cause in man any way moving him either in its own nature or by divine constitution moving him to bestow this grace on any So the Apostle 2 Timoth. 1. 9. God hath saved us and called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his own purpose and grace And indeed we being all found dead in sinne what could be found in one to move God to bestow the life of faith and repentance upon him more then upon another And if any such thing were found in man moving God hereunto then should grace be bestowed according unto works that is in the Fathers phraise as Bellarmine acknowledgeth according unto merits which was condemned 1200 years agoe in the Synod of Palestine and Pelagius himselfe was driven to subscribe unto it otherwise they had condemned him also But as touching the conferring of glory God doth not bestow this on whom he will finding men equall without any moving cause thereunto even in man For though there be no moving cause hereunto in man of its own nature yet there is to be found a moving cause in man by constitution divine whereby God is as it were moved to bestow solvation on some and not on others For God hath made a gracious promise that whosoever beleeveth and repenteth and continueth in faith and repentance unto death shall be saved and whosoever beleeveth not and repenteth not shall be damned So then though men are equall in originall sinne and in naturall corruption and God bestowes faith and repentance on whom of them he will curing their corruption in whom he will yet when he comes to the conferring of glory men are not found equall in morall condition and accordingly God cannot be said on like manner to bestow glory solvation on whō he will For he hath tyed himselfe by his own constitution to bestow solvation on none but such as dye in thestate of grace Yet I confes some say that God bestows solvation on whom he will in as much as he is the author of their faith repentance bestows these graces on whō he will yet certainly there is a different manner in the use of this phraise of bestowing this or that on whom he will For when God bestowes faith and repentance he findes them on whom he will bestow it no better then others But when he comes to the bestowing of glory he findes them on whom he bestowes that farre better them others Now we come to the things decreed in reprobation and these are two 1. The denyall of the grace of regeneration that is of the grace of faith and repentance whereby mans naturall infidelity and impenitency is cured 2. The denyall of glory and the inflicting of damnation The first of these to wit the denyall of grace mentioned is made to whom he will And it must needs be so in ease God gives this grace to whom he will And the Apostle professeth that as God hath mercy on whom he will so he hardneth whom he will And as God denies this grace to whom he will so did he decree to deny it to whom he will Yet there is a difference considerable For albeit God hardneth whom he will by denying unto them the grace of faith and repentance yet notwithstanding like as it is just with God to inflict damnation upon them for that sinne whether originall or actuall wherein he findes them when the ministry of the word is afforded them so likewise it cannot be denied to be iust with God to leave their infidelity and impenitency wherein he finds them uncured But yet because God hath not made any such constitution namely that whosoever is found in infidelity and impenitency shall be so left and abandoned by him therefore he is properly said as to cure it in whom he will so to leave it uncured in whom he will finding them all equall in originall sinne and consequently lying equally in this their naturall infidelity and impenitencv So wee may iustly say there is no cause at all in man of this difference to wit why God cures infidelity impenitency in one and not in another but it is the meer pleasure of God that is the cause of this difference And if any list to contend hereabouts we shall be willing to entertaine him and conferre our strength of argumentation on this point 2. But as touching the denyall of glory and inflicting of damnation which is the second thing decreed in reprobation there is alwaies found a cause motive yea and meritorious hereof to wit both of the denyall of the one inflicting of the other And God doth not proceed herein according to the meer pleasure of his will that by reason of his own constitution having ordained that whosoever continueth finally in infidelity in profane courses and impenitency shall be damned And albeit on the other side it may be said in some sence as formerly I have shewed that God saves whom he will in as much as he is the author of faith which he bestowes on whom he will yet in no congruous sence can he be said to damne whom he will for as much as he is not the author of sinne as he is the author of faith For every good thing he workes but sinne and the evill thereof he only permits not causeth it And lastly as God doth not damne whom he will but those only whom he finds finally to have persevered in sinne without repentance so neither did he decree to damne or reprobate to damnation whom he will but only those who should be found finally to persevere in sinne without repentance Now let us apply this to the Article we have in hand which is this The moving cause of reprobation is the only will of God and not the sinne of man originall or actuall and for the explication hereof according to that which hath been formerly delivered We say that reprobation doth signify either a purpose of denying grace as above mentioned or a purpose of inflicting damnation And each may be considered either as touching the act of Gods decree or as touching the things decreed We shew how the Article holds or holds not being differently accommodated 1. As touching the things decreed 1. As touching the deniall of grace We say That God decreed of his meere good pleasure to deny unto some the grace of faith and repentance for the curing of that naturall infidelity and impenitency which is found in all without any motive cause hereunto found in one more then in another 2. As touching the inflicting of Damnation We say That God decreed to inflict damnation on some not of his meer pleasure but meerly for their finall perseverance in sinne without repentance 2. As touching the very act of Gods decree We say Nothing in man could be the cause hereof but the meer pleasure of God as Aquinas professeth it a mad thing to devise in man a cause of divine predestination as touching the act of God predestinating as I have
of evill for himselfe But by the way I observe how you mistake the opinion of your opposites as when you say that this decree of manifesting Gods mercy or justice is a decree of working an effect in that subject for this is utterly untrue This were to make the decree of salvation of the one and of damnation of the other to be before the decree of creation And although some such thing may be conceived out of a superficiall apprehension of it as proposed by Beza and Piscator yet both in true account of that opinion in generall and mistaking of it in speciall no such thing is avouched Nay whereas your selfe maintaine that the decree of damnation is before the decree of permission of finall impenitency a point no way congruous to your Tenet about massa corrupta you have often read in my writings that I account the decree of damnation in no moment of time to precede the decree of permission of finall impenitency Then the case of Angells is utterly against this unlesse you maintaine the one to be elected upon the foresight of their obedience the other reprobated upon the foresight of their disobedience which I am perswaded you shall not find any Orthodox Divine in the point of mans election to maintaine 3. Conclusio tertia Gods decree to permit sinne is before his decree to manifest either his mercy in pardoning sinne or his justice in punishing sinne because that is a decree de eventu this a doing of something by occasion of that event Resp 1. To your reason here mentioned I have answered before 2. There is no priority or posteriority in intention but onely in respect of finis and media ad finem 3. It is untrue that the former decree is a decree of an event and the latter of doing something by occasion of this event For what is Gods permission the event you meane If so then Gods working grace may be accounted an event also and so Gods decree of salvation upon his working grace shall follow upon his decree of working grace which is manifestly Arminianisme Is the sinne permitted the event First why should you call it an event is it because you conceive it to fall out besides Gods intention Arminius himselfe professeth the contrary The articles of Ireland professe that God from eternity did by his unchangeable counsell ordaine whatsoever in time should come to passe your selfe acknowledge that Gods decree of permitting sinne is a decree de eventu your selfe acknowledge that God did foresee that man would sinne in case he did permit him to sinne which is as much as to say stice food did intend that sinne should come to passe by his permission which is 〈…〉 and expresse profession of Austin where he saith Non ergo aliquid fit nisi omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo so that whether things come to passe Deo faciente as good things or Deo sinente as evill things still they came to passe Deo volente as Austin professeth Now this sinne is apparently the cause of the damnation of many thousands for as much as many thousand infants are damned onely for sinne originall And therefore like as upon this sin existent God doth not take an occasion onely but a cause of damning many thousands so if the decree of permitting this be presupposed before the decree of damnation you may say as well that God upon the foresight of this sinne doth not onely take occasion but a cause also of decreeing their damnation And this may be applyed to the reprobation not onely of infants but of all that are damned forasmuch as all that are damned are damned for originall sinne onely here is the difference such reprobates as dye in their infancy are damned onely for originall sinne but others are damned not only for originall sinne but for their actuall sinnes also Againe it is manifest that the decree of permitting sinne originall is no more a decree de eventu and Gods decree to manifest his mercy in pardoning it is a decree of doing something by occasion of that event than Gods decree of permitting all actuall sinnes of his elect from the first to the last is a decree de eventu and Gods decree to manifest his mercy in pardoning actuall sinnes is a decree of working something by occasion of that event and I cannot but wonder this being againe and againe put to your consideration that you doe not take notice of the equipollency of these whence it manifestly followeth that the decree of pardoning sinnes shall presuppose massam corruptam as well with actuall sinnes as sinnes originall Againe if Gods decree of shewing justice in punishing sinne is but a decree of taking occasion of doing something then Gods decree of damnation for mens actuall sinnes is but a decree of taking occasion of doing something and consequently by what reason the decree of punishing sinne presupposeth the decree of permitting sinne originall by the same reason the decree of damnation shall presuppose the decree of permitting not onely sinne originall but all actuall sinnes also By the same reason the decree of salvation is but a decree of doing something upon the occasion of faith repentance and good workes For if sinne deserve not to be accounted a cause moving God to resolve to punish a man with damnation but rather an event by occasion where of he resolves to punish with damnation much lesse shall faith repentance and good workes be accounted a cause moving God to decree to save any man but onely an event by occasion whereof God doth decree some mens salvation Yet looke by what reason the decree of punishing with damnation doth presuppose the decree of permitting sinne by occasion of which event punishment by damnation is decreed by the same reason the decree of salvation doth presuppose the decree of giving faith repentance and good workes by occasion of which events salvation is decreed for why should not faith and good workes be accounted an occasion of the decree of salvation as well as sinnes are the occasion of the decree of damnation 4. The fourth conclusion is this Gods decree to produce the person of Peter is before his decree to manifest his mercy in Peter by the reason aforesaid Thes 8. Resp That eighth Thesis aforesaid made no mention of priority in decree or intention but onely of priority in execution by vertue of Gods decree for the words of that eighth Thesis are these God decreeth first to produce that subject and afterwards to worke such an effect thereupon Not that God did first decree to produce the subject but onely that God did decree first to produce the subject manifesting hereby that your intent is onely to reason from the order of execution and therehence to inferre the like order in intention which is the ordinary course of Arminians at this day And you signifie your meaning to be this in that eighth Thesis though in the issue you faile of
we acknowledge of predestination both in the way of a meritorious cause on Christs part and in the way of a disposing cause on our part For God we say hath predestinated to bestow upon us both grace and glory for Christs sake where Christ is made a meritorious cause of grace and glory but not of the act of predestination And farther we say that God hath predestinated to bestow glory upon us as a reward of grace as a reward of faith repentance and good workes and to this purpose it is said that God by his grace doth make us meet partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light Coloss 1. 12. But as for the bestowing of grace on any we say there is no cause thereof on mans part For he hath mercy on whom he will Rom. 9. 18. and he hath called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his own purpose and grace 2 Timoth. 1. 9. Now let us apply this to reprobation which is the will of God as well as predestination and if there can be no cause of predestination quoad actum Praedestinantis because there can be no cause of the will of God quoad actum volentis Who seeth not that by the same reason there can be no cause of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis And if it be a mad thing to maintain that merits are the cause of predestination quoad actum praedestinantis it must be as mad a thing to maintain that any merits of the creature can be the cause of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis And this doctrine Aquinas applies expresly to Reprobation it selfe upon the 9. Rom. Lect. 2 da at the end of these words Praescientia peccatorum potest esse aliqua ratio reprobationis but how ex parte actus reprobantis nothing lesse but rather ex parte effectus and what effect not the denying of grace but only as touching the inflicting of punishment thus Praescientia peccatorum potest esse aliqua ratio reprobationis ex parte paenae quae praeparatur reprobatis in quantum scilicet Deus proponit se puniturum malos propter peccata quae à seipsis habent non à Deo And farther we prove this both by cleare evidence of Scripture and cleare evidence of reason and thirdly by as cleare a representation of their infatuation that oppose this doctrine and particularly of the Author of this discourse First by cleare evidence of Scripture Rom. 9. 11. Where the Apostle proves that Election stands not of good works by an argument drawn from the circumstance of the time when that Oracle The elder shall serve the younger was delivered together with the present condition of Jacob and Esau answerable to that time thus Before the children were borne or had done good or evill it was said to Rebecca The Elder shall serve the Younger Therefore the purpose of God according to Election stands not of good workes Now look by what strength of reason the Apostle concludes this of Election by the same strength of argumentation may I conclude of reprobation in proportion thus Before the Children were borne or had done Good or Evill it was said to Rebecca The Elder shall serve the Younger therefore the purpose of God according to reprobation stands not of evill workes that is like as good workes are not the cause of Election so evill workes are not the cause of Reprobation to wit quoad actum reprobantis as touching the very act and eternall decree of God it selfe Secondly observe I pray whether my reason be not as cleare If God upon the foresight of sin doth ordain a man unto damnation thus I am content to propose it in the most rigorous manner then this is done either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God Not by necessity of nature as it is confessed and the cause is evident for undoubtedly he could annihilate them and so he can the holiest creature that lives as all sides confesse Therefore it must be by the constitution of God but neither can this hold For if so then God did constitute that is ordaine that upon the foresight of sin he would ordaine men unto damnation Where observe that the act of divine ordination is made the object of divine ordination as much as to say he did ordaine to ordaine or he did decree to decree Whereas the objects of Gods decrees are alwaies things temporall as for example We say well God did decree to create the world to make man out of the earth to send Christ into the World to preserve us to redeeme us sanctify us save us But Gods ordination or decree is an act eternall and cannot be the object of his decree or ordination I challenge all the Powers of darknes to answer this and to vindicate the Tenent which I impugne from that absurdity which I charge upon it if they can O but some will say it 's very harsh to say that God of his meer pleasure doth ordain men unto damnation I am content to doe my endeavour to remove this scandall out of the way of honest hearts yea and out of the way of others also First therefore consider is it fit to resist the evidence of divine truth because it is harsh to mens affections Secondly Wherein consists this harshnesse Is it in this that nothing is the cause of Gods decree and will nothing temper the harshnes of it unles a thing temporall as sinne be made the cause of Gods will which is eternall and even God himselfe But let us deale plainly and tell me in truth whether the harshnes doth not consist in this That the meer pleasure of Gods will seems to be made the cause not of Gods decree only but of damnation also as if God did damne men not for sin but of his meer pleasure And this I confesse is wondrous harsh and yet no more harsh then it is untrue though in this jugling world things are so carried by some who will both shuffle and cutt and deale themselves as if we made God of meer pleasure to damne men and not for sin which is a thing utterly impossible damnation being such a notion as hath essentiall reference unto sin But if God damne no man but for sinne and decreed to damne no man but for sinne what if the meer pleasure of God be the cause of this decree what harshnes I say is this As for example Zimri or Cosby perished in their incestuous act and gave up both lust and ghost together so going as it were quick to Hell never fearing the judgements of God untill they felt them If we say God decreed they should be cut off in this sin of theirs and be damned for it What hatshnes I pray in this though God made this decree of meer pleasure For is it not manifest he did For could he not if it had pleased him have caused them to outlive this sin of theirs and given them space for repentance and
of his Scene whereunto it is fit he should be serviceable And as for the two Articles here mentioned wherein they are said unanimously to agree and which he calls maxima gravamina It is true they doe agree herein but it may be in a farre other sense then he is willing should be taken notice of For as for the first 1. That the moving cause of reprobation is the alone will of God and not the sinne of man originall or actuall 1. This is true in proportion to election that like as no good work of man is the moving cause of election but only the will of God so no sinne or evill work of man is the cause of reprobation but only the will of God 1. That so it is of election the Apostle both 1. Saith Election is not of Workes but of him that calleth 2. And proveth thus Before Esau and Iacob were borne or had done good or evill it was said The Elder shall serve the Younger therefore Election is not of Workes that is of good workes but of him that calleth 2. That so it is of reprobation I prove by the same argument of the Apostle thus Before Esau and Iacob were borne or had done good or evill it was said the Elder shall serve the Younger therefore reprobation stands not of workes that is of evill workes but of the meer pleasure of God 1. And like as this is farther evident by Gods course of calling in the point of Election as the Apostle intimateth for as much as God calleth effectually whom he will in bestowing faith and repentance upon them For as the Apostle afterwards professeth He hath mercy on whom he will 2. So it is as evident in the point of reprobation in as much as God refuseth to call whom he will by denying faith and repentance unto them as afterwards the same Apostle professeth saying that God hardneth whom he will 2. And this doctrine we doe explicate by distinguishing that which our Adversaries desire to confound least their cheating carriage should be discovered as formerly I have shewed For Predestination and Reprobation may be considered either quoad Praedestinantis Reprobantis actum or quoad Praedestinationis Reprobationis terminum as much as to say quoad res praedestinatione reprobatione praeparatas that is either as touching the act of Predestination and Reprobation or as touching the things decreed by Predestination or Reprobation Now as touching the act of Predestination never any man saith Aquinas was so mad as to say that the merits of man are the cause of predestination And why so Because the act of predestination is the act of Gods will and formerly saith he I have shewed that there can be no cause of the will of God as touching the act of God willing but only as touching the things willed by God Now apply this to reprobation For is not reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating the very act also of Gods will This cannot be denied and herehence it followes that like as there can be no cause of Gods will as touching the act of God willing so there can be no cause of reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating And like as it was a mad thing in Aquinas his judgement to say that merits were the cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating so it is no lesse madnesse in his judgement to maintain that either sinne originall or actuall can be the meritorious cause of reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating And what are the reasons hereof in School-divinity Why surely these 1. Predestination and Reprobation are eternall but good workes and evill workes of the creature are temporall but impossible it is that a thing temporall can be the cause of that which is eternall 2. The act of Predestination and Reprobation is the act of Gods will and the act of Gods will like as the act of his knowledge is the very essence of God even God himselfe and therefore to introduce a cause of Gods will is to bring in a cause of God himselfe 3. If works or faith foreseen be any moving cause of Divine election then either they are so of their own nature or by the meer constitution of God Not of their own nature as it is apparent therefore by the constitution of God but this cannot stand neither For if by the constitution of God then it would follow that God did constitute that upon foresight of mans faith he would elect him that is ordaine him to salvation And what I pray is to constitute Is it any other then to ordaine And herehence it followeth God did ordaine that upon foresight of mans faith he would ordaine him unto salvation Whereby the eternall ordination of God is made the object of his eternall ordination whereas it is well known and generally received that nothing but that which is temporall can be the object of divine ordination which is eternall In like sort I dispute of reprobation if sinne be the cause thereof then either of its own nature it is the cause thereof or by the ordinance of God Not of its own nature as all are ready to confesse if you say by the ordinance of God then it follows God did ordaine that upon the foresight of mans sinne he would ordaine him unto damnation For reprobation is Gods ordaining a man unto damnation as touching one part of the things decreed thereby which we come to consider in the next place and that both in election and in reprobation having hitherto considered them as touching the act of God electing or reprobating and shewed that thus they can have no cause But as touching the things decreed thereby they may have a cause as Aquinas professeth and we professe with him As for example to begin with election The things decreed or destinated to a man in election are two Grace and Glory Now both these may have a cause For both Grace is the cause of glory and Christs merits are the cause both of grace and glory But let grace be rightly understood For in the confuse notion of grace many are apt to lurke thereby to shut their eyes against the evidence of truth For no marvail if men be in love with their own errours and in proportion to the love of errour such is their hatred of Divine truth opposite thereunto Now by grace we understand the grace of regeneration whereby that naturall corruption of mind and will commonly called blindnesse of mind and hardnesse of heart which we all bring into the world with us through originall sin is in part cured More distinctly we call this grace the grace of faith and repentance whereby our naturall infidelity and impenitency is cured Now this grace we say God bestowes on whom he will finding all equall in infidelity and impenitency For so the Apostle tells us that God hath mercy on whom he will And as God bestowes it on whom he will not finding any
death upon a sinner of meere pleasure but being provoked thereunto and that according to the purport of the first place Ezech 18. by the sinner himselfe and also according to the purport of the second place only in case of impenitency And I concurre with him in this And so I conceive it to be delivered in the same sense with that Lament 3. 32 33. For though he cause griefe to wit by reason of mens sinnes v. 39. yet will he have compassion according to the multitude of his mercies to wit in case he repents Ier. 18. 7. Iudg. 10. 16. For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men Mark I pray not willingly to wit in as much as he is provoked thereunto by sinne and by refusall to repent And this is in the former Scripture phrases not to take pleasure in the afflicting and grieving of men For if any work be such as wherein pleasure is taken we need not enquire after a cause why it is done but though no pleasure be taken in it yet for some benefit redounding thereby a man may doe it yea though it be grievous and bitter unto him As a sick man is willing to take a bitter potion for the recovery of his health Now come we to the argument God takes no pleasure in the death of any therefore he doth not of pleasure inflict death We willingly grant it in as much as he never inflicts eternall death on any that doth not dye in sinne unrepented of And as he doth not inflict death on any of meere pleasure that is without just cause on the part of him that dyeth deserving it So we willingly confesse that God did never decree to inflict death on any without just cause on the Malefactors part deserving death And this is the uttermost whereunto this Authors argument can be extended And all our Divines unanimously confesse that God neither decreed to damne any man of his meer pleasure but for his sinne wherein he died without repentance 3. Observe the cunning of this Disputer to deceive himselfe first and then to abuse his readers For whereas he should have proceeded in his argument by degrees thus God hath no pleasure in the death of a sinner therefore he doth not of his own pleasure inflict death and thence proceed if he had thought good to conclude the like of Gods decree thus if God doth not of his ownpleasure inflict then neither doth he of his own pleasure decree to inflict death and damnation This author leaping over the inflicting of death as a block in his way for the last consequence would have betrayed its own nakednesse flyeth at first to the application of it to Gods decree Now I willingly grant that Gods having no pleasure in the death of a sinner doth signify that God inflicts death on no man without a cause for that were of meer pleasure to inflict But dares he herehence inferre therefore God doth not of meer pleasure decree to inflict death and damnation on man for sinne for to this alone comes all the force of this argument Now to shew the vanity of this consequence consider I pray 1. It is as if he should argue thus in plain termes sinne is alwaies the meritorious cause of damnation therefore sinne is the meritorious cause of Gods eternall decree of damnation Now this Enthymeme hath no force any farther then it may be reduced into a Categoricall Syllogisme and this Enthymeme is reducible into no other Syllogisme then this Damnation is the decree of Damnation sinne is the cause of Damnation therefore sinne is the cause of the decree of damnation But in this Syllogisme the proposition containes a notorious untruth Or thus Sinne is the cause of damnation therefore the foresight of sinne is the cause of the decree of damnation But this Enthymeme is not reducible unto any categoricall Syllogisme at all for as much as it consists of foure termes all which must be clapt into the Syllogisme whereunto it is reduced and consequently make that Syllogisme consist of foure termes which utterly overthrowes the illative forme thereof 2. We may as well dispute thus Good works as well as faith and repentance are the disposing cause unto salvation therefore good works as well as faith and repentance or the foresight of them are the disposing cause to Gods election or to the decree of salvation But shall I tell you the chiefe flourish whereupon this Author and usually the Arminians doth insist in this his loose argumentation I conceive it to be this they hope their credulous readers unexpert in distinguishing between Gods eternall decree and the temporall execution thereof will be apt hereupon to conceit that we maintain that God doth not only of meer pleasure decree whatsoever he decreeth but also that he doth decree of meer pleasure to damne men which yet is utterly contrary if I be not deceived to the tenet of all our Divines all concurring in this that God in the execution of the decree of damnation proceeds according to a Law and not in the execution of reprobation only but also in the execution of election And the law is this Whosoever believes shall be saved whosoever believes not shall be damned And like as he inflicteth not damnation but by way of punishment so he conferres not salvation but by way of reward But in the execution of his decrees of election unto grace and reprobation from grace we willingly professe that God proceeds according to no law given unto men to prepare themselves hereunto but meerly according to his good pleasure having mercy on whom he will and hardning whom he will And this indeed is the criticall poynt of this controversy But neither this Author nor his complices some of them of my knowledge have any heart to deale on this I come to his Second pregnant place as he calleth it DISCOURSE SECT II. GOD hath shut up all in unbeliefe that he might have mercy on all Rom. 11. 32. in these words of the Apostle are two all 's of equall extent the one standing just against the other an all of unbelievers and an all of objects of mercy look how many unbelievers there be on so many hath God a will of shewing mercy And therefore if all men of all sorts and conditions and every man in every sort be an unbeliever then is every man of every condition under mercy And if every man be under mercy then there is no antecedent precise will in God of shutting up some and those the most from all possibility of obtaining mercy for these two are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they cannot stand together TWISSE Consideration I Willingly grant the word all in each place is of equall extent but how in the Apostles meaning in this place that is look in what sense the Apostle takes the word all when he saith God hath concluded all under unbeliefe in the same sense he takes the word all when he sayeth that he might have mercy
themselves God took not that pleasure in them as to give them his custodient grace to keep them from withdrawing themselves which grace and that out of his good pleasure he afforded unto others But this grace comes in no account throughout with this Author like unto the Remonstrants who would have no other notice taken of any other counsell of God then that whereby he decreeth to save believers and damne unbelievers But if you call them to enquire of Gods decree to bestow the grace of Faith and repentance upon some and not on others as whether it proceeds absolutely or conditionally they usually lend a deafe eare to this whereby it is as cleare as the Sunne what estimation they make of the grace of regeneration of the grace of Faith and of repentance and after what manner they give God the glory of it By the way observe I pray how he makes the state of man in being a reprobate consequent to his withdrawing himselfe which undoubtedly is a Temporall act and accordingly the act of Reprobation whereby a man is denominated a reprobate to be meerely Temporall and consequently such an act must election be also viz. not eternall but Temporall Still he keepeth himselfe in his strength of confusion as most advantageous for him as in saying God forsakes no man till by actuall sinnes and continuance in them he forsaketh God But albeit God forsaketh no man as touching the inflicting of punishment untill man commits actuall sinne and continueth therein impenitently yet before this God did forsake him as touching the denyall of this grace custodient from sinne and the denyall of the grace of repentance to rise out of sinne which yet he grants to many as in shewing mercy to whom he will like as whom he will he hardneth and so accordingly cures in some that naturall infidely and hardnesse of heart wherein we are all borne and leaves it uncured in others Now consider we his argument following which is this If God reject no man from salvation in time or in act and deed till he reject God then surely he rejected no man in purpose and decree but such a one as he foresaw would reject and cast off God Now this argument not one of our Divines deny not only as it is applied to reprobation but neither doe we deny it applied unto election For we willingly professe that like as God bestowes salvation on none but such as he then findes believers penitent and given to good works in like sort wee all professe that God decrees to bestow salvation on none but such as he foreseeth will believe repent and become studious of good works Like enough many doe wilfully dissemble the true state of the Question between us others ignorantly mistake it The question is not whether God decrees to bestow salvation on such as he foreseeth will believe and reject those from salvation whom he foreseeeth will not believe but of the order of reason between these decrees of God and the foresight of obedience the one side and disobedience on the other that is whether like as faith repentance and good works in men of ripe years doe precede their salvation as disposing causes thereunto so the fore-sight of faith repentance and good works precede election as disposing causes or prerequisites thereunto In like manner on the other side whether as finall perseverance in sinne precedes damnation as the meritorious cause thereof So finall perseverance in sinne as foreseen by God precedes reprobation as the decree of Damnation as the meritorious cause thereof So that the argument here mentioned which is all his strength in this place rightly applyed must runne thus Faith repentance and good works actually existent precede salvation as the disposing causes thereunto therefore faith repentance and good works foreseen precede election as the disposing causes thereunto and what is this but as good as in expresse termes to professe that election is of faith repentance and good works though it be in direct contradiction unto Saint Paul professing in terminis to speak in this Divines language that the purpose of God according to election is not of works So on the other side Finall perseverance in sinne precedes damnation as the meritorious cause thereof therefore finall perseverance in sinne foreseen precedes the decree of damnation as the meritorious cause thereof And then what is to make reprobation to be of evill works if this be not Whereas Saint Paul look by what arguments he proves that election is not of good works viz. because before Jacob and Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said of them the Elder shall serve the Younger by the same argument it is equally evident that Reprobation is not of evill works Yet we acknowledge an exact conformity between Gods decrees and the execution thereof because like as God damnes no man but for sinne so he decreed to damne no man but for sinne where sinne is in each place made the meritorious cause of damnation not of the decree of damnation And like as God bestowes salvation on no man of ripe years but by way of reward of faith repentance and good works so he decreed to bestow salvation on no man of ripe years but by way of reward of faith repentance and good works where faith repentance and good works are in each place made the disposing causes to salvation but not to election There was never any so madde saith Aquinas as to say that merits are the cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating and Why but because so is the cause of predestination to be enquired into as the cause of Gods will is enquired into but formerly he had shewed that there can be no cause of Gods will as touching the act of God willing Now let every one judge whether the act of reprobation be not as clearly the act of Gods will as the act of predestination and consequently whether it be not equally as mad a course in Aquinas his judgement to devise a cause of reprobation as to devise a cause of predestination on the part of Gods will And no marvail for the act of Gods will is eternall all the works of the creature are temporall Then the act of Gods will is God himselfe for there is no accident in God and therefore they may as well set themselves to devise a cause of God as a cause of Gods will His phrase of casting off is ambiguous if it signifieth the denyall of salvation it followeth disobedience if it signifieth the deniall of grace it precedes disobedience in what kind soever 3. Our velle and facere are both temporall in God it is otherwise for his deeds are temporall and may admit the works of men precedaneous thereunto but his resolutions are his decrees and they are all eternall and can admit no work of man precedaneous thereunto yet is God as just in the one as in the other For like as he damnes no man but for
the Gospell according to that Mar. 1. Repent ye and believe the Gospell Now to believe the Gospell is one thing the summe whereof is this That Jesus Christ came into the World to save sinners but to believe in Christ is another thing which yet this Author distinguisheth not though it appears by the course of his argumentation that he draws to this meaning and that in a particular sense which is this to believe that Christ died for them as appears expressely in the latter end of this Section And no marvaile if this Author carry himselfe so confidently in this being as he is armed with such confidence But I am glad that in one place or other he springs his meaning that we may have the fairer flight at him to pull down his pride and sweep away his vain considence though we deale upon the most plausible argument of the Arminians and which they think insoluble My answer is first Look in what sense Arminius saith Christ died for us in the same sense we may be held to say without prejudice to our Tenet of absolute reprobation that all who heare the Gospell are bound to believe that Christ died for them For the meaning that Arminius makes of Christs dying for us is this Christ dyed for this end that satisfaction being made for sinne the Lord now may pardon sinne upon what condition he will which indeed is to dye for obtaining a possibility of the redemption of all but for the actuall redemption of none at all Secondly But I list not to content my selfe with this therefore I farther answer by distinction of the phrase of dying for us that we may not cheat our selves by the confounding of things that differ To dye for us or for all is to dye for our benefit or for the benefit of all Now these benefits are of a different nature whereof some are bestowed upon man only conditionally though for Christs sake and they are the pardon of sinne and Salvation of the Soule and these God doth conferre only upon the condition of faith and repentance Now I am ready to professe and that I suppose as out of the mouth of all our Divines that every one who hears the Gospell without distinction between Elect and Reprobate is bound to believe that Christ died for him so farre as to procure both the pardon of his sinnes and the salvation of his soule in case he believe and repent But there are other benefits which Christ by his obedience hath merited for us namely the benefit of faith and repentance For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulnesse dwell Col. 1. And He hath blessed us with all spirituall blessings in Christ that is for Christs sake and God works in us that which is pleasing in his sight through Jesus Christ and therefore seeing nothing is more pleasing in Gods sight on our part then faith and repentance even these also I should think God works in us through Jesus Christ and the Apostle praies in the behalfe of the Ephesians for peace and faith and love from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ that is as I interpret it from God the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost as an efficient cause and from the Lord Jesus Christ God and Man as a meritorious cause thereof Now I demand whether this Author can say truly that t is the constant opinion of our Divines that all who heare the Gospell whether Elect or Reprobate are bound to believe that Christ dyed to procure them faith and repentance Nay doth any Arminian at this day believe this or can he name any Arminian that doth avouch this Nay doth himselfe believe this If he doth not if he cannot shew any Arminian that doth with what face can he charge this opinion upon us as if we should extend the obligation to believe much farther then the Arminians doe whereas usually they criminate us for not extending it so farre as we should And indeed there is a main difference between these benefits and the former For as touching the former namely pardon of sinne and salvation God doth not use to conferre them but conditionally to wit upon the condition of faith and repentance But as for faith and repentance doth God conferre them conditionally also If so then let them make known to us what that condition is on mans part and whatsoever it be let them look unto it how they can avoid the making of grace to wit the grace of faith and repentance to be given according unto works But if these graces are conferred absolutely and Christ dyed for all to this end that faith and repentance should be conferred absolutely upon all then it followeth manifestly herehence that all must believe and repent and consequently all must be saved So that not only Election as Huberus that renegate faigned must be universall but Salvation also Thus have I given in my answer distinctly to that which he delivered most confusedly Fourthly I come to the scanning of the particular opinion of Zanchy namely that every one that hears the Gospell whether elect or reprobate for so I suppose it proceeds to wit only of them who heare the Gospell though this Author takes no consideration of that neither but hand-over-head laies about him like a mad man is bound to believe that he is elect in Christ and will trye whether I cannot reduce that opinion of his also to a faire interpretation And here first I observe Zanchy is not charged to maintain that every hearer of the Gospell is bound to believe that he is elect in Christ unto faith and repentance but only to salvation that puts me in good heart that Zanchy I shall shake hands of fellowship in the end and part good friends Secondly I distinguish between absolute-Election unto Salvation and election unto Salvation-absolute The first only removes all cause on mans part of election the latter removes all cause on mans part of salvation By cause of salvation I mean only a disposing cause such as faith repentance and good works are as whereby to expresse it in the Apostles phrase we are made meet partakers of the inheritance of the Saints of light Now albeit Zanchy maintains as we doe that all the elect are absolutely elected unto salvation there being no cause on mans part of his election as we have learned yet neither Zanchy nor we doe maintain that God doth elect any unto salvation absolute that is to bring him to salvation without any disposing of him thereunto by faith and repentance Now to accommodate that opinion of Zanchy I say it may have a good sense to say that every hearer is bound to believe both that Christ dyed to procure Salvation for him in case he doe believe and that God ordained that he should be saved in case he doe believe where beliefe is made the condition only of salvation not of the Divine ordination and the confusion of these by the Arminians doth usually
understandings purged from prejudice and false principles 5. My fifth argument is this If sinne be the cause of Reprobation that is of the decree of damnation then either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God not by necessity of nature as all that hitherto I have known confesse But I say neither can it be by the free constitution of God for mark what a notorious absurdity followeth hence and that unavoidably namely that God did ordaine that upon foresight of sinne he would ordaine them to damnation marke it well God did ordaine that he would ordaine or God did decree that he would decree In which words Gods eternall decree is made the object of Gods decree Whereas it is well known that the objects of Gods decrees are meerely things temporall and cannot be things eternall we truly say God did decree to create the World to preserve the World to redeeme us call us justify us sanctify and save us but it cannot be truly said that God did decree to decree or ordaine to ordaine for to decree is the act of Gods will and therefore it cannot be the object of the act of Gods will Yet these arguments I am not so enamoured with as to force the interpretations of Scripture to such a sense as is sutable hereunto presuming of the purity of my understanding as purged from prejudice and false principles I could willingly content my selfe with observation of the Apostles discourse in arguing to this effect Before the Children were borne or had done good or evill it was said the elder shall serve the younger therefore the purpose of God according to election stands not of works In like manner may I discourse Before the Children were borne or had done good or evill it was said the elder shall serve the younger therefore the purpose of God concerning Reprobation stands not of works And like as hence it is inferred that therefore election stands not of good works so therehence may I inferre that therefore reprobation stands not of evill works 6. If sinne foreseen be the cause meritorious of reprobation then faith and repentance and good workes are the disposing causes unto election For therefore evill works foreseen are made the meritorious cause of reprobation because evill works exsistent are the meritorious cause of damnation And if this be true then also because Faith and Repentance and good workes are the disposing causes unto salvation then by the same force of reason faith repentance and good workes foreseen must be the disposing cause unto election But faith repentance and good workes foreseen are not the disposing causes unto election as I prove thus 1. If they were then the purpose of God according to election should be of faith repentance and good works which is expressely denyed by the Apostle as touching the last part and may as evidently be proved to be denied by him in effect of the other parts also by the same force of argumentation which he useth as for example from this anticedent of the Apostles before the Children were borne or had done good or evill it no more evidently followeth that therefore the purpose of God according to election is not of workes than it followeth that the same purpose of God according to election is not of faith nor of repentance For before they were borne they were no more capable of faith or of repentance than of any other good works And undoubtedly faith and repentance are as good works as any other 2. If God doth absolutely work faith in some and not in others according to the meer pleasure of his will then it cannot be said that faith foreseen is the cause of any mans election For in this case faith is rather the means of salvation then salvation a means of faith and consequently the intention of salvation rather precedes the intention of faith than the intention of faith can be said to precede the intention of salvation And to this the Scripture accords Acts 1348. As many believed as were ordained to everlasting life making ordination to everlasting life the cause why men believed answerable hereunto is that Acts 2. last God added daily to the Church such as should be saved and that of Paul to Titus according to the faith of Gods elect So that according to Pauls phrase fides est electorum but according to the Arminians Doctrine the inverse hereof is a more proper and naturall predication as to say electio est fidelium But God doth absolutely work faith in some men according to the meer pleasure of his will denying the same grace to others which I prove 1. By Scripture Rom. 9. 18. God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth compared with Rom. 11. 30. Yee in times past have not believed but now have obtained mercy where it appears by the Antithesis that to find mercy is to believe that is to obtain the grace of faith at the hands of God in Saint Pauls phrase 2. By cleare reason for if it be not the meer pleasure of Gods will that is the cause hereof then the cause hereof must be some good workes which he finds in some and not in others whence it manifestly followeth that God giveth grace according unto works which in the phrase of the ancients is according to merits and for 1200 years together this hath been reputed in the Church of God meere Pelagianisme 2. I further demand what that good worke is whereupon God workes it in one when he refuseth to worke it in another Here the answer I find given is this that God doth work in man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 velle credere modo velit Now of the absurdity hereof I appeale to the very light of nature and let all the books that ever were written on this argument be searched and let it be enquired whether ever any did expresse themselves in the manner of so palpable and grosse absurdity as wherein the act of willing is made the condition of it selfe whence it followeth evidently that it must be both before it selfe and after it selfe for the condition must allwaies exsist before the thing conditionated Yet they are driven upon these rocks of absurdities in spight of their teeth so shamefull is the issue of their discourses who in hatred of Gods truth revealed in Gods word and in a proud conceit of their own performances in the way of argumentation dare prescribe rules to all others how to carry themselves in the interpretation of Scriptures as namely to be so warie as that they doe not deliver any thing repugnant to understandings purged from prejudice and false principles as if the word of God supposed them that are admitted to the studying thereof to have their understandings already purged from prejudice and false principles not that it is given by God for this very end namely to purge our understandings for what is the illumination or opening of the eyes of the mind other than the purging of
but to draw them up by these to an expectation of better things and a carefull endeavour to please God that they might obtain them But what blessings had the Gentiles more than common blessings doth he particulate any And as for the expectation of better things than the things of this world whereunto he pretends God doth draw them hereby what oracle hath he for this Prosper in the Book wherein he insists hath nothing at all of any possibility of knowledge of God unto salvation arriveable unto by the meere contemplation of the creature neither have I found any such Oracle throughout the Nation of the Arminians Nay he professeth plainly that that knowledge of God which is attaineable by the contemplation of the creature is not sufficient unlesse he enjoy the true light to discusse the darknesse of mans heart De vocatione Gent. l. 2. cap. 6. his words are these Tam acerbo natura humana vulnere sauciata est ut ad cognitionem Dei neminem contemplatio spontanea plenè valeat erudire nisi obumbrationem cordis vera lux discusserit And the Apostle more than once professeth of the Gentiles that they were without hope And the tast of the powers of the world to come seemes to be by the Apostle ascribed to the word of God as the cause of it Heb. 6. Yet 't is true the Heathen had odde notions of a condition after death as many as believed the immortality of the soule but where I pray was it upwards in heaven or downewards rather under the earth as Styx Phlegeton and the Campi Elisii yet Cicero looks upwards I confesse in his Tusculans questions but yet he goes no farther than the starres and this was their expectation of better things though Adrian an Emperour and a Schollar too bemoans himselfe that he knew not what should become of his poore soule Animula vagula blandula Hospes comesque corporis Quae tu abibis in loca nec ut soles dabis jocos horridula rigida nudula But this Author most confidently supposeth that these better things are manifest by the creatures by the contemplation whereof he might attaine to the knowledge of them and then I doubt not but he might entertaine a hope to attaine them provided he carefully endeavoured to please God which this Author conceaves to have been very possible and therewithall knew what that was by doing whereof he might be sure to please God And all this he obtrudes upon his Reader by a most dissolute course without one crumme of reason for it In like sort he discourseth very confidently of the end of man without distinction of any relation hereof as if the end of man were equally known as well by light of nature as by revelation of Gods word Solomon telleth us That God made all things for himselfe even the wicked against the day of evill Was this known to the Gentiles by the light of nature Not one of all the Philosophers of old acknowledged the Worlds creation out of nothing and who ever manifested any such faith among them as of enjoying a perpetuall society with God in heaven But it may be they all erred in interpreting the book of nature aright and understanding the language thereof concerning this poynt of faith This Author may doe well to cleare the World of this errour and that out of the book of the creatures and then proceed to interpret unto us therehence a generall resurrection also And if he could find Christ there too togeather with the Incarnation of the Sonne of God and his death and passion resurrection and ascension and sitting at the right hand of God to make request for us and our justification by faith in him togeather with regeneration also and the generall judgement then no doubt though the Gospell should continue to be a scandall to the Jewes yet surely through the incomprehensible benefit of his comfortable atchievements it should continue no longer to be foolishnesse unto the Gentiles only our faith should then cease and be turned into sight before we are brought to the seeing of the face of God And yet I see no great need of Christ if it be in the power of an Heathen man to know what it is to please God and to have an heart to please him For certainly as many as know what it is to please God and have an heart to please him God will never hurt them much lesse damne them to hell Yet the Apostle telleth us that they that are in the flesh cannot please God but whether this Author thinks Heathens to be amongst the number of them that are in the flesh I know not But I little wonder when an Arminian spirit of giddinesse hath possessed him if he proceed to the confounding not only of the Law with the Gospell but heathenisme also such as might be with Christianity But suppose a man might attaine to as much knowledge by the meere contemplation of the book of nature as we doe obtain by the Revelation of Gods word yet we that conceive the knowledge of Gods word to be no impediment to the absolutenesse of reprobation must needs find our selves as much as nothing streightned herein by this Authors roaving discourse as touching the generall providence of God in his works as long as that of the Apostle he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth shall stand and be received for the word of God we shall never want ground for maintaining the absolutenesse both of election by the one and by just proportion of Reprobation also by the other For so long as God doth absolutely and according to the meere pleasure of his will decree to have mercy upon some by giving them faith and repentance for the curing of their infidelity and hardnesse of heart this is very sufficient to maintain the absolutenesse of election unto grace and if God doth absolutely and according to the meere pleasure of his will decree to harden others by denying them the grace of faith and repentance so to leave their naturall infidelity and hardnesse of heart uncured this shall be as sufficient to maintaine the absolutenesse of Reprobation from grace As for election unto salvation though the decree thereof can admit no cause yet we say that God by this decree doth not decree to bestow salvation on any man of ripe yeares but by way of reward of faith repentance and good workes as for the decree of Reprobation from glory and to damnation though the decree hath no cause yet we say that God by this decree doth not decree to inflict damnation on any but for sinne unrepented of only I confesse that as touching the interpretation of those words of Saint Paul He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth I doe not know how it may be charmed by good witts least it may seem repugnant to some reason gathered by contemplation of the creatures for some affect such a
speaks of the necessity of it unto salvation or that many thousands are now adaies regenerated without any Sacrament of regeneration That the Spirit of God is the efficient cause of Regeneration I think no Christian doubteth but this Author maketh the Baptizing with Water to be an efficient also as when he saith Baptisme is appoynted to be a means of Regeneration to all that are Baptized and not only so but that it doth effect it also in all that doe not put an obstacle in the way to hinder it I acknowledge willingly that Baptisme materiall is an instrument to wit both as a signe as a seale But that it is an instrument in any other kind of operation than belongs to a signe and seale I have not hitherto learned out of the word of God And as I remember Arminius was sometimes challenged for Heterodoxy about the Sacraments and withall that his Apology was this he never ascribed any other efficacy unto the Sacraments than is denoted under the tearmes of Signes and Seales but no marvaile if a degenerated condition hath seized on any that such proficiunt in pejus and grow more and more degenerate The phrase used here in calling Baptisme a means of regeneration sounds harsh in my eares we commonly say and it is the doctrine of our Catechisme that a Sacrament is an outward and visible signe of an inward and invisible grace now this grace in Baptisme I take to be the grace of regeneration and is it a decent expression to say that the signe of Regeneration is the means of Regeneration As for Baptismus spiritus the Baptisme of the spirit that is the very working of regeneration but Baptismus fluminis the Baptisme of water that is the administration of the outward signe and seale of the grace of regeneration The word Preacheth forgivenesse of sinnes to all that believe so doth the Sacrament of Baptisme but the word Preacheth this to the eare the Sacrament to the eye The word assureth it for it is Gods word the Sacrament assures it for it is Gods seale but neither of these worketh the assurance without the spirit of God and as for the working of Faith it selfe I have read that Faith comes by hearing I no where read that Faith comes by the being Baptized And sure I am when men of ripe yeares came to be Baptized they were first Catechumini then competentes and none admitted unto Baptisme unlesse the word had formerly brought them unto faith The Apostle calls Baptisme the laver of regeneration by the Rhemists translation the fountain of regeneration by the former English translation the washing of regeneration by the last but whereas this Author dignifies it with this title because it doth effect regeneration in all that doe not put an obstacle in the way to hinder it if this Author shall prove it while his head is hot we shall give that credence to it as it deserves in the mean time it stands for a bold affirmation let him take his time to make it appeare to be sound the Rhemists upon the place have this note As before in the Sacrament of holy Orders 1 Tim. 4. 2 Tim. 1. So here it is plaine that Baptisme giveth grace and that by it as by an instrumentall cause we be saved Master Fulkes answer is this Here is no word to prove that Baptisme giveth grace of the worke wrought but the Apostle saith that God hath saved us by the renewing of the Holy Ghost which is testified by the Sacrament of Baptisme marke I pray the office of Baptisme in Master Fulkes judgement to testify the renewing which is Sacramentally the laver of regeneration not by the worke wrought but by the grace of Gods spirit by which we are justified So speaketh Saint Peter and explicateth himselfe 1 Pet. 3. 21. Baptisme saveth us not the washing of the flesh of the body but the interrogation of a good conscience And because I know no obstacle that an Infant can put to hinder the effect of it for I suppose the obstacle must be rationall and Infants are not come to the use of reason to performe any rationall act which may prove any rationall obstacle therefore it seems this Authors opinion is that all who are Baptized in the Church are regenerate this indeed was the profession of Master Mountague before he was Bishop and was answered by Bishop Carelton as touching the best firmament of his opinion the Book of our Common-Prayer where the Child Baptized is said to be regenerate that is to be understood Sacramento tenus which is Saint Austins phrase and which he distinguisheth from truly regenerate And Bishop Usher in his History of Gotteschaleus alleadgeth out of the Author of the imperfect work upon Mathew Hom. 5. this sentence Eos qui cum tentati fuerint superantur pereunt videri quidem filios Dei factos propter aquam Baptismatis revera tamen non esse filios Dei quia non sunt in Spiritu Baptizati As also out of Austin De Unitate Ecclesiae cap. 19. Visibilem Baptismum posse habere alienos qui regnum Dei non possidebunt sed esse donum Spiritus Sancti quod proprium eorum est tantum qui regnabunt cum Christo in aeternum And lastly out of the same Austin as he is alleadged by Peter Lombard l. 4. Sent. dis 4. Sacramenta in solis electis efficere quod figurant All this is to be found in that Book of Bishop Usher p. 188. Besides many more pregnant passages are collected by him for the same purpose And not to charge him with authority only but with some reason when Saint James saith Jam. 1. 18. Of his own will he hath begotten us by the word of truth what I pray is here meant by the word of truth Is it not the Gospell to wit The Preaching of Christ crucified Now consider to whom doth he write but to the twelve Tribes that is to the Christian Jewes such as were begotten to a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ as Saint Peter speakes writing also to the Jewes If then these Jewes were regenerated by the Preaching of the Gospell surely they were not regenerated by Circumcision and if regeneration were not necessarily annexed to the Sacrament of Circumcision amongst the Jewes then neither is it necessarily affixed to the Sacrament of Baptisme amongst the Christians For our Divines doe usually maintaine against the Papists that the Sacraments of the Old Testament were as effectuall to the Jewes as the Sacraments of the New Testament are effectuall unto us Christians It is true Baptisme is ordained that those which doe receive it may have the remission of their sinnes but not absolutely but conditionally to wit in case they believe and repent as appears both in that place Acts 2. 38. and Rom. 4. 11. And Baptisme as a Seale doth assure hereof only in case they believe and repent and therefore none of ripe years were admitted unto Baptisme untill
