he the Lord knoweth Now who doubts but that our doctrine of justification by faith and not by workes may be an occasion to some to abuse the grace of God unto wantonnesse such there were even in the Apostles daies but what Shall we therefore renounce that doctrine I am not yet come to the tempering of the manner of proposing this doctrine I have more to say before I come to that What difference is there in harshnesse between these doctrines If ye doe not believe therefore ye doe not believe because God hath ordained you to destruction and this If ye doe not believe therefore ye doe not believe because God hath not regenerated you Let any man shew how a doore is open to slothfulnesse more by the one then by the other especially considering the ground of all is mans inability to believe without this grace of God effectually preventing and working him unto faith Now this doctine is plainly taught and that particularly of certain persons to their faces Ioh 8. He that is of God heareth Gods word ye therefore heare them not because ye are not of God The phrase to be of God I interpret here of regeneration but both Austin of old and our Divines of late doe interpret of election and so it is precisely the same with the Preaching of reprobation in his true colours as this Author interprets it and passeth this censure upon it as opening a doore to liberty and profanenesse which may I confesse well be occasionally to carnall men or to men possest with prejudicate opinions yet here it appears plainly to be in effect the same with that which our Saviour himselfe Preached But take this withall as it may be an occasion of slothfulnesse so it may be a meanes to humble men and beat them out of the presumptuous conceit of their own sufficiency to heare Gods word to believe to repent and the like and thereby to prepare them to look up unto God and to waite for him in his ordinances if so be as the Angell came downe to move the waters in the poole of Bethesda to make them medicinable so Gods spirit may come downe and make his word powerfull to the regenerating of them to the working of faith and repentance in them And I appeale to every sober mans judgement whether to this end tended not the very like Doctrine and admonition proposed by Moses to the Children of Israel in the Wildernesse Deut. 29. 2 3 4. Ye have seen all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharaoh and all his servants and unto all his Land The great temptations which thine eyes have seene those great miracles and wonders Yet the Lord hath not given you a heart to perceive and eyes to see and eares to heare unto this day For is it not Moses his purpose to set before their eyes how little they have profited in obedience and thankfulnesse unto God and amendment of life by all those great workes of his in the way of mercy towards them and in the way of judgement towards the Egyptians And what was the cause of all this but the hardnesse of their hearts and the blindnesse of their eyes and to what end doth he tell them that God alone can take away this hardnesse of heart and blindnesse of mind which hitherto he had not done Might he not seem to justify them in walking after the hardnesse of their hearts by this and harden them therein by this Doctrine of his like as this Author casts the like aspersion in part upon the like Doctrine of ours Yet Moses passeth not for this so he might set them in a right course to be made partakers of Gods grace and that by the ministry of the Law to humble and prepare them for the grace of God which is the Evangelicall use of the Law And it is remarkable that in the first verse of this Chapter these words are said to be the words of the Covenant which the Lord commanded Moses to make with the Children of Israel in the land of Moab beside the Covenant which he made with them in Horeb. Wherefore seeing the Covenant made in Horeb was the Covenant of the Law it followeth that this Covenant is the Covenant of grace and these words are the words of the Covenant of grace which is plainly expressed in the next Chapter v. 6. And the Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart and the heart of thy seed that thou maiest love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soule that thou maiest live And what is the usuall preparation hereunto but to humble men by convicting them of sinne and of their utter inability to help themselves and that nothing but Gods grace is able to give them an heart to perceive and eyes to see and eares to heare But yet because we doe not speake in the same measure of the spirit and of power as Moses and our Saviour did therefore we labour to decline all harshnesse as much as lyeth in our power where we see occasion is like to be taken of offence Therefore first as touching this discourse of Calvins If you believe not therefore it is because you are already destinated unto damnation I say this is untrue more waies then one First if he conceives destination unto damnation goes before Gods decree to deny faith this I utterly deny and have already proved that in no moment of reason doth the decree of damnation precede the decree of denying grace Therefore Gods decree to deny them grace is rather the cause why they believe not then the decree of damnation Secondly whether we take it of the one or of the other or of both yet the proposition is utterly untrue For it doth not follow that because a man doth not as yet believe therefore God hath decreed to deny him faith and because he hath so decreed therefore he denies him faith For he that believes not to day may believe to morrow Saul was sometimes a persecutor of Gods Church but was it at that time lawfull to conclude that because he did not then believe therefore he was destinated unto damnation so that the reason indeed is either because God hath not decreed at all to give them faith or because the time which God hath ordained for their conversion is not yet come This is so cleare that Calvin himselfe were he alive would not gainsay upon consideration Neither doth he justify this discourse but only saith we must be more wise then so to discourse to our Auditors But this Author in saying this is to set downe our doctrine of reprobation in its colours delivers that which is shamefully untrue and nothing sutable with our doctrine More necre to the matter we should say rather That like as therefore a man heareth Gods word because he is of God that is as I interpret it because he is regenerated of God so therefore men heare them not because they are not of
for me includes many things as the benefits which arise unto me by the death of Christ may be conceived to be many But let these benefits be distinguished and we shall readily answer to the question made and that perhaps differently as namely affirmatively to some negatively to others as thus Doe you speak of Christs dying for me that is for the pardon of my sins and for the salvation of my soule I answer affirmatively and say I am bound to believe that Christ died for the procuring of these benefits unto me in such manner as God hath ordained to wit not absolutely but conditionally to wit in case I doe believe and repent For God hath not otherwise ordained that I should reap the benefit of pardon and salvation by vertue of Christs Death and Passion unlesse I believe in him and repent But if question be made whether I am bound to believe that Christ died for me to procure faith and repentance unto me I doe not say that I am bound or that every one who hears the Gospel is bound to believe this Nay the Remonstrants now a daies deny in expresse tearmes that Christ merited this for any at all I am not of their opinion in this but I see clearly a reason manifesting that Christ merited not this for all no not for all and every one that hears the Gospel For if he had then either he hath merited it for them absolutely or conditionally Not absolutely for then all and every one of them should believe de facto which is untrue for the Apostle saith Fides non est Omnium Nor conditionally for what condition I pray can be devised upon the performance whereof God for Christs sake should give us faith and repentance In like sort if I am demanded whether God did decree of the meer pleasure of his will to refuse to give grace and glory unto some and to inflict upon them damnation To this I cannot answer at once there being a Fallacy in the demand But distinguish them I answer and say that as touching the poynt of denying grace God doth that of his meer pleasure but as touching the denyall of glory and the inflicting of damnation he doth not decree to doe these of meer pleasure but rather meerly for sin to wit for their infidelity and impenitency and all the bitter fruits that shall proceed from them So that Reprobation according to our Tenent rightly stated is the decree of God partly to deny unto some and that of his meer pleasure the grace of Faith and Repentance for the curing of that infidelity and hardnes of heart which is naturall unto all and partly to deprive them of glory and to inflict damnation upon them not of his meer pleasure but meerly for their finall continuance in sin to wit in infidelity and impenitency and all the fruits that proceed therehence 2. Now as for the cause of this decree as likewise of all the decrees of God when any of our Divines say that it is the meer pleasure of God as in some places it is expressed of some decrees let them be understood aright not as if they distinguished between the decree of God and the good pleasure of his will for we know full well that the decree of God is the good pleasure of his Will what decree soever it be but hereby we only exclude all causes from without moving God to make any such decree like as when it is said Deuteron 7. 7. The Lord did not set his love upon you nor chuse you because ye were more in number then any people but because the Lord loved you as much as to say The Lord loved you because he loved you Where we cannot soberly devise any distinction between love and love as between the cause and the effect only hereby is excluded all cause from without Now we are ready with open face to professe that of the Will and decree of God there neither is nor can be any cause from without all things from without being temporall and the Will of God being eternall and the Will of God quoad actum Volentis being the very Essence of God For God is a pure Act and that indivisibly One whereby he is said to Bee whatsoever he is as wee doe conceive variety of perfections in God yet all these are but one indivisible Act in God and by this one indivisible Act he both knowes all that he knowes and willeth and decreeth all that he willeth and decreeth Man when he willeth any thing as likewise an Angel when he willeth ought they produce an act of willing passing upon this or that object but it is not so with God in whom there is no accident And therefore Aquinas was bold to professe that never any man was so mad as to professe that merits were the cause of Predestination as touching the act of God predestinating and why so why surely upon this ground because predestination is the will of God and like as nothing can be the cause of the will of God as touching the act of willing so nothing can be the cause of divine predestination as touching the act of God predestinating His words are these in the same place Sic inquirenda est ratio praedestinationis sicut inquiritur ratio divinae voluntatis dictum est autem suprà quod non est assignare causam divinae voluntatis ex parte actus volendi But because like as the love of God is sometime taken for the good thing which God bestowes like as Jansenius interprets that place Iohn 14. 21. He that loveth me shall be beloved of my Father to wit of the effect of the Fathers love and we commonly say that Passions are attributed unto God not quoad Affectum but quoad Effectum in like sort the Will of God is taken for the thing willed as 1 Thes 4. 3. This is the will of God even your sanctification that is this is willed by him Therefore Aquinas distinguisheth a double consideration in the will of God one quoad actum volentis and so it hath no cause from without another quoad res volitas and so it may have a cause So likewise in predestination as considering it either quoad actum Praedestinantis and so it hath no cause or quoad effectum Praedestinationis and so it may have a cause as there he professeth both touching the will of God in generall and touching Predestination in speciall Of the will of God in generall thus Non est assignare causam voluntatis divinae ex parte actus volendi sed potest assignari ratio ex parte volitorum in quantum scilicet Deus vult esse aliquid propter aliud And of predestination in speciall thus Sed hoc sub quaestione vertitur utrum ex parte effectus praedestinatio habeat aliquam causam hoc est quaerere utrum Deus praeordinaverit se daturum effectum praedestinationis alicui propter aliqua merita Now thus
lamentable ends to which he had from eternity appointed them and so by good consequence it makes the pure and holy God to be unholy and ascribes unto him farre greater cruelty then can be found in the most bloudy and barbarous Tyrant in the World Suetonius in the life of Tiberius one of the veryest Butchers of all the Roman Emperours reports of him that having a mind to put the two sonnes of Germanicus Diusus and Nero to death Variâ fraude induxit ut concitarentur ad convitia concitati perderentur He used cunning contrivances to draw them to reproach him that so he might cover his cruelty in their death under a pretext of justice And a little after he saith of the same Emperour that because it was not lawfull among the Romans to strangle Virgins he caused certain little maides to be deflowred by the Hangman that so they might afterwards be strangled This cruelty of Tiberius exceeded the bounds of humanity and yet it comes as short of that which this way laies to the charge of God as a temporall death comes short of an eternall and the power of man in drawing men to offend comes short of that irresistable power which the Almighty is able to use in the producing of sin Besides it takes from men all conscience of sin and makes sin to be no sin We use to say Necessitas non habet legem Necessity hath no law Actions in themselves evill if an absolute necessity bear sway in them are transgressions of no law and consequently are no sin for sin is a transgression of the law and men when they doe them they have no reason to be forry for them The Tragoedian could see this where he saith Fati ista culpa est Nemo fit fato nocens when one evill action is done the doer is not in fault but the decree that necessitates him to doe it It takes away likewise from good and evill actions that defect which they naturally carry with them of Rewards and Punishments as Saint Hierome tells us Liberi arbitrii nos condidit Deus nec ad virtutes nec ad vitia necessitate tranimur alioqui ubi necessit as est nec damnatio nec corona est Where necessity domineers there is no place for retribution and therefore none are drawn by the adamantine chains of necessity to virtues or vices but left free to the choyce of their own wills When Zeno his servant was punished by him for a fault that he had done he told his Master out of his own grounds that he was unjustly beaten because he was Fato coactus peccare constrained so to doe by his undeclinable destiny and certainly if malefactors could not chuse but play their rude prankes they could not be justly punished for them For all just punishments suppose a possibility of avoyding those offences of which they are the punishments TWISSE Consideration THis Authors pretence being only to oppose that Tenent which maintaines that the decree of denying grace and glory and of inflicting damnation doth not presuppose the foresight of final perseverance in sin you may well marvaile to what purpose this comes in about the different condition of man considered by God either as before the Fall or after the Fall in Adam it being a question of another nature and meerly Logicall to wit about the ordering of Gods decrees of Creation Permission of the fall of Adam giving or denying Grace Salvation or Damnation The resolution whereof depends upon the right distinction of these decrees in reference to the end and to the means tending to that end For this being Resolved according to the rules of Divinity the order between them must consequently be determined according to the rules generally received in the Schooles namely thus The intention of the end is first then the intention of the means so that if Salvation be the end and Creation and Permission of Adams Fall and Raising therehence by Faith and Repentance to be the means it must be confessed that the decree of Salvation must be first then the decree of Creation permission of sin and of raising out of sin So if the damnation of any be the end that God intends and creation and permission of sin and of finall perseverance therein be the means it must be acknowledged that the decree of damnation was before the decree of creation c. But if salvation and damnation be no ends intended by God but means rather as well as creation and permission of all to sin in Adam together with the raising of some therehence and leaving some therein tending to some farther end namely the Manifestation of Gods glory in a certain kind as the Scripture together with manifest reason doth justify For God being the supreame efficient must necessarily be the last end And even there where the word of God doth testify that God created the wicked against the day of evill it doth therewithall give to understand that what is signified by To the day of evill doth not denote the end of Gods actions that before being expressed to be God himselfe God made all things for himselfe not for acquiring ought unto himselfe for he is so perfect that nothing can be added unto him but for the manifesting of his own most glorious nature so that if God be pleased to manifest his glorious beneficence on man in the highest degree and that in the way of mercy mixt with justice this end requires and bespeaks both creation no glory at all being manifestable without this and permission of sin otherwise it could not be manifested in the way of mercy and satisfaction for sin otherwise this mercy could not be mixed with justice exactly and faith and repentance otherwise the good which God intends could not be bestowed by way of reward and last of all Salvation under which we comprehend the highest and most blessed condition that the nature of man continuing a meere man is capable of And herehence we conclude that in case the end is such as hath been specified and all these actions following congruous means tending to that end therefore the decree of manifesting Gods glory as above specified is first with God and secondly the decree of the means which means although they are many materially yet they come all under one formall notion of means tending to a certain end which according to the severall parts thereof bespeaks them all and consequently they are all to be considered as making up the object of one formall decree called the decree of the means and the intention of none of them is before another but all intended at once as means tending to that end which is first intended In like manner if God shall be pleased to intend the manifestation of his glory in Man or Angell in the way of justice vindicative the means necessarily required hereunto are Creation Permission of sin and Damnation unto punishment and all three makes up the object of one formall
bind him for he hath mercy on whom he will and so also on the other side He hardneth whom he will Yet I have given no instances in any passages of the Old Testament which give plentifull testimony of Gods secret providence of evill the evidence whereof did wring from Austin this confession Contra Iulian. Pelag. lib. 5. cap. 3. Et multa alia commemorare possemus in quibus aliquando appareat occulto judicio Dei fieri perversitatem cordis ut non audiatur quod verum dicitur inde peccetur si◠ipsum peccatum praecedentis paena peccati Nam credere mendacio non credere veritati utique peccatum est Venit tamen ab eâ caecitate cordis quae occulto judicio Dei sed tamen justo etiam paena peccati monstratur And in his Book De Grat lib. arbitr cap. 20. inquiring how it is said that the Lord bid Shimei to curse David Quomodo dixit Dominus huic homini maledicere David Quis sapiens intelligit How did God bid this man curse David Who is wise and he shall understand Non enim jubendo dixit ubi obedientia laudaretur sed quod ejus voluntatem proprio vitio suo malum in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo occulto inclinavit Ideo dictum est dixit ei dominus Nam si jubenti obtemperasset Deo laudandus potius quà m puniendus esset sicut ex hoc peccato postea novimus esse punitum Neither saith he is the cause concealed why God thus dealt with Shimei Hoc est cor ejus malum in hoc peccatum miserit vel dimiserit I expresse it rather in Austins words then mine own because the adversaries of Gods truth think it enough to passe the censure of blasphemy upon ought that we deliver herein Now the cause was Ut videat Dominus inquit humilitatem meam retribuat mihi bona pro delicto ejus in die isto That God may see my humility saith David and recompence me good for his cursing this day Ecce quomodo probatur thus Austin goes on Deum uti cordibus etiam malorum ad laudem atque adjumentum honorum Thus saith he he used Iudas betraying Christ thus he used the Iewes crucifying Christ and how great good things did he thereby procure to all that should at any time believe Who also useth the Devill himselfe though most wicked yet he useth him optimè most holily for the exercising and proving of the faith and Piety of the righteous not to himselfe who knowes all things before they come to passe but to us who had need that after such manner God should proceed with us The adding hereunto how God wrought in the heart of Absalom to confound the counsell of Achitophel he breaks forth into this exclamation in the beginning of the next chapter Who would not tremble at the consideration of these judgements divine whereby God workes even in the hearts of wicked men what he will yet rendring unto them according to their deserts Then making mention of Rehoboam his despising the counsell of the Antients as also that 2 Chron. 1. how God stirred up the spirit of the Philistins and Arabians against Ioram and they came up upon the land of Judah and laid it wast Here saith Austin it is manifest that God doth raise up enemies to lay such countries wast whom he judgeth worthy of such punishments But yet saith he will you say they came not up by their own will or did they so come up by their own will as to make that untrue which the Scripture saith namely that God stirred them up Nay rather both are true for both they came up by their own will and yet God stirred up their spirits to come which also saith he may be delivered in this manner namely that both God stirred up their spirit and also they came up by their own will Agit enim Omnipotens in cordibus hominum etiam motum voluntatis eorum For the Almighty doth worke in the hearts of men the very motion of their will that he may work by them that which he thinks good to work by them even he who knoweth not how to work any thing unjustly Unto these he addeth variety of other testimonies all drawn out of the Word and concludes His talibus testimoniis divinorum eloquiorum quae omnia commemorare nimis longum est quantum existimo minifestetur Operari Deum in cordibus hominum ad inclinandas eorum voluntates quocunque voluerit sive ad bona pro suâ misericordiâ sive ad mala pro meritis eorum judicio utique suo aliquando aperto aliquando occulto semper autem justo INTRODUCTION SECT III. BEsides it takes from men all conscience of sinne and makes sinne to be no sinne we use to say Necessitas non habet legem Necessity hath no law c. ut est in superiori Sectione usque ad finem Sectionis TWISSE Consideration THis Motive as this Author calleth it hath the first place in the 16 th reason of Arminius whereby he laboureth to disprove their opinion who conceive the object of Predestination to be the Masse of mankind not created as appears in the declaration of his opinion made before the States of Holland c. and it is the first particular of six mentioned in that sixteenth reason of his And why should he divide it from the rest and not clap them together into this ranke of motives to prepare him to the renouncing of that Tenent which here he impugneth and adde Arminius his other ninteen reasons hereunto to the same purpose if himselfe be privy to the cause thereof I am not But as it lieth I will consider it Now it proceedeth upon supposition that such a necessity of sinning is brought upon man by this decree as stands in opposition unto liberty Whereunto I answere 1. That this decree in reference to the act of denying grace brings no necessity at all of sinning upon man it being only the divine decree of not cureing by the grace of regeneration that is by the grace of faith and repentance that naturall infidelity and impenitency wherein every man is borne all men being conjecti in necessitatem peccandi through the sinne of Adam as Corvinus confesseth they being his own words Now let every sober man judge whether to leave that infidelity and impenitency which God findes in a man uncured be to bring a necessity of sinning upon him 2. Secondly we answer that notwithstanding that necessity of sinning whereupon all are cast as Cornivus speaketh yet there is no sinne committed by a naturall and carnall man which is not committed by him freely The act of lying the act of blaspheaming the act of whoring the act of drunkennesse gluttony rayling and in generall every sinfull act being freely committed by every one by whom it is commited as is apparent by this that there is not one of these sinfull acts but is forborne by divers
of them proceed on this manner The first thus Praedestinatio est voluntas Dei de illustrandâ suâ gloriâ per misericordiā justitiā At illa voluntas locum non habet in nondum condito ceu condendo The third thus Praedestinatio est pars providentiae administrantis gubernātis humanū genus ergò posterior naturâ actu creationis vel proposito creandi Si posterior actu creationis vel propositio creandi hominē jam homo praedestinationis objectum non est consideratus ut nondū conditus His 4 th argument is this Predestinatio est praeparatio supernaturalium bonorū ergo praecedit communicatio naturaliū proptereà creatio in naturâ sive actu sive in decreto Dei His last reason is of the same nature thus Illustratio sapientiae Dei per creationē prior est illustratione sapientiae Dei quae est administratio praedestinationis 1 Cor. 1. 21. Ergo creatio prior est praedestinatione To all which reasons of his I have answered in my Vindic. Grat. Dei lib. 1. part 1. De Praedestin digress 5. in severall chapters Only the second argument of Arminius insisteth upon Gods ordination of mans fall And to be freed from the trouble of answering this argument is the only thing that I know we gain by leaving the first and second way and embarking our selves in the third But how freed surely only so farre as that the doctrine of election and reprobation supposing Adams fall doth not engage us to inquire into divine providence concerning Adams fall But neverthelesse it cannot be denied but that had not God permitted Adam to fall he had never fallen And we that take the first way acknowledge no other Providence divine concerning the ingresse of sinne as sinne into the world but in the way of permission Sinne as sinne admitting no cause efficient but deficient only And it is utterly impossible that God either in doing what he doth or in forbearing to doe what he doth not should in any culpable or justly blameable manner be deficient And if it be farther demanded whether upon Gods permission it followeth that sinne shall be committed by the creature We readily professe it doth This Vorstius acknowledgeth a favorite of the Arminians Nay doth not Arminius himself deliver it expresly where he saith That when God permitteth the willing of ought Necesse est ut nullo argumentorum genere persuadeatur ad nolendum This he delivers without all qualification of the necessity mentioned which we doe not And this also Navarettus a Papist professeth and though he be a Dominican yet I know no Jesuite that opposeth him in this And if any man inferre herehence that then God determining to permit sinne did determine that sinne should enter into the World We willingly grant that God did so ordaine namely that sinne should come to passe by his permission Non aliquid fit saith Austin nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo And Bellarmine professeth that Bonum est mala fieri Deo permittente so that herein God doth not will evill but that which is good in the acknowledgement of Bellarmine and that in the heat of his opposition against our Divines in this particular And Arminius is expresse in saying Voluit Deus Achabum mensuram scelerum implere And what is this but Peccata peccatis cumulare And though the Jesuits and Arminians doe with all their force resist yet it evidently followes from the notion of efficacious grace embraced by the one and by the notion of an efficacious impediment of sinne dictated by Arminius himselfe For efficacious grace with the Jesuites consists in the congruity thereof and the congruity thereof consists in this that God foreseeth that upon the confession thereof sinne will be avoided Now what is the reason why God grants such a grace whereupon he seeth sin will not be avoided and denies such a grace upon the granting whereof he knowes full well that sinne would be avoided but because his pleasure is that sinne shall be committed by his permission and not be avoyded although he hath given them grace sufficient to avoid it as they say and it was most true of Adam in the state of innocency In like sort doth Arminius distinguish of Peceati impedimentum sufficiens efficax Efficacious hinderance of sinne is that whereby God seeth sinne will be avoided sufficient is only that whereby a man may avoid it if he will But withall he confesseth that God in the Promptuary of his wisdome hath not only such impediments as are sufficient to the avoiding of any sinne but such also as whereby any sinne would indeed be avoided were he pleased to grant them But yet as often as he thinks good to permit sinne he doth not grant such impediments And is not this a manifest evidence that it is Gods will that sinne shall come to passe to wit as often as it doth come to passe by his permission But suppose all our Divines that embrace the third way doe imagine the absurdities here spoken of to be justly chargeable upon the first way Yet as he thinks them in an errour while they conceive they can with ease avoid these absurdities by their third way let him be pleased to conceive they may as well be in an errour in thinking them justly chargeable upon the first way and consequently their opinion is nothing sufficient to justify that they are unremoveable by them that embrace the first way It is true there is no cause of breach either of Unity or Amity between our Divines upon this difference as I shewed in my digressions De Praedestinatione Digress 1. seeing neither of them derogate either from the prerogative of Gods grace or of his soveraignty over his creatures to give grace to whom he will and to deny it to whom he will and consequently to make whom he will vessels of mercy and whom he will vessells of wrath but equally they stand for the divine prerogative in each And as for the ordering of Gods decrees of creation permission of the fall of Adam giving grace of faith and repentance unto some and denying it to others and finally saving some and damning others whereupon only arise the different opinions as touching the object of predestination and reprobation it is meerly Apex Logicus a poynt of Logick And were it not a meer madnesse to make a breach of unity or charity in the Church of God meerely upon a poynt of Logick Thus have I justified the improbability and utter unlikelihood that ever any schisme will be made in the Church of God upon these nice and meer Logicall differences in my Vindic. Grat. Dei which this Author is acquainted with as appears by a passage that hereafter he representeth therehence and that farther into the Book then these my digressions are upon the point of predestination but is content to take no notice thereof least it might hinder the course
cause in man any way moving him either in its own nature or by divine constitution moving him to bestow this grace on any So the Apostle 2 Timoth. 1. 9. God hath saved us and called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his own purpose and grace And indeed we being all found dead in sinne what could be found in one to move God to bestow the life of faith and repentance upon him more then upon another And if any such thing were found in man moving God hereunto then should grace be bestowed according unto works that is in the Fathers phraise as Bellarmine acknowledgeth according unto merits which was condemned 1200 years agoe in the Synod of Palestine and Pelagius himselfe was driven to subscribe unto it otherwise they had condemned him also But as touching the conferring of glory God doth not bestow this on whom he will finding men equall without any moving cause thereunto even in man For though there be no moving cause hereunto in man of its own nature yet there is to be found a moving cause in man by constitution divine whereby God is as it were moved to bestow solvation on some and not on others For God hath made a gracious promise that whosoever beleeveth and repenteth and continueth in faith and repentance unto death shall be saved and whosoever beleeveth not and repenteth not shall be damned So then though men are equall in originall sinne and in naturall corruption and God bestowes faith and repentance on whom of them he will curing their corruption in whom he will yet when he comes to the conferring of glory men are not found equall in morall condition and accordingly God cannot be said on like manner to bestow glory solvation on whō he will For he hath tyed himselfe by his own constitution to bestow solvation on none but such as dye in thestate of grace Yet I confes some say that God bestows solvation on whom he will in as much as he is the author of their faith repentance bestows these graces on whō he will yet certainly there is a different manner in the use of this phraise of bestowing this or that on whom he will For when God bestowes faith and repentance he findes them on whom he will bestow it no better then others But when he comes to the bestowing of glory he findes them on whom he bestowes that farre better them others Now we come to the things decreed in reprobation and these are two 1. The denyall of the grace of regeneration that is of the grace of faith and repentance whereby mans naturall infidelity and impenitency is cured 2. The denyall of glory and the inflicting of damnation The first of these to wit the denyall of grace mentioned is made to whom he will And it must needs be so in ease God gives this grace to whom he will And the Apostle professeth that as God hath mercy on whom he will so he hardneth whom he will And as God denies this grace to whom he will so did he decree to deny it to whom he will Yet there is a difference considerable For albeit God hardneth whom he will by denying unto them the grace of faith and repentance yet notwithstanding like as it is just with God to inflict damnation upon them for that sinne whether originall or actuall wherein he findes them when the ministry of the word is afforded them so likewise it cannot be denied to be iust with God to leave their infidelity and impenitency wherein he finds them uncured But yet because God hath not made any such constitution namely that whosoever is found in infidelity and impenitency shall be so left and abandoned by him therefore he is properly said as to cure it in whom he will so to leave it uncured in whom he will finding them all equall in originall sinne and consequently lying equally in this their naturall infidelity and impenitencv So wee may iustly say there is no cause at all in man of this difference to wit why God cures infidelity impenitency in one and not in another but it is the meer pleasure of God that is the cause of this difference And if any list to contend hereabouts we shall be willing to entertaine him and conferre our strength of argumentation on this point 2. But as touching the denyall of glory and inflicting of damnation which is the second thing decreed in reprobation there is alwaies found a cause motive yea and meritorious hereof to wit both of the denyall of the one inflicting of the other And God doth not proceed herein according to the meer pleasure of his will that by reason of his own constitution having ordained that whosoever continueth finally in infidelity in profane courses and impenitency shall be damned And albeit on the other side it may be said in some sence as formerly I have shewed that God saves whom he will in as much as he is the author of faith which he bestowes on whom he will yet in no congruous sence can he be said to damne whom he will for as much as he is not the author of sinne as he is the author of faith For every good thing he workes but sinne and the evill thereof he only permits not causeth it And lastly as God doth not damne whom he will but those only whom he finds finally to have persevered in sinne without repentance so neither did he decree to damne or reprobate to damnation whom he will but only those who should be found finally to persevere in sinne without repentance Now let us apply this to the Article we have in hand which is this The moving cause of reprobation is the only will of God and not the sinne of man originall or actuall and for the explication hereof according to that which hath been formerly delivered We say that reprobation doth signify either a purpose of denying grace as above mentioned or a purpose of inflicting damnation And each may be considered either as touching the act of Gods decree or as touching the things decreed We shew how the Article holds or holds not being differently accommodated 1. As touching the things decreed 1. As touching the deniall of grace We say That God decreed of his meere good pleasure to deny unto some the grace of faith and repentance for the curing of that naturall infidelity and impenitency which is found in all without any motive cause hereunto found in one more then in another 2. As touching the inflicting of Damnation We say That God decreed to inflict damnation on some not of his meer pleasure but meerly for their finall perseverance in sinne without repentance 2. As touching the very act of Gods decree We say Nothing in man could be the cause hereof but the meer pleasure of God as Aquinas professeth it a mad thing to devise in man a cause of divine predestination as touching the act of God predestinating as I have
and perseverance did flow from Gods absolute decree to save them Nay Austin himselfe in Joan. Tract 42. as Hunnius and others alleage him and I find it true hath these words of those of whom our Saviour saith Therefore you heare not because ye are not of God Praecogniti erant quòd non fuerant credituri eâ fide quâ solâ possint a peccatorum obligatione liberari and afterwards saith secundum hanc praedestinationem loquutus est Dominus But will it herehence follow that Austin did deny absolute predestination Vossius himselfe acknowledgeth the contrary of him as well as of Fulgentius namely that Gods foreknowledge of perseverance in good proceeded from Gods absolute decree of saving them And let every sober reader judge whether upon the same grounds it doth not follow that Gods foreknowledge of mans perseverance in infidelity doth not likewise follow from Gods absolute decree of reprobating him For what is the ground of the former but this that God had absolutely decreed to give faith unto some Now doth it not herehence follow that God absolutely decreed to deny faith unto others For as Ambrose saith and as Austin alleageth out of him si voluisset ex indevotis fecisset devotos Yet am not I of Vossius his opinion in this I say rather Gods foreknowledge of one mans faith proceeds from his decree not of saving him but of giving him faith and Gods foreknowledge of another mans finall perseverance in infidelity proceeds from Gods decree not of damning him but of denying him grace to cure his infidelity And as for the decree of salvation I deny it to be in any moment of nature before the decree of giving grace in like sort I deny the decree of damnation to be in any moment of nature before the decree of permitting mans infidelity to continue uncured unto the end And the criticall question in this point consists in this Whether the granting of grace or deniall of grace be not meerely of the pleasure of God and not according to any different dispositions in man by grace understanding grace effectuall to the working of faith and true repentance And unlesse the Ancients be shewed to have maintained either that faith and repentance are not the gifts of God or that if they be the gifts of God that God dispenseth his effectuall grace for the working of them not according to the meer pleasure of God but according to the different dispositions of men all that they talke of the Ancients in this point is meerly vaine and to no purpose But I come to Prosper whose relation I doubt not this Author takes to be of greatest moment Now to this I answer 1. To say that Penè omnium par invenitur una sententia qua propositum praedestinationem Dei secundum praescientiam receperunt doth not prove that there is no footing amongst the Ancients for absolute predestination Neither doth Vossius alleage halfe so many Fathers for this opinion as were those Bishops who joyned with Cyprian in decreeing the Rebaptization of Hereticks 2. This seems to be related by Prosper not so much out of his own opinion as by way of an objection proposed by the Massilienses desiring Austin to shew how it is to be answered Illud etiam saith he qualiter dilucitur quaesumus demonstres quod retractatis Priorum hac de re opinionibus penè omnium invenitur par una sententia c. And this is farther evidenced by these words of Prosper Obstinationem suam vetustate defendunt ut ea quae de Epistolâ Pauli Romanis scribentis ad manifestationem divinae gratiae praevenientis Electorum merita proferuntur a nullo unquam Ecclesiasticorum ita esse intellecta ut nunc sentiuntur affirment 3. Observe When Prosper urged them to expound those passages in S t Paul after what meaning they thought best they forthwith professed ingeniously that they found nothing in the Fathers that gave them content their words related by Prosper are these Nihil se invenisse quod placeret 4. Bellarmine De Grat. liber Arbit lib. 2. cap. 14. takes notice of this objection drawn out of Prosper and answereth it according unto Austin in this manner Augustinus ipse in libr. de Bono Persev cap. 20. dicit Veteres Patres qui ante Pelagium floruerunt quaestionem istam nunquam acuratè tractasse sed incidenter solùm quasi per transitum illam attigisse Addit verò in fundamento hujus sententiae quod est Gratiam Dei non praeveniri ab ullo opere nostro sed contrà ab illo omnia opera nostra praeveniri ita ut nihil omninò boni quod attinet ad salutem sit in nobis quod non sit nobis ex Deo convenire Catholicos omnes ibidem citat Cyprianum Ambrosium Nazianzenum So that it appears hereby that Austin did not acknowledge the former Writers to have embraced this opinion though the Massilienses pretended so much And herewithall he openeth unto us a way how to conceive aright of their opinion in predestination namely that as many as acknowledge Gods grace preventing us in every good work they all are to be accounted to agree with him in the doctrine of predestination For it is apparent that in the contrary doctrine Pelagius grounded his opinion concerning predestination And Austin himselfe sometime thought that God quem sibi crediturum esse praescivit ipsum elegit cui spiritum sanctum daret ut bona operando vitam aeternam consequeretur and why so because forsooth he at that time conceived it to be mans work to believe which saith he I had never said had I known faith it selfe to have been amongst the gifts of the holy Ghost Retract lib. 1. cap. 25. and therefore De Praedesti Sanct. cap. 1. in his answer to the Letter of Hilarius mark what course Austin takes for the justifying of his own doctrine concerning predestination Prius fidem quâ Christiani sumus donum Dei esse debemus ostendere And Bellarmine in the place above cited professeth that Austin did herehence rightly collect out of the Fathers Gratuitae praedestinationis sententiam fidem in Ecclesiâ Catholicâ semper fuisse Neque olim saith he defendi potest praedestinatio ex operibus praevisis nisi aliquid boni ponatur in homine justo quo discernatur ab impio quod non sit illi à Deo quod sanè saith he Patres omnes cum summâ consensione rejiciunt In like sort Junius in his answer to Baro for the justifying of gratuitous predestination counts it sufficient to prove Fidem esse donum praedestinantis miserentis Dei ex praedestinatione ipsius And adds saying Hoc omnes Patres uno consensu ex Christo Paulo agnoverunt Ipse Justinus Martyr Apolog. 2. alii Gravissimè verò Clemens Alexandrinus in hac alioqui palestrâ non ita exercitatus ut sequentia saecula Stromat lib. 2. Basilidis Valentimi dogma esse dicit quod
of the number One of the Souldiers was billeted in an old Widdowes house and another being a Goldsmith told him and another consort of theirs he had a devise to put mony in all their purses for he knew how to make a Rex-dolar of three-pence sylver and in that Widdowes house they would ply their businesse very securely To work they went and casting plates of Tinne to the quantity of one of those Dolars and stamping them full and faire this Gold-smith with the quantity of three pence silver sylvered them over very fairely and least they should seem too light hangs them up in the chimny in a bagge that the smoak might bring them to the sadder hew Thus having met with a mine of Sylver in their lodging one is imployed as a Merchant-man to goe to the Staple of Cloth and he laies out their coyne in cloth whereof afterwards they made good silver indeed at length one of them paying a debt of his to a Dutchman in Delfe in one of these Rex-dolars he found the Dutch to betray some suspicious gestures and interpretations upon the coyne That was a faire warning to an intelligent man of armes and hereupon they get them packing ing away with all speed and home they come and make themselves merry with the relation In like sort these Remonstrants shew a great deale of Tinne and trash in these argumentations and they have not so much as three pence silver to colour it therewithall to cheat the World if they will be cheated But they hope the colour of some dishonour by their adversaries doctrine redounding unto Christ will be taken for a peece at least of good silver I confesse I am somewhat the more merrily disposed at this time For being taken off from the midst of a sentence by the courteous invitation of a Gentleman to come unto him to his Inne He was pleased to entertaine me with such good discourse that it did not a little refresh my spirits His reaches were after new discoveries for the advancement of learning and endoctrinated me more in one halfe hower then seventeen years study in the University For whereas I never learned there more causes then foure he was pleased to acquaint me with nine which I took some pains to learn without book and they were these Matter Forme Workman Will Power Time Finding out Accident End And most courteously offered himselfe to enlarge on every one of them but having left off at a broken sentence I was desirous to return to my studies Theologicall and to let those Philosophicall progresses alone But I protested unto him seriously that he had informed me more in the number of causes in a short space then Oxford had done in many years he entreated I would consider of them and I promised I would and conferre of them too with all the Schollers I companied with which he took in very goo part and so I took my leave And finding my spirit not a little elevated with this recreation I resolved forbearing my usuall time of supper to follow these studies close that night which truly fell out very happily For one of those causes being found out otherwise called Invention as for Judgement I doe not remember that it was admitted into the number I made use of it very happily in finding out or discovery of the foppery of these Remonstranticall argumentations Now I proceed to the second Question as more seasonable to the present occasion And here first they begin with their former artifice making infidelity on the part of reprobation answerable to faith on the part of election which is most untrue as formerly I shewed Only the not curing of infidelity by the grace of faith is made by us subordinate to reprobation as the curing of naturall infidelity by the grace of faith is made by us subordinate to election But they goe on as in shaping our Tenent at pleasure so in basting it with their very liberall censures as absurd and execrable in such sort as the bare commemoration of it they take to be sufficient to represent the horrour of it and to confute it and this they commit to the judgement of all the faithfull of Christ And indeed their best strength lyeth in setting forth their Adversaries doctrine in such colours as the Devill is painted with And in this particular they conceive good hope no doubt that propitious Readers will conceive hereby that the infidelity of man is made by their Adversaries the work of God as well as Faith Whereas it is well known that there is so little need of working men to infidelity that all being borne in sinne and corrupted and estranged from the life of God through the fall of Adam infidelity is as naturall and hereditary to a man as any other corruption And it is as well known and undeniable that none can cure it but God by faith but this he cures in whom he will by giving Faith to whom he will and if he refuse to cure it in any that and that alone is enough to make him a vessell of wrath that so Gods glory may be manifested upon him in the way of justice vindicative But come we to their Arguments 1. The first is this If Infidelity followeth Reprobation unto destruction then God cannot in justice destroy Reprobates for their infidelity For there is no greater injustice then to destroy a man for that that followeth necessarily upon reprobation which is the work of God To this I answer 1. According to mine ordering the decrees divine Secondly according to the Contra-Remonstrants Tenent in ordering them 1. According to my ordering of the decrees divine In no moment of nature or reason is the decree of damnation precedent to the decree of permitting infidelity or leaving the infidelity of some men uncured to wit by denying them faith by denying the grace of regeneration But the decrees of creating all in Adam of permitting all to fall in Adam in bringing all men forth into the World in the state of Originall sinne of leaving this originall sinne uncured in them and last of all of damning them for their sinnes are decrees not subordinate but coördinate as decrees de Mediis tending joyntly to one supream end which is the manifestation of Gods glory upon them in the way of justice vindicative as also to shew the riches of his glory upon the vessels of mercy whom he hath prepared unto glory to wit by beholding in others that miserable condition which through Gods meer grace and goodnesse they have escaped 2. According to the Contra-Remonstrants Tenent I answer 1. Many of them doe not maintaine that infidelity is consequent to the decree of damnation but in the foresight of God precedent rather as appears by the Brittish Divines their Theses De Reprobatione and Alvarez professeth the same The denyall of grace and so the permitting of naturall infidelity to remain uncured they make consequent as it seems to a negative decree of denying glory And
