The Universalist Examined and Convicted, Title page – To the reader
THE VNIVERSALIST Examined and Convicted, deſtitute of plaine Sayings of Scripture, or Evidence of Reaſon.
In Anſwer to a Treatiſe entituled, The Ʋniverſality of Gods free Grace in Chriſt to Mankind.
By Obadiah Howe, A. M. Oxon. Paſtor of Stickney in Lincolne-ſhire.
For their ſakes, I ſanctifie my ſelfe.
John 17.19.
He dyed for this Nation, and not for this Nation only, but that he might gather into one all the Children of God.
John 11.51.
Urgent fratres articulum iſtum totidem Scripturae verbis nunquam reperiri, ſed reſpondemus, fieri non poſſe ut articulus Controverſus inter eos qui Scripturam pro verbo Dei agnoſcunt, totidem verbis concipiatur.
Remon. Coll. Hagienſ. 170.
[Christus mortuus eſt pro omnibus] [eſt propitiatio pro peccatis totius mundi] &c, qui ſic loquitur, cum Scriptura loquitur, qui phraſin hane repudiant, andax eſt & Scripturarum judex non interpres, qui iſta loca convenienter Analogiae fidei explicat, boni interpretis officium facit, controverſia enim eſt de ſenſu non de verbis.
Armin. Reſp. ad 31. Artic. Art. 13.
Printed for John Rothwell, at the Sun and Fountaine in Pauls Church-yard, 1648.
To the Chriſtian Reader, with ſome Animadverſions upon the Authors Epiſtle.
THe infirmity of crowding to the Preſſe is growne Epidemicall. Infirmity I call it; becauſe from thence men doe (Publicè inſanire) and have this unhappineſſe, that, in the Apoſtles phraſe, their madneſſe is knowne to all men, 2 Tim. 3 9. And Epidemicall I call it: for who though of the meaneſt of the people, but may fill his hand and the Preſſe at pleaſure. Such hath been the Licenſe of theſe latter times, that Pamphlets ſwarme without Licenſe, and now the pretended Mother ſtriveth to divide the childe, with the true, errour with truth, and pleadeth if it hath not equall liberty of the Preſſe, that truth is ſuppreſt. We want ſome wiſe Solomon to give wiſe judgement, to give truth its owne, and let errour know what ſhe is. Whether the want of ſuch hath not much diſhonoured the Preſſe, blemiſhed the truth, impeded Reformation, diſſetled the people, let common experience determine. Such daily births of Pamphlets to and fro can be no leſſe to the people, then the windes are to the waves, make them crowde into new ſtormes. As Athens aſcribed her troubles to the Orators, who toſſed the flexible multitude into ſedition; I wiſh that this had not too great an influence into our preſent diſtractions; which if they were ſuch as did recompence us with ſome hidden truths, they were worth the buying at ſo deare a rate; but if we obſerve them, they are ſuch as are addicted only to miſcall truth, as if they were hired to curſe Iſrael. If they can but call Antichriſtian, erroneous, impious, blaſphemous, it paſſeth for current, as if they had proved it ſo, as if a foule mouth was the Index of a deep head, and ſcurrilitie the meaſure of reaſon.
Reader, that which thou haſt here to the teſt, and examined, is no new opinion, nor any new light added to an old truth, but the manner of maintaining it is very ſingular, none before daring to appeare ſo apſurd in Print.
This with foure other annexed points of Arminius, have formerly troubled quiet ſtates and ſtrong heads, but now I cannot ſay that they doe either: Men of but indifferent parts (much more of more accurate) have left raking in the aſhes of theſe perplexed Diſputes, being ſuch as have had their heat pretty well allayed long ſince; but of late ſome indigeſted and ſhattered braines have revived them, with no more hope of ſucceſſe, than intention to cure our Commotions.
The Authour of this Diſcourſe, with whom I am to engage, would be taken for a Meſſenger of new Light, but he appeares under no other face than of a miſhapen Arminian: One ſtrong in the Point of Redemption, but looketh with another face in the Point of Election. In the former he is not different, but where he is more abſurd.
