a course to justifie God herein by saying that God hath mercy on none but in respect to their former good works Nay much more contradictions for as much as no good works in the state of nature or grace can bee meritorious of reward But sins may bee and are truely meritorious of punishment In the 22 vers there is not the least mention of obduration much lesse any mention of the cause thereof least of all any reversing of the former cause expressed ver 18. and justifyed ver 20. from the authority of God the Creator having power to make his creatures of what fashion hee will and substituting a new in the place thereof And although all that are vessels of wrath are sinners and consequently deserve punishment yet obduration in opposition to shewing mercy consisting in the deniall of saving grace is no punishment for as much as God doth not thereby withdraw any saving grace from them which formerly they injoyed and as for inflicting evill that hath no place in obduration for as much as all confesse that God doth not obdurate any man infundendo malitiam but non infundendo gratiam Neither is it sin either originall or actuall that which constitutes a man a vessell of wrath as a vessell of wrath is opposite to a vessell of mercy For sin both originall and actuall is incident to the Elect as well as to the Reprobate but like as Gods shewing mercy makes a man a vessell of mercy so Gods denyall of mercy finally constitutes a vessell of wrath exposing him to finall infidelity or impenitency which sin alone is not found in any of the elect It seems you think they are fitted to destruction by themselves as if vasa the vessels did separate and not Herus the Master rather Sin alone makes a man obnoxious to condemnation as deserving it and so there is sin in the best of Gods children to drive them to confesse that if the Lord should bee extream to mark what is done amisse none were able to abide it Yet the sin of the Reprobates you confesse God could prevent and not preventing it yet could cure it by the blood of Christ so that though sin bee granted to bee a cause hereof yet a more originall cause though nothing culpable must bee acknowledged to bee the deniall of Grace as our Saviour budgeth not to professe to the faces of some Yee therefore heare not my words because yee are not of God and Joh. 12. 40. Therefore they could not beleeve because Esaias saith Hee hath blinded their eyes and hardned their hearts that they should not see with their eyes and understand with their hearts and should bee converted and I should heale them All this while have I maintained the safenesse of that exposition which interpreteth Gods hatred of Esau of a lesse degree of love and the same word is also used in the same sense But yet so understand mee I conceive this lesse degree of Love to have somewhat in it of the true nature of Hatred For as the nature of Love standeth in affecting communion with one and communicating good unto him So likewise the nature of hatred stands in the contrary to this either in affecting separation from one or inflicting evill on him or at least in not vouchsafing communion or communicating good unto him So is a man said to hate his brother that will not vouchsafe him such an office of brotherly communion as that hee will communicate a kindly reproofe to him for his sin Now I would easily grant that before Esau had done good or evill God so hated him as that hee did not communicate to him that fellowship with Christ which by Gods election and donation the members of the body have with him their head in Gods account even before the world was Neither did God vouchsafe that plentifull communication of his free grace unto him as might in time by a reall actuall power draw him to Christ and to live by him Yea God was pleased to set him in a state further remote and separate from him then his elect brother Even in the estate of a servant to the elect and in stead of communicating free grace hee purposed to deale with him rather according to his works by a covenant of Justice For both these are implyed in Gods putting of Esau into the state of a servant First the denyall of such grace and fatherly love to him as is reserved for children Secondly the not refusing of him to just dealing such as is due to servants according to their works I look to receive from you some proofe that the word Hatred is used in the same sense to wit to signifie a lesse degree of Love for to my judgement it is a wilde interpretation for in this sense God might bee said to hate every one of Gods elect excepting Christ for hee loves them all in a lesse degree then hee loved Christ and one in a lesse degree then another according as degrees of Love attributed to God are to bee estimated that is not quoad affectum for undoubtedly there are no degrees to bee found in the nature of God but quoad affectum and undoubtedly God alots one degree of grace to one and another degree to another and as hee deales with them in communicating of grace so in the communicating of Glory also Love and hatred undoubtedly are opposite contrarily and not onely contradictorily And because quot modis dicitur unum oppositorum tot modis dicitur alterum as love of complacency consists in delectation so hatred opposite is of displicency or aversation And as love of beneficence consisteth in wishing or doing good So hatred opposite consists in wishing or doing evill to another Here at length I observe the place you stand upon to prove that hatred in holy Scripture doth sometimes signifie a lesse degree of love and that seemes to bee Levit. 19. 17. Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart thou shalt plainely rebuke thy brother and suffer him not to sin And to serve your turn in this interpretation you shape a correspondent practise of Love consisting in vouchsafing communion which unlesse it bee a communion of reproofe is nothing to your purpose who desire to shape hatred in contradiction thereunto And yet hatred all conceive to bee much more then not to love But were all this yeelded unto you yet doth it fall short of your purpose for albeit hee that forbears to reprove his brother doth him harm yet if hee doe not intend him harm hee cannot bee said to hate him For in Scripture phrase hatred denotes an intention to harm as Deut. 4. 42. Where wee reade that certain Cities were appointed That the slayer might fly unto which had killed his Neighbour at unawares and hated him not in times past But if you measure hatred by the harm done why should the sparing of reproofe to preserve a brother from sin and consequently from incurring the wrath of God bee
ability Dicere solet humana superbia saith Austin si scissem fecissem What was Pauls meaning when hee said of himselfe Rom. 7. 9. I once was alive without the Law I should think this impotency cannot be discerned without the life of grace For like as a dead man naturally is not sensible of his death so hee that is dead in sinne is nothing sensible of this his sinfull condition But howsoever surely grace revealed onely hath no congruity to such a worke as to bring a man to see his impotency for what greater grace in the kind of revelation then the word of God let this word testifie that a man is shaped in wickednesse and in sinne conceived and that hee is dead in sinne Is this sufficient to make him see his impotency Is the hearing of Gods word sufficient to make him beleeve it why then is it not sufficient to take away mens blindnesse and why then doth not every one that hears it cease to be blind and consequently cease to bee lame and deafe yea and cease to be dead also Nay which is more suppose a Physician discovers a man to be in a dangerous estate when hee dreames of nothing lesse and suppose the party beleeves it upon his word yet here-hence it followeth not that hee seeth the dangerous estate wherein hee is untill hee hath some feeling of it So likewise if hee should beleeve the word telling him that hee is unable to doe any thing that is good yet hee shall not be said to see it till hee hath some feeling of it and whence can this feeling proceed but from some principle of life that must be shed into his soule that hee may have a feeling of that miserable estate wherein hee is by nature otherwise though upon supposition hee should beleeve it in Gods word yet hee should not see it in himselfe Further you say It is sufficient to stirre him up to seek for help and strength and life in him where it is to bee found A strange conceit that a man should seek for life whereas if hee hath not life hee is dead and was it ever known that a dead man sought for life well Martha might seeke for the restoring of life to her dead brother Lazarus but surely Lazarus himselfe being dead neither did nor could seeke for life A man that hath life may be said to labour for life that is to hold it when hee is in danger of losing life but for a dead man to seeke for life is more then miraculous for it is utterly impossible When the Angell came downe into the Poole of Bethesda the poore Creple had never a whit the more sufficiency to enter in had his heart beene as lame to desire as his body to goe notwithstanding that he saw so good an opportunity hee should make no more haste to desire the benefit then his body could to enjoy it Againe no man seekes for that hee desires not neither can hee desire ought unlesse hee know it and loves it And is it possible that a man should know the precious nature of the life of grace and be in love with it and yet without the life of grace Is the knowledge of the precious nature of the state of grace and the love thereof a fruit of the flesh thinke you But by that which followes it seemes this is not your meaning but you suppose that notwithstanding all the operation of grace mentioned they may despise it In which case they neither love it nor understand the precious nature of it for no man despiseth that which hee loves and accounts precious Therefore this stirring up seemes to bee nothing but perswasion and exhortation Now this as Austin long agoe delivered Doctrinae generalitate comprehenditur and we willingly grant that the word preached doth equally exhort all that heare it to faith to repentance to prayer in some of which or in all which consists the seeking of life And no man makes question but the word of God sufficiently performes its part in exhortation to faith to repentance to prayer but the Pharisees despised this and so doe most and God is blamelesse But of any power that they have to beleeve repent and pray upon the doing whereof they should obtaine life your selfe are content to say nothing at all but keep your selfe unto generall phrases which are very apt to deceive us and this is the course not onely of them that are in love with their owne errors but with good men also when out of a desire to justifie God and not content with that simplicity of satisfaction which is laid forth unto us in holy Scripture and seemes harsh to flesh and bloud making them cry out Durus est hic sermo they shape unto themselves other courses more convenient as they thinke to give satisfaction yet not so much unto themselves as unto others but all in vaine for flesh and bloud will receive no satisfaction in the plaine truth of God A third Reason then to prove that God purposed life to the world upon condition of their obedience and repentance is taken from the end God aimed at As hee declares himselfe to offer meanes of salvation unto the world which is not in the first place to harden and to leave without excuse but to bring them to the knowledge of God and of themselves to repentance to the seeking after God to the purging of themselves from sinne and to peace To the Gentiles God gave the workes of Creation and Providence and his Law written in their hearts to reveale the knowledge of God to them to teach them to doe the things of the Law to judge of them that doe amisse and thereby be brought to condemne themselves doing the same things to lead them to repentance to move them to seek after the Lord. And thus much light Christ enlighteneth every man withall that cometh into this world From whence also it was that God vouchsafed heavenly dreames and visions even to the Gentiles That hee might withdraw them from their sinnes and hide their pride and save their soules from the pit But because this light alone did not prevaile with the Gentiles as to bring them to the knowledge of God in Christ therefore it pleased God in the fulnesse of time to send the preaching of the Gospel amongst them and in the meane time not to iudge them nor condemne them for their not beleeving in Christ of whom they had not heard nor for transgressing the Law of workes which they had not received but onely for sinning against the law of nature which was written in their hearts and expounded to them daily by the workes of Creation and Providence and sealed up to them by particular amplification partly by their Consciences accusing or excusing Rom. 2. 15. partly by dreames and visions Job 33. 15 16. To the Jewes God revealed his Covenant clearly and fully sent his Prophets among them early and late gave them deliverances chastened them with
