kind of assurance as Mr. Calvin indeed thought essential to Faith but is found by experience to be separable from it I would transcribe the passages in the Homilies that relate unto the five Points but Mr. Prin hath already done it and done it so throughly that nothing considerable seems to have escaped his diligence I beg of my Reader that he would vouchsafe to put together Dr. Heylin's and Mr. Prin's Allegations out of the Homilies and then pass judgment There was a probable Argument drawn from the Prolocutor of this Convocation Mr. Alexander Nowel He must needs be supposed fully to know the mind and sense of those that confirm'd the Articles nor can it be supposed that he had not a great hand in the drawing of them up yet this reverend and learned Person in his Catechism published by him after this Convocation doth declare himself for absolute Election Places clearly proving this were alledged out of an English Translation of that Catechism by Mr. Norton dedicated to the two arch-Arch-Bishops the Bishop of London by name and to all the Bishops in the several Diocesses in England this was printed by Iohn Day with the Queens Majesties priviledge for ten years An. 1575. In answering this Objection the Doctor spends many words even so many as make up pag. 24 25 26 27. Of some of these words I know not how to make any sense Of others of them I think I know the meaning but cannot perceive their design for admitting there hath been a greater Catechism of Mr. Nowels admitting that which is authorized to be taught in Schools is the less and not the bigger what is either gained or lost unless the Author had declared his judgment with some diversity in the two Catechisms which is not cannot be pretended What though I do not find any one single Question concerning Predestination or the Points thereupon may not the Author in Answer to other Questions sufficiently declare his mind I will set down the passages quoted by Mr. Hickman at large To the Church do all they properly belong as many as do truly fear and honour and call upon God altogether applying their minds to live holily and godly and putting all their trust in God do most assuredly look for the blessedness of eternal life They that be stedfast stable constant in this Faith were chosen and appointed and as we term it Predestinated to this so great Felicity Again The Church is the Body of the Christian Common-wealth i. e. the universal number and fellowship of the Faithful whom God through Christ hath before all beginning of time appointed to everlasting life This the Doctor saith is not to be found in the Latine Edition But I say and am sure of it it is to be found in the Latine Edition of 1570. set forth by the Author and printed by Reginald Wolf the Queens Latine Printer He saith secondly It is taken almost word for word out of Bishop Poinet 's Catechism and therefore must be understood in no other sense than before it was when it was perused and approved by the Bishops and other Learned men of King Edward 's time If so then up goes Calvinism for we have before proved Arch-Deacon Philpot one of those Learned men expresly to own Calvin's Predestination nor is it possible to interpret Poinet's words so as that Faith shall be an antecedent and not consequent of Predestination He that saith only those who are predestinated to Eternal life believe doth say that no Believer can finally fall from Faith if he understand the necessary consequences of his saying as in justice we are bound to think so great a Scholar as Bishop Poinet did But of Poinet no more Mr. Nowel's own words are plain and clear for an election unto Faith and Salvation before the foundations of the World were laid and that they who are thus elected have in their own minds the spirit of Christ the Author of this confidence and in like manner a most certain pledge of it The Scholar finally is taught to say that by the instinct of the Divine Spirit he most certainly perswades himself that he also by God's good gift through Christ is freely made one of this blessed City And it is further worth observation that there is scarce any one place of Scripture made use of by the Calvinists to prove Personal election which Mr. Nowel hath not put into the Margin of his Catechism Matth. 16.18 Rom. 8.29 30. Ephes. 1.4 5. Col. 3.12 Tit. 1.1 Rom. 8.9 15 16. 2 Cor. 1.22 and 5.5 Ephes. 