turn I shall conclude what relates to Bishop Ridley with those words of his farewel pag. 506 Acts and Monum The Church had holy and wholesom Homilies c. It had in matters of controversie Articles so penned and framed after the holy Scripture and grounded upon the true understanding of God's word that in short time if they had been universally received they should have been able to have set in Christ's Church much concord and unity in Christ's true Religion and to have expelled many false Errors and Heresies wherewith this Church alas was almost overgone He here approves all the Articles and therefore the three before-mentioned as agreeable to God's Word As to Cranmer we have him not only owning all the Doctrine and Religion set out by King Edward but also offering if Peter Martyr might be joyned to him with four or five more to maintain that it was more pure and according to God's Word than any that had been used in England for an hundred years This had been a most foolish challenge indeed if he had not known full well that Peter Martyr and he jumped in their judgements about all the Articles and particularly that of Predestination With Heterodoxy in which he might well expect to be charged for Iames Lambert had been apposed in that point in King Henry the Eighths Reign and our Martyrs in Queen Mary's time were frequently twitted with fatality making God the Author of Sin destroying Free-will and what not The next Martyr I shall instance in is Mr. Philpot to whom Mr. Bradford refers his Friend for satisfaction in the matter of Election What he did write about Election I do not find but I find enough to make me confident that if he had written any thing about it he would have shewed himself sufficiently Calvinistical For in his fifth Examination he took occasion to ask his Popish Adversaries Which of them all was able to Answer Calvin 's Institutions which is Minister of Geneva To which Dr. Saverson replies with lye and all A godly Minister indeed of receipt of Cut-purses and Runnagate Traytors And of late I can tell you there is such contention fallen between him and his own Sects that he was feign to flee the Town about Predestination I tell you truth â—or I came by Geneva hither At which calumny Philpot â—s zeal was stirred as appears by his words I am sure you blaspheme that godly man and that godly Church where he is Minister As it is your Churches condition when you cannot answer men by learning to oppress them with blasphemies and false reports for in the matter of Predestination he is in none other opinion than all the Doctors of the Church be agreeing to the Scriptures If this be not full and home what is The profound Disputant and blessed Martyr answering for his life avows Mr. Calvin's Doctrine of Predestination to be agreeable to the ancient Doctors and Scriptures And how could a Doctrine be more amply commended His Friend Mr. Bradford will say as much for the Doctrine it self though not taking notice of Mr. Calvin as delivering it in his Institutions There is a Letter of his concerning Election to two of his Friends N. S. R. C. recorded Acts and Monuments 352. Who the persons were notified by these four letters N. S. R. C. I have no certainty but suppose that N. S. was one Skelthrop who held conditional Election and Free-will but by the pains Mr. Bradford and others took with him was reclaimed After this Epistle of Mr. Bradford's Mr. Fox adds some Notes appertaining to the matter of Election which Notes do not in the least contradict any one tittle in Mr. Bradford but more largely explain what he touched but briefly But Dr. Heylin saith Dr. H. page 42. Fox his Notes corrupt the Text and that Bradford's Notion of Predestination is plainly cross to that of the Calvinistical Party Let us see whether there be any such crossness or no. Bradford saith he believeth that Faith is the work and gift of God given to none other than the Children of God Who are they Those whom God the Father before the beginning of the World hath Predestinated in Christ unto Eternal life Answ. Is this Election cross to that of the Calvinists Do not they say against the Arminians that Faith flows from Election as a fruit of it and that it is commensurate with Election so as none believe but those who are elected It not this the very offensive Notion of Election against which the Remonstrants make such outcries The Letter further adds that though the Election be first in God yet to us it is last opened But the Doctors Election is last in God as well as last opened to us Let the Martyr proceed in his Letter By the light of the Spirit a man may see this Faith not given to all men but to such as are born of God predestinate before the World was made after the purpose and good will of God which will we may not call into disputation but in trembling and fear submit our selves to it as to that which can will none otherwise than that which is holy right and good how far soever otherwise it may seem to the judgement of reason which must needs be beaten down to be more careful for God's glory than man's salvation which dependeth only thereon as all God's Children full well see Lo here he speaks of a Predestination in which there is an unsearchable depth of an Election about which if reason not assisted by revelation should pass judgement there would seem to be in it something of injustice Whereas the Arminian Election making God to predestinate men to life upon the foresight that they would believe and to pass by others upon a foresight they would not believe hath nothing of a depth in it but is as easily accounted for as any other act of God's providence whatsoever I said before that I conceived one of those unto whom this Letter is directed was by it rectified in his judgement touching Election and the use of Free-will which he had made a condition of that Election at least I am sure one Skelthrop was made to see the light in this particular Mr. Bradford takes notice of the change wrought in him and praises God for it in a Letter to Careless page 336. Not doubting but that he would be so heedy in his conversation that his old Acquaintance may ever thereby think themselves astray In the same Letter he salutes in Christ True and his Followers hoping that God had his time for them also Now this True was a man differing from Careless in the point of Election as doth most manifestly appear by the Examination of Careless related by the Doctor page 15 16 Part 3. He thought as the Popish Clergie did that we be elect in respect of our good works But Mr. Bradford hoped he would come off from that opinion But I think he did not but still continued to sacrifice to Free-will
And the Protestant cause was not credited by him for he plaid such a prank as any ingenuous Heathen would have been ashamed of his Keeper shewing him more favour than he deserved he ran away from him and brought him into great danger Thus you may see sayes Careless the fruits of our Free-will-men that make so much boast of their own strength but that house which is not builded surely upon the unmoveable rock will not long stand against the boisterous winds and storms that blow so strongly in these dayes of Trouble This is the only Sufferer I know of that held conditional Election and surely his carriage was not so commendable that we should envy him unto our Adversaries But whereas the Doctor thinks that the strong confidence which Careless had of his own salvation and of the final perseverance of all those who are the chosen Members of Christ's Church was a thought of his own unto which the Doctrine of the Church gave no countenance It will appear that this was no singular opinion of his but a kindly derivation from the Article of Religion concerning Predestination unto Life and it seems to be that which he had learned from holy Bradford who in a Letter to Mistress M. H. under great heaviness and sorrow teacheth her That we should use all God's benefits to confirm our faith of this that God is our God and Father and to assure us that he loveth us as our Father in Christ and that God requireth this faith and fatherly perswasion of his fatherly goodness as his chiefest service Adding that no suggestion of Satan grounded upon our imperfection frailty and many evils should make us doubt of God's savour in Christ and that obedience giveth us not to be God's children but to be God's children giveth obedience And finally that as certain as God is Almighty as certain as God is merciful as certain as God is true as certain as Jesus Christ was crucified is risen and sitteth at the right hand of the Father as certain as this is God's Commandment I am the Lord thy God so certain she ought to be that God was her Father pag. 327 328. To another Gentlewoman page 330 thus he writes If he had not chosen you as most certainly he hath he would not have so called you he would never have justified you he would never have so exercised your faith with temptations as he hath done and doth if I say he had not chosen you If he have chosen you as doubtless Dear heart he hath in Christ for in you I have seen his earnest and before me and to me they could not deny it I know both where and when if I say he hath chosen you then neither can you nor ever shall perish And in the same Letter page 331 he sayes Your thankfulness and worthiness are fruits and effects of your Election they are no causes If once you had a hope in the Lord as you doubtless had it though now you feel it not yet shall you feel it again for the anger of the Lord lasteth but a moment his mercy endureth for ever In another Letter page 349 the same blessed Martyr sayes that One man which is regenerate well may be called alwayes just and alwayes sinful just in respect of God's seed and his regeneration sinful in respect of Satan's seed and his first birth Betwixt these two men there is continual conflict and war most deadly the flesh and old man by reason of his birth that is perfect doth often for a time prevail against the new man being but a child in comparison and that in such sort as not only other but even the Children of God themselves think they be nothing else but old and that the spirit and seed of God is lost and gone away where yet notwithstanding the truth is otherwise the spirit and seed of God appearing again and dispelling away the clouds which cover the Sun of God's seed from shining as the clouds in the air do the corporal Sun Many things to like purpose follow in that Letter by all which and by several Treatises in the printed Works of Mr. Bradford it sufficiently appears that he favoured the Doctrine of absolute Predestination And let any man judge whether he thought the term of a man's life to be moveable or no by some passages in his Examination page 286. As for my death my Lord there are twelve hours in the day as I know so with the Lord my time is appointed and when it shall be his good time then shall I depart hence but in the mean season I am safe enough though all the People had sworn my death Page 291 he desires them to proceed on in God's name he looked for that which God appointed them to do Upon which the Chancellor le ts fall these words This Fellow is in another Heresie of Fate and necessity as though all things were so tied together that of meer necessity all must come to pass What replies Bradford Things are not by fortune to God at any time though to man they seem so sometimes I speak but as the Apostle said Lord See how Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Prelates are gathered together against thy Christ to do that which thy hand and counsel hath before ordained for them to do Consider we next the judgement of Peter Martyr and Martin Bucer who though Foreigners had a great hand in the English Reformation As to Peter Martyr methinks there should be no question made of his judgment In his Commentary on the Romans and in his Common places he hath gone as high in the matter of God's decree as ever Calvin did But the Doctor tells us that Dr. H. Part 2. page 110. It s more than probable that Peter Martyr was not Peter Martyr whilst he lived in England Answ. If he would prove it but probable he must prove that it hath seemed so to all or to the most or to the wisest or to the most famous among those that are wise which I despair of ever seeing him prove so far am I from thinking that he will prove more than this The London Edition of his Common places is not now in many mens hands yet it is to be found in England and elsewhere and never did any one that was a possessor of it so much as adventure to affirm that in that Edition any thing was delivered concerning Predestination that was in the least contrary or seemingly contrary to what we find in the Editions more commonly used This answer the Doctor himself was somewhat diffident of and therefore did not give it until he had before made way by disparaging Peter Martyr as one Dr. H. pag. 109. Of whom there was little use made in advising and much less in directing any thing which concerned the Articles and who having no authority in Church or State could not be considered as a Master-builder Ans. Is the Doctor of the Chair of no authority in Church or State
