many wholesome afflictions yea sent his holy Spirit among them And all this in the first place not to harden no not carnall Israel nor to leave them without excuse but to purge them to humble them and to prove them and to doe them good in the latter end And when these ends were not attained hee complaines hee had used these meanes in vaine which plainly argueth his first and chiefest intent was to heale and not to harden In fulnesse of time God sent his Sonne into the world not to condemne it or any thing in it but that the world might bee saved through him implying that even that part of the world which is condemned for refusing of Christ it was not Gods chiese intent to send Christ to procure their condemnation but their salvation rather If they should plead their condemnation to bee unjust for unbeleese because they were not able to beleeve Ver. 18. our Saviour answers by a reasonable prevention Ver. 19. This is their condemnation viz. the just cause of their condemnation that when light came into the world men loved darknesse rather then light men chose rather to cleave to their sinfull estates and wayes of darknesse than to follow the light of the meanes of grace which might have brought them on forward to beleeve in Christ Again when Christ lived here in the world and was the Minister of Circumcision and so might speake and doe some thing as man yet as man he went not to doe his owne will but the will of his Father who sent him and yet how willing and earnest was hee to gather Jerusalem under his wings even his wings in which lay healing and salvation A signe it was the will of God to have healed and saved that part of Jerusalem which would not And when our Saviour with tears tells Jerusalem Oh that thou hadst known at least in this thy day the things that doe belong unto thy peace doth hee not intimate that God had even to that day carried thoughts of peace unto them and accordingly to send them meanes of peace even those that should never from that day forward enjoy the like means of peace Finally God sent his Spirit into the world to convince it of sin because they beleeved not in Christ Which argueth that the Spirit did not onely perswade them to beleeve in Christ but did convince them also that it was their sin that they did not attaine to beleeve on him Now the Spirit of God moveth to nothing but what hee knoweth to bee according to the will of God And therefore the Spirit beares witnesse the will of God is the world of unbeleevers shall not bee shut out from Christ if they shut not out themselves through unbeleefe Still you proceed to prove that which no man denyes namely that God purposed life to the world upon condition of obedience and repentance provided that you understand it aright namely that obedience and repentance is ordained of God as a condition of life not of Gods purpose Otherwise it were a very wild expression to say that God ordained that obedience and repentance should be the condition of Gods ordination Or that God purposed that obedience and repentance should be the condition of Gods purpose Yet by the way I desire to know whether you exclude faith If you doe what ground have you to prove that God ever purposed that any of Adams posterity coming to ripenesse of age should be saved upon the condition of obedience and repentance without faith Last of all on the other side it is as undoubtedly true that God ordained that whosoever coming to ripe yeares should not beleeve and repent should be damned the very elect not excepted Not that any such conditionate decrees are agreeable unto God but upon such decrees as were absolute in God such Propositions as these are naturally inferred Whosoever beleeveth and repenteth shall be saved Whosoever beleeveth not and repenteth not shall be damned One thing I had almost forgotten In the former Section you spake of a Purpose of God to save the world upon condition of obedience or repentance in a disjunctive manner now you are come off from that and turne your former disjunctive into a copulative saying that God purposed to save the world upon condition of their obedience and repentance This argueth that you are not well grounded in your owne opinion Howsoever your third reason is drawn from the end which God aimed at in offering meanes of salvation to the world which is not say you in the first place to harden or leave them without excuse but to bring them to the knowledge of God and of themselves to repentance to the seeking after God to the purging of themselves from sinne and to peace I am content first to consider what you say secondly how you prove who ever said that God offered meanes of salvation to any to this end that hee might harden them Meanes of grace were never that I know of called meanes of obduration Hardening followeth hereupon by accident but meanes of grace harden not But when meanes of grace are offered the corruption of mans heart uncorrected by the spirit of regeneration is apt to suggest carnall considerations such as are apt to make a man obstinately stand out against them The motion that Israel made to Sihon to passe through his Country hardened him not but the feare of inconveniencies and dangers more than enough upon the passage of so great an Army through his Country in all likelihood was it that hardened him and God is said to harden him in not correcting that feare but moving him according to that projecting disposition wherein hee found him And mark how Cajetan commenteth upon these words Utramque hominis partem spiritum cor hoc est superiorem inferiorem malè dispositum à Deo intellige negative penes dona gratuita positivè autem quoad judicum inclinationem prosecutionem boni sensibilis It à quod Deus spiritum regis durum hoc est non cedentem petitionibus reddidit non dando ci gratiam acquiescends cooperanda cidem ad affectum securitatis boni proprii When Moses came to Pharaoh to require him in the name of the Lord to let Israel goe this was not that that hardened him but his owne pride superstition and covetousnesse Neither did Gods judgements harden him for it is divers times signified that when hee found himselfe eased then hee hardned his heart and in other places in the way of an adversative when 't is said that yet Pharaoh hardened his heart and the like This also doth remove the cause of hardening his heart from Gods judgements yet notwithstanding it cannot bee denyed but that when God offers the meanes of grace to many hee doth it with a purpose to harden their hearts if so be hee entertaines any such purpose at all as your selfe grants hee doth for Gods purposes are eternall and immutable As for your qualification
Esau that hee should serve Jacob before hee had done good or evill The Hebrew and Greek word signifie neither to create nor bring into the world but to preserve or to cause to stand to stirre up or to advance which presupposeth Pharaoh already born yea and of such a Spirit that if God preserve him and stirre him up hee was become a fit subject upon whom God might shew his power in his hardning and overthrow Otherwise God might as well bee said to condemn Pharaoh out of his absolute will without all respect to sin as to shew his power in hardning of him without all respect to sin Hardning when it falls upon the creature is both the height of his sin and depth of his misery and therefore is it as prejudiciall to Gods justice to inflict it without respect of sin going before and to the creature as dangerous to undergoe it as condemnation to hell it self Hell hath no greater torment then an heart desperately hardned under the wrath curse and judgement of God which was Pharaohs case But consider Pharaoh not in the estate of Esau as having done neither good nor evill but in the state wherein he stood when God gave out his Oracle concerning him that for this cause hee stirred him up to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow and then may I easily grant more then is required viz. When God purposed to passe by him not only in communicating grace and glory unto him but also to fall upon him in his utmost wrath as well in outward strange calamity as especially in spirituall judgements hardnesse of heart and blindnesse of minde to his utter perdition In the former part you declined a direct answer to the question proposed for whereas the question proposed was touching the communicating of grace and glory you not adventuring to maintaine a purpose of God to communicate grace and glory to them whom you call the world of mankinde onely maintain a purpose in God at least you seem so to doe of communicating life and glory some other way then out of grace But with what advantage to your cause that hath been carryed I have already considered Now you seem to answer the question looking it directly in the face For though you acknowledge such a purpose in God concerning Pharaoh to wit of passing him by in communicating grace and glory yet the cause you say is not alike of Esau when Gods Oracle was given out concerning him hee being not then born as of Pharaoh when the Oracle here spoken of was given out concerning him hee being then a fit subject upon whom God might shew his power in his hardning and overthrow Yet here againe you decline the question For the question was not whether Pharaoh at that time when God said For this cause I have raised thee up c. were a fitter subject for God to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow then Esau was while yet hee was in his mothers wombe But whether God had not a purpose to passe by Esau as touching the communicating of grace and glory even before hee was born which hee had concerning Pharaoh at that time before spoken of which that hee had I prove thus It was said of Esau before hee was born that God hated him What more could bee said of Pharaoh to expresse his alienation from him Secondly look how you qualifie the hatred of God to Esau in the same manner may it bee qualifyed towards Pharaoh even at this time you speak of For Gods hatred towards Esau you qualifie thus God had a purpose to deale with him according to his works But say I even then when God professed of Pharaoh saying For this cause have I raised thee up c. God had a purpose to deale with him according to his works Thirdly if therefore God had no such purpose towards Esau namely to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow because Esau was not yet born then belike God had no such purpose towards Pharaoh himself while Pharaoh was not yet born But this is utterly untrue for as much as Gods purposes are eternall and not temporall And in like manner it may bee proved that if ever God had the like purpose towards Esau to wit after his preferring a messe of pottage before his birthright or at any other time it followeth that God had the same purpose towards Esau even before hee was born for Gods purposes are not temporall but eternall Lastly as for the difference you put between them besides the question one being a more fit subject for God to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow then the other I grant it to bee true in part as touching the hardning of them For obduration presupposeth a man of such ripenesse of years as to have the use of reason But this hinders not but that God might at the same time have a purpose to harden him in his time as Pharaoh in his time And yet why I pray was not Pharaoh as fit a subject for God to shew his power in changing his heart as well as Saul was in the middest of his bloody persecutions of the Church of God And what naturall man such as I presume are all those whom you call the world of mankinde is not a fit subject for God to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow though hee bee never so morall yea as morall as Trajan who raised one persecution or Marcus Antoninus Philosophus who raised another or as Aurelianus who raised a third It is true if God will move any man unto courses contrary to his corrupt inclination and not give him grace to master that corrupt inclination that man whatsoever hee bee shall bee a fit subject for God to shew his power in his hardning yea and overthrow also if it please him But if God move any man never so contrariously to his corrupt inclination and withall give him grace to master that corrupt inclination of his hee shall bee a fit subject for God to shew the power of his grace in his conversion and salvation You speak much of hardning even according unto pleasure without giving your Reader any explication of the words whereby hee might understand your meaning wherein obduration consists Surely obduration is either the denyall of grace or whatsoever it bee it is alwaies joyned with the denyall of grace as I take it But in very different manner I confesse which you distinguish not As for the deniall of grace that was found to have course in the first sin that was committed both in Angels and men For I am of Austins minde concerning the Angels that stood that they were Amplius adjuti then the other that fell De Civit. Dei lib. 12. cap. 9. As also concerning Adams fall that in that case Though God gave him posse si voluit yet hee gave him not velle quod potuit and these hee makes severall adjutoria The like may bee said of every
wit his elect Angels and those that fell they that stood being amplius adjuti more succoured then the other as Austin professeth De Civ Dei lib. 12. cap. 9. And Coquaeus at large upon him So that in this respect the denying of corroborating grace to those Angels that fell while before they were without sin was just with God not in any reference unto their works as if they had deserved that God should permit them to fall into sin it being impossible that any creature should deserve this For in this case there should bee acknowledged a sin to precede the first sin which cannot bee avouched without manifest contradiction But it is just in respect of Gods Soveraignty to keep from sin whom heo will and to permit whom hee will to fall into sin Quest Thou wilt further say unto me Why doth hee yet find fault for who hath resisted his will Answ To this the Apostle returneth answer in foure materiall points First Hee checketh the petulancy of the creature by shewing that though God should harden the creature by his irresistible will yet it is not for the creature to reply thus to God this hee doth by a comparison arguing Gods Soveraignty over the creature suitable to the power which the potter hath over the clay ver 20. Secondly hee admitteth a deny all or at least a mitigation of the rigour of that word objected in the manner of Gods hardning by his irresistible will instead whereof the Apostle implyeth hee doth rather harden by his suffering and long patience What if God suffer in long patience c. ver 22. Thirdly Hee cleareth the justice of God in hardning the creature by shewing the conditions of those persons whom hee thus hardneth not creatures that have done neither good nor evill but 1. vessels of wrath which men are not till first considered as sinners 2. fitted or as it were perfected and ripened unto destruction which Ephes 2. 23. men are not till after the refusall of the means of grace Ephes 2. 4. 2 Chron. 36. 15 16. or else after grosse and unnaturall iniquity Gen. 15. 16. compared with Levit. 28. 27 28 29. Fourthly hee declares the holy ends which God aimes at in all this his dealing with vessels of wrath after this manner which ends are the manifestation first of his power and wrath toward the wicked ver 22. secondly of the riches of his glorious grace toward the elect in dealing far otherwise with them v. 23. Rom. 11. 