THe Apostle is here taking up againe the same discourse which in the ninth Chapter he had begun, and hitherto continued; now win­ding up all towards a conclusion.

For our more distinct understanding of it, we must first observe the occasion, then the discourse it selfe.

The occasion; an objection which might arise from the Jews refusall of the Gospell, which the Apostle doth so prevent and answer, as in his an­swer he doth clearly open the great mystery of e­ternall Predestination.

The Objection ariseth thus; The Apostle having formerly preached the truth of the Gospell, in that maine Article of justification by faith alone without the works of the Law: Hence this Ob­jection; if that be truth, and the onely of life; how comes it to passe that the Jews Gods cove­nanted Israel generally refuse it? sticking to the [Page 2]Law for righteousnesse to life: Hence it will fol­low that God hath made void his Covenant set­led upon Abraham for himselfe, and his seed, in that he hath now cast off his people; the seed of Abraham, this in the first verse (I say then hath God cast away his people?) But then they assume, but God hath not made void his Covenant; therefore they conclude against the truth of the Gospell, that justification is not by faith, as the Apostle taught.

For answer; The Apostle retaining the truth of the Gospell; first disclaimes, then refutes the objection.

First he disclaimes it, (God forbid) God makes good his Covenant to the utmost. Secondly, He refutes it. 1. By speciall instance of himselfe, For I also am an Israelite &c. vers. 1. this concludes God hath not cast away all his people; but what if some? Therefore in the second place, he an­swers by distinction, vindicating the faithfulness of God, that not one of his Covenanted ones hath he cast away: the summe of his answer here is this; of the people of God, so by outward call, and within the outward administration of the Covenant; some he foreknew, others he did not foreknow; these whom he foreknew, are his peo­ple indeed, to whom not onely the outward ad­ministration, but the spirituall and eternall bles­sings of the Covenant do belong; these he hath not cast off, the rest he hath; yet herein his faith­fulnesse not lyable to exception, for as much as they never were truly his Covenanted ones, onely pretenders to, and seemingly in the Covenant. This is the summary meaning of those words, vers. 2. God hath not cast away his people which he [Page 3]foreknew: (By the way observe, if any of Gods covenanted ones should fall short of eternall life, making defection from the truth; the A­postle leaves God under that guilt which the objection here chargeth him with (viz) that he breaks Covenant, and casts away his people con­trary to the undertaking of his Covenant;) but this by the way against that horrid Tenent of the Saints finall apostacy.

The Apostle having thus answered by distincti­on, he goes on; first confirming, then concluding his answer; in the conclusion likewise explain­ing what he meant by this fore-knowledge of God concerning his people.

For confirmation that God hath not cast off his people whome he foreknew, he instanceth the Churches state in Elijah's time, from the 2d. to the 5th. vers. The sum is this, though the whole Nation in generall fell off from God to abomin­able Idols, and no where true worshippers ap­peared, yet then had God his reserved number, cleaving to the truth, and obtaining life. The conclusion is vers. the 5th. by application of the former instance; the sum this: though at this present time the Nation of the Jews generally oppose the Gospell, and bring damnation upon themselves; yet there is a remnant according to the Election of grace who embrace the Gospell, and find life; where together with the conclusion, we have his interpretation, the people whom God fore-knew are they whom he elected, and that of meer grace and peculiar favour: And then vers. the 6th. having descanted upon this grace, that it shuts out works. (Works then are as incon­sistent with the grace of Election, as with the [Page 4]grace of justification, with that free favour where­by God chuseth unto life before all time, as with that whereby in time he puts into the state of life, and therefore works fore-seen have no more to do in Election, (it being the onely way wherein they in time to be performed, can be represented to that degree which prevents all time, then works done, have to do in justification) but to return; the Apostle having infer'd, that because Election is of grace, it must therefore shut out works; and this with speciall aime at the errour of the reprobate Jews, who stood so much upon works: he doth in the 7th vers. resume the con­clusion, differencing first betwixt Israel in com­mon, and the Elect of of Israel: the Election here being the same with the remnant according to Election, vers. 5. Then betwixt the Elect and the rest from the Elect, by Israel in the former part of the vers understanding the rest of Israel from the Elect in the latter part, who were blinded, or ra­ther hardened, for so the same The verb derived ra­ther from [...] Callus then from [...] Caecus: & what if it signifie (when blindnesse) most pro­perly that kind of blindness which is by thick filmes and hard scales over the eye? word [...] is otherwhere usually rendered, John 12.40. where it is differenced from this signification of blinding, and Mark 6.52. it having in it the sig­nification of a brawny hardnesse; and so it an­swers more expresly to the Apostles Doctrine, o­therwhere, as Rom. 9.18.

The way thus cleared, we have two things to observe in the words.

1. The difference betwixt man and man foun­ded in the breast of God; some are Elect, others the rest from the Elect, even amongst his own people. So by outward call; some his people whom he fore-knew with the knowledge of pe­culiar love; others his people whom he did not fore-know.

[Page 5] 2. Then different condition for eternall life, who are thus differenced in the breast of God; the Elect shall certainly have life: (The Election hath obtained it) the rest are hardned unto death. (And the rest were hardned) we shall conclude both in this following Doctrine.

There is this difference between man and man founded in the breast of God; Doctrin. some are chosen to life, and therefore they shall most certainly ob­tain it; others are refused to death, whence they shall as certainly not escape it.

Before we proceed to confirm the Doctrin, it will be necessary to premise some cautions.

1. In handling this Doctrin, we shall be cast upon the deep things of God, matters of high adoration, even to amazement, for it is a great Mystery we have in hand: so the Apostle concludes admiring and adoring, Rom. 11 33. and there­fore here we must bespeak all sobriety of spirit, with fear and trembling; and indeed there it be­hoves us to bespeak it, where it is to be had, even at the throne of grace by faithfull prayer.

2. We shall meet with many things to startle humane reason, against which it will cavill end­lesly. So Rom. 9 14. God is charged with unrigh­teousness, and in vers. 19. with tyranny by mans corrupt reason: Here therefore we must resolve setting our own wisdom apart, to follow step by step the Clue of the Word, which alone is able to guide us into this Maze; so to hear (what God speaks) though never so contrary to our apprehensions (and affections too) as to stop all curious and unwarranted enquiries; and where he makes an end of speaking, there must we make an end of enquiring, remembring the incompre­hensible [Page 6]greatnesse of God, and his absolute domi­nion over us: so the Apostle, Rom. 9.20.

3. Many things we are like to meet with, which many are likely most dangerously to abuse; some to licenciousness, others to insolent mur­murings against the Lord, and indeed according to this difference betwixt man and man held forth in this Doctrin: this Doctrin it self in the prosecution of it, is like to have a different work, opening the eyes of some, striking others blinder then they were; softning some, hardning others. But first, forasmuch as God hath in his Word re­vealed it, we may and must enquire into it, onely stint our enquiries by the Word.

2. This Mystery truly conceived is of most ex­cellent use; the spring of true comfort, the foun­dation of true humility, that which gives light to other Mysteries of the Gospell, makes very much for clearing the free and peculiar grace of God, which is indeed the life of the Gospel; is the Maul to beat in pieces, the Rock to split many the most dangerous Errours against the truth of the Gospell, and therefore so much in all ages op­posed by the Devill and his Agents.

3. There is the same different fruit of all the truths of God, when they are preached; they are to some the favour of life to life, to others, of death to death; yet are we the Ministers of the Word in preaching of them, unto God a sweet savour in Christ, both in them that are saved, and in them that perish.

4. The children of God must not therefore be denyed any part of their food, because the chil­dren of the wicked one will poyson themselves with it; much lesse must they be denyed their chiefest food.

[Page 7] These things thus premised, we return to the Doctrin, the confirmation whereof depends upon the description; first of Election, then of Re­probation, as out of the Scriptures they are to be gathered, and by the Scriptures to be opened; But forasmuch as in the 9th. to the Rom. this Mystery is most fully spoken to, both for Election and Reprobation, from the first to the 24 vers. and what the Apostle here speaks in the 11 Chap­ter, hath dependance upon what he had disputed in the 9th. Chapter, It therefore seems very ex­pedient, briefly to open the Scripture in the first place; then to descend more particularly to the Doctrine of Election and Reprobation apart, confirming each particular as we go along out of the 9th. to the Rom. first open'd, adding as occa­sion shall be other Scripture Testimonies: Now for this Chapter, The Apostle prevents and an­swers the Objection formerly mentioned, as in the 11. Chap. resumed, which was made against the truth of the Gospell from the Jews rejection of it: in the first 23 verses, arising in his answer to this great Mystery, which he first asserts, and then cleares all the way by propounding and re­felling Objections against it. In the five first verses, and the former part of the sixth, we have the Ob­jection not in terms propounded, but in the an­swer insinuated, the sum of them being this; Though the Jews generally refusing the Gospell, fall short of eternall life, and are indeed accursed from Christ; yet the word of the Covenant made betwixt God and them, with their Fathers, stands firm, and God fulfills his Covenant to the ut­most; whence it is manifest what the Objection is, to which this answer is given, the same with [Page 8]that which was formerly mentioned, (viz.) If that be the Gospell which the Jews refuse, and by refusing miss eternall life, then is the Covenant of God of none effect; in wich objection, there is first a supposition of the Jews rejection. 2. An inference thereupon of Gods unfaithfulness.

The Apostle grants the supposition, denyes the inference; grants the supposition in the five first verses, not expresly affirming the rejection of the Jews, but rather taking it for granted, expresseth his marvellous grief for it, in the three first verses; where observe the Apostle in the third verse, co­vertly sheweth what is the state of that people, in wishing himself accurst from Christ for their sakes; it is as much, as if he had wished himself in their stead, so they might thereby have become Heires of blessing; It is impossible that man on­ly should be mans Redeemer, yet so high a strain of love doth the Apostle here run, that for the salvation of the Jews he would undergoe that wrath, which for man, lay upon mans Redeemer, a love so like to the Mediators love was in that breast, as sometimes the like in Moses towards the same people; Moses their sometimes Typicall Mediatour: the Apostle having thus express his griefs, shews the speciall reasons of it, partly his interest in them, vers. the third; partly their in­terest in God, in those many precious priviledges they received peculiarly from God, vers. the 4th. and 5th. And having thus granted the sup­position, he denyes the inference, vers. the 6th. Not as though the word of God had taken none effect; this word is the word of the Covenant, I will be thy God and the God of thy seed, Gen. 7.7. as ap­pears by the following discourse: the meaning [Page 9]then is, the Covenant of God remaines firm, not­withstanding the generall apostacy of the Jews, which the Apostle proves by a three-fold instance, all tending to this, to limit the Covenant to the true Heirs of it; the first instance in the posterity of Jacob, the common Father of the Jews; All are not Israel that are of Israel; Israel in the first place signifies Jacobs Genuine posterity, accor­ding to the purport of the Covenant. In the se­cond place, it signifies Jacob himself, the meaning then is; that for Jacobs posterity, all are not faede­rally his children, that are his children natural­ly; they are not all his children as he is Israel (the name of his prevailing with God for the blessing) that are his children according to the flesh; But for light to this and the following instances; let us observe how a people may be said to be in co­venant with God in a double sence, according to one of which, all Jacobs posterity generally were in Covenant; but according to the other, onely the remnant according to Election: a people therefore may be in Covenant with God. 1. Ac­cording to the outward and common admini­stration of it; so all Jacobs posterity was in Co­venant, separate by outward call, and sealed up by Circumcision to the Lord. 2. According to the speciall and primary intention of it, which is eternall life, and all blessings effectuall there­unto; and so not all the posterity of Jacob was in Covenant: The former may fall short of life not­withstanding that Covenant-interest, as not ful­filling the condition of the Covenant; the lat­ter cannot; the covenant for them undertaking the condition, and therefore the faithfulness of God is engaged not onely to give them life upon [Page 10]beleeving, but to give them to believe unto life.

The second instance is in the posterity of Abra­ham, who was the head of the Covenant, Gen. 12.3. Galat. 3.8. in whom all the families of the earth should be bles­sed; here the Apostle againe distinguisheth be­twixt the naturall, and Faederall off-spring, ac­cording to that second sence of Covenant-Inte­rest, newly laid downe, Neither because they are the seed of Abraham, (by naturall descent) are they all children, according to the Covenant, which he proves by Scripture testimony, setling the Co­venant upon Isaac and his posterity, excluding Ishmael, Christ with all be­leevers. But in Isaac shall thy seed be called; then verse 8. makes an exposition of that Text of Scripture, where the children of the flesh are the same with the seed by naturall descent, and the seed the same with the children of the pro­mise or Covenant, viz. they in whom the Cove­nant shall effectually be made good, and both these the same with the children of God. Third­ly, he confirmes his Exposition, verse 9. quo­ting Gen. 18.10. the summe of his confirmation comes to this; That as Isaac was borne not by the strength of Nature, (for Abrahams loynes and Sarahs wombe were now dead) but by vertue of the Promise, so it is with all the faederall off­spring of Abraham, not in that they are from him by naturall descent, and therefore not all that naturally descend from him, but in that they are his off-spring, according to the Promise, (and onely to some the Promise belongs) are they the blessed seed: The Observations.

1. The maine intention of Abrahams Cove­nant is eternall life.

2. They who are the proper subjects and [Page 11]true heirs of this Covenant, doe effectually ob­tainlife.

3. It is in the Tenure of this Covenant, not only to give life upon condition, but withall ef­fectually to fulfill that condition.

4. Though the greatest part of those that are under the outward administration of the Co­venant fall short of life, yet doth the faithful­nesse of God remaine inviolable, forasmuch as all the true subjects and proper heires of the Covenant doe certainly obtaine life.

These are all cleare from the Objection, that if the Jewes fell from the state of life, the Cove­nant was void, and the answer, preserving the firmnesse of the Covenant, in that the proper heires of it have life.

The third instance followes in Isaac's family, in the 10, 11, 12, and 13. verses, taken out of that History, Gen. 25. v. 23. where first the Apostle cleares it of those exceptions which might bee made against the former instance, vers. 10. Se­condly, he layes downe the same difference ten­ding to the same purpose betwixt Jacob and E­sau the sonnes of Isaac, that he had formerly laid downe betwixt Isaac and Ishmael the sonnes of Abraham, v. 12. & 13. Thirdly, the ground of this difference, vers. 11. where he opens the great Mystery of predestination.

1. For exceptions against the former instance, these two might be made: First, Isaac was borne of the free-woman, Ishmael of the bondwoman. Secondly, after Ishmael was borne, was the pro­mise of the blessed seed made; and therefore no wonder if the Covenant was setled in Isaacs po­sterity only; but it is otherwise in Jacobs poste­rity, [Page 12]the common Father of the Israelites; these exceptions are prevented, vers. the 10th. Jacob and Esau were both by one Father, and one Mo­ther, at one birth; yet as the word of promise unto Sarah, setled it upon Isaac and his posterity, so the word of the Oracle to Rebecca upon Ja­cob and his.

2. The difference is laid down, vers. 12. where it is manifest from the question in hand. 1. That this difference is not such as is common to Jacob, with all his posterity on the one hand, and Esau with all his on the other hand, because it is brought to prove the difference, that hath place in the posterity of Jacob himself; (All are not Isra­el that are of Israel)

2. That it is not so much a civill as a spirituall difference; because that which concludes Jacob in the saving Covenant, and with him that seed of his; that not onely is of Israel, but is Israel; excludes Esau and his posterity that Covenant, it being the maine instance Vindicating the faith­fulness of God in making good that Covenant, notwithstanding the Jews generally fell from the state of life, in as much as the remnant a­mongst them obtains life: this difference is fur­ther both confirm'd and cleared, that it is spiri­tuall, (the servitude of Esau importing his ex­clusion from that Covenant, he in this answer­ing Ishmael in the former instance) vers. 13. their different condition proceeding from the Law of God to Jacob, and his hatred of Esau; which love and hatred applyed to the question in hand, is manifest to be eternall love and hatred, in order to eternall life and death.

The Apostle singularly taught of God, sees [Page 13]more in this hatred of God towards Esau, then the desolation of his earthly inheritance exprest by the Prophet, 1 Mal. 3. Nay in that desolati­on as an outward pledge he reads the Lords eter­nall hatred, which is yet further manifest by the ground of this difference, which now comes to be considered.

3. The ground of this difference vers. 11. where the Apostle first denyes the ground of this diffe­rence to be in their works, which he confirms by observation of the time, when the testimony of their different condition was given; they being yet unborn &c.

2. He so denies it to their works, as he ascribes it unto God; Not of their workes, but of him, that is of God; Therefore so denyed of their works, as likewise of themselves: the originall and su­pream ground of their difference not being of themselves but of God.

