This book made available by the Internet Archive.

TO THE

Honourable CommifTary General

EDWA'RJ) IVHALLSr.

fc^^^fc^i^i^<'

^Jjgr^ ^&fcD Qf^'^?^ ^^ Hough ^'eaknifs nnd difiance have prchihited me U^P ^^l f^^H^ f/j^r converfe "A'ith jtu Which fometime I did ««^:i-^5 l.rX^^' c^joj) jef have they not excti^cd jour former Kindemfs «ut of my Remembrance, Received Benefits (hotildr.ofDie before us : if the Donor kill them not by Ret ration, the Receiver mttfi notfuffocate them bj Oblivion ; nor prove their Grave, Who Woi intended for a Store-houfe, if not a Garden Where tJjej may be Root' tdandbe fruitfulL In thofe hearts Where Benefits Live, the Benefa-^or Liveth. t/fnd thofe that Live in our Efiimation and AffeEiion, We defire their Names may be infcribed on our Alonaments, and furvive With ours. When We are Dead. JVhile We live alfo Wc more regard their ^ndgementf of us, then other mens- and are more ambit iom of flan d-ing right in their efleem ; and therefore are Willing that our jujl ty^po-logie's may be in their hands, to hinder mifafprehenfions , and reffi un-jufi Accnfers. May thefe Reafons e.xcuje my prefixingjcur Name to thffe Papers, anddireElingthemfirft to jeur Hand: (Cuftom having led me into that Road, Wherein J do not unypiliintrlj fol/crv.) It is net

for ProtcWion $r Patronage of tkj Ofmions : For tktt I referre thenu Whokj to the Father of Lights^ the HtHwiKating Spirit, and the Light of that Truth Which thej CMtai*i and Vindicate. Nor do I deftre that joujhould make thefe things y cur Studies ; thej being more fitted to the ufe cf thofe Students, that can laj out much of their time onfuch things. J confefs I had rather fee in jour Hands, the Holj Scriptures, and Books of Trallical Divinity , then thefe Controverfies: and had rather hearfuch Praitical Dijcourfes from yeur Mouth. So farre am I fiomfo/icitingjou to any fingu/ar Opinion of mine , that } folicit y oh not once to reaci thefe "Bookj ; fave enely When any Opinion in therfu jhall be AccuJed,to turn to the Words, and fee What ts faid.It u the Pra^ Bical Chrijlian that holds fafi the Truth, Which muny eager Dijputers foon loje. Doting about ^mfiions that engender ft rife, u not the Reli-gioufne/s that Cod approves ; jvhat ever the Prcfeffours of tht.< Age may imagine. It is the moft Practical Teachers and People in Etig-Jand commonly that are the moft Orthodox. I have oft noted many men} Prayers to be much freer ftom Libertinifm , then their Sermons ; and their Sermons then their fVritings and Dijputes. That's a mam Judgement indeed. Which he dare reduce to Praitice, and own before God.

The fVorkjf thefe Papers haveheen to my minde fomervhat like thofe fad Employments Wherein J attended you : ofthemfelves, grievous and ungrate full ; exajperating others, and not pleaftng my felf (befides tht ruinating of my bodily health) And as the Remembrance of thofe years ufo little delight full to me, that I lookbackjtpon them as the faddeft part of my life ; Jo the Review of this Apologie, vs but the renewing of my trouble: tothinkjof our Common frailty and darknefs, and What Reverend and much valued Brethren I contradi^ j but ejpecially for fear left men (houldmake this CoHifion an oceafton of Divifton^ and by receiving the JJfarks into Combuftible Ajfe^ions, Jhouldturn that to a Conflagration which I intended but for Illumination. If you fay, I Jhould then havi let it alone : The fame anfwer muft ferve , 04 in the former Caufe Wi Were Wont to ufe. Some fay, that I Who pretend fo much for Peace, [houU not Write of Controverfies. For my felf it is not much Matter : but muf} Gods Truth (for fuch I take it) ft and as a Butt for every man to Jhoot at ? Aiuft there be fuch Liberty of c^poftng it, and none of T)e-fending ? One party cannot have Pc'ace Without the others Confent. To be Buffeted and A (faulted, and Commanded to Deliver up the Truth of God, and called Vnpeaceable if I defend it and reftft, thts is fuch Equi-

fj at '^'e^ere^^onttofinde. In a W'erd, both ^"orhj ^'ere ungratefnll to me, and are fo In the preview ; ^ut in both, as Providence and mens ow» fet iwfoJeda-NeceJfitj, and drove mc te that fir att, that I muft Defend ordo\\>urfe; jo did the fame-'providence fo c/ear rny tt'*y, and draw me on, andfweeten Hnttfnal Troubles W'ith nnnfual Adercies, and Jjfue aH in Tefilrr:orAes cf Grace, that ai I had great mixtures of Comfort ^'ith Sorrcv in the Performancey Jo have J in the Review : And as I had more emiyient Deliverances and other (JMercies in thofe years and ^ajes of Blond and Dolour, then in mofi of mj Life beftde ; fo have I had more encouraging Light ft nee I W^w engaged in thefe Controverjies. ( For I (heakjtot of thejefew Papers onely, but of many more of the like Nature that have taken up my time.) And ai Ifiill retain d a Hope, that th& End of ail our Calamities andfirange Dijfoftngs of Providence^ Would befomewhat 'Better then Wa^s Threatned of late : fo Experience hath taught me to think., that the Ijfiieef my mofi ungratefull Labours fhall not be vain \ but that Providence Which extra^ed them hath fome ufe to make of them, better then J am y et aware of i if not in this Age, yet tn times to come. The befi is, We now draw no bloud : and honefi hearts Will not take themfelves Wounded, With that blow Which is given onely to their Err ours. How ever,God mufi beferved When he calsfor it, though by the harfhefi and mofi nnpleaftng Work^ Onely the Lord teach m to Watch carefully over our Dcceitfull Hearts , leafi We fijould ferve Our [elves While We thinks and fay, ive are ftrving him; and Icfi we pjould ALilitate for our own Honour and Interefi, when we pretend to do it for his Truth and Glory !

J hope. Sir, the Diverftty of Opinions in thefe dayes, will not dimi-ni/hyour Bfiimation of Chrifiianity, nor make yon (us'pcU that all it Doubt full, becaufefo much n Doubted of. Though the Tempter feems to be playing fuch a Game in the world, God will go beyond him, and turn that to Illuftration and Confirmation, which he intended for Confufion and Extirpation of the Truth. Ton know its no news to hear of fame Ignorant, Proud and Licentious, of what Religion foever they be. And this Trinity is the Creator of Herefics. And as for the fob tr und (Jodly, it is but in lejfcr things that they difagree : and mofily about words and Alethods more then Matter (though thefmallefi things of Qod are not Contemptible.^ He that wonders to fee wif^e men di^er, dnhbut wo:tder that they are yet Imperfefl, and kj'ow but in part j that is, tktt they are yet Alortalftnners, and not Glorified on Earth ! And fuch roonderers know not what man is, and it feems are too great firangers to themfelves.

L* 3] And

jindifthej turn thefe differences utht frtjudice tf Q$dj Truth, er di» pfOitoMr of Cjodiiaefs,thej fijew tijemfelvesjet mere unreafonable^to hUmt the Snnr.e that men are furblinde. And indeed ttvrr Tride and PaJJioH laid afide i>j our Difputes, and men conld g(ntljjnffer contradict ion^ and hearti/j love and corrcfpond ^'ith thofe that in lower matters do gainfaj them, I fee not hatfuchfiiendlj debates might edifie.

For jour felf J Sir, afjou)^'ereafriendtofoundDoE}rine,toZJnitj andtoPietj, and to the Preachers, Defenders and PraEiifers thereofy V(hileIconzcyfi\\>ithjou3 and as fame informcth tu, have centinued fueh J fc iLc^e that God Who hathfo long prefervedjoUjWillprefervejtH to the end j and he that hath been jour Shield in corf oral dangers, ^ill be fo in (pirituall.

To ftr great fVarfare U not jet accomflifhed: The Worms ofCorrufti' on th.it breed in our bowels,Vcill live infome meafure till We die ourfelves. 7 our Conquefi ofjottrfelf is jet Imperfect. To fight With jour felf ,joh Willfnde the hardefi, but mofi nice^arj Conjiifl that ever jet jou Were engaged in -, and to overcome jour felf the mofi honourable and gainfuU } iclorj. And thlnlajiot that jour greatefi trials are all over. Pro^erity hath its peculiar Temptations, bj Which it hath foiled manj that floed Hnfjakenin the forms of adverfitj' The Tempter Who h.ith had jou on the Waves, Will new ajfaultjou in the calm', and hath hts lafi game ta plaj en the Mountain,till nature caufejou to defcend. Stand this Charge and you Win the daj. To which, as one that is faithful tojou, 1 [hall aC' quaint JOU in a few words,what his temptations are like to be, and how jou fljould refifl them : Jfjou are alreadj provided, a Remembrancer will do, you no harm.

1. Thcfirfi and great Ajfault will be, to entice jou to Overvalue jour prefent Profperitj, and to fudge the Creature to be better then it is, and to grajp after a fulnefs of Honour and Wealth, and then to faj. Soul, take thy Reft. As jou love jour Teace, jour Life, jour Soul, your God, take hed of this. Judge of Projperitj a4 one that mufi go Naked cut of the world : Bfieem of earthlj Greatnefs and Glorj as th.it which yvilljljortlj leave jou in the dufi. whj (J;oiild it be prepcr to Djing men to be wife,and to Judge trulj of this world, when all the living undoubtedly know that thej muft Die ?

2. At leaf the Tempter will perfwade with jou to enjnjjour Projperitj to thefatisfjing cfjourflejb; and tell jou that the f-ee ufe of the Creatures is jour Chrlfiian Liberty, and therefore you need not denj jour felves thofe T>elights th^n God affordethyou. But remember that it is the feem-

ittgfveetnefs oft'he Creature that dra:wi menfitm God: The Pleafantefi Condition ts the mofi dangeroHs. If ever yon would have jour ftnl Fra-Jpery make no provifion for the flc(h to fatisfie its lufts ; j4 better man then any of tu,wot fain to tame his bod^ and bring it into fub]eUion.M.or-tifcation 14 a necefarj, but much negleSled part of the Chrijfian Reli^ gion.

3. Should the Tempter prevail in thefe, it would follow, that God would be much forgotten, former Engagements violated, and the Invi" fible things of the Life to come wof>ld hefeldom thought on, and lefs efiec' med. O thinkjn him that remembredyou inyourg^reatefi fir aits '. Its a provoking Jin to breakjhofc Engagements which depth of Extremity, or Greatnejs of Deliverance, did formerly confirain m to make with our Cod \ Ingratitude makes a forfeiture of all we have. And thinkjtot well of your own heart J when you cannot thini^morefweetly of another world then of this. Its unhappy projperity that makes God to be more jleighted, and the Glory to come more unfavourj to our thoughts, and makes us fay. It is beft to be here.

4. Ancther dangerous Temptation that will attend thefe, will be, ta difregard Chrifis Interefi through an over-minding of their own : To play your own game,and lay out your chiefefi care for your fe If, and make Gods hufinefs tofioop unto your own. where thus prevails, the hearts offuch are falfe to Chrifi : fVhi/e they pretend toferve him, they do butferve them-felves upon him. They will honour Chrifi n« longer then he will honour them. And when they are once falfe to Chrifi, they can be true to no one elfe. Their friends are efieemed but asfieppingfiones to their Ends, when they canferve them no longer they rejeB them as unprofitable. £ver Remember, that manfiandsjafefi that ejpou/eth no Interefi contradictory t» Chrifis •, / had almofifaid. None but Chrifis : For even Chrifis mufi be made his own, and then his own will be Chrifis.God is more engaged ta fecure his own Interefi then ours.There is noPoUcy therefore comparable to this, to Sngage mofi deeply where Chrifis chief efi Interefi lieth , and to ZJnite our own to his, in a jufi fubordi/iation. He that Will needs have a

fianding divided fiom Chrifi, hjdependent on him, or Equal With hirttj, much more in Oppofiticn to him, isfure to fall. It will breakjhe greatefi Prince on Earth to cfpoufe an Interefi inconfifient with Chrifis, when he doth but arifc to plead his Caufe. Study therefore where Chrifis Interefi mofi lieth, and then devote all your own to the promoting of it: and hold none that lives not at the Vine ori the Wall, or rather as the branch in the Vine, in^ependanceupon his. And upon Enquiry jou will fmdc, that

Chrifis

Chrifis Interefl lies much in thefe tvo things, the Pietj and the Peace of

his People. The Rtftrmation cfhis Churches, and the Unit in j of them (at hotne and abroad) are the great eji Vesri^s that any can be Jmplojed in. To yvhich ends Gods chitfejl means, is an Able, ^^Ij, Diligent A^ni-firj, to Teach and Jiule his flocks according to his IVord. All the Inter e^ that Gcdhath CJivcn you, he cxpeSlethfiould be Jjjeedi/j, diligently and Undefervedlj inrployedto thefe Ends. Delay not, joh have but your time. Thir.kjt not enough to do no harm, or no more good then thofe belorv you. Towjlanding is unfafe whcnyou do little or nothing for Cjod. He is not bound to heldyOH the Candle to do nothing, or to work, for your felf.Work therefore while it is day : the nighc comes when none can work. <- 5- yinother Temptation that you mufl cxpeU:, will be, to have your mindefwell withyour Condition : and to Mjrejpefl the inferiour fort of your Brethren.But J hope the Lord will keep you fmall in your own eyes-^od remembring that you are the fame in the eyes of your Judge, and your Jhadow 14 not lengthened by yourfuccejjes, and that you mufl He down witk the Vulgar in the common dufi.

Sir, Becaufe the matter of this Bookjmay be lefs ufeful to you, ■ I could not direEl it toyonr hand, without fome words that might be more ufefuL J do not fear leaf you (hould take my faithful dealing for an injury, or interpret my Monition to be an Accufation ; as long as you fo well know the Ajfeciions of your Ui'fonitor. The Lord be your Teacher and Defence, and Direct, Excite, Encourage and Succeed you, and all that have Opportunity to do any thing to the Repairing of our Breaches, by furthering The Reformation and Unity of the Churches : ivhich « the earnejh 'Deftre, and daily Trayer of

Tour Servant in the workjofCkriJi

»6 J J-

Richard Baxter.

ACCOUNT

Given to his Reverend Brother

M T. "B L J K^ E

OF T H E

Reafons of his Diffent

FROM

The Docftrine of his Exceptions

in his late

Treatise of the CovENANTSt

John 3.7. Little children , let no man Deceive joh : He that doth Righteoufnefsj is RighteoHSj even as he is Righteous.

1 T I M. 4.8.

Godlinefs is Projitable unto All things, having Tnwife of the Life that nsTv is, and of that Which is to come.

London,

Printed by <iA. C^t. for Thomas Vnderhill at the Anchor and

Bible in Pauls Church-yard , and Francis Tjton at the

The Treface ^pologeticaL

O fwect a thing is Chriftian Love and Concord, and fo precious are the thoughts of Peace to my Soul, that I think it unmeet in this contentious Age, to publifli fuch a Controvcrfie as this, without an Apology : which, its likdy, may be needful, both as to the Matter and the Manner. Not that I dare rather choofe to Excufe a fault, then to forbear the committing of it : But that I would have the Reader judge of things as they are. Juft Apologies are not a cover to our faults, but for removal of mif-reprefentati-ons, and healing of mifapprehenfions, that thofe may not be taken for faults which are none, or thofe to be of the greater fize, which fire but ordinary infirmities. Whether my Apology be Juft, the Reader muft judge.

I do fo heartily Love Peace, that I have hard thoughts of Controvcrfie : yet do t fo Love the Truth, that I reftife not to contend for it. Though the ftrait be great, yet its no other then we are ufu-ally put to, even in lower things. The moft noble and excellent ends, may have feme diftaftfiil means: whidi as none that is in his right fenfes will choole for themfelves, fo none but a flave to his fcn-fes will refufc when they arc neceffary. It is no Contradidion in fuch a cafe, biittrue Dsfcrerion, to Choofe the thing which at the fame time we do Abhor : To choofe it as a neceffary Means, and yet to abhorre it for its Ungrateful Nature. We are contented to feek, and buy, and take that Phyfick which we fo abhorre, that we have much ado to get it down or to retain it. The Lord knows, that contending is diftaftfui to my foul: though my corrupt nature is coo

A 2 prone

prone to it. Much ftudying of Controverfies hath oft difcompofed my minde, and interrupted my more fwect and heavenly thoughts, and unfitted me tor publick and private duties; fo that I as fenlibly finde my felf a lofer by if, as by Tome other avocations of a more aliene nature. Yet dare I not be fo felnfli as to caft it off. That muft be endured, which may not be defired. We may not pretend the difadvantages to our fouls (much lefs any lower) againft apparent duty, and fervice to the truth of God. Many wayes hath our Mft-fter to make us a full reparation for our loifes. What then fhall I refolve on? (Neither tcvDelight in Controverfie; nor totally to Refufe it. Not to r'udi upon it unadvifedly, nor to be carried into it by blinde Pafiion and partiality, nor yet to caft away my Captains Colours, nor to draw back when I am preft. Not to militate for any Fadion, but for the Faith ; nor for vain-glory and credit, but for Chrift: And this with fuch a differencing the Perfon from the Caufe, that as it refpedeth the errour, it (hall be bitter and contentious ; but as to my Brother, it fhall be a Conference of Love. I abhorrealmoft nothing nnore in Divines, then laying too much upon the fmaller controvertible Dodrinals, and making too much

of our Religion to confift in curious and * ScncczEpifl.ai Luc. loi. unneceffary fpec^!ations,ifnotunfearch-No« dc^Kit/;oc ho&« f/?c propo- able, unrevealed things- contradiding [mm aHuu^fcrercerP}?^- one of thcir firft Maxims, that Vrko-fu/MajclUte detubcrc. % '-'/ FraBical Scieyice.l^ An honelt

^mo fatiui eft ire ap'cm Philofophcr law the evil ot this *. Yet via, (^ rcSia, quxm fibi ipji mull Gods commands be obeyed, and ficxuidilponcre, quescumniig- the Truth defended, and the Church mmolcfitsdcbc^relcgcrc?Mc- .o^firmedand edified, and the foul of htjpumioncsimit, qum inter ^n erring Brother be relieved, though fepcritecapuntiumlulut. at a dearer rate then a verbal Difputa-

tion. It is about five years fince I wrote a fmall book about Juftificati-on, and being in great wcaknefs and expectation of death, I was forced to deliberate. Whether to publifii it with its many Imperfe-ftions, or not at all ? I chofc the former, fuppofing the Defeds and Crudities would be charged only on the Author, and that fome Light might notwithftanding appear to the Reader, which might further him in the underftanding of fcvcral truths. 1 durft not fo far value reputation, as to be injurious to Verity, for fear of difcovering my own infirmity: Its no time to be folicitous about the efteem of men,

when

when we are drawing near to the Judgement Seat of God. When this Book cannc abroad, it tell under very different Cenfures, as moft things ufe to do that feem to go out of the ordinary road. Too many overvalued it; Some were offended at it. Hereupon being afraid left by Ignorance or Rafhnefs I fhould wrong the Church and Truth, I did in the end of my Book of Baptifm, defire my Brethrens ani-m^dverfions and advice : which accordingly many of the mol^ pious and Learned men that I know in the Land, were pleafed to afford xne ; and chat with fo much Ingenuity, Love and Gentlenefs, as I muft needs confefs my felf their Debtor, as having no way deferved fo great a favour: and I do hereby return them my molt hearty thanks. After this my Reverend and Dear Brother M"" 'Blake in a Treatife of the Covenants, did publifli a Confutation of fome things in my Book (among many others whom he deals with, W Powel/y Mr.Tcmks, Mr.OwY«, Hi'. Firm iff. Sec.) wherein I found nothing but tcndernefs and brotherly Love, as to my perfon ; and no fuch inclination to extreams in his Doftrine, as I found in fome others; but much Moderation and Sobriety, as indeed the Gravity, Piety and Integrity of the man,would promife to any that know him. Only I thought it might have been more convenient to him, to me, and to others, if 1 had feen his exceptions before they had been publiOi-ed, thatlohavingknown what I would reply, he might have publi-fhed only fo much as he remained unfatisfied in. But as it feems, his Judgement was otherwife, (o is it n« whit to me offenfive. Yet when I had read his Book, it was my Refolution, to fend him privately my Reply, thatfo we might confider how farre we were c^reed, and how farre the difference was onely feeming and about words, and might publifh only the remainder to the world, by Joynt Cfonfent. The Reafons of this Refolution were thefe : Firft, Becaufe I was loath by tedious altercations, to hinder the Reader from difcerning the Truth : It is the courfe of moft voluminous Difputers , to tire their Readers with Contendings about words, that they can hardly finde outthe true ftateof theControverfie; much lels difcern oa which fide is the Truth. Which might be much remedied if men would but lovingly firft debate the matter in private, and cut off all the fuperfluities and verbal Quarrels; and then put out only the material differences by joynt Confent, having Correded even in the language and manner of debating, whatfoever was difpleafing or feemed injurious to either {^arty. Secondly, Becaufe 1 unfeigr.edly abhorrc contending, and never wrote any thing that way, but when

I was unavoidably neccffitatcd. Thirdly, Bccaufc I fo well know my own frailty, and proncnefs to be over-eager and keen, and uh-mannerly in my ftiie, and the frailty of moft Brethren in being Impatient hereof; yea of many in judging themfelves wronged when they are not, and making fome plain fpeeches which were but nccef-fary or innocent, to feem proud, contemptuous, and fleighting as to mens perfons, racking them to a fenfe chat was never intended, I therefore thought it farelt to avoid all occafions of fuch miftakes, which may be injurious to themfelves, as weJl as to rae. Fourthly, Becaufe chc Lord hath of lace years by a Itrange, unrefiftible work of his power, fartned in my foul fo deep an Aporehenfion of the Evil oi DiiTeadons, and of the Excellency and Necelfity of the U-nity of Brethren, and the Peace or rhe Church ; and in order hereto, of the healing of our Divilions, :h.\L ic fticks in my thoughts night and day, and the Zeal of fuch a Reconciliation doth eat mc up ; fo that I make it the main ftudy and bufinefs of my Meditations, which way I might do any thing towards its accompUrhment. And I was much afraid, lelt if 1 wrote by way of Controverfie, I might, by exafperadng my Brethren, hinder this happy work. He thatknoweth my heart,knoweth that chefc were my thoughts. Hereupon I did in the firft Page fignifie to M.^/.'^f, this my Refolution, which when I was forced to akcr, I would not alter the words of my writing, but having given this account of the reafon of them,I(hall let them go as I wrote them.

Before I had finifhed my Reply to Hr.Blake, comes out Mr.KeM' dal's Book^Qami\f^.Goodmn,mth his Digreliion againft me: After-this J^^^Bmn^S of divers others that were ready to write againft ray^ii^^P^nd fontt that had written, and were ready to publifli it, and divers others that were defirous to fend me their Animad-verfions. I did therefore apprehend ( and fo did many learned Friends) an unavoidable Necefiity of appearing more publickly, both to fpare my Friends the labour of writing the fame things to me over and over, which fo many others had written before; and to fpare my felf the time and pains of endlefs private Replies ('which have this three years taken me up, and hinderecl me from more profitable work:) and alfo to prevent mens publication of more fuch writings as have already been pubUfhed ; feeing when none know whatlcanfay againft them, the reft may go on in the way as thefc have done, andcroublethemfelvesand the world in vain. Befides, 1 undcrftood chat fome were offended at my filence, as mif-inter-

preting

prcting it to be from contempt. Being therefore necelfitated to do fomethingof this kinde, Icouldnot(accordingto the Laws of Ju-ftice or Friendlhip) deal publickly with any, but thofe that had begun to deal publickly with me. Its true, there hath been long un-anfweredja Book of lAt.Otvens againll fome tkings which I had wrote which concerned him. But I never thought fit (nor yet do) to Reply to that: I. Partly becaufe it containeth To little matter of reall difference between him and me (and moft of that is anfwered by lAt.BUke, andinmy Reply toMr.iCfW^//.-) The main Points being. Whether Ghriitfu&red the fame which the Law threatned, or the Value, or that which was equivalent ? (wherein he yieldeth as much as I need) and, Whether the Covenant be Conditional } and. Whether the Obligation to Puniftiment be diffolved before we Believed, finned, or were born? And to vindicate the Truth in thefc two or three Points, I conceive it not fo meet a way, to do it in An-fwer to that Book, wherein ten times more words would be bettow-cd in altercations, and upon the by. 2. Bcfides, I was never never neceffitated to a Reply to that Book, nor once defired, and I will do nothing of that kinde, which I know how to avoid. 3. Buc indeed my greateft reafon, was the confcioufnefs of my temerity in being fo fooliftily drawn to begin with him ; and the confcioufnefs of my fault in one or two unmannerly words of him, and confequently the confcioufnefs of my duty to be fir ft fi lent. It is not fit that I (hould both begin and end. But thefe Brethren that I here Reply to^ did begin with me.

Upon thefe Reafons, I fent not my papers to Mr.B/ake, but re-folvcd to publifti them, with my Reply to Mr.7C.

AsforMr.A'.himfelf, I know not the man; butby his writings he appears to be a Learned man : Andl will hope his humility may be anfwerable to his learning, though he here exprefs it not; We arc all poor frail finners J and above all do hardly Mafter our Pride; the fire whereof in an unmortified foul, doth make fewell to it fclf of Gods excelleut Gifts, till it have turned them all into fait and afhes. That which this Learned man hach troubled himfelf to write concerning my felf, I will not infill on : It is not fojr my fclf that I am difputing, but for the Truth, fofarreasi knowit: I can truly fay as Augtijiine to Hierom, Ohfecro te per ma-rifuctudinem Chrijii, ttt fite Uft ^ dimittas mihi'^ nee me vkijfim Udendo malum pfo malo reddas Lades enimfi mihi tacucris trrorem mettm, qpicm forte invent" ■>'is in Scriptfs, vel in ditlis meis. Namfi ea in me reprshenderi-Sy qtii&

re

refrehendenclanonfunt, tefotimUdiieiuamwe; ijHtdahfit a morthtUt ^ fanElo frofoftto tho , ut hoc faci>ti wluntate Udendi cut fans in me ^Uojuid dtnte malcvolo, o^ned mente veridicafcu non e^e CHlpand»fJ9,8cc. Fieri potcfl ut tibi videatnr aliud quam Veritas habet, dam tamen aliud fibs te ?ion fat qn^m charitas habct. Nam C7" ego amicijjimam repre^ henfionem tuam gratijjime accipiam, etiamfi reprehendi non meruit, quod relie defcndi potefi : Ant agnofcam ftmul & benevolentiam tuam c^ culpam meam ; G~ qnantum Dominus donat, ' i alio gratm, in alio e-mendatm in veniar. ,^J*jd ergo ? fortajje dura, fed certefalubria ver-ha tua tanqttam cefttn Entelli pertimefcam. Cadebatur ille : non cura-i>atur : Jzt ideo vincebatur, xonfanabatur. Ego autem ft med'cinalem correptionem tuam, tranquilln6 accepero, non doleho. Si vera inft-mi-tasvel humane, velmea, etiam cum Tcraciter arguitur, non potejt non aliquAntulum co,'triflari ; Aielim tumor Capitis dolet cum cura-tur, quam dum ci parcitur, & nonfanatur. Hoc efl enim quod acute vidit, qui dixit, ZJtiliores efe plerumque inimicos objurgantcs, quam amicos ohjurgare metuentes. llli enim dum rixantur dicunt aliquando vera, quee corrigamm : ifii autem minorem quam oportet exhibent y«-fiitiit libertatem^ dum amicitia timent exajperare dulcedinem. Ncn mihic^e debet mole ft umpondw <ttati4 tujt, dummodo conteratur palea culp£ me A. I do not feel my feif hurt by the words of Mr. A'.againft my felf, much lefs by any free difclofure of my faulcs. But I con-fefs I defired more Clemency to his Adverfary, and more humble fenfeof his own frailty, when I read fome paflTages in him againft

Mr.Goodwin. For example,/j^frf. 3. pag. * Yet (ifyoubeableto be- 112,113. much of two pages are taken lieve him) he tel$ his Read- up in [[ * A folcmn Profejfon of hU difcer-er he is lure there is no Pepper ^-^^ ^y a^fn. f^^^j ^r /.^aven, and the (hirit fprinkied throuJ,hoiK his Dil- r n ^1 , r,^r n-^^A.,,:^ j 1

course, nor is \. Coulcious ^/T^^ff f .;; C^^r-Goodwin, and the porn-to himfelf of the leaft bitter- po'^ ^T^^J "/ htsfollj>, to appear mofi ridi-nt{ij i3'c. ' culom, ^'c, ~\ even daring, to S^adore the

hand of God in infatuating his parts, that Balaams Afs may fee the hand of the Angel againfl the Prophet'] with more of the like. And what is the matter? Why Hv.Goodwin over-fecingly wrote the word \^ Antecedent] for [^Confequent] and \^Con~ fequent] for [^Antecedent.] A hainous crime ! When I read fuch paffages as theic ^n him, I began to think, how well 1 had fped, an<l tantum non, did o\v,e him thanks for handling me fo gently,, even iii thofe paffages that others moft blamed. But I

law

faw it was no wonder, if all ray words » i„deedImore dcfircd m

were lifted to the bran *. Mi.Ka confcience fo tcndec

as would have ftiained at fomc of all thofe palpable untruths in matter of faft, then a milder language to tny Telf. but he tcls us in his Epiftle, chat Aliquandt imocemiut dclinquendum erat, nedeclJCHtinqiubudcondornindk,Si.c. EtqutdnimthignxtuUrfxltcii quxdam cr-utula, &c. Whether he think alio that he ihould innocentiui dclinquire, isf f^xltctter crrare, tkat there may be matter for the honour of Gods Grate, as well as mans* 1 cannot tell.

2. As for the Manner of my handling thefe Controverfies (which is the next thing that (more) necdeth an Apology,) I expeft to be blamed for thefe three things: i. For unprofitable Altercations and Repetitions. 2. For too much curiofity and obfcurity in fome di-ftindions. 3. For toocourfeand (harp a flile.

1. For the firil, I knew not how to avoid it, without inconvenience. I mufl follow the leading of them that I reply to. I murt not digrefs too farre, to fetch in more ufefull matter then they put into my hands. Yet I think I have done fomewhat in that kinde, as far as I faw fit. And when the fame words of theirs, require the fame anfwers, I am forced fometime to repeat them, where the occafion is repeated. Yet I can promife the Reader that I will not go near fo far in this way of repetition, as more learned difputants do, and in particular Dr-Twifs.

2. For the feeond Exception, Imulifay, that many are miflaken in my way, in that they difcern not the difference, i. Between Ne-ceflary diflinguifhing and unneceffary. 2. Between Curiofity in the main Caufe, and in the Means of difcufling it. 3. Between curious Notions that are thrufl on the Church and poor ignorant people, as NecefTary and Certain ; and fuch as we are forced to ufe with Lear-n«d men to difcover their millakes, and to expugne curiofity of Er-rour or Uncertainty, by exadnefs of indagation, and as curious an explication of the Truth. I am fomewhat confident that my curious diftinguifhing (as fome call it) is but of the later fort, m all thefe refpeds. For example. In the prcfentControverfie about the In-flrumentality of faith to Juflification, that which offendeth me is, that Divines fhould be fo dangeroufly curious, as to make a Logical Notion of fuch Necefiity, which Gods Word never ufed, nor for ought I know, the Church for many a hundred year; and which poor people cannot comprehend : Yea and that they may lay fo much ^of the difference between us and the Papifls on this point,

(a) thereby

^hereby moft dangeroufly hardening thcni, when they fiiall difcover ^ur Errour; and occafion them to triumph over us, and to think, ^hat the reft of our Doctrine is like this ? And that this Inftrumen-^ality is ftill fo contradiftinguifhed from Merit, as if there were no ^hird way of Faiths Intereft in our Juftification, but it muft needs be ^he one or the other. Yea and the moft Learned in the uplhot flie ^o this, that Credere is not Agere, but Pati, and is but A^io Gram-matica, or thenarae of Adion, but Phyfically or hyperphyfically a fuffering. Is not here a curious Dodrine of Faith and Juftification ? If Arijicth had been a Chriftian he could not have comprehended it: Much more is it too fine for vulgar wits (as well as too falfc for lovers of the Truth.) In oppolition to this, and in compaflion of plain Chnftians, I only fay, that faith is the Condition of our Juftification; or tliat the reafon why we are Juftified by it (fuppo-fing Its Objed, and its Aptitude) is, becaufe the Free Donor, Law-giver and Juftifier will have it fo, and hath defigned it to this Office in his Promife or Teftament. I think this is plain Doftrine, and fit for plain men. There's fcarce the fimpleft man in the Town, li one offer him the Sovcraigns pardon for Rebellion, on Condition he will thankfully Accept it, and promife to Rebell no more, but he knows this to be the reafon why his Acceptance hath an Intereft in his pardoning (viz. as the fitteft Condition freely determined on by the Soveraign) without any more ado. And I think to reade him a Logick Lcdure about Adive or Pailive Inftrumentality, would more abufe then enlighten his underftanding. Yet the fubtilties of thofewhomi oppole, doth force me oft to diftinguilh, to expugnc their Sophiftry : and I am forced to ufe more accurate means to de« fend a plain Truth. And indeed, he that Defineth and Diftinguifti-eth well teacheth well. Confufion is the Mother and Nurfe of Errour. Truth loves the Light. Jt is not found Diftindion that 1 blame in any, but fancies and vain curiofities^ and carrying us from Matter to Words, and making an appearance of difference, where there is none, and calling Coniufion by the name of diftindion or explication. I am fure a few obvious Diihndions, have been a Key to let many a truth into my underftanding.

Moreover 1 muft defire the Reader to confidcr, when things feem too curious to him, and hard to be underftood, whether it be not from the Nature of the fubjed matter, rather then from any unne-ceffary Curiofity in me ; If the matter be fuch as will bear no more familiar and plain enoaacions and explications, I cannot help that.

As.

As Seneca faith, ^pifl.$^. Platoni imputes, mn mihi hanc rerHm^ eiifficuhatent. Nulla efi autem fine difjicultate fubtilhas. I cannot better fpeaR my minde then in the words of >^;y/?;«, li. 5. dt Trinit. C. I. Ab ht^ etiant c^ui ifia ieBftri funt, ut igncfcant feta ttbi tne mtigu t^oluijfe ejuam pttuijfe dicere antTnadvertertnt, tjuod vel if ft melim IntclligPint, ve/ propter mei eloquii difficHltatem non intelilgftnt: Sicut ego eii igmfco, ubi propter [nam tarditAtem intel-li^ere non pojfunt. Pardon my obfcure difficult expreflions,and I will pardon your dulnefs ot apprehenfion.

3. For the third Exception, viz. the fiiarpncfs of my ftile, I have thefe things w fay, i. I dare not, nor will not wholly excufe it. I am too confcious of my frailty, to think my felf innocent in this. I confeded my fault as? to one even now; and I contefs as to another ( M"^ fVaik£f) i committed the fame fault, by too unmannerly pro-vokmg cxprertious ( Though 1 will take none for a competent Judge of the degree of my fault, that hath not read his Anfwer to f.Good-Vfin, and M' Gatukers Vindication of M"" fVottons Defence.) The other paflages that fomeacculeme of, arc, I think, upon a forced miftaken fenfe of my words. The moft real fharpnefs that ever t was guilty o^, was againft M^^ Tombes in my Book of Baptifm : and its too probable that m this againft M'^ K. I have tranfgrcfled: which if I have done, I heartily defire him, as I do all other Brethren whom I have offended, in compaffion of humane frailty, to remit it; as I heartily do all thofe paflages of his, which his Readers do generally judge fo unfavoury. However I do adjure every Reader, that would not break the ninth Commandment, and wrong God and themfelves and me by falfc cenfures, that they impute not my (harp expreflions to a difefteem of Chriftian Unity and Peace, or a hatred to my Brother : and that by too impatient reception, they make it not an occafion of difaffedion, or breach of peace in themfelves. For the Lord knows, that, though my words may be too rough and earneft, yet my foul longeth after the Unity and Peace of the Church. And I never yet wrote againft any Brother fo (liarply, butlcouldheartily live with him in dear Love and Communion; asl am confident I fhouId do with thefe, if they were near me : Forfurelam, Idifagree not with thofewith whom Ido convcrfe; nor ever fell out with any Brother, to my remembrance, fincel was a childe. Charge me with unmeet expreflions if you pleafe; but with no further Unpeaceablenefs, DiIaffedion,or Con-

(a 2) tempt

tempt of my Brethren, then you can prove 2. I muft intreat the Reader to diftingui(h carefully, between my fpceches againlt the Perfon, and againft the Errour or Caufe which I oppofe. I confefs, when I am confident that it is Errour that I fpeak againft, efpecially if It appear to be foul or dangerous, I am apt to fliame it. and load it with Abfurdities, and (hew the nakedncfs of it to the Reader : In this cafe, I finde many take it as if I fpokc ail this of the Pewbn, and cenfured him as abfurd, asldohis Opinion: which is an injurious charge; feeing a wife man may hold an abfurd Opinion. And I think, as I mui\ not fpeak contemptuoully of my Brother for a lefler Eirour, fo neither muft I for his fake, fpeak lightly and favourably of his faults. Errour is not like confefled fins, which none dare own, or encourage others in : but it is a Vice that difpofeth men to Infed all they can; and cmboldneth them to defend it, and fear-lefly to draw all others into the guilt. And therefore it necdeth the moft potent oppofition, and the fouls of our Brethren need the moil effeftualprefervative: And that muft not be only by a naked, dull Confutation^but alfo by a difcovery of the foulnefs,the finfulnes and dangeroufnefsofthe Errour. The Affedions have need to be a-waked, as wellasthcUnderftanding informed, in the prefentcafe, as well as againft common moral Vices. I am fure Seducers make no fmall advantage, by moving the Affedions, and why they that fpeak Truth (hould not do fo, I cannot teii* Ifwemuft dofoin Preaching, fo muft we in fome Difputings, ftiil fuppofing that Information go firft, and exciting application bebutfubfervient, and be not the leading, or the principall part. Thofe that take intelleduali Errour to be no finr.e, muft deny the underftanding to be under a Law, and its ads to hi participative voluntary, and being commanded by the Will- And if Errour be finne, we may have leave to difgrace it and deal with it as finne; provided that we maintain our Charity to the erring Brother. I am bound not to hate my Brother in my heart, but plainly to Rebuke him, and not fuffer fin to reil upon him. If he cake it ill, that makes not me the offender, nor will difcharge me from my duty. 3. I confefs I think we arc commonly too tender ear'd in fuch cafes: of which I have fpoken my minde already in the end of the Preface to my Book of Baptifm. I Iiave oft wondered to think what patience we exped ( and juftiy) yea and finde, in many of the worft of our hearers, when we fpeak to them as cuttingly as polTibly wc can (and all coo little:) and how

little we exercife ©r can allow to one another! and what filkcn ean the Preachers of humility have thcmfelves ? And I cannot but ob-fcrve the ftrange partiality of the beft: how zealous they are againft a Toleration of Errours; and yet how impatient of being told of their own. Other mens (hould be cut down with the Sword, and theirs may not be plainly confuted by the Word: nor can we fo skilfully butter and oy lour words, but that we (hail be taken for contemners of our Brethren. Not that I am free from the fame difeafc : but (though proud hearers judge him a proud fpeakcr that deals plainly with them, yet) Icantruly fay ofthat fin, to the praife of my Phyfition, 2iS Seneca £pifi.S. Salntares admonitiones velut medi-camentorum utilium compofitiones Utteris mando, ejfe illas ejficaces in meii ulceribtu expcrtna : qua etiamfi ferfdfiatA mn fnnt, ferpere de-fierunt' ReSlum iter quod ferb co^novi, O" Uj^m trrtindo, aliis mori' ftro. And for my own ftile in writing, it is but fuch as I would ufe in free fpeaking, if any Brethren were prefcnt: and I think they would then bear it. I would not be furious, nor yet would I be blockifti; nor fpeak as without life about the matters of life. I fay of earneftnefs as Seneca of wit, Epifi.j^. ^M^alls fermo ntem ejfet ft unafederemM, aut ambHlaremus, tales ejfe Epifiola4 meas volo^ qu£ nihil habeant accerfttum, autfiflum. Si fieri pojfet qmdfentiam ojlen-^ dere, quam Icqni, mallctn. Etiamft dijpntarern, nee fupploderem pC' dem ^c. hoc unum plane tibi approbare veflcm, omnia me ilia fenfire aute dicerem, nee tantum fenfire fed amare. Non jejuna ejfe c^ arida volo, quA de rebm tarn magnis dicenthr. Neq; enim Philofophia inge-nio rentintiat. H<ecjit propojiti noftrijumma : qmd feritimns Jaqnamur ; qmd loqmmHr fentiamns.

4. One thing more I defire : that if my words be any where of-fenfive, the Reader will do me that right, as to confider dilic^ently the words that I Reply to: for without that, you cannot equally judge of mine. Though I do not feel my felf fmart by any words of M'"iC's, yet I knew not well how fufficiently to Reply to them, without manifefting them to be as they are, I remember Hierom, fpeaking of one Evagrim that pleaded for the Stoical impalllonate-nefs, faiih he was, ty^pit 'Dem^ aut Saxum: I am neither : and therefore muft fpeak as I am. Yet this I will promife my moft offended Brethren, that in the harfheftofmy Writings, I will not give my adverfaries half fo hard language, as did cither Hierom the mofi Learned of tlie Fathers, or Calvin the moft Judicious and

(a 3) Happy

Happy of the Reformers, no nor as D"^ Twijfe the moft Learned oppofer of the Arminians. And I remember what it was that Hie-rom cOBjpIained of (adverf. Rujji>tum) Canim dente me rodunt, in publico detrahenteSf legentes in attgidn: lidem ^ccufdtores G^ De-fenferes'^ turn in aim ^robenty ijuod in me reprcbant: quafi VirtHS & yitittm Hon in Rebiu fit, fed cum Attthore mutetur.

I cannot blame the Reader if he be weary of this long Apologie, indasJc, To what purpofe are all thefe words? To whom I truly anfwer; More for thy fake then mine own : becaufe fome angry Divines that diffent, do raife fuch an odium againlt my Writings, upon the pretenfes before intimated, that they may thereby hinder thee from receiving any benefit, and entertamin^ the Truth. For my own fake, I confefs it little troubleth me; tor 1 know it hath been the cafe of my betters, and I have greater matters to be troubled for. I can fay as Vi^. Strigelitts £pifi. ad wefenbech. a little before his death, Sgoeditione talium pagelUrum nee nominu mei vanam glorioUm quaro, nee aueupium peeunia exerceo : Sed eupio Deo decU' rare meam gratitudinem pro maximis bene fie iU j c^ EeelefiiA ofiendere tneamconfejfionemy denicj^mediocribm ingeniU aliqua ex parte prode^e. Horum finium cum mihi optime fim Conjcins, non metuo ejmrundam infulfas aut venenatas reprehenfitones, fed me Gr meos labores Filio Dei commendo. Scio meum Vita, curriculum ^ hreve & exiguum ejje: ^uare in hoc brevitate peregrinattonis ea dicamy fcribam & faciam, cfua migrationem in vitam aternam n»n impediunt. This Learned Divine (Strigelifu ) himfelf, and before him Melan^lhon, as peaceable as Learned ( and many another befides them alfo ) have been fo tired with the cenfures and reproaches of Divines, that it made thcm,ifnot weary of Uving,yet more willing to die: So that Me-lanUhon thus wrote down before his death,the motives of his willing-nefs to leave this world.

A dextris. ttA fimijiris, Venies in Lucerne :

Difcedes a Peccatis : Videbts Deunu :

Liberaberis ab arumnii (fr Intueberui Filium'Dei: aRabieTheologorum. Difces Ula mira arcana qu*. in hac

vita intelligere non potutfii: Cur (fC fimui conditi: ^lualis fit copulatio duarum naturarum in Chrifto.

Nay

only Diflenters, that do terrific people from reading :itten, by telling them of I know not what latent dan-

Nay it is not what I have written,

gerots Errours; but even they that are of the fame opinion with me: For example, I .lately wrote, that Qthe Dodrine of Infallible perfeverance of all the fandificd, was my ftrong opinion, and I was perfwaded of its trnth,] and i argued for it from Scripture; yet becaufe I fo far acknowledged my own weaknefs, as to fay, that I was not fo fully certain of it, as of the Articles of the Creed, and becaufe I fay, I thinkitunfafe for a backflidingfcandalous Chrifti-an, to venture his falvation meerly on this controverted Point,] what offence is taken ? what reports fpread abroad ? fome proclaiming that I wrore againft Perfeverance ( even when I wrote for it;) Others that I am turn'd Arminian ; Others that I am dangeroufly warping I In fo much that fome of my neareft friends, for whofe good I publiflicd that Book, were ready to throw it by for fear of being infedcd with my doftrine againft Perfeverance I The enemies Inftruments be not all unlearned nor ungodly.

For my part, I commend their zeal againft Errour, fo it be Errour indeed, and fo they will moderate it with Charity and Humility. I am as ftrongly perfwaded that its the Diflcnters that erre, as they are that its I. And werethey-as zealous againft Errour indeed, I think I might have fpared the labour of fuch Writings as thefe. But I remember how they reprehended 'Beattu Rhenanus for his fup-pofcd coveteoufnefs, Beatm efi Beattn : attamen ftbi. So are fuch Brethren charitable, ftbi & fuis. And all this comes a fludio far'-tium, and becaufe the Doftrine of the Unity of Chrifts Body, and the Communion of Saints (as Saints) is not reduced to pradice ; and we love not men fo much for being of the fame Body, as for being of the fame Side or Party with us; nor for being in the fame Chrift , as for being of the fame Opinion. If he that knows Chrift knows all things; and if Intereft in Chrift alone be enough to make us Happy; then is it enough to make our Brother Amiable ; though ftiU we may be allowed, the diflike of his faults.

Which fide the Truth lies on, in the Points here debated, I willingly leave the Reader to judge according to the evidence that (hall appear to him in the pcrufal. I defire no more of him, but Diligence, Impartiality, and Patience in his ftudying it: And I again intreat my Brethren to believe that I write this in an unfained Love

of peace and them : and that accordingly they will receive it: and where they meet with any of the effeds of my infirmity, which may (ecm provoking and injurious to them, they will corapaffionately remit them; remerabring that Heaven will ftiortly Reconcile our differences.

F^derminHer, Aug.u i6^^.

THE

J.'-?.

whether ^td makf nft of our Faith at hu iMjlrumint to Jufiifie «/, §. 15

28

whether the Covenant of God he hU Inflmment of 'fuflificatioK,^.ij\.2^ Mr . B r J arguing againfi the Injirumentalitj of the Promife confuted §

I5,& 16. 29 Mr.ViVs darjgeroui 'DoHrine confuted, that ^the Efficacy that u in the

Gojpel to f unification it receives by their Faith to ^hom it is tendred

§.i7,&i8. 30 fVhether Afr.'^lfaj truly, that the "^ordhath much lefs an Influx to the

producing of the Effeth bj a proper Caftfalitj,then faith, §.19. 31 Jn ^hat l^vj of Caujalitj the Word Werketh , §. 2 o. 3 2

whether the Word he a Paffive Infirument, §.21 33

Mr.%\'s grange DoBrine examined, that \jhe Word u a T^ajfive Infiru'

mentofJufiificatioH, §.22,&23. 34

More againfi MrM's DoFiriue, that ^Faith through the Spirit gives

efjicaej and power ofWorking^to the Gs^el,in forgiving JinsJ^^.2^. 3 5 FuUerproofofthe mojf proper Jnfirumentalitj of the Gojpei in fujiifica-

tion, §.25. 36

Mr.'Bl.ContradiBion, in making Faith and the Gojpel two Injtruments^

hoth making up one compleat Infirument, S • 25. 3 7

More againfi Mr.Blfirange doBrine, that ^Faith gives ejficacj as an

Infirument to the Word, §-25. 37

A Condition, What ; and how differing fern meer Duty, § .27. 3 ^

The difference between us compromiz^ed or narrowed, §.27, 40

of Evangelical perfonal Righteoufnefs, §.28. 41

what Righteoufnefs ii, §.28. 43

In Whatfenfe our perfonal Right eoufnefs is ImperfeCl and perfeB, §. 28

44 \iai.6/[.6. explained,Our Righteoufnefs is atfilthj rags, §29. 46

How Holinefs isperfeEl or ImperfeU:, . §.30. 47

whether Holinefs or Righteoufnes be capable neither of perfection nor Im-perftEiioni but tn relation to a Rule, §0 ' .& 3 2. 48

Concerning nrf charging learned Divines With Ignorance and other harfh '- fpeeehes, ... ^, . §.33. 49

We are not deriomindted perfehallj righteous for our conformity to the Law •of Works only, or properly^ proved, §-3 3- 50

whether as Mr.Bi.faith,the old Rule, the Moral Law be aperfeli Rule, and the only Rule, §-33. 51

ji Vindication of the Author from the imputation of Arrogance,for charging fome Divines With Ignorance^ § • 3 3 • 49

whether

jyhether ImperfeB Conformitj to tk Law he Right emfnefs,man Image

lefs Uki the patern is an Image^ § ,^^ . j^

Borefavrlj Mr.Blchargeth me to fay [^Swcerity « the New RhU, §.36

55

An Jnfroer to Davcnants Teflimonj tited hj Mr.Bl. §. 37, 56

How far V»be lief and Impenitencj in profejfed Chriflians are violations of the New Covenant, ' §08.57

Bow manjftrts of Promifes or Covenants there are in Scripture mentioned, §-39- 58 Bow far Hypocrites and wicked men, are, or arc not in Covenant ^ith God'jinfeveral Propofitions, §-3 9- 60 tyfn enqnirj into MrSVs meaning, ef VogmatiCatfaith, and being in Covenant, §.39. 64 of the Outward Covenant (as thej call it) and how far the Vnhliever: or Bjfoorit'es may have right to Baftifm and ether Ordinances, §. 3-5,

ibic Mr Bl'/ Akfurditiesfupfofed to follow the rejlraifit of the Covenant ft the Elefl, confidered, § • 4 ^. 80

0/*r twnCovenanting is the principal part eftheCondition ofGodspromift or Covenant of Grace, ^.41. 81

whether I make the Seal ofBaptifm, atidof the Spirit,ttbe of e^jual latitude, '«'•", ^^^^ ^^

Afr.^Vs dangerous argument, anfwered [_The great Condition to Vchicl

Baptifm engageth, u not a preretjuijite in "Baptifm : But fuflifyin^

.'Faith lifuch :Therefor'e~] •§.43. ibic

Kjlfore'ofA'fr3Vs Arguments anfwered, §.44,&45. 2(

My Arguments Vindicated f\om Mr^Ys EjcCepticn, §.4610 52. 8J

26 Arguments to prove, that it is fufiifying faith which God requires p^

them that come to Baptifm, and that Afr.VA's doHrine in thu is un

found and unfafe, §52. 9.

OfMr.^Vs Controverjtewith Mr.Virmin, §53- 10;

My averting of the Abfolute promife efthefrfi Grace,vindicated, §.55

108 JVhether our Faith and Repentance be Cjods ^korks, § • 5 5 • 109

fVhat Life was frcmifed to Adam in thefirfi Covenant, § .J 6. ill

of the 'Death threatned by tbefirfl Covenant, § -5 7- 112.

fvhether the Death of the body by ftparation of the foul were determinate-ly threatned, §-58. 113

Of the Law as made to Chrifi, §-59- 115

whether the Sacrament ftal the Conditional promife Abfolutely ? or the

(Jf 2) Conclufion

Ct>tclufion[_lAmJufiifitdandJh4llbefaved~^ ConditiunAlly , S-60j

61,62,63. 115 The Ndture of JcAling opened^ • §-64. I18

2.0 Profcfttiens{hewing how Godfealethy S-64- np

That the minor being]eAled,the Conclnfion is not eo nominc/c^/f^, as Mr.Bltiffrmeth, §.65. 123

,JHoTv Sacraments fcal with farticuUr Application^ S-67. - 12^

Afr3i's doLlrine untrue, that [_lfthe Conclufion be not fealed, then no Prepojition is [ealcd ] §.68.126

whether it be JirtHAiiy written in Scripture that Alr.Blii fujlified, §.

69. 126 A^oreabout Condieionalfea/ing, ^.jo,^!. 128

fVhetherit is de fide that Mr.Bl.ia fufiified, §.72,73,74. 129

Jn whatfenfe \Vf denj that Conclttfton to be dc fide, § • 7 5 • 13 3

Tkit Divine Faith hath Evidence,4i ^ell at Certainty. Rob.Baronius and Rada'j words to the contrary, examined^ §-75* ^34

The difference between M.r. BLand me contrafled, and a plain cogent Ar-guTtient added,to prove^t hat the Conelufton fore-mentioned is notfealed^

S.76. 139 The pojfibilitj but vanity of Conditionalfealing, § • 7 7 • 140

Afore of Afr.BVsReafonsanfwered, §.78,to8!. 141

The danger of teaching men, that they are bound to believe that they are 'JuBified,andJhalibefaved, ^.81. 142

Jn whatfenfe the Covenant commandeth perfe^ obedience, §.82. 144 Jl^r.BVs Rea/ons examined, concerning the Covenants commanding per-feSlion, §^3,2,t0 9i. 144

How far true believers are Covenant-breakers, -',' ' §.84. 148

The Covenant is Gods Law, ' §-9i' ^5^

The C(/nclufion Apologetical againfi the charge offmgularity , § .92. 152

Th

e

CO

'The l?rologU',

'C^ Y Reverend and dearly be'oved Bfocher, I rcmemW <fr that when I met you laft at Shrewsbury, you tolj mc '^ that you had fent to thc'Prcirea Treattlc of theCox/c-nantj, and defiied me not to be offended, ifyoupub-liihed in it fomc things againft my Judgement: Your Ticatifc is fince come to my hands, and upon a brief perufall of fomepartof it, lam bold to let you knew this much of my thoughts, i. That I very much value and honour your Learned Labours, and had I been M' rinet or M» Fijher, 1 might rather have given (in romerefpefts)a higher commendation* of your Book : And efpeciallyl love it for its found difcoveiies of the Vanity of the Antinomians. 1. So farre am I from being offended at your Writing againft my Writings, thac ( aj I have oft faid concerning M' Ovfen, Cnce I faw hij Book againl^ me, even fodolbyynu) I never honoured you fomuch ( though much ) nor loved you fo dearly (though deaily ) before as fince j for 1 lee more of yourvvoith then I faw before. For where I erre, why fhould I be offended with any brother for loving Gods Truth and mens fouls, above my Errours, or any fecming Reputation ofminethat may beingaged in them, and for feeking to cure the hurt that I have done? God forbid that I ffinuld feekto maintain a Reputation obtained by, ou held in an oppoluion to the Truth. I take all my Errori in Theology ( even in the higheft revealed points, p^rtiapalitcr) to be my finnes; but cfpecially my divulged Erroi-s : And I take htm fcK- my bed friend, that is the grcatelt enemy to my lins. And where I erre not, I have little caufs for my own fake to be offended at your oppofition. For as you are pleafed to honour me too highly both in your Epithetcs and tender dealing, yea in being at Co much pairu with any thing of mine, and in Hooping to a publick oppofuion of that wKich you mi^ht have thought more worthy of your contempt, fo I know you did it in a ical for God and Truth, and you thought all was Error that you oppofcd ; fothitinthe general we fight under one Matter, and for one Caufe, and againll one Enemy: You arc fot Chriit, I. For Truth and againit Errors, fo farre as you know it, and fo am I. 1 know you wrote not againrt Mc, but againlt my Errors, reall or fappofed. And truly, though I wou'd not be flnmelefle or impenitent, nor go fo far as fenced, to fay wefliould no: objefta common fault to fingularperfons (^y'li.CorM lri,ll-<:,i6. p. (mibi) ^<ix. no morcthen to reproach a Blackmorc with his colour i yet I ' ■ B ice

CO

kt fo much by tW moft Learned and Judicious, to aflare me that buadnum efi er^ fire, and that we know but in part, that I cake it far no more di/honour, to have the worid know that I erre, then for them to know that I am one of their Brethren, a (on oiAdxm, and not yet arrived atthatbleflcd ftate where that which ischiidiOi fliall ccafc, and all that is imperfcd fhall be done away. Only if my Errors be greater then ordinary, I muft be humbled more then ordinary, as knowini^that my fin is the caufc that I have no greater illumination of the Spirit. I have truly pubhThed to the world roy indignation againlt the proud indignation of thofemen, that account him their enemy that fliall publiquely contradift them.

a. Yet muft I needs tell you, that in the points which you contradift, I find« no great alteration upon my undcrrtanding by your Writings j whether it be from the want of evidence of truth in your Confutation, or through the dulneflc of my Apprchcnfion, I hope I ftiall better be able to judge, when 1 have heard from you next. I think I may fafely fay, I: is not from an unwillingnefs to know the Truth. And one further difference there is in our Judgements: For my Judgement is,thac it is not fo convenient nor fafe a way to publifli fuddenly a reply to your oppofition, as to tell yoa my thoughts privately ( feeing we live fo near ) and to bring the Points in difterencc by friendly collations to as narrow a compafs as we can, and make as clear a difcovery of each others meanings as may be j and then by joynt confent to tell the world our feveral Judgements, and our Realons, as lovers of the Truth and of each other i that fo others may have the benefit of our friendly Collations and Eni^uiries J and may be thereby advantaged for the more facile difcovery of the Truth. Truly I would have all ftich Controverfies fo handled, that all the vain altercations might lye in the dufl in our ftudies,and that which is publiHi-ed might be in one Volume friendly lubfcribed by both parties. In this 1 perceive by your praftife, your Judgement differs from mine j and that you rather judg« it fitteft to fpeak firft by the PrefTc, that the world may hear us. I crave your acceptance of thefe Papers, rather in this private way, and that you will fignifie to me in what way I fliall exped your return, wherein I think it fitter you pleatcyour fclfthenme. I fliall faithfully give you an account of the effed of your Arguments on my weak underftanding j but not in the order as they lye in your Book, bat I will begin with thofe Points which I judge to be of greateft moment.

§. I.

M"" Bkk« Treat, of Covenants, pag. 79.

IT it dlfo lru€ thit faith accepts Chrift as a Lord, as veeU as a. Saviour: But it U the yieceptation ojhm Of a Saviour, not as a Lord, that ^uftifies: Cbriji Rules hit People as aiding, Tcachcth them as a Prophet, but makes jitonementforthcmcnly as aPneji^ hy giving himfclf tn Sacrifice, his blood for Rcmijfton of fins: Thefe muft be Jijiingiufo-ed, but not divided: Faith hath an eye at all, the blood 0} Chrijl, the command of Cbriji, tbedocirmeefChnft, but as it lies and fafiens on hit blood, fotffuilifics. Hcis fctout apropitidtion through faiih in his blood, Kom.i.z4. not through faith tn his command. It is the blood of Chnfl ihat cleavfcth all fin, and not the Sovcraigmy of Cbnft. Thefe ttnfufions of the diftinH parts ofChrifts Mcdiatorjhip, and the Jpeciall o$ces oj faith may vot be fuffcred. S tripture affignes each its particular place and ww^; Sovcraignty doth not fkanfeui; nor do:b blo(d conimani ut i Faith inbfibl09d,n9tjaiib yielding to bisSove-r'^^ntj dotb ^uftife tit. §. «.

C33

§. I.

R. S.'T'His is a Point of fo ^reac moment in wy cycj, tbac I refolvf to begin JL with it. I doubt not but the diffsnence between you and mc is onlya-bcTut the bare methodizing of our Notions, zndnot de Subfiiiaii rei: But 1 doubt left your doArine being received by common heads, according to the true iitipot-tanceof your expreflions, may do more againft their falvation then is yet well thought on: And that not per <tf«i«i, but from its proper na:arc > fuppciing the impreflionof the foulto be biK anfwerable to the objcftive dodrinal leal, law no friend to the confufion chat you liere fpeak againft i and I am glad to find yoa fo little in love with it, as to pafs your judgment that it is not to be fuffcved ; Poc now I reft aflured that you will net be offended, when here or hereafter, I ihall open your guiltinefs of it J and chat you will not be unwilling of what may teod w your cure. Thefe two or three neccifiry diftinftions I muft firftthere premife, before I can give a clear anfwsr to your wards.

I. 1 diitinguifti ftill between conftitucirc Juftification or Remirtion by the Gofpel grant or Covenant, called by moft 'fujiifium ^urk, and Jultificationper fcntentiam'fudicff. z. I diftingui/h between conttitntive Legal Juftification as begun, and as continued or eosfutiimate. g. Between the Phylical operation of Chrift and his Benefits on the imelleft of the Beleever per modum object upprehevji, •tan intelligible/^e«wJ and the moral conveyance of Right to Chrift and his Bcnefirs, which is by an aA of Law or Covenant-donation. 4- Between thefc twaqueftions, \Vhatjultifiethcxp4rteC&ri/J/^ and What juftifiech, or is required to our Juftification ex firiepacuorki J. Between the true clficicnc caul'cs of our Juftification, and the meet condition,/>/te ^U4h'0n, ^ cum ^i<i. 6. Between Chrifts Meriting mans Juftification, and bis adual juftifyiag hi(n,by conftitucioii or fentence.

Hereupon T will lay down what I maintain in thefe Propofltions, which ( fomc of them) (lull fpeak torcher then the prefcnt Point ia Qaeftioo, for a preparation to what followeth.

Prop.I. Chrift did Merit our Juftification (or a power to juftific ) not as a King, but by fatisfying the jafticeof G^d in the form of a fervanc.

Prop.z. Chrift doth juftifie (^*«nStituU'je as King and Lord, v/^. ut DtminM Kedempttr, i.e. quoxd vilorem ret, he canferreth it, ut 'Dominu* grMk bcneficicns: but <fU9ii modum conditidHolem conferenii, ut ReHor (^ 'BencfsHor. For it is Chrifts cnaftingthcnew Law or Covenant, by which he doth legally pardon or coofec Reniiflion, and conftituce uiRighteous,CuppoUag the condition p;;rformed on our pare And this is i^ot an aft of Chrift as a Pricft or Sa:isfier j bat joyntly, u( Be-ncfjL^or isf Kcciof.

^Vrop.^. Chrift doth juftific by fentence, as he is Judge and King, and not as Piieft.

Trep.^. Sentential Juftification, is the moft full, compleac and eminent Juftification ; thi: in Law being quoid fcntcjitidm, but virtual Juftification j chough quoid con litutioTiern debitt tj* rcluionh, it be aftaal Juftification.

'^rop.%. Faith juftifiech no: by receiving Chrift as anobjeft which is to make a real impreflion and mutation oathe inrellcd, according to the nature ofchcj^c-cits: I fay, To juftifie, is uo: co ixake fi>ch a real change: Though fomc joya with the Papifts in this, and cell m;, that as the Divine Atwibuws »akc their fe-

C43

vcral moral Imprcflions on the foul according to their fcveral natures, To do the fatisfaftion and merit* oi Chrirt, apprchctidcd,prccurc comfort aud joy, and a ju-ftifying icntcnce to be pronounced in the loul i: fe'f: and To the appichcnfion of Chjiks Sovcrainty caulcth our lubcftion ( which lail is true.')

Prop.6 Faiih therefore can have no Phyfical Caufation or EfHciency in jjfti-fyinr > fcein-j; that the woik to be done by us, is not mfmatpjos^untfji^re, in whole or in part, but only J«4 acquircrcii "Bcnejictumgrath jci cindiiwuUter cAU-tum: It ii a Relative change liia: is made by Jullificatiou, and noi a Hial »z Phylical.

ir«^.7-Thc Legal,formal intereft,or conducibility of Faith toour Juftification, cannot therefore be any other then that of a Condition, in the proper Law-fenfe, astheword [Condition] is ufed, w^. that .^ec/cj of conditions which they call Voluntiri* vcl Potcfiattva, and not CajudcsvcHMixtie.

Prop.9. Scripture doth not fay ( that I can fiiidej that Faith juftifieth > but that wcarejujlificd by Faith: I therefore ufe the later phrafc rather then the former, both becaufe it is fateft to fpcak with the Scripture, and becaufe the formec Ipeech fccmech to import an Efficiency j but the later frequently imports no more then a mecr condition. Yet 1 will not quarrell with any that fpeaks otherwife, nor refufc to fpeak in their phrafe while I difpute withthcmj as long as I firll tell them my meaning.

Frop.9. Though, cxpmcChriJii, our feveral changes proceed from his feveral Benefits, and parts of his Office exercifed for us; yet, ex parte nojiri,.'ue.fdei, it ii one entire apprehenfion or receiving of Chrift as he is oftered in the Gofpel, which is the Condition of our intereft in Chrill and his lereral Benefits 3 and theeft'eft is not parcelled or diverfified or diftinguillied from the feveral diiliii(!t refpcds that taith bath to its objcft. Chrift mcriteth Remiflion for us as Satisficr oi Juftice > and headually juiiificthusas Bencfaftor l<.ing and Judge, and heteachcth us as Prophet, andrulethusaj King. The real mutations here on us, receive their oi-verfification partly from our faith, becaul'e there faith doth c^tcrc or UM/jrj > As we learn of Chrift becaufe we Belceve him, or Take him for our Teacher: VVc obey him becaufe we Take him for our KingjtiT'c. But it is not fo with the Conveyance of meer Right or Title to Chrift and his Benefits. Faith doth not obtain Ri^ht to Remiflion and Juftification diftindly as it rcceiveth his Rigbteoufnefsj or himfelf as Pricft i and fo Right to the Priviledges of Chrifts Government, di-ftindly as it takcth him as King J nor Right to Adoption, as it taketh him as a Father i nor Ri^ht to Glory, as it taketh him as Glorifier; no more then all in-feriour benefits (as Title to Magiftracy, Miniftry, Health, Houfe, Lands, (ir'f.) proceed and arc diverfified by the divers afpefti of our faith on Chrift. The titw Reafon of which is this 5 That Ri;;ht to a benefit is the meer eflcifl of the Gift (Donation) or Revealed Will of the Giver : And therefore no Ad of the Receiver hath any more intereft, or any other then it pleafeth the Donor to aflign of appoint it to have. So ibu ( fuppofttid^Ua mtura ) all the formall Civil intereft comes from Gods meer Will, as Donor: ( for to the Abfolute Benefactor doth it belong, as to conferreall Right to his freely-given Benefits, foto determine of the Time and Manner of Conveyance, and fo of the Conditions on the Receivers fart.) The nature of the AftofFaithis caufed by God, as Creator of tbeold and new Creature j 1 mean of our natural faculties, and their lupernatuial endowments or difpofitions : And therefore this is prefuppofed/'woriiwc wjwr* to faiths. Legal intereft : At God is Rtik the Maker of caiih^ before he is the Maker o£

Jdms

c 5:

\^ Jims hcdy : Faith is to be confidcrcd as being Faith (i.e. Tuch sfts cxcicifei about fuch cbjtds) in onicr of nature, bel'oie it can be rightly ccrfidered as ju-liifyingor the condition of Juflificaticn : Seeing ilieiefcre it icctivesall its formal Legal intereft from God, as Leeifiator and Donor of Chrift and hisbeoefiis, which is after its material aptitude ad hoc bfficiim ; its intcrtft muft not be gathered diicdly, cxvaturaaiffcSy but ix covjittuticne d<»:auiii dr crdmauis: And therefore you muiifi;ft picve out of the Golpcl, that It hihcOrdtmtienofGod, iha: as Cbrilts Uvual a^cns havetlicir Itvcral efliits for us and on us, fo out faith fl^all be the proper cencition ot each of thtfe vaiicus cfti els, ^mj <jppr(/;cw<f;l,as it Bclte-veih or Acccptetheachdiilii.it eftcft, cr Chrift tiiflinftly as the caufe of thatef-tcd, (^ cmmconfidcraturn iitmedocaufandi. But, alas, how inviliblc is the Proof of this in all your Writings ? ( 1 will leave the reft of the Prcpcfuicns, by which I intended here together to have opened Icmemoieof my fenfe, till afteiwards, becaufe 1 will not interrupt the prefcnt bulinefs.) Here, either my Unde:ftanding is too fliallow to reach your fenie, or elfe you are guilty, quoad liter am,oi\ ay great confufion j ( which one wonld think fhould have befallen you at any time, rather then when you are blaming others of unfufferable confulicn :) and yet qutadfen' juminvolutum, of more dangerous,unfcriptural, unproved Diftirdion.

I. Your exprcfllonsconfound Chrift and hisAftions, with mans faith in our Juftification: Or,thefe two Queftions [By what are wc']uiiiiicdcxfArteCbrijiiiJ and [By what arc we jalVidcd txpirte noftri ?']

I. Your implied fcnfe, even the heart of your reafoning, confifteth in this after-tioh, that [As out Right, as to the feveral benefits received, is to be afcribed di« ftinftly to fcvetaldittinft Caufes on Ghrift?part, fo alfo as diftindly arc the particular Benefits, quoad Debitum vclTitulum, to be afcribed lo the feyeral diftinft apprchenfions ot thefc Benefits ( as moil fay ) or of Chrift as divcrfly caufing them (as fome fay,^ ] And heie 1 cannot but complain of a treble injuilice that you feera to me guilty of ( even in this elaborate Treat, wherein yeucorteft the Errors of fo many others.)

1. Againil the Truth and Word of God, in implying it to have done that, even in the great Point, the Conftitution of the Condition of Juftification and Salvation, which is nor to be found done in all the Scripture.

z. Againft the fouls of men : i. In fuch nice mincing and cutting the Condition of their falvation, to their great perplexity, if they receive your dcdrine. a. Ajid aifo in not affording them one word of Scripture or Reafon for the proof of it, which is injufticc,whcn you are Confuting others and Redifying the world in (o great a Point. 3. Laftly (and lealtly) it is evident injufticc to your Friend, to Accufe him ( for it is no hard matter to know whom you m;an ) with confounding the diiiind parts of Chiifts Mediatorfhip,which he ftill diftinguifhcth as cxaftly as hecan ; though he do not diilribute as many cfticfs to Faith, as there ate objefts for it, cr ashe doth to Chrilis feveral Works. Why did you not name one line where 1 do confound the parts of Clrrifts Orhces ? I pray you doit for me in your next.

1 will not trouble you much with Argun>ents for my opinion in this Pointj feeing you meddle with none already laid down, and feeing 1 have done it over and over to others, and becaufe 1 am now but Anfwetin^ to your Confutation. Only let me tell you, that the Proof lieth on your pan. iFor when 1 have once proved, that God giveth Chrift and his Benefits toman, on Condition he will Belecve in Chrift.or Accept him : Jf you will now diftingujflij and lay, It is Accepting

B 3 tis.

CO

feijfatiifaAion, which is the Condition of Juftlficatioa, and Accepting him as King, which is the Condition of Sandificacion or Glorification, CT'f. you mufl prove this to be true. For 7ionc[l dif^iagiicndum vclUmitandiim ubi Lex non diiitngufS vclltmiut. If God lay [ Bclcevcin the Lord jeiusjandthou ihalcbc fivcd,] ami you faj, [Bclccvin^ ill him as Priclt is the only Condition of faving thee from guilt: and Beleevingin hiiuasKing, is the only Condicion of faving thee from the power of ria.C^c.]you mull prove this which you fay.Or it you wi-11 no: fay[Ic is the only Condition] but [the only inflrument] you give up the Caufe. For ihcword [Cojidition] is it thatexpreflcih its necrcll Legal InterclHn jutbifying Of conveying any Rijjht: ami that which yuu call ics iniirumcataliryj is but the natural Aptitude and Remote Intereft.

». It is the Receiving of Chrift as Chiift that juftifieih (as the Condition of Juftification ) But he is not received as Chrill, if not as Lord-Redeemer.

I. JulUfying faith is ( fay the Allembly ) the Receiving of Chrill as he is offered in the Gofpcl: But hz is dficicd in the Goipel as Saviour and Lord^ and not as Saviour only : ThcreforCiC^c.

J. Juftifying faith is the Receiving of Chiift as a full Saviour: But that can-no: be except he be received as Lord . For to fave from the power of fin, is as true apart of the Saviours Ofiice,astolavc from the guilt.

4. Juftifying faith rccciveth Chrilt as he juftifieth us, or as he is tojuftifie us: Blit he doth juftifie us as King and Judge and Benefactor J as he fatisfieth and mc-ritcch in the form of a fei vant under the Law.

J, If receiving ChriH as a Satisfier and Meriter, be the only faith that gives right to Juflification, then on the fame grounds you mufl fay. It is the only faith that gives right to further Sandification and to Glorification ; For Chiift Merited one as well as the other.

6. Rejeding Chrift as King, ?s the condemfling fin : Therefore receiving him as King is the juftifying faith, Lm<[.i9.z7. Thofc mine enemies thit would not thaft JJjould reign over them, brivg,Scc. The reafon of the confeouent is, becaufe unbelief condenaneth (at leaft partly) as it is the privation of the juftifying faith : I fpeak of that condemnation or peremptory fentcnce which is proper to the new Law, and its peculiar condemning fin, eminently fo called.

7. Pfiii. Killing the Son and fubmittin^ to him as King, is made the condition of elcapiug his wrath.

8. Mattk.ii.i^yi^iio. TheconditionofEafe and Reft (from guilt,as well as power of fin) is our coming to Chrift as a Teacher aivi Example of mecknefs and lowlinefs, and our Learning of him, and Taking on us his yoke and burden.

9. That faith which is the Condition of Salvation, is the Condition ofjiifti-fication or Rcmiflion : But it is the receiving of Chrift as King, as well as Sacil-fier, that is the Condition of Salvation: Therefore,©^tf. 1. Juftification at judgement, and Salvation (from iicU, and adjudication to Glory) arc all on the fame conditions, Mut. If. (^ abique. x. Juftification is but the juttitying of our Right to Salvation 5 i.e. fcnrcncin^:; us as Non rcos Pmx ( quii T>ijSolitU cil oblrgi-tio) (ff quibuA dchetur fTiXmiiim-y Therefore Juftification and Salvation mull needs have the fame conditions on our part. 3. Scripture no where makes our tai:h, or aft of faith, the Conditiou of Juftification, and another of Salvation. Batcon-tcarily afcribeth beth to one. 4. When Piiitl argueth moft xealoufly againft Works and for Faith only, it is in rcfped to Salvation generally, and not to Juftification Only. E^b.t.ijp. By graces cure favei through fxith,Sec. Sot6Jwrks,lcji

C7]

ivy man JhouUboaJi. Tit.j.T* Sethyvperkscf rigltetmfntjivehicbvpehdvedone, IfUt according to his Merey befavcd Wj&c. Never more was laid againft Juftification by Works (which Tw/cTcludes ) then againft Salvation by them : Nor is it any more diflionour to Chrift that be fliould give Juftification or Remiffion on Co«-dition of our Accepting him as King, then that he fliould give Salvation on that Condition. ?. Pardon of (in and freedom fro.n hell, muft needs have the fame Condition: For pardon refpcfteth the punifliment as truly as rhcfin. P^sm (ff ^oenia fujit advcrfi: Pardon dilTolveth guilt 5 Guilt is the obligation to puniHimem. Yet I fpcak here only of a plenary and continued pardon.

10. Laftly, If Accepting Chrift as Lord-Rcdcrmerj be the Fides qux^ufiifi" cat, i.e. qua efi conditio ^ujiiJicauonK, then it is ncerly, ftriftlyand properly theju-liifyingaft of faithj as the accepting of Chrifts Righteoufncfs is: But the Antecedent is granted by all Divines that I have bad to do with : ThereforCj^c. For the general cheat is by the diftindion of Fides qua ^ujiificat ( that is.'fay thevj the Accepting of Chrift as SavioHr and Lord, by a taith difpofcd to fruitfulr;frs in obedience ) and Fides qui ^uftifat ( and that is the Accepting of Chrifts Righ-teoufnefs as our formal Rightcoufnels, fay feme: Or the Accepting of Chrifts RightCGufnefs a$ the meritorious caufe of our Rightcoufnefs, fay others : Or the Accepting of Chrift hrimfelf as Pricft, fay others :) Now this Fides ['^-j"] either rcfpedeth the meer matter of faith, or it refpedeth the formality of the effed, or it rcfpeftrth the Forma! Reafon of faiths intereil in the eftcft, m medium, vol caufa.

1. If iquj.'] refpcft only the matter of faith, then 1. it is an unfit phrafe ; *^^or C^ai] and Iquatevvs} ate ftridly ufed to exprels the formal Reafon of things.

2. And then the Accepting of Chrift as Lord muft be the Fides t^i too : for that is confitflcd to be materially an ad of that faith which juftifi.-tb. i. If [-i^i] refpeft the formality of the efteft, and fo the refpcAof faith to that efleft rather then another ; then faith is not [juftifying] qui reeipitchrijium,fedquajujlijjcxt: And fo the diftinftion containet>i this truth, Thzt fdcs qua fsiilfifcatctiam jujli* fttat, fed-Konqui (avSifut: (^e centra. But neither of thcfccan be the fcnfc of them that ufe thisdiftinftion in our cafe. 3. It muft theicforc bcthe former reafon of faiths intcreft in juftifying that is cxprefled by [«^i ;] and then it implieth the begging of the Queftion, orthisfalfc I'uppofition [that Fides qui fides iujiifi' wi] I mean not qua fides in ^ciicre, but qua, hac fides, viz- qua eHfiducia in CDnJlum fatiifdcJerem, vclaeceptatioChriili. Indeed the term [Accepting] implieth the gift and offer, and the conftitution of that acceptance for the condition : But the AS it fclf is but the Matter apt to be the condition : If Chrift had been given (or pardon) abfo'utcly, or on fome other condition i then belcevrng in him would not have juftifled. Thcrdoic fidesruChriftum qui talis doth net ii'ftifie j bu: qu.icoH' ditioTefiumtmifraUita: though^(^c.ux cknjiim qua talis had in its nature a Gn-gular aptitude to be chofen and appointed to this Koncur and Office. So much to fhcw the vanity of that difticdion (of much more that might be faiJ.) Further the confcquence of the w<i/or Prcpcfitior. of my Argument,is made paiWll dif-pute, to them that will but well confidcr this r To ( be the condition of cur Juftification) fpeaksthc neareft intereftcf faith'in our Juftification, that is, as it is medium legale i or that kindc of caulality which it hath ; which is to ht caufa fine qtta von,(^ cum qua: Therefore i< is ameer impcflibility thatthc Receiving Chrift as Lord ftiould be the condition of cut juftitlcaticn ( or the fides quae[icovditio, as they fpcak ) and yet that we fhould not be juftificd by it as a ccndiiion, when per-tormtd ? It is ao founder fpewh, then to fay, that is an (fi&cieni caufe, ^^hich doth

BCt

[83

nateffeft. Som; CanJitionj ( anl moll a-nong m;n^' are Moral impu^fivecau-f«s : Faith is rather a rcmovcnt pr9hibent,zni ea:h nothing in it rhat fo well dcforvci the title of a Ciuie, as ot a Condition : though unbelief may be laid to be the Caufe of our Not-bcin^ lulliheJ, a; fuch caut'cs are faid to move Gii, when w< fpcak according to the manner of men : Indeed if they will fay (accord in-" to their principles) that Fides inChriftum Dominum qie cjl conlttio non jujlifjcxt per mrium injlruvuntti 1 ihill grant it: liir. th:n i. I iHiil lay a$ m:ich 4fJ?ic j« (.hrijlum fMisficientcm. a. Thus they grant it the intereft of a Condition in our Juftihca-tion : and I intcni no more- VVe are 'uftih:d by faith i/s the Condition of Julli-fication ; Therefore we a-e juftitieJ by every acft of faith vtbicb is the Condition : YoTyAqiutenut al emne vxUt confequentix. Thus I have given you a few of thofc many reafons which might be ^ircn, to prove that the Accepting of Chrift for Lord-Redeemer, and not only as Satislier, w no: only his Righteoufncfs, is that Faith by which as a Condition wc are jullified. And what ladeffcds it may produce to teach the world that the only jullifyingaft of faith is, The Accepting ot Jufti.ication asmeiitedby Chrifts blood, or the Accepnngof Chrifts Righteouf-nefsto juftifiethem J it is not hard for an unprejudiced man todifcern. For my part,inallmy experience of the cafe of the ungodly that I have trial of, I can fiadc no commoner caufe of their general dcludon and perditionjthcn this vary doftrine; which they have gcacrally received, though not in fuch exaft terms as it is taught them. I never met with the m>ft rebellious wretch ( except now and then one under terrors) but when they have finned their worft, they llill think tobe faved, becaufe they believe : And what is their beleeving ? why they beleeve that Chrift died for them, and therefore God will forgive them, and they truft for pardon and falvationto Chrifts death and Gods mercy ; This were good, if this were not all; but if Chrift were alfo received as their Sovereign and Sandifier and Teacher : Bu: if this were the only juftifying aft (asthey ufually fpcak) then I Hiould not know how to difprove him that (hould tell me that all men in the world fliall be faved that beleeve the Gofpel to be true : or at leaft, the far i reareft part of the moft wicked men: For I am certain that they are willing not to be damned, and therefore Accept,or are Willing of Chrift to favethem from damnation : and lam furc they are Willing to be pardoned as fatt as they (in, and that is, to be juftificd ; and therefore miift needs be Willing of Chrift to pardon them ( fuppofing that they beleeve the G^fpcltobe true) What therefore ihall I fay if a wicked wretch thus ar^ue: He that hath the only juftifying ad of faith is juftified : But that have I; fori Accept of Chrift to forgive and juftifie me by his blood : Thercfo'*c, ^c ? Shall I tell him that he diflcmbleth, and is not Willing ? Why i. Long may I fo tell him before he will beleeve me, vvhsn he feels that I fpeak fallly and flander him. 1. And I (hould know that I flander him my felf: Suppofing that he beleeve that there ii no pardon but by Chrifts blood, (as the devils and many millions of wicked men do bclecvc :) For I km.v no man in his wits can be willing to b: unpardoned and ro burn in hell. Shall I give him the common anfwer ( the beft that ever was given to mc, ) that though the only juftifying ad be the receiving Chrift or his RightcouCnefs to juftifie us, yet this muft be ever ace )m;?aniei with the receiving him as Sovereign, and a reiolution to obey him ? Perhaps I may fo puzxle him for want of Logickor Rcafon j but elfchow cafily may he tell me, that this receiving Chrift as Lord, hich either the nature ofa medium xi fi" Item., or not ? \i it be no meiii<»i, the wane of it in this cafe cannot hinder the Jultification of that mantfvac is lure hs hath the folc juftifying ad it fclf: For as

meer

I

mcer figns or idle concomitants do nothing to the cffcd, Co the want of them hinders not the efted where all caufcs and means are prefent • But if I fay, that this aft of faith is a mcAHs to Juftification j then I mull either make it a Caufe, or a ConditioHjer invent feme new medium not yet known.

But you fay [Sovcraignty doth not clcanfe us, nor doth blood command us.] tAnf.i. How ill is ^flveraignty put in flead of the Soveraign ? I fay not that the reception of Chrifts Soveraignty doth lullifie (thofe words may have an ill fenle) but we arejuftified by receiving Chriftas ourSovcraign (which much differs from the former.^ z. Chrift as Soveraign doth cleanfe us, both from the guilt and power of hnne, by aftual Remiffion or Juftification, and by Sanftification. 3. Suppofc you fpeak true, as you do, if you mean it only of Meriting our clean* fing : What is this to ourQueilion ? But you addc [Faith in his blood, not faith yeeldin^ to his Soveraignty doth juftifieus,] Anf. This is famething to the pur-pofe, if it had been proved. But will a nude and crude AlVertion change mens judgements ? or fliould you^have e«peftcd it ? A text you cite, and therefore it might feem that you thought it fome proof of this. Row. 3.14. But all the force of your Argument is from your dangerous addition, which, who will take for good Expofition ? The text faith. He is fet forth to be a propitiation, through fuitb in bifBUoi. And you adde [Not through faith in bis Command.] 1. SeJ quo jure nefcto. Your excKifion is either upon fuppofitionjthat/u/ifetnfe« Blood is equipoUtnc to faith in his Blood only ; or elfe it is on fome myflerious ground, which you ihould the rather have revealed,bccaufe it is not obvious to your ordinary Reader todilco-ver it, without your revelation. If the former } 1. iiy what authority do you addc [only] in your interpretation ? z. Will you exclude alfo his Obedience, Refurrcdion, Intcrccffion,(i;'c.' When by the obedience of one miny are made righte-out? and Row.8. J 3,j4. It it Cjoithat jujiifieth, vfho is he that condcmncthi It is Cbriji thjt died, ycx rather thit is rifen again ; rvho it even at the right band of God, wba alfomal{eth intercejfton for la. i. But the thing that you had to pr«ve was not the exclufion of [faith in his Command] bat of £faith in Chrift as Lord and Teacher] or either: Receiving Chrift as Rulei-, goeth before the receiving of his particular Commands. And for the text. Root. J.14. It was fitteft for Piw/to fay [by faith in his blooi]becaufe he intends to connote both what we are jullificd by, ex parte thnjli, 3ni what ex parte nofiri, but the former ptincipally. I will explain my thoughts by a fimiliiude or two.

Suppofe a Rebell be Condemned, and lye in prifon waiting for Execution > and the Kings Son being toraife an Army, buyerh this RcbeTl, with all his fellow prifoners, from the hand of Juftice, and fendeth to them this melVagej-If you will thankfully acknowledge my favours, and take me hereafter for your Prince or General, and lift your felves under me, I will pardon you (or give you the pardon which I havepurchafed) and moreover will give you places of Honour and Profit in my Army:] Here now if the Q_ucftion be, What it is on the Princes part that doth deliver the prifoner ? It is hisranfom, asio the Impeiration or Preparation: and it is his free-Grant, which doth it, as to che aftual Deliverance'. Ifitbeaskc What is it that Honourethor Enrichcth him ? I', is the place of Honour and Riches that by the Prince is freely given him. But if you ask on trie oftjnders parr. Whir it is that delirereth him as the condition ? It is not his accepting Pardon and Deliverance (or the Prince as a Pardoner or Ranfbmcr ) thit is the tole Condition of his pardon and deliverance from death : Nor is it the Acctp-ing of the Honour ( 01 of the Prince as one to honour him J that is the fole condition

of his Honour r Nor is it accepting of Riches, that is the folcconJitionof enriching him. But ir is entirely the accepting of the Prince for his General, and thankfuil acknowledging his Ranfom, that is the Condition of all together, and hath as near an intcreft in one part of the Benefit, as another.

Or fuppol'e the condcmnea prifoner be a woman, and the Prince having Ran-fomcd her, doth fend this offer to her, That if fhe will thankfully acknowledge his favour, and take him for her Redeemer and Husband and Prince ( to love, honour and obey him ) hcwill deliver her, and make her his Queen, and ihc (hall partakeof all his Honour and Riches.] Here now if theQueltion be. What it is on his part that Redeemed her ? What that Delivered her ? What that honoured her ? What that enriched l.er ? each effeft muft be afcribed to its proper caufe, and the caufcs not confounded : And /he mull diftindly apprehend, by what way and caufc each priviledge comes. But if you ask only. What it is og her part that is the condition of enjoying thefe Benefits ^ Why it is»but one entire, undivided Condition bcfcre njentioned : Will yoH here fubtillydiftinguiih and fay, that her taking him to deliver her, is the fole a<ft which is the condition of her Deliverance? and her taking him to Dignifie her, is the fole condition of her Dignity ? and hcf taking him as Rich, or to enrich her, is the fole condition of her enriching ? No, It is one undivided condition that equally gives her intereft in all. Much lefs if ic the Accepting of his Riches, that is the fole condition of enriching^her. Yet if any fliould in one Qucftion include both. What on his part did lave her from death ? and what on her part ? then it muft be expreft as Taw/did in the feremen-tioned text, in our cafe : It is her Marrying or Accepting a Mercifull Redeemer. I fliould wrong you, by feeming to imply a doubt of your Apprehenfivenefs, if I fliould fpend words in application of this to our cafe. Having been fo much too tedious already, I will onlyaddej That the common doftrine in this Point, requires that there be as many adtsof faith as tITJfc are Benefits from Chrift to be received j and that each one is the Inftrumcnt of receiving that particular benefi^t: and fo one aft o( faith Juftifieth, another A<io}ptcih,(S'c. And that ad which recciveth Juftification, which they call the Paffive inftrument thereof, intheup-fhot of all their Difputes they fo defcribe, that it is apparent they mtinipfam ^uflificationem pajfivam .- And fo with them (^rcdere iff ^uftificari muft be Sy-nonimall termes: For fo to receive Juftification, is nothing but lo be Ju-ftificd.

§. a.

M'2?/.'T^ Here arc fcverd a^s of ^ufiifjfitig faith, Heb, ii. butthofc are notacisof JL Jujlification. Jt w »« Abrahams obedience, Mofcs fclf-dcniaU, Gideon •r Samplons valour, that were tbeir ^ujiification .- but his "Blood who did cvable them in tkefe duties by hit Jpirit. Paul went ?w thefe duties of high at they, living in more clear tilbt and under more abundant grace. I doubt not but be eut-topt them, and yet be was not thereby fuftified i as i Cor.4.4.

S..B. i.TTisaftrangephrafeto callanyaft of faith [An ad of Juftification.^

•■ If you fpeak properly, you muft mean it c^cienter vel ctnUitutive: either

thatfomead of faith is «n ad of Juftification, a$ tbceflicicnc (* but thacs'fatre

from

fromtrtJthj to bclccveani to juftifie differ) ©rclfcthat icisan ad conftitutinf; Juftification : But that is as far from truth j far then Qrcdexc ihould be ^Jiifcari. Ifyoufpeak improperly, yoHmuflmearij either [Anadeflcding Juftification3 as it feems you do > which is unfound, as well as improper : or elfc [An ad which is the Condition of Juiiification] which is fouad^thou^h improper.

a. Who knows whether you mean that [noncof thole afts, Hc&.ii. arc ads of Juftification] or [not all of them] The proper importance of your words is foe the former. But that is a dangerous untruth: for verf. i j. is judged by our Divines to contain a proper defcription o^ juftifying faith [they faw the promiles («.e. the good promilcd) a farre off, and were perfwaded of thcmjand embraced them ftT't-J iBut which focver you mean, you ihouId hare proved your alicrtion. It will be ca-fily acknowledged that many there mentioned, weic not the great and principall aft which is the Condition of Juftification, as begun: But yet they may be lelki afts which arc fecondarypartsof the condition of continuing their Juftification. I do not think but that aft [ by which Nook became the heir of the vighteoulncls which is by faith,] v.7.had a hand in continuing his Juftification, though it were the preparing the Ark, being moved with fear. I think tfiat aft by whi«h ^bel obtained witneffe that he was righteous, and that by which Enecb plealed God, and without which it is impofUble to pleafe him, had fomchand in Juftification: I think thcfe four great afts mentioned,i;.6. are part of the condition of Juftification. 1. To beleeve that God is (w^. that he is God,thc Chief Good, the firit and laft, the principal efficient and Ultimate Endjt^c.) i. The diligent fceking ofhit». J. Beleevingthat heisarewarder of them that do To. 4. Coming to him. (Ifthil be diftinft from the fecond.) When the holy Ghoft doth of purpofe in the whole Chapter fet forth the glory and excellency of faith,I dare not be one that ftiall imagine that he fpeaks all this of* lower fort cf faith, and quite left out the noblcll part which juftifieth, from his praifes.

g. Yetyoufhould not (in my judgement) have called l^Abruhamt obedience, CMofes felf-dcnial, Gidetns valour] afts of JulHfying faith : Arc thefe afts of faith * If you mean that thefe afts are fruits of faith, its true : Or if you mean that an aft of faith did excite the foul to each of thefe afts, and fo you mean no: the obedience, valour^tT'c. but the aft of faith which excited it, then you might call thofe afts of juftifying faith ; But if I had called valour and obedience fo, 1 ihould have been blamed.

4. What mean you to fay Obedience and Valour was not their Juftification ? Do you think that any aft of faith is Juftification? You mean ( if I may cojije-fture from your afrer-doftiinc) the inftrumcnt of Juftification.

J. But then how come you to fay next, that it is Chrifts blood ? The blood ofc Chrift is the meritorious caufe of our Julfification, which improperly may be called alio, the Matter of it: But I think it is neither out Juftification formally, not: the inftrumcnt of it in proper fpccch.

6. But I thought the contt ft in your Difpute had been. Which is the juftifying aft of faith, and which not ^ and therefore when you denied thofe in Hcb.i i. to be afts of Juftification ( which I am forced to interpret [ juftitying acts] ) I cxpcfted to findc the true aft aflertcd i but in ftead of that I finde the oppclite member, is [The blood of Chrift.] Isthis ioJccd the Controverfic ? Whether it be [Accepting Chrift as Lord] or [the blood of Chrift] that juftifieth ? Ncvct wasfuchaQjJeltiondebatcd by me, in the way here intimated. I am wliolly for youj if this be the doubt: Ic is Chnfts blood that juftifieth mccitoriouny. Out yec

C 1 w|

we arc juftified by faith too, as the condition of our intcrcftin free Juftification^ And why fhould tbcfe two be put in oppoGtion ? I lookt when you had aflcrted and well proved that it is not taking Chrill as Lord.but only fai-.h in his blood>tbac isthe condition on cur part, of our attaining Jul^ification.

7. It would prove a hard task to make good, that there arc feveral aft$ of jufti-fying faith, by which we are not juftified ; without flying m great impropriety of fpeech. By [juftifying faith] you muft mean, the Ad, Habit,or rcneweu Faculty : li the ad, then I think you will fay, ic is but one, or not many : Or at Icaft every ad, which's juftifying faith, muft needs be fuch a$ we are juft.ficd by ; Or elfe why ihould that ad be called [ juftifying faith.] i. But 1 doubt not bur you mean the habit: And then 1. you confefs that the habit is [juftifying faith] which is true; not only as ii helpeth to produce the ad, but even as it is in it fcif j But that will oveithrow the dodrine of inftrumentality. a. It requireth another kindc of Dilpuing then I here meet with, to prove that ads and habits of mans roul,aic of fo different a nature, that where the ads are fpecifically diftiud by the gieat diftance and variety of objeds, yet the habit producing all thcfe is one and the fame, and not diftind as the ads: and that obedience, felf-dcnial and valour, are adsof the fame habit of faith, as isthe accepting an offered Chiift. 3. If you fliould mean by [ juftifying faith] the faculty as fandified, then all other adsof that faculty as fandified, or of the Spirit there refiding, might as well be called Adsof juftifying faiih. But I will not imagine that this is your fen fe.

8. I C«r.4.4.is nothing toourbufir.efs. P«tM/was not hisown julHfier : Though be knew not matter of condemnation ( fenfu EvAngdico, for no doubt he knew him-felf to be a (inner) yet that did not juftifie him, becaufe it is God only that is his Judge. Can you hence prove, that accepting Chrift as Lord, is not the condition of our Juftification ^ Then you may prove the fame of the accepting him as Saviour. For Pill knew nothing by himfelfjas if he were guilty of not performing the one or the other: yet was he not thereby juftified.

M' Bi T Ames indeed faith, thxt Abraham veoi j ujiified by rvorfis, veben be hid oferei llfaacfcw fonon the >4/rjr, Jam.z.ri. but either therevfc muft underHund a worfling fMtb, with Pifcator, Parous, Pemble, and conjcjSthxt Paul and J^mcs handle trvo diUincl qneftions, The one, IVhetber faith alone "^ufiifies rvitheut veor^s ? which be ancludes in the Affirmative : The other, JVhit faith juftijicth ? iVhciher a vporkr ing faith only, and not a fuiththat is dead and idlci Or elfe I linorv m>t how to make feufe of the ApoftU, who ftreight inferres from Abrahams ^.ift if cation by the offer of hk fon. And the Scripture was fulfilled, which faith, Abraham bclecved God and it was imputed to him for righteoufnefs. Hew ethcrwife do tbcfe accords He wof juftified bywords: and the Scripture wiK fulfilled, wbnh faith, be wa juftified kj faith f

§■ ?.

R.3. I. IF ^ames muft ufe the term [Works] twelve times in thirteen verfes,

^ (a thing not ufual) as if he had forefeen how men would ouefti-

on his meaning, and yet for all that we muft beleeve that by [ Works] ^ames

dpih not mean [Works} it will prove m hajd a thing to underftand the Scripture,,

* as

as the Papifts would pcrfwadc us that it is: and that the:c is as great a ncceffity of a living deciding judge.

1. Do but reade over all thofe ycrfes,and put [working-faith] in ftead of [Works] and try w. at fenfc you will make.

3. No doubt but Ptfw/acd jF^wrj handle two diftinfl Qucflions. but not the ^ two that you here txprels. P^u/lpcaks of Meritorious Works, which make the Reward of Debt, and not of Grace, if you will bclceve his own defciipiion of them, Rom.4.4. But Jjwofpeaks of no fuch Works, but of fuch as have a confi-itcncy with Giacc, and ncceflary fubordinaticn to it: I prove i;; The Works that 3^imc,t fpeaks of, we muii endeavour for and perform, or perifli ( fuppofing time) But the works that Pdw/lptaks of, no man muft endeavour, or once imagine that hj can perform, vi'^. fuch as make the reward to be of Debt and not of Grace. Taw/fpeaks indeed of faith collaterally, but of Chrifls Merits and free-Grace, direSly and purpofely : So that the chief part of F4«/x controverfie was. Whether we arc juflitied freely through Chrifts Merits ? or through our own meritorious Woiks ? But James's qucflion is,Whethtr we are juftified by faith alone, or by faith with obedience accompanying it 5 and both as fubordinateto Chrifts Merits? Paulas qutftion is. Of the meritorious Caufe of our juftification; Jrfffic/squcftion is. Of the condition on our parts, of our intercft in a free Re-miflion i fuppofing TtfM/f queflion determined, that Chrift only is the Meriter. *Pd«/fpeaksof Juflifrcation in toro, both in the beginning and progrefs, but efpe-oially the beginning : But ^dtnes fpeaks only of Juftification as continued and confummate, and not as begun : For both Abrahams and every mans was begun, befoie Works of Obedience:. Though a difpofition aad refolution, and engagement to obey do go before.

4. If with the named Expofitors,you underftand by [Works] a working-faith { cither you grant as much as I aiErm, in fenfej or elfe you mull utterly null all the Apoftle*sarguing,fiom vcr/.i 3. to the end. For if by [Working-faith] you fup-pofe that ^tmcs meant that God did not only make [Faith it felf ] to be the principal! condition, but alfo [its Working] in obedience, when there is opportunity, to be the fecondary condition ( or part of the condition ) of Jultificatioil as continued ; as being the necefiary modus, or eflcd (both which it is in feveral re-fpeds ) then you fay the fame in lenfe as I do, only changing the Scripture terms without and againft rcafon. It is ordinary to make the woiw or quality of that matter which is the fubflance of the condition, to be as real a part of the condition as the matter it felf. As when you oblige your Debtor to pay you fo much currant Englifli money j it is here as neceffary that it be [Englirti] and [Currant] as that it be money. If you prcmifc your fervant his wages, on condition he ferve you faithfully : here [ Faithfulnefs] is as real a part of the Condition, as [Service.] If a man take a woman in Marriage, and eflate her in all his Lands, on condition that flic will be to him [a chaft, faithful! Wife :] here her chaR fidelity is as true a part of the condition, as to be his Wife. So if God fay, [He that hath a Working faith fliall be juftified and favcd, and he that hath not, fhall pe-ri(h.] Here as faith is the principal] part of the condition, fo that it be a [Working] is the fecondary, and as real apart of the condition, as that it be bith. And if Satan accufc you for not-beleeving (at Judgement) you mufl be juftified, by producing your faith it felf, fo if he accufe you as having a faith that was not Working j how will you be juftified but by the Works or Working difpofition of that faitb ^

S- As for your fiagic Argument here, I anfwn-, i. Ic is a weak ground to maintain thar ^imcs twelve timts in thirteen verfcs, by [Worki] means not [Works;] and by faith alone ( which be Itill oppofcth ) doth net mean tairh alone, and all this becaufe you cannot ice the connexion of one verfc to the fot^ metj or the force of one cited Scripture. Others may fee ir, and be able to Ihew fenfe in the Apolllej words, though you or I could not. If every time we areata lolTein analyfmgor difcerning the rcafon of a cited Fcxtjwc (hall prcfime to make fo great an alteratioB,meerly to bring all to han| rcgcthcr in our apprehenfions, wc ihali findc Analyzers the greattft corrupters of Scripture. It is ealieto imagine and fain a fake Analylis with much plaufiblcnefs.

I conceive that ^jw«/ci:eth thcfe words expofitorily ; q.d. [And thus or in this fenie the Scripture was fulhllcd, i c. hillorically, fpoke truly of that which was long before done, Abraham belecvcd God, i. e. fo as to iccond his faith with adual obedience, and.it (/'. f. bclccving and fo obeying, or truftin^ Godspromife and power fo farrcas to offer hisfonto death) vfos imputed to ban,Sec. ». Or why may not ^ameshy conceflion preoccupate an objedion ? knowing that this would beobjeAcd he might lay, q. d. I grant that the Scripture was fulhllcd,which faith, &e. but yet though he weie initially juftificd by faith only, yet when he was called to works, he was juftified alfoby his obedience. 3. And is it not as hard to difccrn the reafon of this citation, according to your expolition as mine ? For you may as well fay, [How do thefe accord. He was juftified by a working faith : and The Scripture was fulfilled which faith, H* was juftified by faith ?] For ^ames is not proving that tAbriham was juftificd by faith, and yet this is it the Tex: fpeaks : but tkac he was juftified by works fcconding faith, or, as you fay, by a Working-faich : Where, ifyou put any emphafis onthe term [Working] and account it to fuperadde any thing to meer belecviug, you fay as much as I j and then ^wjcj muft cite that Text expofitorily j and then whether according to my expofition or yours, varies not the cafe, feeing one faith as much for Works as^thc other.

But I fuppofcyou will fay, Faith vrhich juftifieth muft be working > but it ju-iiifieth not qua operam. Anf. i. True : nor qua fides, i. e. qui apprehaidit oljtSiumf if the j«i fpeaks theformall reafon of itsintercftin Juftification. z. But why cannot faith juftifie unlefs it be working f If you fay [ Becaufe that God hath made it the condition of J uftification, that we beleevc with a working faith ] and fo that it be working is part of the Condition, you fay the fame in lenfe as I. If you fay, cither that working is necefTary as a fign, that faith is true j or that the nature of true faith will work j both arc truth : but to fay this is the Apoftle's fenfe, istonull all his Argutnentation ; For he pleads not tor a meer neccfTuy of figni-ficationor dii'covery, but for aneceflity utmei'ijid ^uftificationcm i even that Juftification which he cals [Imputing of Righteoufuefs] and that by God. And he argucthnot only Phyfically, what the nature of faith will produce} but morally, what men muft do tO fuch ends. And it is only as a condition that faith or its working nature can be neceflary adfinem ut media mordii j if you fpeak of fuch an ab-folute neceflity as the Text doth.

§. 4.

M' 3/. A LL rforfis before or after comierfton,i^erent in w, or vfrought bj us,iire exclu-*^^ dedfrom 'Nullification.

§. 4-K.B. L'T^Hctcrm [Works] fignificth either fuch as a Workman doth to de-_f. ferve his wages for the value of his Work j which make the reward to be of Debt and not of Grace } and fo its true : Or it fignificth all good anions j and fo this faying is contrary to the fcope of the Scripture, i. Faith and Repentance are fuch works and wrought by us. i. ^amcs afiertcth the inclufion of fuch works. If you fay. But iaith and repentance juftifie net as Good works : I ea-(ily grant it : That they be Good, flowcth from the Precept ; That they JuAifie, floweth from the Promife, conlHtuting them the Condition . If they fhould ju-itifie becaufeGoodjtbeir gcodnefs muft be fuch as may accrue to aMeritorioufnefst But yet they muft be Good, bcfoic they can juftifie as Coiiditions of the free Gift : yea and have a peculiar eminent goodnelSj confifting in their aptitude to this work, and to Glorifie the free Juftifier. Mdt.i'}. Rcm.i. ^amcs i. with the greatefi part of Scripture,look not with fuch a face as your Propoiition. This may ierv« to yoiu: following word*.

M' Bt. A Nd thefc things ctmfidtrei, I sm truly forty thit faith Jhtuld novo be denied /i to hsve the office or place cj an injirumetit in our ^ujlification: nayfurcc al" lovffed t$ be called the inftrument of oitr receiving Chrifttbatjuflifics US; becaufc the acf «ffaith (^ rx>hicbii that which juftifiethw) it our Whether faith acfualreceiving Chriji, and therefore cannot be the ivjlrumcntofrc- be thelnftru-ceiving. Thk is too fubtleaNction: Ue ufc to fpeaiiotherveife of mem of Ju-faith. Iaith is the eye of the foul vrhcrehy vc fee Chrijl, and the eye is ftification. not fight. Faith is the hand of the foul, whereby it receives Chrift, and the band is not receiving' jind Scripture ^caks otherwife.- IVe receive Hmijfion offiis ly faith,and an inheritance among them thai are favSliJIcd if received by faith, Ad.i 8.i6. Why elfe is this righteoufncfi fomctime caUed the righteoufncjS of fxtth, and fmetime the righteoufvcjS of God which is by faith, but that tt w a rtghtcoiijncjS which faith receives i Chrtjl dwcls in m by faith, Eph. j. 17. By faith we tab^e him in and give bin entertainment: iVe receive the prcmife of the Spirit through faith. Gal. 3.14. Thefe Scriptures (peafioffaith as the fouls ivilrKment to receive Cbrijt ^fta, to receive the Spirit fom Chrijl ^efus.

§. 1. R.B. i.T Know MOt bow to meddle with Controvcrfifs, but fome body will be ■■■forry or angry, which fide foever 3 take. I am forry that I have made you forry, but not for that DcArine which cauftd v. j which yet I fliall be, as foon as I can fee caufe for it.

1. Why would you not here attempt to prorc, that which you are fo forry fliould be denied, v:^. That faith is the ii ftrumcnt of Juflificaiion ? Will all yoHr Readers take your complaint for adcmonftration cf the erroui of what you complain of?

3. 1 was as forry that men called, and fo called faith the inftrument of Juftifi-cation, as ysu are that I deny it: And as your fotrow urged you to publiflb ir^ fo

Ci«3

did mine urge m:. And my forrow had thefe caufcJ ( which I am content may be well compared with yours, that it may appear which wire the jultcr and greater,) I. No S;rip:ure doth either in the letter or fenfc call faith an inllrument of Jufti-ficacion. a. I knew I hid much Scripture and reafona^ainlt it. j. I thought it of dangerous confcqucnce, to fay, that man i theerticientcaufe of jultifyiiv and pardoning himfelt, and fo doth forgive his own Cim.

4. Yet all this had never caufed m .- to open my mouth againft it ( for I truly abhor the miking of new quarrels. ) Bat for the next, vi^ I found that many Learned Divines did not only alVert this inlliumentality, bat they laid fo "reat a. ilreflc upon it, as if the main dift'jrence between us and the Papifts lay here. For inthedoiiiine of Juftification, faythey, it is that they Fundamentally crre, and we Principally differ: And that in thefe four Points,

:. About the focmall caufe of our Righceoufnefs, which, fay thefe Divines, is theformall Rightcoufnefsof Jefus Chrill, as fuftering and peifcdly obeyin ' for us (or as others adde, In the habitual Righteoufnefs of his humane nature > and others. The natural Righteoufnefs of the Divine nature.

X. About the way and manner of our participation herein, which as to Gods ad, they fay is imputation (which is true) and that in this fenfc, chat Legditer we are efteemed to have fulfilled the Law in Chrill,

5. About the nature of that taith which Juftificth, which, fay moftof our for-reign Reformers, is an afl'arance, or full perfwafton of the pardon of my fins by Chrifts blood.

4. About the formal r»afon of faiths tntereft in Juftification, which, faythey, is as the inftrument thereof.

I donbt not but all thefe four are great Errors. Yet for thefe muft we contend as the ReformedReligion > and here mull lye the difference between us and the Papifts. That which troubled me was this: To think how many thousand might be confirmed in Popery by this courfe, and what a blow i: gave to the Reformed Religion. F jr who can imagine but that the young Popiih Stulents will be confirmed in the reft of their Religion, when they finde that we errc in thefe ? and will judge by thefe of the reft of our Doflrine ? Efpecially when they finde us making this the main part of the Proteftant Caufe, what wonder if they judge our Caule naught? This is no fancy, nor any needlefs fears, but fuch areal blow to the Proteftant Ciufe, as will not eafily be healed. Had Divines only in a way of freedom ufed thisphrafc, and not made it fo great a part of our Religion, to the hazarding of the whole, I had never mentioned the unfounJnefs or other inconvenience of it. Now to the thing it leif, Your Arguments for faiths inftru-mentality to Juftificition, I will confider when I can finde them : You begin with (and fay moiefor) faiths inftrunentality in receiving Chrill. You can fay no more of me concerning this, but that [it will be fcarce allowed to be fo called.] This intimites that I make it no matter of contention : nor do I know how I could have faid lefs, if anything; when its only the unfitnefs or impropriety of the phrafe that I mention, and not the fcnfe : which I thought with fomuchten-derncfi I might do, uponrcafon given, it being no Scripture phralc. If faith be the inftrument of receiving Chrift, then it is either the Ad or the Hibit of Faith that is the inftrument : They that fay^ the Habit is :he inftrummt, fpeak not properly, but far more tolerably then the others do. If gracious Hibits are properly calkd inftruments of the foul, then fo may other Hibits: And why is not this language more in ufe ajiong Logicians ? if it be fo unq-icftionably proper ? But I

perceive

Ci7D

perceive iris the Ad of faith that you call theinftrument: for you anfweronlytd what I fay againft that. Idiewupa Scheme of the leveral forts of Giving and Receiving, in Anlwei to another Learned Brother: which, for the neccflity of diftinguiihing here, I would have added, but that fo operous a Reply would be unfatabie to your brief Exceptions. Receiving ftiidly taken is ever Pafljve : Receiving in a Civil, Ethical, Icfs proper lenfe, is but the Ait of accepting what is oftered : When it is only a Relation, or ^utiirem that is oftered, Confcnt or Acceptance is an ad fo nccelfary ordinarily to the polTcfTion (or proper PalHvc reception) that it is therefore called Receiving it felt; yet is indeed no efficient Caufeof the Pafiivc reception or poflcfTion : but a co«i;;;o ftnequii»on, and a fub-jcdivedifpofition ; and fo makes the fubjtd capable of the benefit: but being no efficient it can be no inflrument. Yet ftill 1 fay, that if any will plcafc to call it an irikrument in this fenfe, I will no: quarrel with him, for the impropriety of a phrafe ; fpecially if fome men had the fame ingenuity as others have, that fay, it is bminftrumentttmmctaphoricum. But to fay, that the ad of faith is theinftrument of Ethical Adivc reception (which is it that I argued againft,) is to fay, Receiving Chrift is the inftrument of it felf. Now let's fee what you fay to this. 1. You fay, Its too fabtill a Notion : Thatdefervcs no Reply, z. Ycu fay [We uie to fpcak othcrwife of faith.] Thats no proof that you fpeak properly. You fay [ Faith is the eye of the foul j and the eye is not fight. Faith is the handjOT'c] Anf. «. Strange proof ! not only by Metaphors, but by ractaphori of mecr humane ufc. i. Is the ad of faith the eye of the foul as dilUnd from fight 5 and the hand as diftind fiom receiving ? Tell us then what adual feeing and receiving is? To fpeak metaphors and contradidions is no proving your Aflertion. Next you fay [Scripture fpeaks otherwife.] Thats to the purpofe indeed, if true. Youcite, y^ff.i8.i6. where is no fuch matter. If [By] fignifieaa inftrumentall caufe, It iscither Alwaies or Sometimes: You would not furc have your Rcadec believe that it is Alwaies. It but fometimes. Why do you take it for granted that it fo fignifics here ? Why did you not offer fome proof? Thisiscafie Difputing. Next you fay [Why elfe is this Righteoafnefs fometime called the Rightconfncfs of faith? Sometimes the Righteoufnefs of God whichis by faiih ; butthatitisi Rightcoufnefs which faith receives'] j4nf. i .Its properer to fay, Credens rccipit crC' icniOfThz Believer by beleeving receives it: Then to fay,Faith (efpeciiily the ad) receives it: But if you will ufe that fpcech, it muft exprefs but fermulem rutionent crficnrftexpofitorily, and not the elficicncy of faith, and therefore no infliumen-tality. It is the Rightcoulnels of God by faith, bscaufe God gives it freely (Chrifl having merited it) upon condition of mans faith. You adde [Ep/;. 3.17. Chrift dwelsinus by faith. By faith we tak; him injCT'c] j^vf. You odly change the queftion : We are fpeaking of faiths inftrumentality in receiving Right to Chrift, or Chrift in relation ; and you go about to prove the reception of his Spirit, oc graces really,or himfelf objedivcly : For Chiill is faid to dwell in us, i. By his Spirit and Graces. 1. Objcdively, as my friend dwels in my heart when I love him. The text being meant of either of thefe, is nothing to the purpofe. 2. Yet here you do not prove that [by] fignifictha proper inltrument: no more then your adual intellcdion is faid to be the inftrumen: of Truths abode in you > when it is faid that Truth dwelleth in you by intelledian. The fame Anfwer fcrves to your following words about reccivin:j the Spirit, i. Its nothing to our Queftion. 1. You give us but your bare word that Scripture f^^eaks ef faith as the louis in-ftrument, even iu receiving the Spirit of Chrift, much lefs in receiving Right t»

D Chrift.

Ci8]

Chrift. But ftill rcnwmber that from firfttolaftj I profcfs not to contend with any about the ufc of this phrafe, of faiths inftaimcntality in receiving Chrjft. It is its being really the proper inftrumeMail efficient caule of JuUificition, which I denied, aad refolvedly more then ever do deny. This yuu next come to, and fay.

§. 6.

M' 2/. "T^ He infirumentality of it in the rvorf^ nf^uftificstion U denied, bccaufe the ng. JL /arc ofiin Ivjirumcnt (m cotifiiereJi in Phyfial operstions) doth not cxiBly bclon^tsiti which if itmuji be dlmj-ies rtgtdly foUovtcd, rviU often put us to a (land in the Ajjiglutton of caufes of any^iindcin iMonla^tent. The muertd and formal esiifes in ^ujiif cation are fcarce agreed upon, and no marveU then in cafe men mindc to cou-tend about it, that fome queJlionU raifed about the Inflrument. Bin in cafe tve fljaU confider the nature and liivdeof tbii rvorli, about which faith U imploied,and examine the rcaftn and ground, upon the which faith k difabled from the o^ce of an injlrument in eur^HiiiJication, and withall looliinto that which is brought in i/san injlrument in this vforfitn the jlead of it, I do not doubt but it rviU cjfily appear, tbatthofe7)tvincs, that •with a concurrent jadgcmcnt ( without almojl a dijfeuttng voice, have made faith an injlrument in thii worli) ^ea^mefi aptly, andmojl agreeably to the nature of an in-ftrument.

§. 6. 3t.2.T)Ut is this certain ? Do I therefore deny faithto be thcinftrument ofju-Oftification, becaufe the nature of an inftrument [as confidcred in Phyfi-cal operations] doth not cxaftly belong to it ? I faid i. The adion of the principal Caufe and of the inftrument is one adion. Is not this true of moral operations as well as Phvfical ? If it be not, you muft make us a new Logick before you can reafonably cxpcd that we receive your Logical Theology. 2.. I faid, thcinftrument muit have Influx to the pioducing of thecfledof the principal caufe, by a proper caufality : that is, in fuo genere. Is not this true of Moral operationsi as well as Phyiical ? Its true,Moral caufcs may be faid ro hare alefs proper caufation then Phyfical : But i. The inilrumcntal muft be as proper as that of the principal. 7. There is a wide difference between, caufam Moralem, and ciujam Moraliiatis. EffeUt imuraLii potcQ cjfe caufa morilk, vel imputativi: Et effccii morilii fciiuct Ethi-ci, (utVebiti,^urit ,yneriti,) potcft effecauftrcmotiornaturalis. It may well be called a proper caufation, when theeflftd is pi'^ioccd by as full a caulation as the nature of the thing will admit (as in relations that are by meer reluhancy.)

i.You fay [the inateiial and formalcaufes of Jullification are fcarce agreed on.] But doth that give you a liberty to alleit what you lift, or what cannot be proved true, becaufe all men fee not the truth ? I iTiouid have thought you fliould rather have thus concluded : [ .leeing Divines tbcmfclves cannot agree about the aflig-nation of thefe Lcgical, unfcriptural notions in the bufinels of Juftitication, therefore it is a meer Church-dividing ccuife, to place io much of the Protcftani Caufe in fuch notions, and ir.fift upon them as matteis of fuch ncccffityand weight, as is done in alTerting fairlis inftrumentaiity ro juftific.uion.] Your arLument(in the iffue and tendency) i/. like ihat of plundering fouldiersin time of fight j that lay. Now they are altogether by the earsj we may take that we light on : why fhould

they

- CIS]

they queftion us, till they agree among themfelves ? j. Whether this phrafe be fo ape as you affitm, we (hall better know when you have faid lomething to prove ic. If Divines have been fo concurrent in it as you fay, that there is Icaicc a di(-fenting voice, I hope I am the more cxcufable, if it prove an error, for oppolang it; For ic is pity to let To many miftakc themfelves, miflead others, and make us part of a new Religion,

But Sir, whatsthe caufc of this fudden change ? Through their great con-defcenfion, I have received Animadvcrfions from many of the molt Leavned, Judicious Divines that 1 know in EngUnd: And of all thefcjthere is but one man that doth own the Dcdine of faiths Initrumentality J but they difclaim it ail i fome with diiUft, others with a tnodefl excufc of thsm that ufe it, and tlic gende interpretation of [ a Mttapiiorical inttrument ] and that remote: foi fo tbcy would have mc inttipiet our Divines. I told you this when I favv you, and n^u asked mc, Whether M'C7. were a:.atnft it ? To which I Anfwcr, Notfomu.has divers uchers that wtitt to me J but judge you by his own words, which arc ihcfc, \_0'<j\. But though faith be not the inltrumcntof our Juftification, may it not be calhd the init.unenr of receiving Cbrill ? Anf. I think they meanfoanu no more, who call faith the inltrument of our-Juitification, (j'c- I fhall no: be unvvi'linj; to yield toyou, that to fpeak exadly, faith may better be called a Condition, then an Inlltumentef our Juftification] SofarM'C

§. 7. M' B/. "T^Hc reorii about rchichfMth U imploied.U not an A')folutc,but a relative worf{:X X. worliofGof towards man : not without the aHual co7tcurrcnce efmun: futb in which neither God vor man are folc c^icients j nor any ail of gei or man (an be jole inftrumaiti j but there mu^ be a mutual concurrence of both.

§. 7. R. B. A Dangerous Dodrine, in my Judgement, to be fo nakedly afBrmed : •^ ^Nodoubtbut Jullification is a Relative change : and it is palt Con-troverfie, that it is not without the aftual concurrence of man: for he muft perform the Condition, on which God * J fuppofethewori will juftifie him : But that God is not the fole Eificicnt,nor lASl] is u(ed ft any • Ad of God, the fole Inftrumcnt, I du; ft not have larirelji. us to include affirmed without proof: and much Ids have undertaken to theLawitfdf. prove.

§. 8.

M'B/. IpHKWM/f necij be granted. unlejS we will bring in 7)'Ctli^ts pj(five red-* piency of chrift: thrifts abode in mau Without man, m ^ite of man, andfiip-pofe him to be jufiijied in unbelief

D i §. 8.

§. 8.

R. B.'T"His is veiy naked afTerting. Why did you not (hew fomercafonof thijill •■ confequence ? Itspatt my icach to fee thclcaft. ». Why do you ftill confound Chvilts real abode in us by hisSpiiit, with the relation we have upon Juftification ? when even now you affirmedjit was a relative work (as you call it ) I prayjby the next fliew us more clearly, how thefe abfurdities follow that doftrinc which aftirmethj Tha: God isthefole Efficient caufc of our Juftification, but having made mans Belief and Confent the Condition(whofe nature is to ful'pend the eflcdjtill performed) he will not juftific us till we firll believe and confent. This ic my Dodrinc plainly.

M' Bl. A Nd fditb U difablei from thU office in ^ufiification, by thU jgrgumcnt: If ^fiitbbeAU inilrument,itKthetvjirumentofgodormiin,8(.c. I Arf.Itisthe iiiHrumem el man: and though mAndonot jufltfichimfelf, yetbeconcurrej,asawiUiHg reidy Agent with God tn it. God ii ajuflijier of thofe thit bcleeve in fefm, Rom. 3.26. God hath fet Cbrifi forth a propitiation through faith, Rom.3 .15.

§■ 9. K, £. f P this be not palpable contradidion, faying and unfaying, my Lo^ick is ■• lefs then I thought it had been. If it be [Mans inftrument] of Juftification j and yet [Mandonot jiiftifiehimfelf.] Thencither Man is not Manner an Inftrument is not an Inftrumcntj or Juftifyingis not Juftifying. Kad you only affirmed it to be mans ad, and Gods inftrument ( how ablurd foever otherwifc yet) you might have faidi Man doth not juftifie himlelf. But if it be mans inftrument, then man is the pi incipal caufe ( in refped of the inftrumentall.) Foe emne in[lrumentum efl caufa principalis infirumcntum. Andean he be the efficient caufe, and yet not eftcd ? Is not that to be a Caufe and no Caufe ? In my judgement thisiodrinc (hould not be made part of our Religion > nor much ftrcfslaid on i: if it were true j becaule its fo obfcure : That man concurresas a ready Agenr, who doubts ? but doth that prove him or his faith the efficient caufe of his own pardon and Juftification ? Is the performer of the condition of [Giatefull con-ient ] no willing Agent, unlefs an efficient Caufe ? The text you cite doth not Ipeak of inftruments, for ought I can finde.

lO.

M' Bl. A Ni becaufe it is the infirumcnt of man in a rvork^f this nature, it is alfo the iS inflrumeitt of God. As fame haveobferved a communication of Titles betrveen Cbrifi and his Church (the Church being called by his Name) fo there is a communicationcf aSliitns in thefe relative works. Chnjl dwels in our heartyby faith, Eph. 3.17. jVc believe and not Chrtfl: and yet faith there is Cbrifts ivfirument, whereby hetaliesup his abode-^ed purifies the hearts of the Gentiles by faith, A d. 1 5. r 7. They believed and not God: yet faith is Gods inftrument in the vaork of their purification. So on the 9ther^dc,the Spirit is q^ds mri: yet m by the Spirit do msrtific tiu icsds oftbeflefh, Rom.8.13.

C"]

§. lo.

R.B.TF this bd'indeed true, That it is mans inftrumcnt of Juftification and i. Gods both i then both God and man ai c both (^aufje principaks pirtiales, by coordination making up one principal caule. This 1 hope you will not downright affirm : I deny it on this reafcn : Every abfolure Donor ( I mean, who is abfolutely owner of what he gives ) is the totall caule-efficient-principal, of his own Donation : But God in juftifying is an abfclute Donor (giving remiflion and Rightcoufnefs) Thereforc,(jr(r. i. Or elfe God and man muft be principal caufcs one fubordinate to the other, and each total in his own kinde. This mult be yeur meaning, by your firft words : But then which of thefe is the moft principal caufc, and which the fubordinate ? I: is hard for a better wit then mine to know your minde by your words : For when you lay [Becaule it is mans inftrumcnt,it is alfo Gods inftrumcnt.] It may feem that you take it to be mans inftrumcnt firft, or elfc how can it be therefore Gods inftrumcnt [becaufc] it is mans ? But yet whether you fpeak if ori/neco?f/f(^HfMt« vdconfequentite, deerdtne eJ^cndiCf tffictendt,vel deordine diccndi (^ coUigcndt, I know nor. However, I will not be fo uncharitable as to imagine that you take man for the molt principal caule, and God for the fubordinate i but contrarily. But then you do not only make man the pardoner and juftificr of himfelf, but you make him the neareit total caufe of it: and fo it would be as proper to fay, ^tam forgives himfelf, as that God forgives him : And fo faith would be only mans inibument diredly, as being the neareft caufe-principal J and Gods inftrtiment remotely. As if I hold my pen, and you hold my hand, the pen is preximi my Inlh ument, and rcmotiui yours. And fo God fhould juftifie and pardon man, by himlelf, as Gods inftrument; As if a Judge had committed Treafon, and the King fhould give him authority to Judge, Pardon and Abfolvc himfelf. But how much might be faid againft this' To juftifie t^ciemer is Acim RcciorU .- Scdhomo nou cjl rcBor fuiipfiia ('in the fenfe in hand :) Therefore he cannot jul^ifie himlelf. Indeed if you had fpoke only of the Juftification/«/oroc6»/cffnt/<« you might well have afcribed ic to man as the cfficieoc caufe : but that you fpeak not of.

2. The communication of Titles that you fpeak of, is i. very rare. 2. Uncertain whether at all found in Scripture. That Text i Cor.12.1 2. fecmeth rather to leave out [the Church] as underftood,then to communicate Chrifts Name to it: q.d. [So is Chrift and the Church.] 1 would advife all friends of mine to take heed that they prcfumc not on this flight ground to communicate Chrifts Nameto the Church in their ordinary fpeech. 5. But who can tell what you mean by a communication of anions ? Your putting [Communication of anions] in contradiftindion from [Communication of Titles] makes the proper fenfe of your words be, that Chrift doth as really communicate anions themfelves, as he doth Titles themfelves. But that is no better then a plain impoflibility : For the communication will make it another aftion. The accident perifheth, when fcparated from its lubjed : and therefore the fame accident cannot be communicated. But its like you initnded to hare faid. That there is a common or mutual attribution of each others a(fticns, «r one is entitled to the aftions of theother j and fo mean only a communication of the Name quad modumproducendi, and not of the adions themfelves. Burthen, either this is an improper figurative way of fpetchj 01 it i$ proper, andgroimdcd in th« nature of the thing. If the former,

D ^ tbent

then it i< nothing to ©urQa:ftion, who arc not enquiring whether there'may not be found fo.Ti.-Figure in K.he:orick according to which faith maybe faid to ba mani inllrumenc of J altificatioa and Gods ? but whether it be fo properly and indeed ? And if you could findcany Scripture th»t (o Tpealcs figuratively, calling faith mans inll.umcn: and Go.is io juftifyingj ( as you cannot ) this would do nothing to the deciding of ou: Controvciiie. It is therefore a grsunded attribution that you muli prove, where there is alfo a real inl^rui-nentality, and fo the Name fa:cedrotbe Thing. And how prove you chis ? Why,a$ bcforejE/)i?.j. 17. you lay, [We beleeve and not Chrili > yet fai:b is Chrifts inftrument, whereby betakes up hisabode.] But thisis too facil difputing to fatisfie. i. Hereisnota Word to prove that it is a relative In-dwelling that is here fpoken of. I need not tell you how Angular you arc in this Expofidon ( if you lo expound ; If not, you faynorhing.) i. If chac bad been proved, yet here is no proof that [by] li^nifi-eth inftriimcntality. j. Mach lefs that it is Ciiril^s inftrument. Howcafilyare all thcfe affirmed ? I think Chriftdwels in our hearts, as I faid, i. By his Spiric and Graces j and fo he is faid to dwell in us [by faith.] i. FormzUtcr, faith being the principal part of that grace which dwelleth in us. 1. Condttiomliter, taith being a condition of our right to the :ipirits abode, g. E^nenter,2s the ad of faith doth diri;(ft;y caufe the increafe, and fo the abode of the habit > and ali'o as it exci-teth other graces. If you will call this efficiency an inltrumcntal eificiency, I think it is no proper fpeech : We do not ufe to call the ad of intcUedion, Mans intlrument of knowing or increafing the habits of knowledge : but I wi.l not contend with vou about this : Nor yec if you fay, This ad of beleeving is Mms inftrument ^of exciting and iucreadng grace in himfeif ) diredly, and Gods inftrument remotely : As my pen is iaimediatly my inftrument, and remotely his that holds my hand. Or rather I fhould lay, as my adion in writing is improperly called my inftrwment, and his. And thus man may be faid (yea more properly then thus) to fandifie himfeif, and God to fandifie mm by himfeif: Batinju-ftifacation the matter is tar otherwife : Man ioth neither Jullifie himfeif, nor God juftifiesman by himfeif. The fecond way of Chrifts dwelling in us, is Obje-dively. And here if you will fpeak fo improperly, as to fay that mans ad of believing is his inftrument of receiving Chrilt as an Objed, or of the Objeds abode in the foul, I will not contend with you about it: O.ily as I would defire you to make this phrafe no great part of Religion, nor lay too great a ftrefs upon it, fo alfo to remember, i. That it is but the ^e«« and notCiuift himfeif that is objc-divsly received, and thus dwelleth in us- i. That every other grace that hath Chrift for its objed, is thus far an inftrument of receiving him, and of hisabode in us, as well as taith : but none fa properly ani fu'ly as knowledge. And 3. That thus Chrift dwels objedively in every wick;d man that thinkcth of him: Chough doabtlelie not in that deep and fpcciall manner as in his chofen.

J. And yet further, asa confeqaeni of the firft fort of indwelling, Chrift himfeif may be faid to dwell in us QLvdiier,vel Horditcr, that is, Kcpiititive, becaufc his Spirit or Graces dwell in us KiturdiHr ; As a man that keep* poffeftion of a houfe by his Con or fervant, or by bis goods: And here ail'o, if yoij hive a mindc to the term Inftru iient, you miy, for me, fay that Chrift keeps pofleflion by faith or the Spiritas his inft.a ncnis : But then you muft conlider, i. Thatthisisby no communication of Ac"tioas and Titles: but \\ut is a real ground for this fpeech. X. That ic is not faich as mans adj but faith as Gods grace wrought and main-

cained

C*3]

rained in us, by which he may in this fenfe be faid ro dwell in uJ,or keep poffeffion of us. J. Tha: thas every giace may as truly be faidto be Chrifts inftrumemof poUeflion or indweilingjas faiih; fo he dwellethin us by love, hope, truft, defirc, pji&e- but moft properly by the Spirit or new Creature, or whole body of San-dification.

4 That all this is nothing to prove faith to be mans inftiumcnt and Gods (yea or either alone) to tfFedl our Juftification.

The fame anlvver fcrves to e/?ff. if. 17. God purifieth mans heart by faith: I. From the power of fin, and that is by faith ; 1. Formaliter. z. Ef.cicnter, as is before cxpicllcd. 2. From the guilt of lin j and that is by faith as a condition en mans part (and not asan inftiument •) By or through which God is faid to punfic or pardon us J i. In that heconferreth rcmifllon only on this condition } and fo doth conftitute the formall office of faith in jaftifying. 2, Inihat by his Spi'it he caufcth or givcth faith it felf, and effedeth the matter. Though, whether this Text reach to Juftification, I will not Difpute. So that ycudo but nakedly jffirm, and not prove that faith is Gods infliumcnt or mans in ju-ftifying.

Laltly ro what you fay from Kom.S.ij. I reply, i. AnAdjutoror Concaufc is ill called an inil^' ument, Mui\ the Spirit needs be our inilrument, becaufe it is [By] tre bpiit? Asif [By]ilgnified only an inftiumcnt ?

2. All this is nothing to the bufincfs of Juitificaiion. Prove but this, that man is as true an efficient of bis own panlnr or Juilification, as he is cf mortify-Jn2 the deeds of the body, or of Prcgicflive SanAificaiion, and you (ball carry the Caufc : I will not then contend whether the term [inftrumcnt] be proper or improper.

§. II.

M' Tl. \Jt An neither juHifes vor fdn^ifes himfelf. yet by faith he U raifed to ckfe iSi veiih god in both ; ^vd fo faith as an iiifirutnent receives RightcoufncjS to ^ufiijication ; and therefore U called, The rightcoiifnejS of faith, which ;V our ^«-fitfication, and rcoriis San^if cation ; provided you undcrjiand not the frft viiorli>ffhich is properly Regeneration, and precedent to faith; but the further progreji and increafc cf ft, &c.

§. II. '

R.B. 1.1 F manjuftificnothimfelfjandyct faith bebis infiiumem of juftifying, ' then farewell old Lo»ick.

2. If man fandifie not himfelf, under God, as to the progrefs and aftsof fan-Aificaiion, then farewell old Theology. God bi^s men walh them, and purifie their heaits, and cleanfe thei' hands^ and make them new licarts, tr'c and Peter faith, Te havepurifedyour fouls in obeying the truth thrcugh the Spirit,lkc. i P«. 1.22. And we muft cltanl'e our feives from all bithjnels of flclh and Ipiiit, fcrfeBingholir rxfiinthefearofgod, 2Ccr.7.i. with many the like.

J. [To cloJc with God] in pardoning me, fi^nificth not that I pardon my felf, or that J or any aft of mine is an efficient caufc of pardcii.

4- When you lay, that [Faith as an inlhiimcnt rccciveth righteoufnefsto Jufli-fication] you fpcak cxaftly the conceptions of mcil Divines that I have met with.

Ci43

or read, that go your way j and therefore thefe words deferve a little fanhcr con-{idcrauon. Their m«aninij,as far as I can underiland of the whole bufinefs is this : 1. They conceive of Chriih own righceoufnefs, wherewith himfclt was righteous, asgivcntous. 2. They conceive of the aft of faith, as the initrument of receiving this. 3. Upon thereceivingof; his, they conceive we are juflified, as a man that receiveth Riches is Rich, or that receiveth Honour is Honourable. 4. Bc-caufe faith is the inftrumcnt oi receiving righceoulnefs, therefore fay they,It is the inftrumcntof Juftification. For Jultificaiion Qonjlitutive, is but a relation reful-ting from righteoufnefs received. This is the iumme of the common judgement of moftthat 1 have read.

But thel'e things muft be more accurately conGdered, I think. And i. It muft be known, that the Righteoufnefs given us, is not the Righteoufnefs whereby Chrifts perfon was Righteous: ( for accidents perilTi being removed from the fubjed :) but it is a Righteoufnefs merited by ChriAs i'atisfaftion and ebedienccj for us.

2. It muft needs be known that the faith which is the Juftifying condition, is terminated on Chrill himfelf as theobjcd^ and not on his Righteoafuefs which he gives us in RemiUlon : Remiffion or Righteoufnefs may be the end of the (inner in receiving Chrift j but Righteoufnefs or Remiflion is nottiieobjeft recei* ved by that aft which is made the condition of Juftification : or at Icaft but a fe-condary remote objeft j even as a woman doth not marry a mans Riches, but the iVlan J though it may be her end in marrying the man, to be enriched by him : jiorii her receiving his riches the condition of her firtt Legal right to them > but her taking the man for her husband. And as a Patient being promifed to be cured, if he will take fuch a man for his Phydtian, and wholly trult him, renouncing all other: Here it is not receiving Health, or a Cure that is the proper Condition of the Cure : Health and Cure is the end for which the PhyGtian is Accepted and Truftcd ; but it is himfelf as a fufficient faithful! Phyfuian which is the objeft of that receiving,whichis the condition of the Cure.The like maybe flicwcd in other Relations, of a Mafter and Scholar, Prince and Subjefts, Mafter and Servants, ^c. Receiving the perfons into relation, from whom we expeft the benefit, goes before receiving the benefit it felf by them j which is ufually the remote end, and not the objeft of that firft reception which is the condition. Our Divines there-forcof the Artembly do pcrfeftly define juftifying faith to be, A reccivivgxni refting on Chrijl alone for falvution, nt he is offered. intheGoJpel It is of dangerous confequence to define juftifying Faith to be the Receivmg of Juftification or Righteoufnefs.

J. In my judgement, it is a meer fancy and delufion, to fpeak of the receiving arightcoufnefs that wemay be juftificd CoH§itutiv^ thereby, in fuch a fcnfe, as if the righteoufnefs were firft to be made ours, in order of nature before our Juftification, and then Juftification follow becaufe vvc are righteous j and fothefewere two things : For to receive Righteoufnefsjand to receive Juftification is one thing. Gods juftifying us, and pardoning our fin, and his conliituting us righteous, and his giving us righteoufnefs, is all one thin^ under feverall notions. Yet as God giveth, I. Conditionally, i. Aftually : toman receiveth, i. Kecepiione Eihici Aclivi, figuratively called receiving, z> Keccptione PhyficA, propril,piJjivi : The former goes before Juftification : but only as a fmall, and fecondary part of the conditionjif properly any(it being the accepting of Chrift himfelf that is the main condition :) The later is nothing at all but ^u{iificAri, commonly called, Paffive Juftification. 4.Chrifts

4. Chnfts Satisfaftion or Redemption (^folvcfidc pretkm) and merit, cannot bcproperyicceivcdby us: For they are not in chemfelvcs given to us (but as Tropically they may be faid to be ^iven to uj, became the tiuit of them is ^iven us.) It was not to us, but to God, that Chait gave latistaaion, andthecrice of •ur Redemption. And yet jultifying faith doth as nccefiarily refptd Chritts la-tisfaftion and mcnt, as it doch our Juftification thereby prccuied- It is therc-fovc the adinewkdgtng of this Redemption, Satisfaction cr M.rit, and the receiving ofChnlt :if onahut bithredeemed itf by fitiffi^iiou md merit, and not the receiving that Redcmpimor SsnsfaHion our ielvss. To lay ihc;efo.e, that the juftifving aft of faith, IS only the receiving of Ch-ifts Ri-htcoufneu or of jullification, isto exclude the receiving of Chrift himklf any way j even to exclude him as fatisfiec ftom the juftifying a<a : and to exclude from that aft, his Redemption, by blood-fhed, fatisfadion and merit : For if it be only the receiving of righteoufnefs, that is the juftifying aft, then it is neither the receiving of Chrift himl'elf, nor yet the acknowledgement of his Satisfaftion and Redemption by his blood j and fo they muft fay of thefe as they do of the reception of Chri^ as Lord, that it is the fdet ^uajuftificdt, fed U071 qua, juftifians.

