Discovery of Jacksons Vanity, Section 3 · Chapter 19
CHAP. XIX.
How God of a most lovinge Father becomes a severe and inexorable judge.
NOw because you cannot but perceave how this pincheth sore upon the unchangeable nature of God. Therfore you spend two chapters in the clearinge of this difficulty; wherin if you satisfie your selfe it is well. As for my part I am so farre from receaving satisfaction that I am utterly to seeke in understandinge the course you take to give satisfaction. Whether anger, hate, or jealosie, have any seate in the omnipotent Majestie is litle to the purpose.
But to shew how God of a most loving Father becomes a severe and inexorable judge, without any change, this alone is to the purpose. For the very māner of proposing it doth imply the ceasing to be a loving Father which he was, but becomes a severe & inexorable judge, which he was not. For to bee a loving Father and a severe judge all at once, is not of a lovinge Father to become a severe judge. And though this were granted you; yet it is not congruous to your tenet to maintayne that God was an inxorable judge to any, before the measure of his iniquity be full. And as then he first begines to become an inexorable judge, so it is requisite that then he ceaseth to be a loving Father. And albeit you are loath to acknowledge this because it doth so manifestly imply a change in the nature of God; yet you must be driven hitherto whether you will or no unlesse you maintayne, that still God continueth a most loving Father unto the Divells and ever shall be both unto them and to all damned persons notwithstandinge the wrath of God continue upon them to everlastinge damnation.
And it is a very strange dialect to acknowledge that God is a most loving Father unto damned persons: especially considering that in Scripture phrase we are sayd to be the Sonnes of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Gala. 3. 26. And indeede if you can make good, that to inflict everlastinge damnation, doth consort with infinite mercy; then you shall obteyne, not that God of a most loving Father doth become an inexorable judge; but that at once he is both a most loving father and a most inexorable judge also.
As for anger whether it be in God or no, or whether Lactantius hath carryed himselfe well or no in this Argument, it is nothing at all to this present businesse. The question is whether God ardently desiring the salvation of any man doth at length cease to desire it, or whether still he continueth to will and ardently desire a mans salvation notwithstandinge that he purposeth to inflict or actually doth inflict upon him condemnation. For this seemes to be the intended issue of your discourse as when you undertake to illustrate, how extreame severitie may stand with the fervency of fatherly unfeyned love. As much as to say, that God loves the Devills and loves the damned; and continueth the fervency of fatherly unfeyned love towards them, notwithstanding that he doth inflict everlasting condemnation upon them, and because this love you accoumpt all one with mercy and that it is infinite; in like sort infinite mercy may consort (as before you speake) with extreame severity.
Hence it followeth that all are vessels of merey, the reprobate as well as the elect, only here is the difference, the elect are only vessells of mercy, but the reprobate are both vessells of mercy and vessells of wrath also. Now I demaund what is the fruite of this love, and of this mercy of God towards the damned. Can you devise any fruite of this but the preservation of them in being? And may you not as well say; that he loves at this day every creature, in as much as he preserveth them? And consider I pray doe you call this fatherly love and doe you accoumpt this the fervency of fatherly love? And doth either Scripture or Eclesiasticall phrase allow you in this? Yet speake your minde plainly, and say that Gods will to preserve his creatures may stand with extreame severity used towards them, and no man will contend with you at all in this.
But then consider, whether you are well in your witts, when you enter upon the proofe of this as of some rare notion; when the issue of your meaning falleth upon a most vulgar conceyte and explication. And whether this be to proove that God of a most lovinge Father becomes a severe and inexorable judge, when the only fruit of his love is the holding of his childrens noses unto the grindstone of his wrath, and inplacable displeasure. Yet let us take notice of your illustration.
2. Here wee have a large discourse of Manlius Torquatus and his severe execution upon his owne Sonne, for transgressing the commaundement of his Generall; therefore Martiall lawe was executed by the father (being at that time Generall) upon his owne sonne. But were it all true that you discourse in justifying that fathers severitie upon his child; Yet you miserably forget your selfe, when you say, That excessive love which he bare unto his person, whilst his hopefull beginnings did seeme to promise an accomplishment of his Martiall vertues, turnes into extreame severity and indignation after hee proves transgressor. For this is not to shew, how extreame severitie may stand with the fervency of fatherly unfeyned love; but rather to shew how fatherly love ceaseth and severity and indignation comes in the place thereof.
This is rather answerable to the theame proposed how a most loving Father becomes a severe judge, and answerable to the former discourse of Gods withdrawing his goodnesse from those that have once filled up the measure of theire iniquity. But because in this manner it cannot be applyed unto God without acknowledging mutability in the nature of God, as well as in the nature of men: Therefore as I conceave your pretence was to illustrate how extreame severity may stand with the fervency of fatherly love; though indeede you performe nothing lesse, but rather shew how that fatherly love ceased as being turned into extreame severity and indignation. Yet it seemes you did but forget your selfe in this.
And that your drift was to shew how notwithstanding his love towards his sonne continuing the same, yet in a greater love of Martiall dicipline he caused his head to be striken of. But this also will nothing serve your turne. For notwithstanding this, we see a manifest alteration. For Manlius conceaved not any such indignation against his sonne till now, never entertayned any will to cut him off till the noyse of his transgression came unto his eares. All which cannot bee sayd of God (as it must be if the case be alike) without acknowledging as manifest alteration and innovation in the nature of God.
There was a time wherin Manlius desired his sonnes life and prosperitie; there was a time when he willed and commaunded him to be put to death. It was impossible that both those should be at once in Manlius as implying flat contradiction: Yet you place them both in God eyther at once and so imply contradiction, or successively and so introduce alteration into the nature of God: Manlius his purpose and will was changed upon the fact of his sonne, and his sonne was consumed by it.
But God is the Lord and is not changed, and therfore the Mal. 3. 6.sonnes of Iacob are not consumed. So Selencus never intertayned any thought or purpose of pulling out his sonnes eyes til he was found guiltie of adulterie; this cannot be sayd of God without subjecting him to variablenesse and somewhat more then shadowe of change. And therefore though Manlius and Selencus be justified in theire courses and God justified in his, as no man makes question, whether God be just in that which he doth: yet this proves not that God is exempt from alteration one way, in making a will to damne a man succeede in God his will to save him; or your selfe from contradiction another way, in making God at one and the same time both to will a mans salvation, and at the same time to will the same mans condemnation, yea and to inflict it also. And looke by what reason God may at one, and the same time will both the salvation, and condemnation of the same man, by the same reason he may at the same time both damne and save the same man.
For if you say he wills to save him as he is a man, and wills to damne him as he is a sinner; by the same reason you may say that he can both save him, as he is a man, and damne him as he is a sinner. For the contradiction is as manifest in the one, as in the other: Yet there is a greate deale of difference betweene the course of Manlius Torquatus and the courses of God. For Manlius did not cut of his sonnes heade, but for an actuall and personall transgression of his sonne: but God causeth many thousand Infants to perish in originall sinne, through no actuall and personall transgression of theire owne. What place can you find for that fervency of Gods fatherly love towards them?
Agayne God hath power in the course of his graciouse providence to keepe men from those transgressions, which make them incurre condemnation.
Now let any man judge whether Manlius would not have kept his sonne from transgression in this kinde if he coulde. Thirdly Manlius was not able to provide that the strictnesse of Military discipline should not be remitted, by relaxation of the punishment of his sonne; but God is able to procure that no discipline shall bee the more remitted by reason of his shewinge mercy on whome he will. Nay there is mercy with thee sayth the Prophet that thou mayst be feared.Ps. 130. 4.
Lastly Manlius had no power to pardon whome he would without partiality: but God hath power to have mercy on whome he will, yea and to harden whome he will and that without injustice or partiality. Yet I am content to consider the course you take in justifying Manlius.
