be overthrown. He has another passage to the same effect*, " When," says he, " the devil shall come, who is, by interpretation, the reprover and corrector, upon the land and country of believers, and of them whom the Lord shall feed, in the strength and in the majesty of the Lord his God; and he, the devil, shall tread upon them through various tribulations, and as a proud man shall ascend and depress the houses of our souls, that is, our bodies, et tamen nihil nos a Christi charitate separaverit, yet nothing shall separate us from the love of Christ." The grace of love he more than once represents as that which shall abide, and never be lost. Upon Matthew xxiv. 12 he has this note † ; " He does not deny the faith of all, but of many, for many are called, but few are chosen; for in the apostles, et similibus eorum, permansura est charitas, 'and them that are like them, love remains ;' concerning which it is written in Cant. viii. 7, Rom. viii. 35." And in another place he expresses himself thus; "And because love never fails, he, who is in the soundness of love, that is, as he explains it in the same place, "who loves the Lord with all his soul, with all his heart, and with all his strength, nunquam et ipse corruit, 'he himself also never falls,' according to Romans viii. 35." 66 Now this perseverance and continuance in grace he denies is owing to the free will of man, but is to be ascribed to the mercy and power of God; which he concludes § from 2 Thess. iii. 3, ergo non liberi arbitrii potestate sed Dei clementia conservamur, "therefore," says he, we are preserved, not by the power of free will, but by the clemency of God." And a little after ||, having mentioned the words of Christ to Peter in Luke xxii. 32, he thus addresses the Pelagians; et certe juxto vos in apostoli erat positum potestate, si voluisset, ut non deficeret fides ejus, "but truly, according to you, it was in the power of the apostle, if he would, that his faith should not fail." Jerom does indeed sometimes speak of the Spirit of God being taken away and quenched; but then, by the Spirit, he means the gifts of the Spirit, such as are mentioned in 1 Cor. xii. 8-10. The text in Eccl. vii. 15 he understands **, not of one that is really just, but of one who seems to himself to be so. It must be owned that there are some expressions of Jerom's here and there, which are not easy to be reconciled either with himself or this doctrine; as when he seems†† to make the perpetuity of God's gifts to depend upon the worthiness of men, and men's continuance of grace to lie in the power of their wills, contrary to what he at other times asserted, which has been already observed; as also when he says‡‡ that "God indeed has planted, and no man can root up his plantation; but because this planting is in his own free will, no other can root up, nisi ipsa præbuerit assensum, unless that assents to it." And in another place he says§§, that "though no one can pluck out of the hand of God, yet he that is held may fall out of the hand of God, propria voluntate, by his own will." And again, that "he who is like an adamant stone, which cannot be hurt or overcome by any, yet may be dissolved by the alone heat of deadly lust." And this he says * after he had expressed the doctrine of the saints' perseverance in a very strong manner. Moreover, he asserts †, that the Ethiopians may, upon repentance, become the children of God; and the children of God, by falling into sin, may become Ethiopians; and yet in the same leaf stands a testimony to the doctrine of perseverance, which is cited above. But these must be reckoned among Jerom's unguarded expressions, by which we are not to form a judgment of his sentiments against the numerous testimonies produced to the contrary. CHAPTER VI. OF THE HEATHENS. The To the doctrine of the ancients, concerning the necessity of grace to the performance of every good work, the Pelagians objected the virtues and famous actions of the heathens. These Vossius, a favourite author of Dr. Whitby's, has largely proved, under various theses or propositions, to want all the conditions requisite in good works; such as doing them according to the law of God, in love to him, from faith in him, and with a view to his glory; and that "though some few of the ancients were of opinion, that the more virtuous among the heathens, such as Socrates and others, were saved, yet this notion was condemned of old by the other fathers, especially