AN EXAMINATION Of those things wherein the Author of the late Appeal holdeth the Doctrines of the Pelagians and Arminians, to be the Doctrines of the Church of England.  
Written by GEORGE CARLETON Dr. of Divinity, and Bishop of Chichester.  JOHN 10.2.4.5. 
He that entereth in by the door is the Shepherd of the Sheep—— and the Sheep follow him; for they know his voice, and a stranger they will not follow, but will flee from him, for they know not the voice of Strangers.  
LONDON, Printed for William Turner. 1626.   

TO THE MOST HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE, CHARLES', BY THE GRACE OF GOD, KING OF GREAT Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, etc.  
Most Gracious and Dread Sovereign,  
Such Princes as are raised by God for some great and good service, are many times incubred with great troubles, that they may be tried. Of this your M hath had experience. For besides the great perils out of which God hath delivered you, and brought you home in safety to the joy of all your faithful subjects: two other great dangers have assailed your kingdom of late, the Plague and the Pelagian heresy, the one destroying bodies, the other souls. This latter hath been creeping in corners heretofore, but of late hath come in more public show, than ever before, and dedicated to your M in a book entitled An Appeal to Caesar, wherein the Author hath with confidence delivered the doctrines of the Pelagians and Arminians for the doctrines of the Church of England. By this our dangers grow great and come near us. When the Church is in danger, to whom may we fly unto for help next under God, but only to your M, whom God hath set a nursing father of his Church here. Of necessity these things must be brought to your Ma.tie knowledge, whose godly care is, that this Church which hath thus long prospered and flourished, by the blessing of the Almighty, and the favour of godly & gracious princes, may not lose that honour under so good & gracious a king, which it hath held under your noble predecessors. I will not say, defend me gladio, but defend the truth & faith, whereof God hath made you the Defender, and God, who only is able, will not fail to defend you. I end with that prophetical promise, which I beseech the God of heaven to make good to your M No weapons that are made against thee shall prosper, 
Esa 54.17.  and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgement, thou shalt condemn: this is the heritage of the Lords servants, and their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord.  
Your M most humble servant and Chaplain, GEO. CICESTRIENSIS.   

THE CONTENTS. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Or Recapitulation of the chief passages in this Book.  

CHAPTER. 1. AN Introduction to the whole work ensuing. Pag. 1.  
CHAP. 2. An Introduction for the better understanding of the Controversy following. Pag. 4.  
CHAP. 3. An Examination of the respective pretended decree of Predestination. Pag. 7.  
CHAP. 4. A prevention of such answers as may be made against that which hath been delivered in the former Chapter. Pag. 31.  
CHAP. 5. Of perseverance in Grace, and falling away from Grace. Pag. 40.  
CHAP. 6. That perseverance to the end is a gift of God, given to true believers, flowing from God's purpose and Predestination. Pag. 43.  
CHAP. 7. Saint Augustine's dostrine in the matter of the perseverance of the Saints of God. Pag. 50.  
CHAP. 8. The dostrine of Saint Ambrose, and others of the Ancients touching perseverance. pag. 59  
CHAP. 9 An examination of the Arminians definition of Grace. pag. 65.  
CHAP. 10.11.12. & 13. A view of some particular escapes in the Appeal. pag. 70. & seqq.    

AN ANSWER TO THE Author of the Appeal.  
CHAPTER. 1.  
THE Author of the Appeal hath troubled the Church of England with strange Doctrines in two things especially: First, in the Doctrine of Predestination he attempteth to bring in a decree Respective, which he taketh for granted to be the Doctrine of our Church: But this will never be granted by us, nor proved by him. Secondly, he taketh it likewise for granted, that the Doctrine of our Church is, that a man may fall away from grace totally and finally: If his meaning be that such as are called and justified according to God's purpose may so fall away, this was never a Doctrine of the Church of England. If his meaning be that others may fall away, which are not called and justified according to God's purpose, then hath he troubled the Church with an idle Discourse to no purpose: For in this he hath no Adversary. For it is necessary in the beginning to agree upon the state of the question. St. Augustine sets it in these terms: They that are called and justified according to God's purpose, cannot fall away. Now against this question proposed in these terms, the Author of the Appeal disputeth: For pag. 37. scorning and rejecting this Doctrine, he writeth against his informers as he calleth them, thus. It is your own Doctrine, God hath appointed them to grace and glory, God according to his purpose hath called and justified them, therefore it is certain that they must and shall be saved infallibly.  
In the matter of Predestination I have ever been fearful to meddle; it is one of the greatest and deepest of God's Mysteries: We are with reverence to wonder, and with Faith and Humility to follow that which God in his Scriptures hath revealed in this point, and there to stay. But it hath been the unbridled humour of some to be still prying into God's secrets, and to run rashly and irreverently into these Mysteries. These things were never so irreverently handled by any, as they have been of late by the Arminians. The Author of the Appeal, doth complain of some who 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do conclude upon God's secrets. I would to God, he had been as careful to avoid that fault in himself, 
Tostat. in Genes. cap. 19  as he was to reprove it in others: Tostatus Abulensis hath a remarkable speech. In nulla materia periculosius erratur quam in hac de praedestinatione: Eligerem enim magis contra totius fidei veritatem peruerse sentire, & in hac non errare, quam in omnibus rectè iudicanao in hac sola deviare. The speech is strange, but he intended to show, that error is more dangerous in this point, then in all other: His reason is, Quia ex nulla speculativa cognitione tantum finis noster statuitur, & operationes diriguntur: And again: Scientiae de praedestinatione specialiori modo, quam omnes aliae, à Deo est; ex hac enim perditio vel saluatio nostra exordium sumit: Therefore his advice is, that men should be very sparing in the handling of such a Mystery: which advice I am also desirous to follow: yet here I am drawn into it against my will. For when such men as seem to have little reverence to so high a Mystery, run rashly and boldly into it, and as it may seem without great praemeditation of the matter, which they should have thought on, conceiving things contrary to that, which we have received from the Scripture, I may not be silent: For that were, as much as in me is, to betray the Truth. Yet my care shall be to say no more herein, than I shall be drawn necessarily to speak for the Truth; and to remove that which hath been erroneously presumed by others: For then is a man bound to maintain the Truth, when it is oppugned.  
It troubled me not a little, I confess, that I am to deal with a Minister of the Church of England; one that hath been mine ancient Acquaintance, of whom I had greater and better hopes: But in God's Cause all respects of Friendship and Acquaintance, yea if it were of blood and kindred, must give place to the Truth. Levy said to his Father and to his Mother, I have not seen him, neither knew he his Brethren, nor knew his Children: For they observed thy Word, and kept thy Commandment: Deut. 33.9. And this is the way to do him good: For I am not out of hope of reclaiming of him, seeing he hath promised, that if the evidence be clear against him, or if he be convicted per testes idoneos to have erred, he will recall it. The Scriptures, the ancient Fathers, and the Doctrine of the Church of England are testes idonei. I shall deal freely and plainly. For the ordering of the whole: First after a brief Introduction set down for the better understanding of the controversy, I will examine his extravagant opinions concerning the respective decree of Predestination, and after of falling away from Grace. Last of all, some particulars in his Book.  
This I do not undertake upon any confidence that I conceive in myself. I know many in our Church more worthy and able than myself, and I thank God for them: But as heretofore I have had experience of God's mercy, and found that the love of the truth hath in other things enabled me to defend the Truth, and helped me to know the Truth, so I rest upon the same help: I seek God's Truth, which will not fail them that seek and love it. And if any man of greater confidence in his wit and learning, will enter upon the Defence of the Appeal (for I have heard the whisperings) I shall be willing to spend the rest of mine old days in this, for they cannot be spent in a better service.   

CHAP. 2. An Introduction for the better understanding of the Controversy following.  
THE Church England was reform by the help of our learned and Reverend Bishops, in the days of King Edward the sixth, and in the beginning of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth. They who then gave that form of reformation to our Church, held consent in Doctrine with Peter Martyr, and Martin Bucer, being by authority apppointed Readers in the two Universities; and with other then living, whom they judged to be of best learning and soundness in the reformed Churches. And of the Ancients especially with St. Augustine. And were careful to hold this Unity amongst themselves, and with the reformed Churches. For that these worthy Bishops who were in the first reformation, had this respect unto P. Martyr, and M. Bucer, it is apparent, both because the Doctrine of our Church doth not differ from the Doctrine that these taught, and because that worthy Archbishop Cranmer caused our Leiturgy to be Translated into Latin, and craved the consent and judgement of M. Bucer, who gave a full consent thereto, as it appeareth in his works Inter opera Anglicana. And P. Martyr being likewise requested, writeth in His epistles touching that matter, his judgement and consent of the government and discipline of our Church.  
This uniformity of Doctrine was held in our Church without disturbance, as long as those worthy Bishops lived, who were employed in the reformation.  
For albeit the Puritans disquieted our Church about their conceived Discipline, yet they never moved any quarrel against the Doctrine of our Church, which is well to be observed. For if they had embraced any Doctrine which the Church of England denied, they would assuredly have quarrelled about that aswell, as they did about the Discipline. But it was then the open confession both of the Bishops and of the Puritans, that both parts embraced a mutual consent in Doctrine, only the difference was in matter of inconformity: Then hitherto there was no Puritan Doctrine known.  
The first disturbers of this uniformity in doctrine were Barret and Baro in Cambridge, and after them Thomson. Barret and Baro began this breach in the time of that most reverend Prelate Archbishop Whitgift.  
Notwithstanding that these had attempted to disturb the Doctrine of our Church, yet was the uniformity of Doctrine still maintained.  
For when our Church was disquieted by Barret and Baro, the Bishops that then were in our Church, examined the new Doctrine of these men, and utterly disliked and rejected it: And in the point of Predestination confirmed that which they understood to be the Doctrine of the Church of England against Barret and Baro, who oppugned that doctrine.  
This was fully declared by both the Archbishops, Whitgift of Canterbury, and Hutton of York, with the other Bishops and learned men of both Provinces, who repressed Barret and Baro, refuted their doctrine, and justified the contrary, as appeareth by that Book, which both the Archbishops then compiled.  
The same Doctrine which the Bishops then maintained, was at divers times after approved, as in the Conference at Hampton Court, as will be hereafter confirmed. And again it was confirmed in Ireland, in the Articles of Religion, in the time of our late Sovereign, Articulo 38.  
The Author of the Appeal pleadeth against the Articles of Lambeth, and justifieth the Doctrine of Barret, Baro and Thomson, averring the same to be the Doctrine of the Church of England.  
This he doth not by naming of those men, whose names he knew would bring no honour to this cause: but by laying down and justifying their doctrines, and suggesting that they who maintained the doctrines contained in the Articles of Lambeth, are Caluinists and Puritans: So that those Reverend Archbishops, Whitgift and Hutton, with the Bishops of our Church, who then lived, are in his judgement to be rejected as Puritans.  
The question is whether of these two positions we must now receive for the doctrines of our Church: that which Barret, Baro and Thomson would have brought in, which doctrines were then refuted and rejected by our Church: Or that Doctrine which the Bishops of our Church maintained against these men, which Doctrine hath been since upon divers occasions approved? If there were no more to be said, I dare put it to the Issue before any indifferent judges.   