First you acquaint us with your persuasions and lay them for groundes, a very proper course of argumentation. And these are that few had taken the like care and paines to trains up theire children in the most commendable qualities of that age.
Secondly, that None would have adventured his owne person further to have rescued his sonne from the enimy, or justified him in any honorable quarrell; and this is very ponderously amplified by comparison with a tender harted Mother whome notwithstanding all her tendernesse, the imbecillity of sexe would not suffer to goe so farre. Spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici? Most frivolous conjectures and serving to no purpose. For no man doubts but that it might well be, that the love and care of maintayninge Martiall discipline prevayled above the love of his sonne.
I say it might well be so, I doe not say it was so. Now give me leave to say somethinge against Manlius and the like Manliana imperia as you have spent many wastfull lines in pleading for him and them. Consider what Livy observeth hereupon; in his returne homewards victoriouse, the fathers only went forth to meete him: the youth of Rome both then and ever after hated and abominated him. Before this we reade of Aulus Posthumius a famous dictator, of him Livy writes thus: Egregiae dictaturae tristem memoriam faciunt Livy. dec. … lib. 4.qui silium ab Aulo Posthumio, qui occasione bene pugnandi captus, injussu discesserit praesidio, victorem securi percussum tradunt, nec libet credere: & argumento est quod imperia Manliana non Posthumiana appellata sint quam qui prior autor tam saevi exempli foret, occupaturus insignem titulum crudelitatis fuerit.
After this L. Papirius Cursor nothing inferiour in care of Martiall discipline to Manlius Torquatus, as whome the Romans had destinated as fit to oppose Alexander the greate, had he invaded Italia, in the like case pardoned Q Fabius, upon the intercession of the people; who yet was no sonne of Papirius. Consider the case it selfe. No laws of men are so strict but may admit temperantum aliquod, because mans providence is so shallow, as cannot foresee all particular cases. Lex non cavet de particularibus. For a stranger to goe upon the walls of the Towne in some places hath bin Capitall, yet when the enimy hath bin in skalinge the walls, and a stranger seing it hath encouraged himselfe to advance, and beate downe the enimy, this fact of his hath bin deemed rather meritorious of reward then of punishment.
Manlius the young Gentleman was provoked by the proude speeches of Metuis the Captaine of the enimy. To indure his braving, had bin to suffer the reputation of cowardice, and enough to have discouraged his owne troupe & made his enimyes insolent. As Goliahs defying of Israel strooke feare and terrour into the hearts of the Isralites and lifted up the hearts of the Philistins.
Neither doe I comprehende how any ranke was broken or disordered by this single fight or any inconvenience might redound by this fact of his. But the end being victoriouse and all the damage redounding to the disgrace and dishonour of the enimy. I feare something els possessed the carnall heart of Manlius the Father besides care of Martiall discipline. Why might he not disdeyne that the glory of his sonne allready equalling the glory of his father, might shortly blemish it? at the best a dogged and pertinaciouse adherence to the maintenance of his owne imperiouse course might quench all naturall affection in him. For could no other punishment serve the turne but death?
And might not discipline be maintayned unlesse in so extraordinary a case, the Consulls sonne trasgressing, were adjudged to the same punishment that the basest cowarde deserved? Observe what issue the like severity of Papirius had; and whether it had not bin likely to have marred all, had not hee in time tempered it with mildnesse and gentlenesse. For the enimy understanding of such like strict commaundes, whensoever the Dictator was absent, then would they stirre most, knowing that the Roman Soldiers durst not stirre, yea the Levy. dec. 1 lib. 8.hearts of his owne Soldiers beganne to forsake them, that they had no courage to fight.
