ARCANA DOGMATUM Anti-Remonstrantium. Or the CALVINISTS Cabinet unlocked. IN An Apology for TILENUS, against a pretended Vindication of the Synod of Dort. At the provocation of Master R. Baxter, held forth in the Preface to his Grotian Religion. Together, With a few soft Drops let fall upon the Papers of Master HICKMAN. LUK. 22.32. And when thou art converted, strengthen thy Brethren. LONDON, Printed for Richard Royston, at the Angel in Ivy lane. M.DC.LIX. ARGANA DOGMATUM Anti-Remonstrantium. Or the CALVINISTS Cabinet unlocked. A PRAEFATORY EPISTLE. To my old Friend M. B. Sir, I Have finished the task, to which, whether your haesitation or curiosity did more earnestly solicit me, I shall not determine. A task, I confess, so much the more unpleasing, as I had reason to conceive it the less needful. For (to tell you the truth,) 'tis the observation of Judicious men, that your great Champion comes off, in this encounter, with as little reputation, (though he falls on with as much scorn and passion) as the Proud Philistine in his Combat with little David. Indeed he makes out very fierce and frequent Sallies upon the face of our Tilenus, and defies him utterly in the bitterest asperity of foul Language: But withal he does him the honour to leave him Master of the Field, and exposeth his own Cause to the danger of being destroyed by his own weapons. I do not impute this to any want of skill or mettle in him; for his abilities have approved themselves sufficient to advance him above the pitch of contemptible, would he be careful to manage them with that Prudence and Christian temper, that becomes a faithful Soldier of Jesus Christ, minding nothing more than the interest of his Church. But forgetting his duty herein, like a Soldier of fortune, who lives by wars, or some young Gallant flesh by the weakness of an Aggressor, whom he hath worsted upon advantage, he is apt to have a hand in every quarrel; and though he be not satisfied in the grounds of the difference, yet rather than take up the dispute, and make men friends, he will take a side and make a Party. That he hath done thus in this Controversy is evident to every impartial Reader, that is conversant in his writings. Nay, he hath much ado to keep his vizor close about him, he is ready to unmask himself upon occasion, as the attentive eye may easily perceive, even whilst he is in conflict with Tilenus. For his six days hard march in pursuit after the Grotian Religion, as I am not concerned, so neither do I think it tant-amount to observe the motions of it. But I pray God (besides design in order to the carrying on of that old dispute * Luk. 22. vers. 24 amongst the Disciples) there be not as much uncharitableness, (and that of as ill an influence and abode) in Levying this war, as well against the honour and integrity, as against the most Christian (if equally managed) enterprise of that Learned man, as Master He himself concludes to be in Master P. his book † Preface, Sect. 20. , for which he strongly insinuates, that for the Pres●●t m●●● account, he is more than unc●●a●●●●f salvation. He hath snatc●●●●●●e fair flowers from off the Hearse of the immortal Grotius; but his expectation will deceive him, if he flatters himself with an opinion, that they will serve to dress up his own reputation. For they begin to welk and fade in his hands already; and besides, my information doth assure me, Master P. is Mustering his forces, to go out, with Letters of reprisal, to recover all such spoils of him; of the success of which accomplishment, no doubt, we shall have full Intelligence in due season. In the interim I have addressed myself, for pity sake, to the rescue of a poor Fatherless Tilenus, whom Master Baxter falls so foul upon, in his forlorn hope * His preface to the Grotian Religion. , in this Expedition against Grotius. You may be confident Tilenus expected fairer Quarter at his hands, having some temptation to think he was as inclinable to a state of neutrality, as to an engagement 〈…〉 Quinquarticular Contestation. W●●●e i●, if I be not much mistaken, he hath made the greatest misadventure that ere befell him, whether you consider the Party or the Tenants, whose Vindication he hath so roundly undertaken. Yet I must profess ingenuously, that from my first perusal of his Aphorisms, and my taking notice of his purpose to reduce them to a better Method, and annex what, he saith, † Postscript to his plain Script. proof of Infants, etc. he had prepared [Of universal Redemption], I have expected with some degree of Longing and impatience this performance from him. And my desires have been much inflamed by some Colours which he hath since hung out and displayed in a Preface to [Certain Disputations of Right to Sacraments,] whereby he invites and tolls in his Reader, as with the sound of Drum and Trumpet, to admire his Invention and Acuteness in these words, [To the praise of God I speak it, tha● in those ancient common disturbing Controversies between the Arminian and Anti-Arminian, Lutheran and Calvinist, Jesuit and Dominican, I have discerned those Principles which quiet my own mind, and which, I am confident, were they received according to their Evidence, would quiet the now contending world: But, saith he, I am past doubt, to be derided as arrogant for this Confidence; And should the Principles in a Method with Evidence be propounded, though purposely to heal the divisions of the Church, many of the several Parties, would but rage's at the Reconciler, and pour out their impotent accusations and reproaches against him, because he would attempt the healing of their divisions, and would feign him to be Author of some new Sect, for seeking to put an end to Sects. But let any man make good my just demand, that the Principles propounded shall have an impartial reception according to their Evidence, and I will give you security to make good my Confidence, that they shall quiet the Christian world hereabouts. Thus far M. Baxter. Now if it were but a piece of curiosity in me, to desire to see what prize Master B. would play, if he were brought upon the stage, after this goodly flourish, yet it were very innocent and pardonable. But to a Person that profess to bear a cordial affection to God's Truth and the Peace of his Church, finding himself much unsatisfied too in the common way of stating these Controversies, it is very allowable, if his heart entertained some passion, and were transported with some long to taste the fruit of this so deep rooted and full blown a Confidence. When the Jews met with any difficulty, for which they could find no competent solution, they were wont to say, that Elias would come; and when he came, he would untie all such knots, and unravel such intricacies, scatter the cloud, and administer a clear light of satisfaction. It was the desire of my soul that God would vouchsafe to send some such Elias, as might be able to disentangle the intricacies of these Controversies; and why, thought I, may not this Master Baxter be the man? though I must add withal, that too many Reasons thronged in on a sudden, and offered themselves to oppose that thought, and did actually check and silence it. At last forth comes the Examination of Tilenus; and by that means, I thought, a fair Price was now put into Master Baxters' hand, or rather a handsome invitation and an opportunity offered to him, to show his wisdom. But what was the Result of it? He took the bait, but one would think, by his mere nibbling at it, that he was afraid, there was a hook too sharp for him, either to swallow or dally with. In earnest, (because you are so very urgent to gain my opinion of it) I tell you, though I find little abatement of the confidence he professed, yet I can observe nothing of the success he boasted himself able to accomplish; for indeed his Arrogance flew so high a pitch, that it flew to Lessening; he could not see the game he had undertaken; if he had, he would never have offered his security to perform that, whereof in his very next line, he saith [But I know this is to be expected from none but God. In the said preface. ] What shall we say then, that he was so nice and chary of his healing Principles that he would not afford the Church of God their Benefit? I dare not think him so uncharitable. He tells us, I remember, (in his forementioned Postscript) I am not only distracted between men's contrary Judgements and desires: but far more, between a fear of wronging the Church by mistakes, and of wronging it by my silence, and Christ by hiding my Talon and his precious Truths, which after hard study and earnest supplication, he revealed to me on these terms, that I should reveal them to others. I hope men's contrary Judgements did not still hold M. Baxter in distraction, (from November 12. 1650. till April 14. 1658.) when he wrote against Tilenus; and sure we may conclude [his fear of wronging the Church by mistakes] was blown over, when he made this proclamation to the world. 1657. viz. [And to the Praise of God I speak it, Vbi supra. that in those— Controversies— I have discerned those Principles, which quiet my own mind, and which I am confident, were they received according to their Evidence, would quiet the now— contending Christian world. And now his fear of wronging the Church by mistakes was so well blown over, that he could see nothing but fair weather, and so clear a light of evidence round about him, might we not very well expect that his other fear should work upon him, His fear of wronging the Church by his silence, and Christ by hiding his Talon and his precious Truths, which (he saith) af●er hard study and earnest supplication, he (Christ) revealed to me on these terms, that I should reveal them to others? May we not very well conclude from hence, that Master Baxter hath unfolded his napkin, and disbursed his Talents, and held forth his Revelations? What then, have we all, or the Quintessence of all, that Master Baxter hath to reveal for the world's satisfaction in these Controversies? Some of his Principles, no doubt, he hath communicated in these papers: but unless those Principles be propounded to us in a Method with Evidence, haply they will not convey their healing virtue to us; and that Method, that charming Method, I suspect he hath yet concealed from us. But whose fault is this? Why, he was now in pursuit after Tilenus, and so engaged to leave his own Method, that he might trace his Adversary by his steps. But grant this to be true, in respect of that Part of his Preface, (from Sect. 6. to 17.) wherein he had concerned himself against Tilenus; yet when he came to review the several heads of Controversy (from Section 28. to the end,) he was then at Liberty to propound his Principles as himself pleased; why did he not then give us his own Method with Evidence, but put Master P. off by playing his old Notes over again with a little new descant? If you object, that I have not made good Master baxter's just demand, in giving his Principles an Impartial Reception according to their Evidence; if you please you shall have my Protestation, that I am verily persuaded, I have done it; and whether I have or no, is referred to the Reader to judge by this Reply. I shall but add as a further evidence hereof, that the Effect of this Receipt of his Principles, hath brought much comfort to me; for observing that his promise amounts to so great Confidence, and his performance brings so little satisfaction, he hath healed much of my haesitation, and quieted my mind, with a stronger persuasion than ever, that the certain Truth abideth on the Remonstrants' side, in these Controversies. For the matter of Fact charged by Tilenus upon the Synod, and their Adherents; that M. Baxters' VINDICATION with all his Artifice and ill language, will not serve to make a sufficient plaster to cover, much less to heal that soar, is abundantly evinced in the insueing Papers, but, for the Synods part, especially in the Reflections upon Master Baxter's discourse, relating to each Article. To which I can now add a further proof from some Intelligence which came very lately to my hands from a Foreigner † Arnold. Poelenburg. Confut. Disput. Inaugur. Spanhem. p. 115. who tells us of a most bitter contention betwixt Voetius and Maresius about the sense of that Synod. One of them maintains that the Synod determined the Decree of Predestination and Reprobation to antecede the consideration of the fall of Adam; to which assertion the other hath opposed an Apology for the Synod. So that, though Assembled on purpose to decide these Controversies, and appease the broils that emerged, and were inflamed upon them, yet (that they might seem to agree together in something) have they wrapped up their Decrees and Canons in so many clouds, and Confounded them with so many intricacies (if a man hath recourse to their Suffrages for an interpretation) that they are like to fall into a New Schism, before they come to a settled Resolution, what the meaning of that Synod is; whereof notwithstanding M. Baxter makes himself so great an Advocate. By which his Advocation, I grow a little jealous, he hath given Scandal, and led his Brother into temptation. For was it not upon the account of his Accusations, and the persuasion he had of the truth thereof, that Master Hickman, (whose Pamphlet you mention, as a smart piece) takes the boldness to inveigh and rail so uncivilly † Page 21. (without any provocation from him) upon Tilenus; calling him by the Names of Aethiopian, Scribbler, this poor Fellow? I know it is the Apostles Lesson, Rom. 12.17. Recompense to no man evil for evil. And this is to follow that Copy that our Blessed Master hath set us, Who being reviled, reviled not again. * 1 Pet. 2.21, with 23. Nay Michael the Archangel, though he had the Devil for his Antagonist in that dispute, yet he durst not bring against him a railing accusation. Judas epist. vers. 9 Master Hickman may pass muster for a precious Saint, as the present Accounts are made below, but I am sure he can gather none of those flowers of Rhetoric from the Discourses of the Holy Angels that converse above. He chargeth that Author with impudence in abusing the Triers: but I must tell him (on his behalf) when such Schemes of Rhetoric are used, (as they may be with wonderful advantage, being not only instrumental to illustrate and adorn a Truth, but also to make it the more pungent, and take impression,) the abuse imagined to result from them, is ever, amongst wise men, ascribed to him that takes the impudence to make the Application. And whereas he saith further, that the Synod of Dort, which Tilenus writes against, is a man made up of his own ugly clouts, (or to that purpose; for I have no list to look upon his Scurrilous language) I must tell you, he shall find before he hath read these Papers half way thorough, that those clouts, as ugly as they seem to him, are genuine parts of that Home-spun-stuffe; which was warped and woven and milled too, by that very Synod of the town of Dort. Neither hath Tilenus set this web upon the tenter-hocks, nor torn any part, to make ugly clouts of it: but only used that Liberty, which is allowed to all Artists of this kind, fairly to cut out of the whole piece, such Proportions, as might best serve, to clothe his discourse, in that fashion 'tis now Represented in. This is all I am willing to return to Master Hickman. But because I perceive his Pamphlet hath raised a double scruple in you, I shall adventure to apply something in order for your satisfaction. First, you say, that his Evidence, to prove the Anti-Arminian principles, to be according to the Faith of the Church of England, is so pregnant, that it must needs beget a great prejudice in the minds of men against such as attempt the dissemination of another Doctrine. To which I answer, (1.) Seeing these men have razed the very Foundations of the Church of England, upon which it was established at the Reformation; and made it their design to erect a new Fabric upon, the Platform of a new Confession, a new Catechism, a new Directory, a new Government; why should such a Seal of Secrecy be stamped upon these Controversies alone; why may not these be examined by some new Triers in order to a further Approbation, before they be admitted to take place of Authority in this Church? 2. If these Principles, which you call Anti-Arminian, were embraced as part of the Faith of the Church of England, I might puzzle you perhaps, by ask you, which of them, the Supralapsarian, or the Sublapsarian Principles? But I intent to be brief and clear with you; I say therefore, though those opinions were Canvased as Problems of the School, yet they were not entertained as Doctrines of the Church, much less determined to be Articles of the Faith. O●e irrefragable Argument to this purpose, is as good as ten thousand, and it shall be this. Doctor Whitaker, having obtained the Bishop's approbation to the Lambeth Articles, (and not discerning that the Alteration) of certain words and Phrases in them, had made them capable of a different sense and interpretation to what he intended in their first contrivance) big with joy, as he was, at the apprehension of this conceited victory, he addresseth himself to the Chancellor of their University, the Lord Burleigh; shows him the Theses, and acquaints him with all that had been done, (in favour of his opinions, as he thought, and the rather because these Theses were drawn up in the absence of some that opposed him) in that Convention. But contrary to Whitakers expectation, Artic. Lambethae exhibit. Historia P. 4, 5, 6, 7. that Great man, and wise Counsellor, was extremely distasted at this transaction; and threatened that he would make the Authors repent them of it. In pursuance whereof, having declared to the Queen how her Majesty's Authority, and the Laws of England were hereby violated, he added as the very burden of his Complaint, That it was no hard matter to discern what they aimed at, who stickled in this attempt; For, saith he, this is their Opinion and Doctrine; That every humane action be it good or evil, it is all restrained and bound up by the Law of an immutable Decree; That upon the very wills of men also this necessity is imposed, ut aliter quam vellent homines velle non possent, that men could not will otherwise then they did will. Which assertions Madam, saith Burleigh, if they be true, frustrà ego aliique fideles Majestatis tuae Ministri, quid in re quaque opus sit facto, quid ex usu futurum sit & Regni & tuo, suspensa diu consilia versamus, cum de his quae eveniunt necessario, stulta sit plane omnis consultatio; I and the rest of your Majesty's faithful Ministers do sit in Counsel to no purpose, 'tis in vain to deliberate and advise about the affairs of your Realm, since in those things that come to pass of necessity▪ all Consultation is foolish and ridiculous. At this narration of the Lord Burleigh the Queen was much moved, and sent for Whitgift, and the Council in her Majesty's presence, fell sharply upon him. At last they came to the Question de Facto, (meaning the Absolute Decree) & Dogma (u● ipsis videbatur) bonis moribus, Reique publicae, adversum graviter exagitant, and did vehemently charge that opinion, as opposite to good manners and the Weal Public. The Result of this debate, or rather Increpation was this; The Archbishop begged pardon for his temerity, and promised he would write to Cambridge, that those Lambeth Articles might be suppressed, and never come to Public notice. If the Fundamental point of all these Controversies, and that upon which the rest do inseparably depend, had had so ill an influence upon good manners, in the judgement of this Sage Council, and tended so manifestly, (as they thought) to the frustration of Law, Counsel, Government; certainly such as now sit at the stern, are so Prudent, they will not be induced to believe that those opinions were ever Adopted into the Articles or Doctrine of This Church, though there were alleged many more instances of single persons that did Pretend to have it so. And yet how invalid these Instances are otherwise, might easily be demonstrated, if I were, not only loath to exceed the limits of an Epistle, but also confident that this work will be undertaken by a more accurate hand, to the Readers abundant satisfaction. As for you, my worthy Friend, if your scruple, about this branch of Master Hickmans' Book, be not yet removed; Let me offer one thing more to your consideration. If in any part of the Christian world these opinions be established, as their Doctrine, you will easily grant, it is likeliest to be in the Belgic Churches, for the settling of whose distractions (about these points,) that Synod of Dort was Assembled. But do you think these are propounded, as Articles of their Creed there, or accounted currant Pulpit-Doctrine among them? You must not believe it. For now adays how many are there that dare tell them out of that Place, [God will not have All men to be saved; and the greater part of mankind are Reprobated by God's absolute Decree; or that Christ did not die for all men; or that God calls those, whom he would not in any wise should come to him; or that the Elect (as they are called) cannot by any, no not the most grievous sins, be removed from their Election? Insanire credas eum, qui jam haec dogmata pro concione ausit defendere, saith a Learned person * Arnold. Poelenb. ubi supra in Ep. dedicat. employed amongst them, you may very well conclude the man is not sound in his brain, not well in his wits, that takes the boldness to maintain these Points in his Sermon. And if any person less discreet and provident, hath exposed the Arcana, or Secrets of that his Doctrine, naked to the understanding of the people, illico magna animorum perturbatio existit, there follows presently such a great Commotion and disturbance in their minds, as looks like the preface to a new Schism: which thing, saith that Reverend Person, Ibid. we remember to have fallen out in this very town, (of Horn) where we now exercise our Sacred Ministerial Function. This, Sir, I hope, will be sufficient Antidote to allay and cure the Palpitation of your heart, though it had beaten a great deal thicker upon M. Hickmans' suggestion, that his Quinquarticular opinions were the Doctrine of the Church of England. And for the other branch of his discourse you may acquiesce in a confidence, that Master P. never intended to assert a positivity of every sin, not of sins of omission to be sure. But he is of age to answer for himself. Yet since you press me for my sense of Master H. Metaphysical Divinity, you shall have something towards it. I am not satisfied, that his distinctions to avoid the Possibility of sin, are sufficient to avoid the making God the Author of it. For thus he saith † Edit. the first. , pag. 91. Because it belongs to the Universality of the first cause to produce not only every real being, but also the real positive Modifications of beings; therefore we say, that in good works, both the works themselves, and their rectitude are positive, and are from God; in evil works there are also two things considerable, the works themselves, and their pravity; the works themselves we doubt not, are positive, and from God, as all other positive things (are); but their pravities add no new entities to them, but consist in a mere privation. Thus Master Hickman. In reference to sinful Actions, others deliver the distinction in these terms, (telling us,) [The sinful Act is to be considered, either Materialiter, as to the matter of it, and so it is from God, and of his production; or else Formaliter, as to the Form of it, and so it is from man. But we should remember, that many times, the Material Act (as we may say) cannot be disjoined from the formal, and in that case, why he that is the Cause of the one, should not be adjudged the Cause of the other, is a Question that requires a solid determination. If God produced the Act of eating the forbidden fruit materially, why not formally too, seeing that sin consisted wholly in the eating of that fruit? for Adam could not eat thereof without sin. And if God by an Omnipotent concourse determined David's lying with Bathsheba, will that distinction mend the matter? Will the matter of that foul Act tend to the praise of God's efficiency, when he tells us, † See 2 Sam. 12.12. with Num. 15.30. the Form of it, conduced so signally to his dishonour? If the Act which is evil ex genere & objecto, be materially of God's production, why should we invest man with the formality of it, which is the sin? Is it because the Act is repugnant to the Law of God, to which man stands obliged, 1 Joh. 3.4. and the transgression of this law is sin? This seems to be Master Hickmans' sense, (pag. 91.) In those things which are to be done according to a Rule, good consists in a conformity to, and convenience with the Rule, but evil in a difformity or discrepance from the Rule. But I say, that Act of Adultery cannot be materially committed, but it must unavoidably be discrepant to the Law of God; so that if God produceth this Act materially, it is impossible man should give it any formality, but what is sinful; especially seeing this formality or sinfulness doth of necessity result from the material Act. Indeed were there no Law in force about it, it were possible to conceive, how he that produceth (that which we now call) the Act of sin materially, should not, for all that, be the formal cause of it. But the law being now made, and that by God himself too, what Subterfuge can be invented to avoid it, but that God, who is affirmed to produce the Act, should be accounted the Author of the sin? But God made the Law, you will say, not to bind himself, but to regulate his Creature; Though this be true, yet it doth not take away the objection; for how can it stand with the justice of God, first to make a Law to regulate his creature, and then to impel and Act that creature contrary to that Law, and at last to punish the same Creature, for being so Acted and impelled? Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? Gen. 18.26. God will be justified when he judgeth a Psal. 51.4. ; and therefore when he comes to execute judgement upon all b Epist. Jud. vers. 15. , he will convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds, which they have ungodly committed; not which himself hath Acted them unto, or Acted in them. But Master Hickman perhaps, will stick still to his Metaphysical formality, and say, here is (in the supposed Act) a discrepance or opposition to the Rule which is the Law of God. To this the answer is very easy, that man seldom, or never entertains sin, or consent to it, with a design or mind to oppose himself to the divine Law; but for the most part to enjoy his pleasure and satisfy his Appetites; (Besides if he should consent to sin, with such a set purpose to oppose God's Law; yet we must grant, according to Master Hickmans' Doctrine, that that Consent, and that purpose (being real positive Entities, Acts of the Humane Soul) are from God and of his production;) whence it follows still, either that man doth not sin when he commits such an Act, or, if he doth sin, that the fault is to be transferred upon God, who is the first Cause of that Act. By the way, (before we proceed further) Let me ask you one Question; Can a man a Viz. under the same influx and assistance. do any more good than he doth; or omit any more evil than he b That is, whether he can be guilty either of omission or commission? and upon what account? omitteth? I know you are clearly for the Affirmative: But that will hardly stand with M. Hickmans' Metaphysics; for I argue thus; and first for good works; He that can do more good than he doth, can do some good that God doth not produce in him; the consequence is apparent; because he is supposed to do already all that God produceth in him. But man cannot do some good, that God doth not produce in him; for every good is a real being, and every real being, or real positive modification of beings is from God, and produced by him, saith M. H●ckman. Thus for good; Then for evil; That man cannot omit more evil than he omitteth, according to M. Hickmans' Metaphysics, I prove thus; He that can neither omit the Act to which the evil (of sin) adhereth, nor avoid the obliquity of that Act, which is the sinfulness of it; He can omit no more evil than he omitteth; the consequence is evident: But a man can neither omit the Act; nor avoid the obliquity. Therefore etc. He cannot omit the Act, for that is of God's production; nor avoid the obliquity, for that is either to be done by some other Act, or without it. If by some other Act, that is not in his power, for every Act is from God; and 'tis absurd to say it may be done without it. If Master Hickman holds the negative of that Question; the British Divines of the Synod are against him; and a world of absurdities do follow that opinion, viz. That a man cannot bury his Talon, nor receive the grace of God in vain, nor be idle and neglect the great Salvation; nor watch, nor fast, nor pray, nor do any one good duty more than he doth, nay, that he can do no duty properly so called, nor sin at all, if he be thus chained by a Fatal necessity to every Action and omission. And then what will become of the word of exhortation and the power of Godliness? But let us follow Master Hickman a little in that instance of Hating God † Pag. 90. ; This, saith he, is Complexum quid, and must not be spoken of, as if it were one; the vital action or hatred, is a thing positive, and consequently, (he grants) that is from God; but the undue referring or terminating of that Act to such an object, (to God,) which is altogether lovely: that, saith he, is the sinfulness of the Action. But whence is this derived? He saith (pag. 75.) only from man's corruption, and the Devil's temptation. But what is man's corruption? is it not his vitiosity? yet he saith, (pag. 97.) where the cause itself is vicious, its vitiosity is not the cause of the vitiosity of the effect; for vitiosity of itself, neither can effect, nor be effected. And for the temptation of the Devil, is not that an Act? if it be, than it is from God, for every Act is from him, saith M. Hickman. If he saith the malice of the temptation is from the Devil; I demand, what is that malice of the Devil? Is it not his vitiosity? and then (as before) where the cause is vicious, its vitiosity is not the cause of the vitiosity of the effect; for vitiosity itself, neither can effect, nor be effected; what then? the vicious cause (saith he) taking together the being, and the supervenient privation, is the cause of the vicious effect, taking it in like manner for the being, and the supper added privation. But I say again, the being, whether man's or the Devils, doth not act (according to Master Hickmans' Metaphysics) for every Act is from God and produced by him, and consequently 'tis the Act of God that gives the corruption of man, and the malice of the Devil their life and vigour; and how then can God be freed from being the Cause or Author of the sin? Besides, in the hating of God there is, not only, the Act of hatred, which he confesseth to be positive, and so from God; but there is also the turning of the will in this Act, and the undue determination of it upon God, the object altogether lovely, wherein consists the sinfulness of the Action, as he confesseth. I demand then, is not this determination of the will an Act? If it be (which I presume cannot, with any show of reason, be denied) then, whose Act is it, and from whom? If he saith, from man himself, his best course is to whisper this assertion as softly as he can, else, I must tell him in his own language (p. 96, 97.) he and I both were best not to make too much noise, lest we should awaken the youngsters to fall aboard us with such an Argument as this. If man be the efficient Cause either of a good action or a bad action, than he doth effect it by another action, and so we may proceed in infinitum. Well, for fear of these dangerous Bugbears, we will, for once, ascribe it unto God. So that God is made the cause of that hatred, and of determining the will upon this lovely Object, which is God. Now if we should impannell a Jury of honest men, to inquire who is the Cause or Author of this sin of hating God (in this case;) who would they find guilty, think ye? Doctor Molin saith, In Anat. c. 13. parag. 10. Quod si Deus insontem creaturam destinavit ad perditionem, necesse est eandem destinaverit ad peccatum, sine quo non potest esse justa perditio, & sic Deus erit causa impulsiva peccati. Nec homo poterit juste puniri ob peccatum, ad quod est aut praecise destinatus, aut Dei voluntate compulsus. If his destinating men to sin makes him the impulsive cause of sin, how can he produce in them the Act that is sinful, and determine their wills unto it, and yet not be the Cause of the sin? Let us put a Case for illustration. Suppose a Prince should make a Law, enjoining his subjects to write none but perfect Italian Characters, and then should take the hand of a child to write with, and the Characters prove Bastard Roman, or Secretary: or suppose one should take a dead man's hand and forge a Deed with it * Such a case hath been and a Trial upon it too: and the dead hand acquitted by the Jury. . Though the Subtlety of Master Hickmans' Metaphysics should find the child guilty, and distinguish the Forgery upon the dead body, yet without all peradventure an honest Jury would bring in a better verdict. If it be objected, that these are no competent instances, because there is no vital Ptinciple in the one, nor power to resist in the other (and what else is to be alleged I cannot imagine), it is to be remembered that, according to this Doctrine, the will of man in sinning, is full as much acted by Almighty God, as the hand of the child and dead man, in those instances, are by those who make use of them respectively. That is, the will is merely passive; and how can it be otherwise? For every Act is from God; and if God useth the will to this Act of sinning, how can the will avoid it? Should the will resist God's motion, when he does Act it? That is impossible, 1. Because that Motion, according to the Doctrine of the Calvinists, is omnipotent and insuperable, 2. Because to resist is to act, and every Act is from God, and produced by him. And now we see how little reason Master Hickman had to sleight and reject the Answer, which Gregory de Valent. and Bradwardine give to that Objection, from the hating of God, as he doth (pag. 89, 90.) I recite not their words, saith he, because I need not their help, and because they seem to make impossible hypotheses, as if the hatred of God were produced by God in a stone, whereas it cannot be that there should be the hatred of God in a stone, which neither hath, nor can have any knowledge. The stone is like to be the less miserable for wanting this capacity. But how much doth Master Hickman make man better? He allows him a will and understanding, I suppose, but no more use of these faculties, is ascribed to man, by his Metaphysics, than to a stone; For to use them is to Act them, and Act them a man cannot, because he can produce no action without another action, and so in infinitum, and then the youngsters will fall aboard us again. If Master Hickman will not see these absurdities, and what reproach falls upon the Holiness of Almighty God, by this Doctrine, yet Master Baxter doth consider, and sufficiently censure it; for he saith (in his Call to the Unconverted pag. 229.) Some are so loath to think that God can make a self-determining creature, that they dare not deny him that which they take to be his prerogative, to be the determiner of the will in every sin, as the first efficient immediate Physical cause. And many could be content to acquit God from so much causing † Mark that word. of evil, if they could but reconcile it with his being the chief cause of good; as if truths must be no longer truths, than we are able to see them in their perfect order and coherence: because our ravelled wits cannot set them right together, nor assign each truth its proper place, we presume to conclude that some truth must be cast away. This is the fruit, saith he, of proud self-conceitedness, when men receive not God's truth as a child his lesson, in a holy submission to the omniscience of our Teacher, but as Censurers that are too wise to learn. I hope Master Hickman will become at lest M. Baxter's Proselyte; especially, if he considers how impossible it is, that his Doctrine should hold good, in reference to the first sin of the first Angel, that fell from God; For I argue thus, The Materiality of that first sinful Act, granted to be from God, from whence will he derive the formality, or irregularity, which is the sinfulness of it? Was it from the Angels own Corruption, or the Malice of his Tempter? this could not possibly be, for he had neither; Therefore it must either be from God, and then God is the Cause and Author of that sin; or else from the self-determination of his own will, and then, if that determination be an Act, we have at last found an Act, whereof God is not the first immediate Physical cause. What can Master Hickman say to this? Truly he seems very fairly to grant it, if I be able to understand him; whether this be out of inadvertency, or conviction, I determine not: But in contradiction to what he had said before, he saith (Pag. 97.) Suppose the first sin of Angels to have been a proud desire to be equal unto God; the cause of this proud desire was the will of the Angel; but it was the Cause of the action (in such a sense as a causality may be said to have a Cause) Per se, of the vitiosity of the action, it was only the Cause Per accidens, & per concomitantiam. Thus far M. Hickman. And now, as Poelenburg saith of Doctor Twisse, In confut. Disp. inaugur. Fred. Span. that being affrighted partly by his insolent asperity, and partly by the tedious prolixity of his Volumes, he would not undertake him wholly, but satisfy himself with a Confutation of that one Argument, whereof his Confidence boasted, that the Devil, and his Angels were not able to Answer it; and by his performance in that, the Judicious Reader might judge, what returns might be made to the rest, if any man would give himself the Leisure and trouble to attempt it. So shall I resolve concerning M. Hickman, though neither the strength of his Arguments, nor the length of his Discourse be very formidable; yet there is so much asperity in his style, (which brings no advantage at all to the Cause he undertakes to manage) as deterrs me from a further procedure in the examination of his Pretensions. What is already done is sufficient to evince, that his Armour is not enchanted or impenetrable, nor his weapons mortal. But such is his provocation, he must expect a sharper assault, when it shall be seasonable, from a hand that will strike home and lose no advantage to defeat him, being guided by an eye so piercing, that it discovers every posture that lays his weakness open, and exposes him unguarded to the mercy of his Adversary. Sir, If you would be kept upright, you must not suffer yourself to be led by them who could never keep their own judgements steady in these Controversies. After your recourse to God and the Holy Scriptures, you will find Primitive Antiquity your best Directory; and the nearer you approach the fountain head, the purer, you may be confident, to find the stream you drink at. But if you come down to S. Austin, so many Adversaries had padled, and troubled and spilled the waters of his Cistern, that he could scarce see his own face in it. For instance in that one Question; Whether the truly Regenerate may totally fall away and perish, Master Baxter is very confident, he was for the Affirmative † Account of Persever. p. 5. etc. , and calls them immodest, that deny it; yet M. Calamy * His Serm. at the E. of Warwick's Funeral. p. 19 etc. tells us, this learned Brother's evidence is all slured and made invalid by Bishop Abbot, and that there is in S. Augustine's writings sufficient proof to the contrary. It may conduce something to one's settlement, to consider seriously, how many of the most Learned and judicious Heads, these last Ages have produced, even when they launched forth on purpose to oppose these Truths, have struck sail and paid homage, and some absolutely yielded up themselves to the Empire of them. Arminius undertakes the defence of Beza, but finding himself in pursuit after an utter impossibility, he retreats upon Conviction unto those opinions which have worn his Name ever since. Tilenus' while he sets himself in opposion to Arminius, is awakened with so clear a light of Truth, that he becomes a Proselyte. The force of Arminius' Arguments pressed so hard upon Junius, that he thought fit to give ground, and Piscator flinched a little more upon the impression made by his Adversaries. Gomarus was brought to his Retractations about these Articles; and Walaeus, as well as he were glad to take Sanctuary in Scientia Media, when they could find no other way to disentangle themselves, and free God from the fault of sin. And what an admirable Providence, as Poelenburg † Vbi supra in Ep. Ded. observes, appears in that late conflict between Amyraldus (the M. I presume of M. Baxters' New Method) and Spanhemius! Amyraldus maintains, that God will have all men to be saved, if all men will believe; and from hence Spanhemius infers a necessity of yielding not only Objective, but also Subjective grace, (internal and effectual, as well as external and insufficient,) quia nisi haec admittatur, sententia illa Amyraldi ridicula fuerit & insulsa, Deique tum sapientia, tum potentia indigna, for unless this be admitted, that opinion of Amyraldus, saith he, is ridiculous and foolish, and unbeseeming both the wisdom and power of God. So that, in the judgement of Spanhemius, if he will opine and speak what is Consonant to himself, Amyraldus must shake hands with the Remonstrants: And indeed those objections these men make one against another (which no doubt they respectively conclude to be strong and valid) are clear confirmations of all those Arguments, which the Remonstrants' manage against them both. And thus, as sparks of fire fall from the Collision of two flints; so from the mutual Conflict of these Adversaries the glorious Light of Divine truth breaks forth and falling between them, it serves the Remonstrants to light their Candle. To conclude; The Absurdities, which do unavoidably follow from these Doctrines, if men would admit the light of Reason to discover them, are very many and very reproachful to the Majesty of Heaven; They deflower the beauty of his Attributes, evacuate the merits of Christ's Death, frustrate the use of the Holy Ordinances, and enervate the power of Godliness, as is evinced in the ensuing Papers. For while they advance his Sovereignty, they impeach his Goodness; while they magnify his Liberty, they obscure his Wisdom; while they sweeten his Mercy, they embitter his justice; while they boast his Grace, they confound his truth and sincerity. This Doctrine attributes to Almighty God, a power, not only above the Laws he prescribes, and the Promises he makes unto his servants, but Paramount to his own Essential Equity; For it saith, he may ordain, yea that he hath ordained the greater part of Mankind to destruction, merely for his own pleasure, without intuition of any sin, or respect had to any demerit in them. It makes God like an unwise Potter, who makes some vessels on purpose, that he may dash them all to pieces. It teacheth, that of men amongst whom he found no Disparity of condition, he hath elected some, and Rejected others; and that he introduced a necessity of sinning for the illustration of his glory. How shall we reconcile these things to God's wisdom, or his justice? It teacheth, that God elected men to glory without Christ: but that he decreed through the intervention of Christ's death, to bring them into possession of that glory, that it might be done without any detriment to his Justice. But this is either against the wisdom and justice of God, if he decreed what he ought not to execute, or against his Omnipotence, if he could not bring the same to execution. It teacheth, that God sent Christ to reconcile men to himself, whom he loved with a most dear and unchangeable love, and that before he decreed to give Christ to die for them; That he Courts others to be reconciled, whom he hates immutably; That he calls them to repentance, inlightens them, gives them a taste of the heavenly gift, and zeal to do good works; and all this to serve but for a golden chariot to conduct them with the more formality to a sadder execution; That he binds some men to believe in Christ, for whom he never died; That he invites them to a Covenant of Grace, and ties them to impossible conditions under it, that he may inflict the greater torments upon them; That some men's sins, (of what nature soever,) are but paternal castigations, Privileges of their Adoption, Emergences of providences for their benefit, Confirmations of their grace, and that they do pave their way to glory, being part of that Medium conducing to the execution of the Decree of Election in them. This Doctrine implies moreover, that God is more severe to the greatest part of mankind than to Devils; That they cannot pray but for their own damnation, or that the divine Decrees may be rescinded; That others living in the filthyest sins, may notwithstanding be certain of their salvation, and need not fear hell-torments; for their sins shall not be able to separate betwixt God and them; contrary to the express word of God by his Prophet Isaiah * Cap. 52.2. . This Master Baxter doubtless had a full view of, as may be collected out of his Assize-Sermon † On 1 Cor. 6.19, 20. , where he saith, I had rather say to scandalous sinners [you are bought with a price, therefore glorify God] than (to say) you are absolutely elected, therefore glorify God; Yet, if I mistake not, the Synod of Dort † Deputati Syn. Geldric. call it, Fundamentum Christianismi. In Act. Synod. Dord. p. 30. a. m. par. 3. makes this Doctrine of Absolute Election, the great prop of godliness. Besides, this Doctrine empties Hell of a considerable part of its torments; which consist in the anguish and remordency of conscience, proceeding from her reflection upon lost advantages. Now this must needs be taken away by that Doctrine * For who ever suffered anguish of mind, for that he could not fly, or become an Angel, or any such thing, as is made impossible, by Gods own order? , (if true) which implies, that God's Decree hath from all eternity, set heaven and sufficient means to lead to it, out of the reach of the Reprobate, and made their state of sin and damnation so unavoidable, that they never had the real offer or tendry of such advantages. It renders Gods Commands and Eulogies irrational; for though he commands the work to others, yet (according to the tenor of this Doctrine) he must do't himself; and his Euge's, [Well done good and faithful servants,] are for such actions only as himself hath irresistibly produced, and the men could not do otherwise. In a word; it makes a double Gospel, and a double Saviour; as is sufficiently proved in the following Papers. That these absurd inferences, (and many more which might be deduced) are evident to me, though they should not be so to others, is enough to bind up my Judgement. But if M. Baxter can salve them by his New Method, I am so far from being obstinate, that I shall not only acquiesce in his Performance (when I see't accomplished;) but rejoice in it also, as one that findeth great spoils. Sir, I commend you hearty to the Lord, and to the word of his Grace. The Contents. MAster baxter's uncharitable Censures of Tilenus pag. 2, 3 and ill language ib. How causeless and undeserved p 4, 5 Whence his mistake, and its original p 5, 6 All M. B. pretended falsifications not charged upon the Synod itself: but many upon the Divines thereof, and their Adherents and Predecessors p 6, 7 The Five Articles spoken against by M. B. were drawn up by Tilenus and written in French, though translated afterwards into English p 7, 8 Calvinists divided about the Doctrine of Predestination p 10, 11 Four heads of Supralapsarian Doctrine p 11, 12 Sublapsarians how differing from the Supralapsarians, p 13 The 5 Articles, as they were drawn up at the Conference at the Hague, p 15 16, 17 As they were drawn up after the Synod at Dort, p 18, 19 How abridged by Tilenus p. 22, etc. The first Article made good out of the writings of Calvinists p 23, etc. That the Elect are a small number p 23 That they are elected without regard to Faith and Obedience p 24 That the Reprobates are appointed to destruction, without any regard to Infidelity or impenitency p 25 The Animosities betwixt Supralapsarians and Sublapsarians, and God charged with injustice and foolishness by them p 28, 29 Tilenus his second Article made good against M. Baxter p 29 That Christ died only for the Elect p 29, 30 That Christ had no intent nor commandment from his Father to make satisfaction for the sins of the whole world p 31 Tilenus third Article made good p 33 Calvin denies Freewill in Adam, p. 34. & Maccovius saith h●s Fall was of an unvoidable necessity, p 33 That the Elect do good out of an unavoidable Necessity p 35 They hold the like Necessity for doing evil p 36, 37 This necessity of doing or not doing good or evil, from God's Decree p 38 That man can do no more good, and omit no more evil p 39 That all endeavour after Salvation before the gift of Faith, (which is infused irresistibly,) is of no effect p 41 The 4. Article of Tilenus made good p 41 That the Elect cannot reject Grace p 42 That Reprobates cannot accept it p 45 Tilenus his Fifth Article made good p 47 The Elect cannot fall from Grace p 47 No, notwithstanding the most grievous sins they can commit p 49 The Synod of Dort not a sufficient test to assure us, which are the opinions of the Calvinists p 52 The Synodists do not agreed amongst themselves in the points in controversy p 52, 53 1. They differ about the object of Election p 53 2. And about the foundation of Election p 55 They agree not in this, [whether the Elect be beloved out of Christ] p 56 3. They agree not in in this, [whether Reprobation hath respect to the Fall] p 57 4. Nor in this [whether there be an Affirmative, as well as a Negative Act, in Reprobation] p 58 5. They agree not in this [whether Christ died for all, or only for the Elect] p 59, 60 6. Nor in this [whether the Impetration of Reconciliation is to be separated from the Application of it] p 64, 65 7. They are not agreed [whether all that hear the Gospel are commanded to believe in Christ] p 67, 68 8. They are not agreed [whether the unregenerate have a power to understand the Scripture] p 68 9 Nor, whether they may do any thing conducing to the assuring their Election p 70, 71 10. Whether a man can do more good than he doth, or omit more evil than he omitteth, they cannot agree about it p 72 11. They differ in this Question [whether the Covenant and promises of the Gospel be general] p 73 12. They agree not in this [whether God wills seriously that all should be saved, 75. Or whether reprobates be called seriously] p 76 13. They differ about dispositions previous unto Faith and Conversion p 78 14. They are not agreed, Whether perseverance be a condition of the Covenant p 81 15. Nor in this, Whether Salvation be the reward of Faith, or only the end of it p 82 16. They differ in this, Whether Temporary Faith be a true Faith p 83 17 Whether Faith may be lost; some say the Act may, but not the Habit; others say Neither p 84 18. They make the most horrid wasting sins of the Elect but sins of infirmity p 85 86 19 They say, the faithful falling into heinous sins, may bring themselves into a damnable estate and lose their aptitude to enter into the kingdom of heaven; insomuch, that if they die without an actual renewal of Repentance, it is impossible but they should perish, p. 87. and yet their state of Justification and Adoption, and their Right to the Kingdom of heaven remain inviolable p 87, 88 All opinions (how opposite soever to one another) if opposite to the Remonstrants, are currant by M. Baxters' Test p 88 The pretensions of the Synod not according to their actions p 90 Grevinchovius his character of the riged Calvinists in the Low Country's p 91 Eight detestable errors commonly held by Calvinists, yet the Synod were never troubled at them p 92 93 Bogermen passion favouring so much of partiality, never checked by the Synod p 93, 94 Maccovius his blasphemies not censured, but he dismissed as an Orthodox Divine p 94 The Supralapsarians maintained their Doctrine in the Synod p 95 And the whole Synod guilty of those opinions, and why p 96, 97 The Synod would not declare against the most horrid expressions of Piscator p 97 A Minister of Sedan ejected for preaching too earnestly, that God was not the Author of sin p 98 The Articles and Rejections of the Synod contrived so, that Supralapsarians might subscribe them without impeachment of their own Tenants p 99 Not one of the several Sects of Calvinists censured by that Synod, but they all think themselves countenanced thereby p 99 The Supralapsarian-creabilitarian Doctrine on foot still p 100 In what sense the waryest Calvinists, hold the decree irrespective p 101 M. Baxters Universal redemption condemned by his Brother- Cal. 103. by D. Tho. Hill, and the whole Assembly, 104. (to which we may now add, The Declaration of the congregational Churches.) A necessity of all humane Actions, in regard of God's Decree, the Doctrine of the present Calvinists, p 105, and 109 Hence liberty is defined to be but a rational spontaneity, 107. and some distinctions made use of to free God from being the Author of sin p 108 The Reprobates cannot repent, according to the Calvinists Doctrine p 110 The Decree ties the end and the means together, hence it is concluded, either that the elect cannot sin, 111. or that their sins are privileges and advantages p 112 The false deal of Festus Hom. and D. Damman the Scribes of the Synod of Dort p 118 A character of Bogerman the Precedent of it ibid. The unjust practices of the Syn. of Arnham and of Dort against the Remonstrants' p 119, 120, etc. The Remonst. Doctrines misreported to make them odious p 122 How the Remonst. hold a just man may be certain of future perseverance, 127 and how in this they are falsified by the Synod, p 128 M. Baxter's acknowledgement of the first Article of Tilenus charged upon the Synod, 129. though retracted again p 130 M. B. Sophistry and impertinency in justifying the Synods saying, [That God had no regard to Faith and Obedience in the Decree of Election,] p 131, 132, etc. M. B. maintains a piece of Popery, or the Grotian Religion p 132 That sin is as much a means to our salvation as Faith and Obedience p 133 Their distinction betwixt predestinating and creating to destruction, and predestinating and creating to Damnation; and of what use it is p 138, 139 The Decree of Reprobation makes provision for the introduction of sin, that Damnation may be just, p 135, 137, 140, 141 And their good works lead the Reprobate to hell, as well as their sins p 135 The distinction betwixt preterition and predamnation, used for fashion sake, and doth not mend the matter, but rather makes it worse p 141, 142, 143 Preterition do●h rather bring men into a state of Infidelity then find them in it p 14● Original sin unfitly called a state of Infidelity p 146 M. B. illogicall inference, that God leaves men to the malice and hardness of their hearts, in his Decree of Nonelection p 146, 147 Original sin comes only by God's imputation p 147 Reprobates learn to go alone betimes by the Synods Doctrine p 148 men's personal sin not a previous qualification in the object, but an unavoidable consequent of Reprobation p 149 The Syn. doth not make foreseen infidelity to be the qualification of the object of Reprobation p 150 God decrees sin, or else he could not foresee it, by M. Baxters' Doctrine p 151 Preterition is not an Act of Justice by the Doctrine of many Calv. p 151, 152 A daubing betwixt the Supralapsarians and Sublapsarians in this point p 152 The qualification or object, unto which the Decree of election is terminated p 154 How Gods Decree is built upon his Foreknowledge, and yet men's Faith and obedience not only nor principally of themselves, but of God, p 156, 157 The opinions of the greatest Clerks to be rejected, if they be not consonant to the Catholic Truth p 158 The Doctrine of the Remonst. most consonant to Rational Prayers p 159 But the Calvinists Doctrine not so, ib. for according to that, some men can never use the [Lords Prayer] but they pray for their own damnation, or else that God's Decree may be rescinded p 159 Unregenerate men discouraged from prayer: and all good duties by the Doctrine of Calvinists p 161 Gods giving [To believe and suffer] understood, of the opportunity and Grace; p 162 The C●lv. confess the spirits way of internal operation beyond their reach; yet they would tie us to their definitions about it, p 162, 163 The Prayers of the Primitive Church doubtless as Rational as those offered up by the Calv. p 163, 164 Gods Title of a Helper implies man's cooperation p 167 The ill consequences of that Doctrine that teacheth, God determines every good motion p 167, 168 God upon occasion, in great temptations may determine the will of his devout servants to what is good: but then their adhering to it is not properly a duty in them p 169 Gods options and prayers addressed to us do evince that his Grace doth not irresistibly determine our will p 170, 171 Gods praising of his servants must be considered as well as their Thanksgivings p 172, 173, 174 Those praises were irrational, if God did irresistibly determine their wills to perform the work p 175 A difference betwixt duty and operations merely voluntary. No Duty (which is an Act of Probation) unless a man hath liberty to do otherwise p 175, 176 Preterition without foresight of demerit offensive, p 177 Yet this contested for in the Synod of Dort, and not rejected p 178 What regard the Synod had to sin and demerit, in Preterition: viz. to introduce it, as a just cause of ensuing Damnation p 179 M. Baxters uncharitable insinuation p 180 What is offensive and scandalous in the Calvinists Doctrine p 180, 181 M. Baxter hath a singular way by himself p 182 Sufficient Grace not granted to others as well as to the Elect, by Cal. p 182, 183 That sufficient Grace is not given to the Non elect, according to the Doctrine of the Synod p 183 to 188 'Tis serviceable only to carry on the Decree of Reprobation p 188, &c, M. Baxter undertakes to deliver the sense of All the Calvinists, though there be but few of his mind p 192 M. B. sufficient Grace, like an Emperick's Medicament, confessed to be uneffectuall p 193, 194 What Fee is due to such Physicians? 194. and what expositions of Scripture by such glosses? p 195 Gods spirit doth not leave soliciting us till we shamefully repulse him, 196. But he will not dwell with us unless we choose to embrace him p 196 M. B. hath one Doctrine for the Pulpit, another for the School p 197 God dispenseth Grace to promote duty: but the Calv. would have it administered in such a way, as doth cancel duty, p 197, 198 How God worketh to will and to do p 198 The Doctrine of the Synod is, that according to the will and intention of the Father, Christ died for the elect only p 201, 202 M. B. School divinity at odd● again with his Pulpit doctrine p 203 Redemption in his pulpit is much more universal, than in his disputations, ib. & p 204, 205 His Zeal transports him to a forgetfulness of the decree of Reprobation, 204, 205. One of the wonders of the world that God's Immutable decree (as they calculate it) should be executed. ibid. M. B. seems to make his Auditors believe that God intends all their salvations: yet he denies it against Tilenus' p 206, 207 D. Twisse his doctrine, That the Non-elect shall be justified and saved, if they will believe. Riddle me, Riddle me p 207 As much might with as good reason be said of Devil's p 208, 209 For it is a Grace, that consists only in the logical connexion of an Antecedent and Consequent p 207 That Christ exerciseth his Priestly office only for the elect, is the doctrine of the Synodists p 210 Deliverance from sin by sanctification the work of Christ p 211, 212 And the first part of our Redemption, yet D. Twisse and M. B. affirm most absurdly, that Christ hath procured remission and life, for those, for whom he hath not purchased sanctifying Grace p 213 M. B. own universalists are too strict for his pretensions p 214, 215 A bountiful promise upon an impossible condition 216. unworthy the most merciful God p 217 How God purposed to cause the condition of the new Cou. in us, p 217, 218 Something to be done by us in a way of order to the introduction of Faith and the work of conversion 219 to 222. And this is M. baxter's own doctrine p 223 He makes salvation possible in his Sermons, even to such men, as he makes it impossible unto in his disputations p 224, 225, 226 According to M. B. doctrine against Tilenus [His directions to prevent miscarrying in Conversion] should have been dedicated not to men, but to God p 226 The sufficiency of Christ's death is no proof of the universal extent of the benefit, in respect of God's intention p 227 The Synodists cannot affirm (if they speak consonantly to their doctrine) that the sins of the non-elect were laid on Christ, p 228, 229 M. B. as well as others do untie the end and means, 229. and divide them. The Syn. grants an Evangelicall command, without Evangelicall power to perform it p 230 To promise and offer life upon conditions; which are made impossible by the propounder, is absurd and a mockery, 231. But to torment such wretches as do not, because they cannot perform those conditions, and receive those promises, horrible p 232 Whether Saving Faith, Regeneration &c be under promise, or under Revelation only. The Calvinists differ, and M. B. dissents from himself in this point p 232 to 235 He had reason to alter his opinion, for they that hold them promises do make a double Gospel, to avoid which, he makes use of this new Light, and yet he avoids not the absurdity of making a double Saviour p 236, 237 Infidelity cannot properly be the Reprobates own fault, according to the Synods doctrine p 239, 240 M. B. universal Redemption is not sufficient to free the Non-elect neither from sin, nor punishment 241. Why it ought rather to be called universal perdition p 242 How God calls the Non-elect to Faith and Repentance according to the doctrine of the Synod p 243 M.B. in extremes, p 246 M. B. sufficient Grace deficient, and not such as that the Remonst. mean by sufficient p 247, etc. God's special grace restrained by the Calv. to the elect: and his common Grace of no advantage to the salvation of the rest, 248, etc. But administered only to render them inexcusable p 249 M. B. (if the Synods doctrine were true) might with as much reason inveigh against the Devils, as against the non-elect, for making light of Christ p 250 For the non elect are more hardly dealt withal (by that doctrine) than the devils are p 251 M. B. sufficient Grace is ineffectual of its own nature and kind, 253. But that asserted by the Remonstrants becomes uneffectuall, through man's voluntary and vincible fault, p 254, etc. The Remonst. grant that men may be and are sanctified by that Grace, which they affirm to be bestowed on the non-elect: which Calv. will not allow of, p 255 An exact Account of the power and operations of Grace, according to the Remonstrants' p 256, 257 They grant that Grace works irresistibly upon the understanding and affections, yea and upon the will too, as to a collation of power ibid. etc. Whether he that doth not oppose Grace, and is converted, hath more grace than he that doth oppose it, and is not converted, p 258, 259 Though a supernatural power to believe be conferred irresistibly: yet the actual consent is not so wrought: and why, p 259 If Faith be irrisistibly infused, the word cannot possibly be the instrument, or means of it, p 260 Illumination performs the whole work of Grace, according to Camero, p 261 The Calv. do not bring faith and salvation to man's choice, by their doctrine, as the Rem. do, p 261, etc. The glory of Conversion to be ascribed to God: but the miscarriage in that work only to man, p 263, 255 The Remonst. preserve to the will her liberty, in the work of Grace, p 261 How the soul comes to miscarry under these helps of Grace and to be seduced, and led away by sensuality, 264. And rebel against the light p 265 Conversion, not wrought irresistibly: but a matter of choice, according to the doctrine of the Primitive Church p 266 Preaching and Hearing the means to make men willing p 269 Less Grace would convert some, than what is ineffectual to others, p 270, 271 Conversion is from God's Grace with the cooperation of man's will p 272 M. B. denies God's praedetermination and asserts the wills self-determination, and yet maintains insuperable determining Grace p 273, 274, 275 Grace irresistibly determining the will not necessary, 276. not convenient; for it overthrows that Dominion, which the will is said to have of its own Acts. It destroys the nature of duty p 277 It evacuates the use of the Ministry, the use of exhortation p 279, etc. It furnisheth the obstinate with a just Apology against all exprobrations p 283, 284 It takes away all praise of virtue p 284, 285 It makes God the first deficient cause in man's sinning p 285 It is an Inlet to Enthusiasm, 286. And disparages the sweetness of the Insinuations and motions of Grace p 288 What move Authors to conceal their Names p 291 After the Fall no liberty left in the will to do well, p 292 The Devil hath the natural faculty of Freewill, as well as Man p 292 Men under an unavoidable necessity of good and evil, 292, 293. The Calv. deny only a necessity of coaction in humane affairs, p 297, 298 Elect and Reprobates put under an unavoidable necessity of being saved or damned respectively, according to the Calv. p 296 Spontaneity no good savage for the necessity of sinning; or the justice of perdition that follows it, p 299 Men will take unworthy courses to promote the cause they have once espoused p 303 The Syn. but a party in those controversies; though they took a solemn oath to be impartial p 303 The equity of the Helvetians p 304 Original sin yielded to M. Baxter, 305. Whether Christ hath not restored the power that was taken away by original sin? M. B. seems to be for the affirmative p 306, 307 D. Tailor unjustly censured by M. B. for a Pelagian 308, 309. All the Fathers of the first 300 years spoke like Pelagians, saith M. B. 310. The Manichees as ill as the Pelagians, and the Calv. to avoid one extreme, run into the other, p 311 M. B. will not subscribe the Canons of the Syn. of Dort without his own interpretation, 312. and consequently he had been served as the Remonstrants were, if he had been amongst them ibid. The Syn. taught not the same Doctrine in these points with S. Austin, p 313 S. Austin held that men effectually called, regenerated and justified might fall away and perish 313 He held predestination upon foreknowledge, if consonant to himself, p 313 314 If the Reprobates be under an unavoidable necessity of wanting Faith, etc. That want is not their sin but their Fate p 317 The work of conversion for mightiness, not inferior to the creation p 318 The Synod excludes all others salvation, but the elect p 319 A perverse insinuation of M. B. 320, and 322. His poor cavils, to no purpose p 320, 321 Though God be omnipotent, yet every egression of his power, is not omnipotent, p 322, 323, 329, 330 Proved by M. B. assertion, That no sufficient grace is given to the Non-elect; or else that they can conquer Omnipotency, p 324 M. Bax. five senses p 325 God acts to the uttermost of his power in the conversion of sinners, according to the Synod p 326 M. Baxter slips from the Question p 328 Sanctification, though not wrought without God, yet wrought by means which is resistible p 329, 330 M. Baxter's Fallacy, p 330 M. Baxter decides the case, while he disclaims the judicature p 331 M. B. calls that a slander, which is an evident truth 332. And it is, That the Reprobates cannot accept saving faith. p 332, 333 What power denied, and what granted to the Reprobates p 334, 335 The Devils have a passive obediential, and a natural Active power of willing, 335. God deals more hardly by the Reprobates, than by the Devils, according to the Calvinists Doctrine p 335 M. Bax. pitiful Putoff, touching a sufficiency of power in the Reprobate, illustrated by example 336 M. Bs Ignoratio Elenchi p 337 Betwixt the natural Active Faculty and the moral Disposition, there is a supernatural influx, etc. 338, 339. But M. B. forgetting his Doctrine of sufficient Frace, now utterly denies it p 339, 340, 341 The Reprobates, by M B. doctrine, required to bring in their tale of Brick, but are allowed no straw p 340 For what use is sufficient Grace, if it cannot enable men to act graciously? p 341 M.B. mistakes the Question, 342. The Reprobate are not saved, not because they will not, but because God wills not p 343 M.B. [can not] is more than [will not] p 343, 344 The Reprobates can not and will not do both flow by an inevitable Necessity from God's Decree p 344 M.B. trifling to blind the Syn. doctrine, etc. p 345, 346 M.B. praevaricates, 346 347. That those to whom God giveth Grace cannot reject it, 347. for it is irresistible p 348 The Calvinists persecute their brethren for differing from them in the explication of an Article, which themselves confess, they cannot comprehend, p 349 The conversion of a sinner is like Gods raising up children unto Abraham of stones; according to the Syn. Doctrine, p 349, to 353 Such a conversion cannot be esteemed a duty, nor accounted laudable p 353 Nor is it a fault in those which are not thus transformed ibid. The Calvinists deny the exercise of natural in man's convers. p 354 Grace given to Reprobates comes not from a resolution in God to renew them p 356 The word and spirit may be said to be effectual in a twofold sense p 357 What M.B. his [As full a purpose] signifies p 357, 358 No man bound to believe a benefit belongs to him, unless it be seriously intended to him p 359 Yet M. Perkins saith, that in binding the Reprobates to believe God intends only to make them unexcusable for not believing, 360. God hath a fourfold end in calling the Reprobates, though their obedience be none of them, saith Maccovius p 361 And this is the sum total of M.B. Passive obediential Power, and his natural active Faculty and his Suffic. Grace p 361, 362 God foreknew the non-conversion of the Reprobate to be a sin of ingratitude, obstinacy and rebellion; Therefore sufficient Grace is seriously offered to them; without which their sin could not be such p 362 The odious inferences are not drawn from Gods giving effectual Grace to some: but from his denial of Grace Sufficient and Necessary, and yet decreeing to torment men for want of it p 365 No such odious Inferences do follow the concession of God's foreknowledge, as follows the position of his absolute Decree; and why p 366, etc. M. B. calls that a fiction and abusive language, which is the clear doctrine of the Synod p 370, 371 The Impertinency of the Synods distinction, of [Quoad ipsos] p 372, 373 An illative or consequential Necessity of Perseverance we deny not: but an antecedent causal necessity that takes away the duty p 374, 375 The Ancients, Jesuits, Lutherans and Arminians do hold that the Elect shall never fall away: yet this doth not favour the Calvinists opinion of Absolute Perseverance p 376 That which the Synod professeth to be a perfect truth, and M. B. too: is accounted a perverse insinuation in Tilenus, by Master Baxter's equity p 377 The Calvinists hold the Regenerate may fall into adultery, perjury, idolatry, etc. and yet not fall into such gross sins as the unregenerate, 378. M. Baxters Ignoratio Elenchi ibid. The habitually Gracious may be uncapable of salvation, by the Calvinists Doctrine p 379, etc. The Calvinists superabundant favour towards the Elect, 380. 1. They say, 'tis a contradiction, that they should sin, 380. 2. They say, if they do sin, 'tis only out of infirmity, 380. 3. Or that their sins differ from sins of the same kind in the Reprobate, 381 4. Or that their sins come to pass through God's destitution of them, 382 5. That their sins are but Fatherly castigations, 384 6. That (they are sure) they cannot die in their sins without Repentance, 386 7. That, if they should die in them without an Actual Repentance, this would be profitable to them, p 386. etc. The Synod profess to disown, what they clearly maintain, 388. viz. 1. That the most heinous sins do not hinder the salvation of the Elect, 389. 2. That the Reprobates cannot be saved, though they perform all the works of the Saints, and how these Riddles are to be unfolded, 390, 391. Which doctrine is not for edification, 392 393. 3. That God by his mere will, without any respect to sin, did predestinate and create the greatest part of mankind to destruction, 394, to 400. 4. That Reprobation is the cause of Infidelity and Impiety, and how? 400, etc. 5. That Infants of Believers, are cast into hell, p 405 The Synod, when they deny God to be the cause of sin, do understand it only of a culpable cause, which God is not they say, because he is under no law, p 407, 408 The Synod and M. B. can advise better than practice p 409 An ocular demonstration of the doctrine of Calvin. in M. Perkins Table etc. p 410, 411. Supralapsarians, are Creabilitarians and Existentialists p 412 The Syn. Canonical Description of Election, p 413 The Apostles Doctrine inverted by M. Perkins order of Causes p 414 The Elect beloved most flagrantly and unchangeably out of Christ; which evacuates his satisfaction and merits, p 415 That Christ died to procure salvation for them to whom it was as sure before, as God's Love and Decree could make it ib. That no sin can hinder the effectual calling of the Elect: not put them out of the road to Glory p 416 That the sins of the Elect are of a better rank than those of the Reprob. p 417 The Creabilitarians hold that the greatest part of mankind are Reprobates before Creatures, in God's purpose, 418. That they have no interest at all in Christ, ibid. Being under Gods implacable hatred, (at least, as the most modest Calvinists hold) upon the Fall of Adam, ibid. Though they improve their calling to the uttermost, yet by the sway of the Fatal Decree, they shall be brought into a Relapse and finally perish, p 419 The Glory, which God aims to reap from his creature, according to the Calvinists; consists chief in the execution of his decrees of Election and Reprobation, contrary to the Scriptures p 420, 421 M.B. will have a parting blow at his dissenting Brother p 427 That the Justified cannot fall from their justification, no fundamental point with M.B. p 428 Good Christians, are not made per saltum, ordinarily 428. The elect have such a Magazine provided, they need consult, and take care for nothing, p 429, 430 But the Scripture teacheth another Doctrine, 431 And many that warp to the other opinions are convinced of it, ibid. & p 432 Christianity a matter of choice p 433 Confirmation, of such as are eminently faithful, in a state of indefectibility, very probable p 434, 435 Every single act of every gross sin doth not cancel the state of Justification; probable, 436 What will cancel it, p 437. The danger of backsliding, 438. That the Regenerate may fall totally and finally, 439, 440. and that David did so, p 440, etc. 444 445 Hardening goes along with presumptuous sins, p 442 David a servant of sin, 443, 444. though he had not served out a Apprenticeship to the trade of sinning ibid. Adoption not absolutely granted but upon condition of Persever. p 446, 447 Regeneration, and Sanctification may be repeated, 448, 449. so may conversion the new creation, repentance, (words of the same importance) 451, 452, 453 454. proved from the Discipline of Penance, 455, 456, 457, 458. Heb. 6.10. cleared, p 459, 460 The good ground. Objection from thence answered 461, 462, 463. Objection from David's prayer, Psal. 50. answered, p 464 Every degree of love will not secure the state of justification. p 465, etc. Not safe to rely upon God's mercy, beyond the measures revealed to us, p 467 No depending upon an habitual estimation of God, in our Actual disobedience, p 468 A saving Faith no more separable from chastity, etc. than from charity p 470 Men may perish for want of consideration p 471 How the hearts of the regenerate relapsing are turned into as graceless a frame as theirs, who were never sanctified p 472 Some single Acts of sin may exclude a man out of heaven p 473 The sin of David and Peter were not single Acts only p 473, 474, 479 Habits infused may be lost p 475, 476, 477, 478 Some single Acts of sin do surmount some Habits p 479 Peter's sin mounted up by very many and great Aggravations, p 479, 480 Men may lie in a state of sin and yet pursue a course of Religion p 481, etc. Christ's prayer did not secure Peter from a total falling away, but from a final only p 484 Peter did not constantly build upon the Rock p 487 M.B. expounds the sacred text by Satan's Comment, 488. M.B. ensnared in a Fallacy, p 489 The House built upon a rock, may be blown up though it be not blown down, 489. a caution to prevent it p 490 The Doctrine of the Synnod touching Election and Perseverance not to Godliness, 491. By it the vilest sinners may be certain of their Salvation, without the renewing of Repentance, 492, to 500 They hold every man ought to be certain of his Election, 492, 493. He that is once certain of his Election may fall into gross sins, 495. yet they cannot fall quite away, 496, 497. Therefore once certain and for ever certain, 449 This Doctrine takes away from some gross sinners the fear of God's displeasure, of hell fire, and of judgement to come, which are the preservatives against sin, 501 And is the foundation of the Antinomians Doctrine, which M. B. accounts so gross and absurd, p 500, 501 M. B. holds that no man hath such a certainty of his own sincerity, etc. as to exclude all doubting, p 503 514 The Doctrine of Perseverance in M. Baxters' judgement, gives advantage to security p 504 M. B. interfering, ib. & 505 And incongruity of expression p 506 The word Grace, one of the three that makes so many controversies, etc. p 506 The opinion of the Remonstrants and Lutherans, touching falling from Grace, not against Grace, 506, 507. Nor against God's Fidelity, 507. Ibid. Not. Marg 3. r. add 1 Pet. p 4.19. God's Fidelity is not impeached by man's Apostasy, p 507, etc. The Holy Ghosts Custody doth not secure the Faithful without their own vigilancy p 508, 509 The falling away of the Regen. not against God's wisdom or power, p 509, 510 M. B. opinion against the Grace and wisdom of God 511. God by M.B. doctrines invites the Reprobate to engage themselves in covenant with him: yet he keeps himself disengaged to them p 511, 512 M.B. contradi●ts himself in saying the opinions of the Arminians are against the peace of the Saints, p 513 The certainty of perseverance serves only the interest of the flesh, p 514 No Cordials are to be provided for men in their wickednesses p 515 The opinion of the Remonst. a better foundation of comfort for the lapsed, than that of Calv. p 115, 516 M. B. provides as ill for the peace of the Saints as do the Remonstrants' p 516 That Men are to be judged godly according to the Predominant estimation and operation of their soul, understood with restrictions p 517 A continued Sedition and Rebellion must not go for single Acts: No more must the sins of David and Peter p 517 A relapse in the last stage of life very dangerous p 518 One Act of sin sets a man more backward, than one Act of virtue can set him forward p 518 That the Habituated cannot change, how to be understood p 518, 519 M B. a supercilious Censor rather than a charitable Monitor of M. P. and why? p 519, 520. M. B. chooseth to die in the state of an Adulterer, and Murderer, and of one that hath denied his Saviour with execrations, (whom he confesseth in an incapacity of salvation) than in the state of a person, by whom he knows no ill, but some passages (in a learned Book) which he thinks uncharitable p 520 M. B. doth not judge the person by the works, but the works by the person, 521. Men of M. B. persuasion account that damnable in others, which they think not culpable in their own Party p 522 The Turks measure good and evil by the event, p 523 All events not irresistibly decreed p 524 The Calvinists and M.B. have espoused the Turks opinion in this p 524 That the same sins for kind differ in respect of persons p 524, 525 What Saints are brought forth out of M.B. furnace, after his Spiritual refining 526. Grace confined to a Party p 527 Many of the present leaders of the people guilty of thus seducing them p 528 This gives advantage and scandal to Socinians p 528 Scandal given to the Socinians and advantage by men's pretending to more piety and godliness than their principles do exact p 529, 530 The Remonstrants do advance God's Grace more than the Calv. p 532, 533 A double acception of the word [Grace] p 534 How taken in the right stating of the question p 535 Which side makes man most sinful p 536, 537 In what sense Calvinists do make men the greatest sinners p 539 Whether sins of Regenerate persons be not as great as others 540, 541 Whether the Elect have not the same ends in sinning which the Reprobates have p 543 A Paradox of Calvinists p 543, 544 Take notice that in these Papers, I have made use of Act. Syn. Nat. edit. in folio. Lugd. Bat. Typis Isaaci Elzeviri. Soc. Dord. Sumptibus. 1620. And of the Canons of that Synod Translated into English. Of M. Baxters' writings, are cited His Saints Rest. His Scripture Proof for Infant's Baptism. His Treatise of Conversion. Directions to Prevent Miscarrying in Conversion. Directions for Peace of Conscience. His Call to the Unconverted: His Papers Of Saving Faith, against M. Barlow. His Sermons, at the Assizes, of Judgement. Of Making Light of Christ. Disputations of Justification. Disput. of Right to Sacraments. For the distinction of Supralapsarians, [viz. Creabilitarians and Existentialists] see pag. 412. FOR Master Richard Baxter. Sir, IT is hoped, upon the account of your candour and ingenuity, that you will hold the Ghost of Tilenus excused, if he takes a progress into the visible world, to haunt you a while; especially seeing it is not out of malice, but charity, not to torment or affright you, but (that's all the revenge he desires) to inform you how unadvisedly you have attempted to deface the lustre and take away the life of his fairest reputation. Here by the way I cannot but take notice of the truth of your own complaint and observation, in An Apology, affixed to your Directions for peace of Conscience; Edit. 2. Where you say, I have learned at last by some experience, that we must suffer from the Learned and Godly, and not only from the Ignorant and the Wicked; and being conscious of that humane frailty, whereby I am likely to be injurious to others, I must needs know that it is many such injuries that we must mutually overlook, who are by our pattern of Meekness so indispensably obliged to extraordinary Unity, Love and Peace. A good provision made to entertain unwarrantable proceed; and whether Tilenus' Ghost hath received a fair invitation from you, to it, or no, he resolves it to be his duty to take his share of it. And good reason; for you charge him with falsifying and Calumny, Praefat. Sect. 6. unworthy a Divine, a Christian or a Man, and Sect, 7. you say, He unworthily feigneth them to say. Sect. 8. you ask, Where now is the odious error that this second Tilenus puts such a face upon? Sect. 9 you add, A most shameless falsehood, made as they say of his fingers ends, and a little after you call him This Accuser. Sect. 11. you say, Unworthy falsification still! Well might this Author conceal his name for shame of the world: and a little after; All this is such a selfe-devised tale, that no honest man should have been guilty of against the poorest neighbour or enemy, much less against a party, and a Synod of so many truly Learned and Worthy men. Sect. 12. The fourth Article forged by this Ghost of Tilenus. Sect. 13. The accusation proceeds, you slanderously say that the Synod— and you wrong them also in feigning them simply to say. Sect. 14. and Sect 16. you call that, the fifth feigned Article of Tilenus, adding presently upon the recital of it, This also is in his own abusive language, and not in theirs. Lastly, you conclude Sect. 17. your addition is a perverse insinuation. Thus you are pleased to clothe your rebukes that they may make the deeper impression. If you were ever content to take such coin for good payment, 'tis more than probable Tilenus would be content to receive it at your hands; but I think it should never have passed through his, but have been nailed to a post, as we use to deal by that counterfeit money, whose metal will not bear the Test, though it carries never so fair an image and superscription. However Sir, Tilenus hath a Second, that must take leave to tell you, this Coin is not currant in the balance of the Sanctuary. And thus I find that many times even love of Moderation, and zeal for Truth do transport some men to no small distance beyond them both. But if it were the weight of the cause, Section 6. and the greatness of his sin (as you pretend) which commanded you to be thus plain; Tilenus when he finds his guilt, upon a further examination, will be bound to acknowledge it, and to give you thanks for your Christian charity towards him. In the mean while I must assure you, it was not for shame of the world that this Author concealed his name: but, (if you will not allow it to be imputed to his modesty) perhaps because he thought there was too much truth in that of the Remonstrants, Antidotum in praefat. propè fin. Non patitur tangi aut detegi ulcera sua malesana Calvini secta. Nimis enim foeda ac tetra sunt, adeo ut propiùs intuenti horrorem pariant. Medicinam omnem respuit, & medicum nullum ferre potest. Nemo impunè hactenus ei medicam manum porrexit, nisi cum ei potestas opprimendi defuit. I wish the practices of those of that Party may not translate this complaint into English, and my pen shall not. But I hasten to receive your charge made against Tilenus. You ask, Where did the Synod say this? Sect. 12. 11. 9 Not a word to any such sense in the Synod; and, There's not a word of the Decrees of the Synod, that hath any such importance. So that here we have the ground, upon which you take all your Confidence to accuse Tilenus of (your pretended) falsification and Calumny. But good Sir, give me leave now to ask the question: Where did Tilenus undertake to confine himself to the Decrees and Canons of that Synod? D. Dammans question to Tilenus is this; pag 27. Are these your tenants consonant to the Articles of the Synod of Dort? what opinion have you of that, and the doctrine held forth by the Divines in that Assembly? So pag. 31. He is charged (personating an Infidel) to allege no other reasons to justify his averseness to the Christian faith, than what he can clearly deduce from the doctrine of the Synod and the Divines thereof; (whether in conjunction or severally, is left to his liberty) and so he instanceth accordingly p. 34. in these very words, [As some of your Synod do maintain] pag. 50. the Synod of Alez is joined with it, and pag. 69. Tilenus takes in the doctrine of the Synod and its adherents. And as these expressions must be allowed to reach far downward, so there are others, that will ascend as high upwards. Page 31. mention is made of the Calvinian as well as the Synodical Principle, and pages 36, and 58. M. Calvin and Piscator, their Authorities are alleged and owned, as being men of the same judgement (generally speaking) with those Divines of the Synod. So that Tilenus hath left himself a greater latitude than you did imagine, even a liberty to expatiate into all the opinions of all the Writers of that whole age [not only the Divines of that Synod and their Adherents, but such also whose unwholesome and rash opinions gave occasion of it,] to make good his Articles as they are drawn up; and what words and Phrases some of those Authors have made choice of to represent their conceptions of these points of Doctrine in, we shall see anon. In the mean time, I must acquaint you further, that these very five Articles (word for word, as near as they could be translated) were drawn up by Daniel Tilenus himself (and not his Ghost) who was as like to know, and as able to state the difference and controversies betwixt the Remonstrants and their Adversaries as any other. The truth is, he wrote a small Tract in French, which was translated about 30. years since into English by one of his own countrymen, (a Parson of a Church in London) Master John L'oiseau, alias Tourvail: This, being put into a very mean dress (the Translators skill in the English tongue not able to furnish better) was printed some years since, as I am informed, (for a printed copy I have not seen, though I have had the perusal of one in Manuscript) under another Title; viz. [Presbyterian Doctrine.] Whereas the Title prefixed by the said M. J. L. was this [The Doctrine of the Synods of Dort, and Alez brought to the Proof of Practice, etc.] And at this Torch it was that Tilenus Junior lighted his Candle. Therefore, if in the compiling or drawing up of those five Articles, there be any forgery, or shameless falsehood, or unworthy falsification, as you boldly charge them, it is the integrity of the old, and but the credulity of the new Tilenus, that is to be questioned for it. Praefat. Sect. 6. And truly (you say, yet how truly, is the matter of our present inquiry, but you say) Truly this is an exceeding shame to the Arminian and Jesuit cause. I cannot but take notice, by the by, of your great ambition to make a match betwixt the Arminians and the Jesuits; you join them together at every turn, though you know the parties are not agreed: but if you'll read Lysimachus Nicanor, or Herod and Pilate made friends, you may find a fit match by fare for the Jesuits). But what is that, Ibid. that is so great a shame to the Arminian and Jesuit cause? why, to find the Learned Patrons of it to deal so unconscionably, that a Reader cannot believe them; and that where it is so easy to any to see their falsehoods. He that should read these severe expressions, falling from the pen of a man so serious, as Master Baxter would seem to be, would be tempted to question whether there were ever any such Doctrines entertained or broached in the world, especially in these last ages, amongst the Reformed Churches, as Tilenus writes of. That the Calvinists should be so fare divided about the Object of Predestination, and fly so fiercely in one another's faces; one party accusing the other, that by their doctrine they charge God with injustice, and the other to repay them with a Recrimination, accusing them, to charge him with folly; who would believe Tilenus (after Master baxter's attempt to invalidate his Testimony) if he should acquaint the world that there are such high and bitter Animosities amongst them? Therefore that we may the more readily gain belief in this matter, Disputatio Theologica de 4. controvers. Remonstr. Artic. thes. 10. let Antonius Walaeus state the different opinions. There must be some common state pitched upon, out of which God made a Segregation of Mankind, by his eternal predestination, and distributed them into two Classes, viz. of such as are to be saved, and such as are to be damned. In eo statu eruendo, saith he, mirum in modum humanum ludit ingenium, & varii variè se torquent: summa tamen huc redit, inductione facta; ut homines segregandi judicio divino, considerandi sint à Deo omniscio, 1. aut ut creandi: 2. aut ut creati et integri: 3. aut ut creati & lapsi in primo Adamo: 4. aut ut restituti in secundo Adamo, id est, Christo. Here are three several opinions acknowledged to be amongst the Calvinists; viz. Supralapsarians of two sorts, and Sublapsarians. The whole process of the doctrine of the first sort of Supralapsarians Jacobus Arminius hath reduced to four special heads; which are these. Declarat. Sententiae. translated into English, page 40, 41. First, That God hath Absolutely and precisely decreed the salvation of some particular men by his mercy or grace, and the condemnation of others by his justice, without any sight or intuition in this decree, of righteousness, or sin; obedience, or disobedience; that might proceed from either of them. Secondly, That God, for the bringing to pass this his preceding decree, determined the creation of Adam and all men in him, in the right state of Original righteousness, and further ordained, that they should sin, and so be deprived of original righteousness, and become guilty of eternal condemnation. Thirdly, That God hath decreed those (whom he would precisely save) as to salvation, so to the means appertaining thereunto, to bring them to faith in Jesus Christ, and perseverance in it; and this indeed by his irresistible grace, and power, so as they cannot but believe, persevere, and be saved. Fourthly, That God hath decreed to deny unto them whom, in his absolute will, he hath preordained to destruction, and accordingly doth not confer that grace which is sufficient and necessary to salvation; so as they are neither able to believe, neither can they be saved. Thus Jacobus Arminius drew up the Articles; who as he was a man of too great integrity to impose upon his Adversary or his Reader, so is he known to be of too great learning and judgement to encounter with shadows and Chimaeras of his own imagination. How this Doctrine of Predestination is held forth by the other sort of Supralapsarians and the Sublapsarians, he that desires to be fully satisfied, may procure his satisfaction at an easy expense both of time and money, if he will consult that small Treatise, translated and lately set forth by Master Tobias Conyers, Page 91. 92. 94. 95. 96. under the Title of [The Just Man's Defence]. But amongst other Reasons inducing these men to deliver the Doctrine of Predestination, in a different manner and method from the former, Arminius observes, Ibid. page 97. this was not the meanest; their willingness to prevent, lest God with the same probability should be concluded, the Author of sin, from this their Doctrine, as some of them have judged it concludable from the first. But really (saith He) if with diligent inspection we well examine these Opinions of a later Edition, compared with the Judgement of the same Authors in other points of Religion, we shall find the fall of Adam not possibly otherways considerable, Page 98. (according to the Tenants of these men) then as a necessary executive means of the preceding Decree of Predestination; Page 100 and a little after, The third Opinion escapes this Rock better than the other, had not the Patrons thereof delivered something for the Declaration of Predestination and Providence, from whence the necessity of the Pall may be inferred, which cannot have any other rise then Predestinatory Ordination. Thus Jac. Arminius. Our next inquiry (that we may come to the certain knowledge of the truth of this Matter of Fact; for which you have, with no little confidence to disgrace him, questioned the integrity of our Tilenus) shall be, how the Articles charged upon the Calvinists, were drawn up by the Remonstrants in the Conference at the Hague. Pet. Bert. Coll. Hag. p. 7. 