Gods love to Christ especially when both are acknowledged to be eternall and to be toward both the man Christ and us before wee or the world had a being most of all when in the issue the priority seems to be for us rather then for Christ for it is confest that priority in Gods decrees consists onely in purposing one thing for another And again it is without question that all priority in this case is on the part of that for which another thing is purposed Now albeit wee are Christs servants and hee our Lord yet undoubtedly Christ was ordained rather for our good then wee for his good yet I doe not hence collect that our predestination was before Christs much lesse that Gods love was lesse towards him then towards us but I willingly acknowledge that albeit thousands had tasted of Gods love both in the way of nature and grace and glory before Christ-man had any being at all yet was the love of God to the manhood of Christ infinitely beyond his love towards us measuring the love of God by the effects thereof and that in two respects first for as much as the fruit of Gods love to him was the taking of his humane nature into an hypostaticall union with the Sonne of God secondly in making him the Captain of our salvation Heb. 2. 10. Least of all is it my meaning to extenuate the heinous nature of sinne by setting forth the purpose of God concerning the incarnation of Christ before the consideration of the fall of Adam It is enough to make sinne out of measure sinfull that God in his wisedome saw no meanes so sit as by the sinne and fall of Adam to make way for the humiliation of Christ and thereby for the manifestation of his justice and riches of his mercy and both in Christ although we grant so far as to conceive that God had never thought of humbling the Godhead or advancing the manhood of Christ but upon consideration of sin fore-seen Ex magnitudine remedii magnitudinem cognosce periculi saith Bernard this hath place in what order soever Christ was ordained a Sacrifice for sinne neither is there any colour of remitting ought of the heinousnesse of sin by the priority or posteriority of Christs predestination in comparison to Gods decree concerning the permission of sinne Sinne and the heinousnesse thereof is amplified according to the quality of the transgression in reference to Gods law so honourable a rule of mans perfection and to Gods deserts at our hands and plentifull motives from consideration both of rewards and punishments wherewith it is estadlished It is a common and just aggravation of sinne that it caused the Son of God to be humbled but to aggravate it in making way for Christs humiliation is a very odde conceit in my judgement Neither doe I comprehend how the manifestation of justice in punishing sinne or of mercy in pardoning it doth aggravate the heinousnesse of sin This I say I comprehend not The second DOUBT WHere have wee in Scripture ground for this That the Lords first and primary intention in his decree of Predestination was to set forth Grace and Justice That the declaration of his justice was intended is not doubted but by the Apostle it seemeth his primary aime was the declaration of the soveraignty freedom and dominion of God over the creature in that hee purposeth grace and power The Apostle throughout his whole discourse of Predestination doth no where oppose grace and power for God sheweth as much power freedome and dominion over the creature in his grace toward the elect as in his justice toward the world The Apostle sets forth the like power and soveraign will of God as well in shewing mercy on whom hee will as hardening whom hee pleaseth Doe not think hee opposeth Gods power and soveraignty over Pharaoh to his grace and love unto Jacob for the power hee there speaks of is not soveraignty but ability might and power shewing it selfe forth in the hardening and overthrow of Pharaoh in Moses called the power of his wrath Power naturall is one thing power civill which wee call soveraignty another the first is ability to doe a thing the second is liberty to doe what naturally hee can doe without sinne Undoubtedly the power of God shewed in Pharaoh was in his overthrow and answerable to the power of Gods wrath I like well that the power of God shewed in Pharaoh is extended also to the hardening of his heart onely this is not so congruously applied to the power of Gods wrath for as much as wrath hath alwayes reference to something in man as the cause of it so hath not hardening in that of Paul Rom. 9. 18. Hee hardeneth whom hee will like as hee hath mercy on whom hee will But withall I confesse hardening in this place seems to consist onely in denying of mercy But Pharaohs hardening was much more for undoubtedly mercy was no more shewed him when his heart releâ—ted to the letting of Israel goe then when hee detained them So likewise when God hardened him to follow after them to bring them back this was more than a bare denying of mercy even a secret impulsion of him to take such courses as should precipitate him unto destruction and this may well be accounted a fruit of the power of Gods wrath and accordingly I am verily perswaded that Gods power or soveraignty over Pharaoh are not opposed to his grace and love to Jacob Onely freedome in my judgement doth not so well consent with the execution of justice whether justice be taken in rewarding or punishing Neither doe wee ever read of Gods rewarding or punishing whom hee will freedome and soveraignty is seen only in giving or denying good according to common account Albeit there is a further freedom and soveraignty of God over his creatures in doing evill unto them as in annihilating the most righteous which Arminius acknowledgeth and in exposing his holy Son to suffer strange pains and sorrowes for other mens sinnes when hee had none of his owne Not to speak of the soveraignty wherewith God hath indued man over his fellowes though inferiour creatures That God in his decree of Predestination did shew forth the declaration of his soveraignty freedome and dominion over the creatures I easily grant yet that it was his primary aime rather then the declaration of his justice and grace I cannot beleeve without better proofe My opinion is That all the variety of Gods glory to bee manifested in the creature was intended at once and if they that are otherwise minded come to a particular expression of what glory was intended first and what next and so in order I am perswaded the incongruity of that order will soon appear It is granted on all hands that God first aimed at the declaration of his owne glory Now wherein doth God delight principally for to manifest his glory God himselfe declared it to Moses who
many wholesome afflictions yea sent his holy Spirit among them And all this in the first place not to harden no not carnall Israel nor to leave them without excuse but to purge them to humble them and to prove them and to doe them good in the latter end And when these ends were not attained hee complaines hee had used these meanes in vaine which plainly argueth his first and chiefest intent was to heale and not to harden In fulnesse of time God sent his Sonne into the world not to condemne it or any thing in it but that the world might bee saved through him implying that even that part of the world which is condemned for refusing of Christ it was not Gods chiese intent to send Christ to procure their condemnation but their salvation rather If they should plead their condemnation to bee unjust for unbeleese because they were not able to beleeve Ver. 18. our Saviour answers by a reasonable prevention Ver. 19. This is their condemnation viz. the just cause of their condemnation that when light came into the world men loved darknesse rather then light men chose rather to cleave to their sinfull estates and wayes of darknesse than to follow the light of the meanes of grace which might have brought them on forward to beleeve in Christ Again when Christ lived here in the world and was the Minister of Circumcision and so might speake and doe some thing as man yet as man he went not to doe his owne will but the will of his Father who sent him and yet how willing and earnest was hee to gather Jerusalem under his wings even his wings in which lay healing and salvation A signe it was the will of God to have healed and saved that part of Jerusalem which would not And when our Saviour with tears tells Jerusalem Oh that thou hadst known at least in this thy day the things that doe belong unto thy peace doth hee not intimate that God had even to that day carried thoughts of peace unto them and accordingly to send them meanes of peace even those that should never from that day forward enjoy the like means of peace Finally God sent his Spirit into the world to convince it of sin because they beleeved not in Christ Which argueth that the Spirit did not onely perswade them to beleeve in Christ but did convince them also that it was their sin that they did not attaine to beleeve on him Now the Spirit of God moveth to nothing but what hee knoweth to bee according to the will of God And therefore the Spirit beares witnesse the will of God is the world of unbeleevers shall not bee shut out from Christ if they shut not out themselves through unbeleefe Still you proceed to prove that which no man denyes namely that God purposed life to the world upon condition of obedience and repentance provided that you understand it aright namely that obedience and repentance is ordained of God as a condition of life not of Gods purpose Otherwise it were a very wild expression to say that God ordained that obedience and repentance should be the condition of Gods ordination Or that God purposed that obedience and repentance should be the condition of Gods purpose Yet by the way I desire to know whether you exclude faith If you doe what ground have you to prove that God ever purposed that any of Adams posterity coming to ripenesse of age should be saved upon the condition of obedience and repentance without faith Last of all on the other side it is as undoubtedly true that God ordained that whosoever coming to ripe yeares should not beleeve and repent should be damned the very elect not excepted Not that any such conditionate decrees are agreeable unto God but upon such decrees as were absolute in God such Propositions as these are naturally inferred Whosoever beleeveth and repenteth shall be saved Whosoever beleeveth not and repenteth not shall be damned One thing I had almost forgotten In the former Section you spake of a Purpose of God to save the world upon condition of obedience or repentance in a disjunctive manner now you are come off from that and turne your former disjunctive into a copulative saying that God purposed to save the world upon condition of their obedience and repentance This argueth that you are not well grounded in your owne opinion Howsoever your third reason is drawn from the end which God aimed at in offering meanes of salvation to the world which is not say you in the first place to harden or leave them without excuse but to bring them to the knowledge of God and of themselves to repentance to the seeking after God to the purging of themselves from sinne and to peace I am content first to consider what you say secondly how you prove who ever said that God offered meanes of salvation to any to this end that hee might harden them Meanes of grace were never that I know of called meanes of obduration Hardening followeth hereupon by accident but meanes of grace harden not But when meanes