ability Dicere solet humana superbia saith Austin si scissem fecissem What was Pauls meaning when hee said of himselfe Rom. 7. 9. I once was alive without the Law I should think this impotency cannot be discerned without the life of grace For like as a dead man naturally is not sensible of his death so hee that is dead in sinne is nothing sensible of this his sinfull condition But howsoever surely grace revealed onely hath no congruity to such a worke as to bring a man to see his impotency for what greater grace in the kind of revelation then the word of God let this word testifie that a man is shaped in wickednesse and in sinne conceived and that hee is dead in sinne Is this sufficient to make him see his impotency Is the hearing of Gods word sufficient to make him beleeve it why then is it not sufficient to take away mens blindnesse and why then doth not every one that hears it cease to be blind and consequently cease to bee lame and deafe yea and cease to be dead also Nay which is more suppose a Physician discovers a man to be in a dangerous estate when hee dreames of nothing lesse and suppose the party beleeves it upon his word yet here-hence it followeth not that hee seeth the dangerous estate wherein hee is untill hee hath some feeling of it So likewise if hee should beleeve the word telling him that hee is unable to doe any thing that is good yet hee shall not be said to see it till hee hath some feeling of it and whence can this feeling proceed but from some principle of life that must be shed into his soule that hee may have a feeling of that miserable estate wherein hee is by nature otherwise though upon supposition hee should beleeve it in Gods word yet hee should not see it in himselfe Further you say It is sufficient to stirre him up to seek for help and strength and life in him where it is to bee found A strange conceit that a man should seek for life whereas if hee hath not life hee is dead and was it ever known that a dead man sought for life well Martha might seeke for the restoring of life to her dead brother Lazarus but surely Lazarus himselfe being dead neither did nor could seeke for life A man that hath life may be said to labour for life that is to hold it when hee is in danger of losing life but for a dead man to seeke for life is more then miraculous for it is utterly impossible When the Angell came downe into the Poole of Bethesda the poore Creple had never a whit the more sufficiency to enter in had his heart beene as lame to desire as his body to goe notwithstanding that he saw so good an opportunity hee should make no more haste to desire the benefit then his body could to enjoy it Againe no man seekes for that hee desires not neither can hee desire ought unlesse hee know it and loves it And is it possible that a man should know the precious nature of the life of grace and be in love with it and yet without the life of grace Is the knowledge of the precious nature of the state of grace and the love thereof a fruit of the flesh thinke you But by that which followes it seemes this is not your meaning but you suppose that notwithstanding all the operation of grace mentioned they may despise it In which case they neither love it nor understand the precious nature of it for no man despiseth that which hee loves and accounts precious Therefore this stirring up seemes to bee nothing but perswasion and exhortation Now this as Austin long agoe delivered Doctrinae generalitate comprehenditur and we willingly grant that the word preached doth equally exhort all that heare it to faith to repentance to prayer in some of which or in all which consists the seeking of life And no man makes question but the word of God sufficiently performes its part in exhortation to faith to repentance to prayer but the Pharisees despised this and so doe most and God is blamelesse But of any power that they have to beleeve repent and pray upon the doing whereof they should obtaine life your selfe are content to say nothing at all but keep your selfe unto generall phrases which are very apt to deceive us and this is the course not onely of them that are in love with their owne errors but with good men also when out of a desire to justifie God and not content with that simplicity of satisfaction which is laid forth unto us in holy Scripture and seemes harsh to flesh and bloud making them cry out Durus est hic sermo they shape unto themselves other courses more convenient as they thinke to give satisfaction yet not so much unto themselves as unto others but all in vaine for flesh and bloud will receive no satisfaction in the plaine truth of God A third Reason then to prove that God purposed life to the world upon condition of their obedience and repentance is taken from the end God aimed at As hee declares himselfe to offer meanes of salvation unto the world which is not in the first place to harden and to leave without excuse but to bring them to the knowledge of God and of themselves to repentance to the seeking after God to the purging of themselves from sinne and to peace To the Gentiles God gave the workes of Creation and Providence and his Law written in their hearts to reveale the knowledge of God to them to teach them to doe the things of the Law to judge of them that doe amisse and thereby be brought to condemne themselves doing the same things to lead them to repentance to move them to seek after the Lord. And thus much light Christ enlighteneth every man withall that cometh into this world From whence also it was that God vouchsafed heavenly dreames and visions even to the Gentiles That hee might withdraw them from their sinnes and hide their pride and save their soules from the pit But because this light alone did not prevaile with the Gentiles as to bring them to the knowledge of God in Christ therefore it pleased God in the fulnesse of time to send the preaching of the Gospel amongst them and in the meane time not to iudge them nor condemne them for their not beleeving in Christ of whom they had not heard nor for transgressing the Law of workes which they had not received but onely for sinning against the law of nature which was written in their hearts and expounded to them daily by the workes of Creation and Providence and sealed up to them by particular amplification partly by their Consciences accusing or excusing Rom. 2. 15. partly by dreames and visions Job 33. 15 16. To the Jewes God revealed his Covenant clearly and fully sent his Prophets among them early and late gave them deliverances chastened them with