8. The first head of Doctrine, (which They charge the Contra-Remonstrants, or Calvinists, whom they style their Brethren, to account ORTHODOX) is thus expressed word for word. I. THat God (as some speak) by an eternal and unchangeable Decree, from among men, Supralapsarians. whom he considered as not-created, much less as fallen, ordained certain to eternal life, certain to eternal death, without any regard had to their righteousness or sin, to their obedience or disobedience: only because so was his pleasure, (or so it seemed good to him) to the praise of his Justice and Mercy, or (as others like better) to declare his saving Grace, Wisdom, and free Authority (or Jurisdiction); Means being also fore-ordained by his eternal and unchangeable Decree, fit for the execution of the same, by the power or force whereof, it is necessary that they be saved after a necessary and unavoidable manner, who are ordained to salvation, so that 'tis not possible that they should perish: but they who are destined to destruction (who are the fare greater number) must be damned necessarily and inevitably, so that 'tis not possible for them to be saved. II. Sublapsarians. That God (as others would rather) willing from eternity, with himself, to make a Decree concerning the Election of some certain men, but the rejection of others; considered mankind not only as created, but also as fallen, and corrupted in Adam and Eve, our first Parents, and thereby deserving the curse: And that he decreed out of that fall and damnation to deliver and save some certain ones of his Grace, to declare his mercy: But to leave others (both young and old, yea truly even certain Infants of men in Covenant, and those Infants baptised, and dying in their Infancy) by his just judgement, in the curse, to declare his Justice: and that without all consideration of repentance and faith in the former; or of impenitence or unbelief in the later. For the execution of which Decree, God useth also such means, whereby the Elect are necessarily, and unavoidably saved, but reprobates necessarily and unavoidably perish. III. And therefore that Jesus Christ the Saviour of the World died not for all men, but for those only, who are Elected either after the former or this later manner, he being the mean, and ordained Mediator to save those only, and not a man besides. iv Consequently, That the Spirit of God and of Christ doth work in those who are Elected that way or this, with such a force of Grace that they cannot resist it: and so, that it cannot be, but that they must turn, believe, and thereupon necessarily be saved. But that this irresistible Grace and force belongs only to those so Elected, but not to Reprobates, to whom not only that irresistible Grace is denied, but also Grace necessary and sufficient for Conversion, for faith, and for salvation, is not afforded: To which Conversion and faith indeed, they are called, invited, and fairly solicited outwardly by the revealed will of God: though notwithstanding the inward force necessary to faith and conversion is not bestowed on them, according to the secret will of God. V But that so many as have once obtained a true and justifying faith by such a kind of irresistible force, can never totally nor finally lose it, no not although they fall into the very-most-enormous sins: but are so led and kept by that same irresistible force, that 'tis not possible for them (or they cannot) either totally or finally, fail and perish. Every branch of these five Articles, you may see sufficiently proved, in Appendice Pressioris Declarationis, and by the several Syllabi Testimoniorum inter Scripta Synodalia Remonstrantium. After the Synod at Dort had declared their judgement, upon those five Heads of Doctrine, the Remonstrants abridged the same into these Compendious Articles. I. Almighty God, out of all mankind considered in the same state or condition, chose a few certain men to eternal salvation, without any respect of their faith, repentance, conversion, or of any good quality; but, that he might bring those elect ones, to the appointed salvation, he decreed that his Son should suffer death for only them, (yea, even when they as well as others were fallen into Original sin, and eternal perdition, by Adam's transgression) that he might reconcile unto God them only, that he might, in them only, work faith, by a most powerful working and force no less than that put forth in the Creation of the World, or raising the dead; that he might preserve, in that saving faith, unto their lives end, those very men although fallen into the foulest and filthiest wickednesses, and sticking some while therein, and at last might bring them into the possession of eternal life, for no other cause, but because so was his good pleasure. But on the Contrary, I. Almighty God (would pass by) the fare greatest part of mankind, without any consideration of their own proper and avoidable fault, that is to say, of their own unbelief and impenitence, (and) would not elect (them) to salvation, or have his Son die for them, or give them power sufficient for their conversion, even then, when he invites, entreats, beseeches, and begs of them to answer his Calling them to salvation, under the promise of the said salvation, and the penalty of eternal damnation: but will have them all born into the world to eternal and never-to-be-ended torments and pains of hellfire, and at length throw them headlong thereinto, for no other cause, but because it was his pleasure so to do. II. That God would that jesus Christ should suffer the most bitter and the most shameful death, not for all men, but only for the elect, that for them alone, by the shedding of his own precious blood, he might purchase faith, and all other saving gifts of the Holy Ghost, that by his blood he might cleanse them from all their sins both Original and Actual, committed as well after as before their faith, might keep them to their last breath, and at last bestow on them eternal life. But on the Contrary, That God would not that Christ should die for other Mortals, that he should or might obtain for them any saving gifts of the Holy Ghost, but would that they should be left in Original sin, and should, by consequent, fall or rush headlong into other sins, which necessarily flow therefrom, (that they) should continue destitute, or devoid not only of power whereby they might turn and repent, but also of all hope of grace and salvation, till, at length, being enwrapped in an unavoidable necessity of sinning, they should be thrust down with the damned Devils to eternal and infinite torments both of soul and body. III, and IU. That God doth communicate, inspire and infuse into his Elect children, not only a power to believe, but also the will to believe, yea the very act of believing, or faith, by such a supernatural, most powerful, and, at once, most sweet, wonderful, secret, and unspeakable operation, or working, as, in its power, is no less or inferior then that, whereby the world was made, or the dead are raised; so that it remains not in man's power to will to believe or be converted, but will they, nill they, they cannot but be converted and believe. On the other side, That God doth earnestly indeed call and invite to faith and repentance infinite Myriads, (or ten thousands) of men, with threaten of eternal death and damnation, yet so still, as he wills not to communicate to them either faith or the power to believe and repent; so that, though they be called of God to faith, yet they cannot but remain unbelievers. And that yet notwithstanding all this, he will punish and doth punish eternally with the most grievous and horrible torments of hell, those very persons for that unbelief of theirs, that was unavoidable. V God will preserve in the faith, all those, who are absolutely elected from eternity, and are, in time, brought to faith by an Almighty and irresistible operation or working, so that, although they fall into foul and detestable wickednesses and villainies, and continue in them some space of time, against their Conscience, yet the said wicked villainies do not hinder so much as a straw amounts to, their Election or Salvation, neither do they or can they, by means of, or because of these, fall from the Grace of Adoption, and from the state of justification, or lose their faith, but all their sins how great soever they be, both which heretofore they have committed, and those which hereafter they will or shall commit, are surer than assuredly forgiven them, yea, and moreover, they themselves, at last, though it be at their last gasp, shall be recalled to repentance, and brought over into possession of salvation. That this is the perfect sense of the Synods Doctrine, the Remonstrants have notably evinced in their ANTIDOTUM (Continens Pressiorem Declarationem Propria & Genuinae Sententiae, Quae in Synodo Nationali Dordracenâ asserta est et stabilita.) For Daniel Tilenus, it seems, he took the like course; for whereas the Synod delivered their judgement about the First Head, (Divine Predestination) in the 18 Articles and 9 Rejections, He abridged the sense thereof into seven short lines; and the Second Head (about Christ's Death) comprised in nine Articles, and seven Rejections into four or five lines; and the three and four Heads (concerning Man's corruption and conversion) containing seventeen Articles and nine Rejections, into fourteen lines; and the fifth Head (of Perseverance) dilated in the fifteen Articles with nine Rejections, into less than four lines. And besides, in Compiling his Articles Tilenus had respect to the Doctrine, as it is asserted, or held forth, by the Synod of Alez, (which is not now in my power, to give any account of) But my Present task is to make it good, that these Articles of Tilenus are consonant to the sense of the Calvinists Doctrine, whether delivered in or out of the Synod. The first whereof is drawn up and presented in these words, That God by an Absolute Decree hath Elected to salvation a very little number of men, without any regard to their faith or obedience whatsoever, and secluded from saving Grace all the rest of Mankind and appointed them by the same Decree to eternal damnation, without any regard to their Infidelity or impenitency. Here Master Baxter takes exceptions: 1. Where talk they of a very little number? For your satisfaction hear Martinius, (one of the most moderate of the Synod of Dort) who saith that (a) In praefat. excussioris placidae— Citante Smoutio Eendrachts. fol. 109. God according to his good pleasure hath reprobated the greatest part of men; was it for sin? Christ doth not teach so, Mat. 11. nor the Apostle, Rom. 9 Here we have the greatest part of Mankind under the Decree of Reprobation, and that not for sin neither. The less part therefore is Elected. But we have another Synodist speaks more fully to the Article. (b) Antonius Thysius ad Summam Baronis. p. 10. 20 literis (gg) collatis. God hath by his absolute and irresistible will, reprobated the greatest part of Mankind by far, and created them to destruction; saith Ant. Thysius. And what is the number of the elect then? If it be not small enough, yet Master Calvin expresseth it to a tittle; The Election is of a very small Number of the Godly. Electionem exigui piorum numeri. Instit. lib. 3. cap. 21. §. 7. mihi pag. 592. 2. Master Baxter excepts: It's not true that they say he doth it (without any regard to their faith or obedience whatever). Witness to the contrary 1. Donteclock. How can it be true that God did from all eternity consider us in Christ as faithful? On the contrary he chose from all eternity some certain persons, without respect to faith or any other quality, only for his will and good pleasure. Respons. ad Anonym. Quatern. E. 2. Bucan. What manner of persons are Elected? Such as are unclean and wicked in the sight of God. Loc. come. de Praedest. q. 20. 8. The Contra-Remonstrants. We do profess that God in his Election, had no respect to faith foreseen, perseverance, or any other good quality. Collat. Hag. pag. 126. 4. Damman, Scribe to the Synod. The Election was made without any consideration of faith foreseen. In suo consens. To whom I may add Lubbertus, a Synodist too; who saith, 'Tis a humane invention, that God decreed Salvation to us upon this condition [if we would repent.] In Declar. Respons. pag. 50. 3. Master Baxter excepts; He unworthily feigneth them to say that God [appointeth them to eternal damnation without any regard to their impenitency or infidelity] The truth of this shall be tried by the Suffrages of 1. Calvin. Predestination is Gods eternal decree, whereby he appointed what he would have done concerning every man. All are created in a like condition. But eternal life is preordained for some, eternal damnation for others. And therefore as every man is created for either end, so we say he is predestinated either to eternal life, or eternal death. Instit. l. 3. c. 21. §. 5. Therefore that frivolous shift of the Schoolmen concerning prescience, is overthrown. For Paul doth not say, the ruin of the wicked is foreseen of the Lord, but ordained by his counsel and will. Idem ad Rom. 9.18. 2. P. Martyr. That any should be created of God, that they might perish, seems absurd at first sight. But the Scripture speaks it. In app. loc. come. in loc. de Praedest. 3. Polanus. Whom God predestinated to eternal destruction, those he created to eternal destruction. In Hoseam 13.9. 4. Beza. God destined to destruction, not for corruption, or the fruits of it: but because, so it seemed good to him. de Praedest. contra Castol. pag. 416. & in Notia min. N. T. ad Rom. 9.21. Seeing therefore that the shame of death eternal is signified by the name of dishonour, they speak like Paul, who say some are created of God to just destruction, and they that are offended with this form of speech, do betray their ignorance. 5. Perkins. Every man is to God, as a mass of clay in the hand of the Potter, a● Paul affirms; and therefore God by his absolute sovereignty, doth make vessels of wrath, and not find them. But he should not make them, but find them made of themselves if we should say, that in his eternal council, he passed them by, only as sinners, and not as men. De Praedest. & Gratia Dei. pag. 16. 6. Ant. Thysius, a Synodist. Reprobation is decreed without any regard had to sin. Ad Summ. Baronis ex Piscat. Let not Master Baxter except against this, and say, that Reprobation is not the same with Damnation; for it doth inevitably draw damnation after it, as is acknowledged by Festus Hommius (Scribe to the Synod) in these words; The fruits that follow Rejection, are, 1. The creation of the Reprobate. 2. Desertion, or withdrawing of God's grace and means. 3. Blinding and hardening. 4. Perseverance in sin. Thesaur. Catech. fol. 216. Lastly all the Supralapsarians must give their votes for this opinion, who make the object of Predestination, Man considered, either as created and not fallen, or as yet not created, but possible to be created. Thus Amesius. 'Tis neither necessary, nor consonant to Scripture, to assign any pre-required quality in man as the formal object of Predestination, or any certain state of man, so as to exclude the rest: for it is sufficient to understand that man is the object of this Decree, so that the difference, which is found in men, may follow from the Decree. In Medulla. Theol. l. 1. c. 25. th'. 10. And Gomarus, a Synodist. Predestination is twofold. One to Supernatural ends (which though at once in the accounts of eternity, yet in order of nature goes before; because the end for which a thing is, is first in the intention of the wise.) The other unto Creation in Original righteousness and other means. Thes. de Praedest. disput. 1604. Thes. 12. & Thes. 13. The object of Predestination are Rational Creatures, not as really to be saved or damned, created, about to fall, or about to stand, about to be repaired: but as in a remote and indefinite power, are saveable, damnable, creable, fallable, repairable, etc. And upon these very grounds of Gomarus Maccovius disputes the point stiffly for the Affirmative. Theol. Disput. 17. mihi pag. 59 From hence ariseth that bitter dissension, betwixt the Supralapsarians and the Sublapsarians, wherewith Grevinchovius so worthily upbraideth Smoutius in these words; Gomarus Festus and other Supralapsarians, and thyself also, if I be not deceived, do contend bitterly against Donteclock, Acronius, etc. That nothing more foolish, ot more sottish can be fastened upon God, then that He should have created Man, not having first appointed his end, that is to say, the salvation or damnation of every one, or rather the showing forth of his wrath and power, in the perdition of the Reprobates. On the other side Acronius and the rest of the Sublapsarians, exclaim as much against the Supralapsarians, That nothing can be conceived more unjust, than that Man should be reprobated and created to destruction, whilst considered as, not yet corrupted by sin. Absters. Calum. Smout. p. 51. And this, I hope, is sufficient for the proof of the first Article, as to the matter of Fact. The II. Article runs thus. That Christ Jesus hath not suffered death for any other, but for those Elect only; having neither had any intent, nor commandment of his Father to make satisfaction for the sins of the whole world. What saith M. Baxter to this Article? Why, A most shameless falsehood, made, as they say, of his fingers ends. We must Impannell an honest Jury to try this too, and, 1. That Christ, is said, to have suffered only for the Elect. Call in the Witnesses under written 1. Geselius, what say you to the matter in question? They do greatly err, that teach, Christ died for all and every man. Specim. c. 9 fol. 36. 2. M. Perkins, 'tis expected you should give in a full testimony for the Plaintiff, what say you? The Ransom was designed by the Decree of the Father, and by the intercession and oblation of the Son, for the Elect only. De Praedest. p. 20. 3. Piscator, a knowing man; he will speak the truth, and the whole truth and nothing but the truth; That Christ died sufficiently for every one, is a false Proposition. For he died only for the Elect, paying a most sufficient price of redemption (for them) namely his own precious blood, the blood of the Son of God, the blood of God himself. But for the Reprobate he died in no wise, whether sufficiently, or effectually. Contr. Schaff. Th. 209. 4. Beza, what can you say to this point, for the acquitting of Tilenus? (I say,) Whether you consider the council of God, or the effect of the Passion, or both, Christ died no way for the wicked. In Thes. cum D. Fayo in Scholar Genev. disp. de dig. & effect. Sacrif. J. C. 5. Maccovius, can you say any thing to clear the Plaintiff from the charge that Master Baxter brings against him? For that distinction of Christ's dying for All sufficiently, but not effectually, (I say) 'tis most vain and foolish. For, if you say Christ died sufficiently, because his death would have sufficed to redeem all, if God had so pleased; then by a like reason, it might be said, that Christ hath justified All, and glorified All sufficiently, but none effectually. Mac. distinct. c. 11. disp. 18. p. 110. & Colleg. Disp. 12. 6. Vogelius, what say you to the second Article of the Remonstrants, Concerning the Universality of the merit of Christ's Death? They that subscribe to it are to be suspected of Pelagianisme, Socinianism, and other filthy Heresies. Contra Ministros Campens. pag. 125. This evidence already given in, might suffice for the whole Article: But because there is another branch, perhaps M. Baxter will expect some pregnant proof for that too; viz. That Christ neither had any intent, nor Commandment of his Father, to make satisfaction for the sins of the whole world. To evince this, take here the depositions of 1. Triglandius, a Synodist, (who saith) The passion of Christ in itself is sufficient to redeem all men, yea many more— but according to the Council of the Father, He died only for the Elect, and truly faithful, with that intent, that through faith he might make all them, and only them, partakers of the efficacy of his passion to their salvation. Christian Moderation pag. 25. 2. Zanchy, who saith, Christ according to the purpose of the Father, was born, prayed, suffered, died, risen again, and sitteth at the right hand of the Father interceding only for the Elect, h. e. for those, who were to believe, according to the eternal Election. Miscel. pag. 345. in quarto. 3. Beza. I say again and profess before the whole Church of God, that it is false, blasphemous, and wicked, to say Christ suffered, was crucified, died and satisfied, no less for the sins of the Damned, then for the sins of Peter, Paul and all the Saints, whether in respect of God's Council, or in regard of the effect. Resp. ad Coll. Mempelg. p. 221. 4. Rippertus. To say, Christ died for them that perish, is false, and accuseth God of injustice. Contra Domin. Sapma. p. 764. 5. Vogelius. If Christ tasted death for unbelievers, He drank that bitter cup in vain, or else unbelievers must taste eternal death twice, contrary to God's justice, to the dignity of Christ's death, and to possibility. ubi supra. p. 133. 6. Maccovius. If Christ died for all, than he was a surety and ransom for all, even for those that perish everlastingly. And this will brand God with injustice, for taking a twofold punishment for the same offences, when the first satisfaction might have sufficed. Ubi supra pag. 35. 7. D. Damman, Scribe to the Synod, speaks to the same purpose. It is repugnant to God's justice, that he should constitute Christ to bear the sins of all men, and make full satisfaction for them, and yet ordain some men to bear their own sins, in their own persons, and so make satisfaction for them themselves; then he should punish one sin twice, that is to say, both in his Son, and in them that perish, Consens. p. 63. Piscator shall shut up this Scene; The Reprobate are plainly excluded from the merit of Christ's death, and yet they are bound to believe in him. In Resp. ad Duplic. Vorstii. c. 7. pag. 66. The third Article of Tilenus. That by Adam's fall his Posterity lost their freewill, being put to an unavoidable Necessity to do, or not to do, whatsoever they do, or do not, whether it be good, or evil; being thereunto Predestinate by the eternal and effectual secret Decree of God. What saith M. Baxter to this Article? Unworthy falsification still! I see it will be a hard matter for Tilenus to gain M. Baxter's favour, when he cannot escape his censure; but the best on 'tis, rather than his reputation shall stand branded, with those marks of Infamy, which M. baxter's blackest ink hath endeavoured to imprint upon it, many of M. Baxter's Reverend and (in his opinion) Orthodox friends, are ready to be his compurgators. I was about to summon M. Calvin, in the head of these, but I find him stumbling at the threshold; and taking exceptions at the very Preface of the Article, which chargeth his Adherents and followers, to hold, That by Adam's fall his Posterity lost their freewill; For he will not acknowledge such a Freewill in Adam himself, whereby he might have stood; witness these words of his to Castellio; Thou sayest, Adam fell by his free will: I except against it; That he might not fall, he stood in need of that strength and constancy, wherewith God armeth the Elect, while he will keep them blameless. Whom God hath elected, he props up with an invincible power, unto perseverance. Why did he not afford this to Adam, if he would have had him stood in his integrity? Ad Calum. Nebul. Ad Artic. 2. And Maccovius. However Adam fell Necessarily, in regard of the immutability of the Divine Decree; yet he fell not by compulsion, but of his own accord. (Non coactè, sed sponté.) Coll. Disp. disp. 16. pag. 54. If the Calvinist's put Adam himself under such an unavoidable Necessity, to do, or not to do, as an immutable Decree had determined him; 'Tis strange any of them should give Tilenus the Lie, for affirming it, to be their opinion concerning all men else. And yet Tilenus stands accused by M. Baxter, of an Unworthy falsification; for affirming, that they hold, That the Posterity of Adam (having lost their free will in his fall) are put under an avoidable Necessity to do good, or evil; And therefore to clear Tilenus, that He may still carry the Reputation of a True man, I'll offer the Certificates of his Compurgators; and First they shall certify to the unavoidable Necessity of doing good; as, 1. Sturmius, whose Certificate on the behalf of Tilenus runs thus; The Elect are not only Predestinated to the end, but also to the means that lead to that end; and therefore as they are necessarily saved at last, in regard of the immutability of Election; So in regard of the stability thereof, they do necessarily also embrace the means, by which they are conducted to that end. De Praedest. Th. 10. 2. Zanchy. Whosoever are predestinated to the end, they are also predestinated to those means, without which that end is not to be attained. And therefore as the Elect do necessarily arrive at the end at last, in regard of the steadfastness of Election; so in regard of the same steadfastness, it is necessary they should be led and walk by the means ordained to that end. De Nat. Dei lib. De Praedest. -Sanct. quaest. 5. & lib. 5. c. 2. q. 4. So it comes to pass, that our Will cannot but will good, because 'tis so inclined of God. 3. Cornel. Dungan. Such as the operation of grace is in the beginning, such is it also in the progress. If it be resistible or irresistible, when it gins (the conversion or regeneration of man; and they hold that work irresistible) such it is also, when it goes forward. In pacific. pag. 172. 4. Donteclock. As many as were predestinated by God unto salvation before the creation of the world, (that the purpose of Election may remain sure) they are by the power of God led to it, so certainly and infallibly, that it is impossible that they should finally perish. Instit. de Praedest. pag. 93. But can Tilenus bring any competent number of Orthodox Calvinists to Certify touching the unavoidable Necessity of doing evil? For the other branch seems so plausible that few of them will stick to subscribe to it: But for this branch, who appears to make Tilenus his charge good? 1. Zanchy. We grant that by this ordination of God, the Reprobate are constrained by a necessity of sinning, and thereby of perishing also, and so constrained that they cannot choose but sin and perish. De Nat. Dei. lib. 5, c. 2. de Reprob. q. 2. and soon after, We doubt not therefore to acknowledge, that there is incumbent upon the Reprobate by their immutable Reprobation, a necessity of sinning, and that unto death, without repentance, and for that of suffering eternal pains. 2. Piscator, when Vorstius urgeth him, how unworthy the Majesty of God it is, to make an absolute Decree, whereby a man should be destinated to a necessity of sinning: To this he answers; Indeed humane Reason judgeth so: but the word of God saith otherwise. And again; These say are not therefore false and blasphemous, because humane reason is offended with them. Ad Amic. Coll. Vorstii. Nat. 6. & 8. mihi pag. 157. & Resp. ad Duplic. Vorstii par. 1. pag. 223. When God does necessitate man to sin, that he may punish him for sin, he doth justly, because he hath power to govern man as he will. & Resp. ad Apologet. Bertii. pag. 144. All things are done by the Decree of God, therefore all things are done of necessity. For whatsoever God hath decreed, that comes to pass necessarily, because it cannot not come to pass. And therefore Judas betrayed Christ necessarily, nor could his will to betray be changed in him; because he betrayed Christ by the determinate counsel and fore-decree of God. Also that willing of Judas was the work of God, in as much as it was moved of God; for by him we live, move, and have our being. 3. Fred. Bronkerns, (saith) All things come to pass by an infallible, and an inevitable necessity. Antidote. fol. 50. 4. Sturmius. Upon the privation of Grace there follows a twofold necessity, one of sinning, another of perishing. For the Reprobate being destitute of God's grace, and left to their own nature, as they cannot but sin, so they cannot but perish: unto which double necessity the reprobates are predestinated. De Praedest. Thes. 22. That this unavoidable necessity to do, or not to do good or evil, is (according to the Doctrine of the Calvinists) from God's eternal praedestination, and effectual secret decree, appears sufficiently by the Testimonies already alleged, to which I will add but two or three. 1. Nicasius Ʋander Sure. The end for which God doth elect and reprobate, in respect of man, is, that the elect might be saved, the reprobate damned: but every one according to the means which God hath likewise predestinated, that they might walk in them, the elect in faith and good works, and the reprobate in unbelief and evil works. pag. 20. 2. Sturmius. Hence it therefore followeth, that the elect are diligent in all good works: because they are no less predestinated unto the means then unto the end. But the reprobate omit all care of doing good, because they are rejected from this grace of the means, no less then from the end itself. De Praedest. in explic. Thes. 1. From this unavoidable Necessity etc. some of the Calvinists have drawn these Corollaries (which they maintain to follow by undeniable Consequence from that Doctrine; viz.) I. That man can do no more good than he doth; Omit no more evil than he omitteth. Piscator. Although God simply and precisely wills not that man should do any more good than he doth, or that he should omit any more evil than he omitteth, yet he cannot therefore be reproved of envy, or iniquity, or of any other vice. Ad amicam Duplicationem Vorstii. pag. 177. And because this is a very great temptation and encouragement to carelessness; therefore he could not for shame but insert this much by way of caution. (pag. 176.) Although it be manifest to us, in the general and indefinitely, or at least it may be manifest to us by God's word, that we can neither do more good than we do, nor omit more evil than we do omit; because God hath precisely decreed from all eternity, that both shall so come to pass; yet because 'tis not manifest to us in specie, definitely and in special manner, how much God hath decreed, that we should do or omit, we cannot be justly accounted foolish if we do perpetually endeavour, to do more good than we do, and likewise to omit more evil than we omit. And Pag. 228. Although it be Fatally appointed, when, and how, and how much every one of us ought to practise piety, or not to practise it, yet the daily meditation of God's precepts is not undertaken in vain. And to second Piscator in this opinion, Maccovius doth most fiercely maintain it in a Disputation of nine or ten pages long. Colleg. Disput. Miscel. Quaest. Disp. 2. (mihi) a pag. 410, usque ad 419. And whether the contagion of this opinion had not laid hold upon some of the Synod, we shall examine hereafter. A Second Corollary, drawn by others from that Unavoidable Necessity , is this: That all zeal and endeavour after Salvation, before the Gift of faith, and Spirit of Renovation conferred upon us, is of no effect. So faith Donteclock. We conclude therefore, that all the care, study and diligence, which men can use to promote their salvation is vain and to no purpose, rather hurtful then profitable, before faith and the spirit of renovation. But after faith and conversion they are clearly necessary and profitable. Adversus Castell. p. 171. Note here by the way, that his opinion is, That Faith and the Spirit of Renovation are never given to the Non-Elect. The Reprobates are not called effectually; whence it comes to pass, that they can neither convert themselves nor believe. In Dialogo super Translatis Thes. Gomari & Arminii: quatern. C. The iv Article of Tilenus. That God to save his Elect from the corrupt Mass, doth beget faith in them by a power equal to that, whereby he created the world, and raised up the dead, insomuch that such unto whom he gives that Grace, cannot reject it; and the rest being Reprobate cannot accept of it, etc. How doth this Article come off with M. Baxter? He tells Tilenus' [you wrong them in feigning them simply to say, that those to whom God gives grace cannot reject it.] Because M. Baxter is grown so Gentle, I shall (for his satisfaction) acquaint him out of what Poets Tilenus borrowed this Fiction. 1. Calvin. God moves the will, not after that manner, as hath been believed and delivered for many ages, that it should be at our choice to obey or resist the motion. But efficaciously effecting it. Therefore that so often repeated by chrysostom is to be rejected. Whom he draws, he draws being Willing: whereby he insinuates, that God reaching forth his hand, doth expect whether we will make use of his assistance. Instit. lib. 2. c. 3, Sect. 10. Geselius. Man is regenerated, and renewed by the omnipotent power of God, creating him anew. In Specim. cap. 4. fol. 17. & fol. 73. They who are called unto salvation, outwardly, and inwardly, according to God's purpose, they cannot but believe in Christ, and convert themselves; that is, this calling worketh irresistibly and invincibly, not only upon their understanding and affections, but also upon their will. 3. Smoutius. We will never say, that God determined to save believers only by a gentle suasion, and traction, agreeable to their wills: much less will we deny, that he draws them by an omnipotent operation, which they neither will, nor can, nor can will to resist. Concord. p. 9 Praefat. 4. Contra-Remonstrantes. As no man is able to hinder his own birth, or his resurrection from the dead: So no man is able to hinder the working of God's Grace, when he will regenerate, and raise him up from the spiritual death. Collat. Hag. pag. 207. 5. Donteclock. We determine the Grace of the Holy Spirit to be such an efficacious operation, that men, in whom God is pleased to work it, cannot resist it. For it is as a spiritual regeneration, 'tis the renovation of the understanding, will, and all humane powers, 'tis as a spiritual raising from the dead, by which is taken away whatsoever, in man, is able to resist the Holy Spirit, or hinder it, that it should not, in its time, work conversion and faith in the Elect: So that it depends not at all on the will of man, but only on the will and power of God. Ad scriptum cujusdam Anonymi. lit. B. 1. versa. 6. D. Damman. God worketh effectually in none but in the Elect, and therefore Grace is rightly said to be irresistible. Consensus. pag. 82. 7. Triglandius. They that are converted cannot hinder the taking away of their resistance. Apolog. 274. 8. Gomarus, a Creabilitarian Synodist: Whether is this Grace conferred by an irresistible and efficacious operation of God, so that the will of him who is regenerated hath no ability to resist it, as 'tis said 2 Chron. 20.6. In thy hand is strength and power, and there is none that can resist thee? I do believe it, and profess that it is so. Insua Declaratione. pag. 20. For the honour of the Synod Johannes Bogermmannus, their Precedent, shall have the casting voice in this particular. Grotius citing S. chrysostom, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. If it be grace, may some say, why are we not all saved? Because ye will not. For Grace though it be Grace, saves none but the willing, not such as do daily strive against it. And upon that of S. John. None can come to me except the Father draw him. In the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, draweth, is denoted Help, saith He, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉), nay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith Bogerman, & quidem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that exceeding power, whereby he causeth light to shine out of darkness. Ad Script. H. Grotii, part. 2. Annot. Not. 87. (mihi) pag. 147. And thus I hope, the Reader will be satisfied touching the matter of Fiction, imputed to Tilenus by M. Baxter. But the severer part of M. Baxters' censure is yet behind, touching the other branch of this Article; For here he tells Tilenus roundly, You slanderously say, that the Synod saith, the Reprobates cannot accept it. I am glad to find M. Baxter let fall this expression; because I hope, I may conclude from hence, that, in his opinion, this Doctrine is erroneous, and of evil consequence. But if any of the Adherents of the Synod profess themselves to be of this judgement, Tilenus is like to overthrow M. Baxter upon the Action of Slander, what ever loss and damages he recovers of him. Let us put it to a Verdict of a Jury of good men and true, whose Foreman shall be Peter Martyr. The (divine) calling is extended unto some, that cannot be moved to a capacity to receive it, who are therefore said to be called, but not chosen. In Append. loc. come. pag. 980. 2. Musculus. As the Elect being called in their time, do believe, repent, are justified and saved, neither can they fall from salvation: so the reprobate can neither obey Gods call, nor repent, nor believe, nor be justified, nor be saved. Loc. come. de Reprob. 472. 3. Zanchy. There follows Reprobation the denial of grace, this is attended with sin, and sin with punishment, unto all which God hath preordained the Reprobates from all eternity. Lib. de Nat. Dei. c. 2. de Praedest. Wherefore it is rightly said, that the Reprobates are preordained and predestinated to a perpetual destitution of grace. ibid. pag. 721. in quarto. 4. Gomarus. The Reprobates cannot believe; for faith is proper to the Elect. Disput. (1604) the Prad. thes. 32. 5. Triglandius. Unbelief flows from Reprobation. For the Reprobates cannot attain to faith by Nature; and God hath not decreed to give them faith. Defence. pag. 140. 6. Lastly, D. Damman. We grant that the Non-Elect, neither do, nor can believe, nor persevere in the faith. De persever. pag. 86. Item in Concord. Remonstr. pag. 44. Unbelief flows from Reprobation; for the Reprobates cannot attain unto faith by nature, and God hath not decreed to give them faith. The fift Article of Tilenus. That such as have once received that Grace by Faith, can never fall from it finally, or totally, notwithstanding the most enormous sins they can commit. How doth M. Baxter resent this Article? Why, 'tis feigned, and (Tilenus) his own abusive language. One would think by these expressions, that the man did disclaim the Doctrine. But alas! 'tis only a copy of his countenance (as shall appear afterwards;) for the Calvinists do constantly maintain, Such as have once received that Grace, can never fall from it, finally or totally; Witness, 1. Calvin. As the Spirit is never extinguished, so likewise 'tis impossible that faith, which he hath once imprinted upon the hearts of the Godly, should be lost and perish. In Comment. in Mat. 13 20. & in Comment. ad Hebr. 6.5. The Elect are out of danger of deadly sin. 2. Donteclock. The Elect cannot finally fall from faith. Instit. de Praedest. pag. 101. 3. Mehnius. Justifying faith can never be lost, because it is peremptorily given to the faithful, in perpetuum. In Anchor: Animarum pag, 107, 4. Whitaker. This is that justifying faith with its necessary fruits which we maintain, that we can never wholly lose. In cygn. Cant. 20. 5. Piscator. It is impossible true believers should fall from the faith, the Decree and federal promise of God withstanding it. In Resp. ad Duplic. Vorstii. pag. 246. & pag. 326. The natural infirmity of the flesh, whereby they may lose faith, is so restrained and hindered by the absolute and effectual decree of God, that it cannot break forth into act. Et pag. 238. There is a fatal necessity of the perseverance of the faithful, because it depends upon God's absolute Decree. 6. Contra-Remonstrantes. They who have once believed, have no need to fear perdition. In Collatine Hagi. p. 32. 7. Gomarus. They who have received the gifts of faith and charity,— though in respect of their humane frailty 'tis possible they may totally lose them, yet in respect of the will of God, and his gracious Conservation by his Spirit, 'tis impossible. In Declar. sententia suae. pag. 33. 8. D. Damman. The Elect can never fall totally nor finally. De Persever. pag. 169. & pag. 27. We know though the Spirit may be grieved in the faithful, yet can he not be totally excussed or quenched. 9, Thysius. But what is this to the Elect, who though they do fall, yet they cannot but be renewed? Ad Sum. Baron. pag. 73. And because M. Baxter calls that addition [notwithstanding the most enormous sins they can commit] a perverse insinuation; Behold: the Authors of it are 1 Contra-Remonstrants. It is not true, that they who may fall into grievous sins, and commit the works of the flesh, may fall wholly from the faith. In Coll. Hag. in 5. Artic. 2. Zanchy. Though by their grievous sins they may trouble the spirit, and weaken faith: yet the Spirit doth not wholly departed from them, nor is faith wholly extinguished. L. Miscel. in depuls. Calum. pag. 305. 3. Rennercherus. Those whom God hath once received into favour, their sin and guilt being abolished, them he preserves in his grace as just persons, so that they cannot fall from grace and perish through any sins, because they are and remain pardoned in them. In Catena. cap. 27. 4. Piscator. The tenth head of Doctrine objected to our Divine is, That the Regenerate cannot lose their faith through any heinous sins. But this is the Doctrine that John teacheth. Contra Schaff. pag. 12. 5. Mehnius. The sons of God though they fall into all the sins that Solomon committed, they are always converted before the day of death. In Anchor. Anim. p. 125. 6. Perkins. The foundation of our salvation is laid in the eternal Election of God, so that a thousand sins, yea, the sins of the whole world, and all the Devils that are in hell, can never make void God's election. It may come to pass, that sins may harden our hearts, and weaken our faith, and grieve the Spirit of God in us, but they cannot take away faith, nor quite excusse the Holy Spirit. God doth not condemn any man for sin, whom he hath adopted into the number of his children in Christ Jesus. In dialogo de statu homin. pag 44. 7. D. Damman. The Regenerate heaping up many sins cannot proceed so far, as to excusse the Spirit of grace utterly through an universal Apostasy. Et mox; Because this seed of God cannot be ejected but only by sin, therefore the Regenerate cannot eject it. De perseverant. pag. 33. & pag. 20. If none can pluck them out of Christ or his father's hands; therefore not the Devil nor sin. And pag. 128. The Regenerate when he sins against conscience, he retains so much grace, and hath so much of God's favour, that he cannot but rise again. Item pag. 193. To the objection of Bertius: It follows, that if the Elect cannot die in mortal sins, then if they always go on in mortal sin, they shall never die. To this Doctor Damman answers, I grant it. But the question is whether the Elect can always go on in sin: and pag. 144. The decree of Election doth imprint upon man and his affections an inevitable necessity both of believing, and persevering: and therefore we think the righteous do always persevere, and cannot but persevere. pag. 146. and therefore he concludes, they need not consult about their perseverance; nor fear falling from grace, pag. 123. Thus we see the matter of fact is made evident throughout every one of the Five Articles, and I hope this is more than abundantly sufficient to clear Tilenus from the guilt of the forgery, unworthy falsification, and perverse insinuations, In Praefat. Sect. 5. which M. Baxter hath laid to his charge. But Master Baxter will be ready to object; you know that the Synod of Dort owneth none of these: and it is that Synod that is the Test of the Calvinists Anti-Arminianisme. How far the Synod owns these Doctrines we shall examine anon. In the interim M. Baxter must not think to escape by telling us, That Synod is the Test of the Calvinists Anti-Arminianism; For that is not in question. Every one may observe, that the Project which that Synod did drive at and carried on was, to cry down the Arminian Cause and Party; and in this the Synodists agreed together. † Adeo facile cocunt, qui in fatalitatem absolutam tantum consentiunt. An Deus ex parte una statuatur insipiens, ex altera injustus, fusque deque habent: Salvo tantum fato, Syncretismus Orthodoxus constat. Hoc qui non admittit, etiamsi non nisi verissima dicat, in spongiam incumbat, & ex albo Orthodoxorum deleatur, necesse est: Absolutum Decretum, id est, fatum, tessera est, ex qua dignoscitur, an quis sit Orthodoxus, etiamsi id dicat, unde necessario consequitur, Deum esse insipientem stulium. injustum, Tyranno quovis crudeliorum, peccati Authorem & si quae alia ejus generis blasphema sunt. Exam. Cens. p. 63. b. sive Apol. pro Confess. Remonstrant. Supralapsarians of all sorts, as well as Sublapsarians, conspired in this. But it is the Test of their Calvinisme that we are to bring them to; And where shall we find such a Test, as will secure us of the sincerity of these men's judgements? Calvin himself is not such a Test; He sometimes personates the Sublapsarian, as the Synod of Dort a Act. Synod. ed. in fol. 1. part. p. 203. m. hath dressed him up; Otherwhiles he Acts the part of a Supralapsarian, as he is brought upon the stage by the Remonstrants: b Apolog. pro Confess. Remonstr. p. 64, 65. And Beza treads in the very footsteps of his Master in this Art of double dealing, as will plainly appear to any that shall for his satisfaction) consult the Remonstrants' Apology cited in the Margin. Shall we take the Synod of Dort, upon M. Baxter's bare word, for such a Test? he that would not be deceived must learn to distrust. Indeed it appears that there was a great deal of wash and Fucus c Deus bone! Vidimus atque experiundo didicimus, quanta illi arte, quanto studio sententiam suam incrustare, tegere ac caelare semper conati fuerint, bodieque adhuc conentur. Vix credo humanam industriam comminisci plura posse, quam commenti sunt isti mortales, ut sententiae ipsorum, à sententiae Supralapsariorum differre non videretur. ibid. , of daubing and paintry used, at the drawing up the Canons touching the several Articles, to make them look of the same complexion: but if we examine the Doctors, as Daniel did his Elders apart, we shall find their opinions to stand at push o'pike one against another. For instance. If you would inquire, Whether the Election be necessarily made out of the Corrupt Mass, some of those Divines will tell you it is, and some, as positively; affirm it is not. That the Decree of Election is of certain men, out of mankind fallen into sin and lost, is collected out of Rom. 9.15, 16. I will have mercy upon whom I will have mercy, and verse 23. The vessels of mercy prepared unto glory, and verse 22. the Reprobates are called vessels of wrath. But the wrath of God towards men doth presuppose their sin. Rom. 1.18. The wrath of God is revealed from heaven, against the ungodliness and unrighteousness of men. Also Eph. 1. we are said to be elected in Christ, that we might be holy. Also, we are said to be predestinated unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ; which cannot be said but with respect to sin. The Belgic Professors. Act. Synod. Dort. Part. 3. Pag. 4. And the Divines of Zeeland, ibid. pag. 43. That Election is made out of mankind fallen, is proved out of Rom. 9.15, 16. where the purpose of Election is called, Having mercy, and vers. 23. the Elect are called vessels of Mercy. Now mercy supposeth misery. Rom. 11.32. God hath shut up all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all: and 2 Tim. 1.9. He hath called us according to his purpose and grace etc. That mercy given to us in Christ doth presuppose sin, and show us the remedy of it. But the Deputies of the Synod of South-Holland are of another judgement, ibid. pag. 34. f. Whether in his election God considered man as fallen, or not fallen, they think it not necessary to determine, so that it be concluded, that God considered all men in a like state in his election; that the Elect were no better than the Non-elect, whether in themselves, or in God's gracious estimation. And Gomarus is most positive in this opinion; and therefore he professed in the open Synod, that he could not approve of the judgement of the four Belgic Professors, concerning the object of Predestination; because he thought God did consider man as not fallen, in his predestination of him. supra in Sess. 107. part. 1. Whereupon he set down his own judgement apart by itself; wherein he makes mankind simply considered the object of the Decree. part. 3. pag. 21. II. If you inquire whether Christ be the foundation of Election; you will find them divided in their judgement here too. The Drent Divines say, that Christ is the foundation of Election, not as he is God, nor as he is man, but as he is God-man, our head and eternal Redeemer, by whom we are saved: because he, by his merit, hath procured the grace of God for us, and by his spirit he effecteth faith in us. Eph. 1.4, 5, 6. Art. Syn. Dord. part. 3. pag. 80. f. Thes. 8. And the Hassien Divines to the same purpose, ibid. part. 2. pag. 25. But Pet. Molin. saith otherwise, ibid. part. 1. pag. 290. m. Christ as he is man and the mediator, he is head of the elect, but not the cause of election; seeing he himself as he is man is elect. He is the meritorious cause of our salvation, and our Ransom. But of two alike sinful, he is not the cause why the one is preferred before the other. The Cause is to be sought in God's beneplaciture and free love, which in order goes before the intercession of the Son. For the Father sent the Son and gave him to be the Redeemer. This is his Answer to that Question, [whether Christ be the Foundation of Election?] which is negative. III. If you inquire, whether the elect be beloved out of Christ; they are at odds here too, for some of them say, When we affirm that the love of the Father whereby he chose us, goes in order before the intercession of the Son, our meaning is not, that the elect are beloved of God, out of Christ; For though the love of the Father went before the sending of his Son, yet he never loved us but in consideration of his Son, neither would he ever confer any benefit upon the elect, but in and through his Son. Pet. Molin. ubi supra. Yet the Synod rejects it as an error in them, who teach, that Christ neither could nor ought to die for those, whom God dearly loved, and chose unto eternal life, seeing such stood in no need of Christ's death. Cap. 2. Reject. 7. pag. 253. part. 1. Act. Syn. Dord. iv If you inquire, whether Reprobation hath respect, only, or not at all, to the fall of Mankind; They run division likewise upon this Article; for some of them say, it hath, and others as confidently aver that it hath not. Sibrandus Lubbertus saith, We do not teach that God by his absolute will and decree, without any respect to sin, hath ordained any to damnation. But we say, God would declare his justice in the damnation of the Reprobate; and therefore he would not appoint any to damnation but for sin. Act. Syn. Dord. part. 3. pag. 14. And the Divines of Great Britain say, Reprobation or Nonelection is Gods eternal decree, whereby, for his own most free good pleasure, he determined not to have mercy upon some persons fallen in Adam, so fare forth, as to deliver them effectually, from the state of misery, by Christ, and bring them infallibly unto blessedness. De Reprob. Thes. 1 pag. 11 part. 2. But Gomarus saith, God had no respect at all to sin, as going before it, in the Decree of Reprobation. For, saith He, Peremptory Reprobation is the Decree of God, whereby, for his own most free pleasure, to the declaration of his avenging justice, he determined to give neither grace nor glory to certain men, out of universal mankind, but to suffer them freely to fall into sin, and to leave them in their sins, and at last justly to condemn them for their sins. ibid. part. 3. pag. 24. Thes. 2. And their Deputies of the Synod of South-Holland to the same sense, making mankind in general, not considered as fallen, and in the corrupt mass, the object of the Decree of Election and Reprobation. ibid. pag. 35. p. V If you inquire concerning the Act of Reprobation; whether it be Negative only, or Negative and Affirmative also; The Synodists are not all of one mind in this point neither. For the Hassien Divines say, The Divines of the Reformed Churches do think, we must accurately distinguish betwixt the two Acts of Reprobation, whereof one is negative, viz. The purpose of God not to have mercy, or preterition: The other affirmative, viz. his purpose to damn, or ordination to destruction as a just punishment. Act. Syn. Dor. pag. 33. part. 2. And the Churches of Wedderav. There are two acts of Reprobation; Preterition, or Nonelection, and Damnation, or preparation of punishment. ibid. pag. 40. Thes. 2. item pag. 45. th'. 2. But the Divines of Great Britain were of another opinion. For they say, The proper acts of reprobation as it is opposed to election, we think to be no other, than the denial of the same glory and the same grace, which are prepared for the children of God in election. And in the Decree of election, are prepared, for them, Glory and effectual Grace, and with that intention, that it should be effectual: that is, that by such grace, they may be brought, infallibly, to the said Glory. That such Grace and Glory is prepared for the Reprobates, we deny. ibid. pag. 11. a. m. These differences we observe amongst them in matters that relate to Tilenus his first Article. So in reference to the Second Article; If you inquire, I. Whether Christ hath died for All, or only for the Elect; you will find them (whatever they seem to say in the full Synod) according to their Chamber Practice, to contradict one another; For the Divines of Great Britain do determine, That, God, pitying mankind, fallen, sent his Son, who gave himself a price of Redemption (or a Ransom) for the sins of the whole world. Acta Syn. Dor. pag. 78. Thes. 3. part. 2. Martinius giving in his Suffrage, upon this Article, doth resolve thus. There is a certain Philanthropy of God, whereby he loves all mankind fallen, and seriously would have them all to be saved, ibid. pag. 103. Thes. 1. & Th. 8. If this Redemption be not supposed as a common benefit bestowed upon all: that indifferent and promiscuous preaching of the Gospel, committed to the Apostles, to be performed amongst All nations, will have no true foundation. (Et thes. 9) And seeing we abhor to say this; it is to be considered, how much they speak against most clear and known principles, who, at their pleasure, do plainly deny, that Christ died for all men. Thes. 10. Neither will it satisfy to propose such a sufficiency, as might be enough; but such as is altogether enough in God's and Christ's account. For otherwise the command and promise of the Gospel will be overthrown. For (Thes. 11.) from a benefit, that is sufficient indeed, but not designed for me by a true intention, how can there be deduced a necessity of my believing it, to belong unto me? And Thes. 26. he gives the chief Reasons which induced him to be of this opinion, which are three. 1. That the Scriptures might be reconciled without wresting. 2. That the Glory of God's truth, mercy and justice, in the commands, promises and threaten of the Gospel, might be preserved; lest by these God should be thought to will and do something otherwise then the words signify. 3. That it may be manifest, that the blame of the destruction of the wicked may be in themselves, not in the defect of a remedy, by which they might be saved. Thus Martinius sent to the Synod from Breme, Act. Syn. Dord. part. 2. pag. 104. etc. And Ludovicus Crocius another of the Bremish Divines, sets down his opinion somewhat to the same purpose, though not so well, or so fully (as M. Baxter doth intimate) See ibid. pag. 117. Thes. 2.3. But the Divines of the Palatinate were of another judgement; for they say; That the general love of God to sinners is remarkable. But that Love is more excellent, which moved God to give his Son to save us from our sins. This is not general but special, not common to all and every man, but proper to the elect. ibid. pag. 83. And the Divines of Geneva, to the same purpose; Christ, out of the Father's good pleasure merely, was destined and given to be Mediator and Head to a certain number of men, constituting his body Mystical, by God's election. Thes. 1. pag. 100 & Thes. 2. For these, Christ, who best understood his own office, would and decreed to die, and to add the infinite price of his death, a singular and most effectual intention of his will. And Iselburg saith, Christ died, or laid down his life, for all and every one of his elect sheep or Faithful, and in their stead, and for their good only. Ibid. pag. 111. Thes. 3. And the Ministers of Emden say, Christ according to the intention, council and decree of his Father, died only for the Elect. Ibid. pag. 119. q. 4. The Belgic Professors say, If you consider the proper end, and the singular and saving efficacy of Christ's death, we affirm that, according to his Fathers and his own council, Jesus Christ died, not for the Reprobates and those that perish, but only for the Elect, and those that do believe. Act. Syn. Dor. part. 3. pag. 88 f. The Brethren of North-Holland say, The Scripture saith Christ died for All, that is, for All the Elect out of all sorts of men. Ibid. p. 107. & p. 108. They say, That of the Remonstrants is false, that the intention of the Father, delivering his Son to death, and of the Son in undergoing death, was, that by the same he might save all and every one, though through the fault of many of them the matter happens otherwise. The Brethren of Zeeland offer these Arguments (such as they are) against Christ's death for all, ibid. pag. 112. Thes. 2. & 3. If Christ paid a price of Redemption for all and every man, then All and every one ought to be saved, and none to perish. But this is false etc. If reconciliation with God, and remission of sins be impetrated for all and every man, than the word of reconciliation is also to be preached to all and every one. But the Consequent is false. Ergo. The Deputies of the Synod of Groningen say, we do believe, that according to the Father's intention, delivering his Son to death, and the Son's, in suffering it, reconciliation with God and remission of sins is obtained only for the elect. Ibid. p. 138. The Deputies of the Synod of Gallo-Belgia say, That according to the Scripture, Christ really died for none, but believers. And the will of the Father in sending his Son, and of the Son in dying was not other. Pag. 151. Thes. 2. The Deputies of the Synod of Gelderland, shall conclude this part of the contradiction; and the Reader shall have their very Syllogisms, that he may learn Logic with his Divinity. Whosoever God calls to salvation, purchased by the death of Christ, for them Christ died. But God calls not every man to salvation, purchased by the death of Christ. Therefore Christ died not for all. Whomsoever God commands to believe in Christ crucified, for them Christ died. God does not command every man to believe in Christ crucified. Ergo. ibid. pag. 93. II. If we inquire who then the Impetration of Reconciliation be to be separated from the Application of it, we find them at Boy's play, at Heads and holies, here too; for some are for the Affirmative; as Martinius. That external Calling doth necessarily require, as going before it, these things; the promise and sending of the Son, and the paying of a Ransom to take away sin, and God so appeased, that he requires no other sacrifice of any man for sin, being content with that most full one (of Christ's,) and that there be no need of any other merit or satisfaction, for man's reconciliation, so that (which ought to be done in all remedies) there be an application of the medicine Act. Syn. Dord. part. 2. p. 104. Thes. 7. & thes. 23. Christ hath merited for all God's favour, to be really obtained, if they do believe, and so by God's favour righteousness and life. (and Thes. 24.) This his favour God commonly declareth by his Gospel: which notwithstanding (because he keeps the merits of his Son in his own power, as being given and propounded, not by us, but by himself) he takes order it shall be published, to whom he pleases, and especially by that means it is effectual, in whom, when, and how far he pleases: & Thes. 25. Hence it is manifest, that the merit or impetration, and the application, are and are not, of an equal latitude, in a divers respect. Ludovicus Crocius is of the same judgement too. Vid. ibid. pag. 117. Thes. 2, 3, 4. But these two great lights of the Church of Breme (as far as I can observe, for the present) are eclipsed by the Negative Suffrages of all the rest of that Synod. But first let us hear the judgement of Peter Moulin, inserted amongst the Acts of the Synod, Part. 1. pag. 292. The Sectaries, saith He, pretend, that Christ by his death, hath impetrated reconciliation and remission of sins for all and every man: which is pressed with so many Inconveniences, saith He, and draws so many wicked absurdities after it, that it is a wonder, they can strive against it. Et paulo post, God is manifestly illuded by this Doctrine: and after, Thus God is not only illuded, but He himself is feigned to illude mankind. And, in short, he concludes, that this impetration (as distinguished from the Application) is vain and ridiculous. The Divines of the Palatinate say, That, it is an evident error in the Remonstrants, that they do divide and sever the impetration, and application of the benefits of Christ, according to several objects: and not judge them to be applied to all those for whom they are impetrated. Act. Syn. Dord. part. 2. pag. 87. To the same purpose, the Helvetians, pag. 94. thes. 3. and they in the Name of the Churches of Wedderav. pag. 97. thes. 2. So the Divines of Geneva, pag. 103. thes. 7, 8. And Iselburg contradicts his brethren before mentioned; for he saith, Whomsoever Christ hath reconciled to his Father by his death, to all them and to them only, he doth apply, truly, certainly and absolutely, that impetrated reconciliation with God, and the remission of all their sins, ibid. pag. 113. thes. 5. See also Thes. 4, 6, 7, 8. So the Ministers of Embden. pag. 119. quast. 5. And amongst the Provincial Divines, see to this sense pag. 105. p. 109. m. 113. m. etc. 134, 135, 137. f. 140. Thes. 3, 4. 145. p. p. 151. Thes. 3. (Part. 3.) in folio. III. If you inquire of those Divines whether all that hear the Holy Gospel be commanded to believe in Christ, or no; they are not agreed in this, (which is one of the chief) fundamental Articles; They are yea and nay here too. For the Synod saith, (Cap. 2. Art. 5.) It is the promise of the Gospel, That whosoever believes in Christ Crucified, should not perish, but have life everlasting: which promise together with the injunction of repentance and faith, ought promiscuously and without distinction, to be declared and published to all men and people, to whom God in his good pleasure sends the Gospel. Act. Syn. Dord. part. 1. pag. 252. But P. Moulin was of another judgement (ibid. 294.) The Sectaries, saith he, are always up with this Argument; What all are bound to believe, is true. But that Christ died for them, all are bound to believe. Therefore, it is true. The Minor of the Syllogism is false; saith D. Moulin. And some of those, who subscribed the Former Article, have declared themselves of another judgement in their single Suffrages. As the Deputies of the Synod of Gelderland, who argue thus, Whomsoever God commands to believe in Christ crucified, for them Christ died. God doth not command every man to believe in Christ Crucified. Therefore Christ died not for every man. They have somewhat a better Syllogism following, but the same doctrine still, in these words; They only whom Christ calls unto him, they only are commanded to come unto him, that is, to believe in him. Act. Synod. Dort. part. 3. pag. 95. f. & pag. 100 a. m. and after. Christ calls unto him only the thirsty, the labouring, burdened, such as acknowledge their own blindness, want and nakedness. Therefore— Hereupon we do not command all promiscuously to believe in Christ: though we press this also, that they cannot enter into life eternal, nor be delivered from sin, the wrath of God and damnation, but through Christ only. Again, in Questions relating to the third and fourth Articles, you will be as far to seek, if you have recourse to their judgement for a Resolution. For herein they cannot agree upon a verdict, how ever they made a shift to shuffle up their Canons and Rejections. For inquire of them, whether the unregenerate have power to understand the sense of Holy Scripture? The Divines of Great Britain do affirm it; To certain of the Non-Elect there is granted a kind of supernatural illumination, Act. S. V part. 2. pag. 188. by virtue whereof they may understand the contents of God's word to be true, and yield an unfeigned assent unto them. De 5. Artic. Thes. 1. And the Divines of Drent say, That man fallen, by nature though corrupt, can hear the word of God, understand, believe it to be true, and in some measure be affected with it. To which purpose Paul treats in the first and second Chapters to the Romans. And this also appears from hence, in that the Devils themselves who are fallen, more foully than man, and wholly destitute of God's grace, yet can do these things. Luk 14.13. Act. 16.17. Jam. 2.19. We therefore grant, Act. Synod. Dord. part. 3. pag. 211. f. in a sound sense, what the Remonstrants say, that by the strength of freewill men may attentively hear and read the Gospel revealed. But the judgement of the Brethren of North-Holland is otherwise; for they say, That the blindness of man's mind in spiritual matters is so great, that although the Gospel be preached to him, yet without the internal illumination of the Holy Spirit, he cannot understand the sense of Scripture, Ibid. pag. 175. & p. 170. m. necessary to be known, believed, hoped in, and practised. And the Deputies of Over-Issel say, The understanding being blind, by its natural power, without some other, and that a supernatural or spiritual light, Ibid. pag. 195. V 169. it can by no means comprehend the good that is revealed by the Gospel. And the Deputies of the Synod of Groaning do affirm, That an unregenerate man, that is, considered in the fall, hath nothing in him, whereby he is able to dispose himself unto supernatural good. The Holy Ghost doth expressly deny, that man, by the light and gifts of nature remaining in him, Ibid. p. 206, may be raised to the true knowledge of God. Ibid. p. 219. To the same purpose do the Deputies of the Synod of Gallo-Belgia express themselves; In the state of sin, say they, the natural man is blind; and perceiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; and that not only because he is unable to find them out before their Revelation; but also because after they are revealed to him, he cannot savingly understand, or yield assent unto them, without the internal illumination of the Holy Spirit and special grace. Again if you inquire, whether the unregenerate be able to do any thing, that may conduce to their comfort in gaining assurance of their election and regeneration; The Synod doth at least imply it, in the Chapter of Predestination Artic. 16. where they say, That those, who do not as yet effectually perceive in themselves a lively faith, or a sure confidence of heart in Christ etc. such as these ought not to be cast down at the mention of Reprobation, nor reckon themselves among the reprobate; but must diligently go forward in the use of those means, by which, God hath promised, that he will work these things in us, and ardently desire and humbly and reverently expect the good hour of more plentiful grace. If this doth not imply a power in them to do so, as is here directed, they do but trifle to no purpose but to blind the Reader. That they speak here of the unregenerate appears, 1. Because they propound the case of the Regenerate, in the infancy of their Regeneration, in the words following, and sure they would not be guilty of so gross a Tautology, as to repeat the same thing twice in one Article. 2. Because if this doth not concern the unregenerate, there is no light of hope in the Article, no not so much as for the Elect, that are yet in an unregenerate state; and surely they would not be so negligent as to omit provision for their encouragement unto duty, which therefore must needs be this, they must use the means, etc. And yet to assert that the unregenerate hath any such power, this is rejected as an error, that had troubled the Churches, etc. For that an unregenerate man is not properly, nor totally dead in sins, nor destitute of all strength tending to spiritual good, but that he is able to hunger and thirst after righteousness, or everlasting life, etc. This they reject. Chap. 3. &. 4. Reject. 4. Again, if you inquire, whether a man can do more good than he doth, or omit more evil than he omitteth; The British Divines affirm he can, whether you understand it of the unregenerate, Act. Synod. Dor. part. 2. pag. 135. or of the regenerate. But the Deputies of the Synod of Gelderland, ib. part. 3. pag. 164. do deny it; for they Answer thus. Per Gratiam Dei potest. He may do it by the grace of God: for he can do all things through Christ that strengthens him. But without the grace of God he can do no such thing; and he that saith the contrary, He is injurious to the grace of God on one side, and on the other side he falls into plain Pelagianism, as they say. Here observe, the question is propounded by them concerning the Regenerate, one in a state of Grace, and supposed to be under the influences of the divine assistance according to that state, whether such an one can do more good than he doth, or omit more evil than he omitteth. Now they do not answer directly and positively, that he can, but with this addition, By the Grace of God, he can do it; which is an insinuation of the negative, that he cannot without a further measure of Grace superadded, to that; wherein, being regenerated, He is upposed to stand, as was said before. Again, if we have recourse to this Oracle at Dort, to be informed; whether the New Covenant be made with all and every man, and consequently, whether the Promises of the Gospel be General; Their Decisions are off and on here too; videtur quod sic, and probatur quod non; For example The Divines of Great Britain do affirm, That there is an Universal promiscuous Promise Evangelical founded in the merit of Christ's death. De Art. Part. 2. pag. 79. 2. Thes. 4. & Thes. 5. They say, That according to this promise salvation is offered unto all. And Martinius saith, That there is a common (or general) love of God towards all mankind fallen, and that God seriously would have all men to be saved. De Art. 2. Thes. 1. And accordingly, He saith, there is a promiscuous calling allotted to the Elect and Reprobate, Thes. 2. And a common execution (or exhibition) of Grace. Thes. 6. See the rest, cited out of him above, to the same purpose. The Belgic Professors do affirm; That it is not denied by the Orthodox, but to whomsoever the Gospel is preached, the Ransom of Christ, as such, is to be declared indifferently, and offered in Christ's name, and that seriously, and according to the council of the Father, etc. Act. Syn. Dord. par. 3. pag. 88 m. But all are not of this mind. For the Brethren of Vtrecht say, The promises of the Gospel are universal, but not simply, as belonging to every one of all kinds, but to all and every believer and elect person. Ibid. pag. 118. and 123. As concerning the new Covenant's being established with every man; we answer, that whether God could do it or no, we will not dispute: but that he would so establish it, we deny. Of the same judgement are the Deputies of the Churches of Friesland. Ibid. 130. And the whole Synod rejects it as an error in them that teach, That all men are received into the state of reconciliation and grace of the Covenant, so that no body shall be condemned for Original sin, nor, in respect of it, be liable to death or damnation, but that all are acquitted and freed from the guilt of that sin. Cap. 2. Rej. 5. pag. 253. Let us ask them another Question, viz. Whether God wills seriously, that All men be saved? Some say, yes; As Martinius, who saith, There is a common Love of God towards all mankind being fallen, whereby he would seriously have all men to be saved. De Art. 2. Thes. 1. And the Divines of Wedderau; God in calling the Reprobate, wills their conversion and salvation seriously, with a will approving it, though not effecting it. Ibid. pag. 152. Lubbertus saith, We do not teach, that God simply would not have all men to be converted and saved; neither do we teach that God feigneth, or would not seriously the conversion of all, or that he hath contradictory wills. But we teach that he seriously wills all men's conversion and salvation in respect of approbation and his rejoicing (in it.) Act. Syn. Dor. par. 3. pag. 13. m. But the Divines of Embden, on the contrary, say, Hence ariseth another question, Whether God according to his good pleasure, seriously wills that all men should be saved. The Remonstrants affirm it, every where. But we deny it. Part. 2. pag. 74. Quaest. 13. The Deputies of the Synod of Groaning, say, That general will (of God) desiring and intending the conversion and salvation of all, is the fiction of man's brain, and transforms God into an impotent man, who desires that all men should be saved, but is not able to effect it. Ibid pag. 7●. p. m. Shall we try these Divines with another question; Whether the Reprobates be called unto salvation seriously, or no? Sibrand Lubbertus, is for the Affirmative; as was now alleged; and so are the Synod in their Decrees, where they say, That, as many as are called by the Gospel, are called seriously. For God by his word doth seriously and most truly declare, what is acceptable to him, namely that those that are called, come unto him: and moreover doth seriously promise to all such, as come to him, and believe in him, rest for their souls, and life eternal. Cap. 3. & 4. Art. 8. The British Divines say, Those whom God doth thus affect by his Spirit, using the means of his Word, those he doth truly and seriously call and invite to faith and conversion. De. 3. & 4. Art. Th. 3. p. 128. & in explicat. We must judge, by the nature of the benefit offered, and the clear word of God, of those helps of grace, which are administered unto men, and not by the abuse and event. Seeing therefore, that the Gospel, according to its own nature, calls men to repentance and salvation, seeing the excitations of Divine grace tend the same way, we must conclude, that God doth nothing here feignedly. This is proved by those serious and pathetical Beseeching. 2 Cor. 5.2. (19) We beseech you in Christ's stead, that ye would be reconciled unto God. Exhortations, 2 Cor. 6.1. We exhort you not to receive the grace of God in vain. Expostulations. Gal. 1 6. I wonder you are so soon removed from him that hath called you unto the grace of Christ. Promises. Apoc 3.20. Behold, I stand at the door and knock, if any man hear my voice and open the door, I will come in unto him, etc. But this Doctrine will not down with the Deputies of the Synod of Gelderland: we had their invincible Syllogisms before, whereof the Minors are these. 1. God calls not all men to salvation. 2. God doth not command every man to believe in Christ: 3. Christ calls unto him the thirsty etc. only. But they deliver their mind more roundly, upon the third Article; For whereas the Remonstrants do argue, that these two things are very repugnant, That God would have a man to be saved, and yet should not give him what is necessary to enable him to convert and believe, (without which salvation is not to be had.) To this they Reply, That it seems no less repugnant to them, that God should call one to salvation, and yet not communicate salvation to him. Whence we conclude (say they) Seeing God does not give to all that are called that which is necessary, that they might convert and believe (and he could give it if he would), therefore he would not communicate salvation unto all men, and therefore neither would he call unto salvation All, that are outwardly called: nay seeing God calls All to salvation, whom he calls; therefore as many as are not called unto salvation, are not called of God; that is to say, those, to whom he will not give, what is necessary for them, that they may convert and believe. Et mox. And by this means we shall preserve the Dignity of the (Divine) Calling. Act. Syn. Dord. part. 3. pag. 163. To this agrees the Declaration of the Judgement of the Deputies of Groningen; The sound of Preaching doth promiscuously reach the ears of all men: but in effect it calls them only whom God hath elected to eternal life. For Vocation doth properly belong to them by God's Ordination. Ibid. pag. 208. p. May we take the confidence to examine their sweet accord in one thing more; Are any dispositions required unto Faith and Conversion, or not? What say those Divines to this Problem? There are some external works ordinarily required of men, before they be brought to the state of Regeneration or Conversion, which are wont sometimes to be freely done, sometimes freely to be omitted of them; as, to go to Church, to hear the Word, and such like. This is the judgement of the British Divines. Part. 2. pag. 128. Thes. 1. & Thes. 2. They say, There are some internal effects, praevious to Conversion or Regeneration, which are stirred up by the power of the Word and Spirit, in the hearts of such as are not yet justified; such are the knowledge of the Divine will, sense of Sin, sear of Pain, thinking of Deliverance, some hope of Pardon. And pag. 131. This Spiritual birth doth presuppose the soul to be stirred up by the Spirit, using the organ or instrument of the Word. To the like purpose, do the Divines of the Palatinate deliver their Judgement, in this Point. 'Tis certain, they say, that some Acts of Sorrow, Contrition, Acknowledgement of sin, etc. do precede Faith and Conversion in a man that is to be regenerated; whiles by the Ministry of the Law and Gospel he is prepared to receive Grace. Ibid. pag. 137. p. And so the Divines of Geneva; The salutary sense and feeling of sin, joined with a thirst after the remedy, a good hope, softness of heart, hatred of sin, and flying unto God, these are latent effects of the holy Spirit, preparing and drawing a man by little and little to the grace of Justification, and unto Regeneration. Ibid. p. 155. Thes. 2. But with the Hassian Divines this is pure Remonstrant or Arminian Doctrine; and therefore they reject this as Heterodox; That a man in the state of sin, before Faith and the Spirit of Renovation, hath, or may have any zeal, care or study, to obtain Salvation; and that he may hear God's word, be grieved for sin, desire saving grace, and the Spirit of Renovation; and that this is most profitable and most necessary to the obtaining of Faith and the Spirit of Renovation, as the Remonstrants do expressly teach. Also, That a man in the state of sin, before his Regeneration and Vivification, hath the knowledge of his (spiritual) death, grief and sorrow for it, desire of deliverance, hunger and thirst after life, likewise confession of sins, contrition, initial fear, etc. as our Brethren the Remonstrants, speak at the Conference at the Hague. All this they reject. Ibid. p. 144. Reject. 6. The Divines of Embden are of the same judgement. Vid. ibid. pag. 178. Quaest. 13. Those of Vtrecht say, The heart and affections of an unregenerate man are quite corrupt; so that till he be regenerate, he cannot hunger after the salutary grace of God, and newness of life, nor desire deliverance from sin, nor beg the Spirit of Regeneration. Part. 3. pag. 184. Thes. 6. The Deputies of the Synod of Groningen, deliver themselves to the same sense too. Ib. pag. 73. p. But it is high time to explore the judgement of these Divines in some few points relating to the Fifth and last Article. Touching which, the first thing I shall propound for the Reader's satisfaction, shall be, Perseverance be a Condition of the yea or no? The Divines of the Palatinate a Judic. de Artic. quinto inter Jud. Th. exter. p. 206. a. m. say, That Perseverance is God's gift. But the Remonstrants are deceived and do deceive, in that they think Perseverance, being reckoned an effect of Election and a gift of God, cannot be a Condition of the Covenant, commanded by God, and to be performed freely by us: As if these were inconsistent and repugnant, being rather subordinate and very Consentaneous. For God, who in the New Covenant prescribes the condition of Perseverance, to all the adult, that are in Covenant, and by that prescript requires it, doth not leave it suspended upon the strength of their free will, but doth effectually work and produce it in them. That it is a condition and under command, though it be the gift of God, is the acknowledgement of the b Judic. de 5. Art. inter Jud. Th. pro p. 221. a.m. Belgic Professors, and of the Brethren of Vtrecht c Ibid. pag. 252. Th. 2. , and the Divines of Drent d Ibid. 273. Th. 4. . But this Doctrine is rejected by the whole Synod in their First Rejection e Act. Syn. 1. part. pag. 268. Th. 1. , upon the fifth head of Doctrine. And the Divines of Embden f Ib. 2. part. pag. 246. q. 3. do determine thus, Perseverantia non est Conditio N. P. id est, Perseverance is not a Condition of the New Covenant, prae-required to be performed by men, that the promise of the New Covenant may he sure: but it is the very gift of the New Covenant, which God hath promised to bestow freely upon his Elect. See to the like sense the Judgements of the Divines of Great Britain g Ib. p. 201. Th. 2. , and Geneva h Ib. p. 226. Th. 2. . 2. Suppose we should propound this easy Question, Whether Salvation or eternal life, be the reward of Faith, or only the end of it? This Question, one would think so clearly and peremptorily resolved in Scripture, that wise men could not disagree in the Solution of it; yet behold! here we have pro, and con, too. Salus in Credentibus & Proemium est fidei 2 Tim. 4.8. & Finis. 1 Pet. 1.8. So saith Gomarus, the great Supralapsarian i Act. Sy. 3. part. pag. 21. f. . That is, Salvation in the Believers, is as well the reward of faith as the end of it. Yet the Deputies of the Synod of Gelderland k Ibid. pag. 30. p. will not admit of this, Uti gratis filii fimus, etc. That is, As we are made sons and obtain the right of the inheritance freely, so are we freely also put into the possession of that inheritance. Therefore it is ill said, that eternal life, as a reward, is decreed and given by God to those that fulfil the conditions which he hath prescribed. For to give life as a reward, upon the performance of a condition, upon which, that life was decreed, as a reward, (this) is to give life not altogether freely and of good pleasure, but of debt. 3. Let us inquire of them, Whether a Temporary faith be a true faith, or only hypocritical? What do they resolve of this? The British Divines say l Sententia De Artic. 5. explic Thes. 1. A●●. Syn. part. 2. pag. 189. p. , The Non-Elect may give an unfeigned assent to the Gospel. The seed which fell upon stony ground, Luk. 8.13. doth denote those hearers which believe for a time, that is, which assent to the Divine Revelations, especially to the Evangelicall Covenant: And that this Assent was unfeigned is evident, in that the Word was received with joy. Simon Magus, Act. 8.12. believed Philip evangelizing the things that appertained unto the Kingdom of God, and gave a Testimony of his Faith by receiving the Sacrament of Baptism. Hymenaeus and Alexander made shipwreck of the faith, not that which is counterfeit or feigned, but a true one. For he is not to be blamed, that falls off from an hypocritical faith: neither is shipwreck made of a feigned faith, but a detection and discovery: neither can a man be shipwrackt, unless he were truly in the ship, etc. Thus our Learned Divines, and some others with them. But others of them, and by name the Deputies of Over-Issel m Act. Syn. 3. part. pag. 277. p. p. , are of another judgement, for they say, Quale discrimen est inter hypocritam, & verum Christianum, tale quoque est inter fidem temporariam & salvificam. Look what difference there is betwixt a true Christian and an Hypocrite, the same difference there is betwixt a temporary and a saving Faith. 4. If you inquire of them, Whether Faith may be lost or no; here they divide themselves and their opinions. Some say the Act may be lost, but not the Habit. Others do maintain that not the Habit nor the Act neither. That the Habit, the seed, the root, the Spirit of Faith may be lost, we deny. That the Act, the trust, the comfort may be cut off, and that totally, though not finally, that we grant, say the Divines of Gelderland n De 5. Artic. Act. Syn. Dor. 3. part. pag. 228. f. . And so the Deputies of Friesland o Ibid. pag. 261. Thes. 3. ; As to the Act of Faith, we easily grant, that through the frauds of Satan, the allurements of the world, and the malignant power of the flesh, it may be repressed, interrupted, and as it were suffocated for a time. But as to the Habit of Faith, which is not a transient but an immanent Act, infused into us of the Holy Ghost, whereby our hearts are purified, and we united as members to Christ our head, and quickened by his Spirit, we deny it. But the Divines of Drent p Ibid. pag. 275. p. Quid vetat, quo minus Sancti, dum ipsa actualia peccata, & quidem crassio ra, comittunt, simuactum fidel sentiant? etc. are of opinion, that whether you speak of the Act or of the Habit of Faith, neither of them can be lost amongst such rubbish as the works of the flesh. The Saints may commit sins and gross ones, prey upon the Carcase of corruption, and yet keep their faith, the mean while, upon wing, and in action. 5. If you inquire into the nature of those sins, which it is possible for the Faithful to fall into; They will tell you, They have no such Amulet, or charm, as can keep them absolutely secure and free from the shot, darts or impressions of their Ghostly enemies: They are liable not only to be assaulted, but foiled also as well as others; and to fall into such horrid sins as do most grievously wound, and directly waste the conscience * See Act, Syn. Dor. 2. part. pag. (ed in fol.) 192. th'. 3.202. f. 208. a. m. 216. p. p. 219. f. 222. th'. 3.233. thes. 9, 10, 11. & part. 3. pag. 253. p. 275. p. See also Part. 1. p. 266. De Persever. Sanct. Art. 5. . In atrocia, in gravia, in gravissima peccata, as the British Divines have it. In graviora & atrociora contra conscientiam, as they of the Palatinate; in gravissima & atrocissima, as those of Hassia; in gravia & enormia peccata— ita ut conscientiam gravissimé laedant, as those of Helvetia; in atrocia peccata, adeoque Conscientiam sibi vastant, as those from the correspondence of Wedderau. Possunt quidem in atrocia & conscientiam directé vastantia scelera, incidere, as the Divines of Drent; and as the effects hereof, angores & pavores Conscientiae patiantur; they may feel and suffer the anguish and horror of Conscience, as the Divines of Breme conclude; yet a many of them do account these but slips, and sins of infirmity only. As Sibrandus Lubbertus a Act. Syn. Dor. part. 3. p. 227. p. implies in these words; Etsi regeniti aliquando ex infirmitate labuntur, & fides illorum deliquium patitur, etc. And this Suffrage of his was subscribed by Polyander, Gomarus, Thysius, and Walaeus. So the Brethren of North-Holland b Ib. p. 237. f. , Statuunt ex Dei Verbo, vere fideles, etsi ex imbecillitate carnis nonnunquam labantur & in peccata conscientiam graviter laedentia incidunt, non tamen posse ad Mortem peccare etc. So the Divines of Drent c Ibid. pag. 275. p. do hold, that the Saints may act gross sins, and their Christian saving faith together, Quia ex infirmitate tantum, sine desperatione peccant. Ubi supra. Lastly, if you demand of them, what condition a faithful man brings himself into, by committing such horrid wasting sins; They will tell you, See for this Act. Syn. Dor. 2. part p. 9 p. m. 192, 193. 194, th'. 3, 4, 5, 6. cum, explicat. & p. 202. th'. 5. exp. 244. th'. 54, 56, He contracts a damnable guilt, whereby (1.) he loseth his present aptitude to enter into the kingdom of Heaven, (2.) he hath reason to fear, and that deservedly, the Divine wrath and revenging justice, (3.) that he stands as a person, by his own demerit, to be damned; so that should he now die, before he hath obtained his pardon, through his renewed Acts of Faith and Repentance, and be actually absolved, it were impossible but he should perish: Notwithstanding (so great a Paradox is in this Divinity) they tell you, That, at the same instant, the seed of Regeneration with all fundamental gifts, without which the state of Regeneration cannot possibly consist, are preserved safe and sound in him, so that he hath a saving faith, and the Holy Spirit, and God's special favour; insomuch that his universal justification, state of Adoption, and right to the kingdom of Heaven, do yet remain uncanceled, unviolated, and immovable. By what hath been discovered, in this our scrutiny into their different judgements and opinions, the Reader may conclude what an excellent Test, Master Baxter commends unto us for Trial of the right strain or Tincture of the Calvinists Doctrines. A Test that allows all for currant, that is any way opposite to the Doctrine of the Remonstrants, especially that which stands at the greatest distance to it. And though as contrary as black and white, 'twill set off the work the better, in that it is checkered with such a variegation of opinions. A Test whereby Master Barlee will be approved for an ORTHO-DORT Divine as well, as Master Baxter. But I foresee this will not satisfy M. Baxter. In his Preface, Section 5. He will yet expostulate; Why should you charge a Party with the opinions of a very few, which upon greatest deliberation in a Synod, the Party will not own? To this it may truly be replied, that there were and are more than a very few, of those opinions, and they owned by that Party you speak of, and both joined together in a confederation, to root out another Party, that complained of the enormity of those opinions, which were so far from being redressed, that they were not touched upon at least, if not countenanced by that Synod; which we shall examine further in the sequel. In the mean while, we may consider, how happy it had been, if M. Baxter for the prevention of the mischief that hath ensued, had been amongst them, with his power of Sequestration, to have removed as many as would not have been of one (that is of his, if that be one) mind; though thereupon he had left a very thin unanimous Assembly. But that same [Suffragium] breathing hot and cold, according to the temper of the several Climates (and sometimes the Fantasies of single persons) from whence it came, raised so many cross winds, that they made the Sea of Dort tumultuous and troublesome, and occasioned a Naufragium of that whole design; which the Decrees singly by themselves might have passed over with less disturbance or observation. In good earnest, after much inquiry, I find, 'tis a very hard matter to understand what metal Master Baxter's Test is made of. I confess they seem to allow the Sublapsarian Doctrine as the most Current and Passable amongst the Vulgar: but I do not find them cry down the Supralapsarian, no, nor the Supra-Creatarian neither, as dross or counterfeit. That these are no less pure and Orthodox than the other by that account, we have many presumptions to induce us to believe. For, first we know, Kissing goes by favour; and we find men wedded to the most rigid of those Opinions were embraced, and placed upon the Bench, while the Remonstrants, who detected their enormity, were brought unto the Bar; not permitted duly and sully to implead them; or justify themselves. 2. What was, at least the Pretended, business of their Convention? That those opinions of Arminius, Act. Syn. Nat. Dor. Sess. 140. pag. 285. part. 1. and his followers might be accurately examined, and determined of by the Rule of God's Word only, the true Doctrine established, and the false rejected, and concord, peace and tranquillity (by God's blessing) restored to the Churches of the Low-Countries. This was the end of their Convention. But what opinions were they, that gave the Scandal to Arminius and his followers? Were they not those of the rigid Calvinists? and who were the Authors of that disturbance, but those petulant Parsons, that would not endure the Prescription of the wise Physician, nor suffer their Soars and Ulcers to be lanced? 'Tis true, The weakest must to the wall, and when 'tis put to the Question. Who they are that trouble Israel? to be s●● the Oppressor will have the casting voice. But if the Character (inserted in the Margin) be true, Illi scilicet Religionis ergô, alii ministeriis suis aincti, alii prescripti, relegati, extorres, etc. Nempe Hillenius Alcmariâ etc. Tu quoque aliique tui similes, aut libellis infames, aut concionibus tribunitiis, Conventiculis, schismate, seditione ac rebellione adversus Illust. Ordd. Decreta, ac Magistratuum Edicta, insignes: Hos tu totidem quasi religionis ac professionis vestrae Martyres habe, & in Canonem refer; non invideo; nec vehementer nego, si quidem ista est religio, Populum mendaciis splendidis decipere, ac dementatum in pastors ac Superiores suos concitare: in alienas Ecclesias ac Ministeria involare (quod tu de Samuele & Antipa, Borriis vesiris agnoscis). Loca publica per vim occupare, Clausira publico sigillo munita effringere, Senatui vim infer, Ordd. Edicta atque Interdicta palàm violare, omnia turbare: Haec dum vobis impunè licent, Superiorum sive indulgentia, sive metu, jam istos videre est precarium in vos imperium trahere: At si hâc non succedit via, si eorundem authoritate, toties laesâ, ista maledicendi ac malefaciendi libido vestra coercetur, ferocitas comprimitur, tuique unius vel alterius exemplo alii deterrentur, sisiuntur, & ut verbo dicam, cuneus cuneo pellitur; tum verò vos audire est, vim ac persecutionem, quam aliis intentâstis, quiritantes, Martyria vestra praedicare. Grevinch. Absiersio. Caelumn. Adr. Smoutii. pag. 42. which Grevinchovius hath given of them, I shall refer it to the judgement of the Reader, whether it doth not more than a little resemble a Disturber both of Church and State. But the impartial Synod is Assembled, and upon the invocation of God's holy name bound by Oath, that they would hold the Sacred Scripture as the only rule of their verdict, and demean themselves in the hearing and determining of this cause with a good and upright Conscience. Act. Syn. ubi supra. And in the Frontispiece of every Chapter of the Decrees or Canons, they insert this Title, A Rejection of the Errors wherewith the Churches of the Low Countries have now a long time been troubled. Would not any man expect (upon so solemn an undertaking) especially having made it their method, as well to reject such Errors, as to assert their own Doctrine, that those should be rejected, amongst the rest, that teach, Reprobation to be decreed, in order of nature, before Creation: The greatest part of mankind to be created to destruction: That by the force of God's irresistible Decree, it is impossible but Man should sin: That whatsoever comes to pass, whether good or evil, does come to pass by the force of God's irresistible Decree: That Man's wickedness is not the cause of God's will of abandoning man to hell, but on the contrary, that God's will is the cause of that wickedness: That 'tis not absurd to say, that it may be a capital sin to do the true and primary will of God: That seeing Adam is the cause of sin, and God the cause of Adam, how it can be, that God should not be the cause of sin: That God doth incite, lead, draw, command, impel, harden, deceive men unto wicked actions, and effect sins that are most enormous? Such horrid and blasphemous opinions as these, are frequent in the Writings of Calvin, Beza. Piscator, Martyr, and many others; and yet herein we have altum Silentium, these Doctrines never troubled those Churches, nor the tender Consciences of this Synod. They are so good friends with these Opinions, they never disturb their peace at all. 3. This is not all; when Bogerman, the Precedent of the Synod, had entertained but a suspicion, that the Remonstrants would detect the enormity of these opinions, and the shameful errors that had been broached by those so admired Names, (forgetting his solemn Oath to lay all prejudice and affection aside, and examine all matters to be debated, according to the only rule of God's word) he fell into so great an agony of Passion, that it was discernible in his very eyes and countenance, as if they had touched the very apple of his eye. Yet the Synod obliged by the conscience of the same oath, never gave him the least rebuke or check for this palpable indication of Partiality; as the perspicacious Author of that Judicious Antidotum † Bone De. us! quam vehementer afficiebat ipsum levissima talis suspicio! qui viri oculi! quis vultus! quis ardor animi! quartae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉! etc. Antidotum p. 31 hath observed and put upon record for us. Ibid. p. 32. 4. When Maccovius Professor of Franequer in Freisland, had not only asserted and disseminated by his Writings, the most horrid opinion, of all that ever had been written about Predestination by Zuinglius and Piscator; and moreover in the very Synod undertook, against his Colleague Sibrandus Lubbertus, to maintain, that God wills sin; that he ordains men to sin, as it is sin; that God in no wise would have all men to be saved, and many things of the like import, declaring openly, that if these things were not maintained, they must forsake their chief Doctors, who had taught those things and fall in to the opinion of the Remonstrants. What said the Synod to this bold Supra-Creatarian? Did they sequester or displace him? No, but accounted him for a pure Orthodox Divine, guilty neither of heresy nor erroneous doctrine, as it was declared by the public testimony of the Synod; and so they dismissed him with a wholesome and friendly Caution, to forbear such forms of speech as might give offence to tender ears, and could not be digested by persons ignorant and uncapable of so great mysteries: and that he would not set light by those distinctions of Divines, who had deserved well of the Church of Christ. 