but one thing though expressed under different phrases What is this to the purpose Say they are not condemned till then I say nor then neither 1. Unlesse they continue finally therein for were not the very Elect sometimes strangers and enemies Rom. 5-10 Col. 1. 12. Be it so hatred of the light goeth before condemnation therfore the consideration of this hatred goes before Gods purpose to condemne them If this Logick likes you like this also Faith repentance and good workes goe before salvation therefore they are before Gods purpose to save them whom he saves But wheras you seeme to denote that after a certaine continuance in hatred of the light a mans case is desperate which you seeme to signifie by a phrase of shutting up besides that it is nothing at all to the present purpose but matter of another question I shall beleeve it when I finde your selfe or any man else to prove it In the meane time I continue as I am and rest contented with the reasons formerly mentioned for the disproving of it Undoubtedly by the seed of the serpent cannot be meant all men fallen and corrupted in Adam by originall sinne for they are expresly proposed in opposition to the seed of the woman Gen. 3. 15. Herein I concurre with you but I concurre not with you in the description of the seed of the serpent for that agrees to all even to the Elect as well as to the Reprobate before the time comes that God hath appointed for their effectuall calling for till then they have the Image of the old serpent as you call it stamped upon them for they are in blindnesse of minde and hardnesse of heart which undoubtedly are the chiefe workes of the devill which Christ came into the world to loose Their will is to doe the lusts of the devill for the devill workes in them and being taken in his snare they are led captive by him to doe his will yea Paul himselfe had an hatred of the light and loved darknesse above it But assure your selfe no hatred of the light except it be finall is the cause why our Saviour shuts any man under condemnation I verily thought with my selfe saith St. Paul that I ought to doe many contrary things against the name of Jesus of Nazareth 10. Which things I also did in Jerusalem for many of the Saints did I shut up in prison having received authoritie from the chiefe Priests and when they were put to death I gave my voice against them 11. And I punished them oft in every synagogue and compelled them to blaspheme and being excedingly mad against them I persecuted them even unto strange Cities I see no reason why the prophaneness of Esau should stand in greater opposition unto grace then the zeale of Paul while he was a persecuter Esau intreated Jacob kindly in his returne from Mesopotamia but Esau continued finally in his prophanenesse Paul continued not in the course of his blind persecuting zeale and this puts the true difference between them Though with God there was a difference put between them from everlasting in his counsels to make the one a vessell of mercy the other a vessell of wrath And I see no reason why the reprobates should not be accounted the seed of the serpent from their first conception not because of their originall pollution for that is common to them with Gods Elect but because God doth not purpose to cure it in them as hee will cure it in the Elect though this naturall corruption cannot break forth into actuall hatred of the truth till they were brought acquainted with it and the like actuall hatred breakes forth also in Gods Elect as it did in Paul untill the time comes which God hath appointed for the curing of it But hee will never cure it in the Reprobate Against the point I know nothing of worth besides that in the Rom. interpreted and opened in the answere to the fourth Doubt following save onely that place in Jude where it is said of the false teachers as it is commonly translated that they were ordained of old to condemnation The words in the originall are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sense whereof is given to be that these false teachers were of old ordained to judgement viz. As they take it from eternitie and so before themselves were or had given any former cause of such condemnation and according to this sense the subject whereabouts the decree of reprobation is conversant is not the world as fallen in Adam much lesse as fallen from Christ but as considered in massa pura before they had done good or evil yea before they were To cleare this objection I am to crave leave to depart from the usuall translation and interpretation of this place For first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not in the first place signifie condemnation but as you well know judgement rather And so if I should give the sense they were of old ordained to judgement viz. according to their workes this would not at all touch the second act of positive Reprobation the point now in hand but only confirme the first point touching the former act of positive Retribution spoken of before viz. before the world was God then ordained the men of this world to judgment according to their works And surely I should have rested in this sense but that I see the Apostle Jude interposing the Pronounc◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth thereby point at some spirituall kind of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or judgement spoken of by him in the wordes before v. 3. Hee thought it needfull to exhort them to contend earnestly for the faith once given to the Saints In the v. 4. Hee rendreth a just reason hereof from the antagonists which were crept in amongst them and whom God himselfe as the chiefe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had designed and sent amongst them to put them to this contention and tryall For so the coherence requires this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be here translated for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 coming of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies decerno dimico to contend in law or warre and then judico and last of all condemno doth first signifie lis or certamen contention or tryall and then judgement and at the last hand condemnation Thus Paul takes this word in the first sense with Jude here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for suits or tryalls or contentions There is utterly saith hee a fault amongst you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that you have contentions or suits or tryalls one with another If you take the primitive sense of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and also consider the coherence of the Apostles words in this place this will appeare to bee his native and true meaning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who were of old designed to this contention Yet for a little further clearing of the text let me adde a word touching the sense of the other two words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
all as it is free for God to give grace to whom he will and so to bring them to salvation the purpose whereof is called Gods election so is it enough for God to deny grace to whom he will and thereby to expose them to condemnation the purpose whereof in God is that which wee call Reprobation which as Aquinas saith Includit voluntatem permittendi peccatum damnationem inferendi pro peccato Now of this generall impotency of doing good which cleaves unto all since the fall of Adam you take no notice at all though herein consists the very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of these controversies but carry your selfe throughout in such manner as if notwithstanding that shipwracke of grace which all humane soules made in Adam it were still as much in mans power to obey God as it was before or as much in mans power to rise by repentance now after he is fallen as it was in his power to stand in his integrity and in obedience unto God before he was fallen Put the case all were true that you deliver in the next place namely that God the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost proceed in the way of admonition and exhortation to turne themselves to the Lord that iniquitie might not be their ruine yet this hinders not but that the decree of condemnation might be precedent to Gods decree of taking such a course and permitting them to resist it For upon a purpose to condemne them for such a sinne he might thereupon resolve to expose them to such a sinne And if God should first decree to permit such a sinne and then decree to condemne them for it the permission of this sinne being first in intention should by your owne rule be last in execution that is first men should be condemned for such a sin and afterwards they should be suffered to commit it Not that I maintaine any such order but onely to represent the weaknesse of your discourse approaching shrewdly to such a disorderly constitution of Gods decrees and nothing at all preventing the most harsh tenet that can be devised Againe this that here you deliver were it granted you yet doth it nothing hinder the corrupt masse in Adam to be the object of Gods decree of condemnation For albeit God the Father and God the Sonne faile not of performing all this you speak of yet if by reason of the generall impotency which is come on all they are nothing able to obey these motions of Gods spirit and withall God purposeth to deny them a further grace to make them to obey shall not this be sufficient to expose them to condemnation even for this sinne of resisting the motions of Gods spirit But now let us consider your discourse it selfe and what weight it carrieth which onely makes a shew of much but comes to nothing in the end First you please your selfe in devising distinct workes applyed to the distinct persons in the Trinitie without all ground in my judgement Wee commonly say Opera Trinitatis ad extra sunt indivisibilia Were not the Sonne and the Holy Ghost as active in the creation and are still in the workes of providence as the Father How Christ enlightned the world by his death is a mystery to me his doctrine I confesse did and much more the doctrine of his Apostles But in this ministerie of Christs servants were not the Father and the Holy Ghost as operative as the Sonne As for the knocking of the spirit at mens hearts you nothing distinguish it for ought I found hitherto from the ministerie of Christs servants in admonishing and exhorting which worke is yet the Fathers and the Sonnes aswell as the Spirits But whereas you say all this is done for this very end To turne them to the Lord that iniquitie might not be their destruction I pray you observe your owne words well all the operations you specifie are drawn from these two heads Instruction and Admonition to turn to the Lord and the end of all this you say is to turne to the Lord. Put these together that you may behold the sobrietie of this discourse God exhorts them to turne to the Lord to this end to turne them to the Lord As much as to say God exhorts them to turne to the Lord to this end that in case they obey his voice and turne to the Lord which is their part then God will performe his part also and turne them to the Lord. But what need I pray of Gods worke in turning them to the Lord after they have performed their part so well as to turne themselves to the Lord Againe if God hath a purpose to turne them to the Lord why doth he not Is it because they refuse to performe some act upon the performance whereof God would turne them to himself Now I would gladly know what act that is which God expects to be performed that so he might turne them to the Lord. I am verily perswaded your selfe are not willing to be put to designe this Is it the very act of turning to the Lord or lesse or more If the very act of turning to the Lord you fall upon a manifest absurditie before specified if lesse then turning to the Lord then 't is lesse than a good act and shall God reward that which is lesse then a good act with conversion unto him What is it to conferre grace according to the workes of nature if this be not Yet I would faine know what this act is Least of all will you say 't is more than turning to the Lord for that should suppose conversion unto the Lord already wrought and consequently no need that God should turne them to the Lord which supposeth that they were not before turned to the Lord at all The providing of severall helpfull meanes for the salvation of the world after the fall doth nothing hinder Gods reprobating of the world upon the fall unto eternall condemnation and perdition For if hee purpose to deny them grace to obey these meanes this shall bee sufficient to expose them to condemnation even for the despising of those meanes of grace which God purposeth to provide for them and accordingly the objection here proposed is sound And whereas you answere that these meanes doe aggravate their condemnation by accident onely to wit through their neglect and abuse of them I answere that this their neglect and abuse doth by necessary consequence follow upon Gods purpose to deny them effectuall grace for the using of those meanes aright like as upon Gods purpose to harden Pharaohs heart that hee should not let Israel goe it followed by necessary consequence that Pharaoh through the hardnesse of his heart would not let Israel goe But that Gods end is as you say the restoring of men to salvation and life as if God did will and purpose any such thing is utterly untrue and nothing proved by you hitherto but rather flatly contradictorie to that you have most an end delivered partly in
