A Protestation against the house of Israel. In which three things offer them­selues to our considera­tion: The maiestie of the person which doth protest: the maner how he maketh his protestation, and what hee protesteth. The person beeing God, the maner, by swearing by himselfe, he pro­testeth that he hath no delight in the death of a sinner.

Of the person, Med. c. 25 I say with Augustine: Hu­ius mysterij profunditatem, mens humana non potest concipere, nec oratoria lingua narrare, nec bibliothecarum volumina explicare, si vni­uersum [Page 2] mundum libri repleant. His maiestie is an hidden mysterie, whose depth & bottom the wit of man can not sound, the tong of sinfull man can not vtter, the whole world beeing supposed to bee but one librarie of bookes, would bee a briefe and compendi­ous epitomie, not large and voluminous e­nough to expresse it. Gen. 18. To whom Abraham the nearer hee approached, the more hee perceyued himselfe to bee but dust and a­shes, Esay. 6. at whose presence the Cherubins and Seraphins do hide their faces, as not able to behold his glorie, Esay. 24. at whose appearance the Moone shall be abashed, Exod. 33. and the Sunne a­shamed: whose face Moses could not see without present death, Iob. 9. who is wise in heart, mightie in strength, Iob. 11. remooueth the moun­taines out of their places, causeth the pillars of the earth to shake, commaundeth the Sunne, and it riseth not, closeth vp the stars as vnder a signet, spreadeth out the hea­uens, and walketh on the height of the sea, maketh the starres Arctuarus, Orion, and Pliades, and the climates of the South, whose wonderfull workes are infinite, and without number, whose perfection is higher then heauen, deeper then hell, lon­ger then the earth, Esay. 6. wider then the sea. When the Prophet sawe the Lorde sitting [Page 3] on an high Throne, and the Seraphins stoode vppon it, and one cryed to ano­ther, and sayde, Holie, holie, holie, is the Lorde God of hoasts, the whole worlde is full of his glorie, and the lintils of the doore cheekes mooued at the voyce of him that cryed, and the house was filled with smoke, hee sayde: wo is mee for I am vndone, be­cause I am a man of polluted lips, for mine eyes haue seene the King and the Lorde of hoasts. Then flewe one of the Cherubins to him with an hote cole in his hand, which he had takē from the aultar with the tongs, and he touched his mouth, and sayde: Lo, this hath touched thy lips. If the Cherubin had sanctified my lippes, Esa. 40. 4. as he did the Pro­phets in this place, if he had giuen mee the tongue of the learned, Iere. 1. 9. as hee did vnto him in another place: or if he had put his words into my mouth, as hee did to Ieremie, yet should I not be able to expresse it, for nei­ther Esay nor Ieremie could expresse it. For betweene his reach, and the shallownesse of mans heart, there is as great a wirlepoole, or swallowing pitte, as that which is betweene hell mouth, and Abrahams bo­some. If I shoulde wade in the channell thereof, I should sinke into as deepe a gulfe as the water of Ezechiel, which the [Page 4] first time came vp to his ankles, the second time to his knees, Ezec. 4. 7. the third time to his loins, the fourth time it was a deepe riuer, and and not to bee passed ouer, that hee was faine to bee brought backe againe to the brinke therof, so that the farther he waded, the deeper he was plunged. The Philoso­phers compare him to a circle, because he is infinite, without beginning, and without ending, but such a circle as is repugnant to the principles of Geometrie, whose centre is euery where, Mat. 5. 34 35. but his circumference is no where: his throne is heauen, his footstoole earth, his holy citie Ierusalem. He is al eye, for he seeth all things: all eare, for he hea­reth all things: all arme, for he comprehen­deth al things: Iohn 4. 24 and yet he is none of al these, for he is a spirit, 2. Cor. 3 17. and in spirit to be worship­ped. Medit. 12. 24. He is great without quantitie, good without qualitie, euerlasting without time: in his greatnesse infinite, in his power om­nipotent, in his wisdome inestimable, in his counsels terrible, in his iudgements iust: his thoughts secret, his wordes true, his workes holy: inuisible, yet seeing all things: immu­table, yet chaunging all things: immoueable himself, yet in whom all other things haue their being and mouing.

As I liue, saith the Lord God. We reade of [Page 5] many Gods in the holy scriptures: for Sa­tan is called Deus huius seculi, 2. Cor. 4. the God of this world. Sometime the name of God is ascribed vnto men, Psal. 82. Ego dixi vos dij estis, I haue sayd, ye are Gods, meaning kings, ru­lers, and magistrates, to whom the sword of iustice is committed, because they represent the person of God, but they shall die like men: Exod. 32. sometimes to Idols: Faciamus Deos qui praecedant nos, Let vs make Gods to go before vs. It was the voyce of the people to Aaron, when Moses was in the Mount, of which Paule speaketh: Gal. 4. Euen then when they knew not God, they did seruice vnto such things as by nature are not gods. And, When they knewe God, Rom. 1. they glorified him not as God, but became vaine in their ima­ginations, their foolish heart was full of darknesse: when they professed themselues wise, they became foolish, for they turned the glorie of the incorruptible God, into the image of a corruptible man, & of birds, and foure footed beasts, & creeping things. Such gods are made with hands, Baruch. 6. and can­not saue themselues, 1. Samu. 12. they are vanitie, abho­mination, 1. Reg. 16. the doctrine of vanitie, teachers of lies, Deuter. 7. expressely forbidden in Gods book, They haue eyes and see not, Deut. 27. eares & heare not, Ier. 10. noses and smell not, handes and touch [Page 6] not: Habac. 2. feete and walke not: they that make them are like vnto them, Deut. 26. and so are all they that trust in them. Deut. 18. But the Prophet spea­keth of one God in this place, Esay. 2. which is omnipotent, Esay. 14. which is a spirite, which is eue­ry where present, Mich. 5. and seeth al things, which is immortall, Psal. 115. which is called in a word, the Lord God, Gen. 17. and the God of gods. Sing vnto the Lord a new song, Gen. 35. sing to the Lord al the earth, Iohn. 14. sing to the Lord and praise his name, declare his saluation frō day to day, Ier. 23. for the Lord is great and much to be praysed, 1. Tim. 1. 6 he is to be feared of all Gods. Psal. 96. For all the gods of the people are Idols, Psal. 50. but the Lorde hath made the heauens. 1. Tim. 1. And, The God of gods euen the Lorde hath spoken, and called the earth, euen from the rising of the Sunne, to the going downe thereof. I conclude this first part with Saint Paule: Nowe vnto the King euerlasting, immortall, inuisible, vn­to God onely wise, bee honour and glorie, for euer and euer.

As I liue, 1. Cor. 8. As there is but one God to the faithfull, Zach. 14. which hath but one name, that he may haue no fellowship with the gods of the Nations: 1. Tim. 1. so is he immortall, 1. Tim. 6. onely hath immortalitie, and dwelleth in the light that none can attaine vnto, whom neuer man sawe, nor can see, that hee may bee distin­guished [Page 7] from princes which also are Gods, Psal. 82. but they shall die like men: Exod. 29. and he is a li­uing God, Leuit. 26. that he may be distinguished frō Idols, 2. Cor. 6. which are but dead Gods, and there­fore hee sayth: Psal. 115. As I liue, I delight not. &c. In which wordes I obserue two things: to wit, the Lord sweareth: and he sweareth by his life that is, Psal. 96. by himselfe. He swore in his wrath, Num. 92. that they shoulde not enter into his rest. None (saith he) of the men which came out of Egypt, from twentie yeares olde and vpward, shal see the land concerning which I swore to Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, be­cause they haue not wholye followed mee, excepting Caleb and Iosua. And as God swore, Ex. 20. 17 so sometime man sweare, & that law­fully, Liu. 19. 20 notwithstanding the general prohibi­tion wherin oaths are forbiddē. Dent. 5. 11. Thomas A­quinas alledgeth the authoritie of Saint Au­gust. Iam. 5. 12 Contra mendacium, mat. 5. 33. where hee sheweth, that all oathes are not simply forbidden, Pars. 2. quaest. 89. artic. 2. but vpō respects. Ne iurando ad facilitatē iurandi veniamns, deinde ad consuetudinem, demum ad periurium. Least often swearing breed in vs a delight, and delight growe to an habit, and at the length, De serm. do. in mon. to periurie. And in another place: Si iurare cogeris, scias de necessitate venire infirmitatis illorum, quibus suades, quae infirmitas mala est, [Page 8] non male facis qui bene vteris iuramento vt al­teri vtiliter persuadeas, sed à malo est illius cu­ius infirmitate iurare cogeris. If thou be con­strayned to sweare, it is long of their weak­nesse, which will not beleeue thee without swearing, which weaknesse of theirs is sin: thou art not in fault which takest a lawfull oath, to make fayth vnto an other, but hee is in the fault whose incredulitie is such that he will not beleeue thee without an oath. So to confirme a trueth, Gen. 21. & 26. Iacob and Laban made a couenant betweene themselues, by swearing one to the other. Ruth. 3. By an oath Boaz promised marriage to Ruth. Abdias being a iust mā, 1. Reg. 18. and fearing God, swore vnto Elias, Paule to the Romans. Rom. 19. God is my witnesse whom I serue in my spirite, in the Gospel of his sonne, that without ceasing I make mētion of you in my prayers. And in swea­ring, diuerse ceremonies haue beene obser­ued, according to the times and places as in the time of Abraham, they swore, laying their handes vnder their thighes. Afterward the Iewes taking the law of Moses in their handes, the Christian touching the Gos­pel. But as a learned man sayth, Ceremonia iuramenti nihil est, modò res iusta sit animus iuraniis bonus, & religiosum iuramentum. It is not materiall what outward ceremonie is [Page 9] vsed in swering, so as it be in a lawfull cause, the cōscience of him which sweareth being good, and the oath religious which hee ta­keth. But whosoeuer sweareth, hee must sweare by the Lorde, and when the Lorde sweareth, he sweareth by himselfe. So the Angel swore by him that liueth for euer­more, Apo. 10. 6. there should be no more time. By my selfe haue I sworne (saith the Lord to Abra­ham) because thou hast done this thing, Gen. 22. 16. and hast not spared thine onely sonne, therfore I will blesse thee, and multiply thy seede as the starres of heauen. Nū. 14. 26 As I liue (saieth the Lorde) I will do vnto you, as you haue spo­ken in mine eares, your carkasses shall fall in the wildernesse. But the reason why men sweare by the Lord, and the Lord by him­selfe▪ is alledged by the Apostle. Heb. 6. 13. An oath for confirmation is the ende of all strife: so God, willing more abundantly to shew vn­to the heires of promise, the stablenesse of his counsell, bound himselfe by an oath, that by two immutable things wherein it is im­possible that God should lie, we might haue strong consolation, which haue our refuge to holde fast the hope that is set before vs. Now men sweare by him that is greater thē themselues: but when God made the pro­mise to Abraham, because he had no grea­ter [Page 10] to sweare by, he swore by himselfe. But I come to the last and essential point, where he protesteth, that he delighteth not in the death of a sinner.

