not how the nature hereof hitherunto can be sayd to hinder the entire possession of our selves whether contemplation be vaine or not vaine whether it be used as a pledge of a better life to come or no I see no reason why it hindreth or furthereth the possession of our selves though it hinder or further our possessing of God Certainly that life to come is no part of our selves like as eternall death is no part of the damned selves But eternall life is a condition that God bestowes upon us and everlasting death is a juste recompence which God inflicts upon others Yet in what sense contemplation may be used as you say as a pledge of a better life to come I am to seeke The Spirit of God and the fruits of sanctification are the pledges and earnest penyes hereof but contemplations are not How Angells are sayd entirely to possesse their angelicall natures and men not to possesse their natures entirely hath neede of explication Angells have no bodies and consequently are not capable of augmentation as we are In this sense I conceave how we by degrees attaine to a fulnes of age Angells doc not There is a growth of our soules in knowledge also Eph. 4. 13. in grace 2 Pet. 3. last This fulnesse of age is not all at once in us you suppose it is so in Angels but without distinction for there are Angels of darknesse as well as Angels of light What thinke you of Angels of darknesse doe they entirely possesse their Angelicall nature or no I should think they differ not in nature Angelicall though their accidentall condition bee much different As for the elect Angels doe you thinke they doe already possesse all that may belong unto them either in respect of knowledge or glory It appeares Eph. 3. 10. that the verie Angels themselves doe encrease in knowledge and that by the Church It seemes also that though they are void of sinne and so void of sorrow in respect of themselves yet that all teares are not wiped from their eyes in respect of us for if there bee joy in heaven for one sinner that repenteth what is there in respect of the falls of Gods children No question but the nature of man at best is inferiour to the nature of an Angell And on the other side as little question is to be made I should thinke whether man shall not be as happie in his kinde as the elect Angels in their kinde in the 20. of Luke our Saviour professeth that the time shall come when we shall be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 like unto the Angells Gods infinity is nothing pertinent to the comparison of men and Angels from whom Angels as well as men are infinitely distant as the creature from the Creator yet this infinity of Gods joy is vainly amplified by saying he wanteth no moment of time to enlarge or perfect it by continuance whereas time is no measure suitable with the being of God no nor with the being of Angels Yet God hath continuance it cannot be denied both without beginning and in respect of being without end which is an essentiall perfection of God as much as any as being but the interpretation of his necessary being whereas all the being of a creature is meerly by the free will of God and yet continuance to the creature addes no perfection For will you say that the Angells and Saints of God in heaven doe grow more and more perfect by continuance In this world for a while we grow more and more perfect by continuance But then againe it is as true that by continuance we decay more and more both in body and minde Aristotle hath said that Bonum non ideo melius quia diuturnius But of the transcendentall goodnesse of God you say you now intreat not but of the transcendentall goodnesse of the creature which you make to consist in doing good to others and withall you deliver another maxime namely that amongst visible creatures the better every one is in its kinde or according to its entitative perfection the more good it doth to others And I confesse this latter stands in much congruity with the former But I have already shewed my dislike of the former and given reason for it and I see no reason to embrace the latter A Lyon is the king of beasts but of more good hee doth to others then the inferiour beasts whereon he preyeth I am nothing conscious An Eagle is the king of birds yet we commonly say that a Larke is better then a Kite What creature more profitable then the Sunne yet I pray consider doth not a Mouse or an Emmet or a Fly in entitative perfection go beyond it for these are animate the Sun is not though God sends him forth as his most conspicuous and goodly messenger every morning like a bridegroom bedeckt with light comelines as you are pleased to expatiate or take the aire breath your self in a rhetoricall flourish God himselfe to the contemplation of whom the Sunne you say doth invite us though from the boundlesse Ocean of his internall joy and happinesse as you say sweet streames of perpetuall joy and comfort more uncessantly issue then light from the Sunne to refresh this vale of misery Yet I hope you will not say his entitative goodnes consists in doing good to others For before he made the world he was no lesse good then since the creation and though he had never made it yet had he continued every way as good as now he is And in that dispensation of this his goodnesse which proceeds not from his joy and happinesse though you say so but from the counsell and freedome of his will though as touching the comforts of this life God maketh his raine to fall and Sun to shine as well upon the wicked as upon the righteous yet as touching the dispensation of his grace though he be most good that way also yet it is but towards whom he will for that Oracle of God I will have mercy on whom I will and againe He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth must sway more with us then any vaine conceit or imagination of man to the contrary And why doe you call this world a vale of misery is it not in respect of Gods jugements as well as in respect of sinne which judgements of God have their course as well as mercies how then doth perpetuall joy and comfort more uncessantly issue from him then light from the Sunne to refresh this vale of misery Surely as the Prophet said his song should bee of mercy and of judgement so doth God also sometimes mourne unto us that we may weepe as well as at other times draw us to dance after his pipe You conclude with telling us the causes why men are not so happy as they might be The one is you say That they doe not beleeve the eternall happinesse of their Creator to bee absolutely infinite as his other
