to all but dâ—th our affirmation viz. that God loveth onely his Church with his highest and greatest love contradict that of the Psalmist viz. that God is good to all let the Author better consider hath the Lord nothing to bestow unlesse he give them the top of his love Thirdly he saith it contradicteth the force of all his exhortations and calls to such as refuse nay it leaveth a way for these there being not his highest love for greater it is for God to give hearts willing to obey his call which his very words intimate he giveth not to all therefore loveth not all with his highest love And so for the rest they are weake and to no purpose alledged onely apted against this position that God hath not loved every man at all which is not our affirmation let them that broach it maintaine it But he hath a more stupendious piece of blasphemy against our assumption viz. It saith he hath not loved any other of mankinde no not when he made and beheld them all righteous but hated them Oh fearefull to say that he hateth the righteous Psalm 45.7 But here envy speaketh and ignorance admires for we say not nor can it be infer'd from us that God loved not innocent man at all but that he loved not him with his transcendent and greatest love he did not manifest the top of his love to him and this is no such blasphemy or fearefull thing to say for the gift that he gave to his Church viz. His Son was greater then primitive grace or any thing that he conferred in the creation and our deserts lesse for though in creation we could deserve no good and so his gift be free yet now in in our restoring we deserved much evill in creation what good he gave us was onely without merit but he now bestoweth all against our me it hence the scripture puts the emphasis of love upon the worke of redemption mercy having more in it then meere goodnesse by the former rather then by the latter he would be knowne as by his glory Exod. 33.19 34.6.7 But besides why should he fasten that on us as blasphemy which will prove the result of his owne words he saith to hate is to love in a lesse degree page 92. now doth not God love the righteous in a lesse degree then he loveth his onely Sonne in then he hateth the righteous by his owne doctrine oh fearefull to say but thus much is cleare that grant him that God loved innocent man yet it followeth not that he loved every man with the top and greatest of his love so that our Minor yet standeth good But he descendeth to give some satisfactory answer to the argument and it is well he doth so for his former words have yeelded but little it is well if his afterwords yeeld more we shall not shut our eyes against it He would have the Scripture shewed where it speaketh of the love and hatred let it be so as also his words which are these The Scripture mentioneth a diverse kinde and degree of love and hatred in God shewen in the effects of it Now herein I shall willingly joyne issue with him seriously to consider and weigh not onely what Scripture saith but what the Scripture meaneth in such speeches least we vent our owne conceits unworthy the nature of God love and hatred is no more attributed to God then desire griefe rejoycing with all other affections and passions of men which in us are perturbations and why not then love and hatred but to grant any perturbations in God comes little short of blasphemy therefore it may be controverted whether as all the rest of our affections incident to us so love and hatred be attributed to God properly or onely by an Anthropopathy as the members of our body are given to him by an Anthropomorphy that there is such a thing in God which we call love I grant but that the name of love and hatred is but figuratively given to it that also I affirme Gods love is generally thus defined Velle dare bonum creaturis a will to bestow good upon his creatures now this will is properly said to be in God but it is as I conceive figuratively called love after the manner of men because whom man loveth to him he willeth to bestow good So Gods will to bestow good is termed his love yet this is the difference mans will to bestow good is an effect of his love but God when he willeth to give good it is not any effect of his love but his love it self Scripture furnisheth us with such expressions John 3.16 God so loved the world that he sent his Sonne that is his actuall sending is an effect of his love that is of his will to send but we never finde this nor any such God so loved that he willed to send his Sonne because his will to send his Sonne is that love it selfe Hence that assertion of Cortinus in Molin l. 5. s 3 Let him that will consult with him about that expression Alius affectus mensura alterius affectus causa quod deus decretum faciat hath not stabiliment at all in Scripture this being considered it will appeare that Gods love hath no augmentation diminution alteration diversification Aquin. p. 1â— Q 20. Art 30. Q. 20. Art 20. Q. 23. Art 30. but what proceeds from the good things bestowed or will to bestow them so that as God is said to will a greater or lesse good so he is said to love more or lesse Ex parte boni voliti unum diligit magis aut minus And as the willeth some good freely and yet