A64002:421
The riches of Gods love unto the vessels of mercy, consistent with his absolute hatred or reprobation of the vessels of wrath, or, An answer unto a book entitled, Gods love unto mankind ... in two books, the first being a refutation of the said book, as it was presented in manuscript by Mr Hord unto Sir Nath. Rich., the second being an examination of certain passages inserted into M. Hord's discourse (formerly answered) by an author that conceals his name, but was supposed to be Mr Mason ... / by ... William Twice ... ; whereunto are annexed two tractates of the same author in answer unto D.H. ... ; together with a vindication of D. Twice from the exceptions of Mr John Goodwin in his Redemption redeemed, by Henry Jeans ...The riches of Gods love unto the vessells of mercy, consistent with his absolute hatred or reprobation of the vessells of wrath, or, An answer unto a book entituled, Gods love unto mankind ... in two bookes, the first being a refutation of the said booke, as it was presented in manuscript by Mr Hord unto Sir Nath. Rich., the second being an examination of certain passages inserted into M. Hords discourse (formerly answered) by an author that conceales his name, but was supposed to be Mr Mason ... / by ... William Twisse ... ; whereunto are annexed two tractates of the same author in answer unto D.H. ... ; together with a vindication of D. Twisse from the exceptions of Mr John Goodwin in his Redemption redeemed, by Henry Jeanes ...
Oxford: printed by L.L. and H.H. for Tho. Robinson, 1653
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
2. But take the argument according to the former expression, God cannot damn a man for that infidelity which is consequent to reprobation; And then my Answer to the former argument in every particular thereof, may be accommodated unto this.
2. But take the argument according to the former expression, God cannot damne a man for that infidelity which is consequent to reprobation; And then my Answer to the former argument in every particular thereof, may be accommodated unto this.
3. The Third followeth. If Infidelity flows from reprobation, then God can neither require Faith of reprobates, nor seriously offer salvation unto them, but necessarily counterfeit. For it is manifest Hypocrisy, to invite those unto faith and salvation, who are excluded from both by the decree of God.
3. The Third followeth. If Infidelity flowes from reprobation, then God can neither require Faith of reprobates, nor seriously offer salvation unto them, but necessarily counterfeit. For it is manifest Hypocrisy, to invite those unto faith and salvation, who are excluded from both by the decree of God.
Resp. 1. Here again Infidelity is made to flow from reprobation; whereas nothing flows from reprobation by the doctrine of the Contra-Remonstrants, but the not curing of mans natural infidelity, like as the curing of it by faith, is that which flows from election.
Resp. 1. Here again Infidelity is made to flow from reprobation; whereas nothing flowes from reprobation by the doctrine of the Contra-Remonstranes, but the not curing of mans naturall infidelity, like as the curing of it by faith, is that which flows from election.
2. I say, There is no simulation at all of God in this. For that with he proposeth is but this, that, Whosoever believeth shall be saved, and Whosoever believeth not shall be damned. He sends his Ministers to Preach this, and to Beseech them to believe, and to be reconciled unto God, yea, all they meet with. But for whose sake? Not for the reprobates sake, but for the elects sake, Who because they are mixed among reprobates, and God hath not revealed to his Ministers, Who are elect and who are not (as neither was it fit he should, many of the Ministers themselves, even of those that not only prophesied in his name, but cast out Devils, being reprobates) therefore it was fit their Commission should be general to Preach to all. Yea, did not the Apostles themselves take notice of this? Doth not Paul profess that, He became 1all things to all that he may save some? And who were those some, but the very elect of God, as the same Apostle elsewhere professeth, saying, I suffer all things for the elects sake. And doth not Austin profess that if we knew who were reprobate, 2we would no more pray for them, then for the Devills? De Civit. Dei lib. 21. cap. 24.
2. I say, There is no simulation at all of God in this. For that wich he proposeth is but this, that, Whosoever believeth shall be saved, and Whosoever believeth not shall be damned. He sends his Ministers to Preach this, and to Beseech them to believe, and to be reconciled unto God, yea, all they meet with. But for whose sake? Not for the reprobates sake, but for the elects sake, Who because they are mixed among reprobates, and God hath not revealed to his Ministers, Who are elect and who are not (as neither was it fit he should, many of the Ministers themselves, even of those that not only prophecyed in his name, but cast out Devills, being reprobates) therefore it was fit their Commission should be generall to Preach to all. Yea, did not the Apostles themselves take notice of this? Doth not Paul professe that, He became
4. The Fourth and last. If Incredulity follows the decree of reprobation, then God considered the reprobates in his counsel of reprobation, either as creatable, or as created in the state of innocency, or as fallen into Originall sinne. Sed falsa sunt haec omnia. All these things are false. And these things, he saith, are delivered, contra absurdam, detestabilem, atque abominabilem sententiam.