5. If faith (hall be faid to be the inftrumcnt of Juftification eo nomine, bccaufc it is the receiving of that RtghteoufnejS whereby we are jultified, then it will follow that faith muft alfo be called the inftrumcnt of our enjtying Chiift, eo nomine, bccaufe it receiveth fcim, and theinltrument of o\iv Adoption, eo nomine, becaiU'e ic-tcceivcth Adoption i and fo the fame aft of faith which entitles us to Juftification, d«th not entitle us to any other bleffing j nor that aft that entitles us to Chriii, dothentitle us to Juftification ( unlcfs there be feveral juftifying afts :) but every particular mercy hath a particular aft of faith as the inilrument of receiving it: which is no Scripture doftrine.

6. It muft be remembred that the thing that faith receives naturally and properly, is not Chnft himfelf, or his righteoufnefs j but the fpecies of what isreprefen-ted at its objeft. Asd that taiths reception of Chrift himfelf and his righteoufnefs, or of right to Chrift, is hat Rcceptio mctaphortc£; vel aHio ad receptionem prepriatn liece(firij: and'.hat the true reception, which is fsti, non Agere, doth follow taitb, and thercKie Chrift himfelf is received only Keceptione fidei etbica, aSiiva, metapko-rid : species ChriBipredicAti recipiatur reccptione lutiirdi, inteUigcndo .- Jaa ad Cbri-fiumrccipitHrrecepttonenuturulipxjJivi, propria: That which is conditionally given ( on condition of acceptance or the like ) and offeied to be accepted i this is received, Recc/it/enejfieiclb/c if: whereupon followeth the aftual cfticacious giving of that thing, ( the condition bein? performed, which fufpendcd it :) and this ihe beleevcr leceiveth, T^^ccptionep.ijjivl,propria ; but it." is not his Faitb that recei-vcth it.

7. The great thing therefore that I would defirc to beobferved is this; that though faith were an inftrument of the forcfaid objc-ftive, or of the E':hical, Metaphorical recpcionof Chrift ( which yet is not p'-operly,bcin^ ip(i Kcctptto, ) ye: it is not therefore the inftrumcntal c^ufe of the paflive, proper reccp:ion of Right to Chrift or Righteoufnefs. Of this it is only thj condition nnd not the proper inftrument. ( For I HialhlKW hereafter that i: is i.npofl!'>:e ir ihould be borh;) It doth morally qualifie the fubjcft :o be a fi: patient ro be juftifiod, a: M.'Bcnjam. JVoodbridge faith truly, in his excellent Sc.mon o'i'fuflificatioH. The reafcn of liiis is. That It is only Donation or the will of the Donor lignified, that can efficiently convey a right to his own Bcntfits. The Receiver is not the Giver, aiid there-

E fore

fore not the ccnveycr of Right. Every inftrumcnt is an efficient caafc, and therefore muftciTcd : and ic is only ^/u/»g that cffedeth this right. Now if the giving ( the donation) had been abfoliucj i: bad ablolutely conveyed rij^ht } and faith would have had no hand in it, as being no condition : COr if the gif: had confti-tuied another condition, that other would have had the caufing iiuereft that faith now h3tb ( ut ciufi fine qui noa.) So that the nearert and formal iiitereit of faith is, Its being the condition } and itsapprchcnfion of itsobjcd, ii but the remote aptitudinal reafon, being tpfi fides- The great thing therefore that I affirm is this. That if you will needs call taith the inftrumentof apprehending Cnrilt,or righte-cufnefs,y:t doth it not juftifieproxtwi^tiT'/ormj/Ufr, As inch i but ^j the condition of the gift performed.

8. And if you will fpeak improperly, and call faith as it isthepcrformcd-condi-tion [ injlrumentum KtceftionU ] it is not therefore inftrumentum ^ujiificitionU : In a few words, thii isthefcmme: i. Faith is an Ethical, M'taphorical reception of Chrili, a. If any will fpeak fo improperly as to call this. The inftrumcnt of this Ethical reception J I will not contend with him. j. This Ethical reception Aftivc, is conftituted by Chrifts Teftament» the condition of Paflive proper reception of Right to Chrift, and with bim to his Benefits. Faith muft fi;li be faith, i.e. a^rehenfit Chrijii, in order of nature before it can be the condition of Right. 4. It jaftiSes therefore qui conditio, ind noi qua fides in (^brijlum: or as they improperly fpeak, qui injlrumentum (^hrijium apprJjcndens. 5. If any will take the word Inftrumcnt fo improperly and largely, as to comprehend the condicion, then you may fo further fay, [Faith is not only the inftrumcnt of Attive recepcion, but of true PafTive reception of Right 10 Chrift, and fo of receiving Juftification-] 6. But this is qui conditioprxfiiti, and not qui apprehcvpd C^rifii- 7- And therefore every ad that is part of this condition, may fo be called,/«/frwwcWM7a rmp/eni/. 8. And if it were, as they would have it, that faith i« the inftrumcnt « nomine quid (^'brijium ipprchLniit, then every grace that appre-hcndeth Chrift muft be the inftrumcnt too: And Joubtlcfs Knowledge, Love, Hope, Delight,^*- do apprehend, or receive Chrift in feme lort ; and have him for their objcd. 9. Though I will not contend with him that will fay, [Fides '7t«n qui fides, fed qui conditio prjefliti, ejl tnjirumCHtum monle recipiendi jut ndQhri' (turn (ft jufiitixm abipfo promcritim.'] \cl ( as 1 think he laieth a fnare for himtelf and others, in turning the plain and proper term [Condition] into an improper term linftrumentumRccipien.ii,^ ^o ) I think ir not to be endured that therefore faith or any ad of man, fliould be cailtu the i..ftrument of Juftification. Tor though you may in a ft.-aincd fpecch fay, that ILecepiit mordis aStvA being made the weiww or condition Rcceplionii phyficapiffivx, may therefore be called inflru-mentum recipiendi, and (^rcdcrevclacceptare faid to be monlttervcl reputitive pati ^ ( and fo every condition qua. condition be termed a Receptive inftrumcnt ) I fay, though I will not quaiiell with this fpccch for mcer unfitnefs > yet it is a highland more dangerous errour to lay That faith or any condition ii therefore in^rtt-mentum ^ufiificutionh. It is not an inftrumcinal efficient caufeof the efitd, be-canfe it is medium fine quo non rcctpitur: As Rcalis vcl nitunlk receptio ^ujlificationk, is not ^ufiifiarc, fed'fufiificirii fo much more evident is it thst Menlii (^ impu-tativi Receptio '^ufiificittonis,noncfi ^ujitficure,fcd medium nece(firium adl'^ufitfiari.'] lo. Laftly, 1 fay again what I faid in my Aphorifmesj Thefe two Qiieltions muft bediftinguiffied : What is the nearcft reai'on of faiths intereft in Juftification ? AndjWbat is the cemote reafon ^ or why did God affign faith to this office ?

To

C»7]

To the firft, this is the only, true Anfwcr: Faith Juftifics rather then any thing

elfe, becaufe God in framing his deed of gift, was picafed to make faith the condition ; The mecr conftiririon of the Donor is the caul'e. To the fccond, this is my Anfwer: God chofe faith to this oifice of being the luitifying conaition, rather then other duties, becaufeit was ficteft : as being in its ownnatme, An acceptance of a freely given Chrift, and Life with him ( which men call the inlLu-mcntalicy-) I have the more fully opened my meaning here together about this point (though with fomc repetitions ) that I might leave no room for doubting of St, and mifunderilanding me.

M' Bl '~r^ He Spirttwill do nothing vfitboia our faith, and our fuithcando voihinf X. without the Spirit. iMan cannot jujiifie htmjdfby btkeviug without God, and God mil not jujiifie an unbcleeving man. Fditb then is the aH of man j man beleevet, jet theinjirument ofGodtthatjujitfies only belcevcrs.

§. It. R.T. i.'T* He Spirits working in Sanftitication, is nothing to our queftion of »Lwaivii«j . JL Julfihcation. *. The Spirit worketh our firft faith without faiths co-working j and that ismore then nothing. 3.The Spirit moyeth faith to adion, before faith move it felf: and that is more then nothing. 4. It is not fo eaiily proved as /aid, tl^|it the Spirit never exciteth any good aft in the foul, nor yet rc-ftraineth from any evil,without the co-working or inlltumentality of faith. But thcfe are befide the point. 5. When you have laid down one Propofition [ Maa cannot juftifie himfelf by bcleering, without God, ] how fairly do you lay down this as the disjhnd Propofition ? [and God will not juftifie an unbelecving man.] Concede totum. Is that your Conclulion ^ Would you have no more ? Who would have ttiought but you would rather have laid [ Nor will God juftifie man, unlcfs his faith be the inftiument of it ?] And do you not feem to imply that man witK Goddoth juftifie himfelf, when you fay [Man cannot juftifie himlelf bybclee-ving without God ?] No, nor with him neither ? For none can forgive lins but God only, even to another: but who can forgive himfelf ? Indeed I have thoughc what a fad cale the Pope isi», that is the cnly man on earth that hath no vifiblc pardoner of his fin : he can forgive others j but who fhall forgive him? But I forgot that every belecv^r forgiveth himfelf} for I did not beleeve it. 6. How nakedly is it a^ain affirmed, without the leaft proof, that our faith is Gods iri-ftrumentin juiltifying ? Doth Godefleft our Juftification by the inftrumentall, elficientcaufation of <Hir faith ? Let him beleeve it that is fo happy as to fee it proved, and not barely alfiimcd.

§. «J.

M' 2/. Qo that vthich ii here fpol^en, by wjy of exception, 4gain§l fuith Of an injiru-^ment, holds of e^cients and injlrumcnts, fole and abfolute in their worli and cAufality. But where there is a concurrence of Agents, and one makes u(e of the aH of another to produce the efeSl that in fuch cmfdit^ h wrmght, itvcill mt hold.

£ 1 $. ij.

§. IJ.

It. B.Tl^ ^''^^^'''o"^^*"'"^^^ ^'"^ *^^^'3'°" of words and Tyllablcs, tbatei-IJchcrfi^nifie nothing, or are never like to be underllood by the learner, let him make this an Aitide of his faith, i. What you mean by [abfoluie] I cannot certainly a. iolarc, unlefsthat which is never aprincipail. i. Norknow I whether by [I'olc] you mc2nMat€rialiter,FormdUter, vd ReJpcSlive quoidciufdm principsUm. i. Two materials may concurre to make one formal inlb-ument: Heiethe inftrumenc is but one, though the matter of it may be of divers parts. Surcthisis not your fenfe, that faith and fometbing clfe materially xoncurre to make one inftru-r.tnr. 2. An inftiument may be called [folc] formally, when it it is the only inftiuinentj and there is no other concurrcthto theefFcA. If you mean that my exceptions hold ..gaintt none but luch loleinftrumcntSj then it is morerakedly, then truly afret;ed : nor do they hold ever the more or lefsj whether the inflrumcnt be fole or not : elfe they would hold againft few inftrumenrs in the world. For it is not ufual to have an effcA produced by a folc initrumcnt: efpe-cially of lubordinatc inflruments, though it may be ufual as to coordinate. 3. An ini^rument may be called liolc'] Ref^/eSUve, as to the principal caufe : w'^. It is not the inftrumenc of many principals, but ot one only. Is this your meaning, that ray exceptions would hold, if faith were only mans inllrument, or only Gods > but not when it is both ^ If fo 1. This is affirmed without ihc leaft fhew of proof J or reafon > why my exceptions hold not as much againft that inltrumcnc of a double principal, as of a finglc ? furely the nature of an^inftrument is not varied by that. z. If God and man be both principals (as they muft be,if faith be the inftrument of both ) then cither coordinate or fubordinatc j but neither of thefe, as I have argued before. Man neither forgives himlelf under God, or with God, if you fpeak of one and tlie fame forgivenefs. Though I know there is another kinde of forgivenefs, whereby a man may forgive himlelf: whcrtof i'c-wca fpeaks, de Iri, when he faithj l_lVhy Jljottld I fear any ofmj Errors^ vehen I can fay. See thou do fo no more, I novf forgive theC] lib. j .cap> j 6. O for one proof among all thefe affirmations, that [here is fuch a concurrence of AgcntSt that God makes ufe of the aft of man, to produce the efteft of Remiflicn ] and that as an inftru* mem,and not only as a mecr condition, fne ^ua non.

TsV'Bl.'^T^He^romifcir Grant of the Mew Covenant in the Gofpel, U {infiead of

_!. faith) made the tnjirument in the rvorli of ^uftifcatten. This it indeed

Geds, andnctmant. It is the Covenant of God, the promife

Oftheinftrumentali- ofgod,theGefpel $f Qod: but of it (elf unable to raifeman

ty of the Covenant. up to ^uftification.

§. 14.

Jl.S.V^Ou have been farrefrom fatisfying me inaflerting theinftrumcmality of

1 faith in Juftification. You here come more fhorc of fatisfying me,againfl

the fufficicncy of the Gofpel-grant as Gods inftrument. You fay. This indeed is

Godtj not mans. Ifay^ There is none but Gods : foe non dmr injirumentumy

quoi

quod nonefi cAufaprutcipdlu ivjintmevtum. You fay. It is of it fcif nnablc to raM« man up to Juftification. 1 anl'wer, i. It is not of it felf abletodoall other works antecedent to Juftification, as to humble, to give faith, to Regenerate;^c. But thats nothing to our bufinefs. i. But as to the aft of Juftification, or conveying right to Chviftj pardon, and righteoufnefs, I fay, It is able of it felf as the fignum voluntatis divinx to doit. And you will never be able to make good your accufationof itsdifability. 3. If you fliould mean that [of it felf] i.e. without the concomitancy of faith as a corditicn, it is not able: I anfwer, thais not fitly called difability : Or if you will fo call it; there«ron of that difability, is not be-caufcthcrcisanecefTity of faiths inftrumcntall co^fficicncyj but of its prefeacc as the performed condition : It being the will of the donor that his grant fhvuld noi eflictrea^ualiter, till the condition were performed.

§• 1?.

M' Bl.\T is often tendered and ^ujlification not Alvtxies xfrought, and fo difabled from ' the office of an injiruwicrtt, by Ktckerman inhis ComTnc?fton bis firfi Canon concerning nn tnjirumcnt. tAs foon a/s the inflrument fervcs not the principall agent, fo foouit lo(ithtbeniitureofaninJirument. Heinjfanccth in auborfe rvhiihobej/ethnettbe reins of his rider, but groves refra^ ory: then he cejfcthtobe an injirumevt for traveU. A fnord is not an inilrumcvt ofjlaughter, where itjlayes not: nor an ax an inftrumcnt t« htrr, when it cuts not. Heither is the <j0^il an injlrument of juftification, where itjufti-fiesnot.

§. 15. R. B. T Am too fliallow to reach the rcafon of thcfe words. I knew you had not ■^ Icafuie to write them in vain, and meerly to fill paper. And I will not be fo uncharitable as to think you willing to intimate to the world, that 1 had wrote er thought that the Gofpel was the inftrumcnt of juftifying a man that was nevcc juftified. Do you think I know not a Caufe and Eftcft are fo related, xhit forma-liter it is not an efficient before it doth effcd-? Though it may ftill be the fame Thing, and have the fame Aptitude to produce tht Effed, even when it is aot applied : and therefore by many Logicians is laxly termed a Caufe ftill. j. Nor can I perceive you make this a medium of any argument: except you would argu« thus: The grant of the Covenant is not an Inftrument of juftifying unbelievers that never were juftified : Therefore it is not a full or proper inftrument of juftifying believers that are juftified.] Or elfe, therefore faith is an inftrument as well as the Gofpel. Toyour Reader that is no'wifer then Ij thefe words therefore, are at the beft but loft labour. For I fuppofe this Argumentation you vrill not own.

§. 16.

M' 2l.\7t7Hett the Miniftcr it a Minister of condemnationjhe fivBur of death to ddtlr, V V there the Go^elbccmft an inftrument of condemmienottddutb.

C3o3

§. i6.

K.B. 1. Co it is, if thjrc be no Minifter where it is known any way. i, I

^-'fpeak of Gods grant or p.omife in th. G jfpcl; you fpcak of hi$ cm-fnination. j. If the threat be :hc pioperinft ument of concicmnacion, i. tjiri^ the promife orgiftis the proper inltrumcnt of Juliification. Saw you not this '.^ficn you wrote it ?

THcc^cttcythit U in the go^cL for ^ujlij!cm9n,it receives by their faith to rvbom it is tcndred.

§. 17.

K. B.rx Arkly, but Jangeroufly fpoken. Darkly, for its pofliWe you may L>/mcan, that it receives it by faith as by a condition fine qui homo non cjt fubjeBum pnximi cipax: andfol grant the fenfe: dangeroufly, For the words will leem to any impartial Reader to import more j fpecially finding what you fay for faiths inftrumentality before : v/^. Thac the GMpel receives its eflkacy from faith, or byfaith asihe Jnftrnment which conveyeth that efficacy to the Gofpel: which if you mean, I wouli for the Truth's lake, and your own, that thefe words had never been feen. For if faith give the Gofpel its efficacy , i. It cannot be as a concaufe-inftrumentall, coordinate i but as a fuperiour, more principal caufe to the fubordinate. 2. If it were the former that is meant, yet were ic intoUerable.

I. Nothing but a fuperiour caufe dorh convey efficaciam ciufunii to another. And this muit be either, i. Influendo in pot entidm inferior is. z rdina^um. To fey that mans faith doth either of thefe to the Gofpel-grant, is fuch a doftrine as I will not dare to argue againft, left you take me thereby to accufe you of being guilty of it.

X. Faith cannot as a concaufe, convey any efficacy into the Gofpel: For a coordinate concaufe doth influere immeiiAtd in iffum effekum, itnon incontaufa potcH' tian vel actum.

g. If you had only faid that faith doth concurre in efficiency with the Gofpel, tojuftificationj you had faid snore then you bring any proof for: But let's fee what you bring in ftcad of proof.

§. 18

HEb.4.2. VntouA tv a/! the Gofpel preached a/5 well as unto them: but the Wordpreiched,iti not profit them,, not being mixed with faith in them that beardit. 1 Thef.z.iz,ig. Tou received notthe iVordofGod, as the word of men, but (as It is in truth) the Word ofgoi, which effectually worietb in you that believe.

§. x8.

CjO

§. 18.

K. B.7) Ut Where's your condufion ? er any Ihew of advantage to yourCaufe? tji- In the fiift Tcxtj the Apoftle fpcaks cf the words profiting in the real change of the foul ; and cur quefticn is of the Relative. The Scriptuie meancthj The word had not that further w01k on the heart, as it hath in them that mix it with faith : will you interpret it thus : [Tl:e Word did not juftifie them.] z. Its true, that the Word did ret juftifie them: but thats confcquertial only of the former upprofitablencfs. Once prove that man is but as much efficient in jufti-fying himlelf, as he is in the obedience and change ct his minde or anions j and then ycu do I'cmcthing. j^ Is here ever a word for the Gofpcls receiving its efficacy to Juftification by faith ? no ner of its fo receiving that rea! profit of lan-dificacion, which is here meanr, neither. Its weak arguing to fay. The Word profited notj becaufc it was not miict with faith: tberefere faitli conveys to it its efficacy of lanftifying, yea of juftifying. You cannot but know the fequcl would be denied. In progrefTive far.dification, and obedience, and cxcrcife of graces, the word and faith arc concaules, and one will not effc ft without the other; But it followeth not that therefore faith iiives efficacy to the Word in this (much lefs to Juftification where faith is no efficient.) For ccrcaufes have rot influence on each other, but both on the effeft. The want cf faith may hinder the Word from that further work on the foul, which prcfuppofeth faith (tor faith is not wrcughc with faith's cooperation :) and thats all that the Text laith: But may not ths ab fence of faith hinder, unlefs when prefent it doth effcft ? lam fure in Juftification, where it is but a condition, it may. The nature of a condition, when the gift is free and full, is not toefteft the thing, but to fufpend the efficacy of the inftrument,till it be perfoimcd. As (if I may ulcfo grol's a fimilitude) thcclickcc of a Crofs-bcw doth hinder the bow from fliooting, tillyou ftir it j but doth not adde any force to it, when you do ftir ir.

The fecond Text I know not how you mean to make ufc of 3 unlefs ycti argue thus: The Word workethefttdually only in Beleeveis : therefore faithconveycth efficacy to the Word. I think I need not tell you, that I deny the fequcl ( not to fpeak of the antecedent:) nor yet to tell you that this fpeaksnotoi woiking the relative change of Juftification.

§. 19

M'2/,

SO thiit theGo^el, i?iitfelfcor>fidered, Urennthg in that honour ajjigiied toatt itiHrumim, to hdvc tvfux to the producivg of the cffcH of the pnncipall caufc, hy a proper caufality. Ifvonedarcfiy, that faith hath (uch an influx^ ihej may muck U^ jay that tbc iVord hath [tub an influx.

§. 19.

21. 2.T He Gofpel in it felf confidered, without the coordinate or fubordinate, • or fuperiour caufality of faith, hath tbij honour fo fully, clearly, beyond all doubt, that no man that is a preacher of this Gofpel ffiould queftion it: Much JcfsftiDuld prefer the caufality ot faith, in faying, that [we may much lels ^ivc ihis honour to the Word,] or fay this of the Word, then of our own faith. Vet

C30

the Gofpcl without theconcomltancy of tai-.h, doth not aftjiUy juftific: dfc faith were no condition or ciu/i fine qua «o«; bat ihi: is no J-.lhjnout to the G ipel j nordcfcd ofp3Wcr which fai:h maft fupply. But the fu.c: of the inll. uncut be-in^ mcerly from the Donors wiii, he wUlcth that i: ihiH rhen (inJ not till'hcii) r^fccrc, when the condition i$ perto.mcd. I aj»peal to all the Divi.ies, Liwycrs and Logicians in the world ; when the thing to be convv-yed is buc Dcb:tum v:l }xs tirem, and the ctfcft is bu: a Tianiccndcn:al relation (at Jffc/».<.'n ii^) Is n'^: the VoluntasconftituaiiiivolDonintis ihc only principal prjp.T etti.i.nt ? And is not thefigaumvoluntjxif coujhtuens, the p.opercll iiiltru;«rHL that the wit of niin cia imagine. Isnot thcTcltament ofa manth: moft ll.icl and proper i-iliru-ncnc of conveying right of the Legacy to the Legarsry ? Is not a Covenant, Contrad, Deed of gift, the molt proper iuttiumenca! ctficient caufc of the dancfs of the thing given or conveyed ? It is not only a Law te.m, but a term of the rtriftcft Logick, tocallthcie amans inrtrumen: for conreyance. Is not aprxtniantor priviledging law, in the moft ilrid and proper feme the Lcgiflitors iiifl:'am:nt, cflFefting the dcbitumprjemii vclpriv'.legii ? It is evident that the fullelldehnition of aninllruiTienral erticicnt caulc doth agree tothcfc." as farasthe nature of the cfFcft (^Kditio dcbhivdjurU) wiiladmit of full or proper efficiency. For tbcl'e inftrutnents are the very funismcnu proximx of thelerelationi. Can you prove the like, (yea and more) of faith, and will not? Bat I pray once more remember that it is not the cff.ifliag of a Phyfical change, but a relative, t'e con* veying of Right that we are ipeaking of; fo full an inltrtjment is each of thefe that the very name of theeff;d is oft given to them. So a pardoning inftrument is called A pardon: the inftrument of donation is called A deed of gift. The Law is faid, prxmiare (y punire, quia tonHituit debitum premii t^ pf.nZ'

M'B/.r)Emblct&«'c/crea^>'w/n^tk tVordtobeaa injlrument of Qods Spirit, pre-L fentlj aides, Hsvo injtruments are cither coopentivs or pdffive, and the iVori nHJl be one of thefe ticvo: Cooperuive,he(Mthtt is not, ani gives his rcifon: It ii therefore, [Mbhe, apijfive infirument, wiriiingonly per modam ob cdi, asitcounins* declirsxion ofib: Divine iVi'l, and ttpropofeih to the underJiitiini and will the things to be iiHOWtii beleevU and pn^ifed.

R. B. \ >f r Pcmble fpeaks of the Word efteding, or as the inftrument of fandifi-IVlcation. We fpeak of it as conveying right to Chrift, and as joftifying. Whats that to this ? z. When did M"^ Pc»ii/c prove that the vVord or other ob-jeds arc paffive inftruments ? You know he goes againll the llream of Pliilolo-phers : and then his rcafons muft fway more then his authority : And his rcafon, which you fay he gives, is but this. It cannot be declared what operative force • there (hould be in the bare declaration of Gods will,?i7't'.] But I will undertake to declare that an operation there is bythe agency of this declaration} thou;,h not pundually how it operates: I have read many that fay that objcHiim operdtur in genere ciufe finxlii: and others that fay it worketh /a genere ctafx cfJicieHtis* I'ome faying it eftedcch Pbyfically, othemhac ic efiedeth morally, others that objccium

cperMur

C?5]

9peraturnatHrallter, at prtpsnent 6bjc^um eft tdntumcaufimoulis; others that it is aafi c^cieus objcHiva protattrciiti rcfiectu arum opcrxtiomm qux ab iUa mmediiite txcrceniuri fed uufafinxlU refpcHmltorum opentionum qtnedbiHi fuutpmrumhucr-ventu, «s Burgerfdis ipeaks : But I remember none that call it Jvftrumentum pujff vum: yea not only the ob;ed, but declaration and all, InHrumeHtumpuJJiium. VovmypaxilimoiScotxsminde, that ObjeHam opcritur e^cienter (^ per modum ndtura in inuUeS!um.i fed mouliter txntum in volunUtcm ; irrefiftibly and neccfli-a.-tin«lyon thcintclleft ( conlldciing it as an intelleft, and not fo far as it is /m& impcriovoluntatis0' itaejus opcratienes funtparticipative v^luntarin -,) but on tha will not lo. And 1 am lore this paflive inftiumcntftlity of theWord in fat^ftitying, doth very ill agree with the language of Scripture; which makes the Word to be mighty, powcrfull, pullingdown ftrong holds, (harp, dividing.^c. The feed of God by which we are begotten, lively, the Word of life, faving mens foulsj quick-ning, fanftifying, cleanfing,Cir'<^. But what's all this to Juftification ?

SO tbxt if Burgerfdicius htf gladius and colter be active inftrumentf, and Keckerman'f Incus inftrumentum fabricationis, and hif fcamnum & menfa accubitus, & terra ambulatianis;/« it followetb not, at is thence inferred, that there is nopajjlveinftriment. Here is an inftrnment that ifpxjpvc.

§. II. R. B. "rHcfc words import an intimatioa that I faid all thefc were adive inftru-■■ ments, which ihould not have been done, wfien I manifefted thati took fome of them for no inftruraents. ». Thcfe words intimate, as if I concluded hence (if not only hence ) that there are no paflive inftruments; which ftiouKl not be, when I only brought in thcfe as Objcdionsto be anfwered, and argued viithScbibler againft paflive infliumentsthus: Every inftruracnt isan efficient cauie : All efficiency is by adion : Therefore every inftrument isaftive. If yoa chofe rather ( as ordinarily you do ) to iilencc my reafons then anfwcr them, yet you fhould not have intimated, as if I had given you none, or but fuch as I gave not. J. 1 look for your proof of a paflive inftrument j and not to fay £ Here is an inftrument that is pallivc] as if you were demonftrating it ro my eyes, when you bring nothing buc lingular Mi: PsmbUj lingular word. And I doubt whether you beleeve him or your felf throughly i for if you did,I think you would preach but coldly. I am pcrfwaded you look your preaching (hould operate adively : And indeed fo it muft or not at all ; for pau non eft eperari; and therefore Pcmble dcni-eth it to cooperate, and to operate. Be not offended if I doubt whether you beleeve this your felf, in your Studies, Preaching,Writing and Exhortations. 4. I doubt net but that which doth only realiter piti, may be called an inltrum^nt morahter vel reputative:hat then its reputative inftiumentaIity,confifl:eth in a reparative adtiviry. 5, And I doubt not but the difpspio materia may, by a bovrowed Ipecch becalled inftrumentum recipiendi i ind (0 i?iftru>ncntum pajfivum, ix-Pajfionis, iz. Kcctptionk: but all this is nothing to the bulinefs. 6. If it were proved that there were a hundred p^affivc inftrumens, it would never be proved that fauth is one ( as an inftrument (ignifieth an ef&cient caul'e) of Gads workof juftifying us: neither Really n»c Reputauvely is ic fucb.

f S. it.

CjO

5 11.

THdt which it produced by in efficient tr principiU agent t0 the pr0duciiig i efeci, and receives iciivity And porter fromfomc other, uapujfrje tv[lrui

§. 22.

K.B. CTranger yet! i. Its nothing to the nature ofan inftiument aftiveor ^paflive, whether [it be proJuced by the principal agent] or not, loitdo but rubfervc that agent, z. If this propofition be true, there is never an adivc inikrumtm in rerum natura: For Angels and men, color, frigiu, and all creatures are produced by God as the principal caufe to the producing of fomc cffcds ( except there be any ultimi effccfua found out which are not caufes of other eflcfts ) and they all receive aftivity and power from Ood. Thofe that aremoft for paflive inftruments fay, calor is an aftive inflrument. But if I ufe fire po warm my beer, or burn any thing, this receives its adivity and power from another, and therefore muft be no aftive inflrument, with you. If there be no aftive inflrument, when I thought there had been no paflive inflrument, I was far wide. J. But what mean thefe flrange words of [Adivity and power rcceired] if the inilrunjent be not adive ? Is not the Potentia here meant, Potcntia efficicnii ? and is not all efFe-^ion by aftion ? And is not the aftivity here mentioned, an adivicy in caufing ? What ? and yet no adive inflrument ? Be not ofiended with me, Dear brother, if I confefs, that you and I differ in more poim« tbtn one, aod in our Philofopby u well as Theology.

M-^ Bl.Tyot the iVord U produced and held forth of Cod for the workof ^jiipcatidn, IDattd hub its power of worliing el{ervbcre.

S.. B.V^Et more ftrange I i. 1$ it not enough that you take the Word u> be » 1 paflive inflrument of Confirmation and Converfion ? and all the work that it doth on the fouls of your bearers really ? but you mufl feign the Word to be the paffive inflrumont of Juilification too? Is there any thing in the whole world that can more unfitly be called a paflive inflrument, then the Covenant of JuftificatioB ? Why, it is Gads only inflrument of adive C^ntlitutioa of the duenefsof the benefit ? Though it be but aBione moruli, tu fignum voluntatis donmrii. The T>cbitum refuhs from the Grant, Deed cf Gih, Te-fiamentj or Inflrument of Donation or Conveyance, as from its fuiidamentum froximHm : And is the fundamentHm proximum Relatiom a paffive Inftru-ment ?

a. The Word hath its power of working clCcvvhere, that is, from God > but not from mans faith ; Farre be fuch a thought from my foul.

3. I fufped by your words, when you fay [the Word is produced and held forth of God ] and by your ditcourfe all along, that you all rhi* while underfland

BOC

till

not what I mean by the Covenants jurtifying : ( yet I had hoped you had undci> flood the thing it fdf.) You fcem to think that rhe Coveaant juftifies by fome real operation on the loul, as the Papifts fay j and our Divines lay. It fanfti&es > ot »s ii iu&\(ic& in foro confci€nti£, by giving aflbt-ance and comfort. But Sir, I opened my thoughts of this fully in ^^fror.pag. i7h^74)^75>^7^}^77)^7^)^79' 1 fcaice beftowed fo many words of any one particular point. I fpeak not of the effe6: of Godi Word, as pleached to mens hearts: but as it is Lex prtmulgata, O* Ptdfu, O' TeQiimetttum, and To doth convey Right, or Gonftitute theduenefsof the benefit ? This U the Record tbdt gd hAth given uf, eternsU Life, snd thk Life it in biiSoriyScc. i ^ofe.j. 11,12. This Golpel-donation doth conftitutetheduneliof the thing given, to us i and thus the Covenant juftifies, as a written pardon under the Kings hand, or an aft of grace or oblivion, doch pardon. Do you not oft read in Divines of ^uftfiatio ^ris, vel Legit, as diftinft from 'fuftifi-citio ^udicif, vol per fententixmf I refcrre you to what I laid in the cited place.

W^Lr^Orgivcncf? of fins ii preacheiintbe Gofbtl, Aft. 13. p. Butit Uthofc thxt Vbclccve tm arejuftijjcd. Faith through the Spirit gives efjicacj ind psrver oj working to it.

§. 14. R. B.T Should tremble to fay fo: What Rtmmft by the doftrine of merit gives ■*• more to man in the work of Juftification 1 If our faith give efficacy and power to the Gofpel tojuftifieuj, then we juilific our felvcs when the Gofpel juftifies us.' then the Gofpel is our inilrument of Juftification ! And can this be unlefs it be alfo faid that we made the Gofpel ? Then God and we areconcaufcs in the Gofpels aft of Donation : And is it the fame power and efficacy for jufti-fying, which the Gofpel receives from God, and which it receives from faith ? or are they divers ? If divers, fhew us what they are 5 and which part of its power andcfficacy the Gdfpel receives from faith, and which from God ? If they are the fame, then God muft convey juftifying efficacy and power into faith firft, and by faith into the Gofpel: which who imagineth ? or why (hould I be fo vain as to ftand to confute it ? O that you had condefcendeJ fo far to your Readers weak-nefs, as to have deigned to rtiew him, •^opiodo pMitur Evivgclium recipicndo ? (^ >^d recipit KtfiM potcns (3' tfficux f (^ qusmodo hxc potcntii (^ c^cucia fuit in fde f utrum cminenter an formaliter ? uut utrum fides id communie^vit quod nuniiuim babuit ? (St quomodo agit fides in hoc inftuxu caufxtico in EvMgcUum i with many more of the like, which you make neceflary to be enquired after. And why gave you no proof from Scripture or reafon for a point tiiat is fo new, that 1 think never man printed before you, for fo far as I can learn at piefcnt: That faith gives efficacy and powder of fanftifying or exciting Grace, pec haps fome before you have delivered : but that it gives efficacy and power of jultityiiTg, I think not any.

1. And furc you do not take the foregoing words for proof: If you do, I define your Reader may not do fo. What tboui,h only Believers are juftificd by the Covenant ? Doth it follow that faith gives eificacy and power to the Covenant to Juttifie ? Then citherihcrc are no conditions or caufcs fine iuibm non: or eife

[30

tbcy^Ur* tfficicntt, and give efficacy and power to other efficients: What if your father bequeath by hisTeftaraen: i lo' apiece to each of his Ions ? ro one on condition he will aik it o/his elder brother, and thank him for it: to another,'* if he be married by fuch a time: to a third, if he will promircnot to wall it in Prodigality: Do any of tlicfc condidons tive efficacy and power to the Tefta-ment ? No: Yet the Tcftamcnt doth not t^f4<:;/fr<igerc till they are performed. Why is that ? Becaufeall I'uch iniivumcnts work morally, only by exp.(.fling «t figjiA the Will of the Agent: and therefore they work both when and how he will ; and it is his Will that they ffiall not work till fuch a time, and but on fuch terms } and I'o he frames the conditions himfclf, as ebices to fulpend his Te(tanicnr or other inil'-ument from ading or cftcding, till they are performed : but not to give efficacy and power to his Te(lament. It the gift be ifi iiem,the inftrument receives not erhcacy ard power from the Time, quiiiio veuit dies ; no more doth it per pne-ftatiovem coniitionk.

I. Your terms of [ Faiths giving power through the Spirit] tell me, that furc you ftill look at the wrong aft of the Gofpel j not at its moral aft of Conveyance or Donation, but at its real operation on mans heart: For neither Scripture nor Divines ufe to fay, The Gofpel remitteth lin, or juftifieth by the Spirit: Nor doth the Spirit otherwife do ir, then by cnditing the Gofpel ; unlefs by the Spirit you mean the Godhead in Eflencc; and notin Perfonality. Sanftification h afcribed to the Spirit as the efficient, but fo is not forgivenefs and Juftification-. Nor do I like your phrafe, as to fanftificition it felf. That faith conv-eys efficacy and power to the Gofpel through the Spirit : For i. I had rather fay,The Gofpel and Spirit, or the Spirit bytheGoIpel, convey efficacy and power ro faith, then faith to the Gofocl. a. How faith ihould convey this through the Spirit, is quire beyond my reach : Doth the Spirit receive any influx from faith, and thereby a power,and then convey this to the Gofpel from our faith i But its like you mean, the Spirit doth it through faith.

§. 1?.

'M'BiQOthdt neither the Go£?el, tier faith tn the gofpel, jhouldin thUo^ceofdnirt" OJirument in ^uftificatien be denied their due honour. The Gofjel received by fuith, ii a plenary injlruraent in this rvorli: and faith embracing the tender attd promifc oftheGcJpcl. ThsGoJpcl iianomwardinjlrttment. /iztfcRaranelly : faith aninrard: they both malie up one inftrument full and compleat: yet faith i< more aptly and fitly caUcd aninftrumem : Seeing that faith gives efficacy, as an inftrument to theH^erd: theiVord may be without faith, andfo no inftrument at all: butjaiib alwdy prefuppefeth the iVord of promifc: it is not without itsobjcSf.

K..3. i.fjAd you firft proved any fuch honour due to faith, and fo to man, as tlto be the inftrument of Juttification, yea aad more fitly then the Gefpel, fo to be called, then you might fairly have thus conclud'^d. But I like not Arguments that have but one part, being all Conclufion. I will fay more for the Gorpels inftrumentality. Sigmm voluntatis Tonatoris conftitucnsjits adbenefici-umVonatum (etjiindiemvel fubcondttiene) eft Vonaterit inftrumentummaximeprO' prtHtn: Std Teftamntum Cbnfti eft fgtium voluntatis divina jut mftrum ad Cbnftum

(3t

tH* ^uftifiedtiovcn pnjfivm ccu(litu(^s, (\\x fuhconditient, dj* dBuslhcY qumiopfi-ftitur conditio :) Ergo TcjiAmmum C^rtjh eft jnftrttmcntnm hujiu donatknis, maxin^ prepriim. For the major, examine it by all the qualifications of an inihumenrj and i: will appear undcubted. i. Subfervit iMf,e prir.cipali^fcilicet voLuvuu donatoris. 2. Acitoejui^ priitcipalif (ur.tadtm a^io: fciljcct Donatte, vclcoujiitHerc debitum henef.in. 3. The trucdsifinition of an inftrumcnt agrees to it: Infirumeiitumcft quod ex dircSiom alterius principilU ager.tu inflnit ad produccndum effeBum (c mbilio-rem •• f'c/, per quod cauf4 alia opcratur fie, ut hoc cUvctur ad cffedum (e nobiltorem, feu ultra ferfcCitoncm (^(mm (s' aSiif^ni' fux. 4- Yea it is the moll perfcd inftrarwcni J for triftrumtuum co mdim eft quanta triaiis eft fint propcrttOTiatum: ut Aquin. i. za. q. iS2.il 7. But Gods Legal grant is molt pti if di) proportiored to the conveyance of rightio Chriit, and his benefits. Prove tiii much of faithjas to Jullification, beforcyouagain tell the woiId that faith is n<.rc fitly called an inftrumcnt of Ju-ftification.

1. If the Gofpcl received by faith be a plena, y inftvwnsefitof juftifying, asyou fay: Then 1. How isfaith mo c fitly ca it.i a-. inlhuiTisnt ? z. Then Ka;pcrc EvangeUum IS inftrumentumjuftiftcandimixmcrnprtum (asyou think) making the Gofpel a compleat inftruuient.

J. If faith and the Gofpel be both fullccnipleat inftruments, then cith«i-c/h/"-dcm cfeMi per candcm a^ionem, vd per diverfnf': net per eandcm a^oitem , Foe I. Then they (hould be one inftrumenr. 2. Their f//«; ii i'o cificient that their operari muft needs be different, z. If per diverftu eSftoncs, then coordinate at fubordinate : You think fubordin«te,it fecms, and that faith gives power and efii-cacy tothc Gofpel j-- If fo, then faith doth modo (^ fevfu itobiltsre ^uftifcarc quam Teftamentum. Bat thats farre from truth: For 1. Itismoit proper to fay, The Covenant-grant juftifieth : or the Law of grace juftifieth j but it is lefs proper to fay, Faith juftifieth : aiul Scripture never faith fo that I know of j but that we are juftified by faith. 2. You fay your felf that faith is but a paflivc inftrumem : but the Teftament is aftivc, (morally in its kindc.) 3. Rccipcre Evingcliun it not fo properly ^uftiftcare, as is immedtate ^ufiificarc, Rcmittere, ^ua ad Chriftum &r€miJJionemcon(lituere, which is the Gofpclsaft. (Jrcdere non eft tarnpreprte fuSir-fare. Much more might be faid of thisjif ncceflary.

4. Howplainacontradidion doyoufpeak, that faith and the Gofpel arc two inftruments ; and that both make one compleat inftrumem. They might hate been faid to be materially two things, making one inftrumenc without contradifii-on ; but not withewt notorious untruch.

f. For it is no better when you fay, they make up one comp'eat inflrumenr. For I. You faid before that faith gives power and efficacy to the Gcfpcl : whicb if true, thea the Goi'pel is an inftrument fubordinatt to taith, and therefore no; one with it. 2. The Gofpel is caufatotalis in(uo gcncrc, fully as an inftrumenc conveying right, quando vd ventt dies, vd praftutur (onditio: therefore it is noc taufapartialU, velparscaufa. 3. There is fuch a difparity in the adions of each, viz. (^rcdere, 2r,d Remttterevcl do-iiareQbrijlum($' Remijftonevt, that they cannot pofliblyas c^ufx partiales, ccnftitute one compleat cauie: F;;r one immcdiatly and properly produceih theeftcft; the other not fo. 4. Yoti fsy, that they are both pafllve inftruments ; But lo they cannot make one inftrument: For furcly neepAtiuntur idem, necab codem i vec formavt ^uftificationU Evangilium patiendo re" cipit. Though indeed your authority muft do more then your reafons, to prove ir of cither.

.F 5 6.U

C?81

6, Iffakhbemoreaptly and fitly (asyoui'pcak) called, an inftrotncnr, then it isaproperer fpcech te lay, Faith, or man by taith, forgivethfinii then thac The Covenant-grant or Condonation, or ad of paiJon doth forgive thcin, Sei tAbfit!

7, When you hare well proved that repeated dangerous aflcrtion, [Thatfa!th gives efficacy as an inftrnment to the Word i] you may next take the buldncfs to Ipcak out its confequcnts, and fay, Gods Word is the Delievers word«: the Bclee-yerenablcth Gods Law ot grace to forgive him ; The Law of grace isdefcdivc in power, till the Beleever pcrfett it : Lredcrcnoncfl ucim fubitti, vel Lcgatarif., fed Rework, "fuditis, (^ Tcjlatoris: Ergo H9m$ hibet mtboritatcn fciffum fujlifcanii, tS' fibi tpfi c$udonandi, Jr crtdcndt bine cxcrcct iuthorttntcm,

8, Your ihangc proof is oft anfwercd. What though the Word without faith is no inftrument ? Doth it follow that therefore cither faith makes it an inftru-ment, or isaninftrumentit felf ? The King grams an Ad of Oblivion or Pardon to a thoafand Traytors, on condition that by fuch a day they come and feek and thankfully accept it: EKjih their fecking or thankfull Acceptance^ give power and efficacy as an inftrumtnt to the Kings Pardon? Grare the I?ardon and Acceptance one complca: inftrument ? O: is it more fit to call the TraytoiS Acctptance, the inlhument of his Pardon, then the Kings Ad i* Creia quitrc" dcrepotueji.

Twiffe faith, An Audebit Arminianus diquU a^rmjrc Rcmijfiomm petuterum <r/?e cffeHioncmfdci? tametfi mfi credentibin contitigAtijU Remtffio. Dkes, fidem fdltem prarequifiium qutddam ejSe id Remiffienem p<ccatorum confeqitendttnt- Ejio ; atque bxc rxtionedicaur cfcSiitfidei, fed ingeuerc tantum csufa difpo/idVa, TwiffF/ni Grur. l.i.part.z.^.z'i.^.mibi ^71. So he oft faith both of Faith and Works, that they juflifie only Ht tauf* diip^fitiva: and therefore in one kinde of caufaiity j and not as inftrument J properly fo called.

§. i6.

M' Bl."Y^Herefcretomnie up thU whelc Dilute in wlncb I huve United to be brief^ X (though I feir fomevfill thinii I pave been to$ tedious:) (cei)ig thitthofe tbit mafie faith the infirumeHt in ^jftfication, malietbe Gojpeian injirument li^emfe, and dire t»t go about tojirip it oftts honour ; I hope that they that make the Go^elan inflruvieHt,vfiU adinorcledge faith to be an inftrument in Itlie manner, being in tlyeir e^cacy »f injlruments fo infcparablj joyncd, and foall the Controverfe will be fairly ended and concluded. Amen.

§• i7-R. B. 1.1F this be a Difpute, I am none of thoi'e that think it too long ; I fcarc€ * finde a line in many Pages: It is in my eyes fo lliort, that it fccms ac nothing.

z. Your motion for decifion will take, when man is proved to be God: then mansadof BcUeving may fairly fharc of the lame honour with Gods aCt of Legal forgiving: And yet then I fhall demurre on the pi'eferring it: But till then, I love Peace and Unity, bat not on fuch a compromifing, as to ihare the honour of the Redeemer with the redeemed, of the Creator with the creative, of the Sovereign pardoning, with the Traytor pardoned.

C39j

3.1 ViVtJmdiUittt then lirgo.- and Herbtrts rransformation I much appltud s but not the fubfiitucion oiyjmcv, for a ncceflaiy Erg$. This vimum falix dt(pu~ undi genus, that can prov« all with a word, an iffc dico, and wipe cff all that is op-pofcd with a wet fingerj I never liked. 1 mult newt take in what you adde afterwards.

§. 17.

M'B/. Pag. 91. Obj. 1 r w [aid by dncther, Tffaith be i condition of the Ccvemnt of Qrect, thin it an ' be no injirumtnt of our ^ufiif cation: If it be a condition t» this Covenant, it ;'»• fiifcs Af a condition,and then it cannot jufiifie as an ivjlrutntitt, andfo J puU dovfn whit I build, and run upon contradiHions.

Anlw. Itnfwcr, I f}0uid rather judge on the contrary, thatbccaufe itU a condition cftbe (Covenant in the way as it U before cxpnft, that it « therefore an ivflrument in our ^ufiifcation. God tenders the gift ofrightmifvcji to he rueivei ly faith .- He Covenants for thii faith } for acceptation of it: By bcleeving then nee licep (^ovtvant and receive (^hr)iiferjuftif^caticni rec as well dovehatGod requires, as receive what he tcndcrti we do our duty, and take Gods gift ; and thcrely liecp Covenant, and receive life, and f» faith ii both a condition and an inftrunent.

§. i7. J?. S.'DUtdoyoutakc *^;«w and cojidttio tohc^l one? lealily yield that we JDmaydo oui duty in beleeving, though it were an inftrument: But a condition is more then a duty : yea then z duty to be performed for ih* obtaining of a benefit. Cujacitu faith^ Conditio e(l Lex addita nrgotio qu^e donee praftetur eventun fufpcndit; Vcl eft modm vel caufa qua jvfpendit id quod agitur, donee ex pcft-feHo cortft' nutur. Or ttCMy71 finger. Cum quid in afum incertum {'i.e. contirgcns) qui toteS tevdcre ad ejfe vcl non e^e ctnjertur- And tiiey arc divided into Toteftatiias,Ca(uales, Mixiaa: Uurs is of the former fort, and 1 define it, i/^. the condition of the Covenant to be, ^Biov^luntariad^ future, aTieo LegiJUtoreO- Chrifto Teftatorein mvi Lege, Federe, Tefl&mento requifiia, ut ex ejus prajiatme covSttusturjiu adualead hcncficium: vcl, ut ohUgationem (^evcntutn fufpcvdat donee pntftctur. For ex ftipu-latiotic cotidittouali neque oblig^tio veque aBto uUa (ft, avtcqtmm cojiditio evcniat: J^ia quod eft in aniittot^e, non eft in ohltgationc. Vt Myrfirn?. tn Jnfttt. Schel.

z. Yeu niuA confider that it is not de conditicnetcntraBm venditioni^ ^ewptionit, vel emptyteufis, tel locatitvis, or any the like, that is propter prettum; but it is the cendicion parte donationU, but i'cmcw hat partaking naturaFeudi, astofcmeofthe Benefits. This being preraifed, it is evident that faith cannot juftifie bothasa condition, and as an inftiument of Juftificatinn. For 1 Either of them im-

f>otteth thcprcximam ist caufalcm ratievem of faith, as to the tffcft : But it is utter-y incorfiflent with its nature to have two fuch different ncareftcaufalir.tercfts* To be an inftrument of juftifying, is to ef^eA it per mcdum inftrumcnti; To be the condition, is wbcihc caufa fine qua non, which doth not cflcd, but fufpend the eflcd til! performed: It bath the name of acaul'e, ( and Icmetime is exmateria

a moral jmpulfi yc, and foaietime cot) but it hath the trui nature of fuch a medium

■■----■■'- - ■ ni

Ufinem, as is no caufc. A^ faith cannot be botii c^acm effect, ist efeHum cjuflsm. e^eiemii, nor be bo:h thecrticicn: aivi coiift;cu:iyc caufe (material or formalj) no morccan ir proiliicc one and the lameeftcft of }ui\ihc^'^on per nudumtnjiru' mcmi cfficicntU, and pcrmoium coniitionU fine qui nm. z. EUe you mull l-eijn the pardoning ad taIunthus [ I will pardon th;;e on conJicionihou wilt pardon thy t'clfbybcleevin:;, as the inll.iinen:] an.i not only [ on condition thou accept Chrtft.] J. Itbclongech to the pardoning inllrumcnc co confcrre the right totbethin^, chat is, to diilolvc th^ obligation to punithn:nr, anJ to conftitiitc the condition of this Right or Pardon : For Domuth ejt conftituerc conditioncn ttiim in ipfi tHJirumcnuU Dmitiant. Bu: taith do:li lu: contcrrc Right} toe your fclf fay, It dath but receive it: It doth not dillolve the obligation, but accept a Savioui to 3iffblve it: It doth not conftitucc the condition ot right i for you acknowledge it is the condition it iclf.

To conclude this P»int, for the compiomifing or (hortening this difference between you and lae, I will take your fairer otfcr, pj^. 7 J-or elfe give you as fair an offer of my own. Yours is this: [Faith is conddcred under a deuble notion. Firft as an inftiumcnt (or if ijiat word will not be allowed ) as the way ofour intcreftin Chrilt, andprivilcdgss by Chrift.] In this general I cafily agree with you.

If that fatisfie n9t, I propound this, Cill you ic an inflrumcnt of receiving Chriil, and coofequently righteoufncfs i and give me leave to call it prccifely a condition, or a moral difpoficion of the fubjift to be juftified j and I will not contend with you : So be it, you will i/not lay too great a ftrefs on your own notion, nor make ic of flat neceflicy, nor joyn with them that have made the Pa-pifts believe that its a great par: of th« Protcltant Religion, and confequcntly tba: in confuting it, they refcll the Protcliants. i. Nor fay any naorethat it givci efficacy and power to the Gofpel to juftifie us, and is more fitly then the ■Gofpel called an inftrumcnc. 5. Yea, I muft dcfue that you will forbear calliHg it at all an inftrument of Juftification, and be concent to call it an inftrument of receiving Juftificacion : and I would you wouldconfcfs that too to bean improper fpcech. If you refolveto go further. Ice mc dcfire you hereafter i. To remember that its you that have the Affirmative, that faith is th« inftrument of juftifying us: and I fay, Ir is not written, you adde to Scripture : Therefore ftiew where it is written, expreflsly or by confequence. z. Do not blame mc for making fincere obedience part of the mca* condition ( wherein I think you fay ^s much as I ) and fo as giving too much to man, when you give intollcrably fo much more as to make him-the inftrumencal efficient caufc of forgiving and juftifying bimfclf. J. Above that I have yet faid, I pray forget not one thing: to prove faith to be the inftrumental efficient of fentencial Juliification ( which is moftproperly and fully To called) as well as of Legal conftiiutire Jultification. For thats the great point of which you have juft nothing {pAcetuifiiU dicam) •f wMch you (hould have faid much. And fo much for the Controvcr^c.

§• ^^!

C40

§ i8. Of Evangelical Perfonal Ri^htcoufncfs.

M'Bl. Pa^. iio,(^c.

THcre is yet a third opinion, wbicb I rmy vocll doubt whether I underjland, but fa far IK I do undcrjland, I am At far from ajicnt to a as cither of the former .- and tJ}atisofihofe,vpbo donotSHly affcrt aperftnal iuhcrcut KigbtcoufneJ?, e/sreella/s impu-mi, figaiuil the AvtinomJAns j hut alio a^rm thit tbi< RighteeufmjS h compleat and perfect: which if it were meant only of the pcrfccfton ef tL'efubje^, a/s oppo{eitohypo-crifie, dtJfimuUtisB, ordoublencf, implying that they do not only pretexJi for God, but arc really for him; that they do ?iot lumto him figncdly fiiy r.Vael w^ lomctimahar-ged, Jcr. J. I o ) but with an upright be^rt.- Or sf the perfccliou or entirencf of the ob-jeH : (rcJpeSiivg not one, oronlyfomc, but all Qommand,H<ntt) ■which it called a pcr-feUien of parts i we might readily ajj'ent lo it. The Covenant cals for fuih pcrfc^ion, Gen.i7.». Walk before me and bethou peifcd : and Yiiany havctbcir witncfs in Scripture that they have Attained to it, as Noahj(yCM.7.9. ^ob i.t. Htzekiah, Ifa. 38. j. But apcrfeSfionabovetbefe ii maintained i apcrfeiiton compleat andfuU. IKigh-teoufnefs fignifics (<w » faid) a conformity to the Rule, and a conformity with A quacGiius or an imperfeSl rectitude is not a true conformity or rcctituie at all ■■ Imperfect Rightc-oufneji is not Righteoufneji but unrighicoufnef. It is a contraiiclion in adjcdo ; Though holinejS be aci^iowlcdged to be imperfect in all rcfpecls, where perfc^ion is expe-Ited, in reference to the degree that it Pmild obtain, or the degree which it foall obtain, or in reference to the excellent object, about which it is cxcrctfed, or .in reference to the old Covenant, or the dtreSIive, and in fomc (enfe the preceptive part of the new Covenant ; In aUthcfe rcfpeHs it ii imperfeii i and Righteoufnefs materially ccnfidcred if holiuefs, and therefore thui impcrfcH : butJormxUyconfidered, tt iiperfect 7{ighteoiifnefs or none i this not in relation to the old Rule, but the new (Covenant.'] Upou thii account they arc charged withgrofs ignorance, that ufc and underjiand the word Righteous and Righteoufuels as they relate to the old Rule j a/i if the godly were called Rightcoxs ( bcfidcs their imputed Kighteoufr.cfs ) only bccaufe their fuuit if cation audgooi worlds have ($me imperfect a-greement with the Law ofw^rl^s- Th'u ani much more to ajfert a per foval perfect inherent Righteoufnefs, as is faid: all which as it is here hcli out, is new to me, and t muji con^ fe(i my (elf inigHoran.e all ever. I never too^i imperfect Righteoufnefs to imply any fu.h contradict ton, any more then imperfcil bolincfs.

R. B.T^ He child opinion you rife againlt, is that which yoiitaketobe mine, X as yoLii- citing my-words doth nianifcll: but you confefs your fdf uncertain whether ynii undi:riland ic or not. There is a pofllbilicythcu thac when you do undciltand me, you may prove your felf ot the fame Opinion.

Inthem:3n time it is your Rcafons which muft juliifie your ftrong diflear, which I rti.ill heboid to ex:t:ninc. When- you fayj I [do no: only alFerc a per-" fonal inherent Righ-.coufncfsj as well as iinpiitcd, a^ainlt the Antinomians, but alfo affirm that this Riijhtcoufnefs is perfect,] 1 Rcpiy : Richer 70U fuppofc the

G later

C4»D

later propofition to be sn adJiiion to the former, in terms onlyj or in fenl'c alio : If only inicrmi, the fcnfe being the fame, I fuppofe you would not oppofe ir. Ifinfenfe, then it is either fomcwhac ical, or fomcwhat modal, wliichycu fuppofe the later to adde to the former: Real it is not, for Rcs(^ per feci loRci, arc no: aiftinguiflicd as Rests'Kts, but as R4s(^ Modia. It is thctcforc but a modal ad-<iition. And it is fuch a JV;oi«as is convcrtibU with En/. And therefore there is as much imported in the fiiil P.opoficion [We have a perfonal inherent Ri^hte-oufncfs] as in the fecond [We have a perfcfk perfonal inherent Rithtcouf-ncis.] For Ens (^ Fcrfccfiim arc as convertible as Evs (g* Bomm, or Em (^ Vtrum.

%You adde [ If it were Bieantonly of thepcrfedionof thcfubjc(5tj as'oppofcJ to hypocriliejCiT'f, or of the pcrfcdion or entircncls of iheobjcft (refptiflin^ no: only One or SomCjbut All Commandments) which is called aperfcttionofpartSj we miijhr readily aflent to it.] ' "

To which I Reply : i. Your terms are uncouth tome, but! will do my beft to guefs at your meaning. A pcrCeftion of the fubjed is perfc^id effentialis vcl ac ddentalfs. The former is no more but e^efubjdium, verc (^ pYoprii. The later may be varioufly taken, according to the variety of acciden-^s: But certain I am that the fubjcft is impcrtcft, quod di ptrfcHionan accidcm^lcm. And tlicrcforc in this large exprtfllonj you fcem to fay much more then T. You and I, who arc the Uibjefts of Ri^htcoufncfsjareimperfeft, though perfcftly Tubjeds.

2. That which you call here pcr/cf?/o/M^;£^«, is nothing but the truth of tfie immediate fubjedj aslunderftand you. ^uftitia eft velcaufje,velperfoKiie^, velfat' tern confiderata vcl ut caufa vcl ut perfonx. C'^uf'i eft fubjeHim pro^^imum: Terfo?u eft fubjeciumprmun^principalc. ^uftttia caufx, eftvcla^iommvclhjihjtttumautdijpo-fuioKU'i. Terfccit fmit babitKi (^ dijpofttioves, (j^ Armies vd perfectwne c^hauli Trivficnienulij^j^ ituperfecii [ii7ft, qituvcre i\\ni.(^ verd fitntii\cs :) vel pcrfeciiMe accidetnah : tT* ita aliquo modopcrfckit (^ alio imptrfc^i funt. It kcms therefore that you here lay as much atlcaltasl, for the perfedion of the wjncr of our inherent RighteouUiefSj ( if not more) for I am fure you fpcak more unlimi-tcdly.

5. I do charitably coaiedurCj that when you fpeak of [a perfcdion of theob-jcS] you do not mean as )ou fpeak, but you mean a perfedion of our Ads as they refped the objed, cxtenlively ( for whether you include or exclude intention, I know not.) Here muft I diltinguilh between objcds of abfolute nccclFity, (and foof the adsabt u: thole objcds) which a man cannot be juftificd or faved without: and i. Objcds of lefsncccffity (and fo ads) which its pofiTible to be ju-Ttificd and faved without. In regard of the former, I confcfs our ads may be faid to be [Truly ads that arc exercised about Uich objeds] if you will call tha: perfedion (as in a larger fcnfe you may :) But as to the later, 1 acknowledge no inch peixcdion. And therefore ( for that which you call [A peifidioa of parts] I acknowledge that every righteous man, hath a perfedion of the effcntial parts (that ?s. he wants thcin no;) but not of the integral alwaicsj muchlcfsot^acci-dentSi vvKfchare improperly called parts.

Ncxt you repeat fomt of my words, and then aJde [ All which as ic is here h;;ld cut, is ne\i; ro me, and I muft confefs my felf in ignorance all over.] R^ply : I cannot ^clp that, but I will do towards it what lean, chat it may be nonecf my laiilt: and therefore will let you know my meaning. And in opening the. fenfc and nature of [Perfedion] I cannot give you more of my minde

C4J1

in a narrow room, then Schibkrhithhiddownin Mctdph.l.i.c.ir. ^erfecfumtfi cui ad.effentium vihil deeji. Scaligcr Excrcit. 140. p.470. Omne qutd cjf, ftht efl, o* bonum, lytotum, O' pcrfe^um. It is a Metaphifical Tranfccndental Pcrfeftioa that I fpcak of, which hath no contrary in Being j which confilfcth in the pve-^ fenccofallthingsneccflary to Being : and that only of an infciiour, dciired Being, fuch as the creature is J for we meddle not wich the infinite Di>inc Being or perfcdon} Nordo wctakc JLE in a comparative fenfc, but in an abfolute: this beingaP.ighrcoufnefs perfcft in irskindc, though a more pcrfcifl kindc accidentally, may be found out: \t?.kck i?.zhc( vc^miiialitcr then participalitcr : but ftill remember that I take it not dc pcrfcBionc dcddeHtali, fed cQcntUU. /^nd therefore I ftiU maintain that in feveral accidental relpcfts oar Rightcoufnefs is im-pcrfcft.

Now to know how our Righteoufnefs is efTcntially pcrfeft, let us confider what isclTential toit. Its form is a Relation of ouradionsand difpolltionsim-mcdiatly, and our fclvcs remotely, as compared with the Law or Rule. This Law ( befidcs the confticution of the reward and punifliment confidered in them-felvcSjof which we now fpeak not) dotli i. Conltitutc ( I mean efficiently determine) what Ihall be our duty in general. 2, It detcrmincth more fpccially, what part of this duty, fliall be the condition of our Jultihcation and falvation, fine qui mn. When we coine to be judged at Gods barrc, he that hath performed the condition fhall be juftified, though he have omitted much of the other duty : but all that have not performed the condition fliall be condemned. (But remember of what it is that this is thf condition : vi^. of the new Law of grace, whofe ofScc is to make over tons Free remiflion of fins, and falvation through the fatisfadion and merits of Chrilt: and not the conditionof that Law, which gives the reward direftly for the work) Take up altogether then, and you will lee that I. Righteoufnefs is formally a relation : i. And that not of our Anions or dif-pofitions to the mcer precept of the Law, determining of duty as fuch, (commonly called the moral Law j) bu: I. to thcLaw, as determining of the condition oflife or death j 2. to thepromifeand threatning of that Law, which are joyned to the condition. So that [to be lighteous] lignifieth (^ quoad IcgemnovarH) ihclc two things; i. ll^ouobligattudd pttuam, (^ cui dcbctur pr<imium.2 2. [ei^/coH-ditioncm impuniutis, (^ pramii prajlitit.'] The fii ft qucUion in judgement being \_Anfit ohligdim ad pxnam, vd uon i (^ an premium fit dcbitum ?] therefore the former is our firil and principal righteoufnefs, and here to be pleaded. But before the firft qiieftion can be determined, the fccond muft be raiixd and rcfolved, [^Utrum prAjlititconditior.cm P] And here the fecontl is our Righteoufnefs ( conditi' omspneftitio) by which we mufl anfwer the acciifation IConditioncm vonpr^efiiiit.'j Thatis, [Ke lived and died an unbeliever or impenitent.] Sothat 3. You fee that our fiift Righteoufnefs iMoureatitspantS: vcl jus ai impuniutem (^ ad pra' tnium,'] asitrcquircth Chrifts perfed fatisfadion, 3iSamcdiHm to it, by which all the charge ot the Law of works, muft be anfwcrcd j fo it rcqui'es our performance of tfee conditionef the Law of grace, as another medium, by which Chrift and his benefits are made ours, and by which the falfe accufation of [biingunbe-lievers and impenitent, and I'o to be condemned by the Law ot gra^c it fclf, us having no part in Chrift] muft beanfwercd, and we juftified agiiult it. 4 It is not only tht form of our righteoufnefs, that is traiifcendentey pcrfcd, but alfo the matter, as futh, as it i3 the matter: that is, thefubjcct idiuns and i"ifp;fitionSj arc fub^cds truly capable of that relation. All this is no more but that it is a

G 2 true

true Rigbtcoufncfs, and not equivocally or falfly fo called : andfo that even the matter or fubjcft, is ically the matter orfubjcft of fuch a Righteoufncrs, f. The form here beiiu a rclaiion, initfclf, admits not cf degrees. 4. The matter or fubjcft (curdirpofuions and adions ) though qudmMcria, they hare the forel'aid metapiiyiical pcrftdi .n, yet coijfidtrcd in it fcU, or conlidered in reference to the meerprcctpi; of i!. Law, ard fo in itiineer morali v, it is impcrfcd. AsSchibler faith, OnrncperfcBiimcfl e vj .- 0/ omucau eflperfcctumtraiifccHdenuli, CycJJcntuU perfi^ionc: Duolmnmaimodh adhttcpojjuni crittavtcdriimptrfcils. i. ^cctdenuli' ter,quod fcilicct dcfit id quod .d vne^ntitcm vcl Oruamevtum, vcluUieremf^ intentio-rcm nutumpcttiv.ct. EtfiibbdC impcrfiUiOJic ctUm continetur imperfe^to, qux efl in dcfeclupiriiiimmitcrtx mium princfulium^ Ndm materiapertinct Ad ejfcntialcm per-fcciioHcm, (e Ud complctur fat is (nimdum partes prtncipdks in toto httcrogcnco, qua/u^-cientes [unt ad radicandam (^ (ujlcutanddm forrtum, mamfefto ivdicio, quod ablatii parttbui minui principalibus, manet prior Jpccics. Vclitti fi humo (sf carat pcdibus, (^ brackiis(^vafo(^ oculii.adhuctimcji cii bomo,Scc. ^tquc it a per iblationem psrttum. minus pnmpUium pibil adbiic dcejl quod pcrti7iC4tadtranfcejidtfualcm pcrfec{ionem,qutx cjfnitialis rjl ipfius borr.inis. A^quc ita homo adhuc cji perfcSlehomo, (s' pcrfeifccits: indcquc iiccbactmpcrfcclioiic toUitur pcrfcHie tranfcendeutjlii.Scc. z. To[funt vocari cntia'ilmpcrfecla'] iomparate, quod fcilicct jiOHbabcantflfentiam tsinpcrfc^am0' no-bilcm, quam alia. Tta materiatQimperfecta, quia mn fit, tarn mbilcensacJorma^Scc. Hxc igitur impcrfcciioiterum von ttUtt per fell iovem travfccndentalcm, quo mimls tran-fcendenter, perfect a dicamur qux fie [ant imperje^a, I. i .c 11.

In both ihcfc rcfpcds I confefs and maintain that our Righteoufncfs is imper-feft : that is 1. Our graces, holinefi, obedience, good works, are gradually imper-fedj yea eft mmcro, as well as gradu. i. The Rightcourncfs which we have in or from Chrifts pcricft fatisfadlion and merits, is a Rightcourr.cfs of a more noble and pcrfed kinde, then this inherent Righteoufncfs required by the Law of grace : for the later ftmds in fubordination to the former, as a neceffary meani, i.e. condition to make it ours. Omnctamenciiscjl perfecJum, von folumiu genere cutis, fed etiamingcncretalft ctitis,Scc. Et ficetiam materia, cifi in compantionc ad alia entia, fit fat if imperfecta, tamen in ftto genere hibet omnino perfect ioucm, veque fie deeji ci quicqiiam corum, quxad ipfiiis cjfcpcrtt7ient.Sch\h.ubi jupv.y,^.

The like doftrine haihCalovim -Ttlctapbyf.Divin. p. 246J&C. dc perfect me, fully: where of our imputed and inherent Rightecufncfs, he faith, Prior denominationc €xtrinfeca,poUeriorintrinfeca,utfaqueveri, Ctrcaliter,ipfiscompctit. And thtfe are two of his ForifiT.esj Pcrfcaio non admittit migis (3" minus ; and Pcrfccto ntbilpctefl accedereveldecedere. Multirudcs might quickly be cited to the fame purpofe with thcfe abovcfaid, but that it is fo known a cafe.

And thus I have done what at prcfcnt I thought my duty, that it might not be my fault that ycu are [in ignorance all over.] But I have faid the Icfs -becaufe I have lately more exadly opened the nature of our Righteoufnefs, in Anfwer to the Animadverfions of another Learned Brother.

Youadde [ I never rook impcrfcft Rightcoufnefs to imply any fuch cantradi-ftion, any more then imperfect holinef*.] Reply: i. Holincfs is taken 1. For [the relation of a Perfon or Thing dedicated to God :] and fo 1 confefs it admits not of a magis or minus any more then Rightcouiiuls. 2. Bur our common ufe of the v/ord [Holinefs] when about perfor.s, is for the qualities or adions of a fpiri-tually-renewed man : and fo I further fay ; i. That this alfo hath its tranfcen-dental peifcdion, as well aj Rightcoufnefs. But here's the dirfcrence ( which if

you

r

C453

youaddcto what is faid before, you will more fully fee my thoughts.) Hcljnefs thustakcn is a quality, which though it have the truth of ISeing, yet is intended and remitted^ or dothrccipcre magUis' tninus. Rightecufnefs is a relation, which in fusformali is not intended or remitted. Nay if you will cxsftly open it, it will appear that the Righteoufnc's in qiieftion is a Relation founded in a Relation ( the real conformity of cui Ads to the Law or Rule, as it dctermincth what (hall be the condition.) Ycauioie, ihn the \c:y fubjccfumprcximitmhujasreldtior.h, itcc intcnditur ncc remittitur ; and this is it that 1 mean by perfidion, btiulcs the fore-faid tranfcendental peitcdicn. But i bccaufe theft things a; c (XiBioris indigiti-onis) undcrllandihat the reafon of this my ailerticn lies here : The Law as it is the ruU' of obedience .doth requiic ptrfcA obedience in dei:ree ; and lo lictc is an impcrfcdion in ow adions in ihc degree, as being fhct of what the Rule riqui-rcth J and i: bcin;; tbefc aftionswith their habits that we call our holinefs {ibcffi-cicntc (S'' fine) thcicfoic we mult needs fayj Our holinefs is impcrftd ; And if our RiLhteoulnefs were to be denominated from ibis Law, commanding pcrfcdicn, we mull fay, not that fuch Righieoufnefs were imperfcft, becaufc the holinefs or obedience is impetfcd j but it is none at a'l, becaufc ihcyare iraperftft ; For ira-pcrfcd obedience or holnicfs is not a fubjcJl or matter capable of the relation of ^Righteous] according to that perfcd Law which condemneth them, and ad-mitteth only gradually-perfcft obedience, as capable matter, without which the form cannot be received. And fo our faith, repentance, and finccre Gofpel-obedience, as compared to this perfeft Law, arc no pcrfcA Riehtccufnefs, nor any Rightcoulnels at all: And lo this being the matter of our inherent Righteoufnefs, I fay, our faith and obedience are imperfcft ( though not imperfcft Righteouf-nefs, bccaule none) as thus compared. Bu: then the Law as it is the determinec of the conditions, on which Chrill and lite fliall be ours, hath made the matter or immediate fubjcd, to be ?w punBo, as it were, fo that it cannot be more or lefj, becaufe it is the finccrity only ofour faith and obedience, that ismade the condition of Life, and not the gradual perfcdion. So that when we mull be juftified, theQiicftion willnot be, [Haft thou believed and obeyed pcrfedly ?] but [Haft thou done it Truly.] So that no imperfedion of the matter confiftent with lin-cerity, makes it lefs capable of the form, nor no perfcdion of degrees makes it capable of more of the form. The condition here is as truly performed, by true believing and obedience, in a lower meafure, as in a higher; yea and this true performance is as full a Righteoufncfs ( in relation to this part of the Law) as if the matter of faith and obedience weie more pci fed : The Itrongell faith doth not make you Righteous in a higher degree, then the wcakcft that is true: For the ftrongeft is but prxfistiocemiitmiu ( which is the Righteoufncfs in qucftion) and fo is the weakcft. It is not therefore from this ad of the Law (determination of theccndicion) that our graces or duties, are diverfificd as more or lefs perfcd in'degree, but it is in rcfped to the other ad or part of the Law ( determination of duty, asluch.) So thatina word. Duty limply as duty, and holinefs, or fupernaiural grace, as luch, may be more or lefs. But holinefs and duty, as the uMatcriA rcqupta vel (ubjc^um proximum ^ujiiti£, confjlit in indivi-fibili.

Only let it be rf membred, that I fpeak this of the promife of impunity and glory cveilafting abfoluteiy conlidered, and not of a comparative degree of gloty : For ic may be yet conliftent with thisj that a greater faith,!ovc and obediencfij may have a promife of greater glory.

G 3 Remem-

Remember alfo I pray you ( ityou willdo me juftice) i. That I did only afr fcrc Jnniy Aphmifmcs [ i. A mctaphylicaf pirfedion of Being, and z. A pc:-fcdion oMuffi:ifncy in order lO i:s end] in oui-ri^htccarrvcl's ; a. And the fame tranfce.ndeiua! perfcdio.'i of Bcio:^, I affirmed ot hoirnefsic fclf, only adding, tba:itbe:n^ a Qua'iiy may be"intended and remitted, but Rightccurncfs being a Relation canno: ex pirw/w. Now which of thcfe perfcdlions of Riijhtc-oufnefsdo you deny ? N?: that of fufticicncy as to the cndjatyou cxprcdy affirm. It muft therefore be the tranfccndcnia! perfcdion of EfTencc. An i if that be denied, then righteournefs is no rightcoufnefs : for fo omue enspcrfcHum ejl: Ani then you muft maintain that it is but equivocally called righteoufners, but indeed isnotl'n. But yet this I findc you no: about, but ratherconfefs the contrary, not only by affirming inherent Ri^hteoufneis, but alfo affirming a double pcrfedioa of it, which you are plcafed to call fubje(flive and cbjedive, and which can be no lei's then I here affirmed.

§. 19. M' Bl.'-'^ r Saiah Imfure fxitb. All our Rightcoufnefs arc as filthy rags, 1(i 6/^.6. ^Hs gfcitcr charge ofimpcrfcclion an lye Agiinfi the mofi imperfcH holincji, thevthe'ProphetUiesupjnourRighieoufncjS. ^'-^Heithcr do I underjlani htwbolniejS JJ}OuU be imperfeS tA^icn mxterinUyiHni rigbteeufneji perfect, taken formally ih reference to a Rule.

■w:

§• 2^.

Aphor. I afferted, ferre to warrant the Prophets comparifon, without our denying the perfedion of Being ? That is, that it is truly Righ-teoufnefs ?

i. My opinion of that Text is, that the Prophet means plainly, [We are an unrighteous people,] or [wc have no other Rightcoufnefs to glory of, but what jsindeed no rightcoufnefs a: all, no more then the liltby ra^^s areclean] no nor To much J for they nay poffibly have fome part clean. Yet that this is called Rightcoufnefs, is no wonder, when the next words are Negative, q.d. [our Rightcoufnefs is none j oris unrigtueoufnefs :] yea it is not imufaal to give the name either from common eilimation; or the perfons profeflion, and cfpecially from thofe adions which ule to be the matter of Rightcoufnefs, though the form being wanting, they are not now aduallytHe matter. So I think ?o/owzfl?j forbiddeth ovecmuch Rigtsttoufncfs. Further, it's confiderablc, what Rightcoufnefs it is that the Pfor)het there fpcaks of, whether univerfal or particular ? and whether Legal, confiilin? in abfolute pertedton > or Evangelical, confilUng in fincerity ? and alio whether he fpviak of himfclf and each individual,or only of the Jewilh Nation defcrioed according to the generality or main part of them.

g. As for that ncxtpalHge, where you tell us what [you underAand not] I confefs it feems ftrangeto me: but I hope youmakjitno argument againft the opinion which you oppofc. If it were a good argument indeed, then the lefs a manunderftands, the better he might difpuce. Bat lee us fee what it is that you underftand not. i. [ How holinefs fhould be imperfcd taken materially ?] Sure you undsrftand that; for what elfe did you mean in the foregoing words, [No

greater

C473

greater <h«tgc of imperft^ion can lye againft th* mcft impuTeftholinefs?] 2. It is therefore, no doubtj theother brqr.ch that you mean, how [Rightecul-nefs is perkft taken formally in reference to a Rule] i. That Righteoufncfs in Jcnfu LcgaUis' jorevfiissi iclacionconfifting in a confcrmiiy, or congnicncy to the Rule, I luppofeyou underf^and, feeing both Schoolmen, and ProteiUnt Divines do fo commonly affirm !t: e.g. Scoius and Df TwiJ^ oh- z. That omnc em eft^jfentiditcr fcrjcHwn, I fuppofe alfo you undcrfland : and io that this Relation muft be a pcrfed Relation, or none at all: where there is the form, thercis ilie being > and thereiorc the word tRii^iJtecufncfs] fpokcn firmditcr of our Righteoufncfs, muft needs csptcfs that which is truly Ric,hteoufnefsj and not etjuivocally fo called. 3. Yial fuppofe you undcrftand, that Relations do not admit oimagU and mirm ex purtc fm, but cniy when they are founded in quality, cxpiiTtefitnhmcntivelfubjcHt: At lealHf any,would deny tfear, yet the relation in t^uettion, being of the nature of [Parixy,] and not of fimilitude ou y, (which are both implied in conformuy) doth not fo mi^ch as rati'eiic fusJr.nenti idmh oi imenfion or remiflit^n. Thefe things being all l6'gcr,cra!ly acknowledgedjyou leave ir.e only to admitt tVia: you Ihduld fay, Ycucndeiftand thcrti not.

W Bi:\Tl7Emay {fer ought I k^iovo) hsvpcU mafieholm^formaV, avdrefcrreit \ ^■'toa RulCi and. Rightcoufntjs mAtcruU, tn an abfelutc (ovlidcrati07i,vPiibout reference to xii). Rule laaU.

§.30. 3^B. i.T 7C/Heihcr ycu take hclinefs as fignifylng a Quality or ReIation,there V V j$ no doubt but it hath its form, or elle it could no: have a Being ? Did you indeed imagine that I had denied that ? z. But that holincfs in our coaamon ufc of the word, doth formally corflil in the relation of our qualities or aftstothcLaw, efpecially in that relation of conformity^that we arc now fpeaking of, I finde not yet proved. Holineis taken for the qualities and ads themfelv6s, is no relation. Hdlinefs taken for Dedication to God, is fuch akinde of Relation as Donation is: It referrcs to God as the tcrrmnm: For omne(u7i^um eft T)eofan-Ifum. But to be [Dedicated to God] and to be [ccntcrmed to the Law or Rule] arc not all cne. 5. If you or any man refelvc to u(c holinefs in the fame fenfe as righteoufncfs, if I once know your mindcs, I will not connadift you, forlfinde nopleafure in contending about words. But for my fcIflmuU ufe them in the common fcnfe, if I will be undei flood. 4. That ycu m.ay ufe the word [Righte-oufncis] materially, without relariontoany Rule, is as much as tofay. We may dcnomw3te a materiafijiefcritja. The form is relative. Ifyoamean, Wc may denominate that which hath a form, fvom th; matter, and not ficm the form, then I Hcply, I. Then you muft not denominate properly and logically : z. And then you mufl not caU it Righteoufiwfs ; except you mean ludtre xquivoeh^ and fpeak de^uftiiixpirticuliiri ethicu auafuim cuiqiie tribuitntu, when wc arc fpeaking de'^pfti-tiaLegdi,Civili,Forevfh called by tfee Schoolmen ^nfiitia unnerfalii in our cafe. I am not of the Papifts mindi. ihjt make our Righteoufncfs to be cur new qualities, 3ix\6. confound ^uftitiam O" SahMttutcm, (j'inde "^uftifieatmem (sr SmiBifcii-tiQnem.

§. 31.

[483

§. ii.

M' 2/. A '}(din fuchconfilerit'ton I do net hjtorv hove xhencinbepcrfcHion or inpcr-l\feclien cither in bolinej? or righieoufacf: It ;V i/s they come up to,orfaHJ}}ort tfthe Kule,tbit they biuc the demmiiution of perfect ton or impcrfeBion.

R.S. ''AT the fii-ft view, the firlt lentence feemcd To ft'-angc to me, that I /ithoughc it mccteit tofay nothing, bccaufe it is Icarcc capable of any apt anfwer bat what will leem fliarp or unmannerly, For that which ycu fay you may confiJcr, is fomething or nothing : If foaicthing, and yet not capable jfper-fcdion or imperfection, it is fuch a fomeching as the world never knew till now. But upon fecond thoughts 1 finde that^e;«/fmi your words may be born: For it is nothing that you fpeak of. Legal Rightcournefs not relaped to the Law or Rule, is Hething: And 'l{othi7tg cannot be more pcrfed or lefs 3 mfi negativd. But that holincfs taken for fpiritual habits and ads, can have neither pcrfeftion or imperfedion j or that they are capable of no perfedion or imperfeftion in any other fcnfe, but as related > nor yet in any Relations to God, or the pcrfon dedi-catingjfavc only in the relation to the Rule J all thelcfor the firil reafon fliall have no anfwer but a recital. .". , ■,„.^ "'"

§• J*. M' 2/.p AulV GojpcLjrime, whether you voitl all it righteoufnefs or hoUnefs U fet out -*■ Iamfurc,Ilom.7.fnUofimpcrfeiiioni yetaUtkif ts in reference to the Rule, as is tinfrvcred, or fell flmt in conformity to it, verf.ai, I delight in the Lave of God after the inner mau.

§. 31. 21.3. i.TSnot [Righteoufnefs] or [Holinefs] as Scriptural, as Logical, as Aplainatcrm, and as fit for Difputants, as [Gofpel-frame ?] Till I know whether by [GofpeUframe] you mean. Habits, Ads, Relations (and what Relations) or what elfe^ I fliali pafsitas uncapableota better Reply, i. Did not I acknowledge exprelly as much imperfcdion as you h:rc affirm of TrfZi/s frame? Why then do you intimate by your arguing as if I did not? J. There is a twofold Rule, or adion of the Law, which our Habits and Adions do refped, as 1 have ott fald. The firft is the Precept determining of Duty (imply. This all our Adions and Habits come lliort of, and therefore no man hath a Righteoufnefsconfifting in this conformity. The fecond is the promilc, or that ad going along with the promife, whereby Gad determincth of the condition, Thisistwofold : One of the Law of Nature and Works; and according to this no man is Righteous: for the condition and the duty are of the fame extent, it being obedience gradually perfcd, tha: is here the condition. The other is of the Law of G.acc i which determincth what fliall be the condition of our Right to Chiift and Life. Pm<1 never complaineth of an imperfc&ion of Eilcncc, ofthij laft. It is of the former that he fpcaks. Thcfe nccefliry things l^ould not be

hidden.

J

hidden, by confounding the fevcral Rules, or Offices of God» Law, which fo tf-

ptrntl/ diffev.

M' Bl. A Nd whereas a charge of igr.orance U laid even upon learned Teatbcrs, thit

•^"^ commonly under/land the word iRighteoufMjS'] And [Kightcotu] at it r»-fers to tfre old Rule, IprofejS my felfto have little ofthctr Learning.bm I am voboUy theirs in tbii ignorance. 1 k^iorv no other Kulcbut the old Rule, the Rule of the TA^ral Law »tfr4l it with me a RmU, a perfeH Rulejaiid the only Rule.

X;B.rjIther lam an incompetent jadge, through partiality, orclfe yeu had Cdonebu: the part of a friend,-yea of a candid advcrfary, to have taken inthcrcft ofmy words, which mull make up thefenfej which were thefe lAsif ibegodly vtere called Rigbteoia ( bcftdes their impiaed righteoufnefs ) only becaufc thtir fanHif cation and good worfit have fame imperfcH agreement to the Lawofxvor^s.'] I pray let the word [oa/y] be remembred. z. It is bu: in this one point that I (barge them with Ignorance. And who is not ignorant in more points then one ? If it be fo proud and arrogant a fpecch as fome other Brethren have affirmed it to be, then erery man is proud and arrogant that differs from another, and difputeth the difference. For I cannot differ from any man unlefs I fuppofe him to Errc: And doubtlefs every man is fo farre Ignorant as he Erretb. Muft I then differ from none ? yea from no Learned Divines ? Why then when one aftirmeth and another denieth, I rauftbeof bothfideSj for fear of cenfuring one fide as Ignorant or Erroneous. 3« I confefs I was not well acquainted with the genius of many of my Reverend ani.4 truly Honoured Brethren. 1 thought that no godly man would have taken himfelf wronged, if a man told him, he had Error, no more then to tell him he had (in. I took it for granted that bumanum eft errare, and that we know but in part, and that fandifying grace had To farre deftroyed pride, and made the foul apprehenlive of its imperfcdion, that, at leaiJt, men of eminenc godlioefs could have endured patiently to hear that they are not omnifcient nor infallible, and that they have fome ignorance with their eminent knowledge ? and why no; in this point as well as another ? If any think that I arrogate that know-ledg,ctomy fclf whichldeay to them: I reply, So I do in every cafe wherein I differ from any man living: For if I thought not my judgement right, it wcec not indeed my judgement: and if I thought not his opinion wrong, I did noc differ from him. But if they will affirm that therefore I do either vilifie :he«, or prefer my felf in other things, I hope they will bring better proof of their affirms* tion. For my own part I unfeignedly profefs my felf confcious of much more ignorance then ever I charged on any ofmy Brethren in the Miniftry : yea I muft profefs my felt ignorant in a very great part of thof« Controverfies, which ace moft commonly and confidently determined by my Brethren. I fpeak not all this as to M'fi/. but to other Brethren that have madefo {grange an expofition of this ono word, and of one more/)4g. 51. [Vulgar Divines] as that they can thence conclude and publifh me a {lighter and contemner of my Brethren: As if they that knovi England, could be ignorant, that the Churches among us have many fucb guides, as may well be called Vulgar Divines: Take them by number, and

H judg*

jaclge (in thofc Coumici thit I am acquainted In ) whether the greater nombet beofthc Profound, or Subtillj or Angelical, or Scraphital, or Iirefragablefott ofDoftorj? or equal to fome of thefe Reverend Excepters, tvhofc worthlcon-fcfs fo far beyond my mcafurc, that bad I fpokecrf ttcmas Vulgar Divines, they might well have been offended. But O that it were not true that there arc fuch, chrough tnoft oiEngUnd, Jf^ales, and JreUni (if any) on condition I were beund CO Recant at every Market Crofs in England, with a fagot on my back > fo be h there were the fame number of fuch choice men, as fome of thefc my offended Brethren are in their flead. And then who knows not that the Vulgar or ordinary weaker Teachers, do take up that opinion, which is mofl in credit, and which is delivered by the moft Learned Doftors whom they moft reverence ? So that the fumme of my fpeech caa be no worfe then this; [ It is the moft common opinion] which is all one as to fay [It is the opinion of the Vulgar Divines and foroe of the Learned, the other part of the Learned going the other way,] which is it that men ccnfure for fuch an approbrious, injurious Ipeech. Yet I will not wholly excufe ir, nor this that M'B/. toucheth upon. I confefs it was fpokea too carclefly, annaannsrly, harfhly, and I fbould better have confidered how ic might be taken.

As for M'B/^tc's profefHon [That he hath little of their Learning, btt Is wholly theirs in this ignorance,] I did flill think otherwifc of him, and durfl not fo have defcribed him : but yet my acquaintance with him is not fo great, as that I (hould pretend to know him better then he knows himfelf j and I dare not judge butthat hcfpeaksas he thinks. Let me be bold to (hew him part of that which he faith he is wholly ignorant of: That [ our perfonal inherent Riohteoufnefs, is not denominated from the old Lav? or Covenant, as if we were called Righteous (beCdesour imputed Righteoufnefs ) only becaufe our fanftification and good works have fome imperfeft agreement to the Law of Works] I prov* thus:

1. Ifno man be called Righteous by the Law of Works, but he that perfeftly obcyeth ( fo as never to fin ) then no imperfeft obcycr is called Righteous ( ki^ ie(}uJvoci) by that Law. But the Antecedent is true, Therefore fo is the con-feqwcnt.

■ i. If the Law of Works do curfe and condemn all men, then it doth not judg« them Righteous (^nifi aquivfce-) Butit doth curfe and condemn all men; There-fore,e7'<r.

3. If the Law of Works do judge us Righteous for our works (taking rigbte-•»» properly and not equivocally) thenwemuftbe juftified by our works, according to that Law : Lex (ii.) eft norma juiicii: <y ornnU -dcr) jujlus, eftjuflifcandua. ^flificatio Legis e(i virtualiter jufiifcatio judicU. He thatcondemneththe Juft is an abomination to God. But we muft not by the Law of Works be juftified by out works : Therefore,^c.

4. He that is guilty of the breach of all Gods Laws, is not dendminated Righteous (vifi aquivoci) by that Law : But we break all Gods Laws: Therefore. Yea he that offendeth in one is guilty of all. Rcade Brochmoud in ^ic.i.io. and ^acob.Liurentius,iT\d'7aulusBurge7ifij (in Lyra) on the fame Text. Vtd.(^Plii-ttmm in Thtfib. Salmurienf. Vol.i.pag 29.§.i jjji/r. iVottw dc Rccondl' Part.i. l.i. c.5.n. 16. TveiJS. Vindic Grat. li.t. part.i.c.i 5. pag. {vol. minore) 2 14. col.z. See whether yours or mine be the Proieftamsdoftrine. Here, it ever, its true, thatflor 9um eft ex caufts integjrif.

y. If imperfcft works are all finnes or finfull, then they arc not oar Rightc-oufnefs according to the Law of works. ( For it juftifieth no man for his fins.) But the former is true : Therefore the later. I doubt not but you know the ftatc of the Gontrovcrfie on this points between us anel the Papifts.

6. If the Law of works do denominate a man righteous, for imperfcA workj (which truly and properly are but a lefs degree of unrighteoufncfs) then it feems that all wicked men (if not the damned) arc legally righteous : For they committed not every aft of fin that was Sorbiddcn them, and tbeiefore are not unrighteous in the utmoft pofiible degree. And the Law of works doth not call one degree of obedience [Righteoufnefs] more then another, except it be perfift. But certainly all the wicked are not Legally Righteous (^nt^dtquiv^i^) There-fore,6r'c.

7. If our Faith, Repentance and fincere Obedience, maybe, muft be, and is, called our Righteoufnefj, as it is the performance of the conditions of the new Covenant, or Law of Grace, then (at leall) not only as they have an imperf«.ft agreement with the Law of Works. But theantccedem is true? Therefore the confequent.

Let us next perufe Mr. 2/rf^e*s Reafons, why [ He is wholly theirs in this ignorance.] He faith [ I know Mother Rule, buttheold Rule, tbe Rule of the morall Law i that is vettb me a Rule, a perfect Rftle, sni the $nly Kule.'] Rep. Sei diftivgucn-dumejf. The morall Law is taken either for the entire Law of works confilting of Precept and Sanction ( and that either as it is themcer Lawefna'urc, or as comaining alfo what to Adam was fuperadded ) or elfe it is taken only for the meer preceptive part of a Law, which is not tbe whole Law. In the later lenfe, it is taken i. For the preceptive part of the Law given ^to ^iiw. 2. Forthe preceptive part of the Law of nature redelivered by Mojcs. J. For the preceptive partof the Law of nature, now ufed by Chrifl: the Mediator, as part of his own Law. ». Wejnuft diliinguifh of a Role. 1. There is the Rule of obedience, orwhat fhall be </«c ^ow»4.« This is the precept (under which I comprehend the prohibition, it being but praceptumienonagendu.) i. There is the Rule of reward, determining what fhail be due to us: This is thccondhional promife or gift, fofar forth asitdetermineth ie f^/opr«»;ro. 3. There is the Rule of pu-ninitnem, determining what (hall be due to man upon his fin : This is the threat-ning. 4. There is the Rule of the condition of the reward or punifliment, and of judging to whom they do belong, determining on what conditions or terras on their parts, men fhall be faved, or elfe damned J (though the fame afts were before commanded in the precept as they are duties, yet to conftitute them conditions of the promife, is a farther thing.) Thisisthe promife and threatning,as tbcy are conditional, or as they conftitute their own conditions. I think the folidity and great neceflity of all thcfe diftinftions, is beyond Difputc. Thefe things being thus, I. What confufion is it to talk of tbe moral Law being the only Rule, when it is not one thing that is called the moral Law ? and who knows what yoa mean ? i. How ftrange a thing is it to my ears, that you, even you, (hould lo w^o'/own this, and fo heartily profefs that you take the Moral Law for the ovlf Rule? Forfuppofe youtake it for the preceptive part of the Law of nature only (as I think you do:) i. That is but part of that very Law of na-ure : Doth not the Law of nature, as well as the pefitive Law, determine deTiebitopam, as well as dcDebiioo^dif and isa RuIeofpHniflimcnc as well asduty. i. Or if you took it for the whole Law of nature, is that the only Rule ? x. What fay you f«r mattee

•f duty, to ihepofulve Precepts of the Gofpcl ? of Baptifnij the Lords Supper, the Lords day, tbc Officers and GoYtrnmcnt of the Church.^T'c. Is the Law of nature the only Rule for thcfc ? If you fay, They are reducible to the fecond Commandment : I demand i. What is the fecond Commandmen: for the Affirmative part, but a general precept to wot fliip God according to his I'ofirivc Inftitution ? And doth this alone fuffice ? Doth it not plainly imply that there are and muft be pofitive Laws inlUtuting a way of worffiip ? z. Do you take the Vtcccpzdegeticre, to be equivalent to the Precepts dejp<(icbuif or to be afuffici-entRule without them ? if the Moral Law, or Law of Nature, be to you, the 9%ly KuU, and d^pcrfcSl Rule, then you need no other. And if God had only written the ten CommandmcntSj or only faid in general, [ Thou flialt worffiip God according to his pofitive Inltitutions] would it have been your duty to have Baptized, adminiftrcd the Lords Supper ? (^c Doth the general Precept conltitute this particular Ordinance as my duty? If no: ( as nothing more certain) then the general Law, is not the only Rule, nor fufficient in omnipine (though fuffi-titni\n[uogenere,(^ adpurtcm proprilim) fortheconftitution of Worfliipj Ordinances, Churchj Offices, ei/'c. or accjuainting us with our duty therein. Moreover, did Chrili in InlUtuting thefe Ordinances and Officers, do any more then was done before, or not ? If no more, i. It is fnperfluous. i. Shew where it vrasdone before, 3. Sure the fourth Commandment did not at once command both the fcventb day of the week and the firft. If more, then the former was not fufficient, nor is now the only Rule.

Moreover, doth not the Scripture call Chrift a Lawgiver ? and fay. The Lnvf JhiUge outof2ion,8cc. Ifa.x.i. And is he not the Anointed King of the Church ; and therefore hath Legiflative power ? And will he not ufe the principal part of his Prerogative ?

z. I think the Moral Law, taken either for the Law given to Aiim or written in Tables of flone,i s not a fufficient Rule to us now for beleeving in Jefus Chrift; no nor the fame Law of nature, as ftill in force under Chrift. For a general command of beleeving all that God revealeth, is not the only Rule of our faith j but the particular revelation and precept are part. Aad a general command to fub-mit to what way God ftiall prefcribe for our juftification and lalvation, is not the •nly Rule, but that particular prefcript is part. And a general command of receiving every offered benefit,is not the only or fufficient Rule for receiving Chrift, without the Gofpel-ofFer of him and his benefits.

J. And I fuppofe you grant that as mans foul hath an undcrftanding and a will, the former being a paiTage to the later, in the former praftical receptions being but initiate and imperfed, and in the later perfcded j To Laws have their prefaces declaring the grounds and occafions of them, oft times > and fo the Laws of God have their Narratives, Hiftories and Doftrines, concerning the grounds, the fubjeft, the occafionj^;'*;- as well as the more elTential parts, vii^. Precepts and Sandion. Thefe I fpoke not of before in the diitindions. Now do you indeed think that the Law of nature, or what ever you now mean by the old Rule and Moral Law, is the fufficient and only Rule of Knowledge, judgement and Faith ? I take it for granted that you will acknowledge the afTenting act of faith to be in the underftanding : and that the Word of God is the rule of this aflenc. Had you in the old Rule or Moral Law, a fufficient and only Rule for youi faith, in the Article of Chriits Incarnation, Birth, Life, Innocency, Miracles, Death, Biirialj KcrnncftioAj Ai^enTion^ full Dominion in his huinjune natutc ^tdte. Was this

Auide

C5J3

Article in the Creed before Chrifts coming lExceptyt leleevc^at I Atn he, ytfhM He in yeur^nnes ?] Befidesj matter of faith is alio matter of duty: for it is our duty to belecve all thcfe Truths. Bat I think it was then no mans duty to believe that this Jefus the fen of Afdrj'was the Saviour, before he was Incarnate J or to believe that Chrift^was Dead, Afcendedj^c. Therefore that which you call the Old Rule, is not as you fay the Only Rule of our Duty in Belce* ving.

4. But what if all this had been left out, and you bad proved the Moral Law, the only Rule of duty ? doth it follow that therefore it is the evly^nlc? Sure it is not the only Rule of rewarding 1 For if you take the ^4cra^ Law, for the rriecr preceptive part of the Law of nature, then it is no Rule at all of rewarding j folic is thcprcmifc, and not the precept that doth make due the reward. And if you take the moral Law for the whole Law of nature, ir is a very great Difpute whether it be ReguU pramiandi at allj much more as to that great reward which is now given in the Law of grace by Chrill ( your fclf deny 'n,pJg. 74 ) I dare not fay that if we had perfcftly obeyed, Everlaliing Glory in Heaven had been naturally our due. And for Rcmiflionof fin, and the Juftification ©f a iinncr,and fuch like, they aie fuch mercies,a$ I never heard the Law of nature, made the only Rule of our right to them.

f, The fame 1 may fay of the Rule of puniftiment. The privation of a pur» chafed, offered Rcmiffi'jnand Salvation,is one part of the pcnalcy of the new Law, of which the Moral Law can fcarce be faid the only Rule. (1{onc ojihim thatrvere hiddtn jhall tafte vj the Supper.

6. But the principal thing that I ifltend, is that the Moral Law is not the only Rule what fhall be the condition of Lite or Death: and therefore not the only Kule according t9 which we muft now be denominated, and hereafter fentcnced JuftorUnjuft. For if thcaccnfcr fay He hath not performed the conditions of the Law of grace, and therefore hath no ri'^^ht to Cbrifl and Life] or fay fimply that [we have no right to Remifl'ion and Salvation j] if we can deny the charge, and produce cur performance of the faid concitions, wc are then non-covdcmnandi, and the Law of grace, which giveth Chcilt and Life on thofc conditions, will juftifie us againlt that charge, of having no right to Chrii't and Life ; But I think fo will no: the Moral Law. The Law of works juftifieth no man but Chrift : therefore it is not the Law of works by which we are to be jiiftificd in judgement. But feme Law we muft be julfified by : for the Law is the Rule of judgement: and the word that Ghrift hath fpokcn fliall ludge us : therefore it muft be by the perfcft Law of Grace and Liberty. If it be then laid againll us ihat we are finsers againfl the Law of nature j we Ihall all have an.antwer ready [ Chriit haihmadc fufficient fatiifadion.] But if it be faid that we have norigiit to the pardon and rightcoufnefs which is given cut by vertue of that fatisfadion, then it is the Law of Grace, and not the Moral Law, that inuit juftifie us : Even that Law which faith [}Vbo[ttvcr beUcvctb Jl:dU iittperifi^Sic.'] Moreover deth not the Aprftle fay plainly, that Ichriii u the (Mediator of a better CavettMt, cfUbhjhed en better ptomifes: anitfthatfirft Covenant hxd been faultlej?, then fiieuldno phu have been fought for the fecond: but finding fault vwb them he j<«ifr, 7ich:ldihc dates come fiith the Lordthatl mkmalic a new Covenant,Sec.'] Hcp.8.6^7,8. v\hich fpcaksnotonly of Ceremonial precepts, but principally of the promifory part.

^ If yoa ftiould fay,Thi$ is th« Covenant and net the law. I Reply i .Then the law is not the enlj Kule. x.Its theiamc thing in feveral refpe^f that we call t-Law ^ a

Us CovcntK

C^4]

Covenant (except you mean it of our Covenant ad to God, of which we fpeak not.) Who knows no: that pr^»i/4r«(ir'p«M«Vc are ads of a Law ? and that an aft of oblivion or general pardon on ccr:ain terms, is a Law : and that the promifc is the principal part otihe Law of grace. So that I have nosv given you I'ome of my Rcal'onsjwhy 1 pielunjcd to call that L^noraacc] which I di4 not then know thac you would to Wholiy own.

§• ?4.

M' Bl. nr* He perfe^ion of thU holfnefi axi righteoufneJS in mins integrity, floed in the J. perfeH conformity to thii LdW ', and the reparation of this in our regenerate eSaxe (in vhub the tApoUleplaceth tbc Image of g»i) muji have reference as to god for a pattern, fo to bis Law as a Rule.

§• 34. R.B. 1.1 T was the very tranfccndentall pcrfcdion which is convertible with its ■■ being ( as to Righteouinefs ) which then itood in jperfed conformity to the I aw. Adamiiuvh'MRdlCm, was not only lefs righteous, bu: reut mortis, condcmnandua, and noc righteous in fenjuforenfi according to that Law. For I hope you obfe-rve that we fpeak not of that called Moral Righteoufnefi, con-liiHngin a habit of giving every man his own : but of 'fuUitiaforenfis.

I. There is a partial reparation of our holinefs in regeneration, but no reparation ef our perfonal inherent legal Righteoufnefs at all. Is Righteoulnefs by the Law of works ? I take this for dangerous dodrine.

§ 5?. Mr. 2/. \S AH Image carrying an imperfect refembUnce of its SampUr , k ^ AH Image j fo conformity imperfe^ly anfwering the Rule, it conformity H^ewifi.

l{iB. i.jnIther that Image is like the Samplar (asyoucalUt) In fomc parts and Cunlike in others, orelfeit is like in no part, but near to like. If the later, then it is but near to a true Ima»e ef that thing, and not one indeed. If the former, then it is nothing to our cale. i. Uecaufe it is ^ujlitiauuiverfAlis, and not particular is, that according to the Law of works mutt denominate the perfon righteous, and not-condemnable. i. Becaufc indeed no one word, adion, oc thought of ours is truly conform to the Law of works.

X. Similitude, as Scbtbler tels you truly, doth lie in punSfo as it were, and ex partefui admits not of magis or minus: and therefore flrOfe (^ pbilofopbite loquend» (faith he) that only is/fw'/e, which ispcrfedly fo : b\it vulgaritcr loquendo ih^it is called/Jwi/e, which properly is but minus difftmtlt. Scripture fpeab v«/gir/tcr often, zni not jiriHi and pbJlofophici, asfpeaking to vulgar wits, to whom it muft fpeak as they can underftand. And fo that may be called the Image or likenefs of Godj wbich participatccb of fo lauch of his excellency as that it demonflrateth ii to othas, as the cft'cd doth its caufe, and fo is Ufs unlike. God. I dare

noc

not once imagine^ that a Saint in hearen is like God in a UnA tai proper fenfe.

3. If all this were otherwife, it is little to your purpofe. For in this conformity of ours, there is fometbing of Quantitative refemblance, as well as Qualitative J and fo it hath a kinde of parity and equality in ic, as well as fimilitude to the Rule. And I hope you will yield it paft doubt, that parity admits not of magis dlfminiu, what ever (imilitude docb.

§. 36. M' S/.^Inccrity is faid to be the new Rule, or the Rule of the new Covenan^ji ^^ButtblfKnorule.but our duty, takirgthe abftraH for the concrete, fmceritj, for the finccrc vralfiing, and thU dccordmg to the rule of the Lavt, not to reach it, bux in iUfirts toiimat, and hxvc rc^icH to it. Then Iha'l I not be afliamed when I have refpe<a to all thy CommandmcmsjT/>/.i 19.6. jind this is our inherent rigb-tcoufHe^, vrhich in reference to its rule, Ubotirs under man) impcrfeeiiovs.

§ 36. R. B.l 7t 7 Hen I firft rcade thcfc word:,which you write in a different charafter, V V and father on me, I was afhamed of my Kow-fcnfe, for they arc no better: but it came not into my thou hts, once to fiifpcfi a forgery in your charge: Far was Hrom imagining that io Reverend, Pious and Dear a Fiiend, would tell the world in Print, that I faid that which never came into my thoughts, and confute that foberly and deliberarely,as mine,which I never wrote > and which any man that would reade my Book might hnoc, is wrongfully charged on me. And truly I dare not yet lay that you are guilty ef this: For though 1 have read my Book over and over of purpofe in thofc parts that treat of this fubjcft, andean finde no fuch word as you here charge me with ; yet before I will lay fuch a thing to your charge, I will fufpeft that it may pofllbly be in fome odd corner where! overlookt it, or cannot finde it. But I fee (if I am not overfcen ) how unfafe it is to report mens words themfelves, much more their opinions, from the reports of another, how Grave, Sober, Pious and Fritndly foever. If when we are dead, men Hiall reade Mr. S/i^c's Book that never read mine, and there fee it written that I faid [Sincerity is the new Rule, or the rule of the new Covenant.] Can any blame them to believe it, and report it of me, as from him, and fay \_lVhjx, fliAllI nothckevefttihand fuchamav, that reports uinexprejS words ?'\ But let th$ go, with this condufion : If indeed I liave fpokcn any iuch words, I rctraft them as jio«-fenfe, and when I finde them I (hall expunge them : If I have not, patienc* is my duty and relief i and I have long been .learning, that we muft fufler from Godly and Friends, as well as from ungodly and enemies j and till I had learned that lelTonj I never knew what it was to live quietly and contentedly.

The reft of this ScAion hath anfwer enough already. No doubt but fincerc obedience confifteth in a faitbfull endeavour to obey the whole preceptive part of Gods Law,both naturaland poGtivc : But no man can by it be denominated righteous {nifi itqumc^) but he that perfeftly obeyeth in degree.

CjO

" '■ §. 17.

M' 3/. A 'F erfeci ion ef fu^ciency to AUiin the end, T witlingly gnm, G»i ctrdcfcet' t\ ding through rich gfAce, to crovuxwciiiobcitence: in thU fenfe, turimpcr-' feci ton hitb its perfeHnejS: otherrvife I mujl {xy that our inherent ri^hteoufnefi it an iwi" perfect rightcoufncffe, in an imperfeSi conformity to the rule of nghteoufaeffe, dnd with-out thit reference to the rule, there it neither perfection nor impcrfcciiou tnA'iy dcfion. See Z>. Davenan: dijputingagainfl^uji-iflcstion by inherent rigneoufncffe upon the Account $f theitnpcrfeciionofitydtiniXk'bahk.p.i^g. attd how fully hevoi/s perfveiiedoftheini' ptrfcHion of this rigbteoufncjfe ippurs by fentences prefixt before two Treitifcj, as may be feen tn the margent.

§• 57. Jt.3. I'^Outterm [othcrwife] isambiououi. If yoa mean that in fome other I rcfpeds you cake ri^hteoufnefi to be imperfcd, fodo Ijand that a licclc more then you acknowledge, if you mean that in [all] OLhcr refpefts you take thjj righteoufnefs to be impeifcd i why then do ydli wrong your Reader with equivocation^ in calling it [Righteoufnefs] when you know that tranfcendcnttl perfedion is convertible with its Being ? i. A natural perfedion or imperfedion, adions are capable of without a relation to the Rule : though that be nothing t» ourbufinefs, yet you lliould not conclude fo largely, j. Many a School Divine hath Written ( and ^z6iC«/at large) that our adions are fpecifi.d 4/«e, and denominated Good or Evil, and fo perfed or imperfcd x fine more fpecially and principally, then a Lege. But this requires more fubtilty and accuratenefs for the deciHon, then yoa or I in thefe loofc Difputes do fliew our felvc$ guilty of.

As for what you fay from Reverend "Davenant, I Reply, i. Do yoa not ob-ferva that I affirm that which you call Our righteoufnefs inherent, to be imperfcft, as well as Bi(hop Divenant, and that in more rcfpeds then one? yet one would •hink by your words that yon had a minde to intimate the contrary, a. Yea I fay more, that in reference to the Law of workj, our works are no true righteoufnefs at all ; And I think he that faith, They are no righteoufnefs, faith as little foe them, as he that faith they are an imperfed righteoufnefs. Yet, if the truth were known, I do not think but both 'Ddvemnt, and you and I agree in fenfe, and differ only in manner of fpeaking. My fenfe is this: Our obedience to the Law of God is fo imperfed, that we are not juft but guilty, and condemnable in the fenfe of the Law of works: therefore fpeaking ftridly, we are not righteous at all in ^(f»/a/(»rc«jJ according to this Law ; but fpeaking improperly, and giving the denomination i materia, or ab accidente diqua, (^ mn a forma, fo we may be faid to have an imperfcd legal righteoufnefs, while equivocally we call him juft, that is but comparatively lefs unjuft then another. For though righteoufnefs in fenfit forenfi, hire no degrees, yet unrighteoufnefs hath many, j. And I fuppofe you know that Biihop Davennt doth not only fay as much as I concerning the intereft of worksin Juftihcation, but alfofpeaks it in the very fame notions as I did. If you have not obferved it, I pray reade him deyuft.Hab.& AH. cap.io.pag.iS^,(^y»

And then I would ask you buc thisQueftion: If the tccufation charge us to

hare

Cj73

Jiavc no right in Chrift and Life, becaufe we died unbelicvert and impenitent, or rebels againft Chrill 5 muft not we be juftlfied againft that accufation, by pio« ducing our faith, repentance, and fincere obedience it felf ? and if fo (then which nothing more certain ) are not thefe then To farre our rightcoufnefs againft that accufation to be pltaded ? And if it be not a true righteoufnefs, and metaphy-fically perfed, and fuch as will peifedly vindicateus againft the accufation of being prevalently and finally unbelievers, impenitent or rebels againft Chrift, thereisno Juftification to be.hoped for from the Judge, but condemnation w endlefs mifery.

Moreover, the Thefit that Vivenmt proves in the Chapter which you cite, is iiihterentem juftitiam nen ejfe caufim formalem ju^HficAtionU neflrte coram Dep, And ifthaibetrue, ihenit isimpoflible that it (hould have the formal reafon of righ-teoufnefs in it- For if there be vera format there muft needs be the fermatum, and he that hath true formall rigteoufncfs, muft needs be thereby conftituted Righteous, or juftified covftimivd, and then he muft needs be fcntenccd Juft,vyho isjuft.

But then note that Piucwiwtfpeaks of that univerfal righteoufnefs, whereby we arc juftified againft the accufation of being finners condemnable by the Law of works} ( and here Chrifts fatisfadion is our righteoufnefs ) and net of that particular Righteoufnefs whereby we muft be juftified againft the accufation of finallBon-performance of the conditiens of the Covenant or Law of grace: For there it is the performance of thofe conditions, which muft it fclf be our righteoufnefs, and fo far juftifie us.

Do6toiTmjfe againft Dodor'fuckson, pag.687. faith, [ Trt I willingly grant that every fin h againft Gods good veill and pleafure, a/i it fignifieth hit pleafure rvbat jhall be our dnty to do i vehich « nothing elfe but bis commandment. And it is as trup that herein are no degrees j every fin is eqttaUy againft the (Commandment of God.'] I think I may with much more evidence of truth and neceftlty, fay it as 1 did of Perfonal Gofpel-righteoufnefs, then he can do of finne. And fo much be fpoken of that Controvcrfie.

How farre unbelief and impsnitcncj in profejfed Cbriftians are yiolationt of the 'I{ew Covenant.

BJB.\Mr.Bl.pag.i^$.c.ii. doth lay down a Corollary, That Impenitence and IVi Unbelief inprofe(fed cbriftians, is a breach of (Covenant. Though I take that to be intended as againft me, yet lam uncertain, becaufe he reciteth no words of mine. I have no more to do in this therefore bur to clear my own meaning. 1. The word [Covenant] is fomccimc taken f^r Gods Law made to his creature, containing Precepts, Promifes and Thrcatniiigs; Soaictitjic for mans pro. mifetoGod. [Violation] is taken either rigidly for one thatJin judgement is efteemsd a »o«performer of the conditions : Orlax'y, (o: one that in judgement is found a true performer of the conditions, but did negled or refufc the performance for a time. Taking the w ord [Covcnaii:] in the later fcnfe,I have affirmed that man breaks many a Covenant with God, ye.i even the Baptifmal vow it felf is fo broken,, till men do truly repent and believe. But taking the word

Cj8]

[ Cevcntm] in the former fenfc, and [Violation] in the ftrifter fenfc^ I fay that fo none violate the Covenant but finall unbelievers and impenitent j that Is, no other are the proper fubjeds of its peremptory curfe or thrcatning. I tkink nat my fclf called to give any further anfwer to that Chapter of Mr. ZUfics.

R. S.\i|r. B/4te's ji. Chap. I take to be wholly againftme, and though I iVlknow nothing in it that I have not fufficiemly aafwcred, either in

the place of my Book of Baptifm, whence he fetchech my ff^Ctber]ujliffifig words, in the Appendix in the Animadverfionson Doftor faith be prercqui' If^iird, or before to Mr. Tombes, yet bccaufe I take it to con-lift to B^tijk, tain dodiine of a rery dangerous nature^ I will more fully

Anfwer it.

§. 39.

M'3/. Ch-ix. A Dogmatical faith entitles to Baptifm,

3.1 Tfurther foUoTPs hy way cf Covfeliary, ihst a T^fgmiticalf^ith {oriinirily ciUei ^by the name of faith Hiftoneal, fuch that affents te ^ofpcl truths, thou:^h not affcciing the heart t$ a fall choice of Chrijl, andtherefsre rtas f\)ort of faith vchtchwM jufiifying and faving) gives title to 'Baptifm. The Covcjuntis the ground enivhich BaptifmU bottomed: ethervfife Church-memberfl)ip rvould cvifice vo title, either in infants tr in men of years to Baptifm: Butthe Qovenart {tswc haveprevcd) U entered rvith mn tffaith not faviug: and therefore to tbem baptifm is to be admiaijired. How the confc' quent can be denied by tbofe that grant the antecedent} Baptifm denied in foro Dei, to men fhort of faving faith, when they are in Covcuant, I cannot imagine ,- Tet fomc xhat covfeJS their interefiinthc (Covenant, deny their title to Baptifm, anda^rm, llfmen be once taught that it is a faith, that is Jbort of jnflifying and faving jaiib, which admittctb nun to Baptifm,it wiU mah^e foul work in the c hurch-

§• 19-Jl. 3.T)Iifore I give a direft Reply to thefc words, I think it necGflaiy that JDl tell youj How farre I take Unregcnerate men to be-in Covenant with Godj and how farre not: and that I alfo difcovcr as farre as I can Mr. BWie\ minde in^ihis Point j that it may be known wherein the diflPerencc lieth. «'

The [Covenant] is fometimc taken for Gods part alone, fomctime for our part alone, fometimefor bothconjund, even for a mutual Covenanting. Asic istaken far Gods aft, it fignifieth i. Either fome abfolute promife of God, made i. Either to Chrifl concerning men, or on their behalf ( and fo the elcQ; inaybefaid to oe in Covenant before they arc born, bccaufe Chrill hath apro-wlfe that they (hall be fared, and the wen-elcft are in Covenant before they are born, bccaufe Chrift hath a promife of fome good to them.) 2. Or to men them-ftlvcs:* And that is either i. Common, or a. Peculiar to fome. i.Common: as the promife made to fallea mankindethat a Saviour [fhould be fent to Rjcdeem thetn. The promife made to the people of Jfrnel that the Mcfitah ihould be of

tbem

ti9l

them accdrding to the fieili, and perfoiiall/ live among ibemj and preach the Gofpel to them. The promife made to titib and the world, that the earth fhould no more be drowned with water: The promife of preaching the Gofpel to all Nations (which is commonj though not abfolutely univerfal:) the promife of a Rcfurredion to all the world, and that cheyfhall be judged by Chrifl the Redeemer, and (at leaft thoffl that heard the Gofpel) on the terms of the new Law, and not on the TBeer rigorous terms of the Law of entire nature : the promife of a fuller and clearer promulgation and explication ^( the Law of grace, when Chrift fhould come in the fic(h : the promife of a ftjller meafure of the Spirit to be poured out, for Miracles to confirm the Chtiftian Doftrineto the beholders, hearers and adors j that there fhall be a Miniftry Commidloned to Di' fcipleand Baptize all Nations, maintained to the end of the world (which gives Miniilers right and authority to Baptize them s) and jif there be any other the like promife of the 'tneitts necejjirilj anteceding faitb. Thus fatre many thoufands that are unregenerate, andnon-eled, may befaidtobe in Covenant, that is under thefepromifes. 1. Someof thefeabfolutcpromifes are peculiar to fome: as to one Sex (though common as to that Sex ) as the mans fupcriority : to one Age: to one Degree in order of nativity ( as to the elder brother to have fome fuperiority over the younger, Gcn.4.7.) to one Nation, as to the Ifraelitcs were made many peculiar promifcs J andthofc before mentioned which I called common as to all Jfraelt were peculiar te them (fome of them) in^exdulion of other Nations. And fome to particular perfons, good or bad : as for faccefs in bat-tell, or other cnterprifes j for avcrfion of fome threatncd judgement j for the abating of fome inBi&ed paniHiment $ for fome temporal or common bieiTingi of which fort |we finde many particular promifes which God by fome Prophet made with particular men. In all tbefe refpeds I fay wicked men have been under a promife, yea men not eled to falvation: and thus far they may be faid to be in Covenant with God. But this is but a tax and improper fpeecb, to fay ( fuch arc in Covenant) to be ufed now among Chriftians that have ufed to give the name [Covenant] by an excellency, to another thing. Alfo now wicked men are not under peculiar perfonal promifes of temporal things, asthen they were, becaufe now there are no extraordinary Prophets, or other the like Meflcngers or Revelations from God to make fuch particular promifes to men. (Yet I will not fay God hath reftrained himfelf from this, or cannot, or will not do it at all, or that no man hath fuch Revelations j but only x. That it is not ufual. a. Nor is God engaged to do it.)

So for the abfolute promife of the firft fpecial grace (firft faith and repentance) to be given to all the Eledt (luppofing that there is fuch a promife:) this is made to none but the ungodly and unregenerate, though eled (unlefs you will fay, it is made to Chrift for them, or rather is a predidion of good eventually to be conferred on them.)

But though in all thcfe refpeftj wicked men are under a promife, yet it is none of all thcfe that gives them right to Bapjifm. There is no qucftion of any but the laft : and for that I have proved in my Appendix againft Mv. Bedfori, that it is not that Covenant that Baptifm fealeth, Whithecl refer you to avoid Repetition : much mote eaiic is it to prove, that it is not that bare promife that gives right to Bapcifni. For many are Pagans and Infidels to vvho.n that promife belongs. So jpuch for the Abfolute promife.^

a. As for Conditional promifes to man, they ace ekhec

I. Peculiar: a$ extraorclinary prcmiks of temporal b'cflings conditionally made to feme particular pcrfons heretofore. Of thefc 1 fay, as of the former* Wicked men may be under luch proiuircs j but thcfegivc iwt ri^ht to Ba-piifm.

a. Common: (uch as arc not made to this or that man more then others, but to all, at lealt in the tcnour of the giant, thrugb it be not prcmnUate toall. Of tbisfort I. Some fuppofc certain promiltsto go before the great Law of'jracc. 1, But T yet know not cf any bu: the Law of grace it felf, (anon to be defcirbed.) 1. Thofethat do fuppofe fome fuch antccedancous prcmile, are of two forts: 1, The Arminians and Jcfuites. ». Such as Mr.B/^^f about Ghurch-OrdiRan-ccs. I. The Jefuites and Arminians fpcak of two fuch common promifcs. 1. One is of the giving of fupcrnatuial means of Revelation, to men, on condition of the right ulcot natural Revelation. As ifG'-dhad promifed to all Heathen and Infidels that never beard of Chrift, that they ftiall hare the Gofpel fcnt tbem, if they will ul'e the light of nature well, or wi',1 feck out for the Gofpel. 1. Thcetherpromifc which they imagine is, that God will give fupernatural or fpecial grace (v/^. the firit grace of faith and repentance ) to men, on condition they will ufewc'l their common grace and means. I know of no fuch promifeas cither of thefe in Scripture ( of which fee ©iucwnrin his Diflcrtation of Uni-verfal Redemption.) \Vhenany Arminian will fhew fuch a promife in Scripture, we (hall yield. But yet I will tell you how far I yield, i, I yield that God doth, aftually give temporal bleffings to wicked men: But thisis no Covenarit or pro-mife. Yet it gives them a right to enjoy them ^e ^r«/irBfj while they do enjoy tbem 5 fo that it is not found Dodrine of them that fay, Wicked men have no right to the creature, in whatfoever they poflefs, and that they are but ufurpers. For if you fee one naked in the fttcet, and put him on a garment j he hath right to wear that and enjoy it, while you permit him : But yet beeaufe you promifc him nothing for the future, he is not certain a moment of the continuance of that right or poffefl'ion, for ycu may take it off him again when you will. So wicked men have right and poilcfTion of Gods mercies by aftual collation depra-fetttiy but not by promise de future, or by fuch proper donation, at givei them the full propriety (for fo God ufeth not to part with the propriety of his creatures to any.) 2. I yield that God doth give to Heathens, who hare but naturallight, fome helps which have a tendency to their further advancement, and doth appoint them certain means to be ufed for the obtaining of a higher light, and that he giveth them fufficient encouragement to go on in the chearfull ufe of thofe means, jupoflibilitics and probabilities of fucceis i fo that they areunexcufabic that ufe them'not. Thefe Mr.CoK6Hca!s half promifcs (as who knows but the Lord may do thus and thus ? Twj therefore tf perhaps the thoughts of thy heart may befof given theCySi.c.'S But promilca properly they are not. God hath thought meet to keep bimfclfdifcngagcd from this fort of men. 3. The very [amcl yield of men in the vifible Church ufing common grace, as well as they can : that is, that God hath appointed certain means which lucb men are to ufe for the getting of fpccial grace: that ihofe that perifli, do julily periih, for not ufing thofe means fo well as they could, and fo for not bclceving : that he hath given rhem fuflicieat incou-ragcment to ufe fuch means by examples, experiences, the nature of the means, and fome half promifes of fuccefs: but no promifc properly fo called. 4. 1 yield that he aftually gives faving grace to wicked men : or cKc none could bare it.Biic this they can plead no right to before they have it.

».The

'' a. The fecond fort of prcmifes before the great Covtrtnt of grace, 5$ feigned by Mr. BUl{e (and if there be any c; her that go that wayjas feme do, and that wirh fome diftcrcnce among ihemfelvrs •) and that is A prcmife of Church-priviledges upon condition of a faiih not juftifying or faving. Here feme annex fpecial grace tothefe Chuvch-privjledges, and fo fall into the Arminian ftrain. So Dr. fTard a^ainft Mr. G<Jt<2^cr, doth make a ccmmon (not-juflifying) faith, the condition of Baptilmj and then that Baptifm a means von fsjienti obicem of the certain Juftification of all the Baptized, andfo, at leaft, the infant* of all ccmmon pro-feflors, baptized, ihouM be certainly juftified. But I finde not Mr. Blalie any where owning this connexion of fpecial grace, and efficacy of Baptifm on fuch : therefoic 1 fuppofe it is but feme common mercies that he luppofeth this promifc to make over to the Baptized. But I will enquire further into his opini% on anon.

X. The common or general promife-conditional, which I acknow'edgc, is the new Law of grace, or ot faith, whe.ein God promifeth [to be our God, lo we will take him for our God, and will be his people] and [ro give us Chrifland Life, if we will accept him as he is offered in the Gcfpcl] or [that he that repen'eth and beleeveth, fball be jkU fied and favcd] and he that doth not fball be damned: Whereto is alfo annexed, the prcmife of temporal mercies, f«j far as they are gocd for us J as appurtenances to the main bltflings of the Covenant. Now 1 will tell you how far wicked men arc under this great prcmife or Ccvmant. i. As it is a conditional p.omife on Gctis part, or a Law of grace enaded conditionally gi-yicgChrift and Life to al! men, fo All men are urder itj or the fvbjcds of it: that is, Ail the whole world, as tothe tencur of the Law of grace, following the mcer inching 3 and all that hear the Gofpel, as totbe p'cmulgation. i. So as it hath a pitccpt conjund, iccuiring thtni to believe andirpentlor rcmifficn and falvation,fo all are under it, that hear it. 3. So rrcthcy as to the annexed threat-ning upon their urbcliefai'd impenitency. 4. So 3$ the Pieschcis of theGcfpel do by Commiflion from Chrift, apply all this m them, ard 'nt: tat them, byname torepent and believe, and cftcr them Chrift and the ether benefis of the Cotc-nant, if they will rtpent and believe > fo wicked n,(n are liil! under the prtn'.ifeor Covenant, as to the Ntinciativc offers nnd cxfortaricn«, which is feme what mf re ihenameer Prcmulgation of it as a Law. All thcfewaies, orinthefc refptds, I yield that wicked men, or unregenerate men, maybe under prcmife, or Gods Covenant. But thisis not ftriftly to [ bein Ccvnant :] nor i$ this it that the right of Baptifm bclrngs to; For all this btlrnj;s not only to *Tagafis, but even to ohjnvate Pagavs that pcrfccute this GofpeT, and draw cut the blood of thofcthat thits lYeachit to them : whom I fuppofe, few Divines judge meet fub-jeds for Baptifm.

And thus we have fpoken of Gods aft in the corditicnal prctrife. before the condition be perfornicii by man., and fobefore Gndspromife do sflually conferre right to the (inner. As for the aft of Gods Ccyenant afterwards, I ftiail fpeak of it anon.

». Having faid thus much of Gods aft of p-cmife or Covenant, andfeenhow far the wicked may be laid to bt under that prcmile or C< vcnart, we muft next cenfiderof their own prcmife to Gcd, or the aft of Cover an'ing on their own part. Mans Covenanting With Gcd, or his en:ring the Covenant of God propounded to him, is either i. to te ccrfidercd in lefpcft of the efficient; i.orof theobjcft. As to the cfiiciem, it isfeither 1. The aftofthe whckman, J.f. of

C<0

minde and body i z. Or of part only : and tha: x, cicher of the minde alone: i. or of the outward man alone, x. Objcdirely confidcred, it is either i. A true proper confcnt agreeable to the formall objcd ( or to the objcft in its abfo-liiteneceflaryrefpeds and nature.) z. Or it is an iaipcrfcd confent, analogically or equivocally called [Covenanting] when it is not fuited to the formill nature of the objcd. Thiserrour is i. About theobjeft fimply in it felf considered, i. About the objcd comparatively confidered : as God compared with tha creature. And both or cither of chefe errours is i. Either in the iatelled: when it doth not underhand the nature oftheobjed, and Gods terms on which only he offer* his blefTings j or at Iea{l doth not pradically underhand it> buc fpcculatively only. x. Or of the Will: when it doth not really confent to the objedj and terms of Godj though they be undciLlood,at leaft/pecalatively. 3. Or it isj both the errour of the underftandine and the will.

Having thus neceflarily diftinguilhedj I will lay down in thefe Condufionj, how far man is in Covenant with God as to his own ad. i. Man may oblige himfclf by Vows to particular duties, that are not of the I'ubftance of the Covenant, and yet be wicked, i. Yea maa may oblige himfelf to things indift'erent, and forae think to evil, as "fcpths, fo far as to cnfnare himfelf in a neceflity of finning, whether he perform it or not. j. That which God rcquireth of man on his part, asa neceffary condition, to his right in the benefits proraifed by Godj and that God may be, as it were, obliged adually to man, is the fmcarc refolved confent ofthe Heart or Will. 4. Yet he requireth for fcveral reafons, that the external profeffionofconfent be added, where there is capacity and opportunity. %. God doth as abfolutely require to our participation of his bleflings, and thac his Covenant may be in force adually to give us right to them, and he, as it were, obliged to give us the things promifed, that we underftand the ablolutely neceffary part ouhe objed of our confent, or acceptance } and that with a pradical knowledge. 6, As abfolutely doth he require that we do really confent according to that pradical underflanding. 7. It iselfentialto God aa the objcd of mans faith, to be his fupream Lord and Redor as Creator, and his ultimate end and chiefeft good : and fo mud he be apprehended and willed by all that indeed take bim for their God : as alfo to be perfcd in Being, Wifdom, Goodnefs and Power, and of perfcd Veracity. 8. It is effential to Chrift as the objed of our faith, to be God-man, that in our nature hath Ranfomed us, by the Sacrifice of himfelf ontheCrofsfor uj, and Died, and Rofe again, and is now Afcended in Glory with the Father, and is Lord of us all, and will Judge according to his Word to Everlaflingjoy or Punifhinent. 9. It is eflentialto the objed of our faith, as fuch, to be confidered comparatively. As that God be taken not only as our good, but our chief Good, to be preferred before every creature: that hs be taken not (Jnly as our Lord, but as Sovereign Lord, to be obeyed before all other: that Chrift be taken for our only Saviour, and for our Lord-Redeemer, to be alfo obeyed before all creatures; particularly before and againft the devil, the flefti, and the world, la. Where thefe eflentials are not in the apprehenfion ofthe objed, there is not truly the confent, or faith, or covenanting which God hath made the condition of his Promife } and therefore fuch are faid (as tothe Faith^ Confent and Covenant fo required ) but equivocally or analogically to Confent, Covenant or Believe : when truly and properly it is to be faid, that they do not Confent or Covenarxr. Confent hath relation to the oSa : and if it be not the off«:ced thing (bat is confentcd tO) but fomewhit eife under chat nanie^ then it is '

noc

not indeed Confem : for there is no Relate without its Correlate* Covenanting (in the prefent fenfc) implies Gods propounded Covenant and terms. For our cntring the Covenant, is not a Making of terms, but an Accepting of the terms made to our hands and tendered ( with a command to accept them.) Now if we donotconfent to the fame terms propounded, it is truly no Accepting, nor no Covenanting : For God never offered to enter into Covenant on fuch terms, and that which was never offered, cannot be properly accepted j nor can we Covenant with God in a mutual Covenant, on terms contrary to thofe which he propounded. The Civil Law faith, Igncnntis noneftConfenfui. A God that is inferiour to creatures in Rule, or in Goodnefs and Delirablenefs, is not God indeed. And therefore he that takes God in this fenfc for his God, takes but the Name of God, and not God himfelf, but an Idol of his brain. A Chrift that is only a Juftificr and not a King and Governour, is not the Chrift that is offered us of God j and therefore no man is called to accept fuch a Chrift. To erre therefore about the veryefTenceoftheObjeft, asfuch, is to null the Ad, ic can be noConfent or Covenantor Acceptance truly at all, but equivocally only. ii. The fame may be faid of counterfeit Covenanting, when it is only crctentu, with the mouth and not the heart, ii. Yet may an oral counterfeit Covenanting oblige the party to the duty promifed (in our cafe) though it give him no right to the benefit offered, nor ii God as it were obliged to perform his Covenant to fuch. ij. The like may befaidof the forefaid equivocal erroneous Confenting, Accepting, Covenanting. If the crrour be through the fault of the man hirafclf, his ad may oblige himlelf, though God remain difobligcd, and though he have no right to the thing promifed by God. Thus much I thought meet to fay,for the cpcning of that branch of the Queftion, How far men unregenerate may be in Covenant, as to their own aft.

But the great Queftion is yet behind. Whether thefe men be in Covenant with God, as to Gods adual engagement to them : fo far as that Gods prcmifeisin force for conveying aftual right to them as to the promifed bleflings ? and fo whether it be a mutual Covenant, and both parties be adiially obliged ? And thus I fay that wicked men are not in Covenant with God, that is, God is not in Covenant with them ; Neither have they any right to the main bleflings given by the Covenant, vi\. Chrift, Pardon, Juftification, Adoption, Glory : Nor yet to the common bleflings of this Covenant, for they are given by the fame Covenant and on the fame conditions as the fpecial bleflrings : So that though they may have right to them at prefent on the ground of Gods prefent collation, or truftingthem with them (asafervant hath in his Mafters ftock) yet have they no right by Covenant." For it is Godlincfs that hath the promife of this life, and of that tocomCj as being the condition of both > and it is feeking firft Gods Kingdom and RighteoufncTs, that is the condition on which other things ffiall be added to us. The fame holds of Church-priviledges and Ordinances quoad po(feJ[i»nem not proper to the faithfull.

So that in theconclufion, I fay, that though wicked men have manypromifcs from God, efpecially the great conditional promife of Life, if they will repent and believe J and though they arc alfo obliged by their own imperfcft, equivocal Covenanting with God j yet God remaineth ftill unobliged to them, and they have no adual right to the benefits of his promife} becaufe they have not performed the condition of their fiilt right, that iSjhave not Covenanted truly with Godi «r cntrcd the Covenant which he propounded } having net confenicd to his terms,

nos

[643

nor xccep'cd Cbvift and Life as offered in the Gofp^l: Aad therefore h is the moft proper Ua^ui^c to Uy, tha: none but lincere belecvcrs are in Coveninc with God ; Fortherclt liavc bat equivocally Covenanted with God, and God no: ad-ially engaged in Covenant svi:h-.hem (for while the condition is unperformed there is no actual obli^aaon oa the promiies) and lo it is no proper mutual Covenant. And confcqucntly thcle mea in proper Itrid fcnfe, arc no true ChrilUans, but analogically only.

Yetbccaufe we have no accefs to their hearts, and therefore muft judge of the heart by the profcflTion aixd outward figncs, therefore we muft ju jge thefe probably to Covenant with the h^arc, who do profefs :o do fo with the tongue i andthofe to Covenant cndrely and wi.hout erroar in the elfentials, whoprofel's fo to do : and therefore we muft juige them probably to be true Chriltians, and truly godly men (till they re:rad that profeffion by word or deed ;) and therefore we muft judge them p:obably to be truly in Covenant with God, and fuch as Gad is, as ic were, obliged to juftifie : and therefore we muft give them the name of Chrifti-ans, and men in Covenant with God : and therefore we muft ufe them as Chri-ftians in works of charity, and in Ordinances, and Church co.n.nunion : and To muft ufe their children as C^riftians children. The warrant for this ufage and Judgement, 1 muftdefire the Reader to take notice of, in what I have written to M'T«mbes Ob)cA'iot\s on iCor.j.i^ and to Dr./furi, and againft WXombet Prccurfor more fully : For to repeat all here again would be tedious and unnecef-fary. When Chrift faith to us, llfi Brother repent, forgive him^ here by [Repenting] doth Chrift mean plainly Kepemng, or the profcrtianof it ? No doubt, repenting it felf. Why, but how can we that know not the heart, know here when out Brother repenteth ? Will M:.B/. fay therefore that none is obliged to forgive ? Ra:her we know that man muft jud-;e him to repent that profelTeth fo to do : and therefore forgive him that profeflech it. No: becaufe profeffing was the aftigned requifite condition : but a fign of that condition: and therefore we are to accept of noprofeffion, but what probably fignifieth true repentance. Forifwcknewa nsandiflembled, or jeered us in profeffing repentance, we arc not bound to do by him as a penitent. So God commandcth us tolove and honour them that fcac the Lord, that are faithful!, that love Q\\t\^,(3'C' But we know not who thefe be: Ace we therefore difobligcd from loving and honouring them ? Or will Mr. S/. fay that we muft not honour them, left we miftake and give that honour to one that hath no right to it ? ( as he faith about the Sacrament; herein joynlng with t/it.Tunhcs.) Thofe that profefs to fear God and love him, we muft love and honour as men that do feat and love him : yet in difFerent degrees, as thefignes of theirgraccs are more or Icfe propable. In fome common profefliag Chriftians, we fee but fmall probability : yet dare we not exclude them from the Church, nor the number of true believers, as long as there is any probability: Others that are more judicious, ieaious,diligeat, and upright of life, we have far ftronger probability of j and therefore love and honour them much more.

Mr. B/j^c therefore in my judgement had done better, if, with that moderate. Reverend, G»dly man ^'c. Stephen MirJhJill, he had diftinguilhed betwean thefe two Queftions, [Who are Chriftians or Church-members ?] and [Whom are we te judge fach and ufe as fuch ?] and to bring in the unregenerate in the later rank only.

N^'xt we are to fee what is Mr. Blik.es judgement herein, that we may not argue againft him before vre underftand: which yet I think I Ihall in fome meafure be

forced

forced to do, or fay nothing, i. I finde it very hard to underftand what perfon* they be that he takes to be in Covenant: x. And as hard to underflani what Covenant he means. For the firft, 1 findc it clear that negatively he means, They arc not truly Regenerate pet Tons, but Pofuively how they muft be qualified I finde not fo clear. Tog. 189. he laitb it was with ail that bore the name of Ifrsel (which ^ no further true then I have laid down in the former Conclu(ions) fo that it may feem that he takes all to be in Covenant that bear the name of Chriftians. What? thoUjjh they know not what Chrift or Cki iilianity is ? l& taking a name, entering into Covenant ? The post Indansihn by thoufands are forced by theSpAHtirds to be baptized, are faid to know fo little what they do, that fome of them ferget the name of [a Chrilfian] which they aflumcd.

Piig.i^z. he laitb [All profeffed Chriftians, focallcd, are in an outward and finglc Covenant] r.VVhat ? thofe that are called profefled Chriif ians,3nd are not? No: fure that's not the meaning ;elfe mens mifcalling might put them in Covenant. It is then thofe that are fo, and are called fo: But will it not ierve, if they are fo, unlefs called io ? 2. He means either thofe that profefs the name of Chri-ftianity, orthe Thing. Of the infufficiency of thefirfl, I fpokebeforc. For the fecond, ifthey profeCsthe whole EUcncc of Chriftianity undillcmbledly, I think they are truly Regenerate. Ifthey profefs but part (as to the Matter both of Af-fent and Confcnt, of which I fpoke before in the Conclufions, and which we have in this County lately fet down in our Profeflion of Faith^ then it is not Chritlia-nity which they profefs: for part of the effence is not the Tiling: where an ellen-tial part is wanting, the form iiabfent. If it be the whole matter of Chriftianity that is profclled, but Diflembledly j then as he is equivocally or analogically a Believer or Chriftian, folyicldhe iiamember ofthc Vifible Church, which fo fat St it is only Vifible^ is equivocally called 'JThe Church : of which I have tullicr fpoken in Anfwer to M' Tembcs Pracurfor. I know M' B/.thinks, that there may bean undiffemblcd Profeflion, which yet may not be of a faving Faith. But then I yet conceive it is not an entire Profeflion of the whole elfential objed of Chrifti-an faith, vii^. of AfTent and Confent. It will be a hard faying to many honeil Chriftians to fay, that a man not juftified may believe every fundamental Article, and withall truly profefs Repentance of all his fins, and to Take God for his So-TcraigntoRule him, and his chief Good to be enjoyed to his happinefs > and to take Chrift for his Lord and only Saviour, and bis Word for his Law and Rule, and the holy Ghoft for his Guide and Sandifier, and the reft which is eUcmial to Chriftianity.

Pag.ipt. He faith of all that externally make Profeflion (Thefe engage them-felves upon Gods terms.] But ifthey do fo fincerely they are fincere Chriftians: If not fincerely, they arc but equivocally Chriftians. Some think that in the 11'''' Chapter of the 3'^ part of my book of Reft, I gave too much to an unregenerate eftate : and yet I think there is nothingcontrary to this that I now fay. Hcthac profeflcth not to prefcrre God and the Redeemer before all other things, prottikth not Chriftianity : and he that profcfleth this and lieth not,is a Regenerate juftified Chriftian.

^Pag.ioo. he defcribcth his unregenerate Chriftians to be fuch [as Accept the terms ofthc Covenant.] And this none doth indeed but the fandified. IfMr.B/. will fay, that the unregenerate may doit, he will make them true believers : For what is true faith but an Accepting of Chrift and his Benefits on the Covenant terms ? Though I confcfs others may falfly fay, they Accept him.

^ag.iio. he faith [Laws rcndred by a Prince, and received by a People, make up the Relation of King .n-.d pccplc (yet indeed, that's not true, for it is the Receiving the man to be our King which is antecedent to the receiving his Laws,that makes the Relation.) A marriage Covenant tendred by a man, and accepted ky a Vi-gin, makes up the Relation of Husband and Wife: Covcnanr draughts between man and man for fervice,make up the Relation of Maftcr and ScrvamrNow the Gofpel Covenant is all of thefe between God and a People.] Rep. The Accepting Chrift in this Covenant is true Juitifying Faith : If an unregcneratc man have this indeed, thenheis jullified, and Faith and Juftification are common things, which I will not believe. If Mr.B/. mean that the external profcflion of this Acceptance, alone, doth make up the Relation, I fay, as before. It may oblige the Profcffour, but makes not up the Relation of Real Chriilians, becaufc God conlenicth not, nor is adually in Covenant and obliged. The differences Mr.B/.muft take notice of, between his humane Covenants, and ouri with God, or eh'c he wiil marre all. Men know not one anothers hearts, and therefore make not Laws for hearts, nor impofe Conditions on hearts: and therefore if both parties do profcfs Confent, though diflemblingly, they are both obliged,and the Covenant is mutual. But God offers to Confent, only on Corrdition thit our hearts Confent to his terms J and therefore if we profefs Confent, and do not Confenr, God Confenteth not, nor is, as it were obliged.

Next Mr.B/.proceeds there to tell us^ that the Accepting the Word preached,ig the note of the Church. But that is a more lax ambiguous term then the former. Some call it an accepting the Word, when they a e content to hear it: Some when they fpeculatively believe the truth of it. Thefe are no true notes of true ChrilH-ans, or Chuichcs (in the firft fenfeof the word Church.) O hers Accept but part of that word, which is the nccefiaiyobjeft of Faith, ofwhom the like may be faid. It is the Accepting Chrift and Life in him, offered by this werd, which isChriftianity it felf, or true Faith; and the profefllion of this, is that which makes a man a Member of the Vifiblc Church fHe may accept it for his Infants alfo.) So much for thcindagationof Mr.B/'$ meaning about the delcription of hi« vifible Chrifiians.

N«xr, what he means by [Covenant] I confefs I defpair of knowing.Sometime he fpeaks as if he meant it but of their own ad of Covenant, whereby they oblige themfelves. But ordinarily,it is evident,that he fpeaks of a mutual Covenant, and makes God-to be alfo in Covenant with them. But what Covenant of God is this? Pag.1^1. He faith [they are in an outward and fingle Covenant-] But what he means by a fingle Covenant,! know not.He there alfo chooleth to txprefs himfelf in Taricwj words,who dilHnguifheth inter beveficii feederk (which he deni-eth thein_J and ^us foederis fwhich he allowech them.) But I tonfcfs I know not what ^usfcederis is, except one of thefe two things: t.A Right toen er Covenant with Chriff: and fo have Infidels, z. Or a Right to the Benefits promifcd in the €ovenant : and thishcdcnicth thcra. Ifhcmeancth (as Far »«leems) a Right to beefteemed as Covenanters, andufed as Covenanters, by ihc Ghurcli ('though indeed God is not in Covenant with them) this we eafily grant.

But Mr.2ii's common phrafe is, that they are [in the outward Covenant] and what that is, 1 cannot tell. I know what it is to covenant ore»«««, only outwardly, or by a dillembled proftfrion,or elfea profeffion maimed,or not underftood j and I have faidjthat hereby they may further oblige themfelves (io far as the creature can be faid to oblige it fcif, who is not fui fwH, but wholly Gods; and is unJer h'.s absolute

C«7]

folutc obligation already.) But it is Gods Covenant aft that we are cni^ulring after. In what fenfe is that called Outward ? i. It cannot be as if God did as the diflembling creature, ore tt%m, with the mouth only covenant with them, and not with the heart, as they deal with him : 2, I know therefore no poffiblc fenfe bui this, that it is called [Our ward] from the Bleflingspromifed which are outward. Here therefore, 1. I fhould have thought it but reafonablefor Mr.B/.to have told. «s what thole outward Blcflings ave that this Covenant piomifeth. i. That he would have proved out of Scripture that God hath fuch a Covenant, diftinft front the Covenant of Grace, which pmmirethjuliification and Salvation, and having Other Conditions onour patt.For b-Jth theft 1 cannot finde what outward blcflings he means but Church Ordinances and Piivi!edgcs. Tlirfe confilt in the WordjSa-cramentSjPiayerjDifcipline. For the \Void,God oft beitowcth it on InfidclSjand in 'EngUniihtit are men that deride the truth of "-criptu'Cjaud cftecm ii a htbonjand yet for credit ot menjCome ordinarily to the Congregation. Thefc have the Word given thcm^and lo have other unregenerate men ; but not by Covenant that 1 know of. Even the godiy have no Covenant alluring them that for the future they fliall enjoy the Word, furthcrthcn it is in their hearts (txctpt that promife wih a le-ferve. If God lee ir Goodjfir'f.j Where hathGod faid. If thou wilt with th/ mouth profefs to believe,! will give thee my Word preached ? z. For Baptifm, It, IS part of ourprofefTionit felf. And though God hath commifiloncd us to Baptize fuch profeffours and their feed, yet that is not a Covenant with them : Nor do I know where God faith,I will give thee Baptifmjil-thou wilt but fay,thou bclicveft, or if thcu wilt profefs ferioufly a half faith: Muic ftiall be faid againft this anon. 3. For the Lords Supper the fame may be faid. God hath no wheie made a Covenant, that they fhall have the Lords Supper that wi!l piofcfs faith. To feign God to make a Covenant with man,whofe condition Hiall be oral! profeflion,3nd whcfc Bleflingpromifed, is only the nudum figmm, a little water to waftimen, and a little biead and wine, without that Chrilt, and Remifllon of lin, Moi.tificati<m and Spiritual Life, which thefc Sacraments are in their Inftitution appointed to figni-fie, feal and exhibit, this is, I think agroundlcfs and prefumptuous couifc. 4-The fame may be faid of Difciplinc : which alas few Churches do enjoy.I dclire therefore that thofe words of Scripture may be produced where any fuch outward Covenant is contained. I take outward Ordinances and other blcffings to be a ftccnd part of, or certain appurtenances to the bkfllngs of the great Covenant of Grace, and given by Covenant onthe fame coridition(ortrue faith) as Jullification it felf is : but allowed or given by Providence, where and when God pleafeth, and fome-time to Infidels that never made profcfficn, as to fome of them (the Word and temporal merci.s) and not alfurcd by promife to any ungodly man, that hom Providence receivcth them.

At laft, after this neceffary explication, I come to Mr.B/'s words which I propounded to Reply to. And firft, when he faith \_\ dogmatical faith cntitleth to Baptifm] I reply, i. A mecr Dogmatical,Hiitorical fai:h, is only in thcun.'er-ftanding ; and that not Pradicnl neither. New if this be the contrition of the outward Covenant, then it may confilt witha P..tnouncing Chrift, and open dil-claiming himjVea a perfecuting the veiy Chiidian name : For a man may fpecu-lativcly and flcightly believe the word of God to be true, and yet mav open'y profefs [I love the world, and my plcamre, and honour, fo much better then Chrift, that 1 am refolved ] will be no Chrillian, nor be baptized, nor take Chrift on the terms that he is o^'ercd en.] At kaft, he that profclVeth Aflewt only, and will not:

K X profefs.

profefs confcnt alfo, doth not profcfs Chriftianity: For Chrirtianity and true faith licth in the VVilscoiifentjas well asthe underlbndings A (Tent. z. And how can Mr-B/ call this Dogmatical faith, a covenanting ? wnen covenanting it known to hethecxpreflioii otthe VViU confentjand not the profeflion of an opinion. 3. If a Dogmatical faith be the condition^ and make a man a Chrillianj then he may be a Chrillian a^ainft hii Will: which was yet never affirmed.

ButMr55/.in his explication of this Dogmatical faith, addcth by wayofexdu-fion[though not affeding the heart to a fi^ll choice of Chrill.] Where he fccms to imply (though heexpicl'sit not) chat the faith which he meanuh doth affed the heart to a choice of Chrift which is not full. But if fo, then i. It is much more then AiTent, orameer Hillorical Dogmatical faith. 1. But is the choice which he in-» timateth Real,as to the Aft, and fuited to the Objed ? That is, the real choice of fuch a Chiiftas is ofiered,and on fuch terms?Ifro,it isjuftifyingfaith. Ifnot, either it is counterfeit as to the Ad, or but nominal as to the Objed,and is indeed oochoofing of Chrift. Though perhaps, it may not be fuited 10 the Accidentals of the objed, y«: to the Eilentials it mufl,or elle it hath but equivocally the name as a corps hath the name of a man.

He faith,[The Covenant is the Ground of Baptifm, otheewile Church-mem-berihip would evince no Title, Gr'c-] Repl. i. I take Gods precept to be the Ground of Baptifm, as it is offictum a Duty, both as 10 the baptixer and the baptised ; and his Promife, or his Covenant Gram, to be the G:ound of mens Right to it, as it is a Benefit given diredly by God ; and their own true confcnt, faith or covenanting (which with me are all one, for all that you fay againft it) to be the condition of tiiat Right. But then I think that in foro EccUfia a difjiemblcr may claim that Right which flridly he hath not,and wemuft grant him what he claims when he brings a Probable ground of his claim ; And in that it i> Minifters duty to Baptize fuch, they rray indiredly, and quoid Ecclefiiim be faid to have Right to be Baptiied. 1 lay Indiredly, yea and improperly : for ic is not the rcfult of Gods Covenant Grant to them i but of his precept to his Minifters, and his Inftrudi-ons, whom they ought to Baptize.

2. I argued from Right of admiflion to Church-memberrtiip, withMcT. and that Right I take the heart-covenant (of Parent or parties themfelves) to be the condition of, as to the Invifible Church-ftatc, and the ProfefTion of that Covenant, not alone, but joyned with it, to be the condition of true Right before God to Vifible-memberfliip ; though men are but to ufe him as one thac hath true Right, who by an hypocritical profefTion feems to have Ri^h:. , Where he takes me 10 grant his Antecedent, that [the Covenant is cntred with Oiea of faith not faving] be doth me wrong: For in the properclt ftiofe {i.e. as if Mfk^ were adually, as it were, obliged to fuch, in the Covenant of Grace, I never ^b^ it : ^^^^ how tar fuch are in Covenant or under promife, I have by neceflary ailiindion explained before : and I think it befeems not a ferious Treatife of the Covenants, wherein this Queftion is fo largely of purpofe handled to have confounded thofe feveral confidcrations, anddifpute lo fcrioufly before the Reader can tell about what.

The words which Mr.B/.qaeftioneth, I confefs are mine, againft Dr./fW, and I did not think in fo groi an opinion Dz.WAfi would have found any fecond to undertake that caufe.

§40.

J

C8il

S. 40. Mr. Bl. I.

ALL that hdth been faidfor the latitude of the Covemnty may fitly be ap~ flyed in oppoficion to this Tcnm, for the 10^6 latitude ef Baptifm,

§. 40.

K, B, nPHcrcfore did I fay the more of rhc Covenant before, to fticw your con-* fufion and miftake in that. It is not every Covenant or Promilc that Baptifm is the Seal af.

§. 41.

Mr. Bl. ALL the ^bfurdities foliomng the re^raint of the CovenAnt to the ^* Eli^yt» men of faith favingandjufiifyingy foUorv upon this re-fitaint ef intcrcfi in Baptifm,

§. 41.

X. B, rW7Hat Abfurdicics follow fuch a reftralntof it to found believers, as I have aflcrtcd, I fhouJd be willing to know , though with fome labor I fearched for it.Bear with me therefore, while I examine what you refer mc to. It ispag. 20^. where you charge thofc Abfurdities. And the lirfl is this, i. Thii vefiiiciwn of the Covenant (tofl)iiteHtatlthcno?i-rcgcnciate) maizes an utter con-fu(ion bctveceu the Covenant itfclf and the conditions of it : or (if the cxprcfiion d» notplcafc) the Covcnam it fe!f und the dutiesrcqutredin it-., between out entrance into Co^<^^^nt, andourobfcrvaiionofit,orv.-'aH(mgupinfaithfuhKfsto it. All l^novf that a bargain for a fumme of money^ and the payment of that fumme % the covenant with afcivantfor labor^ and the labor according to this covenantj arc different things, Faithful men tiuit mai^e a bargain, l^ccp it ; enter covenant^and fiand to it : But the malting and l^eeping; the entering and obferving are not the fame ; and now actor dm^ t$ thii opinion. Regeneration u our entrance into Covenant, and Regeneration I'ifiur peeping of Covenant ; bef$re Regeneration we mal^e no Covenant , after Regeneration jve brcati no Covenant, there is no fuch thing as Covcnam-breal^ing. . ^U this maizes nn utter confufionin the Covenant.

Reply I. 1 have feldom met with a complaint of confufion j, more unfeafontJ-bly, where the guilt of it in the plaintiffe is fo vifible as to marr all the work fo much. a. I cannot give my judgment of the intolerablencfs and great danger of your miftake here manifefted, without unmanncrlinefs. I will therefore fay but this 3 It is in a very weightie point , neer the foundation, wherein to erre, cannot be fafc. In my Aphorifms 1 gave my realons (pag.zi$) for the contraric. It is a truth fofar beyond all doubt, that our own Covenanting is a. ffincipal part of the condition of the Covenant of Grace, as that it is, in other terms agvcat partof thcfubftanceof thcGofpel. i. The conditions arc im-

Aa pofcd

pofcd by God, and to be pcrfoitncd by us ; the fame aft therefore is called thv f6W^/ifi</?.'5 rsilic pcrfoimti.^, and Getis crnditicns ss the Impoftr and Promifcr , giving his bkfliiigs cnely on thclc impofcd conditions. Mcft properJy thty arc called the condiiiors of Gcds Covenant or Promilc, rather then of ours : for our own Piomilc is the fiift pait of ihcm, and otir performance of that Pro-mifc but a feccndaiy part. tori. Gods Covenant is n free gift of Chiift wrf Life t9 the n'oilficn ctndit/en of their ^Icccptcfcc: ihis oui Divines againft ihc Papiflson the Doftiinc of n-.crir, hr.ve lulJy proved. Onely this Acceptance nnift have thele neccflaiy modifications, which may conftiiuic it futable to the quality of the cbjift, nnd Ibtc of the receiver. It muft be a Loving, Thank-iuil Acceptance : and it being ihc Acceptance of a Soveraign, and Sanftificr, it crniains a Refolution to obey him. Our Acceptance, or Confcnt, is our Cove-nantirg, and cur (aiih. So thai cui Covenanting with Chrift, and our faith is ihc feme ihir g : thai is, our accepting an offered Saviour on his terms : Or a Confcnt that he be ours and we his on his terms. And who knows not that this Faith, or Covenanting, or Conknt,is the condition by us to be performed, that we may have right to Chrift and Life offered? 3. Indeed ibcrc is herewith joyncd a piomife for future duty : but mark I. whati 1. and to what end j I. It is principally but a prcmife of the fame confcnt to be continued, which wc already give: and jcccndarily, a prcmife ot fincere obedience. ^. It is not that thcic future promifcd tfts fliall be the condition of our firft Juftification, or right to Chrift j but onely the condition of the continuance of our Juftification, it being certainly begun, end we put into aftateof favor and acccptance,meerly en cur 6tft confcnt or covcnantirg, that is, believing or receiving Chrift.

That all this is no ftrangc thing, ( that cur own Covenant Ad ftiould be al-fo the Primal y condition of Gods Covenant)may appear by your fore mentioned Jjmilitudcs, and all other cafes, wherein fuch Relations are contraftcd. If a King will offer his Son in marriage to a condemned woman and a beggar, on ccndition that ftjc will but have him, that is conlcnr, and fo covenant and marry him : here her covenant!) g, confentiiig or marryir g him, is the performance of the condition on her part, tor obtainri g her fiift Right in him and his : but for the continuance of that Right, is further rcquifitc, Primarily the continuance of that confcnt ; fccondarily the addition of fuhjedion and marriagc-faithfulnefs. Yet though confcnt begun, ai.d confcnt continued, be both called confcnt, and arc the fame thir g, it is only the beginning that is called marriage : fo is it only begun faith, which is our marriage with Chrift, and conftitutcs us Regenerate, 01 converted. And therefore you do not well to talk of •7vf^<^»fi'vr/ioa bcitJg the kjepifig of our Covenant. If by Kcginerat'ion you mean not Gods Aft, but our repenting and believing, ihenit is our keeping Gods Covenant,by ptrformingthc condition, i. e. Our obeying him in entering his Covenant j but it is not the keeping ofour own Covenant: for our making or entering Covenant, is our principal condition, on performance whereof we are juftified j yet in fo doing, we promife to continue that confcnt or faith : and fo the continuance is our Covenant-keeping.

As for your inftances of the Covenant of paying money, and doing work, had I ufcd fuch inftances, what fliould I have heard from thofe men that already charge me with giving too much to works in Juftification ? you fliould have con-fidered, that our Covenant i. is not principally to pay, and to labor, butto '>ec€»vc. a, Tioiisiiondy defuthro, huide prtefmi; A confcnt to hare Chrift

fo.

Z931

for our Lord, Redeemer, Saviour , Head and Husband In prcfcnt and for tij« time ro tome , though the very relation confentcd to, doth indeed oblige us to the future duties of that Relation. By this time, 1 leave it to the Reader to judgc,who it is ihat introduceth confufion about the Covenant, and whether this bean error of the lower Ilze >

As for that you addc, that then there is no Covcnant-hreal^ing;! Reply, i,^iiaad effcutiam^ p0fsibilitatcr»ihcvQ IS. i. ^oadi'xifiejiiiam, there is a breakuigof meer Verbal and of Erring halt Covenants, But if you think that found Covenanting may be utterly broken, then you arc againft the tcrtaintie of pcrfcve-rancc. As for the texts you cite, I fay i. The Ifraelircs broke Gods commands, which a re called his Covenants, z. They broke their particular Covenants, a-boutretorming Idolacric and fuch particular fins. 3. They broke their Verbal and equivocal Covenant 01 Pronufe to God , wheicby they feemed to Accept him on his tcrms,but did not; and therefore had not hii. obligation again to them, but yet thereby obi ged themfelTCs.

Your I. Ablurdicic ]s,ih2t then there arc no Hypocrites, Reply, Rather, Then all unrcgmeratc piofijjors arc Hypocrites. They pretend meerly to real proper Covenanting, and they do Covenant but Verbally , and equiyocally. Your An-fwers to the objc ft ion therefore, pr^. iii, -ii. have not the Icaft ftrcngth , where you fay, The Covenant which they enter is their pretence for God i I Reply, they do therefore but pretend to take God for their God , which is tht proper Covenanting. How clfe could you next fay, that they arc guilticof hy-pocrifie ;• Doubclels they had hypoctifie as well in entering the Covenant, as after in pretending to ftand to ic. Is it not you rather, that confequentially (ay , There is no Hypocrites (among thefe at leaft ) i\ Covenanting, who make them all to Covenant truly and unfcignedly? And where you fay, that then they do but. pretend to the fi^g<-') <««^ ^0 hypocrtftc: Ic is a ftrangc feigned confequence,without the Icaft flicvv ot proof. What 1 is he but a pretender to Hypocrifie, that takes on him a Chriftian, when he is none ? ( Suppofc he never Covenanted ) or he that takes on him to confenc or covenant in heair, when he doth it but in words, and wilfully diflcmblcs ? Yea, if tliey think they A.cc.-pt Chrift , not knowing what Chrift is, and (o do net Accept him as he is offered them, and yet go on in a fup-pofition that they arc Chriftians; thefe fccm to have done what they did not, and to be what they arc not ; and therefore are Hypocrites, though not pur-pofelydiiTcniblirg.

For your 5. Abfurdity, I have faid enough againft that charge to Mr. Tembesy which Ihall ft.rnd, till you confute it, as the confutation of yours. And fo much for your fcign.d Abfurdities.

Mr. Bl. "T*© ma\t the Vtfibk Seal of Msptifnti whieh is theTrivUedge of the ^ Church yifblcy to be of equal latitude with the Seal of the Spiritytvhich is peculiar to inv'iftbU members3 is a Taradox,

A.r $.4:.

C«4l

5. 4^.

K.S

BUtyou take itfor granted thnt wc do foiwhich Is too eafic difputiog.Wc give the Seal of Baptifm to all \lutfetm found Bclievcis,and their ftcdi and wc lay , the Seal of the lanftifying Spirit, is oncly theirs that AiC fuch Bc-licveis. But if you fpcak onely ot Covenant-Right to Ba.pt\{m , Coram 'Deo, by h's {;i;'t of Covenant, then I make them of the lame extent ; fuppofing that by the Seal of the Spirit, you mean fomtwhat common to every true believer. 3. But if it be the forma'h Kaiio of Scalingjthat you look at , I fay, God fcalcth to the wicked his Covenant or Promifc as it is made to them, (of which before) : He fcalcd the conditional Covenant, which they fecmcd to Accept, (which if they had not fecmed to Acetpt, he would not have commanded the anixxlngof the Seal; : and fo God may be faid to do it, in that he command-cth his Miniftcrs to do it. But it is not fuch a fealing, as leaves God aftually obliged to fulfill the piomlfc, as he is to them that perform the condition. But of this more in its own place.

S- 43.

Mr. Bl. TPHf peat conditon to vrhich Baptifm (Jigageth,ii not a preycqu'tfite in bap' itjm. This w plain 5 no man is bound to mal^e good his condition , ic-fore engagement to tsnditisns : 710 fcrvant is tyed to do his vpooJ^ , befere he hath received his carncft : no Souldler to fight before he ishjledy or hath given in bis name. But faith that is Jiifify^rg to Accept C h/ijl^is the Cor.diticn to ychich Bapiifm ivgageth.

§^. 43.

T{.'B. ^^Hatisthe conclufion > therefore Jitfiifying faith isnot uprertquifitein Baptifm : or according to the (\mi\c,theicfore no man is bound to accept Chrifi to Jti^ification before he is bapt!\cd. 1 confcfs, the reading ot fuch paflages in Grave,Learned, Godly Divines, and that with fuch confidence uttered as undoubted truth, and that in zeal to fave the Church from the errors of us that are contrarie minded, doth very much convince me of humane frailtie, and that the beft of men do know but in part, and in a little part too : and ic makes me lefs angrie at thofe unlearned miftakcn men^ihat have of late fo troubled the Church; and to fay with Seneca^lniqum eft qui commune vitium fingulis ebjicitj &c. quanta in. his Juftwr Vcniajit, qua per totum genus humanum vulgatafunf- Omnes inconfuki , lb'improvidi fumtti ; omncs incerti,quef'uU,ambitiofr, ^id lenio/ibus verbis hI' cus publicum abfcondam ? Omnes mail fumus. ^iicquid itaqke in alie reprchen-ebturftdunufquifqueinfuo finuinveinct. ^iiilluts paSorem ? iliius maciemno-tas ? Tcftile?iiiae(l. Tlacidiaresitaquc invuemfumits. Mali inter maloi vivimus. But to the matter.

J. Thenitfeems, If a man believe fincercly and favingly , the main ufc of Bapiifm, asengaging, is paft already. Miift any found believer then be Bap« cifcd ? ©r oncly unfound believers and Infidels that will proinife to believe hereafter ?

C853

after ? But I will fhcw the foulncfsof chis error anon , and therefore kt irpaft now. i . But you fay. This is plain ; to whom ? all men have not the truth, that are confident tfiat they have it j I fee that you fay , No man is bound to ma{e good his Cond'tiion before-evgagcmml i &c. very dangerous : It is not our condition only nor piincipally, as to the efficient obligation, nor at all as tothe Juftification. Arc we poor worms , our own Gods and Lords, that we fliould be difobliged till we will be pleafed to oblige our fclvcs > Our faith is Gods Condition as the Im-p^fer J three feveral Bonds hath he la.d upon us. i. As Lcglflator of the Law of Grace , he hath commanded us to belieyc in, and accept an offered Chiift. And is Gods command infufficient to oblige Us, till we oblige our felvcs ? then more happy are Pagans then I imagined, i. As the Donor of Chrift and Life, and the Author of the Promifeor Deed of gift (and fo Chriil as Teftator) he hath made our finccrc faith the condition j faying ■■, If thou belicvfythoH fhalt be favcd. Hereby we are bound to believe, as a neccflary means to falvation. This is but a fanftion ot the firft obligation. 3. The like may be faid of the threat-ning , He that bclitvetb jigtpuUbe damned ; which God addcth as Lcgiflatorto this Law, fo that every man is bound to found Believing, as thencccflarie condition of falvation, before he doth confcnt himfclf, or oblige himfelf to it: even ^y an obligation which is ten thoufand fold flronger then any that he is capable of laying on himlelf.

3. It IS alfo a very high miftakc, to think that our Covenanting or Confent j (which is our aftual believing) is none of our condition, when it is the great and pi incipal part of our condition ; yea all the condition of our begun Juftification ( not taking the word Faith too narrowly). You will perhaps fay , Thefc are our conditions as fubjcds, but not as Covenanters. Reply. They are our conditions as lubjeds called to Covenant, as we arc the perfons to whom the Covenant is offered : They arc conftituted by G^d as Donor, Benefaftor, and Author of the Covenant or ProMiife, and not mcerly as Reftor. It belongeth to the Donor to determine of the conditions of his own gift, on which they fhjjl become due or not. Yet Joth God make no tranfaftioiis with men but as with fubjeds j and therefore even when he deals with us as Bencfaftor and Donor in free giftsj it is flill as 'Dominm& Keilor Bcucficiens : he lays noi by his Dominion or Sovc-raigntie, nor thcfe Relations to us.

4. For your inftance of fervants and fuuldicrs,they leave out the great part of the condition of the Covenant of Grace : which is, that we confent to b? fervants andfouldiers. The Relation mult fiifl be entered i God muft be taken/or our God, and Chrift for our Redeemer, Lord, and Saviour j the Holy GhofTfor our Guide and Sandifycr : This is Faith and Covenanting. This goes before working and fighting. But this Covenanting is the great condition of Gods Covenant. As when the forcmentioncd Prince is offered in marriage (with his Dignities and Riches) to a condemned beggar i as it is a gift, and covenant propounded on his part, and actually to be entered, ic is confent, or marriage-covenanting on her part that is tlie c edition j yea, and airthe condition of her fir ft right to him and his riches and honors^ Som your inftance .* It is the fervants confent or covenant to have fuch a 4nan for n is m after j and the fouldiers confent and covenanting to have fuch a man for his General j that is thecondition on which one hath all his firft right to the Priviledges of the family , and the o-th;r tothe Priyiledgcs of the Armie. Is not this confent cccflarie in our pre-font.cafc ?" If you would have fpoke to the point, youthould have faid thus,

[SO

7(0 fervent u tyedfacerely t» ardent or covenant to be afervanty btftre he have re-feivedbtf carue^ : Ho fouldia u tjed tKonjeulor covenant truly to l/c aJoiddter 3 till be be Lfted , which arc both plainly falfc. Bjptifm is as ihc iifting j Con-fcnt (which is faving Faith) is die heart covenant, prcrcquifitc to lifting , and not the work to be done after , except you fpcak of the continuance of confenr. Bdptirm is the fjIcmniT rgour mirii gc wiih Chiift. A;id it is a ftrange marriage , v.h.rtin rhe woman doth only promil'e thac flic will begin hcreahcr to take that n;an for her hu^band, but not at prcfent. Nay where fuch prcfent con-lent is not Rtquifitc , is a fc gned ornominal, or half-confcnt, the condition on which a woman hath Right to the man and his tllaic , and a tull confentherc-aftcr the thing that ihe is engaged to.

5. In ycur minor. But fMth thst u Jujllf)ing to Accept C^ifli u the cenihiento vohkh Bapt'tfm cngagcth , cither you mean only the continuance of that faith, and that is true,(but not your meaning I think ^ Or you mean, the beginning of that faith (as doubtlefs the foregoing woids ihew that you do) j and then why had we not one word tending to the proof, which would in this place hare been very acceptable to me. 1 will anon make an argument of the con-trarie.

You fecm to me in all this to miftake the very formal nature ot a condition , as if it received its denomination from our promifc to perform itj when as,by the confent of all Lawyers chat 1 have read of it, it is denominated from the determination of the Donor , Teftator , or other Impofcr ; and moft evidently and unqucftionablyit is fo , in unequal contrafts , where one is the Bcnefaftor, and hath the abfolutc power of diipofing his own favors.

$. 44.

Mr.Bl. ITHat Faith u f on which Simon Miigus inthe primitive times was bdp-ti\cdf u that which admitieth to Baptifm ; Simon himfelf believed and WM Bapti\cd, Aft. i.i^.But Simons Faith feSjfjort of favmg andjuitfying.

S. 44.

K.B. ^^Oncedo totum ; fed defidecatur Conclufio j That may be faid to admit to V*-/ Baptifm, which fo qualifieth the pcrfon as that we are bound to Baptize him, as being one that feemeth found in believing, as Stmon did. But this is noi Etttitulingi oryhzv'ing Coram'DCO& a ftederey Right to Baptifm : nor doth prove that it is notfaving Faith which God in his Covenant makes the condition prcrequifiic to fuch a Right to Baptifm.

$. 4f.

Mr.Bl. tf.TN' (^4fe only juftifying Faith give admifsitn to Baptifm, then none is able U

^■bapti'^ifeeingthu by none u difcerned:and to leave it to oht charity,afj^rm'

i*g that we may admit upon prefumfUon of a title when God denies 3I h(ivefpok.en Jttne-

wbst

C87]

what. Chip. »ndl rtftf to M-. Hudfon in bU Vlndieaticn , vpbom Icamtd Jtf'.Baxter fo highly comnunds^to (hew the unreafonabiefs (fit.

S. 45.

Tt.B, I. CEing you have read what I have faid to Mr.Tombes againft this Objedi-tJon, I lliall take it as needlefs to fay more, till you confute it: 2.1 (ay noixhix. onelyjujlifjiftzrdithgrjcs AdmiJJion to Bspufm. I lay tUat the feeming, or Probable Proteflion offuch a faith gives Admitun^e. j.Nor is it left to out Charity, but impofed on us as a Duty to Baptize tbefc that profefs found belief ; but whether the profeflion be probably fcrious,. or not, our underftanding, and not our Charity muft judge. And if you go not that way too, then i: feems you would Baptize a man that ihould apparently jcftor deride Chrift under colour of profclkng ; which were to Accept that as a profeflion which Is no profeflion. For it is no further a protcmon then it feems to be linous and cxprefs what is in the heart. 4. Though God deny 'he juftnefs of the hypocrites Title iiforg D i, yet he doth not deny it to be oui duty to deal with ihem, for their profeflion , as with thofe whofe Title is juft. 5. I kno not what Chapter it is that you refer us to for more. 6. Having lent Mr. Hudfens book out, I have it not now by me, and therefore cannot confult him : but 1 fuppofc you would ufe the Arguments which you thought ftrongefl.

5. 4^.

Mr.Bl.TTErc it kohjeTred : i. When Chrift faith, j\/<^; me T)ifci>l(s of aS Nmi-rijni ybapti\inglhcm, he meant finccre Difciples, though we cannot ever know them to be fincerc. / Arfxver-, In C^fe I mtl^e this fir fl Objection bought sgainli me/ny fcunth and Ufi Agimmtfoi me^ n veill fully difco^ir the wesi^ncfi of it ^ and thus I form it.^iU that a>e Difciples unto Cirijljaiid made "Difcipks for CbnftyMre tt be bapti-\cd : But fome ate made Difaplis to Chrifl,thai arcfbjit »f Faitb faving andjufii-fyiHfi its hath been proved at la>ge : Thu Di/tiplipj:p thai Chrifi here mentions^ fuch «f which rvhole Nations are in capaaiy , as u plain in the Coftaiifim ^ t^vrhich thu Nation (with others) hath happiy attained ace or diTig to the manifold Pi tpbe^cs bfm fore cited : Oftbefe the whole Vnivrrfil viCdtle Church con ft He th, fo irrcfijgahy proved by ^IrM'^dCon in his Treat ife of that fdfjeJIy and hk V.nduation. Nofrif whole Nations , yea the whole yH:vcrfai yipble Church (confifling of diap.'edNations) were all Believers, it w:re a great happimfs; the E'e^lion would kt as lagi as yocatioiiy when Chrifi faith. Many are called, but few chcfen.

5. 45.

K.F.I TO vindicate my Objcftions ! If i: be not finccre Difciples that Cl^rift means in that Tcx', then no Apoftle was bound by that C'Omhiiflrpn and great Precept to endeavour the making of fincere Difciples fbut only coiui-tcrfeits and half Chriftians:;But the Antecedent is fa]fe,thercfore,&c.i.For your Argunicnt, I grant the Conciufion 3 and what wswJd you have more r B;it knew

5'ou not ihat'itlsnottVicthingin'>ucllion > 3. I grant the Minor, taking the word Difc pkscquivocnllVjas a Cnps is called a man ; and I confcfs it iilual lb to t^ y^ the uOld :bur oihciwifcLikny.ihc Minor. To be ChriftsDifciplc (as to the agcu) :s to b.: one that hath uiifcig,ncdly taken Chrift for his Maft>.r,toTeach him and Rule him, renouncing the contrary guidance of the Fkfti, the World,and Devil : and it iiiiplyeth that he hath already learnt his ncccfTity of Chrifti Gui-<lancc,and who Chrift is,and what a Maftci ,& to wh^t End it is that wc m«ft l.'arn of hirfj, and what arc the great conditions on which he rcceivcth his Diioples. And I think they chat do this fjnccrely'., arc juft;ficd : and they that do not,are but fecmingDifciplcs; blit if you will call fuchDifcipics (as we muftbccaufc they feem Co) then you may lay, They arc Really fuch (fecmingj Difciples, 4." To your confirmation, I deny the Minor: and 1 fay, that it is lb new Do-Arinc to affirm that vvholc Nations are not capaWc of being found Believers, that it dcfci ved one word of proof. Wuch lefs fl^ould you have hid your Minor, and turned it into "iSegAt'io exlfUnt'nt^ when it {hould have been but a Ncgatio CapidtatU. Doth it follow that a Nation is not capable of found faith, bccaufe they have ic not ? or wiU not have ic ? f. Do you think Preachcis )ct be not bound to endeavour the faying Conycrfion of whole Nations ? If you fay, No ; you take them off the work that their mailer hath fee them on. If you fay, Yea, then you think they muft endeavor to perfwade men to chat which they have riot a capacity of. 6. If there be any Nation uncapable of Faith, then God cannot make them Believers. But that is not true,thcreforc,&c. 7. You fay not well that the whole llniverfai Vifible Church confifteth of Difcipled Nations, if you mean [only] as you feem. For then poor fcattered Chriitians in a Heathen Nation, fliould be no part of the llniverfai Vifible Church. 8. Vocation un-efteftuaJ, is common to Pagans, Vocation throughly cfltdual, is of the fame extent as juftification, and (I thinkj Elcdion. Vocation which is effcAual only to bring men to an outward Proteffion of faving Faithjis larger then Elcftion, and makes men fuch whom we are bound ro Baptiie.

S. 47.

Mr. B]./^B/Vr7.i. When he faith,He that BcJicveth and is baptized (hall be fa-V:/vtd, here Faith goes before Baptifni i and that not a common, but a favingFaithj for here is but one Faith fpoken of, and that is before Baptifm, Anfw.i. This is the ti^cal^cftofaU ^rguwents^to reafonfor a precedency of one before another, f I om the order m rvhich they are ylaceA in Siripmre.Sotvc may jay, John Baptized before he preached the Baptlfm of repentance, for his biif>ti':;jfig is rrentivued befvre preacl.ing of Eaptifm, Mar.i.4. So we mtfy fay , We mufi havegloiy fir(l,and Vertue after; for fo they are placed by the ^po(iU, z Pct.i.5. All that cxn be c«l-fe^ed,ify that roe wuftia Gods ordinary way of conferring falvation , have both Faith and Bapiifm; though there be not thelii^e abfohite neccftty ofBaptifm us of Faith: Bap-tifmbcifig vccefary, ncccffitatc prarcepti, Jefus Chrifl havnig InSituted and com-mandcdit\ but Faith necejfary both ncccflitate medii & prxccpii, feeing Chriftnot cnely tommandcd ity butfalvntiencan at no h»nd be obtained (by men incapaiciyof it) without it: And it hath been ■u>eliobferved,that in the wordi following, the lil^e firefs is not laid on Baptifm as on FMth: Vot [he that is not baptized] i«/ [he that h^-

§.47.

C8p3

§. 47.

K, B. TF affirmations be good proof of the weaknefs of Arguments, then this JLis fufficicntly confuted. Biu to the reft : i. I confefs there may be a Hyflcren Protcron in the Scripture: and In fuch a cafe wc may not gather the rcall picccdency of that which is fiift named. But otherwife, I know not whence wc ihould better gatha the natural order then from Scripture order In expreflioB. If I may by tin. order of your fpccchcs gather the order of things m your conception and intentions^ then may 1 oblcivc the Holy Ghorts order alfo to the like ends : for I f ippofe you fpeak not more orderly then the Holy Ghoft. But I may furc to that end obfcrve the order of your txpreflions, therefore. Moreover, this is not one Text going againft the order cxprcJkd in moft ethers : but contrarily, the fame order is iifually obfcrved n\ other Texts that fpeak of Ftith and Baptifiii, putting Faitiv firft. Furthermore, this is not a nicer Hiftorical Narration, or tircumftantialby-palTage , butit is the very fum of the I-awof Grace^ I'olemnly delivered by Chrift to his ApolUcs ( with their grand Commifllon^ before his Afccntion ; and where may we cxpeA if not here 5 where in fo few words is cxprcfltd the fubft.ir.cc of the Covenant ? Moreover, it is not dodrinal-ly and in general precepts onely, tnat thisodcr is held, but ia particular precepts, dittd.ng in prefcnt matter of execution. TheEunuch mull Believe with alibis heart, and fo others commonly muft prokfs belief, before they muft be Baptized : and the Scripture gives no hint that this Is one kinde of Faich, and that anothei, iVf.ir. 1.4. ihcvvs firft In General what/o')« did in the wildernefsj zi\. Baptize : and i. in what order he did it, ^'.\. fiift preaching that Bap-tilin of Repentance to them. That z Pet. i, 3. is fpoken in perfed Logical order : It fpeaks not ot Chrifts order of Execution, and our order ot Alfe-cution, but ot Gods and our order ot Intention. If it had been faid that he givcth us gloi-y and vertuty it had been a Hyficron Protcron : but it is only, be caUcd Hi to p/«,) a-:d vcrtue : And of ends the Ultimate is the firft in Intention, and all ends are fo b;;fcre their means ; and therefore may well be fo in expref-fion,

X. Ithink as Baptifm hiTuly ^tediumad falutefK -, fo it may be faid to bene-Ci^Hxiy, ?trccfiiiat€ medusas \yc\l asfiic'fsitaic pacipu : only with a diftinftjon of ncccfliiic,accrding to its Degrees ; Faith is abfolutely 1 cceffarie ; as fine qua non , and Baptifm is of an inferior Icls neccffir'.e, foinc'Ime but adbcn" cjje & UiLcmnnatcm, Laftly, the command foregoing , Bifc'plc me aUNanms., Bap-tiyng them : fetteth Faith ( in prefent or pcribns at -ige thcmfel vcs) before Baptifm, as included in Difcipling : And if this text which contaijis the Coni-miflion, put not Faith before I'aptifm, its like others do not, .nnd then why may not any Heathens that will, be baptized : and the text fpeaks but of one faith, for ought I can finde.

§. 48.

Mr. Bl, z.T Lt Peter xvhcrehe fpsa\s of fahat'ion Sy baptifmy interp-m thefe JL^ r(>§Yd%i Baptifm doth now alio (faith he) fare us by the refur-

B b region

rcfllifjifif IcfusChrift, i Pet. 3.11. and then exflaiVsVimfclf. Not the putting a-»ry the tilth of the fljlij biittncanrwciof a gooil confcicncc towarrfi God ; ihis iirfwc-iorn{lij--u'a!ion (n thr ounvrtidadwimfiraiio'tiof Bapliiniy ii that tvhich fol-lotvs tiponBapuffKjbiit Jnf^ifyi'/ig Taith u that rclhp.iLitiofi (at lca(} a piVlipdbranch ff'it ) and ihtrtferc thcic is no mcefsitic lb.it it ^0 before, bnt a nccejsiiie that it mii^ follow fftii baptifrn. It n iruc that in tTicn cf ytars^ Juftifying faith fomctinits poc^ btfcrc baptijm , /75 i/i Abraham it rvent bifiri C^rcumcifon : but it it iwtof nicfct'uy -icqidrcd to Inicrcft us in a Kght, n-.ithcr rf B.iptijm nor Circtnncifion.

§.48.

75. i. T Will not row ftand to enquire of the fi nefs or unfitnefs of your term, J- '^e^ipidaticn, ashcrculcd. Kajrouicih/ic/?/;'/^^//as being the lame r.ft z% fiipi:!a)i ; and Civilians ufc it but rarely. In every ftipujation thty make two parties , the Stipulator (which is he ihat asks the qucflion ^ and thcPromifcr ^ which is the anlwcrcr, that obligcth hjmfelf). Though larcJy and unuiiially alfo, the Piomillr be called Stipulator. But I luppofc it is Re-fponfio Promfl'orisy that you mean by Rcftipulation,flnd not another Intcrogation whereby a double ftipulaiion is made; fuppoling this your meaning I Reply : J. Why did you not give us one word for proof , that this Rcftipulaiion is a thing following Baptilm ? This is too dilute and cafic difputing. I took the contrary for an unqutftionabk truth. The bcft Interpreters Judge, that P<:/f>-means here, the Anlwcr whereby the Promifer in Baptifm did lolcmnly oblige himfclf ." which was to two Qucftions. CrcdisinPatrem , fHium& fpiriiifm fan-clum f Crido. ^brcnuncias T^iabohim, niundiim& Cf^'^cm ? Abrcmrncio. And vrho knowcth not that thefe went before the application of the water ? (of which more anon. ) Doth not mutual confent cxpriflcd go before the fcaling of ihe Covenant > Doth Chrifl bid us Baptize men into the name of the Fa/-thcr. Son, and Holy-Ghoft ; and would you have us do this before they profefs their confent ? Ihallwc Baptize them firftj and ask them whether they believe and confcnt after ?

1. 1 gratefully accept your Conccffion, that J unifying Ta'nh is that T^Jlipida-lien. "Which is your minor ; ( that is, juftifying Faith, profcflcd). And thence I concludcjthat then Juftjfyirg faith is EflicntiaJ to the mutual Covenant, and fo without it, God is not thus in Covenant with men: For who knows not,that ever read Civil Law,that there is no ftipulationj/wc Pyomifsioneywhkh you call Cond fo do other Divines) Rcftipulation ? and that this Rcftipulation is an cfl'cntial part of the contraft, called ftipulation ? This being paft doubt, it follows, that Juftifying Faith being our Reflipulation , is an 'Eflcntial pait of the contraft or Baptifmal Covenant. And it is apparant that Peter meant not any other contraft which was to be entered between God and man, after the Baptifmal Contraft , and different from it -. for then he would not have faid baptifm fayeth la i and have interpreted it, rffjf<s^.i vefponftonc vdpremifsionc^ ^ nondc yiud.i lotione.

3. The Conccffion which you wcre.forced to, about men of ycarsj how it doth €W the throat of your caufcj I fhall flicw you anon.

CJO

-.'bi.)v §.49

■;rf

"MI

Mr^BI, /^Bj. 3 .That faith cd which the promifcof Remifsion and Jciftificat'ion \y is made, it miift alfo be fcaled to, (or that faith which is the con-4itionof the Promifc, is the condition in foro T>ei of the Title to the Seal). But it is only folid tiue faith which is the Condition of the Promife Cof Remiflion) . Thciefore it is that only that gives Right in foro Dei, to the Seal. Anfiv. Her^ isanarrumc»tfir(ipropofcd; *. ina parenthcfts pxraphrafcd : For the propofilioU, I fry, Va'ptb is not fcaled Co, but Remifsion of fms, or falvation upon condition of Faith', 4 profijfor of Faith that gocs no further^ may aigage himfdfto advcly tvofking Faith^ and upon thofe terms» God engages for., and puts his Sea! for Remifsion andfalvatm. For the parenihefisi That faith which is the condition of the Piomife , is the condition in foro Bei of Title to that Seal •, Ijudjj the coJiirary to be undeniable , that Faith which is the condition of the Promifc, is not the condition in foro Dei, of Title to the Seal. ^4n aiknoveledgmcnt of the Kaepiiy offuch faith , vt>ith engagement: toit, is fufjicient fof aTitle to the Seal, dfid the performance ef the cendUien of like vccffsity to attain the thing fcaled. To-prowifefrvice andfidelhic inwf.^ is^cUiu^k to get lificdi as to dofi>vicc » ef ncccfsity to be rewarded.

§.49.

^•^' ^- VX"^^^ Sacraments rightly ufed, are a miJtual Scaling to the mutual O Covenant, A'i in the Lords Supper j Taking and eating , is'oiir Scaling, profcffing ^fiion ; fo in Faptifm , receiving the water applied , is otp: Seal and proftffing Pafljon : ( For weare morePaflivc inou-r new birth, then moi^r feeding for growth). So is the prefcnting our pcrfons, or our children , of our delivering them up to Chrift, as his Dlfciplcs. It is i^ercfoic our part, as well as Gods, that is Scaled to.

I. Wl^rc you fay, Aprofeff^r of Faith may eagaieto a. livelytvorJiing Faith j you mc;^!},cither aProfiffbrofthatlivclyfaith^oTafrofcJfgrofadcad, not ivorl^-mg Ya.it,i\, If the fiiftj it is a contradiction to fay , Ht profejjcih to have <t lively Faith J '^n^l^con'^y engagetJ* fotobciievehcrcafkr. For if he profefs to have ic already, then he can engage only to the Continuation, and not the Inception of ic. If you mean the latter, then I fliall ihcw you anon , that a man profcfling a Dead, not-working Faith, is not in Scripture called to Covenant with Gjd in Baptifm , to believe lively far th- future, {inceplve) and to believe for the future with a working F^iith. In the mean time, this (hould be proved , which yet I ncvei^' ^aw. You fuppofe then, fuch a profcflor as this, coming to Baptlfmj laying, Lord I befme that Thou art Cod atone andchriif the only T^e dec mcr, and the Hi)!y-Gh«^,ibe GHidf-and^a niii^C iMflb^^iafk^^ndthat the u-o.ld,Fkfh, mi 'Devil is to be renonnccd for thee : but at prcfcnt ihefe are fo dear to mo, that 1 will iiQtforfakc them for thee ; I will not taf^s Tk«e for my Gnd,to Rule me,nr be my Happi-ncfs^nor wiU I tal^e Cb/i^ to Govern me,and Save me in His w^y^nor w:Hi be Guijied or SmHi^edbyUie H{)ly-Ghof(\k(itl)pe<ifter I wiU,& tht/cforel cofge ip be Baptised.

3. Tlvvtwhich you judge undeniable, you fee 1 deny. It is not thcrcfojfc (ic faiio vni^n'k^)?k, Wl^cn you and I can each of us attain to fuch a heieht <;,f

Bb X coflft4vn<;<?>

confidence, of the Vciity of our fcvcraiCQiuradidory Propoficionj, in a mat-tci ot fuch moment, and about the Piinciplcb of the Doftiinc of Chflff, which the Apoftlc rcckoncth as the nulk of Babes, who arc unskilful in the word of Rjghtcpujncfs (Hill. 5.11,13,14. and 6.1.zj itcncrcafcth myconviftionof the great ncdclVity of toleration c-f fomc gicat errors, even in Preachers ol the Go-Jpd ; For cither yoiHs or mine fcem luch. I findv no proof ot your undcny-ablc Propofition. i. The Seal is but an affix to the Promilc: therefore that which is the condition of the Prcmifc, is ihc condition ot the Seal. 2. The ufc of the Seal is to confirm ;he Promifc to him to whom it is Sealed : Therefore the condition of the Promifc is the condition of the Seal. ^ .H the Promife and Seal have two diftinft conditions, then there are iwo diftind Covenants (for from 'the conditions, moft commonly are contiatfts fpccificd : and thcrctorc Jl'cfin-beclniii and fuch like Logical Civilians, call it the form of the contraft,or ftipii-lation to be either Dura vcl in dic?fi, zclfub condiUoHC^ and thofe fub-conditions are fpecificd oft from their various conditions). But tlrcrc is not two Covenants, thcretoici but of this more anon.

4. Is it not agajnft the nature and copfmon ufc of Scaling , that it ftiould be in order before the Promifc or Covenant j and that men Ihould have firft right to that Seal on one condition, before they have right to the Promife i and then have right to the Promifc after on another condition ? y. If it be lo undcny-able, that thai Faith rvhich it the condition of the Tiomfcyis not the cendition in fo-ro Dei of Title to the Seal jas you affirm: why do you then build fo much againft C^lr. Tombcsy on that argument from Aft. 2. The Tromfc is to you and yenr children J arguing a Right to the Seal, from an Intercft in the Promife?

6. Where you fay, that ^a ac\norvkd^cmciU of the ncccfity offuchfaithy tvith engagement to it J isfiiffcient for a Title to the Seal. I Reply, then thofc that at prc-fent rcnoimce Chrift, fo it be againfl their knowledge and confcience , and will engage to own him fincerely for the future, have right to Baptifm. A convinced pcrfccator may acknowledge this ncccffity, and engage* that before he dies he will be a true Believer, and yet refolve to be no Chriftian till then , no not fo much as in profeflioru 7. Your inftancc of fervice & fidelitie In war,runs upon the great miftake which 1 have fo often told you ot.Thc forrHal Reafon ard denomination of a condition, is from the Donors conftitution or impofition, giving his benefits only on the terms byhimfelf afligned j and not from our Promife to perform them. And therefore our Promife it fclf, is the chief condition of Gods Promifc, and ('to fpeak as your felf did). Our Juftifing faith being our Reftipulation, that Refti-pulation is not only part of our condition , but the whole as to our firft Right to Chrift,Juftification and Salvation ; though that Right ffi.nll notbecontinued,nor we aftually glorified, but on condition both of continuing that faith,and of adding (ifthercbeopportunitie) fincerc obedience, in perfeverance to the death.

§. 5°.

Mr. Bl. 4, AS for the argHmem ad hom\ncm,framed again^ thofe ypho nia\e ini-•^ tialor common faithy fufficicMt to eutitlelo Baptifm i and yet affix 7{tmifsim of fins to all Baptifm, evtnfo received rvithout any performance of further ingagemtm i / leave to them to d^enidjwho mainmnfufh Vs^rinh <*»<^ tofpcak to the Ahfurdities thatfoiiew upon it, $. Jo.

C5>j3

§.50.

71; B. TpHough you avoid the dint of this argument, by forfaking Dr. Ward here, yet it may perhaps appear thai your own way is clogged with more Abfurditics then a few.

§.51.

Mr. Bl. y. 'TTnatof Philip to the Eioiuchyfeems to carry moli colour ; The Eunutb wufi believe rvith aM his hearty before he muft be baptised 3 and I have t(^nowH it trouble fame, that a, c fully convinced , that a Dogmatical faith gives title to baptifniy fatisfymg thcmfelvcswittj this anfwer, that hoTvfeever Philip calltd for fuch a faith which leads to f'a'vMio?Jj yet did not exprefs himfelf fo farythat no faith fhort of this gives title to baptifm. -It maybe anfwercdithat-a Dogmatical faith is true faith, (uogencvc, as well as that vfhich Jitllificth ; therefore I Jfc«o»' not why men pjonld give it the term offalfe Faith, feeing Scripture cads it Faith, and fuch as thofe Belierers, and the heart in Jtich a Faith (as to an entire affeni) is required, if we loot(^ int» the Eunushs an-fwcr,in which Philip didrefi fatisficd,and froceedec(upon it to baptifmfit Tvill tal^e <i-way allfcniple : his anfiver is, I believe that Jcfus Christ is the Son of Gad'. There is no more in that then a commen Faith •' this is believed by men net jufiified : yet thii Faith entitles to baptifm, and upon this confifsion ef Faith the Eunmh is baptised.

§. Ji.

7^. B. 'TTHat will not trouble you, which troubleth others. To your anfwer I i^cply, I. When we do,with the Scriptures, enquire after Faith in Chrift Crucified, we may well call that a falfc Faith which pretends to be this, and is not this, however true in fuo gtnerc. Faith in Jupiter. Sol, Mahomet, is true in fill) gcHcrc : andfo is. humane Faith : yet I would call it a falfc Faith , if this Ihouldbc pretended to be Faith in Chrift. To believe in ChriA as man only, or as God only, or as a Guide to Heaven only, and not as a Redeemer by ranfom, or as one that is to juftific us, but not to bancflifie or Rule us ; each of thcfe is true in ffogencrc, butfalfeif they pretend robe that which Scripture calJs Faith in Chrift, and which denominateth Believers. So is it to believe with the un-dcrftanding fpeculativcly and fuperficially, and yet to Dilfcnt with the will. I thinV, if a man fay, This is the Son, lb6 heir., came let us t^iU him,and the mheritante P^.tU bevurs ; we wi-il not have th-s man Reign over us : that thcfe are not true BeU«*vcr5,-nor have right to BaptifitJ, (hough their belief that he is the heir, be a Ddgmacical Faith, true in its kindc.

2. As Amefius Medulla \i. i. tap. ^. $ 20. ^amvis in Scripturis aliqimndo Af-fenfus veritati qua eft de Deo & Chnfto, Jeh.i .50. habetur pro vera fide, includttur lamen femper fpccialis fiducia, atque adeo omnibus in tocis ubi fcrme e(l defaluturifi-de,velpr<efufpnitur fiduciain ^efUm, &indic^itHr tantum dcterminatiovel ap-plicatioejus adperfonam Jefu Cbrijii, vel peraffenfum iUimdcfigmiHT, tanquatn sfm

B b 3 fcQuin

Cp43

fc^ii>M ptY fudtn caufa>». And as f.^oris of Knowledge and Afftnr, do In Scripture ofc im ly nffcSion and confcnt, fo on the contrary, words of confenc and afFcdion do alwaies imply Knowledge and Affem. And therefore Faith is foraetime denomu natcd ffoiTi" ihe Intellectual aft Bdievivg , and fomctiqie from the Wills aft /Jivei-

VlBg.

3. Do you not know how ordinarily even favlng Faith It felf is dcnomiaatcd from the Intclleftual Ad alone ? when yet you'l confefs the Will Is neccffarily an Agent in ihii ? many texts might quickly be cited to that end. Thofe thzt 4meJtus ckcth rnay fuffice : Jeh.i^. ^5J '-6, i?- He that bcHcvcth in me ftjalllive. Believeft thou this i yea Lox^^ I bciu vc that thou an that ehrijl the Son of god, that wtu to come /». to the voM. Such was tlaihanicls faith. Job. 1.49, 50. 1 Job. 4.1J ..iVbofoevir (hall confefs that Jcfiu U tl)e Son of God . Goci drvcUeth in him^ and he in God. And 1 Joh. 5. X. whojoever believetb that Jcfus ii the Chrift, is born of Cod. Here is more then Right to Baptlfm. The great doubt was then whether Chrift were the true Mcf. y«j/j, and therefore this was the greateft and moft difficult part of Faith, to Aflenc CO this i and therefore the whole is denominated from it, it being fuppofcd, when they believed him to be the only fuffickm and faithful Phyfitlan, that they were willing to be healed by him in his way.

4. If you think, as you fecm by your anfwer to do, that a man may AflciM to the Truth of the Gofpel with all his heart, and yet be void of Jullifying Faith, you do not lightly err. Though an unregcnexate man may believe as many truths as the Rcgenerate,yet not with all his heart jChrlft faith Math, i j. The word bath not rooting in him, Doubtlefs, whether or no the Praftlcal underftanding do unavoidably determine the Will, yet God doth not fandific the underftanding truly, and leave the Will unfanftlfied : which muft be fald, if the Dogmatical Faith, that is the Intelle-ftual Affent of a wicked man, be as ftrong as that of a true Belitvcr. Dr. Downam In his Treailfe of Juftification, and againft Mr. Pemble hath faid enough of this , to which I refer you. 1 take that anfwer as equal to filcnce, which yet Mr. Bl. fo highly values, as to fay, It will take away all fcruple.

U Aving Replyed to your Anfwer, I fhall be bold to trouble you with fome more Arguments to this point. Mr. B/^j/j-e affirmeth , that Juflifying Faith is

the great Condition to which Baptifm cn-lUvet In Animad.In Annotat.Grotli gageth, and therefore not prercquSfite to Bap-In CafTandr. in arr.4. p. ij fol. tifm 3 and that an acknowledgment of the Fides qute non farit obeditntiae propo- Keceflity of fuch Faith with engagement to fitum, nan efi vera fides. Hac cum ky Is Aifficient for atltlctotheSeal : andfo frimum ingeneratur cum foenitcntia it U a Dogmatical Faith which entitles to conjm£la efi, qua non potep efc fine Baptifm,' in which Baptifm wc niMft engage obcd'cmia pYopofito. Fidei formata to believe with a lively and working Fairh &infoymis apud ^eteics Catholicos hereafter; Againft this Dpftr/ne I argue. 1. Tie yeftigium quidem reperUury fide From Authorky ( beginning with the lowefl fide jufiificante& falvifica, &c. Argument^. The Reverend Aflembly in their

Advice for Church GoYcrnment, Printed after the DIreftory, pag. f 8. of the Church fay thus, Particular Churches in the Primitive times Wire made up of yffihk Samts, viz, offnch asbeingof /igc^profeffed. faith

I

C95 3

in chA^tMdobed'uncc Uftto chri^j auording totheRu!c «f Tj'itb and Life] taught b^ Chrift andbU Apojiles j aad oftbcit cbildfen: and they eke A£l. t, 38,41, laft /compared with A^. J- 14- I Cor, 1 2, compared with 2 Cor,^, i ^. Now if the Pro-feffioR of this Saint-ihip in Faith and obedience according to the Rule, were necfffi-ry,tbentheprofeirion of Juftlfying Faith wasncccflary ; Forthlsis jaftifyingFaith without doubt. And if fo, then it is not a Faith Ihort of this which is the condition of Church member.fhip j for then the profcflion of that other impcrfed Faich might fuffice i of which more anon. Seeali'othe AlTemblics Confeffion.cap. 28. §.i,6. and tha two Catechifms of Baptifm , where i. obferve the ends of Baptifm , that ic SealethRemirtion,Regeneration, Adoption, e>f. 2. thefubjeft, that none are tobe Bjptized at age till they profefs their Faith in Chrift and Obedience to him. Which if they do fincereIy,no doubt that Faith is no Icfs then juflifying. Sec alio what that truly ludiclous, Learned, Reverend Divine, Mr, Gm&ilcr hatli Replyed to Dr. lizard, ( vi\* agalnfl thofe words which I confuted,not knowing that it was Mr. duai^er that iheDodor dealt with) in Ms, Gatal{C,s Defccpt.uio de ISaptifmaiis Infamdis vi ey* cfficaciaf^y^. 71. whete healfo cites Luther,, Calvifi, Sucer, n'hltclier^ Sec. and therefore I will cite no more, (Mr. May(hal in his lace Sermon for Unity, I mentioned before.) A hundred might cafily and truly be ciced to this pur{ ofe.

Argir. 2. My Second Argument fiiall be from the Teftimony and Pradiceof the pureft Antiquity, i. ^uliin Martyr in his fecond Apologie, relating the Churches cuftomin Uaptlzlng, faith, As many as being fcrTwaded do believe the/e things to be true rvbiih tve teach, and do promifc to live according to them, they fir (I lea/n by prayer (ini fn(ih'g to beg pardon of Gad for ibeir former fins, our /elves alfo poping ear prayer and fifi'i'!g '• r/7r?; they are bi^ought to the tvater and bom again, in the fame way as we our felves were born again : So for the other Sacrament he addeth , TbU food we call the Eucharift, id which no man U admitted, but be that belicveih the Truth of our D<?<3' ine, being wa(hed in the Laver of Regeneration} for Remifsion of fin, and that (9 livHh as Cbrifl both taught.

2. lrcK(t:is I. 4. c. 13 . fliews that Abrahams Faith by which he was juftified, is the fame with the Chriftian Faith, yea with that whereby we begin to be faved. And cap. 76. having reference to the Baptifmal Covenant, wherein men deliver up themfelves to Chrift, he faith, Siigitur t?adide-ri4 eiquodtuumeji, idefi , fidemineum & fub^ jc^onem, pcrcipics ejus aitem^& cris perfedum Dei opus : fiautcm nm credidem «", e^ fugeris manus ejus, erit Caufa in te, &c. llie enim mi fit qui vocarent ad Nnptias j qui autem non obeiierunt ci (cmetipfos privaniM regui c^nd.

3. Athenagoras inUgit.pro C^rifiianU p. 3. ihU i^-x^iTKi-vU -mmcit (^ «s V'SiDKfii'S,^ Tov K'o)fiv. NuUus enim Cbrijiunm malu^ c(i, mil banc prcfcfsiencm fimu-' l.:v:rit. He therefore that ©nly profeffeth ,is but a counterfeit Chiiliian j and he that profcffethany thing lower then Holynefs or an obediential Faith, doth proftfs fome-what ihort of Ghrlflianity^andnot Chriffianity itfeif.

■4. TertuUian Apolog. cap. 44. Speaking how the Heathens were fain to piinilli one another in Prifons and houfes of Corredions, addes,^'i■wo;7?.r Cbjftiafjui, vifi p'ane t.iittumCbrifliantu,autfi& aliiid, jam nen Chnfi amis ; No Chiiltian comes there unlefs mcerly bccauf: he isaChrifiian : or if othcrwi(s (i.c.as3i wicktd liver ^ then he is noChiiliian. And de B.iptifmo,ksiihht (csp. 6, J Ita & angdusbap' tifmi arbiter fupervtnturo fpintui favHo viasdirigit abiutione dehftoiUK-iquaca fi^des im-pctrat, obligiata in Patre& Fdio& fpiniufando. Many places mis,ht be cited in him,that fliew, they took the baptized for juftified Believers.

fm^lgenui t'mgli &inBapt'ifmo^prteterita peccatadlmUti^&e. And Eplft. i. §.'a. Sed psjiquam undcgenhalU aaxitiofuper'mU <tvi labe deter fa, tn expiatum pcHus ac pu» rum defuper fe lumen iHfuditypoflquam ctelitui fpiritu hmfio in novum me hominem Nutivitas Secundareparavit, &c But it Is fo well known a CafCj thjt Antiquity runs wholly thi> way, that I think 1 may fpare thelabor of tranfcrJbing any more. 1 had a: hand ihe full tcllimonies oiClemens Alexand- Origen, Epiph.wiiu, AthinajluSj LMrdiiHiiNa':^vi':^cn,NyffLri^ Bijil-Cyril oi Alexandria^ Cynl of fcrufatcm, Sync/iu4t Hiomr', '^iacifius , Enfehins. with divers others, which I now calt by as tedious and usincceifaryj but Hull produce quickly,, if I once findc it of any ufe. Yet two or three brief ones I will ai^d , which ihew that It is tha Covenanting or Profefllng of true Obedience , and conlequently of a lively working Faith that Is required , and not the profeflion of an unfound faith only.

6. I^i-^ian-^en 0/.J^ 40. p. 641. vol. i. (Edit, ^forcl.) faith, Fortdfumme up all in a words s'^ ought to judge, that the force and faculty of Baptifm, u nothing elfe but a Covenant entered with God, for ( or a Promife made to God »f) a Second Life , ( or a new Life ) and a more pure courfe of living 1 And therefore that rvejhall all exceedingly fear^ and with all diiiqeme k^^p our Souls, left we be found to have violated this Covenant. And doubtlefs toenterfuch a Covenant Gncerely, is the work of a Faith not fhort of juftifying : and therefore it is juftifylng Faith which in Baptifm is profeffed, and thereto required.

7. ^jfil. Amph. c. 9.As rve believe in the Father^ Son and Holy Ghofl, fe arc we Sapti\td into the name of the Father,5«n and Holy Ghofi. And Confcfsion as Captain leads the rvMy to falvation : and Baptifm /eating up our Promife (or Covenant) faUoTv, eth. (It is then a ^eal of our Promife, as well as of Gods )

8. Chryfoftom, Tom. 5. Homd. ad Neoph. iVouldwe did anfwerablygo on j and thofc Symbols and Covenants wherewith we arc bound, did liicli in our hearts j rvc have confeffed Chrifls Government ; we have renounced the Devils Tyrannic ; This Hand' TViiting, this Covenant, tbu Symbol we are taught u con/cribed : See that we be not again found Debtors to this handwriting.

9. Hierom , Dial, adverf. Lucif. faith again and again that Baptifma non cfi ( e&» nuUum e(l) fine fpiritu fanUo : which faying,thouglil approve not, yet that and many more paflfagcs in that Dialogue fully (hew his judgement in this point.

\o. Salvian de Gubem. I. 4. initio, laith. Nam cum hoc fit hominis chriftiani fides , fideliter Chrifit mandatafervare,fit abfque dubio ut necfiiem babeat qui infidelis eft, nee Chriftum credat qui Cbrifli maniiata conculcat. Ac per hoc totum in id revolvitur , ut qui Chnfliani nominU oput non agit, chriftianui non ejfe videatur. Nomen etiim fine a£lii atque officio fuo nihil e[l. Et lib. 5. p. 66. ^uid efi igitur C^'edulitas vel fides ? opiaor fideliter hominem Chrifto credere , id eft, fidelcm Deo ejfe, h$c eft, fideliter Dei mandata fervarc. pag, 67. Infidelu fit neceffe eft, qui fidci commiffa non fervat,

ArgU' J. If it be required in Baptifm that men do finceiely promife for the fa-ture to Btlicv^ favingly, and to obey Chrift fincercly, then luftifying Faith is re-qaired in Baptifm. But the Antecedent Is acknowledged by Mr. Bl. ( except the word rmcercty.^ He yieldeth that men muft in Baptifm engage to do tr.is hereafter. Now I would know of him, whether God require them to make this engagement fe-rloufly, fincerely, &firmato ammo, or not ? if not, then God calls them but to Differablcj which is not trae. If yea ; then I fay. This is jultifying Faith it felf, or at lead comes from it , if it be a Promife to do this prefently without delay. For he that will heartily engage kimfelf toobey Chrifl ashis Soveraign,and reft on him for falvationj muft needs be refolved To (e do. But he thac isfo refolved, is a ftue

Believer:

Bdltfter: For k!s will Isfandifitd ; or elfe he could notbethusr^folred. But If it be only for fo long dmehenccj tkic 3 min protnifech to believe and obey (incerely » with a rcferre and rcfolutloa to lire wickedly till then, I hope few will believe that this Is the condition of Baptifm , or the true Bapcifmil Covenanr.

Affjt. 4. They that are to Renounce the World, Flellij and Devil, are to be true believers ^to juftificatlon^ } but they that arc to be bapti3t«d, are then to Renounce the World, Fleih and Devil .• therefore &c. The major Is evident, in thi: renouncc-Ingthefe,i$ arenoanceiog them as Rulers that would command us before God,or as worldly, flertily pleafaies or profits,might fccm our chief good, to be preferred before God.Now It is none but the lincere believer that can To renounce thefe. All ethers are fervants to them, and make them their end Tlie Minor is proved thus. 1. There can be no tnotiu to the Tertnims adqucm, but there muft alfo be a Tcrminm I quo. The World, Flclh and Devil, are the TerminKt a. quo } withou: which we cannot be faid to takeGodtorour God, or Chrift for our Lord-Redeemer, i D:fi£l3y this Abre-nunclatlon hath been ufcd in the Churches Baptifm, ever (ince the Apoftles days> as far as we have any Hiliory to guide us. TertuUian, Cyprian^ and all Antiquiry uno ore that write of thefe things, puc that pift qucftion. And I dare not think rhat Chriits Church hath ever required that as neccUary in Baptifm, which was not rcquilite till afterward. And if vlr. B'. fay, that they did buc promife for the future ^ not to follow the Wo Id, V^lefh and Devil before Chrift .- /Reply, They renounced them at prefenc, and thereby (hewed the prcfentconverfionand Refolution of their hearts, that it was afterward that this was to be minifefted in adion.

Ar^u. J. They that are required to believe fincercly lo the Father, Son and Holy. Ghofi , are rfqui.ed to believe to J unification. Bu: fuch are all that come to baptlfm. Therefore^ lor the major, it requires no mere proof, but to exp'ain what it Is to believe in the Father, Son and Holy-Ghoft. And our Divines agalnft the Pa* plfts have enough proved, that the phrafe of Believing in, comprehendech the %Gt of the will as well as of the undcrthnding. To bflieveinGodfis to takehimfor our God: to take him for our God, is to take hi,n for our Soveraign,Ruler and Chief good.This none but a found believer can truly do. Mr. Bl. confeflethelfwhcre, that thisis the lummeoftheCovenant,totake God for our God,& giveupourfelves to be his people. Forthe Mino- : They tlwt are to be bap:ized into the name of the Father , Son, *nd Holy-Ghoft, are to believe in the Father, Son, and Holy-Ghoft. But all that are bapn'ted, are to be baptized into the name of the Father, Son and floly-Ghoft.} therefore.

Wcreitneceffary. many Texts might be cited that prove it is not only Afient, but a believing in Chrift, thit is rcquilite. The very Creed diews it, whichhath Credo mDeiint, &c. which Creed, forthe tsain Articles of it, the Church hath ever required all to profefs, that would be bipcizcd , before the application of the water. And then that this is required to be done^wcr/f.'yjneeds no proof-with them thar will not believe that God commands or loves diffembling. So that I conclude^ This fincere Faith is required in and before baptifm, and not only to be promlfed that wc will perform it hereafter.

Argu. 6: 1 hey that are required to repent fincerely are required to believe to juflL fication at the faaietime. But all thit coaie to bapti^n ( at age ) are required to repent fincerffly; therefore.

The major Is evident, i. In that lincere Repentance and true Faith arc infcpar^ able. z. In thnt Rcmiflion is promlfed to all that truly Repent, as well as to them thatbsllcye. X^cMjQor is provedfionifcveral pl^in Scriprurej, Ail< i. 38. ^&,

Cc t'C/it

C?S3

pKt.^tdki "Bafn^ichve-'ytnccfjDii mihc y.imccf J<fus Cfirtjl f»r the 7(cm'ifApM if jjtis : Anii ir was no l^ali oi corrnion Rcpcnrancc that he caJls them to ', for Kuv-iflion ct fins was to be its Conftqiicnr. If Mr. B/. fay here tlfo, That It is the weakiR ofall A:giiircnts, to a!guc from the order cxprtfli:d in Scripture* 1 fliall fay I wJJi not believe him i bccaufc 1 fiJppofe Scripture in fuch Piadical dirccticns, fpcaks not move cos.fiilcdjy or prcpoflcirnfly then he orl \sould do-' ^n. 11.18. It is called Repentance unto lite, which ihcGcmilshad before and in their Baptifm .' ycaihcy had firft the HoJyGhoft, ^(7, 1 o, 47. And Ktb. 6. 1. Repentance jvorn deed irov/^j is a Trincipk. Vanl, tlic jaylor, and all that wc read of thci were Baptiz-cd, did repent or fcemcd fo to do, and were rehired to doit bcfoic Bapti'ni. If Nir. B/. 1. y, It is a Repentance (hort of that which is lavir.g, that is here required ^ 1 would he would dcfcribe it to us, and tell us \sherein it is {l-.ou ? 1. Objcftively, I hope he will not deny but it is every fin . ibat iTiCn fhould rcpcntof. 2. Si:bjcftivc!y , it is doubtkfs , fincere, and not countcilcJtj thoi is required. 1 conclude therefoic, that feeing, laving Repentance is prcrcquijitc to Baptifm, by Gods appointment, and not only to be pro-mifed to be afteiward peifoimed, we muft fay tl e fame of faving Faith.

^igh'. 7. If favir.g Grace be not required in Chrifts Baptifm, then it rcqiii-reih Icfs then Jel.rti Baptifm did. But the Confcqucnt is falfc : therefore fo is the Antecedent.

The Conlcqucnce of the major is all that requires proof. Which I prove from n'.any Texts, ^lat. 3.2.^, &. He 6rft prcachtih Repentance, and caufcth them to confefs their fins, and rcprchcndcth the Tharifts that came in Hypocrific, or with unfcimd Repentance. And it was true Repentance^ for Rcmiflion of fins was annext, jv;»v. 1. 4. Ami it may not only be required after Baptifm, but before ; and it is called the Baptifm of Repentance, bccaufc in it they profcflcd Repentance. SoA'A. 13. 24 and 19. 4.

Aifu. 8, If Faith-Juftifying be required before Rcmiflion of fin, then is it required of God before we come to Baptifm (or in us before we bring our Infants ), But fuch Faith is prcrcquifire to Rcmiflion ot finj therefore.

The confequencc is proved thus. Rcmiflion is the end and immediate con-fequent of Baptifm, where men come as God hath required them. Therefore , if fincere Faith be prcrcquifite to Rcmiflion, itisprercquifite alfo to right to Baptifm. '■

I prove the Antecedent; AB. 12.1^. Ananias faith to Vaul,TVhy tanycftthtM ? arife and be bapU\cd, and tvajh atvay thy fins. This was a prefent Rcmiflion, and not a future only. So Afi. 2. 3 8. «e bapi'fx^d ci;C;y one of you, in the name of Jtfus Chi ft for the Kcmifsim of fnis. And it is a Faith which hath the Promijc of Rcmiflion which Teter rcquirci of the Gcntils before he baptize them. Ail, 10. 4-3, ACl. 13. 39. the Apoftle tells them , All that bdivc are Ju^ifcd , when he is perfwading them to believe. It is therefore a believing to juftification, which he was perfwading them to. Kom. ^.3,4. J\}ioTvye not, that as navy as recrc ^ami^id hto Jrfus CL',^Jl,ive;ebaptiyd into his dtalh ? tbcrtforcvn are buiyed with him, by baptifm inte death, that lil^e as Chrift ypas raifid upJYcm the dead, &c It is there-lore m the aft of Baptifm, that wc are buried and rife SacramentaJly, to fignifie the prefent change of our flare from the Grave of fin. So Col. 2. 11,1 2,15.. <nd I P<^ 3.21. Baptifm is faid to fave us,bur not the external wafliing , without the anfwcr of a good confciencc j which afFordeth two argumtnts. One In that Baptifm favcdb and therefore Jeavcs not man ( when rightly ufed ) a chUdc

of vrrath afcerward. i. Inthatthc Anfwer of a good conrcicnce is required to-

concurrwIthBaptifm : for fo the Apoftle plainly intimates, and the bcft Ex-pofitors underftand it, and not of a thing ro follow, as Mr, B/. doth. Eph. S» r^, i4. Chrift loved the Churchi and gave himfdf for it , tkatle m'lzjn ptrjciifie and clcanfe it with the w.ijblng of water by the word. Wherefore Taal fiippofcth them <leanfed that arc Baptized .' i Cor. 6, ii. Such were fame of you, but ye are wafif^dy but ye are fanStificd, but ye arc fupfiedin the name of the Lrrd Jcfm , Sec, And Expofitcrsjudgcthat the Holy-Ghoft refers to the fign as well as the thing fignitied, to the Sacrament as well as Subftancc, when he makes vvailiing fo ne-ceirary,and fpeaks of wathingus from our fins in the blood of C'uift, Rcv.i.i, ThoiigJ) he malic them ml cqiutl at ncce(sity. Joh, 3. y. Sxccpt a man be born of wa-ter^ Sec. Hcb. 10. ii. Let us dra^onecr with a trite heart, m fuU ajjuran:e offnitbj having our hearts(fridl^'ed frgtn an evil confci:nccyin.i our bodycs w.ifli:d wUh fure •water. If >t be the end of Baptifm, to walh our hearts from an evil confcicnce, (i. e. a Confcicntia mail ) then it is the end of Baptifm, to Seal the prefent Re-miflionof fin : But &c. therefore, Ti^ 3 . ?. He favod tti by the wafij:ng of Re-'generation : It is a faving work that Bapcifm is appointed to do. By Regeneration I underftand, our new Relative ftate, at lead principally. He that is in Chrift is a new creature j old things arc palled away ; behold all things are become new. He hath a new head, is a member of a n^w focietie, the old guilt of fin is done away , the old enmity between God and us; we have a new Father , new brethren,ncw right to farther bLrtings, as well as a new heart. Regeneration is too narrowly taken for a Renovation of the heart alone. So that I think Remiflionand Reconciliation and Adoption, arc meant by Regeneration, inT»r. 3. f.andCj/. i. n, li. The fpcaking of Baptifm , and the heart-cir-cumcjfio:! therein received or profcff.-d, faith , they put off the body of the fms of the fl(fji by the circitmcifion of Chri(i, being burycdwnh him in Baptifm y &c. So in 2 Pet. 1.9. The Apoftle faith , He that lacl^cth thefe things is blinde, and cannot fee jar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old fins : that is Sacra-mcntally, and as far as the Church could go in purifying him : wiiich Ihews that tlic end of Baptifm is ( by obfignation and folcmnizaiion ) to purge men from their old fins ; or as Pj«-' fpeaks, The fins that are paft, through the forbearance of God, &c. Rftn. f. So that Remiflion of fins at prefent, being the end of Baptifm rightly received, it muft needs follow that Juftifying faith is prerequi* fiteco the right receiving it, and that it is notfomc other Faith, nor is it enough to promifc Juftifying Fauh for hereafter.

Artu. 9. If the Apoftlcs ufc to communicate the proper Titles of the Juftified to aUthatare Baptized, (till they fee them prove apoftates or hypocrites^ then they did take all the Baptized to be probably juftified ( though they might know that there were hypocrites among them, yet cither they knew them not, or might not denominate the body from a few that they did know ) But the Antecedent is true ; therefore.

I need not cite Scriptures to prove that the baptized are called by the Apoftlcs, Believers, Saints, Difciples,Chviftians : Mr. B/a^e hath done it already , chap. i8. Now who knows not that falvation is made the Portion of Believers, Saint*, Difciplcs '". Butwhat, is it another fort of them > or doth Scripture ufc to divide Saints, as the Genus into two Species ? Not that I know of j It is but as an tequivtcumin fua aquvocata. : The Apoftlcs naming men according to their appearance and Profefsion, and calling them futh as they probably might be.

Cc 4 Why

Whyelfc ftioiildihcy canthimfuchjhadicuhcyrccmcatobcfachj and pro* ftflcd it.? Tl-c n.inics tlcicfore do not P.in arily ?gitc laihtfcasa true Species of licl-cvi!<, ba,nt<,D;fcJpks, Chi.ft;arli ; tut fccondaiiJy, as the name of a man to a corj s, ci as tl>c name of a Habit to a difpofiiion, by iranflation, or Annie gic.

But to }iut (he mattci beyond doubt, 1 wlfli Mr. fi/. to confider, that jts not only ihtfc foiti>Knticncd titles , but even ihc reft which he will acknowledge piciKi to the Ri generate, which arc given by the A|^oi\lcs generally to the bap-rized. Adoption is afciibtd iotlxn,,Grt/. 3. J-^, i7- Fiyycc are aUlht children of God by Vmh in Chifi J, (if,: for as rcoD-j vf yon as have bitnba^ii\fdinto CbriP, have \>iit on chiip. 1. .'i-hc latr.c " cxt alcribtth to ihcm Union with Chiift ) 7f e hcze fut on Chi if. 3 ." And Unif n wali hii boJ y. yc arc cM om in Chrip Jcfw. 4. Yea (hcnixt vcifcaddes, ^4vdif yc Ic C]},ifs,yc an Abiahams/If</, (3«<<ki/-i M.cciY»ir,glo ihe Tremfc, What niore pre pci to the tuily fanftificd > So the A-poftlc faith to all the e hurchcs of Colltif in general. J. That Ihcy had pHt off the^ body of fill i being binytd n^ith Cbrift hi Bapfifm, wherein a/jo they were 1 ifcn with him, throiiz})the V,iuhvf the operation of Cua j Col. i. 11> 1 *. ^« Yea in i Cor, €.. 11. He tells the CorinthtarSi they wi;e w.-jhcdyfan^ifedy and jufifiid m'thenamc of the Lord Jcfiis; fothat Juflilication it ftlf is afcribcd to them, Co'. 1. 13. The Apoftk: tells them, God had qt/icl^ned them with fhrifiy having, fargizen thtm alltyejp/iffes. 7. Yea the like he iaith of their falvation , i Cor, IS. i. JE-ph. t. y, 6, 7, 8. yea he tells thcni vcife i ^, New therefore ye are no more gangers and furrtircrs, lutfeiiove-CitivvswiththeSaim5avdf{thehopfholdof God \ and kft. any fl-«ould think that Saints and C'tti^cns^ and the houfhota of God, do hciC fign--fic but cc-mmon Pnvikdges of the vifible Church, he addcs , ^nd arc btd'.t upen, the foundation of the ^pejllis and Prophets-, Jcfus On'fl hiwfelf being the chief coiWr-Slone, in whom aUthe building fiily frafred together, groweth to an holy 1'cmplc in the Lord ; in whom you a'foarc builded together for an habitatkn of. God through the Spirit, Where moft planly the Church is manifcfted to be but onc,and that one to have faving Priviledgesjandconfcqucntly, thofe thai have not thelcjto be but equivocally Chriftians.

Many more texts might be produced, where the moft particular Priviledgcs of the Saints arc given to whole Churches in common ; which {hews that the name is by Analogy or equivocally given from the fincerc, to the reft , bccaule wc, are to judge and denominate on piobabilitics.

^rgu. 10. If the profefsion of Juftifying Faith be rcquifitc in Baptifm j. then the Fauh fo protcfTed is r'.quifite to the right receiving of it ( and not only to be performed hereafter.) But fuch profession is rcquilicc; therefore.

The major is as true, as that God rcqujrcth no man to Jyc and dificmble, and to profefs that with his mouth which is not in his heart : nor doth he make lying, the condition of his Covenant, (let them call it an outward Covenant, or what they will : if it be Gods Covenant, this can be none of the condition.) For, it muft fiift in order be a Duiie, before it be m.ide Conditional. And no lye is aDutic. Piofefslng is a Dutic to them that have the thing they piofefb : but to others , immediately and in fenfu c(m[ofiio , it Is a hainous lin, and no duty. ; though it be their duty ftill to get Faith firft, and then to pxofcfs it.

The minor is proved already, in the foregoing arguments , and more flull be anon. It is no lefs then juftifying Faith that Chrifts Church hath ever to this, day rcquircd.ihc Baptized to profcfi bcfarc the application of the water. To

believer

believe in God the Father^ Son and .Holjj-Ghoft, and profcfs Repentance /brail fins, and to renounce the wprJd, the flefti and Devil, &c. And when Mr. Bl. makethptoftfilon enoueh to give Right t« baptifm, I would know whether he nrcan the profcfsion ot Juftitying-f aith, or not. If yea, then :juftify-ing Faith is prcrequifite, or clfe the profcfsion of it could not. If not, then the p^ofeUion of true Chriftianity is norrtquifirc ; but of fome part of it. For, as 1 h,ivc ilitwtd, it is not the true Chi iftian Faith, but fome part of it only, if itbefliortof that Faith which is jV)ftifyi«g. Ajidlctmen fay no more, that profcfsion is it that entitles to Bapiiim , without the thing profefled , when they take even piofcfjionit felf of true Chriftianiiie to be confcqucntial , and not prere qui lite.

^i'g'i. II. If Baptifin be the folcmnlzing of the myfiical marriage between Chrift and the baptized, then tiue juftifyingFaith isof God required thereto ; but the Antecedent is true ; therefore.

Therefore is it faid rhat wc ait b.iptizcd into Chrifiy and into one body. And thc| Ciurch hath ever held the Antecedent to be true. The confcqucnce is evidcnti in that no man but the found believer, can truly takcChriftas a Hiisband and Head jforfo to do,Isjuftifying Faith. It ;s Chrift himfcif firft in ordcr,and then his benefits that arc offered in the Sacraments. The main bufinefs of them is to cxhibite Chrift himfck" to be received by a marriage Covenanting. Thefigns axe but ^Kans and inftiumcnis, as a twig and turfc and Key in giving polTcfjioni When the miniftcr in Clirifts name faith. Take, Eat, &:c. it is not only biead that he bids men take, but fiift and principally Chcift by Faith. JoalnmM Vadimm Q\Aphorifm. dc Eucbarifl..li. 5. p/ig. 8 1. ) much commendcth a laying of Chryfoflitms, viz. Jf thou hadfins body, Then Ch/tU would have delivered thcc aH. thcfegifts n^k^d'y { or immediately ) : itutbccaufe thy SoiU is conjoyncd rvitb a body^ be haih delivered them in (indmih thcfefenfibkthif^gs. Ic is one of the grcateft errors that can be committed in the Sacraments , to overlook Cliirft himftlf who is oflired, and to look only either to the figns or to his other gifts. Wc receive him firft ss our Saviour^our Sovcraign, Redeemer, our Head , our Huf-Hafid;.oiir Captain and Guide. He therefore that comes to thefc ordinances , doth pretend thus to receive Chrift : and doubtlefs to receive him thus finccrely, is true juftifying faving Faith : and therefore it is faving Faith that is called f-or to the due Rcceivirg of the Sacraments. And doubtlefs God means a fin-cere, and not a feeming, diflcmbled, nominal Faith, inhis command.

.4rf,«. I 2. If tlicic be no fuch Covenant mentioned in the Scripture, (Tpcci-aily to be fealed with baptifm) wherein men engage themfelvcs to perform hereafter their firft aft of true Repentance and juftifying Faith, then Mr. Blal^es Do-ft 1 ine is unl'ound : but tJiere is no fuch Covenant; therefore.

Men arc oft in Scripuirc called to Repent and Believe j, but nowhere (thct 1 know of3 to Covenant with God that they will hereafter begin to do n finccrely y much lefs is there fuch a Covenant fealed WJth Baptifm. They that affirm fuch a thing, let them prove it, if they can. . . ;

^rgit. 13', If according to Mr. 2i/<7it« Doftrinc no true found Belicvci , or Penitent perfon, can regularly be baptized;; then his Doftiine is unfound. But vlic Antecedent is true i therefore.

The conftquence is proved before. The Antecedent is proved thus •. Ac carding to his Doftrinc, faving Faidi, accepting .Chi iff to Jiiftification , is the great condition to which Baptifm crgsgeth , and is not prcicquXuc therein.

Cc 3. Therefore

Therefore he that already pcrfoTmcihtliatcondkioiv, Js paft fuch cn^pgeing fo do it inicially hcrcafccr : and fohath no ufc for baptifm as to chat cngjecment to the great condition : fo that if fiJch a peifonbe baptized, it muft be to other ends then the Ordinance is appointed tor, and fo not Regularly. The like may be faid of Gods part f for to Inch a Believer God ihould Seal Reinilsion paQ or prcfcnc J whereas accordii g to Mi.it'. the Ordinance is inftituced to leal Rc-niifiJ'jnfutnrc.

^ygn. 14. If the Doftrine Oppofed be tnic, then the Gofpcl preached bcfoic baptjfm,\vas not inftiiiucd, nor h to bw ulcd as a means ( at kaft an ordinary means) of favirgconverfion (J. c. of producng faving Faith and Repentance) But thcconfcqiicnt is falfc i theielorc fo is the Antecedent.

It Would be tedious and needkTstothe liuclligent, to heap up Scripture proof of the minor, zii^^. that the Gofpcl preached before baptifm, is appointed for an ordinary meani ot working true convcrfion. Wc fee it was ordinarily done elfc Preachers could not endeavor it, or hope or pray for it. The consequence is manifcft, in that Mr. L7, makes this true juftifying Faith, and confcQuently true Repentance, to be not^prercquifite to baptifm, but to be engaged for as to the future performance. And therefore regularly it muft be only the word after Baptifm that muft truly Convert , or not at all,

Argu. I f. If Mr. Blades Dodrine be true, then regularly it muft be fuppofed that allpcribnsarcinaftateof damnation immediately on their.bapcifm^ and if they then dyed , ftiould perifli. But the confcquent is falfc j therefore fo is tlic Antecedent.

For the Confcqucnce j if Mr. Blaise mean, that it is anyfpace of time after baptifm that we engage to begin our juftifying Faith in , then the conjcquencc isundcnyablc : for till then , thcperlbn is unjuftificd. But if he mean that in baptifm they muft engage to believe to Juftification in the fame inftant of time then this is to make fuch Faith ncceflary in the inftant of bapt.fm ; and this is but an evident vanity, to fuppofc a man not behcving to juftification, who yet can and muft proraife to do it in the fame inftant, or the next.

^rgu. 1 6. If it be only true juftifying Faith that gives men right coram Des ( by vertue of his Covenant) to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, and fo be prcrcquifite to that Sacrament j and not only to be promifcd tor the future • then the fame may be faid of baptifm. But the Antecedent is true j therefore,

• The confcqucnce is proved , i. In that the Sacraments are both Seals of the fame Covenant, z. It is right to Churth-priviledges in general that Mr. Bl, afcribes to his Dogmatical Faith, and therefore to one Sacrament as well as the other. For the Antecedent, I think our brethren that would fo fain keep the Church and Ordinances pure, would hardly admit a man to the Lords Tabic , that they were furc did not take Chrift for his Lord, or that would fay, I believe all the Creed and Word of God, but I will not have Chrift Reign over me at the prefent, but I promife that hereafter. I will feeDoftor D/VJi^e againft Mr. JHumficyi whether they would admit fuch. Hierom argues thus, from Baptifm, to the Adminiftration of the Lords Supper : therefore I may do it as to the lece'iv'mg.^amobrcm orote utcntfatrificandiei llcentiamtnbuascujusbaptifmapro-has, au[ reprobes ejus baptifma, quern non exl^'mas facerdotem. '^(eque mm fieri foteft , ut qui in baptifmate fan^ui ejhfi^ ''/'«<' ^^tare peccator. Bier. Dialo?, adv. Luciferian,

Argil, tr^

A'l^u. 17. That Dodirinc which feigneth anun-fealcd Covenant for giving right CO the Seal of the Covenant of Grace 3 is unfound : But fucii is Mr. EUl{CSs therefore. -

No Scripture can be brought to prove fuch an outward Covenant of Gods z And it is againft the common reafon and cuftom of men , that a fecond Covenant fiiould be drawn to convey right to the Seal of the firft Covenant, feeing, right to Covenant and Seal go together : and if there mull be another Covenant to give right to that, then by the fame reafon -there muft be another to give right to that, and another to diar, aod ^o in infinitum.

To the Antecedent, it is apparent that Mr. £/. diftinguilTicth ex parte Tici^ht-twccn the outward and the inward Covenant. It Is probable that he thus di-Ihibutes them from the blcfsings promifed, whereof fome are inward, and fomc outward : for though he e?cplaan not himfelf fully, yet I know no other fenfc that it will bear. It is evident that his outward Covenant hath no Seal, Fol: \t\%3.Coy:mnx.dc figiUnconfe-fcadn. If therefore it hive a Seal, it is cither tlic fame which is promifed , or fome other. Qi^her I never heard of: they nowhere tell us what is the Seal of their oiiftWai'd Covenant. The fame ic cannot be .' for the fame thing cannot bj the mnerU fedcru or the Legacy it felf, or the benefit given j and the Seal too of that Covenant whereby it is given.

Argil. 18. That Doctrine which makes it the regular way inBaptlfm for all mentopromifc that which they can neither fincerely promife nor perform , is unfound : but fuch is Mr. «/^/;m i therefore. . . .'^. ,0

The difabilitie which I here fpeak of, is not fuch fts i^in'a Godly man j to i6 any good without Chrift and the Spirit , as is in the fecond caufc to aft without the fiift : or in a partialcauie, to aft without its compartial; but fuchasis in an unregencrate man to do the work of the Regenerate \ or In any broken inftrument, or difabledagentjtodo its own partof the work till it be altered^ and made another thing, as it were. For the confequctice, it is evident in that,

1. No man iTiould ever perform Gods command concerning covenanting*

2. And no mans word were fit to betaken concerning the pcrtormflncc of h}« own Covenant, i. Whether God may or do coinmapd fom^mcn, orallnKU, that which they have not abilitic to perform, is nothing to the point, For yet he gives fome of them abilitic, a«d caufeth them to perfcrm it, when he makew itnecellarie to falvation. But in this cafe God fliould enable no man ('regularly) to that Bapcifmal Covenant which he commandeth,nor lliould any obey his command. For he commandeth them finccrcly to take him for their Godj and promife to Love, Believe, and Obey him hereafter, ( For to dilTniblC) he commands no:ie). Butthis no unrenewed Soul cm do, or ever did to this day. They cannot rcfolvc it 5 therefore they cannot finccrely promife ic • and if juftifying Fath muft legularly begin after baptifm ( as being the great condition to which it engage?!} and not prertcjuifite ) then ic is only unr'cgcnerice men that are the rcgulai' fubjcfts of baptilin. r. And its plain that he who cannot finccrcly pro-raiie, C and therefore doth it dlflcmblingly, or with a half heart j nor is able to perform his promife, is not to be credited. God himfelf never cnableih an un»-rcctncnite man, to believe and repent favingly, while he Is fuch , infc/ifu compct-fito : and therefore is it likely that it is ordinarily and regularly fuch dead men that muft Covenant to Repent and Believe to juftification ' Renewirg Grace mvift intercede, which is not in their liand ; how then can they pronurc to do

the

^hc Works of ihc truly Gracious. God may invIretftA'commanci rfic deai f» live, yea and to do the works of the living, bccaufe he gave them life , ^4 gives them means fori cvival. Bit 1 know not where he calls fuch men to pro-jnjfc to do jc : much Ids is the conftant Bajnirmal Covcnalit liich.

sArgu. II). If she Diftiibution of the Church into vKible and inviiibic, be Jbut at tJie luhjcC^ by divers Adjunfts, and not of avGe^/winco irs Species, then chat part, or thofc members which arc meerly vifibic, arc indeed no paitor members of the Church (o diftfibuted, (but arc. only C4quivocal!.y called a ChurchjChriftians, Ghurch-Menibcts»&c. ^ But the Antecedent i&<crue j therefore.

The Antccedenr is not only tl)e commo;i Doftrinc of the Reformed Divines againft the Papifts, but is exprefsly affiimed by Mr, Blaise in this his Book. The confcquence is undeniable, in chat Adjunds areno partof ihc EOciice , much Jefs the Form, ur the whole Eflcncc ; and therefore cannot denominate , ( but equivocally) inftcad of. tlie Eflcnce, Note* that viftbiU is not the fame with vifitm.

^rgu. 2o. If the man without the Wedding Garment, ha.d coram Deo Right to be there , then would not the Lord have challenged him therein with a friend, how camcfi thou in hUhcr,not having on a rveddmg Garmcac ? If you will hc'p him that was ipeechki's to an anfwcr, and fay for him, Lofd, be was compelled to come in at thy command ; 1 Reply , He that compelled him by invitation, did not only bid him cwwc, but ^o fome j not only to come iu, but to come in as a Grt£/2yfco«W, to honor and not difgrace the Feall. At left it fliould have bcca known as implyed. Itwas no unrcvealcd thing.

Argii. zi. If Circumcifion were the Seal of the Righteoufncfs of Faith, even a Juftifying Faith already in being; then fo is Baptifm j but the former i^ certain, Rom. 4.11,11. He received the ftgn of Circumcifion, a Seal ofihe T^jghte-oufnefs of the Faith, which he had yet being uncircumcifd : that he might be the Father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcifed , that Righteoufncfs night be imputed to them ctlfo. The laft words confirm the conic-4juence alfo.

^Ygu. 2i. Many texts of Scripture Ihew that it was Juftifying Faith that was Jby God required in the aged in baptifm : which I will cite together , and not ftand to fetch an aigument from each alone. ^^. 1.3 3,39. was before cited, .Vcrfc4i. Itwas they that gladly received the word that were Baptized, /tJf.S. 37. alio, is before fpoketo j It mufibe believing with aB. the heart. Mir. 16. i y, 1 6 , is very plain ; firft Chrift commands them to preach the GofpeJ: then he enaftcth that on this preaching , He thatbtlicvcth endis baptiy:d,fhalibefavcd. It is then a laving Faith, It is plain that Chrift purpofeJy putteth it before baptifm, as its due place, even as that preaching to which Faith is here related is pijt" before j and in that he gives us here the exa^ compendium of his new Law. And if it be not this faving Faith tliat goes before baptilni, then Chrift doth not fo much as mention it. And to imagine thtit in this fumme of his Covenant, he dotli both leave wholly unmentioned that Faith which is the prercquifite condition of Baptifm , and alfo put in its place another Faith \vh.ch isconfcqucn-tial, this is to fuppofe Chrift toclogg the moft effential parts, and cleareft com-pcndiumsof his Law, with fuch inluperable obfcuriiics that it cannot be under-ftood. And fay the like by all other Scripture, and you will make it more dark then the Papifts acculc it to te, «/i<S?. i^, 3' > l^f 33» The Jaylor asks what he/

fliall

fhalldo tobefavedj T^w/anfwers him, BeheveintheLord JcfusCbrift, and then ^altbefuved andthyhoiifc ; towliichcnd, they fpa^c to him thcnrord ef theLord^

and to all that were in huhonfe ; and foj He ivat Bapti-T^ed ^ believing in God with

aU hishoufc. The Faich that P<t///^herc commends to him , was a Hiving Faith

cxprcfly : He that is laid to believe upon that command and inftiudion , is fuppofed to behcvc with the Time faith that was fo required of himj/if?. 10.4.7,48. The Gentiles theic were not only true Believers, but had the Holy-Ghoft before baptifm, ^£1. 16. I J. The Lord opened Lyd'/as heart ( which fccms to figmfie a Ipecial operation of the Spirit) bi.foic flic was baptized. Act. 18. S.Ci'fptH and alibis honfc bAicvcd ontbe Lord, which flguifieth more then an Hiftorical Faith. So ^t?. 19. 4, j. It was b;licvjng on Chriftj and in his name , that was the Antecedent to their b-iptilai. 3lat. 2.8, 19. GoyDifciple all Nations, bap-n\tngthem; that Difupli g which is here com:iiandcd, is in order to go before bapcifni : but it is making men iincere Diic'.ples that is here commanded j therefore. It is prefiipporcd, what ever DIkipling ii be, that it is not the Event, but the Endcivoi that ib here made their dutie. And if it be only common Diiciplefliip,dun the Apoftles and ocaer Preacher^ of the GofpL-j, are not commanded to endeavor to mak • men true found Believers and Difciples , till they had firft baptized tlicm, which is untrue. Moreovcrthe Baptifmal Faith, mufi: be a Faith in Chrifts blood j for the application of the water fignifi.th tlie ap-plicattcn of Chrifts blood ^ and thcicfore their reception of the one, fignifieth the other : But Faith in Ciirifts blood, is Juftifying Faith , Rom. \.Z'),z6. The Righlcoujncfs of God wlrch is by the Faith of f'^fus Chri^, u unto all and upon 4// ibem that believe^ T^m. 3. z J. It is therefore but equivocally called believing in Chrift, as being but lomc part of that belief", which attaineth not this Righte-oufncfs. How'many times over and over , do Chrift and his Apoftlcspromife pardon and lalvation to all that believe in Chrift, without diftindion of believing ? whence it fecms cvidcnt,that it is but improperly and equivocally called Bc//ct;Wgi>/C/;>ij/?, which is not Juftifying and laving. Sec Job, 3. if, i^T, 18.and 11. 2 J, 16^. and 7. 3 8. and n. 4<?, 44. and J. 14. and 6. 3 5^, 40, 47. and 14, li. I J4)h, J. I, J, 10. I Pet. z. 6. Rom. 9.33. and 4. j . and 10, i i, Aff^i^, 48. Moreover, howeafic is It to bring many Texts that prove that it was true Taving Faith it felf that Chrift and his Apoftlcs preached to men , and endeavored to bring them to before baptifm ? Nay finde any one of them that ever did othcrwifc ; whereas according to Mr. Blal^es Dodrine, they fhould have pcr-Twadcd them to a Dogmatical Faith only before baptifm ( I mean, to be before pel formed ) and a juftifying Faith after. But I vvill addc no more of this.

^yg.'i.il. Jhe Church hath ever Tuppofcd baptized perfons to be favcd; ilnlcfs they afterward did violate that Covenant. Therefore they fuppofed them to have the condition of falvation. Faith and Repentance.

Hence thofc high clogics ot baptifm in moft of the Fathers, wherein they arc now mif-intcrprcted by many, as if they aicrlbed Icto the external ordinance, whereas ihty prcfuppofe, as the blood and Covenant of Chrift , fo the right qualifications of the partic ba^:ized ; upon which fuppofition ( which we are bound to entertain of all that make a probable profeflion ) they did fo predicate the glorious efFefts of Baptifm, as well they might.

Atgfi. 14. Mr. Bla{(cs Doftrinc of Baptifmal Faith, leaves us in utter obfcuri-tie, fo that no man according to it, can tell whom to Baptize. Hv hath not

D d Tthac

Cibai I ^3J^ fi"<it) given i;s any defcription otihatFaithAvhich entitles to bap-tifm •, andl vciily think is not able to tell us what he would have himfclf to be taken fo; i:. It it wiic a mccr D( gmatical Faith, then ihofc fhould be bap-iizv:d that were uticily unwilling, or at kaft unwilling to take God tor their God, or Ch'.ift for ihcir Lord and Saviour, and the Holy-Gholt tor their SanftiHcr j and fliould openly piofcis , I iviUiiot have this mm rcirii over me., for J cannot yet (pareihc plcaj'iirc of my fm. If Mr. 2J/. mean that there is rcquifitc fcmtwhat of the will and confcnt, tliough not fo much as to juftific j why did he not tell us what ads ot ihc Will they be that arc ncccflaiy > Is it only a confent to have God called thcii God, and thcnilelves named his j-ecplc ? I will not be fo uncharitable as to think ihat is hismeanirg j Is it only a confcnt to be baptized, and to hear the V/ord, and receive the bacramcnts ' then might it ftand with the fcrcfaiddifclaiming of the Government of Gcd and the Redeemer, and foot obedience. 1 think by that time Mr. B.'. hath but adventured to give us an ex-aft definition or defcripcion of that Fa'.th which he makes piertquifiic and fuf-ficient to baptifm ( which 1 hereby inircct him to do ) he will have fct Ui up fo fair a mark to floor at, that with a vciy little skill it may be fmittcn to the duft.

A,?u. 15. 1/o'-'. 1. 19. They viHnt out [,om uiibut they-were 7iot of us : for ]f they had been of us, thtyyvonldiw doubt have eonilmiedmth us : but they -went cut, that it might be made mm fefl thai thiy yvcre not aH of us. They wire not therefore truly Chriflians, Difciplcs, Church-Members , but equivocally.

Ay?u. 16. I will end as I begun, with humane teftimony. i. Our Divines againll the Papifts, do generally plead that hypocrites arc not true members of theunivcrfalChuich , out as a wooddcn leg ;s to the body. I am loth to turn over books and iranferlbc without need, but 1 fliall foon do it , if it be denied. 1. Our Divines againft the Arminians, do fuppofethe firft aft of believing to be the firft time that God is as it were engaged to man in the Covenant of Grace ; and that it is dangerous to make Gcd 10 be in adual Covenant with men, in the ftate of nature, though the conditional covenant may be made to them, and though he have revealed his decree for the fanftifying his, cleft : but he is fuppofed to difpcncc his m."rcies to the unrcgencrate freely, as Dominus abfolutus, or as KeClor[upaleges y and not by giving them a Legal or Covenant-right. And indeed, in my opinion, the Tranlitionis very eafie from Mr. Blal^es opinion to A: minianifm, if not unavoidable, fave by a retreat, or by not feeing the connexion of the Confequcnts to the Antecedent, For grant once that common Faith doth coram Dee give ilght to baptifm, and it is very eafie to prove that it gives tight to the end of baptifm, God having not inftituted it to be an emptie iign to thofc that have true Right to it. And it will be no hard matter to prove that it is fome fpecial Grace that is the end of Baptifm , at left Rc-miflion of fin. And fo upon the good ufc of common Grace, God fliould be in Covenant obliged to give them fpecial Grace : which is taken for Telagianifm.

§.55. 'Rj^Hen I had Replycd thus far to Mr. Blal^ey I was much moved in my mlnde ^_ to have Replycd to his anfwei to Mr, F; rmin on the like fubjeft : and alfo

to

C 107 ]

to have then provid that the children have no Right to baptlfni.cxcept the iramcdiace Parent be a believer, for the fake of any of his Anceftors : and that the children of Apoftates and wilfull obftinace wicked livers, Hiould not be baptized ( as ihiirs ) • and to haveanfweied whatMr. 8/. hath fa id to the contrary ; and'this meerly in love to the Fiuth , left the reputation of man (liould cloud it ; and in love to the Church and the luftre of the Chriftian name, left this fearful gapfliould let in that pollution that may make Chriftianitiefcem no better then the other Religions of the world. For I fear this loofe Doarinc of Baptifin will do more to the pollution of the Church, then others loofe Dodrineof the Lords Supper • or as much. But I am very loth to go any further In ControverIi?,then I (hall be ncceflitated: And if Mr. Firmin be living, I conjedure by his writings, that he is able eafily to vindicate his own words ; Not that I have low thoughts of the abilitie> and worth of my dear and Reverend friend Mr. Blaise , but that I take, his anfwers on thofe fubjeds tobe very dilute, fipace tantiv':riitadicam : fogreac a difadvantage is an ill caufe tothemoft learned man. Mc. Firmin I know not any further then by his Booka-galnft Reparation But in that Book I fee fo much Candor, Ingenuitie, Moderation Love to Feace^ and fome convenient terms for Peace difcovered that I am heartily forrlc that there arc no more to fecond him,and that his incltcmentstoaccommodatlon arc no more laid to heart. But the Peacemakers fliall be blefled In the Kingdom of Peace, how little foever they may fucceed in this tumultuous world. For as where envy and ftrifc Is (contentious zeal) there is confufionand every evil work * fo the fruit of Righteoufnefs is fown in Pcace of them that make Peace.

§ J4-

I Had thought alfo at the fixH view, that It would have been ncceflary to have confuted Mr. «/j^« ji. Chapt. when J found this Title : A man in, covenant tviih God , and received into the Vnivcrfal church FlfMe , -needs na more to give him accefss to , and interefl in particular ytfible Churches. But I know not whether he mean the accefs and intereft of a ftranger in paflagc or a Traufient Member, or of a fixed Member. If of the latter, I Ihould have proved moreover that there is Neceflary, both his Cohabita'tion, and his Confenc to be a Member of that Church ; and his confent to fubmit to the particular Paftors of that Church as his Teachers and Spiritual Guides in the Lord. But I findc In the following pages, Mr. B/<?4e doth acknowledge all thi himfelf " s

I fliall therefore pafs on to fomc other Aibjed j only remembering Mr. Bl. that as it is not Number of Arguments but Weight that will carrie the Caufe , fo It is not Number that 1 truft to : and therefore if any one of thofe i6 Arguments foregoing be good, though 15 be bad, I muft needs think the Caufe bad which I argue againft.

Dd a S. yj.

EioS3

whether Faith and Refentance be Cods IVorkj.

Mr Bl. /^Hap. ij. so Mr. Baxters ^rtcfliomfl qu. How do you rn«ke Faith ^^-^ and Repentance to be Conditions of the Covenant on our part, feeing the beftowcng of them is part of the condition on Gods prt ? Can they be our Conditions and Gods too ? ^rTiver^ Slc. A>'d I (h-Unotftandto difli?igui(b of an Abfolutc and Conditional Coxcmnt, aiid [o ntf<l{ >g the whole in the Abfolute Covenant to be Gedsj and in the Conditional this pa, t to be oun ( which I ^"*w not ivhethcr ex-adly under flood 3 the ScnpiurciviUbcar) but in plain tcrtn^ deny that they are Gods conditions^ and affim them to be ours. 1 k-^ow n-hnt Godfpeal^s in hu iVord , concer-nmg tl^efc rvorki ; thai He will wrire his 1 av in our hearts,and put ic into our inward parts •, that he will take away the heart of Itone, and give an heart of flclh : which implyes this rporli of which we fpe.-\- 1 k.norv I'l^nvife what in pct,-licular u a§iimcd of Chrifi, th.1t he is the Author and Fini/her of our Faith, &c. Tct aBthu rtjcs not up higher to mal^e them formiUy Gods affs, and not ours, n'hufc afls they bet bit Cat:ditions they-are; this is evident- But they ere our cMs ; we Believe aud Repent ', it u not Goi that Believes^ it ii not ^od that Repents^ &c. Faith ond Repentance are mans worlds , net Cods woilis^which man in Covcnimt does 1 rcfpe6l.ve to falvation in the Gcvenant tendered. ButtheApoflk (fome may fay) la the nextwords tells us , That it is God that works the Will and the Deed. There he feitns to tr\c them from m, and afcribes the formality of them to God. In this Cooperation of Gods , whether they be formaUy our wo,l(S, or Cods, let Ifaiah determine^ I fa. 26. iz. Thou haft wrought all our worlcs in us, ii'hen God hath wrought it , the worli is ours ; we hiroe the re-ward, &c.

§ 55

K. B. \A ^ Blal^cs bufincfs herCj is to confute the anfwer that I gave to that ob ■*-▼■■- jeftlon. A brJef Reply may eafily fatisfie this confutation. 1. 1 did explain in'what fenfe iheCevitrc tilled Coveiia>!ts^ fliewingthac that which is called the Abfolute Coveiiant, Is in feme refped no part of Gods Legifluive Will, and Co doth not;w cfl«/"oytf, but only pnrt of his Decretive Will revealed ; but that in o-thcr refpeds it belongs to the Lcgiflative Will , and may be called an abfolute pio-mife. And fo the word Conditions applycd to God, is taken for the lb:ugpromif(d. Improperly called a condition ; but applied to us, it is itiiftly taken : nor had 1 ufeil the term Condition asto God,butas itwas neccflary to fatisfie the Obieflor, who fo called it, intimating the improprietieof it, Alfo I did plainly flicw that the thing called Gods Condition^ was rot prccifely the fame with that called curs ; Ours was Believing and RepentingjGods is the bcjtowing ofthefc^is the Qucftion ex-prelfed y or the giving us new and foft hearts, that we way do it our fclvcs, and do it readily and wiUingly^ &c, as I expfcfled, pag. 46. becaufe I was not willing to meddle (affirmatively or negatively^ with the queftion of Gods Imtncdiate Phyfical Effici-cncleofourown aft j yet I doubt not but God doth truly, powerfully and effedually (to the removing or overcoming ail reHilance) move the ^oul to thea^ Ic fclf j and

therefore .

therefore It may truly be faid, that not only Gods own AAlon, but alfo our aftion of Believing,- is the thing promlfed, ^called his Condition by the Qnerlft ; and though improperly, yet in a language very common In Mr. Blufies Treatife). This much being premifed, I Reply more particularly, i. I will yet fay that God hath fuch an abfolute Promife, as well as a Condicional^ till y^ou give me better Reafons of your denyal, or your Queftloning whether scripture will bear it. And I fhall yet fay that the giving of our Faith and Repentance, Is the matter of that abfolute promife. For your Argument to the. contrarie, hath little in it j to compell me to a change. YourMaiorls, Pf^hofe n^s they are ^ hii conditions they are j inftead of proof, you fay, This is evident. I Reply, i. Negatively, it had been evident de ASlionc quatallfithitKh no ones Condition but his that perfoims it ; as the condition is fald to behis that performethj and not his that impofcth It. But Affirmatively the propofitlon holds not univerfally. Nor NegativelyjfpeakIng dc ASlionequa cji quid donandum. To your MinV, I could better anfwer if I could have found it. I ex* peded it Ihould have been this, ^ut our Faith arid Reficntance arc fWt Gods a£ls. But I know not whether I may be fo bold as fay, you will own that. Before you fay , ThU rifes not to mii^ic them formally Gods a^ls, and net ours : where i. you cautcloufly fpeak the two Propofitlons copulatively j and 2. you put In the word foimatiy^Mihich finxy do much to help yeu out. For the former, It is enough according to your own Rule to prove them Gods Condieions and ours, if they be Gods Adions and ours : fot you hyi ifhofc afiiom they arc, ha Condnions they are i that u evident. ,It is not therefore ncceflary that I prove them Gfds and/tot ours. 1. It Is hard to know whether your firrwally refpcft a natural or moral form. If the former aSlon is the form i: felf, it ij harder to finde out Its matter. Accidents have not properly matter and form J but the fubjeft is called its matter ; but Adion hath fcarce fo pro* per a fubjcft as other Accidents have, feeing it is rather AicntU , then inagcnte inhtt-five : Of tranfients, Its beyond doubt •, and I think foof Immancnts, unles we may with ScoiiHj take them for Qualities ; If you fpeak of Moral formality, were It linful Adion , I fhould deny God to be the Author ; bucof Faith and Repentance I dare not do fo ; I think God is the Author of them formally as well as materially. But \\ your following words you fay, But they are our aCisj&c. God believes not^ &t ^ep!y J I. To believe is our aft j but to give u> Faith , or to move us efFe-duilly to Believe, as a fuperior Caui'e this is not our work, but God?. ** x. Let it be fo ; to believe is our work, and our condition ; It follows nor, that it is not Gods, 3. r here are fufficient reafons why God is nat fald to Belifvej though he caufe us to believe If you go on the Predeterminant:sgrcufids, I luppofe yr u know their r.afons, who take notice of the Arminlans making ciiis objcdion. If you enquire of the Jefults and Arminians ^ that go the way of determined concourfe, or of parriil Caufality, they think they have yet more to f.iy, ot which L fup^ore you nor ignoranc. Dtf?-</?;<^.V5 his followers, think they have moi^ of all to fiy, bjth why God Ihould be faid to believe , and why he is not the Author of our (in , in that ihey fnp. pofe tha: he caufeth not the ad immediately. And yet all (htfe avknortlcdge God to be the caufe of our ads.

But yju adventure a flcp further, and fay, Faith and Rcpaitance anm.ms ivj-^f, -aor. GodsiJ'orl^s, Reply; 1. What mean you then to yield afterward that Gij^Wi)^('Pffe all our rvoilii in tu. fthofe which he worketh are fure his works ) And that, It is God that rooi\Hh in ui the if^di and the Vecd.

2. I never met with any orthodox Divine, but would yield that Eahh is a woikof Gods Spirit. And the Spirits work is doubtlefs Gods work.

Dd 3 l'^

3. If you go the common way of chc Prccicterminants,you muft acknowldgc that God is the Phyfical, Efl&cient, Predetermining, Pnncipal> Immediate ca^fc of every ?d of every creature : and therefore douklcfs of oiir f aich ; and that boih Immedianoiie V'lrtutis t> Siippofiti^ fo that ic is inom piopcrjy his a«il then ouis. For my part, i confefsiuy lelf of Bjihop Di*iLf»j«ij niindc who faith, (againft Hoard p. 11 ^) As for ihcpedcterm'iHaiion nf mens Wilis ^ it is a Controvcf' fie (jctn^ccn the 'Dominicans and Jcju'itcs, withwijofc CMct.if yjical ffccnlamns oHr Trotcftanl Divines love ml l» torture their Ifrainsi Or ac Itft they lliould not. I take it to be a puint beyond the knowledge of any man, which way Gods woiks on the Will ii thtferefpcSs. Though if I muft cnclinc to any one way, it would be rather to Duramlus (for ftronger reafons then 1 findc in Ludov. a T>o!a, who yet hath more then I have feen well anfwcred), and left ot all to the Prc-determinants, for all tl.c numerous arguments of the Dominicans, and the Teeming ftrcngih that Dr. 7 wjf/c , Ht:C'CbooYdyT{uthc<fordy and others of our own doadde to their caufe. But yet lam far from denying our Faiih and Repentance to be Gods Works ; for I doubt not but he caufeth them iit caufa 'Vniver-/j/m, by his general Providence, as they are natural Aftions j and a!fo by his fpccialefFcdualGrace,Cfl»^/•« omncm 1{cjHlcntiamy infallibly caufeth them is they are the fpecial gifts of the Spirit. So thatlmarvail that you fliould fay they are not Gods Works.

In the conclufion you adde , Our dexteritie in holy duties is from the fame into Tvhich Grace puts Hs : fo (iiU the tvarkis eitrs,though power for a fiion is voHchfafed ef God. Reply ; Both yelle & Perficere is the gift of God,and not only Tafe Vttte &perficere. Why ftiould 1 trouble the Reader to fay qny more to that point, wh.n Dr. Twijje and others againft the Remonftrants have faid fo much • and/i«/2i» fo much be ore them all > And yet 1 never read a Remonftrant that would fay that the work is fo ours, as that it is only the power that is vouchfa-fed us by God. I conclude therefore that you have not confuted my anfwcr • 1. In that you have not difproved the abfolute Promife of tl^e firft fpecial Grace. ^. You have not difproved God to be the Author of our Faith , fo as that it is his work. 3. If you had, yet Believing which is our work, is not the fame thing with giving Faith, or moving us to believe , which I fay is Gods Work.

§. 5^. Of the Ijife Promifed^ and Death threatrted to Adam in the firJl Law.

Mr. Bl. T Findevo material difj'erence in the Conditions on Gods part in thefe Co-X venants i Life is promifedin both in Cafe of Covenant-i^cepin^ : and 'Death ii threatncd in both in cafe of Covenant-breafiing. Some indeed have endeavored lofinde a neat difference in the Life Vrom'ifedinthe Covenant of worl^Sy and the Life that is promifcd in the Covenant of Grace; as alfo in the De.ith that isthreatnedin the one and in the other ; and thereupon move manyy and indeed inextricable difficulties. What Life man (hould have enjoyed in cafe ^d'<TW had not fallen > and what Death man ihould have dyed, in cafe Chrifthad not been promifcd •- From rvhich trvOjCndUfsly more by way ef Confedary maybe drawn, by thofe that want neither wit nor Icifure to dtbaie them, Jn which the bcfi way of fatisfaiUon, and avoidance

dance of fucb pu\\cling ma\fSi is to enquire what Scripture means by Life , -which is the good in the Covenant prormfed, and what by Deaths rvhich w the evil thraittncd. I^owforthe ftr^^ Life contains all whatfocver conduces to true Happinefs^tomalie man bkfjed in Soul and body. All goed that Ch)i(i pur chafes and Heaven injoycs, is com-prtfed under it inGofpelexprejsions^&c. On the contrary, under death is comprifcd all that ts injur ions to man or manl{iHdc, that tends to his mifcry in Soul and body; The damnation of Hell., bcingcalled death (the uttcrmoslof evils being the feparation of Soul and body fiom God y Job. 8,51. i joh. 3. 14.) Sin rrhuh leads to it, and is the cattfe of it, is called death in iil(e manner, Eph. ^. i. ^Andthe feparation of Soul fiom the body being caUcd Death, ficiinefs,plagues , are fo called in like manner^ £xod. 10. 17. Now bappinejs beingpromijed to man in Covenant,only indefinitely, under that notion of Life, rvithout limit to this or that way of happincfs, in this er that ■flaee ; God is fill at liberty, fo that he ma^e man happy, where or however to continue happinefs to hiwt and is not tyed up in his engagement cither for earth or heaven. And therefore , though learned Camcro m his Trad, de triplici fardere. Thef. 9. ?nake this difference hetTvecn the Covenant of W9rl{s and the Covenant ef Grace ; In the Covenant of Works (which he calls nature^ Life was pro, mifcd, and a moft bleflcd Life, but an animal life in Paradife ; in the Covenant of Grace, a life in Heayen and Spiritual. And ^ir. Baxter in his Aphor. of Juftification^/>. 5. faith , That this Life promifed was only the continuance of that ftate that ^irfrt'W was then in, in Paradife, is the opinion of rlioft Divines ; Til with fuhmifsion to belter ^ lodgements, I fee not grounds for it : feeing Scriptuh no wjy determines the way and l(inde,&c. And indeed there are ^rong probabilities , Heaven being fet out by the name of Paradife^ in Chrifis fpeech to the thcif on the Crofi,a?id in Pauls vifion, &c.

§. 16.

K. B. I. VOur opinion in this point is moderate , and (I think Vfound. I have nothing therefore to fay to you , but aboutt)!/!* different cxpreflions, and therefore excufc me if I be fliort3 for I love not that work. I think your judgement and mine are the fame. z. Only remember, that it is M'-. Blake alfo that hath thefe words,f^g. 74. The Conditions en mans part in the Covinam of iVor^s , vccre for mans pnfovation in ftatu quo ; in that cofldition lit which he was created ; to hold him in Communion with God ^ which was his happincfs ; he cxpcflcdnot to be bettered by his cbediciicc, cither refpe^live to happiness {}:0 more is promifed thcnin prefcnt he had'^dryet tn his ^talif cations rcfpe£tiveto his conformitie to God in T^ighteoufncfs and true heltncf. jrhat improvement he might have made of the Habit infufcd, by the txcrcife of cbcclicnde, JfhaU net determine ; but no change in Ratifications was looked after or given in Tromife; fo far Mv.Blake •,,,•■.

If the Reader cafinotrcco'ncnc^'Mr. Bla1(e'iiM\tnc, fccWfe- fcfCqrtcla" ^t.'^lH(t with'himfclfj and th^vvorkis'ddne. '|' ' ''; '; '' " •*•',.

3; But I confefs that upon more rcrious tbrifidera'tion fef feveril paflages In the New Tcftamcnt, naming and dcfcribing the work of Redemption, I am rcr-dy to think it far more probable that Adam was not created in Pati ia, but ia Via; not in the highcft perfcftion which he ihould cxped , but in the way to it. But whether God would have given it him in the fame place that he was in, or in

fomc

[C«»3

fduc Other / caJkd Hcavcnj upon a remove, I cake as Mr. Bl. dodi j to be uu-rcvcalcd, and undccciniincd jn the Promifc. So that I could fiiidc in my heart to fall a confutino the fame opinion in Mr. Blal^c^ exprcflcd in thcfc laft words j - V'.-h'«.h he coufuicih i:. luc ; but that his former favc mc the labor.

4. I confcfs alfo tl.ac I f^>oke radily in fay.ng that U vo.n the opivioH of mojl .T>ij;?ics-y fctrirg it fo hard a matter to know which way mod go in the po.nt. I alio confefs that the judgement of Caf/icrOiMv. BaU, Mr. Gat.tii^er , &c. fwayed much ui^hnic i but thi: iticiu'C of the text iuGf^ji. much more : but 1 had not f'j well weighed Icvei at Texts in ihe New Tcrtamcnt, as 1 ought, which de-Jciibiiig Rcdoinptioi}, give fomc more light into the point. Tl>e fame I fay concerning the qiialitie of the Death thicatned. • "f. I agree to Mr. £/.f<lj;f5 fii ft conclufion, that the thing is indeterminate j or at left, hard for us to know ; but I cannot reconcile his prcmifcs with that con-clulion I much LTs with this his latter fpcech/>. 74. Foi\ if ('as he faics) the Life promifed was aU whatfocvcr condut^s to true happincCs , io mal^c then Ucjjcd m fold Md body ; (by conducing to, I fuppofe he meant conftuiUing of) then either the Caelcftial Degree of Grace and Glory conduces -net to that happincfs ( and then not to ours, who have no greater natural capacitic) j or clfe I fee not how it can be faid that this greater bklTcdncfs was not Fromiied. DoubrliJfs Ad.t>» had not in prcfcat poffi-flion fo greatameafure of hojinefs, io confirmed a ftate of Holinefs or Glory, nor fo great and full a fruition of God, as Chrift hath given us a furehope of in the Gofpel. And therefore, though he fay, God is at liberty for the ^lace and way, yet that is nothing to the liinde and weafuic.

6. Obferve that the words of mine, which Mr. Bl. oppofcth , are but that Dim zines are of that judgement.

§. J7.

Mr. BJ. A7{d-n>hat I have faid »f the Life premifedy I fay of Death: threatned, ^^ &c. My Learned friend Mr. Baxter, enquiring into th/s Death, that yoM here threatened,faith, that the fame Damnation that followed the breach of the fecond Covenant, it could not be. Aph. p. i %. ifhen 1 fuppofe, ». rather fhoidA he faid, that in fubftance and kinde it cm be no other. Infidels that were never un-der any other Covenant, &c.

§. 57.

K.B. I. VWHat alfo I have anfwercd to the former, may fuffice to this for the main. t. One would think that you intended dircftly to con-tradift mc:but whether you do fo indeed,! cannot well tell. I know nor what you mean hy fubftance and liinde. Pain and Lofg have no fubftancc,but a fubjeft ; I never doubted but that it is the Lofs of the fame God t and Bleflcdnefs ( formally confidered) but I am yet very uncertain whether the Bleflcdnefs promlfed by €hrift, be not far greater in Degree, then that to Adam , and confcquencly whether the Pcena Damni thrcatned in the Gofpel be not far greater. Alfo I know as to the mediate Blcflings, Relative , they are not the lame : To be deprived ,by Unbelief, of Reraiffion^ Reconciliation, Adoption, the cvcrlaftingpraifing of

him

.t"3 3

him, that Redeemed us by his blood, &c, tliefe are true punifhincnts on UnbcIIe-Ycrs, thac rejeft the mercies offered co them : but thcfe were none of Adams punifhments. That yvas a Negation only to him , that is a Privation to them.

I profefs alfo that I ever took the pain of Senfcto be of the fame nature, which was due to ^dams Sou!, and which is due to unbelievers. Only I then did and ftill do doubt, whether any Scripture fpcak of the everlafting Torments oiAdamsbody ; or whether it were not only his Soul that fliould eternally fuf-fer, his body being turned to dull and fo fuffering the pcnaltic of lofs : Nay, whether the New Tcftamcnt do not make RelurreelioH the proper fruit of Chrifts death and Rcfurrcdion ? But of this I am not fully refolved ray felf, much lefs will I contend for it.

But I muft needs fay, that I took not a gradual difference in punilhmcnts to be inconfiderable. Nay I know that moral fpccifications are grounded in natural gradual differences. And Rewards and PuniOiments being moral things formally, they may and oft muft be faid to differ]])Ct/f jand not to be the fame, when naturally they differ but in degree. Yea, whether in naturals themlclres, wc may not fometimes findc a fp^-cification in meet degrees, is not fo clear ag raflily tobe dcnyed. There is but a gradual difterencc between the Imalleft prick with a pin, and to be thruft throovv with daggers in lo places }yet I will not lay that it is the fame punifliment.

§.y8 Mr. BI.

N Either can I ajjent to that fpecchjTo fay that Adam ihould have gon quick to Hell, if Chrift had not been promifed,or fin pardoned, istocontradift the Scriptures that make death temporal the wages of Sin. It rvere I conftfs toprcfttme above Scripture, but I cannot fee it a contradiilion of Scri-fturc. A burning Fcaz'er , Confiimptien , Leprofe , Peflilence , cj^c. are in Scripture made fhc wages of (in. Tet many ?« to heU through thofe dif. eafesy &c.

$. 58.

K, S. t Willingly leave every man to his own judgement in this .• But I think X itmoft probable,that the f parationof Soul and body was particularly intended in the threatning, Thou JhaIt dye the death. Reaf. i. Becaufe this is it that is in prima fignifieaiiouc called Death, and the miferies of Life, but Tropically, much more this or that particular niifcrie : which anfwers your objedion about fickneill-s. i. This is it that Chrift was neceffarily to iuffer for us : and if it had not been neccffary for man to dye thus, by tlie Conimination of that Law, then it would not tlicncc have been necefTary for Chrift to dye this Death. For it was not the following ftntence (which you call Leges pofi latat) which Chrift came tofatisfieor bear, but thecurfe of the Law. Gaf.^.i^, he being made a curfe for ui. Phil. 2., 8. ^9/. i. ii. Hsb. 9. 1 J. by means of death he was to Redeem the tranfgreffors of the firft Law ; without Blood there is no RcmiC-fion ; The death of the creatures in facrificings Irgnificd the neceffity of this

E c Death

C«J4|

Death of Chrift. 1 haVc met with iiAnebur Ur. John Geoilmn that faith , Chrifts readynefbov wiHir.gnefs to have dyed, might have fcrvcd the lUrn^ thoughthc jews had not put him to death. Ce/. i. lo. 14. £/)/;. i. 7. i?(j«j. 3.15;, Its true, the Apoftle fpeaking of the nccefluic of lilood, in Hcb. hath rcfcrenct 10 the Conftituti'jns of Alofcs Law : but then it muft be confcflcd that that Law did in its Curfc much explicate the former, and dircft us to fee what was ihreat-ncd, and what u.iifl by li.c Mtfliah bcfuftcrtd for us. Hcb. i. I4. Chrift was to dcftioy by death, h^m that had the power of dcatl, that is ihc Devil: but it feems, thai the Law g.iVc hm hlip.owcr, at the Will and Sentence of the ludgc, for exccutkn. 1 Coi. i 5. i6. J4. Death.is the laft enemy to be overcome. O Death,trhycii tiyjUji^? 0 G/avi^ivhcH if il yviHoyy} This is no doubt, the death now in quiftion j It is t,c evils bttallen mankindc incxtcution of the violated Law, that arc called enemies. Though we dye, it fecms, there was a rcci-fluic of Cluifis dying to locfc the bonds of our Death, and procure us a Rcfurrctftion. Rom. 5. 17. Asby one mansojf'cncc death leirfud by one, &c. That one nian muft dye for the people, Caiap'/.as prophcfitd, Job. i 8. 14.

3. The fciitcncc ufeth to contain what is thrcatncd in the Law , and though part may be remitted, yet the other part is the fame thrcatned. But Gods Sentence en .<^WflM, contained the penakie of a temporal Death. Though he mentioned not the Hteinal, bccaufc he would provide a remedy , yet the temporal, as one part meant in the thrcatning he laid on man himfelf : bitft ihoitart, and tofl/tfijha/i tkeu return % This is not as you imagine. Lex fofi lata ; but jentin-tia Judieif Lcgh violata cerrim'mat'mum ixcqiicntis. When it i* faid,i CorA 5.12. InhA^maUdye ; itii^in Adams finningall became guilty of ic, and \n Adttm then fentenced, all were adjudged to it. Which is intimated alfo Rom. y. 1 a. Sin cntc; cd mte the reorld, and death by fin, andfo death gaffed en all men, for that all havefitrned.

So that the fentence exprcfling this Death particularly, and Chrift bearing it neceflarily, and (addc moreover) all mankinde, for the generality , bearing it certainly, and alfo "Death fignifying primarily the feparation of Sou] and Body, ic feems to me moftprobable, that this Death was in fpecial meant in ihe threatning.

Btit you fey. He t:fi(es the fame way Tvhere his Juflice / athfutiifa£iion ; thofe that tire priviUdgedfnm death as the wages of fnjthus T>ye, Reply. I donot believe you that any are Priviledged from death as the wages of iin, who dye. This is the part of the penalty which the fentence pafled on the offender himfeJf, for all the promifcd fatisfadion by a Redeemer : Nor did the Redeemer itisfie to that end, to prevent our death, or tocaufc that it fliould not be the wages of fin, feut to deliver us from under the power of it. Where you fay , that this way of Qo^iVpithunbeluveiS is v^luntaiy, not necessitated : 1 Reply; So it may be ne-vcrthelefsj becaufc it was meant in the threatning. It is aai gcrous to imagine that God is ever the lefs free, or more neceflitatcd, fo as that his adions ftiould. bclefs volimtary, bccaufe of his dcterminatioBS. He doth as voluntarily do what he hath predetermined to do, and foretold he will do,as if he had done neither. God changcth not, and therefore he is as voluntary in the execution, as he was in the determination. :

Of the Law m made to Chrifii

Ir. Bl, ^^Hap. ^.p. if. ^nd though ^{r. B^xicr doubts whether it be any pare V-> of Gods Lcgiflacive Will, as it refcrrs to Chrift, but only as it bc-

Mr _ . . .

)n!y: longs to us as a Prophcfic what God would d«> i:i the advancing of Chrift and his Kingdom, and fo of us i Append, p. 39. Tit methinl{sit ispla'myfcemgC^riiJt aclinowlcdgcs a commandfiotnhU Fiithti-y in laying doiv/ihii life, ]oh. 10. 18. and the ^pyjilcfpeaking of the tvorliifaithy Ho was obedient in it, &c.

§. 19.

[. B. /^Nc that had not read what I write, would think by your Anfwer, that V-/ I had made a doubt whether there be any Law made to Chrift ac

R.

Vy I had made a doubt whether there be any all or not ? Whereas I fpakc only of that called the Covenant between the Father and the Son made from Eternity .' or the promifcs cxpicired by tlie Prophets as to Chiift in his mcer Divine nature, not yet incarnate : For I conceive that Chrift before the incarnation, may not be fa id to be a fubjeft j and that God is not "properly faid to command himfclf, or covenant with hinifelf, or make promifcs by Prophets to himfelf. But I deny not but that Clirift as man was under a Law, yea and a Law peculiar to himfclf, whereto no other creature isfubjed ; even the L.-vW of Mediation, which deferves in the body of Theo-logie a pecular place, and the handling of it, as diftind from all the Laws made with us men, is of fpccial ufc, and it w.lldone, would do much to remove the ftumbling blocks which the Antinomians fill upon.

§. <<o.

ivhetherth? Sacraments jeal the conditional Pr0mife abfolately ? or the conclufon cdnditionMly, when onlj one of the Vremtfes is of Divine Revelation ? And whither this conclnfion be de tide , I am Juftihcd and (liall be laved.

Mr. B!. p.

58. \yyi th.n which I may vol pafs ^ ii fomcwhat of ccnccnimcrtt D y, th to my f( 'f and i he prcjcnt caiifc in hand^ &c.

%.6o.

R. B. T Need not tranfciibcthefe Words, being of anorhcr , and not fpoke to

1 me. But I willpafs myconjcdurctohisciacftions. i. i conjedurc

that the '^trift by Evading, meant Owning andjitfiifyr:igtke f.iil , and jo cvc-

dini theblJmc: t. To the i.cond I conjcdurc the Ouciift had been lately con-

Ee ^ verfant

vcrfant in Mr. Bhl^rs book, and fo iiwas in hia mcmorie : and whether he knew what ihofe whcm ycu mention do hold I cannct tell. 3. To ihe third ; if hy Sacia)Kcrtaljcalr,:^^ ycu iv.Qtn (\ndiiii.nal jcalirig 3 I conjc6uic his conceit n-,ight be this, that as the PjciiuTc n ry be conditionally tcndicd to In-lidclsj Murdeicis, or any other, fo might the Seal» it it were tut Conditional as the Pioniifc-, As we may fay to the woi ft j if ihou fvUt be/iive , thou jhali be fdvcci 5 fo might we conditionally feal falvation to him. But 1 take this to be a great mjftake.

5. 61.

Ki. Bl,/). 40. \AR Baxter (who is put lo ity to Poop tooloivin theOfifwcrop •tVJ- fiich fiifics) mhis ayifivcrtothisvorvin hand, hath tal^ai Much pains tofinde out the w.iy of the Sacraments fialir.g ; aridin the icfidt^ he and I jhaii not be found much to diff'c'v; yet fte'irg provukiicc niadt nic the occajhn of parting the qutfiion, I (ha!/ ta\c ka-u to tal{e' feme view of what is [aid. Jl//. Baxter/ai//^. It is in vain to enquire, whether the Snciamcntsdolcal Abloliitely or Con-dttionally,till you hi ft know what is that they do feal ; and in ordir to the finding ihis oHti he layes down the tray that a C'hiiJI'i^n doth gather the romance ej his Jnflifuation and Salvation ; which is thus, He that bclicveth is Juftificd,and fliall bcfavcd : but I believe, therefore I am Juftifiedand fliall be favcd j I eonfifs if 1 had been put upon a difcsvcry of that which is fealed in the Sacraments, this Syllogifm (I think.) would fca-, ce ha-yc come into my though:s, feeing the Seal is Geds (as Jiir. Baxter obfcrvcs ) I fhould have rather hoiked for o?ie from hirn, then to have fuppofed a. believer to have been upon the frawe of cifH.

§. 61.

