AN ABSTRACT OF SOME LETTERS TO AN Eminent Learned PERSON, Concerning the EXCELLENCY Of the BOOK of COMMON-PRAYER, etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 8.1. LONDON, Printed for William Crook, at the Green Dragon without Temple-Bar, 1679. SIR, I Humbly entreat you to tell me whether you do not Judge it Sinful to stay at home on the Lord's Day, rather than go to Church only to hear the Common Prayer. Preaching doubtless is in no wise to be Neglected, but this I must say, that I cannot apprehend that that person has any Actings of that Faith which worketh by Love (without which All the Knowledge we gain by Hearing Sermons does not Edify, but only Puff up the Mind) who when he comes to the Place of God's public Worship, knowing that he may not expect a Sermon there, is not Confident that he shall be as much Edified by the Prayers, & Chapters etc. as he should be by never so good a Sermon. But however, by reason of the Rarity of the Habit of True Christian Faith (even in that part of the World, which we call Christendom) and the frequency of the long Interruptions of its Actings, where it is, Various, & fresh Expressions of Saving Truths (which are apt to Excite the Minds of the Vnsanctifyed by the Fantasy to give heed to the Sense they import) are very Necessary. But This is most evident, that People are exceeding apt to take the Sensible Workings of their Soul stirred up by the Novelty of Expressions in Sermons, & the Emphatical Pronunciation of the Preacher etc. for Fervency of SPIRIT; which Sensible Motions I presume you will grant are of no value, otherwise than as they are Subservient to Rational Abhorrence of all Sin, of all Inordinate Affection to Finite Objects; or to a Rational, or Spiritual Inclination to the ONE INFINITE GOOD through JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD, the Effectual Notices of which INFINITE GOOD how is it possible but we should be continually stirred up unto in the Hearing of the Common Prayer, if we would Apprehend the Free Offers of the Spirit of Truth, which the Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ makes unto us in an Unlimited Abundance in the Use of all such Means of Grace, as He calls us unto. Here I could Run out with much Fervour of Indignation against the Despisers of these Means of Grace, & Strong Guards from those Accursed Errors, Socinianism etc. which whilst I lived in Oxford, seemed to me to be coming in like a Mighty Torrent upon this Distracted Kingdom, whilst the Frequent Professions of Belief of the TRINITY, Gloria patri, and the Three Creeds were cast out of Our Churches. If it be said, what Reformation have we now? etc. I Reply, that one Reason of his Kingdom's Miscarriages, I might say Abominations, is, that some of those that are sincerely Learned, & Pious have not such an Esteem of our Liturgy, as they Ought to have; And hundreds of those that are thought by the Vulgar to be so, do themselves Despise it, or Countenance others in so doing. You give me not any punctual Answer to my Question, whether you do not Judge it Sinful to stay at home (though to read Good Books &c.) on the Lord's Day, rather than come to Church when nothing is to be heard there, but the Common Prayer. You say you are more against spending the Lords Day in Idleness or in any thing which is worse, than in Hearing that alone. I thank God I was never so Mad, as to make a question of This: I have nothing to say to it but that I dislike these words, worse than the Common Prayer, which seem to insinuate that It is not Good. I am not guilty of slighting Preaching (as 'tis taken in contradistinction to Reading &c.) as you seem to Conceit. I Affirm, that to Suit, or Proportion our Expectations of Grace, in the Use of All Means whereunto we are Called, to the Apprehensions of INFINITE Bounty, etc. is a Property of Saving Faith. But, say you, GOD who appointeth several Means, doth usually work according to them; and when he withdraweth them it is a Judgement, which it were not, if he had promised as much Grace without them as with them. I grant, that God who appointeth several Means, doth usually work according to them. But I utterly Deny, that when he withdraweth any Particular Means of Grace it is a Judgement to Him who is in the Act of sincere Love to the Blessed Jesus; for such a one is at All Times, and in All Places Under the Gracious Influences of the INFINITY of Light and Love, directing him how (by Submission to the Divine Will withdrawing any Particular Means of Grace, and by the Renewing his Resolutions to make a Right Use of all such Means as God shall at any time call him unto, etc.) He may Receive of the Fullness of Christ, in as great Measures, as he could have done in the Use of the Means withdrawn from him. The LORD give us both Understanding in all Things. Now I have found the way by your Letter to discover your Thoughts concerning the Common Prayer, in your Printed Papers; I shall not trouble you with any more Post-Letters on that Subject: but shall stick to the Defence of this Great Truth, that the withdrawing of any particular Means of Grace is not a Judgement to him that is in the Act of Divine Love— Against which you