of those that vigorously fought against it We need not say that Campneys deserved all the ill names that Veron and Crowley bestowed on him perhaps their zeal might be in some particulars too bitter yet we cannot think that men of so great repute and learning would charge Pelagianism and Popery upon one that had honestly declared himself against both Popery and Pelagianism The Doctor tells us that Campneys hath sufficiently purged himself of both these crimes And indeed by reading his Book I find that he hath declared himself against Merit but so hath many a professed Papist done He doth also muster up the errors of Pelagius publickly recanted by him in the Synod of Palestine declaring them or at least one of them to be vile and abominable This notwithstanding it is possible he might be a very Pelagian Austin himself doth not speak more sharply against Pelagius than do the Ring-leaders of the Semipelagians and yet they erre as bad an errour as the Pelagians do But of all these matters let indifferent Readers judge by comparing Campneys Book with the Answers made to it More I need not say about the sixteenth Chapter had it not pleased the Historian to defame Calvin Beza and Knox. Calvin and Bâ—za he charges with unworthy practices used against Sebastian Castalio a man he says of no less learning but of far more modesty and moderation than either of them yet they never left persecuting and reviling him till they had first cast him out of Geneva and afterwards brought him to his grave meerly because he differed from them about Predestination Calvin and Beza's learning modesty and moderation are sufficiently vindicated by others Castalio discovered little either of modesty or moderation in his bitter censures of the Book of Canticles or in the help and assistance he afforded unto the cursed Socinians Beza and Calvin are not the only persons that have condemned him nor did they condemn him meerly or principally for differing from them in the point of Predestination as the Doctor might have known if he had rather consulted the impartial Historians of that time than Castalio's own writings For Mr. Knox styled pag. 5 The great Incendiary of the Nation and Kirk of Scotland I will not undertake an Apology His own Country-men who were better acquainted with his principles and practices may better do it Yet because I find him to have taken great pains in promoting our Reformation here in England I shall adventure to mind the Doctor that Spotswood purposely employed by our King to write the History of the Kirk of Scotland and having also by the King liberty given him to write truâ—h impartially doth make very honourable mention of Mr. Knox. And our own Bishop Ridley joyns him with Latimer Leaver Bradford and commends them all for their sharp reproof of all sins and sinners in King Edward's days Dr. H. Part 3. pag. 18. No sooner had that gracious Lady Queen Elizabeth attained the Crown than she took order for the reviewing of the publick Liturgy appoiâ—ting for the review Dr. Parker Drâ— Gâ—indaâ— Dr. Pilkington Dr. Cox Dr. May Dr. Bill Mr. Whitehead Sir Thomas Smith Answ. 'T is true such a revision was appointed and performed by the men here mentioned I intend not a character of them they have their characters already given them by abler Pens but so principled they were that if any thing had been left in the Liturgy favouring conditional Eâ—lection or the Apostasie of Saints it had not failed to be blotted out The Injunctions of Queen Elizabeth are mentioned by the Doctor pag. 19 in which he observes that Erasmus his Paraphrases were appointed to be provided for every Church Injunct 6. and Injunct 16 that every Parson Vicar Curate Stipendiary Priest he omits under the degree of a Master of Arts should provide and have of his own the New Testament in Latine and English with the Paraphrases the Injunction saith only with Paraphrases The conclusion he hence infers hath been before considered I must take notice that the 51. Injunction straitly chargeth and commandeth that no manner of person shall Print any manner of Book or Paper of what sort nature or in what Language soever it be except the same be first licenced by her Majesty by express words in writing or by six of her Privy Conncel or be perused and licenced by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York the Bishop of London the Chancellors of both Universities the Bishop being Ordinary and the Archdeacon also of the place where any such shall be Printed or by two of them whereof the Ordinary of the place shall always be one and that the names of such as shall allow the same be added to the end of every such work for a testimony of the allowance thereof From this Injunction I infer that Campneys had no respect at all unto the Queens Order or else he would not have published his Papers without Authority I also infer secondly that neither Queen nor Councel nor Archbishops nor Bishops were of Campneys mind because else he would have prevailed with some of them to authorize his Book that it might have been more passable And now if the Doctor have got any thing by these Injunctions much good may it do him Dr. H. Pag. 20. Here he gives us a very merry conceit that the Zuinglâ—ans being increased exceedingly both in power and numbers and notice being taken thereof by those that were of most Authority in the government of the Church it was thought necessary that the Articles of Religion published 1552 should be reviewed accommodated to the use of the Church and made to be the standing Rule by which all persons were to regulate and confirm their Doctrines Answ. He would have extreamly obliged us had he but vouchsafed to name any one person intrusted in the government of the Church at that time who was in the least offended with the Zuinglian Doctrine We have Records from which it may appear who were Anno 1562 Archbishops and Bishops amongst them all it will be hard to find any one that was not a cordial Friend unto the Doctrine of Zuinglius and Calvin some of them are blamed for agreeing too well with them in matter of Discipline and Ceremony also the names of almost all may be found in Mr. Fuller Book 9. p. 69. But the Historian would have done no less than wonders if he had informed us how the passing of the Articles in Queen Elizabeth's first Convocation could be a probable means to suppress the growth of the Zuinglian Doctrine Certain I am that if they were designed for any such use they had no prosperous success but were in the days of Queen Elizabeth and King Iames made use of to suppress the Antizuinglian Doctrine Indeed the seventeenth Article plainly lays down such a Predestination as the Anticalvinistical ear cannot hear and the Homilies so much commended in the Articles have a little too much Calvinism in them for they place Faith in such a
est Antichristus Wherefore let not the Historian spend time to prove that those Articles do not bind the Church as those did that solemnly passed in the Convocations for I ascribe no such Authority to them only urge them as Declarations of the Articles of our Religion just as I would urge the judgment of the two Lord Chief Iustices calling in to their assistance others learned in the Law for the expounding of a Statute 't is not impossible they should be mistaken in their exposition but it would be strongly presumed by all modest men that they were not mistaken And so I could let go these Articles had it not pleased the Historian to tell us of a mighty offence taken at them by the Lord Burleigh and a resolution of having all that acted in them attainted of a praemunire from the danger of which the Arch-Bishop could not get release until he had promised speedily to recall and suppress those Articles All which we have laid down page 81 82 as things affirmed by Mr. Mountague from the Remonstrants in an Answer of theirs published 1618. But where did these Remonstrants hear this story Why possibly they might have it from the mouth of Baro or some other Cambridge men Will any man believe so great things upon so slender proofs as the possibility of the Remonstrants hearing them from the mouth of some Cantabridgian when they do not so much as pretend to have heard any such thing from any member of our Church nor doth any one ever since offer to tell us when and where the Arch-Bishop was forced to make any such submission The Heads of Houses in their Letter to the Lord Burleigh own the sending up of Dr. Tindal and Dr. Whitaker to conferr with the Lord of Canterbury and write of the great and comfortable quiet that by the coming down of the Articles was brought unto the University until that Baro in January following contrary to restraint and commandment gave some new disturbance In the same Letter also subscribed with their names and bearing date March 8. 1595 they resolutely tell the same Lord that Baro had determined preached printed diverse points of Doctrine not only contrary to himself but also contrary to that which had been taught and received ever since her Majesty's reign and agreeable to the errours of Popery Wherefore they pray his Lordship to vouchsafe his good ayd and advise to the comfort of themselves and all others of the University truly affected and to the suppression in time of those errours and even of gross Popery like by such means to creep in among them And upon this Letter or something else Baro left his place in the University because he could not keep it say Dr. Ward Mr. Fuller and all other Cantabridgians that ever I read but this Oxford Historian who can easily affirm any thing that he much desires tells us he left his place neither because he was deprived nor because he had any fear of being deprived but meerly because he had no mind to keep it any longer Nay he sticks not to affirm that in case it had pleased him to continue any longer Lecturer it is probable he might have carried the Lecture from any other Candidate or Competitour of what rate soever But by what mediums did he bring himself to this probable perswasion or whence did he collect that Baro had so great a number of adherents Only from Dr. Overals being chosen to succeed Dr. Whitaker But if they were the Anti-calvinists that carried it for Overal why did they not rather carry it for Baro himself seeing they had such fair presidents of preferring those who are Lady Margarets Professors to be King's Professors Hutton had been so preferred so had Whitgift so had Chaderton Or if Baro's interest were so great how came he to use so little care and Conscience as not to provide a Successor of his own mind Did he think his opinions were not worth the knowing If he did not why did he trouble the world with them If he did why would he so tamely yield to the chusing of Doctor Playfer than whom there was not a man in all the University more opposite to him The truth is Doctor Overal had not then declared himself to differ from Calvin and therefore was by the University employed to convince Barret and afterwards when he delivered such things as some Calvinists condemned him for yet he never deliver'd his mind so as to deny personal election or the certain perseverance of all the elect Something more of his mind we shall hear hereafter in the Hampton-Court Conference In the mean time I must mind the Doctor of a certain Catechism consisting of Questions and Answers touching the Doctrine of Predestination bound up with our English Bibles printed by Robert Barker Anno 1607. but not then first bound up with our Bibles as the Doctor seems willing to think pag. 101 102. The Questions and Answers are to be found in the Church Bibles commonly called the Bishops Bibles printed by Christopher Barker I my self have seen Bibles printed twenty years before the coming in of King Iames in which they were and for ought I know they were as old as any Translation of the Bible used in Queen Elizabetbs time He asks by what authority those Questions and Answers were put in betwixt the Old and New Testament and so I remember he somewhere asks by what Authority the Metrical Translation of the Psalmes was allowed to be Sung in Churches I am not able to give him a satisfactory answer either to the one or the other question no more than he is able to answer me who made our second Book of Homilies Yet he thinks I suppose that those who made that Book were Authorized to make it and so I think that those who first bound up those Questions and Answers and Singing Psalmes with our Bibles had Order and Authority so to do All this while Cambridge hath took us up We must now look into the other University in which we are told that all things were calm and quiet no publick opposition shewing it sâ—lf in the Schools or Pulpits The reason of this quiet is guessed at because the Students of that University did more incline to the canvasing of such Points as were in difference betwixt us and the Romanists For witness he calls in many Papists and on the other side Bishop Iewel Bishop Bilson Dr. Humphry Mr. Nowel Dr. Reynolds and many others which stood firm to the Church of England This last clause sure slipped from him unawares Upon second thoughts I fear he will scarce affirm that all these stood firm to the Church of England If they did no lot or portion hath he or any of his in the Church of England most of them having declared their minds point blank against conditional election c. Iewel hath told us his mind about Election in his Comment on the Thessalonians so hath Mr. Nowel in his Catechism Dr. Humphries
