Discovery of Jacksons Vanity, Section 3 · Chapter 21
CHAP. XXI.
How Anger, Love, Compassion, Mercy or other affections are in the divine nature.
II is true some Schoolemen thinke that distributive justice may be properly enough attributed unto God but not commutative; not because this includes rationem dati & accepti, but rather because it includes, aequalitatem dati & accepti. Yet others are of opinion that justice distributive can be attributed unto God with no greater propriety, then justice commutative: as may be seene in Vasque 1. in 1. part. disput. 86. Likewise I know none, that thinke, mercy is more properly to be attributed unto God then anger. For voluntas vindicandi as properly and formally belongs to God, as voluntas miserandi: that being as easily abstracted from greife, as this from compassion.
As for revenge there is no colour why that should not in greatest propriety be attributed unto God like as also reward. To say that affections or morall qualities may be contayned in the divine essence eminently, is a very poore justification of them to be the attributes of God. For to be eminently in God is no more (as your selfe heretofore have explicated it chap. 4. sect. 2.) then God to be the Author of them, and produce them. Now in this sense you may attribute the name of any body or beast unto God, and say God is such, or such a thing is God, to wit eminently. But who can doubt but voluntas miserandi and voluntas vindicandi are in God not eminently but formally. Yet notwithstanding the very will of God is infinitly different from the will of man. No passion, as a passion is in God though that name which signifieth a passion in man, may be truely verified of Gods signifying the nature of God in a certayne reference unto his creatures without all passion.
So there is a will and understanding in God, but nothing like to the will and understanding of man: For will and understanding in man are accidents they are not so in God. Our anger at the best, as being displeased only with such things that displease God, though in some litle thing it be like Gods anger; yet in many things it is very unlike: For it is a passion in us, not in God, it riseth in us which before was not no such innovation in God. Gods anger is vindicative ours ought not to be so, but only in case we are his ministers. For vengeance is myne I will repay sayth the Lord. I cannot justifie you in so speaking, when you say that mercy is more reall, and truly affectionate in God then his anger; For taking them sequestred from theire imperfections, each is formally attributed unto God, though not as passions, and not eminently only as you have delivered it.
As for the execution of each more or lesse, that receaveth moderation merely from the pleasure of Gods will. For he hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardneth; and farre more hath he made vessels of wrath amongst the nation of men, then vessells of mercy, though it be reputed otherwise amongst the nation of Angelis. Mercy consists in pardoning sinnes, and saving sinners and no passion at all is required unto this in the nature of God, but passion enough, even unto death upon the crosse in the nature of man, & person of the Sonne of God. The better use men have of reason, the lesse are they subject to perturbation, but no whit lesse doe they participate of affection, for vertues are not foreign or foreign as Aristotle hath taught us; but the right ordering of them. Christs soule was heavy unto the death, at the approaching of his passion, and wept often before this; yet had he never a whit the worse use of reason; For all this. But no passion at all can be in God; for passions rise and fall upon new occasion, but no such alteration is incident unto God. I know not what you meane by devouring affections. They may be concealed or restrained not in a vertuous manner, but vitious; only to keepe the rankor of theire hearts from discovery, 2. Sam. 13. 22. 25.as Absolon a long time sayd nor good nor bad to Amnon after he had defloured his sister Thamar, he was not any whit the more charitable in that, but playd the foxe in waiting opportunity to doe mischeife. Likewise, when Haman saw Ester. 5. 9. 10.Mordecai in the Kings gate that he stood not up nor mooved for him then was hee full of indignation at Mordecai. Neverthelesse Haman refrayned himselfe, though hee had plotted the destruction both of him and all his natiō. To say that passions are moderate in matters, which men least affect is as much as to say, that affections are moderate in matters which men least affect. And indeede affections must needes be moderate, when they are least in motion.
