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…

3. That Reprobation was the chief cause of all the uproars in the Churches of that time.

3. That Reprobation was the chiefe cause of all the uproares in the Churches of that time.

4. That it was accused with open mouth and challenged of falsehood, and therefore bound in justice to purge it self of the crimination.

4. That it was accused with open mouth and challenged of falshood, and therefore bound in justice to purge it selfe of the crimination.

5. That it may easily be defended, if (as some say) it be such an apparent truth. For, Nihil est ad defendendum puritate facilius, saith St Hierome.

He little dreamed of exposing the truth thereby to such a censure, as if it blushed at the light. And if some few might be justly censured as blushing at the light, must all for their sakes, by the rules of justice, be made obnoxious to the same censure, and not the Doctors only, but the Doctrine it self? Is it not apparent that a true and sound doctrine, may be weakly apprehended by many, though learned, and Veritas est temporis filia, and the accurate handling and maintaining of the truth ⟨p. 77⟩in plainer points then this of reprobation, comes not to perfection, but by degrees, and after much ventilating of it in a ruder manner. Thus I think I have cracked the crown of this conclusion; I may proceed with the greater facility to the rest.

He little dreamed of exposing the truth thereby to such a censure, as if it blushed at the light. And if some few might be justly censured as blushing at the light, must all for their sakes, by the rules of justice, be made obnoxious to the same censure, and not the Doctors only, but the Doctrine it selfe? Is it not apparent that a true and sound doctrine, may be weakly apprehended by many, though learned, and Veritas est temporis filia, and the accurate handling and maintaining of the truth ⟨p. 77⟩in plainer points then this of reprobation, comes not to perfection, but by degrees, and after much ventilating of it in a ruder manner. Thus I think I have crackt the crowne of this conclusion; I may proceed with the greater facility to the rest.

1. That Reprobation is an Head to any part of practical Divinity, I never read, nor heard till now. But yet in every theoretical point, as touching the nature of God and his attributes, by the true doctrine thereof, the glory of God, and good of Religion is promoted, & by the erroneous doctrine thereabouts it is as much impaired. For like as it is blasphemy, to attribute that unto God, which doth not become him; so is it blasphemy also, to deny unto him that which doth become him. As for the entertaining or refusing conference thereabouts, I have already spoken sufficiently; yet two particulars more I have to deliver, which I purpose to subjoin to the end of those five considerations here distinguished, as remarkable ones, if my memory fails me not.

1. That Reprobation is an Head to any part of practicall Divinity, I never read, nor heard till now. But yet in every theoreticall poynt, as touching the nature of God and his attributes, by the true doctrine thereof, the glory of God, and good of Religion is promoted, & by the erronious doctrine thereabouts it is as much impaired. For like as it is blasphemy, to attribute that unto God, which doth not become him; so is it blasphemy also, to deny unto him that which doth become him. As for the entertaining or refusing conference thereabouts, I have already spoken sufficiently; yet two particulars more I have to deliver, which I purpose to subjoyne to the end of those five considerations here distinguished, as remarkable ones, if my memory failes me not.

2. A Connection I grant there is, between election and reprobation, and the clearing of the truth in the one, doth give light unto the other. But which of these is to be handled first, that the clearing of the truth therein, may give light to the stating of the other, I should think no sober man would make question. Yet the Remonstrants at the Synod of Dort, were eager to begin with Reprobation, but were therein generally censured by the consent of foreign Divines that assisted there. But that one of them cannot be handled without the other, is a palpable untruth, as appears by the very practice of this Author himself, and his own carriage in this business. For he undertakes only the point of reprobation.

2. A Connexion I grant there is, between election and reprobation, and the clearing of the truth in the one, doth give light unto the other. But which of these is to be handled first, that the clearing of the truth therein, may give light to the stating of the other, I should think no sober man would make question. Yet the Remonstrants at the Synod of Dort, were eager to begin with Reprobation, but were therein generally censured by the consent of forraine Divines that assisted there. But that one of them cannot be handled without the other, is a palpable untruth, as appears by the very practice of this Author himselfe, and his own carriage in this businesse. For he undertakes only the poynt of reprobation.