I muſt acknowledge the depth of theſe Controverſies, theſe negotiating and criticall times, my ſlender yeares, and my Paſtorall imployment, doe all comply to a diſadvantage, were they not counterpoiſed with ſome incouragement from my Adverſary. My genius was never martiall'd up in theſe Bible-battels, therefore it cannot be expected that I ſhould adde any new Light to theſe Points, which have exerciſed, yea exhauſted the choiſeſt Lamps in Chriſtendome for their diſcovery. I muſt ſay of this my Anſwer as the Poet of his Satyr againſt ſome Scriblers in his time: Perſ. in ProlNon ad poeſin ingenio natus, ſed temporum ratione ductus—… Such are the diſtempers of the times, and the negotiations of men, both of weake judgements, and corrupt minds, that now the exigence both of truth and peace requireth, that they that have but little, caſt in their Mite. I may doe it at as cheape a rate as any. Empty Margents, common reſolutions, and an anſwer as worthleſſe as his Diſcourſe, will not be to my diſparagement. I have nothing that can promiſe more: for as I have nothing to ſatisfie if men expect, ſo I have nothing to loſe if men cenſure.
Reader, if thou obſerveſt, we may ſee the whole Fabrick in his Frontiſpiece, the marrow of his whole diſcourſe in his Epiſtle; and therein we have a taſt of that Scripture, reaſon, or faire dealing we are likely to expect from the whole, which if I ſhould throughly examine, and give a ſolicitous anſwer to, I ſhould prevent my ſelfe, and make my Epiſtle as voluminous as his Treatiſe: I ſhall therefore take ſome things that are not elſe where, and leave the reſt to fall under the ſucceſſive refutations in the following diſcourſe.
Firſt we find the man in a paſſion of the heart:
[Heartily grieved that a Church profeſsing the great love of God, in the authoriſed Doctrine thereof, ſhould be abuſed by many.] It ſeemeth then there is a Church of England, and the Doctrine thereof Orthodox, both which is much queſtioned now in theſe times; were he well furniſhed, he ſhould have my voice to be the Churches Champion, but that I feare he hath an eye more to his owne tenent then the Authority of the Church of England; and ſo long as She ſaith as he ſaith, Shee ſhall not want the Title of a Church, that it may bee known he hath the ſuffrage of a Church of his ſide: not much unlike that Papall Sycophant, Conſtat ſummum Pontificem à pio Conſtantino Deum appellari. But the Particulars of his ſad Complaint are theſe:
[Many deny and blaſpheme this great love of God to mankind in Scripture affirmed. John 3.16, 17. As if God hated moſt men from Eternity, ſo as they are not beholding to him for any good at all nor have any doore of repentance, or meanes of life opened and afforded to them.] It is uſuall with Impoſtures, to frame to themſelves Adverſaries, and worke them to their owne conceits; and this is the Authour guilty of. For,
1. He cannot produce any that denyeth the great love of God to the world of mankind: John 3.16. Which is, that he ſent his Son, that thoſe that beleeve might not periſh, but have everlaſting life. 2. For his deduction there-from, it is no high blaſphemy to deny.
Secondly, As for that Phraſe, [Hating moſt men from Eternitie.] He doth not deale very candidly, to ſet before his Reader the odious tearme of (Hating moſt men from Eternity,) which fleſh and bloud doth not well digeſt, without explaining the meaning of his Adverſaries herein, as if they taught ſome monſtrus Doctrine, when indeed it is his owne Doctrine. For, that God hated Eſau he cannot deny, and that that hatred conſiſted in his denying that peculiar favour to Eſau which he gave to Jacob, he granteth; Pag. 93. And ſo he defineth Gods hatred to be a leſſe loving; Pag. 92, And this leſſe loving is a denying of that good which he giveth to another. Now, for God to deny that great good, viz. Grace and Glory, to moſt men, which hee giveth to his Elect, this is in our ſenſe to hate them; and let him if he can produce any that ſpeaks otherwiſe of Gods hatred: But this is no ſuch Blaſphemy as he pretendeth, for he ſaith no leſſe himſelfe: [He decreed to harden and give up the reſidue, for contempt of meanes, to ſhew his juſtice, when he overcommeth his Elect, and brings them in to beleeve, and ſo to the inheritance. Pag. 123.] Now, is not to decree to harden, to deny that great good, Grace and Glory, which he giveth to his Elect in overcoming them to beleeve? And is not this to hate? And is not this to moſt men in his owne expreſſes? Yet he cries out of blaſpheming the love of God, in ſaying that in that ſenſe God is ſaid to hate moſt men. But he may happily reply, that Gods hardening moſt men is for contempt of meanes; but this helpeth him not, becauſe he overcommeth his Elect notwithſtanding contempt of meanes; therefore he denies that grace to one which he giveth to another:Aquin. part. 1. q. 23. art. 3. Therefore to this I ſay with Aquinas: [In quantum vult. omnibus aliquod bonum, omnes amat; in quantum aliquibus non dat quodcunque bonum, nec illud bonum quod eſt vita aeterna, ideo eos odio habet & reprobat.]
