Book II
Of the order of God s decrees about man s election and reprobation.Of the
end to which we are ordained; a supernatural union with God and com
munication of himself. The infinity of grace discovered therein.
CHAPTER I.
That God had a respect unto man considered as im fallen, in his election of him
unto the end, and also unto man as fallen into sin in his decrees to the means.
This distinction to the end and to the means, in the decrees of God, is so
generally acknowledged, that I need not insist on it.
But concerning what is the end, and what are the means, as in my sense
I intend it, needs some explication.
1. The end is either (1.) God s glory, and that I call the supreme end of
all. Of this my assertion proceedeth not. (2.) There is that fulness of
glory God designed to bring his elect into, and this I call the ultimate end
or issue of all (as the other the supreme]. And this end (which the apostle terms
* perfec
* the end, 1 Cor. xv. 24, and Rom. vi. 22, and Christ the
tion of his members, John xvii. 22, 23 compared) is that I mean, when I
affirm that the decree to this end was not after, or upon the consideration
of, the fall first had. But, indeed, that all those means to accomplish or
bring us through unto the attaining of this end, they all suppose man fallen
as the object of them.
2. And then, secondly, I distinguish again of what are termed means to
this end among several divines. The pure superlapsarian he takes into the means to this end, the creation, and the permission of the fall, and calls them means to bring about that intention or decree to that ultimate end or
glory specified.* But I do limit myself that those only are means, either which on Christ s part he, as a redeemer, hath performed thereunto, or
which on our part are wrought in us or by us ; such as are calling, justifying
: Rom.
faith, and repentance, which are termed preparations unto glory
* Whom he hath afore prepared unto glory. Also good works, and an holy life : Eph. ii. 10, Which God had afore prepared (so in the
ix. 23,
margin and Greek), that we should walk in them. He will give grace as
the means then, glory as the end. These I am sure are such means as do, ex se, prepare for glory, by way of direct and proper influence. And all such do presuppose a fall, and are a restoration of us out of it. And it is
of these I now speak, and unto these I do limit my discourse.
And as for that other of creation, &c., sure I am that that holiness in Adam by creation, whilst he stood, and in which he was created, was not a
* Nisi tribus illis mediis, 1, homine condendo ; 2, condito integro sed labili ;
3, denique lapso, intervenientibus, ad istos fines Deus pervenire non potuit. Piscator
Quest, de Objecto Praedestinat. p. 176.
CHAP. I.] OF ELECTION. 85
means at all of that glory, that is, of that election glory, which we are now
speaking of. But therefore it must be cast upon some other consideration,
notion, or account, than of a means which election should have prepared for
that glory. Also the sin of Adam, no man must say that it was a means, but at the utmost of it, but an occasion, or rather indeed but a mere outlet
or passage through which election wrought itself into a new enlargement or
amplification and magnifying of the grace of itself towards the elect, in a new
way, considered as sinners, and as now become miserable, which by creation
they were not ; in which new way and course the grace of election would
further expiate, and as with a fetching a compass about, bring us to that
* glory it had designed (as in Heb. ii. 10 the phrase is) ; thereby the more illustriously to glorify itself by making thereby a new edition of
ultimate
grace, which should give all anew after sinning, and desert of the contrary, foreseen.
Whereas the former grace, considering us unfallen, and designing us unto
that end, was a mere supercreation and supernatural grace through Christ
as a mediator of union ; but this last was by him as by a Saviour purchas
ing all anew, and restoring us unto such graces, now utterly lost, as were
requisite for man fallen to have ere he should be brought unto glory.
But what aspect or subserviency any way, creation or permission of the
fall have unto the decrees of election or reprobation, I have a more proper
place to shew it in. But it is certain they serve but in common unto each
of those decrees, and are but such matters as common providence. That which at present I would say is only that I rank them not among proper and
direct means unto that ultimate end spoken, but I limit the proper notion
of means unto such as do suppose the fall ; for that Christ considered as a redeemer ; as also that we should be called and believe ; these are all such means as have an immediate influence into that glory, as all do and must
acknowledge ; and they suppose the fall first, and therefore I limit the decree
of the means unto such. This for the stating of it. Now as touching my assertion, as thus stated, viz., his making this apart ment, that in the decree to the end God had an eye unto man considered as
not fallen, I am not alone in it. Polanus speaks adequately unto this my
sense, whom I the more willingly cite, because he also makes Christ as he
is Christ the head and foundation of election, considered afore the fall ; as
also, suitable unto this my present argument in hand, I profess myself to do. He speaking how man is the subject or object of election, and how con
sidered by God therein, hath these words :* God in his decree of election
did behold (or look upon) his elect as to the end he predestinated them unto, so as men absolutely in common, without all consideration of qualities in
them. But if we consider the means leading to the end, so he looked upon men, not as in their upright condition (afore the fall), but as they would be corrupt of and in themselves by the fall, and fallen headlong by their own default into eternal death. Than which nothing is more fall unto that
division or distinction of means and end which I have made.