3. As touching the third particular, in charging the doctrine of reprobation, with being the chief cause of all the uproars in the Church at that time; this author takes to himself a strange liberty of discourse. We read and hear of no small stirs in the Church of Rome, between the Dominicans and the Jesuits; but I never read that the Jesuits laid to the Dominicans charge, that their Doctrine as touching the predetermination of the creatures will to every act thereof, was the cause of any uproar in the Church of Rome: But to the contrary rather. I read that in the contention between the Dominicans and Jesuits in Rome it self, wherein Valentianus through some heat in disputation, caught a fever whereof he dyed within three days after; of the relation whereof, made by one Pet (that had been a Priest) in Oxford I was sometimes an ear witness. The Jesuits were rather taxed for their heterodoxy in the poynt de auxiliis, as Petrus Mattheus in his History reports it. And from D. Jacksons mouth, I have heard what a Spaniard should deliver upon the mention of Molina the Jesuit, namely, that he was the man, qui tantos tumultus excitavit, to wit, in Spain. But as for Churches Protestant, he doth well to limit his crimination to a certain time. For the stir that was raised by Huberus in the Lutheran Churches, was neither caused nor occasioned by our doctrine concerning reprobation. Huberus his cause was, a pertinacious standing for an universal Election. It seems he hath relation only to the Hague conference, and the uproars, as he calls them, amongst the States only, and their particular, or provincial congregations alone (as it seems) he denominates the Churches. Now let us consider, Who made those uproars, were they the Contra-Remonstrants, or the Remonstrants only? If he chargeth this upon the Contra-Remonstrants, let him prove it, least he be justly censured for one of those wild beasts, an Emperor was sometimes warned to beware of, they were the slanderers. If the Remonstrants were the authors of these uproars, how doth he prove that the doctrine of reprobation, was the chief cause of them, Were not those Arminians voluntary agents in those uproars? If they conceived their opposites doctrine to be unsound, could they not oppose it without uproars, without violent proceedings?

3. As touching the third particular, in charging the doctrine of reprobation, with being the chiefe cause of all the uproares in the Church at that time; this author takes to himselfe a strange liberty of discourse. We read and heare of no small stirres in the Church of Rome, between the Dominicans and the Jesuits; but I never read that the Jesuits laid to the Dominicans charge, that their Doctrine as touching the predetermination of the creatures will to every act thereof, was the cause of any uproare in the Church of Rome: But to the contrary rather. I read that in the contention between the Dominicans and Jesuits in Rome it selfe, wherein Valentianus through some heat in disputation, caught a feaver whereof he dyed within three daies after; of the relation whereof, made by one Pet (that had been a Priest) in Oxford I was sometimes an eare witnesse. The Jesuits were rather taxed for their heterodoxy in the poynt de auxiliis, as Petrus Mattheus in his History reports it. And from D. Jacksons mouth, I have heard what a Spaniard should deliver upon the mention of Molina the Jesuit, namely, that he was the man, qui tantos tumultus excitavit, to wit, in Spain. But as for Churches Protestant, he doth well to limit his crimination to a certain time. For the stirre that was raised by Huberus in the Lutheran Churches, was neither caused nor occasioned by our doctrine concerning reprobation. Huberus his cause was, a pertinacious standing for an universall Election. It seems he hath relation only to the Haghe conference, and the uproares, as he calls them, amongst the States only, and their particular, or provinciall congregations alone (as it seems) he denominates the Churches. Now let us consider, Who made those uproares, were they the Contra-Remonstrants, or the Remonstrants only? If he chargeth this upon the Contra-Remonstrants, let him prove it, least he be justly censured for one of those wild beasts, an Emperour was sometimes warned to beware of, they were the slanderers. If the Remonstrants were the authors of these uproares, how doth he prove that the doctrine of reprobation, was the chiefe cause of them, Were not those Arminians voluntary agents in those uproares? If they conceived their opposites doctrine to be unsound, could they not oppose it without uproares, without violent proceedings?