5. That which is beyond all exception; we find in the very Acts of the Synod [Sess. 107. Act. Syn. Nat. Dord. 233. part. 1. ] That Gomarus declared publicly, that he could not approve of the Judgement of those Belgic Professors, concerning the object of Predestination; that he thought, they must determine, Man to be considered of God in his Predestination, not only as fallen, but also before the fall. Hereupon he drew up his opinion by himself; and therein Predestination is said to be made out of Mankind simply considered, Ibid. part. 3. p 21. m. & 24. pr. and not as yet fallen into sin. and the Synod of South Holland were of the same judgement too, Ib. p. 33. m. whose chief members, Pestus Hommius, Henricus Arnoldi, Baltazar Lydius, Gisbertus Voetius, were chief enemies of the Remonstrants. 6. If Master Baxter will not yet allow that the Synod may justly be taxed with these opinions, Section 5. because (as he pretends in his Preface) the Calvinists do not Commonly hold them; they are but the opinions of some few; I desire him to examine his own Musterroll, how many he hath inlisted therein, for the defence of the Synod? Of all the Synod he could find but the British Divines, which were but five; and the Bremish, which were but three; to pass the Muster upon the Article of Universal Redemption, and but one single foreign Auxiliary Paraeus, to bear Arms for it. And yet these seven or eight men, in Master Baxter's account, shall justify all the rest from the guilt of such opinions as they do peremptorily maintain, though himself as well as the Remonstrants judge them most absurd. If so small a number will serve Master Baxters turn to justify; in all reason a far greater should serve Tilenus' interest to condemn them. 7. But what ever enormity Master Baxter will allow to be in those opinions, the Synod hath drawn the guilt of it upon their own heads, and deservedly aught to bear the blame; For Persons Commissioned and impowered to suppress errors, if they do not forbid and check them, the fairest interpretation we can give of their remissness herein is to say, they afford them a toleration. Non impedientes ad Genus causarum Moralium pertinent, saith Scheibler. And, Metaph. l. 1. c. 22. n. 140. Qui tacet consentire videtur, saith the Civil Law. And, Agentes & consentientes pari poenâ plectuntur, saith the Moralist. Indeed I find there were some who had a mind to condemn the opinions of Piscator in the Synod; Antidotum pa. 63. f. and some would have added to their Rejections, a rejection of certain hard and incommodious expressions (they might have called them blasphemous and horrible), which are found in the writings of some of the Reformed Doctors: Act. Syn. Nat. Dord. sess. 132. p. 239. part. 1. ed. in fol. To this end reasons were alleged on both sides, by the British, Hassien and Bremish Divines, with some others. But when the matter was put to the vote, the major part of Suffrages were for the Negative; (forsooth) lest by the rejection of such expressions and Phrases, the Adversary should take advantage to allege that the Orthodox Doctrine, professed by those men, who imprudently made use of such phrases to explain it, were rejected also. Especially seeing some of those modes of speech were the language of the holy Ghost, others, in a sound sense, admitted by the Remonstrants themselves, and fare the greatest part might admit of a charitable interpretation. By this we may perceive what temper Master Baxter's Test † That more than a very few, even the major part of the Synod favoured these opinions. was of; especially, if to this we add what was observed to be the general practice, after the Synod was dissolved, in those Low-country Churches; The least suspicion a man could lie under, for favouring the Remonstrants' Doctrine, was ground enough to remove him from his Ministry. (The imitation of which practice was forthwith taken up at Sedan; Franciscus Auratus, a most faithful Minister of that Church, being dismissed from the execution of his Function, because, upon occasion of that text, Jam. 1.13. God tempteth no man, etc. he largely declared, that God was not the Author of sin. This they thought a sufficient indication that he did not sufficiently abhor that Doctrine which the Synod of Dort had condemned). But on the other side the most violent abettors and urgers of the most rigid Supralapsarian Predestination, Clamosissimos tenebriones & spurcissimae vitae mortales. Antidotum pag. 33. were so far from the stroke of censure or rebuke, that though of never so lewd a conversation, one might see them adorned with the happiest conditions, and promoted to the chiefest chairs and Churches, tanquam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fortissimos. Lastly, if we consider that the present Galvinists of all sorts, Creabilitarians, Supralapsarians, Sublapsarians, do all centre in this Synod, as the Test of their Anti-Arminianisme (as Master Baxter calls it) we must conclude that the design of that Synod was not to reduce all those several Sects to one opinion, (that being impossible, their differences are so high and irreconcilable) but their elaborate Artifice, in contriving and daubing, varnishing and trimming up the Decrees and Canons thereof, was used on purpose, to calculate them for the Meridian of every their judgements, and make them serve indifferently the interest of their several opinions. So that this Synod is to men of that persuasion what Manna was to the Israelites (as some affirm). It affords them that relish, to which every man's palate is most affected. One man discovers enough therein to encourage him to be a Supralapsarian; another man finds the contrary. To this man's sense they maintain universal Redemption, to another's apprehension they deny it. Hereupon we see our late and present Divines are no less divided in their judgements about these Questions, than those which were before the Synod, as we may observe in reference to each of Tilenus his five Articles. The Orthodox Evangelist, pa. 52. m. pa. 56. m. For 1: Master Norton of New England, as a pure Creabilitarian, saith, The creature in its condition of possibility is the object of the Decree. And a little after, Not man considered as actually being; whether in his pure, or corrupt estate; but as yet to be, and in the Divine Essence: namely, as capable in respect of the sufficiency of God, to be what he pleased, is the object of the Decree. And a little after; The creation of man mutable, the permission of sin, the punishing him justly for sin, make up one full and perfect medium conducing to this end, (God's glory) as concerning the Reprobate. The creation of man mutable, the permission of sin, the effectual Application of Free grace and Glory, notwithstanding sin, for the merit sake of Jesus Christ, make up one full and perfect medium, conducing to this end (viz. God's glory) as concerning the Elect. And afterwards he concludes, Pag. 66. f. That Reprobation is not an Act of justice; and a little after; Though condemnation of man for sin be an Act of justice, yet God's will not to have mercy, his will to permit sin, his will to leave a man in sin, his will to punish man for sin, are Acts of his Lordship, not of his justice. If the Assembly of Divines came any lower, yet not so low as the Sublapsarian way; For they say; Confess. of Faith. ch. 3. th'. 3. By the Decree of God, for the manifestation of his Glory; some men and Angels are Predestinated unto everlasting life, and others fore-ordained to everlasting death. By ranking Men and Angels in the same Decree, it is evident, they conclude men to be Elected and Reprobate antecedently to the fall of Adam; which appears more fully by comparing the 6. and 7. Theses of that Chapter, with this third. The Calvinists that speak most warily, do yet maintain an Absolute and irrespective Decree, not as to the end but as to the means, Dr, Kendal De Doct. Neopel. oratio habita in Comit. Oxonii. p. 36. Asserimus Decretum Absolutum, quod nullum Motivum, (ut loquuntur) admittat ex parte Dei. We assert an absolute Decree, because it admits of no Motive on God's part. Non negamus fidem conditionem esse salutis; Asserimus vero fidem dari absque omni conditione. Similiter & de damnatione philosophari solemus. Non negamus impoenitentiam finalem esse conditionem damnationis; Asserimus vero Deum absolutè decrevisse; reprobos omnes, impoenitentiae suae permittendos, fidem verò in Electis omnipotenti Gratia suo tempore creandam. We do not deny faith to be the condition of salvation; But we affirm that faith is given without any condition. In like manner also we are wont to speak concerning damnation; we do not deny final impenitency to be the condition of damnation; But we affirm God absolutely decreed to permit all Reprobates to their own impenitency; but to create faith, in his own time, in the Elect by his omnipotent Grace. And a little after, Decretum illud irrespectivum, non est de salute, said side; nec de instigendis poenis, sed non concedendâ Poenitentiâ. That irrespective Decree 〈◊〉 not (such) as to salvation, but as to faith; nor as to the infliction of punishment, but as to the non-concession of repentance. As well Sublapsarians as Supralapsarians of both forts, though they frame a Decree that suspends the benefit of salvation upon a condition, yet it makes that condition absolutely irrepudiable and irresistible as to some persons, and absolutely impossible unto others, and so takes away the proper nature of sin and duty, and by consequence saves and damns respectively without them. 2. If we consider the Article of Redemption by Christ; however M. Baxter finds an Universality of it, in the decisions of that Synod, yet Doctor Thomas Hill (Master of Trinity College in Cambridge, and able sure to understand a piece of Latin, as well as Master Baxter) could find no such matter; For to signify his esteem of that Assembly he calls it a happy remedy against Arminianism; (in his Epistle to the Christian Reader; before Master Fenners Wilful Impenitency. a. 3. ) yet two pages after he breaks out into this Lamentation; But alas, Arminius now appears amongst us, not so much in the Schools and Pulpits, as in popular meetings. For as Zanchius complained with much regret of the Sulteran (I suppose it should be Lutheran) Ubiquitaries, that he found them ubique, every where to vex and molest him, so may we grieve, (O that we could with brokenness of heart bewail it!) that our Universalists, are almost universally spread amongst us; It is gotten into our Netherlands, much into the Fennish and Moorish parts of this Kingdom, yea amongst many people that love Jesus Christ, and therefore entertain it, as conceiving it most for his Honour, (the more are they to be pitied, etc.) Thus Doctor Hill; who certainly did not think his happy Remedy to be infected with that (he accounts) disease, and so much bewails, as if it were as mortal, as he conceived it Epidemical. Good God That man's eye should be so evil, because God is so good and gracious! That he should think it a matter of humiliation, and that with brokenness of heart, that the Name of the Lord Jesus, and the Merits of his Death, and the emanations of his Grace, should be so much magnified! And yet we find the whole Assembly of Divines (if we may collect their Judgement out of their Public Confession, rather than take it from what a single member (it seems) hath whispered into M. Baxter's ear) had so narrow a Faith they could not admit this Point to be an Article of their Belief; For they speak restrictively of Christ's Sacrifice. (Chap. 8. th'. 5.) that it hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father, and purchased not only reconciliation, but an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of Heaven, for all those, whom the Father hath given unto him. And more fully (thes. 8.) To all those for whom Christ hath purchased Redemption, He doth certainly and effectually apply, and communicate the same, making intercession for them etc. And this is very probably collected out of the third Chapter too, comparing the 6. and 7. Theses together. They who are Elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ— The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable council of his own will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy, as he pleaseth, for the glory of his (not Justice, but NB.) Sovereign Power over his creatures, to pass by, and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice. ˙. ˙. Besides, Master Baxter hath had some contest (as I remember) with Adversaries, who make the remission of sins the immediate effect of Christ's death, and maintain that it is granted unto the elect, before they do Actually believe. I suppose Master Baxter will not say these men are for universal Redemption (though perhaps as great Admirers of the Synod as himself:) and I doubt, these are not a very few. 3. As touching the unavoidable necessity of all humane Actions, in regard of the effectual Decree; that the Calvinists do commonly maintain it is evident; That I may not tyre the Reader with a multitude of testimonies, I shall satisfy myself with one or two. The first cause so concurreth, as it determineth the second cause in its operation, saith M. Norton. This is readily granted in natural Agents, in free-rationall Agents it is proved thus. If the futurition of the operation of the second Cause is determined by the Decree of God, than the operation is self is determined by the efficiency of God. The Orthodox Evangelist p. 110. m. And a little after; If as often as the will doth not will; it therefore doth not will, because God hath not determined that it should will, then as often as it willeth any thing, it therefore willeth, because God hath determined that it should will. But as often as the Will doth not will, it therefore doth not will, because God hath not determined that it should will. Therefore— p. 126. f. Notwithstanding sin is wholly of man, and subordinate efficiency in sinful actions, belongs formally unto the second Cause: yet the infallible futurition and execution of all effects; the infallible futurition, and ordering the execution of all events; is as fully ascribed unto God, as if man had no hand therein. I know Master Baxter hath declared himself against this Philosophy, (in his Treatise of Judgement, Answer to 23. excuse). But whether the Assembly of Divines have not, at least insinuated, this to be their judgement, I leave the Reader to consider, by a view of some of their expressions. Chap. 3. th'. 1. (of their Confess.) They say, God from all Eternity did by the most wise and holy Council, of his own will, freely and unchangeably ORDAIN whatsoever comes to pass; and Chap. 5. thes. 4. The Almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite Goodness of God, so far manifest themselves in his providence, that it extendeth even to the first fall, and all other sins of Angels and men; and that not by a BARE PERMISSION, but such as hath joined with it a most wise and powerful bounding, and NB. OTHERWISE ordering and governing of them in a manifold dispensation to his own holy end; and thes. 2. In relation to the foreknowledge and DECREE of God the first Cause, All things come to pass IMMUTABLY and infallibly. Indeed all they, who ground God's certain Foreknowledge of all things future, upon his infrustrable and ineluctable Decree for their futurition, must grant that all humane Actions whatsoever are immutably necessary, otherwise God should not foreknow them. And what is it that hath begotten a new definition of Liberty, and many distinctions to free Almighty God, and convince man of the guilt of sin, but the common opinion of the Necessity of all humane Actions by reason of the secret effectual decree of God? The liberty of the second cause (saith Master Norton) doth not consist in a power of indifferency, Vbi supra p. 74. to act or not to act: (as it was wont to be defined) Liberty consists in a spontaneity, quam ratio praecedit, saith Maccovius † Colle●. dis. 16. pag. 53. , A spontaneity (such as Beasts are carried by) ushered in by Reason. Therefore whatsoever a man doth, reason going before, that he doth freely, though he cannot but do it. This is the Liberty of the Leviathan; and by this Philosophy, man is yoked in the same name with brute Animals, his reason having the honour to be the fore-horse in every expedition. Again, upon this opinion, that men's evil Actions are of an unavoidable necessity, by God's immutable Decree, and irresistible determination, that God may not be concluded the Author of sin, and that man may be properly accounted guilty, certain distinctions are invented, Vbi supra pag. 63. p. 8. f. as, First, We must distinguish (saith Master Norton) betwixt the Action and the evil of the Action. Notwithstanding God is no way the Author of the evil of the Action, yet God ascribeth unto himself the doing of these Actions that are sinful; 1. Because he is the Author of the Act wholly: 2. Because he is the Fore-determiner, Orderer and Governor of the sinfulness of the action to his own glorious and blessed end. The action is ascribed to him absolutely; the sin cleaving to the action not absolutely, but only in such sort and respects. 2. That man may be accounted properly guilty, notwithstanding this inevitable necessity that lies upon him (according to this Doctrine,) they use distinctions to reconcile Liberty with Necessity. To which purpose they say, 1. 'Tis but a necessity of immutability, not of compulsion; and 2. though the sinful Action be inevitable in senfu composite, that is, in respect of God's Decree and divine determination; yet in sensu diviso, suppose man left to his own liberty, and divided from this conduct of God's providence, (which is impossible) then 'tis avoidable. These distinctions will serve to play withal in a Sophister's Problem: But in a matter of so high concernment as life and death eternal, they will serve as little to magnify God's justice, as to abate the pains of hell fire in such as shall be damned upon this Account. 4. For the fourth Article, touching the Grace of conversion; that those who are Elected cannot reject, those who were Reprobates ca●not accept it: you may find the Judgement of the Calvinists (and I think of most, if not all, that are of that denomination at this day) bound up in those expressions of Master Norton; Vbi supra pag. 126. Notwithstanding the creature in regard of his formal Free-efficiency, is somewhat distinguished from a mere Instrument: yet even those effects wherein▪ God useth the second Cause, as a subordinate Free-Agent, depend upon and are determined by the first Cause; as much as where the second Cause is a mere passive Instrument; because the Free-efficiency of the second Cause, is the effect of the first Cause. Can the Axe not cut, when the Carpenter will have it cut? or can it cut, when he will not have it cut? (I speak not here of God's direction of Free-Agents to others ends and objects: but with reference to sin and the work of their Conversion respectively.) This Doctrine distinguisheth men from stocks and stones, in the work of God's Regenerating Grace upon them, as little as the Synod † 3 and 4. ch. of Convers. Artic. 16. p. 259. part. 1. can possibly admit of; and here is very little room for the Free-Agents Can and cannot. For the Elects cannot reject it; if Master Baxter doth not think it an absurd opinion, why doth he allege any thing to colour over the matter? but if he thinks it absurd and a distinction needful to clear the Doctrine; I shall show anon, that he doth little less than reproach them with it, even by what he citys from them to excuse it. That the Reprobate cannot, accept that Grace (or be converted) is the distinct affirmation of Master Fonner more than once or twice, Pag. 8. & 16. etc. in his Treatise before mentioned; where he saith; The Reason why the wicked do not repent, nor come out of their sins, is not because they cannot, (though they cannot) but because they will not. For the last Article of Tilenus, That the Regenerate cannot fall away; how ever Master Baxter makes an offer to except against the Indietment, which Tilenus prefers against them for it, I suppose, no Calvinist will deny it. But what? shall the Elect be saved then however they live? By no means. That Diabolical Sarcasme (saith Master Norton † Vbi supra pag. 83. ), & bitter scoff invented to the abuse and derision of the Doctrine of the Decree; is not only an untruth, but implieth a Contradiction; viz. If I be elected, howsoever I live, I shall be saved. Satan in this Sophism, divides the end and the means asunder, which God hath joined together. The Decree consists not of the end without the means, nor of the means without the end, but of both together: Both end and means are contained in one Decree. Yea, so fare is the Decree from admitting such an inference, as that the contrary infallibly followeth thereupon: and in point of Election, is not only necessarily concluded, but irresistibly caused. Faith, Repentance, New-Obedience and Perseverance, being the effect of Election. Thus fare Master Norton; and what can ye wish more? But stay, the Divines of the Synod told us the Elect might fall into most gross, foul, heinous, wasting sins. Do these move upon another Centre, without the Decree, or hath the Decree of Election made Provision for them? This looks like a very hard Chapter: M. Norton udi supra p. 5●. but Master Norton and Master Perkins will help us to spell it out. The Creation of Man mutable, (you had the words before, but being so comfortable, Decies repetita etc.) the permission of sin (and not only that of Adam's Fall, but, toties quotiès, by parity of Reason, to advance God's grace and glory, else it will not serve our turn here; and then the renewed) effectual Application of Freegrace, and Glory, notwithstanding sin; for the merit sake of Jesus Christ, make up one full medium, conducing to this end, (God's Glory) as concerning the Elect. To this purpose Master Perkins reckons the sins of the Predestinate, amongst the number of their Privileges, upon their Adoption; First, saith He, They are Heirs of God; then Coheirs with Christ, and Kings. 3. All their afflictions, as also their defects and slips (or falls) are only paternal castigations for their good. In his Armilla Aurea. cap. 37. Q. 4. Now can any Calvinist but M. Baxter call it abusive language, and a perverse insinuation, to say, That such as have received that Special Regenerating Grace (which is the fruit of Election) can never fall from it, notwithstanding the most enormous sins they can commit? Why, man, they have an Absolute Decree passed in heaven, for their Indempuity. And what is that Decree? Vbi supra pag. 51. The Decree (saith M. Norton) is God by one eternall-free-constant Act, absolutely determining the futurition, i. e. the infallible future being of whatsoever is besides himself, unto the praise of his own Glory. If Election, which is God himself (according to this Doctrine) be absolutely theirs, there can be no more danger of miscarriage in their salvation, than there is that God Almighty should lose his very being; and therefore the Assembly of Divines, consonantly to these principles have peremptorily defined, that, They whom God hath accepted in his beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by his Spirit, neither totally nor finally, can fall away from the state of Grace; but shall certainly persevere therein unto the end, and be eternally saved. In their Confess. Chap. 17. Th. 1. Thus, if Master Baxter will not, other Readers will be satisfied, that the several Articles of Tilenus stand impregnable, as to the matter of Fact, against the very Synod of Dort, their Predecessors and their late and Present Adkerents. And now where shall Master Baxter erect a new Forge for Calumny and Falsehoods, to justify his uncharitableness (to say no more) in casting out a suspicion whether Tilenus were a Christian, in the 8 and 13. Sections of his Preface? I Have done with the reproachful part of Master Baxter's discourse, in defence of the innocent Tilenus. There is a Rational part yet behind (such as 'tis) and that Master Baxter may have no occasion to blame our neglect of that, or triumph over it; we shall make Reflections upon the several remarkable periods of it, beginning (where Tilenus is first engaged) at the Sixth Section of his Preface. Where Master Baxter breaks off from Master Pierce, and goes out of his way, though he thinks it is a stepping into his duty, to Rebuke the unworthy dealing of (Master Pierce his friend, whom he protests not to have sock or known to this day) Tilenus. He pretends, saith Master Baxter, to give us concisely but truly, the sum of the Doctrine of the Synod of Dort in the five Articles. And when he hath made this promise, he presently falls to falsifying, and calumny, unworthy a Divine, a Christian, or a Man: the weight of the case and greatness of his sin, command me to be thus plain: yea were I of his Party, I must say the same. What! Catholic M. Baxter, come already to espouse a Party! Tilenus' will one day thank you for the intended charity of your Rebukes. In the mean time on his behalf, I desire the Indifferent Reader but to lay this child at the own Father's door; and so to his discretion I shall leave it. But, What! (saith M. Baxter,) shall so many Countries purposely Consult to declare their thoughts, and their writings be common in the hands of all, and the adversary purposely write against them, and pretend to be acquainted with their Doctrine, and make it his design to bring it to be odious to the world, and yet shall falsely tell the world, that they hold and assert the things that they are not only silent in, but disown, detest, and are contrary to their Doctrine. Ans. 1. For the Convention of so many countries' to consult; that is no more than may be alleged by the Fautors of the Trent Council. 2. Writings that are commonly in men's hands are not commonly read, not always understood, never sifted to a discovery of their absurdities by Persons that swear allegiance to their admired Authors, upon others commendations, as too too many do of all Sects whatsoever. 3. The Adversaries design was not, to bring that Doctrine to be odious: but to evince it to be unpracticable (at least) and useless; which I think is yet sufficiently done, for all your pretended Vindication. 4. Whether he tells the World false tales, more than Master Baxter, is submitted to the Judgement of the Reader. 5. If they be silent in these things, their silence is consent; for they declare the end of their Convention to be, to suppress errors etc. and therefore, 6. If they had detested these, certainly they would have disowned them. However I am glad the Doctrines, which Tilenus charges them with, are detestable in the judgement of Master Baxter. I pray God keep him still in this mind! though he proceeds to rebuke Tilenus in these words; Truly this is an exceeding shame to the Arminian and Jesuit Cause, to find the learned Patrons of it, to deal so unconscionably that a Reader cannot believe them; and that where it is so easy to any to see their falsehoods. Answ. 1. The Jesuit Cause is lest to their own vindication, or your Catholic charity. But, 2. For the Patrons of that Cause (you call Arminian, being the Catholic Doctrine of Christ's Church (as you acknowledge for some of its Branches, in your Account of Perseverance) for one thousand four hundred years together) what is the Reason you cannot believe them? Perhaps because you will not read them. How shall they believe on him of whom they have not heard? As to your Controversy with Tilenus, read that Antidotum forementioned: after a serious and impartial perusal whereof, if you do not sit down with satisfaction herein, I shall conclude in your own words to Master Warner (of Justification pag. 314.) It is not replying that will serve the turn: but either prejudice will hold them to the side that they have taken, or else they will think him in the right that hath the last word;— but usually they will go with the Party that is in greatest credit, or hath most interest in them, or advantage on them. But 3. you upbraid them with unconscionable deal, unworthy falsification, perverse insinuation; and upon this threefold Cord it is that you suspend your belief towards them. But can you discover such moats in the Remonstrants' eyes (which how many soever your Multiplying Glass, or indisposed Medium presented to you, are by this time washed out of Tilenus') and can you not see the Beams that are lodged in the eyes of your own Party? Do they stand at too near a distance for you to behold them? If you will promise to suspend your faith here too, upon the discovery of such beams, I will be so charitably officious as to direct you to a Prospect whence you may take a full view of them. If you have seen Festus Hommius, (who was one of the Scribes of the Synod) his Specimen Controversiarum Belgicarum, you might have seen enough of such deal as you unjustly charge Tilenus with, as is sufficiently discovered in two little Pamphlets, the one bearing this Title, Joan. Wtenbogardi Responsio ad ea quae illi speciatim impegit Festus Hommius; the other this, Optima Fides Festi Hommii, etc. Of this Man and his Brother Scribe Doctor Damman, the Author of that Antidotum, Pag. 11. writeth thus, To whom is the falsehood of these men unknown? Festi sc. Hommii in edendis & pro arbitrio suo truncandis atque interpretandis Trelcatiorum Scriptis, non sine magnorum virorum gravissima indignatione? Similiter in propolandis pessimâ fide Episcopii Disputationibus privatis, etc. And of Bogerman Precedent of the Synod, He saith thus, An non ille est, cui (o justa Nemesis ●) arts, frauds, & mendacia sua (quibus titulis ille innoxios & insontes Remonstrantes in Synodo, Ib. pag. 10. suopte arbitratu injussus & praeter omnem rationem oneratos ac gravatos tantâ cum acerbitate & amarulentia dimittebat, ut poenitentia tactus, veniam sibi posteà petendam indicaret) adeoque ambitio & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 palam publicéque exprobrata & in os objecta sunt, quòd, vid. etc. But alas! these are Peccadillo's not worthy Master Baxter's taking notice of; we will therefore bring him to a Mount, (which will afford him a notable Prospect indeed) whence he shall descry the Reputation of the Innocent Remonstrants, bleeding under the strokes of such objected forgeries and Calumnies. Hactenus Remonstrantibus, saith the same Author, Pag. 23. ferè crimini datumtest, quod malâ fide sententiam contra Remonstrantium proponerent atque exprimerent: dici vix potest, quot convitia, dirae ac probra propterea passim contra Remonstrantes in foris, pulpitis, circulis, conviviis, scaphis, rhedis, curribus, triviisque hominum dicta ac projecta fuerint, tanquam in falsi manifestos & fide omni indignos Mortales. Ipsa Synodus Arnhemiensis (O rem foedam ac detestandam! quis credidisset?) ausa est sententiam illam, quam Remonstrantes ipsissimam ac genuinam Contra-Remonstrantium sententiam esse asserebant, tanquam foedam atque impiam sub vocabulorum quorundam homonymiâ & aequivocatione communibus calculis damnare, eâ tantum de causa, ut falsum dixisse Remonstrantes crederetur, atque ita publici odii victimae fierent. But to bring the Prospect a little nearer to Master baxter's ken. Was there no such Artifice used in the Synod of Dort? What say they in their fourth Rejection, upon the First Chapter of Divine Predestination? They reject the error of those who teach, that in the Election unto faith this Condition is formerly required, viz. That a man use the light of Reason aright, that he be honest, lowly, humble, and disposed unto life eternal, as though in some sort Election depended on these things. Is not here an insinuation, as if the Remonstrants held this Doctrine, (the design of the Synod being to declare against them) yet say the Remonstrants, this is falsely and by way of Calumny thrown upon them; for the Contrary appears as clear in their writings, as the light at noon day a Ibid. p. 72. . In the sixth Rejection, they reject those who teach that not all election unto salvation is unchangeable, but that some which are elected, the Decree of God notwithstanding, may perish and for ever do perish. The Synod herein doth adulterate, pervert and traduce the Doctrine of the Remonstrants by odious expressions. Ibid. p. 76. That last branch, that the elect may perish eternally, the Decree of God notwithstanding, is without cause thrown upon them, and against their judgements. For the first, they ever profess Election and the will of God to be immutable. Indeed when they say so, they make the subject, about which Election is exercised, to be the faithful man, as such. Hence it comes to pass, when that man who believes to day turns Infidel to morrow, there is no change in God's Election, but in the man only. The Reason is, because God will not choose the unfaithful, but the faithful. And therefore when the faithful man becomes unfaithful, the will of God concerning the Election of faithful men remains uniform and the same: But the truth is, if the will of God, or the Divine Election concerning that man, (now) become unfaithful, should persevere, than the will of God should properly be changed; because he should will to elect unto salvation not only the faithful men, but the unfaithful also. In the Seventh Rejection; the Remonstrants complain, that they (of the Synod) have clothed a most certain truth with some rough invented Phrases, to make it odious, and look ugly. Ibid. p. 77. The Error rejected is, That in this life there is no fruit, no sense, no certainty of immutable election unto glory, but upon condition, contingent, and mutable. But the Remonstrants profess they have not these words in all their writings. They know no fruit more sweet to a pious man, than what grows upon the consideration of God's unchangeable love; whereby he will most assuredly confer eternal life upon believers. As for that opinion (which some place so much of their comfort in) that he who doth once truly believe, may be always certain of his being in the faith and Grace of God, however he pollutes, or behaves himself, this is a fruit, which indeed they cannot relish, growing only upon that tree of Election, which (by whomsoever it was planted) hath no sound root in Scripture. In their Ninth Rejection the Synod doth covertly insinuate (to make them odious) that the Remonstrants teach, That the cause why God sends the Gospel rather unto this Nation than unto another, is not the mere and only good pleasure of God, but because this Nation is better and more worthy of it than that, to which he hath not communicated the Gospel. But the Remonstrants know none that do say or think so. Upon all occasions they have professed and taught the contrary, saith the Author of that Antidotum, pag. 79. v. sqq. This last imputation Perfrictae frontis & mentis odio tantum non excaecatae indicium est. Ib. p. 80. Touching the Second Chapter (of Redemption) in their Second Rejection, (That this was not the end of Christ's death, that he might establish a new Covenant of grace by his blood; but only that he might procure unto his Father the bare right of making again with men any covenant whatsoever, whether of Grace, or of works) here in the first member (of this Article) they impute to the Remonstrants what is manifestly false, and contrary to their public Doctrine. And the Second Member is a fiction and interpolation to render them odious. Vid. ib. p. 88 In the Fourth Rejection, the first branch is of the same complexion; and the opposition made therein very unapt and ridiculous. Ibid. p. 89. The first Rejection, the Remonstrants observe to be equivocal, and to admit of a double sense. Whereof they account one to be false, but the other they do most steadfastly embrace. ib. p. 90. Touching the Third and Fourth Chapters, (of Conversion) they say, they may justly challenge three things of the Synod. 1. Bonam fidem. 2. Charitatem sive aequitatem. 3. Prudentiam & attentionem, pag. 104. The first we are now concerned to inquire into. And whereas, in their First Rejection, they condemn the Remonstrants, as teaching (that it cannot well be avouched that original sin of itself it sufficient for the condemning of all mankind, etc.) If they understand this of Adam's first sin, there is none of them but acknowledge, that the guilt of it hath overspread his whole posterity, and made them obnoxious to condemnation: But whether that which is appendent to it, by way of punishment, makes a new guilt and begets a new punishment, no act of man's will passing unto the espousing of it; this they think too vain and trivial a subtlety to contend about. In their Fourth Rejection, They insinuate, that the Remonstrants teach, That an Unregenerate man is not properly, nor totally dead in sins, nor destitute of all strength tending to spiritual good, etc. whereas there is not one of them that did ever write or affirm so: but in their third Article they confess, That in the state of Apostasy and sin, man of himself and by himself can neither think, will, or do any good, that is truly good. In the Seventh Rejection, They impute to them, that they teach, that, The Grace whereby we are converted is nothing else, but a gentle suasion, etc. whereas there is not one of them have such an affirmation, That nothing else is required to the power of believing but a gentle suasion. Quid enim ineptius quam Potentiam in homine effici per suasionem? For what can be more foolish than to affirm that a power may be wrought in man by persuasion? In the Eighth Rejection they charge them to affirm, That it lieth in man's power to be, or not to be regenerated. When their meaning is no more but this, that it may come to pass, that man may oppose a new contumacy, or resistance to God's Call, etc. Ibid. pag. 105. In the Fifth Chapter (of Perseverance) (as in the rest) the 1, 2, 3, and 4 Rejections, Ibid. p. 119. are observed to be of the same argument and importance, that by the Fiction of a multiplicity of errors the Remonstrants might be rendered the more odious; and this is none of the most conscionable, much less worthy dealing. Besides, there is (to use Master Baxter's own words) a perverse insinuation in the first Rejection; where they affirm, there are some (meaning the Remonstrants) who teach, That Perseverance is a condition of the New Covenant, which is to be performed on man's part, by his own freewill, before his peremptory election and justification. In that this condition is said to be performed by man's freewill, Ibib. p. 126. the Remonstrants are brought under a suspicion, as if they did not think the grace of God and the continual assistance of his Holy Spirit necessary unto perseverance in that which is good; whereas the Synod knew they were of a contrary persuasion: Besides, by implying, that they should assert any freewill to be in man, which was not made so by grace, to do that which is pleasing unto God, they procured the Remonstrants' envy, which was a manifest injury to them. Likewise in the Second Rejection, the Remonstrants are (Master Baxter would say) feigned to teach, That when as all abilities necessary unto perseverance, and all things, which God is pleased to use for the preservation of faith, are granted and set in readiness, that it still remaineth in the choice, and pleasure of man's will to persevere, or not. Which words do darkly insinuate, as if the Remonstrants did believe and teach, Ibid. that God, for his part, doth first perform all those things, that are behooveful, towards men, and then leave them to themselves, affording them no further grace or help to assist, and exstimulate them to do their duty: But this is far from the Remonstrants' Doctrine, who did always undoubtedly hold, that God doth always, both in the beginning, progress and end, more especially in temptations, assist and help man by his grace to persevere in that which is good, unless he confronts those divine aides and succours by the unworthiness of a shameful neglect, or the opposition of a contumacious rebellion. The liberty whereof, under the most gracious and potent dispensations, is ordinarily, according to His most just and wise providence, reserved unto man by Almighty God, that so his perseverance may be, under such a sweet conduct, a work of his own choice and duty, and consequently capable of the Divine approbation and reward. Once more; That Author complains, that such Doctrines are imputed to them, as the Remonstrants, never so much as dreamt of, especially, as they stand reported by the Synod. For example; such as are in their Fifth Rejection, viz. That no certainty of future perseverance can be had in this life, Ibid. p. 127. without special revelation. Indeed they own no such certainty of a future absolute perseverance, as flows from an inconditionate Election, and serves to furnish Cordials for the secure and sinful, in the midst of their perversities, drowning their cares and sorrows, and extinguishing their fears of hell fire and Gods displeasure. But they do most willingly acknowledge that an upright man, one that feareth God, eschews evil and worketh righteousness, may be certain of his future perseverance; so that no force, fraud, or fallacy shall be able to rob him of (that treasure) his hope of eternal life, if so be he be not wanting to God's grace, but walks circumspectly in that road which God hath appointed to lead him in, and beset it with Guards of Angels to secure his passage against the incursions of the enemy. And he that walks according to this Rule, Peace be upon him and mercy! But in the Sixth Rejection, there is another unworthy imputation cast upon the Remonstrants, viz. That it is a very commendable thing to be doubtful of future Perseverance. They say, That as the Regenerate are begotten to a lively hope, so they go on (if they do their duty) to a Persuasion, and grow up to a full Assurance, and they exhort Heb. 6.11. hort every one (with the Apostle) to show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope even unto the end. And this is Gospel's truth, Christian consolation, and a practice laudable. But for the certainty of such a perseverance, as was mentioned above; they do not only doubt of it, but absolutely deny it, as having no just Title to the ground 'tis built upon, and having a Genius that comports too much with the interests of the flesh and carnal security, and apt to make abatements in our accounts of solid devotions, and the practice of Holy duties. He that seeks for such a certainty of his perseverance in God's favour, as may be made serviceable to caresse him in the height of his lust and vanity, is sure never to find it otherwise, then by special revelation. For the Holy Scriptures will not afford it. And the Revelation that brings it being contrary to that Rule, how extraordinary soever, cannot come from heaven, and therefore aught to be suspected (if ever it comes) for a strong delusion. And now having discharged my undertaking, and brought Master Baxter to so full and clear a view, of that unconscionable dealing, unworthy falsification, and perverse insinuation, in the Practices of his own Party, I hope they shall receive equal measure from him with Tilenus and his Adherents. I hope he will not yet Jurare in verba: but suspend his belief of their say also, till a further examination. Reflections upon the VII. Section. WHere we cannot but take notice of M. Baxter's ingenuity in acknowledging the full sense and importance of the first Article, as it is charged upon the Synod and its Adherents; For he confesseth that in the Decree of Election, God had no regard to faith or obedience, in the persons whom he did elect, as a means or Antecedent to his Decree; and this he knows well enough to be the point in question. 2. That he appointeth the Reprobates to damnation, without any regard to their Impenitency or Infidelity; This Master Baxter acknowledgeth too; for he saith, they (of the Synod) profess, that it is for their infidelity and other sins, that God decrees to damn them, as the Causes of damnation, though not of the eternal decree. Therefore the appointment of them to eternal damnation, (which is the Decree, and that which Tilenus spoke of) though not the execution of that appointment, was without any regard to their infidelity or impenitency. One would think now that Tilenus had a fair Title to Master. Baxter's right hand of fellowship: but to show the pregnancy of his wit in taking up exceptions, in the writings of such as differ from him, and the acuteness of his Judgement in finding out distinctions to blind, or set a fair gloss upon the absurdities of those to whose opinions he is wedded, he proceeds in his discourse, and first by way of Interrogatory, he demands (as if this circumstance were the main hinge of the whole Controversy) Where talk they of a very little number? Answ. With your patience, Sir, I conceive Tilenus had the phrase (as you heard) from Master Calvin, whose expressions the Synod did too much reverence to disown, much less detest them. And therefore though they have not the very words, they come not short of the sense. For they say, that out of the common maltitude of sinners, he culled out to himself, for his own peculiar, some certain. Cap. 1. Art. 10. & Art. 7. A set number of certain men, and so Rejection 1. And Cap. 3. & 4. Art. 7. They say, Under the Old Testament God disclosed unto but a Few this secret of his will, (viz. concerning salvation) and yet I hope it was disclosed to all the Elect (at that time in a capacity to receive the Revelation.) So that by luck, we have found, a Few, even in their Canons, and some certain, culled, out persons, for his own peculiar. And now I hope Master Baxter will be satisfied in this particular, if I had in Tilenus his behalf said, that the number whether more or less shall not increase the quarrel But the next word would have done it, if Master Baxter had not been prudent in the choice of it; For he doth not rudely say, It is a lie, but more modestly, It's not true? But what is the untruth? That they say, he doth it (elect unto salvation) (Without any regard to their faith or obedience whatsoever.) But doth Master Baxter say this is an untruth? yes and proves it too, and that substantially, by a handsome way of sliding from the question; For they profess, saith He, that he (God) hath regard to it, (and a double regard too), 1. as the benefit which he decreeth to give them, 2. As the condition of the Glory, which he decreeth them. But what is this to the matter in question? The question is about the Prevision of it, as a qualification, wrought by God's Grace, in the person to be Elected, and you tell us of a Provision made for it, that it may be wrought, ex Post facto, after they are elected. I'll discover the impertinency in a familiar instance. Suppose Master Baxter hath a sequestered Parsonage at his disposal, and power to give Ordination, Institution and Induction: one reports of him that he hath made choice of an Incumbent without any regard to his Learning or Godliness whatsoever, he being acknowledged to be a very ignorant and vicious person to all the neighbourhood. Upon this report Master Baxter's Confident undertakes the vindication, and to salve the matter, He cries out, It's not true, that he made him Incumbent to that Parsonage; without any regard to his learning or Godliness whatsoever; For he had regard to it, 1. as a benefit, or quality which he designed to work in him. 2. As the condition of that greater preferment which he intended to confer upon him. This is Master baxter's way of Answering Tilenus. He decreeth to save none (saith M. Baxter) but for their Obedience as the fruit of faith, which is not a means or Antecedent to God's decree, but to our salvation, as the most rigid Anti-Arminians teach. (For obedience as the fruit of faith?) Is the fruit better than the tree? why not for Faith, as well as for obedience, or rather for both together? But if ye should set it so (Faith being much dearer to some of them then Obedience) yet I doubt many of your rigid Anti-Arminians would not teach so. Why not thus? By Grace † Eph. 2.8. & Chap. 4.32. , through Faith, for Christ his sake? Or if you will, Secundum opera, but not Propter opera, by no means; works are via ad Regnum, but not Causa regnandi. The way unto the kingdom of Heaven, but not the Cause of reigning there; and therefore let it be according to their works, and not for their works. For, if your [For] be Causalis respectu Consequentis, and not only Rationalis respectu Consequentiae; it hath Popery in the belly, or at least a piece of the Grotian Religion, and though Bellarmine makes it a point of his Belief, yet Amesius cannot digest it. Bellarm. Enervat. Tom. 4. pag. 208. This obedience, as the fruit of Faith, you say, is not a Means or Antacedent to God's Decree, but to our Salvation. This is ORTHO-DORT indeed. But you might have said the same of the sins of the Elect, as well as of thei● Faith and Obedience. For they are all alike Ingredients to make up that One full Medium, as concerning the Elect. They are part of the Means or Antecedent in order to the Execution of that Decree, as you have heard before out of Master Perkins, and Master Norton; And would not this be very wholesome Doctrine to teach your people, that God had a regard to the Permission of sin in them, and their several falls, though into most heinous, wasting crimes, to serve for Fatherly chastisements, as well as to their Faith and Obedience, to make up the full and entire Means or Antecedent in order to the execution of the Decree of their Election. Master Baxter goes on with his exceptions, He calls that Secluding, all the rest from saving grace, which the Synod calls but Preterition, and Nonelection, and Reliction. What a trabiliary and hypochondriac Passion suggested this exception to him? Is saving grace attainable or within the reach of these Non-Elect, Relict, (Gomarus hath Abject) Past-Byes? If not, why do you carp at the word Secluded? you have a mind to find a knot in a bull rush, if you could tell how. But to let you see it was not a word invented or made use of by Tilenus, to the Prejudice of your Party, you may find it used by some of them before him. Et si Deus ab aeterno certos quosdam ad communionem salutis in Christo Elegit, alios vero ab ta EXCLUSIT pro suo beneplacito: Zanch. in Misel. tract. de Pradest. Sanct. c. 1. in Thesib. de Instit. Dei Thes. 8. And Calvin. Instit. lib. 3. c. 23. Sect. 1. in pr. Quos ergo Deus praeterit reprobat; neque alia de causa (observe that) nisi quod ab haereditate quam filiis suis praedestinat, illos vult excludere. I hope you will allow Exclusit and excludere, to be very near of kin to Secluded; and so I leave it. But Master Baxter hath a severer censure for Tilenus in his following words, (He unworthily feigneth them to say) that God (appointeth them to eternal damnation without any regard to their impenitency or Infidelity,) when they profess, that it is propter infidelitatem & caetera Peccata, that he decrees to damn them, as the Causes of damnation, though not of the eternal decree.) Why then, Tilenus said true, They were appointed, without any regard to their Infidelity etc. Ay, but he regarded their Infidelity and other sins as the Causes of damnation. Your meaning is, that those sins are the means or Antecedent (as your expression was a little before) in order to the execution of this Decree. And so are their very best works by the Doctrine of your Party, who speak consonantly to their principles. Statuere possumus bona opera Praedestinationi quandoque, quandoque etiam reprobationi inservire. Praedestinatio per illa gloriam Dei illustrat, & quoad reprobationem, sunt nonnunquam rationes, quare gravior reddatur Lapsus. Qui enim à Deo deficiunt, cum ab illo fuerint ornati bonis operibus, ut gravius peccant, ita etiam acerbius puniuntur. We may resolve that good works do serve to the furtherance sometimes of Predestination, and sometimes of Reprobation. Predestination doth set forth the glory of God by them; and in respect of Reprobation, they are many times the means to aggravate Relapses into sin. For they who do fall from God, when he hath adorned them with Good works, as they do more grievously sin, so are they also more severely punished, Loc. Com. De Reprob. Pob. 1. p. 122. f. saith Steph. Szegedin. 2. But doth not your Decree of Reprobation (in good earnest) make provision for those sins, in order to the illustration of: God's justice, when he shall condemn them? An attentive Reader may remember something alleged (above) to this purpose? But not to leave it unto conjecture in a matter of so great moment, I shall give you Master Nortons' words, (out of his Orthodox Evangelist. pag. 56. f. 11.) The and of God in the Decree, saith he, is himself, for the manifestation of his glory, in a way of Justice upon the Reprobate. The creation of man mutable, the permission of sin, the punishing of him justly for sin, make up one full and perfect medium, (that is, means) conducing to this end, as concerning the Reprobate. (Remember 'tis the constant and unanimous Doctrine of the Calvinists, that the Decree includes the means as well as the end.) And this is the very Doctrine of Gomarus held forth in the Synod, not detested, nor rejected, nor disowned, nor silenced; for it is inserted amongst their Acts. Part. 3. pag. 24. Thes. 2. you had it fully in the former passages. Hereupon the Divines from the Correspondence of Widderau, do conclude in the Name of those Churches to this purpose. Act. Syn. Dor. part. 2. pag. 154. f. Quid ergo? an peccata fiunt necessario? ita est sane; si nempe intelligas necessitatem illam, quae pendet à gemina hypothesi, decreti scilicet permittentis, & finis boni. What then? are sins committed necessarily? yes, so it is, if you consider that necessity which depends upon a double hypothesis, that is to say, the Decree (not ineffectually, for so they hold of permission) Permitting, and the Good end intended. The case then in short may be thus illustrated. A Noble man commits Treason for which his Prince seizeth upon all his estate to the utter undoing of his posterity. These, being disabled to purchase Arms and other accommodations for the wars, according to that equipage that becomes their Noble extraction, the Prince makes a Decree, of two branches, 1. Negative, That none should assist or supply their needs, 2. Positive, That they shall lose their heads: but this shall be for neglect of duty, or disobedience; which that they may be found guilty of, they are summoned to appear in person, as becomes their Noble birth, and his Eminence, to fight his battles. These unhappy persons appear with such strength and Accoutrements as are left them, according to the notice they have of the Prince his pleasure. But being unable, naked wretches as they are, to subdue their Prince's enemies, He is informed, that now he hath a just cause to fall upon them, and take away their lives, and accordingly Sentence is given, and the fatal Block and Axe employed for a present execution. If any should complain, that this were great severity, towards poor wretches made miserable by their Father's miscarriage, which they could no way hinder or consent unto (being no way privy to it); Master Baxter is an able Advocate to justify these proceed. He will tell us, (if one should say these men were appointed to death without any regard to their disobedience) it was for their disobedience and neglect of duty that the Prince decreed to behead them, as the Causes of their beheading, though not of the Decree itself. Here it will be seasonable to take notice of a subtle Distinction, which some of this Party makes use of to maintain that (Horrible Decree) as Master Calvin calls it, Antid. p 38. and yet to free God's justice, Supralapsarians. as they suppose, from the imputation of Severity. 'Tis one thing, say they, to Predestinate and Create unto damnation, another thing to Predestinate and Create unto Destruction. God, say they, hath Reprobated and Created to destruction the fare greatest part of mankind without any respect at all to sin in them: But he hath not preordained, or doomed any one man to eternal damnation (and the Synod makes a great use of this word Damnation) without respect to sin coming between. What is the ground of this opinion or Distinction? When God condemneth the world, He performs the Office of a Judge, who pronounceth sentence upon the guilty, and therefore he hath (in that Capacity) a respect to foregoing sin, as the meritorious cause of that his sentence. But when he doth reprobate to eternal Destruction, he useth his Right of Dominion, Vid. Act. Syn. Dort. part. 3. pag. 67. of. as an absolute Independent and supreme Lord, who being bound to none, deals thus by his creatures without any intuition or sight of sin and transgression in them, as himself pleaseth. Hence it is that so many men make the glory of God's Power and Sovereignty † See the Assemblies Confess. of Faith. Chap. 3. Thes. 7. rather than that of his Justice, the end of Reprobation. Finis Reprobationis est gloria Dei. Nam sic Deus demonstrat Liberam suam potentiam, & jus Summum faciendi de suis creaturis quod vult, say the Divines of Embden in their Suffrage, De Artic. 1. Thes. 2. Hypothes. 4. Pag. 76. And that (now mentioned) Distinction doth enable the Supralapsarians, to hold their own opinions, and yet to subscribe to the Decrees and Articles that define Damnation to be in consideration of sin only. And this was a great help to accomplish that harmony and consent (not so much of minds and meanings, as of modes of Speech and Phrases) which we find in that Synod. And now is not this Decree notably Calculated to set forth the Glory of the Divine Attributes? First God Reprobates and Creates the greatest number of men to destruction, to set forth the Glory of his Sovereign Power: so say the Supralapsarians. And then, that the Divine Justice may have her share in Glory, order is taken by the same Decree, which comprehends the means as well as the end † See Gomar. Th. de Praedest. disput. (1604.) Th. 23. and M. Norton ubi supra. pag. 56, 57 , that sin shall fall in, to make those persons guilty, that they may be an object fit for Justice to triumph over, under a sentence of condemnation. And though this was a very common Doctrine amongst the Greater Lights (as they were reputed) of those Churches, yet they were not troubled at them, but at those that detected their enormity, and consequently, not those errors, but these Persons, that attempted their Reformation, are ejected. But doth this respect of infidelity and impenitency, or other sins, as the Causes of damnation, though not of the Eternal Decree, mend the matter or make it worse? It seems to make it more plausible to inconsiderate Readers, that look but superficially upon it. But weigh it exactly, and it renders the Doctrine much more absurd and repudiable. For, (as hath been intimated) it makes sin by God's design to truckle † Quamvis enim peccatum, in decreto reprobationis, non spectavit Deus, ut causam illius objectam, habuit tamen permissionis illius rationem, ut medii quod fini, reprobationis subjecit ac subordinavit. Gomarus in disput. de Praed. (disp. 1609.) Thes. 91 under this Decree of Reprobation, as a necessary consequent, and as a means subordinate to the execution of it; so that according to this opinion, the Reprobates are at first (in our manner of apprehension) inevitably destinated to destruction, and then to sin, that that destruction may be ushered in with the Formalities of a Judicial Process, and a sentence of condemnation. And yet after all the service this Distinction of Reprobation hath been pressed to do them, it proves to be but a Distinction without a difference, upon the matter, by their own confession. It is but Docendi causa, to help Learners, that they consider a double Act, one Negative, (the denial of undue Grace) which is preterition, the other Affirmative, Compend. Chr. Theol. pag. 26. (the destination of due punishment) which is Praedamnation, saith Wollebius, and so say the four Professors of Leyden, in their Synopsis Purioris Theol. Disput. 24. Thes. 52. (mihi) pag. 308. In Anatome. cap. 13. parag. 3. Whereupon Molinaeus deals ingenuously, and tells us plainly they come both to one reckoning, as we say; Reprobare ac velle damnare idem esse, quemadmodum eligere idem est, ac velle salvare. To Reprobate, and to will damnation are the same thing, even as to elect is the same as to will salvation. And though he styles the Synod Reverend, and commends it for the celebrity and sanctity of it; and again they give him thanks, for his accurate judgement and consent in Doctrine; yet in this he goes against the whole stream of them; and (in the 9 Parag. of that his Anatome,) he takes up an objection: Non effugeret, qui diceret. Reprobatione non destinari homines ad damnationem, sed tantum praeteriri, an't non eligi. If any one saith, men are not destinated to damnation by Reprobation, but are only passed by or not Elected, he shall not escape so, saith Molin. Nempe sic quaeruntur verba molliora, quibus eadem res dicatur. This is but a dressing up of an ugly Matter in finer and softer words. Perinde enim est, sive Deus destinet hominem ad damnationem, sive id faciat, ex quo damnatio necessariò sequitur. For it is all one, whether God doth destinate a man to damnation, or doth that from which damnation necessarily follows. Molin knew well enough, that to Reprobate is, as it were, a putting the fatal rope about the man's neck, and tying his hands behind him: and whatever follows, whether exhortations or prayers, is but in order to a preparation for turning the Ladder. Hereupon he concluded, that no man is Reprobated but for sin. (ibid. parag. 3.) But M. Baxter would make us believe, in his next words, that the Synod and himself too are of this opinion; for he goes on, and saith, They do not only respect Infidelity and other sins as the cause of damnation, but as the state, in which God findeth many, when he denyeth them the grace of Faith;] You speak not a word of Impenitency, 'tis clearly granted by you all, that that was not looked upon in the Act of Preterition. But for its companion, (as Tilenus had linked them together) though you divorce them, for your advantage, remembering the old Rule (Divide & Impera) I mean Infidelity, God had respect to that, as the state wherein he found many, etc. I pray how many are they? and which? Infants or Adult only? 2. Is there not a Fallacy in those words, (When he denyeth them the grace of Faith?) He denyeth it to the Reprobates for ever; and therefore if you understand it of his denial of This grace in the last stage of their lives, He must needs find them then in a state of Infidelity. Or 3. do you mean the Heathens, by these Many? What state can they possibly be found in else, when God denyeth them the Grace of Faith? But if this be your meaning, you have placed that Infidelity amongst very unfit Associates; For this can be but a Negative, not a Positive Infidelity; and so whether it can be reckoned amongst their other sins (as being a sin itself) is another question. † That men cannot see or believe, without a certain Medium or object, this is no more their fault, than it is that they see not non-existents, etc. M. Baxter of saving faith pag. 53. f. But 4. did God find any, really, in the state of Infidelity, when he denied them the Grace of Faith, according to the Doctrine of the Synod? Do not they and you conclude, that Preterition is the denial of this Grace? 'Tis proved sufficiently already that they do so. And you know, some of them are of opinion, (and that opinion not rejected by the rest) that in his Preterition God considered mankind, only as having a possibility of being, in regard of the sufficiency of his divine power; Did God find any then in a state of Infidelity? They that bring the Decree of Reprobation down lowest (amongst the Synodists) do affirm, that it was passed in consideration of the Fall of Adam. To this purpose I might produce a cloud of witnesses, Act. Synod. Dord. 2. part. pag. 77. q. 5. 3. part. pag. 24. thes. 7. & p. 123. f. were it not needless, seeing we find so much in confirmation of it amongst the very Decrees and Articles of the Synod, to which all those Divines subscribed. That God out of his mere just will hath not decreed to leave any man in the fall of Adam, and common state of sin and damnation, or to pass over any in the communication of grace necessary unto faith and conversion. This they reject as one of the troublesome errors. Cap. 1. Reject. 8. and cap. 2. Re ect. 5. That all men are received into the state of reconciliation and grace of the Covenant, so that no body shall be condemned for original sin, nor, in respect of it, be liable unto death or damnation, but that all are acquitted, and freed from the guilt of that sin. This they reject as the same error too. To the like purpose is the first Rejection of the 3. and 4. Chapters. Where we have not only rejection or denial of grace; but damnation also entailed upon Original sin. And if the grace of faith was denied to them upon that account, how could God find them before it in the state of Infidelity? Sure you will not make it Adam's state before his fall, for he had no need, and therefore it was no part of his duty to believe; in the Gospel sense of believing; and consequently Original sin, whether as committed by him, or derived unto us, cannot be Infidelity; Therefore that was not the state he left men in, and yet the Decree of Reprobation had no other lower Prospect of man, as a condition to pass him by upon, but that wherein Adam left him, as the Synod hath defined. And therefore your [other sins] must disband together with your state of Infidelity, unless Original sin be a Noun of Multitude; For that is that, which the Synod calls the common state of sin and damnation, wherein they say, God left the Reprobate, when he denied them the grace of Faith. But M. Baxter proceeds, and tells us of the Synod further, that Of all the Non-elect they determine that God leaves them but in that misery, into which, by their own fault they precipitate themselves: and that he leaves them by his just Judgement to the Malice and Hardness of their own hearts. 'Tis most certain, when ever God leaves men, he doth it by his most just judgement: but that He should leave them, to the Malice and Hardness of their own hearts, before this Malice and Hardness be found in them, were very strange. And unless Adam's sin, or Original sin, upon which the Decree of Reprobation passed against them, be Malice and Hardness of heart, I see no truth in that assertion, that God leaves them (then) to the Malice and Hardness of their own hearts. This is indeed a misery, into which men by their own personal faults, do precipitate themselves: such is not that which you and the Synod speak of; neither by omission, nor by commission, nor by consent. How then? It is the fault of their Nature, which they are made guilty of only by imputation, saith Master Calvin, as you may find him cited in the Preface to Tilenus his Examination. To which I will add that of Lubbertus † A Synodist. In Declaratione Respons. pag. 105. , Our Carnal generation from Adam, fallen and guilty, neither is, neither can it be, the cause of that original guilt which we derive from him; but the imputation of sin committed by him, etc. And if it be thus, than you cannot say, they are but left in that misery, into which by their own (if you mean proper personal) fault, they ptecipitate themselves. Neither is it true, that they are but left in this misery; for according to the nature of the means, designed by this very Decree, and subordinated to the execution of it, they are subjected inevitably to a far greater misery, 1. of sin, and 2. of condemnation and punishment. To proceed. You say, Though they deny Election to proceed upon foreseen saith (because God decrees to give that faith, before we can be foreseen to have it) yet they purposely pass by the question, Whether foreseen Infidelity be in any the qualification of the object of Reprobation or Preterition: But plainly they took foreseen [Malice, hardheartedness, mens own sin, and their own ways and common misery] to be the qualification of that object. Answer 1. For the Common misery we grant it; In drawing up their Canons against the Remonstrants, touching the divine Decrees, they thought it would be most for their advantage to plant them upon that ground. But what? men's own sin, and their own ways too, did they take these to be the qualification of the object? It seems the Reprobates learn to go alone betimes. But I suppose they had not gone very far in those ways, what ever speed they made; For the Synod do determine that this Act of Reprobation, or preterition, passed against them upon the fall of Adam, (as was observed before, and the places where they hold it forth pointed out to you) and how many Leagues had Cain travelled upon his own legs, at that time? and yet he was the first of such travellers that were left in that fall, if yet we may conclude him to have been left in it. But I see, if you have not mistaken them, the Synod have misled you, in these, [their own ways]; Cap. 1. Art. 15. For whereas they say, the Non-elect are those, whom God hath decreed to leave in the common misery, and not to bestow saving faith, and the grace of conversion upon them, but leaving them in their own ways, etc. Here's a description of Reprobation, with the fruits or effects of it. 'Tis a reliction of men in the common state of misery, accompanied with the denial of saving faith and the grace of conversion; and here is their first setting forth, in their progress into actual sins, till, having accomplished that unhappy voyage, at last they arrive at condemnation and just punishment, as the Synod (in other words) reports it. Here then, if you consider the Decree of Reprobation passed upon the Account of Adam's fall, men's own (if you take it for) actual sin, and their own ways are not a previous qualification for it: but a necessary and unavoidable consequent of it. 2. Unless [Malice and hardheartedness] be common Titles for Original sin, (and if they be, they are very absurd ones) you are as much out of the story as before, as hath been made evident already. And so for Infidelity; For Infidelity of this kind, as a sin, there can be none, (according to your own doctrine) till Christ, the object of saving faith be propounded. He could not be propounded (for a Saviour, till there was need of him) till after Adam's fall; but before that Proposal, the Act of Reprobation stepped in, and prevented all the Non-elect of his saving benefits, as the Doctors of the Synod have concluded. And yet 3. If God found many of these Non-elect, in a State of Infidelity (as you affirmed a little above), why that should not be acknowledged, as fit a qualification, to be looked upon, in an object of Reprobation, as Adam's fall, or any other, if not much more, than any other of their own sins, I cannot yet understand. But the truth is, though Master Baxter saith, they purposely pass by the question, yet having fixed their Decree of Reprobation upon the fall, to speak consonantly to that Doctrine, they could make no question of it; especially having denied election to proceed upon foreseen faith; De Reprob. Judic. de propos. 1. Act. Synod. Dor. part. 2. pag. 19 For the Divines of the Palatinate do conclude from that Rule, Contrariorum eadem ratio, eadem scientia est, That from the account given of Election 'tis easy to take the measures of its opposite, Reprobation. † Dicere, Deum quofdam reprobasse propter praevisam incredulitatem, blasphemum est in Deum, cui hac ratione jus suum detrabitur, gloria eripitur. Paraeus in Rom. 9.13. One thing more, I must take notice of, though it be shut up in a Parenthesis; you say, God decrees to give faith before we can be foreseen to have it. I would fain know, whether God's foresight hath no other Perspective glass or way of discovery but His Decree? For, if he doth, in your opinion, decree to give or effect every thing in us, before we can be foreseen to have them; than it inevitably follows, that in your Judgement, that [foreseen Infidelity, Malice, hardheartedness, men's own sins, and their own ways and common misery.] are to be put upon the account of God's Decree, and laid at the door of his efficiency. And then, whether to punish men for these, (if they be the effects of his own Decree, and so unavoidable) be justice in him or no, you go on and tell us of the Synod, That, they make Preterition an Act of Justice in God. Answ. But Sir, I have showed you before, that not only a single Person, M. Norton, Quum Deus Decretum electionis fecit, tum justitia ejus nondum erat laesa. Piscat. contr. Schaff. Th. 104. but a whole Assembly, (that late one at Westminster) make it not an Act of Justice, but of Sovereignty. And may not this be the very sense of the Synod, by an equivocal use of the word Justice? For Gomarus * Thes. de Praed. disp. 1604. Thes. 27. Nicasius à Schure saith, Non accidere ex justitia judicii divini, quod plures s●nt condemnandi, quam salvandi, sed ex justitia do●minii, etc. So Appen. pressor. Declar. in Praefat. Reprobation being fixed at original sin, and that ascribed to God's imputation only, the whole account of that Decree is finally, by them resolved into God's mere will; hence they make a● rather an Act of Power than Justice. (a Creabilitarian, as was noted above) saith, though God doth destinate and create men to destruction, he cannot be accused of injustice, in regard of a double right in him; 1. that of absolute dominion; 2. that of judgement, subordinate and relative to sin, (when it is committed.) So, saith he, here appears a double justice. One is the Justice of an absolute Sovereign, who is supposed to do no injustice, whatsoever he doth, being under no Law, and having all at his dispose; In this sense the Supralapsarians call Preterition an Act of Justice. (Jure Dominii:) Or 2. the Justice of a Governor or Judge, who passeth no sentence of condemnation, but upon intuition of sin, or evidence of guiltiness; and in this sense the Supralapsarians will not, but the Sublapsarians do acknowledge Preterition to be an Act of Justice. Now, how many of the Synod were for Gomarus his sense, and how many for the other; I shall leave to M. Baxter to Examine. In the mean while I shall hasten to make my Reflections upon the VIII. Section. HAving gotten footing upon such firm ground, as he supposed he had laid, He proceeds to expostulate very Magisterially in these words. And where now is the odious error that this second Tilenus put such a face upon? Sir, It hath a more ugly face of its Own, than any Tilenus can put upon it; and neither the Synods mask; nor your paintry can hid it, much less make it beautiful. But where is it to be seen? you ask, Is it in the Number? If he think a greater number are saved or absolutely decreed to salvation, than they do, he should speak out. I Promised you already not to quarrel further with you about the number. But what if Tilenus should speak his mind out, in this particular? I hope there is no Felony, nor Treason can be made of it. I will therefore tell you plainly for him, (if you do not know his mind already), that he is so far from thinking that a greater number are absolutely decreed to salvation, than they do, that he doth not think so of any single person whatsoever. But what! do they think, that any number are absolutely decreed unto salvation? Absolutely? That is, without any regard to their Faith or Obedience whatsoever; and are they come to this already? But perhaps by the word Absolutely, you intent, Absolutely in respect of Motives on God's Part, not in respect of Means on our Part, and yet I cannot tell how you should do that neither, since the means are absolutely decreed too, as to be wrought in the Elect, according to the judgement of the Synod, and most expressly declared by the British Divines. * Act. Syn. Dor. part. 2. pag. 200. But what if we grant you an Absolute Decree, in respect of such Motives? If we acknowledge, that there is in man no Cause, Motive, or Moral Title unto his Election: but ascribe it wholly to God's good pleasure and Grace: will you then condescend to it, that there is any qualification at all in him, unto which, as the Term or Object, the wisdom of God thought fit, the Decree of election should be Terminated? Grant this and we shall soon agree. But what should this Term or Object be, to qualify Persons for their Election? It can be no other, than what may make us capable, in the accounts of the Divine wisdom and Grace (of which the holy Gospel is the best Repository) to receive the Highest Act of God's Dearest Love towards us in Christ Jesus; and such is our Election unto Glory, Our Saviour's [Come ye blessed children of my Father] at the General Judgement, being nothing else, but the Solemn Judicial Publication of it. But if Tilenus be of this opinion, What manner of Persons ought we to be in all holy Conversation and Godliness? 2 Pet. 3.11. For it should seem by this Doctrine, that a holy faith and a blameless life, are made the previous dispositions to our immutable election unto Glory. But this will usher in a new objection of Master Baxters against Tilenus. For if he think, (saith Master Baxter) that God foresaw that they would believe and obey, before he decreed to give them faith or the grace of obedience, and consequently that these are only or principally of themselves, and not of God, be must condemn Austin etc. as well as the Synod of Dort. Here we have a very Perverse insinuation, if I may make so bold, with Master Baxter's leave, to use his own expression. Believe and obey (you mean the Gospel) before a Revelation of it, or a call to it? Was Adam obliged to do so, or could he do so in his state of Innocency? And will poor collapsed Tilenus pretend to it? No, he hath studied the Mysteries of Grace, and learned himself, and the incapacities of Mankind better. God hath, not only a Foresight, which is, as I may say, bounded within the compass of things future, In their due time, existent; which cannot be without his Decree: but also a Foreknowledge, which extends to all things Possible, though no Decree ever did, or ever shall pass for the futurition or existence of them. Thus He foreknew that the men of Keilah would have delivered up David into the hands of Saul, 1 Sam. 23.12. if he had stayed amongst them; and thus he foreknew that Tire and Sidon would have repent, Mat. 11.21. if they had been placed under the same dispensations, as Chorazin and Bethsaida were. Now suppose, Almighty God to consider men under such a state and order of means; though he hath not, as yet (to speak after the manner of men) decreed to establish either such an order, or such men under it, yet by his Omnipotency, he infallibly foreknows what creatures of such capacities, would do, being put into such a Posture. But for Faith and Obedience, these duties relating to some Authority and Revelation, and requiring power far above what remains in us since the fall of Adam, it implies a Contradiction to say, Man can believe and obey the Gospel, before he receives as well a competent strength as a proper Object for it. But Almighty God having put such and such capacities into us, and placed us under such and such means and dispensations, in his eternal wisdom, He Foreknows what use and what improvement every one will (in that order) make of those capacities and dispensations; And then making a Decree according to this his Foreknowledge, He Foresees who will believe and obey, not before he decrees to give them Faith or the grace of Obedience, as M. Baxter perversely insinuateth: but after it, (though considering them under such an order of means, he foreknew it, before his Decree) and consequently this both faith and obedience are neither only, nor principally of themselves, but of God; And this is consonant to the Doctrine of the Primitive Church, for all the purest Ages of it. † As Mr. Baxter acknowledgeth in his Saints Rest. part. 1. pag. 154. in the margin. f. And if the Passion, or prejudice or interest of fierce Disputers have raised new Articles, and maintained them at the charge, or upon the reputation of their Over-credulous Admirers, yet having imposed so palpably upon the Faith of the Church, they are in these particulars, to be forsaken, by what Names, or Titles soever they be dignified or distinguished. And for this we have S. Austin's own warrant and direction. Disputationes quaslibet etiam Catholicorum & probatissimorum virorum, Epist. 111. non esse tanti faciendas, etc. He saith, The Disputations of the most approved Catholics are not so highly to be esteemed, but that it may be always lawful for us, with respect to the honour that is due to them, to reprove those things in their writings, which we think to be recessions from the truth. And he addeth, that himself did so by the writings of others, and he would have others do so by his own. Nevertheless Master Baxter may receive competent satisfaction to his scruples, if he will but keep his word; For he makes a very reasonable demand in these words; For my part, saith he, I wish no more in this, then may consist with Rational Prayers and Thanksgivings; and if this be all, who will not add a great AMEN to it? Do you wish no more than what may consist with Rational Prayers for the Grace of God? For my yart, I am so fare from denying you this Option, that I wish, with all my heart, that you would really grant but so much for yourself and all your Party. But the truth is, men of your Ortho-DORT Persuasion, if they speak consonantly to Right Reason, they must conclude the prayers of the Major part of mankind, to be grossly irrational and absurd. For according to your principles, some, even of those, who are truly sanctified, (for such S. Austin, by your own acknowledgement, allows to be amongst the Non-Elect) can never address themselves to their Devotions, but they must, either pray for their own damnation; which is irrational; or that the Divine Decree about it (as it is calculated by your Doctrine) may be repealed; which is no less irrational than the former. And in (that which is of general Prescription) the Use of the Lords Prayer (A Form, which I hope M. Baxter's modesty will yield to be as Rational, as any his zeal, Fantasy or Godliness can make, at lest Ex tempore,) All the Non-Elect are, by unavoidable Consequence, involved in offering up (as it were in one breath) cross Petitions to a like Purpose. For, according to your Doctrine, All these Non-Elect, are left, at least, in the Lapse of Adam, under (as many call it) an efficacious Permission to fall into Actual sin; in intuition and respect whereof, they are Predamned to everlasting fire; and the End of this, you say, is the Advancement of God's Glory, and the Final execution of it, at the Great day, which will be the consummation of his Kingdom. Hence it follows undeniably, that in offering up those Petitions [Hallowed by thy Name; Thy Kingdom come; Thy will be done;] They pray for their own damnation. And again, seeing this Damnation, (to which, Yours say, they are Preordained upon this account) is the greatest evil of Punishment, (or a combination of them All,) To which, though they may be Decreed (according to the Doctrine of many Calvinists) by Gods Right of Dominion, or his absolute Sovereign power of Jurisdiction, yet adjudged and sentenced to it justly they cannot be, without the guilt of sin; and therefore the said efficacious Permission of sin, and the peremptory Denial of Grace Sufficient and necessary unto Faith and Repentance (without which there is no Remission) are Decreed likewise, as the unavoidable Means of bringing that Horrible Decree to its Final, Infallible execution; Hence it follows by unavoidable Consequence, That in offering up those other Petitions, [Forgive us our trespasses; and lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil,] These Non-Elect do implicitly Pray, that the said Decree may be Repealed. But his Question following, [Would you not have men pray for faith that want it?] May put a man to a stand, if not to silence. The Synod itself was not resolved about it. For though it be a piece of their advice in their 16. Decree upon the 1. Chapter: Yet upon second thoughts, (Chap. 3. and 4. Reject. 4.) and a fuller view of it, they descry it to be an enemy, not only in Arms, but upon the March too, (as the English Translator gives Intelligence) against direct Testimonies of Scripture: And Donteclock saith, All study and care a man can use to promote his salvation, before faith and the spirit of renovation, is not only vain, but rather hurtful then profitable, as you heard above. If this be true, to what end should a man pray for faith that wants it? But I thank God, I am not of M. Donteclocks opinion; and therefore you shall have my advice without a fee in this case; Let him pray. And he that hath it, let him Pray for more continually with thanksgiving. But M. Baxter hath not done his Expostulations yet; for he goes on in the same strain still. Was it not a Rational Prayer [Lord increase our Faith] and [Lord I believe, help thou my unbelief?] Who doubts it? And was it not a Rational Thanksgiving of Paul for his Converts, that [God had given them both to believe and suffer for him? Phil. 2.29. ] That God had given the Philippians to believe and suffer (not to fight) for him, I find, by way of assertion, not thanksgiving, which yet had been very commendable, if he had thought fit to take the occasion. But you observe God gives both to Believe and suffer; I suppose you mean the opportunity and patience to glorify his Name and Gospel by their sufferings; for sure you cannot think that God did actually inflict the reproaches, which they suffered, or their stripes upon them; and if you understand it of the grace and power to yield submission to their Persecutions with meekness, we must remember the concession till we meet with a fit occasion to make use of it. In the interim we will hare the patience to read out your long objection; which proceeds still in these words, [Sure you do not mean when you pray for [Increase of Faith] that God would give you natural freewill, which you had before, or that he would send the Gospel to you; but some way that he will effectually procure you to believe. (And doubtless the way of his internal operation is beyond our reach, and therefore beyond our dispute.) 1. If this be beyond our reach and our dispute; why have your Party stretched themselves so much, and multiplied so many fierce disputes about it? Ch. 3. & 4. Reject. 8. & Art. 12. Nay, why have they defined so positively, that God employ's his omnipotent strength in it, working (our regeneration) in us, but not with us (as the English Translator hath it) but, without us; why do you say this operation is performed, insuperably, irresistibly? Nay, if the work be beyond our reach, why have so many Worthy learned men been, not only reviled but ruined by them; because they chose rather to follow the expressions of the holy Scriptures and Ancient Fathers, then subscribe to their new and unsavoury, and contradictory Phrases, and positions? 2. You may be sure, when he prays for Increase of Faith, no man in his right wits, intends his natural free will, nor the sending of the Gospel, when he hath it lying by him. But now, I pray, let me take my turn to put Questions. Had the Primitive Church for 3. or 400. years together no Rational Prayers? Have the Lutheran Churches at this day, no Rational Prayers? Did not they, and do not those, in their devotions, beg earnestly of Almighty God, that some way he would be pleased effectually to procure them to believe? Can this doctrine make so great a Harmony in their Liturgies, and can it not consist with your Prayers? I am sure the fault is not in the Doctrine. That is innocent and charitable and good friends with all the world, and therefore very well disposed both for Prayers and other holy Duties. 3. What think you of these Prayers, amongst the rest, in the English Liturgy? ALmighty God, which showest to all men that be in error, the light of thy Truth, to the intent that they may return into the way of righteousness; Grant unto all them that be admitted into the fellowship of Christ's Religion, that they may eschew those things that be contrary to their profession, and follow all such things as be agreeable to the same, through our Lord Jesus Christ. Or of this, LOrd from whom all good things do come, grant us thy humble servants, that by thy holy inspiration, we may think those things that be good, and by thy merciful guiding, may perform the same, through our Lord Jesus Christ. Or of this, O God, forasmuch as without thee, we are not able to please thee, grant that the working of thy mercy may in all things direct and rule our hearts, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Or of this, KEep, we beseech thee, O Lord, thy Church with thy continual mercy, and because the frailty of man without thee cannot but fall, keep us ever by thy help, and lead us to all things profitable to our salvation, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Or of this, LOrd, we beseech thee, to grant thy people grace to avoid the infections of the Devil, and with pure heart and mind to follow thee, the only God, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Lastly, what think you of this Prayer, PRevent us, O Lord, in all our do, with thy most gracious favour, and further us with thy continual help, that in all our works begun, continued, and ended in thee, we may glorify thy holy Name, and finally, by thy mercy, obtain everlasting life, through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Is not this a Rational Prayer? Doctor Jackson saith, That, In the first part of this Godly Prayer, B. 10. chap. 37. pag. 3131. we have the state of the Question concerning the concurrence of Grace and Freewill, more pithily and more plainly set down, than in any Controversy-writers, whether in the Romish or reform Churches. The Sum is, That without Gods Preventing Grace, or peculiar disposition of his Favourable Providence, we cannot do any good works at all, though but Civilly or Morally Good, nor any works Spiritually Good without God's assistant Grace, or gifts of the Spirit inherent in us. To be a Helper, is a Title, which the Almighty frequently takes upon himself; and the Church is wont to appeal to him under that Title, when she addresseth herself to him, to gain his succours in her distresses. And, as S. Austin hath observed, that Title is as well a prescription of our duty, as a support of our expectation. Ipsum nomen Adjutoris praescribit tibi, quia & tu ipse aliquid agis. Agnosce, quid poscas, Agnosce, quid confitearis, quando dicis, Adjutor meus es, ne derelinquas me. Adjutorem utique invocas Deum. Nemo adjuvatur, si ab illo nihil agatur. If we style God our Helper, we suppose ourselves to be in action, and our Prayers designed to solicit his assistance, not to cut out work for him. If we think those divine dispensations, under whose influence, we desire, in our prayers, to be conducted, should determine all our good motions, we might soon be tempted to throw off all care and leave all other duties to be wrought in us, by God alone, and betake ourselves wholly unto prayer. And having entertained this vain imagination, how many are there in the world, that, when they suffer infirmity, or fall into fouler sins, are ready to ascribe it, not so much to their own neglect of duty (for alas! humble and modest wretches, they can do nothing!) as to the suspension of that divine Omnipotent determination, that should have accomplished the same in them. And then they comfort themselves with such thoughts as these; [God did not determine me, not bow my Will to do otherwise. I cannot of myself change my disposition, and this is that I received from God, who suffered me to be led into this temptation, though I have not failed to pray daily not to be led into it. What shall I do? I hope God will one day give me so to be determined that I shall not fall.] Thus they hope, and pray, and expect the return of their prayers, but their sin remains, because they will not be convinced, that it is their own duty, at least, not that it is in their own Power and choice, to determine against it. Our torpor and lukewarmness is a disease that wants so great a remedy as our own prayers and God's quickening assistance. But if the sword of Josua doth not second the elevation of Moses hands, if our endeavours do not attend upon our Prayers, those Amalekites that infest us will never be discomfited. Hence Saint Peter is careful, that when we rise from off our knees, we should take heed to our walk also, 1 Pet. 1.17. If ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your so journing here in fear. In a time of violent temptation, I doubt not, God may and many times, doth vouchsafe, so to fortify and determine the will of his faithful and devout servants, at the importunity of their ardent prayers, (or when he sends them out upon some signal employment, Rev. 3.10. Mar. 13.11. for the service of his Name and Church) that they shall not be vanquished or transported by it. But when their will is thus necessarily determined by Almighty God, their liberty ceaseth, and they cannot properly be said, at that very time, to obey God (as obedience presupposeth liberty, and denoteth duty) in overcoming that temptation; because that Special Help (which gains the Conquest) is given as a kind of reward of their former piety, or as a present benefit returned unto their prayers. But we are to consider, not what God's superabundant Goodness is pleased to confer upon such as are excellent in virtue, (whether by way of reward for their former piety, or of benefit upon the earnestness of present devotions) to help them in their saddest exigencies: But what his ordniary way of dispensation is in the Commencement and carrying on the work of Grace in men's hearts. The best measures we can take for this, are his own Revelations; and these are discovered not only by Commands, established with promises and threaten: but by obtestations and complaints: As I live, saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth; Ezek. 18.23. Turn ye, Turn ye; why will ye die, O house of Israel? Psal. 81.13. By Options and wishes; O that my people had harkened unto me: and Israel had walked in my ways! Deut. 32. v. 29. Chap. 5.29. O that they were wise, that they understood this! O that there were such a heart in them! By Prayers and beseechings; This is signified by the extension of hands, Isa. 65.2. (which is often set forth as a posture of Prayer) All the day long have I stretched out my hands to a gainsaying people: (and) Now than we are Ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us, we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled unto God. The Sincerity of God's earnest desire of man's Conversion and Salvation, attested by these (and other like) Pathetical obtestations, Options, and Prayers, is enervated and overthrown, viz. as well by the necessity of an irresistible conversion, as by the insufficiency, or internal inefficacy of Grace, and impossibility of obedience. 'Tis inconsistent with the Divine wisdom to desire impossibilities, as life from a dead creature, or motion from a carcase; for that were, to desire a sufficient effect from an unsufficient Cause. So to desire an irresistible conversion; for that were to desire obedience, wherein there must be liberty, in necessity; and to be earnest that that may be done by others, which he absolutely intends to do irresistibly by himself. But whereas M. Baxter is so tender and jealous of the reputation of his own Reason; and that must not be debased so much, as to be prostituted to an irrational devotion; it were well, if he were no less tender and jealous of the honour of the Divine wisdom. For such is God's gracious Condescension, in his intercourse with poor Sinners, that he makes Prayers to them too, that they would be converted, and be reconciled, and be at peace with him. Are these His Prayers Rational or serious, think you? If your prayers to him, cannot Rationally consist, without his irresistible determination of your will; how can his to you, consist with it? Is it not agreeable to your Reason, to pray for God's preventing and following Grace, For Grace to excite and enable, and assist you, unless he doth invincibly apply your will to the singularity, and every circumstance of every good act you do; And is it agreeable to his wisdom, to pray and beseech you, to do that, as your duty, which he must insuperably work in you himself, or else it shall not be done at all? So that, in short, your objection from Rational Prayers, is unavoidably returned upon yourself; For what, you think, you may rationally expect from him, upon the account of your Prayers; the same he may as Rationally expect from you, upon the account of his. And thus much for Rational Prayers. And by Parity of Reason, your objection from Rational Thanksgivings will admit of a like Solution. 