Sect. 4.

I am glad to see my name so often remembred by this Authour in his margent; for a long time I desired to know his way by certaine evidence; for I would not suffer my selfe * to be carried away with rumours; and withall I found some contradiction in the relations I received from different persons, but at length I was so happy as to see it under his own hand, and there to observe not his judgment only, but the strength of his affections also. Now let the Reader observe the cunning carriage of this Authour, and how farre off it is from all ingenuitie. For what I discourse, being drawne thereunto by Arminius his ex∣cursions, that this Authour obtrudes upon me, as if the defence of the cause I tooke in hand had drawn me thereunto, notwithstanding that I have professed the contrary. For thus I write l. 1. pag. 1. De electione Sect: 4. pag. 127. In the canvasing of this section Arminius runs out at large, saving that most of these things which here he heapes up are aliena, and no∣thing pertinent to the present purpose; as pertaining rather to the decree of reprobation, then to the decree of election. And a little after I write thus; Hence it is that Arminius expa∣tiates and transfers his disputation from the point of election, to the point of Reprobation too un∣seasonably: Yet wisely affecting the incolumity of his wavering cause. By that right (saith he) which God hath over his creature, he cannot ordaine any man to the suffering of pain without the foresight of sinnne. To wit that his cause might stand upright, and that this examiner might omit nothing that tends to the making of his opinion plausible with his propitious reader, it was needfull that he should make use of some such transition, though never so unreasonable but seeing such are the wiles and artifices of our Adversaries to confound all Scholasticall method, it shall not be unseasonable for me to weigh what he delivers as briefly as I can. Therefore after I had refused Arminius on that point, where he denyes, that God can doe that injustice, which he can doe by power; after this manner I enter upon a new digression concerning this point. Hitherto have I followed Arminius in his extravagants. For M. Perkins hath not pro∣ceeded so farre; as to affirme that God hath power to afflict an innocent creature, neither hath his Adversaries objected any such thing unto him, as justly inferred from ought delivered by him. So that all such have well hardened their foreheads, who faigne that our opinion cannot well subsist without the help of so horrid and so harsh an assertion, to wit, That it is better to be miserable, then not to be at all. It is true, some may conceive that though this were a truth, it were to be suppressed, rather then affirmed by reason of the harshnesse of it. Let every one consider aright that I undertake the defence of M. Perkins, and it is he that hath uttered this harsh assertion, (namely, That God can inflict hell paines without a∣ny demerit in the creature) out of Cameracensis: And it stood me upon to defend M. Per∣kins so farre as I had reason for it. Now finding the maine argument whereby Arminius maintaines the contrary (to that other, yet more harsh proposition) to be most unsound; and even this assertion which sounds most harsh in the eares of many, not only to be maintained by Austine himselfe and and divres Schoole-Divines, but answered by many arguments, the solution whereof was never expedited by any; have I deserved so sharply to be censured for representing all this in the way of justifying M. Perkins, whose defence I undertook against Arminius?

1. My words are these translated, God can annihilate the holiest creature, which Arminius confesseth, how much more is it in his power to afflict an innocent creature, and that for ever, considering that not only according to Schoole-divines, but also accor∣ding to Austine, yea according to the truth it selfe, it is more to be desired to have being un∣derPage  37any pain, then to have no being at all. And afterwards I propose not one argument of mine own for the justifying of this, but only represent the discourse of Austine hereupon, as it is analized by Durandus that Schoole Divine. Now why are not the School-men censured, as men speaking unreasonably and against common sense? Nay why is not Austine censured as one that had rather speak unreasonably and against common sense; then lay downe the conclusion which he hath once undertaken to maintain, as well as my selfe? Yea and much more considering that the discourse proving this, is Saint Austin's; and had I not added on the by these four words etiam secundum ipsam veritatem, there had been no place at all for any censure to be past upon me. If a man finding himselfe convicted by Austin's dis∣course shall confesse that what he writes is true, is it equity to censure him as one who had rather speak unreasonably and against common sense, then lay down the conclusi∣ons which formerly he hath undertaken to maintain. When in the mean time no censure is at all passed upon Austine, who alone is the player of the game, he that stands by professing only in his judgment, he playes his game well.