of grace are offered the corruption of mans heart uncorrected by the spirit of regeneration is apt to suggest carnall considerations such as are apt to make a man obstinately stand out against them The motion that Israel made to Sihon to passe through his Country hardened him not but the feare of inconveniencies and dangers more than enough upon the passage of so great an Army through his Country in all likelihood was it that hardened him and God is said to harden him in not correcting that feare but moving him according to that projecting disposition wherein hee found him And mark how Cajetan commenteth upon these words Utramque hominis partem spiritum cor hoc est superiorem inferiorem malè dispositum à Deo intellige negative penes dona gratuita positivè autem quoad judicum inclinationem prosecutionem boni sensibilis It à quod Deus spiritum regis durum hoc est non cedentem petitionibus reddidit non dando ci gratiam acquiescends cooperanda cidem ad affectum securitatis boni proprii When Moses came to Pharaoh to require him in the name of the Lord to let Israel goe this was not that that hardened him but his owne pride superstition and covetousnesse Neither did Gods judgements harden him for it is divers times signified that when hee found himselfe eased then hee hardned his heart and in other places in the way of an adversative when 't is said that yet Pharaoh hardened his heart and the like This also doth remove the cause of hardening his heart from Gods judgements yet notwithstanding it cannot bee denyed but that when God offers the meanes of grace to many hee doth it with a purpose to harden their hearts if so be hee entertaines any such purpose at all as your selfe grants hee doth for Gods purposes are eternall and immutable As for your qualification
then is the meaning of the Lord saying I have smitten your children in vaine they have received no correction I answer we are to conceive Gods corrections to tend to this according to that of Peter knowing that the long-suffering of the Lord is salvation or God speakes this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the manner of earthly parents seeking their childrens amendment by correction but not obtaining it And this being an end of correction in Gods children in the wicked this end is not obtained And what difference is there between meanes naturall and meanes morall but this meanes naturall have power to effect their ends meanes morall are to admonish morall agents of their duty to doe this or that and so the ends of Gods punishment is that by them wee should learne to amend our lives as is signified in the Collects of our Church In a word naturall means tend to ends that shall be thereupon morall means tend to ends that should be and each are usually said to be in vaine when the end according to each kind is not obtained God sent his Sonne into the world not that hee should condemne the world but that the world should be saved by him Most true for hee sent his Son into the world to dye for the world and to dye for them is to save them and not to condemne them But for whom did hee send his Sonne into the world to dye Surely for the world of Elect even for those whom God the Father had given him Thou hast given him power over all flesh that hee should give eternall life to all them that thou hast given him Joh. 17. 2. And if wee consider the world in distinction from those whom God hath given him hee plainly professeth that as hee did not pray for them Joh. 17. 9. so hee did not sanctifie himselfe for them Verse 19. that is offer himselfe up upon the Crosse as Maldonate acknowledgeth to be the joynt interpretation of all the Fathers whom hee had read And your selfe have but earst confessed that God did not Joh. 3. 17. give the world unto Christ by him of grace to be bought or brought unto salvation Undoubtedly hee sent not Christ into the world at all to procure any mans condemnation neither doth Christ procure any mans condemnation although infidelity and disobedience to the word of Christ procures the condemnation of many And I wonder what moved you so to speake as to imply it was Gods intent though not chiefe intent to send Christ into the world to procure the condemnation of any At length wee are come to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the point controverted between us in the words following If they should plead their condemnation to be unjust for unbeleefe because they were not able to beleeve Ver. 18. our Saviour answers by a reasonable prevention ver 19. This is their condemnation viz. the just cause of their condemnation that when light came into the world men loved darknesse rather than light men chose rather to cleave to their sinfull estates and wayes of darknesse than to follow the light of the means of grace which might have brought them on to beleeve in Christ First let us consider the Text it selfe then your interpretation and accommodation thereof Our Saviour doth plainly derive the cause of their unbeleefe or disapprobation of the Gospel signified in these words They loved darknesse rather than light I say the cause of this our Saviour referres to their workes of darknesse expressed in these words Because their deeds were evill The full meaning whereof I take to be this The workes wherein they delight are evill that is workes of darknesse and therefore no marvell if they hate the light and preferre darknesse before it Pulchra Lavernae Da mihi fallere da justum sanctumque videri Noctem peccatis fraudibus objice nubem But give mee leave to make an honest motion As it becomes us to take notice of this cause mentioned here so it becomes us nothing lesse to take notice of other causes mentioned in other places Now another cause of unbeleefe is mentioned Joh. 5. 44. and that of the same generall nature with this but expressed in more speciall manner by our Saviour thus How can yee beleeve which receive honour one of another and seeke not the honour that cometh from God onely Yet this is not all the cause of unbeleefe which the Scripture commends unto us for the Apostle also takes notice of Sathans illusions in this worke of unbeleefe 2 Cor. 4. 3 4. If our Gospel be hid it is hid to them that are lost Whose eyes the God of this world hath blinded c. And because it is in the power of God to correct this delight wee take in evill workes and to deliver us from the illusions of Sathan if it please him to shew such mercy towards us and when he doth not he is said to harden us The hand of God in this our Saviour takes notice of as the cause of unbeleefe in man Joh. 12. 39 40. Therefore they could not beleeve because Esaias saith againe Hee hath blinded their eyes and hardened their heart that they should not see with their eyes and understand with their heart and be converted and I should heale them Like as Moses of old told the Jewes saying Deut. 29. 2 3. Yee have seen all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharaoh and unto all his servants and unto all his land The great temptations which thine eyes have seen the signes and those great miracles Ver. 4. Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive and eyes to see and eares to heare unto this day And this hee doth even then when his purpose was to reprove them for their naturall incorrigiblenesse for men sinne never the lesse obstinately because God denyes them grace but rather so much the more obstinately because as Austin well saith Libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia and consequently they are never a whit the lesse faulty though it be not in their power to correct that corruption of their hearts whence this faultinesse proceeds And hereupon the Apostle gives way to the same objection in effect which you propose for having concluded that God hath mercy on whom hee will and whom hee will hee hardeneth hee gives place to such an objection Thou wilt say then Why doth hee yet complaine for who hath resisted his will and answers it not as our Saviour doth for our Saviour proposed no such objection to be answered as you feigne the Apostle doth plainly and in expresse termes Our Saviour discovers the immediate cause of unbeleefe to wit because their hearts were set on evill as it was sometimes with the Colossians Col. 1. 21. yet because it was not in their power to change their hearts but God alone who will change them through mercy in whom hee will and will not change them in others
for himselfe and as all things are from him so all things must be for him for the supreame efficient must be the supreame end Now if God at once and in one moment of nature decreeth to give salvation by way of reward of faith judge you or let any indifferent Reader judge whether this decree of salvation be not necessarily conjunct with the foresight of saith 5 As for the occasions of slandering and reviling the orthodox truth of God which as you conceive this doctrine of yours cutteth of to the cavilling and froward spirit you have not so much as expressed what they are much lesse justified them to be such occasions as you speak of or shewed how they are removed by your doctrine and not by ours In like sort what is that equitie of the wayes of God the credit of the clearing whereof you attribute to your owne doctrine and derogate from ours you take no paines to explicate If your meaning be that you maintaine that God condemnes no man but for sinne voluntarily and freely committed by him and withall doe obtrude upon us the contrary you doe us the greater wrong provided you speak of men of ripe yeares As for the damnation of infants I doubt you feare so much to offend men that you come too neere the Pelagian and Arminian tenet hereabouts And if you thinke there is any active power in a naturall man to believe and repent wee will not feare offence to resist you or any man in this the scripture having so plainely expressed the contradictorie to this 1 Cor. 2. 14. and Rom. 8. 