issues doe justly befall them because they abhorre to professe that God causeth us to walke in his statutes and to keepe his judgements and doe them The course that Junius took to quiet her conscience who thought she was damned for neglecting to goe to Masse by proving unto her that the Masse was a meere wil-worship was faire and reasonable but the course this Author takes to comfort an afflicted soule I have shewed to be most unreasonable Absolute reprobate hath a different sense according as it is differently applyed If applyed unto damnation or the denyall of glory we utterly deny that either the one is inflicted or glory is denyed absolutely but meerely upon supposition of sinne But applyed to grace we willingly confesse that God doth absolutely give the grace of regeneration the grace of faith and repentance to whom he will according to that of Saint Paul He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9. 18. compared with Rom. 11. 30. Where to shew mercy is apparently to bring men unto faith neither can it have any other sense Rom. 9. 18. being set in opposition to hardening and in reference to the objection rising therehence in the words following Thou wilt say then why doth he yet complaine for who hath resisted his will v. 19. And while this Author denies that faith and repentance are given according to the good pleasure of Gods will which is to give them absolutely he must be driven to confesse that they are given conditionally and if a man will take any comfort therehence he must be acquainted with the condition which yet this Author undertaking the office of consolation upon this ground doth from the first to the last conceale as if he feared to discover the shamefull nakednesse of his cause which I have adventured to display and whereof I desire the indifferent reader would judge So that indeed this discourse is a new snare rather to entangle a poore soule in sadnesse and heavinesse inextricable fowler-like then any true office of consolation where she may escape as a bird out of the first snare of the Fowler by breaking it and delivering her Indeed these grounds of hope and comfort a Minister cannot make use of that holds absolute Reprobation What sober man would expect he should but such a one is never a whit the worse comforter for that For as for these grounds I have already discovered them to be voyd of all truth of all sobriety For if men be not absolutely Reprobated from the grace of faith and of repentance but conditionally For as for the denying of glory or inflicting damnation we utterly deny that God hath decreed that they shall have their course absolutely according to the meere pleasure of his will having made a Law according whereunto he purposeth to proceed therein it became this Author performing the part of a Comforter on this ground to make knowne the condition which he utterly declineth And with all I have shewed the reasons of his carriage thus in Hugger Mugger to wit that their shamefull Tenets might not breake forth and be brought to light We abhorre to say that God gives the grace of faith and repentance according to mens workes Wee abhorre to say that God workes in men the act of believing and repenting provided they will believe and repent or that he workes in them the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 velle of every good worke modovelint But our comsolations proceed as I have shewed in this manner If any man man doth believe and repent we can assure such a one by our doctrine that he is an elect of God this Arminians by their doctrine cannot as who maintaine that a true believer may fall a way from grace and be damned which is to hold the soules of the best children of God upon the rack of feares and terrours and tortures continually and make them walke as it were upon pinacles of the Temple for they have no assurance of stedfastnesse but in their owne wills to keepe them from dropping into Hell fire which burneth under them If men doe not believe and repent we will enquire into the cause of their feares grounds of their apprehentions that they are Reprobates and shew that they have no just cause for such apprehensions whether it be the conscience of their sinne or want of faith that doth affright them For as much as the holiest meÌ„ living before their calling had as great cause to be affrighted as they yet had they thereupon conceived themselves to be Reprobates this had been but an erronious conceit If perhaps it be not the conscience of sinne in generall that affrights them but rather the conscience of some sinne in speciall which they conceive to be a sinne unto death or a sinne against the Holy Ghost which they conceive to be unpardonable we will conferre with them thereabouts and try whether they understand aright the nature of that sinne and endeavour to scatter those mists of illusions in this particular which Satan hath raised desiring to swallow them up in desperation if it doe not prove to be a sinne against the Holy Ghost we will set them in a course to get the spirit of faith and of repentance For albeit God alone can give them yet seeing his Word is a Word of power even a voyce that pearceth the graves we willperswade them to give themselves to be wrought upon by Gods Word and we will pray for them who yet want spirit to pray for themselves And albeit they cannot prepare themselves in a gratious manner to the hearing of Gods Word yet let them come and when they are come let his Word worke yet if forthwith we have not that comfortable experience of Gods goodnesse towards us let us not give over to wait at the lords gates and to give attendance at the posts of his doore Give him leave to be the Master of his own times let us not prescribe unto him We know his course is to call some at one houre of the day some at an other and at the very last hour he calleth some This is the way of consolation that we take We doe not take any such course as this Author at his pleasure obtrudes upon us that God would have all to be saved and that Christ died for all I have allready set forth this Authors collusions in his triple universality of Gods love Christs death and and of the Covenant of grace We rather will exhort him to believe and herein we will take such course as God in his Word hath directed us unto and we will pray unto God that his Word may be as the raine that cometh downe and the snow from Heaven returneth not thither but watereth the earth and maketh it bring forth buâ—d hat it may give seed to the sower and bread to him that eateth So his Word may be that goeth out of his mouth it may not returne unto him voyd but accomplish that
from eternity of his meer will and pleasure without any consideration of actuall continuance in sinne and unbeliefe utterly to cast off from grace and glory Millions of men considered in the fall even those whom he calls to repentance and solvation by the Preaching of the Gospell for the manifestation of his severity and Justice That all mankind is involved in the first sinne and the fruits thereof which are corruption of nature and the guilt of eternall death I confidently believe But that God did absolutely intend to leave men in that woefull state for ever and upon this only sinne to build a peremptory decree of the unavoidable damnation of the farre greater part of mankind I cannot yet be perswaded Having thus plainly laid down the position which I deem to be false I come now in the next place to deliver my reasons against it which are of two sorts 1. Such as first made me to question the truth of it 2. Such as doe for the present convince me that it cannot be a truth TWISSE Consideration HEre breaks out the main reason that moved this Author to represent the different opinions of our Divines about the object of Predestination that so a way might be opened unto him at pleasure to charge the former opinion with what he thought good and as for the proofe of his criminations he might the better ease himselfe of the burthen thereof by shewing the dissent of other Devines of the same profession from the former in this particular making choyce rather to shape the object of Predestination and reprobation under the notion of mankind lying in the masse corrupt by the fall of Adam For surely it is to be presupposed that they did not dissent from their former friends without some reason and this Author makes bold to insinuate that these absurdities mentioned by him were the reasons As when he saith These absurdities following too evidently from the upper way Others of the same side willing to decline them as rocks and precipices doe leave that way But that these were the motives whereby they were induced to decline the former opinion and to embrace the latter he proves not nor so much as adventureth upon the proofe thereof but leaves unto his credulous reader to supply that by his forwardnesse to take it upon trust as if this discourser by his morall carriage might winne the opinion of so much worthinesse as to be a man with whom you may well play at Put-finger in the darke quicum in tenebris mices And yet Arminius might have taught him that there is a middle opinion between these namely of those who make the object of predestination the masse of mankind created but not yet corrupted And he puts this opinion upon Junius and appeals to his Theses as giving evident testimony thereunto Now there is no shew or colour of reason why to avoyd the absurdities premised by this Author any man should decline the first way and embrace the second which is the way of Junius And this I conceive to be the main reason why this second way is altogether dissembled by this Author or by the spirit that guided him For albeit it was for this advantage who hankes after every sorry consideration to serve his turne in the way of motive learning to represent the multiplicity of opinions hereabouts amongst our Divines yet it being a matter of greater moment to gain the justification of his absurdities charged upon the first way from the mouthes or practice of our Divines at least in appearance and some colour hereof he findes by declining the first way and falling upon the third but no colour at all by declining the first way and falling upon the second Therefore he thought it a part of his wisdome altogether to dissemble the second and to represent the opinion of those Divines who decline the first yea and second too and fall upon the third But suppose Iunius had preferred the third way and not the second Had he done it out of a desire to decline the absurdities here mentioned It is apparent by that his conference with Arminius which yet he set not forth but the Arminian party after his death that he maintaines all these considerations to have their place in Predestination and therefore makes Hominem communiter consideratum the object of predestination which as it is a notion abstract from all the three speciall notions of nondum conditum or conditum but nondum corruptum or denique corruptum so it is indifferently applyable unto them all And indeed Piscator resolves the question about the object of Predestination namely that as Predestination includes the decree of creating men unto different ends so the object must necessarily be mankind not yet created as it includes the decree of permitting all to fall in Adam so the object as he thinkes must be mankind created but not yet corrupted and lastly as it includes the decree of chusing some out of that corrupt masse and refusing others or leaving them in it so the object of his judgement must be mankind both created and corrupted And Arminius himselfe professeth that the twenty reasons wherewith he disputeth against the first way may also be accommodated against the other waies And albeit the followers of the second and third way doe think that they can better maintain their Tenent and free it from the absurdities wherewith the other waies are charged yet it followeth not herehence that therefore they did justify them the contrary whereunto appears in the particular of Iunius as before I mentioned Moulin indeed disputes against the first but doth he to decline that subsist in the third as touching the making of the corrupt Masse the object of reprobation it is apparent he doth not But as reprobation denotes Gods decree of damnation he premiseth thereunto the foresight of finall impenitency Of this opinion of his this Author takes no notice Yet is Moulin sound throughout in the doctrine of election wherein if this Author did concurre with him we should nothing trouble our selves to take him off from his concurrence with Moulin in that particular of reprobation And wee of the first way are willing to professe that God neither damnes nor decrees to damne any man but for sinne and finall perseverance therein nor so only but in plain termes to pronounce that in no moment of nature doth Gods intention of damnation precede the consideration of sinne and final impenitency though we doe not make the consideration of sinne to precede the intention of damnation as Moulin doth And to my understanding other reasons there are which cast Divines upon the third way then the declining of these absurdities mentioned by this Author as namely that the very notions of election and reprobation the one being conceived to be an act of mercy the other an act of justice doe presuppose sinne And whereas Arminius in his conference with Iunius produceth five reasons against the first way no lesse then foure
thing came to passe invito Deo Though I willingly confesse that such a generation hath risen up in these daies affirming that God willeth and desireth the salvation of all men and yet the greater part of men are damned And what is to come to passe invito Deo if this be not I willingly professe I know not But Melancthon he saith doth not spare to call this absolute decree Fatum Stoicum Tabulas Parcarum and to charge the Church of Ceneva with labouring to bring in the Stoicks errours as appears by Melancthons Epistle to Peucer and Beza's confession in the life of Calvin To all which I answer 1. That this Author either was better read in Melancthon then in Luther or no so just matter could he find in Luther to cry down the absolute nature of Gods decrees 2. Beza reports what Melancthon seems to some and that Epistle of his to Peucer might be their ground Now therein he delivers his mind meerly upon Laelius his relation which was this De Stoico Fato usque adeò litem Genevae moveri ut Quidam in carcerem conjectus sit propterea quod a â—â—one differret This I say is Laelius his relation made unto Melancthon whereupon Melancthon saith no more then this O Mijera tempora doctrina salutis peregrinis quibusdam disputationibus obscuratur 3. Melancthon died foure years before Calvin the one Anno 1560. the other 1564. And therefore if he did passe any censure on the Church of Geneva it was in Calvins daies many years before his death Now Calvin and he were very great Melancthon so well known and esteemed by Calvin that more then once he appeals to Melancthons judgement Once in the point De Caenâ Domini mentioned by Osiander Hist Eccles Cent. 16. Anno 1558. pag. 666. which was but two years before his death Likewise in the poynt of Free-will and Predestination as appears by Calvins Epistle unto him prefixed to his Books de Libero Arbitrio which he sent unto Melancthon Was it ever known that Melancthon passeth any censure upon them 4. When Grotius in like manner objected Melancthon see I pray how Lubbertus answereth him In Respon ad Pietatem Grotii Quod ad Melancthonem attinet erras si ipsam stare pro Remonstrantibus existimas c. Idem Melancthon in 9. ad Romanos Cur inquit nos ad Evangelium vocavit non vocavit Alexandrum Macedonem Augustum Socratem Pomponium Atticum qui non minus civilitèr vivebant quà m nos Hic necesse est causam rejicere in voluntatem Dei Et Jacob electus est Esau reprobatus priusquam quicquam boni vel mali fecissent Ergo opera non erant causa sed voluntas vocantis Non addam hic quomodo cavillentur ista nonnulli Tantum hoc meminerit Lector si opera secutura in vita erunt causa electionis non licuit Apostolo dicere Non ex operibus Ex his constat sa it Lubbertus Melancthonem idem cum Calvino Luthero de praedestinatione sensisle Fatetur hoc ipse Melancthon ad Calvinum suo inquiens haec cum tuis congruere sed mea sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad usum accommodata Idem in Epistolâ ad Erasmum Ego integrâ conscientiâ non possum Lutheri dogmata damnare He proceeds farther to shew the different Method used by them in delivering the doctrine of Praedestination Calvinus saith he à Priori docet illos qui electi sunt immutabili Dei consilio electos esse atque inde infert illos perire non posse Melancthon verò a Posteriori docet nos ex verâ fide seriâ resipiscentiâ discere quòd sumus electi Ego credo in Jesum Christum seriò resipisco ergo sum electus atque ita in ipsâ re consentiunt Hanc enim Melancthonis argumentationem approbat Calvinus illam Calvini approbat Melancthon tantum abest ut alter alterius doctrinam rejiciat aut contemnat 5. When I observed this relation made out of an Epistle of Melancthons unto Calvin I could not rest satisfied untill I had seen the Epistle it selfe at length I found it amongst Calvins Epist 49. Therein coming to the poynt Ad Quaestionem saith he de praedestinatione habebam amicum Tubingae doctum hominem Franciscum Stadianum qui dicere solebat se utrumque probare Evenire omnia ut divina providentia decrevit tamen esse contingentia sed se haec conciliare non posse Here we have gotten one friend more then we looked for and that a friend of Melancthons also And to what end doth he make mention hereof but to give Calvin to understand that with him at Tubing there wanted not such as concurred with him in opinion and that as touching the eveniency of all things by the decree of Gods providence which yet might well consist with Contingency though we are not able to reconcile these such is the mysterious nature of Gods providence And herein Stadianus agrees with Cajetan and Alvarez For Cajetan having professed that the distinctions devised by the Learned for the reconciling of Gods predestination with the liberty of mans will did not quietare intellectum thereupon he saith Ego captivo meum in obsequium fidei In quo saith Alvarez doctissimè piâ—ssimè loquitur Melancthon goes on to represent his carriage in Teaching Ego saith he cùm Hypothesin hanc teneam Deum non esse causam peccati nec velle peccatum posteà contingentiam in hâc nostrâ infirmitate judicii admitto ut sciant rudes Davidem suâ voluntate ultrò ruere eundem sentio cum haberet spiritum sanctum potuisse cum retinere in eâ lucta aliquam esse voluntatis actionem All these things he grants afterwards to agree with the Doctrine of Calvin But may not a man proceed farther and to dispute hereof something more accurately then this He denyes it not Haec etiamsi subtilius disputari possunt tamen ad regendas mentes hoc modo proposita accommodata videntur In the same manner he goes on Accusemus ipsi nostram voluntatem cùm labimur non quaeramus in Dei consilio causam contra eum nos erigamus sciamus Deum velle opitulari adesse luctantibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inquit Basilius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yet I presume no Arminian will conceive that Melancthon did not acknowledge this very act of willing to be the work of God considering the Apostle so expressely professeth that God worketh in us both the Will and the deed according to his good pleasure and Leo Serm. 8. de Epiphan Dubium non est hominem bona agentem ex Deo habere effectum operis initium volumatis Fulgentius Epist 4. Ab ipso Deo est initium bonae voluntatis And if Melancthon had any conceit opposite hereunto yet let the Opinion of the Affrican Bishops prevaile in authority above Melancthon who in their Synodicall Epistle write thus as it is
things and for thy will sake they have bee and are created And albeit men faile in giving God the glory of his power and wisdome as they should will it follow herehence that God is not so much to be glorified for his power and wisdome as for mercy justice and truth yet who falles in this that failes not in the use of the Lords Prayer the conclusion whereof is this For thine is the Kingdome and power and glory And indeed albeit Power and Wisdome may be shewed other waies then in the way of mercy justice and truth yet Gods mercy justice and truth cannot be shewed without the simultaneous demonstration of his power and wisdome And therefore when God comes to make good his gracious promise for the delivering of Israel out of Egypt which cannot be denied to have been a singular work of mercy justice and truth the Lord professeth that then he would make himselfe known unto them by the name Jehovah by which name he was not known before The Incarnation of the Sonne of God was it not an admirable work as well in the way of power and wisdome as in the way of mercy justice and truth I am apt to confound Gods justice with his truth ere I am aware without having that awfull regard to the authority of this writer as perhaps may seem fit But I hope it is a pardonable fault considering my education hitherto in divinity whereby I have attained only thus farre to the acknowledgement of justice Divine for justice consisteth in giving every one his due now this due being either in respect of God or the creature Justice Divine in giving God his due Aquinas hath taught me that it is all one with Gods wisdome promoting his ends by congruous means justice Divine in giving the creature his due I have learnt to depend wholy on Gods determination manifested by his promises and threatnings and this is commonly called justitia fidelitatis which I take to be all one with truth But I am very willing to be better informed by this Author and I give my selfe to his contemplations to have my thoughts fashioned by them as they can and if hitherto they have not transformed me into a new Creed I cannot help that Now if it be so that Gods power and wisdome accompany the demonstration of his mercy justice and truth I cannot see how God is honoured more by the exercise of the one sort then of the other but rather on the contrary So that albeit a King is more renowned among his Subjects for his clemency equity candid and faire dealing then for his dominion and authority yet I doe not easily perceive how God is renowned more for his clemency equity c. then for his power c. yet again this seems to me a very poore argument to conclude Clemency to be a chiefe attribute of God because men doe more magnify him for that then for his Power For consider a Malefactor going to execution is called back and saved by the Kings pardon this man be sure will magnify the King more for his clemency in saving him then he would for his justice in putting him to death but will it follow herehence that Clemency is a more chiefe attribute of a King then justice Solomon the greatest of Kings hath said the Throne is established by Justice and it was wont to be said fiat justitia ruat orbis No such thing is said of Mercy Then again the King could not doe this but by vertue of his prerogative yet the Malefactor magnifies him not for his prerogative but for the favourable use of it for his good for that is all he respects yet aske I pray any man of judgement which is the chiefer attribute of a King and more glorious of the two his prerogative or his clemency Clemency is a very vulgar vertue but the royall prerogative is peculiar to one A Thiefe after a robbery committed on the high-way meeting with a begger that beggeth a penny if he astonish him with the gift of twelve pence the begger is very likely more highly to magnify him then any honest man going on the way that bestowes but an halfe penny upon him yet Whose liberality is the greater of the two Carnall men renowne others for the benefit they receive by them not according to their true worth yet there is a farther difference humane authority may be abused and Soveraignty on earth is not alwaies joyned with good Morality much lesse with Piety but in case a man could not sinne the more honour and authority is laid upon him the more glorious should he be as being backt with the greater power to execute his goodnesse Thus it is with God it is impossible he should abuse his soveraignty yea his mercy and justice are one and the same reality with his power what a vanity then is it to discourse as this Author doth in preferring one attribute of God before another as if God were more glorious in the one then in the other But he hath farther reasons for this let us consider them 1. Power saith he is no vertue nor morally good but mercy justice and truth are I answer Though it be so yet who will say the glory of vertue is greater then the glory of power 2. Especially considering that vertue is common to the meanest 3. A little vertue joyned with power shall bring forth farre better fruits then a great deale of vertue without power 4. Though it be so in man whose power may be abused shall we transferre it to God whose power cannot be abused his power and his goodnesse being all one 5. Morall vertues denote a goodnesse removeable where it is obtainable where it is not but no such goodnesse can be found in God and consequently no Morall vertue in proper speech whatsoever is in him that being naturall and essentiall unto him 6. Lastly to power only and soveraignty we owe obedience and not to goodnesse and jurisdiction is farre more glorious then subjection Yet by the way it is untrue in my judgement that acts of Power are made good by being accompanied with justice speaking of Morall goodnesse as acts of vertue alone they are morally good not as acts of power If justum oportet esse quod laudem meretur then justice if not alone yet chiefly shall be that whereby one is renowned yet herehence it followes that every act of Gods power shall laudem mereri because it is impossible that any thing he doth should be otherwise then just such a justitia condecentiae followeth all his actions otherwise we must grant that God hath power to doe that which is unjust 2. And accordingly though power humane and Angelicall may be shewed in barbarous actions yet power Divine cannot let him doe whatsoever he is able it shall not be unjust let God turne all the World into nothing another manner of destruction then that of Sauls slaying the Lords Priests or Netuchadnezzars casting the three Children into