Argue thus: That which tendeth to hinder his continuance in that Act of Love is a Judgement, but such is the withdrawing of some Means of Grace. I Answer, the withdrawing etc. is so far from being Directly, and in its own Nature that which tendeth to hinder etc. that, as It is in its own Nature, viz. the work of the Infinitely Good GOD, It is the Means of Grace, and he takes it for Such that is in the Act of Divine Love, as I endeavoured to show you in my last. We question not, say you, God's bounty, but his Will: show us a Promise that when a man is deprived of the Preaching of the Gospel, the Communion of the Church, the Company of all good men, and cast amongst impious deceivers, and heretics, he shall have his love continued, and increased as much as if he had better Means. I Answer, This Promise of Our Saviour, Whatsoever ye shall Ask the Father in my Name he will give it you (John 16.27.) would Engage the Heart of any one in the Act of Divine Love, if God should put him into such a Condition, as you express, to expect from GOD through Our LORD JESUS, as much Grace or Improvement of his Divine Temper under that Dispensation of Providence, as he knows he could have grounds to Expect in the Use of those Means of Grace which the Only Wise GOD has thought fit to Withdraw from him. But I am ready to say with you, If God should take away the Bible, and Preaching from the Land, I would take it for a Judgement, though the Common Prayer were lest us: neither did I ever say any thing to the contrary: but I have said implicitly, and shall upon all occasions say expressly, that nothing retains the Nature of a Judgement, or Sign of the Wrath of God, to him that is in the Act of Divine Love, which Essentially implies Rational Complacence in Every thing that proceeds from the Will of the Infinitely Good GOD, I do not Grant (as you may gather from what I have said) that any Particular Means of Grace are Better, or more Spiritually advantageous, than the being Deprived of them, will certainly be to him that Complies with the Divine Will in that Dispensation, Doing whatsoever is his Duty to do in Relation thereunto. If in saying we question not God's Bounty, but his Will: and God's bounty giveth Grace according to his Liberty of Will, you imply this Proposition (which I find asserted by a very Ingenious Person E. W. in his NO PRAEEXISTENCE p. 13.) that the Will of God sometimes Obstructs the effluxes of his Goodness; your meaning is False, as I shall Demonstrate, if you shall call me thereto. 'Twould be Absurd indeed to say that God's Bounty giveth Grace per modum naturae, quantum in se, but Gods Offers of Grace (as I have formerly expressed myself) are in an unlimited Abundance. Grace is Received by the Faithful Ad modum Recipientis: 'tis only the Measure, or Non-Vltra of the Recipients' Expectance that Stints its Influence. I shall not give you, and myself the trouble of writing unto you any of my Reflections on the former part of your Letter, supposing that whatsoever is in it Opposite to my Assertion will be fully Refuted in my Reply to your Direct Answer to my last, beginning thus: But you have a Promise that whatsoever we ask shall be given. Ans. yes; whatsoever you ask according to Gods Will: but it may be his will to punish a cold Love, and other Sins consistent with Love, and not to remove the punishment upon our ask; and indeed why should any man ask it that is of your opinion? But you describe him to be one that wholly complieth with the Divine Will, doing whatsoever is his Duty. You do not well to leave out these words of mine in that Dispensation and in Relation thereunto, for by them I signified the praying conditionally for the Restoration of the Lost Means of Grace, and the using of all possile means for the Recovery of them, because it is our Duty so to do; not but that we may have sufficient grounds to Expect from God, in case he Judged fit not to Restore them, the same Grace we should Expect by the Restoration of them. This is a full Answer to those words of yours: one part of his Duty is to lament the Judgement of the removal of the Means, and to pray for the restoration (so that here you are self-contradictory) and to these words, why should any man ask it that is of your opinion? By an Act of Divine Love I understand such an Act of the Will, or Tendency of the Heart to God, as implies an Aversion from all Finite Objects, unless as they stand in Relation to Him, or (to speak more Accurately) As they are in Him. He that is in this Act has all things that are of God, actually Good unto him. And whatsoever he Asks being Actually in this Divine Temper of Mind (which implies that Faith which Punishes the Heart) is certainly According to the Will of God, which is Our Sanctification (as the Apostle speaks) which certainly implies thus much; that God would have us to Ask nothing of him Principally and Absolutely but that we may be HOLY as He is HOLY. And that when we ask in Sincerity for Grace or Holiness in the Name of Jesus, It is always the Will of God to supply the Defect of any Particular Means of Grace. But if you mean, say you, that as long as a man is perfect, and never sinneth no want of