3. It is so of God, as that it is of his purpose of Election and Reprobation; For the purpose of Election it is here laid down; the purpose ac­cording to Election, being as much as the pur­pose of Election, or that purpose whereby God Elects; for the purpose of Reprobation, it is here divers waies insinuated.

1. In the specifying of this purpose of Election, which because it is a purpose of choyce in re­gard of Jacob, must therefore be accompanied with a purpose of refusall in regard of Esau, which purpose of refusall, is the purpose of Re­probation.

2. In the removall of works as the ground of their difference, as well evill works denyed the supream ground of Esau's servitude, as good of [Page 14] Jacobs Dominion, of Esau's hatred, as of Jacobs love.

Therefore another ground must be found for Esau's condition, as well as for Jacobs, which can be no other then what is hinted concerning Esau, in that which is exprest concerning Jacob.

3. The different state and condition of the parties here instanced; if onely the purpose of Election as it is here exprest, had been understood, well might beloved Jacob as the object of it be mentioned; but what place for hated— Esau, in reference to Election? That the Apostle then gives this double and contrary instance, removes what might be imagined grounds in themselves from both; (from Esau especially, that which alone might be conceived a ground in him) a­scribes the condition of the one expresly to Gods purpose as the originall ground; it must needs be that the contrary purpose of God, is like­wise the originall ground of the others conditi­on; hitherto, that it is not of works, that it is of God; that it is so of God, as of his purpose of Election and Reprobation: Now follows, 4. It is so of the purpose of Election (on Jacobs part) as that it may [...] abide. And therefore 5ly. So of God according to the purpose of Election, as of him that calleth; in our Call we receive faith, and that renewing worke of the spirit, whereby we are brought into the state of life; it is then so of God according to the purpose of Election, as of him that by vertue of that purpose gives faith, and brings into the state of life, by the re­newing of the holy Ghost; and thus his Election remaines firme for the issue of it, eternall life to the Elect, as borrowing nothing, depend­ing [Page 15]on nothing in man, but undertaking and gi­ving all: hence it is manifest, when the Apostle shuts out works, he shuts out as wel works foreseen as done, because expresly for Election; so denyes it to be of works, as that it shall be of God; but if of works foreseen, it was of our selves, so of God as of his purpose, which (we shall see by and by) cannot be built upon any thing but himself; so of his purpose as that it may abide without change, and therefore must have a surer foundation then works fore-seen, or indeed any thing foreseen in man: and therefore so of God according to his purpose, as of him that calls; therefore shuts out not works onely, but faith too; faith not onely acted but fore-seen. 1. It is not thus, not of works, but of him that believe­eth; but not of works, but of God. 2. Nor thus; not of works, but of him that justifieth; but thus, not of works, but of him that calleth; justi­fication supposeth faith, in our call we receive faith; it is then of God according to the pur­pose of Election, not as of him that fore-sees ei­ther works or faith, but as of him that gives faith; and therefore cannot fore-see it antecedently to his purpose, but in his purpose of giving it: And now that the fore-light of evill works, or of any thing in man, is not the first ground of his peri­shing condition; but in Esau's case evill works fore-seen have no more to do, then wrought, as to the point in hand we shall make it appear in these two Conclusions.

1. That the different purpose of God electing some, refusing others; in the first ground of their different state, who embracing the truth are sa­ved, and who rejecting the truth are damned.

[Page 16] 2. That this purpose is not built, doth not stand nor depend upon any thing in man, but is wholly of it self.

These two Conclusions as they are clearly to be made good from the Apostles discourse hither­to, so will the confirmation of them make good the thing in hand.

For the first we have seen it in Jacob and Esau, and they are speciall instances to conclude the generall question about the Jews, the Nation generally refusing the Gospell, and so perishing, the remnant imbracing it, and so obtaining life, as is clear by the Apostles discourse, which af­terward he enlargeth to all mankind.

For the second, (setting aside that the Apostle hath carryed the purpose of Election and Repro­bation, in a parrallel strain) let these arguments conclude it.

1. Whatsoever is done, God either doth it as the first worker, or permits it to be done, as the supream Ruler. 'Tis clear, if God will neither have an hand in doing it, nor suffer it to be done, it cannot be done; Enchrid. ad laurent. c. 95. Nothing is done without the will of the Almighty that it should be done, he either suffering it to be done, or himself do­ing it; Augustine further, whatsoever is permit­ted to be done, as the evill of sinne, requires some concourse of God, (In whom we live, and move, and have our being) for production of that act, to which as by man done, sinne cleaves inseparably; otherwise second causes in producing their acts, should move independently upon the first cause, and the Creature should Create.

Therefore onely so far doth God fore-see be­fore all time, what shall be in time, as he sees his [Page 17]owne will, either for the doing it, or permitting it to be done, for affoording that concourse with­out which it cannot be done.

The will of God then before all time, that is, his decree or purpose for the being of such or such a thing in time must be the ground of his fore-sight that it shall be, and therefore in order of nature before it, and so his purpose meerly of himselfe: For still whatsoever can be imagi­ned fore-seen, as that which shall be, to move his will, that it may be fore-seen, as that which shall be, must of necessity suppose his will that it shall be.

For further clearing this truth, (though in­deed it is a truth that shines so clearly in its own light, as well might forbid all further clearing) consider, of things that are not; Some are only possible, and may be, (God can raise up children to Abraham of the stones;) Some are future, and shall be, both knowne to God: But how is this know­ledge differenced? All things possible he knowes in his owne power; all things future in his de­cree.

Secondly, if God fore-see what shall be, in or­der of nature before his decree that it shall be, otherwise then in his decree, then is he dispoiled of all liberty, both in his decree, and for his de­cree. 1. In his decree; if he will decree, he hath his rule before-hand from the creature, what he fore-sees antecedently to his decree shall bee; therefore because it shall be, doth he fore-see that it shall be, then hath he no liberty left to decree otherwise, but either his decree must be frustrate, or contradictions must be true; Such a thing shall be, and therefore God hath fore-seen that [Page 18]it shall be; the same thing shall not be, God hath decreed that it shall not be: But for as much as both these cannot be true, God must be content to stand under the most fatall necessity that is imaginable; The sum of the Stoick fate was, Once hee comman­ded, he o­beyes al­wayes. Semel jussit, semper paret, here it is Nunquam jussit, semper paret; he must obey what is pre­scribed by the creature, even there where subje­ction is fatall bondage in the determination of his will, how unseasonably are the adversaries of the truth wont to raise clamours against that necessity which man stands under upon supposall of Gods decree? That second causes should by the first cause be determined, so as upon suppo­sition of the first causes predetermination, to work only to that issue which is predetermined, (the same conditionall necessity being undenia­ble upon their own supposition of fore-sight:) In the mean time for the manner of their workings, rational & free agents left free in their working, the same decree that determines them to one issue, determining them likewise to work freely to that issue; all this is orderly and faire: The first cause herein having its due preheminence, the second cause in due subjection, yet without all impeach­ment, but to lay the first cause under the seconds foot, and that when in its weakest state; not in being, but that which shall be, is to raze the everlasting foundations: Thus is God dispoiled of liberty in his decree. Secondly, What liber­ty hath he for it? Such a thing shall be, is so fore-seen of him before his decree; what place is there now for his decree? in his decree he playes but an after-game, it will be, whether he decree or no; how is this beseeming the Divine Wis­dome [Page 19]to decree that which is sure enough to be, before he determine any such thing? To what end is such a decree?

Thirdly, by the different condition of men, according to Gods different purpose of Election and Reprobation, is God finally and eternally glorified; if then God hath not determined meerly of the Counsell of his owne Will, and ac­cording to his purpose within himselfe, their difference with the whole order of it; he hath not of himselfe determined his owne state of e­ternall glory, but it comes to passe occasionally from the creature, as he light upon it peradven­tures, according to the uncertaine working of the sickle creature, it is so now, it might have been otherwise: Adam fell, so way was made for the eternall manifestation of Gods revenging Justice, and sparing mercy in Christ, he might have stood for ought that God determined, and so, for ought that he determined, such a way of glorifying himselfe might not have been; so all the great workes, mans finall state, Gods finall glory, the giving of Christ, the whole method of salvation by Christ, are occasionall from the creature, not originally from the Counsells of God, but as the creature hapt to put him upon these things: But is there any thing more prime­ly clear both in Scripture and to true Reason, then that the first things in Gods aime in order to all his workes is his glory? Did he not make all things for himselfe? Are not all things of him, from him, to him? Is not he the supreme great, and therefore all things must be subservi­ent to his glory? Is he not the supreme good, and therefore lovely above all? therefore loves [Page 20]himselfe above all? therefore makes and orders all things for his owne glory? There is a natu­rall obligation of justice to himselfe whereby he cannot but set up his own glory, as the white to which all his workes shall be directed, that then being first in his eye, as the end of all, and that way whereby he is unto all eternity glorifi­ed, being pitch't in his counsells, he must needs order and administer all things making there­to, and therefore by vertue of his owne glory decreed, he decrees the whole Series from the first step to the last tending thereto. Hence then it is manifest, that this purpose of his for the dif­ferent state of man, it is meerly of it selfe, above all works good or evill, faith or unbeliefe, above the fore-sight of all, comprehending these with­in it, appointing and ordering them; which will yet be further cleare by the Apostles discourse.

THe Objection, ver. 14. the Apo­stle knowing how endlesly the flesh will cavill against this truth, layes down and prevents an Ob­jection here, What shall we say then, is there unrighteousnesse with God? This is the charge of mans corrupt reasoning a­gainst God, arising from the Doctrine of Prede­stination.

The summe of the Objection is this: If God deal so unequally with them that in themselves are equall, then is he unrighteous, but according to the Apostles Doctrine so it is; for their works good or evill come not at all into account with God as Motives to his Will one way or other for his decree; therefore he is unrighteous.

[Page 22] For answer; 1. The Apostle detests the con­sequence of the proposition. Though God deale so unequally (in regard of his decree) with those that in themselves are equall, yet far be that blasphemy from any to charge him with un­righteousnesse.

2. He Vindicates the righteousness of God: 1. In points of Election, vers. 15.16. Vers. 15. By that soveraigne liberty which God hath for willing, and decreeing mercy to whom he pleases, meerly because he pleases, for which he quotes Exod. 33.19. whence vers. 16. he laies down a generall conclusion; So then it is not, &c. the meaning; it is not by any, either good desires in man (it is not in him that willeth) or good en­deavours of man, (it is not in him that runneth) that God is prevented in his decree, but his de­cree is wholly of it self; for mercy, because he will have mercy; (But of God that sheweth mercy.)

2. In point of reprobation, the Apostle shewes the same Liberty of proceeding meerly according to the will of God in the instance of Pharoah, for which he quotes Exod. 9.16. and thence con­clude a full and equall liberty in God, both for E­lection and Reprobation.

1. For the instance of Pharoah vers. 17. Two things are affirmed. 1. That God raised him up, which comprehends his bringing into the world, his preservation, his advancement to the Throne, his singling out to stand in opposition against the Lord, his obfirmation in that wickednesse of his —2. The end of it, that God by powerfull de­stroying such a wicked Tyrant, might glorifie his great name.

2. Now that God made use thereof the same [Page 23]liberty appears: First by the connexive particle (for) which relating to the former verses, where that Liberty had been asserted insinuates here the like. 2. By the conclusion, vers. 18. which avouch­eth the same liberty here as formerly in Election; and the Apostle drawing this conclusion for that part of it which concerns Reprobation, from the 17. vers. as appears by the illative particle (there­fore) he gives us to understand, that what is said of Gods raising up Pharoah is so to be conceived, as that therein that soveraigne liberty whereby God proceeds meerly according to his will is imported.

WE shall now proceed to confirme the Doctrine:

1. For that part of it which speaks to Election.

2. For the other of Reprobation.

1. For Election let us thus describe it.

It is the eternall decree of God whereby he hath of meer love and good pleasure, ordained effectually to eternall life, and all blessings making for life in Christ, a certaine number and those the fewest of men, to the praise of his glorious grace.

In this description we have these particulars to observe.

1. That Election is the decree or purpose of God.

[Page 46] 2. That it is his eternall decree.

3. That it is for eternall life.

4. That it is of persons, and that a certain and determined number singled out by name.

5. That it is of the fewest of men.

6. That it is of love and good pleasure.

7. Of meer love and arbitrary pleasure above all respects in man.

8. That it is as for eternall life, so for all bles­sings making for life in Christ.

9. That it is effectuall hereunto.

10. That it is to the praise of the glorious grace of God.

1. That it is his purpose or decree, two words the Scripture here useth. 1. [...] purpose, Scilicet. a setting down before hand, Rom. 9.11. Rom. 8.28. his purpose, and the counsel of his will, Ephe. 1.11. 2. [...], his distinguish­ing purpose, translated Predestination; it im­ports to ordain before hand, such as within cer­tain bounds and limits are to receive what others without those bounds shall not partake of, Ephe. 5.11. Rom. 8.29. the eternall distinction and se­paration betwixt man and man, for their finall state having here its first rise.

2. It is his eternall degree; If his decree, an immanent act in the breast of God, it must be e­ternall; nothing is new in God, though all things be new from him: if this discourse shall not be so clear to some, Scripture testimonie is clear, Ephe. 1.4. Chosen us before the founda­tion of the world, so the Kingdom prepared for them, Mat. 25.34. and the redeemer to bring them to that Kingdom, The word translated fore-ordain­ed is [...] fore­known, 1 Pet. 1.20. Whence it is clear that fore-know­ledge in Scripture language is not a meere prescience, but points out the de­cree of God; for who can think that God fore­saw in the humane na­ture of Christ any thing ante­cedent to his decree, whereby he was moved to unite it personally to the Son; so as in the divine per­son of the Son should subsist? 1 Pet. 1.20.

3. It is for eternall life, Stapleton the Jesuite [Page 47](and he hath others even amongst our selves to follow him) would put off what the Apostle hath about Election, Rom 9. as though what is there spoken, aimed at the inheritance of the Land of Conaan, the birth-right &c. and not at eternall life, and they will have it, that what the Apostle there spake of Gods love to Jacob, and hatred of Esau, concerned Jacob and all his seed in common, and Esau and all his: and therefore to reach no further then the inheritance of Cana­on for Jacob and his seed, and the destruction of Esau's inheritance, as exprest by Malachi.

But that it is for eternall life, is very clear. 1. In the 9th. to the Romans by divers Argu­ments.

1. From the Objection which was about the Jews refusing the Gospell, and so missing of eter­nall life; the Apostle in his wish, insinuating clearly as much, and in the following answer disputing upon that supposition.

2. The Apostle makes the distinction, which he derives from Election and Reprobation in Jacobs own seed, v 6. which he backs with the like distin­ction, in Abrahams and Isaac's Family; then deri­ving all from Gods different decree, gives Jacob and Esau speciall instances thereof.

3. The Apostle instanceth for Reprobation in Pharaoh, wherein if any man shall think he aim­ed not at eternall condemnation, which yet the Testimony of his hardning may evince, his fol­lowing discourse will conclude it, and clearly determine this controversie; and therefore,

4. The Apostle concludes the Reprobate Ves­sels of wrath fitted for destruction; and the E­lect Vessels of Mercy, fitted for glory.

[Page 48] 5. What he speakes of Vessels of mercy fitted for glory, he applies to the called of the Gentiles, as well as of the Jews: and can any man now possibly perswade himself that this is meant on­ly or mainly of outward priviledges? as thus in the 9th, so in the 11th. Chap. where the Apostle resumes the same Objection, and answers it in the same manner, distinguishing betwixt the Elect and the rest.

1. He opposeth the Elects obtaining to the hard­ning of the rest, and doth not hardening with the following Testimonies against them, vers. 7.8, 9, 10. relate to eternall wrath: then must E­lection also relate to eternall glory. Further, what the hardned Jews, through their fall misse of; the called Gentiles, together with the Elect Jews obtain; and what is that? Not the Land of Canaan, outward birth-right, or any such outward priviledge &c. but Gospell-salvation, vers. 11. Reconciliation, vers. 15. and is not the surrogation of the Gentiles, the planting of them into the Covenant of life? Many accor­ding to outward administration, the Elect a­mongst them, by effectuall vocation: Again, what shall be the main of their restoring, vers. 25.26. onely outward priviledges? Nay but that state of salvation by embracing the Gospell which the Gentiles now are in, the Gentiles ful­nesse herein depending upon the Jews return. And as these Scriptures wherein this controversie is expresly handled, are clear; so for other Scrip­tures, Rom. 8.29.30. there is the chain of eter­nall life; whereas Election is the first linke, so glory is the last: the intermediate, all such as tend to glory; as here the Chain, so otherwhere the [Page 49]Book of eternall life, Reu. 13.8. and 17.8. and 20.12.15. and 3 5. and Phil. 4.3. Objection, that 3 Rev. 5. supposeth Election changeable, that their names who are enrolled may be blot­ted out.