33. Oh the depth of the riches both of the wisdome and of the power of God! how unsearchable are his judgments and his wayes past finding out To him bee glory for ever Amen By this objection arising out of the former Doctrine namely that God hath mercy on whom hee will and hardneth others hee doth evince that by shewing mercy is signifyed Gods giving the grace of obedience by hardning his denying the same grace of obedience And withall that by denying this grace it comes to passe that men cannot obey the will of God seeing hereby is manifested that Gods will is not they should obey but rather continue in their hardnesse of heart uncured and consequently in their disobedience whereupon it seems unreasonable that God should complain of mens disobedience as oftentimes hee doth as Esa 1. Hear O Heavens and hearken O Earth I have nourished and brought up a people and they have rebelled against mee Again Esa 65. All the day long have I stretched out my hands unto a people that walk in a way that is not good even after their own imaginations And Jer. 8. 7. Even the Stork in the aire knoweth her appointed times and the Turtle and the Crane and the Swallow observeth the time of their comming but my people knoweth not the judgements of the Lord and ver 6. I hearkned and heard but none spake aright no man repented of his wickednesse saying what have I done Every one turneth into their race as the horse rusheth into the battle And Hose 7. 14. Though I have bound and strengthened their arm yet they have rebelled against mee And Exod. 10. 2. Thus saith the Lord God of the Hebrews How long wilt thou refuse to humble thy self before mee Let my people goe that they may serve mee ver 4. But if thou refuse to let my people goe behold to morrow I will bring Grashoppers into thine house c. ver 20. But the Lord hardned Pharaohs heart and hee did not let the children of Israel goe Now this I say seems most unreasonable in the judgement of flesh and blood Namely both to harden a mans heart and yet to complain of and finde fault with the hardnesse of his heart with his rebellion and disobedience considering that no man can resist his will To this the Apostle answereth in certain notable particulars First shewing that when the Scripture doth manifest this to bee Gods course namely to harden and yet to complain of a mans hardnesse and disobedience it becommeth not the creature to quarrell with God or dispute with God hereabout because his weak capacity is not able to comprehend the reasonablenesse thereof As for hardning by a will irresistible implying that there may bee a kinde of hardning by a will resistible as Arminius interpreteth the Apostle it is to put upon the Apostle the conceits of man for hee maketh no such distinction Secondly Hee proceeds to shew how that God as the Creator hath power over the creature to dispose of him as he thinks good in two notable particulars First in making him of what fashion hee will ver 20. Secondly in making him to what end hee will and that without controll from the creature the one being answerable to the other in these words Shall the thing formed say unto him that formed it why haste thou made mee thus Now these different conditions as different fashions of a vessell are to bee conceived in congruous reference to the double act of God formerly mentioned First the one was in shewing mercy on whom hee will whereby a man is made a vessell of grace fit for honour Secondly the other was in hardning whom hee will whereby a man left destitute of grace is exposed to rebellion and disobedience and consequently made a vessell fit for dishonour Secondly to what end hee will to wit either to honour or dishonour that is either to become finally a vessell of mercy or a vessell of wrath like as the potter disposeth of clay in making vessels thereof answerable hereunto in each particular according to the meere pleasure of his will Thirdly hee sheweth that the end of all this is threefold 1. The manifestation of his wrath or justice on the one 2. The riches of his glory that is of his glorious grace on the vessels of mercy 3. His power and soveraignty in making whom hee will vessels of wrath or mercy Fourthly hee shews withall that before the execution of his wrath comes hee suffers these vessels of
then is the meaning of the Lord saying I have smitten your children in vaine they have received no correction I answer we are to conceive Gods corrections to tend to this according to that of Peter knowing that the long-suffering of the Lord is salvation or God speakes this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the manner of earthly parents seeking their childrens amendment by correction but not obtaining it And this being an end of correction in Gods children in the wicked this end is not obtained And what difference is there between meanes naturall and meanes morall but this meanes naturall have power to effect their ends meanes morall are to admonish morall agents of their duty to doe this or that and so the ends of Gods punishment is that by them wee should learne to amend our lives as is signified in the Collects of our Church In a word naturall means tend to ends that shall be thereupon morall means tend to ends that should be and each are usually said to be in vaine when the end according to each kind is not obtained God sent his Sonne into the world not that hee should condemne the world but that the world should be saved by him Most true for hee sent his Son into the world to dye for the world and to dye for them is to save them and not to condemne them But for whom did hee send his Sonne into the world to dye Surely for the world of Elect even for those whom God the Father had given him Thou hast given him power over all flesh that hee should give eternall life to all them that thou hast given him Joh. 17. 2. And if wee consider the world in distinction from those whom God hath given him hee plainly professeth that as hee did not pray for them Joh. 17. 9. so hee did not sanctifie himselfe for them Verse 19. that is offer himselfe up upon the Crosse as Maldonate acknowledgeth to be the joynt interpretation of all the Fathers whom hee had read And your selfe have but earst confessed that God did not Joh. 3. 17. give the world unto Christ by him of grace to be bought or brought unto salvation Undoubtedly hee sent not Christ into the world at all to procure any mans condemnation neither doth Christ procure any mans condemnation although infidelity and disobedience to the word of Christ procures the condemnation of many And I wonder what moved you so to speake as to imply it was Gods intent though not chiefe intent to send Christ into the world to procure the condemnation of any At length wee are come to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the point controverted between us in the words following If they should plead their condemnation to be unjust for unbeleefe because they were not able to beleeve Ver. 18. our Saviour answers by a reasonable prevention ver 19. This is their condemnation viz. the just cause of their condemnation that when light came into the world men loved darknesse rather than light men chose rather to cleave to their sinfull estates and wayes of darknesse than to follow the light of the means of grace which might have brought them on to beleeve in Christ First let us consider the Text it selfe then your interpretation and accommodation thereof Our Saviour doth plainly derive the cause of their unbeleefe or disapprobation of the Gospel signified in these words They loved darknesse rather than light I say the cause of this our Saviour referres to their workes of darknesse expressed in these words Because their deeds were evill The full meaning whereof I take to be this The workes wherein they delight are evill that is workes of darknesse and therefore no marvell if they hate the light and preferre darknesse before it Pulchra Lavernae Da mihi fallere da justum sanctumque videri Noctem peccatis fraudibus objice nubem But give mee leave to make an honest motion As it becomes us to take notice of this cause mentioned here so it becomes us nothing lesse to take notice of other causes mentioned in other places Now another cause of unbeleefe is mentioned Joh. 5. 44. and that of the same generall nature with this but expressed in more speciall manner by our Saviour thus How can yee beleeve which receive honour one of another and seeke not the honour that cometh from God onely Yet this is not all the cause of unbeleefe which the Scripture commends unto us for the Apostle also takes notice of Sathans illusions in this worke of unbeleefe 2 Cor. 4. 3 4. If our Gospel be hid it is hid to them that are lost Whose eyes the God of this world hath blinded c. And because it is in the power of God to correct this delight wee take in evill workes and to deliver us from the illusions of Sathan if it please him to shew such mercy towards us and when he doth not he is said to harden us The hand of God in this our Saviour takes notice of as the cause of unbeleefe in man Joh. 12. 39 40. Therefore they could not beleeve because Esaias saith againe Hee hath blinded their eyes and hardened their heart that they should not see with their eyes and understand with their heart and be converted and I should heale them Like as Moses of old told the Jewes saying Deut. 29. 2 3. Yee have seen all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharaoh and unto all his servants and unto all his land The great temptations which thine eyes have seen the signes and those great miracles Ver. 4. Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive and eyes to see and eares to heare unto this day And this hee doth even then when his purpose was to reprove them for their naturall incorrigiblenesse for men sinne never the lesse obstinately because God denyes them grace but rather so much the more obstinately because as Austin well saith Libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia and consequently they are never a whit the lesse faulty though it be not in their power to correct that corruption of their hearts whence this faultinesse proceeds And hereupon the Apostle gives way to the same objection in effect which you propose for having concluded that God hath mercy on whom hee will and whom hee will hee hardeneth hee gives place to such an objection Thou wilt say then Why doth hee yet complaine for who hath resisted his will and answers it not as our Saviour doth for our Saviour proposed no such objection to be answered as you feigne the Apostle doth plainly and in expresse termes Our Saviour discovers the immediate cause of unbeleefe to wit because their hearts were set on evill as it was sometimes with the Colossians Col. 1. 21. yet because it was not in their power to change their hearts but God alone who will change them through mercy in whom hee will and will not change them in others
all as it is free for God to give grace to whom he will and so to bring them to salvation the purpose whereof is called Gods election so is it enough for God to deny grace to whom he will and thereby to expose them to condemnation the purpose whereof in God is that which wee call Reprobation which as Aquinas saith Includit voluntatem permittendi peccatum damnationem inferendi pro peccato Now of this generall impotency of doing good which cleaves unto all since the fall of Adam you take no notice at all though herein consists the very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of these controversies but carry your selfe throughout in such manner as if notwithstanding that shipwracke of grace which all humane soules made in Adam it were still as much in mans power to obey God as it was before or as much in mans power to rise by repentance now after he is fallen as it was in his power to stand in his integrity and in obedience unto God before he was fallen Put the case all were true that you deliver in the next place namely that God the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost proceed in the way of admonition and exhortation to turne themselves to the Lord that iniquitie might not be their ruine yet this hinders not but that the decree of condemnation might be precedent to Gods decree of taking such a course and permitting them to resist it For upon a purpose to condemne them for such a sinne he might thereupon resolve to expose them to such a sinne And if God should first decree to permit such a sinne and then decree to condemne them for it the permission of this sinne being first in intention should by your owne rule be last in execution that is first men should be condemned for such a sin and afterwards they should be suffered to commit it Not that I maintaine any such order but onely to represent the weaknesse of your discourse approaching shrewdly to such a disorderly constitution of Gods decrees and nothing at all preventing the most harsh tenet that can be devised Againe this that here you deliver were it granted you yet doth it nothing hinder the corrupt masse in Adam to be the object of Gods decree of condemnation For albeit God the Father and God the Sonne faile not of performing all this you speak of yet if by reason of the generall impotency which is come on all they are nothing able to obey these motions of Gods spirit and withall God purposeth to deny them a further grace to make them to obey shall not this be sufficient to expose them to condemnation even for this sinne of resisting the motions of Gods spirit But now let us consider your discourse it selfe and what weight it carrieth which onely makes a shew of much but comes to nothing in the end First you please your selfe in devising distinct workes applyed to the distinct persons in the Trinitie without all ground in my judgement Wee commonly say Opera Trinitatis ad extra sunt indivisibilia Were not the Sonne and the Holy Ghost as active in the creation and are still in the workes of providence as the Father How Christ enlightned the world by his death is a mystery to me his doctrine I confesse did and much more the doctrine of his Apostles But in this ministerie of Christs servants were not the Father and the Holy Ghost as operative as the Sonne As for the knocking of the spirit at mens hearts you nothing distinguish it for ought I found hitherto from the ministerie of Christs servants in admonishing and exhorting which worke is yet the Fathers and the Sonnes aswell as the Spirits But whereas you say all this is done for this very end To turne them to the Lord that iniquitie might not be their destruction I pray you observe your owne words well all the operations you specifie are drawn from these two heads Instruction and Admonition to turn to the Lord and the end of all this you say is to turne to the Lord. Put these together that you may behold the sobrietie of this discourse God exhorts them to turne to the Lord to this end to turne them to the Lord As much as to say God exhorts them to turne to the Lord to this end that in case they obey his voice and turne to the Lord which is their part then God will performe his part also and turne them to the Lord. But what need I pray of Gods worke in turning them to the Lord after they have performed their part so well as to turne themselves to the Lord Againe if God hath a purpose to turne them to the Lord why doth he not Is it because they refuse to performe some act upon the performance whereof God would turne them to himself Now I would gladly know what act that is which God expects to be performed that so he might turne them to the Lord. I am verily perswaded your selfe are not willing to be put to designe this Is it the very act of turning to the Lord or lesse or more If the very act of turning to the Lord you fall upon a manifest absurditie before specified if lesse then turning to the Lord then 't is lesse than a good act and shall God reward that which is lesse then a good act with conversion unto him What is it to conferre grace according to the workes of nature if this be not Yet I would faine know what this act is Least of all will you say 't is more than turning to the Lord for that should suppose conversion unto the Lord already wrought and consequently no need that God should turne them to the Lord which supposeth that they were not before turned to the Lord at all The providing of severall helpfull meanes for the salvation of the world after the fall doth nothing hinder Gods reprobating of the world upon the fall unto eternall condemnation and perdition For if hee purpose to deny them grace to obey these meanes this shall bee sufficient to expose them to condemnation even for the despising of those meanes of grace which God purposeth to provide for them and accordingly the objection here proposed is sound And whereas you answere that these meanes doe aggravate their condemnation by accident onely to wit through their neglect and abuse of them I answere that this their neglect and abuse doth by necessary consequence follow upon Gods purpose to deny them effectuall grace for the using of those meanes aright like as upon Gods purpose to harden Pharaohs heart that hee should not let Israel goe it followed by necessary consequence that Pharaoh through the hardnesse of his heart would not let Israel goe But that Gods end is as you say the restoring of men to salvation and life as if God did will and purpose any such thing is utterly untrue and nothing proved by you hitherto but rather flatly contradictorie to that you have most an end delivered partly in
