Catholic Theology Plain Pure Peaceable, Section 15
SECT. XV. Of the Order of Gods Decrees by way of Intention and Execution.
362. THere is no part of this Controverſie more contentiouſly and I fear preſumptuouſly and too audaciouſly handled, than this of the Intentional order of Gods Decrees. Of which many have ſaid much, but no man hath laid ſo great a ſtreſs on it as thoſe two very good men Dr. Twiſſe and his follower Samuel Rutherford. *Scotus's order is elſewhere recited: Take Vaſquez's as in 1. Tho. q. 23. a. 3. d. 95. c. 6. Both of the adult and infants: [1. Praeviderit Deus omnes in Maſſa perditionis peccato obnoxios propter tranſgreſſionem Adami: 2. Hoc non obſtante, voluit primaria voluntate ex ſeipſo quoſdam parvulos & omnes adultos ad beatitudinem pervenire, & ad hoc media ſufficientia conceſſerit, quamvis efficacia & congrua negaverit; non intentione excludendi …os à regno, ſed oſtendendi divitias ſuas in vaſa miſericordiae. 3. Ut viderit …os in p…cca. orig. aut actuali decedere, & 4. Ob id efficaciter decreverit ipſos expellere à beatitudine, & adultos ad poenam ignis deſtinaverit, ex quo quarto inſtanti incipit Reprobatio eorum à gloria. Circa alios vero parvulos quibus non conceſſit poſſe applicari remedia, Ordo in divina praeſcientia & eorum reprobatio à negatione gratiae incipit.] Would you not think that he took all theſe for diſtinct thoughts in God? when he meaneth no real diverſity at all.But on this ſuppoſition we have had many very bold Schemes of Gods Intentional Decrees given us; of which you may ſee ſome in worthy. Mr. Perkins Golden Chain, and in Beza, and out of him in Engliſh his Tractate publiſhed with Mr. Gilbies of Predeſtination, and in Piſcator, and others.
363. By this way the Anti arminians are fallen into the diſtinct parties, of Sublapſarians, and Supralapſarians; And theſe into two parties; one making man as not exiſtent in eſſe cognito, the other man in innocency, the object of Predeſtination.
364. 1. The common way is to diſtribute the Means among themſelves, as any of them are ſubſervient to others, as their end, and ſo to make a great many of Decrees or parts of the Decree, firſt of the ultimate end, and then of the next, and the next to that, and ſo on, till you come to the firſt means which is no end; as the Writer imagineth them to lye.
365. 2. The ſecond way is invented as Conciliatory by Dr. Twiſſe (and ſo it is) viz. that God hath but two Decrees, one de fine, and the other de mediis, and that all the media are the objects but of one Decree, and ſo that we need not trouble the Church with diſputing which of them is firſt or laſt.
366. 3. A third opinion I have long ago read in a MS. of Animadverſions on Dr. Twiſſe by a Learned Judicious and Godly Doctor (yet living) who proveth that God hath but one Decree de fine & de mediis, which caſteth away all the matter of the Controverſies about the priority and poſteriority. And it were well if the Controverſie were ſo ended.
367. 4. Many Arminians write as if the order of Intention and of Execution were the ſame, and ſo begin at the other end, and give us a Scheme juſt contrary to the firſt ſort, (Beza, Perkins, &c.)
368. 5. Some hold that Intendere finem is proper to the imperfect creature, and not belonging to God; and therefore that he hath no order of Intention in his decrees at all, becauſe no proper end.
