my flock by a hand unskilfuller than mine own Let it suffice that I am not so self-conceited as to flatter my self with his opinion My Assistant was very much fitter to teach the people their Christian duty than Mr. Hickman or his peers can be in hast Fitter I say from after the time of his conversion whatever he might have been whilst he was yet a Presbyterian But he hath long since left the world and well it had been for Mr. Hickman if he had not thus rake'd in an honest mans Grave But that he had rather look'd inward and laid to heart the common Rule Qui alterum incusat probri c. For if it is true whâ—t I have heard from many men of good crediâ— and what I have partly read in print too that Mr. Hickman at the same time possessed three Livings at once and had not any right to either to wit an excellent Fellowship in Mag. Coll. besides the Parsonage of St. Towles as it s vulgarly call'd enough to keep a worthy man who has wife and children and also the Vicaridge of Brackley where his neglects of his children are most notoriâ—us if I may call them his which by another kind of Plagium he seiz'd upon then is he of all others the unfittest creature in the world to tell his Readers by intimation of my omissions towards my Flock which are very well known to have been none Nor will it advantage him now to plead that he spake with an if and that his inference is true upon his bare Hypothesis or supposal For then without offence to him I may also bespeak my Readers thus That if Mr. Hickman is very ordinarily drunk and if he is given to swear fearfully by fits and if he is a great striker when intoxicated with rage Then hath he put something on his Doomesday book which I wish he may have time to take off by Repentance â—his I speak with an if and my supposal being granted my Inference cannot but be true But I abominate these courses and have onely shew'd him as I have done his brother Baxter that their Trade is as easie as 't is inhumane § 26. In his next ensuing words p. 6. he does distinguish my opinion to which he is an enemy from my person to which he saith he is a cordial friend And yet in the next words to those he does not equally distinguish betwixt the persons and opinions of those Beyond-sea Divines of whose opinions I hope I may use as hard speeches as Mr. Hickman hath used of mine and yet be no less their cordiall friend We have seen Mr. Hickman his cordial friendship towards me But I was never so unmanlike as to exercise the like upon his Divines whose pages and very lines I have laid together with their words whilst heaven and earth are call'd to witness what they have said against God as well as what in that case I have duly said against them § 27. In that he adds of his pretious Divines that they are scarce to be equalled by any now alive or to be excelled by those in any Calendar ibid. he hath spoken most unhappily to say no worse For 1. he knows in some Calendars Mr. Fox his Martyrs are recorded And was it not much more excellent to dye for Christ then to write for irrespective decrees of sin and damnation Besides 2. He either knows or ought to know that all the saints are in the Calendar Novemb. 1. so is Michael the Archangel and as our Collect understands it All the the Angels of heaven on September 29. John Baptist the Virgin Mary who is no less then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Mother of God in the expression of the Greek Fathers Nay Christ himself and the holy Ghost and the Father too upon Trinity Sunday are either by name or in equivalence at least in some Calendars Thus he committ a spirituall whoredome by Idolizing Mr. Calvin and other men of his sect yet has the heart more then once to accuse another of partiality § 28. Whilst he talks how he will shew not that the Remonstrant but the contra-Remonstrant opinion hath been the Doctrine of the Reformed Church of England p 8. he talks unskilfully enough for a man of his own Breeding for 1. The Remonstrants and their Opponents are much too young to denominate the Doctrine our Church espouseth to that here he speaks as a parachâ—onizer But 2. I do not pretend that in every point the Remonstrants agree with the Church of England our Church having avoided to define in some things 3. That they agree in some things is as manifest as the Sun by what our Article saith of the death of Christ and the falling away of the Regenerate And if in every other point they do not speak the same thing yet they are infinitely liker to one another then either can be to their common Enemies And 4. I am sure Our Church is favourable in nothing to the contra-Remonstrants against the Remonstrants But 5. If the Remonstrants in some things do adhere too much unto Arminius wherein the Calvinists and Arminius do but too much agree as I have elsewhere shewed of some points and am able to shew of others also it is no wonder if our Church doth stand at a distance from both together And so t is a very grosse Fallacy whether by ignorance or craft it comes to passe I do not say To make the Doctrine of our Church and the Doctrine of the Remonstrants though the most Orthodox men of the Belgick Churches to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Aequivalents in our Accompt I can manifest a difference whoever else will say he cannot And holding fast mine Antagonist to the precedent limits of my Discourse or of the Termes I use in it I shall proceed to answer his next assertion first by denying his prooflesse and helpless saying that the countenancing of Arminianisme as that is a Nick-name for the doctrine which we embrace with the Church of England is no older then Bishop Laud and Bishop Montague and for a proof of my Denial I refer him to Dr. H.'s Certamen Epistolare but more especially to his Quinquarticular History 2. By affirming that if Bp. Laud and Bp. Mountague did more eminently then others give great Encouragement and Countenance to what hath been commonly called Arminian the meaning of it is onely this that they would not suffer those Doctrines which were exceedingly remote from what was owned by our Church and in some things contrarie to what our Church had defined to pass with freedom for the Doctrines of the Church of England when they were nothing but the mistakes of particular men in the English Church § 29 But what hath Arminianisme to do with the words of the Homily against the Peril of Idolatry p. 9 that Mr. H. should be so giddy as to make that an Argument for his position does he think that Arminius and the Remonstrants
