both beeing out of the true Church, and before they haue any vse of reason: and againe many there are, which albeit they liue long, yet being either idiots and fooles, or borne deafe, they cannot come to the true vse of reason: in all which, it is not credible that their should be suspected any contempt of the Gospel which they could not learne. IV. Esau was hated of God for none o∣ther cause, but for that it so pleased him. Rom. 9.18. V. If this opinion should be true, then would it follow that men should be condemned for nothing else but incredulitie: the which is not so. Ioh. 3.36. Christ speaking of vnbeleefe, saith not that for it the wrath of God came vpon man, but remaineth vpon him. And why should we daily aske pardon for our sinnes, if nothing but incre∣dulitie or vnbeleefe condemned vs? nay, although that there were neuer any contempt of the Gospell, yet that corruption of originall sinne, were suffici∣ent enough to condemne men. VI. Also that admiration which Paul hath, Rom. 9.20. O man, who art thou which disputest with God•• doth plainly shew that the cause of the decree of God in reiecting some, is vnsearchable: and that it doth not at all depend vpon any foreseene contumacie towards the grace of God offered in the Gospel. For if it were otherwise, we might easily giue a reason of Gods decree. August. epist. 105. saith very well. Who (saith he) crea∣ted the reprobates, but God? and why, but because it pleased him? but why pleased it him? O man, who art thou that disputest with God!
Some Diuines perceiuing that this is an hard sentence, they goe about to mitigate it in this sort. The matter, say they, or obiect of predestination, is a reaso∣nable creature, and that not simply or absolutely considered, but partly as it fell, part∣ly as of it selfe it was subiect to fall: and thereupon God preordaining men from euer∣lasting, considered them, not simply as he was to make them men, but as they were such men as might fall into sinne, and againe be redeemed by Christ, and after called to the light of the Gospel. The efficient or first motiue cause, was not any foreknowne cause either this or that, but the meere will of God. For he disposeth all things not of, and by his foreknowledge, but rather according to the same. But these things albeit they may seeme to be subtile deuises, yet are they not altogether true. Reasons. I. The potter when he purposeth to make some vessell, doth not consider the clay, and regard in it some inherent qualitie, to make such a vessell, but he ma∣keth it of such and such a forme, to this or that vse, euen of his alone free-will and pleasure. II. Rom. 9.21. Hath not the potter power to make of the same lumpe one vessell to honour, and another to dishonour? In which place we may not vn∣derstand by the name lumpe, all mankinde corrupted, and fallen, and so to be redeemed in Christ: for then Paul would not haue said that God made vessels of wrath, but rather that he did forsake them after they were made. III. This seemeth preposterous, that God did first foreknow mankind, created, fallen, and redeemed in Christ: and that afterward he ordained them so foreknown, to life or to death. For the ende is the first thing in the intention of the agent: neither will a most skilfull workman first prepare meanes by which he may be helped to doe a thing, before he hath set downe in his minde all the endes, both such as are most neere, and them that are very farre off. Now we know this, that mans creation; and his fall in Adam, are but meanes to execute Gods predestination, and therefore are subordinate vnto it: but the ende of Gods