369. 6. Some hold that the whole buſineſs of the order of Intention is utterly beyond our reach: And therefore that we ſhould meddle only with the order of Execution: Thus ſaith the moſt judicious Biſhop Davenant ſoundly, Diſſert. de Praedeſt. & Reprob. cap. 9. pag. 209. Haec argumentatio (Corvini) vocat nos ad ſpeculationem valde difficilem & dogmaticae Theologiae fundandae minime accommodatam. Nititur enim conſideratione Prioritatis & Poſterioritatis in illis duobus Voluntatis Divinae decretis de dando Mediatore & de Electis ſervandis, quae utraque ab aeterno fuere concepta & conſtituta. Ad me quod attinet, ſcio ordinem Executionis, ſecundum quem Deus voluit beneficia ad homines pervenire, nullo negotio poſſ… delineari: At quo ordine Deus conſignata ea tenuit ab aeterno in mente ac voluntate ſua, is ſolus enarrare praeſumat, qui ſe Deo ab arcanis & aternu conſiliis etiam affirmare audeat. Fatemur Deum ab aeterno conſtituiſſe, ut omnibus ſalvandis Chriſtus primo in loco proponeretur, dein per fidem apprehenderetur, hinc ut eorundem juſtificatio ſequeretur, tum ſanctificatio, & demum Glorificatio. Sed ſiquis minime contentus hoc ordine exequutionis velit etiam nobis deſcribere ſeriem Decretorum Divinorum ordine conceptionis in mente & Voluntate Dei quaſi diſtinctam, atque urgeat cum Arminio Divinam juſtitiam impugnari niſi hoc conſideretur ut illo prius, is mihi videtur nimium ingenio ſuo fidere.
And he citeth Gabr. Biel in 3. d. 2. q. dub. 3. ſaying Prioritates illas in Divinis hiſce decretis non eſſe ponendas, ſicut nec pluralitates actuum ordinatorum. Ac proinde ſiquis conſiderare velit talem ordinem horum decretorum ut ponat Chriſti incarnationem electione priorem, vel è contra, hanc conſiderationem eſſe falſam ſpecnlationem.
370. Dr. Twiſſe who reduceth them to two, excludeth mans ſalvation from the Decree de fine, and thus enumerateth the decreed Means: Twiſs. in Vindic. Grat. ll. 3. Digreſ. 3. pag. Vol. minoris 52, 53.[1. The Permiſſion of ſin (of which more anon.) 2. The gift of a Saviour. 3. The grace of Vocation, Faith, Repentance and Perſeverance. 4. The Salvation of perſevering penitent believers.] And ſo as to the ultimate end only [quod Prius eſt intentione, poſterius eſt executione.] But that the order of execution only is to be obſerved among the Means.
371. The matter it ſelf (or at leaſt my thoughts of it) I ſhall open as plainly as I can with brevity. Firſt premiſing that their own doctrine ſhould take them off their confidence and contention about this order of intention. For, 1. They oft tell us that all Gods Decrees are eternal without any order of Time. And ſhould we not then be afraid of boldneſs about any other order?
372. 2. They oft tell us, that Preſcience and Science, Predeſtination and Deſtination are all one in God, and not to be thought of as acts paſt and ceaſed.
373. 3. They oft tell us, that God is one, and his Will is himſelf; Praedeſtinatio Dei eſt ipſa Dei eſſentia quae eſt neceſſaria. Alliac. Camer. in 1. q. 12. D. See in Ruiz de Vol. Dei, diſp. 24. how they are confounded about the ordering of Gods decrees as to the order of Intention and Execution: His Solution ſuppoſeth that Unius objecti Volitio eſt ratio determinans ad aliorum volitionem: When as ex pa…te Dei there is but One Volition, and that hath no cauſe; and the Ratio is a deceiving ambiguous word.and his Decrees are his Will, and therefore are all but one.
374. 4. They cannot deny but that all our conceptions of God are improper, and analogical or metaphorical more or leſs; and that what Knowledge and Will in God is formally, no mortal knoweth. And ſhould we diſpute then audaciouſly about this Order?
375. 5. None can deny, but that theſe Myſteries require the higheſt reverence, and that it's dreadful to take Gods Name in vain, and dally with the Conſuming fire. And yet ſhall we preſume?
376. 6. They all confeſs that our Lord Jeſus, his Prophets, Apoſtles, or Scriptures, lead them not this way, and decide not theſe Controverſies, ſo as that they can ſtand to their deciſion alone.
377. 7. They cannot deny, but that deſiring arrogantly to be as Gods in Knowledge, was our firſt Parents ſin, that ruined them and us, and that this was Satans firſt ſucceſsful game. And that our diſeaſe is like to be ſuch as its original.
378. 8. Laſtly, They cannot chooſe but know, that it is the troubling of the Church with new Articles, and new practices, and leading them from the ſimplicity that is in Chriſt, even as the Serpent beguiled Eve, (with the promiſe of more knowledge,) which hath been the great plague and divider of the Churches in all Ages; though the Apoſtle foretold them that It was this that he feared of them. And are we not ſelf-condemned, if after all this, we will cenſure and reproach one another, and foment diviſions for that which moſt certainly no mortal underſtandeth?