'Tis certain we can never give Almighty God sufficient thanks for the Riches of his abundant grace and favour towards us. But there are a sort of sturdy Beggars, that will cross the proverb and be choosers too; and if they may not have what they list, they remain churlish and unthankful for all other instances of our bounty. But the law hath made a good provision, in appointing not an alms to cherish, but a whip to chastise such dispositions. A [God I thank thee] may be expressed with no little vehemency of Spirit, when men have little thanks for their labour; For 'tis ordinary, as well to ascribe unto God what his Justice will not own, a Jer. 7.10. as to expect what his wisdom will not grant. b Isa. 58.3. You should consider that as we are obliged to give thanks: so God hath thought fit to give commands, and doth vouchsafe commendations and praise to our well performed duties. Whatever the Ignorant vulgar do, a wise man will not cast away his commendations upon the actions and combatings of those little Puppets that play in fight, but reserves them for the honour of that invisible hand behind the Curtain, by whose sole strength and activity they are put into their several postures. If our Regeneration or conversion be wrought in us solely by God's Omnipotent strength, without us (as the Synod hath designed) it were very absurd that we should have any praise for it: yet the Apostle saith, that, that circumcision of the heart, in the Spirit, (which can be nothing else but regeneration, or conversion) though it gains no praise from man, as not subject to his observation, yet it hath praise of God. Rom. 2. ult. God allows his servants to seek for glory and honour, as well as immortality, by a patiented continuance in well doing. Rom. 2.7. c Phil. 3.8. and he assures us, for our encouragement, we shall not lose this part of our reward. For he will give praise, and an Euge d 1 Cor. 4.5. Mat. 25 21. serve bone & fidelis, well done thou good and faithful servant! God understands the extent of his own work and his creatures duty, better than you or I; and he is so jealous of his own glory, he will not prostitute any part of it to an unworthy flattery of his Vassals. The Approbation and Applause he gives them, at the end of the day, when their work is done, is an earnest admonition unto us, who are still upon duty in the Vineyard, that he expects to be honoured by an ingenuous and free obedience. To lay all the burden of our duty upon his operation, that the more thanks may accrue to him upon that account, is to grow lazy that Grace may abound; And he will never accept of such thanks, as are set up to commute for duties that are attended with more cost and difficulty, or are made a pretence for sloth, or an encouragement to tepidity. 2. I would ask, from whence these Thanksgivings, you set so much by, come? Sure, if the rest of your good Motions carry this stamp of Divine and irresistible Determination upon them, your Thankesgiving do so too, and then whether they be Rational or no, you cannot but perform them, and in that case, whether it be Rational to expect praise and glory for them, I have some Reason to be doubtful. The sum of all is this; The Praise which God gives his servants for the performance of their duty, it is a Rational Praise, or it is not. I hope, you will not say the last, for shame; for admit there be a great Grace in it, yet you must allow that there is some truth too, Joh. 1.17 and then it must be Rational; for God is a God of wisdom. If this praise be Rational, than it is for something done that might have been omitted, or done otherwise; else how can a man have praise in himself alone and not in another, Ecclus. 31.10. as the Apostle saith he hath, if his works be Judgement-proof and current? Galat. 6.7. In short, this puts the difference, betwixt that Good, that consists in duty, and that which consists in operations merely voluntary; and that whether they proceed from the Excellency of Essential Perfection, as in God, or from the benefit of exalted Nature, as in Saints, and Angels. They, who are subject to a law in the quality of Probationers, in order to their trial for preferment, they can give no proof of themselves; Acts of Subjection they may do, but rewardable obedience they cannot perform, unless they have liberty of Contradiction (as the Schools call it) a freedom to do, or not to do their duty. It is otherwise with Angels and holy Spirits at their journey's end, when they Rest from their duties, Rev. 14.13. and reign as kings in the possession of eternal bliss. The excellency of their goodness consists in a perfect voluntary Conformity to the chief Good, with a full satisfaction and acquiescence in the fruition of it, with out that imperfection of a liberty to do otherwise. Upon our arrival in heaven, and our immediate approximation unto God, when we shall be like him, and see him, as he is in Glory, we shall then Will Good as the blessed Saints and Angels do, most voluntarily, yet not of freedom but necessity: But to do this, is the Prerogative of our Nature, in highest state of Exaltation, by way of reward upon the consummation of her duty, which is free obedience, and never properly performed (unless by special dispensation, if any such be granted) but when we have it in our own power and choice to do otherwise. But this contemplation hath transported me beyond my bounds. All that is desired of Master Baxter is this, that he will allow, that praise, which the most wise God gives unto men for their good duties, may be as Rational, as Man's Thanksgiving for the benefit of the Divine Grace; and then his objection will amount to nothing. But as long as he continues so eager in a palpation and flattery of his own Reason, He must expect to meet with some Adversary, that will be no less zealous in a just vindication of God's wisdom. But let us attend to the case he puts for Tilenus to answer, which is ushered in with a [If,] and an interrogatory, after this manner. 3. [If his offence be at God's preterition of men without a foresight of their demerit) as taught by the Synod. To interrupt your Period, I suppose this is a matter to take offence at, and to carry a just indignation against too. For Donteclock and Molinaeus say, it chargeth God with unjustice; Molin. Anatom. Armin. cap. 13 pag. 84. For it cannot consist with God's Justice, Si homo innocens & nullam ob culpam destinaretur ad desertionem, ex qua aeterna perditio necessario consequeretur; If a man innocent, and for no fault should be destined to desertion, from whence of necessity his eternal perdition followeth. He addeth another Reason (Parag. 10.) If God hath destined his creature to perdition, it is necessary that he should have destinated it to sin too, without which that perdition cannot be just, and so God shall be the impulsive cause of sin. Nor can man be justly punished for that sin, unto which he is either precisely destined, or compelled by the will of God. And (Parag. 6.) He flies higher, and saith, By this kind of Reprobation the Innocent creature is not only made most miserable, but also most wicked. For if God doth first hate man, the work of his own hands, it cannot be but that man must needs hate him again; and so God, by this opinion, is made the Author of sin, and man's hatred of God. This Opinion therefore, even in the Judgement of Molinaeus, (to whom the Synod gives so great commendations, amongst their Acts † Part. 1. p. 300. .) does justly give offence to all Readers, that are tender of the honour of Divine Justice. But (saith M. Baxter) it is not their Doctrine (true or false) but his (Tilenus) forgery, yea it seems contrary to their Doctrine. You say right M. Baxter, it seems contrary to their Doctrine: and they and you, are much beholding to your seem: But Multa videntur, quae non sunt; and so doth this. Was it rejected as a troublesome Doctrine to those Churches, wherein it was so fiercely maintained? Let the Reader remember (if Master Baxter will not) what the Contest was, betwixt Maccovius and Lubbertus, mentioned above; Let him also reflect upon the Public Profession of Gomarus in the open Synod, let him read again his Definition of Reprobation, forecited. There were many Creabilitarians, as well as Gomarus, who made the creature in its condition of Possibility, to be the object of the Decree. And these Spirits were too Mercurial to have been fixed, to a subscription, of those Canons or Decrees of the Synod; if any Syllable had been found in them, which they could not easily, by the benefit of some few distinctions, have reconciled to their Supralapsarian Doctrine. These are none of Tilenus' forgeries, Master Baxter; by which, what ever their Doctrine seems to you, (for Perit judicium cum res transit in affectum) it will be evident to the impartial Reader, that the Major Part, to which the rest subscribed, thought it a thing indifferent, Act. Synod. Dor. part. 2. pag. 34. f. Sir Judic. Gomari de Reprob. part. 3. p. 24. Th. 2, 6, 7. (and so the Deputies of the Synod of South Holland, express themselves, as was alleadgcd above) Whether God's Preterition of men were in foresight of their demerit, or without it. If, (as you say of God's regard to faith and obedience in reference to election; so) you affirm he had regard in his Preterition to men's demerit, 1. as the necessary fruit or effect of that Preterition or Reprobation; ● as the condition upon which he decreed to damn them; I grant in this sense, 'tis their unanimous Doctrine, that in his Preterition, God had a regard to it, and a foresight of it. But indeed, saith M. Baxter, they (well) (how well, is referred to the Readers judgement) affirm that there was the same sin and demerit, (therefore not regard to faith and obedience in Tilenus' sense) in many, whom yet, God Decreed to convert and save. They say so; but there is so much equivocation and Artifice in their say, that we see the Supralapsarians concluded they might Subscribe to it, without Prejudice to their own opinions. Master Baxter proceeds thus, 4. If his offence be, that they think, that [God doth not effectually convert and save all the rest of the world] if he be a Christian, he believes the same himself: or if he be not, one Part of it may be seen. If you had Practically learned, what that of our Saviour meaneth, Mat. 7.3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, you would have weeded this last clause out of your discourse, before you had charged Tilenus with Perverse Insinuations. But Tilenus will take no offence at this; neither is he offended, that God doth not effectually convert and save all the rest of the world; no nor yet, that he doth not give to all Grace that is immediately sufficient to faith in Christ and to salvation. But his offence is, that you teach, God hath rejected fare the greater part of mankind, not-willing to save them, nor to give Christ to die for them, nor to confer any saving benefit upon them, by the help whereof they might convert themselves, no not when he doth seriously and with open arms invite, solicit, and even with prayers and supplications exhort them to be converted and save themselves from perdition; but to have decreed, that infinite Myriads of men, fallen, by divine punishment inflicted for Adam's sin; into an utter inability to rise again and convert themselves, should without any mercy be born under a designation to the eternal and most exquisite pains and torments of hell fire; and which is more, that when the Promises of the Gospel are held forth to allure them to an expectation of a better condition, See Act. Synod. Dord. part. 2. pag. 24. Th. 2, & 6. & p. 84. Thes. 21. p. 35. Thes. 2. & part. 3. pag. 76. p. p. that they should be decoyed into a state of infidelity, and a new contumacy, whereby they may be involved in a more heinous guilt, and so obnoxious to a far more intolerable condemnation, for the rejection of that Grace which was never intended to be of advantage to them; and all this to no other end in the world, but that by this means, the most Gracious and Merciful God, might procure (as is pretended) the Glory of his Liberty and absolute Dominion, in saving and damning his poor Creatures at his Pleasure. But here Master Baxter, falls upon us again; for he saith, 5. If he be offended, that they teach, that God doth not give sufficient Grace to the rest; I answer, That which he calls sufficient Grace (but you cannot tell where) or those of his way) they confess that God gives to other men as well as to the elect. Answ. 1. Those of his way? why may not he have a way by himself as well as you? But the truth is, he is no great friend to Singularity. He loves to keep the good old way, where a man may be sure to find him, and where he is sure to have good company, that love to keep the beaten road with him. But of your Party, Isa. 56.11. Of Right to Sacram. in the preface. every one follows his own way, as the Prophet complains; insomuch as you take liberty to tell them, it is not in my power to be of all men's minds, when they are of so many and inconsistent. But 2. do the Divines of the Synod say, that God giveth sufficient Grace to other men as well as to the Elect? I pray point us to the place, I am sure, your so much admired Martinius saith otherwise, and yet he was the most likely to use the fullest expressions to this purpose; But when he had cut some fair Trenches, as if he would bring the water of life into the dwellings of the Reprobate, on a sudden he opens a Sluice that carries all from them again to refresh the of the Elect. Et quia his (Electis), saith he, Fides, applicandi organum, donatur, Martin. de morte Christi pro solis electis. Thes. 5. part 2. p. 107. reliqua communia beneficia, quae ex fonte communis dilectionis oriri dixi, incredulos praeterfluunt, apud eos non manentia, in solos electos influunt; ut quibus solis fiunt utilia. All common benefits which do spring from the fountain of God's common Love, they do slide by, and make no stay in unbelievers: But they flow into the Elect, and become beneficial to them alone, to whom Faith is effectually communicated, to that purpose. By this it is evident, that Martinius did not give sufficient Grace to others, as well, as to the Elect. 3. I wish M. Baxter had dealt ingenuously and freely with us. He might have told us positively, that the Synod confess, God giveth sufficient Grace to the Non-elect: But he knew very well, this is inconsistent with their Doctrine, which I shall make evident by several arguments; as 1. They who are left in the fall of Adam, and common state of sin and damnation, they have not Grace sufficient to salvation. The Non-elect are left in the fall of Adam, and the common state of sin and damnation. Therefore they have not Grace sufficient, etc. The Major is evident of itself, The Minor is the express Doctrine of the Synod. In the 1. Chap. of Predest. Art. 15. & Reject. 8. & Ch. 2. Reject. 5. 2. Arg. That which comes to the Non-elect by accident, and not out of an intention in God to do them Good, is not sufficient to salvation. That Common Grace comes to the Non-elect but by Accident, and not out of an intention in God to do them good. Therefore— The Major needs no proof. The Minor is the Doctrine of Triglandius, a Synodist, In Declar. pag. 202. who saith, That the external calling of the Gospel is properly directed to the Elect only; and the Reprobate are not called but improperly and by accident. And Master Baxter hath let fall something to this purpose, in his Treatise of Right to Sacraments. pag. 418. m. and little less is employed in the 15. Sect. of his Preface, in these words, Is it a Rational conceit,— that God hath as full a purpose etc. To this sense the Deputies of Gelderland above. 3. Arg. That which comes short of what is necessary to salvation, is not sufficient to salvation. The Grace conferred upon the Non-elect comes short of what is necessary to salvation. Therefore etc. The Major is evident; because the least measure of sufficiency that can be, taketh away necessity. The Minor is the Doctrine of the Divines of Embden, (in terminis) As God for his good pleasure Decreed to leave some in that misery, Act. Synod. Dord. par. 2. p. 76. Hyp. 5. into which they were precipitated by their own fault; ita Media ad salutem necessaria iis non confer, decrevit; So he decreed not to confer upon them means necessary unto salvation. So the Deputies of the Synod of South Holland, amongst the Acts of the Synod at Dort. Part. 3. pag. 35. De Reprob. Reject. 1. and the whole Synod in the 8. Reject. upon the First head of Doctrine, where they threw it off as an Error, that God did not decree to leave any in the fall of Adam, and pass any over in the communication of Grace necessary to Faith and Conversion. 4. Arg. Common Grace only is not sufficient to salvation. The Grace conferred upon the Non-elect is common Grace only. Therefore. For the proof of the Major, I will refer the Reader to M. Baxters' additional Sheet, (at the end of his Papers, Of saving Faith † Pag. 94. ) especially Prop. 13. where he may see the nature and effects of common Grace, and how far it can carry a man. The Minor I presume M. Baxter will not deny. 5. Arg. That Grace which doth Specifically differ from saving Grace, and can by no improvement of the Non-elect, become saving Grace, is not sufficient to salvation. The Grace conferred upon the Non-elect, doth specifically differ from saving Grace, and can by no improvement of theirs become saving Grace. Therefore. The Major, I think will not be denied. Vbi supra. The Minor as to the first branch of it is Master Baxter's Doctrine; Synod. Dord. 3. part. pag. 213. and as to the second branch of it, 'tis the judgement of the Divines of Drent, who affirm, that Finis horum generalium donorum non est, ut eorum recto usu majora & plura mereamur aut assequamur, & tandem Reprobi fiant Electi: Sed ut Societas humana & politia conserventur, Electisque variis modis inserviatur, utque ad vocationem internam praeparentur. That is, Those general gifts are not bestowed upon us, to the end that by the right use of them we might obtain more and greater gifts, and so at last the Reprobate become Elect: But that humane Society, and Policy might be preserved, and that they might be inservient to the Elect, and prepare them for their inward call. As much as this, upon the matter, is employed by the Synod amongst their Decrees. Chap. 3, & 4. Reject. 5. 6. Arg. That Grace which doth not slow from the fountain of saving good, is not sufficient to salvation. The Grace conferred upon the Non-elect doth not flow from the fountain of saving good. Therefore, The Major is clear enough. The Minor is proved out of the Decrees of the Synod. Chap. 1. Art. 9 Where they say, Election is the fountain of all saving good; from whence faith, holiness, and the residue of saving gifts, lastly, everlasting life itself, do flow, as the fruits, and effects thereof. 7. Arg. That Grace which is not conducible to the salvation of the Non-elect, is not sufficient for their salvation. The Grace conferred upon the Non-elect is not conducible to their salvation. Therefore. The Major is evident. The Minor is proved thus, That Grace, which in the very intention of God worketh to the hurt of the Non-elect, that Grace is not conducible to their salvation. The Grace conferred upon the Non-elect, in the very intention of God, worketh to the hurt of the Non-elect. Therefore. In Hoseam 13.9. The Major needs no proof. The Minor is proved out of Polanus; Those, saith he, whom God hath Predestinated to eternal destruction, those he also createth to eternal destruction, to them all things which are for the salvation of the elect, are unto their eternal destruction. Which shall further appear by this 8. Arg. That which is intended and designed, as a mean to carry on the Decree of Reprobation, to its final execution in the Non-elect, that is not conducible to the salvation of the Non-elect. The Grace conferred upon the Non-elect is intended and designed to carry on the Decree of Reprobation to its final execution in the Non-elect. Therefore. The Major is not to be denied. The Minor is proved out of M. Perkins, who speaking of the execution of the Decree of Reprobation, (in the Adult, Armilla Aurea. Cap. 53. who are called) makes three Degrees in it; and in the first, he placeth their Illumination, Repentance, temporary faith, the taste of the heavenly gifts, and the sanctity of their outward life. These are several steps in carrying on the execution of the Decree of Reprobation, and to this end is that common Grace conferred upon them, as the more ingenuous and clear, of that side, do acknowledge. For they tell by sufficient Grace (when the equivocation of the Phrase is laid aside) they mean sufficient (not unto salvation, that is far from their thoughts, but) to these Four ends. To Convince them of their contempt, or at least, neglect of that great benefit (which elsewhere they say, Synod. Dord. par. 279. was never intended for them) thus the British Divines. De Art. 2. 2. To render them inexcusabi●. So Gomarus, in his Theses de Praedest. (disp. 1604.) Thes. 31. and the Belgic Professors in their Synopsis Pur. Theol. Disp. 24. Thes. 55. and the Orthodox Churches of Wedderau, in their Judgement given in at the Synod, and Master Perkins speaks very home to the point. Ib. par. 3. p. 152. (de Praedest. pag. 85.) All that are within the Pale of the Church are bound to believe the Gospel; that he is redeemed by Christ every one, as well Reprobate as Elect, but for different reasons. The Elect is bound to believe that by believing, he may be partaker (of the fruits) of Election: The Reprobate, that by not believing, he may be made inexcusable, etiam ex intentione Dei. 3. To improve their induration, and blindness. So Calvin. Instit. l. 3. c. 24. n. 12. Those whom he hath created to dishonour and destruction, that they might become instruments of his wrath and examples of his severity; that he may bring them to their end, one while he deprives them of power to hear the word, another while he doth more blind and harden them by the preaching of it. (& n. 13.) Behold, He directs his Word to them, but it is to make them the more deaf: He sets up his light amongst them, but to make them more blind: He affords them his Doctrine; but to the end they may be more hardened by it: he applies the remedy, but that they may not be healed. 4. To augment their condemnation and torments. So Beza. Most miserable wretches, In brevi explic. tot. Chris. Aph. 6, 7. altius conscendunt, ut gravius ruant. They are advanced higher by these gifts of Grace, that their fall may be the greater. Resp. ad Scrip. cujusd. Anon. And Donteclock saith, Christ is preached to the Reprobate: but to what other purpose, then that, Resp. pro Daventr. ad Apol. Mathisti. p. 36. by this means their condemnation may be the greater: and Jacob. Rivius saith, the Reprobate may frequent the Church, hear God's word, receive the Sacraments, etc. but yet they cannot be illuminated by these things; but all this means tends to aggravate their condemnation, because God will declare his glory by their destruction. These are the only ends for which Master baxter's Common Grace is acknowledged by those Divines to be sufficient. But if the Reader be so weak, as to be imposed upon, and think Master Baxter meant (Sufficient) to salvation, the Synod do utterly disclaim it. So the Divines of Geneva De Reprob. Thes. 1. (2. part. pag. 51.) and those of Embden, pag. 73. Quaest. 12. & pag. 175. f. they say, Distinctio illa Gratiae in sufficientem & efficacem, si non de externis mediis, sed de vero & interno Spiritus tractu loquamur, minimè nobis probatur. They will not allow of the distinction of Grace, into sufficient and efficacious, if by sufficient you understand any thing besides outward means. So Gomarus, (part. 3. p. 24. th'. 2.) The Divines of South Holland, (pag. 35. a. m.) and they of Gelderland, cast a reproach upon the Doctrine of sufficient Grace in these words; Quod de sufficienti gratiâ & suasione Spiritus S. dicitur, qua potest velle, credere, converti, cui adhibetur, nugae sunt. Mere trifles, say they. Part. 3. pag. 162. f. The Deputies of Over-Isel do earnestly deny it too, pag. 195. p. and P. Molin. Part. 1. pag. 290. f. In a word, what ever Master Baxter saith, the whole Synod denies sufficient Grace. Ch. 1. Art. 15. and Reject. 8. and Ch. 3, & 4. Reject. 5. and elsewhere; Nay, (to use his own words) though Master Baxter puts such a face upon it, he denies sufficient Grace plainly himself, in his very next words; for he saith, To give them (the Non-elect) the natural power of free will, and a Christ to be believed in, and an offer of Christ and life, and an earnest persuasion of them to accept him, and to leave the matter to their own choice, yea and to add common exciting moving help of the Spirit, which yet is uneffectuall, this is it that the Jesuits call sufficient Grace. Who quarrels with them for the name? The Dominicans yield it them; and though the Jansenians deny it them, the Protestants have no mind to quarrel about a word, the thing is yielded them by all: Nay Master Baxter, abate me an ace, quoth Bolton. All the Divines of the Synod did not grant it. But I wonder, you should so confidently undertake for all Protestants, as if you were their Great Dictator, or Prolocutor, and had all their Senses in your head, and their votes at your girdle; when alas! we see by too many of your complaints and volumes, that there is not so good an accord amongst you; where upon you say, in your Preface (To your Disp. of Right to the Sacrament) If I agree with some Reverend Brethren, it must displease the rest by disagreeing from them. And in the point we are about, you disagree from a many of them; who deny sufficient Grace, unless taken in those four senses above mentioned, as well as the Jaensenians, whose ingenuity I must commend, that denying the Thing, they abhor the practices of others, who study to deceive by equivocating with the Name. But I see Master Baxter will be Catholic indeed; He is grown as charitable as the very Jesuits, and allows the Non-elect as much sufficient Grace as they do; The natural power of , an offer of Christ, and a persuasion to accept him, yea and exciting help of the Spirit too, but uneffectuall. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉! But let us examine how much it weigheth, that the Non-elect may see how much they are beholding to him for his courtesy. A thing may be said to be effectual or uneffectuall in a twofold sense; as for example, a medicine may be effectual of its own nature, against such a disease, and yet, prove uneffectuall through his fault to whom it is administered; and that either because he will not endure the Application of it; or because he will do something or take something, that prevents or disturbs and interrupts the operation of it. But when Master Baxter tells us of his sufficient uneffectuall Grace, he doth not take uneffectuall in this sense. 'Tis uneffectuall in its kind, and of its own nature (as to the production of faith and conversion, (according to their Doctrine) and not only through the fault of him to whom it is administered. So that we may set forth the sufficiency of Master Baxters Administrations, for cure of the sinsick soul, by a comparison of the like made to the body. To a man desperately sick, suppose Master Baxter should thus address himself in the company of an eminent Physician; Sir, you are in a very sad condition, and nothing is to be expected but sudden death, unless you will submit to our directions and Prescriptions to prevent it. I see, God be thanked, you have all your natural faculties, your mouth and your stomach, and here I offer you an excellent Physician, and I entreat you hearty to be advised by him; he will give you Physic shall be wholesome and work very gently, it may stir the humour a little, but there is no danger of working too much, for indeed 'tis uneffectuall. Let the Reader judge whether M. Baxter should not deserve a fee of such a sick person, for affording him such a sufficient means of Cure. Would not this Doctrine make an excellent exposition upon that of Jer. 51.9. Curavimus Babylonem, We would have healed Babylon [we applied very wholesome medicines, yet uneffectuall] but she is not healed: forsake her? And would not this doctrine make a very Pathetical Gloss upon that Commination (of Ezek. 24.13.) In thy filthiness is lewdness; because I have purged thee (administering very sufficient remedies, yet uneffectuall) and thou wast not purged, therefore shalt thou not be purged any more from thy filthiness, till I have caused my fury to rest upon thee? Yet this is Master baxter's Doctrine, and his concession of sufficient Grace to the Non-elect; and if they will not take his word for the making of it good, he will put in Sureties, the Jesuits and the Dominicans, for the performance of it. But that we may not doubt he is in earnest, he renews his Grant in these words; This General and Common Grace which such call sufficient, leaving the matter to the sinner's choice, we yield that God giveth to the worst that perish. Which such call sufficient? Who are those [such]? Such as your self, the Dominicans and Jesuits. But the Remonstrants are Non-such. If you go to the Jesuits Schools to learn the doctrine of the Remonstrants, no marvel you are deceived. But that the Reader may not follow you in your error, I must tell him the Remonstrants have not so learned Christ, having been taught as the truth is in Jesus. But I must not take leave of this passage, till I have taken notice of a [perverse insinuation] in it, in these words, [Leaving the matter to the sinner's choice]. What, as if a man should bring food, or Physic, or Cordials, to the door of a sick Bedrid person (under a pretence to relieve him) and leave it there (for him to take in, who is not able to stir out of his bed) and depart, taking no further care for the importation of it? This is none of the Remonstrants' Doctrine. God doth not leave the matter to man's choice in this sense. He continues his solicitations, till he hath been very frequently and very shamefully repulsed (for his Spirit shall not always strive with man, Gen. 6.) He stands at the door (which is within our sick-man's reach, Rev. 3.20. and is by God's knocking made in his power to open; there God stands) and knocks still, for admission and entertainment; but it being man's duty, and therefore a matter of choice, not of necessity, (wherein, as the common saying is, He can neither will nor choose) it must be his own free Act to open the door, else Christ will not enter in and sup with him. And this is notably evinced, 1. from God's command, Deut. 30.19. Therefore choose life. 2. from Christ's commendation, Luk. 10.42. Mary hath chosen the good part. 3. from that commination, Prov. 1.29. For that they did not choose the fear of the Lord. And this is good wholesome Doctrine with Master Baxter, when he gets into the Pulpit; For there he tells his Congregation, in good sober sadness, that the reason that most men perish, for all the mercy that is in God, and for all that Christ hath done and suffered, Treatise of Convers. pag. 2. and for all the Grace that is offered them in the Gospel, is, What? Even because they will not receive this Grace, nor entertain Christ and the mercy of God, as it is offered to them. And what doth this signify, but this, because they would not choose it? And upon this account they are condemned, and very justly. Yet when he is come from his pulpit, and undertakes to dispute with Tilenus, 'tis not sufficient that God's Mercy and Christ's Merits, and the Divine Grace be at his choice, to receive it; this may serve the Non-Elect: But be not angry, saith he, if we thank God for more, even for giving us both to Will and Do. If you may be allowed to be your own Carvers, no doubt, you will be very liberal in the choice of your own portions; and if God ratifies it, 'tis well for you. But we find that God's design, in his way of dispensing Grace, is to promote and advance duty: but your way doth evacuate and cancel it. For if he works the very Act (which we call duty) by an irresistible operation, in nobis sine nobis, as the Synod saith of Conversion, in us but without us, than duty is no more duty, but necessity: and Grace is no more Grace, but force. That God worketh to Will and to Do, others acknowledge with no less thankfulness than yourselves, if you mean a power and ability in us to Will and to Do (as you employed your meaning to be, a little before, when you said, He gives both to believe and to suffer) that is, a power to do it; yet so as the will is left, more free rather then determined under an irresistible necessitation, and consequently man may abuse his liberty, Heb. 12.15. 2 Cor. 6.1. and be wanting to the Grace of God, and make default in his cooperation, and so his will may remain undetermined, and the work to which he was enabled, be left undone. But if you think, when God works to will and to do, 'tis not in Man's power to bury his talon, and contradict God's motion, I must reject that Comment as a corruption of the Text, and a subversion of the Apostles argument to enforce his exhortation; With all humility, solicitude, fear and diligence, Eph. 6.13. lest God be offended, and you miscarry, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Perficite, conficite, interficite, superate (for the word hath all these significations) all difficulties and opposition being subdued, work out, and make your salvation dead sure; for it is God that grants and works ability, not of necessity and indesinently, but of his mere grace and good pleasure, which he may be provoked to suspend and withdraw. This sense gives a huge enforcement to the exhortation. But according to your interpretation, the Apostle should argue thus, My beloved, it is God that worketh in you to Will and to Do, determining your wills to the very Act of duty, insuperably and irresistibly, so that it is not in your choice to do otherwise; and this he doth because it is his Good pleasure: therefore work out your salvation with fear and trembling. Would such exhortations tend to the quickening of your Audience, or rather make them careless? Or can it consist with the Holy Spirit of Discipline and wisdom to use such a vehement exhortation, and then back it with such a Reason, as (if granted) would render that exhortation insignificant and to no purpose? for what diligence is to be used out of a fear of miscarriage, if the effect be irresistibly determined? In the Appendix to your Aphorism, you say, Pag. 52. Believing is properly a condition required of the Party if he will enjoy the thing promised. And in your Treatise of Conversion, pag. 296. you say, Salvation is not given barely from the will of God, but from the faith and obedience of men, for it is an act of rewarding Justice, as well as of Paternal love and mercy: What is that rewarding Justice terminated upon? Man's free duty, or God's omnipotent irresistible work in him? Resolve this, and Tilenus will not be angry, that you give God thanks for working in us to Will and to Do. Reflections upon M. Baxters' IX. Section, and the II. Article. WHerein Master Baxter sets up (to be baited and worried, as his Fantasy pleases) the Second Article, in these words, [Saith this new Tilenus, They hold, that Christ Jesus hath not suffered death for any other but for those Elect only: having never had any intent nor commandment of his Father to make satisfaction for the sins of the whole world.] Here M. Baxter flies out into passion and foul language, and the first Case of his indignation he gives us in these modest expressions [A most shameless falsehood, made, as they say, of his fingers ends.] By the way, I cannot sufficiently wonder, why a man, that hath wrote so many Directions for Peace of Conscience; should throw such Birds of prey off his own fist, to devour a strangers. Reputation: but the best on't is, they are so well acquainted with the place of their breeding, he may safely venture to fly them without his varvells, they will find the way home of themselves; and therefore I shall not need to trouble myself to take them up for him. But whether Master baxter's finger's ends be not more dexterous at such work then are Tilenus', let the Reader judge by what follows. There is not a word of the Decrees of the Synod that hath any such importance; saith Master Baxter. But you have taught us to distinguish betwixt Name and Thing; suppose the word should not be there, I hope it will satisfy the Indifferent Reader, and save Tilenus his Reputation, if the sense be there; and if (at least) this be not there, I shall despair of ever understanding the Riddles of this Sphinx, without the help of such an Oedipus, as Master Baxter. The Synod (in their 2. Chapter, Art. 8.) decrees and declares their Doctrine in these words, For this was the most free council, gracious will, and intention of God the Father, that the lively and saving efficacy of the most precious death of his Son should manifest itself in ALL the ELECT, for the bestowing upon them ONLY, Justifying faith, and bringing THEM infallibly by it unto eternal life; that is, God willed, that Christ by the blood of his Cross (whereby he was to establish a new Covenant) should effectually redeem out of every people, tribe, nation, and language, All THEM and ONLY THEM, who from eternity were elected to salvation, and given to him of the Father, that he should bestow saith on THEM (which as also the other saving Gifts of the holy Spirit, he purchased for THEM by his death) that by his blood he should cleanse THEM from all sins both Original and Actual, as well committed after, as before they believed, and finally should present THEM before him in glory without all spot, or blemish. Here we see the saving efficacy of Christ's Death for their Redemption, restrained to the Elect Only, and that according to the council, will and intention of the Father; and this Master Baxter had under his view, when he expressed so much wrath against Tilenus; and therefore he confutes himself with this Confession, They do indeed assert, Art, 2. Sect. 8. That it was only the Elect that God the Father intended by the death of Christ effectually to bring to faith, justification and salvation: which is the same Doctrine with that of Election before mentioned. Who ought Master Baxter this shame, to betray him to this incogitancy? The same Doctrine with that of Election before mentioned? Why, was not that Election of some, certain, culled out Persons; as the Synod declares? So we see what Master baxter's Universal Redemption comes to: His Redeemed All, are no more than his Elected All: 'tis an All in respect of kinds, not of Persons. But Christ is theirs to be suit, according to the most Free Council, gracious will, and intention of God the Father. So saith the Synod, and this Master Baxter will subscribe to, when he is Disputing against Tilenus, though when he gets into the Pulpit he declares, this to be a Doctrine of an ill influence; for he saith, Christ and salvation are made light of, because of this disjunctive Presumption, either that he is sure enough theirs already, Making light of Christ. pag. 21. and God that is so merciful, and Christ that hath suffered so much, for them, is surely resolved to save them, or else it may easily be obtained at any time, if it be not yet so. Is it not the express Doctrine of the Synod and Master Baxter, that Christ is sure enough the Elects, and that God and Christ are resolved to save them, and that this will most infallibly be obtained at God's time, if it be not so yet? This disjunctive presumption which he preacheth down in his Church, he disputes up in his Closet. And though, when he is conversing with his papers (inter Adversaria) and drawing Diagrams concerning the Divine Decrees, his good wits jump with the Synod, and tells us, The Father intended by the death of Christ effectually to bring to Faith, justification and salvation, none but the Elect, yet when he hath his Crown, which is his crowd of Auditors about him, he forgets himself, and if not his love to truth, his zeal to souls transports him into other language, much more pathetical than this Doctrine will allow of; For thus he addresseth his exhortation to them; Ibid. pag. 29.30. Beloved hearers; the office that God hath called us to, is by declaring the glory of his Grace, to help under Christ, to the saving of men's souls. I hope you think not that I come hither to day of any other Errand. The Lord knows I had not set a foot out of doors, but in hope to succeed in this work for your souls. I have considered and often considered, what is the matter that so many thousand should perish. [Now the man is in a rapture and hath quite forgotten his Decree of Reprobation] when God hath done so much for their salvation; and I find this that is mentioned in my Text; [Mat. 22.5. But they made light of it.] is the cause. It is one of the wonders of the world, that when God hath so loved the world, as to send his Son; and Christ hath made a satisfaction by his death sufficient for them all, and offereth the benefits thereof so freely to them, even without money or price, that yet the most of the world should perish; yea the most of those that are thus called by his word! [Is it one of the wonders of the world, that God's eternal and immutable Decrees concerning them, should be executed?] Why, here is the reason, (saith Master Baxter,) when Christ hath done all this, men make light of it; God hath showed that he is not unwilling; (but your Synod hath showed otherwise;) and Christ hath showed that he is not unwilling, that men should be restored to God's favour and be saved; but men are actually unwilling themselves. God takes no pleasure in the death of sinners, but rather that they return and live, Ezek. 33.11. (How came he then to reject them upon Adam's sin, and deny them Grace sufficient unto salvation, as you teach?) But men take such pleasure in sin, that they will die before they will return. The Lord Jesus was content to be their Physician, and hath provided them a sufficient plaster of his own blood: (but such as his Father intended should not be effectual, by your doctrine:) but if men make light of it, and will not apply it (which your Party confess they are not enabled to do) what wonder if they perish after all? This Scripture giveth us the reason of their perdition. It is a most lamentable thing, to see how most men do spend their care, their time, their pains for known vanities; while God and Glory are cast aside: (and a little after) Oh how should we marvel at their madness, and lament their self-delusion! (who preach such contradictions) Oh poor distracted world ● what is it that you run after? and what is it that you neglect? If God had never told them what they were sent into the world to do, or whither they were going, or what was before them in another world, (or what Decrees had past to shut them up under sin, and deny them the Grace of Faith and Repentance, according to your Disputations) than they had been excufable; but he hath told them over and over till they were weary of it. This is Master baxter's preaching vein; by which his vulgar flock would be ready to flatter themselves, that they had their Teachers warrant to be confident, that God doth earnestly intent the salvation of them all. But when this pang of soulsaving zeal is over, that he gets into his polemical strain, than he disputes them out of all their hopes again; for thus he proceeds; If this Tilenus think that God intended the justification and Salvation of all by Christ, it's absolutely, or conditionally. Here I wish Master Baxter had positively spoke out, what it is that God intends them, whom he calls the Reprobate or Non-elect; if not their Justification, and salvation; then, I know nothing else it can be, but their greater condemnation, and then sure he is unwilling they should be restored to his favour; which is opposite, point blank against Master baxter's popular exhortations. But if God intended their justification and salvation absolutely, they shall be saved, saith Master Baxter, which no Christian that I know believeth; Tilenus, as little Christian as you make him, is of This Faith too; and therefore he saith, God intended this but Conditionally. But then Master Baxter tells us, The rigidest Anti-Arminians, even Doctor Twisse doth over and over grant it you (and I thank him for nothing) of Justification, and salvation, that Christ died to procure this Common Grace, that men shall be justified and saved, if they will believe. The Reader perhaps may be amused at this Doctrine, That Christ should die to procure Salvation, upon Condition of belief, for such as are absolutely reprobated. But here lies the pretty knack; In Logic, there is a certain truth of the Connexion of the Antecedent and Consequent, when yet both the Antecedent and Consequent taken apart are false. For though it be true, saith Master Norton, If Judas believe he shall be saved; Vbi supra p. 79. yet is it not true, either that Judas shall believe, or that Judas shall be saved. Now by the help of this Logic, Master Baxter, and his Party, may be able to preach a very Common Grace indeed, though they utterly deny Saint Jude's Common Salvation. Epist. ver. 3. For the Scripture telling us indefinitely that Christ came to seek and to save that which was lost, Mark 16.15, 16. and Christ giving his Apostles Commission to preach the Gospel to every Creature; sticking to the letter of the Text, a man might infer, that Christ died to procure this Common Grace, for the horse and mule that have no understanding, yea even for the Devils; that they shall be justified and saved, if they will believe. For there is a truth of the Connexion of the Antecedent, and Consequent, [Whosoever believeth shall be saved], though taking them apart there is no truth in them: It is not true, either that horse, mule or Devil shall believe, or that they shall be saved. But as Master Baxter saith a little after, Christ did not die to purchase empty Names, as a benefit; So I may say, he did not die to purchase empty Connexion's of Antecedents and Consequents. This would be an excellent Motive to conversion, if made use of amongst the unregenerate, or a sweet Cordial for the Desolate spirit, to tell them there is a certain truth of the Connexion of the Antecedent and the Consequent, if they believe they shall be saved, though taking them apart there is no truth at all in them; For really they shall neither believe, nor be saved. Is not this strong consolation and passing encouragement to tell them, they have just as much possibility of grace and salvation as the beast that perish, or the veriest Devil? I know Iselburgh, In Artic. 2. Th. 1. p. 110. par. 2. one of your Bremish Divines, doth say, that no mortal man's sins are so great, but the sacrifice of Christ is sufficient for the expiation of them; nullus etiam ex genere humano ab eo ita aut pariter alienus sit, atque Satanas & Angeli mali: That no man is estranged to such a distance from Christ, as the Devil and his Angels are; and he citys for it, Heb. 2.16. He in no wise took upon him the nature of Angels: but the seed of Abraham. But Zanchy saith, he was born, prayed, died, risen again, ascended into heaven, and there maketh intercession for the elect only; and then as good he had not been born at all in respect of the Non-elect, nay, it had been good for them, if he had never been born; as we shall show anon. In the mean while the Reader is to be informed that the Divines of the Synod, at least, a many of them are of Zanchy's Judgement; and so we have not only the sense that Tilenus' charges upon the Synod, but the very words too. For the Divines of Vtrecht a De Artic. 2. Thes. 4. par. 3. p. 117. say positively, Christus pro omnibus & singulis hominibus non est mortuus; etc. Christ did not die, nor procure reconciliation with God and remission of sins, nor satisfy God's justice for the sins of Every one. Of the same judgement are the Divines of Over-Isel. b Ibid. pag. 134.135. The Hassien c Par. 2. p. 92. Divines deliver the same Doctrine too. And those of Wedderau d Pag. 100 , are of the same opinion; Christ performed all the parts of his Priestly office, fulfilled the law, paid the ransom, makes intercession; And of these three, all and only the Elect are the adequate object. Qua tria pro objecto adaequato habent omnes & solos electos. And the whole Synod in their Decrees Rejects e C. 2. de Morte Chr. Reject. 5. it as an error in those, who teach that all men are received into the state of reconciliation, and grace of the Covenant. If Christ died for the Non-elect and purchased neither Reconciliation, nor remission of sins, nor sanctification, nor eternal life for them, as the Synodists do generally conclude; to what end then did he die for them? to procure, saith Master Baxter, This Common Grace, which amounts to no more than the truth of the connexion of an Antecedent and the Consequent, [If they believe, they shall be saved] though there be a Decree passed against them from all eternity, that they shall neither Believe, nor be saved. Is not this a worthy achievement for the eternal Son of God to shed his blood, and lay down his life for, and a rare subtlety worthy the profound judgement of Doctor Twisse, and a whole Synod of Antiremonstrants? But the office of Christ's Mediatorship must be a little more evacuated, and stoop somewhat lower yet, to serve the interest of this Doctrine, as we shall now demonstrate. For, why was the Title of a Saviour imposed upon the Son of God? The Angel told Joseph, the reason was, because he should save his people from their sins. Mat. 1.21. What, from the guilt of them only? no sure, from the power of them also, the dominion and pollution. For he came to destroy the works of the Devil, 1 Joh- 3-5, 8. To turn away ungodliness from Jacob, See 2 Cor. 5.19, 20, 21. Rom. 11.26. To Redeem us from our vain conversation, 1 Pet. 1 18. To redeem us from all iniquity, and purify us unto himself, a peculiar people zealous of good works, Tit. 2.13.14. His Commission to this effect did not expire at his death, it was continued and ratified after his Resurrection; For God having raised him from the dead, sent him (which implies his Commission) to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities. Act. 3. last. And this was according to the Covenant, sealed with his blood, which contained on God's part a gracious Grant of power, That we being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him all the days of our lives, Luk. 1.74, 75. To this agrees the Grand Commission for the establishment of the Ministry; whose great employment is, to preach repentance, (and that is conversion, saith Master Baxter) and remission of sins in Christ's name among all nations. Luk. 24.47. To open their eyes, and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of their sins, and an inheritance amongst them that are sanctified. Act. 26.18. (From which, I remember Master Baxter, in some of his Papers, proves Sanctification to go before Justification, as Justification goes before Glory; and to this purpose, he tells his Reader flatly, that without a grain of his own salt, he cannot relish that saying of Saint Austin, Bona opera non praecedunt justificandum, sed sequuntur justificatum. Good works do not go before justification, but follow after it.) The Hassien Divines likewise do most expressly declare, Act. Synod. Dor. 2. par. p. 92. pr. that holiness and righteousness † And they do allege for it, Hebr. 9.10. Hebr. 13, 12. Eph. 5.25.26, 27. were as true parts of Christ's purchase, by the sacrifice of himself, and intercession of his blood, as were either Pardon, reconciliation, or eternal life. Now if our delivery from sin, by sanctification, be the very first Part of that Redemption which Christ hath wrought for the world; is it not a very gross and palpable absurdity, to overlook or overleap these first fruits of our Redemption (as I may call them) and to affirm, That Christ hath purchased the latter for some men, for whom he hath in no wise procured the former, i. e. Remission of sins and eternal salvation, for those to whom he hath not so much as procured reconciliation or sanctifying Grace? Yet this is generally the Doctrine of those Calvinists who seem most to advance the Merit and efficacy of Christ's death by their proclaiming an Universal Redemption. Christ, say the Hassien Divines, appears before his Father, as the only Mediator, Ibid. p. 100 that by the Presentation of his merits and accomplished satisfaction, he may procure remission of sins, and restitution of righteousness for us. Then he undertakes with his Father for our obedience and gratitude; the seal and earnest of which sponsion or undertaking, (which is) his holy Spirit, he confers upon us, by whom he stirs up in us a care and study both to avoid sin, and to perform righteousness. Lastly, he makes intercession for us. Quae tria intercessionis Christi momenta nullo modo ad hoedos, sed tantum ad oves Christi pertinent. These parts of Christ's Mediation do belong to none but the Elect. But perhaps these are none of those universalists of the Synod, that Master Baxter will be tried by. Well then, to do him a kindness, he shall have his own choice. First he named Paraem; and having examined him, he acknowledgeth the sufficiency of the merit: but the efficacy, as to the procurement of power, Ibid. par. 1. p. 213. etc. for the Non-elect to perform that Condition, of Faith and Repentance, (upon which pardon of sin, and eternal life are suspended) he flatly denies it. Ibid. par. 2. pag. 79. Th. 3. in explic. Here is but cold comfort from that stranger; let us therefore come to those, who sat warm in the Synod; what say the British Divines? It seemeth good to Almighty God (they say) even after his acceptation of Christ's Sacrifice, not to confer remission of sins and eternal life, actually upon any, but by and through Faith in the Redeemer. And here that eternal and secret decree of Election discovers itself; when that Ransom which was paid for all, and shall most certainly be beneficial unto all the faithful, to life eternal; yet notwithstanding it doth not profit all, because it is not given to all, to perform the condition of that gracious Covenant. Christ therefore so died for all, that by means of faith, all and every one, by virtue of this ransom, may obtain remission of sins and life eternal. He so died for the Elect, that by the merits of his death, especially destined for them, according to God's eternal Beneplaciture, they might infallibly obtain both Faith, and eternal life. Here is very slender confirmation of Master baxter's Universal Redemption hitherto; and now he hath but one reserve to trust to, the Bremish Divines; and alas! they say so little to make his assertion good, that I wonder as much, why he should offer to entitle them to it, as why he should so foully asperse Tilenus for declaring the Divines of the Synod etc. to be of another judgement. Ibid. p. 110. Thes. 2. For Isel-Burg affirms roundly, that the Decree of Reprobation hath shut out all the Non-elect from all the saving benefits of Christ's death. And Lud. Crocius, tells us of no other universal Redemption, Ibid. p. 117. Thes. 3. but Reconciliation, upon Condition, if they will repent and believe: Ibid. p. 106. Th. 21. with Pag. 107. Thes. 2, 3, 4, 5. but not a word of procuring Grace to enable all men to perform this Condition. And Martinius, whom it seems M. Baxter reposed most of his confidence in, though he tells us of a like Conditional Remission and Salvation, if they will be regenerated, repent, and believe, yet, really and effectually Christ hath promerited, purchased, obtained, and communicateth Faith, Regeneration, or effectual Calling, Justification and Glorification, to none, but the Elect, according to God's special Decree. This is his judgement. And now are not these Divines wonderful Magnifiers of the merit of Christ, in affirming that it hath procured this Common grace, even for the worst that perish, as Master Baxter Phraseth it, that he shall be saved, if he will believe? This is just according to the Proverb, If the sky fall, we shall catch Larks. You had as good (and may do it as reasonably) tell men of a certain inheritance designed for them in the world in the Moon, provided they will make a Ladder to Climb up to take possession of it. Happiness propounded upon Condition, but that Condition made impossible, and that by a punishment, inflicted by the Propounder; and yet he to be the Father of Mercies, who sent his own Son to seal a Covenant of Grace with his own blood, wherein he hath undertaken to give both Grace and Glory, this as the end, and that as the way. How inconsistent! But, saith Master Baxter, did God purpose to cause in men this condition or not? Sure he did. Otherwise, it would follow, 1. That God invites poor sinners to confederate with him in a covenant of Grace, and yet is deficient, in affording what is necessary, to enable them to perform it. And then, 2. it would follow that God were the First Desertor in respect of this new Covenant, which is against all sober Divinity. 3. It will make the Covenant of Grace to be no less intolerable than that of works; for by this Doctrine, it doth exact impossible commands, and afford no strength at all to perform them. It supposeth God to make new Laws, and lay new Impositions, upon those bruised shoulders of Adam's Posterity, whiles he pretends to heal them. It is a Rule in the Civil Law, Quando quis aliquid concedit, id etiam concedere videtur, sine que res concessae esse non potest. If God makes a grant of eternal life to any, or a serious Promise, sure he promiseth and granteth therewith, whatever is necessary for the enjoyment of that life. And in our case, (you heard,) provision is made for it by the very Article of the Covenant, Luk. 1.74, 75. Eph. 5.25. Heb. 13.12. and 'tis a main Part of our Mediators Office to take care for the performance of it, (in a way suitable to his wisdom, justice and mercy) according to that of the Apostle, Act. 5.30, 31. The God of our Fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye flow and hanged on a tree; him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, to Give Repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. * See Act. 3. last. But because he gives this, not to evacuate but assist our duty, not to discharge us from it, but to enable and so oblige us the more to be diligent in applying ourselves to it; Hence it comes to be our duty, as well as his donation, To have Grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and Godly fear, Heb. 12.28. and upon this account the Apostle exhorteth so earnestly, Phil. 2.12, 13. Work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God that worketh in you to will and to do, of his good pleasure. And this makes a fair way for our Answer to Master baxter's next demand, in these words; If God did (purpose to cause this condition) than it was Absolutely or Conditionally: if absolutely, it it will be done. If conditionally, what is the Condition? and so in infinitum. That you may not tire out your patience, or run yourself quite out of breath in such a long course, I shall endeavour to stop your passage, by telling you, that there is ordinarily, some condition to be performed, not by way of Causation, Merit, or Congruity, but by way of Order, to the introduction of faith, or the work of Conversion. This is confessed by Master Norton, who saith, Vbi supra chap. 6. pag. 129. That Christ in his ordinary dispensation of the Gospel calleth not sinners as sinners, but such sinners; that is, qualified sinners, immediately to believe. But because, he may run with the Hare and hold with the Hound, like yourself, in this course; therefore, I shall send an Ahimaaz after you, to give you a turn; I mean Doctor Jackson, 2 Sam. 18.27. no Novice, M. Baxter, in School, or Practical Divinity; Book 1 &. 3109. c. His words are these, And because Man by the assistance of God's special Providence (without the concourse of sanctifying inherent Grace) is enabled to do somewhat, which being done his Conversation or Mortification shall undoubtedly be accomplished; therefore are we said to mortify the body; and not so only, but to make our Election sure; yea to work out our own salvation. For so the Apostle speaks, Phil. 2.12. But how are we said to work out our own salvation? Non Formaliter sed Consecutiuè: Salvation is the Necessary Consequent of our working, or doth necessarily follow upon our work, Not by any Merit, or Causality, force or efficacy of our work, or by any natural Connexion, but merely by God's grace, by the Council of his holy and irresistible Will, by the Determination of his eternal Decree, by which it hath pleased him to appoint, Pag. 3110, & 3111. See p. 3114. The one as a Necessary Consequent of the other; to wit, Spiritual Mortification or life itself, as the Issue of our endeavours to Mortify the flesh. Thus that profound Doctor. To whom I may add the invincible Argument of that Learned, P. 3143. f. and Judicious Editor of his Works; His words are these, Let us take a Polemo, (a most shamelessly debauched Ruffian), upon this man we desire the work of the Lord by our Ministry may be prosperous. We must either tell him that there is something required of him in this present state, unconverted as he is, and so set him a Task; or that nothing at all is expected from him. These two be Points Contradictory Diametrally, there is no mean betwixt them. I say, that of this man, something is required. The first Minimum quod sic, is Reflecting upon his own actions, and the Law writ in his Conscience. Next I would apply some of God's words spoke by the Prophets to some sinful people or Person; Or I would read to him, Ezek. 18. as Isa. 1.16. Wash you, make you clean, put away the evil of your do, cease to do evil, learn to do well. Or that of Saint James 4.8. Draw nigh to God.— Cleanse your hands ye sinners, and purify your hearts, ye double minded. And would Affirm that these words signify something, were (not empty noises, but) Precepts; and if Precepts, have some Duty correspondent to be performed by him to whom I laid them; which is, quod quaerimus; that I would have done. My Adversary must say, Nothing is to be done; It's to no purpose for me to Exhort, or him to Try, nothing can be done to purpose. Now what will the poor Patient say? Men are naturally inclined to believe them, that most ease and please their nature's best. The least Consequent of this Doctrine that he will or can make, and that if he were a good natured man too, will be this; Why then I will betake myself to a negative idleness, wrap my body in my arms, sit still, and wait the Good hour when Grace shall breathe upon me. A Second will say, Go to then, I will eat my meat with joy, and take my portion of the things of this life, till tastes of a better drop into my mouth from heaven. A Third may perhaps do worse; wend to a Tavern, or worse place, and make work for Grace, with a graceless Desperate hope, that the more he sins, the more Grace, when it comes, may abound; that quo sceleratior eo Gratia vicinior: If my Adversary says nay; He must abstain from lewd Courses; we are half agreed: is not that part, the same with Esay's, Cease to do evil? If he maintain his Conclusion; I have no more to say, but to enter an Appeal to God, and this Protestation to man; That I disclaim all such dispositions, preparations, endeavours, as, cooperating to the Production of Grace, after the manner that temperate behaviour concurreth to produce the Habit of Temperance; or that natural qualities do, to produce Forms merely Physical: And this will quit me from Pelagianisme or Popery; But he shall never be able to free himself from the Errors of the Stoic or Manichees that holds it indifferent, what works a man does before he be regenerate. Ibid. This is Master baxter's own Doctrine. Sure I am, saith he, that some means is appointed to be used for the Acquisition of Special Grace. Of Saving Faith. (pag. 27, and pag. 46.) And that a very command to use such means as means, is a strongly encouraging intimation, that God will not deny men the end and blessing, that use the means as well as they can. For it is certain that he appointeth no means in vain. But whereas you say, immediately before this, That [you are satisfied, that God hath not entered into Covenant or Promise with any unregenerate man to give him saving Grace upon any Condition to be performed without it] Give me leave to ask you, Hath not God made a General invitation to all the unregenerate (within the pale of the Church) to come unto him, with a gracious promise to receive them? and doth not this promise imply a readiness, to grant what ever may fit them for his communion, without which, that promise cannot be made good to them? Dare you affirm, that God will deny saving Grace to some, who make the best use they can, of the Gifts of nature and his common Grace, to stir up themselves to lay hold upon him? If you dare do this, you dare contradict the Apostle S. Peter, Act. 10.34, 35. and say (though not, as he doth, Of a truth) [I perceive that God is a respecter of Persons: for in every nation, there be some that fear God and work righteousness, which are not accepted with him]. You complain * Vbi supra, pag. 40. , you have people in your Parish that are harping on this string, (and yet this is Ipsissima Fides DORDRACENA, † Chap. 3. & 4. Reject. 485. a string of that very Instrument, which you have provoked Tilenus to play upon) [We cannot give Grace to ourselves, nor be saved without it; nor can we have it till God give it us: which if he will do, we shall be saved: if he will not, all that we can do will not help it.] I pray do not you twist another string for them to harp upon, by telling them, Do what they can to dispose themselves for it, God hath made no promise to bestow saving Grace upon them. For this will make as foul a jarring in their minds, and as unpleasant Music in God's Church, as the Denial of works Preparatory and Dispositive to saving Grace. But to give you your due, you Govern your discourse sometimes with more moderation and Caution when you address yourself unto your Congregation. For though in heat of Disputation, you determine, That God hath Culled out some certain persons for himself by his Decree of Election; wherein he had no praevision of, or respect unto, either faith or obedience or any other good quality, as wrought in them by his Gospel accompanied with his Spirit; But he therein made provision for it, that in due time it might be irresistibly wrought in them, not with, but without them, by His own Omnipotent strength; And for the rest, not comprehended within that Decree, there is another Decree passed against them, withholding from them all internal Grace sufficient and necessary for their salvation; which though offered them in the Gospel, yet 'tis suspended upon the Condition of Faith and Repentance, which Condition is impossible, because God did not Purpose to 'Cause it in them. This is your Disputation-wise Doctrine, when you are combating with an Adversary: But when you are consulting the advantage of Souls, than you are zealous (as best becomes you) in another strain. In your Sermon (on Mat. 22.5.) you say, It is true that Grace is free, Making light of Christ. p. 21, 22. and the offer is universal, according to the extent of the Preaching of the Gospel; and it is true that men may have Christ when they will; that is, when they are willing to have him on his terms; but he that hath promised thee Christ, if thou be willing, hath not promised to make thee willing: and if thou art not willing now, how canst thou think thou shalt be willing hereafter? But soon after; Oh Sinners! you might do much, though you are not able to yourselves to come in, if you would now subject yourselves to the working of the Spirit, and set in while the gales of grace continue. And in your Directions for Peace of Conscience, Direct. 9 p. 65. Edit. 2. you affirm, If wicked unbelievers would but do what they can, in daily, serious, deep considering of these things, (viz. the vanity of the world, and certainty of damnation, the excellency of Holiness, with the certainty of everlasting Happiness) and the like, they would have no cause to despair of obtaining Faith and Sanctification. This is your Sermon wise Doctrine. And you have written [Directions to prevent Miscarrying in Conversion]. Sure, you do not fear a miscarriage of the work on God's part, the danger is not from his falling, but our own. Therefore something is required on our Part, and possible to be performed by us, which being performed, our Conversion is ascertained, but being neglected, it miscarries, and we ourselves only are guilty of it. If this be not true (Master Baxter) the Title of that Book is improper, and your whole Discourse impertinent. And now you have so many blocks in your way, and some of your own sawing out, I hope your course will be stopped, and your Dispute not run out in infinitum. I return to your Vindication of the Synod: you say, 2. [But contrary to this Accuser] This is another Cast of your displeasure: A Civil Title; To be an Accuser, is a piece of the Devil's character: but such bolts are soon shot, when Faction hath bend her Bow, and Pride hath a mind to make a quarrel. But if Tilenus be the Accuser, the Synod or Master Baxter is the Adversary; For he saith, Contrary to this Accuser the Synod declareth. (Art. 2. Sect. 3.) [This death of the Son of God is the only and most perfect Sacrifice and satisfaction for sins, of infinite value and price, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world] and that it is, [therefore sufficient— because this death was joined with the sense of God's wrath and curse, which we by our sins had merited.] that is, that the sins of all the world were etc. But how is this contrary to this Accuser? Indeed it is besides him, if you will, and as much besides the purpose. There is in the Chamber of London as much Treasure, perhaps, as will pay the Debts of all the Prisoners about the City; and 'tis so much the more currant, because it is of excellent old Gold: But what is this to the poor Prisoners redemption, as long as the Major and Aldermen, (in whose sole power it is to dispose of that Treasure) will not disburse it to that purpose? The superabundant sufficiency that is proclaimed to be in the Exchequer, doth not relieve the distressed, for whose benefit 'tis not employed, but rather upbraid the want of Liberality in him who is Master of it, and hath the Power but wants the Will, to lay it out in such charitable and pious uses. But, you say, [the sins of all the world were charged on Christ, and he bore their penalty, as Paraeus in his writings to the Synod (and there contained) expresseth it.] Answ. Laid on Christ? To what end? to Load him, or ease them? But you join with Paraus, Pag. 14. in your first Assize, Sermon, where you say, Doubtless Christ died not for all alike, nor with equal intentions of saving them; and yet he hath born the sins of all men on the Cross, and was a Sacrifice, Propitiation, and Ransom for all. To what end, I say, all this, according to your Doctrine? Was it to purchase saving Grace, Faith and Repentance for them? you say, No. Was it to make satisfaction and procure Pardon? you cannot with any modesty affirm it, if you speak consonantly to the Principles of the Synod; For, as you confess (Sect. 7.) they determine concerning all the Non-elect, that God left them in that misery, into which they were precipitated by the fall of Adam, and decreed to damn them for this and all other sins (which would inevitably follow upon their dereliction in this condition) as the Causes of their damnation▪ So that this Decree hath from all eternity, laid the sins of the Non-elect, upon their own shoulders, and they are immutably designed to sink under them; why then should they be charged on Christ? why should he bear the Penalty of them? Is not Christ a principal link in that Golden chain of means, composed by the Eternal Predestination to draw the Elect to glory? From hence some of the Divines of the Synod do conclude, That the death, and all salutary benefits of Christ do belong only to the Elect. Ad credentes quidem, propter indivulsam illam salutis catenam. Rom. 8. To them alone, Jud. Eccles. Wetter. Confir. Thes. 3. par. 2. pag. 98. in regard of that inviolable chain, Rom. 8. And you tell your Reader, in the Preface of your [Call to the Non-converted; [For God's Decrees, you must know that they separate not the end and means, but tie them together;] If it be so, why do you untie them here, and ascribe the Death of Christ, which is a prime means of salvation, in any measure to the Reprobates, who are immutably appointed to another end, unless you affirm withal, (which i● the Doctrine delivered by many of your Party † See M. Perkins Synopsis above, and Testimonies cited for this. ), that Christ's death belongs no further to them than it may cooperate to their End, that is, be a means of their destruction? But, you say, They add also (Sect. 5.) [That the promise of Salvation to all that will believe must be preached to all without difference, with the command of Faith and Repentance.] This Command is either Legal or Evangelicall; Legal a Quia solum Evangelium novit remedium contra maledictionem legis, solum etiam pr●dicat poenitenti●● in nomine Christi. Hemingius Syntag. Inst. Christ. Loc. 16. Thes. 21. I know you will not say; If Evangelical, then there is a promise of strength annexed to those commands, to enable us to perform them (for this makes the difference b Wendolin. Theol. Chri. lib. 1. c. 19 Thes. 6. in explic. Discrim. 4●. Evang. & Legis. betwixt precepts purely Legal, and Evangelicall; the Gospel doth afford strength, the Law none.) And Redemption from our vain Conversation, being (as was said) the first part of our Salvation, our Salvation must needs commence in an oblation of strength, the tendry of a Gracious Subsidy towards Faith and Repentance; which yet you deny the unregenerate to have any promise of, and how then can the Promise of Salvation be preached unto them▪ 2. If by salvation, they and you, understand only eternal life, (which is the consummation of it,) then to preach this, unto men, who are punished with an utter inability to repent and believe, for the Fall, or upon the Fall of Adam, I say to proclaim such a promise of Salvation, to persons of that quality, under condition of Faith and Repentance, is no less absurd, than to run in amidst a multitude of blind men, and promise them ten thousand pounds apiece, if they would but view such colours and distinguish the green from the black and white. And if you take remission of sins in to this promise of Salvation; and tell us, that is to be granted too, even to the Non elect, if they will Repent and Believe; This is as if a Physician should come into an Hospital full of sick and diseased persons, and profess seriously to them, Alas! poor wretches! what a number of sad Objects are here! But I have compassion in store for you, and my bowels yern over you, (and yet he administers nothing effectually to work their cure; but exhorts them vehemently after this manner) Come, be ye ruled by me, do you but purge your humours, and allay the inflammation of your blood and spirits, and reduce your bodies to a good temper, and I will save your lives, and preserve you from death and torments. Were not this a comfortable proclamation? But suppose a Command † As the Non-elect are tied, to Repent and Believe by a command, but excluded and denied ability by the Decree. were added to this Promise, and a Commination appendent to that Command, that if those blind men do not distinguish those colours, and those sick men do not of themselves recover their health, they shall be tormented in flames of fire, and kept alive in those flames to the uttermost; what would you think of such a tendry of salvation to these poor Mortals? But the Synodists were very willing to pass over this black and more horrid part of the story, whereof the event is undeclinable, and to take occasion to tickle the conceit of the Reader, with the Imagery of glorious promises, whose fruition, to such Non-elect, is utterly impossible. Yet even about these promises of the Gospel, I find a considerable difference amongst them▪ They are not agreed whether saving Faith, Conversion, or Regeneration (which come all to the same reckoning in this point) be promises or no. Upon that passage in Saint Peter, 2 Pet. 1.3, 4 Whereby there are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises, that by them we might be partakers of the Divine nature. In Notis Minor. ad lo●●● Beza saith, He doth not understand the Divine Essence, but a Participation of Divine qualities, whereby the image of God is restored in us. And sure, this is nothing else but Regeneration. If this be the matter of those great and precious Promises, and not the effect of them only, then here is a promise of Regeneration (conditionally) made to the Unregenerate (for the Regenerate being already possessed of them, the Promises cannot properly be said to be made to them as such) and truly seeing an Unbeliever hath a Conditional promise of Salvation made to him, Amesius Bellar. Enervat. Tom. 3. cap. 2. num. 10. as an Unbeliever, which becomes absolute upon his believing, as Amesius saith, I can see no reason, why we may not as well say, that an Unbeliever, or unregenerate Person hath a conditional Promise of Faith and Regeneration. The British Divines, if I be not much deceived, De 5. Artic. Act. Synod. Dor. p. 200. part. 2. were of this Judgement; For to prove that Faith and Perseverance are Absolute Promises, they say thus, There are some Promises of God which concern the End, others which concern the Means unto that end; The Promises which concern the end, v. g. concerning Salvation, are conditional. Believe, and thou shalt be saved. Be faithful (or persevere) unto the death, and I will give thee a crown of life. And seeing no man is able to perform these Conditions, God hath also made most free and absolute promises to give these very Conditions; which he himself worketh in us, that by these, as the means, we may attain unto the end. To prove this they allege, Deut. 36.6. God shall circumcise thy heart, that thou mayest love the Lord thy God, with all thy heart, etc. The end here promised is life; which the Israelites could never attain unto, unless the condition were performed, that is to say, the love of God. But God doth here Absolutely promise, say they, that he would give them this Condition. Here than we have a promise of Faith and Regeneration or Conversion, (for so the Belgic † Synops● Pur. Theol. Disput. 32. Thes. 2. pag. 420. Professors understand [the circumcision of the heart] and to whom is this promise made, but to such as were yet unregenerate? And Master Baxter himself was once of this Judgement; For in his Appendix * Pag. 47. to his Aphorisms, in his Answer to the eighth Objection of his Adversary, he saith thus, If the Covenant were only Absolute, than it can be made to none but wicked men: and indeed the absolute Covenant is made to none other. Sure those that God doth promise to bestow new hearts upon, and soft hearts, have yet their old and hard hearts: (except it were meant of a further degree, and not of the first saving Grace.) 2. And as the Absolute, so the great Conditional promise [Believe and be saved] is also made to ungodly men. Is not this spoken to Unbelievers? will you speak it to none but those who believe already? were none of those Jews ungodly, to whom Peter saith Act. 2.39. The promise is made to you, and to your children? etc. But it seems he hath since met with a new light; For, in his Directions to prevent Miscarrying in Conversion, Pag. 265. dividing the Benefits, or Mercies derived to us, from Christ, into Common and Proper, The Proper or Special Mercies, he makes to be of two sorts. Some Physical inherent qualities, or Performed acts, 2. And some are adherent Rights, or Relations. Of the inherent sort, he makes three Degrees: whereof the first is, the first Special work of Vocation, Conversion, or Regeneration, causing the Sinner to Repent and Believe, and giving him the Principle of Spiritual life; and of this, he saith, God hath not promised it Conditionally or Absolutely to any individual Person that hath it not. He hath bound all to Repent, and Believe, but hath not promised to make them do it: (only he hath revealed, that there are certain Persons, so given to Christ, as that they shall be infallibly drawn to believe.) But he hath appointed certain means for the ungodly, which they are bound to use, in order to their conversion; and if they will not use them, they are without excuse. What should move Master Baxter to change his opinion in this Article? I will give you my conjecture. The promises of the Gospel are observed to be General, and must be preached promiscuously, to Elect, and Reprobate (as they call them) without distinction. And if the Redemption, wrought by Christ, be not supposed as a common benefit, bestowed on all men: that indifferent and promiscuous preaching of the Gospel committed to the Apostles, to be performed among all Nations, should have no true foundation, as Martinius hath observed. What should these men do in this case, De Artic. 2. Thes. 8. or what should they say? To say, the Promises of the Gospel are not to be Preached to all, the more Sober and Learned, dare not. To say, Faith and Regeneration are Promises of the Gospel, is to confess them to belong indifferently and promiscuously to the Reprobate, as well as to the Elect; and then maintaining that these are Promised most freely and absolutely, to be wrought in us, without us, by God himself; this would by an undeniable consequence entitle the Non-elect to as good an interest in the Benefit of an irresistible conversion, as the very elect. What course then must be taken so to state the Article, that they might avoid this Inference? The Synodists, they divide the Promises, (as you heard) into some concerning the End, which are conditional; If you repent and believe, you shall have pardon and salvation; and these may be safely preached unto the very Reprobate; it really entitles them to nothing; For, By this Proposition, If you believe, you shall be saved, it is not signified that God willeth either Faith or Salvation unto him to whom it is so declared, more than unbelief and death, seeing he addeth together therewith, If you do not believe you shall die; saith Amos. † Rescript. ad Grevin. cap. 5. The other Promises (in their division) are concerning the Means, Faith, Regeneration and Perseverance, which are absolute, undertaken to be wrought of Almighty God without us, by the strength of his Omnipotency, and these are the Propriety, and of the Elect; not to be indifferently and promiscuously preached. But by this Doctrine they set up a double Gospel; one for the Elect, which offers salvation upon such conditions as God hath absolutely promised and undertaken to perform himself, by an irresistible efficiency; another for the Reprobate, which offers salvation upon other terms, though under the same Name and Title) that is, upon such Conditions, as they are bound to perform themselves, though there be no competent strength of Grace, either promised or administered to enable them hereunto. Perhaps (to give him the Title, he bestows on Amyraldus) our Oculatissimus Baxterus, upon his second thoughts, discovered this foul Absurdity; and to prevent it, chose rather to call them Revelations concerning the infallible effecting of Faith and Regeneration, than Promises. But there is another foul Absurdity sticks even to his Doctrine, and he cannot possibly shake it off, that is, He makes Christ to be set up as a Double Saviour; For unto some, he hath procured sanctifying Grace, which he doth effectually and irresistibly communicate, to redeem them from sin and their vain conversation, and this in order to their Glory; And thus he is the Saviour of the Elect. But for others he allows no more, but external Ministeries, with Common Grace, which is uneffectuall, and these in order to their condemnation too; such a Saviour he is to the Reprobate; Indeed in respect to these, he is made a Pure Socinian-Saviour; from whom (according to this Doctrine) they receive little or no influences, but those of his Holy Laws, and A Grand Exemplar. And yet, right or wrong, Master Baxter now he is engaged will pursue his vindication, as he imagineth, to a perfect Triumph; and therefore he pleads moreover for the Synod, that they add, That [the Reason why many that are called by the Gospel do not repent or believe, but perish in Infidelity, is not through any defect of the Sacrifice of Christ offered on the Cross, or insufficiency of it, but by their own fault.] By their own fault? Saith the Synod so? Alas! how could that be? It was a punishment indeed inflicted on them, when as yet they had but a mere Possibility of Being in regard of the sufficiency of the Divine Power to effect it. So the Creabilitarians, or Gomarists have determined. But to come as low, as the lowest Calvinists; Admit it were upon the Fall of Adam; yet he could not by that Fall, forfeit an interest in Christ, which he never had before that Fall (for then, that being a means and power to rise again after falling, he could not have lost it, by falling) whether for himself, or his Posterity. 2. Did Adam's Posterity become their Father's Surety, that he should perform the conditions of that First Covenant, and so became liable to the Forfeiture of that Obligation, which he did violate? Or, 3. did They voluntarily, and of their own choice, set up Christ, to be their Prince and Saviour, and were the Laws of Repentance and Faith (the breach whereof becomes so exceeding sinful to them) of their Own Election, or were these both Laws and Prince imposed upon them, and they invited to embrace, submit and subscribe to them, as Special Acts of Grace, and the only Instruments to make them happy? Or, 4. Was it ever in their power to Prevent, or is it yet in their power to rescind that eternal Decree of Reprobation, whereby God immutably determined to leave them in the Lapse: iisque, media ad fidem & Conversionem, vel simplicitèr non dare, vel non efficacitèr applicare, idque ex mero Placito & liberrima voluntate, faciente de suo quod vult; (as the Zealanders have defined, and it is inserted amongst the Acts of the Synod; Par. 3. p. 45. ) And either simply to deny them Means necessary to Faith and Conversion, or else not to apply it effectually to them, and this out of his mere will and pleasure, Disposing of his own, according to his own mind? By which Doctrine we learn, that it is their Misery to be ruined for Adam's sin, but not their Fault to perish in Infidelity. Neither proceeds it from any insufficiency or defect of the sacrifice of Christ, but merely from the sole Pleasure and incontrollable will of God. And yet, for all this, Master Baxter runs on, and to make a fuller Vindication, he tells us, The British Divines, and the Bremish especially, and most clearly Martinius, (and Crocius well) did give in their suffrages for Universal Redemption, which are Recorded in the Acts of the Synod, and these Decrees are plainly agreeable. How well Crocius and the rest have stated the Point, we have seen already; and indeed one may thrip cross or pile, whether he squares his judgement by their suffrages, or the Decrees of the Synod. What the sense of those Decrees is, you find in their eight Article upon the second Chapter or Head of Doctrine, cited above, at the beginning of our Reflections upon this ninth Section; and he that would see more, may examine their 5. and 6. Rejections. What is this Universal Redemption you or they speak of? Doth it consist in the Ablation of the Curse or Pain, the Impetration of Grace and Righteousness, and the collation of Life and Glory? Man's Misery consists but of two parts, sin and punishment. Doth your Universal Redemption make sufficient provision to free the Non-elect from both, or from either of these? From the wrath to come, the Damnation of hell, or from iniquity and their vain conversation? Indeed in your Assize Sermons, you did very seasonably Preach up Christ, to be a Lord Chief-Justice, to Judge the Reprobate; but I cannot find that ever you Declare him to be their Lord Keeper, or their Lord Treasurer, to communicate his saving Grace, for their Conversion, or to secure them against the assaults and rage of their Ghostly enemy. These last Offices you suppose him to bear, in favour of the Elect only. So that your Universal Redemption hold a very fair Correspondence with your Sufficient Grace (as to the Non-elect); there is not one single person sanctified by this, or saved by that. Nay further, seeing all the influence, Reprobis Deus Mediatorem patefacit. ut neglecta conditione poenitentia & fidei inexcusabiles reddantur. Wendol. ubi supra explic. Thes. 8. that Christ's death hath upon them, according to your Doctrine, is of a kill nature and tends clearly to no other end, then to carry on the Decree of their Reprobation, and they being the far greater part, it had been a much more proper Title, if you had said, Those Divines did give in their Suffrages for Universal Perdition. Martinus, (who deals so clearly, as you suppose, in this Question,) saith, That the Redemption by Christ must be proclaimed, De Artic. 2. Thes. 8.11. not only as a Common sufficient Benefit, but as really and intentionally designed for me, else no necessity can be deduced from it, to engage me to believe, that it belongs to me, (which, by the way, doth somewhat take off the edge of the unregenerate, from endeavouring after Regeneration, if there be no promise concerning it, as Master Baxter's New Light, hath discovered.) But what is this common Benefit, and what doth that Redemption amount unto, which is to be thus universally preached? why, (not saving Grace; for that is peculiar † Ib. Th. 14. to Believers, but) remission of sins, and eternal life, Ib. Thes. 21. if they Repent and Believe. It will be worth our while, to observe, after what manner, God is supposed, by this Doctrine, to address his Visitations and Calls of Mercy, to these Non-elect, who are dead in sins, and sick of an impotency to Believe and turn themselves, that he may woe them unto Repentance. He must (consonantly to these opinions) bespeak their Repentance after this manner: O ye children of Reprobation, once, in your first Parent Adam dearly beloved of me, but now rejected and cast away by me, out of an eternal and implacable hatred; how long will ye abuse my Patience? how long will ye spin out the war of your Rebellion against me? Know ye not, how acceptable a sacrifice Repentance and a broken heart are to me? Go to, therefore, recollect yourselves and believe me; I entreat and pray, request and supplicate, beg and beseech, turn yourselves, and seek after Righteousness; I swear by myself, (that ye may have no temptation to be doubtful of it) Obedience is better to me then Sacrifice, and I will be the Author of eternal Salvation to All them that obey me: And if these things cannot move you, behold! the tears of your God, your Creator, a Father of Mercies to you, and will ye be deaf also to his sighs and moans, complaints and lamentations? O that ye would be wise, O that ye would consider, Oh miserable wretches, why will ye die and perish in your sins? What pleasure is it to you, to provoke your God to anger, who loveth Righteousness and hateth iniquity? 'Tis very true, and I know it right well, that you cannot but Rebel against me, because I have deprived you of the power to will and to do rightly, and from all eternity rejected you from all communion in my saving Grace: but yet I do seriously affirm it, and protest and swear by my Holiness, that your Repentance will be very acceptable to me And do you but Repent thoroughly, and I will unfeignedly give you Pardon and Salvation. Behold what a Pathetical Scheme of Persuasion God should use! Behold, what affections and bowels his Invitation of the Non-elect should be clothed with, according to this Doctrine! And yet for all this in the next (10. Sect. Master Baxter puts it home to Master Pierce, with sufficient confidence, in these words, Can Tilenus, or you, or any that is most passionate in these points, tell us of one jot more that you ascribe to the death of Christ for all, than the Synod of Dort doth? I must say, if you can, it's yet beyond my reach or my remembrance. Then I must say, you have a shallow reach, or a Treacherous memory, or a Partial judgement; The first, if you could not apprehend; the second, if you have forgotten; the third, (which lies most under my suspicion † Because I find you referring your Reader to Books that are confuted, and yet you take no notice of it. E. G. Saints Rest. par. 1. pag. 154. in the Margin. Bogerman, Vedelius, etc. I pray see Corvinus against Bogerman, and Vedelius Rhapsodus. ) if you will so rashly condemn, whom you will not vouchsafe to hear, pleading God's cause, as well as their own, so earnestly and so convincingly in their many Writings. But 'tis time to take up here, that we may reserve our strength and patience, to follow you, in your next stage, where you run on in Tautologies of a tedious length. You set forth after this manner; They give more to Christ's death for the Elect than you, but no less that I know of, (the more shame for you then, to condemn opinions and persons unheard and unexamined) to his death for all than you. For you say, that he died to bring it to men's choice, whether they will have Christ, and life or not? and so say they, (you should add EQUIVOCALLY, and perhaps you may say true;) and Calvinists, commonly, (as Dallaeus hath told you, in the very words of abundance of them.) If you say, that according to you Christ hath purchased Grace for all, or for more than the Elect, to Cause them to believe. I answer, I. That the highest Grace with you doth but bring it to their choice; and help, but not determine their wills; and this (but not verily this) they grant to others, as well as you do. 2. Is it the Name of sufficient Grace, or the Thing? The thing that you call so, as I said (too often already, unless it had been to more purpose), they grant to be as common as you can Reasonably expect them to imagine, (you say right, considering the rest of their Principles,) and Christ did not die to purchase empty Names, as a benefit. (I pray, what is that Remisson of sins, and eternal life, which you say he purchased for Reprobates? Is there Name and Thing too? They hear the sound of it, but never any of them tasted how sweet it is.) The difference (you conclude) is plainly but in this: The Synod thought that Christ purchased more for some, than you do; but no less for others. Here we have Master Baxter in extremes; he is excessive in his bounty towards the Elect, but defective in his Charity towards the Reprobates; and therefore no wonder he is out in the mean, which is that Grace that brings Salvation to Man's choice, as stated (not by him but) by the Remonstrants. For the First, he is deficient even in his Pretended Sufficiency, and the Accounts being truly and exactly cast up, we shall find the Reprobates are very little obliged to him, or to the Synod, for their Alms of sufficient Grace. For when they speak of Grace, they understand either God's Love and favour; or the effects of it. God's Grace in the first sense is, either General, extended to all mankind considered, as Rational Creatures, but out of Christ, and this, though the Reprobates have an interest in it, will not serve the turn; or Special, which passeth into a Decree of Election, and thereby provides Christ and all other means necessary to the working of Conversion and bringing Salvation (as they affirm) insuperably. And this is a peculiar Enclosure to the Elect. If we take Grace in the Second sense, for the effects of Gods free Love and favour; this Grace is divided (as the former) into General and Special; The Special Grace which is saving, is Proper to the Heirs of Salvation, saith M. Baxter, and the Synod too, that is to the Elect. The General, is that Common Grace, consisting of such effects as flow from God's General Love, and this is vouchsafed to the Reprobate. Which Grace, though adorned with the Title of Sufficient, to tickle the fancy of the unwary vulgar, and flatter him into an apprehension, that it contains all that is needful unto his salvation, yet really it signifies only (in the very acknowledgement of the more ingenuous sort of Calvinists) so much as is sufficient to Convince men of their sin and misery, of their infirmity and want of a Redeemer; and because it informs them likewise, that Christ is such an one, sent to give life and pardon upon condition of Faith and Repentance (though intentionally designed for the benefit only of the Elect) and that life and pardon is tendered to them upon those conditions, which are irresistibly effected in those Elect, but made impossible to the Reprobate; therefore by the administration of this Common Grace, they become guilty of impenitency and unbelief, and so this Grace is inservient to the execution of the Decree of Reprobation; And this is all the Sufficiency I can find in it, whether I examine it by Perkins his Table, or the Doctrine of the Synod. We see how little the Reprobates are beholding to you for your bounty. For this your sufficient Grace, both Name and Thing, is of no more value than a New Nothing, which many times is promised unto children to please them; but with an intent really to cousin them; and therefore discovering the fallacy, we account it a piece of ingenuity in them to slight the offer. If the Non-elect neither have, nor can have interest in that Grace of God (by what name soever you will call it) which is of force to procure Conversion and a saving faith, what do you telling them of the rest, by which never man was, nor ever shall be, nor ever can be saved? And is it possible for any man to arrive at Salvation, who lies under the Decree of Preterition, and is thereby, ipso facto▪ put in the order of men certainly to be damned, Damnation being the unavoidable execution of that Decree, whereof Preterition and Predamnation are but several † Synopsis Purioris Theologiae. Disp. 24. th'. 