Gods love to Christ especially when both are acknowledged to be eternall and to be toward both the man Christ and us before wee or the world had a being most of all when in the issue the priority seems to be for us rather then for Christ for it is confest that priority in Gods decrees consists onely in purposing one thing for another And again it is without question that all priority in this case is on the part of that for which another thing is purposed Now albeit wee are Christs servants and hee our Lord yet undoubtedly Christ was ordained rather for our good then wee for his good yet I doe not hence collect that our predestination was before Christs much lesse that Gods love was lesse towards him then towards us but I willingly acknowledge that albeit thousands had tasted of Gods love both in the way of nature and grace and glory before Christ-man had any being at all yet was the love of God to the manhood of Christ infinitely beyond his love towards us measuring the love of God by the effects thereof and that in two respects first for as much as the fruit of Gods love to him was the taking of his humane nature into an hypostaticall union with the Sonne of God secondly in making him the Captain of our salvation Heb. 2. 10. Least of all is it my meaning to extenuate the heinous nature of sinne by setting forth the purpose of God concerning the incarnation of Christ before the consideration of the fall of Adam It is enough to make sinne out of measure sinfull that God in his wisedome saw no meanes so sit as by the sinne and fall of Adam to make way for the humiliation of Christ and thereby for the manifestation of his justice and riches of his mercy and both in Christ although we grant so far as to conceive that God had never thought of humbling the Godhead or advancing the manhood of Christ but upon consideration of sin fore-seen Ex magnitudine remedii magnitudinem cognosce periculi saith Bernard this hath place in what order soever Christ was ordained a Sacrifice for sinne neither is there any colour of remitting ought of the heinousnesse of sin by the priority or posteriority of Christs predestination in comparison to Gods decree concerning the permission of sinne Sinne and the heinousnesse thereof is amplified according to the quality of the transgression in reference to Gods law so honourable a rule of mans perfection and to Gods deserts at our hands and plentifull motives from consideration both of rewards and punishments wherewith it is estadlished It is a common and just aggravation of sinne that it caused the Son of God to be humbled but to aggravate it in making way for Christs humiliation is a very odde conceit in my judgement Neither doe I comprehend how the manifestation of justice in punishing sinne or of mercy in pardoning it doth aggravate the heinousnesse of sin This I say I comprehend not The second DOUBT WHere have wee in Scripture ground for this That the Lords first and primary intention in his decree of Predestination was to set forth Grace and Justice That the declaration of his justice was intended is not doubted but by the Apostle it seemeth his primary aime was the declaration of the soveraignty freedom and dominion of God over the creature in that hee purposeth grace and power The Apostle throughout his whole discourse of Predestination doth no where oppose grace and power for God sheweth as much power freedome and dominion over the creature in his grace toward the elect as in his justice toward the world The Apostle sets forth the like power and soveraign will of God as well in shewing mercy on whom hee will as hardening whom hee pleaseth Doe not think hee opposeth Gods power and soveraignty over Pharaoh to his grace and love unto Jacob for the power hee there speaks of is not soveraignty but ability might and power shewing it selfe forth in the hardening and overthrow of Pharaoh in Moses called the power of his wrath Power naturall is one thing power civill which wee call soveraignty another the first is ability to doe a thing the second is liberty to doe what naturally hee can doe without sinne Undoubtedly the power of God shewed in Pharaoh was in his overthrow and answerable to the power of Gods wrath I like well that the power of God shewed in Pharaoh is extended also to the hardening of his heart onely this is not so congruously applied to the power of Gods wrath for as much as wrath hath alwayes reference to something in man as the cause of it so hath not hardening in that of Paul Rom. 9. 18. Hee hardeneth whom hee will like as hee hath mercy on whom hee will But withall I confesse hardening in this place seems to consist onely in denying of mercy But Pharaohs hardening was much more for undoubtedly mercy was no more shewed him when his heart releâ—ted to the letting of Israel goe then when hee detained them So likewise when God hardened him to follow after them to bring them back this was more than a bare denying of mercy even a secret impulsion of him to take such courses as should precipitate him unto destruction and this may well be accounted a fruit of the power of Gods wrath and accordingly I am verily perswaded that Gods power or soveraignty over Pharaoh are not opposed to his grace and love to Jacob Onely freedome in my judgement doth not so well consent with the execution of justice whether justice be taken in rewarding or punishing Neither doe wee ever read of Gods rewarding or punishing whom hee will freedome and soveraignty is seen only in giving or denying good according to common account Albeit there is a further freedom and soveraignty of God over his creatures