I know there is a controversy among divines, not at all whether election be not as well to the means as to the end, and so unto both, none that I know deny that, but the controversy is, whether the whole act of God s
* Eos Deus in decreto electionis intuitus est, quod finem attinet, ad quern eos
praedestinavit, ut homines communiter et absolute extra aliquam qualitatum in iis considerationem ; quia de iis disponendi liberrimam potestatem tanquam Dominus habet. Sin vero media ad finem ducentia consideremus, intuitus est homines non ut
integros, sed quatenus futuri erant a se, et in se corrupt! per lapsum, et in mortem
seternarn, propria culpa prsecipitati. Polan. Synlag. 1. iv. c. 9, p. 249, folio.
36 OF ELECTION. [BOOK II.
decreeing unto both should not have been pitched, either wholly upon man
considered in the mass of mobility afore the fall, or wholly upon the mass
of mankind considered and viewed first as fallen into sin. And many c
jud^e it incompatible that both should stand. f profess not to enter upon the merits of so great a question here, but
only that both conditions were at once viewed by God, so that one was
neither first nor second to the other in time, but that God having all afore
him in his immense understanding, had in his purpose of election to the end
a respect unto man considered as unfallen, but in that to these means, unto
man considered as fallen ; and decreed both, and all in one and the same
determination of his divine will.
That there have been some eminent divines that have gone about to recon
cile those different opinions, whether men fallen or unfallen were the object
of predestination, may be well known among them that are versed in this
controversy.
That judicious and good divine Keckermanus, he first states the contro
versy :* The whole question (says he) about the object of God s decree of
election is, whether men were absolutely considered (as creatures) or under
the consideration of the fall ; and then determines it by the application of
this very distinction in the sense I have given it. Thus : The decree of
election" falls under a double consideration : the first, in respect cf the end,
namely, life eternal ; and so the consideration of the fall was not necessary,
because the fall was not a means thereof, but rather an impediment ; secondly,
this decree may be considered as in respect unto man s frail condition, which
God foresaw, as also of the means, such as in respect unto man s (frail)
condition were to come, namely, of redemption and regeneration ; and
so the decree of election necessarily includes a respect and consideration of
the fall.
And interpreting that to the Romans, chap. viii. 29, Whom he hath
foreknown, those he hath predestinated to be conformable to the image of
his Son, he further draws out of these words the state and decision of this
controversy. The apostle (says he) distinguisheth the decree of God into
two acts: 1, foreknowledge of such as are his; 2, of predestination. Which when I weigh (saith he) I understand by the foreknowledge, his decree simply considered of giving to men eternal life, as man is considered without the
consideration of the fall. But by predestination I understand God s decree
concerning man fallen, as he was to be raised up again, and to be brought to eternal life. And indeed election, in the import of it, is very ordinarily
: the first to be unto the end
distinguished by divines from predestination
simply ; the second to import the decree unto the means, as including the end.
I shall here omit what Junius and Piscatorf have attempted to the recon
ciling of this controversy.
But I add this : 1. That God s decree unto these means specified, they
* Tota quaestio est de objecto facti hujus decreti, utrum niminim fuerint homines absolute spectati, an vero sub consideratione lapsus. Ad quam questionem respondendum videtur electionis decretum dnpliciter posse considerari. Primo respeciu Finis, vid. vit seternse, et sic non fuisse necessariam considerationem lapsus ; quia lapsus non est medium hujus fir is, sed potius impedimentum. 2. Considerari posse decretum hoc, ratione turn ipsius hominis, cujus fragilis conditio a Deo praevidebatnr; turn etiam mediorum qualium respectu humanae conditionis futura erant ; vid. redeniptionis et regenerationis. et ita decretum electionis includere necessario respectum et considerationem lapsus. Keckfrman. System. Theolog. t See Junius in his Arnica Collatio cum Arminico ; and Piscator. Qucext. de Objecto Prcedcst., p. 1J6.
