The riches of Gods love unto the vessels of mercy, consistent with his absolute…The riches of Gods love unto the vessells of mercy, consistent with his absolute…

4. In the last place, I come to the relation of Georgius Major of a certain School-Master in Hungary, Petrus Hosuanus by name, for so I find him called in Dietricus, though this Author calls him Ilosuanus, mistaking belike the copy which he transcribed. Now Dietricus relates it as out of Georgius Major as this Author doth. But I wonder not a little that Osiander in his last Century makes no mention of it, that I can find, though I have searched after it, as the Woman in the Gospel did after her lost groat: Whether he gave any credit to Georgius Major his relation, I know not; or whether any thing came to his knowledge afterwards, as touching the unfaithfulness thereof. But take we it as it lies in this Authors relation.

4. In the last place, I come to the relation of Georgius Major of a certaine Schoole-Master in Hungary, Petrus Hosuanus by name, for so I find him called in Dietricus, though this Authour calls him Ilosuanus, mistaking belike the copy which he transcribed. Now Dietricus relates it as out of Georgius Major as this Author doth. But I wonder not a little that Osiander in his last Century makes no mention of it, that I can find, though I have searched after it, as the Woman in the Gospell did after her lost groat: Whether he gave any credit to Georgius Major his relation, I know not; or whether any thing came to his knowledge afterwards, as touching the unfaithfullnesse thereof. But take we it as it lyes in this Authours relation.

1. That he professed himself of Calvins and Austins opinion: I hope this makes no more against Calvin and us, then it doth against Austin and all those that took part with him, against the Pelagians in his days, and the remnants of them afterwards. But if his opinion was, that men are not dealt withal secundum bona or mala opera, but that there are occultiores causae of mens Eternal conditions, will any sober Arminian impute this unto us? Do we say that God damns any man but for sin, or that God rewards any man of ripe years with Salvation but by way of reward, of their faith repentance and good-works? When the Remonstrants at the Hague conference proposed their doctrine of predestination and reprobation, after this manner, namely, That God from eternity did ordain to save believers and to damn unbelievers, (to this effect), Did any of the Contra-Remonstrants, or any of the Synod of Dort except against the truth of this? But whereas the Remonstrants and Arminians did acknowledge this to be the whole decree of predestination and reprobation: Against this exception was took both in the Hague conference, and in the Synod of Dort, and Theses also by divers foreign Divines laid down against it, & particularly by our Britain Divines amongst others; All of them maintaining that there was an other decree concerning the giving of the grace of regeneration, of the grace of faith and repentance unto some, and denying it unto others. And this decree, we willingly maintain, proceeds not, no not in the execution thereof, according to mens works good or evil, whatsoever be the end of any that maintain it. The contrary, namely, that grace is given according unto works, being a doctrine generally condemned in the Church from the year 415, at that time it was condemned in the Synod of Palestine, and Pelagius himself driven to subscribe unto it, otherwise himself had been anathematized. But this Author delivers it as the opinion of Hosuanus concerning mens Eternal conditions, whereby I take to be meant Salvation and Damnation. And indeed as here the doctrine is expressed, it is more agreeable with the doctrine of the Predestinarians, as Sigebert relates it, then with the doctrine either of Austin or Calvin: and the same Sigebert writes not that it was Austins doctrine, but that it rose out of the misunderstanding of Austins writings: