turn I shall conclude what relates to Bishop Ridley with those words of his farewel pag. 506 Acts and Monum The Church had holy and wholesom Homilies c. It had in matters of controversie Articles so penned and framed after the holy Scripture and grounded upon the true understanding of God's word that in short time if they had been universally received they should have been able to have set in Christ's Church much concord and unity in Christ's true Religion and to have expelled many false Errors and Heresies wherewith this Church alas was almost overgone He here approves all the Articles and therefore the three before-mentioned as agreeable to God's Word As to Cranmer we have him not only owning all the Doctrine and Religion set out by King Edward but also offering if Peter Martyr might be joyned to him with four or five more to maintain that it was more pure and according to God's Word than any that had been used in England for an hundred years This had been a most foolish challenge indeed if he had not known full well that Peter Martyr and he jumped in their judgements about all the Articles and particularly that of Predestination With Heterodoxy in which he might well expect to be charged for Iames Lambert had been apposed in that point in King Henry the Eighths Reign and our Martyrs in Queen Mary's time were frequently twitted with fatality making God the Author of Sin destroying Free-will and what not The next Martyr I shall instance in is Mr. Philpot to whom Mr. Bradford refers his Friend for satisfaction in the matter of Election What he did write about Election I do not find but I find enough to make me confident that if he had written any thing about it he would have shewed himself sufficiently Calvinistical For in his fifth Examination he took occasion to ask his Popish Adversaries Which of them all was able to Answer Calvin 's Institutions which is Minister of Geneva To which Dr. Saverson replies with lye and all A godly Minister indeed of receipt of Cut-purses and Runnagate Traytors And of late I can tell you there is such contention fallen between him and his own Sects that he was feign to flee the Town about Predestination I tell you truth â—or I came by Geneva hither At which calumny Philpot â—s zeal was stirred as appears by his words I am sure you blaspheme that godly man and that godly Church where he is Minister As it is your Churches condition when you cannot answer men by learning to oppress them with blasphemies and false reports for in the matter of Predestination he is in none other opinion than all the Doctors of the Church be agreeing to the Scriptures If this be not full and home what is The profound Disputant and blessed Martyr answering for his life avows Mr. Calvin's Doctrine of Predestination to be agreeable to the ancient Doctors and Scriptures And how could a Doctrine be more amply commended His Friend Mr. Bradford will say as much for the Doctrine it self though not taking notice of Mr. Calvin as delivering it in his Institutions There is a Letter of his concerning Election to two of his Friends N. S. R. C. recorded Acts and Monuments 352. Who the persons were notified by these four letters N. S. R. C. I have no certainty but suppose that N. S. was one Skelthrop who held conditional Election and Free-will but by the pains Mr. Bradford and others took with him was reclaimed After this Epistle of Mr. Bradford's Mr. Fox adds some Notes appertaining to the matter of Election which Notes do not in the least contradict any one tittle in Mr. Bradford but more largely explain what he touched but briefly But Dr. Heylin saith Dr. H. page 42. Fox his Notes corrupt the Text and that Bradford's Notion of Predestination is plainly cross to that of the Calvinistical Party Let us see whether there be any such crossness or no. Bradford saith he believeth that Faith is the work and gift of God given to none other than the Children of God Who are they Those whom God the Father before the beginning of the World hath Predestinated in Christ unto Eternal life Answ. Is this Election cross to that of the Calvinists Do not they say against the Arminians that Faith flows from Election as a fruit of it and that it is commensurate with Election so as none believe but those who are elected It not this the very offensive Notion of Election against which the Remonstrants make such outcries The Letter further adds that though the Election be first in God yet to us it is last opened But the Doctors Election is last in God as well as last opened to us Let the Martyr proceed in his Letter By the light of the Spirit a man may see this Faith not given to all men but to such as are born of God predestinate before the World was made after the purpose and good will of God which will we may not call into disputation but in trembling and fear submit our selves to it as to that which can will none otherwise than that which is holy right and good how far soever otherwise it may seem to the judgement of reason which must needs be beaten down to be more careful for God's glory than man's salvation which dependeth only thereon as all God's Children full well see Lo here he speaks of a Predestination in which there is an unsearchable depth of an Election about which if reason not assisted by revelation should pass judgement there would seem to be in it something of injustice Whereas the Arminian Election making God to predestinate men to life upon the foresight that they would believe and to pass by others upon a foresight they would not believe hath nothing of a depth in it but is as easily accounted for as any other act of God's providence whatsoever I said before that I conceived one of those unto whom this Letter is directed was by it rectified in his judgement touching Election and the use of Free-will which he had made a condition of that Election at least I am sure one Skelthrop was made to see the light in this particular Mr. Bradford takes notice of the change wrought in him and praises God for it in a Letter to Careless page 336. Not doubting but that he would be so heedy in his conversation that his old Acquaintance may ever thereby think themselves astray In the same Letter he salutes in Christ True and his Followers hoping that God had his time for them also Now this True was a man differing from Careless in the point of Election as doth most manifestly appear by the Examination of Careless related by the Doctor page 15 16 Part 3. He thought as the Popish Clergie did that we be elect in respect of our good works But Mr. Bradford hoped he would come off from that opinion But I think he did not but still continued to sacrifice to Free-will
Venerable Synod The Judgement of the Synod of Dort in the first of the five Points against which alone or rather against one part of which alone viz. that of Reprobation the Arguments transcribed by the Doctor page 42 43 44 45 out of God's Love to Mankind do militate though he through a stupendious inadvertence speaks of them as alledged against the whole frame of the Synods Conclusion The Judgement I say of the Synod in the matter of the Divine Decrees was as followeth Article 7 Election is the unchangeable purpose of God by which before the foundation of the World according to the most free pleasure of his Will and of his meer Grace out of all mankind fallen through their own fault from their first integrity into sin and destruction he hath chosen in Christ unto salvation a set number of certain men neither better nor more worthy than others but lying in the common misery with others Which Christ also from all eternity he appointed the Mediator and Head of all the Elect and Foundation of Salvation and so he decreed to give them to him to be saved and by his Word and Spirit effectually to call and draw them to a communion with him i. e. to give them a true Faith in him to justifie sanctifie and finally to glorifie them being mightily kept in the communion of his Son to the demonstration of his mercy and praise of the riches of his glorious grace Ephes. 1.4 5 6. Rom 8.30 Article 15 The Holy Scripture herein chiefly manifests and commends unto us this eternal and free grace of our Election in that it witnesseth that not all men are elected but some not elected or passed over in God's eternal election whom doubtless God in his most free most just unreprovable and unchangeable good pleasure hath decreed to leave in the common misery whereinto by their own default they precipitated themselves and not to bestow saving faith and the grace of coversion upon them but leaving them in their own wayes and under just judgement at last to condemn and everlastingly punish them not only for their unbelief but also for their other sins to the manifestation of his Justice The Reader may perhaps expect that I should give him an account of the Judgement of the Reformed Gallican Churches in the five controverâ—ed Points But Grotius in his Epistle to N. N. Epist. Eccles. pag. 746 hath saved me this labour averring that Moulin a leading man in the Gallican Churches was though absent a chief forger of the Canons of the Synod of Dort and the only cause why they were without any examination received in France Only I must needs take notice of Grotius his calumniating humour whilst he gives out that the Dort Canons were received in the French Churches without any examination Whereas it is certain that in the National Synod at Alez Anno 1620 the Canons of the Synod of Dort were read and expended severally and attentively and by the common consent of all and every one present approved as agreeable to the Word of God and the Confessions of the French Churches as written purely and wisely and as meet to eliminate false Doctrine and to conserve true Doctrine Every man also swearing that he did approve these Canons and would according to his strength defend the same to his last breath It was also then ordained that these Canons should be sworn to and subscribed by all that were afterwards to be admitted ether to the Ministry or to any Office in the University All this was also confirmed in the next ensuing National Synod at Charenton Anno 1623. Vid. Corp. Confess edit Geneâ— Anno 1654. Can. Dordreâ—htan pag. 55. It is here said that the Dort Canons were agreeable to the former French Confessions of Faith and that they were so cannot be denied by any who will read the Confession of Faith exhibited to Charles IX Anno 1561 for these are the words of that Confession Article 12 Credimus ex hac corruptione damnatione universali in qua omnes homines natura sunt submersi Deum alios quidem eripere quos videlicet aeterno immutabili suo consilio sola sua bonitate misericordia nulloque operum ipsorum respectu in Iesu Christo elegit alios vero in ea corruptione damnatione relinquere in quibus nimirum juste suo tempoâ—e damnandis justitiam suam demonstret sicut in aliis divitias milericordiae â—uae declarat Neque enim alii aliis meliores sunt donec illos Deus discernat ex immutabili illo consilio quod ante seculorum creationem in Iesu Christo determinavit neque posset quisquam sua vi sibi ad bonum illud aditum patefacere quum ex natura nostra ne unum quidem rectum motum vel affectâ—m seu cogitationem habere possimus donec nos Deus gratis praeveniat ad rectitudinem formet Against the absolute Decree as stated by the Synod of Dort and the French Divines let us hear what can be objected out of God's love to mankind for thence doth the Doctor transcribe as confidently as if there had never any Answer been returned to that Book whereas there are few Scholars any way inquisitive after Books who do not know that it hath been answered by Bishop Davenant Dr. Twisse Amyraldus not to mention Dr. Ward and Mr. Aylesbury who have took occasion to refel some of the Book though not all it is out of that Pamphlet that the Sublapsarian opinion is argued against as Dr. H. pag. 42. 1. Repugnant to plain Texts of Scripture Ezekiel 33.11 Rom. 11.32 2 Joh. 3.16 2 Tim. 2.4 2 Pet. 3.9 Gen. 4.7 1 Chron. 28.9 2 Chron. 15.2 Ans. Now if it should prove contrary to any one of these Scriptures it were meet to be abandoned by all good Christians But many Opinions are confidently affirmed to be contrary to Scripture which are not Such perhaps is this I needed not to have said perhaps for let it be remembred that the Opinion of the Sublapsarians is but this That God hath decreed the infallible Conversion and Salvation of certain singular Persons and also the permission of some mens Impenitence and Perdition and it will soon be seen that the Scriptures produced have not so much as as a seeming contrariety to it 1. Ezek. 33.11 God saith yea sweareth that He hath no pleasure in the death of a Sinner Therefore God never decreed to let sinful Creatures finally run on in their wicked wayes What a wild conclusion is this Hence indeed it might be inferred that neither spiritual nor Eternal Death do fall under that Will of God which is called his Voluntas simplicis complacentiae But Sublapsarians do not say that they do fall under that Will If they did they must also necessarily maintain that they be things in themselves good and lovely which none of them that I ever met with do 2. It is said Rom. 11.32 God hath concluded them all in unbelief that
their infancy they would reply that they were predestinated to life or death according to the good or bad life which God foresaw they would have lead if they had come to maturity of years Do the Arminians who are so angry when called Pelagians differ from them in this I confess Arminius doth not make a man to be predestinated from foreseen Works but from foreseen Faith nor doth he make Faith the cause but a condition or decent antecedent using a less suspected term but intending the very same thing for as our incomparable Davenant hath well observed Conditions are of two sorts common distinguishing these later he defineth to be such acts or qualities which being foreseen or preconsidered in the subject contrary Divine Acts are exercised about that subject Arminius when he makes Faith a condition of Divine Election infidelity a condition of reprobation takes the word condition in the later sense and so plainly makes it the same with a meritorious or motive cause for he every where maintains that posita side ponitur electio negata fide negatur electio that Faith is a means ordained and appointed by God for the obtaining of Election therefore as that Learned Professor well concludes pag. 119 120. Sunt merae verborum praestigiae cum aiunt praevisam fidem infidelitatem esse conditioones non modo quae praecedunt praedestinationem reprobationem communiter promiscue consideratam sed etiam ex quibus oritur distinctio electorum tamen negant habere aliquam causalitatem Consequently as the Pelagians and Semipelagians did hold that the number of Elect and reprobate was not definite but indefinite and indeterminate so also do the Anticalvinists or Arminians Illud pariter non accipiunt eligendorum rejiciendorumque esse definiâ—um numerum saith Hilary Epist. ad August of the Massilians Grevincov Thes. exhib p. 137 saith the same Electio incompleta potest interrumpi ac interdum interrumpitur suntqâ—e incomplete electi vere quidem electi sed possunt fieri reprobi ac perire numerusque electorum potest angeri ac minui 3. Our third parallel shall be in the Doctrine of grace the efficaciousness of grace Hilary in the so often quoted Epistle to Austin thus describes the Massiâ—ians They affirm the will to be so free that it can of its own accord admit or refuse Cure or Medicine and Faustus plainly tells us that Though it be of the grace of God that men are called yet the following the call is referred to their own will Are our Arminians any whit more careful to give grace the things that belong to grace do they not make converting grace to be nothing else but a gentle suasion do they not every where rant against those who hold that God doth by an Omnipotent and unresistable motion beget Faith and other Divine Graces in us I shall among many places that do occur for the confirmation of this make choice onely of two Hague conference pag. 282. A man may hinder his own regeneration even then when God will regenerate him and doth will to regenerate him And Arnold against Boyerm pag. 263. saith expresly that all the operation which God useth to the Conversion of men being already performed yet this Conversion still remaineth in mans power so that he can convert or not convert believe or not believe I had thought to have proceeded to the point of perseverance but that I considered the necessary dependance of that on the other two concerning Election and Grace By what hath already been laid down it is manifest that if the Pelagians and Semipelagians were in the right then are not the Arminians mistaken but if Austin Prosper Hilary and those others whom the Church of God hath been wont to grace with the Title of Orthodox were not in an errour then Mr. Calvin and those that follow him are in the right Obj. Here I may expect it will be said that the Doctrine most quarrelled at in the Calvinists is the Doctrine of absolute reprobation and in favour of that nothing hath yet been produced out of Orthodox antiquity Ans. To that I shall answer 1. By concession that if by reprobation absolute be meant a purpose to damn any man without consideration of or respect unto sin either actual or original such an absolute reprobation is indeed unknown to all antiquity but as yet I could never meet with that Calvinist that asserted such an absolute reprobation 2. But if by reprobation absolute be meant Gods purpose to deny Grace to some according to the pleasure of his will I then stick not to affirm that such reprobation absolute is not unknown to antiquity Indeed the Ancients do rarely speak of reprobation our Church in her Articles mentions it not at all both they she leave us to gather the nature of reprobation which is but Non-Election or Praeterition from what we find laid down concerning Election Now seeing the Fathers those of them that had to with the Pelagians and Semipelagians did constantly affirm that Gods own good will not any foresight of the good use of free-will was it which moved God to give converting grace unto some they must also hold that God did out of his own good pleasure and not from any fore-sight of an ill use of free-will purpose to deny this efficacious converting grace unto others Indeed it 's scarce rational to assert that God should purpose not to cure any one because he is sick not to enlighten any one because he was by him looked on as dark and blind But concerning the Judgement of Antiquity in this matter no more shall be said at present the Reader that desires further satisfaction is referred to the Learned Davenant in the close of his most accurate Dissertation concerning Election and Reprobation As for Vossius his judgement concerning reprobation it is considered in a Manuscript by Doctor Twisse which Manuscript may possibly in a short time be published From it the World will soon see how unjustly the absolute Decree is charged with Novelty Object 2. It may be further objected that about the year 415 there were a Sect of men called Praedestinati who were accounted and condemned for Hereticks whose opinions about the Divine Decrees seem to be the very same that are now maintained by the followers of Calvin Answ. This Objection were scarce worth the taking notice of if one R. B. Gentleman in his English Manual called a Muster roll of evil Angels had not placed the Praedestinati among the Capital Hereticks but since it hath pleased him so to do upon the credit and authority of Sigebert Monk of Gemblaux it will be needful to let the English Reader know that this Predestinarian Heresie is a meer figment and that there never were any such Hereticks as the Praedestinati So much this Mr. R. B. might have learned from Doctor Twisse Answer to Gods Love to Mankind Part 1. pag. 58 59. and more fully from Iansenius Tom. 1. pag. 219 220
