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 our Saviour saith that he was a murderer from the beginning, and as St Peter saith, The devil goes about like a roaring Lyon seeking whom he may devour; so who can make doubt but these courses practised against Job, were fruits of his murdering and devouring disposition? And all sides now a days confess, that the act of the most flagitious sin committed by man or Angel, is the work of God in the way of a principal efficient cause, as well as it is the work of the creature. And as for the sinfulness of the act, either of the Devil or his Wife, that was not it which did or could hurt Job: but the works wrought by Satan, the temptation atheistical proposed by his Wife, this was the greatest danger in the consideration thereof to corrupt his soul, for that is it alone that works upon the will to incline it. And as for their sinning herein, that proceeded from the want of Gods fear, according to that of Abraham. Genes. 20. 10. I said surely the fear of God is not in this place, therefore they will slay me for my Wives sake. And albeit God engageth himself towards some, for the putting of his fear in their hearts, that they shall never depart away from him. Jerim. 36. 40. yet he hath not engaged himself thus far towards all. For the Apostle plainly professeth, that, He hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardeneth Rom. 9. 18. and hardening we know is denying the fear of God, either as touching the habitual infusion thereof, or as touching the actual excitation thereof after it is infused. Yet I deny not but obduration and excaecation are sometimes promiscuously used, the one for the other, because of the strict conjunction that is betwixt them. And as touching the particular act of Convitiation, Austin spares not to profess, that even when it is committed by man, it is brought forth by God out of his secret providence lib. 9. Confess. cap. 8. Quid egisti Deus meus? unde curasti? unde sanasti? nonne protulisti durum & acutum ex alterâ animâ convitium tanquam medicinale ferrum ex occultis provisionibus tuis & uno ictu putredinem illam ⟨p. 19⟩praecidisti? And whereas Bellarmine endeavoureth to blast the evidence of this place giving testimony unto Gods secret providence in evil, I have endeavoured to show the vanity of his discourse in my Vind. Grat. Dei lib. 2. Crim. 3. digress. 2. cap. 13.

As our Saviour saith that he was a murtherer from the beginning, and as St Peter saith, The devill goes about like a roring Lyon seeking whom he may devoure; so who can make doubt but these courses practised against Iob, were fruits of his murthering and devouring disposition? And all sides now a daies confesse, that the act of the most flagitious sin committed by man or Angell, is the work of God in the way of a principall efficient cause, as well as it is the work of the creature. And as for the sinfulnesse of the act, either of the Devill or his Wife, that was not it which did or could hurt Iob: but the works wrought by Satan, the temptation atheisticall proposed by his Wife, this was the greatest danger in the consideration thereof to corrupt his soule, for that is it alone that workes upon the will to incline it. And as for their sinning herein, that proceeded from the want of Gods feare, according to that of Abraham. Genes. 20. 10. I said surely the feare of God is not in this place, therefore they will slay me for my Wives sake. And albeit God engageth himselfe towards some, for the putting of his feare in their hearts, that they shall never depart away from him. Ierim. 36. 40. yet he hath not engaged himselfe thus farre towards all. For the Apostle plainly professeth, that, He hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9. 18. and hardning we know is denying the feare of God, either as touching the habituall infusion thereof, or as touching the actuall excitation thereof after it is infused. Yet I deny not but obduration and excaecation are sometimes promiscuously used, the one for the other, because of the strict conjunction that is betwixt them. And as touching the particular act of Convitiation, Austin spares not to professe, that even when it is committed by man, it is brought forth by God out of his secret providence lib. 9. Confess. cap. 8. Quid egisti Deus meus? unde curasti? unde sanasti? nonne protulisti durum & acutum ex alterâ animâ convitium tanquam medicinale ferrum ex occultis provisionibus tuis & uno ictu putredinem illam ⟨p. 19⟩praecidisti? And whereas Bellarmine endeavoureth to blast the evidence of this place giving testimony unto Gods secret providence in evill, I have endeavoured to shew the vanity of his discourse in my Vind. Grat. Dei lib. 2. Crim. 3. digress. 2. cap. 13.

And in what congruity can it be said, that God bid Shimei to curse David, but that in the same analogy of faith, it may be said, that God bid Job's Wife in this manner to tempt him? And which of the two was the greatest provocation, Tiberius his Ministers Provocation of Drusus and Nero; or Shimei's provocation of David railing on him to his face, the Subject blaspheming his Prince? undoubtedly the provocation was nothing inferior, only here was the difference; Tiberius gave such commandment to his Ministers so to provoke Drusus and Nero, God gave no such commandment (in proper speech) unto Shimei, but rather commanded the contrary in his law, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people. But Gods secret providence, whereby he makes use of all his creatures in what condition soever he finds them, even of Devils and wicked men, to serve his turn by them, either in the way of judgement, or in the way of mercy, and sometimes for trial of the faith and patience of his children, is in Scripture phrase called Gods bidding or commanding. And indeed it is far more effectual then his commandment. And Austin by pregnant passages of holy Scripture convicted of this truth, spareth not to profess as much in these words, His & talibus testimoniis divinorum eloquiorum quae omnia commemorare nimis longum est, satis quantum existimo manifestatur operari Deum in cordibus hominum ad inclinandas eorum voluntates quocunquè voluerit sive ad bona pro suâ misericordiâ, sive ad mala pro meritis eorum, judicio utique suo, aliquando aperto, aliquando occulto, semper autem justo. De Grat. & lib. Arbitr. cap. 21. And touching this particular case of Shimei, inquiring about the interpretation of it, see I pray, how he resolves concerning it. Quomodo dixerit dominus huic homini maledicere David, Quis sapiens & intelliget. Non enim jubendo dixit, ubi obedientia laudaretur, sed quod ejus voluntatem proprio vitio suo malam in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo & occulto inclinavit. Ideò dictum est, dixit ei dominus. Nam si jubenti obtemper asset Deo, laudandus potius quam puniendus esset, sicut ex hoc peccato posteà novimus esse punitum. And he proceeds farther to show the reason of this divine providence.