sin that was committed whereas God could undoubtedly restrain from the committing of it and that either in a gracious manner or in a meere naturall manner When it is committed his gracious restraint is not afforded but denyed rather What that other action is wherein this obduration consists and which is joyned with the denyall of grace you expound not Suppose it bee Gods moving a man to some course contrary to his corrupt nature either by his word as hee moved Pharaoh to let Israel goe or by his works or by the suggestions of conscience according to that Law which is writen in mens hearts is not this usually found also as often as sinne is committed contrary to light of Nature or light of Grace And hath not obduration consequently its course in all this And why you should pronounce of obduration indefinitely That it is both the heighth of mans sin and depth of mans misery I see no reason Do not the children of God sometimes feele it and in patheticall manner complain of it Lord why hast thou caused us to erre from thy wayes and hardned our hearts against thy feare Esay 63. 17. What saith our Saviour to his Disciples Mark 8. 17. Perceive yee not neither understand have yee your hearts yet hardned As for your phrase of inflicting obduration that doth much require explication which you doe no where perform that I know There is I confesse another operation of God besides those I mentioned formerly whereby men are given over by God whence it followeth that they will grow harder and harder and that is the suspension of his admonitions either by taking away his word or forbearing inward motives by his spirit or removing his judgements and giving outward prosperity whereby God is said to give men over to their own hearts lusts But how this or any of these can bee called the inflicting of abduration I understand not And whereas you say it is prejudiciall to Gods Justice to shew his power in hardning Pharaoh without respect to sin like as to condemn him I have already shewed the great difference between condemnation and obduration It being never said that God damnes whom hee will but the Apostle plainely professing that God hardens whom hee will even as expressely as it is said Hee hath mercy on whom hee will and no marvell For God hath revealed a Law according to which hee proceeds in damning men but you are not able to shew us a Law according to which God proceeds in the hardning of them For if the elect before their callings bee no better then reprobates it is impossible to assigne a Law according to which God proceeds in the hardning of men but that by the same Law the Elect of God must bee hardned also And hardning in the Scripture phrase is usually opposed to Gods shewing mercy It is one thing to speak of an heart hardned another to speak of a heart desperately hardned Yet if you were put to explicate your self and shew what it is to bee desperately hardned and that of God and there withall to prove how Pharaoh was at the time you speak of desperately hardned I am perswaded this phrase would cost you more pains then you are aware of for the satisfying of your self and perhaps somewhat more for the satisfying of others If then God purposed to fall upon Pharaoh in his utmost wrath c. Surely from everlasting hee purposed so to fall upon him for all Gods purposes are everlasting If your meaning bee onely to denote the precedency of such a condition of Pharaoh in sin to Gods falling upon him in bringing such judgements upon his back but not a precedency to Gods purpose I willingly concurre with you herein But then the like may bee said of God concerning Esau before hee was born to wit that God purposed to bring such a measure of obduration and confusion upon him after such a condition of sin But if your meaning bee as indeed hitherunto the genius of your opinion drives you namely that upon the foresight of some sinfull condition God did decree to bring obduration and condemnation both upon Esau and Pharaoh as this may bee said as well of one as of the other here you will give us leave to dissent from you considering how manifestly you are found herein to dissent from your self For if such a foresight of sin goe before Gods decree of obduration and condemnation then God did first decree to permit that sin before hee did decree to harden and condemne man for it so that the permission of that sin in Gods intention must bee before obduration and condemnation and consequently last in execution that is men shall first bee hardned and condemned and then suffered to commit that sinne for which they are hardned and condemned Again if Gods purpose to punish with condemnation must necessarily presuppose foresight of sin in God by the same reason Gods purpose to reward with salvation must necessarily presuppose a foresight in God of obedience and in this case what shall become of the freenesse of Gods grace in election not to trouble you with the profession of Aquinas that never any man was so mad as to introduce a cause of predestination quoad actum praedestinantis The case is the same with introducing a cause of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis For the ground of this is only because there can bee no cause of the will of God quoad actum volentis Now reprobation is well known to bee an act of Gods will as well as predestination Answer But say further that this hardning of Pharaoh bee an effect of the like hatred of Pharaoh as of Esau neither is it said to depend on the sin of Pharaoh but on the will of God as mercy doth as the first cause thereof I answer this hardning of Pharaoh though an effect of Gods hatred of Pharaoh yet it is not an immediate effect of the like hatred hee bare to Esau before hee had done good or evill but presupposeth the sin of Pharaoh viz. his malitious hatred of Gods Church comming between God hateth no man so farre as to harden him till hee hath fallen into some sin in which and for which hee may bee hardned Hardning being alwaies as far as I can perceive by Scripture not only a sin and cause of sin but a punishment of sin How can God bee said to punish sin with sin in hardning the creature if sin in Pharaoh bee not presupposed to goe before the hardning It is true indeed this hardning of Pharaoh is referred by the Apostle to the will of God as the first cause thereof For otherwise the answer of the Apostle had not been sufficient to the objection propounded ver 14. for there it was objected that unrighteousnesse might seem to bee found in God even respect of persons to deale so unequally with persons equall such as Jacob and Esau were for if Jacob and Esau had done neither good nor evill when God had exalted
the younger to the participation of his free love and to soveraignty over his Brother and depressed the elder to the condition of a servant and as a servant reserved for him just dealing but not fatherly love might not this seeme an unequall partiality with God to deale so unequally with persons equall To resolve this doubt the Apostle could not have cleered God from unrighteousnesse by pleading the sin of Esau which deserved that hee should bee so dealt withall for neither did Jacobs sin deserve better and besides the Apostle had said before God gave out these Oracles which pronounced his different respect of them without all consideration of good or evill in either of them viz. before they had done either good or evill Therefore to satisfie the objection and cleare Gods righteousnesse the Apostle wisely alledgeth testimonie of Scripture to prove Gods absolute power and ability to shew mercy on whom hee will and whom hee will to harden When you say this hardning of Pharaoh though an effect of Gods hatred of Pharaoh yet was not an immediate effect of the like hatred which hee bare to Esau before hee had done good or evill but presupposeth the sin of Pharaoh your meaning seems to bee this that it is not at all an effect of the like hatred which hee bare to Esau before hee had done good or evill yet it is no lesse then the not writing of his name in the book of life as touching the communicating of saving grace and glory neither do wee acknowledge it to bee any more like as Aquinas doth not now the consequent of this kinde or measure of hatred in holy Scripture is no lesse then the worshipping of the beast Rev. 13. 8. nothing lesse then the obduration of Pharaoh The obduration of the children of Israel was no greater then such as was consequent unto this that God did not give them an heart to perceive and eies to see and ears to heare Deut. 29. 4. And this of not giving hearts to perceive c. undoubtedly is a consequent even to that hatred which you are content to attribute unto God concerning Esau But you helpe your self with a complicate proposition and flie to an immediate effect which alone you deny in this case for as much as the hardning of Pharaoh as you say presupposed sin committed by him but very improvidently For if it bee not an immediate effect of the like hatred that God bare unto Esau then in accurate consideration it is to bee acknowledged an effect thereof Only there is some effect thereof more immediate then this and what I pray was that was it Pharaohs sin for of no other doe you make the least intimation the more improvident is your expression intimating thereby that Pharaohs sin was a more immediate effect in Pharaoh of the like hatred God bare to Esau then this obduration But how doe you prove that Pharaohs hardening was not an immediate effect of the like hatred which God bare to Esau to wit because it presupposed sin But I deny this Argument neither doe you discoursing at large give your selfe to the proving of it but onely suppose it By the same reason you might say that salvation is not the immediate effect of election unto salvation because salvation in men of ripe years presupposeth faith repentance and good workes Nay you may as well say that Gods giving of grace is not an immediate effect of Gods love to any man because in most men of ripe years it presupposeth many good works In Saul it presupposed his zeale and his righteousnesse according to the Law which was unblameable If you say that Sauls righteousnesse whatsoever it was before his calling was no fruit of his love I may with more probability affirme that Pharaohs sin which preceded his obduration was no effect of Gods hatred If you say that though such righteousnesse in Saul was no moving cause to God to give him saving grace In like manner I say that no sin in Pharaoh was a moving cause in God to deny him saving grace For if it were then either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God Not by necessity of nature for undoubtedly God could have pardoned this sin of his and changed his heart as well as he pardoned the sins of Manasses the sins of the Jews in crucifying the son of God Act. 2. the sins of Saul in persecuting Gods Saints and changed all their hearts Nor by any constitution of God for shew mee if you can any such constitution of God And if you would but explicate wherein the hardening of Pharaoh did consist I presume it would clearely appeare that the meere pleasure of Gods will is the cause of it like as it is the meere pleasure of God that he doth not harden others in like manner But when we carry our selves in the clouds of generallties we are very apt to deceive not others onely if they will be deceived but our selves also Againe you seem to speake of Pharaohs hardening mentioned Exod. 9. 16. And indeed for this cause have I appointed thee to shew my power in thee c. Whereas from the first time that Moses was sent unto him hee was hardened and that by God according as God had told Moses before-hand that hee would harden him As for his sin before ever Moses was sent unto him you doe not take any speciall notice thereof at all but whatsoever it were as suppose the cruell edict of his in commanding the male children of the Hebrews to be cast into the River like as God answered him most congruously in his works first causing the waters of Aegypt to bee turned into blood and in the last place making the waters of the red Sea the grave of Pharaoh and of his Host was this horrible sin any lesse then a consequent to more then ordinary obdurationâ— for even heathen men are seldom exposed to such unnatural courses So that if this obduration were an effect of Gods hatred but not immediate supposing sin according to the manner of your Discourse then you must be put to devise some other sin as precedent to this obduration And whereas that sin also cannot be denyed to be a consequent to Gods denyall of effectuall grace to abstaine from sin we shall never come to an end till the cause of all these obdurations be at length resolved into originall sin And what share I pray you hath the world of mankind therein which Gods elect have not When you tel us the hardening is a punishment of sin it were very fit you should deal plainly tel us in what operation of God this work of hardening doth consist which I make no doubt would cleare all All confesse that God is not the cause of hardnesse of heart in any man but man being borne in hardnesse of heart Ezek. 36. 3. 1. God is said to harden not infundendo malitiam sed non infundendo gratiam By leaving him thereunto whereby it comes