Means hurteth him, etc. I mean, as I have often said, that when a man is in the Act of Divine Love (as I have described it) no want of Means hurteth him, but it does not follow but it is Our Duty, as earnestly to Desire any particular Means of Grace when we are Deprived of them, as to make use of them when we have them, but this Desire, as of all things else but Grace, or Holiness, is but Conditional, or with Exception 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (as the Royal Philosopher speaks) the Use of the Truth I Assert in this, and my other Letters, is to cure the Souls of men of this most dangerous Disease, viz. the Conceit that any thing can be Directly, and in its own Nature the Hindrance of our Attainment to further Degrees of Grace, or Holiness, save only the Naughtiness of Our own Hearts. From hence also it is manifest to those that understand that the Common Prayer is Agreeable to the Scriptures, that no man can be a Loser (as your word is in one of your Letters) by coming to the Place of God's Public Worship to Hear those Prayers when there is no Preaching there, unless by the Perverseness of his own Heart. I do not speak this to derogate from frequent Preaching; I know it is very Necessary, especially for Vnsanctifyed people. I do not apprehend myself concerned in what you bid me to demonstrate: but this proposition, Gods Will is the Same with Infinite Goodness, is a Demonstration of the Falseness of this, that Gods Will sometimes obstructs the Effluxes of his Goodness. I say further, that 'tis Essential to God being Infinite in Goodness, to Fill the Capacities of his Creatures According to His Infinite Wisdom. Though the Almighty may not be said to give Grace per modum naturae, quantum in se, yet he may rightly be said to do it Secundum Naturam Bonitatis Infinitae. You do well to join Wisdom with , for All that the ALMIGHTY Does is According to the Council, i. e. the Wisdom of his own Will, which imports the Communicativeness of his Goodness to all the Capacities of his Creatures. In Answer to my Saying that Gods Offers of Grace are in an unlimited Abundance, you writ thus: Say you so? who made thee to differ? doth God do no more for any but offer them Grace? is the Recipient's Expectance none of his Gift? can God make no man better than he is? nor take the Heart out of any man, otherwise than by offer? is not faith whereby we accept that offer, the Gift of God? doth a clod, or stone so stint God's Influence that he could not make it an Angel, if he pleased? nor make any creature nobler, or other than it is? Doth God give as much Grace to all the Infidel Heathen World, as to Christians? or do they so stint his Influence that he can give them no more? Woe to us, if we have no more than the general Offers of Grace, and yet I believe not that this offer is unlimited, or equal to all the World. Good Sir, Be not so hasty, do not run on in a conceit that my words import that we make ourselves to Differ from the Unsanctified. Doth God do no more, say you, for any, but offer them Grace? I answer; that Gods Offering of Grace is the making of men presently Capable of Doing his Will, by the Assistance of his Good Spirit; So that All the Acts or Inclinations to Act, of Gracious Souls, as such, are the Gift of God. The Recipient's Expectance is the Gift of God, but the Non-Vltra, or Desiciency of it, is of himself. Can God make no man better than he is? To this, I Answer; Any man's being Better than he is, is not the Object either of God's Volition, or Nolition: Not of the former, for then (you know) His Will would be Resisted: Not of the latter, for than he would be the Direct Cause of the Creatures not Doing what He hath Commanded him to Do: the only Cause then that any man is not what he Ought to be, is the Perverseness of his own Will. As to the words following, Nor take, etc. If you think sit to continue this Dispute, and express what you mean by them in a plain way of Opposition to any thing that I have said, I shall give you an Answer. Doth a Clod or Stone, etc. I Answer; Any such Creature may be Annihilated, and another Angel Created, but that It should be made an Angel (if we speak in sensu rigoroso) implies a Contradiction. Every Creature is in its own Nature Res OPTIMA, though some Creatures are Better to Us than others, because they do more Exhibit to us the Notice of the Divine Goodness; and some Creatures are better to themselves than others, because they do more Enjoy It, which is ALL in them All. God knows, I do not Affect Obscurity of Expression, but such Deep Things cannot be set forth in Vulgar Phrase. To what you say of the Heathen World, I shall make no other Reply but this, that God's Judgements are Unsearchable, and his Ways past finding out. But though we cannot show How Many Truth's concerning his Boundless Goodness etc. do comport with what we apprehend of His Ways in many Instances of His Deal with the Sons of Men, it does not follow, that we should thereupon in the least Scruple at these Truths. That Gods Offers of Grace are in an Unlimited Abundance (which you say you do not believe) I prove thus: If God cannot be the Direct Cause of Stinting the Influences