379. I. And firſt your very foundation is uncertain, that God doth properly Intendere finem. Nay, it is certain that (as Aquinas afore-cited Vaſqu…z ſaith, that Gods own Goodneſs is not a final Cauſe of his Volition; ſuppoſing that movere ad Electionem medii is final Cauſality. Ruiz aſſerteth the contrary; taking final Cauſality to be firſt eſſe primum objectum: And thus men ſtrive about artificial notions. Vaſq. 1. d. 82. c. 1. Ruiz de Vo…. Dei, d. 15. §. 1. p. 159. But that nothing is the Ratio Volendi but his own Goodneſs, ſee Albert. 1. p. tr. 20. q. 19. m. 1. a. 1. Alex. 1. p. q. 35. m. 3. Henric. quodl. 4. q. 19. Gabr. 1. d. 14. q. 1. a. 2. Dried. de Concord. p. 1. c. 3. Vaſq. diſp. 82. Scotus 1. d. 44. Molin. 1. q. 19. a. 5.ſaith) though Vult hoc eſſe propter hoc, non tamen propter hoc vult hoc. He preſcribeth Ends to Man, and ſetteth Ends to Means which are fi…es operis; But that he Intendeth an End Himſelf, muſt be ſaid very improperly, or very uncertainly, or not at all. The truth is, that we muſt ſay that God doth finem intendere, becauſe we muſt ſpeak of him after the manner of men, or not at all. But it is not true in the ſame ſenſe as we ſpeak it of man, and as the word properly ſignifieth; but equivocally.
380. For, 1. To Intend an End, is to make that End a Cauſe why we chooſe the means (as moſt ſay:) But Gods Election or Actions have no Cauſe. All deny that there is in God Cauſe and Effects; or that propter hoc vult hoc.
381. 2. In man to Intend an End, doth imply that a man yet wanteth his end; and that it is ſomewhat that he needeth, or at leaſt doth not yet obtain. But God needeth nothing, and hath no end that is deſired or wanting, nor but what he continually poſſeſſeth or enjoyeth, as well now as hereafter.
382. 3. We know no ſuch thing as Intendere finem where the Act and the End are the ſame. Intendere is not the ſame with Finis. But in God they are the ſame: He that is moſt ſimple hath no Intention, which is not Himſelf, and no End which is not Himſelf, and ſo both are one.
383. 4. Our Intendere finem is not the ſame really with Electio mediorum. But God hath no Intention but what is really the ſame with Election, though not denominatively, connotatively and relatively.
384. 5. Divines uſually ſay, that Nothing below God himſelf can be his End. But where there is no means, there is no End or intention of it. But to God there is no Means. He is not a Means of himſelf; And no creature can be a means of him: If we ſay, that any thing can be a means ut Deus ſit, vel ut ſit Maximus, Sapientiſſimus, Optimus, it were no better than Blaſphemy. God then hath not an End like man.
385. Yet neceſſity conſtraineth us to uſe the phraſe, but theſe things muſt ſtill be underſtood when we uſe it. 1. That no creature can be Gods End; unleſs you will call an object as terminative, an End; or elſe an Effect.
386. 2. That it is not Gods Eſſence and perfections that is an end as to any medium; But it is his Will: For his Free Will is the Beginning, and the Complacency of that Will is the End of all things. But if you call God his own Object, and ſo call the final Object an End, ſo we muſt conſider God as Loving Himſelf; and Himſelf is the End or final object of his own Love or Complacency; and he himſelf as Loving himſelf, is ſaid to Act on that End or Object. And indeed eternal ſelf-knowledge and ſelf-love (which ſome of old ventured to call the ſecond and third Perſons) are the Great Immanent Acts of the Divine Eſſence, (with the ſibi vivere.) And it ſeemeth the chief Notion of Holineſs in God, that he Loveth Himſelf in primo inſtanti, and that he is moſt Amiable to his Creatures in ſecundo inſtanti, and that he is the Cauſe and End of all that is good in them. Thus a final object of his own and our Love or Complacency, God is paſt all doubt. And ſecondarily his Will is pleaſed and fulfilled in all his works.
