that is not till after one and another admonition neverthelesse this makes nothing for you unlesse you maintain that Gods Spirit convicts them also of this that it is in their power to beleeve which power of beleeving you seeme to attribute to a man unregenerate though you are loath to speake plainly in expressing so much And you seem to intimate such an Argument as this They sinne in not beleeving therefore it is in their power to beleeve But you may as well inferre that wee sinne in not keeping Gods Law therefore it is in our power to keep it Or if you dispute thus The world is convicted of sinne in not beleeving therefore they have power to beleeve You may as well dispute thus The regenerate are convicted that they sinne in that their flesh lusteth against the Spirit therefore it is in their power to keep the flesh from lusting against the Spirit Besides when men quench the motions of the Spirit and persecute the Ministers of the word how can they be said in so doing to resist the Holy Ghost if the Holy Ghost went not about such a worke as to bring them to Christ and to life by him Could they be said to resist the Holy Ghost if the workes of the Holy Ghost had never striven with them to worke this worke in them Thus then you see those three that beare witnesse in heaven the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost they all from heaven beare witnesse of this point in hand concerning the truth hereof The Father by the end of the creation of his workes and providence the Sonne by his end of enlightening the world and of his coming into it to dye for it the Holy Ghost by his inward wrestling in the hearts of men doe all of them really proclaime that it is the will and good pleasure of God as to save the Elect not according to their owne workes but his grace so likewise to save the world of mankind if their workes hinder not his good will towards them Thus you see also a sweet harmony between the Purpose and the Covenant or Promise and the Providence of God This Purpose willeth life unto the world upon the condition of their obedience and repentance the Promise in the Covenant of Workes offereth life unto them likewise upon the same condition the Providence of God the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost provideth and applieth severall meanes of life unto the world upon the same tearmes And there is in every godly man renewed after the Image of God a just concord betwixt his Purpose his Covenant or Promise and his Performance So is there here the like in God You may read what Gods purpose is toward the world by his Covenant made with the world and you may see both what his Covenant with them and purpose of them is by his performance and axecution of them both in his actuall providence in the fulnesse of time If you ask how God may be said to purpose any thing that is not effectually accomplished I answer the act of Gods will which hee is pleased to put forth is alwayes accomplished There is no good thing possible to be though it never come to passe as that all men should in all things obey the word of God but God passeth upon it some act of his will hee at least approveth it to be good and good it is though it never come to passe This act is not disappointed for as hee will prove it so likewise doth hee approve it Doth God command this or that good duty to be done which is not done Yet that act of his will which hee puts forth is done as hee willed to command it so hee did command it Doth God purpose to give life to the world upon condition of obedience and accordingly give means to help them to the performance of this obedience so farre as it is meet for them to doe Surely God performeth it on his part although men performe it not on their part their salvation is indeed disappointed but not Gods will who never willed to give salvation to them but upon that condition The motions of the Spirit which are quenched are godly motions in the way of admonition perswasion exhortation and they are quenched not onely in the men of the world but too often in the children of God the flesh too often prevailing in their lustings against the spirit whereby are quenched for a time the motions of the Spirit that is the regenerate part lusting against the flesh and consequently the motions also of the Spirit of God admonishing and inviting unto good either by the hearing of the word or by the observation of Gods works This worke of morall motion and invitation is wrought sometimes with a purpose to worke obedience conformable thereunto sometimes with no such purpose as often as God doth not make them effectuall to the working of obedience whether in the unregenerate or regenerate for even these sometimes yea too oft erre from Gods wayes and have their hearts hardened against his feare for if God had a purpose to make them effectuall who should hinder him Who hath resisted his will cui nullum humanum resist it arbitrium saith Austin for ex nolentibus volentes facit Undoubtedly morall invitations if they be not yeelded unto are justly said to be resisted to what end soever they be made whether to convert them or to leave them without excuse even such an excuse as Austin speaks of when hee saith Dicere solet humana suporbia Si scissem fecissem I see no reason why you should deny the Elect to be saved according to their workes our Saviour doth manifest Mat. 25. that they are so Come yee blessed of my Father inherit the Kingdome prepared for you c. For I was an hungred and you fed mee c. and can it be denyed but that God rewardeth every man according to his workes I have fought a good fight I have finished my course I have kept the faith saith Paul Henceforth there is laid up for mee a crown of righteousnesse God is not unrighteous to forget the labour of your love c. Looke to your selves saith John that wee may not lose the things that wee have done but wee may receive a full reward Piscator a precise Divine spareth not to professe that fides is causa salutis They are not I confesse causa meritoria as sinne is causa damnationis but they are causae dispositivae according to the Apostles phrase God hath made us meet partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light Neither doe I see any reason why you should oppose grace and good workes in the point of salvation howsoever they are opposed in the point of justification The place you point unto for proofe treats not of the salvation of glory but of the salvation of grace consisting in effectuall calling as the Text it selfe manifesteth Had you spoken plainly as you might and as
to will their repentance after they are damned or no If no then is hee changed if ever hee willed their repentance 7. Certainly he speaks of men defiled with originall and actuall sinne for hee speakes of such whom he exhorts to repentance yet this hinders not but that it may proceed of his antecedent will for nothing but finall impenitency makes way for Gods consequent will concerning damnation 8. Saint Paul of all his labours tendred to the good of all sorts professeth that hee suffered them for Gods Elect How much more in Gods intention was the Ministry of his Prophets for the Elect sake The question is not so much about Gods delight in the death of the wicked as about his delight concerning their repentance and life and this hath no parallel Ezech. 18. applying it to other then Gods Elect. 9. The third Answer though it seemes to mee not congruous enough in respect of life because revealed will in this distinction is usually taken onely for Gods commandement and life is no precept yet is it congruous enough in respect of repentance for it is generally commanded and consequently Gods will of life if it be called his will revealed may be reduced to congruity as consequent to repentance which God commands to all and consequently hee may be said by his revealed will to will the salvation of all The Answer to this is nothing to purpose as sticking upon the termes secret and revealed and not applied to the usuall acceptions of this distinction which is onely to signifie Gods will of commandement which wee all know to be revealed and Gods will of purpose which mostly is not revealed 10. It is untrue that it is Gods good pleasure that all should repent for the will of Gods good pleasure in the acception of all that ever I read is onely of that which God will have come to passe and consequently of what shall come to passe not of what should come to passe to wit of mans duty that is generally accounted voluntas signi in distinction from voluntas beneplaciti and in speciall wee may call it voluntas praecepti and distinguish it from voluntas propositi this is What God will have to bee done that is what God will have to be our duty to doe And thus farre it may be accounted the will of Gods good pleasure as you call it But then Gods displeasure following hath no congruous opposition hereunto as when you say It is his displeasure if they repent not the contrary whereunto is not as you shape it It is his good pleasure that all men should repent but rather thus It is his good pleasure if they doe repent That distinction tends to meere confusion Neither yet doe I like this expression shaped never so congruously rather it should runne thus God is well pleased when men doe repent and most displeased when they doe not repent which is most true but least to the present purpose as touching the distinction ventilated betweene us concerning voluntas signi voluntas beneplaciti Your second instance of voluntas beneplaciti is no lesse extravagant as when you make the object thereof thus If they repent they shall not perish If they repent not they shall perish for promises and rewards are but adjuncts to voluntas signi and nothing secret but plainly revealed But to whom God will make his commandements back'd with promises and threats effectuall to the working of repentance this is a secret and this wee commonly account voluntas beneplaciti When you adde saying Thus the will of God revealed in a distinct axiome is alwayes consonant to his revealed will and never frustrated You continue still in a miserable confusion worse rather then better as when you talke of a disjunct axiome in reference to that which went before when no disjunct axiome at all went before but certaine conditionate axiomes as these If they repent they shall not perish If they repent not they shall perish whereas disjunct oppositions are such as these They shall repent or no They shall perish or no And to say such axiomes are consonant to Gods secret will is a wild expression whereas indeed they are neither consonant nor dissonant save onely in enuntiating that in an indeterminate manner which Gods will hath made determinate and in that respect it is dissonant enough Of the cause of the death of a sinner there needeth not to be any question for undoubtedly the sinne of man is the cause thereof in the way of a cause meritorious but not in the way of a cause naturally efficient And as undoubted it is that Gods will is the cause thereof as a Judge in the way of a cause naturally efficient but not in the way of a cause meritorious And as cleare it is that onely the meritorious cause is the chiefe cause in this kind for as much as by the rendring thereof alone satisfaction is made to him that demands the reason why such a one suffereth death But I wonder what you meane to change the former Translation of the Text thus I have no pleasure in the wicked mans death into another thus I will not the death of a sinner For is it not God that inflicteth death and doth hee not doe all things according to the counsell of his will Ephes 1. 11. Yet if it were so to be rendred it will nothing advantage you And in no other sense can it be said that hee doth not will it then in that in which hee is said not to punish willingly Lam. 3. according to the Latine phrase when hee doth not punish Animi causa but by reason of some provocation the sinne of man urging and moving him thereunto as is fairely intimated in that Hos 11. 8. How shall I give thee up Ephraim how shall I deliver thee Israel And Esay 3. They provoke the eyes of his glory For a second ground In the Covenant of Workes you may see as in a glasse what the purpose of God is in the manifesting his Justice upon the world of mankind as in the Covenant of Grace you may see as in a mirrour what the purpose of God is in manifesting his mercy upon the Elect For as it is in men renued after the Image of God so likewise it is in God himselfe Such as his Covenant or Promise is such is his Purpose God doth covenant and promise in the Covenant of Grace to give life to the Elect out of his grace in Christ So here doth God covenant and promise in the Covenant of Workes to give life to Adam and all his posterity if they continue in obedience of his Law or if breaking this Law they return again to him by repentance as it is described at large Gen. 4. 7. Levit. 18. 5. Ezek. 18. 5. 20. 11. 40. 21. Gal. 3. 12. Surely then the purpose of Gods just retribution is to give life to the world of mankind upon condition of their obedience or of their repentance