4. The Fourth and last. If Incredulity followes the decree of reprobation, then God considered the reprobates in his counsell of reprobation, either as creatable, or as created in the state of innocency, or as falne into Originall sinne. Sed falsa sunt haec omnia. All these things are false. And these things, he saith, are delivered, contra absurdam, detestabilem, atque abominabilem sententiam.
Resp. Here is froth enough of words, but a very hungry discourse for substance of argumentation throughout.
1. Yet as I said, All this nothing toucheth them, Who albeit they maintain that God of his mere pleasure, hath mercy on some, giving them faith and repentance (considering all in the corrupt Mass) and of his mere pleasure hardens others (no worse in nature then the former) by denying them faith and repentance, yet as reprobation signifies the decree of damnation, do permit thereunto the foresight of final perseverance in sin.
1. Yet as I said, All this nothing toucheth them, Who albeit they maintaine that God of his meer pleasure, hath mercy on some, giving them faith and repentance (considering all in the corrupt Masse) and of his meer pleasure hardens others (no worse in nature then the former) by denying them faith and repentance, yet as reprobation signifies the decree of damnation, doe permit thereunto the foresight of finall perseverance in sinne.
2. According to my Ordering of Gods decrees, Who conceive mankind not yet created to be the object of all Gods decrees, they being eternal, and but one act in God, and that act his very Essence, and all other things being temporal. I do not maintain that the decree of damnation, is in any moment of nature or reason, before the consideration of mans final impenitency. As neither do I conceive it to be after this, but both simultaneous; for as much as the decree of permitting all to fall in Adam, together with the decree of final leaving some therein, and the decree of damning them for sin, I take not to be subordinate, but coordinate and simultaneous.
2. According to my Ordering of Gods decrees, Who conceive mankind not yet created to be the object of all Gods decrees, they being eternall, and but one act in God, and that act his very Essence, and all other things being temporall. I doe not maintain that the decree of damnation, is in any moment of nature or reason, before the consideration of mans finall impenitency. As neither doe I conceive it to be after this, but both simultaneous; for as much as the decree of permitting all to fall in Adam, together with the decree of finall leaving some therein, and the decree of damning them for sinne, I take not to be subordinate, but coordinate and simultaneous.
3. Whether we take the First-way for shaping the object of predestination, or the Second, or the Third, I Answer.
1. The difference hereabout is in my judgement merely Logical, nothing Theological; the resolution whereof according to general rules, is easily made by light of nature, if once it be agreed upon in Divinity, What is Gods end both on the part of election, and on the part of reprobation, and what are the means that tend unto those ends.
1. The difference hereabout is in my judgement meerly Logicall, nothing Theologicall; the resolution whereof according to generall rules, is easily made by light of nature, if once it be agreed upon in Divinity, What is Gods end both on the part of election, and on the part of reprobation, and what are the means that tend unto those ends.
2. Which way soever we take of the Three, I never found any reason given by Arminians of any force to take us from it, as I have justified in my Vindiciae, as touching the First-way; And in my Examination of the Conference between Arminius and Junius, as touching the Second-way; And in my Answer to Corvinus against Tilenus, as touching the Third-way, and therein, I trust, routed and profligated the 20 Reasons of Arminius, proposed against the First and Last-way, but chiefly against the First, in the Declaration of his Opinion before the States.
Now I return to the Author of this discourse, and to the remainder of his second Motive, from whence I have digressed.
Now I returne to the Author of this discourse, and to the remainder of his second Motive, from whence I have digressed.
