CHAP. XVI. Of the first breakings out of the Predestinarians, and their Proceedings in the same.

THUS we have seen the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Five Controverted Points, [ I] according to the Principles and persuasions of the first Reformers. And to say truth, it was but time that they should come to some conclusion in the Points disputed: there being some men who in the beginning of the Reign of King Enward the sixth, busily stickled in the maintenance of Calvins Doctrins. And thinking themselves to be more Evangelical than the rest of their Brethren, they either took unto themselves Page  590(or had given by others) the name of Gospellers. Of this they were informed by the reverend Prelate, and right godly Martyr, Bishop Hooper, in the Preface to his Ex∣position of the Ten Commandments: Our Gospellers (saith he) be better learned than the holy Ghost, for they wickedly attribute the cause of Punishments and Adversity to Gods Providence, which is the cause of no ill, as he himself can do no ill: and over every mischief that is done, they say it is Gods Will. In which we have the men and their Doctrine too, the name of Gospellers, and the reason why that name was ascribed unto them. It is observed by the judicious Author of the Book, called Europae Speculum that Calvin was the first of these latter times who search'd into the Counsels (the Eternal Coun∣sels) of Almighty God. And as it seems he found there some other Gospel than that which had been written by the four Evangelists: from whence his followers in these Doctrines had the name of Gospellers: for by that name I find them frequently called by Campneys also in an Epistolary Discourse, where he clears himself from the crimes of Popery and Pelagianism, which some of these new Gospellers had charged upon him; which had I found in none but him, it might have been ascribed to heat or passion in the agitation of these Quarrels: but finding it given to them also by Bishop Hooper (a temperate and modest man) I must needs look upon it as the name of the Sect, by which they were distinguished from other men.

And now I am fallen upon this Campneys; [ II] it will not be unnecessary to say some∣thing of him in regard of the great part he is to act on the stage of this business. Protestant he was of the first Edition cordially affected to the Doctrine of the Church of England in the present points, but of a sharp and eager spirit. And being not well weaned from some points of Popery in the first dawning of the day, of our Re∣formation, he gave occasion unto some of those whom he had exasperated to inform against him, that they prosecuted the complaint so far, that he was forced to bear a faggot at St. Pauls Cross (as the custom was in all such cases) Miles Coverdale, then or not long after Bishop of Exon, preaching a Sermon at the same. But whatsoever he was then in other Doctrinals, he hath sufficiently purged himself from the crimes of Popery and Pelagianism, wherewith he had been charged by those of the adverse Party.* For whereas one William Samuel had either preached or written in Queen Maries times, That a man might deserve God, &c. Campneys beholds it for a Doctrine so blasphemous and abominable, that neither Papists nor Pelagians, nor any other Heretick old or new hath ever-written or maintained a more filthy and execrable saying. For it is the flat and manifest denying both of God the Father, and of his Son Christ Jesus: neither doth it require any confutation to him that doth but confess that there is a God. And as for my self, saith he, I do not love my life so dearly, as I hate this vile saying deadly. He gives not long after to the Popish Pelagians the name of a filthy and detestable Sect. p. 5. mu∣stereth up all the errours of Pelagius, which had been publickly recanted in the Synod of Palestine, and falling upon that which teacheth, That the grace of God is given ac∣cording unto our deserving; he declares it to be vile and abominable, contrary to the manifest mind and words of the Apostle, p. 12. Finally, Not to trouble my self with more particulars, encountring with another of the Pelagian Heresies, he passionately cries out, O blasphemy intolerable! O filthy puddle, and sink most execrable! full of stinking Errours, full of damnable presumption, like to the pride of Lucifer, most abo∣minable, p. 15.

This is enough to free this man from being either a Papist or Pelagian Heretick, [ III] as his Enemies made him. And for the other reproach which they laid upon him, of being an Enemy to Gods Predestination, I conceive it will not be regarded as a matter of moment, considering the Disputes between them, and the usual acts of the Calvinians to defame their Adversaries. We shewed before, how Bogerman, Paraeus, and the rest of the Calvinian Sect, reproach'd the Remonstrants with Pelagianism in their publick Wri∣tings, though as free from it as themselves. We shewed before, how Cross in the continuation of his Belgick History imposeth on them for some of their detestable O∣pinions, that they made God to be the Author of sin, and that he had created the infinitely greatest part of mankind to no other end, but to burn them in Hell-fire for ever: which horrid blasphemies they both abominated and confuted to their best abilities. The like unworthy practices, were used by Calvin and Beza, against Seba∣stian Castel, a man of no less learning, but of far more modesty and moderation than either of them; whom they never left persecuting and reviling, till they had first cast him out of Geneva, and afterwards brought him to his grave. And this they did unto a man both of parts and piety upon no other pretence or provocation whatever, but Page  591because he maintained another way of predestination than that which they had taught their followers for Gods Truth and Gospel. And therefore it can be no wonder if the new Gospellers in England pursued the same courses against all those who opposed their fancies. For being governed by this spirit, they taxed their opposits sometimes for being haters of Gods Predestination, as before is said, though entire lovers of the same,* re∣viled them by the names of Popish Pelagians, and justifiers of themselves, imputing to those men the whole mass of Pelagianism, who from their very hearts and souls abhorr'd all their wicked Opinions, and have been many years willing to bestow their lives against all their abomi∣nable Errours. And sometimes finally they call them Free-will men. in contempt and scorn; designing by that name not the Papist only, but such of their own Mothers Children also, as taught that Cain was not predestinate to slay his Brother,* and that God hath not predestinate any man to the committing of Murder, or any such like wicked abominations.

Which being said, and the credit of the man set right, [ IV] we may the better know what we are to trust to in taking up some few following passages upon his Authority. Amongst which I shall first begin with that of Knox, that great Incendiary of the Na∣tion and Kirk of Scotland, who in a book of his published in the end of King Edward's, or the beginning of Queen Mary's Reign, against an Adversary of Gods Predestina∣tion, as the Title telleth us. First builds the Doctrine of Predestination unto Gods absolute Will, without relation to mans sin, or our Saviours suffering: and then ascribes unto the predeterminate Counsel and Will of God, all humane actions what∣soever.

In reference to the first he was of their opinion plainly, who building upon the ex∣ample of Esau, exclude all that is in man, either original sin or actual, from the cause of Gods hate, which they lay on his own pleasure only; which Knox endeavoureth to make good by this following Argument, p. 141. That if Esau was hated for his evil deserving, then must needs follow, that Jacob was loved for his well-deserving,* the Argu∣ment following, as he saith, by the rule of contraries. What superstructure he hath raised upon this foundation? Assuredly no better nor no worse than this, That the wicked are not only left by Gods suffering, but compelled to sin by his power, p. 317. More copiously, but not more plainly in another place, fol. 158. where it is affirmed, That whatsoever the Ethnicks and Ignorants did attribute unto fortune, we Christians do assign to the Providence of God, that we should judge nothing of fortune,* but that all cometh by the determination of his Counsel; and finally, that it displeaseth him when we esteem any thing to proceed from any other: so that (saith he) we not only behold and know him to be the principal cause of all things, but also the Author appointing all things to the one part, or to the other by his Counsel. In which last, if he make not God the Author of sin (as I think he doth) we shall very shortly find another that will.

So able a Leader as John Knox could not want followers of all Nations to attend up∣on him: in the Catalogue or list whereof, [ V] * we must first look upon the Author of a Treatise written in French, and published afterwards in English, entituled, A brief Declaration of the Table of Predestination, in which it is affirmed expresly, That seeing God hath appointed the end, it is necessary also that he should appoint the causes leading to the same end; as if he should have said (saith Campneys) that as God hath appointed some man to be hanged, so he hath appointed him also to steal, as a cause leading to the same end, to which by God he is appointed. The same French English Author lets us know in another place, That by vertue of Gods Will all things were made; yea,* even those things which are evil and execrable: Which execrable saying he endeavoureth to palliate with this distinction, That those evil execrable things which are wrought by the vertue of Gods Will, are not evil and execrable, in that they are wrought by his divine Counsel:* but for as much as they proceed from the Prince of the air And as for the foundation of Election to eternal life, he laies it not on the free Mercy of God in Christ, which he affirms to be no other, but an inferiour cause thereof; but teacheth us to ascend unto an higher cause, that is to say, to the eternal purpose and predestination of God, which he determined only in himself. Conform to which we find in the Genevian Bibles this marginal note, amongst many others of like nature, viz. As the only Will and purpose of God is the chief cause of Election and Reprobation; so his free mercy in Christ is an inferiour cause of sal∣vation, &c. Rom. 9.

In the next place comes out a Pamphlet, entituled Against a privy Papist; [ VI] the Au∣thor whereof takes him to prove this point, That all evil springeth out of Gods Ordinance, or that Gods Predestination was the cause of Adams fall, and of all wickedness. Now Page  592this man goes to work like a Logician, and frames his Syllogism in this manner, viz.

That whatsoever was in Adam,* was in him by Gods Will and Ordinance.

But sin was in Adam.*

Ergo, Sin was in him by Gods Will and Ordinance.

Of which Syllogism Campneys very well observeth, that if the major of it be under∣stood of Adam after his fall, (as by the minor it must be) then may it be affirmed also of any other, that whatsoever execrable wickedness is in him, the same is in him by Gods Will and Ordinance. But then because it might be asked, that seeing it is the Decree, Ordinance, and Will of God that man should not sin; how they should creep into that secret Council,* where God ordained, decreed, and willed the contrary? The leader will come in to help his followers in the present plunge; for in his trayterous and seditious Libel, Against the Regiment of Women (which he calls, The first blast of the Trumpet) he knows not how to shift off the obedience due by Gods word to lawful Queens in their several Kingdoms, but by flying to some special Revelation from his secret will, not publickly communicated to the Sons of men: And this he speaks not faintly, but with zeal and confidence, telling us who assured him, that God hath revealed to some in our Age, (that is to say, himself and his Disciples in the holy Presbytery) that it is more than a Monster in nature, that a Woman should Rule and have Empire against man. And what could they do less, upon this assurance, upon so plain a Revelation of Gods secret Will, than take up Arms against the Queen, depose her from her Throne, expel her out of her native Kingdom, and finally prosecute her to the very death. The Ladder which Constantine the great commended to Assesius a Novatian Bishop, for his safer climbing up to Heaven, was never more made use of than by Knox and Calvin, for mounting them to the sight of Gods secret Council, which St. Paul calls 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or things unspeakable, such as are neither possible nor lawful for a man to utter.

But of all Knox's followers, [ VII] none followed so close upon his heels as Ro. Crowly, a fugitive for Religion in Q. Maries days, and the Author of a Book called a Confutation of 13 Articles,* &c. In which he lays the sin of Adam (and consequently all mens sins from that time to this) upon the Absolute Decree of Predestination; for seeing (saith he) that Adam was so perfect a Creature that there was in him no lust to sin; and yet withal so weak of himself, that he was not able to withstand the assault of the subtile Serpent; no re∣medy, the only cause of his fall must needs be the Predestination of God. In other places of this book he makes it to be a common saying of the Free-will men (as in contempt and scorn he calls them) that Cain was not Predestinate to slay his Brother;* which makes it plain that he was otherwise persuaded in his own opinion: That the most wicked persons that have been, whereof God appointed to be even as wicked as they were, that if God do pre∣destinate a man to do things rashly and without any deliberation, he shall not deliberate at all; but run headlong upon it,* be it good or evil: That we are compelled by Gods predestination to do those things for which we are damned:* And finally, finding this Doctrine to be char∣ged with making God more cruel and unmerciful than the greatest Tyrant, and pressed therewith by some of the contrary persuasion, he returns his answer in this wise, If God (saith he) were an inferiour to any superiour power, to the which he ought to render an account of his doing, or if any of us were not his Creatures, but of another Creation besides his workmanship, then might we charge him with Tyranny, because he condemneth us, and ap∣pointed us to be punished for the things we do by compulsion, through the necessity of his Pre∣destination. For a Catholicon, or general Antidote, to which dangerous Doctrines, a new distinction was devised,* by which, in all abominations God was expresly said to be the Author of the fact or deed, but not of the crime; which subtilty appeareth amongst many others in a brief Treatise of Election and Reprobation, published by one John Veron in the English tongue,* about the beginning of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth; which subtilty, Campneys not unfitly calls, a marvellous sophistication, a strange Paradox, and a cautelous Riddle, and he seems to have good reason for it. For by this Doctrine (as he noteth) it must follow, that God is the Author of the very fact and deed of Adul∣tery, Theft, Murder, &c. but not the Author of the sin; Sin having, as they say, no positive entity, but being a meer nothing as it were, and therefore not to be ascribed to Almighty God: And thereup on he doth infer, that when a Malefactor is hanged for any of the facts before said, he is hanged for nothing, because the fact or deed is ascribed to God, and the sin only charged on him, which sin being nothing in it self, it must be nothing that the Malefactor is condemned or hanged for.

By all the Books it doth appear what method of Predestination these new Gospellers drive at, [ VIII] how close they followed at the heels of their Master Calvin in case they did not Page  593go beyond him. Certain it is that they all speak more plainly than their Master doth; as to the making of God to be the Author of sin; though none of them speak any thing else, than what may Logically be inferred from his ground and principles. And by this book it appeareth also, now contrary these Doctrins are, to the establish'd by the first Reformers in the Church of England; how contrary the whole method of Predestination out of which they flow, is to that delivered in the Articles, the Homilies, and the publick Liturgy, and witnessed too, by so many learned men and godly Mar∣tyrs. Which manifest deviation from the rules of the Church, as it gave just offence to all moderate and sober men, so amongst others unto Campneys before remembred; who could not but express his dislike thereof, and for so doing was traduced for a Pe∣lagian and a Papist, or a Popish Pelagian. For which being charged, by way of Letter, he was necessitated to return an Answer to it which he published in the second or third year of Queen Elizabeth. In which Answer he not only clears himself from favouring the Pelagian Errours in the Doctrine of Freewill, Justification by Works, &c. but solidly and learnedly refuteth the Opinions of certain English Writers and Preachers; whom he accuseth for teaching of false and scandalous Doctrine, under the name of Predestination;* for his preparation whereunto he states the point of Universal Redem∣ption by the death of Christ, out of the parallel which St. Paul hath made between Christ and Adam; that by the comparison of condemnation in Adam, and redemption in Christ, it might more plainly be perceived, that Christ was not inferiour to Adam, nor grace to sin; And that as all the generation of man is condemned in Adam, so is all the generation of man redeemed in Christ: and as general a Saviour is Christ by Redemption, as Adam is a condemner by transgression. Which ground so laid, he shews how inconsistent their Opinions are to the truth of Scripture, who found the Doctrine of Election and Re∣probation on Gods absolute pleasure; by which infinitely the greatest part of all mankind is precedaniously excluded from having any part or interess in this Redem∣ption, reprobated to eternal death, both in body and soul: as the examples of his vengeance, and consequently preordained unto sin, as the means unto it, that so his vengeance might appear with the face of Justice. Which preordaining unto sin, as it doth necessarily infer the laying of a necessity upon all mens actions, whether good or bad, according to that predeterminate Counsel and Will of God; so these good men, the Authors of the books before remembred, do expresly grant it, acknowledging that God doth not only move men to sin, but compel them to it, by the inevitable rules of Predestination.

But against this it is thus discoursed by the said Campneys: [ IX] that if Gods Prede∣stination be the only cause of Adams fall, and filthy sin:* And consequenty the only cause and worker of all evil: yea even with compulsion and force (as they shamefully and plainly affirm) then will no man deny, but that (on the other side) Gods Predestination worketh as violently in all things that are good: so then if Gods Predestination work all, without all exception, both in evil and good; then all other things whatsoever they be, although they all appear to work and do some things; yet do they indeed utterly nothing. So that the Devil doth nothing, Man doth nothing, Laws do nothing, Doctrine doth nothing, Prayer doth nothing: but Gods Predestination doth all together, and is the efficient cause, yea and the only cause of all things. He further proves, that according unto this position,* they hold the Errour both of the Stoicks, as also of the Manicheans; that is to say,* (as St. Augustine declareth) that evil hath his original of Gods Ordinance, and not of mans freewill; for if Murtherers, Adul∣terers, Thieves, Traitors, and Rebels, be of God predestinated and appointed to be wicked, (even as they are) cannot chuse but of meer necessity by the Ordinance of God, commit all such wickedness even as they do: then what is our life but a meer destiny? All our doing Gods Ordinances; and all our imaginations, branches of Gods Predestination? And then we must have Thieves by Predestination, Whoremasters, and Adulterers by Predestina∣tion, Murderers, and Traitors by Predestination, and indeed, what not: if all mens actions are necessitated by the Will of God, and so necessitated that they can neither do less evil, nor more good than they do, though they should never so much endea∣vour it, as some of our Calvinians teach us, which Opinion, as Campneys hath observed,* is condemned by Prosper of Aquitane in his defence of St. Augustine, in these following words: Predestinationem dei, sive ad malum, sive ad bonum, &c.*

For which see, Chap. 6. Numb. 11.