HISTORIA Quinq-Articularis Exarticulata OR ANIMADVERSIONS ON Doctor Heylin's QUINQUARTICULAR HISTORY IN WHICH 1. The Aspersions cast on Foreign Reformers are wiped off 2. The Doctor 's manifold Contradictions are manifested 3. The Doctrine of the Arminians in the five points is proved to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Reformed Church of England By HENRY HICKMAN B. D. The Second Edition Corrected and Enlarged Si moriens mordeat mordeatur mortuus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cato Censor London Printed for Robert Boulter at the Turks-head in Cornhil over against the Royal Exchange 1674. THE EPISTLE TO THE READER READER I Am told the following Papers are mine And really I think they be for I well remember that sundry years ago I did hastily either write or dictate to others to be written a Confutation of Dr. Heylin's Historia Qâ—inquarticularis that so I might remove a stone of offence which some told me I principally had occasioned to be laid in the way of yong students Had I thought â—o unstudied a scrible meet to be exposed to publick â—iew I could then have sent it abroad when either I â—â—uld have procured a Licence to imprint it or should â—ot have been esteemed an offender though I had imprinted it without a Licence Some Friends have now adventured to put it forth without my privity I doubt a little unseasonably but I am confident with a good intention Therefore I must not be angry with them For my self I must desire thee once for all to take notice 1. That I only relate some mens opinions Historically and defend them from unjust aggravations but am not concerned to maintain them to be true or accurately expressed 2. That I acknowledg there be some depths in the Controversies relating to Predestination and Grace which I am not able to fathom Nor are these the only points in Divinity in which I believe some things against which I have objections that I cannot answer any otherwise than by saying that every Divine Revelation must needs be true though seemingly contrary to something which my imperfect and corrupt reason apprehends to be true It is commonly laid to the charge of the Socinians that they make reason the Judg in Controversies of Faith and so I verily think it is in some sense but that it should be Judex normalis the Norma or Rule according to which we are to judge so as we are to believe nothing but what we could have demonstrated to be true or possible by meer reason is an opinion so wicked that I hope it is but falsly fathered on the Socinians I believe the Hypostatical Vnion a Trinity of persons in the Vnity of Essence if a reason of this my Faith be asked I will quote the Scriptures which clearly assert those two Articles having so done I have resolved Faith into its first Principle and I will continue stedfast and immoveable in my Faith though I cannot comprehend either how three Persons subsist in one numerical nature or how two natures can be united so as make but one person In like manner I will believe the Doctrine of Original Sin as it is explained in our Articles of Religion because I find that explication of it agreeable to Scripture though I cannot so clearly make it out to my own or another mans reason how Original sin is propagated I will also believe that God hath mercy on whom he will and hardneth whom he will bestoweth his determining Grace on whom he will and denieth it to whom he will because this is a Scripture Doctrine though the reconciling of Gods eternal Decrees and the efficacy of Grace with the liberty of mans will surpass my knowledge And I am the more confident that I am not mistaken in thinking this to be a Scripture Doctrine because as I have shewen in the following Papers it hath been so adjudged by the Ancient Fathers of the Church Nor is it a small confirmation to me that the greatest opposers of Calvinism as they are resolved to call it have after the highest straining of their wits and diligence been able to say nothing against it but what the Pelagians and Semipelagians had before objected against S. Austin and his Disciples I know there be many who think quite otherwise These will say Qâ—id tandem Arminio cum Pelagio aut quid Calvino cum Augustino Arminius learned not his opinions from Pelagius nor did Calvin owe his notions to S. Austin Such men I earnestly desire impartially to consider what I have hereafter produced and if they can answer my allegations I will thank them for undeceiving me But this I will tell them that he who hopes to make me his proselyte must be 1. No Railer nor Reviler I have read that some in old times through I know not what foolish and wicked superstition thought Garden-Basil that I suppose answers to Plinie's Ocimum would grow the sooner and better if it were sown cum convitiis maledictis with reproaches and evil speaking So many of late seem to have been of opinion that the Doctrine which they plant will prosper the better if they water it with torrents of contumely against those that differ from them Perhaps the more rank their stile is the more it may please some Readers but he was wise who said As dead flies cause the Oyntment of the Apothecary to send forth a stinking savour so doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisdom and honor Eccl. 10.1 A very little of any thing that is but a kin to scurrility will make an ingenuous person disgust and nauseat the most learned book Dr. Crakanthorp hath very sâ—lidly confuted Spalaâ—â—â—sis but the uncivil language be every where useth against the Archbishop hath sometimes turned my stomach and made me leave off reading Dr. Abbot hath most judiciâ—usly defended the Reformed Catholick against Wâ—â—â—â—â—m Bishop but when I find him calling Wright foul-mouthed dog when c. I cannot but wonder where a man that had all his days been bred up among Scholars learn'd such language As for Bishop Mountague he boasts that never any had handled the Papists as he had done and I verily believe him His Gag is a piece for which he may well be denominated a Matchless Scoffer Fool Goose Cockscomb Ass Horse Bâ—ind Buzard Poor Woodcock Catholick Cockscomb c. these are flowers that grow in Mr. Mountagues Garden are they not very lovely sweet will not Popery fall to the ground after one of its Patrons hath been so bespattered with so many unseemly names or will not the Papists rather be confirmed in Popery when they shall observe a dignified Minister in the Protestant Church to use such unsavoury language without check or controul from his Superiors 2. I expect if any one answer me that he faithfully relate Historical matters For let him not imagine that I will think the worse of any party because I 〈…〉 slandered Rather I shall judge men good because their Adversaries durst not speak evil
will and to do which the Remonstrants cannot The Remonstrants must needs if they will not contradict themselves affirm that God doth pari gradu modo in the like degree and measure will and work antecedently the conversion of those who are converted and of those who are not converted If so what ground for fear sith man can convert himself when he pleaseth and restore the lost habits when he listeth The Apostle Paul one of the rarest examples of humility did sure best know what 's most likely to quel and subdue high thoughts and proud imaginations and what weapons doth he make use of to this end Why two such interrogations as must needs prick the bladder with the Contra-remonstrant but not with the Remonstrant Let it be demanded of a Calvinist What hast thou that thou hast not received He will answer Nothing Let it be enquired Who made thee to differ He will reply The meer undeserved omnipotent grace of God But a Grevincovius will say He made himself to differ But perhaps no Arminian else will say so Yes Mr. Playser in his Appello Evangelium hath said so and all Remonstrants must say so that will not fly from their principles To manifest which I shall only English something out of the Declaratio sententiae Remonstrant circa Articul cap. 3 4. pag. 21 If it be enquired why this man is converted and another not We answer this man is converted because God converts him not opposing any new contumacy the other is not converted because he doth oppose new contumacy But you will enquire why this man opposeth new contumacy not the other We answer this man opposeth because he will oppose the other opposeth not because he is moved by grace ne velit opponere to have no mind to oppose If you enquire whether he who opposeth not new contumacy and by consequent is converted hath greater grace than he that opposeth and by consequent is not converted We answer that antecedent and preventing grace may be equal but the former hath co-operating the latter hath not Hence it is plain that it is man according to the Remonstrants who makes sufficient grace to be effectual and by necessary consequence man doth make himself a penitent a believer a regenerate person than which Pelagius himself could not write or speak higher or more proudly Dr. H. Page 72. The Historian is pleased to mention another charge against the Remonstrants Opinions viz. That they symbolize so much with the Church of Rome that they serve onely as a bridge for Popery to pass over into any Church into which they can obtain admission And further tells us that this clamor being first raised in Holland was afterwards much cherished and made use of by the Puritan or Calvinian party among us in England Answ. Where I take notice 1. That he gives a false account of the rise and first beginning of this charge that These points do where they are entertained dispose mens minds for the reception and entertainment of Popery For before the troubles raised by Barnevelt our Divines did suspect conditionate election and falling away from grace c. to be an inlet to Popery as is manifest from the Letter of the Heads of the University of Cambridge to their Chancellor written upon the occasion of Baret's and Baro's preaching or reading things agreeable to the Opinions that are now called Arminian in which Letter bearing date March 8. 1595 't is affirmed that if passage were permitted to those Errours the whole Body of Popery would by little and little break in upon them to the overthrow of Religion and consequently the withdrawing of many there and elsewhere from true obedience to her Majesty and therefore in the close they humbly beseech his Lordships good aid and assistance for the suppressing in time not only of these Errours but even of gross Popery like by such means in time easily to creep in among them as they found by late experience it had dangerously begun Unto this and many other testimonies alledged by Mr. Hickman in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Doctor will yield no assent but answereth three things Dr. H. Pag. 73. 