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Apostle alludeth to the common course of Judges and suites in the law or of wrestlings in the Olympian or of captaines in the war who were wont conscribere to designe afore-hand or set downe in writing the names of such adversaries as were to have their causes or tryalls tryed before them And as for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies of old I dare not stretch it so farre as to reach it to eternitie neither doth the place require it nor any other in scripture to my remembrance Yea God himselfe in Jeremy plainly distinguisheth time of old from eternitie as the lesser from the greater If you then aske what is that old time Jude here speakes of wherein God wrought afore-hand and as it were designed viz. these false teachers to the tryall of his Church and contention with him I answere About 4040. yeares before Jude wrote this Epistle when God pronounced in ' Paradise that ancient curse upon the serpent and his seed I will put enmitie saith he between thee and the woman and between thy seed and her seed then was that of old when God did assigne and appoint these false teachers under these generall words the seed of the serpent to this enmitie and contention with the Church concerning the faith once given to the Saints And indeed the description which Jude gives of these false teachers thus set out by God unto this contention doth plainly decipher them as the seed of the serpent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ungodly men turning the grace of God into wantonnesse denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ Thus have I declared how farre or rather how little I have departed and upon what grounds not so much from the received doctrine of our Church as the received manner of the explication of it In all which I humbly submit my spirit not only to the judgment of the reformed Churches whether of England or of foreigne countries if ever they come to take notice hereof but also of every learned godly brother into whose hands this discourse may fall As for that place of Jude 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sense hereof you say is given to be that these false teachers were of old ordained to judgement viz. As they take it from eternitie and so before themselves were and had given any former cause of such condemnation This you make the interpretation of the place given by others and their doctrine accordingly And the consequent thereof you make to be this namely That according to this sense the subject whereabout the decree of Reprobation is conversant is not the world as fallen in Adam much lesse as fallen from Christ but as considered in massa pura before they had done good or evill yea before they were Now I have diverse things to object against you in this First were I of your opinion in the point of Reprobation I should utterly deny that there is any such consequent that may be lawfully inferred from the former interpretation and doctrine For albeit men are from eternitie ordained to condemnation and consequently before themselves were or had given any former cause of such condemnation yet if when God did ordaine them hereunto he did foresee not only their fall in Adam but their finall infidelitie and impenitency also and thereupon did proceed to ordaine them to condemnation as it is acknowledged on all hands at this day both Papists Arminians and orthodox Protestants your selfe onely that I know excepted then surely herehence it will not follow that massapura should be the object of Reprobation but massa corrupta and that not in Adam onely but with actuall sinnes and that throughout the whole course of their lives all along even untill death And I perswade my selfe you also will be of the same opinion if you give your selfe to a due and serious consideration of it which might have saved you all this paines in straining a poore text to serve your turne in a miserable manner and that most causelesly For certainely you feare in this place where there is no cause of feare at all on your part Secondly why should you straine courtesie to acknowledge Gods ordination which is no other then Gods decree of men unto condemnation to have been from all eternitie For what Papist Arminian Lutheran or orthodox Protestant provided that he be learned withall is found to deny this Was it not one of the prodigious doctrines of Vorstius to maintaine that Gods decrees are not eternall Whence it should manifestly follow that God is changeable For if God should now begin to will that which formerly hee willed not this would introduce a change in God as well as if hee should cease to will that which formerly hee willed Can it be denyed but that God did everlastingly foresee whatsoever should come to passe If hee did then he did from everlasting foresee the finall infidelitie and impenitency of every one that in such a condition departs out of the world And why then should it not become God from everlasting to ordaine all such unto condemnation Thirdly who are they that interpret St. Jude in such a manner as you obtrude upon them I cannot beleeve any is found so absurd What that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should signifie no more then ordaine to judgement What shall become of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then a word in this place most significant I perswade my selfe you cannot name one the Author of so loose an interpretation But let us consider how you carry your selfe in the clearing of it as you speak which indeed is to raise a mist rather in the clear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you say in the first place signifies judgement and I say neither doe they render it otherwise whom you undertake to confute Yet holding the translation here as it were at bay without specification it cannot stand with your interpretation to wit of Gods ordaining men to judgement in generall according to their workes a judgement of mercy in case their workes prove good or of wrath in case they prove evill whatsoever you pretend to the contrary but most improvidently For albeit the word judgement be generall and indifferently appliable to either kind yet the Apostles phrase here this judgement 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot be understood and maintained in any such generalitie and indifferencie And therefore you could not rest in this sense without much oversight as your selfe observe and forthwith confesse Therefore you proceed further to observe that the Apostle v. 3. thought it needfull to exhort them to contend earnestly for the faith once given to the Saints That is true In the v. 4. hee addes the reason hereof that also is true in these words For there are certaine men crept in of old ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And these men you call Antagonists hawking thereby after some congruitie to your interpretation following And thirdly you observe that
admonish them of the error of their waies either by his word or by his judgements and chastisements in his works That God doth harden out of his absolute will and yet hardens none but for sin cannot bee avouched in my judgment without manifest contradiction If they are not contradictions Then those also are not God hath mercy on whom hee will yet God hath mercy on none but in respect of their good works going before Secondly by the same reason it may bee said that God condemnes men out of his absolute will and yet hee condemnes none but for sin yet you shall never read that God condemnes whom hee will Thirdly if God doth harden out of his absolute will then also hee did purpose to harden of his absolute will Whence I infer that then God did not purpose to harden for sin For Gods purpose to harden only in respect of sin is commonly accounted and that by your self a will conditionate and a will conditionate is opposite to a will absolute Lastly I deny that God doth harden for their sins as hardning denoteth a denyall of saving grace For to harden for sin is to punish but to deny saving grace to them that never had saving grace is not to punish them to leave a man in the state wherein hee findes him is not to punish him And therefore when Epaminondas ran his Javelin through a Sentinell whom hee found in sleepe saying I did but leave him as I found him because sleep is usually said to bee Mortis Imago the Image of death had hee no better Apologie for his fact then this hee had no way freed himself from injustice If God may harden man for sin and yet sin shall not bee a primary cause moving God to harden him by the same reason though God condemnes man for sin it is not necessary that sin should bee a primary cause moving God to condemn him which is directly contrary to your tenet in the point of reprobation And this consideration of your own if you hold your self unto it attentively may bring you into the right way from which you have erred and the want of it hath been a means I fear to confirm many in their errors Wee acknowledge it to bee Gods absolute will to condemn for sin but withall wee say it is his absolute will to permit whom hee will to sin and continue in sin by denying saving grace to raise them out of sin And this deniall of grace cannot bee for sin as I have already proved To harden a man in opposition to Gods shewing mercy on him wee take to bee nothing else then his refusall to cure him Now let any man judge whether it bee a decent speech to say that because a man is sick therefore God will not cure him In the cases proposed by you of casting a servant off for a disease which hee can cure if hee list or breaking a vessell for some filthinesse which one may cleanse if hee will whether this bee not to bee resolved into the absolute will of the Master I am content to appeale to every sober mans judgement although the comparisons are not congruous to the case wee have in hand for as much as the casting of a servant off is distinct from the not curing of him the breaking of a vessell is distinct from the cleansing of it But the hardning of a man in opposition to Gods shewing mercy on him is nothing distinct from Gods refusing to cure him If the question were proposed thus Why will not a man cleanse his vessell when hee is able to cleanse it why will hee not heale his servant when hee hath power to heale him Is it a good reason to say therefore hee heales him not because hee is sick therefore hee cleanseth not his vessell because it is unclean Neither is it a more sober speech to say therefore God hardens a man because hee is a sinner For it is as much as to say therefore hee refuseth to cleanse him from his sin because hee findes him unclean by reason of his sin Answ The want of considering this point hath as I conceive it intangled the Doctrine of predestination with needlesse difficulties and exposed it to rash and hard censures in the mindes of gain-sayers Then it may bee said there was no cause of that objection Why complaineth hee and who can resist his will or at least of that answer to why doth hee yet complaine Rom. 9. 20 21 22. I answer that objection propounded by the Apostle Why doth hee yet complain for who hath resisted his will doth not arise upon occasion of Gods preferring Jacob before Esau but upon the latter part of the Corollary going immediately before v. 18. Whom hee will hee hardneth for if it bee God that hardneth the creature and that according to his absolute will then might the hardned creature say what fault is there in mee to bee so hardned Why doth God complain of mee for my hardnesse and impenitency Who hath resisted his will To make this objection colourable wee need not say as you seem to imply that the Apostle gave occasion of it by ascribing the hardning of Pharaoh and other reprobates to Gods absolute will and without all respect to sin yet the creature hardned is wont to plead with God about it Esa 63. 17. you shall there see Gods own people to erre and upon their error to have their hearts hardned from Gods feare and both done by God and yet the people expostulate with God about it which if Gods own people may doe reverently is it any wonder if the reprobates doe the same upon the same occasion petulantly and profanely But the answer of the Apostle to the objection propounded cleareth the whole matter For as a man would justifie the severe proceedings of a Master of a Colledge in refusing to elect an unworthy person and in stead thereof expelling him the Colledge by pleading first the liberty or authority of his negative voyce Secondly the desert of the person refused and expelled So the Apostle beateth down the insolency of the objection and pleadeth the justice of Gods proceedings against Reprobates hated and hardned from first the Soveraignty of God over his creature ver 20 21. secondly the due deserts of persons being vessels of wrath and fitted for destruction ver 22. What these needlesse difficulties are wherewith the Doctrine of predestination is intangled by the Doctrine of them whom you impugne you doe not expresse nor the hard and harsh censures which are passed upon it that by due comparing of the one to the other wee might examine how justly such censures are pronounced But of what nature your opinion is how inconsistent in it self on how little reason it is grounded what consequences it draws after it as also what causelesse fears you raise unto yourself and above all and which is worst of all how you deal with Scripture in this argument to serve your turn I leave it to your
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