Answ. The unchangeableness of Election will hereafter be fully cleared; in the mean time to prevent mistake, this is spoken after the manner of men, and sutable to the metaphor, to blot out of the book of life, is no more but to deny it to him, or not to plead eternall life on his behalf; and so make manifest, that though his name see­med to be written in that book; yet it never was a like instance which must receive this interpreta­tion, we have Mat. 13.12. Concerning the know­ledge of the Gospel Mystery. Whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken, that which he hath, that is, that which he seemed to have, Luke 1.18. But if he but seemed to have it, and had it not, how can it be taken from him? onely thus, it shall be made manifest that he did but seem to have it, but had it not in truth: But to return, Election is called the book of Life; therefore it is for eternall life; agreeable hereunto the E­lect are likewise said to have their names written in heaven; add to this that which is clear in the Scripture, that the Land of Canaan, the birth-right &c. were outward pledges of the eternal in­heritance, Heb. 11.9.10. and the Apostlesdiscourse of Esau's subjection to Jacob, Rom. 9. setting forth therein the difference of their spicituall state in order to eternall life, as we have now seen in shewing the Apostles Doctrine of Election and Reprobation, there to reach to eternall life, and death clearly conclude as much, a pledge of E­sau's [Page 50]spirituall servitude, according to the mind of the Oracle, we have in the losse of the birth-right prophanely despised by him, Gen. 25.32. &c. 4. That it is of persons; and that a set com­pany and determined number singled out by name in the counsell of God.

1. The disourse of the Apostle, Rom. 9.11. clearly holds forth this, the sum whereof is, that whereas the greatest part of the Jews refused the Gospell to their own condemnation, a remnant embraced it unto salvation; the supream ground of this difference was the different decree of God, loving some in order to eternall life, ha­ting others in order to eternall death, of which Jacob and Esau are singular instances; and by vertue of this different decree, some are cal­led and carryed on to the enjoyment of life; o­thers hardned unto death, agreeable to the for­mer Election, Rom. 8.28.29.30. The purpose of God pitcheth upon some for life in the first place, whence he administers the whole method of life to them.

2. It is manifest by that metaphor, whereby so frequently Election is exprest, viz. The book of Life; It is not a Statute book, setting down the Lawes, or the way of Life; but a Register, where­in are enrolled the Heirs of Life.

3. The following particulars concluding it, every one apart together joyntly.

1. That is of the fewest of men, if it be not of persons, but of the way of life; thus as some would have it, (beleevers shall be saved, un­believers shall be damned, not determining who shall believe and be saved, who shall not beleeve and be damned;) then is it not either of the [Page 51]fewest or of the most, but either of all alike, or of none alike.

2. That it is of love and good pleasure.

3. Of meere love and arbitrary pleasure; love must needs relate to persons: So in the instance ( Jacob have I loved) meer love and arbitrary plea­sure must arise above all different respects, either existent or foreseen in men: now there is no place for this love, in case it be not of persons, but onely a decree setting down upon what terms and in what way men shall saved.

4. That it is as for eternall life, so for all bles­sings tending thereto; for if the faith and holy­ness of those that are saved, and all other graces and priviledges depend upon this decree, and are the fruits of it; then it must needs be, that this decree first pitcheth upon the persons, before they be considered as beleeving and holy; and because God hath set them apart in love, as upon whom he will glorifie his grace, therefore he gives those graces and priviledges to them.

5. That it is effectuall to eternall life; for then is not the decree suspended upon mans obeying the call of God, and persevering therein, but by vertue of this decree, he doth effectually obey, and persevere.

6. Herein is the glory of divine grace, that he makes Vessels of honour (finds them not such) having afore prepared them (in his eternal coun­sel) unto glory; It remaines therefore that we prove these particulars, which do at once both confirm the former, and further open this great Mystery of Election: Therefore 5. It is of the fewest of men; Here is one particular that mans reason is not willing to hear of, but for this, the [Page 52]Scripture is express, Mat. 20.16. First, If we com­pare those who are outwardly called, with those who are not, we shall find the fewest called; for about the first 4000 years, how was the world generally overlooked in point of out ward call, Act. 17.30. [...], God was then plea­sed so to overlook the Children of men, as not to declare his will to them, or call upon them to repent by his word or voice; for severall ages, some speciall families of Seth's line, of whom Noah: afterward one little Nation of the Jewes derived from Abraham, Psal. 147.19. and 2 Since the times of the Gospell, how many great Nati­ons (and even at this day) unto whom the word of God is not made known? but all the Elect are called; for those of years generally by an outward call (and even their infants in their Church state, and faederall interest have an outward call.) All of them inwardly so called as justified, and in conclusion glorified, Rom. 8.30. Now that Gods Election raigns generally amongst those that are outwardly called for themselves and their Children; it is clear enough, because he hath appointed his word and Sacra­ments the meanes of life; and generally where he hath chosen to the end, he hath likewise chosen to the meanes, otherwise the meanes would not be so choice and excellent blessings, so highly to be prized as the Scripture sets them forth; if then generally the Elect be outwardly called, and amongst such as are called outwardly Salvation takes place, and these are the fewest, then are the Elect the fewest; but here is yet another step, all the Elect are in time inwardly and effectually called, and onely who are in time so called, are [Page 53]Elect before time; But of those many that are called outwardly but a few thus, hence but a few saved, so Rom. 11. a remnant according to Election.

6. It is of love and good pleasure, 1. [...] Love, Rom. 9.13. with the 11. verse, [...], good pleasure, Eph. 1.5. & 9. this love exprest in singling out, and fore appointing to life, of the same meaning [...], Rom. 8.29.11. Rom. 2. with 5, the people whom he fore-knew, the remnant according to Election; to know in Scripture phrase importing to embrace in love, (after ye have known God, or rather are known of him, he knows (Scil.) he approves the way of the righteous, on the contrary to the wicked, I know you not,) so 1 Pet 1.2. and 20. so 2 Tim. 2.19. there [...], the Lord knows (as those whom he hath in special manner loved, and built upon the sure foundation of life his own purpose) who are his. 2. It is his decree of di­stinguishing love, love with choice so imbracing these as refusing those; this [...] Election holds forth, limiting his love and good pleasure, for life to such as he hath in his purpose gathered apart from others; [...] what [...] Predestina­tion, or rather praefinition is to [...] purpose, the same is [...] Election to [...]; to love and good pleasure.

7. It is of meere love and absolute pleasure, not upon either good works, on faith fore-seen, this is clear. 1. From the 9th. to the Rom. vers. 11. where the Apostle makes Election the pur­pose of God, as of him that calleth, and for this end that it might abide: Now it is the effectuall call of God that gives faith, and in this call is [Page 54]that renewing work of the holy Ghost, whereby the Elect are brought into the state of life, and principled for good works in order to life; and this call of God is a sure and unmovable founda­tion of eternall life to the Elect, as borrowing nothing of man, but depending wholly upon the unchangeable purpose of him, in whom is no change, neither shadow of turning; forasmuch then as in our call we receive faith, and the spi­rit, and Election is of God as of him that calls, he neither fore sees faith nor good works in any after-called ones, antecedently to the decree of Election; but in his decree of giving them, it is that he fore-sees them.

2. Those arguments used in the explication of the 11th. vers. towards the latter end of the first Sermon, to prove this generall conclusion; That no purpose of God can depend upon any thing without himself, will here conclude.

3. That discourse in the second Sermon, from almost the beginning to the end of that Ser­mon, proving that not onely comparative Pre­destination is above all different respects in the Creature, but single above all respects, and thence concluding that not man considered as fallen, but considered as not yet Created, must be the object of Predestination, will here likewise con­clude.

4. This absolute and arbitrary pleasure of God is really and experimentally made manifest, in his dispensations to the Children of men, (why did he chuse one Nation of the Jews to be the onely Nation of the Covenant; and therefore the people amongst whom generally his secret Election raigned, over-looking all the Nations [Page 55]of the world beside? did he fore-see indepen­dently upon his decree, greater inclinableness to faith and holiness in them, then in all the world beside? I think no man will be willing to own so wild a conceit: I am sure Moses tels them the contrary, Deut. 9.4.5. why doth he send the Gospell since the door of faith hath been opened to the Gentiles, to such a people rather then to another? Is he not therein found of those that sought him not? why did he in such an age first make known the mystery of the Gospell, to all Nations for the obedience of Faith, and so for life, by Jesus Christ; which mystery till that time was kept secret from the beginning of the world, Rom. 16.25.26? what is here to be said? but even so O Father, because so it seemed good in thine eyes.

5. It is the Election of Grace, Rom. 11.5. and therefore not of works, vers. the 6. if Election, not of works, then not of works fore-seen; for Election being Gods eternall purpose, as former­ly hath been proved, and the Apostle in his whole discourse, disputes upon that as a granted prin­ciple, there could be no other way whereby it might be supposed of works, then of works fore-seen; if not of works fore-seen, then not of faith fore-seen, because faith here puts on the nature of works, as being a qualification in our selves, commending us to God by that which hath prevented his free gift, Hence:

6. Upon the supposal of faith and works, or faith alone fore-seen, the Doctrine of free grace is wholly undermined in the foundation; no­thing more frequent in Scripture, then that our Call is of grace, 2 Tim. 1. & 9. Faith is the gift [Page 56]of God, Ephe. 2.8. Grace alwaies so interpreted as to shut out works, to forbid glorifying, (yet matter of glorifying granted; if there be any thing in our selves before it be given of God to commend us to him;) Now to what end is all this, if we have prevented the free gift of God, even from all eternity, by fore-seen faith and works, engaging his purpose for us?

7. It is manifest in the instance of Christ, the head of the Elect, that God proceeds in his E­lection according to his absolute and arbitrary pleasure; what reason can be given, other then meerly the absolute will and good pleasure of God, that the man Christ, conceived of the God of David; a mortall man, should in the wombe be made the head of the Angels, the onely begot­ten Son of God, the image and glory of the Fa­ther; the light, righteousness, and life of the world? Can any man make himself believe there could be any thing foreseen in the humane nature of Christ, to move the Lord thus to purpose con­cerning him? In the Churches head saith S. Austin, we have a most clear evidence of most free Electi­on; that it is thus of meer love and arbitrary pleasure, not of faith or works fore-seen, is yet further manifest by the next main particular.

8. God in his purpose of Election decrees as life, so all spirituall blessings making for life, to be freely given us in Christ, Rom. 8.29.30. there the whole method of salvation is derived from Election, Ethe. 1.3.4.5. we are blessed with all spiritual blessings according to Election the foun­dation of all; and of the giving of Christ in whom we receive all, thence our holinesse vers 4. our adoption vers. 5. our redemption, the for­givenesse [Page 57]of our sins, vers. 7. the discovery of the Gospel mystery, vers. 9. our title to eternall life, vers. 11. the word there used [...], we are taken by lot, or have our lot assigned us, further hinting to us, how little the will of man hath here to doe.

Object. We are Elected in Christ, but we are no otherwise in Christ then by faith (Ergo) our faith fore-seen is the cause of our Election.

Ans. 1. We shall give the true meaning; we are Elected in Christ, that is, we are Elected to re­ceive in him united to him as the members to the head, all blessings prepared for us in our Electi­on; Christ is not the motive of Gods decree, but the meanes of accomplishing it: Thus the Apo­stle, 1 Thes. 5. and 9. 2. We shall confirm it, that it must be so understood.

1. Christ himself is ordained the mediatour of the new Covenant by vertue of Election, Rom. 4.16. The Apostle there shewes that God in con­triving the Covenant of grace, whereby Christ is the head and mediatour, had a speciall eye to the Elect seed; that seed to whom, to all whom the Covenant shall be sure for life. Christ was not then the motive to Gods decree, but for their sakes to whom he had drereed life, did he ordain Christ a mediatour, and in his hand the Cove­nant of Grace.

2. Faith whereby we might be conceived to be represented to the decreeing eye of God as in Christ, is given us by vertue of Election, there­fore no otherwise fore-seen in us then in that de­cree, whereby God hath determined to give it us, Acts 13.48. John 10. vers. 26.27. because they are Christs sheep, they hear his voice and believe, [Page 58]in their effectuall Call; therefore his sheep be­fore their call; that is according to Election, whence it proceeds originally that they hear and obey his Call: Hence Tit. 1.1. The faith of Gods Elect; as faith, so holiness, or whatsoever might be imagined to commend us to God.

1. All depending upon faith, therefore if faith be not praevious to the decree, neither is holiness.

2. We have seen before our holiness depends up­on our Predestination thereto.

3. Otherwise we rather chuse God in Christ, then God us, John 15.16.

4. Then were Election of works contrary so expresly to Rom. 9 11. Hence we learn the true meaning of those Texts of Scripture, 2 Thes. 2. and 13. and 1 Pet. 1.2. in both which it is said, we are chosen in sanctification of the spirit (for so it is in the Originall) &c. that is, we are cho­sen that by the sanctification of the spirit, &c. (to which sanctification we are likewise chosen) we might obtain glory: from this particular then thus concluded it is further manifest, both that Election is of persons, and that it is abso­lute.

9. As it is for life, and all blessings making for life; so it is effectual unto life, not one, nor other of Gods Elect shall ever finally miscarry, but as only they, so every one of them shall most certain­ly have life.

1. The purpose of Election is firm, unchange­able, irrevocable, 2 Tim. 2.19. and Rom. 9.11. that it may abide, therefore hath it so unmove­able a foundation, the will of God alone, Heb. 6.17. [...] The immutability of his counsell, that which can never be other­wise [Page 59]placed as the word imports.

2. By vertue of Election, they are most cer­tainly preserved against all temptations, that though in themselves before their call they be children of wrath for their present state, after their call through weakness and remaining cor­ruptions, they might a thousand times mis-car­ry: yet by vertue of Gods unchangeable Election. [...]. They shall every one of them in due time be called effectually. 2. They shall be upheld af­ter their call against all temptations, and surely brought to glory.

1. That they shall be every one of them ef­fectually called, besides what is clearly confirmed by those Scriptures which were brought to prove the eighth particular; we shall add a further testimony or two, John 37.38.39, 40. where we may observe; 1. That it is from the gift of the Father originally, that we are delivered unto the care and custody of Christ; we are the Fathers by Election, before we be Christs by redempti­on, and therefore not chosen because fore-seen as redeemed by Christ, and applying by faith his redemption; but because chosen, therefore gi­ven into the hands of Christ, that by him we might be redeemed.

2. That every one of the Elect as they are gi­ven of the Father, so they shall certainly come to Christ; there is their effectuall Call; not on­ly shall they have a power to come, but actually they shall come.

3. That every one of them thus comming shall certainly have life; all this vers. 37. which is further confirmed, 38.39.40. So in the 44. and 45. verses, there are these conclusions.

[Page 60] 1. No man can come to Christ, but he that is drawn of the Father.

2. Whosoever is drawn comes.

3. Whosoever being drawn comes, shall have eternall life; these in the 44. verse, the promise in the latter end of the verse (I will raise him up at the last day) necessarily supposing that he that is drawn comes, which is further confirmed and cleared in the 45. vers. where the drawing of the Father is interpreted his teaching, where two things are affirmed.

1. That they shall all (viz) all that the Fa­ther hath given to Christ, be taught of God.

2. This teaching of his is such an heart-tea­ching, that every man that hath been thus taught of the Father comes: Hence it is manifest;

1. That the Elect have an effectual, and therefore a peculiar teaching of the Father, there is not one common aide to all, upon which they are left to difference themselves who have received it; whosoever partakes in this teaching he doth come, all come not, therefore all have not been thus taught; hence St. Austin, If every one which hath been taught comes, then must it needs be, that he that comes not, hath not been taught: Again, Lib. de. predest. sanct. c. 8. what is that? Every one that hath heard and learned of the Father comes to me; but this, there is none which heares and learnes of the Father but he comes to me; for if every one which hath heard of the Father and learned, comes cer­tainly; whosoever comes not, hath not heard of the Father and learned; for had he heard and learned, he had come.

2. That as they are by divine teachings effectu­ally cal'd, so they do finally persevere, and every [Page 61]one of them obtain life, they are so drawn of the Father and so taught by him, as they are raised up at the last last day, and that unto glory as is manifest, in that this raising is a fruit of the Fa­thers drawing to Christ, and by comparing vers. 44. with 39. and 40.

3. It is here further manifest, that onely the Elect to whom it is given to come, have the power to come to Christ, whosoever comes not, have not the power of comming.

As for the Objection, Ioh. 17.12. it is too light, they would argue thence that some given of the Father to Christ, according to Election may pe­rish.