1.13 14. and 5.30 All this notwithstanding the Doctor pleaseth himself as if Mr. Nowel were his own And that he might not seem to lay claim to him without some gound he produceth two places out of his lesser Catechism promised by the Author in the Epistle Dedicatory of the larger and now as more apt for youth commonly taught in Grammar Schools page 33. In tender compassion unto him and my Reader I will not relate them but they are both such as any Calvinist will embrace with both arms as savouring of that special Faith that some ancient Calvinists too securely following their Master contend for In it the Doctor finds that we are elected by or through faith in Christ therefore saith he the Decree of Election is not absolute and irrespective Nor do the Calvinists say it is without a limitation or distinction of the words irrespective and absolute The second passage is such as no Remonstrant can mention without abhorrence for Remonstrants do utterly deny that God made any Covenant with Adam that if he stood all his Posterity should stand if he sell all his Posterity should fall and be corrupted with Original Sin but the Calvinist is eager for this Covenant and no less eagerly doth he contend that God promised to send Christ the Seed of the Woman to break the Serpent's head that is the Devil and so to deliver him and his Posterity that believed the same for this if it proves any thing proves particular Redemption which the most famous Calvinists now a days do not contend for some of them have written whole Books against it I shall only insert one passage more out of Mr. Nowel's Catechism relating to the peremptoriness and irreversibility of God's will of purpose it is in his Exposition of the third Petition of the Lord's Prayer Non tantum precantur ut quod illi decretum fuerit eveniat quod quum divina voluntas efficiendi necessitatem secum semper adferat evenire necesse est c. quoting in the Margin Psal. 115.3 and 135.6 7 Rom. 9.19 And so my Pen takes its leave of this holy and learned Person a constant hearer of Peter Martyr both wonderfully preserved from the fury of the Bishops and both no doubt of one mind in these matters In the next place I am to wait on the Doctor to the Queen Elizabeth Homilies for he hath adventured to look into them and a great adventure it had
week at one of the Legats Houses for the proposing debating and framing of all their Decrees before they were brought to be voted and defined abroad in any publick Session for by this means the Legats would be sure either to have every thing prepared to their own mind and be able to number the Voices before hand which way they would be given or else not to suffer the matter to be brought to any open definition in their Councel at all Finally the foresaid Learned Doctor having given us the Decree concerning the new Canon saith that it was passed but by a few for of the Greek Church they had not one unless it were some such as blind Sir Robert of Scotland was of the English as few for the Bishop of Worcester Richard Pates was not yet come among them and when afterwards he came thither he was there but in a private and personal capacity having no employment given him by the Church of England of the Helvetian German and Northern Churches none of the French Church scarce two of the Spanish not many all the rest were Italians among whom divers were the Popes Pensioners and sent thither to out-ballance other mens voices some of them Titular and some Unlearned He that pleaseth may read the story of the remaining 21 Sessions in Padre Paul and having so done let him if he be impartial judge whether it be probable that such a company of men should be blessed by God to find out truâ—h and settle the peace of the Church But let us suppose there had been at Trent a Meeting of the most Holy Reverend and Learned Divines that the Church of Christ then afforded Did they determine any thing either for or against the Calvinians in these five points In no wise debates indeed there were about the mysterious point of Praedestination in which those Popish Divines which went the way that Pelagius did of old and Arminius of late prevailed whilest use was made only of corrupt carnal humane reason but when the testimonies of Scripture came to be examined they were manifestly overcome as Doctor Heylin himself tells us out of the incomparable Servits Hist. pag. 15. The same Doctor confesseth that the Decrees about this and the points connexed with it were so contrived that every one might understand them in his own sense so as to give no distast to the Dominican Fryars and their adherents pag. 26. Indeed the ancienter Popes of Rome notwithstanding the great pretence they made to infallibility were wiser than to take upon them to determine the differences betwixt the Dominicans Franciscans which are almost the same with the differences betwixt the Contra-Remonstrant Remonstrant Micraelius in his Hetorodoxia Calviniana disputatione quinta shall be my witness for this who after that he had told the World how much this question had vexed the Pontifician Schools How God was not the cause of sin seeing he was the cause of those actions as to their substance unto which moral pravity is conjoyned thus expresseth himself Parag. 