T{, B, "T^His difpuce is fo confufcd, and fo much about words that I would not have meddled with it, ( let men have made what ufe of yours they plcafed) but only for fome matters of greater moment that fall in upon the by, in your handling ir. 1 think your meaning and mine is the fame. i. I not only fald, (as yuu cxprcfs) that the Seal is Gods, but gave my Reafons to prove a mutuaJ Scaling as well as a mutual Covenanting. 2. What rcafon have you why I might not illuftratc the matter by this Syilogifm , as well as another. 3. If you will have a Syllcgifm of Gods making, why did you not tell us when or where you found it ? and let us fee as well as you, whence you had it, that we may know God msde it. God doih not 7JC;, ere byllog'ftfios for4iimfclf, not a61 u, immanente : if he do it, it is only foi us per aflum VfCtijcuiiitm ■: and then jt may be found in his word But more of that anon. 4. I Ihould think ( though for illuftration I jujgtd itnot unuftful j rhatitlsof Jio ncceftitic for you or me to talk ot any SyiJo^ifm at all, in thi. enquiry after the fcalcd propofition . If it be but cue propofition, we may cxprcis it olonc : If more, we may diftinftly c^picfs them 3 rather then thai ftiail breed any difference, 1 care not whether .Tny Syllogifpi be mentioned any more ; Lc: iii few: what yours is.

Mr. B], ANdfiiih a one I Jhouldhave looked to have gathcredupfifomthe Jnf'ttH-*^ t'loiiinndthui (1 conceive ) framed-., He to whom I give Chrift , to him I give Juftificacion and Salvation ; But here 1 give ihcc Chrift y therefore to rhec I give Juftificationand Salvation.

7^. B. 1. \^7'Hac mean you hy gatkcr'tng it '■: Do you mean that you will V V lead it there ready formed } If Jo, (hew us the Chapter and Vcrfe f But that muft not beexpeftcd; for you fay anon , that it is fomething not written that is fcalcd. Or do you mean that in the Inftitution , God gives you the materials, and you form it your fclvcs > If fo , why blamed you mine , which is ot mans foi mint;, but yet as you fuppofe, the materials fo far of God, that the conclufioa is dc fide. To give you the materials of a Syllogifm, is noc togivc you a Syllogifm • for the fornWf«(7««i«.i/fx, I muft thereforefuppofe a Believer yet to be upon the frame of one ( as you fpeakj. For 1 take you to be a Believer ; and I finde you here at it very ferioufly. z. I confefs, C though rhave no mindc to quarrclwith your Syllogifm) that I am never the better for the AibUitution of this in the room of the humane one. I know nor the meaning of the fir ft word, ( but I will not ftand on thit, as being 1 know but a verbal llip^ I do not apprehend what \.\{(i there can be for this Syllogifm in this bufmefs. 1, tt is fuppofed that every Chiiftian knows that Chrill and Rcmiflion are given together \ and when they know it, what ufc for fyllogizing tcwirds ihc explication of the ufe ot that Seal ? t. Nay doih not youv firguing intimate that the believer is more afluied that Chrift is given to him, then that pardon is given him > Orelfcif theformer weicnot ^«ifi/«o//«.f, how could it be a fit wfW d'uim ? you fuppolc his doubt to be of pardon and falvation , and the former brought to prove thatjwhercas I think, fcv^ doubt of one, but they doubt of the other ; and 1 think the Sacrr.mentfealeth the gitt of Chrift, as w^Jl as of pardon, as you con'"efs. I fee noc but you iviioht have laid down as conveniently in this one pr'.poficion,ari that you fay is fcalcd, 1 give ibce C'lyi'lji^'ftd Ju^ificatiori tvad Salvittlon. But this is of' fmall moment. ,"!,"•'.•

Wr. Bl. 'irH.c )>ia]or hoc IS 7i8t fcalcd; fur the Sacrament sfcal to tie tnnf. uf lai general Frnpofitiims, but they fialivilh app'icaten to ■paftUuLit per- ■ fnns to tvhom tl^c Rictncvts a-c difpinfedy ^s Trelcf'ant n^utea have difndcd agamjl Papifts, and put into the difn'n'nm of a Sacrament^ itfeah then thatwh'jih fnfiplics the place of the minor in this tcndtr, which ts Gods e'ft of C^''''fi- in the Sacrament Chri(i fmh , This is my body, he faith this is my b'sod 3 and this isfiidia all that coni' m.imcate. T^ow whether ibis gift of thcbody audl^'ncAof Cknft be Jbfoluti/y or Conditionally featcd, will be caftty refo'ved. The onttva-d E'erm-fits.ayc givci on this

cojidjii--''.

t"83

ct^iUim ti)4ttD4¥uciii£ ihtfUt th^vfu^tc an.ddav]^ them,.. JT'c.bavinot_£hri^

Sairamcnt'^u), nil tvc l;avc tal^cn and eaten ^nddiunl^ the Elements. wc have not Chrifl in t/.'c Saa ami7n btforc our Sou's hold jij th th'U which anfivcrs to ibis catint and drwkjni.r^ai "^huh aU do not p.r,talic of that rcciive the S.iciamcit^s not Abfo-/utely bill Coaditiffnally fcalcd lit the SAcr.imcnt. None canmtfs of thai vhieh Cod nbfol/itdygiAHts andalfulittcly fca'cth. But alldonotpanalie of Ch,i(lin ihcSacra-mtnt \ therefore he is not Abfohitely hid Covdnio/uHyJealcdin the Sjc,\imcnt.'

§. ^4.

K.B. I. /"^Onfuflon makcth Concrovcrfics cndlcfs, and gives a«l Vantage to V^ miftakcs to prevail with the weak Reader. I flull firft cclJ you what I mean hy ffaimgy bctbic wc further difpuce what is fcalcdjan^] how. Some lobcr men, no way inclined to Anabaptifni, do think thai wc ought not to call the Sacraments Seals, as being a thing rot to be proved from the word) ( for all Row,4.)But I am not of their minde. Yet I think it is a Metaphorc; ai.d to make it the fubjcd of tedious difputations, and lay too great ftrefs upon a Metaphorical notion, isthc way not to cdifie, but to lofc our felvcs. I nm not ly well skilled in Law as to be very confident, or to pretend to any great cxaftncfs in ihefe matters i but I conceive that in general, a Seal ii ah'Appropriativc fign , when it is fee upon things,as Goods, Cattels, &c. itfignifics thein to be ours : when they arenpplycd to Inftrumcnts in writing, they have i. the c6nimon end of a Seal. i. a fpjcial end. i. The common end is to fighifie by a fppcial f^n our owning ef that writing or Inftrumenc to which it is annexed. ' i. The fpecial end is according to the nature and ufe of the Inftruments zi^.i. Some Inftruments ditcftcd to a Communitic ^ or Indefinitly to any whom it may concern. i. Some to particular perfons, or fome few Individuals. Both ot them are, i. either Narratives de re. 1. Or obligatory Conftitutions or acknowledgments de Dcbito. The former arc either i.Doftrinal, and fo a man may give it under his hand and feal chat he owns fuch or fuch a Dodrinc, or confeflion of Faith , or torm prefcribed by him as Teacher to his Schollers or Hearers, lit. z. Or H'.ftoricalj and fo a man may give it under his hand and ScaTj that fuch a pcrfon is thus or thus tjualifiei ; or did this or that aft, orfuilcrcd lolTes, pain, &c. z. The Conftitutions de Dcbito, arc i.BeDebito officii, the Conftitution of Dutie. I. By equals upon voluntary obligation by ^ontraft (v/hiclvconcerncth not our bufinefs ). z. Ijy Superiors to their Subjects or Inferiors, which is cither a Law toanyor tofome Coinnumitie : Or elfc a Precept to fome patticulars. And fo Sovcraigns may give out Laws, aud Procjamacions uuder their hand and Seal ' and Jufticesand inferior Mag!ftrates may feal their Precepts and Warrants, and Orders, &c. z. Or they arc dc Dcbito Bale fcii y Coniliturcd i. bya Leg flator or Reftor as luch. z. by a Proprietary or Owner or Lord , as fuch. I. The former is eitlier Abfokite , as the Collation of fome honors may be, and iome afts of pardon, and the Dlvifions of Inheritances, as among the ifiaclites at their firft poflcfliiig^d^tz^w ; O: they are Conditional j And the Condition is either pure Acceptance (which is fo naturallyrcquifitc, that it is ufually fiip-pofed, and not cx;n'.fl"-d,and fuch Collations go commonly uiidjr the name of Abfoiute and Pure Donations, though indeed they are "oO. Or cl:c fome ixqui-fite fervice or moral a<5tion,which may properly make the B.ntfic to be Tr<emHm,

a

a Rtvrard. All thcfe being feakdj the Seal doth oblige the Benefafior or Donor, becaufc the Inftrumctit is obligatory, if it be for future conveyance. If a prelent Collation, then the Seal doth confirm the Receivers Right, againfl any that may hereafter queftionic. The like may be laid of Acknowledgments, as of Con-ftitiitions : The Subjcft may acknowledge his fubjeiftion and Seal it ; the Stipulator may caufe the Prom ilor tj acknowledge Duty or Debt, and to Seal it : So for Acknowledgments of Debts difcharged, Rewards received, Conditions performed, &c. 3. The like may be laid dc Dcbito fxnx-i when Penal Laws are fcalcd : and of Commiffions and Warrants for cxecuticn '■, but this Icfs concerns our calc.

So that the ufe of a Sealas fuch, isbut toteftifie in a fpecial manner that the Thing or Inflrumcnt is really ours, or that we own It; and lo as ^mcfins faith, to be Tc/?/«2o/7//<'/''7 5('c;.'«<5?rt>i«W5 added to the Primary Tcftimonie of the Covenantor other Inftrument. But the fpecial end of the Seal arifcth from the aa-lure and ufc of the Inftrument fcalcd, and not from thc-nacure of a Seal as fiich. • . ; ■' ' •

My opinion now up^n the prefcnt Concrovcrfic.^ .1 givayouin thele Cton-clufions. ■ ' •• ■-' ■ .'';■'

Concl. I. Taking the word as ftriftly as we ufc to do In Englifli, the Sacraments are not properly Seals, but Metaphorically. But taking the word Seal more largely , as it fignifieth any inftitutcd fign for tcftimony of ones owning the Inftrument, Revealing, Promifing, Exhibiting , &ci fo they may be called Seals. . v<f, av . ' ■ - •

1. The Sacraments arc not to be applycd to unlverfaT or indc finite fubjefts , but to particulars : Indeed they cannot be entire Sacraments, without particular Application ; that is, either to that particular Congregation, or a particular pcrfon : and ftill the Receptive Application muft be pcrfonal.

3 . Therefore not niecr univcrfaI,or particulir,or indefinite Enunciations are to be uled by the Adminiftcr, but fingulars alfo.

4. Yet I conceive that as the Univerfal Enunciation isfirft to be cxprcfled, fo it is that imivcrfal thatis I'ealcd, though with application to lingular perfons ; it being not a Collcftive, but a Diftributive Univerfal j and not Diftributive only in Genera fingulontm, bnt mfifigula Genernm : and therefore may be *pplyed ad firiiHl^ GcncfiifN.

J. 1 conceive that God may be faid to Seal firft the truth of the Hiftoryof Chrifts death and bloodllicd ." and alfo th: Truth of theDoftrine of the Go-fpcJ, that this Blood was ihed as a Ranfom for finncrs, and that it was for our fins that he dyed.

6. And this quoadinftitutionem Sacramauor/iin , may be faid to be intended to his uniTtnfal Church ; but quo:idexeietmm3 & aSiuaUm applicdtieitemj itisdi-reftly fttUCO fingulars.

7. IconceJvcalfo that in tie Minifterial afl of offering, and faying. Take, Eat, Drink, Chrift may be laid to Scalhisr-Preccpt, whereby lie hath made it the dutie of man> to Take or Accept an offered Saviour with his benefits , on the Offerers terms.

8. Thus far there is noqueftionbuthc fealethto Hypociites, as w^ll as to true Believers.

9. Concerning the Prom ill-or Tcftamenr, wc muft y€t diftinftly confider, I. the Promifc it felf which goes firft, 2, the fealing of this Promik, which is

next.

C"^3

next. 3. thcDelivcryor Application by oftli which is ncxc. 4, the Reception or Acceptance of the thing offered, which is next. S. the adual efficacic of the Promife in Conftituting the Riglu of the Receiver in the Benefit, which is next. 6. the mutual obligation ofcachPaicic to fulfill the rcniaindci of the Covenant for the future, which is the lall.

10. That Seal wii.ich properly confirms the Gofpel to be true, is miracles and other gifts ot th; Holy Ghoft \ but the Sacraments, though they may do much alio to that, .is they arc a continued publick Commemoration , and lo anexcel-■icntway of Traduion, yet are they efpecially Applicatory f;gns for renewing clear apprehenfions, helping memoric, afllfting in uur Application of the general Promife, refolving oiu: Wills, exciting our affcdions to a more lively fenfe of Chiifts Love, and our fiii and Duty, &c. and adually to help us in the Praifcs of the Rjedeemcrby lofolemn and Icnfible a Commemoration of his Redemption of. us.

11. Minifters areChrifts Officers in Explication and Application of his Laws and Covenants.

li. Their Application or Explication is no Addition to the fenfe, nor any making of a new Law or Covenant. Therefore when God faith,/yfco/oei'f/* •will Believe,fljall have Clmft and L'.fc ; and the Minifter faith, // thou. A. B. rvilt fft-tieve, thou Jbalt have Chriji and Life ; The Minifter addcth not to the Promife, but applyeih it according to its proper fenfe ; feeing a univerfal Enunciation ab-foiutely fo called, may be iiftributed in fingula gtnerufn , though a Univerfal jec/^;»^w quid may be only diftributed into Species or gcacra pngu' lorum.

1 3. And therefore to feal to that lingular Enunciation, is no more then to feal to the Univerfal, but much lefs, if it were to that alone.

14. It is Gods Legal Deed of Gift, or Promife written in.Scripture, or other-wlfecKprcflcd, to which the Sacrament is a Seal, and conlcquently to that fingu-lar enunciation, which is but part of the fame Promife, and that as it is contained in the univerfal -: but not as it is a thing diftinft from the univerfal Promife, or as fuppofed to addc to it, or contain more, for fenfe, in it j nor to the Application of the Minifter, as fuch.

I f. But for the right underftanding of this , wemuft explain this word , f» Seal to, which is of leveral fignifications : i. It is one thing to/>d/ro a thing as the Teftimoniump/imarium, to which the Seal is the Teflmomumfecundaiium. So thclnftrument isfealed to. t. It is another thing to/calioi thing as the fub-jeSinm materiale obfi^atum : fo the matter contained in that Inftrumcnt is feal' edto. 3. It is another thing to/f^/fo a thing as the )f«Aj <://:;;« ultimatut : fo the good which the partic ultimately receives from that Donation, Contrad? &c. asitsendris/e<a/e</ro. 4. And its another thing to feal to a thing as the finn CHJHS proximuSy vel propior : and fo to our Right to Chrift, our Remiflion, juftj-fication, Adoption, &c. are fealed to. ?. And its yet another thing to feal to a perfon as ihcfinU cut : and fo God f'oleth to us, the forementioned Covenant, &c. I mean that according to its feveral refpeds to thefe things, the words feal to hath feveral fignifications. Now the application , the Right delivered, &c, may be faid tcyhtfealed to, as the fitiis proximus ciijus : for it is fealed that it may be delivered and applyed for conveying Right : but thefe are not fealed to as the fubjeClum obftgnatum ; thatisthc rronufc ot Grant it fcif, whereby Right is conveyed.

i^. The

Cw»3

IS. The Sacraments arc not only Seals td^hc Grant or Promife, but furthermore are Exhibiting or Conferring figns,in fubferricncie CD the Promife ; as Inftrumcnrs to folemnizc the Collation of Chrift and his Benefits. And this feems to be a far more remarkable end of them, then proper fcaling : For Sacraments are fuch ki:id of figns , as thofc in thcfolcmn;zationof marriage, in glying hands, purring on a ring, cxprcfliig Confenr , &c. Or as the Crowr.ing of a King, oi the liiling a SouJdicr : or as a twig, a turf, or a Key in giving polFcrtion. So that the niaia life tolloweth the nicer fealing.

17. As Gods Uaiverlai Grant of Chrift and paidon is but Conditional (In form or fcnfc) to which the Sacrament fealcth •, To the min'ftcrthat diftribuccth the llnivcrfal to fingulars, muft do it but Conditionally, If thou A. B. wilt Be-ticvCy thou (h^lt hiivc Chrijl and Life : So that ftill it is no Abfolute but a Conditional Promile or Grant that is fealed.

18. This Conditional Promife is lealed Abfolucely and aftually •, for were it fealed only Conditionally, then it were not AAually fealcd at all, till the Condition is fulfilled : but the fcnfc would run thus , Th^s A^ionfhiUbe my Sed, when you bcluvc, or peyform fomc other Condiitrn. But I conceive God fcaleth Aftu« ally, and therefore Abfolurely, before men truly or really believe, when a Mini-ftcr on his Command and by hib Commirtion doth it.

19. Yet though God Seal the Con licional Promife Abfolurely to fuch as pro-fcfs to receive it ; th.u is, though h? hereby atteft that he owns that Promife as his Aft or D-cd -, 'yet doth he not either Exhibitc or C onvey Right to Chrift and his Bcnefirsjfior yet oblige himfi-lf for thi. tutuie, Abfolutv.Iy, but Conditionally only, for in this Conveyance an«i Obi gation the Giant or Covenant is the principal Inftrumenr, and thefign the lefs principal -y and both to the fame ufe : :.nd thercf )re the laucr cannot Abfolurely Convey, or Oblige the Pro-mifer, UiiLfs the firft d^ it nblolutcly too.

10. Go- may ihercfo.c leal his I'lomife, and thereupon ofF.r Chrift and Life to men that pi-tended a wilhngmfs to Receive it, and yet not aftually convey Kg .t to Ch ift and Life, nor Aftually oblige hiinfelf to pardDnor fave thcfin-ner, bcciufc the pa; tie mry rcfufo tic offj!, cith-r rcfufing Sacrament and ail, or'.nly ReUifing in h.art the benefit ofF.rcd, nt left as fuch and on the terms that its offered on, and on which only it may b; hnd. And fo when the fealing ufe is p.ft, the Sacrament may lufe its Conveying and obliging force ('fo far as we may fay God obi gcih himlllf) for w?.nr cf tru.- Reception ; and thus ic doth With allunfound Believers.

Id-firerb.e Readci, according to this explanation tounderftand that which I wrote againft Mr. Tombcs in my book ot" Bapiifm, about the Sacraments fralmg to the UMgwdly.

Having faid tiius much for the opening of my opinion, and the avoiding of Confufion , I return to Air. B'-ilfi words. And i. where he faith , The ma'ior is not fcii/cd ■,for the SacramaJtsfcal not to the truth of any renernl p: op^ifuir.ns , tut thcyfcalrv'nlrapiJicaiioniOparticuUypcyfom: I R-'ply, They feal no doubt with refpeft to particular perfons ; but that they may not Hal both the gen.ral Promife and tiie firgular as comprized in it, to that particular p:ifoa, I hear not yet proved, v\. q. d. Hav'm promifedChnfl and Life to every one ihatvoitt Accept himy left thou [Iivtldfl (larger at this my TroniilCy I owl it by this fa', z. Where he faith. It fc.ils that which fupplies the place of the minor j viz. I give thee Chrift : 1 Reply , I. Its true j becaufc this is no addition to the generafGrant, but part

till'}

of jrt proper fenfi: : Tot ht\hsii^3i'iihy I given to all Believers ^ faith in fenfca J give it to thee if thiu be a Believer. Othciwife God fcaleth net tOi what he pro-niifethnot : and were rot the lingular Enunciation comprehended in the lenfc of the Univei fal, you could ntvci prove chat the lingular is fealcd. z. But what lb ilic meanii gcf y cm Min( i, whitli )ou hy ib fc-alcd > Is it an Abfolute and hmplc P:opo»H'.oiior Eininciatiou, a^ you cxprcTs it '- Or is it a Conditional one > Do you nuan,i wlH ^ivc tbcc C'hiijl o'n Condition that thou Acccft hiw at fjjfhed; or, 1 uili vive hm Jbjolnt('y : And I y giving, do you mean proper cfte-ftu.il giving which conveys Right '-. ox only an orfci which conveys not Right till it be Accepted on the terms on which its olFered > If you mean by gift, a meet oftcijthcn it may be lealed Abfoluiely j fou God doth AbfolucclycfFcr , where he doth but Conditionally Give. He doth not fay, 1 wilt offer you (^/.(ii/?,o« con-fiilien yen will tc,i{c lim j tor he cftcrcth him whether men Accept him or not. It you mcin a full gifr, and mean tl.c Enunciation to be Abfolute, then that man fliall certainly have Cluift and Life, v.iiether he accept him or not ; or at left , accepting is no Condition, And chm all that God lb fealcth to, fliall be faved. Nor will it help you to lay, that he fcals ch s Ablolute Promifc but Conditional-Jy : for hcwcverjrjic man muft needs be faved by fuch a Gift or Promife it felf, though it Were never fealedat all. If you mean (as I fuppofcyou do ) / give thee Chiift la he time , on condition that thou Accept him as off a cd ; then i, Why. did you exprefsa Conditional Gitt, in Abfolute terms , leaving out the Condition > 2, Why then arc you fo loth to yield that this Conditional Grant is A^b-folutelyfealcd, that is,ovvncd by ancxprefs iign ; As long as the Grant is but Conditional, yea and the fign it f'Jf doth Exhibit or Convey but Conditionally J what danger to fay that it fealeth Abfolutely ' Is there not more inconvenience in faying tl.at both the Grant is Conditional, and yet aIfo that it is but Conditionally fealed f

3. You adde, The outtv^rdElements arc ^ivcn on this C(.jiditio'a, tiat rcc receive thtmi that wc cat and drinl^ them : Reply, I never gave them but on a higher Condition, vi\. Jf you Tvill lalie Cbrijteff'ccd , tai^c this which fignificth, &c. And 1 think Chrift never gave them but on condition , that men Accept him as well asthc fign ; though when they performed not. what, they pretend to do , he doth not lufpcnd his aft of Tradition .* And in fuch a cafe it is a Delivermg, but not a proper Giving, And I do not thmk that you ufc your felvcs to give the Sacramental figns meerly on condition that men will Take , and Eat, and Drink them : As you charge a further Condition on them, fo 1 conjc-fture that if they Ihould profcfs no more, then fo to Take the figns , you would not deliver them.

Next you argue thus, 7hat which all do not partal^e of that receive the Sacra-fnent, is not Absolutely,but ConditimaUy fealcd in the Sacrament. But all do not par-taf^eof Chrtflin the Sacrament i therefore he is not ^bfo'ute/jiy but Conditionally feal- . td : Reply, i. What if I fliould grant all this .'' what is it to our prefent que-ftion ? to 5f/j/C/;>ij?, is fomewhat an uncouth phrafc. It is either the Grantor Promife of Chrift thatyou mean, which Gives Chiift : or it is tlic ^/^i fo Given : C Fo'^ Chrift hJmfelf in fubftaiice is not Given by the Covenant , other-wife then by giving us Right to him.) If you mean it of Right to Chrift, then this is the Terminuspreximus cxhibitienisy and the more remote end of fealirg j whereas our Queftion was of the fubjed fealed, and not of the end of fealing. And therefore you fliould not have thought that you conclude the Queftion,

when

when you fpeak only to anochcr queftion. But it by fealin^ ChrlH, you mean only /"m/jw^ the Promife or Giiinc of Orrifi and Life inhi/n; then i. I deny your major propofition. If you had faid only, That which alt Ao not partal^e of that receive the Sacrament ^ is not ahfoliutly Given; 1 fliouldeafily have granted it : tor it is Given on condition of Kecciring : and even a fealcd Grant may be un-cflfeftual to Conreyancc, through the inrerpofition of the DilTcnt and Rcjc<aion of him that (hould receive. But you adde for the confirmation of the major , None can mifs of that which G).i ^ibfolutcly. Grantcth,and ^i/folutciy fcaleth ; Reply, I. But what is this to your major ' was there any mention of AbfoliiteGrantmr > This is fomcwhat a larg^ Addition, i. And what is this to the queftion between yoUand mc ? You know and acknowledge, that I fay. It is the Conditional Grant that is Abfolucely fealcd ; why then do you difpute againft Abfolute Granting and Sealing ? This is lofs of time to the beft of your Readers ; and for the worft, it may make them think my opinion is clean contrary to my own profcflion.

Mr. Bl. {^"K '" ^^/^ ^^'^ Soul frame any Argumentation, I fuppofc it is to be con* \J ccived Tothis pu/p»fc ; If God give me Chrift , he will give luc Juftificotion and Salvation by Chrift j but God gives me Chrift j therefore he will give me Juftification and Salvation. The major tsfiippgfcdnotfcaled: thcming-f is ihcre fcaled : The Elements being lead, ed by tbcSiiinilicr in Gods ftead^aud received with my handi I am co'"fi,med that God gives Chnjt to my Faith : And the minor being p. ah d, che eonclufton co nomine is fcaled. The proof of any propofition in a SyBng/fm, is pi order to the proof of the Conclufion •■, and fu the fealing of any fro-pofition is in order to thcfcaling of the Conclufion ; which indeed ^ir. Baxter grants; w'.'cre hejaycs that the Propofition that God fcaleth to runs thus. If thou do believe, I do pardon thee, and will l^vz thee : Tet fcverdpajjages in that Vifcourfe, are I confefs beyond mywia^ apprcbcnfion.

7?. B. I. TpO your Argument there needs no more to be faid then is (aid to the former. When God hath in one Deed of Gift beftowcd on us Chrift and Life, Remiffion, Juftificacion, Adoption, &c. ( i Joh. j. io,i 1,12. Job, 1. II, li.) it muft hz in cale of great ignorance that the perfon that knows that God givcth him Chiift, muft yet be conftrained by after a:guings to acknowledge chat he giveth him Juft.fication. And how this argument tends to explain the n.iturc of Saciamental fealing, I nciiher know, nor lee any thing here to help mc to know. If you wilHuppofe luch an Aigument as this uied for Application , I would not ftick toyicldit ufcful •,/;V)rtr God doth by bis Te3ament give to all men, on condition they will Accept it^ that he gives torn:: on condition I will .Accept it. But he gives Chrid and L'fc in him, to all men if tbey will Accept it\ tJierefnrc to me : (^Or jf you will fay^ to all that hear the Gofpcl. ) Though the ufc of fuch an Argument is more for Iiv>^ly Application, then confirmation of the Truth of the Giant.

tiH3

I. Your fuppofition that your minor is fcalcA, and not your major, hath

enough laid to it.

3. ric Saciamcnts may cojifirmc your faith in Chrift as. given to you, other-wife tiicn by fcalii.j;, i/^. as ti^cy aic iigus-foi Rcmcnibiancc, Excitation to fcnfe and liv<iy ?pp:«.l-.ciiuonsot Gods Donation>andab vhcy arc figns inftiumcntal in lolc Conveyance of the bcncfic Given, as a iw g and a lurtc, and a Key in giving poflcihon, and the words and adions of niatrimonial folcmniiatonor Contiad.

4. It is new J.ogick to iY\y undciftanding, that the minor being fcalcd, the Con-clufion to nomine u fcakd : The minor ot mnny an Aigumcnt may be true, and the conclufioo-fajfe. And therefore when the cafe fo tails out, that both minor and conclufion arc uue,or f.aicd, icisnot o) »')wi»f , bccaufc the minor is tiuc, that the Conclufion Is lo, (ox is fealcd, co nomn: bccaule the minor is lo^ but be-caufc both nujor and mirior are fo,. nd not then neither, but upon fuppoiition that the Syllogilm be found.

5. But to prove this, you fay, the vroi.f any Trofafiliovin a SyUngifniy Uin order tothc proof'of the Cnnctu/ien : and (0 thcjeahtig of anyTropofilinn is m order to the ■ fealing of the Conclufion : Rtply ;" The hi ft ks tiuc. i. but what is this to the matter '■• Is it all one to prove if and zobc in oracr to prove itj 10 feal it and wbc in order tothe feaiingof it ' Is the Conclufion proved on the proof of one Propc-lition ' No ; therefore according to your own argui: g, neither is it fealcd by the fealingof onePropofition. i. Thac the Icaling of one Propcfition is in order to the fealiiigof the Cor.clufion, I deny. i. It may be a fingle Propofition that is lealed, not ftanding as part of a Syllcgifm : as this, 1 Giw Chrtfi and Life in him to you allthanviU^iceepthnn. z. jt it be fiippofcd part of a byllogifm , it is enough lonK time that the Conclufion be cleared or confiimed, or we enabled ig-falhblytu gather it, by the lealingcf one Piop'fition: but it is not neceflaiy that it be the very fealing of the Conclufion, to which the fcalingof that Ptopofuion doth tend. When a Landlord l.ath fealcd a Leafe tohis,Tenant, he hath feal-ed this Propofition, If A.B. rpelland ftdy pay fichT^ents, he Jhall quietly cnjey fuch Lands : fuppole ihc minor to be, But A. B. doth or wiU fveU and truly pay fuch Rents : fuppofc thii minor Propofition eiibcr falfe or uncertain, will you lay then that ihefealing'brthc major was in order to the fcalingof the Conclufion ? No: the Conclufion is -^blolute, therefore h.Vi. fljall enjoy ftich Lands : butthcPro-pofit.on fcaled is Condicional. It is enough that it fecurehis Right, if he pay his Renr, and that it enable him infnllibiy fo to conclude, while he performs the conditions, thougli it tend not at all to ftal the Conclufion. We feldom ufe feals to Syllogifms : and not to Conclufions as fuch, or eo no;w«f ,becaule a major or minor Propofition is proved : though the thing fcalcd may be to other ufcs made pa It of a Syllogifin.

Yet 1 grant that where the Syllogilm is fuch as that one of the Propofitions doth morally contain the Conclufion in fenfe, though not in terms, there the conclufion is fealcd when that one Propofition is fcalcd : becaufe it is the fenfc and notmeer terms that are fealcd-, and undoubted naturals are prefuppofed in moralitie, and therefore thefcallng of one is the fealing of both ; For example, ir you argue either from a Synonimal term, or trom the thing as Defined to the thing as named, or from the Genm to the SpccieSy or from the Species to the Individual; thus, fuccinum c»rroborat cirebrum : At Amba;riimyvelele£lrum e^fuc" iittitm: xhQKifoie ,40ibarum vei eUHrHmcorroborat cmbrum: or thus^ frivatio

vifits

§. <S6r.

Mr. Bl. UEthatBclievctliisJunifiedandfliallbefaved- i. u;. ^ ™

K. B. A LL this is anfwcredfuflScicntJy already. Only obfervc that byJ^ai^i*' ■t\. jkvprf, and ivDiilftvctbcCi I mean but fljdlhavc, $r J will give thee prefent Right to falvation-j For the continuance of that Right, hath more then Faith for its condition.

$. 67.

M;. Bl. 'T'Hat itfcaktb mt to the truth of the minor Tropofition , But I beh'evc, ( he fays ) w beyond difpuic, giving in his rcafons. It fljould feal then to that which u net rvrtttcn; for no fcnpturef-tithy that I do believe; lo certainly Sacraments dofcal; they fed to that which is not dirr£lly written^ they feal with farticH-lar applicatim, but the man to whom they are app'ycd hath not hu name injcripture written ; lhey feal to an individual pcrfnn , upon the ifaryants of a general Pro-mfc : though I do not fay that Tropoftien ^s Jea!cd;yet mc things this reafon is (cajce cogent.

R, S. '^JOu deny not my aflertion, butaigue againft the reafon of it ; ai before by tellirg u.c what you thought, fo here by affirming the contrary certain, you attempt the confutation of mine. To your i ftance I give ihefe two returns i. It is equivocation, when our qucftion is of fealing to a thing as the fnhieaum obftgtatnmi for to inftancc in foaling co a perfon as the finu cui»

Ff 3 The

Ttiefeal, A« Is to appUcitlon as an end, not to application as the fubjeftfcaled. 1. lut If you rcfpeft not the perfon as the Old of application, but at the party tx-p t.(^ii in the t^roinifc which Is fcaled, then I fay, If you can prove that the unlver-lal l^ropoficinn doth not in fcnU contain the fingulars, fo that this lingular, if thou be ficve thoit (halt be favd , be not In Moral Law fenfe contained In this unlverfal. All that believe^.tU he Caved , ( the Law fuppofing them all to be men and Tinners ) then I will prove, that God doth not properly fcal to the fingulars i But till then I fufpend.

§.68.

Mr. Bl. V4 K Baxtcr/<iy«, The^reat queflionui whether tbeyfealto the Conclufion , as they do to the major Propojition / Toivhichbeanfrve)s ^ No, dlrcdly and properly It doth not. if the Propofitionfccms dircClly to prove the Conclufion , then that -tvhich dircllly con^rms any Fropofttion'm arightlf formed SyUogifm ^ confirms the Qonculfwn. If the Conclufion be not fcaled,then no Propofitm is feded, or elfe the Syllo^ gifm it ill-framed.

§.68.

R.B. X^*'*j*"on«'»DoarIne to be received without one word of proof Dotf, he that lealeth the major of this following $y llogirm, feal the Conclufion? Att that truly Receive Chrift, are the Sons of God,and(haltbe faved. Judas did tru'yZ ecive Chrift ', therefore Judas rva, the Sen of God, and fhiU be Cavtd. I think "both Premlfes muft be true, before the Conclufion will thence be proved true. And It Ic notlcaledbyGod, when It isfalfe. " u ms

§. 69.

Mr.Bl. l^Eafons are given. This Conclufion is nowhere written inScrfoture

and therefore is not propsrlyiheobje^SI of Faith; whereas the fcais arc /v«'r^r^T; ^% T^^i**^ r.Tr/;icfe/r.^, Itur^ritten Virtually, thoughnot exprefly That J (haH rife in judgment u nowhere mitten, yet it u ofFahhihat I fhiUrife ; md when! have concluded Faith in my heart, Js weU as Reafon in m soul, knoromgrnyfelf to be a Believer as I know my fclfto be a man, I may Js weU con-clHde that 1 {halt nfe to Lifc^ 04 that I fl)aU rife to Judgement, ^eu con.

§. 69,

R. B. I. ^Utnyouop^oCc yirtwUy to Exprefly,you[ei,v. by WittUiUy to mean m fenfe though not In terms. If fo, then your Syllogjfm Is tautological. But take It In what fenfe you wlU in any propriety, and I deny that It is Virtually written In Scripture , that youor I do Believe, or yet that you or I are Juftified and (hall be faved. Yet I confefs that fomc Condufions may be fald to b; l4tcrp,eta» tivtvelfecHnd(imloqui(tionmmoralemla$ctlpw:e, when but one of the premifes is

thirc J

Ct»7l

there: but diatls whcnthc other is prefuppofedas being as cettain : but of this more anon, where you fpeak of tl>is fiibjed more Jaigcly.

z. To your inftance, I fay. It is by Faith and nacural knowledg mixc that you conclude you fliall rife again. The Conclufion paiticipateth of both Picmifes, as to the giound of its certainty. That it doth/f^«;, is a right gathered Con-clufion, is known only by Reafon, and not by Faith : that it is true, is known partly by Reafon, and partly by Faith, when the Premifes belong to both. Yet though in ftrift fenfc, it be thus mixc, in our ordinary difcourfe we niuft denominate it from one of the Premifes, and ufually from the more notable, al-waies from the more Dcbilc. Scripture faith, AU min jhaU rifcj Reafon faith, you area man. Though the Conclufion here partake of both, yet it is moft fitly faid to be Wc/r/f, both becaufc Scripture intended each particular man in the lliiivcrfal J and bccaufc it is fuppofcd as known to all, that they arc men 5 and therefore the other part is it that refolvcch the doubr, and is the notable and

more debilc part. - •

Irs I know undoubted with you, that C«ncli<fio fqnilur partem dtbUiorcm,Now though Gods Word in it felf is mofl infallible,yet in rcfpeft of the evidence to us, it is generally acknowledged that it is far fliorc of natural principles, and ob-jefts of fenfe, in fo much that men have taken it for granted, that thd objcAs of faith arc not evident (of which I will not now ftand tofpeak what I think,but touch it anon).Thcreforcit being more evident that you arc a man,tlicn itis ih t allmcn Ihall rifi ,'t is fitteft to fay the Conclufion is dcfidc as the more debile parr.But can we fay fo of the prefent Conclufion In qucftion ? Have you a fuller evidence thac you are a fincere Believer, then you have that , All finccre Believers arejufti-fied ? I have not for my part : But it fucms by your following words that you have, or fuppofe others to havcj to which I fay 3, If you have "as evrdemly concluded that Faith is in your heart, (faving Faith) as that Reafon is in your Soul, & know your felf to be a Believer as evidently as you know your felf to be a man, then your Conclufion may be denominated to be nV fide, as a parte ditUfiore.. But if this be not your cafe, it is mofl fit (for all the mixt inteicft of the' Premifes^ to fay that it is not dc fide , but from the knowledge of your finccrity in the Faith, as a pate dcbU'iore. And if it be your cafe indeed, you arc the happi.ft man that ever I yet fpakc with. Cut I know that no man ordinarily can have fuch evidence of his finccrity ; yet b-caufe I wiil norfpeak of you or others by my felf, nor judge others hcarrstobe as bad as my own, or as all thofe that 1 have convcrfed With, we will if you picnic thus comprimiZC the difrcrencc : All thofc whofe evidence of finccriti? is as cleer as the evidence of their Reafon and manhood, yea cr more then Scripture evidence, fo that Gods Tcftmiony is purs dc-bilior in the Syllogifm i thcfe fliall cake rhc Conclufion, tlat they are jfapficd, to he de fide : and all the reft fliall take the C-ncIufionto be not dc fide , but fr^ m the knowledge of ihemL'lves : and then let the iffue ibcw v/heihcr more will l»e of your mind or of mine. I chink this a fair.Agreement,

Mr. Bl. /^Therwife (faith he) every man rightly Receiving the Seals, muft

V-r needs certainly be Juftificd and favcd. 1 fi:e no danger in yielding

this ConcUifion ; everymanrigbt/y receiving ^rjU'uKproving the fcals, wn^be)a-ve.d

and

C "8 3

Mfid Jitjlificd. He thai yightlyyecdvcs thcfalsy receives Chrlfl in the finis t and r<-ccivlng Chrifiy he 'fccives JJiaiicn. Sohe thatriehtly kms. Hear and your Souls ihall live. Ifa. ff. So he tbairtg!'!ly p/ayes. Wholocver calh on thcnamcof the Lord (hall be favcd. Rom. i o.

§. 7^.

R- B- '. jy^ "^ghtly, I meant, having R'ght lo it, and that only in/oro £f-*J c!e/U, and not Re fie. But 1 confcTs 1 fliouJd have plalnlyci" cx-preft my me;n.ng. i. Whether you here contradid not your Dodrincot Bap-tifmal Faith, where you fuppofc juft'fying Faith to b? iht thing promifcd by us in Baptifni, and rhereforc not prcrcqu.fitc in it, 1 leave you to judge, and rcTolvc as by your explication.

§. 71.

Mr. Bl. A Ndno mancangroundedly adminiftcr the Sacrament to any but •■A himfclf, becaufe he can be certain of no mans Juftification and Salration 3 Vpon the fame terms that he l^notvs any man may be faved, upn the [ante he may give him the Sacrament feaimg this falvation. Thu argument as rve heard ItefoHyis Bellarmines, and coucluihs indeedagdinfl ^bfolittc jeals in the Sacrament, but not againft Conditional fealing , as is confejj'cd by Prctcfiant Di-

vines.

§. 7t.

R.B, I. T know it not to be true of any man that he (hall be faved ; thcrc-JL fore I m y not foal it to any, by your Conccrtion. God Seals to no fal(hood J 1 know not whether it be trueor falfe that ^. B. jhaUbc faved. Yet it is on fonie of the Oppofers principles that 1 now argue.

i. 1 defirc you nottoanfwer it as Bellarmines ir^umcnty but as mine , feeing you choofc me to deal with. 3 .The Argument makes as much againft my alHrting theTiuthof your Conclufion , as the fealing it : fo that let your fealing be Conditional or none at all, i may not fo much as affirm to any man whofc heart I know not, the Conclu(ion which you fay 1 muft fcal. The Conclufion is Abfo-lure, Thou A. B. art Jufiifed andjhalt be faved; though the Major Propolition, or or Uiiivcrfal Grant be conditional. Now if youwiliS^al this Abfoluce Co iclu-fioa conditionally, then i. you will fin in the bare aflfinuing it a true Conclufion, before you feal it , if you go but fo fat. z. What is the Condition that you mean ? I fuppofi; true Faith. But if fo, then where there is not true Faith , ' ihetc you do not Aftually fcal : For a Conditional feal.ng, is not Aftiial fealing till the-condition he performed i for the condition not performed fufpcnds the ad. And then you hare miftaken in thinking that the Covenant is fealed adually to the unrcgcneratc or ungodly. But if you mean any thing (hort of trueFa.ih, how can you on that condition fcal to any man , that he is Jttftifiedy aadJhaR be favcd. 1 do therefore rather thoofe to fay, // thou Believe tboujh^lt

be

^ faved: and thmj as contained in the gumaL Granti labfolutdyfcal; then to ^^y* Thoujhalt be favedy and this I fed if thou Believe. Though I fay again , I make a fmall matter of this, and fuppofc your meaning and mine is the fame , for all ihefe words.

4, Where you fay , It concludes an ^bfolnte fealing ; I fay. No , if it be but to a Conditional Grant, and if Abfoluce Exhibition or Collation be not added to abfolute fealing.

§.72.

Mr. Bl. \AK Baxter adds, I amforry ro fee what advantage many ofourmoft: learned Divines have given the Papifts here, as one error draws on many,and leadcth a man into a Labyrinth of Abfurdities •, being firft mi-ftaken in the nature of juftifying Faith, thinking it confifts in a belief of the pardon of my own fins (which is thc^onclufion ) have therefore thought that this is if which the Sacrament fcaleth. And when the Papifts alledge that it is nowhere written, that fuch or fuch a man is juftified •■, wc anfwer them that ic being written, that He that Bclieveth is juftified, this is equivalent. Bht ^Ir, Baxttt doubUefs l^nntvs that many Divines rvho arc out of that error concerningthe na-tU'C sf Jtifiifyifig Faith, and have learned to dijiinguijh between Faith m the Ejfence ef It and Ajfuratee ; yet arc cotfid.ntly perfrvadcd that the Sacrament fcals this Con-dfffion, {(nowiiig that the Sacrament fcaleth tvhatthe Covenant promifcth to the ftrfons in Covenant, and upon the fame terms as the Covenant doth promife it. Now the Covenant prgmifethfoigivenefs of fins ( as Mr. Baxter conftjjes ) conditionally , and this to all in Covenant, and this the Sacrament fcaleth.

^. B

' S.7i.

. I. TF there be any that miftake but in one of thofc points , whca others JL iniftaktintheni all, thofe arc not the men meant that I fpeak of. I intended noccveiy ma:, thjtheld your opinion, but only thofc th.it held it on the ground and with the worfer conf.qucnt or defence which I cxprLlTcd. 2. I fliali know whom you mean , when I fee the Authors and place in rhem cited. 3. I think nioftof our great tranfmarine Div ncs who write of itagainftchc Pa-pift?;, do own that which you acknowl'.'dge an error; and what advantage that will give the Papifts, who arc fo ready to take a Contutatioa of one Dodrine of the Pto^cftants for a Confutation of all, you may cafily conjeAure. 4. This Conclufion many contVfs fcaled , If then A. B. doklicvc, thoujhalt be faved: but not this Conclufion , Tl}du A. B Jha't be faved. 5. I have (hewed you that it is one thing to fcal to the Promife tot form and matter ^ and another thing to feal to the perlons Right to the thing promifcd. T his adual Right is but the end , which is/ot obtained, till Delivered or offered i Reception and adual Collation go before j and then is not lac fubjeftum obfignatufn. Your argument I conceive doth nothing for your caufe, yea is wholly for mine. Your Conclufion is, therefore this the Sac: anient fcaleth--, what is this > why Forpvcncfs of fins Conditionally, md this to all in Covenant. Here i. you fcem to yield that it is not the Abfolute but Conditional Promife which is iealed , which is the main thing that I ftood on ; ^. You fccm to apply the word Conditionally to forgivcnefs, and not

G g to

tofidlng *. androtoconfefiibatthclcalinp is aftual; and if aftual, then not mcerly conditional. For to fay 1 condiUonaUy feal, is C) lay, ItPtall be m fcal , //// thepoformancc of the Conditien. But you fecm toconfcfsit a fcal before of Conditional foi givcncfs. 3. Ycu ftcm to acknowledge the general Promifc fcalcd, though with apphcation to particular pcrfons.

§. 73'

Mr. Bl, A Ndas it U an error to hold that to believe myfitts areforgivcnj itef tht X\ nature or ejjcnce of Fa'tih, as though none didbeheze but theft that had attained fuch aflurafue, {true Faith hath cjju' ancc in purfuit only y fonietitr.cs , end not alwaies in pojjijsion) So ou the other hand n is a niijial[e to jay, that k is no vvoikof Faith. The ApofUc calls it the full ajfmane i of Faith, Htb. lo. i%. cnddc-jeribeth Faith to be thcfubfiance of things hoped for ; Faith reahy.ih falvation wbieh rpe have in hope to the Sunl. ADefcnpiioiuif Faah (fiith Br. Amcfius o/it of a Schoohnan) by one of the mofi eminent a£ls that it produceih; there jure I tal^e tin to he a good ahfwer that is here charged with error, that when it is wi itten, He that Be-licvcth is J uftificd, it is equivaliat, as though it were fuch or fuch a man is Jujlificd, in cafe with ajjuredgrounds and infallible Dimonflrations he tan malie it good to his oypnfelf that he bclicveth.

5. 75-

K. B.

IF aflutance be not of the nature or Eflcnce of Faith , then it is not Faith : for nochJrg is Faith, but what is of the nature and Eflcnce of Faith : But accordiiig toMr. iJ/. aflurance isnotof thenature or Eflcnce of Faith (for he faich, its an error to hold it) j therefore according to Mr. Bt. aflVi-rancc is not Faith. But I fufpedt by the following words, that by nature and cffcnce, he means the minimum quod fie.

z. That which is but cither Purfutd or Poflcfl^ed by Faith, is not Faith it fclf, ( for nothing is the Purfutr and Purfued, the Poflcflbr and Pofleflcd j as to the fame part; nor will Mr. Bl. I conjtftuic, fay, that a Icfs degree of Faith poflTefl"-cth a greatcrj but according :o Mr. Si. affurance is but puilued or poflcfled by Faith ; therefore is not Faith.

3,1 know none that denyeth Afllirance to be a Work of Faith , which Mr. B/. here faith is amiftaketo fay , Love and Obedience are wroks of Faith , but not Faith it felf.

4. 1 muft have better proof before I can believe that it is Affurance of our own fine(ritie,ora5lualJuJiificationi which the Apcftle calls The full aflurancc of Faith, Heb. l o. zi. Though how far this may concurr, I now enquire not.

J. And as hardly can I difcern aflurance of our finccritic, in the dcfcription of Faiih, Htb. ii. i. Unlefs you mean that hope is part of Faith, and aflurancc the fame with hope ; both which need more proof. Hope maybe without aflurancc : and when it is joyned with it, yet it is not the fame thing. Only fuch aflTurance is a iingular help to the excrcifc of Hope,

6. Its true that Faith may be faid, as you fpeak , to Realize falvation to the Sowl f that is 3 when the Soul doubtcth whether theic be indeed fuch a Glory

and

Ci30

nd Salvation to be cspefted and enjoyed by Bellevers,as Chrlft hatli promife'd , lerc Faith appiehendcth it as Real or Certain, and fo relolvcs the doubt. Bur vhenthedoubtisonly whether I be a true Believer, Faith rcfolves it not : and ,vh;n the doubt is, whether this certain Glory and Salvation flull be mine, Paithonly cooperatcth to the refoivc of it, by affording us one of the Propoft-ions 5 but not both, and not wholly the Conclufion.

7. I am of Dr. Sdmcs mindc that it is one of Faiths moft eminent afts, by which it is there deferibed : But fo think not they that tell us that is none ofthc Inftrumental Juftifying aft which is there dcfcribed.

8. This which you took to be a good anfwer, is that great miftake which hath To hardned the Papifts agaiiift us , and were it not for this point, I fliould not have defired much to have faid anythingtoyou of the reft, ("about Conditional fealing) as being confident that we mean the lame thing in the main.

9. You forfake them that ufe to giv« this anfwer, when you confine Ic to ihofc. only thit with afuredgrounds and mfallible demouflratious can mal^e it good ta thcmfelvcs that they Believe, i. e. favingly. I doubt that anfwer then will hold but to very few , if you mean by Ajfhrgdgrounds, &c, fuch as they are adual-Jy allured are good and demonftrative.

10. Demonftrations may be infallible, and yet not known to be fuch to the p;r-fon : but I fuppofe that by the word "Demonltrat'ien % ycM intend that the partic difcerns it to be an infallible Demonftration : which fure intimates a very high kindeof certainty,

11. Yet even in that cafe, I deny that the general Premlfc, in the major , is equivalent to the Conclufion, lam Jitflified andfJoallbe faved, though I fliould acknowledge that the Conclufion may be laid to be de jide^ in that the Major hath the predomuiant Intercft in the Conclufion, if fo be that the man have better evidence of his finceritic, then of the Truth of the Promifc.

§. 74.

Mr. Bl. Ty^t this is faid to be agrofs mjlalie, and thus proved, as though the Ma-D jor Propofition alone were equivalent to the Conclufion .* But here beitigin our Syllogifm, both a ^iajor and a J^linor, there is ac^dedfurther, or as if the Conclufion muft or can be meerly Qrcdenda, a properobjcft of Faith, when but one of the Propofitions is of Faith, the other of fenfe and knowledge : Here the Major is ccnfcft to be of Faith; but the Minor, I fincerely Believe, is affirmed to be i^noxvn by inward fenfe and fclf-re flexion' i^crc I rnufi enter my dijjait, that a Conclufion may be Credenda, an objcB of Faith, when but one of the P.opofitions is of Faith, and the other of fenfe and l^noTvledge: yea that it vPiU hold in matters of Faith both fundamental andfuperftru^ive.

§. 74.

7^. B. 1. TT was not this according to your limitations that was faid to be a

1 grofs miftake j but as applyed to ordinary Believers, though my,

reafons make againft both. ,^ .

a. You deal more cafily to your fclf, then tairly with mc, in your entred Dif-fcnt. 1. 1 faid meirly Crtdmday as confcfling it is partly of Faith, and partly of knowledge, as the Picjnifcs arc ; and you leave out Wfc'/y, and put in (JrcdcTuia. alone, as jt Iccnyed it to participate ot Faith. 2. I denycd it thcicfctc to be a proper olycl of faith; that is, a mccr Cf'cdcndiim or Divine Tcftimony j acknowledging that it may he panicjp.itive OiUii partially,and kfb properly called anOb-j«A of Faith ; and you leave out propulyj and only affirm it an Ob)c£l (fFaithf of what fort focvcr, in g neral.

3. I have anfwercd this fi fficitntly , in telling you my opinion : ». p. The ConcJulion ftill partakes of the nature ot both Premifes : and therefore when one is dc fide, aaidihc ouxr HatitralitCi iCvc/atiim zcl coffiitum , there the Con-clufion, is not purely cither lupematinal or natural, r^c)i'«f, or CJ^ cognuioHc natii-rali J bucniixt of both. That its tiulya Conclufion , following thofe Prcn ifcs , is known only by Rational difcouifc, and \s not de fide : but that it is a t:uePro-pofuion, is known partly naturally, partly by fupcrnatural Revelation ( which is that we mean, when we fay it is dc jidt). But bccaufc it is fittcfl in our common fpecch to givctiiis Conclufion a fimple and not a compound Denomination (for brevkic lakc^ therefore wc may vreIl"iicnominate it from one ot the Propofitions, and that nnift alwaics he a partedibiiioie : And thercferc when it is pnmipiA naturalitLYHota that make one propofition or fcnliblc things, or what ever that is more evident then thetruth of the Propofifion which is of Divine Teftimony, chere it is fitteftto fay, The Conclufion is de fide , or of fupernatuial Revelation i As when the one Propofition is that ti^crc i\ a God, or I am a maji, or God is deat, or Good,or True. But when the other Propofition is lels evident thtn that which is ot Divine, Revelation, then it is fittcft to lay , that the Conclufion is fuch as that Propofition is, and not properly//p/f/c. For the Conclufion being the joynt iflUeof both Premifes as its parents or trueCaufes, it cannot be more noble then the more ignoble of .them. This explication of my opinion is it that I rcfcri you to as the fubftance of my anfwer to all that follows.

§. 75.

Mr. BI. y^HHcn Fiflier the Jcfu'uc totdDr. Featlcy that it was {olid Divinity,that a C'ovclufion de fide mnji neccfjdrilyby inferred out of trvo Piopojitions iit fide, D/-. Goad {bci7}g prcfcni as Dr. Fcatkys /Iffisiant) inttrpofcd in thefe VPOids, 1 will maintain the contrary pgainft you or any other ; That a Conclufion may be de fide , although both Propofitions be not de fide , but one of them otherwife evidently and infallibly true by the light of Reafon or experience ; nving inflancein this Conilufion,Qhr\i^\xs eft uC\hi\\s,vpbich he faid and t,itty,rpas dc iide, though both Propofitions whence it is tnfet red t>c not de fid*. Omnis homo.cft rifibilis, ij«ef aV/opofition dc Indc ^ or fupematurally revealed in Sciiptwe ; yet thence the Conclufion follows in this Syllogifm. Omnis homo eft rififailis : Chriftus tflhomo : r/;f>f/o>c Chriftus eft rifibilis, winch is a Con-slufion de fide, affirming thn Mclchior Canus had judicioufly handled and proved ihit tcncnt,which he faidhe could otherwife dcmonfirate to be infaUib!e:To whom D/.Fcat-ley ajJ'ents,fccond Daics difpntc, pag. 2$. It were (afie to frame many fuch Syflogifms. Jf'an Herctiil^jhoud affirm that Chrift had only apbantafiicl( body in appearance only, hffw-wouldyou prove the contrary but with this Syllogifm^ He that is truly man,hath a true body, ;uid not a phantaftick body only. This is a Vfifitan in rtafov, Chrift

istrujya man : th'n is a P$fition de Hue ih ScipturCy whence follows the ConclW ffon dc Bdcythat Chrift hath not a phantattickbody j Ifonfjhoidd deny that Chrifi had a rcajonabkfoiili affirm'wg that his body was informed by the Dtctic inftcad of a SoulymiiHitnotbethtcspiOvcd'^ Every true man hath a rcafonablc Soul: Chrift is a true man, and therefore Chrift liatha rcafonablc Soul. The Citie that ru-leth over the Nations of the carih, and is fcatcd on fcven hills, is the feat of the Beaft. This is a Scripture Trapofttion : But that Rome then rided over the Na* lions of the Earthi and was fcatedon 7 hiUs^ we i^mw by Hiflory and Geography : JVhcnce the Co'idujion follows, ffc<Jf Rome is the feat of the Beaft. Abundance of thefc maybefamedy where the Propofnion oppofitc to the Conclnfion, is cither an Herc-fic or at Icafl an error m Faith. The Condition is of Faith 'Difputing againji the Vbi' qicitarians and Tranfiihftantiation ; to holdup the Orthodox Panhy we are necefsita-tcd to mal^c ufe of maximes ofl^tiown rcafon. If they were deuyed us , the new Crew now fiart up, that deny all con fcqucnccs from Scripture , and will have none but Scripture words, had here a notable advantage. This Argument well followed, would put Mr. Baxter himfelf to a gcat lofs in fome of his Arguments (for which yet I five him tkanl{s ) to prove th'H the Scripture is the word of God.

§. 7J.

K. B.'T'His is fully anfwercd before, even In mylaftSeftion. 1. Dr. Goad ■4 faith but the fame that I fiy : only I diftinguilh I. Between that wliich is ^\xrc\y de fide, and that which is only denominated de fide as the more dcbilc of the Premifcs. In the latter fcnfe the Doftors conclufions are de fide , in the former not. 2. When a Conckifion is dcnyed to be dc fide, it maybe meant cither as a Diminution of its evidence, or as magnifying its evidence above that which Is purely ^c ^i/f, or as equaling it thereto. When I fay this Concluflon is not de fide, ^. B. is Jufiified and (Jja/I befaved, I fpeak ic byway of Diminution of its evidence and authority. And I confidently fpeak it, and doubt not to maintain It. But when I deny thisConclufion tobc fimply or purely dcfidc, I R. B .Jhallrife again, I diftinguilli nothing of the evidence or nectftityot It. And when I thM :irgu^, Omne quodfcntit & ratiocinatur^ cfl Animal. ff(;R.B. fentio& ratiecinor : tUcrci'oie ego fum Animal; though I fay that' here the Conclufion is not de fide, yet I intend thereby to extoU It for evidence above that which Is de fide. And when I affirm this Conclufion to be de fide , / R'. B. fj-ill rife again , as denominated a parte debiiiorc, 1 do fpeak it in Diminution of its evidence, in comparifon of that which Is more evident in nature : The Premifcs are thefc, All men fh.iU rife again : I am a man • therefore jfhall rife again ( fuppofing we fpck of men th.at dye). If the Major which Is dc fide, were as evident as the MInor,which is not, the Conclufion would be more evident then it is : and if neither were Wfj?^f, but both known naturally as the Minor is, the Conclufion would not be de fide , but would be more cvidenr. This I fpeak tliat you may not think that I deny the Certainty,Evidence or NecefTry of every Conclufion,whichl deny to hcdc fide,e\x.hzx purcly,or by prevalent p.TitIc!pat on. 3. For the Papifts , though ofttimcs they take the term <ff^^(, as you an0 I do, for that which is by fupcrnatural Revelation Divine,yet fometimcs they tnkc it for any point which is nccefla; y to falvation to be held, without refpcct to the fupernaturaliiy of the RcveJaiion, How Fi^er ufed it, I know not.

Ci34]

4. I think your Condufion,that ^Vj/;//i).tit»d r/«tf bodj/yh ^lUrcly de fdd and may be provLd by mccr Scripture Tcftiniony, without your medium.

f. The ndvantage that you fay the new Crew would have upon dcnvaJ of ihe ufc of Maxiincs ot known rcalbn, 1 know no: who gives thcin ('except l^doni-la and his followers, againft whom its long fincc I read and conkntcd to yfdclius in the main). But once again, and once tor ail, kt mc tell you, that it' the other of your Prcmifesbc Iclsevident or proveable then the very Woid of God, and be more to be doubted of, then your Conclufion is not ^c fide. For nothing that is truly f/fj^^f, is Icrsevidcnc then the truth of Gods Word, and that part of the word in particular. But yet though in fuch a cafe we tell them that the Con-c'ufion is not dcfidcy yet it follows not that it is untrue, yea or not evident ; nor do wc therefore deny the ufc of Reafoning from mediums of lower evidence then Scripture ; much Icfs of clearer evidence. But many confcqucnccs may he true, and yet not dc fide when one of the Premifcs is de fide.

Note alfo for the undciftanding of what I have liiid concerning the evidence of the objcds of Faith, that whereas wc do ufuallyfu compare Science , Opinion and Divine Faith, as to conclude that Science is an allcnt both firmc, certain and evident j Divine Faith is an allent, fitnie and certain, but not evident ^ Opinion is fomctimc firme, but never certain or evident j 1 do not fpeak in the language of thefe Divines and Philofophers, when I afcribe an Evidence to Divine Faith: But then you muft undcrftand that the difference is not (as I conceive ) de re buzdenom'mc j For I take not the term cx'i«^f«/', in fo reftrained a fenieas they do: As to in ftance in 7^0^. 2?^/owi«i (thatfecond C am ere) who faith, /ijjcnfm evidens eft cum quis per fc, hoc cft,vi fui fcufus autrationlsy abfque alterius informa-t'lonc & teftificationc fcrcipit earn propofilionemy ch'i affe?ititur,ejje vcram : and he makes that an inevident kiVcm, cum qicis ^jj'entitur propofitioniy nm quod fcnfus, aut foil da ratio cam veramtffe'Dimonjirct : fed zcl quod Iczis & ittcfjicax ratio il/ud fuadeat, velqHodaliustefleturcamcff'evcram j Pbilof. Thcol. an, p. 148. But I think the teim fw^i-^f, is here too much reftrained j and that with great inconvenience , and fomc wrong to the Chriftian Faith. I take that to be properly evident, which is to the underftanding truly Apparent, or Difccrnable • which hath divers degrees : And the Negative addition ( that it muft be abfqu'e fUterius tc(iificaUo/ic) is not only fuperfluous, but unfound ; And may appear ev£n from the Authors words ; i. where he oppofeth thcfe two, in dcfcribing in-evident J^flent ; twi quidfenfus aut folida Ratio cam vcram cff'e demonflret ^ and fed quod alius tcfietur cam effe vcram. Where he grants that whatfoe ve r foiid rca-fondemonftraceth to be true, that is evident. Now I fay, that he fliould not have oppofed all Teftimony to this. For folid rcafon doth dcmonftrate Gods Teftimony to be true, and this ro be his Teftimony. 2. He afcribeth Certainty to Divine Faith, which he dcfcribeth to be an Aflent , quinititur certo aliquo am folido fundamentOy non vcroleviautfallaci ratione • and he^noteth diligent]y,that ad certitudmcm afftnfus requiri, ntfundamentum quo mens niiitur dnmafjcupim p,xbct , non folum ut fit in fc ccrtuffi,fed ctiam ut aff'cnticnti tale videatur j niftcmm tile fci<u ratiomm qua nitiiuf cffe ccrtam, ejus afjenfus nullo modo erit certus & sJabilis. Now heconfcflithchattheobjcftof Science muft be evident : and here he faith nifi[ciat rationcm cffe certam. If hzm\i{\.fcire ecrtitudinemy then h-j muft fci;-e evidentiam^ii allobjeds of fci-nce are evident. And what is it to know , but to difcern or undcrftand a difcernable, cognofcible, or evident objed ? How then c9L\\Yii(cirectrtltudinminififckndodiqnam c^mtHdms I.vidmiam } I conceive

therefore

thctcfoM that It istrue proper evidence which is allowed to Divine FalA , under thl$ name of Certainty, even by them that fay it is not evident: I know whiita ftirthe School-men make about this point. The Queftion is not only de Evideniia fdei, but dcEvidenti Theologie alfo, wrhich they diftinguiih from fides , as habitus primorum fmcipmim, & fcicfitia Co«f/«;f<?««warediflind. Though the moil of the Schoolmen go the other way, yet fome ( as Hinricia J^aodl.b. i z. q. a. and Bcyi Aahicf'ijc. Hifpalcnf. qu. i.prolog, art. 3. not. 3. 4.) do affirm our Theology to have Evidence. Aquinas and his followers maintain it to be a btience j butthat is, becaufethey fup-pofe it to be fubalternate to the Science of God and the Gloryfied. And therefore Atjttifi. 1 i. qu. 1. tirt. 5. c. denyeth thofc things to be fcita qu^e commtmitcr & fwplici' tcr/ttbfiie cemncmurtJiniii^it^tbec^ufe omnu [dentin habctur per aliqua principia per fe nota, &per coufeqiuns vifa. But I think that per coxfcqucns vi/a, will not hold without exceptions and limitations j and I iup^oCektobcexpri/icipiisperfc notis originally : Yet In t'leforegoing Article, Aquinas grants that though qux Oibfunt fidei Confideratainfpeeialinonpoffunteffefmulvifais' Credita^ tamen in gcncrali fub com' ^muniratione Credibilis fie v'lfafunt abeoqui Credit. NenenimCrsdcrct nift vidcret ea effe Credenda, velfropter Evidentiam fizjiorim vel propter aliquid hujufmodi. And [ eafily confefs that matters of meer fupernatural Revelation are not In themfelves evident, nor ab Evidemia ipfms rei muft we prove Irj But that we have Evidence of the Verltle of the Conclufions , by the Evidence of the great Principles and the Co-nexion, I take yet for found Dodrlne. The Scotifts In oppofition to the Thomifts make much a doe on the queftion Vtrum Theo'ogta fitScientia ; And if properly 5d-entia. it feems It muft be evident, Scotm lays down four things neceffary to Science ftridly and properly fo called j i.^iodfit cognitio certa, i. c. fine deception. 2. ^uod ftt de objc^lii neceffario, & non csntingente, 3. Debet ejfc Caufata, a Can fa Ev}denti inteUehiu,id f/?, a principiis evidcnter notU intelte6lui.):>y which he faith Science Is dh ftingullhed from Faith which Is cognit'to obfcura, ttmgmaticay & inevidens. 4 ^uod hujufmodi princ'/piafeu caufa ex tcrminu cvidcns intcllcBui debet appUcari perd'lfcurfum SyUogijlitttm bonum&Ugitimum ad infcrendam conclufonem : and fo Science fs defined Notitia intelleHi4alis,ccrta & Ev densd'cnju! vrri^ nfccjf.rni^ evdeater dedii5li ex p>-in* c p is nccefsa-' Hs pr us Evidenter notis- Yet Radit faith, the fourth of thefe is accidental. And I fee not but we have even fuch a rigid ftrid Science of the objefts of Faith, i.lt TMy he Notitia InteUeHualis ccrta^^s iWconfds. i. And de objcHiy nc-ceffario. Only let me add , thar when wemake ufe of infallible Tradition dc fj£Io, In proving the foundnefs of our Records, that this was Contingens a priori ^ yet is ic neceffaty a. poftcriere nectfsitatc exiflentia; and that as to the verity, though it be coh-tingent, whether this or that particular man fpeak truth, yet confidcring but the force of objefts and common natural inclinations in determining the Will, ic may certainly be concluded rhat as to a whole Nation, or World, fome voiuntai y adions are fo Contingent, as thar yet they are of a moft certainly difcernable event .- Bvcn men beforehand may infallibly know that they will come ro pafs , ( fuppoling the world to continue I'ational); As that all this Nation, or all Europe will not famifli themfelves willfullyj and will not hang themfelves, &c. is a thing that may ss certainly be foreknown, as if it were not Contingent : much mora may the Verity of fuch " paft 3(5tions be known. 3. And that ic may have evident principles, (liall bt Ihown anon. 4. And then that it is difcourfive, is clear. Though Credere it felf as it is the quieting and repofe or confidence of the minde upon the authority or apprehended Veracity of the Reveale, Isaneffedof this difcourfe, feeing )f(^//cw Is not purely or chicfllyj an Intellectual a^, nor fidm alicui hnbere is it fignificch this repofe ; Yet

the

the Trutfc received on the Spakers Truft or Crcdk, Is received by the Iniellca In a dlfcourfivc way.

Rad.> grante.h thcfc Conclufions, i .[Thcologia fecundimfc e(i vere & p-/ofne fcien" tia. I. Tbcologia Dei rcfpt^u co-fum qua funt neceffTria fecundtm fc^ cfl vcrc & pioprie fc:cnt a. 3. Thcolo^ia ■•» iicitit ((i proprte & vcrc(cient'ta quoad ornncs. 4. Conditiones fcicniite. Ycc this eighth Conclullan is that Thcologia pi out efi .« ntibii viatoyibiu I'tt c(i profr:c & (lyific jcicntin. And the great Argamenc to prove ir is, prouc cfl in nobis efi incvi^ens cfuia frmcipia mflrte Tbcolegia I nut toJitiim Credit jjio that all the weight is hid on i^iis inevidence Briiflyj my rcafons for the i vidence of the ObjeS ot Divine Faith arethefe. i. If it be evident that Df«i f/i Ki?MXj & Dcus hxcicflatur, that God is true of his Word, and that this is his Word or Revelation , then Faith hath evident principles. Bus the Antecedent is trucj therefore. Into thefe principles we refolvc all points of Faith = Whatfoever God witnefTch is true i but the Dodrine o£ the Refarrcdion, judgment, &c God wi:neffeth or revealethj therefore j 1 hat God is t: ue, we have the fam' Evidence as that he is pcrfeAly good, and that is, that he is God • and that there is a God> I take to be as evident a Truth as any in Nature to4 Reafon, though God himfelf be fo far above our comprehcnfion. That this is a Divine Revelation, hath alfo its evidence , in evident miracles fealing it to the fir(\ wit-jieffes J and in Evidently Infallible Tradition delivering down to us the Records with tlie feals. I doubt not to affirm that fome humane Teftimony affordeth fuch a Certainty as is uDgucftionable, becaufe of the Evidence of that Certainty : as thac King ^iwies was King of England, Sec and of the matter in queftion we have as great, and In it felf far greater. But of this elfcwhere. .2. If Divine Faith give us a Certainty without objettive Evidence, then It is miraculous or contrary to nature, or at leaft above it ( not only as redifying difabled nature, which I grant, but ) as moving man not as man, or the I ntellcd not as an IntcUca , which knows naturally no other Adion but upon fit objcds^ and what Is wrought by them : It knoweth no apprehenfion of truth, but as it Is apparent or evidenced truth. To underftand this Axiom to be true, All men (hjlt be Judgedy and to fee no Evidence of its truth , are contradidions. 3. At left it cannot be concluded in general, that the objefts of Faith are not evident to any, in that they were evident not only to the Prophets and Apoftles themfelveSjbut to all the Churches in that age where they wrought their miracles, ^ot 2S the furmale fdeiobje^lum, viz Feracitas Rcvelantis, is tvident to Nt' ture, and fo to all that have not loft reafon 5 I'o that God himfelf was the Author or Revealer, was evident to all them whofe eyes and ears were witneffes of the frequent Miracles, Languages and Gifts of the Spirit, whereby the truth was thenfealed by God. 4. That which hath no Evidence,cannot be Rationally preached to the world: But the Dodrine of Faith may be Rationally preached to the world} therefore Pleaching hath a natural tendency to mens Convcrfion. It is a (hewing men the Evidence cfGofpel Truth;, and the goodncfs of Gofpel objed*, and f«j thereby per-fwading men to Believe the one, and Love and Accept the ether. He that doth not pr^drcareEvidentiamvcrilatisEvangelic*jdothnot preachthe Go(pe\/in the fiill re-fped, as he that preacheth not the goodnefs of Chrift and his benefits, doth not preach it in the otlier. Preaching is not Uk: Chrifts laying on clay and fplttle, which hath no natural tendency to open the eyes ; Fur the effed of Preaching, as fuch,is not miraculous, no nor fupernaturally otherwife then as the Dodrine preached being of fupernatural Revelation, may be faid to be a fupernatural Caufe, and fo telatively the fffed called fupernatDral : though the fame effed as proceeding from the '-pirit which Is a Concaafe, or fuperior Caufc 7 may be truly called rupetnacural. 5. That which

may

raay.b: Adeemed lo be certain Truth, without fpeclal or extraordinary Grace 3 even by wicked men and Divcls,hath forae evidence which caufcth this difccrn-ingor belief: But luch is the Dodiinc of Faith^ therefore. I know fontc Di-vincsto the no fmall wrong of the Chriftian Faith, fay, None can really believe it, but the Regenerate. But tbe Jews believe the fupcrnaiural Revelations of the Old Teftament, and the Divcls and many a thouland wicked men believe, both old and new 5 experience tells us fo : Chrift tells us fo, that many believe who fall away in perfecution, James tells fuch men, that they do wellin believing, but the Divel doth fo too : elfe men could not lejctl or perfecute the known Truth. To conclude it is commonly faid that infufed Habits, infundimtur udmB-dum acqiiifitorum ; and therefore the habit of Faith in the Intdlcd nnift be cau-fed by an Imprefsof evidence : Though the Spirits fupcrnatural aft be mtflie-ovcr neceflary, yet that makes not oiher caufcs unnccclVary.

Kadaywhocondudcsithiz Theologia no(l,an9n cftevidcm ^ gives but thcfe two poor rcafons ( and I Ihould as foon look for ftrong ones from him, a^ almoft any man of his Religion or party) i. Tiincl^ia Cmclufionum nofh a Theotogttt nrafunt nobis Evideiuta, fed Condita : iheiciorc ?icc Conclji/ioncs3 Sec. I deny the Antecedent, which he proves not; yeracitas Dtv'raa e(i formale objCiJiimfideiy and that is evident, fo is the Revelation, as is faid. i. He faith. Si, conclufwics vojliaTheolog!tecjjcmEvidentes,pofjl'mns convincerc Infidclesy la fidcmJisjham fuf-eiperrnt, quia Evidcntia convincit lHtelU£iiim. I anfwer, i. The gi cateft Evidence fuppofethotherneceflary concurrents for conviftion , as a Will to underftand, and divers other things which the wicked want. As it is not for want of Evidence of prefent Objeds, but for want of good eyes that a blinde man feeth not; fo it is here. 1. Many Infidels do Believe without fpccial Grace : though not fo deeply and clearly as to prevail with their Wills tor a through converfion j yea the Divels themfelves believe. And whereas he adds Tauls words , 2 Co,'' J. '^"•^ wali^by FaiLhy-nocby (lij)t j itfpeaks not of Rational Evidence, but of fenfitive, and chat we confefs is wanting. Faith is the Evidence of things not feen, Heb. il, I. Were it not for digrefling too far, I would examine the ^. ^ujl. Mater. I4. dc fide of Aqiiin.ndc y'eritiUej .nnd fliew how ill heanfwers the nme Arguments , which he undertakes to anfwer, and how weak his own Arguments are for the proving that fides nen pote(t ejj'cde rebus feitis. And I iliould flicw that Faith is a kinde of Science; or if we will diftinguiili it from Science, it niuft not be fo widely as is ufual, nor upon the reafon that it wanteth Evidence. But I fippofe he that will impartially read ^^«i«.««f;/7///>, will without any help ice the weaknefs of his anfwers, and how he fcemcd to ftagger himfelf.

Yet let mc add this caution or two ; I. 1 do not mean that every man who hath true Faith, doth difcern the great and chicfeft Evidence of the Truth of the Doftrinc of Faith. 1. Wiier..' there is the fame Evidence in the thing, there may be fuch different apprehenfions of it, through the diveili y of Intdledual capacities and preparations, as that one may have a fir.ne Belief, and certain, and another but a probable opinion, and anodier none at all. 3. Thoughl take the Evidence of the Doftrineot Faith to be as full as 1 have mentioned, yet not fo obvious and eafily difccrned as fenficivj evidence ; and therefore (as one caufc) there arc fewer believe, 4. Alio the diftance of the objcds of Faith makes them work lefs on the affeftions, and the prefence and other advantages of fenfiial Objcds for a facile moving the Spirits, makes them cariir men away fo potently, by making greater Commotions in tlie pallions ; fo that nowon-

H h der

tun

<icr if fenfc do prevail with moft. 1 conkfs alfo that men have need of good acquaintance with Antquity and oihcr Hiftory, and the Seal of the Church in moft parts of the world,to fee the ftrong Evidence that there is of the Infallible Tradition of the Scriptures down to us .' and to fomc obfcuve men, this may be incviJcnrj as it may be to one brought up in a fccrct Cloiftcr, whether ever wc had a Kjri^ or Parliament or Laws in Snrjand. But the thing is not ihtrtforc inevidcnt to thcinduftiious j No tiiough it depend on that verity of Rcpoit , which as proceeding from each particular pcrfon is contingent j feeing there ik Evidence of Infallible Verity even in the Ciiciimftanccs of thefe Contingent reports. And as Kada^ when he concludes boldly that Cogfitto Dei refpeHu CoK' t'lmivtiurn vox cfi v;opic& j'cicniifly&c.ycx fecms to grant that God may fche Con-tingcnt'iauiniCij}ayiai& finonut Contivgmia : fo it may be faid in our prcfent Gafe : the lame Reports which arc Contingent, are yet in other refpcfts of Evident Verity, and fo we know them.

But I findc 1 have been drawn beyond my intent to digtcfs far on this point t but it is bccoufc it tends to clear the main point in qucftion. To return therefore to Mr.U/flj^f jl do not know the meaning of his next wordsjwlure he faith,that This Aigiimcnl n'cUfoUoiired, wotdd put mc to a great lofs in [owe of my Arguments far Scripture, &c. Doth he think that 1 argue to prove the Divinity of Scriptures , from thcmfclvcs alone as the Teffifier thereof to our Faith ? or that, 1 take it fobemecrly cr primarily ^c fide, that Scripture is Gods Revelation F when 1 -have pro^cffcdly publifhcd the ccntraiy, before thole Arguments ? where I have alfo added thck words of Mr. Rich. Hotter ■, wherewith I will conclude this Scftion. Truly it is not a thingimpofsiUet nor greatfy hard., even by fuch l(mdc of proofs fata ffi.inifcjlmd clear that paint, that 7to man living fhaU be able todc/iyitj Tvithoiit dc}iy':rg tome apparent principles , fuch as all men ac^noTvlcdgc to be tyuc. Again, Scripture teachcth us that faving Truth rvhich God hath dijcovercd to tie Tforldby Revelation; but it pre fume th us taught otherwife,that it felf is Divine avd Sacred. Again, Thefe things rve believe, l^noTving by Reafon that Scripture is the Word of God. Again, It is not required, nor can be exacted at our hands, that tve Jhould yield it any other ^jjent then fuch as doth anfwer the Evidence. Again, How bold andconfdintfecvcr we may be inwards; when it comes to the tryal,fucb as the Evidence is which the T; nth hath, fuch is the Jjjent ; -nor can it be ftronger if (grounded as it Jhould be ; fo tar Mr. Hotter cited once more j Ecclef. pol. p. loi, 103, d^c.

§. 16.

Mr. Bl. nro winde up all, though there be fome difference in the way between me and my learned fund,yet there is little in the thing it felf. SMr. Baxter/tfif^ that the Propofition to which God fealeth, runs thus, If thou believe, I do pardon thee and will fare thee. The loul muft aflume the Minor. But 1 believe • Irom whence the Ccnclufion will follow, 1 fhall be pardoned and favcd. Jnd I infer, the Major being fealed, the Conclufion that rightly iffucs out of it, having its fhengthfrom it, is fealed liliewife ; failed to him that can mal^e gotd that: Affumption Sue 1 Bclievcj andupo?i thefe terms that he be akliczcr.

■''-ir- i.i„ ■ r-IT. ,....■

R.S, I. T^He diflfercnce Is fo fmall that were it not for fome fcattcrcd by-naf-fages, I fliould fcarce have replyed to you, 2. All the quarrel aii-feth from the divers undccftanding of the term fealcd, I fuppofe that you include the confirming of the Receiver, and the conferring of Right to the Benefit, both which I have faid aie done Conditionally, as being to tollovv the Delivery and Reception 5 whereas I take ic for the Tepmo?iiim fecundarmn , or that Obfignation whereby the Inftrument is owned : the following cfteds belonging to it in a further refpcd. 1 ever granted that by the fealing o?" the Conditional Promife,thc Believer hath a fingular help to raife the Conclufion, and be confirmed in it ; but not a help lufficient, without the difcerning of his own Faith, which is the AlVumprion. So that if you will, participaliter and cofifcqncmer, the Conclufion maybe faid to be fea led to him that hath the Condition C whether he fee it, ot not). But lotaliter &■ direfie only the Conditional grant is fealcd. 3. The Conclufion iflues from, and hach its flrength froip botli Prcmifes jointly^ and no more from one alone, then if it were none at all ; and therefore where only one of the Premifcs is lealed, and the other unfealcd, there the Conclufioj\ anhchutasl hii, participaliter & confequcnter Cezled : And though I grant thus much to you for reconciliat;on,yer 1 conceive it unfit to fay at all, as in proper l^iccch, that the Conclufion is fealed : which I make good by this Argument'. Conclufio fcquilnr partem dcbiliorcm^vd dtteriorctrt. ^4t Tropofitia non obftQtiatacSi pirs dcbiUor vddetcrior : therefore Conclufiofcquitnr Propofttionemnon. obfgncitain. And fo it is on the fame grounds to be denominated, not failed; as a Conclufion is to be denominated Contingent, when one of the Prcmifes is Contingent and the other Ncccflary ; or to be ^(egative, when one of the Prcmifes is Negative and the other Affirmative; o: xo he Pa/tic id ar, when one of the Prcitiifes is Particular arid th; other Univerfal ; And therefore I fllll fay, that it is fitted for you and mc to fay, that this Conclufion, Thou A. B. art Jufiificd y and hajil^jghtio Salvatioay is an unfcaled Conclufion ; till you can prove the Minor fealed, Thou A. B. art a fiticcre Believer. For my part, I know not what objeftion can be made againft Cither part of the fore-recited Argument, (the major being a Common Canon or Rule that holds in all Figures, and the Minor being yielded by yout ft-'if) eUe 1 would anfwer to it.

§. 77.

Mr. Bl. \y|K. Bixtcr^ fourth and fifth Tofuions in the cloftng up of hk-Difcourfc ^^^ fijotddbe coiifidercd , The Sacrament fe.ileth to Gods part of the Conditional Covenant, and lealcth this Conditional Promife,not Conditionally but abfolutcly , as of an undoubted Truth. To ivhich an cafie aafwcr may be givm, in order to a fair 'J^econciliation, ivlmi the Covenant tyes to the Condition^ and the Sacraments fcaltipon the fame t^ms that the Covenant tyes, the feat ii properly Co^ditienal, in cafe there is any fucb thing in the world ss a Conditwial fcal. T^cither is this Conditional Promife any abfaliUe undsubted Truthy but uponfup-pofalof the Condition put, and fo both Fromife arid Seal abfjlutely bind,

H h i §. 77- .

k

0V>1

5- 77.

7^. B. I. T Never heard of, nor knew a Gondi:J«)nal fcalingin the world ; X though 1 have oft heard of tlie cfFcds of Obligation and Collation of Right to be Conditional, which are not only fcparablc from the Termivui froximus of fealingj but alfo arc dircsftly the cfFc^s of the Covenant, Promilc , Tcftamcnt, &c. cnjy , and but.icmotcly of the Seals , inafmuch as that Seal is a full owning of the Inftrumcnt of Conveyance. Yet fuch a thing as a Conditional fcaling n)ay be imagined, feeing fcaling is a Moral Civil aftion,and fo dcpendcth quoad foymam on the will of the Agent after the matter is putj the Agent may if hcplcafc put the matter now, and introduce tlic form upon a future Condition ( or a prcfent, or a pad ) as if he fliould fct the wax and material feal to a Deed of Gift, with this addition, i hcvcby fealte this , •y fiwn it as m deed, if fuch a man be now living in France j <»■ if fuch a Ship be fafe arrived: er if fuc\t a manfJjnlldofnch a thing; othcwifc thisfhaUbc vs feal. But fuch exceptions or conditions being alwaics added to the Inftrument or Principal obligation or conveyance, and being of no ufe asto thcfeals only, I never heard of fuch, nor I think ever fliall do. For if all thefe or any of thefcCondi-; tions be in the Deed or Obligation, the Seal doth but conirm that Conditional Obligation, though it be abfolutcly and aftually a Seal ." and therefore doth not oblige the Author adually, but conditionally : and therefore to feign a Conditional fcaling, befidcs the conditional Covenanting or Granting, Teems very ufelefs and vain, to fay no more.

i« I confefs that neither Promlfe nor Seal bindc abfolutely, till the Condition be performed (which I pray you remember hereafter, if you be tempted to think any perfon in Covenant with God (the mutual Covenant where both ftand obliged) before they perform the Condition of the firfl benefits or • right ^. But when you fay that the Conditional Promife is not any abfoUue undoubted Truth t but ufon fufpofal6f the Conditimput, you make mefceftlllthc neccflity of mutual forbearance, and that all our writings muft have an allowance, as it were, in re-fpcd to fome inconfideratencfs 5 and the Authors not to be charged with holding all the Doftfines which they write. I dare not fay it is Mr. Sialics judgment, that Gods conditional Promifes be not abfolute undoubted Truth, till men perform the condition, i. Though they are not Abfolute Promifes , yet they are Ab-folutely and not Conditionally true ; Otherwife either it muft be faid , that till the condition be performed, they are Aftually falfc, and Conditionally true, or elfc that they are neither capable of Truth or Fallhood. The former I will not dare to fupppofe from you j nor yet the latter. For whether you put it in this form, H^h0foeverTviU Believe, Jhall be Juflificd : or in this. If thoiitvilt Believe t thoufhalt be JufUfied : there is no qucftion that both muft be cither true or falfc; and not hke an Interrogation that is capable of neither.

1. And then as it is an Abfolute Truth, foitis an undoubted Truth : For yeracitasDivinaefiformaleobje^iumfidei: and if Gods Truth be not undoubted, then our Faith hath an uncertain Foundation, and Chriftianity is not undoubtedly a true Religion,* i^m 1 charge none of thefe on you,as not doubting but it is an •vcrfight.

LhO

s. 78.

Mr. BI.

W^nen Caleb bad engaged himfelf^ He that fmlteth K'riatJfSepher and ta^ keth It, to him will I jJve Acbfab wy daughter co wife t Othnlel the Son of Kenat taking «, there was an abfolute tye upon him for performaxce, Jo(h. i f, 16/17. Jrhen Saul pvomifed hif Daughter to David on this conditieni that he would bring him an hundred of the foresl^ins of the FhiHftlns, i Sam, 18.2 j, David having made it good rvith advantage^ now there is an abfolute tye upon him.

§. 78.

R. B "T*His Is nothing but what is {ranted. I yield that God Is not as Ic were ob^

Heed till men performe the Condition. But the Qucftlon U whether he Abfolutely fealeth before, and not whether that Seal oblige before.

§ 79.

Mr. Bl. "CVen the Arminians Conditional incompkate EleHionl upon Condition of •Lj F»th and per fever ante t they confefs it abfolute and compleati upon fuppo fat of Faith and per fever once. This I tal^e to be Mr. Baxters meanings that upon fuppofal »f Faith it Abfolutely fealeth^ which I willingly grant: but it u adminiftred to many wba never put in that Condition^ nor come up to the terms of God, that believiTig they may be fffved, endfo in our fenfe it fealeth Conditionally.

§.7P.

Jt. B. I. T Have better expreflcd my own meaning.lt Is pitty that the Reader rtioulJ ^ be troubled with fo much, about To low a queftion , which of us two doth beft ezprcfs our meaning ? but that I hope he may gather feme things more ufe-fill on the by. In your fenfe, if it be according to your terms, God doth not aftu-ally Seal at all to any but the Godly, which is my maine Argument agalnft you, A Conditional feal, is not a feal till the Condition be performed.

$. 80.

Mr. BI. A Kdlcan make nothing elfe of Idr. Tombes his Aptitudinal and A£lual -^ featy but that the Sacrament hath an Aptitude to feal in an Abfolute waj to alitbat cmmmcate: it doth ASlually fsai to Believers and Penitent ones.

■ ■ 11 ■ -

S. 8e.

7^. P. I. T Perceive Mr, Tombes and you arc ni6icof a mlndc tlicn Iwasa-1 ware of. X. Stalivg ofy niuft not bccGnt'oiinded wuh /(Alnig to , as rcfj'cftingchc end : nw the next end, which is Efleiual lo Uk Sea], fasil->c 'fcr-minmtotbc Relation) withmoix; l":parabL-^nds. It is in rcgndofthc fiiftonU that I fpake agtinft Mi> Tonibej,iM affirmed it to be Adual and not only Apti-tudinal, but not in regard of the Obligation faswemay fpeak ; on God , or tlieaftualconreyancc o( Right, which follow the condition,which ] dcfiie Mr Tof}ibcs to take notice of, accoiding co my forcgoThg cxplicarioni if he mean to Reply to that.

^mmmmmm^'*'-** m n » i , i » ^ »'

Ml-. Bl. J^Either let any thlnli that here I ftc\ a flarmghole to recede fom am x\. thing that heretofore I have publijhcd on thisfubjed. In my anftvcr to t:^fr. Tombes, pa^. 9 9. J explain my fclf no 9tbcrmfe,hav'mgquotedT)r. Ames and Mr. Kuihci(oidJ in the vpords noTV recitcdt I there add. The Conditional fcal of the Sacraments Is made Abfolutc, by our putting in the Conditioner belitviirg, •&c. Itt cafe my anfwirluidbecn irj,::^r.Ba%Krs hand rchenhisappendix came out as hefjucs it was not, that he. might have fecn hew J explained my [elf , l fuppofc he TVQuld have fccn that in the refnlt of the -whole 1 Utile differ from him, fa that 1 can fear ce fee, that when the matter « broufhl home, that I have anyadvcrfary.

S. 8l,

R^ B. \, JT is fo rare a thing for men to manifcft fo much ingenuity and fclf denyal and Impartial love to the Truth, as freely to recant what thoy have once affertcd when they finde it a miflake, that if this had been your cafe , I would not have been one that fliould have blamed you for it, or charged you with unconftancy or levity. To err, is common to all men ; but frccJy to recant it, is not fo. 1 never write, but with a fuppoficion that 1 lliall manifcft tJic weak-nefs of my Intellcft, and do that which needs reformation, i. I did not fo much as pretend you to be my Adverfary ; I did dctend you, and not argue a-gainft you : and therefore you have licdc need to perfwade me to have lower thoughts of our differences then I did exprefs, or that you and I were no advcrfaries.

But though I make light of our feeming difference about fealing,! muft intreat you to remember, that i not only mai'itain my former Ailcrtion , that the Con-clufiov, I A. B. amjufltfied , is not de fide, but that I account it a matter of far greater moment.

It hath been too common Doftrinc among the moft renowned Divines , that Jt is not only dc fide, but every mans duty alfo, yea a part of the Creed, and fo a fundamental, for to Believe that our fins arc remitted, (for fo they expound the Article of Rcmiffion of fins). 1 will not name the Authors, becaulc .1 honor

them.

them 3 ani would not fcem to dlfparage them ; and the Learned know tlicm already : yea they caineftly prcfs men to Believe the pardon of their own fins in particular, and tcU them that thev have but the Faith of Devils elfe. By which dangeroiis Doftrinc, l. moft li^eA hfc pcrfwaded to telievfe' a faldAood : for moft are not forgiven, i. The carclefs world is driven on fafter to prefumption, to which they are fo prone of themfclvcs. 3. Painful Miniftersare hindreci,and their labors fruftrated, whofc bufinefs is fii ft to break mens falfc hopes and peace ; which they finde fo haid a work, that they need not refiftance. The ungodly that 1 deal with, are fo confident that their fin is forgiven,and God will not damn them for it, that all that lean lay is too little to fliake their ccmfidence , which is the nuifc of their fin. 4. Gods word, yea the Articles of our Creed, muft be abufcd to do Satan this ferrice, and mens Souls this wrong. All the world cannot finde fo ftrong a prop to the Kingdom of the Devi], norfo powerful an encouragement to prefumption or any fin^ as miftakcn Scripture ('either mifinter-pretcd ot mifapplycd). ?. When 'wicked men, that have but the Faith of Devils, are immediately required to believe the pardon of their own particular fins, and this made lohcdc fide, Grtd-is diihonored with the charge of fuch uirtruths , as if falllioods were dc fidCy and God commanded men to believe ihem.

And for the Godly themfelvesjit hath in a lower df grce many of the fame inconveniences, if there be any one that hath as good Evidence of his foundncfs in Faith, Love and Repentance, as that the Word of God is true, and all found Believers are Juftified ; what is luch a man to many a thoufand that have no fuch Evidence > yea andfor that man, it is impoftible that his Evidence fliould be as conftant>as Scripture Evidence, though it were as full. Scripture Evidence varieth not, as the Evidence of Grace doth in our mutable unconftant Souls: But for my part I never yet fawthc face of that fobcr man (to my knowledge ) who durft fay, Tiiat he was as fure or as confident of his own fincerity, as of the Truth of Gods Word, and particularly of that Promife , HethatBelievcthJJyali 7ii)t pcrjhf but have Evcylaftiug life. And as 1 have oft faid already , The Coti-clufion may not be faid to be dt fide, unlcfs the other Propofition be as t viderit as that which is de fide : bccaiife ConcUifio feqitlliir partem detcriennf. Yea let me be bold CO grow a little higher, and to tell you that it fecms to me iinpofijble and a contr.ididion that any man lliould be mote certain that he Believeth fin-cere ly, then he is that Gods Word is true, or that the Promife is Gods W( rd , which he aoch Believe. For the truth of God .in his Word , is the foimal ob)eft cf Faith, without which there can be no Faith. No man therefore can be more certain that he believes truly, then he is that Gods Word is tnie : For to Believe, is to apprehend the cei tain Truth of the Word. And noi-.c can be nioreccrtairt that he apprehends the word as certain, then he is that the Word is certain, if you fay, I am certain that I believe the certainty of the word, but weakly : I anfwer , At left then the faving finceriry of your Faith will be as uncertain to you, as the word is, if not the being of that Faith. And then there is no more ctrtairty, I think, rationally and ordinarily, then there is Evidence.

So much for that Controrcrfic,aud (o of all, fo far as I have obferved, which Mr. ^lal{i hath with me , or.bath called mc to giycan account of my judgement.

vj'hcthcr

fvhether the Covenant of Grdct reqmre ferfc^ion , and ac"

cept fim:erity.

TTHough I have done with what Mr. B!al{C faith to mc, and htvc no dcfirc to do any thing unnecdTary in a way of Conrrovcrfic : yet bccaulc ir is of the like nature with a fubjcd formerly handled, or tends to clear up feme things a-bout it, I will very briefly touch on his Arguments, p-*?. 107. 108. upon this Qu eft ion.

§. 8x.

Mr. Bl. A Sfcoad opinion tSj that the Covenant of Grace requires pcrfedionm-^* the cxa(tefl wy. vf'uhoKt help ofthefe mens difltniiions, in an equal degree rvitb the Covenant of lyorlf^s^ but with this difference j in the Covenant of iVOY^Sy there is no indulqmce or difjtenfatton in cafe of failing , but the penalty tal^es holdithcCfi^JefoUows Hponit : But the Covenant of Gracey though itcaUfor perfe-Cliony fuch k the exaClnejs of ity yet it accepts of finccrityy fuch u the qualtfcatitn of it through Graecy or the mercy in it. If ifheuld tal(C up any opinion in the world for the Authors fai^Cy or thofe that have appeared as Tatrons of ity then Jfhould embrace this : The Reverence defcrvedly due to him that I fuppofeprft mamfe^cd himfclfin it, hath caufed it tofinde great entertainment. But upon more then twenty years thoughts about ity Ifindc it Ic^ouring under manifold inconveniences.

§. 8i.

K. B. I, i-Tmay feemaudacioufnefs in a young Divine to qucftion that which * you ihall now fo confiderately deliver , after more then twenty years thoughts. But no prejudice muft hinder us from a further enquiiy after the Truth.

1. I began to conjefture that the Reverend pcrfon that you mean i$ Mr. BaU', and yet methinks, you fhould not fuppofc him the Author : It is therefore furc fome one much elder,

3. For the thing it felf, if I may {hoot my bolt, upon a fliortcr deliberation, I conceive,that all your difference with the men of that Judgement, is occalioacd by the Ambiguity and various acccption of the word Co^uenant of G>vzcf,which in my judgcment,you ought to have removed,by diftingui{hing,bcfore you had argued againft their opinion. The term Covenant of Grace y is fomctimc taken Sriftly for the Contrad alone i either I. for the full Comrad, which is mutual or by botli parties, which is moft properly called a Covenant : Or z. for the engagement of one part only : i. cither for Gods Promifc. 1, or mans. Hcrc-tn the Condition is implyed, not as commanded , but as tend red. Now it is certain that taking the Cox^f»flWt in this rcftraincd fenfe , it doth not command Pcrfcdion of obedience, for it commands nothing at all : nor doth it propound it as the Condition, for then wc were undone, But then it muft be known

that

£145 3

that this is too reftrained a fenfe for us ordinarily to uFe the vtord iivenant itC, God hath made no fuch Covenant with us, which is not a Law in one refpeft, a« Well as a Covenant in another •* He layes notby his Sovereignty in Covenanting. Nay they are all more properly called Laws then Covenants : Even the Promife it felf is moftpropcrly LcxGrat'!<e7^medians,L\kc an aft of Oblivion or Pardon to a Nation ofKcbels. Yet comparatively,the Law of Grace is far more fitly called a Covenant then the Law of Nature ( which perhaps is never {o called in Scripture), becaufe the Promiflbry part is the predominant part in the Law of Grace, the precept being but fubfervient to thatj but the preceptive pare is moft predominant in the Law of nature ; the Promife being not Co much as expreffed by Mofcs, and obfcure in nature it feJf, fo that it will held great difpute, whether God were obliged at all to Reward man with heavenly Glory, yea or any proper Reward ( bcfidcs non-puniihment which is Improperly a Reward). The Lutherans are the leaders of that evilcuftom and conceit of denying the Gofpcl to be a Law. i. In the next place therefore the word Covenant of Grace is taken for the New Law, containing Precept, Prohibition, Promife and Threat-ning. And here it is taken i. fo narrowly as to comprize only the Precept of Believing, with the Promife and Threacning annext , as being indeed the principal parts, z.Somctime more laigely,as containing alfo the Precepts that Chrift hath given the Church fince his coming, that were not before given : Principally that of Believing Jefus to be the Chrift, and alfo thofc of Miniftery, Ordinances, Church-Aflemblics, &c. together with the Doftrines or Articles of Faithi which he fincc revealed, 3. Sometime it is more largely taken for that whole Syftcmeof Doftrines, 'Hiftories and Laws ^Precepts, Promifes, and Threats) which dircftly concern the Recovery of fain mankinde. 4. Sometime for as muchof theie as was delivered before Chrifts coming, in Promifes, Prophcfies and Types, &c. 5. Sometime for as much of the fe as yet remains in force, whether delivered to the Church before the Incarnation or fince, (for many Covenants or Evangelical Promifes and Precepts,are ceafcd now that were in force before : as that Chrift (hould be born, and they fliould accept his birth, &c.) This laft fenfe, containeth the Doftrinc of Redemption by Chrift, and the Hi-•ftory of his birrh, life and Death and Refiirrcdion (as Narrations of the ccca-fion, end and matter are ufual appurtenances of a Law^ as alfo the Precepts of Repenting and Believing ; Loving God for our Redemption, and Chrift as Redeemer J Loving men as Redeemed ones, and as Members of Chiift j Miniftryt Sacraments, Church-aflemblics, proper to the Gofpel , with the means to be ufed for getting, keeping or improving this Grace as fuch j the command of Hope, or looking for Chrifts fecond coming, &c. and of fincerc obedience. I conceive the firft f as containing the fumnie of all ) and fpecially this laft (as containing the whole Syfteme of thcDaftrinc and Laws of our Redemption and Reftauration 3 are the ficccft fcnfes for ut ordinarily to ufe the word ^0-vcnant of Grace in ( zidc Groul differtitioncm de nomine Aix^rim-^utc Annotat. in. Novum Teflam.) Now if the ^ucftion be whether in any of thefe fcnfes the New -Covenant doth command perfcft obedience j I anfwer , All the doubt is of thq 5 latter : Burl rather think negatively, that in none of thefc Acccptions can the New Covenant be faid to require pcrfeft obedience. 6. But then fometakc the New Law or Covenant f r tne wliole Law that now ftands unrepealed, and obligeth the Subjcfts of the Mediator, fuppofing the Moral Law to be now •chc Law or Covenant of Grace, i, f. the matter of it, as it was formerly the

matter of the Law of Works ; and that the Covenant of Works being totally and abfolutely Abrogated, the Moral Law muft be the material parr of the Covenant or Law of Grace, or of none : and of fomc It muft be ; For God gives no precepts but up<'n fom? :crms. c;r wi'h fime iardicn ot Ktward or PuniOimcnt: And hereupon they favjthac i: is ni'W the >jcral Law \>hich is the matter cf ihc new Covenant, which ccmmancicih per fed'jbt'diencc. i his it maintair.ed by 3n acquaintance and friend of Mr. BAritrj^n man vi cxr:30!ilinary Lrarning and Judgement, efpecially as thioughly ftudycd in ihcfc things as any that ever 1 was acquainted with. For my part, • ( though I thii.k, the cliffcrtn<;cis mfift in notions and terms, yet ) I ftill judge, that thcLswof VVotks, that it. the Pitcepc and Tbiearning, are not abrogated , though the Promifr of thar iirf* i>t C€ift<l, andfoic is not fo fitly now called a Covenant j and fomc paitiruiir t'lftfpts a.e 3b o^^^atecr cc.iUd } and fo I think it is this remaining Law ci mtu:c which Ccmmandeth peifcA obcJicr^cCjand ftill proncunceth Dca^h, the I'ut punifjiment of our difobtuitrKC. But I acknowledge even this Law ci NatuTi to be now the Law of Chriil, who as Redeemer of all mankindc, hath Nature and its LavT ai:d all things tlfc oeiivcicd unto him, todifpofecf to the ad"* Vintage of his i.f cicnption i nds ; fut Itiil I foppofe this Law of Nature to be fo far from being the fame with the Law of Giacc , ;hat it is this which the Law of Grace i- tl.xxih, and whcfe obligattcn it difTolvcth, when our fins aic forgiven. So thatthed fftrercc isbut in rhe Notion of.Unityor Diverfity J whether (feeing all is Now the Redeemers Law ) it be fitter to fay , It is one Law ; or that. They are two diftin6Laws. I-or in t'C matter we are agreed, vio^. that the Iromife of the fir ft Law i$£taiJea, (^ becaufe God cannot be obliged !oa lubjeft made uncapable ) and fome pauicular i rfccpts arc c. afcd Cc(Ja//tc m:.tc; ia , and Mofcs JewiHi Law is partly ceafcd, and paitly abifjgaic j and that there is now in force as the i edcemers Law, ihePrcc'prot perfcd cbedience and the 1 hreatning of Death to every lin , with a Grant of Kennfllon and falvation to all that finceiely Repent and Believe , and a threatning of farlbrer punilTimentto the Impenitent and Unbelievers. Thus far the Agieemtnt. The dilagieement is but this ; I think that though thefcare both the Redeemers laws, yet they arc to be taken as two •, One in this forme, VcrfcSi Obedience n ihyDniy ( or obe\ perfifiiy) : DerJh is ihy Due for every fin. The other in this forme, Repent avd Bciicve, and thou (halt be faved (from the former eiirfe) : Or e'fc damned. CJthe^s thinks that it is fitter to fay that thefe two are but one \,zw,<juo,id /i)j«).7w, running thus , 1 con mand to thee fain man^ perfvCl obedieneey and oblige thee tol'tini(hrf}e/it for every ftijj Yet notrcnicdthfly } but fo as that if thou Believe and Re-paty this Obl/p/.tion fh.iU be d/ffolvcd, end thou (riVcd; elfenot. To this purpofethe fcicfaid Learned^ Judicious. ai)d much honored Brother, explains his opinion tome. Now aslong as weagree that the former Law, or part of the Law, ( call it which youwill^ doth Adu illy oblige to peifcft obedience, or future Death ; and the lat-'.cr LavVj or part of the Law, doih upon the performance of the Condition , diffolve Jjis Cblrgation,'and give hs fu-i adimpimitatem & fatutcm 5 what great matter Is it, whether we call it One Law or Two ? For we are agreed againft them that look on the Moral law as to the meer preceptive part^ as ftanding by it felf, being not the matter of any Covenant, or connexed to any fanAion to fpecific it.

lo apply this now to Mr. JS/^j^^j Queftion j It h moft likely that thofe Divines that affirm that the Covenant of Grace doth require perfed obedience, and Accept {incere,do take that Covenant in this hft and largefi fenfe ; and as containing the Moral Law as pait of its matter j and fo no doubt it is true,lf you underftand it of pcrfedion for the future, as fpeaking to a creature already made imperfe^.Now feeing

the

the whole difference is but about the Reftridion or Extenfion of the termc -Qo-vi-nnrrT, T conceive, after twcr.tle years ftudy, Mr. B/. Ihould not make it fo material, nor charge it fo hcavi'y. Andthouglil am notottliac panic and opinion my fclf which he chargith, ycc feeing it may' tend to reconciliation, and fet thofe men more right in his thoughts, to whom he profclllth liich cp^cceding reverence, I will briefly exuninc 1 lis, Reafons 4^ iji|//<iAj which he here bringcth in againftthcm.

§. 83.

Mr. Bl. I. TTc^ayiifljcihtheforino- ojiimonoppofcd hy Proteflnnls, »nd butnow A rcfufcd tti to thcObcdnncc andthc Degree of it called for in Covenant : and if I fhotdd be rndulgentto my afftciionsy to caufc my Judgement tojloopy dijlilit of the one would Mal^c me as avcrfc from it, as an opinion of the other would mal(e me prone to receive it. Judgment therefore muli lead, and AffcUiom be waved.

§. 83.

"^ -K. TF you iuLetpret tiic Papiftb, a^ meanip,g that the Law requires true Per-,,, ■»■ fedion, but Accepts ot fincerc , :thcn if it be fpokcn of the Law of Works or Nature, it is faJle , and not the fame with theirs whom you oppofe, who fuppofc it is the Covenant ot' Grace that fo accepts of fincerity. If you take tliem ( as no doubt you do) as meaning it of the Law of Chiift (as the Trent Council cxpefs themfelvcs) then, no doubt, but they take the Law of Chnft in the fame extended fcnfc as was before cxprcfled , and then they differ from us but in the forementioncd Notion : But then 1 luppofe y.ou wrong them by making them rightei then tlieyarc : For the very pafl^gcs which you before cxprcfTcd out of lomeof the chief of their writers, do iniimatc that they do not indeed take the Covenantor Law it fclf to command true Perfeftion : buc that which they call Peifcdion, is but ( as you fay ) No other then the Grace of San£lifi6Alion in the vcryfaife as the Orthodox hold it out ; But it is true peifedion that thofe mean whom you now write againft. So that I fee not the Icaft ground for this riift charge.

§. 84.

Mr. Bl

z. TF this opinion (landy then God Accepts of Co''^'cnant-brealters j of thofs X that deal filfly in It j whereas Scripture charges it upon the wiclicdy thofe of whom God coinp'.ains as RcbellioU'S, Dcut, 19 2 j. Jolh, 7. i j. Jer. u. i o. and 12. 8. 9. lea. it may be charged upon the befi, the mo[iho!yin the world lyingun-der theguUt of it. ' ' '

D4^1 S. 84.

2.«

. •T'Hii charge procccdeth mccrly from the confounding of the Duty au

Inch, sntl the Condition as luch. A Covciiaiit winch is alfu a Law as well .1 s a Covenant, may by the preceptive part Conftitute much more Duty then fliall be made the Condition ot the Prumiles. Properly it is only the i on-pcrformancc of the Condition that is Covenant breakirg j and Co the Divines whom you oppolc are not chaigcable with your Conftqucnt : For they fay not that Thi C'jvinant vf Grace doth rridtic pc-.fcil Obedience the Condition of its Tromife, and AcceptImfcrfect. That were a Hat contradift.on : for the Condition 13-Cr.ii[:i fine qua non, ^xim qu.t : But only ihcy fay, It Rcquireih or Comniand-eth perted obedience, and Acccpteth lUsperfcd. And if you will fpcak fo largely, as to lay, that all who break the preceptive part of the Covenant, arc Cove-iKknt-bfcaktrs, then no doubt but God Accef tcth ot many fuch,-and of none but-^ fuch. And as the word Covenant is not t.'ktntor the mutual contiaA , but for-Gods new Law, called his Covenant, his Ttftamtnt, his Difpofition, Conftitu-tion, Ordination, &c. fo no doubt, we all are Covenant-breakers. For whether wc fay that the new Law commandeth perfeft obedience , or not; yet unlefs you take it exceeding reftrainedlyi it muft be acknowledged that the Precept is of larger extent rhcn the Condition, having appointed fome Duties which it hath" not made fine qua non to falvation : If you ferid your childc a mile of an errand, and fay 1 charge yon playnot by the vpaj^buc mal^c hajie, and do not go /» the dirt, &c: and if you come baci^ by fuch an hourt, I miUgivc you fuch a Reward , ;/ not^ you fhall be nvbipti He that playcs by the way and dirties himfelf, and yet comes back by tltevhour appointed, doth break the preceptive parr,but not the condition. Or if y"ou fuppofc are-cng?g^mcrt by Promife to dcboth thefe : he breakcth his own Covenant in the nrft refpcA ( which was not the condition of Reward or Punifhment ) but noiin thefccond. And fo do true ChriftJans both break the preceptive part of the Covenant, and alio fome of their own particiJar covenants with God : as when a man promlfeth, 1 will commit this fin no more , or I will perform fuch a duty fuch a day. But thefc are not the Conditions of the Covenant of Grace , which God hath made the (^au-fa fine qua non of Juftifi-cation or Saltation. So that I conceive this charge unjuft, to fay no more.

S; 85..

Hi. Bl.j.TTWw itvpillftHow that as none can fay that they have fo anfcfcyed the. Command cf the Larv that they have never failed^ they have not ( if pitto tinfvper in thegicatefl rigor) ontetranfgrefj'ed ; fo neither can they with the church maf^e appeal to God 3 That they have not dealt faljly in the Covenant, nor frpickedly departed from their God. Pfal. 44. I nJLvtrypn (Mfmding to tha opimon) bti»i a trcach of it, and « dailing fa/fly in it.

^^ *f>

Cm^I

§■. 8 J.

I^ B. "pHis charge is asunjuftas the former; and the abfurdlty fuppofed to follow, doth noti but is fuppofed fo to do , upon the forcmentioncd confufionof two ads of the Covenant, or New Law ; the one Determining what (hall be mans Duty; the other, what (hall be Conditio fine qua nm of Jufti-ficatiunand Salvation.

§.8f.

Mr. Bl. 4. 'THcn the great ^^mifc of mcrcy from everla(UMg to everlafiing upon them that fear himy and his Righteoufnefs .unto chUdrcns children tofuch as \eep his Covenant^ and to thofe that remember his Commandemcnts to d9 themj Pfal. 103. 17,18. ow/y appertains to thofe tbatfo l^eep the Law that tbey fn not at all again^ it.

5^; B. FT follows not. If they fincereJy keep the Law, they fulfill the Condi-A tions of the Covenant, though not the Precept. And they keep the Precept in an improper but ufual feafe , as Keeping is taken for fuch a lefs degree of breaking as on Gofpel groundiis Accepted. This ftill runs upon the forefaid Confufion.

S. 87.

Mr. Bl. J. '^HcnourBaptifm-Vovt it never to fin again^ God ■■, and as often aavot renew our Ct-vcnant , tve do not only humble our [elves that wc have Jkned, but n>eaf,cfh binde ourfelves never moie to admit the ieafi infirmityy and fi iive and dye itt the breach of it.

§; 87.

J^, B. TWE do not promife in Baptifm to do all that the Precept of the Co-venant rcquireth , but all that is made the Condition of Life , and to Endeavor thqicft. Much lefs as the Covenant is taken in the large ft fcnfe , as thofe feem to do whom you oppofc, may it be faid that we promife to Iseep all k«,Precepts.

$.88.

Ml. Bl.

(, 'VHcn &c d''{i}?iffion between th»!'e thattvtred Covcv.wt and brake it , »r5 ]-r. 3 f, 31, I ■^. flvdtlofc that haze the La^.v-w; nun in their I carts, and put hilo fl'jiii hrrr.trd p.tits to ob.hve it, faiisy all (landing equaUy Guilty cj tl c breach of it , fto hel\i of -G-race being vf power to enable to l^np Covcrmt.

§.88. -

^' ^- W^'" finccre obedience and pcifc(fl obedience arc all one, and when ilic precept and the Condition of the Covenant are piovcdco be of equal extent, then ihcrc will be ground for ihc charging of this Conlcquence^ Inihe fnft Covenant of Nature the Precept and the Condition were of equaj extent ; for perfed obedience was the Condition ; but it istiotfo in the Cove, nant of Grace.

§. 89.

Mr. Bl. 7. npHc« it follows that finceritie « never called for m aD/Hyyorre". jL quired as a Grace i but only difpcnfcd with as a fiiiivg, indulged (U a. want. It ismtfo much a Christians honor or Chamber, as his blcmijh or failing j rather hU dcfefl then praife. But we finde the contrary in Noah, Job , Afa, Heze-kiah, Zachary (7»<f Elizabeth, Nathaniel an Ifrnelitc indeed that cntrcd Covc-n'anfmd l(ept C^vmmu —

§. 8p.

K. B, \ Will not fay.it is paft the wit of man to finde the Ground of this chaigc,i. f. to fee how this fnould follow ; but 1 dare fay, it is paft my wit. if it had been faid , The Covenant conmandcih perfeflion and not ftnce-. ■lity ; Or The Covenant Accepteth fifucrity, but not Commandcth it , there had been fome rcafon for this charge. But do you think that fincerity is no part of Per-feftion 1 Can the Covenant require perfection, and not require fincerity, when lincerity is contained in perfection ? If you like finceriry, exclnfivc only, as excluding pcrfcftion,and not at zWformalitcr j then its true that it is not comman-dcd,nor is a duty, but a failing : For I hope the Gofpcl doth not command Im-perfedion, but tender us a Remedy for it. You might with more colour have argued, that then Repentance is no Duty, becaufe inconJf(lent tvitb commanded perfe^ ^ion. But that will not hold neither ; Fot they fuppofe , RepcntaHCc com-: mandcd by the fame Law, in cafe (and upon certain fuppofal) of Imperfc-Aion, or fin.

§. fo^

Mr. Bl.

1, A Nd thcYffoic I conclude that as in the Law there Tvasfuye Juflice , as ^^ wellm the command Given, as punijijment thrcatncd, without any condcfccnfion or indulgincc : So in the Covenont there is meny and condefccnftony as well m the Condition rcqiiii ed, as in the Tendty thnt is annexed to it. The Covenant icquircsno more :henit accepts.

§. 90.

7^. B. A ^L this will be cafily granted yoii by thofe of the contrary part, as ^* nothing to the puipoic. It tolJows not, that becaufe there is condcfccnfion ia the Condition , that therefore there is fuch an abatement in the Piccept, or that the-Covcnant hath no Precept but de pYte(landa Conditionc. 1. It were ftiaiige it' the Covenant Ihould require more then it accepts. Did ever fo-bcrman (much Icfs fiich as yoiu Rcvcrencd advcrfaries ) imagine a thing fo Impious ! as if God would not Accept that which himfelt" commandcth. But if you would have faid, ns your arguing requires, that the Covenant accepteth no kfs then the whole which it commandeth or rcquireth , then not only your An-tagonifts, but my felt and many another will deny it, and demand your proof. Bnt he. e I take this as granted by you , that you take not the word covenant lit Icart forcftrainedly as excluding all Prcc.pt •, fof 1 luppofe you mean ^owwaw^f-iiigi \n the terms icqiuAni, andcaUmiforss duty.

'jh^ndj

inrrii'iU) hivh as

<;■ any ifiarecalLdforfiom hi/n then through Grace he dvth perform , he rifes as

„,,... ^ /.'« Rul-i iiiuifins not thrnngh any Impcfcaion-^ j thC'Cjore to mal{e it out that

a f,ci!<:vc,s Impf fci. ions arc h/i fins, it mt:<i needs be that the Cavrnant requires pci'

/cainni-M to ma}{C good that he may he fuvi^l pi his lmpe:f(cli<rnsy it mujlhcffjaintaincd

hat by accepts fincoiiy. Hut //' u /t-gumat i:\ rot vjwaghi: Ch'i(i entring-a Gofpcl-

ivith man, fiudcsinm under the comf/tandof the Law, which conmiand the

arc under the Law as men \ we are taiiev vHo Covcnam as Criitians : retaining the humane nature, the Law fiiH comnianiis us ; though the covenant in chrijt through ihc abundant Gyacc of itj -upen thctCYtniihat it>eqtiires and accepts , frees usfioifi the (emencc of it.

K. 8. I, T Was at firft doubtful, left by rfcf law you had meant (asthcLw-ihe/ans ) a Law of God in general, as oppofcd to the Gofpcl a« being no Law ; and that you had meant by the Law, only the Moral Precepts* which is burthc mattcrof the Law of Naturcorot" Works, or of the Law ef •Grace (in fomc rcfpcd). But i perceive that you mean »hc entire Law, both Precept and Sanftion, by your mentioning the Sentence of it. If thcrcforc.you do by the Larv mean but one Species, w'^. the Law of Nature, acknowledging the new Law of Grace ( commonly called the New Covenant, from the Pro-mife which is the moft eminent part ) to be a Law too, tl.cii 1 agree with you in this folution as to the matter ot Perfeftion j or elfc not. And yet I dare not hold that the New Law commandcth no more then its Condition. Buc for 'them that ijIc the v/ord Cot/c»/in( for nothing but the bare Promiic , 1 muft tell them, that it is but a piece of Gods Law or Inftrument, feparatcd from the body which they faftcn a Name upon." and if they will fignihe fo much , that it is but part of the Redeemers Law of Grace, which they call a Covenant, and will give another naine to the whole, that fo we may underftand them , I would not willinglyquarrcl with them about words. But if it be the thing as well as the name that they err in, affirming tliat the Gofpel is a mcer Proniile, and that God hath no Law but one, and that one the Law of Works ; or clfe that all his Precepts Natural and Pofitive, are one Law by themfelvcs as diftinft from the San-ftions, when Precepts arcbutpartof Gods Laws, which by their Sanft ions arc fpecified and diftinguifticd ( as moft think into two forts, of Nature and of Grace ; but as Camera thinks into three forts, of Naturc,& of Jewilh works, & of Grace ) then I not only profcfs my diffent, but do cftecm the former error very dangerous and intolerable; and the later, fuch as tendcth to great confu-fion in the body of Theologie.

1. This very Argument which you recite and anfwcr, doth undenyabiy prove, that the Divines whom ycu oppofe, do by the Covenant of Gracey underftand «11 cheLaw that isnow in force under the Government of the Kedecmer.Otherwifc they would never imagine that there is no fin but what is againft the Covenant of Grace j and that there is no other Rule but this Covenant for a Chriftians obedience. It is therefore out of doubt, that this difference is but about words, ( or little more ) they taking that Covenant of Grace in a larger fenfc then you and I think meet to take it.

If you fhould reply , that it is an unrcafonable thing of them to take it fo largely : I fay that 1 do not think meet to imitate them in it , but I could flicw you fo muchfaid that way by the forementioncd Reverend, Learned man, your "friend and mine, as would convince you that they have more to fay for what they do, then every one that is againft them is able to anfwer.

S. 9i.

Tffe ConclftpoK,

JJ Aving thus taken the boldncfs to examine your Exceptions, and deliver my JRcafons againft fomc of your opinions, I do crave youc favorable accep-

tance

rsncc of what I have dorir, and yonr friendly interpretation or remiiiori of any uk -favory words that I have let fall : And I muft dcfire you not to fuppofe that I judge of all the reft of your Book, as I do of this which I have here Replyed to. I value the Wheat while I help you to weed out the Tares. Pardon my confidant Gondu-dlng you in the error, and my felf In the Truth : whether ic be from the convincing felf-revealing nature of Light ; or from the common unhappy fate of the deluded ; I muft leave you and others to judge by the Evidence that Is in my arguments, whatever further evidence I may have my felf within j doubclefs the various ftate of In-teileds, doth caufe a ftrangc variety of apprehenfions, of thofe objeds which are In themfclvcs the fame. And words be but dcfedlve Cgns : Tiierc is fomethlng in $en-fation and Intelledlon, which words cannot fully (hew to another. It is but tbeSpe. cies and not the thing it felf which you fee in this Glafs. My moft exquifice defcri-ption of my own Tail, and the fwectncfs of what I taft, will not caufc another to taft that fwcetnefs. And theie Is fomcwhac like this in Intelledion ic felf j for though I confcfsmy felf Ignorant what manner of thing our IntcUeftlon wjllbc, whenwearc out of the fleHi ; yet now me thinks I perceive thit it dwh in fomc fort participate of fcnfe , and that vid. Angtifi- ds Ti'tnit, ji. y. f. i itik'o. Scntio m InlcUgere, Is a fpeech not wholly void of Truth. I confcfs alfothat I (hould have little modcfty or humili* ty, if I (hould not think more highly of the undciftandingof your felf and fo many Reverend and Learned Ikcthren who dllTcnt from me in feveral points here de* batcdjthen of mine own.But yet we muft prove all things^ind not fo truft to other mens eyes as to Qiut our own, or refufe to give credit to our light. They may far excell me in miny other things, though they miftake in this. I remember P^jWj, if ive or an jiuQcl from heaven, 8cc. And I remember TertuUiaHS , Non cx perfonit probamtu fidciH, fedcx^dcferfoJ.rj (//. Pafcript^adv. bier. c. i.) And Ircn^ut his, Presby-tern adhmrere oportct qit'i & Apoflolorum do&in^tm cuflodiunt , & cum Presbylcrii (hdincfcrmonetf) f.iiitrn cti[lod:i4iil icc.(li. 4-f-44) And Cypri.tns, .^«< ifta ob(lmatio cli quxpr^efampOaJbutnanam traditioncrn Div!n<e difpofiiioni antcponerc*nec animadvsy tr,e,''idig}tMt &'iy.ifci Dcuft^quotKs Diviii pracepiafalvH &prxterkbimmci traditlO' EPifi. 74- iid lub^n.in.p. 119. And miny a one of A/t(lhis yet plainer then ihefe, to the fame purpofe are commonly known, P.)«/ himlclf could do nothing againft the Truth, but for the Truth, at having no Authority given him CO deftruftion bat to Ldifica-tion. lam willing to itoop to the judgment of my betters as far as is Rcafon.ibic , Confcionableand l^fliblc , and if no further, I hope I raiy be excafcd : when L fee plain Reafon ag.nlnft them, i: is unrcifcnthLc to I'ubfcribe to the opinions of the moft learned : whcnSciiptare is again 1^ :h«.m, it were dillionfftaiid uncoiifcion^blc: And when they arc one agaifift anothcr^to ailcnt to all is iinc>oflibL. Infuchacafc , I muft needs bear the Accufations of one paity , whu think me Arrog.mt. : roud andSelf concci;ed,asruppofin^ my felf to bf wifer then thfy. ,',u'I have lang been ftudyin" and Preaching,(and I ihink pradifmg) chat ncielTuv jrid cxcelltnc Duiy/^f bciii2 fo contented wit^ Gods I'ole approb.itijn, as ihofc chii kaow dicy ^Xi\i or fall at his bar = and thercfjre mult tftccm it a very fmiil thing ro b-judged by m:n I have long valued and believed that faying of Ai'ltit (comm:mly ci'cd, and found , ///;. 5. d(? T'iwi'.^J/'. '^•fhc very laft words ) Co^'l,a Rniomm n.mo iob/iui j CoKtra Scripluras nemo Cbyift'ruius; Contra. Ecclelid>/i nemo pacifcwi. In ihf point cf Faiths Inftrumentality,and thenatuvcof the iuftifyingad, wi-.ich I uifFcr fi;om yen in, I am conftrained upon all chefe three grounds to my iiilT;nt. 1 Lcil by icnou .cing my Reafon 1 Ih^uU ceafc tobefober, ^ Though yet I thi•^k fobcr riicn may be con. tiary minded^ tiot feeing thcfe Rcafjns). i. Ltft by foifiking the Scripture, I /hould

K k ccafc

Cm3

ccftfc to be a Chciftlan, (Though Chriftian* that obfcrvc not,or underftand nor chat the Scripture is againft you in this^may juiigc as you).3. Left by comraiifting the Church, I (hould ccafc to be peaceable ( Though men othcrwife peaceable may be drawn to it through prejudice), If you will bring one found Rcafon, one word of Scripture, or one appiovcd writer of the Church (yea or one Heretick, or any man wliatfoevci) for many hundred years after Chrift (I chink 1 may lay 1300 at left) to prove that Chrift as Lord or Kmg is not the objcA of the Juftlfying aft of Faith, or that Faith Juftlficth properly as an Inftrument, lam conicnccd fo far to lofe the Reputation of my Rcafon, Underftanding, Reading, and Mjmory. For though I have not read all that hath been written for fo many hundred years, yet I have read moft of the Writers of great note, (except the moft Voluminous, which I took but part of) and by that much , I fee lb far into the fcnfeand language of thofc times, that I dafe ftand to the hazard of this adventure. I fpcak this bccaufc you tell me, that there was fcaicc a dillenting voice among our Divines that are ogainft me about the Inftrumentality of Faith. And if there cannot be brought one man that confcntcth with them for 1100, or 1400 years after Chrift, 1 pray you tell inc whom a humble,modcft,peaccablc man Ihould follow, were he never fo much ready to deny his own underftanding ■" Beeaufc a word or an opinion that is unfound , hath got poffcflion ot a iitcic corner of the world for about 150 years; therefore lam fufpefted as fingular and as a Novilift, for forfaking it. Whereas it is to avoid fingulanty, and notorious Novelty, that laflcntnot to yourway. Thcfamel fay about the Intcrcft of mans Obedience, in his juftificationascontinued and confuinmatc in judgement. If cither Ckmens Romaa.Tolycarp. Ignatius, Juftin Martyr, Irenaui, Tcr-tHllian, Origrn, Atkinagorai,Tatianm, Clem, ^lexand. Jiimutius Falix, Arnobiufy La{laTi:iHf,Cyp^*^»)-^^f^^''''^'*h Eufcbim, Greg. N.jy.m^cn, Efipharuus , ^)ritf. H'lerofol. Sync fins, CyriU AUxandr. Macarins, Hicromc, Salvian, l^incmtlus Lain. yjgiliiiSi or any Counccl were of your mindc in any one ot thefe points, and a-gainft mine, then I will confefs, at kft my fupine n«.gligcncc in reading , or my very faulty memory in retaining their words. l^nA iov^Aujiin, Chryfofi. and o-thcrs , of whom I have read but the lefter part, I do ftrongly conjcdure by that part, at their fenfe, and that they concurr with the reft. It youfa/that the Fathers had their errois, and cUchisis but humane Judgement, and all men arc fallible, I confefs all this to be true : But as 1 ftill fay, that Cmtra EccUfiam nemo facificus, fo I define leave to Judge thofe Brethren that oppofe me, as fallible, and fubjeft to error, as all the Primitive Fathers were : and therefore that I may be no more blamed or thought fingular for contradifting them , then they are for contradifting the Primitive Church ; I know as ^«J?/n faith Ae C'v'uate 'Z>ci,ii. 11. c. ■^o.Serv.-'nd!graditscrant'Divinimuncris-y lit primum darctur ti-btrum arb'itrium, quo non-pcccarc poffet homo ; Tiovifsimnm, quo pcccare non pojj'cf ntqucilhidad comparandum mcritum ; h^c adrecipundum pramium pcrtincrct. And the cafe of the Intcllcd being the fame , we muft ftay til this time of Reward be come, before we fliall receive our KoHpJp cryare. I know no Brother that op-pofcth me, doth pretend to Infallibility. All that I defirc by my far greater advantage of humane Teftimony, is but to cxpugn prejudice, that I may ftand on even ground with them that contend with nic : Andcould I but prevail for thi^, that the caufc might be decided by mcer Scripture-rcafon,jind humane Authority wholly ftand by, and the Reader could but impartially confider things, without being hyafied CO any/Wf or p.rriyi as if he knew not what any man clfe

dorh-

ri

Joth judge of It, I Should then make Jittk doubt o£ the good ifluc of the Con" irovcrfie. The moft that I meet with, that explain againflt my judgement, arc ihey that confcfs that ih.y know not what it is, or cllc apprehend it to be what it . is not: but whaterer it is, fomc that they value are againft it, and that is it that fatisficth them that I am in an error. I do unfeigncdly dcfirc that in daik Con-trovcrfics beyond their reach, the unlearned people would more regard the genc--rality of fobcr Godly Divines, then any liiigle and fingular Teacher ; ye* though it fall out that he be in the Truth, as long as the Evidence of that Truth is out of their reach. But this may not encourage any to fhut their eyes, or to ncglcft to fearch after the Evidence which they might difccrn, much kfs may it cxculc fuch unfaithfulncfs in Divines themfelvcs i nor yet may it encourage any to captivate their judgement to a party, againft the general judgement of the Church : For if I were on one fide , and all the Divines in £»£/d«(^ on the o-ther,therc is yet the fame realon to prefer all the firft Churches,before all thcni,as there is to prefer ail them before mc. In a word, 1 fhall ever think him more culpably fingular, who d.ffercth from Chrift, and his Apoftlcs, and all his Church for hod or 1400 years, then he that dlft'ercih fioinany party now living, and diffcreth not from them forementioncd. And how the calc ftands in this between mc, and thofc Reverend Divines that oppofe mc , in the forclaid poiacs of diifercnce, 1 am heartily content to refer to any fobcr, impartial Reader, that takes not things ontruftfrom others, nor judgcih of the Do-ftrinc of aniient writers, by any imperfcd d fmcmbred parcels.

Gcorgius Czlixius, Epitom.Theols^, Moral, fag. ^67,,

Iyfur^ogatl qute fides nofiya, qute do^rina^rrfpond^mui earn tj]e fidcm & da^r'iium fiojlram, quam ComjLditur fjmbolum ^pofiolicumifymbolum Nutenum, Conft/inti-Twpoiuanum, & Athanaftanum , ^nathemati^mi Lphefini ; Cjufcfsio C'oalccdonenfis : ^'<f Nc{lonaaorum& Eitiichia>ioiumrctiqiiH!yqianta& fexta fyfiodi oppufunnnt : S>j<e itemTelagianu AffuanapleniYiJ.. five ui voceid fokt miUz'itana. fynodm & ^lauficana frcunda f)nodus eppofucyunt. Hac fymbola hdt covfcfsiones & dcclaratio-nei continent, nonmodoqu^Crtdere, fine qnibus fiiem & ajfcnfum prttbere hamintm Cr'ii^aanum opoi let, & fine qu'ibui cycdllis atque cognitis falvayi ncquit ; fed tUis, etiamqui hac ipfa doccudo tya£la.nt,&- aliis expnnun! uTnTvTnrtv v'yixn'oirra)/ Koya^ quam temant fi eefcyibuut. ^ne aiitcm hifcc fymbol/s confifsiombus & dcclarationibus compnhcndicntur e Sacra Scnptuyahaufinfmt: q/fppe in i/s qiite aperte in Sc/tjfivya pi'it.jf}tnt invcniuntiir ikaomuiaqua continentfid.m morcfqitc vivmdi,&c.T)emque cxcyccmui n^s ^d confctentlim hab^ndam fine offeufx apudD:um c^ homines fmpcr.

LHtherHS,rejereKte Hopfnero Saxoft. Evangel, p, 110,

NlUV. ptjiilentius in Ecclefia doccri poiefi,quam(i ea qtnencceffaria nonfunt, necef-fayiafi.'Ht. Hac enimtyranntde cenfcicntite illaqueaniur,& Libertas fidcicx-t uiguituy-y mcrtd^cium pro veritatc,lJolum pro Deo,^bominatln pro finiluate coittiir. 1 coruiKide with that of Kup. Mcldenius clfcwhcre, once before ciicd, Parancf. ( citante C- ^*-^'iif) "P. "i-.

ycrbo dicJm : fi nosfeyvayemusy in NcccfTirlis Llnitatcm ; in Non-ncceffariis Li-bcrtarcm, in Uciifque charitatein, optiino ccite loco efleni resnoftrx. Itafiat. Amen.

FINIS.

T H F

REDUCTION DI GR^'e S S O R:

O R ^B^h. Baxters

REPLY

TO M*^ (jeorge Kendall's

DIGRESSION

in his Bo o K againft

M' g 0 0 2) r / Xi

Job 42.3. who is he that hideth Counfel ^'ithottt KrJsvrledge ? Therefore have I uttered that I undcrfiood not, things tooVoonderfutl for me, i ^hich I k*ievt> not.

Rom-11 • 3 3 • O the depth of the riches both of the »cifdom and knowledge ; of God ! how unfearehable are hif judgements, and hi6 iraies fafi finding tut !

Nam oucmodo intellcftu Dcum capit hom>i,qui ipium intellcftum luiim, quo EumTuit capei-Cjnondum capit ? Auguilin.de Tnn.rjtc ,i.$ .c.i.

LONDO N,

Printed by J.L^f. for Thomas Vnderhill, at the Anchor and Bible in

P4«/j Church-yard near the little North-door, and FrAncis Tyton^

at the three Daggers in Fleetftrect near D«w/?4»j Church. 1654.

I

J

Nazianzcn. orat.ip. p^Z'^91* Edit. Morclli.

'El J^ mhvti>f>Ayuoveii MO'S ytv^nrnv vg.] rtivyJ]'^ ^oJhv, &c.

. ZJcd ft in filii gencratioriC C^ Spiritfu procejfione fcrvejii-gandaCHriofum te prtehs^ ego (jucq) pari cHriofitatetUfUVU anima corporif(j-y ccnjiinLHoHem C^ temper amentum inqui' mm: (^t'.oTKodo pHlviscs,(^ DeiIwago ? ^htid efi cjuodte moveat ? aut cjuid quod moveatur ? ^Immodo idem mo'net & movctur ? ^luomodofenfus in eodcm manet, & externa attrahit ? ^lupmodo mem in te wanet, Cr in alia nfcnte fcrmoticm gigr/tt ? ^)m modo cogitatis perfcrmoncm impertitur ? Nondum nujora profero ■ ^1^*^ c<gli conver-fio ? ciHis fjderunt motifs, & ordo ? aut medta ? qute conjunciio aui difiantia ? qui maris termini ? unde venti profluant ? undc partint annirevolHtiones, aut pluviarum effufiones ? Si nihil hortim intellectu percepifli, o homo, (percipies autemfortajfc aliquando cum perfctiionetn confecutHt fueris & ut conjicere pofpmui ea qu<e nunc cernimm, non veritatem ipfam ejje, fedquedam duntaxat veritatts fimulachra ) ft teipfum non nofti, quifqurj es qui de h^ rebm dijpHtai, fi h^c nondum tntellcElu comprehendifli, quorum fenfm ipfc teflu efl, quo tandem modo ^uid, & ^uantm fit 'Dens, te certo tenere ac fcirc arbitrarts ? MacnxprofelVoidflultitixefl. ^uocirca ftquid mihi obter^pera4, htc efi Theologo minim} audaci, ut mnnulU jampercepifti, ita ea qumfu-perfunt ut percipia^, roga, precibufq; contende. Ea parte qua in to manet content us efto : reliqua in fupemis thefauris recondita maneat. Pervita probitatem afcende : per purgationem, eum qui pur us efi-adi-pifcere. Vis Theologns aliquando fiert^ ac divinitate dignus ? Afan^ data ferva : per Dei precepta incede (a^io emm gradus efl ad con-templationem ) ex corpore operam animx nava. zAn quifquam efi; mortalium qui ad earn fublimitatemefferripoffit, ut ad PauU menfu-ram perveniat ? At ille tamen viderc fe per jpeeulum O" <cnigma dicit, tempufque ajfore, quo facie ad faciem vifurns fit ; fis tu licet aliis in Dijputando fublimior : at Deo hand dubie inferior es._ Sis licet aliis fortajfe acutior & perjpicacior: at certe veritate tanto pofierior es, quanto ejfentia *Dei ejfentiam tuam antecellit'J See the reft to the end.

Oih vonfvx ^' y^aKirtcv ^^<ru Ji dAwttJov, &.C. *DeMm wtelleBfi der-cipere dijfieile efi, elocjki atttem imptfJfihiU , ut * Pwio IS the man he prophanortim ThcologorHin * cjhidum docuit, mto means. Note th^t cjnidemjuduio non incallid'e', ncmve Kt ex to quoii Ki^a "scauT/bm ^^tcMln dijjictlem ujirm^t, op^.Umm h.PnmU, bumble Chriiliiis an ^ff^r^t, fe enm cogmtione percepilJe. fx eo nuttm JnipoHibjii:y. qnod nuUn verbis e$4m explicnri pofje ait, hoc tig.tt

ne injcitta Jua prodi atcjne ccnvinci ^neat. Ego vero it a. pcttM dicendHm cenfco \_Dn natHram nullis qr.idim verb if tx-plicari pojft ; aniino antem atc^ue intelle^ln comprchetjdi mnlto minus pcjfe. Nam c^md <jun animo ar^pte ratiorte compltxm fher it, id t^noijtie fcrtajfe fermone dec Iar are cjueat, fi nonfat is dilnctde atqne perfpic ne, at faltem obfcure, mode anditorem nacin^Jit non omniKo Jnrdy.m^ tardi^i is^ (iupidi ingenij. At rem t ant am animo comprehendere cmnino impof-ftbileefi, mnmodo ignavis cr langnidis, dcorfyimo^y.e vergentdw, Jed magrips etiam C^ exceljis viris, Deique amorepraditis, ac mirt.alibi^ ptr£Cjne emnibiUy cjHibits ad vert cognitionem, caligo h^c Qp- carni-s crajjities tenchras ojfnndit. At(jMe baud fcie an hoc quoqne fublimiori-bm illps Cr intelligentibHs naturU negatnm fit, qn(g. ejnia Deo propius junUxfhnt, ac totofuo jp/endore collncent, cernere utii^; ^trtajfe cjneant, fi mnprorfm, at certeplenins c^nam nos k^ fulidins, atc^-^ alix -diis, pro cttjpifq) ordinc, vel iiberiii^^velparein4.

-x-rr.

Nee vero hac verba ita accipi ve/im, cjuafi percipi non poffe dicam,. Quod fit Deus ; fed Qoid & Quale/7f.iVf^; emm inanu^ esl prxdicatio mflra, nee vana fides njfira -^ nee id eft cjHod aftruimiu ( nc rnrfus id quod probe candideque dixlmii^, in impietatis C^ ealumnijt argumen-turn trahoi, ac nobi^ ut ignorantiam confitentibii>s, arroganter infultcs.) Tifirimum namqyintereft, certo tibi perfuade.u, aliquidejle, an J^id tandem illud fit compcrtum habetis. Etenim ^l^'i DiPts fit, ac Princcps qudidam caufia, qu£ res omnes prvcreavit, atq-^ confer vet, turn cculi ipjiy tum Lex naturaUs docet^^c Ac r.imis profecto hehcs ac ftolidus tfty cuifquis non hucufq; fponte fua progreditur, naturaliun^q) dcmcnftrati-vnum vefiigips infifiit, atq^ adeo hoc fihi prrfuadet, Ne id (|uidcm D^-um cfle, quod vel imagine quadam animi concepimus, vcl informavi-fnus,vel orationis penicillo utcunq-, dci'cu^Cymm. ^iodfiqui^ ftnquam cogitatione Deum quoquo modo comprehendit, qmnam obfecro argumento i^probabit f &.C. Pag.