desired him to shew him his glory The Lord saith hee mercifull and gracious and that will by no meanes cleare the guilty visiting iniquity Where God declareth and proclaimeth his chiefe glory to stand partly of attributes and the work of grace in the one hand and of justice in the other for God in like sort declareth wherein hee delighteth chiefly to glorifie himselfe viz. in the exercise of loving kindnesse and righteousnesse and judgement Jer. 9. 24. I should think whatsoever is in God is equally glorious even his strength as well as his mercy wherewith the Lord begins in the place alledged though here pretermitted Neither doth it follow that because these only are here mentioned therefore the glory of God doth principally consist in these And besides there is the glory of his soveraignty expressed even then when the promise of this revelation here mentioned was made to Moses to wit in shewing mercy and having compassion on whom hee will I beseech thee shew mee thy glory And hee answered I will make all my good goe before thee and I will proclaime the Name of the Lord before thee for I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion And this is it the Apostle doth most insist upon Rom. 9. yet I make no question but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the various wisdome of God is as glorious as any of the rest and this appeareth in the incarnation of the Sonne of God and in the complete execution of his office as in nothing more But I conceive that glory of God represented to Moses Exod. 34. 6 7. was expressed to a speciall end unto his people namely to compose them to a greater reverence of his Majesty which reverence is a quality consisting of a mixture of love and feare a morall gesture Not to speak how the execution of mercy and justice are competent unto the creatue nor to mention that wherein Vasquez and Suarez concutre otherwise much different about their conceptions of Gods justice namely that there is no justice in God toward the creature which is not grounded upon the determination of his will and so undoubtedly is the execution of his mercy also onely with this difference God hath revealed unto us rules according to which hee will proceed in the execution of his justice no such rules hath hee revealed to us or prescribed to himselfe according to which he wil proceed in the execution of his mercy It is well observed by others that those vertues which grace the Will are more honourable than those which grace the Understanding or other parts It is a greater honour to a Prince to be gratious and just then to bee wise and powerfull power and wisedome may bee found in a vitious Prince not grace and justice If then grace and justice doe more set forth the glory of their soveraignty surely God who aimeth at his highest glory in the highest and first place he aimed chiefly at the manifestation of his grace and justice above the manifestation of his power and dominion 1. First concerning the instance it selfe I answer 1. It is not to be expected I confesse that vertue should be found in a vitious person but yet Princes commonly make more accompt of their absolutenesse then of their vertue 2. And the most capitall crime against them consists rather in the derogation to their power then to their vertue 3. And vertue is common to all and if all were as they ought to be what glory were it to a King to be vertuous 2. But as for the accomodation of it though all were granted yet it concludes nothing To be vertuous is honourable to a man because he is indifferent to execute his power in the way of vice as well as in the way of vertue But there is no such indifferency found in God Gods gratious disposition tyes him to doe good to none but to whom he will Had he never made the world nor purposed to produce any creature he had beene notwithstanding the same he now is yea the very execution of justice in God doth presuppose the determination of his owne will whereupon it is that Bradwardine distinguisheth betweene meritum aptitudinale meritum actuale Aptitudinale meritū is the merit of such good as God can bestow in the way of reward if he will or such evill as God can inflict in the way of punishment if he will Actuale meritum is the merit of such good or evill as God hath determined to bestow or inflict Answerable hereunto Gerson professeth that when a sinne is committed it is meerely at the pleasure of God to inflict what punishment he will And withall he professeth that God doth actually remunerate every good worke ultra condignum and punish every evill worke citra condignum all which I hold to be Orthodox and sound And let me intreat and prevaile with you in this that you will not thinke any thing in the nature of God to be lesse glorious then another howsoever to our apprehension some attributes may seem more glorious then others Consider what you finde last in the execution of Gods decree and from thence gather what was first in his intention Now at the last judgement as likewise in the course of his providence in this world God doth chiefly manifest the glory of his grace to the elect and the glory of his justice upon the world When God in his wayes towards the elect blesseth them with all spirituall blessings in Christ what doth he rather aime at then the praise of the glory of his grace When God destroyeth the wicked in their flourishing estate and causeth the righteous to flourish in their weake and decayed age what doth be rather aime at then to shew that the Lord is upright and there is noe unrighteousnesse with him When Christ shall come to judgement at the last day what will he rather shew forth then the righteous judgement of God upon the world of the ungodly and the admirable glory of his grace to the Saints Since then all the wayes of God doe finally worke to this issue the setting forth of his grace and justice surely we are so to conceive it as his primary aime and intent to be to glorifie rather his grace and justice then his power and soveraignty 1. That God doth manifest the glory of his grace to the elect and the glory of his justice upon the world both in this life and at the day of judgement I grant But that he doth chiefly manifest this is not proved save only there is a propension in the phrase to signifie as much as properly and then it is true indeed His grace properly on the one his justice properly on the other whereas the glory of his power and soveraignty and wisdome is promiseuously shewed on both yet there is not taken so distinct a consideration of justice as seems fit For
whereas justice is as well remunerative as vindicative as this hath place only on the wicked so the other on the good I meane those that departed the world after they came to yeares of discretion yet consider I pray you what thinke you of them that perish in no other sinne but originall derived unto them by the fall of Adam which Adam we beleeve to be saved In the condemnation of these what glory of God doth appeare more either of his justice or of his soveraignty 2. But be it granted that these glories doe appeare chiefly at such times yet if other glories doe appeare also in the same last execution how will you deduce herehence that only those glories you mention were first in intention Will it not rather follow that seeing other glories as well as these did appeare in execution though not chiefly therefore other glories as well as these were first in intention though not chiefly 3. When God blesseth his elect with all spirituall blessings in Christ we need not say he aimes rather at somewhat else then the praise of the glory of his grace when out of meere grace he made his glorious selfe known unto us he made not only his grace known unto us but all his attributes more or lesse which to our understanding are equally glorious in themselves though we take more comfort in the speculation of his grace which yet is more wonderfull when we consider his soveraignty over us his creatures and that it was indifferent to him to make us vessells of wrath as well as vessells of mercy and in this very consideration the very damnation of reprobates shall improve our glorious joyes in the apprehension of Gods free love to us at the day of judgement according to that of the Apostle Rom. 9. 22. You are to looke to it how you make your Tenent good who maintaine that God doth rather aime at the one then at the other 4. As for the wicked the righteousnesse of Gods judgement upon them we can in some measure conceive at this present But as for the power of God in executing such judgements maintaining the creature in the suffering of eternall sorrows wee are not able to conceive and therefore the glory hereof is farre more admirable then the other So likewise what shall be the fruits of the grace of God towards us at that day and after neither eye hath seene nor eare hath heard c. nor that glory contained in seeing the face of God If God should but reveale unto us the wisdome whereby he hath managed his providence towards us before he called us and since the calling of us immediatly by himselfe mediatly by the ministry of good Angels contending with and crossing the counsells and practises of wicked Angels what a body of glory would appeare unto us and how should we be ravished with the contemplation of it How much more with the contemplation of his providence thoroughout both in managing the whole course of nature and the whole course of grace QUESTION â— How and by what demonstrative reasons may it appeare that there is a necessity of a departing from the doctrine delivered in our Church The reasons which moved me a little and but a little to depart from the forme of words usually received in delivering the doctrine of Reprobation are such as to me seeme if not demonstrative yet convincing And though I have learned to suspect mine owne judgement where I differ never so little from my godly and reverend loarned Brethren yet I consider we are taught to trie all things likewise and to hold fast that which is good and as wee believe so to speake submitting our selves to the feare of God But before I come to the ground wherupon I have beene led to believe and speake somewhat otherwise of this point then is commonly received let me first shew you how farre I consent with the received opinon even in all usefull truthes and how little it is then wherin I dissent In the doctrine of election I consent wholly with Augustine Calvin Beza Martyr Zanehy Perkins Paraeus and others who have taught us by plaine evidence and that from scripture 1. That before the world was God out of his free will hath chosen the elect by name by an unchangeable decree unto grace and glory in Christ Jesus to the shewing forth of the riches of the glory of his grace 2. That to restore them who were losâ— in Adam he sent forth the Lord Jesus to be obedient to the death for them and by his death to redeeme them as effectually as if they themselves had suffered in their owne persons 3. That in the fulnesse of time he calleth each one of them by an effectuall and invincible drawing even by such an almighty worke of his quickning spirit as he did put forth in raising Christ from the dead 4. That those whom he so calleth he preserveth by some powerfull worke of his spirit to himselfe in Christ so as they never fall from him totally or finally Only herein take it not amisse if I place the subject of Election in Persons considered in Christ before the world or themselves were and not in massa corrupta with the late venerable Synod For though herein they follow Augustine and Zanchy and some others yet have they dissented from the chiefe instruments of the reformation of our Religion And with reverence I speake it as I am led to conceive that it need not trouble any if taking Christ to be the head of the elect I conceive him to be first thought upon and chosen and we in him Mr. Baynes followeth the schoole in so expressing it and the reasons delivered above in the first point have carryed me with them and the difference lyeth in opening the purpose of Reprobation But see here how farre I goe with the streamâ— and â—hen I goe aside how little and upon what ground How convincing or demonstrative the reasons are I addresse my selfe to consider It is good to make progresse in the investigation of truth Austin professeth himselfe to be of the number of those qui proficiendo scribunt scribendo proficiunt only our care must be that we goe not backward and make things worse then wee found them which comes to passe especially with good men many times not so much by falling into error as by confusion of method for hereby it comes to passe that the passages opening the way to the investigation of truth are stopt up and we find our selves in a brake and see no way out To prevent them I am perswaded it is a profitable consideration to thinke with our selves that different opinions especially amongst godly Divines may be no other then the dividing of the truth betweene them About the object of predestination there hath bin a triple difference in opinion some standing for massa nondum condita others for massa pura that is condita but nondum corrupta others for massa corrupta yet
both Junius did endeavour but very obscurely and Piscator hath endeavoured very perspicuously to reduce them into one If he failed therein especially in some one particular his failing rightly observed and discerned may open a way for the discovery of the entire truth But let the issue therof commend it selfe Your phrase of usefull truths I do not like amongst Arminians I often meet with such a course of arguing truth by the usefulnesse of it which is like the giving of the larger coat to him that is bigger because it is fitter for him when in the mean time he had no right unto it And though we can judge aright of a coats fitnesse to a body yet it is a dangerous course for us to presume so farre of our judgements in the usefulnesse of opinions as thereupon to conclude what are true and what are false 1. To choose before the world is to choose before the creation or Adams fall according to your owne exposition formerly mentioned but in this sense your selfe confesseth in the 4. place that Austin and Zanchy doe not concurre with others in this was there no more in Gods intention when he elected some then the manifestation of the riches of his glorious grace Did not God purpose to manifest also the glory of his remunerative justice Is it not undeniable that God will bestow salvation upon all his elect of ripe yeares before their departure out of this world by way of reward and crowne of righteousnesse which God the righteous Judge shall give at that day to all that love his Sonnes appearing It being a righteous thing with God as to recompence tribulation to them that trouble his Children so to his Children that are troubled rest with his Apostles when the Lord Jesus shall shew himselfe from Heaven with his mighty Angels in flaming fire rendring vengance c. When he shall come to be glorifyed in his Saints and be made marvellous in all them that beleeve c. It is great pity this is not considered as usually it is not especially for the momentous consequence thereof in my judgement sufficient if I mistake not to have stifled this opinion following touching Reprobation in the first conception of it 2. Touching the Second I have nothing to say