CHAP. I.] OF ELECTION. 87
must certainly presuppose the consideration of the fall ; for to believe on
Christ a redeemer, &c., necessarily presupposeth it ; and although these
concern the execution of God s decree, whereby to bring men unto that
end, yet certainly God decreed the means from everlasting as well as the end.
2. That for God to have decreed unto glory without any respect or con
sideration of the fall, thus far, even those that are of that other opinion,
that is, for election after the fall considered, do yet freely and frankly
acknowledge.
That most learned, perspicuous, and candid author, Bishop Davenant,
* that if by predestination any do understand the de
doth acknowledge,
signation unto the end, viz. of glory, as many (says he) of the ancient school men did ; and by reprobation, only the negation of that act (namely, a non-
election unto glory), though I think (says he) it is not necessary to suppose
sin to have been first in the person or subject, either elected or reprobated. And his answer is, Because sin (as first foreseen) is altogether impertinent unto either of these acts ; for it is not the ground or reason of electing or
not electing (as all confess), nor is it a qualification of the subject, without
which these acts could not befall these persons, as appears evidently in the
case of angels. Thus he, although for his own opinion, he rather inclined
to think that the Scripture (as Austin had done) seemed rather to place the
decrees of the end and that to the means, both of them upon man presup
posed as fallen, and yet speaks tenderly in it.
Now, I readily grant that the decree of end and that of means were both
in God s mind at once, and in it neither had a priority or a posteriority. But still the question will be, whether both these estates of man unfallen
and fallen (though in execution they succeed one after the other), yet lying
alike level unto the prospect of the divine mind and will of God, he might
not have, yea, had not in the decree of the end, or to glory simply, a respect
unto man, considered by him as unfallen, as the terminus a quo, or rise in
his choosing of him, as also in his denying that glory to other. And then
again, in his decree of the meam or way to that glory, he had not a respect unto that fallen condition of man ; and both thus, the one and the other, and
all lying at once afore him, whether he did not place and pitch his decree
to the end upon their unfallen and creable condition, and make that estate
or condition the terminus a quo of it, and his decree to the means upon his
fallen condition ; and this is it that I affirm.
Obj. 1. The learned bishop urgeth that predestination in Scripture is not
only to the end, glory, but also to the means, as faith, &c. which means
(says he) are such as "suppose man fallen, and therefore election to the end
doth also.
Ans. 1. For answer, 1, 1 grant that election to glory as the end, doth not
take up the whole of the act of election, as the object of it ; but takes in
election to the means that makes up the whole of it ; nor do I find those
schoolmen he speaks of, that they do not acknowledge election to be also unto
grace as the means. But it no way follows that because election to those
means do suppose man fallen, that therefore election unto glory also should
necessarily do the same ; for the grace of God in his electing us unto glory,
first of man considered as unfallen, might and did design an ampletion or
* Primo si per prsedestmationem quis intelligat solam designationem ad finem
glorise (sicut multi intelligunt ex antiquioribus scholasticis) et per reprobationem solam uegationem hujus actus, yel decretum non elegendi ; puto non necessarium
ut supponamus peccatura fuisse prsevisum, quia peccatum ad actum divinse elec-
tionis,velnon-electionis omnino impertiiienter se habet. Davenant, Dissert, de Elect.
p. 116.
QQ OF ELECTION. [BOOK II.
magnifying of itself, the more by permitting them to fall into sin, whom he
had ordained to glory, and so redeem them and save them through such
means as are requisite to save man fallen, and through them to bring them
unto glory. ... . Am. 2. And, 2dly, we find that the Scriptures, when speaking of election,
do pitch the ordination of it upon no other than eternal life and glory, as
the object of it ; and faith, which is that consequent of that ordination to
life : Acts xiii. 48, As many as were ordained to eternal life, as the end,
believed, as the means through which God brought them to that end ; yea,
and through which I acknowledge they also, by an act of election, were
ordained to be brought ; yet still the ordination unto life is there only and
precisely mentioned. He says not; those that were ordained to believe,
believed; but those that were ordained to eternal life, believed, as that
through which they arrived at it. But as this election to the end was one
thing, and that to faith as the means another, so they may respect these two
several conditions of man chosen mentioned. Again, elsewhere, though it
be true that faith is said to be given by an act of election, as well as eternal
life, and therefore is styled the faith of God s elect, Titus i. 1, yet eternal
life is there also, not distinctly alone and apart spoken of, in ver. 2, but as
that which being originally promised by God, who cannot lie, afore the
world began, viz., as that which being promised and decreed, had drawn on
the believing, and the ordination thereof by election ; so as although these
two are conjunct, yet still they may and are to be abstractly considered, not
only as distinct decrees, but as those that may be determinated upon the elect
under distinct considerations or notions of fallen and unfallen.