of His Grace or Goodness into the Hearts of Men, Then his Offers of Grace are in an Unlimited abundance: But God cannot be the Direct Cause, etc. The Minor is evident in this, That the Essence of God is Infinite Goodness. I shall in this Paper give you my Reflections but on some part of your last Letter, wherein there are many things so pertinently Expressed in Opposition to what I have written to you, that my Reflections, or rather Animadversions thereon, are exceeding Advantageous unto me, for the Improvement of my most Satisfactory Speculations concerning the Divine Goodness, whose Infinity we must be ever Careful that we do not derogate from, upon any Pretences of Preserving the Liberty of the Divine Will. Liberty of Will (so far as it implies Perfection, must of necessity be implied in the Notion of the Infinity of Being. I declare This to be the Root of all my Apprehensions in Theological Matters, EST VNUM SIMPLICITER INFINITUM. I shall now betake myself to the Consideration of what you say in your last Letter. I think I need not give any other Reply to that you say, No man doth use all possible Means for the Recovery, etc. but only to tell you, that by all possible Means, I understand All things which we Know to be such Means, being also Assured that 'tis possible for us to use them as such. On my Explication of what I understand by an Act of Divine Love, your Animadversion is this: How easy had it been for you to have told me, whether you mean a perfect Love, or an Imperfect culpably, and a perfect Aversion, etc. or a culpably Imperfect? I must confess, I have observed so many Learned men needlessly Entangling themselves in the hardest Knots of Controversy by reason of these words, Perfection, and Imperfection Attributed to the workings of men's Hearts, that I have thought it my Duty to do what I can do to avoid the use of them; but since you Urge me to it, I shall Tell you that the Motion, or Tendency of the Heart, which I call an Act of Divine Love, does not imply, or include in its Nature any culpable Imperfection, but is as contrary to all Love of Creatures, or Finite Objects (unless only such as arises from their Relation to the First Being) as Light is to Darkness. To my saying that he who is in the Act of Divine Love has All things that are of God, Actually Good unto him, you Answer thus: While he is sinfully imperfect in this Act, he hath not the perfection which he wants, nor that complacential acceptance with God, nor that perfect freedom from castigatory Penalities internal, or external, nor that Glory which would be good to him; and all this is of God. I Answer; As to Castigatory Penalties, so far as they import nothing but what may be imputed unto God, as the Author thereof, they are Actually good to Him, viz. they All ork together for his Good, whilst he is in the Act of Divine Love, and all his Reflections thereon are the Rejoicing of his Heart. The Perfections he wants etc. are not, but only in GOD, the Fullness of All that he Wants: and certainly it is actually Good for him, That there is in God whatsoever is Wanting unto him. By being Actually in this Divine Temper, I mean the exerting of an Act of Divine Love, or Adhaerence of the Heart unto God, in which Act there is nothing Culpable, though there may remain Dispositions in the Heart very contrary thereunto, from which it often comes to pass, that many of us who are in some measure Sanctified Sink deep into such Impurities of Heart, and Mind, as we sometimes Fancy ourselves Elevated so far Above, that there's no Danger of Falling into them. But I can far more easily Describe what it is to be Holy, i. e. to be in the Light, than Discourse accurately, and Clearly of the Works of Darkness. He cannot Ask any thing not Agreeable to the Divine Will, who Desires nothing, but This, or in Subordination thereunto, that his Will may be Conformable to the Divine Will in All things. Whether he Pray Directly, and Expressly for Things Temporal, or Spiritual, he Actuates his Heart in a way of Conformity to the Will of God, who Prays, as he Ought, viz. Ask in Faith, which worketh by Love. I suppose by what I have already said, you will perceive, that in Ask for Holiness we Virtually Ask for Justification, or Pardon, and the continuance of being etc. And when we expressly Ask for these According to the Mind of Christ, We Virtually Ask for Holiness, or Purity of Heart. The Consummation whereof is the Fullness of Life, and Glory. All Desires of Holiness are Acts of Holiness Consider's with Respect to their Efficacy to make way for furhter Act, or Tendencies of Heart unto God. The Free Mercy of GOD in JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD is the Root, and Principle of all that Good which groweth in Us, or (if you will) in which We Grow: the Sense of which is employed in all Motions of the Heart acceptable unto God. By Absolutely, I mean but what we are to understand by First in the Gospel, where Our Saviour says, Seek ye First the Kingdom of God, etc. i. e. Chief, and Principally, so as to Ask nothing else but in Subordination thereunto, and upon Condition, if it conduce to our furtherance in the Ways of Holiness, which Led