Animadversions on Doctor Heylins Quinquarticular History, Part 21
Dr. H. pag. 39.
Well, but the Doctor proceeds further, and tells us, that this extremity being every day found more indefensible, the more moderate, and sober sort of the Calvinians, forsaking the Colours of their first Leaders, betook themselves into the Camp of the Rigid Lutherans, and rather chose to joyn with the Dominican Friers, than to stand to the Dictates of their Master Calvin.
Answ. It would be endless to discover all the weaknesses of this period. 1. Calvin was a Sublapsarian; therefore surely not the Master of the Supralapsarians. 2. The Dominican Friers do not all make the object of Predestination massam corruptam; nor yet the Rigid (if rigid) Lutherans. 3. Those that are Sublapsarians, do not judge the Supralapsarian way indefensible: Witness Davenant, who hath defended the Supralapsarian way against the impertinent Objections of the Author of God's Love to Mankind; and yet was himself of the other perswasion.
Thus of the Supralapsarians: Now follows the Evidence brought in against the Sublapsarians, and the Dreadful Sentence pronounced upon them. Witnesses against them, are the Remonstrants in the Hague Conference, published by Bertius and Daniel Tilenus: which our Historian hath taken word for word out of a supposititious Tilenus, who hath troubled himself and the world with an empty piece, called Arcana Dogmata Contraremonstrantium, or the Calvinists Cabinet unlocked, Printed for Richard Royston, 1659, having also Printed an Examination of Tilenus before the Triers of Utopia. Mr. Baxter, in his Discovery of the Grotian Religion, charged this Gentleman, with giving a false and odious account of the Doctrines of the Synod of Dort. He in his Defence alledgeth, that he never tied himself to the Decrees and Canons of that Synod. Yet Dr. Heylin, page 41, calls them the Conclusions of the Synod of Dort, which is to be conceived to have delivered the genuine sence of all the Parties, as being a Representative of all the Calvinian Churches in Europe, except those of France, some few Divines of England being added to them. The truth is, Not one of his five Conclusions, pag. 41, 42, are the Conclusions of the Synod of Dort; nor, as they are worded, are they so much as agreeable to the Conclusions of that Venerable Synod. The Judgement of the Synod of Dort in the first of the five Points, against which alone, or rather, against one part of which alone, viz. that of Reprobation, the Arguments transcribed by the Doctor, page 42, 43, 44, 45, out of God's Love to Mankind do militate, though he through a stupendious inadvertence, speaks of them as alledged against the whole frame of the Synods Conclusion: The Judgement, I say, of the Synod, in the matter of the Divine Decrees, was as followeth. Article 7, Election is the unchangeable purpose of God, by which before the foundation of the World, according to the most free pleasure of his Will and of his meer Grace, out of all mankind, fallen through their own fault from their first integrity into sin and destruction, he hath chosen in Christ unto salvation, a set number of certain men, neither better nor more worthy than others, but lying in the common misery with others: Which Christ also, from all eternity, he appointed the Mediator and Head of all the Elect, and Foundation of Salvation, and so he decreed to give them to him to be saved, and by his Word and Spirit effectually to call and draw them to a communion with him; i. e. to give them a true Faith in him, to justifie sanctifie and finally to glorifie them, being mightily kept in the communion of his Son, to the demonstration of his mercy, and praise of the riches of his glorious grace, Ephes. 1.4, 5, 6. Rom 8.30. Article 15, The Holy Scripture herein chiefly manifests and commends unto us this eternal and free grace of our Election, in that it witnesseth, that not all men are elected, but some not elected or passed over in God's eternal election; whom doubtless God, in his most free, most just, unreprovable and unchangeable good pleasure, hath decreed to leave in the common misery (whereinto by their own default they precipitated themselves,) and not to bestow saving faith and the grace of coversion upon them; but leaving them in their own wayes and under just judgement, at last to condemn and everlastingly punish them, not only for their unbelief but also for their other sins, to the manifestation of his Justice.
The Reader may perhaps expect, that I should give him an account of the Judgement of the Reformed Gallican Churches, in the five controver…ed Points: But Grotius in his Epistle to N. N. Epist. Eccles. pag. 746, hath saved me this labour, averring that Moulin, a leading man in the Gallican Churches, was, though absent, a chief forger of the Canons of the Synod of Dort, and the only cause why they were without any examination received in France. Only I must needs take notice of Grotius his calumniating humour, whilst he gives out, that the Dort Canons were received in the French Churches without any examination; Whereas it is certain, that in the National Synod at Alez. Anno 1620, the Canons of the Synod of Dort were read, and expended severally and attentively, and by the common consent of all and every one present approved, as agreeable to the Word of God and the Confessions of the French Churches, as written purely and wisely, and as meet to eliminate false Doctrine and to conserve true Doctrine: Every man also swearing, that he did approve these Canons, and would, according to his strength, defend the same to his last breath. It was also then ordained, that these Canons should be sworn to and subscribed, by all that were afterwards to be admitted, ether to the Ministry or to any Office in the University. All this was also confirmed in the next ensuing National Synod at Charenton, Anno 1623. Vid. Corp. Confess. edit. Gene…. Anno 1654. Can. Dordre…htan. pag. 55. It is here said, that the Dort Canons were agreeable to the former French Confessions of Faith: and that they were so, cannot be denied by any, who will read the Confession of Faith exhibited to Charles IX, Anno 1561; for these are the words of that Confession, Article 12, Credimus ex hac corruptione & damnatione universali, in qua omnes homines natura sunt submersi, Deum alios quidem eripere, quos videlicet aeterno & immutabili suo consilio, sola sua bonitate & misericordia, nulloque operum ipsorum respectu, in Iesu Christo elegit: alios vero in ea corruptione & damnatione relinquere, in quibus nimirum juste suo tempo…e damnandis justitiam suam demonstret, sicut in aliis divitias milericordiae …uae declarat. Neque enim alii aliis meliores sunt donec illos Deus discernat, ex immutabili illo consilio quod ante seculorum creationem in Iesu Christo determinavit; neque posset quisquam sua vi sibi ad bonum illud aditum patefacere, quum ex natura nostra ne unum quidem rectum motum vel affect…m seu cogitationem habere possimus, donec nos Deus gratis praeveniat & ad rectitudinem formet.
Against the absolute Decree, as stated by the Synod of Dort, and the French Divines, let us hear what can be objected out of God's love to mankind; for thence doth the Doctor transcribe as confidently, as if there had never any Answer been returned to that Book: whereas there are few Scholars (any way inquisitive after Books) who do not know, that it hath been answered by Bishop Davenant, Dr. Twisse, Amyraldus; not to mention Dr. Ward and Mr. Aylesbury, who have took occasion to refel some of the Book, though not all: it is out of that Pamphlet that the Sublapsarian opinion is argued against, as,