of Christ also Must not they be necessitated here to slee to an unknown Concomitance the one of the other and not a coexistence And if thus the blood hath the flesh of Christ concomitantly as well as the â—lesh the blood and so for this reason might the Cup be received without the Bread But we positively deny both such Carnal Capernaitical Coexistence as is here presumed and such necessary Concomitance too that with the receiving of one alone the other should be necessarily taken also but hold rather where both are not Present both are absent and no Sacramental Receiving of Christ can possibly be hoped for And though I have been long of this opinion before I found any authority express to this purpose besides the very intrinsique nature of the Sacrament it self now touched Yet am I not alone For thus speaks a Reverent and Learned Father of our Church In all compounded things the moiety of the matter is the moiety of substance Bishop Whites Reply to c. pag. 483. And whatsoever Jesuited Romanists teach I see not how their Laicks can truly say that they have at any time in all their Lives been partakers of this Sacrament for if half a man be not a man then likewise half a Communion is not a Communion But were there more colour for nothing of reality do we find in their Offers to vindicate themselves in what is said for the possibility of a Sacrament in one Kind received What can be said for their gross abuse of their and our Lords Institution and their Relinquishing the unanimous practice of the Catholick Church for so many Ages together Did not Christ equally institute both Did he not equally communicate both to his Disciples Or supposing that they were then all Priests which may be well doubted of seeing they were not compleatly consecrated then by the descent of the Holy Ghost nor commissioned to Go teach and Baptise all nations until after this doth this give any likelihood that therefore it is the sole Right for Priests to receive in both Kinds Did Christ any where make two Institutions One For Priests and another for Laicks If but one Who should presume to alteâ— or adulterate his Prescriptions He said Drink ye all of Mat. 26. 27. this which is more than we find he said of the Bread And the shift is sad and pitiful which some who have nothing better to say yet must say something adde that Christ said This do as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of 1 Cor. 11. 25. Fisher against White me As if he excepted sometimes from drinking when he commanded to eat Ridiculous The meaning of Christ being as plain as any thing need be that there should so often be had a devout remembrance of him as we communicate and not imply as is most boldly insinuated that sometimes we may not communicate in the Sacramental bloud of Christ For it followeth As Often as ye eat this bread and drink this cupp ye do shew the Lords death 1 Cor. 11. 26. till he come Never are they separated in the Scripture No ground at all for the omitting of one rather than the other The Church hath power to denie one as much as the other The Church hath no power to denie either or any thing else of such divine Institution The Church of God for above 1200 years did constantly and universally practise both And until the Council of Constance about the year 1415 many in the Roman Church so received but then it was violently taken away But to this very day all Churches not subdued to the Roman continue the Ancient form And do a companie of paltry reasons drawn from possible inconveniences in Lay-mens taking the Cup countervail so great a cloud of witnesses and so strong arguments to the contrary What if sometimes the Ancients did permitt the exportation of the one without the other to such as were sick or unable to receive in Publique Does this come home to the Case which requireth that the Publique Ministration should be changed also And how doth it appear I am sure not by their demonstrations that such Persons so receiving in half were ever reputed to have Sacramentally received Christ Nay not half of the Autorities or Instances commonâ—y given of such Communications do concern this subject for most are to be understood of the Panis Benedictus or the Bread blessed by the â—riâ—â—â— upon 〈◊〉 offering of it by the People which was not all consecrated Sacramentally and so given unto Christians to be imparted to such as were of the same Communion in token that they were in Communion with them though absent This I grant was sometimes performed by the sending to such the Consecrated Element of Bread in the Eucharist Not with an opinion of the Fathers of the Church however possibly same vulgar and ignorant Christians might have too high a conceit of it that such receiving was tantamount to the receiving in both Kinds Sacramentally But to their inconveniences which are many of them more fit to make sport than to sway in so grave a Controversie we shall only reply that all they can alleadg was no newes to their and our Predecessours and yet never could it enter into their hearts to attempt so monstâ—ous a change upon such frivolous pretences But the truth is the Errour of transubstantiation being throughly received occasioned this by way of common prudence as well as Christian devotion For it being firmly and clearly believed the Consecrated Elements became Christs Bodie and Blood forsaking wholely their own Nature Common Reason required that all possible respect and Care should be taken as far as the wit of man could reach that no detriment or indignity should be done to them and that then became indecent and prophane which before was not To have the Least Crum fall aside must be accounted a grand prophanation though in voluntary and therefore humane wit invented Wafers and preferred them before bread according as Christ used it In breaking of the Host some possible waste might happen therefore though Christ and following Christians communicated of 1 Cor. 10. 