A Dangerous Plot Discovered, Chapter 20
CHAP. XX. The point of Predeſtination is debated.
THis Chapter examineth two queſtions onelyonly.
1 Whether his doctrine of Predeſtination bee true or not?
2 Whether he conſenteth in it, with the Church of England, &c.
We omit to enquire, whether he conſenteth with the Church of Rome or not: becauſe the Counſell of Trent hath decreed nothing (that I can finde) touching the nature of Predeſtination; and the moſt common opinion of their Schooles diſſenteth not from the Church of England: Some doe diſſent, as Occham, and others with him in former times. And in latter times Gabriel Vaſquez, and ſome others with him; but the difference, is rather in Poſition, and manner of ſpeaking; then really, and in the thing.
The diſputation in this Chapter is reſtrained vntounto the ſecond onelyonly: for of this point, he ſaith, Appeale, page 61.
Take it as I conceiue it, and ſo ſhall profeſſe it, vntill I am informed and aſcertained, that the Church of England teacheth all otherwiſe then I conceiue of it.
This ſheweth you loſe but labour, when you attempt to draw him from his opinion by any arguments taken from Scripture, or mans writings; bring him the Church of England, and it ſufficeth; if you bring not that, he is ſtill where he was. The doctrine of the Church of England is not concealed from him, nor is the ſenſe obſcure; hee needeth not dig de…pe to finde it, there is none worſe then hee that will not vnderſtand.
Before I can ſhew what the Church of England teacheth, and how hee diſſenteth there-from; I muſt take a view, and hauehave a cl…ere vnderſtanding of the things deliuered by him. In which there is ſeuen diſtinct branches, as the reader may ſee, in the former Chapter: The ſeuenth branch, hath theſe words:
He drew them out which tooke hold of mercy.
This branch doth appertaine to Pred…ſtination, for it concerneth mans ordering vntounto his laſt end, and perfection. The other ſixe, belong not thereto; for they ſpeake of mans being, and the cauſes thereof, and things pertaining thereto. They hauehave not a word of ordering man, to any end. If this ſeuenth branch bee framed according to Art, it will ſtand thus;
Predeſtination to life, is an act or decree of Gods will, whereby he purpoſed to draw them out of the ſtate of perdition, which tooke hold of mercy.
In this frame, wee hauehave the thing defined, and that whereby it is defined; I reſtraine the queſtion vntounto Predeſtination to life, becauſe our Church doth ſo: Artic. 17. and the Scriptures are more frequent in that; and no meruaile why, becauſe the Scriptures were written for the direction, and conſolation of them that ſhall goe to heauen, I hauehave framed it altogether by his owne direction: the queſtion of Predeſtination is put ſo by himſelfe, as I will now ſhew.
Appeale, page 38. hee calleth it an act or decree of God, which muſt needes be an act of his will: and ſo hee termeth it, Appeale, page 61. This act is immanent, not tranſient; for he ſaith in the ſame place, hee conceiues it, ſetting by, all execution of purpoſe: and againe he ſaith in the ſame place, he that is actually Saued, is ſo ſaued, according to the purpoſe of his decree. So ſaued, are So ordained by God, Gagge, page 177. He ſaith further, Gods will is the cauſe of things, either poſitiuely by diſpoſing them, or by permiſsion, &c, Gagge, page 177. Hee doth take this act of Gods will, to bee a poſitiue, not a permiſſiue diſpoſing: for he ſaith, whatſoeuer was done in time, was So diſpoſed of, and ordered before all time, Gagge, page 178.
The word Them, imports, that man is the ſubiect of Predeſtination; a certaine number of men, not generally all; and ſo he ſpeaketh, Appeale, page 51.
The words out of, &c. imply, that the predeſtinate to life, (in our apprehenſion, or (as they ſay) in ſigno rationis,) were in the ſtate of perdition, before they were predeſtinate: and ſo the ſteps which in his opinion, are obſerued by God, toward the Predeſtinate, and related in the former Chapter, doe expreſly ſhew; which alſo he hath, Appeale, page 52. fully and plainely.
Theſe words which tooke hold of mercy, doe ſignifie, that in Gods foreknowledge, the Predeſtinate doe finally beleeue and repent, &c. before they are predeſtinated, or before the will of Predeſtination is termined vntounto them: and that this faith & repentance, &c. is the obiectiue reaſon, mouing, and regulating the diuine will of Predeſtination, vntounto the party predeſtinated; ſo as if you aske the reaſon why God did predeſtinate ſome, it is anſwered, becauſe he would. If you demand further why he did predeſtinate this ſingular man; it is anſwered, becauſe hee tooke hold of Gods mercy in the meanes of ſaluation offered, by beleeuing and repenting; and this I take from himſelf: where he ſaith, He that is actually ſaued, is So ſaued, according to the purpoſe of Gods decree conſequent, not antecedent, Gagge, p. 177. And again, he ſaith; men are not ſaued without relation to their repentance, Appeale, page 74. which thing is moſt fully declared, Appeale, page 58. where he blameth this ſentence: Gods decree to glorifie Peter, was without any conſideration had of, or regard vntounto his faith, obedience, repentance: which ſentence for ſubſtance he ſetteth down, and reiecteth, Gagge, page 179. And Appeale, page 74. he ſaith, without finall perſeuering, they are none of Gods elect.
Where he ſaith, he drew them out, &c. hee placeth the whole terme or end of predeſtination in giuing eternall life. This thing he implyeth alſo, Appeale, page 78. where he ſaith, It is your owne, God appointed to giuegive grace and glory; as if he ſhould ſay, this ſentence is proper to you; I diſclaime it. If man hath grace before he be predeſtinate, then grace is not the terme or end of Predeſtination: he affirmes the firſt, ſo muſt he doe the laſt.
Thus we hauehave his ſentence of Predeſtination, and the ſenſe thereof: now wee muſt compare the Doctrine of the Church of England with it; that, thereby wee may ſee, whether our Church hath oppoſed the contrary thereto or not, which hee affirmeth it doth, Gagge, page 179.
I will ſet downe againe the Doctrine of the Church of England in an orderly forme, for the better vnderſtanding thereof: It is this,
1 Predeſtination is Gods decree,
Eternall.
Conſtant.
By his Councell ſecret to vsus.
2 To
Bring to ſaluation by Chriſt.
Deliuer from damnation.
3 Some elected out of mankind in Chriſt.
4 Before the foundations of the world were laid.
5 As veſſels made to honour.
And thus ſtandeth the Doctrine of the 17. Article, each part being placed according to art: the ſenſe whereof I will now alſo declare.
PREDESTINATION, is the thing defined, whoſe nature our Church doth declare, by that which followeth.
IS, hath the place of a band, to tye the following part of the ſentence, vntounto that which went before.
GODS DECREE; Theſe words ſignifie that thing which Predeſtination hath in common with oher actions of Gods will, called the generall nature: it doth expreſſe alſo, the principall efficient; namely, GOD, and an act of his will.
ETERNALL; This doth ſet out, what kinde of act Predeſtination is, (to wit) ſuch an act as is eſſentiall vntounto God: yea, it is of his eſſence, for nothing is eternall, but the being of God. This act of his will doth remaine in God, & is vſually called an immanent act, for it paſſeth not out of God, working a reall change in the creature, which is the property of a tranſient act.
We conceiue that this act of Predeſtination, is an eliciated act of Gods will; and an eliciated act is that which floweth from a power, that is the beginning thereof; as beleeuing is an act which proceedeth from the faculty which the ſoule hath to beleeue. But Predeſtination is an eliciated act (in our apprehenſion onelyonly:) by reaſon we are not able to apprehend the being of God as it is. Whereas the eſſence of God is a pure act, altogether without mixture of the firſt and ſecond act, conſidered apart, and ſeparated in the thing. Laſtly, the relation that this act hath, vntounto the creature, is rationall, not reall: God is a being of himſelfe, without reſpect vntounto any created effect.