That he delighteth not in the death of a sinner, we need no further proof, then this, that hee sent his sonne to die for the salua­tion of sinners. Iohn 12. God sent not his sonne to condemne the worlde, but that through him the worlde might bee saued. And notwithstanding the enmitie betweene God and vs continued no longer, Rom. 5. 10 then vn­till wee were reconciled vnto him through his sonne: Col. 1. 21. yet vnlesse hee had of his free mercie loued vs from the beginning, hee had neuer sent his sonne to reconcile vs. For so writeth Augustine: Tract. in Iohn. 100 Incomprehensibilis & immutabilis est Dei dilectio, non enim ex quo ei reconciliati sumus per saenguinem filij eius ce­pit nos diligere, sed ante mundi constitutionem dilexit nos, vt cum eius vnigenito nos filij eius essemus antequàm omnino aliquid essemus. In­comprehensible and immutable is the loue of God, for his loue towardes vs did not then first begin, whē we were reconciled to him by the death of his son, but his loue was frō the beginning, for he ordeined vs when as yet we wer not sons, to be heires with his only son. Iohn. 3. Ita deus dilexit mundū, &c. So God loued the world, that he gaue his onely be­gotten [Page 11] son for vs, that whosoeuer belee­ued in him should not perish, but haue life euerlasting. In which wordes of our sauiour Christ, I note six things, which al do sauour of the infinit mercy of god shewed to sinful men. The first is, that god is the only author and efficient cause of y ^t saluation of sinners. The 2. is, what moued God to saue sinners: his great loue towards them: the 3. how far this loue of god is extended: euen to all sin­ners, for he so loued the world: the 4. the means how he wrought the saluation of sin­ners: by which saluation he made his loue knowē vnto thē: by giuing his son, y ^t highest degree of cōpassion, hee gaue the innocent for the nocēt, the righteous for the vnrigh­teous, & that not a stranger, but a kinsman, not a kinsman but a son, & not a son onely, but an onely son. The 5. what sinners take hold of this his mercy, not simply al sinners, but all beleening sinners: the 6. is, the end of his compassion vpō sinners, that they should not perish in their sins, but haue life euerla­sting. These things being so, that we haue so many argumēts of his mercy shewed to sin­ners, that he is the only author of their salua­tion, and that it proceedeth from his loue, and for the working of it, he spared not his onelie sonne, and that it extended not to a fewe, but to all: for as much as hee [Page 12] loued the world. And, which is a more eui­dent proofe of his mercie, seeing he woulde haue none to perish, but all to come to re­pentance, 2. Pet. 3. 9. seeing he would haue all men to be saued, and to come to the knowledge of the truth, for as much as there is one God, and one Mediator betweene God and man, the man Iesus Christ, which gaue himselfe a raunsome for all men, 1. Tim. 2. 4 to be a testimonie in due time, seeing euery one which calleth on the name of the Lord shall be saued. Ioel. 2. And our Sauiour Christ inuiteth them saying. Come to mee all that bee laden, Matth. 11. and I will refresh you, Psal, 145. if Gods mercie be greater then all his workes, if he bee more ready to saue then to destroy, to absolue, then to con­demne, as it appeareth in that immediately vpon the sinne by Adam committed in Pa­radice, he pronounced the sentence of sal­uation before the doome of cōdemnation, promising the Messias the blessed seed, Gen. 3. be­fore he threatned him with misery & death, that he might raise him vp to a liuely hope, and not throw him downe into the pitte of desperation. And as saint Augustine sayeth, Quando peccauit homo miserabiliter, condona­uit Deus misericorditer, When man sinned most miserably, God forgaue him most mercifully, Et licet ô Deus in cunctis tuis ope­ribus [Page 13] mirabilis es, tamen mirabilior esse crederis in operibus pietatis. Though he be wonder­full in all his workes, yet hee is more to bee wondered at for his workes of pittie. In so great a clowde of witnesses of Gods mercie, which is extended to all, and that hee de­lighteth not in the death of any sinner, how can it be that many are called, Ma. 20. 16 and few are chosen? that great is the way that lea­deth to perdition, and many there bee that finde it, Mat. 7. 13. and narrowe is the gate which lea­deth to saluation, Luk. 13. 24 and fewe there bee that enter therein? That when Esau and Iacob had done neither good nor euill, that the purpose of God might remaine according to election, not by workes, but by him that calleth: before they were borne God loued Iacob, Rom. 9. and hated Esau? chose one, and refu­sed the other? Mat. 1. that he will haue mercie on whom he will haue mercie, Exod. 33. and shew com­passion on whom he wil shew compassion? Esa. 10. 21, 22. That it is not in him that willeth, nor in him that runneth, Rom. 9. 27. but in God that sheweth mercie? That he hath mercy on whom hee will, and whō he will he hardeneth? though the children of Israel were in number as the sandes of the sea, but a remnant shall be sa­ued? I haue thought good to handle this poynt at large: and for the better discussing [Page 14] therof to collect and gather out these three conclusions.

The first, that it is not the will of God that all men should be saued.

The second, that the absolute wil of God, & his secret decree from all eternitye, is the cause why some are predestinated to saluation, others to death and destruction, and not any foresight of faith or good workes in the one, or of infidelitie, neglect, or contempt in the other.

The third, that Christ died not effectually for all.

Of the first S. Augustine disputeth in this maner, Enchirid. ad Laur. cap. 95, & 97. That God will not haue all men to be saued, it is manifest, forasmuch as our Sa­uiour wrought many works in the vnthank­full cities, Mat. 11. 21 Corazin, Bethsaida, & Capernaum, which he knew would not repent, but he re­frained from shewing any such examples in Tire and Sidon, and Gomorrha and Sodom, which if he had done there, Tire and Sydon had repented in sackcloth & ashes, & Sodom had remained vntill this day. Moreouer, saith he, I giue thee thanks, ô father, lord of heauē & earth, because thou hast hid these things (meaning the misteries of saluation) frō the wise & vnderstāding, & hast opened them to babes, it is so, ô father, because thy good wil was such. But how then, saith he, shall we answer the obiectiō of S. Paul? 1. Tim. 2. Quo [Page 15] modo dicit apostolus deus vult omnes homines saluari quum plurimi non fiant salui? If God will haue all men to be saued, as the apostle wri­teth, how is it that the greatest part are dā ­ned? Deus multa potest quae non vult, sed nihil vult quod non potest? his power is greater thē his will, and his will extendeth not it selfe so far as his power: his will is not to do all that he can, but he can do whatsoeuer is his will, as the prophet speaketh. Psal. 115. 3. Our god is in hea­uen, and he doth what he listeth. If it be his will to saue all, and his power is omnipotent to do what he will, why then are but a rem­nant saued? Some, saith August. do answer, that the cause is in thēselues, as if God will, but they will not, Mat. 23. 27. as it is in the gospel, Ieru­salem, Ierusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest thē which are sent to thee, Luke. 13. 34. how often would I haue gathered thy children togither, as the hen gathereth her chickens, but thou wouldst not? Tanquam dei voluntas superata sit hominum vnluntate, & infirmissimis nolendo agentibus facere non potuerit potentissi­mus quod volebat. Vbi tum est eius omnipotentia qua omnia quaecū (que) voluit facit si colligare voluit filios Ierusalē & non facit? As though the wil of God could be crossed by the wil of men, and the almighty could be hindered of his purpose by the weakest vessels. how thē was he omnipotent, if he were willing to gather [Page 16] the children of Ierusalem, but did it not? That text being not vnderstood, would at the first sight seeme to import so much, as if the will of God were made frustrate, and of none effect by the will of men, where then were his omnipotencie? An potius & ipsa filios suos ab illo colligi noluit, sed ea quoque nolente filios eius collegit ipse quos voluit? Nay, rather Ierusalem in deed, forasmuch as lay in her, would not haue her children gathe­red togither, but his will was not frustrate, for as much as hee against her will gathered together as many of them as seemed good to his owne will and pleasure. And in ano­ther place hee doeth answer it more fullye, Enchi. ad Lau. c. 100 where he saith. Quantum ad ipsos attinet, quod Deus noluit fecerunt, quantum verò ad omnipo­tentiam Dei, nullo modo id efficere valuerunt. Hoc quippe ipso quod contra voluntatem Dei fecerunt, de ipsis facta est voluntas Dei. Miro & ineffabili modo nō fit praeter eius voluntatem quod fit contra eius voluntatē quià non fieret si non sineret: nec vti (que) nolens sinit sed volēs, nec sineret bonus fieri male, nisi omnipotens de male etiam facere posset bene. For their parts, & as much in as them lay, they did that which God would not haue to be done, but if ye consider the omnipotencie of God, they could not doo otherwaies then was his will. [Page 17] For, in as much as they did contrary to the will of God, in them so doing was fulfilled the will of God. And it is a wonderfull my­sterie to see, that which is against his will, is not otherwise then hee hath willed; for but by his sufferance it could not bee, neither doth he suffer it against his will, but with his will: neither would God which is good suf­fer any thing to be done which is euill, vn­lesse his omnipotencie were such that hee could make good of that which is euill. Fi­nally, to this obiection out of Saint Paule, (hauing first disputed antagonisticò) he ma­keth his owne answer dogmatice, Enchir. c. 100. and that two maner of wayes. The first is this: Quod Deus vult omnes saluari, & tamen plurimi non saluantur, ita intelligendus est ac si diceret, nullum hominem saluum nisi quem saluum fieri ipse voluerit, non quod nullus sit quem non sal­uum fieri valit, sed quod nullus saluus fiat nisi quam velit, & ideo rogandus sit vt valit, quia necesse est fieri si voluerit, de orando quippe Deo agebat apostolus vt hoc diceret. Where it is written, that God willeth all men to be sa­ued, and yet the greatest part of men are not saued, it is so to be vnderstood. God wil­leth all men to be saued, that is, no man is sa­ued against his will, but whosoeuer is saued, it is by his will, not as though there were [Page 18] none whom hee would not haue saued, but that none are saued, vnlesse hee will, and they onely whom hee will, and therefore he is to be prayed vnto that he would, because it cannot otherwise bee, but they shall bee saued if hee will, for the Apostle alleageth this as an argument, that wee should pray to him for the saluation of all men, because it is by his will that they are saued. And because the safest and most sound interpre­tation of the Scriptures, is by other like places of the Scriptures, wee reade the like kinde of saying in the first of. Iohn, con­cerning Christ: Illuminat omnem homi­nem venientem in mundum, non quia nullus hominum est qui non illuminatur, sed quia nisi ab ipso nullus illuminatur. Hee lighteneth all men which come into the worlde, and yet manie sit in palpable darkenesse, as Pa­pistes, Iohn. 1. Iewes, Turkes, Infidels, and in the shadowe of death, therefore it is not so to bee vnderstoode, as if all men were lightened by him, but so, that that no man is lightened but by him. His seconde an­swere is this: That whereas hee willeth all men to bee saued, this woorde All, is bee vnderstoode, as it is often tymes v­sed in the Scholes, not De singulis gene­rum, sed de generibus singulorum, Not as if [Page 19] hee woulde haue euerie one in particular, of all sortes of people to bee saued, but of all sortes some to bee saued. For thus hee sayeth: Omnes homines vult saluos fieri, non quòd nullus hominum esset quem saluum fieri nollet, qui virtutes miraculorum facere noluit, apud eos quoi dicit acturos poenitētiam si fecisset: sed vt per omnes homines omne hominum genus intelligamus per quascun (que) differētias distribu­tum, reges, priuatos, pauperes, mares, faeminas, &c. By all men we must vnderstand all kind of men. Whereas it is written, hee will haue all men to be saued, it is not to be vn­derstoode, as though there were no man whō he would not haue saued, for as much as he would not work wonders among thē, which (as hee saith) had bin conuerted, if he had wrought them amōg them: but by eue­rie man, all sortes of men, as kings, subiects, rich, and poore, are to be vnderstood. Nam Apostolus ibi praecepit vt oremus pro singulis, specialiter addit, pro regibus qui poterant super­bia seculari ab humilitate Christiana abhorre­re. For the Apostle in that place exhorteth, that supplications be made for all men, but especially for princes, and such as are in au­thoritie, because such men may be more ea­sily by the prosperitie of this life, drawen away from the humilitye of fayth.