God that is not yet regenerated but yet neverthelesse they may be in good time Yet here also there is some defect for want of cleare explication of this truth For will you conclude hence that non-regeneration is the cause of infidelity as some doe in effect Why but this is either notoriously false or if true it is true in such a sense as whereby God is no more the cause thereof then a Physitian is the cause of a disease because he will not cure it For infidelity is a naturall fruit of mans hereditary corruption and God alone can cure it but if he will not God is not to be said to be the cause of any disobedience issuing therefrom otherwise then per modum non removentis by way of not removing the cause of it or per modum non dantis quod prohiberet by way of not curing the cause that is by not giving faith Now what harshnesse there is in this to as many as doe not concurre with the Pelagians so as in plain termes to professe that Grace is given according to mens works And the objection framed against Austin and grounded upon that doctrine which he acknowledged ranne thus Caeteri qui in peccatorum delectatione remoramini ideo nondum surrexistis quia nec dum vos adjutorium gratiae miserantis erexit Therefore you are not risen out of that delight you took in sinne because the succour of Gods grace hath not raised you not as Calvin expresseth it Therefore you believe not because ye are ordained to destruction And this very doctrine as formerly I said our Saviour spares not to apply to some particular persons and Preach it to their faces like as Moses Preacheth the very same doctrine to the Children of Israel Deut. 29. 2 3 4. Yet Austin to prevent harshnesse doth not like this manner of proposing it so well seeing it may be and it is fit it should be delivered coveniently thus Si qui autem ad huc in peccatorum damnabilium delectatione remoramini apprehenditis saluberrimam disciplinam Quod tamen cum feceritis nolite extolli quasi de operibus vestris aut gloriari quasi non acceperitis If any of you doe yet continue in the delightfull course of damnable sinnes take hold of wholesome discipline which when you have done be not proud thereof as of your own work or Glory as if you had not received this grace of God Now what advantagious service this first witnesse hath done him I am well content the indifferent may judge I come to his second witnesse that is of the Land-grave of Turing reported by Hesterbachius as I remember it is about the Twelfth Century of yeares since our Saviours incarnation This man being admonished by his friends of his dangerous and vitious courses made this answer Si praedestinatus sum nulla peccata poterunt mihi Regnum Caelorum auferre Si praescitus nulla bona mihi illud valebunt conferre It is not the first time I have met with this story not in Vossius only but in an Arminian Manuscript it seems they make some account of it yet I see no cause they should make any such account thereof It is the common voyce of prophane persons corrupting the doctrine of Predestination to serve their own turnes My selfe remember an instance of it in my minority when I was little more then a child and I remember both the Person whom and the place where it was delivered and it was accounted as a signe of a prophane heart yet this Vossius makes use of as an instance forsooth of a Predestination Heretique And I wonder why they doe not devise as well a Praescientiarian Heresy and that by as good an instance as this of one of Austins Monkes who being reproved by his brethren made the like answer as touching Gods praescience but yet with more sobriety saying Whatsoever I am now I shall be such as God foreseeth I will be Yet herein as Austin professeth he spake nothing but truth but the saying of the Landgrave implyes a notorious untruth namely that if he were predestinated he should be Saved though he continued in his sinfull courses Now this I say is a grosse untruth For predestination is the preparation of Grace as Austin desineth it and consequently such as are predestinated shall be taken off from their sinfull courses in good time and by Grace be brought unto Salvation In like sort he supposeth a Reprobate may be truly righteous whereas Austin professeth of such as are not predestinate that God brings none of them to wholsome and spirituall repentance whereby man is reconciled unto God in Christ what patience soever he affords them Contr. Jul. Pelag. l. 5. c. 4. Nay this kind of Argumentation drawn from destiny Stoicall wherewith our adversaries doe usually reproach our doctrine of Predestination like as the Pelagians did in the same manner reproach Saint Austins doctrine concerning Predestination I say this argument was in course and profligated in the daies of Cicero and censured as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an idle argumentation as before I mentioned and it is to be seen in Cicero his book De Fato and thereupon they distinguished of some things which they called Fatalia as victory and some things which they called Confatalia as all necessary meanes requisite to the getting of the victory And Origen though he be accounted a favourer of our adversaries Doctrine in his writings yet he shewes the vanitie of this Argument applyed to fate wherby undoubtedly he meanes providence divine For he proposeth such a kind of objection as if a sicke man should dispute himself from taking Physick after this maner Either by destiny is it appointed I shall recover or no If my destiny be to recover I shall recover though I use no Physicke if my destiny be not to recover all the Physitians in the world shal doe me no good And the vanity of this is represented by the like argument in another manner thus If it be thy desteny to beget children whether thou usest the company of Woemen or no thou shalt beget children And concludes thus Ut enim hic si fieri non potest ut quis procreat nisi cum muliere concubuerit sic si valetudinis recuperatio medicinae via efficitur necessariò adhibetur medicus The Greeke of Origen is set downe at large by Turnebus in his disputation upon Cicero his book De Fato against Ramus Now judge you I pray what colour of detriment to Religion hath he produced from our doctrine of absolute Reprobation and whether his discourse herein is any better then the imagination of a vaine thing DISCOURSE SECT IV. BUt there are two things chiefly which are said for the vindicating of this opinion from this crimination 1. First that many of them which believe and defend this opinion are Godly and holy men and therefore it doth not of it selfe open a way to liberty but through the wickednesse of men who pervert the
like as none were more opposite to the Epicures then they so none were more religious and devout among the Heathens then they Yet there is no opinion so true or good but by a prophane heart may be abused But as for the efficacy of Gods will we are so farre from maintaining that it takes away either the liberty of mans will or the contingency of second causes that we professe with Aquinas that the root of all contingency is the efficacious will of God and with the Authors of the Articles of the Church of Ireland Artic. 11. That God did from all eternity ordaine whatsoever in time should come to passe and yet neither the liberty nor the contingency of second causes is thereby destroyed but established rather DISCOURSE The Fift and last sort of Reasons It is an Enimy to True Comfort SECT I. I Am come to my last reason against it drawn from the Vncomfortablenesse of it It is a doctrine full of desperation both to them that stand and to them that are fallen to men out of temptation and in it It 1. Leads men into temptation 2. Leaves men in it And therefore it is no part of Gods word for that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 good newes to men a store-house of sweet consolations for them that stand and such as are fallen These things are written saith the Apostle Rom. 15. 4. That by patience and consolation of the Scriptures we might have hope implying that therefore was the word written and left to the Church that by the comforts contained in it those poore soules that look towards heaven might never want in any changes or chances of this mortall life a sweet gale of hope to refresh them and carry on their ship full merrily towards the Haven It leads men into temptation and into such a one too as is as sharpe and dangerous as any the tempter hath The Devill can easily perswade any man that makes absolute reprobation a part of his creed that he is one of those absolute Reprobates because there are more absolute Reprobates even an hundred for one then absolute chosen ones and a man hath a great deale more reason to think that he is one of the most then one of the least one of the huge multitude of inevitable castawaies then one of the little flock for whom God hath absolutely prepared a Kingdome Such a man is not only capable of but framed and fashioned by his opinion for this suggestion which is a very sore one if we may believe Calvin Bucer and Zanchius Calvin tells us Quod nulla tentatione vel gravius vel periculosius fideles percellit Satan that the Devill cannot assault a believer with a temptation more dangerous And a little after he saith It is so much the deadlier by how much commoner it is then any other Rarissimus est cujus non interdum animus hac cogitatione feriatur unde tibi salus nisi ex Dei electione Electionis autem quae tibi revelatio Quae si apud quempiam semel invaluit aut diris tormentis miserum perpetuo exeruciat aut reddit penitus attonitum So ordinary is the temptation that he who is at all times free from it is a rare man we are to conceive that he speakes of those that believe absolute reprobation and so dangerous it is that if it get strength he which is under it is either miserably tormented or mightily astonished And a little after this he saith againe Ergo si naufragium timemus sollicité ab hoc scopulo cavendum in quem nunquam sine exitio impingitur He that will not wrack his soule must keep from this rock Bucer also hath a passage like to this Vt caput omnis noxiae tentationis saith he repellenda est quaestio sumusnè praedestinati Nam qui de hoc dubitat nec vocatumse nec justificatum esse credere poterit hoc est nequit esse Christianus This doubt whether we are predestinated or no Must be repelled as the head of every pernitious temptation for he that doubts of this cannot be a Christian Praesumendum igitur ut principium fidei nos omnes esse a Deo praescitos Every man therefore must presume it as a principle of faith that he is elected This very speech of Bucers Zanchy makes use of to the same purpose We see then by the restimony of these worthy men that this temptation is very dangerous and ordinary too to such as think there are absolute reprobates The truth of both will farther appeare by the example of Petrus Hosuanus a Schoolemaster in Hungary who intending to hang himselfe signified in a letter which he left in his study for the satisfaction of his friends and Countrymen the cause of it in that writing he delivered these three things 1. That he was of Calvins and S. Austins opinion that men are not dealt withall secundum bona or mala opera according to their works good or evill but that there are occultiores causae more hidden causes of mens eternall condition 2. That he was one of that woefull company of absolute castawaies Vas formatum in ignominiam a vessell prepared to dishonour and that therefore though his life had been none of the worst he could not possibly be saved 3. That being unable to beare the dreadfull apprehensions of wrath with which he was affrighted he hanged himselfe For these are some of his last words there recorded Discedo igitur ad Lacus Infernales aeternum dedecus patriae meae Deo vos commendo cujus misericordia mihi negata est I goe to those infernall lakes a perpetuall reproach to my Country commending you to God whose mercy is denyed mee Out of this example we may easily collect two things 1. That men who think that there are many whom God hath utterly rejected out of his only will and pleasure may be easily brought to think by Satans suggestion that they are of that company And 2. That this temptation is very dangerous I conclude therefore the first part of my last Reason that absolute Reprobation leads men into temptation TWISSE Consideration AS I remember when this Author first had resort unto some prime stickler for the Arminian way to conferre with him there about it was told me that this Authour should alledge that our doctrine of election was a comfortable doctrine but then on the other side it was alledged that granting that yet with all it did expose to dessolutenes of life And therefore I little expect any such argument as this to be proposed least of all to be ranged amonst the nūber of those that are taken to be of a convincing nature Yet is it the lesse strange because the Apostle telleth us of some that their course is proficere in pejus to growe worse and worse But let us consider whether he speeds any better in this then in the former And whereas he saith It is a doctrine full of desperation both to them that stand
Augustini quisque teneat De me intelligo quemlibet ante uterum matris pradestinatum vel ad vitam vel ad mortem quod nunquam quisquam nisi in horâ mortis cognoscere potest Ego sum ex numero damnatorum ergo Deo nunquam asscribi possum Hoc certo credatis rectum esse quod Paulus Rom. 9. scribit Misereor cujus misereor Discedo ad lacus infernales Deo vos commendo cujus misericordia mihi negata est Et addit Major haec verba Hic est fructus perversae doctrinae de praedestinatione hominum Concerning which relation give me leave to observe somewhat 1. Here is no such thing as this Author relates that Hosuanus should say that man by Calvin and Austins opinion is not dealt withall secundum bona or mala opera and indeed this deciphering out of Austins and Calvins opinion is notoriously untrue neither as touching occultiores causae of mens eternall conditions as indeed it is apparent that in the way of a cause meritorious there is no other cause of damnation then sinne and in the way of a disposing cause no other cause of salvation then faith repentance and good workes And as touching the efficient cause of both none is or can be the cause thereof but God But as touching the cause why God gives grace to one and denyes it to another wee willingly confesse there is no cause thereof but the meere good pleasure of God In like sort of absolute cast-awayes here is no mention no nor of Vas formatum ad ignominiam nor any such saying of himselfe that he was none of the worst 2. Here is no mention made of the cause moving him hereunto as this Author pretends but only 't is said that it proceeded of desperation And though Major adds as a Coronis his censure that Hic est fructus perversae doctrinae de praedestinatione hominum yet I hope his censure is no Oracle with us no nor with Lutherans neither for I find him branded by Osiander in his Ecclesiasticall History And though he were of Austins and Calvins opinion in this poynt of predestination and did despaire yet it followes not that this doctrine moved him to despaire Suppose the conceit of being a reprobate moved him hereunto might it not move him hereunto according to the Arminian tenet as well and according to any tenet provided they doe not believe that God hath as yet decreed nothing or if he hath that his decrees may be recalled And then again by our Doctrine of Predestination it cannot be concluded of any man that he is a reprobate while he lives Nay this seems contrary to his own opinion which was this that no man can know whether he be predestinate to life or death till the houre of his death and his death was not brought upon him but wrought by him And as it was in his power not to have killed himselfe so was it in his power not to believe that he was a reprobate by this opinion of his Then again what moved him to conceive that he was a reprobate is concealed all along Now the conscience of sinne committed against the Holy Ghost may make a man conceive he is a reprobate of what opinion so ever he be concerning reprobation And as I take it That famous Doctor of Germany whom Goulartius mentioneth remaining then at Hall in Swabe was no Calvinist of whom he reports out of the History of Germany That having oftentimes turned his Conscience some times toward God some times toward the World having inclined in the end to the worser part said and confest publiquely that he was undone and fell so deepe into despaire as he could neither receive nor take any comfort or consolation so as in this miserable and wretched estate of his soule he slew himselfe most miserably It was not the doctrine of Predestination or Reprobation brought him unto this And though a man hath not sinned against the holy Ghost yet a conceit of such a sinne may drive a man unto this or of blasphemies in an inferior degree when God gives a man over unto the power of Satan as Gaulartius makes mention by his own experience of another desperate man whom he had heard who being exhorted to turne from the too vehement apprehension of Gods justice unto his mercy which was open unto him He answered very coldly you say true God is God but of his children not for me his mercy is certain for his elect but I am a reprobate a vessell of wrath and cursing and I doe already feele the torments of Hell When they did exhort him to call God his Father and Jesus Christ his Sonne My mouth saith he doth speake it but my heart hath horrour of it I believe that he is the Father of others but not of mee When they did lay before him that he had known God heard his word and received his Sacrament yea but he added I was an hypocrite and guilty of many blasphemies against God And then he returned to his ordinary discourses I am a vessell prepared to wrath and damnation I am damned I burne The same Goulartius reports out of the History of the times of a Learned man at Lovaine called Master Gerlach Who had profited so well in his studies as he was one of the first amongst the learned of that time And that being touched with a grievous sicknesse he sighed continually and feeling himselfe to draw neer his end he began to discover the ground of his sighes speaking such fearfull words as desperate men are accustomed to utter crying out and lamenting that he had lived very wickedly and that he could not endure the judgement of God for that he knew his sinnes were so great as he should never obtain pardon so as in this distresse he dyed oppressed with grievous and horrible despaire What this wickednesse of his was in speciall it seems he concealed it might be horrible enough though done in secret yet no just cause of despaire unlesse it were the sinne against the holy Ghost The like is recorded of M. Iames Latomus one of the chiefe Doctors of the University of Lovaine being one day out of countenance in a Sermon before the Emperour Charles the Fift returning ashamed and confounded from Brussells to Lovaine and did so apprehend the dishonour that he fell suddainly into despaire whereof he gave many testimonies in publique the which did move his friends to keepe him close in his house from that time unto his last gasp Poore Latomus had no other speech then that he was rejected of God that he was damned and that he hoped for no mercy nor salvation as having malitiously made warre against the grace and truth of God He dyed in this despaire neither was it possible for any friends or Physitians to make him change his opinion 3. If this story of Hosuanus be a truth I like his condition the worse for not giving any reason moving him to this desperation and
againe the word of God came to Semaiah the man of God saying speak to Rehoboā the son of Solomon King of Iudah unto all the house of Iudah Benjamin to the remnant of the people saying Thus saith the Lotd ye shall not goe up nor fight against your brethren the children ef Israel returne every man to his house for this thing is from me Here we have Gods word for it Who can deny that the hardening of Pharohs heart that he should not let Israel go the selling of Ioseph into Egypt by the hands of his unnaturall brethren came to passe by the will of God I proceed to prove the same truth by evidence of reasō First because God permits sin to come to passe as all confesse though he could hinder it if it pleased him that without all detriment to the free will of the creature why then doth he permit it but because he would have it come to passe accordingly permission is reckoned up by Schoole Divines amongst the sinnes of Gods will like as allso is Gods commandment Now what God commandeth if it be done it is said to come to passe by the will of God albeit the things that God commandeth seldome the things he permits allwayes come to passe according to the common tenet of Divines even Vostius Arminius not excepted Againe it is the common opinion of all that therefore God permits sin because he can and will worke good of it which plainly supposeth that sinne shall come to passe if God permits it consequently it must needes be the will of God it shall come to passe Thirdly it is granted on both sides that the act of sin is Gods worke in the way of an efficient cause not the outward act onely which is naturall but the inward act of the will which is morall even this as an act is the worke of God How can it be then but the deformity and vitiousnesse of the act must come to passe God willing it though not working it considering that the deformity doth necessarily follow the act in reference to the creatures working it though not in respect of Gods working it Lastly all sides agree that God can give effectuall grace whereby a man shall be preserved from sin infallibly Wherefore as often as God will not give this grace which is in his power to give doth it not manifestly follow that he will not have such a man preserved frō sin To these I added the testimony of divers as that of Austin Not any thing comes to passe unlesse Good will have it come to passe either by suffering it to come to passe or himselfe working it If good he workes it if evill permits it 't is true of each that he wills it cap. 96. It is Good saith Austin that evill should come to passe And Bellarmine himselfe so farre subscribes hereunto as by professing that It is good that evills shoul come to passe by Gods permission The same Austin confesseth that The perversity of the heart comes to passe by the secret judgment of God And againe that after a wonderfull and unspeakable manner even those things which are committed against the will of God to wit against the will of his commandment do not come to passe besides the will of God to wit the will of his purpose Anselme the most ancient of schoole Divines in his booke of the concord of foreknowledge with free will Considering saith he that what God willeth cannot but be when he wills that the will of mā shall not be constrained by any necessity to will or no and withall will have an effect follow the will of man In this case it must needs be that the will of man is free and that also which God willeth shall come to passe to wit by that will of man Now observe what in the next place he concludeth hence In these cases therefore it is true that the worke of sin which man will doe must needs be though man doth not will it of necessity And in his concord of predestination and free will In Good things God doth worke both that they are and that they are good in evill things he workes onely that they are not that they are evill Hugo de sancto Victore 1. De sacr 4. p. 13. When we say God willeth that which is good it sounds well but if we say God willeth evill it is harsh to eares neither doth a pious mind admit of the good God that he willeth evill for hereby he thinkes the meaning is that God loves and approves of that which is evill therefore the pious mind abhorres it not because that which is said is not well said but because that which is well said is not well understood To these I adde the testimony of Bradwardine at large A man reputed so pious in those dayes that the Kings prospe ous successe in those dayes was cheifly imputed unto his piety who followed him in his warres in France as Preacher in the camp In the last place I make answer to the Sophisticall arguments of Aquinas and Durandus and the frothy disputation of Valentianus all of them standing to maintaine the contrary Now let every sober Christian judge of this Authors proposition when he saith that If God doth will and procure sin c. he is worse then the Devill For I have made it evident by variety of Scripture testimonyes by reason and also with the concurrence of diverse learned Divines that it is Gods will that sin should come to passe even the horrible outrages committed against the holy sonne of God were before determined by Gods hand and counsell Now what followes herehence by this Authours dicourse but that the holy Apostles yea and the Spirit of God do make God worse then the Devill So little cause have we to be impatient when such horrible blasphemyes are layd to our charge when we consider what honourable compartners we have in these our sufferings Yet see the vanity of this consequence represented most evidently For albeit the will of Gods decree be powerfull effectuall and irresistable and consequently every thing decreed thereby shall come to passe powerfully effectually irresistibly yet this respects onely the generality of the things eveniency not the manner how For onely things necessary shall by this irresistible wil of God come to passe necessarily But as for contingent things they by the same irresistable will of God shall come to passe also but how not necessarily but contingently that is with a possibility of not comming to passe Now the free actions of men are one sort of contingent things They therefore shall infallibly come to passe also by vertue of Gods irresistible will but how Not necessarily but contingently that is with a possibility of not coming to passe in generall as they are things contingent And in speciall they shall come to passe not contingently onely but freely also that is with a free power in the
words ye therefore heare them not because ye are not of God now what reasonable mā can deny but that it is a sin not to heare God's words then doth not our Saviour plainly professe that the true cause hereof is because they are not of God Now if to be of God in this place doth signifie God's Election then the cause of their sinnes hereby is made God 's not electing of them But if this phrase To be of God signifie God's regenerating of them as I thinke it doth then God's not regenerating of them is made the cause of this their disobedience in not hearing God's word 's and indeed the evill of sinne hath noe efficient cause but deficient only as Austine hath delivered long agoe And God is not bound to any either to elect him or regenerate him so that in failing to regenerate mā he doth not deficere or faile in any culpable mā ner now let every indifferent Reader judge whether here be not Dignus vindice nodus a knot worthy to be loosed it will require some worth of learning in him that solves it And is it decent for this Authour to censure a man for a conclusion made by him out of the word of God without shewing the faultinesse either of his interpretation thereof or of his consequence framed therehence So that this Author's wit cunning is more to be cōmended in not specifying the place where Piscator delivers this doctrine then either his learning or his honesty He was loath to raise spirits afterwards to prove unable to lay them Therefore thus I answer in behalfe of Piscator though God her by me made the cause why sōe heare not God's words to wit in as much as he doth not regenerate thē nor give the eies to see nor eares to heare an heart to perceive according to that of Moses Yet he doth not make God any culpable cause neither indeed is he any culpable cause while he failes to performe so gracious a worke towards thē the reason whereof is this He and he alone is a culpable cause who failes in doing that which he ought to do ut God all be it he doth not regenerate a man yet he failes not of doing that which he ought to doe For it is no duty of his to regenerate any man for he is bound to none Now to be the Authour of sinne is not only to be the cause thereof but to be a culpable cause thereof Undoubtedly God could preserve any man from sinne if it pleased him and if he doth not he is nothing faulty Secondly I answere that in true account God is only the cause why our naturall infidelity is not healed our corruption not cured Like as a Physitian may be said to be the cause why such a man continues sicke in as much as he could cure him but will not Soe God could cure the infidelitie of all but will not Only here is the difference the Physitian may be a culpable cause as who is bound to love his neighbour as himselfe but God being bound to none is no culpable cause of man's continuance in sinne and in the hardnesse of his heart albeit he can cure him but will not As for Piscator's saying here mentioned Reprobates are appointed precisely to this double evill to be punished everlastingly and to sinne and therefore to sinne that they may be justly punished Hereing are two things charged upon Piscator 1. That Reprobates are precisely appointed by God to perish everlastingly To this I answer that noe Arminiā that I know denies Reprobates to be appoinby God to everlasting damnation All the question is about the manner of appointing them namely whether this appointment of God proceeds meerly according to his meer pleasure or upon the foresight of sinne We say it proceeds meerly according to the good pleasure of God and not upon the foresight of sinne preceding And this we not only say but prove thus If reprobation proceed upon the foresight of sinne then it were of men's evill workes Now looke upon what grounds the Apostle proves that election is not of good workes upon the same ground it is evident that reprobation is not of evill works for the argumēt for the one is this Before Iacob Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said to Rebekah the elder shall serve the younger therfore election is not of good works In like manner thus I reason concerning Reprobation Before Iacob and Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said to Rebekah the elder shall serve the younger therefore reprobation is not of evill workes 2. If God doth ordaine any man to damnation upon foresight of sin then this sin foreseen is the cause of the Divine ordinance but sin foreseen cannot be the cause why God ordained man to damnation as I prove thus If it be the cause then either by the necessity of nature or by the ordinance of God not by necessity of nature For undoubtedly God if it pleased him could ordaine to annihilate them for their sinnes instead of punishing them with eternall fire Nor can it be the cause of any such decree by the free ordinance of God For if it were marke what intolerable absurdityes would follow namely this That God did ordaine that upon the foresight of sinne he would ordaine men unto damnation whereby God's eternall ordination is made the object of God's ordination whereas all know that the Objects of God's decrees which are all one with his ordinations are things temporall not things eternall 3. If the foresight of sinne goes before the decree of damnation then the decree of permitting sinne goes before the decree of damning for sin that is the permission of sinne was first in intention and consequently it ought to be last in execution that is First man should be damned for sin and not till afterwards permitted to sinne The second thing charged upon Piscator is this that Reprobates are precisely appointed to sin Now here the crimination grates not upō the manner of being appointed thereunto otherwise a way could be opened for a progresse in infinitum Now why should it be any more a fault in Piscator to say of some that they are appointed to sinne then in Peter to say of some that they are appointed to disobedience or in all the Apostles to professe that all the outrages committed by Herod and Pilate by the Gentiles and people of Israell were such as Gods hand his counsell had before determined to be done or why doth Piscator make God to be the Authour of sinne in this more then Peter and all the Apostles And considering this man's unconscionable carriage in this let the Reader take heed how he suffers himselfe to be gull'd by this Authour and drawne to censure such speeches in Piscator as making God the Authour of sinne when hereby he is drawne ere he is aware to passe the like censure on the Apostles And the
then to advance our selves into the very Throne of God's Soveraigntie and doe wee not feare least his wrath smoake us thence And if all this that hee contends for were granted him that nothing but mere necessitie were found in the motion of men's wills yet Suarez will justifie us from speaking contradiction or delivering ought that exceeds the compasse of God's omnipotencie And what if all the world were innocent yet God should not be unjust in casting the most innocent creature into hell fire as Medina professeth and that by the unanimous consent of Divines and Vasquez the Jesuite acknowledgeth this to be in the power of God as he is Lord of life and death and in the last chapter of the booke de praedestinatione gratiâ which goes under Austin's name there is an expresse passage to justifie it And albeit that worke be not Austin's yet it is lately justified to be the worke of a great follower of Austin's and as Orthodoxe as he namely the worke of Fulgentius as Raynaudus the Jesuite hath lately proved and justified that passage also together with that which is usually brought by School-Divines to prove it out of the twelfth chapter of Wisedome and shewes the right reading as followed by Austin and Gregory And withall represents a pregnant passage taken out of the fifteenth Homily of Macarius to the same purpose And out of Chrysostome in his 2. De compunctione cordis about the end thereof And out of Austin upon Psalme the seventieth about the beginning And to these he addeth Ariminensis Cameracensis Serarius and Lorinus all maintaining the same And this is evident by consideration of the power which it pleased the Lord to execute upon his holy Son and our blessed Saviour and by the power which he gives us over brute creatures This I say if all that he contends for were granted should rather be concluded therehence namely that in this case the creature should be innocent then that God should be the Authour of sinne especially considering that God performes in all this noe other thing then belongs unto him of necessitie as without which his moving of the second causes it were impossible the creature should worke at all which we have made good by shewing the manifest absurdity of their contrary doctrine who maintaine a bare concourse Divine either in subordination unto the agency of the creature or without subordinating the operation of the creature to motion Divine But we doe subordinate it as without which the second cause could not worke at all and by vertue whereof it doth worke and that freely so farre forth as liberty of will is competent to a creature but not so as to make the creature compeere with his Creatour Let man be a second free Agent but set our God that made us evermore be the first free Agent least otherwise we shall deny him the same power over his creatures that the Potter hath over the clay of the same lumpe to make one vessell unto honour and another unto dishonour This power in my maker the Lord hath given me eyes to discerne as taught us in his holy word and an heart to submit unto it and to his providence in governing my will even in the worst actions that ever were committed by me without any repining humour against his hand though I thinke it lawfull for us in an holy manner to expostulate with God sometimes in the Prophets language and say Lord why hast thou caused us to erre from thy waies and hardened our hearts against thy feare Which yet I confesse he brings to passe at noe time infundendo malitiam by infusing any malice into me who naturally have more then enough of that leaven in me but non infundendo gratiam not quickning in me that holy feare which he hath planted in me of which grace I confesse willingly I have a great deale lesse then I desire though the least measure of it is a great deale more then I doe or can deserve Neither shall I ever learne of this Authour after his manner to blaspheme God if at any time hee shall harden my heart against his feare Though this Authour speakes commonly with a full and foule mouth yet his arguments are lanke and leane and of noe substance but words As when hee saith that God over-rules men's wills by our opinion Now to overrule◠a man is to carry him in despight of his teeth Wee say noe such thing but that God moves every creature to worke agreably to it's nature necessary things necessarily contingent things contingently free Agents freely though nothing comes to passe by the free agency of any creature but what God from all eternity by his unchangable counsell hath determined to come to passe As the eleventh Article of Ireland doth professe by the unanimous consent of the ArchBishop Bishops and Clergy of that Kingdome when those Articles were made So I speake warily and circumspectly the rather because one Doctour Heylin doth in a booke intituled The History of the Sabbath professe Chapter 8. page 259. That that whole booke of Articles is now called in and in the place thereof the Articles of the Church of Ireland confirmed by Parliament in that Kingdome Anno 1631. A thing I willingly confesse at first sight seemed incredible unto mee namely that Articles of Religion agreed upon in the dayes of King Iames should be revoked in the dayes of King Charles but expect to heare the truth of that relation For the Authour thereof hath never as yet deserved so much credit at my hands as to be believed in such a particular as this But to returne this Authours text is nothing answerable to the margent For first imperare to command is one thing and to over-rule is another thing though he that doth imperare command ought is commonly accounted the Authour thereof as a cause Morall from whom comes the beginning of such a worke But utterly deny that God commands evill and the truth is wee acknowledge noe other notion of evill then such as the Apostle expresseth in calling it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an incongruitie to the law of God which law commands somethings and forbids other things I come to his third reason 3. I grant wicked counsellours and perswaders are deservedly accounted the Authors of sinne The common use and acception of the words as I shewed in answer to the first is observed to denote such Therefore Cicero makes Authour and disswader opposite and by law they are punishable in the same degree with the Actors But God is noe counsellour or perswader to any lewd course but forbids it and disswades it and that with denuntiation of the greatest judgments among trangressours 2. I willingly confesse that councelling is farre inferiour to enforcing yet in Scripture phrase earnest intreaty or command is oftentimes exprest by compelling as Mat 14. 22. Mark 6. 45. Luk 14. 23. Gala 6. 12 and 2. 14. 1 Sam 28. 23. 2 Chron 21. 11. And noe marvaile
pleasure proceeds in the denying of faith and repentance whereby alone sinne is cured and so of mere pleasure suffers some finally to persevere in sinne yet in inflicting damnation he doth not carry himselfe of mere pleasure without all respect to men's workes but herein he proceeds according to a law which is this whosoever believeth not and repenteth not shall be damned And like as God damnes noe man but for his finall perseverance in sinne So from everlasting he did decree to damne noe man but for his finall perseverance in sinne So that by vertue of the Divine decree of reprobation sinne and finall perseverance therein is constituted the cause of damnation but by noe meanes is it constituted the cause of the decree of reprobation neither doth the foresight of sinne precede it For first like as upon this doctrine that Grace is not given according unto workes the absolutenesse of predestination is grounded in the judgment of Austine as by necessary consequence issuing there from In like sort upon this that grace is not denied according unto men's workes as necessarily followeth the absolutenesse of Reprobation Secondly looke by what reason the Apostle proves that Election is not of good workes namely because before the children were borne or had done any good it was said the Elder shall serve the Yonger by the same reason it evidently followeth that reprobation is not of evill workes because before they were borne or had done good or evill it was said the Elder shall serve the Younger Esau's reprobation being as emphatically signified under his subjection to Iacob his younger as Iacob's election was designed by his dominion over Esau his Elder brother 3. If sinne be the cause of the decree of Reprobation then either of ' its own nature or by constitution divine Not by necessity of nature for undoubtedly God could annihilate men for sinne had it pleased him If by constitution Divine mark what absurdity followeth namely this that God did ordaine that upon foresight of sinne he would ordaine men unto damnation 4. If foresight of sinne precedes the decree of damning them for sin then the decree to permit sin much more precedes the decree to damne them for it as without which there can be noe foresight of sin and consequently permission of sin is first in intention and then damnation and therefore it should be last in execution that is men should first be damned and afterwards permitted to sin to wit in an other world 5. And lastly Reprobation is the will of God but there can be noe cause of God's will as Aquinas hath proved much lesse can a temporall thing be the cause of God's will which is eternall Upon this ground it is that Aquinas professeth Never any man was so mad as to say that any thing might be the cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating So may I say it were a mad thing to maintaine that any thing can be the cause of Reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating For the case is altogether alike the will of God being alike uncapable of a cause in both whereas this Authour saith that God by our opinion doth draw men on by his unconquerable power from sin to sin 't is mere bumbast All men being borne in sin must needs persevere in sin unlesse God gives grace to regenerate them For whether they doe that which is morally good they doe it not in a gracious manner or whether they abstaine from evill they doe it not in a gracious manner He that is of God heareth God's wordes ye therefore heare them not saith our Saviour because ye are not of God Arminius acknowledgeth and Corvinus after him that all men by reason of Adam's sin are cast upon a necessitie of sinning He askes what difference is there in the course which God taketh for the conversion of the Elect and obduration of Reprobates and I have already shewed a vast difference and here in breife I shew a difference He hath mercy on the one in the regenerating them curing the corruption he finds in them he shewes not the like grace to others but leaves them unto themselves as touching the evill acts committed by the one he concurreth as a cause efficient to the act which for the substance of it is naturally good For ens bonum convertuntur every thing that is an entity so farre is good but he hath no efficiency as touching the evill as which indeed can admit no efficiencie as Austin hath delivered of old Man himselfe is only a deficient cause of sin as sin and that in a culpable manner which kind of deficiency is not incident to God But to every good act he concurres two manner of waies that in the nature of a positive efficient cause in both namely to the substance of the act by influence generall and to the goodnesse of it by influence speciall and supernaturall It is true the Fathers made sin the object of prescience not of predestination the reason was because they took predestination to be only of such things which God did effect in time Now sin is none of those things that come to passe by God's effection but only by God's permission And that such was the notion of predestination with the Fathers I prove first out of Austin In sua quae falli mutarique non potest praescientiâ opera sua futura disponere illud omnino nec aliud quidquam est praedestinare In his foreknowledge which can neither be deceived nor changed to dispose his own workes that is to predestinate and nothing else And sin not being the worke of God no marvaile if it come not under predestination Secondly out of the Synod of Valens Praedestinatione autem Deum ea tantum statuisse dicimus quae ipse vel gratuita misericordiâ vel justo judicio facturus erat We say that God by predestination ordained only such things as himselfe would work either of his free mercy or in just judgment Againe it is as true that they made even sin it selfe the Object of God's will witnesse that of Austin Non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo Not any thing comes to passe but God Allmighty willing it either by permitting it or working it So the eleaventh article of the Church of Ireland So Arminius Deus voluit Achabum mensuram scelerum implere God would have Ahab to fulfill the measure of his sins So scripture often mentioned And Austin gives the reason of it malum fieri bonū est it is good that evill should be Bellarmine confesseth as much namely that Mala fieri Deo permittente bonum est It is good that evills should come to passe by God's permission And shall not God have liberty to will that which is good When he saith of the Ancients that They refuted this foule assertion of an absolute irresistable and necessitating decree
a thing it is for any man to maintaine that there is some cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating So as mad a thing it must be every way to avouch that there is a cause of Reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating And truely the Apostle St. Paul plainly manifests that upon what ground he proves that Election is not of good works namely because before Iacob or Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said The elder shall serve the younger upon the same ground we may be bold to conclude that Reprobation is not of evill workes And the same reason manifests that faith and infidelity are excluded from being the causes the one of Election the other of Reprobation as well as good and evill workes And both Piscator by evidence of Scripture and Bradwardine by evidence of reason have demonstrated that no will of God is conditionall which is to be understood as touching the act of God willing And it may be evidently further demonstrated thus If any thing be the cause of God's will then either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God Not by necessity of nature as is evident and all confesse there being no colour of truth for that besides such an opinion were most dangerously prejudiciall to God's soveraignty and liberty If therefore they say it is by the constitution of God maske I pray what an insuperable absurdity followeth hereupon For seing God's constitution is his will it followeth that God did will that upon foresight of this or that he would will such a man's salvation and such a man's damnation And thus the act of God's will is made the Object of God's will even the eternall act of God's will Whereas to the contrary it is apparent that the objects of God's will are things temporall never any thing that is eternall But as touching things willed we readily grant it may be said there is a cause thereof as School-Divines doe generally acknowledge And thus Gerardus Vossius speaks of the conditionall will which he faith the Fathers doe ascribe to God For this is the instance which he gives thereof as for example when God ordaines to bestow salvation on a man in case he believe here faith is made the condition of Salvation but not of the will of God And in like manner we willingly grant that reprobation is conditionall inasmuch as God intends to inflict damnation on none but such as die in sin without repenance But albeit predestination as touching this particular thing willed may be said to be conditionall according as the School-men explicate their meaning and reprobation likewise as touching the particular of dānatiō mētioned yet no such thing cā be truely affirmed either of the one or of the other as touching the particulars of grāting or denying the grace of règeneratiō which are intended also by the decrees of predestinatiō reprobatiō For albeit God intends not to bestow salvation on any but upon condition of faith nor damnation on any but upon condition of finall impenitency and infidelity Yet God intends not to bestow the grace of regeneration on some for the curing of their naturall infidelity and impenitency Nor to leave the same infidelity and impenitency uncured in others by denying the same grace of regeneration unto them This I say God doth not intend to bring to passe upon any condition For if he should then grace should be conferred according unto works which was condemned in the Synod of Palestine and all along in divers Synods and Councells against the Pelagians So that albeit God proceeds according to a law in bestowing salvation and inflicting damnation yet he proceeds according to no law in giving or denying the grace of regeneration for the curing of our naturall corruption but merely according to the pleasure of his will as the Apostle testifies saying He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth And if the conferring and denying of this grace be absolute how much more are the decrees hereof to be accounted most absolute And consequently that one man is delivered from the power of his sins whether originall or habituall another is not but still continueth under the power of them This I say doth must needs come to passe by vertue of Gods absolute decrees Yet no absolute necessity followeth hereupon First because no greater necessity then that which is absolute can be attributed to the existence and continuance of God himselfe Secondly God did absolutely decree to make the world yet no wise man was ever known to affirme that the worlds existence was and is by absolute necessity In like sort God did absolutely decree that Iosiah should burne the Prophets bones upon the Altar That Cyrus should build his Citty and let goe his captives That no man should desire the Israelites land when they should come to appeare before the Lord their God thrice in the yeare That God would circumcise their hearts and the hearts of their children to love the Lord their God withall their heart and with all their soule To put his feare in their hearts that they should never depart away from him To cause them to walke in his statutes and judgments to doe them To worke in them both the will and the deed according to his good pleasure Yea to worke in them every thing that is pleasing in his sight through Iesus Christ Likewise that Absolom should defile his fathers Concubines that the Jewes should crucify the Son of God that some through disobedience should stumble at the word that the Kings should give their kingdomes to the beast Yet these actions were done by them as freely as ever they did ought in their lives All these things I say by Scripture evidence were decreed by God to come to passe The good by God's effection the evill by God's permission and decreed absolutely on their parts that did them if not let it be shewed upon what condition on Absolon's part he should defile his fathers Concubines upon what condition on the Jewes part they should crucify the Son of God upon what condition on their part others through disobedience should stumble at God's word And upon what condition on their part the Kings should give their kingdomes to the beast And if they take Arminias his way let them reply upon mine answere to Arminius if Bellarmin's let them reply upon my answer to Bellarmine that we may not trouble the world with out Tautologies If a different way from both these I shall be glad to be acquainted with it give it such entertainement as according to my judgment it shall be found to deserve So that with Epiphanius though we are ready to concurre in denying destiny which as before we heard out of him was a necessity derived from the starres yet with Austin we may still hold that the wills of men need not to be exempted from all necessity to maintaine the liberty
but that to him sinne is to be imputed when it is done by Tertullians rule approved by this Authour quite contrary to the judgment and doctrine of Austin putting this difference betweene man and God the creature and the Creator that if we suffer others to sinne when we can hinder them rei cum ipsis erimus but how many sinnes sayth he do we see committed in the world which could never come to passe if God would hinder them Shewing how our doctrine opposeth Gods mercy according to his conceit and coming to deliver things more closely as he sayth and comprehending that which he hath to say under 4. particulars The 2. whereof this That it was the sinne of our nature not by generation as I have shewed but by Gods owne voluntary imputation The proofe whereof and the confirmation of it out of M. Calvin being set downe at large in some 13. lines or more in M. Hords discourse is here utterly left out which will be the more remarkable by comparing it with what he delivers concerning another attribute of God here inserted and which he pretends also to be impugned by our doctrine p. 54. where he seemes to sup up that which here he delivered Num. 3. These words are inserted I thinke I may conclude with the words of Prosper He which sayth that God would not have all men to be saved but a certaine set number of predestinate persons only he speaketh more harshly then he should of the height of Gods unsearchable grace Nay he speakes that which cannot stand with his infinite grace and mercy especially to the sonnes of men The 8. objection of the Galles was this That God will not have all men to be saved but a certaine number of persons predestinate Now Prospers answer hereunto is very large and it begines thus If about the salvation of all mankind and calling them unto the knowledge of his truth the will of God is maintained to be so indifferent throughout all ages that God may be shewed to have neglected no man altogether the unsearchable depth of Gods judgement is hereby assaulted For why did God suffer all nations in ages past to walke in their owne wayes when the Lord chose Iacob to himselfe and dealt not so with every nation And why are they now become Gods people which before were no people of God c All this makes nothing for this Authour The next is directly against him not only at large but in this very particular wherein he alleadeth Prosper not in his answer to this 8. objection but in his sentence proposed afterwards upon it For what is this Authours meaning in citeing him to affirme that God not only willeth their salvation whom he hath predestinated but all men also or at least that such as say the contrary do speake more harshly then we ought to speaks of the depth of Gods inscrutable grace but to cast a colour that Prosper concurres with him and judgeth that God is indifferunt to save all But the reason why he only saves some and not others is because some prepare themselves for grace and accordingly he bestowes it upon them Others do not prepare themselves and accordingly God doth not bestow it upon them Now prosper directly contests against all such as maintaine this opinion and that in two particulars 1. In taking upon them to give the reason of Gods judgements and that drawen from the wills and actions of men and which is no lesse impiety in thinking that grace is bestowed by way of reward for good workes Or restrayned from men by reason of their evill workes His words translated run thus But whosoever referreth the causes of Gods workes and judgements throughout to the wills and actions of men and will have Gods dispensations varied according to the changeable condition of mans free will such a one professeth the judgements of God to be scrutable and his wayes such as may be found out And that which Paul the Doctor of the Gentiles durst not touch this man thinkes he can unlock and make known And that which is a fruit of no lesse impiety the very grace of God whereby we are saved is given by the way of reward for good workes and denyed or restrained for evill workes So that in each particular Prosper is directly contrary this Authours tenet Now seeing the most part of men have not the grace of salvation that is such a grace as is of saving nature And the reason by God doth not give it them is not in consideration of their evill workes let any other sober and judicious Aminian be judge whether God can be sayd to will their salvation in such a sense as we speake of it when he denyeth them the grace of salvation and that not for their evill workes sake but which necessarily followeth hereupon meerely according to the good pleasure of his will And indeed in Prospers large answer to this eighth objectionto the Galles which taketh up almost a whole columne in Austin this Authour finds nothing at all to fasten upon for his advantage But yet you will say in his eighth sentence which he proposeth it is as this authour alleadgeth I grant it but observe his censure well The inscrutable depth of Gods grace may suffice to keep us from speaking so rashly as to say that God wills not all to be saved but only a certaine number of persons predestinate Where observe first he counts it an harsh speech to say that God willeth not that all men shall be saved the reason whereof undoutedly is this because it is expresly contradictory to a text in Scripture But then if we object how can God be sayd to will their salvation whom he hath not predestinated to whom he will not give the grace of salvation that not for their evill workes sake but according to the meere pleasure of his will Now Prospers answer in my judgement is this The depth of Gods inscrutable grace will beare us out in it so that we need not cast our selves upon so harsh an expression as to deny that God will have all men to be saved which is contradictious to the letter of Gods word In effect it is as if he should say It is a secret This I take to be Prospers meaning and herein I remit my selfe to the judicious But sure I am that Prosper is directly contrary to that opinion whereunto this Authour by vertue of this sentence of his desires to draw him In like manner the Authour of the booke De vocatione Gentium which is commonly thought to be Prospers though Vossius affects to entitle it unto another upon no other ground but because he conceits that Authour not to be so rigorous in the doctrine of predestination as Prosper But let the judicious compare Prospers cariage in this particular with that Authours and observe whether they do not exactly agree For that Authour holds up that text of Paul God will have all to be
have answered it and shewed the absurd interpretation that he makes of it He vaunts that he hath proved reprobation absolute to be unjust when he hath performed no thing lesse But making only a greate cracke he goes out like a squib and throughout meddles not with one argument that our Divines bring out of Scripture or reason to justifie their doctrine concerning the absolutenesse of reprobation And it is apparent that he denies the absolutenesse of election as well as the absolutenesse of reprobation and consequently must necessarily maintaine that grace is given according to works whereupon it was that Austin grounded his doctrine concerning the absolutenesse of Predestination And upon the like ground have we as good cause to ground our doctrine concerning the absolutenesse of reprobation it being every way as evident that Grace is not denied according unto works as that it is not granted according to mens works And the Scripture is equally as expresse concerning both where it is said that as God hath mercy on whom he will so also whom he will he hardneth Pag 75. 76. Treating of God's sincerity Sub-sect 1. There are two passages inserted taken out of Piscator before the passages alleadged out of Zanchy and Bucer For having said that Now God's meaning is by this doctrine that the most of those to whom he offereth his grace and glory shall have neither forthwith he gives instance in Piscator thus And so Piscator saith Grace is not offered by God even to those who are called with a meaning to give it but to the Elect only Gratia non offertur à Deo singulis â—licet vocatis animo communicandi eam sed solis electis In the same booke he hath such an other speech Non vult Deus reprobos credere liâ—etliâ—gua profiteatur se velle Though God in words protest he would have reprobates to believe yet indeed he will not have them they make God to deale with men in matters of salvation as the Poets feigne the Gods to have dealt with poore Tantalus They placed him in a cleare and goodly river up to the very chin and under a tree which bare much sweet and pleasant fruit that did almost touch his lips but this they did with a purpose that he should tast of neither For when he put his mouth to the water to drinke it waved away from him And when he reached his hand to the fruit to have eaten of it it withdrew it selfe presently out of his reach so as he could neither eate nor drinke Just so dealeth God with reprobates by their doctrine He placeth them under the plentifull meanes of salvation offereth it to them so plainly that men would thinke they might have it when they will yet intendeth fully they shall never have it withholding from them either the first grace that they cannot believe or the second grace that they cannot persevere Did not those gods delude Tantalus yes doubtlesse And if God doe so with reprobates what did he but delude them and dissenible with them in his fairest and likeliest offers of salvation that he makes them And this doe Zanchius and Bucer grant by evident consequence as appeareth by a speech or two of theirs which cannot stand with their conclusion and therefore I suppose fell unwarily from them This treatise of Piscator De praedestinatione against Schaffman I have the second editition printed at Herborne Anno 1598. But these words according to their quotations here are not to be found the severall distinct passages are distinguished by numbers which in all editions hold the same not so the pages Yet the latter passage quoted p. 143. I meet with in mine p. 128. According to the like difference I try whether I can find out the other but in vaine But yet I meet with such matter of discourse as whereunto this passage is very congruous to be there delivered if any where yet no such thing is there delivered as num 74. Schaffman's argument is this If God calls all to salvation then he will save all To this Piscator answereth The proposition is false But he calls with animo simplici atque vero a simple mind and true Sane saith Piscator as much as to say I grant that but so as that he calls them with condition of repentance and faith Therefore as he promiseth salvation seriously unto them that performe this condition and therefore performes this promise So on the contrary he doth seriously threaten death and damnation to them who doe not fulfill the condition and performes unto him that commination Then though God be not capable of hypocrisy yet he doth not alwaies will that what he commands shall be alwaies performed by him to whom he gives that command Whether by commanding he meanes to prove a man as to prove Abraham he commanded him to sacrifice his Son or because to him whom he commandeth he will not give grace to performe that command as he deales with reprobates And num 120. To Schaffman's objection which was this God is no hypocrite he answers thus But yet he gives not grace to all to performe what he commands theÌ„ For promiscuously he commands as well reprobates as elect to believe as many as he calls by the preaching of the gospell but he gives this grace to his elect alone according to that To you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdome of heaven but to them it is not given So that undoubtedly God offers grace to wit pardon of sinne with a purpose to communicate it to all that shall believe according to the judgment of Piscator neither doth he offer it with a purpose to communicate it to any unlesse they believe But the grace of faith is not offered to any with a purpose to communicate it upon a condition For then grace should be conferred according unto works which is manifest Pelagianisme As for the other which I meete with p 128. num 120 take it at full and not as it is dismembred by this Authour who cares not how he calumniates so he might advantage his own cause Schaffman's objection was Deus est unius linguae voluntatis God is both of the same tongue and will Whereto Piscator answers thus Your meaning is that God look what he professeth with his tongue that he willeth But this saith he is not alwaies true nor in all particulars For by his tongue that is by speech uttered he professed that he would have Abraham to sacrifice his Son Isaac yet he would not have him sacrificed With his tongue he professed by his servant Ionas that he would destroy Nineveh within forty dayes yet he would not so doe With his tongue by the ministers of the Gospell he professeth that he would have the reprobates to whom he speaketh among his Elect to believe the Gospell in as much as he commands them so to doe yet he would not have them to believe in as much as he will not
body or the decree of advancing a subject by way of reward doth presuppose his service or the decree of a Patron to present his sonne to a benefice doth presuppose his fitnesse for it or the decree of Solomon to bring Shimei his gray haires unto the grave in bloud did presuppose the offence for which this was brought to passe but rather from these decrees and intentions each Author in his kind proceedeth to bring to passe every thing that is required to the accomplishment of that end which he requires As I prove by instance in every particular 1. I have knowne one that to shew the power of his balme hath wounded his owne flesh and pouring his balme into it hath cured it in the space of twenty foure houres Aske wherefore he wounded his flesh every one seeth that both he wounded it and healed it with his balme to make the vertue of his balme knowne So that his intention of manifesting the vertue of his balme did not presuppose the wound but drew after it both the making of the wound and the pouring of balme into it as the meanes tending to the demonstration of the power of the balme 2. So we have knowne another to take poyson and afterward his cordiall against it both the one and the other joyntly tending to the manifestation of the vertue of his cordiall 3. A King intending to promote a favourite but withall to doe it without envy of the Nobility may resolve to doe it by way of reward which purpose presupposeth not good service but rather hereupon he will imploy him in service as in some honourable Embassage or in the Warres to the end that he may have occasion to advance him upon his service without envy of the Nobles 4. A Patron having a young sonne may entertaine a resolution to bestow a living upon him when time serves This intention doth not presuppose his fitnesse without which he cannot be admitted but because he hath a purpose to preferre him thereunto therefore he will take order to bring him up like a Schollar and send him to the University to make him fit 5. Last of all Solomon you know upon Davids admonition on his death bed entertained an intention to bring Shimei to his grave in bloud yet not for his cursing of David but for a new transgression therefore he takes a course to ensnare him and bids him to build him an house in Jerusalem and not to passe over the Brooke Kidron upon paine of death Now it was not indeed in Solomons power effectually to ensnare him and so certainely to bring upon him the execution of death But this is in the power of God For let him but expose any creature unto temptation and derelinquish him therein without giving him his grace to support him that creature shall certainely fall into sinne otherwise if any creature can keepe himselfe from sinne without Gods grace then Gods grace shall not have the prerogative of being the cause of every good action But this prerogative of Gods grace must and by Gods grace shall be maintained unto the end And upon this foundation the prerogative of his soveraigne power also over his creatures in disposing of them as he thinkes good and making some vessells of mercy and some of wrath which Arminius himselfe professeth he dares not deny to be in the power of God to wit to make vessells of mercy and vessells of wrath and that ex massa nondum condita in his Analysis of the ninth to the Romans But I proceed to the forme of your Syllogisme 1. The reason you say may be laid downe Syllogistically thus 1. God could not intend to pardon any without supposition of that which is necessarily required to make them capable of pardon But sinne is necessarily required to make them capable of pardon therefore God could not intend to pardon any without supposition of sinne 2. God could not intend to punish any without consideration of that which is in justice required to make them punishable But sinne is required in justice to make any person punishable therefore God could not intend to punish any without consideration of sinne Resp 1. In both Syllogismes the Minor we grant the Major we deny as being in effect the very same proposition which is in question and all the evidence it carryeth with it consisteth in the parts which have a shew of an Enthymeme thus 1. Sinne is necessarily prerequired to the pardoning of sinne therefore it is necessarily prerequired to the decree of pardoning sinne 2. Sinne in justice is prerequired unto punishing Ergo 'tis in justice prerequired to the decree of punishing Now this is the very proofe which formerly I laboured to disprove by shewing the inconsequence thereof yet the proposition whereon you rely either must depend upon this proofe or upon none at all But I will proceed with you a little farther upon these Syllogismes you propose 2. Sinne you say and that truly is necessarily required to make men capable of pardon And this generall truth brancheth it selfe into two specialls 1. Sinne originall is necessarily required to make men capable of pardon for sinne originall 2. Sinne actuall is necessarily required to make men capable of pardon for sinne actuall Now because God doth intend to pardon all the sinnes of his elect not onely originall but actuall committed throughout the whole course of his life it followeth that God could not intend to pardon these actuall sinnes without the presupposition of them 3. By the same reason of yours I dispute thus 1. God could not intend to bestow salvation upon any man by way of reward without supposition of that which is necessarily required to make him capable of reward But the obedience of faith repentance and good workes is necessarily required to make a man capable of reward Ergo God could not intend to bestow salvation on any man by way of reward without supposition of faith repentance and good workes 2. As God cannot intend to punish any without consideration of that which in justice is required to make him punishable so God cannot intend to punish any in such a degree without that which is required in justice to make him punishable in such a degree Now not onely sinne originall but all actuall sinnes of every Reprobate together with their finall impenitency therein is required in justice to make every one of them punishable in such a degree Ergo could not God intend to punish any Reprobate in such a degree without consideration of all their actuall sins And as mens actuall sinnes are the meritorious causes of their damnation so the consideration of them shall be the meritorious cause of their reprobation or at least of that decree whereby God doth decree to inflict damnation upon them in such a degree And by just proportion of reason like as faith repentance and good workes are the disposing causes unto salvation so the consideration of faith repentance and good workes shall be the