CONSTANT, This importeth the certaine euent and infallible performance of the thing decreed by Predeſtination; ſo as he to whom God hath appointed grace and glory, ſhall not faile of either of them, but inioy them both without miſſing: And that this is the true intent of our Church, it is very plaine: becauſe it doth not call the decree it ſelfe, or God in decreeing, Conſtant. For that it hath already declared in the word Eternall, which ſignifies a duration without beginning or ending; which doth ſo fully and plainely expreſſe, the conſtancy of God in decreeing, that the word Conſtant cannot adde any thing thereunto.
BY HIS COVNSELL. By theſe words, our Church ſheweth; 1. that Gods vnderſtanding is ioyned with his will, in this act of Predeſtination; for counſell is an act proper to the vnderſtanding: 2. This act of the vnderſtanding (to ſpeake according to humane capacitie) is to iudge the act of Predeſtination to be good, and to perſwade thereunto, by the allegation of reaſon: for ſo we conceiue the vnderſtanding to direct the will; and, this is the nature, or condition of Councell; he that counſelleth doth thus.
SECRET TO VSUS, By ſecret is meant vnreuealed; the iudgement then of our Church, ſet down in this ſentence, may be expreſſed in theſe words.
The reaſon, that moued God to predeſtinate this, or that perſon, is vnknowne to vsus.
TO BRING TO SALVATION; Theſe words, doe ſet forth the ſpeciall, and proper nature, and formall being of Predeſtination: by which it is diſtinguiſhed from all other actions of God; and they import the terme or end of Predeſtination, or the thing appointed to bee giuen by this decree of God; which conſiſteth in happineſſe or glory after this life; ſignified by the word ſaluation: and grace in this life, by the words, bring vntounto, by Chriſt. For God doth not bring man to ſaluation, but by means, and that means can be nothing but grace: for can it bee conceiued, how our comming to ſaluation can bee attributed to God as his worke, but by reaſon that hee doth giuegive grace?
Laſtly, it cannot bee conceiued, how God ſhould bring to ſaluation by Chriſt, but, by giuing of grace: ſeeing none come to ſaluation by Chriſt, but ſuch, as are members of Chriſt; and none are members of Chriſt, but by the meanes of grace.
And that it was the meaning of our Church, to make finall grace one thing appointed by Predeſtination to be giuen vntounto man; it is apparent by that doctrine of the Article which followeth; where it maketh Predeſtination to be the cauſe, or reaſon wherefore God beſtoweth grace, and glory vponupon man in the euent, for thus it ſaith,
Wherefore they which bee indued with this excellent benefit, viz. of Predeſtination, be called, according to Gods purpoſe, by his Spirit, they through grace, obey the calling, and at length by Gods mercy, they attaine to ſaluation.
BY CHRIST; Hereby our Church, doth ſet forth the means (appointed by Predeſtination,) wherby in courſe of time man ſhal enioy the thing appointed by Predeſtination, and that is Ieſus Chriſt, vnderunder whoſe name, all other ſubordinate meanes are fitly comprehended: and that our Church meant ſo, need not be doubted; becauſe it addeth other meanes of grace, and ſaluation, (beſides Chriſt,) in the doctrine of the Article following.
TO DELIVER FROM DAMNATIOM. By this the nature of Predeſtination formerly deliuered, is ſet out or made more plaine vntounto vsus; for this being contrary vntounto that, doth make it the more manifeſt vntounto our vnderſtandings; and the Scripture taketh the ſame courſe alſo, as in many other places, ſo in theſe: He that beleeueth is paſſed from death vntounto life: There is no condemnation to him that is in Chriſt: Rom. 8. 1. By damnation is not meant the ſtate of damnation actually: for that ſenſe cannot ſtand with the doctrine of our Church which followeth; but by damnation is vnderſtood the poſſibilitie of being in the ſtate of damnation, preuented by the decree of Predeſtination; for that ſenſe doth agree very well with the doctrine of the Article: which ſaith, This decree is conſtant; as is declared before.
SOME ELECTED OVT OF MANKINDE. The ſubiect, or parties predeſtinated, are here ſayd to bee man, but not all men vniuerſally; it reſtraineth the ſame vntounto ſome of mankinde, by ſaying that they are elected ones: and elected out of mankind. 2. The ſubiect that receiueth Predeſtinatiō, is deſcribed by two things. The one by the name, and vnderunder the title of man meerly, without any addition; whereby is ſignified that man conceiued in himſelfe onelyonly, as an intellectuall creature without grace or works of grace, is obiected vntounto, and ſet before the diuine will of Predeſtination, and in that notion onelyonly he receiueth the ſame. Our Church doth not ſay, that God waited till man had grace, and then, and vponupon the intuition thereof, he was moued to, and did predeſtinate him. That this may be the ſenſe of our Church is cleere: becauſe it is a courſe agreeable and decent vntounto the diuine prouidence, and man himſelfe: and that this muſt be meant by our Church, is certaine alſo, for no other ſenſe can be made therof agreeable to theſe words, and thoſe words that went before, which ſay, the reaſon mouing God to predeſtinate, is ſecret to vsus: And grace is beſtowed by predeſtination. The other thing deſcribing it, is the word elect, which ſignifieth an act of Gods will, whereby our Church doth giuegive vsus to vnderſtand, that the reaſon why this or that man is predeſtinate, ariſeth from Gods will and pleaſure, of which it is, that the predeſtinate are ſingled out, and ſeuered from the reſt of mankind.
IN CHRIST. Our Church referreth theſe words vntounto the word elect, thus;
Thoſe whom hee elected in Chriſt.
In this ſentence, the word elect, doth ſignifie, 1. an act of Gods will. 2 An act going before predeſtination. 3 A collection of a certaine number of men, (from others) to be predeſtinated, vntounto this, or that meaſure of grace, and glory; for ſo it ſpeaketh in the 17. arti. ſaying,
Thoſe whom he choſe, he decreed to bring to ſaluation.
The words in Chriſt tell vsus, that Gods eye was extended to the choſen ones in or through Chriſt. Now this act of election, may bee done vponupon man in the intuition of Chriſt, either as the end intended and aimed at in the act of election; or as the meritorious cauſe thereof. In the firſt ſenſe wee may not take our Church, ſeeing it ſaith, the reaſon that moued God to predeſtinate is ſecret to vsus: wee muſt therefore vnderſtand our Church to ſpeake in the firſt ſenſe; for that is moſt agreeable to the courſe of Scripture, to the dignity of Chriſt, and to the operation of grace in man. What heart is it that will not rather make it ſelfe ſubordinate vntounto Chriſt, then Chriſt ſubordinate vntounto him: And that our Church meant thus, we hauehave yet better reaſon to thinke, viz. becauſe this whole deſcription of predeſtination is takē out of the firſt chapter to the Epheſians, where the Apoſtle hauing ſaid in the fourth verſe, He hath choſen vsus in him; He concludeth in the 12 verſe, That we ſhould be to the praiſe of his glory: which ſheweth that Chriſts glory was the end intended & aimed at, in the act of electiō.
BEFORE THE FOVNDATIONS OF THE WORLD WERE LAYD. (That is,) before the Creation. The world is created, either in the reall being thereof, or in the decree to create. Our Church ſpeaketh not of reall creating; for, then it ſhould ſay the decree of Predeſtination is before actuall Creation. This it could not meane, or that is as much as if it had ſaid, the decree of Predeſtination is eternall: for before that creation, there is no duration but eternitie: But our Church meant not by theſe words to ſay, Gods decree was eternall: for it had ſaid ſo, in expreſſe words a little before, and this phraſe of ſpeech doth not make that more plaine: but, doth rather more obſcure it. Our Church then ſpeaketh of Gods decree to create, and ſo it ſetteth forth the moment wherein (in our apprehenſion) man is predeſtinate by God, and is, as if it had ſaid,
Gods decree of Predeſtination (in our apprehenſion) goes before his decree of creation.