some evill for the sinne of the creature that creature may be said to be both loved and hated Idem potest odio haberi amari diversa ratione peccator amatur odio habetur and that as God willeth to give this man eternall life and to deny that man the same good he is said to love the one and hate the other although to both he give some good Deus omnes amat in quantum omnibus dat aliquod bonum in quantum aliquibus non dat vitam aeternam ideo eos od o habet These being considered I shall make it appeare that there is more feare of his confounding the degrees of his love of compassion then that wee should confound his love of compassion and delight as he speaketh Now to proceed to what he saith of Gods love and hatred of Gods love he speaketh of a double sort Love of Compassion and Delight I shall not insist on these termes though I might and show his want of wisdome in hinting such expressions without explanation for true the Scripture gives to God compassion but in compassion there must needs be passion but none in God Nor yet to insist upon what he saith of either by way of bounding to each its limits in good things bestowed though I might expatiate my selfe herein for
THE VNIVERSALIST Examined and Convicted destitute of plaine Sayings of Scripture or Evidence of Reason In Answer to a Treatise entituled The Vniversality of Gods free Grace in Christ to Mankind By Obadiah Howe A. M. Oxon. Pastor of Stickney in Lincolne-shire For their sakes I sanctifie my selfe John 17.19 He dyed for this Nation and not for this Nation only but that he might gather into one all the Children of God John 11.51 Urgent fratres articulum istum totidem Scripturae verbis nunquam reperiri sed respondemus fieri non posse ut articulus Controversus inter eos qui Scripturam pro verbo Dei agnoscunt totidem verbis concipiatur Remon Coll. Hagiens 170. Christus mortuus est pro omnibus est propitiatio pro peccatis totius mundi c qui sic loquitur cum Scriptura loquitur qui phrasin hane repudiant andax est Scripturarum judex non interpres qui ista loca convenienter Analogiae fidei explicat boni interpretis officium facit controversia enim est de sensu non de verbis Armin. Resp ad 31. Artic. Art 13. Printed for John Rothwell at the Sun and Fountaine in Pauls Church-yard 1648. To the Christian Reader with some Animadversions upon the Authors Epistle THe infirmity of crowding to the Presse is growne Epidemicall Infirmity I call it because from thence men doe Publicè insanire and have this unhappinesse that in the Apostles phrase their madnesse is knowne to all men 2 Tim. 3 9. And Epidemicall I call it for who though of the meanest of the people but may fill his hand and the Presse at pleasure Such hath been the License of these latter times that Pamphlets swarme without License and now the pretended Mother striveth to divide the childe with the true errour with truth and pleadeth if it hath not equall liberty of the Presse that truth is supprest We want some wise Solomon to give wise judgement to give truth its owne and let errour know what she is Whether the want of such hath not much dishonoured the Presse blemished the truth impeded Reformation dissetled the people let common experience determine Such daily births of Pamphlets to and fro can be no lesse to the people then the windes are to the waves make them crowde into new stormes As Athens ascribed her troubles to the Orators who tossed the flexible multitude into sedition I wish that this had not too great an influence into our present distractions which if they were such as did recompence us with some hidden truths they were worth the buying at so deare a rate but if we observe them they are such as are addicted only to miscall truth as if they were hired to curse Israel If they can but call Antichristian erroneous impious blasphemous it passeth for current as if they had proved it so as if a foule mouth was the Index of a deep head and scurrilitie the measure of reason Reader that which thou hast here to the test and examined is no new opinion nor any new light added to an old truth but the manner of maintaining it is very singular none before daring to appeare so apsurd in Print This with foure other annexed points of Arminius have formerly troubled quiet states and strong heads but now I cannot say that they doe either Men of but indifferent parts much more of more accurate have left raking in the ashes of these perplexed Disputes being such as have had their heat pretty well allayed long since but of late some indigested and shattered braines have revived them with no more hope of successe than intention to cure our Commotions The Authour of this Discourse with whom I am to engage would be taken for a Messenger of new Light but he appeares under no other face than of a mishapen Arminian One strong in the Point of Redemption but looketh with another face in the Point of Election In the former he is not different but where he is more absurd I must acknowledge the depth of these Controversies these negotiating and criticall times my slender yeares and my Pastorall imployment doe all comply to a disadvantage were they not counterpoised with some incouragement from my Adversary My genius was never