for if you have any opinion concerning some benefit that redounds to the Reprobate by the death of Christ it is more then hitherunto you do discover 3. Touching the Third it were to be desired you did expresse whether no lesse powerfull motion would serve to the drawing of them to faith and repentance 4. Likewise touching the Fourth whether this powerfull worke being denyed to any it is possible for such a one to beleeve and repent unto salvation Concerning the order here mentioned though my opinion be that the object of predestination is massa nondum condita yet in no moment of nature or reason was the decree of God concerning Christs incarnation and our salvation by him before the decree of creation and of permission of Adams fall and consequently Election unto Salvation had the consideration of massa corrupta concomitant with it though not precedent only the consideration of massa nondum condita being antecedentall to all these decrees Likewise in my opinion they doe mistake who take the Synod of Dort to maintaine the consideration of massa corrupta as precedent to Election though they beginne with signifying what God purposed to bring to passe upon the fall of mankind in Adam And Galvin in his answere to Pighius confesseth that the safest course is to treate of predestination upon the consideration of the corrupt masse in Adam As touching what you have delivered touching Election in Christ our head in the first place that I have already examined Our Divines commonly conceive a double act of Reprobation as Bellarmine and others of the Papists doe 1. Negative as they call it a non-election or Reprobation unto which some adde a purpose of forsaking the creature excluding it from glory and from sufficient meanes of grace in Christ 2. Positive ordaining it to condemnation The former they conceive to be absolute as being an act of Gods soveraigne Lordship over the creature without all respect to sinne The latter they conceive as being an act of vindicative justice to presuppose originall sinne at the least and some of them as Bellarmine actuall sinne also whom Paraus in this point seemeth to give way unto 1. To the first of these acts I wholly assent so farre as it resteth in a non-election or preterition of the creature according to the libertie of Gods absolute soveraignety That which is added to it of a purpose of forsaking the creature and to exclude it from glory and from sufficient meanes of grace in Christ before all respect of sinne I want warrant from scripture to condescend unto But this Negative act I would rather expresse in such words as the holy Ghost hath used before me and so distinguish it into two branches That before all respect of good or evill in the creature 1 God did not so love the world I meane the world of mankind distinguished from the elect this is plaine from the Apostles comparison of Jacob and Esau Rom. 9. 11. 12 13. 2. God did not give the world to Christ by him of grace to be brought to salvation as he did the elect for they are not said to be written in the Lambs book of life from the beginning of the world Revel 13. 8 17 18. And indeed all who were given to Christ doe in fulnesse of time come unto him Joh. 6. 37. Gods hatred of Esau before he had done good or evill reacheth to this act also Rom. 9. 13. 2. Touching the positive act which they conceive I wholly agree with them that God ordaineth none to condemnation but upon sinne presupposed Annihilate the creature God may without presupposall of sinne for annihilation is an act of Soveraignetie suteable to creation but condemne it he may not without presupposall of sinne For condemnation is an act of justice and presupposeth a rule of justice transgressed and thereby wrath or just revenge provoked onely this positive act of Gods counsell about the world of mankind severed from the elect upon serious consideration of sundry passages of Scripture I would rather distinguish into a double act 1. Whereby without all respect of good or evill in the men of this world God ordained them unto judgment according to their works Ezech. 33. 20. to judgment I say not of condemnation which presupposeth sinne in the creature to be condemned but judgment I meane of just retribution whereby God is willing to deale with them according to their works in justice justice I say aswell distributive to reward them with life if they continue in obedience as vindicative to punish them to death if they provoke him by carelesse and wilfull disobedience Hitherto even to this act the hatred of God to Esau reached 2. Whereby upon the
man erres and that in weighty matters I consider not any judgement of God upon him but upon the world rather that hereby are so much the more countenanced in their erroneous wayes which are advantageous to flesh and bloud and therefore they delight in them and thereby become the more worthy to be given over to illusions to beleeve lyes Let mee touch upon that also as where you say It was not the efficacy of Gods decree that did put upon Adam any necessity of breaking it This I confesse is a plausible speech now adayes and apt to bee taken up especially coming from good mens mouthes to choake others withall who feare not to give God the glory of his power with as much truth and with a greater distinction and plainnesse wee say with Aquinas that Gods will is so efficacious as to cause all things to come to passe after such a manner as they doe come to passe to wit necessary things necessarily and contingent things contingently or freely whether in good or evill And if you spare to speake with the Holy Ghost yet wee will not but professe that Both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and people of Israel were gathered together to doe that which Gods hand and Gods counsell determined before to be done And with Austin Non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo So that even those things which God sinit sieri vult sieri Good things he will have come to passe by his working of them evill things hee will have come to passe by his suffering of them Nay otherwise it were impossible hee should foreknow them for unlesse they are future they are not knowable to be future But how can it be that things contingent and in their owne nature indifferent as well to be not future as future how I say is it possible that they should passe out of this indifferent condition into a condition determinate and things meerely possible in their owne nature become future without a cause And what cause can be devised of this transition but the will of God For from everlasting nothing was extant to cause them of things possible to become future but God himselfe and in God himselfe nothing can be imagined to be the cause hereof but the will of God This is the insoluble demonstration that cuts the throat of Scientia media whereupon the Jesuites and Arminians and all that oppose the absolutenesse of Gods proceedings doe and must relye either wittingly or unwittingly and whether they will or no unlesse they will directly turne Atheists and with Cicero deny that God fore-knowes things that are to come So that upon supposition of Gods will to permit Adam to fall it was necessary that Adam should fall necessary I say that hee should fall But how Not necessarily but contingently and freely and no other necessity is at this day found in man for the performing of any particular sinfull act but such as is joyned with liberty and that in such sort as that the necessity is only Secundum quid the liberty is Simpliciter so called I say in respect of any particular act But I confesse there is an absolute necessity of sinning in generall laid upon man by the Fall of Adam whereby it comes to passe that whether a man commits a sinfull act then questionlesse hee sinneth or whether hee omit a sinfull act yet therein hee sinneth also in as much as hee doth not abstaine from it in a gracious manner I come to the second Reason Againe you say In Christ they have so much knowledge and grace revealed to them and offered as is sufficient to bring them on to see their impotency in themselves and to stirre them up to seeke for help and strength and life in him where it is to bee found which if they neglect and despise as the Pharisees did and all impenitent sinners doe God and his Covenant are blamelesse in offering them life and the meanes of it their destruction is of themselves I have read such manner of discourse as this often in Carvinus that busie Arminian I am sorry to read it in the writings of good men especially when I find it not one jot mended in them Yet all this I see still tends to a gracious end even to the justifying of God as when you say Their destruction is of themselves But so doe Arminians also pretend to wit the justifying of God in the way of Reprobation but the issue is to justifie themselves and glorifie themselves in the way of Election But I pray you what thinke you of Infants that perish in Originall sinne how is their destruction of themselves Is it of themselves that they are borne in sinne Yet I presume you will not say with Arminians that all Infants that dye in their infancy whether they be the Children of Turkes and Saracens yet are saved as well as the children of beleeving Parents Againe was not Pharaohs destruction of himselfe also for not letting Israel goe yet will you deny that God hardned his heart that hee should not let Israel goe Sihon King of Heshbon was not his destruction of himselfe in that hee would not suffer Israel to passe by him though they promised to goe by the high-way and to turne neither to the right hand nor to the left and to pay for all that they received of them both meat and drinke neverthelesse it is said that The Lord hardned his spirit and made his heart obstinate because hee would deliver him into the hands of the Israelites The destruction of Abimelech and of the Shechemites was it not of themselves yet surely God it was that sent an evill spirit betweene Abimelech and the men of Shechem that the cruelty against the seventy sonnes of Jerubbaal and their bloud might come and be laid upon Abimelech their brother which had slaine them and upon the men of Shechem which had aided him to kill his brethren But to proceed The face of your discourse seemes to tend to the maintenance of a sufficient grace in the Reprobates themselves whereof there is much question but yet you expresse onely a sufficient grace without them whereof there is no question For undoubtedly in Gods word whereof even Reprobates are partakers as well as the Elect there is grace sufficient in the way of instruction and revelation no man makes question of this Undoubtedly therein is contained all things necessary both for faith and manners and so to bring them to salvation if they will obey it But all the question is whether they have any sufficiency of grace to enable them to obey it I presume your selfe will not avouch this And the Pelagians of old acknowledged a sufficiency of grace in the way of doctrine and instruction Onely you say There is sufficient grace given them to bring them to see their impotency But how doe you prove this The naturall man commonly is too preiant of his
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
God designed them to somewhat and the better to hold up the congruitie of your interpretation you call God the chiefe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the thing whereunto God designed them was you say to put the Christians to whom the Apostle writes to this contention and tryall Where you leave the Greek as no longer able to serve your turne for it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereunto God ordained them But yet which is enough you positively avouch that the coherence requires this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to bee so translated This I say were enough if you could as substantially prove it as you doe confidently avouch it And yet I presume you well know your selfe to have been the first that hath discovered any such pregnancie of the text to goe as it were with child with any such sense and meaning And therefore it behooves you to bring good cardes for the proofe of this your interpretation Now before I come to examine your proofe I say that this interpretation of yours is farre more 〈◊〉 than that is which you impugne by how much it is farre more 〈◊〉 as Arminius urgeth against Mr. ' Perkins according unto truth to say that God from eternitie ordaines a man unto sinne then that from eternitie hee ordaines men unto condemnation And Piscator concurreth with you in the issue though he takes a different way Ad hoc judicium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. saith hee ad hanc impietatem qua impietate commerentur sibique accersunt judicium Dei i. e. eternam condemnationem As much as to say to this impietie which is their condemnation according to that of our Saviour Joh. 3. 