8. Or if your opinion be that God doth not harden whom he will as well as hee shewes mercie on whom hee will where the good pleasure of God is as evidently signified to be the cause of the one as of the other wee shall not forbeare by Gods grace through feare of offence to resist you in this also And if Pharaoh shall hereupon object and say Why doth God complaine of my not letting Israel goe when he himselfe hardens my heart that I may not let Israel goe wee thinke it fit to take the Apostles course to stop such a ones mouth and say O man who art thou that disputest with God shall the thing formed say to him that formed it why hast thou made me thus Hath not the potter power c. And let men take heed they doe not take upon them to be wiser then the Holy Ghost and thinke to satisfie men by devises of their owne when the word of God doth not satisfie them Yet in all this the Apostle doth not impeach the libertie of their wils nor Austin neither but rather justifieth it throughout yet is hee bold to pronounce that libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia As much as to say a man without grace hath will too much to that which is evill and averse from that which is good as being wilfully bent to the one and opposite to the other And the providence of God in the efficacie of working all things to his owne ends compared with the libertie of the creature hath ever been accounted of a secret nature whereas now a dayes nothing will satisfie the Patrons of free will unlesse this secret and misterious providence of God as it was wont to be accounted come to be utterly overthrowen and libertie of the creature if not chance be brought to domineere in the place thereof When you speak of the orthodox truth of God I presume you doe not distinguish of the truth of God as if some were orthodox and some not Yet I confesse Epithites have another use besides the use of distinction yet in this case also the Epithite is not congruous for orthodox is as much in effect as true 6 As touching the last I presume you will not deny but that the riches of Gods grace to Christ and in him to all the Elect are by our Tenet acknowledged to be as wonderfull as by yours As for the absolute power of his soveraigntie in dealing farre otherwise with the world I presume your opinion is that wee doe exceed rather then come short of you in the acknowledging thereof For wee maintaine God to be as absolute and free in the denying of grace to some as in giving it to others And by denying of grace wee understand the hardning of men at least as touching the chiefe part wherein it consists Yet this you will have to proceed not so much according to Gods absolutnesse as according to his justice in punishing men with obduration yet I grant there is an obduration which is properly enough a punishment of sinne and when men are thereby prostituted unto danger and exposed unto destruction Yet I dare appeale to the judgment of any intelligent Arminian whether in case you doe maintaine as you speak the absolute power of Gods soveraigntie in dealing farre otherwise with the world then with the elect any scandall is removed out of their way by your tenet which is cast in their way by ours As for the unsearchable depth of his wisdome in the order and end of all his wayes as also of his patience towards all men I presume you will not say it is more maintained by your tenet then by ours But by the way I hope you will not except against that of Austin Quantam libet praebuerit patientiam nisi Deus dederit quis aget poenitentiam cont Jul. liber 5. Cap. 4. And againe in the same place Istorum neminem to wit non praedestinatorum adduoit Deus ad salubrem spiritualemque poenitentiam quâ homo reconoiliatur Deo in Christo sive ampliorem illis patientiam sive non imparem praebeat And againe adducit ad poenitentiam sed praedestinatum adducit and none other in his opinion As for the justice of God to obstinate sinners I hope you will not say the common tenet of our Divines doth any way infringe it wee generally maintaine him to be righteous in all his workes and holy in all his wayes For hee punisheth none but for sin none of ripe yeares but for sinne voluntarily and freely committed by them and that in such sort as they might avoide it speaking of any outward transgresion Onely it is not in their power to change their hearts and to love God with all their hearts and feare him and depend upon him Whence it cometh to passe that albeit there is no particular materiall transgresion which they could not avoide yet it is not in the power of a naturall man to avoid it in a gracious manner and all for want of that love of God before spoken of which cannot be wrought in a man but by the spirit of regeneration If any man should further object as I wish you had objected to the uttermost against our Tenet supposing a naturall man to performe what good lieth in his power to performe but not in a gracious manner and likewise to omit what lyeth in his power
Esau that hee should serve Jacob before hee had done good or evill The Hebrew and Greek word signifie neither to create nor bring into the world but to preserve or to cause to stand to stirre up or to advance which presupposeth Pharaoh already born yea and of such a Spirit that if God preserve him and stirre him up hee was become a fit subject upon whom God might shew his power in his hardning and overthrow Otherwise God might as well bee said to condemn Pharaoh out of his absolute will without all respect to sin as to shew his power in hardning of him without all respect to sin Hardning when it falls upon the creature is both the height of his sin and depth of his misery and therefore is it as prejudiciall to Gods justice to inflict it without respect of sin going before and to the creature as dangerous to undergoe it as condemnation to hell it self Hell hath no greater torment then an heart desperately hardned under the wrath curse and judgement of God which was Pharaohs case But consider Pharaoh not in the estate of Esau as having done neither good nor evill but in the state wherein he stood when God gave out his Oracle concerning him that for this cause hee stirred him up to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow and then may I easily grant more then is required viz. When God purposed to passe by him not only in communicating grace and glory unto him but also to fall upon him in his utmost wrath as well in outward strange calamity as especially in spirituall judgements hardnesse of heart and blindnesse of minde to his utter perdition In the former part you declined a direct answer to the question proposed for whereas the question proposed was touching the communicating of grace and glory you not adventuring to maintaine a purpose of God to communicate grace and glory to them whom you call the world of mankinde onely maintain a purpose in God at least you seem so to doe of communicating life and glory some other way then out of grace But with what advantage to your cause that hath been carryed I have already considered Now you seem to answer the question looking it directly in the face For though you acknowledge such a purpose in God concerning Pharaoh to wit of passing him by in communicating grace and glory yet the cause you say is not alike of Esau when Gods Oracle was given out concerning him hee being not then born as of Pharaoh when the Oracle here spoken of was given out concerning him hee being then a fit subject upon whom God might shew his power in his hardning and overthrow Yet here againe you decline the question For the question was not whether Pharaoh at that time when God said For this cause I have raised thee up c. were a fitter subject for God to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow then Esau was while yet hee was in his mothers wombe But whether God had not a purpose to passe by Esau as touching the communicating of grace and glory even before hee was born which hee had concerning Pharaoh at that time before spoken of which that hee had I prove thus It was said of Esau before hee was born that God hated him What more could bee said of Pharaoh to expresse his alienation from him Secondly look how you qualifie the hatred of God to Esau in the same manner may it bee qualifyed towards Pharaoh even at this time you speak of For Gods hatred towards Esau you qualifie thus God had a purpose to deale with him according to his works But say I even then when God professed of Pharaoh saying For this cause have I raised thee up c. God had a purpose to deale with him according to his works Thirdly if therefore God had no such purpose towards Esau namely to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow because Esau was not yet born then belike God had no such purpose towards Pharaoh himself while Pharaoh was not yet born But this is utterly untrue for as much as Gods purposes are eternall and not temporall And in like manner it may bee proved that if ever God had the like purpose towards Esau to wit after his preferring a messe of pottage before his birthright or at any other time it followeth that God had the same purpose towards Esau even before hee was born for Gods purposes are not temporall but eternall Lastly as for the difference you put between them besides the question one being a more fit subject for God to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow then the other I grant it to bee true in part as touching the hardning of them For obduration presupposeth a man of such ripenesse of years as to have the use of reason But this hinders not but that God might at the same time have a purpose to harden him in his time as Pharaoh in his time And yet why I pray was not Pharaoh as fit a subject for God to shew his power in changing his heart as well as Saul was in the middest of his bloody persecutions of the Church of God And what naturall man such as I presume are all those whom you call the world of mankinde is not a fit subject for God to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow though hee bee never so morall yea as morall as Trajan who raised one persecution or Marcus Antoninus Philosophus who raised another or as Aurelianus who raised a third It is true if God will move any man unto courses contrary to his corrupt inclination and not give him grace to master that corrupt inclination that man whatsoever hee bee shall bee a fit subject for God to shew his power in his hardning yea and overthrow also if it please him But if God move any man never so contrariously to his corrupt inclination and withall give him grace to master that corrupt inclination of his hee shall bee a fit subject for God to shew the power of his grace in his conversion and salvation You speak much of hardning even according unto pleasure without giving your Reader any explication of the words whereby hee might understand your meaning wherein obduration consists Surely obduration is either the denyall of grace or whatsoever it bee it is alwaies joyned with the denyall of grace as I take it But in very different manner I confesse which you distinguish not As for the deniall of grace that was found to have course in the first sin that was committed both in Angels and men For I am of Austins minde concerning the Angels that stood that they were Amplius adjuti then the other that fell De Civit. Dei lib. 12. cap. 9. As also concerning Adams fall that in that case Though God gave him posse si voluit yet hee gave him not velle quod potuit and these hee makes severall adjutoria The like may bee said of every