co-action is sufficient The fourth The Semipelagians did admit the necessity of interiour preventing grace to every Act even to the beginning of Faith and in this they were Hereticks because they would have that grace to be such as the will of man might resist or obey The fifth It is Semipelagianism to say that Christ died or shed his blood for all men without exception We to whom among the manifold cares which dayly molest our mind it lies chiefly upon our heart that the Church of God committed unto us from above the errours of wicked opinions being purged may safely pass the warfare and as it were a Ship in a calm Sea the Waves and storms of all tempests being allayed may safely sail and arrive unto the wished for Haven of salvation For the weightiness of these five Propositions tendred to us as aforesaid we have caused every of them to be diligently examined by divers Doctors in Divinity before certain Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church and have maturely considered their suffrages delivered both by voice and writing and have heard the same Doctors in several Congregations held before us largely discoursing upon them and every of them Whereas from the beginning of this discussion we enjoyned both publickly and privately the prayers of many faithful Christians to be made for the obtaining of the Divine assistance afterwards the same being more fervently renewed and the assistance of the Holy Spirit by us carefully implored at last by the Divine Majesty of God assisting we proceeded to this under-written declaration and determination The first of the aforesaid Propositions Some precepts of God are impossible to just men willing and endeavoring according to the present power they have they wanting grace by which they might be possible we declare to be temerarious impious blasphemous condemned under Anathema and Heretical and we declare it to be such The second That in the state of lapsed nature there is no resistance made to interiour grace we declare to be Heretical and as such we condemn it The third That to merit and demerit in the state of lapsed nature there is not required in man liberty from necessity but liberty from co-action is sufficient we declare to be Heretical and we condemn it as such The fourth That the Semipelagians did admit the necessity of interiour preventing grace to every Act even to the beginning of Faith and in this they were Hereticks because they would have that grace to be such as the will of man might resist or obey we declare false and Heretical and as such we condemn it The fifth That it is Semipelagianism to say that Christ died or shed his blood for all men without exception we declare false temerarious scandalous and being understood in that sense that Christ should have died only for the salvation of the Predestinated impious blasphemous contumelious derogatory to Divine goodness and Heretical and as such we condemn it We therefore command all faithful people in Christ of either Sex that they do not presume to think teach or preach otherwise of the said propositions than is contained in this our present Declaration and Determination under the censures and penalties against Hereticks and their Favourers expressed in Law We likewise command all Patriarchs Archbishops Bishops and other Ordinaries of Places Inquisitors of Heretical pravities that they repress and restrain all the Contradictors and Rebels whatsoever by the censures and penalties aforesaid and all other opportune remedies by Law fact and usage the help also of secular power being called in hereunto if need be We do not intend nevertheless by this Declaration and Definition made upon the five Propositions aforesaid any way to approve other opinions which are contained in the aforesaid Book of Cornelius Jansenius Given at Rome at St. Mary Major in the year of the Incarnation of our Lord 1653. Kal. Jun. the ninth year of our Pontificat Hi. Datarius G. Gualterius P. Ciampinus In the year of the Nativity of our Lord Iesus Christ 1653 the sixth indiction the ninth year of the Pontificat of our most Holy Father in Christ and our Lord Innocent by the Divine Providence Pope X. the ninth day of the Month of June the aforesaid constitution was affixed and published in Eccles. Lateranens ac Basilicae principis Apostolorum de urbe necnon Cancellariae Apostolicae valvis ac in acie campi Florae per me Hieronymum Marcellum Sanctissimi D. N. Papae cursorem Pro D. Mag. Corsurum P. Paulus Desiderius Cursor A good part of this condemnation of Iansenius is mentioned by Arnoldus Poelenbergius in an Epistle to Christianus Hartsoeckerus Epistolae Ecclesiasticae pag. 845 in which he pretends good man to be grieved that the Pontificians who do too often deviate from Scripture when they attribute too much to Tradition should sometimes be more wise in Divine things than our Reformed Divines who yet acknowledge Scripture alone to be the norma and regula of our faith And that the poor Iansenists might have no starting hole by slipping into which to avoid the force of this condemnation the Jesuit did put a new Article into his Creed the 12 th of December 1661 Datur in Ecclesia Romana controversiarum fidei index infallibilis extra Concilium Generale tam in quaestionibus juris quam facti Unde post Innocentii X. Alex. VII constitutiones fide Divina credi potest librum cui titulus est Augustinus Jansenii esse Haereticum quinque propositiones ex eo decerptas esse Jansenii in sensu Jansenii damnatas Whether the Doctor hath so many and so firm Friends among the Protestants must now be tried But we shall not presently fall upon the Augustan Confession It would be injurious to the Evangelical Churches in the Valleys of Piedmont if we should take no notice of their Confessions Churches of which Doctor Heylin was pleased in a former Edition of his Geography to say That they did never bow the knee to Baal of which the Frier Rayneirius Saccon writing against them Anno 1254 confesseth That they continued from the times of the Apostles In Mr. Moreland's History of these Churches I find pag. 39 40 A brief Confession of Faith made with general consent by the Ministers and Heads of Families of the Churches of the Valleys of Piedmont assembled in Angrogne Sept. 12. Anno 1532 but said to contain that Doctrine which was delivered to them by Tradition from their Fore-fathers In that Confession these are three Articles 1. All those that have been and shall be saved have been elected of God before the foundation of the world 2. It is impossible that those that are appointed to salvation should not be saved 3. Whosoever upholdeth Free-will denieth absolutely Predestination and the Grace of God I find also page 61 c. another Confession of the said Churches which was published but in the year 1655 consisting of thirty three Articles whereof the eleventh is this God saveth from Corruption and
Condemnation those whom he hath chosen from the foundation of the World not for any Disposition Faith or Holiness that he saw in them but of his meer Mercy in Jesus Christ his Son passing by all the rest according to the irreprehensible reason of his Free-will and Justice The twenty sixth is as followeth The Church cannot erre nor be annihilated but must endure for ever and all the Elect are upheld and preserved by the power of God in such sort that they all persevere in Faith unto the end and remain united in the holy Church as so many living members thereof In the close of this they protest That they do agree in sound Doctrine with all thâ— Reformed Churches of France Great Brittain the Low-Countries Germany Switzerland Bohemia Poland Hungary and others as it is represented by them in their Confessions as also we receive the Consession of Augsburg Therefore certainly they did not apprehend that their opinions about Predestination Grace Perseverance had any thing in them contrary to either the Articles of the Church of England or to the Augustan Confession both which it seems are by Doctor Heylin thought to be Anti-Calvinistical but without any reason as shall God willing be made to appear Dr. H. Pag. 30 31. Here the Doctor tells us That we need not take much pains in looking after the judgement of the Lutheran Churches which come so neer to that of the Church of Rome as to be reckoned for the same That he may not seem to be mistaken in making them the same he doth pag. 32 33 extract out of the Augustan Confession the Doctrine of the Lutheran Churches in the five points only adding one clause to the first Article out of the writings of Melancthon and other learned men of that perswasion Well what is this addition God beholding all Man-kind in their wretched condition was pleased to make a general conditional Decree of Predestination under the condition of Faith and Perseverance and a special absolute Decree of Electing those to Life whom he foresaw would Believe and Persevere under the Means and Aids of Grace Faith Perseverance and a special absolute Decree of Condemning them whom he foresaw to abide Impenitent in their Sins Ans. Would not any Man in the World think that we should have had the places quoted out of Melancthon or some other Lutheran Divine in which these things are affirmed But no such quotation is made or so much as attempted onely in the Margin we are referred to Appello Evangelium cap 4. as if all that Mr. Playfer faith concerning the Lutherans were as true as Gospel and must be believed without any examination Mr. Playfer hath four considerable Arguments against this which with him is the fourth Opinion Why are none of them answered For my part I see not what there is in these passages which the most strait narrow-throated Calvinist may not swallow for it is not here said that there is no other Decree of Election but that mentioned and the Calvinist will readily acknowledge that God hath decreed to save Man-kind under the condition of Faith and Perseverance but he will also maintain that there is another Decree by which God hath determined to bestow Faith and Perseverance in Faith on a certain number viz. all his Elect. Bate us but the impropriety of the phrases used in this addition which is so great that the Decrees of Election and Reprobation seem confounded with Justification and Condemnation and we shall all of us subscribe to it But to speak more distinctly about the Augustan Confession The composition of it we owe to the joynt endeavours of Luther Melancthon and Pomeranus Iustus Ionas being absent when these three set about the work but Melancthon did most in the business a man whose both Learning and Piety were admirable but being of too timorous a spirit he so drew up the Confession which is also called an Apology as that he seemed to some not to keep distance enough from the Papists which made his Friends blame him nor had it any good effect upon his Adversaries Pope Pius V. in an Epistle to Sigismund King of Poland thus writing Augustana Confusio so he calls it and not Confessio etsi similis est caeteris Haeresium pravitatibus tamen ob eam causam periculosior est quod levius quam caeterae a Catholicae Fidei professione declinans speciem quandam Religionis retinere videatur eo perniciosior aliis quo venenum ejus occultius latet nec eminet foras so true is the common saying Media via neque amicos parit neque inimicos tollit Grotius indeed tells us in his Votum pro pace that the Anathema's of the Trent Councel were not directed against the Augustan Confession but against the sayings of some private Persons and that Charls the Emperor did intercede at Rome that the Augustan Confession might not be put among prohibited Books But in this as in most things that did pass between him and Rivet he doth but delude his Reader No man that reads over the Trent Canons can choose but see that some of them are directed against the Augustan Confession As for the Emperour that ever he made any such Intercession it appears not If he did he had sure altered his mind when he commanded that a Confutation of the Augustan Confession should be written At least this is certain that the Emperour's Intercession availed not for it is sufficiently known that the Confession is put among the prohibited Books I have by me an Index of prohibited Books Printed at Antwerp 15â—0 but approved by Pope Pius IV. Anno 1554 in which I find prohibited pag. 16 Apologia Confessionis Augustanae Augustanae Confessionis Ecclesiarum causae quare amplexae sint retinendam ducant suam doctrinam and pag. 21 Confessio Fidei Augustanae Nor is it any wonder that the Augustan Confession is prohibited seeing the Epistles of Isaac Causabon who endeavored to oblige the Roman Catholicks as far as he could without forsaking the communion of the Reformed Churches are forbidden also Doctor Rivet in his Annotations on Grotius's Cassander only tells us that he had heard it so related but Hornebeck had met with the Papal Bull it self and exemplifieth it to the full in his Disputation upon the Bull of Pope Innocent V. pag. 177 178. It is most certain that this Confession was never intended whatever use be made of it now to be a perpetual rule or symbol for all Protestant Churches for it was made in great haste Scripsi saith Melancthon in an Epistle to Flachius Augustanam Confessionem tunc cum haberem reprehensores multos adjutorem neminem Melchior Adam in his life tells us he would often say That if he were to make or draw up that Confession again he would use more accurateness than before he could possibly use Melancthon himself in an Epistle to Ioachim Camerarius saith Ego mutabam resingeham pleraque quotidie Plura etiam mutatuâ—us si
very fair interpretation of it and subscribe unto it This I had thought to have shown but I am prevented by the incomparable Zanchy who descanting upon the agreement made betwixt the Divines and Professors of the Church and School of Argentine Anno 1563 concerning the Divine Prescience and Predestination doth also teach us how to interpret the Book of Concord Which yet all things considered might better have been called the Book of Discord so much variance did it create among those whose Wisdom and Piety it would have been to unite against the common Enemies of Reformation Here it may not be amiss to take notice that when Marbachius about the years 1561 1562 did accuse Zanchy's Doctrine of Predestination as heretical the judgement of Churches and Universities and private learned Men was desired and the University and Church of Marpurg the School and Church of Heidelberg the Church of Scaphusinm the Tigurine Church and School the Church and University of Basil besides many private Persons did justifie him as may be seen in his second Book of Miscellanies page 79 80 c. Object But do not many of the Lutherans decry Calvins Doctrine of Predestination as injurious to God and destructive of the power and practice of godliness Ans. I must needs acknowledge they do and that at such a rate and height that they have in virulence exceeded most of the Papists Like deaf adders they seem to have stopped their ears against the voice of all those who would have charm'd them into any moderation and to have that alway written upon their hearts which once dropped from Luther's Pen in a fit of passion Blessed is the man who hath not gone in the counsel of the Sacramentarians nor stood in the way of the Zuinglians nor sate in the seat of the Tigurines The first set and solemn Dispute I find betwixt Lutherans and Calâ—inists about Predestination happened in the year 1586 and was managed principally by the learned Theodore Beza and Iacobus Andreas a man of mean birth but advanced at last to be Chancellor of Tubing the place Mompelgard the occasion such as that no good success could be expected from it Frederick the Prince was from his youth trained up and instructed in the Ubiquitarian Doctrine but by going to Berne and Geneva and frequent hearing the Lectures and Sermons of Beza began to have some more favourable thoughts of the Calvinists and therefore gave entertainment to some French exiles at Mompelgard But as soon as it was buzzed into his ear that the Duke of Wittenberg had no Heir male that the Austrians would never endure him to be Successor if he favored the Hugonots and that he was already suspected so to do both because he had been at Geneva and also because he had received and given entertainment to the French Protestants upon these reasons he yielded to the Conference not to find out truth but to purge himself from any suspition of being Calvinistically affected I would not have charged so great a Prince with so carnal a design but that Scultetus in the History of his own life pag. 28 assures me that Toâ—sanus told all this in his hearing to Pezelius And indeed by reading the Conference it self as related by Lucas Osiander I found reason to suspect some such design for whereas the Prince in his Letters missive inviting to the Conference mentioned no other cause of it but the unhappy controversie about the Lords Supper Beza and his Associates must at the Conference be put upon it unpreparedly to discourse about Predestination and the Prince as if he could not in conscience endure to hear Beza's blasphemies forsooth must offer to put an end to his Speech had not Andreas who was confident he should be able to answer him desired his Highness not to give him any interruption lest afterwards it should be said that Beza was not sufficiently heard in so weighty and great a matter And yet I observe that Andreas so declareth himself about the Doctrine of Election as that Beza saw no reason to contradict him Andreas his Positions are these 1. Deus salvandos non modo praescivit sed etiam ab aeterno elegit ad vitam aeternam praedestinavit 2. Electio facta est in Christo priusquam fundamenta mundi posita sunt hâ—c est ut per Christum salvarentur 3. Salvandorum apud Deum certus est numerus These things he layeth down as matters that come noâ— under any Dispute Beza contradicts not any of these nor had he any reason to contradict them But Andreas saith This is the question Whether God have so predestinated his own Elect to eternal Life as that he hath also destinated some and the greater part of mankind before they were born to eternal Condemnation and that by his absolute and hidden decree so as that he would not have them repent be converted and saved This he denieth and so would any Calvinist that is in his wits till the terms be distinguished I do challenge all the Jesuits and Arminians now living to name and shew me that man who hath in Print ventured to affirm That God did Decree to Damn any one single Person but for Sin When it is charged on us that we say God would noâ— have men Repent what is the meaning Is this it that there are some whose Impenitence God resolves not to cure unto whom he decreed not to give the Grace of Repentance Why who can question this If the meaning be that there are some whom God never put under an obligation to Repent unto whom he never made Repentance a duty I must needs say I am yet to learn the name of that Divine who hath affirmed any such thing Alas that Scholars should not distinguish betwixt Gods will of purpose determining of events and his legislative will determining of the creatures duty or once imagine that there is a contrariety betwixt these two wills The Conference ended Beza desired that notwithstanding any difference they might still look upon one another as Brethren which Andreas would not yield to offering Beza dextram humanitatis but not dextram fraternitatis The summ of all that I would have observed concerning the Lutherans is That the more ancient of them do not differ from the Calvinists in the Articles of Predestination or Perseverance the latter do differ from them somewhat though not so much as the Arminians in both yet the latter and worser sort of Lutherans do so lay down the Doctrine of Free-will that they may easily be driven to grant both absolute Election and absolute eternal Non-election or Preterition For as Hornbeck well Summa Contro p. 726 727 This being once granted that it is not by our own strength or concourse that we are converted but only and meerly by the grace and operation of the Spirit it follows that men cannot be converted but by this his grace and that they are then only converted when this grace is given Now all are not converted
