Animadversions on Doctor Heylins Quinquarticular History, Part 14 – Part 17
Dr. H. Ibid.
Not content to travel a known and beaten way, he must needs find out a way by himself, which neither the Dominicans, nor any other of the Followers of S. Augustine's Rigors, had found out before, in making God to lay on Adam an unavoidable necessity of falling into Sin and Misery, that so he might have opportunity to manifest his Mercy in the Electing of some few of his Posterity, and his Iustice in the absolute Rejecting of all the rest.
Answ. A very high charge; Which if it be not made good, all must needs say, that Dr. Heylin's heart did not much stand in awe of that Precept, Thou shalt not bear false witness. And made good it is not to be sure; for we are not so much as directed to any of Mr. Calvin's Works in which these words, or any words of like import, are to be found. This is sufficient Answer; but yet we will a little scan the Opinion here laid down by our Historian, and examine wherein the heinousness and singularity of it doth lie: Is this the heinousness of it, that man being fallen, God should design to glorifie his Mercy in the electing of some, his Iustice in the passing by of others? I should … her think it had been a crime to say, that God would ever have suffered the fall, had he not known how, and actually intended, to bring about his glory by it. Is it strange that h… should choose to shew his Mercy in electing but of a few, and his Iustice in the rejecting of the greatest part of men? To me this is not strange; for when all are alike obnoxious, and of themselves unmeet for Mercy, what more injustice is there in rejecting millions of men, than in rejecting of one single man? I, but this is harsh, that God should lay on Adam an unavoidable necessity of falling into Sin and Misery: Perhaps if it had been said, that God had laid on Adam an avoidable necessity, it would have well enough pleased the Doctor; but then others would have thought, that an avoidable necessity had bordered a little too near the coasts of non-sense and contradiction. But is it not unworthy of God, to say, that he did lay on Adam a necessity of falling into Sin and Misery? Not unworthy of him to be sure, to lay a necessity of being miserable in case he sinned: Some rather question, whether it would not have been unworthy of him to let sinful man pass without punishment, unless on some such valuable consideration as the suffering of a Mediator? As for laying a necessity on Adam of falling into Sin, that is indeed an uncouth phrase; and if the meaning of it be this, that God compelled Adam, of himself unwilling, to fall, I have not charity enough to excuse it of Blasphemy. But, as I said before, we are not told where the phrase occurs in Mr. Calvin. This seemeth to be the whole of his opinion, That God did eternally decree to permit the fall of Adam; and God having decreed to permit his fall, it was necessary he should fall. That man, whom we shall shortly have our Historian endeavouring to justifie, Arminius, hath laid it down as a truth, That if God permits a man to will this or that, it must needs be, that no kind of argument can move him not to will it.
Dr. H. Ibid.
In which as he can find no countenance from any of the ancient Writers, so he pretendeth not to any ground for it in the holy Scriptures: for whereas some objected on God's behalf, De certis (Disertis he should have written) verbis non extare, That the decree of Adam's fall, and consequently the involving of his whole Posterity in sin and misery, had no foundation in the express words of holy Writ, he makes no other answer to it, than a quasi vero; as if (saith he) God made and created man, the most exact piece of his workmanship, without determining of his end.
Answ. In which as he can find. In what doth the Doctor mean? Nothing till now hath he quoted out of Calvin; and that Chapter which he now refers us to, viz. Chapter 23. lib. 3. Institut. manifests that Mr. Calvin had some countenance from S. Augustin, who is one of the ancient Writers; for in all his Answers to the Objections of his Adversaries, he fortifieth himself with the Authority of Augustin. Well, however we will consider the Objection made by Calvin against himself, and his Answer to it, Disertis verbis hoc extare negant▪ decretum fuisse a Deo ut sua defectione periret Adam: That's the Objection which our Historian either would not or could not rightly translate. What is the Answer? Quasi vero idem ille Deus quem Scriptura praedicat facere quaecunque vult, ambiguo fine condiderit nobilissimam ex suis creaturis. Who seeth not that the Answer doth most fully enervate the Objection? Who seeth not that Master Calvin doth here quote Scripture, and Scripture from which (if it be to be understood as he understands it) it necessarily …ollows, that God did decree and will that Adam should fall, and by his fall perish? He advanceth another Objection against himself in the words immediately following: They say he had Free-will to make his own Fortune, and that God decreed nothing but only to handle or deal with him according to his d…serts. If so cold a figment be received (saith Calvin) where will be that Omnipotence of God, by which he moderates all things according to his hidden counsel, which depends on nothing else? But Predestination, whether they will or no, discovereth it self in the Posterity of Adam; for it did not come to pass by any natural necessity, that all should fall from happyness by the fault of one. What makes them they will not confess that concerning one man, which whether they will or no, they must yield of all mankind? Why should they lose their labour by tergiversation? The Scripture proclaims, that all Mortals, in the person of one Man, were adjudged to Eternal Death: this, seeing it cannot be ascribed to Nature, comes plainly from the admirable Counsel of God, &c. What sayest, Reader? Was it not an immodest calumny to affirm, that Mr. Calvin pretends not to have any ground for his Opinion in the holy Scriptures?