6. Haec cum ita disceptabantur factum est tandem Lovanii in Belgio ut circa 86 annum superioris saeculi gravissimâ— de Praedestinatione inter Dominicanos Iesuitas lites extiterint quas quidem Nuncius Apostolicus ad tempus composuit sed postquam Iesuita Lud. Molina librum de concordia liberi arbitrii donorum gratiae evulgarat res ad ipsum pontificem delata est qui tamen arbitrum se veritus est interponere suam cuique permisit sententiam At which I do the less wonder because I find that the Pope had used the same artifice in a controversie depending betwixt the Franciscans and Dominicans about the Virgin Maries being or not being conceived free from Original sin alledging the Spirit of whose perpetual assistance Popes are wont so proudly to boast nondum mysterii tanti penetralia Ecclesiae suae patefecisse A brief but accurate story of this transaction is to be seen in the learned Apology of Dr. Andrew Rivet for the most Holy Virgin l. 1. c. 6 7 8. Yea something may be observed in the Councel of Trent which makes not a little for the Calvinists viz. that not Calarinus as the Doctor p. 15. but Catharinus invented a middle way That God of his goodness had elected some few whom he will save absolutely to whom he hath prepared most potent effectual and infallible means and that of these thus singularly priviledged all the places of Scripture which do ascribe all to God and which shew infallibility are to be understood and that the number of these is certain with God Yea Balthasar Meisner in his Anthropologia Sacra de gratia Dei Praedestinatione disp 11 yields in the examples of Paul and Abram a grace extraordinary efficacious infallibly and always which so calls a man that as it were by a necessary will and willing necessity he is converted unto Faith and the Church of which no cause can be assigned but the will of God the simple and absolute will of God which cannot be hindred is always most efficacious From these two mens acknowledgements and confessions I infer that seeing some are absolutely elected and converted by an insuperable grace therefore absolute election and grace insuperable are not contrary to Divine Wisdom or Goodness or Justice do not destroy the Liberty of mans Will and therefore are but weakly impugned when they are impugned by arguments drawn from these Topicks But if that will do the Doctor any courtesie or if he think it any credit to his cause I will grant him that thaâ— part of the Papacy which is most Papal doth favour his Arminianism and not many years ago a Pope as wicked as ever sate in the Chair when he was come to his dotage was prevailed with to make use of his infallibility and to condemn the Doctrine of Iansenius A copy of his Anathemaes and condemnations I have thought meet to insert as I find them in Maresius the Professor of Groning his Apology for the Iansenists Innocent Bishop Servant of the Servants of God to all faithful people in Christ Health and Apostolical benediction Whereas upon occasion of publishing a Book Entituled Augustinus Cornelii Jansenii Episcopi Iprensis amongst other opinions of his there did arise especially in France a controversie upon five of them many of the Bishops of France did sollicite us to consider those propositions presented to us and to give our certain and definite sentences touching every one of them The Tenour of the said propositions is as followeth The first Some precepts of God are impossible to just men willing and endeavouring according to the present power which they have Grace also is wanting to them whereby they might be possible The second In the state of lapsed nature there is no resistance made to interiour grace The third To merit and demerit in the state of lapsed nature there is not required in man liberty from necessity but liberty from
The Councel of Trent consisted for the most part of Italian Bishops some others being added for fashion sake and that it might the better challenge the name of General as that of Dort consisted for the most part of the Delegates of the Belgick Churches to whom the foreign Divines were found inconsiderable Answ. What a wilde parallel is this Is it equally faulty for a National Synod to consist mostly of the Delegates of the Belgick Churches and for a Councel pretending to be Oecumenical to consist mostly of Italian Bishops and those many of them but titular Far better and with more colour of reason it might be objected against our Synods or Convocations here in England that they consist not mostly bu only of English Divines not one Foreigner being admitted either to consult or to decide nor the Puritan Non-conformists so much as invited to declare their Opinions or to alledge any thing in their own Justification Who ever till now found in any History a National Synod branded and censured because as many Foreigners were not admitted to it as there were of that very Nation for whose sake the Synod was assembled Dr. H. Ibid. The Differences as great at Dort as they were at Trent and as much care taken to addulce the discontented Parties in the one as the other Answ. In this also the Parallel is unparallel Differences there were at the Councel of Trent about the very fundamentals of Faith but the Differences at Dort were very slight and inconsiderable lying in the way and manner of expressing and wording the Doctrine rather than the Doctrine it self as will appear by examining particulars 'T is said that Dr. H. page 55 56. The British Livines together with one of those that came from Breme maintained the