that he had cursed them already And equally and indifferently as God is made the Author of blessing to the obedient so is he made the Author of a curse to the disobedient and therefore calls heaven and earth to witnesse that hee hath set before them life and death blessing and cursing So that death and cursing is indifferently attributed to God as the Author of them like as life and blessing and both are in due proportion to the behaviour of man as it is found either in the way of obedience or in the way of disobedience And in this respect perhaps you may say that man is the cause of cursing not God To this I answer 1. By the same reason man is the cause of blessing suitable to this cursing and not God 2. If in this respect cursing be to be derived from sin it is onely in the way of a meritorious cause so doth not fruit proceed from trees but onely in the way of an efficient cause God and none but God can be the Author as of happinesse so of misery as of eternall life so also of everlasting death And as none is truly blessed but whom God blesseth so none is truly accursed but whom God curseth Yet no man I thinke that hath his wits in his head will say that this cursing proceedeth from Gods love but rather from his hatred Gods love towards the creature is essentiall his love to the creature is not so no more then to be a creator is of Gods essence And love is no more of Gods essence as a Creator then hatred is of Gods essence as a revenger And the blessing and cursing attributed unto God in the Scriptures before alledged belong to God onely as a Iudge to execute the one by way of reward and the other by way of punishment Albeit there is another course of Gods blessing and of his cursing though you love not to distinguish but to consound rather as all that maintaine bad causes love darknesse rather then light I come to the second point wherein you insist In that he is the Author of being he is the Author of goodnesse to all things that are And this is very true for God saw all that he had made and lo it was very good And as it is very true so it is nothing at all to the purpose For when we enquire whether Gods love be extended towards all and every one wee presuppose their beings in their severall times and generations And secondly we speake of a love proper to mankinde which consisteth not in giving them their being for God hath given being unto Angels even unto Devils as well as unto men and as to men so to all inferiour creatures be they never so noysome and offensive unto man And it is a strange course of yours to magnifie the love of God to man in giving him being which is found in the basest creature that breathes or breathes not I have heard a story of a great Prince when one of the prime subjects of the land being taken in a foule act of insurrection and yeelding upon condition to bee brought to speake with that Prince presuming of ancient favour whereof hee had tasted in great measure and which upon his presence might haply revive he found nothing answerable but imperious taâ—ts rather and dismission in this manner Know therefore that we hate thee as we hate a toad Yet you magnifie the love of God to mankinde in as comfortable manner when you say that hoe hath given us being which wee well know God hath given to lyons rigers and beasts of prey yea to snakes and adders to frogges and toads and fiery serpents Herehence you proceed to the third point and do inferre That because he hath made us therefore hee loveth us for He hateth nothing that he hath made as saith the wise man and to give the greater credit to the authority alledged by you you use an introduction of strange state for you say The wiseman saith this of him that is wisest of all of him that can neither deceive nor be deceived that He hateth nothing that he hath made But to what purpose tends all this pompe Is the sentence any whit of greater authority because it is spoken of him that is wisest of all and can neither deceive nor be deceived May not fooles speake of him that can neither deceive nor be deceived as well as wise men and have their sayings any whit the greater credit and reputation for this If the author of that sentence had beene such a one as neither could deceive nor be dedeceived then indeed the sentence had beene of greatest authority and infinitely beyond the authority of Philo the Iew. Or did you presume that your Reader inconsiderately might swallow such a gull take the author of it for such a one as could neither deceive nor be deceived If you did this were very foule play and no better then a trick of conicatching Yet we except not against the sentence but pray you rather to take notice of an answer to this very objection of yours taken from the same ground above two hundred yeares ago You shall finde it in Aquinas his summes where his first objection is this Videtur quod Deus nullum hominem reprobet Nullus enim reprobat quem diligit sed Deus omnem hominem diligit secundum illud