the younger to the participation of his free love and to soveraignty over his Brother and depressed the elder to the condition of a servant and as a servant reserved for him just dealing but not fatherly love might not this seeme an unequall partiality with God to deale so unequally with persons equall To resolve this doubt the Apostle could not have cleered God from unrighteousnesse by pleading the sin of Esau which deserved that hee should bee so dealt withall for neither did Jacobs sin deserve better and besides the Apostle had said before God gave out these Oracles which pronounced his different respect of them without all consideration of good or evill in either of them viz. before they had done either good or evill Therefore to satisfie the objection and cleare Gods righteousnesse the Apostle wisely alledgeth testimonie of Scripture to prove Gods absolute power and ability to shew mercy on whom hee will and whom hee will to harden When you say this hardning of Pharaoh though an effect of Gods hatred of Pharaoh yet was not an immediate effect of the like hatred which hee bare to Esau before hee had done good or evill but presupposeth the sin of Pharaoh your meaning seems to bee this that it is not at all an effect of the like hatred which hee bare to Esau before hee had done good or evill yet it is no lesse then the not writing of his name in the book of life as touching the communicating of saving grace and glory neither do wee acknowledge it to bee any more like as Aquinas doth not now the consequent of this kinde or measure of hatred in holy Scripture is no lesse then the worshipping of the beast Rev. 13. 8. nothing lesse then the obduration of Pharaoh The obduration of the children of Israel was no greater then such as was consequent unto this that God did not give them an heart to perceive and eies to see and ears to heare Deut. 29. 4. And this of not giving hearts to perceive c. undoubtedly is a consequent even to that hatred which you are content to attribute unto God concerning Esau But you helpe your self with a complicate proposition and flie to an immediate effect which alone you deny in this case for as much as the hardning of Pharaoh as you say presupposed sin committed by him but very improvidently For if it bee not an immediate effect of the like hatred that God bare unto Esau then in accurate consideration it is to bee acknowledged an effect thereof Only there is some effect thereof more immediate then this and what I pray was that was it Pharaohs sin for of no other doe you make the least intimation the more improvident is your expression intimating thereby that Pharaohs sin was a more immediate effect in Pharaoh of the like hatred God bare to Esau then this obduration But how doe you prove that Pharaohs hardening was not an immediate effect of the like hatred which God bare to Esau to wit because it presupposed sin But I deny this Argument neither doe you discoursing at large give your selfe to the proving of it but onely suppose it By the same reason you might say that salvation is not the immediate effect of election unto salvation because salvation in men of ripe years presupposeth faith repentance and good workes Nay you may as well say that Gods giving of grace is not an immediate effect of Gods love to any man because in most men of ripe years it presupposeth many good works In Saul it presupposed his zeale and his righteousnesse according to the Law which was unblameable If you say that Sauls righteousnesse whatsoever it was before his calling was no fruit of his love I may with more probability affirme that Pharaohs sin which preceded his obduration was no effect of Gods hatred If you say that though such righteousnesse in Saul was no moving cause to God to give him saving grace In like manner I say that no sin in Pharaoh was a moving cause in God to deny him saving grace For if it were then either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God Not by necessity of nature for undoubtedly God could have pardoned this sin of his and changed his heart as well as he pardoned the sins of Manasses the sins of the Jews in crucifying the son of God Act. 2. the sins of Saul in persecuting Gods Saints and changed all their hearts Nor by any constitution of God for shew mee if you can any such constitution of God And if you would but explicate wherein the hardening of Pharaoh did consist I presume it would clearely appeare that the meere pleasure of Gods will is the cause of it like as it is the meere pleasure of God that he doth not harden others in like manner But when we carry our selves in the clouds of generallties we are very apt to deceive not others onely if they will be deceived but our selves also Againe you seem to speake of Pharaohs hardening mentioned Exod. 9. 16. And indeed for this cause have I appointed thee to shew my power in thee c. Whereas from the first time that Moses was sent unto him hee was hardened and that by God according as God had told Moses before-hand that hee would harden him As for his sin before ever Moses was sent unto him you doe not take any speciall notice thereof at all but whatsoever it were as suppose the cruell edict of his in commanding the male children of the Hebrews to be cast into the River like as God answered him most congruously in his works first causing the waters of Aegypt to bee turned into blood and in the last place making the waters of the red Sea the grave of Pharaoh and of his Host was this horrible sin any lesse then a consequent to more then ordinary obdurationâ— for even heathen men are seldom exposed to such unnatural courses So that if this obduration were an effect of Gods hatred but not immediate supposing sin according to the manner of your Discourse then you must be put to devise some other sin as precedent to this obduration And whereas that sin also cannot be denyed to be a consequent to Gods denyall of effectuall grace to abstaine from sin we shall never come to an end till the cause of all these obdurations be at length resolved into originall sin And what share I pray you hath the world of mankind therein which Gods elect have not When you tel us the hardening is a punishment of sin it were very fit you should deal plainly tel us in what operation of God this work of hardening doth consist which I make no doubt would cleare all All confesse that God is not the cause of hardnesse of heart in any man but man being borne in hardnesse of heart Ezek. 36. 3. 1. God is said to harden not infundendo malitiam sed non infundendo gratiam By leaving him thereunto whereby it comes
sin that was committed whereas God could undoubtedly restrain from the committing of it and that either in a gracious manner or in a meere naturall manner When it is committed his gracious restraint is not afforded but denyed rather What that other action is wherein this obduration consists and which is joyned with the denyall of grace you expound not Suppose it bee Gods moving a man to some course contrary to his corrupt nature either by his word as hee moved Pharaoh to let Israel goe or by his works or by the suggestions of conscience according to that Law which is writen in mens hearts is not this usually found also as often as sinne is committed contrary to light of Nature or light of Grace And hath not obduration consequently its course in all this And why you should pronounce of obduration indefinitely That it is both the heighth of mans sin and depth of mans misery I see no reason Do not the children of God sometimes feele it and in patheticall manner complain of it Lord why hast thou caused us to erre from thy wayes and hardned our hearts against thy feare Esay 63. 17. What saith our Saviour to his Disciples Mark 8. 17. Perceive yee not neither understand have yee your hearts yet hardned As for your phrase of inflicting obduration that doth much require explication which you doe no where perform that I know There is I confesse another operation of God besides those I mentioned formerly whereby men are given over by God whence it followeth that they will grow harder and harder and that is the suspension of his admonitions either by taking away his word or forbearing inward motives by his spirit or removing his judgements and giving outward prosperity whereby God is said to give men over to their own hearts lusts But how this or any of these can bee called the inflicting of abduration I understand not And whereas you say it is prejudiciall to Gods Justice to shew his power in hardning Pharaoh without respect to sin like as to condemn him I have already shewed the great difference between condemnation and obduration It being never said that God damnes whom hee will but the Apostle plainely professing that God hardens whom hee will even as expressely as it is said Hee hath mercy on whom hee will and no marvell For God hath revealed a Law according to which hee proceeds in damning men but you are not able to shew us a Law according to which God proceeds in the hardning of them For if the elect before their callings bee no better then reprobates it is impossible to assigne a Law according to which God proceeds in the hardning of men but that by the same Law the Elect of God must bee hardned also And hardning in the Scripture phrase is usually opposed to Gods shewing mercy It is one thing to speak of an heart hardned another to speak of a heart desperately hardned Yet if you were put to explicate your self and shew what it is to bee desperately hardned and that of God and there withall to prove how Pharaoh was at the time you speak of desperately hardned I am perswaded this phrase would cost you more pains then you are aware of for the satisfying of your self and perhaps somewhat more for the satisfying of others If then God purposed to fall upon Pharaoh in his utmost wrath c. Surely from everlasting hee purposed so to fall upon him for all Gods purposes are everlasting If your meaning bee onely to denote the precedency of such a condition of Pharaoh in sin to Gods falling upon him in bringing such judgements upon his back but not a precedency to Gods purpose I willingly concurre with you herein But then the like may bee said of God concerning Esau before hee was born to wit that God purposed to bring such a measure of obduration and confusion upon him after such a condition of sin But if your meaning bee as indeed hitherunto the genius of your opinion drives you namely that upon the foresight of some sinfull condition God did decree to bring obduration and condemnation both upon Esau and Pharaoh as this may bee said as well of one as of the other here you will give us leave to dissent from you considering how manifestly you are found herein to dissent from your self For if such a foresight of sin goe before Gods decree of obduration and condemnation then God did first decree to permit that sin before hee did decree to harden and condemne man for it so that the permission of that sin in Gods intention must bee before obduration and condemnation and consequently last in execution that is men shall first bee hardned and condemned and then suffered to commit that sinne for which they are hardned and condemned Again if Gods purpose to punish with condemnation must necessarily presuppose foresight of sin in God by the same reason Gods purpose to reward with salvation must necessarily presuppose a foresight in God of obedience and in this case what shall become of the freenesse of Gods grace in election not to trouble you with the profession of Aquinas that never any man was so mad as to introduce a cause of predestination quoad actum praedestinantis The case is the same with introducing a cause of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis For the ground of this is only because there can bee no cause of the will of God quoad actum volentis Now reprobation is well known to bee an act of Gods will as well as predestination Answer But say further that this hardning of Pharaoh bee an effect of the like hatred of Pharaoh as of Esau neither is it said to depend on the sin of Pharaoh but on the will of God as mercy doth as the first cause thereof I answer this hardning of Pharaoh though an effect of Gods hatred of Pharaoh yet it is not an immediate effect of the like hatred hee bare to Esau before hee had done good or evill but presupposeth the sin of Pharaoh viz. his malitious hatred of Gods Church comming between God hateth no man so farre as to harden him till hee hath fallen into some sin in which and for which hee may bee hardned Hardning being alwaies as far as I can perceive by Scripture not only a sin and cause of sin but a punishment of sin How can God bee said to punish sin with sin in hardning the creature if sin in Pharaoh bee not presupposed to goe before the hardning It is true indeed this hardning of Pharaoh is referred by the Apostle to the will of God as the first cause thereof For otherwise the answer of the Apostle had not been sufficient to the objection propounded ver 14. for there it was objected that unrighteousnesse might seem to bee found in God even respect of persons to deale so unequally with persons equall such as Jacob and Esau were for if Jacob and Esau had done neither good nor evill when God had exalted