Thirdly, As for that Phraſe of [Moſt men being not beholding to God for any good at all.] It is his owne perverſe inference; that becauſe we ſay he denyeth the top of his love to moſt men, therefore he chargeth us with this, that they are not beholding to God for any good. Falſe ſuggeſtion! That God ſhineth both on Juſt and unjuſt, ſhews many mercies to all, no man denyeth: [Omnibus dat aliquod bonum, ideo omnes amat.]
Fourthly, As for the laſt, [And no doore of life and repentance ſet open for them.] I only demand, what doore can be ſet open? and with what intention it is ſet open to them whom God hath determined to give up to deſtruction? But this he hath done to moſt men, as he ſaith, Pag. 120. Now that I may in a few words thus reaſon: they that are decreed to be given up and hardened are Reprobated, and they that are Reprobated, whilſt they remaine ſo, cannot be ſaved, nor receive Faith, or Converſion, is the Confeſſion of Corvinus; Cap. 26. §. 5[Si intelligatur de reprobo qua tali in ſenſu compoſito, nego reprobum poſſe ſalvari aut fidem accipere & ſe convertere.] And that they that are from Eternity Reprobated, do alwaies remaine ſo, is cleare from their Principles: becauſe Reprobation is paſt on them that do finally perſiſt in Infidelity and diſobedience, whom God foreſeeth to do ſo, and by vertue of his preſcience do infallibly perſiſt in it, and ſo remaine alwaies Reprobates. Hence is it that Corvinus himſelfe,Cap. 21. §. 6. though he ſaid that Juſtified perſons might be reprobated, yet he durſt not ſay that Reprobated perſons could be juſtified; becauſe that was the concluſive Act, being done after finall impenitence, after which no man can beleeve or repent. Therefore how a doore of life can be opened to ſuch in time I cannot ſee, and to deny it is no blaſphemy.
The ſecond thing which he ſadly layeth to heart is: That
[Many contradict plaine ſayings of Scripture, as that Chriſt gave himſelfe a ranſome for all, 1 Tim. 2.6. Chriſt taſted death for every man, Heb. 2.9. and affirme contrarie, that Chriſt did not ſhed his bloud, or die for everie man.
But herein he diſcovers either affected Ignorance, or wilfull Calumny: For
1. He cannot produce any that deny the truth of thoſe Scriptures. If he will content himſelfe with what thoſe places affirme he ſhall have no Antagoniſt: but that which we deny is his gloſſes on, and inferences from thoſe Texts, as that Chriſt did by death procure Eternall life for every ſon of Adam, which no Scripture affirmeth. The Remonſt. to whom our Author muſt come behind in theſe Controverſies, have been ſo farre from charging us with denying Plaine ſayings of Scriptures, that they have granted that their Tenent is not, nor can be thought to be contained in plaine ſayings of Scripture.Col. Hagien 170. [Vrgent fratres articulum iſtum totidem verbis Scripturae nunquā reperiri; ſed reſpōdemus, fierinon poſſe ut articulus Controverſus inter eos qui Scripturam pro verbo Dei agnoſcunt totidem verbis Scripturae concipiatur.] They had the ingenuity to conceive that no man that had the leaſt ſparke of grace, or reaſon, would queſtion or deny that which the Scripture plainely affirmeth;Rep. ad art. 31. art. 12 and Arminius profeſſeth that in this very point, the Controverſie is not about the words, but ſenſe and interpretation; as may be ſeene in that place quoted in my Frontiſpiece; but our Adverſary delights [fingere ſibi adverſarium ſtolidum] to make to himſelfe a fooliſh Adverſary.
A third thing that he complaineth of is this:
[That the Doctrine of the Church of England ſhould be called a flat lie, (viz. that God redeemed me and all mankind) in this aſſertion, he redeemed none but the Elect.] Wherein we may ſee the Church of England hath a Son of a very good nature, but a very bad ingeny, ſorry to have her wronged, but knoweth not when ſhe is ſo, therefore pickes quarrels without cauſe. For,
1. He that takes the Liturgie of the Church of England for the Doctrine thereof may very well take that for an injury which is not; and what cauſe many have had to ſay, that many expreſſions were foiſted into the Liturgie, and it not retaine its Primitive purity, I leave to him to examine.