Pag. 548. §ji}A tAndem ^ens mturn [ha & t$entia ft, ntcho* m'tnHm cjttifqifAm ntiqtiam invenit, neeinvemre poteh. An vera ali-cjuando fit inventttrm, cjtfArat hoc^ qui volet, ac perfcrntetur.

Pag.^%6. Having heaped up many intricacies and infuperable difficulties about the creatures, he addes [_Po}untne hoc expedire Phyfici, atq'^ i'rtanps eruditiotju landc cdehres , ac vere cjatho r^are, hoc ejt, res t Ant us inger.tojm metientcs /]]

1 intreat the capable Reader to perufc the reft of that excclleiic Oration in the Author.

I cite thefe paflages i. If it werepollible to pcrfwadcpoor mortals that we are no Gods, nor (hould afpire as did the father of Tinners J and therefore that we have lefs knowledge of Gods Eflence and nature, then the vain Dilputers called Schoolmen have long pretended to. 2. That hereby the matter of the Churches contentions being removed, our wounds may dofe again. For who know-eth not, how many curious and vain, though much applauded Vo-hnne^, are all built upon the fands of fome prefumptuous fuppofi-tion of the Nature of God ? If ihey did not take it tor granted that God uoth properly 'L'^ichrftMul and Will, and properly Intcndert f'/jem, with many the like, what matter could they have for their Voluminous contentions ? If but only thofe two fuppofitions wer« known to be (at leai^) uncertain, what (hould we do with all thofe Learned Writings that lo fubtilly Dilpute of the order and number of Gods Decrees? and how fliould we elleem them ? He that will readc the AngufLwe ConfeiVion, may fee what thoughts the firft, Proteftants had of the Controverfies about Predeftination, and how. little of that dodrine did enter their Religion.

F»Wf Eufebium Tnffitrat. Evangelic, lib. undecinta, cap.11.

Where he affirm.s that Afc/es and all tlie Prophets teach that Gods Nature cannot be explicated by words, and that his Name is ineffable, and how Plato agreeth with them.

As alfo cap.^. where lie makes the very Name Ens proper to God, and alledgeth Phux^'s confenr, and crfy^.io.ihe confcnt oF Numenitu,. and cap. 1 j. the tonlcnt oi'PUitarch.

Alfo lib.%.ii-p.^.f.iff. (niiii) 365. out of Jofcphm he citcth this, [[ThatGodisthci5f(;»/««;>^, ih^Aiiddle, the £«i^ of all things, ancL

A 3 a^

as he Is in Works and Benefits confpicuous, yea of aU things by far the moft notable (or known) fo is he both in Nature and Greatncfs moftobfcurc: Nothing that is like him (or no hkenefs of him) can befecnof us, or imagined by us; nay it isnotlaivfull fo much a» lightly to frame it (fuch a rcfcmblance) in our mindes.]

Novatiatms ( nondum lapfn^ ) lib. T- de Trimtate inter opera Tertulliani, cap- 7.

ScAtamcn dr ipfe (Chrijlm) fic adhuc de Deo locjuitur homimb:u ijuomodo pojJfiKt adhuc Atidire, vel caperc : licet in agnitioisem Dei re-hgiofam jam facer e incrementa mtatnr : Invenimtis enim fcriptum ejfe (jHod^Deiis eharita! ditttu fit-^ nee ex hoc tamen Dei fubflanti.i cha-riras exprejja esi. St quod Lux diEliu efi, nee tamen m hoc fubfta»-tia Dei eft: j Sed totum hoc de Deo diflum efl quantum did potefi j ut merito C^ (juandoJpiritHi dicim efi, nonomneid quodefi dietlu eft, fed ut dum mens hommum intelligendo ufq; ad ipfu'm proficit fpiritum, con-V erf a jam ipfainjpiritu aliud quid amplius per (pirttum conjicere, DC' ftm e^epoffit. Id enim quod elt, fecundum id quod eft, nee humano fermone edici, ncc humanis auribus pcrcipi, ncc humanis fenlibus colligi poteft. Nam ft qua pr<cparavit Dens hts qui diligunt ilium, nee ocului vidit, nee auris audivit, nee cor hominu, aut mens ipja percepit, f]uali6 & quantHS eft ille ipfe, qui h.'ZC repromittit, ad quA intelligenda ^ mens hominn C^ natura defecit.

This is one note by which it is known not to be Tertu/lian's writing, becaufe TertulUan grofly erred in makingGod too like the creature, as is well known.

The like paflages you may reade, in Ruffini Expofit. in Sjmbolum Apoflolor, Seft.^^$^6yS. with feveraldifficulties propofed in things about our felves, to convince us of our ignorance.

Author de Cardinalibus operibui Chrifti inter opera Cypriani

Prolog. §.3. p. 482.

Nee patitur ad liquidumfe videri Divinitas^ quam utiq; inveftiga^

tio, fideiis aliquo modo adorat vel fentit ; fed puram ejta ejj'entiam nee

conjpicit , nee eomprehendit: Affirmatio quippe de D.i ejfentia in

promptu haberi non poteft ; neq-^ enint difinibilt<s eft Divinitat ; fed

verius

%erittifincerikfpj', rcmotioinMicAt, tiegiwdo quidmnjit,qH^imA([eren' do quid fit. ^It^oni^m (jtiic^uid Jhtj'y.i fpthjacet, iLf{d ejje uon fetcfi cjucd iKftem ft^ferat innlUEip.m. ^l^icqhtd afidiri, zel videri vel iciv\ fttcfi, i^o/i conz'cyjtt wajijiati'j hthes fji inljAC cor,fideratime cmnts

cxies jer.fuk'iK c^ caligat ^jpitim. P-4^3- §-^- Et utivAmme if-

fhtn ctgncfctim i^-Jctam ! ^^cd fi anm<t tk^a ^ha coy-fort's niei ohtinet princifathm, nee crif^inem Jcio, ncc metior cjp:antit({tem, nee qualu Jit intueri ju^cio, Jt ignvta tfl miht ratio i^fiare ipfa de/cfietftr in coy fore ferfecutcre fko&iQ. faticrder we fcrre opcrtetft ofer^itcrem nr.iverfitatis nonintelligo, c^ui in minimiioferationumfuarhm fiirticulismeum prc" jitecr C£citatem.

Reade the reft of that Prologue excellently (hewing how far God is known, and how far not.

Synefius de Regno, pag.8,9. Edit. Petaviannr. NnUufn unc^UfiW Kiir.en thvehtum ffi ejucd Dei Katkram ajfeejuerc-If^^s fcdchm ah tA (xprinAnda k(rni^.es fiherrareht, fer ea qti<t ab tllo Ji^nt, ipfttm^xittirtgere ccr.Mti funt -^ five trgol^atrem , conditorcm, fizealifidcjuidptam aixerus, jite Fn/uipikw, fr.e i^ujc.nt, kaicomnia rejpfElw e^Hidum funt, e^ ad eu c^ua fib iUo ariunthr cmptirationes, Eodem mcdo Regem ft apeiiu ah ii< cjhirtf?t Rex efi, non a propria pfr-fona KAt^riimtlliHS(ipprehendcre art-1(7 is. lento jcm nd relicjua ejus nomina,&cC. 'Binp.m uticj-^ Dtim in r.es, ttni fapientes quam imperiti homines uhiqicelehrar.t/ii)^Q. Ncndhm trrr,en hoc ipjum Bonum ^/c^;:-tumziis extra conteKticntm pcj;if:m, Dei in n/rJf^ra f^^aflahi/itattrnde-clarat: ex li^ vero ejud pcjiertira fhnt nvrcg^ithr. Nee enim Bcninc-nten, ahfoluthw e^uidanrihtu fnat_, fedillu Bcnhm qtiirp.weffc^.x eji^ 4fluiq',eo fifii fejjfint.^c. Fide reiiq.ih.

Cyrillus, Bierofel.Ctiteekef6. pag. 46,47,.^ 8. is large on this.

Dicimfts non quaeportet de Deo', n^ni tifolikitc nota junt: Sedqutt

proffio modulo capere nattiTA khwana potefi, & qM^eirr.hecillitas mjira

ferrcvaltt. Acft enim ^^uid fit Deus expenimus : A'^m candide nos

ACCuratAnt de ee ecgnitiintm ncn habere ccnfttmtir. ^li^f.m ignoranti^m

ngncfctntes, njagnam de Deo ccgniticnew prof tern ftr.^r-— -^t dicet

qui^iart, Si ccmprekendi neqttit ejjentia DiiiTts, quid efi qucd tu de

his eftarras ? &ic. Laude Diminhm decorare, ren exprimere 'verbis

*ggredior,bi.Q, ^luid igifvr, dictf eliqf^ii, mnne fcripthm eji q*^od

jingelii

An^ell islornm Vident [em^er fAcicm fatris rnci cjui m exit's ejl 1 At vlaent Angeli mn ficut Dens eft, fed /^uatenw ipft capere pujfnnt, 3cc. Cum igitur <t/^yi^eli nefcUnt, nnllHS homo fuam eruhefcat t»/citi,im, e^ i^norAntutm conjiteri^ turn ego (jHt nunc locjuor, turn omnes ommnm temporum homines. £^n etiam ejuomodo enttnciare non poffnmns : Nam quomodo po[fem enm verbn exprimerc, cjut ipfe dcdit ut ver-ha proittAm ? Ego qui 'iAntmam haheo nee ejta formam itneu-mentave pojfum exprimere , ejtiomodo confervatorem anim<t enuneiare

fotero

Cyrillus Alexandr. To.i .TheJaur.U.ii .e.i .E^^^dsWy near the end is full for the fame as the former cited Authors, as he doch in divers other places. And in Commentary on John among Cjrill'si Works but indeed ClitloveH^^i is frequent. As/;, i.e. 13. Nam cjuemadmodum ejuamvts nnllns novit ^uidnam jeeundum naturam Dem fit, fuftifica' Tur tamen perfidem cpinm ered.it prxmia ilium redditurum qu.trentibui tnm : fie etft operum e'lm rationem ignorat, quum tamen fide omnia ilium po^e non dttbitet, von eontemnenda tamen probitatt4 hujm pr<emia con-fecjuetur.

And/j. 9. r. 34. Sed nullm naturdT^eitatu capax intelleClui eft. Ac ideo furiofm eft qui audet temeraria feruratione rimari auidnam Dens feeundum naturam eft. Z^mbru tamen Qr <:nigmatibM ut in Jpeculo, &c.

Auguftin. de Trinitat. reproves three forts of Errours about God, in the entrance, lib.1. cap.i-. i. Thofe that judge of fpiri-tual things by corporeal. The fecond is thofe ^^hn feeundumhu-mani animi naturam vel affe^um de Deo fcntiunt, ficjuid fcntiunt. 3, Thofe that do indeed endeavour to tran(lend the mutable creature that they may raife their intention to God, fed mortalitatis tnere pr£gravati, eum cr videri v^lunt fcire cjuod nefciunt, or ^uod volunt fcire non pojfu>0y prxfumptiMcs opinionum. fnarum audaeim affirman?lo, interetudunt fibimet inte/ligentia vias, magii eligcntes fen-tentiam fuam non corrigere perverfam, ^uam mutare defenjam,8iC.'""-ffluA vero proprie de Deo dicuntur, e^uanqHam in nulla creatura iav«e-niuntur, raro ponit Scriptura Divina, ^q.

Clemen?

Clemens Alexandr. Stromat.ii.^. commends Tiato for faying that God cannot be expreffcd by words, as agreeing with Scripture; and himfclf addeth that he is neither Genus, Species, diffenntia, indivi-' dnum, numerWy accidens, nee cui uliquid accidit, totum, pars, &c. Et ideo eji figura expers, c^ qnod mminAri non potefl. Et ft aliqttando eum nominemHs, non propric vocantes aut Vnunt, ant Bonnm, aut Mentem, aut ipfum id <jued efi, aut Patrem, aut Deum, aut Crea-torem, ant Dominum: non id dicimns tanejuam nomen ejus proferen^ tes, fed propter ejpu peteftatem pulchris utimur nominibpu, ut in alii4 mn aberrans , hia inniti pojfit cogitatio, &e. I ufc Hervetw tran-Qation.

Ircnaeus U. i. cap. i6. Efi autem (fr fuper haic ^ propter hac inenarrabilU : fenfm tnint eapax emnium bene C^ reSie dicetur, fed non ftmilis hominum fenfui : Et lumen reU:iffime dicetur ; fed nihil fimile ei, quod cFi fecundunt nes lumini. Si autem efl in reliquis hominibuf, nulli [imilis erit omnium pater hominum pufiUitati: (^ dieitur quidem fecundum h<ec propter dileHitnem, ftntitur autem fuper ha^c fecundum magnitudinem.

Juftin Martyr Serm. ad Gent, exhort.

Intellexit (Plato) 1)eumnonindicajfeilli (Mofi) nomenfuumpro' prium. Nullum enim potefi Deo convenire proprie.

Yditra Apolog. i. Pro Chriftian.Zfmverforum Pater nullum nomen habet inditum : Pater enim, Deus, Creator, Dominus, Herns, non no-mina funt, fed a beneficentia defumpta vocabula^ Sec. Sicut Cr Dei vocabulum non tarn nomen eji, quam inenarrabilis ret hominibus innata opinio.

Idem y^pol. 2. Sljjj^ enim potefi dicer e quodnam ft nomen inejfabile ? quod nemo nifi deplorate infanm prcferre tentaret.

I conclude from all this, that either it is certain that IntelUgere, Velle, Amare, Intendere,Scc. are not fpokcn of God Properly, or by Analogy of Attribution (as they fpeak ) or at leaft, that it is utterly uncertain to us, whether it be fo or not: But that w€ muft

B ufe

ufe both thefe and lower notions of God» from the glafs of mans nature and adions, ftill confefling the Impropriety in all, and that we hare no poricivcformall certain apprehenfion of the thing cx-prefled (vizj. God and his ads) but only a general apprehenfion that it is foraewhat which is beft reprefentcd to us in the glafs of thefc metaphorical Notions, which contain as great a likenefs to the thing it felt as we are now capable of reaching; and upon thefc confide-rations we mull Hick clofc to the Scripture phrafe which conde-fcendcth fo low in fpcaking of God; and not hearken to the unproved fancies of Schoolmen, that tell us Thu^Si is pr^oerly in God, as implying no impcrfedion, and That u not feeing all humane ads do contain irapcrfcdion in their very formall nature.

As Salvian de Provid. li.-i,. p.6ly6^. faith, fo, a fortiori, dol : Nefcio fecretum, & conjilium Divinitatu ignoro. Sufficit mihi ad canfit hujtu frobationem difii calejit4 orarulum. Si fcire vis quid tenendum [it, habes literM facras : ferfeEia ratio efi hoc tenere quod legeru. £ltta caufa autem Dem htc de quibus lo^Himmr^ ita facittt, noh a me requirof. Homo fum, non intetligo fecreta Dei ; invejii^ gare non attdeo, & ideo etiam attentdre formido: quia O' hoc if [mm gentu qnaji facrileg£ temeritatis eft , fi fltu fcire cupiof, qnam finaris , &c. Sicut enim flui eft D^tu qttam emnit ratio humana > fic fins mihi debet ejfe quam ratio, quod a Deo agi cunEla cog-nofco.

Cf\j]i }df(fva^a{ THf 9je7«]©-S^f «4'^j(tt,&c. faith Macarim Homil.i. lieq-, enim Natura, Divine eft Anima^^htttioxt Inielledion and Vo-htion are not the Divine Nature) neq-, Naturatenebrarummalitia ^ fed eft quid creatnm fenfihile, viftbile, infigne c^ admirandum, atque tlegans fimtlitHdo & JmAgo'Dei.~\ Intelledion and Volition are in their natures comprehennble, but that which in God we call Intelledion and Volition is incomprchenfible, and not to be formally underftood. ^^ts enim poteft capere quantm fit Dem ? ( faith 7"/;^-ophjiaft in Luc. iz.) cr manifeBum eft ex Seraphin, qui fe obtegunt propter excellentiam Divini luminii. Which is as true of Gods Ef-fence as his Grcatnefs: and as true is it of formall proper intelledion, as Minutim Fdtlix faith of Vifion, Deum oculU camalibtu vis videre, cum ipfam animam tuam qua vivificarts & loquertiy nee ajpicerepojfij, nee tneri f

£pipha^

£piphamHs difpvLting againft thofe honeft Hereticks, called the Andians ( caft out of the Church by the Bifhops for their honefty, and at laft banifhed.) H<crfjC 70. ^<«f. 815,816. fpeaking againft thofe that placed the Image of God in mt Soul only (as the Andians did place it in the Body) becaufe, fay they, the foul is Invifible, and hath the Power of Adting, Moving, Underftanding, Reafoning, and therefore contains the Image of God, he An^Afcreth, That Qlf therefore the foul be faid to be made to (Gods) Image, it cannot be faid to be made after his Image at all: 0 j^'f ^°i iTnKdpa. fivei-tv-niTiheifftoVyScc. ^ew enim Infinitis pra ammafartibM ecq',ampUu4. comfrehenfionem omnem ac co^itatienem ^f*gi^y ^C. Ipfe enim cum cmniacomprehendit, turn a nuUo comprehenditHr.^ And after {^Spirit w enim Dem eft qui omnem jpiritum exuperat, c^ //<.v luce omni pra-flantior. ^luicquid enim ah ipfo conditum efi, infia illitis decHS & glo-riam efi. Sola vero Trinitas comprthendi non poteft , C^ infinitam quandam gloriam obtinet^ qti<z nee cenjeElura capitur^ nee InteJligen-tia percipitur.

I conclude with the words of Colvius in Beverovic. de Terming Vita, pag. 160,163, 164. \^NoH Jntelligitts quomodo Intelligatitj centum Sjllogifmos facitis (^ nefcitis quomodo: q^ vultis Inteliigere cjutmodo ille InteUigit qui efi fupra omnem intelle^um ? &c.] ^.^Si'^dji exigua hdc (^ ctntemptibilia nature penetrare non poteji humani ingenii acies, annon efi extreme impudentite ms velle pertingere ad ipfam Di-vinttm ejfentiam ? J^tc efi ei7n^.i^®-}ctoet(PHyct7{KH& in feipfay nobis Z'froa'^^^*'^"^®">**>''^'^^j ^ t'77t£^'j*'asT?j &c. ^on terminalnr vifu, uon-tenetur teiiu , non fentitur incejfu , non comprehenditur IntelleUu ;

Major omni csrde, major omni laude. Novi homines, bu/U nafccn-

tes ^ evanefcentes, 2ic. exhaurire vultis mare vafculo ? terram metiri palmo ? 6iC. Furor efi cogitare homuncionem vidert Dei fines, qui fuos non videt, Deum velle metiri qui fuam menfuram ignorat, ut capiat 'Divinitatis terrninos quos non capit ipfe mundns ; cu]m vix Imago efi

Jpiritui,cujui umbra mkndm, judiciaahy^ia.- Deum laudare omnes

poQumtu & debemm, definire mmo potefi: Non poteft Dew quxri nimii ; inveniri nunquam potefi, digne ipfum (cfiimamm cum intefii^ mabilem conjitemtir : digne laud/tmm cum pr^fiupore animi in fi lent to ipfum adaramus j apprehendi potefi voluntate, comprehendi non potefi

inteliefl/i. Afajor efl ipjiui I»compreheftfilfiIita4 cjUAtn comprehenderc foQumw : Nen it a capit eum arguta fcicHtU, cjuarn iHttm fentit (^ gf^fiat mnnda confcientia : Afelim nos docet eum ZJnBio ejuam erttdi-tio. Hoc efl illud manna ai>fco»ditu?fty (juod ipfe dut timentibiu ipfum, tton iJMtcnt lis qui in arcanA iRius temere invoUnt. Et idcirco %'eniMnt indoCli er cjtii DeHmJumma cum revercntia colunt, & rapiunt regttHm calorum ; interim acutijfima, (-r [uperbijfima, ingenia exantfcunt, in froprii^fuhtilitatibm, Qr merquntur in injernnm: loqui volentes de

profundi:} merflfunt in profuaan. ^uocirca optime honas horas collo-

cant, cjui veritatemfummo fludio quxrunt: Sed pejfime judicant <^uife

ilUm invenijfe putant. Deflno, & dico cum Hilario, quod nen per

diffici/es qudtfiiones ad vitam beatam nos ducat Dem.

The Lord repair by Love, Humility and Holy Obedience, the ruines that have long been made in his Church, by Contention, Pride, and unfanftined-prefumptuous-ignorant-Learning, and reduce men to the Scripture fimplicity of Dodrine,and convince them that their overmuch Wifdom is but Folly, and all their over-doing but undoing.

THE

§.7.&8. fyhether Intelle^ion and Volition be afcribedto God hj Anatogj of At^ trUfution^ M M^K.ajJirms? • 37,3P

s. p.

The true %Analjf\s and fenfe of my \vords ^hich M^ K. oppofeth^

40,41 §10,11,12,

IVhtther an AB be properly an EffeEi ? 42,43

§. 13-

whether M"" K. fj^eak^ truly, Vphen he faith f Neither doth it (aEiion) carry that (tile (of an efe^) in uny of tbefe Learned Sophies,^c."^

44,45 §. 15-

Codi aSlj no Accidents, ABs inhere not in afubjeB, 47

§. 16. whether Gods Immanent aBs have any other Terms then thetrobjeShsi

;\^w 48

§. 17*

whether the difference affigned by Af^JL. between Gods Immanent and Tranfient aHsybe oi clear as between heaven and earth. And ^hom I meant in that £luef1:ion whether Immanent aSls be any more Eternal theu Tranfient f 49

§. 17-

An tAnfwer f lM^K'j 150. 154. pages againft iM'' Goodwin,'

§. 18.19. The Anfjvers that feme make to M^ K's Arguments againfi the newnefs of Immanent aBs, 53,54,5S

§. 19-whether the ground of fuch new aBs as afcribed be in God or the crea* ture. 55,57

§. 20. Horv ungroundedly M^ K, chargethme ^Ith contending ^ith D^ Twi fs and all fober Divines that ever ^ere Worthy to Jpeak^ to a School Point, 58

§. 21. whether it be not from the rejpeB to the objeB that Gods Ejfence is called Knowledgei or the Knowledge of thu or that, 5 9

whether

§t 22.

fVhtthtr it be as ant to k/Knpp the ftitMrity and the exifience •/ things,

§. 23.

J^t K*/ *tnw«rthy fttftning tn me Vcords of hu diviJtTtg* Cl

§. 24. An example jhemng that Immanent and Tranftent a^s, are of the fame nature, 6z

§• 25. M^ Yi'$ Anfwer te the infiance ef the Sunnes not being changed bj c^-jfff/, ii fartlj Lnfory, partly yieldcth the C^ufe, and partly £r» reneotu. 63

S. 2(5.

^r K*x Exceptions about the fimilitude of 4 Glajfe, refelled.

<54,65.66

§. 27. A Recapitulation of ^hat 1 have faid on this SubjeSf, 6j

§. 27. The great incapacity of man to comprehend the nature and aUs of Godi

S. 27'

Rob. Baronius TefHmony about Mutation of Immanent aEis, And fome Scripture Teftimony. 7^,73

§. 2^»

Af^K's fecondundertaking to little purpofe: contrary to the former: andhcrv ill performed, 77

§. ap. Juflification or Remijjion, not from Eternity. 78,79

§. 29. M^ K'j Reafons to prove Gods Decree to have fsmtvohdt like Jufiifica-tion, do 06 much prove it to have fometvhat like San^ification and Glorification, 80,84

§•29. Mail's Antinomian doBrine, falfe ^ that \^being jujlified in Gods fight, ii ^hen he maks^ **^ ^^ f^^> ^^ makes it evident to outfight that ^e are jufiified.^ 85

§. 29. The boldnefs and falfnefs of AI^ K, affirmation, that J^to H^iff to Willy '^oi never heard of7\ %6

Seven

§. 19* Seven Argkments proving that the Elicite aBs of the fVill, may be the objeSiofthema, 87

§. 29. Six fever aI cafes "^therein I finde that I WiU the aSls ofmj own ^ilL

88

§. 29-Its untrue^ that [_ he that fVils to JVilly Wits no more then he doth al-readj.2 »b.

§. 30. Af' K*/ doElrinCy that [^the Decree to Remit fin, carries in it a Rtmiffion of them tantamount^ is tantamount downright Antinomianifm* 89

5. 30. Teu mifchievous confequents of thts DoBrine (and fo of Jujlification from Eternitj.) 90

§. 30. Sin may be charged on tts before "ffe believe^ for all Godt Decree to far-don it, 9o»?i

§• 30-

A{^K*s Antinomian doBrine, that ^there is no danger of fuffering for

fin J ^hereGoddecreethto Remit it^ confuted by many arguments :

It maketh Chrifis bloody to have faved ut from no danger^ and Cod

never to have freed us from danger,^c, 92

§. 30. Chaftifement a (pedes ofPuni/btnent. ib,'

§• 31-

fVhat is the Acceptance» ^hich M'^ K. makei the objeSi of Cods Decree*

n

§. 34.

Pardon difiinguijhed and defined. p6

§• 34-

Ai'^Y>*s dejperate language, calling the aB of the Law of grace or Jfro' mife ^ An odde empty, moralyaBionJi and that \_by the promulgation of it, God doth as improperly give usChrift^ or difable the Law to condemn m.~^ 98

§ 35-

M^ K'/ admirable doBrinc that [jhe Covenant juflificth by fuch an ^ff<« Qaantitas^4rA faciendo Quantum, or Patcrnicas ficiendo pacrem, viz. informing, 100

H^

Bis profound Notioriy that the Covenant jufiifieth ht Aptitudmalitcr.

loi

§• 55.

The Covenant faraoneth immediately, otir faith being but a condition, and not a caufe. ib.

§. 36. M^K's horned Argument anfwered [jGodjftJiifies bj the Covenant All, orSome,&CQ,~] 103

§• ^7-

Af^K*sdifperate Conclujton, that [_thui amanW'ifely jufiifics himfcif

by beleeving, andmore a great deal then the Covenant by promifiMg^ orGodbyprvMulgatingit.^ 104

§. 38. His further dejperateDoEirine [_fufifo Cos Adam brought death into the ^orId rather then ^od ) in the ntw Covenant, Believe and be jufiified, JVhofufiifies the Believer, God or himfelfQ 106

§•39,40,41,42. Afuch more to the fame purfofe, vainly intended to prove that I make manhis ownjufiifer, 107

i §. 42. M^K,faitht theJudgeWiho pronoanceth the fentenee, or the Law, do notfo properly condemn a malefA^our as himfelf: Therefore fo the Believer 'jpiflifiethhimfelf, 108

§• 43.

whether M' Y^'s Client be ingenieufly infiruEled, Vi'ho being faved from the Gallows by hts Book^, faith, ^Grammercy to my Reading more then to the ceurtefie of the Law.'} • I cp

§. 44.

The f-ilfehood of M^ K*s Confet]uence, that \^he that performs the con*

dition makes the grant become Abfolntef} if it become fo on his per^ formance* no

§. 45,4^.

He unworthily intimates that I deny faith to be a real effect of God on the foul: faying,he W'til prove it againfi me, and pretending to force me toconfefs it. HI

§. 4(5. Hefalfly affrms that I deny Habits diftinSl from the foul, 112

§• 47. About the infirumentality of faith: the untruth of hid firfl\ Anfwer,

b . and

§. 48. M^ K. faith, §. 47. [_J fbaHmakf it appear to he both Gods ittflrnment andwAnsinfGmefeHfe~\ and%»^%* he faith [_Ido notfaj it u (Gcds Jnjlrumtm) proper/j.2 llg

§. 49* yl/rR. untruly faith, [^Faith « m much Gods Injirument oithe new Cevenant^ a^dgives an Ul defcription off^th, at hit reafon* ib.

His next Reafun nothing to the purpofe. 114

§. 51' Hi* ill explication of Gads ] unification by faith, viz. \decUring hereby the rtghteoufnefs ofChrifi to be bu cr9n.~^ 11J

§. 51.

Hefirangely ajfrms, that [_man u the Subje^, not tht Anthour of his

ewnalt ofbelieving.'^ 'b.

He makes man his $'»n jufiijter. Il6

Heodly faith J[_Faith hath a proper caufality up<m ottr^ttflificationpaf' fively taken3 that is, upon our receiving the Righteoufnefs ofChrifl.'^

117

Heconfcjfeth that ^itisneedlefstofay,Faithit a pajfive Infirument.']

118

§. 54.

He dangeroufly faith £Faith doth help the aSion •f the frincipalagent, that IS, Cod in our 'fufiifeat ion. ib*

S- 54-

More of hisfalfe Accufation refelled. lip

§. 56.

He makes ]ufiifyingfaith to be an nA^ion "^hich i^ Virtually a Paffion^ and that is, A Jujfering tnr felves to be led by the Spirit oj God, and his authority y againfi the fuggejiions of our own reajon, 120

§. 56.

But proves the InflrumentalitJ by filence, ib.

§. 57-His infirument of Receiving n^ proper Infirument, as being no efjicient*

121

*i^ Moral

§. 58.

M^taI infrMmems hdve m Mcral A^ion. ib.

§. 5P-

H§w illLMr K. makes a jeft of the Inflruntintalitj ofChrifs Covefi4nt $rTeftiiment% 111

§. 60. M^ K*/ tinanfrptrable Arguing W'hereltt he VMnfftiJhtth Me, 12 3

§. 61. ?yheM I am f rowing that [jhe aB vf faith is not the Inftruwent of f*i-ftificAtion^ He confutes me bj faying, Faith is u Habit. 114

§. 61. The reafon>^hy I "^illnot contend With them that onlj call faith, the in' firumcnt of Receiving Chrifl. ib.

§.62. Divinesaffrming commonly^ that It is the ati effaith, and not the Ha-hit that juflifieth, do thereby overthrow their oivn dtUrine of fniths proper In^rumentaiity in jfijlifying. I a?

§. 62. M'^ K. firfi feigns me to call the Habit of faith afanHiped faculty y and then very gravely Schools me for it. 1 16

§. 61. jibo$a the Real Identity cfthefouljts faculties, holinefs* ib.

The VnreafonabUnefs of M^ K'j impatiency, 1 28

§. ^4-Hoyo M\^^. can call ^Faith a Habit,equivalent to a nnv faculty."] up

§.64. D^ TwifTe*/ Arguments to prove that faith or other grace is no nei» pOKver. 130

§> ^4.

Faith is truly A moral porter, that is, A Habit or ^Vijpoftion, W^ithout ^hich ttv Jhall not be t rue believers. 131

§. 64. Ai^ K'j dead doElrir.e, that ]^ithoHt faith a man can tie more do ought towards receiving Chrifi, then a dead man can '^alkj>r ^eakS\ ib.

§. 64. The Vanity of his arguing for faiths irfirumcxtal jf-fi'fjitfg, fern its giving life to the foul in alljpiritual operations, J 131

b 1 Afore

More of the ^eaknffs of hU arguings nl>out receiving Chnfi.maytifefttnL

. S. 66,

The end of L^^K*s undertaking, confidered. fvhethtr 1 Mnrrorthily handled D'^ Twifs and M^ Pcmblc ? An AcknovoUdgcmcnx of all that Deficiencji that M'^ K. doth tanco molimine ^roije megniltj of, 134

§. 6-]. M^ K. concludeth before he hath done his main task_^ Which fo oft promi' fed, viz. To tell m What ts the Tranficnt-j>ijiifjing-a^ of God. 137

§.67. A conjeElure at his fenfe. He defirojeth hii Caufe UnttrvareSi Strange-ly mijlakes the nature of a Condition* 13 8

§. 67. f unification hj faiths in Scripture fenfey is not in foro confcientiac.

139

§. 6-7. Gods giving faith is not his immediate jf^f^ifjif^g a^, proved. 141

§. ^7. -.r.«>\>>

Arguments proving that it is in Law-fenfe (commonly called Senten-Cia Lcgis) that Av are firfi jujlified hy Faith, andfo the Moral all tfthe Law is Gods immediate Nullifying aCl, 141,142

§. 6^* The Conclufion* 145

tk

DMi ^:

Ei3

■■!T r.

1.

^he TroIogMe'WM\¥i.

i^SI

•OD

§, I.

Sir,

N 3d 7Sl'

^K T^-'S^ Q^>^7 ^ Hou^h I would not have you reftrained from ^revealihg fcUg^Sn lgJ«uJ ^V Truth, ye: if I had been worthy to have been of yqur counlcll, I fliould have advifed you to. Jbs^ve avoided this cjuarrelfotn w:^y. Our world J\athCo;/tcjuifl;i c«^ nough already j: and it comes not fi'©m lo good a roog (Frcy. I J. lo.) nor is ir fo good a lympcom, n^r dotl^ it produce fuch lovely cfttds ( Prov.n.io. & 17.19. & 19.21.) nor doth ic bring io good a name (^rov. 11.14.) as may make ic fcem defuable in my eves-Had you confulted Solomon himfelf, he would have bid you IStrivenotwitbamiumthoutacaufc, if hekii.cdonetbeenohMm, Prcy.j.jo ] and igo not forth b^ftily to jlrivc, Icfi thou knorv not rvhit to do in the cnil thereof, vchcji thj 7icii;hhourbiih flit thee to JJjimc^ zs-^-'] for iTbc beginning offlrifciimToilknone lettctb out TMicr: therefore luvs off" contention before it bemedlcd ivitb, 17-'4.] it feems a ftrange thing tome, that you could findc no man 10 deal within the main Controverfie hcrechofen out, that was indeed againft you, but that you mull make toyour felfjanadverlary of one that you confels doth not once deny your Con-clufion. Unlefs ic be becaufe you arelikely with fuch a one to have the ealieft confliti. But then you (hould have remcmbred, that the Vidory will be as Iniall. I pretend not to fuch a piercing knowledge, nor to fuch acquaintance in the invi-fiblc regions, as to determine infallibly of what Province or Degree, of what quality, <i/&«ia«4rcr, that fpiric was tha: raifed the l^orm of your i'afllonSj or to know exadly hlsnasicandfirname that animated thcfc your lines : Buclccing you are pleafed to choofc nie for youradvcrfaiy, 1 mull dtfirc you to bear with me if X fpeak fomctime Icfs plcafingly J and to ufe what paci^nce you have left, as knowing you have drawn this trouble upon your fclf. And whereas youpuL me on a double iuiployment: one to defend the Truth; anJ the other to defend my fclfs fo I pcrfomi the firi^ fucccfsfully, I hope 1 may be cxcufcd if I be more negligent in the later} yea if I give you the day, and freeiy confefs as much ignorance as youchaige me with. Its true that I have not the Tides or Robes of Honour, and asUtilqdcfcrve thcmj as you here exprcfs. liuc might I be furcthat I have right

G to

CO

to that farre better Title (of piety) which you are plcafed to bcftow on me, I could cafily allow you the other. I remember tbcdefcription of the old Chiiltians by fhtitaaitu Fdtlix, {T{es qui non babitu fdpitntiam, fed mcnte fraferimm ; nen elcjui-nurmj^ns, (eivrJmtu: glorixmur jios confeattos quod lUi fumma cottentionc quttfl-veruut, Tiec tr%ien!refotucru7it.'] And ibm oi Mranduld iFtsUcitjuemphiloftphUqua-rit, Tbeoltgutnvcnit, 7{fligi»poj/idet."] And to contend for the reputation of being Learned, I (hall fcarcc think is worth my labour, till 1 have higher thoughts of the prjic. Mem thoughts and words area poor felicity. Applaufe is fuch an aery noui i/hmcrttj that I fee few thrive by .' (though I muft confefs that in mc,-as wcH as in orhers, the unrcafonable fin of pride is daily ftirring, and convincing me by experience that it is mortified but in part.) O that I may have the honoui- of being a member of Chrifl, and then I can fpare the vain glory of the world ! ycra ibi glorii erit, ubi laudantU vcc errore quifquum, nee aduUttonc Liudabitur: f^erut honor qui nuUi vcgabitur digm ; vuUi dcfcrctur mdigiio : fed ncc ad cum ambiget uUtu indignut, ubi nuUuipermittciur cffemji dignui: laith Auilin, de Civit. Det,U ult. cJp.uU. Only I muft crave this of the Reader, that my confclled wcakncli be no prejudice to Godstruth; and that he will not judge of the caufc by the perfon, nor take the name or perfon far a fault J which is the thing that the ancient Chiiftians did lo deprecate of the Pagans, and therefore I hope every Chriflian will grant. And I muft alfo defirc that want of fmooth and pleafing wordi may not be judged the want of truth. Evimvero diljoluti efl peBorii in rcbiafcriif quxrere vduptitem, (g' cum tibi fn ratio cum male fc bibentibui atque ccgrit, fonts auribm infandere dulciorcs, non fncdicinim vulncribiK admovere: inqmt Arnobius U.i.adv.Cjent. f.^^. I confefs I do deeply compaffionate ordinary Chriffians, when I think what a hard thing ic is for them todifccrn the truth, among all the ftTiooth words and plaiifible arguments of Learned contenders. Ufually they think every mans talc good, till they hear the other i and then they think it bad : and a; lali when they ice what fail-glofles a Learned man can put on the worlt caufc, they are ready to run into the other cxtrcam, an? to believe or regard nothing that rli;;y fay. As MtKutiu^ Falix faith, iJltius mrjcordeiotogencredijpiajindi: qtto^pleritmq'ypro di[fcrattit(m viribta GT ctoquentiapoteflate, etiim ptrfpicuix veritjxii toniititnutctur, Idacciderc pernotiim eii auditorurnfualiute, qaidum vcrborum Icnocinio a rerum intcntwuibm avocantur,fiae deleciu ajjentiuntur diHii omnibus, r.ec a reef is fdlfa fcccrmtvt, ncjciciitcs mrj^c tS" in in-credibilt vcrum, (^ in vtrifimili mendacium. Ittquc qne (xpitta ajirjcrxtionibiei credunt, eofrequentiui a peritioribws arguumtsr: fie djfidue tcmeritate decepti, culpam judicii tnvf^ feriivt ad inceru qaercUm, ut damnatis omnibus mdist univcrfa fujpaidcre, quim de faUacibus judicarc.l But let fuch at Icait hold faft the Foundation, and remember that we are all agreed in t !)at.

The Xeader that I cxpt<fi fliould profit by ifeefe Writings, muft neither be u •-tcrly unlearned, nor fo learned as your felf. For the former are not yet capable of it J and the later are beyond it, ,and will hardly learn from any but the more (earned. It is the younger fart of Studenrs whofe edification I intend : who are neither quite above, nor below my inftruftionsi nor fo engaged to a Party or Opinion, but that their mindes lye open to any evidence of Trurh. ^rcevcnttcs cnim falfx epinionis errore hnmxnut nuiitus, al veri rationcm perdpicndan, dursa tff pcrdi^cilif invtyiiiur, quantifcunque teflibia urgutur. Mavuli erum pravi ihgmitis (ertentijim ^ qua femeL infeHta e3, pcrvcrfus vmiiare, quam hinc euudcm tantit dtvinsrum himinarnmqi legum awhorttMibua refuntam falubriut immutare: inquit Vigilius contra Euticb. li.i. mitie.

Laftlj,

Laftly, If you fliould be in tbe right and I in the wrong in any one Philofo-phical Controvetfiej 1 inuft exped that the Reader do not thence conclude, that you are ri^ht in your Theology, And I could wifli that you had fo mean thoughts of your Philofophy, as that you might no: build your Theology on it too much > nor thiiik much the better of your VVritings, or of your felf. For doiibdefs when the Canon of a Council forbad the reading of Heathens Books, thcfe things were rot to highly valued as now. I approve not of that cxtream neither: but fhall conclude wich that ferious exclamation of ^^eH(<50ritJ'(LfgJ{.pfrC&ri^/'i«.p. 13,14.)

dheoua.'rt., y^)']i'\o ■i'trnKHiiiVoVi yj'iV 1^ K^TV^fiou/xivav, l-jJhu[y.oi'cti knroitKtiy, «Vt Teti-^^i,a( Av]in i^to^v 7a\7 i^^ovi tiyeiiTcj.v, Sec,

Pag. 155. M'K-

For the fuller opening oftbU pdrtkuUr, J mtl be content to wi^c fame Digre^ionfrom. jour Beoli, andtojhtw k Thxt there can be no new immanent a^ in God, Againfi M' Uaxter. i. Thit there it (omevDhit like ^ufltfication in that imminent aU efgod, -where" If kc decrees from eternity to juftife AJid condemn men. And 3. thst yet that immanent gci.fxnnotbc jliLed ^ufliflcatioH; nor if it meant fo by Dr. TwilVc «r uWr.Pcmblc thdt I k'iorv', and fo that purification it not from eternity: and then I full return t» you, Set,

§. z.

R. S. V^Oul- Digreflion, methinks, is very fudden, and the occafion to a ftrangcr I haidly difcernablc : Its like it was the uncouth apparition of fome ruling wight of another Oibj which made upon your intcllcd that ftrangc impreflion, which caufed you to reel thus out of your way, and lead you unhappily into this private path, or rather bewildred you it? this Maze where we now finde you, Buc whoever led you in, charity commands me to do my part to help you out, or ac leaft to warn others that they do not follow you.

I. As to your firit undertaking, I confefs it was very ingenuoufly done, to fay, You will do it [againft Mr, Bjxtfr] and not [againft his doftrine or opinion,] acknowledging atterwards that I deay not your Concluiion. But I am ufed to Difputc againil Doftrines, and not Pcrfons; and therefore will give you the better in this.

1. Your fccond undertaking is more admirable then thefirft. For I have met with fome belidcs you that dare adventure oi\ the former, but never man that durft attempt the later. Is it not enough for you to prove Gods Decree of juUifying to have fomewhat like Juftification ? but you muft alio prove, that the Decree both to juftific and cOHiewH, hath fomewhat like JuiUfication ? If the Decree to condemn a man have fomewhat like juilifying him, then the Decree to torment him in hell hath fomewhat like glorifying him : and the Decree to kill, hath fomething in it like quickening him. You mall fly to feme _,eneral point of fi-militude, or to the Lord Brool{Cs doftrinc, that all things arc 0:ie, to make this good. Buc if it were but your overtight, then I hope hereafter you will be more

C 2 com-

E43

compaffionate to yout Brethren, and no more fo Tolemnly call men to [ fee ttic hand of heaven, in the pompous difplay of their folly, to appear moll ridiculous j and toadove the hai.d of God in infatuating their paitSjtrc] as you do by Mr. Goodwin for a fmaller miltakc then yours. Alas what man fo Learned and accurate, as to be free from all overfjghts.

3, Uu: indeed Sir I cannot fo eafilycxcufeyour next crrour, annexed to the third part of your undertaken-task J where you fay [>Icr is it fo meant by Dr. Trrtji at Mr. Pcrai/c that I know.] What is it that is not fo meant by ihem ? Why thit this Im.nancnt aft can be ftileJ Jullification. You have b:;ldly ventured to vn.cthos : and 1 will be bold to try how well. Either iistrue, or not true thac they fo meant: If truCj and undeniably apparent in the Writings of one of them, if no: both, and oft repeated by hi.n, and yet Mr. Iiy^- knoweth it not, why then ficdorh not only write before he knows, and Vindicate men before he undcrftand whether they arc guil:y or innocent, but makes it the i;reat motive of his undertaking, as [not having the patience to fee lo worthy Divines fo unworthily handled.] It in the miuft of his impatience he knew not this, then it fecms I am not alone ignorant of the bulinefsthat 1 meddle with. But I will lay it open to the Judgement oithe Reader, whether the thing be true or falfc ? and whe:her you _triigh: notwifhlefs learning have known this if you would ? and ou^ht.not tohave known trie caufe before fo zealous a Vindication.

DTTi'//iriHi.C^rir.li.i.part i.§ zj. ^. (vol.min) 171,171. Sic fcrioit lOmnk AHmlif uUijiutioejljuQifiutio, (ff omnti jufiificatio fimpliciter JiSlit co^igrueutqrex-jionenda cfl de juflifationc aciudli. '2^m AnAlogum per fc pofitt^ Jlut pi\o^fsmojiQri ftgnifcdto.'] {_Sed lihct bis p-iitlifper immonri. -^::eium critHU peuutorum Kemtffia qu: fidcm confcquctur; (^ qiiam oportcit spiriua (wicfo acccpwn referred 'RcmiJfiB entmpeccatorum, fiquiddttatemin^icini, vihddiud efiq:amaut ^Hnitionii'-^giiio, aut Velttionii pimendt negatio. Sit crgopccau ^cminerc, mbiUHudqium nollcpunire. At hoc nolle punirc, ut a^us immjinens tn Deo, fuit db atcrno, ncc fidcm cojifequit^rjSic. ^uoivero operxtionc SpiritusfjinBi nobis cxbacpjrtc, per fidcm contiugn, iSud cjfc iwn potcjl quam fenfus grdtitz Dei, 8ic. '^liure fi-quilmorte fuJ. * Are not Chrifts vobis impetrat (^briflia, quod ad pcccatorum nojlrorum Kcmtfto. Merits and the' ncm attiiicdt, (ctifum* iJium<imoris ViviHi pcccitamjirj rimit-Spirirs gifts here tentis,nobisimpctretneccjSce(i. E( pag.279. c.i. iNum jujiitiA highly honoured? Chrifii dicitur 7iobi> nnpuuri, (^ merit a ipfiui nobis applican per fidcm, 7iojt coram Deo, fed ipud confcictttij^ noftrM ■• qiutenuipcr fidemgeneratur in cordibm noftris feiifca (^ agnitio bujtu filutaris apphaiionis exa^norc "Dei quern exfidegujlimm ; (^ Jptritiuhter(entimyi nos jiifiificantem, i:f in filios fuos adoptantcm, ex quo nufcitur pux confcic7ttia. f^mrc ante fidcm hxc Cbrifti jujittia no-ftrafuit, quatcjiKiexiutfntiojieTJei pxtris (^ Chrifti mcdiaioris pro 7iobis prtsjlita, Si.c. Sedadvcmcutefide quamineordihmnsjiris ^p (xncl'M acccndit, itnn dcmum agnofcitur (^ percfpitur hie amor Dci erga nos in chriflo jfcfu. Undc diciturjHJlitia thrijli imputari •nobis per fidcm, qutanonmfiperfidcmdign'jfcittiritD(o nobis imputari: (ff turn dcmum juftificari dicimur ijKtgeiieris jujlificationc, ata-, xhfoltittone a peccatis i:oj}ris, qiitepacem. ingcueratcoufcicutiis 7w(iris- Hocantem duobice argumciitis confirmo. i. ^^iupcrji-fittiam C'l^rijlinon modb ajicquimur remijfiojxm pccatoriim, fed(^ fidcm ipfam, atq, re-ftpifccTitiim, hoc cji, cordis c?rcH?Mc//;oncw, Eph.i.g. ergo ctiam ante /Idem i^ rcfipi-fcentiam ipplicaturnobis jufiitiA Qhrijli, utpote propter quam gratiam ajicquimur t§ica-cem ad credendum in ChriHum C^ agendum pxiiitentiam, Altcriim cfl, quia juflificatio & abfolutio, prom fignificant a^um divinx voluntatis immanmcm, (itnt ab xternt.

Unius

C5]

tivitti autem vcluntatif votificatio cxurm, per m$dum ahfolutmU cujufdam judieiilU (^ fore%fis, qti(sfitperv(rbumi^ jpnnutn, fro tribunali confcJauia uvtufcujiifq-,, hsc eft iUi fujhtia Chrijii imputjtio, ucma; pifiificaue (^ rdr.ijpo atqite abfolutto qua jidcm ccvfequitur.'] Et covt.prafat. j^.ii.h. E>.''riccr,invcrfUmtfir(m:jfior.tm peccatcrum preut iji aSiui in Deo mmavem antcccdcre rtoftram fikm ts' rcfiprfcuitiam : ^cbh vera vonnifipcrfidemimotcfiit, cu^fu ctium fiduciamuhuaJhuc ctvfirr^Aiior aaut per re-ppifcemiam.'l

Lib.i. Part.i.p.iy^' l^uftifcatmcmvcrdc!^ "^ecovdliatmcm fro coJtmhahcri abtArrninio (quod(^v(rum(jtJi:/i. And ne oft niaintaiiiC*b the eternity cfRc-conciliaiion.

Lib.z. P.i. pa2.4;54. [ Ergo aiim atite fidcm Tctn i:ohi< rccovdl'iitta ((l: ticque tnimnift jsm rcccrtciliatus (fy'propinvs grauficAUir iiolis fidem. ^ad qnod rerrillio pcccatoiuni (^ acccptutiotejiri, Non nili actus interr.r^s & immantntcs/» Pro no-tant: aijus gCTicrha£{i07iCsi.on (uioriur.tur D(ode ro'io.l Legeult. (_f^pcUcu l^iixti ifld dijiitiguercfoicrimus do rccoiuiliationc duflicitcr dcfj : 'j\u>a (^ Vcus rccoualiivit vos ftbi in C hrijio quoad ret -aritatcm ; tr" ?« mivijlris (uis pofuit verbum ncovcihationis, quoxd cju(dcmprxtioiievcritj.uscvidc7itium(^niumfcjhiuorem. Sic cum ivmu: cJfcmNs dicimur rccDutlinti fui^c Xeo quodd rti vcruttem : quodnmcn ron iiifi per Evav.gci^ prxdictltioftcmjit queid cjujdcmvcrittUispatcfjlliomyn (j" (jlutarcmcommunicattiticm.^ Etp.43J. IJt Armin:us:ipplrcatiovcmr€m}J[i07iis pcccutorutJt, ita ivtirprcimvidetur, utpcr applicjitioncm fint, (:f:r jdntquufidc iioiocjjcvicipiut: qupft viro von rcquiratur, ut jam d7:tea cxijiiit qued appluATidum cji. Nobis vcropc rii(iiiu€7idum vidclur. Cbrijius mortc (uA r.obtsprecuravit redfmuevem a pcccatis, cum Vco rcconciliuttoKcm, (<;'pccfa-tdrum cmnium rcmjficmm ; qvx quidimptrprxdicitiojicmEvir.gdij (y per fidcm, vohis ■applicavtur, mnutfitit^lcdutTiobisinvotcjcaht. Nam ratJotxmtm7:cm fupcrutqucmodo appVciri pojfif tliud quod vondum cji, £:c.] Pag- 454. Ncftru vcro :7itcrprctdtioficpro-ccdit; cbrijius nobisacqwfivit mute (ua rcdimpttoum (^ca(cm (2r aciuaUm, id cjiy a^u&Um pcccatorum remijfitricm, (y' rccovcihitionan cum Tco. Jppltcantur auicm rjlx perpradicationcmEvangclij. vcnutde vtvofiuvt, feint vohii i7i7;otcj(avt,Scc. s/^t in-quies, aciudis Remiffit pccatorum eji ipfa '^ujhficatio: ^uflificatio (cquaur fidcTA : %im fide jullifcamur: ergo vcmivc pcccata remittunur antcquam credit. Ki^07idc6, ^um docctjpojlolusnos fdejufxificiri, mhilahud ex vifjitutodocct, qujm %os jujtiji-caripcr [AVgiancm Ckrtfti, five propter chrijtum crucifixum.'] Ai.d in the Index he cwnsitj that Rcm:J[io acfiialU cji ^afiifiutio: and therefore wc may take what he faiihof remifiion as meant ofjulijfication.

The like Ljb.^.pag,i8.(^ lib.' .p.i. pig. zjz. which we before cited part of iNec fane occurrit fpeciesaliqiiar:itior.T5, cur recc7iciliati9 icg^tur incrdv.em cumtmpe-traticue ran!jf!C7ih,^u{iificatwvii (^ rcdoTJptionif, pctiui qudh! lum aHuali Rcmiffione, ^ufiificatic7!e (3' Redemptiove.'] bo that he pius adiial Jiiiiifn.ation with Rcraillion and Reconciliation.

So centra Cervinum pigA^. Et quid qua fe Adcptio eti quam covfcquimur per fidem i T>ichcfe Aiccptatioum'Dci. <^id autcmcji.' cccptuiie f yl7.ru)nai{ut inDeo immA' nens ? An vcro aclta Vco mmar.i7is fupcrvcxii de uvo ?"|

Its undeniable in this that Twifje dorh net only tffirm Rcmiflion aini Rtcohci-liat'onand Adoption to be before we are born, imir.cdiatly en ChrilU death;. but alfoto be immanent ASs, and irrm Eterni-y : and tl.cugh he be mere feU dom in thus ufing the word [Ji flilkancn] yet he affirms Reccrciliaricn''ard RcmilTion ( w hich he faith are t:cm Etci nity ) to be the fame thine with Jufti-ficaiicn : yea he cxprcfly cr/.itkth thai eternal in maiunt aft [ Julbfication.l

C 5 Ana

CO

And did he only affirm Remiffion and Adoption and Reconciliation and Acceptation to be immanent afts and from c:crnicy,I belceva tew fobcr men will think it any better, then to affirm ibc Umeof Juttification. Yeahcplainly intimates a diflindionof Juftification : one from eternity or from Cljriftsdeath, and the other upon our believing : And therefore when he [peaks of Juliification by faith, he cals it [that fort of J uftification] intimating the other fort.

Now for Mr.'Pemblc, as hecxprcflv maintains Juftification inferoDei robe long before we arc born, even on Chrilts dying, fo that is all one to our purpofe, as if he maintained it to be from eternity. And it were meet that feme of you

fliould have fhewed before now, what Tranfient aft it is by * Ipuy joit Sir which particular finners not yet born ( and therefore not yet remember to do finners) arc jullitied at Chrilh death * ? If it were (as Mr. tbhinyournext. Pemble intimates, I think) G^ds accepting the Price, its

worth the while to (hew that to be Temporal and Tranfient, when Dr. TwiJS will have his accepting ef man in Adoption to be immanent and eternal: But if you maintain Gods jultifying aft at Chrifts death (whether undertaken oi' fuifercd ) to be an immanent aft, then it muft be before Chriils death, even eternal too. hU. Pcmbles words are, f'ini Gr^r. p.ii. [But with a diitinftion of juitification. i. In foro Vivino, in G^ds fight j and this gseth before all our fanftification. Vor even whilft the Elcft arc unconverted, they are then aftually juilified and freed from all finneby the death of Chrilt: and God fo elteems of them as free, and having^ accepted of that fatisfaftion, is aftually reconciled to them. By this Juftification we are freed from the guilt, of our iinnes: and bccaule that is done away, God in due time proceeds to give us the grace of fanftification to free us from iinnes corruption, ftill inherent in our per-lons- 1. Infaro eonfcientiix, incur own fenfe : which is but the Revelation and certain Declaration of Gods former fecret aft of accepting Chrilts Righteoufnefs loour Juft.fication.] Sopi^.xj. he fpeaks again of th/fame Juftification in foro Vet, and faith, that all the linnci of the Elcft arc actually pardoned, the Debt-Book croflTed, the hand-writing cancelled,cifc. and that this grand tranfaftion between God and the Mediator Jefus Chrift was concluded on and difpatcht in heaven long before we had any being either in nature or grace.] This phraft of [difpatching it in heaven] makes me conjefture that it will prove fome immanent aft which they call Juftification at Chrifts death. Lay all this together, and judge whether it be true that neither Dr. TrvijS nor Mr. Temble, do mean that the immanent aft can be ftiled Juftification. Or'if it were true, whether Juftification before we are born, is not an crrour fit to be refifted. Indeed it is true that Ml. I^. faith, that neither Dc.TvfiJi nor Mr. Pemble did ever mean, that [ the Decree of God fram eternity to juftifie and condemn men, is to be called Juftification :] For the Decree to condemn men cannot well be called Juftification : But I believe this being but Mr. t^. overfight, he will not make ule of it to juftific his third Propofition.

Mr. IC Digreflion. P. i.

WHethcr there may be a new immanent Aft in God >] Tothefirjf, 'By in imnHncnt iff, we man fitch of U terminmei tn the Jgent ; ani not in any thing Without it. HosfthAt there can be any new itnmincnt iSl in God, M. bix^ci: doth ntt

adven-

C7] ,

adventure to i^rm. Otiljf he u pteafeJ to fij thU, iThat all immafient aBs in God are ctermll, he thinkjs w ^uite beyond our wtierfunding to linow. Aphor. fa.g.i-j/^.'^ aid he caBcth out fomcwhat to render h fufpceied, p. 17^. vchicb I J1)aU fxtmine by Aid by.

§. I' K.J^.nr^Hey fay of tbofe that arcLred louldicrs and ufed to bloodshed and Vi-JL ftory, that the Rare muft make them fiei'h work and finde them con-ftant imploymentj or elfe tl-y will inake woikand finde imploymesn for thtm<, felves. A Polemical Divine much ui'cd to Dilputaticns, and tlcteby to the glory and Ttiumph ot Viftory, i<j as it fccms by this Leanied man, in ihefatre c.-»rc. Mr. Geoi^w/n found him not work eroughj and rather 'hen he would want more, hcmakcs to himfelf an adverfary (for he faith, ic is againfl Mr Baxter) which here in the beginning he confefletb, makes not himfelf one, fo much as by a denial of bis Prcpofitionj or an affirmin;; the contrary. Could you findc never a man in the world to deal withj that affirmed that there maybe new immanent nfts in God ? If you could, they had been fitter for ycu to take in hand : For its likcj they would purpofcly have maintained that alVcrtion with fome ihew of rcafon : If you could not J then your dodrine is fo univerfally received, that I (hould think it fhould not need your Arguments novy to fupport it: And then yon may well conclude, as you do, that you have done little by this Difpute j if you have but laboriouily maintained that which no man denies. But it fecms to me it was fome rcafons 4& fcowtw, from the perfon of your chofen-feigned adverfary, rather then from thecaufe that allured or impelled ycu to tJiis encounter.

As you well begin with fomc explication of your fenfe, fowill I alfo r and tjjc rather feeing I have little elfe to do. Idtfire the Reader therefore to undcr-ftand this much of my thoughts about the lubjed in hand, before I proceed further.

I. IngtneraU, 1 am very ftroniily perfwadcd that it is one of the greateft fins that a great part of Pious Learned Divines are guilty of, that they audacioufly adventure to difpute and dettrrrir.c unrevcalcd things j and above all others, about the Narure and Anions of the Incomprehcnfiblc God. And that this is the very thing that hath divided, wcakmd and luinedthe Church, more then any one thing, except plain contempt of God : And that it is under the wounds of thefe ovcrwifemtns Learning, that the poor Chuicli hath lain bleeding many hundred years. Our Contentions, Envyings, Hcari-buinirigs, by peiverfe zeal, and much of all oar warrts and calamities, are long of this finne in thefe men: That as the Romilh Clergy are juftly cftecmcd the greateft Schifmaticks en earth, for their audacious and unmeicifull adoiticns to the Greed, making fuch anumber of new Keys which heaven muft be opened and fhut by, which God iitvcr made : So are thofe zealous Learned men, the cruel diriders of the ChiacL. by L^cafioning our contentions, that will with boldncfs pry into thij-'^s unrcvcsied, and with cenfi-dence and peren^ptorincfs detcnrjf.c themj and then with !ci!j^, and fubtil and fervent argeiings maintain them, and makcihcnifetm neceflsr; to the peaceof the Church, or the fcundnefs of our fai.h. Scarce any ' 1 r thing hatbircrc fully difco-vered 10 me the fraiUy and fearfuilprs'ity cf man, then this: To think, that fo filly a worm fhould be no more acqiiaintec with his own wcakr.efs, and the infinite diiiancc between God and man j uud fliould io confidently th:nk that he knows

what

what he dotU not know ! yea and what he canno: know ? yea and be angry witti ill the world tliat wil not lay, It's true ) and \^iil not believe that he Icnowswhac he prctcnJs toknow ! It aman fliould periwavic methaclknow how nvany Angels arc in heaven, or how many dales it will be till Chtilh coming to Judgement, one would think it v.ere no hard matter for me to know that I do not know any fijch thing. Burit 1 lliouid perfwadc my fclf thit 1 know it, and rtiould cxpcft that all others ihouid believe that I know it, and would w.ite Volumes to prove it, and count all thofc ignorant or erroneous that will not believe me, or that will not fay they knew it when they do not, as well as I, whether this v/eie the part of a man awake and in his wits, let others judge. How much raoretcyond cur reach isthc unfearchablc nstiireof God, further then he hath revealed hi.Tjfclf in his Works and Word, whicli, alas, aftordeth us but a t:limpf: of his backparts. Yea the wonder is yjt greater that thei'c lame Learned Divines, when they are at a non-plu in their arguing, will plead mans ignorance and incapacity to put oft their adverfary and blame others for too bold cn'iuiries and intrulions into Gods fc-crets : and moft of our Reformers do fpeak .hardly of the Schoolmen for it ( and verydefervedly ) and yet will not lec the guilt in thcmlelves. No man freaks more agaiiift his own natural inclination in this thtn I do : I feel as great a deiire to Know, and to pry into any thing that others have dilputed, and as much natu-lall delight in the reading of the moft audacious fubril Dilputers, as others do. I was won: to fay, 1 could get more out of Aquinif, ScotM, Dunndtis, and fach like inaday, then out of many Ancient Fathers, and later Treatifers, inamoneth. Uut I fiadc that as dciue to know was the beginning oi our mifeiy, fo is it the continuance. Why do men fear thcmfelves no more, in that which innocent tAdim was undone by ? I finde that this bait of knowing things unrevealed, doth bat entice men into vain hopes, and labours, and felf-deluding promilcs, and flatter men into a plcafant lol's ot titie (andworfe:) and in the env\ failcth all theii expeditions: and the Learned Diipatcrs come off as Aiam did, with Gods acknowledgement that he was like God in knowing good and evil (Ironically, as fome Divines think j or exprefling his unhappincls plainly, as others.) Tbofe leaves of Brdiwirijraf and Tvfi^ ymi.a^nA dcfcient.-TUcd. See. which I was wfont to readc with longing and delight, I confc.'s I look on now with fear j and many Learned Schoolmen (fpecially on the firft Book of the Sentences) I read, as 1 hear men Iwear or take Gids name lightly in their co.nmon talk ; even fcldom, unwillingly (looking for other matter) and with horrour. Yet how oft doth Dr. Twijfe tell tArminm and D:. ^^cliien of the finfulnefs, unfafenels and uncertainty of departing from the Scriptures in thclc hi^b things, about the Nature and Decrees of Qod? And what Br<idwj.riine excellently faith, 1 defirc the Reader to fee in him, de Q^ufi Dei, l.ic-i. tc/ro/ j». But clpecially I deiire the Reader to perufe that excellent Epiftlc ef (JoLitu in Bcvcrovicm dc Termino Ttfj j which contains what I have a minde further to have faid of this: with GjIj/ch/'s iivlt Chz'pz. deLibcrtxtc Dei (Ub.z. dehl.) which fhews how far God is above all out higheft names and notions: and thac Veui ab lUis Liber eH: with much more a-gainft the Dod.inc thit I oppof:. See alfo CirJ. ContireUut deoffido Epijiopi, ope-rum p.410, 41 i. and v/hat heciteth out of f^ionyfius. And I intrea: you toicaJe feriouQy that ncta'^le piifige, 1 Tin.6. i,4>^ where pride ij fliewed to be the root, and fuppofed knowledge faid to be but Doting, and they are faid to knsw nothing, that thought they knew moftj and the lad cffeds of all are ma-ni^efted, ..j,„. 4. I do

C»3

^. T do think thst moft of our pi'ofounJ Difputesj wherewith die Dominican! ami Jefiiitcs, the Arminians and Antiaiminians have Lsatnedly troubled th: world, are giiihy inpart, ofthis hainousfinne before mentioned : and that thcfc great Dodors do dii'pute for the mcft part or they know not what. I confcfs its tifual with men that know little themfelves,to think that others know as little, ani to meafure the knowledge of other men by their own : and fo ics pofllble I may undervalue the Learning of thefc men, becaufe having none my felf, I cannot un-dcrlland the lar^eneis of their capacities, and fublimiiy of their fpeculations. However I am fure I am wifcr and tighter in one point then I was: For when 1 ftecped my thought* in their fpeculations, and was my felf of the fame cxprcfs opinion with one of the parties, I thought that I begun to grow fomewhat wife my felf; but now I know I was deceived, and it was my folly, and that I knew not what I thought I knew. And though I will be bolder to befool fuch a one as my felf, then menoffnch fublime incomprehenfible knowledge » yet its my opinion that they are but men ; and what a man is though I do not yet fully know, yet I am daily both ftudying and trying : and experience which i. the teacher of fools, hath taught me this much of him J that he is no Deity i nor one of the Intelligences that moveth or comprehendeth the orbs; that the wifeft are not fowile as ihey would feem, or as they imagine thcrafelves > that all their conceptions which they judge fo comprehenftve are comprehended in thecompafs of a narrow skull, and there lodged in a puddle of fuch brains, and humciirs, that a little knock if it hit right may make the wifefl man an Ideot, and drive cut all that profound Learning vshich M'l^. thinks is fo near kin to the knowledge of God. 1 confefs of late I haveaccuftomed my Iclf to fuch mean though $ of man and his imaginations, and fuch high thoughts of God, that I reade many of the profoundcft School Divines (whom yet in fome refpccli I honour) as I hear children dif-couvfing of State matters, or Theology; or as if I heard two difputing in their deep. The Serpent hath beguiled us as he did Eve, by drawing us from the fim-plicity that is in Chrift. Vain Pbilofophy hath been the bait to deceive the Church : And fo we are judicioufly broken in pieces and ruined ; and have learned to our coft to know good and evil. I think there is no hope of the Churches recovery but by returning to the primitive Chriftian (implicity ; and uling Ari' fiotkis a help in Ntturals, but not preferring him before Chrift in the teaching of the highclt fpeculations of Theology, as ifwemullgo learn Gods nature of Arijiotlc, where Chrill leaveth us at a lofs. When tnofe Learned men, who proufling thcml'clves wife became——(hall become fools that they may be wife, and come quite back again to their cognofce tcipfum, then they may know more of God then they yet do, and yet pcrciive that they know lefs then they thought they had knowu: and then their know,edge will cdifie which now pjf-feth up.

J. I think that man can have no. poGtive proper cor.ceprion of Gcd, at Icaft befules cvi (whicii the Scotilb think proper) and that there is no word in humatiC hnr,ui e that can exprcfs Gods nature in Itiid propiiety, but all our notions of him art fo exceeding impcrfcft, that they rxprefs more of our ignorance then of our knowledge. I0}ite is bold to fay ( InfiitHt. Pcripatct. l-^.USi. 9, 10.) that fiohe of the Names that we attiibute to God, hath a notion which hath in God a formall objtft : and that that fcicnce is of all other the moft fub'imc and proper, which iiv^uireth into the impropriety of the names that are fpckcn of Gcd, and dc-nicth ihem all as to him.

D 4.1 think

4. I think tbst there ii no fuch thing in G3d as UnderftanJing, Knowledge, Will, Intentioa, Decree, IcleAion, Love, ^c. as thele are by men conceived of, andexpreflcd : And that man knows not what it is in G^d formally which thefp terms are ufcd by him to cxp:efs. And that it is a farre lefj improper fpecchto fay, that the Firmament is a nutfhellj or the fun is a i;low-woriB, ortodeno* minaic thereai'jnof men from the apprchcnfions of a fly or a worm, tbcntoat* tribute Undcrftandjng, Wili^f. to God. What the impropriety is,we rtiall fpeak to more anon.

5. Therefore all thofe reafonings concerning Gods Nature or Afts, which arc drawn mecrlyfrcm the nature and afts of manj3S concluding from a fuppofcd Analogy of attribution (much more a formal Identity) is a vain deceittuil rex-foning.

6. Yet as Scripture fpeaks of God in terms improper, according to mans capacity, and fetcht from mans nature and afts, fo muft we both conceive and fpeak: tha: is, not believing that thefeare proper expreffions or concep:ions of God, bat that there is that in God which we cannot now more ti.ly conceive of then under thcfc notions, or fi.lier exprcfs the 1 in thck terms. God hath nothing properly caled Knowledge or Will: bat he hach or is tint which man cannot fit-ilerexprefs or conceive of then under the notion of Knowledge and Will: But what it is, God knows. We mufl fay, God knows, and God wiileth j and G^vi mnft fay fo to us : For eife man could not hear or fpeak of Gad, if God conde-fcended not to the language and capacity of man. (^'Amero faith, even of our moft perfedl ftate of glory, that Fmi "Deonilaliui cfl qiumpotcnti4,pifientia, be* •aititis divina fructumperfipere, quern ireaturAmodu4(^ ratio fcrrepoteJl.Scc. Et vu deturDcuitxperiunJequisfit (i-Jo 3,) Et quilemfe crgiinospTajlct,c<xterttm {^quic-qtiiidicfuent(choU(lict, homines acuti quidem, fed in hoc Argumento nimit icutt, invi-pbilk cji vd AngcliSi. quihia ad Dei conjpcBum nulla peccati libet, foU natura imbeeiUi-tit (crcAtur^e enim fum) aditum intenlufit. PrxleH- dt yerb.Dei. CjUfc. c.7. p4 j J. I am more certain that even the eye of our undcrflanding hathnodircifl and proper fight of God, while we are in the flcfli.

7. Ye: thefe attributions of Knowledge and Will, to God, are not falfe-hoods, for there is really fomewhat in God which thefe are made the improper exprefTuns of. E^uivocals and Analogies are not eo nomine falfc ex* pre/Tnns.

8. I am fo farre from thinki»g that it is by Analogy of Attribution ( as the Schoolmen call it ) that Knowledge, Will, Cr"*?. are attributed to God and the creature i that 1 think thefe afcribed to God by an exceeding farre fetcht metaphor, funherthcn (as I faid') if I fhould call Heaven a nutmcll; there being a thoufand fold more likenefs between thcfc, then between Gods Knowledge and Will, and mans: For between finite and Infinite there is no proportion. Yea I will not undertake to prove that the Ratio bomonymitu is not in Us, only, and not at all in the Things.

9. Yet no doubt, the thing meant by Knowledge and Will when attributed to God, is not only, as many fay, molt eminently in God, butisfolely in God j that which is called knowledge and will in man being not the fame thing, but tota »enere diverfum. Eut yei the conception that we have of Gods Knowledge and.

■ Will is but improper derived from thefuppofed fimiiQ, vi'^^. cur own undcrlland-ing and will, which reprcfenteth it with exceeding imperfedion. So that the leraw of Knowledge, Will, Decree, (jr'f. are fpokcn firil and properly

t««3 .

of the crestur«, and thence Improperly of God,

JO. Yet I acknowledge rhat though all thcfe terms of Attribution, at to God, are exceeding improper, yet there are degrees of impropriety } fome being more improper then others are: And fo I doubt not but that the terms that are takeA from humane paflions and imperfcdions are more improperly applied to God,tbcti thefc forementioned of Underftanding and Will,C7'c«

And thus I have told you fome of my thoughts, that M'IC> may know on what terras to deal with me, and not contend with one whofe minde be underhand* eth nor.

And as to his defcription of Immanent Ads, I deny that there is arty fuch thing as an Ad in God terminated in himfelf, fuppofing that you fpeak not of a meer objedivc tcrminatien ( as I know you do not j For elfe you would call many of thefc tranfient ads, as having an cxtrinfick objed.) All acknowledge no certainty of a proper Ad in God, fo I acknowledge no pofitive termination of that which io him we call an Ad i and we call it immanent but in that negative fenfc which the later daufeof your defcription doth exprcfs. We are like to make a good difpuce of it, when I am forced to deny the fubjed, as being a Chjmara.

§.4. Mr-IC'T N the mean tim, eut of the rtffcH I beir to the memorj of Dr. Twi (Tc, / edn-^notferbeartofajy thdt (Mr. Baxter hti better cojifuUed hit own honour if he had [aid ntthivg to the iiffangement of that Reverend mi Kenownei DoHor: 6f whom he ffea^s very Jleightingfy more then once in hk otherrvtfe excellent Treatife of Infant-Baptilm, and in all hit other Bool^t: In xfhicb I could mjb there were not fome-vfhatoftbe ToUrinal part not anfwering that of the Devotional l^at ZJr.TwifTc bath fail of ^uftifjcation-from eternity, upon thU ground, that there ean be no ntvf immanent aHinOod, and horvmuchfome in the Synod (aid agoing him, and boxv little he replied for bimfelf matterj not: he vug now grorm old,

Et videas feflbs Rhadamanthon & ^acon annis, EtMinoaqueri

L/^ec»ougfr, Mult urn mutatusabillo Hedore qui rcdit exuvias indutus Acbillis.

iVben he beat Arminius, Corvinus, Tilenus, Penottus, Bellarmine, Z)r, Jack-fon, and I ^norv not how many more out of the field; & folug vacua dominarus zrem left them all bleeding, as Afr. Goodwin would huvefaid, at tbe feet ef his lV,i-tings. It may be he was now at hji, but magni nominis umbra, but whofe very name really did moji of the fervice , and I am furc war that formiduble thtr.g to the learned Adverfary: Hut as old as he wa, I qucflion not bat he could brjc eafily made this good, There is no new immanent a:^ in God ] agaivji M that opposed him in the Synod, and !Mr. Baxter to boot: avd I would fu:n bur ary of them all thit oppofed bim , to ^ive a fatkf/i^ory anfwtr but ta this one Argil-ment.

D* $4.

EiO

§. 4.

K. 2. i.V^Ou nccdnot argucmc toa higher refpcftto Dr. rm|/ir then I have I cvcrmanifeftcJ, except you would hare mc fay, He was a God, or an Angel, or an Infallible man.

a. If you cannot forbear, as you fay, its pity you ftiould be hindered : Men and women muft fpeak when their lift is fo great. Who can hold that which will away?

3. I confcfs that I did not much confult mine Honour in that writing. Elfc you had not found your felf work as you have done in thcfc leaves. If you mean the Honour of my Honefty, your proof mull do more to the determination then your aflertion : If you mean the Honour of my LcarniRg, do not you knew well enough, how little I have to confult ? He that hath nothing , ha:h nct/:in^ tolofe.

4. [ Sleightingly ] is a word thac will kretch , and therefore I will not charge you with untruth. In one mans fcnre, he (leighis a man that cals film [that famous excellent Divine:] but in another mans, llti^hting tii;-nifieth the efteeming of a man below his worth, and cxj^rclVing 10 much, or fctting light by a man. I am miferably troubled with thofe kinde ot people that cannot endure [ Weighting ] as they call it, above all folks in the world. ( I ufe to call them plainly, Proud people, here in the Coumrey j but if I were to talk to Learned men I would ufe more manners.) They think I fleight them, if I do not applaud them, or compleineRt with them, or if I commend thenrnst with fo loud a voice as they expeft (and they area people that are never {ow in their expcftations :) or ifldobut praife another above them, or Ipeak to another before them, or be rtiort with them ( when I am bulje ) when they look for a longer more refpcdlfull difcourfe i yea if my Hat ftiould be over mine eyes that I fee them nor, or my memory fo fail me as that I torget them ; thele and abundance morel an> guilty of flcighting every day, that I am now grown accullomed to the vice, and fhamelefs in hearing it charged upon me. But I lufpeft that my flcighting Dr. Twijfc confirteth in my fuppofing him to crre, and telling the world fo : that is, in taking him to be a man: for hminumtji errarc: and for faying he knew but in part, that is, ttiat he was not glorifi.'d on earth by pcrfiftion. If you could have charged me with any more the:i this, would you not have done it ? J fay, would you not ? when the Vin«lication of this Reverend man was the end' of your cncountring me ? and it boylcd fo hot on your Itomack, that [ you could not forbear: you had not the patience to fee (o Worthy men fo unworthily handled.3 "Yea your feif affirm that which is his dodrine to be unnue, and yet I fl.ight lliin for faying fo'. Lay this with the commanded Adoration ot the footfteps, ajid it fce.iis, it is high matters indeed that you expcd- 1 doubr, by this, that you will fay, I flight ;'0M before I have done, either becaufe 1 praife you nor enough, or becaufe I take you not for infallible and indtfedible, or bccaulc 1 value Dr, Treilfc or McTtwfc/c fo very, very, very faire before you ; when yet lam accufcd of flighting them. Sir, thele Reverend men, I doubt nor, are perleded Saints in heaven, and hate pride fo much, that if tfiey know i:, they will give little thanks to him that will contend for the honour of their Infallibility, yea or for the guiUing over any of their errours i mu:lilef», if their honour fhou'd be made a^fove tp the entangling of iha godly, and a means to the promotinij the

Kingdom of darknefj, and oppoCrg that Truth which they love bettCr tb«n their Honours, and the diftioncuiing of that God whcfc gloty is their felicity.

Yea let mc tell you that I take my felf bound in confcience to fay more then «yer I have yet faid, and that h this [ AlLyoung Students that will deignc to take advice from fo mean a man as I, as ever you wculd preferve youi graces and ccn-verfations, preferve,your Judgements } and as ever you would maintain the Do-ftrine of Chrilljtake heed of the Errors of the Antinomians:and as ever ycu would efcape the fnare of Antinomianifm, take heed of thefe principal Articles of it following : [That ChrilhfatisfaAion is ours quiprajfiti, befoiethe Application > and that lo far, as that we are adually Pardonedj j^'^Jfi^d, Reconciled and A-dopted by it before we were born, much more before we believe : yea that Adcpti-on and Rcniiflion of fin are immanent ads in God, and fo are from eternity, even before any death of Chrift, or eflncacy of it: That pardon of fin is noihing but Vd'cmn'^unirc: That Juilificadon by faith is nothing but Jultification in foro covjctaitia, or the fcnfc of that in our hearts, which was really ours from eternity, or frcm Chrilis death, or both: That juftifying faith is the fteling or appre-henlion ot Gods eternal Love, Rcmifiion and Adoption.1 1 fay,take heed of theTc mafttr- Points ci Antir.ctniarifm : And as ever ycu would avoid ihcfc, take heed how you receive them on the nputation and plaulible words ot any Writer: and efpecially of D'Twij/i, who is full of fuch palVages, and being of greater learning and cltccm then others is liker to miflead you. For you know, if youreceivc thele then ycu mu If receive iherift, if you difcern the concatenation. For if all your fins'were pardoned as loon as Ghrift died, then what need you pray for pardon, or Repent or Believe or be Baptized for pardon ? then God loved you as well when you were his enemies, as fincc; and then how can you be reftrained from fin bv fear < (^c. And that you may know I fpeak not this in flighting of the D< dfnr, as M . f{,. chavgcth rre. i. I profcls to do it mainly fcr Gods glory and Truth, and for the love of fouls, a. 1 take my felf the rather bound to it, bccaufc 1 was once drawn my Iclf to feme of thcfc opinions by the mcei hi^b cfti-mation ot Mr. Ffwi/eand Dr. Tvi^iffe. J. I prcfcfs ilill mofl highly to love and revtrence the names ci iLvfc two bkfled excellent men, as formerly I never honoured any two men more. For Dr. Tw/^, I am more beholden to his Writings for that little knowledge I have then almeif any one mans, bcfrdes : and for Mr. Pc»i-hle, for ought I can fee in his Bock of Juftification, he revoked this fame crrour tvhichinhis f^tudic Grtt. he hath delivered : fure lam, no two mens Writings have been more in my hands, and few mens nam.s are yet fo highly honoured in my heart.

This much I take my felf bound to publifli for a common warning. And I' would further advifc all to take heed how thty entertain Dr. Tvii:jS s dcdrine abouc the caiife of fin j of which I ("hall be ready to give my reaion when 1 have a call} l>ut will not now cigiels Co far.

5. Vorvourgocd wilTi [that my Books bad not fomething in.the Doft.inal part not anfwering the devotional] Ttinnk you-. But, alas, igr.oiancc and errour will not be healed with a with: Many a year have I ftuditd andpraicd againii them, and yet tbcy Itick by ine ftill. But had I erred in the Foundation, it would have fpoiled mv Devotion : tor mnrccfevhitttr, ubi dc Vconc7ibcvccrcditur: And I had rather be defective in Icller drdrinals, then in Devotion- And thoujiii I am as confident that you erre in fame of your Dcdrinals ( as I fliail arron ma^j-

Dj !.i;) =

fcft ) a you irc of my erring, y« T heartily wirti your Dcvction be u good u youc JuJgcmeiu in DoArine j ani I think I wilh you a greater blefliag then ydji wi^cd rac.

6. I donot well rcliiTi your^xccedingcoldnefs in G3<^s cftHfe, who ari h hot for man : When it is for the Honour of your Leaim. 1 Bcthren, (_ you hive not paticncf, you cannot forbear.] But what Dr. Tw/Ji hath faid for Juftihcatio.i from E:ernity, on the ground that there is no new immanen- ad in God, this you fay, Mdtters not: 1$ it a phrafe befecming a Preacher of Chrilh Tiuth to laY> [rt mittersrut f] When that Truih is conrradided in fo hij^h a Point ? and the foals ef men, and the peace of the Church fo much endangered ? AGiUto might better have fpoke thus. E^glini hath not fpcd To wcli ^y the Aniinomians of late, esthat any knowing friend of it, (hould fay, It matters not, when fuch great Di-.vines promote their caufe.

7. And where you alfo fay, that [ it matters not what fome in the Synod faii againft him, and bow little he faid for himl'elf.] I am notof your minde. 1.1« it only the ve[iigu T>9Si8ru Trvijfi (<f H. I^. that are to be adored ? You fliall give me leave to honour you much, and the Dodor more, but the Aflcmbly more then either of you. %. I do not think the Dodor was fo weak, or at leafta good caufe fo friendlcfs in the AtTembiy, bat that himfclf or fome othtr would have done I'omething conliderable to the jaftilication of his caufe, if it had been jafii-fiable, j. I will be bold to ask you, the next time I fee you^ whether all your heat and impatience for unworthy handling or flighting the Dodor be not meant againft the Aflerablyas wellasme ? or if not. Whether it be not refped of per-fons that made the difference? or rather the fecuring of your reputation, which you might think would be elevated by a Vidory over others, or at Icaft lofc nothing, though the perfon were fo contemptible, as not to adde to your glory j but by an oppofition totbe AlTembly it might have been dafht in pieces ? Or if the Antinomians being queftioned by the AiTcmbly (hall allcadge Dr. Twin's words (frequently and plainly uttered ) for their Defence j and the Dodors caufe being hereupon quettioned (hall tall without any juftification i I pray you rell me. Whether there may not be the fame neceifi-y for i»to take notice of his lirrours as ><he Alfemb'y ? and whether after them we may not doit (while we honour his tWorthas much as I ftill do) without flighting or wronging hiqj. It ii more diflionourto beQueflioned by an AlTembly and come ftff unjuflifietJ, then to be judged to miltake by fo contemptible a pcrfon as I.

8. Where you fpeak of [his very Name doing moft of the fervice.] I do not undcriland what lervice you mean. 1 know you mean not the fervice done in his Writings: And fure you dare not mean [the fervice done by the Aflembly :} foe that were to make them a contemptible AlTembly indeed, if a mans Name, yea ,inigni nomtnk umbrj, did moft of their lervice : And it were to think as balely of tftcir fervice as the worft Sedary doth, that! have met with. It were not worth fo much colt, and fo many years pains, nor worthy the Acceptation of Parliament or People, if ic were bu: the oftspring of Dr. rw/l/c's Name. But Sir we hava received fruits that (liew they came from another caufe then a name or the (hadow of a name. I confefs I valuetheir leaft Catechifm for children above all Mr. !(,cniaU's learned Labours, were they twenty times more of the fame quality. I never heard but oie Learned man fpcak contemptuoufly of the Allembly, and his friends fay it was becaufc he was not thought Worthy to be one of them ( I except thofe that wereagainft them in the Warrc J where heat of oppofition might

occauon

occafion difeftkai .* But if this weic Mr. J{,'s cafe, yet methinkj when he changed • hisCauleand Party, he flioiild whhall have changed bisefteem ofthe Aflembly.) But its likely that Mr. I^. means that it was the Dodors Name that did moil of the fei vice of a Moderator > moft of his own part in the Aflembly : It may be fo : But if he had nothing to work by but his Name, y« bad his caufe been good, it would inthai Alfembly have found feme friends. But wflat you mean then by the following words, I do not well know,th3t his Name youarefure [was that formidable thing.to the Learned adverfary.] Perhaps you mean your felf, by the Learned adveifary, of whofe fears I contcfs you might be fure, and fo might know the Name or Word that did affright you : elfe 1 cannot imagine who you mean, except it were the Kings party or the Epifcopal Divines together : But for Epifcopacy, I know of no Difputejthat ever the Aflembly had upon it, and fo bad no adverfaries in adifputing way j at leaft during Dr. rw//?'$ time. And for difputirg the Kings Caufe, I think they did as little in it. Some chofen men in the Trcstici indeed difputed againft Epifcepacy, but with other weapons then Dr. Twiffe's Name. If you fhould mean that it was Dr.rw/j/e's Name that made the Learned Epifcopal Divines have Reverend thoughts of the Allcmbly, I mult tell you that there were in that Aflembly no fmal! number of Divines ot that tx-cellency for Learning, Piety and Minillci ial Ability, which might command Reverence from the Learncdeit adverfaries of you all.

9. But though his Name did all the fetvicc ; yet you [qucftionnot but he could have eafily taadc it-good, That theie is no new immanent aft in. God, againfl,C?"'^] It ieems by this that you think this the caficr to prove ofthe two: And indeed I am ac(]uainted with none that arc minded to cp-pofe it,

10. Nor is it reafonable for ycu to fay, that you [would fain have any of them all that oppofed him, to give a fatisfadory anfwer to your Argument,] when you know it was not in that Point that they oppofed him. Would you make more your adverfaaies againft their will as well as me? or do you long for more honourable Antagonifts to cope with? And whais your Argument ?

Mr-K,. j F there be in/ newimmdvent ASi in god, it tnufi be eithir cfhkUnder-* ftandirtg or his tf^ill: Of his Vn.icrjian'divg there an bcnove: clfe mufi he kwTBf foPitvphai a Ticvf, whiih-i7}ferrci he VPiif Mt Omr.i(cicnt, l^mvp not all before this new iff oj K^ervUdgc: If of his iViU, then either this new iff is for the better er worfe or indiffercTtt.' If for the better, heivAt vot'ab(olutelj perftB before, as being capibk of bettering: If for the vntrfe, be is 7iot fo per fell Jtnce this iff a/f he m/s before; vchich is to mil{e him Uj! perfect ly his neve aB : Jfmiihir, then is ikis iff fu(b Of might Of rveli h^ve-been out of in : and then it is an imperfccfien to aff fo im-fcrtiuently. This famet/irgumint as I take it msde ufe of by Mr. Goodwin hmfelf tHdliliecafc, audihcrcferc he will im be offaidcd bow highly [oevrr I value it as an itr ejiraz^able Demon fir aiiMt.-

$^ J.

CiO

■■ '^'• , s. 5.

R. S'H Emcmbcr that I fay not that your Dodrine is Untrue, but Uncertain^ l\li may be pofTibly as you fay J but whether you can tell that it is fo, or prov;ittobc To, I Jjubt. To your great Arjumcnc, I exped better proof of ycra: mujor Piopofuion, which indeed hatb none at all. Two things I expcfted youlliould have proved: i. That God hath an Underftanding and Will which ad i properly (o called : or that you know what it is that is improperly called Gods Uiidcrftaiidinj; and Will? i. That God hath no immanent Ad but of hisUnJerllindin^ or Will. Ts begin with the lalt: I will not fay, duur tcrtiuvt. For I dare not fay properly diintur duo: Bat I will dclire you to prove your major t and Ithiak that in the fame fcnfeasGod is faid to have an Underilanding and Will, for ou^h: you know he may have other ads, which thofe two notions will not exprefs. Fur i. You are uncertain whether Angels may not have other faculties or aclj-imtianenr, belidcs Undcrllandmg and Will: ( If you fay, you are fure they hive not, prove it:) and fo others may be alcribed to God by Analogy from them, as thcl'e be by Analogy from man. You know perhaps how many fenfesy:)u hive your felf; but how can you prove that no other creature hatha fixth fenfe, which you are uncapable of knowing the name or nature of? So how know you but Angsls may have powers or immanent adsbcfideUnderftanding and Willing, which you know nothing of for na-mc or natuic ? Muft all Godi fuperiour creatures be needs meafured by poor man ? How much more noble creatures hath God, then thefe below that dwell in dull ! %. But if you were acquainted with all the Angels in heaven, and were at a certainty about the number or nature of their powers or ads, how prove you that God hath no other ad then what Undcrltanding and Willing doth cxprefs ? That one unconceivable perfed ad in GjJ, which Eminenter (by an unconceivable tranfcendcnt eminence) is tinierjiinding and fViUing, ( yet but Analogically 'fo called) but properly and formally is neither, but lomewhat more excellent > is in all likelihood very reilrain-edly or defedivcly cxprelfed by thefe two words > even as to the objcdivc ex:ent. How know we but that in fome of Gods c<Q.atures, or at lealt in Gjd himtclf there may be fomcthing found bcddes Entity, Verity, Goodnefs j or any thing that istheobjcdot Intelledion or Volition, whereof no man had ever any conception. However, is it not unlikely, yea a dangerous imagination, That the powers or ads of fuch wretched worms as we, Hiould be lo tarre csmmenlurable with the Jntiniie Mijclly, that as wc have no immanent ad but of Undcrltanding or Will (or fubj dinate tothefc) fo God hath no other? or none but what are ex-preiTcd in thefe two notions 1 Alas, that iilly worms ihoiKd fo unicverently pre-lunie I and pretend to that knowledge of God which they hive not! and might Co eafily know chat t hey hive nut!

And for the former, How farre G id harh an Uideittanding or Will, I will perul'e yo.ir won^s to Milter Qoodwiu when i have done with this Se-dion.

This were enough to your Argument and Challenge : but I proceed to the confirmation of your implied w/«or. And i, I caii'y grant you, that it is certain there is no Addition to,or mutation of Gods ElVence. a. I think all the Ads af-cribcd to God are his Elfence, and are one in themfelves confidered. Pardon.that I do but fay [I chink :] For though pri.iciples of reafon and Mctaphyfical Axioms

feem

C»7D

fcetntolead plainly to this Condufionj yet I am afraid of pretending to any greater Certainty then I have; or of building too much on the doubttull con-clulioBS ot mans flippery Reafonings, about the nature of the Invilibie Incom-prehcnfible God. I think it moft futable to Gods Unity and Simplicitv, that all his immanen. afts ( To called by us) are Himfdf and are One. Biitldave not fay I am ccitain that G^d cannot be Simple and Perfed, except this lv: true ; both bccaufe He is beyond my knowledge, and bccaufe the doftiineof the Trinity alKrcrti us that there is in God a true diveifity conlilting with Unity, Simplicity ind Peifcdton of Eilcnce. j. You know not what the fubjeift ot your Propoti ion is, (Gods ads of Undcrllanding and Will :) and therefore you arc unca^'ible of men peremptory concluding deM»dis, knowingly and certaiidy, as here you prertud to. 4. You cannot prove that there's any luch thing in God as an Imminent Aft, or an Utidcrllanding or a Will in proper fenfe : but fomc-thing thtie is which we cannot fitlier or more profitably conceive or exprcls then under fwch notions, drawn Analogically from mans ads of UnJcrltaiiding and Willing. Now if wc will rpeak of Godslncomprehenliblc nature by Uich Analogy, and put the names ot Undcrltanding and Willing on God, as borrowed from mans unde'-(landing and willing , then mull we accordingly conceive of Gods unuerftanding and willing, as like tomans in the form of thefe ads ( foe wc can reach to no higher conceptions, though thefe be ntterly improper.) Now tnansadualintelleftion do:h connote [and fuppofc an iniciligible objcd, and his Will doth connote and fuppole an appt:tible objed ; and confeqiiently it cannoc be expeded according to the utmoll imaginable natural perfcdion ot them, that either ihould go beyond the extent of their objeds, or be fuch ads without their proper objcds: * Thefe things thus pre- * Even Af CJodt mifed , fome will perhaps rhink you I'ufficiently anlwered Omnipotency k but ( when you fay,it inferresthat God was not Omnikientjknew didi ad pollibi-notallj^c.) by telling you 1. That as Omnifcicncy ligni- lia, fid. Aquin. fies a Power of Knowing all things, Analogically afcribed to i.^.ij a.i c Goi ad aptum humanum asdilUndfrom the ad of knowing; fo God svas ye: Omnifcient. 2. As Omnifciency ligiiifieth the adiial Knowledge of all intelligible ob/eds, fo Gjd was Oiinilcien- And no more isrcqui-fitetothe perfedion of his Knowledge. ^. But an Objtd may have not only its real but its * intelligible Being de tiovo * See Bu\ iJane of which it had not before; and therefore as Omnifciency iig- that queilion in bu nifieth the Knowledge of all things that will be intelligible, as EtifiJ^! (0 fir as well as thofe that now jrc intelligible, To (fay they) it be- to Iherv the grot !ongs not to Gods perfcdion to be Onnifcient > for iris un- di^aiUy. naturally and improperly called Science (and fo Omnifcience) which hath net an Objed. Their foundation ( which may feem abfurd to you) vi"^. That fome things may ic/iovo become the objeds of Knowledge, they declare thus: I. They luppofe, that though God be Indivifible, and fo his Eternity be Indivifible, and have neither in it, Prxtcritum nor Futuntm, nor '?{j<hc neither, as wcnnderlland it, as exprcffing a pre.'ent inihn: of ti.ne : yet as Cjodknowe; h not Himfelf only, but the crearure alio, fo he knowech not Etei nity only but Time : He knows how things are ordered and take olace in mans Divifible mca-fure of motions: and therefore he knows things as Pad, PieUnt a:»d Future, quoidbomincmii;" tcmpus, vihich arefopall, prefen: and fu urc. Ani he doili not know aching Pall to be Prefcnc {quoiite>npM(S'hominem) norathing Facureto

E be

[■83

be Paft : bu: knowj things truly as they be. i. This being prcmiicJ, theywiil thcnafl'umCj that T«fr and Pju/ did not aftuallyexift from ctcrniiy ; Chriil did not a£tually fuffcr from eternity : and (o the adual cxiitcnce of Pact ia tiunc tcmporif, was not an intelligible objcd from Etcrn'ty : and therefore they think they may conclude} iliat it could not be known from Eternity. They will u'gctiicir rcafon thus : i. There was no Time from Eternity (thatisjbc-forc time:) therefore it could not be intelligible, that Peter did adually then cxill in Ti r,c. x. Elfc you will confound Futurition and Prcfcnt exillence: God d'd know from Eternity, that 'PcttT would exift in Time, r e. futtiriiionem Petri: 'bereforc it was notTcrcr'sprefcnt aftaalexittcncc that he knew. 3. Tlic nature oi forck^orvUdgt is to know things as futurCj and therefore muft not be con. flunked with knowledge of things as exiltent. 4- This propofition before the creation v.3$ not true ITctcr doth actually exift:] therefore God could not know it o be then true. But after Pctcr'i birth it did ie novo become a true pro-poiltioi) : and therefore muft be ic novo known t» be then true. Before that, it was only true that iHac PrQpofitiovera fnturdcjl'] but not Ivcra eji :'\ therefore no more but the futurition of tlie Truth could be known, and not the adual prc-fent crxiitence ( as referring to time :) It is not all one to fay IPetnucrW] and [Pi;fr«4f/i] nor all one to know it. 5. The contradidory Propofition was thcr> true [Peter doth not exift :] But both contradiftory PropoHtions could not be known to be true together, that is from Eternity. Therefore God did then know the Negative Propofition as then true i^etrua nen exiftif :'\ and the Affi.mative defaturo to be true iPctrta futuriu eft, vcl extjiet:'] but he did not know the Af-. firinative dc cxijicmiA pr^feuti to be true from Eternity [ Fetriu in num tempcrit exifljt] no nor ITetruanHunc a/Etcrnitatii cxiftit c") for they were then falfe Pro-pofitions ; nor yet was it then true that iTempM uHu fxi/hr] If you fay. That there were no Propofitions from Eternity, and theretore they could not be true or falfe: this alters not the cafe : for 1, We fpeak on fuppofition that there had been creatures to have framed thefe Propofitions. z. If we conceive not of Gods Undcrftanding as knowing the truth of Propofitions, concerning thirigs, we (hail fcarce have any concep ion of it as an Underflanding at all. 5. 1 lie Schools commonly fpeak of the Eternal truth of Propofitions, e.g. de futurii contnigcatt-bua. 4. There are Propofitions in Time, and thefe God knows: and thatsall one to the prefent cafe. At I{oihs fiood God knew not this Propcfition to be then true l_Pctrtii cx'ftit:"] for it was not then true. Nor did ht know then that [it is true in nunc temporis quo cxtjiit Tetras] bat only, that it rojU be true : For Futun and not things prcfently cxiltent are the objedii of Foreknowledge : and that [_T^nc tcmporif'] it felf did not then exift. 6. O.hcrwife it would be true that All things do cocxilt with God from Eternity: (which is difclaimed by :hofe that are now oppofed :) and fo that they doexill trom Etcrni;y. For if this Propofition were known to be true from Eternity {fPetms exijlit, vclDcococxiQit,'] then the thing exprelied is true, Peter did fo cxill and coexiit. For that wi'ich is falfe cannot be known to be at the lame time uuc. If it be granted therefore Jiat Pcrer did not cxilt from Eternity, and confc-quently that that Piopofition was not then true, nor intelligible as then tvue, but only as of future Verity, then when God in lime knows it to be of prefent exiftent Verity, he knows more then when be knows it to be only of future Verity and of prcfcnt falfhood : And [-o about the creatures, Whtn he knows that they do exift and knows them as exifting, h€ knows more then when he knew ibem only to be future and as fuiure. For if it be

not-

not more to know a thing as exigent then as future, and To knowledge be not dr vcrfified from the objeft, then it is no more to know fomething then nothing : For thercafon is the fame: and future is a term of diminution as toexiftcnt* And then it will be all one to know [ jMiiJf is damned] and [Prter is favcd :] [jfACob is loved]and [E/ia is hated.] Yea then it would be all one it {pcrpojfibile vcl im^ffibtlc)k were knownCFefcr is damned] and l^udaf is favcd] or [Petcr is favcd and damned :] and foit would be all one to know fahhood and truth.

Many luch reafonings as thefe will be ufed againft you. Of which if you would know my own opinion, I think they arc de ignoiis, dreams, fightings in the daik, yet much like your own. And though 1 know feverall things ihar you may fay aeainft thisrcafoning, fo do I know much that may be faid againlt yours: and, I think, both fides would do bettcrtoprefcfs that ignorance which they can neither overcome nor hide. How conftantly do the Schools diltinguilh between Gods Abiliaftive and Intuitive Knowledge ? Scicntiam [implicis intcUigcntix (3* purx ^''iponH ? and tell us thar the former in order ot nature goes before the other ? If this be {o, then God hath a Priut and F<|/Jm»4 intheafts of his knowledge. The like we may fay between Gods Knowledge ofKimfelfand the creature. If they think it not abfurd that etiAtti in mcnteDwinA there ftiould bea tranlition of thingi e numeropojfibilium in numcrum futurorum, ini this fine mutationei why may they not admit a knowledge of things as exirtent only when they are cxilfenr, and of things as future when they arc future? and this fine mutatienc too? For the diftindion qnoAi moment a temper k, will make bur a gradual dificrence, in point of mutation, irom thu quoni ordinem mtura, vel moments 7{itionfs. All dillimfli-on, that hath real cround, denotes imperfeftion, according to our highell fpccu-lators, and fo mult all be denied of God. I retufe not to fay (if 1 mull fay any thing) of both as Mr. BxtIotq doth Exercit.f. ( think him not pedantick, becaufc he is bound with Schiblcr:) CMutitioilU ejl folum in objc^o cognito, ven in cogno-fcette, (eucognitione; eumcognitio divina abobjecfo non dcpendet, ncc ad mutmoncm. objeBimutJtioncm uUim pMitur, Sec. Cum ideo Admittit Alvire"^ res primo e(fe pofi-hilet folum inordtne ad potentiam (3' futunM in ordir.e ai voluntatcm.nccejj'e cjtut prius cegHofat cognitionc abftraSitvi ( quii ut pojjibiles ca folum cognitione cogvafci pafSmt ) (^'pojledcumpcrvoluntAtcm fiuHt futures, (j'etiima^ttexijieutes, illa/s cognitionciH' tuitivl cognofcctVcus. At bine nullJ. in Veomuutio jejuctur, fcifolum tnobjcilo {lit fateutur necejiee}i ) Et per confequenshoc dMo, quod [cientiADeiababflrj^tivx in in~ tuitivjmmutiretur, txnienmn fcqueturDeumeJJe mutabilem, velcognitionem(mm ex parte rci ; fed folum quod objeilo viriato, intetteHua nojlcr, Viriofj ei denomimtiorss attrjbait: ut quod ^ JHtuitiv-t, qusd abjlracfivi, quje folum fitnt Jtnomination^s variee cognttiottt divina ab intcUecfu nojtro impofitx, pro diver fo rc^eHuad creatunm, ciim tnft fit omsino fmplcx o* iKViriata.']

Bat then I would fain know whether there be not the fame necefliiy that the difference between objeds [only future] and [ presently exiltenc] fliould caulc our undcrftandings to put the forcinentioned various denominations on Gads Knnv^ledgc, as the difference inter Pojfibilia (j' Futura, doth focaufc us to puc on it ? And alio whether in the fame impropriety and imperfcdion, the very notions of [Undcrllanding, VViiling, Afting, Immanently, eiT'c] be not I5f'J9• 5Jli»4^20ncJ ii tnrcWf (f?H nojiro impojita, or alfumcd by God in condctccnlionco humane wcaknefs, cxprefling but fome little, very little, of that Divine 1 know

no: wha:. For that fame thing which man hath a true formall conception of under the notion of [Knowing, Willing] is varied according to the variety of

E 2, objeds •

[203

objefts: But if it be not fo with God (as I muft think and fay, It is not, if I

prcfume to think and lay any thing of ir,) that is bccaoi'e Knowlcd^r and Willing in Him are nJt the things that wc by thoic tcririiulcto cxprcis i nor yet 2ri) thing that \vc can have formali proper cmctptions of: And b) the iamc ntciflity ana wairant as we do bring down the Divine nature loiow, as to apply to it t lie notions of Acting, Undei Handing, Wiliing j may we alfo apply to it the noiicns of Afting, Knowing and WiliiKg dcncvi; contciring a further addition to the impropriety of Ipccch. And therefore as God himftlf doth in Scripture accomodate himfclf to our capacicy, by alluming the terms and notions of Undcr-ilaniiing and Willing, lo doth he alfo of loving where he before hated, with divers the like, which in man would imply an innocent mutation.

1 have here given you fome reafon of feveral pafi'agcs of mine, which your following I'ages carp at, before you difcerncd my meaning, as I fhall fliew you further anon.

So much to your proof that there is no new immanent ad in Gods Under-ftanding. One word to what follows about his Will.

Where ycu argue thus; [ IftfhU iViR, then this vcw aef is either for the Bettert or jVorfc, or Indifferent, &c.] ^vf. In Itrid propriety, it is taken as unprovcdj that he hath Will, or Immanent afts. But Ad captum htmdr.umis >/vc irc ncccSi-tated toalcribe Willing and Ading to him, fo they that think they may on the fame grounds afcribe New a^s of Will to him ( as the Scripture undoubtedly doth,) will think that your Argument is fufliciently anlwercd thus ;

1. This arguing fuppofcth mans filly intellcd capable of comprehending the Reafons of the Ads of the Almighty j as if it cannot be, except we can apprehend the reafon of it, and whe:her it be for the better or worlc or indifferent ; or what it produccth, or to what end it is : which is a nioli bold arrogant picfum-ption in Inch moles as we arc. As 1 faid before, you know not whether there may not be more A&'e6iiom or ^odi cntiitm open to theDirine Intellcd and Will, or Nature,then we have any name for or conception ot : And though mans will look only at the goodncfs or appetibility or conveniency of objeds, yet you know not what Gods will is j and therefore know not what is its adc(}U3te objed. Many other reafons alfo of the obfcurity of this might be given.

2. It will be anfwered you, that the laid New ad of Gods will, is for the Better* But then they will diflinguilh of [Bcr»er.] i. They will fay, It is Better quoad rerum ordinem : and it is Better to the creature: (as for God to love bim that before he bated: or approve of him, whom before he dif3pproved.)i a. They ciiftinguifh alfo between that which may be faid to be Ik-iter to God himfelf: Either Really, by a real addition to his perftdion ; and fo nothing can be Better to Gad: Oi' z. Relatively and Rcputatively; ax God is faid to bc Blcfled, Gioiified, Honoured, Wellplcaied, Exalted, Magnificd.CT'f. And thus it may be Better to God, though he receive no real addition of felicity > am! fo not Vain or IndifTcrent.

g. They will delirc you to Anfwer your own Argument as to tranflent Ads, and they think it may fcrve as to immanent ads. (Remembring that they fuppolc that there be new ads in God without mutation j btcaufc they fuppofcthat thofe very things that we call immanent Ads in him are but denominations of his fim-pJe Elfence, according to the various afpcds or refpeds of the objcds, which make no more, mutation then relations do.) Was Gods ad of Creation, of rai«

fxng

fing Chrift from dcath-tT'*;' for the Better, er Woffe, or Ixidiffercnt ? 1 th}nk you will fay as before, thar it was not Better as to God in the adding of any r«al felicity to him : But to God Reputatirely and Relatively, and to the creature really, it wa*. Pcttev. So will they fay about immanent afty, which may perfeft the V. hole ( as the Honour of the Prince is rhe good of the Commonwealth) and-may be neceilary titlie Goc-d of paricular pcrfors j andthc rcpucative Good of God hiniuif. Iti I'aidjGcd made AH things toi IhrnfcU", Was it toi Betterto him-felf,orWorre.or IndiflFeunt ?

4. 3^ i; Better I r VVoiTc for a !ooI;ing G ; 1 tha: it receive a hurdicd various^ Riecitidcvovc f Y-^u willpcrhaps fay, It ,^ no difpaiRocmepi :o the Glafs to be-rct fPfivc of ncwjf ifjcj without being made Bcitct v Wori'c : as alio thic its reception is pafTivc. and fb is not Gods UnJcrftunding a Wilir.'^. 1 know not whac it is: but I contefs it mufl needs be a very imprcj f ci.nc«prion to conceive of G^-i as paflivc in kn.nving. And yet man hatii no rue app.ehenfion of a knowledge which i» wholly fine fajjiohc: Bur how pro'^'c you that God cannot, if heple.-'fe, by his aftive Knowledge, Know dcncvo, wi.nouc becf.ning Better or Worle ? or doing it in vain ? Arc you lure th't cvciy new a(5c of inteilcftion (even in a dream) doth make mans underftanding beiter or worle ? or clfe is vain? I confefs more may be here faid.

J. Having done with your Argument, they will further tell ycu, that. If God may have new relations without any real change, then, for ought ycu know, he may have new immanent ads without a real change: But the Antecedent is unqucftionably true : (God was not a Cieator before be had creatures: nor is he our Father before we are his children j nor our King. MafterjfiT'c. before we are hisfubjeds, fervants, (ire- except de jure cn\y.) The Conlcquencc they prove thus: Relations have as true an Entity, as, for ought you know, thefe which we call Immanent Ads in God, may have : Tbcrefoie the Novation of them will make ai great a change. Here they fuppofe that A^io and Rc/jna are both accidents (taken properly) and neither of them mcer Eiitia Ratior.is ( for in fo thinking they eo in the more beaten road ) much lels nothing : Or if ycu will fay, that Relatio is but Modtuentu, they will fay lo of aftiontoo: Or however they tell youj that it may be fo for ought you know, with that which wc call an Aft in God. And here they fuppofe that bis Ads are not his Elknce abfolutely and inic felfconfidered i and tbit it fignifies not ail one to fay, God is God, and to fay, God willeth the exiftence of this worm: And therefore they will fay, that thtfe which we call Ads, may be., if not Relations, yet feme of Scotia his formalities, or fomcthing to us tnown, v.hich have either no more Being then Relations, or at leaft not fo much as :o nvike a real change in God. And that there jsin hi$fimple,.indiviflble Ei''.-ce, a Trinity of p^rfons, without any im-perfedion : fo there maybe in his iiflencc, dsftind forraslities (or fomevvbac that wc cannot name cr f^nceiv^ rt ) of a loworiiatuje, then Perfonality, without any inconvenience: and ss thefe may be fupc'-ad'-'ed to the meer abfolute. Eflenccof God (as /gere, IntcUtgire, VcUe, ate .-idJed) without dividing, or multiplying it: fo may ihey on the fame grcj.nds be New, or renewed, without any Mutation of Go. ? Eilence j but on'y ot il;e fornKiity of intellcdion or Volition, which is added to his EHence.

6. They further think i.h.1- ihenaturecf tianfient ads, doth prove that immanent ads may be renewed : B'Jt this will be inoic Ipoke to anon, when we come. to your dodrinc cf tranfient Ads. They lay, A iranlient ad is not a meer Re-

E 3 lation

lition or Paflion or ESzA : But there is in ic chit which msy be called adion ai ^<nie, as well as ^idion i.^iente. Now if sSfio be efcicutis iciio here, and GoJ incrcatinj the world dii fvcriugcrc, then cither the world was created from etcr-nity, o: cue God did crcarc it from E:ernity, and yet it wai created only in Time, and :hc Ciui'ationor Cauling creating Ad was infinitely before th< Edf<;di or cllc there was a new ad really performed by God in Time. The firfl none will maintain, that I deal with. The fecond, fay they, \\ againll common reafon : For G^dsad istheC7ia/i proximo crciturXi and omnis caufs proxtnid reciprocstur cum fuo efeci u: i.c.TofiucMfi pr$ximA inaSlu, nccefieejl cfeclum potit: I fie be cittfifoulii, yea and recjuireth no:hin^ elfc to the ctfed fo much a$ by preparation, or dilpciition, no nor a fubjed matter, then the ad of creation mulfc needs im-mediatly produce the creature > ani the Crure and Qrari mull needs be infepara-bie: Its anfwcrcd that Gods crearing ad was from eternity, but the effeft, oc creaturc,wa$ not till its Time. But it will be replied,That either God did more tor the creatures produdion or creation a: the time of itspaffive creation, then he did from Eternity, or he did no more: If more, then he did fomcthing dc novo: If no more, then cither the creature would have had its Bein^ from Eternity, qui4 pofiu cMtsi pon'nur cffecittti or elfe if y^u ask whats thcrcafon that the creature was not in Beini^ fooncr or latci-,no caufe can be alTi^ned : and fo God fhould not be the cauf*. This holds equally (fay they) whether you make the creating ad to be only Gods Vellc, or a fuperaddcd execution of that will, as being the efted of power. For either God willed the creatures prefenc exirtence from eternity, as much as at the time of its creation, or as at this day j or he did nor. If he did not, then he willcthicMOvo; If he did, then the creature would have exided, as faon as it was willed. To fay, that God willed from Eternity thac the creature fliould be in Time, is true : But is it as much to Will that it jhiU be, as to Will its prefenc exiftence ? If it be anfwcred, That there is no T^/f or F«wrf with God > I anfwer i. That this was prevented before J when it was (aid, that God undcrftandeth Time, and propofuions concerning time, though time bconly mans meafurc, and propofitions mans inftruments. z. The men that I fpeak to, maintain that all things cocxift not wich God from Eternity (though indeed the term \^irom'] as here ufed, contradidcch Eternity :) and they diftin-guifh between Gods willing rerumfuturitmcm (^ cxi(lentum prafcntem: and therefore this feemeth to make againll their anfwer. ( But indeed none of all this arguing is folid, becaufe of the different manner of producing efFcds pcrvoLuautem, & per potentUm excquentem volunuti fupenidiuoi.) Perhaps it will be faid, that if all this be granted, yet it followeth not that immanent ads may be de wnj9 without a chtngqin God, becaufe the Creating ad, or any tranfient ad is f» : For the former is God himfclf, butthclater is not. To which it may be replied, I. We fpeak not now of a produd or cffed, called the Creation, but of thecrca-ting ad andthen why iliould not that be God himfelf, as well as an immanenc ad ? If you fay it is a Being, then icisGod or diftind from God : If dillind from God, it is a fubftance or accident, or fone moiia, or who knows what ? Accidents God hith none: Subliancc it cannot be j except it be God. If you fay it isany moij^, you know what School contradidion you mult exped : Or if you fay it is a Reality or a Formility, thofe that you deal with will tell you, thatrhey can as well proye the immanent ads to be formalities, or fuch like, as you can the tranfient. For iiheyfay (withorhers) that thele ads are not called I aim ancm, Pjfitiycly, as ifcheyhad anyeffcd or terminutin Gjdhimfelf; ' buc

but Negatively, becaufc they have no cfftd, *d extrd ; and do nthilpoitert in objelfo, Sothat as to the nature of the a6t it (c\i, they lay, it is the fame, or at leaft, the later as much cflential to God, as the former ( though not their efttfts.) And .1 have paper converfe with a Divine, if I miftakenot, tuUas Learned as M'I^. ( toipesk fparingly) who maintains, that thofe which you call immanent aAs (w'^Gods Knowing and Willing other things bcfides himfclf) are tranficnr, and lo to be called j as having as much an cxtrinfick objcd, as thole that ycu and I call Tranficnt j though they make no real change on them : and that thofc only are to be called Gods immanent ads, whole objeft is himfclf. j. Moreover yoB will acknowledge that Gcds VeUc'is an immanent ad: But how many and how great arc they that maintain that Gods Creating aft, was but his /'c/Zcthat things fhould be '• 1 need not tell vou of Schoolmen that arc for this: but when ycu (doubtlefs) know that D' Tvet^e himfclf sllirms it, in his Vindic you mufi either be ofhisminde, or bundle hint unveorthHy by your Diilent, as I did in another cafe. Now if the aft by which God jror.uced the creatures be but his ycUe, then it is an aft which you call immanent. Aed you well know how commonly it is maintained that 7)cus cfentur prr cjfenttjm: and that there is no aft but his cflencc it fclf, requifitc to any eftift, which hcproduceth, as it is the eftcft of the firft Caufe. But this is but ad homjum i for thcfe are not their principles whofe arguings I now recite. They fuppole that creation and other tranficnt afts, are not mecr Volitions, bur afts of power, in execution of Gods will. To which purpofe how largely many famous Schoo'men have argued, is obvious to them that areconverfant in them. AurcoUu hath fifteen Arguments to tl.is end. Gregor. ^rwfwc?!^/hath many Arguments to prove that however Creation or Conferva-tion be taken, neither of them is Gcd himfclf. (^afreoltu 1 know and other Tho-mifts aniwer thefe Arguments : and much may he replied and is, to thofe an-fwers: fotbatin fodarkand unfearchablc a Contrcveifie, ftrons wits may finde fomethingto fay, againit each other, longer then the patience of the wifclt of tlieir Readers will hold out to know the illuc ot their difpiites. (&/£gidm,Tbom. de tArgcnt. Occam, and others plead alfo for a n^ct fliry of an executive aft of power, diftirft from the mecr aft of willing, cr that Creation is not God. ^o do ^acob. iMartini,Suarc^,Scbibltr, and other later Authors. And if ( as >^^«/7;(W faith ) tranfient afts ht formdittrinagentc, as well as immanent, then ihe inception of new immanent afts feems to have no other inconveniences, then the inception of tranfitnt afts as to the form. But indeed the ThcmiAs fay the fame of both, that they arc only Gods cffence, and that God hath no tranfient aft at ail, but cnly that his EiVenceor Will or Llndeiitanding mav be fo dencminatcd for the rational Relation of the Objeft thereto. AtA ihat-icxc Jqujr.M (i.q ij.d.i.) maintaining that theie is in God ^TotctiUaaSfivn ( thcui;h not pijftva) witliall maintains it to be the fame thing, astheafticn, and as hi!> Will and UnderUand-ing. ( And yet fcmctime hecslleth Gods afticns traifienv ; but in this be fpeaks unconffantly or doubtfully, as S'Kdrf^ nottth IMet.difp.io.%.^.') And the lub-ftance of all Capreoltu awfwer to jiuribltu fifteir Arguments lis this fame diftindi-on, between Gods aft of Creation u Iclf ( which is bis Will and Eflcnce, immanent and eterrai ) and the Rf/rff/o r4r/cri» beiween-God and the objeft j from which Gods will is denominated a nanficnt ift. But yet in this trarfient aft, it is only the relation, and not the sft it ftlf ( which r. G.d himlilf) which inay be diverfificd or renewed. Now if this ir.etr rclati^ifAiittiishc lumcient erourd for our denomination of Gods aft to be [Trarfient] J^nd thefe iianfieni £fts 'o

be

C«43

b: njw, then it miy fc;-u thi: thcrdirionof the laineiA to fotne ex'.rmfick tsTrminicivc ojjscli ( not GoJ'kaowleJ^c to the prclcnt cxillonceof cftings ia nuiu tcm}OTk) do:h ^ive ths umw ^rounito cili thal'e aifls new, though no: To p.opaly tranlicrj:. For it on: miy be d^noT^inateJ fiom its rcl'ped to its objed, why no: the other: Niy why the (ame rc/ifj»M{»OM*f may no: as well denominate thole aditranii:nt alio, whicU .vcaovcall imTuncnt, is no: ealle to difcern : For both iiaveiofped :o an ex:riii(i:k objcd, if that fulfijc. Niy Joth not that ad which IS ca.ci imn.t.icnt, produce or cfl;cl i Icein^ it is only ^o/c«io withouc any other exccuiive adion tui: G Ji cft.d^h a'l things that are efteded : ani thisFc/Zt: frj.ncrcrniry is (fay they) ciuji ini^it ot cho'c thin^^s that are proJtieci i.i tine. Aal therefore tmny lay, thit God hath no Will as to cxtrinlicks, but what iscfFLCt.ve : ani li cha: his Will ha:h m ex:rinlick objed proJorly fo called, but only prjJufti or ett.ds. That onncvelle Dci ejl [oicncrjum (^ c^c4x coram qujt viU, and hit rherefor: he may no: be laid to will any thing but wha: he doth effect. SecGibienfie LibertM.i.c.i^.0' 1.

So that 111 Conclulioii, according to the Doftrine of the moft Learned Tho^~ mirts, there is in Gid neithe: immanent noi tran(l:nt ad in M'f^'j I'cnle. ( Except thul'e that are terininatei, as they call it, in himi'elt as the objed.) Not im-aianent ; tor they arc not terminaced in the A^ent, as M'K-faith, I'uch arc; nay they have reipcd co things ex:rinlick ; nav, lay many, they are prodiidive of thefe cxtrinlick things- Nottranlient; for G ids eflence doth not trstifircintb-jcHwnexiraneufi, ba: on'y ciufc it withau; any other executive adionj and Jo refpcdech it. In the fame lenfe therefore, and on the fame grounds as you .vill maintain the tranlient id to be in time, and not eternal, will rhele men think to prove it alio of the immanent. Fo: even the tranlient ads of God (fo called) arc Hot in rhecrciiure, bac only relped and effed them. As CJprco/w laith (li. i. diB. I. q. I.art. j.) Td'n altio prxiicimentilis (s' qijt c[l motits, ejl fubjccfiv^ in pijSo: Diviiu iutem aciit noa ejt motia , nee muutio, licet aufet motum (^ muu-tiottcm.

7. But they much infift on that before intimated, that if it be no wrong to Gads limpticity to have diverfity or multiplicity ol imaianent ad^ alcribed to him, then it is not any wrong to his immutability to have fuch ads afcribcd to him dc novo: Focthereafon will prove alike. But that it is no wrong to GoJ to have diverfity of immanent ads afcribcd to him, is evident by i. The ufe of Scripture. z. The ufe of all Divines. ?. And the neceflli^ of the thing. 1. I need not tell any man that hath read the Bible, that Scripture diltinguifheth o( Gjds attributes: that it afcrijeth to him Uiderftanding, Will, Memory,(J'c. that it fpeiketh nit ot his Love and Hatred, his Approbation and Difallo.vance, his Jufticc and Mercy, as being one, not to bediltiniuilhed. 1. And what Divines fpeak othcrwife? evenof them that make the boldell enquii ies into G )ds nature, ani pal's of it ttie moll conhisn: concuifions, as if they had fee.i the invifible M']:fty; I mean the Schoolmen of ail forts: To how little purpjfe weremany a Volume i:i "Sent, for the moft part, if it were enough to apprehend in God undivilibir-U.iity ? How eiiily on chefe i;roundi might we anfwer all BrAivOM-iiHCi, all Taiffcs fjbiime difputes, about G^ds willing fin, his ordci of iiuention, ani'ii his Decrees, his Tilcdion ani Rpirobation, whether abfoluteor condi-tio-al, definite or indefinite, and dc rcru^ poljlbilitatc (^ fuiuntienc ab Jitcrn9, with many the like ? Itsealie to fay, that all thefe a:e one and the fane thing: and the fame is not before or afcer it felf,cir'c, Yet this is not taken for a fatisfadory

way

Cn3

way of difputing. }. Yea h i: not apparent, that there is a nccefliry of fuch ^i* ftinguifliing language ? How many fouls would yeu be likely toconvcitjand favc^ how many lins:o prevent, by telling your Auditory, that in deed and truth it i» all one thing in God to Decree a man to falvation, or to decree him to damnation? Jts all one to Will that you (hall fin, and that you fliall not fin : that you (hall die this day, and that your Neighbour fhall live fourty years longer: Its the fame thing, without any true difference, for God to Love you now you believ-e, and to Hate you while you were a worker of Iniquity J to be pleafed and difpleafcd, to Approve anddiflike J His Love to Pcrcr, w^icoh, and his Hatred to fudas, to Efiiu was the fame thing, only the efFcfts are not the fame. I fay, how favoury and profitable would this doftrinc be ?

And are there not the fame Reafons for our afcribing to God, the beginning and ending of Immanent A As, as the Diverfity of them? Is not one as confident with his Immutability, as the other with his fimplicity ? Doth not Scripture a-fcribc to God the Inception and ending of Immanent Afts, as well as the Diverfity of them? And istherc not as great a neceiiity of our ufing that language as the other? How many fouls were you like to fave by telling them [God Loved you as well before you believed, yea before Chrift died for you, as he doth fince l God doth Hate you now as much as he did when you were a worker of iniquity, and is as much oflended with you fince you believed as he was when you were a childe of wrath ! He had the fame thoughts of you when you were blafpheming, murdering and committing adultery, as when you repent and pray. God is now decreeing to create the world J he is now decreeing to give the Law by Mofes, to fave Nod^ by the Ark, Lot out of Sedom: he is now Decreeing that Chriii fhall fuffer for us j he now knows all thefe as future : he is no more Reconciled to the world by Chrift, or Pleafed in or by his Sufferings and Merits then he was before: God knows now that [Chrift is now on the Grofs] or [Chrift is ^not Rifen] is a true Propcfition, becaufe he did once know that it is a true Propofition : and he ceafeth not to know it:] would this kinde of dcftrioc feem found and edifying? Do you ufe to preach thus ?

But you'le fay. That Gods Knowledge, Will, Power, Goodncfs, Juftice, In-finitencfs, his Willing the End and the Means,the futurition of things, and theic prefent exiftence, mens falvation or damnation are all divcrfified oneiy as to ex-trinficlidenomimtm, and not really : from the variety of objcAs it is, that one aft of God is varioufly denominated,

Anfw.i. But ScotJM with his followers, SireHm, Bafoli(,Trombetale Rcy, Ge-t}mtiui,Muyro, Faventinus, and the like, tell us of more then cxtrinfick denominations: And if there be in God a Diverfity of Formalities J it may as well be faid, that there is an inception and ending of thele Formalities in him. This doth no more derogate from the Immutability of God, then the other from his fimplicity.

1. Have thefe extrinfick Denominations any true Ground in the things denominated, or not ? If not, it feems they arc all fall".-, and therefore not to be ufcd. If they have, then what is it ? The difference of names Ihould fuppofe an equal difference in the Things. Ameer Relative difference, fome arc loth to grant. If they fhoiild, as they plead for a diverfity of Relations, others may as well plead for an Inception and Ceflatign of Relations : (Could they prove Immanent afts to be but Relations.) If they lay they are Modi or Entii rationk, or what ever title rafh adventurous wits may impofe on them. Hill others will fay as much for their

F Beginnig

Beginning and Ending, as ihty do for their DiverfTtyj and that one implid no more a Change in God, then the other denieth his Gmplicity. The dcfcribers of Extrinfick Denomination that place it between Ew and j\j^j/, make it to fig-nifie the order of a thing to the fubjcd which yet it is not in. liut then it is a meet Relation which is Denominated j or if any more, it ftiauld be tx parteobjccii only ia our cafe.

3. But fuppofc that it be but ameer extrinfick Dcnominationj and have no Real! Ground in the thing denominated ; fee what follows : But this much : That Gods Knowledge, and Will, and Power, and Jufticc, and Mercy, his Knowing me to be Godly or ungodly, his decreeing FcKr to life, znd^udoi to death j his loving JjcoA and hating £/(<«, arc all one; his knowing one thing to be future, and another not future, is all one: But yet bccaufe of the Diverfity of objcds ic is meet and necdfull, that we Denominate cxninfecally Gods ads to be divers: and fe to diftinguilli his Intention of the End, from his Elcftion of the M<;ans ; his Elcftion from his Reprobation, his Approbation from his difliksj^c. Even p3, thcfe ads in God have in themfelrcs no Beginning or End : God did never Begin to Love, to Will this or that, to Know (^c. But yec becaufc of the Beginning and Ending of objcds, it is meet and needfull to Denominate Gods ads cxtrinfecally as Beginning and Ending, as the objeds do, and changing with them. For here the cafe is the fame as to Gods Immutability, as in the other to hisfimplicity. And if this hold, then thofe men that fhould write Voluminous Difputes, about tiae Beginning and Ending of Immanent ads, would do as wai-rantably as D'Tw//? and others do in writing fo of their diverfity, priority aivi pofteriority in nature. Nay is it not much more Jullifiable then many of their Volumes ? For from Eternity there was no rcall diverfity of ob/eds to denomi* nate Gods Immanent ads from. For that ejfc ccgnittttn vcl volitum, which they'l* fiieto, could be no where, h\ii in tHCVtc(*;'vbluntifc7)ivhu: and if there were no Diverfity ;» menteDivina at all, then what ground can be imagined of the extrin-fick Denominations ^ For example, TOj/^WwCT*/«(;<« being nothin.:, could net in themfelves differ from eternity : Yet how great a fabrick doth D'Tw//? build upon this Propofition, that [the tranfition of things future i Humcro pojfibtlium inttumerumfuturorum, being from Eternity, it mull needs have an eternal Caufe which can be no other then Gods Will.] Now if there were no fuch tranfition, but iu mc}itedmni,2n.\ if there were no fuch notion from Eternity any where elfe, as is ^Future and Poflible] and fo it mull be imagined to be a.nEnt rationiiDivina,\.hcn k plainly follows that tber« was no fuch thing asFutuie,diilind from Poflible: for in God is nodiftind Immanent ad85(as knowing PoiTibles, and Knowing things futurej) and in the things was no diflindion, for they are nothing.

It feems therefore that upon your own Grounds it isas Juttifiable and ncceflary, to Denominate extrinfecally Gods Immanent ads, as having Beginning and End, when the objeds have fo, as it is to Denominate them divers from the diverfity of the objcd : and that if we made this our ordinary fpeech in voluminous Difputesj you could no more blame us for it, then all the exadell School-Divines are to be blamed for the ether.

Moreover, fomemay think, that youdo teach Irfidels todeftroy the Chriftian Faith, or teach a man toprove or di(provc wi)at lie will, becaufe Contradidories mayconfifl, e.g. If they would prove that [Chrift is not Rifen] thus: That which God knoweth to be true, is true : But God Knowcth this Propofition to be true [Chrift is not Rifen] Therefore. The minor they prove thus: God did

C»7l

once know this Propofitien to be true; Therefore he doth Co ftill: for there i« no Ending of any Immanent ad of God. It will be anfwcred. That this onely fhewsaditlerence intheobjedj that it was once true, which now is not : but Gods act is the fame by wliich he knowech thefe mutable objcds. Be it fo : (ycc whether it be certain and can be proved ftillj is by them doubted;) but is it fit for us to Ipeak of this ad as one only ? It feems then , k is all one, in God to know a Propoluion to be True, and to know it to be falfe. For the fore-faid Pro-poficion [Chiift isnot Rilcn] was True one day, and Falfe the next j and God knew both. You'le fay, It is all one in God to Kbow that to be True which is True, and that tobe Falfe which is Falfe : but in both he knows Ferd, ctfi von verum. But then you mult tell us further, what it is for God to Know [rraO*-] Is it the Congruency of his Knowledge to the Objcd, which we call the Ti;uth of it? 1 think you will fay fo : Andiffo, then it is not obvious to (hew how there was fuch a Congruence from Eternity, when there was Nothing but God ; and fo no other objcd for his knowledge to agree to; For in God they were all but one, ehhtv in cjfe cognito, orejfevoUtO; for in him is no reall diverfity : and out of him, or inthcmlelves they were not at all; and therefore if God knew all things as many or divers, when they were not at all, and as exiflcnt, when they didnotcxift, where is the Congruence of the ad with the objed? But all this arguing is but light.

But they further argue thus: Gods Immanent ads, which we are fpcaking of, are not Himfclf: and therefore as they may be either divcrlified or multiplied without his Divilion or Compofition, fo they may begin or end without his Mutation. The antecedent they prove by that common Argument: Thefe Immanent ads about the Creature, are Free ; God Freely Willeth the exiftence of this worm oc pile of grafs : he fo Willed it that he could have not willed it, or nillcd it. But his own Being is neceffary, and cannot but be: Therefore, (^c. It feems hard to fay, that God did as neceflarily Will the pardoning of your (ins, as he is nc-celfarily God : Or that he could no more have Willed ©ne pile of grafs more or lelfc on the earth, or one fand moreor Icfleon the Sea-(hore, or one day more or lefle to any mans life, then he could ceafe to be God. This is a lliort way of an-fwering Scwrovif josqueltion, and of anfweringthc prefumpcuous en^^uiry, Whether God could have made any thing better, and a thoufand more ? Itjir.c Cttsnt ipfumNumenptoconliringhar ? Is it a good Argument ? Dcuaefij ergonce^e eft Crtituris t^e, iiecplures, necpiuciora, ntc prius, rut pofierius, &c ? One of my Rabbi's (by whofe name I have acquainted Mr.I(|. with luy ignorance) anfwereth that Gois Decrees are Free, Solum per termtTUtionem ai extriineum, feu in quantun f'olitio'Dei, circa ebje^am aliqu«iextrinfccumpri£iiceell. But this is aj much as to fay, No Immanent ad is Free ; For Im-panent ads (at leall if Mr.I^ know) are not terminated in any thing without: Or if a man ihould fay, that thofe thac havcan cxtrinGck objed, are objedively terminated in fomething exainficki yet this feems none of the Authours fenfe (as the word fra^ici Ihews:) and if ic were (as perhaps it is) his words would run thus: [Gods Decrees are free, oncly as they are fuch and fuch Decrees about fuch objedj:] which would but yield tiic caufe, thac as fuch Decrees they are not the fame formally with the divine EOencc. And were it not for the Connoration of the Objed, it were no Decree, nor to bccalledjbut limply Gods ElVence. I am lure Di.Twijfe will be fully and earneit-ly enough for thofe that maintain the liberty of the Divine Decrees which we now mcmion: and therefore I fuppofc Mr.I^ will be of the fame mindc.

fa And

Ci8]

And that there is not fuch dear Evidence in this cafe, as ts embolden men to fuch confident Concliifions, or to build fo much on them, as lomc do, let Suare:^ pcr^kxtd Dufuic Mcuph.DiJp-iO. Scci.9. teltifie , f^omoio cum dtvin,i libirtitc ftet ImmutiibilitM i Where atter the producing of many opinions, and the Arguments and Anfwers, he concludes, Exhif qujecircahit opimoncsdidafunt, (jxis (ut cpinor) deiUritum cfiqumti jit hujua opivionii diijiculiwi i fucUtufque cjjc qunnltbet ejuspirtem tmpugnare, qium aliquum probe itfendere, aut cxpliure. 'i^Jtprepter non verc9r Confitcri nihil meinvenire qued mihi futisfdcut, nifihoc folum, in hujufmodi rtbua id de Deo e(}e crcdendum, quod incffubtlicjiupcrjcctiom magis fit confchtaueum, quodqitc 4.bomnitmpcrfcciionealicnumJit,Sic.'] And bow unccrtdin aremen, that lome of tbofe things may not conlift with i he Divine PertcftionjWhich yet they confidently afiiim to be inconfiftent with it? If icbcapoint that is fo fane pait the reach of SuATC^ and many other fuch fubcil Difputcrs, I think Mr. f^. fhould not pretend tofo full an infight into it, which may railehim to that confidence which is here exprelled j much Icflc flvould he think it fo obvious to the unJcrflandin^s of hisinferiours.

How light fo ever Dr.rw//? make of ihem, certainly they are accounted no children among the mod learned of their fide, who do teach, That there may be lo far a Beginning and Ceafin^ of Gods Immanent ads, which have a mutable objeft, without aay change in God himfclf, aithat they may have anew tranlition to theobjeft, and fo God may Will that which before he Willed nor, though yit it be all by one limple aft. Of this minde is Penottua, Ljchctta, Fr. a Sunki CUra And the faid SiaStj. QUm citeth others as countenancing his Dodrinc. But though there are but few for this opinion, yet for the formal diitindioiv of Gods Immanent ads (which as is faid, fcems te be asinconliflcnt with his hmplicity, as this with his Immutabil ty) there are many and that of the moft Learned : Fid. quxhabetSiotuiin[ent. /.i. 4zy?.8. =^.3. (it d'lji.i.'i^.^. (^7. ^'dili.in. (^ psjftm. And Rai.: faith, ihu Scoti fcntentiumabejtudiebu4 tmvcrfu Punenfis SchoU femper amplcxitifncrit , necnon (3' Lovar.icnfisatquc Bononievfts Acadctnij j Etinluni-verfa ItalU apud omnes vivos docios eft celcbrii c/fumofa. ItiCtntr ^. And their ReaCons are not contemptible, which may be fccn in their feveral Writers : Specially in thofe that have wrote whole books of the Formalities. Oi Rudu (a man of a clear underltandingandcxprefTion) will afford you many in that on* Coiitr. 4. whichare worthy confideraiien. And if Th Fabcr FavcrtiKia his rcconciWng Interpretation of their Diftindion Rationii Rutiocvuta, will prove their fcnfe, then many of the Thomifts are alio of tke fame minde. r/d.Favcntin, TraH defor^ malitAt.cap-i.

I do not mean by this Argument to conclude that there w«/i be (or in all cafes may be) an Inception or Cellation of thofe Ads which admit of a formal Diitin-dion : But only thus, that if a formal Diltindion be confiiient with the Divine limplicity, then an Inception and Ccflation of fome fuch formalities (or ads, quoad formales diffcrcntia/s) may feem confident with Gods Immutability : (And I know no other Argument of moment then left, if that be folvcd.) What thefe formalities are, I do not wonder, Jf they 'j,ive but a dark account: Yet that they aredifferentobjcdlve conceptions they agree. And as Kadi faith, <:i 'DiftinSliO' lum formulem duo requiruntur. Alicrum e(i,qttodutrumquc diftin^ionif cxtrcmum di-cax iltquid Fojitivum in re, fcdufa opcratione [ntcUctfui : Altcrum ejt,qi(od utrumque extrcmumdicatproprtamformalitatem, fauudum qaam fit in rcrum natura extra fuam ^Hf/am^ And Scotus himfeif faith of this as applied 10 God i ^^d Forma in crea^

tiirk

turUhahttiliquidmfcrftF.mu, fcilket quod eji Fcma infomJvs aliquiJj fy' Fdrs fompcfiii: all quid ai&m hihct quod von cfl mperfeSltc-nis, (cd confcquhur am fecundum fuamrdti6vcmej[evt)aUmjwcftrmakm, fcilica, quod ipfa fit quo aliqnid eft tale, c. gs fapientiainnchhcft Jccidais, hoc (ft imfcrfiBionk : (cd quod tpfj fit quo diquid eft /i-picns, hoc voneft imper/tclmis, fed ejj'evtialisrdtionif fupicvtia. Indivivii autcm nihil eft forma, (ccu-ndum tUim dupliccm ratiovcm impcrfccfionis, quia nee Informavs, vee pan: c3 tamcu ibi (aptentta in quantum eft quo illud in quo ipfa eft, eft faptctti, (ir hoc r.on per aliquamcomptfiiionem^Sic. Sent.\.dift. 8.^9.

Some think yet dearer Arguments might be fctcht from the Hypoftatical Union, from the Afts of generaiion andTpirationj cr LevCj whereby the Son is begotten of the Father, anei the holy Ghoft pvocecdtth ficm the Father and the Son, and from the diflirdion of Perfonsinthe Trinity. But I will ftcp here (as having run further then I intended) Icfl you fhould mif-intcrpvet me, and thinkj that I own all thefe Arguments that I touch upon. 1 know v\ hat DTwjf againft TcNao/wjhathfaid to ojte or two of them, and what the Schoolmen commonly fay to the fame I mention thcfe only to fliew that a full or clear foluti-on of thcl'e doubts is not aifo facile and obvious, as you fetm to imagine.

I muft again intreat you, and every ingenious Reader, tofaflcnno opinion on me, but what I own, at leaft none which 1 difdaim. 1 f I muft be of one fide in thisControveifie, I will bcof Mr.f(,cnrfij/j fide, and fay, that Gcd hath but one aft immanent, and that is Eternal. But my thoughts are, that we know not what we talk of when we fpeak thus, and therefore I will not be of any fide in this.

I think, I. That God hath no Aft at all in proper fpeech : but both Afting, and Undcrftanding, and Willing are by a veiy, very, very low remote Analogy akribed to him.