by the eares not considering the dangerous consequence here-hence utterly overthrowing the Orthodox doctrine of our Churches in the very point of Election and bringing in Arminianisme entire and whole not in Reprobation only as Master Moulin doth and you seeme to doe but in Election it selfe unavoidably though hitherto I confesse the Arminians have not been so happy as to discerne it I doubt not but your meaning is in that Proposition That sinne is not only the cause of damnation but of Gods decree also of ordaining thereunto But to affirme this seemed so foule to Aquinas namely that there should be conceived a cause of Gods will or Gods decree that hee professeth never any man was so madde as to affirme it But because the saying of Aquinas moves you little why should it seeing it little hindered not onely Valentianus the Jesuite from saying as you doe but Alvarez also the Thomist and a great Thomist therefore I will proceed further What should move you to affirme That to ordaine to condemnation is an act of vindicative justice Condemnation I grant is an act of vindicative justice like as remuneration is an act of justice remunerative but will it follow here-hence that to ordaine to condemnation is an act of vindicative justice I will not presse you with the authority of Master Baynes who denyes Reprobation to be an act of justice but thus I dispute If Gods purpose to condemne to death be an act of justice vindicative then also Gods purpose to remunerate with eternall life is an act of justice remunerative And if Gods purpose of condemnation presuppose sinne it followes that Gods purpose of remunerating with eternall life must also presuppose obedience even obedience of faith repentance and good works for all these God doth remunerate with eternall life Here appeareth the foule tayle of Arminianisme in the doctrine of Election which this plausible doctrine of yours and of Master Moulins in the point of Reprobation drawes after it The consequence is manifest though few or none consider it even of them that are both Orthodox in Election and most versed in the examining and discerning of just consequences Now because this consequence I presume is unexpected I imagine men may bee moved to cast about and consider how they may wind themselves out of this dangerous inconvenience And perhaps it may come to their mindes to affirme that they doe not conceive Election under this forme namely to bee the decree of God to remunerate with everlasting life And I verily believe they doe not for if they did it were not possible they should continue Orthodox in the point of Election but miserably betray their cause by giving way to a doctrine plainly contradictory in the point of Reprobation But why then doe they not consider Election as they ought Is it not generally confessed that Election and Reprobation are contrary why then should they not be shapen under contrarient formes and what act I pray you is contrary to the act of justice vindicative but the act of justice remunerative But perhaps you may say Though this bee true yet there is no place for such an opposition here for as much as though a man may merit damnation by sinne yet hee cannot merit salvation by obedience I answer therefore that this onely shewes there can be no opposition between them in a speciall kind of retribution to wit in the way of retribution according to desert on both sides yet this hinders not but that there may be and indeed is an opposition in the generall of retribution For it is well knowne that God will reward every one according to his works and that he means to bestow salvation upon every one of ripe yeares by way of reward and tanquam coronam justitiae as the Arminians urge and justly though with no just advantage to their cause but according to their shallow and unlearned conceits as if therefore God should first fore-see their obedience before hee should ordaine them to a reward which yet will follow if on the other side wee grant them that God first fore-seeth mans finall impenitency and thereupon ordaines them to condemnation Perhaps you may say Is not the contrariety between Election and Reprobation sufficiently maintained by saying the one is Gods purpose ordaining to salvation the other Gods purpose ordaining to condemnation I confesse it seemes so and is generally reputed to be so and this I take to bee the principall cause of this error one confusion drawing on more and more after it But I say there is no congruous opposition between salvation and damnation for to damne is either finally to punish or to adjudge to punishment Now as the Negative opposition hereunto is onely not to punish or to adjudge to punishment so the contrary opposition hereunto is to reward or to adjudge to a reward So that Election as it is Gods purpose ordaining to salvation by way of reward is onely opposite contrarily to Reprobation as it signifies Gods purpose ordaining to condemnation More fairly and voyd of all equivocation thus Like as Reprobation is Gods purpose to punish with everlasting death so Election is Gods purpose to remunerate with everlasting life And thus the contrariety of these acts being rightly stated it followes as evidently that Election must presuppose not obedience but the fore-sight of obedience as Reprobation presupposeth not sinne but the fore-sight of sin And thus are wee tumbled into the very gulfe of Arminianisme over head and eares before wee are aware But it may bee this discourse of mine may raise such a Spirit as will not easily bee laid and hereupon some may the more profusely bee carryed to embrace Arminianisme in the very point of Election also because as Reprobation seemes to bee an act of justice vindicative so Election also as here it is stated seemes to bee an act of justice remunerative And I willingly confesse I never found any Arminian that discernes the advantage which our Divines doe afford them by shaping the doctrine of Reprobation as they doe Therefore I will endeavour to quiet this Spirit that I have raised first by discovering the Sophistry that bleares our eyes in this and secondly by cleare demonstration I will prove that no fore-sight of sinne and obedience can precede the purpose of God ordaining to salvation and damnation As for the discovering of the Sophistry which hath place herein consider first It is agreed between Vasquez and Suarez though otherwise much at odds about the nature of justice in God that there is no justice in God towards his creature but upon the presupposition of his will whence it followeth manifestly that the purposes of God being the very acts of his will are no acts of justice but onely the executions of these purposes may bee acts of justice to wit upon the presupposition of some act or purpose of his will And the reason hereof not to insist wholly upon any humane authority is manifest for as much as in remunerating
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
erraverit locutus suerit ego dominus seduxi prophetam illum extendam manum meam super eum exterminabo eum de medio populi mei Israel patientia est an potentia Quod libet eligas vel utrumque fatearis vides tamen falsa prophetantis peccatum esse paenamque peccati An hic dicturus es quod ait Ego dominus seduxi prophetam illum intelligendum esse deserui ut pro ejus meritis seductus â—rraret Age ut vis tamen eo modo punitus est pro peccato ut falsum prophetando peccaret sed illud intuere quod vidit Micheas propheta Dominum sedentem super thronum suum omnis exercitus caeli stabat circa eum a dextris ejus a sinistris ejus Et dixit dominus Quis seducet Achab Regem Israelis ascendet cadet in Ramoth Gilead dixit iste sic iste sic Et exiit spiritus stetit in conspectu Domini dixit Ego seducam eum Et dixit Dominus ad cum in quo Et dixit exibo ero spiritus mendax in ore omnium prophetarum ejus Et dixit Seduces praevalebis exi fac sic Quid ad ista dicturus es Nempe Rex ipse peccavit falsis eredendo prophetis At haec ipsa erat paena peccati Deo judicante Deo mittente angelum malum Ut apertius intelligeremus quomodo in psalmo dictum sit Misisse iram indignationis suae per angelos malos Sed numquid errando numquid injuste quicquam aut temere judicando sive faciendo Absit Sed non frustra illi dictum est Judicia tua sicut abyssus multa Non frustra exclamat Apostolus O altitudo divitiarum sapientiae scientiae Dei quam inscrutabilia sunt judicia ejus investigabiles viae ejus Quis