No sooner was this book come out, [ X] but it gave a very strong alarum to those of the Calvinian party within this Realm; which had been very much encreased by the retiring of so many of our learned men to the Zuinglian and Genevian Churches in Queen Maries days, amongst which none more eager, (because more concerned) than Veron, Crowly above mentioned. The first of these, being reader of the Divi∣nity Lecture in the Church of St. Pauls, and one of the Chaplains to the Queen, pub∣lished his Answer shortly after, called, An Apology or Defence of the Doctrine of prede∣stination and dedicated to the Queen: in which Answer he gives his Adversary no bet∣ter Titles, than the blind guide of the free-will men. p. 37. A very Pelagian, and consequently a Rank Papist, p. 40. Suffering the Devil, by such sectaries as Campneys to sow his lyes abroad, &c. and 41. The Standard-bearer of the free-will men; His book he calls a venomous and Railing book, upbraids him with his bearing of a faggot in King Edwards days; and challenging him, that if he be able to maintain his own Doctrine, and oppose that in the answer to it, let him come forth and play the man. Nor was it long before another An∣swer came out by the name of Crowly, called an Apology or defence, of the English Wri∣ters and Preachers, with Cerberus the three headed dog of Hell, Chargeth with false Doctrine, under the name of Predestination, printed at London in the year 1566. And by the Title of this Book, as we may see with what a strange Genius the Gospellers or Cal∣vinians were possessed from the first beginning, we may well conjecture at the Gentle usage, which the poor man was like to find in the whole Discourse. But if it be objected in favour of these two books, that they were published by Authority and according to Order; when that of Campneys, seems to have been published by stealth without the Name of Author or of Printer, as is affirmed in Verons book before re∣membred; It may be since answered, that the Doctrine of the Church was then un∣setled, the Articles of King Edwards time being generally conceived to be out of force, and no new established in their place, when Veron first entred on the cause. And secondly it may be answered, that though Crowlyes Apology came not out till the year 1566, when the new Articles were agreed upon, yet his Treatice called a Con∣futation of thirteen Articles, which gave occasion to the Quarrel, had been written many years before. And he conceived himself obliged to defend his Doctrine, and get as good countenance to it as he could within a time, especially intent on suppres∣sing Popery, might be no hard matter for him to do. And as to that part of the Ob∣jections which relate to Campneys, and his suppessing of his Name, I look upon it as a high part of wisdom in him, in regard of the great sway which the Calvinians had at their first coming over, the prejudice conceived against him for his slips and suffer∣ings in the Reign of K. Edward, and the Authority of the men against whom he writ. Veron a Chaplain to the Queen, Crowly of great esteem in London for his diligent preach∣ing, and Knox the great Directer of the Kirk of Scotland.

CHAP. XVII. Of the Disputes among the Confessors in Prison in Queen Maries days, and the Resetling of the Church on her former Principles under Queen Elizabeth.

MORE calmly, [ I] and with less deviation from the Doctrine of the Church of England, were the same points, disputed in Queen Maries days, amongst the Confessors in Prison, which coming to the knowledg of the Queen and her Councli, a Commission was granted to one Dr. Martin (a busie man in all such matters as ap∣pears by the story) to make enquiry, amongst many other things, into this particu∣lar; and he according to the power given by the Commission, convents before her one John Carelese, born at Coventry, of no better quality than a Weaver, yet one that was grown very able to express himself, when the matter came to examination: by which Examination it appears, that as Carelese somewhat differed in the Doctrine of Predestination, and the point depending thereupon from the Church assembled, ac∣cording as it was established in King Edwards time; so Trew, another of the Prisoners (but of what quality or condition, I was yet to seek) seems more inclinable to that Opinion, if Carelese understood them rightly, which was defended all that time by the Popish Clergy. And that the Reader may perceive the better how the difference stood: I shall lay down so much of the Conference, between Dr. Martin and the Pri∣soner, as concerns this business, leaving the Reader to admire at Gods infinite good∣ness, giving poor unlettered men such a measure of Christian courage, as might en∣able them to speak both stoutly and discreetly in their greatest troubles. Now the said Conference was as followeth.

2. The Examination of John Carelese before Dr. Martin.

No, [ III] Master Doctor, that is not so, there is a thousand times more variety of opi∣nions amongst your Doctors,* which you call, of the Catholick Church; yea, and that in the Sacrament, for the which there is so much blood shed now adays. I mean of your later Doctors and new Writers; as for the old they agree wholly with us.

Now in this conference or examination there are divers things to be considered: For first, I consider Carelese as a man unlettered, and not so thoroughly grounded in the constitution of the Church of England, as not to entertain some thoughts to which the doctrine of this Church could afford no countenance. Amongst which, I reckon that strong confidence which he had of his own salvation, and of the final perseve∣rance of all those who are the chosen Members of the Church of Christ, which was not taught him by the Church, and could not be obtained in any ordinary way by the light of that doctrine which then shined forth unto the People. Secondly, I consider him as one so far instructed in the knowledge of Predestination, as to lay the foundation of it on Gods great mercy, and infinite goodness in Christ Jesus; which plainly crosseth with the new Gospellers of those times, who found the same upon his absolute will and pleasure, without relation to Christs sufferings for us, or our faith in him. Thirdly I consider that the Doctrine of Ʋniversal Redemption, by the death of Christ, and the effectuality thereof to the Sons of men, was then so generally received and taught in the Reformed Church of England, as not to be known to Artificers, Tradesmen, and Me∣chanicks; and that they were so well instructed in the niceties of it, as to believe that though Christ died effectually for all, yet the benefit thereof should be effectually ap∣plied to none but those who do effectually repent. Fourthly, I consider that if the Popish Clergy of those times did believe no otherwise of Predestination, than that men be elected in respect of good works, and so long elected as they do them, and no lon∣ger, as Carelese hath reported of them; the Doctrine of the Church hath been some∣what altered since those times; there being now no such Doctrine taught in the Schools of Rome, as that a man continues no longer in the state of Election, than whilst he is exercised in good works. And finally, I consider the unfortunate estate of those, who living under no certain rule of Doctrine or Discipline, lie open to the practices of cunning and malicious men; by whom they are many times drawn aside from the true Religion. For witnesses whereof, we have Trew and Carelese above mentioned; the one being wrought on by the Papists, the other endangered by the Gospellers or Zuin∣glian Sectaries: For that Carelese had been tampered with by the Gospellers or Zuin∣glian Sectaries, doth appear most clearly, first by the confidence which he had of his own salvation, and of the final perseverance of all others also, which are the chosen members of the Church of Christ; and secondly, but more especially, for giving the scornful title of a Free-will man to one of his fellow Prisoners, who was it seems of Page  597different persuasion from him. For which consult his Letter to Henry Adlington, in the Act. and Mon. Fol. 1749. which happened unto him as to many others; when that Doctrine of the Church wanted the countenance of Law, and the Doctors of the Church here scattered and dispersed abroad, not being able to assist them. In which condition the affairs of the holy Church remained, till the beginning of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, and for some years after.

But no sooner had that gracious Lady attained the Crown, [ IV] when she took order for the reviewing of the publick Liturgy, formerly Authorized by Act of Parliament, in the fifth and sixth years of King Edward VI. The men appointed for which work, were Dr. Parker, after Archbishop of Canterbury; Dr. Grindal, after Bishop of London; Dr. Pilkington, after Bishop of Durham; Dr. Cox, after Bishop of Elie; Dr. May, Dean of Pauls; Dr. Bill, Provost of Eaton, after Dean of Westminster; Mr. Whitehead, (some∣times Chaplain to Queen Anne Bullen) designed to be the first Archbishp of this new Plantation; and finally, Sir Thomas Smith, a man of great esteem with King Edw. VI. and the Queen now Reigning. By thesE men was the Liturgy reviewed, approved, and passed, without any sensible alteration in any of the Rubricks, Prayers and Con∣tents thereof; but only the giving of some contentment to the Papists and all mode∣rate Protestants in two particulars; the first whereof was the taking away of a clause in the Letany, in which the People had been taught to pray to Almighty God to deli∣ver them from the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome, and all his detestable enormities. The second was, the adding of the sentences in the distribution of the Sacrament, viz. The Body of our Lord Jesus, which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul to everlasting life. The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ which was shed for thee, &c. which sentences ex∣clusive of the now following words of participation, as they were only in the first, so were they totally left out of the second Liturgy of King Edward VI. Other alterations I find none mentioned in the Act of Parliament, 1 Eliz. c. 2. but the appointing of certain Lessons for every Sunday in the year; which made no change at all in the publick Doctrine, before contained in that book; and that the People might be the better trained up in the same Religion, which had been taught and preacht unto them in the time of King Edward VI. She gave command by her Injunctions, published in the first year of her Reign, Ann. 1559. that the Paraphrases of Erasmus should be diligently studied both by Priest and People. And to that end it was required (as formerly in the Injunctions of the said King Edward) 1. That the Paraphrases of the said Erasmus,* and on the Gospel in the English tongue, should be provided at the joynt charges of the Parson and Parishioners, and being so provided should be set up in some conve∣nient place of every Church, so as the Parishioners may most commodiously resort un∣to the same, and read the same out of the time of common service. And secondly,* that every Parson, Vicar, Curate, and Stipendary Priest, shall provide, and have of his own within the time therein limitted, the New Testament in Latine and English, with the Paraphrases on the same; conferring the one with the other. And the Bi∣shops by themselves and other Ordinaries, and their Officers in Synods and Visitations, shall examine the said Ecclesiastical Priests how they have profited in the study of holy Scripture. Evident Arguments that there was no intent of setling any other Doctrine in the Church of England, than such as was agreeable to the Judgment of that Learned man.

The next care was for making and perfecting those Homilies, [ V] of which we find men∣tion at the end of King Edwards book, for the necessary edifying of Christian People, and the increase of godly living; both books sufficiently provided for (besides the confirma∣tion of that first Article of the year, 1552.) in the Rubrick of the second Liturgy, where it is said, that after the Creed, if there be no Sermon, shall follow one of the Homilies already set forth, or to be set forth by common authority; which Rubrick being revised with the rest of the Liturgy, put the said books of Homilies (as well the second as first part of them) into the service of the Church, and thereby made them no small part of the publick doctrine: But who they were which laboured in this second book, whe∣ther they were the same that drew up the first, or those who in Queen Elizabeths time reviewed the Liturgy; or whether they were made by the one, and reviewed by the other, I have no where found, though I have taken no small pains in the search there∣of. But those few doctrinals which were contained in the Book of Common Prayer, or deducible from it, not being much taken notice of; and the Homilies not confirm'd by that common Authority, which was required in the Rubrick, the Zuinglians or Gospellers took the opportunity to disperse their doctrines, before the door of utterance Page  598should be shut against them, or any publick course be taken to suppress their practices. And this they did with so much diligence and cunning, that they encreased exceedingly both in power and numbers; of which more hereafter. Notice whereof being taken of those which were of most Authority in the Government of the Church, it was thought necessary for the preventing of the mischief which might thence ensue, that the Articles of Religion, published in King Edwards time, 1552. should be brought under a Review, accommodated to the use of the Church, and made to be the standing rule, by which all persons were to regulate and confirm their Doctrines.

And to this end a Convocation was assembled on the 13. of January, [ IV] Ann. 1562. which continued till the 14th. day of April; the main business which was acted in it, being the canvasing and debating of the Articles of King Edwards book, and passing them in the form and manner in which now they stood, which business as they took first into consideration on the 19th. of January, and diligently prosecuted from day to day, by the Bishops and Clergy in their several houses, they came to an agreement on the 29th. of the same month, on which the said Articles were publickly recited, gene∣rally approved, and subscribed by the greatest part of the Clergy which were then assembled. And being so subscribed, presented to the Queen, and ratified by her Royal Authority, were forthwith published to the same end for which they were made, that is to say, For the avoiding of diversities of opinions, and for the stablishing of consent touching true Religion, as in the title is declared. In the composing of which book, though a clause was added to the twentieth Article, and another taken from the third; though some Articles of King Edwards were totally omitted, and some new made (as that amongst the rest for confirmation of the second Book of Homilies) which were not in the book before; yet the five Articles touching the Doctrine of the Church in the points disputed, as they stand in the eighth Chapter of this book, were left in that same state in which they found them. And being left in the same state in which they found them, were to be taken in the same sense, in which they had been understood at the first making of them, according to such illustrations as occur in the book of Common Prayer, such explanations as are found in the book of Homilies, and the judg∣ment of those Learned men and godly Martyrs, which had a principal hand in the Re∣formation, so that the Articles being the same as to these particulars, the paraphrases of Erasmus state the same; the publick Liturgy, and the first book of Homilies, in all points the same; and the second book of Homilies, agreeing exactly with the first in the present controversies, as appears by the three first Sections of the seventh Chapter of this book, and that which follows in the next; there is no question to be made, but that the doctrine was the same in the said five points, which had been publickly allowed of in the time of King Edward.

But against this it may be said, [ VII] that one of the material Articles of King Edwards book (in reference to the points disputed) was totally left out of this; and therefore that there was some alteration of the Churches judgment, as to the sense and meaning of the present Articles, which Article being the tenth in number, as it stands in that book, is there delivered in these words, viz. Gratia Christi seu spiritus sanctus, qui per eun∣dem datur, &c.

For answer whereun∣to it may first be said, that the Composers of that Book, thought ir not fit to clog it with any unnecessary points in which the peace and safety of the Church seemeth not much concerned; and therefore as they left out the present Article, so they omitted the sixteenth, touching the blasphemy against the Holy Chost, together with the four last of King Edwards Book, touching the general Resurrection, the state of means souls after death, the Doctrine of the Millinaries, and of a general salvation to be given to the wicked also, after they had endured the pains of Hell for a certain time. Secondly, they considered that the doctrine of mans free Co-operation with the grace of God, had been sufficiently expressed and provided for by the tenth Article of this Book, and the ninth of which, illustrated by divers passages in the publick Liturgy, accommoda∣ted and applied to the most encrease of piety in the book of Homilies: therefore that Page  599there was no great need to contend about it, or to retain it in the Book. And some∣what also must be done (the point being so secured and provided for, as before was said) to content (the Zuinglians, or Calvinians, by which last name they were after∣wards more generally called) who were grown strong and numerous in most parts of the Realm: Insomuch that many of them did not refuse to subscribe the book, and were complained of for that cause by the Prolocutor to the House of Bishops; desiring that an order might be presently made to cause them to subscribe their names to the said Article, either in their own house, or before their Lordships: which order being made on the fifth of February, the Prolocutor signified to the Archbishop and Bishops in the name of the lower House of Convocation; that some of the Refusers had sub∣scribed, and that others still persisted in their former obstinacy, And thereupon the Bishops ordered the same day (the tenth of February) quod nomina eorum qui hactenus non subscripserant, presententur coram iis in proxima sessione; that is to say, that the names of such who still refused to subscribe, should be presented to their Lordships at the next Session, which put an end to the dispute, for after this I hear no more of their refusals; the subscription of the book being universal, as appears by this memorial in the journal of the Convocation, viz. universus clerus eosdem etiam unanimiter & recepit & professus est, ut ex manuum suarum subscriptionibus patet; that is to say, that all the Clergy did unani∣mously approve the said Articles, and testified their consent therein, as by the sub∣scription of their hands doth and may appear; so difficult a thing it was from the first beginning, to bring that violent and head-strong faction unto any confor∣mity.

In the next place it is objected that Mr. Alexander Nowel Dean of Saint Pauls, [ VIII] who was Prolocutor in this Convocation,* maintaineth in his Catechism a Doctrine con∣trary to that which the Arminians, as some call them, do now contend for; and that it is not to be thought that he and others engaged with them in the same convoca∣tion, were either so ignorant, as not to understand what they put into the Articles, or so infatuated by God, to put in things quite contrary to their own judgments, which be∣ing supposed or took for granted, we are directed to his Catechism written in the English tongue, and dedicated from the two Archbishops, from which the Objector hath abstracted these two passages following, viz. To the Church do all they properly be∣long, as many as do truly fear, honour, and call upon God, altogether applying their minds to live holily and godly, and with putting all their trust in God, do most assuredly look for the blessedness of eternal life. They that be stedfast, stable and constant in this faith, where chosen and appointed, and (as we term it) predestinate to this so great felicity, p. 44. The Church is the body of the Christian Common-wealth, i. e. the universal number and fellowship of the faithful, whom God through Christ hath before all beginning of time, appointed to everlasting life. Such are the passages in this Catechism, from which the Objector hath con∣cluded, that Mr. Nowel had no communion with Arminians (as some please to call them.) And to say truth, he could have no communion with the Arminians (as some please to call them) though he had desired it; Arminius being not born, or but newly born, when Mr. Nowel wrote that Catechism; and Mr. Nowel had been dead some years be∣fore the name of an Arminian had been heard in England.

But unto this it hath been answered, that looking upon Mr. Nowel, [ IX] in his publick capacity, as he was Prolocutor to that Convocation, it cannot be denied, but that he was as like to undersTand the conduct of all affairs therein, as any other whatsoever: And yet it cannot rationally be inferred from thence, that therefore nothing was con∣cluded in that Convocation which might be contrary to his own judgment for a pri∣vate person, admitting that he was inclined to Calvin in the points disputed, as he was not neither. For had he been of his opinion, the spirit of that Sect is such as could not be restrained from shewing it self dogmatical, and in terms express; and not oc∣casionally only, and on the by (as in the Catechism now before us) and that too in full general terms that no particular conclusion can be gathered from them.* It hath been answered again thus, that the Articles in the five points, being the same with those in King Edwards book, and so confessed by the Objector; and no new sense be∣ing put upon them by the last establishment, they must be understood no otherwise than according to the judgment of those learned men, and godly Maryrs, before remem∣bred, who had before concurred unto the making of them, from which, if Mr. Nowels sense should differ in the least degree, it is to be lookt upon as his own, not the sense of the Church. And thirdly, it hath been observed that the Catechism to which we are referred for the former passages, is not the same with that, which is authorized to Page  600be taught in the Grammar Schools in Greek and Latine, nor the same which was pub∣lished with the consent of the Author in the English tongue, Ann. 1572. but a Cate∣chism of a larger size, yet of less authority, out of which the other was extracted; such points as were superfluous, and not well expressed, not being reduced into the same. And somewhat certainly there was in it, which rendred it uncapable of any further editions, and not thought fit to be translated into Latine, though such a tran∣slation of it was propounded to the Archbishops, Bishops in the Epistle Dedicatory, to the shorter English. And though to let us know what Catechism it is he means, he seems to distinguish it from the other, it being dedicated to the two Archbishops: Yet that doth rather betray the Objectors ignorance than advance his cause, the Authors own Latine Edition, and the English of it beign dedicated to the two Archbishops as well as that.

