are not sins of commission actions? Is murder no action? and does not God himself say, Non est malum in civitate quod ego non feci? And was not murder one of these evils? Whether it were or not I say no more, but that God is the cause (not the author) of all actions and motions; whether sin be the action or the defect, or the irregularity, I mean not to dispute." But in another place *, he will by no means admit of the distinction between the action, and the sinfulness or irregularity of it.

Now, though our opinion is often charged with making God the author of sin, yet we are far from admitting such a charge to be just, and one way of clearing ourselves from such an imputation, we take, is by using the distinction of an action, and the ataxy, disorder, or irregularity of it, which Mr. Hobbes disallows of. And so far are we from making God the cause of sin, that we allow sin to have no efficient, but only a deficient cause, though Mr. Hobbes is of opinion t, "that the distinction of causes into efficient and deficient, is bohu, and signifies nothing." All these things being considered, it will not appear that there is such a plain and manifest agreement between the doctrine of Mr. Hobbes and us concerning this matter, as to the great concernments of religion, as is undertaken to be shown. But supposing there is a plain agreement between him and us in this single point, of the consistence of liberty with necessity, why should it be cast upon us in a way of reproach? when it is notorious, that in many things there is a plain and manifest agreement between him and the Socinians and Arminians; for, not now to give instances of his agreement with the former, about the doctrine of the Trinity, the person §, and offices of Christ, and his satisfaction, the doctrine of justification ¶, the immortality of the soul**, its state after death, and the eternity of the future torments of the wicked:++ I shall just hint some few things in which he agrees with the latter; by which it will appear that if any reproach attends an agreement of sentiments with him, it will fall upon them, and not upon us. And,

1. We say that all men are, as David was, shapen in iniquity, and conceived in sin; that they are evil from their birth, and are by nature children of wrath. But Mr. Hobbes says ‡‡, “that men are by nature evil, cannot be granted without impiety; and though from their birth they may have desire, fear and anger; yet they are not to be reckoned evil on the account of these, since the affections of the mind, which flow from the animal nature, are not evil; but the actions which arise from them are sometimes so, when they are noxious and contrary to duty. Infants, unless you give them all that they desire, weep and are angry,

*The questions concerning Liberty, Necessity, and Chance, clearly stated and debated, p. 89. See also his Leviathan, c. 46, p. 322. Ed. Amsterd. 1670.

+ The questions concerning Liberty, Necessity, and Chance, clearly stated and debated, p. 175. Leviathan, c. 16, p. 81; c. 46, p. 317; Append. ad Lev. c. 1, p. 333, 339, 342, 346.

§ Ibid. c. 46, p. 317; Append. c. 1, p. 339.

¶ Ibid. c. 43, p. 287; de Civ. c. 18, p. 12.

|| Ibid. c. 38, p. 217; c. 41, p. 226, 227.

** Ibid. c. 38, p. 211; c. 44, 295; Append. c. 3, p. 363.

+ Ibid. c. 38, p. 210, 211; c. 44, p. 295, 300, 301.

Objectum porro a nonnullis est, quod omnes homines non modo malos, sed etiam (quod concedi sine impietate non potest) natura malos esse, &c.-Hobbes Præfat. in lib. de Cive.

and even beat their parents, and this they have from nature; and yet they are without fault: nor are they evil: first, because they cannot hurt; and next, because, wanting the use of reason, they are free from all duty." In this the Arminians agree with him, who, one and all, deny the doctrine of original sin: it would be needless to refer to authorities in proof of this.

2. We say, that every imagination of the thought of the heart is evil; that the first thought and desire of sin, or inclination and motion to it, is sinful. "But," says Mr. Hobbes *, "their opinion, who say the first motions of the mind are sins, seems to me to be too severe, both to themselves and others." He denies "that the affections of the mind are evil," or 66 that the passions of men are sins." And do not the Arminians agree with him, when they say †, "that concupiscence, and the first motions of it, are no sins; and that it was not forbidden to Adam in his state of innocence ?"