[Page 20] Hoc dicit esse bonū vt pro talibus [...]retur, statim vt desperationem tolleret, addit: Quia deus vult omnes saluari. Therefore, saith the Apostle, it is good & acceptable in the sight of God, that such men be prayed for, and that wee may hope well of all, and despaire of none, he addeth: For God willeth all men to bee saued. Wherefore in a worde, God will not haue all men in particular, but all men in a generalitie, that is, all kindes of men to bee saued, as in the wordes going before, he will haue prayers to be made for all men, that is, not for all men in particular, but all kinds of men: for there bee some men in particular, for whom we may not pray. 1. Ioh. 5. 16. If any see his brother sinne a sinne which is not to death, let him aske, and life shall be giuen him: but there is a sinne to death, that is agaynst the holy Ghost, which cannot be forgiuen, and for that thou shalt not pray. Likewise our Sauiour saith: Luk. 11. 24 Wo be to you Pharisies, for you tithe mint and rewe, and all hearbs, but passe ouer iudgement and the loue of God. Yet they tithed not all hearbs, but all kinds of hearbs, not omnia oleta, sed omne genus o­lerum. So God willeth all men to bee saued: not all men, but all kinds of men. To these two answers of Saint Augustine, which are both consonant and agreeable, not only to [Page 21] the analogie of fayth, but also of that place of Saint Paule, I will adde a thirde answere, for the more fuller satisfying of all such as desire to attaine vnto the know­ledge of the truth, & that is this: Forasmuch as God will haue all men to bee saued, wee must distinguish of his will, which is two folde, Voluntas reuelata, & voluntas benepla­cita, his hidden or secret will, which is onlie knowen vnto himselfe, and his written or reuealed will, which is imparted vnto man in his holy Scriptures. According to his written will, Mat. 11. hee willeth all men to bee saued. Matt. 26. 27. For he sayth: Come vnto mee all: Drinke of this all: his Gospell hath beene preached vnto all nations. Psal. 19. The sounde of them, meaning the voyce of the Apostles, Ma. 28 29 hath been heard in all lands, Mar. 16. 20. Go, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the father, Act. 2. 5. &c. They went forth and prea­ched euery where. There were at Ierusa­lem men that feared God, of euery nation vnder the cope of heauen, and euerie one heard the Apostles preach in his owne lan­guage, that by their meanes the fame of the Gospell might be spredde abroad in all the corners of the earth, that no infidell might hold himselfe excused by pleading igno­rance at the day of iudgement. But accor­ding [Page 22] to his secret wil few are saued: and that is it of which the Apostle speaketh, saying: The foundation of God remaineth sure, 2. Tim. 2. 19. and hath this seale or priuie signet: Solus deus no­uit suos: only god knoweth who be his. And least any should think, that this distinction of the will of God into his secret will, and reuealed will, is but an idle and friuolous di­stinction, sauouring of curiositie more then of substance, I will proue it by such euident places of Scripture, that it cānot be denied. In one and the self same action of the trea­son of Iudas, when he sold his Lord and ma­ster, appeare two sundry wils of God, the one hidden, the other reuealed, and one cō ­trary to the other. His secret will was that Iudas should betray him: his reuealed will was, that he should not betray him: and yet both these willes, in respect of God, were good and iust. His reuealed will was, that Iudas should not betray him. For it is not onelie forbidden in a generalitie, where it is written: Exod. 20. Thou shalt not kill, or consent to murther: And among those things which the Lord hateth, Pro. 6. 17. one is: Manus effunden­tes innoxium sanguinem, Handes that shed innocen blood: But also hee is forbidden by a particular caueat, where our Saui­our sayde as hee sate at meate, verily [Page 23] I say vnto you, Matt. 26. 21. that one of you shall betray mee, euen hee which dippeth his hand with me into the dish, hee shall betray mee, but wo be to that man by whom the sonne of man is betrayed, it had beene good for that man if he had neuer beene borne. And at the verie instant when he did betray him, he rebuked him, Luk. 22. 48 saying: Iudas, dost thou betray the sonne of man with a kisse? Act. 2. 22 And yet Peter speaketh plainlie, that God in his secret will had appointed that Iudas should betray him: for, saith he: Iesus of Naza­reth, a man approoued among you with great workes and wonders which God did by him in the middest of you, as yee your selues know, him I say, haue ye takē by the hands of the wicked, being deliuered by the determinate counsell and prouidence of God, Act. 4. 25. and haue crucified and slaine. And it is the voice and consent of all the apostles. Psal. 2. 1. 2. Thou hast saide by the mouth of thy ser­uant Dauid: Why did the Gentiles rage, and the people imagine a vaine thing? The kings of the earth stood vp, and tooke coū ­sell against the Lord, and his Christ. For doubtlesse, against thine holy son Iesus whō thou hadst anointed, both Herod, and Pilat, with the gētiles & people of Israel, gathered themselues togither to do whatsoeuer thine [Page 24] hand and thy counsell had determined be­fore to be done. This conclusion being thus determined, two doubts or scruples may a­rise. The first: These things bee graunted that God hath two willes, the one contra­rie to the other, whether it may bee sayde at any time, that God is contrary to him­selfe? The second is: If whatsoeuer the wicked do, bee done according to the will of God, why are they not blamelesse for dooing his will? To this first I answere: Voluntas Dei in se est simplex, nobis tamen ap­paret multiplex qui quo modo idem diuerso mo­do fieri, & non fieri velit non comprehendimus. God is not contrarie to himselfe, albeit his reuealed will, and his secrete will, are not one: for the will of God in it selfe is one, but it is saide to bee diuerse, as it appea­reth vnto vs, whose dulnesse is such, that we cannot conceiue how in diuerse respects he he will, and he will not. Or else wee may safely answere with Caluin. Contrariae sunt Dei voluntates, sed in diuersis institutis. His willes be different, but to diuerse purposes. But in respect of vs his will is alwayes one, and the same, because for our parts hee ex­acteth alwayes the same dutie at our hands to be performed, that thereby wee may be voyd of excuse, if we performe it not. He [Page 25] commaundeth vs alwayes to do the same, if in his secret will he will put in our hearts to to do otherwayes then he hath commaun­ded, it is either for our punishment, or the setting forth of his owne glorie, or the executing of his secret purpose. In vnâ vo­luntate illius elucescit Dei iustitia, in altera pro­ditur crimen hominis. In one of his willes is made manifest the iustice of God: in the o­ther the offence of man. To the second: If the wicked do but the will of God, are they therfore to be excused? Nothing lesse. For first: Licet Deus Illud voluerit, tamen aliud ijs praecepit. Howsoeuer God willed one thing, he commaunded an other thing by them to be done. We must not inquire after his se­cret will, but wee must follow his written commandement. Secondly howsoeuer the wicked do the wil of god, yet they do it not to that ende, to obey his will, but to satisfie their owne desire. Hugo de sancto vic­tore dè sa­cra pars 4. cap. 15. As Hugo writeth. Non sua voluntate diriguntur ad implendam Dei voluntatem, sed occulta illiu. dispositione. They are not moued by their owne will to fulfill the will of God, (for they meane nothing lesse) but by Gods secret inclination, wher­by hee moueth them so to do, they doe his wil, not knowing themselues that God hath appointed them to do so. And as Augustine [Page 26] sayth: Epist. 48. ad Vincen. Quum pater tradidit filium, & Domi­nus corpus suum, & Iudas dominum, cur in hac traditione Dominus est iustus, & Iudas reus, nisi quod in vna re quam fecerunt, causa non erat vna ob quam fecerunt? When God the father gaue his Sonne, and the Sonne gaue his owne bodie, and Iudas gaue our Lorde, the action beeing one and the same, why were God the father and the sonne iust, but Iudas guiltie, vnlesse, because the thing be­ing one, which they did, the end and intent was not one for which they did it. For God gaue his sonne for the redemption of man­kinde, the sonne gaue himselfe to be our re­deemer, but Iudas gaue him for thirty pee­ces of siluer, because he was a theefe and lo­ued the purse. As in another place saint Au­gustine speaketh most fitly to this purpose in this maner. Enchir. c. 100. Quandoque bona voluntate ho [...] ­mo vult quod Deus non vult, quum tamen dei voluntas sit bona: vt si bonus filius velit patrem viuere quem Deus bona voluntate vult mori. Et potest fieri vt homo velit id voluntate mala quod Deus vult bona, vt si malus filius velit mori patrem, velit hoc etiam Deus: Tantum interest quid velle homini, quid Deo congruat, & ad quem finem suam quisque referat vo­luntatem, vt approbetur vel improbetur. Deus quasdam voluntates suas bonas implet per ho­minum [Page 27] voluntates malas, sicut per Iudaeos ma­leuolos, bona voluntate patris Christus occisus est, quod ita bonum fuit, vt Matt. 16. quando Petrus id fieri nolebat, Satanas ab eo qui occidi venerat diceretur. Sometimes the will of man is contrary to the will of God, and yet his will is good: sometimes againe, the will of man concurreth with the will of God, and yet the will of God is good, the will of man euill. As for example: A good sonne desireth that his father may liue, when the will of God is that hee shall die, there the will of man is pleasing to God, though the one be contrarie to the other. Likewise, an euil sonne is willing that his father shal die, God willeth the same, the will of God and man are the same, yet one is iust, the other is sinne, &c. I come to the second conclusion.

The absolute will of God, and his secret decree from all eternitie, is the cause why some are ordayned to saluation, others to death and destruction, and not any foresight of faith or good works in the one, or of infidelity, neg­lect, or contempt, in the other.

[Page 28] This conclusion is the doctrine of no lesse Doctor in diuinitie then Saint Paule him­self most learnedly and profoundly deliue­red, in the Epistle to the Romans, cap. 9. from the 11. to the 23. verse, where he writeth in this maner.

[Page 30] In which words are cōtained three things: first, Ver. 11, 12 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23. the conclusion it selfe.

Secondly, That notwithstanding he lo­ueth some, and hateth others, before they are borne, when they haue done neyther good nor euill, yet God in so doing is not cruell, or vniust.