this he confidently believes Now I should think that there is no shew of cruelty in executing eternall death on them that are guilty of it For if God were cruell herein then also he were cruell in damning each one whom he doth damne both Men and Angells Now I pray let every sober reader judge which is the greater cruelty of the two to execute eternall death on him that is guilty of it or to make him by meere imputation guilty of eternall death who otherwise is not guilty of it Is not this latter farre greater cruelty then the former Or indeed the only cruelty there being no cruelty in the other at all like as Cicero said for a Mule to bring forth having conceived is no strange thing but for a Mule to conceive that indeed is prodigious Now this latter is this Authors doctrine expressely professing in the next page to that where now we are that the sinne of Adam the fruit whereof he makes to be the guilt of eternall death is the sinne of our nature by imputation only whence it followeth that God makes all men guilty of eternall death by imputation only Now judge I pray which of us makes God the Father of cruelties he or wee This is the fruit of opposition to Gods grace for how can they tast of that grace of God which they impugne and in impugning it how can it be but that they should be given over to the curse of Gods wrath to fill up the measure of their sinne as it is said of the Jewes to fulfill their sinne alway for the wrath of God is come upon them to the uttermost yea and to be stricken with the spirit of giddinesse also and become like a drunken man that erreth in his vomit the issue whereof is to defile himselfe and those that are nearest to him Yet he trembles to think of these blasphemies for in all this you must think his zeale is very warme and his piety reakes So Saul persecuted the Saints of God as blaspheamers but when God did strike him downe with a light from Heaven that he found that himselfe only was the blaspheamer 1 Tim. 1. Well I am contented to consider his reaking fit Doth his mercy please him when he hath made such a decree as shewes farre more severity towards men then mercy Why holy Sir Gods severity towards some who in Scripture are called vessells of wrath what doth it hinder Gods mercy towards his elect Gods severity towards the Jewes did it any whit qualify Gods bountifulnesse towards the Gentiles I marvaile not he holds up his discourse of Gods mercy in generall that so it might be appliable to all this was a pretty dogge-trick of his But if Gods mercy hath his course towards his children only as himselfe makes the accommodation if God be severe towards those who are none of his shall this any way prejudice his mercy towards them or if he take liberty to account all Gods creatures his children by reason of creation why doth he not extend the mercy of God to Devills also and for shame leave off his former distinction of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and confesse ingeniously that t is not worth a rush But whether he will acknowledge it or no the Apostle plainly speaks of vessells of mercy in distinction from vessels of wrath and surely the course of his wrath on them doth nothing impaire the free course of his mercy toward others But give we him leave to breath on Is he slow to anger when he hath taken such a small and speedy occasion to punish the greater part of men in Hell torments for ever and for one sinne once committed hath shut up the greater part of men under invincible unbeliefe and damnation Now I pray apply this his devout interrogation unto the Angells that fell who upon the first sinne committed by them have ever since been shut up under invincible hardnesse of heart and damnation Yet what doth this hinder his slownesse of anger which is to be understood of the execution of his wrath not of his decree For all the decrees of God are everlasting nor can be otherwise And as for the execution of wrath the Devills themselves feele it not yet they are reserved to the judgement of the great day they believe and tremble they cryed out to our Saviour art thou come to torment us before our time Nay suppose all were to be damned to eternall death as soon as they were borne what injustice were there in this if so be all be found guilty of eternall death which this Author denies not Nay farther he saith it is God that hath made them guilty of it by meere imputation yet as for the corruption of nature which he makes to be the other fruit of Adams sinne I doe not find that he ascribes that to divine imputation Now what is the nature of this corruption is it invincible unbeliefe or no if it be then he disputes against himselfe as well as against us if it be not what unbeliefe doth he call it or is it no unbeliefe at all So I demand whether it be invincible hardnesse of heart or no if not whether at all it is to be called hardnesse of heart if notwithstanding this corruption a man hath power to believe to obay power to yeeld to any spirituall good whereto he shall be excited why doth he call it naturall corruption The Apostle plainly professeth of them that are in the flesh that they cannot please God that the naturall man perceiveth not the things of God and that he cannot know them of some that they could not believe of others that they cannot repent But be all this granted he is never a whit the lesse slow to anger that is to punish the Devills themselves as yet doe rather feare then feele his wrath Lastly touching punishing in hell it is either spoken of Infants or Men of ripe years if of Infants departing in infancy if guilty of eternall death t is no injustice to inflict it and though he be slow to anger towards some yet it is not necessary he should be so to others The Scriptures witnesse the contrary in the flood where Infants perished as well as others and in the destruction of Sodome by fire where none were spared save Lot and his two Daughters As for men of ripe years their damnation is not for originall sinne only but for actuall sinnes unrepented of The Angells fell irrecoverably upon one actuall sinne I know not the like condition of any besides And as for the smallnesse of Adams sinne which this Author is pleased to extenuate by calling it a small occasion as if he were of his spirit that said If God turned Adam out of Paradise for eating an Apple shall not I turne thee out of my service for purloyning a fat Capon Why doth he not charge God rather for making all men hereupon guilty of eternall death by meere imputation as himselfe
if God should reveale to any that he is a reprobate he might be sure he should be damned and that as well according to their shaping of reprobation as according unto our But in three things he saith men are in a farre worse condition by it let us consider them 1. The first is In their appoyntment unto Hell not for their own proper personall sinnes but for the sinnes of another made theirs only by Gods order and pleasure Now I see why he pretends to oppose the Sublapsarian way keeping his liberty upon every occasion to ejaculate what his malice can suggest unto him against the Sublapsarian For only against the Sublapsarian way this objection hath place and that not justly but most unjustly most untruely For not one of them that I know doth maintain that God by reprobation intended to damne either Cain or Judas or Esau but for their actuall sinnes and transgressions unrepented of And as for those Heathen Infants who perish in originall sinne they perish for that corruption wherein they are borne which is as naturall unto them as the Leprosy of the Father or any hereditary disease is naturally derived to the Child by vertue whereof they are borne children of wrath as the Apostle expresseth and if to be borne children of wrath be to be in a worse condition then Devills seeing to be borne children of wrath is not our making if it be of Gods making and that according to Gods meer pleasure it must be acknowledged that this is a worse condition and neverthelesse God is to be justified herein and wisdome is justified of her Children and if Arminius will not concurre with us herein sure I am Papists will For thus Bellarmine discourseth De lib. arbit lib. 2. cap. ult Longe major justitiae rigor apparet in reprobatione hominum quam Angelorum tum quia maximam partem hominum minimam Angelorum reprobavit tum etiam quoniam Angelorum nullum De us paenae sempiternae addicit nisi propter culpam propriâ voluntate comissam hominum autem plurimos damnat propter solum Originale peccatum quod alienâ voluntate commissum fuisse non dubium est And yet though in this respect the rigor be greater nevertheles considering the punishments of Infants which Austin professeth to be mitissimam thus it is qualified that undoubtedly it is better for thē to be as they are then to be Devills Though as touching the kinds degrees of punishmēt that is of a mysterious nature the Scripture cōcealling it and we have no help of reason to succour us in the investigation thereof Farre better our care be to avoid it both as well by orthodoxy of Faith as by holinesse of life And him that looks for salvation by grace it behooves to look unto it how he shapes this grace of God least if he be found to mock God giving the main stock of his conversion to his own Free will rather then unto God he may be mocked in the end and meet with no better Salvation then the liberty of his will can procure him which will prove condemnation rather then salvation See I pray what giddinesse of spirit he betrayes in laying such a crimination to our charge whereunto himselfe is obnoxious in an equall degree or in a higher degree then wee For he hath confessed that God of his meer pleasure makes all Infants guilty of eternall death now where appears the greater rigour on our side who say God inflicts eternall death on none but such as are guilty of eternall death or rather on his side who saith that God of his meer pleasure makes men guilty of eternall death 2. The second is that their inevitable destination to destruction is under shew of the contrary the Devills as they are decreed to damnation so they know it but men even those that are appointed unto wrath are yet fed up with hopes of salvation Is it possible that a man in his right witts should so miserably forget and so shamefully carry himselfe Doth not he himselfe maintain that all reprobates are from everlasting appoynted to eternall death It may be his meaning is that no reprobate is appoynted to eternall death untill his death so making Gods decrees temporall and denying them to be eternall But if this be his opinion what Arminian or Remonstrant concurres with him in this But if reprobation and election be eternall how doe we feed reprobates up with the hope of salvation more then he himselfe Doth he think none but the elect are his heares for I doe not know whether he may run and whether his shallow witts may carry him whether to the dreaming of an universall election with Huberus And doth he not feed up all his hearers with hope of salvation as well as we And how doe wee feed them up with hopes of salvation Doe we feed our hearers with any other hopes of salvation then are builded upon faith and repentance and finall perseverance therein And doe we not strike them as well with the terrours of God and fears of damnation in case they doe not believe in Christ or not break off their sinnes by repentance And doth not he the like Or if he hath good grounds of hope that all and every one that hears him is or may be an elect of God why may not we or any other Minister have as good grounds as he for such an hope But what doth he mean so superficially to presume that we teach that men doe not perish defectu misericordiae divinae but defectu voluntatis propriae Why should he so confidently presume that we should teach such contradiction to the doctrine of Augustine who professeth expressely of many that they perish non tam quia ipsi servari nolint quam quia Deus non vult As is apparent of all Infants that perish in originall sinne out of the Church of God Nay why should he presume of all us to be stricken with the same spirit either of infatuation or obstinacy as to Preach a Doctrine so directly contrary to the holy doctrine of Saint Paul professing that God hath mercy on whom he will c. And to our Saviour whose profession is that therefore men heare not Gods word because they are not of God How otherwise could the damnation of the vessells of wrath tend to the augmentation of the riches of Gods glory towards the vessells of mercy namely when they shall consider that it was the meer grace of God to put so mercifull a difference between them and others regenerating them and bestowing faith and repentance on them the bestowing whereof he denyed to many thousand others yet withall it is true that men therefore doe not believe and repent because they will not but if you aske quare nolunt saith Austin imus in longum yet to this he accommodates his answer thus men will not many things either quia latet they know not the benefit of it or quia non delectat it is not