Obj. 2. And again, that it is said, 2 Thes. ii. 13, He hath from the
beginning chosen you to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit, and
belief of the truth. Where our election to the means and to the end are
joined, and that end itself is termed salvation, which respects the fall ; for
out of that it is that we are said to be saved.
Ans. 1. I grant that that ultimate grand story of God s being all in all, hath upon the fall the title of salvation anew put upon it ; and Christ s
purchase of it anew for us did deserve that title. And so I grant also ; yet when we were ordained unto these means of faith, &c., we were withal
ordained unto this end, as it is salvation ; yea, and as that which was to be
purchased anew by Christ as a Redeemer, by reason of the fall foreseen ; yet this hinders not another gift of it by God, and title of us thereby to it, by an act of election in Christ as an head, without respect unto the fall, and as
it considered primely and simply glory, the glory which God gave Christ
himself as an head first, and he and his Father by that title, unto us as so
considered by him : John xvii. 22, And the glory which thou gavest me, I have given them : that they may be one, even as we are one. Things being
fallen, he was fain to purchase it anew for them ; but as in that respect it is termed salvation, ver. 13 of that 2 Thes. ii., so it is also styled the glory of
Christ in the next words, ver. 14, to the obtaining of the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ; that is, that which Christ had given him by an election before the foundation of the world, John xvii. 24, which, as an head to us, he says he had given us, ver. 22, and is therefore, in 2 Thes. ii., styled the glory of Christ, as elsewhere the glory and kingdom of God, which Christ is said to receive us unto, Rom. xv. 7.
Ans. 2. So as in truth the allegation of this or other Scriptures to the same purpose, is but to insist and to urge one truth to include another, as
falls out almost in all controversies ; for as it is a truth that there is an elec tion to the end, without consideration of the fall, and these means to that
CHAP. I.] OF ELECTION. 89
end upon the fall, so also it is as great a truth that an election to the end is
specified in Scripture, when it no way relates unto the fall, but is considered
apart from it. Thus those benefits we are chosen unto, Eph. i. 3, where
election is handled, tanquam in proprid sede, are such as no way depend upon the consideration of the fall, but hold upon our election unto Christ, and are
given by election upon grounds higher and distinct from that of his being a Redeemer: ver. 5,
* Having predestinated us unto adoption of children, by Christ unto himself; which, if relating to God the Father, speaks this great
truth, that God ordained us into immediate communion with himself, as else where it is said ; or if that word doth refer unto Christ himself (as some),
yet farther still, a predestination to adoption is all one in effect, as to say,
predestinated unto glory ; for adoption and a sonship in election unto Christ,
speaks withal a title unto glory, as that place, Romans 8th, shews : If
children, then heirs and coheirs with Christ, &c. ; and, it is added, heirs with* God himself, as Christ also is. And so those words, Eph. i. 3, Pre
destinating us to adoption to himself, as referring to the act of God the Father as predestinating, it is all one as to say, we were predestinated to
inherit God himself, and to immediate communion with himself ; and so it
refers us to that ultimate glory, when God shall be all in all. Now this title
of adoption holds clearly by another right besides that of redemption ; for
Christ, as the natural Son, being by election onef head and husband, a rela
tion unto him upon that account bestowed, doth convey adoption and son-
ship to us, and so a right to that inheritance ; which agrees with what I have
elsewhere said. In like manner, by our choice unto complete and immutable
holiness, in the 4th verse, is not meant that imperfect holiness in this life, which is ordained as such to be means of glory (as our sublapsarian divines
allege it) ; for it is that holiness which is without blame before God, and so such an holiness which will never be subject to change or mutation ; yea, and so perfect an holiness in God s own view, for time to come as well as
time present, as God shall find no defect in to blame. Whereas even the most perfect holiness the angels had by creation, whilst made mutable, was
charged with folly and imperfection in that respect, Job iv. 18 ; but this
is that unchangeable holiness, the holiness which is the end itself, as well as
glory, and the concomitant of it, or the ground-work of it ; and this also
might and doth flow from a relation unto Christ, as an head given by elec
tion, and an influence from him considered as such, and not only from him, as supposed as a Redeemer first, although to man when fallen, he is an head