for me includes many things as the benefits which arise unto me by the death of Christ may be conceived to be many But let these benefits be distinguished and we shall readily answer to the question made and that perhaps differently as namely affirmatively to some negatively to others as thus Doe you speak of Christs dying for me that is for the pardon of my sins and for the salvation of my soule I answer affirmatively and say I am bound to believe that Christ died for the procuring of these benefits unto me in such manner as God hath ordained to wit not absolutely but conditionally to wit in case I doe believe and repent For God hath not otherwise ordained that I should reap the benefit of pardon and salvation by vertue of Christs Death and Passion unlesse I believe in him and repent But if question be made whether I am bound to believe that Christ died for me to procure faith and repentance unto me I doe not say that I am bound or that every one who hears the Gospel is bound to believe this Nay the Remonstrants now a daies deny in expresse tearmes that Christ merited this for any at all I am not of their opinion in this but I see clearly a reason manifesting that Christ merited not this for all no not for all and every one that hears the Gospel For if he had then either he hath merited it for them absolutely or conditionally Not absolutely for then all and every one of them should believe de facto which is untrue for the Apostle saith Fides non est Omnium Nor conditionally for what condition I pray can be devised upon the performance whereof God for Christs sake should give us faith and repentance In like sort if I am demanded whether God did decree of the meer pleasure of his will to refuse to give grace and glory unto some and to inflict upon them damnation To this I cannot answer at once there being a Fallacy in the demand But distinguish them I answer and say that as touching the poynt of denying grace God doth that of his meer pleasure but as touching the denyall of glory and the inflicting of damnation he doth not decree to doe these of meer pleasure but rather meerly for sin to wit for their infidelity and impenitency and all the bitter fruits that shall proceed from them So that Reprobation according to our Tenent rightly stated is the decree of God partly to deny unto some and that of his meer pleasure the grace of Faith and Repentance for the curing of that infidelity and hardnes of heart which is naturall unto all and partly to deprive them of glory and to inflict damnation upon them not of his meer pleasure but meerly for their finall continuance in sin to wit in infidelity and impenitency and all the fruits that proceed therehence 2. Now as for the cause of this decree as likewise of all the decrees of God when any of our Divines say that it is the meer pleasure of God as in some places it is expressed of some decrees let them be understood aright not as if they distinguished between the decree of God and the good pleasure of his will for we know full well that the decree of God is the good pleasure of his Will what decree soever it be but hereby we only exclude all causes from without moving God to make any such decree like as when it is said Deuteron 7. 7. The Lord did not set his love upon you nor chuse you because ye were more in number then any people but because the Lord loved you as much as to say The Lord loved you because he loved you Where we cannot soberly devise any distinction between love and love as between the cause and the effect only hereby is excluded all cause from without Now we are ready with open face to professe that of the Will and decree of God there neither is nor can be any cause from without all things from without being temporall and the Will of God being eternall and the Will of God quoad actum Volentis being the very Essence of God For God is a pure Act and that indivisibly One whereby he is said to Bee whatsoever he is as wee doe conceive variety of perfections in God yet all these are but one indivisible Act in God and by this one indivisible Act he both knowes all that he knowes and willeth and decreeth all that he willeth and decreeth Man when he willeth any thing as likewise an Angel when he willeth ought they produce an act of willing passing upon this or that object but it is not so with God in whom there is no accident And therefore Aquinas was bold to professe that never any man was so mad as to professe that merits were the cause of Predestination as touching the act of God predestinating and why so why surely upon this ground because predestination is the will of God and like as nothing can be the cause of the will of God as touching the act of willing so nothing can be the cause of divine predestination as touching the act of God predestinating His words are these in the same place Sic inquirenda est ratio praedestinationis sicut inquiritur ratio divinae voluntatis dictum est autem suprà quod non est assignare causam divinae voluntatis ex parte actus volendi But because like as the love of God is sometime taken for the good thing which God bestowes like as Jansenius interprets that place Iohn 14. 21. He that loveth me shall be beloved of my Father to wit of the effect of the Fathers love and we commonly say that Passions are attributed unto God not quoad Affectum but quoad Effectum in like sort the Will of God is taken for the thing willed as 1 Thes 4. 3. This is the will of God even your sanctification that is this is willed by him Therefore Aquinas distinguisheth a double consideration in the will of God one quoad actum volentis and so it hath no cause from without another quoad res volitas and so it may have a cause So likewise in predestination as considering it either quoad actum Praedestinantis and so it hath no cause or quoad effectum Praedestinationis and so it may have a cause as there he professeth both touching the will of God in generall and touching Predestination in speciall Of the will of God in generall thus Non est assignare causam voluntatis divinae ex parte actus volendi sed potest assignari ratio ex parte volitorum in quantum scilicet Deus vult esse aliquid propter aliud And of predestination in speciall thus Sed hoc sub quaestione vertitur utrum ex parte effectus praedestinatio habeat aliquam causam hoc est quaerere utrum Deus praeordinaverit se daturum effectum praedestinationis alicui propter aliqua merita Now thus
so Gods grace preserved him from such excesse but that the Ministers Tiberius set about them did more provoke them by exasperating courses then God did in like manner provoke Ionah it doth not appeare but had Ionah hereupon broken forth into blasphemies had Ionah's sinne been excusable or Gods course blameable Revel 16. 21. we read of a great hayle that fell upon the men like Talents out of heaven and men blaspheamed God because of the plague of the hayle for the plague thereof was exceeding great And Isai 8. 21. The Lord prophecyeth that He that is afflicted and famished shall goe to and fro and when he shall be hungry he shall even fret himselfe and curse his King and his Gods and look upward such plagues are the work of God for there is no evill in the citty but the Lord hath done it Amos 3. But let them look unto it that thereupon take occasion to blaspheme And Tentatio probationis was never yet that I know denyed unto God to try whether they will blaspheme God or no. To this end Satan desired to have an hand on Job yet not so much to try whether he would blaspheme or no but being confident he should bring him to blaspheme Job 1. 11. stretch out now thine hand and touch all that he hath and he will curse thee to thy face The Lord gave him leave and Job acknowledgeth the Lords hand in all that Satan did saying The Lord gave and the Lord takes away yet in all this Job sinned not nor charged God foolishly Satan desires yet farther liberty saying skin for skin yea all that a man hath will he give for his life But put forth thy hand now and touch his bone and his flesh and he will curse thee to thy face And the Lord said unto Satan Behold he is in thy hand but save his life So went Satan forth from the presence of the Lord and smote Job with sore boyles from the sole of his foot unto his crowne and he took him a potshard to scrape himselfe withall and he sate down among the ashes Then said his Wife unto him Doest thou yet continue in thy integrity Curse God and dye She manifested the inward corruption of her irreligious heart Job might have brought her to a forme of godlines by his pious courses in his family but litle power of godlinesse doth appeare upon her For as Solomon saith If thou faint in the day of adversity thy strength is small It seems her heart was sowred with Atheisme thinking the world was governed by chance rather then by divine providence and consequently it was all one whether a man did blesse God or curse God and a madnesse to make a conscience of walking in integrity and that in Iobs case at this time whether he did blesse God he must dye or whether he did curse God he could but dye and better it was for him thus impoverished thus afflicted to dye then to live as for the powers of the world to come it seems she never had but a tast of them and that tast never produced any true faith in her concerning them Here was a sore temptation the very gates of hell playing upon him with their greatest Ordinance to batter if it were possible his shield of faith But what is Iobs answer Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh What shall we receive good at the hand of God and shall we not receive evill In all this did not Iob sin with his lips The worke of Satan in the impoverishing of Iobs estate and afflicting his person cannot be denied to be Gods work As for the work of his wife why might not that be the work of God as well as the work of Satan For did not Satan sin in all this As our Saviour saith that he was a murtherer from the beginning and as S t Peter saith The devill goes about like a roring Lyon seeking whom he may devoure so who can make doubt but these courses practised against Iob were fruits of his murthering and devouring disposition And all sides now a daies confesse that the act of the most flagitious sin committed by man or Angell is the work of God in the way of a principall efficient cause as well as it is the work of the creature And as for the sinfulnesse of the act either of the Devill or his Wife that was not it which did or could hurt Iob but the works wrought by Satan the temptation atheisticall proposed by his Wife this was the greatest danger in the consideration thereof to corrupt his soule for that is it alone that workes upon the will to incline it And as for their sinning herein that proceeded from the want of Gods feare according to that of Abraham Genes 20. 10. I said surely the feare of God is not in this place therefore they will slay me for my Wives sake And albeit God engageth himselfe towards some for the putting of his feare in their hearts that they shall never depart away from him Ierim 36. 40. yet he hath not engaged himselfe thus farre towards all For the Apostle plainly professeth that He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9. 18. and hardning we know is denying the feare of God either as touching the habituall infusion thereof or as touching the actuall excitation thereof after it is infused Yet I deny not but obduration and excaecation are sometimes promiscuously used the one for the other because of the strict conjunction that is betwixt them And as touching the particular act of Convitiation Austin spares not to professe that even when it is committed by man it is brought forth by God out of his secret providence lib. 9. Confess cap. 8. Quid egisti Deus meus unde curasti unde sanasti nonne protulisti durum acutum ex alterâ animâ convitium tanquam medicinale ferrum ex occultis provisionibus tuis uno ictu putredinem illam praecidisti And whereas Bellarmine endeavoureth to blast the evidence of this place giving testimony unto Gods secret providence in evill I have endeavoured to shew the vanity of his discourse in my Vind. Grat. Dei lib. 2. Crim. 3. digress 2. cap. 13. And in what congruity can it be said that God bid Shimei to curse David but that in the same analogy of faith it may be said that God bid Iobes Wife in this manner to tempt him And which of the two was the greatest provocation Tiberius his Ministers Provocation of Drusus and Nero or Shimei's provocation of David rayling on him to his face the Subject blaspheaming his Prince undoubtedly the provocation was nothing inferior only here was the difference Tiberius gave such commandment to his Ministers so to provoke Drusus and Nero God gave no such commandement in proper speech unto Shimei but rather commanded the contrary in his law Thou shalt not speak evill of the ruler of thy people But Gods secret providence whereby he
out of measure through the abundance of revelations Therefore saith he I take pleasure in infirmities in reproaches in necessities in persecutions in anguishes for Christs sake for when I am weak then am I strong And had not Joseph as good cause to conceive that it was the will of God that he by the unchast motions of his wanton Mistris should be provoked unto unclean courses as David had to perswade himselfe that it was Gods will by the rayling of Shimei he should be provoked unto revenge that so by the power of his grace strengthning them against such provocations they might come forth of their severall temptations as gold out of fire more bright more resplendent then before Ioseph was a faire person and well favoured Genes 39. 6. Now this was a sore provocation to a lustfull eye Beauty is said to be of a dangerous nature as that which makes a man either Praedonem alienae castitatis or Praedam suae But Joseph had a gracious and a chast heart his beauty gave him no encouragement to prey upon others chastity but being a congruous baite to the lustfull appetite of his Mistris it was in danger to expose his own chastity to be preyed upon And as Austin said of Gods providence concerning Shimei ejus voluntatem proprio vitio suo malam in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo occulto inclinavit Who seeth not that the like may be said of Gods dealing with Ioseph's Mistris and that without all aspersion of unholinesse unto God For if he gives Men or Women over unto their lusts what will be the issue but uncleannesse Rom. 1. 24 26. When God gave them up to vile affections what followed but this even their Women did change their naturall use into that which was against nature vers 27. and likewise also the Men left their naturall use of the Women and burned in their lust one toward another and Man with Man wrought filthinesse and received in themselves such recompence of their errour as was meet Here we have a strange course of Gods providence in punishing sin with sin For these Gentiles in defiling themselves one with another in a most unnaturall and abominable manner are said to receive such recompence for their errour as was meet In few words what is meant by provocation unto any sin Is it to doe that whereupon man may take just cause or occasion to doe that which he doth without blame like as the Corinthians provoked Paul as a foole to loast himselfe as himselfe expresseth it for he adds ye have compelled me But this cannot be affirmed of Tiberius his ministers in provoking Drusus and Nero. For no provocation could be sufficient to make them unblameable in convitiating their Prince much lesse can it be said that God provokes any man in this manner neither doe I think that any of our adversaries as malevolent as they are dares impute any such crimination unto us as if wee attributed any such discourse unto providence divine What then is it to provoke unto sin Is it to doe somewhat upon the consideration whereof mens passions being moved they cannot but sin But this in like sort is equally as untrue as the former even of those provocations which were made upon Drusus and Nero by the practises of Tiberius Or is it the doing of somewhat whereupon occasion is taken to sinne to blaspheme this hath no colour of truth in it For even man without all transgression may doe many things whereupon occasion is taken of doing evill and therefore we distinguish of Scandalum datum Acceptum Nay though man knowes offence will be taken upon the doing of some things yet if the doing thereof be commanded by God he must doe them what occasion soever is thereby taken to offend Indeed if they are things indifferent I must abstaine from the doing of them in case I know offence will be taken thereat and that thereby I shall lay a stumbling block in the way of my Brother For Paul professeth that if meat would offend his Brother he would never eat meat rather then offend his Brother But no such obligation lies upon God For he knoweth full well how some will abuse his mercies others grow worse and worse by his judgements breaking forth into blasphemy thereupon yet no wise man will say that God is the more unholy in the shewing of mercy and in the execution of judgement He professeth in plain termes that to them who feare him he will be a sanctuary but as a stumbling block and as a rock to fall upon to both the houses of Israel and as a snare and as a net to both the Inhabitants of Ierusalem Isai 8. 14. As for the last clause of this odious Parallel concerning the end of Tiberius his course in this namely that so he might cover his cruelty in their death under pretext of justice Undoubtedly I should think the putting of them to death was just in case they did convitiate their Prince whatsoever their provocations were For hereby they deserved death yea everlasting death and damnation His sin was in causing them to be provoked hereunto and so also it might be in the manner of their execution For it is written of him that fame necavit he famished them I know Tiberius was cruell enough but by the story it seems that policy wicked policy moved him unto this first to intend their deaths because he saw the affections of the people towards them belike for Germanicus his sake a worthy man according to those times For when he found that in the beginning of the yeare vowes were made on their behalfe to wit for their preservation he dealt with the Senate that such rewards ought not to be tendred but towards such who were of experience and of ripenesse of age and that hereupon the inward character of his affection towards them being discovered he laid them open to every mans criminations variaque fraude inductos ut concitarentur ad convitia concitati perderentur accusavit per literas amarissimè congestis etiam probris judicatos hostes fame necavit And anon after the same Author discovers the reason of all this to wit that seeing Germanicus was but his adopted Sonne and one Drusus by name was his naturall sonne and his own sonne Drusus being dead leaving a sonne Tiberius behind him he desired to make him as his naturall sonne his successor in the Empire Aelium Sejanum ad summam potentiam non tà m benevolentia provexer at quà m ut esset cujus ministerio ac fraudibus liberos Germanici circumveniret Nepotemque suum ex Druso filium naturalem ad successionem Imperii confirmaret Sure we are God hath no need of any such politique courses neither hath he need of any pretext of justice to take a mans life from him It is confessed now of all hands that God can annihilate the holiest Angel by power absolute And if it be in the power of God to keep any man
no lesse then abominable most damnable sins Yet undoubtedly God did not animate Herod Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and people of Israel to do what they did against our Saviour but rather left them to be ordered by his Law wherein such things are prohibited And neverthelesse the Apostles in their pious meditation with one voyce professe that All these were gathered together against the holy Son of God to doe those things which Gods hand and Gods councell had predestinated to be done and why the like is not to be acknowledged of the most barbarous facts committed by Tiberius or any other monster of nature I know no reason And as touching shamefull courses no lesse abominable in the kind of acts flagitious as these here mentioned of Tiberius were in the kind of acts facinorous The Apostle professeth both that God gave them up to vile affections and to the lusts of their own hearts to the committing of such abominations and also that herein they received such recompence of their errour as was meet and the errour which God avenged in this manner what was it but such wherein Tiberius was as deep as those whom the Apostle speaks of namely in changing the glory of the incorruptible God to the similitude of the image of a corruptible man and of birds and of four footed beasts and of creeping things And they were but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into which God delivered up Tiberius and to such God delivered up them of whom the Apostle speaks and his actions as well as theirs were equally the fruits of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into which God gave them up that so they might receive that recompence of their errour as was meet I come to the second instance here made of Tiberius his cruelty which he compares to those courses which we out of holy Scripture have learned to be attributed unto God himselfe Now this hath long agoe been objected by Bertius in his Preface to the Conference of Arminius with Iunius I say objected by him unto Piscator thereunto Piscator also hath answered long agoe And whereas Bertius hath replyed and allowed Piscator a year for putting in his answer thereunto whereof had he failed he would interpret it as a confession of his insufficiency to make good the cause maintained by him Piscator answers that he had no need of so long a time as he prescribed him for after he had read over his book in the space of two or three daies he addressed himselfe to an answer thereunto and within a month finished it Now if the Author of this discourse were ignorant hereof his ignorance might excuse him if otherwise he might have with more credit occupied himselfe in the answering at the least of some chief particulars whereupon Piscator stands for the justifying of his doctrine delivered by him not of his own brain but according to the word of God then hand over head to hold up the crimination without taking notice of the dilution thereof many years a goe proposed and set forth to the judgement of the world But I am content to take into consideration how Scholastically and judiciously he carrieth himselfe in this crimination as well as in the former and the rather because it may be that this odious cōparison he makes more account of for the preparation of his Auditors to entertain that which followes with the more propitious affectiō then he doth of the strength of ought that follows whatsoever he doth or may pretēd to the cōtrary to the point thē Tiberius commanded the Virgins to be defloured that they might be strangled Now is there any carriage of God taught by us like unto this If God were disposed to strangle any certainly he hath no need to have thē defloured first For it is now a daies confessed even by Arminius himselfe that God can lawfully annihilate the holiest creature that lives and that without all respect to sin or the vitiation of them And annihilation I think is much more then strangulation this causing only a dissolution between the body and soule but annihilation setting an utter end to body soule by turning them both into nothing And farther had Tiberius only permitted the deflouring of them whē he might have hindered it though this were a foule part in him yet I hope no Christian will say it is a foule part in God to permit any act never so flagitious or facinorous when he is able to hinder it especially when he may hinder it without any prejudice to the liberty of mans will and that this is in Gods power Arminius acknowledgeth and supposeth at large in his Examen and Treatise there De Permissione But Tiberius commanded the Hangman to defloure them But is this our doctrine that God commanded the ravishing of any the murthering of any or any other sin whatsoever Do we not all teach rather that God forbids it and that under penalty of everlasting death yet it is true the word of God expressely professeth out of the mouth of David that God bad Shimei to curse David and that he bid the evill spirit to seduce Ahab that he might goe up to Ramoth-Gilead and that not to be strangled I confesse but which was nothing better to him that he might fall and be slain there But this is a figurative speech and signifies not properly any command of God but rather denotes the secret operation of Gods providence in the hearts of men even of wicked men for those as well as Devills God knows how to make use of to serve his own turne And Austin professeth Deum operari in cordibus hominum ad inclinandas eorum voluntates quocunque voluerit sive ad bona pro suâ misericordiâ sive ad mala pro meritis eorum judicio utique suo aliquando aperto aliquando occulto semper autem justo And touching the particular of Shimei writes thus ejus voluntatem proprio suo vitio malam in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo occulto inclinavit As for Tiberius his causing the little maides to be defloured that might be done without their sinne they might be ravished and in that case that might be their sorrow but not their sin And as for the hangmans fault in this he was not excusable by Tiberius his causing him to defloure them For Tiberius his causation herein extended no farther then to command them And I hope it was no just excuse for the people of Israel in their Idolatrous courses that therein they did but keep the statutes of Omri and all the manner of the house of Ahab Mic. 6. Yet neither doth God command any man to doe that which his Law forbids or to sin against him And farther we acknowledge with Austin that sin hath no efficient cause but deficient And it is enough with God to expose any man to sin by not working him to that which is good it being his office to work us to every thing
that is pleasing in his sight Heb. 13. 20. to cause us to walk in his statutes and judgements and to doe them Ezech. 36. 28. yea to keep us from presumptious sins and that they get not the dominion over us Psal 19. 14. yea to deliver us from every evill work 2 Timoth. 4. 18. But perhaps some may say Our doctrine is that God willeth sin to be committed for which men may and shall be punished like as Tiberius would the Virgins should be defloured that they might be strangled And I answer that Arminius himselfe professeth that Deus voluit Achabum mensuram scelerum suorum implere God would have Ahab fill up the measure of his sinne that he might be condignely punished And why may we not say as well that God would have Tiberius to fill up the measure of his sinnes And yet like as Tiberius would have the Virgins to be defloured that they might be strangled so Ahab would have Naboth accused of blasphemy that he might be condemned for it and so put to death and stoned and all these things were done under colour of Religion Yet Arminius in reference to these very courses spares not to professe that God would have Ahab to fill up the measure of his sinnes yet doth not Bertius upbraid him for defaming God with imputing cruelty unto him Againe the same Arminius professeth that in their ignominious handling of Christ God would have the Jewes progredi quousque progressi sunt proceed so farre as they did proceed And was it not Gods will in like manner that the Gentiles should proceed as farre as they did in the same businesse Now we know full well by the story Evangelical how farre they went in their mischievous courses against the Son of God For Judas betrayed him and the high Priests both hired Judas hereunto and suborned false witnesses against him and both the Herodians and Souldiers mocked him and the people urged Pilate to crucify him and to dismisse 〈◊〉 and Pilate yeelded to the peoples desire took order to have him first scourged then crucified And if it may be truely and piously said that in these ignominious usages of the Son of God they went as farre as God would have them to goe why may it not with as great truth and piety be avouched that Tiberius also in these his barbarous courses went as farre as God would have him Neither doth Arminius give himselfe to qualify the harshnesse of these his affirmations We say that whatsoever comes to passe it is Gods will it should come to passe as Austin expresly professeth Enchir. cap. 95. Nec aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit and the Articles of Ireland Artic. 11. professe the same But withall we explicate it as Austin dothin the words following by adding the different manner how they shall come to passe by the will of God according to the different condition of things that come to passe namely good or evill thus Vult fieri but how vel sinendo ut fiat to wit in case they are evill vel ipse faciendo to wit in case they are good So then good things God will have come to passe by his effection evill things only by his permission And Bellarmine opposing our Divines to the uttermost of his power in this particular being convicted in conscience by the evidence of truth is driven to confesse Bonum esse ut malum fiat Deo permittente It is good that evill should come to passe by Gods permission or Gods permitting it Tiberius willed that the Virgins should be defloured and impiously he willed it God willed that Davids Concubines should be defloured and holily he willed it neither is he delighted with impurity For the Scripture attributes this unto God I will give thy Wives unto thy Neighbour and he shall lye with them in the sight of all Israel and before the sunne And this constupration of Davids Concubines served for the chastising of David as Arminius professeth Inserviit castigando Davidi omnes paenae habent Deum authorem All punishments have God for their author they are the words of the same Arminius It was impiety and cruelty in Tiberius to cause the Virgins to be defloured and strangled But what Christian dares to impute impiety or cruelty unto God for causing the Children of the Sodomites some in their Mothers wombe some hanging upon their Mothers breasts to be consumed with fire and brimstone It was impiety and cruelty in Tiberius to will the deflouring of those Virgins that they might be strangled But Arminius thought it neither impiety nor cruelty for God to will that Ahab should fill up the measure of his sinne that so he might accumulate unto himselfe wrath in the day of wrath for if he had I presume he would not have ascribed any such will unto God as he doth in expresse termes Although he well knew the vast difference between the power of man and the power of God in executing vengeance the ones power extending only to the execution of vengeance temporall but Gods power extends to the execution of vengeance eternall Now I find a story immediatly following this very story alleadged by this Author out of Suetonius expressing the cruelty of Tiberius in a farther degree as not contented with the death of them whom he would destroy and therefore he would keep them alive to torment them Mori volentibus vis adhibita vivendi when they desired to dye he caused them to live by force Nam mortem adeò leve supplicium putabat ut cum audisset unum è reis anticipasse eam exclamaverit Carnutius me evasit For he accounted death so light a punishment that when he heard one of the condemned persons to have anticipated it he cryed out Carnutius hath escaped me for that was the condemned persons name And when he took notice of them that were inward when one desired to suffer betimes he answered him Nondum tecum in gratiam redii I doe not as yet beare these so much good will Now why may not some Atheisticall person track the steps of this Author and in this particular exaggerate the hainousnesse of Gods holy courses as savouring of cruelty beyond all example beyond the cruelty of Tiberius because he holds delinquent creatures upon the rack of eternall torment in hell fire For certain vindicative courses in Tiberius inferior unto these are accounted abominable cruell and impious how much more if this Authors argumentation be of force those courses which the word of God hath informed us to be the courses divine infinitely beyond the courses of Tiberius in the way of severity and rigour As for the power of God in producing sinne we acknowledge none Above 1200 years agoe it was delivered by Austin that sinne hath no efficient cause but deficient only But when the creature sinneth he sinneth in doing that he ought not to doe or in doing what he doth not in that manner he ought to doe or in not doing what he
naturall and carnall men and therein they doe abstaine from the committing of it freely And yet we say that even in abstaining from these acts they doe not abstaine from sinne for as much as they doe not abstaine from them in a gracious manner and all by reason of that originall corruption which remaines uncured in them untill such time as God who hath mercy on whom he will is pleased to cure it by the grace of regeneration 3. But because I imagine this Author le ts fly at randome and keeps not himselfe to the precise genius of the Tenent by him impugned but rather aimeth at our doctrine concerning providence divine and the decree of God according whereunto we willing professe with Austin that Non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit Enchir. 95. Therefore I answere in the third Place That the necessity following upon this will of God is nothing prejudiciall to the liberty or contingency of second agents in their severall operations Although I am not ignorant that now a daies it is the common and glorious course of our Adversaries very confidently to presume and presuppose that upon the will of God passing upon the action of the creature there followeth a necessity standing in flat opposition to the liberty of rationall agents and no marvail for sic factitavit Hercules Arminius the great Champion of their cause his learning served him to doe so before them As if the contumelious usages of our Saviour by Herod and Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and people of Israel were not performed freely but by meer necessity opposite to liberty For it cannot be denied but that all these were gathered together against the holy sonne of God to doe what Gods hand and Gods counsel had predestinated to be done Acts 4. 28. And in like sort they that through disobedience stumbled at the word of God did not freely disobey the Word because Peter professeth of them in expresse termes that Hereunto they were ordained And after the same manner it is to be conceived of the Kings that gave their Kingdomes to the Beast namely that they did it not freely in as much as the Holy Ghost saith that God put into their hearts to fulfill his will and to consent and give their Kingdome to the Beast Yet the Church of Ireland in their Articles set forth by as good Authority as the Articles of the Church of England Art 11. having professed that God from all eternity did by his unchangeable counsel ordaine whatsoever in time should come to passe to prevent such like objections as this Author fashioneth forthwith adde Yet so as thereby no violence is offered to the willes of reasonable creatures and neither the liberty nor the contingency of second causes is taken away but established rather And Austin in his Book De Grat. Liber Arbitr where he speaks as freely of Gods effectuall Providence working in evill as no where more in so much as our Adversaries take great exceptions against his speeches such as formerly delivered and that in expresse termes His main drift notwithstanding and scope in that Book is to prove that notwithstanding the divine operation in working the motion of the creature as he thinks good yet is the creature never a whit the lesse free in its own operation And indeed where grace is wanting there is too much will rather then too little unto that which is evill according to that he writes also elsewhere Libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia And if Gods operation prejudiceth not the liberty of the creature much lesse the will of God For though not any thing comes to passe unlesse God willeth it whether it be good or evill yet with this difference as Austin in the same place professeth He will have that which is good come to passe by the effecting of it but evill only by his permitting of it Non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo But though Austin and the Church of Ireland yea and the Word of God teacheth this yet the Tragaedian as this Author saith could see the contrary that is perceive the evidence of the contrary which none of these saw And is not this a pretty Comaedy that a Tragaedian and Zeno's servant must be brought in and that in a confidentiary supposition to out face not Divines only both antient and late but the very word of God For it is as clear forsooth that what comes to passe by the will of God and by the effectuall operation of God doth not come to passe freely and consequently that the doctrine which maintaines that evill comes to passe by the will of God as the crucifying of Christ by the predestination of God or by the operation of God as the Rent of the ten Tribes from the two and the hardning of Pharaoh's heart so as not to let Israel goe God professeth to be his work takes away all conscience of sinne All this I say is as cleare if we believe this Author as that Seneca's Tragaedies are the Oracles of God And I pray consider must it not take away as well all conscience of righteousnesse whether of faith or of repentance or of obedience unlesse we deny faith to be the gift of God repentance to be the gift of God unles we deny that God is he Who makes us perfect to every good work working in us that which is pleasing in his sight that God is he that putteth his own spirit in us and causeth us to walke in his statutes and to keep his judgements and doe them Yet what doth Seneca speak of the divine will or divine operation Did the Tragaedian under the terme of Fate denote the divine decree or the divine administration of things which is plentifully revealed to us in the word of God Austin I am sure thought otherwise in more places then one in Psalm 31. on these words Pronunciabo adversum me He blames those who when they are found in their sinnes say Fatum mihi fecit stellae meae fecêrunt But saith he Quid est fatum Quae sunt stellae certè istae quas in Coelo conspicimus Qui eas fecit Deus Quis eas ordinavit Deus ergo vides quod voluisti dicere Deus fecit ut peccarem Then he tells of others who said that Mars facit Homicidam Venus Adulterum So that Fatum with them were second causes which we all know in their operations doe both work by necessity of nature and have no power to maintain the free will of man and in Psalm 91. Quaeris ab illo quid sit Fatum dicit stellae malae Quaeris ab illo quis fecit stellas quis ordinavit stellas non habet quid tibi respondeat nisi Deus It 's true indeed the Pelagians did object the Stoicall Fate unto Austin as if his doctrine favoured of it and what doth he answer thereunto Nec
of God is it a Christian course to renounce it or to question the integrity of it because he finds no footing in Antiquity for it What then shall become of the faith of Laicks and such as are unlearned Must the writings of the Fathers be translated into all vulgar Languages and the unlearned addict themselves to the study of them least otherwise their faith prove a wavering faith for want of finding Antiquity to favour it Belike the writings of the Prophets and Apostles are no part of Antiquity in this Authors more mature judgement But if formerly the doctrine of absolute reprobation were received upon the evidence of Gods word as it is fit the faith of every Christian should be grounded thereupon especially the faith of a Divine called to be a Teacher of others I should think there were no just cause of alteration but upon discovery of the errour of those grounds whereupon formerly it was builded and the discovery hereof alone were chiefly to the present purpose namely to shew just cause of change of mind alteration of judgement but no such course doe I find taken here These motives and reasons here proposed may carry a shew of reason why a man being yet to chuse his faith in these particulars possessed with neither way but indifferent might preferre one way before another one opinion before another but nothing sufficient to justify a change unlesse the weaknesse of former grounds be laid open For it may be that the former grounds might be such as upon due comparison would be found to overweigh these pretences For upon view that I have taken of the discourse following I find not one argument drawn from those places of Scripture that treat of election and reprobation these I find are purposely declined as so many rocks as if the Author feared to make shipwrack of his errours pardon my boldnesse in so naming them Austin is my precedent in this saying Hoc scio contra istam praedestinationem quam secundum scripturas defendimus neminem nisi errando disputare posse but in the mean time while he fears to make shipwrack of his errours let him take heed least he make shipwrack of a good conscience But proceed we with him about the inquiry what footing this doctrine finds in Antiquity He saith he cannot find it but it is more then I find that ever he made any convenient search after it his whole discourse hereupon is of so hungry a nature The absolutenesse of election and reprobation we conclude in Christian reason from Gods absolute carriage in giving and denying grace understanding thereby the grace of regeneration Now the absolutenesse herein as we suppose consists in bestowing this grace on some and denying it to others according to the meer pleasure of the Lords will Now hath not the Apostle more ancient then all the Antiquity he speaketh of professed in expresse termes that God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth What need we seek farther amongst the Ancients for the iustification of this And that mercy here is meant such a mercy in bestowing faith on some which is denied to others in converting the wills of some unto good when others are not converted I could prove by variety of places out of Austin whose authority in this case is farre more worthy then all the authority this Author produceth Neither is this the voyce of Austin only but of Ambrose also in that famous saying of his Quem vult religiosum facit so much magnified by Austin And not Ambrose alone but Nazianzen also and Cyprian are alleaged by him as concurring with him in the foundation of the doctrine of predestination which he makes to be the freedome of Gods grace in converting whom he will And which is farre more then this yea farre more then all that can be produced to the contrary by the very Prayers of the Church every where in use he iustifies the generall concurrence in that which he accounts the foundation of predestination As when their common course was to pray unto God that he would be pleased to convert unto the faith of Christ the hearts of Heathens and wherein did this conversion consist but in giving them faith and repentance manifestly giving us to understand thereby that the whole Catholique Church did concurre in this Article of Faith that it was in the power of God according to his free grace to convert whom he would unto the faith of Christ and consequently not to convert whom he would For if there were any cause on mans part why he doth not convert some converting others then there were also on mans part a cause why God doth convert some not converting others and consequently grace should be given according unto works that is in the phrase of the Ancients Gratiam dari secundum merita as Bellarmine acknowledgeth which was ever accounted expresse Pelagianisme and was as expressely condemned in the Councel of Palestina above 1200 years agoe and Pelagius himselfe was driven to subscribe unto it by shamefull dissimulation so to prevent Anathematization of his own person But the upper way saith this Author was never taught or approved by any of the Fathers for 600 years Here breaks forth another reason of this Authors or his that directed him cunning carriage in distinguishing the two waies of our Divines in maintaining the absolutenesse of election and reprobation to wit that in the course of his discourse he might serve his turne with both and where Antiquity served not his turne against the one yet might it serve his turne as he thought against the other But the truth is there was no such question at all ventilated in those daies as touching the obiect of predestination no nor in Austins neither nor many hundred years after that I know And no marvell For it concernes the ordering of Gods decree aright which is meerly Logicall as I have shewed in my Vind. Grat. Dei It s true that S t Austin doth usually accommodate that of S t Paul Rom. 9. 21. concerning the Masse unto mankind considered in Massa damnata as he commonly calls it that is in the corrupt Masse but not alwaies but sometimes he speaks of it and accommodates it cleerely unto the Masse of mankind uncorrupt yea as yet not created as there I have shewed And as for the right ordering of Gods decrees and the right stating of the object of predestination and reprobation We desire no better nor other ground then that of the Apostle God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth that is he cures infidelity and hardnes of heart in whom he will by bestowing faith and repentance upon them and leaves it uncured in whom he will by denying faith and repentance unto them And as for the rigour of this Tenent as it is commonly accounted of making the Masse of mankind not created the object of predestination I have already shewed the vanity of that
fundomento praedestinationis which he accounted the the doctrine of Free grace and cites to this purpose Cyprian Ambrose and Nazianzen and by the common prayers of the Church that God would convert the unbelievers unto the faith of Christ that the same doctrine which was in his judgement the foundation of predestination as he maintained it according to the Word of God was generally received in the Church of God Before I part from this I think fit to adde something concerning the stile here given to Lucidus before the revocation of his pretended error for here I find him stiled the Predestinarian Now I presume this Author that pretends so great reverence to gray haires and so much preferres Antiquity before Novelty hath good ground for this his denomination of him and that out of Antiquity Now I desire he would be pleased to communicate unto us his learned reading in Antiquity for this and the rather because in the whole story of the businesse between Faustus and Lucidus I find no mention of any such attribute given to his person or to the doctrine reputed by Faustus erroneous maintained by him The terme Praedestinatus qualirying a person I find first in Arnobius junior and from that time I find not the Praedestinati or Praedestinatians mentioned till the daies of Hinemarus about the year of our Lord God 850. And as for the story of the Predestinarian Heresy which this Author licks his lipps at the originall whereof is referred to the yeare 415 by Sigibertus it is very strange that in Austins daies it was not known unto him or being known not taken notice of by him nor by Prosper neither after him And Alphonsus à Castro in his Book contra Haereses professeth that the Author of this Heresy he found not neither in Sigibert nor in any other because indeed not one of those who wrote of Heresics makes mention of this Heresy besides Bernard of Lutzenburg in his Catalogue of Heretiques and he saith no more of it then what Sigibert mentioneth in his Chronicle And withall he addes that after this errour was buried by the space of almost a thousand years it was revived by John Husse the Bohemian Whereby it appears that Alphonsus was not of this Authors opinion in censuring this Lucidus for a Predestinarian And the first that I find to intimate so much is Hincmarus about the yeare 850. In like sort Prateölus acknowledgeth that Quis corum Dux institutor fuerit nescitur But Gerardus Vossius hath herein helped us with this conjecture referring the originall of this Heresy to the Monks of Adrumetum and Bishop Usher in his Historiá Godescalci saith Vossius was the first that charged those Adrumetine Monks to be the author thereof Yet if I be not deceived he might be beholding to Coccius for helping him to this conceit But this makes the matter more strange another way namely that Austin should not take notice of this Predestinarian Heresy seeing none was so well acquainted with the opinion of those his neighbour Monks as he being the man whom they consulted about the difference that rose thereabouts and wrote two Books thereupon and composed all And yet I see no reason why Vossius should referre it to the Adrumetine Monks hand over head when as it is cleer by the relation of them that came over to Austin to complaine thereof and to conferre with him thereupon that they were but few who were carried away with that errour whereof they complained and that it was but one that troubled the place of their Monastery herein who was as it were the Ringleader to the rest of which Vossius could not be ignorant And therefore I see no cause why he should charge them all indifferently or that party either who were tainted herewith as is pretended seeing there was an Antesignanus who led the rest of whom Vossius speaks nothing at all and I suppose he knew some good cause why Besides the Predestinarian Heresy is pretended to have risen Ab Augustini libris malè intellectis Now I find no colour of evidence hitherto that these Monks of Adrumentum whom Vossius makes the founders of this Heresy were led awry by the misunderstanding of Austins writings Neither doth Vossius any where that I know take any pains to cleare this And I would gladly be beholding to this Author that pretends so much zeale unto and skill in the knowledge of Antiquity and so boldly stileth Lucidus a Predestinarian for communicating unto us his rare evidences concerning this point out of his great observations And so much the rather to take mee off from mine errour who since the first time that I travelled in the search after this Predestinarian Heresy in dealing with Corvinus which is now some three years agoe I have been apt to conceive that this Heresy from the first was but a meer fiction of the Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians cunningly to disgrace thereby the doctrine of St Austin And since the coming forth of Dr Ushers History in the cause of Godescalcus I have been confirmed herein as wherein he gives to understand that whereas Tyro Prosper wrote hereof before Sigibert although the Printer hath made him to speak as Sigibert doth namely that Haec Haeresis orta est ab Augustini libris malè intellectis yet that is not the language of Tyro himselfe but plainly this Haec Haeresis ab Augustino orta est and that learned Bishop hath shewed out of two Manuscripts of Tyro the one in Bennet Colledge in Cambridge the other in our Kings Library and this he farther confirmes by comparing the description which Gennadius makes of that which he calls the Predestinatian Heresy with the doctrine of Augustin lib. 5. cont Julian Pelag. cap. 4. de Bono Persev cap. 15. And withall the same learned Bishop makes it appeare that look what doctrine Sigebertus ascribes to the Predestinatians the same doctrine was charged upon Austin and such as concurred with him therein This I say that learned Bishop proves out of the beginning of the 6 Book Hypemnesticon Credere nos vel praedicare sugillatis quod Deus quosdam hominum sic praedestinet ad vitam regni caelorum ut si nolint or are aut jejunare aut in omni opere divino vigiles esse eos omninò perire non posse nec prorsus sui debere esse sollicitos quos Deus quia voluit semel jam elegendo praedestinavit ad vitam quosdam verò sic praedestinavit in Gehennae paenam ut etiam si credere velint si jejuniis or ationibus omnique se voluntati divinae subjicerent in his Deum non delectari vitam illis aeternam in totum dari non posse c. Now this in effect is the very Heresy of the Predestinatians related by Sigebert Therefore I much desire this Author would take the paines to prove that this pretended Predestinarian Heresy was indeed received to be an Heresy by the Catholique Church and not
rather a fiction of the remnants of the Pelagians wherewithall to reproach the doctrine of S. Austin in the poynt of Predestination Thus have I examined this Authors pretence of the Novelty of our Tenent I come to the consideration of that which followes DISCOURSE The Second Motive IT S unwillingnesse to abide the Tryall I find that the Authors and Abettors of it have been very backward to bring it to the Standard not only when they have been called upon by their Adversaries to have been weighed but also when they have been intreated thereto by their chief Magistrates who might have commanded them A shrewd argument mee thinks that it is too light In the Disputation at Mompelgard Anno 1586 held between Beza and Jacobus Andreas with some Seconds on both sides Beza and his company having disputed with the Lutherans about the person of Christ the Lords Supper c. When they came to this Point did decline the sifting of it and gave this reason among others that it could not then possibly be disputed of sine gravi eorum offendiculo qui tanti mysterii capaces non sunt without the great scandall and hurt of the ignorant and unacquainted with these high mysteries The Contra-Remonstrants also in their Conference with their Adversaries at the Hague in the year 1611 could not be drawn to dispute with them about this point but delivered a Petition to the States of Holland and Westfrizland that they might not be urged to it resolving rather to break off the Conference then to meddle with it In the Synod likewise of Dort in the year 1618 and 1619. the Remonstrants were warned by the President of the Synod ut de Electione potius quà m de odiosâ Reprobations materiâ agerent that they should rather dispute of the point of Election then the odious point of Reprobation Can this Doctrine be a truth and yet blush at the light which makes all thing manifest especially considering these things 1. That Reprobation is a principall Head of Practicall divinity by the ill or well stating of which the glory of God and good of Religion is much promoted or hindered 2. That there is such a necessary connexion between the points of Election and Reprobation both being parts of predestination that the one cannot well be handled without the other 3. That Reprobation was the chief cause of all the uproares in the Church at that time 4. That it was accused with open mouth and challenged of falshood and therefore bound in justice to purge it selfe of the crimination 5. That it may easily be defended if as some say it be such an apparent truth for Nihil est ad defendendum puritate tutius nihil ad dicendum veritate facilius saith S. Hierom. The striving to lye close and hide it selfe though perhaps it be not so infallible yet it is a very probable argument of a bad cause Truth covets no corners but is willing to abide the tryall whether in men or in doctrines David knowing his heart to be without guile offers himselfe ready to the Lords tryall Search me o God and know my heart try me and know my thoughts and see if there be any wicked way in me And our Saviour tells us that Every one that doth evill hates the light and comes not to the light least his deeds should be reproved but he that doth truth comes to the light that his deeds may be made manifest that they are wrought in God As S. Paul saith of an Heretick he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 selfe condemned and so may we say of Heresy and untruth it condemnes it selfe and by nothing more then by refusing the Touch-stone He is to be thought an empty Scholler who is loath to be opposed and his gold to be light and counterfeit that will not have it touched and weighed and these Opinions to be but errours which would so willingly walk in a mist and dwell in silence when it concernes the peace of the Church so much to have them examined TWISSE Consideration VVHo are these Authors of this Doctrine who here are said to have been backward to bring it to the standard Is Beza those Authors whereof was he the Author Was it the doctrine of predestination as proceeding of the meer pleasure of God and not upon foresight of mans faith and works Is it not apparent that this was the doctrine of Austin 1200 years agoe and that in opposition to the Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians Or was it the doctrine of reprobation as not proceeding upon the foresight of sinne but of the meer pleasure of God Is this Author so ignorant as not to know what are the conclusions of Alvarez in the question Whether there be any cause of reprobation on mans part Lib. 10. de Auxil disc 110. pag. 866. 1. His first Conclusion is this Reprobation whereby God decreed not to give unto some everlasting life and to permit their sinne is not conditionate but absolute neither doth it presuppose in God foresight of the deserts of reprobates or of their perseverance in sinne unto the last period of their life 2. His next Conclusion is In the Angells that fell there is no cause of their reprobation on their part as touching the whole effect thereof but before any foresight of their future sinne God pro sua Voluntate of his meer will did reprobate some of them and suffered them to fall into sinne 3. The third Infants departing in Originall sinne alone there is no cause on their part of reprobation if they be considered in comparison with others which are not reprobated and the like is to be said proportionably of men of ripe years 4. The fourth Not only comparatively but absolutely there is no cause of reprobation Therefore neither sinne actuall nor originall nor both of them foreseen by God was indeed the meritorious and motive cause of the reprobation of any as touching all the effects thereof and the proofe hereof he prosecutes at large 5. Reprobation as touching the last effect thereof presupposeth in signo rationis the foresight of sinne originall or actuall for which a reprobate is damned Marke it well He does not say as the cause for which God decrees his damnation but as the cause for which a reprobate is damned And Aquinas whose followers the Dominicans are expresseth this doctrine in this manner and that more Scholastically and accurately then Alvarez Praescientia peccatorum potest esse aliqua ratio reprobationis ex parte paenae quae praeparatur reprobatis in quantum scilicet Deus proponit se puniturum malos propter peccata c. in Ad Rom. 9. Sect. 2. in fine that is Prescience of sinnes may be some reason of reprobation on the part of punishment to wit in as much as God purposeth to punish wicked men for their sinnes Where sinne is evidently made the cause of damnation and that by vertue of Gods purpose but by no means the cause of the
of the number One of the Souldiers was billeted in an old Widdowes house and another being a Goldsmith told him and another consort of theirs he had a devise to put mony in all their purses for he knew how to make a Rex-dolar of three-pence sylver and in that Widdowes house they would ply their businesse very securely To work they went and casting plates of Tinne to the quantity of one of those Dolars and stamping them full and faire this Gold-smith with the quantity of three pence silver sylvered them over very fairely and least they should seem too light hangs them up in the chimny in a bagge that the smoak might bring them to the sadder hew Thus having met with a mine of Sylver in their lodging one is imployed as a Merchant-man to goe to the Staple of Cloth and he laies out their coyne in cloth whereof afterwards they made good silver indeed at length one of them paying a debt of his to a Dutchman in Delfe in one of these Rex-dolars he found the Dutch to betray some suspicious gestures and interpretations upon the coyne That was a faire warning to an intelligent man of armes and hereupon they get them packing ing away with all speed and home they come and make themselves merry with the relation In like sort these Remonstrants shew a great deale of Tinne and trash in these argumentations and they have not so much as three pence silver to colour it therewithall to cheat the World if they will be cheated But they hope the colour of some dishonour by their adversaries doctrine redounding unto Christ will be taken for a peece at least of good silver I confesse I am somewhat the more merrily disposed at this time For being taken off from the midst of a sentence by the courteous invitation of a Gentleman to come unto him to his Inne He was pleased to entertaine me with such good discourse that it did not a little refresh my spirits His reaches were after new discoveries for the advancement of learning and endoctrinated me more in one halfe hower then seventeen years study in the University For whereas I never learned there more causes then foure he was pleased to acquaint me with nine which I took some pains to learn without book and they were these Matter Forme Workman Will Power Time Finding out Accident End And most courteously offered himselfe to enlarge on every one of them but having left off at a broken sentence I was desirous to return to my studies Theologicall and to let those Philosophicall progresses alone But I protested unto him seriously that he had informed me more in the number of causes in a short space then Oxford had done in many years he entreated I would consider of them and I promised I would and conferre of them too with all the Schollers I companied with which he took in very goo part and so I took my leave And finding my spirit not a little elevated with this recreation I resolved forbearing my usuall time of supper to follow these studies close that night which truly fell out very happily For one of those causes being found out otherwise called Invention as for Judgement I doe not remember that it was admitted into the number I made use of it very happily in finding out or discovery of the foppery of these Remonstranticall argumentations Now I proceed to the second Question as more seasonable to the present occasion And here first they begin with their former artifice making infidelity on the part of reprobation answerable to faith on the part of election which is most untrue as formerly I shewed Only the not curing of infidelity by the grace of faith is made by us subordinate to reprobation as the curing of naturall infidelity by the grace of faith is made by us subordinate to election But they goe on as in shaping our Tenent at pleasure so in basting it with their very liberall censures as absurd and execrable in such sort as the bare commemoration of it they take to be sufficient to represent the horrour of it and to confute it and this they commit to the judgement of all the faithfull of Christ And indeed their best strength lyeth in setting forth their Adversaries doctrine in such colours as the Devill is painted with And in this particular they conceive good hope no doubt that propitious Readers will conceive hereby that the infidelity of man is made by their Adversaries the work of God as well as Faith Whereas it is well known that there is so little need of working men to infidelity that all being borne in sinne and corrupted and estranged from the life of God through the fall of Adam infidelity is as naturall and hereditary to a man as any other corruption And it is as well known and undeniable that none can cure it but God by faith but this he cures in whom he will by giving Faith to whom he will and if he refuse to cure it in any that and that alone is enough to make him a vessell of wrath that so Gods glory may be manifested upon him in the way of justice vindicative But come we to their Arguments 1. The first is this If Infidelity followeth Reprobation unto destruction then God cannot in justice destroy Reprobates for their infidelity For there is no greater injustice then to destroy a man for that that followeth necessarily upon reprobation which is the work of God To this I answer 1. According to mine ordering the decrees divine Secondly according to the Contra-Remonstrants Tenent in ordering them 1. According to my ordering of the decrees divine In no moment of nature or reason is the decree of damnation precedent to the decree of permitting infidelity or leaving the infidelity of some men uncured to wit by denying them faith by denying the grace of regeneration But the decrees of creating all in Adam of permitting all to fall in Adam in bringing all men forth into the World in the state of Originall sinne of leaving this originall sinne uncured in them and last of all of damning them for their sinnes are decrees not subordinate but coördinate as decrees de Mediis tending joyntly to one supream end which is the manifestation of Gods glory upon them in the way of justice vindicative as also to shew the riches of his glory upon the vessels of mercy whom he hath prepared unto glory to wit by beholding in others that miserable condition which through Gods meer grace and goodnesse they have escaped 2. According to the Contra-Remonstrants Tenent I answer 1. Many of them doe not maintaine that infidelity is consequent to the decree of damnation but in the foresight of God precedent rather as appears by the Brittish Divines their Theses De Reprobatione and Alvarez professeth the same The denyall of grace and so the permitting of naturall infidelity to remain uncured they make consequent as it seems to a negative decree of denying glory And