after disobedience Say not Surely God purposed nothing but death to the world of mankind whom hee elected not because hee offered them life upon such condition which hee knew was impossible for them to keep for first in Adam they were enabled to keep it neither impotency in Adam nor efficacy of Gods decree did put upon Adam any necessity of breaking it Againe 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 be found which if they neglect or despise as the Pharisees did and all the rest of impenitent sinners doe God and his Covenant are blamelesse in offering them life and the meanes of it their destruction is of themselves That Proposition of yours As it is in men renued after the Image of God so likewise it is in God himselfe had need of much limitation and qualification lest it prove as often false as true or rather more That which followes Such as is his Covenant or Promise such is his Purpose is likewise as often false as true If the Promises of God are absolute such are his Purposes but if his Promises bee conditionall such are not his Purposes Both Piscator of late by evidence of Scripture and Bradwardine long before by demonstration of Reason have proved that no will in God is conditionate quoad actum volentis all the conditions are found quoad res volitas And indeed though the Purposes of God are absolute yet his Promises are therefore conditionate because they are conformed to the manner of Gods operation with man For as God workes in all things agreeable to their natures so in man hee useth to worke agreeable to his nature And therefore albeit his Purpose bee absolute to bring them to grace and glory to faith repentance and salvation yet hee allures them to faith and repentance by promises and threatnings When you say that God doth covenant and promise to give life to the Elect out of his grace in Christ You might as well have said that God promiseth to give life to them that beleeve and repent and more congruously a great deale seeing the conscience of our faith and repentance brings us to the assurance of our Election the conscience of our Election or of the assurance thereof brings us not unto faith and repentance But it seemes you desire to shape the Promises of God in the Covenant of Grace and in the Covenant of Workes in so different a manner that the one may seeme to bee absolute the other conditionall whereas they are of the same nature in both And as God doth withall intend to give the grace of obedience to the Elect so doth hee as absolutely intend to deny it to the other And I wonder you make not mention of the Reprobate in the latter as of the Elect in the former Undoubtedly the Covenant of Workes concernes all to whom it is preached as well the Elect as the Reprobate And the Covenant of Grace likewise concernes all to whom it is preached as well the Reprobate as the Elect. To all it is preached Whosoever beleeveth shall be saved as well to the Reprobate as to the Elect To all it is preached indifferently Whosoever beleeveth not shall bee damned as well to the Elect as to the Reprobate onely God shewes mercy on whom hee will in giving the grace of faith and hardens whom he will in denying it God doth covenant you say to give life to Adam and all his posterity if they continue in obedience to his Law This then undoubtedly concernes the Elect as well as the Reprobate For they are a part of Adams posterity But I wonder not a little at this language speaking in the Present Tense that God doth covenant to give Adam life whereas Adam many thousand yeares agoe hath ceased to have any thing to doe with any such Covenant Therefore this is for some speciall purpose in joyning Adam and his posterity together as persons covenanted with by God And I imagine the reason of it to be this Lest otherwise there could bee no place for continuance in obedience required of all Adams posterity for that presupposeth them to be in the estate of obedience which was never verified of them all but as they were in Adam and that in his state of Innocency But why should wee please our selves with such confusion Let us consider them apart and say that God did covenant with Adam that if hee continued in obedience to his Law or if breaking his Law hee did returne againe to him by repentance hee should have life But what evidence I pray have you for this namely that God made any such Covenant with Adam in the state of Innocency who ever was found to entertaine any such conceit before you why might not you as well devise the like Covenant to be made by God with the Angels Nay is not the contrary manifest In the day thou sinnest thou shalt dye the death How could this be verified if God made any such Covenant with Adam For if hee were under such a Covenant hee could not be said to violate it by sinning but onely by refusing to repent after hee had sinned And I verily beleeve you have no such meaning as if you conceived any such Covenant to bee made with Adam before his fall and therefore you clapt Adam and his posterity together to the end that if that which you delivered might not hold of the one it might of the other And though it hold of Adams posterity as touching this part of turning unto God by repentance after sinne committed yet of them it holds not as touching the other part of the condition to wit of continuance in obedience for the posterity of Adam through his fall are quite out of the estate of obedience till God restores them Nay God in this life never restores any to the estate of obedience which was found in Adam before his fall Out of this confusion you inferre that Surely the purpose of Gods just retribution is to give life to the world of mankind upon condition of their obedience or of their repentance As before wee were troubled with confusion so here wee are againe troubled with an unhappy distinction For what doe you meane to distinguish Obedience from Repentance as if Repentance were not Obedience Doth not God say as well unto us Repent and beleeve the Gospel as If you consent and obey you shall eat the good things of the land Is it fit to distinguish the Genus from the Species so as to set one in opposition to the other Though the contentions of Brethren are as the barrs of a Palace yet as Brethren they are all the Children of the same Father or Mother or both But take wee your meaning and that by Obedience is to be understood such a state or
communicating life and glory unto him Which to my judgement doth manifestly intimate that you acknowledge in God a purpose to communicate life and glory to Esau some way or other And if you did acknowledge a purpose in God not to communicate life and glory at all unto him this Aquinas confesseth and wee joyntly with Aquinas confesse that it is nothing lesse then to hate him For if God will have a man to bee and will not have him to bee saved surely hee will have him in the end to bee damned For in the end there will bee found no middle state equally remote from salvation and damnation But you doe in plain termes acknowledge a purpose in God to deale in justice with Esau and to give him life or death according to his works I presume you will not avouch this of all them that you account the world of mankinde For I doubt not but you will except Infants As for men of ripe years is it not as true of the elect as of those you call the men of the world that they shall bee dealt withall according to their workes I doe not say according to their deserts but according to their works keeping my self to your own phrase Hath not the Apostle professed 2 Cor. 5. 10. That wee must all appeare before the judgement seate of Christ that every man may receive the things which are done in his body according to that hee hath done whether it be good or evill But these works I confesse are different for either they consist in obedience or disobedience either to the Covenant of the Law or to the Covenant of Grace either to the Law of works or to a Law of Faith Now as for those whom you call the world of mankinde and concerning whom you professe God hath a purpose to judge them according to their works I demand whether your meaning is God wil judge them according to their works in reference to the Covenant of the Law or in reference to the Covenant of Grace If in reference to the Covenant of the Law then the meaning must bee this God hath a purpose to save them in case they perform exact obedience to his Law But in case they continue not in every thing that is writen in the book of the Law to doe it Gods purpose is to condemn them to everlasting death Now I appeale to every sober Christians judgement whether if God hath no purpose to save them but upon condition of such obedience and withall hath a purpose to damne them upon condition of such disobedience whether all things considered it may not bee more truely avouched that God hath a purpose to damne them but no purpose at all to save them If it bee spoken in reference to the Covenant of Grace I dispute against it first in the same manner The conditions of the Covenant of Grace on mans part being Faith and Repentance if God will not save them but upon condition of faith and repentance and will damne them in case of infidelity and impenitency then surely if it shall bee found that the men of this world are far more prone to infidelity and impenitency then unto faith and repentance it followeth that God purposeth rather to damne them then to save them But in case they are naturally carryed to infidelity and impenitency and have no power to beleeve in Christ and to break off their sinnes by true repentance then it followeth as well in respect of this Covenant of grace according whereunto God will deale with them as in respect of the former Covenant of the Law that God hath no purpose to save them but hath a purpose to damne them unto everlasting fire But so it is of all those whom you call the world of mankind namely that they have no power to believe in Christ or to break off their sinnes by repentance but are naturally carryed on unto infidelity and impenitency as I prove thus They that cannot discern the things of God but account them foolishnesse they cannot beleeve in Christ But such are all they whom you call the world of mankind for they are not regenerate and consequently they are meere naturals Now the naturall man as the Apostle speakes perceives not the things of God for they are foolishnesse unto him Again all such persons are still in the flesh Now the affection of the flesh is enmity against God is not subject to the Law of God neither indeed can bee Secondly I prove that God cannot deale with them whom you call the world of mankinde according to the Covenant of Grace For if hee should hee should save them all as I prove thus If whatsoever God requires by this covenant on mans part God undertakes to perform on his part then it is impossible but that all must bee saved with whom hee meanes to deale according to this covenant But whatsoever by this covenant God requires on mans part God himself undertakes to perform on his part as I prove thus First in generall God undertakes in this covenant to bee our Lord and our God to sanctifie us Therefore hee undertakes to give us faith and repentance Secondly in speciall and first doth God require at our hands that wee should love him with all our hearts and with all our soules God undertakes to perform this I will circumcise thine heart and the heart of thy children that thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart and with all thy soule Doth God require at our hands that wee feare him And God also undertakes on his part to work us unto this Jer. 32. 40. And I will put my feare into their hearts that they shall never depart away from mee Doth God require Faith this also on his part hee performes Act. 2. ult God added to the Church dayly such as should bee saved And Philip. 1. 29. To you it is given to beleeve in him and to suffer for him Doth God require Repentance Even to this end God sent his Sonne to give repentance unto Israel and forgivenesse of sins In a word it is God that makes us perfect unto every good work to do his will working in us that which is pleasing in his sight through Jesus Christ Heb. 13. 21. Answ But in the second place it may bee argued that Gods raising up of Pharaoh to this intent to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow argueth the like hatred of Esau as of Pharaoh viz. a purpose of passing both by without communicating grace or glory unto them To which I answer a difference there is between Esau and Pharaoh though not in their finall condition nor in 〈◊〉 purpose concerning them Yet in the degree of their present estate whereunto they were severally come when God gave out his severall Oracles concerning them both for hee saith not of Pharaoh God raised him up to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow before hee had done good or evill as hee said of