And the rather all men ſhould vnderſtand our Church thus: becauſe this order is agreeable to the nature of the things themſelues: Predeſtination being more worthy of louelove then Creation: That being ſupernatural, perpetuall, and mans laſt perfection; This being naturall, temporary, and at moſt but a way vntounto that: therefore it is more orderly, to conceiue the decree of Creation, to be ſubordinate vntounto the decree of Predeſtination, then Predeſtination vntounto Creation.
If any thinke that man cannot be predeſtinate, before he be actually made: I anſwer; in Gods will of execution it is true, man cannot inioy the being of the thing appointed by Predeſtination before hee hath actuall being himſelfe: now, the will of execution is not now in queſtion, but the will of intention onelyonly: man may be predeſtinated in the will of intention, before he hath an actuall being; for God may ſo decree, when man is but in poſſibility to be: as Suarez well obſerueth:
AS VESSELS MADE TO HONOR; In this laſt branch our Church aſſigneth the end of Predeſtination, & the manner how it floweth from the ſame. The end is ſignified by theſe words, made vntounto honour; by honor is ſignified, both the glory & honor giuen vntounto God, by declaring his attributes; as prouidence, and louelove vntounto the reaſonable creature; as alſo the honour which the creature receiueth from God, in beholding him face to face, wherein the true and proper nature of bleſſedneſſe conſiſteth. That being the ſupreame, this the next end of Predeſtination: And that our Church doth meane thus, there is no cauſe of doubt, becauſe it agrees well with the preſent words, and the thing it ſelfe. It openeth the manner how the one floweth from the other, by ſaying, as veſſels made to honour; wherein the Predeſtinate are likened vntounto veſſels, that receiue honour vntounto themſelues, and are inſtruments in honourable offices vntounto God. In ſaying, as veſſels, our Church ſheweth, that this end iſſueth from the act of Predeſtination, immediately, and of the thing it ſelfe. There is nothing in man, added vntounto the diuine will of Predeſtination, to make it fit and apt for theſe effects: for ſuch is the condition of a veſſell, it cannot ſay to the Potter, thou hadſt ſufficient reaſon out of my ſelfe, why thou ſhouldeſt make mee a veſſel vntounto honor, neither can it challenge the Potter for iniury vntounto it, if he doth make it a veſſell not vntounto honour. Laſtly, our Church ſaith, the Predeſtinate are made vntounto honour, (to wit) by Predeſtination: wherby efficiency of eueryevery kinde is attributed vntounto Gods will: no part of this honour is yeelded vntounto the Predeſtinate himſelfe: for then it muſt hauehave diuided the act of making to honour, betweene God and the Predeſtinate: but this it doth not, but giueth that act, onelyonly to Gods will of Predeſtination.
And thus hauehave I gone ouer the Doctrine of the Church of England, whereby it doth appeare, that our Church oppoſeth Mr. Mountagu his Predeſtination ſo fully, as nothing more can be required.
Mr. Mountagu ſaith,
1 Glory onelyonly is decreed by Predeſtination.
2 Man was in perdition, before he was Predeſtinate.
3 Man had finall grace before he was predeſtinate.
4 Mans finall grace moued God to predeſtinate him.
Our Church ſaith,
1 Finall grace and glory is appointed to man by Predeſtination.
2 Man was Predeſtinate, before his actuall being was decreed.
3 Predeſtination is of Gods will, the reaſon thereof is not from man, nor knowne to vsus.
Notwithſtanding this proofe, hee will make you beleeue that our Church oppoſeth this Doctrine of Predeſtination. Hee bringeth his firſt reaſon for that purpoſe Appeale, page 59. thus to be concluded;
That which is oppoſed by many of the learned, and moſt conformable in the Church of England; that is oppoſed by the Church of England. But this ſentence, Predeſtination is without relation to faith, &c. is oppoſed, &c.
Therefore this ſentence, &c. is oppoſed by the Church of England.
I anſwer; I will ſpeake to the point in queſtion, and let the reſt paſſe.
The propoſition, or firſt ſentence of this reaſon, is falſe, by his owne rule, Appeale, page 48. and 49. where he ſaith;
The preſumptions of ſeruants, are not the Lords directions, eueryevery one that Prateth, Readeth, Lectureth, Preacheth, or Profeſſeth, muſt not looke to hauehave his diſcourſes taken as the dictates, or Doctrines of our Church: yes (ſaith Mr. Mountagu, page 59.) If they be of the learned and moſt conformable in our Church; nay (ſaith Mr. Mountagu, pag. 49. Our Mother hath ſufficiently made knowne her minde in Bookes that are publike, promulgated, authoriſed, and ſubſcribed, theſe are thoſe paſſages, at which the liſping Ephramites are to be tryed.
Some that be learned in our Church, doth oppoſe that ſentence, and ſo farre I grant the aſſumption: but their number exceeds not. If Mr. Mountagu conceiueth otherwiſe, hee is one of the Duke of Burgundies ſpies, that taketh a field of Thiſtles, for an army of Pikes, page 320 and ſo the aſſumption is falſe, that ſpeaketh of many. Thoſe ſome doe oppoſe indeed: but priuately and in a corner. Let him ſhew, where euer that ſentence was oppoſed in Print, or in publike place, without controle: therefore their oppoſing is not our Churches oppoſing.
His next reaſon is thus, Appeale, page 59. & 73.
If our Church it ſelfe doth teach, that a man may fall away from God, and become not the childe of God, then it oppoſeth that Doctrine of Predeſtination. But our Church doth ſo teach, directly, and in expreſſe words.
I anſwer; He makes this matter like a Pedlers Horſe, that is acquainted with eueryevery doore, a Knight of the Poſt, to depoſe in eueryevery cauſe: In this cauſe his witneſſe is falſe, his Pedlers ware will not ſell. Our Church doth not ſo teach. Mr. Mountagu (the Gagger being witneſſe) ſaith expreſly,
Our Church hath left it vndecided, and at liberty, p. 158. and 171. and I hauehave proued our Church doth not teach it, Chap. 11. 12.
It is bold importunity, to vrge that for true, which himſelfe denieth to be true, but better that then nothing. It may perhaps be beleeued by ſome, where ſilence is a ſentence of guiltineſſe.
He telleth vsus further, page 59.
Our Church hath gone on in theſe high points, in great wiſedome, not concluding vponupon Gods ſecrets.
I anſwer; I grant thus much: Let him goe on in the words of our Church, and ſticke to them, and it ſufficeth: but what he would inferre from hence, I know not, I am ſure he may inferre, thus,
Therefore himſelfe in diſſenting from our Church, hath not done wiſely.
His third argument I finde, Appeale, page 72. which is to this effect.
That which was ſtiled againſt the Articles of Lambeth, a deſperate Doctrine, at the Conference at Hampton Court, before his Maieſty without reproofe, or taxation of any, is not the Doctrine of the Church of England.
But this Doctrine of Predeſtination, was ſo ſtiled, viz. by Doctor Bancroft, &c. without reproofe of any.
I anſwer; the propoſition is as probably falſe, as true, ſuch a fault might be let paſſe for diuers reaſons of ſtate, and obſeruance. The aſſumption is a manifeſt vntruth. The Booke that reporteth that Conference will ſhew it: for it reporteth that ſpeech of Biſhop Baneroft, page 29. in theſe words,
Many in theſe dayes, neglecting holineſſe of life, preſuming too much of perſiſting of grace; laying all their religion vponupon Predeſtination. If I ſhall be ſaued, I ſhall be ſaued; which he termed a deſperate Doctrine.
Here is not a word of Mr. Mountagues tale.
According to him, the Doctor ſaith thus, this ſentence,
Predeſtination is without relation to mans faith.
Is a deſperate Doctrine.
According to the Booke, the Doctor ſaith, this ſentence,
The Predeſtinate may neglect holineſſe of life, becauſe if he ſhall be ſaued, he ſhall be ſaued,
Is a deſperate Doctrine.