16. This is the condemnation of the world that light is come into the world and men loved darknesse rather then light because their deeds were evill still holding the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to his usuall signification of judgement or condemnation Now wee come to the consideration of your proofe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wee know comes from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies you say first decerno then judico and last of all condemno Be it so hence you inferre that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth first signifie lis or certamen and then judgement and at the last condemnation and thus Jude takes it here If this were granted you then Judes meaning must be this who were of old ordained to this contention But you render it in much different manner thus Who were of old ordained to put them good Christians to this contention Something you plead for the libertie you take in tempering the word but you doe not so much as endeavour to justifie the libertie you take in interpreting Pauls phrase when you say that to ordaine men to this contention is to ordaine them to put Christians to this contention If you should diswade men from impatience and giving a reason hereof should say For many wicked men there are of old ordained to this impatience would any of your Auditors understand you But give we you leave to enjoy your interpretation of the phrase let us see how you can justifie your interpretation of the word The first reason is ab origine nominis as if the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did first signifie to contend and thence you inferre that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies contention in the first place But you bring no Greeke Grammarian or Dictionarie to justifie either the one or the other neither doe I thinke any world of words as Dictionaries are sometimes called doth justifie any such interpretation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A matter may be determined by deeds as by dint of sword as well as by words and legall debatings so that judicare and decernere as comprehended under 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall be still of the same moment and nothing different in the effect though res prove to be judicata different wayes Secondly you say that St. Paul takes the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for contentions I finde by my Concordance that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is found 28 times in the new Testament Out of all these you have pickt out one to serve your turne if that doth serve your turne 1 Cor. 6. 7. There is utterly saith he a fault among you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is say you in that you have contentions and suits or tryalls one with another Calvin renders it thus I am quidem omnino delictum in vobis est quòd judicia habetis inter vos keeping the word to his usuall signification you will have it to signifie contention as if by speciall providence it were here so used For the better clearing of St. Jude our English both the last and Geneva thus Now there is verily a fault among you that you goe to law one with another Now to goe to law what is it but to seeke to civill courts for judgement or justice Yet I am content to take your owne translation whereby it is apparent that by this word is not so much signified contentions in generall as suites and tryalls in speciall like as Piscator renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place controversias forenses to wit by a Metonymie of the effect for the cause for where there are judgements forensecall there must needs proceed controversies forinsecall And as for contentions in generall I doubt not but you well know that in the new Testament they are usually denoted under the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now compare wee this with that of Jude when the Apostle exhorts them v. 3. to contend under the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the faith once given to the Saints and that against those seducers and corrupters the devills factors no doubt who goeth about like a roaring Lion seeking whom he may devoure he doth nothing at all exhort them to such contentions as you call suits or tryalls but rather unto a contention of resistance unto the practice of such who would corrupt them of the same nature with the exhortation of Peter 1 Pet. 8. 5. Having told them of the devils going about like a roaring lion c. Whom resist saith he stedfast in the faith And answerable to that of Paul Ephes 6. 12. Wee wrastle not against flesh and bloud but against principalities and against powers and against worldly governours c. For this cause take unto you the whole armour of God that yee may be able to resist in the evill day and having finished all things to stand So that throughout there is nothing at all that serves your turne for the countenancing of so strained an exposition which yet as before I shewed is most causelesly undertaken You proceed to a little further clearing of the text or rather to the raising of more mists especially in the interpretation of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As for the
for himselfe and as all things are from him so all things must be for him for the supreame efficient must be the supreame end Now if God at once and in one moment of nature decreeth to give salvation by way of reward of faith judge you or let any indifferent Reader judge whether this decree of salvation be not necessarily conjunct with the foresight of saith 5 As for the occasions of slandering and reviling the orthodox truth of God which as you conceive this doctrine of yours cutteth of to the cavilling and froward spirit you have not so much as expressed what they are much lesse justified them to be such occasions as you speak of or shewed how they are removed by your doctrine and not by ours In like sort what is that equitie of the wayes of God the credit of the clearing whereof you attribute to your owne doctrine and derogate from ours you take no paines to explicate If your meaning be that you maintaine that God condemnes no man but for sinne voluntarily and freely committed by him and withall doe obtrude upon us the contrary you doe us the greater wrong provided you speak of men of ripe yeares As for the damnation of infants I doubt you feare so much to offend men that you come too neere the Pelagian and Arminian tenet hereabouts And if you thinke there is any active power in a naturall man to believe and repent wee will not feare offence to resist you or any man in this the scripture having so plainely expressed the contradictorie to this 1 Cor. 2. 14. and Rom. 8. 8. Or if your opinion be that God doth not harden whom he will as well as hee shewes mercie on whom hee will where the good pleasure of God is as evidently signified to be the cause of the one as of the other wee shall not forbeare by Gods grace through feare of offence to resist you in this also And if Pharaoh shall hereupon object and say Why doth God complaine of my not letting Israel goe when he himselfe hardens my heart that I may not let Israel goe wee thinke it fit to take the Apostles course to stop such a ones mouth and say O man who art thou that disputest with God shall the thing formed say to him that formed it why hast thou made me thus Hath not the potter power c. And let men take heed they doe not take upon them to be wiser then the Holy Ghost and thinke to satisfie men by devises of their owne when the word of God doth not satisfie them Yet in all this the Apostle doth not impeach the libertie of their wils nor Austin neither but rather justifieth it throughout yet is hee bold to pronounce that libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia As much as to say a man without grace hath will too much to that which is evill and averse from that which is good as being wilfully bent to the one and opposite to the other And the providence of God in the efficacie of working all things to his owne ends compared with the libertie of the creature hath ever been accounted of a secret nature whereas now a dayes nothing will satisfie the Patrons of free will unlesse this secret and misterious providence of God as it was wont to be accounted come to be utterly overthrowen and libertie of the creature if not chance be brought to domineere in the place thereof When you speak of the orthodox truth of God I presume you doe not distinguish of the truth of God as if some were orthodox and some not Yet I confesse Epithites have another use besides the use of distinction yet in this case also the Epithite is not congruous for orthodox is as much in effect as true 6 As touching the last I presume you will not deny but that the riches of Gods grace to Christ and in him to all the Elect are by our Tenet acknowledged to be as wonderfull as by yours As for the absolute power of his soveraigntie in dealing farre otherwise with the world I presume your opinion is that wee doe exceed rather then come short of you in the acknowledging thereof For wee maintaine God to be as absolute and free in the denying of grace to some as in giving it to others And by denying of grace wee understand the hardning of men at least as touching the chiefe part wherein it consists Yet this you will have to proceed not so much according to Gods absolutnesse as according to his justice in punishing men with obduration yet I grant there is an obduration which is properly enough a punishment of sinne and when men are thereby prostituted unto danger and exposed unto destruction Yet I dare appeale to the judgment of any intelligent Arminian whether in case you doe maintaine as you speak the absolute power of Gods soveraigntie in dealing farre otherwise with the world then with the elect any scandall is removed out of their way by your tenet which is cast in their way by ours As for the unsearchable depth of his wisdome in the order and end of all his wayes as also of his patience towards all men I presume you will not say it is more maintained by your tenet then by ours But by the way I hope you will not except against that of Austin Quantam libet praebuerit patientiam nisi Deus dederit quis aget poenitentiam cont Jul. liber 5. Cap. 4. And againe in the same place Istorum neminem to wit non praedestinatorum adduoit Deus ad salubrem spiritualemque poenitentiam quâ homo reconoiliatur Deo in Christo sive ampliorem illis patientiam sive non imparem praebeat And againe adducit ad poenitentiam sed praedestinatum adducit and none other in his opinion As for the justice of God to obstinate sinners I hope you will not say the common tenet of our Divines doth any way infringe it wee generally maintaine him to be righteous in all his workes and holy in all his wayes For hee punisheth none but for sin none of ripe yeares but for sinne voluntarily and freely committed by them and that in such sort as they might avoide it speaking of any outward transgresion Onely it is not in their power to change their hearts and to love God with all their hearts and feare him and depend upon him Whence it cometh to passe that albeit there is no particular materiall transgresion which they could not avoide yet it is not in the power of a naturall man to avoid it in a gracious manner and all for want of that love of God before spoken of which cannot be wrought in a man but by the spirit of regeneration If any man should further object as I wish you had objected to the uttermost against our Tenet supposing a naturall man to performe what good lieth in his power to performe but not in a gracious manner and likewise to omit what lyeth in his power
sin that was committed whereas God could undoubtedly restrain from the committing of it and that either in a gracious manner or in a meere naturall manner When it is committed his gracious restraint is not afforded but denyed rather What that other action is wherein this obduration consists and which is joyned with the denyall of grace you expound not Suppose it bee Gods moving a man to some course contrary to his corrupt nature either by his word as hee moved Pharaoh to let Israel goe or by his works or by the suggestions of conscience according to that Law which is writen in mens hearts is not this usually found also as often as sinne is committed contrary to light of Nature or light of Grace And hath not obduration consequently its course in all this And why you should pronounce of obduration indefinitely That it is both the heighth of mans sin and depth of mans misery I see no reason Do not the children of God sometimes feele it and in patheticall manner complain of it Lord why hast thou caused us to erre from thy wayes and hardned our hearts against thy feare Esay 63. 17. What saith our Saviour to his Disciples Mark 8. 17. Perceive yee not neither understand have yee your hearts yet hardned As for your phrase of inflicting obduration that doth much require explication which you doe no where perform that I know There is I confesse another operation of God besides those I mentioned formerly whereby men are given over by God whence it followeth that they will grow harder and harder and that is the suspension of his admonitions either by taking away his word or forbearing inward motives by his spirit or removing his judgements and giving outward prosperity whereby God is said to give men over to their own hearts lusts But how this or any of these can bee called the inflicting of abduration I understand not And whereas you say it is prejudiciall to Gods Justice to shew his power in hardning Pharaoh without respect to sin like as to condemn him I have already shewed the great difference between condemnation and obduration It being never said that God damnes whom hee will but the Apostle plainely professing that God hardens whom hee will even as expressely as it is said Hee hath mercy on whom hee will and no marvell For God hath revealed a Law according to which hee proceeds in damning men but you are not able to shew us a Law according to which God proceeds in the hardning of them For if the elect before their callings bee no better then reprobates it is impossible to assigne a Law according to which God proceeds in the hardning of men but that by the same Law the Elect of God must bee hardned also And hardning in the Scripture phrase is usually opposed to Gods shewing mercy It is one thing to speak of an heart hardned another to speak of a heart desperately hardned Yet if you were put to explicate your self and shew what it is to bee desperately hardned and that of God and there withall to prove how Pharaoh was at the time you speak of desperately hardned I am perswaded this phrase would cost you more pains then you are aware of for the satisfying of your self and perhaps somewhat more for the satisfying of others If then God purposed to fall upon Pharaoh in his utmost wrath c. Surely from everlasting hee purposed so to fall upon him for all Gods purposes are everlasting If your meaning bee onely to denote the precedency of such a condition of Pharaoh in sin to Gods falling upon him in bringing such judgements upon his back but not a precedency to Gods purpose I willingly concurre with you herein But then the like may bee said of God concerning Esau before hee was born to wit that God purposed to bring such a measure of obduration and confusion upon