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
the inheritance of the Saints in Light Forthwith you return to the right state of the question to wit in the concession or denegation of regenerating grace but carry your self in shew very prejudicially to the freenesse of Gods grace as when you say What if no Reprobate made such use of the means and helps offered as to obtain regenerating grace Dangerously implying that there is a certain use of the means quo posito which being put regenerating grace should bee obtained As if grace regenerating were to bee dispensed according to an unregenerate persons works Of the same leaven savour your words following when you say That because they did not make better use of the means it was just with God to deny them greater means saving that here you may bee relieved by the ambiguity of the word means by shifting from one sense of it to another For if means bee taken in the same kinde to wit of outward means like â—â— it is just with God to reward the right use of smaller meanes with the bestowing of greater so it is just with God for the abuse of the smaller not onely to deny greater but to take away those smaller But as touching the granting or denying grace regenerative herein God carryeth himself meerely according to the good pleasure of his own will according to that of the Apostle Hee hath mercy on whom hee will and whom hee will hee hardneth Neither can it bee otherwise For as much as mercy in regenerating any man cannot bee shewed according unto good works and consequently the denying of mercy cannot proceed according to evill works as I have already demonstrated in the first place The Sixth Doubt Question 6. HOw may it appeare that the declaration of the equity and sufficiency of Gods justice is reall and not pretended since all things are carryed and come to passe by an absolute and unconditionall decree and providence exempli gratia that fact Act. 4. 28. 2. 23. Answer To say that God carryeth all things by an absolute and unconditionall decree of providence viz. opposing absolute to all conditions presupposed in the creature in my judgment is neither agreeing to the Doctrine of Scripture nor of our Divines who doe both teach that as God in the fulnesse of time doth administer and dispense the way of his providence so hee decreed to dispense them in the same manner from eternity Now in dispensing the performance of the Covenant of works the Lord punisheth and rewardeth the creature according to the condition of obedience or disobedience performed by it as it is at large described Levit. 26 Deut. 28. and therefore surely he decreed to carry such works of his providence upon the same conditions The places that may bee alledged to the contrary do speak of Gods Decree in delivering Christ to death for us which as it was a work of meere grace you may safely conceive it was decreed by an absolute and unconditionall decree of providence as generally the works of free grace are For either they depend on no condition in the creature or at least on none but such as God is pleased to work in us and for us And yet I beleeve that in your own judgement you think not that God did decree the death of Christ much lesse deliver him to death but upon condition of Adams fall If you say God did as well decree a sinfull manner of the death of Christ by the hands of the wicked as the death it self and that by an absolute an unconditionall decree I answer if you mean an unconditionall decree presupposing no condition in those creatures which were the wicked instruments of his death it is spoken without warrant either from those places or from any other That God gave up Judas to betray him it was the punishment of his covetousnesse and hypocrisie That God gave up the high Priests and Pharisees to conspire against him to deliver him to Pilate it was the punishment of their ambition and envy and in some of them their sin against the Holy Ghost That Pilate against his conscience gave iudgement against him it was the judgement of his carnall popularity and his worldly feare of Caesar That the common people and Souldiers cryed out against him and laid violent hands on him it was the punishment of their ignorance and infidelity Now it is out of all controversie that God doth not punish sin with sin nor decree to punish but upon condition of sin presupposed It is true indeed God worketh all things after the counsell of his will but that proveth not that God carryeth all things with an absolute and unconditionall decree of providence For it is the counsell of his will as to work the salvation of his Elect according to the Covenant of Grace freely and absolutely so to dispense rewards and punishments to the men of this world according to the condition of their obedience or disobedience There is therefore no place left for such a question viz. How it may appeare that the declaration of the equity of Gods Justice was not pretended but reall since all things are carryed and come to passe by an absolute and unconditionall decree of providence For neither are all things as it is evident so carryed and if they were I had rather such a question should come out of the mouth of an Arminian then of any godly and judicious Brother The Arminians you know upon a seeming faire pretence are wont to object against our Divines that God calleth the Reprobates rather simulate then sorio in semblance rather then in truth if hee hath before determined of them by an absolute and unconditionall decree But the same answer your selfe would return to their objection the same I return to your question with more probability yea I may truly say with more safety That no will of God is conditionall we have the concurrent consent both of our and Popish Divines For both Piscator maintaines it against Uorstius and Bradwardine demonstrates it And this condition which you speake of can be no lesse then some motive cause Aquinos hath professed that never any was so made as to affirm that there was any cause of Predestination quoad actum praedestinantis as touching the act of God predestinating and that for no other reason then because there can be no cause of the will of God quoad actum volentis as touching the act of God willing Whence it followeth manifestly that in like sort there can bee no cause of reprobation neither quoad actum reprobantis as touching the act of God reprobating and consequently no condition As for the contrary allegations out of Scripture and out of Divines I shall be content to consider them whensoever you shall produce them but I am perswaded you will not bee forwards to trouble your selfe there-about after I shall present unto you how incongruous a course you take to the justifying of that which here you affirme And not incongruous onely but
with death in case of disobedience I began to conceive that as the purpose of election was sutable to the Covenant of grace so sutable unto a Covenant of works must bee a purpose of retribution For how shall God covenant to retribute or recompence with life or death according to works if hee have no purpose at all of such retribution How shall the Covenant of works promise life upon condition of obedience if the purpose of reprobation have absolutely determined death upon all them within that Covenant without all respect of good or evill obedience or disobedience in any of them the grace of redemption offering the death of Christ and reaching forth some fruites thereof unto all as the promising and offering sufficient help to bring them to the knowledge of God and means of grace yea and sometime bestowing on them the participation of some excellent and common graces doth not make a third covenant partly of grace partly of works but bindeth such so much the more to keep the Covenants of works by how much the more helps and means God vouchsafeth them to keep it It is not the helps of grace offered or given that includeth men with in any part of the Covenant of grace but the condition whereupon it is offered or given Secondly if God offer grace and give though never so small even as a grain of Mustard-seed and promise to uphold it freely for Christ his sake and not according to our works it is a Covenant of Grace But if hee offer and give never so many gracious helps and means and gifts and uphold them according to the works of the creature it is still a Covenant of works as it was to the Angels that fell and to Adam though hee gave to both of them the whole Image of God and besides heaven it self to the one a Paradise to the other it is but the same covenant of works which God made with the world of mankinde after the fall and with Adam before the fall though Adam received greater means and helps to keep it then his posterity had after the fall Because still the condition of the Covenant was the same in both to reward them both according to their works So is it still but the same Covenant of works which God makes with mankinde when hee offereth them in Christ greater grace and helps to keep it then after the fall they could have attained unto without Christ because still the condition of the Covenant runneth in the same tenour to deal with them according to their works Neither doe I conceive any danger in the point though by this means obedience to Christ and walking worthy of him should bee commanded in the Law which is a covenant of works For if the infidelity and disobedience of the men of this world to the Gospel of Christ bee sin then are they also transgressors of the Law and then the contrary vertues are commanded in the Law Thirdly the Ceremonies of the Old Testament which were figures of Christ were commanded in the second precept of the Law was not Christ himself under those figures commanded also were they commanded to lay their hands on the sacrifices and not withall to lay their Faith on Christ were they commanded to look on the Brazen Serpent and not withall to behold Christ were they commanded to obey Moses and not withall the Prophet like unto Moses What then doe wee confound the Law and the Gospel God forbid The Law indeed commandeth to obey God in whatsoever hee had of old or in fulnesse of time should afterwards reveale to bee his will but it is one thing to command Christ to bee obeyed and revealed which after Christ is revealed even the Law also doth to all that heare it another thing it is to give Christ freely and faith to receive him and the spirit likewise to obey him yea and perseverance also notwithstanding our unworthinesse to continue in him all which the Gospel promiseth to the Elect of God Glory bee to God in Christ and peace upon Israel If the serious consideration of two convenants did turn the stream of your thoughts into this covenant it should seem you doe acknowledge a third covenant distinct from the former two Therefore I conceive there is an errour in the writing and that whereunto the stream of your thoughts was turned is not a different covenant from the former two but rather an opinion concerning reprobation different from that which is most generally received amongst our Divines And albeit hereupon you fell on this yet herehence it followeth not but that you might hereby fall upon laying a ground for three covenants ere you are aware Yet do I not charge you with this As in some respect you may seem to make three so