unto Everlasting Glory. I do still most confidently Averr, that this is a most Dangerous Disease of the Soul, to Conceit that any thing can be Directly, and in its own Nature, the Hindrance of Our Attainment to farther Degrees of Grace, save only the Naughtiness of Our own Hearts. But, say you, Must we not carefully avoid that which Indirectly hinders also? I Answer, We must Avoid, or Set our Heart against nothing but what we find to be the Will of God, Revealed in his Word, that we should Loath, or be Averse from. Any thing, which for aught we know, God will bring to pass, as to the Depriving us of any particular Means of Grace, we must endeavour to prevent by all ways of Duty to God, and Man, which we Apprehend probable to prove Successful for the Prevention thereof. But we must have a Care that our Heart be Moved against this, which for aught we know God will effect for the Glory of His Name, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, with Exception, as I spoke in my last. You say the penal withholding of the Operations of the Spirit is a Direct Hindrance, and in its own Nature. If it be True that whatsoever God is the Author of, can never be in any wise Evil to us, but only by our Wrong, or Perverse apprehensions of it, than I suppose you will grant that this Proposition of yours bears no Force against me. And whether this be a Truth or no, I shall refer you to Consider by taking a Review of what I have already Written of the Divine Goodness. And by your most Serious, and unprejudiced Judgement of what I shall say hereafter in giving my Reflections on your Animadversions, on my saying that Gods Will is the Same with Infinite Goodness, etc. The Good Lord Lift up the Light of His Countenance upon Us, that we may at length attain to the Full Enjoyment of the Way, the Truth, and the Life. I shall here present you some more of my Apprehensions of the IMMENSE Influence of the Divine Goodness upon All, and Every Part of the Creation. I am Conscious to myself of the smallness of my Abilities to Express such a Truth in any way answerable to the Excellency, and Importance thereof. But some Sparkling of that Light, viz. the Notion I have of the IMMENSITY of the Divine Goodness, which from my Youth up has given me far greater Satisfactions than I should ever have had in all the Learning in the World without it, some Sparklings, I trust, you will perceive in these following Lines. You say to these words of mine, Gods Will is the Same with infinite Goodness, Very true: but the Question is, what that Goodness is? I say it is not a Will to communicate to Creatures as much Good, as he can; For then the World had been Eternal etc. I Answer that the Goodness of God is Himself, the INFINITY of Goodness, Wisdom, Power, of all Excellency, and Perfection. 'Twas not Essential to Him to Create, i. e. not necessary for the INFINITY of Being to Produce out of Himself these Finite Essences, But they being Produced by His Power, according to His Wisdom i. e. the Council of His INFINITELY Good Will, 'tis Essential, or Necessary to His being INFINITE, to be ALL in them All. The Divine Power being INFINITE, such Expressions as these, as many Creatures as God can make etc. can in no wise import any Reality to the Understanding. To your saying that All Saints, and Angels would have the same Degree of Glory, I Answer, that there is no Want in Heaven, no Absence, or Privative Not-Being of any Degree of Glory, or Communicated Divine Goodness; there is nothing but Refulgency of the GLORIOUS DIVINE NATURE. That one Creature should be better to Itself, and to other Creatures, is most Rational to conceive, it being no way Inconsistent with the Notion of the One Infinite Goodness. As for Damnation, this I say, So far as it imports nothing else but what is of God; It is in its own Nature altogether Good: It becomes Evil only to those to whom the Infinity of Love is a Consuming Fire. There's nothing Absolutely, and in its own Nature Evil but SIN. But of all Instances, you say, there's none that confutes me more than the permission of Sin. To this I Answer, that by Permission of Sin we must not conceive any thing of which we may say It is of God, but only His making such Creatures, whose Nature implies a Possibility of Sinning, and the continuing them in Being after they have Sinned. There is, say you, an Higher thing in God, which is his Goodness, even his Infinite Perfection, and Love to himself, which is to be communicated according to his Wisdom and Free Will, and not as a natural necessary emanation from his Essence to the utmost of his absolute Power. To this I Answer, first, that Utmost Power is in no wise to be spoken of God, whose Power is INFINITE. Secondly, I do conceive that your Notion here is not Contrary to mine, though it come somewhat short of it. I think your Meaning is not Opposite to what I Understand by the Diffusiveness of the Divine Goodness, but only to any Conceit of the Limitation of the Divine Power, which no Creature is Able to Resist. There can be no Impediment to It ab extra etc. but I add neither ab Intra, call it Negative, or Self-Limiting, or what you please. Therefore I say again, 'tis Essential