2. To redeem totum genus humanum, is no more then Omnia genera hominum: all mankind, no more then all the kinds of men: and if he would have that Phraſe to meane further, he muſt prove it: now this is not proved a lye by ſaying he redeemed only the Elect, for ſuch he hath in all kinds of men
3. If he peruſe the Doctrine of England in the 39. Articles, he ſhall ſee contrary to his Doctrine; unleſſe to the words thereof he adde his corrupt Comments.
A fourth thing which he grieveth for, is this:
[That men ſhould run into ſo many long-ago-condemned practiſes, evill and Papiſticall, to maintaine their Contradictions of the truth.] But his practice of ſo prepoſſeſſing the minds of his Reader without ground, is far more Jeſuiticall: and was he of any authority [with any but them that labour with his Ignorance] So that we might ſay his tongue is a ſlander, we might upon better ground be grieved for his Calumny: But thoſe tricks where with he challengeth us I ſhall examine.
1. [Pretending inſufficiencie in the Scripture to be the Determiner of matters of faith] This is but his wonted forgery, and Calumny, he cannot ſhew wherein we pretend ſo much, or at leaſt it muſt be in that wherein he is as guilty as any. It hath been our plea that no Scripture holdeth forth his Doctrine; therefore, there is no need why we ſhould fly to the inſufficiency of Scripture to determine matters of faith; indeed his gloſſes and Comments we cannot ſuffer to determine our faith, therefore let that ſhift be returned to them that need it.
2. [Pretending darkeneſſe in Fundamentalls] But herein I demand, whether any there be that ſaith in expreſſe words, that the Scripture is darke in Fundamentals, or whether it be a deduction of his own from our expreſſes upon ſome places of Scripture; if the firſt, then I expect that he produce them; If the ſecond, I doubt it will appeare that the Jeſuiticall Sophiſtry hath a greater influence into his practice then ours: Juſt ſuch dealing as we have from them, we have from him, and in both moſt unjuſt forgeries. The Papiſts becauſe they cannot worke us to their mind to ſay that all Scriptures are hard, they to make us odious traduce us, as if we held that all Scriptures are eaſie. So the Rhemiſts object againſt us in theſe words:Rhem. Teſt. in preſ. §. 16. [They find no difficultie in the Booke ſealed with Seven Seales, and no Interpreter with the Eunuch.Gag. for new Goſp. Pag. 1.] And in another Treatiſe this is laid down by them as an Error of the Proteſtants; [That they maintaine that the Scriptures are eaſie.] And now the Author ſaith as a charge againſt us, that we hold that the Scripture is darke in Fundamentals; delivering it ſo lurgely, and ſo indefinitely, as if we held that the Scripture was wholly darke in Fundamentals; but if either of theſe Calumniators had but conſidered that ſome Scriptures are eaſie, ſome hard and difficult, Scripture neither wholy darke, nor wholly eaſie, there might have been little cauſe appearing for ſuch a Calumny on either ſide. Now to this Allegation, if he meane that the Scripture every where treating of the Foundation, is darke, this no man ſaith: If he meane that in ſome things that are concerning the Foundation the Scripture is darke and obſcure, he cannot upon good ground deny it; certainly St Peter was of that mind when he ſaid, many things were ſo hard to be underſtood, that the unlearned did wreſt them to their deſtruction, 1 Pet. 3.16.
But beſides, it is no convincing Argument againſt us becauſe we do as the Papiſts, if either the Authour or Arminius be right; our Author in the 118. Pag. is loth to diſlike all that they ſay, and Arminius being charged with holding a Papiſticall Tenent,In Perkins, 258. thus replyed; Anne quia Pontificia ideo falſa? This may be eaſily wiped off if he could produce any that did ſo ſay.