Universal Redemption of mankind by the Death of Christ but this by no means would be granted by the rest of the Synod Answ. Concerning this matter of Universal Redemption it is noted in Dr. Balcanqual's Letters page 2 That as there was difference touching it in the Synod so there was much difference about it in their own i. e. the English Colledge The Question among them was whether the words of Scripture which are likewise the words of our Confession Christus oblatus est aut mortuus pro toto humano genere seu pro peccatis totius mundi be to be understood of all particular men or only of the Elect who consist of all sorts of men Dr. Davenant and Dr. Ward saith the Letter are of Martinius of Breme 's mind that it is to be understood of all particular men the other three take the other exposition which is of the Writers of the Reâ—ormed Churches and namely of my late Lord Bishop of Salisbury both sides think they are right and therefore cannot yield one unto another with a safe Conscience Yet page 4. S. D. C. Lord Ambassador is desired to acquaint if he thought fit his Grace of Canterbury that this matter is like to be a difference not in the English Colledge but in the Synod How well this may be accorded with the former Letter is not for me to judge Page 8 't is said that some of the Provincials did use Martinius very uncivilly He is a man very learned and honest sound in all the five Articles as any man in the Synod except the second in which when the Canons come to be made your Lordship will hear there will be more of his Opinion besides himself Page 25 Dr. Balcan gives us a relation of the Iudgement of the British Divines and others concerning the second Article The Bremenses are affirmed according to the number of their Persons to have delivered three several judgements Martinius his judgement was first read who did stand in effect to the Tenents of the Remonstrants in the second Article he mainly overthrew the received distinction and restriction and did determine that Christ did truely die for all and every man that he was made a propitiation both for the godly and the wicked and that by his death he did impetrate reconciliation with God for them all at the latter end he condemned many things both in the Remonstrants and in the Contraremonstrants Opinion but more in the Contraremonstrants Isselburgius defended both the received distinction and restriction Crocius propounded a middle way bâ—tween his two Colleagues granting which we also in our Colledge did that Christ by his death did merit some supernatural things for the wicked but nothing belonging to the remission of sin or reconciliation with God and so indeed for any thing I could perceive his judgement was directly against that of Martinius and in effect all one with that of Isselburgius Finally we are told page 26 that in the second Article there was not altogether so uniform a consent both in regard of phrases and forms of speaking and in regard of some Propositions as were in the first yet certainly there was very great more than could be expected from so great a number of learned men in so hard and controverted an Article So that whereas Dr. Heylin counts it a reproach to the Synod that there was so much difference about universal Redemption Dr. Balcan thinks it an honour there was no more But not to leave this matter so much in the dark If Martinius was for the Arminian equal indifferent universal Redemption of every one of mankind I am well assured that neither all the British Divines nor any one of them was of his mind but indeed his Opinion and the Remonstrants Opinion seem to be heavenly wide as may be proved from his subscriptions to the Synodal Determinations about the Death of Christ and mans Redemption by the Death Acta Synodi pag. 356. for no man can think that in those Determinations the Opinion of the Remonstrants was not condemned But if this be not thought proof sufficient let the Reader be pleased to turn to Acta Synodi pag. 639 c. where the judgement of this Martinius is fully recorded In the very entrance he professeth to follow Ambrose Si Christus pro omnibus mortuus est specialiter tamen pro nobis passus est Pag. 643 644. he rejects seventeen Errors the far greater part of which are the Tenents of the Remonstrants As for Ludovicus Crocius he hath in his Duodecas Dissertationum provoked thereunto by the cavils of some taken a great deal of pains to state this Question about the universality of Christ's Redemption in the tenth dissertation he explaineth the terms and reâ—ecteth the extream Opinions in the eleventh he delivereth his own Opinion in no fewer than nineteen Conclusions in any of which if the Remonstrants can find any lettice for their lips much good may it do them For my part I wonder that Dr. Balcanqual should here write that for any thing he could perceive the judgement of Crocius was directly contrary to that of Martinius The judgements of both those Learned men are recorded about the second Article and