conscience to judge not to mention how this Discourse of yours is found to harden many in the way of error and to offend others in the way of truth Indeed there were no cause of any such objection as that Rom. 9. 29. if so bee God hardens no man but for sin and withall it is just with God to harden men in their sine and lesse cause of such an answer Rom. 9. 20 21 22. No man I think makes any doubt but that the objection Why doth hee complain for who hath resisted his will ariseth from the 18 ver where it is said that God as hee hath mercy on whom hee will so hee hardneth whom hee will even as hee hardned Pharaoh but yet you doe not shape the objection right when you shape it thus What fault is there in mee to bee hardned which is in effect as if you would shape it thus Wherein then have I deserved to bee hardned For the negative to this namely that God doth not harden upon desert is that which the Apostle avoucheth Like as neither doth hee shew mercy upon desert But like as upon the meere pleasure of his will hee shews mercy on some So according to the good pleasure of his will hee hardneth others But well might hee say why then doth hee complain of the hardnesse of my heart and my impenitency or rather the Apostle proposeth it in reference to the fruits of mans hardnesse of heart and impenitency such as God complains of Esa 1. I have nourished and brought up a people and they have rebelled against mee And Esa 56. All the day long have I stretched out mine hands to a rebellious people that walk in a way which is not good even after their own imaginations Or as if Pharaoh hearing of this ministry of Gods providence should say Why doth hee complain of the hardnesse of my heart in not letting Israel goe when hee hath hardned my bea rt that I should not let Israel goe and who hath resisted his will I have already shewed that this hardning of Pharaoh and so likewise of all reprobates as it consists in denying of saving grace in congruous opposition to Gods mercy proceeds meerely according to the good pleasure of Gods will And the Apostle plainly signifies as much when hee saith That like as God hath mercy on whom bee will so hee hardneth whom bee will Neither doth hee take into consideration any sin of theirs as the cause of hardning either in the proposition delivered by him or in answer to the objection arising there-hence Why then should wee bee moved with your bare word in saying wee need not say that the Apostle gave occasion of this objection by ascribing the hardning of Pharaoh and other reprobates to Gods absolute will and without all respect to sin as the deserving cause thereof Neither do you give any reason of that you avouch in saying that albeit God doth not harden but in respect of sin yet the creature will pleade or expostulate as indeed it is most unreasonable to ask why God doth complain of hardnesse of heart and the fruits thereof when it hath been shewed that this hardnesse of heart hath been brought upon man for his own sin and no exception taken against it But when out of Gods absolutenesse men are hardned then and not till then may it justly seem strange that God should complain of the hardnesse of mens hearts and the fruites thereof As for the place of Esa 63. 17. Wherein you suppose Gods people to expostulate with God for hardning them notwithstanding they suppose that God hardens them for their sin this is to beg the question and not to prove ought there being no evidence of any such acknowledgment as you suppose namely that God doth harden them for their sins Yet if there were any such acknowledgment it would not forthwith make for your purpose unlesse they should acknowledge as much of that obduration the Apostle speaks of where hee sets it in opposition to Gods shewing mercy To serve your turn you take liberty to interpret the coherence of these parts to erre from thy waies and to bee hardned against thy feare as if the former were the cause of the other upon no other ground that I know but that thus it shall stand in more congruity with your opinion Whereas indeed there is a farre greater probability that hardning against the feare of God should bee the cause of the errour of our wayes then that errour of our wayes should bee the cause of our hardning against the feare of God especially taking hardning not confusedly hand over head but distinctly in opposition to Gods shewing mercy in mans conversion I take them only as severall expressions of the same things consisting of an inward corrupt disposition as the roote and that I conceive to bee the want of the feare of God and the fruit hereof which is aberration from the good wayes of the Lord. And they expostulate with God for not correcting all this by his grace as by his Covenant of grace which hee hath made with them hee hath ingaged himself hereunto even to keep them from going astray like a good Shepherd and to put his feare into their hearts that they shall never depart away from him Which kinde of expostulation is nothing answerable to that which the Apostle proposeth to answer Rom. 9. 16. And I may well wonder what you meant to yoke them together Non bene inaequales veniunt ad aratra juvencae The children of God doe not expostulate with God for his complaining of their disobedience unthankfulnesse and rebellions against him though they heartily wish they had never provoked him and expostulate with him for not preserving them by his grace from such courses of provocation of him even of the eyes of his glory The wicked have no such desire to bee preserved from sin and sinfull courses which are unto them as sweet bits which they roule under their tongues Although when they heare of the Doctrine of obduration and his power to harden them and in hardning they may take advantage thereby to blaspheme God and to plead Apologie for themselves Belike then you acknowledge that God hath power to harden without respect to sin for to this purpose tends your comparative illustration But then you must bee driven to deny that obduration is a punishment seeing it is impossible that just punishments can have course but with respect to sin as a meritorious cause thereof That God beateth down the objectour and pleadeth the justice of Gods proceedings against Reprobates from the soveraign authority of God over his creatures is most true ver 20 21. But that hee pleads the due desert of the persons ver 22. thereby to justifie God in hardning whom hee will as positively avouched but so farre from truth as that it involves plain contradiction no lesse then if the Apostle after hee had said that God hath mercy on whom hee will should afterward take
Gods love to Christ especially when both are acknowledged to be eternall and to be toward both the man Christ and us before wee or the world had a being most of all when in the issue the priority seems to be for us rather then for Christ for it is confest that priority in Gods decrees consists onely in purposing one thing for another And again it is without question that all priority in this case is on the part of that for which another thing is purposed Now albeit wee are Christs servants and hee our Lord yet undoubtedly Christ was ordained rather for our good then wee for his good yet I doe not hence collect that our predestination was before Christs much lesse that Gods love was lesse towards him then towards us but I willingly acknowledge that albeit thousands had tasted of Gods love both in the way of nature and grace and glory before Christ-man had any being at all yet was the love of God to the manhood of Christ infinitely beyond his love towards us measuring the love of God by the effects thereof and that in two respects first for as much as the fruit of Gods love to him was the taking of his humane nature into an hypostaticall union with the Sonne of God secondly in making him the Captain of our salvation Heb. 2. 10. Least of all is it my meaning to extenuate the heinous nature of sinne by setting forth the purpose of God concerning the incarnation of Christ before the consideration of the fall of Adam It is enough to make sinne out of measure sinfull that God in his wisedome saw no meanes so sit as by the sinne and fall of Adam to make way for the humiliation of Christ and thereby for the manifestation of his justice and riches of his mercy and both in Christ although we grant so far as to conceive that God had never thought of humbling the Godhead or advancing the manhood of Christ but upon consideration of sin fore-seen Ex magnitudine remedii magnitudinem cognosce periculi saith Bernard this hath place in what order soever Christ was ordained a Sacrifice for sinne neither is there any colour of remitting ought of the heinousnesse of sin by the priority or posteriority of Christs predestination in comparison to Gods decree concerning the permission of sinne Sinne and the heinousnesse thereof is amplified according to the quality of the transgression in reference to Gods law so honourable a rule of mans perfection and to Gods deserts at our hands and plentifull motives from consideration both of rewards and punishments wherewith it is estadlished It is a common and just aggravation of sinne that it caused the Son of God to be humbled but to aggravate it in making way for Christs humiliation is a very odde conceit in my judgement Neither doe I comprehend how the manifestation of justice in punishing sinne or of mercy in pardoning it doth aggravate the heinousnesse of sin This I say I comprehend not The second DOUBT WHere have wee in Scripture ground for this That the Lords first and primary intention in his decree of Predestination was to set forth Grace and Justice That the declaration of his justice was intended is not doubted but by the Apostle it seemeth his primary aime was the declaration of the soveraignty freedom and dominion of God over the creature in that hee purposeth grace and power The Apostle throughout his whole discourse of Predestination doth no where oppose grace and power for God sheweth as much power freedome and dominion over the creature in his grace toward the elect as in his justice toward the world The Apostle sets forth the like power and soveraign will of God as well in shewing mercy on whom hee will as hardening whom hee pleaseth Doe not think hee opposeth Gods power and soveraignty over Pharaoh to his grace and love unto Jacob for the power hee there speaks of is not soveraignty but ability might and power shewing it selfe forth in the hardening and overthrow of Pharaoh in Moses called the power of his wrath Power naturall is one thing power civill which wee call soveraignty another the first is ability to doe a thing the second is liberty to doe what naturally hee can doe without sinne Undoubtedly the power of God shewed in Pharaoh was in his overthrow and answerable to the power of Gods wrath I like well that the power of God shewed in Pharaoh is extended also to the hardening of his heart onely this is not so congruously applied to the power of Gods wrath for as much as wrath hath alwayes reference to something in man as the cause of it so hath not hardening in that of Paul Rom. 9. 18. Hee hardeneth whom hee will like as hee hath mercy on whom hee will But withall I confesse hardening in this place seems to consist onely in denying of mercy But Pharaohs hardening was much more for undoubtedly mercy was no more shewed him when his heart releâ—ted to the letting of Israel goe then when hee detained them So likewise when God hardened him to follow after them to bring them back this was more than a bare denying of mercy even a secret impulsion of him to take such courses as should precipitate him unto destruction and this may well be accounted a fruit of the power of Gods wrath and accordingly I am verily perswaded that Gods power or soveraignty over Pharaoh are not opposed to his grace and love to Jacob Onely freedome in my judgement doth not so well consent with the execution of justice whether justice be taken in rewarding or punishing Neither doe wee ever read of Gods rewarding or punishing whom hee will freedome and soveraignty is seen only in giving or denying good according to common account Albeit there is a further freedom and soveraignty of God over his creatures in doing evill unto them as in annihilating the most righteous which Arminius acknowledgeth and in exposing his holy Son to suffer strange pains and sorrowes for other mens sinnes when hee had none of his owne Not to speak of the soveraignty wherewith God hath indued man over his fellowes though inferiour creatures That God in his decree of Predestination did shew forth the declaration of his soveraignty freedome and dominion over the creatures I easily grant yet that it was his primary aime rather then the declaration of his justice and grace I cannot beleeve without better proofe My opinion is That all the variety of Gods glory to bee manifested in the creature was intended at once and if they that are otherwise minded come to a particular expression of what glory was intended first and what next and so in order I am perswaded the incongruity of that order will soon appear It is granted on all hands that God first aimed at the declaration of his owne glory Now wherein doth God delight principally for to manifest his glory God himselfe declared it to Moses who
man erres and that in weighty matters I consider not any judgement of God upon him but upon the world rather that hereby are so much the more countenanced in their erroneous wayes which are advantageous to flesh and bloud and therefore they delight in them and thereby become the more worthy to be given over to illusions to beleeve lyes Let mee touch upon that also as where you say It was not the efficacy of Gods decree that did put upon Adam any necessity of breaking it This I confesse is a plausible speech now adayes and apt to bee taken up especially coming from good mens mouthes to choake others withall who feare not to give God the glory of his power with as much truth and with a greater distinction and plainnesse wee say with Aquinas that Gods will is so efficacious as to cause all things to come to passe after such a manner as they doe come to passe to wit necessary things necessarily and contingent things contingently or freely whether in good or evill And if you spare to speake with the Holy Ghost yet wee will not but professe that Both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and people of Israel were gathered together to doe that which Gods hand and Gods counsell determined before to be done And with Austin Non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo So that even those things which God sinit sieri vult sieri Good things he will have come to passe by his working of them evill things hee will have come to passe by his suffering of them Nay otherwise it were impossible hee should foreknow them for unlesse they are future they are not knowable to be future But how can it be that things contingent and in their owne nature indifferent as well to be not future as future how I say is it possible that they should passe out of this indifferent condition into a condition determinate and things meerely possible in their owne nature become future without a cause And what cause can be devised of this transition but the will of God For from everlasting nothing was extant to cause them of things possible to become future but God himselfe and in God himselfe nothing can be imagined to be the cause hereof but the will of God This is the insoluble demonstration that cuts the throat of Scientia media whereupon the Jesuites and Arminians and all that oppose the absolutenesse of Gods proceedings doe and must relye either wittingly or unwittingly and whether they will or no unlesse they will directly turne Atheists and with Cicero deny that God fore-knowes things that are to come So that upon supposition of Gods will to permit Adam to fall it was necessary that Adam should fall necessary I say that hee should fall But how Not necessarily but contingently and freely and no other necessity is at this day found in man for the performing of any particular sinfull act but such as is joyned with liberty and that in such sort as that the necessity is only Secundum quid the liberty is Simpliciter so called I say in respect of any particular