CHAP. 3. An examination of the respective pretended decree of Predestination.  
THe Author of the Appeal, undertaking to maintain the Doctrine of the Church of England, refuteth that which hitherto hath been taken for the Doctrine of our Church; and maintaineth the doctrine of the Pelagians, striving to make that to be understood the Doctrine of our Church. A bold attempt, whether he doth it through ignorance, or open malice to trouble the Church with these doctrines, which have troubled so many Churches: that himself knoweth best. But that this he doth, it is apparent, by that which he hath written, and will be made more apparent by that which must now be said in the necessary defence of the truth, and of the doctrines of our Church.  
The poisoned doctrines of the Pelagians were never well known before Saint Augustine discovered that danger. The sum is to pull down the power of God, and to set up the power of Man. This they attempted to do by defacing the grace of God. And because that could not be done, without controlling the Doctrine of Predestination, this they have likewise attempted. Predestination is fashioned into a new mould by these men, who have made it not to depend upon God, but upon Man: That God himself and his high and holy purpose and will must depend upon somewhat in man, must expect man's Free will and merits. by this means they saw that grace might easily be defaced. So that the Question is, whether that the fountain of grace be in God, or in Man: For they take it from God's good will and purpose, and place it in man's merits. This is the wisdom of the Pelagians: which the Author of the Appeal seemeth to embrace, and, as well as he can, persuadeth others to do so: For first he laboureth to corrupt the doctrine of Predestination, and then to deface the doctrine of Grace: First against the doctrine of Predestination he hath brought nothing, but the old and worn objections of the Pelagians: Finding no other he was glad to take them, that he might seem to say somewhat against Predestination. Which objections albeit Saint Augustine and others of the ancient Fathers have answered, and refuted long ago; yet that thing moveth not this man: somewhat must be said to deceive the simple, that will be deceived. First I will examine one sentence of his Book, by which we may understand his meaning in the point of Predestination: The sentence is this. Pag. 58. speaking of the 17 Article, he saith.  
In all which passage there is not one word, syllable, or apex touching your absolute, necessary, determined, irrespective, irresistible (in other places he addeth Fatal necessitating) Decree of God, to call, save and glorify Saint Peter, for instance, infallibly, without any consideration had or regard to his Faith, Obedience, Repentance; and to condemn judas as necessarily without any respect had at all to his sin: This (saith he) is the private fancy of some particular men.  
The Author of the Appeal doth often charge some men with a Doctrine, which no man did ever maintain. For I say, he is not able to prove, that any have maintained the Doctrine of predestination, in those terms which he proposeth. Indeed Pelagius and his Followers, and amongst them this Author, have made these objections against the Doctrine of Predestination: We use not th●se terms we reject them, we need them not, we find them not in Scripture, we have enough in God's Word to maintain this Doctrine. Touching that which he saith of judas, that some should teach, that by the decree of God, judas should be condemned, without any respect to his sin; I suppose it will be hard for him to find any that teacheth so in those terms. Calvin I suppose is the man he meaneth: But Calvin in many places saith the contrary, and confesseth that wicked men are damned justly for their sins: that God's mercy appeareth in them that are saved, and his justice in other. He saith indeed of the reprobate: Principium ruinae & damnationis esse in eo, quod sunt à Deo derelicti: which this Author will also confess, because he can say nothing against it.  
But to open this point a little further. It must be confessed that whilst some have strayed too far on the left hand, touching the respective decree, that God for respects in men hath predestinated them: Others in zeal to correct this error, have gone somewhat too far on the right hand; teaching that Predestination is a separation between men and men, as they were found even in the Mass of mankind uncorrupt, before the Creation, and the fall of Man. It is true that this Counsel of God, was before the Creation and Fall. But here we seek upon what ground first presupposed, this counsel of God proceeded. Saint Augustine was clear in this, that God's purpose of Predestination presupposed the fall of Mankind, and the corrupt mass of mankind in sin. And verily this opinion hath such firm grounds of Scripture, that (so far as I can judge) are unanswerable: For the Apostle teacheth that Predestination and Election are in Christ. Ephes. 1.4. As he hath chosen us in Christ, before the foundations of the World: and v. 5. Who hath predestinate us to be adopted through jesus Christ in himself: And verse 11. In whom we were chosen when we were Predestinate. Now if Predestination be in Christ, it must be acknowledged that this counsel of God had respect to the corrupt mass of mankind: For the benefit that we have in Christ appeared not in the state of innocency. Some have answered that the Angels had that benefit of their standing in Christ. To this I say, granting that the Angels had that blessing from Christ: yet this is a thing without doubting, and beyond all contradiction, that the doctrine of Predestination, as the Apostle teacheth it, is not for Angels, but only for men; not for men in the state of innocency, but for sinful men. In declaring the purpose of Predestination the Lord saith, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy: Then the counsel of Predestination, is the counsel whereby God showeth mercy where he will: But mercy doth presuppose misery, and a sinful estate in man: Again the purpose of God is conducted to his end by such means as God hath set, & the Apostle hath opened: that is, by Predestination, Vocation & justification to glorification, that is to the intended end. But vocation & justification cannot be understood of angels, but of men: & not of men with out sin in the estate of innocency, but of sinful men. For sinners are called to repentance: & sinners they must be that are justified from their sins. None are called to repentance and justified from sin, but sinners. And it is also certain that none are thus called and justified, but only they that are predestinated: Therefore Predestination doth not look upon the mass of mankind uncorrupt & innocent, but upon the mass corrupted. These things are set in such evidences of the Scriptures, that for my part I know not what can be said to impeach them. Upon these grounds we must confess, that both Predestination & reprobation do respect that sinful & corrupted mass of mankind.  
But between Predestination & reprobation, amongst many other, this is one difference, that all men for sin have deserved reprobation, but no man could deserve mercy to be delivered by predestination: Rom. 3.23. For there is no difference, for all have sinned, and are deprived of the glory of God. Then in the sinful estate of corruption all are found once a like, and all deprived of the glory of God. And what is this to be deprived of the glory of God, but to deserve reprobation? So he saith, Rom. 11.30. God hath shut up all in Unbelief: So that all that are received to mercy by Predestination, Vocation, justification, are taken out of the corrupted state of mankind, the rest are left in their sins. These we call men reprobate, that are left in their sins; and in the end justly condemned for sin. But why some are left in their sins, other delivered from their sins by Predestination, Vocation, justification, of this no cause can be given but the will of God.  
But saith our Author in that Article there is neither word syllable, or apex to prove, etc. Yes sir, there is somewhat, For in that Article Predestination is said to be The everlasting and constant purpose of God. It is said in the Article, that They that are predestinated, are called according to God's purpose: This is enough to prove all which they intent, and to overthrow your new Doctrine, that men are called in consideration of their Faith, Obedience and Repentance. The Article saith moreover, That they are justified freely. If freely, then without consideration of any thing foreseen in man. Thus whilst in curiosity you were seeking your apices, you stumbled and are fall'n into a dangerous pit, out of which God deliver you. I will do the best service I can to make you see these dangers.  
Your common Objection against them, that teach predestination to depend only upon God's will, is this. You say, They bring in a decree absolute, necessary, irrespective, irresistible, determined, fatal, necessitating. These Objections you borrowed from the Arminians, they had them from the Pelagians. But you say that You have read nothing of the Arminians. It seemeth that you are an excellent Scholar, that can learn your lesson so perfectly without instructors. If they who use these Objections take them from the Pelagians, than you see that the Doctrine which the Pelagians oppugned, is the same which you oppugn.  
St. Augustine had much controversy with the Pelagians. Pelagius taught that Grace is given to men in respect of their merits. St. Augustine refuseth this error of Pelagius, for which he was condemned for an Heretic in three Synods. Gratia Dei datur secundum merita nostra. This was the position which the Pelagians maintained, and which St. Augustine refuted. St. Augustin referreth the matter, to Gods will and purpose only. But this Pelagius denied, and said, that grace dependeth not upon Gods will only: He denied not the will of God, but said that Gods will had respect to merits foreseen. In this sense he saith, Gratia Dei datur secundum merita nostra. And in this sense the purpose of God was held by the Pelagians to be respective, as respecting somewhat foreseen in men predestinated. Pelagius himself said it respected merits: others said, that it respecteth faith foreseen: others devised the respect of works foreseen, which is all one with Pelagius his merits foreseen. The Arminians have added the respect of humility foreseen.  
Hence arise two opinions about Predestination. The one the Doctrine of the Church taught by St. Augustine, and Prosper, by St. Hierom, St. Ambrose, St. Gregory, St. Bernard, and the rest that herein followed St. Augustine: The other is the opinion of the Pelagians who oppugned this Doctrine.  
If the question be proposed, why God receiveth one to mercy and not an other? why this man, and not that? to this question all the Orthodox that have taught in the Church after St. Augustine answer, that of this taking one to mercy, and leaving an other, no reason can be given but only the will of God. The Pelagians and Arminians say, that Gods will herein is directed by somewhat foreseen in men Predestinated. Now that Predestination dependeth only upon God's will without respect to any thing foreseen in men, is as I said, the received Doctrine of St. Augustin, and of the Church following: For before St. Augustin, this thing came not in question, as himself in many places confesseth. The same is the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches. And this hath hitherto been received the Doctrine of the Church of England. I will add also, the same is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome, as Bellarmine delivereth it. 
Bellar. lib. 2. the great. & lib. arb. cap. 16.  For he concludeth thus, Restat igitur ut huius discretionis causa sit voluntas Dei, quae unum liberat quia ei placet, alterum non liberat quia non placet. Wherein he followeth the Doctrine of St. Augustin and the rest.  
Of these two opinions, the Author of the Appeal hath made choice of that which Pelagius held against the Church, and maintaineth it by the arguments which the Pelagians have used. For thus they objected against the Doctrine of St. Augustine, that he brought in a decree, absolute, irrespective, irresistible, determined, fatal, necessitating, and these be our Author's Objections.  
It must be confessed it is a wrong to lay to men's charge Doctrines in other terms than themselves do teach. These terms are not used by them, whom this man chargeth: We do not deal so with the Papists, or any other: For my part I mislike these terms: But if by this word decree there be nothing intended, but the purpose of God's election, I will not wrangle for words: Only I think that we may speak most warrantably in the words of the Scripture: For the holy Scripture hath furnished us with words sufficient. We find it there called the will of God, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the purpose of God, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Good Pleasure of God. These words suffice to sober minds to express this Doctrine.  
Then he chargeth us to teach that this decree is absolute. Because the Pelagians and their Followers infer an absolute decree, they should declare what they mean by this word absolute. If this be the meaning of the word, that God's purpose of Predestination dependeth upon the only will of God, and not upon any thing foreseen in men Predestinated, which God respected in Predestinating: then I affirm that this is the ancient and Catholic Doctrine of the Church, and the contrary is the Doctrine of the Pelagians. If this Author would speak for the Pelagians against the received Doctrine of the Church, then must he declare unto us what thing did move the will of God. And by this means he will teach us a thing which no man ever could speak to, to know the cause of Gods will. Dicat qui potest. I think he knoweth as little in this matter as other men. And yet he is bound to instruct us in this Mystery. For he that saith, the will of God dependeth upon something, is bound to show what that thing is upon which the will of God dependeth: But if it be independing and respecting nothing but itself, why then is it not absolute? And why then doth he with the Pelagians cast this against God's purpose of Predestination, that it is absolute?  
The next accusation is that this decree is necessary: Can any man give us a reason, why the purpose of God should not be necessary? Our Author writeth thus, Pag. 10. The will of God is the necessity of things, say your Masters out of Saint Augustine misunderstood: He that chargeth others with misunderstanding, should declare the true understanding, that they that misunderstand, may be informed. He doth not this, but we must all be supposed to misunderstand this thing in the understanding whereof he will not help us.  
There must be some cause of the necessity of those things that are necessary: What cause can this be? It must either be the will of God, or some other thing. The ancient Writers of the Church make it the will of God. If you can find any other cause, you must declare it. The will of God may truly be said to be the necessity of things, because it is the prime, high and necessary cause of things. If you grant not this, than you must point out unto us some superior cause: which because you cannot do, you must be contented with us to confess, that the will of God is not only necessary, but the necessity of things.  
Bradwardin; that worthy Archbishop of Canterbury, citeth out of Anselm, 
Brad. lib. 1. cap. 10.  his Ancient in the same See, divers things to this purpose: Anselm. 1. cur homo Deus: Si vis omnium quae fecit & passus est seire necessitatem, scito omnia ex necessitate fuisse, quia ipse voluit. And again, Omnis necessitas aut impossibilitas Dei subiacet voluntati: illius autem voluntas nulli subditur necessitati, aut impossibilitati. Nihil enim est necessarium aut impossibile, nisi quia ipse ita voluit. And in this respect S. Augustin speaking of this powerful will of God, whereby he doth what he will & suffereth even evil things, that he may turn them unto good, 
Enchir. cap. 96.  saith, Nisi hoc credamus, periclitatur ipsum confessionis nostrae initium; quia in Deum patrem omnipotentem credere confitemur: Neque enim ob aliud veraciter omnipotens diceretur, nisi quia quicquid vult potest, nec voluntate cuiuspiam creaturae voluntatis omnipotentis impeditur effectus. And again, Voluntas Dei omnium quae sunt ipsa est causa. 
De Genes. contra Man. lib. 1. c. 2.  Si enim habet causam voluntas Dei, est aliquid quod antecedit voluntatem Dei, quod nefas est credere. Upon these grounds the ancients conclude, that the will of God is necessary, that it is the cause of all necessity in things, and therefore may well be said to be the necessity of things.  
But why is this cast upon us as an error, that we teach that the purpose of God's predestination is necessary. Will this man say that it is not necessary, but contingent? one of the two he must say. If necessary, then is he idle that objecteth this against predestination. If contingent, than he runneth blindfold into an high blasphemy, pronouncing the purpose of God to be contingent. It may be amongst the late Arminians, who never care what they speak or write, some may be found to utter such absurd blasphemies. But these men we leave to their own humours, which forsake understanding, godliness and piety. The next accusation of this Author and the Pelagians is, 
Lib. 1 contra Pelag & Calest. cap. 6.  that this decree is irrespective. S. Augustine as before I related, affirmeth in divers places, that Pelagius taught that the grace of God is given in respect of merits. In this respect Pelagius and his followers held the decree respective, as this man doth. He must tell us what Gods purpose respected, and he must give us a reason why he was so bold, as to make this a doctrine of the Church of England, which was first invented, and always afterward maintained by the Pelagians against the Church.  
The next accusation is, that the purpose of Predestination is irresistible. This objection is much used by the Arminians taken from the Pelagians. This was first devised to set forth the glorious power of Freewill. If the question be moved, whether Freewill may resist grace? it is apparent naturally in the unregenerate, it may resist, it doth daily resist: according to that Act. 7 51. You have always resisted the holy Ghost. But if the question be moved of them that are called according to God's purpose, whether they resist the grace of their calling (in which the Apostle teacheth that there is the exceeding greatness of God's power: and what is that but God's omnipotent power? 
Ephes. 1.18.  The eyes of your understanding being enlightened, that you may know what the riches of the glory of his inheritance of the Saints, & what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward, who believe according to the working of his mighty power. Now we believe by the power of his calling, therefore this exceeding greatness of his power is in his calling: For the first grace that is wrought in us is faith, which is wrought according to this power of his calling.) If therefore the question be of them that are thus called according to his purpose, and according to this great power; then, removing the humour of contention, the truth will easily appear. For this power of God doth so order the will of man, that the will of man cannot but be willing to receive this grace, when it is thus ordered, framed and wrought upon; for the power of working is in grace: grace worketh, converteth nature and healeth it: nature is wrought upon, converted, and healed. So the question is whether nature in this case doth resist the omnipotent power of God? 
Lib. de corrept. & gratiae ca 14.  S. Augustine saith, Deo volenti salvum facere hominem, nullum hominis resistit arbitrium. But than saith our Author, it must follow that the will of God is irresistible.  
I demand from whence he had this objection to dart against God's Predestination? it is apparent that it cometh out of the same quiver out of which he had all the rest. I must entreat him to observe this objection more exactly: and by this he may find against whom he disputeth: for the blessed Apostle layeth down these things in order: First the doctrine, which this Author oppugneth; secondly, this man's objection against that doctrine: and lastly, the answer to this objection. Ro. 9.18. etc. The doctrine in this Apostolical conclusion: Therefore he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will, he hardeneth. The objection in these words: Then thou wilt say unto me, why doth he yet complain, who hath resisted his will? The answer in these words: Nay, but o man who art thou that repliest against God? shall the thing form say to him that form it, why hast thou made me thus? Our Author must consider against whom he maketh this objection, when he accuseth God's purpose of predestination to be a decree irresistible: For the Apostle hath met with this objection: Who hath resisted his will? 
Lib. de Praedest. Sanct. cap. 6.  The Apostle saith not that men may resist this will of God, but he saith that this manner of objecting is replying against God. S. Augustine observed thus much. Voluntati eius quis resistit? Numquid responsum est ab Apostolo; o homo falsum est quod dixisti? non; sed responsum est ô homo quis tu es, qui responsas Deo? And that which the blessed Apostle hath taught in this one objection we may by good ground and warrant from the Apostle judge accordingly in all the rest of these accusations and objections, which are here brought against the doctrine of Predestination, that all these objections are nothing else but replying against God. How could such a desperate conceit come into the hart of one that professeth the Gospel in our Church? What this Author may think hereof I know not: but verily I should tremble, if I were found in such a case, in plain terms, opposite to the Apostle; objecting that which the Apostle hath so severely repressed.  
An other accusation against Predestination is, that it is determined. I think the man did not use much premeditation in these things, but took them upon the credit of some that he trusted. For that the purpose of God should be determined, did ever any man doubt? The very word propositum, the purpose of God doth prove a determination. And he may read that neither Herod, nor Pontius Pilate, nor the Gentiles, nor the jews, in showing their greatest malice against Christ and his Apostles, and in exercising their greatest cruelty, 
Act. 4.28.  could go no further, nor do no other thing, than whatsoever the hand and Counsel of God had determined before to be done: This was never doubted, no not amongst the Pelagians, that the Counsel and purpose of God is determined. Only the question is what doth Determine God's purpose? whether his own will or man's Freewill? If this man's purpose be to give this to man's free will, than he cometh home to the Pelagians. If he confess this determinating power to be in God's will; then to what end doth he object this, as a thing absurd, that the decree is determined?  
The last accusation is, that they who hold the Doctrine of Predestination bring in Fatal necessity. As he useth this objection, so the Pelagians used it, and urged it against St. Augustine. St. Augustine complaineth of such accusers of his Doctrine: 
Lib. de don● pursue. Cap. 12.  Pelagiani nobis obijciunt, quod fato tribuamus Dei gratiam: Ipsi potius Dei gratiam fato in parvulis tribuunt, qui dicunt fatum esse, ubi meritum non est. And in an other place: Nec sub nomine gratiae fatum asserimus. 
Ad Bonif. lib. ● cap. 5.  — Si autem quibusdam omnipotentis Dei voluntatem placet fati nomine nuncup●ri, profanas quidem verborum novitates evitamus, sed de verbis concendere nolumus.  
This Author taketh his pleasure to use the same Objections against Predestination, which the Pelagians used. But the indignity is, that whilst he is thus wrangling against our Church with the Pelagians, he must be supposed (forsooth!) to maintain the Doctrines of our Church; as if our Church had need of such maintainers. Who did accuse the Doctrine of our Church? For now he hath done with the Gagger, he is turned to others who charge not the Doctrine of our Church. Th● Doctrine of our Church hath been, and will be maintained by other men and means: We need no Pelagians to help us herein. This man hath more dishonoured our Church; and slandered our Doctrines, than ever did any member of our Church: This is plain dealing without malice. For if he were not plainly told of his errors, how could he see them and redress them? as our hope is he will. But to proceed, St. Augustine sporteth himself with the folly of such, as charge him to induce fatal necessity under the name of grace. Potest enim hinc similiter stultus fati assertorem Apostolum putare vel dicere. 
Ibid.  Quum enim propterea nobis calumniantur, dicentes nos gratiae nomine fatum asserere, quia non secundum merita nostra dari dicimus gratiam Dei: proculdubio confitentur quod ipsi secundum merita nostra gratiam dari dicant. And verily we can say no less to this man, than Augustine said to the Pelagians, that in making these objections, he doth secretly confess that the grace of God is given according to our merits. For there was never any that used these objections against Predestination, but held withal that conclusion, that the grace of God is given in respect of merits, and therefore this man sticketh not at this, but cometh home roundly to the same conclusion: as presently it shall appear.  

Adverse. calumniat. August. c. 1  Prosper found himself troubled with the same accusations, in that other part, of dereliction. Obijciunt (saith he) quod ex praedestinatione Dei, velut fatali necessitate homines in peceata compulsi cogantur ad mortem. Prosper shortly returneth this. Quisquis ex predestinatione Dei velut fatali necessitate homines in peccata compulsos cogi dicit in mortem, non est Catholicus.  
That Doctrine of the respective decree, which the Author of the Appeal nourisheth as a Viper in his bosom, doth indeed respect that conclusion of Pelagius; that Grace is given according to merits. For if grace be given according to some respects or virtues found or foreseen in men predestinated, than it must follow as Pelagius taught, that Grace is given according to merits: for in the end they will close: For this respective decree respecteth somewhat in the predestinated: What is that, but some virtue? and what is that but some merit? Thus he hath brought his respective decree to a fair issue, to join hands with Pelagius. Perhaps he may seek an evasion, that by a respective decree he meaneth not the decree of Predestination, but of Reprobation, which is in respect of sin. I could wish that he had been so advised, as to have reserved this refuge for himself: But he speaketh of the decree of Predestination, scornfully calling it our New Doctrine, and sometimes our decree, sometimes the Private fancy of some particular men.  
But himself putteth this matter out of doubt, in those words of his before cited, on the 17. Article. There is not (saith he) any word, syllable or apex touching your absolute, necessary, determined, irresistible, irrespective decree of God, to call, save and glorify St. Peter, for instance, without any consideration had or regard to his Faith, Obedience and Repentance, and to condemn judas as necessarily, without any respect had to his sin: This, (saith he) is the private fancy of some particular men.  
Now are we come to the instance of St. Peter: For to all other things I have spoken. In this instance he hath somewhat roundly opened himself: This taketh away that refuge, which he might have reserved, to say, that by his respective decree, he might have meant reprobation: That men that are forsaken are justly thrown into condemnation in respect of their sins.  
For to speak somewhat to this particular. If that be granted which we have proved before by evident Scriptures, that both Predestination and Reprobation respect the corrupt mass of mankind: This I say being granted: It followeth that God's justice did find a just cause to condemn all men, because all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God: But God in his mercy receiveth some to favour: Of this we can find no other cause but the mere and only Will of God: God in his justice condemneth other; of this beside the Will of God we find a cause, to be the sin of those men that are condemned. Here riseth a question, whether there be an absolute decree of Reprobation? If we understand an absolute decree to be such as dependeth upon the only will of God, without respect to any other thing; then I confess I cannot understand any such absolute decree in this: For those things are here understood absolute, which depend upon no other cause, but only the will of God. Now here besides the will of God, we find sin to be a just cause to condemn, and to reprobate. For this ground we take with Saint Augustine that Predestination and Reprobation do respect sin. And if besides the will of God, sin also be a just cause of condemnation, then, I understand not how any decree herein can be absolute. But if it should be further questioned whether dereliction of some in their sin be absolute? so far as my knowledge reacheth, I must yield that this may be called absolute; because in this there is no other cause but only the will of God: For seeing that all men are once found sinners, there may be a cause given why all men may justly deserve condemnation: The cause is apparent, that is, sin; but why any man should be saved no cause appeareth, but only the will of God, and his mercy to them whom he is well pleased to deliver from sin. Upon these grounds St. Augustine saith, Obdurationis meritum invenio, misericordiae meritum non invenio. But some object thus: If sin be the cause of condemnation and reprobation, then must all men be condemned and reprobate; for all have sinned. Whereby they would infer, that sin is no cause of condemnation and reprobation, but only the will of God: but I deny the consequence; for the true consequence should be this. If sin be the cause of condemnation and reprobation, than no man can find any cause in himself, why he should not be condemned and reprobate. For I suppose that the greatest Saints that ever lived, could find no cause in themselves why they might not be condemned and reprobate: I say in themselves: for if they look out of themselves upon Christ, than they find an high and only cause, the will of God in Christ, in whom he hath fully revealed his will and mercy to save sinners. For Christ was sent to save them that were lost, and to call sinners to repentance.  
Some may happily say, that these questions and quirks might be forborn, and not spoken of at all. I answer, I am of the same mind: But when the enemies of the Truth, Pelagians and Arminians are ever busy in stirring these questions, these busy heads impose a necessity upon them that love the Truth to maintain it, and by plain writing to walk safely and plainly even through the midst of Maeandrian crooks and windings of the Adversaries. The Church (saith Tertullian) hath a rule, and this rule hath no question, but such as Heresies bring in.  
Thus we see there may be a cause of condemnation besides the only will of God, but concurring with God's will; but of salvation no cause can be given but the only will of God. Yet our Author here undertaketh to find a cause besides the only will of God, though concurring with Gods will: This he doth in the instance of St. Peter: For he saith that There is neither word, apex, nor syllable to prove that God did call, save, and glorify St. Peter without any consideration had or regard to his faith, obedience and repentance.  
The better to understand this, we must clear some things which he hath confounded. They that deal not plainly confound many things of purpose, which must be distinguished that the matter may be cleared. He saith that Saint Peter was not called, saved and glorified without consideration, or regard of his Faith, Obedience and Repentance. This proposition in Truth containeth three propositions in it: And neither can he conclude three propositions at once, neither can any man answer to three at once. Therefore we must distinctly separate these three propositions, that his confusion may appear, and that a clear answer may be framed unto the point in question.  
Of these three propositions, the first is, St. Peter was not called without respect to his Faith, Obedience, and Repentance. The second is, Saint Peter was not saved without respect to his Faith, Obedience and Repentance. The third is, Saint Peter was not glorified without respect to his Faith, Obedience, and Repentance. These three things are not all of one kind. The two latter propositions we grant; the reason is, because salvation and glorification are in the nature of a reward. Now the Scripture witnesseth, that God will reward every man according to his Works: And therefore Saint Peter's faith, obedience and repentance shallbee rewarded with salvation, and glorification: And salvation and glory may be said to respect these goods works that went before.  
But the first of these propositions is, that Saint Peter was not called without respect to his faith, obedience and repentance. Here we close with him. I must charge with Pelagianism in that very point of this Heresy, for which Pelagius was condemned for an Heretic in the Synod of Palestina, as St. Augustine often relateth. In which Synod the Doctrines of Pelagius were condemned, as they were also in many other Synods: Concilio Carthag. 7. Concilio Melevitano: Concilio Arausica: And also condemned by the decrees of the Popes that then were, and the Emperors.  
He saith that St. Peter was not called without respect and consideration had to his faith, obedience and repentance: In denying this proposition he affirmeth the contradictory: That St. Peter was called in consideration and respect of his faith, obedience, and repentance. This is the same which the Church hath condemned in Pelagius. For Pelagius taught no otherwise but thus, Gratia Dei datur secundum merita nostra: In respect or consideration of our merits. This man teacheth that St. Peter was called in consideration or respect of his faith, obedience and repentance. This is evidently Secundum merita, as Pelagius understood merita. For those things which Pelagius and the Ancient Fathers, who wrote in his time, called merita, were no other than these which this man calleth faith, obedience, and repentance; Pelagius knew no greater merits than these. If St. Peter was called in consideration and respect of these things, than was that grace of his calling given in consideration and respect of these things, and so Gratia datur secundum merita: Secundum merita, whether we Translate, according to merits, or in respect and consideration of merits, all is one. I stand not upon any curiosity of Words, there is no difference in the matter. It followeth necessarily, that this man teacheth that Doctrine, for which Pelagius was condemned for an Heretic: let him shift this as he can.  
Here the Author of the Appeal may consider what wrong he hath done to the Church of England; in obtruding, for Doctrines of our Church, the old rotten Heresies of Pelagius. And let him also consider who doth now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 trouble and betray the Church of England. We teach with the Scriptures, and with the most Orthodox Ancient Church, that St. Peter was predestinated and called unto faith, obedience, and repentance. This man runneth with the Arminians into the depth of Pelagius his poisoned Doctrine. And was it not likely that he should run this way, who being a private man without authority, taketh upon him to impose Doctrines to our Church, to change those that are received, and in place thereof to revive the Pelagian errors, to bear men in hand that these are the Doctrines of our Church; to scorn men that have been reverenced for their Learning, and will be reverenced in the ages following; such as Archbishop Whitgift, Archbishop Hutton, Doctor Rainolds, Doctor Whittakers, and the other Bishops and Learned men, that joined with them, whom this man accounteth sometimes Caluinists and Puritans, sometimes that They were reputed learned, as if himself had that in Truth, which they did but seem to have: Who being a Priest of the Church of England, accuseth Bishops, his superiors, to be Puritans; as all must be to him, who yield not to his foolish and erroneous Doctrines: who in commendation of his own style calleth it an Exasperating style: Who in this exasperating humour careth not, and professeth that he careth not, what any think that please not this his humour: Who with such height of disdain sleighteth the diligence and industry of his brethren gathered at the Synod at Dort. Yet they who were employed in that service, were authorized by his Majesty's Commission, directed by his Instructions, and when they returned rendering to his Majesty an account of their employment, were most graciously approved of by his Majesty, only they cannot get the approbation of this Gentleman. It were good for him to consider these exasperating humours; they proceed from Pride: Here is neither Humility nor Charity to be found, and therefore not the Spirit of God. And what good can he do in God's Church, that cometh in Pride, and a spirit exasperating without charity and humility? Sir, I write not this in choler, nor in malice to your person: but I have told you plainly the censures of those men, with whom I have spoken in this matter; both of the higher sort in the Church, who are your Fathers; & of inferior rank, who are your Brethren. I omit the censure of the Laity. I speak of them that are able to judge of your spirit. And because they have observed these things in you, I thought the best service I could do you, was plainly to let you know these things that you may amend them.  
It were good and necessary for you to understand how you have been fetched over by those cozening companions the Arminians, who have plunged you in with themselves in the depths of Pelagius. Their end in devising that respective decree is, that Predestination should not be ruled by God's will, and eternal purpose, but by man's free will. And this is the end which you must embrace, unless God turn your heart, and warn you to avoid these dangerous and pernicious doctrines, wherein you draw the yoke with Pelagius. God make you to see your error, and to make some satisfaction to the Church of England, whom you have so much wronged.  
We say in this, as Saint Augustine said in the like. Promisit Deus, quae ipse facturus erat, non quod homines facturi erant, 
De praedest. sanct. cap. 10.  quum Abrahae promiserat in semine eius fidem gentium: quia etsi faciunt homines bona, ipse tamen facit ut faciant, quae praecepit. Alioquin ut Dei promissa compleantur, non in Deised in hominum est potestate. That which Saint Augustine saith here of the promise of God, is in like manner true in the purpose of God's Predestination. For God doth predestinate that which he himself will do, not that which men would do. For albeit men according to God's purpose are called, do believe, are justified, walk in obedience & repentance, and other good works, yet it is God that worketh that which he predestinateth, and worketh according to his own exceeding great power faith in men, charity, and hope, and maketh them walk in obedience: otherwise, that Predestination should have his effect, it should not be in God's power, but in man's power. Now if it be Gods calling that gave to Saint Peter faith, obedience and repentance, how then doth this man say that Saint Peter was called in consideration and respect of his faith, obedience and repentance? This is true that God giveth these graces: Now he saith, that Saint Peter was called in respect of these graces: what can follow but this, that God giveth these graces to Saint Peter, in respect of these graces. Which were to run giddy in a circle.   