Again, their opposites doctrine, was it never received or preached 'till those days? Or was there any uproar made thereupon, 'till Arminius his innovating? And is that the chief cause of an uproar, which hath no such consequent ensuing until it meets with some turbulent spirits, which begin to stir as innovators in a Church or State. And yet was reprobation that alone, whereupon they stirred? Is it not apparent, that about the five Articles commonly so called, they conferred alike? But he saith it was the chief cause, and only saith it, yet Molinaeus professing reprobation to proceed, upon foresight of final impenitency, as in truth it cannot be denied, but that as the Contra-Remonstrants professed, as well in that Conference at the Hague, as in the Synod of Dort, that God did never intend to damn any man ⟨p. 78⟩of ripe years, but for final perseverance in infidelity and impenitency. Did their contentions hereupon, either totally cease or in part? But such criminations are nothing strange. We know after what manner of greeting wicked Ahab saluted the holy Prophet Elijah. Art thou he that troubleth Israel? but he spared not to answer him, I am not he that troubleth Israel, but Thou and thy Fathers house. In the like manner were Paul and Silas entertained Act. 16. 20. when being caught and brought before the Magistrates, heard such an accusation made against them, These men which are Jews trouble our city: and preach Ordinances which are not lawful for us to receive, neither to observe, seeing we are Romans. And no marvel if the Devil roars, when he falls from heaven, like lightning, and his kingdom is shaken. But because he putts us to it in this crimination, I think it fit to give a taste of the violent proceedings in those parts, as I find them ordered in the Preface to the Synod. Dordrac. set forth by the authority of the States. And because uproars concern insurrections against government in Church or State; The first particular I observe of this nature is, Fol. 3. pag. 1. where after Arminius had been much suspected, and divers times urged to declare his opinion, upon certain points which hitherto he had declined, saving in a false manner, his protestation in the issue, proving directly contrary to his practice.

Againe, their opposites doctrine, was it never received or preached 'till those daies? Or was there any uproare made thereupon, 'till Arminius his innovating? And is that the chief cause of an uproare, which hath no such consequent ensuing untill it meets with some turbulent spirits, which begin to stirre as innovators in a Church or State. And yet was reprobation that alone, whereupon they stirred? Is it not apparent, that about the five Articles commonly so called, they conferred alike? But he saith it was the chiefe cause, and only saith it, yet Molinaeus professing reprobation to proceed, upon foresight of finall impenitency, as in truth it cannot be denied, but that as the Contra-Remonstrants professed, as well in that Conference at the Hague, as in the Synod of Dort, that God did never intend to damne any man

The Rectors of particular Churches, soured with the leaven of his doctrine, openly refuse to subscribe the Confession of the Catechism, though the Synod of South-Holland commanded them. Pastores Arminii sententiam amplexi passim in Classibus recusabant mandato Synodi de subscriptione Confession is, ac Catecheseos morem gerere. Here we have the beginning of a manifest schism. Now consider we the progress hereof. Hereupon a resolution was made (it being high time) by the States, for the calling of a National Synod, in the year 1605. about November 26. the execution whereof, was by divers practises of the Arminian Faction, delayed, and put off from time to time, for the space of 13 years. Fol. 5. pag. 2. Arminius himselfe acknowledgeth, de Heterodoxiâ suâ varios rumores omnes jam ecclesias pervasisse, incendiumque à se suscitatum ipsa Ecclesiae tecta super are dici. Fol. 8. pag. 1. In the mean time, Anno 1608. the States declared their purpose was, to call a Provincial Synod in October following, and signification hereof being made, the Rectors of particular Congregations, as many as were addicted to Arminius, being admonished to manifest their considerations in their several Deaneries, that so they might be fairly sent to the Synod that approached. They put this off also. Illi vero ut antea, ita nunc quoque singuli consuetis tergiversationibus pariter hoc detrectarunt. The like refusal was afterwards made in the Synod of South-Holland, though they were urged by the Synod to declare themselves (for as for the Provincial Synod, that was deferred two months longer.) Whereupon the Synod decreed, that they should give up their considerations within a Months space, or be obnoxious to Censure Ecclesiastical. Hereupon was means made by Utenbogard, for letters from the States unto those Pastors, to send up unto them their considerations sealed, that so they might reserve them to the Provincial Synod shortly to be held. In these proceedings a man may easily smell Barnavells hand all along. Hereupon came forth at length Arminius his Declaration before the States. In answer whereunto Gomarus riseth up, as there we may read, Fol. 6. pag. 2.