to the decree of permitting infidelity they make the foresight of infidelity subsequent and this foresight of infidelity they make precedent to reprobation as it signifies the decree of damnation And thus farre I agree with them That in no moment of nature or signe of reason did God ordain any man to damnation but for sinne and consequently in no moment of nature or signe of reason did the decree of damnation goe before the foresight of sinne or infidelity 2. But suppose as these Remonstrants collect and pick out their meaning They make the decree of reprobation in all poynts proportionable to the decree of salvation that like as the decree of giving faith they conceive to be subordinate to the decree of salvation so the decree of permitting infidelity or denying faith for herein consists the just proportion and not as they feigne it between faith on the one side and infidelity on the other is with them made subordinate to the decree of damnation Then I answer 1. Their Consequence should be this If the permission of Infidelity followeth the decree of damnation then God cannot in justice damne them for Infidelity Now here is no colour of good Consequence 2. If they reply That in case infidelity followeth necessarily upon Gods permiting of it the Consequence is as good as in case infidelity followed upon reprobation For even hereby it appears that infidelity followeth upon reprobation though not immediately but by the mediation of the divine permission thereof but whether it followeth mediately or immediately all is one as touching the force of the Consequence Resp Now to this I Reply Granting that all is one as touching the force of the Consequence but then consider 1. All the force of the argument depends not upon the consequution of infidelity simply unto the decree of damnation but only upon the necessary consequution thereof And yet no mention at all was made hereof in the Consequence of the Major but it is brought afterwards over and above most illogically 2. In this case all the force of the Consequence depends upon the necessary consequution of sinne in generall or infidelity in speciall upon Gods permitting of it So that whether Gods decree to permit the sinne of infidelity be antecedent or consequent to the decree of damnation all is one Yet these Remonstrants make the force of their argument to consist only in the subordinating of the decree divine as touching the permission of infidelity to the decree of damnation which yet appears by this to be of no force 3. But if they hereupon take a new course of argumentation and dispute thus If Infidelity followeth necessarily upon Gods permitting of it then God cannot in justice damne a man for Infidelity pretending no injustice to be greater then to damne a man for that which followeth necessarily upon permission which is Gods work Resp I answer 1. That thus their former argumentation is cashierd as unprofitable 2. We deny this Consequence and call in no meaner name then Arminius himselfe to beare us out in this our deniall Who expressely professeth That in case God permits a man Velle peccatum necesse est ut nullo argumentorum genere persuadeatur ad nolendum Exam. pag. 153. I could adde Vorstius also herein concurring with Piscator Perkins and Navarrettus the Dominican is as expressely in this as any other as also in subordinating it to the decree of reprobation Arminius likewise professeth faith and repentance Nisi Deo dante haberi non posse Exam. 57. and that both of them are denied to the reprobates by the decree of reprobation See his own words At Deus statuit decreto reprobationis reprobis fidem paenitentiam non dare Concedo lubens illam assumptionem sed rectè intellectam He laboureth to charme this inconvenient grant of his but no charme will serve to keep this adder from stinging and wounding their doctrine of reprobation unto death He saith Faith is given by way of suasion We say that matters nothing for so it be given by God wheresoever it be found and so it be denied to reprobates by the decree of reprobation we desire no more We our selves acknowledge that faith is not given to the elect but by way of swasion the Word working faith running in this manner Repent and believe the Gospel and whosoever believeth shall be saved For God hath set forth his Sonne to be a Propitiation for our sinnes through faith in his bloud 3. At length he proceeds in his charming course but most unsuccessefully as whereby his former saying is nothing charmed His care rather seems to be to eat his own words as Satan devoured his own children For distinguishing suasion into that which is sufficient and that which is effectuall this effectuall suasion he confesseth to be administred by the decree of election but as for that sufficient suasion though withall he accounts it allwaies ineffectuall yet he saith it is administred by the decree of providence not by the decree of reprobation At length he confesseth that by the decree of reprobation is denied grace effectuall that is such a grace as whereupon he foresaw they would believe Now herein I appeale to the judgement of every sober man Take we two men into consideration the one elect as Paul the other reprobate as Esau Of two sufficient graces the Lord foreseeth which of them will prove effectuall with Paul and which ineffectuall and he makes choice to give him such a grace as he foreseeth will prove effectuall Again he foreseeth of two sufficient graces which of them will prove effectuall with Esau and which ineffectuall and makes choice to afford him only that which he knowes will prove ineffectuall Now what can be the reason hereof but because he purposeth to shew his mercy in the salvation of the one and his justice in the damnation of another Before Arminius came to this resolution as expressely to professe That by the decree of reprobation is denyed grace effectuall he found himselfe in a streit upon his distinction of grace sufficient and effectuall and the description of each he drew his breath very short and therefore to get as it were more liberty of ayre he concluded that discourse with Haec ex Augustini sententiâ dicuntur pag. 58. and in the next page Hisce autem ita explicatis ex mente Augustini fortè Scripturae sensu But What a mischiefe doth this great Doctor mean to tell us First that he willingly grants that Deus statuit decreto reprobationis reprobis fidem paenitentiam non dare provided it be well understood and after all this explication tells us that all this explication of his is delivered ex sententiâ mente Augustini and but perchance ex Scripturae sensu concealing all the while what is his own Opinion Is this to give us the right understanding of that Assertion Deus statuit decreto reprobationis reprobis fidem paenitentiam non dare most prejudiciall to his own Tenent
of any Against this Scripture therefore fights this absolute reprobation and hatred of men TWISSE Consideration BE it the whole lump of man-kind if that Lettice like his lipps I should think by World is meant homines in mundo degentes men at any time living in the World without any restraint But herehence it followeth not that God doth not absolutely hate the greatest part of man-kind which this Author should have proved but he doth not therefore I will not only deny it but disprove it First therefore consider this love is only secundum Quid in reference to mens persons namely so farre forth as in case they believe they shall obtain everlasting life through the Sonne of God But if there were no farther love of God towards man they might be damned yea every Mothers sonne for all this Secondly if faith it selfe be a gift of God and God gives it not to all but to some only and those but a few for even of them that are called few are chosen and withall if God hath absolutely decreed to bestow this grace only on a few and deny it to the greatest part of the World will it not manifestly follow herehence that if absolutely to decree the denyall of faith be to hate then surely God absolutely hates the greatest part of men notwithstanding this love here mentioned albeit we extend it to all and every one Therefore it became this Author to prove that God is indifferent to give Faith to one as well as to another and that either absolutely whence it would follow that all and every one should both believe and be saved or conditionally and therewithall represent unto us what that condition is whereupon God bestowes faith on one and for the want thereof he refuseth to bestow faith on another This is the very criticall poynt about the controversies of Gods decrees Here therefore he should have shewed his strength For as for Gods purpose to damne we willingly professe that as God damnes no man but for sinne so he purposeth to damne no man but for sinne But as for his purpose to give or deny the grace of regeneration the grace of faith and repentance we as readily professe that not the purpose only but the very giving of faith and repentance for the curing of infidelity and hardnesse of heart in some and the denying of it unto others so to leave their naturall infidelity and hardnesse of heart uncured proceeds meerely according to the good pleasure of his will according to that of the Apostle He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth And by a cloud of testimonies out of Austin we can prove that in this very sense he understood the Apostle in that place And indeed no other interpretation of that place can with any modesty be devised or obtruded upon us As for the redeeming of all and every one by Christ distinguisheth that which the haters of Gods truth doe delight to confound There is a redemption from the guilt of sinne and a redemption from the power of sinne For we are redeemed from our vaine conversation Christ came into the World to dissolve the works of the Devill No greater works of Satan then blindnesse of heart 2 Cor. 4. 3. and hardnesse of heart Ephes 2. 2. and 2 Tim. 2. last The pardon of sinne and salvation God bestowes only on believers and upon condition of faith Now like as God is ready to bestow these benefits on all and every one and that for Christs sake in case they believe so Christ hath merited pardon of sinne and salvation for all and every one in case they believe Such is the sufficiency of Christs merit that if every one of Adams race should believe every one should be saved and this present Text proceeds upon this namely upon the sufficiency of Christs merits But enquire farther whether Christ did not merit for us the grace of faith and if he did whether absolutely of conditionally if absolutely then all must believe de facto and be saved if conditionally then faith is a grace which God bestowes on man conditionally Now let this Author shew us what that condition is upon performance whereof by man God will give him faith and let him try whether he can carry himselfe so warily herein as not to plunge himselfe into plain Pelagianisme This poynt is a break-neck or Crevecoeur unto all Arminians they generally avoyd the delivering of their minds clearly hereupon as a man would avoyd a precipice It is true some Divines doe interpret the word World here of the Elect as Piscator Rolloc doth not making no mention of the Elect hereupon And Piscators meaning is no more then this viz. that this love of God in respect of every gracious effect I mean in the way of sanctifying grace determins only upon the Elect for in all likelihood he followed Calvin in this Universalem notam apposuit saith Calvin tum ut promiscuè omnes ad vitae participationem invitet tum ut praecidat excusationem incredulis To the same purpose saith he pertaines nomen mundi quo prius usus est And again se toti mundo propitium ostendit quum sine exceptione omnes ad fidem vocat But here he subjoynes a caution thus Caeterum meminerimus ita communiter promitti omnibus vitam si in Christo crediderint ut tamen minime communis omnium sit fides Patet enim omnibus Christus expositus est solis tamen Electis oculos Deus aperit fide ipsum quaerant So that this gracious promise is generall to all and every one whosoever believes shall be saved But yet notwithstanding if it shall appeare that God gives the grace of faith to none but to a certain number which are his Elect it followes that the effect of this love of God to wit Salvation shall in the issue redound to none but Gods Elect. 1. As for the designing a place where the World is taken for the Elect we need no such place as I have shewed yet Piscator conceives that so it is taken Iohn 3. 17. That the World might be saved by him But what think you of Rom. 11. 15. Where the casting away of the Jewes is said to be the reconciliation of the World And that 2 Cor. 5. 19. God was in Christ reconciling the World unto himselfe I say the reconciled World is only Gods Elect for the reconciled are all saved as I prove by the Apostles argument Rom. 5. If when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne how much more being reconciled shall we be saved by his life Ioh. 1. 29. The Lamb of God that taketh away the sinnes of the World Are their sinnes taken away that are damned for them And Ioh. 6. 33. He gives life to the World Is life given to any but to the Elect 2. The second reasons why in this place it cannot be so taken are in effect but one and that a
pleasing to them At saith he ut innotescat quod latebat suave fiat quod non delectabat Dei gratia est quae humanas adjuvat voluntates We doe not smother this truth of God that we may delude men we rather represent how all flesh are obnoxious and endangered unto God that all are borne in sinne and therewithall children of wrath and such as deserve to be made the generation of Gods curse and that it is at his pleasure to shew mercy on any only the word of God hath power to raise us from the dead his voyce pierceth the graves and makes dead Lazarus heare it and it is his course to call some at the first some at the last hower of the day Thus we desire to bring them acquainted first with the spirit of bondage to make them feare that so they may be prepared for the spirit of Adoption whereby they shall cry Abba father neither doe we despaire of any that are humbled with feare we count rather their case most desperate who are nothing moved hereby or that perswade themselves they have power to believe when they will and repent when they will we account no greater illusions of Satan then these yet these abominable opinions may be fostered by some and masked with a pretence of great piety forsooth and a shew of holinesse and a zeale of defending Gods glory and salving the honour of his mercy justice and truth 3. The third is in their obligation to believe and the aggravation of their punishment by not believing The Divells because they must be damned are not commanded to believe in Christ yet poore men must be tied to believe in Christ and their torments must be encreased if they believe not I make no doubt but this Author is as confident of his learned and judicious carriage in shaping this comparison as that the fruit of Adams sinne is the guilt of eternall death in all mankind But none so bold we commonly say as blind Bayard and it seems either he knowes not or considers not that the first sinne of Angells was unto them as death unto man that sinne placed them extra viam and in termino incur abilis miseriae as death only placeth wicked men in the like case Now we doe not say that God commands man after he is dead to believe in Christ any more then he commands obedience unto Angells since their case is become desperate The Divells are not commanded to believe or repent because God doth not nor never did purpose to damne any of them for want of faith or of repentance but for their first Apostacy from God But it is otherwise with man for God doth not purpose to damne any of them but for sinne unrepented of And therefore as good reason there is why their damnation should be encreased for want of repentance and acknowledging of Gods truth as why the Devills should be damned for their first Apostacy If perhaps as it is likely enough this Author to hold up his comparison shall fly to God decree of reprobation upon supposition whereof it was impossible that men should either believe or repent I answere first that in like sort upon supposition of Gods foreknowledge that they would neither believe nor repent it followeth as necessarily as it is necessary that Gods knowledge should be infallible that it was impossible they should believe and repent and the like followeth as necessarily of the Apostacy of Angells as of the infidelity and impenitency of man And as men are pretended to harden themselves in vitious courses upon supposition of the unalterable nature of Gods decree So Austin gives instance in like manner of one that hardened himselfe upon pretence of Gods infallible knowledge De bono persever cap. 15. Fuit quidem in nostro Monasterio qui corripientibus fratribus our quaedam nonfacienda faceret facienda non faceret respondebat qualiâ—cunque nunc sim talis ero qualem me Deus esse futurum praescivit Qui profecto verum dicâ—hat hoc vero non proficiebat in â—onum sed vsque adeo profecit in malum ut deserta Monasterii societâ—te fieret canis reversus ad â—uum vonutum tamen adbuc qualis sit futurus incertum est Secondly I answer that the like may be said of Angells upon presupposition of Gods decree to deny the grace of standing unto them which Austin professeth expressely namely that either in their creation minorem acceperunt amoris divini grattam or that afterwards the reason why the one sort stood when the other fell was this to wit because they were amplius adjuti then their fellowes and consequently the other minus adjuti And as God gave grace to the elect Angells which he denyed to others So it cannot be denied but that from everlasting he decreed both to bestow it upon the one and deny it unto the other Now howsoever I know the Arminian party cannot swallow this morsell yet by this it appears how supersiciary is that augmentation of the difference between Men and Angells wherewith this Author contents himselfe yet notwithstanding it is not want of faith alone that condemneth any man by want of Faith man is lest to the covenant of works to stand or fall according to his own righteousnesse or unrighteousnesse whereof if he faile and withall despiseth the counsell or God offered him in his Gospell is there noe good reason his condemnation should be the greater For certainly it is in the power of a naturall man to afford as much faith to this as to many a vile and fabulous relation which is farre lesse credible by judgement naturall we see both prophane persons and hypocrites so farre to believe the Gospell as to embrace a formall profession thereof and sometimes proceed so farre therein as that 't is a hard matter to distinguish them from sincere professors yet we say a true faith is only such as is infused into the heart of man by the spirit of God in regeneration Now what one of our Divines can be represented that ever was known to affirme that the damnation of any man shall be encreased because God did not regenerate him and in regeneration inspire a Divine faith into him As for our answer in generall to this argument considered in briefe and this Authors reply my refutation thereof I dispatcht in the first place Although he carrieth himselfe not fairely in relating the answer on our part in as much as therein he mixeth the consideration of justice divine which is aliene from the present purpose with the consideration of mercy divine which alone is congruous that so while he puts off the plenary justification of his reply to that which is aliene he may seem to undertake a full justification of his reply to the whole But I hope we shall be as able by Gods assistance to manifest his sinister carriage in the interpretation of Gods justice as we have done already as touching his accommodation of
decree of predestination besides this namely that God over and above hath determined to bestow faith on some So on the other side none of our Divines were ever known to deny that God hath decreed that whosoever believes not shall be damned but further they professe that this is not the whole decree of reprobation but that there is another decree concerning reprobation besides this namely that God hath over and above decreed to deny some the grace of faith and that absolutely Now whereas he saith we maintain that God hath irrevocably decreed not to save some whom he promiseth that he will save if they believe Is he well in his witts for charging us with that by way of crimination which no understanding Divine among the Arminians themselves dare deny I mean as touching the poynt of Gods irrevocable decree For what Arminian hath dared in plain tearmes to professe that Gods decrees are of a revocable nature Whereas the meere prescience of God is sufficient to make them irrevocable How much more if Gods prescience be grounded upon his decree as indeed there is no other ground imaginable without falling upon manifest Atheisme But whereas he fashioneth our Doctrine so as if we said that God hath decreed at no hand to save them to whom he promiseth salvation upon condition of faith this is a notorious untruth and such as implyeth manifest contradiction For to say he hath resolved at no hand to save them is as much as to say that he hath resolved to save them on no condition But if he hath promised to save them in case they believe undoubtedly he hath resolved to save them upon condition of faith Only Gods resolution to save them is not held in suspence considering that from everlasting he well knew who would believe and who would not and therefore he knew this because he purposed to grant faith unto the one and deny it unto the other So that in all this cry we have little wooll no substance of any sound proofe but meere clamours and miserable confusion as God sees how well it becomes him to smite them with the spirit of confusion that build Babell of their own invention and oppose the truth the precious truth of his soveraignty over his creatures and of the prerogative of his free grace to have mercy on whom he will like as he shewes his power in hardening whom he will and in smiting with giddinesse whom he will 3. In the next place we are to heare how God by our Doctrine in his threats and comminations is hollow and unsincere I willingly grant these are alwaies denounced against actuall sinnes as also that the sinnes for which men goe to hell are actuall sinnes if they live to be conscious of actuall transgressions But if God have decreed men to hell for originall sinne then God saith he is not true and so not sincere This is utterly unconsequent For God can manifest his pleasure otherwise than by his threatnings Of the Sodomites it is said they suffer the vengeance of eternall fire and Infants perished therein as well as men of ripe years And the Apostle plainly saith that we have all sinned in Adam and that the wages of sinne is death without distinction and that all are borne children of wrath and therefore as many as dye in that condition dye children of wrath And whence hath this Author learned that the sinne of Adam hath brought upon us the guilt of eternall death as formerly he hath professed but if I be not deceived this extends farther than to Infants and in as much as some of our Divines conceive the corrupt masse to be the object of reprobation hereupon he conceits they make God to damne all Reprobates for originall sinne whereas their doctrine is no other than this that God determines to damne every man for no other sinnes but such wherein they dye unrepented of whether they be originall or actuall Threatnings are denounced unto all to this end that men may know that by continuing in sinne without repentance there is no hope of mercy and therefore as they desire to be saved it is there duty to breake them off by repentance And in particular unto some that by this consideration God may bring them unto repentance But these are only Gods elect but as for others God never brings unto them true repentance according to that of S. Austin Istorum neminem adducit Deus ad salubrem spiriitalemque poenitentiam qua homo reconciliatur Deo in Christo sive illis ampliorum patientiam sive non imparem praebeat Yet God ordaines no man of ripe yeares unto destruction but for sinne finally continued in without repentance and the threatning of damnation signifyes no other thing but this that if they repent not they shall be damned which is most true to whomsoever it is pronounced and this dealing of God is plain enough But these Divines would not have faith and repentance to be the gifts of God but the workes of mens free-wills that so they might be their own crafts-men of their salvation DISCOURSE SUBSECT II. 4. GOd is also full of guile in the other things before named by this opinion viz. in his passionate wishes that even those men might repent that repent not and might be Saved that through their impenitency are not Saved Of these we read Deuter. 5. 29. Oh that there were such a heart in them to feare me that it might goe well with them And in Psal 18. 13. O that my people had harkened unto mee and Israell had walked in my wayes And Isaiah 48 18. Oh that thou hadst hearkened unto my commandements c. 2. In his expostulations Isai 5. 3. judge I pray you between me and my vineyard what could I have done more for my vineyard Ier. 2. throughout Especially v. 5. and 31. Have I been a wildernesse unto Israell or a land of darknesse And â— 32. Can a maid forget her ornaments or a bride her attire yet my people have forgotten mee dayes without number Ezek. 33. 11. Turne yee turne yee O yee house of Israell why will ye dye 3. In his commiserations also of the woefull condition of foolish men that would not be reclaymed Hos 11. 8. How shall I give thee up Ephraim how shall I deliver thee O Israell My repentings are kindled together my heart is turned within me and Math. 23. 37. O Jerusalem Jerusalem which killest the Prophets and stonest them that are sent unto thee In all these there is but little sincerity if there be a setled resolution that the most of those towards whom those wishes chidings and melting considerations are used shall be unavoydable damned Gods fairest offers his sweetest invitations his greatest sympathies and amplest curtesies if this doctrine be true come very little short I think of Absolons feast Ioabs congie the kisse of Iudas and the Hyaenaes teares for in all these aliud animo vult aliud verbis significat he sayeth one thing
but to draw them up by these to an expectation of better things and a carefull endeavour to please God that they might obtain them But what blessings had the Gentiles more than common blessings doth he particulate any And as for the expectation of better things than the things of this world whereunto he pretends God doth draw them hereby what oracle hath he for this Prosper in the Book wherein he insists hath nothing at all of any possibility of knowledge of God unto salvation arriveable unto by the meere contemplation of the creature neither have I found any such Oracle throughout the Nation of the Arminians Nay he professeth plainly that that knowledge of God which is attaineable by the contemplation of the creature is not sufficient unlesse he enjoy the true light to discusse the darknesse of mans heart De vocatione Gent. l. 2. cap. 6. his words are these Tam acerbo natura humana vulnere sauciata est ut ad cognitionem Dei neminem contemplatio spontanea plenè valeat erudire nisi obumbrationem cordis vera lux discusserit And the Apostle more than once professeth of the Gentiles that they were without hope And the tast of the powers of the world to come seemes to be by the Apostle ascribed to the word of God as the cause of it Heb. 6. Yet 't is true the Heathen had odde notions of a condition after death as many as believed the immortality of the soule but where I pray was it upwards in heaven or downewards rather under the earth as Styx Phlegeton and the Campi Elisii yet Cicero looks upwards I confesse in his Tusculans questions but yet he goes no farther than the starres and this was their expectation of better things though Adrian an Emperour and a Schollar too bemoans himselfe that he knew not what should become of his poore soule Animula vagula blandula Hospes comesque corporis Quae tu abibis in loca nec ut soles dabis jocos horridula rigida nudula But this Author most confidently supposeth that these better things are manifest by the creatures by the contemplation whereof he might attaine to the knowledge of them and then I doubt not but he might entertaine a hope to attaine them provided he carefully endeavoured to please God which this Author conceaves to have been very possible and therewithall knew what that was by doing whereof he might be sure to please God And all this he obtrudes upon his Reader by a most dissolute course without one crumme of reason for it In like sort he discourseth very confidently of the end of man without distinction of any relation hereof as if the end of man were equally known as well by light of nature as by revelation of Gods word Solomon telleth us That God made all things for himselfe even the wicked against the day of evill Was this known to the Gentiles by the light of nature Not one of all the Philosophers of old acknowledged the Worlds creation out of nothing and who ever manifested any such faith among them as of enjoying a perpetuall society with God in heaven But it may be they all erred in interpreting the book of nature aright and understanding the language thereof concerning this poynt of faith This Author may doe well to cleare the World of this errour and that out of the book of the creatures and then proceed to interpret unto us therehence a generall resurrection also And if he could find Christ there too togeather with the Incarnation of the Sonne of God and his death and passion resurrection and ascension and sitting at the right hand of God to make request for us and our justification by faith in him togeather with regeneration also and the generall judgement then no doubt though the Gospell should continue to be a scandall to the Jewes yet surely through the incomprehensible benefit of his comfortable atchievements it should continue no longer to be foolishnesse unto the Gentiles only our faith should then cease and be turned into sight before we are brought to the seeing of the face of God And yet I see no great need of Christ if it be in the power of an Heathen man to know what it is to please God and to have an heart to please him For certainly as many as know what it is to please God and have an heart to please him God will never hurt them much lesse damne them to hell Yet the Apostle telleth us that they that are in the flesh cannot please God but whether this Author thinks Heathens to be amongst the number of them that are in the flesh I know not But I little wonder when an Arminian spirit of giddinesse hath possessed him if he proceed to the confounding not only of the Law with the Gospell but heathenisme also such as might be with Christianity But suppose a man might attaine to as much knowledge by the meere contemplation of the book of nature as we doe obtain by the Revelation of Gods word yet we that conceive the knowledge of Gods word to be no impediment to the absolutenesse of reprobation must needs find our selves as much as nothing streightned herein by this Authors roaving discourse as touching the generall providence of God in his works as long as that of the Apostle he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth shall stand and be received for the word of God we shall never want ground for maintaining the absolutenesse both of election by the one and by just proportion of Reprobation also by the other For so long as God doth absolutely and according to the meere pleasure of his will decree to have mercy upon some by giving them faith and repentance for the curing of their infidelity and hardnesse of heart this is very sufficient to maintain the absolutenesse of election unto grace and if God doth absolutely and according to the meere pleasure of his will decree to harden others by denying them the grace of faith and repentance so to leave their naturall infidelity and hardnesse of heart uncured this shall be as sufficient to maintaine the absolutenesse of Reprobation from grace As for election unto salvation though the decree thereof can admit no cause yet we say that God by this decree doth not decree to bestow salvation on any man of ripe yeares but by way of reward of faith repentance and good workes as for the decree of Reprobation from glory and to damnation though the decree hath no cause yet we say that God by this decree doth not decree to inflict damnation on any but for sinne unrepented of only I confesse that as touching the interpretation of those words of Saint Paul He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth I doe not know how it may be charmed by good witts least it may seem repugnant to some reason gathered by contemplation of the creatures for some affect such a
gracious intent of promoting the eternall good of men by his blessings bestowed upon them For argumentum ab eventu ad intentionem Dei non valet because no sinfull event is properly under Gods will and decree but his prescience only or at most under a permissive decree and many things happen in the World which are besides the antecedent and principall purpose of God not because there is any want of power in God but because his will is oftentimes conditionall and therefore not effected because the condition is not performed TWISSE Consideration THe gifts of grace he speakes of are three 1. The knowledge of God revealed in his workes 2. Christ 3. The Gospell for these alone are they whereof the objection proceeds which he proposeth to be answered Of the first it is most true that the end thereof represented in the objection is effected by it to wit the bereaving men of excuse as namely in a certain kind which Austin interpreteth De grat lib. arb c. 2. in this manner Quomodo dicit inexcusabiles nisi de illa excusatione qua dicere solet humana superbia si scissem fecissem ideo non feci quia nescivi How doth he call them inexcusable but in respect of such an excuse which the pride of man moveth him to use saying had I known it I would have done it therefore I did it not because I knew it not thus the Gentiles were left without excuse in turning the glory of the incorruptible God to the similitude of the image of a corruptible man c. And for as much as he had sufficiently manifested himselfe by his workes to be eternall and consequently uncorruptible So that knowledge sufficiently revealed doth alwaies take away the pretence of ignorance for a mans excuse whether a man have any need of excuse as in case he lives not answerable to his knowledge or no need at all to excuse himselfe as in case he doth conforme himselfe to that knowledge which God hath given him in which case he is not said to be inexcusable though pretence of ignorance by way of excuse is taken from him as well as from others but because he hath no need of any such excuse as depends upon pretence of ignorance therefore he is not denominated inexcusable but such only who would excuse themselves by such a pretence but cannot But as touching the other gifts of grace mentioned to wit 1. Christ 2. The Gospell 't is most untrue that the end specified is effected by them for Christ doth not effect the falling of any neither is the setting of him up any cause of any mans falling neither is the stumbling of any effected by the Preaching of the Gospell for what is mens stumbling thereat but their disobedience thereunto 1 Pet. 2. 8. Now the Gospell doth not effect any mans disobedience but the corrupt heart of man alone is the efficient cause thereof And I cannot sufficiently wonder at so crude a conceit as this Author manifesteth by so inconsiderate an expression I grant the end primarily intended was no other then Gods glory But as for the salvation of Reprobates that is neither primarily nor secondarily nor at all intended by God as I have often demonstrated both in as much as God hath from everlasting intended their damnation and therefore cannot without contradiction intend their salvation And withall God is unchangeable and omnipotent and therefore as he can procure the Salvation of any if withall he intends and wills to procure it undoubtedly such a one shall be saved Against all which this Author proceeds without taking any course to charme those foule absurdities whereinto he precipitates himselfe And when he saith of the stumbling of many at the Gospell that it is not primarily intended he doth most inconsiderately confesse that it is intended by God though not primarily which is enough for us and the Apostle is expresse professing of such who stumble at the word through disobedience That thereunto they were ordained 1 Pet. 2. 8. Neither doe we say that the Gospell or Christ is the cause of any mans falling but onely the occasion thereof mans corrupt heart alone as formerly I said being the cause thereof But God intends their stumbling shall come to passe which must needs be in case it is through disobedience that they stumble and God hath purposed to deny them the grace of obedience as indeed he hath to many like as he doth deny it to many as appeareth by his hardening of many even whom he will like as on the other side he hath mercy on whom he will So Christs carriage was not the cause but the occasion only of the Jewes plotting against him because they observed that he did many miracles and if they let him alone all men would believe in him and the Romans would come and take away both their place and the Nation Ioh. 11. 47 48. Yet look what they did against him God had before intended and determined to be done For both Herod and Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and people of Israell were gathered together to doe what Gods hand and counsell had determined before to be done Acts 4. 28. Yet not primarily intended neither for all this was to a farther end namely to procure the redemption of the World yea of some of them who crucified him Yet there was a farther end than all this namely the glory of God in the way of mercy mixt with justice and that brought to passe by admirable power and wisdome This was first in Gods thoughts and resolutions as the supreame end all the rest were but as meanes tending thereunto yet doe we not say this was intentionally in Gods first thoughts and resolutions which is as if he should say intentionally in Gods intentions and with the like genius of sobriety he distinguisheth between occasionally and intentionally inclosing the tearmes with a parenthesis as if there were some great judgement though little wit in this distinction and therefore would have it observeable Occasion is justly distinguished from a cause but I never found it distinguished from intention till now It seemes he would say accidentally or casually for such alone are praeter intentionem if any and so fit to be opposed to intentionally but this distinction sticks in his teeth he was loath in plaine tearmes to expresse so shamefull an opinion as to professe that any thing comes to passe in the World besides Gods intention which is the distinction of things fortuitous in Aristotle Nay he leaves place for Gods intention of them secondarily denying only that he intends them primarily But still he keepes this conclusion and holds that up whatsoever becomes of his premises as when he saith God intends them for them for their good that is his Oracle but Saint Pauls Oracle is that the invisible things of God that is his eternall power and Godhead are seen by the Creation of the World being considered in his workes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
the decision whereof carryeth with it the decision of all the rest this Author should unshamefacedly decline it But some there be that hate the light because their workes are evill but doth it become him to taxe others for declining the triall when none sheweth more vile carriage this way then himselfe What that Privy-Councellor was I know not nor have I any evidence of the truth of the story but as it lyeth dictated at pleasure I have shewed how it nothing disadvantageth our cause though the Author of that speech were not only a Privy-Councellor but a great Divine too Yet amongst many good there might be some bad in Queen Elizabeths dayes If that were true which is reported to have been mentioned by D r Lively in a Lecture of his in Cambridge namely that a certaine Booke was found under a Privy-Councellors pillow whose inscription was this De tribus Mundi impostoribus Mose Christo Mahumite As for fate stoicall to give the Divell his right I no where find it maintained by any of them so as to prejudice mens wills but by many great ones I find this expresly denyed and hereof I have already spoken more at large Still he keepes his course in impugning an absolute decree determining mens ends precisely What secret misteries he conceales in the Word precisely I know not but it is aparent we maintaine no such determining the Salvation of any man so as to exclude a Godly life We both know and teach that without Holinesse as much as to say without a Godly life no man shall see God But we further say that this is not wholy the decree of predestination though this Author with his Remonstrants would faine rest here but we farther say that a Godly life is the gift of Gods grace and that God bestowes this gift on whom he will but this Author hath no great lust to oppose us here The more Equivocall a phraise is the fitter it is to serve his turne that lyes upon advantages to promote error and obscure truth And therefore keepes himselfe to the absolute decree and precise determinations either not understanding or not considering that an absolute decree may be takendivers waies either quoad actum volentis as touching the act of God willing or quoad res volitas as touching the things willed the decree properly signifies the act of God willing but this Author in consideratly takes it quoad res volitas as touching the things willed all along as appeares by his oppossing it to decree or will conditionall And will conditionall with him is such as when the thing willed is not effected because the condition is not performed They are his owne words in the last Section save one of his former sorts of reasons the very last words As for example the will of Saving men is not accomplished because men doe not believe Then as touching the things willed Gods decrees being considered here also arise different considerations for as much as the things willed are different Grace and Glory As for Glory and Salvation we doe not say that God hath decreed to confer that absolutly but only conditionally yet thereupon he stiks throughout supposing his adversaries to maintaine an absolute decree concerning the conferring of Salvation abolutely which is most untrue wherein he fights without any adversary yet there he dischargeth himselfe very strenuously and layes about him like a mad man But as for grace to wit the grace of regeneration the grace of faith and repentance this we readily professe that God doth bestow it absolutly to wit on whom he will according to the meere pleasure of his will All this It is the glory of this Author in his discourse most juditiously to confound which made him the more to abound in matter that he might seem to say some thing when indeed it is nothing supple to the purpose And to meet with him in every particular of his conclusion The events to wit of Salvation or damnation are not at all decreed by God to come to passe absolutely but meerely conditionally and consequently not unavoydably but avoydably rather like as things that come to passe contingently doe come to passe with a possibility not to come to passe and accordingly God decreed they should came to passe contingently And consequently mens actions hereabouts are not unprofitable nay they are both necessary for obtayning the ends here intimated such as never faile of obtayning them As for example Sanctification of the spirit and faith of the truth never faile of procuring Salvation for as much as God ordained by these meanes to bring men unto Salvation 2 Thess 2. 13. And by no meanes else And therefore most absurd it is to conceive that the practise of Godlinesse proves unprofitable and from such wild promises the unprofitable nature of the prctise of Godlinesse can prove no better then a wild conclusion I come to his two witnesses the first is Calv. Inst l. 3. c. 23. sect 14. Si quis ita plebem compellet si non creditis ideo fit quia jam divinitus exitio destinati estis is non modo ignaviam fovet sed indulget malitiae This saith this Author is as much to say as this If a man should set downe the doctrine of Reprobation in its colours and explaine it to people in a cleare and lively fashion he would hereby open a doore to liberty and prophanenesse Now this Calvin delivereth as out of Austin as appeareth both by his entrance hereunto and by his shutting up of it His entrance into it is this Et tamen ut singulare aedificationis studium sancto viro fuit that is Austin sic docendi veri rationem temperat ut prudenter caveatur quoad licet offensio Nam iquae vere dicuntur congruenter simul posse dici admonet The man he speakes of still is Austin as is apparent to him that shall consider the coherence of this Section with the former Then he sets downe the inconvenient manner of Preaching this truth as Austin doth though not in Austins words but in his owne Si quis ita plebem compellet si non creditis ideo fit quia jam divinitus exitio destinati estis c. And shutting the whole up he expressely names Austin misliking such manner of Preaching thus Tales itaque Augustinus non immerito tanquam vel insulsos Doctores vel sinistros ominosos Prophetas ab Ecclesia jubet facessere What is the mystery then of this that Calvin is here brought in for a witnesse in making a relation of Austins discourse and Austin himselfe whose judgement Calvin doth but relate is pretermitted especially considering that Austins testimony where it serves his turne would give farre more credit to his cause then Calvins you will give me leave to guesse at the mistery which I take to be this Calvin is well known to be opposite unto him in the doctrine of reprobation but Calvin acknowledging that this Doctrine might be delivered in a harsh
save it being no way fit that a temporall thing should be made the condition of a thing eternall such as is Gods will to save And this is more apparent by the reading of Vossius himselfe Histor Pelag l 7. treating of Gods will to save all Now if we speake thus of Gods will quoad res volitas as touching the things willed these things willed being very different wee have reason to consider them distinctly also Now these things are either grace or glory cōmonly called Salvation And as touching grace to wit the grace of regeneration the grace of faith and repentannee we willingly confesse that Gods will to conferre them is so absolute that he hath determined to conferre them according to the meere pleasure of his will not according to mans workes which is plaine Pelagianisme and condemned in the Synod of Palestine above 1200 yeares agoe and as he gives them to whom he will so he denyes them to whom he will according to that Rom. 9. 18. He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth But as touching Salvation or damnation in which respect this Author usually speakes of the absolute or conditionall will of God we uttererly deny that God in the dispensation or administration or execution of these proceeds or ever did decree to proceed according to the meere pleasure of his owne will but altogether according to theire workes For albeit God hath made no law according whereto he meanes to proceed in giving or denying grace yet hath he made a law according whereto he proceeds in bestowing Salvation and inflicting damnation And the law is this Whosever believeth shall be Saved Whosoever believeth not shall bedamned 2 Cor. 5. 10. We 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 he hath done whether good or evill So that according to that sence wherein this Author usually speakes of the absolute and conditionall will of God we utterly deny that God doth absolutely elect any man to Salvation or reject any man unto damnation though he doth absolutely elect some unto grace that is to the grace of regeneration to the grace of faith and repentance and absolutely reject others there from For as much as he bestowes these graces on some and denies them unto others not according to their workes but according to the meere pleasure of his owne will but he doth not inflict damnaton or bestow Salvation according to the meere pleasure of his will but according unto mans works And as he carrieth himselfe in the execution of Salvation and damnation after the same manner he did from everlasting decree to carry himselfe namely to Save no man of ripe yeares but by way of reward of their faith repentance and good workes so to damne none but for their infidelity impenitency and evill works As for the manifestation of Gods will of election and reprobation unto any we say that ordinarily man may be assured of his election For the spirit of God is given to this very end even to shed the love of God in our hearts that is Gods love towards us Rom 5. 5. And what is the shedding therefore in our hearts but his working in us a sense and feeling thereof especially considering that the sence of Gods love to us is the cause of our love to wards God according to that 1 John 4. 19. We love him because he loved us first and accordingly the spirit is sayd to testifie unto our spirits that we are the sonnes Rom. 8. And if sonnes then heyres even heyres of God and heyres annexed with Christ And the Apostle S t Peter exhorts us to give diligence te make our election vocation sure implying manifestly that men may be sure of their election otherwise why should our Saviour wish his Disciples to rejoyce not in this that Divells were subdued unto them but that their names were writen in Heaven And by what meanes may a man be assured hereof but either immediatly by the testimony of the spirit or mediatly by the fruits of the spirit as the fruits of our election one where of is faith plainly so signified Act 13. 48. As many believed as were ordained to everlasting Life And Act. 2. last God added daily to the Church such as should be Saved And repentance is another Act. 11. 18. Then hath God unto the Gentiles also given repentance unto life Giving to understand that as many as to whom God giveth repentance he hath ordained them unto life And indeed by the worke of our faith and labour of our love and the patience of our hope others come to be assured of our election how much more our selves no man knowing the things of mā so as the spirit of man 1 Cor 2. Thus S t Paul professeth his assurance of the election of the Thessalonians 1 Thess 1. 3 4. We remember the worke of your faith and the labour of your love c. Knowing beloved bretheren that ye are elect of God And hereupon he proceeds to assure them that Antichrist by all his deceiveablenesse of unrighteousnesse shall never prevaile over them in as much as he prevailes only over them that perish 2 Thess 2. 10. But as for them they are the elect of God And how doth he know that Surely by their faith and sanctification which were visible in them v 13. But we ought to give God thankes allwayes for you bretheren beloved of the Lord because that God hath from the begining chosen you unto Salvation by sanctification of the spirit and faith of the truth But as for reprobation we say that no man can by any ordinary way be assured thereof seing nothing but finall perseverance in infidelity or impenitency is the infallible signe thereof whence it followes that no way of desperation is open to one but the way of assurance and abundance of consolation is opened to the other and thereby encouragement to proceed cheerefully in the wayes of Godlinesse being assured that the more holy they are the greater shall be their reward And surely if certainty of salvation were a meanes of licentiousnesse the Apostle S. Peter would never have exhorted us to give diligence to make our calling and election sure And we manifestly seem to perceive strength of encouragement hereby unto Godlinesse as being assured that Christ dyed for us to the end we might live unto him And God receives us as Sonnes and Daughters to this end that we should purge our selves from all pollutions of flesh and spirit and perfect holinesse in the feare of God As also being assured that God will not lay our infirmities and sinnes unto our charge and will be ready to keepe us from presumptuous sinnes and however it fares with us Yet sinne shall not have dominion over us and consequently we shall have the victory over it either by obedience or by repentance because we are not under the
true faith or no but surely so farre as we are perswaded of the truth of our faith so farre have we no cause to doubt of our election But this of Zanchius is no more to the purpose whereunto this Authour alleadgeth it than that of Bucers 4. In the last place I come to the relation of Georgius Major of a certaine Schoole-Master in Hungary Petrus Hosuanus by name for so I find him called in Dietricus though this Authour calls him Ilosuanus mistaking belike the copy which he transcribed Now Dietricus relates it as out of Georgius Major as this Author doth But I wonder not a little that Osiander in his last Century makes no mention of it that I can find though I have searched after it as the Woman in the Gospell did after her lost groat Whether he gave any credit to Georgius Major his relation I know not or whether any thing came to his knowledge afterwards as touching the unfaithfullnesse thereof But take we it as it lyes in this Authours relation 1. That he professed himselfe of Calvins and Austins opinion I hope this makes no more against Calvin and us then it doth against Austin and all those that tooke part with him against the Pelagians in his dayes and the remnants of them afterwards But if his opinion was that men are not dealt withall secundum bona or mala opera but that there are occultiores causae of mens Eternall conditions will any sober Arminian impute this unto us Doe we say that God damnes any man but for sinne or that God rewards any man of ripe yeares with Salvation but by way of reward of theire faith repentance and good-workes When the Remonstrants at the Hague conference proposed their doctrine of predestination and reprobation after this manner namely That God from eternity did ordaine to save believers and to damne unbelievers to this effect Did any of the Contra-Remonstrants or any of the Synod of Dort except against the truth of this But whereas the Remonstrants and Arminians did acknowledge this to be the whole decree of predestination and reprobation Against this exception was tooke both in the Hague conference and in the Synod of Dort and Theses also by divers forraine Divines laid downe against it particularly by our Brittayne Divines amongst others All of them maintaining that there was an other decree concerning the giving of the grace of regeneration of the grace of faith and repentance unto some and denying it unto others And this decree we willingly maintain proceeds not no not in the execution thereof according to mens workes good or evill whatsoever be the end of any that maintaine it The contrary namely that grace is given according unto workes being a doctrine generally condemned in the Church from the yeare 415 at that time it was condemned in the Synod of Palestine and Pelagius himselfe driven to subcribe unto it otherwise himself had been anathematized But this Authour delivers it as the opinion of Hosuanus concerning mens Eternall conditions whereby I take to be meant Salvation and Damnation And indeed as here the doctrine is expressed it is more agreable with the doctrine of the Predestinarians as Sigebert relates it then with the doctrine either of Austin or Calvin and the same Sigebert writes not that it was Austins doctrine but that it rose out of the misunderstanding of Austins writings Yet I confesse that Tyro Prosper before Sigebert spares not to professe of that Predestinarian hereby that it rose from Austin as Dr Vsher observeth But this was a meere practice of the Semi-Pelagians corrupting the doctrine of Austin the better to expose it to obloquy and reproach 2. As for the second that he was one of the woefull company of absolute castawayes Herein the Author of this discourse accomodates himselfe to his own stage Throughout Dietricus his relation I find no mention of any such distinction as of reprobates and absolute reprobates but an acknowledgement certum esse numerum salvandorum praedestinatorum vel ad vitam vel ad mortem And of himselfe that he was ex numero damnatorum but I doe not find the word absolute throughout That his life was none of the worst himselfe was no competent judge yet I confesse there are degrees of prophanenesse and hypocrisy and the very reprobates are not equall in sinne And withall a morall life is esteemed in the world in respect of their conversation towards men but we know that to deny Gods truth and to oppose it against the light of conscience is of an higher nature in the sight of God and usually is of more fearfull consequence Of Francis Spira I find no complaints made in respect of his morality towards men but he laid unto his own charge That he had sinned against the holy Ghost Yet neither this Hosuanus nor Spira doe I find to have broken forth into any blasphemy against Gods justice in reprobating them Nay this latter was heard strangely to discourse of the justice of God without any murmuring against his power And in our time we have heard of strange examples of some that have gone soberly on to the destroying of themselves in a very devout acknowledgement of Gods justice in giving them over 3. As touching the dreadfull apprehensions of Gods wrath I nothing doubt but when God gives men over to the power of Satan they may be so improved by him as to make a man weary of his life though I find not this specified in Dietricus who yet relates this story out of Georgius Major But I read the like in Goulartius his collections of a desperate man in his time dying that said among many other horrible speeches that he wished to be already in Hell And being demanded the cause of so wicked a desire For that said he the apprehension of torments which doe attend me cause me presently to feele a double Hell when I shall feele it at the full I shall not exspect it any more But no mention throughout of any opinion of his concerning Divine reprobation that moved him thereunto The words here alleadged Discedo ad lacus infernales Deo vos commendo cujus misericordia mihi negata est These I say and the matter of these alone I find in Dietericus his relation out of Georgius Major on 2 Tym. c. 2. p. 59. 6. It runs thus Ait in Hungaria multis aliis locis notissimum esse de homine quodam Calviniano Petro Hosuano Rectore Scholae Gengerinae qui ex desperatione sibi ipsi laqueo injecto vitam finivit Anno 1562. die 22. Julii relicto manuscripto in quo praeter alia haec exstitere O me infaelicissimum omnium quia satius fuisset me nunquam natum Verum est certum esse numerum salvandorum hoc ex me sed quid ad me Hoc ità necessariò fieri debuit Nemo igitur argumentetur Deus omnes vocat longe secùs se res habet Calvini sententiam de certo praedestinatorum numero item