conscience to judge not to mention how this Discourse of yours is found to harden many in the way of error and to offend others in the way of truth Indeed there were no cause of any such objection as that Rom. 9. 29. if so bee God hardens no man but for sin and withall it is just with God to harden men in their sine and lesse cause of such an answer Rom. 9. 20 21 22. No man I think makes any doubt but that the objection Why doth hee complain for who hath resisted his will ariseth from the 18 ver where it is said that God as hee hath mercy on whom hee will so hee hardneth whom hee will even as hee hardned Pharaoh but yet you doe not shape the objection right when you shape it thus What fault is there in mee to bee hardned which is in effect as if you would shape it thus Wherein then have I deserved to bee hardned For the negative to this namely that God doth not harden upon desert is that which the Apostle avoucheth Like as neither doth hee shew mercy upon desert But like as upon the meere pleasure of his will hee shews mercy on some So according to the good pleasure of his will hee hardneth others But well might hee say why then doth hee complain of the hardnesse of my heart and my impenitency or rather the Apostle proposeth it in reference to the fruits of mans hardnesse of heart and impenitency such as God complains of Esa 1. I have nourished and brought up a people and they have rebelled against mee And Esa 56. All the day long have I stretched out mine hands to a rebellious people that walk in a way which is not good even after their own imaginations Or as if Pharaoh hearing of this ministry of Gods providence should say Why doth hee complain of the hardnesse of my heart in not letting Israel goe when hee hath hardned my bea rt that I should not let Israel goe and who hath resisted his will I have already shewed that this hardning of Pharaoh and so likewise of all reprobates as it consists in denying of saving grace in congruous opposition to Gods mercy proceeds meerely according to the good pleasure of Gods will And the Apostle plainly signifies as much when hee saith That like as God hath mercy on whom bee will so hee hardneth whom bee will Neither doth hee take into consideration any sin of theirs as the cause of hardning either in the proposition delivered by him or in answer to the objection arising there-hence Why then should wee bee moved with your bare word in saying wee need not say that the Apostle gave occasion of this objection by ascribing the hardning of Pharaoh and other reprobates to Gods absolute will and without all respect to sin as the deserving cause thereof Neither do you give any reason of that you avouch in saying that albeit God doth not harden but in respect of sin yet the creature will pleade or expostulate as indeed it is most unreasonable to ask why God doth complain of hardnesse of heart and the fruits thereof when it hath been shewed that this hardnesse of heart hath been brought upon man for his own sin and no exception taken against it But when out of Gods absolutenesse men are hardned then and not till then may it justly seem strange that God should complain of the hardnesse of mens hearts and the fruites thereof As for the place of Esa 63. 17. Wherein you suppose Gods people to expostulate with God for hardning them notwithstanding they suppose that God hardens them for their sin this is to beg the question and not to prove ought there being no evidence of any such acknowledgment as you suppose namely that God doth harden them for their sins Yet if there were any such acknowledgment it would not forthwith make for your purpose unlesse they should acknowledge as much of that obduration the Apostle speaks of where hee sets it in opposition to Gods shewing mercy To serve your turn you take liberty to interpret the coherence of these parts to erre from thy waies and to bee hardned against thy feare as if the former were the cause of the other upon no other ground that I know but that thus it shall stand in more congruity with your opinion Whereas indeed there is a farre greater probability that hardning against the feare of God should bee the cause of the errour of our wayes then that errour of our wayes should bee the cause of our hardning against the feare of God especially taking hardning not confusedly hand over head but distinctly in opposition to Gods shewing mercy in mans conversion I take them only as severall expressions of the same things consisting of an inward corrupt disposition as the roote and that I conceive to bee the want of the feare of God and the fruit hereof which is aberration from the good wayes of the Lord. And they expostulate with God for not correcting all this by his grace as by his Covenant of grace which hee hath made with them hee hath ingaged himself hereunto even to keep them from going astray like a good Shepherd and to put his feare into their hearts that they shall never depart away from him Which kinde of expostulation is nothing answerable to that which the Apostle proposeth to answer Rom. 9. 16. And I may well wonder what you meant to yoke them together Non bene inaequales veniunt ad aratra juvencae The children of God doe not expostulate with God for his complaining of their disobedience unthankfulnesse and rebellions against him though they heartily wish they had never provoked him and expostulate with him for not preserving them by his grace from such courses of provocation of him even of the eyes of his glory The wicked have no such desire to bee preserved from sin and sinfull courses which are unto them as sweet bits which they roule under their tongues Although when they heare of the Doctrine of obduration and his power to harden them and in hardning they may take advantage thereby to blaspheme God and to plead Apologie for themselves Belike then you acknowledge that God hath power to harden without respect to sin for to this purpose tends your comparative illustration But then you must bee driven to deny that obduration is a punishment seeing it is impossible that just punishments can have course but with respect to sin as a meritorious cause thereof That God beateth down the objectour and pleadeth the justice of Gods proceedings against Reprobates from the soveraign authority of God over his creatures is most true ver 20 21. But that hee pleads the due desert of the persons ver 22. thereby to justifie God in hardning whom hee will as positively avouched but so farre from truth as that it involves plain contradiction no lesse then if the Apostle after hee had said that God hath mercy on whom hee will should afterward take
allusion you finde in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the common course of Judges and suits in the law or of wrastling in the Olympians or of Captaines in the warre who as you say but without any proofe were wont conscribere to designe aforehand or set downe in writing the names of such adversaries as were to have their causes or tryalls tryed before them I have no great edge to oppose it But Calvin goes no further then scripture to discover unto us this allusion Porro saith he haec metaphora inde sumpta est quod aeternum Dei consilium quo ordinati sunt fideles ad salutem liber vocatur And Revel 20. wee read of another booke besides the booke of life wherein the deeds of wicked men are written and is not there written thinke wee their condemnation also As for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of old I confesse there is no native force therein to extend it to the signification of eternitie Nay Mar. 15. 44. it is applyed to a very little time before for Pilate demands of Joseph of Airmathea that came unto him boldly to aske the body of Jesus whether he were dead 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 already yet it is applyable even to eternitie neither doth it signifie any desinite time rising upwards And although this phrase of old be distinguished from eternitie Jer. 31. 3. yet it is not Habac. 1. 12. And as the words are different in the hebrew so neither of them is rendred by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greeke but wee extend not the signification of it to eternitie by any force of the word but from the matter whereof he treates which is the ordination and decree of God which every intelligent and orthodox Divine acknowledgeth to be eternall and I finde it wondrous strange so worthy a Divine as your selfe should be of any other opinion And I pray why might not this designation be from eternitie as well as 4040. yeares before such ungodly men were crept in amongst the people of God Belike not till then was the divell assigned to be an enemie to the woman for it is expresly said God would put enmitie betweene the woman and the serpent betweene the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent Surely that place onely signifies what Gods eternall purpose was in this particular then breaking out and manifesting it selfe not that then the Lord did begin to ordaine it For nothing in the nature of God is temporall And certainely the enmitie of the serpent against mankinde had broken out before this Amongst others I am one into whose hand this discourse of yours is fallen at length having heard some inckling of it in the generall before and truly by accident I lighted upon it without any enquiring of mine without any others offering it unto me and I am sorry to see the scandall and offence that is given thereby unto Gods people in the way of truth and that as I seeme to have just cause to suspect some have been hardned and confirmed in their errour and some I heare doe boast of this discourse of yours as no small credit and reputation to their cause yet I am perswaded this is no judgement of God upon you who are far from any hereticall animositie onely we all know but in part and the best are obnoxious unto errour but the judgements of God that have their course in these dayes doe astonish me in giving men over to illusions to believe lies by what meanes and after what manner he thinks good and all because we doe not embrace the truth the precious truth of God with love thereby making our selves most unworthy of it For when in vouchsafing unto us his holy truth he doth as it were cramme us against our appetite is it not high time for him to make us fast And amongst them of our selves onely this let me adde because verum bonum convertuntur every divine truth is rich in profitable use I have been confirmed in this truth by the holy usefulnesse thereof to all sorts 1 To the Elect it maintaineth and cherisheth the freenesse and largenesse of the riches of the grace of God to them whose salvation he carrieth along in all the wayes of it not according to their works but according to his purpose and grace given them in Christ before the world was under whom also are spread the everlasting armes of Gods almightie power and eternall love to guide and preserve them to his heavenly kingdome which grace to us is so much the more magnified when wee behold the severitie and yet equitie of his justice towards the world of mankinde who though hee love them as his creatures yet he dealeth with them according to their workes which in the end windeth up in their woefull and just destruction 2 To the carnall Christian that sinneth of ignorance or humane frailitie and not of prophane and wilfull contempt of the meanes and wayes of grace this doctrine offereth a serious exhortation to them to seeke after Christ whilst hee may be found and earnestly presseth on him those lively and quickning expostulations of the Prophets Why will you die O house of Israel What could I have done more for my vineyard that I have not done Turne yee turne yee that iniquitie may not be your destruction 3 To the prophance and malignant dog and swine that walloweth in sensuall and worldly lusts and snarleth against the meanes and wayes of his owne peace and trampleth the precious ordinances of God under foote to such this doctrine testisieth to their faoes that God is just in all that cometh on them and his way equall They loved the cursed wayes of sinne and are fallen into them they loved not the wayes of blessing and therefore are they farre from them 4 To the Lutheran and Arminian who refuse the excellent and heavenly benefit of the sound and comfortable doctrine of Election by reason of some hard saying which they observed in the usuall manner of handling the opposite decree of Reprobation to them this doctrine removeth such stumbling blocks out of the way as have hitherto turned them out of the way of truth and peace 5 To the cavilling froward spirit this doctrine cutteth off all occasions of reviling and slandering the orthodox truth of God and against them cleareth the equitie of the wayes of God 6 To all sorts of men yea to men and Angels it ministreth much matter of admiring and adoring the wonderfull riches of Gods grace to Christ the head of the Church and in him to all the elect his members the absolute power of his soveraigntie in dealing farre otherwise with the world the unsearchable depth of his wisdome in the order and end of all his wayes the unsearchable depth of his patience bountie and long-suffering towards all men and manifest equitie of his justice even to those who abuse his patience and bountie to their owne perdition I
to omit but not in a gracious manner which alone is not in his power to performe and say what justice is there in the damnation of such a man I answer as much as in the damnation of an infant for originall sinne considering that by reason of originall sin it is that a naturall man cannot performe any thing in a gracious manner to wit for want of the love of God Originall sinne being an habituall aversion from God and conversion unto the creature or more breifly an inordinate conversing with the creature either in enjoying it whereas hee should onely use it God alone being to be enjoyed or in using it but not in a gracious manner that is not for Gods sake to wit through want of the love of God which is brought upon us by the sinne of Adam as whereby our natures were bereaved of the spirit of God Thus in prosecuting mine answer unto a devised argument I have made bold to open my minde concerning originall sinne A point that hath seemed unto me of such difficultie that I have been wont to range it amongst those three whereabouts I could not expect to be satisfied whilst I lived Another was the very point wee have in hand To the fourth Doubt HOw may it appeare that Gods hatred of Esau is of a lesse degree of love since the making of him who by birth is superiour to be a servant to his underling argueth no good will at all but First rather a purpose to passe him by in respect of communicating grace and glory Secondly since the raising of Pharaoh which was to this intent to shew his power in his overthrow argueth the like Thirdly since hardning is an effect of hatred and depends on the will of God as the first cause thereof even as Mercy doth Fourthly since there is no cause of that objection why complaines hee Who hath resisted his will or at least of that answer Rom. 9. 20 21 22. I Answer as Jacob preferring Ephraim the younger brother to greater estate then his elder brother Manasses did not thereby declare a positive hatred of Manasses but a lesse degree of love to him in comparison of his brother So Gods preferring Jacob to bee a superiour and Lord to his elder brother Esau doth not argue that in him there is no good will at all to Esau but a lesse degree of love To subject Esau as a servant to Jacob doth not reprobate Esau but puts him into the condition of the world of mankind who together with the rest of the Creatures are made to bee servants to the Church of the elect and to the members of it But grant Gods hatred of Esau and making him a servant to his underling argueth no lesse then a purpose to passe him by in respect of communicating glory unto him out of grace And for my part thus farre I yeeld that it may well argue a purpose of God to passe by him in respect of communicating glory to him out of grace that grace I mean whereby hee hath made us accepted in his beloved for this grace or free love is made Jacobs preheminence and is denyed to Esau and though it put him into the estate of a servant to his elect brother and so into the condition of the world of mankind yet it doth not reprobate him or argue a purpose to passe him by in respect of communicating life or glory at all unto him but implyeth only a purpose to deale with him in justice viz. to give him life or death according to his works as I have already shewed in the answer to the former doubt and shall have occasion more fully to declare it in the end of this Surely Jacob in doing that which hee did to Manasses and Ephraim did neither preferre one to a greater estate then the other or love one lesse then the other But in the spirit of prophecy fore-signifyed what would bee the condition of each in their race and posterity But suppose a father in that which lyeth in his power preferres one son before another and accordingly in that way of Amor beneficentiae bee said to love one lesse then another will any sober man say that hee loves the one and hates the other is this a decent expression of lesse love Wee know full well that a lesse love in the way of beneficence may bee joyned with a greater love in the way of complacency As for example an earthly Father though hee suffer his eldest son to goe away with the Land yet hee may bear greater affection to a younger sonne though hee assigne unto him a farre lesse portion then to his elder brother And if it were decent to say hee hates him whom hee loves lesse in respect of beneficence then hee should bee said to hate him whom hee loves best Lastly if the hating of Esau bee interpreted lesse loving why may not the loving of Jacob by the same liberty bee interpreted the lesse hating of him Amongst Gods elect some are more beloved of God and some lesse according as hee ordaines one to greater grace and glory then another and is it fit to attribute that to Esau which wee attribute to Gods elect I grant that to subject Esau to Jacob as a servant is not to reprobate him for this subjection is made in time But reprobation as wee take it in opposition to election Ephes 1. 4. was made before all times It is your own phrase to distinguish the world of mankinde from the elect as if the elect were none of the world of mankinde For the very elect themselves are subjected as servants to the elect every one unto others though as great as Paul and Apollo as appeares by the very place your self have now in a contrary sense alledged more then once And who doubts that wee must all serve one another through love since Christ himself was content to wash his Disciples feete Lastly the yoke of Esau unto Jacob was at length shaken off as appeares by Isaacs prophesie it should bee but the yoke of subjection of all things unto the Church shall never bee shaken off But you perceive well enough that the discourse which you answer considered this temporall preferment which yet had course onely in their seed onely in a typicall manner as that which under temporall things prefigured spirituall and accordingly you proceed to shape your answer thereunto in that respect also The same is this Though God had no purpose to deale with Esau as hee dealt with Jacob that is to communicate glory unto him out of grace yet hee had a purpose of communicating glory unto him some other way and what can that bee but of communicating glory unto him not out of grace A very strange assertion and therefore no marvell you spared to set it down in so many words Onely you say that the putting him into the state of a servant did not reprobate him or argue a purpose to passe him by in respect of
to passe that naturally it is increased especially in case a man bee moved to courses contrary to his corrupt humours whether by Gods word or by his workes and God doth not by grace correct those corrupt humours which are so contrariant to good motions good motions I mean such as have their course onely in the way of instruction and perswasion In this case thus to move and to deny grace is to harden But when God doth forbeare thus to move and gives men over to follow the swing of their own lusts this I confesse is to harden in greater measure and properly a punishment But this was not the manner of Pharaohs hardning For long after the ninth Chapter of Exodus wee read how God continued to admonish Pharaoh by his servant Moses to let his people goe neither ceased hee this Discipline till the ten plagues or nine of them at the least were fulfilled And like as to shew mercy is not to move onely to obedience but effectually to work men to obedience so the hardning of man in opposition thereunto consists not in not moving unto obedience but rather in not working unto obedience although they bee moved thereunto both in the way of instruction and exhortation As for the punishing of sin with sin in the hardning of the creature let us understand our selves aright and not confound our selves when wee need not Is it a sober speech to say that God punisheth his denyall of grace with denyall of Grace or that God punisheth the sins of the heathen with the denyall of that grace which they never injoyed But as for the punishing of sin with sin this is a large field of Gods providence consisting in divers kindes and it is no way fit to consider them without distinction God made the unnaturalnesse of Senacheribs Sons a scourge to chastise Senacheribs unnaturalnesse towards God one mans sinfull act to bee the punishment of anothers Here is one kinde utterly distinct from that you treat of Again some say and I think justly and Austin acknowledgeth it that every mans sin may bee a just punishment unto him in respect of a former as Rom. 1. 25. When men for their Idolatry were given over to vile affections to defile themselves in abominable manner it is said that herein they received in themselves such recompence of their error as was meete So 2 Thess 2. 