own A new Discovery of his stealths with their aggravation His mistake of Iustice for Drollery The Calvinian Tenet renders all study useless The Kings Declaration forbidding its being preached No good Arguing from evill custom The Lord Falklands judgment against Calvin's Mr. H's Inhumane and slanderous Insinuation How much worse in Himself then in any other It s odiousness shewn by a parallel case His Profession of Cordial Friendship with its effect His Sacrilegious Eulogie bestowed on them of his way The Doctrine of the Church of England Vindicated with BP Laud and BP Mountague Of Mr. H's Impertinence implying Presbyterians to be Idolaters The Archbishop cleared as to what he did against Sherfield An Impartial Narrative of the case The Doctrine of St. Iohn concerning Antichrist Original sin assented to as taught in the Article of our Church Loyalty a part of our Religion An accompt to the Reader of the Method observed in all that follows BP Tunstall and BP Hooper out weigh Tyndal c. The 17th Article 2 wayes for us So the Liturgy and Homilies and Nowells Catechism which Mr. H. produceth against himself It was not the Church of England that put the Calvinists into preferments ArchbP Bancroft an Anticalvinist Dr. Richardson and Dr. Overal both publick professors and most severe to the Calvinian Doctrines Dr. Sanderson no less since his change of judgment Persecution is not a mark of error in those that suffer it Mr. Simpson cleared from his censors as to falling from Grace and Rom. 7. Barrets Recanting an arrant Fable BP Mountagues vindication Mr. H's confession That men follow Calvin in their younger and Arminius in their riper years The causes of it given by D. Sanderson Of Dr. Iacksons Act Questions and Dr. Frewin's Of K. Iames and BP Mountague K. Iames his conversion from the Calvinian errors A change of judgment in some Divines who were sent to Dort Mr. H's sense of the University and his unpardonable scurrility of the late Archbishop Vniversal Redemption held as well by K. Iames the late Primate of Armagh and BP Davâ—nant as by Arminius Mr. H. grants the whole cause but does not know it His opposition to the Asse mbly mens Confession of faith Mr. H. proved to grant the whole causâ— at which he rails and so to be a Calvinistical-Arminian Confirmed by Du Moulin Paraeus and Dr. Reynolds Confirmed further by Dr. Twisse And by the Synod of Dort His scurrilous usage of Dr. Heylin shews the length of his own ears His concluding Question childishly fallacious Touching the Remnant of his Book HIs Self condemnation and Contradiction The Calvinists draw their own consequences from their Tenet of Decrees How Mr. H. is their Accuser and how his own How as an Hobbist and an Arminian How in striving to clear he condemns himself and confesseth his making God to be the Author of siâ— His own thick darkness touching the darkness in the Creation How he makes the most real thingâ— to be entia rationis How he obtrudes a new Article of Faith And makes it a point of omnipotence to be able to do evill He proves his own sins to be positive entities by ascribing his rage to his sobriety His slanderous charge against Mr. Tho. Barlow of Qâ—eens C. in Oxford His foul Defamation of Dr. Reynolds His self contradiction and blind zeal as to Dr. Martin The nullity of a Priesthood sinfully given by Presbyterians The Recantations of some who were so Ordained Mr. H's disappointment by Dr. Sandersons change of judgment A vindication of BP Hall BP Morton BP Brownrig from Mr. H's slanderous suggestion The perfect Amitie and Communion of all Episcopal Divines for all their difference in judgment as to some controverted Doctrines Mr. H's confession of his Ignorance an Incapacity to understand the points in controversie His confessed insufficiency to maintain the chief Articles of the Creed Yet his conceitedness of his parts is not the less His way to make a Rope of sand whereby to pull in the Puritanes His sinfull way of defending Robbery by adding a manifold aggravation His slanderoâ—s insinuation against the two houses of Parliament to save the credit of the visitors in sinning against their own commission His disparagement of the visitors in his eâ—deavours to assert them The work he makes with Hypocâ—ondriacal conceits Touching the supream authority of the Nation HE adds Rayling to his Robbery and treasonably misplaceth the Supreme power of the Nation The two Houses vindicated from his gross Insinuation an d the supreme power asserted by 19. Arguments and by very many more for which the Reader is enâ—reated to use the works of Iudge Ienkins Touching the Visitors of Oxford HOw Mr. H. became one of my uncommissioned Receivers In what sense he may be called my Receiver and Vsufructuary How the Assembly-Presbyterians became Abettors of Sacriledge and Praevaricators with the Bible Mr H's confounding possession and right and making no scruple of many Robberies at once His wilfull bitternesse sadly reflecting upon the Visitors And as much on the Lords and Commons worst of all upon the King in excludâ—ng whom he beheads the Parliament How he and his Visitors have acted against the two Houses and withall against the supreme power of the Nation Touching Mr. H's no skill in Logick A Transition to the discovery of his no skill in Logick His Insultation added to hide or bear up his Ignorance Concerning the subject of an Accident Of Subjectum ultimum ultimatum Of an Inseparable Accident Of the substantiall Faculties of the soul. By whom they are held to be its essence Of his granting what he denyes whilst he denyes it and giving up the whole cause A Postscipt touching some Dealings of Mr. Baxter THe Synagogue of the Libertines fitly applyed to Mr. Baxter Hiâ— Railing on K. Iames and BP Bancroft on BP Andrewes and Dr. Sanderson for their Iustice to the Puritans His confession of his own wickednesse again confessed by himself though but in part His prodigious falsifying the Common prayer His denyal of that confession which he confessed a little before His Perjury and Rebellion proved out of his own words His playing at Fast loose with his integrity His Time-serving and fawning upon his Soveraign Richard His rejoycing in our late miseries c. His charging upon God all the villanies of the times His Flâ—tteâ—ing mâ—ntions of Old Oliver as tenderly carefull of Christs cause His being Accessâ—ry to the most Parricidial Act the murder of Gâ—ds anointed The seven wayes of partaking in other mens sins His being an Incendiary in the war and Incouraging many thousand to rebell proved out of his confessions His denying the Supremacy of the King which yet he allowed the two Cromwells His confession that Rebellion is worse then Murder Adultery Drunkenness and the like and that he may be called a Perfidious Rebell by his consent if the supremacy was in the King HIs denying the Supremacy of the King which yet he allowed the two Cromwels How
men by which they would hide the ill consequences of the Doctrine which they teach to wit that all manner of things were predetermined by the Almighty he mentioned this as the first That sin is but a non-entity a nothing so that all things forsooth might be eternally predetermined and yet not sin Thus they are Libertines or Carnâ—adists or both by turns do what they can so long as they adhere to the Calvinian Scheme But Mr. H. omitted what he found of most weight § 8. Whilst I am on this subject I mean the clearing of Dr. Hammond from this Falsificator I shall annex to his Epistle a parallel passage out of his Book where speaking of the positivenesse of sins of omission he saith it is so STRANGE that they also should be positive that he knows not whether ever it were asserted by any but Cerberus alias Champneys Mr. Dukes the keeper of the great Ordinary at Hell in Westminster Mr. P. and whom he would not joyn with such company the Reverend and learned Dr. Hammond p. 69. Here for brevities sake I shall but make these demands 1. With what colour of excuse this can be said of Dr. Hammond or indeed of Mr. P. who never spake of this matter by word or writing more then what hath been shewed in my former sections whereas sins of Omission have not been specified so if they had it had not followed that either I or Dr. Hammond had ascribed to