vitam aeternam idem dicunt non idem nobiscum sentiunt He that would be more fully convinced of this that the Lutherans are not Arminians may please to consult what Durfieldus a Divine of Rostoch hath written against Iohannes Assuerus Amsingus where he shall find the Arminians accused of Pelagianism before the chief Doctors of those Universities that follow the Augustan Confession This I take on trust from Dr. Rivet having not as yet had the opportunity to see the Author But casting my eye on Gerhard's Son's Epistle Dedicatory prefixed to his Father's Comment on Deuteronomy I found him use no obliging language of the Arminians for he saith that they have ad dogmata Socinianorum admodum prurientes aures and he calls Simon Episcopius the Infaelex Arminianismi interpolator But the cutting killing Answer which he cannot mention without triumph is still behind and is thus worded Dr. H. Pag. 73. 3. If Arminianism be so ready a bridge for passing over to Popery it would be very well worth the knowing how and by what means it should come to pass that so few of the Remonstrants in the Belgick Provinces and none of those whom they call Arminians in the Church of England should in so long a time pass over that bridge notwithstanding all the provocations of want and scorn which were put upon the one and have been since multiplied upon the other Answ. If this be so well worth knowing I shall be the more easily pardoned if I take some pains for the Doctor 's information 1. It is asked Why so few of the Belgick Remonstrants did turn Papists For answer I might ask How if the Contra-remonstrants Opinions did as much encline and dispose men to Popery as the Remonstrants it came to pass that not one Contra-remonstrant ever went over to Rome But I forbear that and shall offer two reasons which might as I conceive hinder the Belgick Remonstrants from turning Roman Catholicks 1. Their Wives and Children might hinder them from passing over this Bridge forsake these dear Relations they could not and yet if they did not forsake them they could promise themselves no good reception or kind entertainment among the Pontificians 2. The Remonstrants might therefore not turn Papists because they were resolved to turn to a worse sort of Hereticks viz. the Socinians But did the Remonstrants strike in with the Socinians Yes that they did as I will undertake to prove by as good evidence as can be expected in matter of fact Till I be called to make good this undertaking I refer my Reader to Vedelius's Arcana Armin. and Hornâ—beck's Apparatus ad Soc. conf 2. It is asked Why none of those whom they call Arminians in England notwithstanding all provocations of want and scorn are turned Papists To answer this times must be distinguished 1. Before Bishop Laud ruled and governed those who embraced the Opinions since called Arminian were indeed out of the way to preferment but who knows not that many of them turned Papists Barret did so in Queen Elizabeth's time And the Heads of Houses in Cambridge complain in the before mentioned Letter that they had found by experience that Popery came in among them at the door of Arminianism so I may call it by a prolepsis 2. When Bishop Laud ruled and disposed of all Ecclesiastical preferment Arminians had no provocations from want or scorn yet even then some of them turned Papists 3. Since the breaking out of the late unhappy Civil Wars and Confusions there hath a cup of trembling and astonishment gone round the three Nations and Divines of all perswasions have been made to drink of it all Ministers by what names soever dignified by what opinions soever distinguished have been made the filth and off-scouring of all things but that scorn or want hath befallen any one meerly for being a favourer of Arminianism is more than I know more than Dr. Heylin can prove Sure I am that many of those Army-men who gloried in nothing more than in trampling all Law and Right under foot were Arminians and he who was the only Divine that dared to justifie that horrid fact the murdering of the late King is known to all to be a great stickler for Arminianism But it were to be wished that no Arminians had during the late Troubles forsaken the Church of England and took sanctuary in the Synagogue of Rome I was bred up with Mr. W. H. at Katherine-Hall in Cambridge who was looked upon by the whole Society as a very studious ingenious hopeful person and was thereupon chosen Fellow before he was Master of Arts but by acquaintance with some he began highly to dote on the Common Prayer-book and would leave good Sermons at Cambridge and walk over to Coton on purpose that the might hear the Liturgy withal he had â—ucked in Arminianism but within the compass of two years he fell to downright Popery and is now as they say a Seminary Priest I would not have mentioned this story but that it is notorious I suppose all Cambridge over What shall we think of the late Bishop of Glocester was not he called and reputed an Arminian and did he not die a Son and Member of the Church of Rome The present Bishop of Exeter I confess makes an Essay to