him after such a condition of sin But if your meaning bee as indeed hitherunto the genius of your opinion drives you namely that upon the foresight of some sinfull condition God did decree to bring obduration and condemnation both upon Esau and Pharaoh as this may bee said as well of one as of the other here you will give us leave to dissent from you considering how manifestly you are found herein to dissent from your self For if such a foresight of sin goe before Gods decree of obduration and condemnation then God did first decree to permit that sin before hee did decree to harden and condemne man for it so that the permission of that sin in Gods intention must bee before obduration and condemnation and consequently last in execution that is men shall first bee hardned and condemned and then suffered to commit that sinne for which they are hardned and condemned Again if Gods purpose to punish with condemnation must necessarily presuppose foresight of sin in God by the same reason Gods purpose to reward with salvation must necessarily presuppose a foresight in God of obedience and in this case what shall become of the freenesse of Gods grace in election not to trouble you with the profession of Aquinas that never any man was so mad as to introduce a cause of predestination quoad actum praedestinantis The case is the same with introducing a cause of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis For the ground of this is only because there can bee no cause of the will of God quoad actum volentis Now reprobation is well known to bee an act of Gods will as well as predestination Answer But say further that this hardning of Pharaoh bee an effect of the like hatred of Pharaoh as of Esau neither is it said to depend on the sin of Pharaoh but on the will of God as mercy doth as the first cause thereof I answer this hardning of Pharaoh though an effect of Gods hatred of Pharaoh yet it is not an immediate effect of the like hatred hee bare to Esau before hee had done good or evill but presupposeth the sin of Pharaoh viz. his malitious hatred of Gods Church comming between God hateth no man so farre as to harden him till hee hath fallen into some sin in which and for which hee may bee hardned Hardning being alwaies as far as I can perceive by Scripture not only a sin and cause of sin but a punishment of sin How can God bee said to punish sin with sin in hardning the creature if sin in Pharaoh bee not presupposed to goe before the hardning It is true indeed this hardning of Pharaoh is referred by the Apostle to the will of God as the first cause thereof For otherwise the answer of the Apostle had not been sufficient to the objection propounded ver 14. for there it was objected that unrighteousnesse might seem to bee found in God even respect of persons to deale so unequally with persons equall such as Jacob and Esau were for if Jacob and Esau had done neither good nor evill when God had exalted
to passe that naturally it is increased especially in case a man bee moved to courses contrary to his corrupt humours whether by Gods word or by his workes and God doth not by grace correct those corrupt humours which are so contrariant to good motions good motions I mean such as have their course onely in the way of instruction and perswasion In this case thus to move and to deny grace is to harden But when God doth forbeare thus to move and gives men over to follow the swing of their own lusts this I confesse is to harden in greater measure and properly a punishment But this was not the manner of Pharaohs hardning For long after the ninth Chapter of Exodus wee read how God continued to admonish Pharaoh by his servant Moses to let his people goe neither ceased hee this Discipline till the ten plagues or nine of them at the least were fulfilled And like as to shew mercy is not to move onely to obedience but effectually to work men to obedience so the hardning of man in opposition thereunto consists not in not moving unto obedience but rather in not working unto obedience although they bee moved thereunto both in the way of instruction and exhortation As for the punishing of sin with sin in the hardning of the creature let us understand our selves aright and not confound our selves when wee need not Is it a sober speech to say that God punisheth his denyall of grace with denyall of Grace or that God punisheth the sins of the heathen with the denyall of that grace which they never injoyed But as for the punishing of sin with sin this is a large field of Gods providence consisting in divers kindes and it is no way fit to consider them without distinction God made the unnaturalnesse of Senacheribs Sons a scourge to chastise Senacheribs unnaturalnesse towards God one mans sinfull act to bee the punishment of anothers Here is one kinde utterly distinct from that you treat of Again some say and I think justly and Austin acknowledgeth it that every mans sin may bee a just punishment unto him in respect of a former as Rom. 1. 25. When men for their Idolatry were given over to vile affections to defile themselves in abominable manner it is said that herein they received in themselves such recompence of their error as was meete So 2 Thess 2. 10 11. Because men received not the truth of God with love God is said to send them strong delusions that they should beleeve lies Now seeing this concerneth the providence of God in evill which is very secret it were very fit that you should declare your opinion hereabout and shew what operation of God it is wherein consists the administration of this providence When first the one committed Idolatry contrary to the light of Nature and the other received not the truth with love contrary to the light of grace neither the one nor the other had any saving grace and therefore it is not decent to say that God exposed the one to doe things inconvenient the other to beleeves lies and herein punished them for their former misdemenour by denying unto them that which they never injoyed For to punish is either to inflict evil which formerly they suffered not or to withdraw some good which formerly they injoyed Now how God doth expose unconscionable Christians unto errors of Faith is easily comprehended For whereas unconscionable Christians apprehend the truth which they doe injoy but in a naturall and carnall manner they may easily bee withdrawne from it either by persecution or by seduction Now it is in Gods power to send persecutors or seducers amongst them and thereby expose them to the embracing of lies for not imbracing his truth with love or by withdrawing good Pastors and conscionable teachers from them and then men being naturally more prone to errour then to truth especially in matter of Salvation wee see hereby apparently how God can punish sin with sin in this kinde not by denyall of grace which they never injoyed but by denying some outward means of grace which formerly they injoyed And withall it appears that this is nothing to our present purpose who treate of obduration as it consists in or is joyned with the denyall of saving Grace in proper opposition to the shewing of mercy or affording saving grace As touching the other examples wherein the administration of Gods providence is more obscure while hee punisheth sin with sin I say also that Gods punishing consists in denying or not maintaining some kinde of grace or rather not so much to bee called grace as a naturall restraint not from sin in generall for that cannot bee but by saving grace but from some sins in speciall which are foule in the judgement of a naturall mans conscience such as are those unnaturall defilements the Apostle speaks of Rom. 1. Now God in a naturall manner restraines men from such excesse either for feare of shame of the world or by reason of some naturall detriment that may arise thereby or by the ministery of his Angels restraining the temptations of Satan in this kinde And it is found by experience that Nemo repente fit turpissimus but they grow to extreams by degrees and the longer a man lives the worse hee grows if grace correct not the course of corrupt nature according to that saying Nemo senex metuit Jovem Now if God shall forbeare this restraint and give them over to the power of Satan they shall bee exposed to the commission of such abominable things and therein they shall receive in themselves a just recompence of their former errors And therewithall wee see how this case is as extravagant from our present purpose in discoursing of obduration as the former And you confesse that the hardning of Pharaoh is referred by the Apostle to the will of God but withall you adde that it is referred thereto by him as to the first cause thereof whereas no such distinction or limitation sutable is expressed or implyed by the Apostle but onely for the advantage of your own opinion you are pleased thus to shape it And it is very strange that the Apostle should utterly omit such a cause as is of a most satisfying nature and give himselfe to the pleading of that which affords so little satisfaction in the judgement of flesh and blood such as it seems they relish most of with whom the Apostle enters upon this his Dialogue neither doth the Apostle referre this to Jacob and Esau onely as you fashion it to hold up the difference you put between Gods hatred of Esau before hee was born and his hatred of Pharaoh but to the obduration of Pharaoh also nay more properly to that his obduration alone being expressed and the Apostle being upon an answer to an objection arising from the Apostles Doctrine concerning Gods soveraignty and liberty to harden whom hee will Besides this you doe not well to qualifie the difference God puts between Jacob and
so qualifyed as to bee accounted a lesse degree of love and not a fruite of hatred for consider I beseech you is not this farre worse then to mischiefe a man by cutting off an arm or limb So that albeit Scripture did plainely professe that not to reprove a neighbour but suffer him to sin were an act of hatred yet it followeth not hence that hatred in this case signifies onely a lesse degree of love For certainly such an act to wit in sparing reproofe is worse by far then to give a man a box on the eare yet I presume you will not interpret that to bee hatred onely in such a sense as signifying a lesse degree of Love For certainly the fruites of love are the communications of good and not any contumelious inflicting of evill But by your leave I doe not finde that this is the Scriptures meaning in the place you aime at but rather in my judgement it seems to meet with a corrupt course of the world prone to conceive none to bee their greater enemies then such as reprove them To prevent this the Lord forbids the one to wit the hating of our brother and as expressely commands the other to wit to reprove our Neighbour manifesting thereby that reproofe may bee performed without any just suspition of hatred in him that reproveth In fine this interpretation of hatred which here you make is imbraced by Vossius in his Pelagion Story but hee doth not betray that hee is beholding to Cornelius de Lapide the Jesuite for it in his Commentaries on the ninth to the Romans And hee brings other manner of instances to prove it then you doe And so doth Junius also in Gen. 29. 31. though hee were farre enough off from applying it in the same sense to Esau as his son in law Vossius doth and the Jesuite doth before Vossius In few words your meaning is God did so far hate Esau even before hee had done good or evill that hee did not destinate unto him any saving grace as hee did unto Jacob. May you not as well say that hee did not destinate unto him glory as hee did to Jacob And even this in Aquinas his language is to hate where hee interpreteth Gods hatred of Esau before hee was born Yet you might bee pleased to goe a little further and to affirm that God did not onely not destinate unto him any saving grace but also that God was purposed to deny him such saving grace as hee granted unto Jacob and consequently hee purposed to deny him glory also if you bee pleased to gratifie your self in yeelding to this truth wee will willingly gratifie you in acknowledging that notwithstanding all this God purposed to deale with Esau according to his works As for that phrase of yours of putting him into the estate of a servant though it bee of little materiall consideration in this place yet I have sufficiently discussed it in examining your Answer to the first Doubt The Fifth Doubt Question 5. HOw may it appeare that all have a sufficiency of comming to Christ since no man can come without drawing Joh. 6. 44. 65. and hee who is drawn shall bee raised to life or since no man can come except it bee given him of the Father Which speech is a reason why wee ought not to murmure or bee offended if some beleeve not Rom. 11. 7. and since none but the Elect by the meanes of helpe and power Revelat. 2. 15. I no where say nor ever thought that all men had a sufficiency of power to beleeve or to come to Christ Far bee it from mee to avouch such ungracious Pelagianisme But this I say God giveth to the men of this world this world I say as opposed to the elect such meanes and helps of seeking after the Lord and finding mercy from him that they are sufficiently enabled by him to doe much more then they doe that way they are deprived of those drawing and effectuall means without which none can come and with which none ever failed to come to Faith and Repentance Else how shall wee understand these and sundry such like places of Scripture Act. 17. 25 26 27. Rom. 1. 19. to 25. Rom. 2. 4 5. 14 15. Luk. 16. 11 12. Act. 1. 51 52. Act. 13. 46. Matth. 22. 37 38. Luk. 19. 41 42. Ezek. 24. 13. Prov. 1. 20. to 30. 2 Chron. 36. 15 16. Hose 11. 4. Esa 5. 3 4 5. Job 33. 14. to 18. Joh. 16. 69 From all which places I gather foure Conclusions pertinent to the point in hand First That God offereth to the men of this world helps and means either of the knowledge of God in Nature or of grace in Christ and that to this end to lead them to Repentance and Salvation Thus is God said to manifest to the Gentiles that which may bee known of him by his works and by his Law writen in their hearts and that to this end to make them to seek after the Lord to leade them to Repentance to withdraw them from their courses to heale their pride and to save their soules from the pit Thus God offered to the carnall Israelites means of grace to purge them to turn them Prov. 1. 13. to gather them Mat. 23. 37. to convince them Joh. 16. 8 9. To draw them with cords of man and bands of love Hos 11. 4. To dresse them to bring forth good fruit Esa 5. 4. Secondly That the meanes God useth for these good ends are in some measure sufficient if they bee not hindered by men to bring them to the attainment of these ends for when God saith himself hee useth these meanes for these ends for us to say these meanes are not sufficient for these ends seemeth to mee to derogate from the wisdom and sufficiency of God whose works are all of them perfect Deut. 32. 4. and so sufficient for the ends for which hee wrought them Yet God forbid I should doubt of that which our Saviour telleth the Jews No man can come to Christ except the Father draw him Joh. 6. 44. by the same Almighty power and authority whereby hee sent Christ into the world The whole tenour of your Answer in clearing the Fifth Doubt looks this way as if you maintained a sufficiency of power in those whom wee account Reprobates to perform such things upon the performance whereof they should bee saved I confesse you doe not make any expresse mention of Faith but of obedience in generall and of repentance which I presume you will acknowledge will bee inseparable from Faith And that you doe acknowledge a sufficiency in them to perform Obedience and Repentance requifite to Salvation I prove thus You maintain a true desire in God of their Salvation and how can this stand with the denyall of such sufficiency as is in his power to grant Againe You expressely maintain that there is in God a serious and fervent affection not concerning their Salvation only but their Conversion also