Sap. 11. Diligis omnia quae sunt nihil odisti eorum quae secisti Ergo Deus nullum hominem reprobat It seemes that God reprobates no man For no man reprobates him whom hee loveth But God loves every man according to that Wis. 11. Thou lovest all things that are and hatest nothing that thou hast made Therefore God reprobateth no man And the answer hee makes unto this objection followeth in this manner Adprimum dicendum quod Deus omnes homines diliget etiam omnes creaturas in quantum omnibus vult aliquod bonum non tamen quodcunque bonum vult omnibus In quantum igitur quibusdam non vult hoc bonum quod est vita aeterna dicitur eos habere odio velreprobare To the first is to be answered that God loves all men yea and all creatures for as much as he willeth some good to them all but yet he willeth not every good to all There-fore in as much as unto some he willeth not this good which is life everlasting he is said to hate them or to reprobate them And you might have beene pleased to take notice not onely of that wise man though as wise as Philo who speakes herein of him that can neither deceive nor be deceived but of that wise God who is wiser then men and Angels and can neither deceive nor be deceived and affirmeth openly that He hath loved Iacob and hated Esau as also of the Apostle Saint Paul who by the infallible direction of Gods Spirit applies this to the disposition of God towards them before they were borne
Ezek. 14. 23. They shall comfort you when you see their way and their enterprises and ye shall know that I have not done without cause all that I have done in it saith the Lord God Secondly when God doth chastise not as parents for their owne pleasures but with an eye to the good of those whom hee chastiseth Rom. 12. 10. According thereto is that of Augustine Qui trucidat non considerat quemadmodum laniet sed qui curat considerat quemadmodum seret This is my answer following the course of your owne reading of the place whereas Piscator blames the vulgar translation in this place which you follow for saith hee in the Hebrew it is not I will not the death of a sinner but this I am not delighted in the death of a sinner But saith he A man may will that wherein he takes no delight as a ficke man may will to drinke a bitter potion wherein he takes no delight For he may will to take it not for it selfe but for something else to wit to recover his health And so God willeth the eternall death of reprobates for his owne glory to wit for the manifestation of his just wrath in punishing of their sinnes And Iunius reades it and translates it in like manner and with these accordeth our last English translation As I live saith the Lord God I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked but that the wicked turne from his way and live Ezek. 33. 11. And the 18. of Ezekiel doth cleare the meaning of the Holy Ghost where the same phrase is used and in the same manner translated by our worthiest Divines and followed in our last translation vers 23. Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should dye saith the Lord God and not that hee should returne from his waies and live and verse 32. I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth saith the Lord God wherefore turne your selves and live ye Now in this chapter the Lord justifieth himselfe against an imputation of harsh if not unjust dealing as if hee punished the children for the sinnes of their fathers which in a proverbiall manner was delivered thus The fathers have eaten sowre grapes and the childrens teeth are set on edge which might occasion a desperate disposition in them and provoke them to cast off all care of amending their waies and turning to God by repentance because all was one whether they repented or repented not because the sowre grapes which their fathers had eaten were enough to set all their teeth on edge Against this the Lord made a solemne protestation that all soules were his even the soules of the children as well as the soules of the fathers and that the soule that sinned that should dye and hereupon expostulates with them thus Have I any pleasure in the death of a sinner to wit so as to bring death upon him notwithstanding his repentance because forsooth his father had eaten sowre grapes No no the Lord hath no delight in their death but if they returne and live hee delights in that and therefore concludes with exhorting them to returne unto the Lord that they may live Now when you forsake the translation of our Church and slicke unto the Vulgar corrupt translation to hold up your odde conceits doth it become you to make question whether they that oppose you in your extravagant tenents and proofes have subscribed to the booke of Common Prayer Piscator proceedeth further and saith that the meaning is not simply that God delights not in the death of the wicked but in case he ceaseth not from his iniquity as appeares saith he by comparing of it with that which goeth before and with that which commeth after for otherwise God takes delight in all his workes like as Lyra upon Ezech. 18. Punitio improbitatis bene est à Deo volita quia justa In Proverbs 1. 26. thus we reade I will laugh at your destruction and mocke when your feare commeth How are these places to bee reconciled Piscator answereth God is not delighted in the death of man as it is the destruction of the creature but is delighted therein as it is the just punishment of the creature which is as much as to say he delights in the execution of his owne Iustice like as wee reade Ier. 9. 