Animadversions upon a treatise intitled, Gods love to mankind written by ... Iohn, Lord Bishop of Sarisbvry.

Whether Absolute Reprobation fight with Gods Holinesse.

THe absolute Reprobation which we maintein is nothing else but an absolute purpose in God of not-bestowing grace in∣fallibly bringing unto glory upon some men, which he hath absolutely purposed to bestow upon others. And this we evidently ground upon the Doctrine of our Church, which acknowledgeth Predestination to be a speciall favour or benefit extended to •• certain number known onely to God, from whence faith, perseverance and eternall life do flow as effects from the cause. And because the affirmation ferveth to measure the negation, our Church speaking in the ar∣ticle nothing at all of Non-election or Non-predestination, leaveth it obvious to every mans understanding that all not comprised within the number of the elect must needs fall within the number of the non-elect, as being permitted deficere à gratia & gloria by their own default. And further, our Church in adding, Notwithstanding the decree of Pre∣destination and Election Gods generall promises must be received as they are propounded in the Gospel, intimateth, That the decrees of Ele∣ction & Non-election or Reprobation may stand firm cum possibilitate ad eventus con∣trarios though not cum eventis contrariis. For

Peter notwithstanding his Predestination might have been damned if he had volunta∣rily continued in his impenitency, and Judas notwithstanding his Reprobation might have been saved if he had not voluntarily continued in his impenitency. The absolute decrees of Election and Non-election are not contradictory to the generall condition∣all promises of salvation or threats of da∣mnation. As therefore we condemne the opinion of the Remonstrants, who by re∣ducing Election and negative Reprobation unto foreseen good and bad acts of men erre upon the one hand, so we condemne also their opinions who confound the decree of Damnation with this of Non-election, or who derive the causes of damnation, name∣ly sinne, infidelity, impenitency, from the fore-named decree; which is to erre further upon the other hand. These things premi∣sed we will now go along with this Au∣thour, and see how he proveth this absolute Reprobation or Non-election which we de∣fend to oppose any of Gods principall At∣tributes.

He saith it sighteth with his holinesse, be∣cause it maketh him the principall cause of sinne in all persons not-elected or not-predestina∣ted.

If he can prove this we yield. His nib∣bling [ B] at the Synod of Dort, and charging them

with maintenance of a fatall decree, is to little purpose. If he call that fatall which is cer∣tain and immutable, we are not afraid to af∣firm that all Gods eternall decrees are cer∣tain and immutable; and that very eternall decree of Reprobation which he imagineth to follow upon the foresight of mens finall impenitency is as absolute, as immutable, and in this sense as fatall as that which we de∣fend. S. Augustine did not abhorre Fatum:a Si propterea quisquam res humanas fato tri∣buit, quia ipsam Dei voluntatem vel potestatem Fati nomine appellat, sententiam teneat, linguam corrigat. Others admit the word, and give this definition of it, as Boethius; Fatum est immobilis dispositio rebus mobilibus inhaerens. Aquinas;b Fatum est ordinatio secundarum cau∣sarum ad effectus Divinitus provisos. I might cite infinite Authours who rejecting Fatum astrologicum admit Fatum Theologicum or Ca∣tholico sensu acceptum. Vide Parisiensem 1. part. De universo, part. 3. cap. 24. pag. 746, 747. Halensem part. 1. quaest. 27. Albertum part. 1. tract. 17. Durandum, lib. 1. dist. 39. quaest. 4. I have quoted all these because this Authour through his whole book thinketh he hath beaten down absolute Predestinati∣on to the ground if he can but fasten the name or bare conceit of Fatalitie upon it.

As for the Synod of Dort, it considered not Predestination and Reprobation in massa

corrupta to maintein a fatall decree. For con∣sider it before or after the decree is alike fa∣tall, if immutability of events decreed by God be termed fatality. And put it before or after, it neither way maketh God the principall cause of sinne: which is clear in non-elect angels, in whom Reprobation considered before the fall is by no judicious Divine conceived to make God the cause of their sinne.

But he goeth about to prove that absolute [ C] Reprobation maketh God the Authour of sinne, because some defenders thereof say two things from whence (he thinketh) it may be inferred That God is the principall cause of sinne. Suppose some who hold absolute Reprobation should therewithall hold not two onely but ten false tenents, is the falsity of these a necessary medium to conclude the falsity of the other? As if he that holdeth two false propositions, might not for all that hold a third which is true.

His first Proposition wherewith he char∣geth the defenders of absolute Reprobati∣on, is, That God of his own will and pleasure hath brought men into an estate in which they cannot avoid sinne, namely, into the estate of ori∣ginall sinne, and that both in regard of the guilt and of the corruption.