10 11. Because men received not the truth of God with love God is said to send them strong delusions that they should beleeve lies Now seeing this concerneth the providence of God in evill which is very secret it were very fit that you should declare your opinion hereabout and shew what operation of God it is wherein consists the administration of this providence When first the one committed Idolatry contrary to the light of Nature and the other received not the truth with love contrary to the light of grace neither the one nor the other had any saving grace and therefore it is not decent to say that God exposed the one to doe things inconvenient the other to beleeves lies and herein punished them for their former misdemenour by denying unto them that which they never injoyed For to punish is either to inflict evil which formerly they suffered not or to withdraw some good which formerly they injoyed Now how God doth expose unconscionable Christians unto errors of Faith is easily comprehended For whereas unconscionable Christians apprehend the truth which they doe injoy but in a naturall and carnall manner they may easily bee withdrawne from it either by persecution or by seduction Now it is in Gods power to send persecutors or seducers amongst them and thereby expose them to the embracing of lies for not imbracing his truth with love or by withdrawing good Pastors and conscionable teachers from them and then men being naturally more prone to errour then to truth especially in matter of Salvation wee see hereby apparently how God can punish sin with sin in this kinde not by denyall of grace which they never injoyed but by denying some outward means of grace which formerly they injoyed And withall it appears that this is nothing to our present purpose who treate of obduration as it consists in or is joyned with the denyall of saving Grace in proper opposition to the shewing of mercy or affording saving grace As touching the other examples wherein the administration of Gods providence is more obscure while hee punisheth sin with sin I say also that Gods punishing consists in denying or not maintaining some kinde of grace or rather not so much to bee called grace as a naturall restraint not from sin in generall for that cannot bee but by saving grace but from some sins in speciall which are foule in the judgement of a naturall mans conscience such as are those unnaturall defilements the Apostle speaks of Rom. 1. Now God in a naturall manner restraines men from such excesse either for feare of shame of the world or by reason of some naturall detriment that may arise thereby or by the ministery of his Angels restraining the temptations of Satan in this kinde And it is found by experience that Nemo repente fit turpissimus but they grow to extreams by degrees and the longer a man lives the worse hee grows if grace correct not the course of corrupt nature according to that saying Nemo senex metuit Jovem Now if God shall forbeare this restraint and give them over to the power of Satan they shall bee exposed to the commission of such abominable things and therein they shall receive in themselves a just recompence of their former errors And therewithall wee see how this case is as extravagant from our present purpose in discoursing of obduration as the former And you confesse that the hardning of Pharaoh is referred by the Apostle to the will of God but withall you adde that it is referred thereto by him as to the first cause thereof whereas no such distinction or limitation sutable is expressed or implyed by the Apostle but onely for the advantage of your own opinion you are pleased thus to shape it And it is very strange that the Apostle should utterly omit such a cause as is of a most satisfying nature and give himselfe to the pleading of that which affords so little satisfaction in the judgement of flesh and blood such as it seems they relish most of with whom the Apostle enters upon this his Dialogue neither doth the Apostle referre this to Jacob and Esau onely as you fashion it to hold up the difference you put between Gods hatred of Esau before hee was born and his hatred of Pharaoh but to the obduration of Pharaoh also nay more properly to that his obduration alone being expressed and the Apostle being upon an answer to an objection arising from the Apostles Doctrine concerning Gods soveraignty and liberty to harden whom hee will Besides this you doe not well to qualifie the difference God puts between Jacob and
Esau as if it consisted onely in making Esau Jacobs servant and Jacob Esaus Lord according to your opinion it extends further then this even to the granting of such grace to Jacob as should bee accompanied with salvation and denying of the same to Esau whereupon infallibly followed condemnation It is true God is just in dealing with Esau and God is as just every whit in dealing with Jacob for hee deales with each according to the Law himself made But God shewed mercy also unto Jacob in providing a Saviour to die for him and in circumcising his heart and making him to perform the condition of life hee shewed no such mercy unto Esau You see well how incongruous it were to plead the sin of Esau why hee should bee so dealt withall seeing Jacob at that time deserved no better But why doe you not observe that this Discourse of the Apostle hath every way as pregnant a reference to the obduration of Pharaoh or of any one that is hardned as to Gods dealing with Esau Again suppose some are not so bad as Pharaoh was when God hardens Pharaoh and doth not harden others but rather shews them mercy will you say the reason hereof is because these deserved better at the hands of God then Pharaoh Doe you not perceive how this Doctrine carryeth you ere you are aware to trench upon the freenesse of Gods grace in mans effectuall vocation Suppose Nicodemus who sought to our Saviour by night were converted and Saul had not been at all converted but still hardned would you have said that Paul was hardned because of his sin in persecuting the Church of God but Nicodemus deserved better at the hands of God then Saul Yet wee are sure that Saul in spight of all his persecution was converted when in all probability many a morall Jew and nothing factious in opposing the Gospel of Christ yea and many a Gentile too were not converted but perished in their sins and in the blindnesse of their minde If it bee urged thereupon that God doth harden the creature and also hateth him with a positive hatred without all respect of sin in the creature out of his absolute will I answer in these deep counsels and unsearchable wayes of God it is safe for us to wade no farther then wee may see the light of the Scriptures clearing our paths and the grounds thereof paving our wayes and as it were chalking it out before us The Scripture telleth us That God hardens whom hee will And again sin is the cause in which and for which God doth harden any both which will stand together That as God sheweth mercy on whom hee pleaseth so hee hardneth whom hee pleaseth out of his absolute will Yet hardneth none but with respect of sin going before For First when wee speak of the reprobate with comparison of the elect they are both alike sinners And therefore if the question bee why God hardneth the reprobate and doth not harden but shew mercy on the Elect Here no cause can bee rendred of this different dealing but onely the will and good pleasure of God sin is alike common to both and cannot bee alledged as the cause of this diversity Idem qua idem semper facit idem But when wee speak of the Reprobates alone considered in themselves If the question bee why God is pleased to harden them The answer is alway truely and safely given It pleased God to harden them for their sins And which is yet more when God is said to harden a wicked man for his sin it is not sin that moved God primarily to harden him but his absolute will it was to harden him for his sin for what sin could God see in the creature to provoke him to harden it but what hee might have prevented by his providence or healed by the blood of Christ if it had so seemed good to his good pleasure When therefore God doth harden a creature for his sin it is because it is his good pleasure even his absolute will so to harden him To will a thing absolutely and yet to will it on this or that condition may well stand together in many a voluntary agent when the condition is such as that the will might easily help if it so pleased As if a man should cast off a servant for some disease hee hath which hee might easily heale if it pleased him or break his vessell for some such uncleannesse which hee could easily rinse out Both these may well bee said of him at once that hee cast off his servant for his disease and brake his vessell for its uncleanenesse and yet might hee cast out his servant and break his vessell and both out of his good pleasure and out of his absolute and his free will It is true the Word of God is a Lantborn unto our feete and a Light to our paths and it is fit wee should rest contented herewith for discovering unto us the whole counsell of God Now this Word of God plainly teacheth us that God bardneth whom hee will Now I presume you doe not doubt but that God out of his absolute will shews mercy on whom hee will Nay I can hardly beleeve but that your opinion is that like as God out of his absolute will granted saving grace to Jacob so out of his absolute will he denyed saving grace to Esau And still doth to those whom you account the world of mankinde And I have already shewed that the deniall of this grace can bee no punishment For as much as punishment consisteth either in inflicting evill or in denying some good which formerly was granted them But in denying saving grace to the world of mankinde hee doth not deny them any thing which they formerly injoyed I have already shewed what that hardning is which is for sin and wherein it doth consist not in denying saving grace which they never injoyed but in denying that naturall restraint from some foule sin which formerly they injoyed as I exemplifyed it in that Rom. 1. 27. That in Rom. 11. 7 8 9 10 11. is nothing for you where there is no mention of sin as the cause of their obduration As for that in Psalm 69. 21. Their blinding is referred to their giving unto Christ Gall in his meate and in his thirst vinegar to drink I pray consider Were they not even then blinded when they persecuted Christ unto death And yet notwithstanding some of these were converted Act. 2. But upon this their opposition unto Christ God did proceed to blinde them more and more but how Not by denying saving illumination for this they never injoyed it was denyed them from the first to the last But by withdrawing from them the meanes of illumination more and more as namely the preaching of Gospel and the working of miracles and the giving them over unto the power of Satan This also is to give them over to their own hearts lust Psal 81. 11 12. by ceasing to
