The anatomy of Arminianisme: or The opening of the controuersies lately handled in the Low-Countryes, concerning the doctrine of prouidence, of predestination, of the death of Christ, of nature and grace. By Peter Moulin, pastor of the church at Paris. Carefully translated out of the originall Latine copy

About this Item

The anatomy of Arminianisme: or The opening of the controuersies lately handled in the Low-Countryes, concerning the doctrine of prouidence, of predestination, of the death of Christ, of nature and grace. By Peter Moulin, pastor of the church at Paris. Carefully translated out of the originall Latine copy
Du Moulin, Pierre, 1568-1658.
London :: Printed by T[homas] S[nodham] for Nathaniel Newbery, and are to be sold at the signe of the Starre vnder Saint Peters Church in Cornehill, and in Popes head Alley,

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication ( This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to for more information.

Subject terms
Synod of Dort (1618-1619) -- Early works to 1800.
Arminianism -- Early works to 1800.
Cite this Item
"The anatomy of Arminianisme: or The opening of the controuersies lately handled in the Low-Countryes, concerning the doctrine of prouidence, of predestination, of the death of Christ, of nature and grace. By Peter Moulin, pastor of the church at Paris. Carefully translated out of the originall Latine copy." In the digital collection Early English Books Online 2. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed May 23, 2024.



Of the obiect of Predestination, that is, whether God pre∣destinating, considereth a man as fallen, or as not fallen.

ALthough God hath elected to saluation, these men rather then others, for no other cause, then that it so seemed good to him, nor is the cause of this difference to be sought in man; yet what is the obiect of Pre∣destination, that is, whether God electing or re∣probating men, hath considered them as fallen and sinners, or as not fallen, but as men in the Masse, not corrupted, it may be doubted. The Pastors of the Valacrian Churches, strong main∣tainers of the truth, in their most exact Epistle, the coppy whereof they haue sent to vs, doe professe that they thinke that God considered those men which hee did elect, and which hee did passe by, as fallen in Adam, and dead in sinnes: All the anciens thinke so, to none of whom (as farre as I know) it euer came in their minde to say that God reprobated men without the beholding of sinne. I see that of the same opinion is Caluin, Zanchy, Melanchton, Bu∣cer, Musculus, Pareus, famous lights in this age of the Church, out of whose writings, I haue added some gathered sentences at the end of this worke, least they should stay the hastening reader, and should breake off the thread of the disputation begunne

Page 92

against the Arminians: The confession of the chur∣ches of France doth keepe it selfe within these limits, in the twelth Article, where out of the ninth Chap∣ter to the Romanes, and other places of Scripture, Election and Reprobation is proued to be out of the corrupt masse. The reuerend Synod of Dordt (then which for many ages there hath beene none more famous, nor more holy) harh allowed this o∣pinion: I doe not see what can be opposed to so great authority. A holy assembly gathered together out of diuerse parts of the Christian world, hath prudently seene and discerned, that this opinion is not onely more modest, and more safe, but also that it is most fit to put back the obiections of these innoua∣tors, which doe impudently triumph in this matter: Thus are their frames dissolued, and their sinnewes are cut from them; for Reprobation without the be∣holding of sinne being taken away, which they assaile with all their forces, they beate the ayre, neither haue they any thing that they should strike at: the causes by which our confession, and also the reuerend Synod is led, that they thought it fit for them to rest in the Predestination, wherein man is considered as fallen, I suppose be these.

I. First, that Phrase of Scripture which calleth the Elect, the vessels of mercy, offers it selfe: Now there is no place for mercy vnlesse towards the miserable. He cannot be elected to the saluation, to be obtained by Christ, vnlesse he be considered as one that hath neede of a redeemer: And seeing that the appoint∣ment to an end, doth include the meanes by which that end is come by, and the meanes to saluation is

Page 93

the remission of sinnes, nor is there remission of sinnes without sinne, it is plaine that they are ap∣pointed to saluation, who are considered as sinners.

II. Neither could God, with the preseruation of his iustice, punish those men whom he considered without sin, for God doth not punish the guiltles: Damnation is an act of the iustice of God, which iustice cannot stand, or agree with it self, if innocent man for no fault be appointed to that desertion, and forsaking, which eternall destruction must necessarily follow; or if God had determined to destroy men, before he did deter∣mine to create them.

III. Then as God doth not condemne, vnlesse it be for sin; so it is certaine that hee is not willing to con∣demn, vnlesse it be for sin: But to reprobate men, & to be willing to condemne, are the same thing, euen as to elect & to be willing to saue, is the same thing: There∣fore God doth not reprobate vnlesse it be for sinne.

IV. Furthermore it cannot be denied, but that reprobation or reiection of the creature from God, is the punishment which can be inflicted on the reaso∣nable creature, because eternall torments doe neces∣sarily follow it, which if we get to be granted; it will thence follow, that it is not the part of infinite good∣nesse and highest iustice to forsake his owne creature, and that not because he hath sinned, but because it so seemed good to God, that hee might seeke matter for his glory out of the desertion, and forsaking of the soule which hee created. Can the father, who knoweth that the happinesse of his sonne depends on him, without the crime of cruelty, and want of natu∣rall affection, forsake his sonue that is innocent, and

Page 94

found guilty of no wickednesse, especially if by this forsaking, his son should fall into eternall torments, and by it be made not onely most miserable, but also most wicked?

V. Neither should God deale iustly, if he should giue more euill to the creature, by infinite parts, then he hath giuen good: To which, when he had giuen esse, a beeing, a while after, without any fault of it, he gaue it, male esse, an euill and miserable being, for euer. Indeede if God should onely take away that he hath giuen, and should bring the creature to nothing, there were no cause at all of complaining: But to giue an infinite euill to that creature, to whom he gaue a finite good, and to create man to that end onely that he might destroy him, that out of this de∣struction he might get glory to himselfe, the good∣nesse and iustice of God abhorreth.