1. Why should not a general compliance with the Friers of S. Dominick be thought as ready a way to bring in Popery as any such compliance with the Friers of S. Francis Answ. To which the Answer is easie Because the Dominicans opinions do much tend to the exaltation of grace and the subjection of carnal reason to Faith so do not the Tenents of the Franciscans or Jesuits Now where grace is exalted and carnal reason is subâ—ected there Popery which hath its foundation in carnal reason and pride doth not so easily prevail or obtain This the Pope understood well enough which made his Bull to roar so loud against the in this point Orthodox Iansenians Dr. H. Ibid. 2. The Melancthonian or moderate Lutherans which make up infinitely the greatest part of the Lutheran Churches agree in these points with the Iesuits or Franciscan Friers and yet are still as far from relapsing to the Church of Rome as when they made the first separation from it Answ. Where 1. It is strange that one pretending to History should represent the infinitely far greater part of the Lutheran Churches as Melancthonian or moderate Lutherans When as it is known that a very great if not the greatest part of the Lutherans are as far from being Melancthonians or moderate as Dr. Heylin is from being a Presbyterian or Puritan But it seems if men be never so violent for Ubiquity Consubstantiation Images if they be but against Predestination they shall pass for meek and moderate and Melancthonians 2. It may a little be questioned Whether the present Lutherans be as far from relapsing to the Church of Rome as were those Lutherans who made the first separation from it I know not how much there may be of truth in the talk that hath lately filled our ears concerning Unions and accommodations betwixt the Lutheran and Roman Churches It would be very strange if the Lutherans having all this while been bred up among Images should be as averse from Image-worship as were the first Reformers 3. It is as false as what is most false that the Lutherans do agree with the Franciscans or Jesuits in these Points Micraelius in his Heterodoxia Calviniana disput 5. par 15 rejecteth both the Dominicans and Jesuits the Dominicans as inclining to the Stoicks the Jesuits as falling in with the Pelagians Afterwards he rejects the Jesuits Scientia media confessing that Voetius doth well and unanswerably prove against them that there is nothing knowable but what is the object either of the knowledge of simple intelligence or vision Speaking also of Arminius he will not undertake for him Tarnovius openly rejects the Arminians as of a contrary judgement from the Lutherans Miscel. Sacrorum lib. 2. pag. 710 Vorstiniani Arminiani similes in Belgio quando aiunt fide nos praedestinari ad
No such thing had the Arch-Bishop to charge on Calvin and therefore it is like enough would have desired his assistance in King Edward's time had he not known that Gâ—nâ—va could not or would not have parted with him Certain I am Cranmers and Calvins principles differed very little either as to Doctrine or Discipline nor did either greatly dissent from Lâ—ther unless in the matter of the corporal preâ—ncâ— of Christ in the Sacrament I have done only desiring the Râ—ader to consider 1 Whether it be not difficult to reconcile the Author of the Fides Veterum and the Historia Quinquarticularis seeing the one saith that our first Reformers had â—n eye to the Lutheran Platform and took the Articles of our Church word for word out of the Augustan Confession the other saith that Luther by a spirit of Prophecy no doubt declared himself no friend either to our Doctrine or Discipline And if any one can reconcile this contradiction then let him 2 compare our Articles with the Augustan Confession and see whether our Reformers were such plagiaries as to take their Articles of Religion all or any out of those drawn up at Ausberg And then 3 let him also well weigh whether it be not a great discouragement to all good endeavours to say that Luther and Calvin after all their prayers and study were as subject to error and humane frailty and as indulgent to their own opinions as any men whatever Learning and Piety would scarce be so earnestly prayed for if after we had attained both in some good measure we should still remain as subject to error as obnoxious to humane frailty as indulgent to our own private opinions as any men how unlearned and wicked soever Is there any one else that the Doctor thinks the first Reformers attributed much unto Yes one viz. Erasmus Of whom he tells us that he was Greek Professor in Cambridge Which every one knows as also that he is put in the Catalogue of the Lady Margarets Professors of Divinity in that University but died 1536. And though it be true which the Doctor relates out of Fox that by the Protector in the first year of King Edward's Reign it was commanded That Erasmus his Paraphrasâ—s on the four Evangelists should be set in some convenient place in Churches and that every Priest should have of his own one new Testament in English and Latine with the Paraphrases of Erasmus on the same yet it doth not follow as is inferred that our Reformers intended not to advance any other Doctrine than what was countenanced in the writings of that Learned man I say this follows not or if it do follow then if follows much more from the Canon of our Convocation 〈◊〉 that our Church never intended to propagate any Doctrine but what had countenance in the Martyrology of Fox But that consequence the Doctor will at no haâ—d allow but sets himself against it totis viribus Part 3. â— 56. See the difference King Edward's Council in the first year of his Reign when the Church was scarce crept out of Popery if crept out of Popery placed Erasmus his Paraphrases in Churches therefore the Church intended no Doctrine but that which was countenanced in Erasmus This is a good Argument Queen Elizabeth when Reformation was come to a great height by the advice of her whole Convocation placed Mr. Fox in Churches and Houses of great resort therefore the Church intended no Doctrine but what was countenanced in the writings of Mr. Fox This is no good Argument because the case is altered But I hope the Doctor thinks the Protector did intend to propagate some other Doctrine than what was countenanced in the Writings of Erasmus Why else did he go to fight against the Scots which War was unlawful on the Principles of Erasmus If the Protector warred against his conscience yet I trow the Articles were not drawn up against the minds of those that form'd theâ— yet in one of them War is justified Yea I heartily wish that the Article of the Trinity were not against some Doctrine countenanced in the Writings of this learned man Erasmus The blot of Arianism shall not fall on his face from my pen but our new Arians the Socinians do boast of him as their own I hope not upon so good grounds as they may boast of Hugo Grotius his Countreyman But boast of him they do The Ministers of Transilvania in the most cursed Book of the Knowledge of one God number him among their Ancestors and Socinus himself in his Epistles saith of him that he was not undeservedly suspected by the Trinitarians of Arianism and of the Antitrinitarians reckoned among those who somewhat darkly renounced the Trinity But now at last that Dr. Heylin may say that he hath met with a very good natured man I will give but not yield that Erasmus his Paraphrases were eyed by our first Reformers in making their Confession of Faith What will he gain thence Truly just nothing at all or less than nothing if nothing more be found in them than what is picked out and set before us pag. 109 110 111 For in all those collections there is not one phrase or sentence that doth contradict any one of the five Points as stated by the rigidest Calvinists Even those who say that Christ died only for the Elect in which number I never put my self will bring themselves off from all and every thing that is here alledged out of Erasmus Dr. H. Pag. 110. Of universal Redemption saith the Doctor he tells us thus This Lamb is so far from being subject to any sin that he alone is able to take away all the sins of the whole World Answ. Will Amesius Gomarus or any other that most restrains the death of Christ deny this Do they not all distinguish betwixt the worth of the death and the will of him that died and say that the worth of the death was such that God might without any indecency have accepted it for the redemption of ten thousand Worlds if there had been so many But Erasmus further adds Dr. H. Ibid. He is also so gentle and so desirous of mans salvation that he is ready to suffer pains for the sins of all men and to take upon him our evils because he would bestow upon us his good things Answ. This is so dilute a speech that I will strengthen it and say that he did suffer pains for the sins of all men and yet dare peremptorily aver that no Gomarist would refuse to subscribe the saying for he can grant that Christ died with an intention to purchase some benefits for the very Reprobates and he will further say that for ought appears to the contrary Erasmus might by all men mean the genera singulorum and not the singula generum for doubtless that phrase in Scripture sometimes signifies no more than men of all sorts ages countries I wish men would either not at all dispute for the amplitude of Redeeming grace or
him also among those worthy Persons who subscribed a Declaration sent abroad May 8. 1554. all whose names are to be seen in Mr. Fox his third Volume pag. 102 of the London Edition 1631. which Edition I shall still follow having not the last Edition by me The purport of that I eclaration is to shew Reasons why they will not otherwise â—ispute than before indifferent Judges In the Declaration also is couched a Confession of their Faith worthy to be â—ead by all who would understand the spirit of our Martyrs aright The fourth branch of that Declaration is concerning Justifâ—cation by Faith only Of which having delivered their mind they add in the close By this we disallow Papistical Doctrine of Free-will of Works of Supererogation of Merits of the Necessity of Auricular Confession and Satisfaction to God-wards If they disallowed the Papistical Doctrine of Free-will whose Doctrine did they allow but the Doctrine of Calvin and Luther who in this matter perfectly agreed Luther's high flown expression being abated All that I shall more observe concerning this Mr. Rogers is 1. That he was a Non-conformist even to excess his zeal out-running knowledge unless he had some reasons proper to those times for he never went otherwise than with a round Cap and would not agree to use the Attire proper to the Order of Priesthood unless the Popish Priests might be enjoyned to wear upon their sleeves a Chalice with an Host. 2. That he was very zealous to put to death the two Hereticks condemned by Archbishop Cranmer and burnt 1550 1551. A familiar Friend of his came to him and desired him to make use of his interest with Cranmer that they might not be put to death or if they were put to death that they might not be burnt because that kind of death seemed not so agreeable to Evangelical meekness He answered that the punishment of burning men alive was not so tormenting but mild enough His Friend replied with a great ardor of spirit holding his right hand and striking his own against it Go too perhaps it will come to pass that your selves may have your hands full of so mild burning And he was indeed as I before suggested the first that tasted of the Marian Meekness A. B. Cranmer must needs be supposed to have a great stroke in the framing of the Articles of Religion agreed on 1552. So must Bishop Ridley also for though Cranmer was Metropolitan in Title yet Ridley seems to be the greater Stickler of the two especially in the matter of Rites and Ceremonies He forced Hooper to be Canonically Ordained against his inclination against the King's Letter and the Earl of Warwick's Letter the one bearing date Iuly 23. 