enim cognovit sensum Domini aut quis consiliarius ejus suit aut quis prior dedit illi ut retribuatur ei And again in the same Chapter Sequitur propter hoc Tradidit illos Deus in passiones ignominiae Audis propter hoc quaeris inaniter quomodo intelligendus sit tradere Deus multum laborans ut ostendas cum tradere deserendo sed quomodo libet tradat propter hoc tradidit Propter hoc desâ—ruit vides ejus traditionem qualem libet quomodo libet intelligas quae consecuta sunt Curavit enim Apostolus dicere quanta paena sit a Deo tradi passionibus ignominiae sive deserende sive alio quocunque vel explicabili vel inexplicabili modo quo facit hoc summe bonus ineffabiliter justus Thirdly as touching the third there is as little sounding in that also for already you have confessed that the Apostle in answering this objection to justifie God hath recourse to Gods soveraignty over his creatures as great as the potter hath over the clay who maketh vessels of what fashion hee will and to what end hee will But in the last place you feign most unreasonably a justification of Gods course in hardning whom hee will from the consideration of the persons hardned as being sinners I say this is most unreasonable First because when the creature is dealt withall according to his deserts this alone is most sufficient and satisfactory to every one that acknowledgeth it for the justification of any course taken with such And it is meerly in vain to fly to any other course of justification especially when it is lesse satisfactory then this And how strange were it that the Apostle should insist so fully and directly upon that other course of satisfaction upon the consideration of Gods soveraignty and should onely intimate this and that obscurely when this doth afford farre better satisfaction then the former Secondly in this case there were no ground for any such objection nor any colour of unreasonablenesse if God did but deale with them according to their deserts as often as hee hardneth them Thirdly the objection ariseth not upon Gods hardning a man simply but upon the hardning of whom hee will and that in a conjunct consideration with his shewing mercy therewithall on whom hee will In which case if God bee justifyed from the consideration of their conditions with whom hee deales like as hee dealeth differently with them in shewing mercy on some and hardning others so there should bee acknowledged a different condition in the persons with whom God dealeth in so different a manner But it is confessed by you that the persons here in St. Pauls consideration are equall with whom neverthelesse God deales very unequally Fourthly though this bee a plausible course in the judgement of man especially of the Arminians for the smothering of the light of Gods truth in this place yet when it is well considered in the proper nature of it I presume it will bee very dissonant unto common reason For what I pray you is hardning in this place standing in opposition to the shewing of mercy but onely the denying of the grace of Faith and Repentance to them that heare the Gospel like as to shew mercy is to give the grace of Faith and Repentance as appeareth manifestly both by the same phrase used Rom. 11. 30 31. and also by this very place cleering it self For it is such an operation whereupon it will follow that God shall have cause or occasion to complain as appeareth by the objection moved hereupon Now I say to deny Faith and Repentance is not of the nature of a punishment neither can it bee said with sobriety that man by sin doth deserve that God should deny him faith and repentance like as it cannot bee with sobriety affirmed that man by being sick hath deserved that the Physitian should not cure him or that man being dead hath deserved thereby that God should not raise him from death whereas indeed a man could not bee raised from death unlesse hee were first dead nor cured unlesse first sick neither were there any need of Faith in Christ crucifyed and of repentance unlesse man were a sinner Lastly consider as there is a grace of raising from out of sin so there is a grace of pieserving from sin This grace God granted to the elect Angels hee denyed to the rest meerly out of his own free pleasure according to the Soveraignty hee hath over his creatures and not with any reference unto sin preceding For how was that possible namely that there could bee any sin found in Angels before their first sin yet were the one to wit the elect Angels amplius adjuti more succoured then the other as Austin exprestely profesteth lib. 12. De Civ Dei cap. 9. Indeed I finde Ephes 2. 3. That wee are born children of wrath in respect of sin but that sin makes a man a vessell of wrath or that hee is not a vessell of wrath till sin comes the Apostle saith not nay the Apostle intimates the contrary when hee represents the power of
whereas justice is as well remunerative as vindicative as this hath place only on the wicked so the other on the good I meane those that departed the world after they came to yeares of discretion yet consider I pray you what thinke you of them that perish in no other sinne but originall derived unto them by the fall of Adam which Adam we beleeve to be saved In the condemnation of these what glory of God doth appeare more either of his justice or of his soveraignty 2. But be it granted that these glories doe appeare chiefly at such times yet if other glories doe appeare also in the same last execution how will you deduce herehence that only those glories you mention were first in intention Will it not rather follow that seeing other glories as well as these did appeare in execution though not chiefly therefore other glories as well as these were first in intention though not chiefly 3. When God blesseth his elect with all spirituall blessings in Christ we need not say he aimes rather at somewhat else then the praise of the glory of his grace when out of meere grace he made his glorious selfe known unto us he made not only his grace known unto us but all his attributes more or lesse which to our understanding are equally glorious in themselves though we take more comfort in the speculation of his grace which yet is more wonderfull when we consider his soveraignty over us his creatures and that it was indifferent to him to make us vessells of wrath as well as vessells of mercy and in this very consideration the very damnation of reprobates shall improve our glorious joyes in the apprehension of Gods free love to us at the day of judgement according to that of the Apostle Rom. 9. 