such a positivity 2. Why the man should invent such ugly names as Cerberus importing the Dog of Hell and next to that the keeper of Hell to joyn with a Doctor of so much eminence in the world not more for his Learning then for the holiness of his life 3. Whether calling him the Reverend and Learned Dr. and expressing to him a seeming tendernesse is not a bitternesse oâ— Jeere and so a horrible aggravation both of the falshood and the sauciness which I have noted in my first and second Quere yet this is the meek spirited man who complaines that he is used with too much sharpness and exhorts his Brethren very demurely to let their moderation be known unto all men § 9. Having done with Dr. H. He begins afresh to ease himself on Dr Taylor Whom having taught in what manner he should have Intituled his Book Not Deus but Pelagius or Socinus justificatus p. 4 He immediately lets fly in as known a falsehood as could be spoken That the Dr. would bear us in hand he onely quarrelleth with the Presbyterian Notion of original sin whereas it is clear that Dr. Taylor in his Deus justificatus extends his Quarrel though very civilly even to those whom he owns as his Friends and Brethren sons with himself of the very same mother the Church of England Let Mr. Hickman read and hold from blushing if he is able whilst he beholds the Transition the Doctor makes in solemn manner p. 54. from his Presbyterian to his Episcopal Opponents whom he worthily calls his Dearest brethren That he denyes Original sin he very plentifully denyes and saith he cannot but confesse that to be which he feels and groans under and by which all the world is made miserable p. 12. But now suppose him a flat denyer of that Catholick Doctrine which is taught by our Church of Original sin And let us consider what it was which made him erre in this point whether it was not his contemplation of the horrible consequences and Tenents which Presbyterians are accustomed to superstruct on that Doctrine As for example that all being dead in Adam there was yet no remedy for the far greater part no not in the sufferings and satisfaction of Christ see how rightly the Doctor gathers the odious consequential Blasphemies in the former part of his enterprise as farr as p. 54. from what is taught by the Presbyterians Of he also confesseth his Brethrens Opinions to be free and such as if they were all agreed he would not move a stone to disturb p. 56. The Presbyterians therefore are to be blamed for whatsoever error he may have publisht in this particular And not at all the Church of England which by liberally allowing that Christ hath dyed even for all who were dead in Adam directs the onely both pious and unquestionable way of making good the Antient Doctrine of Original sin § 9. Had Dr. Taylor indeed affirmed what is but forged by Mr. Hick-man too unintelligent a thing to passe a judgement in such affaires that he was not opposed but by Presbyterians his own letters would have confuted him as now they do Mr. Hickman which he directed to the Right Reverend my Lord of Rochester But as it is the result is this That Doctor Taylor in one point is of a singular opinion or way of speaking in which the other sons of the Church of England do avow their sorrow and dissatisfaction who are the only men that can lay sure grounds whereon to plead with Dr. Taylor to good advantage § 10. I am one of the meanest though not I hope the least obedient of all her children And though I am well enough qualified for the clearing this learned Doctor from the calumnie and falshood of his Reviler yet am I too much a Iunior to undertake his conviction as to that which I conceive he hath said amiss But with a Praefiscinè be it spoken to so acute and eminent an Author who I conceive hath onely erred for fear of erring I think it better to insist upon the end of Christs Death then to define what would have been had he never died Concerning the wisdome of God's oeconomy in the disposal of All things I think the best way to judge is to judge as God judgeth and is revealed to have done in his written Word We are assured by revelation that Christ was given for all in Adam or for all who are born from Adam which had he not decreed to have done as he hath revealed we have no measure of judging what should have been the just consequence of Adam's sin or whether any besidâ—s Adam should have been concerned in it We cannot know God's counsels but by words or deeds revealed to us Had Christ been given but not for all in particular not for Heathen infants I think we can as little gueâ—s what should become of those Infants as what the other world had been if God in stead of This had created That By this I am willing to make it known to Mr. Hickmâ—n and his Abettors both how much I dissent from the Doctor 's errour on the right hand and how much more I joyn with him against their Heresies on the left § 11. The man of scorn goes on to teach us how unfit he is for a Divine or to be so much as a lay-Preacher were he in terrâ Corterialiâ— where no-ordaining is to be had For speaking of us and the Presbyterians in relation to our Tenâ—ts of God's Decrees he saith
were as really Idolaters as the same Arminius and his Followers are very well known to be Presbyterians As Presbyterians they might be such if we believe Bp. Andrews and Dr Iackson but as Anti-Calvinians they could not be so And as little force hath that Homily to prove that Arch-Bishop Lâ—ud was no obedient son of the Church of Enland unlesse because he was a Father in that he put Mr. Sherfield to so much cost and a disgraceful acknowledgement of â—is fault and caused him to be bound to his good Behaviour ibid For Sherfields fault was no lesse then a publick Riot even breaking of Church-windows in a private Caprice such as in which if he had pleased he might have broken the Bishops head too To disallow of pictures is one thing and to break them is quite another It was decreed at Frankford by no less then 300 Bishops at once that images are neither to be broken nor worshipt And Dr. Hammond himself who is least liable to the suspicion of shewing any favour to what is Popish saith in his Treatise concerning heresie that we indeed in this matter approve of the Doctrine of the Frankford decrees as that is summed up in * those few words It is so generally known that the Iâ—onomachi were Hereticks who fell to work in the dayes of old almost 1000. years agoe as Mr. Sherfield hath lately don That I thought Mr. Hickman might at least have heard of it And pity it is that any Christian should so farr imitate and gratifie both the Mahumetans and the Iews I have taken some care to inform my self rightly of Sherfield's business and of the windows at Sarum of which he would needs be a Reformer And by the favour of a Friend having no acquaintance there my self I have an accompt from such a person as cannot easily be deceived in that particular and cannot possibly design to deceive another The truth of the Story is briefly this § 30. In a Parochial Church of that City there was painted in a window the history of the Creation And in each dayes work there was added the figure of an old man The glass might be of the colours mentioned by Master Hickman from Mr. Prin. the proportions were small and so obscurely described that very difficult it was to discern the History Few did ever observe or appear to take any notice of it so farr