in another respect you may seem to make but one if the covenant of retribution according unto works bee but one For I see no reason but Gods purpose of election may well passe for a purpose of retribution and consequently if the purpose of election and reprobation bee reduced unto one why may not the covenant of works and the covenant of grace by your rules bee reduced into one As election is Gods purpose to bestow everlasting life seeing God doth not purpose to bestow it but by way of reward of obedience of faith and repentance and good works it necessarily followeth that Gods election is his purpose of retribution But there is besides in election a purpose to work a certain number of men unto faith obedience and good works and unto a finall perseverance in them all So likewise between the covenant of the Law and the covenant of Grace there is this principall difference that God inables his elect to the performance of the one not of the other but as touching the reprobate hee inableth them to the performance of neither condition Subservient to Gods election of some is each covenant The covenant of works to humble them not onely upon the consideration of their sins whereby they have merited eternall death but especially upon consideration how their naturall corruption is so farre from being mastered and corrected by the Law as that on the contrary it is irritated and exasperated so much the more Then the covenant of grace to comfort them considering how the condition of life is adulced and tempered being from exact and strict obedience changed into faith and repentance but chiefely upon consideration that the word of this covenant is a word of power mastering their corruption and inabling to perform faith repentance and Evangelicall obedience in an acceptuble manner unto the Lord. Subservient to the purpose of reprobation may bee the Law only writen in mens hearts which very obscurely intimateth if at all any covenant made of everlasting life between God and man Where the word is revealed that in generall comprehending both Law and Gospel is subservient thereunto in the way of instruction and exhortation and the like thereby taking
away all excuse Of any other end intended towards them I know not except sometimes as Austin observeth Ut proficiant ad exteriorem vitae emendationem quo mitius puniantur And why I pray may not the covenant of workes promise life upon condition of obedience notwithstanding the purpose of reprobation hath absolutely determined death upon all them within the Covenant as well as the Covenant of grace threatens death upon condition of disobedience of faith and repentance notwithstanding that the purpose of election hath absolutely determined life upon all them within that Covenant And yet like as in election wee acknowledge a respect to obedience consequent thereunto in as much as it includes a purpose to give grace to work them to obedience though not any respect therto as antecedent to the decree it self how much more may you easily conceive that in reprobation wee deny not a respect to disobedience consequent for as much as it includes a purpose to deny grace which alone can prevent disobedience though not any respect to disobedience as antecedent to the decree of reprobation And to repeate by the way that which formerly hath been delivered Respect to disobedience as antecedent to the decree of damnation cannot bee imagined unlesse withall you imagine God did first decree to permit it and thereupon for the foresight thereof decree to damne for it Whence it followeth that permission of disobedience must bee first in intention in comparison with condemnation and consequently it must bee last in execution by your own rules formerly laid down as unquestionable foundations Yet doe not I maintain that God in any moment of nature doth first decree damnation and then decree the permission of sin for which hee damnes them I make these decrees not subordinate as most doe but co-ordinate and joynt decrees being onely concerning meanes tending to the same end And with Aquinas I say that reprobation includes Voluntatem permittendi culpam condemnationem inferendi proculpa The end whereof is the demonstration of his glory in the way of justice But withall I desire that culpa in this description of reprobation may bee understood aright and not as Arminius doth whose superficiall consideration of things is usually for his advantage making him thereby the more to abound in arguments for the impugning of his adversaries opinions according to his own shaping of them quite beside their meaning For culpa is not fin in generall in this definition but onely such a sin propter quod quis damnatur for which a man is damned that is finall perseverance in insidelity or impenitency When you say the grace of redemption offers the death of Christ and reacheth forth some fruite thereof unto all you walk according to your course in the clouds of your own mysteries What you mean by these fruites you speak of and by the reaching of them forth I am utterly to seek neither doth ought you have formerly delivered helpe mee in this But in these particulars it seems you love to speak darkly and keep your self to generall terms I know no condition proposed in the Gospel for receiving of any benefit from Christ but faith and repentance But you seem to bring in gracious helps for the obtaining of faith and repentance to bee tendred unto us for Christs sake upon other conditions I know not what neither have I hitherto received any ground of assurance from this your discourse that your self know what In the next place you seem to specifie what these fruites are as when you say that it promiseth and offereth sufficient helpe to bring them to the knowledge of God and means of grace still keeping your self in the generall as if you feared to bee understood And I wonder not a little that your self being a man of such reputation and much exercised in giving satisfaction addressing your self to give satisfactivn in so tender and precious points of Divinity as these should deliver your self in so strange a language But let us take the more paines in discussing the clouds of your Phrasiologies When you say the grace of redemption promiseth and offereth sufficient helps your meaning must bee that the Gospel of Christ doth promise and offer this for as much as wee are acquainted with no promises of Grace but in the Gospel Yet this phrase of expressing used by you is enough to trouble a Reader who when the matter wee treat of is difficult enough might justly desire that hee might not bee put to other trouble as to interpret mens expressions Yet it may bee you may think to have a ground for this out of Saint Paul where hee saith The grace of God which bringeth salvation hath appeared unto all teaching us to deny ungodlinesse and by which grace hee seemes to meane the Gospel Bee it so yet Saint Paul doth not call it the grace of redemption as you doe Redemption in Scripture phrase signifies forgivenesse of sins Ephes 1. 7. and Col. 1. 14. If this bee your meaning I finde no congruity in this your affirmation For what will you say the Gospel preached doth promise and offer to bring men to the knowledge of God and means of grace I had thought rather it had brought the knowledge of God and meanes of grace to them Or rather is the very bringing of it or to speak more properly is the very means of grace it self All which considered I am yet to seek of your meaning I finde it so miserably involved and that in the very close of all enough to make any intelligent Reader despaire to receive satisfaction from you when in the very last act hee shall finde himselfe so farre from making any tolerable construction of your words thereby to pick out any sober meaning Then againe by offering helps you seem to imply some termes or condition whereupon it is offered them but no such condition is expressed by you If it had perhaps thereby wee might have taken the altitude I mean the depth of your meaning throughout The same grace of redemption bestows also you say sometimes some excellent though common graces I have heard I confesse you stand much upon common graces But what they are and to what end they tend and whether absolutely or conditionally imparted according to your opinion when I shall bee sufficiently informed I will doe my best indevour to weigh them in the ballance of Christian and Scholasticall examination and accordingly to give them that due respect which belongs unto them It may bee about a third covenant which they might seem to make partly of grace and partly of works I should not bee much contentious Yet it followeth not that because they doe binde the more to the keeping of the Covenant of works as having more means and helps vouchsafed unto them therefore it doth not make a third Covenant You say it is not the helps of grace offered or given that include men within any part of the covenant of grace but the condition whereupon it is
offered or given that is whereupon they are offered or given to wit the helps of grace Here new mysteries offer themselves againe I must bee driven Balaam-like to cast about for divinations and whether in the issue I shall finde that I seek for I cannot assure my self You came but now from speaking of common graces and by the coherence these helps of grace which here you speak of should bee those common graces considered as helps of grace speciall Now had you given instance and shewed what these common graces are they might of themselves have discovered the reference wherein they stand unto grace speciall which I ghesse to bee faith and repentance This you might easily have done and saved us a great deale of irresolution and paines also partly in seeking after that which wee cannot easily finde and partly in labouring to disprove wee know not what This confused course proceede in some from an ill minde fearing lest their opposites should have too much liberty by their plaine dealing to impugne them but in good men it proceeds from the weaknesse of their cause and from the uncertainty and ambiguity of their thoughts for the justifying of that which they doe maintain But let us proceed These helps of grace by which I hope you mean helps unto faith and repentance you plainly signifie are offered upon a condition and by the quality of this condition wee may judge whether they to whom they are offered are included within the covenant of grace or no. Now let us indevour to sound your meaning These helps of grace must needs bee either outward means or inward qualities and habits By helps I should understand outward means after mine own phrase of speech and by yours also I have good cause for as much as in the words immediately going before you joyn helps and means together and confound common graces with them both As for means of grace they are not given upon condition for what condition can bee imagined whereupon the Gospel should bee given to a Nation shall it bee the using of their naturalls right how will you bee able to make it good that heathen men before they injoyed the Gospel did use their naturalls right Did the Corinthians who were carryed away with dumb Idols even as they were led 1 Cor. 12. 2. And for not honouring God as God did not God give them up into a reprobate minde to doe things inconvenient as well as others thereby to receive the recompence of their errours Judge of this by that which the Apostle mindes them of 1 Cor. 6. For after hee had told them that neither Fornicators nor Idolaters nor Adulterers nor Wantons nor Buggerers nor Theeves nor Covetous nor Drunkards nor Raylers nor Extortioners shall inherit the Kingdome of God ver 9. 