1. It is contrary to vers. 2. of this 17. Chapter, and to Ioh. 6.37. &c. as formerly we have seen.

2. The form of speech there used, will not in­fer necessarily that he was given of the Father; sometimes such a form of speech is used in sound exceptive from the proposition foregoing, but in the true meaning exclusive of it, so Mat. 12.4. It was not lawfull for David and those that were with him, except ( [...]) onely the Priests to eat the Shew-bread, this sounds as though some of Davids company were Priests; the mean­ing [Page 62]is, it was not lawful for any of them in or­dinary case, because there were no Priests to eat of that bread; so here, none that the Father hath given to Christ shal perish, except Judas the son of perdition: The meaning according to the former instance may very wel be, that whereas the other Apostles because given of the Father shal surely be kept to eternal life, Judas as not being one of those that were so given, is a lost man.

3. Grant him given of the Father, yet is it to be understood of another giving, then that which is according to eternall Election.

1. He is given in regard of outward state, as all are that are outwardly called, and make profession of Christ, though few of those bee chosen.

2. In regard of Apostolical Function, in which sense he is said likewise to be chosen, Joh. 6.70. but for that giving, wherein is laid the foundation of eternal life formerly spoken of, had he been so given to Christ, he had never departed from him, Joh. 1.2.19. and when Christ speakes of that Election he expresly shuts out Ja­das, Joh. 13.18.

Hitherto that all the Elect shal in time be ef­fectually called.

2. They shall be upheld after their cal against all temptations, so as they shal certainly perse­vere in the grace of their cal unto eternal life: These Scriptures which prove their cal, do like­wise confirme their certaine obtaining of eter­nal life, as we have seen in the opening them; add to them 2 Tim. 2.19. and Mat. 24.24. and Rev. 13.8. and Rev. 17.8. and Rev. 20.15. and Rom. 8.33, [Page 63]34. &c. All which Scriptures clearly shew that the sure foundation of life and perseverance in grace received unto life is laid in Election, so as not any one of Gods Elect shal ever fal short of life; it was with special eye to the Elect that the Covenant of Grace was ordained, and so contrived, that by that Covenant life might be sure to them, Rom. 4.16.

Before we pass to the tenth and last particular, from the Doctrine of Election hitherto opened, we may take notice of two or three mis-shapen Monsters nourished in the Arminian Doctrine.

1. The uncertainty of called mans spiritual and finall condition.

2. The uncertainty, or rather impossibility of Gods fore-knowledge thereof.

3. Temporary Election and Reprobation.

1. For the first: It being inconsistent with the liberty of mans wil, (according to their Doctrine,) that God should in the cal of a sinner determine his wil by the work of the holy Ghost, so as that it cannot come to passe but the sinner shal obey his cal: And for perseverance in the grace of his cal, the liberty of mans wil requires (say they) that when God hath done all that he doth for any, yet may man for the issue not per­severe. Hence it must needs follow, that all is at meere peradventure, whether any one of all the sonnes and daughters of men should be saved or not? whether ever there should have been any Militant Church upon earth, or Triumphant in heaven, or not? whether Christ should haue ta­ken our nature upon him; his offices, have done and suffered all in vain, or not?

2. For the second: For as much as mans con­dition [Page 64]both for grace here, and glory hereafter, depends upon the use of his wil, imbracing or resisting the cal of God, continuing in, or falling from the grace received in his cal, and they wil not allow that God shal by his decree particular­ly determine how this or that man shal use his wil, and they require it as essential to the liberty of mans wil, that he may as to the event, im­brace or refuse the motions of Gods Spirit, whether in his call, or after it; how can it bee that what is no way certaine to be, as having no certain foundation neither in God nor man, can be certainly fore-known, the certain fore-know­ledge of that which is no way certaine and de­termined, involving a contradiction? Hence they are wont to decline this argument of Gods fore­knowledge, and sometimes some of them spare not to deny it.

3. For the third: Hence it must follow, that the Election of any person cannot be till the last moment of life; the reprobation of any person not til the time of obstinacy in sinne; for they make faith and final perseverance therein, sub­strate to election; unbelief and obstinacy in sinne substrate to reprobation: Now this must be ei­ther actual, or in the fore-knowledge of God, but in the fore-knowledge of God it cannot be, according to their Doctrine, as we but now pro­ved; therefore it must be actual, and so election and reprobation not eternal, but in time; there­fore no decrees or imminent acts of God. Hence they speake sometimes not much incongruously to this result of their Doctrine; Arminius tels us of an external act of reprobation, and wee hear from his followers, and those of greatest [Page 65]note, that Election is not confirmed from ever­lasting; that it is revocable, that men sometimes of elect become reprobate, and of reprobate e­lect, &c. What portents of opinion these are, even

The former Doctrine with cleare evidence of Scripture, truth hath already manifested, to the praise of his glorious grace, or to the praise of the glory of his grace, Eph. 1.6.

There are foure things in the decree of Ele­ction, making much for the glory of his grace.

1. That it is to such great blessings in Christ, the greatest of blessings, and the foundation of the rest; Eph. 1.3, 4, 5. 6.

2. That it is so effectuall thereunto, as in the building of the Temple at setting up the top­stone there was loud acclamations of grace, Zach. 4. so here in the accomplishment of all blessings prepared in Election, when God shall be admired to all eternity in those that believe, 2 Thes. 1.10. in his decree of Election, the foun­dation of faith and all blessings consequent up­on faith, shal this admiration ultimately fix.

3. That it is so free in opposition to all works and faith in man, it being and abiding wholly of him that calls not believers, but unto faith, nor the holy, but to holinesse, as formerly hath been declared.

4. That it is peculiar, it so imbraceth some, as refuseth others, that it is accompanied with the decree of Reprobation, Rom. 9.22, 23. there is [Page 66]nothing more ravishing the heart of a believer, whether here or in heaven, then this considerati­on, Why did God set his love upon me, and chuse me unto life, refusing so many others.

They that pretended much to the advance­ment of free-grace, are for vniversal grace, uni­versal redemption, and such an election (or no e­lection rather) as may stand therewith, betray no little ignorance (how wise soever they seem in their own eyes) of the grace of God indeed, and the true arguments of his glory arising from his grace.

WE now come to the Decree of Repro­bation.

1. For the word, opposite to E­lection, Isai. 41.9.

2. For the thing, it may be ga­thered partly from the precedent Doctrine of Election, partly from expresse Scri­pture concerning it.

It is the eternal decree of God, whereby hee hath, meerly because he would, hated the rest of men, (the same is true of the Angells, but wee confine our discourse to man) besides his Elect, so as to appoint them to dishonour and destruction for ever by sinne, for the glory partly of his sove­raigne power over man, partly of his revenging justice upon perishing sinners, and lastly of the riches of his mercy upon his chosen and saved ones.

[Page 68] This description wil be clearly made good in the particulars of it, by looking backe into the former discourse, that we shal not need to be long upon it.

1. That there is in God a decree opposite to the eternal decree of Election, is manifest, Rom. 9.11. as hath by a threefold argument been proved, in opening that Verse in the first Sermon, as like­wise by opening the 14, 15, 16, 17, 18. Verses at the beginning of the second Sermon, and the se­cond Observation upon them. (I must here, and divers times hereafter in this discourse of Repro­bation, refer the Reader to what hath been spo­ken in opening the ninth to the Romans, &c. both because repetitions of the same thing would needlesly increase the bulke of this discourse, and breed confusion in the understanding.)

2. That it is his decree of hatred, this hatred opposed to electing love is manifest, Rom. 9.13. that it is such an hatred, as refers to the exclusion out of the Covenant of life, and to eternal death, is there proved in handling the third instance up­on Ver. 10, 11, 12, 13. joyntly in the first Sermon, as likewise in the third Sermon almost at the be­ginning, in handling the third particular, that Election is for eternal life: The proofe thereof carrying along with it the proofe of this too, that Reprobation is for eternal death. But for our more distinct apprehension, we have here three things to consider.

1. Wherein this hatred consists.

2. Who are the objects of it.

3. What is the ground of it.

For the first, it consists in two things: 1. The decree of permitting sin, in order to hardning [Page 69]in it: 2. The decree of hardning in sinne, in order to condemnation for it; or rather in the decree of God for two things. First, for per­mitting of sin, in order to hardning in it: And secondly, for hardning in sin, in order to con­demnation for it.

That God decrees the being of sinne in the world, hath been proved by divers arguments towards the end of the second Sermon, and that it be by his permission, without which it could not be. Now further, for the Reprobate he decrees the permitting of it in order to hard­ning, and their hardning in it in order to their condemnation: Hence the method whereby the Reprobates are carryed on to condemnation, which is according to the decree of God oppo­site to Election, is by hardning, Rom. 9.18. (He will have mercy on whom he will have mercy) looking back-wards to his love of Jacob, and fore-ward to the honour, vers. 21. and glory, 23. of the vessels of mercy prepared thereunto, as those on whom he would make known the riches of his glory. (And whom he wills he hardens) looking back-wards likewise to his hatred of Esau, and for-ward to the dishonour of (v. 21.) his wrath and power against, v. 22. the vessels of wrath fitted for destruction, which by abusing the long-suffering of God towards them, they in the end incur, so Rom. 11.7. The Election hath obtained it, the rest were hardned.

By divine permission, then to fall into sin is common to the Elect with the Reprobate, and that both in Adam and themselves, but with dif­ferent aime on Gods part, and different fruit or [Page 70]issue on mans, by the sins of the Elect, way is made for their Redemption by Christ; by the sins of the Reprobate, way is made for their fi­nall hardning in sin, and so for eternall death, that as the love of God to the Elect is exprest, 1. In their effectuall call. 2. In their finall per­severance; so his hatred to the Reprobate, 1. In leaving them to their sins 2. In final hard­ning in sin. For further clearing this point in hand, let us resolve one question.

Q. What is it to harden in sin?

Ans. It is the exercise of righteous judgement by God upon sinners, whereby he gives them over so fully to the power of their own lust, and to the dominion of Satan, that they are no longer capable of spirituall good, but on the contrary, not onely by all temptations to sin, but by the most powerfull meanes against sinne they shall grow worse and worse.

We read of a two-fold hardning, one befal­ling the Disciples of Christ; Mark 6 52. this ex­presseth it self in sottishness, opposite to due ap­prehension, [...], they understand not, con­cerning the loaves, the other peculiar to the Re­probate, expressing it self in stubbornness, op­posite to due submission; thus Pharoah as, yet ex­altest thou thy self against me? Exod. 9.17. It is this that we here speak unto.

Concerning this three things.

1. What is the state of a sinner thus hardned? It is this, he is no longer capable of spirituall good, &c. So with Pharoah, when the Apostle in­stanceth as an example of Reprobation, he still grew worse and worse by all the great works of [Page 71]God before him, and upon him, after every new plague, his heart hardned anew, Exod, 7.2.3.4. when the Magicians were forced to confess the power of God against them; still his heart hard­ned, Exod. 8.19. so the Reprobate Jews, Isa. 6.9.10. with Mat. 13. v. 14.15. their hardness of heart went on against all that they heard and saw in the word and workes of God by the Prophet, by Christ himself, and his Apostles, sottishness and stubbornness, both prevailing in them.

2. What is Gods way of hardning the Re­probate? he gives them over so fully, &c. as it is in the description; here are two particulars especially to be taken notice of.

1. He gives them over fully to the power of their lusts, and this he doth by with-holding those works of his spirit, for enlightning, con­vincing, awing, enclining, which formerly he afforded: There is a time when even the Repro­bates (many of them) are in regard of meanes offorded, and the workes of Gods spirit upon them, by the means in a faire way for life, but they abusing that light and those motions of the spirit,; the Lord with-holds those works of his, no longer restraining them as formerly, but suffering them to run headlong into all wickednesse wholly byassed by their lusts; hence God is said to harden them, Iohn. 12.40 refer­ring to that of Esay 6.9, 10. he thus giving them over, and they are said to harden them­selves, Mat. 13.15. (their eyes have they clo­sed, conmpare the Context) they given over increasing in stubbornness against the Lord, so [Page 72]in the History of Pharoah; sometimes God is said to harden his heart, sometimes he is said to harden his own heart.

2. He gives them over to the dominion of Sa­tan (whom they have chosen rather to serve then God) as the instrument of his wrath, to blind them more, to smite them with further hardnes of heart, to infuse into them, and stir up in them more enmity against God, thus 2 Thes. 2.10, 11.12. God gives over such as received not the love of the truth, &c. to the effectuall delusions of Satan, with certain aime at their damnation, thus 1 Sam. 16.14. and 18.10. and 19.9. there is an evill spirit from the Lord stirring up Saul to rage and murder, an evill spirit, therefore the Devil, from the Lord, therefore he had commission from God (as the lying spirit in the mouths of Ahabs Prophets had) and Saul was given up of God, to the ef­fectuall working and dominion of that evill spirit.

3. The Lord as the supream mover acts them thus destitute of his grace, and wrought upon by Satan; hence the Lord is said to harden, to fatten, to strengthen, to turn the heart of the Reprobate unto evill; so for turning their hearts, Psal, 105.25. (of the work of God upon the wills of men, moving them when they move sinfully, he himself free from their sinne, see more fully in answer to the first Objection in the last Sermon.)

3. The ground of this hardning work, it is their former sinnes; therefore we say it is the exercise of the Lords righteous judgement up­on [Page 73]sinners when he hardens, though the decree of permitting fin in order to hardning, and of hardning in order to condemnation, riseth a­bove sin either acted or foreseen as that which shall be, the Lord in this decree of his seeing that it shall be as formerly hath been proved; yet the execution of this decree in hardning, ever followes sin committed, so 2 Thes. 2. be­cause they received not the love of the truth, there was their sin, God gave them up, &c. there their judgement, so Rom. 1.24.26. Thus have we seen wherein this hatred consists, further clear­ing up to us, that such a decree there is, and thus, and in this method do we understand that which is exprest in the description, that God appoints the Reprobate to dishonour and de­struction for ever by sin. Hence they are called vessels for dishonour and of wrath, fitted to destruction, Rom 9.21.22. Hence the Apostle tels us by clear insinuation, that some are appoin­to wrath, 2 Thes. 5.9. speaking of it as the great happinesse of himself and the Saints there, that God had not appointed them to wrath, some he had appointed thereto, hence Iude 4. Cer­tain men fore-ordained, or fore-written to that judgement: as Election is the book of life, so Reprobation of death, the names of the Re­probate there Registred for destruction, in vain it is objected that fore-writing there is nothing but Enochs fore-prophesying, vers. 14. For

1. How doth it appear that Enochs Prophesie was written?

2. In that they in S. Judes time were by E­noch prophesied of so many ages before, it is [Page 74]manifest they were so many ages before ordain­ed to judgement, & if so many ages before, then from all eternity; there being no imaginable reason why in that age God should first decree it, setting aside that all the decrees of God are eternall, and that his love of Election, and ha­tred of Reprobation are not at all of works done or fore-seen. Hence 1 Pet. 2.8. There are certain men appointed formerly, or put ( [...]) to stumble at the Gospell, disobe­dient thereto, hence Prov. 16.4. the wicked are made for the day of evill; God in the Cre­ation of man, hath the condemnation of the Reprobate for his own glory in his eye, there­fore are they vessels designed to dishonour and destruction when the Lord formes them, Rom. 9.20, 21, 22. Hitherto that there is such a de­cree of hatred in God concerning the Repro­bates, and wherein it consists. Now

2. For the Object of this hatred, who are these Reprobates here spoken of?

Ans. All but the Elect.

1. The Election hath obtained (saith the Apostle) but the rest were hardned, speaking of the Jews; but in his following discourse he di­vides the whole world into these two ranks, as hath been formerly observed, in the second Ser­mon, the second observation upon the Context, from the 14. to the 19. vers. of the ninth to the Romanes.

2. Forasmuch as he hath chosen some, and but some to life; either he hath determined all the rest to death, or else there are some men on whom the Lord hath past no certain determination, [Page 75]either for life or death; not for life, then he had chosen them, not for death as is here supposed. Then 1. He determines not how he wil be final­ly glorified by them. 2. Nor what shall be their [...]mall state. 3. Nor what their way and course shall be in this life, but this is to make void a great part of his providence; then by the same reason the like may be affirmed of the Angels, and so the Kingdome of his providence still more straightned, and he in effect denyed the Univerall and supeam Ruler.

3. The deccree of Reprobation for some hath been already proved, and there being no reason any where hinted in the Scriptures, nor easily imaginable why some of the non-Elect should be Reprobate, and not all; It must needs be granted of them all.