49, & 52. Respects? I must therefore prefer, to such collusion, the ingenuity of those men, who speak their opinion fully out, and tell us that all the Dispensations of Grace administered to these Non-elect, are designed but to make them the more inexcusable. You alleged above, in the words of the Synod, that it is not through any insufficiency or defect of the sacrifice of Christ, that men Perish in their Infidelity; and may not as much be said in respect of the Devils, that it is not through any defect, or insufficiency of Christ's Sacrifice, that they are damned eternally? The Reason is the same for both according to the Principles you go upon, namely because God wills to have it so. And I wonder with what confidence you can tell the Non-Elect (and them you must be supposed to speak to, the Elect not being concerned in it) as you do in your popular Sermon of Making light of Christ, Pag. 52. That, It were better for him he had been a Turk or Indian, that never had heard the name of a Saviour, and that never had salvation offered to him: For such men have no cloak for their sin. Joh. 15.22. Besides all the rest of their sins, they have this kill sin to answer for, which will undo them. And this will aggravate their misery: That Christ whom they set light by must be their Judge, and for this sin will he judge them. Oh that such would now consider how they will answer that Question that Christ puts to their Predecessors, Mat. 23.33. How will ye escape the damnation of Hell? or Heb. 2.3. How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation? Can you escape without a Christ? or will a despised Christ save you then? If he be accursed that set light by Father or Mother, Deut. 27.16. What then is he that sets light by Christ? etc. How I say, can you say this, unless you lay better grounds to glorify God's Justice in punishing the Non-elect for their Infidelity? For by that Doctrine, the most part of the Christian world are so fare from being designed a benefit by the exhibition and tendries of Christ to them, that they receive far more hurt by it, and so their condition is rendered a great deal worse than that of Devils, to whom Christ was never offered; For the most they could say of Christ, was to expostulate or cry out, Art thou come to torment us before the time: but these may complain, that, though there was as little benefit intended them, by the offer of Christ, as the Devils to whom he was never tendered; yet it did serve to aggravate their sin, and made them guilty of infidelity and liable to a greater condemnation. Be not startled at thy news, (if it seems so to you,) for it is the very Doctrine of Gomarus; This is the difference, Thes. 31. de praed. Disput. 1604. saith he, betwixt the Reprobation of men and Angels, that the Angels never have Christ tendered unto them, but unto men he is tendered often, (outwardly in the word, and inwardly by the Spirit,) that being convinced of Infidelity and a stubborn heart, they may by that means, be rendered the more inexcusable. Now I Conjure every Christian Reader, as he tenders the Glory of our ever Blessed God, and the Honour of his most Holy Ordinances, and the eternal Salvation of men's precious souls, sadly to weigh and consider, the pernicious influences of such a Doctrine; that his understanding may be awakened to apprehend, and his will inclined to entertain, more solid practical principles of Divinity; that every mouth that utters such wickedness, may be stopped. For certainly this cannot be the purpose or purport of God's General love towards mankind, in sending his Son to die for them and be preached unto them † See and consider, Joh. 3.16.17 . And now Master Baxter, perhaps will rub up his memory a little better. What! Doth neither Tilenus nor Master Pierce, nor the Remonstrants ascribe one jot more, to the death of Christ for all, than this amounts to? Doth that Grace (of Christ's purchasing) which they account sufficient rise to no higher a pitch, no, not so high, as to put them into a possibility of being restored by Christ's mediation, into at least as good a condition as that of Devils? This is a very strange story. But, God be thanked, there is no truth in it. The difference is so wide, betwixt the two Parties in this Point, that nothing can well be wider. For 1. Sufficient Grace in your sense, is, that which never did, and never will, and never can, bring salvation unto any man; for let him use his utmost diligence to cooperate with it, it will not, it cannot sanctify him, being (not through the Receivers default, but) of its own kind and nature uneffectuall● For thus the Professors of Leiden speak of it; Concedimus omnes illos, etc. Censura in Confess. cap. 17. par. 3. Pag. 235, 236. We grant, that all who are called by the Gospel are sufficiently called, that is, God is not obliged in justice to call them otherwise, than he doth call them, and by that Calling they are sufficiently deprived of all pretence of excuse, before God's Tribunal, if they be not converted; because the fault of their non-conversion resteth in themselves only. This is their definition of sufficient Grace, and the Compiler of this work was the Synod. I shall refer the Reader to the Remonstrants' Descant upon this Definition▪ (in their Examen Censurae. cap. 17. parag. 3.) But sufficient Grace in the Remonstrants' sense, (which is like to be Master Pierce's, and Tilenus his sense too;) is, God's Grace which bringeth salvation unto All men, to whom it hath appeared, Tit. 2.11. For, they say, To the end man may not only be able, but also freely and hearty willing to perform the Divine commands; God willeth to do all things, on his part, necessary to the effecting of both in him: that is, he hath determined to confer such Grace upon sinful man, whereby he may be rendered fit and able, to perform all that is required of him in the Gospel, (and in their next Thesis) God therefore when he calls sinners by his Holy Gospel, Confess. Remon. c. 17. Thes. 1. he bestows upon them Grace not only necessary but also sufficient, to perform faith and obedience (the Requiries of the Gospel.) 2. They do not deny, but God may, and many times doth confer, Imparia Paribus, Paria Imparibus, & Potiora Pejoribus. They acknowledge God hath not past any Decree, whereby he hath debarred, either Himself of Liberty to bestow, or men of a Possibility to receive such several Dispensations. And although they confess, there is a sufficient calling, Ibid. Thes. 3. which yet is uneffectuall, yet they say, the reason is, because it wants the Saving effect, on man's part: Perque solam hominis voluntariam, ac vincibilem culpam, infructuosa est sive eventum optatum ac debitum non sortitur, and that it obtains not the due and desired event but becomes unfruitful, is through the sole voluntary and avoidable fault of man. 3. This Grace doth not only Prevent the will, and confer a power of willing, upon them that are Called, (for I think it unprofitable to speak of the rest,) but (if they oppose not a new contumacy to check it,) it doth also accompany and help the Will of man, so, that the will, when it actually willeth, that is, believes and obeys God, aught to ascribe this, to that very Grace, as the Principal Moving Cause, by the prevention and concomitant assistance whereof, men, duly cooperating with it, are many times, really converted and sanctified, to such a degree, that there is nothing wanting, but Perseverance, to obtain the crown; To which purpose our Saviour Christ saith, He that continueth unto the end shall be saved; which saying of His, doth not only imply a Possibility of defection and consequently of destruction, for want of continuance; but an assurance also, of the happiness of such, if God should please to put a present period to their life, in that condition. 4. Do not the Remonstrants hold, that 'tis possible for a man to fall Totally and Finally from a true justifying Faith, or saving Grace, and that this doth sometimes eventually come to pass? and yet Master Baxter, will not allow this to be special Grace, flowing from that Fountain of Election; (which Grace, according to his opinion can never be lost,) this therefore at least in his sense, is but Sufficient Grace, and yet 'tis fare more, than that common sufficient Grace, which the Synod speaks of; and how could this be either out of Master baxter's reach, or memory, having so lately, before this, put forth his Account of Perseverance? More distinctly, for the satisfaction of the Reader touching the Remonstrants' opinion of the operations of Divine Grace; 1. They hold, that it works upon the understanding enlightening and induing it with the knowledge of Divine truth. Act. Synod. Remonst. de Grat. p. 14. And, that God by the sole illumination of the understanding, without any formal immediate, or direct impression or action upon the will, makes all the Elect, of children of wrath and servants of sin, to become children of light, and servants of Righteousness; This is all that Camero requires unto their Regeneration; as appears in his Theses, and his Conference with Tilenus, where he saith, Fidem proficisci ab illuminatione Spiritus Sancti, That Faith proceeds, from the illumination of the holy Spirit; and also, Thesi 3. animo percipi non posse quo pacto liberum arbitrium, quod principium Ethicum est, aliter quam Ethice moveri posse; It is not to be understood how Free will, being a Moral Principle, can be moved otherwise then Morally. But the Remonstrants say, 2. That the Divine Grace worketh upon the affections also, and that irresistibly, (as likewise it doth upon the understanding;) to which purpose, we may consider those Passages, There came a fear on all, Luk. 7.16. and, Did not our hearts burn within us, while he talked with us? Luk. 24.32. 3. That it works directly and immediately upon the Will too, and that irresistibly, as to the collation of power to believe; Praeterea minime quoque diffitemur Spiritum Sanctum immediatè agere in voluntatem, in illam vires infundendo ac potentiam supernaturalem ad credendum, That the Holy Ghost worketh immediately upon the will, Act. Synod. Remonst. de Gratia. p. 14 infusing strength into it, and a supernatural power to believe, we do not deny; and in the next Page, Si per gratiam habitualem intelligere libeat potentiam quandam supernaturalem, concessam voluntati ad hoc ut credere & benè agere possit, eam libentèr admittimus; If by habitual Grace, be understood a supernatural power conferred upon the will, to this end, that it may be able to believe, and act well, we admit of it willingly. And after, If any one demand of us, Ibid. pag. 20 whether, the action of God converting (a sinner) be only moral, consisting of proposals, invitations, suasions; we answer, say They, that it is more than Moral, and in respect of exciting Grace, we say there is also a supernatural power, infused into the will, distinct from the illumination of the understanding; and if we respect cooperating Grace, we say, that may be called Physical, and hath a real and proper efficiency. If it be demanded whether there be any immediate action of the Spirit upon the will, (they say) we do not deny it. If it be demanded, whether, besides the illumination of the mind, and excitation of the affections, and invitation of the will, Grace doth nothing after the manner of a principle, or antecedently unto Conversion; Pag. 21. we say, it doth. And after, (pag. 62.) Potentiam credendi ante omnia conferri dicimus per irresistibilem Gratiam. We say the power of believing is conferred by an irresistible Grace. And, If it be demanded, whether he, who doth not oppose a new contumacy (or rebellion) but yields to the motions and operations of Grace) and consequently is converted, hath more grace, than he, that doth oppose (and check them,) and consequently is not converted; we answer, the antecedent and preventing Grace may be equal, Pag. 21. but the first hath cooperating Grace, which the later hath not. Indeed after a man is instructed with this Supernatural power to believe, they acknowledge no other Grace necessary towards the Eliciting or educing the act of faith but what is Moral, or that which useth the word, as the instrument, not excluding sundry secret inspirations, impressions and motions of God's Gracious dispensing, which yet do not produce consent otherwise, then in a moral way of working. For if the Actual consent, to what is offered in the word, be instilled or inspired into the will, as it is a Principle of Election; Then, 1. there is a Consent in the Will, before it be elected or drawn out by the will; which is absurd. 2. Then it is not the Wills consent unto the motions of Grace: but Grace that imprints that Actual consent, doth consent unto it self; which is no less absurd than the Former. 3. Then a power of believing in the Will were unnecessary; and it would be in vain to confer it; because the Consent or Act of Believing should not be drawn, out of that power, but be imprinted upon the will by another internal force or mition. 4. Then the word should conduce nothing to the begetting or effecting of faith, or consent in the will of man: For the word cannot concur but as a moral Instrument, nor act but objective and morally, and such actions are resistible, and may be uneffectuall, which such an Actual consent instilled into, or imprinted upon the will (by an Omnipotent Grace, as † Contra. remonstrants. they say it is) cannot be. So that by this Doctrine, if it should be granted, (say the Remonstrants); the Ministry of the Word would be made void and altogether unprofitable. This inconvenience Master Baxter could discover well enough as to the Infusion of Habits; Of saving Faith. pag. 21. And therefore he follows the stream of those Divines, who take Vocation, which (taken Passively) containeth the Acts of Faith and Repentance, to be Antecedent unto Sanctification, which comprehends the Habit of them. Placing the Act before the Habit, he saith, This makes the Word the Instrument of that work, whereas (which moves me very much, saith he) according to the contrary opinion, the Word cannot possibly be the Instrument, or means, of our Regeneration, as to the Habit, (nor as to the Act neither, if that Act be irresistibly infused or imprinted) but only a subsequent means to elicit † Whose Act? not Gods; that were too gross: than it must be man's; and then by this means, Man worketh the will and the Deed. or educe the Act, which seems against the stream of Scripture, and Divines of All Ages. A fair Confession. The Remonstrants then, do, not only grant an Illumination of the mind, which, upon the matter, is made the All-sufficient Grace by Camero, but also a Collation of Supernatural power; which yet they cannot allow to commit such a Rape upon the Will, as to force it, in its manner of working, or deprive it of its natural Liberty to Will or Nill. They reserve to her, as her undoubted Prerogative, that freedom still, as entire as ever, to Act or suspend her action, without which power man is able to do no more Duty properly so called, than the Brute Beast, which hath a Spontaneity as well as Man, but no Rational Election. But Master Baxter will here step in, with his objection, and tell us, This is but to bring the matter to man's choice, and so they do. But I must acquaint the Reader with a vast difference in the Portage, whether you consider the matter or the manner of it. For, 1. Your Doctrine doth not bring the same Thing, to man's choice. It brings Christ as you say, and remission of sins, and eternal life, to his choice▪ upon condition, [If he will Repent and Believe] Butler doth your Sufficient Grace, by an irresistible Collation of power upon the will, bring Faith itself, and Repentance itself, to the choice of them that perish? It doth not, it cannot. For by the conduct of an Immutable Antecedent Decree, Grace sufficient to bring it to their choice in this sense is denied them, and their choice otherwise determined and that Infallibly; unless you equivocate in the use of the word choice, and put it for spontaneity, whereby the wretched Reprobate, for all the influences of that sufficient Grace, is unavoidably led, as an Ox to the slaughter. 2. And as your Doctrine brings not the same Thing to their choice; so neither doth it bring the same assistance. You bring Remission and eternal life, but as a covered dish with a Noli me tangere, upon it. They must not touch it with unwashed hands, and shutting up the Living fountain, and sealing it by an immutable Decree, you afford them neither towel nor water that is sufficient or of force to cleanse them. What you bring to their choice and lay at their door, you leave as a burden too heavy for their strength to take up, and their feeble shoulders to carry in to their quiet possession and comfort. But with us, Faith and Repentance, are as well brought to choice, as Christ, Pardon, or eternal Life; but not laid down and left there. God continues to illuminate the mind; and inspire the will; and thus he knocks at the door of the heart; till man freely opens to him, Revel. 3.20. or gives him such rude and shameless Repulses, as provoke him to withdraw himself in a sore displeasure. Gen. 6.3. Here then being such a free, preventing, irresistible efficiency of a supernatural power, and a no less Gracious concomitant Assistance both of outward means, and inward motions, towards the carrying on, and accomplishment of our Faith and Repentance, our Conversion and Salvation; The Glory of this Work ought in all Reason to be ascribed to the Divine Grace, as the principal Cause or Author of it. † Itaque nec illi debent sibi tribuere qui venerant, quia vocati venerunt; nec illi qui noluerunt venire, debent alteri tribuere, sed tantum sibi, quoniam ut venirent vocati, erat in eorum libera voluntate. August. lib. 83. qq. q. 68 Agen● de invitatis ad coenam. But, if under the conduct of such, no less sweet, then powerful Dispensations, there proves to be a miscarriage, to what can we, in justice, impute this unhappy event, or what can we charge the fault upon, but man's own wilful and execrable Rebellion? For we must consider, though the understanding be enlightened with the knowledge of Supernatural excellencies, yet it apprehends still, the whole variety of sensual or carnal Goods, the will, † Add hereunto, that which the British Divines do aver [de Art. 3, & 4. pa. 133. pr.] Per versitatem sive resistendi potentiam remo●am & in acta primo positam, in suà amarà radice, etiam in Renotorum coluntate deli●escere, unde pronitas ad resistendum motibus spiritus S. v. locum. (though impowered to do better,) hath a liberty to embrace them; and both the understanding and the will have a natural Inclination (tending also to their own ease and Preservation) to gratify the Infirmities of their neighbouring Appetites, whose objects being at hand to affect and tickle the senses, with the soft insinuations and relishes of their immediate presence, have a great advantage over spiritual objects, which are remote at a huge distance, and out of sight to flesh and blood; yea and over the chief Good upon a like Account (whom being enjoyed would transcendently fill, satisfy and swallow up all our most insatiable Appetites;) Hence it comes to pass, that many times Sense finds too great an indulgence with the more noble Faculties, and being preferred above its rank the Objects thereof are entertained with too inordinate a complacency; So that, we observe, how men, though irresistibly convinced of the truth and excellency of things Spiritual, yet once bewitched with the charms and pleasures of these (for want of Mortification and a Main Guard, they pursue the enjoyments of them so eagerly, that they can brook no check. Video meliora, proboque, Deteriora sequor. When men are not able to resist the Spirit speaking to their understanding by way of Conviction, Act. 6.10. they will Rebel against the light thereof, Job. 24.13. and abuse the Liberty of their will, to resist the Holy Ghost; Act. 7.51. And having grieved this Good Spirit so long, till they have made him, even weary of striving with them, no marvel he complains so bitterly of such perversities; Mat. 13.15. This people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed, lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. That this was most unquestionably the Catholic Doctrine of the Church for the First three hundred years after Christ, Par. 1. pag. 154. in Mar. we have M. baxter's own acknowledgement, in his Saints Rest. Thus † Lib. 2. de vocat. Gent. c. 9 Saint Ambrose brought it to men's choice: Igitur sicut qui crediderunt, juvantur, ut in fide maneant: sic & qui nondum crediderunt, juvantur, ut credant. Et quemadmodum illi in sua habent potestate, ut exeant, & isti in sua habent potestate, ne veniant. As they which have believed, are assisted, that they may continue tn the faith: so they also, who have not yet believed, are assisted, that they may believe. And as they have it in their power to departed (from the faith), so these also have it in their power, not to come, (or accept of it). Saint Austin, the Great Champion of Divine Grace, he brings it (in our sense) to man's choice too; even in that book [De Litera & Spiritu,] which was opposed to the Pelagians: Cap. 34. Nemo habet in potestate quid veniat in mentem, saith he, sed consentire vel dissentire propriae voluntatis est. What shall (be represented, or) come into his mind is not in man's power, but it is in his power, to consent to it, or descent from it. And in his Book de Dogmat. Ecclesiast. Cap. 21. Initium salutis nostrae a Deo miserante habemus; ut acquiescamus salutiferae inspirationi, Nostrae est Potestatis. We have the beginning of Salvation from God's mercy; to assent unto his saving inspiration, and acquiesce in it, is in our own power. And in L. 1. Retract. he hath these words; Cap 22. Alio loco dixi, etc. I have said in some other place, that except a man change his will, he cannot work that which is Good, which, the Lord teacheth, us, to be placed in our own power, where he saith, Either make the tree good, and his fruit good, or the tree evil, and his fruit evil: which, saith he, is not against the grace if God which we preach; for it is in man's power to change his will for the better; but that power is none, unless it be given of God, of whom it is said, He gave power to them, to be the sons of God. By which words 'tis evident, his judgement was, that the same man, under the same helps, hath it in his power and liberty to bring forth good or bad fruit. And Hierome writing against the Pelagians, saith, Etiam his, L. 3. Advers. Pelag. qui mali sunt futuri, dari potestatem Conversionis & Poenitentiae; There is a power of Conversion and Repentance, given even to such as will be wicked. It is in our power, saith S. Bernhard, not to be overcome, Serm. 5. de quedrages. and in this Spiritual warfare, none of us can be conquered against his will. Thy Appetite O Man, is put under thee, and thou shalt rule over it. Thy enemies may make a commotion, and levy some forces of Temptations, but it is in thy power, if thou wilt, (to make peace with them, or give battle to them) to give them thy Consent, or to deny it. It is in thy power, if thou wilt, to make thy enemy thy servant, that all things may cooperate to thy advantage. If these testimonies be not sufficient to give the Reader satisfaction, he may find abundance more, if he consults Grotius his Disquisitio, An Pelagiana sint ea Dogmata, etc. Nay, doth not Master Baxter himself preach this Doctrine unto his people, in his popular Sermons? What means that part of his Application, Pag. 54. in his [Making Light of Christ,] where he tells his Hearers; I come now to know your Resolution for the time to come. What say you? Do you mean to set as light by Christ and salvation as hitherto you have done? and to be the same men after all this? I hope not. Oh let not your Ministers that would fain save you, be brought in as Witnesses against you to condemn you. At least, I beseech you put not this upon me. Why Sirs, if the Lord shall say to us at Judgement, Did you never tell these men, what Christ did for their souls, and what need they had of him, and how nearly it did concern them to look to their salvation, that they made light of it? We must needs say the Truth: Yea Lord, we told them of it as plainly as we could; we would have gone on our knees to them, if we had thought it would have prevailed; we did entreat them as earnestly as we could, to consider these things: They heard of these things every day; but alas, we could never get them to their hearts: they gave us the hearing, but they made light of all that we could say to them. And in the Preface of your Call to the UNCONVERTED, you tell them, Our Preaching and Persuasion, and your Hearing and Considering, are the appointed means to get this Moral Power or freedom, that is, to make you truly willing. You know these have no other way of operation, but, what is Moral, which may be rejected or embraced; and therefore if there be not a Supernatural power sufficient (in actu primo) conferred upon men, with a liberty to reduce it into act, which they may freely use or suspend, to what end are all these exprobrations of their neglect? And yet we must account them Rational, (and that cannot be but upon supposition of such power and Liberty) because we find them used by our Saviour Christ, with a denunciation of woe against such contemners; Mat. 11.20. to 24. Then began he to upbraid the Cities, wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repent not. Woe unto thee Chorazin, woe unto thee Bethsaida: for if the mighty works which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repent long ago, in Sackcloth and ashes. But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of Judgement than for you. And thou Capernaum which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of Judgement, than for thee. By which severe intermination and asseveration of our Saviour, it appears, that if God had afforded the men of Tyre and Sidon, or those of Sodom, that Grace which he granted to the Cities of Chorazin and Bethsaida, they would have repent. But this Grace was not any quality or motion determining the will by a Physical, or irresistible operation: for if it had been such, they whom Christ so bitterly reproved and threatened, for Non-conversion, had been infallibly converted. This Grace therefore did but empower, and (bringing the matter to their choice,) assist and solicit them, morally to embrace it; which solicitation and assistance, they obstinately rejected, when they had it in their power and at their liberty, freely to cooperate with it, to their effectual conversion. Our Saviour gives us another Emphatical Instance in the men of Nineve, Mat. 12.41. where he tells the Scribes and Pharisees, The men of Nineve shall rise in Judgement, with this generation, and shall condemn it, because they repent at the preaching of Ionas, and behold, a greater than Ionas is here. How was our Saviour greater than Ionas? in respect of his person, or office only, and not also in respect of the efficacy of his Ministry? He was full of Grace, Psal. 45. had the words of eternal life, taught with Authority, John 1. Grace came by him. Was Ionas a better Preacher than our Saviour? Did a more efficacious Grace of the Spirit accompany his Ministry, than did that of the Son of God, who came from heaven to seek and to save that which was Lost, by calling them to repentance? The horror that follows the conception of such a blasphemy, will not suffer any sober Christian bosom to entertain it. Yet the men of Nineve repent at the preaching of Ionas: But that generation did not repent at the Sermons of the Son of God. Was this through any defect in Christ's Dispensations? No; The administration of Grace here by him was more abundant than that of Ionas. The fault therefore lay in their abuse of their power and liberty, in opposing new contumacy and obstacles to these more Gracious Dispensations. To this purpose Prosper, writeth expressly, (lib. 2. De vocat. Gent. c. 26.) The Grace of God, saith he, is principally preeminent in all our Righteousnesses, persuading us by exhortations, moving us by examples, terrifying us with dangers, inciting us by miracles, giving understanding, inspiring Council, and enlightening the heart itself, and imbruring it with affections of faith: but the will of man is also subjoined and conjoined to it, which is excited by the foresaid helps to this end, that it may cooperate to the Divine work in itself, that it may begin to exercise toward the attainment of rewards, (ad meritum), what through the (power of the) supernal seed it conceived, towards an endeavour [ad studium], having it from its own mutability, if it fails, from the help of grace if it proceeds. Which help is applied to All, by innumerable ways whether hidden or manifest, and that it is rejected of many, is their own wicked fault: but that it is received of many, is both of the divine grace, and man's will. I shall shut up this with an Instance out of Fulgentius, In libr. de Praedest. & Grat. c. 15. framing a comparison betwixt Nebuchadonosor and Pharaoh, he saith; In respect of their nature, they were both men; in respect of their Dignity, they were both Kings; in respect of the Cause, they both kept the people of God in Captivity; in respect of their punishment, they were both chastised and admonished by the rod of Clemency. What was it therefore that made their ends to be so different but this, that one sensible of God's hand, bewailed the memory of his own iniquity: the other fought against the most merciful truth of God by his own freewill. But all this will not serve Master Baxters turn; though he contradicts the faith of Primitive Antiquity, and overthrows, not only man's natural liberty, and way of working; but likewise all the commands and exhortations, comminations and promises of Holy Scripture, he will not be satisfied without God's irresistible attingencie of the will to apply and determine it to the very Consent or Act of willing; which is that we are now to take into examination. But to attain Master Baxters' meaning may be a matter of some difficulty, he doth say and unsay so often; (which makes many not to regard at all what he saith;) For Physical Predetermination he denies it in this Preface; and in his Sermon of Judgement, he saith, Section 5. That God doth determine all Actions; Answer to the 23, and 24. excuses, (mihi. pag. 242, 243.) Natural and Free, as the first Efficient Physical immediate Cause: or else nothing could Act; This Principle, he saith, is most likely to be false. And, that the will is necessarily and infallibly determined by the Practical Understanding, which is unresistibly necessitated by objects: and therefore whatever Act is done by my understanding or will is necessitated, and I cannot help it. And, that Liberty is but the Acting of the Faculty agreeably to its nature: And it was God as Creator, that gave Adam his Faculties: and God by providential dispose, that Presented all Objects to him, by which his understanding, and so his will, were unavoidably necessitated; This, saith M. Baxter, is of the same nature with the former: Ibid. uncertain, if not certainly false. Were this true, for aught we can see, it would lay all the sin and misery of this world on God, as the unresistible necessary Cause; which because we know infallibly to be false, we have no reason to take such principles to be true which infer it. I wish Master Baxter had kept himself always of this mind, and then he had saved me all this labour. But a little after, he tells his Reader, There are other ways of Determining the Will; which yet he mentions not; But in his first Assize Sermon he saith▪ Pag: 9 Christ hath undertaken himself to be a Physician to the world, (who are now Morally dead in sin, though naturally alive,) to cure all that will come to him, and take him so to be, and trust him, and obey him in the Application of his medicines. He hath erected an Hospital, his Church, to this end; and commanded all to come into this Ark. Those that are far distant, he first Commandeth to come nearer; and those that are near, he inviteth to come in. Too many do refuse and perish in their refusal. (And your doctrine declare they cannot do otherwise.) He will not suffer all to do so, but mercifully boweth the wills of his Elect, and by an insuperable powerful drawing, Compels them to come in. So that we have an insuperable compulsory determination. And yet in his foresaid Sermon of Judgement, He tells us, Vbi supra. The will of man in its very Dominion doth bear God's Image. It is a self Determining Power, though it be biased by Habits and needs a Guide. If a Guide would serve Master Baxters turn, we are content to allow him out; not an Ignis fatuus, but a Lantern that doth direct the understanding infallibly, and besides this, a real influx, that after the manner of a Physical Cause, inclines the will to Act: But he must have such a one as doth control and Determine the will to Act and Operate, (notwithstanding the Dominion over its own Acts, which he seems to ascribe to it) which we think not only unnecessary, but, in the ordinary course of God's providence, very absurd, inconvenient, and of dangerous Consequence to be affirmed. 1. That it is unnecessary is evident by God's complaint, Isa. 5.4. Judge I pray you between me and my vineyard. what could I have done more to my vineyard, that I have not done to it? Wherefore when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes? That God administered all things necessary and sufficient (not in Master baxter's sense, of sufficiency which is unsufficient) to this effect, appears, by his expectation of grapes (of good works;) for the Alwise God doth not, he cannot, expect to gather grapes of thorns or figs of thistles; and to expect conversion and good works from them, who have not grace necessary and sufficient to their production, is as unreasonable as to expect a Bird should fly without wings, or a man go without legs. But here was no determining Grace administered; for than they would have been infallibly converted, and have brought forth good works. Therefore such Determining Grace is not necessary. 2. As it is unnecessary, so it is inconvenient; For (1.) it overthrows that Dominion which (by Master baxter's own confession) the will hath over its own Acts, and destroys its Connatural manner of working; For it puts a necessity, in order of Nature and Causality, Antecedent to the Act of the will, so that all Praerequisites put in order, the will hath not a simultaneous power (that may be reduced into Act) to Act otherwise, or a power to want that operation, to which it is so determined; which takes away the liberty of the will quoad exercitium, in regard of the exercise of it. 2. It destroys the proper nature of duty, for a Duty is a work performed conformably to a command, for his Authority sake, who doth command it; that giving proof of our free obedience, we may avoid the Penalty, and gain a Right to the Reward, upon which the Command is established. This cannot be agreeable to the nature of that work to which God doth irresistbly determine the will; for 1. though the work be conformable to his command; yet it cannot be properly said to be done because of his Authority, but because he doth insuperably determine it. 2. The doer (or rather the sufferer) gives no proof of his free obedience, because he cannot do otherwise. 3. This can procure him no right to the reward, because it is not thankworthy, (as the Phrase is, 1 Pet. 2.19.20. ) being no part of a free obedience. And 4. upon what Title can it free a man from punishment? For we see God doth overrule such as become the Rod of his anger, Isa. 10.5, 6, 12. and directeth them to do his work, (according to his Secret, which the Calvinists account his only proper will) and yet when that work is done, he casteth the Rod into the Fire. But M. Baxters' Determining Grace hath the Doctrine of the Synod to justify it, in making Faith and Conversion, Repentance or Regeneration (for the terms are promiscuously used here) no part of man's work or duty. For the Synod saith, That Regeneration etc. is a work, for the mightiness thereof, not inferior to the Creation of the world, or raising up the dead, quam Deus sine nobis, 〈…〉 & 4. de Convers. Art. 12. in nobis operatur, which God without us, worketh in us, and (they say) that Faith, whereby we are first converted, Ibid. Art. 14 & Reject. 6. and from which we are styled Faithful, is really inspired and infused into the will; Ibid. Reject. 8. and that God, in regenerating a man, doth employ the strength of his Omnipotency, powerfully and infallibly to bow and bend his will to Faith and Conversion. And in this work saith M. Baxter * Of Saving Faith. pag. 20. , the Spirit is as the Hand, the Object and Word as the Seal, the Act of impression on the Intellect is first in Order of nature, and so upon the Will the impressed Act and Habit immediately are effected by it. Is this Faith and Conversion (thus wrought) God or man's? It may be called Man's in regard of the Possession of it after it be wrought: but in regard of the efficiency, the production is so merely a piece of New Creation, that it can in no sense be accounted a part of Man's Moral duty. For this is not performed by man because Gods will commands it; but wrought in him, because God's power imprints it. And then 3. This will evacuate the force of the Ministry, the use of Commands, and exhortations, expostulations and reproofs. For how can you in Gods Name seriously command a man, under pain of death and promise of life, to do that (as his duty,) which you teach him to believe, that God will insuperably effect himself? If he believes that God must and will do it, by his irresistible determining Grace, he cannot reasonably believe that he doth seriously require it as his duty; because it implies a contradiction, that God should at once will an effect to be done by another, and yet will to do it himself alone. What do your Ministry then amount unto? 'Tis but the Revelation of what God will do in men's souls, like the Angel's Message to the Blessed Virgin (Luk. 1.30. with 35.) Fear, not for thou hast found favour with God; for the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee. Therefore that Holy thing▪ that Faith and Repentance, that shall be borne of thee, shall be called the work of God. Thus you may signify to your Beloved Disciples what God will do for and in their souls; But if you should attempt the use of exhortations, etc. to move them to undertake that work as their duty; your exhortations would lose all their force and propriety; for that work, you say, is actually and really of God's Impression; Now when Gods Omnipotent hand of Grace sets the Determining Press on work (which is not moved at all by your exhortations, they being directed only to souls that are merely Passive under it) that work (of Faith and Repentance) is stamped upon them irresistibly. And can it consist with God's wisdom to attaque a Sinner thus; If you will be wrought upon, and converted and believe, as the force of my insuperable Grace shall irresistibly determine you, you shall be saved? And can you find in your heart, to exhort your Auditors, and to fall down upon your knees to them (as you say, many times you would do) to entreat and beseech them, not to wrestle with Omnipotency, but to suffer themselves to be moved and determined by it? And can you threaten woe and eternal death to others, if they be not thus determined, telling them withal, (which is a part of your Gospel Truth,) that there is no other internal Grace designed for them, but what is specifically different from that, administered to determine the will of the Elect? Is this a Doctrine according to Godliness? or were this a good way of Preaching? Yet this is exactly according to the sense of your School-Divinity, if you would deal ingenuously and speak without aequivocation. But if you come to expostulate with your Hearers in good earnest, what rational evasions and subterfuges doth this Doctrine afford them to repel the force of all such Expostulations? For whereas you apply yourself (in your Sermon Of Making light of Christ, Pag. 59, 60. etc. ) to try them, whether they will not make light of him hereafter; and demand of them, 1. Will you for the time to come, make Christ and salvation the chiefest matter of your care and study? 2. Will you for the time to come, set more by the word of God, which contains the discovery of these excellent things, and is your charter for salvation, and your guide thereunto? 3. Will you for the time to come esteem more of the Officers of Christ, whom he hath purposely appointed to guide you to salvation? 4. Will you for the time to come make conscience of daily and earnest prayer to God, that you may have a part in Christ and salvation? 5. Will you for the time to come resolvedly cast away your known sins, at the command of Christ? What say you? Are you resolved to let them go? To all these Queries you have furnished them with a ready Answer; They will tell you, (and with great Reason, according to your Doctrine,) yes; if God shall, not only bring it to their choice: but also insuperably determine their will thereunto. Ibid. p. 63, etc. The like Answer will they return to your demands that follow; 6. Will you for the time to come serve God in the dearest as well as in cheapest part of his service? not only with your tongues, but with your purses and your deeds? 7. Will you for the time to come make much of all things that tend to your salvation, and take every help that God offereth you, and gladly make use of all his Ordinances? 8. Will you do all this with delight, not as your toil, but as your pleasure? They will tell you, Yes; if God shall vouchsafe, not only to bring it to their choice, but insuperably determine their wills to it. In like manner are all Gods most Pathetical and earnest invitations to conversion put off by this Master baxter's Determination, and made frustrate; For example, Zac. 1.3. Turn ye unto me, saith the Lord of hosts, Mal. 3.7. and I will turn unto you, saith the Lord of hosts. And Revel. 3.20. Behold! I stand at the door and knock, if any man will hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him and sup with him, etc. The sinner is taught by Master Baxters' Doctrine to Answer, Alas! Lord, how can I turn? how can I open! Do not illude and mock at the impotency of a poor sinner; for seeing Conversion and the opening of the heart cannot be peracted, unless I do determine myself to it: and seeing I am indifferent and undetermined to Act, it cannot be that I should determine myself unto Conversion, unless thou dost first, in order * Ordine causalitatis divinum opus praecedat, nostra operatio secutur, necesse est. Brit. Divin. Act. Syn. par. 2. p. 131. f. of nature and causality, determine me to the same conversion, and that by some such potent and insuperable motion, as I neither have, nor can obtain by any Act of mine, if thou hast not decreed to confer the same upon me. And this Doctrine doth furnish the most obstinate sinners with an Apology against all Gods most vehement exprobrations and reproofs; For whereas, he saith, Woe unto thee Chorazin, woe unto thee Bethsaida, for if the mighty works, which are done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repent, etc. The excuse is very ready and easy, out of this principle; Lord thou knowest the men of Tyre and Sidon could not have repent by this means, unless thou hadst decreed to administer determining Grace to them herewith; and if thou hadst communicated that Grace to us also, we should have repent, nay we could not but have repent, as well as they. When you shall upbraid them for rejecting the Council of God against themselves, and putting the word of life from them, and despising God's Goodness, and neglecting so great salvation; what influence can these exprobrations and reproofs have upon them? If they have once imbibed your Doctrine, they will return scorn to your reprehensions, and tell you, this means was so tendered, that it might be rejected and despised; for it was not accompanied with Determining Grace, but administered only to render them the more inexcusable, and upon that account fit for no other entertainment but neglect. 4. Whereas Faith is so the work of the Saints, that it is said to procure them praise 1 Pet. 1.7. and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ; By this Determining Grace, which makes them mere Passives in the reception of it, working it irresistibly in them, but without them, (as the Synod saith;) All those Eulogies, which are given them, [as, Well done good and faithful servant] are rendered absurd, (not to say ridiculous.) Should a man cause his Servant, (that of himself, hath no mind to go) to be nailed up in a soft chariot, and brought to London, and then commend him for his care and faithfulness in taking such a journey to come and serve him; when he is merely passive in the business; would you think him in good earnest? I think not. 5. If this Determining Grace be necessary, there is another gross absurdity, and of more dangerous consequence than the former; for from hence it follows, That a man cannot sinne, unless God be first deficient in what is necessary. So Piscator (in terminis), Resp. ad Duplic. Vorst. p. 245. Desertio Divina est causa desertionis humanae, obediendi Deo, non autem contra haec causa est illius. God's desertion of Man is the cause of Man's deserting his obedience towards God, and not the contrary. And of all true Believers, he saith, Ibid. pag. 314. They are no more able to omit or neglect the study of perseverance, than a Blackamoor is able to change his colour, or Male and Female their sex. But because this assertion is so palpably contradicted by the foul sins of such as have been Regenerate, De Persev. pag. 6. therefore Doctor Damman doth mend the matter thus; Regenerati non possunt omittere praestationem ejus quod ab illis postulatur, modo Deus illis praestet quod promisit. The Regenerate cannot omit to perform what God requires, unless God doth omit to perform what he hath promised. And, Quando Deus partibus suis defungitur, Ibid. p. 37. nos nostras omittere non possumus. When God doth his part, we cannot omit ours. How do you like this Doctrine, Master Baxter? This is the genuine fruit of your opinion concerning Determining Grace. But it yields another fruit no less unsavoury and of a juice as pernicious in the diffusion of it, as the former; For, 4. This Opinion is a great and ready Inlet to all Enthusiasms; And it is not only easy but ordinary for men to entitle their Diabolical delusions to the Determinations of God's Spirit; and his broad Seal is frequently stamped upon that Commission (to Authorise it), which is drawn up by a lying, and one haply a great deal worse than their own private Spirit. When men of high ambition, and hot Brains, and strong Fantasies, and Passionate Appetites, will not acquiesce (as you know, many times they will not) in God's clear and distinct Revelations concerning their duty; but entertain new Designs, Pretended to a Good end, though the only means visibly conducible to carry them on be apparently unwarrantable; What Methods do they follow in this case? God is earnestly fought and wrestled with, for obtaining a Dispensation, and success in a course of disobedience, against his own express command. When God (who is not so much called upon to counsel, as to countenance and assist in the affair such men have resolved upon, and are praeengaged to transact) being provoked by the perverse importunity of such Addresses, permits them, in displeasure, to the sway of their own inordinate Passions, and to prosper in the irregular pursuit of them, this is presently interpreted to be Gods gracious return unto their prayers, and his casting voice (the intimation of his secret Beneplaciture) for the Determination of their Will to this choice of their very Rebellion against him, and consequently it hath, as is pretended, his unquestionable Approbation. When Balaam upon Balaks invitation of him to curse Israel, consulted the Lord first about that Message and Expedition, He gave him a clear and peremptory signification of his will and pleasure. Num. 22.12. Thou shalt not go with them, thou shalt not curse the people: for they are blessed. But Balaam, upon a new and more urgent invitation, seeks God again, that he may yet obtain leave to gratify his Avarice and Ambition; Almighty God provoked with the perversity of this solicitation, permits him to his own lust, and upon this (which was but an instance of God's indignation against him, that he was not satisfied with his express command at first) without doubt Balaam would have concluded, that God had now infallibly determined and actually sent him, had he not been rebuked for his iniquity by a miracle: but the dumb Ass speaking with Man's voice, 2 Pet. 2.16. forbade the madness of the Prophet. What practices have been suggested and put in execution at Munster, etc. upon a persuasion of such an irresistible Determination? and what work that opinion may yet help to make in other parts of Christendom, if not timely prevented, is easy to foresee without a Spirit of Divination. Lastly, you may be advised to consider, how much you fail in your intended Commendations and praise of the Divine Grace; For you do wonderfully disparage the excellency of its nature, and sweetness of its insinuations, while you think to advance it, by setting it up to so high a pitch as an irresistible Determination. For who performs the most ingenuous and commendable Cure upon a Distracted Person, he that puts him into irons in Bedlam, or he that makes such applications as keep all his limbs sound, and lets him go at liberty? Your Determining Grace, doth withhold the Will from the Contrary Object, and restrains it from one part of the Contradiction, ere it does prevail with it to choose and embrace the other: But Grace with us, the more to illustrate her own Glory, and that she may truly appear to be, as she is styled, Grace, doth win the Will to act even then, when she preserves to it, its natural indifferency and freedom to Act and not to Act. So that in short, the effect of your Grace, is as an obligation which a man is drawn to enter into by Durance; that of ours, as one which he enters into out of † Act. 17.11 Generosity. Generosity, ingenuity, or justice, whereof though the first will not hold good in Law, yet the last doth remain in full power, force and virtue. Reflections on Section XI. and the III. Article. 3. SAith This Tilenus, they hold [That by Adam's fall his Posterity lost their freewill, being put to an unavoidable Necessity to do, or not to do, whatsoever they do or do not, whether it be good or evil; being thereunto predestinate by the eternal and effectual secret Decree of God.] Answ. Unworthy falsification still! saith Master Baxter. But I remember when Christ sent out his Disciples, He gave them a Commission, and charge, when ever they came to a house, to say, Peace be unto this house; telling them withal, that if the house were not worthy, their Peace, (i. e. their Apprecation and Blessing) should return to them again. What Commission Master Baxter hath to asperse, slander, and calumniate his neighbour, I know not; I am sure the Divine Grace did not, whatever the Doctrine of the Synod might do, to determine his will to this unhandsome language: but because he was not very well advised in the disposal of it, having bestowed it upon a person altogether unworthy, it doth infallibly return to him again. But, [Not a word to any such sense in the Synod;] saith he; What, neither Name, nor Thing? Let the Reader judge by what is already said, and still to be alleged; whereby it will appear how little reason Master Baxter had to add that sarcastical expression [Well might this Author conceal his Name for shame of the world.] What induced the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews to coneeal his Name, or your good friends Martin Mar Praelate, and Junius Brutus to conceal theirs? Was it for shame of the world? Is there never a Prophet left, think you, to lament the Desolations of God's Church, and say as Jeremiah did, If ye will not hear, Jer. 13.17. my soul shall weep in secret places, for your Pride? I pray you therefore use no Arts of conjuration to call the Ghost of Tilenus out of his Retirement, where he loves privately to exonerate his passions. But you say, [As the words be not in the Decrees of the Synod; so much is there in many suffrages against the sense.] I wish you had produced, that much, that we might have examined how much it will amount unto. But suppose the words be not in the Decrees of the Synod, it is enough to justify Tilenus his assertion, if they be found in the writings of such as Adhere to the Synod, or such as were before it, if the Synod hath not rejected them, as I am confident they have not. But you go on and tell us, [It is but the Moral, or Dispositive, or Habitual Freedom of the Will, that they or other Protestants commonly say that Man hath lost.] M. Parker whose Theses you do so much cry up, Thes. 13. p. 11. upon all occasions, saith, Licet logica superfuerit ratio, seu principium quod, unde remota ac passiva materia potentia, periit tamen principium quo, sive Forma facultas ad bonum. And the Deputies of Over-Isel say, In the will of man after the fall, Act. Synod. Dord p. 197. par. 3. non remansit libertas bene agendi, there remain no liberty to do well. And in their Decrees, C. 3. & 4. Art. 3. the Synod saith, All men are conceived in sin, and born the children of wrath, untoward to all good tending to salvation, forward to evil, dead in sins, slaves of sin; and neither will, nor can (without the Grace of the Holy Ghost regenerating them) set free their own crooked nature, no nor so much as dispose themselves to the amending of it. See also the 2, 3, and 4. Rejections; and Tilenus charge them with no more. He needs not. See Embdanorum exam. circa 3, & 4. Artic. Quaest. 26, & 29. pa. 185, 186. par. 2. You go on; [They all profess that man hath the natural Faculty of Freewill;] And will you not acknowledge as much of the very Devil? But you bid us, [See my forecited pages in my Treatise of Judgement of this.] If by that Reference to those Pages, you intent to raise in us an expectation of something extraordinary, you have deceived us; for we can find no such matter; if you only directed us, where we might find an account of your Opinion more at large in this point, we have maturely considered it, and must profess to you, that it doth not satisfy. 2. You say, [There is not a word in the Decrees of the Synod, that men are put to unavoidable Necessity. 3. Much less to do or not do, whatever they do or do not, good or evil.] You take sanctuary very often in the Decrees of the Synod, which, you may know, were contrived with a great deal of Artifice to serve the interest of two Parties (as was observed above) and wherein they inserted nothing but what might seem most plausible to save their Reputation. But the Reader may remember (or if he doth not, he may look back and find) that every branch of this Article was sufficiently made good out of the Writings of the Doctors of the greatest note amongst the Calvinists, See Antidote. pag. 41, 42. viz. That men are put to an unavoidable Necessity of doing or not doing good, or evil; so that they can do no more good than they do, nor omit more evil than they do omit; and that in regard of the Divine Decree; And these positions are not where Rejected by the Synod; but rather confirmed by some of the Divines thereof, as was alleged above. That they are under a Necessity of Immubility (and that is an unavoidable Necessity) in respect of the Decree, is to be evinced from the Judgement of the Divines of Wedderau; P. 150. par. 2. pag. 154. De Artic. 3. & 4. Thes. 1. & in Corol. they conclude concerning the Necessity of evil thus, An peccata fiunt necessario? Do sins come to pass of Necessity? They answer yes; by a necessity that depends upon a double hypothesis, Decreti scilicet permittentis, & finis boni; That is, in respect of the Divine Decree (operatively, for so they declare their sense a little afore) permitting it, and in respect of the good end, which God accomplisheth by it. And then for good; To begin with the first Act of it, Conversion or Regeneration, the Divines of Wedderau do affirm, Vbi supra. (and 'tis inserted amongst the Acts of the Synod) Sicut homo ad sui generationem nihil prorsus confert; ita nec ad sui regenerationem; A man can confer no more to his regeneration than he doth to his natural generation. Is not this work wrought by an unavoidable Necessity? and yet the whole Synod, in their Decrees, speak the same sense, (Cap. 3, & 4. Art. 12.) They say, It is a work which God, without us, worketh in us, by an operation, for mightiness not inferior to the creation of the world, or raising up the dead. Is not here an unavoidable necessity? and (Art. 17.) they compare it to that powerful operation of God by which he giveth being to this our natural life. And Re ect. 6. They say, that faith by which we are first converted, and from which we are styled faithful, (So that we have that denomination for a work wherein we are merely Passive) is infused by God; and this is said to be done, by his Omnipotent strength, and irresistibly; Reject. 8. All which expressions do clearly evince an unavoidable necessity; for they affirm in the same place, that it lieth not in man's power to be or not to be regenerated. And for all succeeding good, the Divines of South- Holland do conclude, Post finem Act. Synod. (mihi.) pag. 292. that the Spirit of God doth promove, and apply and determine the mind, will and affections, to act, and not only ad exercitium Actus, sed etiam ad sin gularitatem, to the singularity of the Act, as well as to the exercise of it; that is, (as they explain it) the Holy Spirit doth not only determine us simply to do, but also, to do or to Act in this place, at this time, after such a manner, as pleaseth him. This Determination of the Will unto every good Act, makes a Necessity in order of Nature and causality, antecedent to every such Act. Without doubt, the meaning of Daniel Tilenus (the compiler of these Articles) was this; That, in respect of the Divine Decree, (according to the Doctrine of the Synod) All men, whether Elect or Reprobate, are under an unavoidable Necessity, of being saved or damned, and of performing such works † See Synops. pur. Theo. disp. 24 thes. 18. & Act. Syn. Dord. c. 1. Artic. 7. & Reject. 6. , as do inevitably conduce to the accomplishment of their several Ends respectively. And this is evident, even to the eye of sense, in M. Perkins Delineation of the Decree expressed hereafter; And for the Salvation of the Elect, with the Means conducing infallibly thereunto, that is clear by the Synods Definition of Election therewith inserted; Ibid. and that the Damnation of the Reprobates is under a like unavoidable Necessity, may be collected from hence, that many Calvinists do Resolve of that, by the Rule † Ibid. Art. 15. & Rej. 8. & Synop. pur. Theol. Disp. 24. rh. 44. & Act. Sy. Dor par. 2. p. 19 a m. Jud. Th. pal. of Contraries, as it stands in opposition to Election. And though the Elect may fall into many sins, and the Reprobate perform many good works, (at least, quoad substantiam actus,) yet these do not remove either of them one inch from under that unavoidable Necessity; because those sins are Ingredients, that help to make up one full and perfect Medium, conducing infallibly to their End, as concerning the Elect: Act. Synod. Dord par. 2. p. 118. m. and those Good works are Ingredients likewise, that help to make up one full and perfect Medium, conducing infallibly to their End, as to the Reprobates, as is showed out of Perkins, Szegedine, and Norton, elsewhere. When therefore these men deny, that Mankind is under such an unavoidable Necessity, to good or evil, they do but impose upon the unwary Reader, and abuse him with equivocations and Fallacies; and herein it lies. They make Liberty to consist in a spontaneous motion or Lubency, and a freedom from the Necessity of Coaction and violence; and when you charge them with this Opinion, that Man is under an unavoidable Necessity, to do good or evil, in this sense, they will as stiffly deny it, as Master Baxter doth; They are under no such Necessity, they will say, meaning they are not compelled by violence. But if you press them with a Necessity of Immutability, (which is no less unavoidable than the other) whether arising from God's irresistible operation, as in the conversion and perseverance of the Elect; or from his ineluctable Decree, as in the Government of the Reprobate towards their Final doom; this Necessity they will not, they cannot deny. For the truth of the first branch, i. e. in respect of Gods irresistible operation, See P. Molinaeus, amongst the Acts of the Synod. par. 1. pag. 295. m. The British Divines, par. 2. pag. 132. Thes. 2. The Hassiens. pag. 145. Thes. 3. Those of Wedderau. pag. 150. p. m. Those of Embden, pag. 169. thes. 59, 60. and pag. 185. Quest. 26. and Sibrandus Lubbertus par. 3. pag. 157. m. For the other branch, i. e. an unavoidable Necessity arising from the Immutable Decree, you had it even now, from the Divines of Wedderau (ubi supra) where they add, Multa fiunt necessario etc. (as above) Many things come to pass of Necessity, upon supposition of the Divine Decree, which are done freely in respect of man's will. Thus, they say, the Jews crucified Christ necessarily, and yet freely. Necessarily; because being delivered by the determinate council of God, they took him, and with wicked hands fastened him to the cross and slew him. Act. 2.23. Yet freely; because with a full Lubency, and a deliberate or interpretative will, they sought to slay him, as the Evangelicall Story wttnesseth. And this Multa must be extended to Omnia, to All sins as well as that, or some others, else the rest shall be exempted from God's Decree; which is absurd. Will a spontaneity alleviate the Necessity of sinning, or the Perdition that follows it? Let me put a case to M. Baxter. Suppose a Prince intending the ruin of such a Nobleman's Posterity, makes a Law, that whosoever associate themselves with Strumpets, and are not reclaimed by one or two Admonitions, shall be Rack● alive, and have their bones broken, and their bowels and heart torn out of their bodies and burnt before their faces; And yet underhand takes order to Caresse such persons, and give them opportunity and entertainment amongst Harlots, with plenty of wine, and ravishing airs of Music to take them off their Guard, and applies charms and Philters to work upon their Fantasy, blood or spirits, till those persons are no less drunk with lust and passion than with wine: M. Baxter is sent once and again to admonish them, and he saith unto them, Sirs, I desire you to consider, what a severe yet a very just law, is made against this Luxury wherein you live. You have a most gracious Prince that tenders your welfare, and takes care by my Ministry to reduce you from that exorbitancy, which otherwise will bring you to utter ruin; I earnestly beseech you to recollect yourselves, and reform your lives and manners, that you may be restored to your Prince's favour, whom these crimes have so highly exasperated. I pray, as you tender your lives reflect upon the horror of the punishment awarded to such vices, etc. But the men enthralled by the witchcraft of the foresaid Artifice; (which is still applied to them) do hug their unlawful pleasures, and defy the threatened torments, till the hour comes that summons them to the dreadful execution, which all men, that understands the whole process of the business, bewails with bitter lamentations. But then in steps M. Baxter to justify the equity of the sentence that is passed against them, and he aggravates their guilt, and taking no notice of those underhand practices, by which these forlorn wretches were captivated to this misery, he tells the sad Multitude of Complainers, that the proceed are very just; for they knew the Law, and he had taken pains to inform, exhort and admonish them, in the bowels of his tenderest compassion, and he is sure they had the natural faculty of Freewill, and they lay under no Necessity that compelled them to those lewd courses, for they pursued them with a kind of Lubency and alacrity; and therefore the infliction of their sufferings was very just and warrantable. I am very loath to make the application: For to fancy that the Decrees of the most wise, just and holy God have any such influence or any Aspect that looks that way, were horrid blasphemy. And if there were any such Decrees made in heaven, Almighty God should for his honour sake, rather give Master Baxter a Fee to hold his peace, than to divulge them. And yet they have been divulged by men of no small account amongst the Calvinists, As God denies the Reprobates his Grace that they cannot but sin, so also hath he destined them to this condition, that of their own nature they cannot but commit divers wickednesses. Zanch. de Nat. Dei. pag. 554. And, we doubt not to confess, that by the immutable Reprobation, a necessity of sinning is incumbent upon the Reprobate, and of sinning even unto death without Repentance, and of suffering eternal punishment for it. pag. 571. (alia edit. 743, 744.) Piscator to the same purpose. in Notis ad Duplic. Vorst. pag. 2l7. Although the rebellion of the Reprobates depends upon the antecedent, absolute and irresistibly efficacious will of God, yet by this they cannot nor aught to be excused from the fault of Rebellion; Also pag. 223. When God necessitates man unto sin, that he may punish him for sin, he doth justly, because he hath power to govern man as he list. By this it appears how little reason Master Baxter had to say (as he doth in his following Invective) [All this is such a self-devised tale, that no honest man should have been guilty of against the poorest neighbour or enemy, much less against a Party, and a Synod of so many truly learned and worthy men.] Answ. 1. What Self do you mean? Self-Will? or Self-Richard? Mutato Nomine, I am sure 'tis justified by Zanchy-Self, and Piscator-Self, and why I may not add Synod-Self too, I see no reason but your self-denial, which in this case ought not to be accounted of so great validity as D. Tilenus' affirmation, who (as we have been informed) was privy to the transactions of their very close-Committees. 2. The Calvinists do impute far worse matters to Almighty God himself, as appears by sundry of their Testimonies cited above; to which one thousand more might be added out of their writings, if it were needful; and what think you of that modest expression (lately mentioned) of D. Damman a Synodist, That if God performs his part, we cannot omit ours? 3. I make a very great difference betwixt the Foreign Divines and the Provincial, and betwixt the single Doctors and the † Where not the best arguments, but the most votes do carry it; as Luk. 23.23. Synod, And M. Baxter is a man of so much observation, (if affection hath not darkened his sight) that he cannot but see, when men have espoused a Cause, what unworthy * See Antidotum in Praefat. & p. 130, 131. courses (to say no worse) they will take to provide a Dowry for it, and make it fruitful. These Divines took a solemn Oath at their entrance into the Synod (as was said above) to examine these controversies impartially, without affection or prejudice, according to the word of God, yet so unmindful were they hereof, that they condemned the Remonstrants' unheard, shut them out of the Synod, See, ibid. p. 7. etc. not permitting them the liberty promised in their Letters of Citation, to explain and defend their opinions. By which it appears clearly that they were a Party indeed (in another sense, than M. Baxter takes the word) and therefore as unfit to be Judge in these Controversies, as the Council of Trent was to be Judge of those, betwixt the Church of Rome, and the Protestants. That they were such a Party † And 'tis the more scandalous that a Synod should be such a Party is further evident, by the Diligence used in exploring the Judgement of Divines before they were invited to this Assembly. To which purpose they solicited the Prince of Anhalt by Letters, that he would transmit the Confession of his Divines, that they might examine whether it were calculated, to serve the interest of that Doctrine, See ibid. p. 7. etc. which they were resolved to establish, before they would admit them to their Convention; which motion that Prince resented so ill, that he rejected it, not without disdain and indignation. The only Divines that carried themselves worthily, that is, with prudence and equity towards the Remonstrants, were the Helvetians, who darkly taxed the crafty practices and prejudice of the rest, and professed a desire to suspend their judgement concerning either Party, till the whole cause were fully known; For they say, Caeterum ut criminatio acerba est venerandam hanc Synodum appellare Schismaticam, Act. Synod. Dord. p. 102 f. par. 1. edit. in fol. ita intempestivum nobis videri non diffitemur, Remonstrantes criminis ejusdem, hoc quidem tempore, agere reos & condemnare. Est enim veneranda & sancta haec Synodus congregata eum in finem, ut Doctrinam Remonstrantium propositam, explicatam defensamque audiat, ad Dei verbum probè examinet, de ejus vel veritate vel falsitate pronunciet. Eo usque igitur sententiam de schismate, ejusque Authoribus suspendendam esse sentimus, quandoquidem pars ea, quae post examen convicta fuerit doctrinae erroneae, hoc ipso Schismatica quoque intelligetur, nisi cum corpore, à quo se sentit avulsam, rursus coalescat▪ But their judgement was not followed by the rest, who were so much the less worthy for dealing so unworthily, See the Antidotum, etc. both in word and deed, with their Reverend Brethren. You go on; The Question is, Whether men have Original sin or not? Those of you that are of Doctor Jeremy tailor's mind in this, speak out, and disown the Pelagians no more, but speak as bitterly of Austin as of the Synod of Dort. To which I answer, 1. That men have original sin; the remote Cause whereof is God's imputation of it: but the next Cause is their Carnal Generation. For the sin of Adam is therefore of right imputed to us, because we are carnally propagated from him, now become guilty: and so according to the flesh we were as a certain part of him sinning: because we then existed in his loins, when he sinned. The like, in a manner, is said of Levi paying tithes in the loins of Abraham, Heb. 7.9, 10. The Question then, is not whether men have original sin derived to them from Adam, for that is yielded: but whether being called, they have a new power given them by Christ to become Evangelically Righteous? and this question M. Baxter stated with some show of moderation in his first Assize Sermon, Pag. 12, 13. and resolved it seemingly according to the sense and meaning of Tilenus. His words are these; [The last Question is, Who they be that are and may be urged to glorify God on this ground, that he hath bought them? Doubtless, only those whom he hath bought: but who are those? It discourageth me to tell you, because among the godly it is a controversy; but if they will controvert points of such great moment, they cannot disoblige or excuse us from preaching them. Among the variety of men's opinions, it is safe to speak in the language of the holy Ghost, and accordingly to believe, viz. that, As by the offence of one, judgement came upon all men to condemnation even so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men to justification of life. Rom. 5.18. And that he gave himself a ransom for all, and is the only Mediator between God and man. 1 Tim. 2.5, 6. That he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. 1 Joh. 2.2. That God is the Saviour of all men, especially of those that believe. 1 Tim. 4.10. That he is the Saviour of the world. Joh. 4.42. 1 Joh. 4.14, 15 That he tasted death for every man. From which clear evidence Master Baxter is so fully convinced, that he doth acknowledge a General Grace in words, though indeed, in the result, as he defines it, it is not so much Grace as Severity, having no power to save, and being designed only to render the persons, upon whom it is conferred, inexcusable, and their damnation the more intolerable. But Tilenus, fare more to the advancement of God's Grace and Christ's merits, doth conclude from those Texts, by him alleged, That God for Christ's sake doth confer upon all those, who are called by the Gospel, a new power, whereby they are enabled, if they use their diligent endeavour, and be not wanting to themselves and that divine Grace, to expedite and free themselves from the servitude of sin. But by what consequence this should be drawn to prove a denial of Original sin, I am not able to imagine, seeing this Sufficient power all men will not make use of, no not so much as to exempt and free themselves from that servitude of sin, which is superadded to sin Original. As for Doctor Jeremy Taylor, you should do well to stop his mouth first (not by impotent and unworthy insinuations, but by solid and convincing Arguments) before you invite or provoke others of his mind to open theirs. But why disown the Pelagians no more? would you not persuade your Reader that Doctor Taylor is a perfect Pelagian? and is not this suggestion as odious and uncharitable, as the self-devised tale, with which you charged Tilenus even now? how then comes it to pass that so honest a man as Master Baxter is found guilty of it, not against the poorest neighbour, but against a very learned and worthy person, though haply his enemy for telling him some truths that go against the grain of his interest, Popularity or Ambition? M. Baxter may remember a little Pamphlet entitled [A Testimony to the truth of Jesus Christ, etc.] subscribed by 52. Ministers (his Brethren) within the Province of London; Pag. 4. with the 9 wherein amongst other abominable errors, damnable heresies, and horrid blasphemies, they reckon this for one [That Christ was given to undergo a shameful death voluntarily upon the cross, to satisfy for the sin of Adam, and for all the sins of all Mankind.] Now seeing the Pelagians are charged by the Ancients with this Doctrine [that Christ did not die for all, as appears by Saint Austin, contra 2. Epist. Pelag. l. 2. c. 2. Pelagiani dicunt Deum non esse omnium aetatum in hominibus mundatorem, salvatorem, liberatorem, etc. Suppose a man should return Master baxter's language upon his Party, [Those of you that are of the 52. Minister's mind in this, speak out, and disown the Pelagians no more; How would they take it? or how would Master Baxter interpret it? This would be called a shameless calumny, at least a perverse insinuation in Tilenus, though it must pass currant for a piece of ingenuity and candour in himself. But doth not Doctor Taylor, in stating the Question, that there may be no clamours against the person interested in either persuasion, nor any offence taken by error or misprision; tell you; It is not intended, nor affirmed; that there is no such thing as Original sin; for it is certain, Further, explicat. p. 452 and affirmed by all Antiquity upon many grounds of Scripture, That Adam sinned, and his sin was Personally his, but Derivatively ours; that is, it did great hurt to us, to our bodies directly, to our souls indirectly and accidentally. So great hurt, that the Doctor saith, Pag. 431. (in his Vnum necessarium) That our Spirit, when it is at the best, it is but willing, but can do nothing without the miracle of Grace. He doth not stick (in his Answer to the L. Bishops second Letter) Pag. 101. to call it the Pelagian Heresy, and saith, it did serve itself by saying too little in this Article. And in his Vindication to the Countess of Devonshire, Pag. 101. he saith, I desire to be observed in opposition to the Pelagian Heresy, who did suppose Nature to be so perfect, that the Grace of God was not necessary, and that by Nature alone, they could go to heaven; which because I affirm to be impossible, and that Baptism is therefore necessary, because Nature is insufficient, and Baptism is the great channel of grace; there ought to be no envious and ignorant l●●d laid upon my Doctrine, as if it complied with the Pelagian, against which it is so essentially and so mainly opposed in the main difference of his Doctrine. I do not insert this, as if I had a mind to vindicate the Doctor's opinion, or espouse his quarrel; (he is of age to answer for himself,) but to give the Reader notice of the disingenuous practices used by this great pretender unto truth and Godliness, in his unworthy defamation of some, no less than in his undue vindication of others. But for the Doctor's honour and comfort, M. Baxter puts him amongst very good company, Saints Rest. par. 1. pag. 154. m. (under this accusation,) viz. All the Fathers of the first two hundred or three hundred years; and the plain truth is, saith he, till Pelagius days, all spoke like Pelagians. And yet how this opinion can be true I understand not, seeing S. Austin maintains his Doctrine against the Pelagians, by the Authority of all the Fathers that wrote before him, and condemneth that of Pelagius, as a recent error or novel Presumption. However M. Baxter should do well to consider, that the Manichees are, at least as ill as the Pelagians, and therefore he should take heed, he run not into the extremes of very many Calvinists, who think they are never safe from the danger of this Charybdis, till they fall into that Scylla. And if I should say the Synod of Dort did so, he would not spare to tell me, as he doth Tilenus here, that he speaks bitterly of them. Why bitterly? Some men are so tender of their very errors, that they are ready to complain, Truth bites them, when she doth but employ her tongue to lick their soars, in order to their healing. All other men's Gall and Copperas, it seems, doth corrode and fret: but Master baxter's is purely Balsamical. But is it all Gospel that was said by Saint Austin, or the Synod of Dort? Harae. saith, Augustinum, tam varium fuisse in fervore disputationis hujus, ut passim nec secum, nec cum Scriptura conciliari possit. De great. & lib. arb. lib. 2. cap. 14. You descent from the first as much as Tilenus, and the Canons of the later are not Authentic Text with you, unless you may be allowed to make your own exposition. So you profess in your Confession of Faith, concerning Artic. 1. Sect. 12 Art. 3. Sect. 12. & 15. Art. 5. Sect. 9, Pag. 25. 10, 11, 13. And having cleared yourself of the imputation of Arminianism, you proceed in these words, [So I shall think that those who go as much on the other hand, and differ from the Synod one way, as much as the Arminians did the other way, remain censurable as well as they; and soon after. Yet let me add this, Pag. 27. lest my seeking to satisfy the offended, may draw me into guilt; Though I have voluntarily myself professed my consent to those several Canons and Confessions of Faith, (but this is upon liberty taken to explain what Phrases you dislike in them, and putting your own sense upon them; and therefore you might very well subjoin what follows) Yet for the Synod of Dort, the Confession of the Assembly; yea or the Larger Catechism, without some correction, I do hereby protest my dissent against the so imposing them to a word upon all Ministers, that no man that cannot subscribe to them, shall be permitted in the Church: whether our confession were intended for such a necessary Test, I know not well; But that the Synod of Dort was, is expressed in the end; saith M. Baxter. Whence we may collect, had Master Baxter been amongst them, his pretended moderation would have been intolerable, and if not banished, at least he would have been silenced as well as the Remonstrants. I must not forget to give the Reader warning of Master baxter's Artifice, to insinuate into his credulity, that the Synod of Dort maintains no other Doctrine then what was taught by S. Augustine; which suggestion, had it any truth in it, might gain some reputation to the Synod. But M. Baxter acknowledgeth (in his Account of Perseverance) Pag. 5. that Austin's opinion was that some who are effectually Called, Regenerated, Justified, and Sanctified, do fall away and perish; which neither the Synod nor He will allow of for sound Doctrine. And that he never intended to teach such an irrespective Decree, (I say Irrespective in the same sense) as the Synod holds forth, is evident by that one Argument even now mentioned; † Antiquitùs fundatam Catholicam fidem adversus recentem Pelagianorum haereticorum praesumptionem perniciemque defendimus. Aug. lib. 4. adversus Pelag. Epistol. & cap. 12. Quibus demonstratur quomodo sit haec quam tenemus fides vera, vereque Christiana atque Catholica, sicut per Scripturas sanctas Antiquitus tradita, sic a patribus nostris & usque ad hoc tempus, quo isti eam convellere tentaverunt, retenta atque servata, & deinceps propitio Deo retinenda atque servanda. That he defended his Doctrine by the Authority of all the Fathers that had written before him, and accused the Pelagians of Novelty. What the Ancients opinion was Prosper hath expressly delivered in these words; Paene omnium parem inveniri & unam sententiam, quâ propositum & praedestinationem Dei secundum praescientiam receperunt, ut ob hoc Deus alios vasa honoris, alios vasa contumeliae fecerit, quia finem uniuscujusque praeviderit, &, sub ipso gratiae adjutorio, in qua futurus esset voluntate & actione Praescierit. They all held that Predestination was according to God's prescience; that God made some vessels of honour, others vessels of dishonour, because he foresaw the end of every one, and foreknew what he would be, by his own will and choice, under the assistance of Divine Grace. S. Austin doth profess that S. Ambrose by name maintained this cause with him. But Saint Ambrose (lib. 5. de Fide. c. 3.) saith expressly; Non enim ante Praedestinavit, quàm prasciret: etc. God's Praedestination was not afore his foreknowledge; etc. And in those Commentaries that go under the name of Ambrose, and thought to be of the same Age, Ad Rom. 8. we read thus; Istos, quos praesciit futuros sibi devotos, ipsos elegit ad premissa praemia capessenda. He chose them to receive the promised reward, whom he foreknew would be devoted to his service. Et misericordiam dabo ei, quem praescii, post errorem, recto corde reversurum ad me. I will give mercy to him, whom I foreknow, would after his error, return to me with a right heart. To him we may add Hierome, the sharpest Adversary of Pelagius, who is of the same judgement; for he saith, Ex Dei praescientia evenit, ut, Ad Gal. 1. quem scit justum futurum, priùs diligat, quàm ●riatur ex utero. It is from his foreknowledge, that whom God knows will be righteous, he loves before ever he comes forth of his mother's womb. And upon the first Chapter of Malac. Dilectio & odium Dei vel ex praescientia nascitur futurorum, vel ex operibus. The love and hatred of God ariseth either from his foreknowledge of future things, or else from works. And upon the eighth to the Romans. Proposuit sola fide servare, quos praesciverat credituros. He determined to save them by faith, whom he foreknew would believe. Which is more considerable, in his heat of Conflict against the Pelagians (lib. 3.) He saith, Eligit (Deus) quem bonum cernit. God chooseth him, whom he seethe to be good. I may add to these Saint Austin himself, who in his last writings (being Bishop) ad Simplicianum L. 1. Qu. 2. , hath these words, Nemo eligitur, nisi jam distans ab illo qui rejicitur: unde quod dictum est, Quia elegit nos Deus ante Mundi Constitutionem, non video quomodo sit dictum, nisi de praescientia fidei & operum pietaetis. No man is chosen, but he who is distant, or differs from him who is rejected: hereupon I cannot see how that saying [that God hath chosen us before the foundation of the world] is to be understood, but of God's foreknowledge of Faith and good Works. And a little after of Jacob, he saith, Non electus est ut fieret bonus, sed bonus factus eligi potuit. He is not elected that he might be made good, but being made good he might be elected. From which clear passages I argue; either Saint Austin taught the same Doctrine which the Ancients had taught before him, or he did not; If he did, than he taught Election upon God's foreknowledge of faith and piety, which is against the Doctrine of the Synod at Dort; If he did not teach the same Doctrine, than he falsely pretended their Authority and contested against all Antiquity, as well as against the Pelagians; which is very absurd to affirm of him. So that maugre M. Baxters' pretention, a man may disown the Pelagians and the Synod of Dort too, and yet speak Reverently of S. Austin. Master Baxter shuts up this Scene with a notable Question, in these words; Do you believe that all ungodly men, or any man Naturally, hath the Habit of Faith, or Love, or Holiness? This is the very Question, if you will rightly understand it.] To which I answer, That, I do not believe that all ungodly men, or any man Naturally hath the Habit of Faith, or Love, or Holiness: But this is not the very Question, if I rightly understand it; but rather this, [Whether to continue in the want of these, by reason of an Antecedent Decree, that denies Grace Sufficient and Necessary to perform them, be a matter of unavoidable Necessity, and yet a sin properly so called, in the Natural and unregenerate.] The Synod holds the Affirmative of both branches, as touching all the Reprobate: But I deny such a Decree, and consequently that unavoidable Necessity, supposed to follow it; and if there were such a Decree and such a Necessity of wanting Faith and Repentance, that want could not be the sin, but the Fate of such Reprobates. Reflections upon the XII. Section and IV. Article. [THe fourth Article, you say, forged by this Ghost of Tilenus.] You have been truly informed, that the Article was drawn up by Daniel Tilenus himself; but you are a very bold man in venturing to combat with a Ghost; upon whom, your own Reason might have told you, (if your passions had not transported you to fall on without consulting it) that you were like to make no impression with such blunt weapons, as you manage against him. You must therefore be content, till you can come better armed, to leave the Field and the victory behind you, which your Confidence, no doubt, at your Marching forth, promised you the Glory of in this attempt. But this Ghost must follow you into the next Field, (where he is to try your strength and skill, a little further,) which is, [That God to save his elect from the corrupt Mass, doth beget faith in them by a power equal to that whereby he created the world, and raised up the dead, insomuch that such unto whom he gives that Grace, cannot reject it; and the rest being Reprobate cannot accept of it, though it be offered unto both by the same Preaching and Ministry.] That the work of Regeneration or Conversion, for mightiness, is not inferior to the creation of the world, or raising up of the dead * Cap. 3. & 4. Arb. 12. & suffrag. Gamvens. de 2, 〈◊〉 4 cap. Th. 10, et. 13. ; is the express Affirmation of the Synod, in terminis; What is it then that Master Baxter hath to object against the Article? 1. Where did the Synod say that this was to save his Elect from the corrupt Mass, excluding all others salvation? Tilenus hath not the words [excluding all others salvation;] but the Synod hath the Thing, sure enough; for they conclude that the Election of some imply: † Electio (quam de Jacobo intelligit) absque reprobatione (quam vi oppositionis intelligit de Esavo) ne cogitari quidem potest. Piscat. Respon. ad Syllog. 1. Taufreri. Contra absol. Reprob. Decret. the Rejection of others, and that is exclusion, in Zanchy's sense, as was showed above, and in any man's sense, I think, but M. Baxters. Do they not say, many of them, and 'tis the judgement of them all, that the number of the Elect can neither be diminished nor increased? and are not the rest excluded then by that Doctrine? And although you say, God invites them to salvation upon Faith and Repentance, yet this Condition is impossible, and made so by his own Antecedent Decree, which first ordained their fall * Oportuit ergo Deum quoque hanc unicam viam sibi aperire, id est, Adami Lapsum ordinare, sed ad eum quem dixi finem. Beza. in resp. ad S. castle. de Praedest. in refutat. secundae Calum. p. 361. (as many Calvinists do teach) and then the denial of Sufficient and Necessary Grace unto Faith and Repentance, as the whole Synod hath declared; and thereby they exclude all others Salvation. Master Baxter goes on; [And if you quarrel not with a supposed exclusion but an inclusion, than he that denyeth a necessity of salvation from the corrupted Mass, may tell God he will not be beholding for such a mercy, and stand to the venture] Hear you are really guilty of a perverse insinuation, to render Tilenus and his Doctrine odious to the world, whereof you falsely charge him in other parts of your Preface. Sect. 6. & 16. Why else should you hold forth such a supposition, if it were not to impose upon your Reader, that Tilenus or the Remonstrants deny a necessity of salvation from the corrupt Mass? Where do they say this? or what temptation have you to suspect they think so? if you had no such intent, your [Inclusion] might have been excluded, and so might the other branch of your distinction, which follows in these words; [But if you mean it Exclusively, they profess that Faith is the means of our Salvation, not only from the corrupted Mass, but from Infidelity, and the Curse of the Law, and from damnation, and all the sin that would procure it.] Before Master Baxter spoke of an Exclusion of Persons; but now he comes to resume this Exclusion as the second branch of his distinction, he speaks of an Exclusion of Things, which is not very Artificial, in the way of discourse. But why do you profess Faith is the means of our salvation, not only from the corrupt Mass, but etc.] Who said only from the corrupt Mass? And surely the corrupt Mass is the Terminus à quo, and if you be a Sublapsarian, you must conclude that as Man's Misery, so God's Mercy and Salvation must begin there; otherwise, if men be lest in the corrupt Mass, till they arrive at final damnation, Faith will come too late then to save them. 2. Here you separate Infidelity from the corrupt Mass, and hereby you implyedly acknowledge, that we are not made guilty of Infidelity by Adam's sin, and consequently that men being Reprobated upon the account of this sin, were Reprobated without any respect to their Infidelity, as Tilenus chargeth the Synod, to hold, in his first Article. But why do you separate the curse of the Law, and Damnation, from the corrupt Mass, as if this alone were not sufficient to procure both, as your words insinuate; though I presume as much contrary to your own sense as it is, most certainly, † Cap. 1. Reject. 8. to the doctrine of the Synod? Master Baxter runs on in perverse Insinuations still, saying; 2. [If you think that God doth not cause Faith in us, you will not then pray for it, nor be beholden for it.] I am so well assured that it is God that causeth Faith in us, (in the sense of Holy Scripture) that I account myself obliged, not only to pray for the working and increase of it, but most humbly and hearty to thank and bless him also for the Possession and benefit. But, then saith Master Baxter, If you yield that he causeth it, but not by such a power as you mention, you either think that God causeth it without power (which is an opinion that needs no censure) or that he hath many Powers, and causeth one thing by one power, and another thing by another: which is as unbeseeming a Divine or Christian to assert. Answ. 'Tis acknowledged that God causeth Faith, and that by his Power, which Power of his is one and the same Omnipotency, essentially; but exerted and put forth to the production of several effects, not like the Powers of Natural Agents, which Act Ad Ultimum sui Posse, to their utmost strength, but in such a Proportion and Measure, as seems meet to his Alwise Good pleasure, to allow every Agent in order to its operation. For it is a certain Rule; Licet non possimus Deo tribuere virtutem agendi Lmitatam, nil tamen vetat, quod influxus extrinsecus ab eo ortus, non contineat omnem perfectionem possibilem in ratione influxus. Though God be omnipotent, yet every influx of God is not omnipotent, for what is Omnipotent is Infinite, and what is Infinite can neither be increased nor diminished. If therefore every influx of God unto Second Causes were Omnipotent or Infinite, no one Influx of the Divine Power could be more strong or forcible than another. But let us hear Master baxter's Problem upon the point in these next words; [Is not all the world of sober Christians agreed, that Omnis Potentia Dei est Omnipotentia? Either God Causeth faith by the same Omnipotency by which he created the world, or else he causeth it not at all: For he hath no power but one, and that is Omnipotency.] Here Master Baxter strains his wits to palliate the Synods absurd Doctrine. To which end he confounds God's essential Power, which is Omnipotency, with the Egressions of the same Power to divers effects and purposes, which, as was proved even now, are more or less powerful, as the wisdom of God is pleased to send them forth. But let us try what use we can make of this captious way of arguing; and I shall infer from this Position of M. Baxter, one of these two Conclusions▪ either, 1. That there is no Sufficient Grace given to the Non-Elect, which is against M. Baxters' Doctrine; or 2. that those Non-elect can conquer God's Omnipotency; which (to use his words) is as unbeseeming a Divine or Christian to assert. Thus I argue; Some power of God is exerted towards the Conversion of the Non-elect. All power of God is Omnipotency. Therefore some Omnipotency is exerted towards the conversion of the etc. But that M. Baxter may not Cavil at the Form of the Argument, being in the third figure, we will reduce it according to the Rules of Art; and 1. Ostensiué. All the Power of God is Omnipotency. Towards the conversion of the Non-Elect is exerted some power of God. Therefore, to the Conversion of the Non-elect is exerted some Omnipotency. 2. We will reduce it [Per Impossibile.] No omnipotency is exerted towards the conversion of the Non-elect. All power of God is Omnipotency. Therefore, No power of God is exerted towards the Conversion of the Non-elect. Now Master Baxter may take his choice of these two Conclusions. If he saith there is no power of God exerted towards the conversion of the Non-elect; then his sufficient Grace is vanished; for I presume he will not say that is sufficient to an effect, which hath nothing of God's power in it. But if he saith the Omnipotency of God is exerted towards their Conversion; then seeing they are not [de Facto] actually Converted, it will follow, that they can insuperably resist, and prevail against Omnipotency; which (to take no advantage) of the blasphemy of that assertion) if they can do, though they shall be the greatest Rebels in the world, they will deserve to wear the crown for their exceeding prowess. This will awaken Master Baxter to the use of some of his Five senses, which, to make a show and fill up the Muster, rather than for any great service in this Controversy, are displayed in these words; [In these several senses it may be said, that a thing is the effect of Omnipotency. 