Animadversions on Doctor Heylins Quinquarticular History, Part 72
Dr. H. Ibid.
Finally, That this Counsel is secret unto us; for though there be revealed to us some hopeful signs of our Election unto Life, yet the certainty of it is a secret hidden in God, and in this life unknown unto us.
Answ. The Doctor should have said, if he would have kept to the words of the Article, that God hath ordered by his Counsel secret to us: the meaning whereof seems to be, that the reason which moved God to predestinate this or that person, is unknown to us. But this would have overthrown the whole Arminian fabrick. Therefore another sense is pitched on, no way deduceable from the phrase; contrary to Scripture; contrary to the se…se and judgement of our Martyrs and Confessors: viz. that in this life we can have no certainty of our predestination unto life.
Against this, thus I argue: If a man may certainly know that he believes in Christ, he may know certainly that he is predestinated unto eternal life. But the antecedent is true, ergo so is the consequent.
I prove my major, Because every one that believes, is ordained to eternal life. Which enunciation, if any one shall deny, I prove it, first, by the saying of Mr. Latimer, quoted with applause by the Doctor, If thou believest in him, then art thou written in the Book of life, and shalt be saved: which connexion were not good, if there were any man, a Believer, whose name were not found in the Book of life, or not saved. I prove it, because Faith is called, the Faith of God's Elect, Tit. 1.1. I prove it finally, because it is said, that as many as were ordained to eternal life believed, Acts 13.48. Why is it said, as many as were ordained to eternal life believed, if any could believe but those who are ordained to eternal life? But there is a place not to be eluded, Whom he calleth, those he justifieth; and whom be justifi…th, those he also glorifieth: Whoever are called according to the purpose of his will, are justified and glorified.
As to the minor, that A man may certainly know he hath saith, methinks no Christian should doubt it. We should not so earnestly be pres…ed to try, whether we be in the faith, if we could not know, whether we be so or no. Are there not some effects that are proper to saving faith? If there be, why may not he who feels them in himself, conclude thence that he hath faith?
As for our first Reformers, so far were they from thinking that Election is not knowable, that some of them placed Faith in an Assurance of a mans Election and Christ's dying for him. If I prove this, I shall prove ex abundanti, that they were for personal absolute Election. Of others I shall prove, that they have in terms express owned Calvin's Predestination, or some such Doctrine as is necessarily connexed with it. Secondly, I shall answer every Testimony that Dr. Heylin brings to prove, that the absolute Decrees were decryed by any of our Martyrs, and pass to the other Points.
1. I begin with the Liturgy; In the Catechism whereof, after rehearsing of the Creed, Question is made, What dost thou chiefly learn in these Articles of thy belief? Answer is returned, 1. I learn to believe in God the Father, who hath made me and all the world. 2. In God the Son, who hath redeemed me and all mankind. 3. In God the holy Ghost, who sanctifieth me, and all the elect people of God. The object of the Father's Creation, is here made, the Respondent and all the World; the object of the Son's Redemption, is the Respondent and all Mankind; the object of the Spiri…s Sanctification, is the Respondent and all the Elect People of God. The second object is not so large as the first, nor the third so large as the second▪ and the Catechumen is as well taught to number himself among the Elect people of God, as among mankind. Who are these chosen of God? Surely they are the Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father; and to such is the Sanctification of the Spirit here limited. So that if any one be chosen, he is sanctified; and if he be sanctified, he is chosen; and every one who comes for Confirmation, is taught to profess himself one of those whom the Spirit Sanctifieth, and God Elected. I dare not direct every Baptized person so to say: But by this we may see, what the opinion of the Composers of the Liturgy was.
In the Catechism appointed by King Edward's Authority to be taught by all Schoolmasters, fol. 38, it is said, To the furnishing of this Commonweal belong all they, as many as do truly fear, honour, and call upon God, wholly applying their mind to holy and godly living; and all those, that putting all their hope and trust in him, do assuredly look for the Bliss of everlasting life. But as many as are in this faith stedfast, were forechosen, predestinate, and appointed out to everlasting life, before the world was made: Witness whereof they have within their hearts, the Spirit of Christ, the Author, earnest un…ailable, and pledge of their faith. How much Calvinism is here? As many as fear God, were forechosen, predestinate and appointed out to everlasting life before the world was made: therefore, if any man …ail or miss of eternal life, he never feared God; or, God never put his fear into any, but those whom he so fore-ordained to everlasting life. Yet there is more, fol. 39, The first, principal, and most perfect cause, of our justifying and salvation, is the goodness and love of God, whereby he chose us for his before he made the world. Now the Arminian election is not sure the most perfect cause of our justifying and salvation; nor is it God's chusing of us to be his before he made the world. And let it be observed, that it is said, that after that he hath chosen us for his, he granteth us to be called by the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, when the spirit of the Lord is poured into us.