it was from giving scandal to weaker persons Many old Bibles have the like in the two first chapters of Genesis Nay the like may be seen in an Impression at Geneva let Mr. Hickman mark that It was a calumny rais'd against the excellent Archbishop that he justified the picturing of God the Father by that of the Ancient of dayes in Daniel which Mr. Hickman perhaps invented and pretends no more for it then a simple Hearsay when he onely chastized the presumption of Sherfield not knowing what mischiefs to Church and State such publick riots might one day end in if private persons of their own heads might be suffer'd to Reform in such a manner 'T is true the vision in Daniel might be described agreeably to Daniels Narrative that is by the shape of an old man What is presented to the mind and ear by words and letters may also by pictures be represented to the eye But to picture an old man in the History of the Creation wherein there is not the least mention of any such thing is to falsifie the History And I profess for my part to abhorr it as much as Mr. Sherfield can be imagined to have done Yet would I not take his riotous course whereby to testifie my resentment but humbly complain to just Authority and so amend one fault without the making of another Concerning the wisdome and Piety of Archbishop Land I cannot better convince a Hickman then by the words of Bishop White who if a Bishop at least can be is thought a very good man by the Presbyterians This Bishop speaking of a great scandal withdrawing many from conformity Your Grace saith he in your Metropolitical visitation hath begun a good work in taking this into your religious consideration and you have endeavoured a Reformation God Almighty vouchsafe to give a blessing and good success to your pious intention and that by your Graces Authority this scandall before mentioned may be removed out of the Church § 31. After one or two more of his empty hearsayes of Bishop Lindsey and his Chaplain too contemptible to be nam'd he inveigh's against them who do not think the Pope Antichrist p. 11. how ill soever they think and say of him besides That some indeed of our Church have thought and taught him to be Antichrist is very certain But it does not thence follow that 't is the Doctrine of the Church They that Attribute it rather to Simon Magus and the Gnosticks have no less then S. Iohn for their Authority Saint Iohn saying plainly that Antichrist when he was writing was already in the world 1 Joh. 4.3 which compare with what is said 1 Joh. 2.18 and 22. What is said in the Act for the subsidy of the Clergy as I have not convenience to examine so should I be sorry to find it in contradiction to Saint Iohn And if the matter were to be carried by the votes of men who are greatly learned I know not what can be greater then Hugo Grotius and Dr. Hammond § 32. What he add's against Dr. Taylor pag. 12. Dr. Taylor alone is concerned in unless he thinks that That Doctor is the whole Church of England Let it suffice Master Hickman that the Doctrine of originall sin in the ninth Article of our Church is without any scruple assented too not onely by my self who have given a publick proof of it but by every other man of my particular acquaintance What he saith of the Religion which was sealed by the blood of our English Martyrs ib. should suffice to conjure up the very blood of his Feet into his forehead The best of our Martyrs having been Bishops and such as partly composed or partly admired our English Liturgie and such as taught the very Doctrines which now are nicknam'd Arminian and such as never would put asunder what the Holy Ghost hath joyned in the very same Text 1 Pet. 2.17 Fear God Honour the King And I will hold Mr. Hickman so wise for once as to think a word sufficient for him But when he adds that his Religion hath been defended or fought for by the swords of soldiers ibid. I shall tell him too in one word more That those are very unfit weapons for the defending of a Religion where God himself allows nothing but Prayers and Tears to guard it with The Church of England teacheth none to call their strength the law of Iustice or to fight for Religion with breach of Loyalty We leave such practice to three sorts of men the Turkish Popish and Presbyterian Our English Martyrs were
none of that number § 33. Christian Reader I am now arriv'd at that part of Mr. Hickmans Preface p. 13. wherein Doctor Heylin hath ex professo taken him up See his Certamen Epistolare part 2. pag. 150. § 26. from which place forwards he hath so fully and effectually performed his enterprize as to have given a supersedeas to what I had otherwise detain'd thee with and am in some measure prepar'd for in my Adversaria And therefore partly not to wearie thee with that enormity of Length into which I foresee I shall infallibly grow if I pursue a Fugitive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I have hitherto done and partly not to do what is done already and by one of the exactest Historicall hands and especially because I am no way concern'd in a very great part of the tedious Preface as well as because that I alone am left to speak to the remaining parts of the Book it self I shall resolve to say no more then thou dost probably expect and hast reserved a patience for But if I here and there add what is not observed at least not said by Dr Heylin I hope the fault will be such as will deserve its own pardon § 34. If that were true which he saith of Tyndal c. p. 13. yet besides the five things which are returned by Dr. Heylin p 152 153. I can requite him with Bishop Tunstal in King Henry the eight's dayes and Bishop Hooper a little after who both abhorr'd that Doctrine which Frith and Tyndal are urged for and wrote against it to better purpose then these were able to write for it The seventeenth Article which he urgeth p. 15. is proved two wayes to make apparently for us 1. By the phrase of God's choosing in Christ. 2. By the care which is injoyned that we receive God's promises as they be generally set forth to us in holy Scripture which why did Master Hickman so very fraudently conceal in his recital but because his heart told him 't was quite against the whole Frame of Calvinistical Decrees See Dr. Hammond's Fundamentals p. 146. § 35. 'T is very remarkable p. 16. that he pretends the Common Prayer and Homilies are for his turn but is not able to cite a word And Dr. Heylin makes it appear as Bishop Overal long ago that all is destructive to his pretensions What a rare Argument hath he urged p. 18 From Doctor Nowel being Prolocutor in Queen Elizabeth's time He concludes the Articles of the Church to be Calvinistical And then to manifest how ignorant he is in these points he cites a passage from Nowels Catechism which he hopes is for his interest though it is as visibly against it as can be wish'd For whereas it is said They that be stedfast and constant in this Faith were chosen and appointed and as we term it predestinated to this so great felicity p. 19. It is inferred unavoidably That God did choose or predestinate to life eternal the stedfast stable and constant in the Faith Which is as much as Arminius did ever desire to have granted whereby to prove the Decree to have been respective to wit respective of that stedfastness and constancy in the Faith which imports perseverance unto the end without which it is confessed God chooseth none It being impossible for God even because he is perfect to predestinate or choose a person so qualified as is expressed by Doctor Nowell with out respect to the qualification So that Nowell was an Aâ—minian or Arminius a kind of Nowellist no matter which and Master Hickman understands not what 't is really to be either Hâ— could not else so often write after the manner that he doth either quite beside or against his purpose § 36. To his Question pag. 19. how came the Church of England to dispose of her places of greatest influence and Trust to such as were of a contrary perswasion if she consented to the opinions commonly call'd Arminian Doctor Heylin's answer is most sufficient p. 170. c. But yet I add five things 1. Our Church in all things was not one way or other there lyes a fallacie in Arminian which we disown and so she was not in particular for irrespective decrees 2. The Church taken collectively as when we say the Church of England or used to signifie the Doctrine never disposed of preferments But they were ever disposed of to the better or to the worse as men corrupted with interest and evil principles have been more or less prevalent with those in power as of late the Independents dispos'd of all from the Presbyterians witness the Deanarie of christ-Christ-Church from which Doctor Reynolds was ejected and the Conscience-stretcher of England if the song speaks truly preferr'd before him And yet whilst I am writing 't is vice versâ a like case Qui color albus erat c. does it follow they were both in the right by turnes no the wisest men say they were both Vsurpâ—rs 3. They could not be Arminians who lived before Arminius was alive 4. If Calvins Doctrine was that of our National Church whilest his Followers prevailed in point of Number and for that very reason as Mr. H. now argues then the contrary to that was her Doctrine too when the Nick-named Arminians did as much prevail by his own confession p. 4. The absurdity of which will make Mr. H. renounce his Logick 5. Since he boasts of his number I shall probably name ten of worth and eminence on this side for every single man of Note which he names on that not that I favour such wayes of arguing but meerly because I would convince him by that which he chooseth to make his own I shall publish if it be needflul an ample Catalogue of the Orthodox on whom such places have been conferred in the Church of England as will be granted to have been ever of greatest influence and trust But I abstain whilest it is needlesse out of that reverence which I beare unto peace and prudence § 37. If Arch-Bishop Bancroft had hated that which is called Arminianisme as the shadow of Death which Mr. H pretends p. 20. he would not have shewed such a hatred to Mr. Calvin and his Followers Nor would he have published the confessions both of Coppinger and Wigginton touching their publishing their Pamphlet of Predestination to prepare the way to their intended murder and Rebellion even by laying the blame of their leud attempts upon the absolute decree of the Almighty which is inferred by that desperate Doctrine to give a fatal necessity to all events and I therefore call it a desperate Doctrine because it was called so expressly by Bp. Bancroft himself in the famous Conference at Hampton Court § 38. Whilst he saith that in Cambridge there was one Dr. Overall who was suspected a little to Arminianize ibid. He is unhappy in 2. respects For 1. If he means one as opposed to more and not by
though guilty still § 47. That some of our Divines did change their judgement notwithstanding their employment at the Synod of Dort will not I think be denyed by any who hath not the forehead of a Hickman For Mr. HALES his conversion is known to most as Tilenus his to all and Dr. GOAD'S to very many That Bp. DAVENANT was at last for Vniversal Redemption I have long since proved and more then once what hath been said by Bp. Hall against the tenent of absolute or irrespective reprobation I have elsewhere at large informed my Readers That Dr. WARD and Bp. DAVENANT were of opinion that all Infants by Baptisme are freed from the guilt of Original sin and in a state of Salvation implying some to fall totally and finally too because there are some who die Impenitents being men notwithstanding being Infants they were Baptized Mr Gataker hath assured us by divulging of their Epistles If I would passe over to France I could tell him of Famous Moulin who had an interest in the Synod although not there and yet was exactly an Arminian as to the point of Reprobation and accused as such by Dr Twisse so was Camero Amyrald Testard and Dâ—ille as well accused by Spanhemius as by other followers of Calvin for passing over to the Arminians in the point of General Redemption but to speak of such as these is to pay Mr. H. in more then full measure § 48. To Mr. H.'s two Questions proposed in one breath what thinks Mr. P. of the Vniversity of Oxon did not she know the Opinions of the Church of England p. 46. I briefly answer First that whilest she had the privilege of injoying a Real Vniversity which she injoyed until the year 1648. I think as well of the Vniversity as when she burnt the Book and condemned the Doctrine of the great Calvinist Paraeus who sowed those Presbyterian seeds of the late prosperous Rebellion of which such fellows as our Compiler enjoy the harvest To the 2. I answer by way of Interrogation Did not the Church of England so much as know her own minde when she commanded Erasmus his learned Paraphrase to be had in such honour throughout the Nation as to any Piece of Calvin was never given how came the prayers of Erasmus to have a place in our publick Liturgy from King Henry the 8. dayes unto these our own if all our Church was fermented with Calvins Leven The Vniversity of Oxford knew well her Doctrins especially then when she was most of all knowing which was in the time of the late Arch-Bishop in the vilifying of whom Mr Hickman hath shamed his own dear Faction For whilst he calls him an evil instrument p. 48. he makes himself an example of Puritanical Petulancy and passion whereby the men of his Faction will grow more vile And whilest he saith they were never well till they had spewed out his Grace as an evil instrument ibid. he implyes his Faction was deadly Drunk so indeed were the Jews when they were sick of Christ and thought they could not recover till they had spewed him out of the earth But as Titus Vespasian came about 40. years after and cured those Jews of all Diseases so if our Pharisees will be patient but half that time they may perhaps meet with that thâ—t will stop their spewing § 49 Now I come to the objection which Mr. H. confesseth doth lye against him the Church of England is for Vniversal Redemption The Calvinists that are Anti-Arminian are against it p. 48 49. To which he answers two wayes First by a confession that King Iames gave it in charge to the Divines sent to Dort Not to deny that Christ died for all and that this was affirmed by Bp. Vshâ—r for so he calls the late Primate who also said That he gave in his own judgement to Dr. Davenant for universal Redemption and accordingly it was one of Bp. Davenants conclusions that the death or Passion of Christ as the Vniversal cause of mans salvation doth so far appease and reconcile God the Father to Mankinde by the very fact of his Oblation that he is truely now