The Rectors of particular Churches, sowred with the leaven of his doctrine, openly refuse to subscribe the Confession of the Catechisme, though the Synod of South-Holland commanded them. Pastores Arminii sententiam amplexi passim in Classibus recusabant mandato Synodi de subscriptione Confession is, ac Catecheseos morem gerere. Here we have the begining of a manifest schisme. Now consider we the progresse hereof. Hereupon a resolution was made (it being high time) by the States, for the calling of a Nationall Synode, in the yeare 1605. about November 26. the execution whereof, was by divers practises of the Arminian Faction, delayed, and put off from time to time, for the space of 13 years. Fol. 5. pag. 2. Arminius himselfe acknowledgeth, de Heterodoxiâ suâ varios rumores omnes jam ecclesias pervasisse, incendiumque à se suscitatum ipsa Ecclesiae tecta super are dici. Fol. 8. pag. 1. In the mean time, Anno 1608. the States declared their purpose was, to call a Provinciall Synode in October following, and signification hereof being made, the Rectors of particular Congregations, as many as were addicted to Arminius, being admonished to manifest their considerations in their severall Deanaries, that so they might be fairely sent to the Synod that approached. They put this off also. Illi vero ut antea, ita nunc quoque singuli consuetis tergiversationibus pariter hoc detrectarunt. The like refusall was afterwards made in the Synod of South-Holland, though they were urged by the Synod to declare themselves (for as for the Provinciall Synod, that was deferred two months longer.) Whereupon the Synod decreed, that they should give up their considerations within a Months space, or be obnoxious to Censure Ecclesiasticall. Hereupon was means made by Utenbogard, for letters from the States unto those Pastors, to send up unto them their considerations sealed, that so they might reserve them to the Provinciall Synod shortly to be held. In these proceedings a man may easily smell Barnavells hand all along. Hereupon came forth at length Arminius his Declaration before the States. In answer whereunto Gomarus riseth up, as there we may read, Fol. 6. pag. 2.

And amongst other courses of Arminius, makes relation of this, as how Spretis Synodorum Classium & Prebyteriorum judiciis ac decretis ad supremi Magistratus tribunal prima instantia prosiluisse, ibique querelas atque accusationes suas adversus Ecclesiarum doctrinam proposuisse, artibusque aulicis favorem sibi Ecclesiis verò odium consiliare diligenter studiisse. And hereupon besought the States, that seeing Contentions gliscerent, Ecclesiae turbarentur, Civesque in parts distraherentur, the National Synod which they had promised might be gathered together with the first; which yet by the practice of Utenbogard and others was still delayed. Hereupon Arminius his Faction grew so bold, as publicly to Preach against the received Doctrine, as Bertius spared not to declare himself; but wherein? Mark I pray the Article well, because this Author draws all to reprobation. Now the Articles whereupon Bertius declared himself, to differ from the Doctrine received, were, De justificatione hominis coram Deo, De Praedestinatione, De Gratiâ Dei, & libero arbitrio, De Perseverantiâ fidelium; and upon these very points afterwards, proceeded the Conference between Arminius and Gomarus before the States. And one Venator spared not publicly to broach Pelagian and Socinian errors. Whereupon he was suspended by the Churches of North-Holland. In spite of whom notwithstanding, he continued his courses of Preaching. Now whereas the Orthodox Pastors in the Deanery of Alomar considering he was lawfully suspended, and withal ⟨p. 79⟩a man of impure life, refused to admit him into their company. Hereof complaint was made to the States, and by Utenbogards practice a Mandate obtained from them, that they should admit him. Now when the States considering the present exigent, were easily like to condescend to a Provincial Synod, the Arminians moved, that the Deputies to be sent thither, should not be appointed thereunto by the Churches, according to the usual course, but only by the States, presuming hereby, that either none, but such as favoured their cause should be sent, or at least such as were less alienated from their Opinion. fol. 8. p. But though they could not effect this, yet by their practice it came to pass, that the calling, not only of a Provincial Synod, but of the yearly Synods were hindered.

And amongst other courses of Arminius, makes relation of this, as how Spretis Synodorum Classium & Prebyteriorum judiciis ac decretis ad supremi Magistratus tribunal prima instantia prosiluisse, ibique querelas atque accusationes suas adversus Ecclesiarum doctrinam proposuisse, artibusque aulicis favorem sibi Ecclesiis verò odium consiliare diligenter studiisse. And hereupon besought the States, that seeing Contentiones gliscerent, Ecclesiae turbarentur, Civesque in partes distraherentur, the Nationall Synod which they had promised might be gathered together with the first; which yet by the practice of Utenbogard and others was still delayed. Hereupon Arminius his Faction grew so bold, as publiquely to Preach against the received Doctrine, as Bertius spared not to declare himselfe; but wherein? Mark I pray the Article well, because this Author drawes all to reprobation. Now the Articles whereupon Bertius declared himselfe, to differ from the Doctrine received, were, De justificatione hominis coram Deo, De Praedestinatione, De Gratiâ Dei, & libero arbitrio, De Perseverantiâ fidelium; and upon these very points afterwards, proceeded the Conference between Arminus and Gomarus before the States. And one Venator spared not publiquely to broach Pelagian and Socinian errours. Whereupon he was suspended by the Churches of North-Holland. In spite of whom notwithstanding, he continued his courses of Preaching. Now whereas the Orthodox Pastors in the Deanary of Alomar considering he was lawfully suspended, and withall

Shortly after this, finding what liberty they had, they met together of their own accord privily, Sine Magistratus Supremi authoritate magno numero. Atque ibi inter se initâ per subscriptionem nominum confaederatione seu conspiratione, manifestum in Ecclesiis Reformatis Schisma instituunt. That year came forth the Remonstrance. Upon this by the practice of the Remonstrants, Vorstius is brought in to be a Professor in the place of Arminius. For as touching the exceptions taken against him, the Remonstrants professed before the States, he had given them good satisfaction, Fol. 10. pag. 2. Then follow their practises for the removing of such Rectors from their Churches, as were their opposites, and obtruding upon the people such as were of their own Party. At Alcmar, Adolphus Venator, a man of impure life and faith, moved the people to Arms against the Magistrate, whereby he was driven to relinquish his place, and others brought in of Venator his Faction. Fol. 12. pag. 1. Hereupon the Elders and Deacons of that place were removed, and two Pastors, the one having formerly executed his Ministry amongst them for fifty years continuance. Grevincovius in like sort, with the Magistracy of Rotterdam, to deprive his Colleague there Cornelius Geselius of his Ministry first, and then by their Sergeants to cast him out of the City. Utenbogard sends Remonstrants into Utrecht, and amongst others, Jacobum quendam Taurinum hominem turbulentum & saevum. Fol. 12. pag. 2. In Gelderland also the ordinary and annual Synodical Assemblies were hindered by the practice of Utenbogard, like as still they continued withal their art to hinder the calling of a National Synod, so often promised by the States, and so many years deferred. William of Nassau moved both Utenbogard on the one side, and Festus Hommius on the other side, to consider of a course how these stirs might be pacified. To which motion Festus Hommius makes answer, that in case the Remonstrants differed from the Churches only in five Articles, he could think of a course whereby some peace might be made in the interim, until a National Synod were gathered. This is the more observable, because this Author layeth all the cause of those uproars (as he calls them) upon Reprobation. But he professeth they had great cause to suspect the Remonstrants differed from them in greater points of moment.

Shortly after this, finding what liberty they had, they met together of their own accord privily, Sine Magistratus Supremi authoritate magno numero. Atque ibi inter se initâ per subscriptionem nominum confaederatione seu conspiratione, manifestum in Ecclesiis Reformatis Schisma instituunt. That year came forth the Remonstrance. Upon this by the practice of the Remonstrants, Vorstius is brought in to be a Professor in the place of Arminius. For as touching the exceptions taken against him, the Remonstrants professed before the States, he had given them good satisfaction, Fol. 10. pag. 2. Then follow their practises for the removing of such Rectors from their Churches, as were their opposites, and obtruding upon the people such as were of their own Party. At Alcmar, Adolphus Venator, a man of impure life and faith, moved the people to Armes against the Magistrate, whereby he was driven to relinquish his place, and others brought in of Venator his Faction. Fol. 12. pag. 1. Hereupon the Elders and Deacons of that place were removed, and two Pastors, the one having formerly executed his Ministry amongst them for fifty years continuance. Grevincovius in like sort, with the Magistracy of Rotterdam, to deprive his Colleague there Cornelius Geselius of his Ministry first, and then by their Sergeants to cast him out of the Citty. Utenbogard sends Remonstrants into Utrecht, and amongst others, Jacobum quendam Taurinum hominem turbulentum & saevum. Fol. 12. pag. 2. In Gelderland also the ordinary and annuall Synodicall Assemblies were hindred by the practice of Utenbogard, like as still they continued withall their art to hinder the calling of a Nationall Synod, so often promised by the States, and so many years deferred. William of Nassau moved both Utenbogard on the one side, and Festus Hommius on the other side, to consider of a course how these stirres might be pacified. To which motion Festus Hommius makes answer, that in case the Remonstrants differed from the Churches only in five Articles, he could think of a course whereby some peace might be made in the interim, untill a Nationall Synod were gathered. This is the more observeable, because this Author layeth all the cause of those uproares (as he calls them) upon Reprobation. But he professeth they had great cause to suspect the Remonstrants differed from them in greater points of moment.