in the times of Austin." The collection which Dr. Whitby § has made out of the fathers, is very little to the purpose, chiefly relating to the endowments of nature, the blessings of providence, and temporal favours bestowed on heathens in common with others, denied by none. principal testimonies in favour of the good works and salvation of the heathens are taken from Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Chrysostom, and Jerom; but these, as Dr. Edwards observes ||, at least some of them, had been bred in a philosophical way themselves, and so had retained a charity for that sort of men, yea, thought better of them than they deserved. Besides, should these testimonies be examined, they will not be found so full and express as they are thought to be; and other passages of these writers may be produced, contradicting of them. As to Justin Martyr, when he says, that such as Socrates and Heraclitus were Christians, he does not mean, as a learned man of our nation has observed, that they were perfectly, only in part so; that is, as they were partakers of and lived according to the doyos, or reason, which Christ, the Word and † Ib. p 50, C. * Hieron. Comment. in Amos, p. 47, A. Hist. Pelag. 1. 3, par. 3, p. 358 ad 379. § Discourse, &c. p. 550, &c.; ed. 2. 527, &c. || Veritas Redux, p. 439. Bulli Judicium, Eccl. Cathol. de necess. credendi quod Christ. sit Deus, append. ad c. 7, p. 201, &c. Son of God, imparts to every man. And as to Clement of Alexandria, Vossius has clearly shown*, that he could not say or think, that any could be saved without faith, and without the knowledge of Christ; which he supposed the heathens had through Christ's descent into hell, and preaching to them there. Nor that he could mean that the philosophy of the Greeks was sufficient to salvation, only at most, that it was one degree towards, or what had a tendency to lead to Christ. And though Chrysostom says, that before the coming of Christ, they that did not confess him might be saved, yet he elsewhere affirms †, that the works of men ignorant of God, are like to the garments of the dead, who are insensible of them; his words are these; "They that labour in good works, and know not the God of piety, are like λειψανοις νεηρων, ‘to the remains of the dead, who are clothed with beautiful garments but have no sense of them." And though Jerom talks in one place †, of "the knowledge of God being by nature in all, and that no man is born without Christ, and hath not in himself the seeds of wisdom and justice, and other virtues; whence many without faith, and the gospel of Christ, do some things either wisely or holily;" yet in another place he says §, "Let us bring forth that sentence (The just shall live by faith) against those who, not believing in Christ, think themselves to be strong, wise, temperate, and just; that they may know that no man liveth without Christ, sine quo omnis virtus in vitio est, without whom all virtue is to be reckoned for vice." To which I shall add two or three testimonies more, showing that the virtues of the heathens were not properly good works, but had only a show of them, and were insufficient to salvation, and conclude, says Origen ||, " if a conversation of good manners were sufficient to men for salvation, how is it that the philosophers among the Gentiles, or many among heretics, continenter viventes nequaquam salvantur, 'who live soberly, are not saved? but because the falsity of their doctrine darkens and defiles their conversation." Again he observes * from Peter in Clement, "that good works which are done by unbelievers profit them in this world, non et in illo ad consequendam vitam æternam, but not to obtain eternal life in the other." Cyprian has these words**; "The philosophers also profess to follow this (patience), but as their wisdom is false, so is their patience: for how can he be either wise or patient, qui nec sapientiam nec patientiam Dei novit, who neither knows the wisdom nor patience of God?" Ambrosett expresses himself in this manner, "Virtues, without faith, are leaves; they seem to be green, but cannot profit; they are moved with the wind, because they have no foundation. How many heathens have mercy, have sobriety! but they have no fruit, quia fidem non habent, because they have no faith." * Hist. Pelag. 1. 3, par. 3, p. 376, 377. † Serm. de Fid. et Leg. Nat. tom. vi. p. 838. Comment. in Gal. p. 70, м. § Jb. p. 76, B. || In Matt. hom. 27, fol. 53. Ib. 35, fol. 74; vide etiam Comment. in Rom. 1. 