22. You are to looke to it how you make your Tenent good who maintaine that God doth rather aime at the one then at the other 4. As for the wicked the righteousnesse of Gods judgement upon them we can in some measure conceive at this present But as for the power of God in executing such judgements maintaining the creature in the suffering of eternall sorrows wee are not able to conceive and therefore the glory hereof is farre more admirable then the other So likewise what shall be the fruits of the grace of God towards us at that day and after neither eye hath seene nor eare hath heard c. nor that glory contained in seeing the face of God If God should but reveale unto us the wisdome whereby he hath managed his providence towards us before he called us and since the calling of us immediatly by himselfe mediatly by the ministry of good Angels contending with and crossing the counsells and practises of wicked Angels what a body of glory would appeare unto us and how should we be ravished with the contemplation of it How much more with the contemplation of his providence thoroughout both in managing the whole course of nature and the whole course of grace QUESTION â— How and by what demonstrative reasons may it appeare that there is a necessity of a departing from the doctrine delivered in our Church The reasons which moved me a little and but a little to depart from the forme of words usually received in delivering the doctrine of Reprobation are such as to me seeme if not demonstrative yet convincing And though I have learned to suspect mine owne judgement where I differ never so little from my godly and reverend loarned Brethren yet I consider we are taught to trie all things likewise and to hold fast that which is good and as wee believe so to speake submitting our selves to the feare of God But before I come to the ground wherupon I have beene led to believe and speake somewhat otherwise of this point then is commonly received let me first shew you how farre I consent with the received opinon even in all usefull truthes and how little it is then wherin I dissent In the doctrine of election I consent wholly with Augustine Calvin Beza Martyr Zanehy Perkins Paraeus and others who have taught us by plaine evidence and that from scripture 1. That before the world was God out of his free will hath chosen the elect by name by an unchangeable decree unto grace and glory in Christ Jesus to the shewing forth of the riches of the glory of his grace 2. That to restore them who were losâ— in Adam he sent forth the Lord Jesus to be obedient to the death for them and by his death to redeeme them as effectually as if they themselves had suffered in their owne persons 3. That in the fulnesse of time he calleth each one of them by an effectuall and invincible drawing even by such an almighty worke of his quickning spirit as he did put forth in raising Christ from the dead 4. That those whom he so calleth he preserveth by some powerfull worke of his spirit to himselfe in Christ so as they never fall from him totally or finally Only herein take it not amisse if I place the subject of Election in Persons considered in Christ before the world or themselves were and not in massa corrupta with the late venerable Synod For though herein they follow Augustine and Zanchy and some others yet have they dissented from the chiefe instruments of the reformation of our Religion And with reverence I speake it as I am led to conceive that it need not trouble any if taking Christ to be the head of the elect I conceive him to be first thought upon and chosen and we in him Mr. Baynes followeth the schoole in so expressing it and the reasons delivered above in the first point have carryed me with them and the difference lyeth in opening the purpose of Reprobation But see here how farre I goe with the streamâ— and â—hen I goe aside how little and upon what ground How convincing or demonstrative the reasons are I addresse my selfe to consider It is good to make progresse in the investigation of truth Austin professeth himselfe to be of the number of those qui proficiendo scribunt scribendo proficiunt only our care must be that we goe not backward and make things worse then wee found them which comes to passe especially with good men many times not so much by falling into error as by confusion of method for hereby it comes to passe that the passages opening the way to the investigation of truth are stopt up and we find our selves in a brake and see no way out To prevent them I am perswaded it is a profitable consideration to thinke with our selves that different opinions especially amongst godly Divines may be no other then the dividing of the truth betweene them About the object of predestination there hath bin a triple difference in opinion some standing for massa nondum condita others for massa pura that is condita but nondum corrupta others for massa corrupta yet
both Junius did endeavour but very obscurely and Piscator hath endeavoured very perspicuously to reduce them into one If he failed therein especially in some one particular his failing rightly observed and discerned may open a way for the discovery of the entire truth But let the issue therof commend it selfe Your phrase of usefull truths I do not like amongst Arminians I often meet with such a course of arguing truth by the usefulnesse of it which is like the giving of the larger coat to him that is bigger because it is fitter for him when in the mean time he had no right unto it And though we can judge aright of a coats fitnesse to a body yet it is a dangerous course for us to presume so farre of our judgements in the usefulnesse of opinions as thereupon to conclude what are true and what are false 1. To choose before the world is to choose before the creation or Adams fall according to your owne exposition formerly mentioned but in this sense your selfe confesseth in the 4. place that Austin and Zanchy doe not concurre with others in this was there no more in Gods intention when he elected some then the manifestation of the riches of his glorious grace Did not God purpose to manifest also the glory of his remunerative justice Is it not undeniable that God will bestow salvation upon all his elect of ripe yeares before their departure out of this world by way of reward and crowne of righteousnesse which God the righteous Judge shall give at that day to all that love his Sonnes appearing It being a righteous thing with God as to recompence tribulation to them that trouble his Children so to his Children that are troubled rest with his Apostles when the Lord Jesus shall shew himselfe from Heaven with his mighty Angels in flaming fire rendring vengance c. When he shall come to be glorifyed in his Saints and be made marvellous in all them that beleeve c. It is great pity this is not considered as usually it is not especially for the momentous consequence thereof in my judgement sufficient if I mistake not to have stifled this opinion following touching Reprobation in the first conception of it 2. Touching the Second I have nothing to say for if you have any opinion concerning some benefit that redounds to the Reprobate by the death of Christ it is more then hitherunto you do discover 3. Touching the Third it were to be desired you did expresse whether no lesse powerfull motion would serve to the drawing of them to faith and repentance 4. Likewise touching the Fourth whether this powerfull worke being denyed to any it is possible for such a one to beleeve and repent unto salvation Concerning the order here mentioned though my opinion be that the object of predestination is massa nondum condita yet in no moment of nature or reason was the decree of God concerning Christs incarnation and our salvation by him before the decree of creation and of permission of Adams fall and consequently Election unto Salvation had the consideration of massa corrupta concomitant with it though not precedent only the consideration of massa nondum condita being antecedentall to all these decrees Likewise in my opinion they doe mistake who take the Synod of Dort to maintaine the consideration of massa corrupta as precedent to Election though they beginne with signifying what God purposed to bring to passe upon the fall of mankind in Adam And Galvin in his answere to Pighius confesseth that the safest course is to treate of predestination upon the consideration