clear him from Popery but very unhappily whilest he goes about to prove that he did not die a Papist he makes him not a Christian for the former part of his life These are the words used concerning him pag. 637 No wonder if dying and dejected he chose rather to depart in communion with the Church of Rome than to adhere to the Church of England which he thought now decayed and dissolved at least as to its visible order and polity if not quite destroyed not that he owned I hope a communion or conciliation with the Roman Church as Popish but as far as it was Christian. If dying he was reconciled to the Church of Rome as Christian then before he was at enmity with it as Christian and if so he was not a Christian I hope a man may adhere to the Church of England and yet depart in communion with the Church of Rome as Christian In a word there was not many years since a Book published in which were contained the names of many of those who had lately revolted to Popery Let Dr. Heylin read over that Catalogue and then tell me whether it was not a strange piece of boldness to ask so confidently Why none of those who are called Arminians had in all these times turned Papists Dr. H. Pag. 75. Finally it is objected but the objection rather concerneth the men than the doctrine that the Arminians are a Faction a turbulent and seditious Faction so found in the United Provinces from their very first spawning To this he answers pag. 77 that there is nothing in the Doctrine of the Arminians as it relates to the five Points in difference which can dispose the Professors of it to
Authority of Tindal something also was ascribed at least by Arch-Bishop Cranmer one of our Reformers to the Authority of Iohn Frith for he seems to have received his Faith in the Doctrine of the Sacrament from him and with his Heifer did he plow in his Answer to Stephen Winchester Rationes argumenta atque e Doctoribus petita testimonia Johannis Frithi singula commemorare ut immensi esset negotii ita nec valde necessarii praesertim cum Archiepiscopus Cantuariensis in suo adversus Wintoniensem Apologetico idem abunde praestitisse videatur hinc contracta maxima praesidiorum materia quibus adversus cum nititur nec scio an ulli magis Authori hujusce doctrinae fidem acceptam debuit Archiepiscopuâ— quam huic adolescenti Iohn Fox in his Commentary in Latine pag. 130. Dr. H. page 18. Here the Doctor supposeth a Question to be asked On whom or on whose judgements the first Reformers relied in the weighty business And answers it first negatively They had no respect of Calvin whose offered assistance they refused when they went about it of which he sensibly complains unto some of his Friends in one of his Epistles Answ. Here are three things affirmed 1. That our first Reformers had no respect to Calvin 2. That the Reformers refused his profered assistance 3. That Calvin sensibly complaineth of this in one of his Epistles But the Historian is wiser than to tell us in what Epistle for number Calvin makes this complaint or what was the name of that Friend to whom this Epistle was directed Such a reference might have spoiled his whole design and discredited his future proceedings for it would have let his Reader understand that he could confidently aver things that were neither vera nor verisimilia Is any man so facil as to believe that our first Reformers had no respect to Calvin when as among the different opinions concerning the Sacrament they followed his and sent for Peter Martyr and Martin Bucer and Paul Fagius men that they might be sure he had influenced and would influence to assist them in carrying on their work and to defend them by their learning against all opposition I will once more look into Calvin's Epistles and Answers that I may see what thoughts our first Reformers had of that now so much decried man One and but one Epistle I find written by Cranmer to Calvin intimating his desire that learned and godly men who excell others in learning and judgement might meet in some safe place where they might handle all the heads of Ecclesiastical Doctrine and agree not only as to the things themselves but also as to words and forms of speaking This his desire being signified he intreateth Calvin that he and Melancthon and Bullinger would deliberate among themselves how such a Synod might most commodiously be congregated The Letter bears date March 20. 1542. Calvin from Geneva answers this Letter approves the Arch-Bishops design of calling an Assembly of Divines adds that if there might be any use of him he would not refuse to pass over ten Seas to further it but hoped that his tenuity would effect that he might be spared he would think he had done his part if he should accompany others with his Prayers This certainly is not profering his service and complaining that his servâ—ce when profered was refused Calvin also did write to the Protector the Duke of Somerset that Letter was so kindly accepted that he of his own accord offered to present another Letter which Calvin sent to King Edward himself But it may be this Letter to the King was not accepted I answer It was not only accepted by the King but also pleased his whole Council And Cranmer admonished Calvin that he could not do any thing more profitable than to write often to the King as I find in a Letter to Farel from Calvin dated Iune 15. 