4 Forasmuch as in Election, life and all blessings for life are prepared, and all depends upon Election that makes for his glory, and all men in the conclusion are saved or damned; hence it must needs be that all but the Elect are Reprobate, so Rev. 20.15. the condemnation of all those that perish at the day of judgement is ultimately derived from their non-Election; whence it is manifest that upon Election de­pends eternall life originally. We may therefore say of all but the Elect, as it is Hab. 1.12. but we shall not need further to insist upon this, there being very few, if any, who grant the Reprobation of some, but they grant it like­wise of all but the Elect.

3. For the ground of this hatred, why doth God decree to permit the rest of men besides the [Page 76]Elect to sin, with certain aime at their hard­ning in sin, and to harden them in sin, with certain aime at their condemnation for sinne?

Ans. There is no ground at all but his own will for his own glory: therefore we say he hath hated meerly because he would: for this the Apostle is clear, Rom. 9.

1. Expresly removing all works of man, so as to ascribe all to the purpose of God, v. 11.

2. Expresly resolving the difference betwixt the Elect and Reprobate meerly into the will of God, vers. 15. to 24. The fuller clearing of this Scripture, making good the matter in hand, see in the first Sermon, beginning at the 11. vers. of this ninth to the Rom. thence to the end of the second Sermon, where we shall finde upon the 11. vers.

1. Three arguments to prove that the purpose of God must be wholly of it self.

2. The Apostles whole discourse both in rai­sing and refuting Objections from vers. 14. to vers. 22. clearly proving it.

Hitherto that Reprobation is Gods eternal de­cree, that it is his decree of hatred, that it is his decree for permitting to sin, with certain aime at hardning in sin, for hardning in sin with cer­tain aime at condemnation for sin, that the ob­ject of this decree is all to a man, besides the Elect.

Now follows the end of it, his own glory,

1. In his soveraigne power over man.

2. In his revenging justice upon perishing sin­ners.

3. In the riches of his mercy upon his cho­sen and saved ones.

[Page 77] That the glory of God is the end of all, that he is all manner of waies in all his attributes to be glorified; that whatsoever his wisdom di­ctates to be for his glory must be brought to pass: see towards the end of the second Sermon, where we have spoken to the second part of the Apostles answer, Rom. 9.22.23.

Now these attributes, the glorifying where­of the Lord had in his eye, especially in the de­cree of Reprobation: Are

1. His soveraigne power over man, consider­ed neither as pure, nor impure, but not as yet created; his decree ordaining the rest but the Elect, unto sin, and destruction by sin, Rom. 9.20 21. And this is more fully discoursed, and (I think) clearly proved in the second Sermon, beginning towards the beginning of the Ser­mon, at the fifth observation there, continuing to the end of the Apostles plea for Gods ab­solute power, and the opening of that plea, vers. 20.21. It is likewise further cleared in this Ser­mon where this hatred of God is opened, that which we have but now been upon.

2. His just wrath, or revenging justice upon perishing sinners, together with his power or might for their destruction, vers. 22. where we may observe.

1. The power mentioned in this vers, is his [...], that is, his might for execution of his judgement upon the Reprobates to their de­struction; the power mentioned vers. 21. is his [...], that is right or authority; this refer­ring to the Creation of Man, God hath right to Create man to what finall state he pleaseth, [Page 78]and accordingly to order him thereto, that to the condemnation of sinfull man.

2. The Reprobate are vessels of wrath fitted or prepared for destruction, which neither on­ly nor mainly relates to themselves, as corrupt­ing themselves, and so bringing damnation up­on themselves, though it be true that so they do, but it primarily refers to God and his aime in their Creation, as is manifest both by the Me­taphor: The Potter prepares or fits the Vessell of dishonour for it's dishonourable use, and by the former discourse, which hath been large-spoken to, agreeable to the Scripture other­where, Prov. 16.4. he hath made the wicked man for the day of evill, in his decree of Cre­ation, then he had his finall destruction in his eye, and therefore whatsoever should make for it, so 1 Pet. 2.8. and Jude 4.

3. His mercy towards his Elect, vers. 23. this hath been formerly spoken to, at the end of the third Sermon, upon that part of the description of Election, to the praise of his glorious grace.

HAving laid down the po­sitive doctrine of Repro­bation, we come now to answer Objections.

1 Express texts of Scrip­ture.

2. Other arguments fa­stening in the Adversa­ries opinion, great absur­dities upon the Former Doctrine.

1. For the Texts of Scripture, they are main­ly these, wherein there is as much seemingly for them, as in all other texts of Scripture, 1 Tim. 2.4. where it is said, Gods wills the salvation of all men, and that they should come to the know­ledge of the truth, 2 Pet. 3.9. where it is af­firmed that God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance, [Page 80] Ezek. 33.11. where the Lord affirmes with an oath, that he hath no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live, Ezek. 18.23. the Lord hath no pleasure at all that the wicked should dye, and vers. 32. he hath no pleasure in the death of him that dyes: These Scriptures they are wont ve­hemently to urge an edge, the Lord say they here declares himself positively, he wills all to be saved negatively, not willing that any should perish; further, that they might be saved, he wills their saving knowledge and repentance as having no pleasure, no none at all in the death of a sinner, no not of him that dyes, but the contrary that he turn and live; and for this the Lord engageth his own life.

For Answer.

1. We must give generall answers to those Scriptures wrested by them joyntly.

2. Particular answers to them severally.

Ans. 1. Consider on the other hand what hath been formerly cleared by Scripture: that some the Lord hates in order to condemnation, this hatred, his decree for permitting sin in or­der to hardning, for hardning in sin in order to condemnation; this decree arising above all respects of sin in man, though not without re­spect of sin in him: that as the Potter of the same lump, makes some Vessels to honour, some to dishonour; so the Lord out of man-kind e­qually represented to his decree, not as yet Created, fits some for glory as vessels of mercy; others for destruction as vessels of wrath, that the different decrees of Election and Repro­bation, [Page 81]are the originall ground of that dif­ference which is found in the spiritual and eter­nal state of men, (the Election hath obtain'd, the rest were hardned) That in both these the will of God raigns; I wil have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and whom I will, I harden; that some were of old ordained, fore-written to this condemnation, Jude 4. that as God hath made all things for himself, so the wicked man for the day of evill, Prov. 16.4. that some are appointed or set to stumble at Christ, and his word, disobedient thereto, 1 Pet. 2.8. and these opposed to the Elect or chosen people, vers. 9.

We must so interpret the Scripture as it may stand with it self; and therefore so the former Texts of Scripture, as that we overthrow not these, and the main truths held forth in them.

Ans. 2. By distinction of the will of God.

The will of God is taken two wayes, some­times for his decreeing will, or will of intenti­on; sometimes for his declaring will, or will of administration.

1. His Decreeing wil determines what shall, or shall not be, of this Psal. 115.3. and Rom. 9.19. whatsoever he wils by this, is certainly brought to pass; whatsoever is not brought to passe, it is most certain he thus wil'd it not; for this will of his cannot be frustrate, as the Psalmist af­firmes, and the Apostle grants; for this will, all the most crosse wills of men and Devils to his commands, fulfill it. Lib. de Corrept. & grat. c. 14. ‘To will and to nill is so in the Liberty of him that wills or nills, as that he can neither hinder the will of God, [Page 82]nor overcome his power:’ S. Austin.

2. His declaring will shews what is mans du­ty, what being done or undone, God approves or disproves, it is exprest, partly in comman­ding, partly in affording meanes; the Lord herein dealing with men, speaks after the man­ner of men, what they command, or for what they afford meanes, it is commonly (though not alwaies) their intention it should be done: This will is so often frustrate, as the command is broken, or the means abused; this will re­spects not alwaies the event; when God com­mands Abraham to offer Isaac, here is his decla­ring will for it, it was Abrahams duty to go a­bout it, God approved of his ready obedience, but that Isaac should be sacrificed, he intended not, as is manifest by the issue; this is not pro­perly his will, but the signe of his will, as to us, which sometimes agrees to his wil of intention, sometimes not; in respect of the Event, it be­ing many times his decreeing will, that his de­claring will should not be fulfil'd; which (be­sides other cases, as in that of Abraham for of­fering up his Son) is alwaies when sin is com­mitted; of this will, Levit. 13.34. I would, ye would not; I would, by all my Prophets for­merly, now by my self; I called upon you, and afforded you meanes for turning to me, ye would not, ye have resisted my call, and abused the means afforded you.

Hence when God is said to will the salvation of all, not that any should perish, not the death of him that dyes &c. either the note of univer­sality (All, not any) is so to be limited, or the [Page 83]Will of God, so to be distinguished, or both, as nothing may be ascribed to the will of Gods intention, but what certainly comes to passe in the event.

This conclusion therefore we lay downe for further answer to those Texts of Scripture joyntly, and to all of the same purport: God never intended the salvation of any, but those who are and shall be saved; for then should his will of intention be frustrate, which that it can­not be.

1. We have seen Psal. 115.3. Rom 9.19.

2. The truth of this conclusion will appear by enquiry into that will of intention, which in God they imagine for the salvation of all without exception, it is either a compleat and determinate act of the will of God, or a natu­rall inclination in him, not in compleat opera­tion.

If the former, then is he not unchangeable, first determining all men to life, then reversing that determination; but with God there is no change nor shadow of turning, neither can there be, all change proceeding from imperfe­ction, whether of wisdome, or power, or happi­nesse, therefore God wills not now one thing, then another, though he executes his Will part by part, and time by time, but his Will is al­wayes one and the same constant act from all, to all eternity.

But the adversaries here chuse the latter ra­ther, affirming it a naturall inclination in God, not in compleat operation, to this end distin­guishing the Will of God into antecedent, or [Page 84]fore-going, and consequent, or following.

The antecedent they define a naturall incli­nation in God, whereby he wills the salvation of all, before he considers a certaine act (as A­dams sin) or some certain acts, as other sins in man: The consequent will whereby he deter­mines actually the condemnation of many, this determination issuing from the last judge­ment of Divine Wisdom, upon the consideration of certaine acts in the creature fore-seen as those which shall be, without his decree that they shall be. For answer.

1. If this distinction were admitted, it could not reach; for this which they call the conse­quent Will of God, hath it not taken place in the breast of God long since? Hath not God to this day considered of all things that can fall within consideration concerning his creature, in order to eternall life or death? Or, by what slow degrees do they conceive the considerati­on of God to move forward? Nay, can they forme to themselves such grosse apprehensions of God, as that he should not have considered all things considerable before the world was? If so, then his consequent will is past for the condemnation of many by their own grant.

2. This distinction is not to be admitted, as that which transformes God into a worthlesse Idol; Being,

1. Against the simplicity of his spirituall na­ture, whereby he is what he is purely, and com­pleatly in act: And this is manifest from the perfection of his nature, the more all pure in­clinations are in operation, the more perfecti­on [Page 85]there; in Angells and men the more not on­ly an inclination to the love and feare of God, &c. but the more actuall love and feare is found in them, the more perfect is their state; what light is in the Sun, it alwayes actually shines; But the nature of God is a nature of utmost per­fection, therefore no inclination in him, but what in compleat operation; hence he hath been by all Divines Orthodox in this point of the perfection of his nature accounted a pure Act.

2. It is against the perfection of his Wisdom, there is no time nor moment can be considered, wherein God doth not actually consider what­soever can fall within consideration concerning the creatures acts, and all things thereupon de­pending, and therefore no moment can be con­sidered wherein God doth not compleatly and determinately will whatsoever he wills concer­ning his creature.

3. The Conclusion stands good from the power of God; If he wills the salvation of all, and hath power in his hand for it, then all shal be saved: It is a ruled Case, Quod volunt potentes agunt omnes, whatsoever any one really wills, if he have power in his hand he wil do it; what is further imaginable for doing a thing but wil and power? What saith Arminius here? he wils the salvation of all, but mode convenienti, after a fit manner: For answer briefly; The salva­tion of all either may be brought to passe after a fit manner, or it may not; if it may, then still the argument stands good, he wils it, and it may be fitly done, and he hath power to doe [Page 86]it, why is not then done? And indeed that it might be done after a fit manner if he pleased, is manifest, because after the same manner he gives grace to some, and perseverance in grace, he could do it to all; If it may not be done af­ter a fit manner, and yet according to their supposall God wills it, then he wills something which cannot be done after a fit manner; how great an absurdity is here fastened upon the Will of God, which is the rule of all cleare, righteous, and fit proceedings? This is a will beseeming a child rather then God; Or, what will they say further? Though he wills it, yet for as much as it makes more for his glory that all be not saved, therefore all shall not be saved.

Answ. But if it makes against his glory that all should be saved, then he wills it not, if God could will what makes against his own glory, and that way whereby he hath determined fi­nally to be glorified, he could sin against him­selfe; according to this supposall, there are lines running crosse in the breast of God, and he is at strife with himselfe. That what the Poet speakes of the weake elements amongst them­selves, these Prophets speaks of the one, perfect God.

[Page 87] This last expresly, weighty things with light, his former Will, as a thing of no weight, make­ing against the weighty aime, and way of his own glory, (which is the end, and measure, and rule, and poize of all) must give way to this lat­ter Will, as that wherein there is true weight.

4. From the happinesse of God; Bradwardi­na, l. 1. c. 1.8 parte Co­rollarii. If he be perfectly happy, whatsoever he wills shall cer­tainly be brought to passe, happinesse is an in­tire and perfect good, and it is more happy to have whatsoever is willed, then to want it; for if the wanting of one thing willed doth not in any degree diminish happinesse, then neither doth the want of another thing willed, for no­thing added to nothing makes but nothing still, then neither doth the want of a third, fourth, and so on in the conclusion then he may be as happy who hath nothing that he wills, as he that hath all things that he wills: But this common sense abhors.

5. From the Knowledge of God; If from all eternity he knowes who shal be condemned, then did he will their condemnation, and that antecedently to this knowledge, he therefore knowing it, because he hath willed it; for what­soever he knowes as that which shall be, he knowes either in it selfe, or in himselfe; hee knowes it not in it selfe, whilst as yet it is not, but nothing but himselfe was before the crea­tion of the world, therefore nothing in it selfe could then be knowne to him.

Object. But as we see what is present in certain moments of time, so he in his eternity comprehending at once and together all time, (for his eternity is the [Page 88]entire possession together and at once of a boundlesse life) sees before all time whatsoever is in any part of time.

Answ. That in his eternity he may see any thing in it selfe, there is required not only the existence of his boundlesse life together and at once but the co-existence of the thing it selfe to be seen, and therefore as man sees not any thing in it self in one moment of time, which is not in that moment, but shal be in an after mo­ment, so neither doth God see any thing in it selfe before all time which is not, but in time, otherwise he should see time in it selfe before all time; which is a contradiction, and here is no shadow of imperfection in God, but an impossi­bility in the thing; and what is here said for the thing it selfe, is as cleare for all created cau­ses of the thing, they cannot in themselves be seen before all time, they themselves being but in time, what he knowes then from eternity as that which shall be, it is in himselfe that he knowes it, if in himselfe, in his will.

1. In God there is a threefold knowledge First, an apprehension of the nature of things, this may be shadowed by those formes which we finde in our owne minds, when we think of a­ny thing meerly according to the simple nature of it, as when a builder hath the Platforme of a house in his mind, but proceeds no further, either to determine it shall, or shall not, may or may not be built: thus in the Divine Nature there is the apprehension of all things, possible, impossible, possibilities, and unpossbilities, but that herein he doth not determinately know what shal be is manifest, because thence it would [Page 89]follow, that he apprehends no more then the things that are, and shall be.

1. The knowledge of what is possible, what may or may not be determinately; and this he knows in his own power, whatsoever is possible to be done, is therefore possible, because he hath power to bring it to pass; but herein doth he not determinately know what shall be, because then he should be of power to do no more then he doth.

3. It remaines then that the knowledge of what shall be, is founded in his will; how did he know the world should be, and should be this and no other, before it was? in his mind are thousands of other formes and representa­tions, and he was able to have made it of an­nother form, and other kind of Creatures, so that here he could not know it should be, and that it should be this; but herein he knows both that it should be, and that it should be this, and no other, because he wil'd that it should be, and that it should be this, that it is: If God knew then from all eternity, that all should not be saved, and who they were, herein he knew it, because it was his will that all should not be saved, and that these should be they which should not be saved: But as hath been former­ly noted, the Arminians are very creperous in point of Gods knowledge of the state of man, in order to eternal life, allowing no determi­nate and certain ground of it, either in God or Man.

Thus much for answer in generall to these Scriptures joyntly, now more particularly.

[Page 90] 1. To those two Scriptures, 1 Tim. 2.4. where it is said God would have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth, and 2 Pet. 3.9. where it is said, that God is not wil­ling that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance: these Scriptures free them­selves from that generall interpretation, so he that wills that all shall be saved, as he wills that they should come to the knowledge of the truth; so he is not willing that any should pe­rish, as he wils that all should repent; But is it the Lords will of intention, or his decreeing will, that all without exception should come to the knowledge of the truth, and to repentance? the contrary is manifest.