10. forthwith hee addeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these things were some of you as much as to say some of you were fornicators some adulterers some Idolaters some wantons some buggerers some theeves some covetous some drunkards some raylers some extortioners or some of them in diverse kindes if not in all these kindes lyable to condemnation and utter exclusion out of the Kingdom of God But yet for all this yee are washed but yee are sanctifyed but yee are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the spirit of our God ver 11. And is it not manifest that when the Gospel is first preached to any Nation it is preached as well to the uncivill as to those that are civill as well to the debauched as to the morall Again In this case the Gospel should bee bestowed by way of reward of obedience but obedience is no obedience unlesse it bee performed upon knowledge in obedience unto some Law given Now how could the Gentiles know of any such Law that whosoever used their naturalls should bee rewarded with the benefit of the Gospel seeing this is no where pretended to bee revealed but in the Gospel So that assoon as any man hears of such a Law hee already enjoyeth the Gospel The two first of these arguments may as well bee applyed against this doctrine of yours if by helps of Grace you mean some habits or qualities besides that which may bee further alledged upon your specification what these habits and qualities are And here is a faire way opened for a third Covenant for as for the two covenants commonly acknowledged they are onely for the obtaining of Salvation different wayes besides which here is brought in another Covenant for the obtaining the means of grace and that different wayes also to wit either by works or by Grace But when I look unto your former words and consider them well as when you say it is not the helps of grace offered or given that include men within any part of the Covenant of grace but the condition whereupon it is offered or given these words It is offered or given perhaps are not referred to the helps of grace but rather to the grace it self yet I interpret them of the helps of grace with no other minde then to salve this rule of yours from manifest contradiction For by your rule you professe that the inclusion of some within the covenant of grace and the exclusion of others depends not upon any indifference in the things offered or given but onely on the condition whereupon they are offered or given manifestly implying thereby that the same things are given to them that are without the covenant and to them that are within but the difference is onely in the condition whereupon they are given But if your rule run thus it is not the helps offered or given that include a man within the Covenant of grace but the condition whereupon the grace it self is given Hereby you manifest that they within the Covenant of grace and they without are distinguished not onely by the condition whereupon that which they have is given but also by the things themselves which are given them for as much as onely the helps of grace are given to the one to wit to them that are without the covenant but not only helps of grace but grace it self is given to the other which serves directly contrary to your rule here given not to speak of the miserable confusion that like a Leprosie seizeth upon your manner of expression and which you hold up in the beginning of your next section But before I come to the scanning thereof let mee tell you of your dis-junctive phrase as when you said offered or given this is very ill-accommodated to the helps of grace if you meane helpes outward such as the Gospel for the Gospel where it is preached there it is not onely offered but hoc ipso given The phrase offered is as ill accommodated to grace it self in respect of the condition whereupon depends admission into the convenant of grace For to offer to a man admission into the covenant of grace upon condition is to offer it upon a condition to bee performed by
him to whom it is offered But such an offering your self confesse doth savour of a covenant of works but when the condition is meerly for Christs sake that you say makes the covenant of grace Now to that which followeth If God offer say you and give it to wit grace though never so small even as a grain of mustard seed and promiseth to uphold it freely for Christs sake and not according to our works it is a covenant of grace But if hee offer and give never so many helps and means and gifts and uphold them according to the works of the creature it is still a covenant of workes as it was to the Angels that fell and to Adam Here you continue your former confusion for pretending to maintain the difference between them within and them without the covenant of grace as depending meerely upon the condition whereupon things are given you notwithstanding this make a difference also in the things given For the one thing given to them within the covenant of grace you seem to make grace it self though perhaps as small as a grain of mustard seed and not onely helpes of grace but the things given to them without the Covenant are onely gracious helps and means And withall you deale not fairely in the expression of that which you intend for you do not make it plainly appeare that you put a difference between the things given lest you should contradict your self for you place the difference onely in the condition whereupon the thing given is given but that which is given to them within the covenant of grace you formerly expressed by the relative it which made mee in doubt whether I should referre it to grace it self or to the helps of grace yet forthwith on the other side running again to helps you doe not style them helps of grace as before you did which doth manifestly distinguish helps of grace from grace it self but you call them gratious helps and means and not contented with that you adde gifts also as if your purpose were not to distinguish them from grace in the other member of the comparison mentioned but rather to confound them therewith Which I confesse sorts best with your rule which placeth the difference only in the condition of the things given and not in the things given themselves And this is further confirmed by the instance given in Angels and Adam where you plainly give us to understand that by gracious helps and means and gifts given them you understand the Image of God which clearly signifies not any outward help and means after which manner I was prone to interpret this phrase of yours but the very inward sanctification of their natures which in my judgement is very untowardly called means of grace or helps of grace Whereas it is rather that holy power wherewith God had indued them to perform that which hee had commanded them For of Adam that is undoubtedly true which Austin saith namely that God gave Adam posse si voluit non dedit velle quod potuit power to obey if hee would but not a will to doe that which hee could and questionlesse it is as true of the Angels as of Adam And this power I confesse had continued in them had they performed actuall obedience according to that power whereof by their disobedience they were deprived Whereby you give mee good ground to guesse what that opinion of yours is which you carry wondrous closely and I verily beleeve because of the offensive nature thereof to good men such as your self namely That power to beleeve and repent is given to them as well without the covenant as to them within like as both Angels and Adam before their fall had power to perform obedience to Gods Commands But to them within the covenant of grace it is given and upheld onely for Christs sake to others it is to bee given and upheld onely according to the covenant of worke that is upon condition of some performance of theirs But yet of the full pourtraiture of your opinion I am to seek in some particulars As First what the condition is upon the performance whereof they shall have power given them to beleeve and repent Whatsoever you say or give instance in if it bee a work of nature it will necessarily follow that grace shall bee possibly at least resolved into a work of nature then wee are where wee are and still to seek how they came by power to perform that work of grace Secondly I am to seek by what means God doth work this power whether onely by perswasion which is onely a morall action or by an immediate change of their natures by the inspiration of Gods Spirit Now the first of these cannot bee for perswasion hath no power to change the nature of ought and work new powers in it which are not wrought without giving a new life And indeed perswasion tends rather to move men to doe that which they have power to doe then from thence to receive a power of doing Wee doe not perswade men ut possint aliquid facere sed ut velint ut faciant to bee able to do ought but to move them to bee willing to doe it If by immediate inspiration giving a new life then it follows that regeneration is a common grace possible at least given to them as well without the Covenant of grace as to them within to the Reprobates as well as to the Elect and that upon performance of a work of nature And because it were in vain to speak of upholding it after it is given unlesse it were given indeed you imply hereby that even this power is given to Reprobates But whereas it is to bee upholden but upon condition yet you doe not expresse what this condition is But I guesse the condition hereof is the exercising of this power like as upon the exercising of the power which God gave Angels and Adam before the fall they had been confirmed in their integrity But what if they do not beleeve or repent for a year or two together yet I presume you will not say they are thereupon deprived of this power but that it continueth for ought wee know to the contrary to their lives end though it fell out quite contrarily with Angels and Adam who immediately upon their disobedience were deprived of this power What is your meaning when you say God offers mankinde in Christ greater grace and helps to keep the Covenant of works then after the fall they could have attained to without Christ I cannot easily comprehend and throughout finde you very close and reserved hereupon which to speak like a free man is no good dealing First I know not what that grace and help is which here you speak of If your meaning bee no more but this that they have more power to perform the Covenant of works through Christ then otherwise as I guesse it will come to no more in the end I pray you what think
you of mankinde before Christ came into the world had they this power you speak of through Christ If you think they had I pray you how came they by it If onely it hold of mankinde since the preaching of the Gospel I demand whether of all or some if of all then you must acknowledge the Gospel to bee preached to all If only of them to whom it is preached yet the question still is whether it bee wrought by perswasion or inspiration Secondly in saying that in Christ they have greater grace to help to keep it your phrase doth imply that even without Christ men have grace and helpes and power to keep the Covenant of works In a word dare you say that any naturall man hath any power to bee subject to the Law of God or to doe that which is pleasing in Gods sight If you say they have any such power I demand whether ever any were found subject to the Law of God or did that which was pleasing in Gods sight It is very strange that never any such act should proceed from a power so generall If they were or did that which was pleasing in Gods sight then they were not in the flesh for they that are in the flesh cannot please God Lastly when you say these helps or this power is offered them in Christ it implies that upon some condition performable on their parts it is offered unto them Now it were very requisite you should deale plainly and expresse this condition which you doe not I confesse I see no danger in acknowledging that God purposeth to deale with mankinde according to their works nay I wonder you should exclude the elect from the number of those with whom God deales in this manner when the Apostle professeth so directly wee must all appeare before the judgement seat of God that every man may receive the things which are done in his body according to that hee hath done whether good or evill 2 Cor. 5. 