of the corrupt masse in Adam As touching what you have delivered touching Election in Christ our head in the first place that I have already examined Our Divines commonly conceive a double act of Reprobation as Bellarmine and others of the Papists doe 1. Negative as they call it a non-election or Reprobation unto which some adde a purpose of forsaking the creature excluding it from glory and from sufficient meanes of grace in Christ 2. Positive ordaining it to condemnation The former they conceive to be absolute as being an act of Gods soveraigne Lordship over the creature without all respect to sinne The latter they conceive as being an act of vindicative justice to presuppose originall sinne at the least and some of them as Bellarmine actuall sinne also whom Paraus in this point seemeth to give way unto 1. To the first of these acts I wholly assent so farre as it resteth in a non-election or preterition of the creature according to the libertie of Gods absolute soveraignety That which is added to it of a purpose of forsaking the creature and to exclude it from glory and from sufficient meanes of grace in Christ before all respect of sinne I want warrant from scripture to condescend unto But this Negative act I would rather expresse in such words as the holy Ghost hath used before me and so distinguish it into two branches That before all respect of good or evill in the creature 1 God did not so love the world I meane the world of mankind distinguished from the elect this is plaine from the Apostles comparison of Jacob and Esau Rom. 9. 11. 12 13. 2. God did not give the world to Christ by him of grace to be brought to salvation as he did the elect for they are not said to be written in the Lambs book of life from the beginning of the world Revel 13. 8 17 18. And indeed all who were given to Christ doe in fulnesse of time come unto him Joh. 6. 37. Gods hatred of Esau before he had done good or evill reacheth to this act also Rom. 9. 13. 2. Touching the positive act which they conceive I wholly agree with them that God ordaineth none to condemnation but upon sinne presupposed Annihilate the creature God may without presupposall of sinne for annihilation is an act of Soveraignetie suteable to creation but condemne it he may not without presupposall of sinne For condemnation is an act of justice and presupposeth a rule of justice transgressed and thereby wrath or just revenge provoked onely this positive act of Gods counsell about the world of mankind severed from the elect upon serious consideration of sundry passages of Scripture I would rather distinguish into a double act 1. Whereby without all respect of good or evill in the men of this world God ordained them unto judgment according to their works Ezech. 33. 20. to judgment I say not of condemnation which presupposeth sinne in the creature to be condemned but judgment I meane of just retribution whereby God is willing to deale with them according to their works in justice justice I say aswell distributive to reward them with life if they continue in obedience as vindicative to punish them to death if they provoke him by carelesse and wilfull disobedience Hitherto even to this act the hatred of God to Esau reached 2. Whereby upon the
it is cleare that God is not bound to remunerate any creature but upon presupposition of his will for hee may convert him into nothing if it please him But if hee hath determined to reward them according to their obedience it must needs bee so for as much as the Divine nature is without variablenesse or shadow of change So likewise neither is God bound to punish any sinner for hee may pardon him if it please him but upon supposition that hee hath determined not to leave a sinner unpunished in this case onely is hee bound to punish Further I will shew that in such acts the condition whereof doth not depend upon the will of God the act may be of one condition and yet neverthelesse the purpose of God to performe such an act is of another condition As for example the act of creation is an act of Gods almighty power but Gods purpose to create the world is no act of power but of will rather So likewise Gods act of ordering all things unto their end in wonderfull manner is an act of infinite wisedome but his purpose to order all things in so admirable manner is no act of his wisedome but of his free-will Now I will demonstrate that the fore-sight of sinne cannot be the cause of Gods purpose to condemne For if it be the cause of Gods purpose then either by necessity of nature or by the free constitution of God not by necessity of nature for hee is naturally more prone as Piscator confesseth upon Exod. 24. 6. to remunerate obedience than to punish for sinne but no man will say that hee doth remunerate by necessity of nature therefore neither doth hee punish sinne by necessity of nature therefore it must be onely through the voluntary constitution of God that sinne is the cause of ordination unto condemnation But marke I pray the foule absurdity hereof for here-hence it followes that God did purpose that upon the fore-sight of sinne hee would purpose that men should be damned So that the purpose of God is made the object of his purpose and that upon a certaine condition whereas nothing can be the object of Gods purpose but some temporall thing or other and consequently one purpose of God shall be in time precedaneous to another purpose of God which is impossible first because no purpose of God begins in time secondly there is no priority between the purposes of God but priority of nature and reason and that onely in such a case as when one is of the end and the other of the meanes tending to that end which hath no place in this matter wee now treat of By the way when you say God cannot condemne the creature without sinne though hee may annihilate him what doe you meane by condemnation doe you take it for punishment If so then the formality of it expressed at full is this Affliction for sinne Now consider is it a sober speech to say God cannot afflict for sin without the presupposall of sin I doubt not but you deliver your mind of what God cannot do in the way of justice But it is utterly impossible that any man should bee afflicted for sinne without the presupposall of sin I presume your meaning is only this though incommodiously expressed God cannot excruciate or afflict a creature without the presupposall of sinne But in whom I doubt not but your meaning is in the person afflicted But what thinke you then of the Sonne of God how was hee afflicted and without any presupposall of sinne in him And I pray you tell mee hath not God as much power over us as over him Againe consider I pray what power doth God give unto man over inferiour creatures But let this passe Can God annihilate us without any respect to sinne and can hee not afflict us Alas what affliction would most men bee content to endure rather then to dye much more rather then to bee turned to the gulfe of nothing from whence wee came If it be said that God may afflict in some degree but not in the highest or for a time but not for ever such as wee conceive that torment to bee which wee signifie by the word Condemnation I pray remember wee are made after the image of God and endued with the light of reason and let us not cast our selves in a brutish manner upon conceits without all evidence of reason Now tell mee what reason can bee devised why God should bee able without all prejudice of his justice to inflict