then is the meaning of the Lord saying I have smitten your children in vaine they have received no correction I answer we are to conceive Gods corrections to tend to this according to that of Peter knowing that the long-suffering of the Lord is salvation or God speakes this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the manner of earthly parents seeking their childrens amendment by correction but not obtaining it And this being an end of correction in Gods children in the wicked this end is not obtained And what difference is there between meanes naturall and meanes morall but this meanes naturall have power to effect their ends meanes morall are to admonish morall agents of their duty to doe this or that and so the ends of Gods punishment is that by them wee should learne to amend our lives as is signified in the Collects of our Church In a word naturall means tend to ends that shall be thereupon morall means tend to ends that should be and each are usually said to be in vaine when the end according to each kind is not obtained God sent his Sonne into the world not that hee should condemne the world but that the world should be saved by him Most true for hee sent his Son into the world to dye for the world and to dye for them is to save them and not to condemne them But for whom did hee send his Sonne into the world to dye Surely for the world of Elect even for those whom God the Father had given him Thou hast given him power over all flesh that hee should give eternall life to all them that thou hast given him Joh. 17. 2. And if wee consider the world in distinction from those whom God hath given him hee plainly professeth that as hee did not pray for them Joh. 17. 9. so hee did not sanctifie himselfe for them Verse 19. that is offer himselfe up upon the Crosse as Maldonate acknowledgeth to be the joynt interpretation of all the Fathers whom hee had read And your selfe have but earst confessed that God did not Joh. 3. 17. give the world unto Christ by him of grace to be bought or brought unto salvation Undoubtedly hee sent not Christ into the world at all to procure any mans condemnation neither doth Christ procure any mans condemnation although infidelity and disobedience to the word of Christ procures the condemnation of many And I wonder what moved you so to speake as to imply it was Gods intent though not chiefe intent to send Christ into the world to procure the condemnation of any At length wee are come to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the point controverted between us in the words following If they should plead their condemnation to be unjust for unbeleefe because they were not able to beleeve Ver. 18. our Saviour answers by a reasonable prevention ver 19. This is their condemnation viz. the just cause of their condemnation that when light came into the world men loved darknesse rather than light men chose rather to cleave to their sinfull estates and wayes of darknesse than to follow the light of the means of grace which might have brought them on to beleeve in Christ First let us consider the Text it selfe then your interpretation and accommodation thereof Our Saviour doth plainly derive the cause of their unbeleefe or disapprobation of the Gospel signified in these words They loved darknesse rather than light I say the cause of this our Saviour referres to their workes of darknesse expressed in these words Because their deeds were evill The full meaning whereof I take to be this The workes wherein they delight are evill that is workes of darknesse and therefore no marvell if they hate the light and preferre darknesse before it Pulchra Lavernae Da mihi fallere da justum sanctumque videri Noctem peccatis fraudibus objice nubem But give mee leave to make an honest motion As it becomes us to take notice of this cause mentioned here so it becomes us nothing lesse to take notice of other causes mentioned in other places Now another cause of unbeleefe is mentioned Joh. 5. 44. and that of the same generall nature with this but expressed in more speciall manner by our Saviour thus How can yee beleeve which receive honour one of another and seeke not the honour that cometh from God onely Yet this is not all the cause of unbeleefe which the Scripture commends unto us for the Apostle also takes notice of Sathans illusions in this worke of unbeleefe 2 Cor. 4. 3 4. If our Gospel be hid it is hid to them that are lost Whose eyes the God of this world hath blinded c. And because it is in the power of God to correct this delight wee take in evill workes and to deliver us from the illusions of Sathan if it please him to shew such mercy towards us and when he doth not he is said to harden us The hand of God in this our Saviour takes notice of as the cause of unbeleefe in man Joh. 12. 39 40. Therefore they could not beleeve because Esaias saith againe Hee hath blinded their eyes and hardened their heart that they should not see with their eyes and understand with their heart and be converted and I should heale them Like as Moses of old told the Jewes saying Deut. 29. 2 3. Yee have seen all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharaoh and unto all his servants and unto all his land The great temptations which thine eyes have seen the signes and those great miracles Ver. 4. Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive and eyes to see and eares to heare unto this day And this hee doth even then when his purpose was to reprove them for their naturall incorrigiblenesse for men sinne never the lesse obstinately because God denyes them grace but rather so much the more obstinately because as Austin well saith Libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia and consequently they are never a whit the lesse faulty though it be not in their power to correct that corruption of their hearts whence this faultinesse proceeds And hereupon the Apostle gives way to the same objection in effect which you propose for having concluded that God hath mercy on whom hee will and whom hee will hee hardeneth hee gives place to such an objection Thou wilt say then Why doth hee yet complaine for who hath resisted his will and answers it not as our Saviour doth for our Saviour proposed no such objection to be answered as you feigne the Apostle doth plainly and in expresse termes Our Saviour discovers the immediate cause of unbeleefe to wit because their hearts were set on evill as it was sometimes with the Colossians Col. 1. 21. yet because it was not in their power to change their hearts but God alone who will change them through mercy in whom hee will and will not change them in others
but harden them Hereupon the Apostle gives way to an objection in a matter more sublime than yours as before mentioned and answers it in this manner O man who art thou that disputest with God Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it Why hast thou made mee thus Hath not the Potter power c. which is an answer to such a question as this Why doth God complaine of us for that which proceeds from the hardnesse of our hearts which God alone can cure but will not but rather by denying us mercy continues to harden us But now let us consider the interpretation and accommodation of this place to the plea devised by you The reason you say why men loved darknesse rather than light is because men chose rather to cleave to their sinfull estates and wayes of darknesse than to follow the light of the meanes of grace which might have brought them on to beleeve in Christ It is great pity that by our owne phrasiologies wee should raise unto our selves a mist whereby wee should be the more unable to discerne the truth of God Suppose the Paraphrase were both sound in it selfe and congruous to the Text yet give way I pray to such a question in the second place What was the reason that they chose rather to cleave to their sinfull estates and wayes of darknesse than to follow the light of the meanes of grace If you answer any thing but that of our Saviour Joh. 12. 39. Therefore they could not beleeve because Esaias saith againe Hee hath blinded their eyes and hardned their heart that they should not see with their eyes nor understand with their heart and should be converted and I should heal them I will not cease to pursue you untill you come to this and withall put you to give a reason why you should not take hold of this answer of our Saviour Joh. 12. 39. as of that Joh. 3. 19. especially considering that if a question were moved Why some chose rather to follow the light of the meanes of grace than to cleave to their sinfull estates and wayes of darknesse I doubt not but you would forth with answer Because God had mercy on them and gave them hearts to know Christ and to beleeve in him 1 Joh. 5. 20. Phil. 1. 29. And seeing God doth not shew the like favour to others to shew them the like mercy which is in Scripture phrase to harden Rom. 9. 18. and Rom. 11. 7. or not to give hearts to perceive and eyes to see and eares to heare Deut. 29. 4. why should wee not say plainly that whereas the one takes a right way it is because God shewes mercy towards them to give them so much grace and whereas the other takes not the right but the wrong way it is because God hardens them in denying the like mercy and grace to them like as our Saviour expresly signifieth also Joh. 8. 47. Hee that is of God heareth Gods words yee therefore heare them not because yee are not of God But if any man shall inquire What then moved our Saviour to give this reason why men loved darknesse rather than light to wit this because their deeds were evill I answer hee gives the immediate cause why they loved not the light that is they had no mind to heare the doctrine of our Saviour and that was in respect of the convincing nature of it and therein like unto light which makes every thing to appeare and be manifest according to its proper hiew whereas in darknesse all things are confounded according to that Ephes 5. 13. Now they who brought ill consciences along with them no marvell if they were quickly weary of our Saviours company A pregnant example whereof wee have Joh. 8. 7. For when our Saviour said unto them who brought unto him a woman taken in adultery Let him that is among you without sinne cast the first stone at her Ver. 9. When they heard this being accused by their owne conscience they went out one by one beginning at the eldest even to the last So that indeed the reason given by our Saviour Joh. 3. 19. is not so much a reason why they beleeved not as why they liked not to heare him Many did endure the hearing of him yet were not brought to beleeve in him Austin sometimes proposed such a question as this Why doe not men doe this or that As for example Why doe they not facere quod justum est and hee answers Quia nolunt But if you aske mee Quare nolunt Imus in longum saith Austin Yet sine prejudicio diligentioris inquisitionis hee takes upon him to answer it thus Vel quia latet vel quia non delectat But marke what hee brings in upon the back of this Sed ut innotescat quod latebat suave fiat quod minime delectabat gratia Dei est quae hominum adjuvat voluntates But the face of your discourse tends to this as if you were of opinion that every naturall man hath so sufficient grace as to choose to follow the light of the meanes of grace rather than to cleave to his sinfull estate and wayes of darknesse and that not onely if hee will for if hee will the greatest part of the worke is done already but that his will is indifferently of it self inclinable to the one as well as to the other which is so dangerous an opinion and so opposite to the doctrine of Gods word representing the miserable corruption of mans heart and the peculiar power of Gods regenerating grace that you are loath to breake out in plaine termes to professe as much Lastly whereas you say The light of the meanes of grace had it been followed might have brought them to beleeve in Christ You will not say upon the following hereof they had been brought but they might have beene brought to beleeve By following the light of the meanes of grace I understand a continuing to heare the word of God Now it is well knowne that many nay most in all probability though they continue all their dayes to be hearers yet as the Apostle speakes of some so may wee say of them They are ever learning and never come to the knowledge at least to any saving knowledge of the truth On the contrary Saul persecuting the Church of God even in the way marching furiously Jehu like against the Professors of the Gospel it pleased God to call him and convert him Wee know saith Austin that God hath converted the wills of men not onely aversas à verae side sed adversas verae sidei So that even opposition to grace God can cure if it please him and regenerate a man to bring him to faith and repentance if it please him and if hee doth not certainly the reasons can be no other then because hee will not and that to his owne glorious ends which is reason enough for the Creator to doe what hee will his wisedome in referring all to