admonish them of the error of their waies either by his word or by his judgements and chastisements in his works That God doth harden out of his absolute will and yet hardens none but for sin cannot bee avouched in my judgment without manifest contradiction If they are not contradictions Then those also are not God hath mercy on whom hee will yet God hath mercy on none but in respect of their good works going before Secondly by the same reason it may bee said that God condemnes men out of his absolute will and yet hee condemnes none but for sin yet you shall never read that God condemnes whom hee will Thirdly if God doth harden out of his absolute will then also hee did purpose to harden of his absolute will Whence I infer that then God did not purpose to harden for sin For Gods purpose to harden only in respect of sin is commonly accounted and that by your self a will conditionate and a will conditionate is opposite to a will absolute Lastly I deny that God doth harden for their sins as hardning denoteth a denyall of saving grace For to harden for sin is to punish but to deny saving grace to them that never had saving grace is not to punish them to leave a man in the state wherein hee findes him is not to punish him And therefore when Epaminondas ran his Javelin through a Sentinell whom hee found in sleepe saying I did but leave him as I found him because sleep is usually said to bee Mortis Imago the Image of death had hee no better Apologie for his fact then this hee had no way freed himself from injustice If God may harden man for sin and yet sin shall not bee a primary cause moving God to harden him by the same reason though God condemnes man for sin it is not necessary that sin should bee a primary cause moving God to condemn him which is directly contrary to your tenet in the point of reprobation And this consideration of your own if you hold your self unto it attentively may bring you into the right way from which you have erred and the want of it hath been a means I fear to confirm many in their errors Wee acknowledge it to bee Gods absolute will to condemn for sin but withall wee say it is his absolute will to permit whom hee will to sin and continue in sin by denying saving grace to raise them out of sin And this deniall of grace cannot bee for sin as I have already proved To harden a man in opposition to Gods shewing mercy on him wee take to bee nothing else then his refusall to cure him Now let any man judge whether it bee a decent speech to say that because a man is sick therefore God will not cure him In the cases proposed by you of casting a servant off for a disease which hee can cure if hee list or breaking a vessell for some filthinesse which one may cleanse if hee will whether this bee not to bee resolved into the absolute will of the Master I am content to appeale to every sober mans judgement although the comparisons are not congruous to the case wee have in hand for as much as the casting of a servant off is distinct from the not curing of him the breaking of a vessell is distinct from the cleansing of it But the hardning of a man in opposition to Gods shewing mercy on him is nothing distinct from Gods refusing to cure him If the question were proposed thus Why will not a man cleanse his vessell when hee is able to cleanse it why will hee not heale his servant when hee hath power to heale him Is it a good reason to say therefore hee heales him not because hee is sick therefore hee cleanseth not his vessell because it is unclean Neither is it a more sober speech to say therefore God hardens a man because hee is a sinner For it is as much as to say therefore hee refuseth to cleanse him from his sin because hee findes him unclean by reason of his sin Answ The want of considering this point hath as I conceive it intangled the Doctrine of predestination with needlesse difficulties and exposed it to rash and hard censures in the mindes of gain-sayers Then it may bee said there was no cause of that objection Why complaineth hee and who can resist his will or at least of that answer to why doth hee yet complaine Rom. 9. 20 21 22. I answer that objection propounded by the Apostle Why doth hee yet complain for who hath resisted his will doth not arise upon occasion of Gods preferring Jacob before Esau but upon the latter part of the Corollary going immediately before v. 18. Whom hee will hee hardneth for if it bee God that hardneth the creature and that according to his absolute will then might the hardned creature say what fault is there in mee to bee so hardned Why doth God complain of mee for my hardnesse and impenitency Who hath resisted his will To make this objection colourable wee need not say as you seem to imply that the Apostle gave occasion of it by ascribing the hardning of Pharaoh and other reprobates to Gods absolute will and without all respect to sin yet the creature hardned is wont to plead with God about it Esa 63. 17. you shall there see Gods own people to erre and upon their error to have their hearts hardned from Gods feare and both done by God and yet the people expostulate with God about it which if Gods own people may doe reverently is it any wonder if the reprobates doe the same upon the same occasion petulantly and profanely But the answer of the Apostle to the objection propounded cleareth the whole matter For as a man would justifie the severe proceedings of a Master of a Colledge in refusing to elect an unworthy person and in stead thereof expelling him the Colledge by pleading first the liberty or authority of his negative voyce Secondly the desert of the person refused and expelled So the Apostle beateth down the insolency of the objection and pleadeth the justice of Gods proceedings against Reprobates hated and hardned from first the Soveraignty of God over his creature ver 20 21. secondly the due deserts of persons being vessels of wrath and fitted for destruction ver 22. What these needlesse difficulties are wherewith the Doctrine of predestination is intangled by the Doctrine of them whom you impugne you doe not expresse nor the hard and harsh censures which are passed upon it that by due comparing of the one to the other wee might examine how justly such censures are pronounced But of what nature your opinion is how inconsistent in it self on how little reason it is grounded what consequences it draws after it as also what causelesse fears you raise unto yourself and above all and which is worst of all how you deal with Scripture in this argument to serve your turn I leave it to your
communicating life and glory unto him Which to my judgement doth manifestly intimate that you acknowledge in God a purpose to communicate life and glory to Esau some way or other And if you did acknowledge a purpose in God not to communicate life and glory at all unto him this Aquinas confesseth and wee joyntly with Aquinas confesse that it is nothing lesse then to hate him For if God will have a man to bee and will not have him to bee saved surely hee will have him in the end to bee damned For in the end there will bee found no middle state equally remote from salvation and damnation But you doe in plain termes acknowledge a purpose in God to deale in justice with Esau and to give him life or death according to his works I presume you will not avouch this of all them that you account the world of mankinde For I doubt not but you will except Infants As for men of ripe years is it not as true of the elect as of those you call the men of the world that they shall bee dealt withall according to their workes I doe not say according to their deserts but according to their works keeping my self to your own phrase Hath not the Apostle professed 2 Cor. 5. 10. That wee must all appeare before the judgement seate of Christ that every man may receive the things which are done in his body according to that hee hath done whether it be good or evill But these works I confesse are different for either they consist in obedience or disobedience either to the Covenant of the Law or to the Covenant of Grace either to the Law of works or to a Law of Faith Now as for those whom you call the world of mankinde and concerning whom you professe God hath a purpose to judge them according to their works I demand whether your meaning is God wil judge them according to their works in reference to the Covenant of the Law or in reference to the Covenant of Grace If in reference to the Covenant of the Law then the meaning must bee this God hath a purpose to save them in case they perform exact obedience to his Law But in case they continue not in every thing that is writen in the book of the Law to doe it Gods purpose is to condemn them to everlasting death Now I appeale to every sober Christians judgement whether if God hath no purpose to save them but upon condition of such obedience and withall hath a purpose to damne them upon condition of such disobedience whether all things considered it may not bee more truely avouched that God hath a purpose to damne them but no purpose at all to save them If it bee spoken in reference to the Covenant of Grace I dispute against it first in the same manner The conditions of the Covenant of Grace on mans part being Faith and Repentance if God will not save them but upon condition of faith and repentance and will damne them in case of infidelity and impenitency then surely if it shall bee found that the men of this world are far more prone to infidelity and impenitency then unto faith and repentance it followeth that God purposeth rather to damne them then to save them But in case they are naturally carryed to infidelity and impenitency and have no power to beleeve in Christ and to break off their sinnes by true repentance then it followeth as well in respect of this Covenant of grace according whereunto God will deale with them as in respect of the former Covenant of the Law that God hath no purpose to save them but hath a purpose to damne them unto everlasting fire But so it is of all those whom you call the world of mankind namely that they have no power to believe in Christ or to break off their sinnes by repentance but are naturally carryed on unto infidelity and impenitency as I prove thus They that cannot discern the things of God but account them foolishnesse they cannot beleeve in Christ But such are all they whom you call the world of mankind for they are not regenerate and consequently they are meere naturals Now the naturall man as the Apostle speakes perceives not the things of God for they are foolishnesse unto him Again all such persons are still in the flesh Now the affection of the flesh is enmity against God is not subject to the Law of God neither indeed can bee Secondly I prove that God cannot deale with them whom you call the world of mankinde according to the Covenant of Grace For if hee should hee should save them all as I prove thus If whatsoever God requires by this covenant on mans part God undertakes to perform on his part then it is impossible but that all must bee saved with whom hee meanes to deale according to this covenant But whatsoever by this covenant God requires on mans part God himself undertakes to perform on his part as I prove thus First in generall God undertakes in this covenant to bee our Lord and our God to sanctifie us Therefore hee undertakes to give us faith and repentance Secondly in speciall and first doth God require at our hands that wee should love him with all our hearts and with all our soules God undertakes to perform this I will circumcise thine heart and the heart of thy children that thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart and with all thy soule Doth God require at our hands that wee feare him And God also undertakes on his part to work us unto this Jer. 32. 40. And I will put my feare into their hearts that they shall never depart away from mee Doth God require Faith this also on his part hee performes Act. 2. ult God added to the Church dayly such as should bee saved And Philip. 1. 29. To you it is given to beleeve in him and to suffer for him Doth God require Repentance Even to this end God sent his Sonne to give repentance unto Israel and forgivenesse of sins In a word it is God that makes us perfect unto every good work to do his will working in us that which is pleasing in his sight through Jesus Christ Heb. 13. 21. Answ But in the second place it may bee argued that Gods raising up of Pharaoh to this intent to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow argueth the like hatred of Esau as of Pharaoh viz. a purpose of passing both by without communicating grace or glory unto them To which I answer a difference there is between Esau and Pharaoh though not in their finall condition nor in 〈◊〉 purpose concerning them Yet in the degree of their present estate whereunto they were severally come when God gave out his severall Oracles concerning them both for hee saith not of Pharaoh God raised him up to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow before hee had done good or evill as hee said of