great or small because Gods mercy and Christs merits belong not to him In this very story recorded by Coelius Secundus and Calvin with some others who lived at that time and wrote of it to their friends as in a glasse we may see the disconsolate condition of a poore soule that is strongly conceited that the greatest part of the world are absolute reprobates and that he is one of them he sticketh so fast in the mire and clay that he can very hardly be drawne out TWISSE Consideration THis Section I may fitly divide into two parts The first whereof is a pretty Comedy The second a Tragedy The first is practised by this Authour in a dialogue shaped by himselfe and accordingly accomodated to his owne stage as an Enterlude of his owne making The Tragedy is related only of Francis Spira and I willingly confesse It is the strangest that ever I heard or read of a man going on soberly to the utter undoing of himselfe both body and soule But the relation of it is most hungryly performed by this Authour as if his care were only to serve his owne turne and then cares not what becomes of the maine condition of the story which indeed is most remarkable I have but touched upon it in former passages but here I shall insist upon it more at large and the rather because it is here proposed not more unfaithfully then impiously to deface or out-face the precious truth of God concerning his absolutenesse in making whom he will a vessell of wrath But first I must dispatch my answer to the Antegredients of those two parts And let it be remembred what formerly I have delivered that still he confounds reprobation from grace with reprobation from glory as if we maintained the absolutenesse of the one as well as we do maintain the absolutenesse of the other which is most untrue For albeit we maintaine that God hath decreed absolutely to bestow grace upon some which are Gods elect and absolutely to deny grace unto others whom we account Reprobates here upon not conditionally for if grace were ordayned to be bestowed conditionally to wit upon condition of some worke performed by man then should grace be bestowed according unto workes which in the phrase of the Ancients is all one with saying that grace is bestowed according unto merits And this was condemned above 1200 yeares agoe in the Synod of Palestine Pelagius driven to subscribe unto it lest otherwise himselfe had bin excommunicated But we doe not maintain that God hath ordayned that damnation shall be absolutely inflicted on any but only conditionally to wit in case they dye in sin Yet it became this Authors wisdom to confound them least distinguishing them as they ought to be distinguished carrying himselfe fairly in opposing the absolutenes of reprobation there alone where alone it is maintained by his adversaries to wit in the particular of reprobation from grace he should at first dash manifest himselfe to maintain that grace is bestowed not according to the good pleasure of God but according to the workes of men and that upon this ground it is that he buildeth the comfortable condition of his doctrine concerning predestination which indeed makes no difference in Gods proceedings between the elect and reprobate but respects them all alike For their power to believe and repent is their grace universall which they say is given to all alike So exciting grace in the ministry of the Word is equally made to all that heare it whether elect or reprobate And these are the kinds of grace prevenient Then as for grace subsequent that consists only in Gods concurrence unto the act of faith and repentance which depends meerely upon mans will in their opinion and God is as ready to concurre to the working of it as well in one as in another in case man will On the other side it would appeare that our doctrine is censured as uncomfortable only because it teacheth man for the obtaining of true comfort to depend meerely upon the grace of God and not upon his owne free-will Againe observe how that like as Gregory observes that the same spirit of Antichrist might be found in them that are farre distant in time so an Arminian spirit savoreth the same things one with an other and perhaps at unawars though they in whom it is found be much distant in place Vossius in his last booke of his History of the Pelagian heresy sayth That our Divines doe aleadge that place of S t Paul against their adversaries in the poynt of predestination as the head of Medusa a place indeed that clearely justifies Gods absolutenesse both in predestination and reprobation And this Authour sayeth that our doctrine on the same poynt is like to Gorgons head Now the Learned well know that Gorgon and Medusas head have no difference Now whether our doctrine be so uncomfortable as this Authour objects it will appeare when we come to examine the paroxysme and fit of temptation especially the kind of it being such as this Authour out of his fruitfull invention hath made choyce of to represent as able to elude the strongest arguments of comfort and they applyed with as much art and cunning as canne be supposing that of this art and cunning also he hath given plentifull testimony in the succeeding dialogue which is a very remarkeable passage of this Authours sufficiency especially comming out of his owne mouth Of the integrity whereof there seemes no cause to doubt considering that Arminian ingenuity and modesty whereunto he hath lately arrived He further addes as much weight to his former assertions as words can which though they be but wind yet with some who Camelion like live by the ayre may prove very weighty saying that this doctrine of ours is incompatable with any word of comfort which is very much though a word and any word be very little that can be ministred to a distressed soule in this temptation Now it is very likely that in his dialogue following he brings in as potent arguments of consolation as our doctrine will afford The heads or placss of consolation he reckons up Gods love to mankind Christs death for all mankind and the calling of poore sinners without exception to repentance and Salvation with all other grounds of comfort and all arguments he sayeth drawne from hence our opinion will elude and preclude all consolation from the distressed soule But give me leave to make a faire motion as touching the speciall heades of consolation here particulated If it shall be found that these heads of consolation doe admit a double sense one of the Arminian making an other of our interpreting if consolations drawne therefrom in an Arminian sence be eluded by our Tenet will any disparagement thereby arise to our tenet provided we find store of consolatiō from them taken in our sense especially being ready to admit any indifferent tryal concerning the sense thereof whether theirs or ours prove most agreeable to
touching the Act of God reprobating we say as Aquinas saith concerning the Act of God predestinating namely that no cause can be given thereof as from man like as no cause can be given of God's will God's will being eternall but whatsoever is in man being Temporall But as touching the things decreed or willed by Reprobation these are either the deniall of grace or inflicting of damnation As touching the deniall of grace we clearely professe that like as God of his mere will and pleasure doth shew mercy on some in bestowing the grace of faith and repentance upon them so God of his mere will and pleasure doth harden others in denying unto them the grace of saith and repentance and thus it is that Doctor Fulke maintaines God's election reprobation to be most free of his owne free will not upon the foresight of the merits of either of thē but touching the inflicting of damnation we maintaine that God neither doth inflict damnation nor ever did decree to inflict damnation of his owne mere pleasure and will but altogether for sinne either originall or actuall further we maintaine that in no moment of time or nature God doth decree to damne any man before he foreseeth the sinne for which they shall be damned 2. As touching the second we willingly grant that by vertue of God's decree it necessarily and unavoidably followes that whosoever dieth in finall impenitency shall be damned neither doe I thinke this Authour dares to avouch the contrary Secondly as touching finall impenitency wee willingly professe that upon supposition of God's decree finally to harden a man and to deny a man the grace of repentance It being clearely the gift of God as Scriptures testifie Act 5. 31 and 11. 18. 2 Tim 2 25 it is impossible that such a man should repent neverthelesse both repentance is possible and finall impenitency is avoidable simply to wit by grace 3. But this Authour loves not to explicate himselfe but I suppose he secretly maintaines that every man hath such a power by grace wherby he may repent if he will concerning which Tenent of his we nothing doubt but every man hath such a power but we deny that such a power is grace we say it is nature rather and that for this reason looke by what power a man may repent if he will by the same power he may ref use to repent if he will Now if this were grace then were grace inferior to a morall vertue for no morall vertue leaves a man indifferent to doe good or no to doe good or evill but inclines and disposeth the will only to that which is good so Justice disposeth a man only to just actions not indifferentlie to that which is just or to that which is unjust T is true neverthelesse a man that is just may doe an unjust Act if he will but this is not by vertue of the habit of Justice wherewith he is qualified But only by reason of the freedome of his will wich is naturall unto him for justice undoubtedly inclines a man's will only to that which appeareth just and so every morall vertue inclines the will only to a vertuous Act not indifferently either to acts vertuous or to acts vicious like as on the contrary a vicious habit inclines the will of man only to acts vicious not indifferently to acts vicious or to acts vertuous Secondly grace is supernaturall it were a Monster in Divinitie to say that supernaturall grace doth indifferently incline a man either to good or evill it is impossible it should incline a man save to acts supernaturall now every supernaturall act must needs be gratious it cannot be sinfull or evill lastly whosoever hath a willto repent such a one hath not only a power to repent but actually doth repent as touching the cheifest facultiein the change whereof repentance doth consist for that is the will and it is God that worketh in us both the will and the deed in every kind of that which is truly good and surely to have a will to repent is a good thing if he want power let him and us pray for that out of that will and desirewe have to repent ut quod volumus implere valeamus that what we desire to doe we may be able to doe and we have no cause to feare that God will despise so gratious desires To these speeches let me adde that of Remigius Arch-bishop of Lyons who to Rabanus Arch-bishop of Mentz objecting that Saint Austine wrote a booke called Hipognosticon against Pelagius and Coelestius wherein he denied that Reprobates were properly praedestinati ad interitum predestinate to destruction answereth that Saint Austine said not so but some other man as it is supposed to purge the Church of calumnie which some ill affected ones did cast upon it namely that it taught that God by his predestination did impose upon men a necessity of perishing and did withdraw the word Praedestination from the point of Reprobates and gave it only to the Elect and so gave great occasion of further Errour and mistake In this speech of his it is clearely implyed that it was the constant Doctrine of the Church then that Reprobates lye under no necessitating Decree of Perdition Here we find inserted a passage taken out of Remigius Arcsh-bishop of Lions his answer to Rabanus Arch-bishop of Mentz as it is to be found in the Historie of Gottescalchus written by Doctor Usher Arch-bishop of Armach pag. 107. Now that discourse of Remigius is not in answer to Rabanus Arch-bishop of Mentz but unto Hincmarus Arch-bishop of Remes And withall this Authour is pleased to geld it as he thinkes good For whereas Remigius hath it thus quasi Deus sua praedestinatione necessitatem imponeret hominibus in suis impietatibus permanendi in aeternum pereundi This Authour renders it thus That God by his predestination did impose upon men a necessity of perishing leaving out altogether the former namely of imposing upon men a necessite of perishing in their impieties And every sober man may well wonder at his dealing in this especially seeing he hath left out that which is most materiall and most considerable for neither by Austin's Doctrine nor by our Doctrine hath God imposed upon any a necessitie of perishing but such as finally persevere in their impieties And will any man that is well in his wits oppose this Sure I am nor Hincmarus nor any other was knowne to mee to oppose this in the Church of God Neither is there any necessitie inherent in man on whom it is said to be imposed but a consequent denomination to God's unchangeable or irresistable will to damne all such as persist finally in their sinfull courses without breaking thē off by repentance All the question is about the necessity of Reprobates persisting in their impieties which might be objected as it seemes was objected against Austin's doctrine of Predestination by this Authour is objected against ours now by this
preparatur Reprobatis in quantum scil Deus proponit se puniturum malos propter peccata quae à se ipsis habent non à Deo The foresight of sinnes may be some reason of reprobation as touching the punishment which is prepared for Reprobates in asmuch as God decreeth to punish wicked men for their sinnes which they have of themselves not of God But of reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating there can be noe more cause thereof then there can be a cause of God's will as touching the act of God willing And upon this very ground it is that Aquinas professeth that * never any man was so mad as to affirme that there may be a cause given of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating Let us therefore forbeare to impute any such opinion to Prosper or any other of the Antients which none ever was so mad as to maintaine in the judgment of Aquinas The same answer will serve for the next derived out of the same place in Prosper As for the third of withdrawing strength of obedience This indeed was objected unto Austine as if in his opinion God did so wheras I have shewed also how Austine signifies that he had nothing to doe with that and therefore he leaves that quite out And indeed Austin's is cleare and expresse that as many as God hath not predestinated those he never bring 's unto wholsome and spirituall repentance whereby a man is reconciled unto God in Christ Cont Iulian Pelag lib. 5. cap. 4. And consequently he never brings them to any true obedience The whole sentence in Prosper hath no more moment then the former and therefore admits the same answer A testimony or two I will borrow likewise from some person of note and those Saint Austin's followers too who lived about 400 yeares after Saint Austin's time Remigius the great Patron of Gotteschalke the zeatous preacher and publisher of absolute reprobation in those times in his answer to that epistle which we suppose to be the Epistle of Rabanus saying that God did make the nations of the world and that he doth will that all men should be saved he gives such an answer as cannot stand with absolute reprobation This saith he is very true because God layeth on noe man a necessity of perishing as he hath laid on none a necessity of sinning And a little after he is plainer Those whom God did fore know would live and dye in their wickednesses for reasons most just should perish as himselfe saith Him that sinneth against me even him will I blot out of my Booke In the Valantine Synod assembled in the favour of Gotteschalke we may find these words Therefore doe the wicked perish not because they could not but would not be good and by their owne fault originall or actuall also remained in the Masse of perdition And in the end of their 3. Cannon they pronounced Anathema to those that hold that men are so predestinated unto evill as they cannot be otherwise That any should be saith the Councell predestinated unto evill by the power of God so as he cannot be otherwise we doe not only not believe but also if there be any that will believe so great an evill with all detestation we denounce them accursed as the Councell also did This Authour grants Remigius to be a Patron of absolute reprobation But these words of his this Authour saith cannot stand with absolute Reprobation Remigius undoubtedly thought they could otherwise he must have renounced the Doctrine of absolute reprobation and the Patronage thereof which yet he did not as this Authour acknoledgeth Now is it enough for this Authour to say that these words cannot stand with absolute Reprobation and barely to say it without proving ought and truely I have found such to be the imperious carriage of this Authour in manuscript now I see it in print But let us endeavour to cleare Remigius by proving the Contrary indevour to cleare Remigius by proving the contrary Therefore it is well knowne that the Terme absolute stand's in opposition to Conditionall Now this distinction of will absolute and will Conditionall Gerardus Vossius doth accommodate in respect of the things willed of God and gives instance of God's will of saving which he saith is conditionall forasmuch as God purposeth not to bestow salvation on any but such as believe faith being by God's ordinance the Condition of obtaining Salvation In like sort Doctor Iackson in his book of Providence acknowledgeth the distinction of voluntas antecedens and consequens is to be understood not on the part of God willing but on the part of things willed Now the things willed in the decree of Reprobation are two contrary to things willed in Election For as in Election God doth will the conferring of grace and the conferring of salvation soe in Reprobation God doth will the deniall of grace and inflicting of damnation Now Remigius in the passages here produced speakes altogether of God's will to inflict damnation and he denies that God's will is to inflict damnation on any man absolutely but only conditionally to wit in case of finall perseverance in sinne and so say we with Remigius But as touching God's will to deny grace we utterly deny that God will have grace to be denied upon a condition for nothing can be devised to be the condition thereof but sinne either originall or actuall And if upon such a condition grace should be denied it should be denied to all seeing before grace is given all are found to be under sinne actuall or originall and consequently all should be Reprobates even every mothers sonne 2. And if to avoid this it be said although all be sinners yet grace is denyed to none but such as want a certaine particular obedience Then upon the performing of that obedience grace should be conferred this is as much as to say that Grace is conferred according unto workes which doctrine hath ever been abominated by the Orthodox in opposition unto the Pelagians Now the Apostle clearely makes for us in this professing that God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth Now though there passages produced out of Remigius carrie some shew against absolute reprobation from glorie or unto damnation yet have they noe colour or shew of opposing absolute reprobation from grace As for necessitie of perishing that is merely conditionall to wit in case of finall continuance in sinne without repentance And as for necessitie of sinning that we confesse is found in all in state of nature Corvinus confesseth it to be the doctrine of Arminius that all men naturally are cast upon a necessitie of sinning And Doctor Potter proposeth it as the doctrine of the Church of England that in a naturall man there is no libertas a peccato libertie from sinning which yet is to be understood aright not but that it is in his power to abstaine from any particular sinfull act for
others that should deale with him when in very truth all his performances savour farre more of the Fox then of the Lyon And it is also disstastfull to all the Greek Churches Moulin in his Anotomy speaking of the Supralapsarian doctrine saith if it should be so that God hath reprobated men without the consideration of sinne or hath ordained them to sinne Yet it is the part of a wise man to conceale these things or not to know them rather then to utter them because when they are taught and defended they fill mens heads with sceuples and give occasion to the adversaries to the defaming the true religion The same may as truely be said of the Sublapsarian way for as I have said they are in substance all one And Sir Edwin Sandes is of the same mind too for in his most excellent booke caled A survay of the State of Religion in the westerne part of the world speaking of the deadly division between the Luthernas and the Calvinists in Germany he hath these wordes that though â—he Palsgrave and Lansgrave have with great judgment and wisedome to slake those flames imposed silence in that part to the Ministers of their party hoping the Charitie and discretion of the other party would have done the like yet it falls out otherwise for both the Lutheran Preachers raile as bitterly against them in their pulpits as ever and their Princes and people have them in as greate detestation not forbearing to professe openly that they will returne to the Papacie rather then ever admit that Sacrementary and predestinary Pestilence And as for the Grecians we learne also by Sir Edwin Sandes his relation that they doe mightilie dissent from the doctrines touching the eternall Counsells of God which Calvin as some conceive first fully revealed or rather introduced into the Christian world and some of his friends and followers have seconded as thinking it very injurious to the goodnesse of God and directly immediatly opposite to his very nature In regard of which on of their Byshops hath written a booke against it which hath been sent to Geneva and there received And to say on thing more besides this infamy among Christians it is very probable that among the too many scandals given to the Jewes by Christians among whom they dwell This doctrine is not on of the least rubs in the way of their conversion For they thinke it a bad opinion saith the same judicious and learned Gentleman which some of great name have seemed to hold that God in his everlasting and absolute pleasure should affect the extreame miserie of any of his Creatures for the shewing of his justice and severitie in tormenting them or that the calamitie casting a way and damnation of some should absolutely and necessarily redound more to his glorie then the felicitie of them all considering that his nature is mere goodnesse and happinesse and hath noe affinity with rigour and misery And secondly the determination of the end doth necessarily involve the meanes that preceeds the end as if a man before determined to damnation he must unavoidably sinne else he could not be damned As touching this paticular of M. Moulyn I have addressed an answer puctually thereunto in my Vindiciae amongst my degressions touching predestination yet I am content to say something concerning the point it selfe and his judgment thereupon Reprobation hath two parts which this Authour most judiciously confounds the one is God's decree to deny grace the other is his decree to inflict damnation As touching the first the very execution thereof proceeds merely according to God's pleasure howmuch more the decree it selfe which is eternall and cannot possibly have any precedaneous thereunto whereas the execution is temporall and temporall things may have somewhat precedaneous thereunto Now that the execution thereof is merely according to God's good pleasure is apparent the execution thereof being no other then the denyall of grace And as God of his mere pleasure gives faith and repentance to whom he will so of his mere pleasure he denies it unto others otherwise grace should be conferred according unto workes which was condemned in the Synod of Palestine Pelagius himselfe subscribing thereunto above 1200 yeares agoe and all along afterwards it was condemned in divers Synods gatherd together for suppressing of the Pelagian Heresie Now did M. Moulin think it noe wise part to publish this doctrine That grace is not given according unto workes but according to the mere pleasure of God Nothing lesse Saint Paul plainly professing that God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth Come we to reprobation as it signifies God's decree to inflict damnation without consideration of sinne our adversaries would faine shape our opinions thus and none more eager this way then this Authour I meane him that is thought to be the suggester at first and since the Interpolator and Promotor of all this But this is a most notorious untruth nay how can we maintaine this who imbrace the definition of reprobation given by Aquinas where he saith that repobation includes a will to permit sinne and to inferre damnation for sinne so doth M. Perkins and him have I justified against Arminius in my Vindiciae And not any one of our Divines doth maintaine that God intends to damne any man but for sinne and finall perseverance therein without repentance And the former point concerning the first act of reprobation being granted which neither Sir Edwin Sandes nor any Lutheran that I know denies the doctrine concerning this latter act of reprobation will be found to containe noe difficultie at all forasmuch as we utterly deny that God either doth inflict or ever did decree to inflict damnation according to his mere pleasure but merely for finall continuance in sinne without repentance Now let every sober Reader consider whether there be any harshnesse in all this But as M. Moulin discourseth here so did the Massilienses of old concerning Austin's doctrine as which they would not have at all broached as appeares in the Epistle of Prosper Yet I commend this Authour for his ingenuous confession that the same may be said of the Sublapsarian way But to our prejudice he tells us that Sir Ed Sandes is of the same mind and therefore considering the excellencie of the booke written by him whereunto we may adde the excellencie of the discourse written by this Authour let us for the credit and transcendent sufficiencie of these two renounce not Calvin and Beza only poore Snakes as they were but the whole Synod of Dort and all the outlandish divines assembled there and manifesting their concurrance in opinion with those Synodicall Divines yea and Fulke and Whitaker and the Universitie of Cambridge as they were then affected when they drave Barret to a recantation Yet Sir Edwin Sandes in the place produced betraies not his owne judgment but makes relation of the bitternesse of Lutherans in opposing Calvinists In like manner both
foresee their wicked courses and what will become of them for it namely to be condemned to everlasting fire with the Divell and his Angells what shall we therefore conclude that God did not foresee the wicked waies and ungodly courses of all Reprobates that they would continue in them and die in their sinnes without all faith in Christ and true repentance towards God And if he did foresee what would be the ends of them in case he did create them and bring them forth into the world yet seeing he would neverthelesse create them and bring them forth into the world one after another in their severall times and ages shall we brand the holy name of God and reproach him for unnaturallnesse and barbarous crueltie Rather I will say what meanes this Auhour so unconscionably to corrupt the state of the question by mentioning only the shortnesse of their life and utterly concealing the wickednesse of their life the only meritorious cause of their torments which they suffer and accordingly to shape the ends intended by God to be only the demonstration of his power and Soveraingtie over them without all mention of his justice whereas we say that in the inflicting of damnation the cheife glory which God manifests is only the glory of his justice proceeding herein according to a law which himselfe hath made as most fit it is the Creatour should give lawes to his creature and the law is this whosoever believeth and repenteth shall be saved whosoever dyeth in sinne without repentance shall be damned Not one of our Divines that I know maintaines that inflicting damnation the Lord proceedes merely according to the good pleasure of his will in the communicating of faith and repentance we willingly confesse the Lord proceedes merely according to the good pleasure of his will and it is expresse Pelagianisme to affirme that grace is given according unto workes And herein this Authour is very well content to walke in the darke and conceale his most corrupt opinion most opposite to the grace of God But that damnation should be inflicted without respect to sinne as the meritorious cause thereof what one of our Divines can he produce that affirmeth Yet thus he is pleased to disguise our opinion when he findes the poverty of his strength to wage faire warre and so expose it to the hatred of me as if God ordained to damne men not for their sinnes but of his owne mere pleasure Thus of old the enemies of the Gospell dealt with Christians for first they would cloath them with beare skinnes and then set doggs upon them All that he hath to say to excuse his shamelesse crimination though so much he doth not expresse here is only this that our Divines maintaine the decree of damnation to preceed the foresight of sinne Yet this is untrue of the most part of them who premit both the foresight of sinne originall before reprobation from grace and of sinne actuall before the decree of damnation I willingly confesse for my part that I concurre with neither and if I should I should withall make the decree of permitting of sinne to preceed the decree of damnation for which I see no reason but yet I doe not make the decree of permitting sinne to follow the decree of damnation I hold these decrees to besimultaneous thus that God at once decrees both to create men and suffer them all to fall in Adam and to bring them forth in their severall generations into the world and to bestowe the grace of faith and repentance upon the one and so to save them and to deny the same grace unto others finally permitting them in their sinfull courses and so to damne them for sinne and all to manifest the glory of his mercy to the one and the glory of his justice on the other yea and his soveraingty too but wherein not in rewarding the one with Salvation and inflicting damnation on the other but only in giving grace to the one and not to the other And all the difference between our Divines is merely in apice Logico a point of Logick To wit as touching the right ordering of decrees concerning ends and meanes tending to the ends all concurring in this that God hath mercy on whom he will in bestowing faith and repentance upon them and whom he will he hardeneth in denying the same graces unto others Now when this Authour shall fairly prove that according to our opinion God destroyeth the righteous with the wicked then and not till then shall he prove that our faith differeth from the faith of Abraham What Divine of ours was ever knowne to affirme that God damneth any one that dyeth in repentance Yet it cannot be denied but that temporall judgments befall the righteous as well as the wicked When the Lord swept away 70 thousand with a three dayes pestilence in the land of Israel was it not possible thinks this Authour that any of God's deare children should perish by that pestilence To be caried away into captivity by an heathenish nation I should thinke is a greater calamity then to dye of the pestilence yet those who were carried away into Babylon with King Iechoniah the Lord represents by the basket of good figgs and those the Lord professeth that he had sent them away into Babylon for their good Were all damned will this Authour say that perished in the flood Saint Peter seemes to be of an other opinion where he saith To this purpose was the Gospell preached also to the end that they might be condemned also to men in the flesh but might live according to God in the spirit Truly I doe not say so much of them that perished in the conspiracy of Corah when the earth opened her mouth and swallowed up the conspirators nor them only but their wives and children also especially considering that inter pontem fontem mercy may be sought and mercy may be found Sect. 2. Containing the first Objection with the answer thereunto devised and my reply thereupon and an answer thereunto But God say some is soveraigne Lord of all creatures they are truly and properly his owne Cannot he therefore dispose of them as he pleaseth and doe with his own what he will The question is not what an almighty soveraigne power can doe to poore vassalls but what a power that is just and good may doe By the power of a Lord his absolute and naked power he can cast away the whole masse of mankind for it is not repugnant to Omnipotencie or soveraingty but by the power of a Judge to wit that actuall power of his which is alwaies cloathed with goodnesse and justice he cannot For it is not compatible with these properties in God to appoint men to hell of his mere will and pleasure no fault at all of theirs preexisting in his eternall mind It is not compatible with justice which is a constant will of rendring to every one his due and that is
a thing it is for any man to maintaine that there is some cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating So as mad a thing it must be every way to avouch that there is a cause of Reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating And truely the Apostle St. Paul plainly manifests that upon what ground he proves that Election is not of good works namely because before Iacob or Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said The elder shall serve the younger upon the same ground we may be bold to conclude that Reprobation is not of evill workes And the same reason manifests that faith and infidelity are excluded from being the causes the one of Election the other of Reprobation as well as good and evill workes And both Piscator by evidence of Scripture and Bradwardine by evidence of reason have demonstrated that no will of God is conditionall which is to be understood as touching the act of God willing And it may be evidently further demonstrated thus If any thing be the cause of God's will then either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God Not by necessity of nature as is evident and all confesse there being no colour of truth for that besides such an opinion were most dangerously prejudiciall to God's soveraignty and liberty If therefore they say it is by the constitution of God maske I pray what an insuperable absurdity followeth hereupon For seing God's constitution is his will it followeth that God did will that upon foresight of this or that he would will such a man's salvation and such a man's damnation And thus the act of God's will is made the Object of God's will even the eternall act of God's will Whereas to the contrary it is apparent that the objects of God's will are things temporall never any thing that is eternall But as touching things willed we readily grant it may be said there is a cause thereof as School-Divines doe generally acknowledge And thus Gerardus Vossius speaks of the conditionall will which he faith the Fathers doe ascribe to God For this is the instance which he gives thereof as for example when God ordaines to bestow salvation on a man in case he believe here faith is made the condition of Salvation but not of the will of God And in like manner we willingly grant that reprobation is conditionall inasmuch as God intends to inflict damnation on none but such as die in sin without repenance But albeit predestination as touching this particular thing willed may be said to be conditionall according as the School-men explicate their meaning and reprobation likewise as touching the particular of dānatiō mētioned yet no such thing cā be truely affirmed either of the one or of the other as touching the particulars of grāting or denying the grace of règeneratiō which are intended also by the decrees of predestinatiō reprobatiō For albeit God intends not to bestow salvation on any but upon condition of faith nor damnation on any but upon condition of finall impenitency and infidelity Yet God intends not to bestow the grace of regeneration on some for the curing of their naturall infidelity and impenitency Nor to leave the same infidelity and impenitency uncured in others by denying the same grace of regeneration unto them This I say God doth not intend to bring to passe upon any condition For if he should then grace should be conferred according unto works which was condemned in the Synod of Palestine and all along in divers Synods and Councells against the Pelagians So that albeit God proceeds according to a law in bestowing salvation and inflicting damnation yet he proceeds according to no law in giving or denying the grace of regeneration for the curing of our naturall corruption but merely according to the pleasure of his will as the Apostle testifies saying He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth And if the conferring and denying of this grace be absolute how much more are the decrees hereof to be accounted most absolute And consequently that one man is delivered from the power of his sins whether originall or habituall another is not but still continueth under the power of them This I say doth must needs come to passe by vertue of Gods absolute decrees Yet no absolute necessity followeth hereupon First because no greater necessity then that which is absolute can be attributed to the existence and continuance of God himselfe Secondly God did absolutely decree to make the world yet no wise man was ever known to affirme that the worlds existence was and is by absolute necessity In like sort God did absolutely decree that Iosiah should burne the Prophets bones upon the Altar That Cyrus should build his Citty and let goe his captives That no man should desire the Israelites land when they should come to appeare before the Lord their God thrice in the yeare That God would circumcise their hearts and the hearts of their children to love the Lord their God withall their heart and with all their soule To put his feare in their hearts that they should never depart away from him To cause them to walke in his statutes and judgments to doe them To worke in them both the will and the deed according to his good pleasure Yea to worke in them every thing that is pleasing in his sight through Iesus Christ Likewise that Absolom should defile his fathers Concubines that the Jewes should crucify the Son of God that some through disobedience should stumble at the word that the Kings should give their kingdomes to the beast Yet these actions were done by them as freely as ever they did ought in their lives All these things I say by Scripture evidence were decreed by God to come to passe The good by God's effection the evill by God's permission and decreed absolutely on their parts that did them if not let it be shewed upon what condition on Absolon's part he should defile his fathers Concubines upon what condition on the Jewes part they should crucify the Son of God upon what condition on their part others through disobedience should stumble at God's word And upon what condition on their part the Kings should give their kingdomes to the beast And if they take Arminias his way let them reply upon mine answere to Arminius if Bellarmin's let them reply upon my answer to Bellarmine that we may not trouble the world with out Tautologies If a different way from both these I shall be glad to be acquainted with it give it such entertainement as according to my judgment it shall be found to deserve So that with Epiphanius though we are ready to concurre in denying destiny which as before we heard out of him was a necessity derived from the starres yet with Austin we may still hold that the wills of men need not to be exempted from all necessity to maintaine the liberty
time bestowed the spirit of grace upon them to break off their sins by repentance and from grace translated into glory As for the reasons here mentioned by Mr. Mason to justifie that which my selfe and others have delivered on the former point I have noe cause to justifie because they proceed from a false ground supposing that the reason of this imputation of Adam's sinne and propagation of his corruption unto all his posterity is merely built upon this foundation that we were in Adam's loynes when he sinned which is untrue 1 In his first reason he doth miserably overlash for we could not be guilty of all the sinnes which were committed by Adam from his fall to his lifes end no not upon the ground whereon this Authour builds so long we were not in his Ioynes nor any longer then till he begat Seth for from Seth sprang Noah and we all from him Neither is it credible that Adam continued to beget children till the last yeare and month and day of his life Indeed we no where read that we are guilty of any other of his sinnes besides the first The reason whereof shall be given in the next place 2 Therefore I say in answer unto them both that the ground of imputing Adams sinne unto his posterity is not onely because we were in Adams Ioynes but because the first sinne of Adam was it that bereaved his nature of Gods image and so brought corruption upon himselfe by an aversion from the Creator and unchangable good and conversion unto the Creature wherein the Lord left him bereaving him of his spirit and this nature by this sinne alone so corrupt is the fountaine of all our natures Like as if Adam had stood of the same fountaine of integrity we had all received incorrupt natures so that the like cannot be said of any other sinne of Adam afterwards committed by him nor of the sinne of any other our progenitours succeding him For as for the wicked they have no such spirit of God to loose And as for the Godly they have indeed the spirit of God but so as not to be taken from them by the sinnes committed by them any more then it was from David upon the committing of so foule sinnes in the matter of Uriah neither do any Godly parents propagate their state of grace to their posterity And Aquinas is so bold hereupon as to professe that Impossibile est quod aliqua peccata parentum proximorum vel etiam primi parentis praeter primum per originem traducantur It is impossible that the sinnes of our immediate parents or of our first parents besides the first should be derived unto posterity by propagation For sayth he a man generates the same with himselfe in kinde only not in individuall And therefore those things which pertaine to him as a particular person as acts personall he doth not propagate unto his children Now to the nature of man somthing may pertain naturally somthing by the gift of grace And this originall righteousnesse as a gift of grace was bestowed on the whole nature of mankind in our first parents which Adam lost by his first sinne so that like as originall righteousnesse had beene propagated to posterity together with the humane nature so also the opposite inordination But as for other actuall sinnes either of our first parents or of others they do not corrupt the nature of man as touching that which pertaines to nature but as touching that which pertaines to his person therefore other sinnes are not propagated unto posterity And this reason which Aquinas gives was long before given by Anselme De conceptu virginali originali peccato cap. 23. Section 2. 2 They say that God hath immutably decreed to leave the farre greatest part of mankind in this impotent condition irrecoverabâ—ely and to afford them no power and ability sufficient to make them rise out of sinne to newnesse of life and this decree he executeth in time and both these he doth out of his only will and pleasure Of this proposition there be three branches 1. God decreeth to leave them 2. He doth leave them 3. He doth both out of his alone pleasure 1 God say they hath decreed to leave them without sufficient grace and consequently under an everlasting necessity of sinning This is the very Helen which they sight for the maine act of that absolute reprobation which with joynt consent and endeavour they labour to maintaine Most of them cast their reprobation into two acts A negative which is a peremptory denyall of grace and glory to some men lying in the fall And a Positive which they say is a preordination of the men thus left to the eternall torments of hell Others among them define Reprobation by an act meerely negative and call it Non electionem decretum quo statuit non eo usque misereri Thes our Divines in their suffrage define and in their explication of the Definition which they give they say that the proper acts of reprobation as it standeth opposed to election are no other then a denyall of that same glory and grace which are prepared in the decree of election for the sonnes of God But in this they all agree that by the decree of reprobation grace necessary for the avoyding of sinne is flatly denyed to reprobates And if at any time we heare them say that God hath gratified Reprobates with some grace For so sayth Walaeus reprobates are left under the common providence of God and consequently under some common endowments And our Divines in the Synod say Reprobates though they are not elected yet receive many of Gods graces they are to be understood of such Graces and gifts as are insufficient to make them avoyd sinne as we may see in these two cited places and many more 2 God doth actually according to his eternall and unchangeable decree leave the Reprobates in their severall times and generations without his grace under a necessity of finall sinne and impenitency This is the second branch of that second proposition And this they must needs say For Gods decrees cannot be frustrated what he purposed before time without faile he doth in time I shall not need therefore to prove that they say so Neverthelesse to let it be seene how positively and Categorically they say so I will give an instance or two The Divines of Geneva at the Synod among their Theses of Reprobation have this for one Those whom God hath reprobated out of the same will by which he hath rejected them either be calleth not at all or being called he reneweth not throughly by the spirit of regeneration ingraftcth not into Christ mystically nor justifieth c Like to this is the speech of Lubbert who speaking of reprobates sayth To them either he revealeth not the way of salvation or giveth not faith and regeneration but leaveth them in sinne and misery The same authour speaking against the position of the Remonstrants viz
Synod of Palestine 1200. yeares agoe to this day The difference of opinions here feigned by him about the point of Reprobation amongst our Divines is like the feigning of a knot in a bulrush For what is a peremptory denying of grace and glory to some men lying in the fall other then a denyall of that grace and glory which is prepared in the decree of election to the sonnes of God though indeed neither of them make it a denyall which is done in time but rather Gods decree to deny it For do not the latter Divines maintaine it to be peremptory as well as the former For what difference doth he devise between a flat denyall and a peremptory denyall and as for the latter decree belonging to reprobation here mentioned namely a preordination of the man thus left to the torments of hell do not the latter Divines acknowledge this decree to belong to Reprobation also Only they professe that God preordaines none to eternall torments in hell but for their sinnes actuall as well as originall of as many as live to ripenesse of age Now I would faine know what Divine of ours maintaines the contrary 1. Our Divines in saying Reprobation is Decretum quo statuit non misereri do manifest that not denying grace but the decree of denying it is Reprobation Walaeus speaketh of no common endowments though that be a truth which here is attributed unto them else how should they be called common endowments 2. If he decrees to leave Reprobates without grace and consequently under that necessity of sinning into which all are cast by the sinne of Adam it is nothing strange I thinke that God should accordingly leave them therein though in a different manner the Lord prostituting some to their own lost's and to the power of Satan more then others and making some even by the ministery of the Gospell proficere ad exteriorem vitae emendationem quo mitius puniantur as Austin some where speaketh If Gods decree cannot be frustrated as here is avouched I wonder he should charge us with teaching that God decreeth this or that immutably For if he should change any of his decrees they should undoubtedly be frustrated Indeed we do not say that God decrees Hypothetically to give grace to wit upon condition that men will make themselves fit for it and for failing herein to deny them grace And I am very glad to observe so good correspondence in the suffrages of Protestant Divines in the Synod of Dort and our English also with them Sect 3. 3. God both decreeth and executeth this leaving of men to themselves of his alone absolute will and pleasure This is the third branch 1 That they say so witnesse the suffrage of our English Divines We affirme that this non election is founded in the most free pleasure of God And that no man lying in the fall is past over by the meere will of God is numbred by the same Divines among the heterodox positions To this purpose also speake The Palatinate Ministers The cause of Reprobation is the most free and just will of God That God passeth over some and denyeth them the grace of the Gospell the cause is the same free pleasure of God Thus the Divines of Hessen God decreed to leave some in the fall of his own good pleasure The proofe of this they fetch from the execution of this decree in time God doth in time leave some of mankind fallen and doth not bestow upon them meanes necessary to beleive c. and this out of his most free pleasure This they joyntly affirme and prove it by this reason especially All men were lookt on as sinners If sinne therefore were the cause that moved God to reprobate he should have reprobated or rejected all But he did not Reprobate all therefore for sinne he reprobated none but for his owne pleasure in which we must rest wthout seeking any other cause 1. Now from these two things layd together viz. 1. That God did bring men into a necessity of sinning 2. That he hath left the Reprobates under this necessity it will follow that he is the Authour of the reprobates sinnes 1. Because Causae causae est causa causati the Cause of a cause is the cause of its effect if there be a necessary subordination betweene the causes and the effect whether it be a cause by acts negative or positive But God is the cheife or sole cause by their doctrine of that which is the necessary and immediate cause of the sinnes of reprobates namely their impotency and want of supernaturall grace therefore he is by the same doctrine the true and proper cause of their sinnes 2. Because Removens prohibens that which withdraweth and withholdeth a thing which being present would hinder an event is the cause of that event As for example he that cutteth a string in which a stone hangs is the cause of the falling of that stone And he that withdraweth a pillar which being put to uphold a house is the true cause in mens account of the falling of that house But God by their opinion withholdeth from reprobates that power which being granted them might keep thē from falling into sinne therefore he becometh a true morall cause of their sinnes In whose power it is that a thing be not done to him it is imputed when it is done sayth Tertullian In cuius manu est quid ne fiat ei deputatur cum iam fit It will not suffice to say that God by withholding grace from reprobates becometh only an accidentall not a proper and direct cause of their sinnes For a cause is then only accidentall in relation to the effect when the effect is beside the intention and expectation of the cause For example Digging in a feild is then an accidentall cause of the finding a bag of gold when that event is neither expected not intended by the husbandman in digging But when the event is lookt for and aymed at then the cause though it be the cause only by withholding the impediment is not accidentall As a Pilot who withholdeth his care and skill from a ship in a storme foreseeing that by his neglect the ship will be drowned is not to be reputed an accidentall but a direct and proper cause of the losse of this ship This being so it followeth that God by this act and decree of removing and detaining grace necessary to the avoyding of sinne from reprobates not as one ignorant and carelesse what will or shall follow but knowing infallibly what mischeife will follow and determining precisely that which doth follow viz their impenitency and damnation becomes the proper and direct cause of their sinnes That God of his meere pleasure sheweth mercy on some and hardeneth others is the expresse word of God Therefore he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Now to shew mercy is to give the grace of faith and obedience as appeares