3. We say, that men have no good thing in them, but what is put into them by the grace of God; that they cannot think a good thought of themselves; and that everything of this nature comes from God. But Mr. Hobbes says, that "the schools, not knowing the nature of the imagination and sense, teach what they have learnt; some, that the imaginations arise from themselves, that is, without a cause; others, that, for the most part, they arise from the will; and that good thoughts are inspired into men by God, and evil ones by the devil; or that good thoughts are infused into men by God, and evil ones by the devil." This he represents as a great mistake, and arising from gross ignorance, that good thoughts are infused by God; and what else do the Arminians say, when they affirm§, "that man, before regeneration, has a power of willing that which is good; and that the will of man is flexible to that which is good, without the grace of God; and observe, that when the apostle says, not that we are sufficient to think anything as of ourselves, that he does not say that they were not sufficient to think any good thing of themselves; intimating that men are sufficient of themselves to think that which is good."

4. We affirm, that the understanding of man is so darkened by sin, that, without the illumination of the Spirit of God, he cannot understand the mind of God in the Scriptures. On the other hand, Mr. Hobbes intimates, that "men, without a supernatural revelation,

* Sententia igitur eorum qui motus animi primos peccata esse aiunt, tum aliis tum sibimet ipsis nimirum severa mihi videtur.-Leviathan, c. 27, p. 138. Affectiones animi mali non sunt ipsi.→ Præfat. 1. de Cive. Passiones hominum peccata non sunt.-Leviathan, c. 13, p. 65.

† Concupiscentia in primo statu Adamo vetita non est, ac proinde peccatum non fuit.-Episcop. disp. 20, thes. 16. Primos concupiscentiæ motus quibus assensum non præbat voluntas, dicunt quidem esse peccata, sed Scriptura ita de illis non judicat.—Curcellæus de Pecc. Orig. s. 35, 36. Vid. Institut. Rel. Christ. 1. 4, c. 16, s. 9.

Est autem hoc opus scholarum-nescientes enim imaginationis et sentionis naturam, &c.Leviathan, c. 2, p. 8.

§ Voluntas hominis post lapsum, ante regenerationem retinuit libertatem seu facultatum liberam sive bonum sive malum volendi.-Remonstr. sex colloc. Hag. p. 250. An tu negas liberum arbitrium esse flexibile in utrumque partem, addo et sine gratia? flexibile enim est natura sua.— Armin, contr. Perkins, p. 604.

Vide Act. Synod. circ. art. iv. p. 168.

Ex quibus scripturis per interpretationem rectam, &c.-Leviathan, c. 32, p. 176, & c. 33,

p. 176.

or inspiration, which he calls enthusiasm, may, by mere natural reason, know what God says, and understand the Scriptures, as much as is necessary to know our duty to God and man." And do not the Arminians teach the same, that the mind and will of God may be easily known from the sole reading of the Scriptures, without any illumination of the Holy Ghost; for, say they, "a sense superinfused, would be the sense of the Holy Ghost, and not of the Scripture; and that men endued with common sense and judgment may understand the meaning of them; and that there is a natural power, common to all that are endued with reason, to attain unto it."

*

5. We say, that faith is the gift of God, and does not proceed from natural causes, and that all grace is implanted in us, and infused into us by the Spirit of God. Mr. Hobbes rejects everything of this kind; and says, "that these phrases, infused virtue, inspired virtue, are insignificant, mere sounds, and are equally as false as, that a foursquare is round; and that it is giving the name of body to an accident, to say that 'faith is infused or inspired, when nothing is fusible or spirable but a body." He reckons it among the diseases of a body politic, as a seditious opinion, and what makes men apostates from natural reason, "that faith and holiness cannot be acquired by study and reason, but are supernaturally inspired or infused;" and roundly § asserts, that "though faith and holiness are scarce, yet not miracles; and that they proceed from education, discipline, correction, and other natural causes." And elsewhere || he says, "that God disposeth men to piety, justice, mercy, truth, faith, and every kind of virtue, moral and intellectual, by doctrine, example, and other natural and frequent methods." And though he is obliged to own ¶, that "faith is the gift of God, which he works in different persons, and in different ways, as seems good unto him, and is what he gives and denies to whom he pleases; yet", he says, "when he gives it, he gives it by teachers and therefore the immediate cause of faith is hearing; as in a school, where many are taught, some are proficients, some not, the difference is not always from the master. All good things, indeed, come from God; but most commonly by natural means; therefore we must not rashly give credit to them, who, in their doctrines, pretend to a supernatural gift; for their doctrine is first to be examined by the church." Though elsewhere, when it serves his purpose, he thinks fit to contradict himself, and asserts **, that faith is an act of the mind, not commanded, but wrought by God; which, when, and to *Sensus ille superinfusus non erit sensus verborum Scripturæ, sed sensus Spiritus Dei, &c.— Remonstr. Apolog. pro Confess. c. 1, p. 34. Ib. Confessio, c. 1, s. 14, p. 6. Vide Episcop. disp. 3, thess. 1, 2.