X. Yet I am ready to think, that as we are fain for our own underftanding, to fpejkof God as Afting, Undcrltanding, Willing, Loving,^c. and alio for ouir own underllandingtodiilinguillihis Pcrfcfticns, Properties, Afts, (^c. which are but ore, lo may and mufi we as much fpcak of feme of bis Afts, as beginning and ending (which yet pethaysdo not in themfelves :) Forthc Reafon and Neceflity feemsto bethe fame. For bccaufe the word [Knowle^'s^e or Underftanding] is firft ufed and applied to mans aft of Knowledge, and fTgnifieth firil only fuch a Knowledge as isdiveifified by objects 5 jrea and man can have no proper pcfitive Conception of a Knowledge which is not diveillfied by the diverfity of Objcfts (but onely a Negative Conception j) therefore it is that we are forced to fpeak of Gods Knowledge (and fo of his Will and other Afts) as divers or di-ftinft : as Divines generally do. And en the fame Grounds, as man hath no pcfitive Conception of any Knowledge or Will, about mutable cbjcfts, which is not varied with thefe cbjcftj, as to the Being, Beginning and Ending, therefore we muif as neceflarily denominate Gods afts about fuch objtfts, as Beginning and Ending, as we muft denominate them Divers. And fo we may weil fay, God willed from Eternity the futurition of the worlds Creation, and Chrifts Dcathj O-'C' But now he doth not will their futuriticn, but their preterition : and that he Lovethnow (asbelieveis in Chiifl) thofe whom he before Hated as Workcis of Iniquity} and that he is fatisficd and wcll-pleafed in his Son, and his Sacrifice, who was not fo before. Me thinks Mr.I^. fhculd think this language as fit for the mouths and pens of Divines, as the former, and not to be blamed or accufcd as

F i erroBCcuSj

erroneous^ b/ciufc improper, tslongajwc mad fpeak impropctly of God, »r not at all. And I am lure chat Scripiarcl'pcaki ot GoJ in thii language, afcri-bing to him Immincnc adj, ai new or ai ccafing, aai as moved by cxceiiouc cau-fci: Therefore this wayot ipeakiug is n^t unfi: or intolerable.

TheSummeof alltbatl fay ihercfoicis but this, That we cannot conceive of Gods Immanent ads, as in themfclves ihey a:e (nor are they truely the fame things that we conceive of, when we apply the fcveral denominations to them:) and therefore we mu^ conceive of themby Refemblance to the Ads of Man fo denominated, ftill acknowledging the Impropriety of the terms, and dilclaiming all thole luiperfcdioni which in man they do exprefs.

But becauleM..!^. hath rpoken lb much CO this point already, its like he will take it ill if I takcuono:iccof it. I will therefore a little infill on the confide-ration of what he faith on it, to Mr.Gwiw/s, pag.9j,94. (butbriedy, as being not te me.)

§. 6.

Mr. K. Tp H« is fucb i Rcifon as mojl «/ your Difcipks nceieiyour fivour to ruie i X, Logicli LcHure to them, tbit they might be in x CXficny to give their ^uigcments onit : Tounot hiving beenpleafei to do it, I will for encc grutijie them withaCijlof mj oli O^^^j '<">^ h9ii» fuppofing my felf igitn in my Deins Chiir, I gravely beginthm. Thit Univocum « tbit which is attributed to feverd things tucord-ing to ibefime I^me, aui ^iture fignifiei by thit mme ; as Animxl to a Mm dni an A[fe, torvhichareoppofed ontbeonehini JE:^a\vociim, rcbich it attributei according to the fame Name, but not(iguifying the fane l^juure, as Canis rvbich is [aid of a Starre^ a Beijl, and a Fiji): cither hath the fime nine Canis, but their natures arc as difcr^ CHt if Heaven, EirthandlV^ter. On the other hand Anaio^um, which is attributci according totbc fxme t^ime, and iS ftinifying the i^mz H.aiure j but not in tbc liliemanner. 'l{jw this fame Analogum is of two forts i The terms are promifcuo:tjly lumbled together by the Logicknottgcrs, butletthatbe, i. Proportionis; whentbefane Hamt is gtventothtngsoftheL'xke, butnottbeium t^jtarc: as Laughing, &c. z. Accri-bu:ionis : where the fame Hame is given to divers tbmgt, according to the fam* Afi-turc: but this fame Mature doth not agree to them alike ; but to the one firji, to the other afterwards, fecundum prius & potf erins; yea to the later dependantlj oh the firft t as SubjUrueand Accident are each of them Ens, a thing, &c.

§. 6.

5^ B. fj Old a little, i. The firft part of your task, you have competently per-n formed, viX' to acquaint us of the lower O bs of your ancient Dignity : Our dillance is fo great fio.n the Superioar Planets, tna: we might never have heard of your Deans Chair, had you not happily here informed us : But I hope yo'J had a more noble Imploimen: in your Dians Chair, then, this poor, common,Inferiour work,to tell men of Unijocuma^iuivocum (^Anilogum,i\yi to di-i^inyuiih AnilogumTropirtionis(^ Attributionis : But though I had not the happi-nefs to be educated at your feet, yet in this your Learned, Elaborate, Polemical writing, I may, no doubt, exped the beft of your Judgement i and may conje-dare what you were v/ont to readc to yoar P jptls by that which you here fo grave Ijf read to lii.^ooiwin. Firft, you will not, ic fecms [jumble chc terms fo pro.

mifcuoufly

inifcuoufly astheLogickmorgtrsdo:] But, when thefe words had railed my cxpcAationJ of fom-e more exquifite dilhibution then ordinary, or at leaft of more apttcrmSj I am put off with the old diftinftion, not only common in the Schoolmen, but in the mnltitudes of Logick and Metaphyflck Writeis, which I had thought you had difdained ; Not the imalleft Scvgucrdim but hath it j (onely he, with many others term it, but Barbarous j whereas I(.cc^crw<in terms it Jpfipid , and Burger(dtaut inept :) And 2^Mfgfr/;»5 faith, that Amlogorum nomine (olum ex di-suntur qua fccundum profortioncm apud AriftotcUm vocantur, freut r.otun intcrprctcs ex cap.\6. pcjl c.i^.maximeverdcxc.6. i. Ethic &c. tifxs tumen Latina Scbolx (^ Fbilofopborum obtinu7t,ut cUsm ca qua fccundum attribuUcncm vccavtur avalogorum nomine cetifcaniur.

But though your Diftinftion be very ordinary, I confcfTe there is more then ordinary in your Explication of the members: But it is of fuch a nature, as makes me begin to abate the apprehenlions of my infelicity, in that I had never the happincfs to be your Auditor, and to have Learned Logick at your feet. You: uinalogumtngemro, is that [which is attributed according to the fame name, and as fignifying the/awe NdtMre, but not in the like manner.] Your Analogum pro-portionif, is [when the fame name is givLn to things of the Lfie, but rjct the ftmt nature.'] Analegum in Gcmre, is of ihcfjtnen^tu-x, as well as Name. Analogum Proportionif, is nor the fame Mature, but ihc LUiC. And fo the nature of the Gc7iUs is not in the i'pccfcr: Nay they are contrary one to the other : and onely the later member (Analogum Attributi07iis) remi'ix\$ an Analogum, sndtich Species receives not the definition of the C^enw. If this be the Dodrine which ycu fo [Gravely deliver from your Deans Chair, I will fay as you do [I cannot perfwade my fclf to leave my old Dodors to follow You. ] I will even turn to poor l^ecl^jrman, Burgerjdiciui, Suare^ again j yea to a Kwgerfim, ^acchaw, GorUta, Scrguerdim, Alftedm, or any body that's near me of this generation, before I will iwallow what I cannot digef^.

§. 7.

Mr-KKlOw if Subfiarce and Accident tc Analoga, becavfe of the dependance of Ac* i\ cidents on the SubjcB, tbenrvhat ever U predicated of God and the Cren" ture, muft be predicated Ar.aUgicalij, Iccaufc the creature haib it not but by dcpcvdance cnGod, butGodivdcpcrJcntIyfr£nithc(^rcature: Andasthe Being cf the Crc&ture, 16 derived from ^cd in fieri, avd depends on hm in fsfto cfle j fo quefiionlc^ the t^nowledgc of the Creature, is but a beam -from the fewitain of light, vebich it in Cody and cannot lovgerfubfft, thenhevoucbfafcthtoprefcrveit by a continued imdii-tion, &c.

§. 7-R.B. !• ¥ Would rather fay that Subftance and Accident are AMUgiti, then xAmlogai butycumay ufe your Liberty, and call the tAmloga, Ana-legeta. i. 1 fhould think that it is not dircftly ard/lridly [Becaufe ot the de-pcndance of Accidents on the Subjcd, that Subfiarce and Accident are Analo-gitA: but becaufe of thclmpcrfeft Entity which through this dcpcndance the Ac-dcjots have in the more pcifefi Entity of the Subj<ft. 3. l;ijnotihat moft General

BCrtJl tAndignm, [Ens'] as appHable to G3d a/ii the Creaciirc,that we are now in qacftion of. Cu: it is thofc infcriour of [Forc-knowlcdgc , Knowledge, Will, Eicdion, 67'<''.] »• Your [Bccaufc] is unfound , and I conceive your Confcquence is faU'c, v/^. [then whatfocvcr is predicated of Oad and the Creature mul^ be predicated Aualogically] Do yen tbink thai nothing may be I'po-ken equivocally of God and the Creature ? If you do, you arc a fingular nran> J. I hope you do not think that our knowledge depends on God, as Acci* dents on the Subjcd : If you do, then God haih many Accidents indeed, were that true ; I had rather fay plainly, ihatGod eftedeth our knowledge (by way of joatural CaQfaticn in feme reipe^, and by moralCaufation inoth^r refpeds) as tba: which had no Being before, then :o talk of Emanation as a Beam from the fountain of Light j confidcring what ill Uie many in thsfc times have made of the dodrinc of Emanation. 6, I: feems by your former Conclufion [wbatfoever is predicated of God and the Creature, muft be p:edica:ed Analogically] and by your prefent predication of [The fountain of Light which is in God] that you judge [Light] or [the fountain of Light] to be predicated Analogically of God too. Which if voudo, and this alio muft be by Analogy of Attribution, thenit Teems Heat, Cold, Gravity, Levity, Dcniity, Rarity, Compofition, or what ever is in the Creature may be thus artribu.ed to God. 7. As to the point it felt in-^uertion, i. I will not meddle with that old Controverfic, Whether Es/be fpokcn of God and the Creature Univocaliy, iEquivocaily or Analogically. I have feen what Scottu i'airh for his opinion in Scnt.iAill.iz.tt iUbi. (^ s.iiji.^.q I. (^ ;. And what Anth.Anireif ^Meuph.q.i. Meurine.:;^/eM;&. Scot. I I. J^.8, p.io8,^v. And^bil Fiber.Fdvemin.Th}fScot.Theorem.9').psg.6$^f (^i. Riii, and others fay for it : And whziOccbMi in i.Sera. diji. i.q. 8. And guil.Rubio, fay for the NominaU opinion : And wbiz Cijeun laith againft the Scotifts. (By which Scotiltsthefenfeof Univocation, ^Equivocation, and Analogy, is a little more fubtiily opened, then M'!(,. doth out of his Deans Chair.) BjtthcQueftion thati ipeakto, is onely bow farre Intelligere, VcUc and Jgere, may be Attributed to God. z. And for the diftribution of iAmltgi, and the fenfeof Analogy, I think, it will be long ere the Chair-men are agreed. !M.(U' r;//):out of R.ufc/0 faith, Univocumoppemfoliaquivoce, nonvero AttjUogo, ^ denomi-nxtivi: quiiUnivocum jehibetii aquivxum ftcu:Unum ii Miilu : Unum mum pro-friefoliinmultUtpponituf: (ebihet mtem ii Amlognm tsf derominitivum , tam^uitn vilruifuperi'Miifui inferiori: ^^iiUmvocumtliuiejl p.irum.iUui eft non purum.- Sou pxrum eft am AmUgum, aut Denominitiv-im- HMum fupcrJKS xuum oppor.itur juk in-jcrionbta : liique Vnivoium non opponitur tA^ulogo (^ Devomuutn'o ; fed ah ^Anilogo diiiinguitur unquim Univ9cU'n pur.nn , IS" i 7)enomtnJUivo VnivO' cum quiidititivum , feu illud quod eii (^ prJidiatum Vnivocum (^ Univoce prx-iiatur O:hersinnume-atee/inj/o^4*with tbeHo'nonywiijditlmft from Sjnonima.

Gulcnim (who fpeaks largely of it) gives this diltribution, Lcxic-Th:lof.p.ioo. I tfiink in fitter terms then MrJ^endal. "^

Q^roprii .- ut Bus, bomm,principium,7uuuri, mottcs, Sec'

Aiuugi I ant y r Attribmonetxntim: ut [inum ii Ardmil i^ weiiU'

*^ i'lmpropmJ^"''^'"'^- . «.. • i. • • v^

' \ Ttinjluifroponionc: Rijus, compantione bomnift (Sf

Buc

C»3

But 1 think poor contemptible J^eckermsn and 'Euri(rfiicits have better expi»Ifl« edanddiftribured HowcBjrwjiand ^«j/(jg4, then all that ever I had t<he hap to be acquainted witt, no: exoepcmg the fubtilkft Scotifts. j. A$ for the application hereof to our Queftion, Iftiilaffimj That the thing which the word [Knowledge] is Ipoken of, in Ood, is not only mofe eminently and psrfediy in him then the Creature^ but is only in him, and not in the crea:ure at all: And the thing which the word Knowledge is fpokcn of, ordoih fignihe in man, is no: at aWforinAliter in Gii, bu: there is in him fomerhiag of an Infinite, trant'cendenc Excellency above it, which makes it afclcfs j and in God it wou'd be Imperfcdi-on : And therefore it may be fai J to be in God eminenter nenfomiJiliter: The word [Knowledge] is firft ul'ed to Iignifie the knowledge of man : It is tranfiired to prefs to us that Incomprehenfiblepertedion of G:J, which we cannot otherwise conceive cf or cxpref*. Yet when eva-we make ufc ot;he term, we cannot by i: our felves attain to a conception, p Iriveand true, of any higher thing then fuch knowledge as our own, wi;h fome ne^a:iveadii::uns, for removal ct the Imperfections} as that it is Infinite, c>"f fo thac man can have no true pofi:ive Conception of the Nature ot t'h^t which i^ God we call Knowledge : Only he appre-hendeth it to be fomewhat like that which in man is ca.led Knowledge. But Like is not the fame. Asg^ef/c?.7»s cut of rijiot.luoiA tJi dvuKzyx non funt cucy.in. p.milia Amlogunon [unt cjufJcmgcnerti: non funt euicm gcnerc. It is therefore a proper fpeech to lay [Knowlcdije is nor in God] and proper to fay, it is in man : But yet it is a nece.'aiy Ipcech to fay [Godknows] bccauic we have no fiuer ex-prcflion for thac pj.Kfticnof God, which we lb call. t/Jquin. de Vcrituc »Vjfer. x'l* .il^ I. faith, Et qiiii r.iilU Kj.nofignifiiiu per tpfum nomen definit ipfum Vcian, mtUum nomcn i nobis impofitum cji propns mmcn qus -, [cd cjl proprie (.ruturx ^ux de-fmtur ritioue figmfica^a per nomcn: Et umen ijis nomim quje funt Creitunrum nomitu VmttribuuntttT fccundum quedin (^rejturh jlqui fimiliiudo qm nprefentjuur. The third Opinion which he there rejecteih is. That Knowledge is attributed to God Metaphorically, as Anger is j againil which he oppufcth his fourth, Et ideo ilitir dhtndum eft, quod fcientU T>eo ittrihuti figmjicst iltquid quid in Deo c^ ] As if thcie might not well conhit ! Evena Metaj^horical expicflTun doth cxpreUe fcmething that is in God, though i: exprtfle it bu: Metaphorically. And in '^lu.undecims, he hath no better anfwer to the fifth Objediou, which is drawn from l_the greater diltance between G^dandus, then between En.t ^ru/Mm^ now Ekj] then this, Ai ^"* Sken?ttm,ixodEnxi^ mnEntiiltquid (ecundum xmlogijLm ceKcmt: quod if-fummile^isinsb'Jcei^^iciturEns : ut dicitur in 4. CMeupb. Vnde mc d:ftuutid qux cHintcr ereAturjm t^"Deujn communiutcm xmlqgue Lmpcdinpetcjl. If the Analogy bctw/cen GoJs Aifts, Knowledge, Will, and ours, b?no nearer then between E«j jCT" van ens, I'u.-e it is not fuch as you imagine, and here esprcfs. And coutn Getiil. i:i.c\i. he confclTeth, thjtm ow:/no»x/?ici natfis i/^Ox^iu>irMnJ id tnsdum fiijundt im^j^^io in.eniturqux Vcanoncmpctit, qusmiii res figfuu iLjuo ncdt c^^iiacntt ^CQcoT'Cr.l-it. Now/t/rc,icJre,^J;cVc,a .etcraVs pccpcrV/ fir.ed only to m«ni iir^perfed Modeof.Kncw1ig,Wir:ingjA*fi.,vg.anii do a3ord us'no pciiti^c Cer.ceptiin oTany oth^T:ro that if wecoulJ dtvife 'qim: f^enja wLjuh did cotuptchendGyds ads_i»-y^^ and TBini:)^perfe^i,3iEns docH fubiua,cc andAccidyBt>Yc: ih#. (juAiVnot bcKnow-ledgcorWiU: For thefe a. c the proper names of the (7c»»*/5ipi."r/iii?j«.- As if you fhould fay, SubilMtueli A:iide'4s,.\ certain kindc of CoL;i2*t:!Kn;ion at the Creature God hathj whofe Natu.-c be:>5g to us u;ikn9vta,tb^ ptcpc; Dj'nviiiiuikivwn too^ and therefore Vve arc fain :o cill it bv the prrper nam: of nuns co.nprchenr

G (Ion,

C?4]

fion, i.e. Imclleftion and Science. And all Divines confefs, that as to the order of knowing, and fo as ro the name wc mul^ fii ft begin with the creature, to whom the name is firft appliciblc. So j4quinM contr* Ocntil-l.i.c j J. •^ucxre-tus ilifi inDcicognitioncmpfrvcttmui, rcsvtmitntim dc'Dco (^ AliU rtbm diHorum, per priiu iji in Vco fetundum fuum modum ; fed ratio nominif per pojlcrtus: unde (^ "*■ mivari dicttitr i fuis ctufstif. So Goclaiita Lcxic. Philofofb. dc vAvalog. Duo fujit di-[lingucndi i 7iimirumrcs ipfjepcr vomiva Jigmficitt, (^ nomimim tmpcptit. y,d res ipfm quod attinct, priutcxdcTDcoprjedtcuvtur, quam de crcaturii. Atq.ie bit propni trdocft (y cohvenicritia, quimhibcutcrcdturaai Ticum-, cujus erdtvit ciufa dicuniur ■uominx Ando'Jce deDco (^ deCrcMurii pndicni. <^od vcro attvict ai uomitmm 'Ritioncm(^ Impnfitioncmpriui iU uomiKibtcs uppdUu juiriint res trcdU qiiim Vcus. '^uircquoddicimia iiulogiceprxdie'rinosiinxdc Dee (s" dc CrcAturii, quiaprius de Vco quim dc GrciturU : dc \AvAlogiA rculi fcii (edindntn rem, nQH autem (ccutidum no-minis ntioncm intelligcnium cfi. Zincbj' hath :hc fame words, whole they are firft I know not. How fi: a fpccch tJ js is, de rhialogiu rexli, I leave to others to judge: but all grant that the Name is firft applied to I lie Crcatuic, and ihcncc to God, Now all this holds ot meer M.taphorical (xprcfllons.

To ufe Burgcrfdicius diftiibution, I yield that thefc names applied to God and the Creature, aie not Homovymx k Cii(u, (fuch as ^'quinx/s cont GcnJi/.H&z/ap.cxprer-leth his meerxquivocaU to be) hm a covfilio. But whether the Rxtio Homojijmi^ htinRcbiu, or in vohii , is not colic certainly to determine, 'i^cci^crnun laith, ^mbigui cxfimilitudine cov.ccptta cfi, cumrcbtutoto gcmre divcrfis, M T)co (^ Crea-turif, idemncmcntribuitur ex cognxtioneqiiam mens format. Mimirum intcUccfus »o-fier utcffentiiCf opcraticjiefinituscft, itiinJjTiitue Dcirutun i^ attributis concipicndit non cjl proportienatiis , atque idcircoinVco mhilconcipit dtnclc, fed oblique tx fimili-tudine quidim, (^ imjginc rcifinitx tavquam ohjcBifibicovgruentif. Htuc a nobis Deo (^ attributis ejus voces certtt, propria acdinci^c intponi nequrjcrunt, fed ifidircclx tan-turn, homovyma, (ycxfimilitudineeiqux7)cui7iobisrepra(eHfaturincrcaturis tanquam effe^is, qutercprafcntatiovxlJcimpcrJccfx cjl- Nomc« jchova, i.e cxijlcniif,fibt ip^ impofuit Veui, at vos ncid quiJcm dirccJeconapimtcs: reUqnaxutem quje Vco tribuimtts, ut mifcriiordtam, ^iijiitixm, 8cc.' cjufmoJi vocthus exprimimm qux dircHe impofitx funt virtutibuihomimimfignificandis, tndirccfe dutcm ad Veum pertinent, quatcnui nos tiles in 'Deo virtutesfimtlitudine exrum qiix in homtntbtu funt virtutum concipimta. Vnde von minus pie quatftfcitcCyriUui , inbii qux dc Deo dicuntiir, Maximx fcientia eft Ig-Korantiam confiteri: ei?^ Auguftinus, 'Leoi, inquit, magnut cfl , fed fine quantitatc. Bonus, fed fine qualitate .• ut vera i nobis magnum fine qiiantitate, benum fine qualitatc dircBe dj'plcnd cetuipii cji impojibile, &c. Et Julius Scali-^cr, IS^uUis, ait, vo-cibtu tdm pUhe "Deum fignijicimm, quam its quje Jgurantixm nojiram prx-tendunt.

But fuppofc it be granted, that the Kxtio Homo7iymia is not only j« nobis, fed in^ rcbui, thequcftion will remain, Whether it be ob inaquxUmgeneris attributionem,or on\y ob fimilitudinem, vclmutuxmrcrumadfeinviccmbxbitudincm? and fo be Tropical ?• Mr. I^. aflertcth the former ( under the name of Analogy of Attribution.) The Scotifts have long dcfcrMled their Dodors Aflertion, that Den lion eJiJngenere. t^id.Vah.Viyemin. Phyf. Scot.Theorcm, q6. his Vindication againft Greg. Arimi7tcnfis and Xacconius: and many others oftbena have done this at lar^e. So doth lViclilcff.\n his Trialog.

And if this bold, then nothing can be attributed to God and the Creature by this Analogy, pit intqudcm geiterU attributioum. Yea Aquinas himfelf oft faith,

CJ51

Veuivtuefiingenere (isSxrnantes nota) «"» i.p.q.j.a.f. ci;'i.d.8.q.4.a.i.5'». 6* i.cont/jejit.c.z'). though after in j.ic To««tMq.7.a.j. rf^ir/t. Coruedit Vcum efic Centre fubilinti<e reductive : which Scotut refuteth. So Ejliut in i^Sem. d.'J. §. 10. dcnkth God 10 hcinuUogC7iere. And 5 JrruMW hath no more to fay for it in bis Conciliation (fi^.M ) then this, Ejfeingcnere fiat dupliciter: prtmonodout pursfubjeciivacontenttiiniUogcncrc: Et fic mgitttr Deume^cingenere. Secundo mo-do, utfnncipiamContincnsiflumGc'ntct: Ethoc modoDcmpcr tpproprutionem eft in Gcnerefubjlantia. f^id.Gib.)iic\.\.Sait.dift.^ q.i. But this is not for God to be in gcwcrc, but for that CrCiw to be in God.

Ai Burgerfdtciua ia'nh, Omnium lengiffme i Sjnonymis abfunt htmoitymd A df'** duxqi ciufam bemojijfmue bibcnt in nobifrpreprius adlynonymorum lauirxm ncceduntTropu ea,M impnmii Anulogaat omnium proxime qua ambtguafunt eb tnitqudlcm attributtouen. That thcfe words are not Ipoken of God and the creature uttivoci all of us agree,and the Schoolmen have fully evinced. Alfo that they arc not [^oVcn pure aquivcce.svc are alio agrecdjand the faiJ Schoolmen have evinced (as particularly ^quin.fn (urn. dcVerit.ubi(up. by many Real'ons : And Zinchiiu de HMuta Pe/borrows many of them.) But which of the otlitr kiudes of homonymy they belong tOj is I'hc doubt. Mr.I^. thinks that which of all other is the ncarert to fynonymy : I think not fo : but rather to the Tropical or Analogical, Itridly fo called, that \s,velproptcr [imilitudinem fimplicem, vcl proportionem (if not fome of them, to thofe that have the Ratioiicm homonymix in nobU ) ^icchxus faith (5W«ip/;,/. i.c.6.) Ego vert maUcmijU>nAnilogiimrifirre ai prsporiiondiUtif Anxlogium , non !MeU' phoricam ilUm {quomodo videre attnbuitur oculo (^ mentt) fed propriam, quomodo prin-cipiumdtcitur dccordc, (^funhmcniodomwi. So he difclaims Mr. K.'* Analogy of Attribution; If the thing be not utterly uncertain to us, who know fo little of Gods nature. Bu: that wc may venture on a conjefture, I Ihould ra:her fc: the Creature at a greater diftance fio.ii God then they do ; anJ thiik that thefe Attributes arc all Tropical, fomcwhat Metonymical, but moltly Metaphorical. I never law (in Jquinat or any other Schoolman that fpokc for it) any cogent Rea-fon to prove, iha Iutclhgcre, Vclle, Agere, tAmurc, are attributed to God in any Oihtt kindcihcn K(minilci,GMidcre,Od;obdberc, Irafci,8cc. Only a gradual difference, I eafily acknowledge, v/^. That/nJcI/f^creiT" Tc/Zc having lefl'e Imperfe-Sion, have therefore lelTeimprop.iety. And wJio knows not that thire is a wide difference of this fort among Mctaphoi s, lome being very near, and lomc fo farrc fetcht, as tobe Ca:achrettical Durindutimh {in i.fcnt dift. ^<\. q. a) HuUwn nomen ittribuimus Deo nifi ex Crcxturi* ; uon enim ponitnut noraen niji rel quam tntcUi-gimtu } (^ quunonintcUigimus eum, mfiexcrcMuris, (jy Ur.tum quantum conduii-musexcreMurif, ideonullum nomen inipommus Deo mft ex creuturii, (ff qtiJ.nt:im ii :/Zi, c^itXCondudimusconvenireDcoixcreiturii: conjUtautcm quod non omnii nomim qu.t attribuimus'Deodicuntur dccotriHjhtiv;(^mi.tdpb6r!ce,&cc. Solum autetn illu uomi-m dicuntur de Deo tranjlitive (^ mcupborici quxfi'^nifiaut fpcciiles qu ddiutes rerum creMSrum: velperfcSiioncs fecnudum modun creuturii convcmentcm, ut Leo, Agnus, Sentirc,S(.c. •^/a resfignifcatuper bac ntmtm non cjl in Deo, fed altqu^ ejm fimiU' tudOfUtfortitudo.mJinfuctudo, (^ cognitiofinguUrturn, qu£ in nobis pertinet ad jc:\[um. But I would fain fee it proved, That IvteUtgerc, Fc'.'c, Agere, do not as properly {\gn\&c perfect tones fecundum modum Qraturii convcnientcm, as fentire doth ? And when wefay/cgcrc"j^«^«jat, Huduation is no more proper to the motion of the waters, thtn IntcUigerc, Velle, Agere, are to theperfcftions and adion of man, or other rational creatures And whereas th 17 fay that the terms are applied to

G i God

C;63

God, with a Remoiion of the Impelfcdions which thqr imply in us, I anfwer, So they msy fay of ihofe lower terms, wliicb they conftlic to be Miraphorical, only allowing a gradual difference of irpropriciy. Nor doth it follovr therefore cbat iheic i$ notruih in thcfc cxprcfluns of God, or that they arc no helps to our knowledge of him, ov means of dcmonlfraticn. For Metaphors are not as pure cquivocals : There's lomc cowmon rcalon in the fimilitiidf, though in the hrft and proper fcnfe the name be proper to one. When wc lay, Scgctes flu&uam, wc ciprefle not only Motion, \vherein both a^rce, but a njotion of the Corn like that of the Water. I think, as I faid before, that it is no more proper to call God Scitntcm, Volemm, Agintewtt then to call the Firmament.a Nut-fticll, bccaufc both fcem to have a convexity or conciviry, or contain fomeihing clfc within, (3'c. Ortocall the Simnc Kf^n/e, or a creeping thing, became it moves, and fo do' creeping things : or then i' ii proper to call Knowitdgc, Light, or to put Viic9 ior Inttkigi (as Ml X-c:ils God the fountain of Light before.) The >cripture faithjGci if Light: yet I think this wilt becalily confeifed a Metaphor: and I think n \% hut Mcuphvraprufttrquior, to fay. Dew ItacUtgit, Vult, Agit,Sic. And this I judge after long coniiJcration of what >4^JMiii hath faid, l-f-i4-4.i.&'^. i^.i. i. iff ikhi: and many othei Schoolmen totheiikc pu-po(e.

Shall I adde one Argument forthe Nega ive (that i: is no: by Analogy'of Attribution, that Knowlcd^ej Will, Power, (s^'c. are attributed to God and the Creature J asEtw is to Subftancc and Accident) Ai hominem fpecially ? That Knowledge which is "he fame thing with Will and Power, cannot be the one of the AnaJociates wi:h our Knowledge winch is not the fame ; in this kinde of A-i\^\ooyj ob ir^x!iuikmgeneriidiftribuxjemm : (fuppoling Knowledge to be the Gt-KKA Avalogum.) Bur Gods Knowledge is maintained by thofethar I difpute with, to be the fame with liii Will and Power) many fay, they differ but dtrwminitione extrinfech) Therefore; (ir'c- For the proof of the wj/or, confidcr; Elfc on the fame grounds [Power] might be thus analogically fpokcn of Gods Knowledge and mans Power : For where there is no difference in the Thing, there needs to be none in the Name, a^ reqirlue from the Nature of thcThing (but only from fomeextrinfick refpeft or ufe ) But Power may not Analogically be fpoken de Poseflite hiimanj, at (cicntiu.divivii Ergo, Sec. Common realon and ufe of fpeech confirms the WJHOr, It fccms therefore to be evident truth, that as it is from fi-militude, or feme Tropica! rcfptd, that Gods Immanent afts, have divers names, ra'.hc: then one alone : fo is it from the lame rcafon that they have thefe particular names, rather then other ; And confequently that thcfe names are not jivJLlogiineiiuilis Attr tbutioniiiiuur A communis i bat Anulegi Proportionk, or Tropical. Dursndud (infent.i.difi.i q.i.) faith, Alix ejl opinio qiix miht vidctur v€-rior, viz. quod dtfiinSlio attributorum, fecundum ritioncmntn potejt ftimt, nijipcrcem-pjintionmiialiquamrcalem divcrfititem aciu exijfcntcm m crciturisy vcl poJfibiUm. ^uod prob.i .ficTuffcrefitidiyuonii, iiifi fiifdlfat^viia, licet fit compkuic xb tntd-IcHu, eportct timen quod hjbeat fundimentum in re r fed diferentix mtributorum fccutt' dnmrttionem Mnpotefihiberc(ujicicnsfunUmcntum innatuTA divint tbfolute acccptUf vifi comparetur ad reilcm dtverfuatem qua in creuurii rfl, vcl cffepotcji, ergo diffcrer.ttA Attrihutorumdiviiiorumfecnn.iumritioncm, nonpoteBvcri fumi nifi per compiritioncm gdcreatur/K. Major pdtct: rxtieenim, qunmintelleciid format,nifi fundetur aliqualiter in rty ficfa eft iff vnn, & c Vtde reltq.

I will only adde the wor is of Burgcrfdiciiu Metaphyf I. t. f. 8, §. i. fcquunturcit (titribuu) qua craturk coMvmiicm pofie diximus, faltem y^ dvaiSo'^laM : qua

umm

tdmen dvalogkvDv iniff s TXianrihutU, fed in if [mm (f(Bu pre tpcrat'mihui 51.'*-rnida cfi. %_am cum attnluta ivfrha. fun, aquc dtque tpfd Da cfatUA, & attribute mommumabilia , vulUm kakut itm crcatmii a.v&Ko-)'iajv , mp tt fttii cptmUovtltis area ohjcSij. Crcata (^ fiita. Afp'.y this to Iremanent

Ads.

§. 8. Mt.lC-p3g.94TF Fore ki^wkigeh ^6i avd the (^TCiture be vot mivocally the famet A offurclytkcyarer.ct, then is ibh f ere h^v.ovfledge attrdutcd to Gei tmAtheCrcitttrt, either Eqiiiioedlijr cr yinalcgialy : If Equnccal'y, ibc7i hath tbt fore- timrvlcdgc of god and the Crature only the fume Nunc: But that is not fo ; for God, I hopr,forc-lincwi Off xruly s^ the Creature, and the Craturc may [omettma truly fore-knew. So that here if more then a nominal agreement betrvccn Gods and the C^d' tures fcrc-k^Gwlcrgc. It remains therefore that this jore\nowledge be attributed ro God and the Creature Analogieally: but ii ibis Analogie either of Proportion or jittribu-tion f If of Proportion, ihcn cither God or the Creature it (aid to forc-l[ncw, but cu thcr Metaphorteatly or ^ctoiymteally. If only Metaphoricalij j / pray vehicb of tbcrn h but (Mctiphoriciliy (aid tojcre- ^wcw ? Not the Creature, &c. jind furcly much IcfS maj god be only !Metaphcrical!y (aid to fore- \r.cr0 the(e, and all oiher things thai fjall come t« pafinaUJgcs. If only ^Metor.ymic ally, as (ome things arc [aid to be baltby, bceaufc they have thefii^fs of fanity m them, (I am told to life the Boyes inftancc in this ca[e) Is ciihcr God or ike Crcattire cnly Metovymically [aid to fore fincve ? Not the Creature, &c. Not G<rd, for he ts the Author of our fore- l{i\ovfledge : and therefore though his efjevcc be 9iot tbefubje^ of bis fore- {mw ledge, icr his fore linotrlcdge an Accidcrd of bis 'liature, yetisbejaid to fore linowrvitbout being beholden to any futh poor Trope for it. It rejls therefore that fore f{iuwledgc is attributed to God by more then xbii Analogic of Propor-cisn, and ccnfcqucrtly iy thjt of Attribution Ncrt> I demand vchieh if the famoCus ~ Analogatum > Qods jorc-finoitvlcdge, cr the Creaturesi ri^cfiionicJSgods: there be-ing infinitely greater Caufc to fct the Cromt en Godsfore^llKorrlcdge, then en that of the Creatures, then thercis to fet it on [ubjiatice rather then acerdent. If fo, Sec, then onward, flf Analogarum per fc pcfitmn lUr pro tamffiori Analogato, fo true fore-fi^nowledge mentioned ly it [elf, tnuft alrr,<ycs be eonfirued of the ere l^iiovclcdge Ipf God .• andtbereforefore-ftnowledgeiimolt properly attributable to God. And thus being KOVff Willing to refign my place, Hxc fufficiam pro nunc.

§. 8. R. 5. f F I had once dene with you, 1 would take heed of dealing with a Chair-•^ man again in halle, for your fake : tor I finde I run upon a great difad-vantage. For ihe credit of I'uch mens underftandings is fo great with themfclvcs atlealt, that they need no Argument, but their bare affirmation 10 carry the Caufe. Your fole Argument [jic dico'] doth put me harder to itj then if you had many : For what to fay to thiSj I do not well know. Difpiuc againft it, 1 cannot; and to fetmy Negation againlt your affirmationj will not do, till we ftand on even ground.

I. Aquinofde verit. and many another Schoolman (and 24«c^/out of them) might have helpt you to more cogent Arguments, againll meer equivocal denomination. When you fpcak of Gods fore-knowing, as [trwly] that word [truly]

C38]

IS either oppofcd to/«^«d and fdlf(, or to improperly: that in God which the term [forc-kaowlcdgc] iio:h denote, isTrw/yia him, and him alone, but that which the word £forc-l£nowlcdje] doth properly and primarily fignifie, is not in God.

1. 0\x:Rjihbi% (as you call them46<z/r9 with a fmile) do feem to us punies, to make a fuller dilliibation then you ; as 1 have before (hewed : and therefore wc take yours to be defedive, and confcquently your reafoning void ; I have told you of divers that plcafe me better.

3 How greedily did I rcade on, and follosv you at the heels, to fee how you proved that it is not fpokcn of Go; Meraphorically > and when 1 come to the bu. iinefle. What's the pi oof ? Why you fay [lurclymuch lell'e may Gjd be onely metaphorically faid to foic-know.] You pailc your word on ic ; A'ld this is the knotty Argument that I cannot aniwcr, bccauic I am not of .your Itanding in the Univeifity : A little more of the Univerdty would have done me no harm (as you fay) when I am to deal with this kinde of Argument.

4- Our Tutor Burgerfdieim told us, I remember, that inateriitropls non minut cjl homou/mijslocM, qusm in Metaphora. And therefore Metaphorical and Mitony-mical, are no: a fuflicicnt enumeration.

J. Do not think ever'the worfe of your felf for ufing the Boyes inftance : for

(as you hare partly falved your credit by intimating that you are above it, fo)

Aquinof, Scotus, and moft of the Schoolmen that I have read, befides ZAmhiua,

■and many another of our great Divines, do make ufe of the fame inllancc ; And

to play with this bigger fort of Boyes, is no fuch difgrace to you.

6. Here I meet with a thing that runs in the form of a Reafon : [tor he is the Au'.hor of our fore-knowledge] therefore he fore-knowcth no: onely Mctonymi-caliy. I confelTe the Conclulion is true > bu: I fee not the reafon of the confe-quence. As I remember a Metonymy of the effcd is , when the cfticicnc is fignified by the name of the cfti.d, either by a Verb, as pillct pro tnetuiti or an Adjcdive, amtrspaUidii ot a SubiUntive, as fccluspro fcdcjio (I purpofelychoofe the Boyes examples, as beft bekemingme.) Anal liavc heard men often call Mr.Nir/;.^uri, VifcolUminium, and the limple Cobler; And the Author of that Comedy, by the name of /gHcrJwiw. I confeile it is a good Argument [Heisthe Author of our fore-knowledge , therefore he hath fore-know-\e.i.^ccminenter, or fomewhat that is more excellent then fore-knowledge.) But I dare not fay, that G jd hath formally in himlelf whatfoever he is the Author of. For he is the Author of Nutrition, Augmentation. Comp'ilition, of Sorrow, of Fear, of Hell, of Worms, Toads and Vipers. But it was the former (the Metaphorical Denomination, and alfo that of Itrift proportion, which lomc dill inguifh frem the Metaphorical) which I had hoped you would have difprovcd. But I mult take what will be had.

7. You think you plead for the Glory of the Divine Majcfly, when you tell us he need not be beholden to a poor Trope. As if we fhould dilpute, whether the Sunnedo creepas reptf/ii do ? and I fay, Yes, Metaphorically; and you will ftand up for the honour of the Sun, and fay, we debafe it j and that it doth creep without being beholden to a poor Trope for it : Or if the (^^dtion were, Whether the Sunnc be a Vegetative,or fendtive creature i* and I lay. Yes, Metonymi-cally : for it caufeth Vegetation and fenfe. And you will fay. It is Vegetative without being beholden to a Trope. What a Patron is he of the honour of man-kinde, that will prove that he is a Worm^ a Beaft, Nothirjg, and his life a fha-

doWj

C3?:

dow, a dream, a\yeavers ftimtle, without being beholden to a poor Trope ! Yet arc tbefeunfpcakably neaver^ then the nameiot man and his afts, to God: for interfinitum (ff infijiitum nulla eft proportio. ;,,; ;:.ij

8. You conclude that the /_'»ic^Ki v4Wi:/ogJ<«w, is Gods fore-knowledge, your proof is [Queltionlefs it is lo ;] Asftiongasthe reft. But, when I look tur« ther I finde lomewhat likea Realon : [there being Infinitely greater caule to fee the Crown on Gods fore-knowlcdgej^'rr.] My dread of Gods moft facred Ma-jefty, forbiddeth me tofct on him lucha Crcwnof Vanity. As if the Sun mtsll bcihcjamofiui j^iulogatumivtcr Rcptilia, becaufe the Crown of [Creeping] mult be fct on its head 1 What if we Aiould yield to you, that the term [Knowledge, Will, Adion,(i'c.] bcin-^ fiift Metaphorically applied to God, that yet it is partly Analogical quoad nitsqualcm Generis attributtonem, the term exprefling (though impvoperly as to one) a Nature common to both ? It would not yet follow, that here the more noble fort, even Divine Knowledge, ^c. were the famo-fitcs tAnalogatum: For though it be moft excellent and uncxprcflibly glorious in it lelf, yet the term agreeing firft with the lower, even humane Knowledge, therefore that is thefamofiui t/Jnalogatutn , as being the thing molt famoufly and noto-rioufly meant by that term. It you ask. Whether the Sunne do gliiVcn (as Glowworms, or rotten wood) ov do Rutilare or Candere f It you fay. Yea} yet I think the Sunne here isnot the/4MJo/?»j/^?«/o|;jtH»J, though the light which this word intendeth be more eminently in the "iim, then in the other things.

You conclude, thsc [true fore- knowledge mentionrd by it Telt, muft alwayes be undcrftoodotthe fore-knovvledc,c of God.] 1$ that i'o indeed ?

1. Why thcndo the Schoolmen generally acknowledge, thatthe names are all firft applicable to the Crcatuie, though the thing be moft excellently in God?

2. Then, it fecms, it isno: a ftri(ftly proper fpcech to fay [Man knows, or fore-knows, or Wils, oracleth:] for noneof the Howow/mi, are fpokcn of both, in ftrid propriety.But it ycu would undeitake to prove, that God may in as ftrift propriety be faidto Know, Will or Ad, asman is, there are many that would undertake to prove the terms Univocal : which in moft Divines Judgement, would be to prove, that man is God ; an opinion, which our new world in the Moon (m AngUa lunatica) have very confidently imbraced of late years.

In a word, Sir, my thoughts of man, and his Ads, Knowing, Willing, arc folow, and my thoughts of the Infinite God, fo high, orataloiTe, when I go about to have any pofitive, true apprehenfions of his Nature, that I conceive you and I can no more tell what that is in Gcd which we call Knowing, Willing, A-ding, then my Horle can tell what Realoning or Dilcourfe is ih me, or thereabouts. And yet I be'ieve that the Knowledge of God is eternal Life too, vi^,. Now (as to the beginning) to know that there is a Gcd, and that there is fome-ivhat in Him which mans Knowledge, Will, Goodncfs, Juftice, (ir'c. have fome exceeding, low, diftant rekmblanceof, and which we cannot better apprehend or exprefs then under fuch notions, and by fuch terms J it being yet in it lelf of more unconceivable excellency. And though I know the Schoolmen are confident (without proof) ihaSeire, FcUc,Slc. dotxpreisno Imperfedion, but only Modal, and therefore may be applied to God (whixh I conjedure will alfo be your Argument) yet I do not believe that Allcrtion. Comparatively to lower or equal Creatures, it may be faid, that it is notlmperfedion, which they exprefs. Buc

abfolutely.

abfolutcly or comparatively as to Gai, it is Imperfcdjon : Noton'y feme acci-^ dcni oz i\[oiM, batthcv\;ry thing exprcft by thsk terms, is Imperfcd: Ehe the Creature ilull have fomcching equal :o God, ani fo be G )d. Ani it it were but aMjdal Impcitcdioii > yc: when the tcrni doth Itrid'.yanJ properly cxprcfle that Impcrfeifl vWoiw i: felf, as well as the Thing, then thi cerm cannot bs applied to God any nearlicr then Tropically. K'lowlcdgeiWill, Aclio:!, ani all the tei'ms fiucJtooian, arc fo itriclly ficted to cxprefs the humane Mode, as well aj that which you leparace in your ln:elle<S, and call pcrfed, tha: iicanno: b,* applied to one without the oihcr, bu; abufivcly or tropically j No more then [cet-pinj^] is applicable to the fwifc motion of the Sun, when the term doth intimately liJnific the llownefs and Mode of the motion, with the motion it telf.

Goi forbid that I ihould doubt, whether that in God be Pjrfed, which wc call Kiowlcdge, Will, AdioH : Bjc svhat it is that under thefe names of infiarcly remote h:nilitude we do expralSjWhat earthly man can tell? Became I believe Gods Xmmanen: aAs to be perfctfl, therefore I believe them not to be the lame thin^ thac mm apprchendcth under thefe terms.

Oh that frail man were more acquainted with his Norhingnels '• then would he not dare fo to lift up himfelf incompiiiloii with his Maker ! Then would not theChriiUan world for Co many hundred years have been filled with 'Quarrels a-bout unfearchable Mylleriesj and the great Divines of the Church, be the great Dividers of the Church by voluminous contentions, and cenforious, uncharitable, zealous emulations about Godsfecrcts : They would not have fattened upon utter uncertainties, and things unrcvealed, and then have lliled their fancies [the Orthodox Dodrine] and reproached or quarrelled with thofc that weredilienters. The world would not have been altogether by the ears about things that they know no more then a bcall knows what is he loal of man ; fuch as many of the Schoolmens writings are, and moft of thoie points in which the Connovcrlies between the Arminians andanti-Arminians, thi Jeluites and Dominicans, are ultimately refolved ; Yea, and your Academ cal Chairs would have been better im-ployed r and then God would not have been fo provoked againll them: Nor (hould I have n;eded to fear that your Chair is coming down, while I leadc here that you are coming down i nor have cauie to falute you fo fadly at your defcent, as fearing a future vacancy of your reiigned place.

§ 9. Mr.K. Pag. TSfejM now/<?cw^it:5i/r.Bix:er/iifl!?, tboui,h nottuttfvfjr this Argu-i ment) or any other, yetto detnH fomcx9h.ttfrimtheReput/itiimo/-lht Condujion, tbit there cm be no nerv Imminent act in Goi, but j.11 ire Eterual.

§• 9-

H. 3. np'Ofeign a wrong e»dto amans ipecches, isuhu'lythc way to fatten JL on them a falfe ani alien fcnfe. I therefore who a't> better aeq^^n?-cd with my own End and meaning then M-.I^. is (as well as ha knows me, by looking through his Profpedive Glafs from Cornrvcll to h^UlcrmiiJfuy) thai! better acquaint others what was my meaning in the words, which he fattens on. And this is the true and plain Analylis of my words.

Havingalfirmed Jnltifi-C^tion tobe a traniient ad, and tbSt,therefore the Inception

C4i]

ccption of it argueth no mutation in God, I was forc't to meet with the opinion of D'Tw//?, wiio takes it to be an Immanent Ad, and therefore if it ftiould begin de novo, it would argue a change in God. (Not fpcaking of that » fort Cenfcientia.)

Thefc two Conclufions therefore I took as certain) and neceflarjr to be held of every knowing Chrilf ian.

I. That God doth not change.

z. That God doth not pardon or juftific mea from Eternity j (no nor from the time of Chiifti death') and therefore that he doth in time ]uftifie and forgifC men, even when they believe. Thefc two Conclulions being Certain and neceffary, 1 take the later as alTauhcd by D.TwiJ?-, who thereby would make them feem inconliilent.

His Argument is, Juttification and Rcmiflion are Immanent Afts, therefore from Eternity. To this lanfwer, i. Bydenyingthc Antecedent: For I had before ihewed, that they are Ti anhcnt ads, and what Tranfient ads they arc. 2, Having prcmilcd, that no ads arc Immanent in God Pofitively but oncly Negatively (as i'cW/cr fpcaks i) I anfwered. That many doubt svhethcr Immanent ads are any further Eternal then Tranfient ads (which I will open anon when we come to ir:) and therefore that this is not a mattei- of fuch Certainty as the Propolition oppol'ed is : and thereforcUncertainties muft be reduced to Cer-taintiei, and not Cetraimics to Uncertainties: q. d. 1 am fure God doth not pardon and JulHfic from Eternity from plain Texts of Scripture : But you are not fure that all Immanent ads are Eternal any more then Transient arc j Therefore if thefc two Proportions were as inconliftent as yeu imagine, yet I \vould rather hold the former, and let go the later, then hold the latter and let go the former. Here I fuppofed it objeded, that it is not to be endured that any fliould argue God of mutability: but the forefaid Dodrine doth fo : Therefore, dtc To which I anfwered, that there is no change in God : and they that do hold this opinion, do yet hold it is conliflent with Gods Immutability : and I gave two or three fhort touches of their reafoning : If you ask me, whom I mean, I anlwcr, ImcznLychctut, Tennottiu,Fran(ifcui n SMllaClsrs, and in part 5"H4rf^ and Bur' gcrfiiciut, inthe words which I (hall anon cite in bis Metaphyficks. And mark that I do not fay, that thefc plead for the Inception or Ceflation of Immanent ads: but that Immanent ads are new as Tranfient arc j that is, not qiiixi (ub-ftantiam tHa, but trJinfifionetn in objecfum extnncum. For here it is fuppofed, that it is not thofe Immanent ads, whofeobjed is God himfelf, which is fpokc of, but only thofe that arc about the Creature i Note alfo, that I never thought of owning this opinion ; but had ever owned the opinion of the Eternity o^ all Immanent ads i and fo farrc as the matter is difcernablcj do hold to it Itill: but I take the point in Queftion to be paft our reach > and therefone not of fuch Certainty, as to encourage us to rejed a plainly revealed truth, upon fuppolicion of their in-confirtency.

After this I returned to my firft Pofuion, and made it my full, final Anfwei', that RemiPaon and Juftificacion are Tranfient ads, an.d not Immanent, and that in this I had mcft Divines on my fide, though th',y did not ordinarily explain the Nature of this Tranfient Ad : which thereupon I more fully cxplain'd.

Thus, Reader, I have given the true Analyfis of all thefe words abonc Irama-cemads, which MrJ^. makes the occafion of bis quarrel vrith mc; and which

H he

[40

he Uycthfuch a heavy charge on. And, I think, if I had faid no more to himi but oncly given you this true Analyfis, it had been enough to fatisfie the impartial , and Judicious, and to free my words from that Tandy incoherence and rennefncfs, which (not underflanding them) he doth faften onthem in his charge j and to vindicate my felf from thofccorrupt intentions and errours which be intimates.

§. lO.

i^r.K. 'Clrjl, faith be, ABshave not tbercJpcH of tbctAijtmSi to its SuhjeSi, but It an effect toits uufe: Therefore new Immanent eAclsvciU not in ferre anal' terationinGod: Therefore,8cc.

To ihk antecedent, I anfveer, that no tASi U properly an cffeH, or relates at fuch »» tbeQaufc: the Aci Urxtlkr the Canfality then the cfeSf, at Mr. Baxter may plcafc tg learnfrom hk great 'DoHors in the uMctapbyjiciis, whom I thtnfi enough to name in general^ though he ufcth to quote them fo exaltly, as it were the Gbipter and vcrfe.

R. B.TF I have learning enou'h to underftand your meaning, you endeavour i» X thefe words to prove two Conclufions. The firft and principal (and I think, the whole fcope of your writing^ is, that I am Ignorant and unlearned. The fecond and fubordinate is, that Immanent Afts are certainly Eternal, or thac the change of them will inferre a change in God. The firft you prove by my Pc-(iantick citing of Jcfe/i/er and Burgcrfdiciua, the Boyes companions, and that as if they were Doftors in th^Metaphyficks, and that fo exadly, (^c. which you think it enough to name. To this I anfwer, i. Your Argument labours of two difeafcs, i. Obfcurity : which may make fome,that know you not, conjc&ure that yourdefign was fcacce honeft, which you fo carry under hand by intimations, whtn yet it feems the great Caufe of this your undertaking; For my part,I think you would never have mentioned my name here, but to this end. 2. Of Need-lefnefs: If youhad ftooped folow as to confult me in this bufinefs, and opened to me yourdefign, I could by three lines have faved you the writing of thefe leaves; but that's too late : But yet I may prevent your voluminous labour perhaps for the future, if Idoityct. Be it known therefore to all men by thefe prefents that I R. B. do confefs ray fclf ignorant and unlearned, efpecially compared with fuch as Mr. }^, and his ^eiiiia. HabetU confltentcm ream. What need you any more Witncflcs ? I hope now you may fave the main labour of your next writing.

Yet, let me tell you the reafon of my crime, a little more fully. I take'the common good to be thebeft. I have about thirty Ttadates of Metaphyficks by me (an ill workman, that needs fo many tools) and I value thefe two or .three Common ones which I cited before all the reft : and I think fo do the Schools that ufc them moft commonly. Nor do I fee any great reafon hitheto to take Mr.I^. for 3 more learned, authentick, unqueftionable Dodor in the Metaphyficks, then Suarex, Scbibkr or 'Burgerfdidua, as highly as I value him above my felf. Nor indeed did I ever before this, hear of his name (to my remembrance j) much USk of bis MetapbyGcal writings. Buc as foon as ever Mr.I^'s MetaphyHcks come

w

C4J3

to my hands, if I do not bow to them, ey vejiigiitsnti Tbilofopbi Alorire, th en let him call me an unreyeicnt fellow.

Now to your fecond bufinefs: Where, i. I might better have been undcrftood, if you had not left, out the fore-Joing words i [by Immanent, they muft needs mean Negatively, not Pofitively.] For by thij they chat fee all might have undcrftood that, X. It i$ Godj ads that I fpeak of, g. And you do out of your own brain, affix the Ergo, as if ic were mine, making that an Argument, which I there take as prefuppofed. The reft we will come :o anon.

§. II.

Wr.K. ''T^Hui when the Jircvffsnnj my hinds, the hating it not the effe^ i hut X. the HeM produced inmj hind by the fire. This hat now if tonfticrible threcr/iMncrof vffiyes. I JhiU not h»nour my Papers venh the nxme of Suarez /of thi4, butrcferremyRcidertifhebeayoungSehoUfi Minotfitiffiedinit, tohis Saihh uni Brcrcwood.

§. II. R. B. V^Et again ! You will make men believe that I am grown to fome Repu-X tation of Learning, when you think it neceflary to ufe fo 'many words, to prove me a frelhman. Is not one word of your mouth enough to blaft the reputation of lucha puny <*

§. li. Afr. K.rj/«&«r, i. Asitencrufeth, and in order to the higjbejl degree if heat, aid C fo it is called Motion, which is nothing elfe but the Terminus in fieri. Or 1. A stii received into the fubjeH, and [bit is called Pajfion, heating lt\e beating being A/s well talfCH ill a PsJJive fenfe as an altive. Or, j. At it is derived from the Agent, And fo it is called aSiion ; but this a&ion again U confiderabk trvi manner of rvaycs; Ei-tberlhyfically or Logically. Thyfically, andfo the^atient is thefubjeci of it: the heat whichundergoesthefefeveral denominations, being in my band, as rvjs fuppofed. i. Logically, andfothisa^ionisbutanextrinjecaldeHominatioH, and the Agent is the fubjcci •f if '• 'How tal^e it how you wiU, ABion ii an adjunSlj as denominating the agent, «a way an effect ik an aHion, &c.

§.11. R.B. I. •T'He word [EiFeft] is lometime taken for every thing that hath a A Being and a Caule, and foevery Adiwn is an Etfci^, as hiving i Being dependant on its Caufe: fometimeitis taken more reftrainedly, for that only which is permanent after the Adion, oris Eftlded by ir, and fo AcHon is not an EflFcft. x. The ufe of yourdiftribudon or dilHnftions to oui Dufinefs feems to me fo fmall, as that I know not well to what end you bring tl:-in torih. 3. The order of your dilHnguilhing I have no great minde to learn. 1 ihouli rather have diftinguifhed Logical and Phylical Adion, in the firft place^ had there been any ufe for it. 4, Bat your Logical adion we have noihin3 to fay to : N ?r ^m^^iikdelubfeSto prxdicationis. j. Yet I have no great dcliie of imitanng

H z you,

you, in calling th< Agenij the fubjcd ot tb€ «itrinr<c»l dcnorrination [r/^. A-dion.] It isyour Phyfical AAion, which is fo denominated: Though of the verbal predication [i^/i] I would willingly fay, thac the Agent is the lubjcft. 6. But it is your Phylical Aftion which we have now to do with: and that not as ii is iuTMjcntt, for fo it is PalTionj and not formally Aftion. Whether SctttiA ©pinion of a Real difference be true orirtot (which yet may have mote faiA for it then Tome fuperficial anfwercrs do take notice of) yet formally its like it will be oranted, that they are not the fame : And thereujrc you fliould fpcak of Aftion as Adion, Ut dicit cgrcftoncm (^ dcpcndentum ab igeute, and not as it fignificih Paf-fion, that is, Reception of Adion, and the effedof it : and fo the Patient is not tbe fubjed of Adion ; Nor do I believe it a fit fpeech to fay, that Calefadion is in your hand, though CAl«r be. But w« niuft bear you further y to how great purpose we (hall fee.

§. M-M'K. 1. \10vD tdke it koveyou voiU, Aclion U an adjunSf, gf denominating the i\ Jgent, -no ivay an EfeU, as an ABion. i. ^r dtth it carry thatftileinan/ of thejc learned Sophies, commonly quoted by Mr3iyiicx vpitb fo much reverence

R.B, I. oAyyoufoI is it an adjund as denominating the Agent, take it how v3 I will ? What if I take it, [as it is received into the Subjeft, and called PaflTion] which is your fecond fenfc ? Why faid yeu that your Logical A-dion was an extrinfecal denomination of the Agent, if your Phyfical Adion be fo too ? When you fccmed by this to difference them ? 2. I marvel that my Reverence to the'fe Jopi^aihould be the matter of fo many of your lines, ani you Ihould think i: nccellary to rehearfe it fo oft: Sure you are jealous that your Reader will be very unobfcrvant of your weighty obfeivations. But, Sir, is not Reverence a lign of Lowlinefs ? Why then are you offended at it ? You fliould rather applaud me, and fay, If 2^ B. do fo much Reverence a Suare^ , a Schibler, a Bargcrfdiciua, if he knew me, how much more would he reverence me ! But, to deal more plainly with you, the further 1 go in pcrufal of your learned Labours, the more I perceive my Reverence to abate. Let any man e-xcept your fclf judge by tbe next paffagc, whether you dcferve more reverence then thefe Rabbles and Sophies (as you have honourably be-Titled them.) You boldly and tbtly affirm. That Adion [is no wayanEfted, as an adion, nor doth it carry that (tile in any of thefe learned Sophius, (yc] Either this AiFenion is True or Falfe. If Trire, Mr. I^. hath got lijtle : but I am falfc, if this be true. If it be falfc, either Mr.I^. knew it to be lo, or he did not. If hcdid, and yet fpoke itjand rhat fo confidently, then hemuit pardon mc for Reverencing thefe childi(h Authors before him. If it be lalfe and he knew it not,thcn, i.He is one that will fpeak boldly what he knows not, and accordingly to be believed, z. And then it fecms he knows not what he fuppofcth his Boycsto know, and he looks at as his A.'B.C. I will finde out a Tertium to falve his credit as foon as 1 can. If there be no other, I'lc lay it on a defed of memory,conjund with a certain audacity,to tell the world in print» that thofe things arc not written which he read when he was a boy, and hath fincc forgotten.j Let

/

C45l

Let us try the truth of his Aflertion. I muft rot tell him of feme Schoolmen crany other Philofophical Writers, thatcall [aftion] aneftcft, for then he will fay, Thofe are not tbs Sophies in Qiiettion : It mult therefore be the very fame men. Let i'ffciWer fpeak firft Afft./.i.c.io.nt.J Puvci.p. ^^. ^od ai aHiovem rnrnOTtentcm atttvct j dicitur ea Immancns ah tra tnancvdo, quod falicet m agtine maveat, Extfiimo tamenearn non efcinteUigcndim Tofitive,fcdNegative. Nam aBto Imminens qui talis eji, eft in j^gette, hoc fcrfu, quit wn rratiftt ad Pauem- Iv ipfo autem agente wn eji per modum jidpv^i, fed fimplidrcr ad tffum ccmparatur ut ad Caufam. Uiide hac Propofnio, HemointcUigitj vcldi^utdt, 7tonefiut adjunSfidcfubjccfo, fed ut Et-ic€t} de Caufi: Etpatct: Nam t/Jaio tranfieTts mlliim haht fubje^um, ne quidcm ipfumpaticns, ut vifum efl. Ergo ctiam aSiio Immarens a fortiori Jionpoftuljtfubjc^nm. Coufcquevtiafirmd eji, quiaa^jo travficmmagii eiicxfubjcffe, tr" magis poftulst fub-jtBum, quam Aciio tmmancm. Scd a^ioTravficns incJJ'c A^ionis, vullitmhabuit fab-jtSium,8cc. Ergots covfirmatur, quod A cf tout fie , non dictt wr/z egrcjfum k itrtnte aSlivA alicujtu agtntis. EgrcjS^tu autem opponitar Tr>\ ci]c in. Et hr>ic rclinquitur gencra-tim loqnevdo de aSiiette ut fie, cam nonpo^iuUrc fubjcHim. Neq-, nrim Gcnut debet hubcre NaturamrcpugtiavtcmfuTsjpccicbiu, Sec.

Yet more, that you may be pail doubt of Mr.I^'s Veracity and Ingenuity, lib. i.tap.zi. Tit.i^. Art.K CaterumioxeffcS{ia7nbtguaeft,&c. Frimo Proprie Cr* Adaquate figvifieat caufatum (pcaalitgr , vcmpc cum convMnto reJpcHu nd caufam efficientem, &c. TcindeefeBum fumiturgcneralita(^per Synccdoihcm jpccid pro gevere, quom^do dicitur <rquipelientcr ad Caufatuvi, qusmodo jam Cicero loquebatuTy Sic. "^im piMcrcA i" effcHum (ficut(s' Qaufatnm) aliquando {peeialiter accipiuntur i froutpgnifeanteffejianst^pcrmanenTpDftacfionem: In quo diStivguuvtur comra effe~ dioncmvel aSiionem, velmotum : atque ita aliqui aiuvt ABiouem von cffe cffcHum: fed id quo ptodiicitur efc^us. Hie tamen comrmniia Efelf urn iff Caufitum fumuntur, "Eiciturquc id omnc (^'aufatum quod habet ejSe per dependentiam ab diqua Caufa five fit A-{{io, five Res per Alfievem facia. ^tqueitactiamKamusinLtgu.l.i.c.^. Hue, in-quit, in dociritia EffeSf:, pertinet morns & res mctu fafta, O'c. P'id.ult. 11. Et Art. 3. Ve e-ffcB^o ^eciditer diSio. Nihil autem occurnt hie cxplicandum prater ipcciajia nomina eftcttorum 3 qualia (hm cvkpyeia, h><i[y)\ficisDj7n3]}:h'<r(jut.y r^rpa^n (ff "m't-ci. Igitur ciicyna hoc loco mini aliud eji qaam \]f>\a J\£iio, Vdmafclib-i dtOrihtd. Jid.c.i'). camdefimt, quid fit cfjicax (ff lubjliutialii vatura mctVA. Vc hoc effc^us gcnerc, hoc eji, dctASlione, intelhgciidus eji 7/itc t'<i«oa, Ceflantc caufa ccflat cfte-dus: EffcHut inquam qui eji iii'ny:-ia.: Qcffante Patre ccjfit, {non Piliui [cd) Gene-ratio 7 ilm (Cjjantc Archttccfo ccjfut (mn eicmia fed) xiifctaio. i>;i^yn^, auton opus cjipoji tciievcm maner,s, Sec. 'TTf^c^i^ quandoq-, gencratim fignificut cpcratioucm, fi-cut iff Latina vex ABionii, &c. Vid retiq.

So in his Compevd.Philofde Logic.l.t.§.x.c.'.p.i7. Adeffccium tavquam cxcmplam ejus pcttntmetKs, (ff res motufn^i'

And iMcufh.I I.e. I. Tit.ij.n.^io. he faiih, Rcjp. Ejic amhiguitatcm in voce creati eniisiOcjtMW ctum Ens quanhquc Aiiitur idfolum quod per ACfio7iem crcativim ivcipit cj?c, quod que eji quafi CrcMonis termitmt: Et jk Crcutto von cQ aliquid erect-m: ^jiandoqucvcro Creatum Ens dicitur omr.e tUxd quod iufcmkiitcr ijt ah Enle mytaXOb fivcid fit per modum Aciioni}, five per mocum mfiiclx . .

peraHtonem. Et Im modo Crcatio cfi quia Crcstum, C4//ows» Metaphyf.DivJn. Simile quid eft in vece EfcBi vcl Ejjic'ks: 'Liiituv pijft.p. 524.1n gcntvc caufa-enimqumdoqucefelfumproco quod cjl quafi yi^itonis turn eft operationfic*tf^«of, Terminw, qMmododoniu,y.^.(Jieff<l{um.Al:qu6:ido vcl cpus S'-cjep^r/^.

H ^ vcro

i^

C4«D

vJrofumituram'nHniusutiicMurefccidmquiiquUi CrMefi, fije id jit per moiun Aciionif jeu motus, fijc per moJun reiper mitum fsHx ', Et ficciii-n ipfx ASiioncs di~ cuHtur effcHi, Sec. Atquc itxficiu MJlrx AHmhcs (-inteffeHut ipfjt(Mien MnpofittlitU, utper iliu iciiones fiiut, &c.

So lib.t.up. I o. Tit. J. //rt.J.n.51,Ji. lijim iff ipfi ASiancsiicentar cffc^tu frd-cife, (^tnfe,quij.hibcntefcdepeHicnssUuttie,Scc. So ;i. 41,41. 67* n. 49, ^Ojj i. Etconfirmiiurpcr k:'\{i ii.l.i .Phyf.T .j.o . Vbiait,euniem AHumcjfe Agentitunquin iqu9, (^pitientis unqu.im tn quo, hoc cfljibtbsbctreJpcHum ejfcHi i hic vera hibet relpeSlum, idjunHi.

Again, /.i «.j.r/Xi4.n.4i8. Potentuiidfuum Aciumco<npsrMuruteffe({4n OUmi, Vade InteUeclto, v.g. e^et effcSliu pucntijt intcUcciivx, Sec.

Now Ice Mr.f^'sauJicorscontiJer the nex: tim: he afccnJcch his Chair, how farce their great Miller is to be credited, aiii with wha: Cau.ions his moft confident Aflertions muft be received. L;:c a man fpeak n.ver Co manv Djiftrinal untruths, we may moieftly and handlomly confute them withou: offjnllve lan^uace: but when m;n fpeak fuch palpable untruths in matter of fad, I love not to difpucc with them, feeing a man hath no anfwer for them, beLeeming their errour, but a plain defiicTiturveritwi, which fcems io unhindlome language that ic "is ufually ill taken what ever be the caufa.

Bat let us hear another of the Sophies, u/^. S\xtifL.Metiph.di{p.i^. SeH.io. n.

8, o^oi fi nomine Effcclut cornpreh:nixmu noufolum rem pradiHum, fed quicquid i

virtuteagentii miitit, fin couixiiifa a^ioncm ejSex'jquo mjU efc2.im agentlt, cum fit

dependcns velpotim ipjxmet dependentu ib illo: Ejfeauten Efe^Am, hot Uto modt, non

rcpu :nit ciu(dititi: quin potius in omnibus aufis quns hiHenus tn^ivimMy CAufdUtas eft

cffeciuf cjufa, 6cc.

It were no hard mirter to produce more Reverend Sophies for M:.}^ who ufe

the fame language and call Adions EtF(;di J but being about

Vii. Ailing. PiO- fo fmill a mitter, I think it is not worth the labour. In this

blem. Theolog. much the Reader may perceive to what a lofs of time he may

part.I.p.Jj. bcleadin reading fu:h C^ntroverdc^, where men leave the

Things, and fall upon Pirfons and Words, out of an earncft

defire to findc out fome way to call C3ntempt upon their Brathren.

§. i+.

Mr.K.. \7[7Hiitvfitvf}nttobemjre common in horfe-fyir then Pi.'\kSt[oCiz in V V A^cn:c,T»!fich with the I^Hicli ofthk hidi'iej dijlinciion, evtry duU ^iie could tura at their pkxfure, and hold fomctimcs a^rmxtivdy, fometimes negitivcl/. So then thus krre little Ufiid to the prejudice ofthxt truth, thxt there » na nea [mtixnent del in God f

§. 14.

!^B. WOar horfe-fair, and hackaeydiftindion, and dull Jade, arepilages fo I profound that I muft pafs them as unanfwerablc by any that hath not attained to your Degrees. Bitdoubdeft you knew alfo h')>v com nan it is to maintain the Negative on other grounds, and t© fa/, ihit AH iiCjl A^entls, non in A-gente: and this is the language that I have hitherto thought fictelt: and your contrary juigemeni alone will fcarce move jne to cbinge. As foe the fafecy of your

ConclulioHj

C473

^ondufion, I muft tell yoH, it is no fuch glorious Atchieyement for you to vindi-ateit againft cne that never oppofcd or denied it.

Mr.K. jyUt 2. Though thisjhould be gr Anted ts Afr.Baxtcr to be true in aHs tranfi" XJ ent, yet AnimmAnevtdSl is quefiionUfian AdjmB, avdnot oncly dcnomi-natc the ^gent y but ivhere imt. Fori ink, Jsl^vovoivg or WiUivg a Subftance or Occident ? An Accident qucftionlcffe. If an Accidcvt ; In what SubjcH f Out of the Agent, you mil fnde no place where it may fet the folcef its feot. Therefore it fi in the Agent, And fo an AdjunH : and if (o, (iirc Immanent aSis in God nufi needs infer an alteration. For

R.B.J Confefsyour firft cn-fet (lofuddenj Co cauflefs againft a feigned Ad-X verfary) made me fufpcd ycu to be (omepignaalfjmum animal (as Dr. rwT/? cals his Adverfary) but your profccution puts me cut of doubt, i. Had you confined thefe fpeeches of yours only to the Creatures Ads, you had faid buc a$ many others have done before you : But it is Gods ads that ycu fpeak of^ as you afcertain us in your application [and if fo, fure Immanent ads in God muft needs inferre an alteration.] But indeed do you believe that God is compounded of Subftanceand Accident ? Yea doth the contentious difpofuion fo potently carry you on, that you dare fpeak in fuch confident language, as to fay that it is [an accident queftionlefs] which ycu attribute to Gcd ? What could forftiut have faid more ? I thought you had concurred in opinion with your Brethren, that ufe to call Gods Immanent ads, asdiverfified and as diftind ficm his Ef-fence, only Exttinfick Denominations; But it fcemsyou think otherwife (for a little time, while your haft doth hurry you that way pfr»J0</ttm7Wf«r*.) 2. If you fay, That you meant onely this much [Immanent ads are Accidents inherent in man: Therefore they inferre an alteration in God] You might fo eafily foreknow that I would deny your Confcquence, that me thinks fo great a Difputant ftiould not fo drily have paffcd over the proof. Idonotftick on the ftrangencfs of the Condufion it felt, that [Immanent ads in God muft needs inferre an alteration j] which is againft your felf and all Divines, who maintain that there are Immanent ads in God. For I doubt not but your hafte which the deputing itch provoked you to, caufed you to put [Immanent ads] for new Immanent ads.] 3. But itsftrange, that you could bethink ycu of no anfwtr that might be made toyourQueftion [If an Accident, in what ^ubjcd ?] when you know it is fo common to deny that Inhefion is neceffary to every Accident ; And when you know that in this cafe an cjfe ah, or a dependant Egnffe, is affirmed fufficicnt by fo many. I cited the words of SihihUr to that fenfe even now, where he purpofely cppofeth that which ycu aflerted, lib. i.cap.io. Tit.$. "• 54}5 5. I will net trouble you torehearfe th(m, it being a Book fo farrc below you. Now to your Proof.

f,i6.Mr.Kt

C48]

MrK. T'Or, J. Though Aclion a/s .MionlogiaUy confiicrei, hcbutsn exirtnfecal *"" Vcnomindtion, mi foonlj deuomimtc the Agent, not inhere tntt, tn mutb of Kctltty as there is in all Tranjient ASltons being tu iheTiuient, even PbyfiuUy, or r4-therTdcuphjficiUy confidered■, yet thefc Imminentiiitonsbsvc ihctr Terms too, fjy the fdid Sages, dnd tbofe in the yigent j he thit hah a mindc to look '^. '"•y foo^ fi^de tt in Suarez, or few Scapula Schiblcr, inihc preitumcnt C Action. Thus then the fir ft bolt hdtb done Utile execution agmjt this truth, thit there cuk be no new Immanent AUsinGod.

§. i6.

R. B. IS this al! the proof that wc have waited for [Immanent aftions have their * terms too?] i.Either you mean it of all Immanent ad»,or but of I'omc, if bat of for«e,thenit is a learned Argument :[fome Immanent ad$ have their terms: Therefore there can be no new Lpmanent a^ks in God.] But I fuppofc you mean it of A!l; But then by [tcrmj] do you mean [objedj] which fometimc are called rerffj/n/? Ordoyoumean, the form to which the attion tendeth, and which by it is produced or induced ? If the firft, then the Terminus of thefc Divine ads which we are fpeaking of, ,i$ oft iVithout, (as we ufc to fayj) as when Gjd know-eth, Approvethj VVilleth, Loveth the Creature. And therefore fomc few will not call thefe Immanent ads, but onely thofe whofe objed is God himfclf. Bac I I'uppofe you mean the later, and then, J. You might ealily forefec, that though I had yielded all that you fay of the Creatures ads, yet I would deny it of Gods: And blame me not for it, if I be leflc bold then you : and if I dare not imagine that there is in God either iSWo««i or Terminus ddquem, or eflfed, or form acquired, when he KLnows, VVillcth, Approveth or Loveth the Creacur*. I am in hope that youbeliere no fuch thin^ your klf, when the difputir»g itch is a little allayed. But howevor, could you poflibly think it lo obvious and calic a point as to need no proof ? Why have we never a word here to that end, who need fo many ? I love not thefc Happy Difputers that can prove that by filencc, vvhich neither thcm-fclves nor any other can prove by Argument. If you will flic to your Analogy, and fay [There artTermiHidciionum Immiuentium m m»n : Therefore there are foinGod] I (hould tell you that you may as wifely fay [There are Accidents, EfFeds and Mutations in man : Therefore there arc fuch in God.] At leaft I ihould importune you for the pioof of your confequeocc. 4. Bur for the Terms of Immanent AdioHS you fay [Thefaid Sa^cs (ay it] and [he that hatha minde to look it, may foon Hndc it in S«4rq;, and his Scapuli SchibUr'^ Truly, Sir, I have hitherto hinted your faults in Ironies ; but I think it fit co ask you now (i'cc-ing it ii not once oc twice, nor a flip of your pen) how you dare put Inch things in print, andfe: foU.;bt by honelt Truth-teliing, and leave fuch things on record againlt your fcl.f ? You that do»ita«/j/i;rc£ferrc usto ifbibler as ou: ScipuU, fure know his Dodiine : oratleali, if you know it not,; yoa ihould not take on you to know it, and fay, we may foon finde that in him, which he fo largely and purpofelydifputes againft. Kefai:h indeed, that fome Immanent ads have terms, as Syllogizing : but that cannot be your meaning : for you well know it will Ao nothing to inferre your Concluiion; But doch Aoci'tfe/Wfr (/.t.c.io. Tir.j.art.j.

fun^.

[493

punSf.1,1.) lari^ely dilpute it, that many Immanent a(3;s ha/s no terms, no not Viiion or Inrelledion I andanfwer the Objedicns againft him? and conclude that ABisutjklion dkitreJpeHumaiterminumf AndiftBtelledionbaveno Term, then Decree, and the reft that we were mentioning in the beginning, can havs none in agejite. j. Nay what a great part of the great Philosophers and School-Divines do deny, that Immanent afts are true afts ? Scotns takes them to be qualities, aad not in the predicament of Adion. Soncinus, Ferrxricnjis (and laith 'ccbibUr Thomijijtfrequenter itj ioccnt) deny them to be true iAs. And if fo, then Cure they have not the terminos of true afts.

And I before told you at the beginning of your Difcourfe,that we do not all agree with you in your Defcription of an Immanent aft, ifyou mean that it isfuchasis not only ncgativelyjbut Poiiiively terminated in the Agent, as your words import: You may Ice 5"c/;/i>/fr denying it (when you fliall condefcend to look it in him) in Met.L^.s.iQ^Tit.l.n.^i•(^Tit.^.Art.l.n.6^.Bm let this be how it will in man, I do very confidently deny that there is any fuch ad in Gad, cither of Knowledge or Will, as is either in the predicament of Adion, or hath any Terminus in himfdf, further then as himfelf is the objed of any ad. And therefore you ihould firft prove, that fuch Ads are in God at all, before you difpute whether they may be ia him ie novO'

f5. 17.

^f.K./'^OnjidcrwcwJyatfollwj: [Whether aU fuch Imminent dSls are inj more K^ etcrtuiltbentrinfientaSit, if much quejitoned^ piith Mr.Baxter. By vfhom Iprsy ? A clear diferenu bctvpcen tbem as between heaven and earth i tranfeiit a Sis as I toldjOH but now, being in the Patient, Immanent in the jigent.

§. '7. R. B. I. /^ Happy, too happy wit 1 that hath not onely with Mofcs feen the V-/ back parts of God, but hath taken To full a Survey of his Nature, that it can difcern as clear a difference betwsen his feveral ads, as between heaven and earth I I dare not attempt the like furvey ; but I may receive inllru-ftrudion from you that have ftirvcy'd it. And what is the difference ? Why [tranlient ads are in the Patient, and Immanent in the Agent.] What's the proof ? Why it is this [I told you fo but even now.] This may be a Demonftra-tion to thofe that are capable of it: but recipiturad modum rccipicntis: with me you have loft your Authority, fo farre, that I need another kinde of proof. I will rather call it Paft'ion then Adion when it h in Paticnte. Forma dat nomen : and Piflion and Adion are not the fame formaliter, whatfoever they may be materially. Ufe the names promifcuoully, if there be nodifterence in the things.

You know the lubtil Sc(J«/fi'fay. That Adion and Paflion are not the fame, and that Adion is in the Agent. And I have yet icen no rcafon to prefcrre you before Scomj. But I rather lay, that Tranlicnt Ads are <i&<i|;e«te, but neither in agcntenccpatiente y as having a Caufe but no Subjed, as 1 have before cxprefled. Andyoumay finde inmy SfJpM/j, Met.I. zc. 10. Tit. i.n.<;i. That Omne accidctis cjt in aliofenfu Hegxtivo, 8cc. ali3/s loquendo dcgcaerxli cffcntia aoctientis, non ejl ca ta Inbxrenio, ft rigorofcloquamur, fed ineoquod id qiod accidens ejl ajicit fubjt-intii'n extra cljentialiter, ^vc emu ejfentiam, atit rationern ejus exiJicndQ* Proinde ctji aBto

rigorofe Icpendo nan inhareai, tjmjnfatU hibet de rjtmedccidentif,quia fubfixmidm af-fifit (^ dentmitut extra e[fentiJ.liter. Vnde pond rtjp. ad aj?ump. profjUog. admittcn-do quod tAciio Tny.ficns non fit in ^aticnte, loquendo dc iHiene ut fie, iff fab cJSe AHionU. ^i^oi igitur A^to tratificns dititar ejfe inpAticnte, id non cjt Intel' ligendum formdhcr, fedmstcriilitcr : vcmpeiUi rctqux cji ABiocfiin Tatictue : non t4mr: fib form Ji t/^Hiom, fed fub jormilt pjJfionU: Eiidcm tmm res qut ABio cji, eflctumPiJfio. Now I hope you arc more accurate in your fpccchcs then to ufc to dcuominatc from the mat'.er, rather then the form : and therefore I hope hereafter you will forbear faying, that Aciio cji in Paticnte, how common foevcr it may be. At Icafl remember that you humbled your fclf but even now, to ufe a Hackney diftindion, with whith etery dull Jade could maintain rhc Negative at their pleafuic. And what if I adventured to ufe one Argument, Aclio eji cJictcntU cah-lilitof ; Atefficic}itis CaufalitOiS nonc(ltn Patientc :' Ergo, tAcfiovon eft in Pitientc. The n^/ori prove by Intallible Authority, vt\. Mr.I^'s, pag.i j6. Forthew/Hor, If the Caufality of the Agent were in the Patient, then we might fitly call it F<i-tientU CaufditAS. (For the name fhould be fitted to the thing) Jiut that were ablurdj Therefore, tT'c. Further, That which is in the Patient it a CuufatHm, or t&cCt o(:he Agcmper AHioJiem velCaufulititcm. But Caufality or A<ftion it not a Caufatum or efFcft of the Agent per iBioncm vel cMfalitatcm : Therefore that which is in the Patient is not Adion or Caufality. The major needs no proof; and its meant of every received form. The minor hiih a full demonflration, vi^. Mr.I^'s Authority J whodenieth Adion to be an eft'ed. And thofe that be not moved with his authority, may obfervf that I here take the word [efftd] in the more refirained fenfc as it cxcludeth Caufality or Adion J and therefore that I fay [it is not an Effcd per lASionem'] and that is proved fully, in that otherwifc, there muft be another Aftion to efFcft this Adion, and fotvinfinitum. But I did not think to hsve faid any thing on this. All that Mr.I(|. canexpcdwe Ihould grant him is, thiz Afiii qunTaJfio ejl in Paticnte: but ftili .<4c?;o travficaj qua AH:o non tft inPtaiente, no more then is an Immanent adion. Or if it were, yet the Au-tiioriiy of fo many learned gain-faycrs, makes the difterencc feera fcarce foclear as that between heaven and earth.

Moreover, that which in God we call a Tranfient Aft, is by the Schoolmen in grcatefl ciedit, affirmed to be Gods Eflencc only connoting the creaturt-Rf/d/jo to V. : fo that befides the creature it fclf (which though Scotai cats Creation, yet is lure the efled and not the ad) and beftdes the Relation (which can be no proper ad) there remains nothing but Gods eflencc, to be the fubilancc of the Ad which we call both Immanent and Tranlient. (^apreolus faith, Nulla Vivivx operatic aut aSiio qua formaliier agiiiut opcntur, eft tranfifvj mpaJSum. fie quodin paft'o formaliter reitpiatur, cum cjui agerefit c\ua VellciS' Intelligere, qua futit aclioves Immnentes. Scd cwccdi poteft quod dimna aSiio dicitur quavdoquetranficns propter refj^ecium rationU ad nakm effcHuminCreatura, ut Creatio, Confcrvutie,8cc.L.i-dift.i. q. i-ar/.j. And thcThomifts (ist'nh Suare^, !Met.diJp. zq.§.^.) fay. That Non folum Qreatio, verum ncque uUa.aHij rcJpcBu illiuA potcjt ejfc Ti^inficns. Where then is Mr.I^s clear djffeience ai between heaven and earth ?

And though I am loth to put my finger into the fire, by meJling with Mr. B^. any. further then he invites mc, yet perhaps he may expcd 1 iliould lomewhac. take notice what he faith of this point toMr.GooiiwiTi, pag.i 50,1 54.

1. Wiien he faith, [There are fo many Immutations .in Gods Efi'ence] if uaiifienr operations be the fame with his Efl'ence, (ffc, I deny the confequence ;

becaul'e

C50

becaufe the Terminta or efteft is not the fame with his Eflence, though the aft be. TlieEffeft only isMany J the Aft but one. z. To hisfolutionofthe firftQue-ftion, where he laith, Itisamylterypaffing all underftanding, that God fliould incline the heart to believe and not ad anew, ci/f.] I fay, I believe him for the niyfterioufnefs. But as all multiplicity comes from Unity, Co do all temporals from that aft which is Eternal. To all Mr. I^'s Inftances the Schoolmeu fay, Ic isihecftcft only that is New : In giving the fpirir, faith, raifmg Chrilt,e»;'i;.God had no new aft: Yet Goddidit by TeWe , which is his eternal aft and eflence. To his anfwcr to the fecond Qucition, I R-eply, M.I^'s Qucftions arc iniipid ani fallacious. [Did he Plant faith by making Plants ? Did hemakc me to diiicr by making the world ?] For though it was by the fame aft, yet that aft hath divers denominations from itsrcfpeft to divers objefts. To [make the world] conno-teth a particular objeft, v/^. the world ; and therefore the aft which caufeth you to believe,cannot be called [Creating the world] not becaufe the aft is not the fame, but becaufe it refpcftcth not the fame objeft. The third Queition belongs not to me. To the fourth 1 fay as before : the aft is Gods relle: his l^clle is bis Edencc: Therefore Eternal. His Queftions [Whether the world were drowned by the fame Aft by which it was made ? &€.'] are anfwered as before : It was by the fame Aft, w^. Fellc Divinum i but to be denominated vavionfly according to the Variety of objefts which it doth refpeft and connote. Even as i: is the fame Aft which is Immanent and Eternal, which in Time is denominated Tranlienc from its refpeft to the effsft.

ButF4g.i$4. I finde hiai citing Mr,^. as faying [Learned men Generally acknowledge, that (the aft) is really and formally one and the fame thing with his Elfence.] And Mr.l^, faith contrary, that [No man ever aflerted Tranficnc afts to be the fame with the Agent] and that [all Tranfient afts be the lame with the term, fay all men that meddle with Metaphylicks] and he appeals to any Reader that hath but tafted the firlt principles oi Logick. Truly thefc two Divines arc very contrary : and have bewrayed both of them that which they might have concealed with much more credit to their Reading. Yet M'-. G. may interpret [Generally] with fuch limitations as may bring him off in part: bm Mr.f(,'s prefumption and boldnels is intolerable. When a man of fo fraall Radiiig as I am, know fo well, that the Metaphyfical Doftors do fome fpeak one way, and fome another: as I undertake by quotations now to manifeft when I rtiall under-ftand it worth any time and labour. I remember Mr I^*s words in his third Epi. ftle of the fufficiency of [a pair of Sheers and a met-yard.] But it is not fofarre fufficicnt without more Reading, as to encourage a tender confcienc'c man, to avcrre untruths fo confidently, that iHo mav ever aj?ertcd. Sec."] And where he faith [TheQueftion is not of the afts of his ^/W, but of his Porv:r, &c.]Kaow-cth he not that Dr.r»/y?and the highly honaured Thomifts do make God to work per cjfeiitiam, and fay, that his Power is but his Will, called Power in refpeft to thecticft which it doth produce ? rJ.A]uin. i.^. i 5.4rM.4". Truly me thinks that Mr.I^. doth even to tiie meanly learned expofc himfelf to great difgrace, to fay fo boldly, that [all men that meddle with Metaphylicks fay, that all Tranfient afts be the fame with the term.] Did he never at leall reade Jco/jfi Co oft af-ferting and arguing for the contrary ? Nor any one of bis followers, nor one of all the other parties that deny this ? If he had not, yet he fliould have blu(h-d fo peremptorily to affirm what he did not know, At leali he lliould have known that ^c/?i6/er hath this ConcUiIion, which he largely argues for li" sAHiopes qua

C5*3

tcnduntad terminum vcH futa realttcr idem cum termm'] and faith, (^'rf/f/A?7;ow« 4 Calore f^tcie dtfiiegui. And he there tcls you of Vcuetu*, ^urtoUu, iuirc^ (^ Col-IcgCoiiimbric. that lay as he : At leall he that To derides me for citing thd'e puerile Authors, fbculd not have dared to Tay All men [that meddle with Mctaphyf.] lay as he in this, when both common School-books, and the two molt famous Sc6tsof Schoolmen, Scotifts and Thomiftsare againft him (as Siurc^ will tell him, difpA^ f(r.yn-i- oi Cajct. HifpAlenf.FUndr.CJ' conmuaiter Scotifi Si.c.'] And for the taller anl'wcring of Mr.I^'s Queltions before mentioned, 1 defirethe learned Reader among others to perulc the forefaid Anfwer of Caprcoltu to Aurcolwi 1 y. arguments in l.i.fcia.dijl.i.q.i. a.j. But I mult intrcat you itill to remember thac my own opinion is, That adion is not properly afcribvd to God at ail} nay farre more Improperly then men will eafily believe : Suarc\ biaiiciiiMetiph. dt^.^^. §. j.n. 11. maintaineth Gods Immanent &&s,InttlUgcre tff Vt'^t are properly not ads, nor to be To called. But of this before.

Reade airoOiiiC«/-^cLikr;./, I. w/).!^. §. ij. (hewing that the ad whereby God made all things of nothing is Eternal ; andc.6. />. Jij. And Cardin. Co»-tirenm de prxdejiinsiionc, ptg. {operum) 606 faith, btmpha ist Vitica AHione, quacumtpfiusfublUntUeiidemeji (fttAmeufubjlaHtumiipptllarc Ucet) unties cffc£lm prcducit: iu nulla ctUm tempore aut temperii altquapirte, iciioncm ejm coNttneri^Scc.^ f^id.Aquin.contr.Geut.l i.i.f.gSjj^jjj. 17,18,19,

And that the Adion is not the fame with thcTermitttu, fee the Arguments of Luiovic.aVoli dcConcurfu^art.i. Cip.z, %.6. Jquin. is cited by Capreoiu iai. fcnt.dif.i.q.z.d.i. as faying thus, depot.Teiq.i.a.17.^ i^-"- Dci AcitoeU tttcrm cum fit ejtu (ubftantu s dicitur autem incipere agcre rathue novi effeaus, qui abaierni a^ione confequitur dijpofitionem voluntatii qui traeiltgitur quifi aStidnitprincifium in oy-dine Ad cffeclum.']

1. Bu: the other part of the affigned difference goes down with me no better, but much worfe, i. In that be knows, I think, that it is not fuch a commonly received opinion [that Immanent adions arc in the Agent] in a Politive Icnfe, and not meerly negative, as that he fhould think i: needed no more proof then his mentioning. I gave him the oppoiitien of one Sophie, as lie cai$ him, even now. 2> And if it were fo in man, I again tell him, thac I will not take bis bare word, no nor hisoath, thac it is lo in God.

But Mr.I^. muft needs know who they be that make queftion of this. What if it were but fome private faiBiliars of mine ? Muft Mr.Bj;. needs know their names' But I had thought he had been well actjuainted with the dodiine of Lyibetta, "TcnnntM and Sxndi CUrl in this Point, Who aflirm, That though the ad in it iclf be God himfclfj and fo eternal, yet tlie traniitionof it to fcverai objeds, and fo the denomination may be new } and fo that God may to day predcilinatc him that before was not predeftinatcd, or Love him that before was not Loved, and this without any change in God, Indeed thcfc are the men that I mean.I thought with thcfe men of the higher form you had deigned to be familiar: but bccaufe you fpeak of tlie matter fo ftrangely, I will come down again to our own form, and rehearfc a few words of "Burgerfdicim familiarly known to thofe at your foot-fiool. Metaph.l.i. %.i6. E{lcnimtn2)coconcipic}tdMumeaa£iita, qui nihil aliud efi quam e^cntia divinx. Hie xSliurcfpiccrepottji divcrfdob^cSlA creuta, feu, quod eodent redtt, Veicspcriflum aHumtenderepotejiindfjcrfuobjeaa, vcletum non tendcrc: (s* turn in ilia tendit,revcra. ea vult ,- Vtxi in objeHa create: Num feractipfum Deus non potefi -ittnamart. 2)ecrctdcrgoPiidHoiuv9lvnxti aHum fciUfSt, O'iUtMafiui tendmiam

fine ipplhaticve dd dkctfd djc^a crcaid. tABtu jpfe liber vcn eft , »«» mi* gU quam Dei vel Immcrfita/s, vel %/£urvit!K: fed hbem eft iUim actui appliatio ad oljecta .- qua umcn quta Kibil Dec addit cvtU, fcdfolum dencmihatiovem quAvdtw tx-tcriiam, fumptamacomoutiencohjecticreatf, tavquam termini fui, vequc eornp^^tioncm tfficerepotcft, iiequemutationcm. ^uod a.dco vtrun eft, utexiftimem, fi Vetu deertta. relciTidercpojJ'et, illud imperfectionira aUaturam Dee, ven propter rmttationcm Deircto-rum, fed propter eaufam mutations,qua aut imprudcntij femper eft aut impctentia.

^Mijrf^ hath fuch alike pafl'age, which Fr.a SavctaClara reciting, anlVers this Objcdion about Imprudence or Impctency, as T(fnan:e7ifis before him ; Frollcm. quart, pi^g.ji. (ed hac ratio ejus eft debilii, iitreete rotavit Pofnanicrfis: Nam tm-prudenttavcl incev[iantiav!ttumvoneft, fiquiiprepoftji duolta htnis, primo eUgit mi-tm bcmm f^ poftea majut ; iiifi forte ex pajponc vel tmcrc diffleultatis, vel aha niordini-taaffcctione id prtvcviat i ut putet dc berw calibattis (^ eoujugii. Deia autcm nullo mo-do tbUgatur, nee fifficmluA labor at, fcdexmeralibcralitatc hoc ncn illud eligit: Ergo potefidigcrcfincvotaineonftantix. Hac iUe. Vndc Au^^u&. Si Konespradeftinatust fatutpradejlinerii. EtAmbrofius (rnf.i.Luc.) NovitVomtntumutarcfcntentiam, fi tu nevcrii emendate delictum. Subtilijfmas ctiam Brad wardinus dtat\ banc fentcntiam fttum aliquando pulfajfe animum, &c.

Thus I have given you fome anfwer to your incredulous Qucftion [By whom I pray?] But another kinde of anfwer might be given, conceining another fort of men, who deny the Aft it felf to be Gods Eflcnce, but fomevvhat that hath no more Being then aRelatiouj or a FoimalityjOr Em rationU ratiocinata, or at leaft then a modm Entis ; and confequently that as this may be without any composition in God (which they prove by the cofifcflion of our own Dcftors) fo may it begin and end without Mutation in God. But Tie not oficnd Mr.I^'sears with the names of thefc men.

§. >8.

Mr.K.^Urelj tratifient ^Sis there could be none before the Creation, there being no ^ term of futbAtts, ii6(ub]eBjor them, uvl(f there veere either fomcrvhat that was net made, or fomewhat mad* leftre there wa^ a (,'rcution: but u for Immanent Acts, 06 l\ncipeirgandJViUingin God, they rt^cre before the foundation of the rvorld tons laid. It ii a ury crude parage thus to fay lltiimuibquefiiotitdicvhetber'aH fmh Im-nanent Acts arc avy more eternal then trarficnt ^cts ;] For if the meaning he that any travfient/!(t be eternal, that if a myftery beyond allihathitb beenheard: then fomevebat wta made film eter7uiy .- If the neavtrg he, that no Immanent Act it eterval, that's after the (amc rate. The fir ft made the Creature eternal: the fecond denies Gcd to be eternal: Did he not lincvp frim Eternity, yea fore- fimre all that hath beenfir.ce the Creation, ii cr fhi.ll betotbe dtholution cfthevccrli, he were tat perfect, and therefore mt Gcd fern eternity, ^o then neither can u be t^rn ed, that there w^s any tranfent act eternal, nor an it Ic denied hut that (erne immanent acts are eternal ; and iffome,iben all, cr els a change in Cjod muft of nciejfuy be granted. So that ij the meantng be lltsqtttftie-tiediihethcr ((mcimnanent Aits bevomorecternaithen trarfient Acts'] that is, feme ittma7,ent Acts he not eternal, tbe Arguntcnt returns tcitbthc eld charge, that an altera^ lion muft be yielded in Cod,inimancm Acts being not to be reckoned with any colour among ejects, tut ad)urcts, and nognur.d ofptttttng ary fuch new immar,ettt Act tn God in time, Kkiib I demonftrate further tbtis-, I 3 §.j^, R.B.

C54:

§. iS.

R.B.'rHe meaning of my words is no: hidj but according to the proper literal •■• fenfc, and I had foTierefped co the two forts of men bctorc-mcntion-cd, but chiefly to one. And what I fay in Reply to your wo:ds, you mull be fo juft as to take to be accodin^ to their grounds, and no: mine own : For it is but the unfearchablencfs of theT: rhinos thi: I aai all this while maintaining.

Andfirft to your Argumentation againft the Ecerniiy of trandcnt aft?, it may b: replied, that inrraniien: aft> you mJlt diftinguilTi between the Ad it felf, which is called tranllent, and the Pallion or Reception of that aft in the fubjcft ortheproduft, orcffeftof that aft. The denomination of Tnnfient is given to thitaft inthe larerrefpeft asi: do:h connote the Pioduft, Effcft, PafTion and Subjeft : yea is properly taken to from them, as tha: i: fignific:h nothing effential to the Aft it felf as an Aft '. So that all tha: fame Aft which is in Time denominated Tranfien:, becaufc in time it did produce its efteft, was really from eternity it felf, though the eff.-ft were not > and fo differs not quad rMionem formileni acius, from an Immanent aft. Proved, i. The Aft by which God created the world, was his fimplc l^c'.le: But Gods fimple Tctfe was from Eternity ; Therefore ^c. The OTijor is indeed denied by fuch Panics as Sehibler, and many more of hisminde; but it needs no proof with Mr.I^. for it is the opinion (lam fure the faying) of D^Tw//?; And indeed it comes all to one, as to our budnefs, ifyou go on the others grounds. The m.f;or, M'.I^. maintains. 2. Deiu operntHr per eJ^entUmimmeiute: (eiejScHtiiiivinieJlaterni: Ergo,8cc. The »i4;or is fpo* ken exclufively as to all a«ft$ which are not Gods Elfence j and is fo coinmoa with many Schoolmen, that I will fpare the proof (for I perceiveits eafier taking ic for granted then proving it ) The wiinsr none denieth that confeffcth God. So tha: it is granted Mr. J^. tha: thefe afti were not to be called Traniient from E-ternity, becaufc they were not received, or rathe: did not produce the effeft but in time : But yet the aft which in Time received the denomination of Tranfient, was it felf Eternal: God Willed from Eternity that the Creature (hould Ba in time,and produced it in that tioae by tha: Will which was Eternal. So much on that fide.

Now to your Argumentation for the Eternity of Immanent afts, you would receive two fevcral kiades of Anfwer from the feveral men that I before told you of.

One fort of them think that the Thing it fclfwhichwecall an Aft, is nothing but Gods Eflence, and fo Eternal : but that the tranlition of this Aft to feveral objefts (as 5"4w3j CUra cals it) or the Application of it to thefe objefts (as IBufgeffdicius fpcaks) and fo the connotation of, and refpcft to thefe objefts,is not Eternal, where the objeft is not Eternal: and withali they think that the denomination fpccifical of the feveral Afti, yea and the diverfification of them, is taken from thefe temporaltranfitioni, or applications and refpefts to the objefts j and therefore that they muft be ufed as temporal denominations,and it is fitteil to fay, God Knew,Lovedj(i7'(;. Peter as exifting, not from Eternity, but when he did cx-ili : Yea they think the very name of an Aft, is moft fit to be ufed in this later fcnfe s rather then applied to the pure Eflence of God ; however fome call him in another knic. i fimplc Aft.

The

The other fort of men do thliik, that the v«ry Ai^it fclf is (cn\cM(dus w fcr-malitydiftirft from Gods Eflence, and rcay begin without his Mutation, as it may be his without his Coirpcfition, as I have before faid. Now both thefe forts will Reply, that your Charge of [making God net Eternal] and cf [making alto ation in God] which you oft repeat, are but your bare word without anyp.cof, and therefore not by them to be regarded. That God fore-knew all things that fliould ccme to pafs they eafily grant Ycu : but if he knew not that to be exiftcnr, which is but future, or that to be future which is wholly paii, they fayj :.his makes not God to be impcrfeft, or not eternal.

But 1 marvel that you ftill call Gods Immanent Ads[Adjonds in God]which before you alio called Accidents j net fearing heieby to be cuilty of makin<' a Compounded God, while ycu maintain him Eternal ; Or rot difcern-ing that you give advantage to your Adverfary to maintain, that thofe Accidents or Adjuncts which may be in Grd wi:hcut Ccmpcfiticn , may as well Beginnc or End noiwithlianding his Immutability, if their Ob-](.& be fuch as deth Beeinne or End. Now to your New Dcmcn-AratioD.

§. 19-MrK. If there be a ground cf puttivg a'liciv immanent tA^ in Gtd', Ergo, ThU * ground muji be cither m God or the Creature. Jf a Ground in God rohicb VPat vot before, then an alteration tn him biycnd reply .• a ground in the Creature there ean be nonet e put a new immanent/iH jr. God i fcrthatanimmanent A If hath nothing to do mth any thing wsthcut the j^gevt, it tevg hereineontradiflipguiJJed from tratfient AeiSt ji>jMrdi;/?fw/./4c?Jteiminantur inpallo, immanent tASis\v\3'^tmc. I eonfrj? fome-rchat vptihout the Agent, it many tmes, yea eerr.mcnly the objeci ofimmanait ASls ; hut if ever either the SubjeS or Term, 1 mUfuhlidily turn my £*o^j, a Mr. Baxter e efircs bii maybe, rehen he goes cnc note beyond Pr.l wifs. I am confdevt he reeds not fear eomingfohigh: I am fure he fals infinitely fhort in this ArgMmivt, at wtU appear mort fully by xvhat kcfubjoyns.

§ I5>. R. B. npHisisthe Dcmonftration. 1 fliall underfland that word, in yctir X. mouth, better hereafter. Your horned Argument will be thus ?.n-fwered. The woid [Ground] is ambiguous. If you take it largely for any luf-ficicnt Rcaicn of the attribution, then there is Ground both in the Creature and in God : But if you take it more flriftly for fome one fort of Rcafon, then it may be in one and not in the other. The ground may be in the Creature as the Objtft, and in God as the efficient: ard in one as the relate, and the other as the correlate. But ycu lay [if in Gcd, then an alteration in himj beyond replv ;] that's a pretty way to prevent a Reply : But your contident AiVtrticns fliall hereafter be annu-mtratcd with the weakeft of year Arguments^ though called Demorftraticns.

I. Some will take it for a fufficient Reply to deny your Confeiqucncc, and think you had dealt fairlier to have proved it. For they will think that there may be in God an Eternal Ground of a New immanent Aft, as well as there is of a New Tranfitntad: The newrefs of the Aft, will net prove the rewncfsof the Ground. Andiherefoieyoucalily luppcfcthatitniuft be[agrowid in God which wa-. not

Jjctoic]

C563

before] ifths a£t b2 fuch as was na: before Ba: this you (hould have forcfcen would be denied. And if you lay, ;lu: the newncis or change in the cfteft doth argue fomcchin^ changed or new in the cauici they will deny it i and tell you thaL then every tranfien: ad would argue lomcchin^ new in God.

2, Thofc (ofwhom I fpoke before) that maintain tkat immanent ads as ad» neednolubjcdt, willthink they reply i"ufH:icntly by telling you, that the novity ofiaamanentads, having aground in Gad, will only prove that aUqnii Oei vUa Z)Cfl is altered, but not that .iU{uiitHDco is altered: became that adion fpeaks but a dependant egrcfs, and not an inhelian. The like they will fay as to any form introduced in the fubjcdby immmcn: ad>j who deny to many and moll immanent ads, atcrmj>i;Mj and particularly to intelledion. And if you think that there can be no adion without fome cftcd within or without, I refer you for an anfwcr to my i^fipw/^is you conceit him.

g. Howevermanyofu! will hardly be brought to belcere that Gods imminent ads have in proper fenfo a «r»ii««4: though mans may.

4. Some will think th;y Reply fuiH;iently, by telling you that by [alteration In God] you mean, either [an alteration of his elTence] and then they deny your confcqucnce : or [an alteration of fome modia, or relation, or formality j] and fuch they will gran:; and fay, as oft before, that it is no more againft G ids immutability, then the cxiftenceof that moixa, relation, or formality is againll hisfimpUcity.

f. If when God created th« world, he had a * nc«t

* yiUconfcnt n9t the ReU- relation ( of C.-eatour ) which he had not before,

tionkonly ex pa.tecrci- and this without change, th:n he miy have a new

tatxatUnitmutuxH' immanent ad without chingc , for ought you

know.

6, For Gods ads are not fo well known to fuch M)les and Bats as you and I are, that we fliould be able fo peremptory to conclude that the novity of them muft needs argue himleif to be mutable: we know not fo well how much Being, oc of what kinde, thofe adi have.

' So much for Reply to that which is paft Reply. Now to the next horn of your Dilemma.

You fay [A ground in the creature there can be none to put a new immanent ad in God.] And why? Becaufe [an immanent ad hath nothing to do with any thing without the Agent.] i.How? nothing 1 neither as an occafion, nor anobjed? do not youconfefs within a few lines that fomething without maybe itsobjed J' It is ordinarily laid, and by fome of your friends, that the Attributes and Immanent ads of God are diverfifisd ooly by excrintick denomination j as an immoveable rock in the fea thi: is walht fomitime with one wave and fome-limc with another, without its own change; ( It feems thay take the pafllan ©r reception of thefe motions of the waves, to be no change.) Sododivcr-iity of objeds, fay they, diverlifie G ids ads and attributes quoxi denomhutionen cxtrinfecxm. If that be fo, then objed* fpecifie thofc ad> quoiiieuomittitionern ex-trinfeum, which in themfelves are but one ; andthen the faid obji-di miy as well caufe anovity as adiverlity of imninent ad? quoii deni<ninittoncmcxtrinjewn : And then there is no more impropriety in faying, God dothie Movi Will or Nill; then in laying, that it is not all one, for G id to Will my lalvation, andtoNiU it: fee what you have b:ought your caufe to. z. There are men in the world

tha(

tliat conceive of God, as we do of the fun, thac is ftill fhining, but not ftillflu-ning on tbisorthat creaiure : it may begin or ccafc to fhine on this place or that, without any change in it felf or its adual (hining ; ibJ fothey think it is with God as to fome of his adSjWhich have the creature for their objcds: And for your objedion, That thisisa tranfient aft of the tun, I ftiall reply co it anoB, where you mention it.

But you are a^ain harping on your old ftring ; vi^. [ That immanent ads are terminated in the Agent.] And I again tell you, that Gods ads and mans are not lo near kin, as that you may conclude of the termination of his ads from the termination of ouis: yea I tell you, that I will not belcevc you thac Gods willing or knowing the creature hath any termtnui in himfelf ( further then as you may fay the creature is in himfelf i) that is no terminus ftridly afcribed to adions diftind from a meet objedive termination. A word of proof, i. Where there is neither MorKfl or mutation there is no termintut But in Gsd ading immanently there is neither »JOtjMve/w«W/c; Therefore, (ir'c. I think I need not confirm either pare. X. Where there is no etFed or form acquired or introduced, there is no terminta ( in the fenfe in queftion :) But in God there is no effed or form acquired or introduced (by fuch immanent ads) Therefore, (ij'c. The w.i;or is plain from the common definition of a terminus. The minor is pait «jueftion. ■ But here you confefs that the objeHs •/ immanent a^s may be extrinficl^ (Yet I could tell you, that Viguerius Ittftitut. and others conclude, that yoluntif Divinx nonbibet objcSium extrinfecum:) bin if fubjeH or term you will burn your Booki, &c. But hold your hand a little. Before I dare be guilty of thac, I would fain know what Books they are. But you fpcak cauteloufly : for you tell us not who fhall be judge in this bufinefs: and if 1 fliould fhcw you never fo many that are againft you, you may keep your word by faying they all miltake, and by being the Judge your felf. But, alas Sir, what caufe have you thus to threaten your Books? Who can riddle the occafionof it ? I tell you, that as good Philofophcrs ( for ought I yet finde by you) as you, do think thac facb ads have no fubjed nor term : and you fay, that if any thing cxcrinfick be the fubjed or term you will burn your Books', whichif youdo, let all bear witnefsthat I was no oceaGon of ic: If they have no fubjed or term at all, then they can have none without. Sure if you were not very quarrelfome you would not in fuch high words feign him to be your adrcrfary, that faith more againft the oppofcd Point, then your fclf.

As for that out-leap wherewith you recreate your felf, of my coming fo high as Dr. rwi/?, in the ienfe I ipoke I yet defire it not j in the fenfe you fpeak (luforily) I exped it not: nor do I know any man fo fimple as to compare me with him, or that needed this learned Digreflion. Yet I confefs I thought my felf fomewhat neerer both Dr. Tw//? and your felf then you fuppofc me to be: For though I was ready to obey yourconciufire command, of adoring the footftcpx of fuch, yet I thought not that I had come infinitely jhort, as you here inform mc, I do. I thought only God hai infinitely excellsd thj meanelt creature. Nay then, if you will be needs our Gods, MuminJ Academiea, lam afiaii you will ihortly belower thenmen J and Iclf I (hall hear chat news which I equally fear and ab-hortc, thac you and fuch like will ere long be calt out of that Academical fara-dife. Butlet thac go ; I fuppofe [infinicely] was buc a high word, by a high fpirit, qufiabdte, from a high place. I have itood my felf ero now on a mountain, and every thing in the valley feemcd fmall to me.

K Buc

[583

But I forgot to ull you on€ thing : that ( though 1 fuppofe I know what kinde of termination you mean, yet) you (hould have fpokcn more cautcloufly, and <iiftin£ui(hed, and told your Reader more plainly what you deny > and iiot have refolvcd to burn your Booksj if we prove things without the A^cnt re be a term in general. ¥or you know that we diftinguifti ot Objedsinio Motive and Tcrmi-native i and ordinarily fay that the creatures are terminativc obicds of Gods Will, though not moving objefts. CMeuriffc faith {:Maaph}(. Scct.U.i. ^i-. pao. 117.) Ob]cHum fetmiariua mn potcfl movere intcUcSium diviuun tdcognitionem [hi, litct pojfit ilium termimre, ut docent Thcologt. And Schibler U.i.c. j tit 15.n ^ 07. tlon qua^ putcmM cjfe iliquid quod Acluei qiufi volumatcm divinim, ( quod o^aum altu feletejfcobjiHorum, in ordine adbdhituaet p*tentiit,) fed quix apprcbtndimxi V6lun-tAtcmDivtvam Tcrminiri Ad diqutd quod biiHcTUU bibct rstjoncm tb]eSli. ESIenimai rmonrm tbjccft faiis, fi icrmivci dclum dtquem. And PunH> 1. «.J10. the affcrtion i%J)ci vo!utttis tcmumtur etiam ai res creutM. But enough of that. Now lets fee the proof «f our infinite liiftancc.

§. io.

Mr. K- r A ^ ^'' ^^'^ " ^""^ '^''^ '^^ "^'■^'^ ^"^^ ^"^ '^'ft •' '^'^^ ^"^* '^ ^^^ ^ z^*-/ * iitfied,jufi,&.c. G»ds f»reknovpledge it not a {novfivg tbst fucb a tbin^ it

vfbiebimct, bMtthitfuchathing mil be vphicb is not: yet doth thU mi\e no change in

god, nomtrettentbefuH ischixgedby the variety of creaturts tf^mb it doth enligbten

And rvartn j or the gli([e by the vmety of fices rtbich it reprefenteth, or the eye by the

viriayofcolourfvobub it btholdeth: (For, whitfcever fonc fty, I do not think tha

tvery vAriittoa of the object miiies a rcall change in the eye, or thit the btholiing of ten

difitnH colours at one view iotb make ten dtftinS a£fs of the fight, or alicrttions en it t

tApb.p. 17}, 174.] I cAnnot tell what to maie of this rope, but fatid tt it,tnd nothing elfe,

atfhnU(irAtt appear; and how ilia tnASi.h tbii jitubour W4r, tbtutodefcendin arenani

mth T wifle, Pemble, And I dArefty aU tbcfobcr 'Divines that ever wen worthy to^eA^

to A Scbiol Point-

§. to.

R, B.Q^jinguinolent men do dream of Egbting and killing: It feems you have ac-i3cuffomed your minde fo to contending, that through the crrour of your pbantafie, all words feem chidings, and all anions feem fightings to you : And fo you dreamed not only that I was in ArenA, but ». that Dv.Twijfe and Mr. T. were there with me- 3. Yea and all Divines worthy to fpeak to a School Point. 4. And that we were there coping for mafterics: and in the end of your dteam you rife up as Judge and give them the better, and proclaim me an ill much. But 1. he that reades my Book will finde that I argue not as from my felf, but only fhew how other mens argumentations do manifelt fuch a difficulty in the Point, that we fhould not lay too grfeat a ffrefs on it j as I have rticwed you before in the explicationof my own words. Nay I do not o«ce deny the Point (that immanent afts are eternal ) but only fay. It is much queftioned ( by others) whether they are any more eternal then iranfient afts: and annex a touch of feme mens arguings for it : concluding only in a parcmhefis, that the Point is, as I think, bey«nd our reach. So much to the Erfl fidion. 1. And H I contended not with any then not with Dr. TwiJS and Mr. P. on this Point: it being plai» that it is

on another Point that I deal with them. Thats for the fccond fiAion. j. The third is mounted with great confidence > you [dare fay:] What dare you fay ^ Why that! [thus dofcend in Aremm with all the fober Divines that ever were worthy to fpeak to a School Point.] You are a dating man^ that dare fay thii. But I have tafted fomuch of your temper before, that 1 perceive your veracity is oft leaft where your audaciiy is ^rcateft : I thought I had contended with no man in thofewordsj and yau dare fay^ I contend with all men, worthy to fpeak to a School Point. What if it had been true that I had been here contending, and that againft a Point which all t'hefc hold ? doth it indeed follow that I Ao in Are-n/tn dcfcenderc with them all J' and fcek to match them ? And what reafon have vre that know yon not, to taue you for Judge of all the Divines in the world, who fliall be accounted fober, and who not j and who is worthy t© fpeak to a School Point, and who act ? Or why Ihould I think you more worthy chen the Learned men that I have before named, Ljfcbetus , Pcnnottus , Bur^erfdid-vs,Scci

§. 21.

Mr. K-TTO finow that the world i»tb now exift when once it did not, and that fitcb t * miin 710W is fanSfifed which before he was n»t, mafics no change in God, but cnlyfiews a change iv the objcH: but t» linew now that the world doth cxift which before God did not two», or to lypow now that fuch a mm ii fxnHified, who before was not, which before God did tt$t finow, nafics a change in God, as wcU as the cbje^.

§. »i.

R.B.l 7C 7H0 would look for fuch anlwers from you, that had heard you judge Y V of School Divines with fuch Authority ? The firft pait of youc Anfwer is not againft any thing that I laid : The fecond is a meet begging of the Queftion. Some think that quoad fubjiantiam aSim Gods knowledge is the fame whatever the objed be ; but yet becaufe [Knowing this or that] connoceth the objeft with the ad, therefore the eternal elfence of God fimply in it felf con-(idered is not to be called [Knowledge] much lefs [the knowledge of jhis or that creature J] and that without the object it neither is Knowledge, nor ought to be fo called i and fo as from the object we diftinguifti Gods Knowing and Willing,' fo muft we the fevcral ads of his knowledge j and though the ad quoad fubflantiam, which we call [Knowledge] in God be but one, yet the ratio formalif which muU oivc the denomination, being in the refped of that one adtoitsobjeds, it is moft ht to fay that Gods knowledge of Peters falvation and ^udtf damnation, is not the fame knowledge, though it be the fame fubftantial ad: the like is laid of his Will: And as this muft be faid without wrong to his (implicity, fo the like mull be faid of his beginning or ccafing to Know, without wrong to his immutability : and that 3S it;is not all one for God to know the Futurity and the preCent exiftence of a thing, fo we muft lay, that he began to know the prcfent cxiuence when the thing began toexift, and that God did not know before the creation, that this propofition was true, Pctrui exijlit: and that he ceafethto know the Futuri ion of a thing that ceafeth to be future j and that God doth not now know,rhat Chvift will be born and dye and ri£e: and that therefore immanent ads in God are noc

K 1 to

to be faid to be all eternal» bur only thofc that have an eternal objcft i becaufe the ad is to be denominated from its refpcd to the objcd ; and therefore it being Godi Knowing and Willing which we call immanent ads here, where it is unmeet to fay tha: ad of Knowledge or Will i$ cternall, then it is unmeet to fay, Gods immanent ads are eternal : but when you will exprefs Gods immu:ability, it is fitter to fay [ God is unchangeable, or Gods eflenceor nature is cternall,! then to fay, his knowledge, will, or immanent ads (in thii fenfe) are fo : becaule when we connote not the objed, we are to call it Gads Effcnce, and not Gods Knowledge, Will, or fuch ads : fothat here is no real change in God himfelf, but only a rcfpedive,or modal, or formal (as the .Ueiifl/ fpeakj or fach as we cannot now apprehend, atWding new objedivc conceptions > all the change being in the creature.

Now how doth Mr. I^. prove that this dodrine mtift [ make a change in God as wellas the objcd ?] why he learnedly affirmethit. He that can finde a word more, let him make his belt of it. But in this cafe, all the proof licth on the af-fimer j which we might well have exptded from him.

§. X2.

Mr.K- A N<i therefore tU fober Divines ufe to be Wiry in their exprcjfions in thU i^inde t ^ sclinowlcdgivg no difference btiveeen Gods linowleigc And. forciinoveledge, hut thii, thit his fore^novplcdge is in order to the cbjeH only, and mt of any act of gods: fo thit it is not oppofed to ^oii-fcience, but it pgnifeth only a futurity of the objeH , as wa fl)evfed at Urge in the third Chapter. CjU h^noTos thit. that is to dayvchich xcm vox ye^erday-, butQod as pcrfcHly l^new it ycflerday aatodsy, And lincvf at once, all the virioiu fuccejjiotu in time j or did he ethcrrrife, a chiuge cannot pojfibly be avoided, notwithjiindtvg aU, !Mafter Baxter aUeadgcth to the con" trary.

§. 11. K.X. i.TFyourfirft fcntence be true, I muft lament the paucity of fober DI-X vines} for fure I am,that of thofe which have written on thefe Points, too few have been wary in their exprefllons: and no wonder when they are no more wary in their conceptions j and when men dare maintain themfelves to have that capacity which they have not, and to know certainly that which they do nor, and might eafily know they do not: When even fuch learned men as you will not be perfwaded that thefe tilings are above your reach, but do with fuch haughty contention oppofe one poor fentence in a Parenthefis (which is all my fentence) whercin-1 fay, it is beyond our reach.

a. You lift up your felf too high, in taking on you to judge all thofe Divines to be unfober, that are not in this of your opinion.

3. If the word [prefcience] fignifie only a futurity of the objed, thcnthefeare equipollent exprcflions iDeuthoc prtefcif^ and i Hoc cji futurum:"] but that is not true.

4. The fame humane frailty and diftance from God, which makes it neceflary toui to afcribe Ading, Knowing and Willing to God, and to conceive of him under thefe notions, doth equally necefTitate us to conceive of bis Knowledge and ^illjis 4iftindj and not altogether tbc fame: clfe vre /hould afaibc a meer name^

' without

C60

without any conccption'of the thing named : For we cannot conceive of any fuch Knowledge as is the fame with VVilling, nor of any fuch Willing which is the fame with Nilling; and yet we beleeve the fimplicity of God. And the fame ne-ccffiry that compelleth us to conceive cf Gods Knowing, Willing and Nilling, as divers, ab cbjeSIorum diverfitatc, doth compcU us to conceive of his Knowledge of things as Future, and his Knowledge of things cxiflent, as divers: yet flill we deny a Mutation of God himfeUi only we conceive as the Sco-tiftsj that there ia adiverfityof the objeftive conceptions, and that our various denominations have jundatnentufH in re: but what it is, let him tell that Icnows.

5. A^ainft all this that which you oppofe is but your naked aflcrtion, which I regardlcfs then perhaps you expedcd. I affirm the uncertainty, and you the certainty} and therefore it is you that fhould prove that certainty which you affirm to have ; For no man hath a certainty without fome evidence or other to force aO'ent} and therefore that evidence (hould be produced, if you are indeed a man of as Angelicall intclleduals as you feem to conceit your I'elf,

6. God did yeRerday know that the fun is not rifcn to day, i. e- that to day is not come : You will fay, he did at the fame time yellerday know that to day is come and the fun is rifcn ? fome will thiok to make this true, you muft verifie contradidories, and fay, [It is] and [It is not] at once, may both be abfolute-lytrue (and then farewell our firft Metaphyficail certainty in compofition.) Or elfc you muft aikrt the coexiflence of all things with Gcd in eternity j which how loath you will be to admit, I conjcdure partly from the tendency of your tenets, and partly from your adhefion to Dr. Twijfe, and others of his ninde.

7. For your third Chapter I have faid as much to it already as I findc either need ot lift, being loath you Ihould c«ft on mc Maiter Goodwins cask.

§. zj.

Mr. K- A ^^ '" '^^ fi^(^ illuftration the cafe » ftrangclj/ different; yet I confe^, if it Is did hold, it rvould prove thepoivt^ fortiori: Thus the fun, fiithhct enlightens and warms variety of creatures, yet is not changed : therefore nor need Cod be faid to be changed, though he know today a variation in the creature: I yield dU the couclufion: but all that U nothirg to the purpefc ; for the queftien U not whether to kn^if a variation in the creature prove a change in God i but whether a variation of the aBs of his kitovcledge, acccrdirig to the variation in the creatures do not prove tt change in him? now the putting cf a ntw immanent alf, as ancwfinowivg, ii a putting 0f variation upon him.

^B. '•\7i7Erc my advice of any weight with you, I fhould perfwadeycu V V never to esped any illuftration of Gods'immanent adsby the creature, without a great difterence in the cafe : and therefore that you would no more take fuch difierence as fo^r<i«gc. a. Yeur conccffion that it willf rove the foim a fortitri, if it held, is as much as Icculd dcCre or exped. 3. A man would tbinkj iba; the argumem youberelay down as mlne^ were mine indeed^

whofindcs fo Learned a Divine faying fo, that rttould abhorre falfliood: when you put the words in a diftinft charader, with a [fairh he,^ as if they had been myerprcfs terms : but 1 dclirc rhc Reader not ro judge of ad your Writing* by iuchpafla^esasthis : He may fpcak true at onetime, thatyec takes liberty to fpeak falfly at another. You did take the eaficft courfe imaginable, to fain a con-clufion which you could grant, and then to grant it and fay it is nothing to the bufinefs. 4. I will not confent to your dating the queflion in new terms of your own, tn themidit of adifpute. Donot feign mc to difpurc any qucftion which you make many years after my Writing, and which Pi not ^obe found in my Writing in terms. J. The word iPiCf] may fignifie J.thg Divine eflcnce J and fo he that feigns a new aft feigns a new God : i. Or that mode, formality, reC-peft (or whatever clfc it is to be called,) of God, ariGng from the nature oi-Hate ofcxtrinfick objeftij which 'Burgerfiicm cals, the Application to the Objeft The queftion is only of this now, which fome think may mod: fitly be called,Gods* afts. Your naked repeated affirmation that a variation is put on Gad, when you prove it notj I take no more for a Dcmonftration.

§. i4.

Mr.I(.QEfo»i//, l^jen we are JpeikJng of immanevt aUs, rvbit hive we to do with ^tbe funs eyiligbtemng or wirming f I hud thought thofc bad been trmfieni aBs^ and fo not f roper in thU ufe! Tet

§. i4.

R. B.PlEmember younot the crude queftion that we were on? [Whether fuch iVimmanent afts are any moreeternall then tranficntafts ?] Thc(^efti-onifts mean it quoid formalmi nxturjm aciiUi for they take the dominations of timmanent] and [tranfient] to be but from the eftcft or termi/ioi; And that you may fee what they imagined, when they mention the fmiilicuJeof the fun, let n:>e intreat you to fuppole for difputation fake (^per pojfibilevel Jmpojfibile) that God had made at firft no creature but the fun: 1 Would fain know whcvhcrthat funm (hining and cafting out its rayes and emanation, did aft immanently or tranfiencly ? I conceive not tranfiently: becaufe there were no fubjcftj cxifting into which its aft fhouldpafs, or which fhaulci as its excrinfick termmiii receive from it any new form. It feems then it muft be immanencly : but that is but infenful^cgitivo, becaufe it is not tranfient: fuppofe next that the reft of the creatures were afterwards made, and placed as they are under the influence of this fun, and fo were the receptive fubjefts of its aftion: Is it not the fame fort of Aftion, without any change in it feif, which before was immanent, and now is become tranfient ?

But I need fay no more to this J for you arc plcafed to confefs.

fat.l^.^^Etthirdljf, Vidit boll, I yield it were Argamentum amajori ad minus:

1 Iftbefuttbenotchittged netwitbjiinding all its warmth and Uibteiiing, then

neither were God. But fare the funis changed, indcbaugeth perpetually, tuid could not

iM'u a Univerfill caufe upon tbegreAt variety of creatures in the worlds did it not rejoice

C<50

like a Gyivt to run Hs (ovrfe j diiit ffandftiTl but one year together At one feint, yet or but w^/^t vfzthitt one Hemi^here for a year, Whit fiould wc do for thdt vJritty of fetfons roe need * tAU Summtr would be lU bad at all iVmer. In oppofi:ion to thit change of the Sun, if the Father of Lights (aid to be vPi:hcHtJludor» of turmng. He hath nofucb Solftices or Tropicks > no mottons,but a fcrpetiialpermanency. There is a great difference betvPeen Imuianent aBs and travfient: ihatfuppofingthe Su7i to fUni (iiU at i'i jo-fhua's time, and to aH rvithout motion ; here were no alteration to be ach^mwlcdged in the fuvy votimthflandivg all the variety of ohjccis, yea and variety of opcntwvs vptn thofe ohjeBsy all vpbtib might proceed from the fame ^ a as to the Sun, the difference bang meerly in the Patient: Asforivfiivce, the fame live-coal doth at oikc by its hdtt melt thexfiax, avdhardenthecLy i here are different trai^tnt aSls, but no change or aiffcr-enceataUintbefire i but only in the difpojition of the matter on which tt woriit. But m InmancfU aBi the Cafe ii contrary i for they being in the fub]cli, the vxrutton of them i>ia\{Cs an alteration in that, and n«t the objeSi: a/i the fame man unthshg'.d may be the ob' jeH fometimcs of mens Love, femctimcs oftheirhMred: the variety of tbtfe acts maizes a difference in the eAgent, dothKetalwayesfuppofeanyintheObjcHi and fo here, Gods t^nwing now that thiiit, Godjnotlinownig ycjlerday, that tt it now, makesachangc in. God, but indeed God cannot be faid uoxv to liitew that fiich a thing i, but to iintw that now fuch a thing is Iwhicb wof not before'] andthk he did linow, what ever is now even fretn all eternity, his prcfcicnce betvg a i{nowlcdge in prxi'enti t« htm, though not Je p: :e-lentij Oi to the objeB $ againfi whcfe being in eternity Wiorcjhall bejaid hereafter againft iMf Goodwin, but now I attend M' Baxter, whoprocceds.

-I §. 15.

R.B. I. V70u fcem rather to anfwer in jcft then in carneftj when you tell us of I the Suns local motion, when otir Qiuition was. Whether [the Sun be changed by the variety of Creatures which it doth enlighten and warm] that is, Whether it felf receive any change from the tcrminiu or cbjtfts of its ads? Do you intend the information of your Reader, or the diicoveiy of Truth,when yoM Ibuffle inluch an alien Anlwer ? x. All that its good for, that I know of, is to acquaint us, that you have feme full Demcrftrationagainli CopertiuuS} which hath given you a Certainty that he erres i And it cncfhould hear it, peihaps it would prove like your Ordinary Dtmonflrations : for that which is hinttd in your words, fecmsof kintothem. 3. Youyie!da]l that I fay concerning the Sun, acknowledging that it is not changed by the variety of Objeds: And in the firft words you lay [Did it held, I yield it Yitre Argumcninm i majcri ad tnintts.'] Lay both thefc together, and jutige whether ycu yield ivot the whole Caufc which ycu oppofed. 4. You flill harp onthc old firing, affiiming. Immanent Afts tobe inthe Subjeft, and that their variation alters it, when as good Philolophcrs fay they have no Subjeft, and that Vifion, IntelltAion, (g'c. have no Tfrw/w.-Yeur naked affirmaticnsfo eft repeated, lathci weary then convince. 5. However you cannot from mans Immanent Ads, argue to Gcds, unlcfs they were more like. 6. I am unfatisfied whether a Trarlicnt A& (though not ^waTran-ficnt) makenot as much alteration on the Agent as an Immanent ? Wheilier a Tranfient i& be not the fame with the Immanejotj containme in it all that it contains, with the fuperaddition cf its Reception in, and t&c& upon a Paflive Subjed ? Asia the fore-mentioned inftance ; IftheSun had been crcatc<^ firft alonC) icsadion whereby it nevy lighteth and heatctb, wculd have keen immanent i

C«43

wnt; and yet when the faniJaAion (lull afccrwarJibicomctranficnt by the addition of other crci:urc$ tobcits Objjfts, who will imagine that it is ever the lefs in the SubJL-d (as you fay) or that the alteration ot it would make ever the lefs change of the Asicnt ? I confefs, I conceive no: yet why there ftiould in this point of changing the Agent be any diffL-rcnce between Immanent ad? and Tran-hen:: though! ealily conceive that one only doth change the objeft. 7. Your friend M'^cinc/, pa^.i^i. ufcth thelimilitude of [a Rock in a. River ftandinj immovable, notwithftandingthe fucceflion in the waters that glide by it j] which I think is asdefcdivc afmilitude, as thefe here ui'ed ; yet its plain, that you cannot truly fay, This Rock toucherh the water that is an hundred miles from it. Suppol'etheSun wereancye, and could fee all the world at once, and that p«ri AciivhMe fincreccpuonc jpcdcrum Ab objeHU : Suppofe one man be born, or one flower fpring up this day, which was not in being or vilible ycilerday ; This Sun would fee that to day which it did no: lee ycli:rday without any mutation in it felf: Andyet/ft/;^isan Immanen: aft. Now I would know, whether it be fit to fay. This Sun fees that as in 6e/«5 which is not in being ; Or, Whether it be not fit-tefttofay [It begins today to fee that Creature which begun this day to exift] though by fo beginning it be not changed ? Its true, God/ore-^>ow/ all thing* that Ihallbe: banhit is no: zo finow tbit tbey bc,b[itzhitthej/f)iU be. 8. M'^eixj ibid, faith [Yet this is no hinderance but that there may be and is a change in the extrinlecal Denominations of Gods knowledge from the variation of the objefts hereof, g<;'c.] fo ethers common'y : And may I not hence conclude, i. That then I may denominate G^ds knowledge of tha prefenc exiftcnce of things, as Beginning with its objed; and his knowledge of the cxiflence or futurity of things, as Ending wi:h its objeftj that is, when the thing ceafcth to be future ortoexill? i. And may I not conclude, that this Denomination is fitteft, ind fo tliofe that thus fpeak , do fpeak more fitly then they that fpeak otherwifc ? 3« And that there is fome/«ni<i»ie«ttt»i is re for Inch a denomination: or elfc ic were an unfit denomination, feeing names and words fhould be fitted to the things fignified as necr asmay be ? 9, Do not you imply as much your felf, when you fay his Prefcicnce is a Knowledge in prafentl to him, though not ic prxfcnti i You confefs then that God doth not know £i<!pr^/c«t/, the things that now are not : buc when they exift he knowcth them ieprf/e»« i I confefs the doftrinc of the co-exiflenceof all things with God in Eternity, would falve many of theic things: but that you heredifclaim. 10. Where yoafay, that [Indeed God cannot be faid Now to know that fuch a thing is, but to know that now fuch a thing is (which was not before, as in the Errit. you adde)] it is a faying which I undcr-iiandnot, andconjedureit if ftill maimedof fomc necelFary limb which rtiould make it fpeak your fenfe : For I hope you do not believe what ever you fay. Thai Indeed God cannot be faid Now to know that thofe things are, which arc indeed : If he know it not Now, when will he know it ?

1) ^A. §. x6.

Afr. K. A S the glafs by the variety of faces which it reprefents, hictfi, as the ^^ gU^ without tiny chxnge in itreprcfenttvirioutfices, now one, now another j fidothgoifinow Vinous objeSit, nove one, novf aitBther, yet without cbinge. The Antecedent is munifefilyfdfe i for thit cicb of thefe feuerdfices afi a new fpecics en thcgUfs, and thofe fever aI fpecies trnfic fevenl chtngts. F?r thii purpofc Afr.Baxte r

might

C<53

might bttvermembreiwbAthtfgrtittLogick Mi Metipbyficli Mijiert fay, cdticeming Ens inccntionalcj thititi(Oppofeit$Tei\ciinim3izcn3.lc: Thei^cch%in the ghf it jniceiEnsintentionalcj in oppofitian to Miicrialc, it is not fo in oppojitioH to Rsale : But their putting sni non-putting, or the pre fence and nbfence of the fpecics, wa^a a real change, thoHghnotamnteriiloneinthegU^; fared a one as that it my be jeen, though net a material one that the chtUe that catcheth at if ever lilie to tal^e hold of it; Plainly thus, That it a Real Accident which if in the SubjeH really, and fo if that fpccies, fortvefeettinthcglafsi that k a Material Accident wbich is (o inthe fubjcH as to de--penionit alone for its fupport, without influence of the cedent; heat or cold have [u.h dependanceonthefubjcH, as that that alone can maintain them; as the heat mil (iic^ a while in the water, though tal^en off ft-om the fire , and cold in my hand, though tiiien CM of the water: Buttbefe Intentional Accidents though really inthefubieU, yet arefo little fupported by it, as that if the cedent do not coHtitme its influence, they tm>ncdiately ferifl)aa light in the air, thefe i'pecics, whether tn my glafs or my cyt i who hath fo much Logick and Metaphyfields tojpill upon all occafions a/s 3fr. Bixcerj would have betrayed, I Witt not fay ignorance, but incogitancy info trivial a punSiillio? Onwardf, the cafe if the fame for the Ipecies in the eye and the glaft, and a change is made by the prcfencc or ab(ence of the fpecie$.

§. i6. R.B. p\ IJp utatore nimium foelici,nihil infcelicius; (^ nimium fapientc]quis minus fa • L/ piensf If I ipill a* much Logick upon all occalions, as you do words, fure I am a voluminous Logician, and make up in number what I want in weight. You wanted an opportunity to maUiply words, for ought I know to no purpofe, unlefstoacquaint the unobfervant world with your well-furnifhed Intelleft, that they may be alTured, that you have all thofe things at your fingers end, as trivial pundillio's, which I am fo ignorant of} and thefe few words of mine have occa-iioned the opening of your pack, and iheexpanlion of your wares.

But, I. You arefainto ufetheold arcihcc of putting my words but as the ground of your paraphrafe, and then dealing with that paraphrafe of your own. This is not fo innocent a$ common a trick. I fpeak of a change lof the glaf'\ and you put \_achangeinit:~\ Hadnotyouncwlyrifen up ai the finil decider, I (hould have faid, it is yet fub^udice, whether the Inrentional or Spiritual Being, inqueftion, be indeed R« or not f And fo whether it make any Real change in the glafs. Iconfefsyoueafily difpatch the bufmcfsj which makes me think of ^or/<e»4 words, Exercit.Thilof.y. §.i. pio8. ^^ii ^ecies [int vijibiles in:}uircndum efi: TamcnimearumnaturainteUeSiuieflignota, quam e-e fenftbus notx. Teripateti-ciftamenCT'lnc, ^cut (s'alibi facilifexpeditio. ^^alitates aiunt effe Jpirituales, <& corporis ejfc obieStivum, quodhabetinfpeculovelftmiticorperi. Ts^bis hoc non eil JX' tit: qui qu^rimta porrd , quid qualitas fpiritalis, aut quomodo corpus objcSfive pof-fit effie in fpeculo ? 'Ham hx videntur (ontraiiHidnem quxniam implicare , cer-poris dari qnalitatem fpiritalem,^ rem extra fpeculum exijlentcm e{fe infpccub, &:.

r. But fee what unreverent thoughts fuch Ignorancs as I, are apt to have of learned men ! I am confidently perfwadcd, that you, wha are ^o fully acqnaintcd-with Gods Nature and Immanent A<fls, as to be at a certainty wheie I am ac a iofsjfor all that do not know what that i$ that you fee with your eyes j nor whether i: be in the glafs ornot I And therefore the Lefturethac yoa have read me of Ens intentionalc hath been loft labour as to me I

C«<3

3. And you kad done but your part if you h«d oU'erved tbtt I fpeak n^t' of the meer Reception of the agents aftion, but of :he Repr^fent^ipn to us of the/))««« j which rtieuld not be confounded. ,

4. Are you fure that it is from the objc^, that the glafs receives that viIkum^ on that you imagine ? 1 f it be, Rocks and ilones arc more adivc cicaturei th<» foaiedull fouls will eafily believe j when at the fame time the fame Rock or moun* tain may perform looooo aftions upon fomany eyes or glalles. Yea if in the midftof the Adionof this ftone or Rock, youdobut ^ive your gUfs % knock, and b.eak it into a hundred pieces, h will multiply the a^iou oft^e Rockem buo-drcd fold i and thai without touching or coming 4iearthe Agent I li icoiQtpc<Kty ipoit to fee the aftivity of thefe nimble Rockvand Mountains ? i am oneof tboie Hercticks.that think thefe works of God mull be the matter of ©ur admirationjbuc cannot be compicLended by us here : and that it is no good conftquenc^j that bet caufe you and your fellows nakedly affirm the contraiy (vea notwithftanding att your proofs) therefore Dci Cartes, S' K-Vi&hi f'^hite, Hsbbesi befidwaU. the ekl AdverfarieSj are certainly in crrour. I (hall acknowledge uv»i*c aftion of the Light, or air on the glafs, then of the gbjcft, which i(xmibm^ne qt^sHWu. But withall I fufpeftj ihat the fame Light or air doth perform the fame aCTion .iu the glafs when you iland not before it, or whentheobjed is abfent ; and yet no jpe-eics is then fecn j no nor vifible. And 1 think that there is the fame aftion on every g!afs-window, yea on every wall, or ftoiK, or other body, as is on your fpeculutHi and yet you fee nothing on them as you do on ic. And Ho^bes fai;th« Xhac it is in the eye and not in the glafs, which you think you fe€ in th€ goal's (h« reproaching of our Doftrine of vifible^aw, I pretermit;) and if fo, then there is not (o much alteration in the glafs, as you ijtraginp. And indeed, you fay little to prove it. If your Argument from fight would prove any thing, it would prove that the face is a foot or a yard (ormoreif you draw back) bchiiwJc the glafs, and not in the glafs: And yet if you go behinde you (hall fee nothing : Will you believe your eyes that things change into fuch various colours, and fhapes, and quantities as fomc glaffes by fmall mutations of poflure do reprefent them ? Will you believe your eyes that a ilrait liafF is crooked in the water ? I can tell you by my obferva-tion when I was a Boy, that if you will kill a Fi(h in a River with a Gun, you Hiuflallowmuch to the fallacy of your »JC^/«»j. If then either it be the adioa of the light or air, or fomething elfe, and not the objefi:, then it is nothing to me, who fpcke only againft a change by variation of objeAs: Or if the forefaid aft ion being fuppofed to be the fame on the glafs, when fcveral objefts, or no ob-jeds are before it, that which is fuperadded from the objeft is nibil reakt this is nothing againft me : Orif the/'peczei'.which fcemsa foot behinde the glafs be nop in the glafs, but in the eye or fome where elfe, and fo the glafs be more truly an Agent by Refleftion, then a Recipient of thai [pedes which I fee, ftill this is nothing againft what I faid. So that laying aiide ail that Reception of the aftioi\ of light, or any thing elfe, which the glafsreceives when there is no objeft pre-fent, and laying afide all that which is Received into the eye and air, and not in the glafs, and whereof the glafs is but a ^<i«/i)5a< qus nen; then call the reft an Ens intentionale or fpirituAley or what you will i but prove it to be qitii reale altering the glafs, and do not nakedly affirm it.