CHAP. 4. A prevention of such answers, as may be made against this that hath been said.  
SOme happily may object, that this is not so plain Pelagianism: For Pelagius taught that there was somewhat in Nature, that did cause God to confer grace, but this man seemeth to say, that God giveth grace not in respect of nature, but in respect of grace: For faith, obedience and repentance are graces: and if in these respects God give grace, than it is grace that draweth grace, and not nature.  
This objection, as it may proceed from the Pelagians; is of no validity: For Saint Augustine doth witness that Pelagius himself did confess grace in words, but in truth denied it. I will not think that this man doth so collude in this word Grace: But because he followeth the same course which the Pelagians held, whether wittingly, or as I rather think, unwittingly: We may not suffer the grace of God, whether wittingly, or unwittingly to be defaced. The Pelagians when they speak of faith, and charity, and such like graces, give but smooth words to colour their meaning, and to deceive the simple: Some of them do more plainly open themselves. john Scotus who was the greatest Pelagian that lived in his time (for it was he that brought in the doctrine of Meritum ex congruo, which some of the most learned Papists, amongst whom we may account Franciscus Victoria, do confess to be the true doctrine of Pelagius. Victoria speaking of that doctrine, De merito ex congruo; saith plainly, Haec erat bona pars erroris Pelagianorum, 
R●●ect. 1. de potest.  si ego quicquam intelligo. Scotus then teacheth that faith, charity and repentance may be had ex puris naturalibus. Concerning faith he saith: 
Zib. 3. dist. 23▪ Quest. 1.  Fide acquisita ex puris naturalibus potest homo assentiri omnibus revelatis à Deo. And a little after. Hoc igitur tenendum est tanquam certum, quod revelatorum in Scriptures est nobis acquisita fides generata ex auditu & actionibus nostris, qua eis firmiter adhaeremus. And speaking of faith infused, he saith. De fide infusa quomodo sit ponenda in nobis, hoc non est ita certum an fit, vel quomodo sit ponenda in nobis. After the same manner he speaketh of charity. Lib. 3. Distinct. 27. Quaest 1. & dist. 28. Now seeing these be their positions, it is not much material what words they give; when speaking of grace, they intent to give all to nature in the end. The subtle Doctor saw that they who bring in the respective decree, affirming that God in conferring of grace respecteth somewhat in man, must needs yield that the thing respected in man, must be nature, nothing but nature. And therefore Scotus, being a Famous Pelagian, granteth that roundly, because he perceived that the respective decree cannot stand without this ground.  
But others are or seem to be offended at such gross proceedings, and therefore they would temper this mortar, and daub it up thus: That it is not Nature but Grace that God respecteth. Thus they would in words mollify the horror of the other opinion, and yet they retain the same absurdities. The Author of the Appeal is running on with these; but God knoweth which way he is going, for he himself knoweth not. He saith, God called Saint Peter in respect of his Faith, Obedience, and Repentance, and then he thinketh, that he hath well said, in laying this respect not upon nature, but upon grace, as he thinketh: But he doth not understand the absurdity that this draweth after it. For if God called Saint Peter in respect of his Faith, Obedience, and Repentance; then were Saint Peter's Faith, Obedience and Repentance some cause why he was called; and therefore before his calling. But in true Divinity Saint Peter's Faith, Obedience and Repentance, are the effects of his calling, not the cause; and come after the calling, but go not before it. It may well be said that God justified him in respect of his calling, and God called him in respect of Predestination, and God predestinated him, Secundum propositum, in respect of his purpose: For so Saint Augustine reasoneth, that for the grace of Predestination, we have the grace of God's calling, that is grace for grace: And for the grace of his Calling, we have the grace of justification, that is, grace for grace. But the Ancients that reasoned thus, always observed that the Consequent grace might be given for and in respect of the Precedent grace: but that the Precedent grace might be given for or in respect of a Subsequent grace, there was never Orthodox Writer that taught so: Yet the Pelagians and after them the Arminians, seeming willing to avoid the danger of that Rock, at which so many have made Shipwreck, that grace is given for some respects in nature, to avoid this absurdity, they labour to mollify the matter, but run still upon the same danger: They change the manner of speaking, and say that a Precedent grace is given in respect of subsequent grace, as this man saith, When he holdeth, that the grace of calling is given in respect of Faith and Obedience, which are subsequent graces.  
But this is nothing else, but for the love to hold with Pelagius, to say something; Wherein they forsake Understanding, Reason, Divinity, and Philosophy, and speak Non sense. For that I call Nonsense, that is against Divinity, Philosophy and Common reason, as this is, which maketh a subsequent grace to be the cause of a Precedent grace; to set the effect before the cause. And because in this manner of speech, there is nothing to satisfy the understanding of a Divine or a Philosopher, it is apparent, that this was devised for none other end, but only to dazzle the ignorant with Words without Understanding: But a matter of this nature will not be carried with empty Words.  
And in so high a point of Divinity, to speak without express Scriptures, is a sign that they presume too much, either upon their own wit, or upon other men's weakness. Their end is, that if thus much might be obtained, that God giveth the precedent grace for or in respect of the consequent, they might with more ease afterward fall into the plain terms of Pelagius. For howsoever they may palliate the matter with strange Words not understood, yet the Truth is, as Scotus confesseth, that if God's grace be given in respect of any thing in man, that can be nothing but nature. For in man, before he be called, there is nothing but nature.  
And therefore the plain Doctrine of Scotus, that a man may merit grace Ex puris naturalibus, standeth more probable in reason, than this opinion which deviseth a subsequent grace to be the cause of a precedent grace: For as this is against Divinity, so the reason of the Natural man refuseth it.  
The graces of God are ordered, and they that would disorder them, trouble the whole frame of our salvation. For God hath set the order: From God's purpose proceedeth Predestination, from Predestination Calling, from Calling Faith and justification, from justification Obedience and all fruitful works. The first grace that we apprehend is Calling: And therefore before we are called, there is nothing in us but nature. If then God respect any thing in man, in respect whereof he calleth him, that can be nothing but nature and free will.  
This the Pelagians taught plainly; but some following the Pelagians are ashamed to utter themselves so plainly: They strive to handle the matter more finely, but whilst they seek fineness, they have lost their wits. Surely they have forsaken reason and understanding. Now it is not possible that from nature and freewill any grace should rise: because the Lord saith, 
john 3.6.  That which is borne of the flesh is flesh, and that which is borne of the spirit is spirit. Here be two principles set, one in Nature, the other in Grace: The principle of grace and all good motions is the Spirit: the highest principle of nature and natural motions is the Flesh: Therefore no grace of the spirit can proceed from the flesh; but nature and freewill is nothing but flesh.  
Again, the order, wherein the Blessed Apostle setteth down these things, the purpose of God, predestination, calling, justification, glorification, doth prove that a precedent grace may be some cause to draw after it a subsequent grace; but for a subsequent grace to be any manner of cause to draw a precedent, this is impossible. The blessed Apostle saith: All things fall out for the best to them that love God, to them that are called according to his purpose.  
Before I come to that which I intent, I would here first remove a scruple, which the Pelagians stumble at, in those words of the Apostle: To them that love God: From these words they infer, that God respecteth them that love him; But the Apostle expoundeth himself in the words following: To them that are called according to his purpose: For these are they who love God; who understand that Gods love prevented them and called them according to his purpose. He that hath the knowledge of this love of God, must needs love God again: but this love beginneth by Gods preventing love, as St. john saith: Herein is love, not that we loved God, 
1 john 4.10.  but that he loved us, and sent his son to be a reconciliation for our sins. There be some that begin to love, but fall away and continue not to the end. Of these St. Bede, in his Expositions collected out of Saint Augustine, 
Bed. in Rom. 8.  expoundeth this place thus. Apostolus cum dixisset: scimus quoniam diligentibus deum omnia cooperantur in bonum, sciens non nullos diligere Deum, & in eo bono usque in finem non permanere; mox addidit; his qui secundum propositum vocati sunt: Hi enim, in eo quod diligunt Deum, permanent usque in finem. Thus much to remove this scruple, that no occasion be left to the Pelagians. Now to proceed. The Apostle saith, All things fall out to the best, to them that are called according to God's purpose: Then God's calling is according to his purpose. If any man should say, that God's purpose were according to his calling; should he not invert the Words of the Apostle, and falsify his Doctrine? Then his calling is according to his purpose; but his purpose may not be said to be according to his calling: because the calling dependeth upon his purpose, but not the purpose upon the calling. The purpose is a cause of the calling, but not the calling a cause of the purpose. Now if we proceed from Vocation to justification, we shall understand the same. For as Vocation dependeth upon God's purpose of Predestination, so doth our justification depend upon Vocation; and as this was to pervert the Apostles words, and to falsify his doctrine, as before I said, to say that God's purpose was according to his calling: So if a man should say, as this Author saith, that God's calling is according to faith, obedience and repentance; this man should in like sort pervert the Apostle his words, and falsify his doctrine. For justification, faith, obedience and repentance, depend upon God's calling, but his calling dependeth not upon them: they are given according to his calling; but his calling is not according to them: And therefore they are given for and in considetation of his calling; but that God's calling should be for and in consideration, or regard of these things, which Gods calling draweth with it, and after it; is a thing absurd not only in the judgements of Orthodox Writers, but even in the judgement of Pelagius himself, and of Scotus, and of the most learned of that side; who thought it more probable and agreeing more with reason to say that the grace of God is given according to merits, then to devose this strange fancy, that a subsequent grace should be the cause of a precedent grace. This I say is not a private fancy of some particular men, but such a thing as was never uttered by any sober or learned writer. And because heresy goeth not without absurdities, it may be called either the Arminian heresy, or the Arminian absurdity. For besides Arminians, no man writeth thus.  
I may not omit to observe in the last place, that our Author's words cross the words of the 17. Article; which he professeth to maintain. For the article speaking of Predestination saith. They which be endued with such an excellent benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose, by his spirit working in due season, they through grace obey their calling, they are justified freely, they be made the sons of God by adoption, they be made like the image of his only begotten son jesus Christ, they walk religiously in good works, and at length by God's mercy they attain to everlasting felicity.  
These words of the Article contain the true Apostolical doctrine: For the calling of God is here said to be according to God's purpose; and justification, obedience, walking religiously in good works, these things are declared in the Article to follow the calling as effects thereof.  
But this man, the new maintainer of the articles and of the doctrines of our Church, perverteth this Apostolical doctrine contained in the article. For he saith, that the calling is according to faith, obedience and repentance: contrary to that which is contained in the article. The article maketh faith, obedience, and repentance, to be the effects of calling, and to follow it, and proveth consequently that the calling is not according to these effects, or in consideration and regard of these effects, but that these effects are according to the calling, and in consideration and regard of the calling: By this man's doctrine, the calling dependeth upon faith, obedience and repentance: by the doctrine contained in the article, these things depend upon the calling.  
Thus hath he clean perverted and crossed the doctrine contained in the article, and yet this man is thought fit to expound the Articles, and to declare the Doctrines of our Church. Thus much concerning his errors touching the matter of Predestination.   

CHAP. 5. Of perseverance in Grace, and falling away from Grace.  
THe question as Saint Augustine proposeth it, is of perseverance of the Saints in grace: As this man and the Pelagians propose it, of falling away from grace, or of the Apostasy of the Saints. The question is the same though diversely proposed: so that if we prove the perseverance of Saints to the end, then is that doctrine overthrown, that bringeth in the Apostasy of Saints.  
If this question be moved thus: Whether a man may fall away from grace: The proposition, by reason of the ambiguous acception and use of this word grace, may be both true and false. For this is true; a man may fall from grace both totally and finally. And this likewise true, a man cannot fall from grace neither totally nor finally. They who have a purpose to deceive take the generality of terms; and in universalibus latet dolits. Therefore before any true proof can be made in any disputation, the word that is ambiguous must be declared distinctly. In the Scriptures, and in those Writers that ground themselves upon the Scriptures, there is observed a double acceptation and use of this word grace. I am not ignorant that many distinctions are used of this word, and that Bellarmine confoundeth himself, and his reader with the multitude of distinctions of this word; but distinctions were invented to clear the point in question, and not to confound things. I rest therefore for our present purpose upon one distinction, which is plain and grounded in the Scriptures, and this it is. Grace is taken diversely according to diverse Fountains from which it floweth: For albeit all grace proceedeth from God, yet it proceedeth diverse ways from him; one way is, by the way of his eternal purpose: Thus proceedeth the grace of Predestination, and the grace of God's calling according to his purpose, and the grace of justification according to his calling, and consequently, according to his purpose. This grace is primary, constant and unchangeable: This is a free gift proceeding from the purpose of God, and is wrought in us by God's calling. 
Rom. 11.29.  Of this the Apostle speaketh. The gifts and calling of God are without repentance. This is one way by which grace proceedeth from God: Another way it proceedeth from God, and cometh to us by the way of Preaching. 
Matthew 13.  This way diverse graces come in diverse measures, as hte Lord hath taught in the Parable of the Sour. The Sower sowed the same Seed; but some fell by the Way side, and the Fowls came and devoured it up; by this are they described, who hear the word of the Kingdom and understand it not: Then cometh the wicked one and catcheth away that which was sown in their hearts. Other seed fell upon stony ground, where it had not much earth; and forthwith it sprang up, because it had not deepness of earth, and when the Sun was up it was scorched, and because it had not root, it withered away. By this are they signified, who hear the word and anon with joy receive it: Yet he hath no root in himself, but dureth but for a time; for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended. Thirdly, some fell amongst Thorns, and the Thorns sprang up and choked it. By this he is noted, that heareth the word, and the care of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the Word, and he becometh unfruitful. Last is he that received seed into good ground, he that heareth the Word and understandeth it, which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth some an hundreth, some sixty, some thirty.  
I have stayed the longer upon the full recital of this Parable, because it proveth fully that which I intent to draw out of it. First, it is evident hereby, that by the Preaching of the Word divers graces are given. And the very Preaching of the Word freely to some Nations, is a great grace. In this respect it is called Verbum gratiae, Acts 20.23. This grace, though so great, yet may be lost: For many Nations have had it, that have lost it: Let them that have it make much of it whilst they have it: For who knoweth how soon it may be taken away? And this is one way to lose it, to suffer the Doctrines of our Church to be corrupted. It is the Spirit of God that setteth up Preaching, and directeth Preachers to one place, and not to another: As we read, Acts 16.6, 7, 9 This then is one great grace to have the Word of God Preached to a people; but when it is Preached some understand it not: others receive a greater measure of grace, when they receive the word with joy. Yet this dureth not in some, but is lost both totally and finally: Others are choked with the deceitfulness of the World, and these fall away also: Others are fruitful and bring forth plentifully. All receive the seed in some measure; and thereby receive grace in some measure: but three sorts lose it altogether, the fourth only receiveth it fruitfully. Then all these that receive some grace and lose it again, are said, and truly said, to fall away from grace. These graces that are thus lost are true graces: And men may proceed far in the practice of these graces, some farther than other, and yet may lose them. Then they that speak in general words, that a man may fall away from grace, speak at random. The question is Whether they that are according to Gods purpose Predestinated, called and justified, may lose these graces of their Predestination, Calling, and justification. This the Orthodox Church hath always denied. The Arminians who admit no other Predestination but conditional, affirm it; and none but Pelagians and Arminians. The Arminians hold that men may be often predestinated, often elected; and in the end may lose all. They labour to prove that all grace may be utterly lost, that the power of free will may be received, which then may show her power more fully, when there is no grace.   