I am willing to consider the strength of your Argument it is grounded upon a certaine Scripture phrase Oh that there were in this people an heart to fear me Oh that they were wise Oh that my people had hearkened unto mee c. Is it not great pity that good men and good Divines should be carried away into odde opinions upon the slight consideration of a phrase The Hebrew phrase runnes thus Quis dubis ut cor eorum sit hujusmodi i. e. ità dispositum illis ut timeant me omnibus diebus vitae suae This is Quis praestabit Who shall give or effect that such an heart were in them that they might feare mee all their dayes Now I pray consider if this were spoken properly might wee not answer God according to his owne language and say O Lord doest thou aske who shall give or make good unto them such an heart why who should doe such a worke as this but thy selfe for thou hast made the heart and thou alone canst change it we cannot change an haire of our head much lesse our heart and thou in thy Covenant of grace hast undertaken this even to be our Lord and God to sanctifie us and to this purpose thou hast given us thy Sabbath as a figne that thou the Lord doest sanctifie us to this and thou hast given us thy word which is that truth of thine according unto godlinesse which alone can sanctifie us and thou hast promised to circumcise our hearts and the hearts of our children that they shall love the Lord our God with all our hearts and as to love thee so to feare thee also and that all our dayes and to this purpose to put thy feare in our hearts that wee shall never depart from thee yea and to put thy spirit within us and to cause us to walke in thy statutes and in thy judgements and to doe them And surely if God desires such an heart to be in us hee will not false to give us such an heart seeing hee alone is able to worke such an heart in us Therefore I conclude this is not to be understood properly but figuratively And you may as well inferre out of that of the Psalmist The eyes of the Lord are over the righteous and his eares are open unto their prayers that God hath eyes and eares in proper speech as out of such places as these to conclude that humane ineffectuall desires and wishes and velleities are found in God If God transferre upon himselfe the members of our bodies in a figure of speech called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 why may hee not as well transferre upon himselfe by the same figure of speech the desires and affections of our minds especially considering that God hath made us apt to be moved and wrought upon by such passionate expressions and it is Gods usuall course to worke in all things agreeably to their natures And I make no question but such expressions are usually prevalent with true Israelites with Gods owne people not so much by the force of a passionate expression which is accommodated to the condition of mans nature as chiefly by the operation of Gods Spirit whose sword the Word of God is I doubt not but Gods will is serious what way or course soever it takes but you are very adventurous upon your Readers credulity in endeavouring to perswade him that God willeth such a gracious heart in them in whom hee means not to worke considering as I presume your selfe beleeve although this discourse of yours makes mee not a little to stagger in this mine apprehension that God alone is able to worke such an heart in any yet you labour to expedite a facile way unto our faith or credulity rather to take hold of your Proposition by a familiar comparison A father you say perswades both his sonne and his servant to be cut both being dangerously sicke of the stone but when perswasions will not serve with his sonne hee taketh him and bindeth him hand and foot and causeth him to endure it The servant hee continueth to perswade to endure the like course of cure but proceedeth no further In this case you say the Master doth seriously desire the healing and life of his servant though he did not proceed to the cutting asunder of his flesh I grant all this but I wonder not a little that your selfe doe not observe the incongruity in this comparison which on no side is sutable for the sonne in this case is made to be cut against his will that hee may be healed but God forceth no man to conversion and repentance against his will that hee may be healed for indeed voluntas non potest cogi at least in respect of actus eliciti wherein consists repentance and conversion On the other side the servant is no more willing to be cut than the son for it is not in the power of man to change the will either of servant or of sonne but this is in Gods power and with an omnipotent facility as Austin speakes Omnipotenti facilitate convertit ex nolentibus volentes facit Now put the case that the Master should know that of all the meanes hee could use to make his servant willing to endure the cutting none but one would prevaile with him and that one would prevaile with him to make him willing should the Master use all other meanes which hee well knew would prove ineffectuall and purposely forbeare the other which hee well knew would prove prevalent In this case speake freely I pray whether this man did seriously and earnestly desire the cutting and healing of his servant and not rather the contrary To put the case home unto you you know what admonition David upon his death-bed gave to Solomon concerning Shimei Thou shalt not count him innocent for thou art a wise man and knowest what thou oughtest to doe unto him and thou shalt cause his hoare head to goe downe to the grave with bloud yet withall Solomon must have a care of David his fathers oath for when Shimei came to meet David at Jordan David sware unto him by the Lord saying I will not slay thee with the sword Now while Solomon meditated on some course to take with Shimei suppose God should reveale unto him saying If thou proposest such a condition unto him to wit of building him an house in Jerusalem and to stay there and not passe over the brook Kidron hee will transgresse but if thou proposest any other like condition hee will observe it and hereupon Solomon should be moved to propose this conditon which hee knew Shimei would transgresse judge I pray whether this course proposed to Shimei were an evidence of Solomons earnest and serious affection concerning the saving of Shimei's life and not rather concerning his destruction In like sort when God perswades many by his Ministers to make them new hearts and new spirits and himselfe alone by the power of his Spirit is able to take the stony
persecute the Church as Soul did are nothing further off from seeking the Lord and finding mercy from him then the other These did manifest themselves unworthy of eternall life doe not all so who stumble at the Word of God and refuse to hearken to it For this is the condemnation of the world Light is come into the world and men loved darknesse rather then light because their deeds were evill Joh. 3. 16. Will you therehence inferre that all such are inabled to obey it which is as much to say as that they are inabled to beleeve and repent The eighth is out of Mat. 23. 37 38. How often would I have gathered thy children together as the hen gathereth her chickens under her wings and yee would not Behold your habitation is left unto you desolate c. What I pray you is to bee gathered under his wings can it bee lesse then to come unto him nay is it not to bee healed by him since as your selfe observe healing was under his wings and if so to come to Christ is to bee healed by him can it bee any thing lesse then to beleeve and repent And will you herehence inferre that they had power thus to come under his wings and consequently to beleeve and repent And yet in this very place you professe that as touching all others except the Elect God deprives them of those drawing and effectuall means without which none can come to Faith and Repentance Nay whatsoever it bee that lies in their power to perform besides by the performing of it doe they come any whit neerer to the participation of Grace I do not finde you adventure to professe so much for feare of falling into that which you call ungracious Pelagianisme The ninth is Luk. 19. 41 42. Which is of the same nature and of no greater force then the former Oh that thou hadst even known at the least in this thy day those things which belong unto thy peace but now are they hid from thine eyes For the daies shall come upon thee when thy enemies shall cast a trench about thee and make thee even with the ground because thou knewest not the season of thy visitation To know in Scripture phrase is of a complicate notion and signifyeth knowledge joyned with congruous affections and thus to know the things that belong unto our peace is so to know as therewithall to imbrace them and to know the time of our visitation is so to know as to accommodate our selves thereto in agreeable conversation as Jer. 8. 7. The Stork in the aire is said to know her appointed times and the Turtle and the Crane and the Swallow are said to observe the time of their comming That is so to know it as accordingly to come so to know the time of our visitation is so to know it as accordingly to come unto God when hee visites us and according as his Visitation requires of us Now will you herehence inferre that they were inabled to perform all this and so to seek the Lord I appeale to your own conscience whether it might not bee as justly said of them as Moses said of the children of Israel in the wildernesse Deut. 29. 4. The Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive and eyes to see and eares to heare unto this day Nay doth not our Saviour himself say as much of these Jews Joh. 12. 39. Therefore they could not beleeve because that Esaias saith again 40. Hee hath blinded their eyes and hardned their hearts that they should not see with their eyes and understand with their hearts and should bee converted and I should heale them Neither will it follow hereupon that they are excusable so much the more although this is a very plausible inference for our Saviour professeth notwithstanding this that they had no cloak for their sins Joh. 15. 22. And indeed onely such an inability doth excuse as hereby a man is unable to doe that which hee fain would doâ—â— As for the doing of that they did in resisting the Gospel they had rather too much will therein then too little and that through the want of grace For as Austin wisely observes Libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia Liberty without grace is not liberty but wilfulnesse The tenth is Ezek. 24. 13. Because I would have purged thee and thou wast not purged thou shalt not bee purged from thy filthinesse till I have caused my wrath to light upon thee I should think this were spoken of Gods Elect not so much by observing that phrase till I have caused my wrath to light upon thee but chiefly by comparing it with Ezek. 22. 10. I will scatter thee among the heathen and disperse thee in the Countries and will cause thy filthinesse to depart from thee It may have place not onely of the Elect but of the regenerate also for even them sometimes God doth cause to erre from his wayes and harden their hearts against his feare Which though they have power to repent yet upon supposition of obduration and so long as that continues it may bee said that they cannot repent How much more may it bee verifyed of naturall men in the state of unregeneracy that they cannot repent And shall this any way hinder the course of Gods judgements against them for their sins unrepented of because without grace it is not in their power to purge themselves from their sins by repentance I deny not but they have power to performe feigned repentance as Jer. 3. 10. And shall feigned repentance think you bee of force to keep off the judgments of God or if Gods judgements shall have their course except they bee prevented by unfeigned repentance will it herehence follow that naturall men are inabled to perform unfeigned repentance The eleventh is Prov. 1. 20. to 30. Wisdome cryeth c. 20 How long will yee love foolishnesse ver 22. Turn you at my correction ver 23. Because I have called and yee have refused c. ver 24. I will also laugh at your destruction ver 28. Will you herehence infer that they were enabled to turn to hearken to wisdoms voyce and think to put a difference betwixt your opinion and that of the Pelagians of old by saying that though naturall men have not power to beleeve and repent yet they are inabled to doe more good then they doe in the way of seeking the Lord and finding mercy from him and pin upon every place you alledge such a distinction as this which you no where manifest sufficiently to understand your selfe as touching the latter part of it So loath you are to shew what are the particulars of seeking the Lord they doe attain to and to what particulars further they might attain and of what particulars they must necessarily fall short for want of certain helps Might you not as well infer that it is in the power of man to make him a new heart because God cals upon him to make him
acknowledge no sufficiency of instruction granted them hereunto but rather for the ordering of their lives in morall conversation and for the politique government of the world lest otherwise all things should run to disorder and confusion And as Austin saith that the meanes of grace are granted to some ut proficiant thereby ad exteriorem vitae emendationem quo mitiùs puniantur Secondly Gods leading to repentance in that place is attributed to the goodnesse of God which is shewed in his patience and long-suffering as if it signified no more than giving way unto repentance Thirdly take it as rigorously as you will it cannot signifie more than God performes by his word and preaching of the Gospel For can you imagine that God performes more by his workes in leading men unto repentance than by his word Now Gods leading to repentance by his word is but his admonishing them to repent Acts 17. 