And in what congruity can it be said, that God bid Shimei to curse David, but that in the same analogy of faith, it may be said, that God bid Iobes Wife in this manner to tempt him? And which of the two was the greatest provocation, Tiberius his Ministers Provocation of Drusus and Nero; or Shimei's provocation of David rayling on him to his face, the Subject blaspheaming his Prince? undoubtedly the provocation was nothing inferior, only here was the difference; Tiberius gave such commandment to his Ministers so to provoke Drusus and Nero, God gave no such commandement (in proper speech) unto Shimei, but rather commanded the contrary in his law, Thou shalt not speak evill of the ruler of thy people. But Gods secret providence, whereby he makes use of all his creatures in what condition soever he finds them, even of Devills and wicked men, to serve his turne by them, either in the way of judgement, or in the way of mercy, and sometimes for triall of the faith and patience of his children, is in Scripture phrase called Gods bidding or commanding. And indeed it is farre more effectuall then his commandment. And Austin by pregnant passages of holy Scripture convicted of this truth, spareth not to professe as much in these words, His & talibus testimoniis divinorum eloquiorum quae omnia commemorare nimis longum est, satis quantum existimo manifestatur operari Deum in cordibus hominum ad inclinandas eorum voluntates quocunquè voluerit sive ad bona pro suâ misericordiâ, sive ad mala pro meritis eorum, judicio utique suo, aliquando aperto, aliquando occulto, semper autem justo. De Grat. & lib. Arbitr. cap. 21. And touching this particular case of Shimei, inquiring about the interpretation of it, see I pray, how he resolves concerning it. Quomodo dixerit dominus huic homini maledicere David, Quis sapiens & intelliget. Non enim jubendo dixit, ubi obedientia laudaretur, sed quod ejus voluntatem proprio vitio suo malam in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo & occulto inclinavit. Ideò dictum est, dixit ei dominus. Nam si jubenti obtemper asset Deo, laudandus potius quam puniendus esset, sicut ex hoc peccato posteà novimus esse punitum. And he proceeds farther to shew the reason of this divine providence.

Nec causa tacita est, cur ei Deus justo modo dixerit maledicere David, hoc est, ¹Cor ejus malum in hoc peccatum miserit vel dimiserit ut videat (inquit) dominus humilitatem meam & retribuat mihi bona pro maledictio ejus in die isto. And hereupon concludes. Ecce quomodo probatur Deum uti cordibus etiam malorum ad laudem atque adjumentum bonorum. Sic usus est Juda tradente Christum. Sic usus est Judaeis crucifigentibus Christum, & quanta inde bona praestitit populis credituris? Qui & ipso utitur diabolo pessimo, sed optimè ad excercendam & probandam fidem & pietatem bonorum non sibi, quia omnia scit antequam fiant, sed nobis quibus erat necessarium, ut eo modo ageretur nobiscum.

Nec causa tacita est, cur ei Deus justo modo dixerit maledicere David, hoc est, ¹Cor ejus malum in hoc peccatum miserit vel dimiserit ut videat (inquit) dominus humilitatem meam & retribuat mihi bona pro maledictio ejus in die isto. And hereupon concludes. Ecce quomodo probatur Deum uti cordibus etiam malorum ad laudem atque adjumentum bonorum. Sic usus est Iuda tradente Christum. Sic usus est Iudaeis crucifigentibus Christum, & quanta inde bona praestitit populis credituris? Qui & ipso utitur diabolo pessimo, sed optimè ad excercendam & probandam fidem & pietatem bonorum non sibi, quia omnia scit antequam fiant, sed nobis quibus erat necessarium, ut eo modo ageretur nobiscum.

1. 1De Grat. & lib. arbit. cap. 20.

1. 1Epist: 28.

As we read in the Gospel of a wicked Judge, that neither feared God nor reverenced man, yet he would do the Widow justice to ease himself of her importunate solicitations where with she molested him.

As we read in the Gospell of a wicked Judge, that neither feared God nor reverenced man, yet he would doe the Widdow justice to ease himselfe of her importunate sollicitations where with she molested him.

Come we to provocations unto sin of another nature, in satisfying the concupiscence of the flesh. David arising out of his bed at eventide, and walking upon the roof of the Kings Palace, from the roof he saw a Woman washing her self: and the Woman was very beautiful to look upon: we know what followed hereupon. Now was it not God that lead him into this temptation, into this provocation? Surely if this were not just with God, it were in vain for us to pray, that God will not lead us into temptation; for we need not fear any such temptation, which cannot befall us without violation of Gods justice in the course of his providence. Paul the Apostle, least he should be exalted out of measure, through the abundance of revelations (made unto him, which were very dangerous to puff a man up, and make him swell in the conceit of his own worthiness being admitted into the secrets of God) was sometimes exercised with a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan sent to buffet him. But the fear of God was alive in him, and stirred up his faith to pray unto God three times that it might depart from him: and the Lord made him a gracious answer, not as yet to deliver him, but to support him in this conflict, and give him the victory over it. For the Lord said unto him, my grace is sufficient for thee, for my power is made perfect in thy weakness. This answer put heart into Paul; Therefore, saith he, will I very gladly rejoice rather in mine infirmities that the power of Christ may dwell in me. Mark I pray, Rather, in mine infirmities. He would not blame God for thus exercising him, but rather rejoice to be thus exercised, for as much as this same should do him no harm; for by virtue of Christs power dwelling in him he should have the victory. Secondly, it should do him good in preserving him from being exalted out of measure through the abundance of revelations. Therefore, saith he, I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in anguishes for Christs sake; for when I am weak then am I strong. And had not Joseph as good cause to conceive that it was the will of God, that he by the unchaste motions of his wanton Mistress, should be provoked unto unclean courses, as David had to persuade himself, that it was Gods will by the railing of Shimei he should be provoked unto revenge;