4. [Vſing carnall reaſons to frame abſurdities that follow.] It ſeemes, that reaſoning that preſſeth his Tenent with abſurdities, is carnall reaſoning: a ſafe concluſion for himſelfe, he would faine embrace the errour, but not meddle with the abſurdities that follow; true it is that [Ab uno abſurdo mille ſequuntur.] Many abſurdities will follow from an abſurditie, but certainly no abſurdity will follow from the truth. If his Tenent be Truth, he need not feare to be burthened with the abſurdities that follow; but in that he feares the abſurdities, it is a ſtrong ſuſpition that it is not truth which yet he would embrace, but leave the other, as the Cat, [Amat piſcem ſed non vult tangere Lympham.] But beſides, it is neither a Papiſticall ſhift, nor carnall reaſoning to refute errour by abſurdities that follow, it was the Apoſtles practice, 1 Cor. 15.3. He proveth the Reſurrection by thoſe abſurdities that follow upon the deniall of it: as then is not Chriſt riſen, then are we of all Creatures moſt miſerable, elſe why are ye baptized for the dead, and many other in that Chapter; and very frequent is this way of Confutation in Scripture; and it is a very pregnant way of arguing; but he diſcovereth plainly what thoughts he hath of his Tenent, when he is loath to be troubled with the abſurdities that follow, and I blame him not, for they are many and great.
4. [Impoſing ſtrange ſenſes of plaine ſayings of Scripture.] But what theſe ſtrange ſenſes are he ſhould have done well to have inſerted, that the Reader might have had a ſurvey of them, but in that he chargeth us without inſtance, I need not anſwer: But this I dare referre to any intelligent Reader that is but verſed in the leaſt meaſure, to judge whether they that hold his Tenent, or we, give the ſtrangeſt and moſt exoticke interpretations, and they that do, let them lye under that blacke Charge. Let any review thoſe ſtrange ſenſes that the Remonſt. put upon John 6.37.44. Acts 13.48. With all others that give any light in theſe Controverſies, of which our Author favours in his whole Treatiſe: as in Pag. That Text John 6.37. [Thoſe that my Father giveth me ſhall come unto me.] By thoſe that are (given to Chriſt) he interprets, thoſe that are given to him in the heavenly Calling, ſo as to come to him; So that this firſt (giving) taketh in comming to him; and the ſenſe is this, thoſe that come unto me ſhall come unto me, thoſe that beleeve ſhall beleeve; this in the eyes of any reaſonable man cannot but ſeeme a ſtrange Interpretation. So that Text, John 6.44. [No man can come except my Father draw him.] By drawing here, the Remonſt. as alſo the Author, Pag. Meane the drawing by the call of the Goſpell, outward only by Morall ſuaſion, and ſuch a drawing as is diſtinct from bringing them in to beleeve and give themſelves to Chriſt: But any that conſiders the Context, may adjudge this a ſtrange Interpretation. Our Saviour being to ſhew a reaſon why among thoſe that did equally enjoy the outward call of the Goſpel, and ſo as that they were convinced, yet ſome did not beleeve, he giveth this as a reaſon, No man can come unto me except my Father draw him. Now this word (drawing) ſhewing a reaſon of a diſparity in condition, cannot be meant of that wherein there was a parity amongſt them. So for many others; but the enſuing Diſcourſe will furniſh any with ability to judge who is moſt guilty of ſtrange Senſes, and Interpretations of Scripture.
Having thus ended his ſad complaint, he cometh to counſel his reader, or if he pleaſe, to be an anſwerer, wherein lyeth a mixture of egregious Slanders, therefore I ſhall touch them a little: he wiſheth his Antagoniſt,
[Not to invent lies and ſlanders, to make infamous Such as will not be of the ſame opinion, in which the Antichriſtian brood aboundeth; and ſo many have done in this buſineſſe alſo, giving it out to others, that ſuch as ſay that Chriſt is the Saviour of the world, as Joh. 4.42. gave himſelfe a ranſome for all men, 1 Tim. 2.6. that theſe are,
1. [Falſe witneſſes againſt Chriſt and his Apoſtles.] I ſhould expect the ſame dealing from him to us, that he expects from us to him; and in teaching us to beware of lies and ſlanders, he ſhould not become the father of a lye and ſlander himſelfe: It is not my language, but his owne retorted. I know none more guilty of it than himſelfe: For herein he would poſſeſſe his Reader, that we ſay thoſe that ſay as John 4.42. 1 Tim. 2.6. Such are falſe witneſſes againſt Chriſt and his Apoſtles. A ſhamefull forgery, that beareth its ſhame in the face of it, no man being ſo ſenſeleſſe to charge any man for a falſe witneſſe againſt Chriſt and his Apoſtles for ſaying as they ſay. Let the Author remind his owne Tract, and tell me is there nothing there but what Chriſt and his Apoſtles ſpeake? To inſtance, when he ſpeaketh of 1 Tim. 2.6. He ſaith that that place ſaith that Chriſt gave himſelfe a ranſome for all Adams Sons, and thoſe that have a being from him: Pag. 55.57. Yea, every individuall of all mankind: Pag. 61. But I pray doth Chriſt or his Apoſtles ſay ſo? I could never yet ſee it; no, it is a ſenſe that he putteh upon that Text; and ſo doing, if any ſay he is a falſe witneſſe againſt Chriſt and his Apoſtles, he is not to be condemned of ſlander: rather the ſlander is the Authours charge, becauſe when we deny his interpretation, he ſaith we deny the words; and when any ſaith he is a falſe witneſſe againſt Chriſt and his Apoſtles for obtruding ſuch a ſenſe on them as they will not owne, he chargeth us with ſlander, as if we ſaid he was a falſe witneſſe that ſayth as thoſe places ſay: He might have remembred that ſaying, Qui alterum accuſat probri, &c. He that accuſeth another, had need looke home to himſelfe.