This is both odiously and falsely set down. No man holdeth that God brought Adams

posterity either into the estate of their guilt or of their corruption: but all maintein that it was Adam himself who by his voluntary prevarication inwrapped himself and his po∣sterity both in the guilt and contagion of originall sin. Per unum hominem peccatum in hunc mundū intravit, & per peccatum mors. So that both the sinne and the punishment were brought in by man and not by God. Or if a further cause must needs be found of bring∣ing-in sinne and death, the devil must be charged therewithall. Invidiâ diaboli, &c. It is true, and acknowledged generally by Divines both of our Church and of the Ro∣mane, That it was not by any naturall neces∣sity that Adam falling his posterity should be either universally tainted with originall sinne or liable unto death, but that both these depended à libero Dei decreto, or as some call it à pacto, wherein it was agreed that if Adam persevered in his righteous∣nesse he should transmit it to his posterity, if he rebelled he should make his whole po∣sterity liable both to the corruption of sinne and danger of punishment.

And that this Authour may see that others (who deny God to be the cause of sinne) do hold as much as Calvine, or D^r Twisse, I will quote him some Authours. And first to begin with the Master of the senten∣ces; He teacheth that not God but Adam

brought men into their estate of sinne.c Per Adamum peccatum simul ac poena transiit in po∣steros. Ex Adamo damnationem simul ac cul∣pam suscepimus. Nemo nascitur nisi trahens poenam & meritum poenae. Ex Adami inobedi∣entiaemanavit & in posteros demigravit. So that there is no question Who brought in this sin: All the question is, How it cometh to passe that so unavoidably and generally it layeth hold upon all the sons of Adam. Here even the Romane Divines are driven to con∣fesse with Calvine, that this dependeth upon a free constitution or decree of the Divine will: because naturall propagation would not have stripped Adams posterity of any habi∣tual righteousnesse which God had bestow∣ed upon him, or charged them with the guilt of any sinne personally committed by him, had not God enacted and constituted a de∣cree that so it should be. Vasquez is clear of this opinion;d Primo parenti ità fuit gratia & justitia donata, ut non tantùm sibi sed etiam posteris transmittendam illam acceperit, non quidem ex natura rei, sed ex Dei pactione. And more plainly;e Causa originalis peccati fuit pri∣mus parens ratione suae transgressionis, non qui∣dem physica & naturalis, quia nihil reale in po∣steros traducere potuit virtute propriâ aut vir∣tute peccati quod commisit. And a little after; Negare non possumus ex voluntate sola Dei con∣stitutum fuisse ut gratia originalis traduceretur

in posteros si Adamus in gratia perseveraret, & amitteretur si peccaret. Malderus also grant∣eth that the contagion and guilt of Adams sinne is not derived unto his posterity but by Gods free constitution;f Notandum, cùm De∣us totum humanum genus in uno homine condi∣disset, indebitam naturae justitiam originalem isti homini dedisse, non pro se tantùm, sed pro to∣ta posteritate; adeò ut si ipse perseverasset, omnes posteri nascerentur justi. Paulô pòst; Deus cum Adamo quasi pactum quoddam iniit, quo prae∣varicanti statueret non tantùm ipsi sed toti na∣turae mortem animae & corporis.g Fuit quod∣dam Dei decretum, ex quo decreto accessu pecca∣ti superfuit illud chirographum decreti contrari∣um nobis. And last of all he addeth,h Volun∣tarium voluntate primi parentis sufficere ad ve∣ri nominis peccatum in parvulo: est enim illa voluntas Adae quodammodo voluntas parvuli, ex Dei decreto. These and many more agree with Calvine, in attributing the unavoidable imputation of Adams offense and transmit∣ting of his corrupted nature unto a voluntary and free constitution of God, in whose pow∣er and pleasure it stood (if in his wisdome he had seen it more fit) to have ordered it otherwise. If this decree make God the principall cause of sinne in Adams posteri∣ty, not onely Calvine but all other Divines lie open to this Authours accusation.

But he is utterly mistaken, and pinneth a

false consequent to a true antecedent. For though Gods will was the cause of making the former decree, That all Adams posteri∣ty should be liable to the losse of righteous∣nesse and punishment of sinne upon Adams disobedience, even as if themselves had singularly and personally transgressed; yet neither God nor this decree of God was the cause either of Adams transgres∣sion personally committed by himself, or of the corruption and guilt of damnation which seised upon his posteritie. The law or decree, That if a noble man become a traitour, he with all his posteritie shall be tainted in bloud, and stripped of the priviledges of nobilitie, is not the cause either of the fathers treason or of the chil∣drens losse and punishment: but the true proper working cause thereof is the rebel∣lious will and act of the father. Even so here, Gods decree revealed unto Adam, That if he sinned all his posteritie should be liable to corporall and spirituall death, was so farre from being the cause of his sinne or his childrens miserie, that it was in its own nature a strong retractive or preserva∣tive to have kept him and his children out of sinne and out of miserie.