10. Onely for Christs sake God giveth faith and repentance to some working in them that which is pleasing in his sight through Jesus Christ and doth not deale in the like mercy with others The rest of this Section I dislike not Glory bee to God in Christ and peace upon Israel In submission unto his Truth For why should wee lye for God as man doth for man to gratifie him For an Auctarium here is laid down a short Survey of the ninth Chapter to the Romans so farre as it treateth of the Doctrine of Predestination the better to clear some passages of the former Discourse THe whole Chapter from the first verse to the 23. is taken up in the answering of objections each latter arising from the answer to the former for the Apostle having taught in the last verse of the former Chapter that nothing can separate us from the love of God in Christ giveth occasion of this doubt that may arise Quest What think you of the Jews are not they the Elect people of God and yet are not they separate from Christ Answ The Apostle doth not plainly affirm it that they are separate from Christ but with much compassion bewailes it yea and protesteth that hee would wish himself rather separate from Christ for their sakes The grounds of which hee rendreth to bee for his kindreds sake ver 3. for their priviledges sake ver 4 5. This coherence I could brook well enough onely I say it is devised at pleasure and I finde it is a generall course to feign coherences and sometimes onely to shape thereby some conformation of the Apostles meaning to their interpretation of him The Apostle I am sure makes none and accordingly Ludovious Leoburgensis professeth saying Prorsus nova disputatio instituitur in qua tametsi doctrinam de Justificatione alicubi repetit intertexit tamen duas alias materias principales tractat videlicet quis sit vere populus Dei seu quae sit vera Ecclesia de vocatione Gentium Judaei contendebant se esse Ecclesiam se esse populum ad se solos pertinere promissiones Paulus respondet Elector esse populos Dei The disputation here instituted by the Apostle is altogether new wherein although hee doth sometimes repeale and insert the Doctrine of Justification yet hee handles two other principall matters to wit who are the people of God in truth and which is the true Church and of the calling of the Gentiles The Jews contended that they were the Church they were Gods people and that to them alone pertained the promises Paul answers that the Elect alone are Gods people Analysis What is then the word the word of promise of inseparable conjunction with Christ to them of none effect Answ No all are not Israel which are of Israel nor are all the children of Abraham that are of the seed of Abraham but in Isaac are his seed called viz. Not the children of Abrahams flesh are the children of God but the children of promise ver 6 7 8. which hee proveth by a twofold instance or example First of Isaac the seed of Abraham by Sarah who was given unto him as his seed by the word of promise ver 9. Secondly of Jacob the seed of Isaac by Rebekah of whom another promise was given that the elder brother should bee to him a servant ver 11. Which promise touching Jacob is amplifyed by First the freenesse of it all cause of different acceptation being removed from the two brethren and in regard first of parentage ver 10. secondly of personall condition and indowments ver 11. which freenesse is also further set forth by the end of it that the purpose of God might stand firm as not depending on any condition in the Creature ver 11. Secondly A parallell promise suiting to it preferring Jacob before Esau in Gods affection when they were both considered onely as brethren ver 13. These words of the Apostle are I confesse the key of the whole Chapter for opening the meaning or at least making way to a faire understanding of all that follows If the Jews are rejected as the Apostle presupposeth to wit as touching the most of them in the former words then it may seem that Gods word is of none effect which consequence the Apostle supposing such a consequence likely to bee made by his denying of it doth imply that there was some Word of God that seemed to bee made of none effect by this Doctrine concerning the rejection of the Jews This word therefore is to bee inquired into the investigation whereof will give light to all the rest Now this word can bee no other then the word of some promise made by God for the taking of the seed of Abraham to bee his people to bee his Church For such a promise alone seems to stand in contradiction unto our Christian Doctrine concerning the rejection of the Jews And indeed such a promise God made to Abraham Gen. 17. 7. I will establish
say There is no good thing possible to be though it never come to passe as that all men in all things should obey the word of God but that God passeth upon it some act of his will This I say is nothing to the purpose and that for two reasons First because it proceeds of morall good whereas the object 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rising from the consideration of God willing salvation to the world upon their obedience and repentance had not its course of good morall which is mans duty but of some good naturall which he should receive by way of reward Secondly accomplishment of a thing willed consists not in the approving of it but in bringing of it to passe as all men know by common notion When as you say as touching Bonum that God as hee will prove it so hee doth approve it as if approving of it were for the present and proving of it were for the time to come is so wilde an expression that I cannot comprehend it Wee use by proving a thing to approve it as good and not first approve it and then prove it As little to the purpose is that which followeth as when you say When God commands a duty his will of command is accomplished But whereas God is said to will the thing that hee commands here ariseth a question how that can be said to be willed by God which most commonly is not accomplished For albeit the will of command is accomplished by the commanding of this or that yet Gods will of the thing commanded seemes not to be accomplished unlesse the thing willed by God be sometimes brought to passe The truth is your opinion seemes to be That God not onely willeth the salvation of the world upon the condition of their repentance for that is no more to will their salvation than their damnation but that God willeth and desireth their salvation absolutely in as much as hee willeth and desireth their repentance I confesse you doe not in expresse termes professe as much namely that God willeth and desireth the repentance of Reprobates yet hitherto you seeme to tend in this discourse of yours though concerning this you say no more than this That God gives meanes to help them to the performance of this obedience so farre as is meet for him which while you professe I doubt you understand not your owne meaning and therefore no marvell if others doe not understand it For how farre he doth help them you expresse in a very uncertaine manner which is rather to conceale than to discover and expresse your meaning But I will endeavour to bolt it out These meanes you speake of are either morall onely consisting in instructing them wherein this obedience doth consist and urging them by perswasion thereunto or in affording besides this some efficacious operation of Gods Spirit to worke them to this obedience Now this latter cannot be your meaning for if this were afforded them their obedience certainly would be wrought but the world of whom you speake doe never perform this obedience Now in granting the other there is not so much evidence of Gods will that they shall performe this obedience as by the denying of this wee have evidence that his will is not that they shall performe this obedience Againe in respect of meanes morall can any be saved without the meanes of true faith and true repentance I thinke you will not say they can Then consider have all men sufficient instruction unto the performance of true faith and true repentance How will you be able to make this good Hand over head you say God gives meanes to help them to the performance of this obedience so farre as is meet for him to doe yet I am perswaded you are not able to make this good taking it according to the confuse generality wherein you expresse it For is it not meet for God to afford any Nation or particular persons his word and Gospel as well as it is meet for him to afford it us Nay is it not as meet for God to afford any other person both the outward meanes and the inward efficacious operation of his holy Spirit to worke them unto faith and true repentance as well as by these meanes hee hath been pleased to worke us hereunto This meetnesse what is it but that which Schoolmen call Justitia condecentiae and which they professe doth accompany every action of God So that had God afforded the same grace to others which hee hath afforded unto us hee had carried himselfe therein meetly that is justly justitia condecentiae Againe had hee denyed the same grace to us which hee hath denyed unto others he had herein also carried himselfe meetly or decently that is justly justitia condecentiae I am sorry to observe from such good mens pens such illusions to have their course to the obscuring of the grace of God and his soveraignty of dispensing it to whom hee will This very ayre I find breathed forth in the writings of others and it seemes to mee very probable that they have derived it from hence Besides to cleare this point more fully the will of God towards the world is put forth in a disjunct axiome viz. either to give life unto the world upon the condition of their obedience or to inflict death upon the condition of their disobedience Now as in a disjunct axiome the whole proportion is true if either part be true so the will put forth in a disjunct axiome is alwayes accomplished if either act be accomplished But if it be objected how may it appeare this will of God to give life to the world upon condition of their obedience is serious and not pretended since if hee would hee is able to give them such hearts as would cause them to obey him I answer That God willeth it seriously appeares manifestly by the declaration of his will already mentioned viz. his Oath his Covenant yea and the workes of each Person in the Trinity tending to this end to give life to the world all which it were blasphemy to thinke they were not done seriously Doth the living God sweare and not sweare in earnest God forbid Doth God enter into Covenant with his creature and intend no performance of promise according to his Covenant farre be it from the just and holy God to doe it and from us to imagine it Shall we think each Person in the Trinity slighteth the worke of the salvation of mankind because mankind slighteth to worke out their salvation with the Trinity But besides the declaration of Gods will thus seriously expressed I produce the teares of our Saviour over Jerusalem lamenting their carelesse neglect of the day of their peace which argued not onely in Christ as man a serious compassion of their affected ignorance and misery but also as God a tender consideration of their peace and of providing the meanes for it Moreover what shall wee thinke of those passionate exclamations Oh that there were in
this people an heart to feare mee and to keep my commandements alwayes that it may goe well with them and with their children for ever Oh that they were wise that they understood this that they would consider their latter end Oh that my people had hearkened unto mee and that Israel had walked in my wayes I should soon have subdued their enemies and turned my hand against their adversaries Do not all these speeches expresse an earnest and serious affection in God as concerning the conversion and salvation of this people whereof sundry died in their sinnes It is true God might have given them such hearts as to have feared and obeyed him which though hee did not yet his will that they had such hearts was serious still To cleare it by a comparison The father of the family hath both his son and servant dangerously sick of the stone to heale them both the father useth sundry medicines even all that art prescribeth except cutting when hee seeth no other remedy he perswades them both to suffer cutting to save their lives they both refuse it yet his sonne hee taketh and bindeth him hand and foot and causeth him to endure it and so saveth his life His servant also hee urgeth with many vehement inducements to submit himselfe to the same remedy but if a servant obstinately refuse hee will not alwayes strive with him nor enforce him to such breaking and renting of his body But yet did not his Master seriously desire his healing and life though hee did not proceed to the cutting asunder of his flesh which hee saw his servant would not abide to heare of So in this case both the elect and men of this world are dangerously sicke of a stony heart to heale both sorts the Lord useth sundry meanes promises judgements threatnings and mercies when all faile hee perswades them to breake their hearts and the stone thereof with cutting and wounding of their consciences when they