You iay,that my great Logick and Metaphyfick Matters fay,That Ensintctithi^ ttakM oppofed to Reale i^ OAaXtmle: and yet you fay that the fpecies in the glafs is apt oppofed loEnsrealc.h island it is not,feem reconcilable to youthen without

adir

«^jftifl<5Hon. Indeed as Real is oppofedtoCfefgned] I doubt not it is Real, but as itis oppqfed to Modes and Relations, and Tuch like, that fdmc place between Ent and liJbU, ft muft better be known what it iSjthen the name of Ens intentiomle or fyirituult will a<;q,uaint ns, before we can conclude for certain that it is Real.

As for your Material Acciderrt, it will require more ado to prove, that there IS any fuch thing in the world, as an Accident depending on the Subjcd alone for fupport, eipccially a <^uality, as you jnftance in : Sure you intend not the withdrawing of the influence of every efficient, but of fome lower or inftru-mental: I think,at lcaft,Gods efficiency is neceflary to be conrinued,for the Continuation of the being of every Accident, and ordinarily fome lower efficiency too.

As for the Logick and Metaphyficks which on all occafions I fpill, I take the charge as unfit to be anfwered, as not coming from your head or lieart, but from your Naturals, your fplecn and gal.

My Ignorance in comparifon of you, lamfo eafiljr brought to acknowledge, that I Wonder you (houid think fo many words neceffary to evince it: (yet you flioujd have done it in intelligible language, and not abrupt expreflions, defeftive of fenfe, almoft fuch as H?croffi dcfcribetb in his lib. i. cont.^ovin. initio.) Buc how did you prove my Ignorance or Into|itancy ot Ent intentiomle i Deep fi-lencel Bccaufe I did not mention k, or die who knows why ? By that reafon I am ignorant that M' K. is an honeft man, becaule I do not mention it > But by what is faid, you may fee its poflible to have heard talk of Ens tntentionde, and yec to think this Hmilitude tolerable.

And what if you obtain all thdt you contend for ? vf^. That the fimilitude is faufty ! Alar, Iflialteaiily grant it of any fimilitude whereby we illuttrate th^ Nature or Adsof God. Suppofe-thenthat this glafs did make the fame Re-prcfentations fne reccptiche fpeeierun : Or becaufe thcfe inanimates are more remote, ufc the fitnilirude of the Oeulta Vniverfaiiff which I mentioned cvenndw. I am troubled that you force me to weary the poor Reader with fo many words on fo poor and unprofitable abufincfs: But there s no remedy.

■ ,- -^ ■ .... . . •\ ;§^. zr^'' ■.■■■■■■-■'

^r.K. Vt 0» whereas :!Wf .Baxter Adiesj Tbit whstfoever fome fay, he iotb not thin\, IN tbit the beholding often dtjhnU colours xt one vierv, doth mii{e ten difiinSi aSs of the fight, or Alterations on it j / do not thinf^thxt ever ntionsl man (aid they do, fir it were jlrange there Jhouli be but one view, and yet ten diftinH aSls of fight j but tbequejiionis, iVbetbcr^e change of one of ibefeob]ecfs dotb not change the fpccies itt tbfeye, itndfo occajion another vicvf or fglxd Of rather it is beyond all quefiion that they 4«.' andyet.wbaherthey dotrnonecdiiotbi^quefiioncdKtti^cr i thepointwat liesbeforc w, ii, iVbether dijinici ornew aHs do 7iot Caufe an alteration? Which U that that we bAve jufi Caufe to a^rm veith cottfidevct^ can have n ; place in CJod j and consequently na new immanent tAH ; fo then there being nothing produced by :Mr. Baxter rvhicfj may fug-gejl a (u^ition tbattbcre may mw Immanent AHs be admitted in Gid, or any bit fuch JiS are Eternal^ Gome we to the ■ ■ ■<

■r

K.2. V^Ou are minded toplay with the ambiguity of the word [View] which X I cake for all that Reception in the eye, oc aftivity of it which it per-

L » formcth

C<8]

formeth in one iRftant} and Co for that natural Aft whereby I fix my eye on one place at ence, feeing as many things as at once I am capablcof feeing: You take it, it fceros for your intentional Aftion, or alfo the aft which the vilive pewer performcthjai in reception of that alone. 1 think the fenfe 1 ufe it in, is more common. And I fay again, that it is none of our queliion, what light, air,er'c. do on the eye: for they do no more when 1 behold one Rock, then when 1 behold the lands on the fbore : But the Qucftion is, What the objefts do over and above on the eye ? And whether it 1 lee many millions of millions of fands ac one inflant, there be fo many Real Aftions ot my eye at that inftanr ? And whe* tber every diftinft fand that is added or taken away, there be one Aft added or taken away, and fo a real alteration in my eye ? The reft which you adde ii over and over anfwercd before, and therelore being afliamed that I have ,faid fo much on founpr(.fi;ablea point (thrush conlirained) I iurccale : Onely adding this brief rehearfal of what is faid betoie.

1. Remember that we fpeak not of thofe Immanent afts whofe objeft is Eternal: but of thofe that have a tcmpotary cbjtft, as the aftual exiftence of things, (iT'c.

a. The fe kinde of Immanent Afts may be called Tranfient after a fort, in that they do quoad Tcrrmnitionemobjcclivdm, pafs to an exttinfick objeft.

3. t/igcre, in the fenfe now taken, when applied to Ged, fignificth fomething more then meerly E/?e.

4. The whole Generlcal Effence of Aftionjis found injthej^frtrj of Aftion. ^. JrttcUigere , VcUc. Jmarc, relate to fome Objefts: f^i IvtcUigity aliquti

JnuUigit: qui Amat, diquid JmM. Thcfe terms therefore do alwayes (wbefi affirmed as being in God) connote their Objefts.

6. Thci e is a nectflity therefore that the afts be varioufly denominated from the diverfuy of objefts. It is no way fit to fay, ThatGod doth Nill Good, or Will fin, or that his VeUeCf 'l^pUe is all one : Or that his Jntelligerc (sr Fclk is all one. For, as it is laid, the Aft connotes the Objeft : and therefore wc arc net fo much as to afcribe the aft to God when there is not an objeft for it j or as to an alienc Objeft. Elfc we might fay, 73ei TntcUigere (^ luetic funt idem : 'Dcics IntcUigh Peccata: Erg9 7)cu« Vultpeccata: And that God Nil-leth Good jbccaufe he WillethGood,feeing in God Fellt indfl^jUt are all one.

7. Thisnectffity of various extrinfecal denominations is ordinarily confeffcd by the mok rigid Divines. 1 fhall cite one more anon.

8. This Denomination hath/««i<aw«i<ttwi» re, or elfe it were delufory and abufive j thefe being the fittcft names that moff agree to the Things (of which ktMeuriJ?.Mitaph.Scoti,li.z.c.i, Qonclnf.i. t;'Ducand./.i. iiyj.19. ^.$.§.i;j,i4i. Cr Aquin.ifc Vcrhatc, Matcr.y.q.i,i,&.c.) Notions and Names are true or ialfe, as they agree or difagree to the things.

9. On the fame ground as God may thus be faid 10 Undcrftand, Will, Nil!, Love, (^c. and thele may be faid to be not the fame, he may alfo be faid to have divers aftsof Intelleftion, Willing, Nilling, and thefe not to be rhe fame: e.g. That it is not all one to eleft F«cr, and to cleft ^cib».

• o. Whatfoever this diverfity of names impiieth, as its foundation in God, (whether a bare Relative diverfity, or alfo a Modal, or what ever the like) it is certain that it im^'lieth no Compofuion in hira, but it isoneljwhat is confiftent with his fimplicity.

It- SoBie of the objefts of Gods Knowledge and Love, arc not from Eiernity. " The

The Exlftencc is more then the mccr E/c Volitun, or Will that they fliall cxlft : And it is not all one to know the 1 bing it fclf initfelf^ and to know it in its Caufe. Though God therefore did from Eternity intuitively know the Ej?c fo-litnn, and know the Creature in himfelf its Caufe^ and know its futurity, and To fore- knbw all things: yet it follows not that he intuitively knew the Creature in it felf, as exiiting, (Unleffe we afferi the co-exiflenceof all things in Eternity with God.

12, There is therefore the fame reafon to Denominate Gods Intelledion, LovejCT'c- as beginning and Ending with its Objcfts, as there is to denominate them as divers from the diverfity of objeds. And therefore this is a fit and nc-ceflaiy way of fpeech. It is not fit to fay, God is now Creating the world quoii tMionHftrmaliutcm, though you evcr-lcok the tftcft : it is not fit to fay. That God now knows that the world will be Created ( unlcfTe you refpeft feme new Cieation) or ihn »Abrabatn, SMtfa, T>avid, fhall Die, or that Chrifl Ihall rile again, ^c,

13. This Denomination of Gods ads as beginning and ending, hath as much foundation in the thing, and is as true as the Denomination of his ads as various. And this may as well cqnfill with Gods Immutability, as the other wiih his Sin piicity. The reafon is eridtmly the fame.

Now for the one, hear what otheis fay. SchihUr C^ct li.c 3. Til. 6. n-147, 248. ^ajito eft de jiciidevtibtu qux in Vto put. Mac etim folum poJSunt ctrnpofi-tievm in Vco factrc, &c. Pndcjpectalitcr rclivquitur j quod in 7Jt'o non fit compefi-ste (X lubjeHo (^ atcidcttte, p maxime ei cenvaiiat Agere, tdli aHitve qua pradicdmcn-talU difipojfit. mm aHiovts-non comparantur &d agcvs, per modum effendi in, fei felutn per modum ejicndi ab alto.ut infra, &c. j4tque tta. aSltoncs tantum apprcbcndmtur ut egrcdicvtcs Ah tQentiA rci. >!^od auttm cgrcditur ab cjjcntia rci, htc, to ipjo, non pott fi cum cffentia fiierecowpopticiicm, qua (xtrcmornrh umtvim rcquirit. And n. 97> Ham yiHttMs'Di'utnx trivf(uin(s,von funt fub tdivi in Vto, fed folum a Deo proce-dunt y utidenuUam civipoptjontm cum Veofacium, &c. <^uAnquam idetiam {verum^ cfi deaBiovibuslmmanevttbtis: Hacevimven dicnmur Jmmavevtes pofiiive, quafi in agenterigideUquendo(ttb}ccie?itur, j(d Nsgativi(elum,quia in extcrtiam mitcriam ncn travfiunt. Vndeadratiomma^ioniffimplicitertS'immanevtiits' tranfeuntis, nen re-quiritureffe in, fed folum e^e ab ; Idecquc veutrum factt cum agcnte Compefitioiiem.. Etjic ammavofira, fiiticipiatirJelligcrcautreile, vcntamencompchitur, tumcxfuoef-(e tsf JntellcBiovt (^ FoUtiovc qui tales fuvt: fed in utroque (latu aque ifi Anima pm" pUx,. 2?jx;,qiia tales funt, ^iaad intiUcHiOMmpetefl tonfequi altqua compcptio, p fit perfpecitmlnteUigibiltm.']

l^eeiicrmantvSjjiim.Tkcolcgl.i.c.i. maintaincth, that the Pcrfons in the Trinity , difler iicm the Divine Eiierce, as Muitu arc, and from each ether as Me-dtii A Modo, and that E%s and Modw make no Ccmpcfttion. Much mere may it be lo faid of Relaticnsto things external.

jiltivgiui'FrtbUm.lhtolog'Piir.i.ptig.fS, diftirguiftieth Gcdsaflions, i.Sutit aBiu i7ittifip(i(^ Inrmarcntcs qunAv tranjcuTit iv eh}e8umext€rvtim tr tutlun prtrfwi reffcdum 6ut ^(T.v ad 71 'ilu.. TtlesfinttaHiuptrfcrMesqvosSihoLfiici ncticnales voctnt, gignerc, fpiiare,6ic. Horuniabl$lutaffi7iCCtJJitai abfquepoteKtiaadoppcptumt drjvitatcrni. 2. ^hiit i:({iutxtriipiiquiK0Tifuiit}Rt>eOi fed a Deoj pve qui a Z'ce(«rtcfltdivc, iv Creaturh tutim fubjeHivi: vclut trtare, guletttare, redimcre,. Crc. J)(tu evim (xtririfaici lolum ab iisdtnmivatur. 3. Sunt tABtbi Ivtrivfeci qui' iimin2)(0f jedCoihitantcsrefpcSfum ac ^env ad extra, ut fare, vtUt. Stit ivim

Vemnonfohimfe, [cdctiMtemniatquicquideJifcibiU, fijentptffibile, five utfuturum, yult eudtn nsn foLm (c, fed eujmAlu extra fe, &c. Hvjufmodi aHw (uRt Ztccrcti, r^• Utivinimirumadexcrs, (^pratervoLunisum^.cirftiutunt rcrum extenurujn. Con*-pc{uieaMcmhincmAktnfertHr,&.c. Matkilfo, ihac he name* the hrti fort onely Immanent at^s.

And for the fitnclTc and neccITuy of the D«neminations, hear what Eftiu$ con* {c{\cih in Sent.l. I Jin. 19. §. j. T)c hic igitur fcieutiu TDct (viz. ni cimncubilm) qua/mUO'ipfifinedubiojittnfeinvuriibilif, varie tartuu loqmnos 9portct, prout vaii-antuf propofujoncs iecuuJum tempore. Ctm emm nulUm prcptfitiontm fcirc quit dii catur, bocfcteudimodo, mfi ^eram, aJcmqiu propefiiid propter mutitionem rerum u temporum, mode vera fu, modofiifsi coHfequenserti, Deun nuke fare propofitman AliquamquampoftcavefciAt, crcontru. ^tdperfn^idtvsterr^orumdifferentiae fdcile cjidccUnrc. Nampropofnionemvcr^m ie prxierm, ut,Chri^tu nxttu eft, ime bit vulUAunosnonfcieihii, fedGhriftojmofcirecKptfi cjudemiamennunqium fare dcfinet, ficutnecuUamdiimquxfitprxtcritttcmporii, quispropofitio de frxtcrito vcrx, fcmper crttvcrj^ ^odintcUigcdeprAUrM in genera Nim ft tcrtwn tempaa defignct, ut Heiri lutm eft Chriftus.fcire amies'^t, ej' defuturtfimpUchcr, ut, Poft bidiuim pt^ciu pet. RurfumpropofuiouCmde futuro veram, utOmnt.s rcfurgemu, jciva quidcm ib atcrnOy nee fieri potcft ut tulcm aliquando incipiufcire, quupropofiuo dc future versfewf per fuit vera, It jucndofimiliter dc futiiro in gcnere. Sed earn aliquando fcirc definct i vmpepoft refurrcSioucmfaHam, qitta tuvt vera cjj'c dcftnet tpfapropofifio. Vemque pro-pojitionem deprtfcmivcram, fcitttntifpcrdumcaveraminet, -jclutiftam, Eukfia mi" litat. oAc tilem incipit iliquando fcire, i^ aliquand« fcire iejinit $ nifi forte veiitoii prc^ pojttioniifit perpetua. Sec. Torre omniihacloqtteudivirietas 7i8n inde ndfcitur, qk64 cireiVeifcieutiamacddAtikquaHutatio, [edquia mututttur res fubitS^. Vriie hc-k ceje eft t^ ipfj/i miuari proptfittonet, Sec Mantfeftiun eft autcm rebus mutath noii muffario fcientam mutari, iiccreatam qutdem, nip quid aliud concur rat, vclut Com* pofitio out divifio, aut certuuio major per cxperientiam rei prafcvtit accepta. ^a in Deo locum uou habcnt. Sicut ergo fckntia Medici invaritta pemtanet duraddcmbominiob variMt ytu affeSlionent, modo bac phirmacii, mtdo alia diwrfj frcefcribii, &CC.1

.'14. Lalily, I againdefirc the Reader to remember, that if I fccm in all tl>{» to fp^ak fcepticallyj it is no wonder, when all that i intend ii but to convince thfife Telf-conceited Learned men, that thefe things are indeed beyond theic reach, and chat they know not what they chink they know : it baing my own opinion. That A«^ion, Litelledion-and Will, are but Metaphorically afcribeJ tti Cod, and that we cannot know what that is in propriety!, which- phefe espreflS* ans.do fhadow out in Gpd.' TboJf'biie iiaith* iKfli/»..S4flriZr./z.iX*^.i. pagU'i^, IJ7. '^^^^edicitmuahftrabendoawftMtcmceptibm, efie Titum mim fmpltcitateri prnplicifftmam, quanequefitDcut, ncqaeeusy neqMalind fornkdiPOf qu9\d- mt cbgitit^ie pofftmi^; fed noftra/i cogitatienes earn mxdequate rcprsfentare j non quaft acoipteutes ah-quodunumexpUiribui quaibiaHufmt, felaccipienio ptrticiptiiones qnafdani infhivres coquodipfeeft, 0' dfjjfmiliores quint (alivavelpediculus oft refpcHu bofniHis. Wbc* Ither this hold Qrnoc of the actions, ftcMGr'\£«i, I. doubr not but it holds'.of Intelledion and VoUtiaa: .ar at iea(l thaoiAJcniea Are uoocPBairt'Whatrhefe are irf Qod. Andtbe^ftfangjecottfidsnccofmenin.t'his;, thattheyknoW chatWbich lie^ man knows indeed,, hath made chem urtceveremly vent their concei't^y -andfill the Church with perplex.ing,ajDnrrovccfiesabout things that none can determine. As' M' 'Sur^eJS fiuib of jMlli£c. Lsd. i: ^Oal/ you muft take no:ice char we are

inmecrdarkncfs, and not able to comprehend how God is faid to i&. or work, Ct'c Therefore it is a fure truth, De Deo ctiam vera dicerc pemulofum efi, (^ tunc digaiVeumafiimimws, cumiva(iimabtkm dtcimta; then do we rightly cfteem of him, when wc Judge him above our thoughts or efteem.} i^atih. Paris fpeaking of ths Dominicans teacbingj which caufcd that great diflcntion and confuhon in the Univerfny of Parjf, writes thus (ad annum Vom. ii^i. as he is cited by .the Prefaccr loGuilid. dcSanBo Amore) Incipiclfantdijputarc (3' diffcrcre fubtiltm 6f celjitu quam deiuttaut cxpedivft: ^uivanverentcstdjigcremontes a ghria I>ei eppri-vtexdiniubAnturfecreti Dei tnve(iigabiliatcmfre perfcTtitari, (^^I'diiia Vti qux fkvt abyjfiis mult J, vimis prafumptuose indagare. Vco cnim plui ptacetJirnretfiJeiftmpliihaf't. qutm mmii tranftcvdns in Thcolegia fubtihtitf-'] DvTvdji l^rndit.grat.l.z. Crtm. 5. §.i ^. Sedquidfictfihtc bumana ratio non fcrat ? An mbtl crc' dendummbis ifKumbitmfi quod quotnodo fiat, humjm rattOTte ex- SeeM'I^.'s own pltcarepojfit f MyfleriumfKcforjitanadoraruium pottut quam fcrw conftflion, how undum,8ccr £1/1.2.Cnm.j. §.zo. pag. {mki) 4of. Etum littlewecancon-itontriihcjco fittri, licet mnquamduhitanmdcfancli'Dtindtura, ceive or c'xpre[s tavquam dc ovmi fcdtrU rtitH alicnijfima, hoc tsmendiu m( fHijcTt- of God, in the fufHtcHui[fc {forte ctiam bodie non faucosfuij en jos tenet) quxntm end of his Epift. fciUcetfit ilia vera ratio, qui modm ofcrationU Vivina quo fat ut fe Dedicat. in omni aSiione tanquam Caufa cjjicaciffima immifceat, extra tamen enuiem vitit ceyitigioncm, citra jujiam culpte fujpicionenn Et an hedie per omnia fatit cxpIicatHmhabeamm,Veusnovit,8cc. Srgmfieatetiam Calvinus, multis hunt itodunt vifuiu t(fe tnexphcabilcm, &c. Hocmodotitinscorfulcndum ce7ifuitnojirapietaii,fifa. Uunur hebttudinem fenjus mftri njfienum hoc non capcre-l And why ftiould not the fame Confeflion extend to the preient cale alfo ? Though we do not ule to ■con-fefs our Ignorance till we are utterly at a lofs (and then we fay as Cajctan when he was ftall'd, It doth net quictarcintcUtHum) yet we have oft as great caufe to con-fefs it where we are confident fometim«.s J as perhaps Anba that blames Cajetart for his Confeffion of Ignorance, might knew as little as Alv$re\ that commends it for a mofl holy and pious fpeecb.

I had thought to have faid no moie to this point, but find- * Ihjtew Afr.Ru-ing a moft Learned, * Orthodox, Judicious Divint Robert ihcrioTdbaibfome Btronius {Cimcrofecundus, velC^mcvcni fecundus) to ipeak jarringxfith him; fo fully in this point, in his excelUnt Treatifc dcTeccato Mor- and I do notundef talt^ Veniali, I have adventured to tranfcribe the whole Cha- tj^e to jujlifie ail pter, it being not long, both that the Reader may fee the Rea» that any matt hath lonsof tbt like paifages in my fore-going Replies more clearly, fnid, when IcaU and thai Mr.I(,. may be yet better fatisfied that I am not fo fin- them OrthodtXibut gular in thefe things, as he fccms to think me. / confc^ I thinly

that for folidity in the controverted points that they meddle vith, Davenant, Camero and Baronius are the glory ofBi itainj at having happily hit on thut mean, vehich many others have mift oj, rvhtcb 1 would not have underjUod at d:Jpuraging ahj others: for even in this, they hdve mavy excellent (Companions, and others hate tbeir excellencies, that were 7iot in this fo happy os tbry. 0«r2{cwtwnf</B.U{her;P.PrtftcrjZ).Field, and mavy another famous light in England, kave not only dcferved the honour of eminent Learning and ^iety, but even in tbii judicious Vifcovery of the truth, between the cxtxeams which others have run into, they have helped to reduce theiiolcntto CModtratJon, and tojhi'ff men A fttrtrvetty to overcome the advcffary,then their iifaivantagtmt (xtre^s.

Difp.

C70

Dify. Pirte i» Ccd.6, Deum PoiTc co» amircquos prius odit, & odiflc eoi

quosprius aoiaric, a'lfq; ulU vel pbyGca, vel morali voluncacii Tuz

mutaiione, obiccr Dcdaracur.

'C'X ioSlr'maprteedenti ftnienetraJiia de ju^ificatoram aJcertuntempitt exclU' •^j/oneabeofavoris 'Divinigralu, qui print diligtbantur, neqaajus n fequitur Deum, out volant af en "Dei infe uutabiUm ejfe, fiveloquiMur de laatabilitate phyfisa, fve de muiabilirate morali.

Tiim quoJaJ diviuuat amren'cxtcutioHU Attinet^Tieum non amare ja/lificatot peccatimorialk rtitaittvolutosantireextcationis, nihil aUaie(iy qm »eumnoncon-ferrein iUiSeabomJpiritualia, feu media falatU, qatprim in tos conferehat nuUa igiturefibicmutatio quoad ad luimmingntet, quiin ip/b T>eoexifiunt, fed tantuia quoada^Mtranfeuntes, qui r**'*t extra T)eum (^ inboiHinibmrecipiuntur, & pro-iridciU raufatU nontnutaiur'Dcut, fed iUiin qutbmbi a&nt, (3' eorun tjfida ttt'u piuatur. 7):cet aliquU: "D.'ua noafolum Hon confert ilia beteficiaia eos, [ed etiim durante CO fiatunonvuU ea conferrc : prim aatea voluit ca (onfcrre . (ff prelude tnuiatuefl. Re/p. Votuit prim ilia bencficia tommanicare iu exifteniibmin alio (latu Seiiu exiflerttibm inhocfiatu impietatUf &* impjenitentit^ neq, jam vulr, Heq^unquaft vo'uit, itHOa!^ ^ternon«luu b£C bemficia coatmunieare. Quamvu'gi-tar durante hoc fiatu be>tevolentia7}ei quafiligata d* iapeditafit i ut fupramonui^ line taminnonfequitur earn In fe mutatam iffe .- fedtantora mutattmejfe ejus ob, je£fu«i, quia via objelttim ejusy boc efiy homines ek£li, prius crant eapaces iflotum benejiciorum nunc vera eorum capaces nonfunt.

J, Major (3* g'ravior difficult at e(i de a-aorecomplacenti*, (st olio diJplicentU eioppo/ito. Cun enim hi aifju fint immanentes, boc ejt, tn ipfo T)eo exi/ientes, ik mutatii videtur ipfe Dent infe mutari. Rejponderi folet primo, non mutarihot a^M realiter^ (g* a parte rei { quia uter^ bic acf*t in Deo fuit ab ttterno, &* in teterawn in eo durabir, cum rejpedu ad diverfos ijltM bominit flatm, quorum alter alteri in tempore fuccejftt, Ita refpo^det Fjnfeca tom.i.Mitapb.iib.j.cap*^ qus/i.^, feif.7» ^aoilfi (inquit) qui* objiciat eundem poffe prius odit haberia'Deo, fifitiu' jufius, pofiea vera diligi, ltfitjuftts,(j;' vice verfa, Jim ulli divine voluntatis mu-tatiene, ergo nihil repugnare quo minus Jivim voluntas nulla mtdo mutata tranfeat amlitione in voUtionemretejufdem. ex diSfit patet folutio. Deus eitiia non tuodem odiohabet, acdHigit pro eodem tempore^ fed prodiverfis. Adde, quod etft in eoden bonine ju/fitiafacceditpeccato, autpeccatum\uftiti£, tamen odio, quo Dius iUum profequitur ut peccatore/n, nonfaccedit amor, quo ittjin idigit atju/iwa, aut contra ; [eduterq^ ajfiifut divinus tteinus efl rejpiciens diverfos bominis fiatus, quorum alter alteri {uccedit in tempore.

4. SecanJorejpondeo t qutnv'u concedereouts ej/e aliquam mutationem (^ fuccef-ponem inailibus immanentibus amor it (3* odii divini ftrmaliter conftderatit, quale-nuiperrationemdifiinguunturabejfcntia divina <(^ inter fe, bocefi, quamvii dice-remus a£Iurn amorU complaceutiis erga ele£fumin hoo cafunon ampliusefeinDeo, eiqifuceederea^UTiodtidiJplicentii, non tamen inde fequeretar effe mutationem ali" quanrealeini»ipfo Dio. tl am ait us Dei libsri nihil fuper ad iunt voluntati aut t^entititvinsy prxtcr rejpe3;infea relationen rationit, aut extrinfecamaliquam coiMotatioiem, que tanenadrealemeorum entitatemnot pertinent: namtotaeorum MtitM realis efi ipfa D:i ejflntia, Miibi/^ intrinfeei includunt prater eam. ^amvk

fgitur

t733'

i^har'Detu Jefineret amars est qttosprtus amaiat, non mutaretat mut~atione realh quia nihil teaie amitte,ret. f^ inciferet eos amare quos prias 6dtt,non mutixemryquiA nihil realeei ateederetj mutatio autem reafit ntn ft, fwoUqutt additioneaut aklni tinne reali.

5. Non mcefit efi ut hie probera aifus iUof nttSam realem entitatem ( five ea vo> tetarperfe6lio, five extenfio a&us divini ad ohjtifa) fuperaddere ej/hntix Sviax* Nan Eva«geUci omnes hoc unanimiter tenent: (& quod ad Pontificiot attinet, quamvu C-ij tanus in t*"partem Tbamg qttxfl, i9> art, % (3* i Fanfsca/tfm- j« Idetaph.lib 7,cap ^, qutejl.%. fe£l,^%t3»SxUs i3,ix^ qa^ft.6.art.i^traif^ ^IP'i* ft^ 8. doceant aCfus liberos TJei^ feu decreta ejas,fuperadJere e^entU divintrea^ iem quandam entitatem, quis ab ttemopoiuit non ejfe in 7)e0y qttis^ revera in eo noa fuijffet, ^ ab ttterao aliter deerevijfeti O" hot adus non habuiffet^ major tamen (^

meliot eorumparsincontrariaefi[ententia vi^^ Suarez. ro/w. s* Mltaph. di^.io, f((f.g (^ VAiqiicz. in i"*^ parte a Tbomt. di^utiSo.cap-itO**. Valent. fo«.i» dtlput. I.qu£fi. ig.pan£f.4. AnubaX inprimampartemThom^i di^ut ^4.cap.i. (^ fe fequentibas, Bccanus in fumma. Parte 1. Tra&, i. c4f.ii. qtiiep.4. Tngofusfn fumina Tbsol<^i(a Bonaveoturx ^u«y?. i^. art,t,di$bi» coneluf, i, FrancifcuS Cainel variarumdijpat tom.t.indifp deprttfcientia'Dcidub.i p.^7,Scc. Horumfcn-tentia procuUabio e/t verior il/aalterat qaiafiin'Deo efi realkaliquaentitoii que ab xternopotuit in eo non ejfey atg adeo potuit non omnino ejfe, feu ejfc merum niiil, necejfario feqttiittr aliquidej'ain'Deo quod non eft 'Diui.

6, T>i(et aliquii: fi mutatu aSlibuT liberit T>eus reaitter mn mtttattir, poterlt /alvafua immutahiHtate^ mutate decreta fua de rebus futurii, O* proinde poterit incipere veSe quodaunquam antea volait, vel definere ve/le quod pritu veluit, NaM talk mutatio deaetotum divinorum fit fine aliqua adtUtione, cut ablatione reali i JSie^JT>uplicem ej^e mutationenii vix. Fhyficam (Sf HoraUm» Phyfica,feu realU ma* tatio fit per additionemt out ablationem alicujui entitatit realU. Moralu mutatio eft propofiU (s* voluntatU, out etiam cognitionU (S" fcientite mutatio j ut fi quid quod antea patabat -ueruMydeinde falfunt jaiicet; O* quod antea facere deereverat poftea nolit, quod fane magnam imperfeifionetaineoquific mutatur arguit, VideWii'(\Me* ^ium in I '^partem Tbom« fuper qvuft 9, art.^. Cum izitur Deus dicitur abfoluti immtuabilU id non minui inteUigitur de ntorali quam de Phy^ca immutahilitate, ntm. mutatio propofiti (st confilii qut morali* "vocatttrj arguit inc9nftantiam, impru* dentiam, ta* cognitionit imperje£lio»emi qut nonminus fuunf* & abfoluti T>ti per-fitiio'ti repugnant^ quam Piyfica,feurealU imitatiOt at bene obftrvat Suart-z. tom.t, Metapb dilpB^o. feSl.Q.num.^S.

7 Ex hi* patet Deunt, cam odio difplicenttt pro/eqaitur eleSum, quern prius amabat amore complacentiie,non mutari s quaaviifortaffc nunc minimSfit in eoaifuS complacenttte, confideratus at relpeifum rationit ad tale objeffum divine e^entit fuferaddit ; Prima enim ablato tali a(tu, 'Deus phyfiic (3* realiter non mutatur^ qwanihil eidecedit preter meru^ ref^eifum rationit ut irrefi'agabilibui argumentU dzmonftrant Suarcx- (f l^afjuei, loiiicitatii. Seeundo, nequemutatur moraliter, quia non matat propofitum, fed contra, permanet in fuo propofito, aut potiui itt naturali fua inslinatione, qua ah etcrno fait, nunc eft, <st feraper erit, propenfus ad amatdam virtutem , (s* ad deteftanda vitia, feu petcata. Ptrmanet etiam in [uopropofito perducendi cos quos elegit & ju/iificavitad <eternamghriam, nam foHdumfiat Dei fundamentumj habensfigiUum hoe, Novit Timinus eos qni funtfui, 1 Tim.i, ijj..

C743

Mark here thit the reafon which BamiUu, Burgcrfiicim and others girc againft Gods change of his Decrees, vj^. be (hould be morally mutable, holds not of the imntnent afts which preroppotc their objefts, and whofc objtfts arc really mutable : as Bartnim here manifelteth. It is certain that things are fometimc future, fomedmc prcfcn: or exil^em, and fometime paft ; and that they are lo is of God, but without moral mutation: therefore his Knowing them lo, and his Willing and Approving them fo, is without moral mutation too. So the fame man is good or bely to day that was bad and unholy yeftcrday : theieforc God may Icve him today with cemplacency and approbation, whom he difliked before j and may know him to be as be is, which before he did not, becaufc he was not as he is. 1. Note the reafon why God cannot change his Decrees: Both becaufe they do effcd or produce their ownobjeds (as commonly called ) viz. Kmim pituriti' nan, when as Oods Approbation, his Knowledge^r^ew/S^w, hij Complacency, O'c. do prcfuppofe their objcds. i. And it would be acontradidionfor the fame event, to be future and not future, e. g. mans falvation : therefore if God abfolutcly Decree that Trtcrrtiail be faved, arid after Decree the contrary, thefirft Decree muft be changed caufleily, and for want of power not be executed} and alfo as it is verbum memitt it n^^ft ^ ^*^« • which cannot be.

I Had thought to have faid nothing of panicular Scriptures that (peak of Gods afts which W4 call Immanent as Beginning or Ending , bccaule they arc fo commonly known : But left any fliould think I flight Scripture Argument, which I principally eftetm, or left they take it for granted that there is none fuch, becaufe •one are produced, I will adde fome texts in conErmation of the minor of this fol-k>wlng Argument.

If God himfclf in his Word do ordinarily fpeak of his own Ads, which we call Immanent, as Beginning or finding, then is it not unfit for us to do fo to» ^God knows beft how to exprcfs his own Ads.)

But God himfelf in bis Word doth ordinarily fpeak of his own Aft$,whicb we call Immanent, as Beginning or Ending: Therefore.

'Lxik.i.si.^efMitncreafeiinfawurmtbGodaHdmaM.'] Gods [favouring] Chrift is an Immanent ad: and yet Chrift increafcd in Gods favour ; Incrcafelignificth mutation, by an inceprion of further degrees.

Rom.9. If, I mil caU them my '^cojfle whicbvferenotmy people, snd her Bclevei Ttbich vat not beloved.'] Love is an Immanent ad.

Job. i 6.2 7, The Father himfelf loveth yoM,beedufe je hive loved me and bekeved,8cc.'2 Therefore it was when they beleeved and loved Cbrift,thattbe Father in this fen^ began to love them.

Joh.14.z1, 23. HeibatlovabmeJhaUbclovedofmy Father,tndImHlovibim,8ic» tAnd my Father rviU lovehim,and vee mil eome untohim,8cc.']

Pro.8.17, I love them that love wic, &c.] Therefore with this fame love, they were not before beloved, though with another fort of love they were.

Joh.io.i 7. Tbertfere dotbthe Father love me, becaufe I lay dowamylife,Scc.

Uof. 11.1. iVbeii Jfratl tftfi a cbildc then I Inici bim.

Dcut^

C7J3

Deut.7.»2j»J. ifjehearkfnt^c. theLtritfyGodtiflUkupuntithee^eetitenim* Sic. AndbevfiUlave^u,8cc.

H of. 9.15. Ivfill love them »fl more: All their Trincts Are reualtert. Pfal.f.j. TbouhatcftaUthevforfiers of iniquity.1 Such arc theEUd before con-vcrfion.

Gen.4 -7. If thou do roeUJhitt thou not be Accepted, &c ?

So all thofc texts tha; fpeak of Gods being reconciled, which prepcrly fignifics an Immanent a&.

Aft. 1 o. J f • H« thst feared God ittd worketh righuoufnefi U Accepted of him. Mat. {. 17* This is my Beloved Son in xohoni I am well pieced. H tb. 15.16. ir^itb fuch facrifice God if mil pUsfed. Heb. 11. J. He hsd this tejiimony that he pleafed God. I King. 3.1o. And the Beech plcifei the Lord tbtt Solomon allied^ &C. Heb.ii.6. JVithoutfiiwiThimpolfiblctopleafeGod. I T heir.4.1. How ye ought to wsli And pleafe God. 1 Cor.7. J z. He tbit is unmarried circtb. Sec. how he may pkafe ^e LwL Rom.8.8. They thit Are intheftejh unnot pleafe God. Prov. 15.8. Thepnyer of the upright is his delight. iSam.if.i^. IJ be thin fay, I have no delight in thee,Scc» Jcr 9. 14. F or in theft thirds do I delight faitb the Lord. Zeph. 5.17. HewiU rejoyce over thee with joy, he will refi in his love ; he iMjoy over iheCjiSic.

Deut.iS 61. Anditfballcometopa^e, as the Lord rejoyced over fou t9dojougoii$ &c. fo the Lord will rejoyee over you to dejfroy you,Scc.

Dcut.jo.9. Eorthe LordwiU again rejoyee over thee for good-Pfal. 104. J1. The Lord jhall rejoyce in bis worlit.

ira.6i. s. As the bridegroom Rejoyceth over thi bride, ft fball tbj GodRejifCC nertbee.

I Tim.t.iJ. Study to Jbew thy felf approved untoGod. Deut.j1.19. WhettbeLordfawa, he abhorred them. Gen.i.4,»03»5,J» Godfaw the light thai it wis good.

Ifa. 5 9.15,16 And the Lordfaw it, and it difpleafcd him that there was no judge* mtnt: And he faw that there was no man, and wottdred,8cc. Gen. 19 J»• ff^en the Lord faw that Leah was hated, be. &c. 3ej:.t6.x,}. Diminijh not a word. If fo be they wiU bearlien and turn every mSH from bis evil way, that I may repent me oftheevil,wbich I purpofe to do unto them,becaufe of the evil of their doings.

Jcr. J 6. J. It may be the houfe of ^udah will bear tU the evil which I purpofe to d§ uiao them, that they may return every nau from bis evil way, that I may for* give. &c.

Gtn.6.6. It repented the Lord that he had maie man."] So the 7'''verre. Exod. i%. 14. zAni the Lord repotted of the evil which he thought to do unto his people-

« Sam.if.jj. The Lord Repented he had made Saul fC'«5 ] ^o the elcvenih verfc.

X Sam.x4.16. TbeLord Repentcdhim ofthecvil,and fai^tothe A»gel,8cc. Pfal.106.46. He remembredfortbembis Covenant, and Ripeattd according to the multitude of bis mercies. Jer.x6.19. Attdtbe Lord Repented him $ftbce'jil,Scc.

U 2. Ano»

C7<53

Amos7. 3. the Lord Repmei fer this: . It fi)M m be fsitb the Ltrl'] Ss vcrfe 6.

Jonah 4.1. J ^wrw thit thou art agracicut Goi^and ntercifuUt Jlow to tnger and of great iitndne^, and Repcntcft thee of the evil.

Jon. J. I o. Jl%d Cjcd favf their worfis that they turned from their evil way, and God "Repented of the evil that he had faid be veould do unto them, and did it not.

Joal i.13. Hehgracious,Sic. JJcwtoavger,andRcpenteth bim oftheevil.

Jer.I y.6. lam weary with Repentirg.

Hof.i 1.8. Myheartii turned within me: my rcpcvtings are fiindled together.

Pral.30.5. Forhif /nger endureth but for'amoment.

Pfal. 10 J .8,9. ThcLt>rd k mcrcifuU and gracious, flow to Angcr,^c. Meithcr will be keep his Anger for ever-

I fa. 6 J. 1 o. Therefore be was Turned to be their enemy,&. c.

Pial.8 5.3. Thou haft ta{cv away all thy wratb^ thou haft turned thy [elffrom the per ce-Tufl'e of thy auger.

a Chron. I i. 1 X' And whenhe humbled himfelfthe wrath of the Lord turned from hm that he would not deftroy him .

Jolh.7.16. So the Lord turned from the fierecnej? ofhk wrath.

So * Chr0n.29.1o. & 30,8,9. ScPlaLio^ij. Jer.18.20. and fo frequently.

Alfo very many places that mention the kindling or arifiRgof Gods wrath.

Pral.78,38,. Muny a time turned he his anger away and did not ftirre up allhk math.

ProY.24.18. Left the Lord feeit,.andit difj^leafe him, and turn away hit wrath fiomhim. There arc three feveral immanent ads mentioned together.

Soall thofc Texts where Remembring and Forgetting are fpokenof God,

So many more Texts that mention Gods being difplcaled, ^«.j8.io. N«w« 41.1. 1 Cbron.ii.7, Pf.6o.i.Zccb. 1.1. i^.

So many Texts that fpcak of Gods feeing, isCJen i8.ii^&c.

Pfal.3 4.17. The righteous cry and the Lord heareth and deltyereth, &c.

Pfal.69. J J. For the Lord heareth the poor and dejpifeth not his prifovers.

With many more places that fpeak of Gods Hearing and Hearkcniag.

So many Tcxts.tha^ mention his Regarding, and his Confidering, and Pdn-dering.

And many that mention his Abhorring, and his defpifing.

And many Texts that fpeak of Gods Pity and Gompaffion to the mifcrable.

And many that fpeak of his Favour as beginning or ending, and mans finding favour in his eyes.

And many that fpeak of his Grace when it fignifiech favour, and is expreffcd as beginning or changing. With many more to the fame purpofc.

judg. 10.13.16. Tehave forfa^en me and ferved other Cjods ; ff^erefore I wiU de-liver you no more. Verf. 16. They put away the (Irange Gods ajtd ferved the Lord. and. his foul wa/5 grieved for the mifery of lfrael,Scc.'\ And he did deliver them by ^ephtalj. Yet here God feemeth to revoke a peremptory fcntence.

' If any fhall fay, that all thefe later are but figurative fpccches applied to God from the manner of men : I as cafily grant it as any man : But vvithall remember tbefc two things. 1 • Tfasti fuppofe it is as true of Gods Knowing and Willing, his Elefting, Decreeing, Par^oCing, ^c. only diftcring in the decree of impropriety : Till the contrary be better proved tbcn I have feen it, I think this will bt

Biy

my opinion, t. It is onely the fitnefle or unfitnefic of thefe wayes of fpccch concerning Godj that I am r.ow enquiring into j and not of the propriety. 1( it be the Scripture<^wayfo ordinarily to I'peak of Gods Immanent afts as New, as Beginning or Ceaiing, then is it not unlawfull cr unfit for us fo to fpeakj in imitation of the holy Ghoft: ftil! acknowledging the unavoidable Impropriety of our expreflionsj and the Incompreheniiblenels of that in God, which by fucb ex-prcffions is hinted out unto us.

I renumber what Z-affciw laith jTiEpf/iJoh.Cratoni, in the third Vol. of his Works, pag. (miht) ij5. '^odais, ^recibuitHCveriDcumai/^fcoTnvciSmetcfit quant fi toUamm i 6'cripturfs, qua impietatej (£;' quot pagnantiA von e Scripturis col-t^enturi

The Second Toint.

of god t$ fuflifc men.

Mr.K' Second'j'X^Hittkre Ufmcwbat lilie to yujlificMion in the Eumd Decrees

§. 28. 7{,B, TF this alfo be intended againft me, then. Whether this Learned man •'' did not want ^/ork, when he undertook this, I leave the indifferent Reader to judge. The former Qucftion which he propounded to dilputc, he knew and confefled that I denied not; (Yet he hath forced me to fpcnd many words on it, and to fay more then I thought to have done.) This which he makes his fe-cond Labour, he will not fay that 1 was ever his adverfaiy in j or that ever I debated the Propofition,much lefs denied it: And yet all this feems intended againft me, and by nameanon he biingsme in. If this man had not fcmewhat Ah 60-wzne more forcible then any thing in the matter difputed, which iniligatcd his pugnacious foul to this confiid, then mulH confefs my felf quite miftakcn in the Motives of his undertaking. The former part of his Difpute hath convinced me of this. I remember we had fiich fparks among us when I was a School-hoy, that were wont (for maintaining the reputation of their valour) to appoint lighting matches, and to the field they muft go, before ever they thought what ftiould be the matter of quairel, and when they came to the place, thty muit be dared by a third , to fpit in anothcrs face to make the quarrel j and he that refu-fed was the Coward,and he that fpit firli,and ftiuck fii it,had the firft glory,though fcvTietime not the laft.

What I fliould do with all thefe following words of Mr. I^'s that concern me

not, I do not well know. I hope none will txped that I ftiould engage my felf

againft him to prove, that [there is nothing like to Juftification in the Eternal

Decrees of Godtojuftifie] nor ihatl ihouki anfwer to all that he brings to prove

^ M 3 • it I

C78]

It I Yctbectufel take hlsDIfcourfeto be Tcry feeble, and to ftnill purpofe, I fhilltikc a brief notice of k in :hi way, whether ic were intended ajainll mc Di-rt&\fi or but Collataally.

§. 19. Mr.K. A ^^ ^ nilie itgooi, not from tbk, tbst by resfojt of thk Decree, God k l\ fiidtohiv:fullificir9hjmhepreie(iirntei,Ko:n.9. For tnieei he if fuitobrjeglorifiei thcnilfo; though glorifying of mmj of them benottiU the eni of the vtorli, yei thtt fuUglmfying of nons of them he till then, ani the Decree t» glorifie tit whom be wiUglorifie at the eni of the WitU, xox bef«re the beginning of the vtorli: atU yet this cxpreftonJl)cws the Certiintj of tbcirf.i,lificnion ini Ghrifymg, who are pre-deftiwitcd i the Prccer tenfe being ufei only to exprejS the Cerumy of tbe future. Bite tbk I vPiU not infijl on j but run another courfe, and thit kthkt "fuftifintion k by tbc Confentof allmcn (ImcviTrotejiants) tRemifJitnofourfins, and cAccepting of u at T^Jghteo'M: Nowthk keitbortmeeritnmancttt, or ameer trxniient i/€.?, or both. Hinovenominwillfayttu ameer tranfitntrA^ : there being no tranjteut A^ of Goi rvhicb doth not fuppofc an Imminent one; for that be aHs nothing upon tht Creature, but rvbathefirSpurpofcdiahimfclftoaSi: fo then an Imminent a^ there m'4Jl be confcjit if there be a tranficnt one ; and x trxnjicntone IJhiUaclinorifledge at well at an tmmi' nent, and vobatit k vfiU enjuire by and by: Bitftrfl Icontsndthit imminent 'AH there can be no other then the Decree of Qod topijSibk traujient AH, and tbit thk 'Decree of God topi^ the tranficnt AB of ^ujiifying, carries in it at much as coucemt Gois Kc-mifftonof fins, and Acceptance of la s/i Righteous-, and therefore hiAmtch in it liiie tofujlificiiion; a^dmay befiiledfovfithoutBUfphemy, as ydr.Goodwinkpleafei la brand it in hk Rhetorical. And that thk Oecree to fu[Hfie us, carries as muck as con-cernsRemiffiinof fins, and ieceptingof m at righteotu, I prove thm: If it do not, thea the Remijion of fins, and Accepting of $u at Righteout.ire othpr imminent AHs. But tbit cannot be, for tben,either in t&e Vnierjiandlng or iVdl: but neither cin be fuJ vtitb fobrtety, for fare God cannot be (aid to Decree to l^nove any thing, or to decree to fVill any thing: not tolinswany thing: for tboughhclinowthingsinhfs Decree, yet ioth he not decree to l^now, bk l^nowledge being neceffiry, hk "Decree arbitrary: ant if be did decrcetolinopf any thing, w: mu!l conclude he mt^ht have not linowt it i for decrees are onlyoftbingirv'yichmtybeornotb?: Therefore vfhitfoevzr it be, it k no fuch difitnSt imminent Act in Cjods Vnderflviiing i anithiughtv: ufetofay, Navra minis Julti-fieJin Godsfi^hr, yetdoih notihkput aiy ma> 4:1 of i^titPU-igcin Goi, but ftgni" fics only 1 TcHimony giv:n by God, rvhereby he mimics m f{noi» thit xfe are j-AJiified before God, or inhk fight i audi am fure that Mr binztv, vfboiiotethSfiircz, Schib-Icr and K'.ckcrmrrx at every boHt, cannot be ignorant that tbe r»)rd of fighr, though it be for the form AHiv:,kfor tbefubfiivccof it rather ?ifije,anith:refore it not attributable to God j/s it k to tat but in him it ft unifies a milling of at to fee, and we are faii tibcfidifiii inhk ft^ht, ro'jenbemi^iesit asit rv:reejiientto our fight thit nrc are ^u(iified: asrohin Qod kdiiio l{noix> rv'jit rvis in Hjzekiihs hart, tbe menting k,hc male linovon to Hezckiih vohitivjt in hk heirt.

i. To Decree to iVi'.l God csnin be Cud ; for thit k as much as to If til to Will, rvhicb vfjit nejcr heard of. the o^jscl of the fViU being it bed but tbe impcrate 4 H, not hk ovf 1 elictte AH > for xvhit ne:i oflVdling to i9iU a thing, if'jen one iVdling' k enough f And bethitvfilstovfill, wUs no more then he doth alreaiy ,*r»'jich k to xeill, one of tbefe AHs Muji Meeit be fupcrflu9m > Mi there km grtuni topM arty fuebin Goi,jeaormin.

I at'

I

1 atktuwltJgfannmitifmecafesnnjbefaidttff^illte U mre willittg, A^^hn tU flejh ititcrpoftib and dram him fff fm villnigfully, tr at Uaftfrom txttming hk will r but thii is rathtr uvfiUafcedtm fim a difturbame cfthffcrfitive apptiitt, then torvill the (xercije of the ratiovalvpill', new (uih anmurnbramc o}thtmlUfgcd, thcrccmbe mte, and confequaitlj tiogreuvd whcrcoh to raife fu(h an afftrtion as thit, that he rmy be laid to WiU, or decree to Wtlirvbkb it equivolent, jittd thtu it appears in general, that

there it n»mv>immatiem^HinGodre\uircd,}eapeJJible,tothe^ftifjirgtfaman, *c-fides hit decree to ^(iifie m.

§. »9. R.B. T Confefs I had farrerather be implcycd in debating the point of Juftifi-•* cation^ then of Gods Immanent ads, which you before infiitcd ©n. But to deal freely with you, I nerer read frcm a LearneJ, Orthodox man, a more fupcificialj unprofitable Difcourfc on that Subjeftj orthatlefs exprefleth a com-pnent undcrftandiog of the point, if my Judgement fail not, as probably it may.

1. To what parpofe you tell us what Arguments you will not ufe {vi^. from RwB.8.3*.) I know not.

I. Though I little know to what good ufe it wou!d be, to acquaint us vhoi k li^e^fiificititn, yet, me thinks, were it ufeful, it fhould have been better proved. And firft me thinks your Mtmory fails you (which you had need to'^ake cxttaordinary care of:) The laft Difcoarie was much fpent in (hewing that [there is a great difference between Immanent Afts and Tranfient] and that ttbere is a dear diflerence between them as between heaven and earth: Tranfieuc Afts being in the Patient, and Immanent in the Agent] So that to equal them in Eternity [is either to make the Creature eternal, or to deny God to be Eternal.] And now the fecond Difcourfe muft be to prove them to be like : For the Decree which is an Immanent Aft hath fomewhat like Jufiification, which you tonfefs a Tranfient Aft. But yet I doubt not but your Learning can make this good : For you that can prove that Gods Immanent Afts which are his Effence, do differ no more from poor mans, then as you have expreflcd, may well prove, that Gods Immanent Afts are like Trarficnt Aftsj much more that Heaven and Earth are like. And dcubtlefs your undertaking is very feafible : For you may well prove, that there is a fimilitude between Gods Immanent afts, and a ftonc, or a tree, or a woriUj or any thing in the world : For you will fay, that Godslmmancnt afts are God himldf, and that thefe Creatures are all Good; and then all things that are Good, arefomewhai Liketo God; Therefore every thing in the world (having feme Good") is fcmewhat Like God ; Alfo they have a Being, and therefore have feme likcncfle to the fiift Being, But then what LikencBcthis is, er in what Degree, you have more Wit then to undertake to tell.

4. The Rcafon that you give for your not arguing from Rcw.8.30. isbecaufe [indeed he is faid to have Glorified them alfo.] But how fell it out that you ob-fcrvcd net, that on the fame Rcafon , you (hould have rejefted the Argument which you here ufe ? Becaufe indeed it faith as much (for ought 1 knew) to prove Gods Decree to be like Glorification, as to be likcjulti-£cation.

5. Should you not have told us in what fcnfc you take Juftification before yoU;

Define

define it ? Who knows whether you mean Juftification Conftiiutive, or Sett* tenciall V (notiofneak of ihc many other diitinftions of J unification.)

S. Whjr wouid you tell the world whu 4U 7me/{<tn(/cake Jttfti£cation to be ^ as if you knew them ail ?,

7. Atlcalt, h jw comes i: to pafs that fo Learned a man hath read fo little, and would bewray it Co eafuy ? as to fay that [ All I'loteftanti confentthat Juftifi-cationis theRcmiJTioaof (in, and Accepting of u$ as Righteous ?] Would yau be believed in fucbnoLOiious untruths which you fear not to utter even in a matter of fa*.^, where there is fo much vilible evidence againft you ? How many of our Englifli Divines ( befules all othcts) affirm Remiflion of fin to be a fruit or confequent, and no part of Juftiii:a:ion ? had you read but M:.XradJhiW and Mv.Gitilier, you would have known fome. How many on the other lide make Remifli jn of fin antecedent to Jullification in order of nature ? and JulUfication tob; its immediate confequent ? How many take Remiflion of Iln to be the whole of our Jultihcation ? yea wha: full Difputes and TreatifesaRe written only or principa ly, or ai lead vc.y n^uch to prove this ? and wbac famous Divines arc they that maintain it ? How many be there that take Jullification to confiil partly in Remiflion of iin, and partly in the imputation of Chrilljown Righteouf-iiefs ? andthefe with the former fay, that Accepting us as Righteous is a confc-nuent of Jurti^cation; Sin mult firllbe remitted, lay the former, and Chrifts Righteoufnefs imputed ours, fay the later, before God can Accept any man a^ Righteous; For man mull firil be Righteous, before he can be accepted^as fucb. Yea Mr.Arthur Dent in his Catecbifm, defines juftificarion to be, A clcanfing and renewing of our nature by the Spirit of God,

The number that are of chei'e fcveral opinions are fo great, and the men fo eminent, and well known to Divines that have been much verll in this Con-troverfie, or are of any confiderable reading in our Modern Writers, that I Ihall thinK it needielle to cite any of them. Hath Mr, I^. read none of allihefc f or will he blot out their Names from the number of Proteftams ?

8. Yet more grolVely doth he affirm, that he [knows no man that will fay it is s meet tranfient ad.] I think then you have either read little of this Conttoverfic, or little remember what you have read ; at leafl, are an unfit man to tell us what All men hold, or all Proteltants, when you profefs to know fo little. You might hav« feen this in fome plain £n^li(h books, that are in the hands of the multitude of thofe below you. Mr. Tfeo, Hoo/cer maintains it, That JulUfication it not an Immanent but a Tranfient ad. But what need I name any, when it is known to to be the comjnoa'JuJgement of our Divines, and thofe tew that have maintained Juftification to be an Immanent aft (and confcquemly eternal) have been taken for Erroneous therein, and as militating fo farre for the Antinomians. Sec Mr. 2;<rgejJof Julfitication, Lcf?.20. p. 167,168,169.

9. If Juftification be a TranUent ad, and yet not a tneer Tranficnt ad, thco is it both an Immanent and a Tranfient ad- And if fo, then either it is two ads, or elfe the Immanent and Tranlienc ad are one. If luftification f Adive) be two ads, then it feems it is ditrifible i yea and one part of it is £ternal, and the other in Time only: And then we muft not enquire, What the juftifying ad is? but What each of thefc ju(lifyi«g ads arc ? Of this if I knew your rainie, perhaps I might fay more. If the Immanent and Tranfient ad be but one, diverfly confi-dered ( i. As in the meer form of an Ad, having not yet efFeded anything > z. And as the fame ad is received into the fubjcd EafTire, and To isthePafHon)

then

est]

then the fame aAUno more Immanent, when it is onc« trtnfient j and then we muiifay, that the aftof Juftification wasctcrnalj but the paflion or eflFed in time bnly. Butthisfenfe fcems Tomuch to contradid, .both your foregoing difcourfc of the diSerence o( Immanent and Tianfient ads, and your after hint of the iTran^ntad which juftifyetb, thatlwill^not imagioe it to be the TcAfe you intend.

10. But your rcafpn why no man will fay it is a mecr traoficnt ad, is very darkly oilcovcred : It is bccaufe [there is no tranfient ad of God, which doth, not fuppofe an immanent one.] But doth it follow that therefore Juftification is not a meer tranfient ad, b'ccaule it fuppofeth an immanent ad ? Why did you noc tell us whether it luppofe ic as an antecedent, or as a part of Juftification, or as what elfe ? But you know that all that is fuppofed is not therefore a part. Or i£ it were never fo necefl'ary a foregoing caufe, yet it follows not that the neerec caufemay not bctaufa totAlifitt fuogetterc, and fo be denominated. May not you on thele grounds as well fay, that there is nothing in the world is a meer tranfienc ad, becaufeit fuppofeth an immanent? The building of ahoufel think is a tranfient ad } and yet it fuppofeth divers immanent ads in the builder, and an immanent ad of God that willed it.

11, But what is this immanent ad ? You adde [For that he ads nothing upon the creature, but what he firli purpofed in himfelf to ad.] 1 doubt not but youeafily fee, that if this reafon prove any thing, it will as well prove that Creation, Redemption, Sandification, Refurredion, Glorification, are none of ihem meer tranfient ads: For God ads thcfe in Time: and therefore he firli purpofed to ad them. Yea it will do as much to prove that God never di.i, noc can perform a meer tranfient ad: becaufe he can do nothing but whathepurpo-fcth. What need youthen apply this to Juflification any more then to any thing elfe? as if Jullification had any peculiar participation in this honour, abovq fotBC other ads'. By your reafon, the dividing the red fea, the fending of Manna and Quailsjthe writing of the ten Commandments, were none of them meer tranfient ads.

' 11. Immartent adspafs not into the extrinfick objcdi ani make no change ton them> and therefore are not caufall : and therefore cannot well as caulals be denominated ttom their efFeds: therefore no immanent ad of Gjd can be called Jullification, orpart of Juftification, or a juftitying ad : For it mult be fo denominated from theefF:d of juUifying ; But it is the tranfient ad only that efFcdeth Juftification (Paffive :) therefore it is the tranfient aA only that is to be called Juftification.

ij. I have oft times asiked the Antinomians, what text of Scripture they coull (hew thatcalleth any Immanent Eternal ad of God by the name of Juftification, or of pavt of Jultification ? and I could never yet fee any that they pioduccd ; and I fuppofe that you are alfo unable to (hew any fuch } or elfe you would its like, have done it-

14. When you fay [God decreed to Juftifie] do not you plainly make [Decreeing] and [Juftifying] two things ? and denominate only the tranfienc ad which is in time [ Juitiftcation ?] So of other ads j as when we fay [Gad decreed to create :] you do noc fay, His Decreeing was Grciting.

15. You conclude that [an Im'-naneac ad mullbcconfcft if therebca Tran-ficTitone.] Anf. U is eafily confeft that an Inmancnt ad (fo called, for our undctftanding ) there is from Eternity concerning everything that is in Time

- " "N • • • ' pr9-

£80

produted: bm that provrt not that the prodacfng tft in TJm«, is flot mecrly rfanficnr. 1 all this while fuj^pofc that you mean by denying Juftificationto be fa meer tranfient ad] to include feme other zSt juttifying, eras part of Tu-ftlfication, artd not only to prove an antecedency or concomitancy of fuck 4n Immanent s6t. Elfc your rcafonlng wotild be abi'urd or againft youi fdf.

i6. Hating thus proved that there muft be an Immanent aftj you next fay, that [There can be no other then the Dccreeof God topafi thistranfient ad.] Youf contention for this is bold, your proof of it weilc. As Gods immanent ids are the fame with his fiffence, fo he bath but One, that if, he is but One: Un-icrftandiflg, Willing, Nilling, is all One J and fo there is but one Immanent atft injuflification. Condemnation, or what you will elfc, bec^te there is but One God: Of rather God hath nothing properly called an Ad, bccaufc he is God. Bat as we afcribc One ad to God Analogically I\)cak*lng of him according to our capacity, fo mufl we on the fame neceffity afcribe to him more then One, and that IS by denominating them from the variety ofobjeds which they rcfped and connote. And fo as truly as you can diftinguifh between the Divine Intelle-dion and Volition, fo truly may we diftinguifh the Volitions of God, according to the divers f^ate of the objcds. Andfoif we could yield to you that there is any Immanent ad a part of Jnftificatlon, or that ctrrieih in it as much as conccrneth acceptance of us as Righteous, we might fairly fay as much, at Icaft, for another ad, as you can do for the Decree : For the Decree that you fpealc of, is only [ a Decree to pat's a tranfient ad] and fo hath for its objed fomething future : But the Will of God rfe pr«/r7rt/, by which he willeth the relation of the juftificd per-fon, is yet nearer the effed. So is his mcntatl approbation, and hii acceptance cf the perfon as Righteous (Willingly and Approvingly judging him Jufl j) fome call his eftimation of us to be Juft fcntmiam cvwepum asdiftind from fentnt-tut lax, but neerer to ic then the Immanent Decree to pafs an ad d« fu-

i«7. You »dde [That this Decree of God to pafs the tranfient ad of juftifyijig, carries in it as much as concerns Gods remifCon of fins, and acceptance of us as Righteous.] By which words you may mean almoft what your lift j but how any man ftionld undcrftand your meaning that knows not your mindeby fome better difcovery, I do not know. i. Whether do you mean by [as much as concerns! antflemial conftitutive concernment, ^. i. [as much as conftituteth ?] But if fo, thtft you fhould exclude your tranfient ad, and the immanent alont fhould not be [fomewhatlike Juftification] but Juftification it fclf. For if thi» immanent be as much as conftituteth remiffion of fin, and acceptance of us as Righteous, and Juftification condfteth of thefe two only, then the immanent ad is the whole of Juftification. Or if you mean [ as much as concerneth it antecedently exparte Tiei'] that were manifeftly falfe : For the giving of Chiift, the accepting his Satisfadion and IntercefTion, and many other ads concerning Rcmiffion ana Acceptance, are antecedent to Juftification. Or if you fhould mean it in the full latitude, as your words import, vi\. That nothing concerneth our RemifCon and Acceptance bar only Gods Decree, then it is yet more palpably falfe : but this is fo grofs that I may not fuppofe you guilty of it, though your unlimited Words do fcem to cxprefs it. Or do you mean [as much of Gads immanent adi-on as concerns Rcmiffion and Acceptance is found in this Decree to pafs the tran-licnt adj] fuppoTrngtbij to be part of our Juftification, and the tranfient ad the

I

C8j3

tnbtr^utf Bur i. yotir nett words before ait4 after fe«n<o£diitrt<Iift that. Far you r»y it is C* Decree to juftifie] wbicJi therefore cannot bf pn-t of the thing Decr«C(it 2^« Andwl»»tiiic»nyoud)eii topka^thattcis [fomewbat Like julU* ficatioH] if it be a paccjand fuch a part. Is it worthy a Divine laborioufly to prove that a mans foul is Like a tnao ^ Or that [laying the Foundation] is ibmewhat Like to Building ? The truth i$, your terms perfwade me either that yon hold that Antinomian eternal Juftification, which yoa are oihatncd plainly to reveal^ or elfe f hat you know not what you hold your fclf,

»8, Yet do you repeat theCc ambiguous words again, asthofe, it Teems, which fceft fit your defignt and you prove them thus : [If it donot, thenthe Rcmiflion jof fins, and Accopting of us as Rig,bceous, are other immanent ads: but thac cannot be:] Here you feem to explain your meaning of the former words, that it is £a conftitutive concernment] that you fpokeof: (but whether as the whole or as a part only I cannot tell.) For you fay, that elfe thefe [ircother immanent ads] vtx,' [Rcmifliofl and Acceptance 4re either Gods Decree, or other immanent ads.] But i. why then do you make it your dedgn to prove Gods immanent ad to be fomewbat like Juftification ^ RemifTion and acceptance of us as Righteous, are more then like it. Did not you fay before [Juilification is, by the confent of all Proteftams, a Remiflion of fin and an acceptance of us as Righteous ? a. Why did you before lay your proof no higher then this, [ that every xranfient ad/tt/»po/«b an immanent, vt^. Gods Decree.] j. It fcems to me here that you ail'ert eternal Juiiification in the definition, while youdifclaim it as to jiame. 4. At Icaft, you feera ( if I can underftand you ) to maintain that Re-Stviflion of fin and Acceptation of us as Righteous are from eternity. For you here import that thefe [dre] Gods Decree, and you elfewhere fay enough for the cter-dity of the Decrees. But you knew, its like, that this is fuch grofs Antinomia-nifm, a« that it was not for your credit openly to own it in the plaint ft terms. You give me not fuflSciem occafion hereto ftay long in confutation of this Error: yet briefly this I (hall oppofe. i. He that was not a (inner from eternity, was not a pardoned (inner from eternity : (or, he that had no (in, had none remitted.) But you were not a (inner from eternity : Thereforej^c. For the minor: He that VPtft not from eternity, was not a (inner from eternity : but you were not frot» eternity: Therefore,{i^(;. If you fay to the wujor, that it is enough to make us capable of Remiflion, that we were Tinners in ejfecognit$ t I anfwer, either you (peak deef^efuturitionif, or dcc^e exiflevtt4i ut cognite: If of the former, the aflertion is falfe : for [Future] is a term of Diminution, as to any true Being. An inno-cet man is not a fubjed capable of Remiflion of (in, « «o»k'w, becaufe he will (in hereafter. If of the later, I fay, God knows no man to be a (inner quosd exijleH-titm prsfeutcm, that is not a hnner: Elfe he (hould know untruly. £. Where there is no obligation to puniJhment there is no remKfion of fin. Baton you or mc there was no obligation to puni(hment from eternity : ThereforCj^c. The »ni;or is proved from the definition of Remiflion : which is AdilTolution of an obligation to punifhmcnt. Where there's no obligation, there's none tobedifp folvcd. The minor is proved thus : He that is not a finncr is not obliged to pv.-niihmcnt: But you were not afinner from eternity : Therefore, (i^c. Alfo <>i^i non Eli, uon eft obligitui ad penam: At tu dbaternono^t fttijli: Therefore,c;'c. 3. That which is undone in Time was not done from Eternity. But fin is unpardoned in Time, (v/i^;. till we be united to Chrift by faith, as Scripture abundantly witncileth :) Therefore it was not pardoned from Eternity. 4. God ac

N a cepteth

C«45

ccpteth rio man ts Rigbteoiis-tBat i$ not Righteous ( yea that i< not") (for he ac* ccpccfh rm.n as tiity arc and not as they arc not.) But no man was Ri^htcoBS from E-.erniiy : There tore Grd accepted none as Righteous from Eternity, liut enough

oltii:ic, till you ip«ak "cnc cpfnly. I

19 Y larproof ( that.iiciniffion and Acceptance arenootherads immanent but the Decree) is this: lFof then cither in the Undcrftanding or the Wil.: but neither, c^f] tAnf. i. I eafily yield that Remiffion » no other immanent 3(51 i btcaufc it is none at A\ z. But your proof fecins rwne to me. Yiu utj [Surely God cannot be laid to Dccrea to know anything, or toDccrecto will any thing.] Your argunjcm I chink iic» thus : [If God cannot be faid to Dtcrec t» know or will any thing, then he hath no other immanent ad bnt his Decree: Bm/j'c. Thereforc,C7''.] liut here's no proof of the Conlequcnce ; which needs proof. G 3d cannot be faid to Decree to know himielf (according to you} fori profcfs I am ignorant of thefc high mytteries:) Doth it follow that therefore he doth not know himfclf ? I think nor. Nor doth it follow that the knowledge o£ himfclf is only his Decree, as T hope you will eafily contel's. Moreover ( according to you) God cannot be faid to Decree toknow rhinesto be Pafl. ( For you lay he cannot be faid to Decree to know.) Yet I think Gjd doth know, as bis own Eternity, focur Time, and the Futurition, Prefence, and Preterition ot things in our Time : and therefore it doth not follow that he hath no knowledge of things, but his Decree. For his Decree (as new taken ) is de futurif i but befidcs that God hath i. a knowledge de 'Trxteritis, and i. de ^Trxfentibug. You argue, from the NeccfTuy of Gods knowledge and the Arbitrarinefs of his Decree ; and many words you ufe which fticw that confidence'wbich I admire at: that you fhould pretend to be fo far acquainted with the Divine Nature, as not only to afcribe to God the ads of man fo far as you do, but to determine which ads are ncceflary, and which arbitrary, and that he cannot Decree to Know or to Will. I confefs I am ready to tremble inflead of replying, to think into what Myfteries you lead me fo boldly. But I refolve no further to follow you, then to manifeft your prefumption, and to fhew you that they arc things unfearchable which you vainly pretend fo well to know. Gods Knowledge is commonly dillin-^aiOixcd into fimplicif Intelligmi^, (^ Furx Vtfionk: The former is faid to be irt order before the Decree, and the later in order after it: therefore neither of them are taken for the Decree it lelf: and will you overthrow both by reducing all to the Decree ? The knowledge of Vifion is taken not to be nccelfary (imply, but only on fuppofition of the Decree, v\ hich anteceding in order of nature doth caut'c the Intelligible ob/eds. For, fay they, it is by this Decree that things pafs from the number of PofTibles, into the number of things Future : and they cannot be known as future, till they arc future J and they are made future Freely and not Ne-ceflarily : therefore in the knowledge of Futures there is a freedom rtiikAliter (s^ piTticipitive. And fo it is no luch hard or abfurd coneeflion, to fay, God might not have known what he knows: as long as he might not have made it an intelligible objed.

ao. You next proceed to an objcdion, which you caft in your own way : and though I conceive you would not have made your felf any work, but what you were confident you could honourably and eafily ditpatch, yet here I think it fals 9Ut otherwife. The objedionis from our ule of faying [ Now we are juftified in Gods fight.] Here i. you fay [ This puts not a new ad of knowledge in Ged] of which I have laid enough before. 2. You tell us (be fenfeof it: vi^.

that

rhat [It fignifies only a Teftimony given by God, wbwtby be makes u$ know that we are juflified before God] and you fay [Sight in God fignifies a making us to fee: and we are faid to be juftificdin his fight, when he makes itj as it were, evident to our fight that an e arc juttified.] This interpretation is to me fomcthing ftrange, and not eafily received, both bccaufe of its Errcur, and be-caufe you fay fo little to cover that Errour, but thruft fo grofs a conceit upon u« upon your own authority. I rather think that the afcribing of fuch New afts to Godj is I. From tlie Moral A dot his Law, God being faid to do that which his Law doth: and fohe is faid to jud;;e us Righteous, when his Law of grace doth fo judge us: and vve arc (aid to be Righteous intejlmationeDivirii, when we Arc io in ff^fu Legkx i. From the change cf theobjeA: For as the variety of objcftsiienominateth Gods afts as divers, foonthc fame rcafon the Novity of theobjt6t> muft denominate them as new, though they be immanent ads. 3. Aad. by an Anchropopathie, Sight is oft pu: for Gods Remembrance or Obfcr-vation.

But you thruft upon us pure Antincmian fancies. 1. If your conceits be true, then rone is tc be accounted [Juftified in Gods fight] that do not lee themfelves tobcjuftifiedj for you think [Sight in God, fi,nifies a making us fee.] Then wo to all thole honctt fouls that fee not themfelves [uftified, nay rather think themfelves condemned : But yet ifl difcourfe with fuch, I will venture to give them better encouragement, for all yourdcftrinej and to tell them [You may be ju-ftified in Ood$''*fight, when you are condemned in your own.] 1. Shall we per-ufe the Scriptures that ufe thatphrafe, and fee whether ail or any one of them can be underftood as Mr. I^. cxpoundeth them in the Antindmian way of MAnifeftH' 'tiojt. Pfal.Mj.z. Forinthy fghtjhaUnomitn be']uftificd. Doth it mean, no man ihall fee himfelf jufiified ? Jer.i8.ij. F orgivc not their iniquity, neither bl$t outthcir pnfrom thy fight. Is that only meant of hiding the rcmiflion from their fight ? or letting them know the wo«-forgivcncfs ? Where the Scripture fpeaks fo oft of doing that which if goodin the fight of God, or that which U evil in his fight, Dcth it mean Gods making tis to fee that it is good or evil ? What is fo good in the fight offinnersasthatwhichiscvil in the fight of God ? Job 1$. 15. Tbeheivens are Tiotclean inhiffight. Job 25.5. The fiarresare tot pure inhU fight. Is this fight of God amakine the creature fee ? Hcb. 1^.11. iVorfiirtg in you that whub is wctf fleafing in his fight. Isthismaking us fee? It were tcolong torcciteallj ifthc Reader will perufe the reft, 1 ^oh 3.12. Exod.y 5.26. zSam.^ 2.9. i Ciro». 19.1 j. T/4Z.71.14. Hof.6.z. Kam 5.20. Mat.it.26. Lm^.io.ij. & 15.21. Pfal.19.ii. &JI.4. & 9. 1^. & 5.5 GcM 18.3. & 19.19. cr any other where this phraie is ufcd concerning God, I leave it to his own judgement whether any one of them be takeninMr I^'sfenfe: That of iChron-i^.^i. which he biings, is neither the famepbtafe, nor hath the fame fenfe, and therefore is nothing to the matter. Yet is not Mr.IC's expofition of that fatisfaScry neither : For he cannot prove that it is meant meerly of difcovering Hc\eiiiiih's heart to himfelf. It may be as much the difcovery of it by the eff'efts to others tor their warning, and fo fhew the frailty of man : But the plain fcnfe of the text leferres that knowledge to God himfelf and not to any man J even by fuch an Anthropopathie which is ordinary in Scripture, as in E^f^.i 2.3. It may be they vpiU confidcr, though they are a rebel-licuahoufe, as if God had betn in .in uncertain hope ot it. SoIm^.io.ij. ^er.i6,j. So where God is faid to repent. If God fpeak of himfelf to man.aftcr the manner of his own infirmity, muft wc therefore fayjhe means [our knowledge] when he men-tionctb hi» ow£ ? N 3 u, Thai

C80

»l. Thit 1 mty know whom he fpeaks to, he tideth [lam fare lit.BJxiif whoquoretb J'u4rf^. ^chihUr mi K^iermm it every bout cannot be i^noraat, i^e.'} The mittcr which he racmionfth is nothing to his Caul'c. But let what an overcharged fiotnack this Leirned man hath ? How many cafts hath he bai •Ircady in vomiting up the cboler of his fcorn ? And yet i; comes up ftill as frcfli •nd as biitar as if he felt no IrjimcH by all that evacuation. ' Truly his oft fcorn-full repeating my quotation of thefe childiHi Authours, caufcd me at latt te turn overall ray Book to fee how oft it is that I quote them. And I can findr Suire^ but once named, and no place of him cited. l^eeliprmMi bat once cited, and tbeic twice named i and ^c^iii/<r thrice. Yet doth this man tell the world I quote them at every turn > fo well may we believe his confident Affertions about the unfearcb-able nature and myiicries of God, who hath the face to fpeak thus in a vifible matter of £ad,wherc any man that will bat try it may findc him Nay,fecthemo-

<lefty of the man! I cited two ofthemonce,and the third thrice in a wholeBook.'atvd in thcfe five or fix leaves he tels me of it,or fcoins me for it twelve times I

»i. Henextaddeth [To Decree to Will, cannot be faid ; for that ii as much ai to Will to Will, which was never heard of > the objc<fl of the Will being at bcli, but her imperatcad, not hcrown clicitc a6k.] Rcpl/, i. I ftill abhor your prcfuraptuous pretence of knowing more of God then you do know^ and of (q meafuring him by man. a. Still iefiicrAntur moieftia cr vcritu. Who woul4 think that a man pretending fo much to Learning, ftiould never have met with Schoolman,orPhilofopher chat Cpeaksthat which he here faith [was never heard oQ or having read it (yea or not having read it) durft fo boldly fpeak thus? At lea ft he might have feen it in the mott ordinary and obvious Writings of our own Di-Yines. In y^we^whis Cal'esof CoafcJ!/.i.M^.7. thcfe ar« the Jail words: Hinc vere dtcintitt (y ex omnium gentium cot^enfu, Voi6 Fetle' Believe which thou wile. Reader i but I am fure there's a wide ditfcrcnce between thcfe two men: when one faith, Dicimm omnium gentium confenfa i and the other faith [fi was never heariof.'] YeiFcrriutinfchfUHic.Ortbodox.c^pty. (a Chapter worth the lai^ in^depraieterminitione^ctufapcceati) affirms it of God hamfslf lldeo videtur quod cum VeMpcrmtttitUpfum, ntn fe h^bet mere l^gative, fad cum ili^uo tHu paji-tivo: (^ ideonon fdum non v\ik, (edetiAmvnh non Vclle,i.t. l^tluntM refieHitur fupn finonvolentem: Dumfcilicetnon l^ult fi.da.m\impccca,re, fufpe»dendo aHum Tfl-litionit men negxtione, fed ctiim Vult fe non Vellc: (3* bxc cji aStudif ($• pofiitvs per-mijjio. /tttamcnutiHprim9fign9^rJ{j:giti9 pur4, dec Froiudecum T>ei(t VtliC' rit xh teurno non Incite Upfum, bibuit xSlum rcflexi-jum fuper negxtianem, Sec. At P«-terminavitforeinjuici. Minime: Abjii hoc.'] This is approved by Churches of France. And yet this Learned man dare tell the world in print, that it was never heard of: which that he might have I'afely done, he had need of more ears then two. And it fccms this LearoeJ man hath lead little of the contentions of the Jcfuitej and Dominicans about th: natu e of f.oe-will, where he mi^ht have feen many of them touch this Q^ieftion, as Peuvius doth againft VtnceMiia Lenis, alias, Fromondus, and orhers frequently. N ly it fecms he is a llranger to the Schoolmen too : Perhaps in ftead of reading :hem, he conteinns them as he doth Scbtblcr, Sutre^ind l\eclierm\in. Scotusin^. fent. dijt.A9.q.i. f<'^- ^mibi) ^66. B. faith, Ftnit extra ejt fi!nt>lici:erop{trnum (^ funme volcnium: Ergo inter a qux funtiifinem fjoi e^fibi immdMiut eft migif volendum: fed VcUe eflfibi immedixtiua, qxiximmcdtJititeHliciiiipfuiiutin iinemuUimum, cum fink uUtmui ut bujufmodt fit preprium 9bje^'4%ipfi^ i^elle. Trtbonmrem : lUad «ft mAzis ^i^Undum volunttte

ilbQT*

I

C873

rtberiquodappetituinaturalinatttTAliterefimagu appetenduta; hujufmodi efi qmipr^ pinquiui cfl ultimo, quidfimpliciter ntaxme appetitur vatwralitcr. 'TntUrtA Volumas poteA VcUe (mm aSium, ficut JnteUeSitti InteUigit [mm actum .- out ergo Fait (uum yeUc propter Ititetligere, out ittHverft, aut neutrum propter alterum: O'hquorde VcUc erdinato.

Sicol.i*OrkUit faitb, infent.l z. difi.i$.dub.i. lOmxequod Vult, appetit dd fui kpm imperium: quia fie Vult altquid M Velit fe VcUe illud ; Et idea in aHu VeUndi feipfum mtvct, O'fibi demindtur, (^ pro tamo dicitur liberum {arhitrium) quamvk imtnutabilttcr ordinetur ad iUud.'] AnJ^jfcjCK/flicws, that God Inth K/fHum vo-tuntatiipofitivum circafuampermiJJioncmlt.i.deLibcrt.capiJ^. (^cap. ii, § 7,8, ^c. And why not as well iben about his aft. And Gods Will is his Efl'ence : Therefore he willeth it. "For that 7)eua vult feipfum h.uh hiiherto been unqueftioned^for ought I know (fo fai/cashemay be faiJ^atall to Will.) Aquivaa i.ia.q.i^.a.z. e. faith, ^jUa cum P^olmaatii objeBum eft lionnm Vniverfale, quicquid fub ratione loni contnetur, potcfi caderefub aSiu t^cluntatis. Et quia ipjum Vellc eji quoddam Bo-mm, f«ic^ Vcllc fe Vcile, ficuttJ" Ir.tcllcHMS cujm etjecium e[l Vcram, ImeUigit fe lutcUtgert, quia hoc etiamcjiquoddimycrum.'} yid(ff i.q.Zj.i.x^, If I thought it ncceilary, it were eafic lo heap up many more that are of the fame mindc But Iftiall only inbrothcily duty admonifliMr.I^. to make moic Confcience hereafter of falfe fpcaking : and feeing he hath read fo very little, or loft it again, ra-llbct humbly to acknowledge his Impetfcftion (as wc that are guXty of the like muft alfo do) then to make a confident vain-glorious oflemation of ihac which ic feems by this, and many the like paffages, he bath nor.

Let us adde fome Reafons, that the Elicite aftj may be the objcds of other E-licite afts of the Will, and not the Imperare only, as Mr. I^.faith.

1. As ycfltwargueth before from the proportion with the Intcllcft. A man may underftand tHat he doth nnderftand> by a rcfleft zSl : Therefore he may Will that he Will.

1. That which is an apprehended Good may be Willed : Bat an Elicite Aft of the Will may be an apprehended Good : Therefore, (g-c.

J. Amanmay WillhiscverlaftingHappinefj; (For if the End may not be Willed, what may?) But his everlalting Happinefs confifteth partly in the Elicite Afts of his own Will, everlaftingly to be txercifed on God: [God being Objeftively our Happinefs) Therefore, (s'c. VcUe, Amare, Frui, arc afts that muft be peipetuatcd, and cither may be Willed, or no man may will his own happinefs.

4. Whatfocver is apprehended to be a fit means to this End er Happinefs, may be Willed ; But the Elicit afts of the Will may be apprehended a ht means hereto: Therefore, cy£. They arc commanded, a.nd they are made Conditions of Happinefs : and therefore are a means.

5. The Eftefts of Gods fpccial faving Grace on the ioul may be Willed : Bat the Elicite Afts of the fanftified Will, are the EfFefts (and principal efFefts) of Gods fpecial faving Grace on the foul : Therefore, (j-c.

6. Tiiat which a Ghriflian may pray for,that he may and muft Will : Bu: he may pray for the Elicicc Afts of a fanftified Will; Therefore, (jT'c. As he may pray. Lord, LBelieve, help my Unbelief: Sohemaypiay [Lord I am Wil-ringj make me reore Willing, and hcreaftc; Willing, ■^j't.

7. Experience is in ftead of a thoufaud arguments, Ifcclthai my Wiliingnefs il the objeft of my unwillingnefe 5 and that in thcfe fcvtial waycs. j- I feel that

upon

C883

uponthcrevlcwof my paft Wiilingncfs, and thcfi^ht of my pr</cnt WiliuigneTj (in any Good) my Will barh a Complacency in it, which is a true ^c//f, yea the firll and pnncipal Elicits Aci of the Will. x. I finJe that by a lefs perftft and intcnfc Ad, I do Will a more pcrfed Ad. Iain fomcwhat Willing, bat I would fain be more Willing. Nay to procure the Amendment ot my own hear: by this increal'e of my Wiilingnefs (which is indeed the Incrcafc of moft of ray Graces) is thcmain bulinefs of my life, committed tome by God, and to be in* tended by my fclf. And if I ftiould cail ofichii great bufinefi, and neither dc-Rre moicWillingnefs or Graccj aor pray for more, nor labour for more, becaufc Mr. I^. out of his fubtiUy tels me, rhattbe Elicite Ad isnoc the Wils objt'd, I {hould be bcfool'd out of my Chriftianity and Salvation by a trivial trick of vain Philofophy. }. I finds that by a pfefent Ad of Will, I do Will a future Ad. I do Will now that I may alfo Will to morrow, and to my lives end, and for ever in glory, and that better then now I do. 4. I feci that I do Will a more fincerc Willingnefs. I do Will Salvation with too much refped to my felf in ir, and too little to Gods honour. Now I would fain Will this more for God then I d». 5. I would fain Nill many things which through my corruption I now Will. 6. 1 would fain oft ful'pcnd a vicious ad of my Will, a: Icaft. In all thcfe rcfpeds, the Elicitc Ad'of my Will is the objed of my Will.

But MrX. will be Learned in defpight of Natural and Gracious Experience (for 1 hope, for all his Learning, that he Would Love God more, as Love 1$ taken for au ad of the Rational part, and that he Wils a greater and a perfevering, yea a perpetual Willingnefs of God and obedience i and a fruition of God, and frui is an ad of the Will:) He will therefore prove what he once faith, and that's thus. [For what need of Willing to Will a thing, when one Willing is enough ? And be that Wils to Will, Wils no more then he doth already, which is to Will: one of thefe ads muft needs be fuperfluous, O'c'] To which I Reply j You may fee in the feverallnltanccs which I gave before, that it isneedfull, and that it is nor fuperflaou$,as you fay,and that it is more then he did before i A more perfeft ad, a future ad, a perpetuated ad, are more then he did before. Yea its 9 doubt, Whether a very graceleffe man may not FcUe intcndere 7)eum, vel frui De» yea firidly Will to Will God as his bappinefs, or to Will Holin^Ts before Volu-ptuaufnefs, who yet doth ic not already. And me thinks fo acute a man might fee that this is not the fame ad which he performech already, for it hath not the fameobjed. The man is Willing to be favcd from Hell, but Unwilling to be Holy : He is convinced that he (hall not be faved , unlefle he become Willing to be Holy ; Therefore he wifheth he were Willing to be Holy; If this were but with a Vt'cJty, it is yet an Elicite Ad of the Will, but it may be called a Volition, .hough unefFedaal, becaufe there is a Itronger contrary Will: So that it is l^olitio quoad aHum <sAb(olutam, but quoii aHun Q>m-pxraxum, he is unwilling. The Objcd of that Will which he hath, is his ydle fanHiut€m ,• the Objett of that Will which be would have , is Holi-ncls it felf. It that l^elle (^ ftm^itnf be not all one, then thcfe two Ads be not all one.

But Mr.I( confefTeth at lafl that a man may be faid to Will to be more Willing, but he faith [this is rather to Will a freedom from a difturbance of the fenfitive appetr.c, then to Will the excrcifc of the rational Will.] Bat why is it that this man would not be difturbed by the fenfitive appetite ? Is it not becaufe he would Will heely ^ Djth not be that Willetb tbe meausj much more Will the End ?

And

,And is not the RemovAl of the Impediment, a Means to your freer and more In-tenfe Willing ^ And do not yeu yomfclf Will the increafe of your Willingnefs upon the quieting of that Appetite ? Befides, I hope you do not think that the dt-^fturbanceof the fenfiiive Appetite, is the oncly Caufc of our Imperfedion in afiual Willing : Or that our own Habitual Corruption and diftempcr of the Will it fclf, is not a greater Caufe.

Afferall this you conclude,that [it appears there is no new Immanent ad in God requKcd yea poflible to the juilifyingof a man, belides his Decree to jullifie.] To which I fay, Though it little appear to me from any of your arguing, yet I eaG'y yield to the Negative part of your Conclulion > and 1 fay, that the Decree it felf is no part of Jultihcation, but an Antecedent.

Again, Let it be obferved, that all this arguing will as much prove that Gods Immanent ad; is like to Creation, San(^ification, Glorification, Damnation, or any thing that ever God did, as to Jultihcation : For of all his Works it is as true, that he doth nothing but what he decreed to do. And fo it may as well be faid that our Glorification is an Immanent ad from Eternity, as our J unification.

§. 30.

Mr.K. %MOrepdrticuUrty, itmllbewi Evident that his Decreeing to Remit our iVi fini, carrtes tt Remtjjlon of them tantamouttt: For whojhall tbirge them 9nut, rvhere god d€crecibt« remit them ^ The Gonfcience I confefi mjj i jo mij the 7)evU jaymng with our confctence ■. but ^H thk while their charge it of 710 great dinger t$ m, when God htth decreed to remit them to tts: and though they may trouble us they cannot damn ta, for that their charge is to be brought m Gods ^jmo, ax for fins committed dgamjl his Qrown and Dignity: Mow where he hath decreed to remit thofefint, there it no danger of fufering for them, let what ever accufcrs manage the Evidence agtinjl us, AUthattheycandoitbuttbis, to bring us to cry guilty, and thereupon to appeal to God for Mercy \ who upon our atipexl to him for Mercy, he is gracioujly pleufed to pronounce pardon tout, qoihimfcif I adinowledge alfemay charge th:m on us; and proceed iit (everttY againjl us for a while > but this charge it not any way objlruSitve to his Decree ta remit fin, but rather fuhfervient to it, and to bring us to fee aniconfefS our jins, atd cifl our (elves wholly on bis Tdercy in Cbriji, ta which r jpeSi I mi^ht better jay, that God doth jhew love even in punijhtngunregenerate men that are Eleci, thenyott did erewhiLes', that he may be (Aid ioh\x.zGoi\y mzn, when be punijheth or rather correSietb them: Puni(l)-neHt ayming chiefly aitbe fatisfaciionof fifitce, CorrcHton at the amendment of the offender. Sotbcnhis Decree of Rimittin^ carrtes in it at micb at is required far Any immanent 'Act in him to our Rcmtfjiott, ani (0 much as mceffarily procures the tran^ fient AS in the time that be baih appointed for it. His Decrees are Hie Miunt Zion, and (land fajt for ever: Tnc Coankl of the Lord ftandeth forever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations, T/if. J }.»«.

§. JO. R.B.WOar [rantomount] is a word miie for your ufe > Cajfesthat dare noc I fee the light, ufe to go covered with fuch cermi as will Itretch. But if you mean plainly, that the Dicrecdoth. amount to asmiuh as a rem iTijn of fin,] then I mull needs fa/} that youL Djdrine is tantamoaai Antinjmia3ur>n« Lcc

the confclemious Reader that l<5vcs Gods truth and hij own Pcace/onfidcr by thcfc few particular! following, what a Theologyjnay what a Chriftianity this Learned man would intreJucc*

I. Dothnot this lead men to flight Chrift and bis fuffcrin^s, and to look on bis Dcaih zs that which did them no great good ? For when all our fins were tantamount forgiven from £ternity,there was little left for Chrift to do by his Death, Merit, IntcrceflGonjC^'f' as to our Rcmiflton.

a. How fmall a matter is left for the Regenerate to receive upon their Repenting and Believing in Chrift, as to Reniifllonof fins, when they arc tantamount (Imuft afc Mr I(,'s School-terra) remitted already ? Is this the Repenting and Believing for Rcmiflionof fin which Scripture mentioneth ?

i. How fmall a matter is left for Baptifm to feal and exhibit, as to Remiflion, when all fin was tantamount Remitted from Eternity ?

4. Where is the Excellency and Glory of the Golpel, either as to the Narrative, Preceptive, or Promiflbry part ? For the Narrative, it makes a large Declaration how Chrift was Promiled, Incarnate, Borji, how he Obeyed, Suffered, Satisfied, Merited, Rofe, Intercedeth to procure a Remiflion which was tantamount done already even from Eternity. For the Preccpcive, it prcfcti-beth man a way to obtain Remiflion by coming to Chrift, and to maintain that RemiflTioa by abiding in Chrift, when our lins were tantamount remitted from Eternity. The Promifc feemeth to hold forth an excellent benefit, and all men arc invited to Receive it i and when all's done, it offereth and promlfeth to do that which is done tantamount already from Eternity, If you fay^ that yet Chrift and the Gofpel have their Excellency as they refped other benefits, vi^. our San-ftification and Glorification:! anfwer according to Mr.f^ s groundSjit muft be faid that thcfc alfo were done tantamount from Eternity, in that they were Decreed.

5. How fmall a matter have Chriftians daily to pray for, in that Petition l.Ftrgivtuacurtre^ajfes'] when they were tantamount forgiven from Eternity^ And what a fpur is this 10 prayer ?

6. How fmall a matter have they to Give Thanks for, as received through Chrift from the promifc, upon prayer, 6^*.

7. How fmali a matter as to Remiflion of fin, do we re«ive in the Lords Sup» per, when it was done tantamount before ?

8. How great a help doth this Dodrinc give to Obedience, when men are told that all their fins are tantamount forgiven from Eternity ?

9. How fmall a Difference between the ftate of the Regenerate and unre-generate, fuppofing them Eleft ? The fins of one are forgiven, and the other tantamount.

10. How unfoundly do we perfwadc wicked men of their mifery, and tell them that God hateth all the workers of iniquity , and that they are by nature children ©f wrath, C7C. when for ought we know all their fins were tantamount forgiven from Eternity ? And how hard to convince them of any luch mifery, when they have this Reply ? Lay all ibis together, and fee how much of our Religion and Chriftianity is left!

But he proves all this by a Queftion [Who fhall charge them on us where God decreeth to remit them ?] I Reply, The fame perfons, and as many as might liave charg'd them on us, if God had not decreed it. His Decree takes off no charge, nor difablcs any from charging us. It were not an Immanent A A, if it ^id (onercaUquidin objtllQ. i. We are as much under (be Charge, Curfe, or

Condemnation

C90

Condemnation of the Law, till we belierc, as if no fuch Decree hid pafTci. a. Wfiac the Law doth, God doth by it; for it is his Inftrament. J. Satan may charge us. 4. Andromayconfcicncc. J. And men. But you confcfs your fclf that Confcience, Saran, and God may charge us: But you fay [there is no danger] Reply, i. What if you were to lie all your life in torment with the ftoneorgoutj and yet were furc that you fhould die never the fooncr, and fo there were no danger ? Would you think your felf tantamount a found man? I* it fo fmall a matter in your eyes for an cleft man to He under the guilt of fin, and as an enemy to God till n«ar his death, fo be it he be not in danger of damnati* on? i. If you mean that their damnation is ne»/a?Kr4, I confcfs it: And fo it would be if God ihould but fore-know it, and not decree it (fuppoGng it might be the objed of fuch a fore-knowledge.) j. Butyetl think it is not fie language to fay [there is no danger of fuftcring for fins that God hath decreed to remit.] I lee Itill whither Antinomianifm tends, i. If Chriftdid die to deliver us from danger of fuftering, then we were in danger of fuffering ; Bat Chrift did die to deliver 0$ from it: Therefore, (5'c, Would you make us believe that Chrift favcdus from no danger by his death? %. The aftual Coa-rerfianand Jultificationof theEleft, isa faving them from danger: Therefore they were in danger. 3. If the Elcft unconverted are in no danger, then you muft preach no danger to them, nor perfwade them to avoid any, nor to repenc the incurring of any: orif, becaufe youknow not the Elcft, you fpcak to all o£ da.ngerj you muft tell them that you mean it not of the Eleft ; Bat what fuccefs fuch preaching would hare, iseafie toconjedurc. 4. Where men are bound to Fear and Apprehend danger, there is danger: But God bindeth the Eleft (even after Converfion, much more before) to Fear and Apprehend danger; There- . ieve,(^c- There can be no Fear, where there is no Apprchenflon of dangers no more then there can be Love without the Apptehenfion of Good to be beloved . Chrift bids his Difciples, Pearhtmthstif ablcto dejiroy both boJy mi foul ia hcil firc: And fo Hcfc 4-1• Fexr kfi aprtmife bfin^ left of entrin^ into his r€jf, any of you jhoHldcome Jhort of it. God bids us fear: Mr.I^. tantamount bids us, Fear notj by telling us there is no danger. 5. Where men are bound to labour, run, ftrivc, and ufe much means to efcape danger, there is danger: Butfo God hath bound the Bled: Therefore, ^f. How many Texts might be cited that binde us to fave our felves, and fcek our deliverance, and that fpeak of ourcfcaping, our deliverance and falvation, which all imply a danger from which we efcape, arc laved and delivered :• 6. Mmb.^.iiiii. He that callctbbii brother F0OI, is in danger of hell fire: But an Elcd man hath called his brother fool : Therefore, O'e. 7. Nay if this be true, then God never faved his people from any Danger. Foe he that never was in danger cannot be faved out of it. And he that was from E^ ternity Decreed to be pardoned, according to your Doiflrinc, was never in danger. 8. Andthcn we ought to give no thanks to God the Father, or to Chrift iheRedeemer^ or to theholy Ghoft theSanftifier, not to any Preacher er other Inftrumencj for faving us from any danger of punithment. I think thefe are noc matters to be made light oi : nor that Doftrine of Libertiuifm to ba chcrillicd, which plainly leader h to fuch unhappy fruits.

But let us pcrufe your Reafons: You fay [the charge is to be brought in Gods name.] Reply. So it may be ncvcrthelel's for the Decree j for that takes ofFnone of the charge. Youadde [All they can do is but this, to bring us to cry Guilty, and thereupon appeal to G.7ti for Mercy, (^c.'\ Reply, i. Muft they cry Guil-

ty, and look for Mercy and Rcmiflion, that were tantamount forgiven from E* icrnity ? i. Either you fpcak of an unconverted c\c6t pcrlon in ibii life } pr elfcas fuppofing he were at Jurfgem< nr in that cftate. If the later be yourmeaning, rhen their Acculation might and would do mote then you fpcak otj and would rend to condemnation (it luch a cale might be fuppofcd.) If the former be youc mcanin;^, then thfi'e Eledpcrl'onsdo [Cry Guilty, and ajipeal to Meicy] with true Faith, or without it. If with Fai:h, then their fins arc remitted further ihen by Decree, and thel'eare no: tkc perfons new iiiC^clUon. If without fai;b then they are not Forgiven for all this. As long as liit Elcft remain unrcgcnerate, though that Law, and Satan, and Confcicnce accufe them, yet they do not Belie-vingly feek mercy ; and ifthey were in that iiate at Judgement, it were coo iateio feck Mercy.

Next you [acknowledge that God himfelf alfo may charge fin on us, and proceed in fcveriiy againil us for a while j but this charge is not any way obllrudivc to his Decree to Remit (In,C/c.] Reply. God may be faid tocharge finne on the EKdtbefoie faith, i. By obliging them by his Law to punifliment. i- By in-Aiding fome fmaH part of the punilTimcnt on them. You fecm to me to take notice notice only of the later. But every Chiiltian murt acknowledge that for all Gods Decree, wc a.rcz\l Obliguti adpcenam fempitcrnam, till we are united to Chrirt by faith. To fay this is not obltrudlive to Gods Decree, is nothing to the queftion. The worlds being uncreated from Eternity, did not obftrud Gods Decree of making it, and the Elect's being unfandified or unglorificd doth not bbftruft Gods Decree of Sanditying and Glorifying them: and yet this provci not perftcuting Saul was tantamownt fandifaed and Glorified. And what if God maks the knowledge of our Damnable llate, or our nsH-remiffion,a means to Re-miffion ? That doth not prove that we arc before remitted in whole or in part, or tantamount.

Whether you fpeak to Mr. Goodtvin or me, about the phrafe of [hating the Godly ] I know not : but if to me , I do not believe that ever I fo fpoke.

Your diftlndion of Tunifliment from chaftifement, is pervcrfe : fo learned a man fhould know, that Punifhmcnt ii the Genut and Chattuement is a fpaiet t{ it. All Puni/hment is for the Demonltration of Jultice j but not all foe the fatisfadion of Jufticc, Correftion is as well for a Demonftration of Ju-itice, as for Amending the Gflendor : Elfe it were mecr Afflidion, and no Corredion.

YouL Condufibn next laid down, much differs fiom the divers formerly laid down, and wlwchyou fhould have proved j and yet I have lliewcd, for part of this, how ill you have pirivcd it : though, for my part, I know no Caul'e that I am enga^d in that will be any whit prejudiced by yielding you ail ; as 1 eaiily yield youj that the Tranficnt A£l will certainly follow.

Mr

I^ K"] Ext hU decree to t/icccpt ui, urrkib as muih too ; and there needs nothing i ^ but a Tranficnt A^ to prove his Acceptance, and evidence it to us / for to decree to loof^ upon m as righteous, U not to loo^i upon us as rightcom in our(el.es, but hk foH ; and to ihii looliijig on us, there needs no 7ICW immanent ASi, beyond his eleSmg u» to faitb ill bis Son, mi pcrfcverawe m tbdifniib t Thtu be mof be (aid to give ju to bis Son

before

before, and fo then there it no vcve mmatievt nH. Gods Remitting eur fins, ini ae-cepttng us as Righteous, though they fsund lii^^e Immanet Acis, are to be fenfcd wf Tranfient, dttd bvwjhali bejheopcd neiit: in the interim this which hath been fiid isfufficient tojhevr, Thitinthe 'ccreeofGodto jufiifeue, there is (ontcrthMthit lool{^sliiie fujlifcdttetii a-tid no other immaneut iSi in Ood ts required to our ^ufttficaxion ^ befidcs his Decree from Etermtjtojujlifeustnitme.

R. S.*! Shall ilever think the highdt pretenders totxaA explications to be the J brrt pcrforr.crs. for your fake. You treat ot Acceptance i but who can finde by all that you fay, what you mean by [Acceptance.] You lay, [Though it found like an Imaancnt aft ir is to beicnlcd as Ttianfient,] but what that Tianlient aft is, tor all your p. omii^cs, I can ha;dly finde you difcovering. Surely [to Accept] in oui ordinary Ipecch lignifijth an Immancnc aft of the Will j but (o you take it not} elfe inult vou vield that Immanent afts may be Decreed. Be-fides this, it may fignifie tilt Moral aftiOii ottheLawof Grace, which viitually judgctbthcpci ion RiL,htccus, and its adion is Geds aftien. But this you can Jefs digeft ; and theietorcwha: y^.iir [Acceptance] means, let him tell that knows. All that I can finde is, Citi^er that ic is [the Giving of faith] or [tkeMakingus know our Acceptance] ot which mere anon.

You fay [There needs nothing bnc a Tranfient aft to prove his Acceptance, and evidence it to us.] Rep. Here is chcn but two Afts needfull ; the one is [Decreeing to Accept us as Righteous;] This is not Accepting, as the word and your own confcfTion witntls: The other is [a Trarfient aft toproveand.evidencc his Acceptance.] This cannot be acceptance neither: For what man will fay, that the evidence and proof is formally the fame with the thing proved and evidenced # It it all one [to Accept] and [to evidence and prove Acceptance ?] What a maze do you run your felt into under pretence of difcovering the truth ? You have fairly difputed [Acceptance] into Nothing.

Youadde [For to Decree to look upon u$ as Righteous, is not to look upon u$ as Righteous in our felves but in his Son.] Rep. To Decree to look, is not to Look : cU'e you may fay, it is a Decree to Decree. Your phrafes of [in our ielvcjj and [in his Son] may be fo interpreted as to make your fenfe true > but if yovi mean that it is Chrilt only and net we, who is the lubjeft of that relative Righ-teonfnefs, which formally makes us Juft, then it is falfe.

Ycu fay [And to this looking onus, there n.cds no new Immanent aftbcfides cleftingto Faith and Perfeverance.] Rtp. I pxay ycu then tell us what you mean by [Looking on us:"] an Immanent aft it is not. you think; And is Gcds [Looking on us as Juli] a tranhcnt aft ? What aft then is it ? Did you fay,That God is faid to Look on usasjult, when his Law call us Jult, 1 ihouid not dif-agree with ycu: but \ou difclaim that. But 1 forgot il at ycudid expound your meaning before upon [Gods feeing :] as Gcds feeing is a making us to fee, fo its like you mean [Gods Decree to look.on us as Juft] is a Decree to niake us Look on our lelvcs as Jult : and lo the perfon is changed. But if this be ycuc meaning, 1 had as lieve you faid nothing.

But 1 will tell ycu again, that it you will take [an Immanent aft] formalitcr for Godscilencc, fo there is none new, nor is there any more then ccc j Knowing, Willing and Nilling, Love and Hatred are all one, But if ycu will condefcemi

03 '°

c»4:

to US of the (impler fort, toJl'peakof Icumaneiu adi'aj applied to God after the maiiner of men, and as his ads arc ftrmtUttr, or molUiur, or rtUuve, or denomi-tutni, or however die (in a way unknown co us) diftiocl from his clTcncc, ib^s they may bedivcrribcd among themlelves without diipira^eaient to Gods fim-flicity, they may aifo be^in and end without difpatagement to his Immutability, fjT any thing thi: you have ycc laid to the contiary. And io u they arc divcrfi-ficd or faid to bc>gin denominutivi ex (omotitione objeHi, they may as well be laid to be the objects of Gods eternal D:crce. And thus I conceive, Decree refpedinj the futurcj and [Accepting and Approviag] being ads that connote a pt-efcnt obj«a, and lo may not be laid [to bel'ucbad*] till th€ objed exift, therefore God may well be laid to Decree to Accept us, and Approrc us, and Love us, and Delight in usjeiT**;. though ail be Immanent ada. And Lo my conclulion Ihail be contrary to yours, tha: you have not proved that there i$ no other Immanent ad in God required to ©ur Juftification, belides.his Decreej and if you bad, yet you had done little to the bulinefs: And that you have no more proved [that in the Decree is fooaethlng tha: lookslil^cjuftificaiion] then that it looks like Creation, Salvation, Damnation ; And bad you proved it never lo Itrongly, I know not CO what purpoi'e it is. It is fomewhac like God that is called his Image in his Saints: and yet be that cal$ the Saim«, God, may bUfphemc for ail char.

§. jr. Mr. i^. i.'T^Hjtth'h [mmsnent aH amot be ciUei ^xjlifiutiett, ttpfxirs hetce, tbst •*: HO Imnuncnt a^ mskcs a. red chsnge in the fubjeH, /u fu(lifiuim dotb : TbiXAlVtll to jujlifieut, it a .\fr. Baxter riihUy f£th, terrainusdiminuens, Ati eutmtbe the aSI whereby roe arejujUfied, Th*t fuftijicuion iionil hinds confeffed to be pronouncing or decUring $f ta Righuotu, vbiib unnot be done by in Imminent ik done: iVhit then is the TnujientiH } Teforelciu jpak punHiuHy te this, it if fit to fet dovfu tbit Remiffion of fins, xni editing ta in the condition iai priviledges of Rigkteottt, Are the tvtomxM pins diliinguifhed rationeratiocinata At leAJl, allgrint, / mull needs fdy, I thiuii ReHly. Reauffion of^ns bung the fir (I, And vthich of courfe dnws the other After it, enquire r*€ i. timber there be a TrAnfieat aH of goi vfbcreby be remits our turfiHs i 1. IVbitthis Ui

§ 5*.

R. 3. r Am loath to fpcak againil you where you arc pleafed to plead my caufe i L yet I mull give you thefc brief Animadverfiions. i. That JuftificatioQ mikes on the I'ubjcd a real change, asoppoledto Feigned, Nomina!, Potential, tfc- I yield : but not as oppolitc to Relative : Wherctorc our Divines ordinarily call Sanditication a Real change, as oppofite to the Relative cliange of Juftific*-tion. a. It is but one fort of luftificition wiiich is [on all bands confetfcd to be a pronouncing or declaring us Righteous :] your Lelf Ao afterwards fpc^k of Julti-fication in a fenfc that will not agree with this. Who doth not yield that Contli-tu:ive Jullificacion goes before Sentential ? Dochno: God make us Juft before he judge and pronounce us fo ? Yet in this confufioado you go on llill j and fuch aftirredo you make with [Immanent and Tranficnt] as if you would wear chcfe wordi chredbarc , or never have done wicb tUem ^ So Immanent are

thefc

Cs53

tijefe Notions in your Phantafie, that whtn they witl be Tranfient I cannot tell.

So often do you promife us over ana over to enqaire what is the Tranfiem ict ifl Juftification, and tain of [fpeakingpun^ually to it] that you railed my «-peftationto fuch a height, that I looked for much more then ordinary : But when 1 had read to the end, and could fcarcc perceive certainly, wrhctherever you fpalsc to the Point at all, or at iealt in fo few fyllablcs and fo cbfcurely, that I am uncertain whether I underftand what you mean, Iconfefs you left me between admiration and indignation J that after all your proloaiiei and premifcs, and our areateft hopes, you fhould drop aflecp when ycu fhould come to the work, or ceafe before you remembred the perfoimaflce,made me refolvc to fee lighter by fuch pio-mifes hereafter.

Mr.K- ['T'<' P^^'^ *''^* '^^^' *^ '^ Tranficnt aSl,th(y ttU m no more (faith Afr.Baxtcr) 1 buttbis,thstitdotbutit\&vc in fubjeftum extraneum, by mailing A wo-rallchivge on our Relations, though not a red upon onrpcrfons.'] I confcfS every tran-fitio, to ufe that word, in fubjeftum extraneum mailing a MonU ihingc, hr.otnC' ctjSarily ATravfienta^: For if it be only as upon anOhjclfy vcbcrcto iigiventut &n extrivfectUdevominstion, not tK upon the fubjcSt of aRcaU change, midcbythe aH, the tB bsth no title to Travfient .- for knowledge doth thii much: but whcrcever is a. ^orai en Legal chtngcmsde, tf^frc is of Wifjftty d Tranficnt aH : for that the Lares of men ttke no notice of Immanent aBs 5 and the Law of God ta^cs no notice of any change made in the ohjeH of hare Immanent aBs ; A mm by lujlivg after a woman commits Aialtcry punifljabte by the Ltff of god i the woman ii mhmgthe more defiled: So a man thdt covets his neighbours goods, is lookt 011 by God as a thief ^ the goods notmthftandivg remain in the fame place, and fcfejfm of the Orencr, vor doth God cha''enge than W! Felons goods ; no change made on then -, t^'krever then thercU aTiionU, i, c. « Legall change, there is aTravfieut aSf, and this being in ^uftification a Tranfiem aB is neeeffarily required to this charge. Nfw / yield !Mr. Bsxtcr that [no TranfiettaH is immtdiatly ttrmmed in a Relation, and the immediate cffcH ofGodsfufitfisationor Ke-mi^onof fins, mufi be fencwbat ReaUy mought, either upon the finncr, or fmervhat cife for him.

R.T. T Will not fland to open any wcaknefles or impevtincncies in rhis Sc-Idion, as long as the fcope is found, left I (hew my felt as quarrelfoaie

MrVi-^T^ Re feeond ^eflion is, if'hit is this ? and fo vi>h&t the TravfieM act is f X Mr. bsxtcr faith, [ 1. That the paffing the graut of the New Covenant, or the promulgation of it, is a Travfient act. 2. 60 may the continuance of it alio be* J. This Law or grant hatb a Moral improper i>M ten, whereby it maybe faid to pardon or jafiifie, which prof erly h butvirtuall )uftifyitig. 4. By this gram 1. Geddctb gtv« wth<2{jgbu»uftiejiofchrifttob€ourtwffcn we btiiive. x. Avd difablttb thf Lew t9

T

C963

thiige u t» pmulhrnent «r Ctnicniiitioit. j. IJ^'yich Kts'l founUtitns bcirt^ thn. Uii, $ur RclMioHs $f ^ujiifici uni ^ttrdtnei in Title of LxM io nccejfmlji fol-, Int.]

I cinnotpcrfveiic mj felfia Icsve mi oli DoSfors to foUow Mr. B ixrer, for my tbiu^ be huh fi'd m ill ihii. Let the pro u :.: ttton of the ^{jtv /Joveiuiu firjl sn.ifliU be 4 tnnficnt iH i ihii Cavemnthiih inolic empty Tion'L A^tn iK jujlifiin^ us when we bcUcvCi ani by the promjl^itionof t'.M Co-jcmut Goidoih if tnproperlr give us the Ri^hteoufneJ?ofChriil,snd difiblcth': Liiv toconiemriM, as ihi'i appesr by confiicrinr thmllherefpoiicnof j.cii»ns,is m ofiHioas i>npr9pcrly fo c^Ucd.xndfuch lU cinnst fu^ce to nuke i ReiU cffeci.

§. J4.

R. B. trtZHo your old Doftors are is utterly unknown to me} for I remembec V V not that I hive ever read any Dodw before you that goeth your way C if I know it) and am in hope that I never ihall reaJe any fuch bereatter. Foe your no: following me, as 1 have not been very eager to obtrude my opinions on any J fo if ic be no more for your own advantage then mine, I am noc to dedrous of your company, but that I can be without it. Njw to ths matter*

I am very glad that I am come to a Controverfic more eafic and more ufefuil then that which you made and ftuck in fo long before. As for my opinion abou; the nature ot Remilll m of (ioj I have had occallon to view and review it fince the writing ofmy Aphorifmes, and have received Animadverfions on this very Poinc of another nature then are thefe of Mr. I^'s, both for Learning, Sobriety, and Exaftnefs of Judgement i and upon my moll faithful! and impartial pcrufal of all, I muft needs profefs my fclf much more fatished in my firft opinion, and confident of its verity, then I was befort: And lomc Learned men (as molt Eng/ini hath ) do fully confcnt to it, and confirm it in their Aniini.ivcrfions ; and I remember none of the reft ( Cave the firll-intimatcd Reverend Learned Brother) that doth contradid it, of all chofe Judicious excellent men that have vouchfafed me their private Animidverfions. And even he doth confefs all that aftion of the L»w and change maJe by it, which I mention, asbtin^ a known truth beyond Controverlie j only he thinkethchac the nami of Juftification is to begivcn to no ad but a judicial Sentence, which I call, the moft pe.fed fort of Jultification- Indeed I am alhamed that I fpake fo ftiangely of foeafie and timi'.iar a Truth, as if it had been lome new difcovery, when alj that arc verft in Politicks and Laws miydifcern it to be fo obvious: but the reafon was, that I had noc read any thing of it in Divines as to oi^r prefent cafe.

Before I come to Mr. I^. let me tell the Reader mv thoughts of Remidi in more fully. Pardon aftivciy tasccn is an ad of G")d. Palfive pardon is iheterminua ot efeft ofthat aft. Pardon Aftive, is i. Mentall, in a more imperfcd, dimi-nute, and lefs-propcr fenfc called Pardon: As when a Prince doth pardon a tray-tour fccretly in his own thoughts and refolution only. This is applied to God fpeaking after the manner of .nen (in which manner we are neceflr.ated to fpeak of Cod :) and it is noc (as Mr.f^. imaginetb) to be conceived ot by us as being the fame with his Decree defuturo (fo far as we may conceive of G ids Lnmanenc ads as diners:) though ic be but the fame aft chat recciveth tbele divers dcnomit

nations

C973

ihationsfromjthedivierfity of the objcfts. i. Thefecond Aftive Pardon is Signal, Legal and Conftitutive i which by fignifying Gods Will, doth Legally con-ftitucc us pardoned, by caufing our J« ad Impuvttatemvel Liberstionem, i.e. by diflolving the Obiigarion to punifhment, or by taking away guilt. The aftion or caufation of this pardon, is but fuch as is that of (very FM«iii»ien/H»j in cauling irs Relation, j. Pardon taken adively alfo may lignifie the very Grant of the ad of Pardon (whether particular or general, abfolute or conditional ) that is, theaft of Legiflation (inourcafc^ whereby the Law of Grace is formed, a* the remitting Initrument. This goes before that forementioned j as being the caufing of that Fundamentum, which in time caufeth the Relation aforefaid. 4. The Promulgation or Proclamation of this Law of Grace, or Aft of Oblivion, may aUo be called Pardon. This Legal pardon is an Aft of God as Fc^or fupn Leges inrefpeft to the old Law whofe Obligation it diO'olveth; and it is the Aft of God asLegiflator inrelpeft of the Law of Grace which dilfolveth the Obligation of the Law ol Works.

Accordingly Pardon in a Paflive fcnfe, is taken as many waics. i. With men for rheeffeftsof mcntall pardon in the hear: and minde. i. Vor the ^mad Im-punititcm, or the Diflolution of the Obligation to punifhment, caufed by the fe-cond aft- J. For the Law of Grace, orthe promife it felf. And fo the pardoning Inftrumcnt of a King, is commonly called a Pardon. 4. For the hopefull Rc.ation or ftate that he is in that hath pardon oflered hini on very ealie and rea-fonable terms (as for the Acceptance with thanks.) I think all thelc fenfes the word is uled in the Scriptures j I am furc in Writers and common Ipeech it is fo. Now it iseafie todiicern that all the refl are but impetfeft pardons, and (o called in a diminute fcnfe, except ooly the fccond, which is the full and proper pardon, i. All this I fpeak of Pardon in Law fenfe, the fame with that which I call Juftification conftitutive (or but notionally diflcring :) But befidcs all this there is Pardon and Jultification per fcntentjam ^udicis, which thcfc aic but the means to, and which is the moft perfeft of all. But note that as the word Juftifi-cation is moft proper to [the fentence :] So the word [_Pardo7i'] is molt propec to the Civil or Legal aft that goes before Judgement. 5. And as Go<l pardoneth I. as KeBor fupra Leges by Donation and a new Law, z. and asjud^e by fentence: To J. alfo as the executor of Law and fentence or his Will: And fo pardoning is but Not-punifhing. Where note i. That this fometime may be before and without the firlf, by raeer providence : and i"o wicked men are pardoned without a promife, in fuch meafurc as God abateth and forbeareth punilhing them. i. That in our cafe this executive pardon quoii i«/(ih»i prefuppofeth the fiiIt Legal pardon, ini quoad complementum it prefuppofeth the fentential abfolu-tion. J. Note that thisiort^of pardon hath divers degrees, according to the dv-grccs of any due penalty which_is remitted : and fo may alter. So that in a word, all pardon is of one of thcfe three lorts i. By G)i as Author of the New Covenant, giving Right to Impunity, i. By God as Judge abfolving. 3. By God as executing.

All this being premifed our qiieftion is, which of thcfe it is that "^'cripturc a-fctibeth to Faith, and is called Rcmillion, or Believing, or Jurtification by Faith? Some fay. It ii only Gods mental pardon : Some fay, It is none of thcfc, bu: a Declaration to tha Angels in heaven, who is Jufl. Sonc fay, It is none of thelc, but a Minifeftation to our conlciences ( as fome fpeak) or a fentence of God iu our hearts (as others fpeak.) Some fay. It is ipfi Impunitas, oc uon Punirc (as

p * rw/j^

[98}

TTfti^f romcti^dc, or noUeTunlre, as other times.) I think it is th< Diflblving oi the ob:it;a:iui to puniflitncntj oi the givin" us a §ui dd Ubcrationcnveladimpiai^ Utm, or Ooiisrcmitting his Jm /i«n/<«i«; Where the hnmediatc tfrw/TUM is the PiUblution of tbc obligation, or our 'Dcbitumlibermonis, vtl jittidimpunitjteni and the remote tcrmiuui (which is yet connoted in the term Pardon, aseilentially ncccffiry ) is Impunity it fclf, or adual liberation from puniflimcnt, or h»ih punire. And withall, as in man a mental! Remiflion goes before the aSual Signal, Legal Remiflion, i'o there is iu God, a Nolle punire, and aher the oiannet of men, it may be afcribcd to God, as then beginning when the Law remitteth, and the (inner is a capable fubjed, bccaufc it cannot be denominated Rcmifllon, but by connotation otthcobjcft, and that rauft be, when there is an obj?d fit : And To after tbc manner of men, we attribute it to God, as an at^ which in time heismoved to by an Impulfivccaufe, -ji^. the Satisfadion aixi Meiits of Chiiil ; though ftriftly we ufe to fay, there is nothing abextra can be an impulfirccaufe to God : Much more then this 1 have faid for explication of this Point in private Papers to fomc Learned Friends j but this may fuflBce for the right under-ilanding of what here pafleth between Mr. J^. and me. And now I proceed to hi» words.

X. He acknowledgeth the Promulgation of the New Covenant to-be a Tran-fient aft : It is the fame Inftrument of God that is called his Covenant and hii. Law here. And as it is a Law, the term [Promulgation] doth moU fitly agree to it. And I doubt not but either Mr. IQ> implieth Legiflation fperhaps be mi-Itakes the terms for e4uipollent) or at leaft he will as. freely acknowledge that a Tranfientaft. But he faith, i. That [this Covenant hath an cxlde empty mo. rail adion.] Let any man that reades thefe words of this Learned man, judge: whether I be not cxcufable for'that cenfure iathe Preface to the Appendix of my Bookof Baptifm I A School Divine and a Chairman, ax)d know no more the nature of a Law, Covcnant,or any Legal Inftrument I A DivijK, and an Ari^ ftarchus, and yet dare to fpeak fuch words of all the holy Laws and Covenants of God 1 Why what doth this man fludy and preach, that thinks lo bafdy of Gods. Laws ? The Moral aftion of the Law of Grace or Tefiament of Chviii he calleth tan oddc empty Moral aftion :] Yet its like he knows that Commonwealths are chiefly upheld and ordered by Laws, Contrafks, Convcyances^c^c. and coiifc-quently by aftions of the fame nature. The whole body of the Commonwealth and each member of t, do hold their Eftates, Liberties and Lives by fuch odde empty aSions. Takeaway the odde empty Moral adion of Laws, TcftamcntJ> Obligations, Deeds of Sale, Lea'cs.(5'c. and what is a Commonwealth, and what a, Reftor, and what fccuriry have you of any thing you poflefs ? or what orderly commerce among men ? His next aflertion is as defpcrate as the former^ that tby the promulgation of this Covenant, God doth as improperly give us the Righicoufnefs of Chrift, or djfable the Law to condemn us.] Could any words (not certainly deflrutftive to Chriftianity it felf) have fallen from this Learned man more unworthy a Divine ? Doth not tlie Telbmcnt of the Lord Jefus properly convey the Legacy ? Doth not Gods Deed of gift of Chrift and his Righteoufnefs to us, properly convey ? and doth net God properly Give thereby ? Why bow can a more proper way of Giving be imaginable ? i. If a man do properly give, by a Tcftament or Deed of Gift, then fodoch God : But a man doth^ (^c Thercfore,67't. i. Where there is a plain fignification of the Will of the Donor to confer thereby the bcneficon tbe Receiver, ihero is a proper Giving : * "" But

tw3

But in the Gofpel-piomlfc or Teftaaiem of Chrlft there is fuch a fignification of the Donors Will; Thcrefore,^;*^. Doth not an A&, of Oblivion or Pardon properly give pardon to ail tliat it pardonech ? Doth not any Ad of Grace give the favours exprellcd ?

2. And where he faith, that [God doth hereby as improperly difable the Law tocondcTin US ] 1 Reply, i. Nothing in the world can more properly dilable the Law from cttt dual condemning us, that is, fo as to procure fcntence and execution, then a c.encral Ad of pardon, or then the new Law doth, which is in its very nature Lex Remediant, ^ obligAtioncm ai pxnam prioru dijfolwitf. Though ftillthe Law as to itsfenle is the fame, and therefore doth virtually condemn till the faid dillbluuon. How can the Law of the Land be more difabled from cfte-dual condemning all Trayiors, fer what is paft, then by an Ad ot Oblivion, or a particular pardon under the SoTcraigns Hand and Seal ? z. Yea this Lcarn-td mandifputesagainfl the very forrfiall nature and definition of a pardon: which is to he an J a of the ReSlor jreeing the guilty from puniP)mcnt by dtj}'olvi»g the obligation. And certainly as the obligation it I'elf is one of thefc [odde, empty Moral adions,] To muft the dilfolution of it needs be. Indeed Theologm eji ^urifcottfttltict ChrijUiKua, a ChrilUan Lawyer: and what a Lawyer he is that knows not the nature, ufe and force of Laws, is eafie to be judged. I could wifli men would lay by their over-bold enquiries into Gods Decrees and other Immanent ads, or ac leaft, their vain pretendings to a knowledge which they never had of them, and ftudy this intelligible and neceflary part of Theology a little more.

But Mr.I^.tels us that he will make all this ftrangedodrine[appcar :3andho\v ? Why[by confideringthat all here fpoken of adions, is but of adions improperly fo called,and fucb as cannot fuffice to make a real efted.] Rep.Do you oppore[Real] to [feignei or nominal] or to [Relative i*] If the former, it is fuchdodrine as I dare fay, no Divine will believe, no Lawyer, nounderftanding member of a Commonwealth, and I think, no Chriftian, that underllandcth what you fay. Think not the words rafli, for I think him not fit to be accounted a Divine, no nor a Chriftian ((uppofing him tounderftand the matter) that will or dare maintain, That neither the curfc of the Law, orthreatning of the new Law, whereby fo many arc adjudged to Hell, nor yet the Teftament, Covenant, ProtniTeof the Gofpel, whereby Chrift and his Bcnefi:s, Jullification, Adoption, Salvation (qutad^Hs) are given, do any of them make a true change ? But if you oppofe [Real] to [Relative,] then I muft tell you, that [ Remiflion and Jullification Paflive] are no Real eft'eds, but Relative ; which I had thought you need not have been loU. The ad of Legiflation and Promulgation 'makes a real eftcd ; but the Fundamcntum once laid, caufeth but a relation. Do not you know tlwt the very formal nature of all morality is Relative ? What elfe is @/£^uuntf^uJlHmy^Mc^ rituniy Debitum, ^us, yea benum morale, d;'malum, &c ?

Again I mult tell you,that you ^o not well to mention Promulgdtion alone,when 1 fpokcof Enading, or Granting, or Legiflation, before Promulgation, I hope youtakenot both thefe for one. Nay indeed Promulgation is proper to a Law as it is obligatory to the I'ubjed, and fo is neceflary af:er Legiflation, ai aHiulcm obligationem: but a Law of Grace which doth conferrc benefits, and whereby the Lcgiflator doth, as it were, oblige himfelf, may be in force in fome decree, without a Promulgation: bccaule a man may be madecapabl:of Right to Benefit without his knowledge, though he cannot be obliged to duty vvithoiltf b<s knowledge, except when he it Ignorant through his own fault.

P z ^r.K-

[too]

§ 35.

Mr.i^r"Or/r/J, ThtCovcvMt^ufiifitsus, notby iny til, hutmccrly by the tenour L* 0} it, 04 a Law, wtjigent, and ntofiy things in this hjnde arc faii to do, vrbcn there, IveU, is no acfton at all: Quantitas facit quantum j / hope n» ASlion, tt dotb it formalitcr, not cfficiemer : Patcrnitas facit paticm j I i^no-wtio Affi^ftthu ever WIS afcribcdte Relation, itidoth it formiVncr , not efficienter: and ft dotb tbe Covenant rot ^uflife a Believer by avy /jfi, let Mr.V>zxitxminceH as he vPiU, a moral improper Adion, but as hit grea: Metaphylical RabbicsiroM/i (peaii aptitudina-liter, and tbii but cxtrinfccc too'y /erfcedus non facie Jultum of itfclf, butitmujl be beholden to many intervcnient Caujes-

5- ^^ , . .

K.B. 1. 'TpHanksto Inadvertency (as I fuppofe) it is here acknowledgcJ

_|_ that the Covenant doth Jultificj and iiiat as a Law , which it it doj wc ftialHee anon whether it can be any other way then that which 1 affirm. I. But little thanks is due to this Authour from the friends of Truth, for his dil-covcry of the way of the Covenants Juilifying. [It is (faith he) by the Tc-nour of it, as a Law :] True : How elfc fliould it be ? [but not Agent] Not by a Phyfical proper Adion : that's true : But have Laws, Tcltaments, Covenants, Grants, Pardons, (iT'c. no Moral Adion ? Or is this Moral fo contemptible a matter, that a Learned Divine ftiould make Nothing of it ? When all mens eftates and lives depend on it here, and all mens Salvation or Damnation hereafter. But how is it then that the New Covenant Juliifics ? why he thus proceeds [^^uantitas fjcit quantum j 1 hope no Adion : it doth hformalitcr, not efficienter f Faternitas facitpatrcm t I know no'Adion that ever was afcribcd to Relation, ic dotb it/ormi/wr, not c^«f»fcr.] Reply, i. I thought that Ifacere'] had been as improperly applied to a formal Caulation, as {.Agere"] and that 1 may, at leaft, as fairly do the later, as you the former, z. If this Learned man do indeed think that the Covenant doth formaliter JuiiiRe, as J^antjtas factt qnantutTii (^patcrnitas pstrem, I ihall the lefs repent that 1 was not his Pupil: And it I knew who be his old Dodors that he here fpcaks of, 1 would never read them, if they be no better intherell : nay, I would take heed of looking into them, left they faatl a power of fafcination : What istheAfj»er that the Covenant doth Inform ? Gods Ad, or mans Qu_ality, Ad, or what ? What matter doih it concurre with to conlli-tute ihc Compofitum.^ls not ^uftitiaiha which formally makcth Juft ? Ts the Covenant the Relation oij^nft in the Abftrad ? Why then doth not the dcnominarion follow the form ^ Is it the Covenant qued cxplicat,quid^i^uftijicatus? Or by which ^ufluscjlid quod eftf But let us make thcbeli conltrudion imaginable of M'I^'s vords,3nd fuppofe tha: he would only prove the Negative[what way it is by which the Covenant/uUifieth not,v/^ no: c^cicnter'] and not [what way itdorh Juftifie, vi\.formAlitcr2yii I fhould demand,i.What is then the ufc or purpofe of his Inlfan-cesjor fore-going words ? i.What the better arc wc for his difcourfe, if he tell us not what way it is ? 3. What Caufe will he make it if not an cflicient ? Will he fay it is either Material or Final ? I think not. Bur he faith, that [the Covenant doth not Juftifie a Believer by any Ad, let Mr.B. mince it as he v/ill, a Moral Improper Adion, but as his great Metaphylical Rabbles would fpcak aptittt* dinaliter, and this but cxtr/n/cte too.] Reply. What Reader is muck the wifcr

C-'oiT

• for this anfwer ? Would you know whether FceJus fadt ^uflum, ut formA, vtl ut c^icietijf Why Mr.I(.. tdtcth you, hdoib nhai upututiiiuiitcrf It io, then certainly, nor ut forma: iox fornuaptmdtn^liifiicienstnformitum, is a ftiange creature. It muii then be ma-te. 01 efficient. 1 would not ttiink lo hardly of MrX-as to imagine that he takes it for a Material Came > mtich Icfs that he takes it for MatcrUdptttudiridk ^u[i!fi<./tci6Vh aiiudis. 1 hope fuch dodrine never dropt from his Chair. What is ie;': then, Inu that it be an cfHcient. And if lb, is not ail efficiency by Adion of one [on 'Ji r -.her ? h iid moi cover, h--w comes Efficitvs tan-turn Aptitudindis, to be E§icie7is "Ac!uJL f And if not AUtulii, how comes the Efied to be produced, vi^. The Believe;- to be Juilified ? But 1 dare not impute this ntn fenfc to Mr. I^. Perhaps he takes the Covenant to be no Cauie at all of Juftification ? But that will not hold neither ? Forheplainiy I'aith, that [ihe Covenant juftificih] twice here together. And fure^MjJj^/w^iig-niBeth fome Caufation.

Yet he amufeth me more by adding [and this but fxtr/w/ffe too.] Why, who isit that hath found oot another Juftifying cificient, But onely the cxtrinfccal ? By this 1 fee he takes it not for Matter or Form > for they arc not extrinUcal. But iinottheLaw, thejury, the Advocace, thejudge, eachoftheman cxtrinfccal efficient in juliifying every man that is juftifisdix/ore/wwiaso/ It may be Mr. I^. hathrcfped to the juilification of Conlcience : But doth he think that there are not extrinfick efficienrSj that do more properly and more nobly juftific then our confcienccs do ? Then let man be his own pardoner and juftificr, and be preferred before the bloud of Chriftj the Law, the Advocate, and the Judge of Believers, 1 think it is no difparagcmcnt to our Glorious Judge, thai he will jufti-fieusextrinl'ecally. Conscience which juflifieth ( in fome fenfe) intrinfecaily, doth it by fo low an Aft, by fo fmali Authoiity, that it is very doubtful! whether it be iit to call that Ad either Conliitutivc or fentential JuQi-fying,fo gieat is the Impropriety : (Of which I have fpoke more fully ellwherc.^

Jf Ml.!(,. had named fome of thofe Metaphylical Rabbics, and been guilty ot naming as it were the Chapter and Veife (of which crime be accufcth me) I ftiould the better have known whether he fay true cr falfc, when he telsus that theyi would fay the Covenant juUifieth aptitudimlttcr, and rot by any ad. Its true that the Covenant juftitiech, Vt fignum volimtAiis 'Divina per hec Tccati re-mittentis: And had he laid that it is ■ngr.um Afiitudtmlc to men before they believe, and 5jg?/HOTy^flHj/cafter, there had been lorr.c fcnfc in his words, though yet they had btendeftdive ot Truth or Fitncls: For tiicyaie^^wKwi dflzu/e to millions of the unjuifificd, though no: fignum uciudUtcr 'fu^ifmns. But it is Believers that are adually juftfied, of whom he fpeaks txpitdj : and therefore be hath fome other meaning, what ever it is.

Yet if Mrl^. had denied to the Cctenant in jufiifying, a proper Phyfical aft. only, we were agreed j But he denicth [rn improper moral adion] as he tels me, I mince it : which if I fliould do, I ihculd expcd to be told, ti.at 1 were a very lingular man indeed : For I doubt not but this Learned man Lath read many a large Volume of Politicks, and particularly rfcLcgzfc»4.. and ibctc read their Dii-cow'ks icLcgumnBiomhtu, viz. praiiipcre, prohibcrc, pritnime, punire : 1 doub: not but he hath read many a large Volume of the Civil Law in fpccialjand therein of the Nature of Obligations of all forts : '(Fcr I would not luppofe him dc-fcdive in his reading of any thing.) And after all this for fo Orthodcx a man 10 deny [a Moral improper adion] to Gods Laws, and fo to all Laws, and

P 3 therein

therein differ from all the Ltwycrs and Divine* that ever the world knew (fo farre as I can leirn) 'is fingutarity fnJced 1 Yea and never yet to write one Volume of hit Realons againll all the world, that we might be undeceived? Serioufly I wonder whJt he thi:ik$ot Gods Laws, Govenants, Promifcs, Tctltmeii:, and how hcpreachcth them, yea or believeth tiiem, or what work they have on his foul, who takes them :o hive no Moral improper Aftion ? I (hould think fuch a tteriu 'thyfictu vvcre a ftiange man to make a Divine. But let us hear his reafon : [For Voeiut nonfacit jitltum of it rdf, bu: ic muft be beholden to many intcrveni-ent Caufei] Reply, i. It Teems to be here granted that Fximfjch jujiun mtr-venientilfM ulijt Csiifis -. And it fo , it is an efficient j and if To it hath Lome kindeof Adion. i. ^i^itur fcqieii: What if the Covenan: juilifie not n/jJ intcrvenienttbxi Jliis quibafditn Csujitf Doth it thence follow that it hath no moral Adion ? And wc mull I'pcak mh iVnle to fay, that it jaftifieth but AptttuJtHjlttcrf 5. I deny that there is any other Caufe doth intervjnc between the Covenant, and the Effjft. A Condition on mans part mull be performed before the Law or Covenant of Grace will tAliu Ciufare, i. e. ^uftifiare. And this Condition hith its Caufes; But Remiflion and J unification have no interrcning Cau fes.

I have in Anfwer to other Reverend Brethren fo fully and diftindly laid down my own thoughts of this whole bulinefs, vi^- of the feveral forts of Righteouf-ncfs, and of the nature of each, and the Caufes, that I will fuppofe 1 may be excufedthatl doitnotherc. Only I may tell Mr. i(|. that I take Rightcoufnefs as now in QuelUon, to be a Relation (whether predicamental or Tranfcendental, we will not now difpute ; but I fuppofe ic is the later.) And as Relation is fo fmall or low a Being, that it is by feme reckoned between Ens 67* Hibil, fo the way of it: produftion muft be anfwcrable i and muft be by as low a kinde of Adion. Yet if it have any kinde of Being at all, it muft have fomc Caufe, and chac muft have fome Aftion. And therefore Rabbi I^cc^^ermia faith, F uuiamentum idem fig-nificit quod E^cicHs j TcrminvA idem quod finis. I fuppofe Mr. I^. will acknowledge the Caufation of procatarcktick Caufes, objeSlum , occifio, meritum : and yet will finde thcfe efficients to hare but an improper Aftion (at Icall fome af them) as well the F««i4?ne;ifM»?i hath in caufing a Relation. Belides all this, it is found no eafie matta to reduce all Politicall Notions to the Notions of Logick ov Metaphyficks i and fome think that when wc fpeak of Politicks, we mull fpeak in the terms of Politicks, and that it is an unfit or impoflible attempt to fpeak there in the ftrid language of Logicians, though I am noc of their mindc in the later.