1. From the denyall of meanes.

2. From the denyall of his spirit to many who have the means.

1. For the denyall of meanes. 1. He affords not to all the necessary means; instances of this are so evident, as cannot be gain-said: for the first 4000 years well nigh, the world generally was over-looked, the means of knowledge, the discovery of the Covenant of God, onely in the Church, and that Church shut up first in the families of the Patriarchs, afterwards in the lit­tle nation of the Jews; hence that of the Apo­stle, Acts 17.30. and 16. Rom. 25.26. hence the Jews so startled when the door of faith was set open generally to the Gentiles; The Apostle Peter himself, must by a Vision from heaven, be taught the counsell of God, for the call of the Gentiles, Act. 10.

Since the comming of Christ, to this day, is [Page 91]the Gospel preached in every Nation without exception? are there no Pagan Nations in the world?

2. He hath sometimes denyed the means to those whose hearts he hath seen less obstinate in case the means had come to them, then others unto whom he hath sent the means, and left them to perish in the obstinacy of their hearts against the means sent; thus it was betwixt Tyre and Sidon, on the one hand, and Capernaum on the other, by our Saviours own Testimony.

Object. All in Adam were taken into the Cove­nant of Grace.

Ans. 1. If it was true, it reacheth not, how shall his posterity in after generations, come within the call of Grace, or to the knowledge of the Gospel, meerly upon that ground that Adam was once possest of it for them.

2 It is utterly false, for then should Adam have been a root of Gospell righteousness to his po­sterity, whereas it is Christ in opposition to Adam, that is so, Rom. 5.

Object. They had the meanes of knowledge in their Ancestours long since, who by their unworthy working have lost them, for themselves and posterity.

Answ. 1. If that was granted, it would not thence follow that God would that their po­sterity should come to the knowledge of the truth.

2 This supposeth their Ancestours a common Stock, forfeiting for their posterity, Gospell priviledges all the world over; but it is plain that there were some Nations which never had the Gospel among them, till many years after the death of Christ.

[Page 92] Object. The Creation holds forth so much of God, that if man would improve it so farre as he might by the power of nature, God would then reveale the Go­spel to him, and give him preventing grace; and this law he made with Christ, for the merit of his passion, so that thus all men have the meanes of saving know­ledge initially in the Creature, and it is in their hands to improve those initiall meanes to the obtaining of the ultimate meanes in the word of the Gospell, hence they teach that the Sun, Moon, and Stars, preach the Gospell Rom. 10.

Ans. This Tenent is meerly Jesuitical, over­thrown by the more Orthodox of the Papists themselves, by these, or some of these following Arguments.

1. God in revealing the Gospel, is found of those that sought him not, &c. Rom. 10.20.

2. It is not in him that willeth, nor in him that runneth, but in God that sheweth mercy, Rom. 9.16. whereas according to this Tenent, onely to him that by the improvement of naturall power, wills and runs, mercy should be shown.

3. He will have mercy, on whom he wil have mercy, and whom he will he hardens, Rom 9.18. where the originall ground of salvation is ascribed meerly to the will of God, but accor­ding to this Tenent, his will is suspended upon mans work.

4. Who made thee to differ? and what hast thou that thou hast not received? 1 Cor. 4.7. the graduall difference found amongst the Saints themselves, is from God by what they receive; much more that specificall difference betwixt Saints and Sinners.

[Page 93] 5. The greatest of sinners who have most a­bused their naturall Talents, as Publicans, Har­lets; and such as the Apostle reckons up, 1 Cor. 6.9.10. are called, when many more restrained, and better qualified for moral vertues are pas­sed by. Non habeo &c. There is nothing that I can behold in chusing men to saving grace; should I in my thoughts be permitted to the tryall of this Election, but either greater wit, or smaller sinnes, or both; let us add if you please, bonest and profitable acts; whosoever therefore he is, who is intangled and defiled with the smallest sins, (for from all who can be free?) and of quick wit, and accomplisht with the choisest acts, seemes a fit man to be chosen to grace; but when I shall thus determine, so will he laugh at me, who hath cho­sen the weak things of the world that he may confound the strong, and the foolish things of the world, that he may confound the wise, that I beholding him, and with shame corrected, laught at many, who both compared with some sinners, are more chast, and with some fisher­men, are Orators, &c. Angustine. Ad Simplic. Lib. 1. ad finem fere.

6. According to this supposition, there is no place for preventing grace, but it is prevented debt, when a sinner is converted, so that it over­throws it self; not grace, because it is of works, and so not preventing, because prevented by fore-going works, in the improvement of na­turall powers.

Object. But it is for the merits of Christ, and therefore of grace.

Ans. But where it is of works, it is not of grace, saith the Apostle; therefore this, hath Christ no more merited, it (being the over­throw [Page 94]of grace) then that we should be justifi­ed by works; by both which, grace would be made no grace: as for that Text, Rom. 10.18. compared weth the 19. Psalme, it is a most ridi­culous wresting, to apply it to this purpose; It is plain there, that they whose sound goes forth, &c. are the Apostles, and sent tea­chers preaching the word of the Gospel, to the eare; by whose preaching faith is immediately begotten, upon hearing, vers. 14.15.16, 17 not the Sun, Moon, and stars, holding forth the works of God to the eye, by which men are remotely prepared for the Gospel, and faith by it; and what is alleadged out of the 19. Psalme, is spoken allusively; the course of the Gospel in the hands of the Apostles and their Succes­sors, compared to the course of the Sun in the skie: Thus much for the denyall of means.

2. For the denyall of his spirit in regard of saving operation, to many who enjoy the means: The same word preached is to one the savour of life to life, to another the savour of death to death; whilst some are converted, o­thers are hardned: observe here,

1. It is God that makes the difference. 1 Cor. 4.7. the effectual call of a sinner in saving il­lumination, faith and repentance is the guift, Ephe. 1.17. and 2.8. Phil. 1.29. 2. Tim. 2.29. Ezek. 36.26.27.

2. It is of meer grace, without respect of for­mer works, 2. Tim. 1.9. Rom. 11.5.6. Rom. 9.11.

3. The Lord herein useth an absolute liber­ty, Jo. 3.8.

[Page 95] 4. He gives in the call of a converted sinner, both the power, and the acting of that power; to such as are not converted he gives neither: the former part of this is clear by the foremen­tioned Texts, proving it to be his gift; both the former and the latter is clear, Joh. 6.44.45. no man can come without the fathers drawing and teaching; therefore where this is not, there is not so much as the power, but where this is; not onely can they, but they do come; hence the conversion of a sinner is an effectuall and a pe­culiar work of God; and if God did the same for those who are not converted, which he doth for those that are, they should be con­verted too; but this we have seen before.

5. The Lord in this proceeds according to his decree, for converting some, by hardning o­thers against the means, Rom. 9.18. for conver­sion, Act. 13.48. Rom. 8.30. Ephe. 1.4.5. for hardning, Ioh. 12.37. to the 42. that the Jews were not converted by the powerfull ministry of Christ, was hence, saith the Evangelist; be­cause the Lord had long before determined their hardning, and foretold it; Esay in his time be­holding the glory of Christ, as he was to be revealed by his coming in the flesh, and preach­ing, (adding miracles to his Sermons) to the Jews; prophesied of these Jews, that they by his word and works should be hardned: Hence then it will be manifest upon the summing up of these particulars, that by all here, cannot be meant every one without exception; not so much as the declaring will of God, in afford­ding the meanes being for all in that sense; [Page 96]much lesse his decreeing will, according to which he dispenseth himselfe thus differently, both in affording and applying the meanes; we will here conclude with Lib. de Genes. ad literam. c. 10. S. Austin, God could (saith he) turn the will of the wicked into good, he could 'tis plain, because he is omnipotent, why there­fore doth he not? because he will not; why he will not, it is with himselfe, (penes ipsum est) for we ought not to be wise above what behoves. Here the wisdom and Soveraignty of God betake themselves to their height, he that will here straine his eye, shall lose his sight; he that will needs be soun­ding these depths, shall lose his plumb; he that will search out the majesty, shall be over-whel­med with the glory. Thus much for the parti­cular Answers to those two Scriptures joyntly, now in the last place to each apart.

For the first, 1 Tim. 2.4. It is manifest by the Context, it is meant of all rankes and orders of men, whether Kings, and those in Authority, or Subjects, and those under Authority, (as in Gal. 3.28. no difference of Nation, sex, condi­tion, exclude from Christ) and there was speci­all reason from the state of those times for the Apostle to speake to this; The Kings and Ru­lers of the world being then great persecutors of the truth, and professed enemies to it, it might seem labour in vaine to pray for such a deplored kind of men; therefore the Apostle useth this reason, that of that order of men as well as others, God hath his Elect whom hee will save.

For the second, 2 Pet. 3.9. To us-ward saith the Apostle, who are these? The Apostle an [Page 97]Elect and Believing person writing to the dis­persed Jews, who for the Gospell suffered perse­cution, themselves Elect Believers and sanctified, 1 Pet. 1.1, 2. and 2 Pet. 3.1. The sum then is this, God delayes the day of his great judgement, that he might first gather in all his Elect ones, not willing that any of them should perish, and as this is applied to them of that genera­tion amongst the Jewes, so it looks further to that harvest of Gods Elect amongst them, which in their great call, yet to come, is to be gathe­red in, Rom. 11.28. &c.

For the other two Scriptures, Ezek. 33. and 18.

1. The Lord wills not their death by his de­claring will, for as much as he hath commanded them to return, and given them means for it.

2. For his decreeing Will, the Lord by it wills not their death, according to the purport of their charge against him, to which here he answers.

They charge the Lord, first, as unjust, punish­ing the children for the Fathers offences, the children themselves free, Ezek. 18.2. Second­as unmerciful, as though inexorable against repentant sinners; this the Lord shewes to bee charged against him in his answer to them, chap. 18. mentiening so often that the wicked returning shall find mercy, and both these we find charged upon him, chap. 33. unmerciful­nesse, v. 10. injustice, v. 17. had this charge been true, the Lord had delighted in the death and torments of perishing sinners, as a Tyrant de­lights in the blood of his Subjects, had not [Page 98]willed their death as a righteous judge wills the death of a Malefactor. The Answer then is, That God doth not so will the death of a sinner, as that he is liable to the Charge of Injustice, con­demning without fault, or to the charge of un­mercifulnesse, inexorable against repenting sinners, but for their just and true incourage­ment, hath he so fully expressed himselfe, not to will the death of a sinner, no not of him that dies, in the meane time upon immovable grounds formerly laid downe, the Lord wills the death of those that die, for the glory of his own power and justice, seen in their condemna­tion.

[The like Answers in generall are to be given to those Seriptures so frequently alledged, and as often perverted, for Ʋniversall Redemption; which Scriptures the adversaries are wont to ob­ject against the Doctrine of Predestination. Fur­ther and particular answers, 1. The main Texts alledged by them, do of themselves, together with the Context afford: 2. The Analogie of Faith in many fundamentall Doctrines clearly taught in the word of truth, amongst which this of Pre­destination hath the leading place; in which whosoever is truly instructed, is surely anchor'd against that windy error.]

Hitherto we have answered these two last Scriptures, Ezek. 18. and 33. upon supposition that eternall death was there spoken of, where­as it is indeed temporall judgements which they there complaine of, and about which the Lord cleares himselfe, as is manifest, Ezek. 18.2. with Jer. 27. to the 31. vers. and Ezek. 33. from the 24. [Page 99]to the 30, vers. where it is evident, the desolati­on of their Land was the matter of their quarrel and complaint, they were so far from complai­ning, that God had given them over to hardness of heart, ordering them thereby to eternall death, as that they justifie themselves as suffering undeservedly; That was indeed the complaint of an humble and repenting people, Isai. 63.17. but these were quite of another straine. To this the sum of the Lords answer is; That they are the Authors of their own wo, he is so far from taking pleasure in their undeserved sufferings, that would they be righteous they should be free from miserie, to this end hath he commanded them to turne from their iniquities, and affor­ded them means for the same, that obeying they might live. A great stir the Arminian Nation is wont to make with these Texts of Scripture, disputing all the while upon a false interpreta­tion, and meerly perverting the question here held forth.

WE come now to other their maine Objections, which tend upon sup­posall of the former Doctrine, either to accuse God, or excuse Man

Object. 1. Say they, according to this Doctrine of Reprobation, God must be the Au­thor of sin, and so be guilty of sin, and this they urge upon three grounds especially: 1. In that he decrees it, thence there is a necessity of mans sinning. 2. In that he acts in it, producing as the first cause those acts in and by man, to which sinne cleaves inseparably. 3. That unto Adam he denied that grace, without which it could not be, that as to the event be should persevere in working righteousnesse.

Answ. What is here alledged as the grounds of this Objection, is owned by this Doctrine, but [Page 101]the charge of the Objection is denied, as having here no footing.

1. For the decree;—1. That God decrees that sin should be, hath formerly been proved, but that hence he cannot be concluded the Au­thor of sin is evident, because the decree, as such, is an act immanent in himselfe, not immanent upon the creature, it being the property of im­manent acts to put nothing in the object.— 2. There is upon the decree of God a necessity of mans sin, as Lib. 6 de Genes. ad literam. c. 15. Austin saith well, The Will of God is the necessity of things: But, 1. It is a neces­sity not absolute, but upon supposall, or con­ditionall, not of compulsion, but of consecu­tion, for as much as God hath so decreed, it cannot otherwise come to passe but man shall sin, yet doth he sin freely, chusing so to do, a­cting neither by constraint, nor from a princi­ple of naturall necessity; but of this we shall speake more in answer to the third Objection, which chargeth this necessity as inconsistent with the essentiall liberty of mans will. 2. There is a necessity of the same kind for mans sinning, if we grant that God fore-knowes his sinne, if God fore-knowes that man shall sinne, then must it needs so come to passe, otherwise God fore-knowes that shall be, which shall not be, but this clearly involves a contradiction: We must then either grant a conditionall necessity of mans sinning, or deny Gods prescience. 3. Upon supposall that man shall sin without the decree of God, God himselfe stands under the like necessity, a necessity upon supposall, or of consecution, for as much as man shall sinne, [Page 102]and is so fore-knowne of God, or whether so fore-knowne or not, there is now no liberty left to God for preventing mans sinne, so that whilest we feare to lessen mans liberty, by al­lowing him to stand under a conditionall ne­cessity arising from God, we feare not to lessen Gods liberty subjecting him to the like necessi­ty arising from man.

2. For Gods acting in the sins of men.

Answ. 1. That the great Creator as the first cause produceth all motion in all creatures, seems not obscurely to be taught by the Apostle, Acts 17.28. as he is set forth the Author of life, in him we live, of being, in him we have our being; so of motion, in him we move, and as the Apostle quotes there Aratus one of the Heathen Poets, so sutably another of the Poets sings, Est Deus in nobis, agitante calescimus illo; God is in us, he moving we wax warm.

To me it seems one of the foure letters of his Name Jehovah, to be the Author of all being, and therefore of all operations, in all creatures their operations, not being nothing, and to ascribe to any creature onely upheld, not mo­ved by God, to produce its own motion seems to transfer Divinity to the creature, and dero­gate from it in God. I should thinke the moti­on of the creature, in dependance upon the Creators moving, to be like that Engine, Ezek. 1.—16. a wheel in the middest of a wheel, the motion of God incompassing the creatures mo­tion, and moving it within it selfe: And I would further make this Quaere, Doth God up­hold all and every being? I do not know that [Page 103]this is by any denied, divine conservation and sustentation of whatsoever is; but if motion be upheld by him, it is produced by him; for it being a successive entity or being, how is it otherwise upheld then by Production? and if life be upheld, motion is; this terme, life, inclu­ding this terme, motion, life being in the living creature, the supreme and universall principle and power of operation actually in operation. But to insist no longer upon this; we affirme clearely, as that which comes closer to the pre­sent question and concludes it, whatsoever be­comes of this discourse, for all creatures in all their motions depending upon God.

2. That God as the supreme and universall Governor acts the wills of men, turning them which way he pleaseth in their motions, is clear­ly expressed in Scripture, and there is not a lit­tle depending upon this truth both for our du­ty and comfort.