refuse hee draweth them both the one with his almighty power the other with the cords of man viz. such as are resistible to this cutting and wounding that their soules might live and the elect are brought to yeeld and the men of this world break all cords asunder and cast away such bonds from them Shall we now say God did not seriously desire the healing of such mens hearts because hee procured not to bind them with strong cords to breake them with such woundings as they will not abide to heare of Thus having laid downe the grounds of my judgement touching the first Point That there is a will and purpose in God for to reward the world as well with life upon condition of obedience as with death upon condition of disobedience I come now to the grounds of the second Point You proceed in clearing a difficulty devised and shaped without all ground as if any sober man would find it strange that a conditionate will of God should not be accomplished as often as the condition failes And to this purpose you make use of the nature of a disjunct axiome All-along I savour others that have grased here yet have not rested themselves contented with this but proceeded further to more erroneous opinions A second objection you propose in the second place the solution whereof you seeme to travell with much more than of the former and yet the objection is altogether as causelesse and without all just ground as the former I have now been something more than ordinarily conversant in these Controversies for the space of seventeen yeares I never yet met with any of our Divines or any other that made any question whether Gods will being granted to passe on any object were serious yea or no I should thinke there is no intelligent man living that makes any doubt of this but puts it rather out of all question that whatsoever God wills hee wills it seriously I confesse the Arminians doe usually obtrude some such things on our Divines yet not altogether such for they doe not obtrude upon us as if wee said God doth not will seriously that which hee willeth but rather that hee doth not seriously exhort and admonish all those whom hee doth admonish to beleeve and repent as if hee made shew onely of desiring their obedience and salvation when indeed hee doth not Yet you seeme to sweat not a little in debellating this man of straw Upon these termes I might easily dispatch my selfe of all further trouble in examining your elaborate Answer to so causelesse an Objection but I will not for it may be you insperse something by the way of opposition to that which you doe professe which is this That God doth not at all will the obedience and repentance of any but those who are his Elect. And I would not pretermit any evidence you bring to countenance your cause in opposition to our Tenent unanswered That Gods Oath or Covenant or the workes of any Person in the Trinity tends to the end by you mentioned namely to give life to the world is utterly untrue Likewise it is utterly untrue that you have hitherunto proved any such thing For that which you here deliver as Gods end in giving life is proposed simply and absolutely but that which hitherunto you have endeavoured to prove is onely this that Gods will was to give the world life conditionally to wit upon their obedience and repentance and that as in the last place coming to the point you have expressed it in a disjunct axiome thus To give life to the creature upon his obedieace or to inflict death upon his disobedience Now let any sober man judge whether in this case the will of God be more to give life than to inflict death more passing upon the salvation of the creature than upon his eternall condemnation Could you prove that God doth will at all the salvation of any other save his Elect I would forthwith grant hee wills it seriously I should thinke it no lesse than blasphemy to thinke that God doth either will or sweare or covenant or doe that which hee doth not seriously as blasphemy consists in attributing that to God which doth not become him I nothing doubt but that if all and every one should beleeve and repent all and every one should be saved and none other thing hitherto have you so much as adventured to prove in this particular whereupon now we are But then it behoves you to look unto it on the other side how you cleare your selfe from blasphemy in the same kind while you maintain that God doth will the salvation of those which shall never be saved which not in my judgement only but in the judgement of Austin of old doth mainly trench upon Gods omnipotency for if hee would save them but doth not hee is hindered and resisted by somewhat and consequently his will is not omnipotent nor irresistible And more than this here-hence it will follow that either God continues still to will their
heart out of their bowels and give them an heart of flesh when he resolves to afford this grace unto some but not unto others let every one judge hereby whether God can be said earnestly to desire the changing of their hearts when hee resolves to forbeare that course which alone can change them No no this discourse favoureth strongly of a conceit that it is in the power of an unregenerate man to change his owne heart and of an heart of stone to change it into an heart of flesh And in this case I confesse it were very probable that God should earnestly desire it provided that any ineffectuall and changeable desires were incident unto God That when God putteth forth the second act of positive retribution viz. the rejection of the world or decree of their condemnation God doth behold and consider the world especially men of riper yeares not in massa primitus corrupta nor as newly fallen in Adam but as voluntarily falling off by some act of carelesse and wilfull disobedience To prove this I need not produce other reasons then what I have formerly alledged in the fone-going Point for when God did expresse by his oath his will and good pleasure to be not for the death but life and conversion of sinners was it not after the fall of Adam and all his posterity in him then notwithstanding the presupposall of the fall God had not yet rejected the creature but as hee there declareth himselfe still retaineth and reserveth thoughts of peace towards them even a desire of their conversion unto life Againe with whom did the Lord enter into a Covenant of life and death upon condition of obedience and disobedience was it not with Adam onely and his posterity in his loynes in the state of innocency by the law written in their heart Was it not also after Adams fall renewed to all his posterity both Jewes and Gentiles Then yet God had not cast them away in the fall though the fall had justly deserved it but expecteth yet further to see how they will yet keep this renewed Covenant with him before hee cast them off as Reprobates Even Cain himselfe the eldest sonne of Reprobation is after the fall offered acceptance of Gods hand if hee doe well Moreover is it not after the fall that the Father by his workes of creation and providence judgements and mercies c. the Sonne by his enlightening the world by his death and ministery of his servants and the Holy Ghost by his calling and knocking at the hearts of the wicked doe all strive with men even to this very end to turne them to the Lord that iniquity may not be their destruction If therefore all the Persons in the Trinity doe provide severall helpfull meanes for the conversion and salvation of the world of the world I say now after the fall lying in wickednesse surely God did not then upon the fall reprobate the world unto eternall condemnation and perdition If you say God might well reprobate the world unto condemnation upon the fall and yet still after the fall usâ— meanes for their conversion and salvation because those meanes doe but further aggravate their condemnation I answer these doe indeed further aggravate their condemnation but it is but by accident onely by their neglect and abuse of them but the proper end which God himselfe of himselfe aimes at in the use of these meanes himselfe plainly expresseth it to be not the aggravation or procurement of their condemnation but the restoring of them to salvation and life as hath been before declared So then to draw all to an head the summe of this first reason is If God after the fall doe retaine a will and purpose to restore life to the world upon an equall condition then hee did not upon the fall or upon the onely consideration of the fall reject the world of the ungodly unto their utter perdition But you see God retaineth after the fall an holy will and purpose of restoring life unto the world upon an equall condition as appeareth by his Oath by his Covenant and by his Workes therefore the conclusion which is the point in hand is evident I marvell what you meane to call Gods decree of condemnation his act of retribution retribution being an act temporall and transient the decree of God is an act immanent and eternall And therefore it is not so handsomely said to be the putting forth of an act for so much as it is immanent and not transient 'T is manifest I confesse that sin is alwayes precedent to the retribution of punishment as it is without controversie that sinne neither is nor can be antecedent to Gods decree sinne being temporall but all Gods decrees eternall And I have found it by experience to be an usuall course with our Adversaries to confound condemnation with the decree of condemnation And Junius himselfe very incongruously in my judgement calls this decree Praedamnatio to make the fairer place as I guesse for sins praecedencie thereunto at least in consideration But no necessity urgeth us to any such course and wee may well maintaine that God in this decree of condemnation hath alwayes the consideration of that sinne for which hee purposeth to damne them for undoubtedly hee decrees to condemne no man but for sinne It is impossible it should be otherwise condemnation in the notion thereof formally including sinne But I like not your expressions in the distinction you make saying God considers men in this sinne not as newly fallen in Adam but as voluntarily falling off you mean long after by some act of carelesse and wilfull disobedience When God made this decree they were not newly that is a little before fallen in Adam for that fall in Adam was temporall but the decrees of God are eternall And to consider as newly fallen when as yet they were not much lesse were they fallen is not so much to consider as to erre or feigne But like as God decreed to suffer all to fall in Adam and many also to continue both therein and in bringing forth the bitter fruits thereof even untill death so he purposed to condemne them for those sinnes but take heed you doe not make an order of prius and posterius between these decrees lest either you make the decree of condemnation precedent to the decree of permission of those sinnes for which they shall be condemned which will be directly contradictory to your Tenet here or making Gods decree of permitting such sinnes for which they shall be condemned precedent to his decree of condemnation whereunto you doe encline unawares which will cast you upon miserable inconveniences and that by your owne rule already delivered for if the decree of permitting sinne be first in intention then by the rules received by you it should be last in execution that is men should be condemned for sinne before they be permitted to sinne But the conjunction of these decrees into one as in the same