repentance and that by instruction admonition and exhortation therefore I doe instruct them in the knowledge of God that made them after his own Image and how this image of God came to be defaced in them to wit by the sinne of our first parents and how hereupon we became to be shapen in sinne and borne in sinne and therewithall children of wrath and such as deserve to be made the generation of God's curse then I represent unto them the mercy of God towards man in giving us his Son to beare our sins in his body upon the tree and suffer a shamefull and bitter death upon the crosse for them and that for this his Son's sake he offers unto us the pardon of all our sins upon our repentance and faith in Christ and thereupon I exhort them unto repentance We farther say that God takes no pleasure in the death of him that dieth but takes pleasure in a man's repentance We doe not say neither doth the word of God say that he willeth not the death of him that dyeth For undoubtedly he willeth the damnation of all them that dye in their sins without repentance We doe not say that God would have no man to perish but all come to repentance Neither doth the Scripture say any such thing For that were to deny God's omnipotency For seing many there be that perish if this were contrary to God's will then God's will should be resistible and we should be driven to deny the first Article of our Creed As Austine hath long agoe argued the case But indeed Peter writing to them who had obtained like pretious faith with the Apostles themselves and such as were Elect unto sanctification of the spirit and were begotten againe to a lively hope by the resurection of Jesus Christ from the dead to them he writes saying The Lord of that promise is not slack but is patient towards us not to us Reprobates God forbid that we should so corrupt the interpretation of his words but rather to us Elect to us called to us begotten of God not willing any to perish to wit of us but all come to repentance to wit all of us whensoever through our frailty we turne out of the good wayes of the Lord. God cries unto you by us and calls upon you by us and hath along time shewed great patience and long suffering and hereby led you unto repentance by his word stands knocking at the doores of your hearts and calling upon you to open unto him And the more to move you he is pleased to expresse himself in the affections of a weake man who is not able to accomplish his desires O that there were an heart in you to feare me and keep my commandements and with great passionatnesse cryeth out unto you What shall I doe unto you how shall I intreat you As if he were to seek what course to take and willing to use every provocation to excite you and stirre you up sometimes by gracious promises as Come and let us reason together though thy sins were as scarlet c. Sometimes by threatnings Woe unto thee ô Jerusalem wilt thou not be made cleane when shall it once be And withall he gives us to understand requires us to preach as much unto you also even to acquaint you with the whole counsell of God tell you that as many as are ordained unto eternall life as many as to whom the arme of the Lord is revealed as many as are of God they obey this calling they believe they heare God's words and turne unto him by true repentance sooner or later They that doe not it is because they are not of God And albeit those words are the words of Moses O that there were an heart in you to feare me speaking to them in the name of the Lord yet the same Moses tells the same people plainly that The Lord had not given them an heart to perceive nor eyes to see nor eares to heare unto that Day And albeit the Lord professeth in like manner by his Prophet Esay O that thou hadst hearkned unto my commandements then had thy prosperity been as the flood and thy righteousnesse as the waves of the sea Yet this very disobedience of theirs was consequent to the Lord's obduration of them as appeares Es 6. 9. Goe say unto this people ye shall heare indeed but ye shall not understand ye shall plainly see not perceive Make the heart of this people fat make their eares heavy and shut their eyes least they see with their eyes and heare with their eares and convert and he heale them Then said the Lord how long should this obduration continue And he answered untill the Cityes be wasted without inhabitant and the houses without man and the land be utterly desolate And the Lord have removed men farre away and there be a great desolation in the midst of the land Yet I dare not say of any of you that ye are Reprobates For God may open your eyes before you dye to see your sins and touch your hearts that ye may bewaile them And whensoever this blessed condition doth befall you I will stirre you up to give God the glory of it who alone it is that worketh in us that which is pleasing in his sight Yea both the will and the deed according to his good pleasure If he never workes any such thing in you the more inexcusable are you who presuming of your own power to believe to repent yet are nothing moved with such passionate expressions unto repentance If you doe believe there is such impotency in you to good and that it must needs continue in you while God continueth to harden you by denying his grace and thereupon ye except against Gods course in complaining of their disobedience whom he hath hardned saying Why then doth he complaine For who hath resisted his will I put all such over to St. Paul to receive answer from him Rom 9. 20. 21. 22. As touching this Author's conclusion Dares he himselfe say that by God's decree Reprobates shall ever repent or be saved What then is his meaning why doth he not expresse himselfe in this particular but most unshamefastly earthes himselfe like a foxe unwilling to bring his vile opinion to the light which I take to be no other then this that God's decree of giving faith is not absolute but conditionall namely to give faith to as many as shall prepare themselves for it And to deny it to none but such as faile to prepare for it as much as in plaine termes to professe that Grace is given according unto workes The very filth of Pelagianisme Yet hath he no where discovered wherein this preparation consists that he keeps to himselfe and to his own Muses P. 80. I find another addition to the third Sub-section in these words To offer salvation under a condition not possible is in circumstance a great deale worse For it is a
to begin with the examination of those Arguments against the absolutenesse of Divine Reprobation which M r Mason and M r Hord tooke to be of a convincing nature by which Method in Reading thou wilt the sooner meet with that abundant satisfaction which this worke will yeeld as touching this controversy unto all that are capable or desirous thereof THE FIRST PART CONTAINING A CONSIDERATION of those Reasons for which M r HORD as he pretended first Questioned THE TRUTH OF ABSOLVTE REPROBATION OXFORD Printed by L. L. Printer to the University for T. R. Anno 1653. THIS TREATISE DIVIDES IT SELFE INTO TWO PARTS Viz. 1. An Introduction 2. A Discourse I. The Introduction SECTION I. SIR I Have sent you here the Reasons which have moved me to change my Opipion in some Controversies of late debated between the Remonstrants and their Opposites I doe the rather present them unto you 1. That I may shew the due respect which I beare your Worship with my forwardnes to answer your desires as I can with regard to Conscience 2. That you may see I dissent not without cause but have Reason on my side 3. That if I can be convinced that my Grounds are weake and insufficient I may think better of my Opinion which I have forsaken then I can for the present In the delivery of my Motives I shall proceed in this Order 1 I will state the Opinion which I dislike 2 I will lay down my reasons against it Touching the first your Worship knowes these two things very well 1 That the main 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Question in these Controversies and that on which all the rest hang is What the decrees of God are touching the everlasting condition of men and how they are Ordered 2. That the Men which have disputed these things may be reduced to two sorts or sides The first side affirmes that there is such an absolute decree proceeding from the good pleasure of God alone without the consideration of mens finall Unbeliefe and Impenitency as by which he casteth men off from Grace and Glory and shuts up the farr greater part of men even of those that are called by the Preaching of the Gospel to Repentance and Salvation under invincible and unavoydable sin and damnation The other side disavowing any such decree say that the Decree of God to cast off men for ever is grounded upon the foresight of their continuance in sin and unbeliefe both avoydable by Grace and consequently inferring no mans damnation necessary TWISSE Consideration WOrthy Sir according to your desire to take into Consideration this writing directed unto you at length I have gotten some leasure from other imployments to addresse my selfe to give you satisfaction in this particular 1 That I may shew my selfe answerable to that respect which you have deserved at my hands and not so only but to my zeale of Gods truth which hath deserved much more at the hands of us both 2 That you may the better discern which of us two whom you put to conferre doth maintain the cause of Gods truth and hath the best reasons on his side As for the change of Opinion here mentioned such Professions are nothing strange But whether such a Profession be in truth or in pretence and rather liberty taken to manifest that Opinion which formerly hath been cherished as also with what conscience voyd of all carnall respects such a change or manifestation is made it belongs not unto us to judge but to leave that unto God who tryeth the hearts and reynes Sure we are the heart of man is full of deceitfulnesse both to deceive others yea and to deceive our selves the more need there is to be jealous over our selves and to carry a watchfull eye over our own soules and whether we have chang'd a former way or at the first chose one or other way and continue to imbrace that whereof we have been at first informed not to despise but in the feare of God to practice that holy counsell of the Apostle given to the Corinthians a famous Church and such as were destitute of no spirituall gift Prove your selves whether you are in the Faith examine your selves know ye not your own selves that Jesus Christ is in you except ye be Reprobates as also to consider how indifferently we carry our selves in using means to inform our selves in the way of truth and whether they be not such as doe discover our chiefe care hath been to bring our judgements about to the imbracing of that way whether Truth or Errour which formerly we did effect Certaine it is that Heresies must be and that to this end that they that are approved may be made manifest And Illusions shall have their course when the truth of God is not imbraced with love whatsoever be the pretence of our disaffecting it whether harshnes to affections or discrepancy to carnall reason And when such judgements have their course Who are priviledged from being seduced Let our Saviour speake in this So that if it were possible men should deceive the very elect Upon what may we be assured to stand firme in time of such temptation Let the Apostle answer us in this when after the effectuall working of Satan in them that perish he comes neere to them to whom he writes in the way of comfort thus But we ought to give thankes alway to God for you Brethren beloved of the Lord because that God hath from the beginning chosen you unto salvation through sanctification of the spirit and faith of the truth Like as before he did conclude unto himselfe their election from observation of the work of their Faith the labour of their Love and the patience of their Hope And the greater is the comfort which hereby is ministred unto us the greater should be our care to informe our selves aright in the doctrine thereof and especially to have an eye unto it that we doe not shape it in such a manner that like as it is impossible we should have any assurance thereof so it will prove equally impossible we should draw any comfort from thence 1. But is it so as here it is put upon you that you knew very well indeed that the main 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Question in these Controversies and that on which all the rest hang is What the decrees of God are touching the everlasting condition of men and how they are ordered I assure you if you knew this you know more then I doe I had thought rather that the resolution of the Point concerning Predestination had depended upon the resolution of the Point touching Grace efficacious then the contrary As namely if Faith be confessed to be the gift of God and that not with respect to any thing in man it followeth herehence that Predestination unto faith and reprobation from faith must proceed mecrely upon the good pleasure of God and not upon foresight of ought in man There was a time when Austin
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as that it is not to be accounted any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at all Theologicall but meerly Logicall Let the condition of the decrees be rightly explicated according to Divinity and we shall have no need at all of Divinity for the right ordering of them A meer Logicall faculty by light of nature will serve for this For the decrees whereof we treat are meerely Intentiones rerum gerendarum Now for the ordering of these in what kind soever we have received Rules of the Schooles never yet that I know contradicted by any namely that they are to be ordered according to the condition of the things intended which are but two to wit the end and the means and all doe attribute priority to the intention of the end and posteriority to the intention of the means It is true men may erre in designing the right end as also in designing the right means and these errours are to be discovered and the truth cleered by that science whereunto the consideration of the end and means belong and not by Logick But agreement being made concerning the end and means there is no doubt to be made but that according to the most received Rules of Schooles the end must be acknowledged both first in intention and last in execution and contrarily the means last in intention and first in execution 2. But come we to the Decrees themselves the different opinions thereabouts which follow in the next place Now here I looked for different opinions about decrees in the plural number but I find the relation extends no farther then to one decree and that of Reprobation So at the first entrance reasons are promised even in this writing to be exhibited of chang of opinion in certain controversies in the plurall number when in the issue all comes but to one controversy and that about Reprobation Yet the Scripture speaketh fully of Election sparingly of Reprobation in most places leaving us to judge thereof by consequence from the doctrine of Election Yet some passages we have I confesse that give light and evidence to both alike For like as it is said Acts 2. last that God added daily to the Church such as should be saved so 2 Cor. 4. 3. it is said If our Gospell be hid it is hid to them that are lost and as it is signified Math. 24 24. that T is impossible seducers should prevaile over the elect so 2 Thes 2. both as much is signified ver 13. and also expressed ver 10. 11. that they shall prevaile among them that perish and the 1 Cor. 1. 18. we are given to understand joyntly that the preaching of the Crosse is to them that perish foolishnesse but unto us which are saved it is the power of God and Rom. 9. 18. that as God hath mercy on whom he will so also he hardneth whom he will And like as Acts 13. 48. we read that as many believed as were ordained to eternall life which phrase of ordaining to eternall life I conceive under correction to be all one with the phrase of Writing our names in Heaven Luke 10. 20. and writing us in heaven Hebr. 12. 23. and this phrase I take to be all one with the writing of us in the Book of life So on the other side we read that Whose names were not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the World should wonder when they beheld the Beâ—st and not so only but worship him also But give we every vessel leave to vent that liquor whereof it is full I come to the consideration of the different opinions here proposed concerning the decree of Reprobation and herein I will endeavour to open a clear way to the right understanding of the truth that your judgement may have the more free course in discerning it and withall to represent unto you the unreasonable carriage of our Adversaries in the setting downe of our Tenent whereby you may guesse what you are to expect from them prosecuting against it And herein I will insist upon these particulars The first shall be the Things Decreed The second the Cause of this decree The third the Persons on whom this Decree doth passe The fourth shall be that claw of Unavoydable Sin and Damnation 1. The Things Decreed are here said to be The casting off from grace and glory and the shutting of men up under Damnation Now I pray observe here in the first place that by casting off from grace and glory we mean no other thing then the not giving of grace and glory and by grace we mean the grace of Faith and Repentance the grace of Regeneration For like as in Election God purposeth we say to give this grace unto some which is the same with shewing mercy on them Rom. 9. 18. as we suppose so on the other side God purposeth to deny this grace unto others which in Scripture phrase is to harden them that being made opposite to Gods shewing mercy Rom. 9. 18. And for the farther clearing of the termes we say that God by giving Faith and Repentance doth cure that infidelity and impenitency which is naturall unto all as being borne in sin and by not giving this grace of Faith and Repentance unto others God leaves their naturall infidelity and impenitency uncured And if this Author means ought else by shutting up under sin then the not curing of their naturall infidelity and impenitency he doth us wrong and what he means thereby I know not As for shutting up under damnation that is not our phrase but we love to speak in plain tearmes and say that God doth purpose to inflict damnation on them whom he Reprobates Thus much for the cleering of the tearmes as touching the things Decreed Secondly observe I pray which is of principall consideration that here we have no cause at all specified why he refuseth to give them grace cunningly leaving it to an improvident Reader to conceive that the cause of the decree which is here specified to be the meer pleasure of Gods will is indifferently applyable to the not giving of grace and glory and to the shutting up under damnation as the cause thereof which is a notorious imposture yet I doe not think this Author guilty of it but others rather who abuse their witts by cunning courses to deceive the hearts of the simple Amongst the Fallacies observed by Aristotle there is one called Fallacia plurium interrogationum as when many things are put together and an answer is required to be made either affirmatively or negatively to them all as if they were but one when indeed the answer cannot be made aright without distinction of the things demanded the one whereof perhaps requires an answer affirmative the other negative As for example to instance as touching one of the Controversies here declined We are often demanded whether every one that heareth the Gospell be not bound to believe that Christ died for him Now I say this phrase Christ died
decree which is to be called the decree of the means So that like as God doth not intend the creatures creation before he intends his damnation in the same respect he cannot be said to intend his damnation before he intends his creation or the permission of his sinne And this rightly considered sets an end unto all quarrell about the different consideration of Man in election and reprobation which yet is about a Schoole point only touching the right stateing of the end and the means and the right ordering of Gods decrees concerning them And doth it not set an end also to all aspersions of cruelty cast upon the holy providence of God from the guilt of which kind of blasphemies nothing can free them but confidence in their own way as if it were the way of truth and that by convincing evidence of holy Scripture Whereas it appears how little direction they take from the Word of God throughout for the shaping of their Tenent in this Yet neither is any such confidence able to free them from the guilt of such blasphemies which they utter well it may free them from the conscience of it yet if it doe that is more than I know And only to these two ends doth this aliene discourse of our different opinions thereabouts tend as I conceive namely to shew the difference of our Divines and to give vent to those aspersions of blasphemy on the first way as also to make way for a third in part which comes to be considered in the next Section in the manner how they fall upon the relation of the second way Yet Arminius in his Conference with Junius might have informed him of three opinions concerning the object of Predestination dividing the fruit of these into two The condition of man before the Fall being considerable two waies either as before the Fall but after Creation which they call the Masse created but not yet corrupted or as not before the Fall only but before the creation also which we commonly call the Masse not yet created or Mankind not yet created As touching the most harsh way of these three upon examination of Arminius his twenty arguments against it I find nothing worth the speaking of but meere suggestion of flesh and bloud which yet being duely pondered doe discover most shamefull nakednes His arguments against the making of Mankind not yet created the object of predestination I have proposed and answered in my Vindiciae gratiae Dei lib. 1. De Praedestin digress 5. if this Author hath any mind to be doing with them I shall be ready to consider what he saith as God shall give opportunity And in Junius you shall finde how he laboureth to reconcile them but very obscurely Piscator also sets hand to the same work and carryeth himselfe therein as his manner is very clearely by distinguishing three acts in Predestination The first whereof he will have to presuppose Mankind not created for it is the decree of creating man to different ends The second he will have to presuppose Mankind created but not corrupted for it is the decree of permitting Adam to fall and all Mankind in him The third and last he will have to presuppose Mankind both created and corrupted for it is the decree of raising some out of sin wherein they are conceived and borne and leaving some therein As for the Angells it is without question that election and reprobation divine had course concerning them as well as concerning mankind and as certain it is that no corrupt Masse could be the object of divine Predestination in their election and reprobation As for Arminius his ordering of Gods decrees in opposition to these waies taken by our Divines that he hath communicated unto us in the Declaration of his opinion before the States pag 47. where leaving out the decree of creating mankind in Adam and the decree of permitting all mankind to fall in Adam he takes into consideration only the divine decrees of saving sinfull man 1. The first whereof is Whereby he decreed to make his Sonne Christ a Mediator Redeemer Saviour Priest and King by his death to abolish sin by his obedience to obtain Salvation formerly lost and by his power to communicate it And this decree he saith is absolute 2. The second is Whereby he decreed to receive into grace such as believe and repent and those persevering unto the end to save in Christ for and by Christ but such as believe and repent not to leave under sin and wrath and to damne as aliene from Christ. Where observe 1. This decree of saving such as believe and repent he calleth a decree absolute yet this decree passeth upon no particular persons such a decree is reserved for the last place 2. God with him receives none into grace and favour unles they believe and repent Whereby it is manifest that with him faith and repentance are no fruits of Gods grace and favour for they must be performed before they are received into Gods grace and favour 3. The third is Where by he decreed sufficiently and efficaciously to administer the means which are necessary to faith and repentance This decree whether he conceives it to be absolute or no he doth not specify nor whether he decreed to administer them unto all nor by whom whether by men only or by men or Angells nor whether by means he understands the Gospel only and we have cause to doubt thereof And lastly which is most obscure he doth not explicate what he means by sufficient and efficacious administration Only he adds that in this administration he carries himselfe according 1. To his Wisdome which shewes what becomes his mercy andseverity and 2 ly to his Justice whereby he is ready to follow the prescript of his Wisdome 4. The fourth and last is Whereby he decreed to save and damne certain particular persons Now whereas our Divines generally what way soever they took had a care out of their Logick and Philosophy which they had by light of nature to order the decrees divine according to the common Rules of Art concerning intentions as they are found to be either of some end or of some means tending to an end this seems to have been no part of Arminius his care This order of his I have ransaked in my Vindiciae lib. 3. digress 2. And if this Author think good he may answer thereunto and doe his best to qualify the absurdities wherewith I charge that order of his But as touching the embracers of this first way whose names he expresseth he had need to prove it For divers think otherwise of Calvin and they represent their reasons for it out of his own words such as these De aeternâ Dei Praedestinatione pag. 970. speaking of Pighius Augustinum ridet saith he ejusque similes hoc est pios emnes qui deum imaginantur postquam universalem Generis humani Ruinam in personâ Adae praesciverit alios ad vitam alios ad interitum destinasse
conclude that this reason drawn from the neernesse of the Ancients to the Apostles how plausible soever it seems at first sight yet indeed is of no force Now to the contrary we have these reasons 1. Like as it is fit every man should profit in the knowledge of God more and more as long as he lives so in all likelihood the Christian world doth profit more and more as they draw neerer to the end of the world excepting those times of Gods judgements in giving the world over to illusions to believe lies Austin did profit as in other points of Christian knowledge so in this as concerning Predestination and blames the Massilienses for not profiting with him De Praedestin lib. 1. cap. 4. Videtis quid tunc de fidei operibus sentiebam quamvis de commendandâ dei gratiâ labor arem In qua sententia istos fratres nostros esse nunc video quia non ficut legere libros meos ita curaverunt proficere mecum 2. We have more means and helps for our furtherance in Christian knowledge then they had and that in divers respects First because we enjoy their labours they enjoyed not ours nor the like before them So that by the reading of their writings we soon attain to that knowledge which they had they communicating it unto us and it were very strange we should adde nothing thereunto especially considering that Veritas was wont to be accounted temporis filia and Aristotle accounts it an easy thing to adde Any man saith he may doe that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and thus saith he Arts come to their perfection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A tall man is able to discover much farther then a Dwarfe but let a Dwarfe be advanced upon the shoulders of that tall man and he will discover much farther then he Let then those Antients goe for tall fellowes in the discovery of Christian truth let the Divines of moderne ages be but Dwarfes as the Children of Israel seemed to be but Grashoppers in comparison of the Canaanites especially to the sonnes of Anack yet if by their pious labours and industries which they have with much ingenuity communicated unto us they suffer us to get upon their shoulders shall not we though Dwarfes be enabled hereby to discover somewhat more then they The Eagle is a fowle of great strength and soareth high the highest of all Kites and Haukes yet let her carry a Wren along with her on her shoulders in her aëriall ascentions when she is weary and can fly no higher can it seem strange if the Wren carried thus high by this Anakim of fowles presumes of her own strengh to fly a little higher then she or is this any glory to the Wren or disparagement to the Eagle 2. Secondly Have not we better helpes of Art then they especially as touching the knowledge of the Tongues and Logicall resolutions of the Text. The Latine Fathers most of them were little acquainted with the Greek neither Latine nor Greek Fathers were usually much acquainted with the Hebrew Origen amongst the Greek and Hierom amongst the Latine had not their fellows for this 3. Lastly the Ancients in their daies were not so put unto it as the latter Nothing did more quicken them or doth us then contentions with Heretiques And therefore look how they were exercised with Heresies so it is to be expected they were best seen in those Articles of Faith which were most shaken by Heretiques This both Austin and Gregory take notice of and Austin is most frequent herein some passages to this purpose I shall relate hereafter Now before Pelagius his daies the Fathers were much exercised in opposing the Manichees and accordingly gave themselves to the maintenance of Free-will as Aniarius observes by the relation of Sixtus Senensis But Pelagius was the first that opposed Gods grace and therefore those Fathers that contended with him gave themselves chiefely to the maintenance of Gods grace And now am I come to the treating of Ancients no longer in generall but in a speciall reference to the doctrine of predestination Now herein the Papists themselves who in other points labour to beat us down with nothing so much as with the noise of Antiquity are willing to confesse that in the point of grace and predestination we need not trouble our selves with inquiry after the doctrine of the Ancients before Pelagius rose and that upon the ground before mentioned to wit because they were nothing exercised hereabouts As for example Bellarmine De Grat. lib. Arbitr lib. 1. c. 14. having proposed diverse passages of the Fathers favouring as it seemed the doctrine wherewith Pelagius troubled the peace of Gods Church makes Austin to answer for him Veteres Patres qui ante Pelagium floruerunt quaestionem istam nunquam accuratè tractasse sed incidentèr solum quasi per transitum illam attigisse Addit verò saith Bellarmine in fundamento hujus sententiae quod est Gratiam Dei non praevenire ab ullo opere nostro sed contrà ab illâ omnia opera nostra praeveniri ita ut nihil omnino boni quod attinet ad salutem sit in nobis quod non sit nobis ex Deo convenire Catholicos omnes ibidem citat Cyprianum Ambrosisium Nazianzenum yet he takes a course to reconcile them to the truth so doth Sixtus Senensis Bibl. Sanct. lib. 6. Annota 251. so doth Alvarez de Auxil lib. 5. disp 37. Again consider The decrees of predestination and reprobation are secret neither doe they appeare of what condition they are but by the manner of their executions Now their executions doe consist partly in bestowing salvation on some and inflicting damnation on others partly in bestowing the grace of faith and repentance on some and denying it unto others As touching salvation and damnation we willingly professe that the salvation of men of ripe years doth alwaies presuppose Faith and perseverance therein and the damnation of others doth alwaies presuppose finall perseverance in sinne unrepented of But we deny that herehence it followeth that either faith precedes the decree of salvation or sinne precedes the decree of damnation or the prescience of either That faith cannot precede election nor sinne reprobation is evident For as much as election and reprobation are eternall but faith and sinne are things temporall but that wich is temporall cannot precede that which is eternall Neither doth it follow that because faith precedes salvation therefore faith precedes the decree of salvation For it is faith existent in time that precedes salvation but no Divine will say that faith existent in time precedes Gods decree of salvation unlesse it be some such as maintaine with Vorstius that Gods decrees are not eternall In like sort it is sinne existent in time that precedes damnation but no wise Divine will say that sinne existent in time precedes Gods decree of damnation the former being a thing temporall but this decree eternall Lastly neither will it
follow that because faith precedes salvation and sinne damnation therefore the foresight of faith is antecedanious to the decree of salvation and the foresight of sinne is antecedent to the decree of damnation For no Enthymeme of this nature is sound but so farre forth as it is reducible into a good Categorical Syllogisme whereof these Enthymems are uncapable For Enthymems reducible unto good Syllogismes must agree either in their Subjects or in their Predicates but these doe not Again all the termes in a good Enthymeme must be expressed in that Syllogisme whereunto it is reduced But each of these Enthymemes consisteth manifestly of four termes as in the first theâ—e Faith and the Foresight of faith Salvation and the Decree of salvation Of the second these Sinne and Foresight of sinne Damnation and the Decree of damnation and consequently that Syllogisme whereunto either of these quaternary of termes is clap'd cannot be good For no Categoricall Syllogisme is good that consisteth of foure termes As for the reducing of them into a Syllogisme Hypotheticall such Reductions were never heard of in the Schooles of the learned and that for just reason because that is no course to justify the soundnesse of the Enthymemes but a meer begging of that which is in question As in case a man should reduce it thus If faith be precedanious to salvation then the foresight of faith is precedanious to the decree of salvation But faith is precedanious to salvation Therefore it is precedanious to the decree of salvation In this Hypotheticall Syllogisme the consequence of the Major is the very Enthymeme which is in question for the substance of it and consequently no proving of it but a meere begging of it Yet notwithstanding we doe not deny but that God did decree that no man should be saved but such as being of ripe years should be found to persevere in faith unto death none should be damned but such as should be found finally to persevere in sinne The other execution of these decrees consists as I said in the bestowing of the grace of faith and repentance on some and denying it unto others Now the question is Whether God be indeed the author of faith and repentance yea or no and because the Arminians dare not professedly deny this though lately they are come so farre as professedly to deny that Christ merited it therefore let the question proceede about the manner how God bestowes it as namely whether he bestowes it of his meer pleasure on some denying it to others or Whether the reason why God bestowes it on some and not on others be because God findes some good work in one which he findes not in another This question being decided it will clearly appeare whether predestination proceeds upon the foresight of ought in man yea or no. For if God of his meer pleasure doth bestow faith on one and not on another it followes undeniably that God predestinated him hereunto absolutely and of his meer pleasure without consideration of any future work of man But if God bestowes faith on man upon consideration of some precedent work of his which was not the work of God then and not otherwise neither it will follow that upon the consideration of that future work of man God did elect him unto faith or predestinate faith unto him So that if we desire sincerely and ingeniously to inquire what was the opinion of the Ancients about the absolutenesse of predestination we should state the question as touching Predestination unto faith and not as touching Predestination unto salvation For we all confesse that God predestinated no man unto salvation but such as he foresaw coming unto ripe years would believe sooner or later And therefore the main question between the Remonstrants and Contra-remonstrants was whether this decree were the whole decree of Predestination and whether there were not another decree of Predestination besides as namely whether God did not decree to bestow faith on some and deny it unto others And secondly to inquire Whether this decree of bestowing faith on some did not proceed according to Gods good pleasure without consideration of any different work in man And the most compendious resolution hereof is to inquire of the manner how God carrieth himselfe in the bestowing of faith and repentance on some and denying it unto others as namely Whether on his meer pleasure he hath not mercy on some giving them faith and repentance and of his meer pleasure denyes the gift of faith and repentance unto others Now let the Fathers whosoever thinks good be admitted to bring in their suffrages on this Article and remember what was decreed in the first Synode that was gathered to make peace in the Church after Pelagius had disturbed it namely Gratiam non dari secundum merita that is as Bellarmine acknowledgeth Gratiam non dari secundum opera Lastly all of us now a daies consent as touching Gods concourse to the substance of every act of the creature whether good or evill Now let this Author or any other represent unto us what footing he finds in Antiquity concerning this But I come to answer particularly according to this Authors text He cannot find absolute and inevitable reprobation to have any footing in Antiquity Belike he can find reprobation evitable a strange phraise either way These attributes applied to damnation doe carry a faire sense with them damnation being a work of God wrought in time and undoubtedly may be avoided may be incurred for the time to come But reprobation is eternall as God himselfe and how that should be fancied to be of an avoidable condition for the time to come I cannot comprehend unlesse this Author be of their opinion who desire to shape Gods decrees of a revocable nature as being both to impute unto him an impotent immutability as some are pleased to phraise it But leave we reprobation unavoidable take we the absolute nature of it into consideration this he cannot find in all Antiquity But consider I pray he pretends these motives as inducements to change his former opinion so then belike he stood sometimes for reprobation absolute but did he find any footing in Antiquity for it what time he embraced it if he did formerly embrace it notwithstanding he found no footing in Antiquity for it why should he now relinquish it for finding no footing in Antiquity for it Belike the older he waxeth the more he groweth in love with Antiquity Again when formerly he did embrace the doctrine of absolute reprobation upon what grounds did he embrace it was it because he was in hope he should hereafter find Antiquity for it or was it only for the authority of them who brought him up in this opinion What sorry grounds are these to build a mans faith upon Yet this is not our course to impose Articles of faith on any but rather to endoctrinate them out of the word of God If then a mans Christian faith be built upon the Word
fides à naturâ sit In my poor judgement the Fathers as many as stated predestination according to the prescience of mens works had no other meaning but this that God did predestinate no man to eternall life but such as coming to ripe years should believe in Christ and repent no man unto eternall death but such as should finally persevere in infidelity and impenitency so making works foreseen the cause of salvation but not of Gods decree And Aquinas was bold to professe that Nemo fuit it a insanae mentis qui diceret merita esse causam praedestinationis divinae quoad actum praedestinantis And 't is a good rule that Gerson gives that holy mens Writings are not to be urged precisely according to the letter De Vitâ Spirituali animae Sect. 1. co 11. Notet his quód Doctores etiam sancti sunt magis reverenter glossandi in multis quà m ampliandi quoniam non omnes semper adverterunt aut advertere cogitaverunt ad proprietatem locutionis Improprietas autem non ampliari debet sed ad proprietatem reduci alioquin quid mirum si augetur deceptio 5. We know what answer Austin himselfe makes unto this De Praedestin Sanct. cap. 14. Quid igitur opus est ut eorum scrutemur opuscula qui priusquam ista Haeresis oriretur non habuerunt necessitatem in hac difficili ad solvendum quaestione versari quod proculdubio facerent si respondere talibus cogerentur 6. As before I shewed Fulgentius himselfe maintaines predestination to be secundum praescientiam yet Vossius acknowledgeth him as well as Austin to have maintained the absolutenesse of predestination 7. Lastly this passage concerneth predestination alone as it signifies the divine decree of conferring glory but who ever was known to maintaine the divine decree of conferring grace to have been secundum praescientiam according to foresight of any work in man For this is plainly to maintain that grace is given according unto works which in the Ancients phraise is all one as to acknowledge that grace is given according unto merits which is direct Pelagianisme and condemned 1200 years agoe in the Synod of Palestine As for that of Minutius Foelix We deny that God doth sortem in hominibus punire non voluntatem We doe not say Genitura plectitur we say that in every one who is punished by God ingenii natura punitur Wee confesse that Fatum illud est quod de unoquoque Deus fatus est and that pro meritis singulorum qualitatibus etiam fata determinat Yet the holy Ghost professeth in the mouthes of all his Apostles that both Herod and Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and People of Israel were gathered together against the holy sonne of God to doe that which Gods hand and Gods councell predetermined to be done and yet this predetermination divine I should think was nothing prejudiciall to the liberty of their wills As for Hierome this Author saith that he was an eager opposer of the Pelagians but no where doth it appeare that the point of predestination comes in question between them These very passages out of Hierome are proposed by Grotius in his Pietas Ordinum Hollandiae and answered by Gratianus Civilis punctually and long before by Bellarmine Lib. 2. de Grat. lib. arb cap. 14. I answer what is this any other but that which the Fathers many of them have professed in saying that predestination is secundum praescientiam And doth not Fulgentius affirm the same Yet is he acknowledged by Vossius a maintainer of the absolutenesse of predestination as well as Austin Did Hierome deny faith to be the gift of God or granting it to be the gift of God did he maintaine that God gave it according unto works If not but according to the meer pleasure of his will having mercy on some while he hardned others the case is cleare that he maintained absolute election unto faith As for Gods decree of salvation and damnation we willingly professe that God decreed to save no man but upon his finall perseverance in faith and piety to damne none but such as finally persevere in infidelity and impenitency Now compare we these decrees together the decree of giving faith and the decree of saving which of these are most likely to be the foremost it is apparent that salvation is more likely to be the end in respect of faith and faith the means in respect of salvation then the contrary And the generall and most received rule of Schooles is that the intention of the end is before the intention of the means I think the glory of God in the way of mercy mixed with justice is the end of both and that the decrees of giving faith and salvation are simultaneous as decrees of means tending to the same end and so neither before the other But Hierome saith that ex Praescientia futurorum nascitur dilectio vel odium I confesse he doth in a disjunctive manner thus vel ex praescientia vel ex operibus And we know that passions such as Love and Hatred are commonly said to be attributed to God not quoad affectum but quoad effectum and so they may fairely stand for salvation and damnation which proceed ex operibus in Hieroms phraise But admit he means hereby decretum salvandi which rising expraescientia fidei must presuppose the decree of giving faith to precede I answer then there is to be acknowledged an impropriety of speech and here is place for Gersons rule Sancti non semper adverterunt ad proprietatem locutionis And the rather because Hierome we never find exercised in this Controversy And it is against common reason that faith should be intended before salvation And lastly this were to impute unto him to acknowledge 2 motive cause of Predestination quoad actum praedestinantis which Aquinas professeth against as a thing impossible namely that there should be a cause of Gods will quoad actum volentis Nay he is bold to say that No man was so mad to say that merits are the cause of Predestination quoad actum praedestinantis The last part of this Authors performance in the poynt of Antiquity is the Councell of Arles subscribing as he saith the letter which was written by Faustus against Lucidus the Predestinarian for so he styles him and in his Epistle he insists upon two Anathema's the one this Anathema illi qui dixerit illum qui periit non accepisse ut salvus esse possit The other this Anathema illi qui dixerit quod vas contumcliae non possit affurgere ut sit vas in honorem First I will answer as touching the Anathema's themselves then as touching the credit and authority of this story 1. As touching the Anathema's The first proceeds as well of him that is baptized and afterwards perisheth as of him that is a Pagan and never was baptized and perisheth in his Paganisme as the Anathema it selfe witnesseth if it be repeated at
death upon a sinner of meere pleasure but being provoked thereunto and that according to the purport of the first place Ezech 18. by the sinner himselfe and also according to the purport of the second place only in case of impenitency And I concurre with him in this And so I conceive it to be delivered in the same sense with that Lament 3. 32 33. For though he cause griefe to wit by reason of mens sinnes v. 39. yet will he have compassion according to the multitude of his mercies to wit in case he repents Ier. 18. 7. Iudg. 10. 16. For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men Mark I pray not willingly to wit in as much as he is provoked thereunto by sinne and by refusall to repent And this is in the former Scripture phrases not to take pleasure in the afflicting and grieving of men For if any work be such as wherein pleasure is taken we need not enquire after a cause why it is done but though no pleasure be taken in it yet for some benefit redounding thereby a man may doe it yea though it be grievous and bitter unto him As a sick man is willing to take a bitter potion for the recovery of his health Now come we to the argument God takes no pleasure in the death of any therefore he doth not of pleasure inflict death We willingly grant it in as much as he never inflicts eternall death on any that doth not dye in sinne unrepented of And as he doth not inflict death on any of meere pleasure that is without just cause on the part of him that dyeth deserving it So we willingly confesse that God did never decree to inflict death on any without just cause on the Malefactors part deserving death And this is the uttermost whereunto this Authors argument can be extended And all our Divines unanimously confesse that God neither decreed to damne any man of his meer pleasure but for his sinne wherein he died without repentance 3. Observe the cunning of this Disputer to deceive himselfe first and then to abuse his readers For whereas he should have proceeded in his argument by degrees thus God hath no pleasure in the death of a sinner therefore he doth not of his own pleasure inflict death and thence proceed if he had thought good to conclude the like of Gods decree thus if God doth not of his ownpleasure inflict then neither doth he of his own pleasure decree to inflict death and damnation This author leaping over the inflicting of death as a block in his way for the last consequence would have betrayed its own nakednesse flyeth at first to the application of it to Gods decree Now I willingly grant that Gods having no pleasure in the death of a sinner doth signify that God inflicts death on no man without a cause for that were of meer pleasure to inflict But dares he herehence inferre therefore God doth not of meer pleasure decree to inflict death and damnation on man for sinne for to this alone comes all the force of this argument Now to shew the vanity of this consequence consider I pray 1. It is as if he should argue thus in plain termes sinne is alwaies the meritorious cause of damnation therefore sinne is the meritorious cause of Gods eternall decree of damnation Now this Enthymeme hath no force any farther then it may be reduced into a Categoricall Syllogisme and this Enthymeme is reducible into no other Syllogisme then this Damnation is the decree of Damnation sinne is the cause of Damnation therefore sinne is the cause of the decree of damnation But in this Syllogisme the proposition containes a notorious untruth Or thus Sinne is the cause of damnation therefore the foresight of sinne is the cause of the decree of damnation But this Enthymeme is not reducible unto any categoricall Syllogisme at all for as much as it consists of foure termes all which must be clapt into the Syllogisme whereunto it is reduced and consequently make that Syllogisme consist of foure termes which utterly overthrowes the illative forme thereof 2. We may as well dispute thus Good works as well as faith and repentance are the disposing cause unto salvation therefore good works as well as faith and repentance or the foresight of them are the disposing cause to Gods election or to the decree of salvation But shall I tell you the chiefe flourish whereupon this Author and usually the Arminians doth insist in this his loose argumentation I conceive it to be this they hope their credulous readers unexpert in distinguishing between Gods eternall decree and the temporall execution thereof will be apt hereupon to conceit that we maintain that God doth not only of meer pleasure decree whatsoever he decreeth but also that he doth decree of meer pleasure to damne men which yet is utterly contrary if I be not deceived to the tenet of all our Divines all concurring in this that God in the execution of the decree of damnation proceeds according to a Law and not in the execution of reprobation only but also in the execution of election And the law is this Whosoever believes shall be saved whosoever believes not shall be damned And like as he inflicteth not damnation but by way of punishment so he conferres not salvation but by way of reward But in the execution of his decrees of election unto grace and reprobation from grace we willingly professe that God proceeds according to no law given unto men to prepare themselves hereunto but meerly according to his good pleasure having mercy on whom he will and hardning whom he will And this indeed is the criticall poynt of this controversy But neither this Author nor his complices some of them of my knowledge have any heart to deale on this I come to his Second pregnant place as he calleth it DISCOURSE SECT II. GOD hath shut up all in unbeliefe that he might have mercy on all Rom. 11. 32. in these words of the Apostle are two all 's of equall extent the one standing just against the other an all of unbelievers and an all of objects of mercy look how many unbelievers there be on so many hath God a will of shewing mercy And therefore if all men of all sorts and conditions and every man in every sort be an unbeliever then is every man of every condition under mercy And if every man be under mercy then there is no antecedent precise will in God of shutting up some and those the most from all possibility of obtaining mercy for these two are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they cannot stand together TWISSE Consideration I Willingly grant the word all in each place is of equall extent but how in the Apostles meaning in this place that is look in what sense the Apostle takes the word all when he saith God hath concluded all under unbeliefe in the same sense he takes the word all when he sayeth that he might have mercy