If Adams disobedience (which was the onely true cause of his own and childrens miserie) had followed as a necessary conse∣quent

effect upon such an antecedent law, then had God been the cause both of the sinne and misery whereinto he plunged him∣self and his children: But the law which enacteth a certain punishment against sinne committed, is by no wise man made the cause of sinne committed against that law, but a rule onely according unto which, if the sinne be committed, the punishment shall be in∣flicted. Albeit therefore naturall generati∣on considered alone in it self without the fore-named free constitution of God, would not have propagated Adams sinne or mise∣ry unto his posteritie, yet we acknowledge (and so did Calvine) that it is now propa∣gated by way of naturall generation; because God had enacted that Adam should beget children in his own likenesse, that is parta∣kers of the same originall righteousnesse which he had, supposing he kept it; and par∣takers of his sinne, supposing he infected himself with the act and guilt of sinne.

[ D] As for his objections; If we be fallen into the guilt of the first sinne and the corruption of nature, onely because we were in Adams loyns when he sinned, then are we in like manner guiltie of all the sinnes he committed afterwards:

We answer; Though Adams voluntary rebellion was the onely cause why he lost his originall righteousnesse both for himself

and for his children, and though his chil∣dren be entangled in his sinne and guilt one∣ly by being in his loyns when he sinned, or because they are his children, yet it will not follow that his posteritie stand in like man∣ner guiltie of all the sins which Adam commit∣ted from the fall unto his lives end. The reason is; Because though naturall propagation be the means of conveying Adams sinne unto us, yet (as before was touched) it would not have done so had there not been a liberum decretum established by God to that pur∣pose. And therefore Adams sinne can no further concern his posteritie then is regu∣lated by God himself. Now the Divine de∣cree or constitution did not so order it that any sinne of Adam should be imputable to all that were virtually in his loyns, but that his first sinne onely, in which he did sustinere personam generis humani, should be impu∣ted. And therefore Aquinas excluding his after-sins committed when he was himself fallen and corrupted; saith,i Secundùm fidem catholicam est tenendum quòd primum peccatum primi hominis transiit in posteros. And he is so farre from collecting (as this Authour doth) that by being in his loyns his posterity becometh guiltie of all his other sinnes, that he accounteth it impossi∣ble.k Impossibile est quòd aliqua peccata ••roximorum parentum vel etiam primi paren∣tis

(praeter primum) per originem traducan∣tur. Bellarmine giveth the reason; because whilst Adam stood invested with originall righteousnesse, totius humani generis gessit personam: and therefore that first sin which alone put him out of this estate was onely imputable to us, as being voluntary to us voluntate primi parentis. Malderus more clearly and punctually;m Nulla peccata primi parentis praeter primum per originem tradu∣cuntur in posteros. Quando enim amisit nobis semel justitiam, jam amisit qualitatem capitis, & non ampliùs in ipsius tanquam capitis vo∣luntate mansimus. Ratio est, quòd decretum sive pactum Dei, quo in Adamo constitueban∣tur posterorum voluntates, non extendebat se ad alia ipsius peccata, utpote qui gratiam ca∣pitis moralis primo peccato amiserat. I might quote many more; but by these it is clear that whilst this Authour thinketh he dispu∣teth onely against Calvine and Calvinists, he opposeth the received doctrine of the Catholick Church.

[ E] His second inference, That children should be guilty of all the sinnes of their other Pro∣genitours, is like the former, and upon the same grounds rejected by all Divines: and therefore it needeth no particular answer.

And when he goeth about by testimonies of Scripture to prove it, that they are not guiltie of their Parents sinnes, he maketh

himself work in proving that which no man denieth.

All that I will say is this; That the Pela∣gians from such testimonies of Scripture went about to overthrow the imputation of Adams sinne unto his posterity, and the de∣rivation of his corruption; but for their pains they were held and condemned as he∣reticks. Vide Bellarm. de amiss. Grat. lib. 4. cap. 8. & Mald. 1.2. q. 81. art. 1. pag. 254. where he bringeth in the Pelagian obje∣ctions.

Our own IX^th Article of Originall or Birth-sinne insinuateth a guilt and a corru∣ption caused by Adams first transgression; and yet our Church never taught that there was the same or like guilt proceeding from his after-sinnes, or from the sinnes of our other progenitours. Vide Vasq. in 1.2. quaest. 83. disp. 135. cap. 2. p. 883. Thus much of the first.