And these are afterwards declared to be these, Fol. 14. pag. 1. De perfectâ Christi pro peccatis Satisfactione, de Justificatione hominis coràm Deo, de Fide Salvificâ, de Peccato Originali, de Certitudine salutis, & de Perfectione hominis in hâc vitâ. And whereas, they desired the Remonstrants would deal clearly and make known what their opinion was in those points: Utenbogard having laboured to have a hearing before the States alone, There traduceth the actions of his Brethren in demanding the Declaration of their minds hereupon, as if this were to bring in a new kind of Inquisition amongst them, not to be endured. And hereupon obtains of the States, that no such Declaration should be required at their hands. And more then that, finding the Deputies of the Synod by their continual solicitations with the States (as it well became them in their places) to be most prejudicial to their proceedings, they brought it so to pass, that like as formerly their Annual Synods were hindered, so now it was forbidden to the Deputies themselves, thenceforth to take any such stile unto them, or perform any such office as whereabout they were then employed. And so the Relator proceeds in setting down their insolent courses until at length perceiving, that by the mediation of the King of Great Britain, all for the most part, inclined to the convocation of a National Synod, they fell plainly on, upon these desperate Counsels openly professing that the calling of a National Council, would prove prejudicial to the Majesty ⟨p. 80⟩and Liberty of the Provinces, manifesting themselves hereby utterly averse from such a course; which yet hath been most in use in the Church of God, and that of ancient times, for the pacifying of contentions arising in matter of Religion. I profess, I nothing affect to spend time in such searches and relations, I had rather employ it another way, but you see I am driven unto it, to represent the unshamefased condition of this Narration.

And these are afterwards declared to be these, Fol. 14. pag. 1. De perfectâ Christi pro peccatis Satisfactione, de Justificatione hominis coràm Deo, de Fide Salvificâ, de Peccato Originali, de Certitudine salutis, & de Perfectione hominis in hâc vitâ. And whereas, they desired the Remonstrants would deale clearly and make known what their opinion was in those poynts: Utenbogard having laboured to have a hearing before the States alone, There traduceth the actions of his Brethren in demanding the Declaration of their minds hereupon, as if this were to bring in a new kind of Inquisition amongst them, not to be endured. And hereupon obtaines of the States, that no such Declaration should be required at their hands. And more then that, finding the Deputies of the Synode by their continuall sollicitations with the States (as it well became them in their places) to be most prejudiciall to their proceedings, they brought it so to passe, that like as formerly their Annuall Synods were hindered, so now it was forbidden to the Deputies themselves, thenceforth to take any such stile unto them, or performe any such office as whereabout they were then imployed. And so the Relator proceeds in setting downe their insolent courses untill at length perceiving, that by the mediation of the King of Great Brittaine, all for the most part, inclined to the convocation of a Nationall Synod, they fell plainly on, upon these desperate Counsells openly professing that the calling of a Nationall Councell, would prove prejudiciall to the Majesty

4. And whereas he saith, It was accused with open mouth, and challenged of falsehood, it is apparent that the Remonstrants would very well have rested contented with a mutual toleration of one another in their several ways. For when Utenbogard and Festus Hommius were to meet together, and treat upon some fair course of composition, Utenbogard, together with those of his side, professed they knew no other course for settling peace, but my mutually tolerating one the other; Festus Hommius and others with him on the other side, professed they knew no better course then convocation of a National Synod, and in the interim to tolerate one another, provided they would declare themselves to differ from the received doctrine in the Church, in no other points then in the five Articles. But how they carried themselves herein refusing to declare themselves, I have formerly showed. And farther, in the pursuit of this their practice to enjoy toleration, it is farther storied, by what means they procured a Letter from King James to farther them therein, and after that an Edict to that purpose from some of the States. And consider farther, If any amongst us should rise up, and confederate themselves and impugn any five Articles of the Church of England, and accuse us for maintaining erroneous doctrine therein, and challenge us for falsehood, if they do it with never so open mouth, shall this be sufficient to justify them and condemn us, if we do not come to a trial with them to dispute the case, though We are the Possessors, They the Intruders and Innovators? We maintaining no other Doctrine then that which is by Authority established amongst us, and They which impugn the doctrine received, are they not usually judged amongst us, as such who are rather to be censured then disputed with? And withal consider, that this mutua tolerantia, which the Remonstrants so much pressed and were so glad to enjoy, was with greatest instance stood for long after the Conference at the Hague. Lastly, how often was Arminius himself questioned and called upon to give satisfaction for his Heterodoxies, and how often did he decline it?