387. 3. Yet by that Complacency we mean not that God is paſſive, or receiveth any Delight from the Creature, or hath any addition by it to his felicity: But as he is a Communicative Good by way of Efficiency as the firſt efficient Cauſe, ſo is he a felicitating Good to the Creature as its End, and he is Love taking the creature into its neareſt Communion with him: which is his Complacency, and the End of all things. And hence it is that God is ſaid when he had finiſhed his works, to Reſt complacentially in all as very Good.
388. 4. As the Complacency of Gods Will is his End, in the formal notion (ſo far as it may be ſaid of God) ſo his Glory is his End in the Material notion.
389. That his Glory is not Formally his End, is confeſſed by all Divines who ſay that nothing below God can be his End. But by his Glory is meant ſomething below himſelf; ſome creature, or action of the creature. Ergo, &c. For if by his Glory be meant Himſelf, there is no Means to ſuch an end.
390. Therefore by Gods Glory is meant the ſhining luſtre of his Image; or the Appearance of God in his Works: And not only mans Praiſing and Glorifying thoughts and words of him: which though they are our higheſt duty, are unfit to be Gods End, alone. Yet are they part of that Glory which is materially his End, though not the whole.
391. This Glory or Appearance of God, which is materially his End, is, 1. The perfection of the whole Creation. 2. Next that the Glory of the Celeſtial Kingdom, containing Chriſt and all the holy ones. 3. Next that the Glory of Chriſts own perſon alone. 4. Next that the Glory of the Holy ones alone, &c.
392. Becauſe this perfection of the Univerſe is not yet accompliſhed, but ſhall be, improperly we may ſay that God hath not yet attained his End, that is, his Material End.
393. 5. But properly and formally Gods End is never unattained: Becauſe his Will is never unfulfilled, though the things willed be not yet perfected. For when e. g. the firſt dayes work was made, all was done which he then willed to be done, and ſo for the ſecond day, &c. And now all is done which he would have now done: And his Will is ever perfectly pleaſed; And he wanteth nothing. So that an End not attained, is not to be aſcribed to God, except materially.
394. Thus God is ſaid to have made all things for himſelf, Prov. 16. 4. Becauſe for His Pleaſure they are, and were created, Rev. 4. 11.
395. For his Decreeing diſpoſing Will is fulfilled by all, even the wicked that are for the day of Evil: Though his Commanding Will being not fulfilled by ſinners, according to that he is ſaid to have no pleaſure in them, but to hate them, Pſal. 5. 5. Heb. 10. 38. Mal. 1. 10. Ezek. 18. 32. 23. & 33. 11. Jer. 22. 28. & 48. 38. Eccleſ. 5. 4. Pſal. 5. 4, &c.
396. And leſt any think that thus God miſſeth of his End, let it be well noted, 1. That this phraſe of Gods taking no pleaſure, is objectively both Poſitive, Privative and Oppoſitive, that is, It ſignifieth that God will deprive the wicked of felicity, or the Communion of his Love, and will load them with ſorrows, and will ſet himſelf againſt their Comforts. But 2. As to Gods own Complacency of will, it is but equal to a negative: His felicity lyeth not in theirs: And ſo as Gods will hath no actual Complacency in Nothings (as in more Worlds, or Creatures, than ever will be) and yet his Complacency is perfect; ſo though he have no Complacency in the Holineſs or Salvation of thoſe that are never Holy or Saved, Hence they diſpute▪ Whether Gods Providence alwayes attain his Ends: and Ruiz citeth for the affirmative, Cajet. Naz. Alvar. and Scot. Marſil. Okam, Gabriel, Hervaeus, Driedo; and for the negative, Alex. Aquin. Durand. Marſil. Capreol. Ferrar. & communiter recentiores, Molina, Zumel, Vaſq. Suarez, Valent. Becanus, Sirenus, Pennottus, Arrubal, &c. And all this difference is about names and words. And Ruiz is for the Negative, ſect. 3. pag. 56. qui… aliquos fines Deus intendit volitione conditionata, & non totaliter efficaci. So that the queſtion is, An Volitio condi…ionate & inefficax ſit Deo aſcribendae quando v…lt ea auxili… quae conſenſum hominis reddunt poſſibilem, vel hominem faciunt potentem? Et an volitio haec dicenda ſit Intentio finis? For he concludeth as agreed on by all, that Gods Providence is never fruſtrate, hindred, deceived, or fluctuating, nor any thing done againſt it abſolutely, or againſt its total adequate End.yet his Complacency is perfect.