He would in the second place prove that [ F] absolute Reprobation must needs make God the principall cause of sinne, because the patrones thereof hold, That God hath immutably decreed to leave the greatest part of mankind in this impotent condition irrecove∣rably, and to afford them no sufficient power to make them rise out of sinne: and this decree he executeth in time, and both these he doth out of his own will and pleasure. A bundle of

words, but little substance in them. We an∣swer first in generall; That many who stoutly defend absolute Predestination and Reprobation, and oppose the conditionate Election and Preterition of the Remon∣strants, do notwithstanding detest and con∣fute that blasphemous errour, That God is the cause of sinne. Neither do I now speak this of Calvinists, but of Jesuites, Domini∣canes and Romanists of all sorts. Again, the greater part of those who hold absolute Predestination and Reprobation and reject the Predestination and Reprobation which by the Remonstrants is founded upon pre∣science, do hold notwithstanding a generall sufficiency of grace, Si per homines non ste∣terit quo minus: Which is all the Remon∣strants themselves do defend.

As for the executing of Gods decree out of his own will and pleasure, I wonder it should be objected as false and offensive. For by Gods decrees concerning mans Election and Preterition absolute or conditionall, it is certain they are executed as they were en∣acted, that is, according to the will and plea∣sure of God, and not of the creature. But to come to his propositions particularly.

[ G] His first. God (by those which oppose the Remonstrants conditionate Election and Reprobation, and make them both depend upon Gods absolute will) is said to leave the

Non-elect without sufficient grace, and conse∣quently under an everlasting necessity of sin∣ning. This is the Helen, &c.

The most of those who defend absolute Predestination and Reprobation say and teach, [Answ.] that God decreeth to leave no man unprovided of sufficient grace that repelleth it not by some demeritorious act of his own will. It is therefore a manifest untruth, that with joynt consent they labour to maintein that which with joynt consent a great num∣ber of them labour to confute. Again, they which maintein absolute Reprobation will no more grant that it putteth or leaveth any man under everlasting necessitie of sinning, then that absolute Predestination putteth men under a necessitie of not sinning. Gods decrees (as hath been often said and pro∣ved) carry along with them necessitatem in∣fallibilitatis quoad eventum, but not necessi∣tatem compulsionis quoad modum agendi & eveniendi. The decree of Reprobation left not Cain under the necessitie of killing his brother, nor Absalom under a necessitie of defiling his fathers concubines, nor Judas under a necessitie of betraying Christ: All these sinfull actions and the like are commit∣ted by Reprobates out of their own free election, having a power whereby they might have absteined from committing them. And therefore to think that the de∣cree

of absolute Reprobation must needs leave them under a necessitie of committing their severall sinnes, is a false and vain ima∣gination, as every mans conscience is able to witnesse.

Those who cast Reprobation into two acts do not by the negative act thereof under∣stand a peremptory denyall of all grace, but a peremptory denyall of all such effectuall grace as infallibly would bring them unto glory, and a peremptory permitting them in the use of grace to their own defective free-will. This negative Reprobation in the judgement of most Divines doth stand with the actuall administration of sufficient grace, and in the judgement of all it may stand with it, as it did in the Non-election of the apostaticall Angels. It is doubted both by some Protestants and Papists, whether sufficient grace be de facto prepared for and offered to all the Non-elect: But that Gods absolute decrees of Election and Non-ele∣ction might stand firm though it were so, there is no great cause of doubt.

For the positive act, which this Authour describeth to be to a preordination unto hell∣torments; those who comprise them both under this one word Reprobation, do not∣withstanding make this act or decree respe∣ctive unto sinne, as we have already shewed. As for those of our Church in this contro∣versie;

whether Predestination and Non-predestination be grounded upon the prime absolute will of God, or upon his presci∣ence of good and bad acts to be performed by men, they do and must understand by the word Reprobation not the decree of da∣mning any particular persons, but onely the absolute decree of not-preparing for them that effectuall grace quâ certissimè liberaren∣tur, and of leaving them to such means of [ G] grace under which by their own default infallibiliter ruunt ad interitum voluntarium. Thus our English Divines in their suffrage have described it, and thus the reverend and judicious Bishop of Norwich conceived it, when he made both Remonstrants or Armi∣nians and Contra-remonstrants or Puritanes (as he termeth them) to erre out of the true middle way which the Church of England holdeth in opposition to them both. In Election he maketh this the er∣rour of the Remonstrants, That they ground the absolute decree of mens particular Ele∣lection upon the prescience of their faith and perseverance (as this Authour doth) whereas that reverend Prelate holdeth with the Church of England, and S. Augustine, Electio non invenit eligendos, sed facit. As for the errours of the Puritanes about Pre∣destination or Election, he reduceth them to these heads, the excluding of the condi∣tionate