act But I confesse there is an absolute necessity of sinning in generall laid upon man by the Fall of Adam whereby it comes to passe that whether a man commits a sinfull act then questionlesse hee sinneth or whether hee omit a sinfull act yet therein hee sinneth also in as much as hee doth not abstaine from it in a gracious manner I come to the second Reason Againe you say In Christ they have so much knowledge and grace revealed to them and offered as is sufficient to bring them on to see their impotency in themselves and to stirre them up to seeke for help and strength and life in him where it is to bee found which if they neglect and despise as the Pharisees did and all impenitent sinners doe God and his Covenant are blamelesse in offering them life and the meanes of it their destruction is of themselves I have read such manner of discourse as this often in Carvinus that busie Arminian I am sorry to read it in the writings of good men especially when I find it not one jot mended in them Yet all this I see still tends to a gracious end even to the justifying of God as when you say Their destruction is of themselves But so doe Arminians also pretend to wit the justifying of God in the way of Reprobation but the issue is to justifie themselves and glorifie themselves in the way of Election But I pray you what thinke you of Infants that perish in Originall sinne how is their destruction of themselves Is it of themselves that they are borne in sinne Yet I presume you will not say with Arminians that all Infants that dye in their infancy whether they be the Children of Turkes and Saracens yet are saved as well as the children of beleeving Parents Againe was not Pharaohs destruction of himselfe also for not letting Israel goe yet will you deny that God hardned his heart that hee should not let Israel goe Sihon King of Heshbon was not his destruction of himselfe in that hee would not suffer Israel to passe by him though they promised to goe by the high-way and to turne neither to the right hand nor to the left and to pay for all that they received of them both meat and drinke neverthelesse it is said that The Lord hardned his spirit and made his heart obstinate because hee would deliver him into the hands of the Israelites The destruction of Abimelech and of the Shechemites was it not of themselves yet surely God it was that sent an evill spirit betweene Abimelech and the men of Shechem that the cruelty against the seventy sonnes of Jerubbaal and their bloud might come and be laid upon Abimelech their brother which had slaine them and upon the men of Shechem which had aided him to kill his brethren But to proceed The face of your discourse seemes to tend to the maintenance of a sufficient grace in the Reprobates themselves whereof there is much question but yet you expresse onely a sufficient grace without them whereof there is no question For undoubtedly in Gods word whereof even Reprobates are partakers as well as the Elect there is grace sufficient in the way of instruction and revelation no man makes question of this Undoubtedly therein is contained all things necessary both for faith and manners and so to bring them to salvation if they will obey it But all the question is whether they have any sufficiency of grace to enable them to obey it I presume your selfe will not avouch this And the Pelagians of old acknowledged a sufficiency of grace in the way of doctrine and instruction Onely you say There is sufficient grace given them to bring them to see their impotency But how doe you prove this The naturall man commonly is too preiant of his
ability Dicere solet humana superbia saith Austin si scissem fecissem What was Pauls meaning when hee said of himselfe Rom. 7. 9. I once was alive without the Law I should think this impotency cannot be discerned without the life of grace For like as a dead man naturally is not sensible of his death so hee that is dead in sinne is nothing sensible of this his sinfull condition But howsoever surely grace revealed onely hath no congruity to such a worke as to bring a man to see his impotency for what greater grace in the kind of revelation then the word of God let this word testifie that a man is shaped in wickednesse and in sinne conceived and that hee is dead in sinne Is this sufficient to make him see his impotency Is the hearing of Gods word sufficient to make him beleeve it why then is it not sufficient to take away mens blindnesse and why then doth not every one that hears it cease to be blind and consequently cease to bee lame and deafe yea and cease to be dead also Nay which is more suppose a Physician discovers a man to be in a dangerous estate when hee dreames of nothing lesse and suppose the party beleeves it upon his word yet here-hence it followeth not that hee seeth the dangerous estate wherein hee is untill hee hath some feeling of it So likewise if hee should beleeve the word telling him that hee is unable to doe any thing that is good yet hee shall not be said to see it till hee hath some feeling of it and whence can this feeling proceed but from some principle of life that must be shed into his soule that hee may have a feeling of that miserable estate wherein hee is by nature otherwise though upon supposition hee should beleeve it in Gods word yet hee should not see it in himselfe Further you say It is sufficient to stirre him up to seek for help and strength and life in him where it is to bee found A strange conceit that a man should seek for life whereas if hee hath not life hee is dead and was it ever known that a dead man sought for life well Martha might seeke for the restoring of life to her dead brother Lazarus but surely Lazarus himselfe being dead neither did nor could seeke for life A man that hath life may be said to labour for life that is to hold it when hee is in danger of losing life but for a dead man to seeke for life is more then miraculous for it is utterly impossible When the Angell came downe into the Poole of Bethesda the poore Creple had never a whit the more sufficiency to enter in had his heart beene as lame to desire as his body to goe notwithstanding that he saw so good an opportunity hee should make no more haste to desire the benefit then his body could to enjoy it Againe no man seekes for that hee desires not neither can hee desire ought unlesse hee know it and loves it And is it possible that a man should know the precious nature of the life of grace and be in love with it and yet without the life of grace Is the knowledge of the precious nature of the state of grace and the love thereof a fruit of the flesh thinke you But by that which followes it seemes this is not your meaning but you suppose that notwithstanding all the operation of grace mentioned they may despise it In which case they neither love it nor understand the precious nature of it for no man despiseth that which hee loves and accounts precious Therefore this stirring up seemes to bee nothing but perswasion and exhortation Now this as Austin long agoe delivered Doctrinae generalitate comprehenditur and we willingly grant that the word preached doth equally exhort all that heare it to faith to repentance to prayer in some of which or in all which consists the seeking of life And no man makes question but the word of God sufficiently performes its part in exhortation to faith to repentance to prayer but the Pharisees despised this and so doe most and God is blamelesse But of any power that they have to beleeve repent and pray upon the doing whereof they should obtaine life your selfe are content to say nothing at all but keep your selfe unto generall phrases which are very apt to deceive us and this is the course not onely of them that are in love with their owne errors but with good men also when out of a desire to justifie God and not content with that simplicity of satisfaction which is laid forth unto us in holy Scripture and seemes harsh to flesh and bloud making them cry out Durus est hic sermo they shape unto themselves other courses more convenient as they thinke to give satisfaction yet not so much unto themselves as unto others but all in vaine for flesh and bloud will receive no satisfaction in the plaine truth of God A third Reason then to prove that God purposed life to the world upon condition of their obedience and repentance is taken from the end God aimed at As hee declares himselfe to offer meanes of salvation unto the world which is not in the first place to harden and to leave without excuse but to bring them to the knowledge of God and of themselves to repentance to the seeking after God to the purging of themselves from sinne and to peace To the Gentiles God gave the workes of Creation and Providence and his Law written in their hearts to reveale the knowledge of God to them to teach them to doe the things of the Law to judge of them that doe amisse and thereby be brought to condemne themselves doing the same things to lead them to repentance to move them to seek after the Lord. And thus much light Christ enlighteneth every man withall that cometh into this world From whence also it was that God vouchsafed heavenly dreames and visions even to the Gentiles That hee might withdraw them from their sinnes and hide their pride and save their soules from the pit But because this light alone did not prevaile with the Gentiles as to bring them to the knowledge of God in Christ therefore it pleased God in the fulnesse of time to send the preaching of the Gospel amongst them and in the meane time not to iudge them nor condemne them for their not beleeving in Christ of whom they had not heard nor for transgressing the Law of workes which they had not received but onely for sinning against the law of nature which was written in their hearts and expounded to them daily by the workes of Creation and Providence and sealed up to them by particular amplification partly by their Consciences accusing or excusing Rom. 2. 15. partly by dreames and visions Job 33. 15 16. To the Jewes God revealed his Covenant clearly and fully sent his Prophets among them early and late gave them deliverances chastened them with
but harden them Hereupon the Apostle gives way to an objection in a matter more sublime than yours as before mentioned and answers it in this manner O man who art thou that disputest with God Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it Why hast thou made mee thus Hath not the Potter power c. which is an answer to such a question as this Why doth God complaine of us for that which proceeds from the hardnesse of our hearts which God alone can cure but will not but rather by denying us mercy continues to harden us But now let us consider the interpretation and accommodation of this place to the plea devised by you The reason you say why men loved darknesse rather than light is because men chose rather to cleave to their sinfull estates and wayes of darknesse than to follow the light of the meanes of grace which might have brought them on to beleeve in Christ It is great pity that by our owne phrasiologies wee should raise unto our selves a mist whereby wee should be the more unable to discerne the truth of God Suppose the Paraphrase were both sound in it selfe and congruous to the Text yet give way I pray to such a question in the second place What was the reason that they chose rather to cleave to their sinfull estates and wayes of darknesse than to follow the light of the meanes of grace If you answer any thing but that of our Saviour Joh. 12. 39. Therefore they could not beleeve because Esaias saith againe Hee hath blinded their eyes and hardned their heart that they should not see with their eyes nor understand with their heart and should be converted and I should heal them I will not cease to pursue you untill you come to this and withall put you to give a reason why you should not take hold of this answer of our Saviour Joh. 12. 39. as of that Joh. 3. 19. especially considering that if a question were moved Why some chose rather to follow the light of the meanes of grace than to cleave to their sinfull estates and wayes of darknesse I doubt not but you would forth with answer Because God had mercy on them and gave them hearts to know Christ and to beleeve in him 1 Joh. 5. 20. Phil. 1. 29. And seeing God doth not shew the like favour to others to shew them the like mercy which is in Scripture phrase to harden Rom. 9. 18. and Rom. 11. 7. or not to give hearts to perceive and eyes to see and eares to heare Deut. 29. 4. why should wee not say plainly that whereas the one takes a right way it is because God shewes mercy towards them to give them so much grace and whereas the other takes not the right but the wrong way it is because God hardens them in denying the like mercy and grace to them like as our Saviour expresly signifieth also Joh. 8. 47. Hee that is of God heareth Gods words yee therefore heare them not because yee are not of God But if any man shall inquire What then moved our Saviour to give this reason why men loved darknesse rather than light to wit this because their deeds were evill I answer hee gives the immediate cause why they loved not the light that is they had no mind to heare the doctrine of our Saviour and that was in respect of the convincing nature of it and therein like unto light which makes every thing to appeare and be manifest according to its proper hiew whereas in darknesse all things are confounded according to that Ephes 5. 13. Now they who brought ill consciences along with them no marvell if they were quickly weary of our Saviours company A pregnant example whereof wee have Joh. 8. 7. For when our Saviour said unto them who brought unto him a woman taken in adultery Let him that is among you without sinne cast the first stone at her Ver. 9. When they heard this being accused by their owne conscience they went out one by one beginning at the eldest even to the last So that indeed the reason given by our Saviour Joh. 3. 19. is not so much a reason why they beleeved not as why they liked not to heare him Many did endure the hearing of him yet were not brought to beleeve in him Austin sometimes proposed such a question as this Why doe not men doe this or that As for example Why doe they not facere quod justum est and hee answers Quia nolunt But if you aske mee Quare nolunt Imus in longum saith Austin Yet sine prejudicio diligentioris inquisitionis hee takes upon him to answer it thus Vel quia latet vel quia non delectat But marke what hee brings in upon the back of this Sed ut innotescat quod latebat suave fiat quod minime delectabat gratia Dei est quae hominum adjuvat voluntates But the face of your discourse tends to this as if you were of opinion that every naturall man hath so sufficient grace as to choose to follow the light of the meanes of grace rather than to cleave to his sinfull estate and wayes of darknesse and that not onely if hee will for if hee will the greatest part of the worke is done already but that his will is indifferently of it self inclinable to the one as well as to the other which is so dangerous an opinion and so opposite to the doctrine of Gods word representing the miserable corruption of mans heart and the peculiar power of Gods regenerating grace that you are loath to breake out in plaine termes to professe as much Lastly whereas you say The light of the meanes of grace had it been followed might have brought them to beleeve in Christ You will not say upon the following hereof they had been brought but they might have beene brought to beleeve By following the light of the meanes of grace I understand a continuing to heare the word of God Now it is well knowne that many nay most in all probability though they continue all their dayes to be hearers yet as the Apostle speakes of some so may wee say of them They are ever learning and never come to the knowledge at least to any saving knowledge of the truth On the contrary Saul persecuting the Church of God even in the way marching furiously Jehu like against the Professors of the Gospel it pleased God to call him and convert him Wee know saith Austin that God hath converted the wills of men not onely aversas à verae side sed adversas verae sidei So that even opposition to grace God can cure if it please him and regenerate a man to bring him to faith and repentance if it please him and if hee doth not certainly the reasons can be no other then because hee will not and that to his owne glorious ends which is reason enough for the Creator to doe what hee will his wisedome in referring all to