Yet consider how Papirius caryed himselfe towards a Captayne of Praeneste (not his sonne) and that when he had played the coward. Praenestinus Praetor per timorem segnuis ex subsidijs suos duxerat, in primam aciem, quem cum inambulans ante tabernaculum vocari jussisset, victorem expedire securim jussit. Ad quam vocem examine stante Praenestino. Agedum lictor, excide radicem hanc, inquam, incommodam ambulantibus: perfusumque ultimi supplicij metu, multa dicta, dimisit. By the way I cannot but take notice of an inconsideration if not altogether ridiculous passage of yours, as when you say of this Manlius, that the more desirous he was to make him like himselfe in religiouse observance of Martiall discipline, and practise of justice towards the enimies, the readier he was to doe justice upon him for doeing the contrary. Why was the cutting off of his head a fit course to make him like himselfe in religious observance of Martiall discipline, and practise of justice towards the enimy? I professe, I see no reason for it, it might rather make him the moro desperate, because now he had no more heads to loose. Yet I confesse he taught him effectually herby never to spare any in the like transgression.
As for the rest, I esteeme it but frothe, I have no cause to trouble my selfe or others with any farther consideration therof.
3. God you say must enjoy libertie or priviledge of loving himselfe best. Your forme in expressing this I doe not so well like: For I had thought this had rather bin a necessity then a liberty; And privilege is of signification too base to bee applyed unto God. For privileges are granted from superiors to inferiors. But who shall privilege God? In a worde God loves himselfe only as the end of all other things, and all other thinges which he loves but as meanes tendinge to that end. For he made all things for himselfe; and of Israel he professeth that he hath formed him also for himselfe. Here you conclude Es. 43. 21▪that he loves equity and justice better then he doth any man; but what meant you to leave out Mercy? did that sticke in your teeth, especially cōsidering that forthwith you acknowledge him to be the eternall patterne of mercy as well as of justice? And if he be equity it selfe, is he not justice it selfe also? And if he be justice it selfe, is he not mercy it selfe also seing you make him the eternall patterne of the one as well as of the other? And give that as a reason why he must love justice better then any man? Yet I no way like your divinity in this. For I doe not acknowledge the nature of God to be the patterne which we must imitate in the first place, but rather the law of God; and we are to imitate his nature only in those things, the performance wherof is allowable by Gods law, God might allowe the Israelits in robbing the Egyptians, Abraham in sacrificing his sonne, Sampson in sacrificing himselfe; we may not allowe any in the like: God hath power to expose men unto sinne, to harden mens hearts, we may not take any such courses; but rather doe all we can to keepe our bretheren from sinne.
Now from your discourse it no more followeth that God cannot be unjustly mercyfull, then that he cannot be unmercifully just, especially towards those whom he loves more dearely then any man doth himselfe as you speake. And if you would be pleased to take notice by the way of the oracles of God, and not follow still the course of your owne inventions you might find that God hath mercy on whome he will, and hardneth whome he will. Yet is not he either unjustly mercyfull in the Rom. 9. 18one, or unmercyfully just in the other; Neyther should he be, though the case were altered, and he were mercyfull to those whome now he hardneth, and hardned those whome now he comiserateth satis contraria fata reponens.
But let us goe with you along the coast of Barbarie. Gods love (you say) extends it selfe unto our nature so polluted with corruption. It is true and that not only in respect of corruption by sinne orginall but by sinne actuall. For he gave his sonne to dy for us, when we were his enimyes, and when we were dead in sinne and walked after the Prince of the ayre, and fashions Rom. 5.of the world, he quickned us. Ephes. 2. 29. The effects of this love you say are limited towards men by the correspondency, which they hold or loose with that absolute goodnesse, or with those rules of equity, in which his will is to have man made like him. This manner of limitation is unsound, and fowly unsounde; as that which apparantly excludeth our correspondency to Gods goodnesse, and unto Gods love, out of the number of the effects of Gods love; as much as to say that faith and repentance, thankfulnesse and obedience are no effects of Gods love, but merely works of nature, as if it were not God that worketh in us both the will & the deede according to his good pleasure.Phil. 2. 13.