also ; and these benefits are accordingly there distinguished from those that
Christ, supposed as a Redeemer, doth convey ; and severed from those other
by the apostle in the same place, ver. 7, In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his
* Wherein he hath abounded towards us in all wisdom and prudence
grace. And so on in calling us by the gospel, ver. 8, 9,
: having made known unto
us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure, which he had pur posed in himself; which are manifestly the benefits or blessings (as here
are called, ver. 3), of the means which suppose us sinners, and being sin
ners, we are carried through them unto glory ; but those former are benefits
of the end, which in that their fulness there spoken of take place in the other
world, and which we were capable of, being designed unto, without the con
sideration of being sinners, or Christ his being a Redeemer, as might at
large be shewn, and as Bishop Davenant acknowledged ; and are accord
ingly distinguished from what we have by redemption. We must not there
fore allege the one of either to exclude the other, but take both in their * Qu. of ? ED. f Qu. our ? ED.
9Q OF ELECTION. [BOOK II.
differing respects to either condition of the elect specified ; to unfallen the one,
and of fallen the other. ,
Obi. 8. And a like unto this objection taken from 2 Thes. 11. 13, are those
other, as that election is said to be joined with giving us to Christ, and that
runs as he is a Redeemer and Saviour, to bring us to glory ; and therefore
the whole of election, both to means and end, must have proceeded only
upon foresight of the fall. But, The answer is, That Christ himself beareth (as was even now said) two
relations and respects to us : first, simply of an head, and that in the first
place ; and then, secondly, of a Saviour: Eph. v. 23, Even as Christ is the
head of the church ; and he is the Saviour of the body. His being an
head there, is his being an husband to us ; and so the foundation of that
relation to God, of being his adopted children as by marriage with his Son ;
and that latter of our Saviour necessarily respecteth sin, but not the other ;
and accordingly election may and doth respect those several conditions of
the elect. And a double giving to Christ in both respects will well fall in,
and agrees with Christ s pleas made to his Father on our behalf, in the 17th
of John.
Obj. 4. Another argument against my assertion, urged by others, is,
that election being an immanent act within God himself, must therefore be
unicus, but one single, complete, and perfect act at once, and not divided
into two, nor incomplete ; whereas to suppose that there is an election to the
end, and then unto the means, and one to respect man unfallen, but the
other man fallen, seems to render it imperfect, incomplete, not at once, but
distracted, &c.
Ans. For answer, I must tell those that will urge this argument, that take
all the decrees in God (which are immanent acts in him), both the decrees
of election and reprobation, and those of common providence, and there is
but one individual act in all of them, and yet themselves will acknowledge that the Scriptures do set them forth to us as distinct acts ; and that dis
tinguished by election to diversities of objects they are terminated upon, and
as proceeding from several properties in God, some from justice, some from
mercy. As likewise, in respect of their dependence in, and of one thing upon another, the reason whereof is in this, that the series of things are set
out to us ad nostrum intelliqendi modwn, and as the things do suit, and sort, and correspond each with other. And thus they were made distinct acts,
election from reprobation, and both from his decrees of common providence. Now, bring this general notion of all acts thus made distinct, though all one
in God, and the distinction may be accounted to have been in election itself, and the like in reprobation itself. This matter is clear. Bishop Davenant,
although he professeth to be against those instants or several moments (take them as the school ainrmeth of them) to have been in God s decrees, yet in
the point of reprobation, himself holds not only a distinction of acts, negative
or a non-election, and positive, a pre-ordination to damnation (which two acts
all generally do confess) ; but furthermore, he doth positively express him
self in this manner, It is a far differing thing, says he,* to will to punish one, which is reprobation positive, and not to will or decree to give him glory or the chiefest good, which is the negative act. The first, says he, cannot be in God, but with a respect unto sin first considered as preceding ; but the other act of non-electing to glory may be considered without any respect unto the sin of the person. His reason I omit, because the thing is clear. And he adds, Concerning those divines, that, under that one word of repro bation, do jointly include both those acts of pre-election (the negative act), * Dissertat. de Electione, ch. xvi. p 173.