But since he hath appealed to the larger Catechism, [ X] to the larger Catechism let him go, in which he cannot so much as find one single question touching the Doctrine of Predestination, or the points depending thereupon: and therefore is necessitated to have recourse unto the Articles of the Catholick Church, the mem∣bers and ingredients of it, from whence he doth extract the two former passages. And then again, we are to note, that the first of the two passages not being to be found in the Latine Edition, nor the English translation of the same, is taken al∣most word for word out of Nowels Catechism, therefore to be understood in no other sense than before it was, when it was perused and approved by the Bishops, and other Learned men of King Edwards time. And thirdly, there is nothing in all that passage, which justifieth the absolute and irrespective decree of the Pre∣destinarians, or the restraining of hte benefit of our Saviours sufferings to a few particulars, nothing of Gods invincible working on the hearts of his chosen ones, or the impossibility of mans co-operating any further in his resurrection from the death of sin to the life or righteousness, than in that of his body from the grave to the life of glory; nothing that teacheth any such certainly, or infallibly of per∣severing in the faith and favour of God: as all the sins of the world are not able to deprive them of it, but that they shall, must necessarily be brought again into the place and station from which they had fallen. And as for the last of the said two passages being the very same with that in the Authors Latine, and the English translation of the same, there is nothing in it, which either a true Eng∣lish Protestant, or a Belgick Remonstrant may not easily grant, and yet preserve himself from falling into Calvinism in any of the points disputed. For granting that the Church is the universal number and fellowship of all the faithful whom God through Christ hath before all beginning of time appointed to everlasting life: Yet must it so be understood, that either they were appointed to eternal life upon the sup∣position of their faith and repentance, which may extend to the including of all those who are called to the external participation of the Word and Sacraments: or else that it is meant especially of such as are appointed from all eternity to life everlasting, without excluding any from the Dignity of being members of the Church, who have received the outward call, and openly joyn with them in all publick duties, and thereby pass in common estimate amongst the faithful Be∣lievers: And then this definition will afford no comfort to our modern Calvinists, or create any inconvenience unto those whom they call Arminians.

Page  601

CHAP. XVIII. A Declaration of the Doctrine in the Points disputed under the new establishment made by Queen Elizabeth.

THese Obstacles being thus removed, [ I] I shall proceed unto a Declaration of the Churches Doctrine under this new establishment, made by Queen Elizabeth. And first, all Arguments derived from the publick Liturgy, and the first book of Ho∣milies being still in force; we will next see what is delivered in the Homilies of the second part, establisht by a special Article, and thereby made a part of the doctrine here by Law established: And first, as touching the doctrine of Predestination, it is declared in the Homily of the Nativity, That as in Adam all men universally sinned; so in Adam all men received the reward of sin; that is to say, became mortal and subject unto death, having in themselves nothing but everlasting condemnation, both of body and soul; that man being in this wretched case, ti pleased God to make a new Covenant with him, namely, that he would send a Mediator or Messias into the world which should make intercession, and put him∣self as a stay between both parties, to pacifie wrath and indignation conceived against sin, and to deliver man out of the miserable curse, and cursed misery, whereunto he was fallen head∣long, by disobeying the Will and Commandment of the only Lord and Maker. Nor, secondly, was this deliverance and redemption partial, intended only for a few, but general and universal for all man-kind; the said Homily telling us not long after, that all this was done to the end, the promise and covenant of God made unto Abraham and his Posterity,* concerning the Redemp∣tion of the World, might be credited and believed—to deliver man-kind from the bitter curse of the Law, and make perfect satisfaction by his death for the sins of all People.— For the accomplishment whereof, It was expedient, saith the Homily, that our Medi∣ator should be such an one as might take upon him the sins of Man-kind, and sustain the due punishment thereof, viz. Death—to the intent he might more fully and perfectly make satisfaction for man-kind: which is as plain as words can make it, and yet not more plain than that which followeth in the Homily of the worthy receiving of the Sa∣crament, Fol. 200.

Page  602

Nor doth the Homily speak less plainly in another place concerning Universal Grace, [ II] than it doth speak to this in reference to Universal Redemption, as appears evidently by the first part of the Sermon against the peril of Idolatry,* in which it is declared in the way of paraphrase on some passages in the 40. Chapter of the Prophet Isaiah, That it had been preached to men from the beginning, and how by the Creation of the World, and the greatness of the work, they might understand the Majesty of God, the Creator and Maker of all things to be greater than it should be expressed in any image or bodily similitude. And therefore by the light of the same instruction (had they not shut their eyes against it) they might have come unto a further knowledg of the Will of God; and by degrees to the performance of all moral duties required of them before Christ coming in the flesh. And in the third part of the same Sermon there are some passages which do as plainly speak of falling from God, the final alienation of the Soul of a man once righteous, from his love and favour. Where it is said, how much better in were that the Arts of Painting, and we had never been found, than one of them whose Souls are so precious in the sight of God, should by occasion of Image or Picture, perish and be lost. And what can here be understood, by the souls which are so precious in the sight of God, but the souls of the Elect, of justified and righteous per∣sons, the souls of wicked men being vile and odious in his sight, hated by God, as Esau was, before all Eternity, as the Calvinians do informs us. And what else can we understand by being perished and lost, but a total or final alienation of those precious souls,* from his grace and favour: more plainly speaks the Homily of the Resurrection, in which the Church represents unto us, what shame it should be for us, being thus clearly and freely washed from our sin to return to the filthiness thereof again? What a folly it would be for us, being thus endued with Righteousness to lose in again? What a madness it would be to lose the inheritance we be now set in, for the vile and transitory pleasure of sins. And what an unkindness it would be, where our Saviour Christ of his mercy is come unto us, to dwell with us as our guest, to drive him from us, and to banish him violently out of our souls: And instead of him in whom is all grace and vertue to receive the ungracious spirit of the De∣vil, the founder of all naughtiness and mischief; than which there can be nothing more direct and positive to the point in hand. And as for the co-operation of mans will with the grace of God, either in accepting or resisting it, when once offered to him, besides what may be gathered from the former passages; it is to be presumed as a thing past question in the very nature of the book, for what else are those Homilies but so many proofs and arguments to evince that point. For to what purpose were they made, but to stir up the minds of all men to the works of piety: And what hopes could the Au∣thors of them give unto themselves of effecting that which they endeavoured, had they not presupposed and taught that there was such a freedom in the will of man, such an assistance of Gods grace, as might enable them to perform these works of piety, as in all and every one of the said Homilies are commended to them. More for the proof of which points, might be gathered from the said second book of Homilies; established by the Articles of Queen Elizabeth's time, as before is said, were not these sufficient. Proceed we therefore from the Homilies, [ III] and the publick Monuments of the Church to the judgment of particular persons, men of renown and eminent in their several places, amongst which we find incomparable Jewel, then Bishop of Salsbury, thus clearly speaking in behalf of Universal Redemption, viz. Ceerto animis nostris persua∣demus, &c.

Now as Bishop Jewel was a principal member of the House of Bi∣shops, so Mr. Nowel was the Prolocutor for the House of the Clergy, in which the Ar∣ticles were debated and agreed upon. In which respect his favour is much sought by those of the Calvinian party, as before was shewn. But finding no comfort for them in his larger Catechism, let us see what may be found in his Latin Catechism, autho∣rized to be taught in Schools, and published by his consent in the English Tongue, Anno 1572. And first he sheweth, that as God is said to be our Father for some other reasons,* so most specially for this; quod nos divine per spiritum sanctum generavit, & per fidem in verum suum, atque naturalem filium Jesum Christum nos elegit, sibique Filios, & Page  603regni Coelestis, atque sempiternae vitae heredes per eundem instituit, that is to say, because he hath divinely regenerated us (or begotten us again) by the Holy Ghost, and hath elected us by Faith in his true and natural Son Christ, Jesus, and through the same Christ hath adopted us to be his Children and Heirs of his heavenly Kingdom and of life everlasting. And if Election come by our faith in Christ, as he saith it doth, eni∣ther a Supra-lapsarian, nor a Sub-lapsarian, can find any comfort from this man, in favour of that absolute and irrespective decree of Predestination, which they would gladly father on him in his larger Catechism, and then as for the method of Prede∣stination, he thus sets it forth, viz. Deus Adamum illis honoris insignibus ornavit,* ut ea cum sibi tum suis, id est, toto humano generi, aut servaret, aut amitteret, &c.

Proceed we next to a Lermon preached at St. Pauls Cross, Octob. 27. 1854. by Samuel Harsnet then fellow of Pembrook Hall in Cambridg, [ IV] and afterwards Master of the same, preferred from thence to the See of Chichester, from thence translated unto Norwich, and finally to the Archiepiscopal See of York. For the Text or subject of his Sermon, he made choice of those words in the Prophet Ezekiel, viz. As I live (saith the Lord) I delight not in the death of the wicked, Chap. 33. v. 11. In his Discourse upon which Text, he first dischargeth God from laying any necessity of sinning on the sons of men, and then delighting in their punishment because they have sinned: he thus breaks out against the absolute decree of Reprobation, which by that time had been made a part of the Zuinglian Gospel,* and generally spread abroad both from Press and Puipit. There is a conceit in the World (saith he) speak little better of our gracious God than this, and that is, that God shoould design many thousands of souls to Hell before they were, not in eye to their faults, but to his own absolute will and power, and to get him glory in their damnation. This Opinion is grown high and monstrous, and like a Goliah, and men do shake and tremble at it; yet never a man reacheth to Davids sing to cast it down. In the name of the Lord of Hosts we will encounter it, for it hath reviled not the Host of the living God, but the Lord of Hosts.

First, That it is directly in opposition to this Text of holy Scripture, and so turns the truth of God into a lye. For whereas God in this Text doth say and swear, that he doth not de∣light in the death of man; this Opinion saith, that not one or two, but millions of men should fry in Hell; and that he made them for no other purpose than to be the children of death and hell, and that for no other cause but his meer pleasure sake; and so say, that God doth not only say, but will swear to a lye. For the Oath should have run thus, As I live (saith the Lord) I do delight in the death of man.

Secondly, it doth (not by consequence but) directly make God the Author of sin. For, if God without eye to sin did design men to hell, then did he say and set down that he should sin; for without sin he cannot come to hell: And indeed doth not this Opinion say, that the Almighty God in the eye of his Counsel, did not only see, but say that Adam should fall, and so order and decree, and set down his fall, that it was no more possible for him not to fall, than it was possible for him not to eat? And of that when God doth order, set down and decree (I trust) he is the Author, unless they will say, that when the Right honourable Lord Keeper doth say in open Court, We order, he means not to be the Author of that his Order.

Which said, he tells us Thirdly,* that it takes away from Adam (in his state of innocency) all freedom of will and Liberty not to sin. For had he had freedom to have altered Gods designment, Adams liberty had been above the designment of God. And here I remember a little witty solution is made, that is, if we respect Adams Will, he had power to sin, but if Gods Decrees, he could not sin. This is a filly solution; And indeed it is as much as if you should take a sound, strong man that hath power to walk, and to lie still, and bind him hand and foot, (as they do in Bedlam) and Page  604lay him down, and then bid him rise up and walk, or else you will stir him up with a whip; and he tell you, that there be chains upon him, so that he is not able to stir; and you tell him again, that, that is no excuse, for if he look upon his health, his strength, his legs, he hath power to walk, or to stand still; but if upon his Chains, indeed in that respect he is not able to walk. I trust he that should whip that man for not walking, were well worthy to be whipt himself: Fourthly, As God do abhor a heart, and a heart, and his soul detesteth also a double minded man: so himself cannot have a mind and a mind: a face like Janus, to look two ways. Yet this Opinion maketh in God two Wills, the one flat opposite to the other: An Hidden Will by which he appointed and willed that Adam should sin; and an open Will by which he forbad him to sin. His open Will said to Adam in Paradise, Adam thou shalt not eat of the Tree of good and evil: His Hidden Will said, Thou shalt eat; nay, now I my self cannot keep thee from eating, for my Decree from Eternity is pas∣sed, Thou shalt eat, that thou may drown all thy posterity into sin, and that I may drench them as I have designed, in the bottomless pit of Hell. Fifthly, Amongst all the Abomina∣tions of Queen Jezabel, that was the greatest (1 Kings 21.) when as hunting after the life of innocent Naboth, she set him up amongst the Princes of the Land, that so he might have the greater fall. God planted man in Paradise, (as in a pleasant Vineyard) and mounted him to the World as on a stage, and honoured him with all the Soveraignty, over all the Creatures; he put all things in subjection under his feet, so that he could not pass a decree from all Eternity against him, to throw him down head-long into Hell: for God is not a Jezabel, Tollere in altum, to lift up a man, ut lapsu graviore ruat, that he may make the greater noise with his fall.

But he goes on, [ VI] and having illustrated this cruel Mockery by some further instances, he telleth us,* that the Poet had a device of their old Saturn, that he eat up his Children assoon as they were born, for fear least some of them should dispossess him of Heaven. Pharaoh King of Egypt, had almost the same plea, for he made away all the young Hebrew Males lest they should multiply too fast: Herod for fear our Saviour Christ should supplant him in his Kingdom, caused all the young Children to be slain: those had all some colour for their barbarous cruelty But if any of those had made a Law, designing young Children to torments before they had been born; and for no other cause and purpose, but his own absolute will; the Heavens in course would have called for revenge, It is the Law of Nations, that no man innocent shall be condemned; of Reason not to hate, where we are not hurt; of Nature to like and love her own brood, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, (saith the holy Ghost) we are Gods Kindred, he cannot hate us when we are innocent, when we are nothing, when we are not. Now touching Gods Glory (which is to us all as dear as our life) this Opinion hath told us, a very inglorious and shameful Tale, for it saith, the Almighty God would have many souls go to Hell; and that they may come thither, they must sin, that so he may have just cause to condemn them. Who doth not smile at the Grecians Conceit, that gave their God a glorious title for killing of flies? Gods Glory in punishing ariseth from his Justice in revenging of sin: and for that it tells us, as I said, a very sad and unpleasant Tale; for who could digest it to hear a Prince say after this manner? I will beget met a Son, that I may kill him, that I may so get me a name, I will beget him without both his feet, and when he is grown up, having no feet, I will command him to walk upon pain of death: and when he breaketh my Commandment, I will put him to death. O beloved, these glorious fancies, imaginations and shews, are far from the nature of our gracious, merciful and glo∣rious God, who hath proclaimed himself in his Titles Royal, Jehovah, the Lord, the Lord strong and mighty, and terrible, slow to anger, and of great goodness: And therefore let this conceit be far from Jacob, and let it not come near the Tents of Joseph. How much holier and heavenlier conceit had the holy Fathers of the Justice of God? Non est ante pu∣nitor Deus, quam peccator homo, God put not on the person of a Revenger, before man put on the person of an Offender, saith St. Ambrose. Neminem coronat antequam vincit; neminem punit antequam peccat; he crowns none before he overcomes, and he punisheth no man before his offence. Et qui facit miseros ut miseratur, crudelem habet misere∣cordiam, he that puts man into miseries that he may pity him, hath no kind, but a cruel pity.

The absolute decree of Reprobation being thus discharged, [ VII] he shews in the next place,* that as God desireth not the death of man without relation to his sin, so he de∣sireth not the death of the sinful man, or of the wicked sinful man, but rather that they shoudl turn from their wickedness and live. And he observes it is said unto the Goats in St. Matthews Gospel, Ite malidicti in ignem paratum;

The stating and canvasing of which points, so plainly, curtly to the Doctrines of che old Zuinglian Gospellers, and the modern Calvinians; as they take up the rest of the Sermon, so to the Sermon I refer the Reader for his furtehr satisfaction in them. I note this only in the close, that there is none of the five Arminian Articles (as they commonly call them) which is not contained in terms express; or may not easily be found by way of Deduction in one or more of the six consequences before recited.

Now in this Sermon there are sundry things to be considered, as namely, first, [ VIII] That the Zuinglian or Calvinian Gospel in these points, was grown so strong, that the Preacher calls it their Goliah; so huge and monstrous, that many quaked and trembled at it, but none, that is to say, but few or none, vel duo, vel nemo, in the words of Persius, durst take up Davids sling to throw it down. Secondly, That in canvasing the absolute Decree of Reprobation, the Preacher spared none of those odious aggravations which have been charged upon the Doctrines of the modern Calvinists by the Remonstrants, and their party in these latter times. Thirdly, That the Sermon was preached at St. Pauls Cross, the greatest Auditory of the Kingdom, consisting not only of the Lord Mayor, the Aldermen, and the rest of the chief men in the City, but in those times of such Bishops, and other learned men as lived occasionally in London, and the City of Westminster, as also of the Judges and most learned Lawyers, some of the Lords of the Council being for the most part present also. Fourthly, That for all this we can∣not find, that any offence was taken at it, or any Recantation enjoyned upon it, either by the high Commission, or Bishop of London, or any other having Authority in the Church of England, nor any complaint made of it to the Queen, or the Council-Table, as certainly there would have been, if the matter of the Sermon had been con∣trary to the Rules of the Church, and the appointments of the same. And finally we may observe, that though he was made Archbiship of York in the Reign of King Charles, 1628. when the times are thought to have been inclinable, to those of the Arminian Doctrines, yet he was made Master of Pembrook Hill, Bishop of Chichester, and from thence translated unto Norwich, in the time of King James. And thereupon we may conclude, that King James neither thought this Doctrine to be against the Articles of Religion, here by Law established, nor was so great an Enemy to them, or the men that held them, as some of our Calvinians have lately made him.