1550 the other August 5. Yea so violent was he that he threatned or caused to be threatned death to Hooper if he persisted in refusal Haec Theologomachia sic tandem exiit vincentibus Episcopis Hooperus vel ad palinodiam vel ad eas conditiones adactus est ut semel saltem in concione publica se ostenderet populo more caeterorum Episcoporum insulatus Quod ni fecisset sunt qui putant Episcopos ultimum supplicium ei molituros nam ita audivi a famulo ipsius Ducâ—m Suffolciensem clam Hooperum qui eorum conatus non ignorabat monuisse Fox in his Latine Commentary pag. 280. I much wonder what stirred up this heat in Ridley and much doubt it was some personal pique against Hooper because of his popularity and boldness in reproving the manners of the time and the corruptions of the Church Marvelously was Hooper flocked after Saepe adfui saith Fox quum in templi fores nemo ingredi concionante Hoopero potuerit tanta ejus diligentia fuit ut nullum diem sine binis aut ternis quandoque concionibus praeteriret Rursus ea in Scripturis promptitudo ut si sexies ei faciendum esset tempore ciâ—ius quam materia eguissâ—t pag. 279. I say I doubt there was somewhat of a pique because I find that the same Ridley did ordain Iohn Bradford a Deacon without any of those Canonical Rites that were then in use as appeareth Acts and Monuments pag. 280. But Ridley acknowledged his fault and God forgave him and so must man too In the Letter in which this acknowledgement is made he also accquaints Hooper that he understood by his works which he had superficially seen that they throughly agreed and wholly consented in those things which are the grounds and substantial points of our Religion against which the world so furiously raged in those days By which works in all probability he means some Trearises Hooper composed against Transubstantiation which are exemplified in Fox his Latine Commentary Certain it is that Ridley could not approve all Doctrines in Hooper's works unless he disapproved one Article of our Religion For Hooper in his Commentary on the Creed doth most expresly declare against the local descent of Christ into Hell which is asserted as a truth grounded on Scripture in the Articles of Religion And as certain is it that Ridley could not joyn with him if he condemned the absolute decree of Election I shall shew hereafter that he did not or determining grace in conversion The Article of Election I have already both transcribed and argued from let us now see what may be collected from the Articles of Free-will and Grace which I will present as they were Printed by Iohn Day with the King's Authority 1553. The words of the former are these We have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God without the grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working in us when we have that will Of the latter these The Grace of Christ or the holy Ghost by him given doth take away the stony heart and giveth aâ— heart of flesh And although those that have no will to good things he maketh them to will and those that would evil things he maketh them not to will the same yet nevertheless he enforceth not the will And therefore no man when he sinneth can excuse himself as not worthy to be blamed or condemned by alledging that he sinneth unwillingly or by compulsion If this be not Calvinism and Anti-arminianism I know not what is All power to good works pleasant and acceptable to God without grace preventing and co-operating is denied to us Grace also is said to take away the stony heart and give an heart of flesh to make us to will not only able to will good things And when it comes to be explained what it doth not it is only said it enforceth not and sinners are only said not to act by compulsion which may well consist with some necessity This is the summ of what the Calvinists alledge when charged to destroy Free-will But now the Arminians say there is no liberty where no indifference and that the grace of God leaves a man indifferent to turn or not to
Elizabeth no favourer of Foreign Doctrine She accepted the Dedication suffered the Book and the Annotations to pass among her People without any censure here So much entertainment and applause did it meet with that some who have been curious to search into the number of its Editions say that by the Queens own Printers it was printed above thirty times I am not ignorant that King Iames highly censured this Trans-slation and the marginal Annotations in the Hampton Conference the Translation he calls the worst that ever he saw some of the Notes he calls very partial untrue seditious and savouring too much of dangerous and traiterous conceits instancing in the Note on Exod. 1.19 and 2 Chron. 15.16 which censure a Jesuit takes as if spoken of the Translation used at Geneva it self But the Annotations on both these places are satisfied for by Bishop Morton page 104 of a Book written by him to shew the Romanists Doctrine of Rebellion and Aequivocation As for Arianism charged on these Annotations by Dr H. they are acquitted by the learned Letter of Sir Thomas Bodley I have all this while said nothing of Bishop Hooper and Bishop Latimer out of whose Writings the Doctor hath transcribed so much And truly the things transcribed out of them are so impertinent that it would be no hazard to my Reader if I should wholly pass them over in silence Yet I will not but first shall say something of the men secondly of their writings Latimer was once a very hot Papist as himself acknowledgeth against himself Being converted from Popery he was as zealous for the Reformed Religion boldly reproving the sins of all whether Rulers or Ruled In his Sermons he used a style which perhaps was then accounted elegant but would now be judged ridiculous at least unbeseeming the Pulpit Hooper I look upon as one that feared the Lord from his youth for he chose from his youth to leave Oxford that he might not ensnare his conscience Beyond the Seas he fell into acquiantance with the learned Henry Bullinger and returned not into England till the Reign of King Edward when he gained more love from the Laicks than Clergy being a stiff Non-conformist Hand in drawing up the Articles of Religion he had none one of them being diametrically opposite to his declared judgment yet because he was very great both for piety and learning as his writings evidently shew therefore his judgment is not to be sleighted And if Dr. Heylin have proved or any one else can prove that he and Latimer held the opinions afterwards called Arminian I will grant that those opinions were not by the Protestant Church in King Edward's time adjudged intolerable Whether they held them or no must be considered First I yield that they both asserted Universal Redemption This being granted the Doctor dare say that Dr. H. Part 2. page 50. He Mr. Hickman he means will not be confident in affirming there can be any room for such an absolute Decree of Reprobation antecedaneous and precedent to the death of Christ as his great Masters in the School of Calvin have been pleased to teach him Ans. Mr. Hickman's mind is best known to himself so are his great Masters in the School of Calvin if he ever had any such but this I am confident of that Calvin's Decree of Reprobation may be maintained and yet Universal Redemption not denied Monsieur Amyrald as great a Scholar as this last age hath afforded hath in a whole Book defended Calvin's absolute Decree against Mr. Hoard yet the same Amyrald most strenuously defends Universal Redemption Two Dissertations also of Bishop Davenant are published by careful and faithful hands in the first he sets himself to assert Universal Redemption by Christ in the second to assert Personal both Election and Reprobation Let us see now what the Doctor can find in Latimer and Hooper Dr. H. Part 2. pag. 37. Latimer in his Sermon on Septuages rebukes those vain Fellows who abuse Election and Reprobation to carnal Liberty or Presumption Answ. Why so doth Calvin so doth Ursin so do our Divines at the Synod of Dort Dr. H. page 38. Hooper in his Preface to the ten Commandments saith We must not extenuate Original Sin nor make God the Author of Evil nor yet say that God hath written fatal Laws with the Stoicks and in the necessity of destiny violently pulleth one by the hair into Heaven and thrusteth the other headlong into Hell Answ. All this is just according to Calvin's method No Calvinists say that God's Decree offereth violence to Man's Will or pulleth a man into Heaven Only they say that Electing love makes men willing and that Holiness is an effect of Election As for Sin that they say is not an effect of Reprobation but only a Consequent I but Dr. H. page 39. Bishop Latimer teacheth us that we are to enquire no further after our Election than as it is to be found in our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ. Answ. Why so teach the Calvinists too that our Election is not to be known but by our knowledge of our interest in Christ. But the Anticalvinist will not say with Latimer If thou findest thy self in Christ then art thou sure of eternal life He saith A man may be in Christ and be a Reprobate a man may be in Christ to day and in Hell to morrow Perhaps the Doctor will find more against Calvinistical Reprobation or if he do not he must be concluded to have beaten the Air. First we must hear what he makes Calvinistical Reprobation to be 'T is that he saith Dr. H. Part 2. pag. 47. By which the far greater part of mankind are pre-ordained and consequently pre-condemned to the the pit of torments without any respect had unto their sins and incredulities This is generally he saith maintained and taught in the Schools of Calvin Ans. If it be so then I am sure I never was in any School of Calvin for I never heard or read of any such Reprobation nay I never read of any person whatsoever that asserted such a Reprobation Sundry famous Schoolmen quoted by Dr. Rivet in his fifth Disputation de Reprobatione were of opinion that if God had decreed even innocent creatures to eternal damnation he had decreed nothing unworthy of himself and they seem to have but too much countenance for this bold and audacious Tenent from a passage of St. Austin's in his 16. cap. de Praedestinatione Gratia But the Calvinists as many as I have met with say that as God never actually damned any man but for sin so he never decreed to damn any but for sin All that they say is but this that Whereas Iudas and Peter were both alike corrupted by the fall and both alike apt by nature to abuse and reject grace the reason why God determined effectually to cure the corruption of Peter and not of Iudas was the meer good pleasure of his will The Calvinists are not engaged to say that God
been to look into them if so be he had looked into them with an intention as well to answer what had been alledged against him by Mr. Prin as to consider what made for him I have already entreated my Reader to give himself the trouble of comparing passages of all sorts and then there will remain no further trouble for me I am sure no man can think that any thing in the 29 30 31 pages of the Doctor 's third Part collected out of the Homilies is contradictory to the Calvinists assertions rightly understood The Homily of the Nativity saith Christ must be not only full and perfect man but also full and perfect God to the intent he might more fully and perfectly make satisfaction for mankind This saith the Doctor is as plain as words can make it And plain indeed it is against any that deny either the Deity or Humanity of Christ those that do so usually deny God's Decrees too but there is here neither plain nor obscure words or word against Calvinists Every one will laugh at the passage brought for Universal Grace out of the first part of the Sermon against the peril of Idolatry which amounts to no more than this that Idolatry is against the light of Nature as well as Scripture Yet in this passage did he so much please himself that he proceeds to tell us that in the third Part of that Sermon there are some passages that do as plainly speak of falling from God the final alienation of the soul of a man once righteous from his love and favour Such passages as these would be worth Gold the fine Gold of Ophir He names but one which is this How much better were it that the Arts of Painting and we had never been found than one of them whose souls are so precious in the sight of God should by occasion of Image or Picture perish and be lost This passage looks as if it were designed to perswade Christian Magistrates to break down all Images of God Christ the Saints especially in Churches on which score these Sermons against Idolatry have been decried by sundry of the Doctor 's Friends but what hath it in it that by all the help of the whole Art of Logick can militate against Perseverance Better it were that Painting had never been found out than that by occasion of a Picture a precious Soul should perish and be lost therefore the Souls of the Elect of justified and righteous Persons may be totally and finally alienated from the grace and favour of God I will form his other Argument against Perseverance out of the Homily of the Resurrection The Homilist very affectionately disswades those that are risen with Christ from returning to sin therefore he took it for granted that some truly sanctified Souls might totally and finally fall from grace These two are pretty but the prettiest passage of all is still behind The co-operation of mans will with the grace of God he must mean or else he trifleth in the very first moment of conversion is presumed or else our Church had not writ any Homilies at all Just so he might argue that if Calvin had not held co-operation he would never have preached Sermons And indeed out of Calvin Beza Zuinglius may easily be gathered five hundred places that have a more seeming and colourable face of contrariety against Calvinism than any that the Doctor hath made a shift to gather out of our English Homilies Yet least he might be thought faint-hearted he goes on from the Homilies to Bishop Iewel the Copier out of Peter Martyr's Sermons and Lectures his intimaâ—e Friend at Oxford his Guest at Strasborough and Zurich and his Assistant in compiling his Comment on Iudges In his Defence of his Apology he saith that Christ by saying it is finished plainly signified persolutum jam esse prectum pro peccato humani generis By which the good Bishop sufficiently declared himself to be no friend to Popish Satisfactions But what can hence be inferred either for or against Calvinism Did ever any Calvinist say that Christ did not pay the whole price or that God did expect any part of the price from the hands of any other I but it was paid for the sin of mankind True but not for the sin of every particular person of mankind though if it had been so said by Iewel many Calvinists would have liked Iewel the better for such a speech At length the Doctor hits upon one just of his mind viz. Mr. Samuel Harsnet who preached at Paul's Cross Octob. 