Which how it can stand with a denyall of sufficient power to turn unto God I comprehend not Thirdly You plainly affirm that mankinde slights to work out with the Trinity their salvation Now no man can bee said to slight the doing thereof for the doing whereof hee hath no power You maintain there is in a reprobate mans power to work out his salvation with the Trinity Fourthly the comparison you make to represent Gods different dealing with his Elect and with the reprobate doth intimate as much The servant you say is only perswaded to yeeld himself to bee cut that hee may bee cured of the stone yet earnestly and forcibly perswaded The son over and above is taken by the Father and bound and cut that hee may bee cured Now as it is in the power of the servant to yeeld to bee cut that hee may bee cured so do you hereby intimate that it is in the power of a Reprobate to yeeld to bee converted that God may heale him Fifthly you doe acknowledge that Gods purpose to give life unto the world upon condition of obedience doth imply that God should accordingly give means to help them to the performance of this obedience for you plainly signifie that God purposing to give life unto the world upon condition of obedience doth accordingly give meanes to help them to the performance of this obedience Now I say Gods purpose to give life unto the world upon condition of obedience doth no more imply that God must accordingly give means to help them to the performance of this obedience then that God must accordingly give ability by the help of such means to perform obedience And indeed to what end tends the giving of means to help them to the performance of obedience if they have not ability by the help of those means to perform obedience In this very Section you professe the meanes which God affords are sufficient to bring them to those gracious ends which God you say intends if they bee not hindred by men Which doth imply that in your opinion the men of the world have power to give way unto them and not hinder them Yet I confesse you are very sparing to confesse so much But the more you are to blame by the face of your discourse to bespeak such opinions in your Readers and to draw unto them the maintenance whereof you dare not undertake your self But let us consider what you deliver hereupon And First though you doe not attribute unto a naturall man sufficiency and power to beleeve yet if you doe attribute unto him sufficiency of power to perform ought upon performance whereof grace shall bee given him whereby hee shall bee enabled to beleeve and to come to Christ you shall even in this bee guilty of that which you call ungracious Pelagianisme Now as for your opinion of the power of a naturall-man you here expresse it partly negatively partly affirmatively You confâ—â—â— they are deprived of those drawing and effectuall meanes without which none can come and with which none ever failed to come to Faith and Repentance Touching which I have something to oppose concerning the phrase and something concerning the assertion it self The word meanes used by you and which you call effectuall wee commonly understand as things outward such as either the Word of God and the Ministry thereof or the Works of God and the manifestation of his providence therein But you seem to goe further and comprehend thereby the effectuall operation of Gods Spirit which is very ambiguous and being delivered in the generall is the fitter to serve a mans turn sometimes in the one sometimes in the other signification As touching the assertion it self it utterly overthrowes all that you have delivered in clearing the fifth Doubt For with what sobriety can God bee said to entertain an earnest and serious affection concerning their conversion which is as much as to say concerning their repentance being resolved to deprive them of those drawing and effectuall means without which none can come to repentance Again how can God bee said to entertain an earnest and serious affection concerning their Salvation being resolved to deprive them of those drawing and effectuall meanes without which none can come to Repentance and consequently without which none can bee saved As for the affirmative part you say the Reprobates are sufficiently enabled by God to do much more then they doe in seeking after the Lord and finding mercy from him and that by certain means and helpes Now in this place I conceive by means and helps you understand only outward things as either the administration of Gods providence in his Works or the ministry of his Word and not the effectuall operation of Gods Spirit bestowing any power upon them which naturally they had not though this must needs bee your meaning in the negative part of the assertion But as touching the assertion it self there is no question but every naturall man hath power to doe more then hee doth in the way of actions naturall but in the way of doing ought that is good and pleasing in the sight of God I know no power incident to a naturall man for as much as the Apostle saith They that are in the flesh cannot please God Yet I confesse according as the world accounts morality every naturall man hath power to doe more good then hee doth and to abstain more from evill then hee doth that is hee may give more Almes then hee doth hee may bee more temperate then hee is but whether hee doth that which for the substance of the action is accounted good or abstaines from some particular evill actions yet neither the one nor the other is or can bee performed by him in a gracious but rather in an ungracious manner and whether this bee accounted a seeking after the Lord and that to finde mercy from him I dare appeale to your own judgement yet this is not all you maintain For wheras the Lord may bee sought after as the God and governour of nature onely you further say in the next page that there is a sufficiency of power in the means to lead the men of this world to come to the knowledge of God and to grace in Christ But let us examine the places of Scripture which you muster up in great abundance The first is out of Act. 17. 25 26 27. There wee read that God is not worshipped with mens hands as though hee needed any thing seeing bee giveth to all life and breath and all things 26. And hath made of one blood all mankinde to dwell upon all the face of the earth and hath assigned the seasons which were ordained before and the bounds of their habitation 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That they should seek the Lord if so hee they might have groped after him and found him though doubtlesse hee bee not farre from every one of us 28. For in him wee live and move c. This seemes to bee the most
from maintaining such foule collusions By the way give mee leave to wonder that you expresse your self in such a manner But alas what should wee look for when the cause is no better and yet a gracious respect unto a gracious end namely the justifying of Gods proceedings hath cast a good man upon such a course So dangerous a thing it is when a man is to seek in some particulars not to content himself with acknowledgment thereof and to waite upon God for a time of revelation but to cut out his own way in seeking satisfaction Thirdly the men of this world doe not walk answerably to the means they have received neither doe they imploy or use these talents to such advantage as they might The Gentiles though they knew God yet they glorified him not as God but became unthankfull and vain in their imaginations they did not like to retaine God in their knowledge but to detain the truth in unrighteousnesse The Jews resisted the Holy Ghost despised the messengers and word of God acknowledged not the day and meanes of their own peace refusing him and all his benefits preferring a murtherer and false prophet before him brought forth wilde grapes of injustice and oppression instead of the sweet grapes of righteousnesse and judgement In this they abused the talents and meanes of Grace in a worse manner then could bee excused by any necessity or impotency of corrupt nature Corrupt nature resisting not but by these helps they might have avoided these sinnes which they fell into and might have reached to the performance of these duties for the neglect of which they are here reproved for comming short of 〈◊〉 Yea Pilate himselfe would have brought forth better fruit then some of these which the Jews yeelded but that the Jews themselves prevailed with him for worse To speake plainely that phrases doe not deceive us it is true that the men of the world doe not live according to their knowledge nor abstaine from foule sinnes from which they might abstaine But what if they did should they finde mercy the sooner for unlesse you make this good you say nothing to the purpose Therefore to the maintenance of this you tended in the former Section but all in vaine For consider why then did not the Philosophers find mercy Plato Socrates Phocion the most morall men of the world Again did any of these abstaine from any foule finne in a gracious manner or out of their love to God Look to Isocrates his incitements to morality what are they other then the reward of praise and applause of the world and why I pray you should God regard them any whit the more for this nay did they not look for justification by this all their goodnesse did they not attribute to their own Free will and why should not God hate them the more for this Doe not Publicans and Harlots and did not our Saviour tell us as much enter into the kingdome of Heaven before Scribes and Pharisees Bee it so that the men of the world were Fornicators when they might have forborn it were Idolaters but might have abstained from that were Adulterers Wantons Buggerers and might have kept themselves pure from such abominations were theeves when they might have abstained from laying hands on their neighbours goods were covetous yet might have contemned the world as many did were Drunkards yet might have tempered themselves from such excesse were Railers yet might have ordered their tongnes were Extortioners yet might have been more mercifull then so Now I pray you tell me were not the elect of God such also See what the Apostle saith in reference to every one of these particulars 1 Cor. 6. 11. And such were some of you but yee are washed but yee are justifyed but yee are sanctifyed in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the spirit of our God Nay how many a naturall man was more morall then to be guilty of so foule pollutions as many of Gods elect have been conscious of yet never found mercy at the hands of God If otherwise God should call men not so much according to his purpose and grace as according to workes directly coutrary to Pauls text 1 Tim. 1. 9. And what then should become of that Hee hath mercy on whom hee will and whom hee will hee hardneth Rom 9 18. As for the fault you mention of the Gentiles was it not common to the Elect as well as to the Reprobates What saith Paul to the Corinthians 1 Cor. 12. 2. Yee know yee were Gentiles and were carryed away unto dumb Idols even as ye were led Yet the Romans for above a hundred years had no Images as Varro testifies saying That then the Gods were worshipped castius more chastly and that they who brought in Images timorem ademerunt errorem auxerunt took away the feare of God and increased the errour concerning the nature of God Yet in these dayes of Image-worship thousands were from Idols turned to serve the living God 1 Thess 1. 8. in those former daies not one that we read of Wee come to the Jews bee it so that they were worse then Pilate yet many of them in despight of their sinnes were converted unto Christ I say of them that crucified him and preferred a murtherer before him Pilate was not at least wee have a record of the conversion of the one Acts 2. none of the other Yea Saul breathing nothing but wrath and fury against the Church of God as Ferox scelerum Quia prima provenerant being heartned with the bloud of Stephen as with a cup of sweet Wine was converted unto Christ when many a morall quiet peaceable and nothing factious Jew had not the mercy shewed him that Saul had They abused you say their talents and meanes of grace in a worse manner then could bee excused yet who worse then Saul or Manasses by any necessity or impotency of corrupt nature But who I pray goes about to excuse them this way wee certainly excuse them not no nor they themselves neither for it were most incongruous they should even as if Epicures should complain of the sweet morsels which they roule under their tongues that they are so sweet that they cannot forbeare to bee in love with them But will you deny God to have a hand in hardning them to the committing of so foule excesse what is the meaning of giving over to vile affections to doe things inconvenient and that in an abominable kind and that to what end but this that so they might receive the just recompence of their errour yet that errour is well known to have been incident as well to the very elect of God as unto Reprobates By the way you signifie that by the neglect of the helpes and meanes afforded them they fell short of these duties to the performance whereof they might have reached Their sin was in doing contrary to their knowledge and conscience upon due information out of Gods Word this