1557. Bucer at Cambridge undestood that Calvin's Letters prevailed much with Somerset and therefore intreats him when he did write to him to admonish him not to suffer the Churches to be left void of Preachers and so to be betrayed Bishop Hooper so much valued Calvin that he did write to him even when he was imprisoned saluting him with the Compellation of Vir praestantissime earnestlyâ—begging his Churches prayers and at last subscribing himself Tuae pietatis studiosissimus Jo. Hooperus These things put together make it impossible that our first Reformers had no respect to Calvin Let the Doctor now have leave to tell us to whom or to what our Reformers had respect Dr. H. pag. 18. In the first place saith he to the most pure and sincere Christian Religion in the Scriptures and in the next place to the usages of the Primitive Church Answ. This I grant but must also add that they had a respect unto the condition of the English People much at that time wedded to Superstition and therefore they were feign to recommend to Authority for establishment not every thing which they accounted best but what they thought the weak People would be able to bear Dr. H. Ibid. Being satisfied in both which waies they had thirdly a more particular respect to the Lutheran platforms the English Confession or Book of Articles being takâ—n in many places word for word out of that of Ausberg Answ. If this be true that our Reformers had such an eye to the Augustan Confession I infer that seeing Calvin could and did subscribe to the Augustan Confession there is nothing in our Articles but what he might have subscribed to But the present Lutherans will hardly be perswaded that the Composers of our Articles had so tender a respect to the Conâ—ession of Ausberg at least as now by them understood for Ubiquity in the Article concerning the Lord's Supper is plainly condemned whiles it is defined that the Body of Christ cannot be present at one time in many and diverse places Dr. H. Ibid. Fourthly in reference to the Points disputed they ascribed much to the Authority of Melancthon not undeservedly called the Phoenix of Germany whose assistance they earnestly desired whose coming over they expected who was as graciously invited hither by King Edward his coming laid aside on the fall of the Duke of Somerset therefore since they could not have his company they made use of his Writings for their direction Answ. Of this passage I am not able to give such an account as I desire Well I remember I have read that Melancthon in an Epistle to Camerarius mentions his being invited into England by King Henry the Eighth about the year 1534 and the cause of his refusal to accept the invitation some intelligence he had received that the King had no great care of the affairs of the Church That he was ever invited by King Edward I can neither affirm nor deny having not Melancthon's Epistles at hand But when was it that this great Scholar's assistance was so earnestly desired The fall of the Duke of Somerset
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
est Antichristus Wherefore let not the Historian spend time to prove that those Articles do not bind the Church as those did that solemnly passed in the Convocations for I ascribe no such Authority to them only urge them as Declarations of the Articles of our Religion just as I would urge the judgment of the two Lord Chief Iustices calling in to their assistance others learned in the Law for the expounding of a Statute 't is not impossible they should be mistaken in their exposition but it would be strongly presumed by all modest men that they were not mistaken And so I could let go these Articles had it not pleased the Historian to tell us of a mighty offence taken at them by the Lord Burleigh and a resolution of having all that acted in them attainted of a praemunire from the danger of which the Arch-Bishop could not get release until he had promised speedily to recall and suppress those Articles All which we have laid down page 81 82 as things affirmed by Mr. Mountague from the Remonstrants in an Answer of theirs published 1618. But where did these Remonstrants hear this story Why possibly they might have it from the mouth of Baro or some other Cambridge men Will any man believe so great things upon so slender proofs as the possibility of the Remonstrants hearing them from the mouth of some Cantabridgian when they do not so much as pretend to have heard any such thing from any member of our Church nor doth any one ever since offer to tell us when and where the Arch-Bishop was forced to make any such submission The Heads of Houses in their Letter to the Lord Burleigh own the sending up of Dr. Tindal and Dr. Whitaker to conferr with the Lord of Canterbury and write of the great and comfortable quiet that by the coming down of the Articles was brought unto the University until that Baro in January following contrary to restraint and commandment gave some new disturbance In the same Letter also subscribed with their names and bearing date March 8. 