2. [That ſuch are Arminians.] How ready he is to embrace the Tenent, yet ſhie of entertaining the name of Arminius? for him or any that holds the univerſality of merit of Chriſts death, to account it a ſlander to be called an Arminian, is a meere foppery, and for me to give a ſerious anſwer herein, would be to be guilty of his folly. The Doctrine it ſelfe is one of the five points of Arminius, the diſtinction of procuring and applying, which the Author uſeth, and the manner of applying it is theirs, the Scriptures produced by our Author in purſuance of it are produced by them, his interpretations of contrary Texts are theirs, his Anſwers to our Arguments are theirs; if I make not all this good, I ſhall willingly lye downe under that cenſure. And if the caſe be thus, it is not our ſlander but his folly that appeareth. For either he hath read Arminius or not; if he hath not, then his want of ingenuity appeares in charging us with ſlander, in ſaying he is an Arminian, when he knoweth not what an Arminian is: If he have, then his diſhoneſty appeareth in ſo ſhamefully denying his Maſter, when he cannot but know, his ſpeech doth ſo bewray him. Indeed Arminius hath had an ill ſavour amongſt us for theſe late yeares, and that he reſenteth, therefore I cannot blame him if he be not willing to be ſeene under that garbe.
3. [That ſuch hold that Chriſt dyed for all men alike.] If this be ſuch a ſlander, I would he would not afford ſuch a faire occaſion for our preſuming in this caſe. Doth not his whole Diſcourſe ſavour ſtrongly of it? Let him ſhew me where in all his Booke he maketh the Death of Chriſt to make any difference. Let us but take a taſt: He treating of the ends of his Death, layeth downe three: Firſt, To ſatisfie Juſtice. Secondly, To become their Lord. Thirdly, To ranſome from the Curſe. Now if in any place of his Booke he maketh it appeare, that he ſatisfied the juſtice of God for one more than another; or became their Lord over one more than another; or did ranſome one more than another, then I ſhall thinke that he holdeth not that Chriſt dyed for all men alike; indeed I thinke he maketh the application to be with a difference, but for the impetration or purchaſe, I ſuppoſe he maketh it to be generall, and equall: but if he do not hold ſo, the matter will be the ſame betwixt him and his Antagoniſt.
4. [That men by nature have free will to ſpituall good, that there is no Election, that there is no Grace but what men may fall from.] This I conceive ſome men lay to his charge, and the ground is this: No abſolute Election, univerſall Attonement, free will, falling away from Grace, are annexed Points, and hitherto have been inſeparable, and thoſe that have maintained the one, have with equall ſtrength maintained the other; and when hee doth ſo well acquit himſelfe in the one as quite to deſert the other, I ſhall confeſſe my ſelfe deceived in this buſineſſe. Indeed, he granteth abſolute Election, not upon foreſight of faith, but then this deſtroyeth generall Attonement, as I ſhew in the following Diſcourſe; Therefore he muſt come to deny abſolute Election, or elſe relinquiſh generall Attonement. And ſo for the reſt, they are ſo naturall to his expreſſes in his Diſcourſe, that it will be a hard thing to quit himſelfe of them, how ever the following Diſcourſe will put him to his Purgators, and I feare at laſt they will appeare no ſlanders. I would he did not give too faire occaſion for to charge him. I ſhall mind the Reader but of one thing more, and that is the pretence of the Author, of a tye that lyeth upon him to maintain this Doctrin, and that is the Proteſtation which he took [to defend the Doctrine of the Church of England againſt Popery, and Popiſh Innovations, which the Tenent of Chriſt not dying for all, opens a wide doore unto.] Hereby we may ſee with what ſiniſter reſpects he was byaſſed, and with what blind zeale he was acted when he tooke the Proteſtation; his concluding that he was thereby engaged to defend univerſall redemption, is a bad preſident for Popiſh mentall reſervations, and the enervation of all Covenants, if they may be taken according to the conceit of the Takers, for there is nothing to which we are leſſe engaged than to that: But he here magnifieth his peircing judgement in deſcrying that tye that few beſides himſelfe could ſee, but his ground I ſhall examine, (becauſe happily it may reflect on them that are of a contrary judgement, yet are under the ſame Covenant with him.) His grounds are twofold.