to omit but not in a gracious manner which alone is not in his power to performe and say what justice is there in the damnation of such a man I answer as much as in the damnation of an infant for originall sinne considering that by reason of originall sin it is that a naturall man cannot performe any thing in a gracious manner to wit for want of the love of God Originall sinne being an habituall aversion from God and conversion unto the creature or more breifly an inordinate conversing with the creature either in enjoying it whereas hee should onely use it God alone being to be enjoyed or in using it but not in a gracious manner that is not for Gods sake to wit through want of the love of God which is brought upon us by the sinne of Adam as whereby our natures were bereaved of the spirit of God Thus in prosecuting mine answer unto a devised argument I have made bold to open my minde concerning originall sinne A point that hath seemed unto me of such difficultie that I have been wont to range it amongst those three whereabouts I could not expect to be satisfied whilst I lived Another was the very point wee have in hand To the fourth Doubt HOw may it appeare that Gods hatred of Esau is of a lesse degree of love since the making of him who by birth is superiour to be a servant to his underling argueth no good will at all but First rather a purpose to passe him by in respect of communicating grace and glory Secondly since the raising of Pharaoh which was to this intent to shew his power in his overthrow argueth the like Thirdly since hardning is an effect of hatred and depends on the will of God as the first cause thereof even as Mercy doth Fourthly since there is no cause of that objection why complaines hee Who hath resisted his will or at least of that answer Rom. 9. 20 21 22. I Answer as Jacob preferring Ephraim the younger brother to greater estate then his elder brother Manasses did not thereby declare a positive hatred of Manasses but a lesse degree of love to him in comparison of his brother So Gods preferring Jacob to bee a superiour and Lord to his elder brother Esau doth not argue that in him there is no good will at all to Esau but a lesse degree of love To subject Esau as a servant to Jacob doth not reprobate Esau but puts him into the condition of the world of mankind who together with the rest of the Creatures are made to bee servants to the Church of the elect and to the members of it But grant Gods hatred of Esau and making him a servant to his underling argueth no lesse then a purpose to passe him by in respect of communicating glory unto him out of grace And for my part thus farre I yeeld that it may well argue a purpose of God to passe by him in respect of communicating glory to him out of grace that grace I mean whereby hee hath made us accepted in his beloved for this grace or free love is made Jacobs preheminence and is denyed to Esau and though it put him into the estate of a servant to his elect brother and so into the condition of the world of mankind yet it doth not reprobate him or argue a purpose to passe him by in respect of communicating life or glory at all unto him but implyeth only a purpose to deale with him in justice viz. to give him life or death according to his works as I have already shewed in the answer to the former doubt and shall have occasion more fully to declare it in the end of this Surely Jacob in doing that which hee did to Manasses and Ephraim did neither preferre one to a greater estate then the other or love one lesse then the other But in the spirit of prophecy fore-signifyed what would bee the condition of each in their race and posterity But suppose a father in that which lyeth in his power preferres one son before another and accordingly in that way of Amor beneficentiae bee said to love one lesse then another will any sober man say that hee loves the one and hates the other is this a decent expression of lesse love Wee know full well that a lesse love in the way of beneficence may bee joyned with a greater love in the way of complacency As for example an earthly Father though hee suffer his eldest son to goe away with the Land yet hee may bear greater affection to a younger sonne though hee assigne unto him a farre lesse portion then to his elder brother And if it were decent to say hee hates him whom hee loves lesse in respect of beneficence then hee should bee said to hate him whom hee loves best Lastly if the hating of Esau bee interpreted lesse loving why may not the loving of Jacob by the same liberty bee interpreted the lesse hating of him Amongst Gods elect some are more beloved of God and some lesse according as hee ordaines one to greater grace and glory then another and is it fit to attribute that to Esau which wee attribute to Gods elect I grant that to subject Esau to Jacob as a servant is not to reprobate him for this subjection is made in time But reprobation as wee take it in opposition to election Ephes 1. 4. was made before all times It is your own phrase to distinguish the world of mankinde from the elect as if the elect were none of the world of mankinde For the very elect themselves are subjected as servants to the elect every one unto others though as great as Paul and Apollo as appeares by the very place your self have now in a contrary sense alledged more then once And who doubts that wee must all serve one another through love since Christ himself was content to wash his Disciples feete Lastly the yoke of Esau unto Jacob was at length shaken off as appeares by Isaacs prophesie it should bee but the yoke of subjection of all things unto the Church shall never bee shaken off But you perceive well enough that the discourse which you answer considered this temporall preferment which yet had course onely in their seed onely in a typicall manner as that which under temporall things prefigured spirituall and accordingly you proceed to shape your answer thereunto in that respect also The same is this Though God had no purpose to deale with Esau as hee dealt with Jacob that is to communicate glory unto him out of grace yet hee had a purpose of communicating glory unto him some other way and what can that bee but of communicating glory unto him not out of grace A very strange assertion and therefore no marvell you spared to set it down in so many words Onely you say that the putting him into the state of a servant did not reprobate him or argue a purpose to passe him by in respect of
communicating life and glory unto him Which to my judgement doth manifestly intimate that you acknowledge in God a purpose to communicate life and glory to Esau some way or other And if you did acknowledge a purpose in God not to communicate life and glory at all unto him this Aquinas confesseth and wee joyntly with Aquinas confesse that it is nothing lesse then to hate him For if God will have a man to bee and will not have him to bee saved surely hee will have him in the end to bee damned For in the end there will bee found no middle state equally remote from salvation and damnation But you doe in plain termes acknowledge a purpose in God to deale in justice with Esau and to give him life or death according to his works I presume you will not avouch this of all them that you account the world of mankinde For I doubt not but you will except Infants As for men of ripe years is it not as true of the elect as of those you call the men of the world that they shall bee dealt withall according to their workes I doe not say according to their deserts but according to their works keeping my self to your own phrase Hath not the Apostle professed 2 Cor. 5. 10. That wee must all appeare before the judgement seate of Christ that every man may receive the things which are done in his body according to that hee hath done whether it be good or evill But these works I confesse are different for either they consist in obedience or disobedience either to the Covenant of the Law or to the Covenant of Grace either to the Law of works or to a Law of Faith Now as for those whom you call the world of mankinde and concerning whom you professe God hath a purpose to judge them according to their works I demand whether your meaning is God wil judge them according to their works in reference to the Covenant of the Law or in reference to the Covenant of Grace If in reference to the Covenant of the Law then the meaning must bee this God hath a purpose to save them in case they perform exact obedience to his Law But in case they continue not in every thing that is writen in the book of the Law to doe it Gods purpose is to condemn them to everlasting death Now I appeale to every sober Christians judgement whether if God hath no purpose to save them but upon condition of such obedience and withall hath a purpose to damne them upon condition of such disobedience whether all things considered it may not bee more truely avouched that God hath a purpose to damne them but no purpose at all to save them If it bee spoken in reference to the Covenant of Grace I dispute against it first in the same manner The conditions of the Covenant of Grace on mans part being Faith and Repentance if God will not save them but upon condition of faith and repentance and will damne them in case of infidelity and impenitency then surely if it shall bee found that the men of this world are far more prone to infidelity and impenitency then unto faith and repentance it followeth that God purposeth rather to damne them then to save them But in case they are naturally carryed to infidelity and impenitency and have no power to beleeve in Christ and to break off their sinnes by true repentance then it followeth as well in respect of this Covenant of grace according whereunto God will deale with them as in respect of the former Covenant of the Law that God hath no purpose to save them but hath a purpose to damne them unto everlasting fire But so it is of all those whom you call the world of mankind namely that they have no power to believe in Christ or to break off their sinnes by repentance but are naturally carryed on unto infidelity and impenitency as I prove thus They that cannot discern the things of God but account them foolishnesse they cannot beleeve in Christ But such are all they whom you call the world of mankind for they are not regenerate and consequently they are meere naturals Now the naturall man as the Apostle speakes perceives not the things of God for they are foolishnesse unto him Again all such persons are still in the flesh Now the affection of the flesh is enmity against God is not subject to the Law of God neither indeed can bee Secondly I prove that God cannot deale with them whom you call the world of mankinde according to the Covenant of Grace For if hee should hee should save them all as I prove thus If whatsoever God requires by this covenant on mans part God undertakes to perform on his part then it is impossible but that all must bee saved with whom hee meanes to deale according to this covenant But whatsoever by this covenant God requires on mans part God himself undertakes to perform on his part as I prove thus First in generall God undertakes in this covenant to bee our Lord and our God to sanctifie us Therefore hee undertakes to give us faith and repentance Secondly in speciall and first doth God require at our hands that wee should love him with all our hearts and with all our soules God undertakes to perform this I will circumcise thine heart and the heart of thy children that thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart and with all thy soule Doth God require at our hands that wee feare him And God also undertakes on his part to work us unto this Jer. 32. 40. And I will put my feare into their hearts that they shall never depart away from mee Doth God require Faith this also on his part hee performes Act. 2. ult God added to the Church dayly such as should bee saved And Philip. 1. 29. To you it is given to beleeve in him and to suffer for him Doth God require Repentance Even to this end God sent his Sonne to give repentance unto Israel and forgivenesse of sins In a word it is God that makes us perfect unto every good work to do his will working in us that which is pleasing in his sight through Jesus Christ Heb. 13. 21. Answ But in the second place it may bee argued that Gods raising up of Pharaoh to this intent to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow argueth the like hatred of Esau as of Pharaoh viz. a purpose of passing both by without communicating grace or glory unto them To which I answer a difference there is between Esau and Pharaoh though not in their finall condition nor in 〈◊〉 purpose concerning them Yet in the degree of their present estate whereunto they were severally come when God gave out his severall Oracles concerning them both for hee saith not of Pharaoh God raised him up to shew his power in his hardning and overthrow before hee had done good or evill as hee said of
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