27 1584 and preached Anticalviristically in all the five Points under Controversie This must be granted him if the Sermon were delivered as it was some few years since printed Hence he argues A Sermon preached at St. Paul 's at which no offence was taken upon which no Recantation was enjoyned nor any complaint made had no matter in it contrary to the Rules of the Church and the appointment of the same Mr. Harsnet 's Sermon was such a Sermon preached at St. Paul 's c. Ergo it had no matter in it contrary to the Rules of the Church c. Either the Doctor thinks the major of this Syllogism true or he does not If he does not then can he have no confidence in his own Syllogism If he do then will it evidently follow that in Calvinism there is nothing contrary to the Rules of the Church because so many Calvinistical Sermons have been preached at Paul's which were never complained of to Authority nor any Recantation enjoyned upon them yea for which the Preachers have had thanks and preferments Besides if Mr. Harsnet had been complained of and Recantation enjoyned him the Doctor would not have accounted him the less Orthodox on that account for he knows and will afterwards confess that Recantation hath been enjoyned for such kind of Sermons as Mr. Harsnet's was So that I can scarce tell whether it be worth while to descend to the minor of the former Syllogism for what will it advantage us to prove that the Sermon was Censured and Recanted when as those we have to deal with are resolved to think that lawful Authority hath enjoyned Recantations of Sermons agreeable to the Articles of Religion Yet because we are in genere Historico I deny the minor and say It doth appear that offence was taken at the forementioned Sermon that complaint was made of it and that the Preacher did at least declare his sorrow for it perhaps not heartily for he seems to have lived and died an Arminian yet he did declare his sorrow for the preaching of that his Sermon Had he not so done the University no doubt had spewed him out especially living in a Colledge where Dr. Fulke was Master a man that in his Answer to the Rhemists hath thought himself as much concerned to vindicate the Doctrine of Election and Reprobation and the Points thereupon depending as any other Doctrine of our Reformation whatever Doth any one ask
that the Historian himself confesseth that by means of him and Dr. Whitaker the University had been quite over-run with Calvinism had not Dr. Baro a French-man born set himself to pluck up what the other two had planted and watered Of this Dr. Baro we shall hear the Historian tell us a fine tale Scilicet liberanda veritas expectabat liberatorem Petrum Baro the English Kingdom of Heaven had fallen had it not been for this Atlas that bare it up with his shoulders Let us see what the man was and what he held that we may know how much we owe unto him which yet we cannot well do till we have taken in our way the story of one Barret This Barret in a Sermon ad Clerum April 29. 1595 had vented sundry Anticalvinistical Points for which he was convented May 5. before the Heads of Houses and charged to have preached Doctrines erroneous and false and contrary to the Religion received and established by publick Authority in the Realm of England He confessed the Doctrines charged upon him but denied them to be any way repugnant to the Doctrine of the Church of England Whereupon the Vice-Chancellor and forenamed Heads entring into mature deliberation and diligently weighing and examining these Positions because it did manifestly appear that the said Positions were false erroneous and likewise repugnant to the Religion received and established in the Church of England adjudged and declared that the said Barret had incurred the penalty of the 45th Statute of the University de Concionibus and by virtue and tenour of that Statute they decreed and adjudged the said Barret to make a publick Recantation in such words and form as by the Vice-Chancellor and the said Heads or any three or two of them should be prescribed unto him or else upon his refusal to recant to be perpetually expelled both from his Colledge and the University What the form of Recantation was may be seen in Mr. Prin such it was as gave sufficient honour unto Calvin Peter Martyr and the Doctrines Preached and Printed by them Lo here we have those that were alwaies entrusted with power to judge of and to condemn false Doctrine condemning the Anti-Calvinistical opinions as false and contrary to the Articles of Religion established in England And when such an Authority has laid a Recantation upon Mr Barret how will Dr. H. get it off Why First He doubts whether any Recantation were enjoyned in so many words as are extant in Mr. Prin. This is an irrational doubt seeing Mr. Prin had the transcript under the University Register's own hand Secondly He denies it as a thing most false that ever Barret published any Recantation whatsoever it was And yet Mr. Prin tells him that he had a transcript taken out of an Original copy under Mr. Barrets own hand and tells us as also does Mr. Fuller what words he used after he had read the Recantation and words they are from which it might be infer'd that he was not heartily sorry for the errors delivered by him nor really changed in his judgment But doth it not appear by a Letter of the Heads of Houses dated March 8 that Mr. Barret had never made any such Recantation I answer It doth not appear for the Heads of Houses say not that he had never read the Recantation but that he had refused to do it in such sort as was prescribed which might make those who were in Authority in the University both to mind him of his duty and also to complain of him unto their Chancellour for not doing his duty Yet if it will do the Doctor a kindness let him enjoy his fancy that Mr. Barret Recanted not for to be sure he did not credit his Recantation returning to Arminianism and also to Popery unto which the Heads of Houses say Arminianism had been by sundry made a Bridge However here is the judgment of the Heads of Houses in Cambridge solemnly declared that he who strikes at Mr. Calvin in these points strikes at the Church of England also Yea sayes the Dr but it will not hence follow that Barrets Doctrines were repugnant to the Church of England because these Heads judged them so for if so we may conclude by the same Argument that the Church of Rome was in Light in the Darkest times of ignorance and superstition because all that publickly opposed her Doctrine were enjoyned Recantation Which evasion is so lamentable that he had much better have used none for we do not from the injoyning of the Recantation inferr the falsity of the Doctrines to be recanted but only their dissonance unto the Religion established and certainly the Church of Rome when it was at the worst did never injoyn Recantation of any Doctrine which was not contrary unto her present sentiments And so I leave Mr. Barret and his opinions under the blot justly dropped upon them by the University only taking notice that Barrets peremptoriness might occasion Baro to deliver his mind more plainly and publickly than before he had done which occasioned the University to send up Dr. Whitaker and Dr. Tindal unto Arch-Bishop Whitgift hoping that he who had been so zealous against Cartwright in a point of Discipline would be found to have some zeal against Baro in matter of Doctrine nor did their hopes fail them for he forthwith called to him sundry right worthy and Reverend Divines and drew up those Articles commonly called the Lambeth-Articles agreed upon November the 10th 1595. nine they are in number and were approved by the Arch-Bishop of York as well as by his Grace of Canterbury So that here are the two Metropolitans men no doubt considerable for Learning as well as for Authority for both of them had been Lady Margaret's and King's Professors in the University Now I ask Did these know the Doctrine of the Church or did they not If they did not how durst they call men to subscribe what they knew not If they did then either Calvinism in this matter is the Doctrine of the Church or else the two Primates commended to the University a Doctrine against their own Light and conscience And it is worth observation that the Bishop of York in his Letter to his Brother of Canterbury does give him to understand that his opinion he sent him concerning Election and Reprobation was but that in which they had both agreed while they professed and taught Divinity in the Schools Nor can it be said that Whitgift received his opinion from beyond the Seas where he never was having such favour shewed him by Doctor Perne that he never needed to leave the Kingdom More probable it is that he suckt in these opinions from his Tutor Mr. Bradford and from Bishop Ridley Master of Pembroke Hall whilst he was a fresh-man By whom also he was so principled against the tyranny and Detestable enormities of the Pope that at the time of his commencing Dr. in Divinity he gave this Thesis to be disputed on Papa