themselves God took not that pleasure in them as to give them his custodient grace to keep them from withdrawing themselves which grace and that out of his good pleasure he afforded unto others But this grace comes in no account throughout with this Author like unto the Remonstrants who would have no other notice taken of any other counsell of God then that whereby he decreeth to save believers and damne unbelievers But if you call them to enquire of Gods decree to bestow the grace of Faith and repentance upon some and not on others as whether it proceeds absolutely or conditionally they usually lend a deafe eare to this whereby it is as cleare as the Sunne what estimation they make of the grace of regeneration of the grace of Faith and of repentance and after what manner they give God the glory of it By the way observe I pray how he makes the state of man in being a reprobate consequent to his withdrawing himselfe which undoubtedly is a Temporall act and accordingly the act of Reprobation whereby a man is denominated a reprobate to be meerely Temporall and consequently such an act must election be also viz. not eternall but Temporall Still he keepeth himselfe in his strength of confusion as most advantageous for him as in saying God forsakes no man till by actuall sinnes and continuance in them he forsaketh God But albeit God forsaketh no man as touching the inflicting of punishment untill man commits actuall sinne and continueth therein impenitently yet before this God did forsake him as touching the denyall of this grace custodient from sinne and the denyall of the grace of repentance to rise out of sinne which yet he grants to many as in shewing mercy to whom he will like as whom he will he hardneth and so accordingly cures in some that naturall infidely and hardnesse of heart wherein we are all borne and leaves it uncured in others Now consider we his argument following which is this If God reject no man from salvation in time or in act and deed till he reject God then surely he rejected no man in purpose and decree but such a one as he foresaw would reject and cast off God Now this argument not one of our Divines deny not only as it is applied to reprobation but neither doe we deny it applied unto election For we willingly professe that like as God bestowes salvation on none but such as he then findes believers penitent and given to good works in like sort wee all professe that God decrees to bestow salvation on none but such as he foreseeth will believe repent and become studious of good works Like enough many doe wilfully dissemble the true state of the Question between us others ignorantly mistake it The question is not whether God decrees to bestow salvation on such as he foreseeth will believe and reject those from salvation whom he foreseeeth will not believe but of the order of reason between these decrees of God and the foresight of obedience the one side and disobedience on the other that is whether like as faith repentance and good works in men of ripe years doe precede their salvation as disposing causes thereunto so the fore-sight of faith repentance and good works precede election as disposing causes or prerequisites thereunto In like manner on the other side whether as finall perseverance in sinne precedes damnation as the meritorious cause thereof So finall perseverance in sinne as foreseen by God precedes reprobation as the decree of Damnation as the meritorious cause thereof So that the argument here mentioned which is all his strength in this place rightly applyed must runne thus Faith repentance and good works actually existent precede salvation as the disposing causes thereunto therefore faith repentance and good works foreseen precede election as the disposing causes thereunto and what is this but as good as in expresse termes to professe that election is of faith repentance and good works though it be in direct contradiction unto Saint Paul professing in terminis to speak in this Divines language that the purpose of God according to election is not of works So on the other side Finall perseverance in sinne precedes damnation as the meritorious cause thereof therefore finall perseverance in sinne foreseen precedes the decree of damnation as the meritorious cause thereof And then what is to make reprobation to be of evill works if this be not Whereas Saint Paul look by what arguments he proves that election is not of good works viz. because before Jacob and Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said of them the Elder shall serve the Younger by the same argument it is equally evident that Reprobation is not of evill works Yet we acknowledge an exact conformity between Gods decrees and the execution thereof because like as God damnes no man but for sinne so he decreed to damne no man but for sinne where sinne is in each place made the meritorious cause of damnation not of the decree of damnation And like as God bestowes salvation on no man of ripe years but by way of reward of faith repentance and good works so he decreed to bestow salvation on no man of ripe years but by way of reward of faith repentance and good works where faith repentance and good works are in each place made the disposing causes to salvation but not to election There was never any so madde saith Aquinas as to say that merits are the cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating and Why but because so is the cause of predestination to be enquired into as the cause of Gods will is enquired into but formerly he had shewed that there can be no cause of Gods will as touching the act of God willing Now let every one judge whether the act of reprobation be not as clearly the act of Gods will as the act of predestination and consequently whether it be not equally as mad a course in Aquinas his judgement to devise a cause of reprobation as to devise a cause of predestination on the part of Gods will And no marvail for the act of Gods will is eternall all the works of the creature are temporall Then the act of Gods will is God himselfe for there is no accident in God and therefore they may as well set themselves to devise a cause of God as a cause of Gods will His phrase of casting off is ambiguous if it signifieth the denyall of salvation it followeth disobedience if it signifieth the deniall of grace it precedes disobedience in what kind soever 3. Our velle and facere are both temporall in God it is otherwise for his deeds are temporall and may admit the works of men precedaneous thereunto but his resolutions are his decrees and they are all eternall and can admit no work of man precedaneous thereunto yet is God as just in the one as in the other For like as he damnes no man but for
sinne so he never decreed to damne any man but for sinne But as touching the grace of regeneration the grace of faith and repentance in the granting and denying of this the Apostle plainly tells us he proceeds meerly according to the good pleasure of his will as when he saith The Lord hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth And here also God is as just in his decrees as in his executions For if it be just with him to give this grace to whom he will and deny it to whom he will it is as just with him to decree the giving of it to whom he will and the denying of it also to whom he will And why shall not the Lord take liberty to cure infidelity and hardnesse of heart in whom he will as he cured it in Manasses and Saul and leave it uncured in whom he will as he left it uncured in many a proud Pharisee and proud Philosopher notwithstanding all their Morality they boasted of Very seasonably he confesseth Gods will to be omnipotent and irrefistible when neverthelesse he makes him to will the salvation of all Reprobates though not one of them is saved But by that which followes by will omnipotent and irrefistible it seems he understandeth only will absolute which he distinguisheth from will conditionate which can be no other I suppose then this my will is that all and every one shall be saved in case he believe and repent Now seeing it is as true that 't is Gods will that they shall be damned in case they believe not and repent not let every sober man judge whether this deserve to be accounted a will of saving rather then a will of damning especially in case all men naturally are farre more prone to infidelity and impenitency then to faith and repentance As for a will conditionate in God like enough this Author carryeth it hand over head without distinction as he doth many other things besides whereas no such will is agreeable to the divine nature quoad actum volentis as touching the act of willing as both Bradwardine by clear reason and Piscator out of the word of God have demonstrated but only quoad res volitas as touching the things willed by him 4. I have shewed the poverty of his performances by the particular examination of every place alleadged by him and made it plain how he betraies his own nakednesse of interpretation of Scripture and of argumentation throughout and therewithall the vanity of this his boast that our doctrine of absolute reprobation doth contradict these plain Scriptures But he like a brave fellow well conceited of his atchievements and having thereby gotten some authority to himselfe is bold to give his word that it contradicts also the whole course of Scripture which I verily believe he is as well able to performe as he hath performed the former and very judiciously takes upon him to distinguish between the whole course of Scriptures and a few places pickt up here and there as if they were no part of the whole course of Scripture Belike by reason of their obscurity as he pretends no matter if they were expunged like as owles are offended with day-light Our Saviour tells us of some that loved darknesse rather then light because their deeds were evill None hate the light of Gods truth more then such as are possessed with errours as with familiar spirits especially when they have been found to play the Apostates from Gods truth Whether I have dashed my selfe upon the rocks of Austins censure by contradicting any Scripture that he hath brought or only his corrupt and vile interpretation and accommodation of them let the indifferent judge Yet what more plain then this Gods purpose of election is not of works especially compared with the manner how Saint Paul proves it What more plain then this God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth It is apparent he utterly declines the criticall point of these controversies which is as touching Gods giving grace even the grace of faith and repentance and of what spirit that savoureth let every one judge As for interpreting any place we doe not abridge his liberty in interpreting it after what manner he thinks good but we are ready to weigh it and if we find it too light to esteem of it as it deserves neither doe we refuse to take into consideration what he or any of his complices are pleased to insist upon DISCOURSE The Second sort of Arguments Convincing drawn from Gods Attributes SECT I. As touching the Generall SEcondly it fights with some principall Attributes of God therefore it cannot be true For God useth not to make decrees contrary to his own glorious nature and incompatible with those excellent Attributes by which he hath discovered part of himselfe to men Two things are here to be premised 1. That Gods chief Attributes are those perfections in the manifestation of which by acts conformable to them God is most glorified which are Mercy Justice Truth c. For God is more honoured by the exercise of these amongst men then by the putting forth of his unlimited power and Soveraignty as a King is more renowned among his Subjects for his clemency equity candid and faire dealing then for his Dominion and Authority or any thing that is done only for the manifestation thereof And there is good reason for it For 1. Power is no vertue but mercy justice and truth are acts of power are not Morally good of themselves but are made good or evill by their concomitants if they be accompanied with justice mercy c. they are good if otherwise they are naught For justum oportet esse quod laudem meretur 2. Power and Soveraignty may as well be shewed in barbarous and unjust actions as in their contraries Saul shewed his authority and power to the full in slaying the Lords Priests and Nebuchadnezzar in casting the three Children into the fiery furnace and Daniell into the Lyons Denne but no mercy nor justice nor any thing else that was good 2. The second thing that is to be preconsidered is that justice mercy and truth in God are the same in nature with those vertues in men though infinitely different in degree as light in the aire is the same with light in the Sunne in nature not in degrees and that which is just mercifull and upright in men is so in God too And by these vertues in our selves and such acts as are conformable to them tanquam ex pede Herculem we may safely measure the same in God For otherwise these things would follow 1. The common and received distinction of Divine Attributes into communicable and incommunicable would fall to the ground for against it this night be said that the mercy justice truth and other vertues that are in us are not Gods perfections in a lower degree communicated to us but things of a different nature 2. Men cannot be truly said to
saith then for inflicting eternall death only on them that are guilty of it as we say But let we him finish the Declamation he hath begunne Is his mercy abundant doth it extend it selfe farther then justice when it is tackt up so short limited to a very few chosen ones when a hundred for one at least are unavoidably cast away out of his only will and pleasure As touching this I have already shewed how much he is out in his Algebra but let that passe unlesse this Divine take upon him to deliver truer Oracles then Saint Paul we are bound to believe that the elect only are vessells of mercy distinguished from reprobates as vessells of wrath Rom. 9. 22 23. and toward these alone it is that his mercy is abundant in the way of bestowing saving and spirituall graces It is untrue that he hath proved any such thing as he pretends namely that Gods mercy is extended to more persons then his justice And applied aright namely as touching mercy seen in pardoning sinnes in changing the heart and saving soules which are peculiar to Gods elect the most brazen faced opposite to Gods holy truth that liveth cannot deny but that they to whom these are granted are farre fewer then they to whom they are denied And if within the Church only for there only are found such as feare God his mercy extends to thousands of them that feare him when but to the third and fourth generation he punisheth the sinnes of the Father upon the Children which is all the proofe this Author brings to this purpose it followeth not herehence that his mercy extendeth any whit to more then doth his justice considering the small proportion of those within the Church and therein of them that feare him in comparison to those without the Church And like as visiting the sinne of Fathers which is commonly understood of temporall punishments so in proportion the mercy is to be understood of temporall mercy And we well know that it is nothing necessary that a man that fears God should have children And like as God doth not alwaies thus visit the sinnes of Fathers upon the Children in like sort it is not alwaies necessary that God should shew mercy to thousands of every one of them that feare him He dealt so with Abraham Isaack and Iacob they to whom the Law was delivered knew this full well then again must not they who look to have an interest in this gracious promise look unto it that they walk in the steps of their Forefathers that feared God By all which may appeare the superficiary nature of this Disputants argumentation even then when the zeale of his cause makes him as most confident so also most luxuriant Lastly doe we say that God damnes any man out of his only will and pleasure Doe we not professe that he damnes no man but for sinne And as he damnes no man but for sinne so likewise that he decreed to damne no man but for sinne though there could be no cause of this his decree but of his meere will and pleasure he made this decree namely to damne many thousands for their sinnes But let him come to an end of this his roaving discourse when he thinks good and not before Or doth his love passe knowledge when we see daily greater love then this in men and other creatures What Father or Mother would determine their children to certain death or to cruell torments worse then death for one only offence and that committed too not by them in their own persons but by some other and only imputed unto them How much lesse would they give themselves to beget Children and bring them forth that they might bring them to the rack fire gallowes and such like tortures and deaths What doe I heare Doth man or any creature shew more love to their Children then God doth towards his Elect Did they ever provide such a sacrifice to make satisfaction for their Childrens sinnes as God did provide for his Yea but reprobates also are Gods Children this must needs be his meaning though in plain termes he spared to expresse so much How unnaturall then was Christ who would not pray for the World if they were all his children And what meant he to professe that he sanctified himselfe only for them for whom he prayed Which sanctification of himselfe was in respect of the offering up of himselfe upon the crosse as Maldonate confesseth was the interpretation of all the Fathers whom he had read And in that prayer professeth of them saying they are thine and thou gavest them unto me as much as to say the World was not his And farther consider Is it safe to measure out Gods proceedings by the proceedings of men What Father or Mother would be content to execute a Child of theirs upon the Gallowes when by some capitall crime he hath deserved it How much lesse hold them upon the rack of continuall tortures what then must not God be allowed to inflict eternall death upon his creatures And what hath an earthly Father or Mother to doe either to determine or execute death on any This belongs to God not to man unlesse he make choyce of them as of his Ministers for the execution of vengeance But this Author is nothing yet awaked out of his dreames or his Arminian Lethargy Yet I hope he will grant that God did foresee all this even the sinnes of Judas in betraying and of the Jewes in crucifying the Sonne of God yet neverthelesse he was content to bring forth both him and them into the World Now what earthly Father and Mother would not make choyce rather to be Childlesse then to bring forth such children as should deale with them as Nero dealt with his Mother Proceed then and as from the affections of earthly Fathers and Mothers he disputes against the absolutenesse of Gods decrees so also in the next place let him conclude the like to the utter overthrowing of Gods foreknowledge Yet who of our Divine saith that God for one offence hath determined death and tortures to any reprobate of ripe years Doe they not all professe that as many as dye in actuall sinnes unrepented of God determined to damne them for those actuall sinnes unrepented of I doe not think he can alleadge any that denies this Againe what one of our Divines maintaines that Infants perishing in originall sinne are damned for that sinne which is made theirs only by imputation What a shamelesse habit hath he gotten to himselfe to deliver untruths yet will he not I warrant you be accounted a Pelagian neither will he plainly deny originall sinne as Grevincovius is said to have done and that testibus convinci potuit Their Tenets are nothing lesse shamefull then Pelagius his Tenets were only they have not that ingenuity which Pelagius had in professing plainly that there was no originall sinne conveyed unto us by propagation Now he comes more closely unto the matter yet but a little neither a
and every good work that he hath appoynted for them in such sort that the beast shall not prevaile over them untill they have finished their testimony and in which respect Saint Stephen even when the stones flew about his eares as thick as haile seems to have gone to his death as composedly as a man goes to his bed having ended his Sermon first his prayer for them in the next place and lastly the commending of his own spirit into the hands of God this mercy this rich mercy this unspeakable mercy this Author most virulently and most unconscionably in cunning and crafty carriage labours to obscure and deface and to dispute us out of the faith of it if it lay in his power which lies not in the power of the Devills themselves as much as himselfe and his informers scorne to apprehend any hope of it And all this as unsipidly and unscholastically as profanely by generall and indefinite termes saying by this Doctrine of ours God is not mercifull to men at all wherein I guesse his lurking hole is in the indefinite condition of the terme Men for dares he say that by this doctrine of ours we make God unmercifull to all men even to the very Elect Yet when he saith to men at all the face of his discourse in the common understanding of it should look this way But if his meaning be that he is not made mercifull to all hath himselfe any farther improved the mercy of God then by enlarging of it unto the children of God And if he by children of God understand all men created by him and we only those whom God hath adopted in Christ and regenerated I pray consider which of us delivereth himselfe in best congruity to the Scripture phrase and meaning Can he be ignorant who they be whom the Scripture stiles vessells of mercy Or that these are set in opposition to vessells of wrath and would he have us as brainsick as himselfe to put no difference in the accommodation of Gods mercy between vessells of mercy and vessells of wrath As for the comparison between men and other creatures he is like himselfe throughout in the execution thereof 1. He undertakes to shew that God is not so mercifull to men as to bruit creatures most men are determined by Gods omnipotent decree to such a being as is a thousand times worse then no being at all To let passe the absurdity of the comparison comparing things incomparable to wit being with no being and ascribing a betternesse to no being which is as much as to ascribe a better being to no being Doth not he himselfe acknowledge that as the elect are but few amongst them that are called so the number of Reprobates is farre greater then the number of the Elect Doth not himselfe maintaine that God hath determined all reprobates that is the most of men by his omnipotent decree to such a being as is a thousand times worse then no being at all according to his judgement and that this determination Divine is everlasting or though he dare not in plain tearmes deny that God hath determined most of men to damnation Doth he not here bewray the disposition of his heart namely either to maintaine that Gods decrees are not everlasting nor determined concerning men untill their deaths or that they are of a revocable nature Or will he fly to the qualification of the Divine decree here mentioned and say that albeit the most part of men are destinated to damnation by the decree divine yet not by an omnipotent decree I guesse his meaning is not by an absolute but by a conditionall decree for as for any distinction of Divine decrees into decrees omnipotent I never yet read or heard but this Gentleman being of a phrasifying spirit we must permit him sometimes to overlash otherwise we shall not have occasion to say of him as Augustus said sometimes of Haterius Haterius noster sufflaminandus est But if by a conditionall decree only God hath reprobated those whom he hath reprobated then the decrees of reprobation cannot be eternall but must needs be temporall for res conditionata the thing conditionated cannot exsist before the condition it selfe whereupon it depends hath exsistence Now the condition of reprobation is meerly temporall to wit finall perseverance in infidelity or impenitency 2. What if the condition of other creatures be better then the condition of reprobates For what sober man should expect that the condition of impenitent sinners should be better in the end then the condition of beasts who have made themselves worse then beasts But then he will say what shall become of all those amplifications of Gods mercy towards men commended to us in holy Scripture I answere they all have place concerning Gods children Gods elect the Scripture phrase acknowledging no other vessells of mercy and counting all others in distinction from them vessell of wrath and one end whereto tends Gods providence towards these vessells the Apostle signifies plainly to be the amplification of his mercy towards the vessells of mercy Rom. 9. 22 23. Which may be unfolded thus that by seeing the miserable conditions of vessells of wrath they may be more sensible of Gods mercy towards them in putting so gracious a difference between them 3. It cannot be denied but God foresaw what the condition of most men would be if they were brought forth into the World What then did God mean to bring them forth Where was his mercy in this Were it not a thousand times better for them not to be borne And by being borne was it not infallible that their condition would be a thousand times worse then the condition of beasts according to this Authors grave and Philosophicall discourse 4. Consider though God foresaw that being so dealt withall as God meant they should be they would never repent nor believe yet seeing God had other means and motives in store which he knew full well would prove effectuall to bring them to faith and repentance were he pleased to use them as Arminius acknowledgeth as I have often cited him and it cannot be denied by the maintainers of scientia media Where was Gods mercy that would both have them brought forth and use only such means to bring them to faith and repentance which he knew would prove ineffectuall and resolved not to use such means with them which hee knew would prove effectuall thereunto I appeale to the judgement of every sober man whether this proceeded not meerely from Gods absolute decree to make them vessells of Wrath that is fit vessells in whom should shine the glory of his vindicative justice even to shew the riches of his glory towards the vessells of mercy whom he had prepared unto glory as on whom he was pleased to bestow such means of grace as he knew full well would prove effectuall to bring them to faith and repentance and finall preseverance that so their soules might be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ
coherence of the words with that which goes before it appears to be spoken upon Gods dispensing and denying grace to whom he will and when he will As for example like as there was a time when God had a Church in the World without distinction of Jewes and Gentiles so afterwards the providence of God was to display it selfe after three severall waies the first was in gathering a Church unto himselfe out of the World from out of the posterity of Abraham these were called the Jewes in distinction from the Gentiles who for a long time had not obtained mercy as the Apostle speaks Rom. 11. 30. In as much as they believed not And this dispensation of grace peculiar unto the Jewes with rejection of the Gentiles continued for about 1600 years Then God gathered a Church among the Gentiles with rejection of the Jewes as the Apostle signifies in the place before alleadged saying now you have obtained mercy through their unbeliefe And this dispensation of Gods grace peculiar unto the Gentiles hath continued now for about 1600 years And we believe a time shall come for the calling of the Jewes and then the Church of God shall consist both of Jewes and Gentiles and the generall calling of them as the Apostle signifies Rom. 11. 12. If the fall of them be the riches of the World and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles how much more their fulnesse and v. 15. If the casting away of them be the reconciling of the World what shall the receiving of them be but life from the dead and v. 31. Even so have these also now not believed that through your Gentiles mercy they also the Jewes might obtain mercy For God hath concluded them all under unbeliefe that he might have mercy on all And hereupon it is that the Apostle breaks forth into admiration of this various providence of God and different dispensation of his grace saying O the depth of the riches both of the wisdome and knowledge of God how unsearcheable are his judgements and his waies past finding out So that albeit the justice of God be apparent to the understanding of man in some of his waies yet not in all Neither doth it follow that because God offers the justice of his courses to the triall of humane understanding in some particulars therefore he offers it to the same triall in all or that the understanding of man is able to comprehend it in all Not only carnall men cry out sometimes Where is the God of judgement Mal. 2. 17. Again it is in vain to serve God and what profit is it that we have kept his commandements that we have walked humbly before the Lord of hosts But even the children of wisdome which are apt to justify her are yet sometimes offended through weaknesse of faith or want of judgement to comprehend the depth of Gods providence when they have considered the strange prosperity of the wicked as Job 21. 6 7 8. and David Psal 73. and Jeremy Jer. 12. But to consider punctually the instances here particulated First not one of them treats of Gods decrees though this Author boldly claps then in amongst the waies of God And these places throughout entreat not of the decrees themselves but of the executions of Gods decrees As that Isaiah 5. 3. Judge I pray you between me and my vineyard yet this was meere grace and not justice but the laying of it wast as there he threatneth for the unfruitfulnesse thereof was just even in the conscience of man So likewise the waies of God mentioned Ezech. 18. 25. are most equall as namely in rewarding the obedient and punishing the disobedient In like sort there is no question to be made of Gods decrees concerning the rewarding the one and punishing the other And it is as true that all this is nothing to the purpose The main question being touching Gods decree to give the grace of obedience to one and deny it unto others and of the execution hereof in shewing mercy on whom he will and hardning whom he will No reason hereof can be devised by man without falling into manifest absurdity or manifest heresy or both It is true God will not slay the righteous with the wicked for the Infants of wicked Parents untill God be pleased to regenerate them are not to be accounted righteous as being borne children of wrath Ephes 2. 3. And therefore as in the conflagration of Sodome God took a course to save righteous Lot yet the Infant children of the Sodomites were consumed in the same fire with their Parents And in like manner I answere to that of Moses Num. 16. 22. Shall one man sinne and wilt thou be angry with all the congregation You know though Korah might be and in likelihood he was the principall instigator yet Dathan and Abiram the sonnes of Eliab and On the sonne of Peleth the sonnes of Reuben joyned with him in the separation and with these were joyned no lesse then 250 Captains of the assembly and they famous in the congregation and men of renowne Nor did those alone perish in this their separation but their families also So that whereas when Moses exhorted all the rest to depart from the tents of those wicked men and thereupon Dathan and Abiram came out and stood in the doore of the Tent with their Wives and their Sonnes and their little Children all these were swallowed up and went downe quick into the pit and doe you think their little Children were partners with them in this conspiracy And is not this judgement strange What can justify this but the power of God is Lord over his creature together with that originall corruption that is found in every one when they come into the world Guesse I pray how happy this Author is in his observations This makes me remember how at my first coming into this place having to deale with certain Brownists being willed thereunto by our Diocesan An old man among the rest was willing to conferre so we would give him liberty to open his mind at full we willingly condescended unto him and thereupon he began to alleadge places of Scripture to justify his separation and wheresoever he found the word seperate that he took up for an argument on his side like him that did set downe every ship that arrived in the harbour at Athens as one of his shipps and amongst the rest this 16 chapter of Numbers afforded him one authority v. 21. where the Lord speaks unto Moses and Aaron saying separate your selves from among this congregation whereunto I answered here indeed is a separation commanded but from whom Surely from those who rose up in rebellion against Moses and Aaron Now if you can prove us to be such as rise up in rebellion against Moses and Aaron then in the name of God separate your selves from us But if we are not the men that rise up in rebellion against Moses and Aaron but you rather then are not
that he saith he proves by Iohn 16. 9. The spirit shall convince the World of sinne because they believe not in me Reprobates therefore are bound to believe But now they cannot be justly bound to believe if they be absolute and inevitable Reprobates for three causes 1. Because it is Gods will that they shall not believe and it appears to be so because it is his peremptory will that they shall have no power to believe for its a Maâ—ime in Logick that Qui vult aliquid in causâ vult effectum ex ista causa necessario profluentem No man will say that it is Gods serious will that such a man shall live when it is his will that he shall not have the concourse of his providence and the act of preservation now will any say that forget not themselves that God doth unfainedly will that those men shall believe whom he will not furnish with necessary power to believe Now if it be Gods will that absolute reprobates shall in no wise believe they cannot in justice be tied to believe For no man is bound to an act against Gods peremptory will 2. Because it is impossible that they should believe they want power to believe and must want it still God hath decreed they shall have none to their dving day without power to believe they can no more believe then a man can see without an eye and live without a Soule Nemo obligatur ad impossibilia To believe is absolutely impossible unto them and therefore in justice they can be tyed to believe no more then a man can be bound to fly like a Bird or to reach heaven with the top of his finger 3. Because they have no object of saith Credere â—ubet dâ— fidei nulium objectum 〈◊〉 This decree makes God to oblige men to believe and to give them no Christ to believe in and to punish them as transgressors of the covenant of grace when yet they have no more right unto it or part in it then the very Devills Can God justiy bind men to believe a lye To believe that Christ died for them when it is no such matter If a man should command his Servant to eate and punish him for not eating and in the mean time fully resolve that he shall have no meat to eate Would any reasonable man say that he were just in such a command such a punishment Change but the names the case is the same TWISSE Consideration IN this discourse on the poynt of Gods justice this Author seems to storme and shewes great confidence of bearing downe all before him but the more ridiculous will it prove in the issue when it shall appeare that all this wind beats down no corne He takes his rise from a particular opinion of Zanchy whose opinion is that all even Reprobates are bound to believe they are elected in Christ unto salvation though never they shall believe nor can believe But doth this Author himselfe concurre with Zanchy in this opinion If he did I presume it were upon some better ground then the authority of Zanchy and in all likelihood we should have heard of those grounds or doth himselfe believe that that passage Ioh. 16. 9. He shall convict the World of sinne because they believed not in me doth evince as much or import as much as that is whereunto Zanchy drives it If he doth not concurre with Zanchy in either of these why should he tye us to the particular authority of Zanchy Must we be bound to stand to every interpretation of our Divines or every particular opinion of theirs wherein perhaps they were singular Secondly suppose this opinion of Zanchy be a truth and suppose we concurre with him herein will it from this opinion follow that therefore even Reprobates have power to believe Who seeth not that it is a flat contradiction to the antecedent For the Doctrine of Zanchy as here it is related is this that even Reprobates though they cannot believe yet are they bound to believe Now will it herehence follow that therefore they have power to believe Whereas it is manifestly supposed in the antecedent that they cannot believe And to my understanding the distinction of Elect and Reprobate in this case is most unseasonable For to what end doe we Preach unto our hearers that all sorts of men are bound to believe but this to wit that every one that heareth us being privy to his condition may understand that he of what condition soever he be which is supposed to be better known to him then to the Preacher or at least as well is bound to believe But as for these different conditions of elect and reprobate no man can be privy to the one untill he doth believe nor to the other untill finall perseverance in unbeliefe And if I list I could alleadge the opinion of another Divine who is very peremptory in his way professing that the Ministers calling upon us to believe is no commandement at all but like a Kings gracious Proclamation unto certain malifactors who are all accused of High Treason giving them to understand that in case they will voluntarily confesse their sinne and accept of his gracious pardon offered them he will most graciously pardon them But if they will not but stand rather to their triall presuming to acquit themselves right well and prove themselves to be true Subjects let them stand to the adventure and issue of their tryall And that thus the covenant of grace is offered to be received by them only who feare to come and dare not come to the tryall of the Covenant of works But I will not content my selfe in putting off Zanchy in this manner although by the way I cannot but professe that were I of their opinion who teach that God gives unto all and every one when they come into the World a certain grace for the enlivening of their wills whereby they are enabled to will any spirituall good whereto they shall be excited I see no reason but that the way is open to everlasting life as well by the covenant of works as by the covenant of grace for let perfect obedience be the spirituall good whereto they are excited let them but will it as it is supposed they can and then God will be ready to concurre to the doing of it like as to the work in us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 resipiscere modò velimus so also I should think to work in us perfect obedience modò velimus And in this case I pray consider what need were there of faith in Christ on their part more then on the part of the Holy Angells certainly there would be no need of repentance Thirdly therefore consider we the constant Doctrine of Divines not that Reprobates are bound to believe but that all that heare the Gospell are bound to believe but in what sense Piscator saith as I remember that the thing which all such are bound to believe is
is ingaged to give ability of believing unto men he may as well inferre that he is engaged to give ability unto men to the keeping of his law and what need was there of Christs coming into the world Seeing by his coming into the world we have gained no better condition by the Arminian Tenet than to be saved if we will and if men have ability to to keepe the law even by the law they may be saved if they will and it will follow as well that God without giving this ability to keepe the law cannot justly punish the transgressours of it as that God without giving men ability to believe cannot punish men for not believing no more than a Magistrate having put out a mans eyes for an offence can command this man with justice to read a booke and because he reads not put him to death But this is a very vile simile and stands in no tolerable proportion to that whereunto it is resembled For the man thus bereaved of his eyes hath a will to read and consequently it is no fault for not reading for all sinne is in the will But it is not so in not obeying either Law or Gospell If a man had a will to obey and believe but he could not in such a case it were unreasonable he should be punished But in the case of disobedience unto God we speake of all the fault is in the will voluntarily and wilfully they neither will obey the one nor the other like as they that have accustomed themselves to doe evill can not doe good as a blackemoore cannot change his skinne Yet with this difference that man is never a whit the more excusable or lesse punishable for not doing that which is good not so the blackemore for not changing his skinne But such is the shamefull issue of them that confound impotency Morall with impotency naturall as if there were no difference As wild is the comparison following of the Masters exacting from his Servant a just employment of that stock which he hath taken from him An evill servant may have a will to play the good husband in imploying his Masters stock where he pleased to intrust him with it But though he hath a will to be faithful and thrifty yet without matter to worke upon he cannot exercise this fidelity of his to his Masters behoofe Shew the like will in a carnall man to believe if he could and if God bereave him of power in such a case then conclude the unreasonablenesse of Gods courses herein But if the Master gave him a stock to employ upon a resonable rent to be payd him yearly for certaine yeares if so be the servant wast the stock Shall it not be lawfull for the Master neverthelesse to require his debt And bid him pay that he owes him This is the case we speake of In Adam we all have sinned saith the Apostle and thereby have wasted that stock of grace which God had given us and so disabled our selves to performe that duty we owe to God What therefore Shall not God call upon us to pay our debts because we are become bankrupts Especially considering the naturall man is proud enough of his abilities to performe any thing that is good And as for ability to believe is there not a kind of faith performed by prophane persons by Hypocrites who concurre with the best in the profession of the Gospell Nay Is there not a secret kind of hypocrisie as when a man thinks his heart is upright towards God when indeed it is not Otherwise what should move Saint Paul to call upon the Corinthians to examine themselves whether they were in the faith saying Know you not your selves how that Christ is in you except ye be reprobates 2 Car. 13. 5. It is true there is a faith infused by the spirit of God in regeneration but who ever said that any man was damned because he doth not believe with such a faith As much as to say that non-regeneration is the meritorious cause of damnation Now how well he hath proved that our Doctrine in the poynt of absolute reprobation is repugnant to Gods justice let the indifferent judge DISCOURSE SECT IV. Which I divide into Three Subsections SUBSECT I. THe Third Attribute which it oppugneth is the truth of God God is a God of truth Deut. 32. 4. Truth it selfe Ioh. 14. 6. So called because he is the fountain of truth and the perfection of truth without the least mixture of false-hood the strength of Israell cannot lye 1 Sam. 15. 29. Never could any man justly charge him with dissembling Let God be true and every man a lyar saith the Apostle that he might be justified in his sayings and overcome when he is judged Rom. 3. 4. That is men may lye for all men are lyars but God cannot lye for God is true if any man should goe about to challenge him of untruth his challenge would easily appeare to be a calumny The truth of God like a glorious Sunne will break through all those clouds of accusations which seek to obscure and hide it Simile gaudet Simili God loves such as are of a true heart Psal 51 6. And hath an hypocrite in utter detestation and therefore he must needs be true himselfe No man for ought I know doubts of it But by this decree is God made untrue and hypocriticall in his dealing with all men and in all matters that concerne their eternall estate particularly in his commands in his offers of grace and glory in his threats in his passionate wishes and desires of mens chiefest good and in his expostulations and commiserations also 1. In his commands for by this doctrine God commands those men to repent and believe whom he secretly purposeth shall never believe Now whom God commands to believe and repent those he outwardly willes should believe and repent For by his commandements he signifies his will and pleasure and he must inwardly and heartily will it too or else he dissembles For words if they be true are an interpretation of the mind when they are not are meere impostures and simulations 2. In his offers of grace and glory these offers he makes to such as refuse them and perish for refusing them as well as unto those who doe accept them to their salvation This is evident Math. 22. where those were invited to the wedding that came not And Acts 3. 26. Where t is said To you hath God sent his Sonne Jesus to blesse you in turning every one of you from your iniquities Math. 23. 37. How oft would I have gathered of you saith Christ speaking of such as neglect the day of their visitation and so lost their salvation This is evident also by reason for as many as are under the commandement are under the promise too as we may see Acts 2. 38 39. Repent and be Baptized every one of you and you shall receive the gift of the holy Ghost for to you and to your Children
to have abstained from many of those foule sinnes yea from all of them wherewith God doth upbraid them albeit to abstaine from any sinne in a gracious manner be a worke of Gods speciall grace which he affords not according to mens workes which way tends all this eager but superficiary discourse but according to his own purpose and grace 3. Hosea 11. 8. God represents as it were a conflict within him between his mercy and justice and his mercy hath the glory of the day But wherein To spare them though their sinnes deserved at his hands that he should make them as Adma and Zeboim as Sodome and Gomorrah He would rather shew himselfe to be as he is God and and not Man And wherein But in this man may pardon his enemy but cannot change his heart it is otherwise with God he can both pardon our sinnes and change our hearts and to this purpose he becomes our Lord and our God and walkes in the midst of us as the holy one of Israell to sanctify us as it followeth in the same place of Hosea v. 10. They shall walk after the Lord he shall roare like a Lyon viz. In such expostulations comminations c. but the issue shall be gracious for when he shall reare then the children of the West shall feare that is feare unto him as Hos 3. 5. That is come flying unto him and to his goodnesse with feare like Birds scared from one place fly with greater speed to another so conscience affrighted with sense of sinne and apprehension of Gods wrath shall fly from his wrath unto his mercy to his goodnesse whereof God shall make unto them a full representation in David their King that is in Christ as in whom we behold the glory of Gods grace with open face and trepidare in Latine is found to be of the same signification with festinare And v. 11. Is manifested as much as where it is said They shall feare as a sparrow out of Egypt and as a Dove out of the land of Egypt and I will place them in their houses saith the Lord. That is come flying unto the Lord with feare As for that Math. 23. 37. O Jerusalem how oft would I c. This is of another nature as being delivered by Christ the sonne of God made under the Law who as in his manhood he might entertaine such desires in proper speech so by the Law of God was bound to desire the conversion of his brethren as well as any other Prophet or man of God or minister of his word But such confusion becomes this discourse right well In all this he saith there is little sincerity if there be a secret resolution that the most of these towards whom those wishes chidings and commiserations are used shall be unavoydably damned But what if but one of them towards whom these are used by a secret resolution shall be unavoydably damned is there sincerity enough in these courses divine Sureif this resolution concerning the unavoydable damnation of the one doth not prejudice Gods sincerity neither shall such a resolution concerning the damnation of two or of two hundred or thousands or the most any way prejudice sincerity divine But this kind of discourse is spread all over this Treatise like a scab only to worke upon vulgar affection where judgement is wanting to observe the frothy condition of it And whereas he saith that in all this God aliud animo vult aliud verbis significat its most untrue as to every one should be made manifest according to the right understanding of it had he been pleased to accommodate it severally and shew what that is which God signifies by his word and what that is which he willeth in his heart And indeed as in the poynt of Gods commandement I have shewed there is no colour of contradiction between it and Gods purpose but only according to this Authors superficiary interpretation For to command a thing is only to will that it shall be our duty to doe it notwithstanding which it is apparent God may purpose not to give grace to worke the doing of it So in every one of the rest had he instanced as it became him and shewed wherein the guile consisted the absurdity of this crimination might have been made as manifest as in this That which he conceales and which he would have his readers rather take to themselves than shew himselfe clearely to stand to the maintainance thereof seems to be this that every one hath power given him to believe to repent to change his heart yea to regenerate himselfe but it sticks in his teeth and he dares not speake it out plainly Only he keepes himselfe to Gods resolution concerning mans unavoydable damnation yet we maintaine not that any contingent things come to passe unavoydably that were utterly against the nature of a contingent thing which is to come to passe so as joyned with a possibility of not coming to passe And as for damnation in particular we acknowledge it throughout to be avoydable by repentance and not otherwise unto men of ripe years And as for repentance we say that there is no man but may repent as long as he lives through grace so that in the issue the maine poynt to be debated herein is whether every man living hath such a grace given him as whereby he may repent But upon this poynt though his whole discourse be grounded thereupon yet is he content to say just nothing least their shamefull and most unconscionable courses in dishonouring the grace of God should be discovered and brought to light But consider in a word or two as touching this universall grace which they make to consist in the inabling of the will to will any goodthing whereunto they shall be excited If such a grace be universall then every one hath power to believe and power to repent But this is untrue for the Apostle telleth us of some that they cannot repent Rom. 2. 4. of the naturall man that he cannot discerne the things of God and that they are foolishnesse unto him and while they seeme foolishnesse unto him is it possible that therein he should discerne the wisdome of God 1 Cor. 2. 14. our Saviour tells us of some that they cannot believe Ioh. 12. 46. and tells others to their face saying How can you believe when ye receive honour one of another and seeke not the honour that comes from God only Ioh. 5. 44. Likewise of them that are in the flesh Saint Paul saith They cannot please God Rom. 8. 8. 2. It is the habit of faith that inables us to believe so that if all men have power to believe it must be confessed that all men have faith but the Apostle saith Fides non est omnium 2 Thes 3. 2. Tit. 1. 1. he saith it is electorum like as Austin professeth Habere fidem sicut habere charitatem gratiae est fidelium de praedest Sanct. cap. 5. 3. Whosoever hath power to
prduce a vitall act hath life in him and consequently whosoever hath power to produce any act of the life of grace hath the life of grace in him But the acts of faith and repentance are the acts of the life of grace therefore whosoever hath power to produce these hath in him the life of grace But this is not true of all for the Scripture testifies of some that they are dead in sinne Ephes 2. 1. Are strangers from the life of God Ephes 4. 18. Againe then all should be regenerated but that is untrue for regeneration is signified Psal 19. in Scripture to be wrought by the word of God 1 Peter 1. 23. Iam. 1. 17. But all have not the word of God 4. If a man hath power to believe and repent then the reason why a man doth not believe and repent is not because he cannot but because he will not so that in the issue it comes to this that a man may believe if he will repent if he will But such a power is not grace but nature rather as appears by Austin l. 1. de Gtnesi contra Manich. cap. 3. where he professeth that omnes possunt credere si velint now compare this with that he hath in the same place where though he saith that omnes credere possint si velint yet posse credere simply taken ariseth meerely out of the gift of charity which he professeth to be gratiae fidelium de praedest Sanct. c. 5. But there he professeth that posse habere fidem is naturae hominum the very naturall condition of all men I farther prove it by reason thus Look by what power I can believe if I will by the same power I can refuse to believe if I will Now such a power is no other then whereby a man is indifferent to doe good or evill but such a condition is not grace for grace is goodnesse now goodnesse doth not dispose any either to good or evill indifferently but precisely to that which is good like as naughtinesse disposeth a man only to that which is evill He sleepes so sweetly upon his Arminian pillow that his very dreames make him confident of the evidence of his deductions And he gives reasons for it and that of most force for conviction namely the confession of his adversaries the maintainers of absolute reprobation for even they he saith doe not deny this but ascribe unto God sanctam simulationem duplicem personam duplicem voluntatem But he names none content to sing to himself his Muses throughout when he relats what our sides answer to his profound discourses And I commend his wisdome more then his honesty in this for if he had quoted his Authors herein it may be something might have bin discovered that would be little pleasing unto him yet herein he confounds things much different for as for a double will ascribed unto God all the Learned doe acknowledge so much and the Scriptures testify it as namely that his decree is called the will of God as what the Lord willeth that hath he done both in heaven and in earth and who hath resisted his will as also that Gods commandement is called usually the will of God as This is the will of God even your sanctification that every one should know how to possesse his vessell in holinesse and honour and not in the lust of concupiscence as the Gentiles doe which know not God 1 Thes 4. 4 5. as for duplicem personam that is a phrase which I never read before yet the phrase of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is usually in the Holy Scripture as when God takes unto him both the members of a mans body and the passions of his mind and so speakes in the way of condescension to our infirmities as to put upon himselfe the person of a man and this is undenyable by all that are not Anthropomorphites And as touching our blessed Saviour we acknowledge in him duplicem naturam a double nature though not duplicem personam a double person and accordingly sometimes he both speakes of himselfe and is spoken of as touching the nature of his God-head and sometimes as touching the nature of his Man-hood As for the first that alone is materiall to his present purpose namely as touching Sancta Simulatio ascribed unto God by our Divines Now it were worth the while to know who is his Author in this and that of the passages alleadged by this Author doth professe that they doe represent in God an holy kind of simulation How could he exspect that this should give any satisfaction seeing he conceales the Author of it And what reader would not be moved with a very greedy desire to know the Author of such an interpretation of the passages alleadged by this Divine that he might consider whether it be rightly alleadged or no and if rightly with what sobriety they deliver it Now I remember well to have read in Piscator that the Scripture attributes in a certaine place Simulation unto Christ not in any passage of this nature wee treat of as namely Luke 24. 28. Where it is said he made as though hee would goe farther like enough to irritate their devotions and to provoke their zealous desire so much the more to retaine him a little longer And I willingly professe not the Simulation but the Dissimulation of this Author in this case hath stirred up a desire in me to be satiâ—fied as touching the Author of this Sancta Simulatio Now I find in Piscator his answer to Vorstius his Parascâ—uen the first part pag. 29. both that place of simulation attributed unto Christ out of Luke 24. 28. And also how that in the examples of Gods messages sent to Hezekiah that he should dye and not live And to the Ninevites by Jonah Yet forty daies and Nineve shall be destroyed his opinion is that therein God doth signify care se velle quod non vult His words are these Adhaec etsi Deus interdum significet se velle quod non vult non tamen propterea hypocriseos insimulandus est for this Vorstius objected unto him Sed potius sapientia ejus agnoscenda in hominibus ad serias preces seriam poenitentiam adducendis ut liquet in exemplo Begis Ezekiae recuperantis sanitatem Ninivitarum conservatorum and whereas Vorstius laies to his charge that in saying God commands one thing and purposeth another he doth impute unto God Hypocrisy which is the very substance of this Authors answere in this place See I pray how he answers it without attributing any holy simulation at all unto God in this case Ad praecepta vero quod attinet non statim sequitur Deum agere Hipocritam si quid praecipiat quod fieri nolit etenim hypocritam is demum agit qui simulat pietatem quâ caret Sane quicquid praecipit Deus id vult voluntare approbante si fiat nisi interveniat praeceptum contrarium ut factum est in