to Infinite Goodness to fill the Capacities of His Creatures etc. which, I think, I shall clearly Demonstrate thus: That which does not Fill all Created Capacities is not Infinite, Therefore etc. But perhaps you will say is not a Sinner Capable of being Sanctified. I Answer, that Sin is the Creatures making Itself Uncapable for the present of the Divine Goodness through a false Conceit that the Creator is not All in All. For I hold, yea I know, and am perfectly Assured, that this Conceit is Virtually, if not Formally employed in all Sin, or Aversion of the Heart from Our HOLY ONE. My using these words Secundum Naturam Bonitatis Infinitae, was not (as you say) to hid the Sense, but to prevent your Opinion that I should hold such an Absurdity as this, that God Acts any thing ad ultimum Posse, which words can in no wise be spoken of God: but it seems I had not my Aim. For in the Close of your Letter you tell me that you think my work is to Prove, that God communicateth Good Naturally to the utmost of his absolute Power, as the Sun doth its influence of Light, Heat and Motion. God Forbidden that I should undertake to Prove that God acts like a Finite Agent, as Finite, as having any Utmost, or Limited Power. Whether I misunderstand Goodness (which is another Passage in your Letter) I shall entreat you to Consider, by what I shall say of it in my present Reflections upon these words of yours. His Goodness, even his infinite Perfection, and Love to Himself. This is GOD Himself, He is His own infinite Joy, and Life, and Glory. He is All in all Things, and events, Sin only excepted, Enjoying Himself in these small Creatures, which are so contemptible in the Sight of Men, no less than in the most Glorious of the Heavenly Hosts. And the more we Partake of the Divine Nature the more we Delight Ourselves in all the Works both of Creation, and Providence. Here I cannot but tell you, that I Hate as the Gates of Hell the Folly and Madness of some of the Adversaries of Our Liturgy, which prompted them to speak contemptuously (under Pretence forsooth of Zeal for the Pure Service of God) of that Excellent Hymn. O all ye Works of the Lord, Bless ye the Lord, Praise him, and Magnify Him for Ever. O all ye Angels of the Lord, Bless ye the Lord etc. There is, say you, a Negative Limitation which is not in God's Power, and you seem to grant it to be in his Wisdom, which you truly call the Council of his Will. But what Wisdom doth, it doth as the Guide of the Will, and therefore as Wisdom is the reason of it [I suppose you mean of a mans not being Actually better than he is; for you say in the next Page, that our want of Goodness is the consequence of a mere Non Velle] negatione Directionis, so the Will must needs be the cause of it negatione Volitionis. To this I Answer, that the cause that any man is not better than he is, is not that God cannot make him Better, i. e. that there is any Defect of Power in God: neither can it be rightly said, that God can make him Better than he is, For I understand those words, as you rightly conjecture in sensu composito. But perhaps you will say God could have made him Better than he is. To this I Answer, that the making him better than he is was never the Object of the Divine Power, of which there can be no other Object ad Extra, but what is judged fit to be brought to pass by that Wisdom which is Essentially the Same with Infinite Goodness. This deep thing (let me presume to tell you in all Humility) requires your Utmost Attention. Neither are these Negations (if we may put a Periphrasis of Nothing in the Plural number) of Wisdom to Direct, of Will to Execute the Cause, etc. For of mere Negation there is No Issue, or Consequence. All that you say, Reflecting upon my words concerning the Object of God's Volition or Nolition, etc. I do most Affectionately Approve, as importing very much of the same Truth, for want of which Dr. Twisse (whom you mention) seems to me in many Passages of his Controversial Writings, to Rave (and Talk indeed like a Scholar, but like one out of his Right Wits) rather than to Dispute. But you seem to Falter very much, when you come to say, that our want of Goodness is the Consequence of mere Non Velle. For (as I said but now) of a mere Negation, or Nullity, i. e. of Nothing, there is no Issue or Consequence at all. I think, say you, that it is not true, that Volitio quà Talis efficit ad Extra, sed tantùm quatenus per Potentiam Operatur. To this I Answer, Volitio Divina ad Extra, quà Talis, Divina inquam, Efficit ad Extra, nam Essentialitr includit Sapientiam, & Potentiam Infinitam. To these words, Omnis Volitio non est Efficiens (for God willeth himself) much less omnis Nolitio, I Answer thus: Gods Willing of Himself may not properly be termed Efficient, but it is Effectual, or to the Purpose; that is, which He Willeth to Be: And every Object of His Volition ad Extra, Is or Shall be, Through the Efficacy of His Power, set on work by the Infinite Goodness of the Council of his Will. As for the Divine Nolition, this I say: By it we mean not the Negative of Volition, but an Adverse Act of the Will, which Essentially implying Infinite Wisdom and Power, can never be