Theſe two ſentences, are not ſo like, as the Hares head, and the Gooſe giblets, the one reproues the nature aſſigned to Predeſtination, and telleth them, that Predeſtination is not ſuch as they ſay it is. The other reproueth men that abuſe the Doctrine of Predeſtination: but medleth not with the nature thereof, what difference then there is betweene the nature of Predeſtination, and mans abuſe of Predeſtination, in the courſe of his life: ſuch difference there is, betweene Mr Mountagu and the Booke; he ſpeakes of the firſt, that of the ſecond.
But now let vsus ſuppoſe the Doctor had ſaid theſe words.
Predeſtination, without relation to faith, is a deſperate Doctrine.
Then the ſecond branch of his Aſſumption is likewiſe falſe, becauſe it ſaith, that ſpeech was not reproued: but I finde otherwiſe in the Booke, which reporteth, page 43. a ſpeech of his Maieſtie, that maketh Predeſtination, to be without relation to faith, his words be theſe;
Predeſtination depends not vponupon any qualities, actions, or worke of man: but vponupon Gods decree and purpoſe.
Which ſentence is contradictory vntounto that ſentence which Mr. Mountagu ſaith, was condemned as a deſperate Doctrine, by the Doctor: and therefore it is a ſuffi…ient reproofe of his ſpeech.
His fourth reaſon I finde, Appeale, page 72. &c. it is on this wiſe;
If Predeſtination without relation to faith bee the Doctrine of the Church of England, then ſhould it make a partie with Caluin. But it would not make a party with Caluin; for that were the next way to bring in his diſcipline.
Therefore Predeſtination without relation to faith, is not the Doctrine of the Church of England.
I anſwer; this pelting ſtuffe is not worth the viewing; all the world knowes that the Church of England doth agree with Caluin, in very many things, and it muſt doe ſo, or elſe it muſt agree with the Church of Rome, in all the points which Caluin reiecteth, which are all the decrees of the Councell of Trent, a very few excepted. If I ſhould ſay all the Articles, and the Homilies agree with Caluin, for the maine matters of faith, I ſhould ſay no more then what might be proued. Other exceptions might be taken to this argument, but I paſſe by them: Thus hauehave I put an end to this poore ſtuffe, loathſome to the anſwerer, and diſgracefull to the diſputer; Ducklings, not Eagles, catch Flyes.
Hitherto we hauehave hunted a ſhadow, and laboured to catch the winde, now he will lay hold on the body, and thus he bringeth it.
The poſitiue Doctrine of the Church of England, is no other, but this, [touching Predeſtination.]
1 Sinne came into the world, by the Deuill, not God.
2 Death came by ſinne:
3 God prepared a Mediator, Chriſt.
4 Willed life to eueryevery beleeuer.
5 His good pleaſure was, all men to be ſaued, Gagge. page 180.
I anſwer; he would conclude from hence, thus:
Therefore, our Church doth not teach Predeſtination to be without relation to faith.
For the place requires this concluſion, as hee that readeth theſe places may ſee, viz. pag, 178. that God, &c. page 180. the poſitiue &c. page 179. the Church, &c. p. 181. I nor teach &c. Now, we hauehave his reaſon, I will examine the truth of it. I anſwer, in his owne words, Appeale, pag. 57. (uſed in another caſe.)
The Church of England doth not teach thus, touching Predeſtination, and why may I not ſay ſo, except you ſhew the contrary, or bring me forth a Creed, a Cannon, a concluſion in being for it, in the Church of England?
But let it bee as you will, If this bee all that our Church hath taught, of Predeſtination, then it hath ſaid nothing of it; for Predeſtination is, a decree, or diſpoſitiue act of God; will, as we hauehave learned by your ſelfe No 4. Now, theſe words ſhew vsus from whence ſinne came, and whither it will, what bee the meanes to eſcape it, and it ſpeakes of Gods velleitie, or willingneſſe vntounto mans freedome therefrom; but of any poſitiue act, ordering man to the ſupreame end, Mr. Mountagu brings not a word, as the doctrine of our Church. Beſides this, I hauehave the witneſſe of one M. Mountagu that bringeth more poſitiue doctrine from the Church of England then this, viz. out of the 17. Article, in his Appeale, p. 51. and theſe are his words, In the 17. Article the Church ſpeaketh of Election onelyonly.
1 That there is a Predeſtination by God vntounto life.
2 That it was an act of his from euerlaſting.
3 That he founded it, and reſolued for it, i… the man, and Mediator Chriſt, both for the purpoſe and performance.
4 That it is, and was, of ſome ſpeciall ones, alone elect, called forth, and reſerued in Chriſt, and not generally extended vntounto all mankind.
5 This purpoſe of his, is like vntounto himſelfe, vnchangeable, done according to the Councell of his will.
Which muſt needes bee more, then the former fiue propoſitions, no 14. for there is neuer a one of theſe (except the third) ſo much as mentioned in thoſe former: ſeeing this Maſter Mountagu alleadgeth authority, and the former M. Mountagu bringeth none; this teſtimonie muſt bee receiued, the former reiected: whereby this reaſon is as poore, miſerable, and lame as the former. Therefore I will leaue it in the Spittle-houſe with them, and proceed.
From this paſſage alleadged out of the 17. Article, he diſcourſeth thus;
1 What our Church reſolueth touching this, is reſolued in the 17. Article, the very words of that Article, being expreſſed in termes as farre as concerned that decree, Appeale p. 58.
2 This is all that I can find touching that purpoſe, and decree of God, Appeale, p. 52.
3 In all which paſſage containing Gods decree, is not one word, touching your abſolute decree of God, to glorifie man, without any regard vntounto his faith, &c. Appeale, p. 58.
I anſwer; I will not ſtriue about the firſt, and third branches.
The whole queſtion is about the ſecond, wherein he preſumeth that,
His fiue propoſitions related no 15. doe containe the whole doctrine of the 17. Article, touching the decree of Predeſtination.
If it were true, I would grant him, that, our Church doth not teach, That Predeſtination is without relation to finall grace: but he preſumeth an vntruth. The 17 Article hath not all his fiue propoſitions: It preſumes the firſt, becauſe it doth ſhew what Predeſtination is: but affirmes it not: it hath not the third, nor fift any wayes. It hath more by much then you report, all which is made euident no 5. and 6. ſo that I ſhall not need to ſpend time to ſhew it.
Touching the ſecond branch it ſelfe, I anſwer, it is hardly credible, that you did not ſee more then you report: yea, what you did ſee, ſeemes very vncertain: for out of your Gag. p. 180. you report no 14. the doctrine of the Church of England, touching this point in fi…e propoſitions, foure of them (at leaſt) being wholly different, and altogether vnlike theſe, and yet you ſay, The poſitiue doctrine of the Church of England is no other but them. So as what you ſaid there, and what you ſay here ouerthroweth each other. If it be them, it is not theſe; If it be theſe, it is not them.
If our 17 Article (in your ſight) hath no more but theſe, then you ſee our Church, doth define Predeſtination onelyonly by the generall nature, efficient cauſe, and ſubiect matter, for your fi…e propoſitions, no 15. containe them onelyonly; but you dare not ſay, you did ſee our Church ſo defining Predeſtination: for, then you profeſſe to ſee a fault in our doctrine, not to bee excuſed; ſeeing, that, the nature of eueryevery thing, is ſet out by the ſpeciall and formall being, and end thereof: not by the efficient, & materiall cauſe, without them: But you may not ſo profeſſe: for you ſay;
Our Church hath gone on, in this point of Predeſtination, warily and in great wiſedome, and prudence, Appeale, pag. 59.
Beſides, it is moſt iniurious, and an imputation moſt falſe: Our Church hath defined Predeſtination, in that 17 article, by all the cauſes whereby it exiſteth, as I hauehave ſhewed no 5. 6. which courſe is moſt agreeable to art, if wee may beleeue, Thomas 2 dist. 27. q. 1. ar. 2. ad 9.
