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…

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?

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;

argumenta Nostrorum praecipua quibus astrui doctrina Orthodoxa soleret enervare, Jesuitarum verò aliorumque Adversariorum, quibus doctrinam Ecclesiarum Reformatarum oppugnant confirmare, Varias de doctrinae receptae Veritate dubitationes discipulorum animis ingerere, eandemque cum doctrinâ heterodoxâ prius, quasi in aequilibrio suspender, ac deinde prorsus rejicere, nullam hactenus sinceritatis ac consensus in doctrinâ, licet saepius ab Ecclesiis amanter fraterneque rogatum Declarationem edere voluisse. Now let any indifferent person compare the carriage of Arminius the Innovator, with the carriage of the Contra-Remonstrants, standing for the doctrine heretofore received, and judge impartially which of them betrays the greater distrust of the integrity of their Cause.

argumenta Nostrorum praecipua quibus astrui doctrina Orthodoxa soleret enervare, Jesuitarum verò aliorumque Adversariorum, quibus doctrinam Ecclesiarum Reformatarum oppugnant confirmare, Varias de doctrinae receptae Veritate dubitationes discipulorum animis ingerere, eandemque cum doctrinâ heterodoxâ prius, quasi in aequilibrio suspendere, ac deinde prorsus rejicere, nullam hactenus sinceritatis ac consensus in doctrinâ, licet saepius ab Ecclesiis amanter fraterneque rogatum Declarationem edere voluisse. Now let any indifferent person compare the carriage of Arminius the Innovator, with the carriage of the Contra-Remonstrants, standing for the doctrine heretofore received, and judge impartially which of them betrayes the greater distrust of the integrity of their Cause.

5. As for the easiness of defending it, if it be not, or were not so in their opinion, who are here pretended to have declined the sifting of it, What is that to the purpose? Then who are they, who say it may so easily be defended? I never read any hitherto, who do not acknowledge a great mystery in the divine providence. And from the days of Anselm unto this present day, it hath ever been accounted (in my observation) a very difficult point to accord predestination divine, with the liberty of mens wills. But put the case it may easily be defended, as of evident truth by the word of God, yet notwithstanding, if it be found harsh to mens affections, are they likely to admit it with such ease? I should think it ought to be put out of question, that God hath mercy on whom he will, in bestowing faith and repentance upon them, and thereby curing their natural infidelity and hardness of heart, as also that God hardeneth whom he will, leaving their infidelity and hardness of heart uncured; yet when flesh and blood riseth up against this doctrine thus, Why then doth God complain; (to wit, of mans disobedience) for who hath resisted his will? And the Apostle addresseth hereunto no other answer but this, O man who art thou who disputest with God? shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the Potter power over the clay of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour, another unto dishonour? Is flesh and blood, I pray, apt to rest satisfied with this?

5. As for the easinesse of defending it, if it be not, or were not so in their opinion, who are here pretended to have declined the sifting of it, What is that to the purpose? Then who are they, who say it may so easily be defended? I never read any hitherto, who doe not acknowledge a great mystery in the divine providence. And from the daies of Anselme unto this present day, it hath ever been accounted (in my observation) a very difficult poynt to accord predestination divine, with the liberty of mens wills. But put the case it may easily be defended, as of evident truth by the word of God, yet notwithstanding, if it be found harsh to mens affections, are they likely to admit it with such ease? I should think it ought to be put out of question, that God hath mercy on whom he will, in bestowing faith and repentance upon them, and thereby curing their naturall infidelity and hardnesse of heart, as also that God hardneth whom he will, leaving their infidelity and hardnesse of heart uncured; yet when flesh and bloud riseth up against this doctrine thus, Why then doth God complaine; (to wit, of mans disobedience) for who hath resisted his will? And the Apostle addresseth hereunto no other answer but this, O man who art thou who disputest with God? shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the Potter power over the clay of the same lump, to make one vessell unto honour, another unto dishonour? Is flesh and bloud, I pray, apt to rest satisfied with this?

Now as touching the two things I promised to add, they are these.

Now as touching the two things I promised to adde, they are these.

