The Anatomy of Arminianism, Chapter 11
CHAP. XI.
Whether the power of beleeuing the Goſpell is loſt by the ſinne of Adam.
I. IT is demanded, whether by the ſinne of Adam we hauehave loſt the power of beleeuing the Goſpell; Arminius, that maruailous artificer of deuiſing, doth deny it: For, that he might proue that God is bound to giuegive to eueryevery man power of beleeuing in Chriſt and obtaining faith, he doth contend, that Adam before his fall, had not power of beleeuing in Chriſt, nor was it needfull for him; & therefore we could not looſe in Adam, that which Adam himſelfe had not. He ſaith alſo, that faith was not commanded by the law, and therefore Adam was not bound to faith, becauſe onelyonly the law was giuen to him; he addeth alſo, that no man can beleeue, but he that is a ſinner: And if Adam did not receiue power wherby, if he fell he might riſe again, he did not receiue power of beleeuing the Goſpell, by which we riſe out of this fall.
II. Seeing theſe things tend thither, that Arminius might make a way for himſelfe to that impious and vngodly opinion, whereby he affirmes, that God is bound to giuegive to all men power of beleeuing, and that God is prepared to giuegive faith to all men, if they themſelues will: This queſtion is of no ſmall moment, nor to be perfunctoriouſly and lightly handled.
III. We therefore contend againſt Arminius, that mankinde by the ſinne of Adam, together with their originall purity and righteouſneſſe, loſt alſo the power of beleeuing in Chriſt. For by the fall of Adam we loſt the power of louing God, and of obeying him. Now ſaith doth include the louelove of God, and it is a certaine kinde of obedience.
IV. Adam indeede before his fall, was not bound to beleeue in Chriſt, becauſe he was not declared to him, neither then was there neede; but he was bound to beleeue eueryevery word of God, whatſoeuer ſhould afterward be; this bond paſſed to his poſteritie: but it had not paſſed, if Adam had not beene tyed to the like bond. So the iſraelites in the time of Dauid, were not bound to beleeue, Ieremy foretelling the inſtant captiuity into Babylon, becauſe Ieremy then was not, neither was it needfull for them to know this; and yet the Iewes in contemning the propheſie of Ieremy, violated that law, by which the ſame people was held and bound in the time of Dauid. Hee were a foole who would ſay, that hee that hath loſt his ſight, hath not loſt the power of ſeeing that houſe which was built foure yeares after: or that hee that is blinde by his owne fault, hath not loſt the faculty of ſeeing the collyria or plaiſters which the Phyſitian bringeth him ſome moneths after. Surely Adam, before his fall, had power of beleeuing in Chriſt, after the ſame manner that he had then power of ſuccouring and helping the ſicke and miſerable, although before the fall there was no miſery, nor could there be. Adam was in the remote power to beleeue the Goſpell, as a ſound man is in the remote power to vſe the remedies of a diſeaſe that will or may come: But that he did not beleeue in Chriſt, it was not becauſe it did exceede the power giuen him by God, but becauſe it was not needefull. Finally, ſeeing Adam by his incredulity, loſt the power of beleeuing the word of God, it muſt needes be, that hee loſt alſo the power of beleeuing that word, by which God was to bring a remedy to this euill.
V. In vaine doth Arminius thinke, that it is vnaptly ſpoken, if it be ſaid that Adam had power of beleeuing when hee had no neede, which power was taken from him, when hee began to hauehave neede of it. For neither was the power of beleeuing wanting to Adam, nor was it taken from him, but hee willingly loſt it, when he loſt the power of obaying God: And God of his meere grace doth reſtore the ſame to whom he will, not becauſe we will, but becauſe he worketh in vsus that we will.
VI. But that is ridiculous which Arnoldus, cap. 14. doth ſay, that Adam before his fall, did not receiue power, by which he might riſe, if he ſhould fall: For that power whereby men riſe, after the fall, is not giuen before the fall, ſeeing the power is loſt by the fall; but after the fall is repaired. There is no doubt, but that Adam before his fall, had ſtrength whereby he might riſe againe, if hee had not loſt it by his fall. Arnoldus therefore thus ſpeakes; as if I ſhould ſay, that hee to whom God hath giuen ſound and cleare eyes, hath not receiued power, by which he might ſee with thoſe eyes after he is made blinde,
VII. Finally, as many as are the poſterity of Adam, are bound to fulfill the law; this is a naturall debt; and the law commands vsus to louelove God, and to obey him, and therefore to beleeue him ſpeaking: Whenſoeuer then Chriſt is preached, the doctrine of the Goſpell cannot be refuſed, but with the contempt of the Goſpell, the law alſo is violated. But he to whom Chriſt was neuer preached, ſhall not be condemned, becauſe he hath refuſed Chriſt, but he ſhall be iudged by the law, which tyed him to beleeue in Chriſt, if Chriſt had beene preached to him.
VIII. And Arnoldus is plainely deceiued, when he doth affirme that the power whereby we beleeue God is one, and the power whereby they beleeue Chriſt is another; becauſe, ſaith he, the word of the law, & the word of the Goſpell differ in the whole genus, and are oppoſite; this thing fell inconſiderately from the acute man: Becauſe white and blacke are oppoſite, is it therefore the property of one power to ſee white, and of another to ſee blacke? is it not the operation of the ſame faculty to know contraries? And yet I doe not ſee how the Law and the Goſpell can be ſaid to be contrary, ſeeing the Law is the Schoole-maſter to Chriſt, and the Goſpell doth miniſter the meanes, by which the law ſhould be ſatisfied: Surely betweene the creditor and the ſurety, there is no diſcord. Chriſt came not that hee might aboliſh the law, but that hee might fulfill it. Matthew 5.17. Romanes 3.30.