can like as Arminius Doctrinam de praedestinatione odiosam reddere conabatur as it is professed in the Preface to those Act. Synod fol. 7. pag. 2. and fol. 8. pag. 2. They professe in like manner of the Remonstrants namely that in their Remonstrance they endeavoured Illust Ordd. odiosam reddere doctrinam Ecclesiarum Reformatarum and that not only de divinâ predestinatione but also de Gratiâ Dei Sanctorum Perseverantiâ but all this malâ fide nec sine apertis atrocibusque calumniis Moreover I find Sess 39. pag. 151. this decree of the Synode gratifying the Remonstrants and yeelding to their motion made which was that they might have liberty to treat as well of reprobation as of election thus Quoniam Remonstrantes aliquoties professi sunt se per conscientiam in Synodo subsistere ulterius non posse nisi prius caveatur ipsis fore ut de electione reprobatione eâ ratione quam in Thesibus Scriptis suis hactenus exhibitis proposuerunt in posterùm agatur Synodus quò magis ipsis fiat satis publice ac corà m omnibus declarat statuisse sese ac statuere sententiam ipsorum non de electione modò verum etiam de reprobatione expendere atque examinare Quantum nempe in conscientiâ ad Dei gloriam aedificationem tranquillitatem Ecclesiae omniumque conscientiarum posse ac debere satis esse ipsa judicaret Ad agendi verò modum qui hic est servandus ordinem quod attinet suum esse de eo dispicere non autem fratrum Remonstrantium qui huc sunt citati quicquam praescribere existimat This decree being read to the Remonstrants they refused to give way unto it The 40 Session contains the altercation thereabout between the Synod and them They forsooth would prescribe to the Synod de modo Agendi the Synod must not prescribe to them And they professe against it Sess 41. pag. 155. in this manner Nec satisfit nobis si dicatur Synodum permissuram ut nostram de reprobatione sententiam tractemus quoad illa ipsa ad gloriam Dei aedificationem Ecclesiarum conscientiarum tranquillitatem fore judicabit Nam hâc ipsâ restrictione nobis praeciditur libertas plenaria sententiae nostrae defensio contrariae Impugnatio Praeterquam quòd non levis suspicandi nobis data sit occasio Synodum ubi nos de electione disserentes audiverit nequaquam permissuram ut Contra-Remonstrantium eorum quos illi pro Orthodoxis habent de reprobatione sententiam prout necessarium judicabimus ad incudem revocari Hereupon the Synod entreats the judgement of Forraine Divines and they all with one consent professe Tantam Remonstrantibus libertatem ad defensionem causae suae concessam esse quantâ ex ratione dignitate Synodi Citatis concedi posset Ac proinde nullam esse causam cur Synodicum decretum mutandum videretur aut cur Remonstrantes querelam instituerent vel authoritatem hujus Synodi subterfugerent Nihil illis esse imperatum quod ullo modo conscientias ipsorum gravare posset Ac proinde conscientiae velum frustra pervicaciae obtendi Abundè iis omnibusque modis satisfactum jam esse Absolutam illam nullisque circumscriptam limitibus libertatem quam petunt à Synodo concedi ipsis non posse Aequum esse ut certis sese legibus submittant quibus si exorbitent coërceantur Nay in the next Session which is Sess 42. there is a representation made of their unreasonable demand in these words Professi sunt sibi agendi modum a Synodo praescriptum iniquum videri Sibi permitti velle non tantum primo loco sed circa omnes articulos Theses singulaque argumenta de sententiâ Contra-Remonstrantium corum quos illi pro Orthodoxis habent quoad reprobationem agere quia in hoc argumento calceus illos maximè urgeat Hereupon the Opinions of the forraigne Divines were required to wit Whether it were fit to yeeld unto them as to treat of Reprobation before they treated of Election Qui consentientibus declarabant suffragiis ab omni ratione methodo esse alienum id quod Remonstrantes peterent ut prius de reprobatione quà m de electione agere sibi liceret Their judgements hereupon are here represented severally and at large First of our Brittish Divines then of the Palatine Divines then of the Divines of the Land of Hesse then of the Helvetians then of those who were of the correspondency of Weteraw then of those of Geneva then of those of Breme and lastly of those of Emden 5. Upon the former bald and base pretences as if Conclusum esset contrà Manichaeos the Author proceeds crowing magnificentissimè and demanding in this manner Can this doctrine be a truth and yet blush at the light which makes all things manifest especially considering these things 1. That Reprobation is a principall Head of practicall Divinity by the well or ill stating or ordering of which the glory of God and good of Religion is much promoted or hindered 2. That there is such a necessary connexion between the points of election and reprobation both being parts of predestination that the one cannot be well handled without the other 3. That Reprobation was the chiefe cause of all the uproares in the Churches of that time 4. That it was accused with open mouth and challenged of falshood and therefore bound in justice to purge it selfe of the crimination 5. That it may easily be defended if as some say it be such an apparent truth For Nihil est ad defendendum puritate facilius saith S t Hierome Now albeit for the discovery of the vile vanity of this conclusion I need take no other pains then to appeal to your or any sober mans due consideration of the premises duely examined according to my former answer yet I think good not to passe it over without such particular consideration as it deserves First I pray consider what is that light that makes all things manifest Is it the light of Conference In the Conference of Mompelgard there were diverse other things disputed of besides this of predestination Now is the truth manifested hereby in all those particulars If it be I pray let him signify on whose side whether on the part of Jacobus Andreas or on the part of Beza To whom is it made manifest To either side or only to that side on whose side this Author conceives the truth to stand Doe you not manifestly perceive the crudity of this conceit Nay who seeth not that it is not the condition of conference but the quality rather and ability of the conferrers that is apt to manifest the truth And such men are able to manifest as well out of conference in their discourses either Positive or Controversiall as in conference yea and farre better Those discourses being more quietly carried and more free from altercation then conferences especially in case they meet with malignant
opposites And indeed it is the Word of God alone which is that spirituall light which giveth manifestation to all spirituall truth And consequently neither are they to be censured as blushing at the light that prefer to write quietly of these controversies then to conferre about them in some cases or that preferre conference by the penne as Beza did before conference by word of mouth though this better pleased the lipps of Jacobus Andreas Yet neither Beza did refuse to yeeld to Andreas his own way neither did either the Contra-Remonstrants at the Haghe Conference or the Divines of Dort refuse to treat of reprobation as well as election as formerly I have shewed by authenticall evidences But suppose Beza and his fellowes whether two or three had altogether declined to conferre at all as in my judgement they had good reason to refuse must this be censured their blushing at the light Austin professeth as I have formerly vouched him that there may be many causes of forbearing to deliver the truth at some times He little dreamed of exposing the truth thereby to such a censure as if it blushed at the light And if some few might be justly censured as blushing at the light must all for their sakes by the rules of justice be made obnoxious to the same censure and not the Doctors only but the Doctrine it selfe Is it not apparent that a true and sound doctrine may be weakly apprehended by many though learned and Veritas est temporis filia and the accurate handling and maintaining of the truth in plainer points then this of reprobation comes not to perfection but by degrees and after much ventilating of it in a ruder manner Thus I think I have crackt the crowne of this conclusion I may proceed with the greater facility to the rest 1. That Reprobation is an Head to any part of practicall Divinity I never read nor heard till now But yet in every theoreticall poynt as touching the nature of God and his attributes by the true doctrine thereof the glory of God and good of Religion is promoted by the erronious doctrine thereabouts it is as much impaired For like as it is blasphemy to attribute that unto God which doth not become him so is it blasphemy also to deny unto him that which doth become him As for the entertaining or refusing conference thereabouts I have already spoken sufficiently yet two particulars more I have to deliver which I purpose to subjoyne to the end of those five considerations here distinguished as remarkable ones if my memory failes me not 2. A Connexion I grant there is between election and reprobation and the clearing of the truth in the one doth give light unto the other But which of these is to be handled first that the clearing of the truth therein may give light to the stating of the other I should think no sober man would make question Yet the Remonstrants at the Synod of Dort were eager to begin with Reprobation but were therein generally censured by the consent of forraine Divines that assisted there But that one of them cannot be handled without the other is a palpable untruth as appears by the very practice of this Author himselfe and his own carriage in this businesse For he undertakes only the poynt of reprobation 3. As touching the third particular in charging the doctrine of reprobation with being the chiefe cause of all the uproares in the Church at that time this author takes to himselfe a strange liberty of discourse We read and heare of no small stirres in the Church of Rome between the Dominicans and the Jesuits but I never read that the Jesuits laid to the Dominicans charge that their Doctrine as touching the predetermination of the creatures will to every act thereof was the cause of any uproare in the Church of Rome But to the contrary rather I read that in the contention between the Dominicans and Jesuits in Rome it selfe wherein Valentianus through some heat in disputation caught a feaver whereof he dyed within three daies after of the relation whereof made by one Pet that had been a Priest in Oxford I was sometimes an eare witnesse The Jesuits were rather taxed for their heterodoxy in the poynt de auxiliis as Petrus Mattheus in his History reports it And from D. Jacksons mouth I have heard what a Spaniard should deliver upon the mention of Molina the Jesuit namely that he was the man qui tantos tumultus excitavit to wit in Spain But as for Churches Protestant he doth well to limit his crimination to a certain time For the stirre that was raised by Huberus in the Lutheran Churches was neither caused nor occasioned by our doctrine concerning reprobation Huberus his cause was a pertinacious standing for an universall Election It seems he hath relation only to the Haghe conference and the uproares as he calls them amongst the States only and their particular or provinciall congregations alone as it seems he denominates the Churches Now let us consider Who made those uproares were they the Contra-Remonstrants or the Remonstrants only If he chargeth this upon the Contra-Remonstrants let him prove it least he be justly censured for one of those wild beasts an Emperour was sometimes warned to beware of they were the slanderers If the Remonstrants were the authors of these uproares how doth he prove that the doctrine of reprobation was the chiefe cause of them Were not those Arminians voluntary agents in those uproares If they conceived their opposites doctrine to be unsound could they not oppose it without uproares without violent proceedings Againe their opposites doctrine was it never received or preached 'till those daies Or was there any uproare made thereupon 'till Arminius his innovating And is that the chief cause of an uproare which hath no such consequent ensuing untill it meets with some turbulent spirits which begin to stirre as innovators in a Church or State And yet was reprobation that alone whereupon they stirred Is it not apparent that about the five Articles commonly so called they conferred alike But he saith it was the chiefe cause and only saith it yet Molinaeus professing reprobation to proceed upon foresight of finall impenitency as in truth it cannot be denied but that as the Contra-Remonstrants professed as well in that Conference at the Hague as in the Synod of Dort that God did never intend to damne any man of ripe years but for finall perseverance in infidelity and impenitency Did their contentions hereupon either totally cease or in part But such criminations are nothing strange We know after what manner of greeting wicked Ahab saluted the holy Prophet Elijah Art thou he that troubleth Israel but he spared not to answer him I am not he that troubleth Israel but Thou and thy Fathers house In the like manner were Paul and Silas entertained Act. 16. 20. when being caught and brought before the Magistrates heard such an accusation made against them These men which are
Parentemque caeterorum the Caeteri belike were such spirits as wee call Angells And that Maximi Dei leges were inevitabiles and this was called Necessity and such a Necessity cui ne Deos quidem that is inferior spirits resistere posse Quae verò ab Astris geruntur talia interdum esse ut evitari sapientiâ industriâ labore queant in quo sua est Fortuna Quae verò certis causis progrederentur ac permanerent fixa id dici Fatum quod tamen necessitatem non afferat electioni That the Manichees maintained two supreme and coëternall causes of all things we read the one the cause of Good the other of Evill and that every creature was a substantiall part of one or both and that man in his nature was compounded of both and that his corruption was essentiall from the supream Author of evill and not such as acrewed to him of disobedience We read But of their opinion that all things were determined by them both good and evill I no where read but in this Authors Legend Danaeus hath commented upon Austin de Haeresibus and to every Head of Heresy draws what he hath read thereof in other Authors But I find no mention at all of this Article amongst 21 shamefull errours of theirs which he reckons up The 19 th is this Voluntatem malè agendi quod vocant liberum arbitrium nob is à naturâ ipsâ insitam non rebellione nostrâ accersitam vel ex inobedientiâ natam Quanquam homines propriâ voluntate peccant And where Austin answereth the criminations against the Catholiques made by the Pelagians I find no mention at all of this He should have shewed from whom he takes this that understanding their Opinion aright we might the better judge of the reproachfull comparison which he makes 2 To the consideration of which comparison of his I now addresse my selfe He proposeth two things one whereof he saith must needs be maintained The First whereof is this That all actions naturall and Morall good and evill and all events likewise are absolutely necessary Concerning which I say First I have cause to doubt that this Author understands not aright the very notions of absolute necessity and necessity not absolute There is no greater necessity then necessity of nature And this necessity is twofold either in Essendo in being or in Operando in working God alone is necessary in being and his being is absolutely necessary it being impossible he should not be as not only we believe but Schoole Divines demonstrate and that with great variety of evident and curious conclusions As for the other necessity which is in respect of operation First this is no way incident unto God speaking of operation ad extrà and secluding the mysterious emanations within the Divine Nature such as are the Generation of the Sonne by the Father and the wonderfull Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne But ad extra this necessity of operation is only found in the creature and that only in such creatures as by necessity of nature are determined one way as fire to burne heavy things to move downwards and light things upwards the Sunne Moone and starres to give light and the heavens to turne round all naturall Agents in a word distinct from rationall are thus determined to wit to work that whereunto they are inclined by necessity of nature but yet so that being finite they are subject to superiour powers and thereby obnoxious to impediment most of them even to powers create all of them to power increate Whence it comes passe that no work of theirs is absolutely necessary especially in respect of God who can either set an end to all when he will or restraine their operations at his pleasure We know the Three Noble Children when they came forth of the fiery oven had not so much as any smell of the fire upon them And therefore Durand professeth that these things which are commonly accounted to come to passe most necessarily doe indeed come to passe meerely contingently in respect of the will of God Neverthelesse we willingly professe that upon supposition of the will of God that this or that shall come to passe it followeth necessarily that such a thing shall come to passe like as upon supposition that God knowes such a thing shall come to passe it followeth necessarily that such a thing shall come to passe but how not necessarily but either necessarily according as some things are brought to passe by naturall agents working necessarily after the manner aforesaid or contingently and freely according as some things are brought to passe by rationall agents working contingently and freely And therefore as touching the Question of the Schooles about the root of contingency Aquinas and Scotus concurre in resolving it into the Will of God but with this difference Scotus relates it into the will of God as a free agent Aquinas resolves it into the Will of God as an efficacious agent For the will of God is so efficacious that he can effectually procure both that things necessary shall be brought to passe necessarily and things contingent contingently and according he hath provided congruous causes hereof to wit both agents naturall for the produceing of necessary things necessarily and agents rationall for the producing of contingent things contingently and freely Thus God preordained that Josias should burne the Prophets bones upon the Altar that Cyrus should proclaim liberty to the Jewes to returne into their Country yet what sober Divine hath made doubt whether Josias and Cyrus did not herein that which they did freely And as in doing so in abstaining from doing For God ordained that Christs bones should not be broken as also that when the Jewes all the Males came up to the Lord thrice in the year to Jerusalem None of their neighbours should desire their land Exod. 34. 24. Yet what sober man should make question whether the Souldiers did non as freely abstaine from breaking Christs bones as from ought else and so likewise the bordering Nations did as freely abstaine from invading the land of Israel And how often is this phrase used in Scripture Necesse est of some things coming to passe which yet came to passe as contingently and freely as ought else And unlesse this be granted that Gods determination is nothing prejudiciall to the freedome of the creatures will either we must deny faith and repentance to be the gifts of God or that they are works produced freely and so every action pleasing in the sight of God For the Scripture expressely professeth that God it is who worketh in us every thing that is pleasing in his sight And whatsoever God workes in us or bestows upon us in time the same he determined to work in us and to bestow upon us from everlasting For he worketh all things according to the counsell of his will Ephes 1. 11. and the counsell of his Will was everlasting it being the same with God
have I received this from three severall hands of Arminians each giving the same interpretation of it as if it were called a strange work because it is alienum a naturâ Dei I know none but Papists doe justify them in this interpretation in my judgement a most unreasonable exposition the Lord taking unto himselfe the execution of judgement as his peculiar saying vengeance is mine and I will repay And Magistrates are but Gods Ministers for this And he professeth his delight in this as well as in the execution of mercy It is true he doth not inflict judgement without cause for that were not a work of judgement in proper speech but of power and absolutenesse rather as in turning a holy and innocent creature into nothing And in that respect he is said not to afflict willingly sinne alwaies deserving it Mercy is of another nature and supposeth free grace though I find little or no notice this Author takes of this throughout his discourse Neither doe I find that he or any Arminian acknowledge that the change of a mans heart is wrought in a man of the meere grace of God without any motive cause in the creature Neither doe all Papists concurre in this interpretation for Lyra and Burgensis are together by the eares hereabouts and our Divines as Junius and Piscator doe render it opus insolens terribile an unusuall and terrible judgement interpreting it of bringing the Babylonians upon them so strange a worke that they should wonder at it And as Moses foretold that God should bring upon them Wonderfull judgements Deut. 28. So the Prophet Abakuk sets it forth in like manner Abak 1. 5. Behold among the Heathen and regard and wonder and marvaile for I will worke a worke in your daies you will not believe it though it be told you For loe I raise up the Caldeans that bitter and furious nation which shall goe upon the breadth of the Land to possesse the dwelling places that are not theirs And Jer. 19. 3. Behold I will bring a plague upon this place which whosoever heareth his eares shall â—ingle For seeing Gods lawes are strange things unto them Hos 8. 12. God would bring such judgements upon them that should be as strange unto them And in the same phrase it is said that destruction is to the wicked and strange punishment to the workers of iniquity Job 31. 3. Yet be this granted him it is nothing to the purpose For be it never so deere unto God yet if he restraineth his chiefe mercy which consists in changing the heart whereof this Author seems unwilling to take any distinct notice only to the Elect called accordingly in Scripture vessells of mercy in distinction from vessells of wrath which are the Reprobates this nothing prejudiceth the absolutenesse of reprobation And as for the frequent exercise thereof we read Zeph. 3. 5. That every morning God bringeth his judgements to light and as for the mercy which consists in regenerating man which alone is to the present purpose it is apparent that it is farre lesse frequently shewed then the contrary judgement in obduration And certainly the vessells of mercy are by farre fewer then the vessells of wrath and as for temporall mercies the more frequent they are the worse where the spirit of regeneration is wanting through the corruption of man that makes him thereupon the more obdurate The vanity of the next as touching the amplitude of the objects whereto mercy is extended though this alone is to the present purpose I have already sufficiently discovered it being apparent that in Scripture phrase only the Elect are counted vessells of mercy and all the rest vessells of wrath As there be examples of Gods long suffering and patience so we have fearfull examples of the suddainesse of Gods judgements taking Men and Women away in the very act of sinne Thus the Israelites in the Wildernesse when the flesh of Quailes was in their mouth the heavy wrath of God came upon them and sent them to the graves of lust Zimri and Cozbi perished in their incestuous act and gave up both lust and ghost together Balshazzar a King cut off in his drunken revells to make good the Prophecy of Isaiah The night of my pleasures hath he turned into feare unto me And in like manner the wrath of God seazed upon Herod in his pride But above all this appears in Gods dealings with his Angells who sinned once and fell for ever without all hope of recovery And as for Gods sparing a man in case God gives not repentance what will be the issue but filling up of the measure of their sinnes For to speak in Austins language Contra Julian Pelag. lib. 5. cap. 4. Quantamlibet praebuerit patientiam nisi Deus dederit quis agit paenitentiam Now the case is cleare God gives repentance to a very few who are in Scripture called vessells of mercy which nothing at all prejudiceth the absolutenesse of reprobation 5. Of the riches of Gods mercies to his children we nothing doubt but what doth this prejudice the absolutenesse of reprobating those whom he never meaneth to make his children But here it is to be suspected that this Author accounts all and every one the children of God for forthwith he confounds this notion with the notion of creatures quite contrary to the most generall current of Scripture not of the New Testament only which teacheth us that we are the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus Gal. 3. and if children then heires even heirs of God and heirs annext with Christ Rom. 8. But of the old Testament also Gen. 6 2. The sonnes of God saw the daughters of men that they were faire c. Exod. 4. 22. Thou shalt say to Pharaoh thus saith thè Lord Israel is my Sonne my first borne wherefore I say let my Sonne goe that he may serve me if thou refuse to let him goe behold I will visit thy Sonne even thy first borne Deut. 14. 1. Ye are the children of the Lord your God 2. Thou art an holy people to the Lord thy God and the Lord hath chosen thee to be a precious people to himselfe above all the people that are upon the earth That of the Hen though we give him liberty to amplify her naturall affections as one of the most affectionate Females among unreasonable creatures yet doth it nothing profit him for it represents Gods love appropriated to his Children which nothing prejudiceth the absolutenesse of his power reprobating others Nay rather as it justifies his absolutenesse in electing them if we consider the meere grace of God to have made the difference as the Scripture sheweth Deut. 7. 7. The Lord loved you because he loved you and Deut. 9. at large he beats them out of all conceit of any righteousnesse in them moving the Lord to plant them in the Land of Canaan so by consequent it justifies the Doctrine of absolute reprobation also for as much as the Apostle
repentance on whom he will because he finds all equall in naturall corruption and no difference in any whereby to move God to bestow grace on him rather then on another The case is not alike when God comes to bestow salvation and inflict damnation for some he finds dying in sinnes others dying in the Lord yet we deny not but by power absolute and secluding the determination of his own will he could annihilate the righteous as well as the wicked In like sort the whole course of nature depends meerely upon the pleasure of God yet we say it is naturall for a Leprous person to beget a Leprous person and so as naturall it is for that which is borne of the flesh to be flesh though each depends upon the constitution of God For albeit Adam lost the spirit of God by his transgression and all supernaturall graces wherewith he was endued yet like as God by regeneration of his meere pleasure restored them afterwards to Adam and in due time doth restore them to every one of his Elect so in their very conception if it pleased God he could for Christs sake infuse them notwithstanding the sinne of Adam and consequently it is the free act of God in refusing after this manner to deale with them Yet this nothing hinders but that the propagation of spirituall corruption unto all Adams posterity may be as naturall as the propagation of any hereditary disease from the Father to the child and over and above that it is not in the way of meer pleasure but in the way of justice for the sinne of Adam which was the sinne of our nature bereaving him of that originall righteousnesse wherein he was â—reated and causing all mankind to be 1. Derived from him whereas he could have otherwise provided 2. And that from Adam after his nature was corrupt with sinne whereas he could have derived posterity from him before his fall had it pleased him And therefore I approve the second Canon of the Synod of Dort whereunto our English Divines with many others subscribed where they professe that the corruption derived from Adam to his posterity was per vitiosae naturae propagationem justo Dei iudicio derivata This I take to be much different from saying Adams sinne is made ours by meer pleasure or by imputation only So the fifteenth Article in the confession Ecclesiarum Belgicarum runs thus Credimus Adami in obedientiâ peccatum originis in totum genus humanum diffusum esse quod est totius naturae corruptio vitium haereditarium quo ipsi infantes in matris suae utero polluti sunt quodque veluti radix omne peccatorum genus in homine producit ideoque ita foedum execrabile est coram Deo ut ad generis humani condemnationem sufficiat Our Brittain Divines in their second Thesis upon the third and fourth Articles explicate themselves concerning the condition of originall sinne in this manner Lapsae voluntati inest non tantum peccandi possibilitas sed etiam praeceps ad peccandum inclinatio Nec aliter se potest res habere in homine corrupto nondum per divinam justitiam restaurato cùm ea sit natura voluntatis ut nuda manere nequeat sed ab uno cui adhaeserat objecto excidens aliud quaerat quod cupidè amplectatur ideo per spontaneam defectionem habitualiter adversa a Deo creatore in creaturam effraeni impetu fertur ac cum ea libidinose ac turpiter fornicatur semper avida fruendi utendis ac vetita moliendi ac patrandi Quid mirum ergo si talis voluntas sit Diaboli maneipium I find indeed in Corvinus such a profession of his namely that ex puro Dei arbitrio qui Adami peccatum nobis imputare voluit etiam in nos reatus derivatus est And Walaeus in answer unto him writes thus Nec quinto illo ad Rom. Capite ad quod nos hic Corvinus remittit quicquam tale dicitur aut innuitur nempe quod ex mero Dei arbittio pendeat haec primi peccati imputatio 2. The Second thing he puts upon our Divines is That God hath determined for that sinne to cast away the farre greater part of mankind for ever and so they make God to doe that by two acts the one accompanying the other which the other say he did by one To which I answer First that if they say that God doth no more by two acts then the other say God did by one seeing I have proved that the other doe no way maintain that God doth punish the righteous with the wicked which is his immodest and unshamefac't crimination no nor doe they maintain that God determined to damne any but for sinne and which is more then that supposing humanum genus nondum conditum to be the object of reprobation yet doth it not follow that in any moment of nature the decree of damnation is before the consideration of sinne surely neither will it follow by the Sublapsarian Doctrine that God doth not decree to punish any man with damnation but for those sinnes wherein he dyeth unrepented of much lesse that God doth punish the righteous with the wicked which is the crimination of this Author proposed I doubt against his own conscience T is true some perish only in originall sinne and that justly for if they be borne children of wrath is it strange if they dye children of wrath And is it not just with God to inflict eternall death on them whom this Author professeth to be guilty of eternall death only he saith that God of his meer pleasure makes them guilty of eternall death That is his saying not ours For though we say originall sinne makes a man guilty of eternall death by the free constitution of God yet we say not that this free constitution of God was made of his meer pleasure but justo Dei judicio like as whosoever believes not shall be damned here damnation is by the free constitution of God made the portion of unbelievers but dares this Author inferre herehence that it is not made so justo Dei judicio indeed God gives grace according to the meere pleasure of his will but no wise man will say that he damnes men according to the meere pleasure of his will for this phrase implies that there is no cause thereof on mans part And indeed there is no cause on mans part why God should give him grace but there is cause enough on mans part why God should inflict damnation on him and yet this work of God though just is never a whit the lesse free So in damning for originall sinne only though Gods constitution hereof be just yet is it never a whit the lesse free and though it be free yet it is never a whit the lesse just And like as damnation is inflicted on finall impenitents sola Dei constitutione only by vertue of this constitution Divine whosoever repents not of his sinne shall be
so as if we maintained that God ordained them to be damned absolutely and for the meer pleasure of God concealing the only cause for which God ordained that they should be damned namely for the wilfull transgression of Gods holy Commandements Only the giving and denying of the grace of regeneration the giving of faith and repentance for the curing of that naturall infidelity and impenitency that is found in all and the leaving it uncured by denying faith and repentance this indeed we maintain to be absolute according to that of Saint Paul he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9. 18. Now dare any of them deny faith and repentance to be the gift of God They doe not they dare not only of late they have come thus farre as to deny that Christ merited faith and regeneration for any Secondly inquire whether God gives faith and repentance to some and denyes it to others of his meere will and pleasure or because he finds some good works in the one which he finds not in the other Here is the criticall poynt we defend no other absolutenesse of election and reprobation but such as depends wholly on this namely that God finding men equall in corruption hath compassion on some giving them faith and repentance which he denies unto others All other absolutenesse of Election and Reprobation besides that which we undertake by cleare demonstration to deduce herehence we utterly renounce Neither can our adversaries be so grossely ignorant as not to perceive that this is the criticall poynt of these controversies the resolution of the truths wherein will set an end to all contention about Election and Reprobation Why then doe they not deale plainly and try their strength in this whereby they should carry themselves fairely and ingenuously and deale above board For here alone is that absolutenesse of God in execution which we maintaine but here they are not so prone to shew their hornes this argument is not so fit for the raising of clamours and Tragedies And hating the truth of God as touching his soveraignty over his creatures to have compassion on whom he will and to harden whom he will as also the prerogatives of his grace to work us effectually to that which is pleasing in his fight and that in whom he will also yet not daring plainly to deliver their mind in this as wherein they are found most absurd and encumbred with shamefull contradictions therefore by the back dore as it were they hope to discredit it and by opposing the absolutenesse of Reprobation to supplant and undermine the Doctrine of Gods free grace And not content with this they miserably corrupt our doctrine also in the poynt of absolute Reprobation drawing it to this as if not reprobation only but damnation also were made absolute by us and that God damned men not so much in the way of justice for their sinne as of his own meere pleasure At length to come to the third particular of his reply 3. And that is this that howbeit some things in Scripture which are peculiar to the Gospell are above our understandings and must without hesitation be believed yet many things there have their foundation in nature and may be apprehended by the light of nature and amongst these the justice of Gods waies is one as hath been shewed Isai 5. 3. and Ezek. 18. To this I answer That the waies of God mentioned Isai 5. 3. is only in his expecting fruits after so great pains that he had taken in husbanding his vineyard And Ezek. 18. consists only in rendring unto men according to their waies Neither doth it follow that because the justice of God doth plainly appeare in these particulars therefore it doth appeare as cleerely or comprehensively in all others Is there no difference between the waies of God there mentioned and the waies of Gods justice mentioned in other place as namely in causing the Sonnes of Achan to be stoned to death with Achan himselfe for his Sacriledge in drowning the old World not sparing the very Infants and sucklings and for their conspiracy against Moses and Aaron causing the earth to swallow up not Dathan and Abiram only but their Wives and Children and all that they had So in consuming Sodom and Gomorrah with fire And as for the punishing of of sinne this is no peculiar truth of the Gospell I had thought the Gospell in the proper nature thereof had been above reason altogether and no way capable of demonstration And as for the justice of God must not this suppose him to be a free agent Or was this known to Aristotle by all the light of nature whereunto he attained We that believe him to be a free agent and withall the creator of all are ready to demonstrate that it is in his power to doe what he will with his creature and that not only to annihilate him though never so holy but to inflict what paine soever upon him yea even the torment of hell fire which Medina acknowledgeth to have been Communem omnium Theologorum sententiam viz. that this he can doe ut Dominus vitae mortis as I have shewed in my Vindiciae graciae Dei and by variety of arguments proved it more then once in two severall digressions which this Author pretends to have seen yet answereth not one of them And as for justice divine toward the creature whereupon this Author doth with such confidence discourse both Vasquez and Suarez Jesuits in other poynts concerning Gods justice are miserably at odds yet joyntly concurre in this that all iustice Divine doth presuppose the free determination of Gods will Now because I find this Gentleman so conceited of the purity of his rationall faculty and the power thereof as to require that all interpretation of Scripture should veyle bonnet to the soveraignty thereof I purpose to try his ability this way for the expediting of certain arguments about the absolutenesse of Gods decrees in generall and particularly of the decree of Reprobation Therefore to combate with him on his own ground and in his own element I dispute thus 1. No temporall thing can be the cause of that which is eternall but the sinnes of men are all temporall whereas Reprobation is eternall therefore the sinnes of men cannot be the cause of Reprobation If it be said that sinne is not made the cause of reprobation but as it exsists in Gods foresight and so not so much sinne as the prescience of sinne is the cause of reprobation I reply that this device cannot stand viz. that the prescience of sinne should be the cause of reprobation and that for this reason The cause of reprobation whereof we enquire is of the nature of a meritorious cause But the prescience of God can no way be said to be a meritorious cause thereof Science and prescience are causes of Gods works in the kind of an efficient Physicall not in the kind of an efficient morall such as are
was sufficient to convert them which must be by the Antithesis to bring them to faith provided that they that is the hearers play the good husbands in the using of it But what is it to play the good husbands These and such like Phrasiologies are the usuall sculking courses of the Arminians like the inke which the Fish Saepia casts forth that she may thereby the better hide her selfe and escape from the hands of the Fisher But certainly it must be some worke or other to be performed by the hearer whereby he shall be brought to faith therefore I say it is either the worke of Faith it selfe or some other worke preceding it not of faith it selfe for faith it selfe cannot in reason be said to be a worke whereby a man is brought to faith Secondly herehence it followeth that Mans good husbandry being here distinguished from the worke of Faith it selfe the act of Faith is hereby made the work of mans will not of Gods grace if some work preceding faith whereupon faith is wrought by grace it followeth that the grace of faith is given according to mans works this is the foule issue of their tenet making faith either not at all the worke of God or if wrought by God to be wrought according to mans worke And thus they shape the grace of God conferring faith not only towards Reprobates but also towards the elect Now observe I beseech you how our Brittaine Divines doe purposely reject this Doctrine in the Synod of Dort art 3. in their third Thesis of those which are rejected by them The Thesis which they reject is positis omnibus gratiae operationibus quibus Deus ad efficiendam hanc conversionem utitur voluntatem hominis relinqui in aequilibrio velitne credere vel non credere convertete se ad Deum vel non convertere All the operations of grace supposed the will of man is left in an even ballance whether he will believe or no whether he will convert himselfe to God or no this is the very opinion of this Author against which our worthy Divines dispute there in this manner If this were so then it would follow that God by his grace is not the principall cause of mans believing and conversion but man by his free will rather For in this case God shall not predominantly worke mans conversion but upon condition only to wit in case the will first move it selfe whereby the lesse worke is given to God and the greater worke to man to wit in mans conversion 2. Herehence it will follow that God gives no more grace to the Elect than to the Reprobate and that the elect are not bound to be more thankefull to God than the non-elect because the worke of God in both is no other than to place the will in an even ballance 3. The grace of conversion is given with an intention that it shall prove effectuall and to move nay rather to bring man to the producing of the act of faith in such sort as it cannot be made in vaine Haec gratia a nullo duro corde respuitur ideo quippe tribuitur ut cordis duritia primitus auferatur And seeing the good Husbandry of mans consists in obedience to the Gospell it appears hereby that the grace they speake of is no other than the Gospell exhorting to repentance and this we confesse is sufficient in a certain kind to wit in the kind of instruction and exhortation and is not this sufficient to convict of unbeliefe as many as wilfully resist it and such is the condition of all in hearing the Gospell to whom God gives not the grace of conversion for as Saint Austin saith Libertas sine gratiâ non est libertas sed contumacia and no other impotency of beliefe doe we ascribe to a naturall man but such as consists in contumacy which is meerely a fault and corruption of the will not the defect of any naturall power and therefore as I said the impotemcy of converting to God by faith and repentance is impotency morall consisting meerely in the corruption of the will and there is no question but every man hath as much power to believe as Simon Magus of whom it is said that he believed Fides in voluntate est saith Austin credimus quando volumus but the will of man is so corrupt that without speciall preparation by Gods grace it is rather wilfully set to walke in the waies of flesh and bloud than obsequious to that which is good we make no question but that as Prosper saith every one that heareth the Gospell is thereby called unto grace even to obtaine pardon of sinne and salvation upon his faith in Christ and is called upon also to believe but withall we say with our Brittaine Divines Art 3. De Conversione Thesi 1a. In the explication thereof that God gives his elect not only posse credere si velint which in Austins opinion lib. 1. de gen contra Manic cap. 3. and de praedest Sanct. cap. 5. is common to all but velle credere nay they spare not to professe that if God should worke in us only posse credere posse convertere and leave the act of believing and converting to mans free will we should all doe as Adam did and fall from God through our free will and never bring this possibility into act take their own words Quod si vires quasdam infundendo daret Deus tantum posse credere posse convertere ipsum interim actum committeret libero hominum arbitrio certe quod primus parens fecit faceremus omnes libero arbitrio a Deo deficeremus nec possibilitatem hanc in actum perduceremus Haec itaque eximia est illa specialis gratia qua non modo possunt credere si velint sed volunt cum possunt Phil. 3. 13. Dat Deus nobis velle perficere As for that which he discourseth of Gods principall aime that the Church of Israell should bring forth good fruit let us speake plainly and not cheat our selves first and then become impostors unto others was it that which God did principally intend Gods intentions are his decrees now if God did decree they should bring forth fruit de facto who hath resisted his will Nay take their own rules according to their doctrine of Scientia media Why did God give them only such a grace to move them unto fruitfulnes which he foresaw they would resist And refuse to give such grace as he foresaw would not be resisted and that without all prejudice to their wills Let thē answer unto this for that God in the storehouse of his wisdome hath such courses as being used he foreseeth infalliby that any sin will be hindred Arminius acknowledgeth as I have oftē alleadged him But we may safely say 1. That God intended it should be their duty to bring forth fruit 2. If he did farther intend that the Church of Israel should de facto bring forth fruit this he
they made profession of their faith and as for Infants they were also anciently said to be Baptized in fide Parentum Gods patience Rom. 2. 4. And the goodnesse of God manifested therein leadeth a Man to repentance so doe his judgements also Hos 5. In their affliction they will seeke me early and so doth Gods word and all this only in the way of a moving cause and exciting to repentance every morning God brings his judgements to light he faileth not yet will not the wicked be ashamed Zeph 3. 5. But it is the duty of all to be moved by his word by his works by his mercyes by his judgments to turne to the Lord by true repentance But God alone is he that workes them hereunto without whose efficacious grace none of all these courses will prevaile as Isai 57. 17. For his wicked covetousnesse I was angry with him and have smiten him I hid me and was angry They wanted neither admonition from his word nor from his corrections yet they profited by neither as it followeth yet he went away and turned after the way of his own heart yet what is Gods resosolution but to overcome their stubbornesse by the power of his grace as there we read I have seen his waies and will heale them now who are these whom he leads so as to bring them to repentance let Austin answer Contra Julian Pelag. l. 5. c. 4. Bonitas Dei te ad poenitentiam adducit verum esse constat sed quem praedestinavit adducit and he adds a reason Quamtamlibet enim praebuerit poenitentiam nisi Deus dederit quis agit poenitentiam And in the same Chapter professeth touching the Non-praedestinate that God never brings them to wholsome and spirituall repentance whereby a man is reconciled to God in Christ whether God affords them greater patience than he affords his elect or nothing lesse His words are these Istorum neminem adducit ad poenitentiam salubrem spiritualem qua homo in Christo reconciliatur Deo sive illis ampliorem patientiam sive non imparem praebeat God intends by this his patience that it is the duty of all to repent that is that they should repent ex officio but did he intend they should de facto repent what then could hinder it Then he would afford them efficacious grace to heale them as he promiseth Isai 57. 18. Then would he rule them with a mighty hand and make them passe under the rodde and bring them unto the bond of the covenant So then to the poynt in particular here observed 1. God leads all to repentance by his goodnesse manifested in his forbearance and long suffering by way of admonition that it is their duty to turne unto God by repentance while he gives them time and space for repentance 2. But as for those whom he hath elected he not only thus leads but also effectually brings them to repentance in the time he hath appoynted before which time they are found sometimes to despise the riches of his goodnesse and to have hard and impenitent hearts as much as any Reprobate who more foule in the committing of horrible abominations than Manasses Who more furious in persecuting the Church of God then Saul Yet God took away the stony heart and what is harder then stone out of their bowells and so he doth to all whom he regenerates 3. As touching a finall contempt of Gods patience that is peculiar unto Reprobates as for the elect though some are called at the first houre of the day some not till the last yet all are effectually called before they drop out of the World To say that God intends the everlasting good of Reprobates is to deny the first Article of our Creed even Gods omni potency as Austin hath disputed 1200 years agoe we find in our selves that whatsoever we will doe if we doe not it it is either because we cannot doe it or because our will is changed but to ascribe either mutability or impotency to God is intollerable in a Christian and it cannot be denied but God did from everlasting intend their everlasting damnation so that to say he did intend their everlasting good is flat contradiction neither is there any way to charme it but by saying God intends their everlasting good conditionally but to intend it after such a manner is apparently no more to intend their salvation than their damnation nay lesse rather considering the conditions of salvation are utterly impossible unto man unlesse God correct and cure his corrupt nature but this grace he dispenseth according to the meere pleasure of his will as the Apostle signifyeth in saying he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth As for that 2 Pet. 3. 9. He is patient towards us not willing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any of us to perish it hath been already considered but here he interpreteth towards us as if it had been said towards us men and I hope the elect are men as well as others but what ground hath he for this liberty of interpretation Why may he not take the liberty in interpreting of Iohn as well as Peter both were pillars Gal. 2. where he saith They went out from us but they were not of us for had they been of us they had continued with us and still swalloweth a palpable absurdity following hereupon even to the denying of Gods omnipotency in as flat contradiction to the Apostle where he professeth that God hath mercy on whom he will which is not to have mercy on all but on some only hardening others as Rom. 11. The election hath obtained it but the rest are hardned DISCOURSE SECT V. IN the last place those other gifts of God whereby mens understandings are enlightened and their soules beautifyed which are knowledge repentance fortitude liberality temperance humility charity and such like are bestowed upon all them that have them among whom are many that may prove Reprobates in the end that by the exercise of them and continuance in them they might be Saved The Reprobates are adorned with many of those graces as apears plainly by many Scriptures especially Hebr. 6. 4. Where the Apostle sayes that it is impossible for those that have been enlightned tasted the heavenly gift been made partakers of the Holy Ghost tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come if they fall away should be renewed by repentance and the graces which the Apostle speakes of here are not ordinary and common but speciall graces illumination faith relish of the sweetnesse of Gods Word and the tast of Heaven The persons spoken of are Apostates such as are under the possibility of falling away for upon a dainger not possible cannot be built a solid exhortation and if Apostates then Reprobates and the thing intimated is that upon Apostates and Reprobates are these gifts bestowed The Like speech we have Hebr. 10. 26. For if we sinne willingly after we have received the
of eternall life Now I pray consider who are those wicked men whom God thus gives over to their lusts Were we not all such Did not God find us all weltering in our bloud Ezek. 16. Had not we all stony hearts Ezek. 36. Were we not all blind lame deafe nay were we not dead in sinnes Ephes 2. 1. Did not the Gospell find the Ephesians so Did not the Word of truth find the Jewes so James 1. 18. How then comes this difference that Christ is a stumbling blocke to some and not to others We say the difference is because God hath mercy on some and hardens others Rom. 9. 18. Because some are borne of God therefore they heare Gods Word others are not borne of God and therefore they heare not Gods word Ioh. 8. 47. The Arminians say God giveth power to every one by an universall grace to will any good whereto he shall be excited So when the Gospell is Preached every one hath power to obey it if he doth obey it then Christ is a precious stone to him but if it disobey it then he is given up to the lusts of his heart and permitted to dash against Christ and other meanes of eternall life Here we have a phrase but we are to seeke of the meaning thereof what is it to dash against Christ It must needs be to commit some sinne or other for that is the object of Gods permition for of all other things God is acounted the Author not the permitter the object of permition is nothing but sinne now what sinne can that be whereby we are said to dash against Christ and other meanes of salvation but disobedience to Christ and to the meanes of grace so that from the first to the last the sence comes to this as many as disobey Christ and the meanes of grace they are given over to the lusts of their hearts and permitted to dash against Christ and other means of eternall life that is are permitted to disobey Christ and to resist other means of eternal life So that their disobedience to Christ and the Gospell is very punctually and juditiously set downe to precede by two degrees their disobedience to Christ and his Gospell Some may thinke that this Arminian prosilite doth not carry himselfe well in his businesse and for betraying the nakednesse of his cause may be in dainger to be excommunicated out of their Synagogue But Sir you must believe it this is the very leprosy of their Doctrine that over spreds it from the crowne of the head to the sole of the foot and they are in love with it accounting it not only sanity but perfect beauty God indeed is said in Scripture to give men over to their lusts when he forbears either courses of admonition and reproofe by his word or by his judgements in his workes or when he forbears to restraine Satan as formerly he did but disobedience to the Gospell undoubtedly is hoc ipso a dashing against Christ although God may continue to admonish and exhort even to the end as to prophane and hypocriticall persons in the Church he gives not over this course of his untill the end I have often represented the absurdity of this Authors conceit of a gracious intent in God of promoting the eternall good of Reprobates whereas it cannot be denied that God hath from everlasting intended their damnation and as for our saying that God intends they shall be without excuse that Christ is set up for their falling that the Gospell is unto God a sweet savour in Christ not only in them that are saved but in them that perish This Author is so farre from overthrowing the truth of it that besides other absurdities delivered by him in the way the Author himselfe hath no heart to deny it only saying that God intends it not primarily which is rather to grant that he intends it though not primarily as whereabouts there is no question than to deny it and that occasionally they are so whereas no man but himselfe hath said in saying that they doe effect this end that Christ or the Gospell are the cause hereof but only that they are the occasion But this hinders not Gods intention of them For undoubtedly God intends as well things occasioned as things caused though not in his first thoughts and resolutions which belongs rather to the end than to the meanes to wit to be first intended So that in plaine tearmes he hath not hitherto dared to deny that God intends them though he manifests a good mind to maintaine that they come to passe accidentally and casually in respect of God For he spares not to professe that the scorching of men and the hurting of weake eyes falls out accidentally and that to God for he proposeth this by way of distinction from that which God intends which he saith is the chearing of men by the light of the Sunne like as here he denies that mens stumbling at Christ is a thing intended by God like as in saying a sinnefull event is not properly under Gods will and decree but under his prescience only or at most under a permissive decree And this I confesse is a very plausible doctrine in the judgement of flesh and bloud save that this Authors faint carriage in the delivering of it is enough to make a man suspect it as plausible as it is yet it is hardly true and sound For he dares not say that a sinfull event is not at all under Gods decree only that he saith it is not properly under Gods decree But Saint Peter speaking of them that stumbled at the word of God through disobedience professeth in plaine termes that hereunto they were ordained 1 Pet. 2. 6. And all the Apostles there assembled Acts 4. 28. Doe professe that both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and people of Israell were gathered together against the Holy Sonne of God to doe what Gods hand and Gods counsell had determined before to be done And ere I part I hope to prove that any sinfull act that comes to passe in the world is as properly intended of God as any good act whatsoever although there be a vast difference in the bringing of them forth God causing the one only permitting the other as it is evill And that because it comes under Gods prescience it is well they are not so Atheistical as to deny Gods prescience but I doubt not to make it good that either they must deny that every thing comes under Gods prescience or they must grant that every thing comes under Gods decree For consider nothing can be foreknowne of God as future unlesse it be future Now let us quietly enquire how any thing becomes future and if any cause hereof can with reason be devised without the decree of God let us all become Arminians and deny God either at all to be or to be a free agent but working by necessity of nature For if future things be future of their own
manner who shall deliver me from the body of this death And receiving a gracious answer concerning this concludes with thankes I thank my God through my Lord Jesus Christ if I have a will to believe to repent I have no cause to complaine but to runne rather unto God with thankes for this and pray him to give that power which I find wanting in me And indeed as I may adde in the fourth place this impotency of believing and infidelity the fruit of naturall corruption common to all is meerely a morall impotency and the very ground of it is the corruption of the will therefore men cannot believe cannot repent cannot doe any thing pleasing unto God because they will not they have no delight therein but all their delight is carnall sensuall and because they are in the flesh they â—annot please God and because of the hardnesse of their hearts they cannot repent sinne is to them as a sweet morsell unto an Epicure which he rolleth under his tongue Fiftly dost thou blaspheame God because of Leprous Parents thou art begot and conceived and borne a leprous child What impudency then is it in thee to challenge him for injustice in that the spirituall leprosy of thy first Parents is propagated to thy soule Lastly if thou renouncest the Gospell what reason hast thou to complaine of want of power to embrace it so farre as not to renounce it hast thou not as much power to believe as Simon Magus had as many a prophane person and hipocrite hath that is bred and brought up in the Church of God Hadst thou gone so farre as they and performed submission unto the Gospell by profesing it surely thou shouldest never be brought to condemnation for not professing of it but rather for not walking according to the rule of it which thou promisedst when first thou gavest thy name to Christ I come to the third 3. Look what the Word promiseth that doe the Sacraments scale the word promiseth Justification Salvation to all that beleive the same doth the Sacraments seal As Circumsion Rom. 4. 5. Is said to be the seale of the Rightiousnes of faith so is Baptisme it did in our Saviours dayes and in the dayes of his Apostles seale to the believer and penitent Person the assurance of the forgivenesse of their sinnes over and above Baptisme is the Sacrament of our birth in Christ and the Lords Supper of our growth in Christ each an outward and visible signe of an inward invisible grace But what is the grace were of the Sacrament is a signe Is it a power to doe good if a man will Call you that grace which is not so much as goodnesse for certainly goodnesse consists not in a power to doe good if a man will but in a definite inclination of the will it selfe to delight in that which is good and to be prone to doe it But this grace whereof Baptisme is a signe is suo tempore conferenda like as Circumcision was even to those Jewes who yet were not regenerated untill they were partakers of the Gospell Jam. 1. 18. Of his own will hath he begotten us by the word of truth Writing unto the twelve tribes of the Jewes And it is very strange to me that regeneration should so many years goe before vocation But this opposite Doctrine and the sealing of a blanke is nothing strange to me I was acquainted with it twenty yeares agoe and I seeme plainly to discerne the chimney from whence all the smoake comes 4. As for other gifts bestowed on the Reprobates 1. We willingly confesse they shall never bring them to salvation be they as great as those who were bestowed on Aristotle Plato Aristides Sophocles and the most learned morall and wise men of the World that never were acquainted with the mystery of Godlinesse it was wont to be received generally for a truth that Extra Ecclesiam non est satus But Arminians take liberty to coyne new Articles of our Creed 2. But yet they may doe them good hereby they may Proficere ad exteriorem vitae emendationem quo mitius puniantur For certainly it shall be easier in the day of udgement for Cicero then for Cattline for Augustus than for Tiberius for Trajan than for Heliogabalus 3. And therefore it is certainly false that they are hurtfull and that they proceed out of extreme hatred And as for love the Scripture teacheth us that Jacob was loved of God and Esau hated each before they were borne Such is the condition of all the elect as Jacob of all the Reprobates as Esau and in Thomas Aquinas his judgement Non velle alicui vitam aeternam est ipsum odisse Knowledge I confesse of the mysteries of Godlinesse where life and conversation is not answerable doth encrease mens condemnation neither is God bound to change the corrupt heart of any man if they are workers of iniquity Christ will not know them at the great day though they have Prophesyed in his name and in his name cast out Devills neither was it ever heard of that the graces of edification and graces of sanctification must goe together and that God in giving the one is bound to give the other As for being proud of them pride for ought I know requires no other causes but domesticall corruption but he that acknowledgeth God to be the giver of any gift and hath an heart to be thankfull for it I make no doubt but he hath more grace than of edification only certainly the gifts they have sinke them not to hell but their corrupt heart in abusing them And hath a man no cause to be thankfull unto God for one gift unlesse he will adde another The Gentiles are charged for unthankfulnesse Rom. 1. But it seems by this Authors Divinity it was without cause unlesse we will with this Author say they all had sufficiency of meanes without and power within to bring them to salvation and what had Israell more Or the elect of God more in any age True for according to the Arminian tenet an elect hath no more cause to be thankfull to God for any converting grace than a Reprobate In a word what good act wrought in the heart of man whether of faith or of repentance or any kind of obedience hath man cause to be thankfull to God for when God workes it in him no otherwise than modó homo velit and so they confesse he workes every sinfull act Have they not in this case more cause to thank themselves than to thank God And unlesse we concurre with them in so shamelesse unchristian gracelesse and senselesse an opinion and in effect if God converts the heart of man according to the meere pleasure of his will and hardeneth others all the gifts that he bestowes on man are censured by this audacious censurer as Sauls bestowing Michal on David Jaells courtesy and usurers bounty c. or a baite for a poore fish as if God needed any such course
sweetest and the surest truths revealed in Gods word to their own damnation Resp It cannot I confesse be denyed that many of this opinion are Godly men but it is no thankes to their opinion that they are so the true and naturall genius of which is to breed sloth to drowne men in carnall security and to countenance carnall liberty but to some thing else either to Gods providence who will not suffer this doctrine for his own glory and the good of men to have any great stroake in their lives or to mens incogitancy who think not of reducing it ad praxim or drawing conclusions out of it but rest in the naked speculation of it as they doe of many others or lastly to some good practicall conclusions which they meet with in the word of God and apply to their lives as they doe not the former deductions such as these are for example Be ye holy as I an holy Without holinesse no man shall see God If ye consent and obey ye shall eat the good things of the land Godlinesse hath the promise of this life and of the life to come and such like And hence we may learne to measure this opinion not by some few of the men that hold it but by the sequels which the Logick even of simple men if they should apply their braines to ponder and consider it would fetch out of it No man that hath thoroughly suckt it in and understood the force of it but will either relinquish it or live according to the naturall importment of it that is licentiously 2. Secondly it is said that albeit this Doctrine doth teach that men are absolutely elected or absolutely rejected yet it tells no man who in particular is elected who rejected that must appeare by themselves and their lives and so it doth not stifle holy endeavours in any but rather encourage them in every man because it makes them to be signes whereby men must and may get the knowledge of their election Resp For answer to this in my judgement or the present the ignorance of a mans particular case doth not alter the case a jot For he that believes in generall that many and they the greatest company without comparison are inevitably ordained to destruction and a few others unto salvation is able out of these two generall propositions to make these particular conclusions and to reason thus with himselfe Either I am absolutely chosen to grace and glory or absolutely cast off from both If I be chosen I must of necessity believe and be saved If I be cast off I must as necessarily not believe and be damned Therefore what need I take thought either way about meanes or end My end is pitched in Heaven and the meanes too my finall perseverance in faith and my salvation or my continuance in unbeliefe and my damnation If I lye under this necessity of believing and being saved or of dying in unbeliefe and being damned in vaine doe I trouble my selfe about meanes or end I have my supersedeas I may take mine ease and so I will it is enough for me to sit downe and waite what God will doe unto me And in this manner it is to be feared doe too many reason in their hearts and by this very ground though they will not perhaps acknowledge it encourage themselves to prophanenesse Though men cannot hide their wickednesse yet they will hide their grounds which flesh them in it either through modesty or to avoyde some farther ignominy The foole hath said in his heart there is no God Psal 40. Suetonius de Vita Tiberii c. 69. p. 180. Saies of Tiberius that he was circa Deos religiones negligentior quippe addictus Mathematicae persuasionibus plenus omnia fato agi TWISSE Consideration I have already made answer to his objections after my maner it remaines I consider what he delivereth in debilitating those answers which he takes in to consideration 1. This answer was made by our Brittaine Divines in the Synod of Dort upon the first Article but so as that they proposed it not by it selfe alone but joyntly with shewing that neither the Nature of our Doctrine doth any way prove any hinderance unto pietie as formerly I have made mention therof Whereas he sayth that many of this our opinion are Godly men but that is no thankes to their opinion that they are so I answer that neither doe we give the glory of our Godlinesse to our good opinion nor have cause to thanke it therefore but we give God the Glory both of leading us into this truth amongst many others and for that Godlinesse that is in us also For we acknowledge that God is able to convict our consciences of that trueth hereof and yet refuse to lead us thereby into any Holinesse at all Yet let every sober man judge who are in a fairer way to true Holinesse or who are more likely to be in the state of true Holinesse they that oppose the grace of God in working our wills to faith and repentance or they that acknowledge it They who maintaine that God of the meere pleasure of his will regenerates us endueth us with the spirit of faith and repentance or they who maintaine that God doth not give faith and repentance to whom he will Neither is it the meaning of S t Paul where he sayeth God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth but rather where he findes an absolute disposition or worke in one which he finds not in an other Againe consider I pray indifferently who are more likely to be partakers of Gods grace they who truly magnifie it as the Author of their faith and repentance and of every good worke performed by them and that in a preventing manner or they that pretend to make Gods grace to be the Author of their faith and repentance and every good worke only by giving them power to believe if they will which we are able to prove both by the judgment of Austin and by cleare reason to be meere nature and not grace and accordingly exhorting them to believe and last of all concurring with them to the producing of the act of faith in them in case they will And seeing grace proves effectuall only by this subsequent manner of operation whether they doe not plainely mocke God in making him the Author of grace seing in respect of this effectuall operation they might as well make him the Author of every sinfull act as of every gratious act For it is agreed on all hands that God concurres as well to every sinfull act as any gratious act Whereas he sayth The true and naturall genius of our Tenet is to breed sloth and to drowne men in carnall security and to countenance carnall libertie I answer these words of his are but wind his reasons I have already considered and proved them to be of no weight For they depend partly upon a vaine supposition as if we maintained that God hath