CHAP. 6. That perseverance to the end is a gift of God given to true believers, flowing from God's purpose and predestination.  
FIrst I will produce reasons to prove, that perseverance in grace to the end is a gift of God given to true believers; and then answer his Objections. To prove this, the Scripture is evident to such as read it with a single heart and unblemished eyes. First of all, those words of the Apostle prove it. We know that all things work together for the best to them that love God, even to them that are called according to his purpose. For those whom he knew before, he Predestinated to be made like to the Image of his Son, that he might be the first borne amongst many brethren. Moreover whom he Predestinated, them also he called, and whom he called, them also he justified, and whom he justified, them also he glorified. The purpose of God is the Spring and Fountain from which all these graces are derived: The end is glorification: From the beginning to the end are Predestination, Calling and justification. The chain is so linked together, that it cannot be separated. He that God purposed to Predestinate, must needs be Predestinated; he that is Predestinated must needs be called; he that is so called must be justified; he that is so justified must be glorified: But no man can come to glory without the grace of perseverance to the end: Therefore where God giveth these graces, such a calling, such a justification, he giveth with all perseverance, without which no man can come to this end.  
The same is proved from the words of St. john. Whosoever is borne of God sinneth not, 
1 john 3.9.  for his seed abideth in him, and he cannot sin because he is borne of God. When St. john saith, that a man, once regenerate by the Spirit of God, sinneth not, and cannot sin: We may not understand this of sins of infirmity: For of such St. john himself saith: If we say we have no sins, 
1 john 1.8.  we deceive ourselves, and the Truth is not in us, if we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins. How then do these two agree together? First, we are all sinners and we must confess our sins: Secondly, a regenerate man sinneth not, yea cannot sin. These contentions of the Arminian faction, hath taught us to reconcile these places. For a man that is borne of God may sin; that is, fall into the sins of infirmity; but yet he can not sin, that is, he cannot fall back into the service and dominion of sin totally and finally. The thing which I especially observe out of these words is, that there is somewhat which is here called the Seed of God abiding in him that is once borne of God: And this declareth a regeneration which proceedeth from the purpose of God, and from that powerful calling which is according to his purpose. What this seed is, let any man declare: This is certain, all is not gone, all is not cut off by intercision; here is a Seed of God abiding: Call it what you will, all is one to our purpose: For whether this Seed of God be Faith, or the Word of God, or the Grace of God's calling according to his purpose, or the Spirit, or any of these, or all these: It proveth our purpose, that all is not gone, all is not fall'n away: If all be not fall'n away, than this man in whom it abideth can not fall totally. If Faith be the Seed, the Word of God soweth it, the call of God raiseth it, and makes it fruitful, 
1 Peter 2.3.  the Spirit of God quickeneth it: To this purpose St. Peter saith: Being borne again, not of corruptible Seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God which liveth and abideth for ever: The Word of God is said to live and abide for ever, because of the effect which it worketh, as some learned Interpreters have observed: For here he speaketh of the new birth, as Saint john did, of the incorruptible seed (as Saint john called it) the seed of God abiding, of the word of God whereby the grace of regeneration is given, which liveth and abideth for ever. This agreeth with that which St. john said of the same new birth.  
Saint Peter confirmeth this further in those words: Blessed be God the Father of our Lord jesus Christ, 
1 Peter 1.3.  which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again to a lively hope, by the resurrection of jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance immortal, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in Heaven for you, which are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation. It is hard to devose more express words to deliver this Doctrine of perseverance, than Saint Peter useth here: For he speaketh of them that are regenerate according to the purpose of God, when he saith, According to his abundant mercy he hath begotten us again; he saith, to a lively hope, and inheritance; the inheritance is said to be reserved for us in Heaven, and we are kept by the Power of God through faith unto it. If we be kept for it by God's power through faith, and it be kept for us; then he that denieth perseverance unto the end, must break this power of God by which we are preserved to the end: For what is this power of God that keepeth us through faith to the end, but the grace of perseverance to the end?  
The same Doctrine of perseverance, or of our preservation by God's power to the end, is confirmed unto us from the nature of Faith and of Charity. Of Faith the Lord saith: 
john 5.24.  He that heareth my Word and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death to life. The Lord speaketh of Faith, but this faith is not an Historical faith, nor a Temporary faith; for these do fade and have not this promise which this faith hath of which the Lord speaketh: Then what faith can this be, but such a justifying faith that proceedeth from the Calling of God according to his purpose? The Lord saith, that He who thus believeth hath everlasting Life: If he hath everlasting Life, than what Arminian or Pelagian can take this from him, that Christ saith he hath? Some may answer, that when it is said, he hath it, it may be understood, he shall have it. I stand not much upon that, for whether the Lord, that giveth everlasting life, say he hath it, or he shall have, it is not much differing: But yet I cannot but observe the Lords speech, who knew best how to speak. When he saith He hath it, his meaning is, that everlasting life shall be as firmly and truly given to him, as if he had it already in possession, which yet he holdeth but in hope.  
Now which of all the Pelagians dare say, that perhaps he may have it, and perhaps he may lose it, or that he may fall totally or finally from it, when the Lord saith he hath it? He could have said, he shall have it, but why doth he say He hath it, but only to teach us that true believers have such a grace here, which can not be lost? The Lord saith also of the man that hath this grace, that He shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death to Life. What is that, is passed? but to make this Doctrine sure, that there is such a grace given here which cannot be lost. Let the Pelagians wrangle as they will about loss of grace: this may be sufficient for us to rest in the plain and evident words of our Lord and Master Christ jesus. Thus we see that a true and lively faith carrieth with it undoubtedly the grace of perseverance unto the end.  
The same may be confirmed from Charity. I mean such charity whereby such a faith worketh, as was last described. Of charity the Apostle hath these words. Charity never faileth; though prophecy fail, and tongues shall cease, and knowledge shall vanish away.  
If any man shall here say, that this is spoken in respect of other graces that in this life we have use of, and go no farther. I answer, I admit that to be so: but here the Apostle saith, Charity never faileth. It is true, he numbereth up some graces that do fail. I grant that in the life to come we shall not have use of these graces that fail. The Apostle observeth a difference here between graces and graces: some for the use of this life only, others for this life and for that to come. Of these that are both for this life, and for that to come, he nameth charity which faileth never. If charity never fail, no not in the life to come; than it must follow that it never faileth in this life: because if it should fail in this life, than it must needs fail in the life to come. For no man shall have the glorious comfort of charity in that life, who looseth altogether the gracious comfort of it in this life. Charity never faileth; therefore it abideth for ever: therefore there are graces wherein true believers persevere to the end. Hereupon some Schoolmen say that perseverance is a grace, not really differing from charity: It is true that charity waxeth cold, and the charity of many may fail, and the faith of many may fail: but the purpose of God cannot fail: and those graces that proceed from God's purpose never fail them to whom they are so given.  
But because these controversies were not known in the Church, before the time of S. Augustine, and by him more diligently handled then by any other. For the ancient Fathers that lived before him, could not speak to these things which are brought in by Pelagius after they were dead, and therefore could not come to their knowledge: and indeed spoke somewhat securely as fearing no harm and not knowing that their words should after their death be perverted by the Pelagians, which made S. Augustine say, Vobis Pelagianis nondum natis securius loquebantur Patres Because, I say, before him none could, and after none did so exactly handle these things, as if he had been raised up▪ and reserved by God to do this service to the Church, (as no doubt he was.) I purpose here to ser down S. Augustine's doctrines in this particular, not by way of citing some sentences, but by a continued tract. I may sometimes upon occasions intermingle some things, but that shall be in a parenthesis. The whole body of this that followeth is S. Augustine's. Which I do the more willingly, because I am well assured, that the learned Bishops who were in the reformation of our Church, in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's reign, did so much honour S. Augustine, that in the collecting of the Articles and Homilies, and other things in that reformation, they had an especial respect unto S. Augustine's doctrines.   

CHAP. 7. Saint Augustine his doctrine in the matter of perseverance of the Saints.  

Lib. de pradest. Sanctor  FIrst this is true, that God by especial graces hath made a difference between Saints and other men. This is evident by those words. Quis te discernit? quid habes quod non accepisti? 
1. Cor. 4.7.  Who separateth thee? what hast thou that thou hast not received? This separation or distinction is not made by natural gifts. For no man can say that one man is made to differ from another by natural gifts, which are common to all men: it remaineth then that this difference is made by especial graces.  
(It is incredible to hear the folly and pride of the Arminians Grevincovius, one of them, was not afraid to answer these words of the Apostle, quis te discernit? with these words of his own cracked brain, ego meipsum discerno. But let S. Augustine proceed.)  
This separation whereby one man is made to differ from another, is the separating of some men, and taking them out of the mass of perdition, wherein others are left. That man is discerned or separated from the condition of other that is by mercy taken out; which is done by God's praedestination, calling, justification. Wherein we s●e and confess the miserable estate of all men, by that sin which Adam hath brought upon all his seed, that is, upon all men. We see and must confess the mercy of God, in taking some to mercy, and leaving other: they that are thus taken to mercy are said to be separated or to differ from other men.  
Then this grace of persevering to the end, is the gift of God in Christ. 
Lib. de dono persever.  Whether any have this grace, as long as he is living here, to us it is uncertain, as to us it is uncertain who are praedestinated. A man that believeth and liveth a godly life, albeit he live but one day, or less, hath this gift rather than one of many years, who but a little before his death shall depart from the soundness of faith. Now that this grace is given to men, it is evident by diverse Scriptures. 
Phil. 1.29.  To you it is given for Christ, that not only you should believe in him, but also suffer for his sake. The one of these things, belongeth to the beginning of faith, to believe: the other pertaineth to the end, to suffer. Yet both is the gift of God, because both are said to be given. Now can any man give a reason, why perseverance in grace to the end should not be given in Christ, to that man to whom it is given to suffer for Christ? or to sp●ake more expressly, to whom it is given to dye for Christ? And if this be given to them that die for Christ, who can say that the same grace of perseverance is not given to such as by sickness, or any other means dye in Christ. It is a more difficult thing to suffer death for Christ, yet both that which is more difficult, or less difficult is given by him, to whom it is easy to give both.  
Those things that are contained in the promises which God hath made to us for the nourishing and increase of our faith, we may, we must lay hold on: but God hath promised to give us this grace of perseverance unto the end. The Prophet jeremy saith: 
jer. 32.40▪  I will put my fear in their hearts, and they shall not depart from me. What other thing is this, which God promiseth here, but that this fear shall be such and so great, which God will give into our hearts, that we may perseveringly adhere unto God? Now that which God hath promised unto us, for that have we good warrant to pray. And therefore this grace of perseverance, is such a grace, as believers continually do pray for.  
(Saint Augustine hath observed out of that Exposition of the Lords prayer made by S. Cyprian, that almost in every petition we pray for perseverance.)  
1. Petition. Hallowed be thy name. We say (saith S. Cyprian) hallowed be thy name. Not that we ask of God, that it may be hallowed by prayers: but because we desire of him, that his name may be hallowed in nobis, in ourselves. But how is God sanctified by man, whom God himself doth sanctify? Yet because he hath said, Be you holy because I am holy; this we ask, this we desire, that we, who are sanctified in baptism, may persevere in that which we have begun to be.  
2. Petition, Aduentat regnumtuum. Do we here ask any other thing, then that his kingdom may come to us, which we doubt not shall come to all the Saints? Then they that are Saints, what other thing do they ask here, but that they may persevere in that sanctity which is given to them? For otherwise the kingdom of God shall not come to them, which assuredly cometh to none other, but only to them which persevere unto the end.  
3. Petition. Fiat voluntas tua in terra sicut etc. The Saints who do the will of God, saying, thy will be done, pray that it may be done, when it is already done in them. Why then do they yet pray that it may be done, but only that they may persevere in that which they have begun to be?  
4. Petition. Give us this day our daily bread. S. Cyprian showeth how perseverance is here also prayed for. We desire (saith he) that this bread may be daily given us, lest that we, who are in Christ, and daily receive the Eucharist, as the food of our souls, may be separated from the body of Christ, if by any grievous crime, or being excommunicate, we be forbidden to come to receive this heavenly bread. These things (saith S. Augustine) show plainly, that the Saints by prayer ask perseverance of the Lord, when in this intention they say, give us this day our daily bread, lest they be separate from the body of Christ, they pray that they may persist in sanctity.  
6. Petition. Lead us not into temptation.  
When the Saints pray, Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. What other thing do they pray for, but that they may persist in holiness? For if this gift of God be granted us (which no man can deny to be God's gift, seeing we are commanded to pray to God for it) this being granted to be the gift of God, that we be not lead into temptation, it followeth, that the Saints praying for, & receiving this gift, must needs hold perseverance in grace unto the end: for no man ceaseth to persevere, unless he be drawn away by temptation. If therefore this which he prayeth for be granted, that he be not lead into temptation, then surely by God's grace he persisteth in that sanctification which by God's grace he received. Thus far Saint Augustine out of Saint Cyprian. And now Saint Augustine in his own course. But in perseverance it is not as in other graces. We call him chaste, whom we know to be chaste, whether he persevere, or not persevere in chastity: and the like we say of other graces of God, that may be had or may be lost. We say he hath it, as long as he hath it: but if he lose it, we say then he had it. But in perseverance it is otherwise: For no man can be said to have had perseverance, but he that persevereth to the end: Therefore this is such a grace which many may have, but he that hath it, can never lose it. This grace may be obtained, but when it is once obtained, it cannot be lost through contumacy. Let any man, 
Dicat mihi quisquis auder.  that dare, tell me whether God cannot give that which he commandeth us to ask of him? God commandeth us to ask, that we be not lead into temptation: than whosoever is heard of God in ask this grace, is preserved from the temptation of contumacy, by which he might lose perseverance in grace; for he that is not lead into temptation, departeth not from God.  
After the fall of Adam, God would have it to pertain only to his grace, that man should come to him, and likewise to pertain to the same grace, that man should not depart from him: This grace he hath put in him, in whom we have our inheritance being praedestinated according to his purpose that worketh all things. And therefore as he worketh that we come to him, so he worketh that we depart not from him: wherefore it is said in the Psalms. 
Psal. 80.17  Let thine hand be upon the man of thy right hand, and upon the son of man, whom thou hast made so strong for thine own self, that we depart not from thee. Who is this man? Iste non est primus Adam in quo discessimus ab eo, sed Adam novissimus, super quem fit manus eius, ut non discedamus ab eo, saith Augustine. For Christus totus, all Christ with his members is for the Church, which is his body and his fullness. Therefore when the hand of God is upon him, that we depart not from God, v●rily the work of God cometh to us. For this is the hand of God, forasmuch as by the work of God and his power, it is wrought so that we are permanent with Christ in God: not as Adam departing from God. This is the hand of God, not ours, that we depart not from him. This, I say, is the hand of him that said, I will give my fear in their hearts, that they depart not from me. But we see that some depart; why doth one depart and not another? why is perseverance to the end given to some, and not to others? To this what can we say, but that the ways of the Lord are past finding out. Why is one received to mercy and not another, can any man give a reason but only Gods will? He hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. So he giveth the grace of perseverance to whom he will, and denieth it from whom he will. Yet in this the faithful must rest, that he that hath the gift of perseverance, is in the number of the praedestinated, the other is not. 
1. joh. 2.19.  For Saint john saith of such as depart. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. Quid est, quaeso, non erant ex nobis? What is the meaning of this, they were not of us? were not both they that departed, and they that continued, created of God? both borne of Adam? both called? both renewed in the fountain of regeneration? All this is true, but yet according to another separation they were not of us. What is that separation? God's book is open, we must not turn our eyes from it: the Scripture cryeth loud, let us hear it: before the beginning of the world they had not their part in him; they were not praedestinated according to his purpose, which worketh all things. For if thus had they been, than they should have been of us, and should without doubt have continued with us.  
Saint Augustine in his book the correptione et gratia, hath diverse things to this purpose, which because they conclude for perseverance in grace to the end, I think it not unfit that the reader be made acquainted with his reasons, the rather to satisfy the Author of the Appeal, that this is no new Puritan doctrine, as it pleaseth him to call it. And that he may more fully understand that this which we teach, is not the private fancy of some particular men, but the public doctrine of the Church.  