17. one Bread according to St Paul For we are one Bread and one bodie and we are all partakers of one Bread undoubtedly literally meaning the participation by many of the same Loaf in the Sacrament now superstition hath better instructed us than the holy Spirit St Paul and there must be no more breaking of bread amongst Christians of which the Scripture speakes so often though I confess not alwayes meaning the Eucharist but yet that too many times and which is so lively and proper a Ceremony and signification of Christs passion lest somewhat should fall out amiss toward the supposed Body of Christ in their sense To give Respect to use reverence to it to take all convenient and devout Care about it is verie reasonable and pious for the Relation it hath to Christ and his Proper Bodie and the Virtue to
earthy And the like may be said of other Creatures which yet together with man may be said to be created because they were produced of that which was immediately created by God the first matter Where likewise we are not to understand the word Earth so strictly as not to imply water also for the word Earth doth comprehend all things of and pertaining to this Globe called Earthly from the principal part of it Earth And as Adam was made out of the Earth immediately we read Eve to be made immediately out of Adam God causing a deep sleep upon Adam Gen. 2. 22 23. and then taking one of his ribs and closing up the â—lesh instead thereof of which rib he made the woman And there is no such difficulty as Scholastical wits would frame when from hence they would infer That if God took one rib from Adam he had either more at first than were natural to man or fewer afterward and so must have something of monstrousness a strange argument to perswade such a man as Cajetan That God did not this really but that the Scripture here speaks Metaphorically when as this is a direct History which is given us here of the Creation For suppose we that God had made man at first otherwise than now he is by himself altered might it not be well said that both the one and the other were natural to him It is impossible that God should do any thing monstrous or unnatural through an whole species and therefore no scruple ought to be made of allowing God who is the Nature of Nature to dispose his works as he pleases and change nature so that if it should seem good to him now to take away one of mans legs and cause him generally to go upon one only this would be no more monstrons than his going now upon two is And in like manner is it very frivolous that is given as a reason by the Schools of Gods causing such a deep sleep upon Adam lest he should be sensible of too much pain at that act of taking out his Rib when as the same miracle that cast him into a sleep and preserved him from waking under such supposed pain might as well have preserved him from pain waking as sleeping It may be rather to teach us that he would not have us privy to his mysterious Chrysost de Fide Lege Naturae S. S. acts nor pryers too nearly into them And therefore a reason is given by Chrysostome both acutely and soberly why God first made Adams Body before he created his Soul or breath'd into him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost To. 5. pag. 649. the breath of Life Least he should see how himself was made which might be a reason why at the framing of Eve he was cast into a sleep which is the very reason the same Author or as it is thought some other under his name doth give in another place whose words because I judge to deliver the manner of mans Creation more aptly plainly and sincerely than the Schools who are very busie and curious here I shall thus translate God saith he first framing Man made the Instrument of his Body and then put into it the Soul Why so To the end he might thereby declare the Excellency of Man For seeing other Animals and Beasts being dissolved by death their soul and Body perish together he speaks of the production of them as of those things which were to perish absolutely God therefore about to fashion man takes his Body out of the earth and then breaths in his Soul Stay but a little that I may shew to you the manner of this breathing into man so far as I am able For from what went before and from hence he describeth as it were the hope of Resurrection He makes the Body first and Man first received a dead Image and then the quickening vertue of the soul He was first shown dead then living First he made a dead Body into which he was again to return and thus when he had finished that he added the Character or form and did not make his soul first that he might not be a Spectatour of what was made He would not suffer the soul to be present when he made man lest it should glory as an assistant to God in that work and not only that it might not boast but might not so much as behold the manner how it was done And thus doth God still For he frameth every one of us in the womb But how he so frameth us he hath granted no man to see We are sown and we are fashioned nature perfecting the course but the manner no man comprehends O the wonder A Temple is made in a Temple an House in an House is framed and the outward house perceives it not First then he makes man according to a dead Image and then he saith God breathed into the face of Adam the breath of Life and man became a living soul Some have been of opinion that this Breath was his very soul and that it was given him of the very Essence of God But that saying is not only very mild but absurd also For if the soul were the very substance of God It could not be that in this man it should be wise in another it should be foolish and ignorant and in this man a just soul in that man an unjust For the Essence of God is neither divided nor changed but immutable Nay not only are the souls of men mutable but liable to condemnation For so saith the Gospel Mat. 10. 