IX. Out of theſe, it is eaſie to gather what is to be anſwered to that queſtion, whereby it is demanded, whether the law doth comand vsus to beleeu in Chriſt: For this is euen as one ſhould demand whether the law of Moſes commands the Prophet Eſay to be beleeued: It is plaine, that that is not expreſſely commanded by the law; for no man was bound to beleeue Eſay before he was borne: Yet I ſay it was commanded by the law implicitely, and by conſequence, in as much as the law doth command obedience to be yeelded to God: And God is to be obeyed whether he ſpeake to vsus immediately, or by his meſſengers: The ſame, I thinke, may be ſaide of Chriſt.
X. For of thoſe things to which we are bound by the law, there are two kindes. Some things are due abſolutely, by all men, and at all times; yea by them to whom the law, deliuered by Moſes, hath not beene made knowne, ſuch as are to louelove God and our neighbour: For Adam was indued with the knowledge of theſe duties before the fall, and was bound to performe them in act: But there are ſome things, to the obſeruation whereof, wee are then bound by the law of God, when they are commanded in act, and when the ability of knowing them is giuen vsus of God. Thus the Iſraelites in Aegypt were not bound to obey the commandement of the not gathering of Manna vponupon the Saboth day, or of looking on the bralen Serpent, or of the paſſing ouer lordan, which notwithſtanding, if any had not obeyed when God commanded them, without doubt, they had iuſtly borne the puniſhment of the breach of the law.
XI. But Arnoldus doth wrongfully ſay, that it is not ſpoken here of that generall power of beleeuing eueryevery word of God; for of it, it is plainely ſpoken here, ſeeing that the power of beleeuing in Chriſt, is comprehended in that generall power: No otherwiſe then the power of ſeeing, doth comprehend alſo the power of ſeeing the remedies for blindneſſe, although thoſe remedies are not preſent, neither is there any neede of them before blindneſſe.
XII. All theſe things pertaine thither, that it might appeare, that the power of beleeuing, and of embracing the remedies which God offers in the Goſpell, is loſt by that naturall corruption which is deriued into vsus from Adam: And therefore that Arminius doth erre, when hee ſaith, that God is bound to giuegive to all men power to beleeue in Chriſt, or that he is prepared to giuegive faith to all. For, God is not bound to reſtore to man that which man loſt by his owne fault; nor doth he deale vniuſtly, when he requireth of man, that which hee doth naturally owe.
XIII. Arminius is not conſtant to himſelfe in this thing, and doth pluck vp thoſe things which hee laid downe: For he ſaith, that many nations hauehave for many ages beene depriued of the light of the Goſpell, without which, yet there is no faith, and that for a puniſhment of the incredulitie of their anceſtors: He doth acknowledge, therefore, that God hath not giuen, nor was prepared to giuegive to theſe nations, power of beleeuing in Chriſt. Yea truely Arminius, in ſpeaking thus, doth ſet downe the cauſe why God would not, and therefore was not prepared to giuegive to people that, without which, faith cannot be. Was God prepared to giuegive to the men of Tyre and Sydon the power of beleeuing, of whom Chriſt giueth this teſtimony, that they would hauehave conuerted in Sackcloath and Aſhes, if the word and his miracles had come to them? Doth he giuegive power of beleeuing to them whoſe hearts he hardneth with his vnreſiſtable will, as Arminius ſpeakes? Could they beleeue of whom, it is ſpoken, Iohn 12.39. Therefore they could not beleeue, becauſe it is written, he hath blinded their eyes, and hath hardned their hearts? In Per…ins P. 294. & 295.Doth he giuegive power of beleeuing to them whom, Arminius ſaith, are called of God, by a meanes that is not congruent and agreeable, and by which he knoweth man will neuer be conuerted?
XIV. Here Arminius doth not obſcurely accuſe God of folly; for he will hauehave God to be aduerſe to himſelfe, and to be prepared to doe that, which that it might not be done, he taketh an incongruent and diſagreeable courſe; nay, like a iudge, hee ſets lawes for God himſelfe; for what elſe meane theſe words, God is bound to giuegive the power of beleeuing? Surely it ſeemes that Arminius doth binde God by this Law: neither will God hauehave any reaſon for his iuſtice, vnleſſe Arminius ſupply to him the meanes, whereby he may auoide the crime of iniuſtice.
XV. And although that impotency and diſabilitie of beleeuing be a puniſhment of the ſinne of Adam, yet he is not vniuſtly puniſhed, who by this impotency hath refuſed the Goſpell, becauſe the ſame impotency or diſability, which is a puniſhment, is alſo a fault, which I ſay, that it might appeare how vnproperly Arnoldus doth here vſe the examples of puniſhments which are not faults. Is it equity (ſaith he) that to a Souldier that hath beene puniſhed with the loſſe of his eyes, for not keeping good watch, the Generall ſhould offer the pardon of ſome other fault, or ſhould promiſe ſome other thing, with this condition, that he ſhould watch more diligently, and then puniſh him, becauſe that being blinde, he hath not watched: This example is not to the purpoſe; for to be blinde is not a fault, neither is any man by a naturall obligation bound to ſee: It is otherwiſe with our impotency to beleeuing. Beſides, hee that is puniſhed with the loſſe of his eyes, is ſorrowfull, and doth heauily beare the loſſe of the light. But man therefore doth not beleeue, becauſe he will not beleeue, and this impotency is voluntary.