was sufficient to convert them which must be by the Antithesis to bring them to faith provided that they that is the hearers play the good husbands in the using of it But what is it to play the good husbands These and such like Phrasiologies are the usuall sculking courses of the Arminians like the inke which the Fish Saepia casts forth that she may thereby the better hide her selfe and escape from the hands of the Fisher But certainly it must be some worke or other to be performed by the hearer whereby he shall be brought to faith therefore I say it is either the worke of Faith it selfe or some other worke preceding it not of faith it selfe for faith it selfe cannot in reason be said to be a worke whereby a man is brought to faith Secondly herehence it followeth that Mans good husbandry being here distinguished from the worke of Faith it selfe the act of Faith is hereby made the work of mans will not of Gods grace if some work preceding faith whereupon faith is wrought by grace it followeth that the grace of faith is given according to mans works this is the foule issue of their tenet making faith either not at all the worke of God or if wrought by God to be wrought according to mans worke And thus they shape the grace of God conferring faith not only towards Reprobates but also towards the elect Now observe I beseech you how our Brittaine Divines doe purposely reject this Doctrine in the Synod of Dort art 3. in their third Thesis of those which are rejected by them The Thesis which they reject is positis omnibus gratiae operationibus quibus Deus ad efficiendam hanc conversionem utitur voluntatem hominis relinqui in aequilibrio velitne credere vel non credere convertete se ad Deum vel non convertere All the operations of grace supposed the will of man is left in an even ballance whether he will believe or no whether he will convert himselfe to God or no this is the very opinion of this Author against which our worthy Divines dispute there in this manner If this were so then it would follow that God by his grace is not the principall cause of mans believing and conversion but man by his free will rather For in this case God shall not predominantly worke mans conversion but upon condition only to wit in case the will first move it selfe whereby the lesse worke is given to God and the greater worke to man to wit in mans conversion 2. Herehence it will follow that God gives no more grace to the Elect than to the Reprobate and that the elect are not bound to be more thankefull to God than the non-elect because the worke of God in both is no other than to place the will in an even ballance 3. The grace of conversion is given with an intention that it shall prove effectuall and to move nay rather to bring man to the producing of the act of faith in such sort as it cannot be made in vaine Haec gratia a nullo duro corde respuitur ideo quippe tribuitur ut cordis duritia primitus auferatur And seeing the good Husbandry of mans consists in obedience to the Gospell it appears hereby that the grace they speake of is no other than the Gospell exhorting to repentance and this we confesse is sufficient in a certain kind to wit in the kind of instruction and exhortation and is not this sufficient to convict of unbeliefe as many as wilfully resist it and such is the condition of all in hearing the Gospell to whom God gives not the grace of conversion for as Saint Austin saith Libertas sine gratiâ non est libertas sed contumacia and no other impotency of beliefe doe we ascribe to a naturall man but such as consists in contumacy which is meerely a fault and corruption of the will not the defect of any naturall power and therefore as I said the impotemcy of converting to God by faith and repentance is impotency morall consisting meerely in the corruption of the will and there is no question but every man hath as much power to believe as Simon Magus of whom it is said that he believed Fides in voluntate est saith Austin credimus quando volumus but the will of man is so corrupt that without speciall preparation by Gods grace it is rather wilfully set to walke in the waies of flesh and bloud than obsequious to that which is good we make no question but that as Prosper saith every one that heareth the Gospell is thereby called unto grace even to obtaine pardon of sinne and salvation upon his faith in Christ and is called upon also to believe but withall we say with our Brittaine Divines Art 3. De Conversione Thesi 1a. In the explication thereof that God gives his elect not only posse credere si velint which in Austins opinion lib. 1. de gen contra Manic cap. 3. and de praedest Sanct. cap. 5. is common to all but velle credere nay they spare not to professe that if God should worke in us only posse credere posse convertere and leave the act of believing and converting to mans free will we should all doe as Adam did and fall from God through our free will and never bring this possibility into act take their own words Quod si vires quasdam infundendo daret Deus tantum posse credere posse convertere ipsum interim actum committeret libero hominum arbitrio certe quod primus parens fecit faceremus omnes libero arbitrio a Deo deficeremus nec possibilitatem hanc in actum perduceremus Haec itaque eximia est illa specialis gratia qua non modo possunt credere si velint sed volunt cum possunt Phil. 3. 13. Dat Deus nobis velle perficere As for that which he discourseth of Gods principall aime that the Church of Israell should bring forth good fruit let us speake plainly and not cheat our selves first and then become impostors unto others was it that which God did principally intend Gods intentions are his decrees now if God did decree they should bring forth fruit de facto who hath resisted his will Nay take their own rules according to their doctrine of Scientia media Why did God give them only such a grace to move them unto fruitfulnes which he foresaw they would resist And refuse to give such grace as he foresaw would not be resisted and that without all prejudice to their wills Let thē answer unto this for that God in the storehouse of his wisdome hath such courses as being used he foreseeth infalliby that any sin will be hindred Arminius acknowledgeth as I have oftē alleadged him But we may safely say 1. That God intended it should be their duty to bring forth fruit 2. If he did farther intend that the Church of Israel should de facto bring forth fruit this he
nature then all things must be acknowledged to come to passe by necessity of their owne nature which is to deny God But if things be of their owne nature meerly possible and indifferent to become either future or non-future then there must be acknowledged some cause whereby they are brought out of the condition of things meerly possible into the condition of things future And this cause must exist from everlasting otherwise it should not be so ancient as the effect thereof for it is well knowne that all things future have been future from everlasting otherwise God could not have foreknown them from everlasting but all confesse that God from everlasting foreknew every future thing Therefore the cause making them to passe out of the condition of things meerely possible such as they were of their owne nature into the condition of things future was also from everlasting Now consider where was this cause to be found Not without God for nothing without God either was or is everlasting without beginning therefore is it to be found within God or no where Consider in the next place what is that within God which is fit to be the cause hereof We say 't is his decree but this Author cannot away with that Therefore Si quid novisti rectius isto candidus imperti Certainly the knowledge of God cannot be the cause for as Aquinas saith that causeth nothing but as joyned with Gods will and therefore it is commonly conceived that foreknowledge doth rather presuppose things future than make them so nothing then remaines to be the cause hereof but the essence of God Now the essence of God may be considered two waies either as working necessarily or as working freely if it be the cause of things future as working necessarily then it followeth that God shall produce them by necessity of nature which utterly overthrowes Divine providence What remaines then but that we must be driven to confesse that Divine essence makes them future as working freely which is as much as to professe that Gods will and decree is that alone which maketh things to passe out of the condition of things meerly possible in to the condition of things future And I challenge the whole Nation of Arminians and Jesuites to answer this argument Yet this decree we willingly acknowledge is a permissive decree but look that we understand that aright also thus God decreeth this or that evill to come to passe by his permission like as good things he decreeth shall come to passe by his effection and that upon Gods permission it is necessary that that which he permits shal come to passe is acknowledged not only by our Divines but by Vorstius by Arminians by Navarettus the Dominican as I have quoted thē in my Vinditiae gratiae Dei which yet they deliver without clear expressing how which I perform thus look what God decrees to permit it is necessary that it should come to passe but how Not necessarily but contingently freely And the Scripture is expresse as before expressed that the most barbarous actions cōmited against Christ by Herod Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and people of Israell in their contumelious usages of him were all predetermined by the hand and counsell of God Marke the issue of this Authors most frivolous discourses for this will whereof he speakes whereby God is pretended gratiously to will mans Salvation conditionall as much as to say 't is Gods will that a man shall be Saved in case he believe in Christ now what Christian was ever known to deny this Secondly consider whether this deserves to be called a will to save more than a will to damne for like as 't is certaine a man shall be saved if he believe in Christ so it is most certaine a man shall be damned if he believe not and withall consider to which of these the nature of man is most prone whether to faith or to infidelity DISCOURSE SECT VII BUt by this opinion the gifts of nature and grace have another end either God doth not meane them unto those that perish albeit they doe enjoy them because they are mingled in the world with the elect to whom only they are directed or if he doe he meaneth they shall have them and by them be lifted up above the common rank of men ut lapsu graviore ruant that their fall may be the greater for how can God intend that those men should receive them or any good by any of them whom he hath by an absolute decree cut off and rejected utterly from grace and glory More particularly by this doctrine 1. Christ came not into the world to procure the Salvation of them that perish because they were inevitably preordained to perish 2. The word is not sent to them or if it be it is that they might slight it or contemne it and increase their damnation by the contempt of it and so these inconveniences will arise 1. That God is a meere deceiver of miserable men whom he calls to Salvation in the name of his Sonne by the preaching of his word because he fully intends to most men the contrary to that which he fairly pretends 2. That Ministers are but false witnesses because in their Ministry they offer Salvation conditionally to many who are determined to damnation absolutely 3. The Ministry of the Word canot leave men inexcusable for Reprobates may have this just plea Lord dost thou punish for not believing in thy Sonne when thou didest call us to believe by the preaching of thy Word thou didest decree to leave us woefull men in Adams sinne to leave us neither power to believe nor a Christ to believe in how canst thou justly charge us with sinne or encrease our punishment for not believing in him whom thou didest resolve before the world was that we should never believe in That Ministry gives men a faire excuse which is given to no other end than to leave them without excuse 4. The Sacraments by this opinion signify nothing seale up conferre nothing to such as are not Saved but are meere blankes and empty ordinances unto them not through the fault of men but by the primary and absolute will of God 5. Lastly other gifts bestowed upon men of what nature soever they be are to the most that receive them in Gods absolute intention 1. Unprofitable such as shall never doe them good in reference to their finall condition 2. Dangerous and hurtfull given them not of love but extreame hatred not that they might use them well and be Blessed in so doeing but that they might use them ill and by ill using of them procure unto themselves the greater damnation God lifts them up as the Divell did Christ to the pinacle of the Temple that they might fall and loades them with knowledge and other goodly indowments that with the weight of them he might sink them into Hell and so by good consequence Gods chiefest gifts are intended and laid as snares
to be made reckoning of but his own conceit As the fly sitting upon the Cart wheele in a dry Summer said see what a dust I make Saint Pauls righteousnesse which he speakes of Phil. 3. I take to be better than the vertue of any Philosopher which yet he accounted but dung that he might winne Christ But by the way I observe how liberall these men are in acknowledging the gifts of God in grosse which they will be found utterly to deny if they be examined upon them in particular As for example Morall vertues we commonly say are Habitus acquisiti acquisite habits and that by frequentation of consimilar acts whereupon the habit ariseth naturally Now doe these men maintaine that God is the Author of these acts otherwise than by concourse working in them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 velle facere modò velint I can shew it under the hands of some of them in expresse termes Now I pray you is not God the Author of every evill act after this manner as well as of any good by their own confession for they grant that God concurres to every sinnefull act works 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 velle and facere thereof also modò homines velint Who then is so simple as not to observe that they make God the Author of vertues after no other manner than they make him the Author of vices Yet they are content to talke liberally of the gifts of God only to cheat the simple I meane as many as are not acquainted with their juggling as for us wee maintaine that God determines the will not only to the substance of a good act by determination naturall but also to the goodnesse of it by determination supernatural as for example no vertuous act is truly good but as it is performed out of the love of God but what love Out of such a love of God as is joyned with the contempt of himselfe judge you whether such a love may be performed by power of nature and this amor usque ad contemptum sui Gerson makes to be the character of the child of God like as amor sui usque ad contemptum Dei he make the character of a child of the Devill But to draw to an end of this confused discourse wherein are clapt together gifts of nature seaven whereof are reckoned up as creation sustentation preservation health strength beauty and wisdome and gifts of grace that either purchasing salvation as Christ or applying salvation which are of foure forts 1. The Ministry of the word Sacraments 2. Gods patience 3. Illumination of the mind 4. The plantation of many excellent vertues eight whereof are particulated as 1. knowledge 2. faith 3. repentance 4. fortitude 5. liberality 6. temperance 7. humility 8. chastity which by this time I have gotten by heart ere I am aware I am so beaten to it through a tedious discourse of all which hand over head it is affirmed that either God meanes them not to them that enjoy them but as they are mingled with the elect which hath no colour as I can perceive save of the Ministry of the Word Sacraments for is it sober to impute to any to say that creation or preservation or health strength beauty wisdome or Christ himselfe or Gods patience or illumination of mind or the vertues he speakes of as knowledge faith repentance fortitude liberality temperance humility chastity are not given to any but as they are mingled among the elect Or that they are given for their hurt touching this last I answere in briefe that it is a very absurd thing to say that God gives any of these gifts to man to this end that they may by occasion be hurt by them but God both gives them and in case they prove an occasion of harme of sinne unto them he permits them through occasion from them to sinne and therein to presevere as touching Reprobates to damne them for their sinnes to the manifestation of his own glory in the way of justice vindicative as also hereby the more To declare the riches of his glory upon the vessells of mercy which he hath prepared unto glory Rom. 9. 23. When they shall find that had not God put a gracious and mercifull difference between them and others Christ had been a rock of offence as well unto them as unto others the Gospell had been a savour of death unto death to them as well as others All other gifts which God hath bestowed upon them look in what sort they have been an occasion of falling unto others so they might have been in like sort an occasion of falling unto them also for it is as true as the word of God is true that the Gospell is a savour of death unto death to some and that Christ was set up as well for the falling of some as for the rising of others yea a rock to fall upon to both the houses of Israell and as a snare and as a net to the Inhabitants of Jerusalem and many among them shall stumble and shall fall and shall be broken and shall be snared and shall be taken And that as many as stumble at the word and are disobedient they were thereunto ordained And the holy Prophet wanted not faith when he delivered this execration let their table be a snare before them and their prosperity thir ruine And how poorely this Author labours to charme the energy of these such like passages let the indifferent judge by that which is delivered As for the last of an absolute decree cutting off and rejecting some from grace and glory I will end this with representing the sottish condition of this Author herein parbreaking his stomack without all judgement and sobriety First observe how he claps together grace and glory as if there were no difference in the manner of Gods cutting off from the one from the other whereas the manner of Gods cutting off from the one as it is maintained by us is such as impudency it selfe hath not the face to lay any thing to our charge therein As for the manner of Gods cutting off from the other as it is maintained by us there is indeed such absolutenesse as they maligne bitterly but withall it is so cleerely set down in holy Scripture that their hearts serve them not with open face to vent their spleen against it and that is a chiefe reason of this Authors declining the other controversies and keeping himselfe only to this though I verily think this hath proceeded from the counsell of his abettors And for the same reason it is that he claps togeather the cuting off from grace and glory But I will take leave to distinguish them and answer distinctly to both a part to make their madnesse and unreasonablenesse more apparent And first I will speake of Gods absolute decree of cutting off from glory Now this is well known to be opposed to a decree conditionall as in the end of the
former Section this Author calls it and useth it as according to their own doctrine in opposition to ours but most indiscreetely and unlearnedly This conditionall will of God is to be understood quoad res volitas as touching the things willed by God so Vossius accommodates it in his History of the Pelagian Heresy as before I have shewed and makes it all one in effect with Gods antecedent will and D. Iaokson in his Book of Divine providence treating hereof professeth in plaine termes that the distinction of Voluntas antecedens and consequens is to be understood quoad res volitas as touching the things willed Now the thing willed here is the cutting off from glory now this Author togeather with his instructer will have the will of God concerning this to be conditionall to wit that it is Gods will that no man shall be cut off from glory but for sinne now we say so too and professe that like as God hath not ordained that any shall be damned but for finall perseverance in sinne so likewise God hath not ordained that any man shall be cut off from glory but for finall perseverance in sinne But whereas the Remonstrants maintained that there is no other decree of Reprobation but this and so likewise on the other side that there is no decree of Predestination but such as is properly opposite hereunto namely this That the decree by which God hath purposed in Christ and for Christ to save those that believe and repent to the end is the whole and entire decree of Predestination unto salvation On this poynt the Contra-Remonstrants opposed them and accordingly our Brittaine Divines make this the first erroneous opinion which they reject upon the first Article as touching election And likewise as touching Reprobation the first erroneous opinion which they reject is this That the decree by which God from all eternity and that irrevocably hath purposed out of lapsed mankind to leave none but the impenitent and incredulous in sinne and under the wrath of God as being aliens from Christ is the whole and entire decree of reprobation This I say is the first erroneous opinion which our Brittaine Divines reject which this Author takes no notice of but most unlearnedly discovers that he understands not the state of the question Secondly Now I come to Gods absolute decree of cutting off from grace this we willingly confesse is meerely absolute and unconditionall quoad res volitas as touching the things willed by God for the things willed by God herein are the denyall of mercy and grace to regenerate some the denyall of the grace of faith and repentance concerning which the Apostle professeth that God proceeds herein meerely according to the good pleasure of his will Rom. 9. 18. He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 11. 30. Even as they in times past have not believed God yet have now obtained mercy through their unbeliefe Where to obtaine mercy in the Apostles language is plainely as much as to believe Austin in many places justifies this Epist 105. ad Sixtum 〈◊〉 ille credat ille non credat cum ambo idem audiunt etsi miraculum in eorum conspectu fiat ambo idem vident altitudo est divitiarum sapientiae scientiae Dei cujus inscrutabilia sunt judici◠apud quem non est iniquitas dum cujus vult miseretur quem vult indurat And neere the end Audiat haec non contemnat quod si contempserit ut contemneret inveniat se obduratum Enchirid. 98. Quis porro tam impie desipiat ut dicat Deum malas hominum voluntates quas voluerit quando voluerit ubi voluerit in bonum non posse convertere Sed cum facit pre misericordia facit cum autem non facit per judicium non facit quoniam cujus vult miseretur quem vult obdurat Here misereri eujus vult is voluntates hominum quas vult in bonum convertere See lib. 1. De grat Christi contra Pelag. Caelest cap. 46. He cites this saying out of Ambrose Sed Deus quem dignatur vocat quem vult religiosum fecit And thereupon breakes out into this exclamation O sensum hominis Dei ex ipso fonte gratiae Dei haustum videte si non Propheticum illud est miserebor cujus misertus ero Apostolicum illud non volentis neque currentis sed miserentis Dei quia ut dicit etiam nostrorum temporum homo ejus quem dignatur vocat quem vult religiosum facit Here Misereri Rom. 9. 18. is all one with Vocare Religiosum facere And lib. 1. ad Simplician cap. 2. Unde datur intelligi quod infra utrumque posuit ergo cujus vult miseretur quem vult indurat ita sententiae superiori potest congruere ut obduratio Dei sit nolle misereri ut non ab illo irrogetur aliquid quo sit homo deterior sed tantum quo sit melior non erogetur quod si fit nulla distinctione meritorum quis non erumpat in eam vocem quam sibi objecit Apostolus dicis itaque mihi quid adhuc conqueritur nam voluntati ejus quis resistit conqueritur enim Deus saepe de hominibus sicut per innumerabiles apparet scripturarum locos quod nolint credere recte vivere So that the meliority of man which God workes sine meritorum distinctione doth by Austins judgement consist in recte vivendo recte credendo now here is the proper field of Scholasticall combate betwixt us Ecce Rhodus ecce Saltus let them try their strength to the uttermost to prove that the reason why God regenerates one and not another why God bestowes faith and repentance upon one and not on another is because man hath disposed himselfe by some good worke performed by him which another hath not and when they have proved this then will we truly confesse that Pelagianismus est vere Christianismus not Semi-Pelagianismus only as it was sometimes objected to Arminius But proceed we to the particulars following for by this Doctrine of Gods absolute decree in opposition to their conditionall decree this Author saith 1. Christ came not into the World to procure the salvation of them that perish I answere That look in what sort he came into the World to procure the salvation of them that perish by their Doctrine after the same sort he came to procure their salvation by our Doctrine For as it is their Doctrine that God decreed that for Christs sake salvation should redound to all that believe so is this our Doctrine also but we deny that this is the whole decree of predestination We farther say that God purposed to bestow Faith on some and not on others and accordingly to send Christ to merit faith and regeneration for them which the Remonstrants in the Censura Censurae doe now a daies utterly deny and if this Author together with his
the flesh with the affections and lusts For they that walke in the spirit shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh their faith shall give them the victory over the world and God in his good time will tread Satan under their feet DISCOURSE SECT III. TO be exercised in fruitlesse affaires it is both a folly and a misery 1. A folly for de necessari is nemo sapiens deliberat saith the Philosopher And our Saviour speaking of things above our power Cur estis solliciti saith he to his Disciples Mat. 6. 27. Luke 12. 25 26. Why take ye thought about such things Which is as much as if he had said It is an argument of folly in you to trouble your selves about such things as lye not in your liberty 2. A misery in the opinions of all men as the fable of Sysiphus implies who as the Poets feigne is punished for his robberies in hell with the rolling of a great stone to the top of a sharpe hill where it cannot rest but presently comes tumbling downe againe The Morall of that fable is that it is a torment and a torment fit for Hell for a man to be set about any worke that is fruitlesse and vaine Men will rather be exercised in high and hard imployments that produce proportionable ends then pick strawes play with feathers or with Domitian spend their time in flapping or killing of flies or doe any other easy workes which end in nothing but ayre and emptinesse except they be fooles or selfe-tormentors And therefore when Balaam once saw that the Lord had fully determined to blesse Israell and that all his Sorceries could not effect the contrary he presently gave over and set no more enchantments And reason teacheth every man to doe the like If any man were fully possest with a perswasion that this temporall estate were determined in Heaven and that he should be worth just so much neither more nor lesse he would conclude that his care and paines could not profit him nor his idlenesse impoverish him and so would be quickly perswaded to take his ease And if it were evident that every Common-wealth had a fatall period beyond which it could not passe and short of which it could not come and that all occurrences good or bad were absolutely preordained by the Almighty then the King would call no Parliament use no Privy Counsell for there would be no use of them at all As once a famous Privy-Councellor told our late Queene Elizabeth men would neither make lawes nor obey them but would take the Councell of the Poet. Solvite mortales ammos curisque levate Totque supervacuis animum deplete querelis Fata regunt orbem certa stant omnia lege From these three premises laid together it followes directly that the doctrine of an absolute decree which determines mens ends precisely is no friend to a Godly life For if events absolutely decreed be unavoydable if mens actions about unavoydable ends be unprofitable it in unprofitable imployments men will have no hand willingly men that know and consider this will have nothing to doe with the practice of Godlinesse For their ends being absolutely pitched and therefore unavoydable they will conclude that their labour in Religion will be unprofitable and so will not labour in it at all That which hath been said may be yet farther confirmed by two witnesses The one of them is by two witnesses The one of them is our Calvin who in his Institutions hath these words Si quis it a plebem compellet si non cred it is ideo fit quia jam divinitus exitio praedestinati estis is non modo ignaviam fovet sed etiam in dulget malitiae If any man saith he should speake thus to people If there be any among you that believe not it is because ye are ordained to destruction this man would not only cherish slothfulnesse but wickednesse also Which is as much to say me thinkes as this If a man should set out the doctrine of absolute reprobation in its colours and explaine it to a people in a cleare and lively fashion he would hereby open a doore to liberty and prophanenesse The other witnesse is a man of another stampe the miserable Landgrave of Turing of whom it is recorded by Heisterbachius that being admonished by his friends of his vitious and dangerous conversation and condition he made them this answer Si praedestinatus sum nulla peccata poterunt mihi Regnum Coelorum auferre si praescitus nulla bona mihi illud valebunt conferre If I be elected no sinnes can bereave me of heaven if I be a reprobate no good deeds can help me to heaven I conclude therefore that by this opinion which is taught for one of Gods principall truths Religion is or may be made a very great looser which is my fourth generall reason against it TWISSE Consideration DE necessari is nemo sapiens deliberat This is true of things necessary by course of nature not of things necessary meerely upon supposition of Gods decree For such things are as often contingent as necessary For as he decreeth that some things shall come to passe necessarily so he decreeth that other things shall be brought to passe contingently As the buying of the Prophets bones by Josiah Cyrus his dimission of the Jews out of Babylon to goe to their own Country the contumelious usages of Christ by Herod and Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and people of Israel were necessary in respect of Gods decree it being expressely testified by the Apostles with one mouth that all these were gathered together against the holy Sonne of God to doe what Gods hand and Gods Counsell predetermined to be done Act. 4. 28. Yet who is so impudent as to deny that all these did freely whatsoever they did against Christ In like sort you know what was the course of proceedings against Protestants in Queene Maries daies when they were convicted by Ecclesiastiques of such opinions which they accounted hereticall and which were made capitall by Law of the Land then they were delivered over unto the secular power to be put to death So that herein to wit first in making such bloudy Lawes Secondly in executing them for the establishment of Popish Religion The Kings gave their power to the Beast that is implyed their Regall power and authority to the countenancing of Romish Religion this undoubtedly was a contingent thing Yet was this determined by God as the Scripture testifies Revel 17. 17. God hath put in their hearts that is in the hearts of the tenne Kings to fulfill his decree and to be of one consent and to give their Kingdome unto the Beast untill the word of God be fulfilled Againe suppose God hath determined my salvation yet if he hath determined to save me no other way then is revealed in his word namely by growing in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ If he hath made known unto
law but under grace Rom. 6. 12. Now what encouragement is this to the Souldiers of Christ to goe on chearefully and couragiously in fighting the Lords battailes against the world the flesh and the Divell seing we are assured the day of victory and the glory of it shall be ours in the end God keeping us by his power through faith unto Salvation 1 Pet. 1. And delivering us from every evill worke to wit either by obedience or by repentance and preserving us to his heavenly kingdome and that either by delivering us from the houre aftentation which comes all over the world Revel 3. Or delivering us out of it 2 Pet 2. 9. Or having an eye to our strength so to order it that we shall be able to beare it 1 Cor 10. 14. As for those that have not yet any comfortable evidence of their election yet considering that they may have it and albeit the number of the elect are by farre fewer then the reprobate yet considering how few have the Gospell in comparison to those that enjoy it not though Turkes Saracens and Heathens are without hope Eph. 2. 12. and 1 Thess 4. 13. Yet we Christians are not yea albeit of them that are called but few are chosen Mat. 20. 16. and 22 14. Yet considering how many corrupt wayes there are amongst Christians Nestorians Armenians Abyssines or Coptites who joyne circumcision with the Gospel as in Egypt and Ethiopia the Greek Church denying the proceeding of the Holy Ghost from the sonne and corrupted with many other superstitions Lastly considering how farre Antichristanity is spred and the abominable Idolatry of the Church of Rome we whom God hath delivered out of Babylon have no cause I meane any particular person to project that because the elect are but few therefore we are not of the number of them and thereupon give over all care of hearkening to Gods word which is the power of God unto Salvation and may shew its power upon us also we knowe not how soone but rather as our Saviour answered being demanded of his disciples whether there were but few that should be saved saying strive you to enter in at the streight gate plainly giving to understand that as the gate is said to be streight that leadeth unto Life so there be but few that enter thereat therefore they should strive so much the more to be of the number of those few For what if along time we have little or nothing profited what if we have cause to doubt whether we have any true faith or no such doubts maybe better signes then we are awar of otherwise why should the Apostle exhort the Corinthians to examine themselves and prove whether they were in the faith or no But however it fairs with us doth not the Apostle plainely teach us that God calls some at the first houre of the day some at the the third some at the last 2. Now I come to the consideration of his answer to the objection as himself hath formed it And first I observe that whereas he pretends to build his answer upon consideration of the number of Reprobats without comparison greater then the number of the elect yet the absurd reasoning which he brings hereupon doth nothing at all depend on that For albeit the number of the elect were greater then the number of such as are Reprobats and that without comparison yet the reasoning here deduced from the contrary proposition hath equally place as in the contrary case As namely to reason thus Either I am absolutely chosen to grace and glory or absolutely cast off from both Secondly the joyning of grace and glory together as this Author doth joyne them in this reasoning shaped by him is a miserable confounding of things that differ For to be absolutely chosen unto grace is to be ordained to have grace conferred upon him not according to any worke of his but meerely according to the good pleasure of Gods will answerably to that of the Apostle God hath mercy on whom he will but no man is so chosen unto glory as namely to be ordained to have Salvation bestowed upon him not according unto workes but according to the meere pleasure of God if we speake of men of ripe yeares For God hath ordained to bestow Salvation on such only by way of reward of their faith repentance and good workes So on the other side to be asolutely cast off from grace is to be ordained to have grace denied him not according to any worke of his but meerely according to the good pleasure of Gods will like as Paul professeth that the Lord hardeneth whom he will But no man is so castaway from Glory or unto damnation as namely to be ordained to be deprived of Glory and to be damned meerely for the good pleasure of God but altogether for his infidelity impenitency and evill workes Thirdly no such thing followes as here is inferred from the supposition of election unto Salvation For seing no man is elected to obtaine Salvation whether he believe or no but only in case he believe hereupon men are rather excited to labour for faith then to be carelesse thereof and farther we say that as God hath ordained to bring them to Salvation so he hath ordained to bring them hereunto by sanctification and faith 2 Thess 2. 13. And the word of God is a powerfull meanes to worke them hereunto even to the working out of their Salvation with feare and trembling that because they are given to understand that God is he who wroketh in them both the will and the deed according to his good pleasure On the other side if a man be ordained to damnatiō yet seeing no man is ordained to be damned but for despising the means of grace in case he heare the Gospel for ought any man knowes he may as well be ordained to salvation as to damnation this I should think is rather an excitement not to despise or neglect the meanes of grace then to despise or neglect them Suppose God should not damne any man but annihilate them and suppose this were known unto us by the same argumentation it would follow that a man should have no care of good workes But this consequent is notoriously untrue For seeing the perfection of my reasonable nature whereby I differ from brute Beasts consisteth in knowledge and morall vertues and there is no knowledge that doth more ennoble us then the knowledge of God and no better rule of morality then the law of God surely it stood me upon in reason to strive according to my power to know God and to be obedient rather then otherwise although I know for certaine that after certaine yeares both body and soule should be returned unto nothing Come wee now to the consideration of this reasoning in respect of grace Suppose God hath elected me unto grace yet seeing he bestowes not grace but by his word therefore there is no reason I should neglect the use
to cast a colour that this discourse of Mr Hord's hath not as yet been answered It may be it would faine have shewed it selfe unto the world in this masculine shape and vigour before this time if Doctor Duppa while he was Vicechancellour at Oxford would have given way to the printing of it if it be true as I have heard that it was offered unto him to be licenced for the presse Doctor Potter also of Queenes Colledge performed a freindly part to some body in checking the Stationers for selling the copies of it forwhich courtesy I doe account my selfe so much in his debt as that comes to and should much more had he sent me one of the copies as he did noe lesse then six on the same day to his friend Doctor Aigleonbee as the Book-seller confessed to a Scholar a friend of mine Well Mr Hord's treatise is at length come to the Presse and shewes it selfe in publique without shame though I thought it had been sufficiently confounded almost three yeares agoe yet this Mistres blushes not though dares not open her mouth to cleare her reputation in any one particular of that which I layd to her charge manifesting her to be no Daughter of God's truth but a meere Bastard begotten by a carnall wit upon a specious pretence by miserable deflowring and adulterating the word of God one builds a wall as the Prophet speakes and another daubeth that with untempered mortar Mr Hord is well knowne to be the Author of the first by mee formerly answered But what Mason's hand was used in the addition that is concealed but that may breake out into pregnant evidences before we have gone through with it The Prefacer at the first chop begins with a notorious untruth and that in more particulars then one for first whom doth he meane by the Author of this Treatise M. Horde That which M. Horde sent to his worthy friend is yet to be seen containing not halfe so much as this it was not above 30 leaves manuscript and that not closely but written at large And this containes 55 leaves in print But it may bee M. Horde hath since inlarged his own discourse and so continues to be author of it not in part only but in the whole And I confesse it may be he is as much the Author of the one as of the other if it be true as some have told me of the very first sent to his friend indeed namely that it was the very strength of M. Mason him I knowe of old and should be acquainted with his sufficiency though it was a long time ere I had so much as heard of his zeale for the Arminian cause and after I heard so much it was yet longer ere I could believe it untill I saw it under his own hand And whereas M. Horde comming to his second convincing Argument as he calls it drawne from Attributes Divine layeth downe certaine premises the second whereof is this That justice mercy truth and holinesse in God are the same in nature with these vertues in men though infinitely differing in Degrees I willingly confesse I stood amaz'd and albeit I conceived it and doe conceave it to be one of the absurdest positions that ever dropped from the pen of a Schoole Divine yet the adventure was so great in my judgement that I was apt to imagine that it proceeded not from a vulgar spirit This conceit of mine was improved by the reasons he brings to justifie so strange a Paradox for they are plausible make a faire shew at the first like the fruit of Sodom but crush them once come to the Scholastical discussion of them forthwith In Cineres abeunt vagam fuliginem they vanish into smoak and emptinesse A second untruth is this that he saith The Author was perswaded by a worthy friend to pen the Reasons of his opinion against absolute reprobation for he was only put upon shewing reasons of the change of his opinion in the controversies of late debated between the Remonstrants their opposites as M. Horde himselfe confesseth in his Preface M. Horde indeed is willing to drawe the matter unto the consideration of Gods decrees as if that were the maine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most absurdly and quite contrary to the doctrine of Augustine who shapes the decrees of God in conformitie to the doctrine of grace and accordingly to certifie the Massilienses in the doctrine of Praedestination he thinks it most fit to begin with proving that Faith is the gift of God yea the very beginning of it Now he liked not to follow Austins course and in the first place to deale upon the point of grace And herein hee savours of M. Masons spirit for that is his course as I have seen under his hand yet suppose that this be the maine thing controverted namely the qualitie of Gods decrees whether they be absolute or conditionall only How doth he satisfie his friend or performe the promise made in letting election passe untouched and dealing only upon reprobation And this I know also to have been M. Masons genuine course far worse then the Remonstrants in the Synod of Dort for they made a motion that they might deal upon reprobation in the first place and then upon election wherein notwithstanding they were condemned in the judgement of all forraigne Divines assistant there But this Author and M. Mason too on my knowledge affect to deale upon reprobation only Yet I have alwaies been and still am glad to see the utmost of their strength or any mans strength on any of the five points and should be very glad to see what they could say upon the point of free will which is most congruous for them though they meddle not at all with grace For even on that point I seem to have profited more lately by dealing with some English Arminians then ever before having alwaies acknowledged that to be a point very obscure like as is the nature of originall sinne which was one of the three points concerning which I did not look to live so long as to meet with convenient satisfaction M. Horde I heard conferred with M. Mason about Election and told him that the doctrine of our Divines therein seemed very comfortable to the children of God whereunto M. Mason should answer by granting that but then adding it was very prone to provoke men to loosenesse of life This concession was as a shooing horne to draw M. Horde on to the Remonstranticall Tenet nothing doubting but in the end to take him of from entertaining so good an opinion of our doctrine of Election as if it were not any such comfortable condition teach him to magnifie the comfortable condition of the adversaries doctrine depending upon a threefold cord which as the proverb faith cannot easily be broken 1. The universalitie of Gods love 2. The universalitie of Christs redemption 3. The universalitie of the Covenant of grace Thus the comforts of the Remonstrants are
him to be of the same mind with Raynold the Fox who having lost his owne tayle in a Ginne afterwards he endevours very composedly to perswade his fellowes to cut of their tayles also And to that purpose suffered his wit to exuberate in representing and amplifying the incommodious condition of such a member Railing speeches I know no reason why any man should feare from his adversary for such Hierome hath taught me doe defile the Railer only not him that is railed on And if any man be pleased to spit in my face that way though I am naturally very melancholly yet I am perswaded he shall find little melancholly predominant in my answering him As for unnecessarie divisions for the cause which he doth seriously and wisely admonish his Adversary to beware of I willingly professe I love to have Sea roome and not to be confined unto straights by any sullen rules of my Adversarie and truly I perscribe to none but as I find him so I frame my selfe to grapple with him as congruously as I can If God be on my side why should I be afraid of any colours Let the Divell and all his Angels of Darknesse lye in camp against me I shall not budge But here is danger mentioned which I professe I did not project and that is the dashing of my selfe upon the rocks of my Adversaries displeasure And his interpretation of my courses to my displeasure For if I doe not conforme to his sullen rules of Stoicall moralitie he shall ever interpret it I marke well the Phrase he comes not willingly on to make harsh interpratations but he shall doe it as much as to say the uprightnesse of his judgment and the justice of his disposition will urge him hereunto namely to interpret it As a strong signe of a weake cause or at least an Argument of an obstinate minde But soft and faire who made my Adversary my Judge by whose interpretations I am to stand or fall How Imperiously doth he carry himselfe in this as if he were some Bugbeare or dreadfull Adversary doe I say or Magistrate rather see the poverty of my wit and of my Spirit too the one was never so inventious of any such trick nor the other so audacious or immodest if I may be so bold soe to speak as to serve my selfe therewith to scarre my Adversary desparing by faire waies to overcome him and make him yeild or else his obstinacy knowne to the world for who seeth not that I have as much authoritie to threaten him with the sharpnesse of my interpretations of him as he to threaten me not with the like austerenesse of his I am willingly content the world may judge between us both of the cause debated and of our carriage therein throughout and who hath the truth on his side and shews most learning and honesty in the maintayning of that he undertakes I willingly confesse the five points controverted are tender points and the knowledge of the truth herein meerly concerning a mans salvation But this Author deales only upon the halfe of one of them and that most needlesse also And the resolution of the Doctrine of Election depends upon the resolution of the doctrine of Election depends upon the resolution of an other point namely whether Grace be conferred freely or according to mens workes That it is conferred freely and not according to workes hereupon it is that Austin builds the absolutenesse of predestination and election wherence it followeth evidently that as many as doe maintaine the Decree of predestination to be conditionall must also in Austin's judgment maintaine that Grace is given according unto workes which was of old condemned in the Synod of Palaestine and all along in divers Synods and Provinciall Councells against the Pelagians Now if Predestination be absolute and not conditionall it followes that Reprobation also is absolute and not conditionall which consequence I presume the Author of these additions will not deny But as there is a great deale of craft in dawbing so these craftie Crowders are apt to worke upon generalities and in distinctions Reprobation we know is as well from Grace as from glory and God's reprobation from glory is joyned with a purpose to inflict damnation Now as touching Reprobation from grace we readily professe that God hath both ordained to deny grace unto some of his meere pleasure like as he hath ordained to bestow that upon others of his meere pleasure and also of his meere pleasure hath made such a decree And these Authors dare not mainifestly oppose us in this argument lest the sower leaven of their Pelagian Tenet manifest it selfe to the whole world namely in maintaining that grace is conferred according to workes But as touching reprobation from Glory and God's purpose to inflict Damnation These Juglers so carry the matter as if they would make the world believe our Doctrine is that God decreed to deny men Glory and to inflict Damnation not for their sinnes but meerely because it is his pleasure so to doe a most unshamefast crimination For albeit that God hath made no law according whereunto he proceeds in giving grace unto some and denying it unto others but herein proceeds meerely according unto his pleasure and not according to men's workes it being manifest Pelagianisme to affirme the contrary yet we openly willingly profes And all the Christian world knowes it to be true That God hath made a law whereunto according he proceeds in the distribution of rewards and Punishments namely these Whosoever believeth shall be saved whosoever believeth not shall be damned And according to this law God hath decreed from everlasting to proceed in pronouncing the sentence of Salvation and Damnation on mankind namely to bestow Salvation not of his meere pleasure without all respect of the workes of men but as a reward of their faith repentance and good workes and to inflict damnation not of his owne meere pleasure without any respect to the workes of men but as a due reward for their sinnes never broken of by repentance Only this decree thus to proceed in the execution of rewards and punishments we professe God hath made according to the meere pleasure of his will whereby it is apparent that these men play the part of notable Impostours when they abuse the world's credulitie in making them believe that we maintaine any such absurd decrees or executions of decrees which they obtrude upon us and to this purpose these are willing to take the benefit and advantage of Confusion for it is most profitable for some to fish in troubled waters and to walke in the darke But when the light of distinction comes this madd's them to see their impostures discovered and their sophistications made to appeare in their proper colours The eye of the Adulterer saith Iob waiteth for the twilight and saieth no eye shall see me and disguiseth his face They dig through houses in the darke which they marked for themselves in the day they know not