1. Properly and strictly as denominating the cause. And so all that God doth is the effect of Omnipotency, even the life of a Fly; and therefore you cannot deny it of Grace:] This I shall not Question. But 2. Improperly, as meaning that the Agent doth Act to the utmost of his Power, and could do no more: and thus never did any Divine that was well in his wits say, that Grace is the effect of God's Omnipotency. 3. Improperly also as meaning that so much power as was put forth in causing Faith, would have created a world; had it been that way employed. And this cannot be their meaning, because sober Divines do not use to ascribe several degrees of Power (unless [which is a good Reserve for you] denominatively ab effectis) to God: and if they did, yet would they not pretend to judge of the Scantling, and say, This work hath more power, and this less: especially in such Mysterious works:] Answ. 1. Whether the Divines of the Synod were well in their wits, I shall not examine. 'Tis too evident that many of their Followers are not, which is the fairest excuse that can be made for many of their Doctrines and Practices. And whether they thought, that God did Act to the utmost of his Power, and could do no more, in the conversion of a Sinner, I shall not dispute neither. Nor shall I put any of their words upon the Rack to force them to speak their meaning to be this, [That so much Power as was put forth in causing faith, would have created a world, had it been that way employed.] But whether their sobriety contained them from ascribing several degrees of power to God, at least from implying them, and judging of the Scantling, I shall leave to the interpretation of the Judicious and Impartial Reader, having first set down their very words, which are these; Cap. 3. et. 4. Reject. 8. In the Regeneration of man, they say, God does, suae Omnipotentiae vires adhibere, exert or employ the strength of his Omnipotency. They do not speak here of God's Essential power, which we doubt not to be Infinite, or Omnipotent; but of the influx or emanations of it, applied to, or employed in this work, and these, they say are [vires Omnipotentiae suae] the strength of his Omnipotency. And he that denies this, they add, that he doth [Actionem Dei Omnipotentis subjicere voluntati hominis] subject the Action of the Almighty God to the will of man. Ibid. Art. 12. Which Action or Operation, Virtute sua, nec creatione, nec mortuorum resuscitatione minor, aut inferior, for the mightiness thereof (as the English Translator hath it) is not less, or inferior to the creation of the world, or the resuscitation of the dead. If this be not a passing of Judgement upon the scantling of God's Power, I profess, I know not what Master Baxter means by it. And I would fain be informed, whether, of the work of Special Grace in God's Elect, and the work of Common Grace in the Reprobate, we may not truly say, That work hath more power, and This less; which yet, saith Master Baxter, Sober Divines do not Pretend to judge of, especially in such Mysterious works. But he sums up all in these word: [Gods will is sufficient to cause the thing Willed: And the willing of Grace, will not cause a world, nor the willing of a world, will not cause Grace.] Here 1. Master Baxter slips away from the Question, which is not about the Object of God's Will, but about the Influx of his Power; For 'tis not the will of God Reduplicatiuè, or quatenùs Will, that causeth the Thing willed, but quatenùs Potentia, as it is Power, as well as Will. And we must not forget to take notice, that Things willed of Almighty God, are either willed Absolutely, as his own works, or disjunctively and conditionally, as Man's duty; Gods will alone is sufficient to cause the things willed in the first sense, but not in the latter; And this, not because the Will of God alone cannot, (at least if it doth not imply a contradiction, to say, God can do that which is Formally our Duty) but because alone, it will not. But it is time to feel the pulse of Master Baxters fourth sense, which beateth thus, [4. Improperly, as only describing the degree of excellency in the effects, as related to the Cause. As if they said, there is so much excellency in this effect of Grace, that no Cause below Omnipotency, that is, below God himself, could procure it. And he that denieth this, let him prove if he can, that any Creature without God, can Sanctify.] A very Profound Argument! I will requite you with such another; Let Master Baxter prove, if he can, that any creature can breathe or move one step without God: Ergo, therefore Omnipotency is required to cause every Creature to fetch every haust of breath, and move every step. But let us reduce M. Baxters' Argument into form, and see what will follow from it, Whatsoever cannot be wrought without God, is wrought by omnipotency, or a power not inferior to that by which God created the world, or raiseth up the dead. But Grace or Sanctification is not wrought without God. Therefore, Grace or Sanctification is wrought by Omnipotency, or a power not inferior to that whereby God created the world, or raiseth up the dead. I deny the Major, That whatsoever cannot be wrought without God is wrought by Omnipotency, etc. For i'll assume upon that proposition; thus, Man cannot breathe, nor set one step, nor perform any one natural action without God; Doth it follow therefore, that besides God's General concourse, there is required a Special omnipotent influx not inferior to that power whereby he created the world or raiseth up the dead, to cause us to breathe and walk? Then every breath we fetch, and every step we set, is irresistible, and cannot be suspended or forborn. The Fallacy in these Arguings is A Dicto Simpliciter. God is Omnipotent, doth it follow therefore that the power which he exerteth, or putteth forth to cause Grace in us, is Omnipotent? If it be so, then God Acteth in this work, to the utmost of his power, and can do no more; and no Divine, Our preaching and persuasion, and your hearing and considering, are the appointed means, etc. Call to the Non-Converted, Preface. Joh. 17.17. Eph. 5.26. that is well in his wits, will say so; as Master Baxter hath acknowledged. 'Tis true no creature, without God, can Sanctify: but God useth the creature as his instrument and means to work Sanctification; Now are ye clean through the word: and Sanctify them through thy truth; and Christ doth sanctify and cleanse his Church by the washing of water through the word: yet the word is neither Omnipotent nor irresistible. And it is man's duty † 2 Tim. 2.21. 1 Pet. 1.16.22. 1 Joh. 3.3. to sanctify himself, and as 'tis possible for him to perform, so 'tis possible for him also to neglect it. Master baxter's fifth sense is given us in these words; [And if only the several effects are compared, as if the meaning were [the work of Grace doth more clearly demonstrate Omnipotency in the cause, than the creation of the world] I have met with none that dares pretend to be a Judge in the comparison or competition.] Then I have been more happy in this than you; for I have met with a man that doth more than pretend to it, one that hath played the part of a Judge in the comparison or competition; and I am sorry, you are no better acquainted with him: but you may read his decision in the next words, which tell us [In some respect the work of Grace demonstrateth Omnipotency more, as being against more actual resistance: In other respects the creation demonstrateth it much more.] Now how can we reckon this Judge amongst the number of those Sober Divines, who you say, did never intent to make themselves † Hi sunt qui se ultro apud temerarios convenas sine divina dispositione praestciunt, qui se Praepositos sine ullâ Ordinationis Lege constituunt, qui nomine Episcopatum dante Episcopi sibi nomen assumunt, sedentes in pestilentiae Cathedra, etc. S. Cyprian. de unit. Eccles. pag. 23. Judges (I wonder who else made you so) of these things, or trouble the Church with disputes about them. This Assertion will argue want of Sobriety in some body; let the Reader judge in whom. In the mean while I shall proceed to Master baxter's 13. Section. Where I find his Discourse ushered in again with a new Reproach cast upon Tilenus, whom he upbraideth in this language; [You slanderously say, etc.] Now at a venture, I submit it to the Impartial Reader, to stamp the brand of Infamy, in an indelible Character, upon the Forehead of him who is the greater slanderer of the too, Tilenus or Master Baxter. But what is the slander? [That the Synod saith, The Reprobates cannot accept it, viz. saving Faith;] How dares Master Baxter call this a slander † He doth acknowledge it of them, in Sect. 36. of this Preface. which is so easily proved to be their Doctrine? That which is neither given to them, nor designed for them, by Almighty God, Reprobi credere non possunt. Gomarus, in Thesibus de Praedest. disp. 1604. these 32. Reprobos nec obedire vocenti Deo, nec credere, nec resipiscere, nec justificari, nec salvari posse, inquit Musculus, in locis Com. Loc. de Reprob. that the Reprobates cannot receive, or accept: Faith and Repentance are neither given to them, nor designed for them, by Almighty God: Therefore they cannot receive or accept it. The Major is proved by the words of the Baptist; Joh. 3.27. A man can receive nothing except it be given him from above. The Minor is the Doctrine of the Synodists; For if you examine their Suffrages, most of their Definitions or Descriptions of Reprobation, do include the Denial of Grace Sufficient and Necessary unto Faith and Repentance. But we need not be at that trouble to find proof; for we have it amongst the very Decrees of the Synod. Cap. 1. Artic. 15. They say, God Decreed to leave the Non-elect in the common Misery, and not to bestow saving Faith and the Grace of Conversion upon them. And Reject. 2. They reject it as an Error that troubled the Belgic Churches, That an Election unto justifying Faith may be without peremptory Election unto Salvation. And Cap. 2. Reject. 6. Whereas some, rather than others, are made partakers of forgiveness of sins, and life eternal, They reject it as an Error, [That this diversity depends upon their own freewill, applying itself to Grace indifferently offered: and not upon the singular gift of Mercy, effectually working in them rather than others, that they may apply this Grace unto themselves. By which Doctrine it is evident that this Faith is denied unto the Reprobate, and consequently, that they cannot receive it, which is all I intended to evince from it. By all which, and much more that might be alleged to prove it, it appears that the Synod hath the perfect sense, (and it is that and not so much the numerical words) that Tilenus chargeth them with. But saith Master Baxter [They deny them no power but Moral, which is the willingness Habitual itself;] Yes by your favour, they deny them Supernatural Assistance Sufficient and Necessary for the Introduction of that Supernatural Habit, from whence should flow (if it be at all) that Habitual willingness, which you call Moral Power. [But they knew that all had a Passive and obediential Power, and also a Natural Active Power or Faculty of willing, and so far can Accept.] Answ. 1. For your obediential power, it is no more than what was in the first Chaos towards the Production of the world; and you may with as much reason affirm it possible for all Creatures sublunary, to have been educed or drawn out of that Chaos without God's Fiat, or Omnipotent word, as for Faith to be drawn out of man's obediential Power, unless God bestows a new supernatural power towards the production of it. And for your Natural power, what proportion hath that to a Supernatural Act or Object? So little, or none at all, that Saint Austin acknowledgeth, that the want of such Acts in reference to such objects, is not culpable, but where a new sufficient power is conferred towards them. His words are these, Lib. 3. de lib. Arbitrio c. 16. Ex eo quod non accepit, nullus reus est; ex eo verò quod non facit, quod debet, justè reus est. Debet autem si accepit, & voluntatem liberam, & sufficientissimam facultatem; No man is guilty for that which he hath not received; but upon this account, that he doth not what he ought to do, he is justly guilty. And he ought to do, if he hath received a free will and sufficient ability. We may say of the Devils, as much as you do here say of the Reprobates; we know they have a Passive Obediential, and also a Natural Active Power or Faculty of willing, and so fare can Accept (Grace). And the Divine Decree makes no difference betwixt them, (as the Synod states it); for that is irreversibly passed against them both. But doth God allow these Reprobates, (whom he calls by his Gospel,) no more Grace and Power towards Faith and Repentance, than he allows the Devils? you do not, you dare not affirm it; and yet you affirm what is tantamount, if not worse; For what he does afford them, you would say surely, if you had occasion, as well you insinuate (Sect. 15.) that it is not with a purpose to Convert them. To what end is it administered then? I am sure many, if not all the Synodists, do tell us, that it is to make them inexcusable; by which Doctrine, God should deal more hardly by these men then by the very Devils (as was said above) to whom as the benefit is in no sense tendered, so the unavoidable refusal of it, doth in no sort procure them, (as it doth those) the aggravation of their sin and torments. But I must return to take notice what a pitiful Putoff Master Baxter is fain to make use of, to save the Reputation of his own, and the Synods Doctrine. We will illustrate it by this Similitude. Suppose a School to which are sent many children; There is an Usher appointed to read a part of a Latin or Greek Author to all these Children every day: and the head-Master culls out a small number, to whom he privately communicates the Construction and way of Parsing, and inculcates it with so much earnestness and affiduity that the meanest capacity amongst them cannot but understand it; the rest, which are much the major Part, are past-by and neglected, no care at all taken for their solid institution. When notice is taken, and complaint made of this incongruous and partial way of Instruction, according to the method whereof, those few peculiar Favourites cannot refuse, the rest not receive the benefit, and therefore had as good absent themselves from the School: An Impertinent person undertakes the vindication of this School and the Master of it, telling the Complainant, [You slanderously say, those children cannot receive benefit by this way of teaching; for to my knowledge they have all their senses and Natural faculties, for Discipline, as perfect as the other children.] When the Question is about the helps and means administered on the Master's part, to enable them to gain the Construction and way of Parsing the Authors read to them; This Impertinent waves that which is the only thing in Question, and falls a commending the Boys Natural Abilities, crying up their nimble eyes, and quick ears, and faithful memories, and ready apprehensions. Just thus doth Master Baxter here; The Question is (not about the Habit of faith or Moral disposition to believe, as Master Baxter suggesteth a little after, but) about Necessary and Sufficient Grace for the begetting or acquiring that supernatural Habit, or Spiritual Disposition. The Synod saith, God doth so dispense this Grace, that the Elect cannot reject it, but the Reprobates cannot accept it. No saith Master Baxter, there is no reason to object this against them; for they knew well enough the Reprobates [have a Passive and obediential Power, and also a Natural Active Power or Faculty of willing, and so far can Accept.] What a piece of Sophistry is here! a mere Ignoratio Elenchi. M. Baxter sets himself quite besides the cushion; And it would make one wonder to observe, that men, who handling other points of Divinity make some show of Learning and skill in the Arts and Sciences, when they come to dispute these Controversies, should be driven to such evasions and fallacies, and are content to serve themselves of these mean shifts, rather than abandon their beloved errors. But, saith M. Baxter, [The Question is only of the Moral Disposition: And I pray you, if you are a Christian (which is more sure, than that you are charitable) or a man of Observation, tell us, Whether you think that an Infidel hath a Habit of Faith, or a Disposition of believing; or whether a drunkard hath a Habit or Disposition of Sobriety, or a whoremonger of Chastity, or a worldling of heavenliness]. I think not. But give us leave to ask you another Question; Whether an Elect Infidel, drunkard, whoremonger, worldling, have the Habits or Disposition of Faith, Sobriety, Chastity, heavenliness? Yet these can and do accept (rather cannot refuse) Grace, the rest cannot accept it. Is the Passive and obediential power, and the Natural Active Faculty alone sufficient hereunto in those Elect? No certainly there is something else required. Therefore the Question is not only of the Moral Disposition, as you say; for betwixt the Natural Active Faculty, and the Moral power which you call Habitual willingness, there is a sufficient supernatural or spiritual influx in order to the Acquisition † For, Habitus Infusi se habent ad modum Acquisitorum. And you say, Our new birth is a new creation ordinarily in materia disposita. Of Saving Faith. pag. 40. of that Habit or Dispositition. And I conceive the very Question is about this influx and the degree of its Activity, in helping the Unregenerate to repent and believe. In your Treatise a Pag. 294. of Conversion, you say, That Habitual willingness none hath, but he that hath proportionably received that Grace that doth effect it. There is then some help to supply the defects of that Moral Disposition, or rather to work it, through want whereof the Reprobate cannot have it. Excus. 22. And in your Sermon of Judgement, you say, [If we take Power Ethically, (and who takes it otherwise in this Question, but such as love to lurk in Ambiguities?) none but the effectually called have a power to believe.] The Elect Drunkard, Whoremonger, Worldling, &c. cannot levy forces enough of his own to subdue those Rebel lusts that fight against the soul. You confess God is pleased to send them foreign insuperable aid, out of his Omnipotent and irresistible Armies of Auxiliaries; And though the Principes and Triarii be kept for a Grand Reserve to fall in to their succour when they are routed and discomfited, (and we do not envy them that Assistance, but bless God for such Gracious Supplies, understanding their great need, many times, as well as God's free liberty to show mercy) yet some of the Velites you might allow the Reprobate, at least to balance the force of the enemy; And then being upon such equal terms, (as the first Adam stood upon in Paradise, which I do not understand in respect of Innocency, or, a present and immediate freedom from the servitude of sin, and guilt of death; but in respect of a measure of Grace proportionable to those temptations and infirmities they are to contest against, which is that condition to which the second Adam is said to have restored us) if they will not fight it out then, Rom. 5.17. and quit themselves like men, let them be led into captivity to the Law of sin, till they perish in it. But it seems 'tis but a folly for them to expect such Relief. They are required to bring in their tale of Brick, but no straw will be allowed them: they must make a shift with such stubble as they can rake up upon the Fallows of their own Nature; for so M. Baxter intimates in his next words, which are these, [The Synod never doubted but that men have the Natural Power of willing; and what then can be moreover imagined to be in the will, besides the Moral Inclination to will?] 'Tis true, if by [being in the will] you mean, as being there by the Right, or improvement of Nature: but you have told us formerly of a Sufficient Grace, Praef. Sect. 8. bringing Christ and Salvation to the choice even of the worst that perish. What is become of this Grace now? without this man hath a Natural Active Faculty of willing, and if that Grace superadded to it, cannot enable him to will above Nature, that is, Graciously, or to Believe, what is the real effect, purpose, and intent of it? I pray speak out, without any equivocation or Mental Reservation. But your Sufficient Grace, as fare as I can perceive, is like those men, which deceitful Officers use to take up against a General Muster, that the cheat of their dead Pays may not be discovered; they will serve to make a show, and skirmish a little in a way of Pastime, but are never engaged to fight. Thus you furnish out your Common Grace, (which you are pleased to allow the Non-Elect) and if it be handsomely harnessed carrying a bow, yet wanting string and arrow, like Ephraim it turns back in the day of battle. Never was the body of sin vanquished, nor the soul of any one single Christian crowned under the conduct of it. And therefore perhaps you thought, you were as good to leave the Reprobate to their Natural Active Faculty without that Assistance; which though they may Accept of, yet they cannot improve to their salvation: It is of another sort, and designed to another end, a means (not to save, but) to harden and render inexcusable, for accomplishing the Decree of Reprobation. But let us hear Master baxter's appeal, which he enters in these following words; [Now I dare appeal, saith he, to any Reasonable man, whether these vicious persons have holy inclinations to the contrary virtue? that is, whether a wicked man be Habitually or dispositively a Godly man? This is the very Question when you have driven it to the Head, about the power of unsanctified men to Repent, Believe, Love God, etc.] To which what hath been returned already is sufficient to make it appear, that Master Baxter hath not yet hit the nail o'th' head in this Question. But there are two things which I have observed to fall frequently from him in his writings, to which I must apply an Answer. 1. That even the Reprobates may have Christ and life, Section 8. or salvation, if they will.] But Antonius Thysius * Ad Sum. Baron p. 38. speaks more ingenuously, according to the Doctrine of the Synod, (whereof he was a member); Multi salvi non fiunt, saith he, non quia ipsi nolunt, sed quia Deus non vult. Many are not saved, not because they are unwilling, but because God wills not. And † Contra castle. pag 102 Donteclock saith, Duo ergo sunt qui nolunt, Deus & homo; There are two that are unwilling, God and man. And Calvin a Instit. l. 3. c. 24. n. 14. , Quòd igitur sibi patefacto Dei verbo non obtemperant reprobi, probè id in malitiam pravitatemque cordis eorum rejicietur, modo simul adjiciatur, ideò in hanc pravitatem addictos, quia justo, sed inscrutabili Dei judicio suscitati sunt ad gloriam ejus sua damnatione illustrandam; That the Reprobates obey not the Gospel of God, may very well be imputed to the malice and pravity of their own heart, so this be also added to it, that they are therefore addicted to that pravity (or naughtiness) because by the just, but unsearchable judgement of God, they are raised up to set forth his glory by their Damnation. And little less than this is employed, though very modestly, in Sect. 15. of M. Baxters' Preface. The second Thing I must take notice of in Master baxter's Doctrine about this Article is, That the Reprobates cannot, is no more than they will not, for thus he saith (Sect. 36. of this Preface) When the Synod says they cannot, (which he told Tilenus even now, he slanderously charged upon them; yet now himself finds it in them and expounds it thus) When the Synod says they cannot, they speak but of a Moral Impotency, which is nothing else but Habitual unwillingness, and so the cannot and the will not is the same thing] But Beza † In brevi explic. tot. Christian. c. 5 Aph. 4. doth distinguish them, and saith, Nec volunt, nec etiam possunt; So doth Master Fenner; The Reprobates are not damned because they cannot (though they cannot) saith he, Cap. 3. & 4. Artic. 3. but because they will not; And this is the very Doctrine of the Synod, They say, [All men are conceived in sin, and born the children of wrath, untoward to all good tending to salvation, forward to evil, dead in sins, slaves of sin; and neither Will, nor Can, (without the grace of the holy Ghost regenerating them) [which is denied to every Reprobate by this Synod] set straight their own crooked nature, no nor so much as dispose themselves to the amending of it. And both this Cannot and this Will not, when you have driven the Question to the very Head, do flow by an inevitable Necessity, from the Divine Decree, according to the Doctrine of the Calvinists, speaking even by the Synod; as was showed above, in the Testimonies alleged in proof of the last branch of the third Article; and as appears by the Decrees of the Synod itself; compare Chapter 3, and 4. Artic. 3. with Chap. 1. Artic. 15. In his next (which is the 14.) Section, Master Baxter runs on in his wont strain of accusation; for he tell Tilenus, [You wrong them also (and 'tis just so, and no otherwise then formerly) in feigning them simply to say, that those to whom God gives grace cannot reject it.] It were a strange Fiction I confess to affirm, that they say simply, when 'tis so evident they speak so doubly and equivocally upon all occasions. But doth Master Baxter think that every Reader will bring the Collier's faith, and follow him with a blind obedience in whatsoever he please to impose upon him, if he be ushered in with a valiant Calumny? If he understands Latin he will find the charge Tilenus brings against them, acknowledged in the next words, which tells us, [They say indeed that, Post Dei operationem, (quoad ipsum) non manet in hominis potestate regenerari vel non regenerari, etc.] What altars the case? is it Master Baxters (for 'tis none of Tilenus') Dictum simplicitèr, or the Synod's, Secundùm quid, or, quoad ipsum, the first of which is a mere blind, and the other such an insignificant Parenthesis that the English Translator thought fit to leave it quite out in his Translation of those Decrees. It is a notable sign men are ashamed of their opinions when they use such figg-leaf distinctions to cover their nakedness. But it seems [quoad ipsum] would not do it; and therefore Master Baxter makes it quoad ipsam, in his Descant upon the words, or the Reason he renders to excuse them; which is this that followeth, [For, saith he, when effectual Grace hath done its work, the man is regenerate already, or else grace were not effectual: (do you give it that denomination ab eventu then?) Besides, (saith he) by [Power] here, they mean nothing but the proportion of man's corruption and resisting disposition, (would any man interpret it of man's virtue and cooperation?) compared with that Grace that shall infallibly prevail against it.] What need these trifling circumlocutions; you might have told us in one word, if you would have used your Christian simplicity, that, the Masculine Omnipotency, and the Feminine Irresistibility of the Synod, are so infallibly praevalent in this work, that the Elect cannot reject it; which is that we contend to be the Synods meaning. But, by the way, let the Reader take notice of the sincerity of this Praevaricator. This Article of Tilenus is taken out of that very Decree of the Synod (Cap. 3, & 4. Artic. 12.) which he professeth, (in his Confession of Faith, Vbi supra. he cannot subscribe unto; yet here, he quarrels Tilenus about it, and undertakes the vindication of it, by his sleight Comments, and takes the confidence by unworthy suggestions, to wrong him, under an unjust pretence that he hath wronged them. For evidence whereof, it will not be amiss to give the Reader a more full view of their sense and meaning. The Belgic Professors say, that Faith, De Art. 3, & 4. Thes. 6. p. 155. p. 3 by which we are first converted, and from which we are styled Faithful, is not an Act, but a Habit infused of God: and that so Potent, that the will of man cannot resist or hinder it. Ibid. p. 157. and those 4. Professors subscribed these Rejections. This is subscribed by Polyander, Gomarus, Thysius and Waleus; and approved by Lubbertus; which Lubbertus rejects, amongst others, these two propositions, as unsound opinions; 1. In hominis irregeniti Potestate esse, primam gratiam accipere vel rejicere; That it is in the Power of the unregenerate to accept or reject the first grace. 2. In hominis irregeniti Potestate esse, primâ gratiâ benè vel male uti. It is in the power of an unregenerate man to use the first grace well or ill. And the Divines of † Part. 2. p. 153. m. Wedderau say, that the Grace of the Holy Ghost, which effecteth faith (whether it be done ordinarily or extraordinarily) is irresistible: That man neither will nor can resist it, his vitiosity being conquered by the insuperable power of God. Ita Britanni: ad hoc opus regenerationis habet se homo passiuè, neque est in potestate voluntatis humanae impedire Deum sic immediate regenerantem. That the will of man is merely Passive in this work. So that God is the solitary Cause of the first Conversion. And doth not the whole Synod subscribe to this doctrine? They resemble this work to that Powerful operation of God, by which he giveth being to this our natural life. (Cap. 3, & 4. Art. 17.) A work to the production whereof he employeth his omnipotent strength. (Reject. 8.) A work for the mightiness thereof not inferior to the creation of the world or raising up the dead, which God worketh in us, but (not with us, but,) without us; an operation so carried on, that when God hath done his part, it remains not in man's choice, to be, or not to be regenerate; to be, or not to be, converted; Art. 12. & Reject. 8.) From whence I argue thus; That work wherein man is merely passive, which is wrought in him, but without him, like his first birth, creation or resurrection from the dead, by God's Omnipotent strength; That work, or that Grace that worketh after this manner, he cannot reject. But such is the operation, or Grace that effecteth his Regeneration, or Conversion, according to the Doctrine of the Synod (as was alleged out of their very words.) Therefore the Synod are not wronged, nor is Tilenus' guilty of a Fiction: But M. Baxter accountable for them both. But, saith M. Baxter, [For the manner of God's operation, they confess it such, as man cannot here comprehend, ibid. Sect. 13.] They were then very bold men, so positively to define it to be insuperable, infrustrable, omnipotent, irresistible; And was it done like Worthy Learned Divines to exauctorate, persecute and banish, † For it is well known, they were instigators in this work. their Learned and Godly Brethren, for dissenting from them in the explication of an Article, which they confess themselves unable to comprehend? These things sound ill to impartial ears. Let us hear if the rest will sound any better. And Sect. 16. they tell you, saith M. Baxter that [Sicuti post lapsum homo non definit esse homo, in ellectu & voluntate praeditus, nec peccatum, quod universum genus humanum pervasit, naturam generis humani sustulit, sed depravavit & spiritualiter occidit: ita etiam haec divina regenerationis gratia, non agit in hominibus tanquam truncis & stipitibus, nec voluntatem ejusque proprietates tollit, aut invitam violenter cogit; sed spiritualiter vivificat, sanat, corrigit, suaviter simul ac potenter flectit.] To this I shall answer in the words of the Remonstrants, In respons. ad Epist. Ministrorum Walachrian. p. 71. printed a year before the Synod of Dort began. [At nullum hic discrimen datur operationis divinae in homine & trunco, desumptum ex modo & efficacia operandi, sed solum ex parte subjectorum, hominis & trunci, inter quae infinitum intercedere discrimen nemo inficiabitur, nisi qui truncus sit aut stipes, ideoque quid mirum, si non possit truncus & stipes secundum modum creaturae rationalis simul agere, sicut nec homo secundum modum creaturae irrationalis (aut non rationalis?) Quòd si eâ quam Contra-Remonstrantes urgent ratione Deus hominem convertat, nullum nos discrimen videre ingenuè fatemur inter hominis & trunci vivificationem. Cum enim in homine quamvis voluntate praedito ita operetur ex ipsorum placitis Deus, ut non possit non voluntas agere id quod agit, & sola Conversionis Causa sit Spiritus gratia, non cooperante voluntate, & haec ex innato principio reluctans Spiritui ad obedientiam tamen potentia cui resisti nequit flectatur, ita quidem, ut causa istius actus dici non possit; certe non alium hunc esse agendi modum censemus, quam si ex Lapidibus filios Abrahae esset facturus Deus, aut ex limo terrae Adamum, aut si contra naturalem inclinationem molem aliquam saxeam sursum attolleret. Brevitèr, non magis spontaneè, nedum indifferentèr, quod essentiale est libertati, ad conversionem sui concurret homo, quam cum truncus aut lapis motu non naturali à Motore impellitur. Thus fare in answer to the Epistle of the Walachrians; And in their Antidotum they say, Verum quidem est hominem non esse truncum aut stipitem, Pag. 97. manet enim homo intellectu & voluntate praeditus, sed tamen certum etiam est cum non plus conferre ad illam sui mutationem & conversionem, quam stipes aut truncus ad sui tractionem, id est, esse tantum subjectum merum impressionem recipiens, etc. And this is very roundly acknowledged by Amesius in his Medulla Theol. (l. 1. c. 26. Th. 25. p. 135.) where he saith, Voluntas respectu hujus primae receptionis (Christi sc.), neque liberè agentis, neque naturaliter patientis rationem habet, sed obedientialis tantùm subjectionis. (For the Scripture (2 Cor. 4.6.) alleged to prove this assertion, it speaks of the extraordinary Gifts of knowledge inspired into the Apostles, or the Revelation of the mind of Jesus Christ to them by the Holy Ghost to fit them for the service of the Church than a planting; and so makes nothing to that purpose for which he doth so frequently produce it. This by way of caution; to return;) And Maccovius † In Colleg. Misc. quaest. disp. 1. in Corollar. mihi. 410. is no less Positive in the point than Amesius; Hoc non est crude asserere, ut lapis se habet ad carnem, sic irregenitus ad regenitum. The sum of all is this; The Synod alleages, that (however, they state the Question) they teach that Regenerating Grace doth not work upon men, as if they were stocks and stones. The Remonstrants on the other side acknowledge a vast difference in respect of the Subjects; a man is not a stock or a stone, nor a stock or a stone a man; one hath sense and reason which the other hath not; and therefore no wonder if they do not Act alike: But withal, they say, if the Conversion or Regeneration of man be wrought after such a manner as is taught by the Synod, they can see no difference in the Manner and efficacy of the operation †, from that, Si homo minime liberi arbitrii filius est, atque ideo non potest, diversa eligere, sed necessariò semper manet quod est, quasi lignum vel lapis in seipso subsistet naturae vinculis non arbitrii libertate unitus. Cyr. Alex. Thesaur. lib. 3. c. 2. whereby God should of stones raise up children unto Abraham; For what higher expressions could stocks and stones thus transformed into children's use, than to say, God employed his omnipotent strength in our transformation; and it was effected in us, but without us, and that by an operation for mightiness not inferior to that whereby God created the world and raiseth up the dead, and it was so carried on that when God had done his part, it remained not in our power to be, or not to be, thus transformed into children of Abraham? The case is plain enough. But then there is a Quaere, whether this work can properly be called a Duty, and a wise God account it Laudable and rewardable in these sons of Transformation; and whether upon any score of Justice he can impute it for a fault to those other stones, that lie still in the high ways, untransformed, and adjudge them to an intolerable curse, and subject them to an implacable vengeance (could they be sensible of it) because they are not obedient to such an Almighty operation, though never put forth towards their change. This is the very Question, whether Master Baxter will, or will not understand it. But I shall tell him Saint Austin's judgement, who saith thus, Lib. de duab. Anim. contra Man. c. 10. Cap. 12. ib. De quo nesciente, vel resistere non valente quispiam quidpiam mali fecerit, just damnari nullo modo potest. And again, Peccati reum teneri quenquam quia non fecit quae facere non potuit, summae iniquitatis est & insaniae. It is a part of the highest iniquity and madness to hold one guilty, because he hath not done that which he had no power to do. By what is said already we may give judgement of the truth of Master Baxters Inferences which follow in these words; [So that you see they deny not Natural Freewill, which is a Power of Choosing or Refusing, but Moral Freewill, which is a Spiritual Inclination:] This is fairly spoken: But for my part, I am not so quick sighted; I cannot see, but they deny the exercise at least of Natural Freewill in the work of Man's Conversion, unless [Non manet in hominis Potestate regenerari vel non regenerari] must signify, that man hath a Power of Choosing or Refusing; and if he hath so, than it lieth in his power to be or not to be, Regenerated; which is rejected by the Synod as an error † Cap. 3, & 4. Reject. 8. And how can they refuse an omnipotent operation? . That they have a Natural Freewill, which is a Power of Choosing or Refusing in Natural or Civil matters, is very truly granted: but 'tis nothing to the purpose. But let us follow him, to hear the end of his discourse, which proceeds thus, [And so they deny not in the Regenerate the Natural Power of sinning and resisting grace, (much less in the elect unregenerate.] I thank you for nothing. This is what they dare not deny for shame of the world. Common experience is such a Confutation of that Doctrine, (should they or you deliver it,) as would admit of no Reply. But why do you kindle such an Ignis Fatuus before your Reader; unless it be to blind or dazzle his eyes, while you lead him from the Quaestion, that he may take no notice of the pitiful Subterfuges † The Question is only this; Whether God doth infuse Faith and Repentance, into man's will by a strength and operation irresistible? you are driven to? You say, They deny not in the Regenerate the Natural Power of sinning and resisting grace, (much less in the elect unregenerate) (so you told us: what then?) but only that this Power, or any ill disposition of theirs, shall eventually frustrate the Grace that comes from a Resolution to renew them.] This is comfortable news for all such Elect, if true; but Master Baxter and the Synod may be mistaken in their Intelligence, and therefore every man that tenders his everlasting safety, had best not depend upon it. The Reasons of this advice are given before. But here the Reader may take notice, that the common sufficient Grace, which Master Baxter puts such a face upon, (to speak to him in his own language) saying it brings Christ and life to man's choice, and they deny it not to the worst that perish, This Grace, I say, is like to do them but a little good; it must needs perish with the Receivers; for it comes not from a Resolution to renew them; And therefore as good never a whit, as never the better for the coming of it. And yet to assure us this fell not from Master baxter's pen unadvisedly, we have as much employed in the next, which is the fifteenth Section, which shuts up the fourth of Tilenus' Articles. This Section advanceth upon the Reader after this manner; [I would at this time only ask you, whether every Jesuit will not confess that God did from Eternity Foreknow who would Believe and Repent, and who not?] When you come to be Ghostly Father to men of that Society, you may vouchsafe to put the Question to them yourself, and it is very probable, without the seal of secrecy, they will confess thus much to you. But what then? [If so, then whether it be a rational Conceit, that God in sending Christ to die, and the Word and Spirit to convert men, hath as full a purpose that these shall be effectual to convert and save them, that he foreknew from Eternity would never be converted or saved, as them that he foreknew would certainly be converted and saved?] To which Question I Answer, 1. That it is more modestly propounded than Maccovius his Stultus foret (Christus) si finis esset unus pulsandi, In Col. de Prad. disp. 15 p. 49. ut intraret. It were a foolish thing in Christ, to call them unto Conversion, whom he foreknew would never be converted, if one end of his calling were, that they might be converted. Master Baxter saith not so. He will not speak so broadly: but he asks, whether it be a rational conceit, etc. 2. The word [effectual] is equivocal; It may signify de facto and eventually prevailing and irresistible; or it may signify so powerful an administration as will take effect, if man doth not oppose a new contumacy to check and hinder it. Here we may not admit it in the former, but in the latter sense only. 3. Master Baxter seems in these words to establish God's Purpose, as to Conversion and Non-conversion, to Salvation and Non-salvation with the effectual means thereof upon God's Foreknowledge; if he doth so, as to his Decrees of Election and Reprobation we should soon agree. But this he doth not. 4. Those words [hath as full a purpose] are ambiguous. Do you mean as steadfast a purpose? I suppose you will not so interpret it; for God doth not use lightness in his purposes, which the Apostle did not like to be thought guilty of. 2 Cor. 1.17. Do you mean that this Purpose is Absolute as to some, but Conditional to others? or if Conditional to All, yet that that Condition is intended to be wrought irresistibly in some, but made impossible to the rest? If this be not your meaning, I am not able to divine what it is. It is as fare from my apprehension, as Nebuchadnezars dream was from the notice of the Astrologers. But I will have recourse to some Daniel or other, to whose spirit Master Baxter may be Familiar, and by that means perhaps we may find out the Interpretation. Calvin (in Ezek. 18.23.) saith, Sed notandum, Deum duplicem personam endure; That God, in calling sinners, puts on a double person. And Donteclock saith, Quantum abest à Dei proposito ac sincerâ intentione servare eos, quos per totam vitam ipsorum nunquam vocat, tantum ab ejusdem proposito ac intentione abest, Reprobos, qui vocantur, salvos facere. Ad Script. Anon. lit. k. 3. And Piscator saith, Interim ex Dei verbo constat, Deum etiam Reprobos aliquos ad salutem vocare, & interim tamen non velle, ut ullus Reproborum salvus fiat, quip quos omnes immutabili Decreto ad exitium destinavit. Contra Schafm. praf. pag. 7. God calls some of the Reprobates to Salvation, but he wills not that any one of them be saved; because he hath, by an immutable Decree, destined them to destruction. And (Thes. 120:) Nempe hoc vis dicere, Deum quod lingua profitetur, idem & velle, At id non semper, nec in omnibus verum est. God doth many times profess one thing with his mouth and intent another. And Thes. 83. Et si Deus non semper vult, quod se velle significat, nequaquam tamen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vitio contaminatur. Though he speaks one thing and wills another, yet is he not defiled with hypocrisy. But according to this Doctrine, God, though he calls them, he cannot seriously intent or will their Salvation, having Antecedently and immutably willed and decreed their Reprobation. Neither can he seriously will or intent their faith and repentance. For their Reprobation from Faith and Repentance follows avoidable their Reprobation from Salvation; so that whose salvation God seriously wills not, their faith and repentance he cannot will seriously, lest he should seriously will things contrary and disagreeing. But saith Martinius, with much reason, Vbi supra. Quomodo ex beneficio, sufficient quidem, at mihi non destinato per veram intentionem, deducetur necessitas credendi quod illud ad me pertineat? If the benefit though never so sufficient, be not really intended and designed for me, how can a necessity be imposed upon me to believe that it belongs unto me? Master Perkins distinction offers its service to this cause, De Praedest. and 'tis most exactly consonant to their Doctrine † Though it no way satisfieth Martinius his argument. ; [Every man within the Pale of the Church, saith he, is bound by the tenor of the Gospel, to believe himself redeemed by Christ, whether he be Elect or Reprobate; but upon a different account. The Elect is bound to believe it, ut credendo electionis particeps fiat; that by believing he may be made partaker of the benefit of Election: The Reprobate; ut non credendo, fiat inexcusabilis, etiam ex intentione Dei; that by not believing he may become inexcusable; and this according to God's intention. And in his book [De libera Gratia & libero hominis Arbitrio, pag. 48.] he saith, The commandment of Faith and Repentance, is, to such as are ordained to eternal life, a Precept of Obedience, because God doth enable and confirm them to perform it: To the rest, 'tis a Commandment only for their trial and conviction; that their sin may be detected, and all occasion of pretence taken away. Thus therefore, when faith is commanded, and yet the gift of Faith, [or power of Believing] not conferred, Deus minime ludificatur, sed homines incredulitatis, idque in justitia sua, redarguit convincitque; God doth not mock, but in his righteousness, he doth reprove and convince men of unbelief. And Maccovius delivers his mind as fully, Colleg. disp. 2. pag. 7. & disp. 15. pag. 49. That God in Commanding men to come unto him (which is to believe in him, and to be converted) though he wills not that they should come, yet he Acteth herein very seriously, because he hath a fourfold end, hereby to be accomplished upon them, (though he doth not propound their obedience for any of them) 1. ut explorentur; 2. ut convincantur; 3. ut exprobret illis impotentiam; 4. ut condemnationem in illis augeat. 1. To try them; 2. To convince them; 3. To upbraid them with their impenitency; and 4. To augment their condemnation. By these Lights I presume we may see to read Master baxter's meaning, and gain the perfect sense of his [Rational conceit] and his [as full a Purpose, etc.] namely that God hath other designs and ends to serve upon them; and therefore in sending Christ to die, and the word and Spirit to be administered, he hath no purpose at all that these shall be effectual to convert and save them, they come not from a resolution to renew them. And this is the sum total that Master baxter's Passive obediential Power, and his Natural Active Faculty, and his Sufficient Grace, that brings Christ and life (as he saith) to every man's choice, do amount unto. 5. God certainly foreknew the Non-conversion of these men, you speak of, to be a sin of ingratitude and perverseness, of Contumacy and Rebellion, and decreed therefore to damn them for it. And if he did foreknow their sin to be such, than he did also consider them under such a dispensation of means, as might possibly render them ingrateful, perverse, contumacious and Rebellious. But if in se●ding Christ to die, and the word and Spirit to convert them, he hath no purpose that these shall be effectual to convert and save them, than these Non-converted cannot be ingrateful, perverse, contumacious, or rebellious. Do you think God in his foreknowledge can look upon men as obstinate and ingrateful towards the tendries of his Grace, unless he sees also that such Grace hath been seriously intended and offered to them for their Conversion? If he sends not his Preachers with a serious and gracious intention and purpose to save them, and, in order thereunto, to hinder or recall them from a course of Rebellion and obstinacy, how is it possible his Goodness should find a will to convince them of Rebellion and ingratitude; and not being convicted, what Right can so pure a Justice find, to proceed against them, in judgement, as persons obstinate and ingrateful, when he never had a serious intention to save them, or to free them from such Rebellion and obstinacy? For what ingratitude can there be against a Person, that hath no will to do a benefit, but only a will to seem to do it? What obstinacy can have place against him, that calls not out of a purpose to save, or with an intention to benefit? No man can be ungrateful towards a Cruel Hypocrite. No man can be obstinate against an unmerciful Deluder. And is it not a Cruel Hypocrisy and an unmerciful Delusion, to carry a will of seeming to convince those persons of Ingratitude and Obstinacy, for their rejection of Grace and favour, whom we have Antecedently, for some fault of their Ancestors imputed to them, secluded from all the salutary effects and benefits thereof, with a design and purpose, to take advantage of the next plausible pretence to ruin them? Can the odious crimes of ingratitude and obstinacy have place in such a case? The Jews might with as good reason have condemned our Saviour of Ingratitude and Obstinacy against that invitation to accept their faith and his own deliverance, when, having first nailed him to it, they, in mockery, cried out to him, Come down from the Cross, and we will believe on thee. What is offered in a lusory way, or only tendered to render us inexcusable, nothing in the whole world can be more excusable, then to reject it † Neque enim ea fingi potest homines reddere inexcusabiles per verbum & Spiritum vocatio, quae eo tantum fine exhibetur, ut reddat inexcusabiles. Suffrag. Brit. de 3, & 4. Art. thes. 3. pag. 129. par. 2. . We are not wont to beat our children but to commend their ingenuity, when in such cases they turn Recusants. I hope we will allow Almighty God to be full as equal, if not an infinitely more indulgent Father than man is. Master Baxter shuts up his discourse upon this Article with these words, [And will not most of your most odious inferences fall upon your own Doctrines, if you confess God's Foreknowledge, as well as upon theirs that maintain his Decree of giving effectual Grace to some.] I pray what are those odious inferences you mean, that are drawn from God's Decree of giving effectual grace to some? and who are they that have drawn them? name the Persons, and produce the Inferences. Who denies God a liberty to dispense what undeserved favours he pleaseth, and to whom he pleaseth, and in what measure or proportion he pleaseth? I know no man repines at it, or disputes against it. Hereby, had he pleased so to Reveal and communicate himself, he had done great benefit to them, and no injury to others. The odious inferences are drawn, or rather of themselves do follow, from that which Master Calvin called an Horrible Decree, from your Doctrine of Reprobation; wherein you teach, That God, for the Sin of Adam, denies All Grace that is Sufficient and Necessary to salvation, to the fare greatest part of mankind; and yet decrees in the very self same Act to torment them for want of it; and that notwithstanding, he invites them with the greatest shows of seriousness and earnestness, and the highest expressions of Love and endearment, to embrace it. These Master Baxter are some of the Inferences that strike so deep into the face of God's justice and sincerity, and that makes them so odious and distasteful; and this is the ground of that practice so frequently taken up by your Party, in their writings, as well as by your self in this place; you throw out, before your Readers eyes, the Lure of Effectual (meaning irresistible) Grace, and infrustrable Perseverance, and infallible Assurance, (the greatest certainty whereof lieth in the strength, not of your Arguments, but your Confidence) to draw him off from the deep Resentment of those other Inferences which are really abominable, if not blasphemous. But, hark you, Master Baxter, one word more before we leave this point. Are you sure that such odious inferences will fall upon our Doctrine, upon the Concession of God's Foreknowledge, as falls upon yours, upon the Position of such Decrees? Why, according to your Doctrine of Decrees, things are therefore future, because they are decreed: but according to ours of Foreknowledge, things are therefore foreknown, because they are future. Zanchy saith (as was showed above) that by the immutable Reprobation there is incumbent upon the Reprobate, a necessity of sinning, and that even unto death, without repentance, and of suffering eternal punishment for it. And Piscator saith, the Rebellion of the Reprobate depends upon the Antecedent, Absolute, and irresistibly Efficacious will of God; This Immutable Decree with that irresistible means † Which are inseparably tied together. Hence the Divines of Wodderan, say, that sin comes to pass of necessity, in respect of the Decree, and the good end intended. De cap. 38. & 4. pag. 154. par. 2. appointed in order to its executions, doth make an Antecedent Causal Necessity; But the Foreknowledge of God doth not so, and therefore the Liberty of man's will doth very well consist with this Foreknowledge, though it cannot with that Decree. Nequaquam rectè intelligenti haec repugnarè videntur, Praescientia quam sequitur necessitas, & libertas arbitrii à qua removetur necessitas: quoniam & necesse est quod Deus Praescit, futurum esse, & Deus Praescit aliud aliquid esse, sine omni necessitate, saith Anselmus. That is, In Concordia: Foreknowledge which infers necessity, and Freewill which rejects necessity, are no way repugnant: because both what God foreknows, is necessary to be future, and God foreknows the futurition of many things to be without any necessity. But you will say, whether God foreknows me to sin or not to sin, it is necessary that I do, according to God's Foreknowledge, else his foreknowledge should not be infallible, which were absurd to affirm. To this Anselm answers; You ought not to say, [God foreknows that I will sin, or not sin, but God foreknows that I will sin or not sin without any necessity]: and so it fellows, that whether thou sinnest or sinnest not, it will be without necessity: because God foreknows it to be future, without necessity, and so it must be. God's foreknowledge therefore doth not oppose or take away contingency or liberty from second Causes, but establish them. It doth not press upon the will a necessity of future Acting: but only extends its notice to all her future motions, which are free, and it supposeth them to be such. And therefore although the futurition of things be necessary upon God's Foreknowledge; yet that Necessity is not effective, but only illative. The things foreknown are supposed to have a being before, and not to derive their being from that foreknowledge. Ideo enim quia ponuntur res esse, Ibid. Anselm. dicuntur ex necessitate esse, aut quia ponuntur non esse, affirmantur non esse ex necessitate: non quia necessitas cogat, aut prohibeat rem esse, aut non esse. Nam cum dico: si erit, ex necessitate erit, hic sequitur necessitas quae rei positionem non praecedit. Idem valet si sic pronuncietur. Quod erit, ex necessitate erit. Non enim aliud significat hic nisi quia quod erit, non poterit simul non esse; thus Anselm. Whereby it appears that God's Foreknowledge doth suppose the operation of the will, as future, and therefore the necessity arising from thence is but a Consequent Necessity. He saith the same of Predestination upon Foreknowledge, Ibid. [Quaedam Praescita & Praedestinata non eveniunt eâ necessitate, quae praecedit rem & facit, sed eâ quae rem sequitur. Some things Foreknown and Predestinated, do not come to pass by that Necessity, which precedes the thing and is the cause of it, but by that which doth follow it. I refer the Reader for his satisfaction in this Particular, to Doctor Hammond [Of Fundamentals; pag, 160, 161.] but for M. Baxter i'll commend him to writings, that are of more Authority with him. In his Treatise of Conversion, he saith, [What if I could foretell, from the obstinate wickedness of such a thief, or such a drunkard, that he will never be cured: Is it long of me because I foreknew it? What if the Prophet foretells Hazael what cruelty he shall commit on the children of Israel, is the Prophet therefore the cause of it?] And in his Sermon of Judgement, he saith, [Must God either be ignorant of what you will do, Excuse 26. or else be the cause of it? If you foreknow that the Sun will rise to morrow, that doth not cause it to rise. If you foreknow that one man will murder another, you are not the cause of it by foreknowing it. So is it here.] The short is, God's foreknowledge hath no such influence in drawing men on, either to Presumption or desperation; because it makes no such Provision of insuperable or irresistible means, to carry on the work of salvation or damnation respectively, as that Decree is supposed to do. And thus much in vindication of Tilenus his fourth Article. Reflections upon Section XVI. and Article V. THe fifth feigned Article of Tilenus is, (saith Master Baxter) [That such as have once received that Grace by Faith, can never fall from it, finally or totally, notwithstanding the most enormous sins they can commit] This also saith, he, is in his own abusive language, and not in theirs, whose words concerning falling away are [Quod quoad ipsos, etc. that is, In regard of themselves (it,) not only full easily might, but doubtless would come to pass: yet in respect of God it cannot so fall out; since neither his Counsel can be changed, nor his promise fail, etc.] 1. I desire the Reader to take notice, that this Pretending Vindicator of the Synods Doctrine professeth [in his confession of Faith] That he cannot subscribe to four of their Canons upon this Head of Perseverance. 2. The Synod acknowledgeth that the Faithful sometimes by God's just Permission are carried away into grievous and heinous sins: which the lamentable falls of David, Peter, and others of the Saints, described unto us in the Scripture, evidently show. Art. 4. & Art. 5. They say, Now, by such enormous sin, they greatly offend God, incur the guilt of death, grieve the Holy Spirit, break off the exercise of faith, most grievously wound the conscience, now and then, for a time lose the sense of Grace; Yet Art. 6. they say, That God who is rich in mercy, according to the unchangeable purpose of election, doth not wholly take away his holy Spirit from (them), no not in their grievous slips, nor suffer them to wander so far, as to fall away from the grace of Adoption, and state of justification. And Art. 8. By God's free mercy they obtain thus much, that they neither totally fall from Faith and Grace, nor continue to the end in their falls, and perish. Is not this the same Doctrine that Tilenus charge them with, to a very tittle? Where then is the Fiction or abusive language. Did it fall from Tilenus, or Master Baxter? He could not choose but see these clear assertions; for those cited out of the eighth Article, usher in his, [Quoad ipsos,] and there was something in it, that he slipped over them, and would not direct us to the place quoted by himself. But 'tis usual with these men wilfully to mistake or wave the true state of the Question; * The Question is, a vere Fidelis, ad quem in fide conservandum Deus a parte sua facit, quantum saluâ aequitate facere potest, à vera fide excidere possit. and we have reason to suspect, that it is upon design, when men use such Artifice, to lead honest Passengers out of the right way. And so it is here; For what is the meaning of [Quoad ipsos indubiè fieret?] What I That in regard of themselves they would undoubtedly fall away? 'Tis impossible. † If his Apostasy cannot happen in respect of God, much less in respect of man; for if God will so invincibly preserve him in the faith, man cannot hinder him. For [quoad ipsos] take them in themselves, and they are not up; they are low enough, if you consider them without God: Qui jacet in terram, non habet unde cadat. But to make the impertinency of that distinction [Quoad ipsos] more evident, I shall give you an illustration of it in this example. Suppose a man being to play a prize for his life, upon a Stage erected to that purpose; his friend should come to one, who pretends to understand exactly the strength and structure of the work, and demand of him, whether his Friend, who is to venture his life upon that Stage, might not possibly fall thorough it; should he return this answer, That in regard of the ponderosity or weight of his own body (which hath a natural tendency to the Centre) he might fall thorough: but in regard of the strength and stability of the Stage, made on purpose to support him, it was impossible. Would you not think this a very impertinent and ridiculous distinction, in answer to a serious Question touching a man's (especially if it were eternal) safety? Yet such is the distinction † Which turns sensum compositumin sensum divisum. here used by the Synod and repeated, as an excellent Save-All, by M. Baxter. Why I divide a man from communion with Almighty God, and take him off the stage and supports of his Grace, designed to buttress and prop him up, and the man is not so much as upon his legs, he is at least as low as Adam laid him; and then in that capacity, it is ridiculous to ask, Wither he cannot fall? The Question here is, whether a man, as he is (set actually upon the stage) in the state of Grace, can fall away finally or totally. A clear Categorical Answer might be given in one single syllable, Affirmatively or Negatively; Ay, or No. Let us therefore have the truth uttered roundly and clearly, and away with all equivocations and trifling distinctions, that serve for nothing but to palliate a bad Cause, and amuse the Reader, casting a mist before his eyes, that he may take no notice of the absurdity that follows the opinion we have espoused. But (as Master Baxter goes on) because God's purpose is unchangeable, etc. therefore necessitate consequentiae at least you must confess yourselves that it follows that the Elect must necessarily persevere; and so there is a Logical or Moral impossibility of their Apostasy.] A consequent Necessity of Perseverance, which is inferred from God's Foreknowledge of it, we shall not deny you. We know of no inconvenience, much less absurdity, that will follow it; because that Necessity doth no way infringe, but suppose the vital operation of the will freely determining itself, by the assistance of Grace, ab intrinseco, and so makes Perseverance a duty considered as future, in God's Foreknowledge: but such a Necessity as follows from an Absolute Decree, and that determining Grace, which flows from it, we deny; because that Necessity, in order of Nature and Causality, is Antecedent to the operation of the will, and doth, according to your Doctrine, irresistibly effect it; and so turns Perseverance into an Absolute free Gift of God in stead of being a free duty of man. And 'tis this you contend for, and not the other only; for in your [Account of Perseverance] you say, Pag. 36. 37. 1. We must distinguish between an Impossibility in re and extra rem, or à causis intrinsecis, or à causis extrinsecis or else accidental. It is possible, you say, that true grace be lost, if you speak of a possibility à causis intrinsecis & de natura rei; that is, the Habit and subject together. But it is impossible that it should be totally and finally lost, if you also respect the extrinsic causes: And this both per impossibilitatem Consequentiae; because it is not possible that these propositions should be both at once true. [God willeth absolutely or foreknoweth that Peter will persevere,] and [Peter will not persevere] (And yet this following is reconcileable with the first [it is possible in natura rei for Peter to fall away.] And also 2. Per impossibilitatem Causae, First, because God hath not only Decreed the Perseverance of the Sanctified, but also the Holy Ghost hath undertaken it as his special charge. Secondly, And the Faithfulness of God (as far as I can yet understand) is by his promise engaged for the Perseverance of all the truly Justified and Sanctified Believers. It is not therefore such a Logical Impossibility of Apostasy, that the Synod and you contend for. But of this Question we shall have occasion to speak more hereafter. In the mean time, let us consider your Interrogatory in the next words; wherein you demand, [Will not any Jesuit confess this, that All that (suppose on foreknowledge) God electeth to salvation, must necessitate consequentiae infallibly be saved? No doubt, they will: and some of them much more,] We have told you already, which you know well enough, that that Necessity Consequential upon God's foreknowledge, doth suppose the operation of man's will as determined freely of itself, not as begotten or effected of another; And this as it implies no inconvenience, so it breeds no controversy: But you love not to be tied to the true state of the Question, lest you should lose your licence of Sophistry and daubing, which is here very palpable. In your [Account of Perseverance] now mentioned, Pag. 14. you deliver it as the opinion of the Ancients, Jesuits, Arminians and Lutherans, that they deny an absolute personal Election of men to Faith and Perseverance, and so maintain indefinitely a total and final falling from a state of Justification, without excepting such Elect themselves. But a little after, you add [Yet note, that the Jesuits themselves may confess that the Elect shall none of them finally fall away, but shall all persevere. But that is, because they hold that Election is upon foresight of Perseverance; and so that these Propositions [This man is Elected] and [This man shall not Persevere] are inconsistent as to their truth. But they do not make Election, or differencing grace, the cause of Faith and Perseverance. This being most undoubtedly true, the Reader must needs conclude, that their Authority is very impertinently alleged for the justification of yours and the Synods Doctrine. In your XVII. Section, you tell Tilenus, [Your addition is a perverse insinuation [notwithstanding the most enormous sins they can commit.] How readily ill language flows from this supercilious froward man! [A perverse insinuation!] Why? The Synod doth profess it; as was evidenced above, out of their very Canons; and yourself acknowledge as much, assoon, as ever you had evaporated your Bilious passion. Is it a perfect truth in your mouths, and [a perverse insinuation] when it falls from the pen of Tilenus? Doth his quill slain it more than yours? Why a perverse insinuation? [It seems, you say, to intimate.] If it doth but seem to intimate, haply it may not really intimate. But what? [That they may commit as enormous sins as others, (this were a very perverse insinuation indeed, especially if we take in what follows) and yet not fall away: But why have you changed Tilenus his bare assertive [notwithstanding the most enormous sins they can commit] into a comparative expression [that they may commit as enormous sins as others?] Comparisons you know are odious, especially such as are made betwixt your selves, and such others, as some of your Party are too apt to account Reprobates, for no other Reason, than that they cannot digest your rigid doctrine of Reprobation. But cannot the (once) Faithful commit as enormous sins as others? What think you of Adultery and Murder? or if they be not enormous enough, Of Idolatry, etc. then what think you of * execrations of a man's self and Perjury, and these repeated over and over to gain belief in the denial of the Son of God? Such sins the Regenerate may fall into. But yet the Synod saith, they cannot fall into so enormous sins as others; Cup. 5. Art. 6. for they cannot commit the sin unto death, or against the Holy Ghost; so as to be altogether forsaken of (God), and throw themselves headlong into everlasting destruction; and therefore they cannot fall away. But is not M. Baxter himself guilty of a perverse insinuation here? Do not his words intimate, that, at least, if they commit as enormous sins as others, they do fall away? This must be the meaning of his words, if there be good sense in them. But then his next words contain such a poor ordinary piece of Sophistry, as every Freshman that hath but looked upon Burgerdicius' Logic, would discover. 'Tis the Fallacy called Ignoratio Elenchi; a mistaking of the Question. Observe how his discourse runs, [It seems, saith he, to intimate, that they may commit as enormous sins as others, and yet not fall away: when the Synod holds that in committing gross sins, they fall into a present incapacity of Salvation.] Tilenus' Asserts, [the denial of a final and total falling away,] to be the doctrine of the Synod; Master Baxter seems to conclude against it, but omits the Condition that should make his conclusion a Contradiction to the Assertion; for he tells us, upon their commission of gross sins, they fall into a present incapacity of Salvation; but this doth not contradict the thing in Question, [their final and total falling] which the Synod peremptorily denies, just as Tilenus hath charged them in this Article; and so Master Baxter professeth in the very next words, which tells us, though the Synod holds, [that in committing gross sins, they fall into a present incapacity of Salvation]; yet (there follows a [But] which yields the Question (as to matter of Fact, and the proof of this is all that the Ghost of Tilenus pretends here to aim at;) [That God will keep them from such sins as are inconsistent with Habitual Grace.] For the truth of which Doctrine, we may take a convenient time to examine it. It shall suffice here, to take notice of the opinion of the Synod, [That such as are Habitually Gracious may be uncapable of salvation.] And yet, such is the superabundant favour extended to them more than others, They are, 1. Elected Irrespectively, 2. Converted Irresistibly, and 3. Conducted insuperably and infallibly to their eternal Salvation. Hereupon, They do affirm concerning these Elect; 1. That it implies a Contradiction, that they should live after the flesh; M. Norton's Orthodox Evangelist. p. 79, 80. and 83. and so M. Baxter in his Call, etc. in the Pref. God's Decrees separate not the end and means, but tie them together. Lit. c. 3. Because the Decree consists not of the end without the means, nor of the means without the end, but of both together: Both end and means are contained in one Decree. Yea so far is the Decree from admitting such an inference, as that the contrary infallibly followeth thereupon: and in point of Election, is not only necessarily concluded, but irresistibly caused. Faith, Repentance, New-obedience, and Perseverance, being the effects of Election. Thus Master Norton. But because common experience is too clear a confutation of their impeccability, therefore 2. They say, It is only out of Ignorance and Infirmity that they do sin: Act. Synod. Dor. par. 3. p. 227. Etsi regeniti aliquando ex infirmitate labuntur. So Lubbertus de 5. Art. And the Deputies of the Synod of Groningen to the same purpose; Pii autem cum peccant, Ibid. pag. 283. m. sit non tantum, idque saepe, ex ignorantia. Psal. 19.13. 1 Tim. 1.13. Sed etiam, idque imprimis, ex infirmitate aut interna, aut ext●rna; When the Godly sin, it is not only, and that often, out of ignorance; but also, and that especially, out of infirmity, either inward or outward. And so the Deputies of the Synod of Gallo. Belgia. De quinto Art. Thes. 3. pag. 290. And because it is evident they may, Cap. 5. Art. 4, & 5. and many times do fall into grievous and heinous and enormous sins; Therefore, to alleviate the matter, they say, 3. (as Master Baxter here Sect. 18.) That these sins of theirs are exceedingly in regard of manner, ends, concomitants, etc. different from the like Facts in a graceless man. This Master Baxter haply learned from the Divines of Embden; who tell us (in their Theses upon the fifth Article, Th. 15.16.) However an Elect man falls, he doth not sin, with all his soul * But the more light & renitency of conscience a man sins against, the greater is his sin. , all his mind, and a full will. Ergo si peccata quae ab Electis admit●untur, respicimus, sunt quod ad speciem attinet, peccatis reproborum paria: in modo vero, quo ad peccandum inducuntur, plane imparia. Though the sins of the Elect and Reprobate be alike for kind; yet are they very unlike for the manner of perpetration. If this be not a sufficient extenuation, to reconcile them to the state of Grace, than they say, 4. That their sins come to pass through God's destitution of the Elect, from the withdrawing of his Grace and leaving them to themselves and their own weaknesses. To this purpose D. Damman (one of the Scribes of the Synod) saith (as was showed above) Regenerati non possunt omittere praestationem ejus quod ab illis postulatur, De Persev. pag. 6. modo Deus illis praestet quod promisit. And afterwards, Quando Deus partibus suis defungitur, nos nostras omittere non possumus; That is, The Regenerate cannot omit the performance of what is required of them, if so be God performs what he hath promised to them. And, When God doth his part, we cannot omit ours. And the Synod implies as much in the four first Articles, upon the Head [Of Perseverance]; For, Art. 1. They say, Though God frees them, even in this life, from the Dominion and slavery of sin, yet not altogether from the flesh and body of sin. And Artic. 2. They say, From hence (viz. because God frees them not from the body of sin) arise in holy men, daily sins of infirmity, and even their best works have their blemishes. And Art. 3. They say, By reason of these relics of sins dwelling in them, and besides this, the temptations of the world and Satan, they, which are converted, could not continue in the state of Grace, if they were left to their own strength: And Art. 4. They say, They are not always so led and moved by God, as to be preserved from the seducements of Concupiscence, but by his just permission are carried away into grievous and heinous sins. So that, according to this Doctrine, their failings are not so much their sin, as God's deficiency in affording Grace sufficient and necessary to preserve them from it. If it be alleged, that they say in the Article last mentioned, that it is through their own fault that they are seduced by the concupiscence of the flesh, Ibid. Art. 4. and give way unto the same; It must be remembered, that they make it sin whatsoever a man commits or omits against the Law of God, though such omission or commission be of unavoidable necessity, through want of Divine grace to enable them to perform or omit it; because they received a power in Adam to do otherwise. And it is in this sense only that such omissions or commissions of the Regenerate are called sins. For I argue thus; Either God hath a will, by his Grace, to hinder their sin, or he hath not. If he hath a will to hinder sin in them, and administers his grace to that purpose, and sin be not eventually hindered, than they do insuperably resist his Grace; which is contrary to their Doctrine, in the Eighth Rejection of the third and fourth Chapters, and sundry others of their Writings † V Reliquae judicia Zuyt-Holland; ad finem, Act. Syn. Dord. viz. p. 292. par. 3. . But if God hath not a will to hinder their sin, then, the reins being let lose to the flesh in them, through God's permission, how can they choose but sin? and how can they be said to grieve the Spirit of God, who will not preserve them from sinning? But, (to go on,) because though in the Actions that are sinful, God be the Author of the Act wholly, (as Master Norton hath it, Vbi supra p. 63. ) and the Fore-determiner, Orderer and Governor of the sinfulness of the Action to his own glorious and blessed End, yet the Regenerate, that commit such Actions, are guilty of the defect and enormity that is in them; Therefore in the fifth place, to extenuate, or extinguish rather, the heinousness hereof, they say, these sins of theirs have the nature of fatherly Castigations, and are designed to work for their good. Act. Synod. Dor par. 3. pag. 2, 5. So the Divines of D en● in their Examen, upon the fifth Article, where to prove that the sins of the Regenerate are for their advantage, they produce that of the Apostle, Rom. 8.28. All things work together for good to them that love God. Whence they infer thus; If all the evils wherewith they are chastised; then their very sins also; Quae peccata, quemadmodum in impiis, interdum habent rationem poenae: sic etiam ipsissima peccata, etiam in fidelibus, habent rationem paternae castigationis; Which sins, as in the wicked, they have sometimes the nature of punishment: so the very self same sins also, in the faithful, have the nature of Fatherly correction. Yea and these sins of theirs are illustrations and confirmations of their Grace. So the British Divines (De quinto Articulo.) Tantum abest, Act. Synod. Dor. par. 2. pag. 202. f. say they, ut etiam gravia illa carnis peccata fidelem a statu justificationis adoptionisque semper deturbent, ut contra à Theologis, praesertim practicis statuatur, Deum eadem saepe in justificatis & adoptatis permittere, ut confirmatior postea sit ipsis cum ●ustificatio tùm adoptio; Their most grievous sins are so far from disturbing the justification and adoption of the faithful, that practical Divines especially, do resolve, that God doth often permit such sins in them, that their justification and adoption may be the more confirmed to them. If, notwithstanding the good service their soul sins is designed to do them, any of the faithful should be so tender hearted as to be afraid of them; They assure them, 6. That there is no such reason; For they cannot die in their sins; so the Deputies of the Synod of Groningen, Vbi supra. Non tamen manent in peccatis, sed aut externè per castigationes Dei & admonitiones, aut internè per Spiritus Sanctus gratiam excitati & moti resipiscunt & resurgunt. They do not remain in their sins, but being stirred up and moved, either outwardly by God's admonitions and chastisements, or inwardly by the grace of the Holy Spirit, they do repent and arise. And so the whole Synod, (in the 7. Artic. of Cap. 5.) In these slips, God preserveth in them that his immortal seed (by which they were once borne again) that it die not, nor be lost by them: afterward, by his word and Spirit, he effectually, and certainly reneweth them again unto repentance. But suppose a tender conscience should call for a solid proof of this Doctrine, out of Holy Scripture; and because there is none to be produced, should be troubled with doubtings, fears, and jealousies about it? Why, then in the last place Master Baxter himself hath resolved, Of Justif. Disp. 3. pag. 398. (at the end of his Discussion of Master Tombs his Animadversions,) That, if you can prove it profitable for such a man to be suddenly cut off before Repentance, and that such a thing will be, I should incline (saith he) to think that he will be fully pardoned at the instant of Death, and so saved; because the Lord knoweth that he repent Habitually and virtually, and would have done it Actually, if he had had time for consideration. But Quo warranto is all this spoken? For my part, I shall ever think it my duty, to admonish my Reader, to remember the terror of the evil day, and to take heed strictly that he falls not under the Arrest of it at unawares * Luk. 21.34, 35. ; for it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the everliving God. And thus much shall suffice in return to Master baxter's objections against the Articles of Tilenus. BUt we have another task behind; For though we have cleared the Field before us, and seem to have given a total defeat to all Master Baxter's Pretensions in behalf of the Synod of Dort; yet he hath a Reserve behind, which he leads up to fall on the Rear of Master Pierce; and if he can, with the strength of that, charge thorough His forces, he may take the confidence to proceed and to renew his charge upon Tilenus also. Before we disband therefore, we will advance to find out that Reserve, and fall upon it, that it may not be able to annoy us, when we are retired to repose in our Winter Quarters. This Reserve I find in his 37. Section. And with it, he makes his Charge and Onset upon Master Pierce after this manner: [And for them (whom he styles the choicest of God's servants) and the Synod of Dort, I may well challenge that Justice from you, as to impute no such opinions to them which they purposely disown, and publicly profess to detest.] Master baxter's demand seems very Reasonable; if there be not some ambiguity or equivocation in those words [purposely disown and publicly profess to detest.] For what saith the Apostle of some in his time, Tit. 1. last: They profess they know God; but in works they deny him. Men may profess publicly to detest what they hearty affect; and purposely disown what they like and approve of well enough in itself: but because they see it grows scandalous and unsavoury to a multitude of Judicious Godly men, and not well to be defended without further scandal; therefore for shame of the world, they may publicly profess to detest and disown it for this purpose. And whether it were not so with the Synod in what they disown, and profess publicly to detest, we shall the better judge by examining each particular here mentioned by M. Baxter; The first whereof is, [That the most heinous sins do not hinder the salvation of the Elect, however they live;] Doth the Synod cordially detest and judiciously disown this Doctrine? You heard above what was the opinion of Master Perkins and others, that mille-peccata, a thousand sins, nay the sins of the whole world, nay all the Devils in hell, were not able to make void God's Election. Is it not the General Doctrine of the whole Synod, as well as the Suffrage of the Divines of the Palatinate † De Artic. primo prop. 5. , Electio ad Salutem immutabilis est: nec defectibus aut lapsibus electorum etiam gravioribus interrumpitur, aut abrumpitur; That Election unto Salvation is immutable: and that it is neither broken nor interrupted by their failings or most grievous falls? Do not the Divines of Drent say, that the sins of the Elect cooperate to their benefit; and the Divines of Great Britain affirm, Vbi supra. (as you heard even now) that their sins are so fare from interrupting or disturbing the justification and adoption of the Faithful, Vbi supra. that they serve the more to confirm them. And the whole Synod in their Sixth Rejection of the first Chapter, do Reject it as a gross Error in them, who teach, That not all Election unto Salvation is unchangeable, but that some which are Elected, notwithstanding God's decree, may perish, and for ever do perish. This is their avowed Canonical Doctrine, yet (as if some men of another mind had drawn up this Conclusion of those Decrees and Canons) here (for what purpose the Reader may gather by what hath been already hinted to him) they publicly profess to detest this opinion † This Riddle may be, and is to be read, by the explication of the next here following. [that the most heinous sins do not hinder the salvation of the Elect, however they live.] And they do no less detest the next opiniopinion; [That the Reprobate cannot be saved, though they truly perform all the works of the Saints;] But did Marlorat detest this opinion, In Joh. 15.2 when he saith, Stat igitur firma sententia, quemcunque Deus ante conditum orbem elegerit, eum non posse perire: quem verò rejecerit, eum non posse salvari, etiamsi omnia Sanctorum opera fecerit. Usque adeo irretractabilis est sententia. Whom God hath elected, he cannot perish: whom he hath rejected, he cannot be saved, though he should perform all the good works of the Saints, The sentence passed from all eternity is so irrevocable? And amongst the Acts of the Synod, we find this of Doctor Molin; Par. 1. pag. 290. f. Reprobos posse salvari, dogma est Arminianum, Christianis auribus insolens. That (such as they define to be) Reprobates may be saved is an Arminian Doctrine, unusual to Christian ears. Vid. ib. par. 3. p. 24 thes. 4. & pag. 35. thes. 3. cum Reject. And do they not all conclude, that the Decree of Reprobation is eternal and immutable, so that the Reprobate can never become Elect? And yet these men profess publicly to detest this Doctrine, [That the Reprobate cannot be saved, though they truly perform all the works of the Saints.] How shall we read these Riddles? I'll give you Master Nortons' explication of them, Vbi supra p. 78, 79. (as before). The Scripture, saith he, holds forth the certain truth of the Connexion of the Antecedent and Consequent, when yet both the Antecedent and Consequent taken apart are false. That is, it holds forth a truth in the Connexion of both the parts of such a proposition; in either of whose parts, considered in themselves, there is no truth. For example, to our purpose; saith he; If Judas believes, he shall be saved; If John believes not, he shall be damned. There is a truth in the Connexion of the Antecedent, and Consequent of both; though the Antecedent and Consequent of both, considered by themselves, are false. For though it be true, if Judas believe, he shall be saved; and if John believes not, he shall be damned: yet is it not true, (no nor possible, for you say a little after, that it implies a contradiction) either that Judas shall believe, or that Judas shall be saved; or that John shall not believe, or that John shall be damned. God having Decreed the end, by the Conjunction of the end and means together. Thus Master Norton hath made the Doctrine of the Synod as clear as the Sun in these particulars. We see then what it is that the Synod doth so purposely disown, and profess publicly to detest; The denial of the truth of a Logical connexion of the parts of a Proposition. Now I would fain have M. Baxter, in the highest Paroxysm of his zeal, to preach this Doctrine (if he be confident 'tis a truth) fully and wholly; Let him tell his Auditors at Kederminster; that they are all most certainly and immutably enrolled under a twofold Regiment; one is the black Regiment of Reprobates; the other is the white Regiment of the Elect; and let him use all his Rhetoric to persuade the one unto Faith and Repentance, and to dissuade the other from presumption. He cannot make choice of more probable Arguments to prevail with them, than by telling the first, Certainly there is a Truth in this Connexion of Antecedent and Consequent, If you Repent and Believe you shall be saved: though indeed take the parts of the Proposition asunder, and they are both false; for the plain truth is, you shall neither believe, nor yet be saved; for you are under the Decree of Reprobation; and Impenitency and Infidelity are the means appointed for the execution of that Decree; and Almighty God hath decreed the accomplishment of the End, by the Conjunction of the end and means together † For God's Decrees, you must know that they separate not the end and means, but tie them together. So M. Baxter in his Call to the Non-converted, in Pref. c. 3. ; so that the means can as little be declined, as the end avoided, and both are no more possible, than it is for the immutable Decree of God to be rescinded; yet seeing there is a Logical truth in the Connexion of Antecedent and Consequent, [If you repent, you shall be saved] (though 'tis decreed that you shall neither do the one, nor be the other) I beseech you bring forth fruits meet for Repentance, and cast away your transgressions, and so iniquity shall not be your ruin. Is not here a fair encouragement of sinners to Repentance? The like might be said, for dissuading men from Presumption, upon the account of their Doctrine, touching the Decree of Election; but I am already weary of these gross absurdities; and therefore I leave it to the Readers own judgement to make the Inference. A third opinion, which the Synod doth purposely disown, and publicly profess to detest, is, [That God by his own mere will, without any respect at all to sin, or sight of it, did predestinate and create, the most of the world to damnation;] But hear the Remonstrants † In Antid. pa. 37. etc. have detected the egregious Artifice of the Synod, to palliate the enormity of their Doctrine. For observe, they do not deny, much less reject it as an Error, that troubled the Belgic Churches, [That God by his own mere will, without any respect at all to sin, or sight of it, did Passby, or Predestinate and create the most part of the world to destruction.] For this is the avowed Doctrine of all the Supralapsarians, and 'tis inserted amongst the Acts of the Synod, and earnestly contended for by Gomarus, as was declared above, and his Suffrage is given in by himself (dissenting herein from the rest of his Colleagues) accordingly in these words † Act. Syn. Dord. par 3. pag. 24. thes. 2. , Vid. ib. p. 34. Reprobatio peremptoria est decretum Dei, quo, pro voluntate sua liberrima, ad declarationem justitiae suae vindicantis, certos ex humano genere (simpliciter, non autem lapso) homines, nec gratia nec gloria donare, sed in peccatum libere prolabi permittere & in peccatis relinquere, justequè tandem propter peccata condemnare constituit. By the Decree of Reprobation God determined to give neither Grace nor Glory to certain men, out of all mankind (not yet fallen): but to suffer them freely to fall into sin, and to leave them in their sins, and at last to condemn them for their sins, and this for his own most free will, (and pleasure † Vid. ibid. p. 21. a. m. ), to the declaration of his vindictive Justice. And Gomarus was not alone of this Judgement: for we find the Deputies of the Synod of South-Holland speaking the same sense with him, Ibid pag. 33. etc. in their Suffrage upon the same Article; for they say, God did, Certas qu●sdam singulares Personas— ex toto genere humano seligere, select out of all mankind (not fallen into sin, as others express themselves, but simply considered) certain singular persons. And after, they say, Deum in eligendo omnes homines considerasse in pari statu: Pag. 34. That God in his Decree considered all men in a like condition; using the word [Parity] in an equivecall sense; for it may either be referred to the state of man before the fall, or under it. The chief members of this Synod of South-Holland, were Henricus Arnoldi Precedent there, Festus Hommius Scribe of the Synod at Dort, Baltasar Lydius, Gisbertus Voetius, etc. But these very Supralapsarians, of what sort soever, will Subscribe to this, [That God did not Predestinate men to damnation, without any respect to sin.] They blind their opinion with a distinction betwixt Reprobation and Praedamnation, or Predestination to damnation. For they say, it is one thing to Predestinate and create to damnation, another thing to Praedestinate and create to destruction. Damnation, being the sentence of a Judge, must be passed in consideration of sin: but Destruction may be the Act of a Sovereign, and so inflicted by Right of Dominion, as was showed above. To this purpose, those Deputies, Ibid. pag. 35. m. De Causa Reprobationis, do conclude, Causam adaequatam cur Deus aliquos non eligendo Praeterierit, esse solum divinae voluntatis beneplacitum: That the Adequate cause why God doth passe-by some, is the sole beneplaciture of his Divine will: Causam verò cur eosdem damnare decreverit, esse non tantum actualem oblatae gratiae divinae rejectionem, sed etiam alia omnia peccata, tam Originalia, quam actualia: But the cause, why he decreed to condemn them, is not only the rejection of the divine grace, but also all other sins, as well the Original, as Actual. Besides, the Synod in those their Decrees, where they thought it most plausible, to fix Predestination upon the fall of Adam, they confess God did not reprobate the most part of the world without all respect of sin; because they suppose all mankind infected with that corruption and stain of Original sin, in and with Adam, and God cannot but behold it, because nothing is concealed from his eye: but they never confess that God had respect to sin as the impulsive or Meritorious cause, for which he did reprobate and ordain any to the torments of hell. For they say, if God had been moved by sin, to pass the Act of Reprobation, He had reprobated All without exception; because All had sinned in Adam. Again when they say, God did not do this, without respect of ANY sin, they confess, it may be granted, that he had some respect, to some kind of sin, to that of Adam, committed more than five thousand years ago, without the consent or knowledge of those, who are reprobated, and to that Original sin, that doth follow from that first sin, by unavoidable necessity: but they do not say he had respect to any Personal sin or sins, committed freely and with a deliberate will, of those who are reprobated; I say, according to their Doctrine, God had no respect to any such personal sins, (Infidelity and Impenitency,) unless it were for the introduction of them, by an efficacious permission, as means connected with the end, in the same Decree, for the infrustrable execution of it. And therefore the Deputies, forementioned, Vbi supra. do reject it as an Error, in those, that hold, Causam cur Deus aliquos rejecerit esse infidelitatem & impoenitentiam praevisam. That impenitency and unbelief are the cause, why God rejects men. And the very Decrees of the Synod affirm as much; For (Cap. 1. Reject. 8.) they Reject it as an Error in those, who teach, that God out of his mere just will hath not decreed to leave any man in the fall of Adam, and common state of sin and damnation. But suppose the Synod did grant (as their very nice and wary distinction, [absque omni ullius Peccati respectu] makes it more than Probable, they did not) that God in man's Reprobation had some respect to his Actual Personal sin, yet if that sin be such as those Reprobates could not possibly avoid, the whole matter will be reduced at last, to the respect of that only sin of Adam. And thus the Synod hath determined, Cap. 3, & 4. Art. 3. That All men are conceived in sin, and born the children of wrath, untoward to all good tending to salvation, forward to evil, dead in sins, slaves to sin; and neither Will nor Can (without the Grace of the Holy Ghost regenerating them) set strait their own crooked nature, no nor so much as dispose themselves to the amending of it. So that if the Synod had granted a respect of personal sins in the Reprobation of men, yet they had understood no other sins than such as had been unavoidable to those Reprobates; For they say, those Reprobates want the Grace of God's regenerating Spirit, that they may avoid sin; and they say also God hath Decreed not to give it them; whence it follows, that they cannot possibly avoid those sins; but, through the strength of that first sin and corruption, which they lie under, when they are commanded, by the word of the Gospel, to repent and believe, will they, nill they, they shall fall into those foul sins, of Infidelity, disobedience, impenitency, and the like, as necessarily, as a millstone falls downward by its own weight, for which inevitable sins notwithstanding, they should be said, to be praeordained to the eternal and horrible torments of hell. And then, if God ordained the sin of Adam, and made that necessary and unavoidable too, as Danaeus † Ada●um Dei consilio & ordinatione necessariò lapsum esse. and Piscator and others do positively aver (and the Synod hath no where rejected it, that I can remember) the Reprobation of the most part of the world will be reduced undeniably to the mere will of God, * Deum Adamo legem dedisse ut eam transgrederetur, etc. Sententia Perkinsii nostrorumque Theologorum haec est, lapsum illum evenisse Dei voluntate transeunte in rem permissam, h. e. Deum voluisse, ut Adamus Laberetur. D. Twiss. in vind. Grat. L. 2. p. 1. Sect. 2. c. 12. vigr. 3. p. 142. col. 2. what ever public Profession they have made to detest it. A fourth Doctrine, which the Synod doth purposely disown, and publicly profess to detest, is, [That Reprobation is the cause of Infidelity and Impiety, in the same manner, as Election is the fountain and cause of Faith and Piety.] That sin follows the Decree of Reprobation by an unavoidable necessity, is the express affirmation not only of Piscator, Zanchy, etc. But of many Synodists also; Reprobationem tria consequuntur, privatio gratiae, peccata, & poenae peccatorum; saith Gomarus, Disp. de Praedest. Resp. Otten. There are three things which follow Reprobation, the denial of Grace, Sin, and the Punishment of Sin. And that they do follow it as the fruits of it, is the affirmation of Festus Hommius † Thesaur. Catech. pag. 216. . Fructus Reprobationis sunt desertio vel privatio gratiae Dei & mediorum, induratio, etc. The fruits of Reprobation are desertion or the deprivation of God's grace and means (sufficient and necessary) induration, etc. And the Divines of Wedderau do confess, that a necessity of sin doth follow from the Decree of Reprobation. De 3, & 4. Art. in Corol. p. 134. par. 2 And this is the Doctrine of the whole Synod in their Canons: for they say man cannot but sin, without Gods regenerating Grace, which he hath Decreed to deny or deprive them of; as was showed above. Even Master Baxter himself, doth acknowledge and profess that the Decree doth tie the End and Means together; and what is the Means of Damnation, but Infidelity and Impenitency &c. as he tells us from the Synod, in the seventh Section of his Preface. There is a necessity therefore of these sins in the Reprobate † Loquimur de adultis vocatis. else he should not perish, as such an infidel and impepenitent. Whence is this necessity? not from the nature or will of the creature; therefore from some Act of God; and what is this Act of God, but that Reprobation, whereby he denies unto the Reprobate Grace sufficient and necessary unto Faith and Repentance; and then his Law, whereby he requires the performance of those duties, which without that Grace are not performable? But saith the Synod, Reprobation is not the cause of Infidelity and impiety, in the same manner, as Election is the fountain and cause of Faith and piety. But whatever fallacy there be in those words [in the same manner,] certainly, according to their Doctrine, Infidelity and Impiety do flow by as inevitable a necessity from the one Decree, as Faith and Piety doth from the other; Vid. Antidotum p. 47, etc. so that it is no less impossible † Quod aliqui in tempore fide à Deo donentur, aliqui non donantur, id ab aeterno ipsius decreto provenit. Syn. Dor. cap. 1. Art. 6. for those who are Reprobated to believe and repent, than it is for those who are Elected to remain impenitent and unbelievers. Contrariorum eadem ratio, eadem scientia est, say the Divines of the Palatinate * De Repro. prepos. 