martiall'd up in these Bible-battels therefore it cannot be expected that I should adde any new Light to these Points which have exercised yea exhausted the choisest Lamps in Christendome for their discovery I must say of this my Answer as the Poet of his Satyr against some Scriblers in his time Pers in Prol Non ad poesin ingenio natus sed temporum ratione ductus ◠Such are the distempers of the times and the negotiations of men both of weake judgements and corrupt minds that now the exigence both of truth and peace requireth that they that have but little cast in their Mite I may doe it at as cheape a rate as any Empty Margents common resolutions and an answer as worthlesse as his Discourse will not be to my disparagement I have nothing that can promise more for as I have nothing to satisfie if men expect so I have nothing to lose if men censure Reader if thou observest we may see the whole Fabrick in his Frontispiece the marrow of his whole discourse in his Epistle and therein we have a tast of that Scripture reason or faire dealing we are likely to expect from the whole which if I should throughly examine and give a solicitous answer to I should prevent my selfe and make my Epistle as voluminous as his Treatise I shall therefore take some things that are not else where and leave the rest to fall under the successive refutations in the following discourse First we find the man in a passion of the heart Heartily grieved that a Church professing the great love of God in the authorised Doctrine thereof should be abused by many It seemeth then there is a Church of England and the Doctrine thereof Orthodox both which is much questioned now in these times were he well furnished he should have my voice to be the Churches Champion but that I feare he hath an eye more to his owne tenent then the Authority of the Church of England and so long as She saith as he saith Shee shall not want the Title of a Church that it may bee known he hath the suffrage of a Church of his side not much unlike that Papall Sycophant Constat summum Pontificem à pio Constantino Deum appellari But the Particulars of his sad Complaint are these Many deny and blaspheme this great love of God to mankind in Scripture affirmed John 3.16 17. As if God hated most men from Eternity so as they are not beholding to him for any good at all nor have any doore of repentance or meanes of life opened and afforded to them It is usuall with Impostures to frame to themselves Adversaries and worke them to their owne conceits and this is the Authour guilty of For 1. He cannot produce
odious that wherin the vigour of the argument lyeth is left out and a superfluity of confusion intermingled which giveth us a taste of his faithfulnesse in this businesse which he at first promised if he do it willingly he is to be blamed if ignorantly he will not I hope thinke much to be informed the argument in its genuine shape runs thus and it was the sixth in order in the conscience at Hague Those for whom Christ died he loved them some with the top and greatest love that is showne to man But so he loveth not all and every man with his greatest love Ergo He died not for every man that is for every son of Adam The major proposition is grounded on many Texts wherein the love of Christ in dying for us is not set downe as an expression of love barely but with an emphasis and transcendebly as Rom. 5.8 a love with all commendation or magnification 1 Iohn 3.16 He so loved the world not great love onely but greatest John 15.13 no greater love then for a man to lay downe his life for his friend but Christs greater in that he did it when we were enemies therefore we propound it not so remissely as he fallaciously whom he dieth for he loveth and no more but loveth eminently with the greatest love The minor is undeniable for that God should love every man most and with his greatest love yea the damned with so great as beloveth the saved withall the Arminians durst never yet affirme Scripture no where speaketh and the Author himselfe overthroweth page 89. to some more especiall love is showne Now any may see the wide difference betwixt the argument in its genuine force and as he propoundes it and all his answers fall to the ground being apted not to the argument but his perversions of it yet I shall reply that I may reduce him to truth As for that Text 1 Iohn 3.16 it is picked out of purpose by himself it is not so clearly holding fâ—ith the force of the argument as many others yet to take it as it lieth let us consider that it meaneth that transcendent love beyond the greatest of mans Hereby perceive we that love Cap. 4.10 11. and if he so loved us and behold what love Cap. 3 ver 1. Now can every son of Adam say I perceive the greatest love of God to me in that Christ died for me if every man perceiveth the greatest love then no roome for his expresse page 89. to some more speciall favour iâ— showne His after-plea The place speakes of the perception of love by beleivers helpeth not because it speaketh of no other perception then what arose from the former assertion Christ hath died for us it is a conclusion from infallible premises which any may conclude that can so premise there is such a