† Verba hæc infusa virtus, inflata virtus, nomina sunt insignificantia.-Leviathan, c. 4, p. 19. Nihil neque fusile sit, neque spiribile, præter corpus.—Ib. c. 5, p. 22.

Fidem et sanctitatem acquiri studio et ratione non posse, sed supernaturaliter inspiratas vel infusas esse, sed seditiosa opinio.-L. de Cive, c. 12, s. 6 ; & Leviathan, c. 29, p. 152.

§ Fides sit sanctitas etsi raræ, &c.-Ib.

153. P.

Homines enim ad pietatem, &c.-Ib. c. 36, p. 200.

¶ Est enim fides donum Dei,-Sed tamen quando dat, per doctores dat, et proinde causa fidei immediata est auditus, &c.-Leviathan, c. 43, p. 282, 283.

** Credere enim animi actus est, non adeo jussus sed factus quem quando et quibus vult, Deus dat negatque.-It. c. 26, p. 136.

whom he will, he gives or denies." And moreover says, that "the hearts of all men are in the hands of God, who works in men both to do and to will; and without his free grace, no man hath inclination to good, or repentance for sin." And do not the Arminians agree with this man in his other expressions? since they deny the infusion of habits, before any act of faith, or that any grace is infused into the will, or that the internal principle of faith is a habit infused by God, or that faith is called the gift of God, in respect of any actual infusion of it into our hearts; and affirm‡, that no other grace is necessary to draw forth an act of faith, than that which is of a moral nature, or that which uses the word as an instrument to produce faith; which word of the gospel is the sole and ordinary means of conversion, without the concurrence of any internal, efficacious, and irresistible act of the Holy Ghost.

6. We say, that that faith which is commonly called justifying faith, or that by which we believe to the saving of our souls, is not a general assent to the person and offices of Christ, and to the truths and doctrines of the gospel; but is that grace by which a soul goes out of itself to Christ, and relies upon him for pardon, righteousness, life, and salvation; by which it appropriates Christ to itself, and is a holy and humble persuasion and confidence of interest in him, and in the blessings of grace procured by him. But Mr. Hobbes § says, that "the only article of faith which the Scriptures make necessary to salvation is, that Jesus is the Christ." And not much different from this, is the definition of faith given by the Arminians, who say, that "justifying faith is that by which we believe in Christ as the Saviour of them who believe in general;" or, "that it is a fiducial assent to the gospel, by which a man is persuaded that all that is in it is true, and by which he trusts and acquiesces in God through Christ."

7. We affirm, that we are only justified by the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and not by faith or works, as the matter of our justification before God; that faith is that grace by which we receive the righteousness of Christ, as a justifying one, by which we have the sense and perception of our justification, and enjoy the peace and comfort which flow from it; and that good works, springing from faith, are declarative of it before men. But Mr. Hobbes says, that "both faith and obedience justify, God accepting the will for the deed; that obedience justifies, because it makes righteous, in the same

* Sine cujus gratia libera nemo habet neque inclinationem ad bonum neque resipiscentiam a malo. Ib. c. 44, p. 300.

+ Corvin. ad Walachr. p. 67; Grevinchov. contr. Ames. p. 327; Remonstr. in Coll. Hag. art. iii. & iv. p. 308. Acta Synod. circ. art. iv. p. 62. Ib. p. 128.