paine in one degree in two degrees in three or foure degrees in five six and seven degrees without all respect to sinne onely if in the eight degree hee should inflict it in this manner he should bee unjust Againe if without injustice hee may inflict paine on an innocent creature for a thousand yeares or ten thousand yeares or ten times ten thousand what reason why hee cannot afflict a creature for ever without injustice yet if no finite time can be set which hee cannot exceed why not for ever Nay if a creature should be put to his choyce whether he would choose to bee annihilated or to bee in eternall torment yet preserved without sinne which of these two would an holy creature make choyce of should he not preferre his being without sinne though in eternall torment before annihilation But let us consider the double act of God here devised about the world of mankind severed from the elect God you say did ordain to judge them according to their workes I pray consider who denyeth this even they that maintaine Reprobation as absolute as Election doe notwithstanding maintaine that God doth judge them no otherwise then according to their works for they doe not avouch that God doth ordaine to damne them for ought else then for sinne yea and that for sinne actuall as many as doe dye in actuall sin unrepented of and for originall sinne as many as doe dye only in originall sinne Againe will you deny the same forme of decree to have his course concerning the elect as well as concerning the Reprobate Doth not God reward them according to their workes I meane as many as live unto ripenesse of age for otherwise it cannot be verisied of the Reprobates And if God doth reward the righteous according to their workes did hee not also ordaine from everlasting so to reward them Neither is Election rightly stated and in congruous opposition unto Reprobation any other then Gods decree to reward men with everlasting life for their obedience of faith repentance and good works like as Reprobation is Gods decree to punish them with everlasting death for their continuance in sinne without repentance unto death albeit neither of these is Gods complete decree on either side but the decree of Election is Praeparatio gratiae gloriae as Austin saith that is a decree to give both the grace of obedience both in the way of faith repentance and good works and to crowne them with
moment of nature and reason will both prevent this inconvenience and also justifie Gods decree of condemnation to proceed upon the consideration of those sinnes for which hee purposeth to condemne them But then there is another point of great moment which in like manner must be accorded unto though you seeme to be little aware of it though I willingly confesse this over-sight is very generall namely that God decreeth the salvation of none of ripe yeares but upon or with a joynt consideration of their faith repentance and good workes For let us first make the decrees of salvation and condemnation matches As for example Reprobation as it is accounted the decree of condemnation is a decree of punishing with everlasting death Now if you will match Election unto this as it is the decree of salvation it must be conceived as a decree of rewarding with everlasting life Now let any man judge whether this decree must not as necessarily be conjoyned with the consideration of faith repentance and good works in men of ripe years as the decree of condemnation or of punishing with everlasting death must be conjoyned with the consideration of those sinnes for which God purposeth to punish them And I will further demonstrate it thus Like as the decree of permitting some men to sinne and to continue therein to the end and Gods decree of condemning for sinne are joynt decrees neither afore nor after other and consequently the decree of condemning for sinne must necessarily be conjoyned with the consideration of sinne In like sort Gods decree of giving some faith repentance and good workes and his decree of rewarding them with everlasting life are joynt decrees neither of them afore or after other and consequently Gods decree of saving them and rewarding them with everlasting life is joyned with the consideration of their faith repentance and good workes Now that these are joynt decrees I prove thus First the decree of salvation cannot precede the decree of giving faith and repentance for if it should then salvation were the end of faith and repentance but salvation is not the end as I prove thus The end is such as doth necessarily bespeake the meanes tending thereunto but salvation doth not necessarily bespeake faith and repentance tending thereunto for God intending the salvation of Angels brought it to passe without faith and repentance as likewise the salvation of many an infant hee brings to passe without faith and repentance Secondly the end of Gods actions can be nothing but himselfe and his owne glory and therefore salvation it selfe must have for end the glory of God Now examine what glory of God is manifested in mans salvation and it will forth with appeare upon due examination that the glory of God manifested in mans salvation is such as whereunto not salvation only doth tend but diverse other things joyntly concurring with salvation thereunto As for example Gods glory manifested on the elect is in the highest degree of grace but in the way of mercie mixt with justice This requires permission of sin the sending of Christ to make satisfaction for sinne faith and repentance for Gods justice is seen partly in conferring salvation by way of reward and last of all salvation Out of all these results the glory of God in doing good to his creature in the highest degree of grace proceeding in the way of mercie mixt with justice Thirdly if God gave faith and repentance to this end to bring his elect unto salvation as to the end thereof then by just proportion of reason God should deny the gift of faith and repentance unto others that is to permit them finally to persevere in their sinners thereby to procure their condemnation as the end thereof which you will not affirme neither can it with any sobrietie be affirmed In the next place I will shew that neither can the decree of giving faith and repentance precede the decree of salvation for if it should then should faith repentance be the last in execution to wit if it were first in intention and consequently men should first be saved and afterwards have faith and repentance granted unto them Thus I have shewed my readinesse to concurre with you in opinion in this particular and that upon other grounds than yours and whose grounds are more sound yours or mine I am content to remit it to the judgement of any indifferent Reader As for your reason here mentioned repeating onely what you have formerly delivered as touching the will and good pleasure of God not for the death but for the life not onely of the elect but of all others also the vanitie of this assertion of yours I thinke I have sufficiently discovered And I wonder you should carry it thus not of the death but of the life when most an end you have carried it onely thus hitherunto that Gods willing their life is onely upon condition of their obedience and repentance not otherwise Or in a disjunct axiome thus Either of life in case they repent or of death in case they did not repent and what should move you to call this a willing to give them life and not to inflict death Why should you not rather call it a will to inflict death and not to give life considering that God was resolved to deny them such grace as would effectually bring them to obedience and repentance and to grant them only such a grace as he fore-knew full well would never bring them to obedience and repentance 1. Cain was of the familie of Adam to whom the promise was made concerning the seed of the woman that he should break the serpents head and although Cain was offered acceptance upon his repentance yet it followeth not that all were offered the same acceptance even those that never received any tidings or promise concerning the Messiah And the Apostle plainly signifies that the Gentiles were not admonished to repent untill Christ was preached unto them Act. 17. 