be content to enquire 1. Whether this Doctrine be of such reproach as is here intimated among Papists 2. Whether it be so offensive to Lutherans 1. If it be of reproach among the Papists it is so without any cause because men of the highest esteem and renown amongst them say as much in this matter as ever did Calvin or any of his Followers This I would the rather prove because it will wipe off the aspersion of singularity which was in some former words most unjustly cast upon Calvin Who are of greater esteem among the Papists than Lombard Thomas Aquinas Bonaventure Scotus 1. Peter Lombard the Father of School-men named as every Fresh-man knows the Master of the Sentences who lived about the year 1140 thus determines Lib. 1. dis 41. A. Cum gratiae quae apponitur homini ad justificationem nulia sint merita multo minus ipsius praedestinationis qua ab aeterno Deus elegit quos voluit aliqua possint existere merita ita nec reprobationis qua ab aeterno pâ—aeseâ—vit quosdam futuros malos damnandos sicut elegit Jacob reprobavit Esau quod non fâ—it pro meritis eorum quae tunc habâ—bant quoniam nec ipsi existebant nec propter futura merita quae praevideret vel illum â—legit vel illum reprobavit 2. Thomas Aquinas the Angelical Doctor Canonized by Pope Iohn XXII said to have got his Knowledge more by Prayer than Labour and Industry upon whose Scholastical Labours are publâ—shed as many Commentaries as on the holy Scripture is rather an Hypercalvinian than not a Calvinist in this matter of the absolute Decree The Supralapsarian way is by Arminius in his Conference with Iunius imputed to him Least Arminius should be thought so kind-hearted as to grant more than was needful let us hear Matthaeus Rispoâ—is Divus Thomas ubicunquâ— de ea re loquitur semper docet nullam esse causam reprobationis sed sicut praedestinatio ita reprobatio voluntatem Dei ut causam habet Quam opinionem sequuntur omnes Thomistae praecipue c. Lib. de Praefia quâ—st conclu 3. But it may be Reprobation is not the same thing with Thomas and Calvin Let Aquinas speak for himself part 1. q. 23. art 3. Reprobatio non nominat praescientiam tantum sed aliquid addit secundum rationem sicut providentia sicut enim praedestinatio includit voluntatem conferendi gratiam ita reprobatio includit voluntatem permittendi aliquem cadere in culpam inferendi damnationis poenam propter culpam 3. Bonaventure Reader among Dr. Heylin's Franciscan Friers much about the same time that Aquinas was Reader among the Dominick-Friers canonized by Pope Sixtus IV called generally the Seraphical Doctor of so much sanctity of life and integrity of manners and profound knowledge that his Master Alexander Ales was wont to say In hoc uno Adam non peccavit thus declares himself Lib. 1. disp 40. q. 1. Simpliciter loquendo quantum ad principale significatum neutra i. e. neque electio neque reprobatio cadit sub-merito quantum autem ad connotatum reprobatio cadit sub merito simpliciter praedestinaâ—io vero secundum quid By the principale significatum he means the Act or Decree of Reprobation by the connotatum he intendeth the effect of Reprobation viz. Damnation 4 Finally Iohannes Duns a man of stupendious subtlety called by the admirable Scaliger lima veritatis is very express and punctual for absolute Election and Reprobation Places twice ten might be produced but it is needless to produce testimonies in a matter confessed by the Adversaries of the Absolute Decree Let Micraelius speak Heterodox Cal. disp 40. parag 49. Scotus alias Iohannes Duns Doctor ille 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seculo 14 contra Thomam defendit illam rigidam sententiam quod Quicquid Deus operatur circa creaturas operetur beneplacito voluntatis suae ut sâ—per hoc non sit ratio vel causa petenda lib. 1. dist 41. quodquâ— Deus sola beneplaciti voluntate de tota massa perdita voluerit quosdam homines misericorditer liberare quosdam non ut bonitatem manifâ—staret in electis quidem per misericordiam in reprobis pâ—â— justitiam Et cum alii Scholastici ut Henricus istam propositionem graviter arguerent dicendo 1. Defectum culpâ— non requiri per se ad manifestationem bonitatis 2. Malitiam in mundo miseriam non esse de perfectione universi propterea non placuisse Deo simpliciter ut aliqui in malitia miseria permanerent 3. Dei intentionem non fuisse dum peccata permittit ut habeat quod puniat sed ut bonum inde eliciat 4. Malitiam praevisam esse rationem motivam ob quam damnare reprobum Deus constituerit Scotus hic sese opposuit defendit illam certam praevisionem futurorum contingentium esse ex determinatione voluntatis divinae si offerantur duo aequales in naturalibus ex iis unus praeordinetur ad gratiam vitam aeternam alter non non esse aliam rationem assignandam nisi voluntatem divinam quae quidem est ipsissima sententia Calviniana Is that a Doctrine of reproach among the Papists that hath been defended by so many learned Doctors of the Papal Church Perhaps though the Doctor will not account the Puritan Protestant worthy the name of a Protestant yet he thinks the Puritan Papist or Jesuit the onely Papist If so I cannot deny but that the Doctrine of absolute Reprobation is to them odious enough Molina in his 23. Quest. Art 4 5 having granted that his Schoolmen do commonly maintain absolute Reprobation and not daring to deny but that Austin maintained it too concludes that It s too hard and unworthy of the Divine goodness and clemency more meet for a fierce and cruel than for a most clement Prince the Author of all consolation goodness piety But yet I am sure Bellarmine and Benedictus Pererius were both Jesuits and if we may believe the judgement of learned men concerning them as learned as any two that ever were of that Order yet either I understand not their Latine which is easie enough or they do not speak with reproach concerning the absolute Decree Bellarm. de grat lib. arbit lib. 2. cap. 16 Dicimus reprobationem duos actus comprehendere alterum negativum alterum positivum siquidem reprobi opponuntur electis contradictorie contrarie Primum enim non habet Deus voluntatem illos salvandi deinde habet voluntatem eos damnandi Quod attinet ad priorem actum nulla datur ejus causa ex parte hominum sicut neque praedestinationis Benedictus Pererius in his Comment on the ninth to the Romans roundly takes up Ambresius Catharinus for reproaching the opinion of the absolute Decree with those ugly names of cruel impious desperate 2. The Doctor tells us that this Calvinistical Doctrine is offensive to the Lutherans of what sort soever Which whether
there is not the least contrariety betwixt them Both hold universal Redemption in the sense laid down by Dr. Davenant in his most excellent Dissertation de morte Christi Neither of them maintain it in any other sense Both of them heartily agreed and subscribed to the Canons of the Synod of Dort made in the second Article as did also our British Divines who yet had received it in charge from King Iames not to deny that Christ died for all and every man Moreover it is most manifest that Crocius did in the Synod maintain the Universality of Christ's death by a Letter written to him from one of his Colleagues from Brente during the Session of the Synod Anno 1619 Feb. 25. For in that Letter he hath thanks given him for maintaining the Universality of Christ's death and is told that his Opinion was approved by all to whom he had shewn it Vide Crocii Disser secundam de Peccato Originis pag. 61 62. Dr. H. page 56. The general Body of the Synod not being able to avoid the inconveniences which the Supralapsarian way brought with it were generally intent on the Sublapsarian way but on the other side the Commissioners of the Churches of South-Holland thought it not necessary to determine which were considered man faln or not faln while he passed the Decrees of Election and Reprobation But far more positive was Gomarus who stood as strongly to the absolute irrespective and irreversibls Decree exclusive of mans sin and our Saviours sufferings as he could have done for the holy Trinity and delivered his own judgement in writing apart by it self Answ. Thus our Historian But what saith Dr. Balcan page 25 So ended the reading of the judgements of all the Colledges concerning the first Article in which praised be God for it there was not the least suspition of dissention in any thing And it is to be noted that all of them determined homo lapsus to be the subject of Predestination except Gomarus whom all men know to be against it and the South-Hollandi who only said they would determine nothing of it One Doctor upbraids the Synod with Dissention another praises God as there was reason for their Unity Indeed if the difference betwixt Supra and Sublapsarians be calmly considered it will be found to be only in Apice Logico as Dr. Twiss speaks and to determine of Logical Niceties is not work proper for a Synod of Divines met together to settle the Peace of the Churches I believe the Divines Assembled in this present Convocation have as considerable differences among themselves about the Doctrine of the Trinity as this comes to nor is it to be expected that we should all agree in minutiis Logicis aut Metaphysicis any more than that we should be all of the same stature or complexion as to the outward man Mr. Hoard so much made use of by our Quinquarticular Historian plainly confesseth there is no reason that the Supra and Sublapsarians should differ about circumstances since they agree in the substance Iunius thought the three Opinions about the object of Predestination were rather seemingly than really opposite Piscator will not grant that they are opposite but only different and therefore that all three may have place he resolves the matter of Predestination into three Acts The first is the Decree of creating men to different ends this must needs have for its object massam nondum conditam The second Act is the Decree of permitting Sin and this must needs have for its object man created but not yet corrupted The third Act is the Decree of Electing and Reprobating and this must have for its object man both created and corrupted 'T is besides my purpose to enquire how much or how little is to be said against this way of reconciliation but this I undertake to prove that the distance betwixt the Supralapsarians and Sublapsarians is not so great but that they both may and ought to look upon one another as Brethren and walk in love which is the bond of perfection and fulfilling of the Law The more pity is it that they should so bitterly inveigh against each other as it cannot be dissembled that sometimes they do but this must be imputed to that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which we shall have some degrees as long as we live in this World But the Doctor as if he were perfectly free from this crime thus throweth his stones at others Dr. H. pag. 56. Nor were the differences managed with such sobriety as became the gravity of the Persons and weight of the business but brake out many times into such open heats and violences as are not to be parallel'd in the like Assemblies the Provincial Divines banding against the Foreigners and the Foreigners falling foul upon one another Ans. For proof of this we are referred to the Letters of Mr. Hales and Dr. Balcanqual from which-it doth indeed appear that some very unhandsom language was used by Gomarus and Lubbertus against Martinius and by Scultetus against him and Crocius But sure Scultetus was not Foreigners but one Foreigner Gomarus and Lubbertus were though Learned men yet constitutionally hot and cholerick and therefore apt to break out into unseemly speeches against those who opposed them Dr. Balcanqual saith he could no more blame them for being angry than he could a stone for descending to its center I more wonder that Scultetus a man of better temper should so far forget himself but he was transported through a misapprehension that his reverend and dear Colleague was abused I scarce account it Christian in Dr. Heylin to rake up and bring to remembrance the passionate speeches of men who have many years since given an account unto their Master and never to mention the satisfaction they made to the men whom they had injured For it is said page 15 that they protested they had no hard opinion of Martinius or Crocius but accounted them Learned Religious Orthodoxal were sorry for what they had done and would do so no more Page 64 we have an attempt to make another parallel betwixt the Councel of Tren◠and Synod of Dort the sum whereof is this Dr. H. That the Canons and Decrees of the Councel of Trent were so drawn up as that both Soto the Dominican and Vega the Franciscan did expound them all according to their own Opinion which yet did not only differ but also were expresly contrary And so the Conclusions and Results of the Synod of Dort were so drawn up for giving satisfaction to the Sublapsarians that those of the Supralapsarian faction might pretend some title to them also in so much that there was a bitter contention betwixt Voetius and Maresius about the sense of the Synod Answ. A comparison that halts not on one foot but upon every soot concerning which it is hard to say whether it be more spiteful or ridiculous The Opinions of the Franciscans and Dominicans differ far more than do the Opinions of the
any such practices Answ. I know not that any one hath in print affirmed that the Arminian Doctrine doth naturally lead men to Faction and Sedition but if any one have affirmed any such thing he may prove his affirmation by an argument which cannot easily be answered viz. Those Doctrines which do encline men to Pride do naturally lead men to Faction and Sedition The Arminian Doctrines do incline men to Pride ergo The Minor hath been before confirmed the Major is undeniable as being built upon plain express Scripture But the Doctor contenting himself nakedly to affirm that there is nothing in the Arminian Doctrines which can dispose the Professors of it to seditious practices tells us from some that it is not so with the Doctrine of the other Party Dr. H. Pag. 78. By which mens actions are so ordered predetermined by the will of God even to the taking up of a straw ut nec plus boni nec minus mali that it is neither in their power to do more good or commit less evil than they do and then according to that Doctrine all treasons murders and seditions are to be excused as unavoidable in them that commit the same c. Ans. There is I remember a very noted story out of Holland concerning an Anonymous Libeller who would needs father it upon the reverend and learned Dr. Carolus de Maets that God hath decreed and determined that all things should be done in that time manner place and order that in time they are done and that according to this decree and divine determination a man cannot do more good or evil than he doth or omitteth quite leaving out the explication that was used by the judicious Professor viz. that in a divided sense a man may do more good and avoid more evil than he doth Just so doth our Historian proceed making the Calvinists to affirm that absolutely which they affirm not but with a distinction In sensu composito a man cannot do more good than he doth nor abstain from more evil than he abstaineth from but in a divided sense he may Which made our Divines of Great Britain in the Synod of Dort among the Heterodox assertions which they rejected place this Hominem non posse plus boni facere quam facit nec plus mali omittere quam omittit falsum hoc est absonum sive de homine irregenito animali intelligatur sive etiam de renato gratia sanctificante suffulto The learned Camero was charged by his angry Adversary Tilenus to hold that man could not do more good than he doth nor omit more evil than he omitteth To this what answereth he Ego vero libens agnosco multa esse c. pag. mihi 704 I willingly acknowledge that there are many things which uttered simply do and that deservedly breed offence which very things if they be expressed conditionally appear such as that no man dare contradict them e. c. If any one shall say that Pharaoh could not let Israel go he would offend the ears of all if he add not unless God soften the heart of the wicked man but God hath not decreed to do that therefore it shall not be it cannot be that Pharaoh let Israel go Now his speech will offend no man no not Tilenus himself who doth not deny but that on hardened persons there doth lie and that by the decree of God a necessity of sinning Nor can the Arminians those of them who assert Divine praescience tell how to extricate themselves out of the labyrinth but by the help of this distinction in sensu composito diviso which is made use of by Curcellaeus in his Epistle to Limburgius from Amsterdam Decemb. 13. 1653. To be short there is no Doctrine that can more encline the heart to quietness patience contentedness all which are perfectly contrary to sedition and rebellion than doth the Augustinian or if that must be the name Calvinian Doctrine For this being once firmly imprinted on our hearts that all things come to pass according to the determinate counsel of God's will that the worst of Persecutors are but the staff of his indignation do fulfill the will of his purpose when they most cross and go against his legislative will what place is there left for murmuring what place for envie or revenge against second causes or instruments It was not an Arminian but a Calvinistical apprehension of God's providence about sin which Ioseph had when unto his Brethren fearing lest after their Father's death their old unkindness should be remembred he answered Gen. 50.19 20 Fear not for am I in the pâ—ace of God but as for you ye thought evil against me but God meant it unto good to bring to pass as it is this day to save much people alive Nor would he be understood of the otiosa permissio that Mr. Calvin writes against when he saith Gen. 45.8 It was not you that sent me hither but God This notwithstanding Dr. Heylin will quote some testimonies and authorities tending to prove that Calvinism or doctrinal Puritanism is destructive to all Civil Policy and Government Some scraps he produceth from the old Lord Burley from the Bishop of Oxford Rochester St. Davids from Dr. Brooks once Master of Trinity Colledge But he is I believe afraid to come either to the pole or to the scale either to weigh or to number authorities with us We 'll undertake among English Protestant Divines and Statesmen to produce forty who deny Calvinism to have any tendency to Sedition for one who hath laid any such thing to its charge And 't is a shrewd sign that the Doctor was hard put to it to find out Abettors for his Cause else he would not have set Cerberus to bark against his Adversaries which yet to his no small shame he doth page 79 80. This Campneys was in Edward the Sixths time a Papist a railing furious Papist and as such did suffer though not unto death At the beginning of Queen Elizabeths he began to make disturbance in the Church nibling at the Doctrine that was generally received and entertained by men every way his betters in so mâ—ch that he was generally voiced to be Popish and Pelagian His Pamphlet if it might be called his unto which he was ashamed to put his name was quickly conâ—uted by Mr. Crowly and Vâ—ron men famous in their generation of more judgement and insight in the ancient Fathers than to ascribe the Questiones Vet. Novi Testamenti to St. Austin which every Puny knows to be the fruit of some Pelagian brain I had thought to have followed our Historian and to have given some account of his second and third Part in which he goes about to perswade us that the Doctrine now called Arminianism was and is the Doctrine of the Reformed Church of England But this work is already done to satisfaction by Theophilus Churchman in his Reviâ—w If any say this is but a shift I do here