the word of God But Ecce Rhodus ecce Saltus we are come to the Dialogue it selfe where he undertakes to make good that which he saith And here begins the Enterlude Tempted Woe is me I am a Castaway I am utterly rejected from grace and Glory CONSIDERATION Let me take liberty to set down what I should think fit to answer unto such a complaint Now my Answer is this Who hath revealed this unto thee Art thou privy Councellour to the Almighty We are taught that secret things belong to the Lord our God but the things revealed are for us and for our Children to doe them Now where and when and how hath God revealed this his counsell unto thee namely concerning thy rejection from Grace Glory We know no other revelations divine then are contayned in his Word Now hath God in his word revealed unto thee more then unto me that thou art a reprobate The word saith unto thee If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved Rom 10. 9. Now how canst thou make it appeare that this belongs lesse unto thee then to any Martyr that ever was content to lay downe his life for Christ Wilt thou say Thy sinnes make thee to conceive so I answer are thy sinnes greater then were the sinnes of Manasses who made his sonnes passe through the fire to Molech gave himselfe to witchcraft and sorcery and filled Jerusalem with bloud from corner to corner If his sinns were not sufficient to conclude that he was a Reprobate why should thy sins be thought sufficient to conclude that thou art a Cast-away Are thy sinnes greater then Sauls were who was a Blasphemer a Persecutor of the Saints of God from Citty to Citty Yet was he received unto mercy Wilt thou say Thy sinnes have been committed since thy calling Yet are they greater then was the sinne of Peter in denying Christ his Master with execrations and oathes And these sinns were committed not only after his calling but even within his Masters hearing too Yet he went out and wept bitterly And Christ as soone as he was risen sent word of his resurrection by name to Peter to comfort him Nay hath not God taught us in his word that the bloud of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sinne 1 John 1. And how canst thou make it appeare that any one that ever was or is hath greater interest therein then thy selfe wilt thou say this remedy belongs unto none but such as believe and repent but I doe not I answere in like sort there was a time when Paul believed not and when every one believed not yet at length they believed and so maist thou wilt thou say But I cannot believe and repent I answer this is the condition of all till God takes away the stony heart out of their bowells and gives them a heart of flesh and puts his owne spirit within them wilt thou say God gives grace to others but not to thee I answer there was a time when God had not mercy on them at length an houre came wherin he called them so an houre may come wherin he may call thee And thou hast no more cause to conclude that he hath rejected thee then every Child of God had before his calling that God had rejected him without grace neither thou canst nor they could believe but grace can bring all to faith and repentance and thou hast no more cause to think that God will not bring thee to faith then any elect had before his calling to think that God would not bring him to faith Now seeing this grace is given in the Word doe thou wait upon God in his owne ordinance which any naturall man hath power to doe as namely to goe heare a sermon thou knowest not how it may worke upon thee yea though thou commest thither with a wicked mind For we read of some that comming to take Christ were taken by him And Father Latimer taking notice of some that come to Church to take a nap yet never the lesse saith he let them come they may be taken napping Minister Discourage not thy selfe thou poore afflicted soule God hath not cast thee off for he hateth nothing that he hath made but bears a love to all men and to thee amongst the rest CONSIDERATION And not only poore but miserable also is that afflicted soule that hath no better comforter whether we consider the nature of the consolation or the warrant of it For first hath not God made Froggs and Toades and Devills as well as man And hath an Arminian that boasts so much of strongest arguments of comfort no better comfort to an afflicted soule then that she is Gods creature which is the condition of a Frogge and a Divill and a damned spirit 2. Then as touching the warrant of it Is the booke of Wisdome the best store-house of comfort for an afflicted soule a booke writen by Philo the Jew that living after Christs passion resurrection and ascention yet never believed in him Againe speake out and tell us what is the fruit of that love which God beares to all men Hath he ordained to give Salvation unto all to this afflicted soule in particular If he hath not but damnation rather unto some and particularly to this soule for upon what ground darest thou say or canst assure he hath not art not thou as miserable a comforter to her as ever Jobs friends were to him Or hath God ordained to give all men the grace of regeneration the grace of faith and repentance if so then either absolutely or conditionally if absolutely then all must be regenerate all must believe and repent If conditionally speake it out and let thy Patient know what condition that is on performance whereof by man God will give him faith say what thou wilt the comfortable issue shall be this That grace is given according to workes and this indeed is the only Arminian consolation Tempted 1. God hateth no man as he is his creature but he hates a great many as they are involved in the first transgression and become guilty of Adams sinne CONSIDERATION Pooresoule suffer not thy selfe to be instructed by them that labour to deprive thee not only of the comfort of Gods grace but of the comfort of common sence Dost thou well understand what it is to hate a man as a sinner and not as a man If hatred be no more then displeasure surely whatsoever be the cause of it in hating thee he is displeased with thee as thou art his creature and that in thy proper kind of man if withall it signify punishment whatsoever the cause thereof be surely he punisheth thee as man though not for thy natures sake for that is the worke of God but for some corruption he finds in thee And we should prove very sorry comforters if on such a distinction as this we should ground any true
consolation which hath his course not only with the Devills but even with them that are already under the torments of Hell fire But let not the authority of the booke of Wisdome with thee weigh up and elevate the authority of Scriptures nor Philo the Jew be preferred before S t Paul or the Prophet Malachy by whom wee are taught that as God loved Jacob before he was borne so he hated Esau and before they were borne what difference was there betweene them Yet this passage out of the booke of Wisdome is in a Collect of the Papists Liturgy I conceive a good sence may be made thereof without any prejudice to absolute reprobation for of Papists we ate sayd to have learnt it and are reproached for it And what is that good sense they make of it Take it if thou wilt from Aquinas 1. q 23. art 3 ad 1. Dicendum quod Deus omnes homines diligit etiam omnes creaturas in quantum omnibus vult aliquod bonum non tamen quodcunque bonum vult omnibus In quantum igitur quibusdam non vult hoc bonum quod est vita aeterna dicitur eos habere odio vel reprobare Now if we take this Colect from them let us take also their good meaning with it and if we can let us make it better and not worse We commonly say that passions are attributed to God not quoad affectum but quoad effectum Now the effect of hatred is either the denyall of grace or the denyall of glory or the inflicting of damnation The two latter are executed only according to mens sinnes but the first to wit the denyall of grace proceeds meerely according to the good pleasure of Gods will like as the giving of grace as the Apostle not Philo signifies that God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Now to shew mercy is to bring a man to faith Rom. 11. 30. And if grace be not given according to the meere pleasure of Gods will it must be given according unto workes which is as much as to say in the phrase of the ancients according unto merits which all along hath been condemned in the Church of God as meere Pelagianisme Yet hitherto tends all the consolation that Arminianisme can reach forth unto thee which is to afford thee no better consolation then can be afforded to a Reprobate 2. As for Adams transgression let not that affright thee who art borne within the pale of the Church and of Christian parents for the children of such are holy 1 Cor. 7. when all others are uncleane Yet why should any man find it strange that some of them who are guilty of eternall death should suffer eternall death And this Author hath formerly confessed that Adams sinne hath made all his posterity guilty of eternall death Now albeit God hates many whether as involved in Adams transgression or no what matters that to thy discomfort if he hate not thee And what ground hast thou to conceive that thou art in the number of them whom he hates rather then of those whom he loves He is no good Physitian that lookes not into the cause of the desease to remoove that nor he any good comforter that lookes not into the cause of thy discomfort to remoove them It is to be thought that such an one desires rather to feed thy discomfort then to cure it Such is the practice of this comforter otherwise he should not apply his arguments of comfort which he magnifies as the strongest with as much art and cunning as can be But understand him aright this art and cunning tends not to the furtherance of thy consolation but to the advantage of his owne Arminian cause and to this end I confesse he doth apply them with as much art and cunning as he can 2. And God hath a two-fold love a generall love which puts forth it selfe in outward and temporall blessings only and with this he loves all men And a speciall by which he provides everlasting life for men and with this only he loves a very few which out of his alone will and pleasure he singled from the rest Under this generall love am I not the speciall CONSIDERATION 1. As touching the distinction hold thee to it least otherwise thou never proove capable of more comfort then a Reprobate is capable of No Arminian hath the face to deny that God saves but a very few And the reason is because very few doe believe and repent in this we all agree Againe no Arminian denies that very few doe believe and repent and finally persevere therein Againe no Arminian denies faith and repentance to be the gift of God and that hereby alone men are singled out from the rest Now the question is Whether God singleth out some men from the rest by giving them faith and repentance according to the meere pleasure of his will or according to their workes We say according to the meere pleasure of Gods will for he hath mercy on whom he will Rom 9. 18. Arminians say according to mens workes and hereupon in the issue comes all their consolations to be grounded that is upon a notorious Heresy condemned above 1200 yeare agoe 2. But as touching the accommodation of this distinction unto thy selfe saing thou art under Gods generall love not under his speciall I pray the tell me what ground thou hast for that what one of Gods elect while they were in the state of nature had not as greate cause to be as uncomfortable as thy selfe and why maist not thou be in Gods good time in as comfortable a condition as any of them and to say as John doth see what love the father hath shewed us that we should be called the sonnes of God dost thou mourne for thy sinne or no if thou dost not Why shouldest thou looke to be partaker of those comforts which are peculiar to them that mourne If thou dost thy Saviour hath said Blessed are they that mourne for they shall be comforted Dost thou hunger and thirst after the favour of God and to be made partaker of the righteousnesse of Christ which alone can give thee assurance of thine election If thou doest not hunger and thirst after this why shouldest thou be cast downe because thou hast not this assurance If thou doest desire this assurance and to that purpose hast an hungry appetite after the righteousnesse of Christ thy Saviour saith Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousnesse for they shall be filled Or hast thou a desire to have thy sinnes pardoned and thy soule saved but not any desire that thy soule may be sanctified what comfort shouldest thou or any such expect at the hands of God Thou wouldest serve the Devill but thou wouldest not goe to hell with the Devill But I tell thee God hath decreed the contrary namely that all such shall have this doome Goe ye cursed into everlasting fire prepared for the Devill and his Angells Yet
a true crimination but by flying to Gods absolute proceedings in giving or denying grace And albeit in this poynt wholly consists the Crisis of this Controversy yet this Author utterly declines the sifting thereof as some precipice and breake-neck unto his cause to wit Whether God gives and denyes grace according to the meere pleasure of his will or according to mens workes albeit the issue of all his comforts comes to this namely that either God is not the Author of our faith which now adaies the Remonstrants with open mouth professe that Christ merited for none or if to juggle with the World they pretend an acknowledgement that God is the Author of it yet they plainly professe that he dispenseth it to some and denyes it to others according to some good condition or disposition he findes in the one and which he findes not in another But let us take into consideration what these solid grounds of comfort are whereof a Minister is bereaved by our Doctrine Three I find here mentioned A treble Universality 1. of Gods love 2. Of Christs death 3. Of the Covenant of grace As if universality now adayes were a better Character of the Arminian faith then of the Roman Religion I may take liberty to equivocate a little when this Authour equivocates throughout and that in a case wherein iâ— is most intollerable in a case of consolation to be ministred to conscientia timorata as Nider calls it a poore afflicted soule as this Authour expresseth it To the discovery whereof I will now proceed having signified in the first place that all these consolations are no other but such as every Reprobate is capable of as well as the Children of God which is so apparent as needs no proofe only in the issue of their Tenet the faith of them freeth a man from the conceit of being an absolute Reprobate So that in effect it comes to this Thou poore afflicted soul be of good comfort for if thou wilt hearken unto me and imbrace those solid grounds of comfort which I will reveale unto thee assure thy selfe they shall be as the Balme of Gilead unto thy soule whereby thou maist be confident that albeit it may be thou art a Reprobate and that God from everlasting hath ordained thee unto damnation that yet certainly thou art no absolute Reprobate no more then Cain or Esau Saul or Judas or the Devills were For these my principles will assure thee that there never was nor is nor shall be any absolute Reprobate throughout the world 2. I come to the examining of them particularly to shew that every one of them is as it were against the haire So evident are the testimonies of Scripture against them all and they are obtruded upon a superficiary and most most unsound interpretation of Scripture in some places For 1. as touching the first the universality of Gods love For hereby Gods love is made indifferent unto all and consequently towards Esau as well as to Jacob whereas the Scripture professeth that God loved Jocob and hated Esau and this the Apostle makes equivalent to the Oracle dilivered to Rebekah concerning them before they were borne 2. He might as well have proposed it of the universallity of Gods mercy whereas the Scripture expressely distinguisheth between vessels of mercy vessells of wrath 3. This love is explicated by them to consist in a will to save all Now election is but Gods will to save and the Scripture plainly teacheth and it is confessed by all that I know excepting Coelius Secundus to whom this Authour it seemes is most beholding for his story of Spira that though Many are called yet but few are chosen And whereas it is confessed that the most part of men are Reprobates that is from everlasting willed unto condemnation yet never the lesse they beare us in hand that all men even Cain and Judas yea and as I think the Devills and all were willed by God unto Salvation And that there is no contradiction in all this And every poore afflicted soule must believe hand over head that all this is true what species of contradiction soever be found therein which this Authour from the begining of his discourse to the end hath taken no paines to cleare least otherwise he forfaits all hopes of comfort upon such soveraine grounds as are here proposed by faith wherein aman may be as well assured of his Salvation and freedome from damnation as any Reprobate in the World For albeit he be a Reprobate and God should reveale this unto him yet upon these grounds he may be confident that he is no absolute Reprobate 2. I come to the Second comfortable supposition and that is the universality of Christs death namely that he died for all Now this is opposite to Scripture evidence as the former yea and to Christian reason if not more For albeit God so loved the World even the whole World that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have Life Everlasting which gives a fair light of exposition to those places where Christ is said to have dyed for the sins of the World yea of the whole world to wit in this manner that whosoever believes in him shal not perish but have everlasting life yet the Scripture speaks as often of Christs death in a restrained sense as where it is said Christ gave himselfe a ransome for many And that his bloud was shed for his Apostles and for many for the remission of their sinnes And that Christ should save Gods people from their sinnes And that God hath purchased his Church with his bloud And Christ gave himselfe for his Church And that he is saviour of his body And that he dyed for the elect And in the 17 of John our Saviour would not pray for the World but only for those whom God had at that time given unto him and who afterward should believe in him through their word And look for whom he prayed with exclusion of the rest for their sakes he sanctified himself Now that this is spoken in reference to the offering of himselfe up unto God upon the crosse it was the joynt interpretation of all the Fathers whom Maldonate had read as he professeth on that place and there reckons up a multitude of them Then againe Christs death and passion we know was of a satisfactory nature and therefore if he dyed for all he satisfied for all the sinnes of all men why then are not all saved Why is any damned Is it just with God to torment with everlasting fire for those sinnes for which he hath received satisfaction and that a more ample one then mans satisfaction can be by suffering the torments of Hell fire For therefore it shall never end because it shall never satisfie Againe how many millions were at that time dead and in hell fire and did Christ satisfy for their sinnes by his death upon the Crosse and they continue still to
be as ready to worke it in themselves 3. And now I come to this Authors third Topick place of consolation drawn from the universality of the Covenant of grace Now this is as strange as any of the former or rather much more and when the Covenant of grace is so much enlarged we have cause to feare that it is confounded with the Covenant of Workes And indeed if it were true as some of this sect professe namely that there is an universall grace given to al for the enlivening of their wills wherby they are enabled to will any spirituall good whereunto they shall be excited and to believe if they will and from the love of temporall things to convert themselves to the keeping of Gods Commandements if they will I see no reason but that the Law is able to give life though the Apostle supposeth the contrary and the way is as open unto man for justification by the workes of the Law as it was unto Adam in the state of innocency And if the Covenant of grace be universall and ever was for that I take to be this Authours meaning then God was no more the God of Abraham and of his seed then of all the World nether was the people of Israel more the Lords portion then any other Nation of the World yet Moses was sent unto Pharaoh in their behalfe with this Message Thus sayth the Lord Israell is my sonne my first borne wherefore I say unto thee Let my sonne goe that he may serve mee if thou refuse to let him goe Behold I will slay thy sonne even thy first borne Ex 4. 22 23. Thus God accounts them albeit they were miserably corrupted with Idolatry as it appeares Ez 20. 6. In the day that I lift up my hand upon them to bring them forth of the Land of Egypt 7. Then sayd I unto them Let every one cast a way the abominations of his eies and defile not your selves with the Idolls of Egypt for I am the Lord your God 8. But they rebelled against me and would not heare me for none cast away the abominations of their eyes neither did they forsake the Idolls of Egypt then I thought to poure out mine Indignation upon them and to accomplish my wrath against them in the midst of the Land of Egypt 9. But I had respect unto my name that it should not be polluted of the Heathen So he proceded in despite of their sinnes to carry them out of the Land of Egypt and brought them into the wildernesse and gave them Statutes and Judgments and his Sabaths v 10 11 12. But they rebelled against him in the Wildernesse whereupon he thought againe to poure out his indignation upon them in the Wildernesse to consume them v. 13. But he had respect unto his name v. 14. amd his eie spared them and would not destroy them v. 17. And againe when their Children provoked him by rebelling against him whereupon he thought of powring out his Indignation upon them v. 21. Neverthelesse he withdrew his hand and had respect unto his name v. 22. Then as touching the generation of that present time he professeth he will rule them with a mighty hand v. 33. And the issue thereof is no worse then this I will cause you to passe under the rod and bring you into the bond of the Covenant v. 37 And againe marke with what a gratious promise he concludes v. 43. There shall ye remember your wayes and all the workes wherein ye have been defiled and ye shall judge yourselves worthy to be cast of for all your evills which you have committed 44. And ye shall know that I am the Lord when I have respect unto you for my names sake and not after your wicked waies nor according to your corrupt worke O yee house of Israel saith the Lord God Here is the peculiar fruit of the Covenant of grace to master their iniquities to bring them unto repentance and to deliver them from the dominion of sinne and Satan If God performe this Grace to all and every one throughout the World then is the Covenant of grace universall and all and every one are under it but if there be few very few over whom sinne hath not the dominion then certainly very few are under the Covenant of grace For the Apostle plainly signifyeth this to be the fruit of the Covenant of grace where he saith Sinne shall not have dominion over you for ye are not under the Law but under grace Rom 6. 14. And the like we have Heb. 8. 8. I will make with the House of Judah a new Testament 9. Not like the Testament that I made with their fathers in the day that I tooke them by the hands to lead them out of the Land of Egypt For they continued not in my Testament and I regarded them not saith the Lord. 10. For this is the Testament that I will make with the House of Israell after those dayes saith the Lord I will put my Lawes in their mind and in their heart I will write them and I will be their God and they shall be my people 11. And they shall not teach every man his neighbour and every man his brother saying Know the Lord for all shall know me from the least of them to the greatest of them 12. For I will be mercyfull unto their unrighteousnesse and I will remember their sinnes and their iniquities no more According to this Covnant proceed those gratious promises whereof the Scriptures are full I have seen his wayes and I will heale them Es 57. 18. I will heale their rebellions Hos 14. 5. The Lord will subdue our iniquities Mich. 7. I will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your children to love me with all your heart and with all your soule Deut 30. 6. I am the Lord your God which sanctify you c And therefore these comforts which here are so much magnified as only and fully sufficient for the releeving of an afflicted soul in the hour of temptation are but so many lies to speake in the Prophets phrase that this Author holds in his right hand and if through the illusions of Satan he take hold of them they may cast him into a dreame like unto the dreame of an hungry man who eateth and drinketh and maketh merry but when he awaketh his soule is empty For all these comforts so magnificently set forth have no force save in case a man believe them now if a man believeth our doctrine can assure him of Everlasting Life and so of his election which the Arminian cannot For we teach that which our Saviour hath taught us He that believeth in the Son hath Everlasting Life and he that obayeth not the Sonne shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth upon him But as for the performing of faith they leave that unto man together with Gods concurrence And in like sort for the maintenance of their faith they teach a man to put
his trust in himself with Gods concurrence as if otherwise a mans condition were uncomfortable and the way were open to desperation But what doth Austin answer to such like discourses of old de Predest sanct cap 22. An vero timendum est ne nunc de se homo desperet quando spes ejus demonstratur ponenda in Deo non autem desperaret si eam in se ipso superbissimus infelicissimus poneret Is it to be feared least a man despaire when it is proved that a mans hope is to be placed in God and that he is free from despaire in case he place his hope in himselfe most proudly and most unhappily As for that which he cites out of Melancthon it is every way as much to the purpose as that which he cited out of Calvin in the first Section Melancthon sayeth we must judge of Gods will by his Word so saith Calvin his words are these Qui recte atque ordine electionem investigant qualiter in verbo continetur eximium inde referunt consolationis fructum To enquire after a mans election in the Word is the way to reape singular consolation But they that enquire after the eternall counsell of God without the Word in exitialem abyssum se ingurgitant they plung themselves into a gulfe of perdition Yet when Melancthon sayeth multa disput antur durius the comparative there is not to be rendred as this Authour renders it more harshly but rather thus somwhat harshly And of Melancthons concurrence with Calvin in the doctrine of predestination as touching the substance of the doctrine I have formerly shewed out of his owne Epistle who professeth that he differeth only tradendi ratione in the manner of delivering it and of his owne professeth that they are of a popular nature thus Mea sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adusum accommodata as it were woven with a thicker thred and fited to use and practise No man doubts but that as Melanchton saith it is Gods immutable commandement to heare the Son and to assent to the promise and the promise is universall to wit that whosoever believeth shall be saved Therefore let us not seeke election besides the Word it is a grave counsell and well becomming Melancthon and Calvin gives the very same councell in the very Booke Chapter and Section last related by this Author But he saw it fitter for his turne to represent Melancthon professing as much rather then Calvin We nothing doubt but God will performe that he hath promised and therefore whosoever believeth shall be saved according to our doctrine not so according to the doctrine of Arminians who maintaine that a man may totally and finally fall away from faith Rogers upon the Articles of the Church of England Art 17. Not only acknowledgeth this universality of Gods promises according to the Tenor of that Article but concludeth herehence That they are not to be heard that say that the number of the elect is but small and seeing we are uncertaine whether we be of that company or no we will proceed in our course as we have begunne and accompts all such adversaries of this truth touching the universality of Gods promises and let every sober man judge whether this Author doth not justify this their discourse whom he accompts adversaries to the truth of that Article in that particular The same Rogers in his 8 proposition as touching the comfortable nature of predestination writs thus This doctrine of predestination is to the Godly ful sweet pleasant and comfortable because it greatly confirmeth their faith in Christ and encreaseth their love towards God But saith he to the wicked and reprobate the consideration hereof is very sower unsavory and most uncomfortable as that which they think though very untruly and sinfully causeth them either to despaire of his mercy being without faith or not to feare his justice being extreamely wicked whereas neither from the Word of God nor any confession of the Church can man gather that he is a vessell of wrath prepared to damnation What more contradictions to this Authors discourse of the uncomfortable condition of predestination according to our way yet who was this Authour was he at any time accompted an innovatour in this Church His books dedicated to Arch-Bishop Bancroft writing upon the Articles of the Church of England perused and by the lawfull authority of the Church of England allowed to be publick And because some choosing to play at small game rather then sit out may say that he speakes not a word of absolute election or absolute reprobation let his 5. Proposition be observed which is this Of the meere pleasure of God some men in Christ Jesus are elected and not others unto salvation this he prooves by that Rom. 9. 11. That the purpose of God might remaine according to election And that Eph. 1. 5. Who doth predestinate us according to the good pleasure of his will And that 2 Tim. 1. 9. Not according to our workes but according to his owne purpose and grace And that Exod. 33. 19. And Rom. 9. 15. I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy And as touching the other part of not choosing others that of Solomon Prov. 16. 4. The Lord hath made all things for his owne sake yea even the wicked against the day of evill And Rom. 9. 21. Hath not the Potter power over the clay to make of the same lumpe one vessell unto honour and an other unto dishonour And comming unto the Errours and adversaries of this truth Hereby saith he is discovered the impiety of those men which think that 1. Man doth make himselfe elegible for the Kingdome of Heaven by his owne good workes and merits so teach the Papists 2. God beheld in every man whether he would use his grace well and believe the Gospell or no and as he saw man so he did predestinate choose or refuse him 3. Besides his will there was some other cause in God why he chose one man and cast off another but this cause is hidden from us 4. God is partiall and unjust for choosing some and refusing others calling many and electing but few The other place alleadged by this Author of Melancthon partly repeates the same matter concerning the universality of the promises no mention at all with him either of the universality of Gods love or of the universality of Christs death or of the universality of the Covenant of grace partly opposeth it to dangerous imaginations of predestination what are these but such as proceed without the word For without doubt it is to be understood in opposition to that which he formerly delivered advising us to judge of the will of God by his expresse Word and all one with seeking election extra verbum formerly specified of both which Calvin speakes more at large in that very place aleadged by this Author in the first Section of this last sort of Arguments And there Calvin commends the one as a
them to be a good man or to have the grace of faith repentance or any other truly planted in his heart Which being so I say that the Minister cannot by the eternall acts and fruits of faith and repentance which he seeth come from him make it evident to the tempted for the silencing of all replies that he is without doubt a true believer and a true repentant and consequently no reprobate For still the tempted may say You may be deceived in me for you can see not a whit more in me then hath been seen in many a Reprobate If this be all you can say to prove me to be none I am not satisfied I may be a Reprobate nay I am a Reprobate and you are but a miserable comforter a Physitian of no value This that I say Piseator doth ingeniously confesse where he saith that no comfort can possibly be instilled into the soules of Reprobates afflicted with this temptation Whence it followes that the greatest part of men must beare their burthen if they fall into this trouble as wel as they can the Gospell cannot afford them any sound comfort 2. That the elect in this case may be comforted but it must be this way viz. by their feeling of the burthen of sinne and their desire to be freed from it by Christ which proofs as I have said are but only probable not infallible arguments of a mans election and therefore unsufficient comforts And in the end of the same Thesis where he saith That a man should reason thus with himselfe Grace is offered to some with a mind of communicating it to them therefore it may be that I am in that number he implyes that the doctrine of absolute Reprobation which teacheth this communication of grace to some few only affords but a fieri potest a peradventure I am elected for a poore soule to comfort himselfe withall TWISSE Consideration IN the last place we are to consider how truly he affirmeth that our doctrine leaveth a Minister none but weake grounds and those insufficient to quiet the tempted And whereas he saith We cannot conceive and make it evident to the understanding of the tempted that he is not that which he feares a Reprobate we willingly acknowledge it For not to be a reprobate is to be an elect Now how can any Arminian convince and make it evident to the understanding I doe not say of the tempted but of one that is a believer and walkes on comfortablely in the wayes of Godlinesse is he I say able to convince such a one and make it evident unto him that he is one of Gods elect I doe not think they dare professe that they presume they can or make it evident to their owne understanding that themselves are of the number of Gods elect How unreasonable then is this course to require of us to convince a man that acknowledgeth neither faith nor repentance in him for this is the condition of a man tempted as himselfe fashioneth it and to make it evident to his understanding that he is an elect and no reprobate when himselfe cannot convict him that believeth of this no nor their owne consciences neither notwithstanding all their confidence that they alone are in the right way of salvation Was there ever heard a more unreasonable course then this Againe to feare to be a reprobate or least he be a Reprobate is one thing to perswade himselfe that he is a Reprobate and to despaire thereupon is another thing We say and that according to our Doctrine that there is no cause why any man who hath not sinned the sinne unto death the sinne against the Holy Ghost should perswade himselfe that he is a Reprobate and despaire thereupon we doe not say there is no cause of feare In as much as he hath no evidence of his election there is just cause to feare but then againe seeing he neither hath nor can have any evidence of his reprobation excepting the guilt of the sinne against the Holy Ghost he hath every way as good cause to hope And for the comforting of such a one I would make bold to tell him that there is more hope of such a one as himselfe then of those who goe on in the wayes of their owne heart and in the light of their owne eyes without all remorse and check of conscience without feare or wit not considering that for all these things God will bring them to judgment And towards such I would think it fit to use all meanes and motives to make them feare The Apostle seemes to me to take the like course with better men then such even with such as went on in a faire and comfortable profession of Gospell namely to make them feare and suspect themselves as when he saith Prove youre selves whether you are in the faith examine your selves Know ye not that Christ is in you except ye be Reprobates 2 Cor. 13. 5. And for good reason for as Paul was jealous over the Corinthians with a Godly jealousy for feare least as the Serpent beguilde Eve through his subtilty so their minds should be corrupt from that simplicity which is in Christ 2 Cor. 11. 2 3. And in like manner entertained feare least when he came he should not find them such as he would and that he should be found unto them such as they would not c. 2 Cor. 12. In like manner I should think it is good for a man to be jealous over himselfe with a godly jealousy least their minds should be corrupt their wayes corrupt more then they are a ware of and there upon give themselves to the examining of themselves and to the searching and trying of their wayes whereunto the Holy Ghost exhorts us Lament 3. 40. And there is good comfort to be taken in such a jealousy such a feare such a course For we find that the spirit of bondage making us to feare is the forerunner of the spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Father Rom. 8. 15. Certainely they are in better case and nearer to the Kingdome of God then such as feare not yet is their no cause of despaire for as much as the elect of God had no evidence of their election before their calling Nay after their calling they may be much afflicted with the feares and terrours of God thinking themselves to be in worse case then indeed they are David found cause to pray that God would restore him to the joy of his Salvation yet Bertius would not say that David was fallen from grace and that propter graves causas yet who hath written more eagarly to maintaine that Saints may fall away from grace then Bertius But this Author beares before him such a spirit of confidence as if he would have all men ordered by his rules When Manoahs Wife Judg. 13. 22 23. discourseth thus If the Lord would kill us he would not have received a burnt offering at our hands nor shewed us these things He
is capable of For their grounds are universall as they professe that is common to all to wit as touching the love of God that it is common to all as touching the death of Christ that he dyed for all as touching the Covenant of grace that it also is common to all And if this will comfort any man namely to be assured that he is in as good a case as any Turke or Saracen or any reprobate in the World I find this Author is ready to assure them hereof and rather then faile he will sweare it though I never heard matter of faith put to be tryed by mans Oath till now I had thought only matters of fact had been tryable and assurable by Oath not matter of faith Yet I will not spare to professe that though they should sweare either of these universalities to be true I would no more believe them then I would believe the Divell For the Apostle adviseth saying Though that wee or an Angell from Heaven Preach unto you otherwise then that which we have Preached unto you let him be accursed Gal 1. 8. But let us examine the comfortable nature of these universalities whether they be such as a sober man can say nothing to the contrary I begin with the universality of Gods love the comfort herehence proceeds thus as I conceive God loves all willes all to be saved therefore thou art no reprobate Now consider whether I may not soberly say to the contrary that by the same reason there is no reprobate in the World or ever was whence it followes that I have no more comfortable assurance that I am no reprobate then I have assurance that there is no Reprobate at all in the World Secondly would you have mee believe hand over head that God would have all to be saved without distinction may not I soberly inquire whether your meaning be that God will have all and every one to be saved whether they believe or no whether they repent or no or only thus That God will have all to be saved in case they believe and repent not otherwise Now this is our doctrine as well as yours grounded upon this Scripture Whosoever believeth shall be saved Now doth this doctrine assure any man that he is no Reprobate nor of the number of those whom God hath rejected from salvation Perhaps you will say it is sufficient to assure him that he is no absolute reprobate and that so this Author is to be understood though hitherto in this Section he delivered it simply Admit this Now judge I pray you whether I may soberly oppose against it thus Although I am no absolute reprobate yet if I am a reprobate and may be as much assured of it as that there is any reprobate in the World what comfort can arise to my poore afflicted soule from hence Againe consider that neither we who oppose Arminians doe maintaine that God hath ordained to deny any man salvation absolutely but only conditionally to wit in case he dye in sinne without faith without repentance But suppose I am perswaded that God hath rejected mee from the grace of faith and of repentance what comfort can you Arminians administer to my sick soule in this case For dare you deny faith and repentance to be a gift of God So then if I conceive my selfe to be a reprobate from grace will you comfort me by saying that I am no absolute reprobate from grace Then belike God hath determined to give or deny grace not according to the meere pleasure of his will but according to mens workes And have you no better balme of Gilead to administer to a sick soule then to take sanctuary in such a Doctrine as is direct and flat Pelagianisme In the same sober manner we shall have somewhat to say against that comfort that is reached forth to an afflicted soule from the universality of Christs death Thou doubtest thou art a reprobate but be of good cheere for Christ dyed for all and every one as much as to say thou hast no more cause to believe that thou art a reprobate then to believe that there is any reprobate in the world Secondly be of good cheere for albeit thou art a reprobate and God foreseeing thou wilt dye in sinne hath from everlasting ordained thee to condemnation as well a Judas that betrayed Christ yet I can assure thee thou art no absolute reprobate no more then Judas was And whereas it may be thou art verily perswaded that he that believes and repents and perseveres herein shall not be damned for as much as all confesse that God hath not ordained that damnation shall be inflicted absolutely according to the meere pleasure of God but meerely according to mens workes but all thy feare is least thou art reprobated from grace and that absolutely considering that God as it seemes in the giving and denying of grace proceeds meerely according to the meere pleasure of his will because the Apostle saith He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9. 18. Yet be of good cheere for I can assure thee that is nothing so but as there are no absolute reprobates from glory and unto damnation so there are no absolute reprobates from grace but meerely conditionally it is that men are reprobated from grace like as meerely conditionally God doth elect men unto grace And to speake in plaine termes without dissimulation God gives faith and repentance unto men according as they dispose themselves thereunto for want of which disposition he denyes it unto others And if thou desirest to be more particularly informed in this mistery for thine unspeakable consolation know for certain that if thou wilt believe and repent thou shalt believe and repent And albeit in the Synod of Palestine anno 415. it was concluded That grace is not given according unto merits and Pelagius was driven to subscribe thereto for feare of excommunication too in case he had refused it yet take this comfortable mystery along with thee that this was but a fruit of the Predestinarian Heresy which that very yeare if thou markest the story well had his originall and was brought forth into the World And lastly as touching the universality of the Covenant of grace that is as comfortable as the former for all are under it and therefore thou amongst the rest and consequently thou art no more a reprobate then any other certainly no absolute reprobate for there are none such Iudas was not and therefore thou maist assure thy selfe thou art not And indeed there are none that maintaine that God decreed that any man should be denyed glory or damned absolutely but only conditionally to wit in case he finally persevere in infidelity or impenitency And whereas thou maist feare least thou art absolutely reprobated from grace to wit from the grace of faith and repentance take heart and feare no colours For albeit it be fit to confesse considering the times that faith and repentance are the
gifts of God yet know that God doth not dispense them according to the meere pleasure of his will but according to mens workes whatsoever some men cry out to the contrary charging us with Pelagianisme but if thou art wise thou wilt take comfort in this as in true Christianisme As for those that maintaine absolute reprobation none of them is able to make it appeare unto thee that thou art no absolute reprobate And I willingly confesse that if faith and repentance be not evidences hereof we are not able to make it appeare either to others that they are not or to our selves that we are not Reprobates But by the way it is manifest that this Author by his grounds can give no assurance of election no not to a believer no certainty of salvation and yet he pretends to be a comforter when he leaves him in doubt whether he shall be saved or damned yet upon this pillow Arminians sleepe sweetly and presume that others may sleepe sweetly also that they are not absolutely reprobates And no marvaile for even in the course of the holiest conversation their doctrine can administer no assurance either of election or salvation But perhaps they will say though they can give no assurance of election absolute by their doctrine yet they can give assurance of election conditionall But wherein I pray doth this consist Forsooth in this that if they finally persevere in this their holy conversation they shall be saved But I pray consider Doth not our doctrine afford the same assurance as well as theirs It cannot be denied but that it doth and more then so for our doctrine gives assurance of perseverance in the state of grace to them that are once in the state of grace the Arminian doth not And the Apostle assures the Thessalonians that upon his knowledge they were the elect of God and that from the worke of their faith the labour of their love and the patience of their hope 1 Thess 1. 3. 4. And that the man of sinne shall not prevaile over them 2 Thess 2. 13. Because they are elect whereof also he was assured as there he signifies by their sanctification and faith It is true the outward acts of faith and repentance may be counterfited And it is as true that whether they be counterfeited or no it may be discerned otherwise why should the Apostle be so bold as to professe and that by observation of their workes that he knew they were elect of God 1 Thess 1. 4. The Devill may transforme himselfe into an Angell of light but yet we have a sure Word of God whereby to discerne his practises to corrupt either our faith or our manners otherwise we poore Creatures were but in a very evill case so his Ministers also transforme themselves crafty workers as they are into Ministers of righteousnesse but S t Paul discovered them and warned the Corinthians of them Wolves may goe in sheepes clothing but our Saviour assures us that we shall know them by their fruites none more proper fruite of a false Prophet then his false doctrine And we have a true touch-stone to discover that and make the Devills clawes to appeare in their proper forme and colours And we know how soone Simon Magus discovered himselfe to be in the very gall of betternesse and bond of iniquity Yet I nothing doubt but we may be deceived but most commonly it comes to passe that Hypocrites are the greatest deceivers and coseners of themselves and it is not their condition to be exercised with feares least they be Reprobates and to confesse that their faith their repentance is counterfit It is most likely they deale without Hypocrisy in this But when any doe lay such sinnes to their own charge we will not take them at their word but we will inquire upon what grounds they deliver this we will inquire whether now they are well pleased with this their former Hypocrisy If so what cause is there why they should be disquieted in themselves upon the consideration of that wherein they are well pleased But if it be their sorrow if this cause heavinesse of heart unto them here we have a double evidence of some sparkes of grace in them First in confessing their former Hypocrisy Secondly in being humbled with sorrow in the consideration of it Now God hath promised that if we confesse our sinnes God as he is faithfull and just will forgive them And if they are humbled in the consideration of it and tremble at the apprehension of Gods judgements against Hypocrites they are so much the fitter for God to take up his habitation in their contrite heart and humble spirit Es 57. 15. And Es 63. 2. I hope there is no miserable consolation in all this To minister this Physicke is to be a Phisitian of some value And certainly whatsoever was our former course whether in the way of profanesse or the way of hypocrisy when God brings us to consider it and to confesse it and to be acquainted with his feares and terrours here upon we have cause to conceive good hope that God is now in a gratious way to draw them neerer unto him who before were strangers from him Certainly we will be bold to tell them that there is no just cause why they should despaire I come to the last particular he insisteth upon and that is Piscators confession which because he conceives it serves his turne therefore he ascribes unto him ingenuity in this But what saith Piscator That no comfort can possibly be instilled into the soules of Reprobates Piscators words are these Reproborum anxiis animis nulla consolatio instillari potest This Author addes Possibly to make it the more waighty as he thinkes We acknowledg God to be the God of consolation and his spirit alone to be the comforter and if God will not give them Christ surely they can have no true consolation in Christ which yet depends meerely upon supposition of the will of God like as none but God can give raine and if it be his will it shall raine to morrow or not raine either shall come to passe according to his will and it is impossible it should be otherwise then he willeth yet is raine a contingent thing and God will have it come to passe contingently that is so as with a possibility to the contrary Now that God gives not all unto Christ our Saviour professeth John 17. Thine they were and thou hast given them unto me and afterwards for their sakes I sanctify my selfe This is spoken in reference unto the offering up of himself unto his Father upon the Crosse as Maldonate acknowledgeth to be the interpretation of all the Fathers whom he he had read He dyed we confesse to procure Salvation for all that believe but did he dye to procure faith for all If so then either absolutely or conditionally If absolutly then all must believe and be saved If conditionally to wit upon condition of some disposition
of them that are called but few are chosen Yet might that Synod well admonish Maccovius to take heed of such words as might give offence to tender yeares and be carefull to expresse the same truth in as inoffensive way as we can And accordingly having a digression in this very Argument in my Vindiciae Gratiae I proposed it in this manner Whether the holy one of Israell without any injurie to his Holy Majestie may be said to will sinne after a certaine manner and I maintaine the affirmative after this manner Deus vult ut peccatum fiat ipso permittente God will have sinne to come to passe by his permission and Bellarmine confesseth that Malum esse Deo permittente bonum est It is good that evill should be by God's permission which was also the saying of Austine long before And that non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo Not any thing comes to passe except God Omnipotent will have it come to passe either by suffering it or himselfe working it And the eleventh Article of the Church of Ireland framed in the dayes of King J'ames runnes thus God from all eternitie did by his unchangable Counsell ordaine what soever in time should come to passe yet so as there by no violence is offered to the to the wills of the reasonable Creatures and neither the libertie nor the contingency of second causes is taken away but established rather And Arminius himselfe professeth that Deus voluit Achabum mensuram scelerums uorum implere God would have Achab to fill up the measure of his sinnes and what is it to fill up the measure of his sinnes but to adde sinne unto sinne And this he delivereth without all qualification By these instances it appeareth That they of the first side can easily beare one with another in this difference And to say the truth there is no reason why they should quarrell about circumstances seeing they agree in the substance for which they both contend 1 That the moving cause of Reprobation is the alone will of God and not the sinne of man originall or actuall 2. That the finall impenitencie and Damnation of Reprobates are necessary and unavoidable by God's absolute Decree The difference which this Authour takes into Consideration is about the object of Predestination and the difference in opinion thereabouts is usually to be observed threefold though this Authour is pleased to take notice of a secondfold difference for some conceive the object of Predestination to be man-kind as yet not created others conceive the object thereof to be man-kind created but not yet corrupted A third sort maintaine the object thereof to be man-kind both created and corrupted Now D. Iunius hath endeavoured to reconcile the three opinions making place for each consideration in the object of predestination And Piscator after him adventured on the like reconciliation and hath performed it with more perspicuitie and with better successe in my judgment then Iunius And that according to three different acts concurring unto Predestination The first is saith he God's purpose to create man-kind in Adam unto different ends now this Act doth clearely require the object thereof to be man-kind not yet Created The second Act he conceives to be God's Decree to permit all men to fall in Adam Now this Act he conceives as clearly to suppose the object thereof to be man-kind created but not corrupted The third last Act he conceives to be God's decree to choose some to shew compassion on them in raising them out of sinne by saith and repentance and of Reprobating others leaving them as be findes them and permitting them to finish their dayes in sinne to the end he might manifest the glorie of his grace in saving the one the glorie of his Justice in damning others Now this third Act he supposeth manifestly to require the object thereof to be man-kind both created and corrupted Now the Authours of these severall opinions have no reason to go together by the eares about these three opinions but with Brotherly love to entertaine one another First because the difference herein is not so much in Divinitie as in Logick and Philosophie difference in opinion about order in intentions being meerly Logicall and to be composed according to the right stating of the end intended and of the meanes conducing to the end it being generally confessed that the intention of the end is before the intention of meanes conducing thereunto And that look what is first in intention the same must be last in execution Secondly the Authours of these severall opinions about the object of Predestination doe all agree in two principall points 1. That all men before God's eternall predestination and reprobation are considered as equall in themselves whether as uncreated or as created but not corrupted or lastly whether created or corrupted 2 That God's grace only makes the difference choosing some to worke thē to faith repentance perseverance therein while he rejecteth others leaving thē as he findes them permitting them to finish their dayes in sinne whereby is upheld and maintained 1. First the prerogative of God's grace as only effectuall to the working of men unto that which is good 2. And secondly the prerogative of God's Soveraigntie in shewing mercy on whome he will to bring them to Faith and true repentance and hardning others that is not bestowing of grace and repentance upon them And seeing they all agree in these momentous points of Divinitie they have no cause to take it offensively at the hands of one another that they differ in a point of Logick Now I have adventured on this argument to find out to my selfe and give unto others some better satisfaction then formerly hath been exhibited and that by distinguishing Two decrees only on each part to witt the decree of the end and the decree of the meanes As for example 1. On the part of Predestination and Election I conceive the end to be the manifestation of God's glorious grace in the way of mercie mixt with Justice on a certaine number of men And the Decree of the meanes is to create them and permit them all to fall in Adam and to bring them forth into the world in their severall generations clothed with originall sinne and to send Christ into the world to dye for them and for Christ's sake first to bestow the grace of faith and repentance upon them and finally to save them 2. On the part of Reprobation I conceive the end to be the manifestation of God's glory in the way of Justice vindicative And the decree of meanes to be partly common and partly proper the common meanes are to create them and permit them all to fall in Adam and bring them forth into the world clothed with originall sin the speciall meanes are to leave them as he finds them and permit them to finish their daies in sinne and so not
shewing the like grace to them which he shewed to others 1. So that the moving cause of Reprobation is the alone will of God and not the sinne of man originall and actuall like as on the other side the moving cause of election is only the will of God or not faith or any good workes whereupon this Authour is loath to manifest his opinion This doctrine is not only approved by Doctour Whitaker Doctour of the Chaire in the Universitie of Cambridge and that in his Cygnea Cantio a little before his death but justified and confirmed by varietie of Testimonies both of Schoolemen as Lumbard Aquinas Bannes Petrus de Alliaco Gregorius Arminensis of our owne Church and the Divines thereof as taught by Bucer at Cambridge by Peter Martyr at Oxon professed by the Bishops and others promoted by Queen Elizabeth and farther in the yeare of our Lord 1592 there was a famous recantation made in the Universitie of Cambridge by one Barret in the 37. of Elizabeth whereunto he was urged by the heads of houses of that Universitie The Recantation runnes thus Preaching in Latine not long since in the Universitie Church Right worshipfull many things slipt from me both falsly and rashsly spoken whereby I understand the mindes of many have been grieved to the end therefore I may satifie the Church the truth which I have publiquely hurt I doe make this publique confession both Repenting and Revoking my Errour First I said that no man in this transiâ—â—ie world is so strongly underpropt at least by the certainty of Faith that is unlesse as I afterwards expounded it by Revelation that he ought to be assured of his owne Salvation But now I protest before God and acknowledge in my conscience that they which are justified by faith have peace towards God that is have reconciliation with God and doe stand in that grace by faith therefore that they ought to be certaine and assured of their owne Salvation even by the certainty of Faith it selfe 2. Secondly I affirmed that the faith of Peter could not faile but that other mens faith may for as I then said Our Lord prayed not for the faith of every particular man but now being of a better and more sound Iudgment according to that which Christ teacheth in plaine words Ioh. 17. 20. I pray not for these alone that is the Apostles but for them also which shall believe in mee through their word I acknowledge that Christ prayed for the faith of every particular believer and that by the vertue of that prayer of Christ every true believer is so stayd up that his faith cannot faile 3. Thirdly touching perseverance to to the end I said that that certainty concerning the time to come is proud for as much as it is in his owne nature contingent of what kind the perseverance of every man is neither did I affirme it to be proud only but to be most wicked but now I freely protest that the true and justifiing faith whereby the faithfull are most neare united unto Christ is so firme as also for the time to come so certaine that it can never be rooted up out of the mindes of the faithfull by any temptation of the flesh the world or divell himselfe so that he that once hath this faith shall ever have it for by the benefit of that justifying faith Christ dwelleth in us and we in Christ therefore it cannot but be both increased Christ growing in us dayly as also persevere unto the end because God doth give constancy 4. Fourthly I affirmed that there was no distinction in faith but in the Persons believing in which I confesse I did erre Now I freely acknowledge the Temporarie faith which as Bernard witnesseth is therefore fained because it is temporary it is distinguished and differeth from the saving faith whereby sinners apprehending Christ are justified before God for ever not in measure and degrees but in the very thing it selfe Moreover I adde that Saint Iames doth make mention of a dead faith and Paul of a faith that worketh by love 5 Fifthly I added that forgivenesse of sinnes is an Article of faith but not particular neither belonging to this man or that man that is as I expounded it that no true faithfull man either can or ought certainely believe that his sinnes are forgiven But now I am of an other mind and doe freely confesse that every true faithfull man is bound by this Article of faith to believe the forgivenes of sinnes and certainely to believe that his owne particular sinnes are freely forgiven him neither doth it follow hereupon that that Petition of the Lord's prayer to wit forgive us our trespasses is needlesse for in that Petition we aske not only the gift but also the increase of Faith 6 Sixtly these words escaped me in my Sermon viz As for those that are not saved I doe most strongly believe and doe freely protest that I am so perswaded against Calvin Peter Martyr and the rest that sinne is the true and proper cause of Reprobation But now being better instructed I say that the Reprobation of the wicked is from everlasting and that saying of Saint Austine to Simplician to be mòst true viz If sinne were the cause of Reprobation then no man should be elected because God doth know all men to be defiled with it And that I may speak freely I am of the same mind and doe believe concerning the Doctrine of Election and Reprobation as the Church of England believeth and teacheth in the booke of the Articles of faith in the Article of Praedestination Last of all I uttered these words rashly against Calvin a man that hath very well deserved of the Church of God to wit that he durst presume to lift up himselfe above the high and Almighty God by which words I doe confesse that I have done great injurie to that most learned and right good man and I most humbly beseech you all to pardon this my rashnes as also in that I have uttered many bitter words against Peter Martyr Beza Zanchy Iunius and the rest of the same religion being the lights and ornaments of our Church calling them by the odious names of Calvinâ—sts and other slanderous termes branding them with a most grevious marke of reproach whom because our Church doth worthily reverence it was not meet that I should take away their good name from them Doctor Fulke in like manner maintaines that reprobation is not of workes but of God's free will Rom 9 Num 2. His words are these God's election Reprobation is most free of his owne will not upon the foresight of the merits of either of them for he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth vers 18. Yet here is to be distinguished for the explication of the truth That God's decree of Reprobation may be considered either as touching the Act of God reprobating and willing or as touching the things hereby willed or Decreed As