But against this it is objected by Mr. Prin in his book of Perpetuity, [ IX] &c. printed at London in the year 1627. 1. That the said Mr. Harsnet was convented for this Ser∣mon, and forced to recant it as Heretical. 2. That upon this Sermon,* and the Contro∣versies that arose upon it in Cambridg between Baroe and Whitacres, not only the Ar∣ticles of Lambeth were composed (of which more hereafter) but Mr. Wotton was appointed by the University to confute the same. 3. That the siad Sermon was so far from being published or printed, that it was injoyned by Authority to be recanted. For Answer whereunto, it would first be known, where the said Sermon was recanted, and by whose Authority. Not in or by the University of Cambridg, where Mr. Harsnet lived both then, and a long time after; for the Sermon was preached at St. Pauls Cross, and so the University could take no cognisance of it, nor proceed against him for the same. And if the Recantation was madea t St. Pauls Cross, where the sup∣posed offence was given, it would be known by whose Authority it was enjoyned. Not by the Bishop of London, in whose Diocess the Sermon was preached: for his Au∣thority did not reach so far as Cambridg, whither the Preacher had retited after he had performed the service he was called unto: and if it were injoyned by the High Com∣mission, and performed accordingly, there is no question to be made, but that we should have heard of in the Anti-Arminianism, where there are no less than eight leaves Page  606spend in relating the story of a like Recantation pretended to be made by one Mr. Barret on the tenth of May 1595. and where it is affirmed, that the said Mr. Harsnet held and maintained the same errors for which Barret was to make his Recantation. But as it will be proved hereafter that no such Recantation wass made by Barret, so we have reason to believe that no such Recantation was imposed on Harsnet. Nor, secondly, can it be made good, that the Controversies between Doctor Whitacres and Dr. Baroe were first occasioned by this Sermon, or that Mr. Wotton was appointed by the University to confute the same. For it appears by a Letter written from the heads of that Uni∣versity to their Chancellor, the Lord Treasurer Burleigh. dated March 18. 1595. that Baroe had maintained the same Doctrines, and his Lectures and Determinations above 14 years before, by their own account, for which see Chap. 21. Numb. 80. which must be three years at the least before the preaching of that Sermon by Mr. Harsnet. And though it is probable enopugh that Mr. Wotton might give himself the trouble of con∣futing the Sermon, yet it is more than probable that he was not required so to do by that University. For if it had been so appointed by the University, he would have been rewarded for it by the same power and authority which had so appointed, when he appeared a Candidate for the Professorship on the death of Whitacres, but could not find a party of sufficient power to carry it for him, of which see also Chap. 21. Numb. 4. And thirdly, as for the not Priting of the Sermon, it is easily answered; the genius of the time, not carrying men so generally to the Printing of Sermons as it hath done since. But it was Printed at the last, though long first: And being Printed at the last, hath met with none so forward in the Confutation, as Mr. Wotton is affirmed to be, when at first it was Preached. And therefore notwithstanding these three surmises which the Author of the Perpetuity, &c. hath presented to us, it may be said for certain, as be∣fore it was, that Mr. Harsnet was never called in question for that Sermon of his, by any having Authority to convent him for it, and much less, that he ever made any such Recantation, as by the said Author is suggested.

In the next place we will behold a passage in one of the Lectures upon Jonah, [ X] deli∣vered at York, Anno 1594. by the right learned Dr. John King (discended from a Bro∣ther of Robert King, the first Bishop of Oxon) afterwards made Dean of Christ Church, and from thence presented by the power and favour of Archbishop Bancroft to the See of London: A Prelate of too known a zeal to the Church of England to be accused of Popery, or any other Heterodoxies in Religion, of what sort soever, who in his Le∣cture on these words, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown, cap. 3. verse 4. discoursed on them in this manner.

The only matter of Question herein,* is how it may stand with the constancy and truth of eternal God to pronounce a Judgment against a place which taketh not effect within one hundred years: For either he weas ignorant of his own time, which we cannot imagine of an omniscient God, or his mind was altered, which is unpro∣ble to suspect.* For is the strength of Israel a man that he should lie, or as the Son of man that be should repent? Is he not yesterday, and to day, and the same for ever? that was, that is, and that which is to come? I mean not only in substance, but in Will and Intention? Doth he use lightness? Are the words that he speaketh, yea and nay? Doth he both affirm and deny too?* Are not all his Promises, are not all his Threatnings, are not all his Mercies, are not all his Judgments, are not all his Words, are not all the titles and jots of his words, yea and amen? so firmly ratified, that they cannot be broken: Doubtless it shall stand immutable, When the Heaven and the Earth shall be changed,* and wax old like a garment, Ego Deus & non mutor, I am God that am not changed.* The School in this respect hath a wise distinction, It is one thing to change the will, and another to will a change, or to be willed that a change should be. God will have the Law and Ceremony at one time, Gospel without Ceremony at another, this was his Will from Everlasting, constant and unmoveable, that in their several courses both should be. Though there be a change in the matter and subject, there is not a change in him that disposeth it. Our Will is in Winter to use the fire, in Sum∣mer a cold and an open air; the thing is changed according to the season; but our Will whereby we all decreed and determined in our selves so to do, remain the same.

Sometimes the Decrees and purposes of God consist of two parts, [ XI] the one whereof God revealeth at the first, and the other he concealeth a while, and keepeth in his own knowledge; as in the action enjoyned to Abraham, the purpose of God was two∣fold: 1. To try his Obedience. 2. To save the Child. A man may impute it incon∣stancy Page  607to bid and unbid:* but that the Will of the Lord was not plenarily understood in the first part. This is it which Gregory expresseth in apt terms, God changeth his in∣tent pronounced sometimes, but never his Counsel intended. Sometimes things are decreed and spoken of according to inferiour cause, which by the highest and over∣ruling cause are otherwise disposed of. One might have said, and said truly both ways, Lazarus shall rise again, and Lazarus shall not rise again: if we esteem it by the power and finger of God it shall be; but if we leave it to nature, and to the arm of flesh, it shall never be. The Prophet Esay told Hezekias the King, put thy house in or∣der,* for thou shalt die: considering the weakness of his body, and the extremity of his disease, he had reason to warrant the same; but if he told him contrariwise, accor∣ding to that which came to pass, thou shalt not die, looking to the might and merecy of God, who received the prayers of the King, he had said as truly. But the best defi∣nition is, that in most of these threatning there is a condition annexed unto them, ei∣ther exprest or understood, which is as the hinges to the door,* and turneth forward and backward the whole matter. In Jeremy it is exprest, I will speak suddenly against a Nation or a Kingdom, to pluck it up, to root it out, and to destroy it: But if this Nation,* against whom I have pronounced, turn from their wickedness, I will repent of the plague which I thought to bring upon them. So likewise for his mercy, I will speak suddenly concerning a Nation, and concerning a Kingdom, to build it, and to plant it; but if yet do evil in my sight, and hear not my voice, I will repent of the good I thought to do for them. Gen. 20. it is exprest, where God telleth Abimeleck, with-holding Abrahams Wife, Thou art a dead man, because of the Woman which thou hast taken: the event fell out otherwise, and Abimeleck purged himself with God, With an upright mind, and innocent hands have I done this. There is no question but God inclosed a condition with his speech, Thou art a dead man, if thou restore not the Woman withoput touching her body and dis∣honouring her Husband.

Thus we may answer the scruple by all these ways. 1. [ XII] Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown, and yet forty and forty days and Nineveh shall not be overthrown. Wy? Because Nineveh is changed, and the unchangable will of God ever was, that if Nineveh shewed a change, it should be spared. 2. There were two parts of Gods purpose, the one disclosed, touching the subversion of Nineveh, the other of her con∣version, kept within the heart of God. Whereupon he changed the sentence pro∣nounced, but not the counsel whereunto the sentence weas referred. 3. If you consider Nineveh in the inferiour cause, that is in the deservings of Inineveh, it shall fall to the ground; but if you take it in the superiour cause, in the goodness and clemency of Almighty God, Nineveh shall escape. Lastly, the judgment was pronounced with a condition reserved in the mind of the judge, Nineveh shall be overthrown if it repent not. Now he that speaketh with condition, may change his mind without suspition of lightness.* As Paul promised the Corinthians to come to them in his way towards Macedonia, and did it not: For he evermore added in his soul that condition which no man must exclude, if it stand with the pleasure of God, and he hinder me not. Philip threatned the Lacedemonians, that if he invaded their Country, he would utterly ex∣tinguish them: They wrote him no other answer but this, If, meaning it was a con∣dition well put in, because he was never like to come amongst them,

If it were not for conditions and exceptions, every thing would be perfect, but nothing more unperfect than Nineveh, if this secret condition of the goodness of God at the se∣cond hand had not been.

So far this Reverend Prelate hath discoursed of the nature of Gods decrees, [ XIII] and ac∣commodated his discourse thereof to the case of the Ninevites. Let us next see how far the principal particulars of the said discourse, and the case of the Ninevites it self my be accommodated to the Divine decree of Predestination; concerning which the said Reverend Prelate was not pleased to declare his judgment, either as being imper∣tinent to the case which he had in hand, or out of an unwillingness to engage himself in those disputes which might not suddenly be ended. All that he did herein, was to take care for laying down such grounds in those learned Lectures, by which his judg∣ment might be guessed at, though not declared. As Dr. Peter Baroe (of whom more hereafter) declared his judgment touching the Divine Decrees in the said case of the Ninevites, before he fell particularly on the Doctrine of Predestination, as he after did. Page  608And first, as for accommodating the case of the Ninevites to the matter which is now be∣fore us, we cannot better do it than in the words of Bishop Hooper, so often men∣tioned; who having told us that Esau was no more excluded from the promise of grace than Jacob was,* proceedeth thus, viz.

And that his life and conversation was not as agreeable unto justice and equity as Jacobs was, the sentence of God unto Rebecca was not in the fault, but his own malice. Out of which words we may observe, first, that the sentence of God concerning Esau, was not the cause that his conversation was so little agreeable to justice and equity; no more than the judgment denounced against the Ninevites could have been the cause of their impenitency, if they had continued in their sins and wickednesses without re∣pentance; contrary to the Doctrine of the Gospellers in Queen Maries days, impu∣ting all mens sins to Predestination. Secondly, that Gods threatnings against Esau (supposing them to be tanta-mount to a reprobation) could no more have hindred his salvation, than the like threatning against the Ninevites could have sealed to them the assurance of their present destruction; if he had heartily repented of his sins, as the Ninevites did. And therefore thirdly, as well the decree of God concerning Esau, as that which is set out against the Ninevites, are no otherwise to be understood than un∣der the condition tacitly annexed unto them; that is to say, that the Ninevites should be destroyed within forty days, if they did not repent them of their sins; and that Esau should be reprobated to eternal death, if he gave himself over to the lusts of a sen∣sual appetite: Which if it be confessed for true, as I think it must, then fourthly, the promises made by God to Jacob, and to all such as are beloved of God, as Jacob was, and consequently their election unto life eternal, are likewise to be understood with the like condition; that is to say, if they repent them of their sins, and do unfainedly be∣lieve his holy Gospel. The like may be affirmed also in all the other particulars touching Gods decrees, with reference to the Doctrine of Predestination, which are observed or accommodated by that learned Prelate in the case of the Ninevites, had I sufficient time and place to insist upon them.

CHAP. XIX. Of the first great breach which was made in the Doctrine of the Church, by whom it was made, and what was done towards the making of it up.

IT was not long that Queen Mary sate upon the Throne, [ I] and yet as short time as it was, it gave not only a strong interruption for the present to the proceeding of the Church, but an occasion also of great discord and dissention in it for the time to come. For many of our Divines, who had fled beyond the Sea of avoid the hurry of her Reign, though otherwise men of good abilities in most parts of Learning, returned so altered in their principals, as to points of Doctrine, so disaffected to the Govern∣ment, Forms of worship here by Law established, that they seem'd not to be the same men at their coming home, as they had been at their going hence: yet such was the necessity which the Church was under, of filling up the vacant places and preferments, which had been made void either by the voluntary discession, or positive deprivation of the Popish Cleergy, that they wer fain to take in all of any condition, which were able to do the publick service, without relation to their private opinions in doctrine or discipline, nothing so much regarded in the chice of men for Bishopricks, Deanries, Dignities in Cathedral Churches, the richest Benefices in the Countrey, and places of most command and trust in the Universities, as their known zeal against the Papists, together with such a sufficiency of learning as might enable them for writing and preaching against the Popes Supremacy, the carnal presence of Christ in the blessed Sa∣crament, the superstitions of the Mass, the half Communion, the celebrating of Di∣vine service in a tongue not known unto the People, the inforced single life of Priests, the worshipping of Images, and other the like points of Popery, which had given most offence, and were the principal causes of that separation.

On this account we find Mr. Pilkington preferred to the See of Durham, [ II] and Whitting∣ham to the rich Deanry of the Church; of which the one proved a grear favourer of the Non-conformists, as is confessed by one who challengeth a relation to his blood and family; the other associated himself with Goodman, as after Goodman did with Knox, for lanting Puritanism and sedition in the Kirk of Scotland. On this account Dr. Law∣rence Humphrey a professed Calvinian, in point of doctrine, and a Non-conformist, (but qualified with the title of a moderate one) is made the Queens Professor for Divinity in the University of Oxon; Thomas Cartwright, that great Incendiary of this Church, preferred to be the Lady Margarets Professor in the University of Cambridge: Sampson made Dean of Christ-church, and presently propter Puritanismum Exacutoratus,* turned out again for Puritanism, as my Author hath it: Hardiman made one of the first Pre∣bends of Westminister of the Queens foundation, and not long after deprived of it by the high Commissioners for breaking down the Altar there, and defacing the ancient utepsils and ornaments which belonged to the Church. And finally upon this ac∣count, as Whitehead, who had been Chaplain to Queen Anne Bullain, refused the Archbishoprick of Canterbury, before it was offered unto Parker and Coverdale to be re∣stored to the See of Exon, which he had chearfully accepted in the time of K. Edward; so Mr. John Fox of great esteem for his painful and laborious work of Acts and Monu∣ments (commonly called the Book of Martyrs) would not accept of any preferment in the Church, but a Prebends place in Salisbury, which tied him not to any residence in the same. And this he did especially (as it after proved) to avoid subscription, shew∣ing a greater willingness to leave his place, than to subscribe unto the Articles of Re∣ligion, then by Law established, when he was legally required to do it by Arch-bishop Parker. Of this man there remains a short discourse in his Acts and Monuments of Pre∣destination, occasioned by a Letter of Mr. Bradfords before remembred, whose Ortho∣dox doctrine in that point he feared might create some danger unto that of Calvin, which then began to find a more general entertainment than could be rationally ex∣pected in so short a time: And therefore as a counter-ballance he annexeth this dis∣course of his own with this following title, viz.

Notes on the same Epistle, and the manner of Election thereunto appertaining.

1. What Gods Election is, and what the cause thereof. 2. How Gods Election Page  610proceedeth in working our salvation. 3. To whom Gods Election pertaineth, and how a Man may be certain thereof.—Between Predestination and Election this difference there is, Predestination is as well to the Reprobate as to the Elect, Election pertaineth only to them that be saved. Predestination in that it respecteth the Re∣bate, is called Reprobation; in that it respected the saved, is called Election, and is thus defined. Predestination is the eternal decreement of God, purposed before in himself, what shall befal all men, either to salvation or damnation; Election is the free mercy and grace of God, in his own will through faith in Christ his Son, choosing and preferring to life such as pleaseth him. In this definition of Election first goeth before (the mercy and grace of God) as the causes thereof, whereby are excluded all works of the Law, and merits of deserving, whether they go before faith, or come after; so was Jacob chosen, and Esau refused before either of them began to work, &c. Secondly, in that the mercy of God in this Definition is said to be (free) thereby is to be noted the proceeding and working of God not to be bound to any ordinary place, or to any succession of choice, nor to state and dignity of person, nor to wor∣thiness of blood, &c. but all goeth by the meer will of his own purpose, as it is writ∣ten, spiritus ubi vult spirat, &c. And thus was the outward race and stock of Abraham, after flesh refused (which seemed to have the preheminence) and another seed after the Spirit, raised by Abraham of the stones, that is of the Gentiles. So was the out∣ward Temple of Jerusalem, and Chair of Moses, which seem'd to be of price for∣saken, and Gods Chair advanced in other Nations. So was tall Saul refused, and little David accepted: the Rich, the Proud, and the Wise of this world rejected, and the word of salvation daily opened to the poor and miserable abjects, the high Moun∣tains cast under, and the low valleys exalted, &c.

although they never did that obedience themselves which was in him, Rom. 5.

Page  611

Such is the judgment and opinion of our Martyrologist, [ IV] in the great point of Pre∣destination unto life; the residue thereof touching justification, being here purposely cut off with an &c. as nothing pertinent to the business which we have in hand. But between the Comment and the Text there is a great deal of difference, the Comment laying the foundation of Election on the Will of God, according to the Zuinglian or Calvinian way; but the Text laying it wholly upon faith in Christ (whom God the Fa∣ther hath Predestinate in Christ unto eternal life) according to the doctrine of the Church of England. The Text first presupposeth an estate of sin and misery, into which man was fallen, a ransom paid by Christ for man and his whole Posterity, a freedom left in man thus ransomed, either to take, or finally to refuse the benefit of so great mercy: and then fixing or appropriating the benefit of so great a mercy (as Christ and all his merits do amount to) upon such only as believe. But the Comment takes no notice of the fall of man, grounding both Reprobation and Election on Gods absolute plea∣sure, without relation to mans sin, or our Saviours sufferings, or any acceptation or re∣fusal of his mercies in them. As great a difference there is between the Author of the Comment and Bishop Hooper, as between the Comment and the Text: Bishop Hooper telleth us, cap. 10. num. 2. that Saul was no more excluded from the promise of Christ, than David; Esau than Jacob; Judas than Peter, &c. if they had not excluded themselves: quite contrary to that of our present Author, who having asked the question, why Jacob was chosen, and not Esau; why David accepted, and Saul refused, &c. makes answer, that it cannot otherwise be answered, than that so was the good will of God.