But perpetuall minding of a thing should argue strength of passion, in my judgement rather then moderation. To my thinkinge, now you are in a vaine of writing essayes: Yet I find no greate substance of truth in them. How secret cariages can be violently opposed I conceave not; For if opposed then no longer secret. And the more cunning men are, the more notice (I should thinke) they take of violent opposition, unlesse they doe apparently, see such opposites are like to overshoote or come short; which is a very race case and comes ofter into a schollars fancy then into reall practise. I finde no greate passion in Achitophel; but rather as Caesar came soberly to the ruinating of his country. So Achitophel proceeded soberly to the destroying of himselfe. To have the mastery of his passions like enough is a greate poynt of pollicy, undoubtedly to have a gracious mastery of them is true Christianity; not allwayes to restraine them, but even profusely to enlarge them whatsoever the World thinkes of them.
As Moses in the cause of God was mooved so farre as to breake the tables of the law, and calling others unto him to fall upon the massacring of the people, yet this testimony is given of him that, hee was the meekest man on the earth. I doe Num. 12. 3not dislike your allowance of men to be passionate, in the promoting of Gods glory; I hope you will give like allowance to men to be passionate in the defence of Gods truth. I have no greate edge to make Christians contend in passion, with worldly men how wise soever.
Yet well I wote, that David (one of the worthyes of the World amongst Martialists) his eyes did gushe out with rivers of water, because men kept not the law of the Lord: & holy Psal. 119. 136. 2. Pet. 2. 7Lot did vexe his heart with the uncleane conversations of the Sodomites. These morall essayes of yours have a foule issue; as when you inferre, but most inconsequently (as arguing from the nature of man to the nature of God) that passions are in God, nor so only, but even such affections as essentially include perturbation; you were as good plainly professe, that God is not exempt from perturbation.
Neyther is, to be zealous or compassionate, to be like God in wisedom, but rather in affection. Yet zeale and compassion are accidents in man, not in God; arise in man never without alteration, but no alteration, as your selfe have made shew to maintayne, is incident unto God. Yet I doe easily grant you, that the vehemency of mans passions doth as significantly represent the want of passion in God; as the swift motions of the Heavens doth represent Gods immutability; Like unto him that presenting an unsufficient person to his degree, and being demaunded what he meant to prostitute himself to such profanesse; made answere he might doe it with a safe conscience; For he undertooke for him, but tam, quam, tam moribus quam doctrina, and he thought him as good one way as the other, though indeede good at neyther.
And now if your selfe be arrived after all this unto a rest (I doe not say vigorous least that might proove the embleme of greater motion) from your passion; I pray consider how these doe agree: First to say that Gods wisedom doth not exempt him from passion; and then to acknowledge a want of passion in God.
2: I see no reason why you should complaine of the barrennesse of your imagination, in illustrating the attributes of God; to my judgement it hath bin more fruitefull then all that ever went before you; who I dare say were never able to discerne that lively resemblance you speake of betweene the swift motion of the Heavens and the immutability or vigorous rest of God, as also betweene the vehemency; of mens passions and the vacuity of all passion in God. Your Mathematickes (though I professe my selfe a very sory scholler in that science) I doe reasonablely well understand; as namely that a circular figure is, as it were foreign, and of all figures of equall circumference the most capacious, and that all other figures the nearer they draw to a circle, and the more Angles they contayn of equall circumference are the more capacious. I expect your mysterious and profound explication.
3. The Analogy spoken of betweene sides and Angles, as found in circles and other figures doth fitly expresse (you say) that analogy which Schole divines assign betweene wisedom, science, love, hatred, goodnesse, desire, as they are found in God and man. Your theame was, how Anger, Love, Compassion, mercy or other affections are in the divine nature: of all these there is but one found in this latter enumeration of yours, and that is love; and wheras you proposed to speake only of the affection, and to shew how they are in God. Yet here you mention wisedome, science, goodnesse; which never were accoumpted affections. No name or title of affection can (you say) be univocally attributed unto God.