CHAP. I.] OF ELECTION. 91
and predamnation (the positive), that they could never as yet judge anything
certainly about reprobation. * Nay, he goes on further, that God did not
will or decree to punish, nor put forth a positive act, in the first or same
instant (as in reason we are to apprehend of God s counsels) in which his
will was not to glorify such as he passed by, but in the other instant, in which he considered them as sinners. f And again,
* God s deputation or ordain
ing men to death is not to be conceived as that which was performed in the same signo rationis (or instant according to reason) in which God s non-
electing them was appointed, but in another, after which such a non-elected
person, finally persevering in a state of sin, was foreseen. ! Now if in the two sorts of this sort of decrees in reprobation, the one was and might be passed without the consideration of sin, and so of the fall, the other, but upon the foresight of it ; yea, and performed, as he says, in
several instants, according to reason, and the manner of our conception
(according unto which the Scriptures have set forth these things to us) ; then why should it be uncouth to any that the two acts of election, viz., to the end and to the means, which those other two acts of reprobation do accom
pany and answer to (as the dark shadows to light bodies), should be con
sidered not distinct only in themselves, but distinguished also by this, that
the one is transacted in the divine will and understanding, without respect had unto sin or the fall, and that the other should respect the foresight of
the fall.
Obj. 5. Another farther objection may be against the partition of God s
decrees, as suited to the end and the means, and so against that decree of our election in Christ as an head, without consideration of the fall considered ; that this is to make two elections, that first to the end to be incomplete without the other to the means to complete it. Whereas it is an error our
divines find fault with in the Arminians, to make decrees incomplete, and then afterward complete ; yea, whereas God decrees all unico actu. Ans. 1. The Arminians, indeed, are justly charged with incomplete decrees of election, their sense therein being, that then only when a man
first believes God doth elect him in Christ to salvation, and that that act is
also suspended, and in that sense it is an incomplete decree ; because that man thus believing may fall away, and therefore election with them is not
completed until a man doth die, and the man is found to believe at death. Now this kind of incomplete and complete election, and in this sense, we
utterly deny.
Ans. 2. These two acts of ordaining unto the end and the means, as I have stated them, are but two gradus or degrees || in this decree, as in respect to the things decreed, and that of the decree to the end, velut initium pro-
positi Dei, but as the beginning or entrance of God s purposes, and so both
not to be understood as of two acts of decree, though for our understand
ing we are enforced thus to speak.
Ans. 3. That God, considering and viewing all at once unfallen and
* Qui sub unico vocabulo reprobationis ambos hosce actus divinse voluntatis, praeelectionis scilicet et prse-damnandi, conjunctim includunt, nunquam poterunt aliquid certi de reprobatione affirmare. Ibid.
t Neque voluit eos punire in primo instanti rationis in quo noluit glorificare, sed in illo altero in quo illos consideravit ut peccatores. Davenant, ib. p. 174.
% Hsec ad mortem deputatio non concipienda est ut in eodem signo rationis peracta quo non-electio statuitur. Sed in alio posteriore quo non-electi perseverentia finalis in statu peccati prsevidetur, p. 175.
Qu. parts ? ED.
II Hos duos actus nonnulli vocant gradus satis apposite. Alstedius Theol. Didact.
p. 206. Et decretum finis veluti initium propositi Dei. Ibid.
92 OF ELECTION. [BOOK II.
fallen, unico intuitu, with one act of his divine omniscience, yet consigned,
or designed in two differing respects, of what himself comprehended in one
act, as unto two several objects which he decreed, as, namely, that decree to
the end, or to glory, to respect man simply considered, that state or con
sideration best suiting, and being more correspondent unto that sort of
decree, but that to shew his grace the more, he designed him withal to these
means of redemption, &c., specified upon the intuition of the fall, for they
only do suppose the fall. Like as in the act of God s justifying of us, he
first justified us when we had been afore and until then utterly ungodly ; and he withal worketh tmnctification and godliness in the heart, which is
really a new condition, differing from that state afore. And yet when we
are thus made godly, yet still his act of justifying of us is terminated upon
* But to him that worketh
us, considered by him as ungodly; so Rom. iv. 5,
not, but believeth him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for
righteousness. And his proof for this is, the instance of Abraham s being
justified many years after he was godly by sanctification ; whereupon God, when he justified him, must needs be supposed to have had afore him, and
in his eye, both that Abraham was now a godly man, and yet he was, be
cause he had been once, an ungodly person. He terminates or pitches his
justifying him in the act thereof upon him considered as ungodly. Thus in
like manner, although God had man s pure estate and his corrupt estate
both in his view afore him, yet he chose to terminate his election to glory upon the pure estate, as well as upon him considered in his fallen estate, and as to be redeemed out of it.