of them that are called but few are chosen Yet might that Synod well admonish Maccovius to take heed of such words as might give offence to tender yeares and be carefull to expresse the same truth in as inoffensive way as we can And accordingly having a digression in this very Argument in my Vindiciae Gratiae I proposed it in this manner Whether the holy one of Israell without any injurie to his Holy Majestie may be said to will sinne after a certaine manner and I maintaine the affirmative after this manner Deus vult ut peccatum fiat ipso permittente God will have sinne to come to passe by his permission and Bellarmine confesseth that Malum esse Deo permittente bonum est It is good that evill should be by God's permission which was also the saying of Austine long before And that non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo Not any thing comes to passe except God Omnipotent will have it come to passe either by suffering it or himselfe working it And the eleventh Article of the Church of Ireland framed in the dayes of King J'ames runnes thus God from all eternitie did by his unchangable Counsell ordaine what soever in time should come to passe yet so as there by no violence is offered to the to the wills of the reasonable Creatures and neither the libertie nor the contingency of second causes is taken away but established rather And Arminius himselfe professeth that Deus voluit Achabum mensuram scelerums uorum implere God would have Achab to fill up the measure of his sinnes and what is it to fill up the measure of his sinnes but to adde sinne unto sinne And this he delivereth without all qualification By these instances it appeareth That they of the first side can easily beare one with another in this difference And to say the truth there is no reason why they should quarrell about circumstances seeing they agree in the substance for which they both contend 1 That the moving cause of Reprobation is the alone will of God and not the sinne of man originall or actuall 2. That the finall impenitencie and Damnation of Reprobates are necessary and unavoidable by God's absolute Decree The difference which this Authour takes into Consideration is about the object of Predestination and the difference in opinion thereabouts is usually to be observed threefold though this Authour is pleased to take notice of a secondfold difference for some conceive the object of Predestination to be man-kind as yet not created others conceive the object thereof to be man-kind created but not yet corrupted A third sort maintaine the object thereof to be man-kind both created and corrupted Now D. Iunius hath endeavoured to reconcile the three opinions making place for each consideration in the object of predestination And Piscator after him adventured on the like reconciliation and hath performed it with more perspicuitie and with better successe in my judgment then Iunius And that according to three different acts concurring unto Predestination The first is saith he God's purpose to create man-kind in Adam unto different ends now this Act doth clearely require the object thereof to be man-kind not yet Created The second Act he conceives to be God's Decree to permit all men to fall in Adam Now this Act he conceives as clearly to suppose the object thereof to be man-kind created but not corrupted The third last Act he conceives to be God's decree to choose some to shew compassion on them in raising them out of sinne by saith and repentance and of Reprobating others leaving them as be findes them and permitting them to finish their dayes in sinne to the end he might manifest the glorie of his grace in saving the one the glorie of his Justice in damning others Now this third Act he supposeth manifestly to require the object thereof to be man-kind both created and corrupted Now the Authours of these severall opinions have no reason to go together by the eares about these three opinions but with Brotherly love to entertaine one another First because the difference herein is not so much in Divinitie as in Logick and Philosophie difference in opinion about order in intentions being meerly Logicall and to be composed according to the right stating of the end intended and of the meanes conducing to the end it being generally confessed that the intention of the end is before the intention of meanes conducing thereunto And that look what is first in intention the same must be last in execution Secondly the Authours of these severall opinions about the object of Predestination doe all agree in two principall points 1. That all men before God's eternall predestination and reprobation are considered as equall in themselves whether as uncreated or as created but not corrupted or lastly whether created or corrupted 2 That God's grace only makes the difference choosing some to worke thē to faith repentance perseverance therein while he rejecteth others leaving thē as he findes them permitting them to finish their dayes in sinne whereby is upheld and maintained 1. First the prerogative of God's grace as only effectuall to the working of men unto that which is good 2. And secondly the prerogative of God's Soveraigntie in shewing mercy on whome he will to bring them to Faith and true repentance and hardning others that is not bestowing of grace and repentance upon them And seeing they all agree in these momentous points of Divinitie they have no cause to take it offensively at the hands of one another that they differ in a point of Logick Now I have adventured on this argument to find out to my selfe and give unto others some better satisfaction then formerly hath been exhibited and that by distinguishing Two decrees only on each part to witt the decree of the end and the decree of the meanes As for example 1. On the part of Predestination and Election I conceive the end to be the manifestation of God's glorious grace in the way of mercie mixt with Justice on a certaine number of men And the Decree of the meanes is to create them and permit them all to fall in Adam and to bring them forth into the world in their severall generations clothed with originall sinne and to send Christ into the world to dye for them and for Christ's sake first to bestow the grace of faith and repentance upon them and finally to save them 2. On the part of Reprobation I conceive the end to be the manifestation of God's glory in the way of Justice vindicative And the decree of meanes to be partly common and partly proper the common meanes are to create them and permit them all to fall in Adam and bring them forth into the world clothed with originall sin the speciall meanes are to leave them as he finds them and permit them to finish their daies in sinne and so not
like all and every passage yet but few are the passages wherein I differ from his opinion I have been very sory to observe how by his doctrine in the point of reprobation he overthrowes his own Orthodox Doctrine in the point of Election I would he would answer Sylvester who hath replied to his admirable letters written to Monsieur Balzak I could be well content were I once free to supply what is wanting to Waleus his Apologie for him against Corvinus But to the point the passage here proposed by him is I willingly confesse somewhat harsh I will have this man hang'd and that I may hang him justly I will have him murther or steale But compare it with that of St. Paul formerly mentioned God suffers the vessells of wrath prepared to destruction that he may declare his wrath and make his power known And that of Eli's children They obeyed not the voice of their Father because the Lord would slay them And that Amaziah would not heare For it was of the Lord that he might deliver them into his hands because they sought the Gods of Edom. And that of Ieremiah Doubtlesse because the wrath of the Lord was against Ierusalem and Iuda till he had cast them out of his presence therefore Zedekiah rebelled against the King of Babel And observe how neare Mr. Moulin is to expose these holy passages of Scripture and the doctrine contained in them in like manner unto scorne ere he is aware And let him soberly consider and without any humour of complying with our Adversaries out of a desire to charme them who will not be charmed to what end God doth finally permit some to persevere in sinne and can he find any other but this for the manifestation of the glory of his vindicative justice in their condemnation And without any desire to charme I have shewed plainly that God doth not permit any man to sinne and finally to persevere in sin to the end that he may damnethem But that he both permits them finally in sin and damnes them for their sinne for the declaration of his wrath and power on them and also that he may declare the riches of his glory upon the vessells of his mercy whom he hath prepared unto glory If he put a difference between permission of sinne and a will that they shall sinne I would entreate him not to stumble at this For what difference between God's will to permit man to sinne and to will that man shall sin by his permission And the tragicall acts committed on the holy Son of God by Herod and Pilate the Gentiles and people of Israel the Apostles say not they were permitted by God but that they were predetermined by the hand and counsell of God Mr. Moulin's care is to avoid harsh expressions it is a commendable care For why should we causlesly expose the truth of God to be the worse thought of and provoke men to stumble at it by unnecessary harshnesse Yet I find the Scripture it selfe delivered by the holy Prophets and Apostles is nothing so scrupulous Malim dicere saith Mr. Moulin I had rather say Deum non decrevisse dare alicui gratiam quâ convertatur credat that God hath decreed not to give some one grace whereby to be converted and believe quâm dicere eum decrevisse ut homo sit incredulus impoenitens then to say God hath decreed that man should be incredulous and impenitent And he gives his reason thus Vox enim decernendi aptior est ad ea designanda quae Deus statuit facere quà m ea quibus statuit non mederi For to decree is fitter to denote such things as God hath purposed to doe then such things as he hath purposed not to cure And indeed the Ancients in this sense take the word predestination to be only of such things as God himselfe purposed to worke as Grace and Glory and the damnation of impenitent sinners But if God decrees not to cure impenitency and infidelity in some judge whether upon this ground it may not well be said that God decrees that the impenitency and infidelitie of some shall continue uncured And Mr. Monlin confesseth that God decreed that the Jewes should put Christ to death His words are these Deus vetuit homicidium idem tamen decrevitut Iudaei Christum morte afficerent God forbad murther yet he decreed that the Iewes should kill Christ Yet by the way consider God hath no need of the sinne of man that he may put him to death justly For undoubtedly God could annihilate any creature that he hath made the most holy Angells without any blemish to his justice Yea by power absolute he could cast the most innocent creature into hell fire and continue yet just still as formerly hath been shewed and Raynaudus justifies and represents variety of testimonies for this not only of School-divines one of whom professeth that it is concors omnium Theologorum sententia the common opinion of Divines but of the Ancient Fathers also And therefore though to strangle Virgins was not lawfull for Tiberius yet a greater more severe worke then this is lawfull for God Neither doth God cōmand any impure course to any but under pain of eternall damnatiō forbids it But as he hardened Pharaoh's heart that he should not let I srael goe so can he harden any man's heart to doe as foule a work as this And St. Paul testifies that he gave up the heathens to their hearts lusts unto uncleanes to defile their own bodies between themselves which turned the truth of God into a lie worshipped served the creature forsaking the Creatour who is blessed for ever amen For this cause God gave them up to vile affections for even the women did change the naturall use into that which is against nature And likewise the men left the naturall use of the women and burned in their lusts one toward another and man with man wrought filthinesse And this is noted by the Apostle to have been a work of judgment For it followes they received in themselves such recompence of their errours as was meet I grant Tiberius was the principall Authour of deflowring those Maides For he commanded it and that as I have shewed makes a man the Authour of a crime both out of School-divines and out of Oratours but God gave no such cōmand to these heathens thus to defile themselves And this Authour doubts not but God cooperates to the substance of every act notwithstanding the absoute dominion of the will over her actions for which he pleades And it cannot be denied unlesse the word of God be therewithall denied that in him we move as well as in him we live and have our being And though God gave not commandement to Absalom to defile his Fathers Concubines yet he tells David saying I will take thy wives before thine eyes and give them to thy neigbour and he shall lie with thy wives in the
good if he will but it inclines and disposeth the will unto vertuous actions So justice is not an indifferency of condition leaving it to man whether he will be just or noe but it makes him just and so disposoth him to just courses Againe if grace supernaturall doth only give power to believe if one will this being a free power it is indifferent as well not to believe as to beleive as well not to repēt as to repent For liberty is alwaies to act opposite whence it will follow that by vertue of supernaturall grace a man is disposed not more to faith then to infidelitie not more to repentance then to hardnesse of heart and Impenitency 4. Consider a man hath noe need of supernaturall grace to inable him to refuse to repent seing naturally he is sufficiently disposed hereunto necessarily by reason of that naturall corruption which is hereditary unto him By all this it is apparent that a power to believe wrought in a man by supernaturall grace is not a free power working freely but rather a necessary power working necessarily like unto the condition of a morall vertue which restraines man's naturall indifferency to good or evill and disposeth him only to good And consequently as many as maintaine no other power to be given unto man by grace then to believe if a man will they deale like Pelagians who called that which was meerly naturall prevenient grace Lastly if God be the Authour of man's conversion because he gives him power to convert if he will he may as well be called the Authour of non conversion and perseverance in sinne because God gives power not to convert and to persevere in sinne if he will 2. As touching the second If God be the Authour of man's conversion because he perswades thereunto then certainly he is not the Authour of sinne because he perswades not thereunto 3. If God be the Authour of conversion because he cooperates thereunto then certainly he may be as well said to be the Authour of every sinfull act For that he doth cooperate thereunto I am very confident this Authour will not deny Now I could earnestly entreate the Judicious Reader to examine well this Authour's opinion in these particulars and compare them with his former discourse that he may have a cleare way opened unto him to judge with what conscience he carried himselfe in his former discourse imputing unto us that we make God the Authour of sin albeit in treating of God's providence in evill we generally have the expresse word of God before our eyes and in our explication thereof doe rather qualify the seeming harshnesse thereof then aggravate it For undoubtedly by the tenour of his discourse looke upon what grounds he denies God to be the Authour of sinne he must withall deny God to be the Authour of faith of repentance of conversion And look upon what grounds he makes God the Authour of conversion upon the same grounds he must make God the Authour of sinne As in case to give power to believe if we will and to cooperate with us in the act of faith be to make him the Authour Or if only upon perswading us to believe God is said to be the Authour of faith then it followes as a sufficient Apologie for us that we make not God to be the Authour of sinne seing none of us conceive him to be a perswader of any sinfull act but rather a disswader and forbidder thereof and that upon paine of eternall damnation But on the contrary we make a vast difference between God's operations in sinfull actions and God's operations in actions gracious As first every sinfull act is alwaies within the compasse of acts naturall noe supernaturall act is or can be a sinne Now to the producing of any act of morality every man notwithstanding his corruption hath in him a naturall power But there is noe naturall power in man to the performing of an act supernaturall God must inspire him with a new life called in Scripture the life of God and make him after a sort partaker of the divine nature and give his own Spirit to dwell in him in such sort that being crucified with Christ we hence forth live no more but Christ liveth in us These supernaturall acts are but few according to the three Theologicall vertues Faith Hope Charity whose offsprings they are the love of God to the contempt of our selves hope in God to the contempt of the world as touching the worst it can doe unto us and faith in God to the quenching of the fiery darts of the devill As for all other good acts in the producing of them God hath a double influence one common as they are acts naturall touching the substance of them another speciall as touching the gracious nature of them proceeding from faith and love But as touching evill acts he hath noe influence in the producing of them but that which is common and to the substance of the acts none at all as touching the evilnesse of them the reason whereof is that which was delivered by Austin long agoe Malū non habet causam efficientem sed deficientem Evill hath no cause efficient but deficient only And it is impossible that God should be defective in a culpable manner The creature may the Creatour cannot And the ground of the creatures defective condition is accounted to be this that he was brought out of nothing consequently of a fraile condition And it is received generall as a rule in Schooles that a creature cannot be made impeccabilis per naturam that is such a one as by nature cannot sinne This was delivered long agoe by Anselme one of the first of School-divines In evill things God doth worke quod sunt that they are non quod mala sunt not that they are evill But in good things God doth worke Et quod sunt quod bona sunt both that they are and that they are good Here this Authour sets down our opinion concerning Election and Reprobation at his pleasure We say with Austin that predestination is the preparation of grace that is the Divine decree of conferring grace And both he and all confesse it is also the decree of conferring glory And because in making of this decree God had respect unto some only not to all both men and Angells therefore in this consideration it is called the decree of Election in distinction from the decree of reprobation Now this grace is of a double nature for either it is grace custodient from sinne and the decree of granting this was the election of Angells called in holy Scripture The elect Angells or grace healing after men have sinned and the decreee of granting this is the election of men commonly in Scripture called God's Elect in reference unto this It is farther to be observed that Austin grounds the Orthodoxe doctrine of predestination and election upon the Orthodoxe doctrine concerning grace And the absolutenesse of the one he
built upon the freenes of the other in not being given according unto men's merits As it appeares de bono perseverantiae cap. 15. Where having proposed some exceptions of the Massilienses made against his doctrine of predestination comming to make answer thereunto he begins thus Ista cum dicuntur saith he ita nos à confitenda Dei gratia id est quae non secundum merita nostra datur a confitenda secundum eam predestinatione sanctorum deterrere non debent When these things are objected they must not deterre us from confessing God's grace I meane such a grace as is not given accordiog unto works nor from confessing the predestination of Saints according thereunto Now if the absolutenesse of predestination be grounded upon this that grace is not given according unto merits the scripture phrase denies it to be given according unto workes But Bellarmine acknowledgeth that in this Argument merits and workes are taken by the Ancients in one and the same sense it followeth that as many as deny the absolutenesse of predestination must therewithall maintaine that Grace is given according to men's merits or works And the reason is evident For if God doth not give grace according unto men's works but of his mere pleasure decreed to give grace unto some and not upon consideration of their works And this is to elect absolutely and antecedently without the foresight of any deserving yea of any works though by that expression which this Authour useth he doth sufficienty manifest that his opinion is that God elects not only upō the foresight of men's workes but upon the foresight of men's deservings It is farther considerable to prevent the reaches of such crafty foxes as we have to deale with whose course is in joyning the decree of conversion and salvation together to translate that which belongs unto one unto the other most unreasonably For albeit God proceeds according to the mere pleasure and without all respect to workes in conferring grace and decreeth accordingly to conferre it Yet he proceeds not merely according unto pleasure and without all respect of works in conferring glory but according unto a Covenant which is this whosoever beleiveth shall be saved and accordingly he bestowes the kingdome of heaven by way of reward for faith repentance and good workes This hath Christ deserved at the hands of his Father that our weake performances should be thus rewarded Lastly it is farther to be considered that God as he thus bestoweth salvation by way of reward of our faith repentance so from everlasting he did decree to bestowe salvation namely by way of reward Not that either faith or repentance or good workes any or all of these were the cause least of all the deserving cause of God's decree or antecedaneous to his decree but of his mere pleasure decreed both to give the grace of faith and repentance and to bestow eternall life by way of a reward thereof as may farther be proved and that clearly divers waies 1. By the Apostl's discourse where he discourseth after this manner Before Esau and Iacob were borne or had done good or evill it was said that the Elder shall serve the younger therefore election is not of workes But if election did proceeed upon the foresight of faith repentance and good workes or any of them then it might justly be said that it were of faith repentance or good workes or of all of them And the force of the Apostles argument extends to conclude that election is noe more of faith or of repentance then of workes not only because faith and repentance are workes and so accounted in Scripture phrase as it appeares Io 6. 29. But cheifely because before men are borne they are uncapable of faith and repentance as of good workes 2. If faith were a motive cause unto election then either it were so of it 's own nature or by constitution Divine not of it's own nature as it is apparent If by constitution divine mark what strange absurdities follow namely this that God did ordaine that upon the fore sight of faith he would ordaine men unto salvation whereby God's eternall ordination is made the object of his ordination whereas the Objects of God's decrees are alwaies things temporall never any thing that is eternall 3. It cannot be said that God giveth salvation to the end he may give them faith but it may farre more congruously be said that God gives faith to the end that he may save them therefore the intention of salvation is rather before the intention of giving faith then the intention of giving faith is before the intention of giving salvation Or better thus if God foresee faith before he decrees salvation then the intention of giving faith without which God cannot foresee faith is before the intention of giving salvation and consequently the giving of faith should be the last in execution that is men shall first be saved and aferwards have faith bestowed upon them to wit in another world where they live by sight and not by faith I come to the decree of reprobation the Objects whereof are two proportionable to the two objects of election or predestination The first is permission of sin the second is Damnation for sinne according to that of Aquinas Reprobatio includit voluntatem permitendi culpam damnationem inferendi pro culpâ Reprobation includes a will to permit sinne and to inflict damnation for sinne The first object of reprobation I say is permission of sinne not Sin as this Authour would have it but permission of sinne Because these decrees to wit of permitting sinne and inferring damnation for sinne are decrees of meanes conducing to a certaine end For like as in election God decreeth to bestowe faith repentance and obedience on some and to reward it with everlasting life for the manifestation of his glory in the way of mercy mixt with justice So in Reprobation he decrees to permit others to sinne and finally to persevere therein and to damne them for their sinne to manifest his glory in the way of vindicative justice Now whosoever intends an end must also be the Auhour of the meanes conducing to that end Now God though well he may be the Authour of permission of sinne yet he cannot be the Author of sinne Albeit upon God's permission of sinne it followeth that sinne shall exist Now to permit sinne is all one with denying grace whether it be grace Custodient to preserve from it or grace healing to pardon and cure it after it is committed Now like as the Lord hath mercy on whom he will in pardoning their sinne and healing it by faith and repentance So he hardeneth whom he will by denying faith and repentance So that as God of his mere pleasure grants the grace of faith and repentance unto some so of his mere pleasure he denies it unto others And so in Reprobation he decreeth of his mere pleasure to deny it But albeit the Lord of mere
pleasure proceeds in the denying of faith and repentance whereby alone sinne is cured and so of mere pleasure suffers some finally to persevere in sinne yet in inflicting damnation he doth not carry himselfe of mere pleasure without all respect to men's workes but herein he proceeds according to a law which is this whosoever believeth not and repenteth not shall be damned And like as God damnes noe man but for his finall perseverance in sinne So from everlasting he did decree to damne noe man but for his finall perseverance in sinne So that by vertue of the Divine decree of reprobation sinne and finall perseverance therein is constituted the cause of damnation but by noe meanes is it constituted the cause of the decree of reprobation neither doth the foresight of sinne precede it For first like as upon this doctrine that Grace is not given according unto workes the absolutenesse of predestination is grounded in the judgment of Austine as by necessary consequence issuing there from In like sort upon this that grace is not denied according unto men's workes as necessarily followeth the absolutenesse of Reprobation Secondly looke by what reason the Apostle proves that Election is not of good workes namely because before the children were borne or had done any good it was said the Elder shall serve the Yonger by the same reason it evidently followeth that reprobation is not of evill workes because before they were borne or had done good or evill it was said the Elder shall serve the Younger Esau's reprobation being as emphatically signified under his subjection to Iacob his younger as Iacob's election was designed by his dominion over Esau his Elder brother 3. If sinne be the cause of the decree of Reprobation then either of ' its own nature or by constitution divine Not by necessity of nature for undoubtedly God could annihilate men for sinne had it pleased him If by constitution Divine mark what absurdity followeth namely this that God did ordaine that upon foresight of sinne he would ordaine men unto damnation 4. If foresight of sinne precedes the decree of damning them for sin then the decree to permit sin much more precedes the decree to damne them for it as without which there can be noe foresight of sin and consequently permission of sin is first in intention and then damnation and therefore it should be last in execution that is men should first be damned and afterwards permitted to sin to wit in an other world 5. And lastly Reprobation is the will of God but there can be noe cause of God's will as Aquinas hath proved much lesse can a temporall thing be the cause of God's will which is eternall Upon this ground it is that Aquinas professeth Never any man was so mad as to say that any thing might be the cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating So may I say it were a mad thing to maintaine that any thing can be the cause of Reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating For the case is altogether alike the will of God being alike uncapable of a cause in both whereas this Authour saith that God by our opinion doth draw men on by his unconquerable power from sin to sin 't is mere bumbast All men being borne in sin must needs persevere in sin unlesse God gives grace to regenerate them For whether they doe that which is morally good they doe it not in a gracious manner or whether they abstaine from evill they doe it not in a gracious manner He that is of God heareth God's wordes ye therefore heare them not saith our Saviour because ye are not of God Arminius acknowledgeth and Corvinus after him that all men by reason of Adam's sin are cast upon a necessitie of sinning He askes what difference is there in the course which God taketh for the conversion of the Elect and obduration of Reprobates and I have already shewed a vast difference and here in breife I shew a difference He hath mercy on the one in the regenerating them curing the corruption he finds in them he shewes not the like grace to others but leaves them unto themselves as touching the evill acts committed by the one he concurreth as a cause efficient to the act which for the substance of it is naturally good For ens bonum convertuntur every thing that is an entity so farre is good but he hath no efficiency as touching the evill as which indeed can admit no efficiencie as Austin hath delivered of old Man himselfe is only a deficient cause of sin as sin and that in a culpable manner which kind of deficiency is not incident to God But to every good act he concurres two manner of waies that in the nature of a positive efficient cause in both namely to the substance of the act by influence generall and to the goodnesse of it by influence speciall and supernaturall It is true the Fathers made sin the object of prescience not of predestination the reason was because they took predestination to be only of such things which God did effect in time Now sin is none of those things that come to passe by God's effection but only by God's permission And that such was the notion of predestination with the Fathers I prove first out of Austin In sua quae falli mutarique non potest praescientiâ opera sua futura disponere illud omnino nec aliud quidquam est praedestinare In his foreknowledge which can neither be deceived nor changed to dispose his own workes that is to predestinate and nothing else And sin not being the worke of God no marvaile if it come not under predestination Secondly out of the Synod of Valens Praedestinatione autem Deum ea tantum statuisse dicimus quae ipse vel gratuita misericordiâ vel justo judicio facturus erat We say that God by predestination ordained only such things as himselfe would work either of his free mercy or in just judgment Againe it is as true that they made even sin it selfe the Object of God's will witnesse that of Austin Non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo Not any thing comes to passe but God Allmighty willing it either by permitting it or working it So the eleaventh article of the Church of Ireland So Arminius Deus voluit Achabum mensuram scelerum implere God would have Ahab to fulfill the measure of his sins So scripture often mentioned And Austin gives the reason of it malum fieri bonū est it is good that evill should be Bellarmine confesseth as much namely that Mala fieri Deo permittente bonum est It is good that evills should come to passe by God's permission And shall not God have liberty to will that which is good When he saith of the Ancients that They refuted this foule assertion of an absolute irresistable and necessitating decree
quippe servitus non institutio est Dei sed judicium This slavery of man to Satan is not God's institution but judgment that is God brought it upon him not of his mere pleasure but in the way of judgment Like as Austin in like manner acknowledgeth concupiscense to be not sinne only but the punishment of sinne also So Remigius and the Chuch of Lyons say that God imposed it not on Adam but man falling from God brought a necessitie of sinning upon him upon all his race God hereupon justly withdrawing his holy Spirit from him 2. Why he should alleadge the first passage under the name of the Church of Lyons I know not The reverend Bishop acknowledgeth Florus to be the Authour thereof a Deacon of Lyons pag. 126. Although the same Reverend Bishop acknowledgeth that other book also that goes under the name of the Church of Lyons now extant in the Bibliothecâ Sanctorum Patrum and wherehence Vossius communicateth unto us his excerpta was written by the same Florus pag. 115. He had more reason to father his next passage which he produceth out of Remigius upon the Church of Lyons For albeit Maldonat cites the booke intituled Liber de tribus Episcoporum epistolis whence this passage is taken under the name of Remigius yet he who set it forth ascribes it to the Church of Lyons and that by the direction of the Copy which was in the hands of Nicholas Faber as appeares Goteschalc hist 170. But none doe I find to ascribe this worke of Florus to the Church of Lyons though the Authour of another booke under that title the Bishop acknowledgeth to be Florus 3. Florus acknowledgeth that the very Saints of God are under a necessity of sin in a sort p. 149. In Sanctis licet sit liberum arbitrium jam Christi gratiâ liberatum atque Sanctum tamen tanta est illa sanitas ut quamdiu mortaliter vivunt sine peccato esse non possint cum velint atque desiderent non peccare non possūt tamen non peccare In the Saints of God though there be freedome of will as freed by the grace of Christ and made holy yet this health is such that as long as they carry this mortall body about thē they cannot be without sin and though they would and desire to be without sin yet they cannot be without sin This I conceive is spoken in respect of the flesh lusting against the Spirit of the law in our members rebelling against the law of our mind leading us captive to the law of sin How much more are the wicked in bondage to sinne and Satan as the same Florus sheweth pag. 142 For whereas Scotus taught that a man had not lost his liberty but only the power and vigour of his liberty Florus opposeth him thus Non rectè dicit quia nec sentit he saith not well because he thinks not well sed sicut vigorem potestatem libertatis ita ipsam perdidit libertatem ut jam ipse ad verum bonum unde cecidit liber esse non possit As he hath lost the vigour and power of his libertie so he hath lost libertie it selfe insomuch that unto true good from whence he is fallen he cannot be free to wit untill he be freed by the grace of Christ In like māner Remigius discourseth also grāting free will only to evill p. 36. In infidelibus id ipsum liberū arbitriū ita per Adam damnatum perditum in operibus mortuis liberum esse potest in vivis non potest In infidells free will it selfe so damned and lost in Adam may be free in dead workes cannot be free in living works that is is not free to produce works belonging to a spirituall life So that they unanimously confesse that in respect of originall sin there is a necessity of sinning but this is rightly to be understood namely thus that true good they cannot doe so that whatsoever they doe is evill only that it is free unto them to doe this or that evill which is most true Secondly thus farre they qualifie this necessitie of sinning that never any man is carried by the Divine providence so as to sinne whether they will or no. For albeit Rabanus charged them whom he opposed herewith pag. 53. Si enim secundum ipsos qui talia sentiunt Dei praedestinatio invitum hominem facit peccare quomodo Deus justo judicio damnat peccantem cum ille non voluntate sed necessitate peccaverit For if according to them who thinke such things God's predestination makes a man to sinne against his will how doth God in his just judgmēt damne him that sinneth when he sinned not voluntarily but necessarily Thus they criminated their adversaries but Remigius answers on their behalfe who were thus falsly accused Nemo ita sentit aut dicit quod Dei predestinatio aliquem invitum faciat peccare ut jam non propriae voluntatis perversitate sed divinae praedestinationis necessitate peccare videatur No man so thinks or speakes that God's predestination makes a man to sinne against his will so that a man should seeme to sinne not by the perversitie of his own will but by the necessitie of divine predestination But this is the worke of Divine predestination that he who sins willingly perseveres willingly in his sins shall against his will be punished And the truth is taking predestination as it signifies preparation of Grace or God's decree to conferre this rather God 's not predestinating a man or not giving grace and not making him to be of God is the cause why a man sinneth according to that of our Saviour He that is of God heareth God's words ye therefore heare them not because ye are not of God Yet this is rightly to be understood for God's not conferring regenerating grace is rather the cause why their naturall corruption is not cured thē that they goe on in their sinfull courses for naturally carnall men are prone enough to sin and in this course they necessarily continue untill God changeth their hearts necessarily I say but not against their wills For sinne is as a sweet morsell which they roule under their tongue This may suffice for answer unto these passages and withall to represent the vanitie of this Authour's discourse endeavouring to brand our doctrine with making God the Authour of sinne more of this hereafter For I am acquainted with that which he here conceales and with certaine adjuncts thereunto both touching the opinion of the Church of Lyons concerning falling from grace as also this Authours bold adventure in two particulars in justifying Vossius citing the cōfession of Pelagius as one of Austin's sermons as also defending him in the point of the predestinarian heresie which Doctor Usher maintaines to be a mere fiction of the Semipelagians to bring Austin's doctrin thereby into disgrace But Vossius conceives that there was indeed such an heresie and that the Monks
time so from everlasting he did decree to worke it and it was wont to be the generall Tenet of Protestant Divines in opposition unto Papists that a man in his first conversion is merely passive in which particular Roffensis a Popish Bishop about an hundred yeares agoe opposed Martin Luther As for a sinfull or a vitious act that is alwaies an act naturall For acts supernaturall can neither be vitious nor sinfull but merely gracious And all cōfesse that as all men have naturall power to performe any act naturall so have they power also to abstaine from it Only untill a man is regenerate he cannot but sinne yea though he doe that which is good as touching the substance of the act or abstaine from that which is evill in like manner yet can he not performe the one or abstaine from the other in a gracious manner Therefore you heare not God's word saith our Saviour to the Jewes because ye are not of God They that are in the flesh cannot please God That all men are cast into a necessity of sinning both Arminius and Corvinus confesse as formerly I have shewed And Doctor Potter acknowledgeth it the doctrine of the Church of England that no naturall man hath libertatem a peccato though forthwith he nicks it in saying they have libertatem a necessitate not explicating it that so he might cleare himselfe from contradiction whereas Doctor Fulke usually puts the distinction between liberty from sin and liberty from coaction and denying the former unto a naturall man he granteth the latter Now truely this Theologue taketh very profitable paines to prove that sin is not nothing and exuberates in the proofe hereof to the very solid conviction of all those that imagine it to be nothing if there be any such creatures in terra Australi incognitâ which is not very likely but rather in the Lunary world or in the Joviall world which is waited upon with foure moones as they that came lately from the discovery thereof have made report unto us But by the way I hope he doth not juggle with us and under colour of making sin to be some thing labour to draw us to an acknowledgment that it is some positive thing as Doctor Iackson in his last booke the 8th as I take it of his Commentaries upon the Creed laboureth to prove with great strength of affections Like as in the same vigour of resolution he professeth that whether God punisheth sinne necessarily or no it is not determinable by the wit of man but he is not over prodigall of his reasons for either We are very willing to grant that every sin as sin is something privative and as touching the act substrate it is something positive also And when the Apostle defineth sin by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if in that word the first letter be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 privative clearely the forme of sin is made to consist in privation as much as to say an incongruity to the law of God that is a privation of congruity thereunto Now we are come to an end of this let me admonish the Reader of the wisedome of this Authour All along he supposeth that by our doctrine sinne comes to passe by absolute necessity this I say he supposeth he proveth it not though we utterly deny that any such necessity is consequent to our doctrine And this himselfe knowes full well Alvarez who maintaines that God determines the creatures will to every act thereof even to the act of sin utterly denies that any absolute necessity of humane acts followeth hereupon or any necessity that stands in contradiction to humane liberty Bradwardine also sometime Arch-Bishop of Canterbury elect maintaines that God necessitates the will to every act thereof yet denies peremptorily that humane acts comes to passe by absolute necessity or by any necessity that stands in opposition to the liberty of the creature Only he saith that some kind of necessity and that antecedent may well consist with the liberty of the creature All this this Author knows yet takes no paines to disprove their tenet or answer any one of their arguments no nor to make good his own consequence which is the only thing we deny in this present argument of his As for the other part namely that in case sin come to passe by absolute necessity and without any free will in the creature then sinne is no sinne which no man denies This he proves at large or at least illustrates at large Secondly observe he talkes of things necessarily comming to passe not only absolutely but antecedently whereby he seemes to grant that sins may come to passe necessarily but not so absolutely as antecedently and takes no paines to explicate these his distinctions And in my judgment they have more need of explication as they are accommodated to sins comming to passe in the world then as they are acommodated to the eveniency of faith and repentance Yet I imagine this word Antecedently is brought in of purpose in reference to good actions rather then in reference unto evill And whether he will have this terme Antecedently to be an addition to the former terme Absolutely or only of equivalent force I know not But it is the common course of these men to confound their Reader with termes proposed without all explication But let us endeavour to boult out the meaning of these perplexed discourses as well as we can Will this Authour have saith to come to passe necessarily and that absolutely but not antecedently Or will he have faith to come to passe necessarily but not absolutely and antecedently or will he have faith come to passe not necessarily at all If not at all necessarily to what purpose doth he clog his Reader with such unnecessary complements of absolutely and antecedently If God decrees to bestow faith upon a man doth it not necessarily follow hereupon that such a one shall believe dares this Authour deny it Yet we account not this absolutely necessary but merely upon supposition Neither doth God's decree impose necessity upon all things as Aquinas hath long agoe disputed and proved but only upon some things that is that some Agents shall worke necessarily other Agents contingently and freely In a word God both decreeth things to come to passe the manner of them also that is that some things shall come to passe necessarily other things contingently and freely But God's decree we say is absolute not conditionall of giving faith And indeed all his decrees are absolute as touching the act of God willing as Bradwardine hath demonstrated by cleare reason and Piscator out of the word of God But the decree of giving faith is not absolute only as touching the act of God decreeing but as touching the thing decreed For faith is not given by God to any upon a condition to be performed by man For if it were then faith should be given according unto workes that is grace should be conferred according to mens workes And when
saved as Prosper doth without assaying to cleare it by interpretation as Austin doth and will have it goe for a secret and withall he expresly concurres with Prosper in expressing first that God doth not give grace for mens good workes sake nor denyes it for their evill workes For the ages wherein God so plentifully communicated his grace were no better then the former Observe farther that Austin himselfe in his Enchiridion treating of this place of Paul God will have all to be saved after he hath given two interpretations thereof the last whereof interpreting it of genera singulorum not singula generum is most generally received as most congruous both to Scripture phrase in generall and in speciall unto this very text of Paul as Piscator observes and Vossius against himselfe improvidently confesseth Yet see the ingenuity of this great light in Gods Church If any man can give any other convenient interpretation let him provided we be not driven to deny the first article of Creed whereby we confesse that God is omnipotent And this I conceive proceeded out of a desire to hold up the meaning of that text to the uttermost that the very letter of it may be applyed so we might not be driwen to so foule an inconvenience as to say that God willeth that mans salvation which is never saved which is as much as to say that such a one therefore is not saved because God cannot save him Observe farther in the dayes of Hincmarus and Remigius these controversies being revived in the cause of Goteschalk the church of Lyons writes a booke wherein it treats of the meaning of this place of Paul whereof he gives fower expositions according to the antient fathers First That it is to be understood of genera singulorum not singula generum of all sorts of men not of all men of all sorts Secondly That none is saved but by the will of God Thirdly That God workes in us a will or a desire that all may be saved Fourthly That God will have all men to be saved if they will Then they propose their judgement concerning these fower expositions distinguishing betweene the three first and the last thus In the three first expositions of these words wherein it is sayd that God willeth all men to be saved no absurdity is to be found no repugnancy unto faith But as touching the fourth and the last here we are to take heed for it gives occasion to the Pelegian pravity in as much as it affirmes that God that he may save men doth exspect the wills of men Now this Pelagian pravity is the very substance of our Authours orthodoxy whom I deale with Against this errour sayth the Church of Lyons we read Definitions have beene made in the antient counsels of the fathers This I take out of the extracts which Vossius hath made out of that booke which goes under the name of the Church of Lyons in his Pelagian history l. 7. c. 4. p. 755 756. there is an addition of some few lines in the third Sect concerning Gods justice but they adde noe moment at all to the rest and therefore the answer made in that third Sect to M. Hord may suffice And in the same sect and subsection subordinate to the second assertion which he obtrudes upon the maintainers of the lower way which was this God hath determined for the sinne of Adam to cast away the greatest part of mankind for ever this Interpolation is inserted This is so cleare a case that Calvin with some others have not stickt to say that God may with as much justice determine men to hell the first way as the latter See Instit l. 3. cap. 23. s 7. Where against those who deny that Adam fell by Gods decree he reasoneth thus All men are made guilty of Adams sinne by Gods absolute decree alone Adam therefore sinned by this only decree What lets them it grāt that of one man which they must grant of all men And a little after he saith It is too absurd that these kind patrons of Gods justice should thus stumble at a straw and leap over a blocke God may with as much justice decree Adams sinne and mens damnation out of his only will and pleasure as out of that will and pleasure the involving of men in the guilt of the first sinne at and their damnation for it That is the substance of his reasoning To the same purpose speaketh Maccovius Fromhence we may see sayth he what to judge of that opinion of our adversaryes viz. That God cannot justly ordaine men to destruction without he consideration of sinne Let them tell me which is greater to impute to one man the sinne of another and punish him for it with eternall death or to ordaine simply without looking at sinne to destruction Surely no man will deny the first of these to be greater But this God may do without any wrong to iustice much more therefore may he do the other As touching the assertion it selfe here charged upon our Divines namely that God hath determined for the sinne of Adame to cast away the greatest part of mankind I have thereunto answered at large in my consideration of M. Hords discourse Yet let me adde something by way of an apt accommodation of that before delivered to cleare the ambiguous phrase of this Authour as touching the phrase of casting away For it may well be doubted whether by casting away which he makes the Object of Gods determination he meanes the act of damnation or the act of denying grace If the act of damnation it is most untrue For Reprobates are not damned for originall sinne only but for all the actuall sinnes that have beene committed by them And as they are and shall be damned for them So God from everlasting decreed they should be damned for them Secondly According to my Tenet in noe moment of nature is Gods decree of damning reprobates before the prescience not of originall sinne only but also of all their actuall sinnes Indeed I do not make the prescience of sinne to go before the decree of damnation Nor do I make the decree of damnation to go before the prescience of sinne but I conceive them to be simultaneous It is true many infants we say perish in originall sinne only not living to be guilty of any actuall sinne of their persons why should this seeme strange when M. Hord himselfe professeth in his preface sect 4. That all mankind are involved in the guilt of eternall death If all are guilty of eternall death then it were just with God to inflict eternall death upon all for originall sinne How much more is it just to inflict eternall death upon some few being guilty of it Therefore observe the foxlike cariage of this Authour For this former free acknowledgement of the guilt of eternall death adherent to originall sinne in M Hords discourse is quite left out in this though there it was professed with
upon the foresight of faith But predestination proceeds upon the good pleasure of God's will ergo The Major proposition I prove thus This phrase according to the pleasure of God's will excludes all outward causes And no wise man will referre the cause of a man's absolution to the good pleasure of the judge when a man's innocency is the cause of it For that is the cause of a thing whereby answere is made to the question why such a thing is done And this is the perpetuall phrase of Scripture as Is it not lawfull for me to doe what I will with mine own And All these things worketh the same spirit distributing to every man severally as he will and He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth It pleased the father that in him should all fulnesse dwell It is so ô father because thy good pleasure was such It is God that worketh in you both the will and the deed according to his good pleasure The Lord loved you because he loved you Deut 7. 7. They inherited not the land by their own sword neither did their own arme save them but thy right hand and thine arme and the light of they countenance because thou diddest favour them 2. My second argument is Therefore God gives faith because he did predestinate them As many believed as were ordained to everlasting life and God added daily to the Church such as should be saved 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as appeares by the equipollency of both sentences Now hence I inferre Therefore God gives not faith because he hath not ordained them to everlasting life For if the affirmation be cause of the affirmation the negation is cause of the negation And the Scripture as ordinarily subjoyneth the deniall of grace to reprobation as the granting of grace to predestination For as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as perish is opposite to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as shall be saved And as the consequent of the one is said to be Faith so the consequent to the other is the deniall of the same or like grace As for example All they that are of God heare God's word so others heare them not because they are not of God as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such as shall be saved are added to God's Church so in whom is the Gospell hid only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in them that perish Among whom doth Antichrist prevaile by all deceivablenesse only in them that perish Like as for the Elect on the contrary 't is not possible they should be seduced Mat 24. 24 and 2 Thes 2. 13 3. If predestination were upon the foresight of faith then it should be only upon the foresight of such a faith as perseveres to the end whence two inconveniences follow 1. That no man can be assured of his election untill his death which is quite contrary unto Scripture For Paul was assured of the election of the Thessalonians by observation of the works of their faith the labour of their love and the patience of their hope 2. In this case none can be strengthened against the power of temptation by the assurance of their election But thus we are strengthned by Chist Mat 24. 24. by St. Paul Rom 8. 29. 2 Thes 2. 13. 4. Election is absolute therefore reprobation is absolute The antecedent I prove If it be neither of faith nor of works then it is absolute but it is neither of faith nor works Not of works expresly Not of faith as appeates by the same reason whereby Paul proves it is not of works For the reason is this Before the children were borne or had done good or evill it was said the Elder shall serve the younger Therefore election is not of works Now say I we may as well conclude therehence therefore it is not of faith forasmuch as before they were borne they were as uncapable of faith as of works The consequence I prove thus Looke by what reason St. Paul proves that the election of Iacob was not of good works because before they were borne 't was said The Elder shall serve the younger by the same reason it is evident that the reprobation of Esau was not of evill works the subjection of Esau unto his younger brother as lively representing his reprobation as the dominion of Iacob over his elder brother represents his election 5. Predestination is defined by Austin to be Praeparatio gratiae the preparation of grace therefore reprobation which is opposite thereunto must be the not preparation of grace that is God's decree not to give grace like as the opposite is Gods decree to give grace Now God gives grace not according to works For he hath mercy on whom he will And hereupon Austin builds his doctrine of predestination Now by his doctrine predestination is absolute as Gerardus Vossius confesseth in his preface to his history of the heresy of Pelagius How can it be otherwise For if God conferres grace not according to mens works but according to his own purpose and grace How much more did he decree to give it not upon any foresight of works but of his mere pleasure And the Scripture as clearely testifies that as God hath mercy on whom he will so whom he will he hardneth that is of mere pleasure he denieth grace to some as of mere pleasure he grants it unto others And therefore reprobation grounded hereupon must needs be as absolute as predestination grounded upon the other 6. Like as in Scripture phrase Faith is said to be the faith of God's elect election is not said to be of those that are foreseen to to believe So the worshippers of the Beast are said to be those Whose names are not written in the booke of life They that are not written in the booke of life are described to be such that admire and worship the beast And the not writing of mens names in the booke of life doth as significantly represent their reprobation as the writing of mens names in heaven Luc 10. 20. Rev 20. 12 doth represent their election Thus as formerly I gave six reasons to justifie the absolutenesse of reprobation because he pretended the absolutenesse thereof was repugnant to reason so here I have given six more derived out of the word of God to prove that this doctrine is the revealed will of God to stop his empty mouth that clamoureth and only clamoureth that it is no part of God's revealed will And that this doctrine is not only conformable to right reason but by convincing arguments in right reason demonstrable I have already shewed And that all the absurdities this Authour blatters of they prove to be no better then the mere imagination of a vaine thing That which here he discourseth of a reasonable service comes out of it's place it belonged to the former reason in M. Hord's treatise and there I