Lib. de correp. et gratia  Upon thos● words; Rogavi pro te Petre ne deficiat fides tua: Saint Augustine saith: What did Christ pray for here, but for his perseverance unto the end? And again. When he prayed that Saint Peter's faith should not f●ile: what other thing did he pray for, but that he might have a most free, 
Liber●imā, fortissimam, enuictiss man, perseverantissimam in fide voluncatem.  a most strong, a most invict, a most persevering will in faith to the end? (S. Augustine knew well that Peter sinned in denying his Master, and yet he did not doubt to say, that Christ prayed for him, and was heard for S. Peter's perseverance unto the end. Then it is not every sin that breaketh the course of perseverance, but a falling back into the dominion and service of sin.) Act. 13. 
Act. 13.48.  As many as were ordained to everlasting life, believed Who can be ordained to everlasting life, but by the grace of perseverance? Whosoever are delivered from damnation by the goodness of God's grace, there is no doubt but by God's providence the Gospel shall be preached to them, and they shall hear and believe and persevere unto the end in faith that worketh through love. 
si quando exorbitant.  And these if they sometimes go wrong, yet by reproofs they amend, and return again into the way which they left. Their faith which worketh through love, surely either faileth not at all, or if there be some defect, it is repaired in them before the end of their life. And that intercurrent iniquity which breaks in, is blotted; and perseverance is reputed unto the end, usque in finem perseverantia deputatur.  
But they who persevere not, but fall away from the Christian faith, and from a godly conversation, surely these men are not to be accounted in this number, no not then, when they lived well: they are not separated from that mass of perdition by God's praedestination, not called according to his purpose; but called amongst them of whom it is said, multi vocati, but not of them of whom it is said, pauci electi. And who will deny that these are elect, when they believe, and are baptised, and live godly? They may be said to be elect, sed à nescientibus, by such as know not what they shall be; not by him who knoweth that these had not perseverance. For some be called of us the sons of God for temporary graces which they have received: but unto God they are not such.  
Touching those Saints that are praedestinated to the kingdom of God, such an helping grace is given to them, that perseverance is bestowed upon them, not only that without it they cannot, 
joh. 15.16  but that with it they cannot but persevere. For he said not only, Without me ye can do nothing: but he said also; you have not chosen me; but I have chosen you, and ordained you that you go, and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit remain. In these words the Lord declareth, that he gave them not only righteousness, but also perseverance therein. For seeing that Christ ordained them to go and bring forth fruit, & that their fruit should remain, quis audet dicere, who dare say that peradventure it might not remain? For, the gifts and calling of God are without repentance: but then understand that calling which they have who are called according to his purpose. These receive such freedom by this grace, that albeit so long as they live here, they fight against the concupiscences of sins, & some creep in upon them, for which they p●ay daily forgive us our trespasses: yet they do not wilfully serve that sin that is to death, of which S. john saith, There is a sin to death, I say not for it thou shouldst pray. Of thi● sin, because it is not expressly declared, many & divers things may be thought: but I say that this sin to death, is a falling away even to death, from that faith which worketh by charity. Now albeit the Apostle saith of all regenerate men living orderly: 
Rom. 14.4.  Who art thou, that condemnest another man's servant? he standeth or falleth to his Lord: yet presently his words following respect the praedestinated. For he saith, He shall be established, for God is able to make him stand: then assuredly be giveth perseverance, that is able to establish them that stand, that they may stand most perseveringly, or to restore them that fall. For it is the Lord that raiseth up the bruised, Psal. 146. And therefore, he that rejoiceth, let him rejoice in the Lord. Hence it is that in this place of misery, where the life of man is a temptation upon earth, virtue is perfected in infirmity. What virtue? but that he that glorieth may glory in the Lord. And for this cause the Lord would not have his Saints to glory in their strength, no not in their perseverance in good: but to glory in him, which doth not only give them such an help as he gave to the first man, without which they could not persevere if they would; but in them also he worketh this that they shall will. Therefore is both the possibility, and will of persevering given to them from the bounty of divine grace. Thus hath S. Augustine at full declared himself in this particular.   

CHAP. 8.  
I Was willing to let S. Augustine be heard the longer in that cause, wherein he was most exercised against the Pelagians. The same doctrine as being the public received doctrine of the Church, hath been likewise taught by others. 
In Ephes. 1.  S. Ambrose saith, quos deus vocare dicitur, perseverant in fide, hij sunt quos elegit ante mundi constitutionem. He maketh perseverance a grace that dependeth upon God's calling: he meaneth, as himself expoundeth it, that calling which is according to God's purpose. And he saith again in the same place, hoc placuit deo, cuius consilium retractari non potest. 
Exhort. ad virgin. 2 Tim. 4, 7, 8.  This he proveth also from those words of the Apostle: I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith; from henceforth is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord the righteous judge shall give at that day: and not to me only, but to all them also that love his appearing. Then without perseverance no man can expect glory. And this grace is given not only to Saint Paul, and such excellent Saints as he was, but unto all that love the Lords appearing. 
Prosper. lib. de vocat. gentium. 1. 1 Cor. 1.8.  The same thing is taught by the Author of the book de vocatione gentium, who citeth that place: Who shall confirm you to the end that you may be blameless in the day of the Lord. And those words; Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? 
Rom. 8.35.  shall tribuation, or anguish etc. Charitas dei, saith he, qua eos diligit, quos inseparabiles facit, id est, usque in finem perseverantes: nam quid aliud est perseverare, quam tentatione non vinci? 
Greg. in 1 Reg. cap. 14. lib. 4.  The same is taught by Saint Gregory Qui non praedestinati sunt, saith he, sive audiant doctorum verba, sive non audiant, vocari in dei habitaculum nequeunt. And again he saith: Ab eo qui defecit, venire spiritus dicitur, ire ad eum qui perseveraturus est: quia alios in tempore deserit, alios assumit, nec tamen deserit.— in reliquum dirigitur spiritus, qui à gratia quam percipit, nunquam discedit.— quid est ergo qu●d dicitur à die illa, et in reliquum? nisi quia spiritus gratia sic recipitur, ut in ea electi usque in finem perseverare doceantur? And our venerable Bede, 
Beda in Rom. 8.  upon those words, scimus queniam diligentibus deum omnia cooperantur in bonum, saith thus. Sciens nonnullos diligere deum et in eo bono usque in finem non perseverare, mox addit, his qui serundum propositum vocati sunt: he enim in eo quod diligunt deum, permanent usque, in finem: et quid ad tempus inde deviant, revertuntur, et usque in finem per durant, quod in bono esse coeperaent. Saint Bernard holdeth the same course. 
Bern. de modo bene wuendi. serm. 20.  Salus perseverantibus promittitur praemium perseverantibus datur. Non est bonus, qui bonum facit, sed qui incessabiliter facit. And in another place, 
Lib. de pass. dom. cap. 14.  O sol iustitiae, benign jesus Christ, lucens in tua virtute, reddens temet ipsum in praemium sempiternum omnibus qui perseveraverunt in agone certaminis. Hunc splendorem nemo potest adipisci, nisi qui perseveraverit usque in finem. Abulensis followeth the same doctrine for he saith speaking of outward calling by preaching, and of that conversion which standeth in external profession. 
Tostat. in Mat. 22. q. 6 9  Dicuntur vocati quicunque per praedicationem conversi sunt ad fidem, et tamen non sunt omnes electi, quia non perveniunt omnes ad vitam aeternam. Nam licet quibusdam det deus gratiam conversionis, non that eye gratiam perseverandi in fide, vel operibus fidei, et ita pereunt. Eligere autem est dare gratiam istam perseverandi et perveniendi. He saith; many obtain diverse graces by hearing the word preached, amongst whom they that are elect receive the grace of persevering to the end, but they that are not elect, though they may attain to many graces, yet they may and do fall away, because this grace of persevering to the end is proper and peculiar to the elect.  
From the Schoolmen we are to look for no soundness in this point. For it is a hard thing for them to speak of grace who have it not: Many of them speak of grace like mere natural men. They wanted neither wit nor learning, but many of them wanted grace to speak of grace, as the Jesuits for the most part do at this day. Therefore I pass them over, and come to the time of Reformation. In which time, if I should produce the sentences of them that have been most learned and laborious in the reformed Churches, it would be a long work, and happily give no great satisfaction to the Author of the Appeal, and others whom I desire to satisfy. For how can he receive satisfaction from the judgement of late men, that seemeth to scorn their very names? As for Calvin, his name and doctrines are made odious, but why, I know not. If he hath written somethings amiss, as who writing so much, hath not slipped in many things? yet a charitable construction would help in many things: And admit he hath some things which cannot be excused; yet, if we consider the ancient Fathers, how often they have slipped and erred, we might be more moderate in censuring of others. In the Fathers we take that which they have done well, and the rest we pardon for that which they have done well. And why may we not do so with others? And what greater pleasure can a man procure to the enemies of the truth, then to speak evil and odiously of those men, whose service God hath used, and made them excellent instruments to make the truth known unto us? Some take it for a sign of such as are looking towards Popery, when they offer such a service to the Papists, as to speak evil of them, that have been the greatest enemies to Popery, the greatest propagators of the truth: but I censure none. Then leaving other Churches, we come home to our own Church.  
We have enough in the articles of Faith and Religion, to confirm the same truth, which hitherto we have proved. The Author of the Appeal hath gone wrong in two points: First, in the respective decree; which either he hath devised, or taken from the Arminians. Against this, we have heretofore showed that the 17. Article hath set forth the doctrine of Praedestination in a sound and wholesome manner: that God's calling followeth the purpose of God, and dependeth upon it: that faith, obedience, and repentance follow the calling of God, and depend upon it: but the calling of God doth not follow faith, obedience, and repentance, nor dependeth upon them. So did the 17. Article teach against the new device of this man. This I have observed before.  
The second thing wherein this man wandreth, is denying of perseverance, and scorning it as a Puritan doctrine. I must here again recite the 17. Article: And I would entreat any man, that hath his eyes set right in his head, to read and consider the words, the order and soundness of them: and th●n let him judge whether perseverance unto the end be not sound and roundly set down, and averred in the Article. The words are:  
Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby before the foundation of the world, he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation: wherefore they which be endued with such an excellent benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose by his spirit working in one season. They through grace obey the calling, they be justified freely, they be made the sons of God by adoption, they be made like to the image of his only begotten son jesus Christ, they walk religiously in good works, and at length by God's mercy attain everlasting felicity. Thus far the words of the Article.  
Can any man in any words declare perseverance more fully or plainly from the beginning by the means to the end, than here is done? For what is perseverance, but as S. Peter saith, a preservation or keeping of the Saints by the power of God to salvation? And how can it be better proved, then to draw it from the purpose of God, by predestination, by God's calling, by justification, by the work of God's spirit, by adoption, by being fashioned like to the image of Christ, by walking religiously in good works, and by this means to come to life everlasting? This is done in the Article: And this is the true doctrine of perseverance. They who are called according to God's purpose, and justified and sanctified, made the sons of God by adoption, walk religiously in good works and so at last attain to everlasting life, are they who have received the grace of perseverance to the end: thus doth that Article set forth this doctrine. But our Author saith, before they come to this end, they sin: And what then? God's calling is powerful indeed, according to his purpose: But it was not the purpose of God in calling us, to make us Angels, or to set us in such an estate wherein we should never sin any more; but to teach us humility he suffereth us to strive with sin, and teacheth us to fight against sin. And if in this battle we take a blow, yet he sustaineth our weakness, and will have us to glory in nothing that is in ourselves, but in our infirmities. And still in his mercy preserveth us from falling back from the faith, and keepeth us from presumptuous sins, and from that sin that is unto death.  
This perseverance you will say, is with great weakness. It is true, we cannot glory in our perfections, which are none. The Pelagians and Arminians, who glory in themselves, in the power of their wills, cannot taste this doctrine. But we glory in God, that through many and manifold imperfections and infirmities of ours bringeth us by this grace unto the end. This work to bring us through many infirmities to an happy end, is the work of God, which no power in the world can defeat.   

CHAP. 9 An examination of the Arminians definition of grace.  
FOr the better understanding of these men that plead against the grace of God, We must observe that one especial ground of their error is in this, that they conceive and understand amiss of grace. They take it for another thing then the Scriptures have declared, and the Church of God from the Scriptures have taken it to be. And therefore when they define grace, they say it is a moral persuasion. Arminius himself saith, it is lenis suasio: they admit no power of God here.  
And are not these a strange kind of men, that will make unto themselves their own grounds, and not take their grounds from the Scriptures? If this ground, which they so blindly beg were true, then were it indeed easy for them to prove many of their conclusions: that alike or general grace is offered unto all: that quantum ad Deum pertinet, for so much as is in God, one man receiveth as much grace as an other: that the difference is in man's freewill, in accepting or rejecting of grace: that grace may soon be gotten, and soon lost altogether. But who gave these men authority to make a definition contrary to that which the holy Scriptures have delivered. These men acknowledge no other power in the Gospel preached, but only the power of the Minister that preacheth. The Preacher hath not power to give faith and repentance, to infuse grace, but only useth moral persuasions to the people: but together with the labour of the Preacher the spirit of God worketh: 
1 Cor. 3.9.  And therefore we are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 helpers with God in that great work. And because the spirit of God worketh with power in opening men's hearts, humbling them, leading them to an acknowledgement and confession of their sins, converting their souls, drawing them out of the power of darkness, out of the power of Satan and sin; which work cannot be done by a gentle persuasion only, it cannot be done but by the power of God: therefore the Apostle declaring that grace, which cometh to believers by the preaching of the Gospel, 
Rom. 1.16.  calleth it the power of God to salvation. And again, 
1 Cor. 1.18.  The preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto us that are saved, it is the power of God. And the Apostle speaking of faith, which is the first and one of the greatest graces which we receive, 
1 Cor. 2.3.  saith, your faith standeth not in the wisdom of man, but in the power of God. If our faith which is the first, and the chiefest grace whereby we stand, be in the power of God, not in the wisdom of man, than it is no moral persuasion: For moral persuasion reacheth no further than man's wisdom. But this is most perspicuously taught in the Epistle to the Ephesians; 
Ephes. 1.18.  where the Apostle saith, I cease not to give thanks unto God, making mention of you in my prayers,— that the eyes of your understanding may be enlightened, that you may know what the hope of his calling, and what the riches of his glorious inheritance is in his Saints; 
1●.  and what is the exceeding greatness of his power towards us which believe, according to the working of his mighty power. Then when we are drawn unto faith, when we believe, this is done by the power of God, by the exceeding greatness of his power, by the mighty working of his power. And therefore they that say, that grace is only a moral persuasion, and quantum ad deum, that salvation is alike prepared for all: and that the reason why one receiveth grace, another receiveth it not, is only in man's freewill: These men and their vain and weak fancies are clean overthrown, because grace is found to be in the power of God. For, if quantum ad deum, as they say, it were prepared alike to all, why then doth the Apostle say, that preaching is foolishness to them that perish, but the power of God to us that are saved? If it be foolishness unto some, and the power of God to salvation to others, then verily it is not alike unto all. God is able to make his powerful grace appear unto them, to whom it is foolishness, but he will not.  
here we may find many things to admire, and to wonder at, and to cry out with the Apostle, O the depth! But still we find that the power of God is in his calling, and declared in our faith, which standeth not in man's wisdom, but in the power of God. This doth sufficiently prove, that the grace of God is not as these men affirm, without and against all grounds of Scripture, a moral persuasion: For it is the power of God, the exceeding greatness, and the mighty working of his power.  
They that would understand this controversy, between the Church of God, and th●se ungrateful and ungracious men, that oppugn the grace of God, may best understand it, if they seek out with care and diligence the definition of grace. It is of the greatest importance to know, and being known, will lead a man (as by a thread) unto the particulars of this question. We find plainly, that the love of God, and the power of God is in it: And we may be sure, that they who deny the power of God to be in grace, can never come to the true knowledge of it. It is true, that if that definition were once granted, that grace is nothing but a moral persuasion, then would all those strange conclusions follow of which I spoke before, and others more mad than they; that the purpose of Praedestination is a thing uncertain, and of no power: that God's purpose of Praedestination must be ruled by man, and not by God.  
It is much to be wondered at, that such men should be found in the Church, professing Christianity, that with such boldness take such a definition as granted, and with such ignorance draw those conclusions from it.  
Let us but stop this principle, and we stop their mouths. For if grace be the power of God to salvation, if Faith and grace stand not in man's wisdom, but in the power of God; if we be drawn to believe by the exceeding greatness of God's power, by the mighty working of his power; than it followeth, that the grace whereby we are called, whereby we believe, and repent, and are justified, and in the end saved, is the power of God. It was his good will and purpose to praedestinate us, but it is his power to execute that good purpose, to draw sinful men out of the power of darkness, into the kingdom of light, to work in our hearts a love of obedience by his holy Spirit. To work this, far surpassed the power all of creatures, and therefore it is done by the power of God. Upon this ground thus laid, the course of Arminians is stopped. If they tell us that grace is a gentle persuasion, and goeth no further; We answer, that in grace there is the power of God. If they tell us that grace may be utterly lost, we say it proceedeth from the purpose of God, and is given to us from the power of God. His purpose is immutable, his power who can resist? They must overreach the purpose of God, and overcome the power of God, before they can undo this great work, which God with such wisdom purposeth, and with such power performeth. If it were in the wisdom of man to devose it, or in the power of man to perform it, than might it be soon undone: but this work is Gods, and all men must give God the glory, who only hath undertaken this work, and only is able to bring it to an end. When God hath once manifested his will, it is strange that the pride and ignorance of man should devose ways to bring that into questions and doubts which God in his Scriptures hath evidently set down. But there must be heresies that they which are approved may be known. 1 Cor. 11.19.  
Now I think this long contention may be brought to a short end: If any of the Pelagians or Arminians, or if all of them be able to prove, that the grace of God, by which we are called, and justified, and saved, is nothing but a gentle or moral persuasion, than the Pelagians have overcome us: But if this grace be wrought in us by the power of God, then hath the truth overcome the Pelagians and Arminians. Now I come to take a view of some particular escapes in his book.   