1. I pray consider whether in all this, this Author doth not very judiciously pronounce ⟨p. 82⟩sentence against himself. For you know, your own motion you made unto him, and the promise he made unto you; and I pray consider how answerable hereunto hath been his performance. The certain Controversies, as touching which he professeth change of Opinion, what are they, but the five Articles so much agitated between the Remonstrants, and the Contra-Remonstrants? Do you not perceive how he makes choice only of reprobation to grate upon? Is he not content to lye close as touching four of them? What is this, but according to his language, the coveting of corners? And what willingness of abiding the trial doth this manifest? Yet he pleaseth himself in a conceit, of being as free from guile, as David was when he offered himself to the Lords trial, and thereupon advanceth himself to the greater liberty of censuring others, such as Beza, and Musculus, and their Fellows, together with the Contra-Remonstrants, as too full of that guile, whereof himself, by virtue not of his Free-will, but of a grace of God of his shaping, is void. This is an usual course with those of his spirit, whereof I have had plentiful experience in this very kind. For if you believe them, all the Arminians Geese are Swans, and all our Swans are Geese in comparison to them. He hopes you will not think he hates the light, or refuseth to come to the light, (in his phrase) this is the censure he liberally bestows upon his opposites. For though some of our Divines are willing enough to treat of the five Articles, yet to treat of reprobation, which is a part of one of those, they are not so willing, but this young Master in Israel, out of the plerophorious conceit of his own integrity and sufficiency, is very willing to treat of this of reprobation, though he leaves all the rest alone.

1. I pray consider whether in all this, this Author doth not very judiciously pronounce ⟨p. 82⟩sentence against himselfe. For you know, your own motion you made unto him, and the promise he made unto you; and I pray consider how answerable hereunto hath been his performance. The certain Controversies, as touching which he professeth change of Opinion, what are they, but the five Articles so much agitated between the Remonstrants, and the Contra-Remonstrants? Doe you not perceive how he makes choyce only of reprobation to grate upon? Is he not content to lye close as touching foure of them? What is this, but according to his language, the coveting of corners? And what willingnesse of abideing the tryall doth this manifest? Yet he pleaseth himselfe in a conceit, of being as free from guile, as David was when he offered himselfe to the Lords tryall, and thereupon advanceth himselfe to the greater liberty of censuring others, such as Beza, and Musculus, and their Fellowes, together with the Contra-Remonstrants, as too full of that guile, whereof himselfe, by virtue not of his Free-will, but of a grace of God of his shapeing, is voyd. This is an usuall course with those of his spirit, whereof I have had plentifull experience in this very kind. For if you believe them, all the Arminians Geese are Swannes, and all our Swannes are Geese in comparison to them. He hopes you will not think he hates the light, or refuseth to come to the light, (in his phrase) this is the censure he liberally bestowes upon his opposites. For though some of our Divines are willing enough to treat of the five Articles, yet to treat of reprobation, which is a part of one of those, they are not so willing, but this young Master in Israel, out of the plerophorious conceit of his own integrity and sufficiency, is very willing to treat of this of reprobation, though he leaves all the rest alone.

Yet I pray make the scales even, What instance can be given, I do not say of Beza, Musculus, or any one of the Contra-Remonstrants, but of any one of the like condition to himself, that being entreated by a friend (as this Author was by you) to show the reasons, why he hath changed his mind from Arminianism, to the opposite opinions, hath carried himself, as this Author hath done, to give his reasons only on the part of one of them, and yet passeth his censure so prodigally on others for refusing trial, by the way implying, a glorious ostentation of his own performances to the contrary, as if he had done a notable piece of service, whereas all that he hath performed hereon, by proof from testimonies of Scripture, are little more then two Leaves, and therein also as it were purposely, declines all those places, wherein the Scripture speaketh directly of election, predestination, and of that, which in effect, is all one with reprobation. Such places pregnantly speaking hereof, he purposely declines, and yet he calls the places he insists upon, pregnant testimonies; and indeed so they are, but nothing at all to the purpose of predestination, election, or reprobation. Yet I marvel not he is so well conceited of his achievements. I remember the Fable of the fly, sitting on a Cart-wheel, in a dry summers day, and saying, See what a dust I make. For, because he hath discharged himself so unworthily with you, he may be bold to conceit, that if he had to deal with Beza, or with any of the Contra-Remonstrants, or of the Synod of Dort, he would make it soon appear, that Heresy and untruth condemns it self (this is the sweet accommodation he makes of that the Apostles [Greek or Hebrew]) to wit, by their refusing the touch-stone, and his readiness backed with all sufficiency to come thereto, whereof he hath given so plentiful demonstration in this he hath written unto you; as if he had been with some Oracle of late, who had not only revealed unto him, some reasonable motives, and wise carriages of the matter, but inspired him also with some martial spirit, fit for any encounter, despising his Adversaries, as empty Scholars, and as if their parts were but copper, to his gold. Therefore he may take heart to speak boldly, and show himself in the clear day, when such as Beza make choice to walk in mistrs, and dwell in silence.