Dr. H. Pag. 36.
Whereas others had objected on God's behalf, that no such unavoidable necessity was laid on mankind by the will of God; but rather that he was created by God unto such a perishing estate, because he foresaw to what his own perverseness at the last would bring him: He answereth, that this Objection proves nothing at all, or at least nothing to the purpose. Which said, he tells us further out of Valla, though otherwise not much versed in the holy Scriptures, that this Question seems to be superfluous, because both life and death are rather the acts of God's will, than of his prescience or foreknowledge, &c.
Answ. For this, and what follows, we are referred to lib. 3. cap. 23. sect. 6. That Section I have read, and by reading of it have taken up this resolution, that I will never trust the Historian more. The Objection is framed in these words, Si quis causetur nullam cis inferri ne…essitatem ex Dei providentia, sed potius ea conditione ab ipso es… creatos, quoniam futuram eorum pravitatem praeviderit; To which is answered, Neque nihil dicit, neque …otum, that is, He neither saith nothing, nor yet the whole: Whose confidence besides Doctor Heylin's, would have sufficed to English, Neque nihil dicit, neque totum, He either saith nothing, or nothing to the purpose? As for what is added out of Valla, 'tis undoubtedly a truth, that To appoint or determine life or death, is rather an act of God's will than of his prescience: No wise man can think that life or death do depend on the Divine prescierce.
Dr. H. Ibid.
Notwithstanding all these shifts, he is forced to acknowledge, the Decree of Adam's fall to be Horribile Decretum, a Cruel and Horrible Decree: as indeed it is a Cruel and Horrible Decree, to pre-ordain so many millions to destr…ction, and consequently unto sin, that he might destroy them.
Answ. The expression of Horribile Decretum is indeed Master Calvin's; and glad I am that the Doctor takes notice of it, because Master Pierce, who drew him into the lists, makes such a noise about it, as also the Lutherans and Grotius had done long before him. As for the Lutherans, I should think Wendelin in his Divinity, Cap. de Reprobatione, had written enough to stop their mouths; for he there produceth out of Luther (whom his Followers will scarcely acknowledge ever to have written a word amiss) several places, in which the word Horribile is used in the same sense that here it is by Calvin. As to Dr. Heylin and Mr. Pierce, I wonder why they should go about to perswade the World that Calvin by Decretum Horribile, intended a Cruel and Horrible Decree. Are Horribile & Crudele alway equivalent? God is not cruel, but righteous in all the torments that he hath laid on the fallen Angels: yet, I hope, one might venture to call them Horribiles Cruciatus. Who would construe Horribile supplicium, which sometimes occurreth in good Authors, Cruel Punishment? The clamor that is made against Mr. Calvin for using the word Horribile, brings to my mind a pranck that was plaid by some Sectaries in Bark-shire against their Minister, (a man of good parts and unblameable life;) They come and ask him, What was the meaning of the Psalmist in that phrase, so he giveth his Beloved rest? He unawares replied, It was a plaguy hard place; meaning, doubtless, no more, than that It was an huge hard place. But upon this, these malignant Sectaries, betake themselves to the Commissioners for ejecting of ignorant and scandalous Ministers, and put in a complaint against their Parson, and make this one Article, That he had spoken blasphemously, or at least irreverently of the holy Scriptures. Some colour had these Sectaries for their simplicity or malice, because the word plaguy doth male sonare: but so doth not Horribile; signifying no more, than that which doth incutere horrorem. Therefore the outcries against Calvin for using it, and applying it to the Decree of Reprobation, are very vain, and apparently, …rivolous and malicious.