connexion betwixt his dying for and his greatest love that every one that affirmeth the one doth in eodem instanti affirme the other it is no speciall priviledge of some to perceive his greatest love in dying for them but of all for whom he died Thus for the major He then violently assaulteth the minor thus The assumption is full of infidelity and blasphemy A heavy charge if he can make his charge good but like â—ailing Raâ—shekah he oftner barketh then biteth but how great is his impudence and injury to misalledge his adversary into infidelity and blasphemy let him take the assumption as he should propound it viz. God loveth not every man with his greatest love then either it is not infidelity and blasphemy or else he is equally guilty with us for he saith page 89. God giveth to some more speciall love if so then he loveth not every man with his speciall and greatest love nay yet further he saith page 90. If it had been God loveth not every man in the world it might be granted and proved which is more then he can prove but if it be a truth that he loveth not every man in the world then certainely it is far from infidelity and blasphemy to say that he loveth not every man with his transcendent and greatest love no nor ever hath loved every man with his greatest love Neither is it such blasphemy as he pretendeth to say that he hath not nor doth love any but his Church with his transcendent or greatest love the Apostle giveth great reason so to affirme Ephes 5.25 26. He therefore exhorteth to conjugall affection which is the greatest and strongest of all relations and to the greatest and highest degree of that kinde and the patterne of this he fetcheth from Christ to his Church and that expressed in giving up himselfe to death for them is it not cleare that he loveth his Church with his transcendent and greatest love nay this he plainely affirmeth page 9â— from this very Text Ephes 5.25 where he saith That Text speakes of higher ends of giving himselfe then ransome even of the speciall fruits of application ver 26. so the Author page 94. So intimating that the application holds forth greater love then the giving his life to procure but this is groundlesse for though the Text speaketh of the application of his blood yet the specimen of his transcendent love is not in that but his giving himselfe to that end In that he loved it and gave himselfe for it Besides Scripture speaketh as if to give his life to procure is a signe of greater love then to give his spirit to sanctifie the Apostle inforceth from the greater to the lesse if he gave us him to die for us much more with him will he give us all things spirit to helpe infirmities vocation justification glorification Rom. 9.32 And when the Scripture commendeth his love it is not that he gives them Spirit to apply but his life to merit in that he died and no better testimony doe I desire then of the Remonstrants themselves Collat. Hagien in Arg. 6. Quum vitâ nullum pretiosius pignus quia pro alio constituere potest merito dicitur summam esse charitatem vitam deponere hoc cum scipo Christi convenit sicut cum aliis locis Ephes 1.2 1 Iohn 3.16 That is seeing none can lay downe for any a greater pledge then life therefore it is deservedly said that it is the greatest love to lay downe life for one by which the evidence both of Major and Mâ—nor appeareth But here in page 90 he instanceth where the blasphemy of our assumption lyeth viz. in contradicting and blaspheming many Texts of Scripture as Iohn 3.16 where it speakes of Gods love to the world true but is in the beleeving part of it as the afterwords show for them that beleeve not whom God foreseeth how doth God expresse his love to them doth he send his sonne to die for them that as many of them whom he foreseeth to persist in unbeleefe as that beleeve should not perish So he saith it blasphemeth Psal 145.8.9.136.25 where it saith the Lord is good
debt which God requires c. so that here is not two payments of one debt but a new debt in despising Gods goodnesse I demand when he saith Christ satisfied for sinne what sinne he means what onely for originall and lest us to satisfie for actuall or for some actuall and left us to makt out the rest Was the unbeleife of Paul in the time of non conversion a new debt not satisfied for can any be saved and their sinnes not satisfied for is any able to satisfie but Christ and the sinner be capable of life O impious doctrine derogatory to the sufferings of Christ is not Christs worke a perfect worke but a man may have a new debt that was not thought on by Christ strange divinity how must the deare children of God do with their past rebellions against meanes of grace it is a new debt Christ satisfied not they are not able doth not he doe well to charge others with grosse ignorance that he may have some fellowes Hath he so soone forgot his protestation against popery and to defend the doctrine of the church of England against all popish innovation which doctrine runnes thus That Christ suffered for all sinnes of men originall and actuall Yet he comes with a new debt unsatisfyed for and who must if Christ did not I would have the Author tell me what he meaneth when he saith The whole debt of mankinde became his page 3. is not contempt of meanes and rebellion against Gods call part of our debt certainely herein the Author discovered too much ignorance with which he is pleased to brand others certainely those for whom Christ undertook he satisfyed for all their sinnes originall actuall against Law against Gospel his satisfaction was not done to the halfe to need a corrivall in that worke therfore such can have no new debt and such cannot in justice be bound over to suffer eternall torments for any sinne no not for any pretended new debt he hath taken away all that stands crosse to our salvation so the Author speaketh page 18. 