the parts of it selfe 1. To the matter whereunto it is applyed For it is proposed in such a case as men could not obtaine a certaine incorporation though they much desired it Now such a thing is not incident to Reprobates namely that they cannot believe though they would For had they a will to believe undoubtedly that would be accepted of God Then 2 it is incongruous to the parts of the Simile it selfe For incorporation only is precluded unto Germans by the unrepealable law he feignes without common understanding For undoubtedly all lawes of men are repealable by the same authority whereby they are made And afterwards the condition of obtaining certaine bountifull gratuities by vertue of the foresaid incorporation is proposed most undecently not of their being incorporated into that society but of their will to be incorporated Now it is apparent that by the case feigned their incorporation only is precluded unto them not their will to be incorporated In the accommodation he saith God hath made a decree by our doctrin that such men shall never believe Now what one of our Divines can be produce to justifie this We say God hath decreed not to give them grace to work them unto faith but to leave them unto themselves And is not this Authour of the same opinion Nay doth he not extend it farther then we doe even to the Elect as well as Reprobates We say not so but that his elect he doth not leave unto themselves to worke out their faith if they can but workes them by his grace and holy Spirit thereunto Himselfe seemes to be conscious of the falshood of this his imputation dealing upon the point of God's justice Sub-sect 2. For having there proposed three causes why Reprobates cannot justly be bound to believe The second of them was this in M. Hord's discourse Because it is impossible that they should believe because God hath decreed they shall have no power to believe till their dying day This reason is changed in this Authour 's refining of that discourse as indeed all these reasons are changed by him more or lesse without replying upon ought that I have answered thereunto but only putting out or putting in at his pleasure to cast a shew that the former discourse of M. Hord's is not answered such is his subdolous cariage to undermine that truth which he is not able to oppose in a faire manner with any sound reason least of all by evidence of Scripture that flying in his face at every turne and therefore his best wisdome is to shut his eyes against it And here he sayth not in representing his second reason that God hath decreed they shall have no power to believe to their dying day but thus rather Because it is not God's unfeigned will they shall believe But now againe in this supplement of his he returnes to the first and saith that by our doctrine God hath made a decree that such men shall never believe Quo teneam vultus mutantem Protea nodo But I confesse it is an honour to God's truth that it cannot be opposed but in so vile a manner Yet I have already shewed that we deny not unto reprobates a power to believe if they will We deny not the ministery of the word unto them exhorting them to believe We deny not but that whosoever hath a will to believe or doth believe God must necessarily concurre to the producing of that will and that act of his All this we grant which is the uttermost whereunto this Authour comes but over and above we say that God doth not only give his elect a power to believe if they will and perswade them to believe but that also he works them to believe and not only concurres with them in producing gracious acts but makes them to concurre with him also this is the grace and this alone that he denies to reprobates Pag. 85. Treating of the use and end of God's gifts the Authour hath an addition of some seven lines concerning the Lord's supper but nothing at all to purpose Pag. 87. Of the fift Section next following The passages out of the suffrages of our Brittain Divines in the Synod of Dort quoted by M. Hord here they are expressed namely that there are certaine internall workes preparing a man to justification which by the power of the word and Spirit are wrought in the hearts of men not yet justified such as are the knowledge of God's will and sense of sinne feare of punishment Now I have shewed that these our Brittish Divines goe much farther and yet in their fift Article and fourth position they professe of all such as are none of Gods Elect that it is manifest they never really and truly attaine that change and renovation of the mind and affections which accompanieth justification nay nor that which doth immediately prepare and dispose unto justification And therefore the preparation that this Authour speaks of as out of them must needs be a remote preparation And withall they adde that They never seriously repent they are never affected with hearty sorrow for offending God for sinning neither doe they come to any humble contrition of heart nor conceive a firme resolution not to offend any more Now let every sober person judge whether God proceeding no farther with them then this can be said to intend their conversion and salvation The other position of theirs is this Those whom God by his word and Spirit affecteth after this manner those he truly and seriously calleth and inviteth unto conversion I make no question but whom God calleth he calleth seriously and whom he inviteth unto conversion that is as I take it unto repentance he inviteth truly seriously thereunto But that God intendeth either their conversion or salvation I utterly deny For did he intend it undoubtedly he would worke it For certainly this is in his power Faith is his gift and repentance is his gift and perseverance in both is his gift And unlesse he gives faith and repentance we hold it impossible that any man should believe or repent And what a monster is it in Divinity to maintaine that God's intentions are frustrated which cannot be maintained without denying God's omnipotency For no man's intentions are frustrated but because it lyeth not in his power to bring to passe the things intended by him Pag. 88. In the next section following is inserted a sentence of Prosper which no man denies It is this They that have despised God's inviting will shall feele his revenging will but it is rightly to be understood namely of despising his inviting will all along and finally Otherwise if they break of their contempt by repentance there is mercy enough in store with God to pardon them and his revengefull hand shall not be felt by them Pag. 89. And seventh section concerning the use and end of God's gifts divers passages of our Divines are mentioned shewing the end of God's providence in affording his word unto reprobates As first
indurare tum aeterno exitio perdere idque ut in illis divina bonitas et misericordia in istis autem divina potentia et justitia declaretur atque ita in omnibus deus glorificetur Where if you marke it well you shall find he makes no order between the decrees of creation permission of sin liberation and salvation on the one side of induration and damnation on the other side but onely between creation it selfe and permission of sin and liberation it selfe and salvation on the one side and dereliction and damnation on the other side all which he considers as meanes and in the last place notes the end of all to be the patefaction of Gods glory in goodnesse and mercy on the one side and of his power and justice on the other 2. Againe in your first Thesis containing the maine body of your tenet you will have the foresight of the subject or occasion whereupon any thing is decreed absolutely to be wrought alwayes to goe before the decree it selfe as well as the decree of the end goeth before the decree of the meanes The irregularity whereof as touching God though as touching mans decrees I confesse it is right that you speake I will shew as briefly as I can before I answer your reason brought for confirmation of it 1. If the foresight of the subject and occasion goes before the decree of working upon the subject then much more must the decree of making the subject as also of making or permitting the occasion goe before the decree of working upon the subject and upon such an occasion for no subject whereupon God workes can be without Gods making but it is nothing so with man who findes subjects whereupon to worke rather than makes them Now this is a thing impossible For 1. First nothing is first in intention but the end and 't is not possible that the subject or occasion should be the end whereunto God workes upon the subject thus or thus 2. Secondly that which is first in intention is last in execution And therefore if the making of the subject and permitting of the occasion whereupon God meanes to worke were first in intention it should be last in execution that is God should first worke upon the subject before he had made the subject or permitted the occasion whereupon he workes But yet I confesse if you have a reason for what you say unlesse you may receive some satisfactory answer unto that reason of yours it will be a very hard matter to satisfie you Therefore I come to the consideration of your reason which is this The foresight of a thing is nothing but the consideration of it tanquam reipsa certo futurum But whoso will resolve absolutely to work such an effect upon such a definite subject or to make such an use of such a particular event must consider that subject and that event tanquam reipsa futurum for else his decree will be but conditionall To this I answer 1. First according to their opinion that are accounted the most rigid interpreters of predestination 1. Your proposition is most sound 2. As for your assumption which you suppose to be true they suppose to be utterly untrue as directly contrary to the most generall rules touching the order of things in intention and execution And Alphonsus Mendoza takes upon him to prove at large that the supernaturals of Peter and Paul were intended before their naturals 2. The onely reason saving the plausibility of the proposition it selfe to justifie it seems to be this God cannot worke upon a subject unlesse the subject first be and that occasion also whereupon he works therefore God cannot intend to work upon a subject unlesse first he intend to produce that subject and permit at least the occasion whereupon he intends to work As much as to say because I cannot ride to London without a horse therefore I cannot intend to ride to London unlesse first I intend to get me a horse Whence it manifestly followeth that in execution I must first ride to London and afterward get me an horse to that purpose And the confounding of the order of execution with the order of intention seems to be the cause why this proposition of yours seems to be so plausible 2. Now I will answer your proposition according to my own Tenet in ordering Gods decrees which is likely to give you better satisfaction in the way of your own apprehension Now I grant your proposition acknowledging that in this case so it falls out that he must needs consider the subject as reipsa certo futurum But how non tanquam praecedaneum whereto your discourse tends but tanquam conjunctum the reason is because I make the decrees of creation permission of sin and raysing out of sin not subordinata but coordinata conjuncta So I say in like manner God doth joyntly decree to give both grace and glory I do not say God doth decree joyntly to give them but he joyntly decreeth to give both grace and glory And so Austin defines predestination to be praeparationem gratiae gloriae So that in the same moment that he decreeth glory he considers grace not as praecedaneum in intentione but conjunctum So on the other side God doth joyntly decree finall dereliction of some in sin and damnation for sin as Aquinas professeth of reprobation that it includes voluntatem permittendi culpam damnationem inferendi pro culpa so that in the same moment that he decreeth damnation he considereth their finall impenitency non tanquam quiddam antecedaneum but tanquam conjunctum And judge you what force this hath to qualifie the harshnesse of Tenets hereabouts and what disadvantage to our opposites the Arminians who upon the subordination of these decrees cry out upon our Tenets and expose them to obloquie saying that we maintaine that God doth first decree to damne men and then to this purpose he exposeth them to sinne those sinnes for which they are damned And herewith they charge the Authors of Massa corrupta for the object of election and reprobation aswell as the Authors of Massa nondum condita or condita but nondum corrupta And the twenty reasons which Arminius hath given against the Authors of Massa nondum condita he professeth that with little difference they may be accommodated against the Fautors of Massa corrupta All which notwithstanding I have considered and I hope refuted also both the one way against Arminius and the other way against Corvinus in a Digression by it selfe which containes a whole quire of paper one of them but that is in my answer to Corvinus which is not yet perfected Doctor Jackson my ancient friend partly by his traditionary writings that passe in hugger-mugger from hand to hand four pieces whereof as many as I could come by I have answered and partly by his treatise of divine essence withdrawing my studies another away yet an answer to that I hope to smith by Whitsontide
of evill for himselfe But by the way I observe how you mistake the opinion of your opposites as when you say that this decree of manifesting Gods mercy or justice is a decree of working an effect in that subject for this is utterly untrue This were to make the decree of salvation of the one and of damnation of the other to be before the decree of creation And although some such thing may be conceived out of a superficiall apprehension of it as proposed by Beza and Piscator yet both in true account of that opinion in generall and mistaking of it in speciall no such thing is avouched Nay whereas your selfe maintaine that the decree of damnation is before the decree of permission of finall impenitency a point no way congruous to your Tenet about massa corrupta you have often read in my writings that I account the decree of damnation in no moment of time to precede the decree of permission of finall impenitency Then the case of Angells is utterly against this unlesse you maintaine the one to be elected upon the foresight of their obedience the other reprobated upon the foresight of their disobedience which I am perswaded you shall not find any Orthodox Divine in the point of mans election to maintaine 3. Conclusio tertia Gods decree to permit sinne is before his decree to manifest either his mercy in pardoning sinne or his justice in punishing sinne because that is a decree de eventu this a doing of something by occasion of that event Resp 1. To your reason here mentioned I have answered before 2. There is no priority or posteriority in intention but onely in respect of finis and media ad finem 3. It is untrue that the former decree is a decree of an event and the latter of doing something by occasion of this event For what is Gods permission the event you meane If so then Gods working grace may be accounted an event also and so Gods decree of salvation upon his working grace shall follow upon his decree of working grace which is manifestly Arminianisme Is the sinne permitted the event First why should you call it an event is it because you conceive it to fall out besides Gods intention Arminius himselfe professeth the contrary The articles of Ireland professe that God from eternity did by his unchangeable counsell ordaine whatsoever in time should come to passe your selfe acknowledge that Gods decree of permitting sinne is a decree de eventu your selfe acknowledge that God did foresee that man would sinne in case he did permit him to sinne which is as much as to say stice food did intend that sinne should come to passe by his permission which is 〈…〉 and expresse profession of Austin where he saith Non ergo aliquid fit nisi omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo so that whether things come to passe Deo faciente as good things or Deo sinente as evill things still they came to passe Deo volente as Austin professeth Now this sinne is apparently the cause of the damnation of many thousands for as much as many thousand infants are damned onely for sinne originall And therefore like as upon this sin existent God doth not take an occasion onely but a cause of damning many thousands so if the decree of permitting this be presupposed before the decree of damnation you may say as well that God upon the foresight of this sinne doth not onely take occasion but a cause also of decreeing their damnation And this may be applyed to the reprobation not onely of infants but of all that are damned forasmuch as all that are damned are damned for originall sinne onely here is the difference such reprobates as dye in their infancy are damned onely for originall sinne but others are damned not only for originall sinne but for their actuall sinnes also Againe it is manifest that the decree of permitting sinne originall is no more a decree de eventu and Gods decree to manifest his mercy in pardoning it is a decree of doing something by occasion of that event than Gods decree of permitting all actuall sinnes of his elect from the first to the last is a decree de eventu and Gods decree to manifest his mercy in pardoning actuall sinnes is a decree of working something by occasion of that event and I cannot but wonder this being againe and againe put to your consideration that you doe not take notice of the equipollency of these whence it manifestly followeth that the decree of pardoning sinnes shall presuppose massam corruptam as well with actuall sinnes as sinnes originall Againe if Gods decree of shewing justice in punishing sinne is but a decree of taking occasion of doing something then Gods decree of damnation for mens actuall sinnes is but a decree of taking occasion of doing something and consequently by what reason the decree of punishing sinne presupposeth the decree of permitting sinne originall by the same reason the decree of damnation shall presuppose the decree of permitting not onely sinne originall but all actuall sinnes also By the same reason the decree of salvation is but a decree of doing something upon the occasion of faith repentance and good workes For if sinne deserve not to be accounted a cause moving God to resolve to punish a man with damnation but rather an event by occasion where of he resolves to punish with damnation much lesse shall faith repentance and good workes be accounted a cause moving God to decree to save any man but onely an event by occasion whereof God doth decree some mens salvation Yet looke by what reason the decree of punishing with damnation doth presuppose the decree of permitting sinne by occasion of which event punishment by damnation is decreed by the same reason the decree of salvation doth presuppose the decree of giving faith repentance and good workes by occasion of which events salvation is decreed for why should not faith and good workes be accounted an occasion of the decree of salvation as well as sinnes are the occasion of the decree of damnation 4. The fourth conclusion is this Gods decree to produce the person of Peter is before his decree to manifest his mercy in Peter by the reason aforesaid Thes 8. Resp That eighth Thesis aforesaid made no mention of priority in decree or intention but onely of priority in execution by vertue of Gods decree for the words of that eighth Thesis are these God decreeth first to produce that subject and afterwards to worke such an effect thereupon Not that God did first decree to produce the subject but onely that God did decree first to produce the subject manifesting hereby that your intent is onely to reason from the order of execution and therehence to inferre the like order in intention which is the ordinary course of Arminians at this day And you signifie your meaning to be this in that eighth Thesis though in the issue you faile of
right accommodating it for your words are these If any decree be concerning the working of a certaine effect in such a subject as cannot possibly exist without the producing of that subject then we may suppose that he doth first decree thus you would say though indeed you say otherwise to produce that subject and afterwards to worke such an effect thereupon which in plaine tearmes is to argue thus The permission of Adams sinne presupposeth the creation of Adam therefore the decree of peâ— to create Adams sinne presupposeth the decree of Adams creation Now this is the Resp â—gh way to Arminianisme and Pelagianisme in the highest decree as I shewed you in my first the evidence whereof as it seemes drave you to acknowledge it and to devise some other course for maintenance of the Tenet of massa corrupta yet thro ghout all the reason you give is resolved into this for as there I said herehence it will follow in like manner that because damnation presupposeth all actuall sinnes therefore the decree of damnation presupposeth the decree of permitting of all actuall sinnes and consequently the foresight of them In like manner because salvation presupposeth all manner of good workes in men of ripe yeeres therefore the decree of salvation presupposeth the decree of giving effectuall grace for the performing of all manner of good workes and the foresight of them which is direct Pelagianisme in the highest degree And these considerations perswade me better than heretofore that the maintainers of massa corrupta for the object of predestination must be cast upon the maintenance of Arminianisme and Pelagianisme in the highest degree whether they will or no. 5. Conclusio quinta Gods decree to permit Peter to sinne in Adam is before his decree to manifest his mercy in Peter by occasion of this sinne ex Thes 9. Resp 1. Your Thesis Nona I have already answered 2. Gods decree to permit Peter to sinne in Adam is no more before his decree to manifest his mercy by occasion of that sinne than Gods decree to permit Peters personall sinnes all his life long is before his decree to manifest his mercy in pardoning them And what place you make for these decrees whether in election or out of election you have no where shewed 3. God doth manifest his mercy by occasion of Peters sinnes both originall and actuall not onely in the way of pardoning sinne but in the way of saving his person in despight of sinne whence it followeth by the course of your argumentation that the decree of permitting all Peters sinnes throughout the whole course of his life precedes the decree of manifesting Gods mercy in his salvation 4. And because Gods decree of saving Peter is a decree of doing somewhat by occasion of Peters faith and repentance and good workes it followeth by your manner of reasoning that the decree of saving Peter presupposeth the decree of giving Peter faith and repentance and good workes 6. Conclusio sexta Gods decree to produce the person of Judas is before his decree of manifesting his justice in Judas his person Thes 8. Resp This is all one with Conclusio quarta and admits the same refutation 7. Conclusio septima Gods decree to permit Judas to sinne in Adam is before his decree to manifest his justice in Judas by occasion of that sinne Resp 1. This is all one with conclusio quinta and admits the same answer 2. Why doe you say by occasion of that sinne and not by reason of that sinne perhaps you will say because that sinne is not the cause of Judas his damnation for I cannot devise any other reason but this is not sound for that sinne is the meritorious cause of Judas his damnation For though he be damned for actuall sinnes yet is he damned for originall also Againe many thousand infants are damned onely for originall sinne 3. May you not as well say that Gods decree to permit Iudas his personall sinnes is before his decree to manifest his justice in Iudas by occasion of those sinnes and consider I pray how little agreeable that is to your Tenet 4. And if the decree of permitting Iudas his personall sinnes be before Gods decree of punishing him with damnation why should not the decree of giving faith and repentance and good workes be before Gods decree of rewarding with salvation 8. Conclusio octava Gods decree to manifest his mercy in Peter or to make Peter a vessell of mercy which is properly decretum electionis is before his decree to call Peter to give him faith and repentance c. because that is a decree de fine this de medio Resp 1. I doe not dislike the order of these decrees but I say there is no congruity between them such as should be between the ends and the meanes For there is no shew of mercy expressed in giving faith and repentance but onely implyed in as much as both faith and repentance implies a state of misery preceding the permission whereof alone hath congruous reference to the shewing of mercy as the meanes stand in congraity to the end Faith and repentance and good workes are means tending to another end namely to the manifesting of Gods remunerative justice for as much as God meanes to bestow salvation on men of ripe yeares by way of reward of their faith repentance and good workes And it is without all contradiction that in Peter and every elect appeares not onely Gods mercy but his justice also and that in the highest degree both in the pardoning of their sinnes and saving of their soules for the merits of Christ Jesus And God hath ordained his sonne to give salvation Iob. 17. 2. 2. And I wonder not a little that you should subordinate any Medium tending to the demonstration of Gods mercy rather than the permission of misery 3. Especially considering that God when he purposed to shew mercy on Peter he purposed to shew mercy on him 1. In pardoning not onely his sinne originall but all his actuall sinnes also 2. In saving him not onely in despight of sinne originall but in despight of all his actuall sinnes also Neither have you any way to avoid this but by saying that God made Peter a double vessell of mercy and that by two decrees which I thinke was never heard of since the world began 9. Conclusie Nona Gods decree to manifest his justice in Judas or to make Judas a vessell of wrath which is properly the decree of reprobation is before his decree to deny Judas faith and repentance c. by the same reason Resp Here againe you erre marvelously in making a Medium most incongruous to the end intended To deny faith and repentance what is it more than not to give it and by faith you meane I doubt not faith in Christ crucified c. But it is cleare that God gave no such faith and repentance unto the elect Angells yet farre be it from us to thinke that this was a medium tending
decrees to damne him for all his actuall sins aswell as originall sinne and finall perseverance in them And that in the same moment he foresaw all their sins not that the foresight of their sinnes is antecedent or subsequent to but concomitant or conjunct with his decree of their damnation in the same moment not of time onely but of nature also Undoubtedly actuall sinnes are more apt to justifie God in damning any man than sinne originall yet you maintaine that God decrees to damne a man without the foresight of that which doth more justifie God in damning any man onely you deny that he can decree to damne any man without the foresight of that which doth lesse justifie God in the actuall damnation of any one You will have the foresight of mans actuall sins to follow the decree of damnation which I dare not avouch not onely because it is harsh to mens affections but because it is repugnant in my judgement to manifest reason onely I deny the foresight of all sinnes to be antecedent to this decree I say t is neither antecedent to it which is the dissolute opinion nor subsequent after it which is the rigid opinion and each of them equally untrue but it is conjunct or concomitant to it in the same moment of nature both these degrees being the decrees de mediis and so making up one formall compleat decree de mediis ad eundem finem tendentibus which is the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of justice as I have shewed at large in my third digression amongst those which I heare are lately brought into your hands But I wonder not a little what you are fallen upon in the next place 8. As touching the election and reprobation of Angells I have nothing to say because the Scripture saith nothing It is true that it could not be made ex communi massa corrupta because there was none such But why it might not be out of the foresight of their personall obedience or disobedience I know no great matter to object Nor will it follow that if they were elected upon such considerations we must be so too for our case is wholly different as the Scripture denyeth that of us Resp Hitherto you have discoursed as it were out of the month of our Divines who yet as I have shewed in my eighth Digression are for the most part nothing for this opinion which you propose being rightly understood But in this point not one is for you nor ever could I observe any of our Divines that maintained not the election of Angells to be of as free grace as the election of men or the reprobation of Angells to be of as free Soveraignty and absolutenesse in the denyall of grace as the reprobation of men Arminius never durst professe this which you doe but still puts it off as a matter he hath nothing to doe withall treating onely of the predestination of men which he would never have done had he any hope to make good that opinion which you seeme more to incline unto than to the contrary But though you see no great matter to object against it yet others doe that hold it absolutely impossible to be otherwise namely impossible that any thing in the creature should be the cause of the will of God quoad actum volentis or of predestination quoad actum praedestinantie Insomuch that Aquinas professeth never any man was so mad as to maintaine that there could be any cause of the will of God p. 1. q. 23. Art 5. in Corp. Cum praedestinatio includat voluntatem sic inquirenda est ratio praedestinationis sicut inquiritur ratio divinae voluntatis Dictum est autem suprà quod non est assignare â—iusam divine voluntatis ex parte actus volendi sed potest assignari ratio ex parte volitorum c. Deus vult esse aliquid propter aliud Nulius ergo fuit it a insanae mentis qui diceret merita esse causam Divina praedestinationis ex parte actus praedestinantis sed hoc sub questione vertitur utrum ex parte effectus praedestinatio habeat aliquam causam Et hoc est quaerere utrum Deus praeordinaverit se daturum effectum praedestinationis alicui propter aliquam causam And whereas Suarius hath laboured to helpe himselfe with a shifting distinction betweene causa and ratio as if there might be ratio voluntatis divinae from without though not causa and finding these tearmes promiscuously used by Aquinas in his summes flyeth out to his booke contra Gentes and Ferrarienses thereupon to get hold of somewhat therehence for his advantage yet I have endeavoured to beat that fox out of his holes in my third Digression upon election 2. Are they not called in Scripture the elect Angells Now marke Austins discourse If upon the foresight of mans obedience God elect any man it shall not be said Non vos me elegistis sed ego vos elegi but on the contrary rather vos me elegistis non ego elegi vos For if election of Angells followed upon their obedience they did first choose God that is choose to obey him before God did choose them that is choose to save them 3. If Angells were elected upon their obedience then either by necessity of nature this came to passe or by the free constitution of God It cannot be said by necessity of nature Ergo by his free constitution whence it followeth that God did ordaine that upon the obedience of Angells he would ordaine them to eternall life Now judge you whether one decree of God can possibly be the object of another decree all decrees of God being eternall and the objects of Gods decrees being meerely temporall as appeares in the decree of creation preservation redemption vocation justification sanctification salvation 4. No good act can be wrought but by God and by his grace it is he that workes in us both the will and the deed of his good pleasure Doe you not thinke it is so in Angells also otherwise what cause have they to give God thankes for their election as namely if it sprang from their obedience But suppose you deny this yet all confesse no naturall action can be wrought much lesse gratious without Gods concourse as the efficient cause thereof Now consider doth God concurre modo nos velimus which is Suarius his devise consider I pray you the contradiction included in this Tenet God is the cause working not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perficere but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 velle as they confesse Now is it possible that God concurreth ad velle modo nos velimus can the same thing be the condition of it selfe It may as well be before it selfe Againe supposing we doe velle it is not possible by the power of God that we should not velle for factum infectum reddere me Deus quidem potest But this I have farther prosecuted in a Digression by it selfe
these two wills must needs enterfeere and contradict one the other IEANES THis you gather from what you have not at all proved but only pretended to have proved viz. that the precept or injunction of faith and repentance is properly the will of God And for the contrary I have brought undeniable proofes and therefore though there be any secret or unrevealed will in God whereby he willeth the destruction of any man at the same time when he willeth or enjoyneth his faith and repentance those two wills doe not as you say enterfeere or contradict one the other For unto contradiction it is required that all the termes must be taken in the same sense and signification now this condition is not here observed For that he willeth the destruction of any man is with a will in proper speech that he willeth the faith and repentance of all men unto whom the Gospell is preached is with a will improperly so called viz his commandement M r GOODWIN NOr will that distinction of the late mentioned Author salve a consistency between them wherein he distinguisheth betwixt the decree of God and the thing decreed by him affirming that the thing which God decreeth may be repugnant to or inconsistent with the thing that he commandeth though the decree it selfe cannot be repugnant to the command IEANES THis is not barely affirmed but strongly proved by D. Twisse and of his proofes you take no notice but only object against what he saith This if it be a laudable is a very easy and compendious way of handling a controversy for it would save a man the labour of that which hath still been accounted the most difficult taske in Polemicall Writers to wit solution of Arguments but I shall acquaint the Reader with what you conceale and I doe not doubt but upon representation thereof he will acquit the Doctor and his distinction from that vanity which you lay to his charge Rem a Deo decretam cum re a Deo mandata pugnare posse dicimus interea decretum Dei cum mandato pugnare posse non dicimus uirumque demonstramus Rem a Deo decretam cum re a Deo mandata pugnare posse sic oftendimus sacrificatio Isaaci non-sacrificatic Isaici pugnant inter se sunt enim termini contradicentes At harum altera fuit a Deo mandata Abrahamo uti docet Scriptura simulque eodem tempore non-sacrificatio fuit à Deo decreta ut colligitur ex eventu Nam Deus eam efficaciter impedivit ne fieret Quare res a Deo mandata pugnare potest cum re a Deo decreta Rursus dimissio populi Israelitici ex Aegypto non-dimissio pugnant inter se sunt enim sibi invicem contradicentes at altera nempe dimissio fuit a Deo mandata Pharaoni altera puta non-dimissio fuit a Deo eodem tempore decreta Nam mandavit Pharaoni per Mosem Aaronem ut populum dimitteret simul etiam significavit se obduraturum cor Pharaonis ut non dimitteret ergo res a Deo mandata pugnare potest cum re à Deo decreta That things commanded and decreed by God may be contradictory the Doctor proveth by undenyable instances The sacrificing of Isaack and the not sacrificing of Isaack are termes contradictory but the sacrificing of Isaack was the object of Gods command to Abraham Gen. 22. 2. The not sacrificing of Isaack was the object of Gods decree as appears by the event v. 11. 12. Therefore the object of Gods commandement and the object of his decree may be contradictory Againe the letting of Israell goe out of Aegypt and the not letting of Israell goe out of Aegypt are termes contradictory but the letting of Israell goe was commanded unto Pharaoh his not letting of Israell goe was decreed and determined by God Exod. 7. 2 3. and 10. 1 2. God told Moses that he would harden Pharaohs heart that he should not let Israell goe Therefore a thing commanded by God and a thing decreed by God may be contradictory Concerning the first of these instances you say something pag. 451 452. But there is nothing argumentative in what you say but may receive an answer from your own rule of interpreting Scripture pag. 92. 99. 108. 109. In the next place the Doctor proves that the commandements and the decrees of God are not repugnant Nec tamen decretum pugnare cum mandato sic probamus Mandato significat Deus quid sit nostri officii ut a nobis fieri debeat decretum vero divinum nihil aliud est quam propositum divinum de aliquo ut vel fiat vel impediatur ne fiat idque efficaciter Mandatum docet quid ipse probaturus sit si modo ab homine fiat quid improbaturus si non fiat decretum statuit quid ipse facturus sit aut impediturus ne sit Ista autem non pugnant tui est officii ut hoc facias sed non est mei propositi per gratiam efficere ut facias Pari ratione potest Deus mandare alicui fidem resipiscentiam interea apud se statuere quod non credat aut resipiscat negando scilicet gratiam efficacem qua sola fieri potest ut credat aut resipiscat God by his command signifieth and sheweth what is our duty what ought to be done or left undone by us Gods decree is nothing else but his purpose that things shall come to passe or not come to passe the command teacheth what God will approve or disapprove his decree determineth what he himselfe will doe or hinder c. Now these are no waies repugnant It is thy duty to doe this but it is not Gods purpose to give thee grace for the doing of it Thou art bound or obliged to doe this but yet thou shalt never actually doe it faith and repentance are thy duty and yet thy faith and thy repentance shall never actually exist or come to passe By this that the Doctor hath said it is plaine that there is no opposition between Gods command to all that heare the Gospell believe and repent and his purpose of denying faith and repentance unto many nay most of them And thus you see what the Doctor hath to say for himselfe let us next heare what you can say against him Mr GOODWIN THe vanity of this distinction cleerely appeareth upon this common ground viz. that acts are differenced and distinguished by their objects therefore if the object of Gods decreeing will or the thing decreed by him be contrary unto the thing preceptively willed or commanded by him impossible it is but that the two acts of his will by the one of which he is supposed to will the one and by the other the other should digladiate and one fight against the other IEANES FIrst here againe you perplexe the disputation with talking of two acts of Gods will but supposing that by one of them you meane Gods decree which is in him and
we acknowledge of predestination both in the way of a meritorious cause on Christs part and in the way of a disposing cause on our part For God we say hath predestinated to bestow upon us both grace and glory for Christs sake where Christ is made a meritorious cause of grace and glory but not of the act of predestination And farther we say that God hath predestinated to bestow glory upon us as a reward of grace as a reward of faith repentance and good workes and to this purpose it is said that God by his grace doth make us meet partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light Coloss 1. 12. But as for the bestowing of grace on any we say there is no cause thereof on mans part For he hath mercy on whom he will Rom. 9. 18. and he hath called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his own purpose and grace 2 Timoth. 1. 9. Now let us apply this to reprobation which is the will of God as well as predestination and if there can be no cause of predestination quoad actum Praedestinantis because there can be no cause of the will of God quoad actum volentis Who seeth not that by the same reason there can be no cause of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis And if it be a mad thing to maintain that merits are the cause of predestination quoad actum praedestinantis it must be as mad a thing to maintain that any merits of the creature can be the cause of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis And this doctrine Aquinas applies expresly to Reprobation it selfe upon the 9. Rom. Lect. 2 da at the end of these words Praescientia peccatorum potest esse aliqua ratio reprobationis but how ex parte actus reprobantis nothing lesse but rather ex parte effectus and what effect not the denying of grace but only as touching the inflicting of punishment thus Praescientia peccatorum potest esse aliqua ratio reprobationis ex parte paenae quae praeparatur reprobatis in quantum scilicet Deus proponit se puniturum malos propter peccata quae à seipsis habent non à Deo And farther we prove this both by cleare evidence of Scripture and cleare evidence of reason and thirdly by as cleare a representation of their infatuation that oppose this doctrine and particularly of the Author of this discourse First by cleare evidence of Scripture Rom. 9. 11. Where the Apostle proves that Election stands not of good works by an argument drawn from the circumstance of the time when that Oracle The elder shall serve the younger was delivered together with the present condition of Jacob and Esau answerable to that time thus Before the children were borne or had done good or evill it was said to Rebecca The Elder shall serve the Younger Therefore the purpose of God according to Election stands not of good workes Now look by what strength of reason the Apostle concludes this of Election by the same strength of argumentation may I conclude of reprobation in proportion thus Before the Children were borne or had done Good or Evill it was said to Rebecca The Elder shall serve the Younger therefore the purpose of God according to reprobation stands not of evill workes that is like as good workes are not the cause of Election so evill workes are not the cause of Reprobation to wit quoad actum reprobantis as touching the very act and eternall decree of God it selfe Secondly observe I pray whether my reason be not as cleare If God upon the foresight of sin doth ordain a man unto damnation thus I am content to propose it in the most rigorous manner then this is done either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God Not by necessity of nature as it is confessed and the cause is evident for undoubtedly he could annihilate them and so he can the holiest creature that lives as all sides confesse Therefore it must be by the constitution of God but neither can this hold For if so then God did constitute that is ordaine that upon the foresight of sin he would ordaine men unto damnation Where observe that the act of divine ordination is made the object of divine ordination as much as to say he did ordaine to ordaine or he did decree to decree Whereas the objects of Gods decrees are alwaies things temporall as for example We say well God did decree to create the world to make man out of the earth to send Christ into the World to preserve us to redeeme us sanctify us save us But Gods ordination or decree is an act eternall and cannot be the object of his decree or ordination I challenge all the Powers of darknes to answer this and to vindicate the Tenent which I impugne from that absurdity which I charge upon it if they can O but some will say it 's very harsh to say that God of his meer pleasure doth ordain men unto damnation I am content to doe my endeavour to remove this scandall out of the way of honest hearts yea and out of the way of others also First therefore consider is it fit to resist the evidence of divine truth because it is harsh to mens affections Secondly Wherein consists this harshnesse Is it in this that nothing is the cause of Gods decree and will nothing temper the harshnes of it unles a thing temporall as sinne be made the cause of Gods will which is eternall and even God himselfe But let us deale plainly and tell me in truth whether the harshnes doth not consist in this That the meer pleasure of Gods will seems to be made the cause not of Gods decree only but of damnation also as if God did damne men not for sin but of his meer pleasure And this I confesse is wondrous harsh and yet no more harsh then it is untrue though in this jugling world things are so carried by some who will both shuffle and cutt and deale themselves as if we made God of meer pleasure to damne men and not for sin which is a thing utterly impossible damnation being such a notion as hath essentiall reference unto sin But if God damne no man but for sinne and decreed to damne no man but for sinne what if the meer pleasure of God be the cause of this decree what harshnes I say is this As for example Zimri or Cosby perished in their incestuous act and gave up both lust and ghost together so going as it were quick to Hell never fearing the judgements of God untill they felt them If we say God decreed they should be cut off in this sin of theirs and be damned for it What hatshnes I pray in this though God made this decree of meer pleasure For is it not manifest he did For could he not if it had pleased him have caused them to outlive this sin of theirs and given them space for repentance and
not space only but grace also for repentance seeing as Austin saith Quantamlibet praebuerit Patientiam nisi Deus dederit quis aget Paenitentiam Now I pray what is become of the harshnes of this our Tenent as is pretended And the truth is the harshnes lyeth not here though our Adversaries would faine draw it hither but rather on the other part of reprobation as it denotes Gods purpose for the denying of grace to wit the grace of Regeneration the grace of faith and repentance but on this part they are not very forward to cry out upon our Tenent as savouring of harshnes but themselves rather driven to such straites as either to deny faith and repentaince to be the gift of God wherein the Remonstrants now a daies are come so far as cleerely to professe that Christ merited not faith and Regeneration for any whence it followeth that if God doth give faith and repentance unto any yet it is not for Christs sake that he gives it Or being demanded how it comes to passe that God gives it not to all if his meer pleasure be not the cause of this difference as namely in shewing mercy unto some when he hardens others they are put upon this shift to say that if they would believe God would give them faith if they would repent God would give them repentance and one that I have had to deale with on this very argument spares not to professe that God doth work in man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Velle credere resipiscere modè Velit One thing I had almost pretermitted and that was to represent the infatuate condition of this declaration to wit as touching the Authors Tenet in opposition to ours as in saying that Gods decree to cast off men for ever is grounded upon the foresight of their continuance in sin and unbeliefe For this continuance must be understood of finall continuance therein least otherwise the contradiction to our Tenent be not duely expressed Now the foresight hereof is made to precede Gods casting men off for ever but from what surely from grace and glory in contradiction to our Tenent as here it is shaped and consequently in election the foresight of finall perseverance in faith and repentance must be shaped to precede Gods giving grace to wit in another world as if the other world were appoynted for the giving of grace to some and denying it another and that the giving of the grace of faith and repentance and denying it unto others was after the one hath persevered in faith and repentance and the other in infidelity and impenitency unto the end in this World For this is it we meane by grace when we say God in Election destinates it to one and in Reprobation decrees to deny it unto the other and in contradicting us it is fit they should use our termes in our meaning unles they expresse the contrary and give a reason of it 3. As for the Persons on whom this decree passeth and the aggravation there mentioned namely of shutting up the greater part of men even of those that are called under sinne and damnation This is confessed on all hands That the greatest part of men are reprobated even of those that are called and our Saviour hath expresly given us to understand That many are called but few are chosen And it is without question that if it be lawfull for God to deale thus with one it is as lawfull to deale so with the greatest part yea with all And experience justifieth that the greatest part of them that are called doe not performe true faith and repentance and if they did and dye therein then the greatest part of them that are called should be chosen Whereby it is manifest that God doth not give Faith and Repentance unto the greatest part of them that are called and consequently it is nothing strange that he shuts up the greatest part of them that are called under Damnation So that in true account there is no weight at all of aggravation in this Like as you have read in Newes from Parnassus that when the French and the Spaniard weighed their powers in the ballance and the French being found to weigh 25 Millions and the Spaniard but 20 He thinking to help the matter and to make himselfe as weighty as the French clapped into the scale the Kingdome of Naples and the Dukedome of Millan but beyond his expectation the scale proved never a whit the more weighty then before but lighter rather 4. As for the last claw to help the matter with a couple of Epethetes of invincible sin and unavoidable damnation one of these might have sufficed to be expressed seeing undoubtedly Damnation is no otherwise avoidable by man then by avoiding sin the cause thereof For it is undenyable that man dying in sin his damnation is unavoydable by the whole power of nature But as for the avoydablenes of sin the Author of this Discourse acknowledgeth it no otherwise then by grace and we willingly professe that all sin is avoydable by grace But by the way it is implied that such a grace is afforded unto all reprobates whereby they may avoyd that infidelity and impenitency for which they are damned But this we deny For if this were true then all Reprobates were enabled to believe to repent to please God to discerne the things of God to be subject to the Law of God but to say this is directly to contradict the Word of God which professeth of some that They could not believe Ioh. 12. 39. of others that They cannot repent Rom. 2. 5. Of all naturall men that They cannot discern the things of God as which seem foolishnesse unto them 1 Cor. 2. 14. of them that are in the flesh that They cannot please God Rom. 8. 8. of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the affection of the flesh that 't is enmity against God and it is not subject to the Law of God nor can be Rom. 8. 7. And of the Israelites in the Wildernesse for forty years together God had not given them eyes to see nor eares to heare nor an heart to perceive Deutron 29. 4. INTRODUCTION SECT II. THE first side is divided for 1. Some of them present man to God in the decree of Reprobation considered and looked upon out of or above the Fall and make the Will of God without any consideration of sin in man Originall or Actuall to be the cause of his eternall Rejection that so he might shew his absolute and unlimited power and dominion over him in appointing to heaven or hell whom he pleased and this way goe Calvin Beza Zanchius Piscator Gomarus That way seems to charge God very deepely and to make him the prime and principall cause of mens everlasting ruine and the author also not only of the first sin that entred into the world but of all other sins likewise that are successively committed therein as meanes to bring men by a course and colour of justice to those