Come we to provocations unto sinne of another nature, in satisfying the concupiscence of the flesh. David arising out of his bed at eventide, and walking upon the roof of the Kings Pallace, from the roofe he saw a Woman washing her selfe: and the Woman was very beautifull to look upon: we know what followed hereupon. Now was it not God that lead him into this temptation, into this provocation? Surely if this were not just with God, it were in vaine for us to pray, that God will not lead us into temptation; for we need not feare any such temptation, which cannot befall us without violation of Gods justice in the course of his providence. Paul the Apostle, least he should be exalted out of measure, through the abundance of revelations (made unto him, which were very dangerous to puff a man up, and make him swell in the conceit of his own worthinesse being admitted into the secrets of God) was sometimes exercised with a thorne in the flesh, the messenger of Satan sent to buffet him. But the feare of God was alive in him, and stirred up his faith to pray unto God three times that it might depart from him: and the Lord made him a gracious answer, not as yet to deliver him, but to support him in this conflict, and give him the victory over it. For the Lord said unto him, my grace is sufficient for thee, for my power is made perfect in thy weaknesse. This answer put heart into Paul; Therefore, saith he, will I very gladly rejoyce rather in mine infirmities that the power of Christ may dwell in me. Mark I pray, Rahter, in mine infirmities. He would not blame God for thus exercising him, but rather rejoyce to be thus exercised, for as much as this same should doe him no harme; for by vertue of Christs power dwelling in him he should have the victory. Secondly, it should doe him good in preserving him from being exalted out of measure through the abundance of revelations. Therefore, saith he, I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in anguishes for Christs sake; for when I am weak then am I strong. And had not Joseph as good cause to conceive that it was the will of God, that he by the unchast motions of his wanton Mistris, should be provoked unto unclean courses, as David had to perswade himselfe, that it was Gods will by the rayling of Shimei he should be provoked unto revenge;

that so by the power of his grace, strengthening them against such provocations, they might come forth of their several temptations, as gold out of fire, more bright more resplendent then before? Joseph was a fair person and well favoured Genes. 39. 6. Now this was a sore provocation to a lustful eye. Beauty is said to be of a dangerous nature, as that which makes a man either Praedonem alienae castitatis or Praedam suae. But Joseph had a gracious and a chaste heart, his beauty gave him no encouragement to prey upon others chastity, but being a congruous bait to the lustful appetite of his Mistress, it was in danger to expose his own chastity to be preyed upon. And as Austin said of Gods providence concerning Shimei, ejus voluntatem proprio vitio suo malam in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo & occulto inclinavit. Who seeth not, that the like may be said of Gods dealing with Joseph's Mistress? and that without all aspersion of unholiness unto God. For if he gives Men or Women over unto their lusts, what will be the issue but uncleanness: Rom. 1. 24, 26. When God gave them up to vile affections, what followed but this? even their Women did change their natural use into that which was against nature, vers. 27. and likewise also the Men left their natural use of the Women, and burned in their lust one toward another; and Man with Man wrought filthiness, and received in themselves such recompense of their error as was meet. Here we have a strange course of Gods providence in punishing sin with sin. For these Gentiles in defiling themselves one with another, in a most unnatural and abominable manner, are said to receive such recompense for their error as was meet. In few words, what is meant by provocation unto any sin? Is it to do that whereupon man may take just cause or occasion to do that which he doth without blame? like as the Corinthians provoked Paul, as a fool to loast himself, as himself expresseth it, for he adds, ye have compelled me. But this cannot be affirmed of Tiberius his ministers in provoking Drusus and Nero. For no provocation could be sufficient to make them unblameable in convitiating their Prince, much less can it be said, that God provokes any man in this manner:

that so by the power of his grace, strengthning them against such provocations, they might come forth of their severall temptations, as gold out of fire, more bright more resplendent then before? Ioseph was a faire person and well favoured Genes. 39. 6. Now this was a sore provocation to a lustfull eye. Beauty is said to be of a dangerous nature, as that which makes a man either Praedonem alienae castitatis or Praedam suae. But Joseph had a gracious and a chast heart, his beauty gave him no encouragement to prey upon others chastity, but being a congruous baite to the lustfull appetite of his Mistris, it was in danger to expose his own chastity to be preyed upon. And as Austin said of Gods providence concerning Shimei, ejus voluntatem proprio vitio suo malam in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo & occulto inclinavit. Who seeth not, that the like may be said of Gods dealing with Ioseph's Mistris? and that without all aspersion of unholinesse unto God. For if he gives Men or Women over unto their lusts, what will be the issue but uncleannesse: Rom. 1. 24, 26. When God gave them up to vile affections, what followed but this? even their Women did change their naturall use into that which was against nature, vers. 27. and likewise also the Men left their naturall use of the Women, and burned in their lust one toward another; and Man with Man wrought filthinesse, and received in themselves such recompence of their errour as was meet. Here we have a strange course of Gods providence in punishing sin with sin. For these Gentiles in defiling themselves one with another, in a most unnaturall and abominable manner, are said to receive such recompence for their errour as was meet. In few words, what is meant by provocation unto any sin? Is it to doe that whereupon man may take just cause or occasion to doe that which he doth without blame? like as the Corinthians provoked Paul, as a foole to loast himselfe, as himselfe expresseth it, for he adds, ye have compelled me. But this cannot be affirmed of Tiberius his ministers in provoking Drusus and Nero. For no provocation could be sufficient to make them unblameable in convitiating their Prince, much lesse can it be said, that God provokes any man in this manner:

neither do I think that any of our adversaries ⟨p. 21⟩(as malevolent as they are) dares impute any such crimination unto us, as if we attributed any such discourse unto providence divine. What then is it to provoke unto sin? Is it to do somewhat upon the consideration whereof, mens passions being moved, they cannot but sin. But this in like sort is equally as untrue, as the former, even of those provocations which were made upon Drusus and Nero by the practises of Tiberius. Or is it the doing of somewhat, whereupon occasion is taken to sin, to blaspheme? this hath no colour of truth in it. For even man without all transgression may do many things, whereupon occasion is taken of doing evil, and therefore we distinguish of Scandalum datum & Acceptum. Nay, though man knows offence will be taken upon the doing of some things, yet if the doing thereof be commanded by God, he must do them, what occasion soever is thereby taken to offend. Indeed if they are things indifferent, I must abstain from the doing of them, in case I know offence will be taken thereat, and that thereby I shall lay a stumbling block in the way of my Brother. For Paul professeth that if meat would offend his Brother, he would never eat meat rather then offend his Brother. But no such obligation lies upon God. For he knoweth full well how some will abuse his mercies, others grow worse and worse by his judgements, breaking forth into blasphemy thereupon: yet no wise man will say that God is the more unholy in the showing of mercy, and in the execution of judgement. He professeth in plain terms, that to them who fear him he will be a sanctuary, but as a stumbling block, and as a rock to fall upon to both the houses of Israel, and as a snare, and as a net, to both the Inhabitants of Jerusalem, Isai. 8. 14.

neither doe I think that any of our adversaries ⟨p. 21⟩(as malevolent as they are) dares impute any such crimination unto us, as if wee attributed any such discourse unto providence divine. What then is it to provoke unto sin? Is it to doe somewhat upon the consideration whereof, mens passions being moved, they cannot but sin. But this in like sort is equally as untrue, as the former, even of those provocations which were made upon Drusus and Nero by the practises of Tiberius. Or is it the doing of somewhat, whereupon occasion is taken to sinne, to blaspheme? this hath no colour of truth in it. For even man without all transgression may doe many things, whereupon occasion is taken of doing evill, and therefore we distinguish of Scandalum datum & Acceptum. Nay, though man knowes offence will be taken upon the doing of some things, yet if the doing thereof be commanded by God, he must doe them, what occasion soever is thereby taken to offend. Indeed if they are things indifferent, I must abstaine from the doing of them, in case I know offence will be taken thereat, and that thereby I shall lay a stumbling block in the way of my Brother. For Paul professeth that if meat would offend his Brother, he would never eat meat rather then offend his Brother. But no such obligation lies upon God. For he knoweth full well how some will abuse his mercies, others grow worse and worse by his judgements, breaking forth into blasphemy thereupon: yet no wise man will say that God is the more unholy in the shewing of mercy, and in the execution of judgement. He professeth in plain termes, that to them who feare him he will be a sanctuary, but as a stumbling block, and as a rock to fall upon to both the houses of Israel, and as a snare, and as a net, to both the Inhabitants of Ierusalem, Isai. 8. 14.

As for the last clause of this odious Parallel, concerning the end of Tiberius his course in this, namely that so he might cover his cruelty in their death under pretext of justice. Undoubtedly I should think the putting of them to death was just in case they did convitiate their Prince whatsoever their provocations were. For hereby they deserved death, yea everlasting death and damnation. His sin was in causing them to be provoked hereunto, and so also it might be in the manner of their execution. For it is written of him that fame necavit, he famished them. I know Tiberius was cruel enough, but by the story it seems, that policy, wicked policy moved him unto this; first to intend their deaths because he saw the affections of the people towards them, belike for Germanicus his sake, a worthy man according to those times. For when he found that in the beginning of the year, vows were made on their behalf, to wit, for their preservation he dealt with the Senate, that such rewards ought not to be tendered, but towards such who were of experience and of ripeness of age: and that hereupon the inward character of his affection towards them being discovered, he laid them open to every mans criminations, variaque fraude inductos ut & concitarentur ad convitia & concitati perderentur, accusavit per literas, amarissimè congestis etiam probris, & judicatos hosts fame necavit. And anon after, the same Author discovers the reason of all this, to wit, that seeing Germanicus was but his adopted Son, and one Drusus by name was his natural son, and his own son Drusus being dead, leaving a son Tiberius behind him, he desired to make him as his natural son his successor in the Empire. Aelium Sejanum ad summam potentiam non tàm benevolentia provexer at quàm ut esset cujus ministerio ac fraudibus liberos Germanici circumveniret: Nepotemque suum ex Druso filium naturalem ad successionem Imperii confirmaret. Sure we are God hath no need of any such politic courses; neither hath he need of any pretext of justice to take a mans life from him. It is confessed now of all hands, that God can annihilate the holiest Angel by power absolute. And if it be in the power of God to keep any man from sin, as I think no wise man will deny, surely it is in his power to refuse to keep any reasonable creature from sin.

As for the last clause of this odious Parallel, concerning the end of Tiberius his course in this, namely that so he might cover his cruelty in their death under pretext of justice. Undoubtedly I should think the putting of them to death was just in case they did convitiate their Prince whatsoever their provocations were. For hereby they deserved death, yea everlasting death and damnation. His sin was in causing them to be provoked hereunto, and so also it might be in the manner of their execution. For it is written of him that fame necavit, he famished them. I know Tiberius was cruell enough, but by the story it seems, that policy, wicked policy moved him unto this; first to intend their deaths because he saw the affections of the people towards them, belike for Germanicus his sake, a worthy man according to those times. For when he found that in the beginning of the yeare, vowes were made on their behalfe, to wit, for their preservation he dealt with the Senate, that such rewards ought not to be tendred, but towards such who were of experience and of ripenesse of age: and that hereupon the inward character of his affection towards them being discovered, he laid them open to every mans criminations, variaque fraude inductos ut & concitarentur ad convitia & concitati perderentur, accusavit per literas, amarissimè congestis etiam probris, & judicatos hostes fame necavit. And anon after, the same Author discovers the reason of all this, to wit, that seeing Germanicus was but his adopted Sonne, and one Drusus by name was his naturall sonne, and his own sonne Drusus being dead, leaving a sonne Tiberius behind him, he desired to make him as his naturall sonne his successor in the Empire. Aelium Sejanum ad summam potentiam non tàm benevolentia provexer at quàm ut esset cujus ministerio ac fraudibus liberos Germanici circumveniret: Nepotemque suum ex Druso filium naturalem ad successionem Imperii confirmaret. Sure we are God hath no need of any such politique courses; neither hath he need of any pretext of justice to take a mans life from him. It is confessed now of all hands, that God can annihilate the holiest Angel by power absolute. And if it be in the power of God to keep any man from sin, as I think no wise man will deny, surely it is in his power to refuse to keep any reasonable creature from sin.