2. If Austine hath spoken unreasonably and against common sense, how comes it to passe that this censurer hath not taken the paines to represent unto the world the unrea∣sonablenesse of his argument? This authour spends his mouth frankly in censuring, but takes no paines to free his Reader from errour, by solving arguments produced by Austin for the proofe of that wich this Authour conceives to be an errour.

3. Nay he doth not so much as answer that one argument, which here is proposed by me. An argument which the Scoole-men use as sufficiently convincing the truth, as Du∣randus and Ricardus. Yet considering the unreasonable condition of such adversaries, who take no course to convince or confute their opposites, but imperiously to cry them down; I have taken the paines to call to an account both Austin's arguments and others proposed by Schoole-Divines, and to devise with my selfe what answer might be made unto them, so to performe that for my adversaries, which they shew no hart to per∣forme for themselves, and I was borne in hand that such a digression of mine should be extant long ere this.

4 Yet by the way I wonder not a little that one thing is pretermitted. For if I mistake not, this very Authour is the man that heretofore hath been very full mouthed in censu∣ring, not so much the doctrine it selfe, as a certain answer I made to an argument brought out of Scripture against it; namely from those words of our Saviour, It had been better for that man if he had never been born. My answer was, that it was spoken according to the judgment of man, though indeed erroneous; and that after this manner phraseo∣logies of Scripture doe proceed I there shewed. Now this Authour hereupon spared not to professe, that if this were true he would turne Atheist. I wisht that Friend of mine to whom he spake this, to perswade him the next time he met with him, to enquire and con∣sider well, whether Maldonat the Jesuite doth not imbrace the same interpretation. And indeed if such protestations would carry it, this Authour would prove a very potent and formidable adversary, I have seen the like under his own hand, namely this, As Plutarch said of the old heathens who sacrificed men that they might pacifie their gods: that it had been better with Diagoras to say, There is no god, then to think that God is such a one that delights in the blood of men: And hereupon he adds this Protestation, I protest unto you I think it less dishonourable to the blessed Trinity, to say with the Atheist, there is no god, then to feigne such a God, as the decree of Reprobation maintained by the Contraremonstrants maketh him to be. This man I find is resorted unto and consulted with by the Arminians, as if his judgment were an oracle; and I willingly confesse he deserves to be in some great place unto them: and no place in my judgmentmore fit then to be unto the, à protestationibus. Yet I doe not pre∣scribe but leave it to their discretion to prefer him as they think good: but how comes it to passe, that here he is silent in reviving the reproaches he cast upō my answer to the Scri∣pture before mentioned? Is it because Maldonat the Jesuite hath been since found by him to embrace the same interpretation? And he is loath to fall so foule in censuring such as he is? Yet here he falls foul on me for professing my approbation, not of Schoole-men but of Austin's discourse. This makes me call to mind what was delivered of him sometimes by a London Minister; as that he should perswade a young Divine to study Bellarmine; as also what censures others have passed upon some writings of his. And it hath been my hap to see under his own hand such a counsaile as this givē to a friend of his. These things have I represented unto you the rather, because I would give you occasion to learne that in your younger dayes, which I have learned by late and long experience in my selfe, and that in these two things. First in reading Bellarmine and other adversaies to our Church; I have divers timesPage  38noted such speeches in them, as to my thinking involved contradiction, or had shew of absurdity, or might either give advantage to our selves, or breed prejudice unto them; but when afterward I came in cooler blood to weigh the words better, and to consider the circumstances more narrow∣ly. I found that I did mistake their meaning, and that an itching desire to find an advantage, made me to take shadowes for substance. And the like mistake in my selfe I observed, when I read the fathers, or the Scriptures, ready to interpret every thing either in favour of mine own cause, or in prejudice of the adversaries: And concludes sententiously thus; Nimirum ita est ingenium nostrum, facile credimus, quae nimium volumus. If such be the genius of this Authour, though he thinks not good to spare me for Austin's sake, yet methinks he should spare me for Richardus sake, or at the least for Maldonat's sake. This calls to my remem∣brance an Epigramme which D. Hoskins my chamber-fellow in New-Colledge some∣times made upon the fleas, (that sore troubled him as he lay in his bed.) And the conclu∣sion was thus;

So we proceed.