CHAP. 10.  
PAge 17. speaking of Saint Peter's fall, he saith, Christ prayed for Saint Peter that he might not fall: and Christ was ever heard in that he prayed for: And a little after. If he fell he must needs fall either totally or finally; for cedo sertium? And again, avoid it if you can, you come up and home to our Gagger, that Saint Peter's faith did not fail, and so subscribe to Bellarmine. Petro dominus impetravit ut non posset cadere, quod ad fidem attinet. Thus writeth the Author.  
FIrst this is granted that Saint Peter fell into a great sin; but every fall into sin proveth not a failing in faith. Christ prayed that his faith should not fail, and he was heard in that he prayed for: therefore this is true that his faith failed not. If any Papist speak or write this truth consonant to the Scripture, I take not that for Popery. This Author saith, that Christ prayed that Saint Peter might not fall, and Christ was ever heard in that he prayed for; his conclusion should be that Saint Peter did not fall: Which because he seeth to be false; he would interpret it, that he fell not finally, though he fell totally. But the aught to have interpreted the words of the Scripture, and not to make words of his own, and interpret them. He doth strangely confound the thing whereof he speaketh. Where he saith, Christ prayed for Saint Peter that he might not fail: these be his own words, they are without warrant, against the evidence of the story: For Saint Peter did fall into a great sin: But Christ knowing that he should fall, and giving him warning thereof, prayed that though he fell, yet his faith should not fail. He is entangled with an idle and unnecessary confusion, as though the failing of Saint Peter's faith, and his falling into sin, were one and the same thing. Distinguish these things that are confounded, and then it is clear, that Saint Peter did fall into sin, and yet his faith failed not.  
But saith he, he fell either totally or finally: for, cedo tertium. The ancient Father's writing of the sins of the Saints, give to him his tertium, which he requireth. For when they speak of the falls of the Saints, they use to note them by this word, Lapsus: which though we in English ordinarily call a fall: Yet it is a tertium in respect of a total and final fall; and so saveth such a fall from being either total or final: So whether we call Lapsus, a fall or a slipping, we stand not upon words: the thing we seek is whether every sin in the regenerate cutteth off faith, as Master Thomson devised, and this man seconds him. This they affirm, and we deny: The just man sinneth often, but who did ever say, that he looseth his faith as often as he sinneth? For in the just and regenerate man, there are two men dwelling together, the old and the new man: and sin that is still dwelling is sometimes working.  
This is manifested in diverse places of the Scripture, as namely Romans 7. In which Chapter, whatsoever some say to the contrary, the Apostle speaketh in the person of a regenerate man. Saint Paul confesseth that sin dwelleth in him; that the good which he would do, that he doth not, but the evil which he would not do, that he doth: that he delighteth in the Law of God after the inward man: (which words are sufficient to prove against the Pelagians, Arminians, and Papists, that he speaketh in the person of a regenerate man; for an unregenerate man cannot truly utter those words.) And yet he confesseth, that he seeth an other Law in his members, bringing him to the captivity of the law of sin. Then it must be confessed that sin may dwell there where faith dwelleth.  
This doctrine is contained in the Articles of faith and religion. Article 9 in these words. Although there is no condemnation to them that believe and are Baptised, yet the Apostle doth confess that concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature of sin. In the same Article it is said, that this concupiscence deserveth God's wrath and damnation. So that we must admit that sin and faith may dwell together until we come to an Angelical state. And therefore sin in a regenerate man doth not make a cutting off of faith, according to the new devised cut.  
Yet in this is our Author resolute, that Saint Peter fell totally. I answer that cannot be in the regenerate, where there is repugnance, and reluctation. As long as the war is maintained, the flesh striving against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh. so long the fall is not total, neither can it be, when the spirit is still striving, and disallowing and recovering the hold again. And if this war be maintained, there must needs be the Spirit. For the flesh doth not strive against the flesh, and where the Spirit is there is faith. And therefore as the Spirit is not totally lost in the regenerate, though many times it may be and is grieved so faith is not totally lost in them, though they may fall into diverse sins, by which sins the Spirit is grieved.  
Saint Hilary compareth the book of Psalms to a bundle of keys to open the locks (that is) the difficult places of the Psalms and of other Scriptures. If the right key be taken and rightly applied, it will open the lock. The Author of the Appeal hath set a lock here, that is a difficulty, where there was none indeed. I will try if I can ●ight of the right keys out of the Psalms to open this lock, that is, to dissolve this difficulty which he maketh here of a total fall from grace.  
Psalm 19 verses 12, 13. Who can understand his faults? cleanse me from my secret sins; and keep thy servant also from presumptuous sins, and let them not reign over me: so shall I be upright, and made clean from the great transgression. He prayeth to be cleansed from other sins, but to be preserved from presumptuous sins; that they have not the dominion over him: Whereby we may collect, that the Saints are freed, and still pray to be freed from presumptuous sins, such as reign in the wicked: but for other sins, altogether they are not free.  
Psalm 25. verse 5. Unto thee, O Lord, I lift up my soul, my God I trust in thee. here he professeth his faith: And yet verse 11. he saith: For thy name's sake O Lord he merciful to mine iniquity, for it is great: then in him there was a true faith, and great iniquity dwelling together. It followeth, that not only sin, but sometimes great sins may be in a godly man; but such as are not joined with presumption, but with true and sincere repentance.  
Psalm 37. verse 24. Though he fall, he shall not be cast down; for the Lord holdeth him up with his hand. In this Scripture there is another instance given of that which this Author called for, when he said, cedo tertium: For the Prophet saith: Though he fall, he shall not be cast down. To fall and yet not to be cast down, is a tertium in respect of a total and final fall. For he that falleth so, as yet he is not cast down, falleth, and yet neither totally nor finally: the reason is given which is beyond all answering: For the Lord putteth his hand under him to stay him.  
Psalm 38. verses 3, 4. There is nothing sound in my flesh, because of thine anger, neither is there rest in my bones, because of my sin: for mine iniquities are gone over my head, and as a weighty burden too heavy for me. And yet, verse 15. he saith: On thee O Lord do I wait; thou wilt hear me my Lord my God. He feels the heavy burden of his sins, he doth not conceal the multitude of them, they are so many that they are gone over his head, he confesseth, he complaineth, he cryeth to God. What then? where so great and so many sins were felt (as a tender conscience must needs feel them) shall we say that this man lost all grace? No. If he had not been much troubled with his sins, he would not thus have spoken of them; if he had not had grace, he would not thus confess them and call to God for mercy.  
Psalm 40 verse 12. My sins have taken such hold upon me, that I am not able to look up, they are me in number then the hairs of head. Yet verse 17. Though I be poor and needy, the Lord thinketh of me. Thou art my helper and my deliverer my God. here we find great and many sins, and yet a great and a precious faith.  
It were too long to rehearse all of this kind. This may suffice to prove that grace in the regenerate, is not totally lost by sins; unless they be presumptuous sins which reign: But from these reigning sins, they that are borne of God are preserved: according to that of S. john, He that is borne of God sinneth not: He that standeth upon the top of the stairs, may fall and slip down a step or two, and yet not fall to the bottom. There is danger I grant it. And if we stood by our own power and strength, as the Pelagians and Arminians would have it, than might we fall away altogether. But in a regenerate man, there is power and weakness: the power is Gods, the weakness is his own. When he falleth, this is his weakness: but God by his power doth so order that weakness and those falls, that he will have his great power manifested in this great weakness. Therefore the Apostle had this answer. My grace is sufficient for thee, for my power is made perfect through weakness: Wherefore the blessed Apostle maketh this use. Very gladly therefore will I rejoice rather in mine infirmities, that the power of Christ may dwell in me.  
I say further, that sin is so far from cutting off faith totally in the regenerate, that it is rather ordained, by the infinite mercy of God, (which is rather to be adored, and wondered at, then disputed) it is, I say, ordained for the better exercise of faith and repentance▪ For if by falling into sin, faith were totally lost in the regenerate, than a man so falling could never rise again unto repentance. For he that hath lost grace totally, hath nothing left in him but flesh, and his own nature and freewill. Which of itself can never raise a man to repentance, though the Pelagians and Arminians strive for this, and would have all grace lost, that they might infer, that nature and freewill may raise up a man to repentance: but this is the poison of their heresy. Saint Peter fell into sin, and rose again by repentance, because his faith remained, and failed not, which drew him to repentance. But judas fell, and never rose again, because he never had true faith.  
Now, why do men strive for this, or what do they aim at? When they would have faith utterly lost, against the Apostle, who teacheth that the gifts and graces of God are without repentance; what have they gotten that thus strive, or what would they have? forsooth they would make Praedestination hang upon uncertainties, upon man's will; that a man may predestinate himself when he will, as often as he will: For they have no better ends then these.  
Pag. 18. Speaking of Bellarmine's words, Petro dominus impetravit, ut ●on posset eadere, quod ●d fidem attinet: He addeth these words: Just your Puritan doctrine for final perseverance.  
This is the first time that ever I heard of a Puritan doctrine in points dogmatic, and I have lived longer in the Church than he hath done. I thought that Puritans were only such as were factious against the Bishops in the point of pretended Discipline: and so I am sure it hath been understood hitherto in our Church. A Puritan doctrine is a strange thing, because it hath been confessed on both sides, that Protestants and Puritans have held the same doctrines without variance. The discipline varied in England, Scotland, Geneva, and other where: Yet the doctrine hath been hitherto held the same, according to the Harmony of the several Confessions of these Churches. Not one doctrine of the Church of England, another of the Church of Scotland, and so of others.  
What is your end in this, but to make divisions where there were none? and that a rent may be made in the Church? forsooth! that place may be given to the Pelagian and Arminian doctrines: And then all that are against these must be called Puritan doctrines. It is true, that Arminian doctrines will make a division, where none was before. And our Author of contentions by virtue of that doctrine, hath given a desperate attempt to do the like in our Church.  
And that final perseverance should be that Puritan doctrine, is a thing no less strange. The Pelagians would have so called it in Saint Augustine's time, if they had had that word then, or any thing that might give disgrace to the doctrine of perseverance. For Saint Augustine maintained the doctrine of final perseverance against the Pelagians. And doth not this man in rejecting that doctrine, profess himself to stand for the Pelagians against Saint Augustine, and the Orthodox Church? And yet himself confesseth final perseverance; he had the less reason to call it a Puritan doctrine.  
But he is so various in his sayings, as professing to be at liberty, not to declare his own mind, but to relate what others say, that it seemeth hard to hold him steadfast to any thing. But in this particular he must confess, that though a regenerate and justified man fall into sin, yet there is something that abideth and continueth in him to raise him up again to repentance. As the carnal part abideth, so the spiritual part abideth, so long as the spirit striveth against the flesh. 
Math. 24.13.  Our Lord saith, He that persevereth to the end shall be saved. S. john saith, He that is borne of God sinneth not, for the seed of God abideth in him. Of this I have spoken of before.  
Briefly, touching final perseverance, I would know how any man can truly lay to his heart that article of our faith: I believe life everlasting; but that withal he must believe final perseverance: for he that believeth that he shall receive everlasting life, must also believe that he shall persevere to the end, without which grace no man shall attain to life everlasting.  
When the Pelagians and Arminians would say somewhat to infringe the doctrine of Praedestination, they show all their spite against final perseverance, that all grace may be lost. And what will follow then? If all grace be lost, then surely the grace of Praedestination is lost, and the grace of calling is lost; and then must men go to seek a new Praedestination, and a new calling: and thus of the greatest mysteries of our salvation they make fables.  
I think that the Author of the Appeal is but a young Scholar in the Arminian School, and did not well foresee these consequences, but from the grounds that he hath laid, these things must follow: the grace of Praedestination, and the grace of God's calling must be lost. For I appeal to his Logic, doth not he that saith all grace is lost totally, conclude that the grace of Praedestination and calling is lost? if so, then is not this man bound to tell us how GOD proceedeth to a new predestination, and to a new calling? These be things which the Arminians listen after. How glad would they be to hear that the Church of England should begin to follow them in this course of multiplying predestinations and elections? This is that which they have long aimed at: And here our learned Author hath well bestirred himself to do them this service. Against these foolish and fabulous fancies, the Apostle hath laid this bar. 
Ephes. 1, 4.11.  We are chosen and predestinate in Christ before the beginning of the world, according to the purpose of him, that worketh all things according to the counsel of his own will. This counsel, by which he hath wrought these things, 
Esa. 46.10.  is constant and unchangeable. Against this truth the gates of hell shall never prevail, 
Heb. 6.17.  though the Arminians come with all their tro●pes to maintain the passages of hell gates.  
When the ancient Fathers and other godly men speak of predestination, they teach that it is a grace which God giveth, and God preserveth in us, and by which also he preserveth us to himself. For we cannot keep & preserve ourselves to the end, no more than a silly flock of sheep can keep, preserve, and defend themselves from the Wolves: this is the shepherd his care. So our great shepherd can and doth keep and preserve us to the end: this is his work, not ours. But this grace is given to them that are called according to his purpose, and are justified, and believe in him that is able to bring his promise to his end.  
The great mysteries of our salvation are in danger by these poisoned doctrines of Arminians to be shaken. If this age should give liberty to these beginnings, it is to be feared that in place of Communio sanctorum, in another age may creep in Apostasia sanctorum.  
Pag. 25. and 26. he speaketh variously of falling away from grace and losing of faith, as if he had not yet determined what to hold. He relateth a speech of his Gagger thus. You meant that faith might be lost both totally and finally in regard of God, who made no such absolute and irrespective Decree. If he should be challenged for this speech, he will answer, as his use is, that he relateth only, but doth not determine dogmatically: but in this place he is put from that answer. For he cannot relate this as the opinion of the Gagger, whom we may number amongst those Papists, that deny the respective Decree: for that they deny it, Bellarmine witnesseth, as before I have related. Then this must be his own speech and collection; Faith may be lost totally and finally, in regard of God that made no such absolute Decree, and irrespective. His reason standeth thus, If God made no absolute and irrespective Decree, then may faith be lost totally and finally. But this is his opinion, that God made no such absolute and irrespective Decree, therefore it followeth that in respect of the Decree of God, faith may be lost totally and finally. This would prove fine Divinity, if he would stand to it; he writeth so, as if his greatest care were only to seek the approbation of Pelagius; for these things will never get the approbation of any sound Divine in the Church of England. But it is well, that before faith can be totally and finally lost, he must first prove that God's Decree is respective: This he never laboured to prove, and he never heard any man deliver it but Arminians.   