And this being said, [ V] I would fain know upon what authority the Author hath placed Nachor amongst the Reprobates, in the same rank with Esan, Pharaoh and Saul; all which he hath marked out to reprobation; the Scripture laying no such censure on Nachor, or his Posterity, as the Author doth: Or else the Author must know more of the estate of Nachor than Abraham his Brother did; who certainly would never have Page  613chosen a Wife for his Son Isaac out of Nachors line, if he had looked upon them as reprobated and accursed of God. I observe, secondly, that plainly God is made an accepter of persons by the Authors doctrine. For first, he telleth us that the elder Son had a better will to tarry by his Father, and so did indeed, but the fatted Calf was given to the younger Son that ran away; and thereupon he doth infer, that the matter goeth not by the will of man, but by the will of God, as it pleaseth him to accept. I observe, thirdly, that Vocation, in the Authors judgment, standeth upon Gods Election, as the work thereof; whereas Vocation is more general, and is extended unto those also whom they call the Reprobate, and therefore standeth not on Election, as the Author hath it. For many are called, though out of those many which are called, but a few are chosen. Fourthly, I observe, that notwithstanding the Author builds the do∣ctrine of Election on Gods absolute will and pleasure, yet he is fain to have recourse to some certain condition, telling us, that though the mercy of God, his Grace, Election, Vocation, and other precedent Causes do justifie us; yet this is upon condition of believing in Christ. And finally, it is to be observed also, that after all his pains taken in defen∣ding such a personal and eternal Election, as the Calvinians now contend for; he ad∣viseth us to wrap up our selves wholly, both body and soul under Gods general promise, and not to cumber our heads with any further speculations, knowing that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish. &c.

And so I take my leave of our Martyrologist, [ VI] the publishing of those discourse I look on as the first great battery which was made on the Bulwarks of this Church, in point of doctrine by any member of her own, after the setling of the Articles by the Queens Authority, Ann. 1562. the brables raised by Crowley in his Book against Campneys, though it came out after the said Articles were confirmed and published, being but as hail-shot in comparison of this great piece of Ordnance. Not that the Arguments were so strong as to make any great breach in the publick Doctrine, had it been pub∣lished in a time less capable of innovations, or rather if the great esteem which many had of that man, and the universal reception which his Book found with all sorts of People, had not gained more authority unto his discourse, than the merit or solidness of it could deserve. The inconveniencies whereof, as also the many marginal Notes and other passages, visibly tending to faction and sedition in most parts of that Book, were either not observed at first, or winked at in regard of the great animosities which were ingendred by it in all sorts of People, as well against the persons of the Papists, as against the doctrine; Insomuch that in the Convocation of the year, 1571. there passed some Canons, requiring that not only the Deans of all Cathedrals should take a special care that the said Book should be so conveniently placed in their several Churches, that people of all conditions might resort unto it; but also, that all and every Arch-Bishop, Bishops, Deans, Residentiaries, and Arch-Deacons should choose the same to be placed in some convenient publick room of their several houses, not only for the entertainment and instruction of their menial servants, but of such strangers also as occasionally repaired unto them.

If it be hereupon inferred that Fox his doctrine was approved by that Convocation, [ VII] and therefore that it is agreeable to the true intent and meaning of the Articles of the Church of England; besides what hath been said already by Anticipation, it may as logically be inferred, that the Convocation approved all his marginal Notes; all the factious and seditious passages; and more particularly the scorn which he puts upon the Episcopal habit, and other Ceremonies of the Church. Touching which last (for the other are too many to be here recited) let us behold how he describes the diffe∣rence which hapned between Hooper, Bishop of Glocester on the one side, Cranmer and Ridley on the other, about the ordinary habit and attire then used by the Bishops of this Church, we shall find it thus, viz.*

Here have we the Episcopal habit affirmed to be a contumely and reproach to that godly man, [ VIII] slighted contemptuously by the name of trifles, and condemned in the marginal Note for a Popish attire; the other ceremonies of the Church being censured as more ambitious than profitable, and tending more to superstition than to edification; which as no man of sense or reason can believe to be approved and allowed of by that Con∣vocation; so neither is it to be believed that they allowed of his opinion in the present point. For a counterballance whereunto there was another Canon passed in this Con∣vocation, by which all Preachers were enjoyned to take special care, •ne quid unquam do∣ceant, pro concione; quod à populo religiose, teneri, & credi velint, nisi quod consentaneum sit doctrinae veteris aut novi testamenti quodque ex'illa ipsa doctrina Cathotici Patres & veteres Episcopi Collegerint; that is to say, that they should maintain no other doctrine in their publicki Sermons to be believed of the People, but that which was agreeable to the do∣ctrine of the Old and New Testament, and had from thence been gathered by the Ca∣tholick (or Orthodox) Fathers, and ancient Bishops of the Church. To which rule, if they held themselves as they ought to do, no countenance could be given to Calvines Doctrines, or Fox his judgment in these points maintained by one of the Catholick Fa∣thers, and ancient Bishops of the Church, but St. Augustine only, who though he were a godly man, and a learned Prelate, yet was he but one Bishop, not Bishops in the plural number, but one father, and not all the fathers, and therefore his opinion not to be maintained against all the rest.

CHAP. XX. Of the great Innovation made by Perkins in the publick Doctrine, the stirs arising thence in Cambridge, and Mr. Barrets carriage in them.

THIS great breach being thus made by Fox in his Acts and Monuments, [ I] was after∣wards open'd wider by William Perkins, an eminent Divine of Cambridge, of great esteem amongst the Puritans for his zeal and piety, but more for his dislike of the Page  615Rites and Ceremonies here by Law established; of no less fame among those of the Calvinian party, both at home and abroad for a Treatise of Predestination, published in the year 1592. entituled, Armilla Aurea, or the Golden Chain, containing the order of the causes of salvation and damnation according to Gods Word. First written by the Au∣thor in Larin for the use of Students, and in the same year translated into English at his Request by one Robert Hill, who afterwards was Dr. of Divinity, and Rector of St. Bartholomews Church near the Royal Exchange. In the Preface unto which dis∣course, the Author telleth us,

In which Preface, whether he hath stated the opinions of the parties right, may be discerned by that which hath been said in the former Chap∣ters: and whether the last of these opinions ascribe so much to Gods mercy in Christ, in them that are saved, and to mans natural Corruption in them that perish, will best be seen by taking a brief view of the opinion it self. The Author taking on him to oppugn the three first as erroneous, and only to maintain the last as being a truth, which will bear weight in the ballance of the Sanctuary, as in his Preface he assures us.

Which passage being somewhat obscure, may be ex∣plained by another, some leases before. In which the Question being asked, Whether all things and actions were subject unto Gods Decree? He answereth, And then the Question being prest to this particular, what even the wickedness of the wicked? The answer is affirmative, yet being published, more copiously insisted on, and put into a more methodical way, it became wondrous acceptable amongst those of the Calvinian party, both at home and abroad, as before was said. Insomuch that it was Printed several times after the Latin edition, with the general approbation of the French and Belgick Churches, and no less than 15. times within the space of twenty years in the English tongue. At the end of which term, in the year 1612. the English book was turned by the Translator into Questions and Answers, but without any alteration of the words of the Author, as he informs us in the last page of his Preface, after which it might have sundry other im∣pressions; that which I follow, being of the year 1621. And though the Supra-lapsarians or rigid Calvinists (or Supra-creatarians rather, as a late judicious Writer calls them) differ exceedingly in these points, from many of their more moderate Bre∣thren, distiguished from them by the name of Sub-lapsarians; yet in all points touch∣ing the specifying of their several supposed Degrees, they agree well enough together, and therefore wink at one another, as before was noted.

Page  616

Notwithstanding the esteem wherewith both sorts of Calvinists entertained the book, [ III] it found not the like welcome in all places,* nor from all mens hands. Amongst other Parsons the Jesuite gives this censure of him, viz. That by the deep humour of fancy he hath published and written many books with strange Titles, which neither he nor his Reader do understand, as namely about the Concatenation or laying together of the causes of mans Pre∣destination and Reprobation, &c. Jacob van Harmine, (afterwards better known by the name of Arminius) being then Preacher of the Church of Amsterdam, not only cen∣sured in brief as Parsons did, but wrote a full discourse against it, entituled, Examen Predestinationis Perkinsanae, which gave the first occasion to these controversies (many appearing in defence of Perkins and his Opinions) which afterwards involved the Sub∣lapsarians in the self same quarrel.* Amongst our selves it was objected,

* But none of all our English was so sharp in their censures of him, as Dr. Robert Abbot, then Dr. of the Chair in Oxon, and not long after Bishop of Sarum, who in his book against Thompson (though otherwise inclined too much to Calvins Doctrines) gives this judgment of Mr. Perkinsius, viz. Alioqui eruditus, & pius in discriptione Divinae Praedestinationis, quam ille contra nostram, contra veteris Ecclesiae, fidem citra lapsum Adami absolute decretum constituit, erravit errorem non levem, cujus adortis quibusdam viris inita jamdudum & suscepta defensio, turbas ecclesiis non necessarias dedit, quas etiamnum non sine scandalo & periculo haerere videmus, dum viam quisque quam ingressus est sibi ante tenendum judicat, quam ductam sacrarum literarum authoritate lineam veritatis, tan∣quam filum Ariadnaeum sibi ducem faciat, that is to say, Perkins, though otherwise a godly and learned man in his description of Divine Predestination, which contrary not only to the Doctrine of the primitive times, but also unto that of the Church of England, he builds upon an absolute decree of Almighty God, without reference to the Fall of Adam, ran himself into no small error: The defence whereof being undertaken by some learned men, hath given the Church some more than necessary troubles, which still continued not without manifest scandal and danger to it; whilst every one doth rather chuse to follow his own way therein, than suffer himself to be guided in the Labyrinth by the line of truth (as by the Clew of Ariadne) drawn from the undeniable Authority of holy Scriptures. And so I leave the man with this obser∣vation, that he who in his writings had made the infinitly greatest part of all man-kind uncapable of Gods grace and mercy, by an absolute and irrespective decree of Repro∣bation; who in expounding the Commandments, when he was Catechist of Christs Colledge in Cambridge, did lay the Law so home in the ears of his Auditors, that it made their hearts fall down,* and yea their hair to stand almost upright; and in his preaching use to pronounce the word Damned, with so strong an Emphasis, that it left an eccho in the ears of his hearers a long time after; this man scarce lived out half his days, being no more than forty-four years of age, from the time of his death, at the pangs conducing unto which, he was noted to speak nothing so articulately, as Mercy, Mercy; which I hope God did graciously vouchsafe to grant him in that woful Agony.

But to proceed, [ IV] this Doctrine finding many followers, and Whitacres himself then Dr. of the Chair in Cambridge, concurring in opinion with him, it might have quickly over-spread the whole University, had it not been in part prevented, and in part sup∣pressed by the care and diligence of Dr. Baroe, and his Adherents, who being a French man born, of eminent piety and learning, and not inclinable at all unto Calvins Do∣ctrines, had been made the Lady Margarets Professor for the University somewhat be∣fore the year 1574. For in that year he published his Lectures on the Prophet Jonah. In one of which being the 29th. in number, he discourseth on these words of the Pro∣phet, viz.* Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be destroyed, cap. 3. ver. 4. where we find it thus, Haec denunciatio non est quasi Proclamatio decreti divini absoluti, sed quaedam patio praeponendae divinae voluntatis, qua Deus eorum animos flectere voluit: quare haec oratio, etsi simplex & absoluta videatur, tacitam tamen habet conditionem (nisi rescipiscant) nam∣que hanc in esse conditionem eventus comprobavit; The denouncing of this Judgment (saith that learned man) is not to be beheld as the publication of one of Gods abso∣lute Decrees, but only as a form observed in making Gods Will known unto them, by which he meant to put them to it, and rouse their spirits to Repentance. Therefore (saith he) although the Denunciation of the following Judgment seem to be simply Page  617positive and absolute, yet hath it notwithstanding this Condition, (that is to say, un∣less they do repent) included in it, for that such a Condition was included in it, the event doth shew; which said, he leads us on to the denouncing of the like Judg∣ment on the house of Abimelech, which he had before in Dr. King, Chap. 18. Num. 11. who herein either followed Baroe, or at the least concurred in Opinion with him. And in the next place he proceeds a little further than the case of the Ninevites,* touching upon the point of Election unto life Eternal, by the most proper superstructure could be laid upon such a foundation, Dei voluntas non erat ut perirent, si rescipiscerent, non vult enim mortem preccatoris, sed ut convertatur: Et rursus Dei erat voluntas, ut perirent, nisi rescipi∣scerent. Haec enim duo unum sunt; ut Dei voluntas est ut vitam habeamus si credamus; Et Dei voluntas non est ut vitam habeamus, nisi credamus; aut si credentes, perseveremus, non autem si a∣liquandiu credentes non perseveremus, that is to say, It was not the Will of God that they should perish, if they did repent, (For God desireth not the death of a sinner, but rather that he be converted and live) and yet it was his will that they should perish if they did not re∣pent: for these two are one, as for Example: It is the Will of God, saith he, that we should have eternal life, if we believe, and constantly persevere in the faith of Christ. And it it is not the will of God that we should have eternal life, if we do not believe, or believing only for a time, do not persevere therein to the end of our lives; which point he further proves by the condition of the Message sent from God to Hezekiah by the Prophet Isaiah, 2 Kings 20.1. as before was said in Dr. King: For which, to∣gether with the rest of his discourse upon that occasion, concerning the consistency of these alterations with the immutability or unchangeableness of Almighty God; I shall refer the Reader to the book it self.

So far that learned man had declared himself upon occasion of that Text, [ V] and the case of the Ninevites before the year 1574. being ten years before the preaching of Harsnets Sermon at St. Pauls Cross, and more than twenty years before the stirs at Cambridge betwixt him and Whitacres. In all which time, or at lest the greatest part thereof, he inclined rather unto the Melancthonian way, (according to the Judgment of the Church of England) in laying down the Doctrine of Prodestination than to that of Calvin. For fifteen years it is confest in a Letter sent by some of the heads of Cambridg to William Lord Burleigh, then Chancellour of the University,* bearing date March the 8. 1595. That he had taught in his Lectures, preached in Sermons, deter∣mined in the Schools, and printed in several books, a contrary Doctrine unto that, which was maintained by Dr. Whitacres, and had been taught and received in the University ever since the beginning of her Majesties Reign: which last, though it be gratis dictum, without proof or evidence, yet it is probable enough that it might be so: Cartwright that unextinguished Firebrand being Professor in that place before him, and no greater care taken in the first choice of the other before recited to have had the place, than to supply it with a man of known aversness from all points of Popery. And it seems also by that Letter, that Baroe had not sown his seed in a barren soil, but in such as brought forth fruit enough, and yielded a greater increase of Followers, than the Cal∣vinians could have wished. For in one place the Letter tells us, that besides Mr. Barret (of whom we shall speak more anon) There were divers others who there attempted publickly to teach new and strange Oinions in Religion, as the Subscribers of it call them. And in another place it tells us of Dr. Baroe, that he had many Disciples and Adherents, whom he emboldned by his Example to maintain false Doctrine. And by this check it may be said of Peter Baroe in reference to that University, indangered to be over∣grown with outlandish Doctrines, as the Historian doth of Caius Marius, with refe∣rence to the state of Rome in fear of being over-run by the Tribes of the Cymbri, which were then breaking in upon it, Actum esset de repub. nisi Marius isti seculo contigisset, the Commonwealth had then been utterly overthrown, if Marius had not been then living.

Now as for Barret before mentioned, [ VI] he stands accused so far forth as we can discern by the Recantation, which some report him to have made for preaching many strange and erroneous Doctrines, that is to say, 1.*

For having insisted, [ VII] or at lest touched upon these points in a Sermon preached at St. Maries on the •9. of April, Anno 1595. all the Calvinian heads of that University being laid together by Whitacres, and inflamed by Perkins, took fire immediately. And in this Text he was convented on the fifth of May next following at nine of the clock in the morning, before Dr. Some, then Deputy Vice-Chancellour to Dr. Duport, Dr. Goad, Dr. Tyndal, Dr. Whitacres, Dr. Barwell, Dr. Jegon, Dr. Preston, Mr. Chatter∣ton, and Mr. Claton in the presence of Thomas Smith publick Notary, by whom he was appointed to attend again in the afternoon. At which time the Articles above men∣tioned were read unto him, which we alledged to be erroneous and false, Et repug∣nantes esse religioni, in regno Angliae & legitima Authoritate receptae ac stabilitae, that is to say, contrary to the Religion received and established by publick Authority in the Realm of England. To which Articles being required to give an Answer, he confest that he had published in his Sermon all these positions, which in the said Articles are contained, sed quod contenta in iisdem Religioni Ecclesiae Angelicanae, ut praefertur, omnino non repugnant, but denied them to be any way repugnant to the Doctrine of the Church of England. Whereupon the Vice-Chancellour and the forenamed heads entring into mature deliberation, and diligently weighing and examining these Positions, because it did manifestly appear, that the said Positions were false, erroneous, and likewise re∣pugnant to the Religion received and established in the Church of England,

And by vertue and tenour of that Statute they decreed and adjudged the said Barret to make a publick Recanation, in such words and form, as by the Vice-Chancellour, and the said heads, or any three or two of them should be tendred to him, or else upon his refusal to recant in that manner, to be perpetually expelled both from his Colledg and the University: binding him likewise in an Assum∣psit of 40 l. to appear personally upon two days warning before the Vice-Chancellour or his Deputy, at what time and place they should require.