28. Fear not them that can kill the body but cannot kill the soul but fear ye him rather who is able to destroy both body and soul in hell If therefore the soul be of God then should God condemn himself Therefore it is necessary we should see what this is The Breathing This breathing is the Power of the Holy Spirit For as our Saviour breath'd on the faces of his Apostles and said Receive Joh. 20. 22. ye the Holy Ghost so this divine breath heard after the manner of men is that Venerable and Holy Spirit And this Holy Spirit too present was not the soul it self but made the soul it was not it self changed into the Soul but framed it For the Holy Spirit was the Author it was concerned in the making both of the body and Soul For the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost made this work And do not imagin that the Father contributed one part the Son another and the Holy Ghost a third But this I say that though the Father made it it is the work of the Son and the Fabrick of the Holy Spirit c. Thus far that Elegant and Learned Author However some inconsiderable difference is found amongst ancient and Modern Doctours some saying that the Angels were created but when that was there is nothing besides conjecture only they say upon such a supposal that it affords a
or equity of it or not saying Nay but O man What art thou that replyest against God Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it Why hast thou made me thus Hath not the Potter power over the clay of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour and another unto dishonour No man that acknowledges and every Christian must acknowledge the like and greater power and prerogative in God over Man than the Potter hath of his clay can deny that God may order the work of his hands as he pleases neither can he deny but the drift of the Apostle in this comparison was to show the absolute power and dominion of God over all Creatures and therefore let them see how they aggravate matters of this nature and multiply fond ratiocinations which they cannot but know agree not with St. Pauls stating and decision of this Question I do freely grant the adverse Party that St. Paul doth not at all concern himself with that kind of Predestination Election or Vocation as very many confidently presume he doth in his Eighth and Ninth Chapters to the Romans I mean not particular or personal Prae-determination and the like the whole letter and the occasion of his discourse there being concerning the Election of the Gentile Church and the uncessant protection thereof against all threatnings and Oppositions and disputing the equity of Gods deserting the Jewish Church yet thus far his argument being general holds good in particular persons that if it be free to God without any just exceptions to choose and leave a Church or Nation at his pleasure and according to the counsel of his own will it is also reasonable and just for him to favour or show disfavour to any single person in like acts of his Providence without being called in question for what he doth or not doth CHAP. XIV Of Sin more particularly And first of the Fall of Adam Of Original sin wherein it consisteth and how it is traduced from Father to children The Proofs of it The Nature and Evils of it And that it is cured in baptism That Natural Concupiscence hath not the Nature of Sin after baptism BY what is said competent satisfaction may be had in that mystery of Gods Providence in the fall and sin of the first Man created as we have shewed in such perfection of natural Faculties and divine Grace the reason absolute and demonstrative whereof cannot be rendred by the witâ— of Man viz. Why God should make such a fine and exquisite piece and deliver it over presently to ruin and loss It may suffice that God was not the direct cause of such his Fall by impelling him though his Free-will embracing the Temptation he was privy to his errour As it was in that memorable case of the death of Benhadad King of Syria in the second of the Kings when Hazael was sent to enquire Whether he should recover 2 Kings 8. 10. of that Sickness The Prophet Elisha answered Go say unto him thou mayest certainly recover how be it the Lord hath shewed me that he shall surely dye And this was the true case of Adam whom God knew to have full power certainly to stand and yet he knew he would surely fall As therefore God in that case spake after the method and manner of mans apprehension so he here acted In that he first said the King might surely recover and this was according to the common order of natural Causes which then were upon him in his sickness which were such as were easily resisted and like to have no such effect But then God withal beholding that which was not seen of man perhaps not thought on by the Actour himself at that time he saw withal a necessary dependencie and connexion between another cause and that effect which followed and so declared surely the contrary to the other In like manner God beholding Adam in that integrity and vigour of gifts and Graces with which he had furnished him saw him in a certain condition to persevere in that state but seeing withal the future outward cause of Temptation he might well see the effect what it would be infallibly So that when we say a thing is contingent we cannot say so in respect of all causes but in respect of some special cause to which in our opinion and observation such an effect may seem properly to belong For it is a true Axiome amongst Logicians All causes accidental are reducible to proper and direct causes So that there was no necessity by Gods appointment of Adams Fall as he was framed of God but somewhat might occurr outwardly which by Gods permission might have as certain effect upon the will of Man though Free of it self and indifferent as had the wet cloath laid by Hazael 2 Kings 8. 