30. Now he admonisheth all men every where to repent And here-hence it followes not that God doth will their repentance any otherwise then voluntate praecepti not voluntate propositi or bene-placiti for if hee did then must hee needs give them the grace of repentance Yet I confesse in this voluntas praecepti is included voluntas propositi in some sense which yet nothing serves your turne though some equivocation makes it seeme plausible taking it hand over head in the generall for it signifies withall that it is the will of Gods good pleasure that they ought to repent and it is their duty to repent But there is much difference between these two Propositions It s my good pleasure that it shall be your duty to repent and It is my good pleasure that you shall repent and therefore I will give you the grace of repentance As for the second place of importance drawn out of Job 33. vers 15 16 17. of Gods providence in vouchsafing heavenly dreames and visions unto the Gentiles that hee might withdraw them from their sinnes and hide their pride and save their soules from the pit This likewise in two respects is nothing for the purpose For first this is spoken of such a time as wherein there was no partition-wall as afterwards was erected between the Jewes and Gentiles and therefore you doe not well to apply this unto the Gentiles in distinction from the Church of God for was not Job and such like in those dayes of the Church of God doth not God send his friends unto him that hee might sacrifice for them God himselfe promising to accept it Secondly you are to prove that God doth intend the repentance of those in whom hee doth not effect repentance But Elihu in Job speaks of God intending the repentance in those in whom hee doth effect repentance as it appeares Vers 16 23 24 25. and yet I deny not but God may intend a kind of repentance even in the wicked to wit exteriorem vitae emendationem as Austin speaks and so deliver them from judgement temporall and make also their damnation more tolerable Here you passe over from Gods naturall providence to a more gracious providence but not with a right foot as when you say that because this light alone did not so farre prevaile with the Gentiles as to bring them to the knowledge of God in Christ Therefore it pleased God in the fulnesse of time to send the preaching of the Gospel amongst them You should have said rather Because this light alone could not prevaile but so perhaps you had much prejudiced your owne Tenet I say you should have rather said so seeing you undertake to give the cause of this enterchange of the providence of God For to say onely It did not prevaile is not to alledge any tolerable cause thereof especially considering that you make the blame hereof wholly to lie upon mans wilfulnesse for by the same reason you might introduce a further course of Gods more gracious providence to bring men unto repentance than any hee hath undertaken yet for even the preaching of the Gospel thereby admonishing men to repent doth not prevaile with most There is another incongruity as when you say This light of nature alone did not prevaile as if you would imply that the light of grace alone doth prevaile which I presume you will confesse is notoriously untrue and that not onely illumination of the mind but the affection of the heart by the finger of God is necessarily required to bring men unto repentance As for that which followeth therein I doe most willingly and freely concurre with you acknowledging that God condemnes none for not beleeving in Christ of whom they had not heard nor for transgressing the Law of Moses which they had not received but onely for sinning against the Law of nature which was written in their hearts For I verily beleeve that where there is no Law there is no transgression But I presume you deliver this onely in reference to men of ripe yeares and doe not concurre with Arminians in maintaining that all infants dying in their infancy are saved Thus from Gods providence concerning the Gentiles I come unto his providence concerning the Jewes 2. Of the sufficiency of outward meanes of grace granted unto the Jewes to bring them unto repentance no man makes question yet seeing that among them all were not precious but many were found vile enough and reprobate silver according to that Rom. 9. 6. All are not Israel which are of Israel and that of the Prophet Esay 10. 22. Though the number of the children of Israel were as the sand of the sea yet but a remnant shall be saved and how few were those represented by the basket of good figs Jer. 24. 2. in comparison to those other naughty figs which could not be eaten they were so evill That God did intend the salvation and repentance of those to whom hee never gave repentance and salvation I hold it as impossible for you or any man to prove as to pull God down from the throne of his omnipotency or disrobe him of his immutable perfection For unlesse God continues to intend their repentance and salvation even when they are damned hee must be mutable and if hee did will and desire their salvation the reason why they failed of salvation must needs be because God was not able to procure it I never met yet with any other then vile shifts to avoyd these consequences both in Arminius and others that follow him But consider wee your proofes nay what proofe doe you bring to prove the point you undertake namely that God doth not onely intend their repentance but that in the first place and yet you cannot deny but that this which you say God intends in the first place never comes to passe whereas the other which God intends you confesse though in a latter place doth come to passe But because I think it were absurd to conceive that God intends their repentance whom hee purposeth to harden lest they should
convert and God should heale them therefore I am willing to consider what you bring to the contrary Your first place is out of Deut. 8. 16. Who fed thee in the wildernesse with manna which thy fathers knew not to humble thee and to prove thee and that hee might doe thee good in thy latter end That of humbling thee Junius and Piscator reads thus ut affligeret te belike partly in reference to that which followeth and to prove thee for as much as temporall humiltation hath more congruity to the proving of them than spirituall as whereby they humble themselves and which followeth the proving of them rather than goeth before it partly in reference to the third Verse going before where it is said more at full Therefore hee humbled thee and made thee hungry and fed thee with manna which thou knewest not neither did thy fathers know it that he might teach thee that man liveth not by bread onely By which words wee may gather a faire interpretation of that you alledge If it be spoken of humiliation spirituall thus Hee fed thee with manna to humble thee that is to teach thee to humble thy selfe and so indeed his providence providing alike to them all did equally teach them all to humble themselves But did God intend that every one should de facto humble himselfe why then did hee not give them eyes to see and eares to heare and an heart to perceive as Deut. 29. 4. Moses tells them plainly saying Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive and eyes to see and eares to heare unto this day I deny not but God did manifest by the course of his providence towards them what hee did require and deserve at their hands namely that they should humble themselves to walke with the Lord their God and the phrase to humble thee applyed even to the most carnall may have a faire construction that thou shouldst be humbled or humble thy selfe understanding it ex officio for hereby hee did manifest that this was their duty answerable to Gods proceedings with them and yet futher considering that hee representeth his owne gracious proceedings with them by the proceedings of an earthly father with his children Verse 5. Know therefore in thine heart that as a man nurtureth his sonne so the Lord thy God nurtureth thee no marvell if he expresseth his affections and desires towards them suteable to the desires and affections of an earthly father who being not able effectually to procure their amendment yet desires it And this is Gods usuall course to expresse himselfe in such language per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But shall wee hereupon take liberty to build doctrines as touching the nature of God as if that which is figuratively uttered were properly delivered Hee proved them all I confesse and upon the probation some proved good silver and others no better than drosse and thereupon hee did good to the one in their latter end and not unto the other Neither did hee ever purpose that good in their latter end should redound unto any but as they should be humbled wherein humiliation is made the condition of doing them good not of Gods purpose or intention And withall God gave unto those that were truly mortified that is truly humbled hearts to perceive eyes to see and eares to heare but hee gave not the like grace unto all And looke what is said of Gods intention to humble them the same may be said of Gods intention to purge them according to that Ezek. 24. 13. Because I would have purged thee and thou wast not purged thou shalt not bee purged from thy filthinesse till I have caused my wrath to light upon thee I would have purged thee voluntate praecepti represented by the meanes used in his word which failing hee resolveth to take another course even by judgements in his works meaning to goe on in avenging the quarrell of his Covenant Levit. 26. 25. untill their uncircumcised hearts were humbled Levit. 26. 41. purposing so at length to effect it as hee professeth Ezek. 22. 15. saying I will scatter thee among the heathen and disperse thee in the countries and will cause thy filthinesse to cease from thee Yet this is not so much by the power of afflictions as by the power of his Spirit Esay 57. 17. For his wicked covetousnesse I was angry with him and have smitten him I hid me and was angry yet hee went away and turned after the way of his heart I have seen his wayes and I will heal them But when these ends are not attained God complaines you say He had used these meanes in vaine Indeed Jer. 2. 20. hee saith Of old have I broken thy yoke and burst thy bonds and thou saidst I will no more transgresse but like an harlot thou runnest on all high hills and under every green tree But this is rather a conviction of their unfaithfulnesse in not keeping Covenant with him than a complaint But be it a complaint as such complaints are attributed unto God like as men complaine when they cannot help but take heed wee doe not here-hence inferre that God is like man not able to prevent crosse events contrary to his expectation Neither doth hee there say Hee had used these meanes in vaine for before hee used them he knew at least you will not deny it what would be the issue and no wise man I think will set himselfe to doe that which hee knowes will prove vaine in respect of the end intended by him But Jer. 10. 30. the Lord saith thus I have smitten your children in vaine they have received no correction and this plainly argueth as you say his first and chiefest intent was to heale and not to harden It is true upon a superficiall scanning of the place it seemeth that God intended to heale them but of any comparison made between two ends intended the one chiefly the other secondarily not the least glympse of evidence But I deny that hee intended healing at all in this case for if hee did that being his owne worke why did hee not heale them Will you say Because they would not receive instruction but went after the way of their own hearts still This is a vaine answer for this is no impediment unto God as I prove first by cleare evidence of Scripture Esay 57. 17. I have smitten him and yet hee went after the way of his heart neverthelesse mark what followes I have seen his wayes and I will heal them Secondly by cleare demonstration of reason to heale them is to bring them to repentance Now will you say that God is ready to performe this provided that they doe repent If they repent already what need is there of Gods grace to bring them to repentance and what is it to prerequire repentance on mans part to this end that God may give them repentance as if man must first repent and then God will give him repentance But some will say What
this people an heart to feare mee and to keep my commandements alwayes that it may goe well with them and with their children for ever Oh that they were wise that they understood this that they would consider their latter end Oh that my people had hearkened unto mee and that Israel had walked in my wayes I should soon have subdued their enemies and turned my hand against their adversaries Do not all these speeches expresse an earnest and serious affection in God as concerning the conversion and salvation of this people whereof sundry died in their sinnes It is true God might have given them such hearts as to have feared and obeyed him which though hee did not yet his will that they had such hearts was serious still To cleare it by a comparison The father of the family hath both his son and servant dangerously sick of the stone to heale them both the father useth sundry medicines even all that art prescribeth except cutting when hee seeth no other remedy he perswades them both to suffer cutting to save their lives they both refuse it yet his sonne hee taketh and bindeth him hand and foot and causeth him to endure it and so saveth his life His servant also hee urgeth with many vehement inducements to submit himselfe to the same remedy but if a servant obstinately refuse hee will not alwayes strive with him nor enforce him to such breaking and renting of his body But yet did not his Master seriously desire his healing and life though hee did not proceed to the cutting asunder of his flesh which hee saw his servant would not abide to heare of So in this case both the elect and men of this world are dangerously sicke of a stony heart to heale both sorts the Lord useth sundry meanes promises judgements threatnings and mercies when all faile hee perswades them to breake their hearts and the stone thereof with cutting and wounding of their consciences when they refuse hee draweth them both the one with his almighty power the other with the cords of man viz. such as are resistible to this cutting and wounding that their soules might live and the elect are brought to yeeld and the men of this world break all cords asunder and cast away such bonds from them Shall we now say God did not seriously desire the healing of such mens hearts because hee procured not to bind them with strong cords to breake them with such woundings as they will not abide to heare of Thus having laid downe the grounds of my judgement touching the first Point That there is a will and purpose in God for to reward the world as well with life upon condition of obedience as with death upon condition of disobedience I come now to the grounds of the second Point You proceed in clearing a difficulty devised and shaped without all ground as if any sober man would find it strange that a conditionate will of God should not be accomplished as often as the condition failes And to this purpose you make use of the nature of a disjunct axiome All-along I savour others that have grased here yet have not rested themselves contented with this but proceeded further to more erroneous opinions A second objection you propose in the second place the solution whereof you seeme to travell with much more than of the former and yet the objection is altogether as causelesse and without all just ground as the former I have now been something more than ordinarily conversant in