decree or evangelicall promise, the disordering of the decree of Predestination by bringing it in before the fall and the de∣cree of Christs incarnation. As for the preparation and donation of such a speciall grace per quam non solùm possint credere aut obedire si velint, sed & jam actu velint, cre∣dant, obediant, he maketh it the proper fruit and effect of Election: whereas he granteth unto the Non-elect onely salutem gratiám∣que communem & sufficientem in mediis Di∣vinitus ordinatis, si verbo Dei spirituique sancto deesse noluerint. Unto which adde that wherein all Divines of all sides agree, That God administreth this common grace with an eternall and infallible prescience that it will be rejected or abused by the Non-elect, and with an absolute decree of permitting it so to be; and then it is clear, the English Divines with the Church of England nec divertisse ad dextram in illorum sententiam qui ex praescita fide & perseverantia per liberam cooperationem arbitrii humani gra∣tiae praevenientis & sufficientis auxiliis instru∣cti praedestinationem deducunt, nec ad sini∣stram deelinasse in illorum opinionem qui pro∣missionem generalem & gratiam sufficientem tollunt, &c. They are the words of that reverend Prelate D^r Overall. To return to our Authour; Whereas he saith that all the defenders of absolute Predestination

and Reprobation (that is, all who oppose the Remonstrants conditionate Election and Non-election) do agree, that by the decree of Reprobation necessary grace for avoyding sinne is flatly denied to Reprobates, it is quite otherwise. For saving grace, many confesse that in causis universalibus it is sufficiently prepared for all men: They confesse that under the Evangelicall covenant, Si credide∣ris, salvus eris, every man hath a true claim unto eternall life: They confesse, that wheresoever is Christs Church, there is such a sufficient administration of grace as would have saved the Non-elect, had they not op∣posed a malignant voluntary act of their own will against the motions and operation of Divine grace; according to those words of our Saviour, John 3.17. & 12.47, 48. & Acts 13.46. Calvine saith as much;n Mundi nomen iterum iterúmque repetit, nè quis om∣nino arceri se putet, modò fidei viam teneat. We therefore, as well as the Remonstrants, grant a conditionall possibilitie of grace and salvation to all men: but here is the diffe∣rence; We say the Elect by a speciall mer∣cy of God are so guided and ruled that they and they alone perform the condition, and that the Non-elect are alwayes permitted to fail in the performance of the condition.

Now whereas this Authour saith, that whatsoever we speak of grace afforded to

persons Not-elected must be understood of such grace as is insufficient to make them avoid sinne, he is a very bad interpreter of ou•• meaning. We think and teach, that God hath not prepared for them, and therefore never giveth unto them such grace as finally freeth them from sinne: but we say, that God doth give them oftentimes such a•• measure of grace as keepeth them from committing many particular sinnes where∣unto they are prone and bent of themselves▪ We say further, that God giveth them such a measure of illumination, such excitations unto doing good and eschewing evil, as lea∣veth them convicted in their own conscien∣ces (whatsoever brabblers may say to the contrary) that wittingly and willingly they commit their severall sinnes, not out of in∣sufficiency to avoid the acts of adultery, rob∣bery, theft, deceit, &c. but out of malignity desirng and choosing to do them.

[ I] For the second branch; Whereas he will have the defenders of absolute Non-electi∣on or negative Reprobation to say and hold, That God doth actually according to his eternall and unchangeable decree leave the reprobates in their severall times and generations without his grace, under a necessitie of finall sinne and im∣penitency, surely they never chose him to be their speaker. If this man will give them leave to speak for themselves, this it is they

say, That God doth in time according to his eternall decree withhold from all per∣sons Not-elected that speciall mercie or ef∣fectuall grace which he knoweth would in∣fallibly free them from finall sinne and im∣penitency, and leaveth them (not without all grace, nor under a necessitie of living and continuing in the practice of their sinnes, but) under grace committed (as the Re∣monstrants would have it) to the dominion and good usage of their own free-will, and under a permission of their finall sinning and impenitency out of their own free-will: From both which God infallibly foresaw their finall impenitencie, and respectively there∣unto decreed their eternall punishment.

But how doth he prove that they must needs say as he would have them? His rea∣son is, Because Gods decrees cannot be fru∣strated: What he purposed before time, without fail he doth in time. We agree that quoad eventum Gods decrees cannot be frustrated. But this impossibilitie of frustration ariseth not from a necessitie put upon the agents to do thus and not otherwise (as this Authour perpetually but most falsely doth suppose) but from that infallible providence of God, who can and doth bring into act events de∣creed according to the nature of the next causes or immediate agents. Naturall agents work naturally in producing decreed events:

neces∣sary agents work necessarily: and free agents such as are Angels and men, work freely. It is a flat Non-sequitur, Events decreed cannot be frustrated; Therefore the agents are under a necessitie of sinning. And it is further to be considered, that albeit all Gods decrees are infrustrable, yet there is a main difference betwixt Gods decrees of producing good saving acts in his Elect, and of permitting the Non-elect to pro∣duce their wicked actions, and finally to continue in them. The former he doth by using his own hand in framing their hearts unto such good actions, and guiding their wills indeclinably in the voluntary practice thereof: but as for the latter, their wicked hearts are not wrought by God, nor their wicked wills guided by God unto their wic∣ked actions, but they are permitted out of their own free-will to commit such wicked actions. Here is no necessity put upon the agents by either of the forenamed decrees.