Thirdly, Albeit God hardeneth the harts of men to do euill, as hee did the heart of Pharao, and that according to his owne will and pleasure, and it is not in the power of man to auoyd it, for who can resist the will of God? yet Gods wrath is iustly kindeled agaynst them whome hee hardeneth.

The conclusion in these wordes: For before the Children were borne (mea­ning the two twinnes of Rebecca, Esau and Iacob,) and when they had done neyther good nor euill, it was saide to her, (that is to Rebecca) Gen. 25. the elder shall serue the yonger, (that is, Esau shall serue Iacob.) And because it may bee a question, what is meant by these words, The elder shall serue the younger: hee dooth interprete them by a playner place of Scripture, out of Ma­lachy, that is: God hath loued Iacob, and hated Esau.

The reason why God loued the one, and hated the other, before they were [Page 31] borne, and when they had done neither good nor euill, is alleaged in the parenthe­sis, that the purpose or secret decree of god in choosing one & refusing the other, might remain according to electiō, not by works, but by him that calleth, which is God alone. There is plainly set downe the eternall decree of God, in choosing some, and re­iecting others, proceeding meerely from himselfe, without any respect or regarde of the persons, which are elect or reprobate, or any thing foreseene in them, where hee sayth: Not by workes, but by him that cal­leth. And here is preuented the aunswere of the Papistes, which confesse that Iacob was loued before hee was borne, but ex praeuisis operibus, for the good workes which God foresawe in him, as also of Huberus, and other Lutherans of our times, the bro­chers of straunge opinions, which holde that some are predestinated to bee ves­sels of honour, but expreuisa fide, because of theyr fayth, which God did foresee to bee in them, others of dishonour, but ex mero contemptu, aut neglectu, non ex Dei decreto, not by anie decree of God, but because hee had in them a foresight eyther of neglect, or contempt: as if the causes of theyr predestination were [Page 32] in themselues and not in God, whereas in deede these wordes: Not by workes, but by him that calleth, do ende all controuersie, shewing that the whole causes of election and reprobation, are in himselfe and not in vs, and therefore not long of any fayth, or workes of ours. And as Saint Augustine sayth: Si futura opera quae Deus vti (que) praescie­bat, Enchir. c. 98. vellet intelligi, nequaquam diceret, non ex operibus, sed ex futuris operibus, eoque modo istam solueret quaestionem, immo, nullam quam solui opus esset faceret quaestionem. If the A­postle did vnderstād any good works fore­seene in Iacob, to be the cause why God did loue him, he would not say as he doth: Not of workes: but he would rather say, God loued him because of his workes which hee foresaw in him, and so he would not onely ende this controuersie, but make it so plaine that it should be indeed without all contro­uersie. Againe, the Apostle doth explaine his owne meaning, that he loued Iacob, and hated Esau, without respect of any thing in them worthy of loue or hatred, by the ob­iection following, where he sayth: What shall wee say then? Is there iniquitie with God? God forbid. Because it seemeth to flesh and blood not to stand with the iustice of God, to condemne men before they are [Page 33] borne, but to be crueltie in him to hate thē which neuer did euill: therefore the apostle preuenteth that obiection, and purgeth God of that suspition which men might cō ­ceiue against him, which he should not need to do, if God did loue or hate vpon anie foresight of faith or good works in the one, or neglect and contempt in the other; for that were in the iudgement of men, a suffi­cient cause of loue and hatred, without all shewe of iniustice. Thirdly, he maketh it yet more plaine, by the wordes which fol­low, vers. 18. where he saith: Hee will haue mercie on whom he will haue mercie, and whom he will he hardeneth. He maketh two causes of saluation, and damnation, and both subordinate to an higher and more principall cause, the subordinate cause of saluation beeing mercye, because none is saued but by mercie: of damnation hardening, or obdurating, for they which be damned, are hardened in their sinnes, that they cannot repent, and both those inferior causes are subordinate to his will, as the highest cause, and onely in himselfe, and these inferiour causes doe both proceed from his will. And finally, when he sayth: It is not (meaning election) in him that willeth (that is, in the indeuors of man) nor [Page 34] in him that runneth, (that is in the workes of men) but in God onely that sheweth mercy: hee teacheth that the onely rule of predestination, and reprobation, whereby God is directed, and the only law which he tieth himself to obserue therin, is his will: so that no part of our electiō is ascribed to our selues, or any thing which may be in vs.

Secondly, to answere this obiection. Is there iniquitie with God? God forbid. He cleareth that two maner of waies. First, God is not vniust by being partiall in sauing, hee dooth not erre in his choyse by preferring Iacob before Esau, when the case of them both was one, both vnborne, neither of them had done good, why hee should bee chosen, or euill, why hee should be refused. For God will haue mercy on whom he will haue mercy. Non potest peccare in dolectu, cu­ius voluntas est iusticiae regula. Hee cannot erre in his choyse, when that is iust, whatso­soeuer is his will. When two theeues haue committed murther, and both deserued death, may not the King without suspition of iniustice shewe mercie in pardoning the one, and doe iudgement in executing the other?

Iacob and Esau were both as we all are, by nature the children of wrath, could not [Page 35] God iustly haue compassion on Iacob, Ephe. 2. and let Esau die in his sinnes? That anie are sa­ued it is his mercie, and hee may haue mer­cie on whom hee will. It is worthie of ob­seruation that the Apostle dooth say: when they had done neither good nor euill. But hee dooth not say: when they were neither good nor euill. For true it is that they had done neither good nor euill, because they were vnborne, and therefore coulde not commit anie actuall sinne: but they were both of them euill, for both were infected with originall sinne, in their mothers wombe, which they drewe by inheritance from Isaac theyr father, and Rebecca their mother, Enchir. cap. 98. and therefore sayeth Augustine: Ambo gemini natura filijirae nascebantur, nul­lis quidem operibus proprijs, sed originali­ter in Adam, vinculo damnationis obstricti: Iacobum igitur dilexit per miscricordiam gratuitam, Esaum odit per iudicium de­bitum, quod quum deberetur ambobus, in al­tero tantum alter agnouit, non de suis meri­tis sibi gloriandum, sed de diuinae misericor­diae largitate, quia non est volentis, neque cur­rentis, sed Dei miserentis. Cap. 94. Re­manentibus reprobis in aeterna poena, sancti scient planius quid illis contulerit gratia: tum vebus ipsis apparebit, quod Psal. 100. scriptum [Page 36] est: misericordiam & iudicium tibi cantabo do­mine, quia nisi per indebitam misericordiam ne­mo saluatur, nisi per debitum iudicium nemo dā ­natur. Cap. 95. Ex duobus paruulis alter assu­miter per dei misericordiam, alter relinquitur, per Dei iudicium, in quo is qui assumitur, agnos­cit quid sibi per iudicium debebatur nisi miseri­cordia subueniret. Cur iste assumitur magis quam ille, cum vna causa esset ambobus? eadē est causa cur apud quosdam nō sunt factae virtutes nempe in Tiro & Sidone. Mat. 11. Quae si factae fuissent poenitentiam egissent, sed in Corazin & Bethsaida factae sunt, qui non erant credituri. Cap. 99. Quum Dei misericordiam commen­dasset dicens, non est volentis ne (que) currentis &c. deinde iudiciū commendat, quoniam in quo non fit misericordia, non fit iniquitas, sed iudicium. They were both by nature the children of wrath, not by reason of any offence which thēselues had cōmitted, but for y ^• first offēce of Adam: they were in state of damnation, as all the rest of Adams posteritie: wherefore that God loued Iacob, it was free mercy and vndeserued grace: that hee hated Esau, it was no wrong, but iustice, a punishment due vnto his sinnes: which punishment be­ing due vnto them both, was in iustice in­flicted vpon one, and in mercie but vpon the one: that as one was an example of his [Page 37] iustice: so the other might bee a vessell of mercie, that none may boast of his owne merits, because it is not in him that willeth, nor in him that runneth, but in God that sheweth mercie. When the wicked shall be tormented in hell fire, then shal Gods saints clearly perceiue howe much his grace and mercie did auaile them: then shall they find it true by their owne experience, as a thing verified in themselues, which Dauid spea­keth in his hundred Psalme. My song shall be of mercie and iudgement. For that they are saued, it is free mercie: that the other are damned, it is iust iudgement. When of two infants one is chosen through mercie, the other refused in iustice: he which is chosen, cannot but confesse, what in iustice was due vnto himselfe, had not mercy beene shewed vnto him, So then, where mercye is not shewed, there is not iniquity, but iust iudg­ment inflicted. I remember, Saint Augu­stine speaketh very fitly to this purpose, in an other place, though vpon an other oc­casion: for in his 157. Epistle to Optatus, he proposeth this question, why God hath ordained so few to be saued? and foreseeing that so many millions of men are to bee damned for their sinnes, why he doth crea­ate them? Why so mercifull a God should [Page 38] be glorified more by the damnation, then saluation of his owne creatures? For if his glorie did consist in sauing rather then in destroying, it should seeme without doubt, that the greatest number shoulde bee sa­ued, and that hee would not create those whom he doth foreknowe to be but repro­bate.

Hee maketh this answere: Meritò in­iustum videretur, quòd fiunt vasa ad perditio­nem, nisi esset vniuersa ex Adam massa dam­nata. Indeede it might seeme verie iniuri­ous, that anie shoulde be ordayned to bee vessels of wrath, if it were not, that the whole lumpe of which the vessels of wrath are framed, had beene damned before in Adam, but nowe: Quod fiunt nascendo va­sa irae, pertinet ad debitam paenam: quod fiunt renascendo vasa misericordiae, pertinet ad inde­bitam gratiam: That manie are borne vesselles of wrath, it is but a iust punish­ment due to theyr originall sinne: that a fewe by their regeneration are made ves­sels of mercie, it is vndeserued fauour. But if all which are borne of Adam, shoulde bee regenerate, and borne anew, and none should bee damned, then: La­teret beneficium quod donatur indignis: [Page 39] Then Gods mercie which is extended to them that are saued (which indeede are all vnworthy of their saluation) would not bee so apparent as nowe it is when but a fewe are saued. Plures Deus fecit damnandos quam saluandos incomparabili multitudine, vt reiectorum multitudine ostenderetur, quàm nulli momenti sit apud Deum iustum quan [...] talibet numerositas iustissimè damnatorum, atque vt hinc quoque intelligant, qui ex ipsa damnatione redimuntur, hoc fuisse massae illi vniuersae debitum quod tam magnae eius parti redditum, cernerent. But therefore GOD hath ordayned, without all com­parison more to bee damned then to bee saued, for these two causes. First, that it myght appeare by the great mul­titudes of them which are damned: howe little GOD, which is most iust, regar­deth the outcryes of whole multitudes of sinners, which are iustlye punished: Secondlye, that they which are redee­med from that damnation, may by their owne redemption, confesse, when they see the greater part damned, that that dam­nation was due to the whole lumpe, (and therefore to their owne selues) which was [Page 40] adiudged to the greater part. Secondly, he is not vniust by any parciality in punishing, because, first hee may, because it is his will and pleasure, iustly condemne some, as it appeareth by Pharao: secondly, as in elec­tion, so in reprobation, between his decree, and the execution of his decree, there bee subordinate causes: for although his will be the first & principall cause, that he decreeth who shall be saued, and who shall bee dam­ned: yet between his decree to saue, and sal­uation it selfe, there is mercie, for none is saued but by mercie: and betweene his de­cree to condemne, and the damnation, there is hardening that men can not repent, but continue in their sinnes. So that albeit the cause why he decreed that men shoulde bee damned, is only in himself because his owne wil is the cause of that decree, there is found cause of damnation inherent in themselues, which is infidelitie and hardnesse of heart: so that none are condemned, but first there is found in them matter enough worthy of condemnation, as the Prophet speaketh: Perditio tua ex te, Ose. 14. 13. salus ex me Israel, Thy saluation, ô Israel, commeth onely from me, but thy damnation from thy selfe. 2. Pet. 2. 12. And as the apostle speaketh. These which as bruit beasts lead with sensualities, speake euill [Page 41] of the things they knowe not, shall perish through their owne corruption.