desire either Dr. Heylin or any Friend of his to direct me to the best Argument in either of those two Books and if I do not presently make it appear that that Argument is either so weak as not to need an Answer or else already answered I shall then yield the Cause Till this be done I shall not think that that can be the Doctrine of the Church which was contradicted by all or the major part of our learned Divines and Professors or that the whole Church or any lawful Authority in the Church would impose it on her own Members to recant her own Doctrine Seeing the Church is wont to enjoyn Recantation to those who contradict her Articles why she should enjoyn the Recantation of Arminianism if that be agreeable to her Articles he had need have the wisdom of all the seven wise men that can shew a reason I conclude humbly beseeching all those who are entrusted with Ecclesiastical Authority that they would not be so intent on Discipline as to neglect Doctrine that they would not let Pelagianism enter in under pretence of opposing Puritanism that Calvin 's Institutions and the 39 Articles which a Convocation in Oxford joyned together may not now be put asunder Here I had thought to put an end to my Animadversioâ— on the Doctor 's History supposing it needless to wipe ofâ— the aspersion of Arminianism from the English Church which scarce any one of our own for fourscore years had the confidence to cast on her Yet having since considered that men easily believe that which they greatly desire and finding many very many mens wits at work to gather up any thing that may evince so much as the least probability that a meerly conditional election was never reprobated by the Martyrs Composers of our Homilies and Articles I have taken up a resolution to give my self the unpleasing trouble of running through the second and third Part of the Doctor 's History that so the Reader may not have so much as a straw left to stumble aâ— The first thing done in the second Part is to lay down the Doctrine of our Church concerning the fall of man and his recovery â—y Christ. Which Doctrine should have been gathered from our Articles or from some Homilies purposâ—ly written of those subjects but the Doctor gathers iâ— fâ—om the Homily of Chrâ—st's Nativity Many of his dear Frâ—ends wâ—ll conâ—â—â—im no thanks for so doing But I am conteâ—t â—o â—et aâ—l that he hath collected pag. 4 5 6 pass as the unquestionable Doctrine of our Church Yea I rejoyce to find it acknowledged that Adam by his Fall became the Image of the Devil the Bondslave of Hell and nothing else but a Lump of Sin and that this so great and miserable a Plague fell not only on him but also on his Posterity and Children for ever Hence I infer that they are no Sons of our Church who either quite deny Original Sin or make it to be no Sin properly so called I infer also secondly that the story of which the Doctor is so proud page 7 doth not represent the case in which God found fallen man For the King of Lombard found in Lamistus both a power to lay hold on his Hunting-spear and a willingness to save himself by it but if man be the Image of the Devil and nothing but a lump of Sin he hath no power till it be given him so much as to accept of Grace offered nay his carnal mind is enmity against all the Laws by which God would bring him to happiness As for the Principle laid down page 6 towards the end that as were the Acts of God in their right production so were they primitively in his intention it is very unfitly expressed and either the meaning of it is only this that as God did put forth his Acts in time so he purposed eternally to put them forth or else it is most absurd and contrary to all Principles of Philosophy and Theology The next attempt is fouly to bespatter Wickliff Frith Barnes Tindal As concerning Wickliff it is said Dr. H. page 8 9. That it cannot be proved that our Reformers had any eye at the man and that his Field had more Tares in it than Wheat and that his Books afford all the Sects and Heresies among us the grounds of their several dotages To make good this charge we are referred to Thomas Waldensis and Nicholas Harpsfield and lest we should except against them to that which is more liable to exception the Convocation in Henry the Eighth's time Anno 1536. Answ. To which I say first that neither Waldensis nor Harpsfield nor that discontented Convocation are meet Witnesses against Wickliff or his Followers for they all lay to their charge things which we can manifestly prove they alway abhorred 2. I set against these 1. The University of Oxford which in a Convocation Anno 1406 gave Letters testimonial to Wickliff declaring him to be a man of honesty and great worth 2. The judgement of Iohn Huss and Hierom of Prague who are acknowledged to have lighted their Candle at his and Iohn Huss had such an opinion of him that he wished no greater happiness than to be where the Soul of Wickliff was 3. Finally his own works whether printed or manuscript out of which or some of which Dr. Iames hath collected enough to prove his conformity with the Church of England Reformed 3. I will take a particular view of all the Errors fathered on him by these men or rather by the Doctor out of them 1. That the Sacrament of the Altar is nothing but a piece of Bread Mr. Fox makes mention of Wickliff's Wicket and I my self have it as it was reprinted at Oxford by Ioseph Barnes Prefaced by the Reverend Henry Iackson of Corpus Christi Colledge by the which any one may see he speaks reverently of the blessed Eucharist and strongly confuteth Transubstantiation It is there expresly said the Bread consecrated is Christ's Body in figurative speech which is hid to the understanding of Sinners 2. That Priests have no more authority to minister Sacraments than Lay-men This is a calumny as Dr. Iames his Apology for Wickliff will manifest Yet if he had maintained that a Lay-man or Woman in case of necessity may administer the Sacrament of Baptism he had been in an error but in an error common to him with the Popish Church and the Lutheran Church and our own Church till headed bâ— King Iames yea had he held that a Lay-man or woman may administer the Lord's Supper I hope the Doctor will not much swagger against him on that score seeing the beloved of his Soul Simon Episcopius affirms as much as that comes to making also the immortal Grotius his Vouchee for this opinion Lo his words in his Answer to the sixty four Questions page 39 It is not absolutely necessary that the Administration of the Supper should be performed by some Officer of the Church and therefore because in
is placed by Mr. Fox at the 22. of Ian. 1552 the sixth year of the King's Raign but a few moneths before the King 's own death He had indeed two years before lost his Protectorship and so as to that may be said to be fallen Before either his fall as Duke of Somerset or as Protector Peter Martyr and Martin Bucer had been in England Now both these Worthies I shall prove to be Calvinistical in the Points under debate And certainly the sending for two Calvinists is a better and stronger Argument that our first Reformers had a respect to Calvin in drawing up the Articles of Faith than the sending for one Melancthon is that they had an Anticalvinistical project especially if it be considered that Hierom Zanchy a Calvinist if not more than a Calvinist was also sent for over into England and had come over to assist in carrying on the Reformation if when he was just upon his journey a call to another Church had not diverted him Let me also ask What Writings of Melancthon be they that our Reformers had for their Directory The first Edition of Melancthon's Common places approved by Luther was written as Calvinistically as to the matter of Predestination as Calvin himself could desire Calvin's own Book against Pighius was approved by Melancthon and indeed dedicated to him If in any other writings he seems to contradict Calvin he doth but seem in these matters it is to be imputed not to any contrariety in his own judgement but to a contrariety in those mens tempers that he had to deal with and there is even betwixt St. Iames and St. Paul writing against contrary errors such a seeming contrariety as every man is not able to reconcile Something there is in what Lampadius writes in the continuation of Pâ—zelius his History page 409 Philippus rigidissime olim si quisquam alius de praedestinatione scripsit in Loc. communibus Anno 1523. Postea cum videret infirmos duris Lutheri phrasibus offendi perduelles eas passim cippo affixas ad inflammandum Evangelium traducere calumniari mitigavit sententiam suam ut qui satis esse putaret auditores deduci ad Christum vitae librum tanto magis fructus fidei deposceret urgeret viz. concordiam charitatem neque tamen ob hanc sobrietatem ab Orthodoxis unquam est repudiatus aut condemnatus neque ipse propterea a severioribus syntheticis alienior fuit sed ad Bezam se per omnia cum Genevensibus Orthodoxis â—acere scribit No Church can be more Melancthonian than the Church of Breme it answering by Pezelius to the Besâ—huldigung van Calvinischer the accusation of Calvinism hath these words translated We and our Predecessors have alway so declared our selves and by this do again declare our selves that as by the Magistrate of this City we are called to the Function Ecclesiastical to teach according to the Prophetical and Apostolical Writings the Catholick Symbols of Christian the Augustan Confession the Apology the Franckford Recess and the whole Body of the Doctrine of Philip Melancthon so we have by the grace of God hitherto taught congruously thereunto and by none have been convinced by solid reasons to teach any thing different therefrom in which kind of teaching by the help of God we have moreover decreed to persevere Yet the three Divines of this Church did not refuse to subscribe the Canons of the Synod of Dort so that in the opinion of these men who seem to have studied the five Points as much as any Melancthonism and Calvinism are not irreconcileable And if our first Reformers were regulated by Mâ—lancthon they and the Calvinists may shake hands as good Friends But how comes the Dr. in this History to speak more favourably of Luther than of Calvin It was but Iuâ—e 6th 1654 that he did write a Preface to his Fides Veterum In that thus he expresseth himself Though I had a good respect both to the memory of Luther and the name of Calvin as those whose Writings had awakened all these parts of Europe out of the ignorance and superstition under which they suffered yet I alwaies took them to be men Men as obnoxious unto error as subject unto humane frailty and as indulgent too to their own opinions as any others whatsoever The little knowledge I had gained in the course of story had preacquainted me with the fiery spirit of the one and the busie humour of the other thought thereupon unfit by Arch-Bishop Cranmer and others the chief agents in the Reformation of this Church to be employed as instruments in that weighty business Nor was I ignorant how much they differed from us in their Doctrinals and forms of Government And I was apt enough to think that they were no fit Guides to direct my judgement in order to the Discipline and Doctrine of the Church of Eâ—gland to the establishment whereof they were held unuseful and who by their practises and posiâ—ions had declared themselves Friends to neither Here 's plain downright dealing indeed sentence given impartially Luther and Calvin both 〈◊〉 by thâ—ir practises and positions declared themselves to be Friends neither to our Doctrine nor Discipline both much differed from us in their Doctrinals and Forms of Government both were thought unâ—it by Arch-Bishop Cranmer c. to be employed as instruments in the Reformation of this Church Luther was of a fiery spirit Calvin of a busie humour and yet the Doctor presently adds he was never Master of so little manners as to speak reproachfully of either Luther or Calvin All other men whatever I suppose think he hath spoken reproachfully of both those Reformers in sundry of his Books and in the passage before us he speaks not over respectfully concerning either of them and I believe vilely wrongs both and Cranmer too For where doth it appear that the Arch-Bishop thought either Luther because of his fiery spirit or Calvin because of his busie humour unfit to be employed in the Reformation of this Church Our Church was not reformed to any great purpose till Luther was in his grave for he died the 8 th of Feb. 1546 not a month after King Henry the eighth whose decease is placed by Iohn Speed 28 Ian. 1546. How far Reformation was advanced by that King may be collected from his Will signed Decemb. 30. 1546 in which Masses multitudes of Masses are appointed to be said for his Soul Indeed Mr. I. Fox acquaints us from A. Cranmer that the King the August before he died declared his purpose to abolish all Masses and in stead of them to set up the Communion Had he lived and performed that resolution and had Luther lived to hear of the Performance of it yet might not Cranmer perhaps have accounted it adviseable to keep any correspondence with him because he had written against his Soveraign more bitterly than was meet and had repented of that repentance which he sometime expressed for his bitterness
No such thing had the Arch-Bishop to charge on Calvin and therefore it is like enough would have desired his assistance in King Edward's time had he not known that Gâ—nâ—va could not or would not have parted with him Certain I am Cranmers and Calvins principles differed very little either as to Doctrine or Discipline nor did either greatly dissent from Lâ—ther unless in the matter of the corporal preâ—ncâ— of Christ in the Sacrament I have done only desiring the Râ—ader to consider 1 Whether it be not difficult to reconcile the Author of the Fides Veterum and the Historia Quinquarticularis seeing the one saith that our first Reformers had â—n eye to the Lutheran Platform and took the Articles of our Church word for word out of the Augustan Confession the other saith that Luther by a spirit of Prophecy no doubt declared himself no friend either to our Doctrine or Discipline And if any one can reconcile this contradiction then let him 2 compare our Articles with the Augustan Confession and see whether our Reformers were such plagiaries as to take their Articles of Religion all or any out of those drawn up at Ausberg And then 3 let him also well weigh whether it be not a great discouragement to all good endeavours to say that Luther and Calvin after all their prayers and study were as subject to error and humane frailty and as indulgent to their own opinions as any men whatever Learning and Piety would scarce be so earnestly prayed for if after we had attained both in some good measure we should still remain as subject to error as obnoxious to humane frailty as indulgent to our own private opinions as any men how unlearned and wicked soever Is there any one else that the Doctor thinks the first Reformers attributed much unto Yes one viz. Erasmus Of whom he tells us that he was Greek Professor in Cambridge Which every one knows as also that he is put in the Catalogue of the Lady Margarets Professors of Divinity in that University but died 1536. And though it be true which the Doctor relates out of Fox that by the Protector in the first year of King Edward's Reign it was commanded That Erasmus his Paraphrasâ—s on the four Evangelists should be set in some convenient place in Churches and that every Priest should have of his own one new Testament in English and Latine with the Paraphrases of Erasmus on the same yet it doth not follow as is inferred that our Reformers intended not to advance any other Doctrine than what was countenanced in the writings of that Learned man I say this follows not or if it do follow then if follows much more from the Canon of our Convocation 〈◊〉 that our Church never intended to propagate any Doctrine but what had countenance in the Martyrology of Fox But that consequence the Doctor will at no haâ—d allow but sets himself against it totis viribus Part 3. â— 56. See the difference King Edward's Council in the first year of his Reign when the Church was scarce crept out of Popery if crept out of Popery placed Erasmus his Paraphrases in Churches therefore the Church intended no Doctrine but that which was countenanced in Erasmus This is a good Argument Queen Elizabeth when Reformation was come to a great height by the advice of her whole Convocation placed Mr. Fox in Churches and Houses of great resort therefore the Church intended no Doctrine but what was countenanced in the writings of Mr. Fox This is no good Argument because the case is altered But I hope the Doctor thinks the Protector did intend to propagate