[ K] For the Divines of Geneva; they have set down nothing in their testimonie alledged, but either that God calleth not the Non-elect, or that he calleth them not vocatio∣ne secundùm propositum, which alwayes fol∣loweth Predestination, and draweth after it Justification, Sanctification and Glorifi∣cation. In the first they speak of an Evan∣gelicall vocation, by revealing Christ in

the preaching of the glorious gospel, which vocation experience sheweth hath been de∣nyed to many.o Vocati non sunt qui nec spem vocationis audiverunt. In the latter they speak of that speciall grace which the Ca∣tholick Church hath defended against the Pelagians to be a speciall gift, and not pre∣pared for all nor given to all. Vide Aug. De Praed. Sanct. cap. 9. & Epist. 167. Prosp. De Voc. 1.13.

Lubbertus saith the same in effect, and no [ L] more. And S. Augustine hath said as much De grat. Christi contra Pelag. cap. 12. And not he alone, but the Synod of Bishops in Sardinia, De gratia non dignè sentit, &c. For the other saying of Lubbertus, That God doth not administer unto all men necessa∣rie and sufficient means unto salvation, with an intention of saving them; It is to be ob∣served 1. first, That he doth not speak of a provision in universalibus causis, nor of means sufficient, Si non defuissent sibi, si non fecissent inutilia interveniente libero actu pro∣priae voluntatis: for all this he may well grant; but he speaketh de Mediis Divinâ providentiâ applicatis. And here, if the Re∣monstrants think faith to be a necessary means to mens salvation, and the word preached a necessarie means to the beget∣ting of faith, they must (will they nill they) subscribe to Lubbertus. 2. Secondly, it is

worth the observing, That when the Re∣monstrants have said all they can for the universalitie and sufficiencie of saving grace, they are forced by convincing arguments and evidence of Scripture to retreat unto the same universalitie and conditionall sufficien∣cie which I spake of but now, and where∣in no man opposeth them. Nay we are of opinion, that to have sufficient means of sal∣vation administred, which shall prove no otherwise effectuall then under this condi∣tion, Si homines sibi non desint, is an argu∣ment of the Divine Non-election: as on the contrary, not to have their salvation thus suspended upon their own free-will, but upon that speciall mercie of which S. Augustine spake when he said, Deus nulli∣us frustrà miseretur, is a demonstrative ar∣gument of the Divine Election. 3. Last of all, whereas Lubbertus saith that God doth not administer sufficient grace unto all with an intention of saving them, nothing more true, nothing more clear. For what God doth eternally decree or intend to do, that he in time infallibly doth: For he doth all according to the eternall counsel of his own will. But he doth not in time save the Non-elect by that sufficient grace whereof this Authour speaketh: therefore he had not an eternall intention of saving them by that grace which from all eternitie he knew

would never save them. The intention of Gods will cannot but take effect;p quia nec in se nec in mediis potest impediri. An omni∣potent will alwayes obteineth its intent, be∣cause the willing is the working, the Fiat is the Factum est. Aquinas hath well expres∣sed this efficacie of the Divine will,q Est impossibile, quòd Divina voluntas non effe∣ctum consequatur suum.r Quicquid Deus simpliciter vult, fit; licèt illud quod anteceden∣ter vult, non semper fiat.s Cùm aliqua causa efficax fuerit ad agendum, effectus consequitur causam, non tantùm secundùm id quod fit, sed etiam secundùm modum fiendi. This Authour therefore mistaketh Lubbertus, who by the Divine intention of saving this or that parti∣cular person understandeth that absolute will which never faileth in producing the effect willed, not a will affected with this exception, Nisi per homines steterit quò mi∣nùs salventur. The former intent of saving all men by the means of salvation tendered unto them, is onely denied; not the latter, which is improperly called the Divine in∣tention of saving any man, because it inclu∣deth an intention of permitting his own free-will justly to procure his ruine.

We must come to the third branch; [ M] where his charge is this; That God (in our opinion) decreeth and executeth this leaving of men to themselves of his alone absolute will and

pleasure. If he mean the leaving of men Not-elected utterly forlorn of all such grace as would save them if themselves were not in fault, and the necessitating of them to their transgression and perdition, we acknowledge no such decree, no such manner of executing any Divine decree, no such absolute will and pleasure in God to follow upon the decree of Non-election. Our English Divines affirm that this Non-election is founded in the most free plea∣sure of God: So our Spanish Divines, our Italian Divines, French Divines (who never saw the Synod of Dort) and in a word, all Divines who know what they affirm when they dispute of Non-election or negative Reprobation. And yet neither the English Divines nor they ever dreamed of such a passing-over the Non-elect by the mere will of God as this Authour would fasten upon the decree of Non-election. He hath alrea∣die been fully answered, that the absolute decree of Non-election implieth not an ut∣ter denying of sufficient grace in the limited and conditionall acception of Sufficiency, which the Remonstrants themselves are content to admit of.