most dangerous tending manifestly to the utter overthrow of the Freenesse of Gods grace in Predestination which indeed very frequently you shake in this unhappy discourse of yours As God in fulnesse of time doth administer and dispence the wayes of his providence so you say bee decreed to dispence them in the same manner from all eternity Wee grant it willingly but what of all this you adde that in dispencing the performance of the Covenant of workes the Lord punisheth and rewardeth the creature according to the condition of obedience or disobedience performed by it or rather by the persons under it This also wee willingly grant But what doe you inferre herehence onely this Therefore surely hee decreed to carry such workes of his providence upon the same conditions Now this conclusion we embrace as readily as your selfe but this is farre from justifying the decree of God to bee conditionall Nay your selfe doe plainly expresse that the carriage of such workes of his providence is upon such conditions Not that Gods decree is upon such conditions which is as much as to say in plaine termes that the execution of his decree proceeds upon condition not the decree it selfe Yet I confesse in the same manner Arminius himselfe and his followers discourse as if they would explicate themselves in this manner of argumentation Sinne alwayes goes before damnation therefore a respect to sinne goes before Gods decree of damnation As if wee should argue thus Faith in men of ripe yeares alwayes goeth before salvation therefore a respect unto faith alwayes goeth before Gods decree of salvation Doe you not perceive by this the dangerous issue of your argumentation yet this is the very thing they aime at this is the Helena they are enamoured with But I am confident you are farre from this and would not a little grieve to understand that the Orthodox faith of some in the very point of predestination is not a little shaken by such argumentations as these And the rather because they have found such an eminent man as your selfe not onely to swallow them but in a confidentiary manner to propose them as most sound to give satisfaction unto others Therefore Aquinas fairely distinguisheth of the cause or condition of Gods will either quoad actum volentis as touching the act of God willing or quoad res volitas as touching the things willed no cause or condition thereof quoad actum volentis there may be quoad res volitas As for example to give instance in predestination no cause thereof at all quod actum praedestinantis as touching the act of God predestinating there may be a cause thereof quoad res praedestinatione praeparatas as touching the things prepared by predestination As for example Grace may bee and is the cause of glory and Christs merits may be and are the cause of grace So of Reprobation no cause thereof at all quoad actum reprobantis as touching the act of God reprobating no more then of the will of God quoad actum volentis as touching the act of God willing But there is a came thereof quoad res reprobatione praeparatas as touching the things prepared by Reprobation as sin is the cause of condemnation And indeed many confound these and thereupon professe the will of God in some cases to bee conditionall the issue whereof is no more then this That some things which God will have to come to passe shall not come to passe but upon on condition Thus Vossius understands voluntas conditionata a conditionate will which hee attributeth unto God not considering how handsomely he contradicts himself And Doctor Jackson of Providence discoursing of voluntas antecedens consequens will antecedent and consequent premiseth that the distinction is to be understood non quoad actum vokntis not touching the act of God willing but quoad ves volitas as touching the things willed though his discourse hereupon bee nothing suitable A manifest evidence that hee understood not the distinction any more then Uossius did You are willing to acknowledge that Gods decree of delivering Christ to death was absolute as a work of meere grace As for the condition of Adams fall to bee premised to this decree sure I am that is not your Opinion neither doth it become any to maintaine any decree of God to be both unconditionall and conditionall And why that sinne more then any other for which Christ satisfied should be imagined to bee premised as a condition of this decree I see no reason and if every sin must bee presupposed why not the sin of crucifying Christ This sin started Arminius and this is it and this alone which he thinkee good to except in this case I doe nothing wonder that his learning and his honesty were so well met both of a very temperate nature But albeit the fall of Adam was not preconceived to this decree of delivering of Christ to death yet I am not of your Opinion who thinke hereupon that the decree of sending Christ into the world was before the decree of permitting Adams fall concerning which I have discoursed enough while I examined how well you cleared the first doubt But when you distinguish of Gods decree to deliver Christ to death and to deliver him to a sinfull death you take a course to make mad work amongst Gods decrees As if God did first intend the generality of a thing and not till after the foresight of somewhat else intend the specialty thereof I will not tell you how undecent a course School-men conceive it to bee to attribute decrees to God of things indefinite I never found any Arminian take such a course Philosophy hath taught us duplicem ordinem naturae a double order of nature as namely nature generantis naturae intendentis in generation and intention And albeit secundùm naturam generantem communia generalia are priora specialibus in generation things common and generall are before their specialls According as a man in generation prius vivit vitam plantae first lives the life of a plant then vitam animalis the life of an Animal Lastly vitam hominis the life of a man yet quoad naturam intendentem as touching the intention the order is quite contrary that the more specialls as more perfect are first in intention And whereas intentio rerum gerendarum the intention of things to be done is for the production of things in existence and it is well known that generals can not exist but in specials nor specials exist but in particulars it is very strange that God should first intend to produce a Genius and after intend the specialty seeing nothing can bee produced but in particular You may as well say that God did first intend that Christ should die but whether a natural or violent death that was at first undetermined Secondly that God determined hee should die a violent death but whether by a judiciall proceeding or extrajudiciall that as yet was left undetermined And
7. 23. And this price wherewith Christ hath bought that which hee hath bought is his blood Rev. 5. 9. 1 Pet. 1. 18. But blood is no sit price wherewith to buy Dominion His blood is propitiatory and satisfactory and so fit onely to buy poore soules and to save them from condemnation And accordingly the life that hee gave for many was given by the way of ransome Matth. 20. 24. So that persons thereby are ransomed rather then any generall dominion procured And is it sit to say that Christ by his blood obtained dominion over the wicked to damn them for their sins Rather the power which hee obtained was to give eternall life to them whom his Father had given him Job 17. 2. and that in despite of sin Againe is it fit to say that Christ by his blood bought dominion over brute and senselesse creatures Or that by his blood hee obtained dominion over Angels and Devils Whom Christ bought hee bought unto God Rev. 5. 9. And shall wee say that by his death hee bought unto God the dominion over Reprobates whether Men or Angels and over all other creatures Again whom hee bought hee bought from the earth Rev. 14. 8. And from men ver 4. Can this bee verifyed of Angels of light and of angels of darknesse and of reprobate men and of all Gods creatures Lastly whom hee bought by his blood hee redeemed from their vain conversation 1 Pet. 1. 18. So hee did not redeem either reprobate men or reprobate angels and as for the Elect Angels they stood not in need of any such Redemption much lesse the brute creatures of God Yet even of some that were no better then Reprobates it is said that hee redeemed them 2 Pet. 2. 1. And hence Arminius inserres that the most wicked are redeemed by Christ and that in the same sense that Gods Elect are redeemed by Christ You say hee redeemed even the Reprobates but not in the same manner as hee redeemed the Elect but onely that hee bought the dominion of them But this seems a forced interpretation For whom hee hath bought they are his in speciall manner But to hee Christs is peculiar to Gods Elect 2 Cor. 3. ult And hence the Apostle inferreth Glorifie God in your bodies 1 Cor. 6. ult You will say In what sense doth the Apostle say of wicked men that the Lord redeemed them I answer it may bee said in the same sense wherein it is said of the gods of Damascus that they plagued Ahaz not that indeed they plagued him or had any power to plague him for An Idol is nothing saith Paul that is hath no power to doe good or evill but it was Ahaz his opinion that they plagued him and so hee sacrificed unto them Again their former profession was such that they were the redeemed of the Lord as well as any other So Piscator interpretech that place in Peter as spoken not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not as it were so indeed but in their opinion onely or in the common opinion of others The creature likewise shall bee restored by him Act. 3. For the Heavens must contain him till the time come that God hath appointed for the restoring of all things But that redemption is not yet neither hath hee purchased that redemption with his blood Wee deny not that all creatures are under the dominion of Christ but that they should bee translated into his dominion by way of purchase by his blood that seemes to mee a strange conceit Yet it sufficeth us that you confesse that Turks together with their Infants are not translated into the kingdome of Grace By Infants of Turks wee understand none other then such as dye in their Infancy and I wonder you should distinguish betwixt them Why you should reckon the condition of Infants deceasing out of the Church amongst the number of the secret things of the Lord I see no reason Are they not born children of wrath And if they continue so from the time of their conception unto their birth why not as well from the time of their birth to the time of their death dying in their Infancy And can wee doubt what is the condition of those who dye children of wrath doth not God say of the Sodomites that they suffer the vengeance of eternall fire and were there think you no Infants at all amongst them As for those who are commended to the blessing of Christ I make no question but that of such is the Kingdom of God For the Apostle teacheth us that if but one parent bee a beleever the children are holy but if neither are they are unclean But if they die in their uncleanenesse unwashed unsanctifyed what shall become of them You doe well in mine opinion to range little children under the covenant of their Parents that I like well but I like not so well the reason whereby you inforce it For the sins of the Father who is under one Covenant may bee visited upon their children unto the third and fourth generation who are under another covenant For the sins committed in the dayes of Manasses were in the captivity of Babylon visited upon the children in a fourth generation after and that upon as gracious children as were those that were represented by the basket of good figges Jer. 24. And the Covenant between Jonathan and David was only the preservative for keeping gracious Mephibosheth from having visited upon him the sins of his Grandfather Saul in slaying the Gibeonites Neither yet have wee cause to complain as the heathen doth Delicta majorum immeritus lues Romane For if I mistake not there is a great deale of difference between punishing the Son for the sin of the Father which hath no place at all in Gods providence excepting the case of punishing originall sin if so it hath place in that and visiting the sin of the Father upon the Son This being the punishment of the Father rather then of the Son And God being able to sanctifie any temporall affliction that falleth upon the son for the sin of his Father either while the Father liveth or after and to make it fall amongst the number of those things which work together for his good The Eighth and lost Doubt Question 8. HOw may it appeare that this makes not three Covenants The first of works requiring perfect obedience The second of grace promising Christ and all his graces even faith in him The third partly of grace providing a redemption and promising sufficient help partly as requiring both what wee can doe of our selves and Gods helpe proceeding with us accordingly Answer This frame of Doctrine is so farre from making three Covenants that the serious meditation of two Covenants was one of the principall reasons that first turned the stream of my thoughts into this covenant For when I saw that the Covenant of works did in justice reward according to works as well with life upon condition of obedience as