Lastly, Vers. 19. where it is written: Thou wilt say vnto me, why doth hee yet complaine? for who hath resisted his will? Hee graunteth two antecedents, that God hardeneth whō he will, And that no man hath power to re­sist his will, And yet the argument is denied as a weake consequent, that therfore Gods wrath is vniustly kindled against them whō he thus hardeneth, and constraineth to do his will, shewing that man may not thus expostulate: which hee proueth by two rea­sons. First, an argument, called in Logicke, à comparatis, Vers. 21. where he saith: Nunquid deo non licebit quod figulo licet: The potter may of his owne clay make vessels for the bedde, as well as for the boord, and may not God much more, of the same lumpe make vessels of wrath. The second is, Ab optimo fine di­uini concilij, drawn from the end which God doth propose, where he saith: What if God woulde, to shewe his wrath, and to make his power knowen, suffer with long patience the vessels of wrath, prepared to destruc­tion? And that he might declare the riches of his glorie vppon the vessels of mercie, Vers. 22. 23. whom he hath prepared to glorie, who can accuse him of vniustice? Then he sheweth [Page 42] that neither the saluation of the elect, nor the damnation of the wicked, is the last ende of his eternall decree and purpose, but that he proposeth a further and better end, which is his owne glorie, that he may shewe his wrath, and make his power knowne, as also he may declare the riches of his glorie. A poynt of so deepe diuinitie, woulde re­quire both a learned and large discourse, especially before so honourable, frequent, and iudicious an auditorie; but two houres are too short a scantling, & I am cōstrained to be briefer then I woulde. But that you may bee fully satisfied concerning this poynt, I will with as great breuitie as I can, aunswere three obiections, which doe seeme to make agaynst this doctrine of predestination, which I haue deliuered vn­to you.

The first is of Samuel Huberus a Lu­theran, which affirmeth that this place of Saint Paule, concerning Esau and Iacob, is not meant of any particular men, but of whole nations, not of hea­uenly things, but temporall blessings, and therefore maketh nothing to proue predestination.

[Page 43] The second, of the Papists, which inferre this absurditie, that if God hardeneth men to doo euill, then God is the au­thour of sinne.

The thirde of the Atheistes and carnall men, which denye the prouidence of GOD and dispute with themselues in this manner: If GOD haue predestinated mee to Hell, then in vayne is it for mee to leade a godlye lyfe? If hee haue predestinated mee to saluation, what neede I to confourme my selfe vnto his VVoorde? For his will and pur­pose must needes take place, I can not auoyde his secrete Decree, it is lyke the law of the Persians, it can not be al­tered.

Touching the first, Sam. Hu­berus Hel uetius Ber nensis, pa­stor Eccle­siae Deren­dum gensis in Ducatu Witten [...] bergensi. For as much as it is written: I haue loued Iacob, and ha­ted Esau: Samuel Huberus a Lutheran first distinguisheth the ambiguitie of the names, Easu and Iacob, as also of loue and hatred, affirming that Esau and Iacob are to bee vnderstood collectiue, not distributiue, [Page 44] not personally, but nationally, as by Iacob is ment all the posteritie of Iacob, and by Esau, all the families and ofsprings of Esau: as for example, oft times in the Scripture, Israel, Edom, Ismael, Amon, Moab, Iuda, Le­ui, are vnderstoode, not of particular men, but of whole nations: so likewise the loue of God to the one, & hatred to the other, is not to be vnderstood of spiritual graces, but temporall blessings: not in the life to come, but in this life: not to belong to their owne persons, but to appertaine to their posteri­tie, and thereupon he inferreth this conclu­sion: that these wordes of the Apostle doo make nothing at all, either to proue electi­on, or reprobation. And because this doc­trine of Saint Paule is quoted out of Mala­chy, Malac. 1. and that of Malachy out of Genesis, Gen. 25. he examineth these three places of scripture, and by the coherence of the text, seemeth to alleage many arguments to that purpose. His arguments out of Paule are these. 14. 1. A great prerogatiue is graunted to the Iewes aboue other people, Ro. 9. 4. 15 but they are the whole posteritie of Iacob. Ver. 7. vnto 13. 2. That prero­gatiue is drawne from the couenant, which the Lord did make with Abraham, which couenant is belonging to many, and not ap­propriated to Abraham alone. 3 He de­riueth [Page 45] this prerogatiue from Isaac to Iacob, and separateth Esau frō it, as one which was no partaker of that blessing: but what is this prerogatiue which is giuen to Iacob aboue Esau? namely, that in his posteritie should be continued the true worship of God, that in his posteritie the Messias should be born, that in his posteritie should be established a temporall kingdome, neither was that pre­rogatiue, and glorie alwayes to continue in Iacobs posteritie, but only for a time, for as much as at the length, the Iewes which were Iacobs posteritie, were reiected, and and the Gentiles chosen in their place.

4 Whereas is written: Vers. 12, 13. The elder shall serue the yonger, it was neuer verified of the person of Esau, nor during the life of Iacob, because Esau did neuer serue his bro­ther Iacob, but only his posteritie did serue his brothers posteritie, when the Israelites had brought the Edomites into subiection.

5 He sayth: Vers. 24. Whom the Lord hath chosen, not onely of the Iewes, but also of the Gen­tiles: where hee mentioneth whole nations and kinreds. Ose. 2. 6 He vrgeth the authoritie of Ose, saying: I will call them my people which are not my people. Esay 10. 7 The authori­tie of Esay: Though the number of the chil­dren were as the sandes of the sea, but a [Page 46] remnant shall be saued. 8 Hee opposeth all the Gentiles to the whole nation of the Iewes, Vers. 30. saying: The Gentiles which followed not righteousnes, haue obtained vnto righ­teousnes, which is of faith: but Israel which followed the law of righteousnesse, coulde not attaine to the lawe of righteousnesse. 9 He sheweth that Iacob hath not the true knowledge of God: Cap. 10. 2, 3 ver. 9 & 12 which coulde not without impietie bee vnderstoode of the person of Iacob. 10 Out of Deut. 32. and Esay 63. He commendeth the obedi­ence of the Gentiles, and reprehendeth the contumacy of the Iewes. Cap. 11. vers, 2, 3, 4▪ 5▪ 8, 9, 10, ab 11. ad 29▪ 30, 31 11 he saith: Hath God cast away his people▪ god forbid. 12 He sheweth that of the posterity of Iacob some are saued, but the greatest part are gone a­stray. 13 He compareth together the zeale of both nations, as well Iewes as Gentiles. 14 Hee concludeth of both Nations in in this manner: As you in tymes past haue not beleeued God, yet haue obtay­ned mercie through their vnbeleefe: so now haue they not beleeued God, by the mercy shewed vnto you, that they also may re­ceyue mercie.

As for the Prophet Malachy, where he sayth: Mal. 1. I haue loued Iacob, and hated Esau, he expoundeth himself, and declareth with [Page 47] what kinde of hatred he hated Esau. Name­ly, he made his mountaines waste, and his heritage a wildernesse for dragons: which was neuer brought to passe while Esau li­ued, but long after his death. And not­withstāding he bloued Iacob, yet he abhor­reth his vnthankfulnesse: which ingratitude could not be obiected to his persō, but to his posterity, as in that whole chap. he discour­seth, not of one in particular, but of a whole nation. Vers. 23. To come to the examination of the words contained in the 25. of Gen. The lord said to Rebecca: Two Nations are in thy wombe, two maner of people shall bee diui­ded out of thy bowels, and the one people shalbe mightier then the other, & the elder shall serue the yonger. Where it is most manifest by the coherence of the wordes, that hee speaketh not of persons, but of peoples: so that where hee sayeth: The el­der shall serue the younger, he meaneth the elder people shall serue the younger peo­ple, or the posteritie of the elder sonne, shal serue the posteritie of his younger bro­ther. In another place, Isaac saith to Iacob: Let peoples bee thy seruants, Gen. 27. 29 and Nations bowe to thee: bee Lord ouer thy brethren, and let thy mothers Children honour thee. But this can not bee verifyed of the [Page 46] [...] [Page 47] [...] [Page 48] person of Iacob, because his brethren did not bow vnto him, neither were people his seruants, neither did his mothers children honour him, but he serued others: himselfe was a fugitiue in Mesapotomia, and did o­beysance to his brother Esau: but onely the posteritie of Esau serued the posteritie of Iacob, 2. Sam. 8. when they were by Dauid subdued and brought into subiection.

As for the loue of the one, and hatred of the other, it consisted onelie in temporall things, which he proueth by these three reasons. 1 One could not be a seruant to the other in the life to come, Gene. 27. because there is freedome and no seruice, euerie one is no­ua creatura in Domino, a new creature in the Lord. 2 When Isaac blessed Iacob, hee said: Behold, the smell of my sonne is as the smell of a field which the Lorde hath bles­sed, God giue thee therefore of the dew of heauen, and fatnesse of the earth, and plen­tie of wheat and wine. But with the same blessing he blessed Esau, though not in so great and ample maner, Vers. 39. saying: Behold, the fatnesse of the earth shall bee thy dwelling place, and thou shalt haue of the dewe of heauen from aboue. But all these things are temporall respects, 3 If these things had been spirituall, and to be vnderstood of the [Page 49] life to come, then Iacob and Esau standing in opposition one against the other, in so much that one should be chosen, the other damned, then both of them could not haue beene blessed.