It is to as little purpose which he hath out of the Palatine Ministers Suffrage, or the Divines of Hessen, the sense of which propositions hath been already cleared, and

the truth proved: and therefore we let them passe.

As for sinne, which is considered equall [ N] ••n all men tanquam communis affectio subjecti, whether elected or not-elected, it is plain, ••hat it maketh all and every man reprobabiles: but it must needs be out of his own plea∣sure and free-will, that all being in a state unworthie of the riches of Gods speciall mercy, he should notwithstanding prepare it for some, and decree the giving it in due ••ime, which we call their Predestination, ••nd not prepare nor decree to bestow it up∣on others, but to leave them under common grace, and to permit them to the deficient ••ule of their own will, which we call nega∣••ive Reprobation.

The ground of the Remonstrants errour ••s a false fansie, which they have enterteined ••nto their understandings concerning the very nature, formalitie or essence of the de∣crees of Divine Predestination and negative Reprobation. For whereas in deed and in truth they are decrees finding all men in a miserable and damnable estate, and out of it determining to bring some and to fit them for eternall happinesse, and not to bring o∣••hers by fitting them thereunto; these men make them decrees finding and seeing some by the acts of their own will fitted for hea∣ven and hell, and thereunto appointing them

according to their deserts and misdeserts. This is with Faustus the Semipelagian to make Predestination an act of remunerative justice, and to make Non-predestination or Non-election an act of vindicative justice: both which are rejected as erroneous not onely by Calvinists or Contra-remon∣strants, but even by the common consent of the Romane Divines. God at the last day shall crown the Elect and condemne the Non-elect according to their finall perse∣verance in faith or infidelitie and impeni∣tency. But this difference of their finall estates absolutely foreseen is a consequent not an antecedent to the decrees of Election and Preterition.

[ O] I might passe-by what he further addeth upon his own false inferences, of Gods bringing men into a necessitie of sinning, and leaving Reprobates under this necessitie, be∣cause I have shewed no such thing can be deduced from that absolute negative Re∣probation which we defend. But let us heare what he will say. He reasoneth thus; CAUSA CAUSAE EST ETIAM CAUSA CAUSATI, where there is a necessary subor∣dination betwixt the cause and the effect, whether it be a cause negative or positive: But by the do∣ctrine of absolute Reprobation we make God the chief or sole cause of the sinnes of Re∣probates, namely through their impotency or

want of supernaturall grace. For the ordi∣narie Axiome, we admit it ubi secunda causa non egreditur ordinem primae, that is, where the second cause worketh or doeth any thing by virtue of that influx or motion that it hath from the first.

As for this distinction of Negative and Positive causing, it is obscure and improper. The aire hath heat and light from the posi∣tive causing of the sunne-beams; darknesse, fogginesse, coldnesse followeth upon the negation of the sunne-beams: and yet nei∣ther the sunne nor his beams nor the retra∣ctions of his beams, are true or proper causes of coldnesse or darknesse in the aire. The reason himself hath touched upon, Be∣cause those dispositions or qualities in the aire issue not from the sunne per subordinatio∣nem effecti ad causam, but out of the nature of the aire onely: That is a cause per quam res est id quod est. Thus the sunne is the true cause that the aire is hot and light. If by virtue flowing from the absent sunne it be made dark, then might we call the sunne a cause of the darknesse. In proportion we say the same of God: If from his decree of Non-election there flow any darknesse or pravity into mans will, or any crookednesse and sinfulnesse into his actions, there were some colour in terming him a negative cause of mans sinne: But this he shall never be able to demonstrate.

He saith, that God by his decree of nega∣tive Reprobation is the sole or chief cause of that impotencie and want of supernaturall grace which is the necessarie and immediate cause of all the sinnes which they commit. Want of the grace of Predestination is neither chief nor sole, nor any cause at all of the sinnes of the Non-predestinate. Non-Election or negative Reprobation doth not involve any such impotencie of avoiding sinfull acts, or any such necessitie of committing sinfull actions, as this man imagineth. For though Preterition or Non-election be not a prepa∣ring or bestowing of such grace as would infallibly make men better, yet it must not be conceived to be the working of any thing in them whereby they are made worse. Again, though negative Reprobation be a deniall of such grace as doth effectually produce the faith, perseverance, and eter∣nall happinesse of the Elect, yet it is no such absolute subtraction of grace as is a necessa∣rie and immediate cause of any mans parti∣cular sinnes, or of his finall perseverance in sinne. The Non-elect Angels were under the eternall decree of negative Reprobati∣on before they were created; yet were they not by want of sufficient grace at their crea∣tion made impotent to stand, much lesse constrained by any necessitie to rebell and sinne against God. Adam in the state of

his innocencie was not predestinated to per∣severance; nay, (which is more) God had positively decreed the permission of his fall: yet the want of a decree predestina∣ting his perseverance in that estate did nei∣ther affect him with an impotencie of stand∣ing nor with a necessitie of falling. Vide Prosp. ad Vincent. Resp. 10. 15.