397. There is no doubt but Man hath Ends and Means, becauſe God hath ſo appointed it, and made him not in a ſtate of perfection, but in via: Yea, Angels have an End and every creature, becauſe defective dependent beings; even in a formal ſenſe.
398. God is this Ultimate End of man, as he is to be perfectly Loved and Pleaſed; to which all are means: And the means are ordered as Ends to one another.
399. Uſually where the Scriptures and Preachers do ſpeak of God as the End, and of Intention of Ends, they mean Mans Intention and End, preſcribed him by God. But if they ſpeak of Gods, they mean only, formally the fulfilling of his will, and materially his Glory, or the perfecting of his works.
400. The finis operis as diſtinct from the finis operantis is nothing but the aptitude and tendency of the work to the Authors Intended End, or to ſome effect: Not that the opus quà opus finem intendit.
401. If all theſe difficulties lye in the way, Whether and how far God intend an End at all, judge how far it is fit to contend about the Mental Order of his Intentions, and whether Judicious Davenant was not in the right.
402. II. If it were granted, that Quod prius eſt Intentione, poſterius eſt executione, nothing would follow to gratifie either party in theſe Controverſies. For all would be but this, that [God Intended Himſelf, and the Fulfilling or Complacency of his own Will, before he willed any thing elſe that ever cometh to paſs.] And what's this to the buſineſs?
403. But they ſay, It is his Glory that he firſt intended: I anſwered before, His Glory is, 1. Himſelf (and then it's the ſame which I aſſerted:) or 2. a Creature (and then it is not formally his End.) 2. His Glory as it is his Compleat Image on the whole perfected World, is his End indeed Materially: But that is but to be the Compleat Means: The perfected means may improperly be called his End: But forma denominat.
404. When they ſay, that it is the Glory of his Mercy and Juſtice, 1. They ſay but the ſame and need no other anſwer. 2. They ſpeak very defectively: For it is to aſcribe to God a defective Decree or Intention, which is not for the glory of all his revealed perfections: Doubtleſs whatever is materially the perfect means of glorifying God, muſt glorifie his Greatneſs and Active Power or Life, his Wiſdom and his Goodneſs, and therein his Veracity or fidelity, his Juſtice and his Holineſs, his Benignity and mercy, his Immutability, Independency, &c. All this muſt be in the means it ſelf.
405. If Mr. Perkins, Beza, Gilbie and many other good men had well conſidered this, they had never made the glorifying of Gods Mercy and Juſtice in the ſalvation of ſome and the damnation of others, Gods ultimate end; Thereby committing many palpable errours. 1. Making quid Creatum vel Creaturae to be formally or properly Gods end, which is but a Means. 2. Making one little parcel of that means, to be the end. 3. Inſerting two acts or parts only of that which they themſelves confeſs to be but Means. For what ſhould the names of Salvation and Damnation do in the deſcription of the end? Are they any part of the end? Why is not Redemption, Juſtification, Sanctification, Preſervation, Reſurrection, &c. as well put in? Is he not Glorified in them as well as in final ſalvation or damnation? Yea and in Creation and the fr…me of nature too? Yea why is not the glory of Angels, and all the world put in, as part of the ſame means to his end?
406. If it be ſaid that it is only Gods Glory of Mercy and Juſtice in men… ſalvation and damnation which is the end of Redemption, Converſion, Preaching, Ordinances, Sanctification, Adoption, &c. 1. I deny it: His Power, Wiſdom and Goodneſs, and his forementioned ſubordinate attributes are thereby Glorified alſo. 2. It is an injury to God unworthy of a Divine, to make God to have as many diſtinct ultimate ends, as they think there are particular aptitudes or tendencies in the means.
407. For undoubtedly we muſt feign in God no more ultimate ends than one. And undoubtedly the means conſiſting of innumerable parts, make up one perfect whole, in which Gods Glory ſhineth ſo, as it doth not in any part alone. And he that will cut Gods frame into ſcraps and ſhreds, and ſet up the parts as ſo many wholes, will more diſhonour him than he that would ſo mangle a Picture, or a Watch, or Clock, or Houſe, or the pipes of an Organ, or the ſtrings of a Lute, and tell you of their beauty and Harmony only diſtinctly. Well therefore did Dr. Twiſſe reduce all the Decrees de mediis to one: But they are one in their apt compoſition for one end: And the Glory of Sun, and Stars, and Angels, and the whole Creation is a part, and the Glory of our ſalvation and damnation is but another part.