consolation which hath his course not only with the Devills but even with them that are already under the torments of Hell fire But let not the authority of the booke of Wisdome with thee weigh up and elevate the authority of Scriptures nor Philo the Jew be preferred before S t Paul or the Prophet Malachy by whom wee are taught that as God loved Jacob before he was borne so he hated Esau and before they were borne what difference was there betweene them Yet this passage out of the booke of Wisdome is in a Collect of the Papists Liturgy I conceive a good sence may be made thereof without any prejudice to absolute reprobation for of Papists we ate sayd to have learnt it and are reproached for it And what is that good sense they make of it Take it if thou wilt from Aquinas 1. q 23. art 3 ad 1. Dicendum quod Deus omnes homines diligit etiam omnes creaturas in quantum omnibus vult aliquod bonum non tamen quodcunque bonum vult omnibus In quantum igitur quibusdam non vult hoc bonum quod est vita aeterna dicitur eos habere odio vel reprobare Now if we take this Colect from them let us take also their good meaning with it and if we can let us make it better and not worse We commonly say that passions are attributed to God not quoad affectum but quoad effectum Now the effect of hatred is either the denyall of grace or the denyall of glory or the inflicting of damnation The two latter are executed only according to mens sinnes but the first to wit the denyall of grace proceeds meerely according to the good pleasure of Gods will like as the giving of grace as the Apostle not Philo signifies that God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Now to shew mercy is to bring a man to faith Rom. 11. 30. And if grace be not given according to the meere pleasure of Gods will it must be given according unto workes which is as much as to say in the phrase of the ancients according unto merits which all along hath been condemned in the Church of God as meere Pelagianisme Yet hitherto tends all the consolation that Arminianisme can reach forth unto thee which is to afford thee no better consolation then can be afforded to a Reprobate 2. As for Adams transgression let not that affright thee who art borne within the pale of the Church and of Christian parents for the children of such are holy 1 Cor. 7. when all others are uncleane Yet why should any man find it strange that some of them who are guilty of eternall death should suffer eternall death And this Author hath formerly confessed that Adams sinne hath made all his posterity guilty of eternall death Now albeit God hates many whether as involved in Adams transgression or no what matters that to thy discomfort if he hate not thee And what ground hast thou to conceive that thou art in the number of them whom he hates rather then of those whom he loves He is no good Physitian that lookes not into the cause of the desease to remoove that nor he any good comforter that lookes not into the cause of thy discomfort to remoove them It is to be thought that such an one desires rather to feed thy discomfort then to cure it Such is the practice of this comforter otherwise he should not apply his arguments of comfort which he magnifies as the strongest with as much art and cunning as can be But understand him aright this art and cunning tends not to the furtherance of thy consolation but to the advantage of his owne Arminian cause and to this end I confesse he doth apply them with as much art and cunning as he can 2. And God hath a two-fold love a generall love which puts forth it selfe in outward and temporall blessings only and with this he loves all men And a speciall by which he provides everlasting life for men and with this only he loves a very few which out of his alone will and pleasure he singled from the rest Under this generall love am I not the speciall CONSIDERATION 1. As touching the distinction hold thee to it least otherwise thou never proove capable of more comfort then a Reprobate is capable of No Arminian hath the face to deny that God saves but a very few And the reason is because very few doe believe and repent in this we all agree Againe no Arminian denies that very few doe believe and repent and finally persevere therein Againe no Arminian denies faith and repentance to be the gift of God and that hereby alone men are singled out from the rest Now the question is Whether God singleth out some men from the rest by giving them faith and repentance according to the meere pleasure of his will or according to their workes We say according to the meere pleasure of Gods will for he hath mercy on whom he will Rom 9. 18. Arminians say according to mens workes and hereupon in the issue comes all their consolations to be grounded that is upon a notorious Heresy condemned above 1200 yeare agoe 2. But as touching the accommodation of this distinction unto thy selfe saing thou art under Gods generall love not under his speciall I pray the tell me what ground thou hast for that what one of Gods elect while they were in the state of nature had not as greate cause to be as uncomfortable as thy selfe and why maist not thou be in Gods good time in as comfortable a condition as any of them and to say as John doth see what love the father hath shewed us that we should be called the sonnes of God dost thou mourne for thy sinne or no if thou dost not Why shouldest thou looke to be partaker of those comforts which are peculiar to them that mourne If thou dost thy Saviour hath said Blessed are they that mourne for they shall be comforted Dost thou hunger and thirst after the favour of God and to be made partaker of the righteousnesse of Christ which alone can give thee assurance of thine election If thou doest not hunger and thirst after this why shouldest thou be cast downe because thou hast not this assurance If thou doest desire this assurance and to that purpose hast an hungry appetite after the righteousnesse of Christ thy Saviour saith Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousnesse for they shall be filled Or hast thou a desire to have thy sinnes pardoned and thy soule saved but not any desire that thy soule may be sanctified what comfort shouldest thou or any such expect at the hands of God Thou wouldest serve the Devill but thou wouldest not goe to hell with the Devill But I tell thee God hath decreed the contrary namely that all such shall have this doome Goe ye cursed into everlasting fire prepared for the Devill and his Angells Yet
be many things disputed in this poynt more harshly yet when all is done the universall promise of grace and salvation is a Christians only Bulwarke in this temptation and combate Obtemperemus igitur saith he ne vagentur animi quaerentes electionem extra verbum relicto Christo omisso mandato de amplectenda promissione sed teneamus certa est indubitata fide promissionem gratiae non inanem esse fabulam sed Deum vere patefecisse voluntatem suam in promissione verè praestare quod promisit Let us not therefore leave Christ and looke for an election out of the word but let us judge of Gods will in saving men by the promise and commandement which are both universall And in another place of the same booke he hath these words Sicut est necesse scire Evangelium promissionem esse gratuitam ita est necesse scire Evangelium promissionem universalem esse hanc universalem tenere necesse est adversus periculosas imaginationes de praedestinatione ne disputemus hanc promissionem ad paucos quosdam alios pertinere non pertinere ad nos Non enim dubium est quin omnium animos haec cogitatio exerceat As it is needfull to know that the promise of salvation is free so it is needfull to know and hold that it is universall against some dangerous conceits of predestination c. By these speeches we see clearely what this learned man thought to be the true balme of Gilead whereby a wounded scule should be cured viz. the universality of the promise and of Gods love and Christs death too for they all hang together and cannot be disjoyned The reason why these grounds are able to help a man in this case is twofold 1. Because they are directly contradictory to the temptation a will to save all a giving of Christ to death for all and an offer of grace to all cannot possibly stand with an absolute antecedent will and intent of casting away the greatest part of mankind or indeed any one man in the world Upon this followes the second reason 2. Because they serve to convict the tempted that he cannot be in that condition in which he supposeth himselfe to be For if two contradictories cannot be true he that evinceth the truth of the one convinceth the understanding of the untruth of the other and he that makes it appeare that this contradictory God would have all to be saved redeemed and called to repent and believe is true puts it out of doubt to the understanding that the other contradictory God will have most men to be absolutely and inevitably damned must needs be false and so raiseth up that poore soule that was pressed downe with an erroneous conceit and feare that it was true In this manner did Junius though not in the same temptation relieve a Woman perplexed exceedingly with a strong perswasion that shee and all her Children should be damned because she was busied about her Children at a certain time when she should have been at Masse Junius maketh short work with her tells her that her employment about her Children was a duty pleasing unto God but the Masse was a meere Will-worship and so delivering her of her errour upon which the temptation was built gives her present ease and comfort In like manner tell a man that feares he is an absolute reprobate that there are no such absolute Reprobates and that his feare is but a meere fancy and his doubt a dreame convince him once by contradictory grounds that there is no man in the World in that state in which he thinkes himselfe to be and you drive out one naile by another and expell the temptation These are the Sword of Alexander which will cut asunder the Gordian knot of absolute Reprobation and these are the true Nepenthes of a sicke soule Now these true Grounds of hope and comfort a Minister cannot make use of that holds absolute Reprobation if he doe usurpe them he cannot maintaine them against the replyes of the tempted unlesse he relinquish his opinion because as I have said there is a plain contradiction between them and no man is able to maintaine two propositions which speake contrary things to be both true any more then he can make it good that the same thing may have a being and yet not have a being at the same time For example a Minister comes to comfort a man that thinkes himselfe to be an absolute Reprobate and how doth he set about it He tells him that God would have all to be saved that Christ dyed for all c. But what right hath he to these grounds of comfort holding the contrary conclusions viz. That God will have a great many to be damned and to have no part in Christ Well he usurpes them notwithstanding but is he able to maintaine them against the answer of the tempted can he make a good reply No for thus the tempted answers God would have all to be saved with a revealed will and Christ died for all sufficiently not intentionally Or if God did intend that he should dye for all yet he intended it upon a condition which he purposeth the most should never performe What can the Minister reply upon this If he will make a direct reply that shall take away the answer he must deny that God hath two wills contrary to each other a secret will that many shall be unavoydably damned and a revealed will that all may be possibly saved and he must also deny that God hath an intent that Christ should not dye for a great many or that he intended he should dye for all upon condition they should believe and repent and yet intend that the most should never believe and repent But can he deny these things He cannot except he deny his own conclusion and opinion which is that there are many thousands eternally and unavoydably rejected in Gods absolute purpose from grace and glory for ever For that conclusion is all one with the answer of the tempted and contradictory to those arguments of comfort which he is glad to make use of Absolute reprobation therefore bereaves that Minister who believes it of the solid grounds of consolation and so makes him unable to recover a poore soule wounded with this temptation TWISSE Consideration 1. HEre in this Section the question is Whether our Doctrine of absolute Reprobation bereaves a Minister of the solid grounds of comfort Still wee must remember how magnificently this Author goes on to confound things that differ For whereas we maintaine that God hath decreed to proceed absolutely with men only in the giving and denying of grace not absolutely in the giving of salvation or inflicting of damnation And this Author though he so carrieth the matter all along as if we maintained Gods proceeding to be absolute herein to wit in granting salvation to some and inflicting damnation upon others yet hath he no meanes to help himselfe herein and cast a shew of