I was here passing over unto the third instance, to wit, of the proceedings in the Synod of Dort; but upon my looking into the History thereof, to prepare my self for an answer thereunto, ere I was a ware, I lighted upon the reasons of that the Contra-Remonstrants motion to be spared, preferred unto the State. And they utterly deny what is here cast upon them, namely, that they deprecated at all, that they might be spared from conferring upon the point of reprobation. But whereas the Remonstrants had encumbered the point of election and reprobation with seven Questions, which pertained not to the state of the Controversy concerning the first Article, and being also imperfect and intricate for the most part, and proposed to this end, to draw their Adversaries away from the true state of the Question; They desired to be spared from answering unto them. And upon this Petition of theirs it pleased the States, that leaving those thorny questions, they should come to the handling of the Articles. This is set down in the Preface to those Acta Synodalia, set forth by the Authority of the States. Fol. 10. pag. 1. For after the proposing of these two questions to the Remonstrants, as touching the decree of Predestination. 1. Whether the entire decree of Predestination were contained in this Article, namely, That God did from everlasting decree to save believers, which no man denies. 2. Whether they thought faith & perseverance therein, did precede election, as the Causes or Conditions thereof. After the Remonstrants had answered affirmatively unto them both; hereupon they bring in their seven, for the most part, intricate questions. Reponebant deinde septem alias tum de electione tum de reprobatione, questiones, ad quas a Pastoribus à Classibus deputatis responderi volebant. Quae cum ad controversiae de primo articulo statum non spectarent, etiam mutilae atque intricatae pleraeque essent; eumque in finem ab illis proponerentur, ut hoc modo a praecipuo controversiae statu rectaque agendi ratione, in ambages ad ducerent. Pastores expositâ per Libellum supplicem Illust. Ordd.
I was here passing over unto the third instance, to wit, of the proceedings in the Synod of Dort; but upon my looking into the History thereof, to prepare my selfe for an answer thereunto, ere I was a ware, I lighted upon the reasons of that the Contra-Remonstrants motion to be spared, preferred unto the State. And they utterly deny what is here cast upon them, namely, that they deprecated at all, that they might be spared from conferring upon the poynt of reprobation. But whereas the Remonstrants had incumbred the point of election and reprobation with seaven Questions, which pertained not to the state of the Controversy concerning the first Article, and being also imperfect and intricate for the most part, and proposed to this end, to draw their Adversaries away from the true state of the Question; They desired to be spared from answering unto them. And upon this Petition of theirs it pleased the States, that leaving those thorny questions, they should come to the handling of the Articles. This is set down in the Preface to those Acta Synodalia, set forth by the Authority of the States. Fol. 10. pag. 1. For after the proposing of these two questions to the Remonstrants, as touching the decree of Predestination. 1. Whether the intire decree of Predestination were contained in this Article, namely, That God did from everlasting decree to save believers, which no man denies. 2. Whether they thought faith & perseverance therein, did precede election, as the Causes or Conditions thereof. After the Remonstrants had answered affirmatively unto them both; hereupon they bring in their seaven, for the most part, intricate questions. Reponebant deinde septem alias tum de electione tum de reprobatione, questiones, ad quas a Pastoribus à Classibus deputatis responderi volebant. Quae cum ad controversiae de primo articulo statum non spectarent, etiam mutilae atque intricatae pleraeque essent; eumque in finem ab illis proponerentur, ut hoc modo a praecipuo controversiae statu rectaque agendi ratione, in ambages ad ducerent. Pastores expositâ per Libellum supplicem Illust. Ordd.
iniquâ hâc agendi ratione, non quidem deprecati sunt, ne de reprobatione sententiam suam manifestarent (uti Remonstrantes improbè saepius ipsis objectarunt) sed disertè sententiam suam quantum ad Ecclesiarum pacem atque aedificationem sufficere existimarent, non tantum vivâ voce sed & scripto declararunt. Se nimirum cum aeternum electionis singularium personarum decretum ponunt, simul quoque ponere aeternum de reprobatione & rejectione quarundam singularium personarum decretum, quum fieri nequeat ut sit electio, quin simul quòque sit aliqua reprobatio aut derelictio. Difficiles omnes circa hunc articulum questions temere excutere, nihil aliud esse quam inutilibus disputationibus & nihil profuturis litibus, Ecclesiam replere, ejusque pacem perturbare. Declarationem suam hanc Libello supplice expressam, moderatis omnibus, pace• que amantibus ingeniis, sufficere debere: Credi videlicet ac doceri ab ipsis, Deum neminem condemnare, imò verò ne statuisse quidem condemnare quenquam nisi justè propter propria ipsius peccata: Placuit itaque Illust. Ordd. ut missis illis spinosis quaestionibus, ad articulorum pertractationem deveniretur. And Pag. 136. & 156. I find this objection proposed by the Remonstrants in these words. Pag. 156. In Collation Haghiensi Libello supplice Illust. Hollandiae & Westfriziae Ordinibus exhibito, deprecati sunt Contra-Remonstrantes ne de reprobatione ageretur: & more at large Pag. 195. Thus, Ipsi Contra-Remonstrantes cum in Colloquio Haghiensi jussi essent, ad interrogata quaedam nostra de reprobatione respondere Magistratui morem gerere gravati fuerint, usque adeò ut Collationem caeptam abrumpere see mall profiterentur quàm ut summarum Potestatum imperio see constringi paterentur, nihil aliud conscientiae suae praetexentes quam quod Ecclesiae aedificationi obfuturam eam agendi rationem judicarent. Now to this Pag. 157. Festus Hominus, one present in that Conference, stands up and answers, Exposuitque paucis quàm non bonâ fide haec de illis dicerentur. See Libello supplice non fuisse deprecatos, ne de reprobatione ageretur: caeterùm quia Remonstrantes subdolè in ipso Collationis initio, septem questionibus spinosis ac minime necessariis non tantum ad reprobationis, sed electionis quoque doctrinam spectantibus, à recto agendi ordine Contra-Remonstrantes in ambages adducere conarentur.