19. And all that he saith notwithstanding the proposition standeth firme CHAP. XVI Of the fourth Objection A Fourth Argument is this Those to whom he would not vouchsafe to manifest himselfe or to pray for for those he would not die John 17.9 But he would not manifest himselfe to nor pray for the world of ungodly and wicked men Ergo He did not die for the world of ungodly or wicked men Before I come to his answers I shall take notice of his dealing with the argument to make it fit for his purpose 1. He confoundeth two arguments together for Manifestation of him self that belongeth to an other argument neither can he give any president of jumbling these two together which confusion will make the argument not clear and the answers obscure 2. He cannot produce any that citeth John 17.9 to prove the Major 3. Nor any that maketh the Minor to runne thus But he prayed not for the world of ungodly or the conclusion to run thus Ergo He dyed not for the world of ungodly all these are purposely foysted in to make the argument seeme vile this is no faithfull dealing as he promised the argument runneth thus in the seventh Argument in Hag. Col. Those whom he reconciled he interceded for John 17.9 But He interceded not for all and every son of Adam John 17.9 Ergo He reconciled not every sonne of Adam John 17.9 The Major is thus grounded Rom. 8.32 he saith If he give us his Sonne he wil much more give us all things The Argument is this if he gave us the greater he will certainely much more give us the lesse so if he die for us he will pray for us so in the negative we conclude if he pray not for the world which is the lesse he did not die for or reconcile which is the greater Now to perpend his answers he giveth this generall and facile refutation This objection is false many waies And that which he driveth at I guesse to be the ground of the reason that is the ground of proceeding from the lesse to the greater negatively that he would prove it is no good reason to say because he would not pray therefore he would not die for the world and he urgeth thus It is not right reason to say God would not make Heaven c. whom he would not preserve in that good estate But had he beene in his right reason he would have seen this very impertinent to our purpose our argument proceeds from the lesse to the greater negatively but his instance proceedeth from the greater to the lesse negatively which is unsound and quite contrary to the businesse in hand for to preserve in a good estate is a greater mercy then to create in such estate onely so that though this is not sound he will not create because he will not preserve yet this is good if he will not create which is the lesse he will not preserve which is the greater and this serveth us the lesse may include the greater negatively but the greater cannot the lesse As for those expresses that touch that part of the argument viz. the manifesting of himselfe to the world it is not to this argument which mixture of Heterogeneous expresses will pertuâ—be the reader in the cleare decision of this argument therefore I wave them Againe he urgeth If Christ had said he never did nor would pray for the world which he never said yet it were evill in us to use that as an argument to deny the truth of his own words as that he dyed for all and every one But rather an evill in himselfe to obtrude such a sense on those places that contradict Christs owne words or the true consequences from the same it is no evill in us to gainesay the phansy or glosse that the Author puts on those Texts from this I can gather little but that the Author would have all the sayings of our Saviour to take the modell of their interpretations from his own conceits upon those places 1 Tim. 2.6 Heb. 2.9 which is not a reasonable postulatum as for that parenthesis which he did not if he once said he did not and it cannot be proved that ever he did pray for that world we may presume he meaneth he never had nor would pray for them This confoundeth his love of compassion common to all and of delight peculiar to Beleevers It is hard to divine his meaning herein unlesse he meaneth that his dying for be only the love of compassion and his praying for the love of delight and so to pray for us to be a greater love then dying for us for so he maketh the love of delight to be the greatest love but this is not apparent by any Scripture and how this argument confoundeth compassion and delight the Author would have done well to have discovered to them that see it not This confoundeth the death of Christ as ransome