And this is true, and as true of habits and powers of our soules, that they cannot univocally be attributed unto God. For whatsoever is in God is mere essence; and therfore such titles as signifie accidents in us, cannot denominate God secundum nomen & nominis rationem. But as we love by an act of passion: so God may love by an act, which is his essence. Our wills and understandings are accidents; yet doth God as truly will and understand as we, by his very essence; not by any act which is really distinguished from his essence, Gods love, Gods wrath, are merely his will, to doe good or to revenge evill, as they signifie any thing within God. But if they be used as externall denominations, so, when God punisheth us, he is sayd to be angry with us; when he doth us good, he is sayd to love us.
And in the like sense may every name of any affection, be attributed unto God, provided it doth not essentially imply any imperfection, as feare doth, and desire doth, which cannot be attributed unto God but metaphorically. The fruits of love & compassion proceede from none so freely, so plentiously as from God, and therfore he may justly be sayd to be most loving most compassionate, but to whom he will. In like sort the fruits of wrath and a revenging will, proceede from none more powerfully and more heavenly then from God. Psal. 90. 11. Heb. 10. 13. Who knoweth the power of thy wrath? Psalm 90. It is a fearefull thing to fall into the hands of God. Therefore may he justly be accoumpted a most severe regenger of iniquity, but on whom he will; For he can pardon it and cure it in whom he will, these being but the fruites of his mercy and he hath mercy on whom he will. But to say he is wholly love and wholly displeasure, is a wild expression in my conceyte. For to say, that he is wholly love, is as much as to say, that whatsoever he is, is love; whence it followeth that seeing he is displeasure also, as you say his very displeasure is love; and consequently by the same reason, his very love is his displeasure.
The truth is, affections in us belong only to the will; and so translated unto God they should only denominate his will. Now his power, his understanding, his will are very distinct notions; though in God they are not really distinct: yet so farre distinct as that it seemes absurd to say, that his power is his will, or his wisedom, or that his wisedom is his will or his power, or that his will is eyther his power or wisdom. So you speake truth, we are content, you take what liberty you think good in the illustration of it, and to satisfie your selfe with your illustrations, though your readers you doe not. I finde you are much pleased in the commodious illustration which a circle doth afford you, or which you divise in a circle, which you call the true embleme of eternity.
Some I confesse have professed that eternity doth ambire tempus, but I never observed that they compared it to a circle; but only I conceave theire meaning was, that at this present it was not only before all time, but after all time. You adde unto this, and will have this comprehension to be circular; and elswhere have called it a circular duration. Yet as for this conceyte of theirs, Durand hath longe discovered the absurdity therof, & confuted it. And as greate a Mathematician as you are, I doe not like your interpretatiō of foreign and foreign, which you render, as if it signified all sides and all angles; I rather take it to signifie, all angle, all side, as if it were an angle throughout and one side throughout not all sides and angles.
Ant it is apparent the circumference is but one that encloseth this figure, and angles arising from inclination of lines in the circumferenc, there is a perpetuall inclination, not the least part that may be designed and imagined, but hath an inclination of partes. When you say, the sides are angles, and the angles sides if not essentially yet penctratively the fame. You speake gibrish, you may as well say, in any right angled figure, that the angles and sides are penetratively the same; the sides are lines, and in the predicament of quality the angles, are the beginning of figures, as poynts are of lines, and so in the predicament of quality: of which figures, lines are the determinations and outward limites.
This I speake but upon remembrance of my old philosophy; and the angles arise from the inclinations of lines one towards another. What liberty you take in saying that a circle is of equall sides and of equall angles, whereas indeede it is but a side, throughout, and an angle throughout, let the reader judge. Yet it contaynes the space of any other figure of equall circumference and somewhat more: and so vertually it may be sayd to conteyne them even theire sides and angles, in as much as it doth conteyne the space of them. So whatsoever the power, habits and affections of men doe signifie (allwayes provided that you take theire significatiō as touching the perfections in them severed from theire imperfections) they are in God, and much more.