1. [He profeſſed to maintaine the Proteſtant Religion againſt Popery, and Popiſh Innovations:] To which he thinkes the denyall of his Doctrine ſets a wide doore open. I know not what his conſcience is, I am ſure his underſtanding is weake if he herein ſpeake as he thinks; as for any feare of Popery I conceive no ground, there is no affinity at all: Let the Author peruſe the Jeſuites over, looke the Remiſts in the Controverted places, and then let him tell me if that Proteſtation tyed him againſt Popery, obliged him to hold univerſall Redemption; the Authour (if he tooke the Proteſtation in judgement) doth, or may know, that Papiſts are divided in thoſe Points as well as Proteſtants: and that ours hath no more affinity with Popery than his Doctrine, becauſe Papiſts there are on both ſides, as well as Proteſtants on both ſides.
2. [The ſecond ground is, becauſe he proteſted to defend the Doctrine of the Church of England.] As if his Doctrine fetched any authority from that: He produceth foure ſeverall Articles, I ſhall examine them ſeverally.
1. [Art. 6. Holy Scripture containeth all things neceſſary to ſalvation, ſo that what is not there read, or proved by it, is not required of any to be beleeved] True: But why doth not he thinke himſelfe by this obliged rather to relinquiſh his opinion than to defend it? Seeing no Scripture ſpeaketh ſo much, as is afterwards ſhewne; and in that no Scripture faith ſo much, this Article of the Doctrine of the Church of England binds him not to beleeve it, much leſſe to defend it: Firſt let him prove that his Tenent is the language of Scripture before he be bound by that article to defend it.
2. [Art. 20. It is not lawfull for the Church to ordaine any thing that is contrary to the Word of God, neither may it ſo expound one place of Scripture that it be ſo repugnant to another.] And ſtill this is no friend to him or his Doctrine, or way of maintaining it; it muſt be firſt tryed who are moſt guilty of giving ſuch uncouth interpretations of Scripture as that they cannot be reconciled to other places, which I feare will fall upon the Author, and this the enſuing Diſcourſe will make appeare. Herein the Reader may take a ſurvey of the ſize of the Authors underſtanding and judgement in his Proteſtation taking.
3. [Art. 2. Chriſt very God, very man, who ſuffered, was crucified, &c. to reconcile his Father to us, and to be a Sacrifice not only for originall guilt, but alſo for all actuall ſins of men.] This is truth, but then the Reader may ſee that is no ſuch enemy to the Popiſh Innovation, againſt which this Article was framed; nor is this Article ſo great a friend to his Tenent as he in both pretendeth: Let us take the Popiſh Innovation as he layeth it downe, Pag. 98. [That Chriſt only paid the greateſt part of the debt to his Father, wholly in reſpect of Eternall puniſhment, and left a Part of the debt in reſpect of temporall puniſhments for his People to pay, &c.] Now, whether do we that ſay according to this Article, that Chriſt by his death was a Sacrifice not for originall only, nor ſome actuall ſins only, but originall and all actuall ſins of them for whom he dyed, So that …here is no new debt required of them for which he did not ſatisfie; or, he that ſaith that there is a new debt which Chriſt did not ſatisfie for, viz. Contempt of meanes of grace, which God may require of them for whom Chriſt dyed, as a debt not ſatisfied for, let any rationall man judge. But as the grounds of his proteſting, So are his performances, very weake. Secondly, This Article is no friend to his Tenent; for, if he have not ſuffered ſhipwracke of his common underſtanding, he may ſee a wide difference betwixt the ſins of all men, and all the ſins of men, and hence ariſeth his miſtake, he referreth the Particle (All) to men, and it is to be referred to ſins. That Chirurgion that ſaith he hath wrought a cure on all the members of mans body, doth no way inferre that he hath wrought a cure of the Members of all mens bodies. That Article tendeth hitherto, to affirme that Chriſt did take away all the ſins of them for whom he dyed, as well Actuall as Originall, and our Authour would ſtretch it to averre that he tooke away the Actuall and Originall ſins of every man: but this is not to defend, but to deſtroy the Doctrine of the Church of England.