That I may answer with as great breuitie as I can. The Argument doth not follow, that because Saint Paule dooth discourse of whole nations, and not of particular persons: therefore these words do make against pre­destination. For, if we do well consider the drift and scope of the Apostle in this place, we shall find the contrarie most plainely to appeare. For although the argument which the Apostle handleth in that Chapter, and the two other Chapters following, is a spe­ciall discourse of the generall apostacie and reiection of the Iewes, and the vocation of the Gentiles, yet by a kinde of occupation, he entreth into a particular tract of prede­stination, although it be obiter, and by the way, as a question most necessary to be tou­ched, for the right vnderstanding of a place of Scripture, which seemeth at the first sight flatly to make agaynst this doctrine, which he hath deliuered concerning the ge­nerall reiection of the Iewes, and so hee in­intreateth of predestination, for the preuen­ting of an obiection. For, in the beginning [Page 50] of the same chapter, hauing lamented the reiecting of his kindred the Iewes, hee ma­keth this obiection with himselfe: If it bee so that God hath reiected the Iewes, and called the Gentiles in their place, it should seem to be contrarie to the couenant which he made with Abraham, (for his promise to Abraham was otherwise) and that his worde should be of none effect. To which obiection he answereth, that albeit the ge­nerall reiecting of the Iewes, yet the pro­mise which the Lorde made to Abrahaem remaineth sure and stedfast, for as much as notwithstanding their general apostacy and infidelitie, the Lorde in his secret coun­saile chooseth of them some in particular whom hee listeth, whom hee hath before predestinated to saluation. For hee made the promise to Abraham, and his seede, not in a generalitie to all his seede, accor­ding to the flesh, but in particular, to all those of his seede which should be his chil­dren according to the fayth, euen as hee was the father of the faithfull. And there­fore the state of this question thus stan­deth: That this grace is offered to all the posteritie of Abraham, without exception, that hee woulde bee their God, and they should be his people, but it is sealed onely [Page 51] to the faythfull: the vertue and efficacie thereof appertaineth onely vnto them of the seed of Abraham, which be of the num­ber of Gods elect, which are predestinated, which hee proueth by two examples, the one of Abraham, and the other of Isaac. Concerning Abraham: hee hadde two sonnes, Isaac, and Ismael, though Ismael were the sonne of Abraham, as well as Isaac, yea, and circumcised before Isaac, had receyued the circumcision, yet by the ordinance of God was Isaac onely reputed the sonne of Abraham, and the heire of the promise, and Ismael reiected: hee yeeldeth this reason, because they which are the children according to the flesh, are not as children: but only the children of the pro­mise, are accounted for the seede. Concer­ning Isaac also he had two sonnes, Esau and Iacob, both they were twinnes, and nearer one to the other then Isaac and Ismael, because they had both the same father and mother, yet before either was borne, one was chosen, the other refused, to shewe that notwithstanding the generall reiection of the Iewes, yet God kept his promise with Abraham, forasmuch as it concerneth one­lye those children of Abraham which are according to faith, and not according to the [Page 52] flesh alone, whom he predestinated before they were borne, not for any foresight of any good thing in them, but of his owne good will and pleasure, because it was his will and pleasure, which in deed are in num­ber but a fewe, beeing compared with the great multitude of them whom he hath ha­ted, although they be of the stock of Abra­ham. And as for that loue and hatred wher­with hee loued one, and hated the other, although it be historically vnderstoode, as it is in Moses, and Malachy, consisteth of temporall and worldly blessings: yet in this Epistle of Saint Paule, it cannot otherwise be constered, then of the kingdome of hea­uen, and of the life to come, as Paule him­selfe the best interpreter of himselfe, dooth in the wordes which followe explaine his meaning. For he sheweth that the hatred of Esau was such, as the hardening of Pharao a reprobate, not onely in this life, but also in the life to come. Moreouer, hee tearmeth thē which are so hated the vessels of wrath, prepared to destruction, and them which were so loued, as Iacob was loued, the ves­sels of mercie prepared to glorie, saying: God to shewe his wrath, and to make his power knowen, doth suffer with long pati­ence the vessels of wrath prepared to de­struction, [Page 53] and to declare the riches of his glorie vpon the vessels of mercie, which he hath prepared vnto glorie. Furthermore, least wee should bee like the Iewes, 2. Cor. 3. which when the vaile was put vppon Moses his face, did not looke to the end of that which should be abolished: and therefore theyr mindes are hardened, and till this day doth remaine the same couering vntaken away: in the reading of the olde Testament wee must not be ignorant that it receyueth two interpretations, the one hystoricall, the o­ther mysticall: Biblioth. sanc. lib. 3. de vtilita­te credendi ad Hono­ratum, c. 3 as Sixtus Senensis, and Saint Augustine did well obserue. As for example. Christ speaketh of Iudas in this maner: I speake not of you all, I know whom I haue chosen, but it is that the scripture might be fulfilled: he that eateth bread with me hath lifted vp his heele against me. Iohn 13. But if ye con­ferre these wordes with the wordes of the prophet from whence they are taken, Psal. 41. 9. they do hystorically concerne the person of Da­uid, and his acquaintance, and cannot bee vnderstoode of Christ and Iudas, because Christ was without sinne, but in the fourth verse of that Psalme, he sayth: Haue mercy on me, and heale my soule, for I haue sinned against thee. Yet Christ in the new Testa­ment dooth mystically expounde it of him­selfe, [Page 54] & the treason of Iudas against his per­son. Likewise Peter interpreteth this saying of Dauid, Let his habitation be void, & no man dwell therein, Act. 1. 54. of Iudas, where in that place the prophet speaketh in the plural nū ­ber, Psal. 69. 25 not of one, but of many, saying, Let their habition be voide, and none dwell in their tents, speaking of the whole nation of the Iewes, that the iust punishment of God should be iustly inflicted vpon thē for cru­cifying of Christ, that their city should bee sacked, & they dispersed by the Roman Em­peror. And seeing the soundest interpretatiō of the scriptures, is by other places of scrip­ture, y ^t these blessings & cursings, loue & ha­tred, which in the old testament are histori­call, are in y ^e new testamēt mistical, as in this promise made to Abrahā, Isaac & Iacob, and their posteritie, it is made manifest by the apostle, Heb. 11. 8. saying: By faith Abraham abode in the land of promise, as in a strange land, as one that dwelt in tents with Isaac and Iacob heires with him of the same promise, for he looked for a foundation, whose builder and maker is god. But I come to the 2. obiectiō.

Rom. 9. 17. 18. The Apostle writeth in this maner: For the scripture saith vnto Pharao, for this purpose I haue stirred thee vp, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all [Page 55] earth. Therfore he hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardneth. What then, if God hardned the heart of Pharao, and caused him to sin, is not God the author of sin? Nothing lesse, forasmuch as God is goodnesse it selfe, his very essence is good, and nothing can proceed from him, but that which is exceeding good. True it is, as the Prophet sayth, Amos. 3. Non est malum in vrbe quod non fecit Dominus, There is no euill in the citie but the Lord did it. The lord doth not onely suffer the wicked to do euill, but him­selfe is a doer, and principall agent therein. I knowe there bee some of greater modestie then iudgement in diuinity, which for reue­rence to the person of God, do affirme, that all the actions of sathan, and the wicked, are not done by the will, but onely by the per­mission & sufferance of God: by which opi­nion of theirs they fall into two absurdities: the one is, they deny his prouidence which doth so moderat & dispose of al things, that nothing can come to passe otherwise thē he hath apointed and decreed before. The o­ther is, they derogate much & detract from his omnipotencie, as if he should suffer any thing to be don against his wil. I know some haue trāslated the lords praier in this maner: suffer vs not to be led into tentatiō: but the [Page 56] Greeke text hath [...], which is, Lead vs not into temptation: so that if we be tempted, he is the leader. And likewise whereas it is written, Mat. 6. 13 [...]. Rom. 1. 24▪ 26. 28. He gaue them vp to their hearts lusts, vnto vnclean­nesse, and to a reprobate sense: hee gaue them vp vnto vile affections: some transla­ted it, Permisit eos libidinibus, and he suffred them to follow their owne lusts. These things as they proceed frō God, are good, but in respect of the men which doo them, they are euill. Enchir. c. 100. Saint Augustine saith: Deus bene vtitur malis tanquam summè bonus, ad eorum damnationem quos iuste praedestinauit ad poenam, & illorum salutem quos digne praede­stinauit ad gratiam. Vult peccata, nō vt probet, sed vt iudicium suum exequatur, sic malis in­strumentis bene vtitur. Vsus est Iudae proditione & pontificum crudelitate, ad illorum perni­ciem, sed ad nostram salutem. Pharaonem indu­rauit ad suam ipsius gloriam, & ad eius poenam: sed aliud fuit illius, aliud Dei institutum. God which is infinitely good, doth vse the mini­sterie and seruice of them which are euill, to their damnation whome hee hath iustly predestinated to death, and to their salua­tion whom he hath predestinated to glory. He will haue offences to be committed, not [Page 57] as if hee did allowe and approue them, but that by them hee might execute his iudge­ment, and so he doth make vse of the euill as his instruments, himselfe being good. He vsed the treason of Iudas, and the crueltie of the Iewes, to their destruction, but to our saluation: he hardened Pharao, to his owne glorie, but for Pharaos punishment. But the intent and purpose of Pharao, was not the same which God intended: though the ac­tion which God and Pharao did were the same, yet in God it was good, in Pharao it was euill, because the intent of them both was not the same. Sometime God causeth men to sinne for their punishment, because oftentimes hee punisheth one sinne with an other: when man hath sinned grieuously, God causeth him to commit a more grie­uous sinne, or a punishment of his former sinne, and so one sinne is heaped vpon an o­ther, that at the day of iudgement their damnatiō may be the greater, if they do not repent, As Saint Augustine obserueth. As for example. Contra Iulian. Rom. 1. The Israelites did serue the creature for the Creator, which is bles­sed for euer, Pelag. li. 5. cap. 3. Amen. There is guilt of sinne, but the Lord did punish this sinne of theirs by causing them to commit an other sinne, for he gaue them ouer into a repobat sense, [Page 58] to do those abhominations which were not conuenient, as it is particularly specified in the text, and so they receiued the reward of their errour. 2. Thes. 2. So likewise speaking of them which were to bee seduced by Antichrist. They loued not the truth that they might be saued, that was a grieuous sin, the Lord punished it with another sin, therefore God shall send them strong delusions, that they should beleeue lies. 1. Reg. 22. Micheas saw the Lord sitting vpon a throne, & the host of heauen stood on his right hand, & on his left, & the Lord said: Who will seduce Achab, that he may go and fall at Ramoth Gilead? Then there came forth a spirit and stoode before the Lord, and said: I will seduce him: I will go out, and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets: then the Lord saide, thou shalt seduce him, and thou shalt preuaile. Now therefore behold the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of al those thy pro­phets, and the Lord hath appointed euill a­gainst thee. Therfore in a word I answer ac­cording as it is a doctrine receiued in the schooles. Deus est author mali, sed mali poenae, non mali culpa, quatenus est in hominibus culpa est, quatenus proficiscitur à Deo paena est, culpa non est, iustae vindictae deus author est, & Satan minister. God is the authour of euill, but of [Page 59] what euill, our schoole learning teacheth vs to distinguish of euils: one is a sinne, the other a punishment, God is the cause wee do euill, but as wee doo it, it is sinne, as hee doth cause it, it is no sin, but a punishment for our sinnes. And so as it is a punishment or reuenge, God is the authour, Sathan is the executor of the same. Part. 1. quaest. 1. artic. 6. Thomas Aquinas sheweth, that in sinne two things must bee considered, which are, Actio, ac actionis viti­um, res & qualitas rei, actio quatenus res & opus est, bona est, & à Deo proficiscitur, quate­nus vitiosa est, non à Deo sed ab hominis natu­ra corrupta: vt est peccatum, Deus non iubet, sed vl [...]iscitur. The action it self, and the fault or vnlawfulnesse of the action, the thing it selfe, and the qualitie thereof: as for ex­ample: in the treason of Iudas we must ob­serue, first, the action it selfe, of deliuering Christ to the Iewes to be crucified, that in it self it was good, & proceeded frō god for the redemption of mankind: the qualitie of that fact as it was wilfull murther, so it was euill, and did proceed from the corrupt nature of Iudas, which was a theef, and desired therby to inrich himselfe, so that the action com­meth frō God, in whom we haue our being, and mouing, but the offence cōmeth frō our selues, because god which causeth vs to do y ^e [Page 60] action, doth propose a good ende and pur­pose which is secret and knowen to himself, but man which doth the action, proposeth an other ende and purpose, contrary to the end and purpose which God doth propose, and therefore in man it is an offence. In the self same action, both God and the diuel do worke in the hearts of the wicked, & yet so that hee cannot bee excused, because God concurreth with thē, nor yet God accused for doing that which the diuell and the wic­ked do▪ for their doings being the same, yet they are different two maner of wayes, to wit, in the end which they propose, & in the maner of their working. As for example: When the cattell of Iob were stollen away, Iob. 1. in the same action were three agents, God, the diuell, and the Chaldeans: but they dif­fered in the maner of doing, because God was the authour, the diuell was but a mini­ster, or executor of the will of God, and the Chaldees were the instruments of the diuel to bring it to passe, as also they differed in the end wherunto they did this. For the in­tent of God was, onely to trie the patience of Iob, and his faith: the intent of the diuell was cleane contrarie, to driue Iob to despe­ration: the intent of the Chaldees was ney­ther of these, but to inrich themselues.