in doing evill unto them as in annihilating the most righteous which Arminius acknowledgeth and in exposing his holy Son to suffer strange pains and sorrowes for other mens sinnes when hee had none of his owne Not to speak of the soveraignty wherewith God hath indued man over his fellowes though inferiour creatures That God in his decree of Predestination did shew forth the declaration of his soveraignty freedome and dominion over the creatures I easily grant yet that it was his primary aime rather then the declaration of his justice and grace I cannot beleeve without better proofe My opinion is That all the variety of Gods glory to bee manifested in the creature was intended at once and if they that are otherwise minded come to a particular expression of what glory was intended first and what next and so in order I am perswaded the incongruity of that order will soon appear It is granted on all hands that God first aimed at the declaration of his owne glory Now wherein doth God delight principally for to manifest his glory God himselfe declared it to Moses who
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
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
rewarding him according to his deserts in conformity to that of the Apostle Therefore hath God exalted him But neither this advancement of his is the end of his humiliation nor either of these the end of his assumption into an hypostaticall union with the Sonne of God Nor his hypostaticall union with the second person in Trinity the end of any of these and therfore they are to be accompted rather co-ordinate then subordinate in the intention of God 2. Now I come to examine how this doubt is cleered Here we have first a rule then the accomodation of this rule Touching the rule I acknowledge it and I adde something to the cleering of it Granting that there is no order in Gods decrees but such as is grounded upon this that God purposeth one thing for another This one thing and another are only the end and the means between which we say in the intention of God there is onely prioritas rationis priority of reason which in my judgement is well expounded thus when ratio unius petitur à ratione alterius the reason of the one is taken from the reason of the other as ratio mediorum petitur à ratione sinis the reason of the means is taken from the reason of the end And therefore we say The end is first in intention and then the meanes As for the accomodation of the rule it seems to me to be nothing at all to the purpose for the doubt proposed was not how it might appeare that there was any thought of the glorifying of God before the presupposall of Adams fall and of Christs humiliation We willingly acknowledge the glory of God was thought on before them all both before the incarnation advancement of the man Christ mans fall and Christs humiliation I say before them all prioritate rationis by priority of reason for undoubtedly both the incarnation of the Son of God That is the hypostaticall union of Christs manhood to the second person in the Trinitie and the advancement of the man Christ was to the glory of God as the end thereof as well as ought else And this glory of God hath been specified at least in part And as for the glorifying of himself in Christ this still denotes the glory of God as the end though it addes withall the matter wherein it shines to wit the man Christ And to prevent the errour of equivocation that usually lurkes under generalls This glorifying of God in Christ consists either in severall or in common with the glorifying of himself in man also to wit in the elect considered in severall I confesse there is a double glory of God manifested in Christ The one is the glory of his pure grace in conferring the greatest good and honour that the creature is capable of as namely in the hypostaticall union of the manhood of Christ to the second person in the Trinitie Secondly the glory of Gods remunerative justice in the highest degree possible both in respect of the reward the greatest that possibly could be deserved for that hypostaticall union could not be deserved and that is the glorisication of the humane nature of Christ both in respect of his glory absolute and of his glory relative as by whom salvation is procured to others as also in respect of the desert the greatest I thinke that possibly could be to wit the humiliation of the Sonne of God to the death of the crosse in way of obedience to his Fathers will There is also a glory of God that appeares in Christ not in severall as a sole meanes thereof but in common with other meanes joyntly concurring thereunto and that is the glory of God in the way of mercie mixt with justice in saving sinners for the obedience of Christ The glory of God in all these severall wayes was in the first place intended by God before ought else prioritate rationis in prioritie of reason and afterwards the congruous meanes to these severall ends as the ends them selves did bespeake were intended by him for ratio mediorū petitur à ratione sinis the reason of the meanes is taken from the reason of the end But all this is nothing to shew that the incarnation of the second person or advancement of the man Christ should be before the consideration of mans fall or Christs humiliation Yet let us examine that which followeth delivered by way of proof of that which no man that I know makes question of Because Christ was ordained before the world was therefore before the consideration either of Creation or Fall For in scripture phrase when God is said to doe one thing before another he meaneth before the existence or being of it in his consideration as an inducement leading him unto it as well as before the existence of it by nature As when God is said to have loved Jacob rather then Esau before they had done either good or evill Rom. 9. 