And thus touching your theame proposed how Anger, Love, Compassion, Mercy and other affections are in God, your resolution may be this, if you thinke good, that all perfectiōs are conteyned in him, not tanquam trigonum in tetragonon, but tanquam triganon and tetragonon and pentagonon, and all angled figures in circulo; but then they must be of equall circumference, which limitation hath no place in the comparison betweene God the Creator and his creatures. If your meaning be no other, then that these, which we call passions, are in God eminently the resolution of the question proposed had bin as easy as it is vulgar, for to be in God eminently is by your owne exposition, no more then God to be the Author of them. And no Christian doubts but that as God is the Author of our bodyes and of our soules; so he is the Author of our naturall affections also.
4. The Diameter I confesse is the measure of a circle; that being knowne all is easy to be knowne, I meane in the poynt of measure: but as for the proportion, you speake of, betweene that and a man in reference to the World. I leave to every one to judge of that. Who they be that are the Authors of such proportions, I willingly confesse I know not. In these kindes of proportions you are very excellent, although you complaine of the barrenesse of your imagination that way; as when you tell us, that mans nature uncorrupt did include such an eminent uniformity to all things created as the eye doth unto colours. I professe you stone me with these resemblances of yours, and make me wonder at my dwarfy capacity, that is so overcoped (to speake in your owne phrase) with these your tall inventions. For it were strange you should not understand your selfe; that were like the Nunne at Delphos, to give out oracles to set others on worke to understand, that which shee understood not her selfe.
And first I cannot devise, what that uniformity should be, which you say the eye hath to all colours; you seeme not to understand it of the morall constitution of the eye; for that is different as colours are different, but rather of the formall constitution in respect of the discerning faculty it hath. Now the uniformity betweene this is no other then betweene any faculty and his object.
So then the uniformity runnes this way; like as the eye of man judgeth of all colours; so man was in his innocency to all things created; here I was about to adde, for the completing of this sentence, I know not what; but on a sodayne I remembred what erst you proposed, namely, that man was like the diameter in a circle, the measure of all things. The meaning whereof I conceaved to be this; as by the knowledge of the diameter the circle is easily knowne: so by the knowledge of man, which conteynes the nature of all things created, the nature of all created things may be knowne. In like sort touching this last uniformity you speake of. Like as the eye judgeth of all colours; so by the knowledge of man we may judge of all other things created. I neede not trouble my selfe in taking exception against these illustrations; I doubt not but I shall performe a meritorious worke in gratifying your reader so farre a… to blanch your meaning, and of the congruity or incongruity to leave it unto him to judge. Thus was man the true image of God for his essence; and in this properly beares a true shadow of the divine prerogative. For like as all perfections are conteyned in God: so all created things are conteyned in the nature of man; save that they are eminently conteyned in God, in such sort as he is able to produce them; but so created things are not conteyned in the nature of man: Yet as the eye judgeth of all colours; so man participates of all other natures, and by the knowledge of him men may judge of them.
If the divine nature conteyned lesse perfections then the perfections of all things, then indeede it were something strange, it should be the measure of all. But seeing perfections in him are infinite, there was no reason, that you should bring mans acknowledgement, that his essence is the measure of all perfections; with an (allthough) in reference to his measurelesse perfection. Yet I professe I am to seeke how to conceave Gods essence to be the measure of created perfections; seeing mensura & mensuratum ought to be in the same kinde, as it was wont to be sayd. But all this may be helpt with saying he is the measure of them eminently; and indeed he is the Author of them; For he made all things in number, weight, and measure.
And indeede ere I was awarre, I find you fall upon this in the very next sentence, where you say. All the conditions or properties of measure assigned by Philosophers are as truly conteyned in the incomprehensible essence, as sides or angles in the circle, but farre more eminently. VponUpon this I looke for an enumeration of the conditions and properties of a measure, and the application of them unto God; and particularly that, that a measure must be that which is better knowne then the thing measured.