For certainly though Adam were created in innocence, yet he preserved him not in innocency, but left him to himself, having exposed him to Satan's temptations. The Angels had no Satan to tempt them; God preserved the elect Angels from sinning, and how? let Austin speak in this particular; either by giving them majorem amoris divini mensuram in their creation then their fellows; or by giving them amplius adjutorium after their creation. And in particular concerning Adam, the same Author professeth that God gave him, Posse si voluit, but he gave him not, Velle quod potuit. And dares any man deny that it is in the power of God by the denial of his efficacious grace, to make way for the entering of sin into the World, and that wonderful work of the incarnation of the Son of God, and the redemption of the World by him; as also for the manifestation of his own glory, both in the way mercy by the pardoning of sin, and in the way of justice by the punishing of sin. Let Arminius be heard in this, Who confesseth ⟨p. 22⟩that God in the storehouse of his wisdom and power, hath not only sufficient impediments of sin, but efficacious also, by the use whereof, sin would certainly and infallibly be hindered. His words are these, Praeter illa sufficientia, impedimenta etiam efficacia habet in suo sapientiae & potentiae thesauro, quibus productis certô & infallibiliter peccatum impediretur. ¹Which if it be true, certainly it was as true, as touching the hindering of the sin of Adam, as of hindering any mans sin else from the time of Adams fall. And as certain it is that God would not make use of any of these impediments, though it is apparent these impediments Arminius speaks of, are of such a nature as whereby sin would be hindered without any prejudice to the freedom of mans will, as appears by all his instances following of this kind, showing how God did efficaciously hinder the sins of many. And indeed it is evident in reason and such as cannot be denied, unless a man will say, that whatsoever course had been taken by God to preserve him from sin, without prejudice to the freedom of his will, yet nevertheless he would have sinned: which is in so high a degree absurd, as manifestly to contradict the very light of nature. For seeing Adam in the state of innocency was naturally indifferent, as well to stand, as to fall;

For certainly though Adam were created in innocence, yet he preserv'd him not in innocency, but left him to himselfe, having exposed him to Satans temptations. The Angells had no Satan to tempt them; God preserved the elect Angells from sinning, and how? let Austin speak in this particular; either by giving them majorem amoris divini mensuram in their creation then their fellowes; or by giving them amplius adjutorium after their creation. And in particular concerning Adam, the same Author professeth that God gave him, Posse si voluit, but he gave him not, Velle quod potuit. And dares any man deny that it is in the power of God by the deniall of his efficacious grace, to make way for the entring of sin into the World, and that wonderfull work of the incarnation of the sonne of God, and the redemption of the World by him; as also for the manifestation of his own glory, both in the way mercy by the pardoning of sin, and in the way of justice by the punishing of sin. Let Arminius be heard in this, Who confesseth ⟨p. 22⟩that God in the storehouse of his wisdome and power, hath not only sufficient impediments of sin, but efficacious also, by the use whereof, sinne would certainly and infallibly be hindered. His words are these, Praeter illa sufficientia, impedimenta etiam efficacia habet in suo sapientiae & potentiae thesauro, quibus productis certô & infallibiliter peccatum impediretur. ¹Which if it be true, certainly it was as true, as touching the hindering of the sinne of Adam, as of hindering any mans sinne else from the time of Adams fall. And as certain it is that God would not make use of any of these impediments, though it is apparent these impediments Arminius speakes of, are of such a nature as whereby sinne would be hindered without any prejudice to the freedome of mans will, as appears by all his instances following of this kind, shewing how God did efficaciously hinder the sinnes of many. And indeed it is evident in reason and such as cannot be denied, unlesse a man will say, that whatsoever course had been taken by God to preserve him from sinne, without prejudice to the freedome of his will, yet neverthelesse he would have sinned: which is in so high a degree absurd, as manifestly to contradict the very light of nature. For seeing Adam in the state of innocency was naturally indifferent, as well to stand, as to fall;

1. 1Exam p. 157.

and morally more inclined to stand then to fall; (for as much as God had made him good) even in respect of this indifferency it cannot be said, that upon every occasion or temptation unto sin, he would have yielded thereunto. For such a condition is not an indifferent condition. Nay Philosophers acknowledge that of three sorts of contingents, one sort is of such which they call, Contingentia aequalitèr, that is, such as fall out as often one way as another. And what ¹are these? surely all such and none but such as are subject to a mans free will. And even of Esau borne in sin (so was not Adam) Austin thinks it strange, that any man should deny, but that there was a course to have called him as effectually, as he called ²Jacob, had he been pleased to have used it. Now hereby it manifestly appears, that God hath no need of any provoking courses, exasperating courses to draw them unto sin, let him but withhold those efficacious impediments of sin, which are in the storehouse of his wisdom and power, as Arminius acknowledgeth, and sin hereupon shall enter. For the permission of sin (by Arminius his distinction of it) is the suspension of that efficiency whereupon it would be avoided. And if it were a safe course to ³judge of what becometh God by that which becometh man, we should conclude even of permission of sin, that like as it becometh not us to permit sin if it lieth in our power to hinder it, in the same manner it becometh not God to permit any sin, seeing it lieth in his power to hinder it. Sed judicia ejus (saith Austin) multa abyssus. Nos certè, si eos in quos nobis potestas est ante oculos nostros perpetrare scelera permittamus, rei cum ipsis ⁴erimus: quàm verò innumerabilia ille permittit fieri ante oculos suos, quae utique si voluisset nulla ratione permitteret. In the 2 Kings 2. 26, 27. we read of a desperate course of the King of Moab, that finding the battle to be sore against him, first tried with 700 men to break through to the King of Edom, but when he could not, he took his eldest son that should have reigned in his steed, and offered him for a burnt offering upon the wall; the sight of which barbarous part of his struck grief into the hearts of the children of Israel, so that they departed from him, and returned into their country.