2. Our next task is to look into the sentiments of our Martyrs and Confessors; such as lost their lives, or left their Countrey, or were deprived of their Liberty or Dignities and Preserments, for bearing witness to the Doctrine that was established by all Authority, Ecclesiastical and Civil, among us. Our first Martyr in order of time was Iohn Rogers; our first in order of Dignity, were Cranmer of Canterbury, and Ridley of London, Bishops. I have not met with any writings of either of these, in which they have expresly declared their judgments in the Points under debate: yet we will see what may be at least guessed concerning their mind.
For Mr. Rogers, I find he was the Convert of William Tindal, and Miles Coverdale, and that he joyned with them in making that Translation, which now goes by the name of Matthews Translation: and what opinions that Translation doth favour, I leave it to indifferent persons to judge. I find him also among those worthy Persons, who subscribed a Declaration sent abroad May 8. 1554. all whose names are to be seen in Mr. Fox his third Volume, pag. 102, of the London Edition, 1631. (which Edition I shall still follow, having not the last Edition by me.) The purport of that I eclaration, is to shew Reasons why they will not otherwise …ispute, than before indifferent Judges. In the Declaration also is couched a Confession of their Faith, worthy to be …ead by all, who would understand the spirit of our Martyrs aright. The fourth branch of that Declaration, is concerning Justif…cation by Faith only; Of which having delivered their mind, they add in the close, By this we disallow Papistical Doctrine, of Free-will, of Works of Supererogation, of Merits, of the Necessity of Auricular Confession, and Satisfaction to God-wards. If they disallowed the Papistical Doctrine of Free-will, whose Doctrine did they allow but the Doctrine of Calvin and Luther, who in this matter perfectly agreed, (Luther's high flown expression being abated.) All that I shall more observe concerning this Mr. Rogers, is 1. That he was a Non-conformist even to excess, (his zeal out-running knowledge, unless he had some reasons proper to those times;) for he never went otherwise than with a round Cap, and would not agree to use the Attire proper to the Order of Priesthood, unless the Popish Priests might be enjoyned to wear upon their sleeves a Chalice with an Host. 2. That he was very zealous to put to death the two Hereticks condemned by Archbishop Cranmer, and burnt 1550, 1551. A familiar Friend of his came to him, and desired him to make use of his interest with Cranmer, that they might not be put to death, or if they were put to death, that they might not be burnt; because that kind of death seemed not so agreeable to Evangelical meekness. He answered, that the punishment of burning men alive was not so tormenting, but mild enough. His Friend replied, with a great ardor of spirit, holding his right hand, and striking his own against it, Go too, perhaps it will come to pass, that your selves may have your hands full of so mild burning. And he was indeed (as I before suggested) the first that tasted of the Marian Meekness.
A. B. Cranmer must needs be supposed to have a great stroke in the framing of the Articles of Religion agreed on 1552. So must Bishop Ridley also; for though Cranmer was Metropolitan in Title, yet Ridley seems to be the greater Stickler of the two, especially in the matter of Rites and Ceremonies. He forced Hooper to be Canonically Ordained, against his inclination, against the King's Letter, and the Earl of Warwick's Letter, the one bearing date Iuly 23. 1550, the other August 5. Yea, so violent was he, that he threatned or caused to be threatned, death to Hooper, if he persisted in refusal. Haec Theologomachia sic tandem exiit vincentibus Episcopis: Hooperus vel ad palinodiam, vel ad eas conditiones adactus est, ut semel saltem in concione publica se ostenderet populo, more caeterorum Episcoporum insulatus. Quod ni fecisset, sunt qui putant Episcopos ultimum supplicium ei molituros: nam ita audivi a famulo ipsius, Duc…m Suffolciensem clam Hooperum, qui eorum conatus non ignorabat, monuisse, Fox in his Latine Commentary, pag. 280. I much wonder what stirred up this heat in Ridley, and much doubt, it was some personal pique against Hooper, because of his popularity, and boldness in reproving the manners of the time and the corruptions of the Church. Marvelously was Hooper flocked after: Saepe adfui (saith Fox) quum in templi fores nemo ingredi concionante Hoopero potuerit; tanta ejus diligentia fuit, ut nullum diem sine binis, aut ternis quandoque concionibus praeteriret. Rursus ea in Scripturis promptitudo, ut si sexies ei faciendum esset, tempore ci…ius quam materia eguiss…t, pag. 279. I say, I doubt there was somewhat of a pique, because I find that the same Ridley did ordain Iohn Bradford a Deacon, without any of those Canonical Rites that were then in use, as appeareth Acts and Monuments, pag. 280. But Ridley acknowledged his fault, and God forgave him, and so must man too. In the Letter in which this acknowledgement is made, he also accquaints Hooper, that he understood by his works, which he had superficially seen, that they throughly agreed, and wholly consented in those things, which are the grounds and substantial points of our Religion, against which the world so furiously raged in those days. By which works, in all probability, he means some Trearises Hooper composed against Transubstantiation, which are exemplified in Fox his Latine Commentary. Certain it is, that Ridley could not approve all Doctrines in Hooper's works, unless he disapproved one Article of our Religion: For Hooper in his Commentary