15. upon the face of Benhadad this only excepted That what natures simple Act did in this the will of man combining freely against himself with those outward causes suffered in that The thing therefore principally to be here enquired after is rather about the Nature of this Sin in Adam and the Effects thereof And as to the former it is to be observed That what was in him an Actual sin became in us an Original and what was free to him to be subject to it or void of it becomes necessary to us and inevitable It might be called in some sense an Original sin in him as it was the first in nature and time he stood guilty of but not as if his Nature was from the beginning so corrupt as to dispose him unto it Again in him it was of it self purely sinful and a transgression of Gods Law upon which followed evil effects but in us it seems to partake originally of both sin and punishment but chiefly of this latter For though they speak truly in the larger sense who make three things proper and inseparable from Sin Guilt Stain and Punishment yet restraining our selves to the true Nation of it there are these two things only essential to it The matter it self which is the evil act committed against the Law of God or which commeth to the same omitted contrary to the same And the manner or formality of it which consisteth in the perversness and pravity of the will which is so essential to it that it both distinguishes the errours of rational men from them of beasts and mad-men and them of the same Man from one another so that what was done voluntarily and freely differs wholly from that done with incogitancie so not affected for then the will concurs with it and infects it and without any intention so to do as to point of moral Goodness or Evil. And according to the bent or averseness of the will to evil commonly are estimated the degrees of evil But though in Adam all these things concurred to the heightening of his Actual sin yet in those that inherit that evil from him the sin must needs be much less in Nature and lighter because
12. 24 who was Moses in like manner Christ is called the Mediatour of a New Covenant in the Epistle to the Hebrews because the tearms of that Covenant were obtained of God by Christ and that Covenant was delivered unto him to manage and transact Another Act of Christs mediation was by Prayers and Supplications as it is in the Epistle to the Hebrews Who in the dayes of his Flesh when he had offered up Prayers and Supplications with Hebr. 5. 7. strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death was heard in that he feared And in this respect he is called our Advocate by St. John saying If any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus 1 John 2. 1. Christ the Righteous A third Act of Christ in his mediation related to Man by offering to him the tearms and means of Reconciliation in knowledge and sanctification and moving him to accept of so favourable free and gracious tearms of Reconciliation as the doctrine of the Gospel presented to him thus fully expressed by St. Paul All things are of God who hath 2 Cor. 5. 18. reconciled us unto himself in Jesus Christ and hath given unto us the ministry of reconciliation To wit that God was in Christ reconciling the World unto himself not imputing their trespasses unto them and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation Now then we are Embassadours for Christ as though God did beseech you by us we pray you in Christs stead be ye reconciled unto God But the second way of Mediation and Reconciliation is that which is most proper to Christ the former being communicable to man in some sense namely as the received power and authority from Christ as is even now shewed to minister in Christs stead as inferiour Instruments under him And this is by making himself a Sacrifice and Satisfaction for sin according to that of St. Paul to Timothy There is one God and one Mediatour between 1 Tim. 2. 5 6. God and Men the Man Christ Jesus Who gave himself a ransom for all to be testified in due time And to the Ephesians he saith And walk Ephes 5. 2. in love as Christ also hath loved us and given himself for us an Offering and a Sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour And when he saith For he hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin it is manifest that sin in the 2 Cor. 5. 21. first place is used according to the Hebrew word for a Sacrifice for sin Now nothing can be more frivolous in the ears of rational men or more sacrilegious in Gods ears than to draw this to such a kind of figurative speech as Socinus and his Fellows do as should imply an occasionalness and exemplariness only in Christs death to take away sin and not to satisfie Gods Justice for them And so to satisfie as a Doctour showing us the way and as a President leading us the way towards peace with God This I say can in no propriety of speech be the meaning of holy Writ assuring us first That Christ was a Propitiation for us as Romans 3. Whom God hath Rom. 3. 