touching the Act of God reprobating we say as Aquinas saith concerning the Act of God predestinating namely that no cause can be given thereof as from man like as no cause can be given of God's will God's will being eternall but whatsoever is in man being Temporall But as touching the things decreed or willed by Reprobation these are either the deniall of grace or inflicting of damnation As touching the deniall of grace we clearely professe that like as God of his mere will and pleasure doth shew mercy on some in bestowing the grace of faith and repentance upon them so God of his mere will and pleasure doth harden others in denying unto them the grace of saith and repentance and thus it is that Doctor Fulke maintaines God's election reprobation to be most free of his owne free will not upon the foresight of the merits of either of thē but touching the inflicting of damnation we maintaine that God neither doth inflict damnation nor ever did decree to inflict damnation of his owne mere pleasure and will but altogether for sinne either originall or actuall further we maintaine that in no moment of time or nature God doth decree to damne any man before he foreseeth the sinne for which they shall be damned 2. As touching the second we willingly grant that by vertue of God's decree it necessarily and unavoidably followes that whosoever dieth in finall impenitency shall be damned neither doe I thinke this Authour dares to avouch the contrary Secondly as touching finall impenitency wee willingly professe that upon supposition of God's decree finally to harden a man and to deny a man the grace of repentance It being clearely the gift of God as Scriptures testifie Act 5. 31 and 11. 18. 2 Tim 2 25 it is impossible that such a man should repent neverthelesse both repentance is possible and finall impenitency is avoidable simply to wit by grace 3. But this Authour loves not to explicate himselfe but I suppose he secretly maintaines that every man hath such a power by grace wherby he may repent if he will concerning which Tenent of his we nothing doubt but every man hath such a power but we deny that such a power is grace we say it is nature rather and that for this reason looke by what power a man may repent if he will by the same power he may ref use to repent if he will Now if this were grace then were grace inferior to a morall vertue for no morall vertue leaves a man indifferent to doe good or no to doe good or evill but inclines and disposeth the will only to that which is good so Justice disposeth a man only to just actions not indifferentlie to that which is just or to that which is unjust T is true neverthelesse a man that is just may doe an unjust Act if he will but this is not by vertue of the habit of Justice wherewith he is qualified But only by reason of the freedome of his will wich is naturall unto him for justice undoubtedly inclines a man's will only to that which appeareth just and so every morall vertue inclines the will only to a vertuous Act not indifferently either to acts vertuous or to acts vicious like as on the contrary a vicious habit inclines the will of man only to acts vicious not indifferently to acts vicious or to acts vertuous Secondly grace is supernaturall it were a Monster in Divinitie to say that supernaturall grace doth indifferently incline a man either to good or evill it is impossible it should incline a man save to acts supernaturall now every supernaturall act must needs be gratious it cannot be sinfull or evill lastly whosoever hath a willto repent such a one hath not only a power to repent but actually doth repent as touching the cheifest facultiein the change whereof repentance doth consist for that is the will and it is God that worketh in us both the will and the deed in every kind of that which is truly good and surely to have a will to repent is a good thing if he want power let him and us pray for that out of that will and desirewe have to repent ut quod volumus implere valeamus that what we desire to doe we may be able to doe and we have no cause to feare that God will despise so gratious desires To these speeches let me adde that of Remigius Arch-bishop of Lyons who to Rabanus Arch-bishop of Mentz objecting that Saint Austine wrote a booke called Hipognosticon against Pelagius and Coelestius wherein he denied that Reprobates were properly praedestinati ad interitum predestinate to destruction answereth that Saint Austine said not so but some other man as it is supposed to purge the Church of calumnie which some ill affected ones did cast upon it namely that it taught that God by his predestination did impose upon men a necessity of perishing and did withdraw the word Praedestination from the point of Reprobates and gave it only to the Elect and so gave great occasion of further Errour and mistake In this speech of his it is clearely implyed that it was the constant Doctrine of the Church then that Reprobates lye under no necessitating Decree of Perdition Here we find inserted a passage taken out of Remigius Arcsh-bishop of Lions his answer to Rabanus Arch-bishop of Mentz as it is to be found in the Historie of Gottescalchus written by Doctor Usher Arch-bishop of Armach pag. 107. Now that discourse of Remigius is not in answer to Rabanus Arch-bishop of Mentz but unto Hincmarus Arch-bishop of Remes And withall this Authour is pleased to geld it as he thinkes good For whereas Remigius hath it thus quasi Deus sua praedestinatione necessitatem imponeret hominibus in suis impietatibus permanendi in aeternum pereundi This Authour renders it thus That God by his predestination did impose upon men a necessity of perishing leaving out altogether the former namely of imposing upon men a necessite of perishing in their impieties And every sober man may well wonder at his dealing in this especially seeing he hath left out that which is most materiall and most considerable for neither by Austin's Doctrine nor by our Doctrine hath God imposed upon any a necessitie of perishing but such as finally persevere in their impieties And will any man that is well in his wits oppose this Sure I am nor Hincmarus nor any other was knowne to mee to oppose this in the Church of God Neither is there any necessitie inherent in man on whom it is said to be imposed but a consequent denomination to God's unchangeable or irresistable will to damne all such as persist finally in their sinfull courses without breaking thē off by repentance All the question is about the necessity of Reprobates persisting in their impieties which might be objected as it seemes was objected against Austin's doctrine of Predestination by this Authour is objected against ours now by this
no supernaturall act is or can be sinfull every sinfull act must needs be an act naturall and power either to doe or to abstaine from any naturall Act is not to be denied to any naturall man But it is impossible that any naturall man should abstaine from any sinne or doe any naturall good act so commonly accounted in a gratious manner untill grace comes so to season the heart of man as to love God even to the contempt of himselfe and out of his love to doe that good which he doth and to abstaine from that evill from which he abstaineth 2. But if the question be of the manner how this necessitie of sinning is brought upon the nature of man we say it is not by the pleasure of God But by the sinne of Adam according to that of the Apostle Rom 5. By one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne for man by reason of sinne was justly bereaved of the Spirit of God and begetting children in this Condition he begets them after his owne Image and likenesse that is bereaved of the Spirit of God And we hold it impossible for a man bereaved of God's Spirit either to doe that which is good or abstaine from doing that which is evill in a gratious manner 2. Secondly I come to the Synod of Valense when they say the wicked not perish because they could not doe good but because they would not These words may seeme to imply that even the wicked could doe good if they would and truely I see noe cause to deny this But that we may safely say with Austine that omnes possunt Deo credere ab amore rerum temporalium ad divina praecepta servanda se convertere si velint Believe God if they will and from the love of all things temporall convert themselves to the keeping of God's Commandements if they will for if a man would goe to Church but cannot because he is lame would read in God's word but cannot because he is blind These impotencies are naturall not morall but the impotency brought upon mankind by the sinne of Adam is morall not naturall Now morall impotency is found noe where but in the will or at least is chiefly there and secondly in the understanding also as touching knowledge practicall and accordingly when Scriptures testifie that they who are in the flesh cannot please God Rom 8 cannot repent Rom 24 connot believe Ioh 12. This impotency consist's cheifly in the corruption of their wills noted by the hardnesse of heart Rom 2. 4. Eph 4. 18. Againe I have already shewed out of Remigius that a wicked man can doe that which is good but by what meanes to wit by grace not otherwise The words are these Si dixisset generaliter nemo hominum sine Dei gratia libero bene uti potest arbitrio esset Catholicus had he said generaly not any man can use his free will without grace he were Catholique And pag. 36 the same Remigius hath these words In infidelibus ipsum liberum arbitrium ita per Adam damnatum perditum in operibus mortuis liberum esse potest in vivis non potest free will so damned and lost in Adam may be free in dead workes in living workes it cannot Yet pag. 174 thus he distinguisheth answerably to the passage alleaged by this Authour De reprobis nullum salvari ullatenus existimamus non quia non possunt homines de malo ad bonum commutari ac de malis ac pravis boni ac recti fieri sed quia in melius mutari noluerunt in pessimis operibus usque ad finem perseverare voluerunt And pag. 143. Florus of the Church of Lyons where Remigius was Byshop sets downe the same truth more at large thus Habet homo post illam damnationem liberum arbitrium quo voluntate propria inclinari potest inclinatur ad malum habet liberum arbitrium quo potest assurgere ad bonum ut autem assurgat ad bonum non est propriae virtutis sed gratiae Dei miserantis Nam qui mortuus est potest dici posse vivere non tamen sua virtute sed Dei Ita liberum arbitrium hominis semel sauciatum semel mortuum potest sanari non tamen sua virtute sed gratia miserantis Dei ideo omnes homines admonentur omnibus verbum praedicatur quia habent posse credere posse converti ad Deum ut verbo extrinsecus admonente intus Deo suscitante qui audiunt reviviscant Man hath after that damnation to wit such as followed after Adam's fall free will so that of his owne will he can be inclined and is inclined to evill he hath free will whereby he may rise unto a good condition but that he doth arise to that good condition is not in his owne power but of the grace of God compassionating him for of him also who is dead it may be said that he may live yet not by his owne power but by the power of God Soe man's free will also being once wounded once dead may be restored not by his owne power but by God's grace pitying him and therefore al men are admonished to all the word is preached because they have this that they may believe they may be converted unto God that by the word outwardly admonishing God inwardly raising they which heare may revive As touching the last condemning those who say that any should be so predestinated to evill by God that they cannot be otherwise this Authour would faine insinuate into his Reader an opinion That wicked men may change from evill to good of themselves But neither doth the Councill of Valens or Remigius a chiefe man therein intimate any such thing But only that it is in God's power by his grace to change them and so hath changed and will change the hearts of many namely of all his Elect but not of one other That the Remonstrants did not at that time desire that it should be talked of among the common people who might have stumbled at it but disputed of among'st the Judicious and Learned who as the threshing Oxen who are to beate the corne out of the Huske are to bolt out those truthes which are couched and hidden in the letter of the Scriptures That the doctrine which is loath to abide the triall even of learned men carrieth with it a shrewd suspicion of falshood the heathen Oratour shall witnesse for me who to Epicurus seeing that he would not publish his opinion to the simple people who might happily take offence at that answereth thus Declare thy opinion in the place of Judgment or if thou art affraid of the assembly there declare that in the Senate amongst those grave and judicious Persons Thou wilt never doe it and why but because it is a fowle and dishonest opinion True religion as Vives saith is not a thing guilded over but gold it selfe the more it is scraped and
that they shall come to passe in such a manner as joyned with a possibility of not cōing to passe otherwise they should come to passe not contingently but necessarily But it is growne to be this Authours naturall genius miserably to overreach while he keeps himselfe to his own formes inshaping the opinion of his adversaries impatient to be beaten out of them and to have his veteres avias à pulmone repelli oldgrandmothers vain conceits to be pulled out of Lastly this Authour shapeth us to make damnation an end intended by God which we conceive to be a very shallow project we know nothing but Gods owne glory that can be this end And therefore even there where Solomon professeth that God made the wicked against the day of Evill herewithall acknowledgeth that God made all thinges forhimselfe At length we have gotten cleare aboard to come acquainted with this Authours full discourse and not by patches as hitherto we have done For here he promiseth to acquaint us with the reasons that have convinced him of the untruth of absolute Reprobation as it is carried the upper way and like a Martialist a man at armes he tells us they fight against it and thus the interpolator discourseth The first part of the first Argument against the supralapsarians sect 1. They are drawen ab incommodo from the greater evils and inconveniences which issue from it naturally which may be referred to two maine heads 1 The dishonour of God 2 The overthrow of religion and government It dishououreth God For it chargeth him deeply with two things no wayes agreeable to his nature 1 Mens Eternall torments in Hell 2 Their sinnes on Earth First It chargeth him with Mens eternall torments in Hell and maketh him to be the prime principall 2nd invincible cause of the damnation of Millions of miserable soules The prime cause because it reporteth him to have appointed them to distruction of his owne voluntary disposition antecedent to all deserts in them and the Principall and invincible cause because it maketh the Damnation of Reprobates to be necessary and unavoydable thorough Gods absolute and uncontroulable decree and soe necessary that they can no more escape it then poore Astyanax could avoyd the breaking of his necke when the Graecians tumbled him downe from the Tower of Troy Now this is an neavy charge contrary to scripture Gods nature and sound Reason 1 To Scripture which makes man the Principall nay the only cause in opposition to God of his owne ruine Thy destruction is of thy selfe ô Israell but in me is thine help As I live saith the Lord I will not the death of the wicked c. Turne yee turne yee why will yee dye He doth not afflict willingly nor greive the Children of men To which speech for likeneile sake I will joyne one of Prospers Gods predestination is to many the cause of standing to none of falling 2 It is contrary to Gods nature who sets forth himselfe to be a God mercifull gracious long suffering abundant in goodnesse c. And he is acknowledged to be soe by King David Thou Lord art good and mercifull and of great Kindnesse to all them that call upon thee And by the Prophets Joell Jonah and Michah He is gracious and mercifull slow to anger and of great Kindnesse And who saith Micah is a God like unto thee that taketh away iniquity c. He retaineth not his wrath for ever because mercy pleaseth him 3 'T is contrary also to sound reason which cannot but argue such a Decree of extreame cruelty and consequently remove it from the father of mercyes We cannot in reason thinke that any man in the world can so farre put off humanity and nature as to resolve with himselfe to marry and beget Children that after they be borne and have lived a while with him he may hang them up by the tongues teare thir flesh with scourges pull it from their bones with burning pincers or put them to any cruell tortures that by thus torturing them he may shew what his Authority and power is over them Much lesse can we believe without great violence to reason that the God of mercy can so farre forget himselfe as out of his absolute pleasure to ordaine such infinite multitudes of his Children made after his owne image to everlasting fire and create them one after another that after the end of a short life here he might torment them without end hereafter to shew his power and soveraingty over them If to destroy the righteous with the wicked temporally be such a peece of injustice that Abraham removeth it from God with an Absit wilt thou destroy the righteous with the wicked that be farre from thee O Lord. shall not the judge of all the world doe right How deepely may we thinke would that good man have detested one single thought that God resolveth upon the destruction of many innocent soules eternally in hell fire Here this Authour carrieth himselfe like another Ptolomeus Ceraunus or as if he had some cheife place in the lightning legion not by his prayers but by his discourse he seemes to thunder and to lighten all along When the Lord appeared to Elias he was neither in the mighty wind nor in the earthquake nor in the fire but in the still and soft voyce I hope to prove all this to be but Ignis fatuus Mountebancks use to make great ostentation and crackes but commonly they end in meere impostures and it is no hing strange when men opposing the grace of God loose their owne witts and please themselves in the confusion of their owne senses For when men are in love with their owne errours they hate the light yea the very light of nature in the distinct notice of it would be an offence unto them Can this Authour be ignorant of that which every meane Sophister knowes that there be foure kinds of causes Materiall Formall Efficient Finall that he should expatiate thus in speaking of a cause without all distinction Is it strange that God should be a prime cause and principall in execution of vengeance Doth he not professe saying vengeance is mine and I will repay Is he not called the God to whom vengeance belongeth And are not his magistrates his Ministers to execute vengeance temporall here in this world And can any sober man dout whether God be invincible whom the Apostle pronounceth to be irresistable Againe an efficient cause admits farther distinction for it is either Physicall or Morall Physicall is that which really workes or executes any thing as every tradesman hath his worke which his hands doe make so God hath his worke which he executes and his worke is judgment as well as mercy I am the Lord which shew mercy and judgment and righteousnesse for in these things I delight saith the Lord and he would have us when we doe glory glory in this that we doe understand and know him to
be such a God A Morall efficient is twofold being only of a moveing nature to move others to doe somewhat as namely either by perswading or by meriting or deserving He that perswades moves an other to doe some what he that meriteth thereby moves another either to reward him or punish him Now to walke in the light of this distinction and not to please our selves by walking in darknesse though God be the prime principall and invincible cause of man's damnation in the kind of a cause efficient physicall which should not seeme strange to an ordinary Christian who knowes full well that vengeance is God's peculiar worke as the Iudge of all the world and that he delights in the execution thereof yet this hinders not but that man may be the cause of his own damnation in the way of a meritorious cause justly deserving it Omnis poena Deum habet Authorem All punishment hath God for the Authour of it This is a principle acknowledged both by the Arminians and Vasquez the Jesuite but never is punishment inflicted on any by the hands of God save on those who formerly have deserved it Consider we farther as touching the severall kinds of causes formerly mentioned if the question be which is the principall Aristotle answereth that this is not confined to any one kind of them somtimes the materiall cause somtimes the formall cause somtimes the efficient somtimes the finall cause is the demonstrative cause the cause propter quam the cause by vertue where of the effect hath its existence but this peculiar and speciall cause is described thus It is that whereby satisfactory answer is made to the question demanding why such a thing is Now in execution of punishment or condigne vengeance this satisfactory answer is made by representing the meritorious cause never by representing the efficient cause as for example if it be demanded why such a malefactor is executed upon the gallowes no sober man will answer because the Sheriffe cōmanded it to be so or because the Judge would have it so but because he robd upon the high way or committed some criminall fact or other which is capitall by the lawes of our land and to be punished with hanging upon the gallowes In like sort if question be made why devills or wicked men are damned is it our doctrine to referre the cause hereof to the mere pleasure of God Doe not all confesse that God inflicts damnation upon thē merely for their sinnes and transgressions wherein they have continued unto death without repentance Yet we acknowledge that God could have taken them off from their sinnes while they lived if he would by giving them repentance as he hath dealt with us and that merely of his free grace For we willingly confes that our sinnes are our owne but our faith is not our repentance is not When I say our owne I meane in respect that they are of our selves otherwise we acknowledge both faith and repentance to be our owne accipiendo in asmuch as we receive them but they are God's gifts and so they are his dando in asmuch as he gives them as Remigius speaketh Now what is become of this Authours pompous discourse Is it not the like the cracking of thornes in the fire making a great noise but the light of distinction like fire sets an end unto it and makes it appeare in its owne likenesse and proves nothing but a squib For albeit God in his decree makes the damnation of reprobates to be necessary and unavoidable yet seeing he makes it not to fall on any but for their sinnes what colour of dishonour unto God in ordaining that Iudas shall necessarily and unavoidably be damned for betraying the Sonne of God and afterwards most desperatly murthering himselfe If hereupon he could no more avoid his damnation then Astionax could the breaking of his neck when the Grecians tumbled him downe from the tower of Troy will any man that is not bereaved of common sense make strange of this It is true God did appoint both Iudas and all other wicked persons that never break off their sinnes by repentance unto destructiō of his own voluntary disposition For God workes all things according to the counsaile of his will and if it pleased him he could annihilate them upon the fresh foot of any sin or after they have suffered the vengeance of hell fire as many yeares in hell as they lived here in sinne yea and the devills in hell as Origen was of opinion and the Jewes at this day are of the same by Sir Edwin Sandes his relation whether this Author be of the same or not I know not And lastly we willingly confesse that the decree of God was antecedent to the deserts of men for reprobation is as antient as election and election was made before the foundation of the world if we believe Saint Paul rather then any other who either by word or deed doth manifest himselfe to be of a contrary opinion Still damnation is inflicted by God only for sinne and in degree answerable unto their sinnes and only because of their sinnes as a meritorious cause thereof though God makes use of it to his owne ends and the manifestation of his owne glory as Solomon professeth namely that God made all things for himselfe even the wicked against the day of evill And Saint Paul tells that as the Lord suffereth with long patience the vessells of wrath prepared to destruction that he might shew his wrath and make his power known So likewise another reason hereof he specifies to be this That he might declare the riches of his glory upon the vessells of mercy which he hath prepared unto glory For when we shall behold the unspeakable misery brought upon others by reason of their sinnes how rich will God's glory appeare unto us when we consider that had it not been for his free grace delivering us from sinne we had been swallowed up of the same sorrowes And thus Alvarez writeth disput III. The glory of God's mercy in his elect and in like manner the manifestation of divine justice on Reprobates is truely and properly the finall cause why God did permit sinnes both in Reprobates and Angells And he proves it out of this passage of Saint Paul So Aquin 1 p. pag. 23. art 5. This is the reason saith he why God hath chosen some and Reprobated others that representation might be made of Gods goodnesse towards the Elect in the way of mercy pardoning them and on the Reprobates in the way of justice punishing them And Alphonsus Mendoza a Scotist concurres with them in this and we see they make Saint Pauls doctrine their foundation And indeed albeit at the day of judgment there will be found a vast difference between the Elect and Reprobates the one having departed this life in the state of faith repentance the other in infidelitie and impenitency in such sort as God will bestow on his elect
Agents by whom they are acted to doe otherwise Yet there is another difference according to the morall condition of these actions For if they are good and so farre as they are goood they come to passe by Gods working of them but if they are evill and so farre as they are evill they come to passe onely by Gods permitting according to that of Austin Non aliquid sit nisi omnipotēs fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo Not any thing comes to passe but God willing it either by suffering it to wit in case it be evill or himselfe working it to wit in case it be good And according to that eleventh Article of Religion agreed upon by the Arch-Bishop and Bishops and the rest of the Clergy in Ireland which is this God from all eternity did by his unchangeable counsell ordaine whatsoever should come to passe in time yet so as thereby no violence is offered to the wills of the reasonable creatures and neither the liberty nor the contingency of the second causes is taken away but established rather Farther consider it is confessed by all that God concurres in producing the act of sinne as an efficient cause thereof not morall but naturall And Aquinas himselfe though he denyes that Voluntas Dei est malorum Because indeed as Hugo de Sancto Victore observes by the will of God is commonly understood in this case Voluntas approbans his will approving it and loving it And so it is justly denyed that God doth will evill things speaking of the evill of sinne Yet Aquinas professeth and disputes and proves that Actus peccati est a Deo the Act of sinne is from God Like as the Act of walking is from the soule though the lamenes in walking ariseth from some disease in the legge Now the Devill concurres not in this manner to any act of sin neither is the efficient cause thereof in the Kinde of a Naturall efficient but onely Morall by tempting and perswading What therefore shall we conclude as this Authour doth without feare or witt or honesty that by the confession of all men God is hereby made worse then the Devill To what abominable courses do the wilde witts and profane hearts of these men expose them The greatest works of Satan in moving men to sin are comprehended under blinding and hardening of them Now these operations are also attributed to God And like enough he doth usually performe them not by the ministry of his holy Angells but by the Ministry of Satan and his Angells of Darkenesse as we read 1. Kings 22. v. 21. 22. 23. Ioh 13. 27. Acts 5. 3. What then shall the Devill so farre possesse our hearts as to break forth into such intolerable blasphemyes as to conclude hereupon that God is bad or worse then the Devill The providence of God I willingly confesse is wonderfull and mysterious in this like unto the Nature of God to be adored rather then pryed into So this providence to be dreaded rather then for satisfaction to every wanton and wild witt to be searched into Yet all confesse that the Lord could hinder all this if it pleased him and rebuke Satan and restraine the power and stop the course of sin and prevent occasions leading thereunto but he will not and why But because he knowes it becomes his allmighty power and wisdome infinite rather exmalis bene facere quà m malum esse non sinere To worke good out of evill then not at all to suffer evill Lastly what meanes this Authour to carry himselfe so as to betray so strange ignorance in mitigating Satans operation in tempting unto sin as if this were not sufficient to make him the Authour of sin Especially considering the reason that moves him hereunto which is meerely the delight that he takes in dishonouring God and being a desperate spirit himselfe to make as many as he can partakers of the same desperate condition For cupiunt perditi perdere sayth Cyprian cum sint ipsi paenales quaerunt sibi ad poenam comites being damned themselves they desire to damne as many as they can And being bound in chaines and kept to the judgement of the great day they desire to have as many companions as they can in drinking of that cup of trembling and sucking the very dreggs of that cup of trembling and wringing them out For as the Historian observes Maligna est calamitas cum suo supplicio crucietur acquiescit alieno Calamity makes a man of a spightfull nature and when himselfe is tormented he takes content in this that others suffer with him And as the Oratour observes Nullum adversarium magis metuas quà m qui non potest vivere potest occidere No adversary more to be feared then he who cannot live himselfe yet can kill another This makes a coward resolute when he must needs dye he will fight like a mad man and kill all he can I say what meanes this Authour to carry the matter hand over head as if it were without question That he is not the Authour of sinne who onely is a Morall cause thereof but rather he that is the naturall efficient whereas great Divines carry it to the contrary As namely Dominicus Soto in his first booke of nature and grace chap 18. Although sayth he there are many that thinke it hard to explicate how in the hatred of God which hath an inward and indivisible malignity God can be the cause of the entity but not of the fault Yet this is not so hard to be understood Then he proceeds to shew how this may be First laying for his ground what it is to be the cause of sinne thus In morall actions he is altogether and is judged to be the cause who by a law or help or counsell or favour or perswasion moves any one either to good or evill Observe I pray the doctrine of this School-Divine directly contrary to that which this Authour supposeth without all proofe For in the judgement of Dominicus Soto he onely is to be accounted the cause of another mans sinne who is the morall cause thereof as by tempting counselling perswading thereunto And upon this ground he proceeds to free God from being the Authour of it after this manner But as for God he by all these wayes moves his creatures to that which is good and honest and none at all to evill Neither is the doctrine of Dominicus Soto alone but the common doctrine of the Divines of Salamancha as Molina confesseth in his disputation 23. And albeit Molina the Jesuite were of another opinion Yet Vasquius the Jesuite professeth that he was ever of the same minde with Dominicus Soto and the Divines of Salamancha in this In his 129 disputation upon the first part of his Summes As for Prosper he hath no such argument But first observe the Objection whereunto he answereth was made against the Doctrine of Austin as the Authour acknowledgeth Whence it followeth that looke
in my writing So Beza in his questions and answers I say God hath ordained not judicio for judgment but judicio for just judgment that is to manifest his justice upon them Secondly we deny that God suffers them to persevere in their sinfull courses without giving them grace to repent to the end that he may damne them But with Alvarez every way standing as much for absolute Reprobation as Calvin that God suffers them to sin and to persevere therein and damnes them for their sin to this end namely for the manifestation of the glory of his justice And as for this Authour's opinion in premising the foresight of sin to the decree of damnation I have already represented the manifest absurdity thereof as namely in this that seing God cannot foresee sin unlesse he first decree to permit it it followes that by his opinion the decree to permit sin must preceed the decree of damnation that is sin is first in intention and then damnation Whence it followes that if sin be first in intention it must be last in execution and consequently men shall be first damned for their sin and after that suffered to commit sin this is the glorious issue of the premises of this Authour His third and last is that by our doctrine God for the effecting of all this powerfully doth so governe and work upon the wills of Reprobates that they have noe libertie or abilitie at all in the issue of avoiding their sinnes but must of necessitie commit them To this I answer that no other power is requisite for the effecting of all this then 1. To suffer all men to fall in Adam 2. To bring forth all men in originall sinne which alone deserves damnation as Mr. Hoord confesseth and as this Authour sometimes read in his Lectures at Magdelen Hall 3. Not to regenerate Reprobates but to suffer them finally to persevere in their ungodly courses without giving them grace to break off their sins by repentance 2. Yet we deny that all power and ability is taken from Reprobates to avoid actuall sinnes We grant willingly neither Elect nor Reprobate have any power to avoid sinne originall all of them being conceived and brought forth into the world in the corrupt masse But as for actuall sin not only regenerate have power to avoid that and that in a gracious manner but every Reprobate hath power to avoid that in a naturall manner My reason is because though a good worke may be an act supernaturall yet a sinfull work cannot be so but every actuall sin is an act naturall for the ground and substance of it But every naturall carnall man hath power freely either to doe any act naturall or to abstaine from doing it though when they abstaine from doing it as from committing murther adultery theft slaunder or the like they never abstaine from it in a gracious manner Like as any morall good worke they have libertie to doe but they cannot doe it in a gracious manner This proceeds meerly from the Spirit of regeneration which Spirit of regeneration the Lord never bestowes upon any Reprobate Sect 3. Thus they teach and therefore by just consequence they make God the Authour of sin as it will plainly appeare by these following considerations 1. It is ordinary to impute sin to those who have not so great an hand in the production of it as hath the Almighty by the grounds of this opinion For first the Devill is called the Father of lies and by the like reason of all other sinnes And therefore he that committeth sinne is said to be of the Devill and to be the child of the Devill And sin is called the the worke of the Devill which the Son of God appeared to loose And why is the Devill so called but because he doth egge and allure men by inward suggestions and outward temptations to fall into sin This is all he doth or can doe But God doth much more if he necessitate and by his decree first and next by his powerfull and secret working in the soules of men determine their wills irresistibly to sinen For to determine is infinitely more then barely to perswade for as much as sin must needs follow the determination but not the perswasion of the will God is therefore a truer cause of sin by this doctrine then the Devill 2. Wicked men are esteemed Authours of their own offences because they plot purpose choose commit them and are immediate Agents in the acting of them But God by this opinion doth more for he overruleth the projects purposes of wicked men and by an uncontroulable motion proceeding from an immutable decree carrieth all their deliberations resolutions choices and actions precisely that very way so as they cannot chose but doe as they doe whatsoever they may think to the contrary They have indeed potentiam in se liberam a power in it selfe free to chose what they refuse or to refuse what they chose to determine themselves this way or that way as liketh them best but they have not Liberum usum a free use of this their power God doth determine their will before it hath determined it selfe and maketh them doe those only actions which his omnipotent will hath determined and not which their wills out of any absolute dominion over their own actions have prescribed More rightly therefore may God be called the Authour of those offences For deeds whether good or bad are owned more truly by him that overruleth them then by the servile instruments that only execute and doe them 3. Wicked counsellours and they who allure and advise men to sin are accounted by God and men to be the causes of those sins to which they are the perswaders and have been punished for those misdeeds which others through their instigations have committed Jezabell Ahab's wife was reputed and punished as the murtherer of Naboth because she counselled and contrived the doing of it as we may see 1 Kings 21. 23. 25. But what is counselling to inforcing Evill counsells may be refused but an allmighty power cannot be resisted God therefore that useth this according to their doctrine in the production of sins is much more an Authour of them then he that only useth the other After two leaves spent first in the charge and secondly in proving that God is not the Authour of sin in a fumbling manner and thirdly in representing the doctrine of our Divines at pleasure now at length he comes to make it plainly appeare that by just consequence they make God the Authour of sin as he saith will plainly appeare by certaine considerations following which in few words come but to this in generall namely that God doth more then the Devill or wicked counsellours in alluring and advizing others to sin more then wicked persons in acting of their own sins But by this discourse of his he is as farre off as ever from proving that we make God the Authour of sin For consider
rather then to an other If Scholars of our Universities use any such phrases it is no other then they find in use among School-divines It is true indeed Jesuites oppose the Dominicans in this This Authour sides with the Jesuites but why doth he not take to taske any one chapter in Alvarez on this point to answer to overthrow their grounds which are no other then the very word of God and cleare reason doth justifie And the ground of the Jesuites in opposing is meerely an invention of their own concerning a certaine knowledge of God called a middle knowledge a vile invention and a palpable untruth and controulable of manifest contradiction For they suppose a thing knowable by God as future before God's will hath passed upon it to make it future being in it's own nature meerly possible and consequently cannot passe out of the condition of a thing meerly possible into the condition of a thing future without a cause Now noe cause can be devised hereof with any colour of reason but the will of God For first the cause hereof must be eternall seeing the thing it selfe of the cause whereof we dispute is eternall to wit the fruition of any thing This I say was eternall for it is known with God from all eternity Now there is noe eternall cause to be found but in God alone therefore the cause why things meerly possible in their own nature became future and that from everlasting must be found in God alone Therefore it must either be the will of God or the knowledge of God that did make it future and seing the knowledge of God rather supposeth them to be future then makes them so what remaines but that the will of God must necessarily be the cause hereof Nay consider whether the Jesuites themselves doe not manifest more ingenuity by farre then this boisterous Theologue that thinks to carry all with the blast of his words the resolution of whose arguments generally neither having the word of God for their ground nor any confest principle of reason Whereas not the greatest Angell of God will take upon him such an authoritative manner of discourse For did we grant that God by his Allmighty will did impose any necessity upon our wills Yet Suarez confesseth that so to worke doth neither involve any contradiction nor exceed the Allmighty power of God Whereas we are ready to prove and have already proved that their doctrine of God's concourse without subordination of the second causes to the first implies flat contradiction We say the wills determination of it selfe is the worke of God otherwise faith and love and every gracious act shall not be the worke of God Againe the wills determination of it selfe is no other then the wills operation and this Authour that opposeth us dares not deny the wills opperation to be the worke of God But what School divine can he produce that delivers himselfe in so absurd a manner as to say that God first determines the will and that afterwards the will determines it selfe especially speaking of such actions of the will as are produced by the power of nature The wills determination of it selfe we say is the worke of God moving the creature agreably to the nature thereof that is to be carried necessarily to that which is it's end and appeares to be good in genere convenientis and freely to the meanes which appeare to be good in genere conducentis as fit to pronounce the end intended All confessing Durand excepted that God works the act the question whether he works the act absolutely the will a second agent subordinate unto God as to it's Creatour Or conditionally modo vellimus provided that we will it God the first agent subordinate to the will of the creature This Authour will have it to be wrought by God that is conditionally in dependence upon and expectation of the operation of the creature which we say is most absurd First because thus the first agent is made subordinate to the second agent which is most unaturall Secondly observe a manifest contradiction For the question is about actus volendi the act of willing in man Now if God produce this act upon supposition that man produceth this act then the same act is produced by God upon supposition that it is produced by man If it be produced by man what need is there of God's producing it by way of supplement Thirdly by this meanes the thing is made the condition of it selfe For hereby it is said this act is made upon condition that it doth exist so the selfe same thing shall be before after it selfe 4. Thus man's production of the act shall be noe worke of God which holds off faith and repentance as well as of any naturall act in this Authours opinion Fiftly It is not possible the will can produce the act unlesse God produceth it If then God doth not produce it unlesse the will doth produce it in this case there shall be noe act produced For if I goe not to London unlesse you goe with me nor you goe to London unlesse I goe with you here is no going at all till one saith I say I goe and his resolution carrieth the other with him if the others depend thereupon 6 Whereas to helpe at a dead lift the Jesuiticall doctrine of Scientia media middle knowledge is called in after this manner God foreseing that at such an instant the will of man will produce such an act if God be pleased to concurre and upon this foreknowledâ—e God resolves to concurre This doctrine I have already confounded by shewing the apparent falsity of this supposition For seeing the wills producing such an act at such an instant is a thing merly possible in it's own nature no more future then not future It is impossible that this should passe out of the condition of a thing meerly possible into the conditioÌ„ of a thing future without a cause And noe cause hereof can be but the will of God as I have often proved It followes that the wills producing such an act depends rather upon the will of God to have it produced then on the contrary that Gods producing such an act dependes upon the creatur's will to produce it As for that which followes of the absolute dominion that the will of the creature should have over it's action I presume he meanes independent it sounds more like the voice of the Devill then of a sober Christian Yet it is more then I know that Lucifer himselfe challengeth any such absolute Dominion over his actions unto himselfe If he doth I know noe greater sinne that hee or the creature can be guilty of unlesse in case grosse ignorance doth excuse it To deny God to be the first Agent is to deny his God-head and if hee be primum agens hee must be primum liberum too the first free agent And to make our selves to be prima libera the first free agents what is other
built upon the freenes of the other in not being given according unto men's merits As it appeares de bono perseverantiae cap. 15. Where having proposed some exceptions of the Massilienses made against his doctrine of predestination comming to make answer thereunto he begins thus Ista cum dicuntur saith he ita nos à confitenda Dei gratia id est quae non secundum merita nostra datur a confitenda secundum eam predestinatione sanctorum deterrere non debent When these things are objected they must not deterre us from confessing God's grace I meane such a grace as is not given accordiog unto works nor from confessing the predestination of Saints according thereunto Now if the absolutenesse of predestination be grounded upon this that grace is not given according unto merits the scripture phrase denies it to be given according unto workes But Bellarmine acknowledgeth that in this Argument merits and workes are taken by the Ancients in one and the same sense it followeth that as many as deny the absolutenesse of predestination must therewithall maintaine that Grace is given according to men's merits or works And the reason is evident For if God doth not give grace according unto men's works but of his mere pleasure decreed to give grace unto some and not upon consideration of their works And this is to elect absolutely and antecedently without the foresight of any deserving yea of any works though by that expression which this Authour useth he doth sufficienty manifest that his opinion is that God elects not only upō the foresight of men's workes but upon the foresight of men's deservings It is farther considerable to prevent the reaches of such crafty foxes as we have to deale with whose course is in joyning the decree of conversion and salvation together to translate that which belongs unto one unto the other most unreasonably For albeit God proceeds according to the mere pleasure and without all respect to workes in conferring grace and decreeth accordingly to conferre it Yet he proceeds not merely according unto pleasure and without all respect of works in conferring glory but according unto a Covenant which is this whosoever beleiveth shall be saved and accordingly he bestowes the kingdome of heaven by way of reward for faith repentance and good workes This hath Christ deserved at the hands of his Father that our weake performances should be thus rewarded Lastly it is farther to be considered that God as he thus bestoweth salvation by way of reward of our faith repentance so from everlasting he did decree to bestowe salvation namely by way of reward Not that either faith or repentance or good workes any or all of these were the cause least of all the deserving cause of God's decree or antecedaneous to his decree but of his mere pleasure decreed both to give the grace of faith and repentance and to bestow eternall life by way of a reward thereof as may farther be proved and that clearly divers waies 1. By the Apostl's discourse where he discourseth after this manner Before Esau and Iacob were borne or had done good or evill it was said that the Elder shall serve the younger therefore election is not of workes But if election did proceeed upon the foresight of faith repentance and good workes or any of them then it might justly be said that it were of faith repentance or good workes or of all of them And the force of the Apostles argument extends to conclude that election is noe more of faith or of repentance then of workes not only because faith and repentance are workes and so accounted in Scripture phrase as it appeares Io 6. 29. But cheifely because before men are borne they are uncapable of faith and repentance as of good workes 2. If faith were a motive cause unto election then either it were so of it 's own nature or by constitution Divine not of it's own nature as it is apparent If by constitution divine mark what strange absurdities follow namely this that God did ordaine that upon the fore sight of faith he would ordaine men unto salvation whereby God's eternall ordination is made the object of his ordination whereas the Objects of God's decrees are alwaies things temporall never any thing that is eternall 3. It cannot be said that God giveth salvation to the end he may give them faith but it may farre more congruously be said that God gives faith to the end that he may save them therefore the intention of salvation is rather before the intention of giving faith then the intention of giving faith is before the intention of giving salvation Or better thus if God foresee faith before he decrees salvation then the intention of giving faith without which God cannot foresee faith is before the intention of giving salvation and consequently the giving of faith should be the last in execution that is men shall first be saved and aferwards have faith bestowed upon them to wit in another world where they live by sight and not by faith I come to the decree of reprobation the Objects whereof are two proportionable to the two objects of election or predestination The first is permission of sin the second is Damnation for sinne according to that of Aquinas Reprobatio includit voluntatem permitendi culpam damnationem inferendi pro culpâ Reprobation includes a will to permit sinne and to inflict damnation for sinne The first object of reprobation I say is permission of sinne not Sin as this Authour would have it but permission of sinne Because these decrees to wit of permitting sinne and inferring damnation for sinne are decrees of meanes conducing to a certaine end For like as in election God decreeth to bestowe faith repentance and obedience on some and to reward it with everlasting life for the manifestation of his glory in the way of mercy mixt with justice So in Reprobation he decrees to permit others to sinne and finally to persevere therein and to damne them for their sinne to manifest his glory in the way of vindicative justice Now whosoever intends an end must also be the Auhour of the meanes conducing to that end Now God though well he may be the Authour of permission of sinne yet he cannot be the Author of sinne Albeit upon God's permission of sinne it followeth that sinne shall exist Now to permit sinne is all one with denying grace whether it be grace Custodient to preserve from it or grace healing to pardon and cure it after it is committed Now like as the Lord hath mercy on whom he will in pardoning their sinne and healing it by faith and repentance So he hardeneth whom he will by denying faith and repentance So that as God of his mere pleasure grants the grace of faith and repentance unto some so of his mere pleasure he denies it unto others And so in Reprobation he decreeth of his mere pleasure to deny it But albeit the Lord of mere
abstaine from sinne when such a grace is granted him and consequently in granting such a grace he permits him still to sinne as well as in denying it and in denying he permits him to doe good as much as in granting it So that still it is not God that keepeth a man from sinne as often as he abstaineth from it but merely the power of his own free will Whereby it is evident that this Authour as well denies that God is the Authour of any good as that he is the Authour of any evill But man is Authour of the one as well as of the other The power of doing good he will grant is from God neither can it be denied but that the power of doing evill is from God He will grant likewise that God is ready to concurre to any good act if man will and I presume he will not deny but that God concurres also to the substance of every evill act The only difference that remaines is this God perswades only to good and disswades only that which is evill Now this third and last assertion we grant as well as he Yet he layes to our charge that we make God the Authour of evill but cares not at all how he denies God to be the Authour of any good in the actions of men and makes noe place for any grace save such as is hortatory which is performed usually by the ministery of men Yet consider what Bradwardine sometimes Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Elect hath written in this kind before Luther or Calvin were borne The title of the fourth chapter of his second booke is this That free will being tempted cannot of his own strength without the helpe of God and his grace overcome any temptation Of the first this that free will strengthned with what created grace soever cannot without another speciall succour of God overcome any temptation of the sixth this that That speciall succour of God is the unconquerable grace of God Of the seventh this That no man though not tempted can by the strength of his free will alone without created grace or with created grace how great soever it be without the speciall asistance of God avoide any sin all these propositions he demonstrates with variety of argument Behold the ingenuity of this Authour He flies in the face of Calvin and Beza and other our Divines for maintaining that unlesse God by his grace keep and preserve a man effectually from sinning it cannot be that he should abstaine from sinne Bradwardine maintained the same before any of these were borne yet he saith nothing to him le ts all his arguments alone but upbraides us for maintaining the same doctrine without giving any reason to convict us of our errour Adde to this which I have omitted the Corolary of that seventh chapter in Bradwardin formerly mentioned is this That it is the will of God which preserves them that are tempted from falling and them that are not tempted both from temptation and from sinne Not one of the arguments whereby he confirmes any of these positions doth this Authour goe about to answer In like manner Alvarez Positâ permissione divinâ infallibiliter peccat homo upon supposition of God's permission man sins infallibly The proposition he intends to prove in that disputation is this Therefore a man is not converted because he is not aided of God But both he and we deny that hereupon a man sinneth necessarily alwaies but only in some cases In some cases it followeth as namely a man borne in sinne and in the state of corruption the naturall fruits whereof are infidelity and impenitency untill God affords a man the grace of regeneration he cannot believe he cannot repent They that are in the flesh cannot please God Thou after the hardnesse of thy heart that cannot repent Therefore they could not believe In which case God is not the cause of infidelity and impenitency but these proceed naturally and necessarily from that originall corruption wherein they are conceived and borne God is only the naturall cause why this their naturall corruption continues uncured For none can cure it but God it being a work nothing inferior to the raising of them from the dead Yet he is no culpable cause of this For as much as he is not bound to any but he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth So that necessarily without the grace of regeneration every man continueth in his naturall corruption devoyd of faith of hope and love These being supernaturall and whereunto no man can attaine with out supernaturall grace In like manner hence it followeth that no naturall man can performe any morall good act in a gracious acceptable manner in the sight of God because â—he fountaines of such performances are not found in naturall men But they have a free power as to commit any naturall evill worke so to abstaine from it though not in a gracious manner Free power as to abstaine from any vertuous act so to performe it also though not in a gracious manner They may be temperate chast just and the like but their vertuous actions are not truly vertues in a Christian account because they know not God nor Christ much lesse doe they believe in him and performe these vertuous actions out of their love unto him If Maccovius and Whitaker and Pareus be of the same mind and the Dominicans with them and Bradwardine before them all let the indifferent Reader consider what an hungry opposition is made by this Authour not offering to answer any one of their Arguments nor of mine neither in my Vindiciae Nor saith ought by way of reply upon any answer to the like argument of Arminius The resolution of all that here he delivers determining in a rule himselfe proposeth without reason or authority to justifie it A rule as here it is applyed conteining a notorious untruth For causa deficiens in no case can be efficiens in proper speech any more then causa efficiens can be accounted deficiens unlesse it be understood in divers kinds As for example efficiens naturaliter may be deficiens moraliter and deficiens moraliter may be efficiens naturaliter An efficient cause naturally may be deficient morally and so a cause deficient morally may be efficient naturally Least of all can it have place in the present question which is of the cause of sinne For sinne as sinne evill as evill non habet causam efficientem sed deficientem hath no cause efficient but deficient only as Austin hath long agoe determined and it is a rule generally received and never that I know denied of any Againe causa deficiens in necessariis may be culpable I confesse and so interpretativè as they say may be interpreted to be as good as an efficient As in a civill consideration it is said of the Magistrate that Qui non vetat peccare cum possit jubet He that forbiddeth not a man to sinne when it
is in his power or when he hath authority to forbid 't is as if he should command the committing of that sin Now this is only in such a case where the necessitie respects the person who is the deficient cause as namely in case he be bound in duty to afford help and succour to him that cannot keepe himselfe from sinning without the succour of an other not otherwise And therefore it reacheth not to God who is not bound to preserve any man or creature from sinning Least of all is he bound to regenerate a man that is borne in sinne Adam was created in all sufficiency that the reasonable creature was capable of without any pronenes unto evill but rather in a morall propension to that which was good And his fall hath brought this corruption upon all mankind even a necessitie of sinning as Arminius and Corvinus confesse He wanted no power to doe that which was good or to abstaine from sin but ever since his fall impotency to that which is good pronenesse unto that which is evill hath been the naturall inheritance of all mankind And as for the permission of Adam's fall his sin was in a thing naturally indifferent the holines of his nature not inclining him more to abstain from that fruit any more then to partake of it Neither doe we say that God did withhold from Adam any grace that these our adversaries maintaine to be necessary for the avoiding of that sinne which was committed by him How Adam himselfe was brought by Eve to eate of that fruit is not expressed As for Eve the temptation which Satan used with her which did prevaile is expressed He allured her with the representation of the powerfull nature of that to make them as Gods knowing good and evill he made this seem credible by the very denomination which God gave unto the Tree the Tree of knowledge of good and evill It seemes not likely that she knew who it was that spake unto her in the Serpent nor that she was acquainted with the fall of Angells Then againe the desire of knowledge is no evill thing it selfe or stands in any contradiction to the integrity of a reasonable creature Nay nothing more agreeable to the nature of the best it brings such a perfection with it Only the errour was in affecting it this way God did not keep the Devill off nor reveale unto her who it was that spake unto her much lesse his apostaticall condition least of all his project to supplant them Neither did he quicken that holy feare which he had inspired into her to resist it at the first to goe to her husband to acquaint him with it She might thinke that the knowledge of good and evill might make her more fit for the service of God then unfit All which considered her will being moved to seek this perfection by tasting of such a fruit there was no cause or reason to hinder her from tasting it save only the consideration of God's prohibition For the will of every reasonable creature is naturally apt to affect that which is good and though that good may prove evill in some circumstance yet if that circumstance be not considered the will proceeds to affect it How long the Devill was exercised in this temptation we know not Inconsideration is conceived by Durandus to be the originall of that sinne of theirs and God was not bound to maintaine this consideration quick in her and of the danger of such a transgression In fine she came to a will resolution to tast of it to the producing of this act as a naturall thing the Lord concurred as all confesse namely to the substance of the act The question is whether he concurred to the effecting of it absolutely or conditionally It was as true of Adam and Eve that in him they lived and moved and had their being as it is of us We say God as a first cause moves every second cause but agreeably to their natures Necessary agents to worke every thing they worke necessarily Free agents to doe every thing they doe freely But to say that God made them velle modo vellent to will in case they would will is so absurd as nothing more The act of willing being hereby made the condition of it selfe and consequently both before and after it selfe See what I have delivered concerning this in my Vindiciae lib. 2. Digr 3. and Digr 6. of the nature of permission more at large where unto this Authour is content to answer just nothing Sect 7. There are two things say they in every ill act First the materiall part which is the substance of the action Secondly the formall part which is the evill or obliquitie of it God is the Authour of the action it selfe but not of the obliquitie and evill that cleaveth to it as he that causeth a lame horse to goe is the cause of his going but not of his lame going And therefore it followeth not from their opinion that God is the Authour of sinne First all sinnes receive not this distinction because of many sins the acts themselves are sinfull as of the eating of the forbidden fruit and Saul's sparing of Agag and the fat beasts of the Amalekites Secondly It is not true that they make the decree of God only of actions not of their aberrations For they make it to be the cause of all those meanes that lead to damnation and therefore of sinfull actions as sinfull and not as bare actions For actions deserve damnation not as actions but as trangressions of Gods law 3. To this simile I say that the Rider or Master that shall resolve first to flea his horse or knock him on the head and then to make him lame that for his halting he may kill him is undoubtedly the cause of his halting And so God if he determine to cast men into hell and then to bring them into a state of sinne that for their sinnes he may bring them to ruine we cannot conceive him to be lesse then the Authour as well of their sins as of those actions to which they doe inseperably adhere and that out of Gods intention to destroy them This distinction of that which is materiall and that which is formall in sinne is commonly used by Aquinas 1. secun q 71. art 6 in corp Augustinus in definitione peccati posuit duo Unum quod pertinet ad substantiam actûs humani quod est quasi materiale in peccato cum dicit dictum vel factum vel concupitum Aliud autem quod pertinet ad rationem mali quod est quasi formale in peccato cum dixit contra legem aeternam So then the substance of the act is the materiall part in sinne And the opposition of this act to the law of God is the formall part of it both according to Aquinas and according to Austin also And q 75. art 1. corp He defineth sinne to be Actus inordinatus
on the part of Reprobates is not the damnation of them but the manifestation of his glory in the way of vindicative justice which in Scripture phrase is called the Declaration of his wrath For God made all things for himselfe even the wicked against the day of evill And to this end he doth not only permit them both to sinne and to persevere therein without repentance but also to damne them for their sinne And this worke of God namely the permission of sinne is as requisite for the manifestation of his mercy on the part of his Elect as for the Declaration of his wrath on the part of reprobates Yet who was ever found so absurd as to say that we make the sinfull actions of men to be the meanes which God useth to bring about the salvation of his Elect. So little cause have we to make use of this distinction as the action it selfe and the sinfullnesse thereof to shew in what sense it is a meanes which God useth whereby to bring about the damnation of man For we utterly deny sinne to be any such meanes of God but the permission thereof only is the meanes whereby to bring about not their damnation as this Authour suggesteth but the meanes together with the damnation for sinne whereby he bringeth to passe the declaration of his just wrath But men of this Authours spirit unlesse they be suffered to calumniate at pleasure and corrupt their opposites Tenet at pleasure they can say just nothing It is true actions deserve damnation only as they are transgressions of God's law but we deny that these transgressions are God's meanes but only the permission of them is his meanes and by permitting these transgressions as also by damning for them he brings to passe his glorious end to wit the declaration of his just wrath 3ly It is most untrue that God brings any man into a state of sinne He brings himselfe into it most freely God having no other hand in the sinne but as permitting it that is as not preserving from it Indeed if he did bring men into sinne and they not rather bring themselves thereinto he were the Authour of it But it is well knowne that sinne cannot transcend the region of acts naturall All acts supernaturall must needs be the worke of grace and truly good But every sinfull act is merely naturall never supernaturall Now never any of our Divines denyed a man liberty in his greatest corruption unto acts naturall the Devill himselfe hath liberty thus farre It is true originall sinne is brought upon all by the sinne of Adam For hereby the fountaine of humane nature became corrupted but in this very sin of Adam we had an hand if there be any truth in Scripture which testifies that In Adā we all have sinned This is the doctrin which the Author spights though he be more wise then to publish to the world his spleen against it And I have seen under his hand where he denies originall sinne to be veri nominis pecatum sinne truly so called And albeit M. Hoord makes a flourish in saying that God might justly damne all man-kind for the sinne of Adam and that also was this Authour's doctrine in the lectures which he read at Magdalen Hall yet I have good cause to doubt whether this be his opinion now and not rather the same with Pelagius his opinion saving the difference which Pelagius did put between not entering into the Kingdome of heaven and damnation As for all other sins which we call actuall they are as I said naturall only and not supernaturall and therefore no man wants liberty as to doe them so to abstaine from them Only he wants a morall and Spirituall liberty to abstaine from them in a gracious manner according to that of Aquinas Licet aliquis non possit gratiam adipisci qui reprobatur à Deo tamen quod in hoc peccatum vel illud labatur ex ejus libero arbitrio contingit Though a man who is reprobated of God cannot obtaine grace yet that he falleth into this or that sinne it comes to passe of his own free will It is true also even in God's providence concerning acts naturall there is a great mystery For as God foretold David that his neighbour should lye with his wives and though he sinned secretly yet the Lord would doe this openly So he foretold that upon that Altar which Ieroboam erected a child that should be borne of the house of David Iosiah by name should burne the Prophets bones And that Cyrus also should build him a Citty and let goe his captives Yet who doubts but that Cyrus did freely deliver the Jewes out of Babylon and Iosiah did as freely burne the Prophets bones upon the alter in Bethel as ever they did action in their lives So Absalom did as freely defile his Fathers Concubines Then againe we deny that the damnation of any man is the end that God intends but the manifestation of his own glory And therfore though he hath made the wicked against the day of evill yet both that and all things he hath made for himselfe And to this tends both the permission of sinne and the damnation of Reprobates for their sin And in no moment of nature are either of these intended before the other both being joyntly meanes for the procuring of another end And if permission of sinne were first in intention with God and then damnation as these men would have it it followeth evidently by the most generally received rules of Schooles that permission of sinne should be last in execution that is men should first be damned and afterwards permitted to fall into sinne This is the issue of these men's Orthodoxy and accurate Divinity Section 8. The will is determined to an Object two waies 1. By compulsion against the bent and inclination of it 2. By necessity according to the naturall desire and liking of it God's predestination say they de termineth the will to sinne this last way but not the first It forceth no man to doe that which he would not but carrieth him towards that which he would When men sin t is true they cannot choose And it is as true they will not choose It followeth not therefore from the grounds of their doctrine that God's decree is the cause of men's sins but their own wicked wills 1. The Ancients made no distinction between these two words Necessity and Compulsion but used them in this argument promiscuously and did deny that God did necessitate men to sinne least they should grant him hereby to be the Authour of sin as I have touched before and shall intimate againe afterward Nor did the School men put any difference between them as may appeare by the testimony of M. Calvin who speaking of the School-distinction of the will 's threefold liberty from necessity from sin from Misery saith This distinction I could willingly receive but that it confoundeth necessitie with coaction 2.