for himselfe and as all things are from him so all things must be for him for the supreame efficient must be the supreame end Now if God at once and in one moment of nature decreeth to give salvation by way of reward of faith judge you or let any indifferent Reader judge whether this decree of salvation be not necessarily conjunct with the foresight of saith 5 As for the occasions of slandering and reviling the orthodox truth of God which as you conceive this doctrine of yours cutteth of to the cavilling and froward spirit you have not so much as expressed what they are much lesse justified them to be such occasions as you speak of or shewed how they are removed by your doctrine and not by ours In like sort what is that equitie of the wayes of God the credit of the clearing whereof you attribute to your owne doctrine and derogate from ours you take no paines to explicate If your meaning be that you maintaine that God condemnes no man but for sinne voluntarily and freely committed by him and withall doe obtrude upon us the contrary you doe us the greater wrong provided you speak of men of ripe yeares As for the damnation of infants I doubt you feare so much to offend men that you come too neere the Pelagian and Arminian tenet hereabouts And if you thinke there is any active power in a naturall man to believe and repent wee will not feare offence to resist you or any man in this the scripture having so plainely expressed the contradictorie to this 1 Cor. 2. 14. and Rom. 8. 8. Or if your opinion be that God doth not harden whom he will as well as hee shewes mercie on whom hee will where the good pleasure of God is as evidently signified to be the cause of the one as of the other wee shall not forbeare by Gods grace through feare of offence to resist you in this also And if Pharaoh shall hereupon object and say Why doth God complaine of my not letting Israel goe when he himselfe hardens my heart that I may not let Israel goe wee thinke it fit to take the Apostles course to stop such a ones mouth and say O man who art thou that disputest with God shall the thing formed say to him that formed it why hast thou made me thus Hath not the potter power c. And let men take heed they doe not take upon them to be wiser then the Holy Ghost and thinke to satisfie men by devises of their owne when the word of God doth not satisfie them Yet in all this the Apostle doth not impeach the libertie of their wils nor Austin neither but rather justifieth it throughout yet is hee bold to pronounce that libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia As much as to say a man without grace hath will too much to that which is evill and averse from that which is good as being wilfully bent to the one and opposite to the other And the providence of God in the efficacie of working all things to his owne ends compared with the libertie of the creature hath ever been accounted of a secret nature whereas now a dayes nothing will satisfie the Patrons of free will unlesse this secret and misterious providence of God as it was wont to be accounted come to be utterly overthrowen and libertie of the creature if not chance be brought to domineere in the place thereof When you speak of the orthodox truth of God I presume you doe not distinguish of the truth of God as if some were orthodox and some not Yet I confesse Epithites have another use besides the use of distinction yet in this case also the Epithite is not congruous for orthodox is as much in effect as true 6 As touching the last I presume you will not deny but that the riches of Gods grace to Christ and in him to all the Elect are by our Tenet acknowledged to be as wonderfull as by yours As for the absolute power of his soveraigntie in dealing farre otherwise with the world I presume your opinion is that wee doe exceed rather then come short of you in the acknowledging thereof For wee maintaine God to be as absolute and free in the denying of grace to some as in giving it to others And by denying of grace wee understand the hardning of men at least as touching the chiefe part wherein it consists Yet this you will have to proceed not so much according to Gods absolutnesse as according to his justice in punishing men with obduration yet I grant there is an obduration which is properly enough a punishment of sinne and when men are thereby prostituted unto danger and exposed unto destruction Yet I dare appeale to the judgment of any intelligent Arminian whether in case you doe maintaine as you speak the absolute power of Gods soveraigntie in dealing farre otherwise with the world then with the elect any scandall is removed out of their way by your tenet which is cast in their way by ours As for the unsearchable depth of his wisdome in the order and end of all his wayes as also of his patience towards all men I presume you will not say it is more maintained by your tenet then by ours But by the way I hope you will not except against that of Austin Quantam libet praebuerit patientiam nisi Deus dederit quis aget poenitentiam cont Jul. liber 5. Cap. 4. And againe in the same place Istorum neminem to wit non praedestinatorum adduoit Deus ad salubrem spiritualemque poenitentiam quâ homo reconoiliatur Deo in Christo sive ampliorem illis patientiam sive non imparem praebeat And againe adducit ad poenitentiam sed praedestinatum adducit and none other in his opinion As for the justice of God to obstinate sinners I hope you will not say the common tenet of our Divines doth any way infringe it wee generally maintaine him to be righteous in all his workes and holy in all his wayes For hee punisheth none but for sin none of ripe yeares but for sinne voluntarily and freely committed by them and that in such sort as they might avoide it speaking of any outward transgresion Onely it is not in their power to change their hearts and to love God with all their hearts and feare him and depend upon him Whence it cometh to passe that albeit there is no particular materiall transgresion which they could not avoide yet it is not in the power of a naturall man to avoid it in a gracious manner and all for want of that love of God before spoken of which cannot be wrought in a man but by the spirit of regeneration If any man should further object as I wish you had objected to the uttermost against our Tenet supposing a naturall man to performe what good lieth in his power to performe but not in a gracious manner and likewise to omit what lyeth in his power
admonish them of the error of their waies either by his word or by his judgements and chastisements in his works That God doth harden out of his absolute will and yet hardens none but for sin cannot bee avouched in my judgment without manifest contradiction If they are not contradictions Then those also are not God hath mercy on whom hee will yet God hath mercy on none but in respect of their good works going before Secondly by the same reason it may bee said that God condemnes men out of his absolute will and yet hee condemnes none but for sin yet you shall never read that God condemnes whom hee will Thirdly if God doth harden out of his absolute will then also hee did purpose to harden of his absolute will Whence I infer that then God did not purpose to harden for sin For Gods purpose to harden only in respect of sin is commonly accounted and that by your self a will conditionate and a will conditionate is opposite to a will absolute Lastly I deny that God doth harden for their sins as hardning denoteth a denyall of saving grace For to harden for sin is to punish but to deny saving grace to them that never had saving grace is not to punish them to leave a man in the state wherein hee findes him is not to punish him And therefore when Epaminondas ran his Javelin through a Sentinell whom hee found in sleepe saying I did but leave him as I found him because sleep is usually said to bee Mortis Imago the Image of death had hee no better Apologie for his fact then this hee had no way freed himself from injustice If God may harden man for sin and yet sin shall not bee a primary cause moving God to harden him by the same reason though God condemnes man for sin it is not necessary that sin should bee a primary cause moving God to condemn him which is directly contrary to your tenet in the point of reprobation And this consideration of your own if you hold your self unto it attentively may bring you into the right way from which you have erred and the want of it hath been a means I fear to confirm many in their errors Wee acknowledge it to bee Gods absolute will to condemn for sin but withall wee say it is his absolute will to permit whom hee will to sin and continue in sin by denying saving grace to raise them out of sin And this deniall of grace cannot bee for sin as I have already proved To harden a man in opposition to Gods shewing mercy on him wee take to bee nothing else then his refusall to cure him Now let any man judge whether it bee a decent speech to say that because a man is sick therefore God will not cure him In the cases proposed by you of casting a servant off for a disease which hee can cure if hee list or breaking a vessell for some filthinesse which one may cleanse if hee will whether this bee not to bee resolved into the absolute will of the Master I am content to appeale to every sober mans judgement although the comparisons are not congruous to the case wee have in hand for as much as the casting of a servant off is distinct from the not curing of him the breaking of a vessell is distinct from the cleansing of it But the hardning of a man in opposition to Gods shewing mercy on him is nothing distinct from Gods refusing to cure him If the question were proposed thus Why will not a man cleanse his vessell when hee is able to cleanse it why will hee not heale his servant when hee hath power to heale him Is it a good reason to say therefore hee heales him not because hee is sick therefore hee cleanseth not his vessell because it is unclean Neither is it a more sober speech to say therefore God hardens a man because hee is a sinner For it is as much as to say therefore hee refuseth to cleanse him from his sin because hee findes him unclean by reason of his sin Answ The want of considering this point hath as I conceive it intangled the Doctrine of predestination with needlesse difficulties and exposed it to rash and hard censures in the mindes of gain-sayers Then it may bee said there was no cause of that objection Why complaineth hee and who can resist his will or at least of that answer to why doth hee yet complaine Rom. 9. 20 21 22. I answer that objection propounded by the Apostle Why doth hee yet complain for who hath resisted his will doth not arise upon occasion of Gods preferring Jacob before Esau but upon the latter part of the Corollary going immediately before v. 18. Whom hee will hee hardneth for if it bee God that hardneth the creature and that according to his absolute will then might the hardned creature say what fault is there in mee to bee so hardned Why doth God complain of mee for my hardnesse and impenitency Who hath resisted his will To make this objection colourable wee need not say as you seem to imply that the Apostle gave occasion of it by ascribing the hardning of Pharaoh and other reprobates to Gods absolute will and without all respect to sin yet the creature hardned is wont to plead with God about it Esa 63. 17. you shall there see Gods own people to erre and upon their error to have their hearts hardned from Gods feare and both done by God and yet the people expostulate with God about it which if Gods own people may doe reverently is it any wonder if the reprobates doe the same upon the same occasion petulantly and profanely But the answer of the Apostle to the objection propounded cleareth the whole matter For as a man would justifie the severe proceedings of a Master of a Colledge in refusing to elect an unworthy person and in stead thereof expelling him the Colledge by pleading first the liberty or authority of his negative voyce Secondly the desert of the person refused and expelled So the Apostle beateth down the insolency of the objection and pleadeth the justice of Gods proceedings against Reprobates hated and hardned from first the Soveraignty of God over his creature ver 20 21. secondly the due deserts of persons being vessels of wrath and fitted for destruction ver 22. What these needlesse difficulties are wherewith the Doctrine of predestination is intangled by the Doctrine of them whom you impugne you doe not expresse nor the hard and harsh censures which are passed upon it that by due comparing of the one to the other wee might examine how justly such censures are pronounced But of what nature your opinion is how inconsistent in it self on how little reason it is grounded what consequences it draws after it as also what causelesse fears you raise unto yourself and above all and which is worst of all how you deal with Scripture in this argument to serve your turn I leave it to your