30. But suppose it were so yet this hinders nothing at all the precedencie of the decree of condemnation unto the decree of giving such a Covenant and permitting them to dispise it For because God purposed to damne them for such a sinne therefore hee might decree to give them such a Covenant and permit them or expose them by leaving them destitute of his grace to the despising of it Not that I doe approve of any such conceit as before I have manifested but to shew how short your discourse falls of making good that which you undertake to prove And I am much deceived if you mistake not their tenet who make reprobation to proceed upon the consideration of the corrupt masle in Adam For undoubtedly their meaning hereupon is not to maintaine that God did purpose to condemne all reprobates only for the sin of Adam or for originall sinne drawne from him this were a very mad conceit But supposing that by Adams fall an impotency of doing that which is good is come upon
in carnall Christians Whereas if things were distinguished aright it would more easily appeare what is within the region of nature and what beyond it as meerely imputable to the speciall grace of God and operation of his spirit 3 As for dogs and swine wee are forbidden to give our holy things or to cast our pearles before them at all And therefore are wee not to trouble our selves in considering to what end this doctrine is to be preached unto them And yet as for the testifications proposed as proper unto them it is nothing so for not to them only but to carnall Christians also doe such belong yea to the very Children of God also to wit That God is just in all that cometh on them and his wayes equall As when after Davids foule sinnes in the matter of Uriah the sword pursued his house and Absolon defiled his fathers concubines and hee was driven to flie from Jerusalem and Shimei meeting him on the way cursed him c. And I pray you what unregenerate man throughout the world doth not love the cursed wayes of sin in some kind or other though not in all kinds And no marvell for vice is like a pike in a pond it devoures both vertue and lesser vices One vice is opposite to another and not onely unto vertue And therefore no mervaile if no man be found vicious in all kinds 4 As for the Lutheran and Arminian you professe that this Tenet of yours removes such stumbling blocks out of their way as have hitherto turned them out of the way of truth and peace But what these stumbling blocks are which you have removed I know not It seemes this hath been a chiefe inducement unto you to decline from that which you confesse to be the most received opinion of our Church and to shape unto your selfe a new forme of opinion different from that which is received if not to remove some stumbling blocks out of your owne way Now if it be so the fairest course had been to have expressed what these offences are Secondly how our most received Tenet doth either cast them in tho way of others or at least doth not remove them and thirdly to shew how by this opinion of yours they are removed But none of these have been performed by you Againe Mr. Moulin being very orthodox in the point of Election as you are varieth from us as you doe in the point of Reprobation maintaining Reprobation to be instituted upon the foresight of mans finall impenitency in his Anatome Arminianismi Corvinus an Arminan hath taken him to taske in a worke of his and is never a whit the more forward to concurre with us in the point of Election because Moulin concurres with them in the point of Reprobation Nay what doe Papists say about Durham by occasion of our complying with them but this They need not comply with us for wee come fast enough forwards to comply with them And more then this I have already shewed that this tempering or corrupting rather of the doctrine of Reprobation maketh a faire way for the utter overthrowing of that which you call the sound and comfortable doctrine of Election Forasmuch as looke by what reason you maintaine the foresight of small impenitencie and infidelitie to goe before Reprobation as it signifies the punishing with everlasting death by the same reason it will appeare that the foresight of finall perseverance in faith repentance and good workes must necessarily goe before Election as it signifies Gods decree of rewarding with everlasting life In which notion alone election or the decree of salvation is contrarily opposite to reprobation or the decree of condemnation For in maintaining that Reprobation as a purpose of God to condemne for sin doth presuppose the foresight of sinne you doe thereby imply that Election as a purpose of God to reward for righteousnesse of faith and repentance doth presuppose the foresight of faith and repentance But if your meaning be no other than this that God hath ordained no man unto damnation but for sinne what offence or scandall doe you remove hereby which wee doe not remove also who concurre with you herein And which is more wee are ready not onely to affirme but to make good also that in no moment of nature doth the purpose of Condemnation goe before the foresight of sinne even of that sinne for which men shall be damned Whereas you in maintaining that the foresight of sinne is precedent to the purpose of condemnation are not able to make it good but must necessarily fall foule upon a manifest contradiction to your owne rules For if the foresight of sinne be precedent to the decree of condemnation then God did first decree to permit sinne before hee did decree to damne for it And herehence it followeth that permission of sinne in Gods intention was before condemnation and if it were first in intention then by your owne rules it must be last in execution that is men shall be condemned for sinne before ever they be permitted to sinne Nay I appeale to your owne conscience whether wee doe not open a fairer way for composition in the point of election then you doe in the point of Reprobation Considering that like as in Reprobation Gods decree to condemne is in no moment of nature precedent to Gods foresight of sinne so in Election I am bold to affirme that Gods purpose to save is in no moment of nature before his foresight of faith repentance and good workes and finall perseverance in them all Will not you thinke that you have cause to feare hereupon that I am more dissolute in the point of Election than rigid in the point of Reprobation Yet if you will confesse that herein is a faire way opened for composition in the point of Election I dare undertake to perswade you that this shall be maintained without any prejudice either to the freenesse of Gods grace or to the absolutnesse of his power The truth is our Divines have a long time erred in making different decrees of those which are but one I mean formall decree to wit of the meanes though materially different which is nothing strange For why should it seeme strange that many meanes should be required to the same end Wee commonly say that Gods decree to give salvation is the decree of the end and his decree to give faith and repentance is the decree of the meanes yet they dare not say commonly that Gods decree to inflict damnation is the decree of the end and Gods decree to deny grace is the decree of the meanes And so they are driven to overthrow all Analogie between Election and Reprobation I say that Gods decree of giving faith and salvation unto sinners are but one formall decree of God concerning the meanes the end whereof is the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of mercie mixt with justice And indeed nothing can be the end of Gods actions but his owne glory for hee made all things