§ Unicus articulus fidei quem ad salutem æternam necessarium faciunt Scripturæ sacræ, hic est, quod Jesus est Christus.-Leviathan, c. 43, p. 28; 1. de Cive, c. 18, s. 6.

Fides justificans est qua creditur in Jesum Christum tauquam in salvatorem credentium universe, Armin. Artic. perpend. de fide art. vi. est autem fides in Christum assensus fiducialis evangelio adhibitus, &c.-Episcop. disp. 14, thess. 3.

¶ Fides et obedientia utraque justificent, sed in diversa significatione Justificare.—Leviathan, c. 43, p. 287, 288. Justificat ergo obedientia, quia facit justum eo modo, quo temperantia fecit temperatum, &c., justificat ergo fides co sensu quo justificare dicitur Judex, qui absolvit, &c.— L. de Cive, c. 18, s. 12.

manner as temperance makes a man temperate, prudence makes a man prudent, and chastity makes a man chaste, namely essentially : faith justifies in the same sense as a judge is said to justify, who absolves by a sentence which actually saves; in this acceptation of justification, faith alone justifies; in the other, obedience alone." And how near does this come to the sentiments of the Arminians*? who say, "that faith only, although it is not alone without works, is imputed for righteousness; and by this alone we are justified before God, absolved from sin, and reckoned, pronounced, and declared righteous by him;" and, that "this, by the free acceptation of God in Christ, is reckoned for the whole righteousness of the law, which we are bound to perform ;" and "that faith is properly to be taken for the habit, without that obedience which is to be yielded to the gospel; and by that we are properly, though freely, justified and saved by God." Now, not to take any notice of the agreement of these men with Mr. Hobbes, about the extent of Christ's death, and the nature of his sacrificet, the power of man to do what he will, before observed, and the easy performance of the laws of nature, when these things are seriously considered, the charge of Hobbism or Hobbesianism, will fall upon them, and not upon us.

XII. It is said §, "that our opinion differs very little, and in things only of little moment, from the stoical fate; and lies obnoxious to the same absurdities which the philosophers and Christians did object against it." To which I reply:

66

1. That of all the sects of the ancient philosophers, the stoics came nearest to the Christian religion, has been observed || by many; and that not only with respect to their strict regard to moral virtue, but also on the account of principles and doctrines; insomuch that Jerome affirms ¶, that in most things they agree with us. They assert the unity of the divine Being, the creation of the world by the Aoyos, or Word, the doctrine of Providence, and the conflagration of the universe." And it is not to be wondered at, that they should have any knowledge of these things, since Zeno, the founder of their sect, was a Phenician, as was also Antipater of Sidon; and others of them were of Syrian extract, as Diogenes Babylonius, and Posidonius, who, doubtless conversed with and received most of their doctrines from their neighbours, the Jews **. And certain it is, that several of the first Christian writers were either of this sect, or much inclined to it, and greatly favoured it; as Pantaænus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Tertullian, Arnobius, and others††. It is an observation of Lipsius++, that "Divine Providence, before it would spread the first light of wisdom

Hæc mea sententia est, fidem eamque solum quanquam sola sine operibus non est, ad justitiam imputari, &c.-Armin. ad Hippol. inter ejus Opera, p. 772. Hæc per gratuitam acceptilationem Dei in Christo habeatur pro omni legis justitia, quam nos præstare tenebamur.-Bert. Discept. Epist. contr. Lubbert. p. 6. Fidem proprie accipiendam esse pro habitu, &c.-Ib. p. 8). +Vide Leviathan, c. 38, p. 217, &c., 41; p. 226, 227. § Whitby, p. 359; ed. 2. 350.

Vide L. de Civ. c. 3, s. 30. | Vide Gataker, Præloq. ad Marc. Antonin. Stoici qui nostro dogmati in plerisque concordant.—Hieron. in Esaiam, c. 11, p. 22, L. ** Vide Gale's Court of the Gentiles, par. 2, b. 4, c. 3, s. 1, 5, 8.

++ Vide Lips. Manuduct. ad Stoic. Phil. 1. 1, diss. 17, p. 100, 101.

‡‡ Divina providentia priusquam lucem sapientiæ plenam, &c.-Lips. ib. diss. 16, p. 91.