4. [Art. 15.31. That by the Sacrifice of himſelfe he ſhould take away the ſins of the world, and all the ſins of the whole world both Originall and Actuall, and this againſt a Popiſh Innovation] Truth; and ſo he doth take away the ſin of the world, that is of men living in the world: as he is ſaid to be beleeved on in the world, that is, by men living in the world. He taketh away ſins from the world (quoad partem credentem) in them that beleeve: as John 3.16. And for all the ſins of Beleevers all over the whole world; thus farre we grant it, but he cannot with any ſhew of reaſon ſtretch thoſe Articles any further, he may ſee that the ſcope of them tend to another buſineſſe, for if they ſhould ſpeak as much as the Author intendeth, they ſhould ſay thus much, That Chriſt took away all Originall & all Actuall ſins of every Son of Adam; which no Scripture ſpeaketh, no Arminian affirmeth, and the Author diſclaimeth, for he ſaith, contempt of meanes is a new debt: Therefore the Doctrine of the Church of England being Orthodox, and ſo he haveing proteſted to defend it, it cannot ſpeake any ſuch thing, or any waies favour his Doctrine. Many more particulars might be inſtanced in, but they are of ſo low a flight that they cannot but be diſtaſtefull to the Palate of them that are any way ingenuous, therefore with theſe I content my ſelfe, as affording a ſufficient taſte of his forged Calumnies, impertinent Allegations, abuſe and foule dealing with his Oppoſers, infirm and weake grounds both in maintaining his Doctrine, and matters of greater concernment, his Covenant and Proteſtations, which ſhould be done in judgement. Ex pede Herculem, by the foot we may gueſſe at the ſtature of the Body, ſo by this we may gueſſe at the whole; but I prepoſſeſſe thee not with prejudice, as thou findeſt, judge. Now happily thou mayeſt demand, why this comes forth as a birth out of due time, after ſo many in theſe Controverſies, as Mr Whitfield and others? To this I anſwer, Firſt, becauſe this was finiſhed before Mr Whitfield's came to light. Secondly, becauſe if the men we have to deale with were of ſuch ingenuity as that when a man doth [foreign refutare] refute the moſt illuſtrious, and expreſſions of greateſt force in a Controverſie, they could acquieſce in it, as if he did foreign refutare, refute all; Then I know Mr Whitfield would give good ſatisfaction, he having given ſuch ſolutions as the Author will never contradict. But any that conſidereth the nature of our Antagoniſts, they may adjudge what hath been ſaid to be a little too conciſe, and thence they take occaſion to ſay that we picke and chuſe for our owne advantage, therefore. I have applyed my ſelfe to a generall Anſwer, not leaving any materiall expreſſion unexamined: wiſhing every intelligent Reader to conſider, that the nature of my Antagoniſt neceſſitateth me to this tediouſneſſe. Thirdly, I hope, (though much hath been ſaid,) with my poore Tallent to caſt ſome Mite into the Treaſure of publique deciſions; therefore not with intention to ecclipſe in any meaſure what hath been before ſaid, but deſiring in a brotherly way to unite forces to refell this ſpreading errour that eateth like a Canker. The Method of his Chapters I have inverted, his Sixt is my Firſt. To try a man when he is halfe hanged, and to ſtate a queſtion in the midſt of a Diſcourſe, I thinke not much different. And to the Reader of what judgement ſoever, I ſay but this; Let neither affection, nor prejudice either interpret Scripture, or anſwer Reaſon, follow the naturall and cleare genius of the Text, and I commit this my unworthy Diſcourſe to thy peruſall, and us all to God, to lead us into all Truth neceſſary for our Salvation, and remaine
Thine to ſerve thee in our Common Saviour Obadiah Howe.