most comfortable course and sets forth the danger of the other in farre more emphaticall manner then Melancthon doth and therewithall discovereth the true Balme of Gilead wherein it consists in the same manner that Melancthon doth and more fully but it served not this Authors turne to represent Calvin thus discoursing though he could not be ignorant there of if himselfe read the place which he alleadgeth out of Calvin and tooke it not upon trust at anothers hand By the way I observe he makes the universality of the promise mentioned by Melancthon all one with the universality of the Covenant of grace mentioned by him As if the Covenant of grace consisted only in this Whosoever believes shall be saved and accordingly you may guesse of his meaning as touching the universality of Christs death namely that the benefit thereof shall redound to all that believe as good as in plaine termes to professe that Christ dyed not to procure and merit faith for us which the Remonstrants doe now adaies openly professe but I doe not find that our Arminians hitherto dare to concurre with them therein And in like manner the universality of Gods love is to be understood namely of willing salvation to as many as believe not of willing grace unto them at least not of any meaning to bestow faith and repentance upon them Yet not any will yet shew themselves so ingenuous as to confesse in plain termes that God gives not faith and repentance to any man but leaves that to be wrought by the power of their wills pretending that God hath enabled all men with a power to believe And indeed if faith and repentance be a gift and speciall gift of God it is strange that God should bestow them upon us extra Christum not for Christ sake And whence it followeth that those gratious promises of circumcising our hearts of sanctifying us of writing his law in our mind and inward parts and his feare in our hearts never to depart from him of healing our wayes our backslidings our rebellions of taking away the stony heart out of our bowels and giving us a heart of flesh and causing us to walke in his statutes and keepe his judgements and doe them are nothing belonging to the Covenant of grace in this Authors judicious consideration And to conclude if all men be under the Covenant of grace what force or substance at all is there in that promise which God makes unto his people of Israell namely that he will cause them to passe under the rodde and bring them unto the bond of the Covenant As also in that Ezek. 16. 60. I will remember my Covenant made with thee in the dayes of thy youth and I will confirme unto thee an everlasting Covenant 61. Then shalt thou remember thy wayes and be ashamed when thou shalt receive thy sisters both thy elder and thy younger and I will give them unto thee for Daughters but not by thy Covenant 62. And I will establish my Covenant with thee and thou shalt know that I am the Lord. I come to the consideration of the reasons why these grounds are pretended to be able to healpe in such a case 1. Because they are directly contradictory to the temptation a will to save all a givinig of Christ to death for all and an offer of grace to all cannot possibly stand with an absolute anticedent will and intent of casting a way the greatest part of mankind or indeed any one man in the world To this I answer 1. Though they be contradictory to the temptation yet if they carry manifest evidence of notorious untruths in their foreheads delivered as they are without explication what true comfort shall an afflicted soule receive therehence when by embracing them he shall but hould a lye in his right hand For doe not these comforters themselves acknowledge that God hath from everlasting decreed the damnation of the greatest part of men Yet they would have a poore afflicted soule believe that notwithstanding this he wills the salvation of all even of them whom he hath appointed unto wrath it is the Apostles phrase 1 Thess 5. 9. To endeavour to perswade them of this what is it but to make a sickly creature to feed on fire or digest Iron as if that could ever turne into good nourishment In like sort to perswade him that Christ hath made satisfaction for all the sins of al mē merited salvatiō for all every one when notwithstanding Christs merits of their salvation the greatest part of the world shall not be saved And notwithstanding Christs satisfaction for their sinne they must be put to satisfy for them that by suffering the torments of hell fire that for ever 2. Let these points be explicated then no comfort at all will appeare therehence to an afflicted soule in some case As for example when they shall understand that Gods love tends only to the saving of them in case they believe repent mortify the deeds of the flesh persevere in such like gracious courses unto death alas what comfort is this to a sick soule when he feeles in himselfe no power to believe no power to repent no power to any spirituall good contrary wise prone to evill either not taking delight in Gods Word or nothing profiting by it Will it suffice to out face them herein tell thē they have power to believe if they will to repent if they will to mortify the deeds of the flesh if they will to crucify the affections lusts if they will yea to have victory over the world if they will and to quench all the fiery darts of the Devill if they will And withall that their wills are enlivened to will any of all these yea to will all these and any other spirituall good whereunto they shall be excited Whereas the Scripture teacheth us that men are dead in sinne before the time of their effectuall calling and that such was the condition of the Ephesians before the Gospell was Preached to them and they converted by it and that till they embrace the Gospell all men are led captive by the Divell to doe his will 3. What poore comfort is this to perswade a man that he is no absolute Reprobate when upon the same grounds namely that the number of Reprobates is farre greater even an hundred for one then the number of Gods elect he may still be perplexed with doubts and feares yea and with as strong an apprehension that he is a Reprobate And amongst all the examples that I have lighted upon of desperation upon this ground they have not proceeded according to this distinction of reprobats absolute or not absolute but simply upon an apprehension that they were Reprobates that not upon the consideration of the small number of Gods elect and the vast number of Reprobates but upon the conscience of some sinne or other which they conceived to be unpardonable a sinne unto death a sinne against
desire and utter they know not what such distraction of mind and and perturbation of judgment shall surprize them A false perswasion that mens soules shall die with their bodies and that they shall have no being after death urgeth every man indifferently to take his delights and pleasures while he may whether this delight and pleasure be taken in courses vicious or in courses vertuous because death sets an end as to them so to their pleasures and delights But if their greatest happinesse or misery doth begin in joy or sorrow after death and this is well known unto them sober reason doth suggest unto them to provide for the obtaining of that happinesse and declining that unhappinesse above all other according to that Ladies resolution in Sophocles and that upon this ground 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there I shall continue for ever But when he saith the wicked will the more eagerly pursue their carnall and sinfull delights because after all their pleasures they shall be in a better case then if they had no being I long to have the judgment of any lewd person throughout the world concerning this as namely whether he takes any comfort or encouragement to sinfull courses from this that albeit he shall be cast with the devill and his Angells into hell fire that never goeth out Yet this condition is a better condition then not to have any being at all whereas this better condition consists only in this that being is better then not being not in this that he hath any ease or is lesse obnoxious to torment and sorrow which shall be so unsufferable as to provoke him to wish that he never had any being at all Or that forthwith he might be turned into nothing Secondly I oppose common consent Where shall we pick out a man but will say if he speak from his heart that he were better to vanish into a thou and nothings then to be cast into hell What is the reason why men are so afraid of hell when they are touched to the quick with the conscience of their ungodly lives and the expectation of eternall vengeance that with Job they curse their birthday and wish an hundred times over that they had never been or might cease to be that so they might not come into that place of torments because they judge a being there to be incomparably worse then no being any where And why are men who are sensible of hell fire so strongly curbd and held in with feare of feeling it even from dailing and beloved sinnes but because they apprehend it to be the most terrible of all terribles feare of being annihilated can never doe that which feare of hell doth And is he well in his wits that talkes of a thousand nothings I looked whereto it would come with such like wild discourses even to runne out of common sense at last Yet all this that he discourseth of for the substance of it is no other then Austine hath taken notice of in his very argument and shewes the vanity of it and the errour of man's imagination conceiving the condition of being nothing to be a condition of ease and rest from sorrow pain againe aske the same men whether they would not be content to be turned into dogges wolves snakes toades rather then to be under the torments of hell fire aske againe whether they would not be contēt to be turned into devills so they might be free from the torments of hell fire Aske the Adulterour whether he would not be content to lye with an other mans wife all his daies rather then to suffer shall I say the torments of hell fire Nay rather then dye possest of the joyes of heaven Aske this Authour whether he would not be content to maintaine stiffly that grace is given according to workes and that a man is justified by his workes rather then suffer the paines of hell fire yea though it were against his own conscience As for me were I a damned creature yet according to this judgment which God hath given me cōsidering that the glory of God's justice is manifested in my condemnation though extreamity of pain would transport me into as wild wishes as this Authour justifies yet according to right reason I should rather be content to suffer then wish that I were turned into a bruit beast or into a devill or into nothing I think the whole nation of sober divines would justifie me in this undoubtedly God is able to worke me or any man to this resolution without sin 2. If because men through feare of hell and expectation of eternall vengeance doe with Job curse their birth day once and wish they had never been therefore it is better to be nothing then to be in hell By the same reason because they doe no other then Job did it must follow that it was better for Iob to be nothing then to be under such torments But if Iob's desire was an unsober and unreasonable desire in this why might not their desire be as unsober and unreasonable also proceeding not so much from calme reason as from the strength of passion inflamed and disordered through extremity of torment We know that men upon the rack doe sometimes make confessions even against the light of their own consciences And feare of evill sometimes distracts as much as the sense thereof as in him who hearing the sentence of death passed against him at Paris fell into a sweat of blood And it was wont to be said that pejor est malo timor ipse mali Francis Spira in the time of his distraction confest as much of hell it selfe And if one desire once having course prove unreasonable why should the renewing of it a thousand times over prove lesse unreasonable And let the judicious observe the hand of God in striking this Authour with such giddinesse even in this argument which he conceives of all other to be advantagious to his cause so as at every turne to supplant himselfe and to betray the shamefull nakednesse of his discourse As first in talking of a thousand nothings Secondly In putting the case of some cursing their birth day but how as Iob did Now will any sober man make the like collection of Iob's cursing his birth day as this Author doth from others cursing theirs Thirdly and lastly in calling hell fire the terrible of all terribles Who seeth not that this proceeds in reference to such things which as they are feared soe they may be felt and supposing a subject existing as to feare it before it comes so to feele it when it is come but such is not the condition of being nothing And when he feignes us to conforme to his crude conceptions namely to conceive annihilation to be a thinge feared he pleaseth himselfe in his owne fictions He no where finds me to speake of annihilation as a thing to be feared no more then I speake of it as of a thing that is to be felt Onely I say