25. 1 John 2. 2. Ephes 2. 16. set forth as a Propitiation through Faith in his bloud And St. John He is the Propitiation for our sins And St. Paul to the Ephesians tells us how he became such a propitiation for us That he might reconcile both unto God in one Body by the Cross having slain the enmity thereby Is Reconciliation of God and Man and that by delivering up his body to death upon the Cross no more than to give us good instructions how to serve God so as to reconcile our selves to him Is slaying the enmity or extinguishing the enemy to us the Devil or the Enmity which was between God and us no more than by good example to direct us how so to do Saint Paul likewise to the Romans plainly affirmeth that he reconciled us to God Rom. 5. 10. by his death Secondly Who by purging us or any man else could understand before these dayes no more than good words and counsels But St. Paul sayes he By himself purged our sins And that we may see that St. Hebr. 1. 3. Paul was far from any such intention and forced sense as is modernly imposed on him he writes thus also It was therefore necessary that the paterns of Heb. 9. 22 23. things in the heavens should be purified with these but the heavenly things themselves with better Sacrifices than these For Christ c. The meaning of which words must necessarily be this that whereas the errors and sins under the Law which were paterns or types of the Gospel were expiated by bloud and sacrifices But the heavenly things were purged by better things i. e. The Sacrifice of Christ Therefore if it cannot be said that such things were purified only by good precepts and documents given but real bloud was shed for that purpose Real though much better and more precious bloud was shed for the expiation and purification the sins of the Gospel which bloud was Christs And thirdly how most abusively must the tearms Redeeming and Redemption and Redeemer be used by the Scripture beyond all other writings or speeches if it signifies not a real recovery or purchase of somewhat lost or necessary to one Now such expressions applyed to Christs mediation are so plain and frequent that it may seem superfluous to recite them St. Matthew saith The Son of Man came to give his life a Matth. 20. 28. Titus 2. 14. 1 Pet. 1. 18 19. ransome for many St. Paul saith He gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity St. Peter by his comparison used sheweth what manner of purchase it was saying Ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things as silver and gold from your vain conversation received by tradition from your Fathers but with the precious bloud of Christ as of a Lamb without blemish without spot But redemption with silver and gold is proper and expiation by the bloud of Lambs was proper and real therefore also must the redemption by the bloud of Christ be so too And in the Epistle Heb. 9. 12. 13 14 to the Hebrews is the like comparison used most aptly and at large Fourthly the tearms Offering and Sacrifice so often ascribe unto Christ must needs import more then verbal or exemplary mediation divers of which places we have noted before to which we may adde what in the Hebrews is directly Hebr. 7. 27. spoken of Christ Who needed not daily as their High Priests to offer up Sacrifice first for his own sins and then for the peoples for this he did once when he offered up himself And St. Paul to the Corinthians Christ our Passover 1 Cor. 5. 7. John 1. 29. is offered for us And St. John The Lamb of God that taketh away the sin
Family is gone out the house falls into disorder and so finding it he sentences his servants to their several punishments or may turn them out of doors So God having the liberty to depart from his Creature at his pleasure in this way of Preterition whether Supralapsarian or Sublapsarian there doth upon that spring up from it evil and disorder in the soul contrary to Gods will revealed which he reflecting upon may safely and justly decree to entertain it in his favour no longer but reprobating it adjudge it to the punishment deserved God doth not therefore primarily as some have boldly delivered propound to himself the positive pains and ruine of any Creature no inducement no grounds going before but he may very well in a negative sense be said to reprobate it not affording those preservatives needfull to its security This doth sufficiently appear in the first act of his Reprobation of men and Angels whom without all doubt he could have preserved in their original state but he freely refused and they both freely chose to leave him and expose themselves to his severest judgement which was by this positive Reprobation to bring them under the effects of their sins damnation So that they who deny any cause out of God of his first Reprobation do not deny a cause sufficient of his second and positive but the Devils and those men as are signaliz'd Reprobates are undoubtedly the free and full authors of Gods reprobating them and condemning them in this manner Of the Angels St. Peter and Jude speak expresly rendring 2 Pet. 2. 4. their offences a reason why God proceeded so against them and not the simple will of him God spared not the Angels that sinned but cast them down to Hell and delivered them to chains of darkness to be reserved unto judgment And the same is repeated by St. Jude And when God saith Jude 6. Gen. 2. 