on the Creed, doth most expresly declare against the local descent of Christ into Hell; which is asserted as a truth grounded on Scripture in the Articles of Religion. And as certain is it, that Ridley could not joyn with him, if he condemned the absolute decree of Election, (I shall shew hereafter that he did not,) or determining grace in conversion. The Article of Election, I have already both transcribed and argued from; let us now see what may be collected from the Articles of Free-will and Grace, which I will present as they were Printed by Iohn Day, with the King's Authority, 1553. The words of the former are these, We have no power to do good works, pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ, preventing us that we may have a good will, and working in us when we have that will. Of the latter these, The Grace of Christ, or the holy Ghost by him given, doth take away the stony heart, and giveth a… heart of flesh: And although those that have no will to good things, he maketh them to will; and those that would evil things, he maketh them not to will the same; yet nevertheless he enforceth not the will: And therefore no man when he sinneth can excuse himself, as not worthy to be blamed or condemned, by alledging that he sinneth unwillingly, or by compulsion. If this be not Calvinism and Anti-arminianism, I know not what is. All power to good works, pleasant and acceptable to God, without grace preventing and co-operating, is denied to us. Grace also is said to take away the stony heart, and give an heart of flesh; to make us to will (not only able to will) good things. And when it comes to be explained, what it doth not, it is only said, it enforceth not: and sinners are only said, not to act by compulsion, which may well consist with some necessity. This is the summ of what the Calvinists alledge, when charged to destroy Free-will. But now the Arminians say, there is no liberty, where no indifference; and that the grace of God leaves a man indifferent, to turn or not to turn. I shall conclude what relates to Bishop Ridley, with those words of his farewel, pag. 506, Acts and Monum. The Church had holy and wholesom Homilies, &c. It had in matters of controversie Articles so penned and framed after the holy Scripture, and grounded upon the true understanding of God's word, that in short time, if they had been universally received, they should have been able to have set in Christ's Church much concord and unity in Christ's true Religion, and to have expelled many false Errors and Heresies, wherewith this Church, alas, was almost overgone. He here approves all the Articles, and therefore the three before-mentioned, as agreeable to God's Word.
As to Cranmer, we have him not only owning all the Doctrine and Religion set out by King Edward, but also offering (if Peter Martyr might be joyned to him, with four or five more) to maintain that it was more pure, and according to God's Word, than any that had been used in England for an hundred years. This had been a most foolish challenge indeed, if he had not known full well, that Peter Martyr and he, jumped in their judgements about all the Articles, and particularly that of Predestination: With Heterodoxy in which, he might well expect to be charged; for Iames Lambert had been apposed in that point in King Henry the Eighths Reign; and our Martyrs in Queen Mary's time, were frequently twitted with fatality, making God the Author of Sin, destroying Free-will, and what not?
The next Martyr I shall instance in, is Mr. Philpot, to whom Mr. Bradford refers his Friend for satisfaction in the matter of Election. What he did write about Election, I do not find; but I find enough to make me confident, that if he had written any thing about it, he would have shewed himself sufficiently Calvinistical. For in his fifth Examination, he took occasion to ask his Popish Adversaries, Which of them all was able to Answer Calvin's Institutions, which is Minister of Geneva? To which Dr. Saverson replies, with lye and all, A godly Minister indeed of receipt of Cut-purses, and Runnagate Traytors. And of late, I can tell you, there is such contention fallen between him and his own Sects, that he was feign to flee the Town, about Predestination. I tell you truth, …or I came by Geneva hither At which calumny Philpot …s zeal was stirred, as appears by his words; I am sure you blaspheme that godly man, and that godly Church where he is Minister. As it is your Churches condition, when you cannot answer men by learning, to oppress them with blasphemies and false reports; for in the matter of Predestination, he is in none other opinion than all the Doctors of the Church be, agreeing to the Scriptures. If this be not full and home, what is? The profound Disputant, and blessed Martyr, answering for his life, avows Mr. Calvin's Doctrine of Predestination, to be agreeable to the ancient Doctors, and Scriptures: And how could a Doctrine be more amply commended?
His Friend Mr. Bradford will say as much for the Doctrine it self, though not taking notice of Mr. Calvin as delivering it in his Institutions. There is a Letter of his concerning Election to two of his Friends, N. S. R. C. recorded Acts and Monuments 352. Who the persons were, notified by these four letters, N. S. R. C. I have no certainty; but suppose that N. S. was one Skelthrop, who held conditional Election, and Free-will, but by the pains Mr. Bradford and others took with him, was reclaimed. After this Epistle of Mr. Bradford's, Mr. Fox adds some Notes appertaining to the matter of Election; which Notes do not in the least contradict any one tittle in Mr. Bradford, but more largely explain what he touched but briefly. But Dr. Heylin saith,