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…

As touching Gomarus in the last place, I have seen little or nothing of his; but when Lubbertus in his Book Ad 99 Errores Conradi Vorstii pag. 807. had professed, Massam consideratam esse a Deo, non ut integram, sed ut corruptam; and was charged by Vostius as delivering that which was contrary to the doctrine of Calvin, Beza, and Gomarus, he replies that herein he doth not contradict them, but saith he, Illorum dict a quae quibusdam asperiuscula videntur, lenio, & in commodissimum sensum interpreter.

As touching Gomarus in the last place, I have seen little or nothing of his; but when Lubbertus in his Book Ad 99 Errores Conradi Vorstii pag. 807. had professed, Massam consideratam esse a Deo, non ut integram, sed ut corruptam; and was charged by Vostius as delivering that which was contrary to the doctrine of Calvin, Beza, and Gomarus, he replies that herein he doth not contradict them, but saith he, Illorum dict a quae quibusdam asperiuscula videntur, lenio, & in commodissimum sensum interpretor.

But be it so, that all of them made Humanum genus, not corruptum, no nor integrum, but nondum conditum the object of reprobation. I am of their mind that do so; and was not Dr Whitaker also, whom very wisely this Author conceals? This renowned Professor in the University of Cambridge, in a Public exercise, his Concio ad Clerum, professeth, what Paul speaks De luto & sigulo non posse melius exponi quàm de Massâ incorruptâ: and that Bucer understands it thus, Bucerus per Massam intelligit primam humani ganeris originem ex quá homo conditus à Deo & fabricatus est. And he disputes at large, that there is no cause of reprobation, and that neither sin actual, nor sin original is the cause thereof, and professeth this to be the Opinion of the Church of England. And though now a days we be upbraided, as if we had learned it of Papists and School Divines, this great light of Cambridge, spares not to make honourable mention of Schoolmens solid discourse on this point, saying, Hanc sententiam Scholastici si ullam egregiè solideque pertractarum praeserùm qui insigniores sanioresque habiti sunt. Lombardus ait, ut praedestinationis nulla merita sunt, ità nec reprobationis. Now the doctrine which he saith the Schoolmen handle so solidly as none more, is the very doctrine which this Author seems here to impugn, as when he saith, some make the will of God without any consideration of sin in men, original, or actual, to be the cause of their eternal Rejection; for Dr Whitaker expresseth it thus, His igitur isto modo explicatis, sequitur tertiam opinionem solummodò & necessario veram esse, aequè reprobationis ac praedestinationis causam esse dei voluntatem, quandoquidem providentiae divinae munus est omnia ad fines istos certa ratione certisque mediis ordinare. Only as touching the end here mentioned, That so he might show his absolute and unlimited power and dominion over them, in appointing to heaven or hell whom he pleaseth, that I find not in Dr Whitaker. He saith plainly that God predestinated unto death, whom he would, and because he would: Deus igitur ad mortem praedestinavit quos voluit, & quia voluit: (which phrase I willingly confess I like not so well) but that the end thereof is to manifest his absolute and unlimited dominion and power, he saith not;