these Controversies for the space of seventeen yeares I never yet met with any of our Divines or any other that made any question whether Gods will being granted to passe on any object were serious yea or no I should thinke there is no intelligent man living that makes any doubt of this but puts it rather out of all question that whatsoever God wills hee wills it seriously I confesse the Arminians doe usually obtrude some such things on our Divines yet not altogether such for they doe not obtrude upon us as if wee said God doth not will seriously that which hee willeth but rather that hee doth not seriously exhort and admonish all those whom hee doth admonish to beleeve and repent as if hee made shew onely of desiring their obedience and salvation when indeed hee doth not Yet you seeme to sweat not a little in debellating this man of straw Upon these termes I might easily dispatch my selfe of all further trouble in examining your elaborate Answer to so causelesse an Objection but I will not for it may be you insperse something by the way of opposition to that which you doe professe which is this That God doth not at all will the obedience and repentance of any but those who are his Elect. And I would not pretermit any evidence you bring to countenance your cause in opposition to our Tenent unanswered That Gods Oath or Covenant or the workes of any Person in the Trinity tends to the end by you mentioned namely to give life to the world is utterly untrue Likewise it is utterly untrue that you have hitherunto proved any such thing For that which you here deliver as Gods end in giving life is proposed simply and absolutely but that which hitherunto you have endeavoured to prove is onely this that Gods will was to give the world life conditionally to wit upon their obedience and repentance and that as in the last place coming to the point you have expressed it in a disjunct axiome thus To give life to the creature upon his obedieace or to inflict death upon his disobedience Now let any sober man judge whether in this case the will of God be more to give life than to inflict death more passing upon the salvation of the creature than upon his eternall condemnation Could you prove that God doth will at all the salvation of any other save his Elect I would forthwith grant hee wills it seriously I should thinke it no lesse than blasphemy to thinke that God doth either will or sweare or covenant or doe that which hee doth not seriously as blasphemy consists in attributing that to God which doth not become him I nothing doubt but that if all and every one should beleeve and repent all and every one should be saved and none other thing hitherto have you so much as adventured to prove in this particular whereupon now we are But then it behoves you to look unto it on the other side how you cleare your selfe from blasphemy in the same kind while you maintain that God doth will the salvation of those which shall never be saved which not in my judgement only but in the judgement of Austin of old doth mainly trench upon Gods omnipotency for if hee would save them but doth not hee is hindered and resisted by somewhat and consequently his will is not omnipotent nor irresistible And more than this here-hence it will follow that either God continues still to will their
heart out of their bowels and give them an heart of flesh when he resolves to afford this grace unto some but not unto others let every one judge hereby whether God can be said earnestly to desire the changing of their hearts when hee resolves to forbeare that course which alone can change them No no this discourse favoureth strongly of a conceit that it is in the power of an unregenerate man to change his owne heart and of an heart of stone to change it into an heart of flesh And in this case I confesse it were very probable that God should earnestly desire it provided that any ineffectuall and changeable desires were incident unto God That when God putteth forth the second act of positive retribution viz. the rejection of the world or decree of their condemnation God doth behold and consider the world especially men of riper yeares not in massa primitus corrupta nor as newly fallen in Adam but as voluntarily falling off by some act of carelesse and wilfull disobedience To prove this I need not produce other reasons then what I have formerly alledged in the fone-going Point for when God did expresse by his oath his will and good pleasure to be not for the death but life and conversion of sinners was it not after the fall of Adam and all his posterity in him then notwithstanding the presupposall of the fall God had not yet rejected the creature but as hee there declareth himselfe still retaineth and reserveth thoughts of peace towards them even a desire of their conversion unto life Againe with whom did the Lord enter into a Covenant of life and death upon condition of obedience and disobedience was it not with Adam onely and his posterity in his loynes in the state of innocency by the law written in their heart Was it not also after Adams fall renewed to all his posterity both Jewes and Gentiles Then yet God had not cast them away in the fall though the fall had justly deserved it but expecteth yet further to see how they will yet keep this renewed Covenant with him before hee cast them off as Reprobates Even Cain himselfe the eldest sonne of Reprobation is after the fall offered acceptance of Gods hand if hee doe well Moreover is it not after the fall that the Father by his workes of creation and providence judgements and mercies c. the Sonne by his enlightening the world by his death and ministery of his servants and the Holy Ghost by his calling and knocking at the hearts of the wicked doe all strive with men even to this very end to turne them to the Lord that iniquity may not be their destruction If therefore all the Persons in the Trinity doe provide severall helpfull meanes for the conversion and salvation of the world of the world I say now after the fall lying in wickednesse surely God did not then upon the fall reprobate the world unto eternall condemnation and perdition If you say God might well reprobate the world unto condemnation upon the fall and yet still after the fall usâ— meanes for their conversion and salvation because those meanes doe but further aggravate their condemnation I answer these doe indeed further aggravate their condemnation but it is but by accident onely by their neglect and abuse of them but the proper end which God himselfe of himselfe aimes at in the use of these meanes himselfe plainly expresseth it to be not the aggravation or procurement of their condemnation but the restoring of them to salvation and life as hath been before declared So then to draw all to an head the summe of this first reason is If God after the fall doe retaine a will and purpose to restore life to the world upon an equall condition then hee did not upon the fall or upon the onely consideration of the fall reject the world of the ungodly unto their utter perdition But you see God retaineth after the fall an holy will and purpose of restoring life unto the world upon an equall condition as appeareth by his Oath by his Covenant and by his Workes therefore the conclusion which is the point in hand is evident I marvell what you meane to call Gods decree of condemnation his act of retribution retribution being an act temporall and transient the decree of God is an act immanent and eternall And therefore it is not so handsomely said to be the putting forth of an act for so much as it is immanent and not transient 'T is manifest I confesse that sin is alwayes precedent to the retribution of punishment as it is without controversie that sinne neither is nor can be antecedent to Gods decree sinne being temporall but all Gods decrees eternall And I have found it by experience to be an usuall course with our Adversaries to confound condemnation with the decree of condemnation And Junius himselfe very incongruously in my judgement calls this decree Praedamnatio to make the fairer place as I guesse for sins praecedencie thereunto at least in consideration But no necessity urgeth us to any such course and wee may well maintaine that God in this decree of condemnation hath alwayes the consideration of that sinne for which hee purposeth to damne them for undoubtedly hee decrees to condemne no man but for sinne It is impossible it should be otherwise condemnation in the notion thereof formally including sinne But I like not your expressions in the distinction you make saying God considers men in this sinne not as newly fallen in Adam but as voluntarily falling off you mean long after by some act of carelesse and wilfull disobedience When God made this decree they were not newly that is a little before fallen in Adam for that fall in Adam was temporall but the decrees of God are eternall And to consider as newly fallen when as yet they were not much lesse were they fallen is not so much to consider as to erre or feigne But like as God decreed to suffer all to fall in Adam and many also to continue both therein and in bringing forth the bitter fruits thereof even untill death so he purposed to condemne them for those sinnes but take heed you doe not make an order of prius and posterius between these decrees lest either you make the decree of condemnation precedent to the decree of permission of those sinnes for which they shall be condemned which will be directly contradictory to your Tenet here or making Gods decree of permitting such sinnes for which they shall be condemned precedent to his decree of condemnation whereunto you doe encline unawares which will cast you upon miserable inconveniences and that by your owne rule already delivered for if the decree of permitting sinne be first in intention then by the rules received by you it should be last in execution that is men should be condemned for sinne before they be permitted to sinne But the conjunction of these decrees into one as in the same
the younger to the participation of his free love and to soveraignty over his Brother and depressed the elder to the condition of a servant and as a servant reserved for him just dealing but not fatherly love might not this seeme an unequall partiality with God to deale so unequally with persons equall To resolve this doubt the Apostle could not have cleered God from unrighteousnesse by pleading the sin of Esau which deserved that hee should bee so dealt withall for neither did Jacobs sin deserve better and besides the Apostle had said before God gave out these Oracles which pronounced his different respect of them without all consideration of good or evill in either of them viz. before they had done either good or evill Therefore to satisfie the objection and cleare Gods righteousnesse the Apostle wisely alledgeth testimonie of Scripture to prove Gods absolute power and ability to shew mercy on whom hee will and whom hee will to harden When you say this hardning of Pharaoh though an effect of Gods hatred of Pharaoh yet was not an immediate effect of the like hatred which hee bare to Esau before hee had done good or evill but presupposeth the sin of Pharaoh your meaning seems to bee this that it is not at all an effect of the like hatred which hee bare to Esau before hee had done good or evill yet it is no lesse then the not writing of his name in the book of life as touching the communicating of saving grace and glory neither do wee acknowledge it to bee any more like as Aquinas doth not now the consequent of this kinde or measure of hatred in holy Scripture is no lesse then the worshipping of the beast Rev. 13. 8. nothing lesse then the obduration of Pharaoh The obduration of the children of Israel was no greater then such as was consequent unto this that God did not give them an heart to perceive and eies to see and ears to heare Deut. 29. 4. And this of not giving hearts to perceive c. undoubtedly is a consequent even to that hatred which you are content to attribute unto God concerning Esau But you helpe your self with a complicate proposition and flie to an immediate effect which alone you deny in this case for as much as the hardning of Pharaoh as you say presupposed sin committed by him but very improvidently For if it bee not an immediate effect of the like hatred that God bare unto Esau then in accurate consideration it is to bee acknowledged an effect thereof Only there is some effect thereof more immediate then this and what I pray was that was it Pharaohs sin for of no other doe you make the least intimation the more improvident is your expression intimating thereby that Pharaohs sin was a more immediate effect in Pharaoh of the like hatred God bare to Esau then this obduration But how doe you prove that Pharaohs hardening was not an immediate effect of the like hatred which God bare to Esau to wit because it presupposed sin But I deny this Argument neither doe you discoursing at large give your selfe to the proving of it but onely suppose it By the same reason you might say that salvation is not the immediate effect of election unto salvation because salvation in men of ripe years presupposeth faith repentance and good workes Nay you may as well say that Gods giving of grace is not an immediate effect of Gods love to any man because in most men of ripe years it presupposeth many good works In Saul it presupposed his zeale and his righteousnesse according to the Law which was unblameable If you say that Sauls righteousnesse whatsoever it was before his calling was no fruit of his love I may with more probability affirme that Pharaohs sin which preceded his obduration was no effect of Gods hatred If you say that though such righteousnesse in Saul was no moving cause to God to give him saving grace In like manner I say that no sin in Pharaoh was a moving cause in God to deny him saving grace For if it were then either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God Not by necessity of nature for undoubtedly God could have pardoned this sin of his and changed his heart as well as he pardoned the sins of Manasses the sins of the Jews in crucifying the son of God Act. 2. the sins of Saul in persecuting Gods Saints and changed all their hearts Nor by any constitution of God for shew mee if you can any such constitution of God And if you would but explicate wherein the hardening of Pharaoh did consist I presume it would clearely appeare that the meere pleasure of Gods will is the cause of it like as it is the meere pleasure of God that he doth not harden others in like manner But when we carry our selves in the clouds of generallties we are very apt to deceive not others onely if they will be deceived but our selves also Againe you seem to speake of Pharaohs hardening mentioned Exod. 9. 16. And indeed for this cause have I appointed thee to shew my power in thee c. Whereas from the first time that Moses was sent unto him hee was hardened and that by God according as God had told Moses before-hand that hee would harden him As for his sin before ever Moses was sent unto him you doe not take any speciall notice thereof at all but whatsoever it were as suppose the cruell edict of his in commanding the male children of the Hebrews to be cast into the River like as God answered him most congruously in his works first causing the waters of Aegypt to bee turned into blood and in the last place making the waters of the red Sea the grave of Pharaoh and of his Host was this horrible sin any lesse then a consequent to more then ordinary obdurationâ— for even heathen men are seldom exposed to such unnatural courses So that if this obduration were an effect of Gods hatred but not immediate supposing sin according to the manner of your Discourse then you must be put to devise some other sin as precedent to this obduration And whereas that sin also cannot be denyed to be a consequent to Gods denyall of effectuall grace to abstaine from sin we shall never come to an end till the cause of all these obdurations be at length resolved into originall sin And what share I pray you hath the world of mankind therein which Gods elect have not When you tel us the hardening is a punishment of sin it were very fit you should deal plainly tel us in what operation of God this work of hardening doth consist which I make no doubt would cleare all All confesse that God is not the cause of hardnesse of heart in any man but man being borne in hardnesse of heart Ezek. 36. 3. 1. God is said to harden not infundendo malitiam sed non infundendo gratiam By leaving him thereunto whereby it comes
Esau as if it consisted onely in making Esau Jacobs servant and Jacob Esaus Lord according to your opinion it extends further then this even to the granting of such grace to Jacob as should bee accompanied with salvation and denying of the same to Esau whereupon infallibly followed condemnation It is true God is just in dealing with Esau and God is as just every whit in dealing with Jacob for hee deales with each according to the Law himself made But God shewed mercy also unto Jacob in providing a Saviour to die for him and in circumcising his heart and making him to perform the condition of life hee shewed no such mercy unto Esau You see well how incongruous it were to plead the sin of Esau why hee should bee so dealt withall seeing Jacob at that time deserved no better But why doe you not observe that this Discourse of the Apostle hath every way as pregnant a reference to the obduration of Pharaoh or of any one that is hardned as to Gods dealing with Esau Again suppose some are not so bad as Pharaoh was when God hardens Pharaoh and doth not harden others but rather shews them mercy will you say the reason hereof is because these deserved better at the hands of God then Pharaoh Doe you not perceive how this Doctrine carryeth you ere you are aware to trench upon the freenesse of Gods grace in mans effectuall vocation Suppose Nicodemus who sought to our Saviour by night were converted and Saul had not been at all converted but still hardned would you have said that Paul was hardned because of his sin in persecuting the Church of God but Nicodemus deserved better at the hands of God then Saul Yet wee are sure that Saul in spight of all his persecution was converted when in all probability many a morall Jew and nothing factious in opposing the Gospel of Christ yea and many a Gentile too were not converted but perished in their sins and in the blindnesse of their minde If it bee urged thereupon that God doth harden the creature and also hateth him with a positive hatred without all respect of sin in the creature out of his absolute will I answer in these deep counsels and unsearchable wayes of God it is safe for us to wade no farther then wee may see the light of the Scriptures clearing our paths and the grounds thereof paving our wayes and as it were chalking it out before us The Scripture telleth us That God hardens whom hee will And again sin is the cause in which and for which God doth harden any both which will stand together That as God sheweth mercy on whom hee pleaseth so hee hardneth whom hee pleaseth out of his absolute will Yet hardneth none but with respect of sin going before For First when wee speak of the reprobate with comparison of the elect they are both alike sinners And therefore if the question bee why God hardneth the reprobate and doth not harden but shew mercy on the Elect Here no cause can bee rendred of this different dealing but onely the will and good pleasure of God sin is alike common to both and cannot bee alledged as the cause of this diversity Idem qua idem semper facit idem But when wee speak of the Reprobates alone considered in themselves If the question bee why God is pleased to harden them The answer is alway truely and safely given It pleased God to harden them for their sins And which is yet more when God is said to harden a wicked man for his sin it is not sin that moved God primarily to harden him but his absolute will it was to harden him for his sin for what sin could God see in the creature to provoke him to harden it but what hee might have prevented by his providence or healed by the blood of Christ if it had so seemed good to his good pleasure When therefore God doth harden a creature for his sin it is because it is his good pleasure even his absolute will so to harden him To will a thing absolutely and yet to will it on this or that condition may well stand together in many a voluntary agent when the condition is such as that the will might easily help if it so pleased As if a man should cast off a servant for some disease hee hath which hee might easily heale if it pleased him or break his vessell for some such uncleannesse which hee could easily rinse out Both these may well bee said of him at once that hee cast off his servant for his disease and brake his vessell for its uncleanenesse and yet might hee cast out his servant and break his vessell and both out of his good pleasure and out of his absolute and his free will It is true the Word of God is a Lantborn unto our feete and a Light to our paths and it is fit wee should rest contented herewith for discovering unto us the whole counsell of God Now this Word of God plainly teacheth us that God bardneth whom hee will Now I presume you doe not doubt but that God out of his absolute will shews mercy on whom hee will Nay I can hardly beleeve but that your opinion is that like as God out of his absolute will granted saving grace to Jacob so out of his absolute will he denyed saving grace to Esau And still doth to those whom you account the world of mankinde And I have already shewed that the deniall of this grace can bee no punishment For as much as punishment consisteth either in inflicting evill or in denying some good which formerly was granted them But in denying saving grace to the world of mankinde hee doth not deny them any thing which they formerly injoyed I have already shewed what that hardning is which is for sin and wherein it doth consist not in denying saving grace which they never injoyed but in denying that naturall restraint from some foule sin which formerly they injoyed as I exemplifyed it in that Rom. 1. 27. That in Rom. 11. 7 8 9 10 11. is nothing for you where there is no mention of sin as the cause of their obduration As for that in Psalm 69. 21. Their blinding is referred to their giving unto Christ Gall in his meate and in his thirst vinegar to drink I pray consider Were they not even then blinded when they persecuted Christ unto death And yet notwithstanding some of these were converted Act. 2. But upon this their opposition unto Christ God did proceed to blinde them more and more but how Not by denying saving illumination for this they never injoyed it was denyed them from the first to the last But by withdrawing from them the meanes of illumination more and more as namely the preaching of Gospel and the working of miracles and the giving them over unto the power of Satan This also is to give them over to their own hearts lust Psal 81. 11 12. by ceasing to
him will you say that every naturall man hath power to discern the nature of God in such sort as to preserve himself from blasphemy every way The third place is out of Rom. 2. 4 5. Despisest thou the riches of his bountifulnesse and patience and long sufferance not knowing that the bountifulnesse of God leadeth thee to repentance 5. But thou after thine hardnesse and heart that cannot repent heapest up unto thy self as a treasure wrath against the day of wrath Now if this doth imply any ability in man of seeking the Lord and finding mercy from him it must needs bee in the way of repentance And this I confesse is a cleare way both of seeking the Lord and of finding mercy from him But dare you say that a naturall man hath power to repent I presume you will not unlesse you frame repentance after such a notion as will bee found to bee neither seeking of the Lord nor finding mercy from him And you your self here professe that God deprives them of those drawing and effectuall means without which none can come to repentance And in the very place alledged it is expressely said of them whom God is said to lead to repentance that the hardnesse of their heart is such that they cannot repent The fourth is taken out of Rom. 2. 14 15. When the Gentiles which have not the Law doe by nature the things contained in the Law they having not the Law are a law unto themselves which shew the effect of the Law written in their heart their conscience also bearing witnesse and their thoughts accusing one another or excusing I wish things were carryed with lesse ostentation and with more judgement then to alledge Scriptures and put the Reader upon making Arguments for them thence For my part I see no colour in all this to justifie any power and sufficiency in a Reprobate to seek the Lord and to finde mercy from him though I make no question but they have power to abstain from many things prohibited in the Law of God and to doe things commanded as touching the substance of the duty commanded or the action forbidden though they are farre enough off from doing it for Gods sake and out of the love of God with all their heart and with all their soule as whom they knew not even the very best of them 1 Cor. 1. 21. 1 Thess 4. 5. The fifth is drawn out of Luk. 16. 11 12. If yee have not been faithfull in the wicked riches who will trust you in the true treasures And if you have not been faithfull in another mans goods who shall give you that which is your own Hence you seem to infer that carnall men naturall men have power and ability to perform faithfulnesse in the administration of temporall riches and you might proceed further to inferre that by performing such fidelity which is in their power to perform they should have true riches and such as should never bee taken from them And what is to maintain that God doth dispence grace according to works if this bee not And yet this latter is with more probability inferred then the former For certainly God doth reward faithfulnesse in little with the bestowing of greater gifts as Matth. 25. 21. 23. But albeit they that are unfaithfull in little are unworthy to have greater gifts bestowed upon them yet herehence it doth not follow that meer naturall men have so much power of goodnesse in them as to bee faithfull unto God in the use of those naturall gifts which God hath bestowed upon them yet in spight of this unworthinesse which God findes in his Elect before their calling hee doth neverthelesse trust them with true riches And if they were faithfull therein they would bee found faithfull also in greater things For ver 10. our Saviour professeth That hee who is faithfull in the least is also faithfull in much The sixth place is Act. 7. 51 52. Yee stiffe-necked and of uncircumcised hearts and eares yee have alwayes resisted the Holy Ghost 52. Which of the Prophets have not your Fathers persecuted That which you stick upon I doubt not is this that they are said alway to have resisted the Holy Ghost both they and their Fathers Wee deny it not but will you herehence infer that they had power and ability to yeeld to the Holy Ghost If this inference like you then you may bee bold to inferre in like manner That because many resist the Holy Ghost moving them to faith and repentance therefore they have power and ability to yeeld to the Holy Ghost in this also that is to beleeve and repent Yet your self professe in this very Section that God deprives them of those drawing and effectuall means without which none can come to wit to the Lord and finde mercy from him which yet undoubtedly they should do did they beleeve and repent Yet I deny not but they might have abstained from persecuting the Prophets but I deny that it was in the power of any of them being but naturall men to abstaine from it in a gratious manner and acceptable in the sight of God And so long as they did not abstain so is it fit to call it a seeking after the Lord or finding of mercy from him I presume you will not deny but that many a Jew in the Apostles daies were free from faction contenting himself to enjoy his own course quietly and peaceably was yet further off from grace then Paul that persecuted the Church God calling him in the midst of his furious pursuite and not calling others though farre more peaceably disposed toward the Church of God then Saul The seventh place alledged is Act. 13. 46. Then Paul and Barnabas spake boldly and said It was necessary that the Word should first have been spoken unto you but seeing you put it from you and judge your selves unworthy of everlasting life wee turn unto the Gentiles Hence you inferre that these Jewes were inabled to doe more then they did in seeking the Lord and finding mercy from him But I would gladly know wherein that seeking of the Lord consists Had they not railed against Paul as I confesse they had power to spare that had they not contraryed him nor spoken against those things which were spoken by him as I confesse they might have held their tongue had this been to seek the Lord more then they did or in better manner then they did I think not for they might have contained themselves from all this nay they might have pretended some propensions to imbrace the Gospel which yet had it been performed in hypocrisie it had nothing commended them in the sight of God As Diasius when hee could not prevaile with his brother to draw him back to Popery pretended some propension in himself to hearken unto him but wee know what the issue was even to slit his head as the issue of Judas his following Christ was to betray him I think they that deale so and through zeale