As if regeneration were but the imagination of a vayne thing; For I presume, you will not say, it is in the power of man to regenerate himselfe. And how can it be a work of God if not an effect of his love, and correspondency unto Gods goodnesse you make to prevent the effects of Gods love. Agayne the effects of Gods love the Scripture teacheth us are limited according to the good pleasure of God, both as touching graces of edification (for he distributes to every one as he will. 1. Cor. 12.) and as touching the graces of sanctification. For he hath mercy on whome he will. Rom. 9. And according to his purpose and grace he hath saved us and called us not according to our works. 2 Tim. 1. 9. And of his owne will hath he begotten us, &c. There is a condition Iac. …of morall goodnesse, which God doth accept to reward with glory; but there is no condition of morall goodnesse which God doth accept to reward with grace: For then grace were of works, and consequently no more grace. And then God should call us accordinge to our works which he expresly denyeth. Tit. 3. 5. and 2 Tim. 1. 9. There is no condition of morall viciousnesse that excludes Gods mercy in calling men unto faith and salvation.
Austine coumpts it impiety and madnesse to thinke otherwise, as I have often alleaged him. Enchirid. 96. He calls some at the first houre of the day, some at the last. And what absurde conceyte is it to require some mitigation of sinne or morall good qualification to make correspondency unto mercy in pardoning sinne and curing it? As no disease of the body is uncurable by God; so no disease of the soule or simfull course is unpardonable or uncurable by the mercy of God the Father, the merits of God the sonne. For each are infinite; but the sinnes of all the world are finite. God himselfe may limite the demonstration and exercise of his mercy as he thinks good. Now as touching the limitation hereof nothing is revealed unto us, but only this, that the sinne against the Holy Ghost shall not be pardoned and cured no small infidelity and impenitency.
All other limitations are merely revelations of flesh and blood, and the inventions of idle Braines; that impugne the prerogative of Gods grace, and in the place thereof advance the operation of nature, as that which first commends us in some sort unto Gods grace; you are apt to discourse of Gods inviting men unto God, and of the riches of his bounty that way; but of Gods working men unto God, and of the riches of his bounty, that may never any Arminian or Pelagian spake lesse then you. Yet the despising of Gods goodnesse shewed eyther in his word or in his works shall indoubtedly increase mens condemnation. But God can breake of these their contemptiouse courses in whome he will, and when he will, and where he will, as Austine professeth with such confidence, as that he censureth him of impiety and dotery whosoever he be that denyeth it.
A silly course it is, to inferre that vicious courses doe exclude men from Gods mercy, because God hates filthinesse or uncleanesse. For God undoubtedly hates all manner of filthinesse and uncleanesse whether the measure of it be filled up or no; For did he not hate Manasses his idolatry and his bloody courses, and his using them that were given to sorcery and witchcrast? Yet all this excluded him not from the participation of Gods mercy. And if for this reason, to wit because God hates filthinesse, men are excluded from Gods favour, so as to be uncapable of his mercy; then every man shoulde be a reprobate and incapable of mercy; and abandoned as a vessel of wrath unto everlasting condemnation.
And you consider not, that to be uncapable of mercy is to be uncapable of Gods love; even in your owne discourse; whence it followeth, that God must after a certayne time cease to love them; as in reason it should be acknowledged by you, according to the tenour of your opinion; and that when the doore of repentance is shut upon them, as your selfe have phrasified it, most of all when God condemnes them to everlasting torments in hell fire, he must needs cease to love them. And consequently you must necessarily admit mutability in the nature of God, which is directly contrary to the perfection of God delivered unto us in holy Scripture. I the Lord am not changed and you sonnes of Iacob are not consumed. Mala. 3. 6. And with God is no variablenesse nor shadow of change. Iac. 1. 19. This rocke you have in your eye & labour to keepe your Tenet from dashing it selfe desperately against it. Wherin how well you have carryed your selfe we are to consider in the next place.