VI. Yet this is the most grieuous thing, that by this, eyther reprobation or desertion of man, being considered without sinne, the innocent is made not onely most miserable, but euen most wicked: For the auersion and turning away of the will, doth ne∣cessarily follow the denying of the spirit of God; and seeing according to this opinion, God hated man, that was made by him, before man hated God, it cannot come to passe, but that the hatred of God, whereby he hates man, by the same opinion, should be made the cause of that hatred whereby man hates God, and so God should be made the author of sinne.

VII. And if God hated Esau, being considered in the vncorruptible masse, as not a sinner, it must

Page 95

needes be, that God hates the innocent creature; and hatred in God, although it is not an humane af∣fection, nor a perturbation, yet it is a sure and cer∣taine will of punishing, and punishment cannot be iust, if it be without offence; neither can a man be iustly punished, vnlesse he be considered as a sinner.

VIII. If any man should say that God is ob∣noxious, or subiect to no lawes, and therefore his actions are not rightly examined, according to the rule of iustice, seeing hee is tyed to no rules: I will anfwere, that the nature of God, is more mighty then any law: That naturall perfection, by which it is im∣possible that God should lie, or that he should sinne; is also the cause, why he could not hate his guiltlesse creature, or appoint man to eternall torments, for no fault of his: Yea if these things were true, it were the part of a wise man to suppresse these things, not to moue this anagyris or offensiue matter, and rather to command silence or ignorance to themselues, then to breake into these secrets, which being declared, doe cast in scruples and doubts, and yeeld occasion to the aduersaries, of defaming the true religion, and by which, no man is made fitter to the duties of a Christian, or of a ciuill man, or to any part of piety.

IX. That could not escape which should say, that by reprobation, men are not appointed to dam∣nation, but onely are passed by, or not elected, Thus they seeke gentler words, that by them the same thing might be said; for it is all one, whether God doth appoint a man to damnation, or doth that, from

Page 96

which damnation must necessarily follow. Whosoe∣uer God doth not elect, whether hee be said to be o∣mitted and passed by, or to be reprobated, hee is al∣waies excluded from the grace of God, damnation doth certainely follow this excluding; because with∣out the grace of election, there is no saluation. For seeing it is manifest to all, that men by election, are appointed to saluation, I would haue it told mee, to what they that are not elected, but passed by, are appointed: Surely if election doth appoint men to saluation, it is plaine, that by reprobation, which is called omission or passing by, the rest are excluded from saluation, and appointed to destruction.

X. And if God haue appointed the innocent creature to destruction, it must needes be, that hee hath appointed it to sinne, without which, there can be no iust destruction, and so God would be the im∣pulsiue and mouing cause of sinne: Neither could man iustly be punished for that sinne, to which he is eyther precisely appointed, or compelled by the will of God.

XI. That the decrees of God are eternall, and that he hath fore-knowne all things from eternity, doth not hinder this opinion, which doth maintaine, God in election and reprobation, to haue considered man as fallen, before he considered him as condem∣ned: For although the decrees of God are certaine, yet there is some order among them; as the eternall decree of ouerthrowing the world by fire, was in or∣der after the decree of creating the world: So al∣though God, from eternity, had appointed the wic∣ked to punishment, yet nothing hinders but that

Page 97

the consideration, whereby hee considered men as sinners, should be in order before that whereby hee considered men as reprobate, or appointed to punish∣ment.

XII. Neither doth it follow of the opinion of the reuerend Synod, and the confession of our Chur∣ches, by which man fallen is the obiect of predesti∣nation, that God created man to an vncertaine end, or to haue missed of that end which he propounded to himselfe. The last end, propounded to God, was the illustration, and setting forth of his glory, by the manifestation of his goodnesse and iustice; that hee might come to this end, hee decreed to create man iust, but mutable and free: The fore-knowledge of the fall of man doth follow this decree, not in time, but in order, and election and reprobation doth in order follow this fore-knowledge.

XIII. They are very farre from the truth, which would haue God, in electing and reprobating, to haue considered man as not created; for they doe as much as if they should say, that God considered man as nothing, and therefore as not man. Surely in that very thing, that they call him a man, they call him somewhat; but to consider something as nothing is a thing well-nigh a dreame: He that will saue or punish a man, must necessarily, first haue willed him to be a man: For if God had appointed man to punishment before he had appointed to create him, he should so doe, as if any one should determine to beate his chil∣dren, before he hath determined to beget them.

XIV. Finally, seeing the first act of his omnipo∣tency was busied about nothing, it must neede, be

Page 98

that it went before the act of his mercy or iustice, which cannot be busied but about something that hath being.

XV. They say the same thing in other words, which would haue God in predestinating to haue considered man, as one that might be created and might fail: For he which saith he might be created, saith he was not yet created; and hee that saith hee might fall, saith that he had not fallen, but that to o∣ther inconueniences, they adde this increase, that they put a power and potentiall faculty in that thing which is nothing In God indeede there was the actiue power of creating the world, before he created it: But there was not in the world the passiue power for creating, before it was created: So neither could there be power for the creation, or for the fall, in man being not created, and it is plainely contrary to rea∣son, that of him which is not, it should be said that he may fall. Then also if God elected man that might be created, what doth hinder that it may not be said, that he elected some whom hee neuer would create? For these also may be created; but if God elected those whom he presupposed hee would create, the will of creating must needes goe before the election.

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.