some other Doctrine than what was countenanced in the Writings of Erasmus Why else did he go to fight against the Scots which War was unlawful on the Principles of Erasmus If the Protector warred against his conscience yet I trow the Articles were not drawn up against the minds of those that form'd theâ— yet in one of them War is justified Yea I heartily wish that the Article of the Trinity were not against some Doctrine countenanced in the Writings of this learned man Erasmus The blot of Arianism shall not fall on his face from my pen but our new Arians the Socinians do boast of him as their own I hope not upon so good grounds as they may boast of Hugo Grotius his Countreyman But boast of him they do The Ministers of Transilvania in the most cursed Book of the Knowledge of one God number him among their Ancestors and Socinus himself in his Epistles saith of him that he was not undeservedly suspected by the Trinitarians of Arianism and of the Antitrinitarians reckoned among those who somewhat darkly renounced the Trinity But now at last that Dr. Heylin may say that he hath met with a very good natured man I will give but not yield that Erasmus his Paraphrases were eyed by our first Reformers in making their Confession of Faith What will he gain thence Truly just nothing at all or less than nothing if nothing more be found in them than what is picked out and set before us pag. 109 110 111 For in all those collections there is not one phrase or sentence that doth contradict any one of the five Points as stated by the rigidest Calvinists Even those who say that Christ died only for the Elect in which number I never put my self will bring themselves off from all and every thing that is here alledged out of Erasmus Dr. H. Pag. 110. Of universal Redemption saith the Doctor he tells us thus This Lamb is so far from being subject to any sin that he alone is able to take away all the sins of the whole World Answ. Will Amesius Gomarus or any other that most restrains the death of Christ deny this Do they not all distinguish betwixt the worth of the death and the will of him that died and say that the worth of the death was such that God might without any indecency have accepted it for the redemption of ten thousand Worlds if there had been so many But Erasmus further adds Dr. H. Ibid. He is also so gentle and so desirous of mans salvation that he is ready to suffer pains for the sins of all men and to take upon him our evils because he would bestow upon us his good things Answ. This is so dilute a speech that I will strengthen it and say that he did suffer pains for the sins of all men and yet dare peremptorily aver that no Gomarist would refuse to subscribe the saying for he can grant that Christ died with an intention to purchase some benefits for the very Reprobates and he will further say that for ought appears to the contrary Erasmus might by all men mean the genera singulorum and not the singula generum for doubtless that phrase in Scripture sometimes signifies no more than men of all sorts ages countries I wish men would either not at all dispute for the amplitude of Redeeming grace or
And the Protestant cause was not credited by him for he plaid such a prank as any ingenuous Heathen would have been ashamed of his Keeper shewing him more favour than he deserved he ran away from him and brought him into great danger Thus you may see sayes Careless the fruits of our Free-will-men that make so much boast of their own strength but that house which is not builded surely upon the unmoveable rock will not long stand against the boisterous winds and storms that blow so strongly in these dayes of Trouble This is the only Sufferer I know of that held conditional Election and surely his carriage was not so commendable that we should envy him unto our Adversaries But whereas the Doctor thinks that the strong confidence which Careless had of his own salvation and of the final perseverance of all those who are the chosen Members of Christ's Church was a thought of his own unto which the Doctrine of the Church gave no countenance It will appear that this was no singular opinion of his but a kindly derivation from the Article of Religion concerning Predestination unto Life and it seems to be that which he had learned from holy Bradford who in a Letter to Mistress M. H. under great heaviness and sorrow teacheth her That we should use all God's benefits to confirm our faith of this that God is our God and Father and to assure us that he loveth us as our Father in Christ and that God requireth this faith and fatherly perswasion of his fatherly goodness as his chiefest service Adding that no suggestion of Satan grounded upon our imperfection frailty and many evils should make us doubt of God's savour in Christ and that obedience giveth us not to be God's children but to be God's children giveth obedience And finally that as certain as God is Almighty as certain as God is merciful as certain as God is true as certain as Jesus Christ was crucified is risen and sitteth at the right hand of the Father as certain as this is God's Commandment I am the Lord thy God so certain she ought to be that God was her Father pag. 327 328. To another Gentlewoman page 330 thus he writes If he had not chosen you as most certainly he hath he would not have so called you he would never have justified you he would never have so exercised your faith with temptations as he hath done and doth if I say he had not chosen you If he have chosen you as doubtless Dear heart he hath in Christ for in you I have seen his earnest and before me and to me they could not deny it I know both where and when if I say he hath chosen you then neither can you nor ever shall perish And in the same Letter page 331 he sayes Your thankfulness and worthiness are fruits and effects of your Election they are no causes If once you had a hope in the Lord as you doubtless had it though now you feel it not yet shall you feel it again for the anger of the Lord lasteth but a moment his mercy endureth for ever In another Letter page 349 the same blessed Martyr sayes that One man which is regenerate well may be called alwayes just and alwayes sinful just in respect of God's seed and his regeneration sinful in respect of Satan's seed and his first birth Betwixt these two men there is continual conflict and war most deadly the flesh and old man by reason of his birth that is perfect doth often for a time prevail against the new man being but a child in comparison and that in such sort as not only other but even the Children of God themselves think they be nothing else but old and that the spirit and seed of God is lost and gone away where yet notwithstanding the truth is otherwise the spirit and seed of God appearing again and dispelling away the clouds which cover the Sun of God's seed from shining as the clouds in the air do the corporal Sun Many things to like purpose follow in that Letter by all which and by several Treatises in the printed Works of Mr. Bradford it sufficiently appears that he favoured the Doctrine of absolute Predestination And let any man judge whether he thought the term of a man's life to be moveable or no by some passages in his Examination page 286. As for my death my Lord there are twelve hours in the day as I know so with the Lord my time is appointed and when it shall be his good time then shall I depart hence but in the mean season I am safe enough though all the People had sworn my death Page 291 he desires them to proceed on in God's name he looked for that which God appointed them to do Upon which the Chancellor le ts fall these words This Fellow is in another Heresie of Fate and necessity as though all things were so tied together that of meer necessity all must come to pass What replies Bradford Things are not by fortune to God at any time though to man they seem so sometimes I speak but as the Apostle said Lord See how Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Prelates are gathered together against thy Christ to do that which thy hand and counsel hath before ordained for them to do Consider we next the judgement of Peter Martyr and Martin Bucer who though Foreigners had a great hand in the English Reformation As to Peter Martyr methinks there should be no question made of his judgment In his Commentary on the Romans and in his Common places he hath gone as high in the matter of God's decree as ever Calvin did But the Doctor tells us that Dr. H. Part 2. page 110. It s more than probable that Peter Martyr was not Peter Martyr whilst he lived in England Answ. If he would prove it but probable he must prove that it hath seemed so to all or to the most or to the wisest or to the most famous among those that are wise which I despair of ever seeing him prove so far am I from thinking that he will prove more than this The London Edition of his Common places is not now in many mens hands yet it is to be found in England and elsewhere and never did any one that was a possessor of it so much as adventure to affirm that in that Edition any thing was delivered concerning Predestination that was in the least contrary or seemingly contrary to what we find in the Editions more commonly used This answer the Doctor himself was somewhat diffident of and therefore did not give it until he had before made way by disparaging Peter Martyr as one Dr. H. pag. 109. Of whom there was little use made in advising and much less in directing any thing which concerned the Articles and who having no authority in Church or State could not be considered as a Master-builder Ans. Is the Doctor of the Chair of no authority in Church or State
reprobates any man who was not worthy to be reprobated All that their opinion obligeth them to is but this Not to make sin the cause of preterition or non-election comparatively considered And against such preterition there is nothing in the Prayers of our Church nothing in Latimer nothing in Hooper nothing in Cranmer nothing in the whole Tenth Chapter of the Doctor 's second Part. And it is a wonder that so ancient a Divine should trouble himself in so many pages to do execution upon a mâ—er Chimaera and yet this employment was so pleasing and acceptable to him that he falls to it again in his â—leventh Chapter In which page 64 he makes the main Controversie in the Point of man's Conversion to move upon this hinge Whether the influences of God's grace be so strong and powerful that withall they are absolutely irresistible so that it is not possible for the will of man not to consent unto the same But they that have either read the determinations of the Synod of Dort or Calvin's own Institutions know that the Controversie moves upon no such hinge but this is the Question Whether when converting Grace hath produced the whole effect God designed it unto man still remains unconverted and indifferent either to turn himself or not turn himself unto God If converting Grace do leave a man thus indifferent they say that Conversion is rather to be ascribed to man than God and that Paul made himself to differ from other Persecutors and not God But they never say that God forceth or offereth violence unto the natural faculty of the will or destroyeth any liberty that is essential to it If any violence be offered it is only unto corrupt lusts and sinful inclinations in which I hope I may have fair liberty to say that the freedom of mans will doth not consist Let but any one fairly and impartially state this Question by drawing Propositions concerning it out of the Writings before mentioned and he will find nothing in Hooper or Latimer contradictory The tenth Article of King Edward's he will find perfectly to express the mind of the Calvinists And so I might dismiss this matter had not the Doctor thought meet page 67 as also in another Writing to smite at us with a Dilemma or something like a Dilemma grounded upon the omitting of this Article in Queen Elizabeth's time Either this Article did favour Calvinism or it did not If it did not why do the Calvinists alledge it If it did why is it in our latter Editions of the Articles left out We have learnt from Logick that such Dilemma's are not to be used which may be inverted or retorted upon those that make them and such is the present Dilemma apparently notoriously such For thus I argue Either this Article is Anti-calvinistical or it is not If it be not why doth the Doctor produce it as such If it be why did our Reformers in Queen Elizabeth 's time who were as he would fain perswade us Anticalvinistical leave it out He must either answer for himself or not expect that we should answer for our selves which yet we could easily do did any Law of Disputation require it of us for this might be the reason of the omission because there was nothing in King Edward's tenth Article but what doth naturally and lineally descend from our present seventeenth Article I will follow the Doctor whither he leads me when I have first admonisht my Reader not â—o prejudice himself by what so frequently occurs among our Protestant Writers that Works done before the grace of Christ do not make men meet to receive grace For it will be found agreeable unto Scripture that Works done before Conversion may leave in the Soul a material disposition or a passive preparedness to receive grace no preparation can be wrought by them that deserves grace none from which grace necessarily flows but yet such may be wrought as from which a man may be denominated more meet and more likely to receive the undeserved love of God than if he wanted it Just as we say in Natural Philosophy that though the rational soul do not emerge out of the organization of the matter but is immediately inspired by God yet an organical matter is a more prepared subject to receive such a soul than a matter not organized I promised after I had laid down this caution to follow the Doctor and so I will to his Twelfth Chapter But in it I shall not need to stay long with him for it is wholly spent in laying down the Doctrine of Free-will as it was agreed upon in the Popish Convocation Anno 1543. Wherefore though there be nothing in the Article of Free-will there delivered but what a Calvinist allowing him but a favourable interpretation may subscribe to yet the Doctrine of the Reformed Church of England must not be measured by the decisions of that Popish Convocation In the Thirteenth Chapter entituled Concerning the certainty or uncertainty of Perseverance passing over the Council of Trent which will be of no use to us to find out the Doctrine of the Church of England Pag. 81 the Calvinists are charged to presume not only to know all things that belong to their present justification as assuredly as they know that Christ is in Heaven but also to be as sure of their eternal election and of their future glorification as they are of this Article of their Creed that Christ was born of the Virgin Mary If any Calvinist â—ver said so he erred greatly not knowing the Scriptures or the deceitfulness of his own heart But if never any Calvinist said so what shall then be done to him that so presumptuously bears false witness against them Certainly the Calvinists do not hold that the Doctrine of Perseverance is so fundamental or so clearly delivered in Scripture as the Doctrine of Christ's Nativity so far are they from holding that they themselves or any of them do as certainly know the goodness of their present state or their eternal election as they firmly believe the Article of their Saviour's being born of the Virgin Mary They are all wont to distinguish of a certitude of the object and a certitude of the subject they say 't is certain from the Word that he who is a sound Believer shall continue to be a Believer until he attain the end of his Faith But they say a man may be a Believer and yet not be certain that he does believe and if once he had a certain perswasion of his faith he may lose that perswasion and many of them I am sure say that he must lose it as oft as he falls into any conscience-wasting sin This is the Doctrine that agrees with our Articles and with the judgment of our first Reformers If any man deliver the Doctrine of Perseverance at a higher rate the Calvinists are not concerned to defend him The sixteenth Article of our Church is brought by the Dr. against Perseverance The words
any it is for a possibility of total falling as we shall hear anon Is this to say expresly that the Church hath so determined then farewel the study of Logick I am sure however that if he said it he hath not proved it Pag. 29 he quotes the words of the Article After that we have received the Holy Ghost we may depart away from grace and fall into sin and by the grace of God we may rise again and amend our lives After quoting of them as if his heart had misgiven him he addeth Haply you will quarrel at the sense of the Articles but then you must remember that the plain words sound to the meaning for which I have produced them and that until the Church it self expound otherwise it is as free for me to take it according to the letter as for you to devise a figure Which done he goes on most untruly to tell the World that this Article was challenged for unsound by the Ministers at the Hampton-Court Conference Of which untruth and sundry others relating to Dr. Overal and the Bishop of London he hath been told by so many that it is a wonder any man should not be ashamed to plough with his Heifer The Arguments out of the Liturgy whether in the form of Baptism or in the publick Catechism or Rubrick before Confirmation are quite besides the Controversie which is by many Calvinists restrained to the grace bestowed on Adult persons and by none understood of that Sacramental grace given to the Seed of Believers in Baptism His Reasons from the Homilies if they were of any force when managed by another do lose their whole strength when they come from him who hath told us That he willingly admits the Homilies as containing certain godly and wholsome Exhortations but not as the publick dogmatical Resolutions confirmed by the Church of England They may seem to speak somewhat too hardly and stretch some sayings beyond the use and practice of the Church of England But let it suffice that he hath trampled upon our Homilies with a foot of pride I dare not so do honouring the memory and reverencing the judgment of those who made them and much more the Authority that hath enjoyed them to be read in Churches Let Mr. Mountague and Dr. Heylin argue from the Homilies as if they had never traduced them Mr. Mountague argues from the title of one of the Homilies which is Falling away from God as if the very title were a sufficient warrant for his opinion Whereas no one of our Homilies is entituled Of falling away from God but only Of falling from God Ridiculous it would be adds D. Heylin p. 88. to write a Sermon de non ente to terrifie the people with the danger of that misfortune which they were well assured they should never suffer By which addition he makes himself more than ridiculous for people are not by the Calvinists well assured that they shall never suffer the misfortune of falling from God but are told that they fall from God as oft as they turn away from God's Law and that by every such