And it alſo hath explicated each cauſe, to make the difinition familiar, and eaſie vntounto vnderſtanding: therefore we muſt conclude, you did ſee more in the 17 Article, then you will acknowledge.
If you could not ſee more in the 17 Article then you profeſſe, to ſee, then you can ſcumme vponupon the ſurface: but not diue into the depth: then hauehave you no cauſe to deſpiſe the capacitie of other men, as poore, nor to vaunt of your owne, as able to worke wonders: ſeeing there is more in the Article then you can ſee; as hath beene ſhewed you.
Thus farre of your reaſons to excuſe your ſelfe, of diſagreeing and diſſenting from the doctrine of the Church of England, in the point of Predeſtination, and for my anſwers thereunto: by which (I hope) all doubts are ſo remoued, that we may conclude,
The Church of England teacheth all otherwiſe, in the point of Predeſtination, then you doe.
Now, wee ſhould examine, whether hee, or our Church doe teach vsus the truth, in the point, that wee may know which of them to follow: but Maſter Mountagu ſeemeth to decline all ſearch after that.
For, he thus writeth,
You cannot reliſh any thing, but Gods ſecrets, you are neuer at quiet with the ſecrets of Gods Kingdome, you can neuer let his Predeſtination alone: that comfortable doctrine of election, and reprobation is your continuall Theame. It is good to be wiſe vntounto ſobriety, Appeale, p. 59.
The ſum of which words muſt needs be theſe;
Predeſtination is neither comfortable, nor reuealed.
Therefore not to be diſputed, nor our common talke. For that is wiſdome vntounto ſobriety.
I anſwer; The Church of England ſaith, article the 17. Predeſtination is full of ſweet, pleaſant, and vnſpeakable comfort. And leſt it ſhould be doubted, whether this be true, or no, our Church addeth a reaſon to confirme it, in theſe words; Becauſe it doth eſtabliſh their faith of ſaluation; and feruently kindle their louelove toward God.
Whether of them ſhall we beleeue? Our Church, or M. Mountagu? S…rely our Church is worthy of more credit: For ſhe paſſed her ſentence with deliberation; and vnpartially. He with ill affection. It confirmes the poſition with an experimented truth. He with his bare word. Such a dutifull child is worthy his mothers bleſsing, that giues her the lie vponupon his owne authoritie. Predeſtination is reuealed to M. Mountagu, elſe he would not ſpeake of it, ſo wiſe is he vntounto ſobrietie: but it is not reuealed vntounto vsus, for wee neuer came ſo neere vntounto the ſpring head, as hee hath done▪ and indeed wee need not pretend reuelation, to oppoſe vntounto him; we onelyonly ſay, ſhew vsus diuine reuelation for your Predeſtination; and wee beleeue it: till then, we reiect it as your own fantaſie. It is your boldneſſe to meddle with Gods ſecrets, or to deuiſe a predeſtination oppoſite to his reuelation.
He proceedeth with theſe words.
I profeſſe, I doe louelove to meddle, in nothing leſſe, then in this their deſperate doctrine of Predeſtination, Appeale, p. 60.
I anſwer; he muſt conclude from hence, that,
Predeſtination muſt not be diſputed.
Or elſe it is meere Gaggling. If he doe thus diſpute then hauehave wee a worthy diſputation: for wee hauehave nothing to guide vsus but his owne preſident.
We muſt grant the conſequent: becauſe the authoritie of the antecedent doth inforce it, and good reaſon too: for who would not louelove and hate, what hee loueth and hateth? He ſaith our predeſtination is deſperate. I commend him for it. By the laſt words he ſpake, he gaue his mother the lye expreſly: She ſaid, is was comfortable. He denyes it, with a ſcoffe. Now he ſaith it is deſperate, wherein he checks her alſo, for our Predeſtination is deliuered, in her words, and conceiued, according to her ſenſe, and true meaning: as may appeare no 5. and 6.
Hee ſcoffes at them that ſay, the doctrine of Predeſtination is comfortable: belike then to him it is not ſo. But whether of theſe bee in better caſe? whoſe iudgement may we follow, our Churches, or his?
To appeale to himſelfe is a thing not equall: Popular poſitions doe often erre: priuate ſpirits are of weake aſſurance, Appeale, p. 8. Well then, whither ſhall wee goe to be reſolued in this point? VntoUnto the publike Doctrine of the Church of England, contained in the Booke of Articles, &c. he doth appeale, for the ending of all doubts with hang in the Church of England, page 9. Agreed; no better match, no fitter Iudge. Let the 17. Article ſpeake. It ſaith, vntounto ſuch as feele the workes of their fleſh mortified, and their mindes drawne to heauenly things, the Doctrine of Predeſtination is Comfortable. But vntounto perſons that be curious, carnall, without the ſpirit of Chriſt, Predeſtination is moſt dangerous: for by it, the Deuill doth thruſt them either into deſperation, or vncleane liuing. By which ſentence I hope the matter is at an end, and the inference is plaine and neceſſary.
VntoUnto the holy, Predeſtination is comfortable.
If Predeſtination be a deſperate Doctrine vntounto thee, then art thou carnall, and without grace.
Mr. Mountagu is able to apply ſpecially, what our Church hath decreed vniuerſally: therefore I leaue that to himſelfe, and all other whom it may concerne; contenting my ſelfe with a bare relation of our Churches iudgement.
He writeth further, thus;
Our Church in the point of Predeſtination, hath not determined ſpecially, Appeale, page 59. of when, how, wherefore, or whom, Gagge, page 179.
I anſwer; this ſentence tends to the ſame purpoſe, (or nothing) that the former did, viz. to diſſwade from all ſearch after the nature of Predeſtination. If a man did not care what he ſaid, he might ſort well with Mr. Mountagu: there is no vntruth ſo apparent, but ſome man dares aduenture to auouch it: there is hardly a falſhood to bee found more apparent, then this ſentence of his, and thus I ſhew it.
Our Church hath determined
whom,
when,
wherefore,
how,
viz.
ſome out of mankinde.
before the Creation.
of his will.
by his ſecret Councell.
As the Reader may ſee in the 17. Article, and I hauehave ſhewed, no. 5. & 6. If our Church hath not determined thus (and all hers ought to follow her example) then Maſter Mountagu is much to blame; For,
He hath determined
whom,
when,
wherefore,
how.
viz.
ſome of mankinde.
being in perdition.
finall grace.
1 willing them ſaluation.
2 prouiding a Mediator.
3 taking them out which layd hold of him.
As the reader may finde plainely laid downe in the former part of this Chap. no 3. 4. 14. 15. His choyce was ill, that bringeth falſhood for truth, againſt himſelfe, and ſuch is his condition in this place.
Now for as much as hee cannot diſcourage you by the force of theſe arguments: therefore hee doth ſummon vntounto the diſputation, in theſe words:
I muſt confeſſe my diſſent thorough and ſincere, in no one point, more then in this their Doctrine of Predeſtination, Appeale, page 60.
I anſwer; the Dice are now caſt, Caeſar muſt be all or nothing: the combat is offered to all commers; the Gantlet is caſt downe, take it vp who dares. But let him know, he muſt proue his owne Predeſtination, or leaue the field. The firſt weapon he appeares withall, is made of this faſhion:
God is not the Author of ſinne, or death, Appeale, page 64.
This weapon is ſtrengthened with ſome authorities of Scriptures and Fathers: from that place to page 69.
But this weapon ſerueth not for this battell. The queſtion is, whether, firſt, God found the Predeſtinate in perdition: ſecondly, whether Predeſtination be with relation vntounto finall grace: thirdly, whether Predeſtination doth not appoint to giuegive grace, for ſo you teach, and theſe we deny. But whether God be the Author of ſinne and death, is not thought vponupon at this time. Thoſe three you muſt proue, or ſay nothing: for them you hauehave offered no proofe. It is a ſafe war, where there is no enemy: and a cowardly attempter, that refuſeth the field where the enemie abideth.