that it is a condition no way desirable by a reasonable creature no more then the suffering of hell fire But whereas hell fire cannot be suffered of any unlesse he hath a being here is something found desirable to wit the continuance of being But in the condition of being nothing there is not found any thing to be a fit Object of mans desire The third thing which I oppose is common sense which judgeth paines when they are extreame to be worse then death Hence it is that Job being tormented in his body by the Devill cursed his birth day magnified the condition of the dead and wished himselfe in the grave plainely preferring the losse of his being before that miserable being which he then had And hence it is that men even of stoutest and hardest spirits as we see by dayly experience would if they might enjoy their option choose rather to have no bodyes at all then bodyes tormented with the stone or gout or any other sharpe and sensible disease It is a knowen saying grounded on this judgement of sense Praestat semel quà m semper mori better it is to dye once then to be allwayes dying This the tyrant Tiberius knew very well and therefore he would not suffer those towards whom he purposed to exercise his cruelty to be put to a speedy death but by lingring torments And Suetonius repoâ—tâ—th of him in that chapter wherein he reckoneth up his barbarous and cruell practises These sayth he who would have dyed through the extremity of their torment he used meanes to keepe alive nam mortem adeo leve supplicium putabat For he accounted death so light a punishment that when he heard that one Carnulius a man appoynted to torments had prevented him he cryed out Carnulius me evasit Carnulius hath escaped mine hands To a prisoner entreating him to put him quickly to death he gave him this answer Nondum tecum redii in gratiam I am not yet friends with thee accounting it a great kindnesse to put him quickly to death whom he might have tortured Many that were called into question did partly wound themselves in their owne houses Ad vexationem ignominiosam vitandam to prevent that paine and ignominy which they knew they should endure And partly poysoned themselves in the mid'st of the Court as they were going to their aâ—â—aingment for the same cause Seneca speaking of one Mecaenas who was so a frayd of being dead that he sayd he would not refuse weakenesse deformity nec acutam crucem no nor the sharpest crucifying so that he might live still in these extreamityes he calleth his desire Turpissimum votum a base and most ignoble and unnaturall with and censureth him for a most effeminate and contemptible man because in all his evills he was afrayd of that which was the end of all evills the privation of his being And certainly we must needs conceive and censure them to be stocks and stones rather then flesh and blood who can so put of all feeling and sense as to thinke a tormented being in hell to be a lighter and lesser evill then no being at all We know that death to such as Iob was is not only better then extreame paines but better then all the joyes of this world by how much to be present with the Lord Christ is better then to be absent from him and we know sayth Paul to the unspeakable comfort of all true Christians that when the earthly house of this our tabernacle is dissolved we have a building of God not made with hands but eternall in the heavens So that I wonder not a little at these wilde discourses of this Authour When he saith that even the stoutest and hardest spirits would choose rather to have no bodyes at all then bodyes tormented with the stone or gout what other is this then to desire that they were impassible would they not desire to have no soules too and to be without sense like stocks and stones But let every sober man judge whether this be a reasonable desire what Christian justifies Iob in cursing the day of his birth What Martyr hath not rejoyced in suffering not naturall diseases but the cruellest torments that most cruell and spightfull Tyrants could devise to be inflicted upon them And even to suffer other evills by course of nature brought upon us with patience acknowledging the hand of God therein and submitting unto his will justifying him as righteous in all his wayes and holy in all his works and condemning our selves even this long a goe hath beene accounted for Martirdome in the judgement of Chrysostome It is true such proverbs have had their course in most nations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praestat semel quam semper mori And amongst us Better eye out then allwaies aking better one dead then allwaies dying But shall we take this hand over head without a difference between a Christian unchristian and heathenish interpretation As many as had an opinion of the immortall condition of the soule and withall of different conditions of men in joy or sorrow according to the condition of their life spent in their courses vertuous or vicious if they were well perswaded of their life past they might accordingly think it better for them to dye then live And it is noe lesse desirable to them who had no comfort in their life past Bradwardine hath such a meditation Mallem non esse quà m te offendere I had rather have no being at all then to offend thee speaking unto God Yet in sinning against him we are matter of his glory which we are not when we have no being at all Matter of his glory I say either in pardoning sinne or in punishing it or both But what sober man will justifie such a saying I had rather have no being at all then be troubled with the stone or gout Is not this the proper place for patience to have its perfect worke And if it be urged that this holds true only in evills tolerable not in case they prove intolerable I answer that surely the pain of stone or gout is not intolerable not any in the judgment of Paul whose profession was this I am able to doe all things his meaning is to suffer all things by the power of Christ that inableth me and when upon his prayer that the messenger of Satan might be removed from him he received this answer from the Lord My grace is sufficient for thee and my power is made perfect in thy weaknesse What is Paul's resolution hereupon though in himselfe a very weak creature I will gladly therefore rejoyce in my infirmities that the power of Christ may dwell in me Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities in reproaches in necessities in persecution in anguish for Christ's sake For when I am weak then I am strong Doth not this extend to the very torments of hell suffered by our Saviour for our sakes Undoubtedly if the glory of heaven possesse
then to advance our selves into the very Throne of God's Soveraigntie and doe wee not feare least his wrath smoake us thence And if all this that hee contends for were granted him that nothing but mere necessitie were found in the motion of men's wills yet Suarez will justifie us from speaking contradiction or delivering ought that exceeds the compasse of God's omnipotencie And what if all the world were innocent yet God should not be unjust in casting the most innocent creature into hell fire as Medina professeth and that by the unanimous consent of Divines and Vasquez the Jesuite acknowledgeth this to be in the power of God as he is Lord of life and death and in the last chapter of the booke de praedestinatione gratiâ which goes under Austin's name there is an expresse passage to justifie it And albeit that worke be not Austin's yet it is lately justified to be the worke of a great follower of Austin's and as Orthodoxe as he namely the worke of Fulgentius as Raynaudus the Jesuite hath lately proved and justified that passage also together with that which is usually brought by School-Divines to prove it out of the twelfth chapter of Wisedome and shewes the right reading as followed by Austin and Gregory And withall represents a pregnant passage taken out of the fifteenth Homily of Macarius to the same purpose And out of Chrysostome in his 2. De compunctione cordis about the end thereof And out of Austin upon Psalme the seventieth about the beginning And to these he addeth Ariminensis Cameracensis Serarius and Lorinus all maintaining the same And this is evident by consideration of the power which it pleased the Lord to execute upon his holy Son and our blessed Saviour and by the power which he gives us over brute creatures This I say if all that he contends for were granted should rather be concluded therehence namely that in this case the creature should be innocent then that God should be the Authour of sinne especially considering that God performes in all this noe other thing then belongs unto him of necessitie as without which his moving of the second causes it were impossible the creature should worke at all which we have made good by shewing the manifest absurdity of their contrary doctrine who maintaine a bare concourse Divine either in subordination unto the agency of the creature or without subordinating the operation of the creature to motion Divine But we doe subordinate it as without which the second cause could not worke at all and by vertue whereof it doth worke and that freely so farre forth as liberty of will is competent to a creature but not so as to make the creature compeere with his Creatour Let man be a second free Agent but set our God that made us evermore be the first free Agent least otherwise we shall deny him the same power over his creatures that the Potter hath over the clay of the same lumpe to make one vessell unto honour and another unto dishonour This power in my maker the Lord hath given me eyes to discerne as taught us in his holy word and an heart to submit unto it and to his providence in governing my will even in the worst actions that ever were committed by me without any repining humour against his hand though I thinke it lawfull for us in an holy manner to expostulate with God sometimes in the Prophets language and say Lord why hast thou caused us to erre from thy waies and hardened our hearts against thy feare Which yet I confesse he brings to passe at noe time infundendo malitiam by infusing any malice into me who naturally have more then enough of that leaven in me but non infundendo gratiam not quickning in me that holy feare which he hath planted in me of which grace I confesse willingly I have a great deale lesse then I desire though the least measure of it is a great deale more then I doe or can deserve Neither shall I ever learne of this Authour after his manner to blaspheme God if at any time hee shall harden my heart against his feare Though this Authour speakes commonly with a full and foule mouth yet his arguments are lanke and leane and of noe substance but words As when hee saith that God over-rules men's wills by our opinion Now to overrule◠a man is to carry him in despight of his teeth Wee say noe such thing but that God moves every creature to worke agreably to it's nature necessary things necessarily contingent things contingently free Agents freely though nothing comes to passe by the free agency of any creature but what God from all eternity by his unchangable counsell hath determined to come to passe As the eleventh Article of Ireland doth professe by the unanimous consent of the ArchBishop Bishops and Clergy of that Kingdome when those Articles were made So I speake warily and circumspectly the rather because one Doctour Heylin doth in a booke intituled The History of the Sabbath professe Chapter 8. page 259. That that whole booke of Articles is now called in and in the place thereof the Articles of the Church of Ireland confirmed by Parliament in that Kingdome Anno 1631. A thing I willingly confesse at first sight seemed incredible unto mee namely that Articles of Religion agreed upon in the dayes of King Iames should be revoked in the dayes of King Charles but expect to heare the truth of that relation For the Authour thereof hath never as yet deserved so much credit at my hands as to be believed in such a particular as this But to returne this Authours text is nothing answerable to the margent For first imperare to command is one thing and to over-rule is another thing though he that doth imperare command ought is commonly accounted the Authour thereof as a cause Morall from whom comes the beginning of such a worke But utterly deny that God commands evill and the truth is wee acknowledge noe other notion of evill then such as the Apostle expresseth in calling it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an incongruitie to the law of God which law commands somethings and forbids other things I come to his third reason 3. I grant wicked counsellours and perswaders are deservedly accounted the Authors of sinne The common use and acception of the words as I shewed in answer to the first is observed to denote such Therefore Cicero makes Authour and disswader opposite and by law they are punishable in the same degree with the Actors But God is noe counsellour or perswader to any lewd course but forbids it and disswades it and that with denuntiation of the greatest judgments among trangressours 2. I willingly confesse that councelling is farre inferiour to enforcing yet in Scripture phrase earnest intreaty or command is oftentimes exprest by compelling as Mat 14. 22. Mark 6. 45. Luk 14. 23. Gala 6. 12 and 2. 14. 1 Sam 28. 23. 2 Chron 21. 11. And noe marvaile