turning away from God's Law if wilful they lose some degree of grace and expose themselves to the wrath of God and lose all sense of his favour and this is sufficient to terrifie any man that is in his right wits and senses Nor doth the Homily it self more favour them than the title of it Out of which neither collects more than a conditional If they be unthankful If they do not order their lives c. Now the very Rule of the Logicians is Conditionalis nihil ponit in esse Will Doctor Heylin quarrel against this Rule Yes for Mr. Yates having brought such a kind of Answer he saith of it that it is a sorrier shift than any before for if such conditional Propositions conclude nothing positively what will become of all those Propositions in the Scriptures by which we are assured If we repent we shall find mercy of the Lord Do they conclude nothing positively neither Most miserable were the state of man if these conditional Propositions should conclude nothing to the comfort of a troubled conscience pag. 96. O dreadful ignorance Can a conditional Proposition conclude nothing positively and determinately unless it conclude that its antecedent shall actually come to pass or may come to pass When Paul saith If an Angel from Heaven preach another Gospel let him be accursed this conditional will conclude that whoever preacheth another Gospel is accursed it will not conclude that ever any Angel can or shall preach another Gospel What pity it is that men should adventure to write Books after they have forgot the common Elements of Logick and what shame is it that men should dare to bring in passages out of our Homilies and omit a material Parenthesis that occurs in all Copies of them as any one may see that both Mr. Mountague and Dr. Heylin have done I only desire seeing the Homilies are commonly to be had that my Readers would be pleased to compare them with the quotations of Dr. Heylin p. 89 and remember that the thing he is to prove out of the Homilies is that real Saints may fall totally and finally from sanctifying grace received and then let him be deceived if he can provided that he will also consider what passages Mr. Yates and Mr. Prin have collected out of the Homilies to confirm Perseverance One more Authority Dr. Heylin produceth and it filleth up pag. 90 91. It is the Authority of Lanceiot Ridley Archdeacon of Canterbury out of whose Comment on the Colossians he collects something relating to all or most of the controverted Points but the Collections if all truly made have not in them so much as a seeming contrariety to any of Mr. Calvin's Tenents But in this very Arch-deacon's Comment on the Epistle to the Ephesians Mr. Prin finds personal Election and if Election then Perseverance also The Doctors not medling with that Commentary his not mentioning Bartholomew Traheron Dean of Chichester and Library Keeper to King Edward nor Thomas Beacon nor Anthony Gilby nor Stephen Garret all famous in King Edward's Reign and whose Books might easily have been procured by one that lived so near Oxford as Lacy Court is an undeniable evidence that he himself did not think King Edward's Divinity and his own to be the same In all the third Part our Historian is put to horrible shifts and plays a very low game indeed And no wonder for he finds the opinions he contends against delivered out of the Chairs in the University countenanced by all Authority Civil and Ecclesiastical his own opinions he finds censured recanted never printed but in hugger mugger and by stealth and yet I do not find him much changing countenance but rather with confidence enough asserting himself a Son of the Church and his Doctrine a Doctrine of the Church His first attempt is to disgrace the Calvinists by calling them Gospellers For thus
of those that vigorously fought against it We need not say that Campneys deserved all the ill names that Veron and Crowley bestowed on him perhaps their zeal might be in some particulars too bitter yet we cannot think that men of so great repute and learning would charge Pelagianism and Popery upon one that had honestly declared himself against both Popery and Pelagianism The Doctor tells us that Campneys hath sufficiently purged himself of both these crimes And indeed by reading his Book I find that he hath declared himself against Merit but so hath many a professed Papist done He doth also muster up the errors of Pelagius publickly recanted by him in the Synod of Palestine declaring them or at least one of them to be vile and abominable This notwithstanding it is possible he might be a very Pelagian Austin himself doth not speak more sharply against Pelagius than do the Ring-leaders of the Semipelagians and yet they erre as bad an errour as the Pelagians do But of all these matters let indifferent Readers judge by comparing Campneys Book with the Answers made to it More I need not say about the sixteenth Chapter had it not pleased the Historian to defame Calvin Beza and Knox. Calvin and Bâ—za he charges with unworthy practices used against Sebastian Castalio a man he says of no less learning but of far more modesty and moderation than either of them yet they never left persecuting and reviling him till they had first cast him out of Geneva and afterwards brought him to his grave meerly because he differed from them about Predestination Calvin and Beza's learning modesty and moderation are sufficiently vindicated by others Castalio discovered little either of modesty or moderation in his bitter censures of the Book of Canticles or in the help and assistance he afforded unto the cursed Socinians Beza and Calvin are not the only persons that have condemned him nor did they condemn him meerly or principally for differing from them in the point of Predestination as the Doctor might have known if he had rather consulted the impartial Historians of that time than Castalio's own writings For Mr. Knox styled pag. 5 The great Incendiary of the Nation and Kirk of Scotland I will not undertake an Apology His own Country-men who were better acquainted with his principles and practices may better do it Yet because I find him to have taken great pains in promoting our Reformation here in England I shall adventure to mind the Doctor that Spotswood purposely employed by our King to write the History of the Kirk of Scotland and having also by the King liberty given him to write truâ—h impartially doth make very honourable mention of Mr. Knox. And our own Bishop Ridley joyns him with Latimer Leaver Bradford and commends them all for their sharp reproof of all sins and sinners in King Edward's days Dr. H. Part 3. pag. 18. No sooner had that gracious Lady Queen Elizabeth attained the Crown than she took order for the reviewing of the publick Liturgy appoiâ—ting for the review Dr. Parker Drâ— Gâ—indaâ— Dr. Pilkington Dr. Cox Dr. May Dr. Bill Mr. Whitehead Sir Thomas Smith Answ. 'T is true such a revision was appointed and performed by the men here mentioned I intend not a character of them they have their characters already given them by abler Pens but so principled they were that if any thing had been left in the Liturgy favouring conditional Eâ—lection or the Apostasie of Saints it had not failed to be blotted out The Injunctions of Queen Elizabeth are mentioned by the Doctor pag. 19 in which he observes that Erasmus his Paraphrases were appointed to be provided for every Church Injunct 6. and Injunct 16 that every Parson Vicar Curate Stipendiary Priest he omits under the degree of a Master of Arts should provide and have of his own the New Testament in Latine and English with the Paraphrases the Injunction saith only with Paraphrases The conclusion he hence infers hath been before considered I must take notice that the 51. Injunction straitly chargeth and commandeth that no manner of person shall Print any manner of Book or Paper of what sort nature or in what Language soever it be except the same be first licenced by her Majesty by express words in writing or by six of her Privy Conncel or be perused and licenced by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York the Bishop of London the Chancellors of both Universities the Bishop being Ordinary and the Archdeacon also of the place where any such shall be Printed or by two of them whereof the Ordinary of the place shall always be one and that the names of such as shall allow the same be added to the end of every such work for a testimony of the allowance thereof From this Injunction I infer that Campneys had no respect at all unto the Queens Order or else he would not have published his Papers without Authority I also infer secondly that neither Queen nor Councel nor Archbishops nor Bishops were of Campneys mind because else he would have prevailed with some of them to authorize his Book that it might have been more passable And now if the Doctor have got any thing by these Injunctions much good may it do him Dr. H. Pag. 20. Here he gives us a very merry conceit that the Zuinglâ—ans being increased exceedingly both in power and numbers and notice being taken thereof by those that were of most Authority in the government of the Church it was thought necessary that the Articles of Religion published 1552 should be reviewed accommodated to the use of the Church and made to be the standing Rule by which all persons were to regulate and confirm their Doctrines Answ. He would have extreamly obliged us had he but vouchsafed to name any one person intrusted in the government of the Church at that time who was in the least offended with the Zuinglian Doctrine We have Records from which it may appear who were Anno 1562 Archbishops and Bishops amongst them all it will be hard to find any one that was not a cordial Friend unto the Doctrine of Zuinglius and Calvin some of them are blamed for agreeing too well with them in matter of Discipline and Ceremony also the names of almost all may be found in Mr. Fuller Book 9. p. 69. But the Historian would have done no less than wonders if he had informed us how the passing of the Articles in Queen Elizabeth's first Convocation could be a probable means to suppress the growth of the Zuinglian Doctrine Certain I am that if they were designed for any such use they had no prosperous success but were in the days of Queen Elizabeth and King Iames made use of to suppress the Antizuinglian Doctrine Indeed the seventeenth Article plainly lays down such a Predestination as the Anticalvinistical ear cannot hear and the Homilies so much commended in the Articles have a little too much Calvinism in them for they place Faith in such a
me how it appears that Mr. Harsnet and his Sermon was so censured and condemned I answer It appears from the plain testimony of Mr. William Prin page 304 of his Perpetuity printed at such a time when Prudence as well as Conscience would have restrained him from uttering an untruth against so great a man as Harsnet was then become Can it be imagined that if this had been a slander so great a Prelate of our Nation would not have demanded reparation and satisfaction As for the Doctor 's Argument that seeing the Sermon was preached at the Cross the University could take no cognizance of it it is such as I suppose upon second thoughts he will wish he had never made use of And he hath as much reason to wish that he had never troubled his Book with any thing of Bishop King's Lectures upon Ionah in which nothing is to be found against absolute Predestination nor yet any thing from which any probable collection can be made that the Bishop had conceived in his own mind any opinion about it contrary to Mr. Calvin's nor could the Doctor himself collect any thing from them till he had first supposed which no one will grant him that there is the same reason of God's eternal Election and his Promises as of his eternal Reprobation and his threatnings This done the Historian fills his nineteenth Chapter with lamentations and weeping bewailing the sad condition of the Church that was feign in her Reformation under Queen Elizabeth to make use of any Learned man that had zeal against Popery to discharge the places of greatest trust and Authority in the Church how Calvinistical soever they were for Doctrine But when was that it the Church was put to this strait was it not in the first years of Queen Elizabeth and particularly in the year 1562 when the first Convocation was held If so what a piece of boldness was it to say that that Convocation drew up Articles with any purpose to give check to Doctrinal Calvinism and what uncharitableness is it to affirm that our learned Divines did change their minds when for a few years they were forced to change the air in the Reign of Queen Mary What men of note had they to converse with beyond the Seas whose Opinions and Arguments they had not read and considered while in England They must needs be clouds without water if the breath of Calvin and Martyr could so easily toss them to and fro But we know those that went over Conformists came home Conformists and those that went over Non-conformists came back Non-conformists though somewhat strengthened in their Non-conformity by the communion they had with the Protestant Churches beyond the Seas I shall hereafter shew that not only Non-conforming Divines but also the most zealous Conformists did set themselves with all their might to declare against and crush the Arminian Doctrine as soon as in any place it began to be be delivered And the Doctor may do well to remember that Mr. Hooper and Mr. Bradford whom he hath before made so much use of though to little purpose were both of them Non-conformists in King Edward's days and Mr. Latimer whom he also challengeth for his own was litle better than a Non-conformist letting fly sufficiently at the Dignities of the Reformed Prelates So that if these three men had been as much for him as he pretends a man might say English Arminianism did spring out of the root of Non-conformity but it will appear that it did spring from opposition to those wholsom Doctrines in which all our Reformers how much soever differing about Ceremonies agreed Mr. Iohn Fox his Martyrology though dedicated to the Queen and by her accepted graciously though highly honoured by a Canon of the whole Convocation 1571 the Historian expresly saith he looketh on as the first great Battery which was made on the Bulwarks of this Church in point of Doctrine by any Member of her own page 58. A piece of confidence suitable to that which carried him to say King Edward was an ill principled Prince and that his removal by death was no infelicity of our Church And it is the more inexcusable because in all his Histoâ—iâ—s about our Reformation he lighteth his Candle so oft at the Martyrologist's It seems he loveth darkness rather than light if it come from Geneva Bishop Hall to whom Episcopacy oweth far more than to Doctor Heylin calleth Fox a Saint-like Historian and for such he will be accounted as long as any one drop of good Protestant bloud runneth in our English veins But did the Convocation appoint no balm for that wound made by the Martyrology Yes that it did he thinks What was it Another Canon page 60 that men should teach no other Doctrine in their publick Sermons to be believed of the People but what was agreeable to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament and had from thence been gathered by the Catholick Fathers and ancient Bishops I say If this Canon had been observed Mr. Harsnet had never preached his Sermon He thinks Calvinism had never been preached because maintained by none of the Catholick Fathers and ancient Bishops but Saint Augustine only who was but one Bishop but one Father All Calvinists will now easily forgive him his reproaches against Calvin seeing he spares not St. Augustine But I hope he will not forgive himself that passion which produced so great an untruth Had he said none before St. Augustine maintained Calvin's Doctrines the mistake had been excusable so is it not to say that no Catholick Father or ancient Bishop maintained it besides St. Augustine Doubtless Prosper and Hilary were both Catholick Fathers and ancient Bishops yet they as much maintained Calvin's Opinions as St. Augustine doth Who are the Bishops and Catholick Fathers that the Doctor follows in these Points of Predestination and grace In his second Part page 36 he quotes three ancient Writers The first Ambrose on the Epistles yet every one knows that those Commentaries on the Epistles are not his but the work as some think of a Pelagian as others of one Hilary no Bishop though a Catholick He also quotes the Commentary upon Saint Paul's Epistles ascribed to St. Hierom but he is not ignorant or if he be ignorant few other Scholars be that those Commentaries however formerly fathered on Hierom do call Pelagius himself Father and he I trow was no Cathotholick Father or ancient Bishop but a most vile Heretick He also refers us to St. Chrysostom in Ep. 14. By which I know not what he means but am sure it is little credit to a Doctor in Divinity living so near the University to bring Chrysostom in Latine whose Greek is so easie as that School-boys are able to understand it so that if this had been any piece of a Sermon I might certainly hâ—â—e concluded that the Doctor had violated the Canon and would fain know of him how our ordinary Countrey Preachers should be in any capacity to
