Autokatakrisis, or, Self-condemnation,: exemplified in Mr. Whitfield, Mr. Barlee, and Mr. Hickman. With occasional reflexions on Mr Calvin, Mr Beza, Mr Zuinglius, Mr Piscator, Mr Rivet, and Mr Rollock: but more especially on Doctor Twisse, and Master Hobbs; against whom, God's purity and his præscience ... with the sincere intention and the general extent of the death of Christ, are finally cleared and made good; and the adversaries absurdities ... are proved against them undeniably, out of their own hand-writings. With an additional advertisement of Mr Baxter's late book entituled The Groatian religion discovered, &c. By Thomas Pierce rector of Brington in Northampon-shire.

Sect. 3.

Mr. Whitfield saith, [

that the summe of what Mr. P. or any of his Predecessors in this controversie about Gods absolute Decree hath objected against it, is included in that which the Apostle objects against himself, speaking of his subject, Rom. 9.14. Is God unjust? and, who hath resisted his will? which he answers with an Absit, & quis tu es? — And if we should give no other answer but this, it might suffice, p. 20.]

What will not some be bold to say, rather then want wherewith to gain-say? First he forgeth a certain Tale, and gives it the Name of a Third general Answer. If he had called it a Whirligig, his impropriety had been lesse; for the Question there is the contrary to what it is here. There it was of God free mercy, which well might be without mans merit: Here it is of his wrath, which cannot be without our demerit. No lesse are the wandrings of Mr. W. But Secondly, Where was he told, that this is the summe of whatsoever hath been objected against his mythical Decree? He nei∣ther names his Author, nor gives his Reason, nay speaks precisely against his knowledge, and crudely dictates (stilo satis praetoriano) This is the summe. I answer with more Truth, but much lesse Majesty, that this indeed is the summe of all their subter-fuges and salvo's, Quis tu es? Who art thou, O man, who objectest against God, that he hath not an efficiency and hand in sin? This was the very last plank which Mr. Hobbs was fain to betake himself unto, when he found himself ship-wreckt by the most learned Bishop Bramhall, in his book of Liberty and Neces∣sity, p. 20. The shift is common to the Libertines and Ranters, with Mr. Hobbs, and Mr. W. and Mr. B. &c. This is the ablest of their Answers, when nothing else will do the work, to say that God would have it so because he would, and however contrary to his word, yet 'tis a part of his secret will, (revealed onely to that Tribe) at which the rest of mankind must content themselves vvith 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and must hold themselves confuted vvith the [Quis

tu es] of the Presbyterians. Thirdly, It is his other abso∣lute leasure, to say that Saint Paul did speak of this sub∣ject, Rom. 9.14. It is enough to say No, and that 'tis senseless to imagin it. But I vvill tell him farther, that Saint Paul is there disputing against the male-contented Jewes, vvho vvere very much offended that the Gentiles should be received, and the Jews rejected (the greatest part of them) vvho hither∣to vvere vvell knovvn to be Gods peculiar and chosen people. This (saith Melanchthon) vvas the occasion of that vvhich follovves. And Hemmingius thus, That S. Paul intented nothing else (v. 10, 11.) but to teach that Grace vvas universal, and ex∣tended also to the Gentiles: This vvas contrary to the Doctrine vvhich vvas then espoused by the Jewes, as novv it is by the Consistorians. Were this a place and a time to argue from the genuine and demonstrable sense of that Chapter (vvhich of it self vvould make a Volume) there could nothing prove more destructive to Mr. W's Doctrines, then that one Chapter; and that not onely according to S. Paul's sense, but even according to the senselesness vvhich the unlearned and the unstable are vvont to wrest from that Scripture. Fourth∣ly, The Quis tu es may fit my mouth a great deal better then Mr. W's. If God vvas pleased to punish none in his eternal Decree vvithout respect unto their sins, and to† give himself a ransom for all mankind, Quis tu es, Who art thou O man that repliest against God? shall the thing for∣med say to him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus? Why was I not decreed and necessitated to bliss from all e∣ternity? why have I not grace irresistible? why shouldst thou leave it in my povver to be unhappy? vvhy should any kind of wickednesse be able to put me into a state of damnation? or vvhy should all men be capable of e∣scaping Hell, as vvell as I and my party? vvhat have

moral honest men to do vvith heaven? vvhy vvere they not rejected before they were? The Puritanical Jewes vvere apt to mutter to this effect, but let not Christians be so irrational. This vvere ansvver sufficient to all the ill∣natur'd murmurings of carnal men. But for the good of the vulgar (for some of vvhom Mr. Wh. may be too hard) I vvill apply my 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to the particular dangers novv spread before them.

Notes

• Mr. W's third General An∣swer a m••er Majestick mistake.
• Non fuit levis offensio, quòd tam pauci Judaei credierunt.— Nomen populi Dei objiciebatur Apostolo.— Haec est (meo judicio) occasio harum disputa∣tionum. Melanchth. in Praef. ad cap 9. ad Rom.
• Non aliud vult Paulus, Rom. 9.••0, 11. quàm docere, Gratiam universalem esse; contra Judaeos, qui culpâ suâ exciderunt Grat••â, &c. H••mming. Praef. in Exposit. Epist. ad R••m. See Doctor Ham. Annot. upon that Chapter.
• 2 Pet. 3.16.
• †

  Tit. 2.14.