4. And whereas he saith, It was accused with open mouth, and challenged of falshood, it is apparent that the Remonstrants would very well have rested contented with a mutuall toleration of one another in their severall waies. For when Utenbogard and Festus Hommius were to meet together, and treat upon some faire course of composition, Utenbogard, together with those of his side, professed they knew no other course for setling peace, but my mutually tolerating one the other; Festus Hommius and others with him on the other side, professed they knew no better course then convocation of a Nationall Synode, and in the interim to tolerate one another, provided they would declare themselves to differ from the received doctrine in the Church, in no other points then in the five Articles. But how they carried themselves herein refusing to declare themselves, I have formerly shewed. And farther, in the pursuit of this their practice to enjoy toleration, it is farther storied, by what means they procured a Letter from King James to farther them therein, and after that an Edict to that purpose from some of the States. And consider farther, If any amongst us should rise up, and confederate themselves and impugne any five Articles of the Church of England, and accuse us for maintaining erronious doctrine therein, and challenge us for falshood, if they doe it with never so open mouth, shall this be sufficient to justify them and condemne us, if wee doe not come to a tryall with them to dispute the case, though Wee are the Possessours, They the Intruders and Innovators? Wee maintaining no other Doctrine then that which is by Authority established amongst us, and They which impugne the doctrine received, are they not usually judged amongst us, as such who are rather to be censured then disputed with? And withall consider, that this mutua tolerantia, which the Remonstrants so much pressed and were so glad to enjoy, was with greatest instance stood for long after the Conference at the Hague. Lastly, how often was Arminius himselfe questioned and called upon to give satisfaction for his Heterodoxies, and how often did he decline it?

When at the first, Motion was made for his surrogation into the place of Junius being deceased, then the suspicions of his Heterodox breaking forth, and they of Amsterdam not well liking to let him go from them, amongst whom at that time, he exercised his Ministry; and that because they observed his luxuriant and novelizing Wit, which was like to breed dangerous effects in an University: at length upon the great instance both of Utenbogard and Arminius himself, way was made for him unto the Chair, upon condition he should confer with Gomarus upon some chief heads of Doctrine, and by a round declaration of his mind thereon, remove all suspicion of Heterodoxy, having formerly by a solemn Protestation given his word, that in case he had any singular opinion of his own, he would not spread it. Hereupon he made open profession, that he condemned the chief Pelagian opinions concerning grace natural, the strength of Free-will, Original sin, the perfection of man in this life, and Predestination, and that he approved all those disputes, which Austin and other Fathers had written against them; and that in his judgement the Pelagian errors were rightly refuted by those Fathers, and withal promised, that he would teach nothing that differed from the received Doctrine of the Churches; and hereupon he was admitted to a Professors place in the University. In the beginning whereof he laboured by all means to quench all suspicion of Heterodoxy in himself, and maintained the doctrine of the Reformed Churches, De satisfactione Christi, de Fide justificante, de justificatione per fidem, de Perseverantiâ verè fidelium, de Certitudine salutis, de Perfectione hominis in hac vitâ &c. all which he afterwards contradicted, as also did his Followers. This I say, he then at the first maintained publicly, contrà sententiam suam (which let every man judge, whether it be not as much as to say, against his own Conscience) and Corvinus is alleged as in a certain Writing of his set forth in Low-Dutch ingeniously professing as much, Praefat, in Synod. Dordracen, Authoritate Ordinum Fol. 2. p. 1. But after he had been a year or two in the place, he begins to unmask ⟨p. 81⟩himself, and by his Public Lectures, and chiefly by his dealing with his Scholars in private, his heterodoxy discovered it self.

When at the first, Motion was made for his surrogation into the place of Iunius beind deceased, then the suspicions of his Heterodox breaking forth, and they of Amsterdam not well likeing to let him goe from them, amongst whom at that time, he exercised his Ministry; and that because they observed his luxuriant and novelizing Wit, which was like to breed dangerous effects in an University: at length upon the great instance both of Utenbogard and Arminius himselfe, way was made for him unto the Chayre, upon condition he should conferre with Gomarus upon some chief heads of Doctrine, and by a round declaration of his mind thereon, remove all suspicion of Heterodoxy, having formerly by a solemne Protestation given his word, that in case he had any singular opinion of his own, he would not spread it. Hereupon he made open profession, that he condemned the chiefe Pelagian opinions concerning grace naturall, the strength of Free-will, Originall sinne, the perfection of man in this life, and Predestination, and that he approved all those disputes, which Austin and other Fathers had written against them; and that in his judgement the Pelagian errours were rightly refuted by those Fathers, and withall promised, that he would teach nothing that differed from the received Doctrine of the Churches; and hereupon he was admitted to a Professors place in the University. In the beginning whereof he laboured by all means to quench all suspicion of Heterodoxy in himselfe, and maintained the doctrine of the Reformed Churches, De satisfactione Christi, de Fide justificante, de justificatione per fidem, de Perseverantiâ verè fidelium, de Certitudine salutis, de Perfectione hominis in hac vitâ &c. all which he afterwards contradicted, as also did his Followers. This I say, he then at the first maintained publiquely, contrà sententiam suam (which let every man judge, whether it be not as much as to say, against his own Conscience) and Corvinus is alleaged as in a certain Writing of his set forth in Low-Dutch ingeniously professing as much, Praefat, in Synod. Dordracen, Authoritate Ordinum Fol. 2. p. 1. But after he had been a yeare or two in the place, he begins to unmaske