CHAP. 11.  
SPEAKING of falling away, he layeth all upon the doctrine of the Homilies. He saith. In the second part of the Homily of falling from God, we are sent to a conclusion more adoppositum, not only of total lapse for a time, but also of final separation, and for ever. Which also is according to the doctrine expressed in the Articles. For he that saith a man may fall away, and may recover; implieth withal that some may fall away and not recover.  
This belike he taketh for a solid kind of proof, if he do but in his imagination think it implieth so much: When he urgeth a point, he bringeth no reasons but a conceit of implications: When he is urged, he doth but relate other men's opinions, but what himself thinketh, that he keepeth close. This close-keeping of his opinion, which he so much professeth, is very suspicious; there is something in it, that he is loath should be known: yet he hideth it not so closely▪ but it may be found out. He pleadeth that a man may fall from grace totally and finally: A man may fall away from grace and become no child of God. All this may be truly said, and then who hath any thing to say to him, that saith nothing but that which any other man may avouch? Forsooth, aliquid latet; If he should say plainly, that they that are called, and justified according to God's purpose, do fall away totally and finally: then he seeth that he should contradict the doctrine of the ancient Fathers, and of our Church: but holding himself in these general terms, that men may fall away from faith and grace, he understood that this might be maintained. We must therefore open this matter plainly. This is soon done, by calling to remembrance, what hath been said of the respective Decree, or irrespective. He holdeth the Decree of predestination to be respective, that is to respect something in men. If this be so, than it maketh no matter, whether faith & grace be utterly lost: For all may be repaired again. But repaired in regard and consideration of that which men do, and not upon that which God hath done. But if the Decree respect nothing in man, than the case is altered. We have before declared the doctrine of the orthodox Church, that the purpose of God, which he calleth the Decree, respecteth nothing but Gods will: and therefore they that are called and justified according to God's purpose, do believe and obey, repent and walk in good works, and at last obtain the end, everlasting life. These graces that proceed from God's calling according to his purpose, cannot be utterly lost, because these gifts and this calling are without repentance. They may be troubled and shaken, but totally lost they cannot be. This man taketh these things otherwise, that they may be totally lost. To be short, we must bring him to this stand: either plainly to confess, that the graces that are given according to Gods calling and purpose may be totally lost: or else to confess that his writings are idle, and trouble our Church to no purpose: because if he speak of graces which proceed not from God's purpose and calling (as many graces do, and in which graces men may make fair and far proceedings, of which graces the Homilies speak) in this point he hath no adversary, that I know. If he will acknowledge plainly that the graces which proceed from God's calling and purpose may be lost, then should not I trouble him in this point. Provided withal, that he give over his respective Decree, which is the ground & root of all this trouble, wherewith he hath troubled himself and others.  
Now we come to examine that which he bringeth out of the Homilies, concerning falling from God. The first Homily saith, that sometimes men go from God, for lack of faith, sometimes by neglecting his commandments: to be short, all they that may not abide God's word, but following the persuasions and stubbornness of their own hearts, go backward and not forward. And whereas God hath showed to all them that truly believe his Gospel, his face of mercy in jesus Christ, which doth so lighten their hearts, that (if they believe it as they ought to do) (this Parenthesis the Author hath left out, which might some way direct the meaning of the Homily) they be transformed to his image, be made partakers of heavenly light, and of his spirit, be fashioned to him in all goodness requisite to God's children: so if they after do neglect the same, if they be unthankful &c: he will take away from them his kingdom, his holy word, etc. These words that follow the Parenthesis depend upon those words contained in it, which our Author hath left out. It is true that if these men behold this grace and believe as they ought to do, that then they are so enlightened, etc. But this is joined with that condition expressed in the Parenthesis: if that condition fail, than these other things following, are not well urged from those words. And what is all this, but if we forsake him, he will forsake us, as the Scripture teacheth. 2 Chron. 15.2.  
It is evident that the Homily speaketh of profane and wicked men, that go from God, because they never care for coming unto God: of which profane men, there are (God knoweth) too many in our Land; whereof the Homily complaineth. The Homily speaketh partly of such, & partly of hypocrites. This is evident from the words of the Homily, which are these. For God that promised his mercy to them that be truly penitent, hath not promised to the presumptuous sinner, either that he shall have a long life, or that he shall have true repentance at the last end. Doth not the Homily speak plainly of wicked, profane, and presumptuous sinners? What is this to them that are called according to God's purpose, and walk with fear and obedience in the works of their calling?  
To the same purpose is that which he hath brought out of the second Homily; Wherein, by his leave, he hath undertaken more than he hath proved, or can prove out of the words of the Homily: For he saith, that in that Homily is concluded not only a total lapse for a time, but also a final separation for ever. This conclusion is not proved out of the words of the Homily: And if they were, they help him not: For that Homily is to be expounded by the words of the former Homily, which speaketh in express words of presumptuous sinners: that such may fall away altogether, who did every deny?  
And because he urgeth so much the words of the Homilies in this point, I would know of him a reason, why in that Homily which is against Worshipping of Images, he denieth that the Homilies contain the public dogmatic resolutions of our Church? Why doth he play fast and lose? Why doth he urge this in one place, which he flatly denieth in an other place? Let him give a reason.  
But the 16. Article teacheth the same, saith he: the words of the Article are these. After we have received the holy Ghost, we may depart from grace given, and fall into sin: and by the grace of God we may rise again, and amend our lives: The Article speaketh religiously and truly. For it is true, and must be confessed that after grace given, we may fall into sin. The Article attributeth all power of rising again to the grace of God: This we embrace. What hath this man against this? truly, no reason, but a pretty fancy of his own. For, saith he, he that saith a man may fall away, and may recover, implieth withal, that some may fall away and no recover. Which kind of speech is a plain confession, that he hath nothing for himself in the words of the Article.  
And yet in this weak manner he cannot proceed, unless he take this liberty to himself, to change and control the words of the Article. For the Article speaketh of departing from grace given, he maketh it speak of falling away. The Article saith, the grant of repentance is not to be denied to such as fall into sin after baptism; and that we may depart from grace given and fall into sin, and by the grace of God may rise again. He will confess, I suppose, that there is no man who liveth long after his baptism, but may fall into sin: and that is a kind of departing from grace given, From these words he concludeth, against all Logic, that a man so falling into sin falleth away: this is far from the words and meaning of the Article, and showeth that his purpose is not to satisfy men of judgement, but by perverting and intorting of words to a strange, that is, to his own private sense, to deceive the simple.  
But Pag: 27. he would prove from Saint Augustin and Prosper, that a regenerate and justified man may fall away. Our learned Author did never intend in writing this to satisfy the learned and judicious, but to deceive and undermine the weaker sort of men. Would any man that had his right wits, allege Saint Augustin and Prosper in this particular, wherein they have so fully, and sound declared themselves to the contrary against the Pelagians? But some what must be said, and some show must be made. Herein our Author may see the wretchedness of his cause, and how little hope he hath to hold it up, when he is driven to seek help at them, who utterly overthrow his cause. Saint Augustine's words by him cited (though they are not there where he citeth them) are these. Si autem regenitus & iustificatus in malam vitam sua voluntate relabitur, iste non potest dicere, non accepi: quia acceptam gratiam Dei suo in malum libero arbitrio amisit. And again: Credendum est quosdam de filijs perditionis non accepto dono perseverandi usque in finem, in fide quae per dilectionem operatur, incipere vivere, & aliquandiu iustè & fideliter vivere. That which he citeth out of Prosper is this: Ex regenitis in Christo jesus, quosdam relicta fide, & pijs moribus Apostatare a Deo, & impiam vitam in sua aversione finire, multis, quod dolendum est, probatur exemplis.  
If that Saint Augustin himself had not made a full answer to these and such like things, as may be cited from him, this Author might with some probability have brought these places. But if you will urge Saint Augustins' words, you must give him leave to expound his own words. Saint Augustin saith, that just men and regenerate; nay, he proceedeth farther, that the Children of God; yea, and more than that, that the Elect may fall away: It is true that Saint Augustin saith all this. But if a man should cite these things from him, & so leave them, as this learned Author doth; he should do great wrong to Saint Augustin. For he expoundeth himself, that these men whom he calleth just, regenerate, the sons of God, and elect, which do fall away, are so esteemed of us, but that they are not such in the knowledge of God. They are said to be such: sed à nescientibus quid futuri sunt. S. Augustin speaketh of them that are so called of us, but are not such indeed. 
Lib: de corrept: & gratia. cap: 7.  Quis neget eos electos cum credunt & baptizantur, & secundum Deum vivunt? planè dicuntur electi, sed à nescientibus quid futur● sunt, non ab illo qui ●os novit non habere perseverantiam, quae ad beatam vitam perducit electos, scitque illos ita stare, ut praesciret esse casuros. 
ibid. cap: 9  To the same purpose he saith again. Sunt quidam qui filij Dei propter susceptam vel temporaliter gratiam dicuntur à nobis, nec tamen sunt Deo. Now take this declaration of his meaning from himself, and then we grant that a justified man, regenerate, the son of God, and Elect, may fall away: because these though by us according to the judgement of charity, may be esteemed such, yet with God they are not: For they only stand & hold out to the end, that are known to God to be such, whom he hath called according to his purpose: of which sort none fall away. To Prosper I answer the same: For Prosper doth follow Saint Augustin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and swarveth not from him, his words are as Saint Augustine's are, and he understood them as S. Augustin expounded himself.  
But he hath here also somewhat out of S. Augustin touching perseverance. Sancti de suo perseverantiae proemio certi sunt, de ipsa tamen perseverantiae reperiuntur incerti. If we grant this, what will he infer? Saint Augustin teacheth that God to humble us, and to make us to seek him with zeal, doth hide some things from our knowledge, as our final perseverance, and our predestination: but this is for our good to remove pride and presumption from us: If we ourselves did either predestinate ourselves; or give the grace of final perseverance to ourselves, than might this objection be made; for than would things be in uncertainties: but we give all the glory to God, who knoweth us better than we know ourselves, and we leave this to him, which only is able to bring his own work to an end. And yet if we search a little more exactly into the meaning of S. Augustins' words, it will appear that S. Augustin speaketh not simply against the certainty of perseverance, but in some respect.  
To be certain of our perseverance, may be two ways understood: either to be certain that we shall never fall into sin, so to trouble the course of our perseverance. Of this S. Augustin speaking saith truly, we are uncertain of our perseverance: or else to be certain of our perseverance, may be understood to be certain of our faith, whereby we persevere; that our faith shall never utterly fail. Of this every man cannot be sure: But he that hath a true faith, believeth that his sins are forgiven, that he is the child of God: this man walketh in love and obedience, without which his faith is vain, believeth to receive in the end everlasting life. And therefore S. Augustin saith; Sancti de suo perseverantiae praemio certi sunt. How can a man be sure of the reward of perseverance, unless he be sure of his perseverance? Everlasting life is the reward of his perseverance, and of this reward he is sure. It must needs follow that in some sort, he is sure of his perseverance. What sort is that? Verily his faith persevereth, as Christ said to S. Peter, though he fell into a great sin, and therefore did not persevere without sinning, yet he had prayed that his faith did not fail: and so he did persevere in the faith. And S. john saith, that he that is borne of God, cannot sin, because the seed of God abideth in him. Then he that hath the seed of God abiding in him, doth persevere according to that grace which abideth in him. Many men speak of grace and faith, but verily none can speak truly thereof, but they that have these things in them. S. Augustin saith, no man can understand the truth, 
Lib. de oper. Monach. cap. 13.  but he that liveth a godly life. In cognition cavendus est error, in actione nequitia: Errat autem quisquis putat veritatem se posse cognoscere, dum adhuc nequiter vivat.  
Now where S. Augustin saith, that Saints or true believers are sure of the reward of perseverance, but not of perseverance itself: if we should understand this, as our Author seemeth to take it; S. Augustin hath wrapped himself in a contradiction. For if a man should thus reason against these words: Every true believer is sure of the reward of perseverance: but every true believer is sure that unless he persevere, he cannot be sure of the reward of perseverance: therefore every true believer is sure of his perseverance. This, I say, cannot be denied by any that granteth with S. Augustin, that true believers are sure of the reward of perseverance: For it followeth, that he is as well assured by faith of his perseverance. And upon this ground it is inferred, because he is sure of the reward of perseverance.   

CHAP. 12.  
PAG. 28. He maketh a great show of all the learned men of the Church of England that composed the Articles; that confirmed them; that justified them at Hampton Court. He saith, that these were the most learned men of our Church: Who denyeth that? or who called their learning into question? But what do these here? And why are they troubled? All these, saith he, are such as do assent to antiquity. There is no doubt but these learned men did assent to learned Antiquity. But where is this Antiquity, or what is it? Parturiunt montes. Truly we have not hitherto had one word from Antiquity, but only those places of S. Augustin and Prosper, which are answered and found to be nothing to the purpose. This is a strange kind of proceeding, to raise so great an expectation, and in the end, all to turn into smoke. We expect to hear, whereunto all these learned men have assented: here is nothing but words in the clouds. You have made a glorious syllogism. The mayor is, that these men were the most learned men in our Church: it is granted: The minor you say you will make good; but that is not yet done: you have said nothing to prove it; you would prove it first out of the 16. Article; but you go from the words of the Article, and show us what in your conceit it implieth. This will never be taken for proof▪ That which you undertake to prove, is a total and final fall; whereof you have not as yet offered a proof, either out of the Articles or Homilies.  
Pag. 30. he saith, The doctrine of the 16. Article was challenged for unsound in the conference at Hampton Court, by those that were petitioners against the doctrine and discipline established: and being so challenged before his Majesty, was then and there defended, maintained, avowed, averred for true, ancient, justifiable, good and catholic, against that absolute, irrespective, necessitating, fatal Decree of your new predestination.  
A man would think that such a man as this, relating things done, should speak truly, especially of such an Act, which every man that list may know. It is more strange that he should report it so, as not to say one word true: For it is not true that it was challenged for unsound: it is not true that it was then and there defended, maintained, avowed, averred for true: For there could be no use of this defending, avowing, averring, where, on both sides, it was confessed to be true, and where the Article was not challenged for unsound. The plain truth is, Doctor Rainolds repeated the Article, and professed, that the meaning of the Article was sound: besides Doctor Rainolds, no man spoke to that particular. How then could our Author say, it was challenged for unsound? Doth he that saith the meaning of the Article is sound, challenge it for unsound? The liberty is great that this man giveth to himself, to think that such things would currently pass, whether his words contain reason or none. Doctor Rainolds only desired that it might be explained by these words added to the end of the Article thus: after we have received the holy Ghost, we may depart from grace: to these words of the Article he desired this might be added, yet neither totally nor finally: Against this, no man spoke then: but for it, that worthy and learned Deane of Paul's then, after Bishop of Norwich, Doctor Overall did speak so much as directly confirmed that which Doctor Rainolds had moved; For Page 42. of that Conference, he professed that it was a Doctrine which himself had taught; That whosoever, though before justified, did commit any grievous sin, as adultery, murder, treason, or the like, did become ipso facto subject to God's wrath, and guilty of damnation. Adding hereunto, that those which were called and justified according to the purpose of God's election, howsoever they might and did fall into grievous sins, and therefore into the present state of wrath and damnation, yet did never fall either totally from all graces of God, to be utterly destitute of all the parts of seed thereof, nor finally from justification. Now when Doctor Overall did in the sum agree with Doctor Rainolds; where then was the challenging of the Article for unsound on the one side, and where was that defending, avowing, averring, on the other side?  
Our Author would prove his assertion out of the Conference at Hampton Court; but out of that conference the contrary is proved. He saith, that a justified man may fall away totally and finally; but D. Overall in that Conference affirmeth the contrary, neither totally, nor finally: he should have used some more probability. He seemeth to be much destitute of reason, when he useth reasons, which being at the first examined, prove directly against him. He must therefore observe, that this doctrine of total and final falling away, which he pretendeth to be the doctrine of our Church, was a doctrine refuted at Hampton Court, by D. Overall, and before that time was never received here: For D Overall would never have refuted a doctrine received in this Church. Then let him seek out when his doctrines began to be the Doctrines of our Church.  
Page 35. & 36. he saith; Let this be acknowledged the doctrine of our Church, that Children duly baptised, are put into the estate of grace, and salvation: but many children so baptised, when they come to age, by a wicked life do fall away from God, and from the estate of grace and salvation wherein he had set them.— if you grant not this, you must hold that all men that are baptised are saved.  
If our Author had been pleased, to have observed the judgement of the Ancients, he would not be thus troubled with novelties. This one poor objection seemeth to trouble the man. Saint Augustin might easily have satisfied him: For he observeth a great difference between them that are regenerate and justified only sacramento tenus, and those that are regenerate and justified according to the purpose of God's election. Abraham received the sacrament of Circumcision, as a seal of the righteousness of faith. The sacrament is good to them to whom it is a seal of the righteousness of faith, but it is not a seal in all that receive the Sacrament: For many receive the sign, which have not the thing.  
Then to proceed: Ishmael was circumcised, and so was Isaak: but Ishmael was borne according to the flesh, and Isaak according to the spirit. Now he was not justified, but only sacramento tenus, that was borne according to the flesh: but he that was borne according to the spirit, was justified truly. Saint Augustin saith, Cum essent omnibus communia sacramenta, non communis erat omnibus gratia. 
August: in Psal. 77.  And again. Omnibus in nomine patris, & filij, & spiritus sancti baptizatis, commune est lavacrum regenerationis, sed ipsa gratia cuius ipsa sunt sacramenta, qua membra corporis Christi cum suo capite regenerata sunt, non communis est omnibus.  
Israel was called to be a people of God, yet all that were so called, were not so in truth: So all that receive Baptism are called the Children of God, regenerate, justified: for to us they must be taken for such in charity, until they show themselves other. But the Author affirmeth, that this is not left to men's charity (as you, saith he, do inform the world) because we are taught in the service Book of our Church, earnestly to believe; that Christ hath favourably received these infants that are baptised, that he hath embraced them with the arms of his mercy, that he hath given unto them the blessing of everlasting life: And out of that belief and persuasion, we are to give thanks faithfully and devoutly for it. All this we receive and make no doubt of: but when we have said all, we must come to this, that all this is nothing but the charity of the Church: and what more can you make of it? For where he urgeth this, that Children baptised are put in the state of salvation, and this must be believed. I make no doubt of it, but because he seemeth to have a strange understanding of it, and urgeth it as if forsooth it could not be answered: I ask him this question, whether we must believe it as an Article of faith, or ex judicio charitatis? this judgement of charity he utterly rejecteth. Then he must hold that we believe it as an Article of faith: but this is not contained in any Article of faith, it is not expressed in any Scripture. And the things which a man is bound to believe for his salvation, to speak properly, he must believe for himself only, not for another man. And therefore this thing which he urgeth, that we must believe for other men, cannot be called properly faith and believing: for no man believeth for another: this proveth evidently that this believing, whereof our Communion bo●ke speaketh, is nothing else, but to believe it ex judicio charitatis: and can no further be stretched. Concerning this judgement of charity, we do not inform the world any otherwise, than Saint Augustin informed the Church long since against the Pelagians. The Pelagians urged these things as you do, that they that were baptised were regenerate, and justified. Saint Augustin answereth they are so, for aught that we know, and until they themselves show themselves to the contrary. Then so long as we have no cause to the contrary, we judge them in charity to be such as we desire they should be: did we devise this? or did we first inform the world of this? it hath been of old received thus in the Church. We do but say that which the ancient Fathers have said before us: and you follow that which your Fathers the Pelagians have taught before you. But here is great difference; we following the ancient Fathers, follow the Church▪ and you following the Pelagians, follow the Enemies of the Church.  
But here he citeth in the margin, pag. 36. that all Antiquity taught thus. I pray you what did Antiquity teach? That young children baptised are delivered from original sin: We teach the same, and we doubt not, if they die before they come to the practice of actual sins, they shall be saved.  
But this is not so to be understood, that no children unbaptized can be saved: For in this point the ancient godly Fathers have delivered their judgements, grounded upon fair evidences of Scripture. And because this is a thing wherein some may require satisfaction, the Reader will not think the time lost, if I somewhat enlarge this point. Baptism is required as necessary to salvation, so that the contempt thereof bringeth damnation; but not the want of it. For where a true faith is, and a sincere desire of Baptism, though a man should by some inevitable means miss of washing by water, yet the Ancients make no doubt of the salvation of such a man. This is the judgement of S. Cyprian, S. Augustin, S. Ambrose, and S. Bernard. Hugo de sancto Victore lived at the same time with S. Bernard. Hugo was troubled with the novelty of a hot-spirited man, who taught this assertion; That since the time that it was first said by Christ; Unless a man be borne of water and the holy Ghost, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven, since that, no man might by any means be saved, without the actual receiving of the visible Sacrament, yea though a man should desire the same with true faith, and contrition of heart, being only prevented by death, that he could not obtain that which he desired, yet should this man be damned without remedy. Hugo having notice of this assertion, wrote to S. Bernard, concealing the name of the Author of that opinion, only declaring his assertion; and craved the judgement of S. Bernard in that point. To this S. Bernard answereth. The sum of his answer is this: 
Bern: epist. 77.  First he taketh exception against the time so precisely set by the Author of this assertion. For he setteth the time to begin presently upon the speech of those words which Christ spoke in secret to Nicodemus, in the night when he came to him. S. Bernard showeth that the beginning of so great a matter was not advisedly set by this new Author, he therefore would have the beginning to be after the promulgation of the Gospel by the Apostles. For the old Sacraments were in force so long, until it was openly and publicly known that they were abrogated; How long after, penes deum est, non meum definire, saith S. Bernard. Then the old Sacraments did stand in force, until they were abrogated, that is, publicly by the Apostles interdicted. And therefore as Baptism is now a remedy against original sin, so was Circumcision of old. Now if any that are come to years and understanding, after the publication of the remedy of Baptism, shall refuse to be baptised, this man addeth another sin to original sin, & so through his own pride, he beareth the double cause of a most just damnation, if he should in that case chance to dye. Yet if before his death he repent, and desire and ask to be baptised, and dye before he can obtain his desire, so that a right faith, a godly hope and sincere charity be not wanting; so God be merciful unto me, saith S. Bernard, as in this case I cannot despair of this man's salvation for the want of water only; Neither can I believe that this man's faith is void, his hope confounded, his charity failed, if that not the contempt, but only the impossibility of having the Sacrament hinder him from being washed with water. And I much marvel, saith he, Si novus iste novarum inventor assertionum, & assertor inventorum; if this new inventor of new assertions, and assertor of things invented, can find a reason in this thing which was hid from the Fathers, Ambrose and Augustin; or can find any authority before the authority of these. For if he know it not, both these judged as we do herein; let him read S. Ambrose his book of the death of Valentinian, if he hath not read it, or if he hath read it, let him recall it well to memory; if he recall it, let him not dissemble; and there he shall find that S. Ambrose confidently presumed of the salvation of that man who died without Baptism, and did undoubtedly attribute that to his mind, which was wanting through impossibility of performance. Let him also read the fourth book of S. Augustin of one only Baptism against the Donatists, and he will either acknowledge himself to be imprudently deceived, or prove himself impudently obstinare. For S. Augustin saith, that sometimes suffering is in stead of Baptism, as appeareth in the thief upon the Cross, to whom though unbaptized, Christ said, to day thou shalt be with me in Paradise: From which place S. Cyprian took an Argument to prove the same point: And S. Augustin addeth; Considering this thing again and again, I find (saith he) that not only suffering for the name of Christ may supply the want of Baptism, but faith also and the conversion of the heart, if happily the straightness of time will not suffer a man to celebrate the mystery of Baptism. And afterward; How much (saith he) even without the visible Sacrament of Baptism, that availeth which the Apostle saith: With the heart man believeth to righteousness, and with the mouth man confesseth to salvation, it is declared in that Thief. But than is this fulfilled invisibly, when as not contempt of Religion, but necessity excludeth the mystery of Baptism. S. Bernard having declared thus much out of S. Augustin, proceedeth thus. I confess, saith he, that S. Augustin retracteth that instance which he put of the Thief, and thought it not so fit to prove this sentence, because it was uncertain whether that Thief was baptised or no: but the sentence itself and assertion he confidently maintained, and divers ways confirmed; neither shall you find that he did ever retract the opinion, if I be not deceived, saith Bernard: And further he saith, that S. Augustin in another place when he had spoken of some, whom the Scripture restifyeth to be sanctified invisibly, but not visibly; He maketh this inference: hence it is collected, that invisible sanctification hath been had, and hath profited without the visible Sacraments, which are changed according to the diversity of times, so that others were then, others are now. And a little after; notwithstanding▪ saith S. Augustin, the visible Sacrament is by no means to be contemned; for he that contemneth it, cannot be invisibly sanctified. Whereby he proveth plainly that a faithful man, and one converted to the LORD, is not deprived of the fruit of Baptism, if he cannot hau● Baptism, but if he contemn to be baptised. From these two pillars (I mean S. Ambrose and S. Augustin, saith S. Bernard) I can hardly be drawn to believe otherwise. I confess myself either to err, or to be wise with these. I myself also believing, saith he, that a man may be saved solâ fide, by faith only, having a true desire to receive the Sacrament, though either death anticipate his holy desire, or some other invincible force hinder it: And consider when our Saviour saith; He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved, 
Mark. 16.16.  whether it be not with great wariness and vigilancy repeated again, But he that will not believe shall be damned? He saith not, he that is not baptised shall be damned; but only, he that believeth not, shall be damned; implying hereby, that sometimes faith alone sufficeth to salvation, and without it nothing. Wherefore albeit we grant, that Martyrdom may be in stead of Baptism, yet we must understand that it is not punishment that maketh this, but faith itself, for without it what is Martyrdom but plain punishment? Now it is against all reason to think, that faith which is reputed for Baptism, where Baptism is wanting, and which doth make Martyrdom acceptable to God, should be sufficient by itself to save a man when either Baptism cannot be had, or Martyrdom is not required. S. Bernard upon these, and such like reasons concludeth, that a man may be saved by faith without Baptism, where there is a true desire, and no contempt of Baptism. And that Infants which die without Baptism are consequently saved, by the faith of their faithful Parents. Thus far S. Bernard.  