and morally more inclined to stand then to fall; (for as much as God had made him good) even in respect of this indifferency it cannot be said, that upon every occasion or temptation unto sin, he would have yeelded thereunto. For such a condition is not an indifferent condition. Nay Philosophers ackowledge that of three sorts of contingents, one sort is of such which they call, Contingentia aequalitèr, that is, such as fall out as often one way as another. And what ¹are these? surely all such and none but such as are subject to a mans free will. And even of Esau borne in sin (so was not Adam) Austin thinks it strange, that any man should deny, but that there was a course to have called him as effectually, as he called ²Jacob, had he been pleased to have used it. Now hereby it manifestly appears, that God hath no need of any provoking courses, exasperating courses to draw them unto sinne, let him but withold those efficacious impediments of sin, which are in the storehouse of his wisdome and power, as Arminius acknowledgeth, and sinne hereupon shall enter. For the permission of sinne (by Arminius his distinction of it) is the suspension of that efficiency whereupon it would be avoided. And if it were a safe course to ³judge of what becometh God by that which becometh man, we should conclude even of permission of sin, that like as it becometh not us to permit sinne if it lieth in our power to hinder it, in the same manner it becometh not God to permit any sinne, seeing it lyeth in his power to hinder it. Sed judicia ejus (saith Austin) multa abyssus. Nos certè, si eos in quos nobis potestas est ante oculos nostros perpetrare scelera permittamus, rei cum ipsis ⁴erimus: quàm verò innumerabilia ille permittit fieri ante oculos suos, quae utique si voluisset nulla ratione permitteret. In the 2 Kings 2. 26, 27. we read of a desperate course of the King of Moab, that finding the battail to be sore against him, first tryed with 700 men to break through to the King of Edom, but when he could not, he took his eldest sonne that should have raigned in his steed, and offered him for a burnt offering upon the wall; the sight of which barbarous part of his strook griefe into the hearts of the children of Israel, so that they departed from him, and returned into their country.

1. 1Zabarel. lib. 1. Post. Analyt. 182.
2. 2Lib. 1. ad Simpli. quest. 2.
3. 3Exam. p. 157. & 166.
4. 4Contr. Julian. Pelag. l. 5. cap. 4.Contr. Iulian. Pelag. l. 5. cap. 4.

What, therefore shall we condemn God, for sending Abraham to sacrifice his son, his only son, his son Isaac? In the 16 Judg. we read a strange story of Sampson whose faith is commended Hebr. 11. For there we read how he dyes, his heart flaming with desire of revenge, and yet with great devotion prays unto God to assist him, that he might be avenged of the Philistines for his two eyes. O Lord God I pray thee think upon me, O God I beseech thee strengthen me at this time only, that I may be at once avenged of the Philistines for my two eyes. And again, Let me loose my life with the Philistines: & he bowed himself with all his might, and the house fell upon the Princes, and upon the people that were therein; so that the men that he slew at his death, were more then they which he had slain in his life. For both the house it self was full, and upon the roof of it there were about 3000 men and women. Here is a strange massacre wrought by Sampson an Israelite upon the Philistines, at that time when the Israelites were in subjection to the Philistines who were their Lords, as sometimes Pharaoh was. For the men of Judah admonished him when they came up to the rock Etam to bind Sampson. Knowest thou not (say they) that the Philistines are rulers over us? Wherefore then hast thou done thus unto us? to wit, in taking such courses as might well provoke the Philistines to root out the Israelites. Yet nevertheless he comes sparkling with zeal to destroy many thousands of them, yea the Princes with the rest, and well pleased to destroy himself with them, to be avenged of ⟨p. 23⟩them for his two eyes. And how could this be done by him without some special & prophetical instigation & animation received from the spirit of God, we know not. And who doubts, but that God animating him hereunto, all this was lawful? which without Gods warrant, could be no less then abominable & most damnable sins. Yet undoubtedly God did not animate Herod, & Pontius Pilate, together with the Gentiles, and people of Israel to do what they did against our Saviour, but rather left them to be ordered by his Law, wherein such things are prohibited. And nevertheless the Apostles in their pious meditation with one voice profess, that, All these were gathered together against the holy Son of God, to do those things which Gods hand, and Gods counsel had predestinated to be done:

What, therefore shall we condemne God, for sending Abraham to sacrifice his sonne, his only sonne, his sonne Isaac? In the 16 Iudg. we read a strange story of Sampson whose faith is commended Hebr. 11. For there we read how he dyes, his heart flaming with desire of revenge, and yet with great devotion prayes unto God to assist him, that he might be avenged of the Philistins for his two eyes. O Lord God I pray thee think upon mee, O God I beseech thee strengthen me at this time only, that I may be at once avenged of the Philistins for my two eyes. And again, Let me loose my life with the Philistins: & he bowed himselfe with all his might, and the house fell upon the Princes, and upon the people that were therein; so that the men that he slew at his death, were more then they which he had slaine in his life. For both the house it selfe was full, and upon the roofe of it there were about 3000 men and women. Here is a strange massacre wrought by Sampson an Israelite upon the Philistins, at that time when the Israelites were in subjection to the Philistins who were their Lords, as sometimes Pharaoh was. For the men of Judah admonished him when they came up to the rock Etam to bind Sampson. Knowest thou not (say they) that the Philistins are rulers over us? Wherefore then hast thou done thus unto us? to wit, in taking such courses as might well provoke the Philistins to root out the Israelites. Yet neverthelesse he comes sparkling with zeale to destroy many thousands of them, yea the Princes with the rest, and well pleas'd to destroy himselfe with them, to be avenged of ⟨p. 23⟩them for his two eyes. And how could this be done by him without some speciall & propheticall instigation & animation received from the spirit of God, we know not. And who doubts, but that God animating him hereunto, all this was lawfull? which without Gods warrant, could be no lesse then abominable & most damnable sins. Yet undoubtedly God did not animate Herod, & Pontius Pilate, together with the Gentiles, and people of Israel to do what they did against our Saviour, but rather left them to be ordered by his Law, wherein such things are prohibited. And neverthelesse the Apostles in their pious meditation with one voyce professe, that, All these were gathered together against the holy Son of God, to doe those things which Gods hand, and Gods councell had predestinated to be done:

and why the like is not to be acknowledged of the most barbarous facts committed by Tiberius, or any other monster of nature, I know no reason. And as touching shameful courses, no less abominable in the kind of acts flagitious, as these here mentioned of Tiberius were, in the kind of acts facinorous; The Apostle professeth both that God gave them up to vile affections, and to the lusts of their own hearts, to the committing of such abominations, and also that herein they received such recompense of their error as was meet; and the error which God avenged in this manner what was it, but such wherein Tiberius was as deep, as those whom the Apostle speaks of, namely, in changing the glory of the incorruptible God, to the similitude of the image of a corruptible man, and of birds, and of four footed beasts, and of creeping things. And they were but [Greek or Hebrew] into which God delivered up Tiberius, and to such God delivered up them of whom the Apostle speaks; and his actions as well as theirs, were equally the fruits of [Greek or Hebrew], into which God gave them up, that so they might receive that recompense of their error as was meet.

and why the like is not to be acknowledged of the most barbarous facts committed by Tiberius, or any other monster of nature, I know no reason. And as touching shamefull courses, no lesse abominable in the kind of acts flagitious, as these here mentioned of Tiberius were, in the kind of acts facinorous; The Apostle professeth both that God gave them up to vile affections, and to the lusts of their own hearts, to the committing of such abominations, and also that herein they received such recompence of their errour as was meet; and the errour which God avenged in this manner what was it, but such wherein Tiberius was as deep, as those whom the Apostle speaks of, namely, in changing the glory of the incorruptible God, to the similitude of the image of a corruptible man, and of birds, and of four footed beasts, and of creeping things. And they were but 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 into which God delivered up Tiberius, and to such God delivered up them of whom the Apostle speaks; and his actions as well as theirs, were equally the fruits of 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, into which God gave them up, that so they might receive that recompence of their errour as was meet.

I come to the second instance here made of Tiberius his cruelty, which he compares to those courses, which we out of holy Scripture have learned, to be attributed unto God himself. Now this hath long ago been objected by Bertius, in his Preface to the Conference of Arminius with Junius; I say objected by him unto Piscator, & thereunto Piscator also hath answered long ago. And whereas Bertius hath replied and allowed Piscator a year for putting in his answer thereunto, whereof had he failed, he would interpret it as a confession of his insufficiency, to make good the cause maintained by him. Piscator answers, that he had no need of so long a time as he prescribed him, for after he had read over his book, in the space of two or three days he addressed himself to an answer thereunto, and within a month finished it. Now if the Author of this discourse were ignorant hereof, his ignorance might excuse him, if otherwise he might have, with more credit, occupied himself in the answering, at the least, of some chief particulars, whereupon Piscator stands, for the justifying of his doctrine delivered by him, not of his own brain, but according to the word of God, then hand over head, to hold up the crimination without taking notice of the dilution thereof, many years a go proposed and set forth to the judgement of the world. But I am content to take into consideration, how Scholastically and judiciously he carrieth himself in this crimination, as well as in the former: and the rather, because it may be that this odious comparison he makes more account of (for the preparation of his Auditors to entertain that which follows with the more propitious affection) then he doth of the strength of ought that follows, whatsoever he doth or may pretend to the contrary to the point then.

I come to the second instance here made of Tiberius his cruelty, which he compares to those courses, which we out of holy Scripture have learned, to be attributed unto God himselfe. Now this hath long agoe been objected by Bertius, in his Preface to the Conference of Arminius with Iunius; I say objected by him unto Piscator, & thereunto Piscator also hath answered long agoe. And whereas Bertius hath replyed and allowed Piscator a year for putting in his answer thereunto, whereof had he failed, he would interpret it as a confession of his insufficiency, to make good the cause maintained by him. Piscator answers, that he had no need of so long a time as he prescribed him, for after he had read over his book, in the space of two or three daies he addressed himselfe to an answer thereunto, and within a month finished it. Now if the Author of this discourse were ignorant hereof, his ignorance might excuse him, if otherwise he might have, with more credit, occupied himselfe in the answering, at the least, of some chief particulars, whereupon Piscator stands, for the justifying of his doctrine delivered by him, not of his own brain, but according to the word of God, then hand over head, to hold up the crimination without taking notice of the dilution thereof, many years a goe proposed and set forth to the judgement of the world. But I am content to take into consideration, how Scholastically and judiciously he carrieth himselfe in this crimination, as well as in the former: and the rather, because it may be that this odious cōparison he makes more account of (for the preparation of his Auditors to entertain that which followes with the more propitious affectiō) then he doth of the strength of ought that follows, whatsoever he doth or may pretēd to the cōtrary to the point thē.