408. The order therefore of Gods Decrees in reſpect of the Execution is on…y fit for our debate: (Any farther than that we may moreover ſay that Gods will or Himſelf is all his ultimate end, and his Glory ſhining in the perfection of his intire works is the perfect means.) And there is nothing elſe that we can reaſonably controvert. And about this our Controverſie is next to none at all. Here we may well enquire what is prius vel poſterius, quid ſuperius, quid inferius, &c. and that to our edification.
409. Seeing then that we are agreed (as is ſaid) with Aquinas that *Ruiz de Vo…n. Dei disp. 15. §. 4. p. 163. prettily argueth that Si non poteſt dari ratio ipſius …olitionis divinae, ſed ſolius denominations extrinſe…ae reſultant…s ab e…lis creat…, ſequitur …anas eſſe plurima… Th…o…ogorum de ordine, depend…tia vel ratione divi…um volitionum, poſt quam inter illos conſtat quem ordinem, dependentiam v…l ration…m habeant externa objecta inter ſe. The conſcquent is true. They are vain indeed, though he deny it. And all his reaſons p. 161, 162, &c. to prove that dantur i… creat…a rationes finales moventes divinam voluntatem, are but triflings with the ambiguities of the word Ratio and abuſes of the word Cauſa, having before confeſſed that there is no Real Cauſe. And are there Cauſes that are not Real? 1. We grant the Creature is an Object of Gods will: and the object is b… ſome called the material cauſe of the act in … … numero. 2. It is the Terminus and Recipient of the divine influx. 3. It may therefore …e cauſa material…s of the diverſity of the effects of Gods influx as Received in patiente ex di…erſitate dispoſitions. 4. Our acts may be the effects of Gods Volitions. 5. And may be ſecond Cauſes of other effects. 6. Thoſe other effects may be ſaid to be Gods nearer ends, ſpeaking of him after the manner of imperfect man. 7. Where our acts are not cauſes, they may be conditions ſine quibus non, of many of Gods acts quoad effectus, (as ſin is of puniſhment at leaſt.) 8. In all theſe reſpects Gods Volition which is One in itſelf, may and muſt be denominated divers from the diverſity of theſe effects and objects, which therefore are the Ratio nomin…: And he that would prove any other Ratio or Cauſe of the firſt Cauſe, the will of God or any of his acts as in himſelf, muſt firſt renounce all natural and Scholaſtical Theologie at leaſt. He citeth Durand. Major, Richardus, &c. But Durandus 1. d. 41. q. 1. doth but ſay that Gods Acts are thus to be reckoned ſecundum rationem, as likening Gods reaſoning or thoughts to ours, (ut. n. 7.) and not …uxta rei veritatem. Richard. is full for what I ſay; 1. d. 45. Voluntas ſive volens de Deo ſecundum eſſentiam dicitur: non eſt aliud Velle, aliud Eſſe: But yet his Velle hoc ſpeaketh not his eſſe quà eſſe; and therefore he addeth that when God is ſaid ſcire aut velle, it is his Eſſence; but to ſay, Hoc aut illud ſcit aut vult is but to ſay, Hoc aut illud eſt ſubjectum ſcientiae vel voluntatis quae ipſe Deus eſt. Et Voluntas Dei eſt prima & ſumma Cauſa omnium; cujus Cauſa non eſt quaerenda; & non eſt diverſa Voluntas, ſed diverſa locutio de ea in Scripturis. And Richardus in loc. p. 141. ſaith but this, that Ipſius divini Velle nulla eſt ratio motiva, cum realiter idem ſit quod Deus: Tamen Ordinationis quae eſt inter divinum velle & ipſum volitum bene eſt ratio aliqua respectu alicujus voliti. Which is no more than I have ſaid. And as to Major, Ruiz did ill to cite him, who there profeſſeth that Predeſtination and Volition is but Relatio rationis & denominatio extrinſeca as to God. And his ordo ſignorum in mente divina is but the Scotiſts aſſimilating Gods acts to mans.Deus non propter hoc vult hoc, ſed vult hoc eſſe propter hoc, that which we have to do is but to enquire, 1. De re, how one thing is a Cauſe or other means of another; 2. And ſo how God Decreed it to work and be.