And it is of use to bring us acquainted with the things measurable. Now God is not better knowne to us then any other thing. To himselfe I confesse he is as well knowne as ought els. But he hath no neede of any measure, whereby he should arise to the knowledge of any thing; though in knowing himselfe he knoweth all other things, nor lookes out of himselfe to be acquainted with ought. But you I perceave are willing to ease your selfe of this burthen; you tell us what a measure he is not, as when you say, the Divine essence is a measure not applyable to measurables, for kind or quantity much different, according to diversities of parts; as who hath no parts: but insteede of telling us what measure it is, you say that the nature, essence, quality, and quantity of all things are applyed to it, in that they have actuall being.
So that for God to measure all things, belike is as much as to say, God hath created all things. Now if to be created is to be applyed to God; then to create is to apply. And so Gods creating and application active, in order of nature was before theire creation and application passive. You say it is impossible the Creator should be fitted to any thing created. And is it not I pray alike impossible that the thing created should be fitted to the Creator? Yet before you sayd that God is a measure not applyed to things created, but wherunto things created are applyed, in as much as they have theire actuall beings. God is immutable and eminently conteyneth all things in his indivisible essence; but to say that hee eternally and immutably, site all the possible varieties whereof contingency it selfe is capable. I doubt, will proove non sense in every particular. For first contingency is not capable of such variety you speake of: The things contingent themselves are various indeede, but not the contingency of them. Things are very various, but the modi rerum are not. There are but two modi rerum; the one we call contingency, the other necessity. You may say necessity is capable of variety as well as contingency. And indeede there is farre greater variety of agents necessary, then of agents voluntary.
Agayne what is it to fit varieties, other then to produce them? For if you meant of fitting them after they were produced, it is like you would have told us, wherunto God doth fit them. Thirdly it is absurd in a Philosophers phrase to say God doth produce varieties; for variety is no fit object of production, it being a relation, which indeede results upon the producing of the foundation, rather then is produced. But suppose you understand it of the things produced in all possible variety: Yet this is directly untrue. For it is possible for God undoubtedly to produce things in greater variety then he doth.
Neyther is this production eternally wrought, or the things you speake of fitted by God; for surely this fitting of varieties, as you speake, beganne not till the world beganne. And what you meane in saying that God doth immutablely fit them I well understand not, God I doubt not is immutable, but the things he fits are not, especially contingency, which includes mutability you say God is fitnesse it selfe; but eyther you consider not, that fitnesse is a word of relation, or if you did, you were to blame in not telling us, in what respect this fitnesse is. With greate pompe of words filling up eleven lines you tell us, that God fitteth all things better by eternall immutable, and incomparable fitnesse, then it could be by any other measure fitted.
And doe you thinke any man doubts whether that fitnesse, which is measured by incomparable fitnesse, should be better then that which is measured and ordered by any inferiour measure of fitnesse? And what is all this, if we speake plainly, but to say, that rewards of obedience, and punishment of disobedience are so well fitted, as they cannot be amended. And this plain and vulgar truth is expressed in termes as obscure as those Paracelsus was wont to discourse in. Not only rewards and punishments which are cheifly reserved for another world, but every thing in this world we beleive to be so ordered, that the wits of men and Angells were not able to mende it.
But yet whether the infinite wisedom of God might not exceede this, the Schoolemen in theire disputation herupon, as I remember doe generally deny. He is eminently all, in as much as he produceth all; but you may be pleased to except relations, such as contrariety and equality. For they are not termini producibiles but such as doe usually result upon position of theire foundation. When you say, As of his other attributes one truly and really is an other, so in respect of man his measure is his judgement, &c. You seeme to reckon amongst the attributes of God a strange one, which you call his measure; and this you say is not only the rule wherby he rewards or punisheth, but the reward and punishment it selfe. Rewarding and punishing are kindes of Gods working. Now if we would know by what rule God works, the Apostle plainly informes us herin, when he sayth, God worketh all things according to the counsaile of his owne will. Ephes. 1. 11. But when you say that his retribution of rewards and punishments is his measure; I pray of what? for measure is a terme of respect; but you speake in a dialect of your owne making; and if we had a dictionary too of your owne making for the opening of your owne dialect, perhaps we might understand you better then we doe.