17. in hie Covenant with Adam In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye he implyeth the reason of his Decree to punishment to be sin And when the Wise man exhorteth saying Seek not death in the error of your life Wisd 1. 12. and pull not upon your selves destruction with your own hands he doth necessarily imply a direct cause in Man of his own ruine And the words 13. following exempt God from any hand in such things as the Author For God saith he made not death neither hath he pleasure in the destruction of the living And here come in that in its due place though it were not intended of a spiritual or eternal destruction O Israel thou hast destroyed thy self For though without any supposition taken from the Creature God may pass him over and deny him grace and glory yet doth he not design any man directly to damnation but upon supposition of sin going before And from this state of things may competent reconciliation be made to the seeming oppositions of Scripture and to St. Austin himself The Scriptures say Because thou hast rejected knowledg I will also reject thee And Hos 4. 6. Mat. 23. 37. Luk. 8. 18. by St. Matthew How often would I have gathered thy children together even as a Hen gathereth her chickens under her wings and ye would not And Whosoever hath not from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have And St. John Ye will not come unto me that ye might have life And in the Joh. 5. 40. Act. 13. 46. Acts Paul and Barnahas It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken unto you but seeing ye put it from you and judge your selves unworthy of everlasting life And St. Peter God is not willing that any 2 pet 3. 9. Isa 5. 3 4. should perish c. And amongst others that of the Prophet Esay must not be forgot And now O Inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah judge I pray you betwixt me and my Vineyard What could I have done more to my Vineyard that I have not done in it All which places and divers more do charge man altogether with his own misery On the other side in that Gen. 1. 26. the Scriptures tell us how God made man according to his own image whereof freedom of will was no small portion And in Deuteronomy Ye Deut. 29. 2. have seen all that the Lord aid before your eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharoah and unto all his servants and to all Land Yet the Lord hath not 4. given you an heart to perceive and eyes to see and ears to hear unto this day And in Jeremy Turn thou me O Lord and I shall be turned And Ezekiel Jer. 31. 18. Lam. 5. 41. Ezek. 36. 26. I will give you a new heart also and a new spirit will I put into you and will take away the stony heart of your flesh and will give you an heart of flesh And St. Matthew All men cannot receive this saying save they to whom it Mat. 19. 11. Joh. 6. 44. Joh. 12. 39 40. is given And Christ in St. John saith No man can come unto me except the Father who hath sent me draw him And elsewhere Therefore they could not believe because Esaias said again He hath blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts And the whole ninth Chapter to the Romans mightily Rom. 9. 16. favours this side of which the substance seems to be contained in this one Verse So then it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy And to the Philippians To will and to do is of Phil. 2. 13. God These with others seem to deny liberty of will to man and to ascribe the reason of good and evil to which man is subject to God as the author making man rather passive under both To that of Free-will we may speak by and by To the present case taking in also what St. Austin saith God doth not forsake but where he is forsaken which may ill consist with what he so largely and often delivers on the other side we answer by the help of the former distinction of simple Preterition and direct Reprobation and the effect of it damnation viz. That the foresaid places suppose an evil affection in the parties so rejected by God and are to be interpreted of his just determination to punish sin and hard-heartedness in them But the incapacity of Grace and Conversion and Salvation are meant by the latter Texts proceeding from the sole Preterition of God refusing to prevent the evil and malignity of mens wills which for want of that preventing Grace do certainly tend to evil and are incurable of themselves But upon this I see divers shrewd Objections to arise as First That by this with-holding of Gods Grace his Preterition there is brought a necessity upon mans will to evil and his indifferency to life and death quite taken away as all use of the means of Grace To this
we have in good degree answered before and there shewed how that the fore-knowledge in God of mans fixed estate whether by his own will electing as they say freely or Gods will determining which fore-knowledge is yielded to God by these Objectors doth oblige them as well as me to shew what profit it would be to man to move or endeavour towards Grace and Life when he is already determined only this is the difference between them The one seems to hold That God by an antecedent act drives the nail whereby man is immoveably fastned to one thing and the other holds That by a subsequent act of knowledge he clincheth it which man himself drove so that it can never stir St. Augustine Aug. Civ Dei l. 5. c. 5. confuting Tullies opinion of Fate impending over all things doth notwithstanding confess and affirm plainly They are much more to be tolerated who hold a Sydereal Fate than he that takes from God the praescience of things future for says he it is most apparent madness for to grant there