Animadversions on Doctor Heylins Quinquarticular History, Part 78 – Part 82
Dr. H. pag. 109.
Why then does Calvin himself blame Bucer, for being Author and approver of such moderate courses, as the fiery temper of the Calvinists could by no means like?
Answ. I answer, that Bucer, by his very best Friends, had been charged at Zurick, Anno 1533, for speaking too doubtfully in the Doctrine of the Sacrament, through a desire to appease Luther: He, then, and there, made such an Apology for himself as was accepted. If at his coming over into England, he fell into the same fault, Mr. Calvin did but the part of a Christian, to admonish him. But certainly Calvin had high and honourable thoughts of him while he lived, and after his death tells Viret, that he found his heart torn in pieces as oft as he remembred, how manifold a loss the Church of God sustained by his departure. And so we leave Bucer and Martyr, with the Elogium deservedly bestowed upon them by Dr. Iackson, The two judicious Commentators, &c.
It is also worth while to enquire after the many worthy Divines, who to save their lives, and yet keep that faith and conscience which they had professed in the dayes of King Edward, did fly beyond Sea. We find some differences among them, relating to Discipline and Ceremonies; an account whereof is given us in the troubles of Frankford. Had they not all been of one mind in matters of Doctrine relating to the Decrees, Grace, and Perseverance, their difference had not been concealed. It had been easie for the party that sided with Calvin in these points, to have crushed the Anticalvinistical party, if any such there had been; but there is not the least ground to think there was any such. Those English Divines who sojourned at Geneva made a Translation of the Bible, and marginal Annotations upon it sufficiently Calvinistical. This was published Anno 1560, and the Authors of it were so little conscious to themselves of having delivered any Doctrine con…rary to that which was received and allowed in King Edward's time, that they adventured to dedicate their Work to the incomparable Princess Queen Elizabeth, no favourer of Foreign Doctrine. She accepted the Dedication, suffered the Book and the Annotations to pass among her People, without any censure here. So much entertainment and applause did it meet with, that some who have been curious to search into the number of its Editions, say, that by the Queens own Printers, it was printed above thirty times. I am not ignorant that King Iames highly censured this Transslation and the marginal Annotations, in the Hampton Conference: the Translation he calls the worst that ever he saw; some of the Notes he calls very partial, untrue, seditious, and savouring too much of dangerous and traiterous conceits: instancing in the Note on Exod. 1.19, and 2 Chron. 15.16. (which censure a Jesuit takes as if spoken of the Translation used at Geneva it self.) But the Annotations on both these places are satisfied for by Bishop Morton, page 104, of a Book written by him, to shew the Romanists Doctrine of Rebellion and Aequivocation. As for Arianism charged on these Annotations by Dr H. they are acquitted by the learned Letter of Sir Thomas Bodley.
I have all this while said nothing of Bishop Hooper and Bishop Latimer, out of whose Writings the Doctor hath transcribed so much. And truly the things transcribed out of them are so impertinent▪ that it would be no hazard to my Reader if I should wholly pass them over in silence. Yet I will not; but first shall say something of the men, secondly of their writings. Latimer was once a very hot Papist, as himself acknowledgeth against himself. Being converted from Popery, he was as zealous for the Reformed Religion; boldly reproving the sins of all, whether Rulers or Ruled. In his Sermons he used a style, which perhaps was then accounted elegant; but would now be judged ridiculous, at least unbeseeming the Pulpit. Hooper I look upon as one that feared the Lord from his youth; for he chose from his youth to leave Oxford, that he might not ensnare his conscience. Beyond the Seas he fell into acquiantance with the learned Henry Bullinger; and returned not into England till the Reign of King Edward: when he gained more love from the Laicks, than Clergy, being a stiff Non-conformist. Hand in drawing up the Articles of Religion he had none, one of them being diametrically opposite to his declared judgment; yet because he was very great, both for piety and learning, as his writings evidently shew, therefore his judgment is not to be sleighted. And if Dr. Heylin have proved, or any one else can prove, that he and Latimer held the opinions afterwards called Arminian; I will grant that those opinions were not by the Protestant Church in King Edward's time adjudged intolerable. Whether they held them or no? must be considered. First, I yield that they both asserted Universal Redemption. This being granted, the Doctor dare say, that
Dr. H. Part 2. page 50.
He, (Mr. Hickman he means,) will not be confident in affirming, there can be any room for such an absolute Decree of Reprobation, antecedaneous and precedent to the death of Christ, as his great Masters in the School of Calvin have been pleased to teach him.
Ans. Mr. Hickman's mind is best known to himself, so are his great Masters in the School of Calvin, if he ever had any such; but this I am confident of, that Calvin's Decree of Reprobation may be maintained, and yet Universal Redemption not denied. Monsieur Amyrald, as great a Scholar as this last age hath afforded, hath in a whole Book defended Calvin's absolute Decree against Mr. Hoard; yet the same Amyrald most strenuously defends Universal Redemption. Two Dissertations also of Bishop Davenant are published by careful and faithful hands: in the first, he sets himself to assert Universal Redemption by Christ; in the second, to assert Personal, both Election and Reprobation.
Let us see now what the Doctor can find in Latimer and Hooper.
Dr. H. Part 2. pag. 37.
Latimer in his Sermon on Septuages. rebukes those vain Fellows who abuse Election and Reprobation to carnal Liberty, or Presumption.
Answ. Why so doth Calvin, so doth Ursin, so do our Divines at the Synod of Dort.
Dr. H. page 38.
Hooper in his Preface to the ten Commandments, saith, We must not extenuate Original Sin, nor make God the Author of Evil; nor yet say, that God hath written fatal Laws, with the Stoicks, and in the necessity of destiny violently pulleth one by the hair into Heaven, and thrusteth the other headlong into Hell.
Answ. All this is just according to Calvin's method. No Calvinists say, that God's Decree offereth violence to Man's Will, or pulleth a man into Heaven. Only they say, that Electing love makes men willing, and that Holiness is an effect of Election. As for Sin, that, they say, is not an effect of Reprobation, but only a Consequent. I, but
Dr. H. page 39.
Bishop Latimer teacheth us, that we are to enquire no further after our Election, than as it is to be found in our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ.
Answ. Why so teach the Calvinists too, that our Election is not to be known, but by our knowledge of our interest in Christ. But the Anticalvinist will not say with Latimer, If thou findest thy self in Christ, then art thou sure of eternal life: He saith, A man may be in Christ, and be a Reprobate; a man may be in Christ to day, and in Hell to morrow.
Perhaps the Doctor will find more against Calvinistical Reprobation; or if he do not, he must be concluded to have beaten the Air. First we must hear what he makes Calvinistical Reprobation to be. 'Tis that, he saith,