1. For Scripture-testimony, Prov. 16.1. What are the preparations of the heart there, but the thoughts, desires, and inward workings of it? These are from the Lord, Prov. 21.1. What is there said of the Kings heart is as clearely to be affirmed of the hearts of other men: What more expresse? It is in the Lords hand, like the ri­vers of water, he turneth it which way soever he will; Is any thing more easily turned this way or that way, then a water-course? So easily doth the Lord turne the hearts of men, how are they turned but by their owne motions? They so move then by their own principles, as the Lord is the first and supreme mover, Psal. 106.46. He [Page 104]turned the Enemies hearts to pitty his people, and he gave them favour in the sight of the Egyptians, Exod. 11.3. So he likewise had be­fore turned their hearts to hate his people, and to deale subtilly with his servants, Psal. 105.25. further testimonies (though these might well suffice) will come in as we shall shew the duties hereon depending, which we now come to in some few instances.

2. Hereupon therefore it is our duty.

1. To seek after the Lord that we may know him, and give up our selves to him; it is further manifest by these testimonies, how we are to un­derstand that of the Apostle, In him we move, the Apostle thence requires this as the duty of all men living, having these experimental wit­nesses within them of their great Creator, in their life, being, motion, they are not, they stir not without him.

2. To glorifie God with all humble adorati­on, as the great Lord in whose hands is our breath, and whose are all our wayes, Dan. 5.23. all our wayes, even to the preparations of the heart, and all the motions and issues there­of, as we have seen.

3. To take heed with sear and trembling to the motions of Gods spirit in us, in the things that concern salvation, that we neglect them not Phil. 2.12.13. for as much as we cannot act but as acted by God, and he acts us by our own wills; first principled by his grace, then moved by his grace, then moved by his spirit; take heed we be not wanting to second these motions of his in us.

[Page 105] 4. To pray unto God that he would incline our hearts to himself, and to his waies, Cant. 1.4. Psal. 119.35.36. Jer. 31.18.

5. To praise God for whatsoever good incli­nations and operations we have found in our hearts, 1 Chron 29.14. for two things doth Da­vid there bless God. 1. That they had what to offer. 2. They had hearts wherewith to offer; the willingnesse of their hearts was from the Lord, as well as all that store they had to offer, and this he further acknowledgeth in prayer, vers. 18.19.

Other duties we might instance in, as humi­lity; as in the last example, vers. 14. What am I, and what is my people? In giving the most to God, they received the most, in that they recei­ved hearts to give, &c. But I forbear instances, onely one speciall case making for our no little comfort, in times of greatest temptation, by the prevailing of wicked men against us.

The Lord hath as well their hearts as hands in his power, to make them pitty us, favour us, as we have seen; he hath made promises to this purpose, Prov. 3.4. So when any mans wayes please the Lord, he will make even his enemies to be at peace with him; and it must not now re­main in the hand of man, whether the Lord shall be true in his promises or no, which it must do, if he doe not act and turn the hearts of men as he pleaseth; Jacob trusted to this when he made that prayer, Gen. 43.14. supposing Joseph to be some godless-Egyptian. Now let any man judge whether these testimonies, and duties thereupon depending, import no more but this; [Page 106]that God conserves man, and upholds his fa­culties, propounds objects, and perswades, then stands a looker on, leaves it meerly in mans power to act, or not to act; this way, or that way; so as for the event, it may or may not not be, this or that, nothing certain or deter­min'd.

Hence then we affirm, that God as the great Creator and universall Ruler, produceth all operations, and motions in the heart of man, even those to which in man sinne cleaveth un­avoidably Much more to this pur­pose, see lib. 5. con­tra. Julia. c. 3. God workes in the heats of men to incline their wills whithersoever he will; whether to that which is good for his own mercy, or to that which is evill for their merits, St. Austin. But now to an­swer the Objection, How then is he himselfe free from sin?

1. God works as the supream mover, man as the proper subject; that is, in whom is the prin­ciple of the sinfull action: this is one step clea­ring God in the case in hand, to make it plain by instances; The Sun shining upon a Dung­hill, raiseth a stink; the Sun stinks not, but the dung-hill in which is the principle of the stink, and it is by the operation of the Sun that it stinks: sinfull man is as the dung-hill, God as the Sun. A Clock false made, moved by the poise striks false; the poise moves true, though the clock strike false. By the shining of the Sun upon a false Dyall, the hours of the day are falsly given, the Sun is true in his course, yet without his motion the Dyall would not lye. A skilfull writer using a pen with an hair in it, for fair letters, blots are made; yet he writes ac­cording [Page 107]to as exact art with that, as with the cleanest pen, the fault is only in the pen. A skil­full Musician playes upon an Instrument out of tune, the musick jarres, the instument sounds a­misse; yet he shews no lesse skill, neither trans­gresseth the lawes of Musick any more, then if he plai'd upon a well tun'd instrument. Sinfull man is the false Clock, the false Dyall, the blotting Pen, the jarring instrument; God in his motion is the Poyse, the Sun, the Writer, the Musician; from God is the motion, in man is the principle of the evill in the action.

2. God works as the Author of nature, man as a morall Agent: that is, as standing under a law, which whilst he observes, or violates, his action is free from fin, or sinfull, sin being the transgression of the Saw of God: now those actions are the same considered as naturall, which as morall differ extreamly, and God works uniformely in those actions which are naturally the same, though morally very diffe­rent, and in point of good and evill, contrary. Instance, Adam eating the forbidden fruit, doth the same thing in naturall consideration, which he had done in eating the same, had it not been forbidden him; yet then had his eating been a lawfull and blamelesse action, whereas now it was most sinfull: nor onely the outward action of eating, but his will and desire of eating (supposing him to have will'd, and desired it not forbidden) hath been the same in nature that it was when he desired it forbidden; yet in one case free from sin, in the other deeply guil­ty. Whence riseth this difference; not from the [Page 108]different exertion of natural power, or a dif­ference in the operation of his will as naturall, but from his different condition; because he is in one case under a law forbidding, from which in the other he was free: Now God here works as the Author of nature, and uniformely; the difference of mans condition varies not his o­peration: as the Sun shines uniformely upon a Dung-hill, and upon a Garden, though the ef­fect be contrary; the weights move uniforme­ly the true, and the false clock, &c.

Another instance; suppose one man in heat of affection slay his adversary justly, another unjustly his friend; here is innatural conside­ration, one and the same action in both, the same exertion of naturall strength outwardly in the motion of the Arme, the same animosity inwardly stirred up in the motion of the will; therefore the operation of God, who works as the Author of nature one and the same for kind in both; the difference in morall consi­deration is found onely in the men, the one acting according to the law of God, the other contrary to it.

3. God works according to a pure rule, man contrary to a pure rule, Gods rule is the dictate of his own wisdom, for his own glory; what­soever the wisdom of God represents as making for his glory, that God wills and acts accor­dingly: now it is plain by the issue, and by Scripture testimony, that the wisdom of God hath suggested the way for his finall glory, in mans finall state, such as supposeth the sinne of man, making way for that glory; God there­fore [Page 109]according to this rule, both determines that man shall sin, and acts sinfull man in those actions of his, to which as in, and from man, sin cleaves unavoidably. Mans rule is the Law of God, man in sinning, though he fulfils Gods intention (for who hath resisted his will? the Jews in crucifying Christ, did whatsoever the hand and counsell of God had before deter­mined to be done) which is not his rule; yet he acts against his law, which is his rule; and therefore God acting according to his pure rule is blamelesse, man working contrary to his pure rule, guilty.

The third ground whereupon they will have the Doctrine of Predestination formerly asser­ted to charge God as the Author of sin, is, That unto Adam wa denyed that grace, without which it could not be, as to the event, that he should actually per­severe in his righteousness.

Ans. To affirm that God is the Author of sin, is granted on both hands blasphemy, and therefore whatsoever the Scripture teacheth concerning Gods dispensations to man about the first sin, or fall of Adam: this conclusion cannot thence be infer'd that God is the Author of sin. Now all the question is, what the Scripture here tea­cheth: This say we, That unto Adam was denyed that grace, without which it could not be, as to the event, that he should stand, and this we clear by these following steps.

1. Adam was created in the Image of God, Gen. 1.26. that is [whatsoever more is compre­hended] in righteousness and true holiness Ephe. 4.24. herein was that state of habituall righteous­ness, [Page 110]whereby he was able to do whatsoever good he should will to do: all the faculties of his soul were fitted to work according to the rule of righteousness without any interruption; it was not then with him, as it is now with the regenerate, Rom. 7.18. with whom to will is present, but how to perform that which is good they find not; he had withall by that habituall righteousnesse a power to will that which was good, even all that good which God according to his law engraven on his heart might require at his hands, free from any principle byassing him to evill: and this power, and this righ­teousnesse, had all his posterity in him.

2. That he was denyed the grace whereby he should actually stand, is manifest by the event; fallen he is, but God was able to have afforded him that effectuall grace, whereby his fall had been prevented, as he hath dealt with the An­gels, who keep, and for ever shall keep their first standing; and had that grace been afforded him, he had stood, for it is a contradiction to say he had that grace, whereby he should not onely be able to stand, but should actually stand; and yet grant that he stood not, he had then both a power to wil all that was good and to do all that good which he should will; but to will, and to do that for which he had a power, was not given unto him. A sound eye hath the fa­culty of seeing, there is the power; but that it may actually see the object before it, it must have light: An Instrument truly made and tu­ned, hath in it the power and principle of soun­ding harmoniously; but that it may yield it's [Page 111]harmony, the skilfull touch of the Musicians hand is necessary: Hence St. Austin, Lib. de cor­reptione & grat. c. 11. The first man had not that grace by which he never could be e­vill; but that grace he had in which if he would abide, he never should be evill. Such an aid of grace he had, as which he might forsake if he would, and in which he might abide if he would: not such as whereby it might come to passe, that he should will to abide. Then comparing it with that aid which beleevers receive in Christ; so much greater is that aid which is given by Jesus Christ our Lord, unto whom it seemes good to God to give it, that not onely we have that, with­out which we cannot persevere, although we should will; but so great, and such that we shall will: for there is in us by this grace of God, both in the recei­ving and holding with perseverance that which is good, not onely to be able to do that which we will, but also to will that for which we are able.

Cap. 12. Again, To the first man, who in that goodnesse wherein he had been made upright, had received to be able not to sinne, to be able not to dye, to be able not to forsake that goodnesse; was given an aid of perse­verance, not by which it might come to passe that he should persevere, but without which he could not be able by his free will to persevere: but now to the Saints predestinated unto the Kingdome of God, by the grace of God not onely such an aid of perseverance is given; but such an one, as that to them perseverance it selfe is given; not onely so, as that without that gift they cannot persevere; but so, as that by this gift they may not but persevere. Much more to the same pur­pose frequently in him.

3. It could not be that he should have that grace, whereby as to the event he might stand, [Page 112]as to his own fitnesse he had by his habituall righteousnesse a power of standing, he was ha­bitually fitted for it; but that it might stand, as to the event, there must be further a vigo­rous influx from God, of light upon his mind, of holinesse upon his will actuating his habitu­all power; Now that this should be afforded him, it could not be, that being supposed for which the Scripture is clear.

1. That God knew certainly that he should fall; that man is put to a very hard shift, who shall deny Gods certaine knowledge from all e­ternity of Adams fall, or of any event whatso­ever; and the free confession hereof would be refutation enough to most mens apprehesions (the impression of Gods perfection, as for other Attributes, so for knowledge, deing deeper set upon the heart of man, then by a little mise­rable Sophistry to be wiped out) of that unluc­ky opinion, which can be no otherwise suppor­ted then by despoiling God of his essentiall pro­perties. Now if God knew certainly that A­dam should fall, then it cannot be that he should have that aid of grace whereby he might as to the event stand; for then God should know certainly that that should be, which yet certain­ly might not be, namely, Adams fall, whereas for as much as God knowes certainly that it shall be, it may not for the event, but be.

2. That God hath decreed his fall; If God had decreed that Adam should fall by his per­mission, (and in that decree of his own permis­sion it was that he knew certainly that Adam should fall) then could it not be that Adam [Page 113]should have that grace whereby as to the event he might stand; for then Gods Administrations to man might make void his owne decree, but that God had so decreed we have formerly pro­ved: Let us gather up a brief discourse about it.

1. That God decreed the making and order­ing all the workes of his hands for his owne glory, as the end of all, is most unquestio­nable.

2. That he decreed particularly that glory which comes to passe from his creature; either that particularly, or another particularly, or lastly, none particularly, but his glory general­ly, and indefinitely; not another particularly, it is too absurd to say that he decreed what comes not to pass, and decreed not what comes to pass, such an apprehension doth at once ut­terly overthrow his wisdome and power; nei­ther did he decree his glory only generally and indefinitely, that apprehension necessarily sup­poseth a defect in his wisdome for dictating di­stinctly and particularly the way of his glory, and ascribes unto God the weakness of man dis­coursing from generals to particulars, which is alwayes accompanied with, and supposeth imperfect knowledge and power.

3. That he decreed his owne glory compre­hensively, to wit, all that glory in every parti­cular which ariseth to him from the creature, this is cleare (to wave other Arguments) from the two former particulars, because his glory is the end of all his workes, as his glory parti­cularly as it comes to passe.

4. That glory of his in the final state of man being such as supposeth sinne, (for how shall [Page 114]some be saved in mercy, others in justice con­demned without sin?) and particularly Adams fall, and in him all his posterity, it must needs be that God decreed that glory of his, and that way of his glory.

Object. But why doth God give a righteous law in charge to Adam, inables him with habitual righ­teousness for the fulfilling of that law, and yet deter­mines that he should not fulfil it.

Answ. We have from cleare and unshaken principles but now proved that God hath de­creed that way of his glory, or the glory of those Attributes in mans final state which neces­sarily supposeth sin, not to the decree, but to his glory; but if God had not made man righte­ous, and given him a righteous law in charge, and left him to the violation of that law, there could have been no sin in man; herein is sinne, man transgresseth that law which he is com­manded to observe, and for fulfilling whereof he had a power, Adam in himselfe, and we in him

Object. By what right doth God condemne may for sinning, when he hath first decreed, and then his dispensation towards man is according, that he shall not have that grace without which it cannot other­wise come to passe but he shall sin?

Answ. But by what right doth dust and ashes lift up its head against the great Creator in these bold enquiries?

1. Whatsoever appears by the Word of God to be his Will, there is no place for this enquiry; By what right? The VVill of God being the rule of righteousness; Nay, Lib. 1. de Gen. Con­tra. Manich c. 3. so the highest rule of righteousness, that whatsoever he wills, in as much as [Page 115]he wils it, it is to be accounted righteous: whereever therefore this question is asked, Why hath the Lord done thus? the answer must be, because he would: but if thou shalt goe on in asking, but why would he? Thou now seekest something greater and higher then the wil of God, which cannot be found Augustin.

2. The Lord here stands upon his dominion over man as his Creator, and thereupon checks the insolency of this enquiry: Nay but O man who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed, say to him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus? or hath not the Potter power over his Clay? &c. It is too high a pitch for man to soar, to call his Creator to the Bar, and there implead him face to face.

3. The Lords proceeding here by vertue of his Dominion, is a depth that must with trem­bling be admired, cannot be sounded. O the depth! Rom. 11.33. Wilt thou acknowledge no more in the most mysterious wayes of God, then what thy reason can graspe?

1. See the refutation of thy pride in the most common things of natures course every day be­fore thine eyes, Ioh. 38 give a clear answer to, and make a clear demonstration of those Geo­merrical, Physicall, and optick Problems there; here let me make the challenge to thee, which sometimes learned Lib. 1. c. 1. Corolari parte 32. vertus prin­cipium. Bradwardine, that great As­serter of the cause of God, against thy fore-fa­ther Pelagius made to the prond Philosoper de­riding Christians, because they beleeved what the Scripture affirmed, though they could not make it good by reason: Tell me thou Phi­losopher (saith he) what it is that thou knowest thoroughly? not theleast mote in the Sun beames, [Page 116]nor the least grain of dust of the earth, nor the least drop of water; in the least materiall quantity, infinite lines, figures, superficiall, corporcall, divers in quan­tity, quality and kinde are contained; and therefore answerably infinite conclusions Geometricall, orderly succeeding, so as that the latter cannot be known but by the former; infinite Arithmeticall conclusions, in orderly dependance likewise: of these, many conclusions in themselves demonstrable, how many knowest thou? Nay, let all the Philosophers be joyn'd together, how many of these infinite conclusions know they? a very few; there remaines therefore very many, not one whereof for their difficulty, and your meanness doth any of you, or all of you together know: A little after, the least spark of fire, doth it not by enlightning and warming make infinite or numberless circles of light, and spheres containing and contained, as likewise crossing one ano­ther; numberlesse lightsome Pyramids likewise, and Pyramids visuall, and those very different one from a­nother; numberless likewise lightsome and visuall beames incident, reflex, refract, in which are contai­ned infinite cenclusions, Geometrical, Arithmeticall, and perspective; and who can fully know all these? In the same place he argues, how much lesse can thy finite little soule comprehend the great God, who is every way infinite? Nay, blush thou Philoso­pher, and be ashamed to own so small a God, as that thou so small, by thy minde so small, shouldest search him out quite through, should'st ransack all his secrets, should have a comprehensive knowledge of him. Thus he.