24. Let him that glorieth glorie in this that he understandeth and knoweth me For I am the Lord which shew mercy and judgement and righteousnesse in the earth for in these things I delight saith the Lord. 4. Now as if you had made all sure on your side partly out of our authorized devotions wherein you make choice of three prayers whereof two are nothing to the purpose and the third at your uttermost straining of it doth but encourage you to conclude finally that God wils not the death but the life rather of them that of Infidels are made Christians and partly out of the Catechisme where you finde that Christ hath redeemed all mankinde which hath no coloutable extent further then all men and without manifest opposition to Austin you finde this phrase will not serve your turne whom yet you oppose so as without answering any one of his arguments one whereof was drawne from analogie of Scripture phrase another from manifest reason professing therewithall that your construction of this place contradicts the prime Article of the Creed And last of all driving the naile of your discourse home with a concludent proofe depending upon a translation of the text quite different from the most authentique translation of our Church which yet must be without prejudice to your conformity having a sound heart of your owne and therefore some peccadilies may bee well borne withall and you take liberty to question others your opposites whether they have subscribed or no to the booke of Common Prayer such is the height of your imperious cariage bearing downe all before you Now you come to enquire By what will God doth will they should be saved that are not saved and you demand whether God doth will their salvation by his revealed and not by his secret will As if this were our opinion whereas neither Calvin embraceth it nor Beza nor Piscator but all concurre upon that interpretation which Austin gave many hundred yeares agoe and which you impugne and how judiciously we have already considered Peter Martyr proposeth it amongst divers others but embraceth it not neither doe I know any Divine of ours that embraceth it Cajetan indeed embraceth it and Cornelius de Lapide and Aquinas amongst other interpretations As you doubt whether your opposites have subscribed to the booke of Common prayer so if you take a liberty to put upon us the opinions and accommodations of distinctions used by Papists you may in the next place make doubt whether wee have not subscribed to the Councell of Trent We plainly deny that God doth will the salvation of any but of his elect For to
for him to repent I know no such state nor any rule that God hath given to himselfe to confine his grace Nay to the contrary we reade that neither continuance in sinne nor greatnesse of sinne doth preclude the grace of God but that Gods grace as it can so it doth many times prevaile over both But you love not to speake distinctly but to carie your selfe in the clouds of generalities They that maintaine a weake cause had need play least in sight wee say plainly that God well knowes no man can repent except he gives the grace of repentance the Scriptures in divers places expresly testifying that repentance is the gift of God though you love not to heare of that eare nor are well pleased as it seemes with the musique that riseth upon the touching of that string On the other side God knowes that every man at any time can repent if God will be pleased to give him the grace of repentance yea and that he shall repent also the habituall grace serves for the one and the actuall and effectuall motion of Gods Spirit is requisite to the other I come to the second parallell of Iesuiticall equivocation or rather the deification of it as you are pleased out of glorious spleene to calumniate your opposites The protestation is on Gods part I will not the nonrepentance of him that dieth the reservation with purpose to make this part of my will knowne unto him But where I pray doe you finde any such protestation on Gods part Ezekiel hath none such In him it is said I will not the death of him that dieth But no where doth he say I will not the non repentance of him that dieth This is a tricke of your owne device as if you followed the counsell of Lysander and where the Lyons skinne will not reach you are content to patch it up with some piece of a Fox skinne Wee professe in plaine termes that as God hath mercy on whom he will so he hardneth whom he will and as he will give the grace of repentance unto some so he will not give the grace of repentance unto others Notwithstanding that he bid all in the ministery of his word I meane all those that heare it To repent and beleeve the Gospel So he did bid the Iewes and that with great earnestnesse to keepe the covenant Deut. 30. 19. I call heaven and earth to record this day against you that I have set before you life and death blessing and cursing therefore chuse life that both thou and thy seed may live By loving the Lord thy God by obeying his voice and cleaving unto him for hee is thy life and the length of thy daies that thou maiest dwell in the land which the Lord did sweare unto thy fathers ' Yet I hope you will not say this could be done without grace though of the nature of grace what you thinke and of the universall extention thereof I should be very glad to understand and that therein you would speake your minde plainly As for the reservation here it is most ridiculous neither is any equivocation of Iesuites I trow answerable hereunto for by reservations a sense is raised contradictious to the sense of the protestation but by this reservation no contradiction ariseth to the former as it lieth but onely it denyeth a certaine purpose to be joyned with it but be it that Iesuits allow such artifice what Divine of ours doth Did we say that God wills not the non repentance of any we would say hee willeth it not in as much as hee forbiddeth it And Gods prohibitions and commandements are usually though