in the Life of Iewel c. This nevertheless I grant that in Queen Elizabeths time there were no disputings ex animi sententia against Calvinism in Oxford Schools No Oxford man during her Reign declared himself for conditional decrees or any thing else opposite to Mr. Calvin in these poinâ—s but many did as they had occasion declare themselves strenuously for Calvin in Queen Elizabeths daies We find the whole Convocation appointing Calvin's Institutions to be read by Tutors unto their Pupils and other Books also as Calvinistical as the Institutions can be by which means our Divines there became prepared against the adversary as soon as he should dare to shew himself Anno 1597 Robert Abbot proceeded Doctor and being alarummed from Cambridge gave these two Theses Aeterna Dei predestinatione continetur aliorum electio ad vitam aeternam aliorum ad mortem reprobatio Electorum certa est salus ut perire non possint Dr. Field qualis quantus vir gave these Theses Doctrina Praedestinationis olim tradita ab Augustino nostris temporibus a Calvino eadem est nec quicquam continet Catholicae veritati aut Fidei regulae contrarium Praescientia Dei aeterno decreto omnia ordinantis non puâ—navit cum arbitrii libertate primis parentibus conâ—essâ— Orthodoxi Patres qui liberum arbitrium esse dixâ—runt qâ—â— bodiâ— sâ—rvum esse docent idem sentiunt Five such Thesis as these laid down by two such Scholars were enough to let the new Pelagianizers see there was no quarter for them in Oxford Nor can I find that they sought any Calvin being there all Qu. Elizabeths days in as much honour as at Geneva And of this the Historian seems sensible confessing that even Barnabas was carried away into Calvinism only he labours to prove that it was but in one point that of the not total or final falling away of Gods Elect. And that is indeed the only point for which Mr. Hooker was quoted but that is such a point as with which the other are necessarily twisted and so defended by him as that he appears Calvinistical to the utmost For whereas there be that maintain the certain perseverance of only the Elect judging it not impossible that some might be believers who were not Elect Hooker plainly makes all true believers Elect to eternal life and therefore sure to persevere in the Faith and he is so confident in this point as in none more prefacing his assertion thus In this I am sure I am not deceived nor can I deceive you At last the Doctor is faign to fly to this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that his Discourse of Iustification might be altered by the Publisher of it or it might be written by him as as an Essay of his younger years pag. 90. Had he not better have said It is true that Hooker also was a Doctrinal Calvinist but I could heartily wish he had not been such And then I should have better liked him What then will the Doctor let go the whole University of Oxford No. Ibid. Some there were who spared not to declare their dislike of the Calvinian tenents and secretly trained up their Scholars in other principles An answer that may indifferently serve for any Novellists by whatsoever names dignified or distinguished The absurd Quakers may say that there have been in the University many that never bowed their Knees to Baal and thereupon charge flesh to be silent and not object singularity to them and they may further add that sundry great Scholars will be as free to joyn with them as Buckeridge and Houson were to joyn with Mountague if â—ver there come a time in which it shall be no more â—â—â—â—rdous to own their friends than it was in 1626 to â—wn Mountague There is only one thing in which the Doctor can hope to out-shoot them and that is this that Bishop Bancroft when Baro died at London three or four years after his leaving Cambridge took Order to have most of the Divines in and about London to attend his Funeral This plainly shews thinks he that there were many of both Universities that openly favoured Baro 's Doctrines pag. 90. But do we indeed favour and plainly declare that we favour the opinions of those whose Funerals we attend If so then must we never go to the Funeral of a Roman Catholick then did Queen Elizabeth and her Bishop Grindal plainly discover themselves friends to Popery when they so magnificently celebrated the Funerals of the Emperour Besides the Historian would do well to consider that when the Prophet Elijah thought himself to be alone Israel was manifestly apostatized from the God of her Fathers and had committed Whoredom with Idols and so in Athanasius his time the world was become Aâ—â—an If the Doctor also will grant that in Queen Elizabeths time the Church was become Calvinistical he grants the very thing we are contending for As for the truth of the Calvinistical opinions that we are ready to try with him by Scripture when he pleaseth In this History we search not what ought to be held but what hath been held not of what mind our Reformers should have been but of what they were If Calvinism be truth it will be truth though it had never found entertainment in the Church of England If it be error it will be error though all the Church of England be for it for the Church cannot make truth or falsehood but only declare what is truth and falsehood Whether the Church have declared Calvinism or Anti-calvinism to be truth that is the only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Seeing we have found Anti-calvinism discountenanced by the Church in Queen Elizabeths Reign let us now follow the Historian to her Successors dayes that we may see whether it were more countenanced then The first thing we are led to Pag. 96 97 98 99 100 is the Hampton Court Conference in which he shall find nothing for him but much against him Dr. Reynolds calls the Lambeth Articles Orthodoxal no one intimated that they were Heterodoxal Dr. Overal declares against the total and final Apostasy of the Saints no one declared for it His Majesty determined that Predestination and Election depend not upon any Qualities actions or works of Men which be mutable but upon Gods Eternal and immutable decree and purpose no one said or whispered any thing against this determination 'T is only said that the Bishop of London told his Majestie how very many in these daies neglecting Holiness of life presumed too much of persisting in grace Calvinists would say such fellows never had grace to persist in laying all their Religion on Predestination If I shall be saved I shall be saved which he termed a desperate Doctrine and so the Calvinists term it also an hundred times over shewing it to be contrary to good Divinity and the true Doctrine of Predestination wherein we should rather reason Ascendendo than Descendendo thus I live in obedience to God in love
to my Neighbour I follow my occasion c. therefore I trust God hath elected me and predestinated me to eternal Salvation not thâ—â— which is the usual course of argument God hath predestinated and chosen me to life therefore though I sin never so grievously yet I shall not be damned for whom he once loveth he loveth to the End In which words there is some thing Hypercalvinistical for the Bishop saith we must rather reason Ascendendo than Descendendo but the Calvinist saith that we must altogether reason Ascendendo in such a way as he after delineates If the Bishop were not a Calvinist I would fain know how a man could according to his principles argue Ascendendo I live in obedience to God therefore I trust God hath elected me and predestinated me to Salvation The Calvinist saith he that lives in obedience to God is predestinated to Salvation but so doth not the Anti-calvinist nor hath he any foundation to build his trust of Predestination to Salvation upon for according to him a man who lives in all good obedience to God may be damned because he may cease to live in obedience to God and hath no promise that he shall not cease But if Dr. Bancroft had not by his speech declared himself Calvinistical yet as hath been said his Chaplain's publishing his Exposition or Analysis of our Articles according to the Calvinistical frame and that with his good liking and approbation is a sufficient argument that he was such To invalidate this argument it is only said that That Analysis had been published 1585 which was eighteen years before Bancroft was Arch-Bishop Which answer adds strength to the argument for by it it appears that he took one to be his Chaplain who had eighteen years before published a Calvinistical Exposition of the Articles and suffered him after his own Consecration to republish it and to dedicate it to his own Grace which it may be presumed he would not have done if it had contained any thing contrary to his own judgement and sense Obj. But why would any one affirm that Bancroft agreed to the Lambeth-Articles whilst Bishop of London Answ. It was Mr. Fullers mistake in his Church History so to affirm Mr. Hickman whom the Doctor hath chosen for his adversary never so affirmed Yet he affirmed that he agreed to them and so it is like he did in the capacity of a Divine called in to consult On which score I also reckon that Mr. Nowel Dean of St. Pauls might agree to them because he was Dr. Whitakers Unkle and resided at London Object 2. Did not King James reject the Lambeth Articles when propounded as fit to be inserted into the Articles Answ. He did not reject them nor could he in honour reject them having never seen them before nor having them read to him at that time He was only told that the Articles were by the Arch-Bishop taking to him some Divines of special note drawn up and sent to the University for the appeasing of quarrels Whereupon his Majesty resolved that when such questions do arise among Scholars the quietest proceeding were to determine them in the University and not to stuff the Book with Conclusions Theological Here is not one word of leaving them to be canvased and disputed in the Schools though if they had been so left they might not forthwith be held in the Affirmative or Negative as best pleased the Respondent for the Respondent in our Universities can hold nothing without the allowance and approbation of the Doctor of the Chair or Vice-Chancelor or University Yea King Iames did some years after allow the putting of these Lambeth-Articles into the Confession of the Church of Ireland Anno 1615. To this the Doctor shapes an answer pag. 101 consisting of sundry particulars First That the Irish Articles were drawn up by Dr. Usher a professed Calvinian who not only thrust in the Lambeth-Articles but also made others of his own Answ. The Articles are the better to be liked because drawn up by a hand so learned and peaceable Secondly That the King might give consent to the confirming of these Articles though he liked them not How so First Because the Irish Nation at that time were most tenaciously addicted to the errors and corruptions of the Church of Rome and therefore must be bended to the other extreme before they could be streight Secondly It was an usual practise with the King in the whole course of his government to ballance one extreme by another countenancing the Papists against the Puritans and the Puritans sometimes against the Papists Answ. I have heard much talk of the craft of King Iames but did never before hear nor do I now believe that this was any part of it for what Policy is it to bring People out of one extreme into another or what Piety is it to agree to Articles of Religion the which all the Clergy must approve meerly to keep the civil interest even But I see what the Doctors fetch is in this what ever King Iames did in the affairs of Religion that his palat relisheth not must be thought to be done to gratifie the Puritans may not the Puritans also say that what ever was done pleasing to the Doctor was done in compliance with the Papists and with whom then will the name of King Iames be precious or honourable One piece of veracity I must needs commend the Doctor for viz. his acknowledging that Dr. Reynolds owned the meaning of the sixteenth Article to be â—ound pag. 98. This I commend because Mr. Mountague found a forehead in his Appeal to aver that it was by him and the other Ministers challenged for unsound I wish I had the like occasion to commend him for veracity to the end of his Book But I have not for pag. 103 he tells us that the opposites to the Calvinians were by the grace and favour of King James invested in the chief preferments of the Church of England conferred as openly and freely upon them as those who had been bred up in the contrary perswasion This if it be understood of men that had openly declared their opinions against the Calvinian Doctrine will be found to be an untruth If any trust be to be given to our printed Catalogues of Bishops there were in that Kings Reign these Translations or Consecrations Canterbury Richard Bancroft 1604. G. Abbot 1610. Asaph Richard Parry 1604. Iohn Hanmer 1622. Bangor Lewis Balie 1616. Bath and Wells Iames Mountague 1608. Ar. Lake 1616. Bristoll Iohn Thornborough 1603. Nicholas Felton 1617. Iohn Scatchfield 1619. Robert Wright 1622. Chicester Lancelot Andrews 1605. Samuel Harsnet 1609. George Carleton 1619. Coventry George Abbot 1609. Richard Neile 1610. Iohn Overal 1614. Thomas Morton 1618. St. Davids Richard Milborne 1615. William Laud 1621. Ely Lancelot Andrews 1609. Nicholas Felton 1618. Exeter Valentine Cary 1621. Glocester Thomas Ravis 1604. Henry Parry 1607. Giles Thomson 1611. Miles Smith 1612. Hereford Francis Godwin 1617. Landaff George