1595 they resolutely tell the same Lord that Baro had determined preached printed diverse points of Doctrine not only contrary to himself but also contrary to that which had been taught and received ever since her Majesty's reign and agreeable to the errours of Popery Wherefore they pray his Lordship to vouchsafe his good ayd and advise to the comfort of themselves and all others of the University truly affected and to the suppression in time of those errours and even of gross Popery like by such means to creep in among them And upon this Letter or something else Baro left his place in the University because he could not keep it say Dr. Ward Mr. Fuller and all other Cantabridgians that ever I read but this Oxford Historian who can easily affirm any thing that he much desires tells us he left his place neither because he was deprived nor because he had any fear of being deprived but meerly because he had no mind to keep it any longer Nay he sticks not to affirm that in case it had pleased him to continue any longer Lecturer it is probable he might have carried the Lecture from any other Candidate or Competitour of what rate soever But by what mediums did he bring himself to this probable perswasion or whence did he collect that Baro had so great a number of adherents Only from Dr. Overals being chosen to succeed Dr. Whitaker But if they were the Anti-calvinists that carried it for Overal why did they not rather carry it for Baro himself seeing they had such fair presidents of preferring those who are Lady Margarets Professors to be King's Professors Hutton had been so preferred so had Whitgift so had Chaderton Or if Baro's interest were so great how came he to use so little care and Conscience as not to provide a Successor of his own mind Did he think his opinions were not worth the knowing If he did not why did he trouble the world with them If he did why would he so tamely yield to the chusing of Doctor Playfer than whom there was not a man in all the University more opposite to him The truth is Doctor Overal had not then declared himself to differ from Calvin and therefore was by the University employed to convince Barret and afterwards when he delivered such things as some Calvinists condemned him for yet he never deliver'd his mind so as to deny personal election or the certain perseverance of all the elect Something more of his mind we shall hear hereafter in the Hampton-Court Conference In the mean time I must mind the Doctor of a certain Catechism consisting of Questions and Answers touching the Doctrine of Predestination bound up with our English Bibles printed by Robert Barker Anno 1607. but not then first bound up with our Bibles as the Doctor seems willing to think pag. 101 102. The Questions and Answers are to be found in the Church Bibles commonly called the Bishops Bibles printed by Christopher Barker I my self have seen Bibles printed twenty years before the coming in of King Iames in which they were and for ought I know they were as old as any Translation of the Bible used in Queen Elizabetbs time He asks by what authority those Questions and Answers were put in betwixt the Old and New Testament and so I remember he somewhere asks by what Authority the Metrical Translation of the Psalmes was allowed to be Sung in Churches I am not able to give him a satisfactory answer either to the one or the other question no more than he is able to answer me who made our second Book of Homilies Yet he thinks I suppose that those who made that Book were Authorized to make it and so I think that those who first bound up those Questions and Answers and Singing Psalmes with our Bibles had Order and Authority so to do All this while Cambridge hath took us up We must now look into the other University in which we are told that all things were calm and quiet no publick opposition shewing it sâ—lf in the Schools or Pulpits The reason of this quiet is guessed at because the Students of that University did more incline to the canvasing of such Points as were in difference betwixt us and the Romanists For witness he calls in many Papists and on the other side Bishop Iewel Bishop Bilson Dr. Humphry Mr. Nowel Dr. Reynolds and many others which stood firm to the Church of England This last clause sure slipped from him unawares Upon second thoughts I fear he will scarce affirm that all these stood firm to the Church of England If they did no lot or portion hath he or any of his in the Church of England most of them having declared their minds point blank against conditional election c. Iewel hath told us his mind about Election in his Comment on the Thessalonians so hath Mr. Nowel in his Catechism Dr. Humphries
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