Frustrated, but always Effects the Opposite to that, to which it is Adverse: So that if any man's being Actually Better than he is, were the Object of Divine Nolition it must needs follow that God would be the Direct Cause of the Opposite thereof, viz. that the man is Actually so Bad, as he is. What then is the Cause & c? I say again, Only the Preverseness of his own Will: Sin only can be the Cause of Sin. What Cause than had the first Sin? why (as in effect I have said already) none at all. Mans own Perverseness of Will, say you, was not the Cause of his First Perverting, or Sin. When we speak of Perverseness of Will with Reference to the First Sin, we mean nothing but the First Sin under that Notion, not that this Perverseness of Will is Really Distinct from the First Act of the Will Perverted. I cannot translate OPTIMA into any English, so suitable to my Conceptions, as these words FULL of Goodness. I did not retire into Silence (as you speak) at the Instance of the Heathens, but Told you this Certain Truth, That we Ought not to Deny our Assent to such Evident Propositions, as this, that 'Tis Essential to Infinite Goodness to Fill the Capacities of all Creatures; so that properly, and in the strictest sense there is no Evil, but the Aversion of the Will of the Creature from the Will of the Infinitely Good, and Wise, and Powerful Creator: To this, I say, we ought not to Deny our Assent, because we cannot give an account of some Particular Ways of Providence i e. of the Modes, or several Kind's of the Influence of Infinite Goodness upon some Parts of the Creation. Modes etc. we Attribute only ab Extrinseco to the Divine Providence, they being only in the Creatures. The Reason, or Proof of this Consequence, if God cannot be the Direct cause of Stainting etc. is this, because if He cannot be the Direct Cause of Stinting his Influence etc. It is on His Part Vnstinted, that is to say, in an Unlimited Abundance. But, say you, God may Non Agere without any Stinting Cause: what restrained him from making the World from Eternity? To this I Answer, though God may Non Agere without a Cause in such a Sense as you Instance in, yet there is always some Cause of his Not-Giving Grace to any man to Do what He Commands him; not that there can be any Impediment put upon God, but that He is ab Extrinseco Denominated Not-Giving Grace for that the Creature does not Receive it from him, the Cause of which Non-Reception is only the Perverseness of his own Will, which indeed is nothing else, but his Aversion from the Divine Goodness. To your Objection against my Description of Gods Offering of Grace. viz. Offering is less than making, and making is more than offering etc. I Answer thus: Every Real Offer must needs imply the Presenting of the Object of Reception: wherever there is an Object of Reception, there is a Capacity or Power to Receive: There can be no Power to Receive that which is Good, but only from GOD: Therefore I do again most Confidently aver, that Gods Offering of Grace is the making of men Presently Capable of Doing His Will, or (as we may speak) of receiving His Commands, By the Assistance of His Holy Spirit. From my Description of Gods Offering of Grace there may be an Objection raised against what has been so Earnestly insisted on, viz. that the Divine Goodness fills all the Capacities of His Creatures etc. But the Answer is Easy. viz. that the Present Capacity of Doing the Will of God is Filled, i. e. the Will of God is Done According to that Capacity, where the Capacity is not Instantly Nullifyed by the Creatures Sinning, or Averting itself from the Divine Goodness. The Sense whereof that I may more vigorously Excite in the Mind of the Learned and Pious Reader I shall here give him my Latin Translation (together with the Original) of an Excellent Prayer composed in English Verse by the Incomparable Mrs. K. P. The Same Sense in two Languages seems to me to Condense the Thoughts of the Reader, and to give the greater Strength to their Influence upon His Affections. ETernal Reason, Glorious Majesty, * In cujus Essentiae comparatione Esse nostrum non Esse est. S. GREG. Mor. 16. c. 16. Compared to whom what can be said to be? Whose Attributes are Thee, who art alone, Cause of all various things, and yet but One? Whose Essence can no more be searched by man, Then Heaven thy Throne, be grasped with a Span. Yet if this great Creation was designed, To sey'ral ends fitted for every kind; Sure Man (the World's Epitome) must be Formed to the best, that is, to Study Tree. And as our Dignity 'tis Duty too Which is summed up in this, to Know, and Do. These comely Rows of Creatures spell thy Name. Whereby we grope to find from whence they Came; By thy own Chain of Causes brought to think There must be one, then find the Highest Link. Thus all Created Excellence we see Is a Resemblance faint, and dark of Thee. Such Shadows are produced by the Moon-Beams Of Trees, or Houses in the running Streams, Yet by Impressions born with us we find How good, great, just Thou art, how unconfined Here we are swallowed up, and gladly dwell, Safely Adoring what we cannot Tell. All we know is, Thou art Supremely Good, And dost Delight