410. And 1. It is agreed that the Creation was Gods firſt work (that we know of or have any thing to do with:) This had (as to the firſt part) no Antecedent Object, but produceth its effect, which ſome call its object. But the latter dayes works had an antecedent object, and alſo a produced effect. And accordingly God Decreed from Eternity that this ſhould be his firſt work. From whence by connotation that may be called, his firſt Decree.
411. That ſin or the Permiſſion of ſin, or other meer Negatives, are not to have place among the aſſerted Means and Decrees, I am anon in due place to manifeſt.
412. 2. God having made man, did give him a Law both Natural and Poſitive: This was next done, and therefore decreed to be next done.
413. 3. Man having broke this Law, God judged him, and laid on him ſome indiſpenſible penalties. This was decreed to be done in the third place.
414. 4. At the ſame time God promiſed Man the victory by the Womans Seed, and giving him pardon of the deſtructive penalty, became his Redeemer, and put him under a Covenant of Grace; firſt given to mankind in Adam, and afterwards in Noah. And this was decreed to be ſo done.
415. 5. Though all were thus put under this Covenant, and God forſook none that firſt forſook not him, yet did he give more Grace to ſome, than to others, to Abel, e. g. than to Cain, ſo that thoſe that did actually repent and believe and live to God, were juſtified and adopted and made heirs of life. And thus he decreed to do.
416. 6. Perſeverance alſo was the effect of his ſpecial Grace, which accordingly is Decreed to be given.
417. 7. The Cainites, Canaanites and others that were the wicked Seed of wicked Parents, who forſook him and his Grace, he accordingly judged, puniſhed and forſook: And ſo decreed.
418. 8. The Seed of the faithful he eminently bleſſed, eſpecially of Abraham; whom he took (by reward) into a further ſpecial Covenant, ſuperadded to the common Covenant of Grace, taking his Seed into a peculiar political and gracious relation to him, promiſing the multiplication and proſperity of them, and that the Saviour ſhould come out of them: All which was ſo decreed to be done.
419. 9. The Meſſiah came in the fulneſs of time, and did and ſuffered all that is mentioned in the Goſpel: And gave us a more perfect Edition of the Covenant of Grace, and greater grace with it, even more of the Spirit, with a better Miniſtry, Ordinances and Church-ſtate: Which were ſo decreed to be done.
420. 10. To ſome Nations of the Earth this ſecond Edition of the Covenant of Grace, (that is, the Goſpel) is freely promulgate or Preached, who deſerved it no more than others, while others for ſin are left under the firſt darker Edition, and under deſertions and grievous puniſhments, for their fore-fathers and their own violation of it.
421. 11. Where the Goſpel cometh among many that all deſerve rejection for the reſiſting of grace, God giveth to ſome that grace which infallibly Converteth them, and conſequently juſtifieth, adopteth and ſanctifieth them. All which he decreed.
422. 12. Giving alſo Perſeverance as aforeſaid, he finally juſtifieth all ſuch in Judgement, and Glorifieth (Chriſt firſt, and) them with Chriſt: ſingly and conjunctly at the final conſummation. And he Decreed to do all this accordingly.
423. If the Decree of God be called but One, for the Reaſons before given, the Controverſie is then at an end: But if it muſt be diſtinguiſhed and called Many Decrees or parts, it muſt be either from the Effects o… from the ſuppoſed objects.
424. 1. If from the Effects, there will be no Controverſie about the Decrees but what is firſt about the Effects themſelves. And moſt of them now named are uncontroverted.
425. 2. And we cannot well denominate and diſtinguiſh the Decrees from any thing elſe but the Effects, (even as we do his operations, as Creation, Redemption, &c.) But the objects then are paſt doubt ſuch as follow.
426. Viz. 1. The object of the Decree of Creation as ſuch (diſtinct from the Effect) is Nothing: that is, There is no object.
427. 2. The object of the Decree of Legiſlation is man conſidered meerly in his Being and Naturals as ſuch.
428. 3. The object of the Decree of the firſt Judgement, was man newly faln.
429. 4. The object of the Decree of the giving of the Promiſe of Chriſt, the New Covenant in the firſt Edition and pardon and grace by it, was faln man firſt judged.