11. He meaneth before they had done it in his consideration as a cause or condition leading him to love or hatred as well as in actuall performance in their owne persons I pray consider why was Christ ordained and to what end before the world was Was he not ordained to be incarnate in the womb of the Virgin and to be a Lambe for a burnt offering to make satisfaction for sins And was it possible that this ordination could have course without consideration of the creation and fall And though this be confessed yet will it not here hence follow that the decree of creation and permission of mans fall was before the decree of the incarnation of the Sonne of God which alone as I conceive casteth some mens inventions upon the platforme of a new course And consequently it will not follow that in this case the consideration of creation and fall should precede as motives to God to send his Sonne For first I say the considerations hereof are not all precedent but conjunct and concomitant like as are the decrees Secondly if they did precede yet should they not precede as motives Good or evill workes are fit motives I confesse of election and reprobation if it were possible their considerations could precede the one or the other But creation and fall are no fit motives of ordaining Christ for they were found in Angels as well as in men though the consideration of them could precede this ordination 2. Election is as expresly said to be before the foundation of the world as the ordination of Christ And was not reprobation in opposition to election in the same moment of time and nature also Doth not election connotate reprobation But it will be said that this phrase before the world signifies not any measure of duration when that worke was done but a negation of any consideration had of the creation or fall This seems a very strange construction therefore it deserves to be discussed 3. Before Abraham was I am would you interpret it thus Before the
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
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
moment of nature and reason will both prevent this inconvenience and also justifie Gods decree of condemnation to proceed upon the consideration of those sinnes for which hee purposeth to condemne them But then there is another point of great moment which in like manner must be accorded unto though you seeme to be little aware of it though I willingly confesse this over-sight is very generall namely that God decreeth the salvation of none of ripe yeares but upon or with a joynt consideration of their faith repentance and good workes For let us first make the decrees of salvation and condemnation matches As for example Reprobation as it is accounted the decree of condemnation is a decree of punishing with everlasting death Now if you will match Election unto this as it is the decree of salvation it must be conceived as a decree of rewarding with everlasting life Now let any man judge whether this decree must not as necessarily be conjoyned with the consideration of faith repentance and good works in men of ripe years as the decree of condemnation or of punishing with everlasting death must be conjoyned with the consideration of those sinnes for which God purposeth to punish them And I will further demonstrate it thus Like as the decree of permitting some men to sinne and to continue therein to the end and Gods decree of condemning for sinne are joynt decrees neither afore nor after other and consequently the decree of condemning for sinne must necessarily be conjoyned with the consideration of sinne In like sort Gods decree of giving some faith repentance and good workes and his decree of rewarding them with everlasting life are joynt decrees neither of them afore or after other and consequently Gods decree of saving them and rewarding them with everlasting life is joyned with the consideration of their faith repentance and good workes Now that these are joynt decrees I prove thus First the decree of salvation cannot precede the decree of giving faith and repentance for if it should then salvation were the end of faith and repentance but salvation is not the end as I prove thus The end is such as doth necessarily bespeake the meanes tending thereunto but salvation doth not necessarily bespeake faith and repentance tending thereunto for God intending the salvation of Angels brought it to passe without faith and repentance as likewise the salvation of many an infant hee brings to passe without faith and repentance Secondly the end of Gods actions can be nothing but himselfe and his owne glory and therefore salvation it selfe must have for end the glory of God Now examine what glory of God is manifested in mans salvation and it will forth with appeare upon due examination that the glory of God manifested in mans salvation is such as whereunto not salvation only doth tend but diverse other things joyntly concurring with salvation thereunto As for example Gods glory manifested on the elect is in the highest degree of grace but in the way of mercie mixt with justice This requires permission of sin the sending of Christ to make satisfaction for sinne faith and repentance for Gods justice is seen partly in conferring salvation by way of reward and last of all salvation Out of all these results the glory of God in doing good to his creature in the highest degree of