1. p. 19 par. 2. . Ex iis igitur, quae de Electione supra dicta sunt, de opposita Reprobatione, ejusque descriptione, quid statuendum videatur, haud difficile est pronunciare. Reprobation then is no less the fountain of Infidelity and Impiety, than Election is the fountain of Faith and Piety. If we list to cavil about the word [Cause;] (which is here made use of to impose upon the unwary Reader,) we could tell them, that 'tis an improper and inept expression, to say Election is the Cause of Faith; For Election in an immanent Act in the mind of God, not an Egression out of him, that produceth any effect in man, though Faith doth infallibly follow that Act, by the emanation of another power, which God, according to the Decree of Election, will exercise, to the irresistible production of Faith. And thus it is acknowledged by Piscator, that, although the Decree of Reprobation be not effective, in respect of infidelity in the Reprobate, because it doth not properly effect or produce that infidelity; yet it is efficax efficacious, Antidote. p. 48. because that Decree being made, infidelity follows of necessity, For example. Suppose a man blind by nature, or made blind by the infliction of punishment upon him for some crime; He that commands such a man upon pain of death to read a Proclamation, though to speak properly he cannot be said to be the cause, that that man reads not the Proclamation; for his blindness is the next and proper cause hereof; yet in sense of Law, and to speak Morally, he may be said to be the Cause, that by not reading, that blind man becomes defective, as it were, in a duty enjoined him and so guilty of death; not by way of efficiency, as producing the defect of reading in him, but by commanding that Reading to whom it is impossible to read, in whom therefore after that command, the defect of Reading cannot but follow. After the same manner, according to their Doctrine, God deals by the Reprobates: first for the transgression of Adam they are punished with blindness of mind in things spiritual; so that 'tis no less impossible for them to believe, when God commands it, than for a blind man to read a proclamation. And yet notwithstanding they are thus punished with spiritual blindness, God commands them to believe under pain of eternal death. Which when God doth, he doth not, indeed, by way of efficiency produce infidelity and impenitency in them, but by his command God is the Cause, or brings it to pass, that they become as it were unbelievers and impenitent; because it is impossible, on the one part, that they should become unbelievers, unless the command of Faith doth intervene, and on the other part, the command of Faith being given, they cannot, in regard of that innate pravity and blindness, but be and remain unbelievers. And this is the means, which (for all their Professed detestation) is tied to the End, (by the Decree of Reprobation) in order to the execution of the said Decree, by the Damnation of the Reprobates. Another Doctrine, which, saith M. Baxter, the Synod doth purposely disown, and publicly profess to detest is, [That many harmless Infants of Believers are snatched from the mother's breasts, and tyrannically cast into Hell, so that neither Baptism, nor the Church's prayers in Baptism can profit them.] That many Infants of Believers are cast into Hell, notwithstanding the Prayers of the Church, and the Sacrament of Baptism administered, (according to Christ's institution and command) for their Salvation, is the express Doctrine of Calvin, Beza, Zuinglius, Martyr, Zanchy, Piscator, Paraeus, Perkins, etc. For the Infants of unbelievers, it is the Doctrine of Gomarus and the Divines of Drent, expressly, that they are Reprobates. Act. Synod. Dor. par. 3. pag. 24. & pag. 83. Gomar. de Reprob. th'. 7. & Judic. Drent. circa. 1. Art. thes. 18. For the Infants of Believers dying in their Infancy, whether the Decree of Reprobation layeth hold on them and makes them liable to damnation, the Divines of South-Hollands judgement is, Ibid. pag. 36 pr. Non esse curiosè inquirendum; we ought not to be curious in enquiring after it; and the British Divines say, De primo Articulo. ubi supra par. 2. p. 10. thes. 7. Ad rationem electionis divinae sive ponendam sive tollendam, circumstantia atatis est quiddam impertinens, & nihil prorsus operatur, The circumstance of age is a thing altogether impertinent, and works nothing touching the Decree of Election or Reprobation. Their meaning is plain enough, and 'tis consonant, no doubt, to the sense of the whole Synod. We may therefore observe a twofold Fallacy in the Proposition, which they publicly profess to detest, 1. In the word [Innoxios] harmless Infant's; See the Antidonum cap. 4, & 5. pag. 52. etc. For the truth is, they acknowledge none such, every Infant of a span long, from its first Conception being guilty of Adam's sin; for which it is justly liable to condemnation; and for that sin many are damned * Act. Synod. Dor. ; as is delivered in Reject. 8. Cap. 1. Another Fallacy is in the word [Tyrannicè] tyrannically, cast into Hell: For when God doth Reprobate such Infants, and cast them into Hell, he doth not do it, they say, after the manner of a Tyrant, who is bound by some certain Law, the transgression whereof is Tyranny: but he doth it jure dominii, as an Absolute Lord, whose Sovereignty is without Law or control, and therefore he may dispose of them at his pleasure. That this is their sense (notwithstanding what they publicly profess to detest) may easily be collected, from the 18. Art. of the 1. Chap. (Of Predestination) where to stop the mouths (as they pretend) of such as murmur at the grace of free Election, and severity of just Reprobation (as they call it) they allege that of the Apostle, Rom. 9.20. O man who art thou, that repliest against God? And that of our Saviour, Mat. 10.15. Is it not Lawful for me to do what I will with my own? Texts of Scripture which the Creabilitarian-Supralapsarians, as well as the Existentialists make use of for proof of their Decrees; and they are just as much to their purpose, that is, altogether impertinent to the use those several Parties do make of them. Amongst those Doctrines which the Synod doth purposely disown, and publicly profess to detest, there is another, which I wonder Master Baxter hath omitted; which is this, [That this Doctrine of the Calvinists maketh God the Author of sin] But perhaps he hath smelled out the Fallacy expressed in the Fifth Article of the first Chapter; where they say, Incrodulitatis istius, ut & omnium aliorum peccatorum, causa seu culpa neutiquam est in Deo, sed in homine. The cause or fault of unbelief, as of all other sins, is in no wise, in God, but in man. Here are two words made use of, as of the same importance, [Causa seu culpa] Cause or fault, by which, while many of their Doctors do affirm that God doth incite and irritate, urge and impel, necesitate and constrain men to sin, nay, worketh sin in them; yet shall they be excused from prevaricating the Doctrine of the Synod; for though to speak properly God be the cause of sin, by such manner of working to the production of it, yet Culpa the fault of sin can in no wise be ascribed to him. Zuinglius and Keckerman have given the Reason of it, because there is no law made to bind Almighty God to the contrary, but man only: For confirmation hereof they add: Sicut Taurus cum nunc has, nanc illas vaceas promiscua & vaga Venere init, adulterii culpa non tenetur, sed homo, si cum aliorum uxoribus rem habeat, eo quod huic, non illi, prohibens lex lata fit; ita Deus peccato seu culpa non tenetur, cum creaturam ad hos & illos actus movet, sed tantummodo creatura ipsa, quia ei lex prohibens lata est, non Deo. I shall not so much as English it for shame. I cannot leave Master Baxter till I have followed him to the very last stage of his Preface, which he shuts up thus, [We should live in peace, if the advise of the Synod (ibid.) were followed, [A Phrasibus denique iis omnibus abstineant, quae praescriptos nobis genuini Sanctarum Scripturarum sensus limites excedunt, & protervis sophistis justam ansam praebere possint, doctrinam Ecclesiarum Reform●tarum sugillandi, aut calumniandi.] But the Synod should have done well to have left us an example herein by their own practice. But we find that when the British, Hassien, and Bremish Divines moved to have the harsh and incommodious speeches of some of their Doctors declared against and rejected; they were out-voted and cried down upon this account, Ne Phrasium istarum rejectione Orthodoxa doctrina ab illis asserta & defensa paritèr damnari videretur. Session. 13●. We may see by this it is a great deal easier to give good advice than to follow it. And this appears further by that Admonition of Master Baxter in the next words, [And if withal we were humbly Conscious of our own frailty and fallibility, and could maintain that unfeigned charity to our Brethren, which beseemeth all the Disciples of Christ, and which would cause us to say and do by others (even in our Controversall writings and private Speeches of them) as we would have them say and do by us. But alas! the Disciples of that Synod, will neither be persuaded to be the first, nor do the last; they will follow none of these Prescriptions; no not so much, as Singular M. Baxter † Physician heal thyself. ; witness his proceed against ocular demonstration of the causes of salvation and damnation A Table of Decrees of Salvation & Damnnation Ye shall live, therefore ye shall mortify the deeds of the Body. Ye shall die, therefore ye shall live after the Flesh. Delineated by Mr. W. Perkins In his Armilla Aurea. Predestination Creation. Election The Fall. Reprobation Supralapsarian Creabilitarians Supral: Existentialists Sublapsarians Suprulap: Creabilitar Sup: Existent: Sublapsarians God's Love in Christ towards the Elect Effectual Calling. Justification. Sanctification. Glorification. Eternal Life. The Word. Softening. Faith. Remission Imputation. Mortification Vivification. Repentance New Obedience. CHRIST the Mediator. His Holiness. Obedience. Death. Burial. Dominion of the grave Resurrection Ascension. Session. Intercession. Illumination. Repentance Faith. Taste. Zeal. Deception of Sinne. Obduration. Malice. Unbelief. Apostasy. Calling Vneffectual Agnition of that Call Relapse. Gad's hatred towards the Reprobate. No Calling Ignorance. Blindness. Reprobate Sense. Greediness in sinning Pollution. Damnation. Death Eternal Death Judgement. Declaration of Mercy. Declaration of Justice. GOD's GLORY. Place this at Page 411 M. Perkins his Synopsis, or Table, In Armilla Aurea. showing (according to his account) the Series of Causes, both of Salvation and Damnation; or the Decrees of Election and Reprobation with the Means and Orders of their Execution. BEcause this Table contains an Ocular demonstration of the matter of Fact, charged upon the Calvinists and their Synod by Tilenus; I thought it convenient to insert it, and to make some Reflections and Observations upon it for the benefit of the Reader; who upon a view of this Diagram may take notice with me, 1. That there are three several Sects, contending as well against one another, as against the Remonstrants. They are usually divided into two Parties, Supralapsarians and Sublapsarians. But because Supralapsarians are of two sorts: I shall distinguish them by several Names. The first sort, who make the creature, Gomar. disp. de Praedest. (1604.) thes. 13. not in its Actual existence, but in its condition of Possibility, the Ob●ect of the Decree, These I shall call Supralapsarian Creabilitarians. The second sort, who make the creature in its Actual Existence, but yet Innocent, the Object of that Decree, These I shall call Supralapsarian-Existentialists. The third sort, who make mankind fallen in Adam, and by Divine imputation guilty of Original sin, the Object of the said Decree, These are called Sublapsarians. * Piscator endeavours to reconcile all three opinions. Considerationes illa non sunt opposi●ae, sed tantùm diversae: ac proinde omnes locum habere possunt: sicut & revera habent.— Objectum praedestinationis esse hominem consideratum & ut nondum conditum, & ut conditum, sed adhuc integrum, & ut lapsum peccatoque corruptum. Idem Tract. de Gratia Dei. pag. 173. etc. Cap. 1. Artic. 7. And although these several Parties differ hugely in fixing the Object of the Decree, yet there is no considerable difference amongst them, touching the means and manner of carrying it on, from the Fall of Adam to the Final Execution of it. Of which, the Synods Canonical Declaration is this, That Election is the unchangeable purpose of God, by which, before the foundation of the world, according to the most free pleasure of his will, and of his mere Grace, out of all mankind, fallen, through their own fault † So they call Adam's sin. , from their first integrity into sin and destruction, he hath chosen in Christ unto salvation a set number of certain men, neither better, nor more worthy than others, but lying in the common misery with others: which Christ also from all eternity he appointed the Mediator, and Head of all the Elect, and foundation of salvation; and so he Decreed to give them to him to be saved, and by his Word and Spirit, effectually to call, and draw them to a Communion with Him: that is to give them a true faith in him, to justify, sanctify, and finally glorify them, being mightily kept in the communion of his Son, to the demonstration of his mercy, and praise of the riches of his glorious grace. They say, Ibid. Art. 15. Moreover, the holy Scripture herein chief manifests, and commends unto us this eternal and free grace of our Election, in that it further witnesseth, that not all men are elected, but some Not-elected, or passed over in God's eternal Election, whom doubtless God in his most free, most just, unreprovable, and unchangeable good-pleasure, hath decreed to leave in the common misery (whereinto by their own † That is, Adam's fall. default they precipitated themselves) and not to bestow saving faith, and the grace of conversion upon them, but leaving them in their own ways, and under just judgement, at last to condemn and everlastingly punish them, not only for their unbelief, but also for their own a Is their own fault even now mentioned any of them? sins, to the manifestation of his Justice. And this is the Decree of Reprobation, which in no wise makes God the Author † Artic. 5. They say, Cause or Fault of sin, etc. of sin (a thing blasphemous once to conceive) but a Fearful, unreprovable, and Just Judge, and Revenger. Thus fare the Synod. 2. Observe, That according to this Order of Causes, the Apostles Doctrine is inverted; for he saith, If ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit, do mortify the deeds of the body, Rom. 8.13. ye shall live. But on the contrary, here the Doctrine runs thus; Ye shall live; therefore ye shall mortify; Or, Ye shall die, therefore ye shall live after the flesh. For sin is acknowledged to be the fruit and effect, Norton, ubi supra, pag. 52. or as others who speak more nicely and warily, an infallible Consequent of the Decree. 3. By this Table, Almighty God is supposed to have loved a certain number of persons, with an unchangeable love, and so dearly, as freely to have elected them to enjoy a communion with himself in joys and glories everlasting, and that before Christ is given to be a Mediator for them; which doth much Eclipse, if not quite evacuate the merit and satisfaction of Christ. For to be chosen to such salvation, is to be in God's highest favour; and than what room is there for the intervention of Christ's Merits and the price of his blood, to satisfy Divine Justice, appease God's wrath, to make an atonement and procure a Reconciliation? This will help to establish, at least to countenance the Socinian Doctrine, who take advantage of that opinion to argue against the satisfaction of our Saviour after this manner; They who are no longer under wrath, but in God's Grace and favour, they have no need, nay they cannot by the death of Christ be delivered from wrath and restored to God's favour. But those whom God loves unto eternal salvation, are no longer under wrath, but in God's favour. Therefore there is no need, nay they cannot be delivered from wrath and restored to God's favour, by the Death of Christ. 4. That Christ is appointed a Mediator only for the benefit of these Elect, to die for them, and procure salvation for them; whose salvation was as sure before, as the Decree and love of God could make it. 5. That Faith, Sanctification and Obedience, are not considered in this Decree, as qualifications in the person to be elected: but are provided to be brought in by it, to dress him up for Glory. 6. That those Elect Persons, in their appointed time, shall be called so infrustrably and irresistibly, that it is not in their power to make it void or hinder it. 7. That no sin can put them out of that road, Series, or File of means drawn by the Divine Decree, to lead them from Election to Glory: No not their foulest or filthiest sins; Hereupon Master Perkins reckons it amongst the Privileges which wait upon their Adoption. Armilla Aurea. cap. 37. Hinc etiam multis Privilegiis donantur, saith he, They are endowed with many Privileges, 1. They are heirs of God. 2. Coheires with Christ, and Kings. 3. All their afflictions, their failings also and falls, tantum sunt castigationes paternae ad bonum illorum; they are nothing but fatherly chastisements, designed for their Good. And such is the Judgement of the Divines of Drent, Par. 3. pag. 275. f. inserted amongst the Acts of the Synod; Whereas, say they, the Remonstrants do maintain that the faithful may fall from Grace; there are a thousand Testimonies of Scripture against it. (And presently after) We will add but one Testimony more: It is said Rom. 8.28. That all shall work together for good to them that love God. If all the evils, wherewith they are chastised; then their very sins also; Quae peccata, quemadmodum in impiis, interdum habent rationem poenae: Sic etiam ipsissima peccata, etiam in fidelibus habent rationem paternae castigationis, Which sins, as in the wicked, they have sometimes the nature of punishment: so the very self same sins also, in the faithful have the nature of Fatherly correction. And may not God be the Author of them then, seeing all evil of punishment is from him? Amos 3.6. 8. From hence it undeniably follows, that the sins of these Elect, must be of another rank, and of a far different nature, from the very same sins (for kind and quality) of the Reprobate. For example, the Adultery, Sedition, Murder, Oppression of the Reprobates do shut them out of God's favour and kingdom: 1. Cor. 6.9. Gal. 5.19. But the same sins (for nature and kind) in these Elect; their Adultery, Sedition, Oppression, Murder, cannot shut them out, either of God's Grace here, or his Glory hereafter. On the other side, Observe 1. That according to this Synopsis, containing Master Perkins' and the Judgement of all the Creabilitarians, That the fare greatest part of mankind are Reprobates before they are Creatures; and according to the most modest opinion amongst them, they are Reprobates (as to the demerit of Preterition) only upon the account of Adam's sin, which was no more in their power to prevent or avoid, than to hinder God's imputation of it, or to forbid their Parents Banes of Matrimony; and for Actual sins, they do commence upon the stock of this sin Original. 2. That Christ was not given, according to God's intention, for their benefit; They have no interest in him; there is no line of communication drawn betwixt him and them. For 3. at least, upon the Fall of Adam, God's implacable and immutable hatred was extended towards them. And hence 4. His calling of them is but uneffectuall; so that 5. Though they own and answer that Call, so fare as to be enlightened by it, repent at it, believe upon it, relish the heavenly Gift, and grow zealous of God's Glory, yet this doth not remove them one step out of that road or line drawn, by the Decree of Reprobation, to lead them to eternal death, according to the Series and process whereof (which is immutably set, and insuperably carried on) the Deceitfulness of sin must and shall inevitably and necessarily prevail to bring them into a Relapse, which shall heighten their pollution and guilt, by an accession of obduration and malice, unbelief and Apostasy, and so cooperate to the aggravation of their condemnation and torments. And this is the very Doctrine of the Synod of Dort, as it is delivered, Act. S. Dor. par. 2. p. 62. th'. 24, 25. in the Judgement of the Divines of Embden; For speaking of the means by which the Decree is executed in the Reprobates, They say, Prima & summa eorum exitii Causa, The first and chiefest cause of their destruction, is the corruption of our first Parents, Spontanea Adami voluntate, of Adam's own accord, first brought upon himself, and afterwards by the just judgement of God propagated unto his whole Posterity: in which if God had left all, he had done injury to none, because he is debtor unto none. The second (Cause) is, because, either God vouchsafes not to call these Reprobates at all by his Gospel; or if he calls some of them outwardly by the Gospel, yet it is not accompanied with any internal Spiritual efficacy: or if in some of them he begets a certain assent, and some kind of faith; yet he leaves them all at last, in their blindness and voluntary corruption, and doth not vouchsafe them his saving grace. And Szegedin, To the Question, In loc. come. de Repr. tab. 1. p. 122. f. Whether the Reprobate can do good works? he makes this answer, They may do good works sometimes, but not persevere in them: as the Predestinate in like manner do fall into most grievous sins. Therefore, saith he, we may conclude, that Good works are sometimes inservient unto Predestination, and sometimes unto Reprobation. By good works Predestination doth illustrate Gody glory; and in respect of Reprobation they are many times reasons, why sin is aggravated. For they that fall from God, when he hath adorned them with good works, as they do more grievously sin, so are they more severely-punished. Lastly Observe, that, according to this Series, or Table of Causes, The only Glory that God designs and aims at, primarily and by itself, as to be drawn out of the Rational Creature for himself, consists in the Salvation of some for the Declaration of his Justice and Mercy, and the Damnation of others, for the Declaration of his Power and Justice. Whereas the Scripture informs us otherwise, viz. That the Glory, which he intended to have, and therefore requires and expects from us, doth consist in the oblation or performance of a free and dutiful obedience, or results from it. To this purpose we have our Saviour's own warrant, Joh. 15.8. Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; and his example, Joh. 17.4. I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work that thou gavest me to do; and his Command, Matth. 5.16. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven; and Gods own approbation, Psal. 50.23. Who so offereth praise, glorifieth me, and to him that ordereth his conversation aright, etc. So that God's Glory is intended all the way; Whether ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the Glory of God. This is that duty, we are all primarily designed for, and called unto, by the dispensations of his Grace, (1 Pet. 2.9. Ephes. 1.6.) And if men will not comply, by a voluntary obedience, with this Gracious design, that the Goodness of God may triumph in our exaltation: then, for their contempt, or neglect of his honour and service, as he hath threatened, so, he rejects them, and glorifies his Justice in the infliction of their deserved punishment, Act. S Dor. par. 2. pag. 104. th'. 5. Martinius therefore acknowledgeth, that the condemnation of the wicked is an event of Gods Calling, which is not intended of God, by itself: but by accident it is an attendant upon man's transgression. Hic autem eventus per se non intenditur à Deo: sed per accidens hominis Culpa sequitur. As for that Glory of God, which the Blessed Saints and Angels do eternally celebrate in heaven, that is not designed by Almighty God, for a part of Man's duty (the Scene whereof lies here on earth) but for his Reward upon the performance of that duty: which duty the wicked having neglected, they are by way of punishment, for ever debarred, Rev. 7.14, 15. Job. 17.24. from having any communion in that blessed solemnity, which is the Master's joy, into which none are admitted but such as have been faithful servants. This (by the way) will afford a sufficient answer to that Maxim in Logic, [What is first in the intention, is last in the execution], (Whence some Admired Doctors would infer, that punishment was intended before sin, and Glory before obedience.) But the Maxim will not hold in the Distribution of Rewards and Punishments, which do always (where Justice holds the Sword and balance) presuppose duty and fault, respectively, as the Ushers to go before them. This is easily seen, and many times complained of in Civil administrations † Call to the unconverted. p. 84. A Rulers will us Lawgiver is first and principally that his laws be obeyed, etc. See the rest. , wherein, as the Magistrate that intends reward before obedience, is accounted imprudent: so he that designs a personal punishment before there be a fault, shall not escape the Reproach of being a Tyrant. AN EXAMINATION OF Master baxter's XIX, and XX. Sections. Wherein the state of DAVID AND PETER is Debated. The State of DAVID and PETER Debated. Answer to Section XIX. THough I have not troubled myself much to examine how violent and rigid an Adversary you are to Master Pierce, in the point of Perseverance; yet in that superficial view, which I have taken of those and some other of your Papers, I observe that after your pretended kindness, and an offer to shake hands, you no sooner unclasp, and begin to take leave, but (such is your temper,) you must have a parting blow, that exasperates your Dissenting Brethren and sends them away as little satisfied in your moderation as when they first met you. This is no great temptation to invite a peaceable spirit, to interpose in any of your Disputes. Yet finding that M. Pierce grows weary (upon such like considerations) of drawing this Saw of contention (and I cannot blame him, having had so much harsh and jarring noise about his ears, as is more than enough to set any ingenuous persons teeth on edge) and resolving hereupon to give himself a little truce and respite, till he meets with further provocation; And finding you also (I hope unfaignedly) professing, that you are truly and hearty willing of further information † And you do not hold it fundamental that the Justified cannot fall from their justification. Of Persev. pag. 17. , I shall in all Christian meekness, at least in order to mine own satisfaction, if it may not prove so to yours, represent my present thoughts by way of Reflection upon those arguments that you have laid before us in the nineteen and twenty Sections of your Preface. But before I consider your arguments I shall premise. 1. That according to the course of God's ordinary dispensations, Christians are not made Per saltum: (I speak of the Adult, and persons arrived to capacity) I conceive, a man, notwithstanding those habits of grace pretended to be infused at that instant, cannot be a sound Habitual Christian at his first Conversion. My reason is, because Christianity is a profession and a matter of choice upon a mature and sober deliberation, as our Saviour Christ hath taught us in that twofold Parable. S. Luk. 14.28. etc. For which of you intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, Deut. 26.17 Josua. 24.15, 22. and counteth the cost, whether he hath sufficient to finish it? lest haply after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, saying, This man begun to build, and was not able to finish. Or what King going to make war against another King, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able, with ten thousand, to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand? Or else while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an embassage, and desireth conditions of peace. Thus is the Discipleship of Christ to be entertained upon a deliberate, due and full account taken of all the cost toil, and difficulties, which we must be at, and encounter with in the profession of it. But, if in the constitution and framing of every good Christian, Non sola intellectus illuminatio, & cordis sanctificatio; sed ipsa quoque voluntatis immutatio, hec est, qualitatum, seu facultatum, & virium supernaturalium in voluntatem infusio, ejusdemque ad conversionem & fidem efficax flexio & inclinatio, fit irrisistibiliter; as the Hassian Divines have declared at the Synod; and after this first conversion, if God doth by a Physical operation, in the will of man, work also alium quemcunque actum verae pietatis, scilicet, ipsum voluntatis motum efficienter attingendo, hoc est voluntatem ipsam applicando & determinando ad volendum & eligendum; In 2. Sent. d. 28. Sect. 2. as Estius and those of that way do constantly maintain; A man that is sure of such a Magazine provided for him, and such invincible forces levied to his hands, hath no reason in the world to sit down to consult about the charge of his ensuing warfare; and if he advanceth, upon any account besides this, he doth but reckon, (as they say) according to these men's opinion, without his Host. Besides, as the seed of the word is a necessary ingredient to the ordinary conception of this new man, so is the travel of the Ministry no less requisite to the parturition of him: and for want of this Regular way of new birth, Saint Paul calls himself an abortive. 1 Cor. 15.8 And to show the necessity of our own cooperation to this work in us, Heb. 12.15. 2 Cor. 6.1. ne defimus gratiae Dei, that we receive not the grace of God in vain, nor be wanting to it, we are enjoined to put off the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and (not only) to be renewed in the spirit of our minds, (in a passive signification (but to put (on actively) that new man, which after God is created, Eph. 4.22, 23, 24. in righteousness and true hol●●esse. And ●s we are enjoined, so are we enabled to it too; For, where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty (and this is the dispensation of the Gospel, and the privilege of those that live under it) whence it follows, that we all, 2 Cor. 3.6. with 17, 18. with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord. Hereupon saith Basil Mag. Habeo in creatione id quod secundum imaginem est. Homil. 10. Hexam. Fio autem proposito & voluntate etiam secundum similitudinem. Vbi tua est gratia? Cur tu coronatus es? Si enim opifex totum N B. contribuit, quomodo regnum coelorum tibi apertum est? To this purpose it is very considerable, what the Assertors and Defenders of that Physical operation, are fain to yield. In the division of Grace in operantem & cooperantem, there ariseth a difficulty; for if Gratia operans be distinguished à cooperante, then that Gratia operans must be said to be that, quae operatur ●n nobis [sine novis] & in voluntate nostra nihil agente; For if our will doth act any thing here, there is no reason why this grace should be called operans and not cooperans. Saint Austin is brought in, in favour of this interpretation, where he saith, Ut velimus Deus sine nobis operatur, cùm autem volumus, & sic volumus ut faciamus, nobiscum cooperatur. To this purpose he produceth that place of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 15. Yet not I, but the Grace of God with me. For when he had said, neither the Grace of God alone, nor Paul alone, he added: but the Grace of God wrought with him; that he was called from heaven, and that he was converted by so great and efficacious a call, this was the Grace of God alone. To the like purpose Thomas is produced. Upon these authorities and the misunderstanding of this doctrine some have been drawn into an opinion, that in effectu gratiae operantis our will doth nihil agere, nec seipsam omnino movere, but is Passive and moved only. But saith Estius, 2. Sent. d. 26. Sect. 8. this sense is false and erroneous, and that he proves by three reasons. 1. Because the inward Act which that working Grace produceth in us; as for example, to love God, to hate sin, it is an Act of the will; not only as of the subject, but also and chief, as of the eff ctive Principle: therefore the will in respect of that act, is moving, and not only moved. 2. Because that act, by which the will gins to will good, is a free act; therefore in respect of that act, the will is a moving principle, not of any sort, but a free one. 3. Because Acts of this kind are under precept. For man is commanded to believe, to convert himself to God, to fly from sin; therefore they proceed from the will freely moving itself hereunto. Wherefore rejecting that false interpretation of those Doctors, he concludes, their meaning was only this; That God works the first act or good motion of the will in us, by his grace, without any other motion of the will, previous in us, whereby we endeavour, or aspire to that first motion, or whereby the will commands it: because many times a good affection of the will is inspired into a man, when he is very repugnant to it, as it happened in Paul, Act. 9 By this we see, that even in the opinion of those men, that maintain, that way of efficacious Grace, by Physical operation (as they call it) our reception of Christianity, or which is all one, our Conversion to the Faith, (even in the first act of it) must be a matter of free choice at least. And as it is a matter of choice, to embrace it at the first, so it is a matter of study and industry to maintain it afterwards in contesting to mortify and subdue all those corruptions, infirmities and temptations, which make opposition to the power of that profession, which is the power of Godliness. He that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things: Watch and pray that ye fall not into temptation: Fight the good fight of faith: and be faithful unto the death, and I will give thee a crown of life: and a multitude of such expressions. 2. Whether, after long and faithful service, God may not vouchsafe, of his especial grace and favour, to reward the devotions and pains of some pious persons, with a secure establishment in a comfortable estate of indefectibility, this you know, the Remonstrants had no mind to dispute. An verò non aliquando pro absoluto jure suo extraordinaria quadam ratione Deus fideles quosdam, Scripta Remonst. Dogmat. Artic. 5. pag. 190. diu multumque in stadio pietatis exercitatos, & in variis adversitatibus atque afflictionibus velut in igne probatos, dono perseverantiae indefectibiles remuneretur ad hec, ut veluti luminaria quaedam pietatis, patientiae & fortitudinis in domo Dei luceant, Deoque pro instrumentis serviant ad alios exemplo suo ad eandem fidei constantiam animandos, in medio relinquimus. Me thinks, 'tis very agreeable to the riches of the Divine Goodness and Grace, by way of reward or benefit for their long and hard duty, to draw his old soldiers into the securest quarters (allotted to any persons in the Church Militant) after they have stood long upon the Guard, and strictly kept their watch, and constantly maintained the fight with admirable courage, prudence and success against all assaults of the enemy. That excellent man of so profound a judgement and learning was of this mind. D. Th. Jack. Ap. to 10. B. of the Creed pag. 3148. There is a Degree or measure of Mortification (best known unto God) which may be obtained before the hour of death, by some later, by others sooner, unto which whosoever doth attain, he is not only actually instated in this promise of life, but confirmed in Grace, and endued with the Gift of Perseverance. I am much pleased to find a Text of Scripture, that to my apprehension, sounds, so like a promise to this purpose. Rev. 3.12. see vers. 5. Him that overcometh, will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the Name of my God, and the Name of the City of my God, which is the New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my New name. And such might be those Elect * And what if, in these, I should grant Master Baxter his twofold cause of stability, 1. the nature or degree of their grace within; 2. the Election and preservation of God without? Of Persever. pag. 37. persons, whom God is said to have chosen, Mark. 13.20 for whose sake, he did vouchsafe to shorten those days of tribulation, and did exempt them from the danger of Seduction, Mat. 24.24. 3. I do not conceive that the single Act alone of every gross sin, doth utterly destroy the New birth, or excuss Charity and the Spirit of Grace, or cancel his interest in Gods paternal favour, and title to salvation, 1 Cor. 6.9. Eph 5.5. who is such a Delinquent. When the Apostle saith, The unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God; I suppose he doth not mean, every man that doth something that is unjust: but he, whose frequent practice, and contracted Disposition, hath procured that denomination. So when the Apostle, Gal. 5.21. having reckoned up the works of the flesh, concludes with this intermination, that they which do such things shall not inherit the Kingdom of God, Joh. 8.44. To do such things may import the custom (according to Scripture notion) and the frequentation of them. In that conflict betwixt the flesh, and the Spirit, in the Regenerate, though the flesh prevail in some single combat, we must not presently blow the trumpet and proclaim it king. One may worst his enemy in a sleight skirmish, yet not presently get possession of the crown and Throne. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether it be of sin unto death, Rom. 6.16. And he that is overcome of his lust, and brought into bondage, he is a servant of corruption, 2 Pet. 2.18, 19 I conclude then, That a single Act, though entertained with some complacency, if retracted, before the pleasure hath made too deep an impression, by a long abode, doth not put a man out of the state of Salvation, nor rescind his gracious privileges and relations, nor cassate his interest in that grace, wherein God hath made him accepted in the Beloved; but only then, when sin doth reign and dwell in peace, or when after a hot alarm of its approach, Ezek. 33.9. and special warning given to arm and stand upon his guard, if a man then turns coward, lets it in without resistance, and permits it to levy forces and stand in competition with the spirit; and much more if he shall invite it in, and assist it against his interest. Whether the sin of Peter or David were of this nature, we shall examine in the sequel. In the mean while, let us consider, what is granted concerning the danger or sad estate that the regenerate men fall into by their perpetration of foul sins. De Persev. Sanctorum. Spiritum contristant, indignationem Dei paternam incurrunt, reatum damnabilem contrahunt: sic ut demeritoriè saltem licet non effectiuè jus ad regnum coelorum penitùs admittunt fideles regeniti & justificati, saith Doctor Prideaux. Some resemble their estate to the condition of a man excommunicated or outlawed, who loseth his actual claim to whatsoever is due to him upon never so good assurance, D. Field Ap. to 2. B. of the Ch. pag. 313. & 834. so that albeit the right and title to it is yet invested in them, yet all prosecution of that right is suspended during the time he continues in that estate. Others represent their estate by the condition of the Leper amongst the Jews, who for the time was debarted the use of his own habitation; yet he lost not his right to it; for after he was healed, he might reenter and keep possession. (But by the way, if he died before his actual cleansing, he could not do so.) I suppose rather that their estate might be represented by the Law made against the presumptuous sinner, Num. 15.30. The Soul that doth aught presumptuously (or with a high hand): whether he be born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth the Lord: and (there was no sacrifice to make his atonement) that soul shall be cut off from among his people. His punishment was not sequestration, or exclusion from his People, but excision. I do not here take upon me to determine, what the final and eternal estate of such a person was, (that must be according to the quality and degrees of his repentance before his execution) but I observe that by the sentence of God, declared in that law, presumptuous sins do ipso facto make an alteration of estate (as great an alteration as is from life to death) in the person that commits them: Now to give us to understand that David's sin was of such a nature, there is the very character of a Presumptuous sin set upon it, which is, that the Lord is reproached by it. ib. and so 'tis said of David's sin, 2 Sam. 12.14. By this de●● thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme. Before I proceed further, I could wish you would seriously consider the importance of that caution given by the Apostle, Heb. 12.15, 16. Looking diligently lest any man fail (or fall from) the grace of God, lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you and thereby many be defiled, lest there be any fornicator or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright, for ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected. If you think such caveats and threaten, being applied as preservations against defection, do always become a means of perseverance to the regenerate; and at most imply but a possibility of their Apostasy, in regard of themselves, not the certain futurity of it, unless it be, in the Non-elect, God having put in a bar against it for the rest; I desire you to consider, that a Type being given, and an instance made, in a person who certainly had once a just right to inherit, whether this must not needs imply a real danger of the event, viz. of falling to those, who for the present have a true right and title to the Evangelicall blessing and celestial inheritance. I say, a real danger of falling, and in some case (which is here set down to aggravate the danger, and consequently to excite their care to avoid it, to the highest pitch) irrecoverably. But to return to David; I think it very easy to conclude him in an unjustified estate, out of your own principles. In your Account of Perseverance, Pag. 40. you lay these for grounds, (n. 5.) The Dominion of any one sin is inconsistent with saving grace and justification. n. 7. You say, He that hath not more hatred than love to any sin, and that had not rather be rid of it, even in the use of God's means, then keep it, in regard of the Habituated state of his will, is under the dominion of sin, and in the state of damnation. n. 8. He that is thus resolved, and affected against a gross sin, or any known sin, that is under the power of h●s will, is not like to live in, or give up himself to it: Nay he cannot commit it without renewed resolutions against it, and a restless importunity of soul to to be delivered, which will prevail. If this be true, (as I am ready to subscribe to it) David was in a much more sad condition, than you are apt to believe him in. For that he was guilty of a gross known sin, you cannot, you will not deny; but where were his renewed resolutions against it? where was the use of God's means, or the restless importunity of his soul to be delivered from it? Did he not give up himself to it, and industriously make provision for it, and live in it? Nay did he not upon design and contrivance, against all the engagements of nobleness, ingenuity, (and humanity) proceed from one wickedness to nother? It cannot with any colour be denied. There is but one Salvo in all your three propositions to help you; you will say, perhaps, that in regard of the habituated state of his will, he had rather have been rid of it, then have kept it. That does not appear, but very much against it. If it had been so, why did he not consult his Prophet, or fast and mourn, as he did afterward for the sickness of his child? His habituated estate, it seems, was a very secure state, that the accustomed ministry of the Church would not serve the turn, but God was fallen to discharge an especial piece of his Ordnance to awaken him out of it. You add in your 10. Proposition; That sin doth as naturally breed troubles and fears, as the setting of the Sun causeth darkness, or as a gross substance in the Sunshine causeth a shadow. And this from the nature of the thing, and by the will of God. If it be so, what can we conclude, from the want of such fears and troubles in him, but that 'tis probable, God left him for the time under some degrees of obduration? And indeed, not so much the palpitation and trembling of the heart, through fears and troubles, as the hardening, of it, is the inseparable companion of presumptuous sinning. The Devil carries himself with a kind of bashfulness till he finds encouragement. And that man must be lustily steeled with impudence, that will be presumptuous where he hath little interest. It is argument enough that the sin hath gotten a great force in a man when it is presumptuous. Upon this account it is, that our Criminal preys so earnestly at another time, Psal. 19.14. Keep back thy servant from presumptuous sins, lest they get the dominion over me. Upon which words Amesius saith, In Psal. 19 Talia flagitia non constunt cum timore Dei. Such crimes cannot consist with the fear of God. Indeed he infers from thence, that the servants of God are not enthralled to such contumacies. And it is true in sensu composito, as they are, and whilst they are Gods servants. But if they betake themselves to the service of another Master, his lusts than they will do. Shall a man need to serve an Apprenticeship to the trade of sin, before he can merit the title of being a servant to it? His servants ye are to whom ye obey, saith the Apostle. Suppose David had only been surprised at first, with the beauty of the woman (though indeed, those sins, whose horrid enormity is so great, that the very light of nature commands us always to be in arms, and stand upon our guard against them, can never be excused or extenuated upon the account of a surprisal.) But put case I say, he had been surprised at first, yet upon whose command was it, 1. That (after sufficient time of recollection and advisement, when he should have been at prayers) he sent Messengers, and sure some preface of courtship was used to flatter and seduce her, and so took her and lay with her. 2 Sam. 12. 2. That he afterwards sent for her husband, from his duty in the Leaguer. 3. That he advised him so earnestly to go home and wash his feet— and sent a mess of meat after him. 4. That he blamed him under a pretence of pity, that he went not down to his house. 5. That he bade him tarry till the morrow, and then invited him to an entertainment, where he made him drunken. 6. That he laid so cunning a plot to murder him (whom he had so lately debauched, that he was scarce awakened, or at least scarce recovered out of his distemper) and then wrote a letter, with so much formality, to Joab, to acquaint him, how he should manage and carry on this projected stratagem, and lastly, that he sent it by Uriah's own loyal hand, making him carry the Warrant for his own unworthy and treacherous execution; At whose command, I say, did David do all this? Was it not at the command of Lust? and then, did he not obey her, as her servant? What clearer evidence can there be in the world than this, to prove, that sin hath got the Dominion over a man? I'll offer you but one argument more, from the doctrine of Saint John. 1 Joh. 3.9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17. verses. Take it in this form, No man that is not of God, that hath not eternal life, nor the love of God abiding in him, but is of the Devil, and abideth in death, no such man is in the state of justification: But David, guilty of the matter of Vriah, is such a man, viz. not of God, not having eternal life, not the love of God abiding in him, but is of the Devil, and abideth in death: Therefore, etc. The Major is undeniable, being the express words of S. John. The Minor is thus proved out of the same Apostle. He that committeth sin, and doth not righteousness, that loveth not his brother, that shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, that not only hates, but actually murders him, (like Cain for the satisfaction of his lust) he is not of God, hath not eternal life, nor the love of God abiding in him, but is of the Devil, and abideth in death: But David in the matter of Uriah committeth sin, doth not righteousness, loveth not his brother, shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, and actually murders him. Ergo. The Major is again the express words of S. John: and the Minor is proved evidently by the History which containeth the matter of Fact. 2 Sam. 11. I am the more confirmed in the certain truth of this doctrine, by reflecting upon the scope and method of the Apostles discourse upon it. Having represented the great privilege of Adoption, he proceeds to declare that this privilege is to be preserved by a purity of soul and life, suitable to that state; and because, 1 Joh. 3. v. 4. to 17. (as he urgeth,) injustice and uncharitableness are altogether inconsistent with it, therefore he earnestly dissuades from them, as a most certain means, conducing to the forfeiture of the benefit thereof. Beloved, Ibid. v. 2. now are we the sons of God (saith he) by inchoation, adopted into that state, of special grace, and favour, to give probation of our filial ingenuity and obedience, in purifying ourselves, that we may be advanced to a due and fitting capacity, for the glorious presence and communion of the Holy God. Thus we are now the sons of God: but it doth not yet appear what we shall be; for that glory is not yet revealed in us; neither have we yet performed the condition, which is required to qualify and dispose us for it; Aug. doth distinguish betwixt sons by Regeneration, and sons by Praedestination: as in your Ac. of Persev. pag. 16. 1 Pet. 1.14, 15. for we must withdraw ourselves from all pollutions, and be devoted by a special separation to his service; As obedient children, not fashioning ourselves according to the former lusts in our ignorance: but as he which hath called us is holy, so must we be holy in all manner of conversation; Wherefore come out from among them (Heathenish pollutions) and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you. And will be a father unto you, 2 Cor. 6.17, 18. and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. This Privilege of Adoption, is not absolutely our own freehold, our tenure in it is conditional, (no less than that of being his house, and his Disciples, which imports the same benefit under diversified expressions) and this condition is the sincere and constant performance of our faithful duty and service, Heb. 3.6, 14. Joh. 8.31. Rom. 2.7. which consists in a course of holiness and righteousness before him all the days of our life; Luk. 1.75. according to the covenant made with Abraham. All the Divines that I have met with (at least to my best remembrance) do set Justification before Adoption (in order of nature, if not of time) and yet, you yourself confess, Aphor. of Justif. distinct. 21. Those only are his practical conquering Disciples, who actually persevere. Disp. of Sacram. pag. 94. that that justification, of which the person hath true possession, though it be ours actually after faith, yet 'tis but conditionally, viz. upon condition of perseverance in faith and sincere obedience. If that Justification, which we are entitled to after faith, be held upon such terms, then much more, that Adoption which follows it. Here than you and Tilenus are agreed, but I doubt it will not hold long. For if the question be asked, whether every Regenerate man will infallibly perform this condition, you answer in the affirmative; and indeed according to your doctrine he cannot do otherwise, unless you take up your distinction for fashion sake, and say that quoad se, he may fail in that performance, but respectu Dei, 'tis impossible; because, to speak openly and plainly, 'tis not he that doth it (and how comes it then to be his duty, and rewardable?) but God by an insuperable power, Preface, Section 9 according to his absolute purpose to cause this condition in him. Let us come at last to your reasons. 1. I do not find (you say) any mention of them (David and Peter) or any others, that were twice Regenerated, or sanctified in Scripture * Then there can never be any other truly Prodigal son; but only Adam. . Answ. 1. Then all those of whose pollutions and backslidings Almighty God so bitterly complains in Scripture, were either not regenerated and sanctified at all (and then it would be somewhat strange, Isa. 1.21. 2 Pet. 2.18.19. Ezek. 16.38, with 60. Jer. 18.11. with 13. Jer. 2.12, 13. that a most wise God should complain that men had corrupted themselves and polluted their ways, who never had been sanctified:) or else that they did all perish in such their pollutions and backslidings; and this will seem no less strange than the other, to any considering person (who attends to it without prejudice). That after so many earnest invitations and woo to return, Jer. 3.12. Isa. 1.18. Hose. 2.7, with 14. Jer. 3.1, 12, 14. Hos. 14.4. and such a gracious reception given by Almighty God to such returners; that notwithstanding all this, every Revolting and backsliding person should be damned, is to me utterly incredible. 2. The Metaphor of Regeneration, may deceive us; For it signifies the production of new Qualities and new Relations, as you say, Treatise of Conversion, pag. 8. I may add, new Capacities too. For consider the whole world as lying in wickedness, dead in trespasses and sins, under the curse of the Law, and the sentence of God's wrath; Christ coming to take away this curse, and make expiation for that sin, and to appease that wrath, may very well be said to have begotten us again to a new hope, in respect of that capacity, which we were put into by the benefit of his death and resurrection † 2 Tim. 1, 9, 10. 1 Pet. 1.3. , even before our embracing of the Gospel. The Resurrection is called a Regeneration too, as Beza and Deodati interpret that Text, Mat. 19.28. Regeneratio sumitur pro illa die, qua electi incipient novam vitam vivere. i e. Cùm animo & corpore fruentur illà haereditate coelesti, saith Beza, and Deodati to the same purpose; so that you see the Scripture mentions a twofold regeneration. But this last will not serve our turn, and therefore I shall reflect upon what you grant, as the Doctrine of the Synod, in your 33. Sect. They deny not, you say, but men may fall from a present capacity of salvation, and under the necessity of a renewed Repentance, to put them again into a present capacity. But, say I, after a lapse into gross and foul sins (which are said to corrupt and defile and pollute the soul, especially upon any abode in them) there is and must be a production of new qualities, as well as a new capacity, (if that new capacity doth not rather consist in such qualities,) therefore, in that case, (this being a Regeneration) the man so lapsed is twice Regenerated. 3. How can there be an actual iteration of the travel of the Ministry, about the very same persons, without a possible iteration of the new birth? Yet we see, the Apostle to the Galatians, Gal. 3.2. c, 5.4. c. 4.6. who had received the Spirit, and were in a state of Grace, God having sent the Spirit of his Son into their hearts, crying Abba, Father, (all which are sufficient evidences of their Regeneration) yet to these he saith, My little children of whom I travel in birth again, Gal. 4.19. Deodati Annot. Eng. until Christ be form in you. That is, saith Deodati, My little children, for whom I endure great pains and anguishs, as a woman that is in travel, until such time as Christ's pure doctrine is re-establisht amongst you, as I had planted it, to frame in your souls a living image of Christ, in righteousness and true holiness. And what can you make of this but regeneration? 4. You do confess, All those five words, viz. Conversion, Repentance, Regeneration, Sanctification, Vocation, Treatise of Conversion, pag. 6. are used in Scripture to express the same work upon the soul; and there is another word, Ibid. pag. 8. you put in (a page or two after) the New-creation. But what more frequent in holy Scripture, then at least the implyed-iteration of Conversion, Repentance, Sanctification, and the new creation? For Conversion take that place Hosea 14.1. O Israel return unto the Lord thy God; for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity: Fallen! from what? from one wickedness to another? No, from the grace and favour of God, vers. 4. I will heal their backslidings, I will love them freely: for mine anger is turned away from him. Let us also consider that of the Prophet Jer. 3.1. If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not the land be greatly polluted? yes, according to that Law made and provided on that behalf, Deut. 24.1, 2, 3. But thou hast played the harlot with many lovers, yet return again to me, saith the Lord. Where we may take notice, 1. What their Relation was to God; He was married unto them, vers. 14. (and to be a wife, sure is as near a relation, and imports as great an endearment, as to be sons and daughters). 2. What their transgression was; fornication, which, in a spiritual sense, as relating to God, was Idolatry; and that doth, ipso facto, altar the state, and rescind the Covenant; whence it was, that Moses finding the people playing the Harlot with the Calf, to intimate that the Covenant betwixt them and their God was cancelled and made void, he broke the Tables in pieces. Yet 3. God invites them to a restitution; return again to me, saith He; and more fully, Vers. 12, 14. Turn, O back-sliding children, saith the Lord; for I am married unto you; and though I might give you a final bill of divorce for your backsliding and Idolatry; yet I will take you again (upon your repentance.) So that here we have some, at least, that were converted a second time from a state of aversion from God, and therefore they were twice Regenerated. What exceptions you will make against these instances, as relating to a national Church, I know not: but what ever they are, I am confid●nt I shall be able to answer them out of your own doctrine, delivered in your Disputations, of Right to Sacraments. 5. That the new Creation (another expression as you acknowledge, Treatise of Conversion, pag. 8. to describe Regeneration) may be repeated, sundry Scripture instances will evince. As Ezek. 18.31. Make you a new heart and a new spirit, and that of David, (who certainly had this new creature, or the new creation wrought in him once before) Psal. 51.10. Create in me a clean heart O God, and renew a right spirit within me. And to whom doth the Apostle direct his Epistle to the Ephesians, Ephes. 1.1. but to the Saints and faithful in Christ Jesus? Cap. 4.24. Yet he exhorts them to be renewed in the spirit of their minds. To put on the new man: as was said above. 6. Repentance, you say signifieth the same work upon the soul, as Regeneration doth. What shall we turn Novatians? No iteration of Repentance neither? Why was that title given to Repentance by Tertullian, Hierom and the rest that followed? why did they call it, Secunda Tabula post Naufragium? Concil. provinc. Colon. mihi pa. 121. a. b. Prima tabula, qua subnixi ex diluvio peccatorum tam in Adam veluti stirpe, quam postea malè vivendo, quacunque tandem ratione contractorum enatamus, Baptismus est, post quem acceptum, si rursus naufragium fecerimus, nulla pro peccatis nova hostia restat, sed tantum superest haec secunda tabula, Poenitentia, quam si gnaviter (donec vita superstes est) apprehenderimus, ac apprehensam persecuti fuerimus, non dubium, quem rursus ad salutis portum pertingemus, quamlibet etiam pericalosi sint, in quos postea incidimus, peccatorum scopuli. It is not only possible for the vessels of the Regenerate to leak and let in a little salt water; but they may run against the rock of Presumptuous sin, and make shipwreck of faith and a good conscience; 1 Tit. 1.19. for that is the damage sustained by their miscarriage, who are embarked upon the bottom of Christianity, as S Paul tells us; and this plank of Repentance is thrown out by special indulgence and grace to such, to preserve them from immersion and utter ruin, and transport them again to the desired haven of eternal happiness. The institution of the discipline 〈◊〉 R pentance (or as the Ancients call it Penance) imports no less; And the Practice of the Ancient Church confirms it. The Apostle delivers up the Incestuous Corinthian to Satan: to what end? for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus, 1 Cor. 5.5. That is, saith Deodati, to macorate and pull down the body extremely, even to death, i● God would have it so; as oftentimes by means of the aforesaid things (viz. excommunication, Annot. in Engl. with its attendants (in those first days of the Christian Church) horrors, anguishs of spirit, and torments of body) death did follow, and at his last passage, if the sinner did show a lively repentance, he was loosed from those bonds of excommunication, and readmitted into the peace of the Church, and into the Grace of God, and so died with comfort, eased and relieved with the public and private prayers of the faithful. Finis excommunicationi propositus non est excommunicati exitium sed salus, Beza. not. minor. ut videlicet hoc remedio d●metur ipsius caro, ut d●s●a● spiritui vivere. Whence it clearly appears, that in the judgement of these Learned men, grounded upon the Scripture, such as lay under the sentence of excommunication were not in a state of justification, and consequently that by the use and practise of this wholesome Discipline they were to be regenerated, and brought forth as it were anew unto it. And this was the end of the same Censures inflicted upon Hymenaeus and Alexander; who had actually repelled a good conscience. 1 Tim. 1.19 and 20. And this was no more, than was contained in the commission upon the donation of the Power of the Keys; Mat. 18.18 Joh 20.23. What ye bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained. I am not ignorant, that there is an extemporary Repentance † 1 Joh. 1.9. this was signified, Lotione pedum. Joh. 13.10. (as Meisner calls it) in order to the continual expiation of intercurrent sins in the blood of Christ; sins of ignorance, and infirmity, of inadvertency and sudden surreption, which the regenerate daily fall into, Luk. 15.7. who yet are said, (in respect of the change of state) to need no repentance. But there is a Solemn repentance after enormous, wasting sins, (commonly called Mortal sins). Why was this instituted and to be performed with so much discipline of severity (as we find it practised by the Apostle and the Primitive Church (for 7, 9, 13, years together upon one and the same person, before his restitution to th● peace of the Church, and the grace of God, and hopes of pardon) but to signify that such persons had extreme need of such a Repentance as might import a change of state, whereby they might be recovered again after a fall wherein they were given for lost? and this is called repentance unto salvation, 2 Cor. 7.10. That this Discipline should be instituted only for the use and benefit of such as never were regenerate (and I cannot see what else is to be alleged to avoid the force of the argument; for a second Regeneration) is so ridiculous to imagine, that I presume no rational man will offer to affirm it. To conclude this argument then. Whosoever may Repent and be converted, and be renewed and sanctified and become a new creature, a second or third time, he may be twice or thrice Regenerated: But a poor sinner may repent and be converted, and renewed, and sanctified, and become a new creature, a second or third time, Ergo. The Major Proposition is undeniable; because, Repentance, Conversion, Renovation, Sanctification, and Regeneration, do all signify one and the same work upon the soul, as is acknowledged not only by Bucan, and the Professors of Leiden, Buc. loc. come. 30. p. 294. Synops. disp. 32. thes. 2. p. 420. Treatise of Conversion, pag. 7. but also by yourself. The Minor is evident by the proofs alleged. I shall but add, what is said by the Provincial Council before named, touching this matter of Repentance after gross sins. Remedium sanè in Ecclesia summè necessarium, Vbi supra. quo sublato, quantula quaeso, hominum pars fuerit, quae post baptismum, nullius peccati, aut etiam criminis sibi conscia, vitae aeternae participationem sperare queat? nulli nobis immaeniores Haeritici unquam fuisse videantur, quàm Novatiani, qui tam necessarium animae medicamentum medio tollere conati sunt. And yet which of the two is more pernicious to Religion, viz. to deny a capacity, in some grossly sinful, to receive the peace of the Church (which cannot keep them out of heaven, if they be truly penitent) or to deny in others a possibility to lose the peace of God; this I say, I shall refer to the judgement of the sober and learned to consider. In the interim I proceed. 2. You say, Those Passages, Heb. 6. and 10. seem to import, that if men should thus wholly excuss the spirit of God, there were no renewing them by Repentance. Answ. If they do but seem to import so much, they may really import something less. You know they have been understood of a renewing by the iteration of baptism. Nam qui post baptismum (in quo cum Christo cruci configimur & consepelimur) labitur, Concil. provinc. Colon. p. 120. ac putat aliam renovationem baptismatis superasse, is Christum denuò Crucifigit. Semel crucifixus est Christus, semel peccato mortuus est, at modo non moritur ergo & unicum oportet esse in ecclesia Baptismum, non plura. 2. By the word impossible, which the Apostle there useth, may, (according to the frequent use of Scripture) be meant, it is, exceeding difficult, to renew such sinners, not that it is absolutely impossible, as the word is used by our Saviour touching those that were too much, for the present, wedded to the world, Mar. 10.25, 26, 27. 3. You may lay an Emphasis upon that expression, If men should thus wholly excuss the Spirit: how do you mean? Renouncing utterly their Christianity and Baptism, and doing despite to the Spirit of Grace, by persecuting all that are faithful Disciples to it; and this against the light of conviction, and the sweetness of experience in Gods gracious dispensations; This may amount to the sin against the Holy Ghost. But though some fall by such sins irrecoverably; yet it doth not follow, but others (who do excuse the Spirit, so far forth, as that signifies the quenching of it, to the loss of God's favour and their justification) may fall and be renewed again by Repentance; For there may be an Apostasy total and not final; And so much is employed in the very text. If they, viz. who have tasted of the heavenly gift, Heb. 6.4, 5. and were made partakers of the holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, Cap. 10.29. If they shall fall away thus, viz. treading under foot the Son of God, and counting the blood of the Covenant, wherewith they were sanctified an unholy thing, and doing despite to the spirit of grace; It is impossible to renew them again unto repentance. Yet others that fall away and excuse the spirit, but not thus adding contempt and persecution to their Apostasy, they may be renewed again unto Repentance. The Apostle puts in his exception, only against one sort of Apostates, and it is a Rule in Law, Exceptio firmat Regulam in Casibus non exceptis. 3. Your next Argument, is Metaphorical, and consequently, none of the most Cogent, but it is taken from Christ's words, who saith, that the Hearers like the good ground that give deep rooting to the seed, do not fall away in trial: But David and Peter, were such by Gods own testimony. Ergo. Answ. 1. I might argue as well, à Remotione consequentis ad remotionem antecedentis: But David and Peter did fall away in trial. Ergo. But they were good ground you say, by Gods own testimony; and 'tis granted you for truth. 2. Therefore, I deny your Major; where doth Christ say, that the Hearers like the good ground that give deep rooting to the seed, do not fall away in trial? I can find no such assertion in all the three Evangelists which record this Parable. Saint Luke saith, Luk. 8.15. Mar. 4.29. Mat. 13.23. they bring forth fruit with patience, and S. Mark and S. Matthew add some an hundred fold, some sixty, some thirty. But he doth not so much as intimate that this good ground is immutably fruitful. Are not thorns and briers the natural off spring of our Red-earth? At least they are very apt to spring up from it, for want of tillage and manuring; Jer. 4.3. Hos. 10.12. Hereupon God calls to his own people, Break up your fallow ground, and sow not among thorns. 3. Whence then did you draw that Predication of good Hearers? [they do not fall away] Perhaps you collect it by way of opposition, to those on the rock, which when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away. So Saint Luke hath it. Cap. 8.13. Now what do you infer from hence? That those Hearers, that are resembled to the good ground, do not fall away, and by consequence you conclude, that David when he was tempted to wantonness, did not fall under the power of that temptation: nor Peter when he was questioned about his relation to Christ, did not Prevaricate; and so the Adultery and murder of the one, and the denial of Christ and perjury of the other, were not falling away. I pray what will you call them? Bringing forth fruit with Patience? What? either an hundred, or sixty, or thirty fold? Had you duly consulted the other two Evangelists, they would have prevented that Fallacy wherein you were taken, I suppose, for want of such advisement. They would have told you what the temptation is that our Saviour speaks of, viz. Tribulation, Mat. 13.21. Mar. 4 17. affliction or persecution for the words sake; represented by the scorching Sun, in the same parable. But what is this to David, who burned himself in other flames, of his own kindling? or to Peter, who wilfully run into the fire? The Sophism then, is à dicto secundum quid, ad dictum simpliciter. The honest and good heart well manured and husbanded like good ground, that receives the seed and lets it sink, and take deep root, and bring forth fruit with patience, doth not whither and dry away through the scorchings of hot and violent persecution. Ergo. The man that hath such a heart, when, grown remiss or presumptuous, he is drawn away of his own lusts and enticed. Jam. 1.14, 15. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin when it is finished, bringeth forth death. The man falls not away then neither by your doctrine; which is not contained in the parable. Nay the Parable tells you, the seed may be destroyed, though the sun of persecution never touch it, by those thorns that grow out of the ground itself. But because you insist so much upon Parables; (for you have another not far off) I would have you to consider; where the point of discrimination lies, in reference to the fruitfulness and unfruitfulness; not in the nature of the seed, or in the influences of the Sun, or any other heavenly dispensation; but in the qualification of the soil only. We may be instructed further from the Plough; that be the ground never so good the seed doth not take root, much less deep root in it presently upon the first sowing; for then the earth is lose and mouldry, and many times a storm doth so beat and discompose it, that the seed is left naked, for a prey to vermin; And though it hath taken root, it is not firmly settled, till a vicissitude of soft showers and warm beams, have stiffened and confirmed the soil about it, and then 'tis lodged sure. 4. Your fourth Argument advanceth in these words; No Scripture tells us that David or Peter were void of charity, etc. Answ. Nor doth it tell us so of Judas † Where doth it tells us of Noah's, or of Lot's repentance. . You know negative arguments from Authority are not concluding, especially for matters of fact. What Scripture tells us, that Master Richard Baxter, is, or should be, Teacher of the Church of Christ at Kederminster. 5. You argue; David prays Psal. 50. that God would not for that sin, take his holy Spirit from him: which implys that yet he had it. Answ. 1. Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right Spirit within me; implies the contrary; and this Petition was before the other. 2. Take not thy holy Spirit from me, may signify no more, than what is repeated by way of further explication in the verse following; Restore to me the joy of thy salvation, etc. 3. I say, this Psalm was composed after his restitution, when the Spirit of God was returned to him, in renewed breathe, and visitations; whereof these holy passions, and devotions were a strong effect. 6. You say, The thing in itself seems utterly improbable to me, that David or Peter should have no love to God, after those particular sins. Answ. 1. Every kind and degree of our Love towards God will no more serve God's turn, than every sort and degree of his will serve ours. There is a common grace (as you declare many times in your writings) which is real, true and good, yet not special saving Grace. See your Saints Rest. Second Edition. And of Saving Faith, p. 2, and 93. Wherefore you tell us, we must not only inquire into the truth of the Act or Habit (in a Metaphysical notion): but also and much more into the Moral truth of it, as it is a grace or duty. The unregenerate, and wicked you confess may love God; because they may apprehend it as good in itself, and good to their persons. I shall add, (though it should seem a Paradox) that the very damned in hell, do carry some affection towards God, as he is the chief Good; else I cannot conceive, how the Loss of the beatifical vision (which consists ●n the fruition of his glorious presence) can be so great a torment as to surmount the pain of sense in them; as the Ancients affirm it doth. I must press you therefore with one of your own Conclusions; that the sincerity of love (without which it will not be saving) is laid in the prevailing degree, not in the act of it. Vbi supra. This you confirm by the words of our Saviour. Saints Rest. Second Edition. Mat. 10.33, 37. He that loveth father or mother etc. more than me, is not worthy of me. And unless ye forsake all, ye cannot be my Disciples. God and Christ being set in competition with the world, and the Spirit set in opposition to the flesh, it is the comparative degree that carries it. To which purpose you quote these passages of Scripture. To him that overcometh, Rev. 3.21. will I give, etc. Psal. 73.2.5 And, that of the Psalmist, Whom have I in heaven but thee, and there is none in earth, that I desire in comparison of thee. This is your doctrine, as near as I can remember, (in your Saints Rest,) for I cannot now conveniently turn to the place. Whether there were now in David or Peter this Prevalent degree of love, as to prefer God before, not only the world and the flesh, but their life also, I leave to every indifferent Reader to judge. But you proceed, and say, The sins I know were odious, and deserved an utter desertion of God: But God inflicts not all that we deserve. Answ. This is somewhat like the thirty fourth Excuse of the wicked at the day of Judgement, Sermon of Judgement. (as you allege it in their names) and therefore I shall return your own words to you; viz. God knoweth his own mercy better than you do; and he hath told you how far it shall extend. If those Scriptures of the Prophet and Apostles, [When the righteous turn away from his righteousness— If any man draw back— Ezek. 18.24. Hebr. 10.38.] be no Gospel with you I cannot help it. If those sins deserved an utter desertion of God; we are to govern as our lives, so our judgements by his Covenant; for to depend upon any Extraordinary supererogations of Mercy, more than his superabundant Grace hath contracted for, or promised, is high presumption. But you go on, and tell us, 1. That although Actually in the time of sinning, the power of sensuality prevailed against the Act of Charity; yet that Habitually God was afterward set less by then the sensual pleasure, by these Holy men, is utterly improbable. Answ. 1. When our Saviour Christ saith, If any man cometh to me, and hate not (which signifieth to love less) his father— yea and his own life also, Luk. 14.26. he cannot be my Disciple. Doth a habitual estimation of God, satisfy the Precept, under the actual breach of it? or can that carry God's acceptation? I think not: (2.) Can the Habitual estimation of God consist with an indulgence to the pleasure of sin, and sensuality? I would fain understand how far they are reconciled? and how long you would keep them friends? I hope not till doom's day. And if you can think fit they should be separated after some considerable time of cohabitation; you must in all reason give them a bill of divorce in David's Case; whose remorseless Conscience, for so many months together, doth sufficiently evince his indulgence to the pleasure of his lust or sensuality. 3. We may observe in some persons, that sins are many times recurrent, especially sins of some sort, and are content to divide with Almighty God, not only in point of time, but likewise in the affections and devotions of the sinner. His zeal for God shall be all fire and tow, at such times, and upon such occasions, and in such company; yet at the return of such and such temptations, (which may be frequent too) he is periodically captivated to the law of that lust. I hope you will not vote such a person into the state of justification, while he is thus divided betwixt God and Mammon. And that David had sinned himself into this, if not into a worse temper, what hinders us from concluding? That he had espoused Bathsheba and so gotten the temptation into his bosom; this was to make provision for his Lust, not for his Repentance; and while we find him unrelenting at the crime, we ought to conclude, his design was to perpetuate the pleasure, under a colour of legitimating the use of his Adultery; and therefore 'tis observable, 2 Sam. 2. last. cap. 12.9.10 God was angry at the after marriage, as well as at the former murder and uncleanness. And this may in some sense be urged against Peter: but of him more anon. 2. You say, You cannot imagine that the Faith of David and Peter were Habitually extirpated, and they were turned unbelievers. And I cannot think (what ever the Papists have yet said to the contrary) that a sound Christian faith is separable from Charity, though a superficial opinionative belief may. Answer. To the first branch of your imagination, I shall say but this fo● the present; we are told by the divine Revelations, that we must be judged by the w●●k 〈…〉 own performing, and not by the 〈…〉 ●ods infusing. 2. Misbelievers as well as Unbelievers may be in an unjustified state; and if Faith without good works be dead, and cannot justify: then Faith with dead works is dead and damning also. 3. As to your second branch, if by a sound Christian Faith, you understand such a faith, as you have defined a saving faith to be, in some of your writings, I think you will have no Papists much less Protestants, your Adversaries: but then I hope, you cannot think such a Faith any more separable from chastity, brotherly kindness, or loyalty to Christ, then from charity: Aut yet we see these separated from the faith of David and Peter respectively; Therefore the faith that they had now, was not that sound Christian saving Faith. 3. You ask a question and then resolve it yourself, thus; Do you think, that if David or Peter had after this sin, been upon sober deliberation put to it, they would not have chosen the love of God before the world or sinful pleasure? I think they would. Answer. 1. Doubtless Judas would have done so too. Esau did so concerning his father's blessing. But what matters it, what men would have done; when woulding is too late, their will having undone them. 2. The neglect of sober deliberation many times betrays men to destruction. The Ox knoweth his owner, and the Ass his Master's Crib: Isa. 1.3. but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider. Jer. 8.6. No man repent him of his wickedness, saying, what have I done? Every one turneth to his course, as the horse rusheth into the battle. 3. Peter had an hours respite after one temptation; Luk. 22.59 and so long a time, is sufficient to make the kill of a man be adjudged a prepensed and wilful murder by our common Law; and whose fault was it, that he wanted such a sober deliberation as you speak of? Why did he not put himself to it, to choose the love of God? He had a natural power, to do it; (to use your own distinction) and why he had not, and did not exercise a moral Power, you must fetch the reason from his own, or (to excuse that) from the will of God. For David's part, he had a pretty considerable time to deliberate in. Sure it was the love of pleasure, not the love of God that kept him from it. 4. You demand; Is it likely that this one Act should turn their hearts into as Graceless a frame, as the ungodly themselves that never were sanctified? It is not likely. Yet so it must be, if they excussed all the Love of God. Answ. If they excussed all the love of God? Why all the love of God? I told you not long since, out of your own writings, that every degree of the love of God will not serve the turn: but only that which doth preponderate and prevail; And therefore (though all the love of God be not excussed, if that prevailing degree be excussed, they remain unjustified, whether or no their hearts be turned into as Graceless a frame, as the ungodly themselves that were never sanctified. But this doth follow, you say, and it is not likely that it should be so. I answer, 2. That a Graceless frame of heart, may be so denominated, either from the total absence and privation of grace only, or else it may imply also a contracted vicious habit in opposition to Grace: In the first sense, I grant their hearts may be said to be turned into as Graceless a frame: but not in the later; because though their hearts may have as little grace for the present, yet are they not, through custom of sinning, reduced to such an indisposition to receive the impressions of Grace, as are the hearts of the notorious ungodly, who were never sanctified. And yet I must tell you. 3. That (as it is observed of water that hath been heat, it will be congealed and freeze the sooner; so) such, as have felt the heat of that Divine fire, and been enlightened and melted, and warmed and refreshed by the sweet and efficacious beams and influences of that Grace; they are in danger, for their great ingratitude, Hebr. 6. and 10. to be permitted to fall into a state more miserable and hopeless, than such as were never sanctified. But 4. you allege, Is it likely that this one Act? Answ. 1. There are some single Acts of sin so heinous, that their enormity doth equalise the Habits of many sins, and of some they do manifestly preponderate and surpass them. And such Acts, though they proceed not from a habit, but are only once committed, they do exclude a man from the kingdom of heaven. One Act of unmerciful severity to his fellow servant, brought an implacable wrath and endless torments upon him, who had not long before received his Lord's Acquittance, though he had not passed a very fair Account to him. Mat. 18.34. What more than a single Act deprived Esau of the blessing? Heb. 12.16. and that sin unto death, mentioned by Saint John, 1 Joh. 5.16. seems to be no more. Mark 10.21 And what followed Christ's unum tibi deest, to the young man in the Gospel? yet that was but an Omission neither. But 2. why do you call it (but) one Act? when it was so accumulatively and exceeding sinful? There was a complication of many sinful Acts, as well in the fall of Peter as of David. To that Objection, Account of Persever. p. 13. that Adam by one act did lose his habitual state of Grace, and Relation to God, becoming unholy and unjustified: therefore so may we: you deny the Antecedent; For, you say, it was not by one Act, but by many that Adam so far fell. But sure here was no less, if not a much greater combination of sinful Acts in the fall of David and Peter, then in that of Adam; therefore neither of them ought to be contracted or extenuated into one single Act. 5. Your discourse runs on in these words; I think it was the Habit of Grace, that the Gracious looks of Christ on Peter, and the words of Nathan to David, did excite and bring again to Act; Peter was converted indeed by a particular Conversion from that sin, when he Repent; but surely he was not converted a second time from a state of unbelief, or of ungodliness, or uncharitableness, or unholiness. Answ. 1. I suppose you mean an infused Habit; and if so; you know it is questionable whether there be any such or no. In 4. dist. 14. q. 2. Art. 5. Dominicus Soto saith that till the Council of Vienna [which was An. 1311.] Nulla fuerit inter Doctores habita mentio de infusione qualitatis. There was no mention made amongst the Doctors, touching the infusion of any [permanent] quality [into the soul] And that Council did define and choose it but as a more probable opinion? Carranz. Sum. p. 820. And therefore till the Council of Trent it was not held (in the Church) as a matter of Faith, Petr. as Jos. Id. th'. sp. L. 4. c. 8, Resp. 1. that there were any such Habits; and I doubt you will hardly adopt it into your belief upon the account of that Authority? 2. If you mean an Habit acquired by frequent Acts and the industrious exercise of (virtue) * So I call it, supposing it, in fieri. the motions of divine grace influencing hereunto; there is nothing more reasonable then to conclude that this may be lost. Nihil est magis rationi consentaneum, quam eodem modo, unumquodque dissolvere, quo conflatum est; is a Rule in Law; and it will hold here, by Master Barlow's concession, Pag. 41. (mentioned in your Account of Perseverance) Lose we may, what addition (He speaks of Habitual Grace) by our cooperation with it, we have gained; and by parity of Reason, if the Habit itself be a matter of our acquist, or gaining (under the transient influences and motions of the divine assistance) doubtless it is also in our power to make shipwreck of it. 3. Grant there be infused Habits, yet enormous sins may expel them, if not efficienter physicè, yet moraliter seu demeritoriè; because the sinner so grievously offending, and so highly dishonouring his gracious Lord and father, Meritò amittit jus quod habebat ad haereditatem coelestem, tanquam filius Dei adoptivus, & consequenter spoliatur gratiâ sanctificante, in qua tale jus fundatum † See Rev. 22.14. Mat. 5.8. erat. So the Romanist; and yourself acknowledge, as much in part, in opposition to M. Barlow, (in the place before mentioned) you say, A man may be active in destroying grace, that was but passive in receiving it. We may merit the diminution, and so may be active. And why may I not add, that by frequent vicious acts, opposite to the habit of Grace, that habit may be extinguished, or (if you like it better) expelled, and at length the contrary vicious habit introduced? Vbi supra. pag. 28. In your answer to that objection against the certainty of Perseverance, drawn from the Apostasy of some persons rarely qualified, who have turned Quakers and Licentious, if not Infidels; you yield an utter expulsion of such Habit. For, you say, Some answer the foresaid Objection by telling them, that as in actual sin (like david's and solomon's) the habit of grace was alive under contrary actings: So in the foresaid actual Errors, the habit of sound faith may possibly be alive in many that seem to be fallen quite away. Though I do make use of this answer, you say, in some cases where there is hope of such habits Remaining, yet I am afraid of using it in most of the forementioned cases. I dare not say that a man that long deliberately and industriously crieth down the Godhead of Christ and the holy Ghost, and that denyeth the Scripture and the Immortality of the soul, etc. can be at that time in a state of Salvation. Here we are agreed. And indeed, as S. John's exhortation does intimate, that, upon our Apostasy or neglect of duty, 2. ep. vers. 8. we may lose, what we ourselves (cooperating with the Divine grace) have gained: so that prayer of David, [Take not thy holy spirit from me] and that intermination of our Saviour [Take his Talon from him] do imply that, upon the like account, God may, and many times doth) take away what he hath given. If any man pretends to an interest in any promise of the Gospel to secure him against this danger; that promise is either conditional or absolute. If he saith, conditional. I must say of such promises, as they usually say of laws, Vigilantibus, non dormientibus jura subveniunt. The remiss and careless, much more the highly guilty, do forfeit and lose the benefit of them. If he claims by an Absolute promise, he doth but beg the question, and gets nothing by it. 4. If the Habit of Grace remained in them, they might have recovered of themselves, without any new influences of actual exciting or assisting grace (Gods simultaneous proportionable concourse, If that be true, that every new degree of grace is infused as the first was, as you seem to imply. [Of Pers. pag. 41.] I can see neither any necessity, nor usefulness of your remanent infused habits. For frustra fit per plura, etc. which is never wanting, always supposed); which you will hardly allow of; And yet the proof is clear from the nature and office or property of a habit, which is, not only to furnish the faculty with strength simply sufficient, to dispose, and incline it to Act, but also to do it with facility; As we see by experience when a power is instructed with a habit in things natural. But this you will hardly grant (as I said) in the restitution of David and Peter † Yet you say, The new nature or disposition of such a man will not suffer him to be long without Actual Repentance; Disp. of Justif. p. 398. . 5. Whereas you argue, that Peter's Conversion was but particular, not from a state but a single sin: I must desire you to reflect upon what was said before upon that head. Some single Acts of sin are not capable of such frequent repetitions as should make them fruitful enough to beget a habit; Yet this doth not extenuate, but heighten their enormity. Such was the crucifixion of our Saviour; and there may be some others, if not Parallel, yet in some measure proportionable to it, whose execrable clamour will not only outcry the habits of many other sins: but in a manner justify them. And that you may not think the sin of Peter so inconsiderable; you must not look upon it as a sudden surprisal; for he was forewarned, not only by the general application of a prediction, [All ye shall be offended, because of me this night] but also by a personal admonition. Mark 14.27 Luk. 22.31. Simon, Simon: behold Satan hath desired to have you, Mar. 14.30. [Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice.] He was forearmed too, if he had followed his direction, [Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation] and retirement was suggested to him also, Mat. 26.41. as his best posture of defence [If ye seek me, Joh. 18.8. let these go their way.] That he was honoured, to be the first in order, of the College Apostolic, the mouth of all the rest, whose confession was made the rock and foundation of the Christian Church, and in whose person, the power of the Keys was conferred upon the whole body of the Priesthood; that such a man as he, † After so high a profession of fidelity too. Though I should die with thee. Mat. 26.35. should, (not fly the persecution, or faint under the pressures of it, but) will fully expose himself to question, and notwithstanding all our Saviour had done to fortify him against it) then lie, and persist in it, and forswear and curse himself, and all this, out of a base unworthy fear, to save his skin, rather than own a person, who was his gracious Master, his God and his Redeemer; who had formerly told him; Whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, Luk. 9.26. of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, Mat. 10.37. Luk. 14.26. and in his Fathers, and of the holy Angels. And again, [He that loveth his own life more than me, is not worthy of me]. So many and signal aggravations are enough if not to mount his sin up to the highest pitch of a pardonable guiltiness, at least to have his name enrolled in the Catalogue of such sinners, as stand in need of a solemn repentance in order to their restitution to grace and pardon. 6. Your sixth Conjecture, (for your arguments are no other) discovers itself in these words. I verily think that after his sin, David went on in his ordinary course of Religion and obedience in all things else (abating in the degrees): otherwise his Apostasy would have been noted by those about him, and so his very sin would scarce have been hid, which he desired to hid. And I do not think that he went to God daily in public and private (was that to hid his sin too?) without any love at all. These things to me are utterly improbable. Answ. I think, and I think, and I verily think; is this a good way of arguing? Other men will be allowed their liberty to think as well as yourself, and (if they see cause) to think otherwise, and yet think as verily as you do; and make no wonder or scruple at it at all that David should go on in his ordinary course of Religion and obedience in all things else. It is so ordinary a thing for Religion to be made a cloak or a vizor, or a stalking-horse to shelter the design, when another game or mark is aimed at, that no man of observation can think this part of your conjecture improbable. Saul in the very time of his grand rebellion, will offer sacrifice. Absalon will go pay a vow at Hebron when he intends an insurrection. Naboth shall not have a false Indictment drawn up against him, and witnesses, sons of Belial suborned to make the charge good upon oath; but a solemn Fast and Prayers shall be proclaimed to usher in the Tragedy. Why, you know well enough that men will be very strict in observing the new Moons and Sabbaths and solemn Feasts and appointed Meetings: they will appear before the Lord, and that they may not appear empty, they will bring a multitude of sacrifices and oblations, Isa. 1. and make many prayers, and spread forth their hands; and yet their hands are full of blood. Have you lived to these years, and are you become so great a master of Israel, John 3.11. and knowest not thou these things? Verily, verily I say unto thee, etc. The very Heathens had taken up that for a rule, Can●e si non Castè. And the adulterous woman, when she hath eaten the bread of lewdness, she wipes her mouth very formally, and saith, Prov. 30.20. I have done no wickedness. But you say, you do not think, that he went to God daily in public, and private, (Sir, you were not Clerk of his closet, and therefore know little of his private devotions; the public, I grant it probable, he did frequent, to the end you mention, which proceeded more out of self-love, then love towards God: but) you do not think he did this without any * As great men's quick goods are presumed to be of a better kind or breed, than the like goods of their poor Neighbours (for Nobleman's geese, as the proverb is, are swan●.) So there be some who will have all qualifications, whether of life or practice, all acts of duty, or performances to be of a better kind or rank in the Elect, than they are in others. And as Belief, so Mortification, in them especially, how little soever it be, so it be true, will suffice unto salvation. Dr. Tho. Jackson. B. 10. p. 3147. love at all. It seems now, that in your opinion, any love will serve his turn, who is once Regenerate. It comes out of a Silvermine and is of the right stamp and must pass for currant, God cannot refuse it: But the love of a poor unregenerate, when it is put into the scale against all the creatures of the world, if it doth not preponderate and turn the scale, it weighs nothing at all with you. But to proceed, there is no doubt, men may have so much love to God and so much zeal to his service (in some particular instances) as may lead them into an expectation of receiving very great favours from him, and yet be (that while) in a very unsafe and unjustified condition. I need no other evidence to prove this than Gods own attestation. He arraigns the Jews upon this very account, and gives order to his Prophet, to prosecute the Indictment against them, in these words; Isaiah 58.1, 2. Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and show my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins. Yet they seek me daily, and delight to know my ways, as a nation that did righteousness, and forsook not the Ordinance of their God: they ask of me the Ordinances of justice: they take delight in approaching to God. Wherefore have we fasted, say they, and thou seest not? I hope, by this time, (whatever they be to Master Baxter) to the indifferent Reader, These things will not be utterly improbable. So much for your Conjectures and Imaginations. To your arguments, 7. You say, Christ prayed beforehand for Peter, that his faith should not fail: therefore his charity was not totally Extinct. Answ. The Church of Rome tells you, by the mouth of all her Doctors, that it doth not follow. Faith they say, may be separated from Charity. But admit it cannot; yet where iniquity doth so abound that Charity waxeth cold, there Faith will grow so weak and languide, yea so dead, that it will not justify. It is not the Metaphysical but the Moral truth or goodness, that makes our Faith or our Charity a grace, or duty, and 'tis the prevailing degree only that qualifies it for acceptance unto justification; (which if I mistake not is your own avowed doctrine) and whether the prayer of our Saviour prevailed so far, Vbi supra. or was extended to that latitude, I leave you to consider. But I am persuaded otherwise; that the prayer of our Saviour (in that respect) was a preservative only against a Final, not against a Total defection; and the admonition, which our Saviour gave him to improve his restitution for the benefit of others, doth confirm me. Et tu aliquando conversus confirma fratres tuos. Luke 22.32. And when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. Here is a new conversion, which in Scripture notion, (as hath been showed out of Amesius and others, and your own writings) signifieth the same work upon the soul, that Regeneration doth. 8. To conclude this: you say, They that build on the Rock, persevere in trial, (Matth. 7.25.) because they build on the Rock; But David and Peter had built upon a Rock: Therefore, I think they did not totally fall from habitual grace. Answ. Here's a hard argument indeed; hewn out of the very Rock: but the best on't is, 'tis but Metaphorical, and Rocks may be removed or rend a pieces; and so I doubt not, to do by this, by his assistance, whose kingdom was resembled to a little stone cut out of the mountain without hands. Dan. 2.34, 45. 1. You say, they that build on the rock, persevere in trial: now I pray, give me leave to assume: But David and Peter did not persevere in trial. Therefore they did not build upon the Rock. But you say, they had built upon a Rock: Therefore they did not fall totally. Answ. 2. An argument drawn from the time passed to the time present, or time to come, is of no validity, unless it be understood of things that are absolutely immutable as God is, who is therefore styled, which was and is and is to come. Judas had been faithful unto Christ, shall we conclude; therefore he continued so? So David had been a man after Gods own heart, but in the matter of Vriah the Scripture tells us he was not so. And Peter had owned and honoured Christ: but in the high Priests hall he did otherwise. 3. Therefore we must consider, that the Hebrews (whom the Greek writers of the New Testament are supposed to imitate as much as may be) having none but a Participle of the Present tense, are wont to make use of the Preterperfect tense of their verbs in stead of it, which signifies any part of time indefinitely, (as is to be observed, Psal. 1.1. & 2.1. & 10.3, 6, 10, 17. & 11.1, 7. and frequently in other places) and so it doth denotare actum perpetuum; So that when our Saviour saith, He that heareth these say of mine and doth them, Matth. 7.24. is like to a man that built his house on a Rock; His speech imports thus much; He that hath for the time past, and doth for the time present, and shall for the time to come, hear these say of mine and do them, He is like unto a man that built his house on a Rock. Hereupon the Apostle exhorteth us, Let us not be weary in well doing for in due season, we shall reap if we faint not. Gal. 6.9. 4. Our Saviour's words are, Whosoever heareth these say of mine and doth them; But was david's gazing upon the beauty of Bathsheba, and then lusting after it, and afterwards sending messengers to her house to court her into his embraces; was this like the keeping of Christ's sayings? Or after Christ had forewarned Peter of his danger, [Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he might sift thee as wheat] and forearmed him with his counsel [Go into some place of retirement * Joh. 18.8. Mat. 26.41. ; watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation,] for him to run into the Court (which he had reason to suspect would be nothing but a bloody Inquisition) to satisfy his Curiosity; and after one modest Interrogatory which did not only put his Faith to a stand, but overthrew it by a flat lie, to return again to seek out the temptation, etc. Was this keeping Christ's sayings or doing them? This is just expounding the Holy Text by the Devil's Comment. For tempting our Saviour to cast himself down from the pinnacle of the Temple; Matth. 4.6. He useth this argument; If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: For it is written, He shall give his Angels charge concerning thee, and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. 'Tis true God hath promised the custody of Angels to secure his children 'tis in omnibus viis suis, Psal. 91.11. in all their ways. That is in their vocation. Ibi viae pro vocatione, Scripturae Phrasi ponuntur. Saith, Aegid. Hunnius. But the Devil applies this promise to that most desperate precipitation of himself, to which he tempted our Saviour; Whereupon he repels the assault with these words, Matth. 4.7. It is written again thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. In like manner, Christ hath said, Whosoever heareth these say of mine and doth them, is like unto a man that built his, house upon a rock, and the rain descended and the floods came, for the winds blew upon that house and it fell not, because it was built upon a rock. But (as the Devil left out [in all his ways,] there: so you leave out, [whosoever heareth these say of mine and doth them] here, and apply the stability, or security (which in the words of our Saviour doubtless belongs only to the obedient (to David and Peter, in their highest impiety and presumption; not remembering, that he builds upon a far different foundation, who acts against his conscience. Quod fit Contra conscientiam aedificat ad gehennam. 5. I find you ensnared in the same fallacy [A dicto secundum quid, ad dictum simpliciter] as before; for the security intimated by our Saviour is against temptation, from without. The rain descended, Mat. 7.25. and the floods came, and the winds blue, and beat upon that house, and it fell not; for it was founded upon a rock. Storms and tempests and floods of adversity and persecution, though never so violent and impetuous, such obedient Disciples of Christ are secured against, continuing their duty: But if there be a Mine within that rock, or underneath it, and some barrels of powder lodged within it, and such a train laid, that if it be set on fire, the Mine will spring; then the house may and will fall. Mat. 15.19. And so it is here, For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications false witness, blasphemies, and these were they that overthrew the house in David and in Peter. And therefore 'tis the duty of every man to keep a special watch here; for his eternal weal or woe depends upon it. Prov. 4.23. Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of death. To this, let us add in our constant practice Saint Judes' direction, and then (by God's assistance which, Ver. 20.21. in so doing, we cannot fail of) we shall never fall. Beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the holy Ghost, keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. Answer to the 20 Section. TRuly Sir, (you say) I am willing to learn better that Doctrine that is according to Godliness, and to disclaim all that is against it: But you must hereafter learn to do us that justice, as not to take our expressions of the worst that the mercy of God will cover in a man obedient in the main, to be our descriptions of Godly men. Answ. Since you ask no favour in this cause, and you tell us, we must learn to do you that justice; justice you shall have; and it is this that when your expressions of what God will cover, whether they amount to a full description of your Godly man or no (but it seems he may be such in those rags as well as when he is clothed in that fine and clean linen mentioned in the Revelation) when they are apparently encouragements to continue men in their disobedience and ungodliness, they ought to be reproved; And if you be as willing, as you pretend, to learn that Doctrine better, which is according to Godliness, such reproofs will be acceptable and welcome to you. In hope whereof, I shall endeavour to make it evident, that those Doctrines, viz. of election and perseverance, etc. In the vindication whereof, you have taken so much, liberty, to asperse and revile Tilenus, is not according to Godliness; and I prove it thus; That Doctrine whereby a gross sinner. v. g. an Adulterer or perjured person, is taught to be certain of his salvation, not only certitudine objecti but also certitudine subj●cti, before the renewing his repentance, that doctrine is not according to Godliness: But by the Synods doctrine and yours, touching election, perseverance, etc. a gross sinner, v. g. an adulterer, or perjured person is taught to be certain of his Salvation, not only Certitudine objecti, but also Certitudine subjecti, before the renewing his repentance. Therefore that doctrine is not according to Godliness. The Major is evident, because such a doctrine, doth enfeeble at least and weaken all exhortations to mortification and repentance; if it doth not evacuate the necessity of them. The Minor shall be proved by these four steps, 1. They hold not only that every man may: but also that it is his duty, and he ought to be Certain of his election: De hac aeterna & immutabili sui ad salutem electione, electi suo tempore, variis licet gradibus, & dispari mensura, certiores redduntur; saith the Synod: And in their seventh Rejection; Acta. Syn. de Divin. praedest. art. 12. p. 243. fol. p 247. They reject those which teach, Electionis immutabilis ad gloriam nullum in hac vita esse fructum, nullum sensum, nullam certitudinem, nisi ex conditione mutabili & contingente. The Divines of Geneva * Judic. Theol. exter. p. 56. thes. 5. ed in fol. say, Haec electio nobis patefit in tempore,— ut spem aeternae gloriae certam concipiamus. Those of North-Holland do affirm * Jud Theol. Provinc. p. 39 m. : Deum in hac vita suos Electos per Spiritum Sanctum, de hoc tanto & incomprehensibili suo (Electionis) beneficio certos facere. Sibrandus Lubbertus saith * Ib. p. 17. Ib. 11, 12. , Aliquis de sui Electione in hac vita, citra peculiarem revelationem, certus esse potest— yea, sensum & gustum Electionis sui percipere. And to this suffrage subscribed Johannes Polyander, Antonius Thysius & Antonius Walaeus. The Divines of Hassia * Jud. Theol. ext. p. 32. m. do affirm, though no man can know himself to be of the number of the Elect, a Priori, yet all and every believer may be certain of his election to eternal life, a Posteriori, that is, by the revelation of the word, and the testimony of the Spirit dwelling in them, and by the fruits or effects of their Election, which believers find in themselves. And those of Geneva * Ib. p. 49. f. say, there is not one of the Elect, that is arrived to the capacity of reason, that doth not, afore his death, receive a most certain persuasion of that decree. To deny the sense and certainty of Election in this life, is to render Election itself unprofitable to the elect in this life, yea to abolish it, tum quoad gratiam, tum etiam quoad gloriam, say the Divines of the Palatinate. * Ib. p. 18 f. And those of Wedderav say, not only Potest: † Ib. p. 39 th'. 7. He may be certain of his Elect. But Oportet: * Ib. p. 44. th'. 7. It behoves him to be so. Nay, Potest & debet: He may and he ought to be certain of it; say the Divines of Embden: † Ib. p, 72. pr. and Vnusquisque too; every man ought to be so. And the Belgic Professors say as much. * Jud. Theol. provinc. p. 7. thes. 5. And this certainty is without any If's, or And's, saith Gomarus; † Ibid. p. 22. f. thes. 12. Fideles in hac vita de Electione sui salvifica certi sunt, non solum hac conditione si perseveraverint: sed etiam absolutè. Quia seize perseveratures esse per Dei & Christi gratiam certi sunt. The faithful are certain of their Election, in this life; not only upon this condition, if they shall persevere: but absolutely. Because they are certain by the grace of God and Christ, they shall persevere. And this is the Doctrine of the whole Synod; who therefore do reject those who teach, There is in this life, no fruit, no sense, no certainty, of immutable Election unto glory, but upon a mutable and contingent condition, as was declared above. As they hold that every man may & aught to be certain of his Election, So they hold of his persevarance also; Of this preservation of the Elect unto Salvation, and perseverance of true believers in the faith, the faithful themselves may be and are ascertained. † Acta Syn. de pers. Sanct. thes. 9 p. 267. . And in their fifth Rejection, they reject those that teach, that no certainty of future perseverance can be had in this life, without special Revelation. I might bring in the suffrages of the Divines; but seeing they all subscribed these Articles and Rejections, it will be to no purpose to tire the Reader with more quotations, especially seeing they maintain it to be the fruit and effect of Election. * Ib. Reject. 1. pa. 268. 2. The second step to the probation of that Minor proposition, [viz. That by the doctrine of the Synod a gross sinner, is taught to be certain of his salvation, before the renewing his repentance] shall be this; that he who hath once examined his state, and finds himself thus certain of his election, and perseverance, may be able to remember it; if not, 'tis but taking his pen and ink and setting down the time when he took this examination, with that certainty which he found to be the result of it. 3. My third step, (or postulate) shall be this; that he who hath taken this pains to examine and shrive himself, and found this comfort, a certainty of his election and perseverance; may notwithstanding fall into gross sins: Wherefore, saith the Synod * Act. Syn. de persev. Sanct. thes. 4. p. 266. , they must continually watch, and pray, that they be not led into temptation, which when they do not, it is not only possible, that they should be carried away by the flesh, the world and the Devil, into grievous and heinous sins, but sometimes also, by God's just permission, they are carried away: which the lamentable falls of David, Peter and other of the Saints, described unto us in the Scripture, evidently show. Whereupon Zanchy saith, Quod negem electos in atrocissima scelera ruere posse, calumnia est, quasi nesciam, & non doceam Davidis scelera, adulterium & homicidium, fuisse atrocissima & gravissima. * Lib. Misc. in depuls. Calum. pag. 307. 4. My fourth and last step toward a proof of that proposition shall be this; that he who is fallen into such heinous sins, may be able to remember the doctrine that hath been taught him, concerning this point; or if he should forget it, he may have recourse to his Authors, out of whom he hath learned it: And if he consults Beza, * In libello Chr. Quest. & Resp. p. 688. he saith Interrumpi interdum fateor in gravibus tentationibus Spiritum— nunquam tamen penitus eripi dico; Et Paulò post. Sic veram fidem & ejus effecta in electis interrumpi dico, ut in iis qui lethargo laborant, & in Ebriis in quibus impediuntur animae facultates, non tamen anima ipsa tollitur, quum inter letha●gum, aut Ebrietatem, & mortem ipsam plurimum intersit, aeternae verò vitae certum pignus habeant, qui adoptionis Spiritum habent. And Ruardus Acronius saith, * In Enarra●. Catechet. q. 53. ss. 11. fol. 89. although, in the souls (of the Elect) the flames of lusts, of revenge, of hatred, and the burn of divers wickednesses do oftentimes arise: though there be also manifold sins of ignorance and omission, doing what they should leave undone, and neglecting what they should perform; yet because these infirmities are covered with the merit of Christ, and for Christ's sake are not imputed, they do not excusse the holy Spirit. Rom. 8.1. There is no condemnation to them, etc. so that should they assent to an error, Quo fundamentum salutis, vel in totum vel ex parte, evertitur, whereby the foundation of Salvation, is, either in whole or in part, overthrown, or violate the command of God, against conscience (repugnante conscientia) and by that means sin most grievously and foully, and through the most just judgement of God, lose the greatest gifts of the holy Spirit: yet are they not deprived of all, nor forsaken totally and finally. For God, who is rich in mercy, saith the Synod, * Act. Syn. de persev. Sanc. Art. 6. f. 266 according to the unchangeable purpose of Election, doth not wholly take away his holy Spirit from his, no not in their grievous slips, nor suffers them to wander so far, as to fall away from the grace of Adoption, and state of justification, or to commit the sin unto death, or against the holy Ghost, or to be altogether forsaken of him, and throw themselves headlong into eternal destruction. Out of these four grounds, I shall now give you the proof of that Minor proposition, viz. That a gross sinner may be certain, etc. before his actual repentance of that sin. Whosoever may be certain of his eternal election and final perseverance, may be certain of his salvation. A man guilty of gross sin, v. g. an adulterer or prejured person, without an actual repentance of his sin, may be certain of his eternal election and final perseverance. Therefore, A man guilty of gross sin, v. g. an adulterer or perjured person, without actual repentance may be certain of salvation. The Major is evident of itself; because election and perseverance do contain all things necessary to salvation. The Minor is proved thus, Whosoever after his unfeigned conversion, and some good progress in holiness, may become guilty of gross sin, as adultery, etc. He, without an actual repentance of that sin, may be certain of his eternal election and final perseverance. A man after his unfeigned conversion & some good progress in holiness may become guilty of gross sin, as adultery, etc. Therefore, a man guilty of gross sin, as adultery, etc. without an actual repentance of that sin, may be certain of his eternal election and final perseverance. The Minor is evident by the examples of David, Peter, and others of the lapsed Saints. The Major is proved thus, Whosoever may have examined the sincerity of his conversion and holiness, and may remember, the result of that examination to be a certainty of his eternal election and final perseverance he, though he becomes guilty of gross sin, as adultery, may without an actual repentance, be certain of his eternal election and final perseverance. A man though he becomes guilty of gross sin, as adultery, may have examined the sincerity of his conversion and holiness, and may remember the result of that examination, to be a certainty of his eternal election and final perseverance. Therefore without an actual repentance he may be certain, etc. The Major is manifest; because election, and perseverance (supposed to be the fruit and effect of it,) are said to be absolute and immutable; therefore, he that is once certain is for ever certain of them; not only certitudine objecti; but certitudine subjecti. The Minor is undeniable; because this examination of his state, and the certainty which follows it, being, said, to be possible, and his duty; A man that is unfeignedly converted, and hath made some good progress in holiness, is presumed to have performed it. Let me illustrate this very considerable truth by an example. Suppose a Prince makes a Decree that every person, who is listed under his Command, and engageth himself in fight, against the common enemy; shall be a Pensioner to him during life: he that knows himself to have been inlisted, and to have fought against the enemy, though he be for the present a captive in the power of the enemy's hands, yet, supposing that Prince, to have an absolute, insuperable, and irresistible power, and will to execute his said Decree, (as the Synod hath determined in our case) he may (if he were sure of life, as men are of immortality) assure himself, to be that Prince his Pensioner, with as great a confidence, as if he had never been taken captive. By this you may see upon what foundation the Antinomians build their judgement, [mentioned by you, Pa. 12. p. in the ninth opinion, of the Saints Perseverance] that though a believer fall into adultery and murder with David, or into Incest and drunkenness with Lot, he ought not to fear the loss of his justification, nor to be humbled with such considerations, nor to rise from the sin with such a motive. Ibid. p. 39 And though you think this opinion so gross, you need say no more of it then disclaim it; yet, it had become a wise Master builder, much better, to have razed the foundation, of such an edifice, as gives harbour to such monsters of opinion, and to have plucked up the roots of such a pestiferous weed; which, I have some reason to believe, you had so full and fair a view of in the deciphering of those opinions. For the short is; A man may be certain of his immutable election and final perseverance, or he may not. If he may not; then (in the opinion of the Synodists * Jud. Theol. ext. 216. aph. 9 & p. 223. th'. 5. p. 249. q. 9 Jud. Theol. prov. p. 243. th'. 2. & 276. thes. 3. ) the foundation of firm and solid consolation is blown up. If he may; (as they unanimously, and strictly maintain) than he may be so still, after he be fallen (as he may be) into the most gross and horrid sins imaginable; as is proved above. From hence I shall draw another argument to prove this Doctrine, to be a Doctrine not according to Godliness; which is form thus. That Doctrine, which takes away (from some sort of men, under the guilt of gross sins) all fear of God's displeasure, of hell fire, and of judgement to come, that is a Doctrine not according to Godliness. This Doctrine (which the Synod maintains) that a man may be absolutely certain of his immutable election and final perseverance, takes away, from some sort of men under the guilt of gross sins, all fear of God's displeasure, of hell fire, and of judgement to come. Therefore this Doctrine is not according to Godliness. The Major is proved; because the holy Scriptures do so frequently inculcate this fear of God, hell and judgement, as a preservative against defection and a spur to Godliness. Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw, back my soul shall have no pleasure in him * Hebr. 10.38. . Fear him, who after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell: yea, I say unto you, fear him † Luke 12.5. . We must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ— knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men † 2 Cor. 5.10, 11. . The Minor is proved by what went before; and the undeniable consequence of the Synods Doctrine. Qui sio Electi sunt, saith Tossanus, penitùs rejici & deseri nunquam possunt, tum quia ex decreto Dei certo & immutabili eliguntur, tum quia non possunt non semper diligi in Christo * Didescal. de pratest. per quast. propos. c. 4. . Who are so Elected can never be altogether rejected or forsaken, both because they are chosen by God's certain and immutable Decree, and also because they cannot but always be beloved in Christ. M. Baxter had notice of this argument (though he does not apply it to one, that lies under the guilt of gross sin as he might,) for he argues thus; Of the S. Persev. p. 28. f. etc. That which is impossible (or certainly not future) need not, and ought not, and if known to be such, cannot be the object of rational fear, and care to escape it. But the damnation, and the Apostasy of any of the sanctified, is impossible, or not future, and known so to be: (according to the Doctrine of the Calvinists) therefore it need not and must not be the object of their fear, and care to escape it. M. Baxter may please to take notice that the argument may be made use of, as rationally, by any person, under the guilt of Adultery, or any other wasting sin, if he hath had any former sense, gift, or certainty of his immutable election, according to the Doctrine of the Synod. But what answer can M. Baxter give to this argument? For my own part, saith he, Ib. p. 31. the answer that satisfieth me, is this: that its true that a known impossibility or non-futurity of evil doth evacuate rational fear: But then he that will be perfectly freed from that fear, must have a perfect knowledge of the impossibility, or non-futurity. But Christ and his Apostles knew that those, whom they wrote to, had no such perfect knowledge: (It seems all the Divines of the Synod had, however they came by it, and herein M. Baxter dissents from them; for he saith farther,) Nay more, it is not (at least by any ordinary means) to be expected in this life, that this knowledge of our sincerity, Justification, and perseverance should be so perfect as to have no degree of doubting, habitual or actual. An ingenuous confession! And, such is the force of truth, Ibid. p. 28. it hath drawn a further acknowledgement from him in these words; Moreover, we cannot deny but that carnal security, not only in hypocrites, but in the godly themselves, may possibly, and too frequently take advantage for increase, from the Doctrine of Perseverance. In consideration whereof he concludes afterward, Pag. 39 that, a very great cautelousness according to the weight of our work, would be necessary, if our assurance of perseverance were perfect. This, proceeding from so clear, and full a conviction of the danger that inseparably attends those Doctrines, I cannot but wonder what should induce M. Baxter, with the hazard of his judgement, to dispute so earnestly against the opposite Tenants; and not without a manifest interfering in the procedure of his discourse, Ibid. p. 14. as will appear by the reflections now to be made upon another Passage in that Treatise. The Opinion of those Ancients (saith he; meaning the Greek and Latin Fathers that were before the days of Augustine * Pag. 3. ) and of the Jesuits, Arminians, and Lutherans, who deny an absolute personal Election of men to faith and perseverance, and so maintain indefinitely a total and final falling from a state of justification, without excepting such elect themselves, is an error of dangerous consequence, against the grace and fidelity of God, if not against his wisdom and his power, and against the peace of the Saints: and therefore is to be carefully avoided and resisted, by those that would not wound their faith: Answ. I confess 'tis of dangerous Consequence indeed, if it be against God's grace and fidelity, etc. but, who saith it is? Do the Maintainers of that opinion judge so? No. Then 'tis possible the inference of an Adversary may be drawn out by passion and prejudice, and so not naturally follow, but only as it is forced to serve an interest. Whether this be of such an extraction, we shall examine presently, assoon as I have demanded, How those several Parties forementioned, could except such elect themselves, (as you speak) when (as you confess) they deny there are any such elect? But let us look upon the dangerous Consequence of this, which you call Error. 1. Against the Grace of God, you say; Then it seems the whole Church of God, or next to the whole, (as you confess) hath held an error of dangerous consequence, against the Grace of God for thirteen or fourteen hundred years at least (as you writ, Account of Persev. pag. 18. though somewhat incongruously; for it should have been, more properly, fourteen or thirteen hundred at least: (but as you tell M. Barlaw, † Of Sau. Faith. pag. 24. we all writ incongruously sometimes; therefore that may pass). We cannot extol the Grace of God sufficiently: But we do not advance, but undervalue it, when we take upon us to bond it, or weigh it out at our own pleasure. Doctor Sanderson hath observed, the word [Grace] is one of the three words, that occasions most of the greatest controversies in the Church, for want of a due explication. But how were those Ancients, and how is that opinion, (which you call an Error of dangerous consequence) against God's Grace? Doth it conclude a man may be converted and saved without God's Grace? you will not affirm it Doth it follow from that opinion, that a man may receive the Grace of God in vain, or be wanting to it, or fall from it? If any of these, or all of them be the Error and of such a dangerous Consequence; 'tis at lest a Consequence of Scripture. 2 Cor. 6.1. Hebr. 12. Gal. 5. Receive not the grace of God in vain. Take heed lest any man be wanting to the grace of God: ye are fallen from Grace. Lastly, is this opinion against the Grace of God, because it implies, that man's Cooperation is indispensably necessary with it, that it may avail unto his final salvation? This is not only Bernard's Doctrine but Saint Augustine's also. Tolle liberum Arbitrium, non erit quod salvetur; tolle gratiam, non erit unde salvetur; saith Bernard a Tract. de great. & lib. Arb : and Augustine b Ep. 46. ad Valentinum. , to the same purpose, Si non est Dei gratia, quomodò salvat mundum? Si non est liberum arbitrium, quomodo judicat mundum. If there be not grace how shall he save the world? If there be not , how shall he judge the world? 2. You say this error is of dangerous consequence against God's Fidelity. Why against his Fidelity? Fidelity relates to one's word or promises. Jacob. Laur. in 1 Pet. 4.61. Fidelis quia est verax in omni verbo, ac speciatim in omni promisso suo? Faithful is he that hath promised, saith the Apostle. Heb. 10.23. But hath God passed his word or promise to any man for such an absolute personal Election to Faith and Perseverance, as you there speak of? I trow not. There are conditions annexed to his promises, upon which they are suspended. Heb. 4.1. Let us therefore fear, lest a promise being left, of entering into his rest, any of you, should come short of it. Be thou faithful unto the death, and I will give thee a crown of life. Rev. 2.10. If we fail not of our Fidelity to him, doubtless he will not fail of his to us; He will make good his word and perform his part; Faithful is he that hath called you, who also will do it. 1 Thes. 5.25. Nay though we be unfaithful, See 2 Tim. 2 11, 12, 13. yet he abideth faithful, he cannot deny himself; but, having past his word to that purpose, Account of Persev. pag, 37. if we deny him, he will deny us. You say, indeed, It is impossible that true Grace should be lost totally and finally. First, because God hath not only decreed the perseverance of the sanctified, but also the Holy Ghost hath undertaken it as his special charge. To which I answer, 1 Whether God hath decreed the perseverance of the Sanctified, is the question; and that you are not certain of the truth of it, appears, in that you dare not venture your salvation upon it, as you confess. Ibid. p. 17. 2. If the Holy Ghost hath undertaken that charge absolutely; then every miscarriage in such a person under his custody, is that undertakers failing, and argues want of power, of care or fidelity. If he hath undertaken that charge but conditionally; then, notwithstanding his office and Incumbency, those under his charge, as they may grieve him by abusing their liberty to evil, so may they despite him, and drive him quite away, by their contumacy in it. But, Secondly, you say, Ibid. the faithfulness of God (as fare as I can yet understand it) is by his promise engaged for the perseverance of all the truly justified and sanctified Believers. Answ. Show us such an (absolute) promise, and it sufficeth. If you cannot produce any but conditional; we are where we were, and no further. 3. You say, If not against his wisdom and his power. Why, [If not?] was it not a suggestion to render the opinion, you contest against odious? Sure you know there can be no such matter; For 1. Who hath been God's Counsellor? must he forfeit his wisdom, if his Decrees be not calculated to every man's humour? And 2. for his Power, how is that any way impeached by this opinion? Doth it suppose him to Act to the uttermost of his power, and yet to be defeated in his enterprise. Thus never did any Divine that was well in his wits say, Preface to Groo Relig. Sect. 12. as you confess, that Grace is the effect of God's Omnipotency. Well may a man despise the riches of his goodness and forbearance and long-sufferering: Rom. 2.4. Rom. 9.19. But (in this sense) Who hath resisted his will? Saint Augustine, whom you look upon, as your great Fautor and Patron in this cause, (though you descent from him too) shall shut up this. To this question; Whence the good will (in men) should be; if by nature, why is it not in all, In libr. de Spiritu & litera ad Marcellinum c. 33. seeing it is the same God, that is the Creator of all? If it be by the gift of God, why is not this in all likewise, seeing he would have all men to be saved? To this question, his Answer is very remarkable to our purpose, Vult Deus omnes homines salvos fieri, non sic tamen, ut eis adimat liberum arbitrium, quo vel benè vel malé utentes justissime judicentur. Quod cum sit, Infideles quidem contra voluntatem Dei faciunt, cum ejus Evangelio non credunt: nec ideo tamen eam vincunt, verum seipsos fraudant magno & summo bono, malisque poenalibus implicant, experturi in suppliciis potestatem ejus, cujus in donis misericordiam contempserunt. You see then that this opinion is of no dangerous consequence against the grace, or fidelity, much less against the wisdom and power of God. But hath not your own Doctrine that very dangerous influence which you unjustly charge upon the other? Is it not against the Grace of God, 1. In your preterition, which denies Grace to the fare greatest part of mankind. 2. In your Physical irresistible operation, which turns Grace into necessity to all others? Is it not against God's wisdom to enjoin that, under promimises of life, and threaten of damnation, to persons, that cannot possibly refuse it, to whom likewise he is supposed to have promised the irresistible effecting of it? And is it not against his wisdom, to invite others, and assure them, by oaths and obtestations, of a free and hearty welcome to the fruition of that, [both end, and means,] which by an immutable Decree he hath absolutely debarred them of, from all eternity, according to your Doctrine? Indeed I find you have made a good Provision to secure God's Fidelity from violation in reference to the unregenerate; For, you maintain, Disput. of Right to Sacram. p. 420. though they be in Covenant with him and oblige themselves, yet he is not obliged, as a Covenanter to them; for he hath no mere outside promises, Pag. 422. when he meaneth not as he speaks. And after you tell your Adversary, Unregenerate men are really in covenant as to their external ingageing act; and this they may break. But doth it follow that they cannot violate their own promise, unless God be actually obliged by promise to them? This may very well secure God's Fidelity: but whether his sincerity will be salved by it, I make some question. Doth he by his Ambassadors and by himself, Mat. 23. Luk. 19 use so much holy courtship, with prayers and tears to allure poor sinners, and draw them into covenant to serve him, and all the while keep himself disengaged, make them no grant, not so much as pass his word, for any thing really sufficient to enable them to do, what he with so much importunity and the greatest expressions of love and tenderness imaginable, urges and engages them to do? This to my apprehension, doth entrench so much upon the riches of his mercy (whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises, that by these you might be partakers of the Divine nature) † Divinae naturae nomine, non essentiam sed participationem qualitatum intelligit, qua imago Dei in nobis restituitur. Bez. not. min. ad 2. Pet. 1.4. that I cannot readily, (without much greater evidence) subscribe to it. But you have one assault more, to make upon this opinion, afore you leave it. You charge it therefore in the Rear, That it is against the peace of the Saints. Answ. 1. I wonder that you of all the Calvinists in Europe should make this objection, having written so much against it. Do you not confess in the same papers, that the Lutherans, Arminians and others of that opinion have as much peace, and with as little doubting as yourselves? It is very clear, you say, that the denial of the Doctrine of the Perseverance of all the sanctified, Account of S. Persev. pag. 19 doth not necessarily destroy all Christian consolation. And a little after, It were unreasonable and uncharitable to think that none of the Ancient Churches (who were all of these Opinions as you confess for thirteen or fourteen hundred years together) that differed from us in this, had Christian peace; that none of the Lutheran Protestant's, or Arminians now have peace; that such holy men as Austin and Luther etc. were deprived of peace. A little after; If we could not have joy and peace in believing, except we receive it from the certainty of our own perseverance, than it would follow, that exceeding few even of them that hold the Doctrine of the Perseverance of all the justified, have joy and peace in believing. For that Doctrine of Perseverance can give assurance of their own perseverance to none but those, Ibid. pag 20. that are certain of their sincerity and justification.— But too sad experience, you say, telleth us that there be but few, exceeding few of the godly, among us, that are certain of their sincerity, justification and salvation. Insomuch that you conclude not long after; I never knew the man that attained any more than such a strong persuasion, Pag. 31. mixed with some doubtings and fears, yet so far overcoming them, Pag. 25. as to live a peaceable joyful life. And four pages after, you say, We cannot deny but that the Doctrine of the certain perseverance of all the sanctified, may accidentally occasion much more trouble than consolation, to many doubting souls that are sincere. 2. Whom would you gratify by your Doctrine? Those fierce Disputers for Assurance, which you mention, that say they are sure of their salvation, with a great confidence; for want of other Arguments; Or those Opinionists, Ib. p. 20. 21. that no sooner run away from the communion of the Church, but find themselves presently wrapped up with such a seeming certainty: or the passionate feelings of hypochondriacal women, who after such a sudden fit of pretended assurance, fall into stronger pangs of doubting and trouble than any others? I profess I cannot see, what interest that Doctrine will serve, but that of the flesh. But care would be taken, lest this pretended peace of the Saints, should justle out the real fear of God; and so the Preachers of it be worthily reckoned amongst those, that are lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God. 3. 'Tis most certain, the work of righteousness shall be peace, Isa. 32, 17. and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance for ever. But would you have Cordials for them in their lapses, Adultery, Incest, perjury, drunkenness, etc. Take heed you do not cry peace, when there is no peace; For there is no peace to the wicked, saith my God. 'Tis your assertion, sin doth as naturally breed troubles and fears, as the setting of the Sun causeth darkness, or as a gross substance in the Sunshine causeth a shadow; Ibid. p. 40. And this from the nature of the thing, and by the will of God. Therefore that of the Psalmist is considerable: I will hearken what the Lord will say; for he shall speak peace to his Saints; but let them not turn back to folly. Why? Because then, he will speak to them in his wrath. 4. In this case, (towards the renewing of repentance, the opinion you condemn doth afford much more encouragement and comfort then that you maintain; because the Defenders of it hold no man excluded by an Antecedent irrespective Decree from that peace of God which passeth all understanding; nor from the intercession and other benefits of Christ's blood, which speaketh better things then that of Abel; as yours do; if not in word, yet certainly in effect. Lastly, what provision have you made for the Saints Refuge, or to secure their peace? Pag. 22. f. you tell us ingenuously, in your forementioned Pa- There is no man of greatest holiness certain that he shall not fall into some odious Scandalous sin; For though there be promises of our perseverance in a state of grace (you should put in Conditional) yet in the judgement of all, there is no promise to the best of us all, that we shall not fall into any such heinous particular sin. No man is certain but he may be Drunk as Noah was, or Incestuous as Lot was, or commit Adultery and Murder as David did, or deny Christ as Peter did. Now what shall become of such a man, if he so die, and there is no man that can be certain, (without extraordinary divine Revelation) but he may so die before Repentance? Disput. of Justif. pag. 398. In this case after one or two conjectures, (which you have little grounds and no proofs for) you resolve, in these words; If we should conclude that God hath purposely left men of such a middle condition (and no man is sure but he may be left so) without any certainty how he will deal with them, that so no man may be encouraged to sin, and in impudence, I think it no dangerous Doctrine, nor injurious to the body of saving Truth. And thus you see, what your pretended error ' [of such dangerous consequence, against the grace and fidelity of God, if not against his wisdom and his power, and against the peace of the Saints] is come to. Your next thoughts, (which I shall reflect upon in this 20. Section of your Preface) are, That men are to be judged Godly or Ungodly according to the predominant Estimation, Election, Resolution, and Operation of their souls, and the bent and course of their lives, and not by a particular Act: because no act will prove us holy indeed, but what proveth a Habit; and a predominant Habit. To this I shall make no difficulty to subscribe with these restrictions. 1. If when you speak of a particular Act, there be no equivocation in the word [particular]; As when David is taxed for the matter of Uriah, and Peter for his shameful denying of Christ; if you take these for Particular Acts (wherein notwithstanding, there was such a complication of continued enormities) you may as well take a Sedition or Rebellion carried on with violence and blood for several years together for a particular Act. 2. If the last Scene of a man's life, be so shut up that it begets no prejudice against such a predominant estimation etc. For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world, through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. 2 Pet. 2.20. And if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. Hebr. 10.38. In his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die. Ezek. 18.24. And if the tree falleth toward the South or toward the North, in the place where the tree falleth, there it shall be. Eccles. 11.3.3. That one single Act of gross sin doth set a man further back, than a single Act of the contrary virtue can set him forward; because though the good cannot deserve heaven, the bad do demerit hell; and (2.) though one single Act be not the performing, yet one may be the violating that Covenant, which doth oblige us to serve God in holiness and righteousness all the days of our life. Luk. 1. It follows in that 20. Section, That men thus Habituated, never live in a course of wilful sin:— and the ungodly have never one true act of saving love to God. This is true Reduplicatiuè [as thus Habituated, or ungodly] and in sensu composito: but not insensu diviso; For the Righteous may turn from his righteousness, and so may the ungodly from his ungodliness. Intervals and vicissitudes they may have: but instead of judging one by the best, or the other by his worst hour, 'tis our duty to call the sinner to repentance, and to tell the dutiful; Blessed is that servant, whom his Lord when he cometh shall find so doing. For your advice to Master Pierce, to try himself, I like it well, if it proceeds from a charitable Monitor; not so well, if from a supercilious censor: And truly the close of your Section carries some suspicion that it doth so; For you say (and in perfect sense of your own severity; which induced you to usher in your saying, with this Preface; Be not angry with me if I tell you) that if I must needs choose one of the two, I had rather die in the state of David before Nathan spoke to him, or of Peter, after he had denied his Lord, then of M. Pierce, that hath committed no such sin, now after this Book, which its like you repent not of (with the rest of your failings, which are known to God.) A strange Option, to fall from a considering Person! You say (Sect. 18.) that the sin of Peter and David put them into that present incapacity for heaven, that Actual Repentance, and deep and serious Repentance too was necessary to their recovery and forgiveness, You would tempt a man to think that you do not believe yourself, or at least, that you uttered those passages very unadvisedly. What, had you rather die in the state of David or Peter, (under the guilt of those wasting sins) that is, in such an incapacity for heaven, that Actual Repentance, and deep and serious Repentance too, were necessary for your recovery and forgiveness; had you rather die in this state, then in the state of Master Pierce? If you be advisedly of this mind, where is your Faith for yourself? Do you believe a third state after this life wherein your soul may be purified and made fit for heaven? Where is your charity to M. Pierce? Of evils we presume you would choose, that which you thought the least. And do you think his soul in a worse condition than theirs, who are in a present incapacity of salvation, and stand in need of an Actual Repentance, and a deep and serious Repentance too, in order to their recovery and pardon? Why, what evil hath he done? He hath written a book, a very learned book (as M. Baxter worthily commends it) in vindication of himself from those slanders, which an eager Antagonist, had cast upon him for a former vindication of his God. Herein Master Baxter (as if he had taken his line and plumet, and sounded the depth of Master Pierce's heart to the very bottom, and discovered clearly from what fountain, they issued) finds (in his opinion) uncharitable passage; and these induced him, to resolve, if he were put to it, to prefer that Option. Be not angry, Sir, if I put S. James his question to you upon this occasion: Are you not then partial in yourself; and become a judge of evil thoughts? Jam. 2.4. For you are clean contrary to God in judgement. He judgeth the person by the works: you judge the works by the person. The bitterest expressions that fall from your Dissenting Brethren, you can have this excuse for; We are united in Christ, Disput. of Right to Sacram. in the Preface. and in hearty love to one another— We are so far agreed, that we do without scruple profess ourselves of the same Faith and Church:— And if any salt be mingled in our writings (which is usual in Disputes which are not lifeless) it is intended rather to season then to free, or to by't that which each one takes to be an error, rather than the man that holdeth it.— And thus on both sides, those that err, and those that have the truth, do show that error is the thing which they detest, and would disclaim it, if they saw it; and that Truth is it which they love, and are zealous for it, so fare as they know it. Sir, a little of this candour or charity would have made a better construction of those passages in Master Pierce his book (at least to alleviate your censure) than what you put upon it. But the judgements of some men are so biased towards the Party they have espoused, that what they account but venial or infirmity, if not laudable in them, shall be censured as damnable in those against whom they set themselves in opposition. To this purpose I find an observation so pertinent, in that profound Doctor, D. Thomas Jackson, B. 10. of his Comment on the Creed. pag. 3181. that I cannot forbear to transcribe it for the benefit of the Reader, The Turks, saith he, being ignorant, or not considering that there is an Immutable goodness precedent to the Act or exercise of God's will; A Goodness, whereof his will, however considered, is no cause; For it is coeternal to his will, to his wisdom and Essence: they fall into grossly absurd errors. And consequently unto this their ignorance, or to the common error, that all things are good only because God willeth them, they sometimes highly commend, and sometimes deeply discommend the self same practices for quality and circumstances, with as great vehemency of zeal and spirit, and with as fair protestations of obedience in all things to Gods will, as any other men do. For Selimus to attempt the deposition of his Father, was in their Divinity a good and godly Act. For Bajazet to take Arms against his Brother, was an abominable impiety. What was the reason? Selimus his attempt sound good success; for he prevailed against his Father, and this was an argument, that it was God's will that he should so do. But Bajazet miscarries in his attempt against his Brother, and his disaster was a proof sufficient that God was displeased with his attempt, it was not his will that he should prosper. And seeing his will is the only Rule of Goodness, seeing he did predestinate these two Princes, as he did Jacob and Esau, the one to a good end, the other to an evil; the self same Fact or attempt was good in the one, but wicked in the other. We all condemn it as an error in the Turk, for measuring the difference between good and evil, by the event. But even this error hath an Original which is worse. They therefore measure all good and evil by the event, because they ascribe all Events (without exception) to the irresistible will of God, and think that nothing can fall out otherwise than it doth; because every thing is irresistibly appointed by God's will, which in their Divinity, is such a necessary Cause of Causes, and by Consequence of all Effects, as the Author † M. Burton of the said Epistle would have it to be. Whosoever he be, whether Jew, Turk, or Christian, which thinks that all events are so irresistibly decreed by God, that none can fall out otherwise then they do, must of necessity grant, either that there is no moral evil under the Sun, or that Gods will (which is the Cause of Causes) is the only cause of such evil. But is the like sin or error expressly to be found in Israel? Do any make the same Fact for nature, quality and substance, to be no sin in one man, and yet a sin in another? or to be a little sin in one men, and a grievous out-crying sin in another? Though they do not avouch this of Rebellious attempts against Prince and State or of other like public Facts, cognoscible by humane Laws; yet the Principles of Predestination commonly held by them and the Turk, draw them to the like inconveniences, in transforming the immutable Rule of Goodness into the Similitude of their partial affections in other cases. The Adultery and Murder, which David committed, had been grievous sins in another man, but in David being predestinated, they were but sins of infirmity: sins by which the outward man was defiled, not the inward man. Such a sin was incest, in Lot; Such are all the sins committed by the Elect. Thus fare Doctor Jackson. And this is as like Master baxter's doctrine as if that great Prophetic spirit, had been in his very bosom at the writing of those passages. For, saith Master Baxter, The sin of Peter, David, etc. was exceedingly in regard of manner, ends, concomitants, etc. different from the like Fact in a graceless man, And two Sections after, In his Preface Sect. 18 (materially) more heinous Sect. 20. Men thus habituated (to Godliness) never live in a course of wilful sin (though elsewhere † Disput. Sacram. pag. 331. , he saith, How long Asa or Solomon sinned we know not: Nor can any man possibly determine justly how long a man may live in the practice of such a sin, and yet have true special Grace, and a state of Justification:) nor have any one sin which for Ends, concomitants and all, is such as that of unsanctified men. What I do the Godly man's Relations extenuate his Commissions? Is his sin less, because his light, and Gods love towards him have been greater? The more endearments he hath received, the more is his ingratitude heightened: and the more encouragements have been conferred, to continue him in his allegiance, the more execrable is his Apostasy and Rebellion; and all those sweet and gracious experiences of God's favour, which he hath enjoyed, by his perversity, are raised up to be Aggravations of his crime. But Master Baxter having considered too, That, as it is a greater measure of spiritual refining and purity, that is promised and justly expected under the Gospel, so a greater measure must be looked after by every man in himself, and by the Guides of the Church in its members; yet he resolves, that a man may be oft drunk, and oft commit fornication, Ib. pag. 329. he knows not justly how oft, and yet have true grace. And a little after, We know many that we see great signs of grace in, and that are well reputed of as eminent for Godliness, that do frequently commit as great sins, as some kind of rash swearing seems to be: For example, It is too rare to meet with a person so conscionable, that will not frequently back by't, and with some malice or envy speak evil of those that differ from them in judgement, or that they take to be against them, or that they are fallen out with: They will ordinarily censure them unjustly, and secretly endeavour to disgrace them, and take away their good names, and love those that join with them in it: So how many Professors will rashly rail and lie in their passions? Pag. 330. (yea, and out of their passions too.) How few will take well a reproof, but rather defend their sin? How many in these times, that we doubt not to be godly, have been guilty of disobedience to their Guides, and of Schism, and doing much, to the hurt of the Church? A very great sin. Yes, with a witness, and would have deserved Sequestration at the least, if it had been committed by persons of another persuasion, than your Party is of: but in your selves, these and whatever sins else, Adultery, Murder, Incest, Denying of Christ, cannot be of moment enough to cut a man off from the state of grace. But tell it not in Gath, Vbi supra in Preface pag. 17. publish it not in the streets of Askalon: You were loath, you say, these things should have been made public, as knowing how unfit it was for the eyes of the profane. In your Preface there. This makes me reflect upon what you have written concerning men's placing their Religion and holiness in their opinions, Treatisa of Conversion, pag. 297. and so turning from the life of Faith and Love, to speculation and vain janglings. This is a bait, you say, by which the Devil hath caught multitudes of souls in all ages of the Church, and especially of late: when he cannot keep men in open profaneness, than he will tempt them to think, that such a Party, and such a Sect are the only right and holy people; and therefore if thou get but among them, and be one of that opinion and Party, than thou shalt be saved. And hence it is that we see that men who are so zealous for their Parties, and glory so much in several opinions, do yet many, and very many of them live so unacquaintedly with God and Heaven, and are such strangers to Christian charity, and can freely reproach both common Christians and Ministers, and speak evil of the things they understand not, and take their railing Accusations for their Piety, and walk in discord and hatred, and disunion from the Church of God, and be glad when they can bear down the reputation of their brethren, whose labours are necessary for the good of souls. This I confess is a most undeniable, though a most sad truth. But it would be considered withal, Whether, it were not some of the present Leaders of the people, that have caused them to err so horribly in this particular; and whether they do not still flatter and soothe them up in it, by persuading them, they continue in a safe condition, their state of Grace is no whit interrupted, they are very Godly persons for all that? These and such like Doctrines and practices are they; that give no less scandal than advantage to the Socinians, as Szlichtingius upbraideth Meisner; (disputing that Question with him. [Num ad regnum Dei possidendum necesso sit in nullo peccato Evangelicae doctrinae adverso manere? In Praefat. pag. 5. ] Haec quaestio ita est comparata, saith he, ut homines mirum in modum hic semetipsos ludant ac decipiant. Aliter enim seize de ea sentire credunt, quam revera sentiunt. Nam cum aperte negare non audeant, tanta sanctitate, & à vitiis puritate ad regnum Dei postidendum opus esse; si penitius eorum sensum mentemque excutias, longè aliter statuunt. Tantoque nocentior est hic error, quanto occultior. Meisnerus, certè ita hunc locum disputat, ut non tantum id, quod asserit Socinus, se concedere dicat sed etiam longe majorem sanctitatis perfectionem requiri affirmet, Socinumque & exemplis, & dictis, & rationibus, & omni denique argumentorum apparatu urget, quod aliquid de tanto pietatis rigore remittat. At si quid in recessu lateat inspicias, deprehendes omnia illorum de pietate dicta splendida, atque magnifica, eo tandem recidere, ut in peccatis, vitiisque manentibus, quamvis ante vitae exitum deposita non fuerint, inductis in eorum locum virtutibus, dummodo morientes meritum Christi sibi applicent, peccatorumque dolore tangantur, Regni coelorum jus & haereditatem asserant. Hoc verò quid aliud est, quàm quod in speciem necessarium ad regni Dei adeptionem esse dixeras, reipsa non necessarium esse statuere? That is, [Whether it be necessary for a man, to the obtaining the Kingdom of God, that he continue in no one sin which is contrary to the Doctrine of the Gospel] This Question, saith he, is so stated, that men do strangely delude and cheat themselves in the case; whilst they fancy themselves to have another sense of the business, than indeed they have. For although they dare not flatly deny, but such an exact holiness and clearness from sin, is needful to the obtaining the Kingdom of God; yet if we look more narrowly into their sense and thoughts, we shall find them quite of another mind. Now this error is the more dangerous for being so close and covert. Meisnerus in his disputing the controversy does not only acknowledge what Socinus asserts, but will have a far greater measure of sanctity required; and takes Socinus to task, both with Examples, Testimonies, Reasons, and all manner of Arguments else, for his remitting any thing of that height and rigour of Piety. But if a man looks what lies within these men's breasts, he shall find all their high and splendid professions of Piety signify no more at last than this; They believe that though men lie in never so many sins and iniquities to their dying day, without any regard to virtuous and good living, yet if at their expiration they can apply the merit of Christ to themselves, and be touched with a remorse for their sins, they may challenge the Kingdom of heaven as their due right and inheritance. And what's this but to say in plain terms, that what they had before affirmed in show to be necessary towards the obtaining God's Kingdom, is in very deed and really not necessary? Thus in his preface. And in his Disputation he renews the reproach in these words; Pag. 50. Jam antè monuimus, Meisnerum, & qui Theologiam istorum sequuntur, in speciem rigidos esse pietatis propugnatores, reipsa tamen nihil minus quàm hoc agere. Nec ulla alia istius fucati rigoris est causa, quàm quòd non multum in eo ad salutem situm esse putent, sive quis vera vitae sanctitate sit praeditus, sive minùs. Itaque de pietate sic loquuntur, tanquam si in alieno foro res ageretur. Strenuè pietatem extollunt, etiam minimos actus peccati damnare docent, dummodo sibi sine salutis discrimine liceat non tantùm actus vitiosos committere, sed etiam in habitibus haerere. Probitas laudatur & alget. Revocate tantùm ad usum pietatem, & mox nobiscum sentieti●. That is, We told you formerly how Meisnerus and the rest of the Disciples of that kind of Theology, are for their out side very rigid Champions of Piety: but in truth they mind nothing less. Nor is there any other reason for this their dissembled rigidness, but their persuasion and belief that it is of little or no consequence to salvation, whether a man be endowed with true Holiness or not. Hence it is that they still speak of Piety, as if they were pleading a cause wherein themselves are not at all concerned. They cry it up for excellent, and tell us that the smallest sins will damn a man; but themselves the whilst will have leave both for the Acts and Habit of sin, and yet without endangering their salvation: they are hot in the commendation of Virtue, but cold in the practice of it. Recall but that once, and you and I shall soon be of a judgement. And now it will fall in very seasonably, to examine the truth of what you would fain have granted you (because you are not able to prove it,) in the 36. Section of your Preface. Where you urge Master Pierce (upon a false ground) thus; Let that then be known to be the difference, that they * Calvinists. make God more gracious, and man more sinful and impotent than you do: and do not say, that which is not so, that they make Godless Gracious, because they make man more sinful. But we must not swallow so gross a fallacy, as you would put upon your Reader; Do not say, that they make God less Gracious, because they make man more sinful. Why, who doth say so? That their making man more sinful, is the Cause of their making God less Gracious? The Fallacy is Causa pro non Causa. But as they assign other Reasons why you make God less Gracious, so with Good Reason they affirm, that you make man less sinful, (though in some sense more impotent.) 1. Which side is it, that restrains God's will and intention of saving; to a few, even of those, whom he calleth to salvation? Is it not the Synod and the Calvinists? Which side doth extend God's will and intention of saving to all that are called, according to the holy Scriptures, which say, God would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth. 1 Tim. 2. and, He would not that any should perish, but that all might come to repentance. 2 Pet. 3. Is it not Master P. Tilenus and the Remonstrants? which of them then make God most Gracious? 2. Which of the Parties is it, that ascribes to God, none but an external will, or an outward signification only, and that in the first intention of God ineffectual, when he calls the Reprobates to salvation; nay rather, who is it that attributes to God plainly a feigned will, whereby he would seem willing to save them, whom he hath professedly willed and decreed to Reprobate, that is, to destroy, for his own glory? Is this the Doctrine of the Remonstrants, or of the Calvinists? 3. Who are they that do attribute to Almighty God a will, whereby he wills that they whom he hath by his own immutable decree willed to reprobate, for the glory of his Name, should believe in Christ, and if they will not believe (which he hath willed to deny them the grace to do) should become guilty of a greater condemnation? Is this suitable to that Name proclaimed to Moses, Exod 34.6. The Lord God Merciful and Gracious? And is this the Doctrine of the Remonstrants, or of the Calvinists? But you argue (Section 33. He that saith [All that ever are sanctified truly, shall be saved] doth more advance the grace of God, than be that saith [some that shall never be saved, are sanctified.] Answ. 1. You must not obtrude a fallacy upon us, A dicto simpliciter: For all that are truly sanctified shall be saved, Mat. 5.8. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. But if they cease to be sanctified, the case is altered. Ezek. 18.24. 2 Pet. 2.20. 2. When you speak of advancing God's grace, you may understand it, either of God's love and favour towards us, or of the effects thereof, viz. some habit or quality, or operation, dwelling in us, or imprinted, or moving upon us. If you take Grace in the first sense; then indeed you may be said to advance God's grace, when you tell men, they may often commit fornication, revile and slander their Brethren, be disobedient to those Guides (both Civil and Ecclesiastical) whom God hath set over them, rend the Church by Schisms, and yet continue in Grace and be eminent for Godliness; Nay in this sense you may be said to advance God's Grace, when you Proclaim a general Gaol delivery for the very Devils, as Origen did. But, I believe, God will Con you little thanks (as we say) for such commendations of his Grace. If you think by such opinions and doctrines to advance the Glory of his Grace; I must take the confidence to declare otherwise. For 'tis his Grace in the second sense, that he desires should be advanced (because that is the best way of advancing the other) and the best measures we can take of the Glory hereof, are his own will revealed in his word (by his Son and his Apostles) and they tell us † Tit. 2.11, 12, 14. Eph. 1.6. 1 Pet. 2.9. , to be zealous of good works, and to be holy in all manner of conversation and godliness, is the best praise (we can render) of the glory of his Grace. Hereby is my father glorified that ye bring forth much fruit. Joh. 15.8. And thus the Remonstrants do more advance God's Grace than the Calvinists. As they make God more Gracious, so they make man more sinful, even such of them, (if there be any such) as deny Original sin; for sure (1.) He is more sinful, who is sinful by inherent pollution, than he that is sinful only by an extrinsic imputation (as the Posterity of Adam are said by Calvin † See in the Epist. of the Exam. of Tilenus. to be); For this way, Babes of a span long, and the Son of God may be sinful: but that way, none but Devils, and men arrived to a capacity to consider and make election. 2. He makes man more sinful that places the original fountain of his uncleanness in his own heart, than he that derives that uncleanness unavoidably to him, through foreign channels, from a spring head, that was opened at a great distance from him, not only before he had power to oppose, or protest against it, but before he had a being. 3. He makes man more sinful, who makes his sin personally voluntary, and of his own free choice, than he who makes it necessary and unavoidable (ab extrinseco). The Reason is, that in all these Cases, the one doth aggravate, the other doth extenuate the sin. But to proceed; He that provides a fair and sufficient excuse for Man's sin, doth make man less sinful, than he that provides none, but chargeth all his sin, with all the aggravations of it, upon his own will; The Calvinists do the first, the Remonstrants the last. That God doth for the sin of the first Parent, punish man with an impotency, or utter inability to believe and obey, and after that mulct of impotency inflicted, that he doth require of him the Act of faith and obedience, which cannot be performed without a new power, He that delivers this Doctrine, makes man excusable; The Reason is, there can be no better excuse for the omission of a duty, than an utter inability to perform it: and if he to whom the duty is supposed to be due hath inflicted that inability by way of punishment, before the obligation of the duty is of force, in all reason such an obligation is to be void, and of none effect. For example; A Prince commits a son to prison for his Father's treason, (which he will needs entail upon him,) gives order the man be put in irons, and secured under custody; (and this is the Reprobates case, being tied and bound in the chain of Adam's sin, and kept in thraldom under the power of the world and Satan); afterwards he causeth proclamation to be made to summon that prisoner to attend him at his Court, (though the former Decree for his restraint continues in full force irreversibly) and in case he doth not make his appearance (which that Prince his own order and warrant unrepealed, hath made impossible for him) this poor prisoner is sentenced to have his present and unavoidable misery augmented by the accession of new and greater torments. Now in this case, whether this prisoners non-appearance at Court; (for disobedience I cannot call it) ought to be accounted a crime, or rather held altogether excusable, and a misery the more to be pitied in that it is unavoidable, I leave to every judgement to determine. But this is according to the Doctrine of the Calvinists, as is evident from what hath been said above. 2. He that saith no man, whether Elect, or Reprobate, can abstain from sin, unless he be kept back from sinning, by a special internal, and in the intention of God, effectual grace administered every moment, He, when man doth sin, renders him excusable. The Reason is, because his excuse resteth upon the defect of that Divine Grace, which defect depends upon the sole will of God, and which (what ever it was in Adam) is not now in the power of man to hinder. But that the Calvinists say this, needs no other evidence than what hath been alleged already. Therefore they make man less sinful. I confess, in another sense, you may be said, to make man more sinful (as he that puts away his wife, is said, (in the Phrase of Scripture) to make her commit Adultery, Mat. 5.32.) For 1. the Non-elect you make (in this sense) disperately sinful: giving them too just an occasion to take up that resolution of those wretches mentioned, Jer. 2.25. etc. 18.12. There is no hope, but we will walk after our own devises, and we will every one do the imagination of his evil heart. Why should I attend upon God's Ordinances, read, hear, pray, endeavour to mortify lusts and appetites, and keep a good conscience in all things, seeing these will (if not render me liable to a soarer judgement, and greater condemnation) but make me inexcusable; and not conduce at all, to my salvation, I being left in an utter incapacity for that enjoyment and happiness, by God's eternal and immutable preterition? 2. As this Doctrine makes some men (All the Non-elect) more desperately sinful, so it tends to make others Presumptuously sinful; for, as no sin of theirs could hinder their election, that Decree for their salvation being irrespectively made in their favour, from all eternity: so no sins, how many or how enormous soever (as was showed above) can hinder their final perseverance; (that being an infallible and necessary effect of the said Decree of Election) and so all the sins of persons under that Decree, are reckoned but infirmities, or castigations proceeding from God's paternal love (as M. Perkins saith) that shall never be able to excusse the spirit of Grace, but serve rather to promote and confirm it, and likewise to advance their Glory. And yet, (notwithstanding your Doctrine makes them thus p esumptuously sinful; so fu l is it of contradictions, that) it makes them less sinful too; for he whose sins cannot exclude him from the kingdom of heaven, certainly is less sinful than he, whose sins do exclude him from it, (else God should not judge men according to their works) But the sins of the Elect, whether Adultery, Murder, Perjury, Incest, or the like; cannot exclude them from the Kingdom of heaven; and yet the sins of the Non-elect, their Adultery, Murder, Perjury, Incest, and the like do exclude them. If you say this is not from the nature of the sin, but from God's special indulgence and favour. I reply, God hath made but One Rule for all sorts of men, and it is peremptory. Gal. 5.19, 20, 21. The works of the flesh are manifest which are these, Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulation, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revel and such like: of the which I tell you,— that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Now I demand; Are the sins, which the Elect do at any time commit, such sins as these, yea or no? Is their Adultery, drunkenness, sedition, heresy, such as these here mentioned by the Apostle? If they he not such, than the Elect even when they do the same Fact for nature, quality and substance, with the Non-elect, are notwithstanding less sinful than they are; which is the thing to be proved. If they be the same for heinousness, then by this General Rule, they must exclude them out of heaven. For he that doth these things whatever he be, shall not enter there; This is further confirmed by that Rule in Logic; That an universal Negative may be simply converted. See Doctor Jackson. 10. B. of the Comment. p. 3162. If no Tree can be a Man, than no Man can be a Tree. If no Adulterer, no Incestuous, no perjured, no seditious, no disobedient, heretical, unrighteous person, nor doer of any of those works of the flesh mentioned by the Apostle, can enter into the kingdom of heaven: Then no man whose entrance into that kingdom is Immutably and irrespectively determined can be an Adulterer, incestuous, perjured, seditious, disobedient, heretical, unrighteous person. If you say, he may be such and yet Repent, and then be capable of entering into that kingdom, which he was not before. I answer, That his entrance being immutably and irrespectively determined, his want of Repentance can no more hinder his entrance, than it can rescind the Decrees of God; and therefore though you do but incline to think so of a person once sanctified, that though he doth fall into such wasting sins, Disput. of Justific. pag. 398. if he be cut off by death before repentance, he shall be fully pardoned at the instant of death, and so be saved; yet you say, of all the Elect, Account of Persever. pag. you are sure of it. Hence it appears that you hold such persons to be less sinful than those of the Non-elect. Yea, their very sins of the same nature, for substance and quality, with those of the Non-elect, to be less sinful.) And this you aver expressly more than once in your Preface, for you say, Sect. 18, & 20. The sin of David, Peter, etc. was exceeding different from the like Fact in a Graceless man, in regard of End, Manner, Concomitants, etc. But here I must expostulate. What other end would an unsanctified man propound in denying of Christ, but his own safety to escape persecution? and did not Peter propound that end to himself? And after what other manner and with what Concomitants could it be attended in an unsanctified man? would he have stood to it with more confidence, or have used bigger oaths and execrations? For David's sin, what the manner and concomitants of that were, we have considered before; and I would fain be satisfied what end he propounded to himself in that matter, more than another Adulterer aims at, even the satisfaction of his lust? He did not such a thought surely, that it should conduce to God's glory. You disclaim that opinion yourself, in your sheet annexed to your debate with M. Barlow † Of Saving Faith, pag. 92. where you say; Either David in Adultery did desire flesh-pleasing for itself, or for some other end. If for itself, than it was his ultimate end in that Act: If for somewhat else as his end, For what? No one will say it was for God's Glory. And there is nothing else to be it. This was then your opinion. Thus you see your Doctrine, as it makes God less Gracious, so it makes man less sinful; whether you understand the Elect or Non-elect. And yet it makes man more impotent too. (a strange Paradox!) But a true saying; for (according to some of your Calvinists (as Piscator and Maccovius) it concludes, No man can do less evil, nor more good than he doth; His will being infallible and irresistibly predetermined to every individual Act, as was declared above; so that he can no more advance one single step further towards hell or heaven, but as he is so predetermined, than add a cubit to his stature. And you make the Elect so impotent (as I may say) in respect of sin, they cannot effectually and eventually hinder, either their Conversion or final Perseverance; on the other side, you make the Non-elect so impotent (and under the influences of Common Grace too, as you call and define it) that they cannot so much as exert one a Preface Sect. 20. Act of Saving love; nor a good purpose or intention b Disp. of Justis. pag. 304. . Such is your Sufficient Grace. Of which enough before. SACRED ANNULETS, OR Spiritual Charms Against the poisonous suggestions of the Three Grand Tempter's of Mankind, to prevent Apostasy. I. The DEVIL. Luk. 22.31. Behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat. Revel. 12.4. And the Dragon stood before the woman, which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child assoon as it was born. The AMULET. Heb. 3.12. Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you, an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. 1 Pet. 5.8, 9 Be sober, be vigilant: because your Adversary the Devil, as a roaring Lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour, Jam. 4.7. Whom resist, steadfast in the faith; and he will flee from you. II. The WORLD. Mat. 4.8, 9 Again, the Devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and showeth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them: And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. 2 Cor. 6.8. By honour and dishonour: by evil report and good report. 2 Cor. 11.24, 25, 26, 27. Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one: Thrice was I beaten with rods: once was I stoned: thrice I suffered shipwreck: a night and a day I have been in the deep: In journeyings ●ften: in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the Sea, in perils amongst false Brethren. Joh. 16.1, 2. These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not be offended. They shall put you out of the Synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you, will think, that he doth God service. The AMULET. 1 Joh. 2.15, 17. Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world.— For the world passeth away and the lust thereof: but he that doth the will of God abideth for ever. Phil. 4, 11, 12. I have learned in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content. I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound: every where, and in all things I am instructed, both to be full, and to be hungry, both to abound, and to suffer need. I can do all things through Christ, which strengtheneth me. Luk. 12.4, 5. Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that, have no more, that they can do. But I will forewarn you, whom ye shall fear: fear him, which after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell: yea I say unto you, fear him. Rev. 2.10. Fear none of those things, which thou shalt suffer, behold, the Devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried, and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life. Mat. 26.41. Watch and pray that ye enter not into temptation. III. The FLESH. Jer. 17.9. The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked. Jam. 1.14, 15. Every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. The AMULET. Prov. 4.23. Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life, Luk. 21.34, 36. And take heed lest at any time, your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and the cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. Watch ye therefore and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape,— and to stand before the son of man. 1 Pet. 2.11. Abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul. Job. 30.1. made a Covenant with mine eyes; why then should I think upon a maid? Psal. 119.37. Turn away mine eyes from beholding vanity: and quicken thou me in thy way. Col. 3.5. Mortify your members which are upon the earth: etc. 1 Cor. 9.27. I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached unto others, I myself should be a castaway. Ex Synodo Arelatensi, contra Lucidum Presbyt. I. Anathema illi, qui per Dei Praescientiam (vel Decretum) hominem in mortem deprimi dixerit. II. Anathema illi, qui dixerit, illum qui periit non accepisse ut salvus esse posset. III. Anathema illi, qui dixerit, quod vas contumeliae non possit assurgere, ut fiat vas in honorem. IV. Anathema illi, qui dixerit, quod Christus non sit mortuus pro omnibus, nec omnes salvos esse velit. Prosper ad object. Gallorum III. A sanctitate ad immunditiem, à justitia ad iniquitatem, a fide ad impietatem plerosque transire non dubium est: & ad tales praedestinationem filiorum Dei, Cohaeredum Christi non pertinere certissimum est. Hieron. advers. Jovin. l. 11. Tamdiu sciatis vos in generatione Domini permanere, quandiu non peccaveritis. Et mox: Si peccaverimus, & per peccati januam ingressus fuerit Diabolus, protinus Christus recedit. August. de Bono Persever. cap. 8. Deus autem melius judicavit miscere quosdam non perseveraturos, certo numero Sanctorum suorum, ut quibus non expedit in hujus vitae tentatione securitas, non possint esse securi. Prosper ad object. Vincent. 12. Praedestinatio Dei apud nos dum in praesentis vitae periculis versamur, incerta est. FINIS. REFLECTIONS UPON A practical Discourse Lately Printed at Oxon. Sir, THe Practical discourse, you sent me, hath given me a needless diversion. For those Judgements (in my opinion) shall never pass the Muster, to be engaged in these Controversies, that are not very high-proof against all the impressions that can possibly be made by such weak discourses. I can as little approve the man's Doctrine, as justify his Practice. Was not He sometimes Scholar to Master B. and afterward his Usher at Westminster School? Had he not once a design to supplant his Master; and was outed himself? Are not these Sermons calculated, think you, to serve such unworthy ends? Doth he not herein endeavour to set forth God for a Precedent, of such Decrees, as he would have others execute; [viz. The Absolute Reprobation of a very deserving Master, and the Absolute Election of a most unthankful Scholar?] I call it an Absolute Election, presuming he doth not expect such advancement for his works; they having little or nothing of Merit in them, whether of Condignity, or Congruity; Yet his Fides Praevisa, (held forth in these Sermons,) He thought haply, might be a fair Qualification and motive to such an Election. But I am apt to conclude, men (in these days of light and Reformation) will not assume or exercise a Sovereignty more Absolute than what they ascribe to God himself. And though they affirm, he passeth his Eternal Decrees upon men, who lie [in Pari statu vel conditione]: yet I have met with none so bold, as to affirm, that he doth Reject the worthy, though he Elects the unworthy. However Divine Providence, I doubt not, will in time awaken the infatuated world to take notice of what Complexion those men are, who pretend to be the greatest Patrons and Advocates of that Horrible Decree. SUETONIUS giving account how Tiberius was improved into the most intolerable Tyrant, attributes the Original of it to his belief, That All things are wrought by a Fatality. How can those men be convinced, P. Disc. etc. pag. 3. they commit injustice, (when they invade the Rights of others) who persuade themselves their wills are tied up so close to the will of God, that like lesser wheels they move only as that Great Mover doth guide them? In the choice of his first Doctrine, I cannot but observe how Prudent the man is, to prevent the danger of a Confutation; making All mankind (upon the matter) Incompetent for such an undertaking. For you can hardly weigh the Reasonableness of his Discourse, unless you put the Justice of God's Proceed into the Balance with it; And if you do this, he presently cries out upon your incapacity to be a Judge in such matters. The ways and counsels of God, how profound and inscrutable soever, we are sure are not so establised or carried on as to defeat the Ministeries of his Grace, of their proper Vsefullnesse, or to dishonour his Essential Attributes. I would ask but this one Question, Whether the Apostle did not Declare All the Conusell of God (touching man's Salvation and Damnation respectively) unto the Church? Act. 20.27. Who dares deny, what the Apostle asserteth of his own Ministry? If here were all and that declared too; then is there no defect either in respect to the extent, or to the perspicuity of this Object. If this Counsel be revealed, is it not a Part of our duty, and our Reasonable service, Joh. 5.39. Rom. 12.1. to search into it, as well as the Bereans? Act. 17.11. 'Tis strange that All, of his persuasion, should be able to determine, in these ways and Counsels of God, (as they do most peremptorily) and that none of mankind besides should be in a capacity to examine them? Sure God understands man's capacity better than your Practical Discourser; yet how often doth he summon the sons of men, to debate the Equity and Justice of his Proceed, before the Tribunal of their own Reason? The Lord doth not only stand up to plead himself: a Isa. 3.13. a but he calls his people to the Bar too, that They may plead together. b Isa. 43.26 Mica. 6.2.3. Yea, and when they have done pleading, He is pleased to refer the Justice of his Proceed to the Sinners own sentence; c Isa. 5.3, 4. And now, O Inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard. What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? And by another of his Prophets he appeals to them in these words; d Ezek 18.25. Chap. 33.17 Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal? God will not only be justified e Psal. 51.4. when he speaketh, but be clear when he is judged too. But how can the Creature bring in a verdict to clear Him, if he hath not a Competent capacity, in some measure, to judge of the Equity of his Proceed? I need add no more, for the force of those sacred Engines is abundantly sufficient to overthrow his Hypothesis, though it had fare stronger props, than such Arguments as he produceth to support it. But these being so feeble, I shall not give you or myself the trouble to handle them. Only I shall vindicate the Sacred Text from his misconstruction, and take my leave of this part of his Discourse. Nay but O man, Quis tu! who art Thou! He interprets this of Man, [In whatever capacity considered:] When 'tis as clear as the Sun by the foregoing verses, that he speaks it of Man made obnoxious to the Sword of Divine justice, by having filled up the Measure of his sin, in despising Gods Gracious Methods, and Dispensations for his Conversion. For of whom speaketh the Apostle this? Is it not spoken of the stubborn Jews, who would not have Christ to reign over them; who would not be gathered by his Gospel: but abused God's Patience, Christ's intercession, and the Miracles of the Holy Ghost, as Pharaoh had done those, vouchsafed by the Lord, and his servant Moses? What then if God deals by these Jews, now (stubborn and Rebellious, as they are) as he dealt then by Pharaoh? whom (though he highly deserved it, and had been swept away by that Plague, according to God's ordinary course of Justice; yet) † Exod. 9.16. He made him to stand, or kept him alive still to serve other ends of his Divine Providence? 'Tis none but such clay as this, that vessels of wrath are made a Se● Jer. 18. throughout. of. And it is such a man whose insolency, the Apostle checks with his [Homo, Quis tu!] Nay but, O man, who art thou! If the Malefactor comes to dispute the just sentence of his upright Judge, 'tis time to take him up, as the Lord doth (Jer. 2.29.) Wherefore will ye plead with me? ye all have transgressed against me, saith the Lord. Such persons therefore, when God enters into Judgement with them, must lay their hands upon their mouths † Job 40.4. . But this doth not debar men the Privilege to examine the Equity and Justice of those Decrees and Laws by which they are Governed, and upon which their Eternal Weal or Woe dependeth. In this case Abraham thinks it no undutifulness to be inquisitive into God's Counsels and Proceed, Gen. 18.23, 25. and to expostulate about them; Wilt thou destroy the righteous with the wicked? That be far from thee, to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked, and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: shall not the judge of all the earth do right? But whether your Discourser be of Abraham's Judgement, I leave you to collect from his own words; Pag. 2. Pag. 3. He lays down this sense, That God acts all things according to the Dictates of his Absolute, Sovereign and unaccountable will; And hereby the greatest part of mankind are left in an hopeless and irrecoverable condition. Then he brings in and presseth an objection, Rom. 9 (out of vers. 19) Thou wilt then say unto me, if our wills are tied up so close to the will of God, that like lesser wheels they move only as that great Mover doth guide them; then why is God so Angry with sin and sinners? why doth he forbidden, dehort, and threaten by his Prophets? To what end serve all those examples of vengeance, which we tremble to read of? for if it be so with us, we may be miserable, but we cannot be sinful; if our spirits be put into an unsuitable frame, so as that we walk contrary to God, it is our sad necessity and not our fault; since none can alter, much less resist the will of God, which alone hath made us so. This is the objection. How doth your Discourser answer it? Doth he vindicate the Goodness and Justice of God from the blasphemy of this imputation? No. In stead of a Solution to that purpose, here follows a clear Concession, as if the Objection were a perfect Truth; For thus he proceeds, [And now the 0bjection being pressed to such a degree of impiety, that it doth tacitly lay the guilt of all men's Transgressions upon God, the Apostle thinks it high time to cut off all further arguing; which he doth in these words— Nay but what art thou, O Man, who repliest against God? As if he had said— Dost thou know who thou art, thou bold inquisitive Creature, or who it is thou dealest with? Consider that thou art but a Man, and wilt thou question thy Maker's Justice? Forbear vain presumptuous man, stand off, and lay thy hand upon thy mouth, for God is in the Bush, God is at the bottom of this dispute, and therefore admire with reverence, what thou canst not comprehend with reason. What the Objector (in the Apostle) did but tacitly, he doth most expressly, viz. lay All men's Transgressions and Misery upon the Absolute and unaccountable will of God; and no man may dispute against it; For this is his Doctrine [Man, in whatever Capacity considered, is not a Competent Judge, of the Equity and Justice of the Proceed, ways and Counsels of God, in the disposing and ordering of his Creatures.] And what remains then in this case, but that Option of the Psalmist, Arise, O Lord, plead thine own cause? For his Discourse on, Act. 13.48. I need say no more, then to evince, how palpably he mistakes the sense of the Text. To this purpose, I shall not tire you out, to examine a cloud of witnesses, that might be produced in favour of the sense which he rejects: but satisfy myself, in discovering some of those gross Absurdities, which follow upon his interpretation. If by [Ordained to eternal life] we understand, [Absolutely Elected;] than it will follow; (1.) That All the Praedestinated unto life, that were in this place, believed at once; And (2.) that those which did believe, could not but believe; (3.) That All they who did now embrace the Faith, (upon this preaching of the Apostle) were Absolutely Elected; and that not one of them could forsake the Faith, which he had embraced; (4.) That this was revealed, not only to S. Paul, but to S. Luke also, concerning the Absolute election of every Individual of these new Converts; How inevitable are these inferences, and yet how Absurd? how ridiculous? On the other side, what shall we conclude of the rest who did not believe at this Sermon? (1.) It follows, that they were All absolutely Reprobated; and yet (2.) that God would have S. Paul command them All to believe in Christ; and (3.) that S. Paul, when he knew them to be Reprobates, and so in no capacity to believe, and be saved, yet He calls them unto Faith and Salvation, and (4.) threatens them with eternal destruction for not believing; and (5.) afterwards upbraids them, that they judged themselves unworthy of eternal life; and (6.) at last, when they would not believe, that he did, for that cause, turn to the Gentiles; what a heap of foul Absurdities are here! And (which is none of the least,) that S. Luke should give notice, by this writing, That such as now believed were all absolutely elected, the rest absolutely Reprobate); To what purpose should this be? or what influence could it have upon them? It could serve no end of Divine providence; but might very well serve the interest of Satan, as a means to tempt those Believers to security, and the unbelievers to desperation, and a contempt of those Ordinances, which, (if this exposition of the Text were true) they were assured by S. Luke's Testimony, could never bring them benefit. Having thus bereft him of His Senses; his Reason must needs want that solidity that should make it considerable, in the accounts of Dear Sir Your Faithful Friend. For Master B. Errata, In the Preface. Pag. 3. l. 25. r. As M. B. himself. sp. 20. l. 10 r. de fato. l. 25. blot out (had) p. 24 l. 3. r. positivity. p. 42. l. 8, & 9 r. Master. In the Apology. Pag. 22. l. 21. r. in, 18. Art. l. 26. r. third and fourth. l. 30. r. into fifteen Art. p. 31. l. 4. r. not effect. p. 37. l. 12. r. Not. 6. p. 39 l. 23. r. and omit. p. 45. l. 19 r. costs and dam. p. 62. l. 5. r. add to p. 6. ●. l. 14. r. Hols. p. 90. l. 2. r. Supralapsarian neither Existentialist, nor Creabilitarian, as dross. line 28. read persons. pag. 94. lin. 24. read Supralapsarian Creabilitarian. pag. 99 lin. 5. read Existentialists and Creabilitarians as well as Sublapsarians, do all. p. 118. l. 14. propalandis. l. 24. judicaret. p. 131. l. 3 r. if I add, in Tilenus his behalf, that. l. 24. r. ex post factum. p. 188. l. 29. r. they tell us pag. 189. in mar. l. 2. r. par. 2. pag. 79. p. 200. l. 24. r. cast. p. 224. in marg. l. 5. r. Reject. 4, & 5. p. 231. l. 25. r. effectual. p. 237. l 18. r. Amesius p. 242. l. 27. r. Martinius p. 253. l. 27. r. was one of the Synod. p. 259. l. 21. r. elicited. p. 272. l. 9 r. imbuing it. p. 283. deal marg. note. 289. deal (generosity) in marg. p. 335. l. 22. r. as well as. p. 345. l. 19 r. if it be. p. 361. l. 19 r. impotency. p. 366. in marg. for 38, and 4. r. 3. and 4. p. 386. l. 10. r Sancti p. 388. l. 28. r. defend. d. p. 400. marg. r. Digress, p. 434. l. 21. r. indefectibilis. p. 438. l. 4. 454. l. 15. r. quin. p. 459. l. 9 r. superesse. p. 470. l. 15. r. And. p. 480. l 11. r. wilfully. p. 488. l. 17. but 'tis in. l. last. r. and the winds blue. p. 493. l. 28. r. his Election. p. 516, l. 13. r. papers. The End.