[Page 61] What then? shall wee say with the wic­ked: If it be so that God hath predestinated me to die the death, to what end shal I con­forme my selfe to do his will and commaun­dements? His counsell and eternall decree cannot be altered, if he haue ordained mee to be saued, I cannot be damned: if he haue ordained mee to bee damned, I cannot bee saued, what course of life soeuer I take: for my saluation dependeth not on my inde­uours, but on his decree, which must needes stand. This is like the disputation of seruant of Leno the Stoike Philosopher, which whē hee was led to the gallowes for his offence, his maister comming thither, said to him: O perdite quis ad hoc te impulit? to whom he an­swered: O stulte philosophe, quis me hoc fatum docuit? O foole what brought thee hither? O foolish Philosopher, thou hast taught mee, that whatsoeuer was my destinie it could not be auoyded. But wee which are Christians, must not bee ignorant, that in matters of our saluation, God worketh by his meanes: as he ordaineth saluation, so he appoynteth meanes to the attainment ther­of, and these means are not to be neglected. God decreed that Abraham should bee sa­ued, therefore he gaue Abraham the gift of faith, without which there is no saluation: [Page 62] and as he could not but be saued: so he could not but beleeue. For howsoeuer these things in respect of our knowledge are con­tingent, yet in respect of Gods ordinance they bee necessarie, and can not other­wise bee, because hee hath so appoynted. Hee decreed that Pharao should be dam­ned, therefore hee hardened his heart that hee coulde not turne vnto the Lord: for if hee had turned, hee had beene saued. He decreed that Iudas shoulde bee a castaway, therefore hee gaue him not his grace to repent, whereas true repentaunce is a meane to saluation. And if hee had trulye repented, without doubt hee had beene saued. 2. Reg. 20. If GOD haue decreed to adde to the dayes of Ezechias, fifteene yeares longer, he hath also appoynted that Eze­chias during those fifteene yeares, shoulde take his refections and bodily sustenaunce whereby life is preserued. VVherefore let vs for our partes followe the meanes which God hath appoynted to saluation, as prayer, hearing, the woorde, receyuing the Sacraments, fayth, amendement of life, godly and Christian conuersation, and then we may secure our selues, that as God hath vouchsafed vs the meanes so hee hath predestinated vs to saluation. [Page 63] But I come to the third and last conclusion.

Christ died not effectually for all,

Though the death of Christ were suf­ficient for the redemption of all mankind, yet hee dyed not effectually for all, for as much as all men are not saued, therefore to manie, that is, to them which are not saued, the deathe of Christ is of no ef­fect. Mat. 20. VVee reade that many are called, but fewe are chosen. Iohn 12, The Iewes coulde not beleeue, Iohn 20. because the Lorde blinded their eyes. Matt. 11 They do not beleeue, because they are none of his sheepe. Matt. 27. God the father hath hidden the mysteries of saluation from the wise men of the worlde. 2 Tim. 2. Euerlasting fire is prepared for the wicked. Iohn 17. Some are vessels of dishonour. Our Sauiour Christ sayth: I pray for them whom thou hast gi­uen me out of this world, but I pray not for the worlde. But to them which are one­lye called, and are not chosen, whose eyes are blinded that they should not beleeue, which are not Christes sheepe, which are vessels of dishonour, from whom God hath hidden the mysteries of saluation, for whome euerlasting fyre is prepared, [Page 64] to those for whom Christ doth not pray, to them the death of Christ dooth nothing a­uaile, to those his death is of no effect.

Huberus a brocher of new and straunge opinions, whereof this is one, that Christ died effectually for all, alleageth so manie common places, being altogither friuolous, and nothing pertaining to the purpose, as would be tedious for mee to repeate them, and I wish it woulde not offend your pati­ence to heare them. Himself diuideth them into three classes, as he dooth tearme them. The first tende to this purpose: to prooue that Christ died effectually for all, in a ge­neralitie without exception. The second, to shew that he died as effectually for Cain and Iudas, as for Peter and Paule, for the godly, as for the godlesse. The thirde, to shew that he died for all, or else (as he sayth) which is dictu horrendum, not to be spoken. Deum grauissimorum scelerum reum peragi, That God is guiltie of heinous crimes. A verie strange and blasphemous speech.

His places to proue that Christ died ef­fectually for all in a generalitie, Gen. 3. are these that followe. Iohn 16. The seede of the woman shall breake the Serpents head: He [...]. 2. The prince of this world is cast out: 1. Cors 15. By death he hath abolished him which hath the power of [Page 65] death, that is the diuell. He shall abolish all powers, and tread all his enemies vnder his feet. But these things (saith he) cannot bee, that the Serpents head should bee broken, that the prince of this world should be cast out, that the diuell should bee abolished, if yet the greatest part of men are vnredee­med. Moreouer, the restoring againe of man, is in as ample maner as was the fall of man. Rom. 5. 19. But as by the disobedience of one (that is Adam) many were made sinners: so by the obedience of one (that is Christ) many are made righteous. Where, by many, all are vn­derstood: so then, as in Adam all are dam­ned, so in Christ all are redeemed. The kingdome of Christ the conquerour, 1. Tim. 2. is lar­ger then the kingdome of the diuell, 2. Pet. 3. which is conquered. Rom. 8. God willeth all men to be sa­ued. Rom. 16. He will haue none to perish. He spared not his only begotten sonne, 2. Cor. 5. but gaue him for all. The Gospell is preached to all nati­ons. God hath reconciled the worlde vnto himselfe, And many other places, if diffe­rent in wordes, yet parallell to these, and in effect one and the same. Which places in­deede are verie sufficient to prooue that Christ died for all, but not that his death appertained to all, or that he died effectual­ly for all, but onely for the beleeuers. And [Page 66] therefore they are but a fallacie in Logicke, called Petitio principij, they proue onely that saluation is offered vnto all, which we doe not denie, but they do not proue that salua­tion is sealed to any more then to the faith­full, which is the question in controuersie betweene vs.

Besides that, some of these places are by him mistaken. For the broosing of the ser­pents head, is not to be vnderstoode of the nullitie or paucitie of them which shall bee subiect to the kingdome of Sathan, as though the Serpents head beeing broken, and the diuell vanquished, all mankinde were so deliuered, that all were saued, and none damned: But it is to bee vnderstood of the triumph of Christ ouer the diuell, o­uer sinne, and ouer death, that as by the di­uell mankinde was ouerthrowne, so by man the diuell should be subdued againe: that as before all men were bondslaues to Sathan, now Satan himselfe should be brought vn­der subiection, that nowe he should haue no more power but by Christs permission, for as much as he hath the key of the bottom­lesse pit, Apoc. 20. and the great chaine in his hande, and he bindeth the great dragon which be­fore preuailed against vs. Saint Paul maketh comparison betweene our fall by the first [Page 67] Adam, and our rising againe by the second, and sheweth that a greater good is deriued to man by the obedience of the second, thē was the punishment which was inflicted by the disobedience of the first. But how? Not as then al which before in Adam were dam­ned, nowe in Christ were saued. But as in Adam all were damned, so in Christ some are saued: for if all were saued in Christ, thē were no vse of hell, of the diuell and his angels, which are appointed for the tormē ­ting of wicked men. But in these three re­spects appeareth the largenesse of the bene­fit deriued vnto vs by the death of Christ, a­boue the losse which we indured by Adams fall. First, our redēption is a greater & wor­thier worke then our creation: Facilius est creare quam lapsos restituere, ex nihilo bonū quàm ex malo bonum facere. It is more easie to create vs then to restore vs, when we had declined from our first integritie, of nothing to make vs good, thē being euill to make vs good: and therfore by our redēption a more rich treasure is heaped vpon vs, but so that it is to be vnderstood of the life to come, not of this present life. Secondly, by the fall of Adam was lost a earthly kingdome, by the death of christ was gained an heauēly king­dome, which is so much the greater benefit, [Page 68] by howe much heauen is higher then the earth.

Thirdly, although before the fall of Adam the righteousnes of man was pure and per­fect, now it is full of imperfections: it was thē inherent, Rom. 7. it is now but onely by imputation (for as Paule speaketh of himselfe, in mee, that is my flesh, dwelleth no good) yet that righteousnesse which was in man before his fall, had not onely annexed vnto it Possibili­tatem peccandi, Possibilitie to sinne, but also Procliuitatem ad peccatum, It was verie prone and apt to sinne, and continued in him but a verie short time, but the righte­ousnesse which we shall bee indued withall by the death of Christ, in the life to come shall farre exceede, because it shall also be inherent in vs, and that not for a season, but for euer, and it shall haue all possibilitie of falling taken away. So that in a word, where the Apostle sayth: By the disobedience of one man, many are made sinners, by many hee meaneth all: but where hee sayeth, by the obedience of one manie are made righteous, by many hee meaneth not all, but some: yet wee gaine more by Christs death, then by Adams fal, I meane we which are redeemed, but the greatnesse of this be­nefite bestowed vpon vs by his death, doth [Page 69] not consist in the multitude of them which are to be saued, but in the great prerogatiue giuen to the paucitie of them which are sa­ued. Mat. 7. For, if we weigh the number, Straite is the gate which leadeth to life, and few there be that finde it, but broad is the way which leadeth to destruction, and many there bee that enter in.