grace proceeding in the way of mercie mixt with justice Thirdly if God gave faith and repentance to this end to bring his elect unto salvation as to the end thereof then by just proportion of reason God should deny the gift of faith and repentance unto others that is to permit them finally to persevere in their sinners thereby to procure their condemnation as the end thereof which you will not affirme neither can it with any sobrietie be affirmed In the next place I will shew that neither can the decree of giving faith and repentance precede the decree of salvation for if it should then should faith repentance be the last in execution to wit if it were first in intention and consequently men should first be saved and afterwards have faith and repentance granted unto them Thus I have shewed my readinesse to concurre with you in opinion in this particular and that upon other grounds than yours and whose grounds are more sound yours or mine I am content to remit it to the judgement of any indifferent Reader As for your reason here mentioned repeating onely what you have formerly delivered as touching the will and good pleasure of God not for the death but for the life not onely of the elect but of all others also the vanitie of this assertion of yours I thinke I have sufficiently discovered And I wonder you should carry it thus not of the death but of the life when most an end you have carried it onely thus hitherunto that Gods willing their life is onely upon condition of their obedience and repentance not otherwise Or in a disjunct axiome thus Either of life in case they repent or of death in case they did not repent and what should move you to call this a willing to give them life and not to inflict death Why should you not rather call it a will to inflict death and not to give life considering that God was resolved to deny them such grace as would effectually bring them to obedience and repentance and to grant them only such a grace as he fore-knew full well would never bring them to obedience and repentance 1. Cain was of the familie of Adam to whom the promise was made concerning the seed of the woman that he should break the serpents head and although Cain was offered acceptance upon his repentance yet it followeth not that all were offered the same acceptance even those that never received any tidings or promise concerning the Messiah And the Apostle plainly signifies that the Gentiles were not admonished to repent untill Christ was preached unto them Act. 17. 30. But suppose it were so yet this hinders nothing at all the precedencie of the decree of condemnation unto the decree of giving such a Covenant and permitting them to dispise it For because God purposed to damne them for such a sinne therefore hee might decree to give them such a Covenant and permit them or expose them by leaving them destitute of his grace to the despising of it Not that I doe approve of any such conceit as before I have manifested but to shew how short your discourse falls of making good that which you undertake to prove And I am much deceived if you mistake not their tenet who make reprobation to proceed upon the consideration of the corrupt masle in Adam For undoubtedly their meaning hereupon is not to maintaine that God did purpose to condemne all reprobates only for the sin of Adam or for originall sinne drawne from him this were a very mad conceit But supposing that by Adams fall an impotency of doing that which is good is come upon
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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
him will you say that every naturall man hath power to discern the nature of God in such sort as to preserve himself from blasphemy every way The third place is out of Rom. 2. 4 5. Despisest thou the riches of his bountifulnesse and patience and long sufferance not knowing that the bountifulnesse of God leadeth thee to repentance 5. But thou after thine hardnesse and heart that cannot repent heapest up unto thy self as a treasure wrath against the day of wrath Now if this doth imply any ability in man of seeking the Lord and finding mercy from him it must needs bee in the way of repentance And this I confesse is a cleare way both of seeking the Lord and of finding mercy from him But dare you say that a naturall man hath power to repent I presume you will not unlesse you frame repentance after such a notion as will bee found to bee neither seeking of the Lord nor finding mercy from him And you your self here professe that God deprives them of those drawing and effectuall means without which none can come to repentance And in the very place alledged it is expressely said of them whom God is said to lead to repentance that the hardnesse of their heart is such that they cannot repent The fourth is taken out of Rom. 2. 14 15. When the Gentiles which have not the Law doe by nature the things contained in the Law they having not the Law are a law unto themselves which shew the effect of the Law written in their heart their conscience also bearing witnesse and their thoughts accusing one another or excusing I wish things were carryed with lesse ostentation and with more judgement then to alledge Scriptures and put the Reader upon making Arguments for them thence For my part I see no colour in all this to justifie any power and sufficiency in a Reprobate to seek the Lord and to finde mercy from him though I make no question but they have power to abstain from many things prohibited in the Law of God and to doe things commanded as touching the substance of the duty commanded or the action forbidden though they are farre enough off from doing it for Gods sake and out of the love of God with all their heart and with all their soule as whom they knew not even the very best of them 1 Cor. 1. 