said to be ready to receive every man into Favour as soon as he will believe in Christ notwithstanding the aforesaid death of Christ restoreth no man no man at least who is come to ripenesse into a state of actual favour Reconciliation or salvation untill he actually believes No man saith the Bishop no not any of the elect before he is qualified by faith meaning that faith which worketh by love an Universal obedience to the commandments of Christ. But by the offering of himself upon the Crosse the Bp. saith that he made God appeased and reconciled observe the word not onely to the Elect but indefinitely to all Man-kinde and that as an Vniversal cause not onely of salvability but saith the Bp. of salvation Arminius never said more no nor ever so much for ought I am able to remember Nor was ever so much said by the Church of England as that Christ reconciled his Father to Man-kinde ipso facto by the oblation of himself ut Vniversalis causa Salutis Humanae as the Vniversal cause of mankind's salvation but I suppose by Salvation he only meant Salvability or no more by cause then meritorious And then indeed he doth no more then Arminianize with the Church of England as Mr. Hickman is wont to phrase it It being the Doctrine of our Church that Christ by his own oblation of himself once offered made a full perfect and sufficient sacrifice oblation and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world And again more fully that the offering of Christ once made is that perfect râ—demption propitiation and satisfaction for all the sins of the whole world both Original and Actual So exactly opposite to the Calvinists is the Church of England in her belief This doth prompt me to tell the Reader if he knows it not or hath forgot it that at a conference held about the Books of Bp. Montague One of the Lords made it his motion that the Doctrine of the Dort Synod as to the points we speak of might be received into the Articles of the Church of England But this was opposed by Bp. White and even for this very reason because our Church in her publick Catechisme doth teach her children to believe what is denyed by the Synod of Dort Christ died for us and for all mankinde Why Bp. Chappel before Bp. did refuse an excellent place in Ireland because he would not subscribe to Dam man alluding merrily to Damman who had the office of Scribe in the Synod of Dort And how at last he became one of the Bishops of that Church by the advantage of that Canon procured by the power of Archbishop Land in Intuition of Bishop Chappel That a man was qualified for preferment in the Church of Ireland without subscribing the Irish if he would but
to as taught in the Article of our Church Loyalty a part of our Religion An accompt to the Reader of the Method observed in all that follows Bp. Tunstal and Bp. Hooper out-weigh Tyndal c. The seventeenth Article two wayes for us So the Liturgie and Homilies and Nowells Catechism which Mr. H. produceth against himself It was not â—he Church of England that put the Calvinists into preferments Arch-Bp Bancroft an Anti-Calvinist Bancrofâ—s Dang Pos. l. 4. ch 10. p 161 162. Dr. RICHARDSON Dr OVERAL both publick Professors and most severe to the Calvinian Doctrins * Sententiae quae exalterâ parte sic aftrâ—unt Decretum Dei absolutum gratiamque efficacem ut tollant voluntatem salutis conditionatam gratiam sufficientem nullo modo in Ecclesiâ Dei â—â—rendae sunt aut tolerandae ut quae pugnent cum bonitate Dei Philanthropiâ cum naturâ hominis aut modo actionis humanae cum verbo revelato tâ—m in lege quà m in Evangelio Deoque aut simulationem mendacium aut malitiam Iniquitatem aut crudelitatem InjustitiaÌ„ affingant Hominibusque aut securitatem carnalem aut desperationem adferant multaque similia Absurda inconvenientia secum attrahant IO. OVERALLVS ad Hug. Gro. Maii. 16 1613. p. 279 280. Dr. SANDERSON no less since his change of Judgement * See Dr. Sandersons letter accorded with by Dr. Hammond p. 10. 11. Persecution is not a mark of Error in those that suffer it Mr Simpson cleared from his Censors as to Falling from Grace and Rom. 7. Barrets Recanting an arrant fable * Hist. Quinquar p. 3. ch 19. p. 72.73 Bp. MONTAGVE'S vindication Mr. Hickman's confession That men follow Câ—lvin in their younger and Arminius in their riper years The causes of it given by Dr. SANDERSON * See Inquifitio Anglicana and other accounts given of the Trieâ—s at Westminster †See Doctor Hammond's Pacifick Discourse of Gods Grace and decrees p. 10. * ibid p. 9. Of Doctor IACKSON'S Act Questions and Doctor Frewein's 1 Cor. 13.11 1 Tim. 1.6 7. Of K. IAMES and Bp. Montague King Iames his conversion from the Calvinian errors * Vid. Epist. Ded. praefix Noâ—is seu Animadvers Danielis Tileâ—i in Canon Syn. Dord * Sâ— coacto immundorum spirituum concilio eorum princeps Diabolus à paredris suis Angelis sive singulatim sive per satyram rogatis sententiis quonam commento odium hominum adversus Deum vehementius incendi atque intendi queat c. A change of judgement in some Divines who were seâ—â— to Dort 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ch 3. p. 103.104 Div. pur Def. ch 4 p. â—29 Mr. H.'s sense of the Vniversity and his unpardonable scurrility to the late Arch-Bp * ☞ Nâ—te the breeding of a lay-preacher ordained at Braâ—kly towards the Primate of all England whom Chamier allows to have been a prince Vniversal Redemption held as well by K. Iames the late Primate of Armagh and Bp. Davenant as by Arminius * Mors sive Passio Christi ut universalis causa salutis humanae Deum patrem ipso facto oblationis eatenus reddit pacatum Reconciliatum Humano Generi ut verè nunâ— dicatur paratus quemvis hominem recipere in gratiam simul ac in Châ—istum crediderit Neminem tamen saltem ex adultis praedicta Christi mors in statum gratiae actualis Reconciliationis sive salutis antequam credat These the words of Bp Davenant by Mr. H.'s confession praef p. 50. * In the COMMVNION BOOK after the act of Consecratâ—on †In the 31. ARTICLE of the 39. See Mr. Clerk's Martyrologie part 2. in the life of Dr. Preston p. 129. to p. 134. for a partiall accompt of the dispute between Dr. Preston Dr. White Mr. Montague Mr. H. grants the whole cause but does noâ— know it His opposiâ—ion to the Assembly-men's confession of FAITH Mr. H. proved to grant the whole cause at which he rails and so to be a Calvinisticall Arminian * See Doctor SANDERSON'S two Reasons why his soul so much abhorr'd and why he was forced to forsake the Sublapsarians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 14 15. * In the Appendâ—x to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Confiâ—med by the confâ—ssions of Du Moulin Paraus and Dr. Reynolds * Act. Synod Dâ—rdr part sess 143. p. 339 †Ib. p. 340. * Vin. Gra. lib. 1. part 1. sect 4. Digr 6. cap. 1 pag 92. who yet confesseth as much as makes himself Arminian too lib. 1. pâ—rt 1. pag. 77. See Pâ—ilan cap. 3. pag. 124. * Vin. Gra. lib. 1. part 1. sect 4. Digr 6. cap. 1 pag 92. who yet confesseth as much as makes himself Arminian too lib. 1. pâ—rt 1. pag. 77. See Pâ—ilan cap. 3. pag. 124. Confirmed fuâ—ther by Dr. Twisse †Paraeus in Explic. Dubior c. 9 ad Rom. p. 880. * Ib. 82. col 2. †Ib. p. 887. Col. 1. * In proof to the corrept cor And by the Synod of Dort †Statutum est pro accuratissimo eo judicio consensu in Doctrinâ gratias esse agendas Sess. 144. pag. 348. * See Divine Philanthropie defended ch 3 p. 124 125. His scurrilous usage of D. Heyâ—in shews the length of his own â—aâ—s His concluding Question childishly fallacious His self-condemnation and contradiction * See his Preface to his Tract of Iustification Pref. p. 1 The Calvinists draw their own consequences from their tenet of Decrees 2 Chron. 