a course to justifie God herein by saying that God hath mercy on none but in respect to their former good works Nay much more contradictions for as much as no good works in the state of nature or grace can bee meritorious of reward But sins may bee and are truely meritorious of punishment In the 22 vers there is not the least mention of obduration much lesse any mention of the cause thereof least of all any reversing of the former cause expressed ver 18. and justifyed ver 20. from the authority of God the Creator having power to make his creatures of what fashion hee will and substituting a new in the place thereof And although all that are vessels of wrath are sinners and consequently deserve punishment yet obduration in opposition to shewing mercy consisting in the deniall of saving grace is no punishment for as much as God doth not thereby withdraw any saving grace from them which formerly they injoyed and as for inflicting evill that hath no place in obduration for as much as all confesse that God doth not obdurate any man infundendo malitiam but non infundendo gratiam Neither is it sin either originall or actuall that which constitutes a man a vessell of wrath as a vessell of wrath is opposite to a vessell of mercy For sin both originall and actuall is incident to the Elect as well as to the Reprobate but like as Gods shewing mercy makes a man a vessell of mercy so Gods denyall of mercy finally constitutes a vessell of wrath exposing him to finall infidelity or impenitency which sin alone is not found in any of the elect It seems you think they are fitted to destruction by themselves as if vasa the vessels did separate and not Herus the Master rather Sin alone makes a man obnoxious to condemnation as deserving it and so there is sin in the best of Gods children to drive them to confesse that if the Lord should bee extream to mark what is done amisse none were able to abide it Yet the sin of the Reprobates you confesse God could prevent and not preventing it yet could cure it by the blood of Christ so that though sin bee granted to bee a cause hereof yet a more originall cause though nothing culpable must bee acknowledged to bee the deniall of Grace as our Saviour budgeth not to professe to the faces of some Yee therefore heare not my words because yee are not of God and Joh. 12. 40. Therefore they could not beleeve because Esaias saith Hee hath blinded their eyes and hardned their hearts that they should not see with their eyes and understand with their hearts and should bee converted and I should heale them All this while have I maintained the safenesse of that exposition which interpreteth Gods hatred of Esau of a lesse degree of love and the same word is also used in the same sense But yet so understand mee I conceive this lesse degree of Love to have somewhat in it of the true nature of Hatred For as the nature of Love standeth in affecting communion with one and communicating good unto him So likewise the nature of hatred stands in the contrary to this either in affecting separation from one or inflicting evill on him or at least in not vouchsafing communion or communicating good unto him So is a man said to hate his brother that will not vouchsafe him such an office of brotherly communion as that hee will communicate a kindly reproofe to him for his sin Now I would easily grant that before Esau had done good or evill God so hated him as that hee did not communicate to him that fellowship with Christ which by Gods election and donation the members of the body have with him their head in Gods account even before the world was Neither did God vouchsafe that plentifull communication of his free grace unto him as might in time by a reall actuall power draw him to Christ and to live by him Yea God was pleased to set him in a state further remote and separate from him then his elect brother Even in the estate of a servant to the elect and in stead of communicating free grace hee purposed to deale with him rather according to his works by a covenant of Justice For both these are implyed in Gods putting of Esau into the state of a servant First the denyall of such grace and fatherly love to him as is reserved for children Secondly the not refusing of him to just dealing such as is due to servants according to their works I look to receive from you some proofe that the word Hatred is used in the same sense to wit to signifie a lesse degree of Love for to my judgement it is a wilde interpretation for in this sense God might bee said to hate every one of Gods elect excepting Christ for hee loves them all in a lesse degree then hee loved Christ and one in a lesse degree then another according as degrees of Love attributed to God are to bee estimated that is not quoad affectum for undoubtedly there are no degrees to bee found in the nature of God but quoad affectum and undoubtedly God alots one degree of grace to one and another degree to another and as hee deales with them in communicating of grace so in the communicating of Glory also Love and hatred undoubtedly are opposite contrarily and not onely contradictorily And because quot modis dicitur unum oppositorum tot modis dicitur alterum as love of complacency consists in delectation so hatred opposite is of displicency or aversation And as love of beneficence consisteth in wishing or doing good So hatred opposite consists in wishing or doing evill to another Here at length I observe the place you stand upon to prove that hatred in holy Scripture doth sometimes signifie a lesse degree of love and that seemes to bee Levit. 19. 17. Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart thou shalt plainely rebuke thy brother and suffer him not to sin And to serve your turn in this interpretation you shape a correspondent practise of Love consisting in vouchsafing communion which unlesse it bee a communion of reproofe is nothing to your purpose who desire to shape hatred in contradiction thereunto And yet hatred all conceive to bee much more then not to love But were all this yeelded unto you yet doth it fall short of your purpose for albeit hee that forbears to reprove his brother doth him harm yet if hee doe not intend him harm hee cannot bee said to hate him For in Scripture phrase hatred denotes an intention to harm as Deut. 4. 42. Where wee reade that certain Cities were appointed That the slayer might fly unto which had killed his Neighbour at unawares and hated him not in times past But if you measure hatred by the harm done why should the sparing of reproofe to preserve a brother from sin and consequently from incurring the wrath of God bee
persecute the Church as Soul did are nothing further off from seeking the Lord and finding mercy from him then the other These did manifest themselves unworthy of eternall life doe not all so who stumble at the Word of God and refuse to hearken to it For this is the condemnation of the world Light is come into the world and men loved darknesse rather then light because their deeds were evill Joh. 3. 16. Will you therehence inferre that all such are inabled to obey it which is as much to say as that they are inabled to beleeve and repent The eighth is out of Mat. 23. 37 38. How often would I have gathered thy children together as the hen gathereth her chickens under her wings and yee would not Behold your habitation is left unto you desolate c. What I pray you is to bee gathered under his wings can it bee lesse then to come unto him nay is it not to bee healed by him since as your selfe observe healing was under his wings and if so to come to Christ is to bee healed by him can it bee any thing lesse then to beleeve and repent And will you herehence inferre that they had power thus to come under his wings and consequently to beleeve and repent And yet in this very place you professe that as touching all others except the Elect God deprives them of those drawing and effectuall means without which none can come to Faith and Repentance Nay whatsoever it bee that lies in their power to perform besides by the performing of it doe they come any whit neerer to the participation of Grace I do not finde you adventure to professe so much for feare of falling into that which you call ungracious Pelagianisme The ninth is Luk. 19. 41 42. Which is of the same nature and of no greater force then the former Oh that thou hadst even known at the least in this thy day those things which belong unto thy peace but now are they hid from thine eyes For the daies shall come upon thee when thy enemies shall cast a trench about thee and make thee even with the ground because thou knewest not the season of thy visitation To know in Scripture phrase is of a complicate notion and signifyeth knowledge joyned with congruous affections and thus to know the things that belong unto our peace is so to know as therewithall to imbrace them and to know the time of our visitation is so to know as to accommodate our selves thereto in agreeable conversation as Jer. 8. 7. The Stork in the aire is said to know her appointed times and the Turtle and the Crane and the Swallow are said to observe the time of their comming That is so to know it as accordingly to come so to know the time of our visitation is so to know it as accordingly to come unto God when hee visites us and according as his Visitation requires of us Now will you herehence inferre that they were inabled to perform all this and so to seek the Lord I appeale to your own conscience whether it might not bee as justly said of them as Moses said of the children of Israel in the wildernesse Deut. 29. 4. The Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive and eyes to see and eares to heare unto this day Nay doth not our Saviour himself say as much of these Jews Joh. 12. 39. Therefore they could not beleeve because that Esaias saith again 40. Hee hath blinded their eyes and hardned their hearts that they should not see with their eyes and understand with their hearts and should bee converted and I should heale them Neither will it follow hereupon that they are excusable so much the more although this is a very plausible inference for our Saviour professeth notwithstanding this that they had no cloak for their sins Joh. 15. 22. And indeed onely such an inability doth excuse as hereby a man is unable to doe that which hee fain would doâ—â— As for the doing of that they did in resisting the Gospel they had rather too much will therein then too little and that through the want of grace For as Austin wisely observes Libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia Liberty without grace is not liberty but wilfulnesse The tenth is Ezek. 24. 13. Because I would have purged thee and thou wast not purged thou shalt not bee purged from thy filthinesse till I have caused my wrath to light upon thee I should think this were spoken of Gods Elect not so much by observing that phrase till I have caused my wrath to light upon thee but chiefly by comparing it with Ezek. 22. 10. I will scatter thee among the heathen and disperse thee in the Countries and will cause thy filthinesse to depart from thee It may have place not onely of the Elect but of the regenerate also for even them sometimes God doth cause to erre from his wayes and harden their hearts against his feare Which though they have power to repent yet upon supposition of obduration and so long as that continues it may bee said that they cannot repent How much more may it bee verifyed of naturall men in the state of unregeneracy that they cannot repent And shall this any way hinder the course of Gods judgements against them for their sins unrepented of because without grace it is not in their power to purge themselves from their sins by repentance I deny not but they have power to performe feigned repentance as Jer. 3. 10. And shall feigned repentance think you bee of force to keep off the judgments of God or if Gods judgements shall have their course except they bee prevented by unfeigned repentance will it herehence follow that naturall men are inabled to perform unfeigned repentance The eleventh is Prov. 1. 20. to 30. Wisdome cryeth c. 20 How long will yee love foolishnesse ver 22. Turn you at my correction ver 23. Because I have called and yee have refused c. ver 24. I will also laugh at your destruction ver 28. Will you herehence infer that they were enabled to turn to hearken to wisdoms voyce and think to put a difference betwixt your opinion and that of the Pelagians of old by saying that though naturall men have not power to beleeve and repent yet they are inabled to doe more good then they doe in the way of seeking the Lord and finding mercy from him and pin upon every place you alledge such a distinction as this which you no where manifest sufficiently to understand your selfe as touching the latter part of it So loath you are to shew what are the particulars of seeking the Lord they doe attain to and to what particulars further they might attain and of what particulars they must necessarily fall short for want of certain helps Might you not as well infer that it is in the power of man to make him a new heart because God cals upon him to make him
fit to humour flesh and blood but your aime I am perswaded is onely to take a fit course to justifie God in his proceedings Only you may bee pleased to remember that it is nothing fit wee should lie for God as man doth for man to gratifie him As for the other end here specified of Leading to Repentance this is neither appliable to that course of Gods providence mentioned Act. 17. which is admonishing to seek the Lord nor to that Rom. 2. 14 15. but to a course different from both namely the consideration of Gods patience and long-suffering which yet without Gods word to inform us better is far more fit to harden mens hearts in their sinfull courses then to bring them to repentance Which is a good reason to perswade that in this second Chapter to the Romans the Apostle makes a transition from the Gentiles to the Jews from them which were nurtured and disciplined onely by Gods works to them which were nurtured also by the Ministery of his word That in Job 33. 17. 29. of with-drawing men from their courses healing their pride and saving their soules from the pit You doe not well to confound the courses taken for this there mentioned with the bare administration of Gods providence in his works or the writing of his Law in mens hearts after a naturall manner For the courses there mentioned by dreams and visions and by an interpreter were in those dayes the onely meanes of grace And then Elihu speaks of Gods effectuall working of these gracious operations to wit In withdrawing men from their sinfull courses to heale their pride and save their soules from the pit And wee can willingly grant that God did intend that which hee would effectually bring to passe But to say that God doth intend and will that such a thing should come to passe which never comes to passe this wee take to bee a most indecent assertion and spoiles God of his omnipotency and plainly contradictious to that which your self here professe in saying that God deprives the men of this world of those drawing and effectuall means without which none can come to Faith and Repentance And with what sobriety can it bee affirmed that God wills their repentance and salvation whom hee deprives of those means without which none can repent that hee may bee saved Yet for the making good of your assertion I have often devised a commodious interpretation of your words which you doe not as namely thus God useth such or such means to withdraw men from their course to heal their pride to save them from the pit That is to admonish them of their duty in turning from their wicked wayes and humbling themselves that they may bee saved And accordingly God may be said to will it with will of precept not of purpose Voluntate praecepti non propositi untill withall hee doth effect it by giving those drawing and effectuall meanes without which none can repent Or lastly God may bee said by using such courses to intend that they should repent and so bee saved that is that they should Ex officio not de facto repent that they might bee saved Thus to the Israelites hee did and to his Church hee doth even to reprobates amongst them offer meanes of grace to purge them Now by the operations of outward means which I think you signifie and if you thereby comprehend the inward operation of Gods Spirit also you doe not well to confound things so different under the same termes such ambiguitie is so apt to deceive us consists only in instruction and admonition and exhortation or correption Now these whether made to turn us Prov. 1. 23. or to gather us Mat. 23 27. or to convince us Joh. 16. 8 9. are not of themselves as you know effectuall to the conversion of any though they are called in Scripture phrase the drawing of us with the cords of a man and with the bonds of love Hose 11. 4. And the dressing of us Esa 5. 