Cyprian: de coena Domini.  Saint Cyprian, (cited here by Saint Augustin and by Saint Bernard out of Saint Augustin) upon this point hath these words; speaking of the thief upon the cross: Latr●cinium damnationem meruerat & supplicium, sed cor contritum poenam mutavit in martyrium, & sanguinem in baptismum. And this is all that antiquity teacheth, or our Church requireth: that baptism is not simply necessary, so as without it damnation must follow of necessity; and that children baptised are delivered from original sin. But this man goeth further. Many that are baptised (saith he) may after their baptism live a graceless life: then they lose grace; or else we must say that all that are baptised are saved. I answer, we need not say so. We say, that, if they fall into a sinful and wicked life after baptism, they lose the privilege of their baptism, and the good that they might have had by it, so long as they remain such: And this is sufficient to answer him. But what is this to the grace of predestination, which he would oppugn by these quirks, drawn only from the charity of the Church and baptism? which charity we also hold. Then to proceed, of these who have received the sacrament of regeneration, and are judged by us to be regenerate and justified, many may proceed and make a great progress in the Church, to be enlightened, to taste of the heavenly gift, 
Heb. 6.  to be made partakers of the holy Ghost (that is of many graces of the holy Ghost) to taste of the good word of God, and of the powers of the world to come: and yet they may fall away totally and finally. But they that are regenerate, justified and called according to God's purpose, (ask not me who these are, it is enough that they are known to God) they may fall into divers temptations and sins, which bring men under God's wrath; but these never fall away either totally or finally. This was expressed by D. Overall in the Conference at Hampton Court. By this distinction of men regenerate, and justified sacramento tenus only, and such as are so indeed according to God's purpose and calling, he might easily and fairly have satisfied himself in all these objections, which he draweth out of the book of Homilies, and out of our Service book. For first he hath not proved, that a justified man may fall away totally and finally; neither doth that follow from any words by him produced: And if it were proved in direct terms, how easy is the answer, that it is then meant of such as are regenerate and justified sacramento tenus, and no further: For that such fall away it was never doubted in the Church, as S. Augustin showeth. And therefore when he saith, that children duly baptised, are put into the estate of grace and salvation; I grant they are so to us, we must esteem them so, 
Lib de bapt: contra Donatistas'. 5 ca 24.  judicio charitatis. Saint Augustin saith, Omnes, qui in Christo baptizantur, Christum induunt: but then he resolveth. Induunt Christum homines aliquando usque nd sacrameti perceptionom, aliquando usque ad vitae sanctificationem: atque illud primum & bonis & malis potest esse common, hoc autem alterum propnium est bonorum & piorum. By which grounds we may understand how the ancient fathers resolved of them that fell quite away from grace. And we may learn to rest in their resolution: Were it not better for this Author, with the Ancients to seek out the truth, and means to defend the truth, then with the Arminians to rake up the Pelagian dunghills for old objections, that are already answered long ago by the ancient Fathers?   

CHAP. 13.  
PAG. 37. he saith, I see no reason wherefore I might not be as confident in maintaing falling away from grace, as you & your Divines are upon weaker grounds in defending the contrary.  
If confidence will make your cause good, then there is no doubt of it; you have enough. You know that he was confident that asked Michaiah this question: When departed the spirit of God from me to speak in thee?  
This Author hath thought it good, as a thing becoming him, not only to imitate the confidence of the false Prophet, but to answer in those very words of his, Pag: 8. Yet for all this confidence, he should find much more comfort in imitating the humility of the true Prophets, than the pride and confidence of the false Prophets. This humour appeareth further in comparing himself with their Divines. What they are whom he describeth in these words (your Divines) I know not. If he mean such as have maintained this cause against M. Thomson and such: I am well assured that all the Pelagian and Arminian schools, have not afforded such learned Divines as they were. But is not this a raising of a faction between Divines & Divines in our Church, and over all the reformed Churches in Christendom? If his meaning be to note all Divines which hold against the Arminians in this particular; he will find the greatest Divines in Christendom in opposition against him; where his confidence will do him as little good, as it did Zedekiah. But whether have the weaker grounds, our factious Author may find in good time, and upon better advice. For though he may be confident, coming, as he taketh, to the first onset, as if his grounds had never been shaken before; yet the truth is, these grounds have been long ago and often examined. Pelagius being confident upon these grounds, was thrust out of the Church. The Arminians of late resuming the same grounds were driven out of the Netherlandes. After all this he cometh on with a fresh supply: but he must look for no other success, than the same cause hath found at other times. For the same God liveth, which hath heretofore raised up the spirits of his servants to maintain the truth against the Pelagians, and will raise up others to stand for the same truth, whensoever it is oppugned.  
Pag: 40. he saith, If it be an error of Arminius, which was the positive doctrine of Lutherans, and Luther, before Arminius was borne; why is Arminius entitled to that which is none of his, but Martin Luther's?  
In these words he seemeth to say that these late opinions of the Lutherans in Germany, were the doctrines of Martin Luther himself. Wherein he is much mistaken. For these opinions were brought in by another: the thing is well known. They increased much in Germany after Martin Luther's time; and in many things disagree from his doctrine: they were seditiously amplified by johannes jacobus Andreas, who was a man of a furious and turbulent spirit, and called himself the Pope of the Lutherans, which Martin Luther himself never did. Why Arminius should be entitled to this, I know no other reason, but the common course that hath entitled Heretics to those heresies, which either they have invented, or maintained and increased. It may be, he affected that title; sure it is that he increased the heresy, & spread it where it was not before. This is no strange thing in the world, that factious men spreading strange opinions, should get titles of that sect which they maintain: For if our Author should proceed far in this course, which he hath so unadvisedly begun, he might happily purchase to himself a title likewise; though thereby he would get no glory.  
Page 42. he saith; Surely those very points (of predestination, freewill, final perseverance) being scholastical speculations merely, and as far from state business, as theory is from practice, are not of themselves, aptae natae to breed dangers.  
These words contain two things: First that the doctrines of predestination, freewill, and final perseverance are merely scholastical speculations: But why any doctrine contained in the holy Scripture should be called a mere scholastical speculation, is a thing I conceive not. He must give a reason that calleth it so. Mere scholastical speculations may well enough be spared without any loss or hindrance to our salvation: But will he say that these doctrines of Scripture may so well be spared without any loss or hindrance to our salvation? It would be an hard task for Pelagius himself to prove that. Another thing in these words is, that these speculations as he calleth them, are not to be feared to breed danger. The Church is quiet, and without danger, until some new doctrines be broached, and contentions raised about the truth: and then the hearts of many are disclosed, and dangers grow. These things that this Author hath moved in our Church, are more apt to breed dangers, than any thing that hath been moved since the time of Barret, Baro, and Thomson. A desperate man may set an house on fire, and say there is no danger; yet the danger is not the less, but the madness of the man is the more, that cries out there is no danger. The ignorance of God's word, and truth therein contained, is able not only to breed danger, but to cause destructions of Churches and states. 
Host 4.6.  The Prophet complaineth that the people of the jews were destroyed, and led into captivity for want of knowledge. Then, the want of knowledge of God, and of the holy doctrines of God's word, is a thing apta nata to throw states and Kingdoms into destruction: And the true knowledge thereof is a thing apta nata to keep states and people from destruction.  
Pag. 42. he saith, These classical projects, consistorial practices, conventual designs, and prophetical speculations of the zealous brethren in this land (meaning Holland) do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aim at anarchy and popular confusion; dangerous indeed to Prince and people.  
He speaketh here of the Ministers of the Low-countryes', between whom and us in the matter of doctrine there hath been a care of mutual consent sought, and by his late Majesty graciously entertained; and for the public good the desire thereof may be continued, though this man should be offended. For though the Church of England be the best Reformed Church, yet is it not the only Reformed Church. And it might seem no good providence in us, to stand so by ourselves, as to reject and disdain the consent of other Churches, though they do not agree with us in the discipline. It is observed by Eusebius, that Polycrates and Irenaeus did both reprone Victor, because for matters of ceremonies he was too much offended with other Churches, which otherwise agreed with him in doctrine. Irenaeus doth admonish him, that the ancient Bishops of Rome before Victor, did keep unity & consent with the Eastern Bishops, though in ceremonies there was difference between them. 
Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 24.  Omnes isticum in observantia variarent, inter semetipsos et nobiscum semper pacifici fuerunt. He saith there also that the dissonance in ceremonies, did not break the consonance in faith. And why may not we do the like to keep the unity of faith with those Churches, which do not agree with us in ceremonies; if we seek the peace of the Churches, that profess the same doctrine?  
Touching the point of their discipline, I can witness that they are weary of it, and would gladly be freed if they could. When we were to yield our consent to the Belgic confession at Dort, I made open protestation in the Synod, that whereas in that confession there was inserted a strange conceit of the parity of Ministers to be instituted by Christ; I declared our dissent utterly in that point. I showed that by Christ a parity was never instituted in the Church: that he ordained 12 Apostles, and also 70 Disciples; that the authority of the 12, was above the other: that the Church preserved this order left by our Saviour. And therefore when the extraordinary authority of the Apostles ceased, yet their ordinary authority continued in Bishops, who succeeded them; who were by the Apostles themselves left in the government of the Church to ordain Ministers, and to see that they, who were so ordained, should preach no other doctrine. That in an inferior degree the Ministers that were governed by Bishops succeeded the 70. Disciples: That this order hath been maintained in the Church from the time of the Apostles. And herein I appealed to the judgement of Antiquity, and to the judgement of any learned man now living, and craved herein to be satisfied, if any man of learning could speak to the contrary: My Lord of Salisbury is my witness, and so are all the rest of our company, who spoke also in the same cause: To this there was no answer made by any. Whereupon we conceived that they yielded to the truth of the protestation. And somewhat I can say of mine own knowledge: For I had conference with diverse of the best learned in that Synod; I told them that the cause of all their troubles was this, that they had not Bishops amongst them, who by their authority might repress turbulent spirits that broached novelties. Every man had liberty to speak or write what he list; and as long as there were no Ecclesiastical men in authority to repress and censure such contentious spirits, their Church would never be without trouble. Their answer was, that they did much honour and reverence the good order and discipline of the Church of England; & with all their hearts would be glad to have it established amongst them, but that could not be hoped for in their state. Their hope was, that seeing they could not do what they desired; God would be merciful to them, if they did what they could. This was their answer; which I think is enough to excuse them; that they do not openly aim at anarchy and popular confusion. The truth is, they groan under that burden, and would be eased, if they could. This is well known to the rest of my Associates there.  
Pag. 58. speaking of the 17. Article, he saith: there is not one word, syllable, or apex touching your absolute, necessary, determined, irresistible, irrespective Decree of God to call save and glorify S. Peter, for instance, without any consideration had or regard to his faith, obedience, and repentance, and to condemn judas as necessarily without any respect had at all to his sin: this is a private fancy of some particular men.  
Of this I have spoken at large before. I have declared that these accusations, which he hath here made against the doctrine of predestination, were the accusations of the Pelagians against Saint Augustine's doctrine. Only here I will answer to a particular surmise, that may happily fall into the thought of the Reader, or of the Author of the Appeal himself. He saith here, that these things are not contained in the 17. Article: and so after his manner of shifting, he may say, that he delivereth not here his own opinion, but only saith that these things are not contained in the Article. To remove this answer, he must remember, that in diverse places through his book, he delivereth the same with confidence, not only as his own opinion, but as the doctrine of our Church, as page 30. He saith (though not truly as hath been proved before) That the 16. Article was challenged as unsound; but was there defended, maintained, avowed, averred, for true, by the greatest Bishops and learnedest of our Divines, against that absolute, irrespective, necessitating, and fatal decree of your new predestination. In which words he plainly delivereth his own opinion, and, as he taketh it, the doctrine of our Church. Thus much I say here to take him from that starting hole, which he might think of, to say that in this, as in some other things, he delivered not his own opinion: his opinion is plain, that he layeth these accusations against predestination, as the Pelagians did.  
Page 71. he saith. That Deodate Minister and professor of the Church of Geneva, professed to him his opinion in some points contrary to the conclusions of Dort.  
All the English Divines which were there do verily believe this to be untrue, because they hold Deodate for an honest man. And to put this matter out of doubt, Deodate himself hath written to a learned and reverend Bishop of our Church, protesting that he never spoke any such thing as the Author of the Appeal imposeth upon him, touching the conclusions of that Synod. He, that durst deal so with Deodate, must needs lose credit in other things.  
Page 72. he saith At the conference of Hampton Court, the Bishop of London Doctor Bancrofte called the doctrine of praedestination a desperate doctrine without any reproof or taxation.  
I answer, as the Bishop of London did then understand it a desperate doctrine, so do I call it. The Bishop of London had reason, for speaking against a common abuse of that doctrine: Our Author hath no reason to speak against the doctrine itself. The Bishops' words were these (which he omitteth to wrong the Bishop) Many in these times neglecting holiness of life, presume too much of persisting in grace, laying all their religion upon praedestination: If I shall be saved, I shall be saved: which he termeth a desperate doctrine: and who will deny this as the Bishop delivereth it? It was not the Bishops' meaning to call the doctrine of praedestination, a desperate doctrine, as Saint Paul preacheth it, or as the 17. Article delivereth it. The Article affirmeth, that the godly consideration of praedestination, and our election in Christ is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh— aswell because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal salvation to be enjoyed by Christ, as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God.  
If the Author had been but indifferently affected to the doctrine of Praedestination, and to the Article that proveth such comfort to be contained in it, and received by it; He would have said somewhat of this comfort, which the godly receive from this doctrine: But he is pleased to find nothing in Praedestination but a desperate doctrine. The Article saith also; that for curious and carnal men lacking the spirit of God, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Praedestination, is a most dangerous downfall. The Bishop spoke of these last words.  
Our learned Author, the determiner of the doctrines of the Church of England, alloweth that the doctrine Praedestination should be called a desperate doctrine. (He cannot say here, that he only relateth the Bishop's words, for therein he hath wronged the Bishop, that he relateth not his words rightly.) But the doctrine of our Church in that Article saith, that it is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons. He hath handsomely maintained the doctrine of our Church, saying, that the doctrine of Praedestination is a desperate doctrine, without any mention of the abuse of it; which before him, no Divine of the Church of England ever uttered.  
Pag. 73. He saith, It is your own doctrine, God hath appointed them to grace and glory, God according to his purpose hath called and justified them; therefore it is certain, that they must and shall be saved infallibly: Thus writeth the Author of the Appeal against his accusers.  
I know not these men against whom he writeth, but he doth much honour them, in saying that this is their doctrine. Sir, is not this your doctrine also? I am sure it is the Apostles doctrine: Quos insitificavit, glorificavit. Saint Augustine draweth out of these words that doctrine which this man condemneth. 
Lib. de Fradest. sanct. cap. 17.  Electi sunt de mundo ea vocatione, quae Deus id quod praedestinavit, implevit: Quos enim praedestinavit, ipsos & vocavit, illa scilicet vocatione secundum propositam: Non ergo alios sed quos praedestinavit, ipsos & vocavit: nec alios sed quos ita vocavit, ipsos & iustificavit: nec alios sed quos praedestinavit, vocavit, iustificavit, ipsos & glorificavit. He saith in the same place, Haec est immobilis veritas praedestinationis & gratiae. Then according to these grounds (which Saint Augustine calleth the immoveable truth of Praedestination, and grace) they whom God according to his purpose hath called, and justified, must and shall be saved infallibly. Sir, do you puff at this doctrine? Durum est contra stimulos calcitrate. The words are short and plain; Quos iustificavit, glorificavit: They must and shall be glorified, because the word of God must and shall be true. These things are not, as this man in scorn calleth them Scholastical speculations, they are the Grounds of our salvation.  
The chief and corner stone, elect and precious, is unto some a rock of offence: Men may dash themselves against this rock, but they cannot shake it, they cannot hurt or remove it. Again, these short words, Quos iustificavit, glorificavit: doth utterly shake in pieces that new doctrine of his, where he laboureth, but in vain, to prove, that a man so justified may fall away totally and finally: Quos iustificavit, glorificavit. If they who are justified according to God's purpose shall infallibly be glorified; then can they never fall away totally, or finally. Yes, saith he, they may fall away totally, though not finally. It seemeth that this man maketh some account of this conceit; for he hath spoken of it at other times, that a man may fall away totally, but not finally. If he, or any man, could prove by evident Scripture, that a man that is predestinated, called, and justified, according to God's purpose, may fall away totally; then will I yield that he may fall away finally. It is a weak conceit to think that he shall stand finally, that falleth away totally. For if all grace be gone, totally lost, then must the man come to another predestination▪ another calling, another justification, 〈…〉 cation another adoption. But then must 〈…〉 man set up another School of Divinit 〈…〉 by that knowledge of Divinity, 〈◊〉 received amongst us, and hitherto preserved, these things cannot stand.  
FINIS.   

Errata.  
Pag. 2. lin. 5. for pag. 37. read pag. 73. Pag. 85. lin. 11. for may be lost, read may not be lost.