32.17 How Mr. H. is their accuser And how is own how an Hobbist and an Arminian How in striving to clear he condemns himself confesseth his m king God to be the Author of sin His own thick darkness touching the darkness in the creation How he makes the most reall things enâ—ia rationis How he obâ—rudes a new Article of Faith And makes it a point of omnipotence to be able to do evil * Compâ—re his words p. 11. with corr copy p. 1. Hâ— proves his own sins to be positive entities by ascribing his rage â—o his sâ—briety * 1 Tim. 6.4 2 Pet. 2.11 1 Pet. 3.9 His slanderous charge against Mr. Tho. BARâ—LOW of â— in Oxford His foul defamation of Dr. REYNOLDS His self-contradâ—ction and blind zeal as to Dr. Martin The nullity of a Priesthood sinfully given by Presbyterians The recantations of â—ome who were so ordained Mr. H 's Disappointment by Dr. SANDERSONS change of judgement ☞ Note that this Section shews his meaning in the seventh ☜ * Note that the Concrete or vitiated Act is here denominated the sin And the sin said to be a compound consisting of two parts act and obliquity not separately but joyntly Note the distinction of Melâ—nchâ—hon The will doth act Deo sustentante non adjuvante God sustaining the faculâ—y but not assisting the choice * Note his exposition of the word affording by not withholding and the word general added to influx and the locomotivâ— faculty which is common to us with Beasts as distinguished from the will which is
the confession of the Adveâ—sary that what is privative of one thing is also positive of another 5. From the necessity of its being complexum quid confessed also by M. Hickman 6. From the meaning of Bonum Metaphysicum as comprehending res aliquid and as signifying no more then ens in ordine ad appelitum whereas it is onely the moral good which is oppos'd to the thing in Question 7. From the positive entity of a Lye which is therefore verum as much as bonum Metaphysicum and yet hath no more of reall goodness then of reall truth in it 8. From the positive being of Satans pride and of Petronius his Inventions together with those of the Presbyterians 9. From the difference or distinction betwixt a negative and positive Atheism 10. From sins being divided into actuall and habiâ—uall 11. From the positive filthiness of flesh and spirit of which a man is deprived when God by his grace is plea'sd to cleanse him 12. From the Importance of the word privative which may be predicated of sinners as well as of sins 13. To harden our own hearts to consent unto Temptations and to destroy our selves by such consent are granted by all to be positive things 14. Sin is spoken of as such throughout the Scriptures 15. It is confessed by M. Hickman and by the men of his way that sin is a compound which doth consist of a materiall and formall part whereof the one being granted to be a posiâ—ive entity both together cannot be less 16. Betwixt the act of haâ—ing God and the sin of hating God which is the act of haâ—ing God there cannot he the least difference because itself cannot be different from itself for that would imply the very grossâ—st of Contradictions ☜ But the Aâ—t of hating God is confessed by Master Hickman to be a positive entity And so he yields the whole Cause in spight of all his endeavours to make resistance § 8. But yet he endeavours a Resistance as far as a Tiâ—le-page can doe it which doth not really belong to any book in all the world much â—ess to thaâ— which he unhappily call'd his For it pâ—etends a Iustification of the Faâ—hers and Schoolmen from their being self condâ—mned for denying the positivity of sin And yet it pâ—etends to be an Answer to so much of my 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as doth relate to the foâ—esaid opinion Hâ—re are â—everall things which prove him willfull in his Impostures For well he knew I had not written against the Fathers or Schoolmen much less against them as self-condâ—mned much less yet for denying the positivity of sin I writ indeed against Himself and M. Hobbs but they aâ—e hardly so much as sons much less Fathers of the Church And though I writ against others also yet neither of thâ—m was a Schoolman much less a Father I writ against them as self-condemâ—ed because I proved out of their writings that they asserted the very Doctrines which themsâ—lves had confessed to be blasphâ—mouâ— So that unless our Iustificator is thicker of sense and understanding then all men else which his perusall of M. Moâ—â—ice forbids his Readers bâ—lieve his prevaricâ—â—ions must neâ—ds be wilfull § 9. After the promises of his portal I find his building is nothing else but a very long Ent y and three Back-doors As if the former were intended â—or the Amâ—sing of his Readers whilst the latter might serve for his own escape His Entry hath such an unseemly length that little less than a whole hour will serve hiâ— Readers to Travel through And if their patience will but serve them as far as the End of so long a passage in hope at last to meet with something whereby to disprove the positivity of sin they will be able to find nothing besides the mentioned Back doors at which the Fâ—â—â—hâ—r eâ—capes from the Thing in Question As if he were coâ—scious to himself of having rashly undertaken to prove a dangerous falshood to wit that sin hath no positive being he spends almost his whole book upon a mulâ—itude of subjects b sides the purpose rather hudling up a Volume from whatsoever he thought pretty and durst purloin from some English Authors then taking the â—ouâ—age to treat of that to which his Tiâ—le-page confesseth he stands obliged Observe good Reader the strangest Answerer of Books that in all thy life thou hast read or heard of § 10. His Volume consists of 175. pages 65. of these are spent in an Epistle and Preface to all that follows wherein there is not one syllable so much as offering to disprove the positivity of sin Then there begins a fresh reckoning up of pages And though he takes upon him again as in his Title-page he had done to prove that sin hath not a positive Being yet he immediately flies out for 48. pages together talking of Bishops and Presbyteries and other subjects of Evasion I will not say in a phrenetick but in a very idle manner before his misgiving heart serves him to make a shew of some proof of the Thing in Question And thus he hath made an easie shift to fill up two parts of three of his Tedious Rhapsodie with more then an hundred such fragments and ends of stuff as serve to prove nothing at all besides his fearfulness to discourse of the matter in hand and his gift of impertinence above the rest of mankind and also the lightness of his fingers to supply the heaviness of his invention For after 113 pages 65 being of that which he calls his Preface and 48 of that which he calls his Book I find him using these words Having removed the Rubbish we may now come at the Question Yet goes he not many steps farther in a pretended preparation to his design when straight he digresseth to curse M. Barlee to talk of the Calvinists and Arminians by the old assistance of M. Prin and to speak for Puritans by such an admirable Impertinence that he is fain at last to use these words The Reader will pardon me who can scarce pardon my self for this excursion yet no sooner doth he confess then he commits the same trespass even by making a new excursion to my dispute with Doctor Reynolds to a Fable of Aesop and to a gross falsification of the Learned and Reverend D. Hammond which in due time and place I shall demonstrate to be such in a high Degree At last indeed he speaks something lesâ— impertinent then before although impertinent also as shall be shewed Insomuch as his Readers may well admire how he could venture to call his Book by so extravagant a Title as did least of all relate to the subject matter of his Discourse unless he thought that his Readers would look no farther § 11. But having shew'd his long Entry I conceive it high time that I discover his Back-doors at which he maketh his foul escapes from the principall Duties Incumbent on him First when it