Tiberius commanded the Virgins to be deflowered, that they might be strangled. Now is there any carriage of God taught by us like unto this? If God were disposed to strangle any, certainly he hath no need to have them deflowered first. For it is now a days confessed even by Arminius himself, that God can lawfully annihilate the holiest creature that lives, and that without all respect to sin, or the vitiation of them. And annihilation I think is much more then strangulation; this causing only a dissolution between the body and soul, but annihilation, setting an utter end to body & soul by turning them both into nothing. And farther, had Tiberius only permitted the deflowering of them, when he might have hindered it, though this were a foul part in him, yet I hope no Christian will say, it is a foul part in God, to permit any act never so flagitious, or facinorous when he is able to hinder it; especially when he may hinder it without any prejudice to the liberty of mans will: and that this is in Gods power Arminius acknowledgeth and supposeth at large in his Examen and Treatise there De Permissione. But Tiberius commanded the Hangman to deflower them. But is this our doctrine, that God commanded the ravishing of any, the murdering of any, or any other sin whatsoever? Do we not all teach rather, that God forbids it, and that under ⟨p. 24⟩penalty of everlasting death? yet it is true, the word of God expressly professeth out of the mouth of David, that God bad Shimei to curse David, and that he bid the evil spirit to seduce Ahab, that he might go up to Ramoth-Gilead, and that not to be strangled I confess, but, which was nothing better to him, that he might fall, and be slain there. But this is a figurative speech, and signifies not properly any command of God, but rather denotes the secret operation of Gods providence in the hearts of men, even of wicked men; for those as well as Devils, God knows how to make use of, to serve his own turn. And Austin professeth, Deum operari in cordibus hominum ad inclinandas eorum ¹voluntates quocunque voluerit, sive ad bona, pro suâ misericordiâ, sive ad mala pro meritis eorum judicio utique suo, aliquando aperto, aliquando occulto, semper autem justo: And, touching the particular of Shimei, writes thus, ejus voluntatem proprio suo vitio malam, in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo, & occulto inclinavit.

Tiberius commanded the Virgins to be defloured, that they might be strangled. Now is there any carriage of God taught by us like unto this? If God were disposed to strangle any, certainly he hath no need to have thē defloured first. For it is now a daies confessed even by Arminius himselfe, that God can lawfully annihilate the holiest creature that lives, and that without all respect to sin, or the vitiation of them. And annihilation I think is much more then strangulation; this causing only a dissolution between the body and soule, but annihilation, setting an utter end to body & soule by turning them both into nothing. And farther, had Tiberius only permitted the deflouring of them, whē he might have hindered it, though this were a foule part in him, yet I hope no Christian will say, it is a foule part in God, to permit any act never so flagitious, or facinorous when he is able to hinder it; especially when he may hinder it without any prejudice to the liberty of mans will: and that this is in Gods power Arminius acknowledgeth and supposeth at large in his Examen and Treatise there De Permissione. But Tiberius commanded the Hangman to defloure them. But is this our doctrine, that God commanded the ravishing of any, the murthering of any, or any other sin whatsoever? Do we not all teach rather, that God forbids it, and that under ⟨p. 24⟩penalty of everlasting death? yet it is true, the word of God expressely professeth out of the mouth of David, that God bad Shimei to curse David, and that he bid the evill spirit to seduce Ahab, that he might goe up to Ramoth-Gilead, and that not to be strangled I confesse, but, which was nothing better to him, that he might fall, and be slain there. But this is a figurative speech, and signifies not properly any command of God, but rather denotes the secret operation of Gods providence in the hearts of men, even of wicked men; for those as well as Devills, God knows how to make use of, to serve his own turne. And Austin professeth, Deum operari in cordibus hominum ad inclinandas eorum ¹voluntates quocunque voluerit, sive ad bona, pro suâ misericordiâ, sive ad mala pro meritis eorum judicio utique suo, aliquando aperto, aliquando occulto, semper autem justo: And, touching the particular of Shimei, writes thus, ejus voluntatem proprio suo vitio malam, in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo, & occulto inclinavit.

1. 1De Grat. & lib. Arbitr. c. 21.

As for Tiberius his causing the little maids to be deflowered, that might be done without their sin, they might be ravished, and in that case, that might be their sorrow but not their sin. And as for the hangman's fault, in this, he was not excusable by Tiberius his causing him to deflower them; For Tiberius his causation herein extended no farther then to command them. And I hope it was no just excuse for the people of Israel in their Idolatrous courses, that therein they did but keep the statutes of Omri, and all the manner of the house of Ahab, Mic. 6. Yet neither doth God command any man to do that which his Law forbids, or to sin against him. And farther we acknowledge with Austin, that sin hath no efficient cause, but deficient. And it is enough with God to expose any man to sin, by not working him to that which is good; it being his office to work us to every thing that is pleasing in his sight. Heb. 13. 20. to cause us to walk in his statutes, and judgements, and to do them, Ezech. 36. 28. yea, to keep us from presumptuous sins, and that they get not the dominion over us. Psal. 19. 14. yea, to deliver us from every evil work, 2 Timoth. 4. 18.

As for Tiberius his causing the little maides to be defloured, that might be done without their sinne, they might be ravished, and in that case, that might be their sorrow but not their sin. And as for the hangmans fault, in this, he was not excusable by Tiberius his causing him to defloure them; For Tiberius his causation herein extended no farther then to command them. And I hope it was no just excuse for the people of Israel in their Idolatrous courses, that therein they did but keep the statutes of Omri, and all the manner of the house of Ahab, Mic. 6. Yet neither doth God command any man to doe that which his Law forbids, or to sin against him. And farther we acknowledge with Austin, that sin hath no efficient cause, but deficient. And it is enough with God to expose any man to sin, by not working him to that which is good; it being his office to work us to every thing that is pleasing in his sight. Heb. 13. 20. to cause us to walk in his statutes, and judgements, and to doe them, Ezech. 36. 28. yea, to keep us from presumptious sins, and that they get not the dominion over us. Psal. 19. 14. yea, to deliver us from every evill work, 2 Timoth. 4. 18.