of the creatures future cooperation what the free will will doe in particular This conclusion is held of all those Divines who maintaine that God by his motion or effectuall grace not only morally but efficiently and physically doth cause us to worke that which is good it is proved saith he by all those reasons whereby it hath been formery shewed that God by his decree effectuall motion doth predetermine all second causes even such as are free to worke preserving their liberty and nature 3. The dominion of her act is not first in the power of free will created but in the power and dominion of God especially in respect of acts supernaturall Our meaning is that all dominion actuall use of dominion which the created will hath as causa proxima the next cause or doth exercise over her free acts which she produceth proceedeth from God as from the cheifest first cause efficient ought to be resolved into him as into the first Authour first absolute Lord thereof And the truth is the question of free will is commonly confounded though there is place of momentous distincion For as for free will unto good that is merely Morall and the resolution thereof is according to the resolution in the point of originall sinne But free will unto actions in generall under an appearance of good this is naturall liberty and the resolution thereof depends upon a right understanding of God's naturall providence in governing the world and working with all creatures in their severall kinds such operations as are agreable to their severall conditiōs The first liberty consists in disposing man aright towards his end like as morall vertues tend to this But the second liberty consist's only in the right use of the meanes unto what end soever is projected by us The appearance of good moving herein is only in genere boni conducentis in the kind of good conducing to the end propounded whether that end can be good or evill right or wrong But the appearence of good moving in the former is only summiboni of our cheifest good the enjoying whereof will make us happy But to returne this Authour with whom I deale in present stands for the will of man's absolute dominion over her acts as before he did expresse whereas Alvarez professeth utterly against this Neither doe I blame him for contradicting Alvarez in this but for carrying himselfe like a positive Theologue nor so only but like a peremptory Theologue contenting himselfe to dictate rules to others without all proofe save this that otherwise we make God the Authour of sinne Yet this is not any expresse Argument of his neither but he obtrudes premise upon us which I thinke was never affirmed by any Divines of these dayes unlesse it be by some Libertines against whom none that I know have disputed more effectually then some of those very Divines which here are traduced by him But observe the vile and abominable issue of this Authours doctrine in this particular making man as he is a free creature to be the Lord of his own free act yea and to have the absolute dominion thereof as formerly he did expesse Sect 3. For seing the act of faith of repentance and the like are free acts if liberty cannot be maintained unlesse a man hath the absolute dominion of his own act hence it manifestly followeth that God doth not determine the will to believe to repent or to any good work yet the Scripture professeth that God is he who makes us perfect unto every good worke working in us that which is pleasing in his sight through Iesus Christ That it is God who worketh in us both the will and the deed according to his good pleasure So that if a man should live Methusalch his age and spend that whole time in a gracious conversation yet that God doth worke in him either the will or the deed of one gracious act more it is merely of his good pleasure so little cause have we to presume of perseverance in that which is good by out own strength And againe all this God workes in us for Christ his sake Christ hath deserved even this at the hands of God his father What then is the meaning of this that God should cooperate with us to the will and the deed provided that we will Consider the absurdity of this upon the supposall of the possibility of such a cooperation which yet by evident reason may be demonstrated to be utterly impossible Did Christ merit any thing for the Angells yet doth he not cooperate with them to every act of theirs as well as to any of ours Nay is it possible that any act should exist without God's operation And is it reasonable to subject such a course of Divine providence to the merits of Christ Thus we see whereunto this Authour tends in this discourse of his namely so to maintaine God to be no Authour of sinne as withall to maintaine that he is no Authour of that which is good no not of faith repentance or any gracious act that is freely performed by any creature man or Angell we on the other side desire endeavour so to carry our selves that while we vindicate God from being the Authour of evill we may not therewithall deny him to be the Authour of any thing that is good and gracious which is this Authours course as appeares manifestly in the issue And observe his crafty cariage foxe like Had he dealt upon predestination and the efficacy of grace and therein professed plainly that faith and repentance being free acts every man's will hath an absolute dominion over them and therefore God doth not determine the will thereunto For that were to make God the Authour of faith and repentance how many thousands would have been ready to have flowen in his face and abhorre such abominable doctrine Therefore he baulks that and deales only upon reprobation and here he layeth to our charge that we make God the Authour of sinne by necessitating and determining the will to sinne though his premises herein I have shewen to be most false therefore he maintains that God doth not determine the will so much as to the act whereunto the sinfulnesse accrewes both because man's will is free and because so he should be the Authour of sinne And if once he can make his Reader to swallow this he doubts not but to take him in the point of predestination and grace also and make him wary to take heed of maintaining that God determines or necessitates the will of man to any good act whether it be of faith or of repentance and that for feare of denying man to have the absolute dominion over his will to worke himselfe to faith and repentance at his pleasure and secondly for feare of makeing God the Authour of faith and repentance and every good act Like as by saying that God doth determine or necessitate the will to sinne we make him the Authour of sinne
Behold Reader the issue of this man's Divinity and whether he be not leading thee into the very chambers of death by working thee with him to oppose the free grace of God both in predestination and in regeneration and the power and efficacy therereof in working thee to faith to repentance and to every thing that is pleasing and acceptable unto him that through Jesus Christ Yet we have shewed a manifest difference between God's moving the creature unto that which is good and moving the creature unto such acts as are evill For in evill be moves only to the substance of the act whereof our Adversaries themselves acknowledge God to be the Authour that is the efficient cause and this he performes by influence generall But as touching every good act the Lord moveth not only to the substance of the act by influence generall but also to the goodnes thereof by influence speciall He proceeds to tell us what Philosophers teach concerning the condition of the will And because it is very absurd for a Christian to goe to schoole to Philosophers to learne the condition of Divine providence he tels us of Fathers too that maintaine the same as he saith but he quotes neither the one nor the other Now I would gladly know what Father hath ever taught that God hath no power over the will of man to convert it and ex nolentibus volentes facere of unwilling to make men willing to worke men to faith to repentance to all kind of pious obedience And as for God's secret providence in evill how plentifull is the Scripture concerning this God is said to have sent Ioseph into Egypt though this was brought to passe by the parricidiall hands of his brethren To tell David that the sword should not depart from his house though this could not be taken up or used but by the free will of men To send Senacherib against a dissembling nation and to professe that this proud King in all his bloudy executions upon the people of God was but as the axe or the sawe in the hand of God The like is testified concerning Nabuchodonosor after him Nay the Prophet demands Whether there be any evill in the Citty and the Lord hath not done it speaking of the evill of punishment though wickedly executed by the hands of wicked men that the Lord caused the King of Assur to fall by the sword in his own land though this was done by the hands of his own children And as in violent courses so in impure courses the Scripture as plainly testifies the secret providence of God to have place therein And what doth Austin observe from the like places both in his fift book against Iulian the Pelag c 3 and in his book de gratia libero arbitrio professing occulto Dei judicio fieri perversitatem cordis that the perversity of the heart or will comes to passe by the secret judgment of God And the power that God hath over the wills of men to incline them even to evill that is his phrase as I have formerly shewed abundantly representing the places where he delivers this He proceeds not so much in Scholasticall discourse as in rhetoricall amplification more like a Shrew vexing him selfe and fretting that he cannot have his will then like a disputer That which necessitates the will makes it become but a servile instrument irresistably subject to superiour command and determination this action of command comes in most unseasonably it denoting a morall action commanding not only things agreable but sometimes contrary to the will of the person commanded No such thing hath place in God's moving of the will of man did he move it unto sinne which yet is most false for he moves it only to the substance of the act But why should it seeme strange that the creature should be a Servant to the Creator and his instrument and a servile instrument Yet the notion of servility is very aliene from the matter in hand that having place only in proper speech as touching morall obedience that which we treat of is rather of motions naturall and of the subordination of the second cause to the first the second Agent to the first And was ever any sober man known to oppose this with such froth of words as this Authour doth Doth this Authour himselfe thinke it possible that the Creature can move it selfe or performe any operation without God's concourse I doe not think he doth Doe we not live in God have we not our being in God And what is this other then to say that our life and being depend on God in the kind of a cause efficient And doth not the same Apostle and in the same place testifie and that in the words of an heathen man to shew that all such did not so maintaine the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condition of the will as to maintaine the exemption of it from influence Divine professe that in God we move also And the truth is all the question is about the manner of this concourse divine whereabouts this Authour spends not a word as if he kept his breath for some other purpose then to deale on that point which alone is controverted The irresistable subjection he speaks of is no more then the bereaving of the will of her liberty which is most untrue For proof whereof I appeale to every man that will but look upon Alvarez that maintaines this divine motion of will under the notion of determining And upon Bradwardine who alone that I know maintaines the same divine motion under the notion of necessitating Whereas he infers herehence that God is a truer cause of all such acts and sins that proceed from the will so determined then the will is Oftentimes he hath set before us such Coleworts but we have nothing but his bare word for it And it depends merely upon this that the action of the creature is not free Whereas both Bradwardin maintaines that God necessitates the creature to every free act of his And Alvarez that God determines the creature to worke freely Now is it a sober course hence to inferre that the act is not free As much as to say it cannot but be free therfore it is not free And yet we know that every one naturally is prone to sinne and in the best of God's children there is a principle that inclines to sinne God is confessed by our very opposites to be the true cause of the act yet not at all the cause of the sin by his concourse Only they differ from us as touching the nature of this concourse We say God concurres to the producing of the act as it becomes not an Agent only but the first Agent not a cause only but the first cause and man as a second Agent and second cause that moveth in God as the Apostle testifies like as he lives in God and hath his being in God But these
I consider this Authour's compounding of these termes absolutely and antecedently I begin to suspect that like as then a thing comes to passe antecedently when it comes to passe by an Antecedent decree in this Authour's language though most absurd So in his language the things are said to come to passe by absolute necessity when they come to passe by an absolute decree the decree in his opinion being sufficient to make a thing come to passe necessarily an absolute decree to make it come to passe absolutely necessarily This undoubtedly is his meaning upoÌ„ which I am stuÌ„bled are I am aware Now let the sober Reader judge how farre these odde conceits are from all sobriety Did not God decree to make the world nay did he not absolutely decree this and antecedently not conditionally and consequently What therefore will it here-hence follow that the world had it's existence necessarily and that by the way of absolute necessity I had thought this had been the peculiar and incommunicable perfection of God himselfe namely to exist necessarily and that in the way of absolute necessity As for all other things which are but God's creatures they have only a contingent existence derived originally from the free will of God the Creator For this I take to be the transcendent perfection of God To be most necessarily to worke most freely Necessity and that absolute being the greatest perfection of being So that Bradwardine conceives this to be the prime and originall perfection of God esse necessario to be necessarily On the other side freedome in the highest kind is the greatest perfection 〈◊〉 operation and God alone so workes as without subordination to any superiour Agent but no creature man or Angell so workes as without subordination to God the first Agent the first cause the first free worker Now I come 〈◊〉 the second particular of this second inconvenience 2. And that is that our doctrine taketh away the conscience of sin and this we willingly grant is consequent upon the former For if sinne be no sinne there is no cause why any man should be troubled with the conscience of sin But all this being grounded upon a vile and most untrue imputation never yet proved namely that we make all actions both good and evill to come to passe by absolute necessity there can be no more truth in the consequent then there is in the Antecedent We say that every sinne that is or ever was committed in the world is and ever was committed freely not only voluntarily much lesse doth any sinne come to passe by any absolute necessity For albeit there be some things that come to passe necessarily by necessity of nature as proceeding from Agents naturall working naturally and necessarily Yet is no worke of nature wrought by any absolute necessity God being able to set an end to nature and the works thereof whensoever it pleaseth him and while nature continueth according to the good pleasure of God he restraines the course thereof or changeth it as he thinks good How much lesse doe the actions of men not only in respect of God's agency who is the first cause but in respect of man's agency a second cause and working deliberately and freely come to passe not necessarily but contingently and freely So farre off are they from comming to passe by absolute necessity to exist by absolute necessity being the incommunicable perfection of God himselfe But I confesse this Authour sheweth some humanity in the proofe of it to wit out of the Tragedian very judiciously and learnedly Fati est ista culpa nemo fit fato nocens It is the fault of fate or destiny and what comes to passe by destiny is no fault of man's Yet Zeno the great Patron of Fate finding his servant in a fault when his servant excused himselfe upon fate saying it was destiny that he should steale made a ready answer saying Et caedo it was his destiny also to be punished So farre was he from justifying or excusing his servant upon any such ground or forbearing to punish him And doth not this Authour know that Iocasta for all her acknowledgment of fate governing all things yet in conscience of her incestuous courses destroyed her selfe in the same Tragedian But consider indifferent Reader whether this Authour doth not carry himselfe as if he were dealing with little children and his purpose were not to informe them but to abuse and mocke them For is that all waies the faith or opinion of the Tragedian whatsoever he puts into the mouthes of this or that Actor Doe not they represent the absurd pretences of some as well as the reasonable discourses of others Then againe who are they that maintaine Fatum destiny Where hath he found this maintained by any of our divines Yet I confesse this Authour deales ingeniously in one thing to wit in walking so fairely in the steps of this forefathers For thus the Pelagians accused the doctrine of Austin not only after he was dead as appeares by Prosper's Epistle ad Ruffinum but even while he was living as appeares by Austin himselfe Nec sub nomine gratiae fatum asserimus quia nullis hominum meritis dicimus Dei gratiam antecedi Si autem quibusdam omnipotentis Dei voluntatem placet fati nomine nuncupari profanas quidem verborum novitates evitamus sed de verbis contendere non amamus neither doe we maintain destiny under the name of grace in saying grace is not prevented by any merits of man But if some are pleased to call the will Allmighty God by the name of faâ—e or destiny we avoid the profane novelties of words but we doe not love to strive about words Where observe how first the same crimination was made against Austin's doctrine by the Pelagians which this Authour makes against ours 2. The doctrine which the Pelagians opposed in this crimination was this Grace is not conferr'd according unto workes 3ly Austin disavowes all antecedency of workes to the bestowing of grace how much more to the decreeing of grace to be bestowed on any which yet is the beloved Helena of this Authour therefore he talkes so oft against an Antecedent decree Then againe it is manifest that the greatest maintainers of destiny and sate did not maintaine it in any opposition to the free wills of men And Austin him selfe professeth that such a necessity as is expressed in these words Necesse est ut fiat it must needs be that such a thing shall come to passe containes no inconvenience nor is any way prejudiciall to the free wills of men His words are these Sienim necessitas nostra ida dicenda est quae non est in nostra 〈◊〉 â—â—detiamsi nelumus efficit quod potest sicut est necessitas mortis ManifestuÌ„ est 〈◊〉 nostras quibus recte aut perperam vivitur sub tale necessitate non esse Multaâ—â—im 〈◊〉 quae si nolemus non facerimus Si autem illa desinitur esse necessitas
at the first which proved afterwards to be a truth as appeares by the first chapter of Austin's booke de correptione gratiâ where Florus is justified and magnified by St. Austin and his criminators condemned And seing there were none such among the Monks of Adrumetum as the accusants pretended who so maintained grace as to deny free-will therefore that also must needs be false which followeth in this Authour when he saith that against them also St. Austin wrote his other booke De correptione gratiâ And the truth is the whole buisinesse was ended and the tumult appeased between those Adrumetine Monks before Florus came over as appeared by the relation made unto him by Florus concerning the amicable composition of all things there And Austin in this very passage which this Authour grates upon professeth that he writes not against them only he answereth such an objection For I conceive it to be no other more fully which was made by some of them formerly against Florus and the doctrine of Austin maintained by Florus The relation whereof was brought unto him by the same Florus as it seemes But of this more at large in my digression concerning the predestinarian heresy which I purpose to subjoine to this Austin saith indeed that Praedestinatio est gratiae praeparatio gratia verò ipsa donatio Predestination is the preparation of grace Grace the gift it selfe which was prepared not the bestowing of it How can it be Can a gift temporall be the bestowing of a thing eternall What entertainment Zeno's servant found at his Masters hands which this Authour conceales I have often shewed who taught no such doctrine as destiny as to free a knave from stripes who as so great a Philosopher had a better judgment in the nature of fate then his servant and himselfe so well thought of by the whole State of Athenians Yet was not Zeno so well instructed in the mystery of Divine providence as we are by the word of God even from the selling of Ioseph all along to the crucifying of the Son of God from thence to the Kings giving up their Kingdomes to the Beast which should come to passe in the latter part of the last times of the world But let him make himselfe mery with Zeno's servant who taken in a theevish fact was content to helpe himselfe with any pretence but Zeno we know did not approve of his appology but prepared a Rod for the knaves back in despite of that And as for the Monks the relation that here he makes is merely a fiction of his own braine without all ground Thus his foundation being ruined no marvaile if the house he builds thereon must needs totter and fall on his ownpate Sect 3. 2. Nor if this be true can sin be punished eternally or that tribunall be just on which the sentence of eternall fire shall be denounced against the wicked at the last day To this I have the fathers bearing witnesse generally and plainly Tertullian hath there words The recompence of God and evill can with no justice be given to him who is good or evill not freely but of necessity Saint Hierome saith where necessity domineers there is no place for retribution Epiphanius saith the stars which impose upon men a necessity of sinning may be punished with better justice then the men themselves We place mens nativities under no fatall constellâ—tions saith Saint Austin that we may free the will by which a man liveth either well or ill from all bands of necessity because of the righteous judgment of God Prosper speaking of the judgment of God by which he decreed to render unto every man according to his works saith this judgment would never be if men did sinne by the will and determination of God Fulgentius also saith the same It is great injustice in God to punish him whom he doth not find but make an offender This was Saint Peruards opinion too it is only a will free from compulsion and necessity saith he which maketh a creature capable of reward punishment Out of these restimonies laid together may be collected three things 1. That the Ancients did use to call a necssity of humane actions good or bad by the name of destiny from what externall cause soever this necessity did arise 2. That they did use these two words Necessity and Compulsion promiscuously and therefore thought that necessity as well as compulsion did take away the wills liberty 3. Which is for our present purpose that they believed and contended that the judgments of God on sinners could not be just if they were held by the Adamantine chaines of any absolute necessity under the power of their sins I will therefore conclude this Argument with the words of Epiphanius writing of the errour of the Pharisâ—es who beleived the immortality of the soule and the resurrection of the dead yet held that all things come to passe by necessity It is saith he a point of extreame ignorance or madnesse rather for him that confesseth the resurection of the dead and the great day appointed for the revelation of God's righteous judgment to say that there is any destiny any necessity in mens actions For how can the righteous judgment of God and destiny comply and stand together And let me adde how can the beliefe of this and true piety stand together For where this perswasion that mens sins are necessary and that therefore there can be no righteous judgment is rooted in religion will quickly be rooted out 4. It tendes to religions overthrow because it makes the whole circle of man's life but a mere destiny By it all our doings are God's ordinances all our imaginations branches of his predestination and all events in Kingdomes and commonweales the necessary issues of the divine decree All things whatsoever though they seem to doe somewhat yet by this opinion they doe indeed just nothing the best lawes restrain not one offender the sweetest rewards promote not one vertue the powerfull'st Sermons convert not one sinner the humblest devotions divert not one calamity the strongest endeavours in things of any nature whatsoever effect no more then would be done without them but the necessitating overruling decree of God doth all And if lawes doe nothing wherefore are they made If rules of religion doe nothing why are they prescribed If the wills of men doe nothing why are men encouraged to one thing scared from another ther and if good endeavours and onsets doe nothing being excited continued limited controlled and every way governed by an active absolute and Almighty decree to what purpose are they used Who seeth not plainly whither these things tend To nothing more then to the subversion of piety and pollicy religion lawes society and government This did the Romans see full well and therefore they banished Mathematicos the teachers abetters of destiny out of Rome These and the like inconveniencies which come from the uppper way did worke
by the opposition of it to obduration which is such as whereupon followeth disobedience as appeares by the objection following hereupon Thou wilt say then why doth yet cōplaine For who hath resisted his will Now God complaineth of nothing but disobedience Againe to give faith is to shew mercy For to have faith is to obtaine mercy Heretofore ye have not believed but now have obtained mercy through their unbeliefe Where to believe to obtaine mercy are made equipollent of the same signification And in reason if God did deny faith because of some unpreparednesse in the creature then God did expect that the creature should first prepare himselfe and make himselfe fit for faith that so God might bestow it upon him so grace should be conferr'd according to workes which is contradictious to expresse testimony of holy scripture testifying that God hath saved us called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his owne purpose and grace all along hath beene condened in the Church of God for Pelagianisme Thus we have beene entertained with a discourse containing nothing but the opinion of our Divines which none of us deny Yet in the proposing hereof he hath wasted a whole leafe and more Now he comes to his argument drawen from these two layd together 1. That God did bring men into a necessity of sinning 2. That he hath left the reprobates under this necessity Hence he concludes that God is the Author of the reprobates sins But this we utterly deny Therefore this he undertakes to prove by two reasons 1. Because the cause of the cause is the cause of its effect if there be a necessary subordination betweene the causes and the effect But God is the cheife or sole cause by their doctrine of that which is the necessary and immediate cause of the sinnes of Reprobates namely their impotency and want of supernaturall grace For answer whereunto I say first begining with the minor 1. That the want of supernaturall grace is not the immediate cause of the sinnes of Reprobates nor the cheife cause much lesse the sole cause And I prove it evidently Let instance be given in any sinne committed by a Reprobate let it be the sinne of murther or of fornication or of theft or of lying For if it were then every reprobate should be guilty of murther of fornication of lying of stealing For positâ causâ principali immediatâ ponitur effectus Where a principall and immediate cause doth exist there the effect must needs exist But it is apparent that albeit every reprobate doth want supernaturall grace yet every reprobate is not guilty of murther of fornication lying and stealing Secondly If the want of supernaturall grace were the immediate and principall cause of all the sinnes of reprobates then not only every Reprobate should be guilty of committing all the sinnes formerly mentioned but at all times every one of these sinnes should be committed by them Because at all times they want supernaturall grace And the truth is every one of these sinnes may be abstained from without supernaturall grace and for carnall respects Only without supernaturall grace they cannot be abstained from in a gracious manner as namely out of faith in God and love to God He that hath neither faith nor love cannot abstaine from these vile courses out of faith and love In like sort heathen men in their generations have beene exceeding vertuous according to the worlds account of vertue in moderating their passions and ordering their conversation aright one towards another and all this hath beene performed by them without supernaturall grace Thirdly The immediate cause of all their sinnes rather of the two is their naturall corruption whereby they are habitually turned away from God and converted unto the creature in an inordinate manner Like as the immediate cause actionis laesae of a naturall function of the body imperfect is the disease or infirmity that hath seised upon some part of the body And the Physitian who is able to cure it and will not is the cause why it continueth uncured But no wise man will say he is the cause why this or that member in a sicke mans body doth not performe its operation as it should In like manner as touching the vicious actions of the soule the want of supernaturall grace is the cause why those vicious actions continue uncured because God alone by his grace can cure them but no sober man that is well in his wits should say that is the cause of vicious actions but acknowledge rather the corruption thereof to be the cause of these vicious actions And indeed all morall philosophy referres the cause of every vicious action unto the vicious habit depraving the will and inclining it to vicious courses Fourthly Yet farther to represent the wildnesse of this Authours discourse The vicious habit it selfe is not the sole cause no nor the principall and immediate cause of a vicious action in particular For if it were then that particular vicious action should alwayes be committed by it So that an impure person should alwayes commit fornication a Lyar should alwayes lye a Theife should alwayes steale a Murtheret should alwayes commit murther For it is a rule generally received that the immediate and principall cause being existent the effect must needs exist also And indeed albeit habits whether good or evill do worke after the manner of nature inclining and swaying the will to the accomplishment of them Yet the will of man being a free and not necessary Agent proceeds not to worke but according unto judgement and occasions and opportunityes from without And albeit a purser that maintaine himselfe by robbery hath a faire opportunity offered him to advantage himselfe to take a purse yet if upon consideration he finds himselfe too weake to goe through with it or that he cannot do it safely he will forbeare For albeit a vicious habit doth naturally and necessarily incline him to a naughty end yet in the choice of the meanes conducing to this end he is free How much more plainely doth it appeare that the want of supernaturall grace is farre off from being either the sole cause or the immediate or the principall cause of any sinne committed by a Reprobate Rather of the two the intestine corruption of the Reprobate is the cause of his sinnes and the want of grace is the cause why this corruption is not cured Now albeit a Physitian may sinne in not curing a sicke person when it lyes in his power to cure him For we are in charity bound to do to others as we would have others do unto us yet God is bound to none I will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion 2. Observe how sluttishly he carryeth himselfe in the next reason taken from removens prohibens His rule proceeds both of withdrawing and withholding a thing which being
present would hinder an event But he gives instance only in withdrawing as in cutting a string whereon a stoneâ— hangs which who so doth is the cause of the falling of the stone And in withdrawing a pillar upholding an house which who so doth is the cause of the fall of that house which is most true in naturall things yet not the immediate cause that is to be referred to the nature of the stone and house which being heavy things do naturally move downwards But this Authour contents not himselfe with conforming the condition of Agents voluntary to the conditions of Agents naturall and necessary but changeth his termes also and puts the phrass of withdrawing into the place of the former phrase which was withholding Now it is true God withholds that grace from Reprobates which he gives to his Elect but he withdrawes and takes no inward grace from them Yet this phrase of withholding is very improper For it signifies a forcible restraint of that which was going Whereas God being Master of his owne grace gives it to whom he will and denyes it to whom he will For he is bound to none And is it not lawfull for him to doe what he will with his owne But albeit he carry himselfe very sluttishly in opposing us yet I willingly confesse he carryeth the matter very clearely in contradicting himselfe as when he concludeth that God in withholding that power that is that grace which would keep them from sinne for this alone is our Tenet hereby becomes a true morall cause of their sinne I say herein he contradicts himselfe very handsomely For himselfe confesseth that God could hinder any man from sinne but he doth not And doth it not herehence evidently follow that God hereby becomes the Authour of sinne yea of every sinne that is committed in the world But I see what he will reply by the face of his discourse namely this He sayth not that God by withholding that grace which would keep him from sinne becomes the Authour of sinne but only by withholding that grace which might keep him from sinne And indeed so he doth but marke therewithall how sluttishly he carryeth himselfe in 2 particulars 1. In deviating from his confirmity to his owne instances For each instance given is in such a thing withdrawen whereupon the event absolutely followeth and which not being withdrawen the contrary event not only might be but would be as if a string holding a stone being not broken the stone not only might be held but would be held So if the not beene withdrawen not only the house might have beene held up but would have pillar had been held up But upon granting grace he doth not say the creature would have beene kept from sinne but might have beene kept from falling into sinne Now what Legerdeimaine is this And could he presume his Reader would prove so simple and Sottish as not to observe this incongruity 2. He deviates from our tenet For we do not say that upon granting grace supernaturall the creature may abstaine from sinne if he will but that hereby is wrought in him a will to abstaine from sinne a desire to do that which is pleasing in the sight of God though not in such perfection as to worke out all naturall corruption that is found within us but that still there is sinne dwelling in us still there is a flesh fighting against the spirit Yea a law in our members rebelling against the law of our mind and leading us captive to the law of sinne Hence proceed the manifold and dayly sinnes even of the children of God but Gods spirit is prevalent with them to renew their repentance even for sinnes of weaknesse and sinnes of improvidence and inconsideratnesse and to keep from presumptuous sinnes that they may not prevaile over them That it may not be said of them as it was of too many among the Israelites in the wildernesse Their spots are not the spots of thy children Nay which is more consider Arminius confesseth that God doth hinder sinne in such a manner as by granting such a grace whereupon they not only may but will and do abstaine from sinne but he doth not thus hinder it in all What therefore shall he be accounted the Authour of such sinnes Yet I willingly confesse Arminius and this Authour shake hands in this that the Reprobates have such a grace as whereby they may abstaine from sinne if they will Yet holy Paul confesseth of himselfe even then when he was in a better condition I trowe then that of Reprobates to wit when he wrote the Epistle to the Romans saying What I would that do I not but what I hate that do I. And againe To will is present with me but I find no meanes to performe that which is good For I do not the good thing which I would but the evill which I would not that do I. But we deny that a Reprobate hath so much as a will to do good For such a will undoutedly pleaseth God But they that are in the flesh cannot please God As for the solution which he feignes to himselfe of his owne argument by distinction of an accidentall cause and a proper and direct cause that is none of ours This is a gambell of his owne to delude his reader God we say is the direct and proper cause of that sanctification which is found in his children to the subduing of their lusts an inordinate affections and as direct and proper a cause of leaving their naturall corruption uncured in others Nor so only but of prostituting men unto their lusts and giving them over to their vile affections to committ abominable things not affording them so much as a naturall restraint from such vicious courses which he could and that without any supernaturall grace And by this postitution of them he knowes how to pay them home for their other ungodly courses in such sort as they shall receive thereby such recompence of their errour as is meet as Saint Paul hath told us Rom. 1. But this Authour takes little notice of Gods word thereby to informe himselfe of Gods providence but roves whithin the spheare of his owne imagination and rationall discourse yet as corrupt as well beseemes him who opposeth the free grace of God as if he would coyne unto us new oracles the devises of his owne addle braines And as for Tertullians rule which this Authour insists upon In whose power it is that a thing be not done to him it is imputed when it is done Observe whether this Authour doth not make God the Authour of every sinne that is committed in the world as well as we For himselfe in the 6. Sect. of the second inconvenience confesseth that if God had not decreed to suffer sinne there would be none and addes Who can bring forth that which God will absolutely hinder So then undoubtedly it is in Gods power that sinne be not done For he can hinder it what followeth then
this asseveration I confidently believe it For he well perceived that this position utterly infatuates the strength of his discourse in this place And I have still looked when these men will come to a plaine denyall of Originall sinne Now if God may justly cast all mankind away for sinne originall and that as touching the inflicting of damnation upon them for it how much more evident is it to be just with God to cast away all mankind for originall sinne as touching the denyall of grace unto them Now let us proceed to that which is here inserted out of Calvin and Maccovius Now Calvin sayth not that God may with as much justice determine men to hell the first way as the latter He speakes not at all of Gods decree of damnation he speaks only of Gods decree that Adam suâ defectione periret by his fall should be obnoxious to destruction And he proves it by their acknowledgment that it was by the counsell of God that all à salute exciderent unius parentis culpâ should incurre the losse of salvation by the fault of one parent Hereupon he demands saying What lets them to grant that of one man which they must grant of all men And a little after It is too absurd that those kind patrons of Gods justice should thus stick at a straw and leap◠over a blocke And whereas Calvin sayth as he relates him that All men are made guilty of Adams sinne by Gods absolute decree alone First This is untrue No where doth he say that this came to passe by Gods absolute decree alone If he had I had thought this Authour would have justifyed him as well as M. Hord who in this very place professeth that Originall sinne is a sinne made ours only by Gods appointment Indeed as M. Hord is now set forth in print this passage is not found but in M. Hord's own copy thus it ranne M. Mason belike hath gelded him Yet that of M. Hord's was accounted the quintessence of M. Mason's strength in this argument and he took upon him the propagating of the manuscripts thereof as my selfe know in some particulars Likewise the involving of men in the guilt of Adam's sinne and of eternall death is M. Hord's phrase in one place as before I have shewed out of the fourth Section of his preface and that by the only decree of God did he expresse in this place The same argument is used by Maccovius applyed to purpose so was not that of Calvin's As for that saying of Maccovius that God may ordaine men to destruction without respect to any sinne of his that is so ordained is not this manifest 1. In the case of annihilation For doth not Arminius confesse that God can annihilate the holiest creature that is 2ly As touching the suffering of hell paines For did not Christ suffer them by the ordinance of his Father Or was this suffering of his for any sinne of his own This have I proved more then once in my Vindiciae to be in the power of God And Medina professeth as much and that ex concordi omnium Theologorum sententiâ And Vasquez the Jesuite concurres with Medina in the same opinion And lately Raynaudus in his justification of Valerianus who proves this to have been the confession of many of the antient Fathers and particularly of Fulgentius in that booke of his De praedestinatione gratiâ which goes under Austin's name And is it not evident by M. Hord's acknowledgment when he saith that men are made guilty of Adam's sin and of eternall death only by God's decree Which passage of M. Hord's this Authour hath razed out and wipeth his lips as if he had done no iniquity with his Index expurgatorius not that he hath changed his opinion as I verily thinke but because he saw what a funestous blow it gave unto his cause in this particular Yet is he magnified as a man unanswerable none daring to take the bucklers against such a Don Quixot But let the judicious consider this his practise well whether he be a man of such authority as deserving that they should pin their faith on his sleeve especially considering that he takes no notice of what I have answered to M. Hord to reply thereupon and that there is scarce any thing in all this which I have not answered in my Vindiciae Yet he continues to clamour still at least by other Jack a Lents whom he sets up but answers nothing but that which is of his own shaping that making his own bed he may lye the more softly But let The Reader seriously consider this that will not be gulled and cheated of his faith as Pope Caelestinus was of his Popedome and remember what Austin sometimes sayd Si lupi concilium fecerunt ut pastoribus non responderent cur oves consilium perdiderunt ut ad luporum speluncas accederent If the wolves have consulted together and resolved not to make answer to the shepheards why have the sheep so farre lost all good counsell as to come to the dens of wolves Pag 67. Sub-Sect 2 concerning God's justice there is a passage inserted out of M. Perkins but it is of no more moment then the rest In the same sub-section the three causes why repobates cannot in justice be bound to believe are much changed from that they were in M. Hord's discourse sent unto his freind which Copy was sent unto me Yet upon better consideration I find it is not so much changed as at first sight I conceived The order of the two first reasons is changed only in the first here some similies of exageration are wanting which are not wanting in the second of M. Hord's The second here is most altered For wheras in M. Hord's first discourse which he tendred to a Freind of his the reason ranne thus Because it is God's will they shall not believe To wit in our opinion it is altered here thus from an affirmative to a negative It is not God's unfeigned will they shall believe Yet himselfe layes the same thing to our charge in an affirmative manner pag 78 treating of God's truth sub-sect 2 the very last words which I answer apart all that page almost not being found in M. Hord's first discourse The words are these Can God speak thus to Reprobates who by his own decree shall never repent c. And in this very place at length he riseth to this affirmative thus It may rather be said it is God's unfeigned will they shall not believe because it is his will they shall want power to believe So that I need not to trouble my selfe with adding any farther answer to this more then I have to M. Hord and to that page 78 concerning God's truth Sub-sect 3. Pag 69 and Sub-sect 4. In dealing on God's attribute of justice After the Authour had proposed his reasons which moved him to thinke that our doctrine of God s absolute decree is repugnant to God's justice he proposeth
upon the foresight of faith But predestination proceeds upon the good pleasure of God's will ergo The Major proposition I prove thus This phrase according to the pleasure of God's will excludes all outward causes And no wise man will referre the cause of a man's absolution to the good pleasure of the judge when a man's innocency is the cause of it For that is the cause of a thing whereby answere is made to the question why such a thing is done And this is the perpetuall phrase of Scripture as Is it not lawfull for me to doe what I will with mine own And All these things worketh the same spirit distributing to every man severally as he will and He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth It pleased the father that in him should all fulnesse dwell It is so ô father because thy good pleasure was such It is God that worketh in you both the will and the deed according to his good pleasure The Lord loved you because he loved you Deut 7. 7. They inherited not the land by their own sword neither did their own arme save them but thy right hand and thine arme and the light of they countenance because thou diddest favour them 2. My second argument is Therefore God gives faith because he did predestinate them As many believed as were ordained to everlasting life and God added daily to the Church such as should be saved 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as appeares by the equipollency of both sentences Now hence I inferre Therefore God gives not faith because he hath not ordained them to everlasting life For if the affirmation be cause of the affirmation the negation is cause of the negation And the Scripture as ordinarily subjoyneth the deniall of grace to reprobation as the granting of grace to predestination For as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as perish is opposite to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as shall be saved And as the consequent of the one is said to be Faith so the consequent to the other is the deniall of the same or like grace As for example All they that are of God heare God's word so others heare them not because they are not of God as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such as shall be saved are added to God's Church so in whom is the Gospell hid only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in them that perish Among whom doth Antichrist prevaile by all deceivablenesse only in them that perish Like as for the Elect on the contrary 't is not possible they should be seduced Mat 24. 24 and 2 Thes 2. 13 3. If predestination were upon the foresight of faith then it should be only upon the foresight of such a faith as perseveres to the end whence two inconveniences follow 1. That no man can be assured of his election untill his death which is quite contrary unto Scripture For Paul was assured of the election of the Thessalonians by observation of the works of their faith the labour of their love and the patience of their hope 2. In this case none can be strengthened against the power of temptation by the assurance of their election But thus we are strengthned by Chist Mat 24. 24. by St. Paul Rom 8. 29. 2 Thes 2. 13. 4. Election is absolute therefore reprobation is absolute The antecedent I prove If it be neither of faith nor of works then it is absolute but it is neither of faith nor works Not of works expresly Not of faith as appeates by the same reason whereby Paul proves it is not of works For the reason is this Before the children were borne or had done good or evill it was said the Elder shall serve the younger Therefore election is not of works Now say I we may as well conclude therehence therefore it is not of faith forasmuch as before they were borne they were as uncapable of faith as of works The consequence I prove thus Looke by what reason St. Paul proves that the election of Iacob was not of good works because before they were borne 't was said The Elder shall serve the younger by the same reason it is evident that the reprobation of Esau was not of evill works the subjection of Esau unto his younger brother as lively representing his reprobation as the dominion of Iacob over his elder brother represents his election 5. Predestination is defined by Austin to be Praeparatio gratiae the preparation of grace therefore reprobation which is opposite thereunto must be the not preparation of grace that is God's decree not to give grace like as the opposite is Gods decree to give grace Now God gives grace not according to works For he hath mercy on whom he will And hereupon Austin builds his doctrine of predestination Now by his doctrine predestination is absolute as Gerardus Vossius confesseth in his preface to his history of the heresy of Pelagius How can it be otherwise For if God conferres grace not according to mens works but according to his own purpose and grace How much more did he decree to give it not upon any foresight of works but of his mere pleasure And the Scripture as clearely testifies that as God hath mercy on whom he will so whom he will he hardneth that is of mere pleasure he denieth grace to some as of mere pleasure he grants it unto others And therefore reprobation grounded hereupon must needs be as absolute as predestination grounded upon the other 6. Like as in Scripture phrase Faith is said to be the faith of God's elect election is not said to be of those that are foreseen to to believe So the worshippers of the Beast are said to be those Whose names are not written in the booke of life They that are not written in the booke of life are described to be such that admire and worship the beast And the not writing of mens names in the booke of life doth as significantly represent their reprobation as the writing of mens names in heaven Luc 10. 20. Rev 20. 12 doth represent their election Thus as formerly I gave six reasons to justifie the absolutenesse of reprobation because he pretended the absolutenesse thereof was repugnant to reason so here I have given six more derived out of the word of God to prove that this doctrine is the revealed will of God to stop his empty mouth that clamoureth and only clamoureth that it is no part of God's revealed will And that this doctrine is not only conformable to right reason but by convincing arguments in right reason demonstrable I have already shewed And that all the absurdities this Authour blatters of they prove to be no better then the mere imagination of a vaine thing That which here he discourseth of a reasonable service comes out of it's place it belonged to the former reason in M. Hord's treatise and there I
measured freindship by profit as in that very book Cicero relateth Then he takes notice of another commendation given of him in these words At multis se probavit he approved himselfe to many Et quidem jure fortasse and truly for good cause perhaps This is Cicero his concession with a perhaps But observe what he brings in upon the back of this Sed tamen non gravissimum est testimonium multitudinis but the testimony of the multitude the many is not most weighty or most considerable For in every art or study or any science or in vertue it selfe every thing that is best is most rare Then follow the words which this Authour alseadgeth not Ac mihi quidem videtur quòd ipse vir bonus fuit And to me truly it seemes that he was a good man This had been to contradict himselfe having formerly said Nihil affirmo I affirme nothing he takes into consideration what others said of him but as for him he would say nothing of him neither in commendation nor vituperation But his words runne thus Ac mihi quidem quòd ipse bonus vir fuit multi epicurei fuerunt hodie sunt in amicitiis fideles For it seemes indeed that he and Polyaenus cum Cyzizâ—nâ— meretriculà were very faithfull one to the other in omni vita constantes graves nec voluptate sed consilio officia moderantes hoc videtur here comes in videtur and not till now major vis honestatis minor voluptatis He still affirmes nothing of the life of Epicurus but taking that which others affirmed of him and admitting it saith hoc videtur major vis honestatis miner voluptatis this testimony of others concerning these particulars did argue more force of honesty lesse of pleasure Ita enim vivunt quidam ut eoruÌ„ vita probetur refellatur oratio For so some doe live that their life is approved but their opinions condemned And on this point only to wit concerning his opinion had Cicero to deale with Epicurus at this time Atque ut caeteri existimantur dicere melius quà m facere Sic â—i mihi videntur facere melius quà m dicere And as others are thought to speak better then they live So these seeme to me to live better then they speake By these he meanes not Epicurus or Epicureans but those some of whom he spake immediatly before And whether this be not the true meaning of Cicero I appeale to the judgment of every sober man that shall consider his words And to requite this Authour and pay him in his own coyne I will not tell him what one of his own Sect hath given forth concerning one that preached in a great place namely that his Auditory should professe that the Authour must needs be an Arminian he preached so honest a sermon Though on the contrary I have heard of a greate Arminian of Cambridge that he should professe to a friend of his comming to him to conferre with him and take him off from his opinion if it might be saying in the close that it was not for the honesty of their conversation who maintained the same that he was of the same mind and gave his reason for it out of his own experience which I will not mention But I will make bold to represent what I have read of the Pelagians to answer this Authour and so to recompence him in the way of charity For Chrysostome placeth Pelagius inter viros piè ac sanctè magnaque cum tolerantiâ viventes amongst men living piously and holily and with great patience as Vossius observes cap 3. hist Pelag and Claudius Menardus before him in his notes upon Austin's book against Iulian the Pelagian Austin in his 106 epistle acknowledgeth Paulinus to have loved him as the servant of God And in his retractions he professeth saying Pelagii ipsius nomen non sine laude posui quia vita ejus à multis praedicabatur I made mention of Pelagius his name not without commendation for as much as his life was magnified by many Amd in his third booke De peccat meritis remiss c 1. he sayth the report that went of him was as of an holy man and one that had profited much in Christianity I find likewise good commendations given of Coelestius also and Iulian the Pelagian And I make no question but an honest and pious man may be sowred with the leaven of Pelagianisme in that way of Arminianisme ere he is aware but God may take them off from it ere they dye Though the eager opposers of God's truth this way even by such as were termed Semipelagians Prosper spares not to call Vasa irae vessells of wrath in his Epistle to Ruffinus And the exiled Bishops of Africa in their Synodicall Epistle stile them no better then Vasa irae vessels of wrath And upon the conclusion of the Synod of Palestine what tumults were raised and what abominable acts were committed by the party of Pelagius is set down in part both by Austin in the end of his booke De gestis Pelagii and in a certaine epistle of Innocentius Pope of Rome To conclude Leviathan God's enemy is represented in Scripture as a crooked Serpent It pleased King Iames to stile Arminius sometimes the enemy of God And Austin I am sure stiles the Pelagians Inimici gratiae Dei The enemies of God's grace And no marvaile if they cary themselves like crooked Serpents turning and winding for their advantage I have laboured to find out the Meanders of this Authour which I little suspected at the first and to meet with him every where and encounter him in his greatest fastnesse And let the indifferent judge whether every where he be not found to hold a lye in his right hand I would to God his eyes were opened that he might see how he forsakes his own mercies by forsaking the fountaine of living waters to digge unto himselfe pits even broken pits that can hold no water While he looks to be saved by no other grace inherent then such as whereby he hath power to believe if he will repent if he will A lamentable condition that a man of understanding and knowledge and good morality should be thus blinded nothing perceiving that this is mere nature and not grace But what infatuation hath seazed upon the Christian world when such discourses are magnified as sound and excellent yea rare peeces and unanswerable Let us give God the glory of keeping us in our right wits and senses otherwise even Flyes with us shall goe for Elephants and the very illusions of Satan shall be advanced as strange performances not only of sober speculations when they are equally estranged both from soundnesse and sobriety such as all along looke a squint upon God's word yet seldome take notice thereof or are conformed thereunto but rather proceed in manifest opposition thereunto and withall are found clearly devoid of all sound reason though thereof Pelagians have