It may be, he will ſay, the refutation of this ſentence, doth refute the latter branch of Caluins opinion of Predeſtination, propounded, page 50. and reiected, page 60. becauſe this ſentence followes thereupon, p. 54. I anſwer; this helpes not the matter, for the queſtion now on foot,▪ is whether Gods decree to ſaue Peter, be abſolute, and doth proceed from Gods will onelyonly, page 53. which is denied by your ſelfe, the Church of England, (as you pretend) the Lutherans, and Arminians. Againſt Caluin, and the Synode of Dort, p. 38. 53. & 56. There is not a word of that ſecond branch, (which concerneth reprobation) obiected againſt you, but it is foyſted in by your ſelfe onelyonly, and that vponupon good reaſon too; for you knew full well, that no man would defend this: but eueryevery man could defend that, againſt you. It was good policy to vndertake to proue a confeſſed truth: for ſo you went with the ſtreame, and to bee ſilent in the prouing of a manifeſt falſhood, for then you had beene found guilty. You tell vsus your reſolution this way, in theſe words;
I neuer held it wiſedome, to tire my ſelfe with haling and tugging vp againſt the ſtreame, when with eaſe enough I might, and with better diſcretion ſhould, ſayle with the flood, Appeale, p. 12.
Now, although the caſe had beene as you pretend, yet you had beene abundantly faulty; for diſputing againſt one branch, when there was two in the queſtion: and for oppoſing a conſequent, letting paſſe the antecedent and conſequence: which is (indeed) to deny the concluſion, when you durſt not meddle with the premiſſes.
Hee keepes the field ſtill, and preſenteth himſelfe in this manner;
The Church of Geneua diſſenteth from the priuate opinions of Caluin and Beza, Appeale, p. 71.
I anſwer; by priuate opinion of Caluin, hee muſt meane this of Predeſtination, and from it hee muſt conclude;
Therefore his Doctrine of Predeſtination is not true.
Otherwiſe he miſſes the preſent buſineſſe. That being ſuppoſed, he commeth on the backe, where hee ought to come vntounto the face of his enemie: hee ought to proue, that, his Doctrine is true, not diſproue ours; but be it as he will, if you aske him how hee doth know that the Church of Geneua doth ſo diſſent, hee doth anſwer; Deodate did tell him ſo. If you doubt of his teſtimony, he tels you, he is a Miniſter, and a Profeſſor in that Church, and ſent to the Synode, from his Country: well, let him goe for a witneſſe without exception; the chiefeſt doubt is how it may appeare, Deodate did ſay ſo: Hee putteth that out of doubt alſo by auouching, he told him ſo, euen Mr. Mountagu, being the man, that Deodate was withall at Eaton; which proofe cannot be auoided: for hee ſhould neuer hauehave had the company of Deodate in Eaton, vnleſſe he had beene ſuch a man, whoſe word is as true as ſteele: yet neuertheleſſe his word is of ſmall authority, for I hauehave found it deceitfull, no 11. 12. therefore I dare not truſt it; but let vsus yeeld him, that Deodate did tell him ſo: and that therefore our Predeſtination is not true. Then hee muſt be conceiued thus to diſpute;
Your Doctrine of Predeſtination is not true, therefore mine is true.
A ſubſtantiall diſpute, and well worthy a rich Diuine, and old learning; mine is, becauſe yours is not; he telleth vsus of ſome that hauehave whirligigs in their heads, Appeale, page 81. I am ſure he is one of them in this argument.
He ends not with this, but goes on ſtill with theſe words,
This ſentence: God did decree to glorifie Peter, without any conſideration had of his faith, &c. is a priuate fancy of ſome particular men; Appeale, page 58. neuer heard of, till of late, page 31.
From hence he muſt inferre;
Therefore this ſentence, God did decree to glorifie Peter, &c. is not true.
I anſwer; The Inference is naught, truth in Diuinity ſtandeth in a conformity vntounto the diuine reuelation, not vntounto the ſooner, or later apprehenſion, and report of men. If you meane, it is not reuealed, then your termes of Priuate fancy, and yeſterdayes heare-ſay are but toyes for Children.
How dare you ſay our doctrine of Predeſtination is a priuate fancie, and a Nouell opinion, ſeeing King Iames of famous memory for learning and knowledge, hath expreſly auowed it, in theſe words;
Predeſtination depends not vponupon any qualities or worke of man: but vponupon Gods decree and purpoſe.
As I hauehave ſhewed no 12. This teſtimonie doth giuegive vsus ſufficient odds aboue you; for Our ſentence hath royall confirmation, and yours hath none: herewith alſo, I would content my ſelfe, were it not, that he vrgeth, with great vehemency; That,
This ſentence aboue ſaid, is the doctrine of Nouellizing Puritans, Appeale, p. 60.
For the remouing hereof, and to giuegive full ſatisfaction in the point; I will adde ſomewhat more thereunto, and ſhew, that the doctrine of Predeſtination which we defend, is neither new, nor the inuention of Nouellizing Puritanes. And becauſe I will auoyde all his ſuſpition and imputation of faction and diſſention, I will alleadge the words and iudgment of other men, not any of mine owne.
Bellarmine ſaith, de grat. lib. 2. cap. 9. after this ſort: No reaſon can be aſsigned on our part, of Gods Predeſtination: not onelyonly merits properly ſo called, but alſo the good vſe of freewill, or grace, or both together foreſeene of God: yea alſo merit of congruity, and condition without which, he that is predeſtinated ſhould not be predeſtinated.
For explication he ſaith further,
I adde, On our part, becauſe on Gods part, Cauſe may be aſsigned, viz. In generall, the declaration of his merciemercy, and Iuſtice; In particular, God doth not want his reaſon, why hee would predeſtinate vntounto life, this man, rather then that, although the ſame be hidden vntounto vsus. Thus farre Bellarmine.
This ſentence he vndertaketh to proue, in the tenth chapter following, 1. by Scriptures. 2. by the teſtimony of the Church. 3. by reaſon founded vponupon Scriptures, and Fathers, which hee beginneth thus. Some out of mankinde are choſen vntounto the Kingdome of Heauen. 1. Effectually, ſo as they come thereunto infallibly. 2. Freely, and before all foreſight of works. This proofe he makes good by the Scriptures in that chapter, By the teſtimony of the Church in the 11. Chapter, namely, by the allegation of many particular teſtimonies; and then in generall he ſaith,
All the Fathers eſteemed of by the Church, euen all of them without exception, did manifeſtly teach this ſentence, after the hereſie of Pelagius was begunne. And alſo, it was approued by the publike ſentence of the Church.
Laſtly, he concludeth in theſe words;
This ſentence ought to be eſteemed, not the opinion of ſome of the learned; but the faith of the Chatholike Church.
He proues alſo the ſame doctrine of predeſtination by ſeuen reaſons, in the twelfth chapter, eueryevery one of them being no other; but the application, and accommodation of Scripture, vntounto the point: and doth defend this ſentence, againſt oppoſition in the 13. 14. and 15 chapters following.
Theſe teſtimonies of Bellarmine muſt bee allowed of by M. Mountagu for many reaſons. 1. Becauſe hee is a Ieſuit; and Ieſuites hauehave the preeminence for the preſent in the Church of Rome; as himſelfe informeth Appeale, pag. 203. and Bellarmine was a man of better ſpirit then ſome of that ſociety, as himſelfe auoucheth, Appeale, pag. 239. whom he doth there alſo profeſſe to be ingenious, and biddeth him, well to fare. He doth commend him, and preferre him too, before others, ſaying:
Bellarmine is a man of as ſtrong a braine, and piercing apprehenſion, as any new vpſtart maſter in Iſrael of the packe, Appeale, p. 77.
But, it may be he will ſay, Bellarmine is factious in this point.
