Animadversions on Doctor Heylins Quinquarticular History, Part 77
Dr. H. page 110.
It is also affirmed, that he, among some other Protestants, assented in the point of falling from Grace to the opinion of the Church of Rome, in the Diet at Ratisbone.
Ans. 'Tis indeed so affirmed by Mr. Mountague (and, that I know of, by none else,) that Bucer did at the Diet of Ratisbon, consent with some other Protestants, to the possibility of the Saints falling from Grace: but Zanchy tells us quite another tale, that Bucer hath in the Relation of the Conference at Ratisbon, laid down that which makes strongly for the certain perseverance of the Saints. If Mr. Mountague had expected belief, he should have answered those allegations, and brought others that might evince the possibility of the true Saints apostasie. This may be sufficient to prove, that he was not against us: that he was for us, Zanchy's quotations out of him will scarce suffer any one to doubt; but we will see whether we can find out any other evidence. First, whilst he was a Papist, he had his conversation among the Dominicans, from whom it is likely he got nothing agreeable to the Jesuits notion of respective Decrees, and frustrable grace. The Star that brought him out of Popery, was Luther's Book de servo Arbitrio; by which Star it is not like that he was lead to Pelagianism, or Semipelagianism, or any other Doctrine that so advanceth the liberty of man's will, as sacrilegiously to rob the grace of God of its due force and power in converting of a Sinner. What Doctrine he preached or delivered in the Schools, whilst in England, may be collected from the barbarous malice of his Romish Adversaries appointing his dead bones to be taken out of the grave and committed to the fire; for Dr. Watson in his Sermon in St. Mary's, chargeth Bucer to have defended that perillous Doctrine concerning the fatal and absolute necessity of Predestination, and that he had set it out in such wise, as to leave no choice at all in such things: as who should say, It skilled not what a man purposed of any matter, since he had not the power to determine otherwise than the matter should come to pass: the which was the peculiar opinion of them that made God the Author of Evil; bringing men through this perswasion into such a careless security of their everlasting eternity, that in the mean season it made no matter, either towards salvation, or towards damnation, what a man did in this life. And because it may be replied, that he speaks this to disgrace and disparage Protestants in general, let us therefore hear what Dr. Perne in his Sermon sayes concerning Bucer. In it we are told, that he held opinion, that God was the Author and well-spring, not only of good, but also of evil; and that whatsoever was of that sort flowed from him, as from the head-spring and maker thereof: adding, that Bucer upheld this Doctrine to be sincere; howbeit, for offending divers mens consciences, he durst not put it into mens heads. And in his sentence of condemnation, this is laid to his charge, as a Doctrine defended by him, Omnia fato & absoluta necessitate fieri. Vid. Mr. Fox, page 770, 772. I know the good man's soul abhorred the things in these particulars charged upon him; nor did Dr. Perne stick to acknowledge, that he wronged him against his own conscience: yet seeing these Popish Agents can scarce be supposed so mad and furious, as to charge things upon him without any colour, we may and must suppose that Bucer did, if not in his publick determinations yet in his private discourses, let the University know, that his judgment did not differ from Calvin's, in the matter of God's decrees and concurrence unto the sinful actions of men. But if so,