2, fol. 142. †† Enarrat. in Psalm i. p. 665. ** De Bono Patientiæ, p. 313. A TABLE OF THE ANCIENT WRITERS CITED IN THIS FOURTH PART, WITH THE EDITIONS OF THEM MADE USE OF IN IT. AMBROSE, p. 436, 474, 515, 543, 573. Ed. Paris 1661. ANTHONY, p. 460. in Bibl. patr. Ed. Tertia, Paris 1610. per marg. de la Bigne. ARNOBIUS, p. 455, 499. Hanov. 1603. cum notis Elmenhorst. ATHANASIUS, p. 427, 462, 505, 535, 565. Colon. 1686. ATHENAGORAS, p. 447. ad calcem Justini. BARNABAS, p. 411, 444, 488, 525, 551. ad calcem Ignatii. CHRONOMATIus, p. 564. in Bibl. patr. Paris 1610. CHRYSOSTOM, р. 437, 479, 518, 546, 574. Eton 1612. a Savilio. CLEMENT of Rome, p. 409, 443, 488, 524, 550. Oxon. 1669. CYPRIAN, p. 424, 453, 498, 533, 560. Paris 1643. CYRILL, p. 432, 469, 509. Oxon. 1703. a Milles. DIDYMUS, p. 471, 541. inter opera Hieronymi. EPIPHANIUS, p. 477, 517. Colon. 1682. EUSEBIUS, p. 458, 502, 534, 563. Hist. Eccl. Mogunt. 1672. Preparat. Evangel. et Demonstr. Evang. Colon. 1688. juxta Ed. Paris 1628. FAUSTINUS, p. 468. Oxon. 1678. FIRMICUS, p. 461. Oxon. 1662. GAUDENTIUS, p. 478. in Bibl. patrum. Paris 1610. GREGORY of Neocæsarea, p. 497. Paris 1621. GREGORY of Nyssa, p. 471, 512, 541, 571. Paris 1615. HILARY of Poictiers, p. 429, 464, 507, 538, 567. Basil 1570. HILARY the Deacon, p. 434, 473, 514, 542, 572. inter Ambrosii opera. ЈЕКОМ, р. 439, 482, 519, 547, 575. Paris 1546. per Erasmus. IGNATIUS, p. 411, 444, 489, 551. Lond. 1680. a Vossio. IRENEUS, p. 416, 447, 491, 527, 552. Paris 1675. JUSTIN, p. 412, 444, 489, 526. Paris 1636. LACTANTIUS, p. 456, 500, 563. Genev. 1630. MACARIUS, p. 464, 503, 536, 566. Paris 1621. MARK the Eremite, p. 467, 517, 545. in Bibl. patrum. Paris 1610. The MARTYRS of France, p. 553. apud Euseb. Eccl. Hist. MINUTIUS FELIX, p. 414, 447. Oxon. 1662. NOVATIAN, p. 426, 455. inter opera Tertullian. OPTATUS, p. 466, 509. Paris 1679. ORIGEN, p. 422, 458, 494, 530, 558. Opera Lat. per Merlin. Paris 1512. Gr. Lat. ab Huetio. Colon 1685. Contr. Cels. a Spencero. Cantabr. 1670. PACIANUS, p. 472. in Bibl. patr. Paris 1610. PAULINUS, of Tyre, p. 457. apud Euseb. Hist. Eccl. TATIAN, p. 447. ad calcem Justini. TERTULLIAN, p. 421, 449, 493, 529, 555. Paris 1634. A VINDICATION OF A BOOK ENTITLED THE CAUSE OF GOD AND TRUTH, PART IV. RELATING TO THE SENSE OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIAN WRITERS, ABOUT SOME THINGS IN CONTROVERSY WITH THE ARMINIANS, FROM THE CAVILS, CALUMNIES, AND DEFAMATIONS OF MR. HENRY HEYWOOD, &c. HAVING published, some time ago, an Answer to the Birmingham Dialogue-Writer's Second Part, I annexed a postscript to it, relating to some charges brought against me by one Mr. Henry Heywood, in an introduction of his to a translation of Dr. Whitby's Treatise of Original Sin. This postscript, containing my answer to the said charges, it seems, is not relished by him and his friends, and has produced a defamatory pamphlet, wrote either by himself or some of his party, entitled A Defence of Dr. Whitby's Treatise of Original Sin, &c. I say, wrote either by himself, or some of his party for I greatly suspect that this piteous performance is done by some other person or persons, and published under his name; since, if my information is right, this man was gone for Carolina some months before the publication of this pamphlet; which, had it been drawn up and finished by himself before his departure, might have been published in ten days' time. The temper and genius of a certain person, not very remarkable for candour and good-nature, are pretty visible in it; but, whoever be the author or authors, revisers and editors of it, they ought to look upon themselves concerned in the guilt and shame arising from the blunders and scandal which are manifestly in it, as will appear by the following examination of it : I. The first charge brought against me is mistranslation, of which three instances are given, and to which I have replied; the sum of the difference between us is, I have rendered plaga, in Irenæus, plague; this man, sometimes wound; and, at another time, sore, and sometimes disease; I have interpreted recenseatur, in Tertullian, re-reckoned, or reckoned anew; he, enrolled anew; I have translated damnatio, in the same author, damnation, he condemnation. I shall not contend with him about words: the reader may choose and prefer which translation he pleases. What is more material, is the pertinence of these pas |