It appears afterwards by the Register of the University, [ VIII] that Barret being resummo∣ned to appear before him, though none but Goad, Tyndal, Barwell and Preston, were present at that time with the Vice-Chancellour or his Deputy (for I know not which) a Recantation ready drawn was delivered to him, which he was commanded to publish solemnly in St. Maries Church on Saturday, the 10th of May then next ensuing. And it is confidently affirmed by the Author of the Arminianism, and his Eccho too, that the said Recantation was publickly made by the said Barret at the time and place therein appointed.* And hereof the first Author seems to be so confident, that he doth not only tell us, that this Recantation was made accordingly, but that it was not made with that Humility and Remorse which was expected; it being said, that after the reading thereof, he concluded thus, Haec dixi; intimating thereby, that he consented not in his heart to that which he had delivered by his tongue. This is the total of the business concerning Barret in the Anti-Arminianism, in which there is somewhat to be doubted, and somewhat more to be denied. And first it is to be doubted, whether any such Recautation, consisting of so many Articles, and every Article having his abjuration or Recantation subjoined unto it, was ever enjoined to be made: for though the Author of the book affirmeth in one place, that the whole Recantation, in the same manner and form as there we find it, was exemplified, and sent unto him under the hand of the Register of the University, pag. 62. yet he contesseth within few lines after, that no such matter could be found, when the heads of Houses were re∣quired by an Order from the House of Commons in the last Session of Parliament, Anno 1628. to make certificate to them of all such Recantations as were recorded in their Page  619University Register, and of this Recantation in particular. And though it be here∣upon inferred, that this Precantation was imbezilled and razed out of the Records of the University by some of the Arminian party, the better to suppress the memory of so great a foil; yet it may rather be believed, that many false Copies of it were dis∣persed abroad by those of the Calvinian faction, to make the man more odious, and his Opinions more offensive than might stand with Truth.

The truth is that a Recantation was enjoyned, and delivered to him, [ IX] though not the same, nor in the same form and manner, as before laid down; Barret confessing in his Letters of which more anon, that a Recantation was imposed on him and ex∣pected from him: But then it is to be denied as a thing most false, that he never published the Recantation, whatsoever it was, which the Heads enjoyned and required at his last Convention. For, first, It is acknowledged in the Authors own Transcript of the Acts, that though he did confess the Propositions wherewith he was charged to be contained in his Sermon; yet he would never grant them to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England, and therefore was not likely to retract the same. Secondly, It is plain by Barrets said Letters, the one to Dr. Goad Master of Kings, the other to Mr. Chadderton Master of Emanuel Colledg, that neither flattery, nor threat∣nings, nor the fear of losing his subsistence in the University, should ever work him to the publishing of the Recantation required of him. And thirdly, It appears by the Letters from the heads above mentioned to the Lord Treasurer Burleigh, that Barret had not made the Recantation on the 8th of March, which was full ten months after the time appointed for the publishing of it. And on these terms this business sheweth the Author his Errour, to affirm with all confidence, (for if the one doth, the other must) that Barret made this Recantation in St. Maries Church on the tenth of May, Anno 1595. Barret declaring in his Letter to Dr. Goad, about nine months after, that he would never make it; And the Heads signified to the Lord Treasurer Burleigh, on the eighth of March, heing ten months after, that at that time he had not made. And who should believe in the present case, Barret that saith he would never do it, and the Heads, who say, he had not done it on the eighth of March: or that they say upon the credit of a false and malitious Copy, (purposely spread abroad by the Puritan fa∣ction to defame the man) that he had published it on the 10th of May, ten months before. I find also in the Title to this Recantation, as it stands in the Anti-Arminia∣nism, (p. 46.) that Mr. Harsnet of Pembrook Hall, is there affirmed to have maintained the supposed Errours, for which Barret was condemned to a Recantation: and 'tis strange that Harsnet should stand charged in the Title of another mans sentence, for holding and maintaining any such points as had been raked out of the dunghil of Popery and Pelagianism, as was there affirmed; for which he either was to be questioned in his own person, or not to have been condemned, to the Title of a sentence passed on another man. Which circumstance as it discredits the Title, so the Title doth as much discredit the reality of the Recantation. adeo mendaciorum natura est, ut cohaerere non possint, saith Lactantius truly. The rest of Barrets story shall be told by himself, ac∣cording as I find it in a Letter of his to Dr. Goad, then being Vice-Chancellour, written about nine months after the time of his first conventing: as by the Letter doth appear, which is this that followeth.

But here perhaps it may be said, [ XI] that though Barret might be as obstinate in refusing to publish the Recantation, as this Letter makes him; yet it appears by the whole course of those proceedings, that his Doctrines were condemned by the heads of the University, as being contrary to that which was received and established in the Church of England. And that it was so in the Judgment of those men, who either concur∣red in his Censure, or subscribed the Letter to the Lord Treasurer Burleigh above-men∣tioned, is a thing past question. But this can be no Argument, that Barrets Doctrines were repugnant to the Church of England, because these Heads either in favour of Dr. Whitacres, or in respect to Mr. Perkins, were pleased to think no otherwise of them: for if it be, we may conclude by the same Argument, that the Church of Rome was in the right, even in the darkest times of ignorance and superstition, because all those who publickly opposed her Doctrines, were solemnly enjoyned by the then prevailing party to a Recantation; and which is more, it may be also thence concluded that the Doctrine maintained by Athanasius touching Christs Divinity, was contrary to that which had been taught by the Apostles, and men of Apostolical spirits, because it was condemned for such, by some Arrian Bishops in the Council (or rather Conventicle) of Tyre, which was held against him.

2. It cannot be made apparent that either Dr. Duport, the Vice-Chancellor who was most concerned, or Dr. Baroe, the Lady Margarets Professour for Divinity there had any hand in sentencing this Recantation. Not Dr. Baroe, because by concurring to this Sentence he was to have condemned himself: Nor Dr. Duport, for I find his place to be supplyed, and the whole action govern'd by Dr. Some (which shews him to be absent at that time from the University) according to the stile whereof, the Title of Procancellarius is given to Dr. Some in the Acts of the Court, as appears by the Extract of them in the Anti-Arminianisin, p. 64. compared with p. 63.

But thirdly, admitting that the Heads were generally thus enclined, yet probably the whole body of the University might not be of the same Opinion with them: those Heads not daring to affirm otherwise of Barrets Doctrine in their Letter to the Lord Treasurer Burleigh, than that it gave just offence to many. And if it gave offence unto many only, it may be thought that it gave no offence to the Major part, or much less to all; for if it had, the writers of the Letter would not have been so sparing in their expressions, as to limit the offence to many, if they could have said it of the most. But of this we shall speak more in the following Chapter, when we shall come to feel the pulse of the University in the great competition between Wotton and Overald after Whitacres death. Of which Opinion Harsnet was, we have seen before. And we have seen before that Baroe had many Disciples and Adherents which stood fast unto him. And thereupon we may conclude, that when Dr. Baroe had for fourteen or fif∣teen Page  621years maintained these Opinions in the Schools (as before was shewed) which are now novelized by the name of Arminianism; and such an able man as Harsnet had preached them without any Controul, when the greatest audience of the Kingdom did stand to him in it; There must be many more Barrets who concurred with the same Opinions with them in the University, though their names through the Envy of those times are not come unto us.

CHAP. XXI. Of the proceedings against Baroe, the Articles of Lambeth, and the general calm which was in Oxon, touching these Disputes.

FROM Barret pass we on to Baroe, [ I] betwixt whom and Dr. Whitacres there had been some clashings, touching Predestination and Reprobation, the certainty of Salvation, and the possibility of falling from the Grace received. And the heats grew so high at last that the Calvinians thought it necessary in point of prudence to effect that by power and favour, which they were not able to obtain by force of Argu∣ment. To which end they first addressed themselves to the Lord Treasurer Burleigh then being their Chancellor, acquainting him by Dr. Some, then Deputy Vice-Chan∣cellor, with the disturbances made by Barret, thereby preparing him to hearken to such further motions, as should be made unto him in pursuit of that Quarrel. But finding little comfort there, they resolved to steer their course by another compass. And having prepossest the most Reverend Archbishop Whitgift, with the turbulent carriage of those men, the affronts given to Dr. Whitacres, whom (for his learned and laborious Writings against Cardinal Bellarmine) he most highly favoured, and the great inconveniences like to grow by that publick discord; they gave themselves good hopes of composing those differences, not by the way of an accommodation, but an absolute conquest; and to this end they dispatch'd to him certain of their num∣ber in the name of the rest, such as were interessed in the Quarrel, (Dr. Whitacres himself for one, and therefore like to stickle hard for the obtaining their ends;) the Articles to which they had reduced the whole state of the business being brought to them ready drawn, and nothing wanting to them but the face of Authority, where∣with, as with Medusa's head to confound their Enemies, and turn their Adversaries into stones. And that they might be sent back with the face of Authority, the most Reverend Archbishop Whitgift, calling unto him Dr. Flecher, Bishop of Bristol, then newly elected unto London, and Dr. Richard Vaughan Lord Elect of Bangor, toge∣ther Page  622with Dr. Tyndal Dean of Ely, Dr. Whitacres and the rest of the Divines which came from Cambridg, proposed the said Articles to their consideration at his House in Lambeth, on the tenth of Novemb. Anno 1595. by whom those Articles were agreed on in these following words.

• 1. Deus ab aeterno praedestinavit quosdam ad vitam: quosdam reprobavit ad mor∣tem.
• 2. Causa movens aut efficiens praedestinatio∣nis ad vitam non est praevisio fidei, aut perseverantiae, aut bonorum operum, aut ullius rei quae insit in personis Praedesti∣natis, sed sola voluntas beneplaciti Dei.
• 3. Praedestinatorum praefinitus & certus est numerus, qui nec augeri, nec minui potest.
• 4. Qui non sunt Praedestinati ad salutem, necessario, propter peccata sua damna∣buntur.
• 5. Vera, viva & justificans fides, & spi∣ritus Dei justificantis, non extinguitur, non excidit, non evanescit in Electis, aut finaliter, aut totaliter.
• 6. Homo vere fidelis, id est, fide justi∣ficante praeditus, certus est plerophoria Fidei de Remissione peccatorum suo∣rum, & salute sempiterna sua per Christum.
• 7. Gratia salutaris, non tribuitur, non in∣communicatur, non conceditur universis hominibus, qua servari possint si velint.
• 8. Nemo potest venire ad Christum, nisi datum ei fuerit, & nisi pater eum tra∣xerit, & omnes homines non trahuntur à patre, ut veniant ad filium.
• 9. Non est positum in arbitrio, aut potestate uniuscujusque hominis servari.

• 1. God from Eternity hath predestinate certain men unto life, certain men he hath reprobate.
• 2. The moving or efficient cause of prede∣stination unto life, is not the foresight of Faith, or of perseverance, or of good works, or of any thing that is in the per∣son predestinated, but only the good will and pleasure of God.
• 3. There is predetermined a certain num∣ber of the Predestinate, which can neither be augmented or diminished.
• 4. Those who are not predestinated to salvation, shall be necessarily damned for their sins.
• 5. A true living and justifying Faith, and the Spirit of God justifying, is not ex∣tinguished, falleth not away, it vanisheth not away in the Elect, either totally or finally.
• 6. A man truly faithful, that is, such an one who is indued with a justifying faith, is certain with the full assurance of faith, of the remission of his sins, and of his everlasting salvation by Christ.
• 7. Saving Grace is not given, is not grant∣ed, is not communicated to all men, by which they may be saved if they will.
• 8. No man can come unto Christ, unless it be given unto him, and unless the Father shall draw him, and all men are not drawn by the Father, that they may come to the Son.
• 9. It is not in the will or power of every one to be saved.

Now in these Articles there are these two things to be considered, [ III] first the Authority by which they were made, and secondly the effect produced by them, in order to the end proposed; and first as touching the authority by which they were made, it was so far from being legal and sufficient, that it was plainly none at all. For what au∣thority could there be in so thin a meeting consisting only of the Archbishop himself, two other Bishops (of which but one had actually received consecration) one Dean and half a dozen Doctors and other Ministers, neither impowred to any such thing by the rest of the Clergy, nor authorized to it by the Queen. And therefore their determinations of no more Authority, as to binding of the Church, or prescribing to the judgment of particular persons, than as if one Earl, the eldest son of two or three others, meeting with half a dozen Gentlemen in Westminster Hall, can be affirm∣ed to be in a capacity of making Orders which must be looked on by the Subject, as Acts of Parliament. A Declaration they might make of their own Opinions, or of that which they thought fittest to be holden in the present case, but neither Articles nor Canons to direct the Church: for being but Opinions still, and the Opinions of private and particular persons, they were not to be looked upon as publick Doctrines. And so much was confessed by the Archbishop himself, when he was called in question for it before the Queen, who being made acquainted with all that passed by the Lord Treasurer Burleigh, who neither liked the Tenents, nor the manner of proceeding in them, was most passionately offended that any such Innovation should be made in Page  623the publicck Doctrine of this Church; and once resolved to have them all attainted of a Premunire. But afterwards upon the interposition of some Friends, and the re∣verend esteem she had of the excellent Prelate, the Lord Archbishop (whom she commonly called her Black Husband) she was willing to admit him to his defence: and he accordingly declared in all humble manner, that he and his Associates had not made any Articles, Canons or decrees with an intent, that they should serve hereafter for a standing Rule to direct the Church, but only had resolved on some Propositions to be sent to Cambridge, for the appeasing of some unhappy differences in the Univer∣sity; with which Answer her Majesty being somewhat pacified, commanded notwith∣standing that he should speedily recall and suppress those Articles; which was perform∣ed with such care and diligence, that a Copy of them was not to be found for a long time after. And though we may take up this relation upon the credit of History of the Lambeth Articles printed in Latin, 1651. or on the credit of Bishop Mountague, who affirms the same in his Appeal,* Anno 1525. yet since the Authority of both hath been called in question, we will take our warrant for this Narrative from some other hands. And first we have it in a book called Necessario Responsio, published by the Re∣monstrants, Anno 1618. who possibly might have the whole story of it from the mouth of Baroe, or some other who lived at that time in Cambridge,* and might be well ac∣quainted with the former passages. And secondly, We find the same to be affirmed by the Bishops of Rochester, Oxon, and St. Davids in a Letter to the Duke of Buching∣ham, August 2. 1625. In which they signifie unto him, that the said Articles being agreed upon, and ready to be published, it pleased Queen Elizabeth of famous memory, upon notice given how little they agreed with the practice of piety and obedience to all Government, to cause them to be suppressed, and that they had so continued ever since, till then of late some of them had received countenance at the Synod of Dort.

Next touching the effect produced by them in order to the end so proposed, [ IV] so far they were from appeasing the present Controversies, and suppressing Baroe, and his party, that his disciples and Adherents became more united, and the breach wider than before. And though Dr. Baroe not long after, deserted his place in the University, yet neither was he deprived of his Professorship, as some say, not forced to leave it on a fear of being deprived, as is said by others: For that Professorship being chosen from two years to two years, according to the Statutes of the Lady Margaret, he kept the place till the expiring of his term, and then gave off without so much as shewing himself a Suiter for it: Which had he done, it may be probable enough, that he had carried it from any other Candidate or Competitor of what rank soever. The Anti-Calvinian party being grown so strong, as not to be easily overborn in a pub∣lick business by the opposite faction. And this appears plainly by that which followed on the death of Dr. Whitacres, who died within few days after his return from Lambeth, with the nine Articles so much talk'd of. Two Candidates appeared for the Profes∣sorship after his decease, Wotton of Kings Collegd a professed Calvinian, and one of those who wrote against Mountague's Appeal, Anno 1626. Competitor with Overald of Trinity Colledg almost as far from the Calvinian doctrine in the main Platform of Pre∣destination, as Baroe, Harsnet or Barret are conceived to be. But when it came to the Vote of the University, the place was carried for Overald by the Major part: which as it plainly shews, that though the doctrines of Calvin were so hotly stickled here by most of the Heads, yet the greater part of the learned Body entertained them not; so doth it make it also to be very improbable, that Baroe should be put out of his place by those who had taken in Overald, or not confirmed therein, if he had desired. And therefore we may rather think, as before is said, that he relinquished the place of his own accord; in which he found his Doctrine crossed by the Lambeth Articles, and afterwards his peace distracted dy several Informations brought against him, by the adverse faction; and thereupon a Letter of Complaint presented to the Lord Treasurer Burleigh, subscribed by most of those who before had prosecuted Barret to his Recantation. Which Letter giving very great light to the present business, as well concerning Barret as Baroe; though principally aimed at the last, I think worthy of my pains, and the Readers patience: and therefore shall subscribe it as hereafter fol∣loweth.