I anſwer, I will therefore fortifie Bellarmines teſtimony; but not with the teſtimony of any other Ieſuites, though I might alleadge Suarez, who is not only ſo full in this point as Bellarmine is, but alſo doth exceed him in the explication and vrging thereof: and that moſt frequently, but I will forbeare that, and only adde the Dominicans; and becauſe I will auoyd needleſſe allegations I will content my ſelfe with Aluarez, who in his booke de Auxiliis diſp. 37. no 6. & 9. &c. Diſp. 120 no 4. ſaith,
There can be no cauſe, reaſon, or condition on mans part aſsigned of Predeſtination: but it is to be referred vntounto the meere, and vndeſerued will of God.
Which, he ſaith further, is according to the Iudgement of Auguſtine: approued of by many Popes, and taken out of moſt euident teſtimonies of holy Scripture.
The teſtimonie of theſe two, muſt needs be of great force vntounto eueryevery man that doth duely conſider them, becauſe, 1. They are our aduerſaries, whoſe teſtimony is of more waight then if they were friends. 2. They are ſuch aduerſaries, as purpoſely doe refuſe to ſpeake as we doe. If then they concurre with vsus in words, and the thing it ſelfe, then it is manifeſt, the truth compels them: for there is nothing elſe to induce them; they want not euaſions (if any were to bee found) for they are men of learning, they hauehave parts of nature, they are induſtrious themſelues, and are abundantly aſſiſted by others; neither are they ignorant that this their doctrin of predeſtinatiō is the opinion of Caluin. To conclude, this is a ſentence not peculiar to themſelues, that is, to the ſociety of the Ieſuits, and the family of the Dominicans whereof they are, but it is a doctrine vniuerſally receiued, by their learned; as may appeare by Aluarez in the 37. diſputation alleadged, and Suaerez opuſc. 1. lib. 3. cap. 16. no 7. and that which goes before: onelyonly ſome of them doe differ in the manner of handling it, namely, whether, both grace and glory, or grace onelyonly, bee thus freely predeſtinated. Laſtly, it may bee truely eſteemed the faith of the Councell of Trent alſo: becauſe that Councell knew it to bee the iudgement of Caluine, whoſe ſentence they meant to reproue in all things they could: yet they decreed not a word againſt it: and it is apparent, they did not forget it, becauſe they ſpent ſo many yeares in that Councell, which is a plaine argument, they throughly conſidered all the differences betwixt them and Caluin. Beſides, in the ſixt Seſſion and twelfth Chapter, it decreeth againſt ſuch as reſolue with themſelues, that they are certainely in the number of the Predeſtinate; iudging this to be the opinion of Caluin, which is a plaine proofe, that they forgot not Caluins opinion in the reſt of his Doctrine touching Predeſtination.
I hope, this proofe is ſufficient to cleere this point from nouelty, faction, &c. termes which it pleaſeth Mr. Mountagu to giuegive it: for what can bee more? Writers (ancient and latter) Churches (of Rome and ours) agree in it, confirm & vrge it. If this be nouelty, faction, puritaniſme, deſperate, deteſtable, and horrible, to the eares of pious men, Mr. Mountagu is happy, and his Dutchmen with him, that hauehave choſen the contrary ſentence: but no reaſonable man will beleeue it, therefore I proceed.
His next flouriſh is in this ſort,
The Lutherans deteſt and abhorre it, Gagge, p. 179.
Strange (though too true) imputations are raiſed againſt it. Odious things are inferred from it, Appeale, page 54. preſſed to purpoſe, and you cannot auoid (to my poore vnderſtanding) their concluſions, Appeale, page 52.
This diſcourſe may ſerue to diſgrace; but not to diſproue: for hee aſſigneth no imputations, nor conſequents, nor conſequences, nor antecedents in particular. but ſpeaks onelyonly, of ſuch, and onelyonly auowes them vponupon his owne affirmation, and vnderſtanding, which are of little worth, for his word is found falſe, no 11. 12. and himſelfe ſaith, his vnderſtanding is poore.
Let him bring thoſe particular imputations, thoſe conſequents, which (hee ſaies) are ſo odious, and conſequences which (hee ſaith) are ſo neceſſary, and antecedents, from which they flow; let him ſhew what is imputed, and vntounto what, and the world ſhall ſee, he ſpeakes neuer a true word.
Hee telleth vsus of Rouing, Rowling, Rambling, I might adde, Ruffling, Scuffling, Schambling, Muffling, Buffling, Brangling, Shifting, Tricking, Shambling, and many more then theſe, if I had Mr. Mountagu his eloquence, and I might put them all, as titles to the diſputations (foregoing) in this point; and yet ſhould I come farre ſhort of the excellency and worthineſſe of his Diſputation, therefore I hope the Reader will iudge as he find s, and ſupply what I want.
He will ſpeake but once more, and that ſhall driue the nayle to the head: thus he ſaith,
Without finall perſeuering in obedience, they are none of Gods elect, theſe being the appointed inſtrumentall cauſes of all their ſaluation, Appeale, page 74.
This reaſon muſt be thus framed,
If finall perſeuering in obedience, be the appointed inſtrumentall cauſe of mans ſaluation, then finall perſeuering in obedience, &c. is the thing, without which no man is of Gods elect.
But finall perſeuering, &c. is the appointed inſtrument all cauſe of mans ſaluation.
I anſwer; by inſtrumentall cauſe of ſaluation, Mr. Mountagu muſt meane (at leaſt) the meritorious cauſe of heauen, which being ſo, his ſentence in plaine Engliſh is thus much;
Finall obedience is the meritorious cauſe of ſaluation.
In which ſentence he agrees with the Church of Rome; for the Councell of Trent hath decreed, that
Eternall life is propounded as wages vntounto ſuch as doe well to the end. Seſ. 6. cap. 16.
Good workes doe merit eternall life.
This Doctrine of the Councell is vrged and defended by Bellarmine in his Booke, de luſti. lib. 5. as the Reader may ſee to the full.
Hereupon wee may conclude againſt Mr. Mountagu, in his owne words, written in another caſe. Which follow;
The Ape diſcouers himſelfe by cracking of nuts, Appeale, p. 308.
So doth this man, who, what, and what ſide hee is of, A Tridentine in faction, and engrayned in affection that way: howſoeuer pretending conformity by ſubſcription, ibid.
But it may be, Mr. Mountagu will ſay, hee did not know that the Church of Rome taught thus much: I anſwer; his owne words will then refute him, for thus he writeth;
If a man continue conſtant in the courſe of good workes, he is ſure of heauen cauſally, in Bellarmines iudgement, as procured by them, Appeale, page 210.
To the parts of the Argument, I anſwer, firſt,
The aſſumption is denied by our Church, which ſaith,
By our deeds wee cannot merit heauen, nor bring vsus to the fauour of God, nor winne heauen; Homilie of Almes-deedes, ſecond part, page 326. 327. & 329.
VponUpon this reaſon: becauſe, then,
A man is a Merchant with God, and ſo defaceth, and obſcureth the price of Chriſts blood.
Now, our Church hath ouerthrowne his aſſumption: there is no need that I ſpeake further thereunto: but yet, that the efficacy of truth taught by our Church, may fully appeare; you ſhall heare himſelfe deny this his owne aſſumption: for thus he writeth;
Bellarmine ſaith, Heauen is of workes cauſally, wherin I differ from him, Appeale, page 210.
There is a reward for the righteous, not for workes, or of workes, Appeale, page 208.
Some man perhaps will ſay, hee doth then contradict himſelfe.
I anſwer; that ſalueth not the wound he giueth vntounto his aſſumption, the voyce of truth in his owne mouth againſt himſelfe, is of more worth then many witneſſes. This part of his reaſon being naught, the reſt hath no force to inferre the concluſion; yet I proceed to the reſt.
The foreſaid argument (at the beſt) (and amongſt his beſt friends) is not worthy anſwering. It is no better then the dry bones of a Hackney ridden to death, many yeares paſt. I finde it propounded and anſwered, by Bellarmine, de grat. lib. 2. cap. 13. Quintum &c. by Suarez, opuſc. 1. lib. 3. cap. 19. no 22. &c. by Aluarez de Auxilijs diſp. 37. no 3. Tertio Deus, &c. no 21. Ad tertium, &c.
To the conſequence of the propoſition, I anſwer, that it is moſt feeble and falſe.
A man may hauehave euerlaſting life in the euent, by reaſon of his finall perſeuering: and yet not be decreed thereunto, by reaſon of his finall perſeuerance foreſeene.
I ſhew it out of the ſaid Authors, thus:
In Predeſtination, there is Gods will of
Intention.
Execution.
This diſtinction I finde in Bellarmine, de gratia, lib. 2. cap. 14. Reſpondeo illud. In Suarez, opuſc. 1. lib. 3. cap. 18. no 4. De deo part 2. lib. 1. cap. 14. no 7. And in Aluarez, de Auxilijs diſput. 37. no 19.
If any doubt of the truth of this diſtinction, the Authors alleadged doe bring proofe enough for it; and chiefly Suarez in the places alleadged, & in his opuſc. 1. lib. 3. cap. 19. no 4. &c. to whom I referre the Reader.
Suppoſing then that the diſtinction is without queſtion, I anſwer; Gods action of execution, wrought in time, doth indeed repreſent Gods eternall will of execution: for the will of execution, is no more, but a diſpoſition of execution, or the execution it ſelfe preconceiued in the minde of God, as the Authors alleadged doe truely ſpeake.
In this ſenſe Mr. Mountagu ſaith truely,
So ſaued, are So ordained by God. Whatſoeuer commeth to paſſe, commeth So to paſſe, becauſe God hath ſayd, So, and no otherwiſe it ſhall come to paſſe, Gagge, page 177.
The one is originall of the other, and the one is euidence of the other, Appeale, page. 61.
But this is not to our purpoſe, for we ſpeake not of Predeſtination, as it containes Gods will of execution; but of intention.
The acts of God done in time, doe not repreſent Gods eternall will of intenſion; which is no more, but a decree appointing, that the thing ſhall bee. The will of intention medleth not with the manner how the meanes ſhall produce the effect, and how the effect ſhall flow from the meanes, it aſſigneth not which is the meanes, which the end, as the ſaid authors hauehave abundantly proued.
It is the firſt act of Gods will, touching mans ſaluation, and is not regulated by any former. God was wholly free to will it, or not to will it, to will it vntounto this man, or vntounto another, there being nothing in the creature to reſtraine this liberty, and determine the diuine will vntounto one: ſo that you muſt ſhew vsus diuine reuelation, that affirmeth the finall perſeuerance of Peter, was the reaſon to moue God, to appoint him vntounto glory. It is not an inferēce made from an act of temporall execution, that can be a ſufficient ground to inioine vsus to beleeue it: but ſuch reuelation there is none, therefore we may conclude, there was no ſuch reaſon, leading God to predeſtinate this or that man vntounto glory. Here, I may enquire of M. Mountagu whether he hath read this anſwer, & others like vntounto it or not: (one of thē is certainly true.) If he hath not read it, where is his tranſcendent reading he ſo much doth vant of? where is that diuine that ſo often calleth others ignorant, poore, and ſcummers vponupon the ſurface; and ſuch like termes Now theſe poore diuines, theſe ſimple ignaroes, muſt giberiſh to him, he knowes not what. If hee hath read them, where was his conſcience, when he vrged an argument ſo often anſwered, and ſo much oppoſed? and (which is more) when he tendered it barely as a thing granted, without (ſo much as) one word out of the diuine reuelation to confirme it, or to take away thoſe anſwers which are made to it? What will he plead? Is Suarez, Aluarez, and Bellarmine ſome of his poore Diuines, meere Gaglers, Blunderers, Ramblers, &c. not worth the anſwering, not worth the regarding, the naming? If his will bee, to ſhew himſelfe ridiculous, he may thus anſwer: and (to ſay the very truth) his deeds doe thus anſwer, though wee hauehave not his words for it. I might goe on with this inquirie; but I content my ſelfe with this, leauing it to the iudgement of the vnderſtanding reader.
Thus hauehave I applyed the anſwers of theſe authors vntounto the argument, which doth abundantly, ſhew the weakneſſe thereof: and I might content my ſelfe with that: but I will adde ſomewhat more which the argument it ſelfe doth lead vntounto.
This argument ſet downe no 27. ſpeaketh of Predeſtination, and if it were a decree to giuegive glory onelyonly, and thereby it doth beg the queſtion; becauſe, that is denyed him, by the Church of Rome, and ours. If he ſay, he takes Predeſtination to be a decree to giuegive grace alſo, then this argument muſt be framed thus;
Finall perſeuering in obedience is the inſtumentall cauſe, that Peter receiued grace in the euent.
Therefore without finall perſeuering in obedience, God did not appoint by Predeſtination to giuegive Peter grace.
The antecedent or firſt part is denyed by all which liue in the Church of Rome: yea, euen by them, that would hauehave Predeſtination to glory to bee vponupon the foreſight of workes; and they muſt ſo deny, becauſe the Councell of Trent hath decreed, ſeſſ. 6.
Preuenting grace is giuen by God, man hauing no merits, cap. 5. Wee are iuſtified freely, becauſe none of thoſe things which precede Iuſtification (whether faith, or workes) doe merit iuſtifying grace it ſelfe, cap. 8.
The ſame thing touching the free giuing of the firſt Grace, wee learne from our owne Church, which taketh it from S. Auguſtine, and tendreth it vntounto vsus, in the Sermon of Faſting, p. 172. In theſe words.
No man doth good workes, to receiue grace by his good workes.
Good workes doe not bring forth grace.
Grace belongeth to God, who doth call vsus, and then hath he good workes, whoſoeuer receiueth grace.
Which ſentence is ſo full and plaine, and of ſuch authority, that I ſhall not need to ſay any more, to ſhew the inſufficiency of the Argument: therefore here, I will end my anſwer therunto, which alſo muſt put an end to our Diſputation, touching this point of Predeſtination, becauſe he doth not offer any further occaſion.
By that which is paſt, it doth appeare, that he diſſenteth from the Church of England, in this point of Predeſtination; and that hee hath nothing (of any worth) to ſay for himſelfe, or againſt our Church.
Now wee ſhould diſcouer, with whom hee doth conſent in the point: for with ſome he doth conſent; elſe it is a priuate fancy, peculiar to himſelfe. With the Church of Rome he doth not conſent. I take that as certaine: therefore he muſt conſent with the Lutherans, and Arminians. I name them both, becauſe both hauehave ſhares in the buſineſſe. The Lutherans doe vrge this doctrine of Predeſtination, but not very ſtrictly; nor as a matter vndoubtedly revealed: nor doe they preſſe it in all the particulars brought by M. Mountagu: and therefore it muſt bee aſcribed to Arminius (by vsus) becauſe hee is the man, whoſe voyce was neareſt vntounto vsus; hee vrged it with more particulars, and vponupon greater neceſſitie, then the Lutherans doe: he choſe rather to ſee the Country that bred him, brought him vp, and aduanced him, come to vtter ruine, rather then hee would hold his peace, or retract this ſentence of Predeſtination. I forbeare to confirme this by the particular paſſages written by Arminius, Vorſtius, and other of that ſide; becauſe it would be tedious, and without all benefit. What hath paſſed, is ſufficient to ſhew, hee teacheth falſhood, and vntruth. Therefore here I will end the whole Diſputation.
There be alſo other points of Faith, in his two Bookes, which oppoſe the doctrine of the Church of England, and which deſerue a reproofe: but becauſe theſe are propounded and handled by him in the firſt place, and their oppoſition is moſt dangerous, therefore hauehave I contented my ſelfe with the refutation of theſe onelyonly, reſeruing the reſt till ſome other opportunity.