Here upon the deputies from the Churches of South and North Holland are sent unto him, who acquaint him with the rumours that went of him, praying him that if he disliked ought in the doctrine received, he would sincerely declare it unto his Brethren, to the end, either by a friendly Conference, he might receive satisfaction, or the whole business might lawfully be put over to the consideration of a Synod. Arminius his answer was, that he never gave any just cause, why such rumour should be spread of him, neither was it wisdom for him to treat with them as with Deputies, that should make relation of the whole matter to a Synod, though as private persons, he refused not to confer with them, provided that in case they differed, no relation hereof should be made unto a Synod. The Church of Leiden also admonished him, that there might be a Conference between him and his Colleagues, before the Presbytery of that Church. To them he answered he could not yield thereto, without leave from the Gurators of the University, and that he perceived not, that any benefit was like to redound unto the Church by such a Conference. At another time Fol. 4. p. 2. being entreated by the Professors and Pastors with great earnestness, that if he had ought to say against the doctrine received in their Confession and Catechism, he would freely and brotherly communicate it unto them, promising their endeavours to give him full satisfaction, or if not so, yet that he and his Colleagues under certain conditions might come to a fair agreement, to live together in peace, and that the reconciliation being made, nothing which passed between them should be divulged. The answer he made, was this, It was no wise part for him to yield to their motion, neither was he bound thereto, the present meeting being not ordained unto any such purpose, fol. 5. p. 2. Gomarus openly tells him, how it became him to declare his opinion, neque ejusmodi subterfugiis diutius hâc in re uti, & fol. 6. p. 2. before the States he represents his continual practice thereunto, in concealing his Opinion, His words are these, Quibus insuper artibus opinions suas disseminare; Publicè scilicet ab Ecclesiis rogatum obtestatumque, sententiam suam occultare, privatim vero Pastoribus quos in eam pertrahi posse speraret, ac discipulis suis diligentèr eam inculcare;

Here upon the deputies from the Churches of South and North Holland are sent unto him, who acquaint him with the rumours that went of him, praying him that if he disliked ought in the doctrine received, he would sincerely declare it unto his Brethren, to the end, either by a friendly Conference, he might receive satisfaction, or the whole businesse might lawfully be put over to the consideration of a Synod. Arminius his answer was, that he never gave any just cause, why such rumour should be spread of him, neither was it wisdome for him to treat with them as with Deputies, that should make relation of the whole matter to a Synod, though as private persons, he refused not to conferre with them, provided that in case they differed, no relation hereof should be made unto a Synod. The Church of Leyden also admonished him, that there might be a Conference between him and his Colleagues, before the Presbytery of that Church. To them he answered he could not yeeld thereto, without leave from the Gurators of the University, and that he perceived not, that any benefit was like to redound unto the Church by such a Conference. At another time Fol. 4. p. 2. being entreated by the Professors and Pastors with great earnestnesse, that if he had ought to say against the doctrine received in their Confession and Catechisme, he would freely and brotherly communicate it unto them, promising their endeavours to give him full satisfaction, or if not so, yet that he and his Colleagues under certain conditions might come to a faire agreement, to live together in peace, and that the reconciliation being made, nothing which passed between them should be divulged. The answer he made, was this, It was no wise part for him to yeeld to their motion, neither was he bound thereto, the present meeting being not ordained unto any such purpose, fol. 5. p. 2. Gomarus openly tells him, how it became him to declare his opinion, neque ejusmodi subterfugiis diutius hâc in re uti, & fol. 6. p. 2. before the States he represents his continuall practice thereunto, in concealing his Opinion, His words are these, Quibus insuper artibus opiniones suas disseminare; Publicè scilicet ab Ecclesiis rogatum obtestatumque, sententiam suam occultare, privatim vero Pastoribus quos in eam pertrahi posse speraret, ac discipulis suis diligentèr eam inculcare;