Page  624

Such was the condition of Affairs at Cambridge at the expiring of the year, 1595. [ VI] the genuine Doctrine of the Church, beginning then to break through the clouds of Calvinism, wherewith it was before obscured, and to shine forth again in its former lustre. To the advancement of which work, as the long continuance of Baroe in the University, for the space of 20 years and upwards, the discreet activity of Dr. Harsnet, Fellow and Master of Pembrook Colledge for the term of 40 yeaas and more, gave a good encouragement; so the invincible constancy of Mr. Barret, and the slender op∣position made by Overald, contributed to the confirmation and encrease thereof. For scarce had Overald warmed his Chair, when he found himself under a necessity of en∣countring some of the remainder of Baroes Adversaries, though he followed not the blow so far as Baroe did; for some there were of the old Predestination Leven, who publickly had taught (as he related it in the conference at Hampton Court)

And so far he had followed Baroe, but he went no further, holding (as he continued his own story) that such persons as were called and justified according to the purpose of Gods Election, did neither fall totally from all the graces of God (though how a justified man may bring him∣self into a present state of Wrath and Damnation, without a total falling from all the graces of God, is beyond my reason) and that they were in time renewed by the Spirit of God unto a lively faith and repentance, and thereby justified from those sins (with the guilt and wrath annexed unto them) into which they had fallen: nor can it be de∣nied, but that some other Learned men of those times were of the same opinion also. Amongst which I find Dr. John Bridges Dean of Sarum,* and afterwards Lord Bishop of Oxon, to be reckoned for one, and Mr. Richard Hooker (of whom more anon) to be accounted for another. But being but the compositions of private men, they are not to be heard against the express words of the two Homilies touching falling from God, in case the point had not been positively determined in the sixteenth Article. But so it hapned, notwithstanding that Overald not concurring with the Calvinists concerning the estate of such justified persons as afterwards fell into grievous sins; there grew some diffidences and distrust between them, which afterwards widned themselves into grea∣ter differences. Insomuch, that diffenting from them also touching the absolute de∣cree of Reprobation, and the restraining of the benefit of Christs death, and Gods grace unto a few particulars, and that too in Gods primitive purpose and intent, con∣cerning the salvation and damnation of man-kind; those of the Anti-Calvinian party went on securely, with little or no opposition and less disturbance.

At Oxford all things in the mean time were calm and quiet, [ VII] no publick opposition shewing it self in the Schools or Pulpits. The reasons of that which might be, first that the Students of that University did more incline unto the canvasing of such points as were in difference betwixt us and the Church of Rome, than unto those which were disputed against the Calvinists in these points of Doctrine; for witness whereof, we Page  626may call in the works of Sanders, Stapleton, Allyns, Parsons, Campian, and many others of that sid; as those of Bishop Jewel, Bishop Bilson, Dr. Humphreys, Mr. Nowel, Dr. Sparks,* Dr. Reynolds, and many others which stood firm to the Church of England. And secondly, though Dr. Humphreys, the Queens Professor for Divinity was not with∣out cause reckoned for a Non conformist, yet had he the reputation of a moderate man, (a moderate Non-conformist, as my Author calls him) and therefore might permit that liberty of opinion unto other men which was indulged unto himself; neither did Dr. Holland, who succeeded him, give any such countenance to the propagating of Calvins doctrines, as to make them the subject of his Lectures and Disputations. In∣somuch that Mr. Prin, with all his diligence, can find but seven men who publickly maintained any point of Calvianism in the Schools of Oxon, from the year 1596. to the year 1616. and yet to make that number also, he is fain to take in Dr. George Abbot, and Dr. Benfield, on no other account, but for maintaining, Deum non esse authorem peccati, that God is not the Author of sin, which any Papist, Lutheran, or Arminian, might have maintained as well as they.

And yet it cannot be denied, [ VIII] but that by errour of these times, the reputation which Calvin had attained to in both Universities, and the extream diligence of his followers for the better carrying on of their own designs, there was a general tendency unto his opinions in the present controversies; so that it is no marvel, if many men of good affection to that Church in government and forms of worship, might unawares be seasoned with his Principles in point of Doctrine;* his book of Institutes being for the most part the foundation on which the young Divines of those times did build their studies; and having built their studies on a wrong foundation, did publickly main∣tain some point or other of his Doctrines, which gave least offence, and out of which no dangerous consequence could be drawn (as they thought and hoped) to the disho∣nour of God, the disgrace of Religion, the scandal of the Church, or subversion of godliness: amongst which, if judicious Mr. Hooker be named for one, (as for one I find him to be named) yet is he named only for maintaining one of the five points, that namely of the not total or final falling away of Gods Elect, as Dr. Overald also did in the Schools of Cambridge, though neither of them can be challenged for main∣taining any other point of Calvins Doctrine, touching the absolute decree of Repro∣bation, Election unto life, without reference to faith in Christ, the unresistible work∣ings of Grace, the want of freedom in the will to concur therewith, and the deter∣mining of all mens actions unto good or evil, without leaving any power in men to do the contrary. And therefore, secondly, Mr. Hookers discourse of Justification, as it now comes into our hands, might either be altered in some points after his decease, by him that had the publishing of it; or might be written by him as an essay of his younger years, before he had consulted the Book of Homilies, and perused every clause in the publick Liturgy (as he after did) or had so carefully examined every Text of Scripture, upon which he lays the weight of his judgment in it, as might encourage him to have it printed when he was alive.

Of any men who publickly opposed the Calvinian tenents in this University till after the beginning of King James his Reign, [ IX] I must confess that I have hitherto found no good assurance; though some there were who spared not to declare their dislike there∣of, and secretly trained up their Scholars in other principles. An argument whereof may be that when Dr. Baroe dyed in London (which was about three or four years after he had left his place in Cambridge) his Funeral was attended by most of the Divines then living in and about the City; Dr. Bancroft then Bishop of London, giving order in it, which plainly shews that there were many of both Universities which openly fa∣voured Baroes Doctrines, and did as openly dislike those of the Calvinians, though we find but few presented to us by their names. Amongst which few I first reckon Dr. John Buckridge, President of St. Johns Colledge, and Tutor to Archbishop Laud, who carried his Anti-Calvinian doctrines with him to the See of Rochester, and publickly maintained them at a conference in York House, Ann. 1626. And secondly, Dr. John Houson, one of the Canons of Christ Church, and Vice-Chancellor of the University. Ann. 1602. so known an enemy to Calvin his opinions, that he incurred a suspension by Dr. Robert Abbots then Vice Chancellor. And afterwards being Bishop of Oxon, subscribed the letter amongst others to the Duke of Buckingham in favour of Mountague, and his Book called Appello Cesarem, as before was said. And though we find but these two named for Anti-Calvinist, in the five controverted points, yet might there be many houses, perhaps some hundreds, who held the same opinions with them, though they Page  627discovered not themselves, or break out in any open opposition,* as they did at Cambridge; God had 7000. Servants in the Realm of Israel, who had not bowed the knee to Baal, though we find the name of none but the Prophet Eliah, the residue keeping themselves so close for fear of danger, that the Prophet himself complained to God, that he alone was left to serve him. A parallel case to which may be that the Christians during the power and prevalency of the Arian Hereticks, St. Jerome giving us the names of no more than three, who had stood up stoutly in defence of the Nicene council, and the points of Doctrine there established, viz. 1. St. Athanasius Patriark of Alexandria in Egypt, St. Hillary Bishop of Poictious in France, and St. Eusebius Bishop of Vevelli in Italy, of which thus the Father, Siquidem Arianis victis triumphatorem Atha∣nasium suum Egyptus excepit; Hillarium è prelio revertentem galliarum ecclesia complexa est, ad reditum Eusebii sui lugubres vestes Italia mutavit; that is to say, upon the overthrow of the Arians Egypt received her Athanasius, now returned in triumph; the Church of France embraced her Hillary coming home with victory from the battel; and on the return of Eusebius, Italy changed her mourning garments. By which it is most clear, even to vulgar eyes, that not these Bishops only did defend the truth, but that it was preserved by many others as well of the Clergy as of the People, in their several Coun∣treys; who otherwise never had received them with such joy and triumph, if a great part of them had not been of the same opinions, though no more of them occur by name in the records of that age.

But then again, [ X] If none but the three Bishops had stood unto the truth in the points disputed at that time between the Orthodox Christians and the Arian Hereticks, yet had that been sufficient to preserve the Church from falling universally from the faith of Christ, or deviating from the truth in those particulars;* the word of truth being established (as say both Law and Gospel) if there be only two or three witnesses to attest unto it; two or three members of the Church may keep possession of a truth in all the rest, and thereby save the whole from errour; even as a King invaded by a foreign Enemy, doth keep possession of his Realm by some principal fortress, the standing out whereof may in time regain all the rest, which I return for answer to ano∣ther objection touching the paucity of those Authors whom we have produced in main∣tenance of the Anti Calvinian or old English doctrines, since the resetling of the Church under Queen Elizabeth; for though they be but few in number, and make but a very thin appearance: Apparent rari nautes in gurgite vasto, in the Poets language, yet serve they for a good assurance that the Church still kept possession of her primitive truths, not utterly lost, though much endangered by such contrary Doctrines as had of late been thrust upon her, there was a time when few or none of the Orthodox Bishops durst openly appear in favour of St. Athanasius, but only Liberius Pope of Rome,* who thereupon is thus upbraided by Constantius the Arian Emperour, Quota pars tu es orbis terrarum, qui solus, &c. How great a part (saith he) art thou of the whole world, that thou alone shouldst shew thy self in defence of that wicked man, and thereby over∣throw the peace of the Universe. To which Liberius made this answer, non diminuitur solitudine mea, verbum dei, nam & olim tres solum inventi fuere qui edicto resisterint; that is to say, the Word of God is not made the weaker by my sole appearing in defence thereof no more than when there were but three, (he means the three Hebrew Chil∣dren in the Book of Daniel) which durst make open opposition to the Kings Edict. Liberius thought himself sufficient to keep possession of a truth in the Church of Christ, till God should please to raise up more Champions in all places to defend the same, not thinking it necessary to return any other answer, or to produce the names of any others of his time, who turned Athanasius as much as he, which brings into my mind a passage in the conference betwixt Dr. Ban, Featly and Sweat the Jesuite, in which the Jesuite much insisted on that thred-bare question, viz. where was your Church before Luther? which when the Doctor went to shew out of Scriptures and Fathers, some of the Papists standing by, cried out for names, those which stood further of ingeminating nothing but Names Names, whereupon the Dr. merily asked them, if nothing would con∣tent them but a Buttery book. And such an Answer I must make in the present case to such as take up testimony by tale, not weight, and think no truth is fairly proved, ex∣cept it come attended with a cloud of witnesses. But what we want in number now, he shall find hereafter, when we shall come to take a view of King James his Reign, to which now we hasten.

Page  628

CHAP. XXII. Of the Conference at Hampton Court, and the several encouragements given to the Anti-Calvinians in the time of King James.

NOw we come unto the Reign of King James of happy memory, [ I] whose breeding in the kirk of Scotland had given some hopes of seeing better days to the English Puritans than those which they enjoyed under Queen Elizabeth. Upon which hopes they presented him at his first coming to the Crown with a supplication, no less tedious than it was impertinent, given out to be subscribed with a thousand hands, though it wanted many of that number, and aiming at an alteration in many points, both of Doctrine and Discipline: But they soon found themselves deceived. For first the King commanded by publick Proclamation, that the divine service of the Church should be diligently officiated and frequented as in former times, under pain of suffering the severest penalties by the Laws provided in that case. And that being done, instead of giving such a favourable answer to their supplication, as they had flattered them∣selves withal, he commended the answering of it to the Vice-Chancellour, Heads, and other Learned men of the University of Oxon, from whom there was nothing to be looked for toward their contentment. But being, thirdly, a just Prince, and willing to give satisfaction to the just desires of such as did apply themselves unto him; as also to inform himself in all such particulars as were in difference betwixt the Petitioners and the Prelates; he appointed a solemn Conference to be held before him at Hampton Court on Thursday the 12th. of January, Anno 1603. being within less than ten moneths after his entrance on the Kingdom. To which Conference were called by se∣veral Letters on the Churches part, the most Reverend and right renowned Fathers in God, Dr. John Whitgift Arch-bishop of Canterbury, Dr. Richard Bancroft Bishop of Lon∣don, Dr. Tobie Matthews Bishop of Durham, Dr. Thomas Bilson Bishop of Winchester, Dr. Gervase Babbinton Bishop of Worchester, Dr. Anthony Rudd Bishop of Davids, Dr. An∣thony Walson Bishop of Chichester, Dr. Henry Robbinson Bishop of Carlile, and Dr. Thomas Dove Bishop of Peterborough, as also Dr. James Mountague Dean of the Chappel, Dr. Tho∣mas Ravis Dean of Christ Church, Dr. John Bridges Dean of Sarum, Dr. Lancelot Andrews Page  629Dean of Westminster, Dr. John Overald Dean of Saint Pauls, Dr. William Barlaw Dean of Chester, Dr. Giles Tompson Dean of Windsor, together with Dr. Joh: King Arch-Deacon of Nottingham, and Dr. Richard Field after Dean of Glocester; all of them ha∣bited and attired according to their several ranks and stations in the Church of England. And on the other side, there appeared for the Plantiff or Petitioner Dr. Reynolds, Dr. Spark, Mr. Knewstubs, and Mr. Chatterton; the two first being of Oxon, and the other of Cambridge,* apparelled in their Turky Gowns to shew (as Bishop Bancroft tartly noted) they desired rather to conform themselves in outward Ceremonies with the Turks than they did with the Papists.

The first day of the Conference being spent betwixt the King and the Bishops; [ II] the second which was the 16th. of the same moneth, was given to the Plantiffs to present their grievances, and to remonstrate their desires; amongst which it was named by Dr. Reynolds,* (as the mouth of the rest) That the nine Assertions Orthodoxal as he term∣ed them) concluded upon at Lambeth, might be inserted into the Book of Articles, which when King James seemed not to understand, as having never heard before of those nine Assertions.* He was informed that by reason of some Controversies arising in Cam∣bridge about certain points of Divinity, my Lords Grace assembled some Divines of especial note to set down their opinions, which they drew into nine Assertions, and sent so them to the Ʋniversity for the appeasing of those quarrels; and thereupon his Majesty resolved thus, that when such questions arise amongst Scholars, the quietest proceeding were to determine them in the Ʋniversity, and not to stuff the Book with all Conclusions Theological. Out of which passage I observed, First, that the Attribute of Orthodoxal is ascribed to the said nine Assertions by none but Dr. Reynolds, who termed them so, and not by Dr. Barlow then Dean of Chester, who related the conference, and had been present at the making of the said Assertions, being at that time one of the domestick Chaplains of Arch∣bishop Whitgift. And secondly, That they were not made to be a standing Rule to the Church of England, but only for the present pacifying of some differences which arose in Cambridge, as is here acknowledged. I observe thirdly, that King James did utterly eject the motion, as to the inserting of the said nine Assertions amongst the Articles of the Church, leaving them to be canvased and disputed in the Schools, as more proper for them. And fourthly, That being left to be disputed in the Schools, they might be held in the Affirmative, or in the Negative, as best pleased the Re∣spondent.

It was also moved by Dr. Reynolds, [ III] That the book of Articles of Religion con∣cluded 1562. might be explained in places obscure,* and enlarged where some things were defective. And in particular he desired,* that an explanation might be made of the 23d. Article for ministring in the Congregation, of the 25th. touching Confirma∣tion,* and of the 37th. concerning the Authority of the Pope of Rome,* as also that these words,* viz. That the intention of the Minister is not of the Essence of the Sacrament, might be added in some fit place to the book of Articles. But that which Dr. Reynolds did most insist upon, was the 16th. Article, where it is said, That after we have received the Holy Ghost, we may depart from Grace. The meaning whereof, though he acknowledged to be sound, yet he desired, that be∣cause they may seem to be contrary to the Doctrine of Election and Predestination in the 17th. Article, those words may seem to be explained with this or the like addi∣tion, viz. That neither totally nor finally. Which motion or proposal concerning Dr. Overald more than any other, he took occasion thereupon to acquaint his Majesty with that which had happened to him at Cambridge, concerning the Estate of a justified man, fallen into any grievous sin, as Murder, Treason, Adultery, and the like, as hath been shewn at large in the former Chapter. But the result of all was this, that after a full debate and consideration concerning every one of the said Articles, and the doubts moved about the same, there was no cause found for altering any thing in any of them,* and as little for the 16th. as for any other. For though the said Dr. Overald had de∣clared it for his own opinion, that he who was called and justified according to the purpose of Gods Election, being brought into a state of wrath and damnation, did neither fall totally from all the graces of God, not finally from the possibility of being renewed again by Gods holy Spirit, as before is said, and that King James himself had left it to be considered, whether the word Often might not be added to the 16th. Ar∣ticle, as thus, viz. We may often depart from Grace, &c. yet being left to the consi∣deration of the Prelates, as were all the rest, the said Article remained without any alteration, as before they found it, and as it still continueth to this very day.