430. 5. The object of the Common grace of that Covenant from firſt to laſt, is faln judged man brought under that Covenant of grace (ut norma officii, judicii & beneficii.)
431. 6. The object of the Special grace of God (at firſt) viz. for effectual Converſion, to men under that Covenant, was the ſame as laſt mentioned, Man brought under the Covenant of grace; of whom 1. Some were prepared and diſpoſed by Common grace for Special. 2. And it's like ſome not, but ſuddenly ſurpirzed by mercy.
432. 7. The object of Abrahams ſpecial promiſe, (beſides the Common Covenant of grace) was Abraham eminent in faith and ſelf-denying obedience to God: And afterward his Seed for his ſake.
433. 8. The Object of the actual gift of Chriſt incarnate, and the perfect Edition of the New Covenant by him, was the ſinful world that had tranſgreſſed both the Law of Innocency and the firſt Edition of the Covenant of grace, and the Jews that had broken Moſes's Law.
434. 9. The object of the gift of the Goſpel as promulgate or publiſhed is the ſame, adding, the world as now Redeemed by the Actual ſacrifice, Merits and Reſurrection of Chriſt incarnate.
435. 10. The object of the Commoneſt grace of the Goſpel Covenant, is Redeemed man brought under this Covenant as the Norma officii, judicii & beneficiorum (quoad jus;) or, ſubditi obligati.
436. 11. The object of the grace of this Covenant proper to the Viſible Church, and common to its members, are Viſible Chriſtians, or Baptized Profeſſours.
437. 12. The object of the firſt effectual grace of ſaving Converſion (ſaith and repentance) is certain perſons Redeemed and brought under the obligation of this new Covenant; Of whom ſome are prepared by common grace, and (it's like) ſome are not.
438. 13. The object of the gift pardon, juſtification, adoption, the ſpirit of ſanctification and right to life, (and all this in Chriſt by union) is a Penitent Believer, and the ſeed of ſuch dedicated in Covenant to God.
439. 14. The object of many acts of auxiliary grace, and of higher degrees of grace is (ordinarily) ſuch as have well uſed former degrees of ſpecial grace: But alſo, who God is freely pleaſed to give it to.
440. 15. The object of the grace of Perſeverance is the ſame laſt mentioned: If not all the Juſtified; which I reſerve as almoſt our only real Controverſie to handle in its proper place in the next Chapter.
441. 16. The object of the Act of Raiſing the dead is all the world, as appeareth in Joh. 5. 22. to 32.
442. 17. The object of the Juſtification of the ſoul alone at the firſt appearance is, the ſoul of a member of Chriſt, or one faithful and perſevering Auguſt. ad Simplic. l…. …. qu. 2. Quia non inv… Deus opera in hominibus qu… …lig…t, id…o man… propoſitum juſtification is ipſ… us: ſ…d quia ill…d …, ut juſtifi…t cred…nt…s, id…o inv…nit opera quae jam …ligat ad r…gnum c…lor….in his Covenant: or a Saint.
443. 18. The object of the final juſtification of the whole man, is a Saint …iſen from the dead.
444. 19. The object of Glorifying Grace, is a member of Chriſt, or a Saint thus finally Juſtified (either in ſoul firſt, or in ſoul and body after as is ſaid.)
445. 20. The object of Gods greateſt felicitating complacency is the Glorified Church of all the holy ones: And the object of his utmoſt univerſal complacency in the Creature, is the Glory of his image ſhining on the whole Univerſe in perfection: (As the object (as we may call it) of his Eſſential Volition, Love or Complacency, is Himſelf.)
And as theſe are the objects of the grace thus diſtinguiſhed by the effects, ſo are they of the will or Decree of giving it, as denominated according to the order of Execution. Beſides which Davenant on one account, and Twiſſe on another grant that quoad media there is no other for man to know.
446. By this it appeareth that the Corrupted Maſs ſimply conſidered was the object of no one of all theſe graces. But the Corrupted Maſs as Judged firſt, and after as Redeemed, and after as under Covenant, &c. Much leſs was it any effect of God, as corrupt.
447. The corrupted Maſs iudged, was not as ſuch the object of Gods diſcrimination by Election of ſome, and rejection of others: For they were commonly brought all under the Covenant of Grace, and had a common ſort of grace, before the diſcrimination.