upon what accounts I have reproved them, you will find that I have reason.

There are one sort of Calvin's scholars, whom we for distinction's sake call Supralapsarians, who are so fierce in their sentences of predestination and reprobation, that they say God looked upon mankind, only as his creation, and his slaves, over whom he having absolute power was very gracious, that he was pleased to take some few, and save them absolutely; and to the other greater part he did no wrong, though he was pleased to damn them eternally, only because he pleased; for they were his own; and qui jure suo utitur nemini facit injuriam, says the law of reason, every one may do what he please with his own. But this bloody and horrible opinion is held but by a few; as tending directly to the dishonour of God, charging on him alone, that he is the cause of men's sins on earth, and of men's eternal torments in hell; it makes God to be powerful, but his power not to be good; it makes him more cruel to men, than good men can be to dogs and sheep; it makes him give the final sentence of hell, without any pretence or colour of justice; it represents him to be that which all the world must naturally fear, and naturally hate, as being a God dehting in the death of innocents; for so they are when resolves to damn them; and then most tyrannically ruel, and unreasonable; for it says, that to make a

te pretence of justice, it decrees that men inevit

sin, that they may inevitably, but justly be

damned; it makes God to be all that, for which any other thing or person is or can be hated; for it makes him neither to be good, nor just, nor reasonable, but a mighty enemy to the biggest part of mankind; it makes him to hate what himself hath made, and to punish that in another, which in himself he decreed should not be avoided; it charges the wisdom of God with folly, as having no means to glorify his justice, but by doing unjustly, by bringing in that which himself hates, that he might do what himself loves; doing as Tiberius did to Brutus and Nero, the sons of Germanicus; variâ fraude induxit ut concitarentur ad convitia, et concitati perderentur; provoking them to rail, that he might punish their reproachings.

This opinion reproaches the words of the spirit of Scripture, it charges God with hypocrisy and want of mercy, making him a father of cruelties, not of mercy, and is a perfect overthrow of all religion, and all laws, and all government; it destroys the very being, and nature of all election, thrusting a man down to the lowest form of beasts and birds, to whom a spontaneity of doing certain actions is given by God, but it is in thei so natural, that it is unavoidable. Now concerning this horrid opinion, I for my part shall say nothing but this; that he, that says there was no such man as Alexander, would tell a horrible lie, and be injurious to all story, and to the memory and fame of that great prince; but he that should say, it is true there was such a man as Alexander, but he was a tyrant, and a

an enemy

bloodsucker, cruel and injurious, false and dissembling, of mankind, and for all the reasons of the world to be hated and reproached, would certainly dishonour Alexander more, and be his greatest enemy. So I think in this, that the Atheists, who deny there is a God, do not so impiously against God, as they that charge him with foul appellatives, or maintain such sentences, which if they were true, God could not be true. But these men, Madam, have nothing to do in the question of Original Sin, save only, that they say that God did decree that Adam should fall, and all the sins that he sinned, and all the world after him, are no effects of choice, but of predestination, that is, they were the actions of God, rather than man.

But because these men, even to their brethren, seem to speak evil things of God, therefore the more wary and temperate of the Calvinists bring down the order of reprobation lower; affirming that God looked upon all mankind in Adam as fallen into his displeasure, hated by God, truly guilty of his sin, liable to eternal damnation, and they being all equally condemned, he was pleased to separate some, the smaller number far, and irresistibly bring them to heaven; but the far greater number he passed over, leaving them to be damned for the sin of Adam, and so they think they salve God's justice; and this was the design and device of the synod of Dort.

Now to bring this to pass, they teach concerning Original Sin ;

1. That by this sin our first parents fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties, and parts of soul and body.

2. That whatsoever death was due to our first parents for this sin, they being the root of all mankind, and the guilt of this sin being imputed, the same is conveyed to all their posterity by ordinary generation.

3. That by this original corruption we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil; and that from hence proceed all actual transgressions.

4. This corruption of nature remains in the regenerate, although it be through Christ pardoned and mortified, yet both itself and all the motions thereof are truly and properly sin.

5. Original sin being a transgression of the righteous law of God, and contrary thereunto, doth in its own nature bring guilt upon the sinner, whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God and curse of the law, and so made subject to death with all miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal. These are the sayings of the late assembly at Westminster.

Against this heap of errors and dangerous propositions, I have made my former discoursings and statings of the question of Original Sin. These are the doctrines of the Presbyterian, whose face is towards us, but it is over against us in this and many other questions of great concernment. Nemo tam propè procul

que nobis. He is nearest to us and furthest from us; but because I have as great a love to their persons, as I have a dislike to some of their doctrines, I shall endeavour to serve truth and them, by reproving those propositions, which make truth and them to stand at distance.

Now I shall first speak to the thing in general and its designs, then I shall make some observations upon the particulars.

This device of our Presbyterians, and of the synod of Dort, is but an artifice to save their proposition harmless, and to stop the outcries of Scripture and reason, and of all the world against them. But this way of stating the article of reprobation is as horrid in the effect, as the other. For,

Is it by a natural consequent that we are guilty of Adam's sin, or is it by the decree of God? Naturally it cannot be; for then the sins of all our forefathers, who are to their posterity the same that Adam was to his, must be ours; and not only Adam's first sin, but his others are ours upon the same account. But if it be by the decree of God, by his choice and constitution, that it should be so, as Mr Calvin and Dr Twisse,* that I may name no more for that side, do expressly teach, it follows, that God is the author of our sin. that I may use Mr Calvin's words; "how is it that so many nations, with their children, should be involved

So

* Instit. 1. 3, c. 23. Sect. 7.-Vind. Grat. 1. 1, p. Digress. 4, c. 3.