Yet I pray make the scales even, What instance can be given, I doe not say of Beza, Musculus, or any one of the Contra-Remonstrants, but of any one of the like condition to himselfe, that being entreated by a friend (as this Author was by you) to shew the reasons, why he hath changed his mind from Arminianisme, to the opposite opinions, hath carried himselfe, as this Author hath done, to give his reasons only on the part of one of them, and yet passeth his censure so prodigally on others for refusing triall, by the way implying, a glorious ostentation of his own performances to the contrary, as if he had done a notable piece of service, whereas all that he hath performed hereon, by proofe from testimonies of Scripture, are little more then two Leaves, and therein also as it were purposely, declines all those places, wherein the Scripture speaketh directly of election, predestination, and of that, which in effect, is all one with reprobation. Such places pregnantly speaking hereof, he purposely declines, and yet he calls the places he insists upon, pregnant testimonies; and indeed so they are, but nothing at all to the purpose of predestination, election, or reprobation. Yet I marvaile not he is so well conceited of his atchievements. I remember the Fable of the fly, sitting on a Cart-wheele, in a dry summers day, and saying, See what a dust I make. For, because he hath discharged himself so unworthily with you, he may be bold to conceit, that if he had to deale with Beza, or with any of the Contra-Remonstrants, or of the Synod of Dort, he would make it soon appeare, that Heresy and untruth condemnes it selfe (this is the sweet accommodation he makes of that the Apostles ) to wit, by their refusing the touch-stone, and his readinesse backed with all sufficiency to come thereto, whereof he hath given so plentifull demonstration in this he hath written unto you; as if he had been with some Oracle of late, who had not only revealed unto him, some reasonable motives, and wise carriages of the matter, but inspired him also with some martiall spirit, fit for any encounter, despising his Adversaries, as empty Schollers, and as if their parts were but copper, to his gold. Therefore he may take heart to speak boldly, and shew himselfe in the clear day, when such as Beza make choyce to walk in mistrs, and dwell in silence.

Besides his care is very Apostolical for the peace of the Church, whereas Beza's was not at Mompelgard, nor the Contra-Remonstrants, neither at the Hague Conference, or at the Synod of Dort. For none of these belike, have been so forward to show themselves unto the World, and upon the stage, for the maintenance of their doctrine (at least in the point of reprobation) no not Beza in his Lectures upon the ninth to the Romans. Yet neither this man nor his Oracle hath done ought that I know, but in corners. And in corners I find these spirits exceeding busy; and I have been so happy (for so I account it, although I confess my time might be far more profitably bestowed) as to meet with some of their Mysteries, ere I was aware. And I find their Lyons skins, do smell far more of the Fox then of ehe Lyon.

Besides his care is very Apostolicall for the peace of the Church, whereas Beza's was not at Mompelgard, nor the Contra-Remonstrants, neither at the Hague Conference, or at the Synod of Dort. For none of these belike, have been so forward to shew themselves unto the World, and upon the stage, for the maintenance of their doctrine (at least in the poynt of reprobation) no not Beza in his Lectures upon the ninth to the Romans. Yet neither this man nor his Oracle hath done ought that I know, but in corners. And in corners I find these spirits exceeding busy; and I have been so happy (for so I account it, although I confesse my time might be farre more profitably bestowed) as to meet with some of their Mysteries, ere I was aware. And I find their Lyons skinnes, doe smell farre more of the Fox then of ehe Lyon.

2. The second is this, Why should their carriage be any prejudice to others, who are as willing to give an account of their faith in these particulars, as any Arminian whatsoever. For my part, I never met with any of them, that I declined, nor I hope never shall. I heartily wish, time might serve me for them all. I have dealt with Arminius his Examen, his Conference with Junius, Corvinus his answer unto Tilenus, I have entered upon Vossius his Pelagian History. I desire I might have time and opportunity, for their Synodalia Dordracena, but most of all with the Jesuits; while I deal with them I learn somewhat, but nothing at all while I am occupied with the Arminians.