decrees to damne him for all his actuall sins aswell as originall sinne and finall perseverance in them And that in the same moment he foresaw all their sins not that the foresight of their sinnes is antecedent or subsequent to but concomitant or conjunct with his decree of their damnation in the same moment not of time onely but of nature also Undoubtedly actuall sinnes are more apt to justifie God in damning any man than sinne originall yet you maintaine that God decrees to damne a man without the foresight of that which doth more justifie God in damning any man onely you deny that he can decree to damne any man without the foresight of that which doth lesse justifie God in the actuall damnation of any one You will have the foresight of mans actuall sins to follow the decree of damnation which I dare not avouch not onely because it is harsh to mens affections but because it is repugnant in my judgement to manifest reason onely I deny the foresight of all sinnes to be antecedent to this decree I say t is neither antecedent to it which is the dissolute opinion nor subsequent after it which is the rigid opinion and each of them equally untrue but it is conjunct or concomitant to it in the same moment of nature both these degrees being the decrees de mediis and so making up one formall compleat decree de mediis ad eundem finem tendentibus which is the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of justice as I have shewed at large in my third digression amongst those which I heare are lately brought into your hands But I wonder not a little what you are fallen upon in the next place 8. As touching the election and reprobation of Angells I have nothing to say because the Scripture saith nothing It is true that it could not be made ex communi massa corrupta because there was none such But why it might not be out of the foresight of their personall obedience or disobedience I know no great matter to object Nor will it follow that if they were elected upon such considerations we must be so too for our case is wholly different as the Scripture denyeth that of us Resp Hitherto you have discoursed as it were out of the month of our Divines who yet as I have shewed in my eighth Digression are for the most part nothing for this opinion which you propose being rightly understood But in this point not one is for you nor ever could I observe any of our Divines that maintained not the election of Angells to be of as free grace as the election of men or the reprobation of Angells to be of as free Soveraignty and absolutenesse in the denyall of grace as the reprobation of men Arminius never durst professe this which you doe but still puts it off as a matter he hath nothing to doe withall treating onely of the predestination of men which he would never have done had he any hope to make good that opinion which you seeme more to incline unto than to the contrary But though you see no great matter to object against it yet others doe that hold it absolutely impossible to be otherwise namely impossible that any thing in the creature should be the cause of the will of God quoad actum volentis or of predestination quoad actum praedestinantie Insomuch that Aquinas professeth never any man was so mad as to maintaine that there could be any cause of the will of God p. 1. q. 23. Art 5. in Corp. Cum praedestinatio includat voluntatem sic inquirenda est ratio praedestinationis sicut inquiritur ratio divinae voluntatis Dictum est autem suprà quod non est assignare â—iusam divine voluntatis ex parte actus volendi sed potest assignari ratio ex parte volitorum c. Deus vult esse aliquid propter aliud Nulius ergo fuit it a insanae mentis qui diceret merita esse causam Divina praedestinationis ex parte actus praedestinantis sed hoc sub questione vertitur utrum ex parte effectus praedestinatio habeat aliquam causam Et hoc est quaerere utrum Deus praeordinaverit se daturum effectum praedestinationis alicui propter aliquam causam And whereas Suarius hath laboured to helpe himselfe with a shifting distinction betweene causa and ratio as if there might be ratio voluntatis divinae from without though not causa and finding these tearmes promiscuously used by Aquinas in his summes flyeth out to his booke contra Gentes and Ferrarienses thereupon to get hold of somewhat therehence for his advantage yet I have endeavoured to beat that fox out of his holes in my third Digression upon election 2. Are they not called in Scripture the elect Angells Now marke Austins discourse If upon the foresight of mans obedience God elect any man it shall not be said Non vos me elegistis sed ego vos elegi but on the contrary rather vos me elegistis non ego elegi vos For if election of Angells followed upon their obedience they did first choose God that is choose to obey him before God did choose them that is choose to save them 3. If Angells were elected upon their obedience then either by necessity of nature this came to passe or by the free constitution of God It cannot be said by necessity of nature Ergo by his free constitution whence it followeth that God did ordaine that upon the obedience of Angells he would ordaine them to eternall life Now judge you whether one decree of God can possibly be the object of another decree all decrees of God being eternall and the objects of Gods decrees being meerely temporall as appeares in the decree of creation preservation redemption vocation justification sanctification salvation 4. No good act can be wrought but by God and by his grace it is he that workes in us both the will and the deed of his good pleasure Doe you not thinke it is so in Angells also otherwise what cause have they to give God thankes for their election as namely if it sprang from their obedience But suppose you deny this yet all confesse no naturall action can be wrought much lesse gratious without Gods concourse as the efficient cause thereof Now consider doth God concurre modo nos velimus which is Suarius his devise consider I pray you the contradiction included in this Tenet God is the cause working not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perficere but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 velle as they confesse Now is it possible that God concurreth ad velle modo nos velimus can the same thing be the condition of it selfe It may as well be before it selfe Againe supposing we doe velle it is not possible by the power of God that we should not velle for factum infectum reddere me Deus quidem potest But this I have farther prosecuted in a Digression by it selfe
their p. 47 l. 2 praeoptat l. 23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 48 l. 5 6 degree l. 8 degree of diminution l 10 any paine p. 49. l. 18 my argument p. 50. l. 7 in this l. 22 will p. 51. l. 22 the corrupt p 53. l. 33. permittente Deo p 55 l. 1 But God by this opinion doth will and procure it by a powerfull and effectuall decree which cannot be resisted p. 56 l. 5 this will l 53 signes of p. 57 l 8 God p. 59 l. 9 of Thomas p. 60 l 16 as holily p. 61 l. 45 is just p. 62. l. 4 restraines ib l. 14 good works l. 22 that therefore God l. 28. double evill l. 48 for it by p. 63 l. 5 Potan p. 64 l. 7 efficacy of l 16 supposition l. 18 necessarily but either necessarily or c. l. 19 supposition l. 24 of Aquinas l. 26 on Gods Marg pro culpa p. 65. l. 34 quotation l. 45 to feare l. 48. emortui sarmenti quia Christo resecti sunt l. 49 multi p. 66 l. 7 saith not l. 12 nill that l. 25 futurition l. 47 from sin l. 56 or whither he abstaine from that which is evill he doeth not abstaine from it in a gracious manner p. 67 l. 12 this of l. 24 you hearts l. 51. mans infidelity p. 68 l. 57. manner of appointing hereunto for if they be at all appointed hereunto undoubtedly they are precisely appointed thereunto p. 69 l. 12 supposition p. 70 l. 28 second way p. 73 l. 24 as we l. 44 severally p. 74 l. 46 author of the Sin l. 48 del good p. 76. l. 13 will not p. 78. l. 3 futurition l. 29 procure l. 30 as a second p 80 l. 12 of England l. 22 but we l. 31 against l. 38 if he should worke them contrary to their natures then c. p. 81 l. 7 effecting p. 83 l. 29 of sin p. 84 l. 24 acts p. 85 l. 1 any naturall act l. 50 mere pleasure as the apostle professeth that God hath mercy on whom he will it is evident that God of his mere pleasure c. p. 86 l. 18 as uncapable p. 89. l. 59 nec recte p 93 l. 30 will doe p. 94 l. 2 nill it p. 97 l. 36 the cause l. 54. my answer p. 100 l. 44 with their p 102 l. 56 and that p. 104 l. 4 Credible p 105 l 2 agent p. 118 l. 41 or vitious p. 121 l. 41 will of p. 127 l. 14 of destiny p. 134 l. 44 asserâ—oribus l. 47 quin author l. 50 I propose p. 140 l. 21 so as to come to passe p 146 l. 22 pillar had not l. 23 del pillar had p. 147 l ult why God p. 151 l. 38 so p. 157 l. 7 without which p. 164 l. 56 it may p. 186 l. 47 decrees p. 193 l. 2 wherein 't is manifest that finall perseverance in sin goeth before l. 3 But if you farther proceed to make it good according to your usuall course thus finall perseverance in sin goeth before damnation Ergo c p 195 l. 35 mine l. 54 decrees p. 198 l. 36 is in p. 199 l 10 and some l. 11. privatively A VINDICATION OF Dr. TWISSE FROM THE EXCEPTIONS OF M r JOHN GOODWIN IN HIS Redemption Redeemed BY HENRY IEANES Minister of Gods Word in Chedzoy OXFORD Printed for T. Robinson 1653. TO THE Reverend and Learned Mr IOHN GOODWIN SIR I Have assumed so much boldnesse as to examine some passages that you have in your Booke entituled Redemption Redeemed against D. Twisse wherein I believe that you your selfe will acknowledg that I have carried my selfe as a fair adversary as an adversary only unto your opinions and not unto your person which I love honour as in other respects so for the good and great gifts and parts God hath bestowed on you Many of my friends have earnestly disswaded me from this vindicatioÌ„ assuring me that I must expect from you insteed of a reply nothing but a libell But for my part I shall hope and pray unto the Almighty for better things of you However I am not hereby deterred from entring into the lists with you However I am not hereby deterred from entring into the lists with you neither shall I deprecate your utmost severity in rationall argumentation for the discovery of any thing that you conceive to be weake and unsound in this my discourse You may perhaps think and say that so small a trifle is unworthy a diversion from your more serious employments but for that I am contented that the learned Reader judge betwixt us Indeed I had long ere this finished an answer unto your whole Book but that there was a generall and as I think a just expectation that some in the University of Cambridge who dissented from you would comply with your faire invitation of them to declare themselves in some worthy and satisfactory answer to the particulars propounded in your Book But upon their long silence which I can neither excuse nor will I accuse as being altogether ignorant of the causes thereof I renewed my thoughts of setting about this worke and intended in the interim to have annexed to this piece of D. Twisse a Table referring unto such passages in this and other of his Books as doe in great part satisfy whatsoever you have delivered in your forementioned Treatise in opposition unto the absolutenesse of Divine Reprobation But from these resolutions I was quite taken off by certain information that the Learned M. Kendall heretofore Fellow of Exeter Colledge in the University of Oxford hath undertaken you But I detaine you and the reader too long with Prefacing I shall therefore presently without more adoe addresse my selfe unto the encounter with you In three places you except against D. Twisse I shall consider them severally To begin with the first M r GOODWIN p. 25. 26. c. 2. §. 20. IT is indeed the judgement of some Learned men that the purpose or intent of God to permit or suffer such or such a thing to be done or such or such an accident to come to passe supposeth a necessity at least a syllogisticall or consequentiall necessity of the coming of it to passe But that the truth lieth on the other side of the way appears by the light of this consideration If whatsoever God hath decreed or intendeth to permit to come to passe in any case upon any termes or any supposition whatsoever should by vertue of such an intention or decree necessarily come to passe then all things possible to be or at least ten thousand things more than ever shall be must be yea and this necessarily For doubtlesse God hath decreed and intendeth to leave naturall causes generally to their naturall and proper operations and productions yea and voluntary causes also under a power and at liberty to act ten thousand things more then ever they will doe or shall doe For example God intendeth and hath decreed to permit that fire
have existed or shall exist for the future but also all that are in any possibility of existence whose existence implyeth no contradiction And that your satisfaction unto this may be the fuller and distincter I shall branch it into some particulars which I shall entreat you to cleare up unto me First there are many things that are meerely possible numberlesse millions of men and Angells which have not never had never shall have actuall existence and unto these there is possible as great a variety of both actions and sufferings which that God hath decreed to permit to come to passe conditionally in some case upon some termes upon some supposition or other is not I confesse within the compasse of my Creed but yet I shall be willing to be instructed by you provided that you prove what you undertake to teach me Now that I am not much to be blamed for making a doubt of this will I hope be confessed by you if you please to consider First that Didacus Alvarez a very learned man holds it to be the more probable opinion that there are not in God conditionall decrees concerning all future conditionall contingents which may be framed by our understandings in infinite combinations as well concerning things actually existent as also things possible but only in comparison of those future conditionalls which are revealed by God Christ or the Prophets c. And he insinuates this reason out of Ledesma because other conditionall decrees would be in vaine impertinent and no waies conducing unto Gods providence and government of the World which reason is as well applyable unto conditionall permissive as conditionall effective decrees M. Rutherford I know argueth somewhat against this but I believe you will not plow with his Heifer Secondly that D. Twisse not only affirmeth but proveth that things meerely possible are not the object of Gods decree in his Book against Iackson p. 283. 333. 394. Looke we saith he upon the decrees of men the wisest of men were they ever known to decree that a thing may be done But rather supposing many things may be done they make choyce to decree the doing of such courses as seeme most convenient things are possible without any reference to the decrees of God but only in reference to his power That is possible unto God which he can doe or which he hath power to cause that it be brought to passe As for example before the World was made it was possible that the World should be made was this by vertue of Gods decree Did God decree it to be possible If he did seeing his decrees are free it followeth that he might have chosen whether the World should have been possible or no. His arguments are applyable unto Gods permissive as well as effective decrees unto his conditionall as well as absolute decrees From agents meerely possible passe we on unto such as doe exist in some difference of time or other and unto them some things are possible only in regard of an obedientiall power some things are possible in regard of a naturall power First some things are possible and that unto all sorts of second agents only in regard of an obedientiall power thus 't is possible for ten thousand Asses besides Balaam's to speake for ten thousand peices of iron besides that mentioned 2 Kings 6. to swimme 't is possible for wine to be made of ten thousand pots of water c. Besides those sixe we read of Iohn 2. It is possible of stones to have children raised up unto Abraham Now that God hath decreed to permit all things thus possible to come to passe conditionally in some case is as I take it false and I shall give you my reason out of D. Twisse his Digression De naturà permissionis lib. 2. part 2. pag. 16. col 2. Irrationalia dicuntur permitti quoties sinuntur ferri secundùm naturam suam quemadmodum cum lapis sinitur ferri deorsum ignis sinitur grassari in domas hominum itaque circa agentia naturalia dum versatur permissio palam est praesupponi non modo propensionem sed determinationem ad agendum non sic quoties versatur circa agentia rationalia nam rationales substantiae quando permittuntur agere sinuntur etiam ferri secundum naturam suam aut alia esset ratio permissionis rerum rationalium quam irrationalium quod minime videtur Irrationall agents are said to be permitted as often as they are suffered to be carryed according to their natures as when a stone is suffered to move downeward fire to rage upon the howses of men So also rationall substances when they are permitted to act they are suffered to be moved or carryed agreeably unto their natures quoties permittuntur sibi pro domesticae inclinationis ratione quà libet feruntur ib. pag. 11. c. 1. or otherwise the nature of the permission of things rationall and irrationall would differ in regard of forme where as the difference between them is only in respect of the matter about which each is conversant as he sheweth presently after the words quoted Againe of those things which are possible unto all sorts and kinds of agents there are some which God hath absolutely decreed to effect or bring to passe by his operation some which he hath absolutely decreed to hinder or restraine Now whatsoever God worketh or effecteth he doth not permit as permission is opposed unto effection and therefore it cannot be the object of a bare permissive decree but of an operative or effective Secondly what he hindereth or restraineth either immediately by himselfe or mediately by second causes he cannot be at all said to permit and therefore he never decreed to permit it more briefely God cannot be said to decree the bare and naked permission of that whose effection or working he hath decreed he cannot be said to decree the permission of that whose hinderance or restraint he hath intended but of things possible he hath decreed the effection of some the restraint and hinderance of others and therefore there are many things possible which he hath not decreed barely to permit I but perhaps you will say that though whatsoever God hath absolutely decreed to effect or hinder he hath not decreed to permit to come to passe absolutely yet he hath decreed it shall come to passe conditionally in such cases upon such termes and upon such a supposition But this is spoken gratis and therefore I doe beseech you to evidence it by dint of argument unto which if convincing I hope I shall submit But I imagine I see a back-doore at which you intend to runne away and save your selfe the labour of medling with that worke which I have here cut out for you and that is the clause which you have added by way of Parenthesis in your consequent or at least ten thousand things more than ever shall be Here your consequent hath two propositions in it one universall then all things possible
naturaliter scire desiderat quare cum per partem proximam habeat voluntatem universaliter efficacem posset illa scire non novitèr quia tunc non semper esset actualissimus scientissimus perfectissimus beatissimus immutailis penitus contra tertiam partem sextam necessario ergo aeternalitèr omnia vera novit Thirdly from his unchangeablenesse which is affirmable of all his other Attributes and consequently of his knowledge But now his knowledge if it were not of things whilest they were to come it would by actuall existence of them be enlarged and so changed This argument is urged by Durand Cumel Rada Suarez and others God knowes thing whiles present for otherwise he should be ignorant of that which men and Angells know therefore he knew them whiles future otherwise by the presence of them something de novo should accrue unto Gods knowledge which cannot be without a change Suarez also argueth to the same purpose The last sort of arguments which I shall mention are drawn from Gods actuall providence or efficiency God is the cause of all things of him saith the Apostle are all things Rom. 11. 36. Now he is the cause of all things by his knowledge and by his will First by his knowledge and that practicall which is resembled unto that of an Artificer who hath a foreknowledge of what artificiall workes he resolves upon for he hath samplers and patterns of them in his mind Rada propounds this argument very briefely Secondly the will of God is the cause of all things as is demonstrated by Bradwardine and by Aquinas and such as Comment upon him in prim part Q. 19. Art 4. Now the will of God is unchangeable from within and irresistible from without and therefore in it all things future may be certainly and infallibly foreknowne Bradwardine from Esay 46. 10. Declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times the things that are not yet done saying my Counsell shall stand inferres the infallibility of Gods prediction from the firmenesse immutability and unresistiblenesse of his will The Prophet signifies saith he that he can therefore declare the things that are not done because his Counsell shall stand and he will doe all his pleasure Quasi velit innuere quod per hoc annuntiet vei annuntiare possit ab exordio novissimum quia omne suum consilium volunt as immutabiliter stabit siet De causa Dei lib. 1. cap. 218. pag. 224. This argument Cumel inforceth by comparison with mans foreknowledge of things in their causes A Mathematician can foreknow an Eclipse of the Sunne or Moone in its cause and therefore much more can God foreknow all future contingents in the determination of his own will As for the testimonies you bring in the Margent they and diverse others are alleadged generally by the Dominicans to prove the existence of things in Eternity and it is very strange unto me that you take no notice of the common answers that are usually given unto them The place out of Gregory is misquoted but that might be an escape of the Printer in my booke it is Moral lib. 20. cap. 25. And a little after he gives the reason why prescience is not properly in God Praescire dicitur qui unamquamque rem antequam veniat videt Et id quod futurum est priusquam praesens fiat praevideâ— Deus ergo quomodo est praescius dum nulla nisi quae futura sunt praesciantur Et scimâ—â— quia Deo futurum nihil est ante cujus oculos praeterita nulla sunt praesentia non transeunt futura non veni uni Quippe quia omne quod nobis fuit erit in ejus prospectu praesto est Et omne quod praesensest scire potest potius quam praescire The ground upon which both Austin and Gregory deny foreknowledge to be in God is because nothing is future but all things are present unto God Unto all these and diverse other Testimonies which occurre in the Dominicans I shall rehearse the answers of severall men First Rada Par. prim controv triges Art 2. pag. 493. Adomnes authoritaies unica solutione sit satis Dico enim quod non intelligunt sancti omnia esse Deo secundum rem praesentia sed secundum esse objectivum cognitum omnia enim in seipso videt intuâ—tur Secondly Suarez gives the same answer but he explaines himselfe more fully The Fathers saith he speake by way of exaggeration to declare the perfection and exactnesse of that knowledge which God hath of things to come for he knowes them so distinctly and accurately with all their circumstances as if they did exist actually present This knowledge of them therefore is not so much abstractive as intuitive not so much prescience as science Thirdly D. Twisse De scientia media pag. 390. gives the same answer that Bradwardine did unto the like saying out of Boetius and Anselme above 200 yeares agoe to wit That all things are present unto God in esse volito as decreed by him sunt ei praesentia id est per suam insuperabilem immutabilem voluntatem praesentialiter determinata decreta certitudinaliter ut fiant futura And this you may see how he cleares both out of Austin and Gregory Fourthly Becanus gives another answer which I take to be the more satisfying And 't is that the scope of both Austin and Gregory is to shew That there is not such a prescience or fore knowledge in God as there is in us viz imperfect and conjecturall c. From your Testimonies I come to the examination of your Reasons M r GOODWIN NOR is it any wonder at all that there should be peace and a concurrence of judgement about such a poynt as this even between those who have many Irons of coâ—â—ention otherwise in the fire considering how obvious and neere at hand the truth herein is For 1. if foreknowledge were properly and formally in God then might Predestination Election Reprobation and many other things be properly and formally in him also in as much as these are in the Letter and propriety of them as competible unto him as foreknowledge Nor can there be any reason given for a difference But unpossible it is that there should be any plurality of things whatsoever in their distinct and proper natures and formalities in God the infinite simplicity of his Nature and being with open mouth gainsaying it IEANES YOur Argument with open mouth gainsayeth that which no body will affirme but is mute in the proofe of that which only will be called for to wit That whatsoever is properly and formally ascribed unto God is really distinguished from Gods Essence and his other attributes If you think I doe you any wrong by this censure reduce your Argument unto Categoricall Syllogismes and make the best of it you can Mr GOODWIN SEcondly if foreknowledge were properly or formally in God there should be
makes use of all his creatures in what condition soever he finds them even of Devills and wicked men to serve his turne by them either in the way of judgement or in the way of mercy and sometimes for triall of the faith and patience of his children is in Scripture phrase called Gods bidding or commanding And indeed it is farre more effectuall then his commandment And Austin by pregnant passages of holy Scripture convicted of this truth spareth not to professe as much in these words His talibus testimoniis divinorum eloquiorum quae omnia commemorare nimis longum est satis quantum existimo manifestatur operari Deum in cordibus hominum ad inclinandas eorum voluntates quocunquè voluerit sive ad bona pro suâ misericordiâ sive ad mala pro meritis eorum judicio utique suo aliquando aperto aliquando occulto semper autem justo De Grat. lib. Arbitr cap. 21. And touching this particular case of Shimei inquiring about the interpretation of it see I pray how he resolves concerning it Quomodo dixerit dominus huic homini maledicere David Quis sapiens intelliget Non enim jubendo dixit ubi obedientia laudaretur sed quod ejus voluntatem proprio vitio suo malam in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo occulto inclinavit Ideò dictum est dixit ei dominus Nam si jubenti obtemper asset Deo laudandus potius quam puniendus esset sicut ex hoc peccato posteà novimus esse punitum And he proceeds farther to shew the reason of this divine providence Nec causa tacita est cur ei Deus justo modo dixerit maledicere David hoc est Cor ejus malum in hoc peccatum miserit vel dimiserit ut videat inquit dominus humilitatem meam retribuat mihi bona pro maledictio ejus in die isto And hereupon concludes Ecce quomodo probatur Deum uti cordibus etiam malorum ad laudem atque adjumentum bonorum Sic usus est Iuda tradente Christum Sic usus est Iudaeis crucifigentibus Christum quanta inde bona praestitit populis credituris Qui ipso utitur diabolo pessimo sed optimè ad excercendam probandam fidem pietatem bonorum non sibi quia omnia scit antequam fiant sed nobis quibus erat necessarium ut eo modo ageretur nobiscum But let us proceed to provocations unto other sins not in the way of exasperation but in the way of allurements Achan was a covetous person at the sacking of Jericho it was his hap to light among the spoyle upon a goodly Babylonish garment and two hundred shekells of silver and a wedge of gold of fifty shekells waight Was not so faire a prey a sore temptation to a covetous person How was Demosthenes taken with a rich bowle that was shewed him by Harpalus but there was great danger in it I confesse yet if desire of prey doth sometimes overrun the sent may it not as well overcome the feare of danger especially considering the opportunity of secrecy to convey it closely into his Tent and hide it there I saw saith he and I coveted them and took them and behold they lye hid in the earth in the midst of my Tent and the silver under it Now can it be denied but that God by his providence brought him into this temptation and consequently into this provocation for to tempt is to provoke 1 Chron. 21. 1. And is it not just with God to bring any man into such temptations of what kind or in what degree soever seeing no temptation or provocation in this kind or degree bereaves a man of the liberty of his will If not what meant our Saviour to teach his Disciples and in them us to pray unto God that He will not lead us into temptation And what cause hath Achan to complaine of this temptation We do not read he did was it not the condition of many others as well as himselfe Was this prey that he ceazed on the only spoyle of that great Citty Were there no Babylonish garments but that one no more silver or wedges of gold but that Achan lighted on Yet they refrained some out of the feare of God that restrained them in a gracious manner and kept them from sinning against him others though not out out of a feare of God yet out of the feare of punishment were moved to beware how they transgressed For albeit Libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia as * Austin writes yet feare of punishment oftimes restraines from committing capitall crimes though this restraint be not gracious and considerations of lesse force then these doe prevaile many times with carnall men both to abstain from evill and to doe that which is good though not in a gracious manner As we read in the Gospell of a wicked Judge that neither feared God nor reverenced man yet he would doe the Widdow justice to ease himselfe of her importunate sollicitations where with she molested him Come we to provocations unto sinne of another nature in satisfying the concupiscence of the flesh David arising out of his bed at eventide and walking upon the roof of the Kings Pallace from the roofe he saw a Woman washing her selfe and the Woman was very beautifull to look upon we know what followed hereupon Now was it not God that lead him into this temptation into this provocation Surely if this were not just with God it were in vaine for us to pray that God will not lead us into temptation for we need not feare any such temptation which cannot befall us without violation of Gods justice in the course of his providence Paul the Apostle least he should be exalted out of measure through the abundance of revelations made unto him which were very dangerous to puff a man up and make him swell in the conceit of his own worthinesse being admitted into the secrets of God was sometimes exercised with a thorne in the flesh the messenger of Satan sent to buffet him But the feare of God was alive in him and stirred up his faith to pray unto God three times that it might depart from him and the Lord made him a gracious answer not as yet to deliver him but to support him in this conflict and give him the victory over it For the Lord said unto him my grace is sufficient for thee for my power is made perfect in thy weaknesse This answer put heart into Paul Therefore saith he will I very gladly rejoyce rather in mine infirmities that the power of Christ may dwell in me Mark I pray Rahter in mine infirmities He would not blame God for thus exercising him but rather rejoyce to be thus exercised for as much as this same should doe him no harme for by vertue of Christs power dwelling in him he should have the victory Secondly it should doe him good in preserving him from being exalted
nature then all things must be acknowledged to come to passe by necessity of their owne nature which is to deny God But if things be of their owne nature meerly possible and indifferent to become either future or non-future then there must be acknowledged some cause whereby they are brought out of the condition of things meerly possible into the condition of things future And this cause must exist from everlasting otherwise it should not be so ancient as the effect thereof for it is well knowne that all things future have been future from everlasting otherwise God could not have foreknown them from everlasting but all confesse that God from everlasting foreknew every future thing Therefore the cause making them to passe out of the condition of things meerely possible such as they were of their owne nature into the condition of things future was also from everlasting Now consider where was this cause to be found Not without God for nothing without God either was or is everlasting without beginning therefore is it to be found within God or no where Consider in the next place what is that within God which is fit to be the cause hereof We say 't is his decree but this Author cannot away with that Therefore Si quid novisti rectius isto candidus imperti Certainly the knowledge of God cannot be the cause for as Aquinas saith that causeth nothing but as joyned with Gods will and therefore it is commonly conceived that foreknowledge doth rather presuppose things future than make them so nothing then remaines to be the cause hereof but the essence of God Now the essence of God may be considered two waies either as working necessarily or as working freely if it be the cause of things future as working necessarily then it followeth that God shall produce them by necessity of nature which utterly overthrowes Divine providence What remaines then but that we must be driven to confesse that Divine essence makes them future as working freely which is as much as to professe that Gods will and decree is that alone which maketh things to passe out of the condition of things meerly possible in to the condition of things future And I challenge the whole Nation of Arminians and Jesuites to answer this argument Yet this decree we willingly acknowledge is a permissive decree but look that we understand that aright also thus God decreeth this or that evill to come to passe by his permission like as good things he decreeth shall come to passe by his effection and that upon Gods permission it is necessary that that which he permits shal come to passe is acknowledged not only by our Divines but by Vorstius by Arminians by Navarettus the Dominican as I have quoted thē in my Vinditiae gratiae Dei which yet they deliver without clear expressing how which I perform thus look what God decrees to permit it is necessary that it should come to passe but how Not necessarily but contingently freely And the Scripture is expresse as before expressed that the most barbarous actions cōmited against Christ by Herod Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and people of Israell in their contumelious usages of him were all predetermined by the hand and counsell of God Marke the issue of this Authors most frivolous discourses for this will whereof he speakes whereby God is pretended gratiously to will mans Salvation conditionall as much as to say 't is Gods will that a man shall be Saved in case he believe in Christ now what Christian was ever known to deny this Secondly consider whether this deserves to be called a will to save more than a will to damne for like as 't is certaine a man shall be saved if he believe in Christ so it is most certaine a man shall be damned if he believe not and withall consider to which of these the nature of man is most prone whether to faith or to infidelity DISCOURSE SECT VII BUt by this opinion the gifts of nature and grace have another end either God doth not meane them unto those that perish albeit they doe enjoy them because they are mingled in the world with the elect to whom only they are directed or if he doe he meaneth they shall have them and by them be lifted up above the common rank of men ut lapsu graviore ruant that their fall may be the greater for how can God intend that those men should receive them or any good by any of them whom he hath by an absolute decree cut off and rejected utterly from grace and glory More particularly by this doctrine 1. Christ came not into the world to procure the Salvation of them that perish because they were inevitably preordained to perish 2. The word is not sent to them or if it be it is that they might slight it or contemne it and increase their damnation by the contempt of it and so these inconveniences will arise 1. That God is a meere deceiver of miserable men whom he calls to Salvation in the name of his Sonne by the preaching of his word because he fully intends to most men the contrary to that which he fairly pretends 2. That Ministers are but false witnesses because in their Ministry they offer Salvation conditionally to many who are determined to damnation absolutely 3. The Ministry of the Word canot leave men inexcusable for Reprobates may have this just plea Lord dost thou punish for not believing in thy Sonne when thou didest call us to believe by the preaching of thy Word thou didest decree to leave us woefull men in Adams sinne to leave us neither power to believe nor a Christ to believe in how canst thou justly charge us with sinne or encrease our punishment for not believing in him whom thou didest resolve before the world was that we should never believe in That Ministry gives men a faire excuse which is given to no other end than to leave them without excuse 4. The Sacraments by this opinion signify nothing seale up conferre nothing to such as are not Saved but are meere blankes and empty ordinances unto them not through the fault of men but by the primary and absolute will of God 5. Lastly other gifts bestowed upon men of what nature soever they be are to the most that receive them in Gods absolute intention 1. Unprofitable such as shall never doe them good in reference to their finall condition 2. Dangerous and hurtfull given them not of love but extreame hatred not that they might use them well and be Blessed in so doeing but that they might use them ill and by ill using of them procure unto themselves the greater damnation God lifts them up as the Divell did Christ to the pinacle of the Temple that they might fall and loades them with knowledge and other goodly indowments that with the weight of them he might sink them into Hell and so by good consequence Gods chiefest gifts are intended and laid as snares
to entrap mens Soules Men that have them have little cause to be proud of them for they are the more unhappy because they have them or small reason to be thankfull for them or to love the giver of them but to hate rather because they are but giftlesse gifts no better than an usurers bounty Jaells courtesie Souls bestowing Michal to David or a bayte for a proud fish which he swallowes with an hooke to boore TWISSE Consideration VVEE have hitherto received a poore and hungry discourse but now in the accommodation of it he thunders lightneth as his manner is both the Master and the Disciple would have it in their owne power to make themselves elect otherwise it seemes they have little comfort and therefore they discharge a great noise of thunder against our Doctrine of reprobation as if they would awe God to give them liberty to elect themselves otherwise they will powder his absolutenesse in taking upon him to Reprobate whom he list Me thinkes these Arminians talke in the spirit of Dr Story as if they would scould us out of our faith I will not say God out of his Throne but he is able to plead his own we are unworthy to plead for him yet thus farre he is pleased to honour us as to admit us to plead for him like as he is the God that pleades the cause of his people I have shewed how absurdly this Author makes the salvation of reprobates to be intended by God which yet in the issue is but after a conditionall manner which is no more to intend their salvation then their condemnation well let us see the quality of these absurdities he fastens upon us The first is that God doth not meane the gifts of nature and grace unto those that perish where to I answer That as touching the gifts of nature there is no colour for this for they as the Author sets them downe are these creation sustentation preservation health beauty wisdome now let any sober man consider whether it be possible that it should not be Gods meaning for as many as doe enjoy them to enjoy them As for the gifts of grace these he divides into graces purchasing Salvation and graces applying Salvation after it is purchased the grace purchasing Salvation is Christ now we say that Salvation is purchased to be conferred upon every man of ripe yeares conditionall only namly in case he believes and on all that doe believe for our Saviour hath said that whosoever believes shall be saved whosoever believes not shall be damned as for the purchasing the grace of faith that we say is so purchased to be conferred absolutly and not upon condition of any worke for that is manifest Pelagianisme and therefore Christ dyed not to procure that for all for then all should believe de facto be saved therefore we say he dyed to procure this only for his elect But the Arminians doe now openly professe to the world that Christ merited not faith and regeneration for any so that God meant not that Christ should be given to any for the purchasing of faith for him So that herein certainly they are more to blame than we by this Authors rules As for the graces of applying Salvation these are the Ministry of the word and Sacraments the long suffering of God the illumination of mens understandings the plantation of many exellent vertues in their hearts I will answer particularly concerning thē all leaving those many more which he conceales to his owne enjoying the contemplation of them And first as touching the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments we willingly professe that we find no monument of the Americans enjoying of them before the discovery of that westerne world by Columbus Vesputius and Magellan no nor to this day in the terra incognita Australi whereof relation is made by Ferdenando de Quir but herein I confesse the Arminians goe beyond us in there spirituall discoveries for by the Catoptricke glasse of their owne fancy they tell us that though Christ hath not been preached amongst them by man yet it may be he hath been preacht amongst them by Angells and deliver it for certaine that having universall grace given them if they use that well as many as use it well shall have the Gospell preached unto them if not by men yet by Angells but as for the administration of the Sacraments by Angells also they have discovered nothing unto us hitherunto that I know And as for Gods patience undoubtedly they enjoy it as much as we if they be as long lived as we And I know nothing to the contrary as touching illumination naturall that I doubt is not meant to be comprehended under the graces aplying Salvation purchased by Christ yet why not as well as fortitude liberality temperance humility chastity and truly herein I doe not find them any whit inferiour unto Christians in some they went beyond us apparently if we goe beyond them in any thing I for my part take it to be in gace rather than nature As for illumination spirituall huhumane I know none they had and as for Angelicall Revelation that is a dish of Lettice for Arminian lippes I want faith to give me any stomach to it I come to those exellent vertues which this Author pretendes to have been planted in their hearts had he spared faith and repentance I could willingly have acknowledged the rest amongst heathens and that according to Gods meaning but what soever and in whome soever they are found he thinks too hardly of us when he saith that God according to our opinion doth not meane them to those that enjoy them and if he doth meane them unto such surely they are directed unto them how is it possible it should be otherwise especially as touching vertues yea and the Ministry of the Word also for he commanded them to Preach the Gospell to every creature to wit where they came only we willingly confesse then he doth not meane any of those shall bring any of them that perish unto Salvation Secondly as touching the lifting up of them up a bove the common ranke of men by these giftes heare is a miserable confused discourse so many things being put together to make up one tearme in a proposition but it is beneficiall to some to fish in troubled waters and if my answer savour of the like confusion it is nothing strange for he that walkes in the Sunne must needs be coloured But I think I may say looke what gifts men have caeteris paribus they are above the ranke of those that have them not but that they are given ut lapsu graviore cadant That their fall may be the greater This deserves to be particularly considered First in generall I say whosoever doth by occasion of those gifts here spoken of fall the more grievously which in many particulars is a mystery to me to the consideration whereof I purpose to descend in the next place God did both intend that
corrupt affections and customes as to make the last resolution of our faith concerning the waies of God thereunto or the understanding of such as he is whether best or worst or of both sizes upon a mere pretence of their indifferency for the entertainement of truths We willingly grant with Zanchy that God can will nothing which is not just Not that hereby we make any justice to precede the will of God but because he hath a lawfull power to doe what he will And there is a justice of condency consequent to all his actions It is otherwise I confesse with a man though the greatest of men as wise as Solomon though vessells after God's own heart as David But hence it followeth not that because in an earthly King there is a justice antecedent to his will therefore it is so in the King of heaven and earth If this Authour thinke otherwise let him know I am not yet sufficiently convicted of the purity of his understanding purged from prejudice and false principles c. as thereinto to make the last resolution of my faith Yet I confesse he carrieth himselfe magnificently as if he had attained to this purgation as when he saith That these absolute decrees of salvation and damnation are not part of God's revealed will But where hath he proved the conditionall decrees that he stands for are any part of God's revealed will Where doth he find that God decreed to bestow faith and repentance upon a man because of some good works of his or deny it to others for failing of some good worke As for salvation and damnation we plainly professe that God intended not to damne any man but for sinne nor to bestow salvation on any man of ripe yeares but by way of reward of his faith repentance obedience and good works Doth not he begge the question all along whē he carrieth his conditionall decrees in a confidentiary manner without once offering to prove thè by any one place of Scripture Here Iexpected he would not begge the question when he chargeth us to begge the question most insipidly When it is well known that our Divines are frequent in proving their doctrine out of Scripture which if it faile of sound proofe in the judgment of his understanding purged from prejudice and false principles yet with no modesty whatsoever their judgment be can he taxe them for begging the question For to begge the question is not once to offer to prove what they say which is this Authour's discourse all along But to supply the place of arguments he usually foist's in a phrase at pleasure in expressing our Tenet of God's decrees as of Decreeing immutably and unavoidably Or as here he speakes of Damnation and salvation inevitable whereas we doe not use to clogge our own expressions or our Readers apprehensions with any such bugheares We rather say that God decrees all things to come to passe that do come to passe and that agreably to their natures as necessary things necessarily and contingent things to come to passe contingently And surely for doctrines of faith I thinke every sober Christian hath cause to entitle the King to be the Authour of them this Authour doth not so much for his Nay the Scripture to him seemed so evidently to make for us which I desire every wise Reader well to observe that this drave him to such a sluttish shift as to except against our interpretations of Scripture upon noe other ground but this that the Doctrine confirmed thereby is not consonant to the understanding of men purged from prejudice and false principles corrupt affections and customes in the designing of what is just and what is unjust And let every indifferent man judge whether this be not a desperate course carying with it a secret acknowledgment that the Scripture indeed doth favour the way we take in the Doctrine of predestination and reprobation And indeed the ninth to the Romans Gerardus Vossius calls Gorgons head whereby we thinke so evident is the Apostles meaning on our side to turne all our opposites into stones though such vants are none of ours but himselfe it seemes had been stupified by it had he not timely taken hold of Scientia media the Jesuites invention and as vile an invention as ever reasonable men conceived 3. Lastly he tells us like a resolute Sir that absolute reprobation can be no part of God's revealed will and his reason is because it is odious to right reason He doth not shew how it is contrariant to God's word but bravely presumes that his reason is right as if he were of the number of that synedrion whose understandings are purged from prejudice and false principles from corrupt affections and customes and ere he is aware bewraies what he meanes by reason when he attributes hatred unto it And I verily believe his best reason is the strength of his affection By the way let the Reader observe that he is as opposite to absolute election as to absolute reprobation only he dischargeth his right reason and the spleen thereof against absolute reprobation not against absolute election We may easily guesse the true notion of his right reason in this his whole discourse savouring farre more throughout of the foxes then of the Lyons skin Now I have given him six reasons for the absolutenesse of reprobation because he appeales to reason purged from prejudice and false principles and not one of them hath he answered though they went out of my hands now full three yeares agoe I will adventure to give him some reasons for it also out of God's word For I desire to follow the crooked serpent which way soever he winds and turnes Therefore thus I dispute Predestination is absolute therefore reprobation is absolute For if reprobation be not absolute but proceeds according to mens evill works then predestination is not absolute but proceeds according to mens good works whether faith or other obedience according to that of Austin If Esau be hated for the merit of unrighteousnesse incipit Iacob justitiae merito deligi Iacob beginnes to be beloved for the merit of his righteousnesse and a little before Si enim quia praesciebat Deus futura Esaui opera mala propterea eum praedestinavit ut serviret minori propterea praedestinavit Iacob ut ei major serviret quia futura ejus bona opera praesciebat falsum est jam quod ait non ex operibus For if therefore the Lord praedestinated Esau that he should serve the younger because he foresaw his evill works For the same reason he predestinated Iacob that he should rule over the Elder because he foresaw his good works and so false is that which the Apostle saith not of works Now that predestination is absolute I prove thus It is not upon the foresight of faith much lesse of works therefore it is absolute The anteceedent I prove thus That which proceeds according to the good pleasure of the Lord's will is not
disposing causes of their election unto salvation But you proceed and I am content to go along with you 3. And this reason especially for the latter part of it which concernes the manifestation of Gods glory per mâ—dum justitiae punientis may be farther confirmed thus That which tends not to Gods glory simply but onely upon supposition if sinne be could not be intended by him simply but onely upon that supposition For so farre and no farther doth God intend any thing as it makes for his glory But to punish men or any other creatures is a thing that tends not to Gods glory simply but onely upon supposition if sinne be Ergo it could not be intended by God simply but onely upon that supposition Resp You need not have mentioned the tending of this to Gods glory your argument is in force and greater force without it For I hold that to punish without supposition of sinne implyeth contradiction paena being properly opposed to praemium and as reward formally hath a respect to obedience going before so hath punishment unto sinne 1. Now first to follow you in your owne course I reason thus That which tends to Gods glory not simply but onely upon supposition of obedience in faith repentance and good workes cannot be intended by him simply but upon that supposition but to reward with salvation and everlasting life tends not to Gods glory simply but onely upon supposition of faith repentance and good workes Ergo it could ot be intended by God simply but onely upon faith and repentance 2. But to your Major I answer No man saith that God doth intend to punish any man but for sinne Now hereupon many not onely Arminians but some Orthodox also are apt to be deceived and to thinke that these words but for sinne are to be referred to the Antecedent removed which is Gods intention But it is not so those words are onely to be referred to the Antecedent next before which is to punish And I prove it thus When any man saith God intends to punish man for his sinne the meaning can be no other than if he had said God doth intend that punishment shall be inflicted on man for his sinne where it is manifest that sinne is noted onely as going before the punishment not as going before Gods intention But as soone as this confusion of sense is opened by distinction then they flye to this kind of argument sinne goeth before the execution of punishment therefore the consideration of sinne goeth before the intention of punishment which is the argument I formerly proposed and the inconsequence whereof I presume you doe manifestly perceive Now to that which followeth 4. Although the reason which you alledge on our behalfe be inconsequent as you have framed it yet I suppose it may be reduced to a true Syllogisme thus The decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth sinne election is the decree of liberation from sinne Ergo election presupposeth sinne If you deny the Major I prove it thus That which presupposeth sinners presupposeth sinne The decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth sinners Ergo the decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth sinne you will perhaps yet deny the Minor but I prove it thus The decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth some that have need to be delivered for else it were vaine and to no purpose Onely sinners have need to be delivered from sinne Ergo the decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth sinners The like argument and in the like forme may be framed touching the decree of dereliction in sinne Or if you take reprobation for the decree of damnation it may be said thus The decree of damnation presupposeth some persons justly damnable for otherwise it were either an unjust or at least and unwisean indeliberate decree But onely sinners are justly damnable Ergo the decree of damnation presupposeth sinners and conse quently sinne For peccatum is de formali ratione peccatoris qua peccator est as you know Resp Every one indeed knowes that peccatum is de formali ratione peccatoris and hereupon it is manifest that the second Syllogisme gives no mite of proofe unto the first For seeing formalis ratio of any thing cannot be separated from the thing it selfe and consequently neither peccatum from peccator you may easily perceive that when we deny that the decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth sinne we must therewithall necessarily deny that it presupposeth sinners Your third Syllogisme addeth as little force unto the former being meerly identica probatio For every man knoweth that to be a sinner and to have need to be delivered from sinne is all one in such sort as whatsoever is denyed of a sinner must be denyed of him that hath need to be delivered from sinne forasmuch as every sinner hath need to be delivered from sinne Thus while you decline that proofe which in my observation alone hath course and the implication whereof in the Major proposition is all the evidence of it you fall upon no sound proofe at all The truth is if you observe you may perceive your Major proposition involves this Enthymeme Liberation from sinne presupposeth sinne sinners such as have need to be delivered from sinne Ergo the decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth both sinne and sinners and such as need to be delivered from sinne Of any other force of proofe that you give I am not conscious 2. If the argument formed touching the decree of dereliction in sinne be of the like forme it will admit no doubt the same answer 3. The Major of the last Syllogisme hath a clause annexed unto it as a reason of it thus else it were in vaine and to no purpose If this reason pleased you you might have relyed upon it in the first Syllogisme of the three whereas now you may perceive they containe no proofe but identicall 2. Your course of argumentation tends to prove that it is impossible it should be otherwise than you conceive which is more than to say it were otherwise onely vaine and to no purpose Thirdly I answer that which is vaine and to no purpose is either to no end or to no good end But the decree of liberation from sinne whether it presuppose sinne as you say or not presuppose sinne as I say still it tends to the same end and that a good end to wit the manifestation of Gods mercy But I erre your meaning seemeth to be this it is vaine in respect that it cannot obtaine the end it aimes at unlesse it presuppose sinne But how doe you prove that Gods decree of liberation from sinne cannot take effect except it presuppose sinne you have no meanes to prove it but this Liberation from sinne cannot take effect without it presuppose sinne Ergo the decree of liberation from sinne cannot take effect without it presuppose sinne And while you decline this way of proofe you light upon no proofe at all 4. Touching your last Syllogisme