REMOVENS PROHIBENS, That [ P] which withholdeth a thing which being present would hinder an event, is the cause of that event: But God withholdeth from Reprobates that power which being granted might keep them from falling into sinne: therefore he becometh a true morall cause of their sinnes. His major proposition is a most inconsiderate and false assertion; which if he will justifie, he un∣answerably maketh God the cause of all sinne. For no Divine will denie but it lieth within the compasse of Gods power to give unto any man that effectuall grace which both might and infallibly would make him freely and voluntarily believe and perse∣vere, and which both might and would in∣fallibly hinder the event of unbelieving and finall perseverance in incredulitie and im∣penitencie. And it is as evident, that God doth withhold from some that grace which being present would hinder those bad events: Who seeth not what the con∣clusion must be, were the major propositi∣on

true? Christ withheld from Lazarus that Divine operation which being present would have hindered the event of his death: Yet Martha saith onely unto him, Lord, if thou haddest been here, my brother had not been dead. She saith not, Lord, thou diddest withhold a thing which if it had been present would have hindred this event of my brothers death: and therefore I find thee t•• have been the morall cause of his death. If Ju∣das had had a sister, she might truly have said unto Christ, If thou haddest been presen•• in my brothers soul by the speciall grace of Pre∣destination, this might and would have hinder∣ed these wofull events of his sinning unto death of his dying impenitent in sinne, of his being damned for sinne: But she could not charge God to be the cause of those events onely for withholding that which would have hindered them.

As for the example he useth, of cut∣ting a string where••n a stone hangeth and so causing the fall thereof, it were to some purpose if the decree of Preterition had been it which cut the string, and so cau∣sed mans fall into sinne. But it was the de∣vil and mans voluntary defective act which cut the string. Reprobation or Preterition was onely a decree of not giving such a string as neither the devil nor the sinner himself should be permitted to cut?

As for that which he further urgeth, that [ Q] God must needs be a direct cause of the event when it is not beside his intention or expecta∣tion, We answer, that God is no otherwise said to intend outward events then by pro∣viding orderly means for producing such events. Non-election provideth no means of making men sinne, and therefore it in∣cludeth no intention of God to make men sinne, though it include a prevision of sin∣full events, and a decree to permit them. We say the same of expectation, which is onely metaphorically attributed unto God, and cannot respect wicked actions. God is said even from the Non-elect exspectare uvas non labruscas, because he affordeth them ordinary means for producing the one, but they themselves by abuse of the means are the onely causes producing the other. So that neither intention nor expectation of sinfull events can be ascribed to God, be∣cause both have a reference unto good things not unto bad.

A Pilote withholding his care and skill from a ship in a storm, foreseeing it will be drowned, is a proper cause of the losse of the ship: there∣fore God by this act and decree of Reprobation, &c. I answer, If one pilote wilfully hath brought a storm upon his ship, if wilfully he run her upon the rocks, though another look on and foresee she will split herself, he

maketh not himself a cause of her drown∣ing, unlesse he were necessarily bound to preserve her. Thus the case fares betwixt God and the Non-elect: therefore he is no proper cause of their Sinne or Perdition.

Notes

• a

  De grat. lib. 5. c. 1.
• b

  Part. 1. qu. 116. art. 4.
• Rom. 5.12.
• Wisd. 2.24.
• c

  Lib. 2. dist. 30.
• d

  In 1^m 2••, qu. 23 disp. 132. cap. 9.
• e

  Disp. 133. cap. 1.
• f

  In 1^m 2^c, qu. 81. art. 1.
• g

  Ibid.
• h

  ••bid. pag. 260.
• i

  1^a. 2••, q. 81. art. 1.
• k

  Art. 2.
• De amiss. grat. 4.10.
• m

  In 1^m 2^ae q. 81. art. 2.
• Vide Ja∣cob. Bayum, Institut. lib. 1. cap. 116.
• n

  In Joh. 3.
• o

  Prosp. ad Cap. Gall. Resp. 4. & Sent. super 4.
• Rom. 10.
• p

  Vide August. Enchir. cap. 95, & De Cor. & Grat. c. 14.
• q

  1. part. qu. 19. art. 6.
• r

  Ibid.
• s

  art. 8.
• Joh. 11.