21. 1 Thess 4. 5. The fifth is drawn out of Luk. 16. 11 12. If yee have not been faithfull in the wicked riches who will trust you in the true treasures And if you have not been faithfull in another mans goods who shall give you that which is your own Hence you seem to infer that carnall men naturall men have power and ability to perform faithfulnesse in the administration of temporall riches and you might proceed further to inferre that by performing such fidelity which is in their power to perform they should have true riches and such as should never bee taken from them And what is to maintain that God doth dispence grace according to works if this bee not And yet this latter is with more probability inferred then the former For certainly God doth reward faithfulnesse in little with the bestowing of greater gifts as Matth. 25. 21. 23. But albeit they that are unfaithfull in little are unworthy to have greater gifts bestowed upon them yet herehence it doth not follow that meer naturall men have so much power of goodnesse in them as to bee faithfull unto God in the use of those naturall gifts which God hath bestowed upon them yet in spight of this unworthinesse which God findes in his Elect before their calling hee doth neverthelesse trust them with true riches And if they were faithfull therein they would bee found faithfull also in greater things For ver 10. our Saviour professeth That hee who is faithfull in the least is also faithfull in much The sixth place is Act. 7. 51 52. Yee stiffe-necked and of uncircumcised hearts and eares yee have alwayes resisted the Holy Ghost 52. Which of the Prophets have not your Fathers persecuted That which you stick upon I doubt not is this that they are said alway to have resisted the Holy Ghost both they and their Fathers Wee deny it not but will you herehence infer that they had power and ability to yeeld to the Holy Ghost If this inference like you then you may bee bold to inferre in like manner That because many resist the Holy Ghost moving them to faith and repentance therefore they have power and ability to yeeld to the Holy Ghost in this also that is to beleeve and repent Yet your self professe in this very Section that God deprives them of those drawing and effectuall means without which none can come to wit to the Lord and finde mercy from him which yet undoubtedly they should do did they beleeve and repent Yet I deny not but they might have abstained from persecuting the Prophets but I deny that it was in the power of any of them being but naturall men to abstaine from it in a gratious manner and acceptable in the sight of God And so long as they did not abstain so is it fit to call it a seeking after the Lord or finding of mercy from him I presume you will not deny but that many a Jew in the Apostles daies were free from faction contenting himself to enjoy his own course quietly and peaceably was yet further off from grace then Paul that persecuted the Church God calling him in the midst of his furious pursuite and not calling others though farre more peaceably disposed toward the Church of God then Saul The seventh place alledged is Act. 13. 46. Then Paul and Barnabas spake boldly and said It was necessary that the Word should first have been spoken unto you but seeing you put it from you and judge your selves unworthy of everlasting life wee turn unto the Gentiles Hence you inferre that these Jewes were inabled to doe more then they did in seeking the Lord and finding mercy from him But I would gladly know wherein that seeking of the Lord consists Had they not railed against Paul as I confesse they had power to spare that had they not contraryed him nor spoken against those things which were spoken by him as I confesse they might have held their tongue had this been to seek the Lord more then they did or in better manner then they did I think not for they might have contained themselves from all this nay they might have pretended some propensions to imbrace the Gospel which yet had it been performed in hypocrisie it had nothing commended them in the sight of God As Diasius when hee could not prevaile with his brother to draw him back to Popery pretended some propension in himself to hearken unto him but wee know what the issue was even to slit his head as the issue of Judas his following Christ was to betray him I think they that deale so and through zeale
wit his elect Angels and those that fell they that stood being amplius adjuti more succoured then the other as Austin professeth De Civ Dei lib. 12. cap. 9. And Coquaeus at large upon him So that in this respect the denying of corroborating grace to those Angels that fell while before they were without sin was just with God not in any reference unto their works as if they had deserved that God should permit them to fall into sin it being impossible that any creature should deserve this For in this case there should bee acknowledged a sin to precede the first sin which cannot bee avouched without manifest contradiction But it is just in respect of Gods Soveraignty to keep from sin whom heo will and to permit whom hee will to fall into sin Quest Thou wilt further say unto me Why doth hee yet find fault for who hath resisted his will Answ To this the Apostle returneth answer in foure materiall points First Hee checketh the petulancy of the creature by shewing that though God should harden the creature by his irresistible will yet it is not for the creature to reply thus to God this hee doth by a comparison arguing Gods Soveraignty over the creature suitable to the power which the potter hath over the clay ver 20. Secondly hee admitteth a deny all or at least a mitigation of the rigour of that word objected in the manner of Gods hardning by his irresistible will instead whereof the Apostle implyeth hee doth rather harden by his suffering and long patience What if God suffer in long patience c. ver 22. Thirdly Hee cleareth the justice of God in hardning the creature by shewing the conditions of those persons whom hee thus hardneth not creatures that have done neither good nor evill but 1. vessels of wrath which men are not till first considered as sinners 2. fitted or as it were perfected and ripened unto destruction which Ephes 2. 