In his second order of common places, he commeth nearer to the purpose, to shew that Christ died effectually for them which are damned in as much as they were by him redeemed, but afterward voluntarily, & by their owne free will they made an aposta­cie, and renounced this benefite of their re­demption, whereof they were once made partakers. His places are these, and others like vnto them: Heb. 6. 4. For it is impossible, that they which were once lightened, and haue tasted of the heauenly gift, and were made partakers of the holy Ghost, if they fall a­way, should bee renued againe by repen­tance, seeing they crucifie againe to them­selues the sonne of God, and make a mock of him. Doe yee not knowe that yee are the Temple of GOD, 1. Cor. 3. and that the spirite of GOD dwelleth in you? If a­ny man destroy the Temple of God, him will God destroy, for the temple of God is [Page 70] holy which you are. 1. Cor. 8. 11. Through they know­ledge shall the weake brother perish, 2. Pet. 2. 1. for whō Christ died. False prophets shal bring in damnable heresies, denying the Lorde that hath bought them, and bring vppon themselues swift damnation. He that hath not these things is blinde, 2. Pet. 1. 9. and hath for­gotten that hee was purged from his olde sinnes. Gal. 5. 4. Ye are abolished from Christ who so euer are iustifyed by the lawe, Iohn 15. yee are fallen from grace. Rom. 11. 12. I am the true Vine, and who so abydeth not in mee is cast foorth. Beholde the bountifulnesse of God towardes thee, if thou continue in his bountifulnesse, or else thou shalt bee cut off.

Vpon which commō places he inferreth this conclusion: They once beleeued, they were lightned, they receiued y ^• knowledge of the truth, they were made partakers of the holy Ghost, tasted of the heauenly gift, were washed, sanctified, made the temples of God, the members of Christ, the Lord bought them. Therefore they were re­deemed, and Christ dyed effectually for them, and that they are not saued, it is not any decree of God from euerlasting, but the free will which was in themselues, that being redeemed, they renounced the [Page 71] benefite of their redemption, when it was in their power to haue receiued it. To these places I answere: That indeed in outward appearance they were washed, sanctified, redeemed, made the members of Christ, and Temples of the holy Ghost, but not in truth and in veritie, for as much as they which are indeed the children of God, can neuer reuolt and start backe from the faith, and their state of saluation. Our Sauiour saith: Iohn 10. My sheepe heare my voyce, and I know them, and they follow me and I giue them eternall life and they shall neuer pe­rish, neyther shall any plucke them out of mine hande, my father which gaue mee them is greater then all, and none is able to take them out of my Fathers hande. And the Apostle sayeth of the false prophets: they went from vs, 1. Ioh. 12. 19 but they were not of vs, for if they had beene of vs, they woulde haue continued with vs, but this commeth to passe, that it might appeare that they were not all of vs. And concerning free will which hee affirmeth to be the cause of their apostacie, the time will not permit mee to say much, onely this in a worde: The will of man is neither as the Eagle which alwayes with stedfast eyes beholdeth the brightnesse of the Sunne, neither as a stone [Page 72] which alwayes falleth downe from the top to the bottome, for neyther doth it alwayes soare vp aloft, nor decline to the centre, but sometime it is in diuine contēplation, some times againe it meditateth vpon vanity. It is not dead, & yet it liueth not: it is not blind, and yet it seeth not: as the seede sowne in the ground is not consumed, and yet it springeth not vp without the warmth and comfort of the Sunne: as the eye in darke­nesse is not blinde, and yet it neither liueth nor seeth, without the especiall grace of God.

There are three sorts of agents: the one is ex Placito, and that is God: the other is, ex necessitate, and that is nature, then there must needes bee a third, which consi­steth in a mediocritie betweene them both: for, Positis extremis ponuntur & Media. No man is good agaynst his will: so no man hath power to will any thing that is good, vnlesse God giue him the will. Ier. 10. For as the Prophet speaketh. The way of man is not in himselfe, neither is it in man to walke and direct his steppes. We are not of our selues sufficient to thinke a good thought, as of our selues, 1. Cor. 3. but all our sufficiencie is of God. Iohn. 6. No man commeth to Christ vnlesse his fa­ther drawe him. Rom. 7. What good I woulde do [Page 73] that do I not: the euill which I would not do, that do I, (sayth the Apostle.) But there is a schoole distinction betweene compul­sion and necessitie: For, Qui necessariò pec­cat, nihilominus voluntariò peccat. Though man cannot choose but offend, yet hee is willing to offend, but that is no libertie, or freedome of his will.

In the third he doth not so much dispute a­gainst the questiō, as blaspheme against the maiestie of God. As, if all mankind be not redeemed by Christ, neither was by his de­cree ordained to life, that he may be iustly accused of notorious crueltie an iniustice, his wordes are, Immensae iniusticiae, doli, cru­delitatis, omnium flagitiorū quae saeuissimo com­petunt tyranno, [...], that hee is not [...] but [...]: They be such reprochfull wordes, that you may blush to heare them, and I, when I do but thinke of them. Iob. 4. I may say with Iob: Feare commeth vpon me, and dread, which causeth all my bones to tremble. I am ashamed to repeate them in English, because I would not defile your religious eares. He doth (sayth hee) moreouer, condemne men their cause be­ing not heard: or if it be heard, himself doth inforce them to offend, and leadeth them into snares to be intrapped, he doth punish [Page 74] them for the contempt of that benefite of their redemption, to whom he neuer ment that it should appertaine: he is like an hous­holder which chasteneth his familie for re­fusing their dinner, for whome no dinner was ordayned: like the maister of a feast, which inuiteth guestes to his Table, but entertayned a verie fewe of them, and in­treateth the most of them hardly when they come thither: hee did when he wept ouer Ierusalem, Fundere lachrymas Croco­dili, that he was not verus, but mendax, and periurus. To these vngodly and irreligious speaches, derogatorie to the highnesse and maiestie of the Sonne of God, I say with Saint Paule, 1. Cor. 15. Euill wordes corrupt good maners, Epist. Iud. and with Michael the Archangel, when hee disputed with the diuell about the bodie of Moses, the Lorde rebuke thee. But to come to the reasons which he alledgeth, setting aside his blasphemous wordes, hee argueth in this manner: To holde with Caluin, that Christ dyed not to saue all, but onelie those which in his will bee had predestinated, were plaine Maho­metisme, Paganisme, Sarasanisme. For first, that were to take away all comfort, which is deriued vnto vs by the passion of Christ, to annihilate the vertue of his [Page 75] death, to ouerthrowe the foundation of fayth, for fayth cannot stand being groun­ded vpon particulars, the vniuersalitie of the redemption of mankind being denied, because then euerie man in particular may doubt of himselfe, whether Christ bee his Redeemer or no, when it is helde that he hath redeemed but a fewe. Secondly, it were to abolish the ministerie of the Gos­pel, for as much as the duetie of the Mi­nister of Gods worde is to preach repen­taunce, and to pronounce remission of sinnes through Christ vnto all, to mini­ster the Sacraments to all, and not to a few. To these absurde conclusions, I may say with Ierome: Ad C [...] ­siph. aduer. Sententias vestras prodidisse, refutasse est. The verie recitall is a suffi­cient confutation of theyr absurdities. Pelag. c. 4 For what man but meanely instructed in the rudiments of Christian Religion, can bee ignoraunt that fayth is grounded vppon the trueth of Gods promise in his sonne Iesus Christ, but the application there­of must not be made to all in generall, but to euerye one in particular by his owne selfe? For, a true, liuelye, and iustify­ing fayth of a Christian man, is thus de­fined: To bee a sure and certaine know­ledge of the loue of God towards himselfe, [Page 76] which beeing grounded vpon the truth of Gods promise in Christ is reuealed and sea­led by the holy Ghost. And that is it which the Prophet speaketh, Habak. 2. Iustus sua fide viuet. The iust man shall liue by his owne faith: and the Apostles Creede beginneth Credo, I beleeue, not Credimus, We beleeue. And Iob saith of himselfe in particular: Iob. 19. I knowe that my redeemer liueth, that though wormes destroy this bodie, yet I shall see God in my flesh. Rom. 8. The spirit of God beareth witnesse with our spirit that we are the chil­dren of God. Gal. 4. Because (sayth Paule) yee are sonnes, God hath sent the spirit of his sonne into your hearts, which crieth Abba, father. So that euery true Christian may by this doctrine of predestination, that Christ died onely for them whom hee hath predestina­ted before, comfort himselfe that hee is one of them which are predestinated, forasmuch as he beleeueth, & the spirit of God which is within him, euen that spirit of comfort, doth witnesse to his spirit that he is the son of God, and therefore assure himselfe of his owne saluation, without entring into the secrets of God, to iudge of other men whe­ther they shall bee saued or no. As for the ministerie of the Gospell, it continueth the same which it was euer from the first insti­tution. [Page 77] For though fewe are chosen, yet ma­ny are called, and only God knoweth who are his. Therfore the Minister must preach saluation to al, Paule must plant, Apollo must water, and leaue it to God to giue the in­crease, Peter must cast his net into the sea, and leaue to God the successe of his labors. The Ministers of Gods word must doe as the seruants of the great king, whē he made a marriage for his sonne, which went out into the high way, and inuited all without exception, euē euerie one whom they could finde, both good and badde, and bid them to the wedding. As God suffereth the sunne to shine, and raine to raine vpon the badde, as well as the good, with all indifferencie. No man knoweth whom God hath called, or at what houre hee will call men, or whe­ther he will call them or not, and therefore we must not refuse to do our indeuour, wee must not despaire of any mans conuersion vnto the fayth, or perseuerance after his conuersion in the fayth. And because God hath two willes, one secret, and knowne to himselfe alone, the other reuealed in the scriptures, and imparted to vs: in his secrete will hee will haue some to bee saued: in his reuealed will hee commaundeth that the Gospel should be preached to all, we must [Page 78] not inquire after his secrete will, which is knowne onely to himselfe, but his reuealed will which is knowne to our selues: for that seruant which knoweth his masters will, and dooth it not, shall bee beaten with many stripes. Thus counsailing euerie one that will enter into the consideration of such deepe poynts of diuinitie, that they would sapere, non altum, but ad sobrietatem, that they would be wise, but with sobrietie, and con­fesse with saint Paule: Rom. 11. O the deepenesse of the riches, both of the wisdome and know­ledge of God, howe vnsearchable are his iudgements, and his waies past finding out? For who hath knowne the mind of God? or who was his counsayler? (Wee must not demaunde reason in matters of fayth, because fayth goeth beyond reason) I con­clude with the godly Meditation of saint Augustin: Miserum me, quo modo sic induruit cor meum, Chap. 30. vt oculi me [...] non indesmenter fundant flumina lachrymarum dum seruus sermocinatur cum Domino, homo cum Deo, creatura cum creatore, qui factus est limo ex cum eo qui omnia fecit ex nihilo? Wret­ched man that I am, howe is my heart har­dened like the Adamant, that mine eyes doe not powre out streames of teares to cōsider that the seruant expostulateth with [Page 79] his master, man with God, the creature with the Creator, he which is made of the molde of the earth, with him which made al things of nothing. To him one inuisible and im­mortall God, the father, the sonne, and the holy Ghost, be all glory, and honour, for euer and euer, Amen.