A treatise of Mr. Cottons clearing certain doubts concerning predestination together with an examination…A treatise of Mr. Cottons clearing certaine doubts concerning predestination together with an examination…

and that he means to bestow salvation upon every one of ripe years by way of reward, and, tanquam coronam justitiae, as the Arminians urge; and justly, though with no just advantage to their cause, but according to their shallow and unlearned conceits; as if therefore God should first fore-see their obedience, before he should ordain them to a reward: which yet will follow, if on the other side we grant them, that God first fore-seeth mans final impenitency, and thereupon ordains them to condemnation. Perhaps you may say, Is not the contrariety between Election and Reprobation sufficiently maintained, by saying, the one is Gods purpose ordaining to salvation; the other Gods purpose ordaining to condemnation? I confess, it seems so, and is generally reputed to be so: and this I take to be the principal cause of this error; one confusion drawing on more and more after it. But, I say, there is no congruous opposition between salvation and damnation; for, to damn is either finally to punish, or to adjudge to punishment. Now, as the Negative opposition hereunto is only not to punish, or to adjudge to punishment; so the contrary opposition hereunto ⟨p. 48⟩is to reward, or to adjudge to a reward: So that Election, as it is Gods purpose ordaining to salvation, by way of reward, is only opposite contrarily to Reprobation, as it signifies Gods purpose ordaining to condemnation. More fairly, and void of all equivocation, thus: Like as Reprobation is Gods purpose to punish with everlasting death; so Election is Gods purpose to remunerate with everlasting life. And thus the contrariety of these acts being rightly stated, it follows as evidently, that Election must presuppose, not obedience, but the fore-sight of obedience; as Reprobation presupposeth not sin, but the fore-sight of sin. And thus are we tumbled into the very gulf of Arminianism, over head and ears, before we are aware. But it may be this discourse of mine may raise such a Spirit as will not easily be laid; and hereupon some may the more profusely be carried to embrace Arminianism, in the very point of Election also; because, as Reprobation seems to be an act of justice vindicative; so Election also, as here it is stated, seems to be an act of justice remunerative.

and that he means to bestow salvation upon every one of ripe yeares by way of reward, and, tanquam coronam justitiae, as the Arminians urge; and justly, though with no just advantage to their cause, but according to their shallow and unlearned conceits; as if therefore God should first fore-see their obedience, before hee should ordaine them to a reward: which yet will follow, if on the other side wee grant them, that God first fore-seeth mans finall impenitency, and thereupon ordaines them to condemnation. Perhaps you may say, Is not the contrariety between Election and Reprobation sufficiently maintained, by saying, the one is Gods purpose ordaining to salvation; the other Gods purpose ordaining to condemnation? I confesse, it seemes so, and is generally reputed to be so: and this I take to bee the principall cause of this error; one confusion drawing on more and more after it. But, I say, there is no congruous opposition between salvation and damnation; for, to damne is either finally to punish, or to adjudge to punishment. Now, as the Negative opposition hereunto is onely not to punish, or to adjudge to punishment; so the contrary opposition hereunto