to omit but not in a gracious manner which alone is not in his power to performe and say what justice is there in the damnation of such a man I answer as much as in the damnation of an infant for originall sinne considering that by reason of originall sin it is that a naturall man cannot performe any thing in a gracious manner to wit for want of the love of God Originall sinne being an habituall aversion from God and conversion unto the creature or more breifly an inordinate conversing with the creature either in enjoying it whereas hee should onely use it God alone being to be enjoyed or in using it but not in a gracious manner that is not for Gods sake to wit through want of the love of God which is brought upon us by the sinne of Adam as whereby our natures were bereaved of the spirit of God Thus in prosecuting mine answer unto a devised argument I have made bold to open my minde concerning originall sinne A point that hath seemed unto me of such difficultie that I have been wont to range it amongst those three whereabouts I could not expect to be satisfied whilst I lived Another was the very point wee have in hand To the fourth Doubt HOw may it appeare that Gods hatred of Esau is of a lesse degree of love since the making of him who by birth is superiour to be a servant to his underling argueth no good will at all but First rather a purpose to passe him by in respect of communicating grace and glory Secondly since the raising of Pharaoh which was to this intent to shew his power in his overthrow argueth the like Thirdly since hardning is an effect of hatred and depends on the will of God as the first cause thereof even as Mercy doth Fourthly since there is no cause of that objection why complaines hee Who hath resisted his will or at least of that answer Rom. 9. 20 21 22. I Answer as Jacob preferring Ephraim the younger brother to greater estate then his elder brother Manasses did not thereby declare a positive hatred of Manasses but a lesse degree of love to him in comparison of his brother So Gods preferring Jacob to bee a superiour and Lord to his elder brother Esau doth not argue that in him there is no good will at all to Esau but a lesse degree of love To subject Esau as a servant to Jacob doth not reprobate Esau but puts him into the condition of the world of mankind who together with the rest of the Creatures are made to bee servants to the Church of the elect and to the members of it But grant Gods hatred of Esau and making him a servant to his underling argueth no lesse then a purpose to passe him by in respect of communicating glory unto him out of grace And for my part thus farre I yeeld that it may well argue a purpose of God to passe by him in respect of communicating glory to him out of grace that grace I mean whereby hee hath made us accepted in his beloved for this grace or free love is made Jacobs preheminence and is denyed to Esau and though it put him into the estate of a servant to his elect brother and so into the condition of the world of mankind yet it doth not reprobate him or argue a purpose to passe him by in respect of communicating life or glory at all unto him but implyeth only a purpose to deale with him in justice viz. to give him life or death according to his works as I have already shewed in the answer to the former doubt and shall have occasion more fully to declare it in the end of this Surely Jacob in doing that which hee did to Manasses and Ephraim did neither preferre one to a greater estate then the other or love one lesse then the other But in the spirit of prophecy fore-signifyed what would bee the condition of each in their race and posterity But suppose a father in that which lyeth in his power preferres one son before another and accordingly in that way of Amor beneficentiae bee said to love one lesse then another will any sober man say that hee loves the one and hates the other is this a decent expression of lesse love Wee know full well that a lesse love in the way of beneficence may bee joyned with a greater love in the way of complacency As for example an earthly Father though hee suffer his eldest son to goe away with the Land yet hee may bear greater affection to a younger sonne though hee assigne unto him a farre lesse portion then to his elder brother And if it were decent to say hee hates him whom hee loves lesse in respect of beneficence then hee should bee said to hate him whom hee loves best Lastly if the hating of Esau bee interpreted lesse loving why may not the loving of Jacob by the same liberty bee interpreted the lesse hating of him Amongst Gods elect some are more beloved of God and some lesse according as hee ordaines one to greater grace and glory then another and is it fit to attribute that to Esau which wee attribute to Gods elect I grant that to subject Esau to Jacob as a servant is not to reprobate him for this subjection is made in time But reprobation as wee take it in opposition to election Ephes 1. 4. was made before all times It is your own phrase to distinguish the world of mankinde from the elect as if the elect were none of the world of mankinde For the very elect themselves are subjected as servants to the elect every one unto others though as great as Paul and Apollo as appeares by the very place your self have now in a contrary sense alledged more then once And who doubts that wee must all serve one another through love since Christ himself was content to wash his Disciples feete Lastly the yoke of Esau unto Jacob was at length shaken off as appeares by Isaacs prophesie it should bee but the yoke of subjection of all things unto the Church shall never bee shaken off But you perceive well enough that the discourse which you answer considered this temporall preferment which yet had course onely in their seed onely in a typicall manner as that which under temporall things prefigured spirituall and accordingly you proceed to shape your answer thereunto in that respect also The same is this Though God had no purpose to deale with Esau as hee dealt with Jacob that is to communicate glory unto him out of grace yet hee had a purpose of communicating glory unto him some other way and what can that bee but of communicating glory unto him not out of grace A very strange assertion and therefore no marvell you spared to set it down in so many words Onely you say that the putting him into the state of a servant did not reprobate him or argue a purpose to passe him by in respect of
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
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