Page  630

But here is to be observed, [ IV] that upon the first motion concerning falling from Grace,

But here methinks I hear it said, [ V] that though the King being then unacquainted with the Lambeth Articles,* thought not meet to put them amongst the Articles of this Church, yet he liked it well enough in his Clergy of Ireland, that they took them into their Confession, and Bishop Bancroft had agreed to them before the Conference, and that when he was Archbishop, his Chaplain with his good liking and approbation published the Exposition or Analysis of our Articles, in which he gives the Calvinist as fair quarter as can be wished. But first (be∣ginning with the last) so much of the Objection as concerns Bishop Bancrost is ex∣treamly false, not agreeing to the Lambeth Articles, not being Bishop of London when those Articles were agreed unto as is mistakingly affirmed; and that Analysis of Ex∣plication of our English Articles related to in the Objection being published in the year 1585. which was ten years before the making of the Lambeth articles; and eighteen years before Bancroft had been made Archbishop. And secondly, It is not very true, that King James liked, (that is to say, was well pleased with) the putting of those Articles into the confession of the Church of Ireland, though the said Confession was subscribed in his name by the Lord Deputy Chichester, is plainly enough not without his consent: for many other things were in the Confession to which the Lord Deputy subscribed, and the King consented as affairs then stood, which afterwards he declared no great liking to, either of the Tenor or effect thereof. For the truth is, that the drawing up of that Confession being committed principally to the care of Dr. Ʋsher, and afterwards Lord Primate of Ireland, a professed Calvinian, he did not only thrust into it all the Lambeth Articles, but also many others of his own Opinions: as namely, That the Pope was Antichrist, or that man of sin, that the power of sacerdotal Abso∣lution is no more than declaratory, as also touching the morality of the Lords day Sabbath, and the total spending of it in religious Exercises: Which last how contrary it is to King Jame's Judgment, how little cause he had to like it, or rather how much reason he had to dislike it, his declaration about lawful Sports, which he published within three years after, doth express sufficiently; so that the King might give con∣fent to the confirming of these Articles amongst the rest, though he liked as little of Page  631the one as he did of the other: And he might do it on these Reasons. For first, The Irish Nation at that time were most tenaciously addicted to Errors and corruptions of the Church of Rome, and therefore must be bended to the other extream before they could be sireight, and Orthodox in these points of doctrine. Secondly, It was an usual practice with the King in the whole course of his Government, to ballance one extream by the o∣ther, countenancing the Papist against the Puritan, and the Puritan sometimes against the Papist, that betwixt both the true Religion and Professors of it might be kept in safety.

With greater Artifice but less Authority have some of our Calvinians framed unto themselves another Argument, [ VI] derived from certain Questions and answers printed at the end of the Bible, published by Rob. Barker his Majesties own Printer in the year 1607. from whence it is inferred by the Author of the Anti-Arminianism,* and from him by others, that the said Questions and Answers do contain a punctual Declaration of the received doctrine of this Church in the points disputed. But the worst is, they signifie nothing to the purpose for which they were produced. For I would fain know by what Authority those Questions and Answers were added to the end of the Bible? If by Authority, and that such Authority can be produced, the Argument will be of force which it takes from them, and then no question but the same Authority by which they were placed there at first, would have preserved them in that place for a longer time than during the sale of that Edition: The not retaining them in such Editions as have followed since the sale of that, shews plainly that they were of no anthority in themselves, nor intended by the Church for a rule to others: and being of no older standing than the year 1607. (for ought appears by Mr. Prin, who first made the Ob∣jection) they must needs seem as destitute of antiquity as they are of authority, so that upon the whole matter the Author of the Book hath furnished those of different Judgment with a very strong argument, that they wrre foisted in by the fraud and pra∣ctice of some of the Emissaries of the Puritan Faction: who hoped in time to have them pass as currant amongst the people as any part of Canonical Scripture. Such Piae fraudes as these are, we should have too many, were they once allowed of: Some prayers were also added to the end of the Bible in some Editions, and others at the end of the publick Liturgy. Which being neglected at the first, and afterwards beheld as the authorized prayers of the Church, were by command left out of those Books and Bibles, as being the compositions of private men, not the publick acts of the Church, and never since added, as before.

But to return unto King James, [ VII] we find not so much countenance given to the Cal∣vinians by the fraud of his Printer, as their opposites received by his grace and favour by which they were invested in the chief preferments of the Church of England, con∣ferred as openly and freely upon the Anti-Calvinians, as those who had been bread up in the other persuasions, Tros Tyriusque mihi nullo discrimine habentur, as we know who said. For presently upon the end of the Conference he prefers Bishop Bancroft to the Chair of Canterbury, and not long after Dr. Barlow to the See of Rochester. On whose translation unto Lincoln, Dr. Richard Neil then Dean of westminster succeeds at Rochester, and leaves Dr. Buckridge there for his successour at his removal unto Lichfield in the year 1609. Dr. Samuel Harsnet is advanced to the See of Chichester, and about ten years after unto that of Norwich. In the beginning of the year 1614. Dr. Overald succeeds Neil (then translated to Lincoln) in the See of Coventry and Lichfield, Dr. George Mountein succeeded the said Neil (then translated to Durham) in the Church of Lincoln. In the year 1619. Dr. John Houson one of the Canons of Christs Church, a professed Anti-Calvinist is made Bi∣shop of Oxon. And in the year 1621. Dr. Valentine Cary Successor unto Overald in the Deanry of St. Paul, is made Bishop of Exon, and on the same day Dr. William Laud who had been Pupil unto Buckridge as before said, is consecrated Bishop of St. Davids. By which encouragements the Anti-Calvinians or old English Protestants took heart again, and more openly declared themselves than they had done formerly; the several Bishops above-named finding so gracious a Patron of the learned King, are, as being them∣selves as bountiful Patrons (respect being had to the performants in their nomina∣tion) to their Friends and followers. By means whereof, though they found many a Rub in the way, and were sometimes brought under censure by the adverse party; yet in the end they surmounted all difficulties, and came at last to be altogether as con∣siderable both for power and number, as the Calvinists were. Towards which increase the differences betwixt the Remonstrants and the Contra-Remonstrants in the Belgick Provinces did not help a little, who publishing their discourses one against the other, sharpened the Appetite of many Students in both Universities to feed more heartily on Page  632such Dishes are were now plentifully set before them, than they had done in former times; which they either were not to be had, or not to be fed upon without fear of surfeit, without ••edanger of dilgorging what before they had eaten.

But so it 〈…〉 that while matters went thus fairly forwards, [ VIII] Condradus Vorstius, suspected for a Sain•setenian, or Socinian Heretick; and one who had derogated in his writings from the Pur•y, the Immensity, the Omniscience, and immutability of Almighty God, was chosen by the Curators of Leiden, Anno 1611. to succeed Arminius in that place. Wherewith King James being made acquainted inflamed as well with a pious ••al to the honour of God, as a just fear lest the Contagion of his Errors might cross the Seas and infect his own Sujects also, he first sollicited the States not to suffer such a man to be placed amongst them, and afterwards to send him back, when they had received him. But finding no success in either, and having sent many sruitless Mes∣sages and Letters to the States about it, he published his Declaration against the said Vorstius, and therein used many harsh and bitter Expressions against Arminius and his followers (of which see Cap. 6. Num. 37. as if they had been guilty of the same im∣pieties. This put the Calvinists again upon such a Gog that none of their Adversaries in either of the Universities (of what eminent parts and name soever) could escape their hands. During which heats, the reverend Dr. Houson, who had been Vice-Chancellor of the University ten years before, was called in question and suspended by Dr. Reb. Abbot, then Dr. of the Chair and Vice-Chancellour also, Propter conciones publicas, minus Orthodoxas & plenas offensionis: for preaching certain Sermons less Or∣thodox and fuller of offence than they should have been. He was sufficiently known for an Anticalvinist; and had preached somewhat tending to the disparagement of the Genevian Annotations on the Holy Scriptures (censured more bitterly by none than King James himself) which brought him under this displeasure. And about two years after, Anno 1614. the said Dr. Abbot fell violently soul on Dr. William Laud, then President of St. John's Colledg, whom in his Sermon at St. Peters on Easter Sunday, he publickly exposed to contempt and scorn under the notion of a Papist, as Barrets d•ctri•es had been formerly condemned at Cambridge by the name of Popery, for which consult the Anti-Armin. p. 66.

But there was something more peculiar in the case of Mr. Edward Sympson than in that of the two great Doctors before remembred; [ IX] King James himself being both the Informer and the Prosecutor against this man, as it is thus related by the Church Historian viz.* It happened in the year 1616. that Mr. Edward Sympson, (a very good Scholar) fellow of trinity Colledg,

He added also that S. Paul in the seventh Chap∣ter to the Remans spake not of himself as an Apostle and Regenerate, but sub statu legis: Hereat his Majesty took (and publickly expressed) great distaste; because Arminius had lately been blamed for extracting the like Exposition out of the works of Faustus Socinus. Whereupon he sent to the two Professors in Cambridg for their Judgment herein, who proved and subscribed the place ad Rom. 7. to be understood of a Regene∣rate man, according to St. Augustines latter Opinion in his Retractations; and the Preacher was enjoined a publick Recantation before the King, which accordingly was performed by him. In which it is first to be observed, that no offence was taken at the first part of his Sermon, in which he went no further than Dr. Overald had gone before, as in our last Chap. Num. 6. Secondly, That the latter part thereof might have given as little, if his Exposition on the 13. Chap of St. Pauls Epistle to the Romans, had not been fathered on Arminius, against whom the King had openly declared in his book against Vorstius, and likewise upon his followers in the Belgick Provinces himself as a dangerous party, which he then laboured to suppress as before was noted. And therefore, thirdly, I observe that the two Professors in Cambridg did neither more wholly or originally of their own authority, but as they were set on by the King, who could nor otherwise be satisfied than by some such censure on Arminius, and conse∣quently for his sake on the Preacher too. For that King James condemned not the Arminian doctrines in themselves, though he had taken some displeasure against their persons, as is said before, appears not only by rejecting the Lambeth Articles, and his dislike of the Calvinian doctrine of Predestination, in the conference at Hampton Court, but also by instructing his Divines commissionated for the Synod of Dort, not to op∣pose the Article of Ʋniversal Redemption, which they accordingly performed. Nor Page  633were the said Professors at that time so forward as to move in it of themselves, as may appear by their not answering of Tompsons book, entituled de Intercrsione Gratiae & Justificationis, though the Author of it was a member of that University: but leaving it to be confuted by Dr. Abbot, their Brother in the Chair at Oxon. So great an alte∣ration had been made in the Affections of the University since the first striking up of their heats against Baroe and Barret, which presently began to cool on the death of Whi∣tacres, and seemed to have been utterly quenched in the death of Perkins. The ham∣mering of the Golden Chair gave the first blow in it.

But though the passions of the King inflamed by holy indignation, [ X] and kept unto the height to serve other mens turns, rather than to advance his own, had used some harsh expressions against Arminius; yet did his passions calm, and subside at last giving him leave to look about him, and to discern the dangers which did seem to threaten him on the other side: considering therefore with himself, or being informed by such of the Bishops and Divines, as were then about him, how great an adversary was Calvi∣nius to Monarchical interesse, how contrary the Predestination doctrines were to all rules of Government, he found it necessary to devise or admit some course of the pre∣venting of the mischief. To which end he issued certain directions to the Vice-Chan∣cellor and Heads of both Universities bearing date, Jan. 18. 1619. Requiring them to take special order among other things, that all that took any degree in the Schools should subscribe to the three Articles in the thirty sixth Canon;* that no man in the Pulpit or Schools be suffered to maintain Dogmatically any point of doctrine that is not allowed by the Church of England, that none be suffered to preach or lecture in the Towns of Oxon, or Cambridg, but such as were every way conformable to the Church hoth in doctrine and discipline; and finally (which most apparently conduced to the ruin of Calvinism) that young Students in Divi∣nity be directed to study such books as be most agreeable in doctrine and discipline to the Church of England, and excited to bestow their time in the fathers, and Councils, Schoolmen, Histories and Controversies, and not to insist too long upon Compendiums and abbreviations, making them the grounds of their study in Divinity. This seemed sufficient to bruite these doctrines in the shell, as indeed it was, had these directions been as carefully followed, as they were piously prescribed. But little or nothing being done in pursuance of them, the Predestinarian doctrines came to be the ordinary Theam of all Sermons, Lectures and Disputations, partly in regard that Dr. Prideaux, who had then newly succeeded Dr. Rob. Abbot in the Chair at Oxon, had very passionately ex∣posed the Calvinian Interest; and partly in regard of the Kings declared aversness from the Belgick Remonstrants, whom for the reasons before mentioned, he laboured to sup∣press to his utmost power. And yet being careful that the Truth should not fear the worse for the men that taught it, he gave command to such Divines as were commis∣sionated by him to attend in the Synod of Dort, An. 1618. not to recede from the do∣ctrine of the Church of England in the point of Ʋniversal Redemption by the death of Christ. A point so inconsistent with that of the absolute and irrespective decree of Repro∣bation, and generally of the whole Machina of Predestination, and the points depending thereupon as they are commonly maintained in the Schools of Calvin, that fire and wa∣ter cannot be at greater difference. But this together with the rest being condemned in the Synod of Dort, and that Synod highly magnified by the English Calvinists, they took confidence of making those disputes the Subject of their common discourses, both from the Pulpit and Press without stint or measure. and thereupon it pleased his Majesty, having now no further fear of any dangers from beyond the Seas, to put some water into their Wine; or rather a Bridle into their mouths by publishing certain Orders and di∣rections touching Preachers and preaching, bearing date the 4th of August 1622. In which it was enjoyned, amongst other things,* That no Preacher of what Title soever (un∣der the degree of a bishop or Dean at least) do from henceforth presume to teach in any popular Auditory the deep points of Predestination, Election, Reprobation, or of the Ʋniversality, Efficacy, Resistability, or Irresistability of Gods Grace, but rather leave those Theams to be handled by learned men, and that modestly and moderately by use and application, rather than by way of positive Doctrine, as being fitter for Schools and Ʋniversities than for simple Auditors. The violating of which Order by Mr Gabriel Bridges of Corpus Christi Colledg in Oxon, by preaching on the 19. of January then next following against the absolute decree, in main∣tenance of universal Grace, and the co-operation of mans free-will prevented by it (though in the publick Church of the University) laid him more open to the prosecu∣tion of Dr. Prideaux, and to the censure of the Vice-Chancellor, and the rest of the Heads, than any preaching on those points, or any of them could possibly have done at mother time.

Page  634

Much was the noise which those of the Calvinian party were observed to make on the publishing of this last Order, [ XI] as if their mouths were stopped thereby from preach∣ing the most necessary doctrines tending towards mans salvation. But a far greater noise was raised upon the coming out of Mountagues answer to the Gagger, in which he asserted the Church to her primitive and genuine doctrines, disclaimed all the Calvinian Tenents as disowned by her, and left them to be countenanced and maintained by those to whom they properly belonged. Which book being published at a time, when a Session of Par∣liament was expected in the year 1624. The opportunity was taken by Mr. Yates and Mr. Ward, two of the Lecturers or Preachers of Ipswich, to prepare an Information a∣gainst him, with an intent to prosecute the same in the following Session. A Copy whereof being come into Mountagues hands, he flies for shelter to King James, who had a very great estimation of him for his parts and learning, in which he had over-mastred, they then though much less Selden at his own Philologie. The King had already served his own turn against the Remonstrants by the Synod of Dort, and thereby freed the Prince of Orange his most dear Confederate from the danger of Barnevelt, and his faction. Arch∣bishop Abbot came not at him since the late deplorable misfortune which befell him at Branzil, and the death of Dr. James Mountague Bishop of Winton left him at liberty from many importunities and sollicitations with which before he had been troubled; so that being now master of himself, and governed by the light of his own most clear and ex∣cellent Judgment, he took both Mountague, and his dectrines into his Protection, gave him a full discharge, or quietus est, from all those Calumnies of Popery or Arminianism, which by the said Informers were laid upon him; iucouraged him to proceed in finish∣ing his just Appeal, which he was in hand with; commanded Dr. Francis White, then lately preferred by him to the Deanry of Carlisle, and generally magnified not long be∣fore for his zeal against Popery, to see it licensed for the Press, and finally gave order unto Mountague to dedicate the book (when printed) to his Royal self. In obedi∣ence unto whose Command the Dean of Carlisle licensed the book with this approba∣tion, That there was nothing contained in the same, but what was agreeable to the publick Faith, Doctrine and Discipline established in the Church of England. But King James dy∣ing before the book was fully finished at the Press, it was published by the name of Ap∣pello Caesarem, and dedicated to King Charles, as the Son and Successor to whom it pro∣perly belonged; the Author touching in the Epistle Dedicatory, all the former passages; but more at large than they are here discoursed of in this short Summary.

And thus far we have prosecuted our Discourse concerning the Five Points disputed between the English Protestants, [ XII] the Belgick Remonstrants, the Melancthonian Lutherans, together with the Jesuits and Franciscans on the one side, the English Calvinists, the Contra Remonstrants, the Rigid Lutherans, and the Dominican Fryers on the other side. In the last part whereof we may observe, how difficult a thing it is to recover an old doctrinal Truth, when overborn and almost lost by the continual Prevalency of a busie faction. And I have carried it on no further, because at this time Bishop Laud (to whom the raising and promoting of the Arminian doctrines, as they call them, is of late ascribed) was hardly able to promote and preserve himself, opprest with a hard hand by Archbishop Abbot, secretly traduced unto the King for the unfortunate business of Early of Devonshire, attaining with great difficulty to the poor Bishoprick of St. Davids, after ten years service, and yet but green in favour with the Duke of Buckingham. What happened afterwards towards the countenancing of these Doctrines by the appearing of King Charles in the behalf of Mountague, the Letter of the three Bishops to the Duke in defence of the man and his Opinion, his questioning and impeachment by the House of Commons, and his preferment by the King to the See of Chichester, are all of them beyond the bounds which I have prescribed unto my self in this Narration. Nor shall I now take notice of his Majesties Proclamation of the 14. of June, Anno 1626. For establishing the peace and quiet of the Church of England: by which he interdicted all such preaching and printing as might create any fresh disturbance to the Church of England: or for his smart Answer to that part of the Remonstrance of the House of Commons, Anno 1628. which concerned the danger like to fall on this Church and Kingdom, by the growth of Arminianism, or of the Declaration prefixed before the book of Articles in the same year also, for silencing the said Disputes, or finally of his Majesties Instructions, bearing date, Decemb. 30. 1629. for causing the Contents of the Declaration to be put in execution, and punctually observed for the time to come. By means whereof, and many fair encouragements from many of our Prelates, and other great men of the Realm, the Anti-Calvinist party became considerable both for power and number.