2. Because thou art a christian, let us go one step higher. Canst thou comprehend by reason all the mysteries of faith? what? that of the three persons in the one God-head? the genera­tion [Page 117]of the Son? the procession of the spirit? what of thy saviours Incarnation? the distincti­on of the two natures united into one person? As for those, who, because they cannot by rea­son comprehend, do therefore deny these main Articles of our Faith; my charity is not easie enough to call them Christians. I will conclude with St. Austine, Thou a man requirest of me an answer; why, but I am a man too, De verbis Apostol. Serm. 20. let us therefore [...] beare him who saith, Nay but O man who art thou? thou askest a reason, a will tremble at the depth: thou arguest, I will wonder: dispute thou, i'le be­leeve; I see the depth, the bottom I cannot reach: S. Paul rested, because he found where to shut up with wondring; be calls them the unsearchable judgements of God, and dost thou come to search them? He calls them those wayes of his which cannot be traced, and wilt thou needs trace them? How much better, and more Christian was it, to captive our reason to faith, beleeving what the Scripture saith, even then when our reasonlesse reason replies, How should these things be?

Object. Is not this great Cruelty in God to ap­point his Creature by his decree to destruction? and here they are wont to raise a mighty out-cry, and by odious comparisons to aggravate this Charge; Tygers (say they) and Bears, and all the most savage Crea­tures, are kinder to their young then so.

Ans. To clear the question. 1. God appoints not the innocent, but the guilty creature to de­struction; though the fore-sight of sin be not before his decree for sin, and destruction: yet his decree appoints that sin shall be before de­struction, and destruction shall be for, and by sinne.

[Page 118] 2. To refute the Objection.

1. Must they not acknowledge that by Gods permission man sins? that by Gods appointment the sin of one man hath cast the whole world in­to a state of condemnation? that in the issue, the greatest part of man-kind is destroy'd? that sometime the whole world was given up to raigning sin, and perished generally in their [...] eight persons excepted? that for many ages the Lord suffered all Nations to walk in the wa [...]es of their owne hearts, without God, without hope in the world? that to this day he [...] many Nations to perish without he knowledge of Christ, there being no other name amongst men whereby salvation is had? that many to whom the Gospel is sent, are hardned by it? when as yet it was in the power of the Almighty to have prevented all this, and that without any the least trouble to himself. Now if Gods do­minion over his Creature, doth not absolve him of tryal at the Bar of natures Law in the Crea­ture (as this objection would bear in hand) how will they avoid this charge of cruelty against him granting what they must grant? would [...] not be cruelty in the Creature, and against the law of nature, to see their young ones torn in peices before their eies, in case they could prevent it; especially without any hazard or trouble?

After the same manner they argue, in charging God as the Author of sin; it is sin in man to wi [...] that another should sin; therefore to suppose of God, that he wils that man shall sin makes his the Author of sin; so they conclude, if this be just arguing, there is no sinne in the world, but God must be the Author of it, whether he will [Page 119]it or not (if we can imagine that God permits sin besides his will) for it is sin in man to permit ano­ther to sin, when he hath power in his hand, (and that without the least trouble to himself) to prevent it.

2. Is there the same kindred and Consanguinity betwixt God, and all the sons and daughters of men without exception, that there is betwixt the living Creatures, and their young ones? it is true we are his off-spring, or of his kind, Act. 17.29. inasmuch as we have our life and being in him, and were created in his image; but to be his sons and daughters, depends upon his Covenant in the hand of Christ, made on the behalf of the pecu­liar and chosen seed; now for them let the whole world perish, not one of them shall miscarry, Rom. 4.16. Ioh. 8.35. Ioh. 11.52. 2 Tim. 2.19. Esay 53.10.

3. Their own objection falls in full weight upon their own heads, who teach that ruinous Doctrine of final apostacy; that they who are truly the chil­dren of God, having embraced his Covenant by true faith, may yet fall from the state of life totally and finally, and so perish for ever.

4. Wherein doth this cruelty appear? that God should condemne hardned sinners, is that cruelty? no; that he should harden wilful sinners, viz. give them up to hardnes of heart as a punishment of their former sins, is that cruelty? no; that he should not recover from sin; all the Sons and Daughters of Adam without exception, is that cruelty? no; that he suffered Adam to sin, and imputed his sin to his posterity, is that cruelty? no; All these things they grant, Scripture-evidence being so clear for them; though some of them, true sons of their Fa­ther Pelagius, would gladly, if for shame they durst; [Page 120]and some have put shame here) deny the imputati­on of Adams sin, and so originall sin; in one of these two then, or in both together, must be the cruelty, that unto Adam was denyed that aid of grace, without which it could not be, as to the e­vent that he should stand; that God decreed ante­cedently to the fore-sight of sin, the sins of men; but it hath been proved already that this is no cru­elty in God, but the charge of cruelty hereupon is blasphemy in man. Instance; But at the least God is not so mercifull, according to this Doctrine, as the Scripture sets him forth. Reply 1. And how is he so powerfull, and so perfect as the Scri­pture represents him, if any thing fall out beside his decree and the full purpose of his will? 2. The Scriptures which speak most this way have been cleared already, and therein we have discovered how inconsistent it is with the nature and happi­nesse of God, that in any thing his will should be frustrate. 3. There are two sorts of mercies, 1. Com­mon, in the blessings of this life; these are to all the children of men, Acts 14.16.17. 2 Peculiar in the blessings of eternall life, those which shall surely make for it; here the Apostle avoucheth a difference, Rom. 9.18. and this founded meerly in the will of God, vers. 11.13. these are onely to the Elect, Ephe. 1.3.4 and how clear the current of Scripture is for this, hath formerly been abun­dantly made good the greatness of the Lords mer­cy is declared extensively in the former, that they are to all, even to those who live and dye his ene­mies, intensively in the latter. 1. That they are so excellent in their nature. 2. That they are so pe­culiar; as we have formerly seen at the end of the third Sermon. So that if the Holy Ghost knowes [Page 121]by what argument to commend the mercies of God to man; he that denies the former mercies to belong to all, or affirmes the latter to belong to all, derogates from the mercies of God indeed.

These are the two main Objections made against the former Doctrin, accusing God: a third now followes tending to excuse man.

Object. 3. The former Doctrine takes away the liber­ty of mans will, and so quits him of all sin; liberty of wil being necessary to every sinfull action.

Upon two grounds do they conceive the liberty of mans will overthrown. 1. In that God hath de­creed his sin. 2. In that God moves his will, when he wills sinfully, the motion that is from God up­on the wil of man, determining it in its operation: whence man must sin of necessity, and therefore not freely, and so his sin is no sin; the objection against the liberty of mans will is the same, in actions not sinfull.

Ans. 1. For the decree.

1. It is most clear by Scripture, and hath been formerly proved, that the actions of mans will both good and evill, are decreed by the Lord. Let us here onely give some speciall and remarkable instances. 1. For good actions, embracing the call of God in the conversion of a sinner is decreed, Rom. 9.11. Rom. 8.28 30. Acts 13.48. the faith and obedience of converted sinners, in an holy course is decreed, Ephe. 1.4. 2 Thes. 2.13. The obedience of Christ fulfilling the will of God in performing the great work of mans Redemption, was decreed, 1 Pet. 1.20. Heb. 10.7. for evill actions: The cruci­fying Christ by the Jews and Romans was decreed Acts. 4.27. Absoloms incest was decreed, as is mani­fest [Page 122]in that it was fore-told by God, 2 Sam. 12.11. and generally whatsoever was fore-told, as that which should certainly come to pass, and not con­ditionally (as Nineve his destruction) must needs be decreed, for if God have not determined, that either by his works or permission, whatsoever he hath fore-told shall come to passe, then may his word be falsified: hence then the bitter persecuti­ons of the Church by her wickedest adversaries, the faith and patience of the Martyrs, in all ages is decreed. To instance in the rage of mystical Ba­bylon; the faithfulnesse of the Virgin-company, the true Church of Christ, overcoming her tem­ptations: to instance further, in the Kings of the Earth, first subjecting themselves unto that whore, afterwards hating and destroying her, in the con­version of the Jewes, and with them the fulnesse of the Gentiles; these are all foretold as those things which should certainly be, and therefore were they all decreed; and how much of the will of man, and the workings thereof, is in all these things who can but see?

2. Yet hence is no infringement of the liberty of mans will, because the decree as such, is an action in the breast of God, makes no change in man, or in his condition, till it come to excution.

3. The decree establisheth mans liberty, foras­much as God hath decreed that man shall wil, it is now beyond all peradventures that he shall wil, for the counsels of God shall stand; but how certain soever it is that he shall wil, so certain it is that he shall worke freely; for to will, is in the motion of the will to work freely; to will, and not to act with liberty of will, is a contradiction: not only all things and operations, but their different kinds [Page 123]and manner also fall under the decree of God; who as he hath fitted necessary causes to work ne­cessarily: as the fire burns necessarily, so hath he likewise fitted voluntary, and contigent causes to work voluntarily (that is freely) and contingently.

Object. But what God hath decreed unist necessarily come to passe, other wise his decree might be frustrate.

Answ. It must necessarily come to pass, that is, it must of necessity come to pass, yet not necessari­ly, that is by necessary operation, but on the con­trary, if it depend upon a free and contingent cause, it must of necessity come to pass, freely and contingently, here is onely a necessity of the event, not of the manner of production, and therefore a necessity of consequence, not of the cause, a ne­cessity neither naturall nor violent, and the neces­sity of consequence we have formerly seen must be granted, or we must both deny Gods fore­knowledge, and make him stand under that kind of necessity, which we think it an unworthy thing that man should stand under.

Object. But may one and the same effect, both neces­sarily and contingently come to passe?

Answ. It may, the necessity being rightly under­stood, viz. not simple, or absolute, but respective or conditionall: Instance, 1. In the actions of God, he creates the world freely, it was in his li­berty whether he would create a world or no, whether this world or no; yet upon supposition that he hath decreed it, it is now necessary that it be in time created, neither can it otherwise come to passe but this world must be created. 2. In the actions of man; when Christ was crucified, his legs were not broken, that the Scripture might be ful­filled which had formerly affirmed, that not a bone of [Page 124]him should be broken, God having so determined as by his Word was declared, it could not be that they should be broken, yet did the soldiers forbear to break them voluntarily and contingently, they were neither naturally nor violently necessitated to forbear. Another instance, whether in the acti­ons of God or the creature, what is done, must of necessity be done, it is impossible that a thing should be done, and not done at once; yet if there be any free or contingent act in the world, which is granted on all hands, liberty and contingency must be granted to stand with that necessity. This Objection is yet further cleared by these two fol­lowing Rules.

1. All effects produced by the creature are ne­cessary or contingent, according as the creature it self, the next cause is in its manner of operation: Natural agents are necessary causes, as fire, the Sun, they worke necessarily, the fire in burning, the Sun in shining, producing alwayes the same action for kind, heating, inlightning, working to the utmost of their power, therefore their effects are necessary. Voluntary agents are free and contingent causes, they work freely and contingently, they so act one way, as that they have an intrinsical power to act another way, so wil, as that they have a power to nil, so nil, as that they have a power to wil the same thing as they shal like or dislike; and there­fore their effects are free and contingent.

2. In regard of God, the first cause, all effects in the world are both necessary, and contingent, or free; in regard of his intrinsicall liberty, whereby he may chuse whether he wil produce them or not they are free, or contingent; so for the shining of the Sun, and the burning of the fire, though they [Page 125]be necessary effects in regard of the Sun and fire, their next causes, yet are they contingent in re­gard of God, in whose liberty it is to afford or with-hold his influx for their production: So the Creation of the world, all effects depending im­mediately upon the Wil of God, Angels, or Men, are in regard of their immediate causes free and contingent; all the most casuallevents, as the lot in the lap, in the same regard contingent; yet all these upon supposition of Gods decree, are neces­sary. Thus much for the decree, and the necessity thence arising.

2. That the wil of man is moved by God, and by that motion of his determined in its operation, doth not take away the liberty of mans will.

For clearing this, we must take notice of a two­fold liberty; there is the liberty of

• 1. Independence
• 2. Choice.

1. The liberty of Independence, where the will so acts, as it is not acted by any higher cause; this is peculiar to the will of God, he onely is inde­pendent, upon any other in the motion of his wil; the wills of all men and Angels are so under his dominion, as that they are moved by him; this hath formerly been proved, as to men, that God as the great Creator and universall Ruler, moves the wills of men which way soever he pleaseth: many more arguments might be brought to de­monstrate that the liberty of mans will must ad­mit the effectuall motion of God upon it; so act­ing it as acted, may act, especially is this cleared in the Doctrine of Conversion and Perseverance; but to insist upon these would be an unseasonable digression, especially the thing in hand having been already proved.

[Page 126] 2. The liberty of choice; where the wil in its operation doth what it likes in the light, and up­on the sentence of the practical understanding, there are two acts of the will, to will and to nill, to chuse, to refuse: Now herein is the liberty of the will exprest: 1. That in these operations it doth what it likes, it wills with liking, it nills with liking; yea with liking doth it nill even the object which it dislikes, and therefore it so wills or nills the present object, as that it hath power at the present to will what it nills, or to nill what it wills; was there an impression of liking upon it contrary to what is, yet though it have this oppo­site power at the same time, it hath not a power to produce opposite acts at the same time, it being impossible that a prevailing liking, and disliking of the same thing should stand together at once. 2. That it act in the light and upon the sentence of the practicall understanding, that is, the under­standing as it shewes and determines wherein is our happinesse or good for the present most de­sirable, and what makes necessarily or mainly for it; this must needs be required to the liberty of the will, because the will is a rationall appetite, and therefore cannot otherwise will or nill, then as the understanding represents the object good or evill; and therefore whatsoever it wills it wills as good, cannot will any thing as evill, for then it should act not as a rational appetite that is, not as the wil; it is true, that the understanding mistakes many times good for evill, and evill for good, whence good is either true or apparent, but what­soever it is that the will chooseth, it is that which the understanding represents as good, and there­fore though the will have a power when it wills [Page 127]the present object to nill it, if it should like so to do, yet so long as the understanding represents it good to will it, and evill to nill it, it cannot like to nill it.

Hence it is manifest, how man in the operation of his wil, differs from necessary Agents, whether na­tural Agents, as the fire, or sensitive as the bruit beast; they are determined by the force and instinct of nature: naturall Agents without either appre­hension or choice, or any shadow of either; sensi­tive Agents have onely the light of sense according to which they like or dislike, and therefore not so much a true choice as a shadow of it; man in the operation of his wil, doth what he likes or dislikes in the light of the understanding. Now to apply this to answer the objection, the liberty of Inde­pendence being peculiar to God, where this liber­ty of choice is, there is all that liberty of will which is found in the Creature, Angell, or man.

Object. But how doth determination to one part stand with this liberty of choice?

Ans. There is a double determination 1. To one of the contrary objects, good or evill, morally un­derstood; that this may stand with the liberty of the will is clear: On the one hand, God himselfe, Christ, the Angels, the glorified Saints, can will onely that which is good; neither have they po­wer to will what is evill; yet in them is the highest liberty of will, without which there is no holi­nesse. On the other hand, the Devill, the damned, the hardned, we may add all the unregenerate, can onely will that which is evill yet in all these the will is free, (naturally free, though morally enslaved) without which there was no sin; deter­mination then to one of these contrary objects, [Page 128]takes not away the liberty of the will. 2. There is a determination to one of the contrary acts, to will or to nill; neither doth this take away the li­berty of the will, for then the exercise of its li­berty should take away its liberty, when ever it either wills or nills, it is for the present not in­different about the object, but determined; now as the Adversaries suppose the will to determine it self unto, and in its owne operation, thereby not destroying, but exercising its liberty, so wee affirme that God by his motion determines it, mo­ving it by its owne principle, and according to its owne nature, that is, by the understanding de­termining it to its operation, and so moving it, as in the vertue, and by the efficacy of his motion it doth whatsoever it likes in the light of the un­derstanding, with a power to the contrary if it should like; so that whatsoever is required to its liberty, stands faire with the motion of God deter­mining it; and the more firmely it is in its opera­tion fixed to the object, the more fully doth it ex­ercise its liberty, as liking more vehemently what it doth, but still in the light of the understanding.

These are the main Objections, where the An­swers to these shall satisfie; what Objections re­main, will prove but wash way, where satisfaction is not received about these, it will be but lost la­bour to proceed to others.