So as my assertion no ways introduceth any pause to come in between the
decrees of the end and the means, to make the first incomplete, no, nor so much as two acts (as in God himself), but only a termination of one and the same act of his will on two several objects he had at once in his view and
understanding, according to his good pleasure.
Ans. 4. I find that, in another case, divines of note and worth do acknow
ledge such a kind of incomplete act in God as this I here propose in these
decrees.*
To conclude ; that this was the opinion (the tendency at least) of those ancient schoolmen, thus to distinguish these two acts in election with a
differing respect unto these two conditions of men, fallen and unfallen, is evident enough. There is this evidence in general, that Suarezf should in the name of the rest afore him, pronounce th;.t to have been the more common opinion of his schoolmen, that the election of men was afore the
permission of the fall ; and that yet themselves, as generally, should acknow
ledge another decree, viz., to give them faith, &c., which latter doth in the nature of the thing itself necessarily respect man s fallen estate.
Particularly, first, as for Scotus J his draught of election runs thus, that in the first instant God decreed glory to a certain number of elect ; then in the second, decreed to give grace ; then foresaw the fall, &c. ; yea, and in
* See Walceus, torn. ii. Contra Carvinum, cap. 26. Sed quid si nos dicemus in Deo fuisse quidem affectum miserendi certorum hominum. sed huiic affectum impeditum fuisse a justitia, quominus actu complete salutem iis destinaret, atque adeo inter hunc
affectum, et peremptoriam ad salutem misericordiam, Christi electionem, ac proinde et satisfactionem intervenisse, ac turn demum eorum salutem actu complete intendisse, ac decrevisse, cum decreta jam morte Christi, atque iis Christo redimendis datis, justicise Dei plene in decreto Dei est satisfactum.
t Probabiliorem existimp, communem sententiam theologorum assereutium electiouem hominum prseuestinatorum antecessisse permissionem originalis peccati. Suarez. part iii. quest. 1, disput. 5.
J Lib. i. diss. 41, quest, unica. et lib. iii. disc. 19, qusest. 7.
CHAP. II.] OF ELECTION. 93
his series of decrees of reprobation, makes a respect to have been had to both estates.
Reprobation is considered, says he, 1, negatively, wherein God ordained not to elect them ; 2, affirmatively, by which God ordained after the per mission of the fall to damn them for sin. The first consideration must be
as afore the fall, the latter doth suppose the fall.
And if reprobation did respect both those estates, then much more elec
tion ; because election hath of the two the more benign and gracious aspects to manifest itself all sorts of ways, to illustrate itself by grace, cast on both
states, the highest and most comprehensive.
For Aquinas, he is alleged by those writers for each of the opinions, whether of the pure or corrupted mass. Suarez, who had studied him as much as any of his followers, cites him for this opinion, if, says he, what he delivers be but attentively considered ; * and Bishop Davenant himself mentions him as favouring that opinion.f And although Aquinas, part. 1,
quest. 23, art. i., ad tertium, seemeth rather to put the term from which, or
object of predestination on which, God should pitch his predestination to be man considered as fallen ; yet Suarez, interpreting him, compounds it with
that very notion and distinction I have prosecuted. Aquinas, J says he, speaks of that predestination which is unto the means by which men are
Baved, but not according to God s fore -intention or election unto glory.
And as for Calvin, he is cited for either, both for massa corrupta, or the
fallen mass, to have been the object of predestination, by Bishop Davenant
in express words, p. 116, out of Calvin s Institutions^ as also in his Treatise
of Predestination against Pighius ; and yet that he is cited for predestination to have been afore the consideration of the fall, is so well known, as there needs not any allegation for it. It is the common opinion put upon him. Now I cannot think that a man of so great a judgment was wavering in the
point, but that he had indeed both in his eye, and saw by the Scriptures that there was in God s decrees, as laid forth therein, a respect had unto
both.