observe this Canon whose Libraries scarcely afford a Father of any Edition to be trusted to The best advice I can give them is to buy such Books as contain a Confession of Faith confirmed all along with Scriptures and Fathers in which I cannot but commend the Orthodoxus Consensus dedicated by Gasper Laurentius to the Prince Elector Palatine bound up with the Corpus Syntagma confessionum Fidei printed at Geneva 1654. There is also published by Cyril late Patriarch of Constantinople a Confession of Faith as Calvinistical as if it had been extracted out of Calvin's own Institutions which is now extant confirmed all along by Scripture and Fathers Catholick and ancient in a little Piece put out by the learned Hottinger where also there is enough said of Cyril's life troubles and death to free him from the aspersions cast on him by the Iesuits and by Grotius We have brought off Mr. Fox and must now see whether the Historian do charge Mr. Perkins with more success of whom it is affirmed page 62 That he did open wider the great breach that had been made by Mr. Fox Sure it may easily be pardoned him that he made that breach wider which was made by the Church it self by putting so much honour upon the Acts and Monuments as did if we may believe this Doctor manifestly tend to the subversion of that Doctrine that she had about ten years before so solemnly ratified But as it may well be presumed that the Church would not consent to the picking out of her own eyes so we have great reason to think that Mr. Perkins did design all his Treatises only to commend that milk unto others which he had with so much delight and nourishment sucked from the Breasts of his Mother the Reformed Church of England The Treatise of his quarrelled at is called Armilla Aurea composed by the Author in Latine translated into English by Dr. Robert Hill at the request of Perkins himself saith our Historian but tells us not whence he had that information nor indeed is it probable that Mr. Perkins would request another to do a work that might easily be done and yet could be done so well by no hand as his own The Translator tells us plainly in his Epistle Dedicatory unto the Judge of the Admiralty Court that he made the Translation at the request of some well disposed that his own Countrey-men might by it reap some profit and perhaps also he had a design to reap some profit by his Countrey-men presaging that it would be of very quick sale as indeed it hapned being printed fifteen times in the space of twenty years Many of the greatest learning and judgment thought this left-handed Ehud did by this his Book wound the Pelagian Cause to the very heart Our Historian thinks not so and tells us page 64 that it found not like welcome in all places nor from all hands Parsons the Iesuite is brought in thus sleighting him By the deep humour of fancy he hath published and writ many Books with strange Titles which neither He nor his Reader do understand as namely about the Concatenation or laying together of the causes of mans Predestination and Reprobation And then Iacob van Harmin he acquaints us wrote a full discourse against it I know not what he means by it Arminius his Examen as we all know being not designed against Perkins his Armilla Aurea but against another Piece called a Treatise of Predestination and of the largeness of God's grace And that Examen of Arminius hath been so confuted by the learned Dr. Twiss that no Remonstrant hath as yet had confidence enough to rejoyn All the wind hitherto sent from the Doctor hath shaken no corn We can contemn Parsons and not value Arminius He therefore further acquaints us page 65 of a very sharp censure passed upon Mr. Perkins by the Doctor of the Chair in Oxford What is this censure No more but that Mr. Perkins otherwise a learned and pious Person therefore surely able to understand the Title of his own Books did err no light error in making the subject of Divine Predestination to be man considered before the fall adding also further that some by undertaking to defend Mr. Perkins in this opinion had given unnecessary trouble to the Church This censure is very gentle in comparison of what the same Reverend and Learned Professor afterwards Bishop of Salisbury thought meet to pass upon Arminius Bertius and all their Followers whom he accuseth of most detestable Sacriledge The same Doctor had before undertaken a Defence of Mr. Perkins his Reformed Catholick calling him a man of very commendable quality and well deserving for his great travel and pains for the furtherance of true Religion and edifying of the Church which Reformed Catholick also is learnedly defended by Mr. Wotton For a parting blow the Doctor tells us that Mr. Perkins scarce lived out half his days and that in the pangs of death he spake nothing so articulately as Mercy mercy which he hopes God did graciously grant him in that woful agony And I for my part do not at all doubt that God shewed him mercy and had shewed him the very riches of his mercy many years before for God is not unrighteous that he should forget that labour of love with which Mr. Perkins had laboured in Cambridge As little do I doubt that there are hundreds in Heaven blessing that Providence that placed a light so shining and burning in that University His dying so soon is not to be imputed to his bloud-thirstiness or deceitfulness but to his hard studies and unwearied diligence which must needs wast his natural spirits and bring him sooner to his grave than he would have come if he could have satisfied himself as some do to enter into the Pulpit no oftner than the High Priest entred into the Holy of Holies He always desired that he might die praying for the pardon of sin and he had his desire If in his Sermon he pronounced the word damned with a more than ordinary Emphasis it was only to forwarn his Hearers to flee from the wrath to come If he so pressed the Law as to make the hair of the young Scholars stand upright it was only that being awakened oâ—t of their security they might seriously ask the question How they should do to be saved The Law was designed to be a School-master to bring us to Christ and would not have that effect if it should not be preached with some of that terror with which it was at first delivered But he made the infinitely greatest part of all mankind uncapable of God's grace and mercy by an absolute and irrespective decree of Reprobation So it is said page 66. but no such thing can be proved out of Mr. P's Writings Had he framed any such decree as made any one man or woman uncapable of grace and mercy he must needs have affrighted away his Disciples and Hearers which he was so far from doing
that the Historian himself confesseth that by means of him and Dr. Whitaker the University had been quite over-run with Calvinism had not Dr. Baro a French-man born set himself to pluck up what the other two had planted and watered Of this Dr. Baro we shall hear the Historian tell us a fine tale Scilicet liberanda veritas expectabat liberatorem Petrum Baro the English Kingdom of Heaven had fallen had it not been for this Atlas that bare it up with his shoulders Let us see what the man was and what he held that we may know how much we owe unto him which yet we cannot well do till we have taken in our way the story of one Barret This Barret in a Sermon ad Clerum April 29. 1595 had vented sundry Anticalvinistical Points for which he was convented May 5. before the Heads of Houses and charged to have preached Doctrines erroneous and false and contrary to the Religion received and established by publick Authority in the Realm of England He confessed the Doctrines charged upon him but denied them to be any way repugnant to the Doctrine of the Church of England Whereupon the Vice-Chancellor and forenamed Heads entring into mature deliberation and diligently weighing and examining these Positions because it did manifestly appear that the said Positions were false erroneous and likewise repugnant to the Religion received and established in the Church of England adjudged and declared that the said Barret had incurred the penalty of the 45th Statute of the University de Concionibus and by virtue and tenour of that Statute they decreed and adjudged the said Barret to make a publick Recantation in such words and form as by the Vice-Chancellor and the said Heads or any three or two of them should be prescribed unto him or else upon his refusal to recant to be perpetually expelled both from his Colledge and the University What the form of Recantation was may be seen in Mr. Prin such it was as gave sufficient honour unto Calvin Peter Martyr and the Doctrines Preached and Printed by them Lo here we have those that were alwaies entrusted with power to judge of and to condemn false Doctrine condemning the Anti-Calvinistical opinions as false and contrary to the Articles of Religion established in England And when such an Authority has laid a Recantation upon Mr Barret how will Dr. H. get it off Why First He doubts whether any Recantation were enjoyned in so many words as are extant in Mr. Prin. This is an irrational doubt seeing Mr. Prin had the transcript under the University Register's own hand Secondly He denies it as a thing most false that ever Barret published any Recantation whatsoever it was And yet Mr. Prin tells him that he had a transcript taken out of an Original copy under Mr. Barrets own hand and tells us as also does Mr. Fuller what words he used after he had read the Recantation and words they are from which it might be infer'd that he was not heartily sorry for the errors delivered by him nor really changed in his judgment But doth it not appear by a Letter of the Heads of Houses dated March 8 that Mr. Barret had never made any such Recantation I answer It doth not appear for the Heads of Houses say not that he had never read the Recantation but that he had refused to do it in such sort as was prescribed which might make those who were in Authority in the University both to mind him of his duty and also to complain of him unto their Chancellour for not doing his duty Yet if it will do the Doctor a kindness let him enjoy his fancy that Mr. Barret Recanted not for to be sure he did not credit his Recantation returning to Arminianism and also to Popery unto which the Heads of Houses say Arminianism had been by sundry made a Bridge However here is the judgment of the Heads of Houses in Cambridge solemnly declared that he who strikes at Mr. Calvin in these points strikes at the Church of England also Yea sayes the Dr but it will not hence follow that Barrets Doctrines were repugnant to the Church of England because these Heads judged them so for if so we may conclude by the same Argument that the Church of Rome was in Light in the Darkest times of ignorance and superstition because all that publickly opposed her Doctrine were enjoyned Recantation Which evasion is so lamentable that he had much better have used none for we do not from the injoyning of the Recantation inferr the falsity of the Doctrines to be recanted but only their dissonance unto the Religion established and certainly the Church of Rome when it was at the worst did never injoyn Recantation of any Doctrine which was not contrary unto her present sentiments And so I leave Mr. Barret and his opinions under the blot justly dropped upon them by the University only taking notice that Barrets peremptoriness might occasion Baro to deliver his mind more plainly and publickly than before he had done which occasioned the University to send up Dr. Whitaker and Dr. Tindal unto Arch-Bishop Whitgift hoping that he who had been so zealous against Cartwright in a point of Discipline would be found to have some zeal against Baro in matter of Doctrine nor did their hopes fail them for he forthwith called to him sundry right worthy and Reverend Divines and drew up those Articles commonly called the Lambeth-Articles agreed upon November the 10th 1595. nine they are in number and were approved by the Arch-Bishop of York as well as by his Grace of Canterbury So that here are the two Metropolitans men no doubt considerable for Learning as well as for Authority for both of them had been Lady Margaret's and King's Professors in the University Now I ask Did these know the Doctrine of the Church or did they not If they did not how durst they call men to subscribe what they knew not If they did then either Calvinism in this matter is the Doctrine of the Church or else the two Primates commended to the University a Doctrine against their own Light and conscience And it is worth observation that the Bishop of York in his Letter to his Brother of Canterbury does give him to understand that his opinion he sent him concerning Election and Reprobation was but that in which they had both agreed while they professed and taught Divinity in the Schools Nor can it be said that Whitgift received his opinion from beyond the Seas where he never was having such favour shewed him by Doctor Perne that he never needed to leave the Kingdom More probable it is that he suckt in these opinions from his Tutor Mr. Bradford and from Bishop Ridley Master of Pembroke Hall whilst he was a fresh-man By whom also he was so principled against the tyranny and Detestable enormities of the Pope that at the time of his commencing Dr. in Divinity he gave this Thesis to be disputed on Papa
to my Neighbour I follow my occasion c. therefore I trust God hath elected me and predestinated me to eternal Salvation not thâ—â— which is the usual course of argument God hath predestinated and chosen me to life therefore though I sin never so grievously yet I shall not be damned for whom he once loveth he loveth to the End In which words there is some thing Hypercalvinistical for the Bishop saith we must rather reason Ascendendo than Descendendo but the Calvinist saith that we must altogether reason Ascendendo in such a way as he after delineates If the Bishop were not a Calvinist I would fain know how a man could according to his principles argue Ascendendo I live in obedience to God therefore I trust God hath elected me and predestinated me to Salvation The Calvinist saith he that lives in obedience to God is predestinated to Salvation but so doth not the Anti-calvinist nor hath he any foundation to build his trust of Predestination to Salvation upon for according to him a man who lives in all good obedience to God may be damned because he may cease to live in obedience to God and hath no promise that he shall not cease But if Dr. Bancroft had not by his speech declared himself Calvinistical yet as hath been said his Chaplain's publishing his Exposition or Analysis of our Articles according to the Calvinistical frame and that with his good liking and approbation is a sufficient argument that he was such To invalidate this argument it is only said that That Analysis had been published 1585 which was eighteen years before Bancroft was Arch-Bishop Which answer adds strength to the argument for by it it appears that he took one to be his Chaplain who had eighteen years before published a Calvinistical Exposition of the Articles and suffered him after his own Consecration to republish it and to dedicate it to his own Grace which it may be presumed he would not have done if it had contained any thing contrary to his own judgement and sense Obj. But why would any one affirm that Bancroft agreed to the Lambeth-Articles whilst Bishop of London Answ. It was Mr. Fullers mistake in his Church History so to affirm Mr. Hickman whom the Doctor hath chosen for his adversary never so affirmed Yet he affirmed that he agreed to them and so it is like he did in the capacity of a Divine called in to consult On which score I also reckon that Mr. Nowel Dean of St. Pauls might agree to them because he was Dr. Whitakers Unkle and resided at London Object 2. Did not King James reject the Lambeth Articles when propounded as fit to be inserted into the Articles Answ. He did not reject them nor could he in honour reject them having never seen them before nor having them read to him at that time He was only told that the Articles were by the Arch-Bishop taking to him some Divines of special note drawn up and sent to the University for the appeasing of quarrels Whereupon his Majesty resolved that when such questions do arise among Scholars the quietest proceeding were to determine them in the University and not to stuff the Book with Conclusions Theological Here is not one word of leaving them to be canvased and disputed in the Schools though if they had been so left they might not forthwith be held in the Affirmative or Negative as best pleased the Respondent for the Respondent in our Universities can hold nothing without the allowance and approbation of the Doctor of the Chair or Vice-Chancelor or University Yea King Iames did some years after allow the putting of these Lambeth-Articles into the Confession of the Church of Ireland Anno 1615. To this the Doctor shapes an answer pag. 101 consisting of sundry particulars First That the Irish Articles were drawn up by Dr. Usher a professed Calvinian who not only thrust in the Lambeth-Articles but also made others of his own Answ. The Articles are the better to be liked because drawn up by a hand so learned and peaceable Secondly That the King might give consent to the confirming of these Articles though he liked them not How so First Because the Irish Nation at that time were most tenaciously addicted to the errors and corruptions of the Church of Rome and therefore must be bended to the other extreme before they could be streight Secondly It was an usual practise with the King in the whole course of his government to ballance one extreme by another countenancing the Papists against the Puritans and the Puritans sometimes against the Papists Answ. I have heard much talk of the craft of King Iames but did never before hear nor do I now believe that this was any part of it for what Policy is it to bring People out of one extreme into another or what Piety is it to agree to Articles of Religion the which all the Clergy must approve meerly to keep the civil interest even But I see what the Doctors fetch is in this what ever King Iames did in the affairs of Religion that his palat relisheth not must be thought to be done to gratifie the Puritans may not the Puritans also say that what ever was done pleasing to the Doctor was done in compliance with the Papists and with whom then will the name of King Iames be precious or honourable One piece of veracity I must needs commend the Doctor for viz. his acknowledging that Dr. Reynolds owned the meaning of the sixteenth Article to be â—ound pag. 98. This I commend because Mr. Mountague found a forehead in his Appeal to aver that it was by him and the other Ministers challenged for unsound I wish I had the like occasion to commend him for veracity to the end of his Book But I have not for pag. 103 he tells us that the opposites to the Calvinians were by the grace and favour of King James invested in the chief preferments of the Church of England conferred as openly and freely upon them as those who had been bred up in the contrary perswasion This if it be understood of men that had openly declared their opinions against the Calvinian Doctrine will be found to be an untruth If any trust be to be given to our printed Catalogues of Bishops there were in that Kings Reign these Translations or Consecrations Canterbury Richard Bancroft 1604. G. Abbot 1610. Asaph Richard Parry 1604. Iohn Hanmer 1622. Bangor Lewis Balie 1616. Bath and Wells Iames Mountague 1608. Ar. Lake 1616. Bristoll Iohn Thornborough 1603. Nicholas Felton 1617. Iohn Scatchfield 1619. Robert Wright 1622. Chicester Lancelot Andrews 1605. Samuel Harsnet 1609. George Carleton 1619. Coventry George Abbot 1609. Richard Neile 1610. Iohn Overal 1614. Thomas Morton 1618. St. Davids Richard Milborne 1615. William Laud 1621. Ely Lancelot Andrews 1609. Nicholas Felton 1618. Exeter Valentine Cary 1621. Glocester Thomas Ravis 1604. Henry Parry 1607. Giles Thomson 1611. Miles Smith 1612. Hereford Francis Godwin 1617. Landaff George