declaring God's justice in mens punishments God doth not predestiminate men to sinne as it is sinne but as a meanes of their punishment He is not therefore say they the Authour of sinne 1. A good end cannot moralize a bad action it remaineth evill though the end be never so good Bonum oritur ex integris â—end manner yea matter too must be good or else the action is naught He that shall steale that he may give an almes or commit adultery that he may beget Children for the Church Or oppresse the poore to teach them patience Or kill a wicked man that he may doe no more hurt with his example or doe any forbidden thing though his end be never so good he sinneth notwithstanding And the reason is because the evill of sinne is greater then any good that can come by sinne forasmuch as it is laesio divinae majestatis a wronging of God's majesty and to Divino bono opposita directly prejudiciall to the good of Almighty God as much as any thing can be This Saint Paul knew very well and therefore he tells us plainely that we must not doe evill that good may come thereof Whosoever therefore willeth sin though for never so good an end he willeth that which is truly and formally a sinne and consequently God though he will sinne for never so good ends yet willing it with such a powerfull and effectuall will as giveth a necessary being to it he becommeth Authour of that which is formally sinne 2. The members of this distinction are not opposite for sinne as sinne and in no other consideration is meanes of punishment If God therefore willeth it as a meanes of punishment he willeth it as a sinne his decree it determinated at the the very formality of it 3 This distinction fastneth upon God a further aspersion and loadeth him with three speciall indignities more 1. Want of wisedome and providence His counsells must needs be weak if he can find out no meanes to glorifie justice but by the bringing in of sinne which his soule hateth into the world and appointing men to commit it that so he may maaifest justice in the punishment of it 2. Want of sincerity and plaine dealing with men Tiberius as Suetonius reports having a purpose to put the two sonnes of Germanicus Drusius and Nero to death used sundry cunning contrivances to draw them to revile him that reviling him they might be put to death and herein is justly censured for great hypocrisie And so if God having appointed men by his absolute will to inevitable perdition doe decree that they shall sinne that so they may be damned for those sins which he decreeth and draweth them into he dissembleth because he slaughtereth them under pretext of justice for sinne but yet for such sins only as he hath by his eternall counsell appointed as the meanes of their ruine 3. Want of mercy in an high degree as if he did so delight in bloud that rather then he will not destroy mens soules he will have them live and dye in sinne that he may destroy them like to those Pagan Princes of whom Justin Martyr Apol 2 two or three leaves from the beginning saith They are afraid that all should be just least they should have none to punish But this is the disposition of Hang-men rather then of Good Princes And therefore farre be those foule enormities and in particular this latter from the God of truth and Father of mercies And thus notwithstanding these distinctions it is in my conceit most evident that the rigid and upper way makes God the Authour of mens sins as well as punishment And so much for the first generall inconvenience which ariseth from this opinion namely the dishonour of God I willingly professe I am to seeke what that Divine of ours is that saith God doth predestinate men to sinne as a meanes of their punishment Here this Authour is silent names no man quotes no place Like as in the former he carried himselfe in this manner The Ancients generally take predestination in no other notion then to be of such things which God himselfe did purpose to bring to passe by his own operation not of such things as come to passe by God's permission Neither can I call to remembrance any Divine of ours that talkes of God's predestinating men unto sinne But the Scripture affords plentifull testimony of God's will ordination and determination that the sins of men come to passe by God's permission Was it not God's will that Pharaoh's heart should be hardened so as not to let Israel goe for a while when he told Moses that he would harden Pharaoh's heart that he should not let Israel goe Was it not God's appointment that Absolom should lye with his fathers Concubines when he denounced this judgment against him that he would give his wives unto his neighbour who should lye with them before the sun Was it not his will that the ten tribes should revolt from Rehoboam when he protested of that businesse that it was from him Was it not God's will that the Jews and Gentiles should concurre in crucifying Christ when the Apostles professe that both Herod Pontius-Pilate with the Gentiles and people of Israel were gathered together to doe what God's hand and counsell had before determined to be done Doth not Saint Peter professe of some that stuÌ„bled at the word being disobedient that hereunto they were ordained And that the ten Kings in giving their Kingdomes to the beast did fullfill the will of God as touching this particular But that God should will or ordaine it as a meanes of punishment as if the end which God aimed at were the punishment is so absurd and contradictious unto Scripture that in my opinion it cannot well enter into any judicious Divines heart so to conceive And marke how this Authour shuffles herein for first he saith that sin may be considered either as sinne or as a meanes of declaring God's justice in punishing it And why doth he not keep himselfe unto this especially considering that not permission of sin only but the punishment of sin also are jointly the meanes of declaring God's justice And where King Solomon professeth that God made the very wicked against the day of evill in the same place he manifesteth what is the end of this namely in saying that he made all things for himselfe that is for the manifestation of his own glory And this glory is not only in the way of justice but in the way of mercy also which this Authour as his manner is very judiciously conceales this attribute of mercy lying not so open to this Authours evasion as that of justice And is it possible God's mercy and the demonstration thereof should have place where there is no sin considering that no other evill or misery had entred into the world had it not been for sin according to that of the Apostle By one man sin entred into the world death by
holinesse and maketh him the principall cause of sin in the greatest number of men I know that the defender of it doth not thinke so For the maine reason which moved the Synod of Dort some other Divines before and since to bring downe predestination thus low and begin their Reprobation after the fall was that they might maintaine a fatall and absolute Reprobation of men and yet avoid this imputation as Doctor Twisse hath noted But what they intended for ought that I can see they have not compassed For it followeth evident enough even from their conclusions too that of all the sins of reprobates which are the greatest number by many degrees God is the true and principall Authour Two things they say which taken together methinks inferre it 1. That God of his own will and pleasure hath brought men into an estate in which they cannot avoid sinne 2ly That he leaveth the Reprobate irrecoverably in it 1. That God of his own will and pleasure hath brought men into an estate in which they cannot possibly avoid sinne that is into the state of originall sinne which consists of two parts 1. The guilt of Adam's transgression 2. The corruption of nature In both these they say mankind is interessed not through the force and efficiency of naturall generation because we all derive our nature from Adam as our first principle but by God's free and voluntary order and impuration It came not to passe by any naturall meanes saith Calvin that all men fell from salvation by the fault of our first parem That all men are held under the guilt of eternall death in the person of one man it is the cleare and constant voice of Scripture Now this cannot be ascribed to any naturall cause it must therefore come from the wonderfull councell of God A little after he hath the same againe with as great an Emphasis How is it that so many nations with their children should be involved in the fall without remedy but because God would have it so As roundly doth Doctor Twisse affirme the same The guilt of originall sinne is derived unto us only by imputation the filth only by propagation and both these only by God's free constitution A little before he hath these words The fault of our nature commeth rom God's free appointment For he doth not cut of any necessity but of his mere will only impute the sinne of Adam to us To this purpose he speaketh a great deale more in the same place To these sayings Saint Bernard hath the like speaking of Adam's sinne he saith Adam's sinne is anothers because we knew not of it and yet ours because it was through the just though secret judgment of God reputed ours And this that they say is agreable to reason For if we be fallen into the guilt of the first sinne and the corruption of nature only because we were in Adam's loines when he sinned and derive our being from him then these two things will follow 1. That we stand guilty of all the sinâ— which Adam committed from his fall to his lives end For we were vertually in his loines as well after his fall as before and in every passage and variation of his life he was still a principle of mankind But where doe we read that we are guilty of any other of his sins To the nâ—st sin only doth the Scripture entitle that sin and misery which entred into the world and invaded all mankind as we may see Rom 5. 15. 16. 17 c. 2. That children are guilty of the sins of all their progenitours especially of their immediate parents For they were in their loines when they sinned and more immediatly then in Adam's But children are not guilty of their parents faults nor obnoxious to their punishments because they are their children as we may see Exod 20. 5. where God saying that he will visit the sins of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation of them hate him plainly implyeth that children are not simply charged with their fathers sins but conditionally if they be haters of God as their fathers were if by imitating their wicked parents they become partakers of their sins In Ezech 18 14 c. The Lord signifieth thus much in his Apology against the cavill of the Jewes For first he saith that if a wicked man begetteth a son that seet his fathers sins doth not the like he shall not die for the iniquiry of his father This implyeth that the derivation of being from the patent doth not render the child obnoxious to the punishment of the fathers sin nor consequently to the sinne For the good child is not obnoxious and yet the good child is equally in the fathers loines with the bad and equally receiveth nature and being from him And then the Lord tells them expresly thus much in two propositions 1. Affirmatively The soule that sinneth it shall die And that it may be known that he speaks exclusively only the soule that sinneth shall dye he delivers his mind 2. Negatively The Son shall not beare the iniquity of the father neither shall the father beare the iniquity of her Sonne c. Our Saviour in that woefull speech of his to the Pharisees Fulfill ye also the measure of your fathers Behold I send unto you Prophets c. them ye shall kill and crucifie that on you may come all the righteous blood c. Intimateth apparently that the Pharisees were not inheritours of their fathers sins punishments by birth but by the commission and imitation of their fathers sins they came to inherit both their sins and plagues Miserable would our case be on whom the ends of the world are coÌ„e if children should be guilty of all their Ancestours prevatications What a world of sins should we be to answer for personall sins parents progenitours sins to a thousand past generations A thing with no reason to be imagined This is the first thing Whereas I am quoted here to give the reason which moved the Synod of Dort and some other Divines to begin Reprobation after the fall namely this to avoid the imputation of making God the Authour of sinne I doubt this Authour hath so long inured himselfe to leasings that it is growne naturall unto him to deliver untruthes For first I make no mention in that fourth Digres of mine in the matter of predestination of the Synod of Dort neither indeed were they the Objects of my thoughts in this particular That Digression of mine is spent in answering the arguments of those who dispute against Massa nondum condita and stand for massa corrupta to be the object of election and reprobation In the first chapter I make answer to Mr. Elnathan Parre in an English tract of his wherein he deales upon this argument In the second chap I deale with others that make choice of the lower way because it seemes to be the easiest