to be so understood: A spicy Mountain on the Universe On which thy Richest Odours do disperse. But as the Sea to fill a Vessel heaves More greedily than any Cask receives Besieging round to find some gap in it, Which will a new Infusion admit; So dost Thou covet how Thou mayst dispense Upon the empty World thy Influence, Lov'st to disbursed thyself in Kindness: thus The King of Kings Waits to be Gracious. On this account, O Lord enlarge my Heart To entertain what Thou wouldst fain impart. Nor let that Soul by several Titles Thine, And most Capacious formed for things Divine, (So nobly meant that when it most doth miss 'Tis in mistaken pant after Bliss) Degrade itself, in sordid things delight, Or by prophaner mixtures lose its right. O, that with fixed, unbroken thoughts it may Admire the Light which does Obscure the Day. And since 'tis Angel's Work it hath to do, May its Composure be like Angels too. When shall these clods of Sense, and Phantsy break, That I may hear the God within me speak? When with a silent, and retired Art Shall I with all this empty hurry part? To the Still Voice Above my Soul advance My Light, and Joy placed in his Countenance, By whose dispense my Soul to such frame brought May tame each treacherous, fix each wand'ring Thought, With such distinctions all things here behold, And so to separate each dross from Gold, That nothing my free Soul may Satisfy But t' imitate, enjoy, and Study Thee. ORatio Omnipotens, Majestas, Gloria Summa, Cui si * In cujus Essentiae comparatione Esse nostrum non Esse est. S. GREG. Mor. 16. c. 16. Confertur Quicquam Non Esse probatur, Cui Quod inest, est Tu, Qui cunctis Rebus habere Esse suum Varium das Vnus Semper, & Idem; Cujus non magis Explorari Essentia possit Humano Ingenio, quàm Summi Culmina Coeli Comprendi Palmo. At fuerint si Cuncta per Orbem In certos generis diversi condita Fines, Ipsum Hominem, Quò Maxima Spiret Nasci constat, id est, Quò se Tibi, MAXIME, Reddat. Hoc Nostrum Officium est, haec Nostra est Gloria, Scire Et Facere usque, Jubet quicquid Divina Voluntas. Condita quaeque Tuum, quasi Sculpta Vocabula Nomen Designant: Fontem hinc pervestigamus eorum: Scilicet ostendit Causarum longa Catena Esse Vnam Summam, à Quâ Pendent Singula, Causam. Naturae quicquid Praeclarae lumina spargit Hoc levis IMMENSI perhibetur LUMINIS Vmbra. Quales in Fluviis Tectorum, aut Arboris Vmbras Producit tenni splendescens Cynthia Cornu. Idêis tamen Innatis BONITAS Manifesta est Illa Tua, & nullis Te clausum Finibus esse, Hîc Alto Absorptos nos LVX IMMENSA recondit Tutò Admirantes Non Enarrabile Verum. Novimus hoc solum de Te, BONITATE SUPREMA Gaudentem, Titulo Te Velle Agnoscier Isto. Mons es Aromaticus: Jucundos Suavis Odores Divite profluvio totum diffundis in Orbem. coit Vnda aliquod Vas impletura receptum In Mare, scrutando Rimas, quibus Influat usque Prosiliens, plus quàm possit Vas accipere urgens: , Pater Alme, Tuâ possit Bonitate repleri Sic urges Vacuum Foecundo Numine Mundum. Ipse Benignus Amas Te Dispensare: Favorem Exhibet Indignis, condonat Crimina gratis Rex Regum. Amplifica DEUS O Ter Maxime nostrum Cor: Avidè Arripiat, quod Tu Largiris Amanter. O, Anima haec Titulis Tibi soli Debita multis Magna, Tuique Capax (tam purum, nobile cui sit Ingenium, ut Sitiat Verum, quod Devia linquit) Ne se Deliciis Pravis illapsa, Minorem Quàm Quae Facta fuit, Faciat, revoluta deorsum, Jus adeo Antiquum potiundi Numine perdens. O utinam certis immotae viribus Ipsa Mentis in Augustum sit Sacro Rapta Stupore Lumen, quo victi vel lucida Tela Diei In Tenebras abeunt. Quam fungi Munere Oportet Angelico, Angelicam tandem, Pater OPTIME, reddat Illi Temperiem. Quando ista Repagula, Sensus, Claudentes Animum, penitus Rumpentur, ut Intus Alloquio DEUS ipse Suo me Personet? Arte Quando Ego Tranquillâ, Curâ semota Metuque Despiciam stolidi Bacchantia Gaudia Mundi? Tu Rape sursum Animam: Lenem super Aethera Vocem Audiat: inque Tuo semper Mea Gaudia Vultu Ponantur. Nostras Te Disponente Medullas Nè Superet Fallax, Agitet nec Mobile Coenum; Clariùs ut valeam rerum cognoscere causas, Atque Auro cautè Scoriam distinguere vilem, ruptis tandem Mens evolet Ignea Vinclis, Et Tibi se jungens Aeternâ Pace Quiescat. FINIS. Page 7. of the Letters, line 12. for Punishes read Purifies. Books Newly Printed this Year, 1678. for William Crook. 1. THe Wonders of the Peak in Derbyshire, commonly called, the Devil's Arse of Peak. 2. Reflections upon Ancient and Modern Philosophy, Moral and Natural; treating of the Philosophers of all Countries and Ages. 80. 3. Melpomene, or the Muse's Delight; being New Poems and Songs, written by several of the great Wits of the present Age. 4. Decameron Physologicum, or ten Dialogues of Natural Philosophy. By Tho. Hobbs of Malmsbury. 80. 5. Tunbridge Wells, or a Day's Courtship; a Comedy Acted at the Duke's Theatre. 6. The Man of Newmarket, a Comedy, Acted at the Theatre Royal. 7. A Discourse, Whether it be lawful to take Use for Money; Written by Sir Rob. Filmer, and published by Sir Roger Twisden. 120. 8. The School of Righteousness: A Sermon Preached before the King by Dr. Sandcroft, Archbishop of Canterbury. 40. 9 Praxis Curiae Admiralitatis Angliae.