in the shell I think next to the study of the Holy Scriptures the reading of the Fathers is the best preservative against Arminianism which came into the Low-countrys with the contempt of the Fathers As for Calvinism it cannot be condemned if sentence be passed upon it out of the Fathers those I mean who professed to set themselves to handle the Controversies concerning grace and predestination Sure I am the Royal directions notwithstanding the University continued as highly or more highly Calvinistical than ever a manifest argument that the University looked upon the Kings directions as no way tending to root out Calvinistical Doctrine but rather as a means to confirm it and so indeed they were The Doctor will not yet give over but pag. 108 tells us of certain Orders sent out Anno 1622 August the fourth designed to put a bridle into the Calvinists moâ—ths These Orders it is notoriously known were put out at such a time when the Spanish match was driving on and common people began to have thoughts of heart whither the releasing of Recusants and the Articles of Marriage might tend In those Orders care was taken among other things that no undecent expressions should be used against Puritanes but it was also provided that no Preacher of what title soever under the degree of a Bishop or Dean at least should thenceforth presume to teach in any popular auditory the deep points of predestination c. but rather leave those points to be handled by learned men and that modestly and moderately by Use and application rather than by positive Doctrine And this was a right good Order for Calvinists who never suffer so much from any thing as the declamatory attempts of men in popular Sermons In the Schools where Syllogisms must be used their Doctrine is not in much danger because he who disputes must keep himself close to the State of the Question through not representing of which Arminians get all their Advantage Mr. Hoard did make choice of that piece of Calvinism which is most liable to exception the absolute decree of reprobation And I confess when I was a young proud Graduate I had read his Book and did think it perfectly unanswerable but when I had the good hap to meet with Bishop Davâ—nants answer to it I was marvelously altered in my opinion and estimation concerning the strength of the Book keeping still an high opinion of the Author of it for I found that the absolute decree of reprobation was quite another thing than it was represented There was in Oxford after the coming out of the aforesaid Orders of the King a Sermon Preached in the University Church by Mr. Gabriel Bridges against the absolute decree this saith the Doctor was a violating of the Kings Order you must pity him he had nothing else to say and this laid him open to the persecution of Dr. Prideaux and to the censure of the Vice-chancelor But all who have searched the Register do know that violation of the Kings Order was never so much as once laid to Mr. Bridges his charge He was accused for Preaching contrary to the Articles of Religion established among us and was Ordered to maintain in the Schools the Contrary to what he had Preached in the Pulpit and he did so and never altered his mind afterwards Indeed it had been most ridiculous once to imagine that a Sermon Preached in the University Church could violate the Kings Order manifestly restrained to popular Auditories in which number the University Auditories were never placed The Doctor hath one Card more left to play which if it hit not he will have a perfect Slam What is that It is his dear friend Mr. Mountague whom he imagineth in his Gagger to have disclaimed all the Calvinian tenents and to have asserted the Church to her primitive and genuine Doctrines Creditis an qui amant ipsi sibi somnia fingunt Well what of this Gagger Why information was prepared against him by two worthy men Mr. Yates and Mr. Ward A sign he was looked on as designing innovation What doth Mr. Mountague After he had got a copy of this information be flees for shelter to King James Poor man did he flee for shelter against the information of two Lecturers What shelter did he there find Why King Iames having now acted a Part at the Synod of Dort condemned the Arminians that he might save the Prince of Orange and Archbishop Abbot coming not at him and Dr. Iames Mountague being dead was Master of himself it seems before he had been a servant to others and Governed by the Light of his own most clear and excellent judgement took both Mountague and his Doctrines into his Protection and gave him a quietus est from all those Calumnies of Popery and Arminianism that were by the Informers laid on him commanded Dr. Francis White to see his Appeal he was in hand with Licenced for the Press and finally gave Order to Mountague to dedicate the Book when Licenced to his Royal self These things are very unlikely that a King should give command to have a Book Licenced before he had seen it or knew what would be in it and that he should give Order to have it Dedicated to himself and because they are unlikely I could be glad to see them confirmed by some irrefragable Authority but find no Authority alledged Wherefore I am a very unbeliever in all these matters so are most I meet with But these things I am certain of First That in Mr. Mountagues Appeal there be down-right untruths in matter of fact in which I do not find the Doctor going about to justifie or excuse him Secondly That never Book gave more discontent than his did for it was answered by no fewer than five or six all considerable in the Nation all agreeing that he had departed from the Doctrine of the Church The Book was also censured in Parliament as contrary to our Articles Archbishop Abbot indeavoured the stopping of it before it came to light Dr. White who had approved it did publickly complain what a trick the Bishops had served him promising to joyn with him in the approbation of the Book but yet cowardly slipping their necks out of the Collar and leaving him to bear the whole envy of the Midwifery of so distastful a Book Finally King Charles himself was feign both to pardon Mountague for all his Writings and at last to call in his Book as the great occasion of many unnecesâ—ary troubles So I let pass Mr. Mountague of whom Dr. Prideaux publickly said that he was more a Grammarian than a Divine As for King Iames we are sure from the Pen of Dr. Featly never used to wrong his Sovereign that not many weeks before his death he called the Arminians Hereticks and so we conclude that for all his and Queen Elizabeths days they were accounted Hereticks and their Doctrine Heresie And seeing they were then so accounted why now the broachers of that Doctrine should
be accounted the most obedient Sons of the Church is a question in which I would most gladly be satisfied Until such satisfaction be gained it will be at least a pardonable error to suppose that that is not the Doctrine of the Church of England which for above threescore Years after her first establishment was not averred in any one Licenced Book but confuted in many FINIS Postscript I Am given to understand that I seem to some not sufficiently to have taken notice of what the Doctor brings to invalidate the Argument drawn from Barret's Recantation I drew the Argument from the Heads of Houses in Cambridge enjoyning Mr. Barret to Recant what he had delivered against absolute reprobation and against perseverance and some other Calvinian Doctrines not only as false but also as contrary to the Articles of Religion here in England established The Doctor doth not cannot deny but that such Recantation was enjoyned him Now if the Heads of Houses in the University who are authorized to judge of the Sermons preached among them and to censure what they find in such Sermons disagreeable to the Doctrine of the Church did judge Barret's Doctrine denying absolute reprobation and perseverance of Believers to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church and manifestly contrary to it and passed this judgment upon mature deliberation I leave it to any ones consideration whether this be not a very vehement presumption that Calvin's Doctrine concerning absolute election and perseverance is agreeable to the Articles of our Church and Barret's Doctrine contrary to them If this be granted what need I contend about by-passages relating to the Recantation being in a place where I can have no recourse to the Records of Cambridge Yet to make it appear that I did write nothing in this business rashly and that the Doctor hath me at no such advantage as he pretends I will now review all he saith not already taken notice of It signifies little that he saith 1. That this process was made or procured by the Calvinian Heads inflamed by Mr. Perkins pag. 70 Part 3. Seeing there were then no Heads but what were Calvinistical and no man can think that they should all be guided and acted by Mr. Perkins a poor Preacher in the Town 2. It is to be doubted saith he pag. 71 whether any such Recantation consisting of so many Articles and every Article having its abjuration or recantation subjoyned unto it was ever enjoyned to be made But what reason have we to doubt of this when as the Form of Recantation is exemplified in Mr. Fuller from whom I had it and also in Mr. Prynne's Antiarminianism and was fairly printed in Qu. Elizabeth's daies some printed Copies of it being still extant and seeing Mr. Prynne declares that the Form of Recantation by him inserted into his Book was a Transcript taken out of an Original Copy under Mr. Barret's own hand Why he doubts because though Mr. Prynne say that the Recantation in the same manner and form as we there find it was exemplified and sent unto him under the Register's hand yet he also confesseth that no such matter could be found when the Heads of houses were required by an Order from the House of Commons to make certificate unto them of all such Recantations as were recorded in their University Register and of this Recantation in particular But first Mr. Prynne only tells us that he had been certified and informed that this Order for Recantation could not be found among the University Records 2. Mr. Prynne doth not pretend to have had in his hands the Form of Recantation exemplified under the Register's hand but only the Order for Recantation The Form of Recantation he tells us he had another way and perhaps the Form of Recantation was never put into the University Archives or Register But if the Order for the Recantation should not be found there neither I should much wonder and yet less wonder because Thomas Smith who was Register at this time is branded for one that was very careless in Registring matters that concerned the University as may be found in Mr. Fuller's Hist. of Camb. p. 49. But that which the Historian most contends for is that the Recantation was never made by Barret Pag. 72. It is to be denied as a thing most false that he never published the Recantation whatsoever it was It is to be thought that the Printer hath mistaken his Copy and put never instead of ever for if it be most false that he never published his Recantation then it is to be affirmed as a thing most true that he sometime published it which is that which we believe Let us sâ—an the reasons of the Doctor to prove that he never read the Recantation ibid. For 1. It is acknowledged in Mr. Prynnes own Transcript of the Acts that though Barret did confess the Propositions wherewith he was charged to be contained in his Sermon yet he would never grant them to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England and therefore was not likely to retract the same The Argument framed stands thus He that would never acknowledge his Propositions to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England was not likely to retract the same Mr. Barret would not acknowledge his Propositions to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England therefore he was not likely to retract the same The Major certainly is most absurdly false but the Minor cannot be proved For Mr. Prynne's Copy doth not say that he would never acknowledge but only that at first reading of his Charge he denyed his Propositions to be contrary to the Religion of the Church of England Many a man at first denies what he afterwards granteth Secondly saith the Doctor ibid. It is plain from Mr. Barret's Letters the one to Dr. Goad Master of Kings the other to Mr. Chadderton Master of Emanuel that neither slattery nor tâ—â—â—atâ—ings nor the fear of losing his subsistence in the University should ever work him to the publishing of the Recantation required of him The Doctor had in his Certamen Epistolare before told us of two Letters of Barret's written one to Dr. Goad the other to Mr. Chadderton and now he tells us that from them it is manifest that neither flattery c. Yet he gives us only a Copy of the Letter to Dr. Goad and never tells us whence he had that nor doth the Letter to Dr. Goad in the least intimate that any flattery had been used to draw him to make the Recantation but rather it manifests that he used flattery to perswade Dr. Goad to be his Friend and obtain for him that he might stay in the University on solemn promise to keep his Opinion to himself A very sneaking Letter it is and shews that he was a poor low spirited man valuing his Place more than his Conscience and yet his Credit more than his Place Nor doth he if we may judge of him by the