improperly called the will of God And here voluntas signi hath proper place enough Like as God commanded Abraham to sacrifice his sonne yet his determination was that Isaac should not be sacrificed Some may have said that God willeth not the death of him that dyeth in case he repent But was ever any heard to affirme that God wills not the non repentance of him that dieth to wit with purpose to make it knowne unto him What madnesse possessed you to ascribe so incredible a thing to your opposites so contrary to the rule of fiction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Callimachus hath set it downe Your addition here likewise which drawes a long taile after it hath no conformity to the patterne And as for the substance of it as touching Gods resolution never to grant some repentance or the meanes of it if thereby you meane the Gospel we acknowledge it to be truth for the arme of the Lord is not revealed unto all neither doth he give repentance or faith to all but hath mercy on some onely even on whom hee will and hardenneth othersome even whom he will that is denieth them repentance and consequently they cannot repent which interpretation of obduration your selfe make in the seventh section following and consequently they cannot live this I doubt not but you will acknowledge with us And therefore the vanity of your discourse is not at an end you proceed to talke of Gods oath in giving assurance that he will not the death of them that are damned built meerly upon a translation which you follow different from the most authorized translation of our Church and that contrary to evident reason for seeing God doth inflict death and damnation upon the impenitent so hee must needs will it for hee doth all things according to the counsell of his owne will Ephesians 1. 11. And yet according to your reading of it a good construction may be given without all reservations as plainly enough deduced out of the word of God it selfe And what God hath manifested unto us in his word I hope is not to bee accounted a reservation but a revelation rather I am not of your minde to thinke that the keeping of an oath is a branch of perfection or to keepe a mans word either which yet is a better point of morality then to keepe an oath Such justice is to bee found amongst heathen men yet workes of mercy go beyond workes of justice yet no great perfection neither but to be mercifull to our enemies When they are hungry to feed them when they are thirsty to give them drinke this is the perfection that our Saviour calleth us unto and sets before our eyes the goodnes of our heavenly Father in suffering his raine to fall and his sunne to shine on the bad as well as on the good And here withall how well your calumniation hath sped imputing to us the deification of Iesuiticall equivocations let the indifferent Reader judge 6 Here you proceede learnedly to distinguish betweene somethings determined by oath and somethings else and in the accomodation of your distinction you tell us that Voluntas signi and beneplaciti can have no place in things determined by divine oath but well it may in other things What is the other member of your distinction opposite to things determined by
fullfilled in theire suffering how is it possible that this theire suffering of death should be against the will of God which yet you boldly affirm and that with such confidence as to breake out into a censure of them that thinke the contrary as if they did rather dreame then thinke the contrary And yet when you breake forth in avouching manifest contradiction would you have your reader conceave your selfe to be in a sober discourse waking or in a dreame sleeping Yet this is usuall in your writings 4. The mayne poynt proposed to wit how God without change of a loving Father becomes a severe judge you dispatched in a few words saying the change is wholly in man and therin giveing us your word for it and afterwards served your selfe with certayne illustrations nothing to the purpose And to refresh your spirits and get some breath you turned aside to the consideration of the proportion of mens punishments to theire sinnes poynts merely extravagant And now you take liberty to maintayne your extravagant discourse by inquiring how it stands with Gods justice to inflict eternall punishments for temporall sinnes VVe must be content to follow you in your wilde goose race For seeing we are in we must goe thorough and get out as we can Yet you acknowledge the doubt proposed nothing pertinent but to make matter of farther discourse you tell us it were pertinent if the immortall happinesse wherunto the riches of Gods bounty did dayly leade them here on earth had not farther exceeded the pleasure of this life then the paynes of Hell doe those grievances which caused them to murmur against theire heavenly Father You are very bold to acknowledge God to be the heavenly Father of the reprobates Whereas the Apostle professeth that we are all the children of God by faith in Christ Iesus Gal. 3. 