saved as Prosper doth without assaying to cleare it by interpretation as Austin doth and will have it goe for a secret and withall he expresly concurres with Prosper in expressing first that God doth not give grace for mens good workes sake nor denyes it for their evill workes For the ages wherein God so plentifully communicated his grace were no better then the former Observe farther that Austin himselfe in his Enchiridion treating of this place of Paul God will have all to be saved after he hath given two interpretations thereof the last whereof interpreting it of genera singulorum not singula generum is most generally received as most congruous both to Scripture phrase in generall and in speciall unto this very text of Paul as Piscator observes and Vossius against himselfe improvidently confesseth Yet see the ingenuity of this great light in Gods Church If any man can give any other convenient interpretation let him provided we be not driven to deny the first article of Creed whereby we confesse that God is omnipotent And this I conceive proceeded out of a desire to hold up the meaning of that text to the uttermost that the very letter of it may be applyed so we might not be driwen to so foule an inconvenience as to say that God willeth that mans salvation which is never saved which is as much as to say that such a one therefore is not saved because God cannot save him Observe farther in the dayes of Hincmarus and Remigius these controversies being revived in the cause of Goteschalk the church of Lyons writes a booke wherein it treats of the meaning of this place of Paul whereof he gives fower expositions according to the antient fathers First That it is to be understood of genera singulorum not singula generum of all sorts of men not of all men of all sorts Secondly That none is saved but by the will of God Thirdly That God workes in us a will or a desire that all may be saved Fourthly That God will have all men to be saved if they will Then they propose their judgement concerning these fower expositions distinguishing betweene the three first and the last thus In the three first expositions of these words wherein it is sayd that God willeth all men to be saved no absurdity is to be found no repugnancy unto faith But as touching the fourth and the last here we are to take heed for it gives occasion to the Pelegian pravity in as much as it affirmes that God that he may save men doth exspect the wills of men Now this Pelagian pravity is the very substance of our Authours orthodoxy whom I deale with Against this errour sayth the Church of Lyons we read Definitions have beene made in the antient counsels of the fathers This I take out of the extracts which Vossius hath made out of that booke which goes under the name of the Church of Lyons in his Pelagian history l. 7. c. 4. p. 755 756. there is an addition of some few lines in the third Sect concerning Gods justice but they adde noe moment at all to the rest and therefore the answer made in that third Sect to M. Hord may suffice And in the same sect and subsection subordinate to the second assertion which he obtrudes upon the maintainers of the lower way which was this God hath determined for the sinne of Adam to cast away the greatest part of mankind for ever this Interpolation is inserted This is so cleare a case that Calvin with some others have not stickt to say that God may with as much justice determine men to hell the first way as the latter See Instit l. 3. cap. 23. s 7. Where against those who deny that Adam fell by Gods decree he reasoneth thus All men are made guilty of Adams sinne by Gods absolute decree alone Adam therefore sinned by this only decree What lets them it grāt that of one man which they must grant of all men And a little after he saith It is too absurd that these kind patrons of Gods justice should thus stumble at a straw and leap over a blocke God may with as much justice decree Adams sinne and mens damnation out of his only will and pleasure as out of that will and pleasure the involving of men in the guilt of the first sinne at and their damnation for it That is the substance of his reasoning To the same purpose speaketh Maccovius Fromhence we may see sayth he what to judge of that opinion of our adversaryes viz. That God cannot justly ordaine men to destruction without he consideration of sinne Let them tell me which is greater to impute to one man the sinne of another and punish him for it with eternall death or to ordaine simply without looking at sinne to destruction Surely no man will deny the first of these to be greater But this God may do without any wrong to iustice much more therefore may he do the other As touching the assertion it selfe here charged upon our Divines namely that God hath determined for the sinne of Adame to cast away the greatest part of mankind I have thereunto answered at large in my consideration of M. Hords discourse Yet let me adde something by way of an apt accommodation of that before delivered to cleare the ambiguous phrase of this Authour as touching the phrase of casting away For it may well be doubted whether by casting away which he makes the Object of Gods determination he meanes the act of damnation or the act of denying grace If the act of damnation it is most untrue For Reprobates are not damned for originall sinne only but for all the actuall sinnes that have beene committed by them And as they are and shall be damned for them So God from everlasting decreed they should be damned for them Secondly According to my Tenet in noe moment of nature is Gods decree of damning reprobates before the prescience not of originall sinne only but also of all their actuall sinnes Indeed I do not make the prescience of sinne to go before the decree of damnation Nor do I make the decree of damnation to go before the prescience of sinne but I conceive them to be simultaneous It is true many infants we say perish in originall sinne only not living to be guilty of any actuall sinne of their persons why should this seeme strange when M. Hord himselfe professeth in his preface sect 4. That all mankind are involved in the guilt of eternall death If all are guilty of eternall death then it were just with God to inflict eternall death upon all for originall sinne How much more is it just to inflict eternall death upon some few being guilty of it Therefore observe the foxlike cariage of this Authour For this former free acknowledgement of the guilt of eternall death adherent to originall sinne in M Hords discourse is quite left out in this though there it was professed with
in God as the distinction of voluntas signi and beneplaciti as applyed in the question in hand doth suppose It is unpossible that I should inwardly and seriously will or desire the death of my Child and yet at the same time seriously also will and injoyne the Physitian to doe the best to recover him IEANES D. Twisse is not singular herein diverse great Schoolemen Aquinas Durand Cajetan Bannes Gregory de Valentia and many others say the same of not only Gods command but all other signes of the will of his purpose or good pleasure The words of some few of them shall for the satisfaction of the reader be inserted in the Margent and the rather because you in the 16 Section of this Chapter tell us that the Schoolemen were the first coyners of this distinction of Gods will in Voluntatem signi voluntatem beneplaciti and how their interpretation thereof holds intelligence as you speake with that sense of D. Twisse which you here impugne the Reader may see Vindic. Lib. 1. pag. 173 174. Some of them professe in terminis that the will of signe or signification is called the will of God only improperly and metaphorically by way of similitude or proportion and therefore the distribution of Gods will into a will of signe and will of purpose or good pleasure is not reall but only verball divisio vocis from whom they doe not dissent who say that 't is divisio Analogi in analogata For as Scheibler a Lutheran and of your opinion for the maine in these controversies observeth that they are to be understood of such an analogy which is by extrinsecall reference and denomination Intelligunt enim eam analogiam quae est per extrinsecam habitudinem denominationem Voluntas enim signi vocatur voluntas extrinseca denominatione in quantum scilicet significat beneplacitum divinum quod absolute est voluntas Dei ad eum modum quo multa dicuntur sana per habitudinem ad santitatem animalis quae primo talis est Metaph. lib. 2. cap. 3. tit 15. art 4. punct 2. n. 535. For the will of signe is called will by extrinsecall denomination as it signifieth Gods good pleasure or decree which absolutely is the will of God after the same manner that many things are said to be healthy or wholsome in regard of reference unto the health of a sensitive creature unto whom health is in the first place properly and intrinsecally attributed Unto these suffrages of the Schoolemen I shall adde reasons drawn from three attributes of Gods will properly so called It is internall eternall irresistible and Gods precept or injunction is externall temporary and resistible 1. Gods will properly so called is internall in God really undistinguished from his Essence whereas Gods precepts or injunctions are externall without him really distinguished from him 2. The proper will of God was from eternall the commands of God are given in time From the Eternity of Gods will I shall also draw this following Argument The will of God properly so called is uncapable of interruption reiteration and multiplication for in eternity there is a most absolute and perfect unity and indivisibility without any succession of parts but now the Commands of God may be very often reiterated and multiplied precept upon precept precept upon precept line upon line line upon line Esay 28. 10. Oh Jerusalem Jerusalem how often would I have gathered thy children together Math. 23. 37. 3. The will of God properly so called is irresistible Who hath resisted his will Rom. 9. 19. Whatsoever the Lord pleased that did he in heaven and in earth in the Sea and all deepe places Psal 135. 6. The Counsell of the Lord must stand and cannot be withstood By all the powers of the World and darknesse my counsell saith the Lord shall stand and I will doe all my pleasure Esay 46. 10. But now Gods precepts and prohibitions are every day violated broken and resisted by wicked men Unto these reasons I might adde your own confession I confesse say you that no signification whatsoever whether of what a man willeth or decreeth to be done or of what is the duty of another to doe can properly be said to be the will of the signifier But now I subjoyne Gods precept or injunction is only a signe of his will and therefore however it be usually termed in Scripture the will of God Mat. 6. 10. Mat. 7. 21. Rom. 12. 2. 1 Thess 4. 3. It is to be understood only improperly and Tropically and that first Metaphorically 2. Metonymically First Metaphorically and by an Anthropâ—pathy when God commands a thing he carryeth himselfe as men doe when they purpose will desire and determine that such a thing should come to passe for amongst men usually their commands are manifestations and declarations of their purposes and desires I say usually because sometimes superiors injoyne some things to inferiors only for tryall and upon their readinesse to obey recall and revoke such commands How Gods commandements and other signes of his will are the will of God Metaphorically Aquinas illustrates in the place but now quoted seeing passions are ascribed unto God only Metaphorically hence the signes of such passions in us when ascribed unto God are called by the names of the passions themselves Punishment is with us a signe of Anger and therefore Gods punishments are termed his wrath or anger so our commands are signes usually of our wills of our desires and intentions and therefore the commands of God are termed in Scripture the will of God But I think with D. Ames that the commandements of God are termed the will of God not only Metaphorically but also Metonymically because they are signes of a proper will of God Media illa saith Ames per quae voluntas ista râ—â—elatur recte vocantur voluntas signi non tantum Metaphorice quia solent inter homines indicare quid velint sed etiam Metonymice quia sunt vel effecta vel adjuncta propriam Dei voluntatem ex parte indicantia Medul lib. 1. c. 7. 53. And this also is observed by D. Twisse in his consideration of the Doctrine of the Synod of Dort and Arles reduced to the practice p. 54. Now we say even Gods commandement notes the will of God also in proper speech to wit what shall be our duty to doe for undoubtedly whatsoever God commands us it is his will in proper speech that it shall be our duty to doe it However then it is the sence of D. Twisse that the commandement of God cannot properly be said to be his will yet he doth not deny that it signifieth or betokeneth the will of God properly so called in which regard it is termed the revealed will of God because it revealeth Gods will all the Question is what will of God it revealeth or signifieth D. Twisse you see roundly expresseth himselfe that it signifieth or revealeth Gods will of obligation what he will oblige