2. The second is this, Why should their carriage be any prejudice to others, who are as willing to give an account of their faith in these particulars, as any Arminian whatsoever. For my part, I never met with any of them, that I declined, nor I hope never shall. I heartily wish, time might serve me for them all. I have dealt with Arminius his Examen, his Conference with Junius, Corvinus his answer unto Tilenus, I have entred upon Vossius his Pelagian History. I desire I might have time and opportunity, for their Synodalia Dordracena, but most of all with the Jesuits; while I deale with them I learne somewhat, but nothing at all while I am occupied with the Arminians.

3. Let me add one thing more: In the Articles of our Church, the seventeenth is concerning Predestination and Election, not one concerning Reprobation. If any of us, should forbear to meddle with the doctrine of reprobation in dispute, may we not justly plead, a fair conformity to the wisdom of the Church whereof we are members? And by the way to touch one thing, Might not this be the reason, why this author utterly pretermits the prosecuting his opinion concerning Predestination and election, to wit, least thereby he should fall foul upon the doctrine of our Church, so evidently set down in that Article concerning the point of Predestination? The Church of Ireland content themselves, with the very form of that 17th Article of ours concerning Predestination: Only they premise two Theses; the one whereof is this, God from all eternity, did by his unchangeable Counsel ordain, whatsoever in time should come to pass, yet so, as thereby no violence is offered to the Wills of the reasonable creatures, and neither the liberty, nor the contingency of the second cause is taken away, but established rather; The other this, By the same eternal Counsel, God hath Predestinated some unto life, and Reprobated some unto death, of both which there is a certain number, known only unto God, which neither can be increased nor diminished.

3. Let mee adde one thing more: In the Articles of our Church, the seaventeenth is concerning Predestination and Election, not one concerning Reprobation. If any of us, should forbeare to meddle with the doctrine of reprobation in dispute, may we not justly plead, a faire conformity to the wisdome of the Church whereof we are members? And by the way to touch one thing, Might not this be the reason, why this author utterly pretermits the prosecuting his opinion concerning Predestination and election, to wit, least thereby he should fall foule upon the doctrine of our Church, so evidently set downe in that Article concerning the poynt of Predestination? The Church of Ireland content themselves, with the very forme of that 17th Article of ours concerning Predestination: Only they premise two Theses; the one whereof is this, God from all eternity, did by his unchangeable Councell ordaine, whatsoever in time should come to passe, yet so, as thereby no violence is offered to the Wills of the reasonable creatures, and neither the liberty, nor the contingency of the second cause is taken away, but established rather; The other this, By the same eternall Counsell, God hath Predestinated some unto life, and Reprobated some unto death, of both which there is a certain number, known only unto God, which neither can be increased nor diminished.

DISCOURSE. The Third Motive. The Infamy of it.

IT is an Opinion (as it is maintained by the Supralapsarians) odious to the Papists, and opens their foul mouths against our Church and Religion, and so abhorred (maintained either Way) by all rhe Lutherans, that for this very Tenet, they call us damned Calvinists, think us unworthy to be above ground, and in their Writings protest; that they will rather unite themselves to the Papists, then to us.

IT is an Opinion (as it is maintained by the Supralapsarians) odious to the Papists, and opens their foule mouthes against our Church and Religion, and so abhorred (maintained either Way) by all rhe Lutherans, that for this very Tenent, they call us damned Calvenists, think us unworthy to be above ground, and in their Writings protest; that they will rather unite themselves to the Papists, then to us.

Sir Edwin Sands speaks of men, whom he commends for singular learning and piety, (whose opinion he so sets down, as he declares it to be his own) that they think it were no blemish for the Reformed ¹Doctors to revive their doctrine, and to abate the rigour of certain speculative opinions, (for so he is pleased to call them) especially touching the eternal decrees of God, wherein some of their chief authors have run into such an utter opposition to all the Romish doctrine, as to have exceedingly scandalized all other Churches withal, yea, and many of their own to rest very ill satisfied.

Sir Edwin Sands speaks of men, whom he commends for singular learning and piety, (whose opinion he so sets down, as he declares it to be his own) that they think it were no blemish for the Reformed ¹Doctors to revive their doctrine, and to abate the rigour of certain speculative opinions, (for so he is pleased to call them) especially touching the eternall decrees of God, wherein some of their chief authors have runne into such an utter opposition to all the Romish doctrine, as to have exceedingly scandalized all other Churches withall, yea, and many of their own to rest very ill satisfied.

1. 1Relat. pag. 194, 198.