in the shell I think next to the study of the Holy Scriptures the reading of the Fathers is the best preservative against Arminianism which came into the Low-countrys with the contempt of the Fathers As for Calvinism it cannot be condemned if sentence be passed upon it out of the Fathers those I mean who professed to set themselves to handle the Controversies concerning grace and predestination Sure I am the Royal directions notwithstanding the University continued as highly or more highly Calvinistical than ever a manifest argument that the University looked upon the Kings directions as no way tending to root out Calvinistical Doctrine but rather as a means to confirm it and so indeed they were The Doctor will not yet give over but pag. 108 tells us of certain Orders sent out Anno 1622 August the fourth designed to put a bridle into the Calvinists moâ—ths These Orders it is notoriously known were put out at such a time when the Spanish match was driving on and common people began to have thoughts of heart whither the releasing of Recusants and the Articles of Marriage might tend In those Orders care was taken among other things that no undecent expressions should be used against Puritanes but it was also provided that no Preacher of what title soever under the degree of a Bishop or Dean at least should thenceforth presume to teach in any popular auditory the deep points of predestination c. but rather leave those points to be handled by learned men and that modestly and moderately by Use and application rather than by positive Doctrine And this was a right good Order for Calvinists who never suffer so much from any thing as the declamatory attempts of men in popular Sermons In the Schools where Syllogisms must be used their Doctrine is not in much danger because he who disputes must keep himself close to the State of the Question through not representing of which Arminians get all their Advantage Mr. Hoard did make choice of that piece of Calvinism which is most liable to exception the absolute decree of reprobation And I confess when I was a young proud Graduate I had read his Book and did think it perfectly unanswerable but when I had the good hap to meet with Bishop Davâ—nants answer to it I was marvelously altered in my opinion and estimation concerning the strength of the Book keeping still an high opinion of the Author of it for I found that the absolute decree of reprobation was quite another thing than it was represented There was in Oxford after the coming out of the aforesaid Orders of the King a Sermon Preached in the University Church by Mr. Gabriel Bridges against the absolute decree this saith the Doctor was a violating of the Kings Order you must pity him he had nothing else to say and this laid him open to the persecution of Dr. Prideaux and to the censure of the Vice-chancelor But all who have searched the Register do know that violation of the Kings Order was never so much as once laid to Mr. Bridges his charge He was accused for Preaching contrary to the Articles of Religion established among us and was Ordered to maintain in the Schools the Contrary to what he had Preached in the Pulpit and he did so and never altered his mind afterwards Indeed it had been most ridiculous once to imagine that a Sermon Preached in the University Church could violate the Kings Order manifestly restrained to popular Auditories in which number the University Auditories were never placed The Doctor hath one Card more left to play which if it hit not he will have a perfect Slam What is that It is his dear friend Mr. Mountague whom he imagineth in his Gagger to have disclaimed all the Calvinian tenents and to have asserted the Church to her primitive and genuine Doctrines Creditis an qui amant ipsi sibi somnia fingunt Well what of this Gagger Why information was prepared against him by two worthy men Mr. Yates and Mr. Ward A sign he was looked on as designing innovation What doth Mr. Mountague After he had got a copy of this information be flees for shelter to King James Poor man did he flee for shelter against the information of two Lecturers What shelter did he there find Why King Iames having now acted a Part at the Synod of Dort condemned the Arminians that he might save the Prince of Orange and Archbishop Abbot coming not at him and Dr. Iames Mountague being dead was Master of himself it seems before he had been a servant to others and Governed by the Light of his own most clear and excellent judgement took both Mountague and his Doctrines into his Protection and gave him a quietus est from all those Calumnies of Popery and Arminianism that were by the Informers laid on him commanded Dr. Francis White to see his Appeal he was in hand with Licenced for the Press and finally gave Order to Mountague to dedicate the Book when Licenced to his Royal self These things are very unlikely that a King should give command to have a Book Licenced before he had seen it or knew what would be in it and that he should give Order to have it Dedicated to himself and because they are unlikely I could be glad to see them confirmed by some irrefragable Authority but find no Authority alledged Wherefore I am a very unbeliever in all these matters so are most I meet with But these things I am certain of First That in Mr. Mountagues Appeal there be down-right untruths in matter of fact in which I do not find the Doctor going about to justifie or excuse him Secondly That never Book gave more discontent than his did for it was answered by no fewer than five or six all considerable in the Nation all agreeing that he had departed from the Doctrine of the Church The Book was also censured in Parliament as contrary to our Articles Archbishop Abbot indeavoured the stopping of it before it came to light Dr. White who had approved it did publickly complain what a trick the Bishops had served him promising to joyn with him in the approbation of the Book but yet cowardly slipping their necks out of the Collar and leaving him to bear the whole envy of the Midwifery of so distastful a Book Finally King Charles himself was feign both to pardon Mountague for all his Writings and at last to call in his Book as the great occasion of many unnecesâ—ary troubles So I let pass Mr. Mountague of whom Dr. Prideaux publickly said that he was more a Grammarian than a Divine As for King Iames we are sure from the Pen of Dr. Featly never used to wrong his Sovereign that not many weeks before his death he called the Arminians Hereticks and so we conclude that for all his and Queen Elizabeths days they were accounted Hereticks and their Doctrine Heresie And seeing they were then so accounted why now the broachers of that Doctrine should
be accounted the most obedient Sons of the Church is a question in which I would most gladly be satisfied Until such satisfaction be gained it will be at least a pardonable error to suppose that that is not the Doctrine of the Church of England which for above threescore Years after her first establishment was not averred in any one Licenced Book but confuted in many FINIS Postscript I Am given to understand that I seem to some not sufficiently to have taken notice of what the Doctor brings to invalidate the Argument drawn from Barret's Recantation I drew the Argument from the Heads of Houses in Cambridge enjoyning Mr. Barret to Recant what he had delivered against absolute reprobation and against perseverance and some other Calvinian Doctrines not only as false but also as contrary to the Articles of Religion here in England established The Doctor doth not cannot deny but that such Recantation was enjoyned him Now if the Heads of Houses in the University who are authorized to judge of the Sermons preached among them and to censure what they find in such Sermons disagreeable to the Doctrine of the Church did judge Barret's Doctrine denying absolute reprobation and perseverance of Believers to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church and manifestly contrary to it and passed this judgment upon mature deliberation I leave it to any ones consideration whether this be not a very vehement presumption that Calvin's Doctrine concerning absolute election and perseverance is agreeable to the Articles of our Church and Barret's Doctrine contrary to them If this be granted what need I contend about by-passages relating to the Recantation being in a place where I can have no recourse to the Records of Cambridge Yet to make it appear that I did write nothing in this business rashly and that the Doctor hath me at no such advantage as he pretends I will now review all he saith not already taken notice of It signifies little that he saith 1. That this process was made or procured by the Calvinian Heads inflamed by Mr. Perkins pag. 70 Part 3. Seeing there were then no Heads but what were Calvinistical and no man can think that they should all be guided and acted by Mr. Perkins a poor Preacher in the Town 2. It is to be doubted saith he pag. 71 whether any such Recantation consisting of so many Articles and every Article having its abjuration or recantation subjoyned unto it was ever enjoyned to be made But what reason have we to doubt of this when as the Form of Recantation is exemplified in Mr. Fuller from whom I had it and also in Mr. Prynne's Antiarminianism and was fairly printed in Qu. Elizabeth's daies some printed Copies of it being still extant and seeing Mr. Prynne declares that the Form of Recantation by him inserted into his Book was a Transcript taken out of an Original Copy under Mr. Barret's own hand Why he doubts because though Mr. Prynne say that the Recantation in the same manner and form as we there find it was exemplified and sent unto him under the Register's hand yet he also confesseth that no such matter could be found when the Heads of houses were required by an Order from the House of Commons to make certificate unto them of all such Recantations as were recorded in their University Register and of this Recantation in particular But first Mr. Prynne only tells us that he had been certified and informed that this Order for Recantation could not be found among the University Records 2. Mr. Prynne doth not pretend to have had in his hands the Form of Recantation exemplified under the Register's hand but only the Order for Recantation The Form of Recantation he tells us he had another way and perhaps the Form of Recantation was never put into the University Archives or Register But if the Order for the Recantation should not be found there neither I should much wonder and yet less wonder because Thomas Smith who was Register at this time is branded for one that was very careless in Registring matters that concerned the University as may be found in Mr. Fuller's Hist. of Camb. p. 49. But that which the Historian most contends for is that the Recantation was never made by Barret Pag. 72. It is to be denied as a thing most false that he never published the Recantation whatsoever it was It is to be thought that the Printer hath mistaken his Copy and put never instead of ever for if it be most false that he never published his Recantation then it is to be affirmed as a thing most true that he sometime published it which is that which we believe Let us sâ—an the reasons of the Doctor to prove that he never read the Recantation ibid. For 1. It is acknowledged in Mr. Prynnes own Transcript of the Acts that though Barret did confess the Propositions wherewith he was charged to be contained in his Sermon yet he would never grant them to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England and therefore was not likely to retract the same The Argument framed stands thus He that would never acknowledge his Propositions to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England was not likely to retract the same Mr. Barret would not acknowledge his Propositions to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England therefore he was not likely to retract the same The Major certainly is most absurdly false but the Minor cannot be proved For Mr. Prynne's Copy doth not say that he would never acknowledge but only that at first reading of his Charge he denyed his Propositions to be contrary to the Religion of the Church of England Many a man at first denies what he afterwards granteth Secondly saith the Doctor ibid. It is plain from Mr. Barret's Letters the one to Dr. Goad Master of Kings the other to Mr. Chadderton Master of Emanuel that neither slattery nor tâ—â—â—atâ—ings nor the fear of losing his subsistence in the University should ever work him to the publishing of the Recantation required of him The Doctor had in his Certamen Epistolare before told us of two Letters of Barret's written one to Dr. Goad the other to Mr. Chadderton and now he tells us that from them it is manifest that neither flattery c. Yet he gives us only a Copy of the Letter to Dr. Goad and never tells us whence he had that nor doth the Letter to Dr. Goad in the least intimate that any flattery had been used to draw him to make the Recantation but rather it manifests that he used flattery to perswade Dr. Goad to be his Friend and obtain for him that he might stay in the University on solemn promise to keep his Opinion to himself A very sneaking Letter it is and shews that he was a poor low spirited man valuing his Place more than his Conscience and yet his Credit more than his Place Nor doth he if we may judge of him by the
he phrasifieth Dr. H. Part 3. Pag. 2. There were some men who in the beginning of King Edward 's Reign busily stickled in the maintenance of Calvin 's Doctrines and thinking themselves to be more Evangelical than the rest of their Brethren they either took unto themselves or had given by others the name of Gospellers Of this they were informed by the Reverend Prelate and right godly Martyr Bishop Hooper in the Preface to his Exposition of the ten Commandments Our Gospellers saith he he better learned than the Holy Ghost for they wickedly attribute the cause of punishments and adversities to God's providence which is the cause of no ill as he himself can do no evil and over every mischief that is done they say it is God's will In which we have the men and their Doctrine how the name of Gospellers and the reason why that name was ascribed to them It is observed by the judicious Author of Europae Speculum that Calvin was the first of these latter times who searched into the Counsels the eternal Counsels of God Almighty And as it seems he found there some other Gospel than that which had been written by the four Evangelists from whence his Followers had the name of Gospellers for by that name I find them called frequently by Campneys also in an Epistolary discourse c. And finding it given them also by Bishop Hooper a temperate modest man I must needs look on it as the name of the Sect by which they were distinguished from other men Answ. All this I have at large transcribed because I have sundry observations to make thereupon First I observe that in all probability the Doctor never read Hooper but trusted to other mens eyes for he quoteth that as from the Preface of Mr. Hooper which is not to be found in the Preface but rather in his Postscript or Appendix to his Declaration of the ten holy Commandments or his Answer to certain Objections that keep men from the obedience of God's Law the fourth of which is Curiosity Nor is this the first time that he hath suffered himself and his Reader to be abused Secondly I observe that he attributes â—hese words to the Reverend Prelate and right godly Martyr Bishop Hooper whereas Hooper when he did write these words was no Prelate but only a licenced if licenced Predicant But I am glad however to find Dr. Heylin speak of honourably of the Ring-leader of the Non-conformists It seems when he is pleased he can allow one that scrupled the Habit and expresly condemned the Civil Offices of Bishops to be reverend and right godly and temperate and modest Thirdly I observe that he chargeth Mr. Calvin from the Author of Europae Speculum to be the first in these latter times that searched into the Counsels the eternal Counsels of Almighty God That the Author of Europae Speculum hath any such observation I am not sure If he have it no way contributed to procure him that esteem with which the World reads his Book for as all eternal Counsels are the Counsels of Almighty God so all the Counsels of God Almighty are eternal And to say that Calvin was the first who in this latter age searched into the Counsels of Almighty God is in effect to say that none of this latter age before Calvin regarded God's glory or mans salvation I suppose instead of eternal Counsels the Doctor intended to say hidden unrevealed Counsels But the assertion of absolute Election and Reprobation is no searching into the secrets of God Almighty or if it be Mr. Calvin cannot by any one that hath the least skill in History be thought to be the first that searched into God's secret Counsels seeing both Luther and Zuinglius had done it before him Fourthly I observe the unrighteous censure or calumny of the Doctor that Calvin by searching into God's Decrees had found out another Gospel than that which had been written by the four Evangelists from whence his Followers in these Points had the name of Gospellers Neither Calvin nor Calvinists ever found out any other Gospel than this He that believeth shall be saved he that believeth not shall be damned Nor was the name of Gospellers given to Mr. Calvin's Followers on the account of their bringing in a new Gospel or on any other account but it was the general name by which all that joyned in opposing Popery called themselves Let any one but consult the word Gospellers in the Index of Mr. Fox's Martyrology and compare the places there referred unto he shall find Papists and Gospellers still opposed Gospellers used not as a name of ignoming but as a name of honour Let him also read Bishop Ridley's Letter to his Chaplain he shall find the same word used and contradistinguished to Papists Likewise in Latine no more usual distinction than Pontificii and Evangelici So that the Historian in making the Calvinists the only Gospellers makes them indeed the only Protestants Finally I observe that the words quoted from Bishop Hooper are inexcusable if they be not qualified with some distinction The Scripture doth not oftner ascribe unto God the Creation of the World than it doth ascribe unto his Providence all the Punishments and Adversities that befal either good or bad men yet it must be granted that God does not willingly afflict the sons of men and therefore never punishes them but when he finds something in them which deserves the punishment so that they may thank themselves for all the evil they suffer from God The Doctor 's next design is to vindicate one Campneys a Fellow that was made to bear a Faggot at Paul's Cross in King Edward's time the learned and pious Miles Coverdale preaching a Sermon when that punishment was inflicted on him This man it seems having either complied in Queen Mary's time or saved himself alive by flight when Q Elizabeth had restored the true Religion began to play his old pranks i. e. to cause disturbance by nibbling at such who were deservedly honoured and preferred in the Church publishing a Pamphlet but unto which he had not courage enough to affix his name against Predestination This Pamphlet was encountred by Mr. Iohn Veron a Chaplain to the Queen and Reader of the Divinity Lecture in S. Paul's Church as also by Mr. Robert Crowley sometime Fellow of Magdalen Colledge in Oxon at that time a famous Preacher in the City of London Both these put out Answers unto Campneys and their Answers were both licenced and approved and Veron's Dedicated to the Queen her self whereas Campney's virulent Pamphlet came forth surreptitiously neither Author nor Printer daring to put their names to it All this notwithstanding the Doctor would have us believe that Campneys defended the Doctrine of the Church Veron and Crowley opposed it as if the Church had so soon lost all her zeal for her Religion and would give no countenance at all to those that contended for it yet would vouchsafe to authorize the writings