a new heart Austin was wont to say and advise rather in this manner In praecepto cognosce quid debe as habere in correptione cognosce tuo te vitio non habere in oratione cognosce unde possis habere In Gods precept know what you ought to have in his rebuke take notice that through your fault you have it not in prayer know whence you may have it The twelfth is out of 2 Chron. 36. 15 16. And the Lord God of their fathers sent unto them by his Messengers rising early and sending for hee had compassion on his people and on his habitation 16. But they mocked the messengers of God and despised his words and misused his Prophets untill the wrath of God rose against his people and till there was no remedy I doe not deny but that it was in their power not to misuse the Prophets not to mock his Messengers but doe you not think that amongst these naughty figges some were nothing so bad and yet did not the wrath of God come upon them as well as upon others Again consider what of all this yet if they had repented had not their foulest sins hereupon been done away so that for want of repentance the wrath of God brake forth against them Now why doe you not as well infer herehence that they had power to repent and so to seek after the Lord and find mercy from him Thirdly was it not enough to bring the wrath of God upon them to bee found guilty of despising his words and hath any naturall man power to keep himself from this sin Is there any greater despising of them then to esteem so basely of them as to account them no better then foolishnesse Now is any naturall man free from this Doth not the Holy Ghost tell us 1 Cor. 2. 14. The naturall man perceives not the things of God for they are foolishnesse unto him But by the way I observe wee little agree in the notion of free will which if I bee not deceived was never accounted by the Learned to consist in ought other then in election of means As for the end according to the habituall disposition of the heart and will a man is necessarily carryed to the affection of an agreeable end agreeable I say to his own disposition Whence it followeth that albeit it bee in the power of grace alone to change the heart and renew the will yet whatsoever the unregenerate either doe or refuse to doe they carry themselves herein freely in as much as they proceed herein with choyce in respect of their own ends I come to the thirteenth out of Hos 11. 4. I led them with cords of a man and with bands of love and I was to them as hee that taketh away the yoke from their jawes and I laid their meate unto them Was not such like the Lords dealing with the children of Israel when hee took them by the hand to bring them out of the Land of Egypt Did hee not leade them with the cords of Love did hee not take off the yoke from their jaws did hee not lay Manna before them yet of them doth Moses professe that notwithstanding all this God gave them not an heart to perceive nor eyes to see nor eares to beare unto that day And in this Text alledged what colour is there to justify this your distinction namely that albeit God deprives Reprobates of those drawing and effectuall means without which none can come to faith and repentance yet they are inabled by him to doe much more then they doe in seeking after the Lord and finding mercy from him The fourteenth is out of Esa 5. 3 4 5. Judge I pray you between mee and my vineyard 4. What could I have done more to my Vineyard that I have not done unto it why have I looked that it should bring forth grapes and it brought forth wilde grapes 5. And now I will tell you what I will doe to my vineyard I conceive herein you may devise a treble ground to build upon I could wish your self had dealt plainely and argued herehence the justification of your premised distinction It might have saved your Reader a great deale of paines whereas now by the manner of your Discourse hee is driven as well to argue for you as to answer for himself that hee may keep himself from being overtaken with errour upon a generall consideration ere hee is aware The first ground may bee that God seems to professe that hee had done what hee could doe now undoubtedly hee could give them power to doe more good then they did in the way of seeking the Lord which is the thing that you affirm and therefore hee did give this power but say I God could give means also to draw effectually unto repentance and consequently hee did draw them hereunto which is the thing that your self deny and the Text it self also for instead of sweet grapes they brought forth wilde grapes Secondly you may ground upon this that God expected they should bring forth sweet grapes and upon such grounds you usually make Collections and herehence you may infer that therefore they had power to bring forth sweet grapes But this consequent is untrue by your opinion for sweet grapes must needs bee gratefull unto God and no lesse then Faith and Repentance But you confesse that God deprives them of such drawing and effectuall means without which none can come and with which none ever failed to come to faith and repentance The third ground may bee Gods resolution to lay his vineyard waste And thence you may infer that they had power to avoid such sins as were the causes thereof But consider I pray you is it not just with God to damne the world for infidelity and impenitency and will you herehence infer that it was in their power to beleeve and repent I presume you will not The fifteenth is Job 33. 14. to the 18. there wee read that God speaketh once and twice and one seeth it not even in dreams and visions of the night 15. When this will not serve the turn hee opens the eares of man even by the corrections which hee hath sealed ver 16. and that which God aimes at in this is That hee might cause man to turn away from his enterprise and that hee might hide the pride of man ver 17. and keepe back his soule from the pit and that his life should not passe by the Sword ver 18. All this represents the power of Gods grace in overcomming the hardnesse of mans heart together with the wisdome of God proceeding various wayes to the same end an instance whereof wee have in Manasses But as for any power in man to doe any more good then hee doth in seeking after the Lord here is not the least indication much lesse to justifie the distinction here devised by you I come to the last taken out of Joh. 16. 8 9. And when hee is come hee will reprove the world
resistance unto Gods intention Directly contrary to the Discourse of Austin Enchir. cap. 96. whose words are these Deo proculdubio quam facile est quod vult facere tam facile est quod non vult esse non sinere Hoc nisi credamus periclitatur ipsum nostrae fidei consessionis initium qua nos in Deum Patrem omnipocentem credere confitemur Neque enim ob aliud veraciter vocatur omnipotens nisi quia quicquid vult potest nec voluntate cujusquam creaturae voluntatis omnipotentis impeditur effectus And if it bee so as you professe That no man can come to Christ except the Father draw him by the same Almighty authority and power whereby hee sent Christ into the world and withall if you adde thereunto as else-where you doe that this power I leave out authority as of an alien signification is shewed onely in drawing his Elect what need all these paines that you have taken since it is cleare that so long as you hold to this you shall never satisfie any Pelagian or Arminian and all the absurdities they charge our Doctrine with are directed against this But well you may puzzle the wits and trouble the minde of many an Orthodox and well-affected Christian with so intricate a discourse labouring to devise a new way to justifie our Doctrine of Election by so tempering the Doctrine of reprobation as utterly to overthrow your own Orthodox opinion in the very point of election as I have already shewed as occasion hath been given Object How then will you say can these two stand together there is a sufficiency and power in the meanes to lead the men of this world to the knowledge of God and to grace in Christ and yet there is an impotency yea an impossibility in the men of the world to come to Christ without greater and stronger means then these bee Answ For answer whereto I will not content my self to say that these means are sufficient because they suffice to leave men without excuse onely in the second place and by accident after when men have neglected to make so good use of them as they might have done but you see that God aimes at other ends in the first and principall place viz. to lead them to repentance to save their soules from the pit as the places alledged give evident witnesse and for these ends it is that these means must bee acknowledged and conceived as sufficient For else the Word of God argued an imperfection or insufficiency of such meanes to their proper ends I think it safe to say these means are sufficient ex parte Dei on Gods behalf to manifest the will of God rather to desire repentance and life then the hardning and destruction of the Creature And ex parte hominum in regard of men sufficient to inable them to the performance of such duties in which their naturall consciences would excuse them and in which way they might the sooner finde mercy mercy vouchsafing more powerfull and more effectuall helps whilest they walk according to the knowledge and helps which they have received and sin not against conscience but only out of ignorance in the state of unbeleef It is Arminius his superficiary conceit that Hortatio non facta sed sprâ—ta makes a man inexcusable not considering that admonition and instruction it self takes away excuse although none have need of excuse but they that doe evill For the excuse is this si scissem fecissem or si audivissem credidissem now this excuse is manifestly removed by the preaching of the Gospel And the word inexcusable though it formally signifie without excuse yet withall it con-notates a condition delinquent and such as had need of excuse though bereaved thereof and such a condition ariseth from the contempt of the means of grace Neither is this condition by accident like as the neglecting to make good use of them is not by accident For God intending to deprive them of those drawing and effectuall helpes without which none can make good use of them did never intend they should make good use of them but rather the contrary in asmuch as hee purposed not to shew that mercy towards them which hee shews towards his Elect but rather to harden them As the Lord tells Ezek. Chap. 2. 4. They are impudent children and stiffe-hearted I doe send thee unto them and thou shalt say unto them Thus saith the Lord God But surely they will not heare neither indeed will they cease for they are a rebellious house yet shall they know that there hath been a Prophet among them So that albeit the Lord knew full well what sorry entertainment his Prophets should finde yet would hee not give way to any such excuse as this If the Lord had sent his Prophet to admonish us of our wandrings from him wee would soon have turned unto the good way of the Lord. No they shall know there hath been a Prophet among them And as for the ground of this his fore-knowledge Esay manifesteth this to bee Gods purpose to harden them Esa 6. 9. Goe and say unto this people yee shall heare indeed but shall not understand yee shall plainly see and not perceive make the heart of this people fat and make their eares heavy and shut their eyes lest they see with their eyes and heare with their eares and understand with their hearts and convert and I shall heale them What place is here for such conceites of leaving men without excuse in a second place and that by accident Yet if you can prove that God did intend any better thing unto them in a first place wee shall bee willing to confesse that this comes in in a second place You say God leads them to repentance to save them from the pit I answer this leading to repentance Rom. 2. is onely his sparing them in their sins and admonishing them to repent and this wee say is done to the Reprobates not with any purpose to bring them to repentance for if God had any such purpose hee would not deprive them of those helpes without which none can come to repentance as your self professe hee doth and if hee had any such purpose to bring them to repentance and yet doth not it followeth that hee cannot And if hee hath any such purpose either this purpose must continue still in God even after their damnation or otherwise God must bee charged with mutability all which you consider not much lesse accommodate any tolerable answer thereto For the same reason I deny that God hath any intention or purpose to save them how can hee considering that from everlasting hee hath ordained them to condemnation And of this also you take no notice much lesse goe about to shape any convenient answer thereunto carrying the matter all along in such manner as if Gods decree of their condemnation were not conceived untill the means of Grace offered are found to bee finally despised Neither doe the places alledged