4. And your selfe professe that unlesse God use those drawing and effectuall means no man can convert no man can beleeve and repent Secondly when you say that the means which God useth for these ends are in some measure sufficient if they bee not hindred by men to bring them to the attainment of these things This is worse then ought you have delivered hitherto yet you are to bee commended for dealing so plainly as you doe in this place and no where else for ought I have found But the more plainly you deale the more foule doth your opinion appeare I should with a distinction willingly confesse that the means God useth are sufficient to wit in the way of instruction and admonition so farre forth as God will have them towards whom they are used to bee instructed and admonished But this kinde of sufficiency doth not depend on man as if hee could hinder it Whether they will receive any instruction or no the means are never a whit lesse or more sufficient in the way of instruction And indeed outward means tend no further then to such like operations as thus to wit instruction admonition correption But when you make the sufficiency of the means to depend on mans will so as to bee hindred thereby this must needs bee delivered of sufficiency in respect of conversion of bringing men unto faith and repentance And withall this is further to imply that it is in the power of man by these means to bee converted unto God to beleeve and repent which is a more foule tenet then any you have delivered yet though little truth hitherto have I found in this Discourse throughout saving in things merely delivered to no purpose And withall it is plainly contradictious to that which here you expressely professe namely that no man can beleeve and repent without some drawing and effectuall means which are far different from the means here spoken of For the meanes here spoken of are such as hee affords to Reprobates but those drawing and effectuall means which hee affords onely to his Elect as your selfe doe acknowledge wee are so farre from denying them to bee sufficient to the ends whereto hee intends them as that wee willingly professe they are all effectuall in their kinde unto the ends whereto hee intends them As for example if God intends them for the converting of some unto God all such shall certainly bee converted if only to the taking away of excuse from others they shall bee effectuall to the removing of excuse if to the bringing of some ad exteriorem vitae emendationem to an outward amendment of life and no further they shall bee effectuall to that also and no further And therefore wee doe nothing derogate from the wisdome of God but look you well unto it that you doe not derogate from Gods omnipotency whilest you maintain that some things are intended by God which are never brought to passe and that because the will of man forsooth stands in
resistance unto Gods intention Directly contrary to the Discourse of Austin Enchir. cap. 96. whose words are these Deo proculdubio quam facile est quod vult facere tam facile est quod non vult esse non sinere Hoc nisi credamus periclitatur ipsum nostrae fidei consessionis initium qua nos in Deum Patrem omnipocentem credere confitemur Neque enim ob aliud veraciter vocatur omnipotens nisi quia quicquid vult potest nec voluntate cujusquam creaturae voluntatis omnipotentis impeditur effectus And if it bee so as you professe That no man can come to Christ except the Father draw him by the same Almighty authority and power whereby hee sent Christ into the world and withall if you adde thereunto as else-where you doe that this power I leave out authority as of an alien signification is shewed onely in drawing his Elect what need all these paines that you have taken since it is cleare that so long as you hold to this you shall never satisfie any Pelagian or Arminian and all the absurdities they charge our Doctrine with are directed against this But well you may puzzle the wits and trouble the minde of many an Orthodox and well-affected Christian with so intricate a discourse labouring to devise a new way to justifie our Doctrine of Election by so tempering the Doctrine of reprobation as utterly to overthrow your own Orthodox opinion in the very point of election as I have already shewed as occasion hath been given Object How then will you say can these two stand together there is a sufficiency and power in the meanes to lead the men of this world to the knowledge of God and to grace in Christ and yet there is an impotency yea an impossibility in the men of the world to come to Christ without greater and stronger means then these bee Answ For answer whereto I will not content my self to say that these means are sufficient because they suffice to leave men without excuse onely in the second place and by accident after when men have neglected to make so good use of them as they might have done but you see that God aimes at other ends in the first and principall place viz. to lead them to repentance to save their soules from the pit as the places alledged give evident witnesse and for these ends it is that these means must bee acknowledged and conceived as sufficient For else the Word of God argued an imperfection or insufficiency of such meanes to their proper ends I think it safe to say these means are sufficient ex parte Dei on Gods behalf to manifest the will of God rather to desire repentance and life then the hardning and destruction of the Creature And ex parte hominum in regard of men sufficient to inable them to the performance of such duties in which their naturall consciences would excuse them and in which way they might the sooner finde mercy mercy vouchsafing more powerfull and more effectuall helps whilest they walk according to the knowledge and helps which they have received and sin not against conscience but only out of ignorance in the state of unbeleef It is Arminius his superficiary conceit that Hortatio non facta sed sprâ—ta makes a man inexcusable not considering that admonition and instruction it self takes away excuse although none have need of excuse but they that doe evill For the excuse is this si scissem fecissem or si audivissem credidissem now this excuse is manifestly removed by the preaching of the Gospel And the word inexcusable though it formally signifie without excuse yet withall it con-notates a condition delinquent and such as had need of excuse though bereaved thereof and such a condition ariseth from the contempt of the means of grace Neither is this condition by accident like as the neglecting to make good use of them is not by accident For God intending to deprive them of those drawing and effectuall helpes without which none can make good use of them did never intend they should make good use of them but rather the contrary in asmuch as hee purposed not to shew that mercy towards them which hee shews towards his Elect but rather to harden them As the Lord tells Ezek. Chap. 2. 4. They are impudent children and stiffe-hearted I doe send thee unto them and thou shalt say unto them Thus saith the Lord God But surely they will not heare neither indeed will they cease for they are a rebellious house yet shall they know that there hath been a Prophet among them So that albeit the Lord knew full well what sorry entertainment his Prophets should finde yet would hee not give way to any such excuse as this If the Lord had sent his Prophet to admonish us of our wandrings from him wee would soon have turned unto the good way of the Lord. No they shall know there hath been a Prophet among them And as for the ground of this his fore-knowledge Esay manifesteth this to bee Gods purpose to harden them Esa 6. 9. Goe and say unto this people yee shall heare indeed but shall not understand yee shall plainly see and not perceive make the heart of this people fat and make their eares heavy and shut their eyes lest they see with their eyes and heare with their eares and understand with their hearts and convert and I shall heale them What place is here for such conceites of leaving men without excuse in a second place and that by accident Yet if you can prove that God did intend any better thing unto them in a first place wee shall bee willing to confesse that this comes in in a second place You say God leads them to repentance to save them from the pit I answer this leading to repentance Rom. 2. is onely his sparing them in their sins and admonishing them to repent and this wee say is done to the Reprobates not with any purpose to bring them to repentance for if God had any such purpose hee would not deprive them of those helpes without which none can come to repentance as your self professe hee doth and if hee had any such purpose to bring them to repentance and yet doth not it followeth that hee cannot And if hee hath any such purpose either this purpose must continue still in God even after their damnation or otherwise God must bee charged with mutability all which you consider not much lesse accommodate any tolerable answer thereto For the same reason I deny that God hath any intention or purpose to save them how can hee considering that from everlasting hee hath ordained them to condemnation And of this also you take no notice much lesse goe about to shape any convenient answer thereunto carrying the matter all along in such manner as if Gods decree of their condemnation were not conceived untill the means of Grace offered are found to bee finally despised Neither doe the places alledged
wrath with long patience implying both by this and by this wrath that the liberty of the creature in sinning is nothing prejudiced in all this and in the course of his patience way is opened for his complaints and admonitions and that in patheticall manner unto these vessels of wrath to move them to repentance For that God doth complain and expostulate and reprove for these their sinfull courses is most evident And it is no lesse evident that when they goe on in their obstinate courses not profiting by Gods Word and Works unto Repentance the cause is though no culpable cause that God hath not given them a heart to perceive and eyes to see and ears to heare from the first unto the last Deut. 29. 4. That is that both man runneth on wilfully in his sinfull courses and that most culpably and also that without grace it cannot bee otherwise Though the reconciling of both these bee very obscure and difficult as indeed the providence of God especially in evill and generally in working what hee will by the free wills of the creature is of a most mysterious nature This patience of God comprehends not Gods bare suffering the wicked only but his prospering of them also Jer. 12. 1. Why are all they in wealth that rebelliously transgresse 1. As for the first materiall point of the Apostles answer I agree with you in the explication thereof 2. But as concerning the second in my judgment there is nothing sound For first you feign the rigour of that which was objected to consist in a certain manner of Gods hardning to wit by his irresistible will As if the Apostle did give us to understand that there is a double kinde of hardning that is imputed unto God The one by his irresistible will the other is not expressed by you but intimated to consist in hardning by his will resistible whereas no such distinction is either expressed or insinuated by the Apostle neither doe you once goe about to prove it And the distinction it self is very absurd both in bringing in a will of God resistible whereas the Apostle supposeth the will of God in hardning to bee irresistible without all distinction neither doth hee give any the least intimation of a twofold hardning used by God or imputable to him Hee plainly professeth that as God hath mercy on whom hee will so hee hardneth whom hee will without all distinction And you may as well distinguish Gods shewing of mercy as if that were twofold one by his will resistible another by his will irresistible For shewing mercy and hardning are made opposite by the Apostle And it is a well known rule in Schooles that Quot modis dicitur unum oppositorum tot modis dicetur alterum of two opposites look how many wayes the one is taken so many wayes may the other bee taken And upon this Doctrine of the Apostle ariseth the objection to this effect That seeing Gods will is irresistible in hardning a man it seems unreasonable that God should complain of such a mans rebellion and disobedience whom himselfe hath hardned supposing that they cannot obey God who are hardned And throughout this objection also there is no colour of any such distinction as you introduce at pleasure concerning Gods will as either resistible or irresistible and accordingly as concerning the different manner of Gods obduration to wit either by his resistible will or by his irresistible will Secondly you feign at pleasure in like manner a denyall or at least a mitigation of the rigour of St. Pauls former Doctrine whence rose this objection for so I had rather expresse it then as you doe when in very obscure manner you call it the rigour of the word objected And I wonder you would adventure to devise a deniall or any colour of deniall made by the Apostle of that which formerly hee delivered in saying Hee hath mercy on whom hee will and whom hee will hee hardneth when your selfe have not hitherto manifested any minde to deny ought delivered by him as it is not fit you should But it may be the rigour mentioned by you is not conceived to consist in Pauls former Doctrine of Gods hardning whom hee will but rather in complaining of their disobedience whom God himself hath hardned his will being irresistible Now this though amplified as a rigorous thing the Apostle may seem to deny or at least mitigate But first it seems to mee that the objection chargeth God not so much with a rigorous course for who shall hinder God to deal with any as rigorously as pleaseth him there being no injustice in rigour as with an unreasonable course But whether rigorous or unreasonable in shew the Apostle by saying God suffers them with long patience doth neither deny nor any way mitigate the condition of this course of his for complaining of their disobedience whom himself hath hardned For albeit God all the day long yea and all the yeer long yea and many yeers long stretcheth out his hands to a people that walk in a way that is not good even after their own imaginations such being the hardnesse of their hearts as even in despight of Gods sufferance of them and gracious proceedings with them in the ministry of his word and sparing them in his works also yet if God himself continues to harden them his will being irresistible Gods complaining of their rebellion and disobedience seems never a whit the lesse rigorous or unreasonable according to the objection proposed For as Austin saith Contra Julianum Pelag. lib. 5. cap. 4. Quantamlibet praebuerit patientiam nisi Deus dederit quis agat paenitentiam though God afford never so great patience yet unlesse God give grace who shall perform repentance And to say that God doth harden by his long patience is a strange liberty that you take in interpreting Paul If to harden bee to suffer with long patience then to shew mercy being opposite to hardning must bee not to suffer with long patience And if to suffer with long patience bee to harden then as often as hee suffers his own elect with long patience hee hardneth them And when St. Peter saith God is patient toward us the meaning in proportion must bee hee hardens us Let me tell you that Julian the Pelagian of old took the like advantage as you doe of the word Patience in this place to corrupt the Doctrine of St. Paul lib. 5. contr Jul. Pelag. cap. 3. Quid est saith Austin quod dicis cum desideriis suis traditi dicuntur relicti per divinam patientiam intelligendi sunt non per potentiam in peccata compu si quasi non simul posuer is haec duo idem Apostolus patientiam potentiam ubi ait Si autem ostendere volens iram demonstrare potentiam suam attulit in mult a patientia vasa irae quae perfecta sunt in perditionem Quid horum tamen dicis esse quod scriptum est Et propheta si