23. men are not till after the refusall of the means of grace Ephes 2. 4. 2 Chron. 36. 15 16. or else after grosse and unnaturall iniquity Gen. 15. 16. compared with Levit. 28. 27 28 29. Fourthly hee declares the holy ends which God aimes at in all this his dealing with vessels of wrath after this manner which ends are the manifestation first of his power and wrath toward the wicked ver 22. secondly of the riches of his glorious grace toward the elect in dealing far otherwise with them v. 23. Rom. 11. 33. Oh the depth of the riches both of the wisdome and of the power of God! how unsearchable are his judgments and his wayes past finding out To him bee glory for ever Amen By this objection arising out of the former Doctrine namely that God hath mercy on whom hee will and hardneth others hee doth evince that by shewing mercy is signifyed Gods giving the grace of obedience by hardning his denying the same grace of obedience And withall that by denying this grace it comes to passe that men cannot obey the will of God seeing hereby is manifested that Gods will is not they should obey but rather continue in their hardnesse of heart uncured and consequently in their disobedience whereupon it seems unreasonable that God should complain of mens disobedience as oftentimes hee doth as Esa 1. Hear O Heavens and hearken O Earth I have nourished and brought up a people and they have rebelled against mee Again Esa 65. All the day long have I stretched out my hands unto a people that walk in a way that is not good even after their own imaginations And Jer. 8. 7. Even the Stork in the aire knoweth her appointed times and the Turtle and the Crane and the Swallow observeth the time of their comming but my people knoweth not the judgements of the Lord and ver 6. I hearkned and heard but none spake aright no man repented of his wickednesse saying what have I done Every one turneth into their race as the horse rusheth into the battle And Hose 7. 14. Though I have bound and strengthened their arm yet they have rebelled against mee And Exod. 10. 2. Thus saith the Lord God of the Hebrews How long wilt thou refuse to humble thy self before mee Let my people goe that they may serve mee ver 4. But if thou refuse to let my people goe behold to morrow I will bring Grashoppers into thine house c. ver 20. But the Lord hardned Pharaohs heart and hee did not let the children of Israel goe Now this I say seems most unreasonable in the judgement of flesh and blood Namely both to harden a mans heart and yet to complain of and finde fault with the hardnesse of his heart with his rebellion and disobedience considering that no man can resist his will To this the Apostle answereth in certain notable particulars First shewing that when the Scripture doth manifest this to bee Gods course namely to harden and yet to complain of a mans hardnesse and disobedience it becommeth not the creature to quarrell with God or dispute with God hereabout because his weak capacity is not able to comprehend the reasonablenesse thereof As for hardning by a will irresistible implying that there may bee a kinde of hardning by a will resistible as Arminius interpreteth the Apostle it is to put upon the Apostle the conceits of man for hee maketh no such distinction Secondly Hee proceeds to shew how that God as the Creator hath power over the creature to dispose of him as he thinks good in two notable particulars First in making him of what fashion hee will ver 20. Secondly in making him to what end hee will and that without controll from the creature the one being answerable to the other in these words Shall the thing formed say unto him that formed it why haste thou made mee thus Now these different conditions as different fashions of a vessell are to bee conceived in congruous reference to the double act of God formerly mentioned First the one was in shewing mercy on whom hee will whereby a man is made a vessell of grace fit for honour Secondly the other was in hardning whom hee will whereby a man left destitute of grace is exposed to rebellion and disobedience and consequently made a vessell fit for dishonour Secondly to what end hee will to wit either to honour or dishonour that is either to become finally a vessell of mercy or a vessell of wrath like as the potter disposeth of clay in making vessels thereof answerable hereunto in each particular according to the meere pleasure of his will Thirdly hee sheweth that the end of all this is threefold 1. The manifestation of his wrath or justice on the one 2. The riches of his glory that is of his glorious grace on the vessels of mercy 3. His power and soveraignty in making whom hee will vessels of wrath or mercy Fourthly hee shews withall that before the execution of his wrath comes hee suffers these vessels of