by you give any testimony to these your uncouth assertions much lesse evident testimony Indeed I blame you not for desiring your Reader would take them so to save your paines of proving it For you take no pains at all to inforce any place by Logicall argumentation to give evidence to such a sense you put upon them though it stand in manifest opposition to the nature of God even to the bereaving him both of his omnipotency and immutability to make him to contradict himself and strangely to go about to perswade the world that God intends the repentance of those men to whom hee denies those helps without which none can repent as your self also acknowledge So that wee need not to bee put to deny the sufficiency of Gods word to those ends whereunto God hath given it which is to instruct in all points of Faith and duties of life and to admonish us to give obedience unto it and reprove them that doe not and consequently to take away all excuse for want of any of these gratious operations And thus it is sufficient ex parte Dei and ex parte hominum too as for God to admonish thereby and men to bee admonished and instructed But otherwise to require any thing on mans part to adde sufficiency to God is too too absurd For whether man doth yeeld obedience the word is never a whit the more sufficient or whether hee yeelds not obedience the word is never the lesse sufficient As for the desire of the Repentance and life of Reprobates which you attribute unto God you keep your course I consesse in strange expressions manifestly contradictious to the nature of God and to your self Can you perswade your self that ever the world will bee brought about to beleeve or any intelligent or sober man amongst them that God desires the repentance and life of them whom hee hath determined from everlasting to deprive of those helps without which no man can repent and bee saved yet that hee doth deprive them hereof it is your own most expresse profession in the former Section As for hardning them doth hee not harden whom hee will and hath hee not from everlasting ordained all Reprobates unto destruction As for any desire hereof in God I account it a very absurd thing to treat of any will in God under the notion of desire in proper speech Speak wee of the desires of weak men who cannot effect what they will but bee advised to spare to attribute any desires to God in proper speech as you would spare to attribute to him eyes and ears and hands and heart in proper speech and though God bee pleased in condescension to our capacities to take upon him our infirmities let us not recompence his goodnesse so ill as to conceive of his nature as obnoxious to the same imperfections whereto our natures are When you say that the Word inables not onely the Elect but others to perform such duties and having but erst spoken of the duty of repentance and this being delivered in the same breath whereto doth this tend but to work in your Reader an opinion that even Reprobates are inabled by the Word to perform the duty of Repentance which you know full well cannot bee affirmed by you without palpable contradiction to your self as well as to the truth of God and therefore I wonder not a little what you mean to carry your self in this your Discourse in such sort as to draw so neere to such foule assertions Therefore you forbeare to name particularly the duty of Repentance but flee to generalls and say that even Reprobates are inabled by the Word to perform such duties in which their naturall conscience would excuse them And I confesse that as Paul hath taught mee even without the word naturall men are inabled to doe some duties wherein their naturall conscience doth excuse them as namely in doing the things contained in the Law and that by nature mark that well I beseech you that you may see the uncouthnesse of that which follows as when you say And in that way they sooner finde mercy For what is a man by nature able to perform some things whereby hee may the sooner finde mercy Was ever mercy found at the hand of God by performing some duty by power of nature What revelation of God hath taught you this that a work of nature should further us to obtaining the mercy of God I speak of morall works of nature not of naturall such as are to goe to Church and to heare a Sermon to goe and to heare are actions naturall not morall unlesse they bee considered as joyned with affections and intentions morall And to go to Church and heare a Sermon with ill affections and intentions as namely either to mock or to take a nap is a naturall way I confesse whereby a man may and doth finde mercy farre sooner then by keeping at home though never so civilly imployed And therefore Father Latimer reprehending some for comming to Church to take a nap yet saith hee let them come for they may bee taken napping which is as much as to say they may finde mercy at the hands of God whilest they are napping Yet I presume you will not say that so to come to Church is the performing of a duty whereby they may finde mercy sooner In the next place you indirectly imbrace the sower leaven of Arminianisme plainly professing that God doth vouchsafe more powerfull effectuall helps to them that walk according to the knowledge and helps they have received As if that of our Saviour Habenti dabitur to him that hath shall bee given you did interpret especially after the same manner as Arminius doth to wit that if men use their naturals right God will give them means of grace But here is the difference they speak their minds plainely you carry your Discourse so that wee are driven to groape as in the dark after your meaning For you deliver this of Reprobates who doe already injoy the Word the means of grace And therefore the more powerfull helps you speak of are not outward means for that they injoy already but inward grace As if God had ordained that grace should bee given according unto works which is direct Pelagianisme And withall you imply a power in Reprobates to walk according to knowledge and helpes already received to wit under the means of grace And what can this bee lesse then a power to beleeve and repent How many a godly mans heart would bleed to understand so foule assertions to drop from the pen of such a man as your self In fine you adde a new qualification of the way to finde mercy the sooner and that is not to sin against conscience but onely of ignorance and withall by the coherence imply that even reprobates and unregenerate persons have power to keep themselves from sinning against their conscience and so to keep themselves as to sin onely through ignorance Whence it manifestly followeth that in such
wrath with long patience implying both by this and by this wrath that the liberty of the creature in sinning is nothing prejudiced in all this and in the course of his patience way is opened for his complaints and admonitions and that in patheticall manner unto these vessels of wrath to move them to repentance For that God doth complain and expostulate and reprove for these their sinfull courses is most evident And it is no lesse evident that when they goe on in their obstinate courses not profiting by Gods Word and Works unto Repentance the cause is though no culpable cause that God hath not given them a heart to perceive and eyes to see and ears to heare from the first unto the last Deut. 29. 4. That is that both man runneth on wilfully in his sinfull courses and that most culpably and also that without grace it cannot bee otherwise Though the reconciling of both these bee very obscure and difficult as indeed the providence of God especially in evill and generally in working what hee will by the free wills of the creature is of a most mysterious nature This patience of God comprehends not Gods bare suffering the wicked only but his prospering of them also Jer. 12. 1. Why are all they in wealth that rebelliously transgresse 1. As for the first materiall point of the Apostles answer I agree with you in the explication thereof 2. But as concerning the second in my judgment there is nothing sound For first you feign the rigour of that which was objected to consist in a certain manner of Gods hardning to wit by his irresistible will As if the Apostle did give us to understand that there is a double kinde of hardning that is imputed unto God The one by his irresistible will the other is not expressed by you but intimated to consist in hardning by his will resistible whereas no such distinction is either expressed or insinuated by the Apostle neither doe you once goe about to prove it And the distinction it self is very absurd both in bringing in a will of God resistible whereas the Apostle supposeth the will of God in hardning to bee irresistible without all distinction neither doth hee give any the least intimation of a twofold hardning used by God or imputable to him Hee plainly professeth that as God hath mercy on whom hee will so hee hardneth whom hee will without all distinction And you may as well distinguish Gods shewing of mercy as if that were twofold one by his will resistible another by his will irresistible For shewing mercy and hardning are made opposite by the Apostle And it is a well known rule in Schooles that Quot modis dicitur unum oppositorum tot modis dicetur alterum of two opposites look how many wayes the one is taken so many wayes may the other bee taken And upon this Doctrine of the Apostle ariseth the objection to this effect That seeing Gods will is irresistible in hardning a man it seems unreasonable that God should complain of such a mans rebellion and disobedience whom himselfe hath hardned supposing that they cannot obey God who are hardned And throughout this objection also there is no colour of any such distinction as you introduce at pleasure concerning Gods will as either resistible or irresistible and accordingly as concerning the different manner of Gods obduration to wit either by his resistible will or by his irresistible will Secondly you feign at pleasure in like manner a denyall or at least a mitigation of the rigour of St. Pauls former Doctrine whence rose this objection for so I had rather expresse it then as you doe when in very obscure manner you call it the rigour of the word objected And I wonder you would adventure to devise a deniall or any colour of deniall made by the Apostle of that which formerly hee delivered in saying Hee hath mercy on whom hee will and whom hee will hee hardneth when your selfe have not hitherto manifested any minde to deny ought delivered by him as it is not fit you should But it may be the rigour mentioned by you is not conceived to consist in Pauls former Doctrine of Gods hardning whom hee will but rather in complaining of their disobedience whom God himself hath hardned his will being irresistible Now this though amplified as a rigorous thing the Apostle may seem to deny or at least mitigate But first it seems to mee that the objection chargeth God not so much with a rigorous course for who shall hinder God to deal with any as rigorously as pleaseth him there being no injustice in rigour as with an unreasonable course But whether rigorous or unreasonable in shew the Apostle by saying God suffers them with long patience doth neither deny nor any way mitigate the condition of this course of his for complaining of their disobedience whom himself hath hardned For albeit God all the day long yea and all the yeer long yea and many yeers long stretcheth out his hands to a people that walk in a way that is not good even after their own imaginations such being the hardnesse of their hearts as even in despight of Gods sufferance of them and gracious proceedings with them in the ministry of his word and sparing them in his works also yet if God himself continues to harden them his will being irresistible Gods complaining of their rebellion and disobedience seems never a whit the lesse rigorous or unreasonable according to the objection proposed For as Austin saith Contra Julianum Pelag. lib. 5. cap. 4. Quantamlibet praebuerit patientiam nisi Deus dederit quis agat paenitentiam though God afford never so great patience yet unlesse God give grace who shall perform repentance And to say that God doth harden by his long patience is a strange liberty that you take in interpreting Paul If to harden bee to suffer with long patience then to shew mercy being opposite to hardning must bee not to suffer with long patience And if to suffer with long patience bee to harden then as often as hee suffers his own elect with long patience hee hardneth them And when St. Peter saith God is patient toward us the meaning in proportion must bee hee hardens us Let me tell you that Julian the Pelagian of old took the like advantage as you doe of the word Patience in this place to corrupt the Doctrine of St. Paul lib. 5. contr Jul. Pelag. cap. 3. Quid est saith Austin quod dicis cum desideriis suis traditi dicuntur relicti per divinam patientiam intelligendi sunt non per potentiam in peccata compu si quasi non simul posuer is haec duo idem Apostolus patientiam potentiam ubi ait Si autem ostendere volens iram demonstrare potentiam suam attulit in mult a patientia vasa irae quae perfecta sunt in perditionem Quid horum tamen dicis esse quod scriptum est Et propheta si