iniquâ hâc agendi ratione, non quidem deprecati sunt, ne de reprobatione sententiam suam manifestarent (uti Remonstrantes improbè saepius ipsis objectarunt) sed disertè sententiam suam quantum ad Ecclesiarum pacem atque aedificationem sufficere existimarent, non tantum vivâ voce sed & scripto declararunt. Se nimirum cum aeternum electionis singularium personarum decretum ponunt, simul quoque ponere aeternum de reprobatione & rejectione quarundam singularium personarum decretum, quum fieri nequeat ut sit electio, quin simul quòque sit aliqua reprobatio aut derelictio. Difficiles omnes circa hunc articulum quaestiones temere excutere, nihil aliud esse quam inutilibus disputationibus & nihil profuturis litibus, Ecclesiam replere, ejusque pacem perturbare. Declarationem suam hanc Libello supplice expressam, moderatis omnibus, pace que amantibus ingeniis, sufficere debere: Credi videlicet ac doceri ab ipsis, Deum neminem condemnare, imò verò ne statuisse quidem condemnare quenquam nisi justè propter propria ipsius peccata: Placuit itaque Illust. Ordd. ut missis illis spinosis quaestionibus, ad articulorum pertractationem deveniretur. And Pag. 136. & 156. I find this objection proposed by the Remonstrants in these words. Pag. 156. In Collatione Haghiensi Libello supplice Illust. Hollandiae & Westfriziae Ordinibus exhibito, deprecati sunt Contra-Remonstrantes ne de reprobatione ageretur: & more at large Pag. 195. Thus, Ipsi Contra-Remonstrantes cum in Colloquio Haghiensi jussi essent, ad interrogata quaedam nostra de reprobatione respondere Magistratui morem gerere gravati fuerint, usque adeò ut Collationem caeptam abrumpere se malle profiterentur quàm ut summarum Potestatum imperio se constringi paterentur, nihil aliud conscientiae suae praetexentes quam quod Ecclesiae aedificationi obfuturam eam agendi rationem judicarent. Now to this Pag. 157. Festus Hominus, one present in that Conference, stands up and answers, Exposuitque paucis quàm non bonâ fide haec de illis dicerentur. Se Libello supplice non fuisse deprecatos, ne de reprobatione ageretur: caeterùm quia Remonstrantes subdolè in ipso Collationis initio, septem questionibus spinosis ac minime necessariis non tantum ad reprobationis, sed electionis quoque doctrinam spectantibus, à recto agendi ordine Contra-Remonstrantes in ambages adducere conarentur.
Contra-Remonstrantes Libello supplice apud Illust-Ordd. de tam iniquâ agendi ratione conquestos fuisse atque ut Remonstrantibus mandaretur, ne extra justam agendi rationem jam inchoatam evagarentur petiisse. De reprobatione autem Contra-Remonstrantes ⟨p. 75⟩quantum ad aedificationem satis erat, sententiam suam clarè ibidem explicasse uti scriptorum editorum fide probari potest. Idem etiam Reverendus & Doctissimus vir, D. Joannes Becius qui & ipse huic interfuerat Collationi, suo praesens comprobabat testimonio.
Now I come to the Synod of Dort.