25. And if sonnes then heyres even heyrs of God and coheyres with Christ. Rom. 8. Much more bold if because our Saviour Christ exhorts the Apostles to be like theire heavenly Father therfore you will acknowledge him the heavenly Father even of reprobates also This is by the way I come to the maine and say first were it so as you speake yet this doubt were nothing pertinent to this place of cleering God from innovation and change of nature as often as his tender love is turned into feirce wrath Secondly your argument contracted being this Immortall happinesse doth more exceede the pleasures of this life then the pains of Hell exceede the grievances of this life therfore it is impertinent to make a doubt how Gods justice doth appeare in inflicting eternall punishment for temporall sinne I see no just consequence at all in this I will drawe it to the best forme I can devise in congruity to your meaning which I desire to picke out as well as I can And that is this Theire obedience should be rewarded with infinite joy therefore theire obedience may be justly punished with infinite sorrow and no doubt is to be made hereof And this I confesse is more suitable speaking of the protension duration of each then of theire intension as you doe For though the joyes of Heaven were never so greate beyond the degree of sorrows of Hell Yet if they were not everlasting the comparison would not hold Because there could be but a finite difference betweene theire intensions for joys of man cannot be infinite in degree But if the one were everlasting the other not there should be an infinite difference in this And albeit the joys of Heaven were but of equall degree in proportion to the sorrows of bell Yet the argument would every whit proceede as well upon supposall of inequality and that of exuberancy on the part of joyes Now I will shew what exception may be taken against this First no laws of the World the execution whereof are reputed just doe or can proceede after any such proportion Let a man take a purse upon the high way or kill a man he shall dye for it Let him give tenn times as much to the poore let him save ten mens lives they neyther doe nor can reward in proportion to the punishment Let the greatest honour or any other kinde of rewards be heaped upon him all are inferiour to his life For all that ever a man hath he will give for his life But then you will say if it be just with man to punish with death though they cannot possibly administer rewards in any proportion therunto how much more is it just with God to punish with eternall death seeing be can and will reward obediency with eternall life And I nothing doubt but that it is just but the question is wherin consisteth this justice For it seemes that justice in this kinde should stand in reference to the worke and not be measured by any aliene consideration Especially considering that the question may be revived on the part of the reward For how stands it with justice to reward with everlasting blisse a temporall obedience so that still we shall be to seeke of the right measure of justice in this kinde Agayne if a Master shall say unto a servant doe such a thing and I will give thee an hundred pound it will not herehence follow that for his disobedience the Master may make him pay an hundred pound And the reason is because it is manifest that like as a man may give what he will freely so he may reward as liberally as he will But it is not so manifest that God himselfe mai doe what evill he will unto his creature and accordingly afflict what punishment he will for the transgression of his creature And therefore the reason that you give for justifying God in this is unsound and you seeme to be sensible of it when you desire to helpe your selfe with the consideration of mens multiplyed contempts of grace all which neverthelesse doe make up but a short continuance in sinne Besides that this consideration hath no place in such infants as perish in originall sinne You cannot find any neglect in them much lesse often and yet to say and barely to say That often and perpetuall neglects turnes slames of eternall love into an eternall consuming fire is to please your selfe in your own dictates but to proove nothing The same song you sing still when you tell us the oftner God pardons a man the greater is his wrath against impenitency save that the prosequution of it is more absurd then the former For it hath reference rather to the intention of his wrath which is greater or lesse according to the qualities of mens sinnes not to the protension and duration of it which is equall to all But by the way where I pray doth it appeare that God doth often pardon the sinnes of reprobates or that he doth at all pardon them Doth God pardon any sinnes without repentance Or are the reprobates at any time brought by God unto repentance I am sure Austine professeth the
as by those Christians that doe believe it And as for the making of the world it is in holy Scripture the language of God attributed to the word of God to the breath of God to the wisedome of God to the power of God to the counsell of God but never that I know ascribed to the goodnesse of God And it had need of explication to shew how Gods goodnesse is communicated unto all much more how it is communicated unto a stone yet the earth is filled with his goodnesse in as much as God provides for every thing that which is good for it so that whatsoever we partake of for our comfort wee call it Gods goodnesse for as much as things which are good to us are derived to us from God and therein we have a taste of his goodnesse towards us in that he doth good unto us Your last position I have heretofore spoken of and shewed the incongruity of it That which is good and that whereunto it is good must be different but the entitie of any thing is not different from it selfe and therefore it cannot be good unto it selfe as you affirme 8. God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 serus irarum slow to wrath even against sinners that dishonour him to his face But to say hee is never swayed to sudden revenge is a more bold assertion then sound Did not Zimri and Cosbi perish in their incestuous act and give up both lust and ghost together without leisure to enjoy their sinne much lesse respite for repentance Perhaps you will say their persons were formerly forborne notwithstanding former sinnes though the vengeance of God cannot be denied to be most sudden So perished Herod in his pride and