There is no composition in God, such as is betweene the subject and the accident, which founds the destinction of abstract and concrete. We admit God to be bounty it selfe, love it selfe, mercy and compassion it selfe, but to whom say you? only to those who are touched with the sense of theire owne misery; or only in solliciting men to repentance? As you would faine steale up your Arminian Tenets and cunningly obtrude them upon the faith of a credulous reader, of a weake reader. We say his mercy and love and bounty cheifly appeares in causing man to be touched with the sense of his owne misery, as also in giveing repentance and not only in solliciting thereunto, not only in being gracious unto them that repent. A greate deale of froth of words you spende, in amplifying the goodnesse of God in rewarding our repentance, when in the meane time you endeavour to drowne all consideration of Gods goodnesse unto sinners, while they lye weltering in theire sins as in theire blood, and draw away the minds of your readers from taking notice therof, as if humility and repentance were a worke of nature, not of grace, a worke of flesh and blood and not of the spirit of God.
And all the way no touch of faith, your discourse savoring of the humour of a naturalist throughout, rather then of a Christian. To them that are sanctified, he is you say felicity and salvation; but what is he to them that are not sanctified? belike to them damnation. Yet the holy Apostle hath taught us, that God hath made Christ to be unto us, wisedom, righteousnesse, sanctification, and redemption. 1 Cor. 1. 30. And that God is he that justifieth the ungodly. Rom. 4. Alas, how often hath the best despised his bounty, love, mercy, grace, and salvation; yet is not he justice, indignation, and severity unto them, but bounty still, love still, mercy, and grace and salvation still, and at length overcomes them, and bringes them from the power of Satan unto God. When for theire wicked covetousnesse he was angry with them, and hath smitten them: he hid himselfe and was angry, yet they went away, & turned after the way of theire owne heartes: Yet after all this, He hath seene theire wayes and hath healed them. Es. 57. 17. 18. Yea he rules them with a mighty hand and outstretched arme, and makes them passe under the rod, and brings them under the band of the covenant. Ezech. 20. 37. He takes away their stony hearts and gives them an heart of flesh, and putteth his owne spirit within them, and causeth them to walke in Ezech. …6. 27.his statuts, and keepe his judgements and doe them. I am sory to find so litle evidence throughout your discourse, that your selfe have neede of this.
What did the heathens understand by theire Nemesis? God? or a creature? If God, surely he is not more powerfull then himselfe. If a creature, is it strange that the power of a creature should be inferior to the power the Creator? VVhen the Apostle sayth, God shall be all in all, he speakes only of his elect, to fill them with the joyes of Heaven, and with God himselfe. VVill you take boldnesse to apply this presence of God to the very divills and reprobates? It is true we looke for the comming of the mighty, God, who shall be glorified in his Saints, & even then shall he shew himselfe from Heaven with his mighty Angells, in slaming fire rendring vengeance to them 2 Thess. 1.that doe not know God, as also unto them which obey not the Gospell of the Lord Iesus Christ: which shall be punished with everlasting perdition from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power: When he shall come to be glorified in his Saints, and to be made marveylous in all them that beleive (and because his servants testimony towards us, was beleived) in that day. Then shall the Heaven depart away like a scrolle, when it is rolled and every mountayne and yle be mooved out of theire place. And the Kings of the earth, and the greate men, and the rich men, and the cheife Captaines, and the mighty men, and every bond man, and every free man, hide themselves in dennes and among the rockes of the Mountaines; and say to the Mountaines and to the rockes, fall on us and hide us from the presence of him, that sitteth on the throne, & from the wrath of the Lamb. For the greate day of his wrath is come, and who can stande? Anno Dom. 1629. Aprilis 30.
FINIS.