is a God and to deny he foresees things future And they that put the cuestion to this issue have mended the matter very little or reliev'd themselves all necessity and certainty being a direct enemy to their design of setting man free to do what he list and change his fortune as we say at his pleasure I find in a very grave and learned Author a distinction which I find no where else designed to ease this doubt between Inevitable and Infallible which in truth are not distinct and therefore he is constrained contrary to the agreed way of speech to make Infallible the same with Necessary whereas the distinction is between Necessity and Infallibility or Inevitability which is the very same For what is infallible but that whose act or object shall have a certain event and this event not to be avoided or declined is called Inevitable But whether the Necessity of Causes be such that this event must in nature succeéd is the question and that notwithstanding the Inevitableness or Infallibility of the event there may not be free motions in the Cause tending to that event So that for instance a man may freely choose and will to do that which he certainly shall choose and consequently be properly and truly said to be author of the same be it his damnation or salvation But you will say If Gods Preterition be such that a man is unable to move himself to saving good without it then must he infallibly fall into sin and necessarily and after this all counsels and commâ—nations and exhortations come to nothing and are in vain Nay unless there be unrighteousness with God man cannot be judged for not doing that which he cannot do is not in his power To this St. Augustines Answer is this Because the whole Mass was Aug. Epist 105 sixte damned deservedly in Adam God repays its deserved reproach and bestows an undeserved honour by Grace not by any prerogative of merit not by necessity of Fate not by the unsteadiness of fortune but by the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God which the Aposile doth not open but admires concealed crying out O the depth of the wisdom c. But if this yet doth not absolutely satisfie as I know it doth not some because say they it is to delude man to offer that and exhort to that which it is impossible to attain to so that though God by his absolute and divine Prerogative might have deserted man yet it stands not with his natural equity or simplicity towards his Creature to exhort and threaten when there is such inevitable necessity upon him and condemn him for not doing that which he knows he cannot do without him refusing effectually to assist him I answer It might very well call in question the fair dealing of God towards his Creature if so be he should make an act for him after he was disabled to observe and perform the same not assisting him to the performance of his will But God doth not so for though the Command stands in force against him yet it was not prepared for him in his destitute condition and no reason that Gods right of ruling should change with the vanity of the Creature It suffices that once it was proportionable to him and that the impotency now pleaded is owing to himself and that Gods Laws now are rather recited and propounded to him than made for him in the condition he is in But secondly Gods Commands indeed though but urged anew should be ludicrous and in vain did they totally miss of their ends in being thus repeated and inculcated if they had no success But so it is not as though the Word of God had taken no effect For they are Rom. 9. 6. not all Israel wh are of Israel as St. Paul hath it that is the case is not the same with all men For as St. Paul afterwards What then Israel Rom. 11. 7. hath not obtained that which he seeketh for but the election hath obtained it and the rest were blinded It sufficiently answers the purpose of God in giving his Law and admonishing and threatning and promising thereupon that it obtaineth its ends upon the election For how many things else might we accuse God and Nature for sending us when they do no good at all that we can perceive but rather mischiefs As deluges of waters in a wet time and in droughts great showers of rain emptying themselves into the Sea or sandy deserts from whence nothing springs answerable to such divine bounty But we are taught that God and Nature made things and ordained them in their kind useful for the Universe and never by a particular purpose that every single act or part should have the same visible and proportionable effect that the whole hath And so in the dispensations of his spiritual Graces it suffices to acquit and justifie divine providence that they have their due ends though not the same that man may expect who certainly would never have it rain might he order matters and choose but at such times and in such places as he thinks fit and then alwayes Again It would go harder against this opinion if so be that the only end why God published his Word and gave his Laws weâ—e to convert men that they might be saved This is indeed a principal but not the only intent God hath but the publication of Gods holiness and justice and righteousness and mercy and the like glorious attributes in which publication God is much more known admired and glorified by wicked men and reprobates than otherwise though they oppose and dislike the same even against their own wills giving such like glory to God on earth as they shall in Hell hereafter And we know that no accession of real good being possible to be made to God the outward manifestation is of principal concernment Last of all Could there be an infallible