Balthasar in his revellings and the Israelites in the wildernesse while the meat was in their mouthes and the delicate flesh of Quailes lay betweene their teeth the heavy wrath of God came upon them and before they could swallow their sweet morsels sent them to the graves of lust to bee swallowed by them Againe Sodome and Gomorrah were consumed with fire from heaven were not some children in their mothers wombs some hanging at their mothers breasts some newly come to the use of reason all consumed to ashes and made an example of Gods wrath and suffered the vengeance of eternall fire as Inde speaketh Here is no forbearance of divers particular persons so it was in the daies of Noah so shall it bee at the comming of the Sonne of man for while they shall say peace and safetie sudden destruction shall come upon them as sorrow upon a woman in travaile and they shall not escape The difference you make betweene man and God I like well man by forbearance may bereave himselfe of power to execute vengeance God cannot and this is a good reason of his forbearance towards the verie reprobates but towards his elect a power exercised in another kind yet a power too namely to sanctifie the consideration of his forbearance to bring them unto repentance as also a power to provide for satisfaction to be made for their sinnes by the blood of his Sonne A sentence related out of the booke of Wisedome ch 12. 15 16 you say is canonicall although the Author bee not a distinction that I never read nor heard of before And if the truth of a sentence be sufficient to make it canonical the canonicall Scriptures shal be multiplied unreasonably not out of the book of Wisdome only but out of the rest of the works of Philo the Iew and Iosephus too yea and out of Senecaes workes and Plutarchs morals not to speake of Plato and Aristotle or your Plotinus But let us consider this canonicall sentence you speake of and weigh the truth of it in the ballance of the Sanctuarie I pray wherein had our Saviour Christ and the Sonne of God deserved to be punished And did not God thinke you thinke it agreeable to his power to condemne him notwithstanding his innocencie and his fervent prayers to be delivered from that cup but with submission to the will of his Father I pray consider the martyrdome of Gods Saints were their punishmēts according to their deserts Nay what thinke you is it not agreeable to Gods power to annihilate the holiest man that ever was yet wee doe not say that God condemnes any man that hath not deserved to be punished the Sonne of God and our Saviour onely excepted But the desert of eternall death is not onely in sinne actuall but in sinne originall also which Pelagius did not say Arminius doth not whether you doe or no I know not the latter clause which is this Because thou art the Prince of all it maketh thee to be gracious to all makes a shew to plead for universall grace I cannot tell whether you licke your lips at this yet the author of the booke could not be ignorant what a difference as touching the participation of his grace God had put betweene the Iewes and the Gentiles for He had shewed his word unto Iacob his statutes and ordinances unto Israel But hee had not dealt so with every nation neither had the Heathen knowledge of his lawes And the Apostle who undoubtedly was canonicall to speake in your owne phrase hath plainly professed that God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth And as for the reason here used drawne from this that he is Lord of all the Apostle himselfe taketh notice of it but in a different manner Rom. 10. 12. There is no difference between the Jew and the Grecian for he that is Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him and who are they that call upon him but they that beleeve in him for it followeth How can they call upon him in whom they have not beleeved Yet like as it is the part of parents not onely to bring children forth but after to provide for their bringing up so God doth not onely make things but also preserveth them and for their preservation causeth the Sunne to shine and his raine to fall as well on the wicked as on the just alwaies provided that even this providence of God is to be dispensed of no other right but meerly according to the good pleasure of his owne will For what grace was shewed to infants either unborne or hanging at their mothers breasts which perished in the flood and in the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by fire from heaven and therefore though there were sixscore thousand persons in Ninivie that could not discerne betweene the right hand and the left and also much cattell yet God was not bound to spare them And can you doubt but as many as these if not in Sodome and Gomorra yet at least or rather many more perished in Noahs flood Yet by the way this sparing of the Ninivites was but as touching salvation temporall not spirituall You have but trifled a long time now you beginne to bee serious yet in little or no