own shadow and what a shame it is for him to have railed so much at Arminian Doctrines to which when he hath done he is fain to yield § 52. To his slanderous insinuation concerning a Book of Doctor Heylin's which he affirms to have been burnt by the hand of the common Hangman as he saith he is informed p. 53. Doctor Heylin himself hath made his own Answer I onely here observe what shift is made by this zelot to revile an aged and Reverend Divine without the least fear of the execution which the Bears made upon the Boyes who made a mockery of Elisha his Reverend Baldness But what they did was less unexcusable For they were little young Boâ—es who wanted teaching But this great Boy is a Boy of years too and professeth with the Gnosticks to be a teacher of others a guide of the blind and an instructer of the foolish Rom. 2.19 20. Those children in years reproached the Prophet with what they saw and were sure of to wit his bald head But this child in manners and understanding makes use of a slander to shew his virulence And hath no more to excuse him then that he Heard it which is possibly as false as the Fact it self But be it so that he heard it what would become of such creatures as Mr. Hickman and Mr. Baxter if other men should put in print whatsoever they hear of their misdemeanours the best of it is he hath gotten no more by his printed hearsay then onely to make the world know how much his ears are too long Nor do I wish him his deserts for then I am sure they would be shorter § 53. To his concluding Question p. 54. I briefly answer three things 1. Dolus versatur in generalibus 2. There is the fallacie plurium interrogationum some are true and some false And by those that are true no advantage accrues to the Calvinian cause 3. Some learned men there will ever be of both the opposite persuasions And therefore the Doctrine of our Church is to be judged of by her Liturgie Homilies and thirty nine Articles In which as very many things are clearly for so there is nothing that I can meet with against the Doctrines which I assert § 54. Having done with his Preface I come to the Remnants of his Book Where setting out with his dislike of Mr. Barlee's sharp stile as if the priviledge of railing had been bequeathed to Mr. Hickman by the proprietarie in chief and presently falling on Mr. Goodwin in such a sharpness of style as he dislikes in Mr. Barlee his elder brother for which I see Mr. Goodwin hath long since made him an example he next arrives at a profession that he never had perused my Defence of the Divine Philanthropie nor ever would he pursue it except he could finde some hours which belong neither to night nor day p. 3 yet besides his Profession of having been conversant in my writings and the use he makes of my expressions as his own he frequently cites the words and pages even of that very Book and farther avows he hath read it over p. 101. Next he quarrels with Mr. B. for printing part of his private letter which if it had not been done by his own consent he might have told me of it in time either by word or by epistle or have conveâ—ghed it to me by them in whose common acquaintance he saith we meet He is a dull Malefactor who is not provided of some excuse and therefore such as Mr. Hickman may finde out many But how his wit will hold out to reconcile the contradiction betwixt â—he fourth page of his Book and the second of his Bookish Preface I am not qualified to guess at so great a distance § 55. At last he falls upon a point which had been very material had it not failed in one Circumstance I mean the truth For telling a story of the Lutherans which he had read in Bp. Hâ—ll he misapplyes it by saying This is the case of the Calvinists They hold an absolute decree of reprobation hence it follows sayes Mr. P. That God is the author of sin p. 5. No hence it follows say the Calvinists faithfully cited by Mr. P. as to their words and pages and very lines that God is the author and câ—use of sin It was not I who drew the consequence though I might rationally have done it as well as they But it was I who observed by whom it was drawn Even by them who have contended for their fanciful decrees I have made this so clear in al my papers and particularly in this Ch. 1. § 2. p. that I wonder with what forehead Mr. H. can say I finde a forehead tosay the Calvinists mâ—ke God the authorof sin Indeed when they hâ—ve said it in plainest termes they sometimes say they never said it and thence I condemned them for so much self-condemnation This the Reader may witnesse for me as by viewing other parts of my Autocaâ—risis so particularly the preface or Introduction p. 7.8 And Ch 3. p. 140.141 142. Now that I am railed at by such a mouth as Mr. Hickmans upon no other ground then my reproving him and others for their often rayling at God himself is a great addition to my contentments And whilst Mr. H. continues either to be what he hath been or to say what he hath said concerning God I hope I shall not be so unhappy as ever to have his good word Sect. 56. Had I met with such Blasphemies in any writings of Bp. Abbot or other men of our Church I should have taken that course which the Rhapsodist tells me had been the wisest p. 6 But haveing met with none such methinks the man should excuse me for my innocent desires to do no wrong Such English writers as I found guilty I very liberally named and as impartially condemned But our Divines at Dort as well as those that are named by Mr. H. were for an Index expurgatorius and so have justified me in my severity to the Doctrines which they condemned Mr. H. is therefore a very strange Person in advising me to passe by the guilt of some beyond the sea and to charge it on some at home who for any thing I know have ever been clear from that offence or if he meanes no more then this that some of our English Anti-Arminians have blasphemed as much as forein Calvinists have done let the Reader take notice that Master Hickman himself is their Accuser § 57. That argument of his if sin is a positive entity either God is the Author of it or it is God He now confesseth to be his own but onely adds that the Iesuits do use it as well as he p. 7. I have often noted the affinity betwixt the Iesuites Presbyterians But why Mr. H. should help my parallel I cannot guess Nor doe I think that that Argument was ever used by any Iesuit unless