onely voluntate signi that he doth not will it is voluntate beneplaciti and this will which is called the will of good pleasure is onely the will of God in proper speech and that S. Paul speakes of when he saith Who hath resisted his will the other to wit voluntas signi is improperly though usually called the will of God It being indeed nothing else but Gods commandement in which sense he willed Abraham to sacrifice his sonne yet who doubts but that it was Gods will in proper speech that Isaak should not be sacrificed And because you perceived how easily the shew of contradiction might be washed off if it were proposed in this manner therfore you made bold upon dame Logicke and without her leave and in despight of her faine a contradiction under another forme by way of consequence which indeed proves most inconsequent Thirdly you speake in a strange language when you say that the affirmation and negation of salvation falling upon the personall being of men containes contradiction implying that it might fall otherwise then upon the personall being of men and in that case it would not prove contradictious both which are not onely untrue but absurd also For the affirmation of the salvation of man cannot fall otherwise then upon the person of man and consequently upon the personall being of man whatsoever be the cause of it which cause you most preposterously conceive to give unto man a being different from his personall being whereupon and not upon his personall being his salvation should fall Againe no distinction of personall being and other being will serve your turne to save the affirmation and negation of salvation of one and the same man from contradiction I say of one and the same man which is of principall consideration in the course of contradiction and yet wholly permitted by you in this proposition though therein you talke of the strictest point of contradiction Straine your invention while you will you shall never be able to free these propositions from contradiction Peter shall be saved Peter shall not be saved But to change the nature of these propositions and of absolute to make them conditionall thus Peter shall be saved if he beleeve and repent Peter shall not be saved if he beleeve and repent not is neither to affirme nor deny the salvation of Peter For to affirme or deny the salvation of Peter is categoricall not hypotheticall What you want of force of argument you supply with devotion as if you came to enchant your reader and not to informe him as when you say Farre be it from us to thinke that God should sweare to this universall negative I will not the death of him that dieth and yet beleeve withall that he wils the death of some men that die as they are men or as they are the sonnes of Adam This is proposed by way of an holy and confident asseveration but consider how sottish it is and most averse from sobriety For first what if God had not sworne it but onely said it had there been the lesse truth in it for this Is not Gods word sure enough without an oath yet before wee heard that in things determined by divine oath the distinction of voluntas signi and voluntas beneplaciti could have no place Secondly where were your logicall wits when you said this was an universall negative I will not the death of a sinner I pray examine your rules well and see whether it bee not a singular will you measure the quantity of a proportion by the predicate and not rather by the subject Yet if you should doe so it would not serve your turne For both Aristotle of old hath taught us that it is absurd to put an universall signe to the predicate and here is no universality added either to the whole predicate which is Nolens mortem peccatoris nor to any part of it which you seeme to confound For he that dyeth is a terme indefinite Neither is it in a necessary matter For the most holy Angell God could turne into nothing if it pleased him And in the 18. chapter of Ezekiel it is apparant that this is restrained to him that repenteth without any mentall reservation but by plaine evidence of the Text it selfe Thirdly you harpe upon a false string and an erroneous translation as it were in spight of the most authorized translation of our owne Church and follow the vulgar Latine herein And withall in opposition to manifest reason to the contrary for seeing God doth inflict death and damnation upon every one that dyeth and is damned and he doth all things according to the counsell of his owne will Eph. 1. 11. it is impossible he should doe any thing and not will it that he should inflict death on him that dieth and not will it Fourthly be it as you will have it that God doth not will the death of him that dieth will you herehence inferre that God willeth not the death of him that dyeth as man or as the son of Adam implying that notwithstanding hee may will the death of him that dieth in some other respect without any prejudice to his oath what a senselesse collection and interpretation is this You may as well say God willeth the life of him that liveth ergo farre be it from us to say that hee willeth not the life of him that liveth as he is a man or as he is the son of Adam implying that for all this God may be said not to will the life of him that liveth in some other respect But I say that if God willeth not the death of any man that dieth as you will have it and to be confirmed also with the Lords oath then in no respect can it be said that hee willeth the death of any man that dieth For it is both ad idem death is the same in both and it is secundum idem for we speak of the same man in both and it is eodem modo for we speake of the will of God in the same sense in both and it is at the same time and must be for Gods will is everlasting and therefore willing whatsoever he doth everlastingly he cannot bee said at any time not to will it As for the cause of death and damnation willed by God we maintaine that God willeth not the death of any man or the condemnation of any man but for sinne But I pray what thinke you of infants perishing in originall sin If Goth doth not will their death as the sonnes of Adam how doth he will it Or had you rather shake hands with Arminius in this also and professe that no man is damned for originall sinne onely but that all the children of Turkes and Sarazens and Iewes and Caniballs that die in their infancie are saved and enjoy the joyes of heaven as well as the children of the faithfull You proceede in your devout asseveration and will have it to bee farre from us to thinke