But fuppafe that I had granted all that Mi'.I^. hath hitherto faid : What is it to thai whicii he Ihou'd prove ? He undertakes to prove, i. That the Covenants Aftion (as [call it) is [an odde, empty. Moral Adion] and fo cannot make thisEffeft: But he hith not yet proved, that the Relation of our Rightcoufnefs may not Rcfult from the Covenant as its Fundamentum, though without a proper Aftion i as fo3a as the Cjndition is performed on our parts to make us fit Sub-jefts. X. He undertakes to prove, that [by the Promulgation ofthis Covenant God doth as improperly give us the Rightcoufnefs of Chrift, and difable the Law to condemn us, bccaufeall here fpoken of Adions, is but of Aftions improperly [0 called] liuc doth he indeed think that Legiflacion, or Promulgation, or Covenant making is but Improperly called Aftion ? If he do, I will not wafte timein fuch a work as the Confacinz him is.

Laftly,

Laftly, If his Argumert be gocd [We arc not properly juflificd hj aft A^'en improperly called Adicn : Bui the Afticn of the Covenant is Improperly called A ftion : Therefore, t^c."] then it will follow that we are iM)t properly Juftificd by anyAftJonot God. For it isgennally held, that [-Aftiori] i$ not properly ap-plini to God, but y^nalogicallyjand afrertbc manner of the cicaiure. 1 think this firft Argument of Mr.I^. deferves no more anfwcr.

uVr.K. a. /^ Odii vctpnpcrly fate to ^ufitfcvi h this tratfevt jiH tf ihe C^ve-VJ tai>i : Fcreitber hc^nj:7fi}tU, orcvlyfome. NctaU:)«raU/lT»pe artttttjiiftified : not fome pure ihen others j ftr tbf New i^bvimntnAka vo difcrtr.ce tfii [elf i and fo God)hftifctb none by it.

§• 56. 3J..B. I. Thither you mean, that Litisnot by the Tranficnr t& Alcne that iZ Godjbflifies] or L^ot by it at a'.!.] If ;hc fcimer, 1 ccnfcfle it, bccaufc the Moral Aft which IcUowcih doth intervene to the prodiiftion ofthcEflcft. It is not by the tranfient Aft of Generation d/CKf, that T/itcr caufat jjhatkvtm. But it lettrs you rake it in the later fcnfe , and ^o it is falie, ^\\o\.\z^\ht¥unddmevitumdclhomticCaufATe'RdatTOntm y idque immediate, yet that Aft which Caufeth the Fundamgntitm, d«th proprrly Caufc the Rclari-QA too.

• z. I ferionfiy proietsrhat it fecm^rome a very fad Cafe, that any man that is calJed a Divine, or a Chriftian fhould argue, and that fo weakly, and io wilicUy againil all the clficacy ot Gcds Teitament. Law or Corcnanr in conveyfrg to us rkc Lading Rclaiiitc benefits of Chriit 1 If it were only (as feme Dtvincs that I deal with) that he acknowledged the thing, and denied ontly the fiinefs of the Name of Juftifyingto the Aft of the Covenant, it were a fmallcr matter: But it isRemifl'ion of fin it felf i the giving us Chrifls Righteoufnefs, the difabling the Law to condemn us, that he Iptaks cf, as ycu may fee before ; and fo he here darcito coxclude. That God juftifits none by it. To tl is lamentable Dilemma here brought for proof, 1 fay, 1. CoKiizftw<Ji/Gcd Juftificth y^ll by his Covc-runr, at leafl All to whom it is Revea cd. AStuiUy he Juftifieth only rhem that have the Condition. \ c^^oic ASiuiUy 10 ConditjovaVy, bccaufe that while it is hut Ccyiditicnal, it isnotyi^M<i/in Law fenfe, that is, EfKftuai, though it is in /.5.U, fo farre done as it is : And indeed it is not \\\ ftrift knie that a man is called, Juflifkd, while it is but Condiricnal: though yet it is a ccmmsn phrafc, bicaui'e the Agent hath dene it jM<niu?tt:«/c, when the Condition is but Acceptance, a. God doth Juftifie feme more then othcis by liis Covenant, vi\. Believers more then Unbelievas : ThismiC thinks a Diwine fliould not have denied.. But he hath rcafon for his denial: and what's that ? Why, fce faith [for the New Covenant makes no diflerence of ir felt.] A ftrong Reafon : Itdothit not of ir felf: Therefore it doth it not at all. But 1 Reply : Tbereisatwo-foid diflFercncc made between men in thcfe fpiritual chatjges. The fit fi is Real, when one that was an Infidel is made a Believci : and tiiis is done by t he Spirit and Wcrd ordinal!! y j andiiisbut to prepare men to be fit obfefts for the juftifying Aft; The fccond i% Relative, when we are rardor.cd, Juftificd; Adapted, and have a Righr

eiven

given uj to other Bcncfi:»: This difference the Covenant makes of it felf,'the former preparatory diff>:rence bein^ before made. To lay , the Cove^ nant makes uotthe fidl Real difference > Therefore it makes nodi ffereacc, Uill arguing.

I would deli'e :he ReaJer to try how Mr. !(,*$ argument will fit the Lawsor Conveyances of men. If a Parent bequeath to each of his children an hundred pound on ConJition thev man y, to become due ac the day of Marriaj^e ; according to Mr.I^. you may 3rj,ue thus: Either this Teltamcnt Giveth the Lcijacy to All, ortoNone; Not to All, if All marry nor: Not to fomc above others : for the Teftaracnt of it felf makes no difference : Therefore it Giv;th it to none. Or if a King give OJt a Pardon, or parte an Ad of Pardon or Oblivion for all Traitors that are up in arms againrt him, on Condition chat they lay down arms, and Accept the pardon ; Mr. I^. would argue, it feems thus: Either this A.SL pardoneth All, or Some : Not All : for All will no: lay down Armrs, and Accept it: Not Some onely i for the ad makes no difference of it felf: Therefore it pardoneth none. Sec what an Interpreters hand the Golpel is fallen into at Blijlini !

Afr.K. J, \ M An fJuU properly be f^ij to fuHifiehimfdf (sthing which IMr.'&ixrer IVl bolls on, oirvellhe mij, wt Monlirum horendum) For where there ti i promtfe of a rcrvdri made to All, upon a Ctudition of perftrming fuib a fervice, hethitobtiimtberervird, gets It by hiiorvtt(crvicei without which the promife would have brought him never the ne^trcr to the reward: and thus a mis wifely ^ujlifies hmfelf by Believing , and more a great deal then God doth "fujUfie him by his Fromulgitioa of the '2{cw Covenant, which would have left him tn his old Condition hid be not better provided for bimfclf by Believing, then the Covenant did by 'Fromiftng,

§. }7. K,B. J^ How much have I been too blame, in my indignation againft poor V^ ignorant Chriftians, for taking up the abfurdell Antinomian fancies fo ealily I When even fuch Divines as this Ihall ufc fuch reafonin^i as I here finde !

I. Idenythc Confequence, u bcin^ verba fomniantis.

1. I think, I fhall anon (hew, that himfeif is undeniably guilty of this Confequence, which here ii Cd^Wcd Monftrumhorrendum,

J. For his reafon, i. Its pity that he cannot diflinguifh between a Caufe and a meer Condition : Where he faith [he that obtains the reward gets it by his fer-vice] I fay, it is here By it, as by a Condition ftnequi non, but not By it, as by a Caufc, I. And its pity that any Divine ffiouid not dilHnguilh between fervicc and fervice. There is a fervice which is opcrjr/, or fome way profirable to him that we perform it to ; which therefore may oblige by commutative Juftice to reward us : and here the Reward is not of Grace, but Debt: and the Work is a Meritorious Caufe, properly fo called. There is a Work which is a Means oT Moral-natural Neceillty (on terms of Reafon and common honelty) to our orderly participation of a Bwucfit freely Given : As if a Traitor fhall have a pardon

i

don on Condition he will Accept it, and come in : Or a$if a Womtn-Traitor ftiould not only have pardon and life, but alfo be Princcfs, on condition ftie will marry the Kings fon, that hath Ranfomedher. Here the ad may imprope; ly be called fcrvice, becaufe Commanded : but properly and in its principal Conlidera-tio», it is a necefTary reafonable means, to her own happinefs : And this ad is buc a meet Condition fine qua non,oi her Pardon and Dignity, and no proper Meritorious, or efficient Cauie.

4. What a dangerous reafoning is this, to teach men proudly to thank them-felveu for their pardon and happinefs, and deny God the thanks / To fay [Gods promife would have brought me never the nearer the reward, had not 1 believed : and I did a great deal more cojullifie my felf by Believing then God did by his Covenant.]

5. Nay, I would defire the Reader to obferve, what Ihift Mr.IC-hath left for himfelf to difclaim this wicked Conclufion : Is there any of the Piemifes which he doth not own f i. I hope he will not deny but the Promife of pardon and fal-vation is made to all that hear it, on Condition, they will Repent and Believe: 2. If he regard not better proof, I hope he will believe Dv.TrvijS (fo oft repeating it) that falvation is given per tnodum pramii. }. I hope he believes, thac without believing, the Covenant would not have brought him to falvation. Muft not this man then conclude on his own principles, that [he wifely julirfies himfelf by believing? and more a great deal then God doth juftific him by his promulgation of the new Covenant, which would have left him in his old Condition, had he not better provided for himfelf by Believing, then the Covenant did by promiUng.] I am loth togive thefe words fo bad an Epithete as is their due. VVby may not any Traitor fay the like that Receives a free pardon ? Or a beggar that Receives a free alms, when Receiving or Accepting is the Condition fiuc qui »w of their attaining andpofleffing it ?

6. The Gofpel bath a promiLe of Faith it felf to fome : and this Faith is Caufed by the holy Ghoft : Therefore it is ftill God that providech for the Eled, better then they provide for themfelves, howfoever fuch difputers may talk. But yre muft not therefore confound the nature of G >ds Gifts, nor their Caufes or way of produdion. The Spirit tjives us Faith firft, which is out Condicion.ani

.makes as capable objeds or lubjeds of Juftification : which being do.Te,the new Law of G.ace doth immediately Pardon, Juftifie and Adopt us: which way then doth MrX'sdefperate confuquence follow ? Oc what (hew of ground hath it ? Ic feemi if this man had forfeited his life, if a pardon were offered him buc on Condition that he would Take it, and fay, 1 thank you ; he would fay , he did a great deal more to his own pardon by Thanks and Acceptance, then the King that granted ic, did by his G.anc; becaufe the Grant would have left him in the old Conilition, had he not better provided for himfelf by Thankful! Acceptance, then the King did by his Pardon.] Yea and in our Cafe the Acceptance is Given too, though another way. I confefs my deceftation of this difputing, is beyond my exprertion.

Zmchj in I ]oh.i. loc.icR.em't^.p.^\,^z. faith, Baptifm is not perpetually a vi-tlble Inrtrumcnt bv which Rcmilfion is offered [_t^crbum autemperpctud ejl tale In-(Irumentum.yerbum crgOHOn BiptifmuStCjl illud proprium^'perpeiuum iujlrumentum per quoi perpctuopQctitorum remijfio nobis offerer (3' douitur (To multitudes more) And in cQmpcnd.Theol.p.76^. PerEvin^eliun Demgntk fujitjlat.

CL . §i«.

§ j8.

Ht.K' T rJ </<'<>' /'»»&« f<i^c cf the N «» Uovcnant, as in thut of the OU: The C«f-i- vArtt ran. In the day thou carcft thereof, rhou (halt die : Tbit rtat G«ds Threat: Ifriy vchobrtught dcathiiMihcvcorld, god or Adam? ^u/l (ointbeHew Covenant, Believe and be Juftified : Wkojuliificsihe Believer,Gei orhtmfelf} Turpc eft doftori <\im culpa rcdarguit ipfuia.

R' B. v-tEver let any caufe be thought [o bad, but that it may have the L\ grcatcft confidence to credit it with the world. [ Its clcir "T faith Mr. I^. in the beginning , and with his proverbiall Poetry, he triumphantly concludes. But if ever man met with weaker grounds of fuch triumph and confidence j in a man of fuch learning, he is of larger experience then I am.

I. To bis fir ft Qucftion, I R»pJy : eAdam brought death into the world as the Deferver, God as the Legiflator, making it Due to him, if he iinncd, and as the Judge, fentencing him to it for fin ; and as the principal Caufe of the Execution. But tAdim was the culpable Caufe.

a. To his fccond Queition, I fay, God juflifieth the Believer, as Leoifla-tor, and as Judge, and as Reftor fuprx Leges, and as Donor or Bcnefador. And the Believer is not fo much as the Meriter of his own Juflification, ss lAisctn was of his Condemnation. Did I think that any Learned Prote-fiant had not known this ? That he hath his Condemnation by his Merit, and his Juftification without hii Merit, upon the performance of that Condition which is the Acceptance of Chrift that hath Merited it for us ? That Death is the wages ot finnc, and Eternal Life the Gift of God through Jc-fus Chrift.

3. But again, I admire what the man means'. Whether he own the wicked Conclufion [Man juftificthhimfelf ] or not? For he makes it to be the Confe-quenccofthistenour of the Covenant [Believe and be Juftified] And dare he fay, . that the Covenant deth not fay,Bclievc and be Juftified ? Yea neverthelefs,thougb icalfogivefaicb.

§ 19-Mr.K. HTHat firfi born of Abominations wWr.Goodwins phrafe UunluckHj l^ii » at Wr.Baxters own door ; andit may appear it is not rvrongfuUy- fathered upon him, by thtt very argument whuh heuniertaiics to anfvfer, gnd doth well enough for fo much Oi it cxpreft, but there it more implied tn it.

R.JB. I. [11 Nluckily] muft be interpreted [byfalfc accufation] I expeft to

*^ have fuch unlucky hands lay more fuch abominations at my door.

2. Mr.lC- confelTeth, that I well enough aniwer the Argument for fo much as

i&

Cie73

Isexpreft: And let tbe Reader well obfervc what the Implied addition is that he makes.

§. 40-Hr. K. *^Hiiihc Promulgation of ibc 'Mjw (Covenant wot from the beginning: 1 Miny menJhiU not be ^ufiified ttU toivards the cni of the iVorli t Ko mxn till a longtmc after tbc^romulgstion: Therefore wt fo much by Gods Pro-^ muli^ition of the Covenjnty m the mttit coYcmmcx hit performing the Coniitian, which is i/7c Immediate C(Ui(c of it, and therefore hcjuflijics htmfelf^ sad thM more then God in tbeNtvfCovemnt.

§. 40. R-B. I. \7t7Hat is here added as impliadte that which he confefletb, that I V V well enough anlwered ? Let him tell that can.

2. How can he prove chat jidam was not juitified till a long time after the Promulgation of the New Covenant ? A bold affercion, mc thinks.

}. The Confcqucnce is a pucid «0M /cjMztor; What ihew doth the man bring to make any man believe bis Conl'equence, but the bare Credit of his own word?

4. What a ftrait doth this Difputer bring himfelf into ? He muft either fay, that the Gofpal or New Covenant doth not promife Pardon and Juftification on Condition of Believing. (And is he fie to preach the Gofpel that would deny fo great a part of it.) Or elfe he muft hold his wicked Condullon, That man ju-^ificth himfelf, and that more then God in the Covenant. And for ought I caa underfland by him he means to own one of thefc.

5. The ground of all this rotten dodiine, is another notoriouserrour here ex-prefled, u/i^. That [mans performing the Condition is the Immediate Caufe o( hisjultification :] when it is properly no Caafc at all. A Condition may fome-timc be alfo a Moral Caufc, ic. when there is fomewhat in the excellency or na« turc of the thin2 Conditioned, to move the principal Caufer : Buc fuch a Condition as is purpoTely chofcn for the abafing of man, and the honour of free Grace, and confilleth but either in Accepting a free Gift J orinnot rejeding ic again, ot not [pitting in the face of the Giver, this is no Caufe, bat/tne quA non. It fcems, this Learned man hath too arrogant thoughts of his own faith, as if it were the Immediate Caufe of hisjultification, and fo he jullified himfelf more then God by his Covenant.

§. 41-Mr.K.. \SferinliMice: IhcrevoKaLivtmiie in ^etn Elizabeths time, thit, l\ every EngliflmiznbivingtilienOrders mtho Komifh Church, coming intt England, j/;iK/«jfcr a^ j. Trxitor: Tlut EngUfl) min, vohichhijini ti^en Orders in the Romijh'- hnrch, comes wow into England, dnd is condemned, hilk HOt[o much r(i[on M f fur^c hn couicmmtion on (he »S^f c«, as himfelf

Cio8]

s. 41.

I. Z.TTHat u becaufc he it the culpable meriting Caufc. Are we the Defervers ^ of pardon ?

§. 41. Mr.K-^r*He Lsw condemns bim-, but Jhc doth not vehomidcthe Law, veho iki J. rrnny yars fme i yea the ^udge who pronouncetb the fcntence doth uot fo properly doit as.the Seminary bimfelf: '2{onortbe Law, 4s the^rtcjlhimfelf ; wb» had he beeu minded to hive fccured bimfclf, might have done it at hU pUafurc, Qayed at 'R.hcincierDowiyiaHdcondemned the Liwof Tyranny -, yea andavtucht all tbofetbat fttffered by it as Tray tors to be really Mirtyrs. The cafe is the fame, though in a different matter.

§' 41. R.B. I. V^Ou confefs here that the Law condetnncth : and then no doubt it 1 juftjfiethroo.

*. Where you fay, [Shee doth not that made the Law] I fay, that is becaufc the Law doth operate or caufc, as it is a fign of the Will of the Rcdor, to confti-tate that ^w which he had power to conftitute. Now when the Queen and Parliament were dead J "they had no power to oblige them that Jhould live after them, much lefs if contrary to the Will of their fiicccllois: Nor yet had they power while they were aliTC, fo to bindc pofte'-ity. The Laws therefore were divolvcd into other hands, and now bindes as fgnum voluntatis KeSlorU jam cxiftentis: For it is his will that it fhould continue > and that will animates it : Yet where any hath power, the figns of their will may be efteftual when they are dead : Or elfc Teftaments were little worth, and Legataries were in an ill calc. But whats this to our cafe? Goddiethnot, and the Laws of his Kingdom lofc not their force, jior change their Mafter, by the change of GovernouiS. Bu; if you had dealt in-genuoufly, you fhould rather have enquired, whether the prcfent Reftor and Mafler of the Law, may be faid ro condemn him that the Law condemns. And that methinks you (hould not deny. Yea, and it may be faid that dead Ly-curgtu was a caufc of the condemnation of furviving odiendors, for all your bare deniall.

J. Where you fay that [ the Judge who pronounccth the fentencedoth not fo properly condemn him, as the Seminary himfelf.] Seeing you yield that both condemn him, the Judge Sententially, and himfelf Meritorioufly, and theque-ftion is but of the greater or lefs propriety in the word [Condemn] I think ic not worth the contending about. Yet Appello "^urifconfultos: and if they fay not that it is a more proper fpeech to fay [The judge condcmneth him] then to fay [He condemned himfelf by breaking the Law] then I am content the next time its aded to take Ignoramut his part, and confefs that I know little of the Lawyers language. Indeed I ftill fay it is the cftendourihac is the culpable caufe. Where you fay that the cafe is here the fame ; I anfwer, then it feems you think you de-ferve a Pardon^ as a thief deferves the Qaliows. I durit not have called thefe cafes the fame.

§.43.MrjM

§. 4J«

Mr.IC- T AT <t Ukf natter take it thta. A man is found guilty of a felony $ the Lave faith, i He jhall be faved if he JbaH reade: be reads and is favcd: gramercy, faith he, to my Reaatng more then to the ceurttfie of the Lave: and though he acknovUdge pro forma that n « the iourttfie aiid grace of the State to him, ytt as the bad Evglijb man, God biefs her Father ana Mmhcr that taught her to reade, elfe the Lave would have been fevere etiough $ he may he faid to have faved himfelf.

5. 4?. R. 2. i.T^Ou fay, [It is alike matter.] But you fay To much and prove fo 1 little, that you lofc much ot" your labour, as to me. It is not a like matter. The Law for laving him that reads ut CleritKt, was made partly to fparc Learned men, beciuTe the Prince 01 Commonwealth hath need of them, and lu-ftaineth a greater Icfs in the death of fuch then ct the unlearntd i and partly in a refped to the worth of their Learnirg, if net with feme fptcia! indulgence to the Clergy for their Office, and to pltafe the Pope. But Gods Law of Grace pardoning a penitent, graceful! Believer, hath no luch intent: God needs not us, as the Commonwealth needs the Learned. lUfidcsthe Law hath laid the condition of efcape in intelledtual Abilities, without any Moral vefpeft to the virtue of the party : but God hath laid it more in the mcer ccnfenc of the Will.

a. Butifyou will interpret the Law of the Landotherwife, asifit were an z6i of pureft grace, then I fay, your Client with his Gramercy is an ungrate-full fellow, and your bad Engliihman, is the pidmeof a bad Chriftian, indeed no Chrillian : But by your fpeeches 1 perceive that about thefe matters experience is a great advantage to the right underftanding of the Truths by the means whereof many an unlearned Chriflian knows mere then feme Learned Difputcrs. He that hath felt what it is to be condemned by the Law, and afterward pardoned by the Go^pe^, and put into a ftate of falvption by Chrift, doth not fay as Mr.I^. that he is more beholden to h"s believing then to Gods prcmifc, but heartily afcribcth all to God. Faith fi the aft of an humbled foul accepting of Chrift as he is offered fn the Gofpel. And can any humbled foul give thanksto his own Acceptance, more then to Gods Gift ? yea when the power and ad of Accepting is his Gift alfo ? If MrX- have an imagination that in every conditional Donation, there is more thanks due to the performer of the condition then to the giver, 1 dare fay, he is an ungratefull perfon to Gcd and men. If his father leave him all his Eftate on condition he give a younger Brother ^'^eu: of it, or that he give 6<'to the poor 5 it feems he will more thank himfelf then his father. If he had forfeited his life, and a pardon were given him, on condition he would Accept it thankfully and humbly on his knets, and that he would not fpit in the face of him that giveth it, nor feek bis death, he would give the chiefefi thanks to himfelf. A$ for the phrale of [faving himfelf ] he knows it is the Scripture phrafe, x Tjct. ^. laft. though pardooing oui felves be not.

Q^J §.44.

Cno]

§• 44-Mr.K-\/Ei.V/. Zixiet cxprejfetb ftmcwbu inhU tnfwer wbitb aiii^cs up full mU' 1 furc of evidence a.^iinjl btm. He fuiih. The coniiiion being pcrfermcJ, the C6ni:(iotu'2gr-int beconiciabfoiutc. Erz^o, fij [, Re tbu performttbc ConiittOM, m^et the grsju to be ibfoLutc, aui jo d»ib more to hU ^ujiificMioH then God, vtbo trnie 9hI} d CenditioiuU grdnt, and vihich uoMithjUndiug be might hive perifht, yea muji vithcutbUewnaH of believing. And truly vtbocvcr mik^t fjJfb tke Condition of tbe New CovauKt injuJ) ifenfe 36 full obedience veii the Condition of the Old, carinat jrjoii it, birtthit minis jujhfiedchiejiy by himfelf, hiiorvnacis, not fo much bj Gods gr see in imputtngchrijls Righicoufncf, but more bj hk ovctt fiith, which IhopeU hiiQxvnaSi, though Gois rvorli.

§. 44.

R.!B. 1. A Li's clear agalnft me, if you be ]uJ^c» buc the whole charge <ic-/Apcndsbut on-he credi: o£ your bare word. That [Er^a, lay I] is the fifon^ proof. Your conftqaeacc is none, buc a mccr fadion. By [Abfolute] 1 mean, i: adually confcrres withouc any further Condition, when all the Condition is peiforincd. Its a hard cafe that a man fo Learned in his own eyes fhould bi. ignorant what a Condition i$, in fenfii Civili, vel LegiU. Were you noc fo, you would not ftill make ic a caufc j when ( unlcfs fomewhac beyond the mecc nature of a Condition be added) it is no caufe at all. Ii is falfc therefore that the performer in our cafe makes the grant to be Abfolutc, it by mj}iing, you mean {iufing, as you before exprefs your fclf, it is only a performing that, fiiie qui DO' rMiononcrit A^uilif vcl Abfoluti. It is the Djnor (yea though he were dead before) that makes the Conditional grant become Aftual or Abfolutc when the Condition is performed. And if ic IHU ftick in your ilomack, that he perfometb no new aft to do this J I anfwcr, it needs not: the ficft ad of making his Tefta-ment, Deed of gift, Contraft, Lz7/,0'c. dochall this. The Law or other in-itrument, is but the Iignifier of his Will, and tharcforcconveyeth when and on what terms he will ( in a cafe within his power.) If it be his will that this In-ftrumenc iTiall ^04 conferrc prefently and abfolutely, it doth it; If buc in iica and ablolutcly, icdothic : If fub c9?idi(ione, it doth it : and in both the lall cafes, its his will that the Inftrumcnc ihall give no Adual Right till the day come, or till the Condition be performed • fo that a Condition is no true caufe of the cffcd ; the new-peiformincc of i: fufpendeihthe aft of the grant, but the performance doth not caufe ic > unlcfs you mean ic of a cAufifMiu, which doth buc rcmovere impcii" menfumi fo chat if chc Day be twen-y years after the Tellaiors death, that the Legacy becomes due, or if the C mjitioa be fo long after performed, it is the will of the Donor that makcch that Inllrument then convey Right, which did not before ; becaufe it works only fignifiando voluntxtem Uonxtorif, [and fo when and how he exprelTed his will it fliould work. Would one think fuch trivial obvious poinds fliould be unknown to M "I^. i

i. Where you talk of [faith bein2; a condition of the New Covenant in the fame fenfe as full Obedience of the O'.d.] I fay your words [in the fame fenfe] arc ambiguous: ^^ond rattonem formalem Gonditionis in gcnere, it is in the fame fenfe a Condition, liai ic is noc a CoAdition of cbe dmtjpecies. Ic differs in the

macccc >

Cm]

matter; one being the humble thankfull Acceptance of Chrift and Life freely rcflored ard given J the other being a perfcd fulfilling of a perft A Law : the ends aredifttrenr: One is to obtain part in Life purchalcd by Chrift, when we were undone by fin; the other to maintain continued intereli in the felicity firft "lytn by the Creator: One is to abafe the finner by felf-deniall^ and to extoll Free-grace 3 the other was to obtain the Reward in away as honourable to man, as he was capable of. More ditfcrencts might cafily be added.

3. Let .he Reader mark what our Quellion was [Whether God Pardon or Juilific us by the Covenant grant ?] and whether Mr. I^. hath nowcauiedit ? It was all this while maintained, that the performer of the Condition, is noc Juflified fo much by the Covenant as by himfelf: Now it is come to thefe terms; [ Not fo much by GoJs Grace in Imputing Chrifts Righteoufnefs , but more by his own faith.] He feems to me to yield, that we are as fure-ly Juftified by the. Covenant, as by Gods Grace imputing Clorifts Righce-oufnefs.

§. 4$. Mr.K-VE* (iyligitinfi A/r. Baxter i. Thdt faith is the Real efftlf rvhich Ood 1 vpor^is, by a Travficnt aSi on a pcrfon vchom hcjujliftj.

§. 41.

R.B'\?0\i aterefoived, it feems, it fhall bcagainft "Mv. Baxter whatever you 1 fay. But what Rational Animal bcfides your felf can tell how this is againftme? If it beagainft me, its either Dircftly or Conlet^uentially. If Di-redly, then I have fomcwhere denied it, or fpoke the contrary : Shew where and fliame me. If Confequentially, why is there no hint given us which way it makes a^ainft me ? or againll what opinion or words of mine ? It feems it was intentionally ag^iinft nic, not againflmy Dodrinebut Me ; Your minde may be againft me, but Truth is not againft me.

§. 46. Mr. K-TP'^''* f^"^ ii a KcaU cffcSi, eibcrswill admit vfithoutproving; iMr. Bax-_|_ ter who denies facuUia avd b<ibits diQitiB from the foul, may be forced, to yield it ly thii Argument. If faith bcnotaReaU cfcH on the foul, then neither is any other grace, for all fore from fxiih, and avfcqucntly no rcall alteration wrought in SanBificatiov, and eenfequcntly no fanHijied foul Really differs frem her (elf when unfavSiified , no nor more then numero from mfinBtfied worldlings -, they are all alike. Taking it then that faith ii a Real effeB: 2. 7/ is acb^dowledged it is wrought by God, and that not of tur {elves, it is thegtft of god. And 3. that it is wrought by a tranfient aH, a/i being a^eaU cffcSl by Godin fub)cdocxtraneo. Let ui fee now hovn by this tranfient alt whereby god works fAi^h, he may truly befaidto jujiifc m in time as he decreed from eternity i

§. 4^.

CiiO

R. B- I. •T'Hc man vionM have his Reader believe that 1 muft be forced by hit

1 Argumcnrs to confcfsfaithtobcareil cftc<^. i. Till he prove ir, I willtakcit forameei flinder, that I dcay FacuUies and Hibi;s diftinft from the foul. 1. I fa id I though: [ic would not be proved,] but I rofe no: to the confidcnccof aflat deniallj as knowing what is faii on bo:h fides, i. Whac ■was i: that 1 faid would not be proved ? That the faculties were no: RuUj difiinU from the foul or one another: bu: not tha: they were no: difiiHS, as Mr.I^. faith. They may bediftind modally or Forniilly, though not «rRa(j7'Ra. j. When did I fay this of Habits, as Mr.IC- aifirmcth ? But 1 will hereafter crped no more truth from him, even in matters of faft, then according to the proportion of the foregoing dil'pute. 4. To the point it fe!f I fay, we muft diftingui(h of Reality: If you oppofe Real cither to Feigned, or Pavativf, or Negative, or Potential, or to an cxcrinfecall denomination, or to meerly Relative, lo its out of doub: that faith and all graces in the aft and habit are Real eflFcft,. But if by Real you mean more then a diftindion formall, or Ratione Kitiocimti, or Modal, I will neither affirm nor deny it, till I better underftand it: You that know fo well the nature of the Immanent ads of G^d, mayathoufand times more eafily know the nature of the Immanent ads and habits of man: but I confefs exceeding great ignorance of both : and to tell you my opinionsofthefe things would be but vain and unfeafonable. ?• Your lall words contain themyftery, that by [that tranlient ad whereby God workcth faith, he may be faid to Ju-ftifiej] we ftiall have good flu^, I think, when this myftery comes to be o-pcncd.

Whether Faith Juftifie as aninftrument.

§. 47. Mr. I^. * yffr Baxter ahjeSis igiinji fiiths beit^ an injirument of our ^ujlijiution : and iVl tbut it if neither msns nor Qods injtrument. I (hill mtiic it appexr to be hothGodsitidminsin fome fenfe, though in different refpeHs, ntuvithjlduiing aU he hithfuid to the contrary. Saithhe, If fiiih be ah ln(trumcnt of our'fufiificitiOH, It it the Inltrument of God or mm: iiot ofrnxn ; for mm is not the priucipiUeJlcicnt, he doth notjujiifehimfelf I Anfvpcr i. According^ to hii doSfrine, man doth jujlifichimfctf, ut fupra. ». ihitmanisnottheprincipille^aentofbisjaiib, more then of hit "fujti-ficatitni it if God who mult hi jethu honour, i- That mnidttb recciv:bis "fuftifi-cation h) faith it an Inftrumcut, a/s fhiU.be fhewcd hereafter.

§• 47.

3^3. T^Hisquarrelfomc man wanting work, had amindctotakc in thisCon-

X. troverfiealfo. about faiths Inftrumentality in Juftifying: but what

anunhandfome Tranfition he makes to draw it in, maybe ealilydi kerned. Let

the Reader remember, that the tbin^ which I deny is, that faith is an Inllrutuenc

In the ftrift• Logical fenfcj that is, an Inftrumental cfEcientcaufeof our Jufti-ficacion : and that I exprcfly difclaim contending de nomine, or contradifting any that only ufe the word Inftrument in an improper larger fenfe, as Mechanicks and Rhetoricians do; fo that the Quefiion is dc re, whether it efficiently caufe out Jaltification as an Inftrument ? This I deny. And to his triple Anfwer I Reply. I. The firit ijofthcold ftamp > a grofs untruth, needing no other reply then a deniall. i. The fecond if it be I'enfe, implieth the dcniall of this maxime, thac [_Injlrumentum eft effictentis principalk InBrumentum"} and thence inferreth, thac t.is man may be his own Inftrument in efi'etfting faith, though he be not the principal! caufe, fo may he be in Juftification of bimfelf.] If this be not the fenfe of it (ifcontradidions may be called fenfe) then I cannot undcrftandit. But the denied maxime needs no proof: that man is his own Inftrument in effeding his faith, needs no more then a deniall to difprovc it (fpeaking thus dc homine, and not dcpme Ali^UAbommiorganici.) That man is not cnufiprincipalis in bclecving, is untrue J though God be QaufAprimi: May none but the Caufaprima be called Haufa prinCTpilis ? then no creature is capable of ufing an Inlhument. g. His third muft be confidered when we come to the fuller proof which he referres us to.

§. 48.

l/li.fl-TyOtwbetibe ptith. Faith is not Gods Inftrument, i. I do not fay it is pro-iJperiy, but it is his wor\, and by giving us faith he juHiftes as, at JhtU be Jbewedanon, he giving tatbM which is our Inftrwrient, whereby we receive the RightC' oufnejS ofChrift.

§. 48.

KB, i.rj Vcnnow be undertook toproTc it Gods Inftrument, but now,he doth 111 not fay it is properly : and I will not contend againft an improper term, when the thing is difdaimed. i. Here is another touch upon the myftery, that [by giving us faith he juftifics us] but we ftiall be fhewcd it anon : therefare I muft not overhaftily anticipate it.

§. 49-Mr. IC- 1. D**^^ i'" "^ much his Ivftrumeut as the new Covenant is ; for faith wori-Dinginmyheart, is that whereby God pronouncetb the Sew Covenant to be of benefit to me for my ^ufttficatm.

§• 49. IS^JB. I.I F the New Covenant be properly Gods Inftrument, and faith be not, 1 then faith is not as much his Inftrument as the New Covenant : But the Antecedent is true: Thereforej(i;'c. The fecond member of the Ancecadent Mr. I^. now yielded. Forthefirft I will appeal to all Lawyers and Politicians, or any that undcrftands what an Inftrument is, whit Civil commerce is, and what a Law or any Contrad is, whether a Deed of gift, a Teftamcnt, or a Law be not as proper Inftruments confcrtnH ^us, conftitHcnii Vebitutn, an is imaginable,

C"4]

or a$ the nature of the thing confthutcd or conferred {Debttum) is capable of. In the mean time, I leave Mr. I{- to examine it, by the common Canons and pro-peniesof an Inftrumcnt. i. Faith is noc [Gods pronouncing,] bu: your belief cf what he pronouncetb, and Acceptance of what he r'.crs; Will you confound faith with its objeft ? Divine Tcftimony is the objcft of faith, and you makcic faith it fclf. J. I know the Antinomians take faith to be [ the belief of our Ju-llification T or the perfwafion or apprehcnfionof Godslove to me in I'pec a!,] buc fodo not our moticrn Proteftants. 4- If this be true doSrine, then wo to poor Chriltiansthat have no AlVurancc of their Juftification r and then, how few have faith ? For I think it is comparatively but a fmall number that have felt Gad pronouncing in their hearts, that the Covenant is of benefit to their own particular JulUfication.* except by the term [ofbenefit] be meant, a conditional JuiUhca-tion, or a tendency or means towards their Juftification; and fo even ungodly men may know that it's [of bcncfi:] to them for Juftification ( as Mr. f^. phra-feth it.) 5. Doth not Mr. I^. (hew here that the Truth flicks in his minde, and that he is fain to hide it in ambiguous terms. What can he mean by this faying tGod pronounceth the New Covenant to be of benefit to me for my Juftification] but this [That the New Covenant juftifiethmc ?] He would not openly tell us which way it bencfitcth him to Juftification, and yet be no efficient inftrii-mentallcaufeof it.

■, u O » 1

§. 50-

Mr. K- A '^^ ? • '* ^^y ^^ ^^^' Ivjirumcnt notveithjlunding his Argument: rvbertof lythejirjl IS \_ for it is not God thit bdioveth'] nornecdsit, (ly I: it is c-nougb ibut god mifieih me believe, and jo rccave the Righteoufncjf ofchrifl: yea God ky maktiig mebclic-jc gives mc an hxni whcreveiib to receive, opens my hand rvhereby I receive it: I alone receive, but thcfe are GodsaHs, and though God be not (aid t$ believe, he truly miy be faidtobexhc Auihourof my belief ^ my belief is an mmavent aif in me, and fo denominates me the believer, atnvfient aSi m from God, and denominates him 9nly ibc tAuthour of my believing : in mc it u an adjunct, it bath to him only the r«-litionofaneffeH- For example, I throw a bowl: the motion of this bowlis more from me then the bowl, and I accordingly am [aid to have howled well or ill: but the motion doth not denomiuats me otbcrwife then in the /'gent, not the fubjeSf ; and though I be (aid tobtwlwcll, the bowl in this cufo is only faid to run, not I. So the chief Authour of my Believing is Cjtfd, and hcmufihivexhc glory of turning aid framing andupholJiug and wcrfiing all in my hearty as betng the authour, Prefcrver and Fivifl?cr of my faith, yet t aUvc am [aid to believe, not God; though my faith be more properly Gods wori{_, then it is my own : had not he begun itinmc, I had no more believed inChriJi, then the bowi would have run to the marliof it fclf i all tbeprogrc^ ofmy fuuhisfromhim, dndtohm be all the glory.

§. ^0. JR.3. i.VlOnc of all this is brought againft my Conclufion, for be yicldeth i\l that J (that cur faith is not pvopttly Gods Inftrumcnt in jjftifj'ing) but it is to fticw the ftrength of his wit againft my mediums. If he yield it to be the truth which I maintain, the matter is thclcfs if I fail in proving it: Or if oncmfiiiwTTjbedcfcftive, itislittlemauer^if thercft, or any onefufficc. 2. Wha:

hatti

hath he faid in all thefe words, morcthcnwhat I faid in thofe.fcw words which hcoppofeth, w'^. [Ir is not God that Belicveth, though its true he is the firft Caufe of all Aitions.] 1$ not this the full fubftance ot his fpeech ? j. All hi» word's fecm to tend but to pnwc that God may be (aid to be the principal Caufe of our faith, and it to be his aft : but what's that to its inftrumcntality in jullify-ing, 4. 1 intended this firlt Propofitioii, chiefly as preparatory to the reft, rather then as a full proof of the Cenclufion by it felf. Perhaps wc may give hitn fomc plainer Argument anoB, when he hath done with thefe.

Mr.K. %/lT'BixttrsfecondArgHmenttoproveit, not Gods Injirument tba rmn U fVl Caufa fecunda fcffirfcn Goe< (t«i tibc ^ff/Off, anifo fHUfnii to jnfitfic himftlf. I anfwcr, i. Man is indeed C%u(i (ecundz, but not bctvtccnGoi and the j'iHi9v, for god detJ) immedidtelj covcitrre to it, and man u in rcgird of the habit oj faith purely fifftvc, -not aSive at all, for that though ether habits msy be acquired, faith w ivfitfed both for the ejfcnce and degree, i. Man may not be faid by his btheving tojuQi' fie hitnfelf, but to Believe to his f unification, and to receive ^ujlificatton by believing, for that by faith, at it is gods work.,God doth jujiifie him, viz. declares hereby the Righteouf-wjfe of Chrijl to hcHisfrpfn ; he doth apprehend or receive the Ri^htcoufnej! of Chriji by believing, as it is his ortn aH, xphcreof (lili he is the SubjcB, not the Author, as the Bovri is of it running.

R.B. I. ^ 71 7Hether Godconcurre Immediately to ail humane aftions, I V V havenomindetodifpace : li Mr.Iv want work on that fub-jed, hemay anfwerL«iov.<t Z)o/i. But it I'ufficeth me that man alfo is an Immediate Caufe of his Believing, i. Whether man be Pallive or not in receiving the habit, is nothing, that I know of, to the matter 5 as lon^ asthe a<fl which ju-flificth is immediately by him. 3. It is a great uncertainty which you aftirm fo confidently. You know not but that the Spirit of G-od by the VVornl, may excite an aft of faith before he infufe a habit, andbythataft (ormore) produce a habit. 4. And fo the habit may be faid to be Infufcd as from God, and acquired by man too : and it is commonly granted , that Infufcd habits are attained (ecunium m odum acquifitsrum.

To the fecond Anfwcr, I fay, i. For your Receiving Inftrument, we rtiall fpeak to it anon. 2. St fides ejicit ^u[lificationem, turn Credcns per fidem ef-ficit Juflificationcm : Atfidcsfimodo InjirumcNtum lujiificationis e(l, iHJiificattoncm efjitit: Ergo, Sec. The »i;f;or is evident, in that man is the immediate proper Caufe of the aft, therefore if the aft doth it, the Agent bythat aft dothic. The luitrument is his that immediately and properly ufcth it.The minor is undeniable, (peaking of a true inilrumental Caufe: For there is no inllrumemal Caufe in any kindc, butof efficients. >^,j <) >

1. A hint I perceive more here of yout opinion, what is Gods juftifying aft, vi'[. Working faith in us : but I will wait till this opinion dare come into the light.

5. I perceive alfo here what yoawke Juftificationtobe, vi^. [declaring Chrifts

R i 'Ri^htcouf-

Cii6]

Rigbteoufnefs to be his own] Right Antinomianifm. i. Will you tell us whether [Dedating ChiiftsRightcoufners to be mine] do not fuppofe it to be firft miner Elfe it is the Declaring of an untruth. And if it were mine before, was not I juft before ? and fo conflitutive juftified ? z. Why did you not tell us when and how that wasdonc ? And what was the ad whereby God did conllitute mc ju[\ ? Which is firft to be known, and which ycu knew that I was fpcaking of. 3. Where, and to whom is it that [God declares this] ycu fpeak of ? Onclyin Confcience, and not to others, no doubt. But I doubt not fully to fliamc (in due place) this Antinomian fancy, that Juftification by faith (in Scripture fcnle) is but Juftification in Confci'.nce, 4. Many a foul hath juftifying faith (ofAf-fent and Confent) who yet doth not believe that Chriib Rightcoulnefs is their own, 5. May not other Graces declare Cnrifts Righteoufnefs to be ours ? ( I know not whether it be/iino/e»/« that you fpeak of Chrifts Righteoufnefs being made ours, but I will not digrefle to enquire further into it now.) 6. You do. ftrangely affirm, that man is not the author of his own aft fwhecher he be the I'ubjcft, I rcferic to what is faid :) If by the Author, you mean, not the perfwa-der, but the Agent, the vital, voluntary felf-determincr, then he is the Author ; or elfe I could tell you of fucli uuavoidablc confequents, as you will be aftiamcd to own. If you be indeed enc of thofe that think man a free Agent, is no more the author of hisownafts, then your Bowl is, I fhall fsar, left you will think your fclf very excufable for all the evil you do, and therefore little care what yoa do: I fhall be loath to truft a man of fuch principles, if his carnal intercft carry him to do me a mifchief. How many Philofophers or Divines are of your minde in this, that man is but the Subjeft and not the Authnr of his own aft of Believing J*

§. Ji-

CMr.K.'T^OhU third Argument, that the A&ion of the principal Caufc, and ot" J_ the Inftrument istbe fame, istrue, aiidvphcnhc ae^is, Whodare lay that faith is fo Gods In'' rument ? I undcrftand not any great danger in afjirming, that Cod giving tne faith, the habit and thereby the aH of believing , comurs rvith my faith whith he hath gtjcn in enabling me to receive Chrijli he gives me an hand, ftretihctb it out, and opens it, and puts Chrifts Rightcoujncffe into it: 0^y U not my hand here his Injlrument xchercby he conveys Chrijls KighttoufnefS to me, as well or more then my «vpn whereby I apprehend it ?

§. 5z. 7{jB. I. rF it be true, that the Aftion of the Principal andInftrumental J[_ Caufc be the fame, then it unavoidably follows, that man juftifi. eth and pardoneih himfelf, when God doth it. For then when God etilfteth our Juftification, Faith, which is his Inftrument doth cfFcft it too : When God forgiveth us c^(?c?/v^, faith forgiveth uscjfc^/W; and confequently the immediate agent man, doth it too. 1. Again, I tell you, the place to examine your Receiving Inftrumcmality is anon where your fclf hath defigncd it. I may not anticipate you.

§• si-Mr. K. A 'Nj whereat he fiith, Fourthly, The Iv^rument hath in Influx on the efc^, £\ hy AproperCaufiiny, whtchivhedare fay of faith f I anjwer, i. That it hath a proper Cau'ality upon cur fujiification paffivcly talicn, tbatu, upen our Kccctvhif^ thel^jghtcoufncfofLhrifl. rAnino more need: for we make tt an Inftrument not to veorii, but to receive. "But fecondly, according to him ithath mere then the Influx of an Infirumental, that of tie principal ifficient upon our ^uflificatien, as being that xvhicb maizes thu Qonditional Grant in the Coienavt to become Abfolutc: And all the hencjit roe receive by the (Covenant if more to be aftrtbed to our faith, then gods grace in the Covenant, which would have been of no advantage to us at all, had it not been that our faith came in and rendrcd it of ufe to us. 7 bus then we do not deprive God oj hk Glory in jufiifying us by faith, though rve afcribe purification to faith j for roe afcribe our faith to God, and make our believing hif work, which as it comes from him is an aSiive dccUrati-9n,asinuia Taffivertfentingof his favour tern in Chrifl, of which we alwajes may th$ugh we xot alfually a^ure our felves.

§• u.

H, B. 1. "I3 EceiTiBg is cither Properly, which 15 alwaycs PaflTivc : Or impro-IV pcrly, morally, imourativcly, which is the Content of the will when a thing is oflPered, and it is adive, called Receiving, becaufe it is ncceflary to the Paflive proper Receiving.

In the former fcnfe, to Receive pardon and Juflification is nothing but to ba pardoned and juftificd : it is a meet Relative Reception. In the later fenfc, faith itfelf is our [Receiving] If Mi.I(,. mean the former, when he faith, that [faith hath a proper Caufality upon it] 1 fay, His words are fcarce fcnfe. To have [Caufality upon] implieth a fubjcft upon which there may be fuch Caufality : But the Reception of a Relation is no fuch capable Subjcd. If he mean only [a Caufality of that Reception] I fay, There is no natural proper Caufe of the Reception of a Relation, but that which caufeth the Relation it felf, by Caufing its foundation : thougfi there may be other Caufes of the fitncfs of the Subjed, yet that fitnefs effedeth not the Reeeption. Moral Caufes there may be befidcs; but this is not pleaded fuch. An efficient Inftrument of the Reception of a Relation, (that is, ^uSitia, vcljuris ad impunitatem) we ftiall believe it to be when we firlt finde feme, and then truth in that afTcrtion. 1. And for the fecond kinde of Raf/wagChrifts Riglueoufnel^e. it is Faith it felf. And to fay, that faith hath a proper Caufality on it (elf, is a hard faying.

Your fecond Anfwer is the meer repetition of a notorious flander, not cnely unproved , but bewraying the grnfle miftake of the Nature of a Legal Conditionjas I have fulficiently ftiewed,and will not watte time to recite.

I conclude therefore contrary to your Ccndufion, that if you make faith the proper Itittrument of juftifying, ycu make man his own pardoner, and rob God of his Soveraignty. Your reafon to the contrary is fuch as the Papifts bring to excufe their dodrinc of Merit: they fay, Chrift hath Merited for them a power of Meriting, and fo the glory redounds to him : fo you fay, [We afciibe our faith to God , though we afcribe Juflification to faith. ] But you. muft needs afcribe it al^ immediatJy to your fclf,if you be the man that believes.

R } Again,

Again, you touch the way of GjJs juftifying darkly : [As it comes from him (youfay) it is an aftivedeclaration, asin usa Psflivc refentini; his favour ro us in Chriit.] But, i. do you mean, it is a Declaration Enunciativc ? Or mecily lignal ? It the termer, it is very t'alfe. Tofpeaka Truth, and to Caufc one to believe it, arc not all one. It the later, then it icenu you think God ju-ftificsaman, cveiy time he giveth him any Evidence ot his Grace. And if lo, then other Graces julliiie as well as t'aith j and then Juftitlca-.ion is incrcaied upon every incrcale of every Grace : Bat more of this when you come to it of purpofe.

And Partive Rcfenting Gads Love ot F.ivouv is an ill defcripdon of juUifying faithj and not a Little dangerous.

A/r. K. \/I \-.'Q3i%.icr proceeds to t.ii(C of an Objeiiion. iBut [one woali eviic it IVl tbm: FMib, (dy they, u a^djfive Lajimment, not an A Hive'] I inovf not voho fjy it, nor mmtrs it muih, yex it is neclkji to(jy f»: Btit t^lr.Bixter* anfwer to this I conceive to be very unfitisfaHory: For rvhcrc be (mb [ i. Even ^ijjivc iajiru-nentsarefiid to help the ASfion of thepri/icipxl yi^CHt,Keeker./o|. p. 151. md he Ihtt (iith faith dotb[o, in my judgementgiv:s to9 much to if] I mfwcr, Tbit voithout 0fence umxy he(jud, tbit Fmh doth help the Action of the pnncipil tAgtut, i.e. Goi in our fujlificuttin, God doing nothing in it vfitbout fditb ; I Jpali of fuch at are adulti, «r of years. *. That Afr.Baxter wiu/i fayfo, for that according to bimfiith milies Gods Conditional ^rant in the No* Covenant to become ahjolutc. And therefore doth the rmiv, o/ ^ods xvorli.

R. B, 1. T E: it beoblei'vcd that Mr.I^. takes it for needlefle , to fay. Faith Lmd isa Paflivc Inftrument: and therefore be muft maintain it to be an Aftive Inllrument, or none.

a. I doubt M.r.}^ would have thought me near to a Blafphemcr ( fuppofing the intereft of his Cauie to have carried him another way) if I had faid and maintained that mans Faith doth help the Aftion of Goi : i.If Gods Aftion were taken to be CiZ«/i/)^r{/(j/« (which I think Mr.I^;. doth not believe it to be) yet mans Adion would help to produce the EfFeft, only by concurring with Gods Aftion, but not properly, help Gods Aftion j for it would have no influx into it. z. If Gods A.A'ion he Caufa totalis in fno gCHcrs, and mans Adion fubordinate to it, much lelVi can mans Adion be faii properly to help Gods adion. j. But the truth is in pardoning lin, and )ulUtying us, Mans adien ot believing is no Caufc atall, and therefore no proper Help to GoJsadion, God hath no need of our help to pardon on: (in. The performing of our Condition by Thankfull Accepting Chriil and Lire, is no Helping Gods Adion. But its ftranze to fee how Mr. IC. reels too and fro J Sometime he dare fay it over and over, that if the New Covenant Cay [B.-lieve and be Jullified] and make our faith the Condition of our Juilification, th:n a ram juttificshimlelf by believing, and more a great deal then Goi doth by the promulgation of his Covenant, and that he is juftined chiefly by himfelf and his own ads , and not fomuch by Gods Gace in imputing Chrifti Riglucouinefs, but by his own faith. ] And yet now he

dare

dare fay, that man* Believing doth help God in Pardoning or Jaftify-ing him.

3. And what's his proof ^ Why [God doth nothing withour faith.] A Grange proof ! So every Matter, Objeft, 7)1 f^optioMateria, or Condition ^«c quanort, ftiouldhelpthe Adion of the Efficient. Sure Helpin" is adin", and therefore EfFefting. So he may as well fay, that the prcparacion^of the foul for Receiving Regenerating, SanAifying Grace, doth help the Spirits Adion of in. fufing it.

4. Asforhisfecond Anfwer, that [I muft fay fo too, for that according to me, faith makes Gods Conditional Grant to become abloiiue] I Reply^ that^this is an oft repeated flander of a hard fore-head, vvithout (liew of prooK If this be mine, it is either diiedly orconfequentially. If diredly , let him produce my words. If conffquentially, let him prove ic if he can. If he attempt it, ic muftbeby thisSyllogifm, [He that faith, Upon the performance of the Condition, the Covenant becomes abfolute, dothfayin fenfc, that the performance of the Condition, makes the Covenant become Abfolutelyj i.e. cffeds ic : But M.B. faith the former: Therefore, crc] Let him that knows nodiffeicnce between ari efficient Caufe, and a meer Condition^nc^/u noit, believe the m^ijor. I know fo much difference, that I dare fay, It is falfe.

^.Hl.. ■■ ^.I.U

§• ?5.

Mr.K.- \J\J Hcrcas befaitb [2. Irw pafi }>iy C'^pscity to conceive of a^ajftve VV Moral Infirumcnt.'] Iatifiver, rehxt ever Mr. hixtei: maj conceive, votinvg k more obvictu tbenthat many men at lenfl arc ufcd by oxhcrs mcerlyfor hlim'es, to bring about their defi^nes, and[0 do very much torvurds tbem, by deivg notbing but flanding fttll.

»i ,jt >«).

§ 55.

Jl. B, I Knew before I heard of ycur name, that the fame thing which iv fenfa * P/'^^co is a Fafficn or Pi iv'ation, may in fcufii Moralt, i.e. reputativej be Adion or an Iniirument. But I everluppolcd that as it hMoralitcr velrtputu-tive /}iflrumc7aum,io hath it MoraUm vtl rcputativam aiJiovcm, 2. That [Tome men are uled by others meeriy for blinds about ibeirdefigns] thisblinde woikofMr.I^, dotli partly perfwade me.

§■ 56.

Mr. K. \',\7Haihcfaiib IbcvfantbcaB of IcUcving (wbiih huih m other beings V V lilt to be sn Ad) be pcjfihly & P.'fjivc Jpftrumcnt i Deibtlw act cf-)c£{ by ftiffcrivg ? Or (anm(emcnbi-u A gruffer comcntbcnihiii'] I at^fwer that tbis ^H ii equiMAlent to [uffer:rgtat ccTtfi^mgLbKfy in * rcUame on thrijis rightcoufticj^c, without cxalttrg our thcugbti aguinS tt, laptivatirg our ilyoiights to it, rawumvg all t}}nigbtj tfour iwn rigbtcoufrxfi,y ea aU ibbngbn that are too apt to rife agamfi it ptmtbe conjidcraticn of our twn rigbtccufr.cf j hcvfbeztftribe fa:m it he du ailiuhyct viiiually thii dBiov ii afuffirivg our felves to be led by ibc Spirit fif ^ci, and by bis AwborUy againil the (uggejUins of cur 6ps>n reafcn-

C«iO]

§. 5^-K.B. 1. T^Wo things you hare here topi ovc : i. That the Ad of faith is a •■ fulVering. z. That by fuaciing it cfftdcth our pardon oi Jufti-ficationasan Inltrumcntal Caufe, For the former, you fay [it is equivalent to fuffering.] Reply i. It fecms then it is but equitalcm. i. Wherein it is equivalent ? I, As to its nature ? That were a ftrangc aft. i. Or in excellency; foit is more then equivalent to lufFcring. j. Or is it as to its ufe and end ? I ca-fily grant you that the ufc of this Adion is to make us capable fabjcdi of pardon, or ficob cds for Gods ad, and difpofcd matter to receive Juftification j as Mr. Benjitninlf^ooibriigc hath plainly and truly, though briefly taught you in his Sermon of Juftification (think not much to learn of him in that, and other points there touched.) If you have a minde :o call this PaJJio KepMAiiviveHMordk, I will not contend witli you : it beingCofli/n'oiffzvi ii Keccpiioncm proprism rcquiji-U. Doubtlcfs the Reliance and Renuncia:ion which you mention, are adions. I. And where you fay, that it is [yirtually a I'uffcring our felvcs to be led by the Spirit, though it be an adion for the fcnm] I never heard before of an Adion immanent which was virtually fuffering: and that from fuch a Gaufe as Authority is : Sure it is fomewhat more then luch a fuffering j and therefore it is new Lo-gick to fay, that it hf^irtuaUy fuffering. Though as I faid, if you hare a mindc to call it a Moral or Reputative Pafllon, I will not contend. 4. But then \that a fuffering is that you imagine it ^ I thought you would have come nearer the matter, and have faid that it is Keceptio Chrijii, vel ^uftitiie donau: but you fay,It is a fuffering our felvcs to be led by Gods Spirit and authority.

2. Butnow I come to the great bufinefs, I finde you as mute as a fifli: You had another AlTertion to prove, [that this Ad doth by fuffering Effcd our pardon :] On this lay all the controverfie : and of this I finde not a woVJ. I pray you remember by the next to fatisfie your Reader, that [this Ad which is Virtually a fuffering our felves to be led by Gods Spirit, and by his Authority againft thefuggcftion of our own Reafon, doth by that fuffering tffed our pardon or Juftification.] Nay, I thought if you had made it but a Receiving inltrument, as you phrafe it, that it had been the Receiving Chrift or R.ighteoufnefs, and not the fuffering our felves to be led by Gods Spirit and Authority againft the fuggeftions of reafon , which (pa tdU) would have been affirmed the in-ftrument of our Juftification ? But you faw not what Roman dodrine this im-plieth.

§. ?7. hdr.Vi.XJtTHcrea^beaiis [4. tAndUftly, I believe vith Schibler, that there is V V 7ig fuch thing aa a Pujftve Injlrument'] I believe he bsth fecn a man oftcu hold up a Jire-J})Ovel to receive coles, vpbich fire-J})9vel if an InSrumcnt, but in that cafe meerlypajjive, and he hath fecn qucjiionle^ boyes at trap hold up their bats to receive the ball i here their hats are Injlruments, but mecrly Pajftve. l^hat examples Burgcrfdicius or Keckerman^/w, ii not confidcrable i iVhatif they mifttok. in their mOances of Paf-pve Infirumentf f FoUows it there are none f

;§. J7.

R. B. 1.1*^'^"^"'* ""^y'^^^ ^"^''^"*^°^^^» * Paffive Inftrumem, and fo 1 your boy may do bis hat. I will allow them both that name among Mecbanicks, Rhetoricians, (s'c. but I (hall not believe that Logicians ftiould fo calltbem, or that either of them is an inltrumentftl efficient Caufe, oc do cffed by fuffering, till you have better proved it, then this put-off comes to. i. I have found no realon yet in all the reading of your labours, to judge your Logick more confiderable then Burgerfdtcm and l^eciermans', or that you are likely to finde out fit inftances, where they could finde none. j. QaUovm and many more arc of the iaEne opinion as ScbibUr in tbis>

Mr.BC- Tyy^f^yy^" Itbelnjlnment is m Efficient CMfe: ill efficiency U by aSfion t O And thit which doth not aH, doth not cffeSl: ] Tou hive forgmen thxt tht grut InfirHmentt of the Roman State, dtiaU by doing Nothing. Unus homo nobis cun-dando reltituit rem. Tbeirjirength, faith the Prophet, u tofitfiilL

K'B. I. OUch athing I now perceive may be : for I think when you have here ^ done all, you bad done more if you had done nothing.

X. I attfwered enough to this before. What if the Confequents of doing no* thing prove better, tbenif there had been Aftion, and thereupon you do call [doing nothing] by the name of [Adion?] Is It therefore Adion indeed ? Or if you therefore afcribc a Caufality to it, is it therefore a Caufe indeed ? I fay again, as fuch are JWori/iter w/ Reputuivi iu^rumenti, i.e. Caufa efficientk injlm-mentxles, eum^hyfici (^reverx nonfunt ^ fo morally and reputatively they arc A-gcnts,and therefore not to be called Paflive inftruments.

5. Let it be ebferved what a fupeificial kinde of anfwers Mr. I^*s Chair doth vouchfafeus? He durft neither plainly deny, that an inftrutnent is an efficicnc Canfe; nor yet that all efficiency is by Adion : and yet fatisfics himfelf with the touch of an alien inftance, implying the denial of the later.

iMf.K.. IJ'Kdeei (fsithMr.Bixicv intheclofe) if fame extend tbeufe «f the vf)rd, 1- In^rument,y»HmiyciUalmojiiinythingtin(nJiru>netit, wbtcb U my xtxy coniucibU to the proiuHion of it»e efcSi under the firji Caufe, and (0 yett miy cxil fxithanlnjlrument.^ Bdilicitts Inthumcntum quoddam vocatum, whxt you rvitt intbeLxrvyers Littne„ audytumujl be beholden to thit to mi'ieihe JV>w Covenxnt Godt Injirument in ^ufti^cition. laftrumentum Novuii for Tcftaaiemum Novum* (jy the CriticfiS'

i'i9'

R.B. I. •TpHefe wordi I fpokc, tofignifiemyrefolurJon, not to contend sbouc 1 words i and ifany man will ufe the tfrm [Inftrumcnt] improperly, tnd tell ut his meaning, and not make it the efficient Caufe of our pardon and Jullification^ much l«(s make the Pipifts believe, that in that notion lieih the very kernel of the Proteftant doArine about Juftification by faith alone, 1 am content fuch a man fpeak as he thinks meet, allowing others the like liberty. To this Mr.I(. gives this learned anCwer [Belike its Infirtnnntum quoiddM vocdtum, what you will in the Lawyers Latine] Outof which wards, or any yet Ipoken by him, if the Reader can pick an argument to prove faith the inftrumental Caufe of forgivenefsor JuHificacion, let him make his bcft of it. AjelHs readier then a good Argument.

X. It ill becomes any Preacher of it,> to 3eny or jeft at the inftrumentality of ef Gods Law, Covenant or Teftanient. It bcwraycj that which you might with more credit have concealed. If Gods Deed of Gift of Chrift, Life, P^r* doHj^tf. be any Caufe of our Right to Chrift, Life, Pardon, (i^'c then is it an in/trumental effi>;ient Caufe, conftltucing that Right: (Let Mr. I^. tell me what other caufe it is, if not this.) But fomc Caufe it is : Therefore, ti'C- Onely as Relations have an imperfcd Being, fq the Caufing of them is anfwerable to it. If Gods Deed of Gift, Lavv, Coveijint, TettamcDt, be no _propcr initrument, than there i« no fuch thing as a proper inltrumcnt Known in Laws, Politicks, Morality, for the conveying of any Right. Asfayruaft'uh, Cltv.Kegiali.6.cap.6.n. ij.p.jjo. Naturdjvfiituit voces t^ fignaunquam In(irumcnta ty medis fine qttibm unia homo aheri iton ■poffit obligari. Not only are they certain Inihumenti when ufed, but is commonly held that they are fonceeflaiyinftruments, that by a meer mental Conception without words a man is not obliged to another. So faith jih mainjn ^J.iyq.x. ^of.Angles infer.4. fentq.de v^te art. z. di^c. 4. ArmtLverb. premijp«. 'Petr. de Arragon. t.. z. q. 88. srt. 3. dub. 4. ^kh.Sttlonjn tzto.i.q.^.ie dominodrt.z. dub.i. Lud. Lope^.p.z-.ivflr.c«nf. c<sp. 30. Emamicl Rodrique\ pdrt. t. tumc.zj.Concl. And its certain that conceptions give no Right to men, though ibc concciver of a ptomifc may coram 2)co be obliged.

Afr.K. inHUtferemtTPBnhtbthMingo*, but toJhewrviih rvhit tools Wr.Bax-jL tcr endeavours to breafi tbt wor^x of fo many cminenf MaHer-builders^ 4nd with vkatftrmidiible weapons he vslimitty (ett himfetf Againfi thofe grtat Ukantm fnons,

—^^ - fie dama Leonem

Infequitur,audetqueVirQConcurrere Virgo ~ •

0 the mjferable fate of poor Drvinity \ that mufl be put tt School tQ Bnrgcrfdiciits <wi Keckcrmans Logick 1 andbe fe beatenforgHu/k}ax:k'Se3iton\ Had ?iof Afr.Baxter been at they fay he veof dvjoJiJkKTVi, he had not fet fo high a price on thefe beggarly tU^ merits, ta to Ut tbcm mafie utramque paginam m this noble ctturoverfie.

■'- '■ .j^ '

C"3]

R. B. ty^Hether this merry Hhetoncal Tviamph were groooclci ort Tuchi V V rcall vlftory as the rrtan dreJim$ 6f, or vVhtthcr prcmircs and Con-clufion be any other then a meer Rapfody of windy oftencationj I muft leave t* the judgement of the impartial, underftanding Reader. I confefs they fticw that he is not onlyunrcafonable J (otridcre is proper to a Reafonable Crcatuvc. I had thought to have given a particular anfwer to each paffagc in this Paragraph, but upon review I iinde that the Replying to fuch like, hath occafioncd more ironies and/harp paflagcs then I date approve j and therefore I think it belt to fay nothing to it, only to remindehim of thefefew things :

I. That I will be none of his adverfary, where he argues only to prove me ig.-norant. It never came into my head to make it the QaelHon, whether Mr.l!|^. oc I were the more wife or learned man ? I have much more ignorance then he is a-ware of.

i. That yet I dare contend with him In point pf veracity, if heufcto do with others, as he doth with me, particularly to talk of [making utramque p^ijiiml and to fcorn at it no !ef$ then twelve times in five or fix leaves, for my citing thcfc Authoursonce or twice, andS'cJb;fc&r thrice in a whole book.

g. That all is not Divinity that fuch Theologues maintain : For I chink he is not Theology in the Abftraft : and therefore its polTible to findc an errour in fuch a man as Mr. I^. without Schooling or ocating Divinity : Not do I think chat found Theology would feel it, chough he had a knock or tw« more.

4. That he proves out of "^ec^ermstn , or others fuch like, that two and two Is four, doth not much abufe Divinity by it : Nor he that cites them ta (hew that all ciHciency is by Adion, though as learned a man as Mr. I^. deny it. Nordol finde Mr.i^. having recourfc to the Bible to prove the contrary, vi\. that there is efficiency without Aftion. And I think the Scripture Texts may be Toon numbred by which he attempts to prove Faith to be the iniliumcnial Caufc of Juflification.

§. 6i.

Mr. I^. Tl E huh one •^cfiion more {.But though Fxtth be not the InjlrumeKt of ^u-n ftification, may it not be called the Injirument of Receiving Cbrifl vfho ^ujiifics tai I do not ( faith he) flick fo much at this Jp eech at at the former (rvc are peholden to you: fome indulgence jet in this particular) Tet is it no proper or fit exprejJioH neither. For, i. thctA^of FAithvhicbisitthitjujiiJieth U our AHml deceiving of Cbrifl, and therefore cannot be the Inflrument of Receiving- To fay our Receiving if we Inflrument of our Receiving, is i hard fsying.l Be the aH of Faith thi a^uil Receiving of Cbrifl: /fTy / vponder miy not faith be faid to be tkc Inflrument of T{^cciving Cbrifl t Is faith only an A If ? t had thought it hai been an Hibit? J id tbr.igh the Receiving be not tfrc Inflrument of Receiving Cbrifl, as being the aHaal receiving of him j yetfaithmayvery vfell be fo called: as tkougb my receiving of a book be not the Inflrw meiuof receiving it, yet the buti miy witbmttaHy great abfurdicj be albwd that nam:.

Cim3

S. 61, Jt.fi. !• I Arguedj that if faitb be the Inftrumtnt of Receiving Chrift, then •■ ciihcrthe Aft of/aithj or the Habit: but neither the Aft nor Habit: Therefore.-67c. To prove that the aft of faith is not the inftrument of Receiving Chrift, I ufed the words that he here citei. What doth this Learned miR but confute this by faying, that the Habit is the Inftrument ? [I had thought (faith he) faith had beenaHabic.] Thus he confutes me, who argue that the Aft is not the Inftrument, by faying that the Habit is. I thinkhc that is rtt/Tc-Ji/oiKTii need not much lament that he loft the benefit of fuch adilputanis tutorage, if he be never in a more waking mood then here.

a. HisRjietoricic is the beft part of hisaufwer. But when will he prove that the Habit of faith fo farre di$"cr$ from the aft, and both from the foul, as that the Habit may as truly or fitly be called the inftrument of Believing or Receiving, as the Hand is of its Aft or the effcft ? If hisfimilitude would prove any thing it would rather be that the Faculty is the Inftiumenr, then that the Habit is: which yet 1 finde him not here attempt: I think that the Habit of faith,,and the aft arc not of fo different natures as is the Hand and its aft.

5- Let it ftill be remembred, that I do not much regar<i how this QmAion is determined (for which Mr.I^. doth fo humbly tell me, he is beholden,) it being much different from the former Queftion. For in the former, the term [Inllrur mcnt] is taken properly for an inrttumental efficient Caufe, in which fenfe I deny that faith jultifieth : But here it is taken Metaphorically or Vulgarly, and not properly: For that which efFcfteth not is not an inftrumental efficient Caufc. And that which they call an Inftrument of Receiving, is in Naturals but Dijpi' ptie miUrix, and in Morals, but "Dijpofitio Maralii, vcl Rcputativa, vcl ^Sfus ti Rece^tioncm pajfivam, fropTJam, vcram neccff^iritui and in our preUnt cafe, ftriftly nothing but a Condition. Now if any will be pleafed to fpeak fo vulgarly and improperly, as to call fuch a Condition, or Aptitude Moral or Natural [an Inftrument of Receiving] fo he do not build any unfoond Do-ftriiie upon it, I do again profeffe that 1 will not contend with him. But the Reafons why I thought it neceflary for all that, to contradift the common Do-ftrine of faiths being the Inftrument of juflification, I have tuUy manifefted in ani'wer to other Brethren.

§. 6i. Mr.K. TYOt fecondly, faith Mr.Baxitr [The feed or Hahit of fiiti umtt fiily b^ xJ called an Inftrument, i. TbejanSiifedfacuUyitfelfunuotbetbe Inftrn-mentjt being the foulit felf,and not anything rcaUy diHinU jrom it,a6 ScotuSjD' O.bel-Jis, Scaliger,67"C. ©rjackfon, L^r.Pcmble iftiw^, and iMr.biW qucftiouj. z. J he holimJS of the faculties, u not then Inftrument: For, 1. it is nothing but thcmfclvei rtBified, and not a Being fo diftinU a/i may be called their Inftrument. z. ffho ever cal ■ led Habits or T^ijpofitionsthejouls InHruments .<" The hpitudc ofaCaufe to produce its cffcff, ciuinot be called. The/njlrumcnt of n. ToumAj ofi rotU call a mans Life the Inftrument oj Ading, orthefljarpucjSofthekn'fc, the fintves hifirnmcyit^ at to call our Holineffe or Habitual faith, the Inftrument of Receiving Chrift.'] I ah(a>cr, you pro-md by certainfteps, and to deny the Hdbtt of faith to be the Inftrument of Keceivir.g

Chrift^

: I. H^hat if it cannot f Who rtckpvf the Habit of faith for a ftnUified faculty f Tbit it

that which fdvBifies the faculties: The faculty is of one Specie* of quality ^ potemit

.tiituriWsy fatthrfhichfaft^ifes of another, habituj. Touare, it [cents, vowandtben

tpt inyour Logiel^, at much an you trouble tu with it, and had necdrciitwyonr Burgerf-

dicius <j?ii Kcckerman. 2. How prove youtbat the fanSiifedjacult} ii the fouln felf,

Jn flcad of the few Narnes you mufler up, I may bringyouthoufands that arcagainil

it: and yet afcwReafonsweigbmtre then all thcje great Names. If the faculty be

the fame with the foul, then the HolincQ'e of the faculty cannot be really dtjtiuH

from the foul, for thittbU Hobncf is to be received into the ficulies ; 4?;i if no faculty be

rtaUy dtjiivif from the foul, then « there no receiving into it any thivg really diji'nlf from

the foul, and tfHolineffc be not Really di(itn£i from the foul,a holy foul, and an iml)oly one

arenot Really diSltnlfiandfoyoujeem to imply inyour fccosd, when you (ay 1

§. 6i. K.3. i.TI Jlr.K.yieideth, if lam ablctounderftand him, that :he Aft of faith iVl is nor the Inftrumcnt of Receiving Chrift : and he layes it on the Habit. Before we proceed here obfcrve,

I. That the Generality of Divines that plead for faiths inftruTentality, fay, that it is not the Habit, but the A&. of faith that juftifieth : ( I faid To too when 1 wrote my Aphorifmt, taking it on truft, but 1 now recant it.) If that be fo, then they cannot (as they do) argue thus: [ Faith is the Inftrumcnt of Receiving Chrift and his Rightecufnefs: Theicfore faith jultifieth as an Inftru-ment] becaufe they fpeak of the Habit in the Antecedent, and of the aft in the Confcquent i and fo by [faith] meannot in both the fame thing ; and fo there are quatuor termini.

1. Obferve, that it is commonly granted, that the Habit of faith is not al-<*ayes in aft; as in flecp,and when we are wholly taken up with thoughts of an ali« cnc fubjcft, and allthetime of Infancy (according to them that think Infants have the Habit of faith.) This being fo, it muft needs follow, that faith is not alwayes the Inftrumcnt of Receiving Chtift, and of Juftifying; (nay perhaps, but feldome comparatively) For the Caufaiity of the Initrument is in Aftion, and faith is not alwayes afting. If therefore faithjuftificasan Inftrument, and wcare alway juftified, and yet faith be not alway an Inftrument, then either wc are not juftified by faith, but feme other way, at thcie times when faith afteth not, or clieccjiante Causa nevceffatefecitu : wl>ich though in feme cafes it may be true, yet here it cannot: becauie the efttft being but a ^us ad rem, a tranfcenden-tal Relation, it hath no nearcl^ Caufe, but its Foundation and Subjeft : and when thofc ccafe the Relaticr ccaleth ; And none jffirn;tth that faith is a Re-motecaufeof Receiving Chiift, that is, Right to Chiift (with his bentfi.s.) And if it were, yet the Fundamentum ReUtmis wu^ have the fuitentation of a coniinned Caufe. Bat in the way that 1 afti ni faith to juftific, as a moral Con. dition only ( having no CauCaliiy) all theie inconveniences, or rather contradh-ftions are avoided : For it being the mecr will of the Donor, that createth the neareli nectflltyof the Condition, and iorcquircs the Condition to fuch an end> he may make either aft or Habit the Condition, and may make the aft the Condition of Beginning our Right to Chrift and Life, and the Habit con-.inued, to be the Condition ot coniiouing that Right, even whca the aft is intcimittcd :

S i and.

and yctthe cffrft miy ftill continue, bK:aute the Will of the Donor^ and the Law or Coremnc which is his Inilruaienc, do both coQcinue i and ic is they chacare C^ie c£Bcicnt Caufcs.

J. Obrcrvcaifo, ihitboth themm forwhom Mr.I^ if here Td zcaloui, v/'^,' MrfPembU, and rainy more , do make the Habit oi taiih to be nothing clfc, buc ourNcwLife, our Holi lefs ofthcicnewed tacultii«^; >ii^ Spirit of God in utj and that all Grace* arc in the Hibi-: and feed but oncv a^ (o accordingly ic fol-lowSj iha: ic is our internal Sindification or HolineCs ttuu ia the Inilrumcnt of our Juftitkation: A Dodrine chat I thinJc thefe men «iU Ccacce own upon conil-deracion.

4. Obfcrve a!ro> that hence it will follow, thai ft it other, graces that juftiHe inftrumcntaliy as well as faith: becauic chty lay, it is the Habit that is the Inltru-mcnt: and this Habit is buc one : not one Habit of faith , andaaother of Love , Hope, (ifc. buc all one : and this one Habit jaftifics, even when mea arc Infants, or aflsep, and do not aft.

5. Thac which is naA^ commonly called, the Habit of Grace , is in Scripture called, [the Spirit in us:] and I'o the holy GhoHis made our inlhitment of Juftitication.

Njw to M'l^'s worJs here. In the words of mine which he cites, I do both indiredly, or f« prin^fM confute a third opinion, vi^. that the fandified facul-cJes are the Inftrument, though the fandity of the faculties be not : and dirediy I argue i fortiore, chat if the fandified Faculties themfelvet may no: properly be called the laftrument of Receiving Chrilt, much lelfe can the fandity of the faculties be To called : Qaiy (^c. Therefore, ^f. Hereupon this coo learned man feigns mc to think, or fay, or imply, the Habit of faith 10 be a fandified faculty j and with feeming ferioufnefs fals a fchooling me, andtelsme, that [che faculcy is of one spst/ci of quality, and faich of anothcrj] yea proceeds in his dream as confidently as if he were waking, to tell me, that I [am now and then out in my Logick.and had need to review my Burgerfdiciut and t^ed^-ermin.'] But wou'd he a little rub his eyes, I would defire him to tell his Reader, whereldiddiredly orindircdly fay, thac Faith is a fandified faculty? And I would know of himj whether a man thould not underftand a matter before he make an anfwef to it !

Next, it feems, he expeded I (hoald have proved, that the faculty is the foul hfelf; And would not that have been as wife a DigrefliDn, and as Neceffary, at is this of his? The Scope of my words was but this, q, d. [It is a controverted, doubcfu^. point, Whether che Faculties ar«diftind from che foul, as Ra Cf Ret, and therefore not fie to bear I'uch a weight as thofe that I oppofe do lay upon the affirmative] (and my own opinion Inclineth to the Negative : yet lo as I dare not be lo prelumpcuous asconfidently to in:erpofeamon» fa many Icirncd men, and maintain my own opinion as certain cruch.) As wife a man asMr. ]^. (and ifl my opinion an eight at Icalt above him) thought the like anfwer to be good in another cafe, 'Divenitt.Determ.'^ J7. pi^- '66. ^9i phibfopbintur voluntatem a^inteUeSHM ejfe du^f potential retpfx difiinSlM, dogmt fhilofophicum efl, ab onnibic hiuirtcepMrn, gt* TheolorUudi^nitibus firminlitMf infirmtniif^ funiatti'ittum mi* nimi idoneum. And he knows, chat the cwoQueltions, ". Whether the faculties be reiliter tntcr fe di(iinS{it ? An J, x. Wheth.:r they be rulher abinmi dijiinHas i ufe to ftand and fall together in the Djtermination.

F«r the few nam:s that he tels me I mulhr up, ic; like be may know that ic were

cafie

C"7D

eafic to give him a farrc larger muftcr-roll, efpecially of the Scotifts. And as f«t the thoufands thac he faith he may bring againft it (ho doubt he means Writers) I conttIs plainly, that he hath fof arte loll his credit with me, that I donotbelicv* him. For thooeh I know they are many, yet I do not thijik he hath read many thoufands on all fides ef that Subjcd. But if he have indeed read fo many thou» fand books rf that one point, alas, how many bath he read in all ? No wonder if poor Burger(dicm, ixhibler or Suarcfi be defpifed by him. It may be that's the teafon that ooth ;he margin and Text ot his book are fo naked of quotations j h^ having read fo many thciuUnds that he knew not which to preicrrc, or where to be2,innc 5 or el(e would have few mens names to bis Works but his own ( except as Adverfaries) left they (houM ftiare of the honour. Nay, if he mould have faid or meant, that there are thoufands that fo write, which others have read though he have not, I doubt he cannot prove it true.

for his £;rcat weighing Reafons, I will honour them as foon as I can fee them, but he hadlittle Reafontoexpeft meto Reafon that Cafe. K this that be next addcs be one of his few Reafons, that weigh fo much, I muft tell him. Every maa tohismindc. 1 doubt he overvalues his own Reafons: For my part, one thou-fand great Names, yea one, will weigh as much with me, as this his Rcafoir. For, 1. I deny his Confequence, and fay, that the Holincfs may be Really di-ftinft from the foal, though the faculties are not j and that Holinefs may immediately inhere in the foul without the mediation of faculties really diSind from it. It had been cafie to have feen the ncccffity of giving' feme anfwcr to this de» nfall. As wife a man as moit we have ( if I conjedure not amifs) and a publick Profeffour in Ox/orii, and now rcfident where Mr-I^. had his Chair, I mean Mr.^iiWw , faith thus; [And fo, however it may be true,tbat a faculty or natural Power may be fo far the lame with the fcul, as th.it it differ only ratioiicratiQcinati, yet in a Habit we muft of neceflity grant a diftindion ex pirte rci: For where there may be a real feparation, and not only mental, there muft audi be granted a diftindionwrf.]

But what if 1 grant Mr.I^*s bardeft Conclufion that Holinefs is not Really di-ftind from the foul, nor a holy foul from an unholy as [Really] is taken for a di-ftindion inter Rem (^ Rem. We fliall fee anon what danger would be in it. But then Mr.IC- ^^^ ^^ ^° honcft, as not to perfwadc any that 1 therefore deny a Real diftindion, as [Real ] is oppofcd to feigned, memal, called Ratmuj Relative, or Dcaoniinative.

§■ 6i. Mr. K. V70« p> [The HoUnrJS of the fuculties u not their Jtiftrument, for it U X nothing but themfclva rcHified, dfid net a 3tivg fo dt^inBoi mty bt caUei their Infirumcnt.'] But is it r.ething but tbemfclves rtSiified i I bad thought it bli been the KtSiifyi.vg of them, vehith "poteft adefie & abefle fine fubjcdi interim ? Mvicfinfcquevtlyitif not tbefaoilticfthcmfclves. jiiVPeUyourmyfjjf, thatthe rtgbtnejfe cf a fiiciiii nothing but the jlickmadenghtii aKdihenhncw^e of the vaU, vsihing but tieWitl madeTfhitc Quistulerit Gracchos five Graculos '■

Mt

■ -<•>, I '. . , ■, .—i.

§. 6j. K.B. I. A L'that I JlTert is, that Hjlinefs differs not from the facuUics, as l\ Res (^ Res, but as l{fs c?* moim. %. I think the abftrad hath no exiftcncc, but as in the Concrete, buc is a meet No:ion. Seeing therefore that is fo, I think the propcreft denomination, as moft i^reeaWc to the thin^ denominated, is CO fpeak of it as t«Cfln<;rcro. j. Yoa did therefore too fuJdenly Itarc up intoyour wondering interrogation, as if there were any contradiftion between thofetwofayings! As if he chat faith [a Rcdifi:d faculty : a white wall] did not as truly cxprctTc the Reditude, and the whitcncfs, aj you that cxprcfs them inCoiKreto! It is toogrolVea fidion, if (as you Teem) you would mike men believe that I intend to prove the Rtditudc to be Fflrwij/Zrcr the fame with the Faculty or foul I My meaning is plainly, that HolincLs is nothing but the fouls Re dicude, and though I exprelVed it in the Concrete, I fay not, that it is the Faculty as a Faculty, butasRedified > (hewing in the ncx: words what k is thac I exclude, vi^. [ A Bdngfo diftinfl, O'c.'] 4. Miy not a Relation or M.0' ius be prefcnt or abfcnt fine fubjeSi interitu ? thoagh ic be not a dil^inA Thing ?

For your ^i( tulerit ? I Reply; P. ide makes men impatient. Did you think no more highly of your own Note, then fome wifeobfervers do, you would ia-ftead of your impatient ^^tf tulerit, have compafllonated your felf and me, and fit down by me, m'M ^ Hos GrAculi However, why lliould you be fo impatient with one fo farre below you? Will you fct your wit to the wit of a <^rX' culiu f

But I will make bold to try your Patience further. Will you hear the voice of the aforc-faid Learned and Judicious man M' IVaHh, who is now in the fame Neft that you were bred in ? See his Tratb rr/ci, chap.S.pag.44,4j-. [A Habit therefore whether Infufcd or Acquired, being but a facilitation of the faculty, cannoc be a Thing diftinft from that faculty, but only a Afoiaa of it, which hath not in it felf a PoGtive Abfolute Being of its own, but is a Modification of another Being : And its Phyfical Being, Exijientu Ret, muft be che fam; with the Being of tha: which is thus Modificaced : For ic is not ipfum exiflens, buc !Miiiu cxifieii" it: And this Manner of Exifting, hath not an Exigence of its own, diflinft from the Exiftencc of that which doth Exifl in this Mmner. Yet its Formal and Metaphyfical Being isdillinft. Yea and its Phyfi:al Exiftence , fuch as it is capable of, thac is, Exijietttismodi'y for not being Res, buc Modus Ret, we muft noc exped that it fh mid have any Exiflence of its own, befides the Exiftencc of zMoiust and chis Ex//ienfamoins the adual modificating of the Thing Exifting after this Manner: The which Exiftencc, though it be not ExiftcHtU Rci, yetis it areal Exiilence (Exijfentiiinre) aai not Mental: For ch: thing Exi-ftent is not only fuppofed to exift in this manner, but indeed doth )fo, chus order* ed, thus modificaced : And therefore that (JVfoiw doth adaally and really modifi*' cate,and is not only fuppofed focodo. Bat if you will noc admit with 5'cot«j_, Sec' And thus ic is true which his Lord(hip fpeaks, that Habicual Knowledge is Nothing but Light more or lefle Glorious. It is Rcafon deared ; It*s only FicuttJS fictliixti, or F4cuUitti ficilitjs: And to this Faculty 0: Readin^ft to operate, £ tinnot AHovf X Phyfiut Exiflenceof tttopfa, as neither to tiny H ibit wbitfoevir, u be-in^biuHod'h dnittot fimia : It's ixoi a Being, but a Manner of B^ing: Noc

Ens,

I

'SV^'W^S.

Ent, but Aliittid EniU» And I fhould eafily be pcrfwadcd to grant the fame concerning all accidents whatfoevcr, which have long fincc been called E»t« c»t/4' And however an Accident hath been accounted tobt Ref^ andfo to have cx/]fcfh tim Rci, yet not fubfiftentiam Rci.'] So far M' fVallit,

Mr. HH. Qj4y you [.Who ever called Huhitsor 7)ilpoftions the fouls Infirumettts f The ^ Aptitude of ft Qau^t tt produce its efeSi, anuot be called its. iHSrument.'] I tAnfvperandjteldyoUt that ordinarily it is not fo: In'all Acquired Habits, there it meerly an Aptitude gotten: but by faith which is aninfufed Habit, there is an Ability gotten i this heinginieedaHahtt, but a Habit equivalent to anew Faculty i andfo we hear ofa new heart and newfpirit, and without faith a man can no more receive Chriji nor do ought towards it, then a dead man can wal^ or (peak, and fo it gives life to the foul in regard of all fpiritual operations: and though life cannot be faid to be au Injiru-mcnt, yet I hope that which gives life may i ais doth faith, which it as the (oul t» the foul in all its holy and heavenly thoughts and dejires: Life cannot be fatd to be an Instrument : for Life K Life it no caufe at all, but an Union of thofe caufet which are rcqui-T€dti^cmaliir^»pofthtAs)\aMt.\xm.

§. «4. R.2. i.TFHabitswcrenercrfopropcuy to be called the foulj inftruments, yet Ithisreachcth not the Queftioji, whether they may properly be called ( Logiciloquendo) inftruments of Receiving when they (arc not inftruments Effc-^ing. I did therefore give them too much advantage in this arguing.

X. If yoa grant that acquired Habits are not to be called the fouls inftrumentt^ and yet maintain that infufcd are, you muft give fomc good rcafon from the difference.

Your rtafon is that [This is a Habit, but equivalent to a new faculty.] To which I Reply, i. What reafon is this? When I even now faid. That [the fanftified faculty it felf cannot be the Inftrument] y«u never did gainfay it; therefore if faith were a faculty or Fotentia, it were not therefore the inftrument of Reception.

1. The term [equivalent] is fo ambiguous, that you may yet make your words trueorfalfe by an interpretation, i. If you mean that infufcd Habits are of the fame nature, and of the fame jfectM of quality, as the Potentia naturalis is, that ftiould have been well proved, and not nakedly aflerted. a. If you mean that it peiformeth the famckinde of operations, and quoad ufttm is equivalent, though not of the fame nature or kindcjthat alio needs great proof, feeing it concradi-ftetb common principles : The operation of things is luch as the Being. }. If you mean but that it is of equal necedUy to the A^, thits nothing to the purpofe i for the neceifity proves it not an inftrument.

But 1 conceive the firft of the three isyourfenfe, or elfelcannotmakefenfeof it; for the two later do no way tend to prove it an Inftrument J and your words do moft plainly import that fenfe. Butjiffo I. Sure you forgot your own words but a little before, where you were pleafed fo farre to Schoolme, as to tell mc that [the faculty is of one j|^me; of quality, Potentia naturalit, faith which lan&i-fies of another, ^4£>irffs,] And you gravely told me, I was now and then out in

T my

ciyLogiclc, an(3<!cmande<3of m«j Who reckons the Hiblt of faith for a fandJ-ficd Faculty ? x- How can you fay ftill that it is a Habit ? For if it be truly a Habit, it muft beof :hc fampjfTCJc/of cjualiiy, as Habit > and admit the dLfini-tion of a Habit, and thcrctoicnor admit the definition oiTotcvtitOi Facultas, nor be of that ^fcifi; and 1 Uippofe you will not fay it is ot both, and be but one Quali-.y : And I fuppofc alio that y-u will not lay, it is PotcntiiifupernJtunlif, and therefore may be of another ^cfiorhcnFcfcnna s4JMrj/«, feeing it is not the way «f efficiency, but the nature of the Efftft or Thing produced, which divcrfificih the {}ccies of QjJality.

But becaufc 1 have great reafoTito think, that you will honoarthe fame thing from D' Twife, which you contemn from me, will you be pleafed to hear him fpeaktoyoua few words* C»ntrA (^orvinum pag.361. \_Sei quii deventum cfi ai gcHUi difputntionU.'^hilofophkum, agendum fecundum prittcipiA Pbilofophix, five natw ralif, five moralii,five mixt£, cumdoHcrtbm Hits covgrediamur- Itaqae iuxta Philofo-pbiam quid altui cji voluntas, quum Totcntia vslcjtdi ? rurfuA quid aliud cjt objcHtim quam bonum ? uvicuiqi vcrd quod ippireti non'SybiUa folium rccitt, jed Ariftotelk magniilltui naturem/lla. Ergonenmodo fecundum Aaguflinum, fed(^ fecundum J' riftotclem, nutur* cjl hominum poffe Velle quod ei appsrejt efe bonum, pofc Mtem Telle quodverc bonum fit, ncCorotnus quidcm hoc loco attrtbuit grdtix (uacommuni. Ego veto ultrAjeror, O" ex jiugujlino di^uto, etiam pojfe credere, pejfcTicumamarf, naturaejfe beminum, juxta argumcntationem fuperiorem t quod (3' hoc argumcnto contcudo. Si potcntiiicredendi, vdquiivkboni fuciendi, nobis accedcrctex gratia, turn potcntiifub-fcSlum effet poteutix j vaturalis gratiofa, quod quiiem hxBenui prorfus iji ivauditum ; nempe ut potentia volendi fubjeSium efjet potcntix volendi. Volunto/s fdtcor cfi fubjcBitni hsbttuum; etiam omnis potentia rationalis, tam ititelleStu* quam volantoj capaxcfl ha-bttuum,fivc ttituralium, quibus magU idotieafiat ad res naturales, tam intelltgendas, quam agendas ; five fupcrnaturaltum, quibus elcvetur ad object a fupcrnaturalia 1 lAt ut po-ientiaaliquicapix fitpotentiarumnovirum, ne fando quidcmhaHenuA accepi, priifquani myfterta fua mundo commununrunt ^Irminiani.'] Many more places to the fame pur-pofe might be cited out ot D'Trviffe. HoethimdeTrinit. faith, Forma fimplexfub-feUum ejfe ncquit: I leave you to gather the confequent. What it I adde a Nayc-lift or two (they (hall not be unlearned) that M' I^. may fee that a Gmcm/m is not (0 folitary as a Pbanix?

Thorn. H^itein ii'ii InfU^ut.Sacr. l.i.leS.^i.p.90. faith, \,Sed(^Hahitumnon tffe aliud quam ipfurn aBum debilim manentem, omnino conHat, ex eoquod impreffio fa-Hainfubjccfum, abfq-, aliquo contrario deftruente, interire non potcjt: quia cfi modua ipfiuifubjcSlt ; 6r quod alio mode imbui requirit novam actionem- Tcrmuuit ttaq-, a&us donecacevtrariodejiruatur. In anima verononeft alia coutrarictas quam conTridiUi-tnis. Donee itaque retraBetur, ex veccffitaxe femper manet aHu*, (^ dtcitur Habitut. Cbji£ies, ejj'econtra manifeflam cxpericntiam quod aSIua mantant, &c. Rcfpondetur, ma-mfeHum effe po(l aUumtntcUcftusvcl phantafix, potentiam maoerc inaSlu iUiiaobjeBi quod cognovit. Expericntia enim docct, earn poffc iterum cognofcerc quod vuli j quod ante primam cognitiovcm von potuit.Scc. LManct itaque impreffioi id eji a^ui fub,'iantiat quatenm ens, (^non tantum motio eft: Vnde cum tv aiumanonpoffn (jfc motus, jW tdxquate manet tmprcjfto ; id cfi aSJus. '^od autrm non apparent m*nere, cfl quia anima in coTpore non agtt ex feic ; fed prxcifc quatenm mevttur a corporr, jeu per corpua j (^ percovfequcns nonfacitfrnfum fui, mfi in cffcBu corporco. Et biuc ft ut cum rurfia agi-mas, fenttamui a^um faciliorcm, vel forttorcm, vcldireHum ty mod'jiutum ab animAt TAtmeprmUaUm; quodarguit mprejfioncm mancre t Sed medum ipfita im^rcffionit,

in

\

in fefe, videre Mitpoffitmus 5 (^ idcocredimus ipfum aSIu non mMpffc.'] And pii.9^* {ExqmbaifitUclarum eft, non ejfehabitut fupernstursUs, fuU prmktStubiapncrequi-ptosi nequeeffe per modum fotcntiarum, fed omvino ficut habitus mturalcsi nifi quol circisliaebjtBiverfcnturi d^ difcurrendumejSe prorfutdeiif, aimoium quo pbilofO' pbamur de naturaltbut, obfervstis ^ecidibm diffcrentiis,']

Yea there ace fome that think .Habits are in the body. TaurcUm in Thilofopk. Triumph. pJg^t.(3i'nh, l^ere tamen rem jiquh intueatur, nil habitutilmdfunt, quant acquifiu quadam intelligendt, vcl alicujtes expetendi premptitudo, noniaimjt, (cd^orpori fidfcrtbenda, cumperfe/inimanecimpediatur, nee aptisr fieri piffit, ad cx'ricn.iiy. aSii' *««, fed quotiiam corporc, ceutnUrumentoutitur, fitutcjutrelpcSiu, vtl hibUiores. vel incptiorcs ad aliqutd e^ciendum ftmua.'] This he afterward thus corred^ih, 'i !^on torptrifolu>n,fedammjietiam, videntur e{fe afcribendi (hibltm) Eundem inteuHum i^ agentcm ejfe dtcimM (^ paticntem: ^er fequidcma^tenumaufaeft, ntc piti, nee impcdiri dicttur j fed reJpcSiu ejus (ui etnjungitur corpori patitur, atque impcdttur qu9 minus probe po fit intelligere. Hac habitus accidentis ratione, noumenti, fed corporipri" mopoffantattrtbHii vel ti vice verfa menti primo sHtenet, fed corperi faundarid adfcri-buntur, Eadem voluntatit eft ratio.']

Icicenot thefe, asovrning them { buc to fhew Mr. I^. thic as learned men ss he, have not the fame thoughts of Habits, and therefore he rtiould not be too ha-ftily coiifiiient: And I confefs, as highly as I think of Mr. I(,*s learning, I do not think be truly and dearly knows what a Habit of the foul is, nor wherein ic is di« ftind from the foul, the faculties, and the ad, and the intelligible j^mcj; n9 nor a wifcr man then himfelf neither. Every man knows not fo much as he boaft-eth of, or thinks he knoweth. ( And how likely then he is to know fo much of God as be here pretendetb to, we may eafily judge.) It was as wife a man as he chat faid C T^jm quomodo imelleHu Deam eapit homo , qui ipfum intelleHum fuum, quo eum vultcapere, nondun capit f Auguft.ie Vrinitas. U. $. cap. 1.3

J. 1 ea{ily acknowledge that grace giveth fuch a power as is commonly called Moral, diftind from the natural faculties, as our corrupt cflate contains an oppo-fitc impotency. But this it but an applying of the terms [Can] and [Cannot^ ^Power] and [Impotency] to Difpo&tionsand Undifpofcdnefs, to Habits and tbelr Privations*

4. A new heart and fpirit^ I eafily confefs necefTary. But thofe words do com* monly fignifie in Scripture, only new Inclinations, Difpolinons, Q^aalifications. It it a new heart, though only the old faculties and fubftince. I hope you will not follow lUyricus.

J. Where you fay that [without faith a man can no more Receive Chrift, not do ought towards it, then a dead man can walk or fpeak.] I Reply i. Fnac proves not faith to be ec^.iivalent to a Potentiiv:lfucult;u, any o:hcrwife then thac it isof as abfolute necellii/, butnotthac it is of the fame nature. If youfliewan illiterate man a Greek or Hebrew book, he can no more reade in icthena dead man, thatis, both ^vctr\x\yin[enfucompofito itnpof&hlt: Bu: yet it is buc a habic that is waatiug to one, and a power o: faculty natural, to thtoiber. And Co ic raaytruly be faid that a finner cannot do well that hath accuftmncd to do evil, no more then a Leopard can change his fpots, ora B'ickm->oie his skin. Yet if you meantLa fuch are equally diftanc from an adual change as a dead man, ic is biic a dead comparifont A dead mart wants both natural faculties, and an indinacioa or moral pswer. An unbeliever wants buc one.

>. Thac [whboHC faici), fucbcan no more do ought cowards the receiving of

T 1 Chrift*

Ci30

Chrift, thena^cad man'can walk or Tpeak] ii a dead dodrinc, like the reft of Anunomianifm, tending to liecntioufncfs, and to fubvert the precepts of the Gofpel, and the Talvation of men, and unfit for any man that fliall ale the Name of Chrift, much more unfit far a Divine. The Ranting fed hath got the word too: and when they are reproved for \yickednefs, orperfwadcd to duty, they fay, {IVhit unihtcreaturedof] To go out of an Alehoufeor Whorchoufc, and t© go to hear the Gofpel preached, is fomewhat $«wards receiving Chrift : for faith comes by hearing i and can ik) man do this without faith ? Cannot the Eunuch reade a Chapter and ask help of an Interpreter without faith ? Cannot men Vaft and Pray, if not as Qernclim, yet as Ahib, without faith ? Is there not a common Grace of the Spirit, drawing men torvirds Chrift that were farre from him, which goes before the fpccial Grace ( at leaft I'ometimes ) whereby they are drawn M chrift i This that you maintain is not thedodrine^of Mr.Tbo.Hoolier, Mr.^^fe. Rogen, Mr. ^oUon, Ferkins, or any of our experimental pradical Divines i oo nor of any Proteftants that I know > I am fure not of the Syned of Vort\ but of the Libertines and Aminomifts. To what end do you preach to any unbelievers ? Da you perfwade to any means or duty towards the getting of faith ? or dioyounot ^ If not, its like you Preach as youDifputej and then I doubt whe* tber you live at Blijlimi: If you do, fure that duty tends to faith, and may be per-foriaed before faith.

J. I think you do more boldly aflcrt, then you can folidly prove that [without faith a man can no more receive Chrift, then a dead man walk] if you mean it of the Habit of faith, as, no doubt, you do. Ifyouftiould mean it of the Ad, it were a merry arguing : q.d. [We cannot Receive Chrift without Receiving him r therefore Receiving him is a Power, and fo an Inftrument] Adual faith, is a« ftual moral Receiving Chrift. But I fuppofe you mean it of the Habit, in conformity to your former Difpute > And then you fuppofe that God cannot caufe the'Aft of faithby bis Spirit, before the Habit, and bythefirftad caufe a habit (as Qinuro taught, and his followers do ftill teach.) I fuppofe if the queftion were put but defaSto, Whether God do ordinarily thus caufe faith ? it is paft Mr. 1^*3 power to prove the Negative : Much more if the queftion be depotaaia divina, whether God an do it.

4. Wijere you fay [It gives life to the foul in regard of all fpiritual operations,] 1 Reply, I. How induftrioufly doth Mr. Pemble prove that faith is not the Mother grace ? not properly the root of all other graces, nor the firft degree of our fandification and fpiritual life, cither in the Habit or the Ad : f^tndic. GrOt, S'^g' 12j' 3i i4> Yet Mr. £^. that is fo zealous in defending him,fticks not to gain-fay it.

X Knowledge and Love may be faid to give life to the foul, if the exciting and aflifting other graces, be giving life.

3. It is in effeding or receiving a relation ( ^m ai Chriftunii impuniwem, falw-^m) that we are en({uiring after faiths Infttuoientality. And you do turn the bufinefsto [giving Life to the foul in regard of fpiritual operatioiu s] whereby ^ou feem to mean that faith is no otherwife an Inftrument of receiving Chrift^ /iben as it is an Inftrument of every other operation which it performeth; and as ivery other habit of grace (Love, Fear,^*.) are inftruments of their ads.

4. You play with the ambiguity of the term [ Life. ] Yob take it for the Union ot Caufcs. You knoii bow comnonly » u nifcd foe tbe WtrtM

f. And fe faith is, as Pemble faith, part of the fouls new life, that is, new fpiritualRfditucIc 5 or as others, xhcvihokfematvelprinciptum. But this ii enly a formall, and noi an efficient (cjuickening, or giving life. And if you fpcak ©f faith exciting other graces: i. That it doth by the Aft, which you ycc afBrm not to be an Inftrument. i. So do all graces in their places help therein.

Laftly, If you did prove that Habits are fitly called the fouls inftruments in producing the Afts, yet it is all nothing to our bufinefs. For we are enquiring how farre it is the Inftrument of the cfftft, or of reception. And I ftill fay, that wherethe Aft is no efficient caufe, there the Habit by caufing the aft, is no inftrument of thecffeft. But in our Juftification, the aft of taith is no efficient caufc (Juftification is the immediate eftcft of God by the Aft of grace now, and by his Sentence hereafter.') Therefore, fcrc. And for reception, 1 fay it hath no inftrument, but as the inftrument of the eft'eft, may be called its inftrument j except yoa will Ypeak as a Mechanick, a Rhetorician, or Vulgsriur, and not Logically. And when Mr.IC-gives me cogent Kcafens againft this^ 1 hope 1 ftiali regard them.

§. 6^

Mr. K-\ J\/Hw4f youtddtleftly, li he Jharpntf of the knife camet be called the

V V knivts lnjiruMevt:} I mufi without AifpAragment to jrour ccvftfl atu-

men in ether things, teUycu, that this u but a ittU infince: for fdith is not as thtjhifp'

wjS, but ts the kf^fe j and faith admits ftmetime a greater JharpneJS, f$metitnes

a lejS, which qualtfes it in its affivg hater or worfe, more or lefi. eAni z. The

Jharpnefofthek^ife, maybecaUed an ififtrumentin a larger feu{e, m frfttudUtiesin

the elements. The fre » (aid to »B by its heat: the water by its cold j by the heat in-

ftrumentaliter, by its form principaliter. jind thus ?• may the foul befaid to aH by its

faithin recehingChrift, without which it were as mpoffibleto receive Untfit by Chrift, tx

to return (erviceto him.

\r, :\c , • •:

: ' ..a ,jl;jij>

§. 6^. _.:., . •.

R.B. I. T Ackacwlcdgc the inftance of little ufe to the main Queftionj be-« caufe it pertains but to the Ad of faith, and not the following paffion or efieft.

2. Theftiarpnefsof yourAnfwer, ferves but to cut your own fingers. That faith is as the knife, is feigned, and not proved. The knife is the fubftance, and the keennefsis the accident or modus. Faith is not a fubftance, but a modus ok acccident of the foul.

J. In your large fenfr, you may [fay quid vis fcridequovk, and foltold you J did not contradift you.

4- J am fo cenforious as to imagine that you fpeak more by rote, then on true knowledge in ycur Fhyficks, about fire; but thats no mauer.

J. Who doubts but the foul may, inthefenfe you mention, befaid [to aft by faith inrecciving ?] But once more diftinguifli of receiving: which is i. The aft ofconfemingto, or accepting of the offer of Chrift and Lifej which isRf-cc^neEjfcicj, metaphorically called Reception. ». The truepafiive reception of Kigbt to Chrift nad Lifc^ vvhicb follows on the foicncr. The firft is but the

Conditioii, Jin J not the Caufeof the later, aiii is in Myality to the later, as in 'Ni.ivKiliihcDijpefftiomittrijtiitothc Rccep:ionof the form: but the cffi:icnc Caufe of the later Rccep:iort is GjJj Will, fi^nified by his Law; and bis Law fignifying his Will, and Cjnftitu:in^ the Daiicls. Nj* if you will fay, thac Faith in the Hibic is the inftrumcntal ciiicien: Cau.e of the firll Receiving Chrift, that is no more then to fay, the Hibic is the inftrumeatal Ciufe of the AA, vi^. icsowa AiVent a;id Confenc; as Love may be faid of its Ad. And whether this Speech be proper or improper, J leave it to your felf, J will not meddle wi:h it. liat for all Faith might be called the inihumcnt of Believing (lup-pofing it may) and that Believing is tropically called Receiving, yet [ deny thac itcan thccefore be properly called the [nltruneat of confeiuent, proper, Paflife Receptioiiof Righ: to Chrift. f The Pillijn is fuch as Relations in their Reception are capable of.) Yet improperly, vulgarly, as an Inftcument is not ti-kenfor an Etfi.ienc Caufe, Ididprofefs and liill do, thac I will contend with nonethit will call Faith the Inllruninc ot Receiving (or any Confeat of the Will, call it Love, or what you will, as well as Belief in Chriil, may fo becall'd an Inft:ument.) Buc that Faith is no true Inllrumental Caufc of forgiving our 6n$,or Juttitying ui,I ftiall yet maintain till I fee ftronger Realoni then M.f^.hach here producedjand to thac I-am mored upon Reafons of great wcight,which 1 have elfwhere manifelled.

Laftly, M'.fv' fpeaijs too unlimiccdly [of che Impoflibility of Receiving Benefit by Ghrift without Faith."] Idareiiy, thac many achoufand (if not all men) have received Beneiic by Chrift before faich. What fay you by the Gjfpcl ? What fay you by Faich it felf ? J hope ic is noc the Inftrament of our Receiving it fell? Yea, and ic is more then Mr. I^. can prove. That God could not if Jhe would, have given pardon ic felf to fome without faith, upon Crtrifts meer Saiisfadion. Buc what need I talk of this, to a man that chinks we have fo much of, or towards Remiflion, Juftification , Acceptation before faith, as he before difpatcd for, i.e. co be tantaai junt Juftifiid ? Though he takes them to be from E:crnity, and fo no fruits of Cdrifts Diarb, yet he cannot deny, but as CO us, we are as capable of Receiving fuch BeaefitSj wichoHt faitb> from Chrift, as without Chrift.

$. 66.

Mf.K. A I^i I acknowledge I bive done very link by this Tyi^atCi «uly I bid not •^* tbepstiencetoleefbivmby DivinttfounvfonbUy btniUd, as tf tbey bid necitoheuughtx Lo^iclili(p>nby ydr.QiKzs'y vf'n (is Ibiueheirdto tbf. dijpirdie' meut of both Hniv^rfities) vfjs farce hred in either, bit is vnch xt I e(iien bis ex-.el" Utttpirts, and I doubt not ftn^nlar piety, yet my Ibeboldto^Ay, fomt»'}r more of the VniverfitY vfonH hive done hm no birm: And I conclude ill witb tbk Item t9 mj felf, tbtitgh ^r.Baxter need not tal^e notice $f it,

- ——Nctu DivJnan Iliadatcnces,

Sed longs fecjacce, 8l Veftigia femper adora.

§,66,

CI353

§. 66. K.B. 1. J Think your firftConcluhon (that you have done little by this Di-J[ fpute) hath as cogent Evidence, asmoftthat you have maintained in thefe fix leaves. But ii had been more wifdom to have forefeen your lolsof titiiCj and to have prevented it, rather then to confcfs it to your difgrace.

z. Where you fay, you [had not patience] I fay. If you cannot forbear^ there's no remedy: who can hold thst which will away ? The tongue is an unruly member. Perhaps your cafe is as hi* D/,'c»K/;«iH. p.^.

3. I dare not cxcufc, much Icl'e juffTfic my :o;;guc or Pen, from t,oo fliarp and unmannerly fpeechcs of my betters : Even where 1 cHfcern nc fault, I do fufpefl fome, as knowing fomuch evil in that heart which j' the fountain : And I hope allthofc picus Brethren whrm I fhal' injure b> iny rartincfs, will heartily forgive it} which I earneltlyrequtlt, and b; GcdsafT.ibnce, (hall do the like by others. But yetl maft needs fny, thnt niv Conuicnccdcrh rot accufe me of [handling unworthily] D' rxvt^ or M' f ot ary uxn. For as T have cxc>.flively honoured them, lo do 1 very hjghly lionourtfern iti. j Si.d their m.lljkth 1 hid not'mentioned, but I. That I had been by them cnlnaicd in fome ot them, and thou;^ht my felf bound to warn others of the dat;gcr. 1. The name of fuch woithy men may do more in propagating an errour, then a thoufand unlearned Aniinomians can do, and therefore (hould theii miflakes be more diligently diklofcd. 3. It i$ pity Gods gifts and Saints ihould be a Defenfative to errour, and a fnare to the Church. 4. I am confident the fouls of thcfe two Saints of God, if they know thefe things below, will give Mr. 1^. no thanks for his Vindication, nor be offended with me for difclofing their millakes, w'hich tf.cy now do farre more dctcft then I. J. It was no fuch Crime in the late Reverend Al'embly to qiieftion one of them for thefe miftakes, or in Learned Bi(hop Powjuwc to wiitc a hundred times more thcrt I againft the other: And why then is it a Crime in me ? 6. Reverend Mr.Owen, who approves your book, doth fay farre more againft Dv.TxviJ^ then ever I did, in his late excellent, learned Viatrib. dc ^uft. VivdtcaX. and yet I I;ear none accufe him for unworthy handling him ; Yea he ingenicufly confeflcth his own former errour, and writes againft it j and why then may not a man for Truths fake be allowed to do by another, what he dothby himfelf ? Had I been my felf the Authour of Dr.7Wfj[^fj\Vciks (pardon the prefumptienof the fuppo-fition) I fhould fay ten times more againft fcveral things in ihem, then I ever yet did. 7. Mi-I^. himfelf here contefleth the rpinions that I mention of their* to be erroneous : And is not that as unworthy handling them as mine ? 8. I intreat the impartial Reader to perufe my woidsihtmulvcs, and then let him judge as he feeth Caufe. They are bu; ihcfc [A great Qiitftion is is, Whether Re-miflion and Juflificaticn be Immanent or 1 rarfient f<fls of Gcd : The miftike of this one point was it that led thcfe two moft excellent famcvo Divines Di.TrfiJS and Mr.Pfwt/e to that crrcur Jird Pillar of Aniincmianifm^v/^Juftification iitm Eternity. For faith Dr.rw?/? often, All A fts immanent in God are from Eternity : But juftification and Kcniifl'un ol fiii.> are immanent A£ts : Therefore.] Is this fuch unworthy handling ? Mr. I^. dutlt not once fay that I falfly aeculed them i or that it was not their e;i cur. And tpuld I give thtm a higher Elegy, then to call them [moft Excellent, Famtus Div"nes.] 1 an. confident tl:c gi cat-cft Arcbbifhops or Cardinals, yea ihe Pope himfqlfviculd tl.inis fuch Ti'.les no

way

way Injuriou? to thim," The Lord General will b; comtm Vfith lower Titlci then [moft Excellent and Fanious] Da not fuch as Mr.FC-go abouc to confiroi the vile reproaches of the timeij asif Miniftcr* were themoft intollcrabLy proui men on earth, when this is taken for unworthy handling'• And when they that cxpcft chat their hearers lhou!d bear their fharpett and trequeni rcproofj, cannot bear fuch an honourable raemion of their miftakes ?

4. Whether there be one true word in Mr.I^'i particular accufation [ai if they had need to be ta-u^hc a Logicklefljn of Mr.BJXwr] I am content my very enemies ftiould Judge. Did 1 ever contend about any point of Logick with them? It was not, whit an ifnnaneot Aft is ? But onely, Whetiicr Juftification be an Immanent Aft, and To Eternal, that 1 enijuired, and in which loppofcd them ? I do therefore take i: as my duty to Admonilh my learned Brother of his great fin, who hath not once, twice, or thrice, but fooftin fix leaves fpoken fuch palpable untruths in matte: offaft, and madcfoUtilcCoofcienceofthe ninth Commandment.

V. If in this Pai-agraph Mr.I^.do difcovcr the very end of his undertaking, not to be fo much the Vindicating of any truth of God , but of Worthy Divines, and Academical! Honour (of which I leave the Reader to Judge) then may wehenceconjefturcatthe Reafon of feverall Paffages through the whole: for theMeans may not be better then the End; and no wonder if they be fuited to it.

6. As for all that follows concerning my [being fcarce bred in cither Univcrfi-tyi&i.'} I have nothing to fay. Did Mr.I(. ever bear me contend for the Reputation of being Liarned ? He eafily carries the Caufe h«re, having no con-tradidion.

7. Atid where he faith, thai ^fancwhat more of the Univerficy would have done me no harm] I do no: bcll«vt him; For though I have been as fenfibic of my want of fuch happy opportunhkt, andmydefefts thereaponj as ever Mr.I^. was, at lead i yet I believe that all things work together for Good to them that love God > and that by that three-fold Cord (onmy Friends, Body, and fcrupuloui Confcience) by which G 3d reftrained me from fuch advantages, and confined me to a more private courfe of ftudies, he did alfo reftrain me from fome evil that I might elfe have run upon,or prevent fome that he faw would befall me; (and indeed he bath fatisfied me now of the particulars.)

8. What men or other creatures thofe were that Mr.I^. did [hear boaft of me tothedifparas^eracntof bothUniverfities] J cannot con/edure. Butthis J will promife Mr.I^. that how little foever J have received from the Univerfities , they fhallhave my frequent andearneft prayers to God, and my beft endeavours with men, for their Profpcrity. The Lord purge them from Pride, Senfuality, Man-pleafin^andSelf-feeking, andcaufc them humbly to iludy Chrill above all, and zealoufly to lay out themfelves for his Glory, and with confiJcratc, rcfolved Self-denial and Uivefervcdnefs, wholly to refign themfelves to his fcrvicc , and make it their main bufinefst9 win fouls tothat true felicity which they have firft caftcd of themfelves} and tbca J Hiould not Co much fear any policy or power oi their Enemies.

9' And for Mr.I^'sconcluJing Poetical injunftion ; J heartily confcfs my ut" ter unworthinefs to beannumeratcdco the Ambairadours of the Lord Jefus, or ever to have been permitted to fpealc in his Name j much more with any fuch fuc-ccfs and encouragement as he hath voucbfafed me : And the Lord forbid that ever

I fhouli]

I (hould be fo arroganr, as to equal ray fclf with the Worthies of the Church, much leffc toenvy the honour ot their preheminence. Yet in regard of the Churches prefentneceflitieSj I dare not give over, for allray imperfedions. Though 1 have ever been of a fpirit tooeafiiy diicouraged , and have many a time been under JoHiWs temptation, and ready to fay as ^crcwy, Iwilljpeak no more in hk Namci yet God hath fofuited his providences to my infirmities and neceflities, a$ not only to cure my backwardneifcand defpondency, but alio to convince mc ot theplcafantnefsof his work, I am allured that it was the Lord that lent me into his Vineyard, and without him none fhall foice me out. He that gave me fewer Talents then others, will exped but an anfwerable improvement at my hands; but be they never fo fmall, Idaic not hide them. He that calleth fot twomites will accept them : Hedefpifechnot theday of fmallthings. Hcfome-time rcvealeth that to babes which he hidcth from the wife and prudent: For the wifdomeof the world is foolilhncfs with God, and the fooli111nefs of God is wi-fcr then men ; and no flcfli ftiall Glory in his light. How many learned men have loft the main end of their Learning, and engaged God fo farre againil them, as to lay both them and their honour in the duft, becaufe they would not devote ic more faithfully to his fcrvice ! The Lord grant that I may fo ufe the fmall abilities that I have, that I be not condemned as an unprofitable and unfaithfull fcrvant 5 and then 1 do not fear being condemned for their fmalnefs. There are many learneder men then Mr.I^> in hell, and many more unlearned then I in heaven.

But (hould I deny my felf to be Vile againft the Accufations of Mr.I(. when I daily confefs my Icif Vile to God, I /hould but prove the hypocrilic of my prayers. And therefore Difpute for Reputation that will for mc. When I am tempted to fuch a work by Accufers, or by my owp heart, I defire God to favc me from the Temptation. He that works principillv.fof'himfelf, muilbchis own Pay-

mafter. '^T?

■>•.>»'■■

§. 67. Af r.K. T^He fumme ofatl thM huh been hitherto (aid in thit T>iragraph,u ti?«,T"fei« t$ ^^'fttfication there if required a tnvfient aH oj iQeds, or the working of Fsitb in our heart: which Jljews, Thit Men Gods T)ecree te ^uQijflc m hive much in it thit lotfisfo well like^uiiificatien, that it rnaj/be cdUed fo without "Blifpbemjf, yet that indeed ^uftt/ication is in time, not from Eternity: And it appears farther thm: That ^ufftf cation being the AbfUving tufrom our fins, and the tAccepting k% as righteous, al' bcit God the Father Decreed it, the Se» Purchased it, a grant of it were made, and «»» der Sesl j jet tillit be pleaded there U no Pardoning j a/s appeirshy comparing Gods par-ion with that of Princes, whttk is not of FAiie till Pleaded, and not pleaded till after the ^ury hith found the Offendor Guilty: (othk-^ufiification which begins at our Believing in foro Confcientix, a more private Seffions is again made more Tublidi in Heaven at our death, and this at Gods Bar before Angels and Saints deceafed j and yet more publtck before all the world at the General judgement. This pardon wot Purcbafed, Refolved,or Jffued out. Scaled, Received, T leaded atfirjj: bur'ni new fins are committed we plead tt again, and fo may be [aid to be particularly fujiificd from p-irticular fins, loties quocies, but alwajcs by virtue of our General Pardon,

§. 67.

R.B.\ 7C 7E arenow paft the End, and yet new to begin. If in this Rccol-V V Icdion he had not Humbled on a woid or twoj that come tiom the Core of his Eirour, 1 Ihould fcarce have underltood any of his minde about the Controvei fie in hand, fave only Ncgatirely, and that he is agaiiill Me. And yec it is no: mach that I candifcernof it. Among all the Dillcrtcrsot all beds :hac ever 1 had to do with, that pretended to Learning, I have feldomc met with the like flippcry dealing, as in Mr-Ii^ who pretending to make fomc notable difcovery of the Truth,did fo lole himfelf inihe eager purfute of a contemptible Adverfary, that he feems to have quite forgo: his undertaking, and leave his errand behindc feim. But to deal truly, it is my opinion, that though theman were drawn to engage himfelf, yet when he had emptied his bilious ftomack , he found his work, done, and therefore was willing to drop afleep when he fhould have performed his Promifc. He doth over and oyer again promile us to open to us wt'/it U the TrM'^ fienff unifying AB, yeaj^i^.ij^. to jfjcj^ FunHusUy to iti and when all's done, the bi;lincfs is fo farre undone, that for my part, 1 cannot certainly tell yet whether he once name it, or what his opinion about it is. Fag. 1^1, He faith [by Giving us taith, he Juftifies us, as (hall be fliewcd anon, he giving us that which is our Inftrumcncj whereby we receive the Righteoufnefsof ChrilV] That [anon] is not yet come ; for 1 finde no fuller difcovery of his minde , but only a little glance in this RccoUeftion, wherewith he doth conclude. In thole former words he feems to make the Immediate Juttifying ad; to be the Giving of Faith j and yet contiadids it in the next words > for that Faith he makes to be Given,thac it may be our Inltrument of Receiving. Now

I. We are enquiring after Gods aft, and not mans Inftrument. z. VVeare enquiring after the Immediate eficding Ad, and not a Receiving, which is no cfFcding.

Let us fee whether thefc words under confideration will any better difcover his fenfe.

i! He faith [that to Juftificaiien there is required a Tranficnt Aft of Godsj or the working of faith in our heart] This isall thetranlient Aft 1 can learn he intends from firfl to lalt. But though before he faid [by Giving us faith, he jtiftifies uj] yet here he thought it fafer to fpeak more ambiguoully, and onely iaithj that [this is required to J uftitication.] But there are many things required to it, bcfides that Aft whicli doth immediately EfFeft it: Antecedents, Conditions, the Caufes of thofe Conditions, are all Required to it j when yet none of them i$t/?e juftifying Aft. But if indeed he do mean that FiVicm dare, is Jm-ftifiure, 1 will fpeak to that anon. Next he faith, that [Gods Decree to julti-he, looks well like Juftification] but that is not it. Next he faith, that [Ju-llification is the Abfolving us from our fins, and Accepting us as Righteous] that he may come to flicw us what is not, and what iSj the Abfolving and Accepting Aft. And firft again he cxcludti'Decreeing from being the Aft enquired after: then he excludes Chriits Purchafe j then be excludes the Grant made and fealcd : then he faith [Till it be pleaded there is no pardoning, as appears by comparing Gods pardon with that of Princes.] Perhaps then lie mean* that [Pleading] is Pardoning, or the juiUfying Aft. No, not fo neither : For he only faith, that tilli: be Pleaded, there is no Pardoning] which plaitly cxpreflech. That pleading

!ng is but a prcrcqulfite Condition, the want whereof fufpendeth the ad of Par-<lon, but is not the Pardoning aft it felf. In the Conclufion he gives us a little more light to fee part of his meaning, where he faith [fo this Jultification which begins at our Believing w/oro^o»/'«eMrf>, a more private Seffions, is again made more publick in Heaven at our death, and this at Gods Bar before Angels, (^c-1 Here herds us more then yet I could gather from him, in quo foro juftifcamur fde, that it is but in foro Confci cutis, a more private Seflions, lo that we are left to fearch for the jultiiying Aft > which though he vouchfafe not exprefly to mention , yet wemay poflibly conjefturcat by this iaftpafiage. If the Reader would fee the whole myliery which is thus darkly lapt up, as being fomcwhat afraid of the light, as far es I can gather, it is thi$.

Mr.I(,. being of the Antinomian faith, That Remiflion and Juftification arc Immanent Afts, and from Eternity (ani confequently not purchal'ed by Chriits bloud) and that Jultification by faith, which the Scripture fpeaks of, is only Juftification ;w/oro tow/<:/cnf/««, or the apprehenfion of the former; he thought, in thefe times, when Antinomianifm haih an ill favour with the beft, that it is the wifefl way to appropriate the name of Remiirion and JalUfication by faith ^ in this life) to this Juftification JK/ore Co«/"oe«rw, and to give to the Immanent E-ternal Aft, the defcripcion without the name. And therefore he thought it fitteil to fay, that [Godsdecreeing to Remit our fins, carries in it a Remiflion of them tantamount} for who (hall charge them on us, where God decrees to Remit them ?] F4g.i}8. That [Gods Decree to paile the tranfient Aft of jufti-fying, carries in it as much as concerns Gods Remiflion of fins, and Acceptance of us as Righteous.] But the change that is made in time by the tranfient Aft, is in our Feeling or Knowledge, and therefore he faith, that when we fay [Now a man is juftified in Gods fight] it [fignifies only a teftimony given by God, whereby he makes us know that we are juftified before God, or in his fight] and that [in God it fignifies, A making us to fee : and we are faid to be juftified in his fight, when he makes it, as it were evident to our fight, that we are juftified] p. 138. (Here before he was aware, he gives it the name of juftification before wc lee it.) Now being Refolved to appropriate the name of Remiflion and luftifi-cation (in this life) to that which is/»/oro CoH/cjewt;^, he is hard put to it, to deliver his meaning of the tranfient juftifying Aft, without opening the rtiame of his opinion. And therefore fometimes he faitbjit is the Giving of faith to be our Inftrumcnt : Sometime that this faith is neceflary to it: but concludes, that it is i» jero Qonfcientix, a private Seflions, that we are juftified before (teath ; So that the Summeisthis: That luftification, and Remiflion, and Acceptation do conllft in our Confcience's apprehenfion or feeling of that which God did from Eternity (which muft not be called Remiflion, but Tantamount RemiflTion:) and becaufc Confciencecannot know or feel this, but by Believing , and becaufe we cannot Believe till God give us the Grace of faith, therefore God juftifics or pardons us by Giving us that Grace ; that is, We by Believing or being Confciousof our Eternal Acceptance, do immediately juftifie and forgive our fclves j but mediately God forgivcth and juftifieth us by Cat-fiiig us to Believe, and Caufing our Con-fciences tojuftifie us immediately.

I will not fay, that I am certain I hare hi: of Mr.L^'s mlnde in this explication* for who can be certain in fuch a mift ? And therefore I leave every Reader that thinks I miftakeitjto gather it bit:er,if he can.

What ever it is, I am fure he oft contradifts himfelf. He that here tels us it is m

U I foro

Cr4o3

foroConfdCHtU, and talkt before of evidencing it to our fdvcs, doth fay P^. 135. l.uU. [WhciccTcr there is a Moral, i.e. a Legal change, there is atranfient a^ and this being in jnftifica:ion,a tranltent ad is nccefl'arily required to this chan^3 Now a mcer Le^al ch3ni;e is dcjure, and not in the feeling ot CanlcicBCc •• and it i« in JSTO nnllo acJuilitcr, fci virtusltter tn foro divino, it being iciu lUiia LcgU qua ejl N.ormi'fuiicii: zndtht^c(orc nni tn foro Confcientia, vcl aliquoprivito. Andific bcconfcit to bea Moral, ic. a Let;al change, what man ices not that it muft be a chin*c per Legem f ic. vovam, remedtautem, or per aHum morakmi Nay, mark how in the very words of tbi> Concluljon, he yields the Caufc and doth not lee it. He confelTeth that wc arc pardoned as Oftendors are by a Prince's pardon, which is not of Value till pleaded. Now let any man of underltanding judge, whether the Princes Pardon Gianted and Sealed, be not the immediate, efficient Gaufeof this Delinquents abfolution or paflSvc pardon, when he doth plead ic; And whO" thcr it be not fii ft a ^w impmititit that is hereby G'ven him, which (whatever is-here faid') is of Value upon the Accepting, before the pleading, though the pleading is affo neceffary to ftop judgement, or prevent Execution, and fo to have the full benefit. And what though the Pardon Granted and Sealed be not Effedual till Accepted or Pleaded ? Doth it follow, that it is not the immediate Caufe afterwards ? Let it not feep.i unmannerly if I fpcak my thoughts 5 that all this pro-cfeck from this Learned mans great miftake or inconfideratenefs of the Nature of Laws and their Aftions, and of the nature and ufc of Conditians, whole nos-pcr-formance doth fufpend the a^ftion of the Law or Grant, (becauic the Will of the Legiflatw or Donor was, that it fliould fo bc)but the performance doth not cauic itsaftion, much lefsimmediatly caufe the Effed ; unlefs there be fomethinginic that may work as a procatarckcick efficient Caufe, by way of Merit, or the like, over and above its mecr Office of a Condition. If a man by his Teftamcnt leave his Son a thoufand pound per Annum on Condition that he do voluntaily Regiftcr his Thankful Acceptance of it: It is not the performance of this Condition that doth at all caufally conftitute the "^u ad rem legdUm, or conferrc Dcbiium,oi Vomrci though thcriOM-perforraance may fufpend the Collation of Right : but it is the Teftamcnt that doth immediately conftitute this Right, when the fufpenfion is removed, which before it did not, bccaufe the Teftator would not have it fo. Grotiu* in Ca^and.art.^.p.iSo. Tromijfi enim ca V.s ut Conditioncm implenti ^m (onfcrAt.ViL ie'fHr.'BcUi.l.i.c.i.%.'^.(3'l.i.c.ii.%.\30'c.\hhtn\x. wereirue,as M.I^.hcrcalfiimi-eth, that it is at this private Seflions:n/orotftfn/i;/m/<c, that wc are lirft juftified on our Believing, ijien the immediate juftifyjng Ad (which Mr.I^.hath talked to oft of) can be no other then cither our own Apprehenlion, or belief that we are Pardoned and Righteous, or fome fuch like Apprehenfion or Conclufton of our own hearts. For if it be inforoConfcienttje, it muft be By Conscience as the Agenr, that is. By the underftandings Concluding us to be what we arc. But this both fuppofeth us to be Pardoned and Righteous before (for the Being of a thing go-eth before the true Knowledge that it is in Being : None can be truly Conlciou$ ©f a Righteoufnefs or Pardon which he hath not:) and alfo it makes us to pardon and juftifieour fclves ; and thetranfiem juftifyina, Ad of God, fo long enquired after, fhould be only Gods cooperating with ui in our Believing, or Caufing us to Believe, Yea rather, the Ad of juftifying faith (which is the Acceptance of an offered Chrift and Lrfe, i^fo/;.5.11,11.) goes before this Ad now mcntioa* ed, and this is but AfTurance or a Confcioufnefs of the State that by Believing we SDre in. Let any man that is willing to know the criub j but examine every Text

of Scripture that fpeak of Juftification bv faith,' and he may eafily fee that they do not (no not one of ahem) fpeak of Juftification in foro Confiiencix, or of any con-fcioufnefs of our Righteoufnefs, biu of Juftification before God. ■ And that .Gods giving faith is not the immediate juiHfying ad, appears I. From the very name, [To give faith] is one thing, and [to juftifie] is another, i. From the real difference. Faith is given by a Phyfical ad imme-diatly : Righteoufnefs, immediatly by a Legal or Moral aft. Faith is a real Quality (in the habit) or Aft : Righteoufnefs is a Relation, and is immediatly by a meer Refultancy. Nay the Tcry matter or meritorious caufe of the Righteoufnefs now inqueftion, is not faith, but Chrifts fatisfaftion and merits. The KrwJJiw therefore of the juftifying aft ( ) fpeak now of our conftitutive Juftification) is Righteoufnefs, a Relation : but the termims of Gods aft in giving Faith, is the Faith fo given. The Objeft alfo of the juftifying aft, and the Subjeft ©f Juftification, is crcdtns, a man already Believing: but the objeft of that aft which giveth faith, is an Unbeliever. ^. Is not this Hat Popery ? to make Juftification to lye in a real change, and not a relative J* and fo to make it the fame with Vocation, Converlion, Regeneration, or Sanftification ? Whereas the holy Ghoft faith, \_U'hbm hccalied. them /?c jM/f//fci, Rom.8.30.] For to give faith is Vocation ( as thofe Divines fay, that make faith to go before other graces in habit and aft:) or it is Vocation, Regeneration and Sanftification, as Mr. Pemble thinks, who fuppofetb all infufed in uno fcmive. So that it Fidem darCt and Jtt/ti^(jrebeallone, then to Juftifie and to CallorSanftifie is all one.

1 bad once thought to have heaped up divers Arguments here in the condufion on thefe two laft points, i. Toprove that our firft Juftification by faith, which Scripture fpeaks of, is not in foro confcicncia. i. To prove that [to give faiih] is not the proper or immediate juftifying aft of God. But 1 (hall forbear 1. Be-caufe Mr. I^. gives me fo little invitation to it, feeing he gives but a few dark hints of hisswn minde. i. In that I finde upon review that almoft all this paper is imavoidably taken up with a meer defence of my words againft his injury, and he hathnotgivenme occafion for many further profitable explications or difputes: and therefore I will referve thefe for a fitter plac^. j. Becaufe I have larglier already Argued againft both thefe in private anfwers to the Animadverfions ef learned Friends: and though thofe are not for publique view, yet I have a back-wardnefs to the doing of one thing fo oft. 4. Becaufe this little that I have here faid, feems enough, and proportionable to his brevity which doth occafion it.

This one thing feems oeceflary, in the Conclufion, that I adde a few Reafons to prove that it is in Ltw-fenfe that we arc fiift juftified by faith, and fo thac the Mor al Aft of the Law is the immediate juftifying aft ( and confcquently the enafting of that Law of gracf, or granting that Deed cf gift, is the next foregoing efficient aft.) There are Reafons enough in my Aphorilmes, but Mr.I^* thought it cafieft to take no notice of them, Arg. I, A tcrmjno. The thing that is given by Reraiffisn is ^ut id Impunitatem: But h is only by LawsjContrafts, Deeds of gift, or the like Moral a ft s, that Right is immediatly cenveyed ; Therefore it is by tiefe immediatly that we arc forgiven : (andfo juftified Conjiituttvi.)

I fuppofe it will not be denied that Remiflionis a Giving ? ^ui (ondtvat/Dtnit. So Lawyers generally fay of Remitting a wrong, and it will hold in cafe of crimes, cfptcially in our cafe, ogainft God. Fraspfut'de ReiimiMKcipub.Cbrili. part.?'

w 5 n.6.

V.6.T>ifp. 17.W.9J. ^844. Talih, Kcmittere injurUm tft DoHire, O* Dwdre efi jiUire fuwn.

Arg.2. A milo remote, contnrio, (^ Tcrmino a quo. The Diffo!u:ion of a Legal obligation, mull be by a Moral ad of the Refior, of the lame kindc with the obliging ad. Bul Remiflion of fin is a Diiiolution of fuch an Obligation. TheretorCiCiT'C'

The mijor is proved by thii common maxime, Eodcm modo di^olvitur ohligitio, quo contriihitur. The»J/««r is proved by the true definition of Pardon ; Which is in criminals. The Ad of a Redor dillolving an Obligation to punilhrncnt. Ketaijfu) €liprcx:md ReitM Rcmijfio j remotiut Pena .- Rutut eji Obligitioid ^gnam. Arg. 3. Abojicio Legit. If it bctheufeof the Law to be ^l^ormi 'fudkii, then he that is juftificd per fententiam "fudtcit, mull be fiiit jultihcd in Law : But the Antecedent is true: Therefore, (^c.

When 1 fay [ Jollified in Law] I do not mean [by the Law] ftridly taken as moil do, for one only 5'pc(;jw of Law : But I mean [ by Law] in general, as ^t is truly defined to be Qon^hutivi 'Determtnatio KeSiork dc Dcbito. yel fignum yoUintitis Rc^criiT>cbitumCon(iituens. For many Lawyers do call only writ:en and Handing Laws, by the name of Laws, and do exclude vcrball precepts of a Redor: In this limited fenfc, as it is taken for [Law by to ExcellcncyJ 1 do not HOW ufe it.

Arg .4. Attituri Scntentia. Declarative fentential Juftification or Pardon, prcfuppofeth Juftification -Conilitutive. Therefore Juft.fication Confticotivc goes before fentential Juftification.

Herelfuppofe i. That Conftltutive is per Ltgem, and not per '^enternkm, which is paft difpute. i. That it is by faith (as the condition) that we arc juftified ^en/fimt/W, it being only Believers that are Movally qualified to be fit ifubjeds for this Jutf ification, and whom alone the new Law pronounceth Righteous, and to whom alone it efFedually giveth Chrill and Life. The A'lteccdenc is plain, in that the Judge mull fentence a man to be as he is, and according to hisCaufe. Amanmufl: be jull, before he ;ullly be pronounced Jull. He that condemneth the Righteous, and he that }ullifieth the wicked, they both a e abomination to the Lord, Trov. 17-« f • He that faith to the vfidied. Thou Art Rtghteom, himfhiUhlitions curfe, people fi)iU abhorre him, Pcov. 14.»4. So that whether the fentence be in confcience or Heaven, it muft prefuppofe Juftification Conilitutive.

Arg. J. A ttitun fiie'i ^ujlificantjs. Ifthe na:ureof that ad of faith which juftifieth, be only fuch as may be the condition of the Laws confticutive Juftification, and not fuch as may be the Inftrumcnt of fentencing us Juil, then Juftification by faith (which Scripture mentioneth To oft) is Juftification in Law fenfe, and not Sentential: But the Antecedent is true j as is proved from the Ad, which I have elfewhere proved to be [the Accepting of an offered Chrift and Life] (including Alfenc ) and no: the Aatinomian, fpecial Belief that we are pardoned , or a pcrfwa* fion of Gods fpecial Love to us, or a confcioufncfi of our Ri^htcoufnefs, or AlTurance of it, which are faid to juftifie fententially inforo Qonfctenttx.

Arg.6. A commani confenfu, ^ ufu loquendi. * It is the cammon judgement of men to think, and comman cuftom to fayi

that

CI433

that [A King pardoneth by his written, oi verbal Pardon, as his Inftrumem^ aHdtodittinguifli l^ulliJicatiovcmLcgis^ A Juftifiatme ^udicit, the former be-in" prefuppoled ; ihtreiore wt murt 00 lo here, unlefs any Ipecial reafon can be brought againft it; For Gods Law hath the common nature of a Law, and his Judgement the common nature of judgement.

To prove the Antecedent I need but to appeal to the common ufe of men ac-tjuaifitcd with Legal and Judicial affairs. Yea even Mr, I^. himfelf cannot for-kear acknowledging it: Yeabefides the foremencioned acknowledgements, he is ftrangely guided to conclude with it, as the very laft word of his Digrtffion, a-gainime [We may be faid to be particularly juftififd from particular lins ttiiet quotics, but alwaies by vertue of our general parJon.] This general pardon is that which God iffued out and fealed as he faith, which becoming effedual when ve-ceived.and pleaded, doth by its virtue juftifie us from particular iins : that isj by its moral or civil adion.

^fg'7' When tlie Scripture fo oftdcnicth Juflificaticn by the Law, it plainly implicth that there is fucb a thing rnrfl'ttOT nuturu, as Juftjfication by a Law, and that it is no improper unfit fpeech : For elfe God would not ufe it, Ga/.J. 4. & 3.11. Yea it oppofeth Juftjfication by grace in Chiift, to Juftification by the Law^y^S.ij.Jp- ^y him aU that believe arc juftifcd from all things fromvehich they teuldnotbe jujt'fedbji the Law ofMefesi Where note the oppolition that [by Chrift and Grace] is oppofed to [by works] and fo [by the Law of Chrift and Grace] is oppofed to [ by the Law of Af0/0 and Works.] That therefore is affirmed of the Law of Grace, which is denied of the Law of Works : vi^. to jufti-fie. And the reafon why the Law of Works could not juliific, was for that it was weak through the fieAi, and not that it was an a&ion or e&d difagreeable to the nature of a Law.

Many other adions of Law to the fame purpofe, I recited out of fgveral Scriptures, in my Aphorifmcs,prfg,i78,179. which I will .not trouble the Reader to repeat.

§. 68.

ANd thus I have done that ungratctull work which Mi-!(,. was pleafed by Digrcfling to put me upon ; which I confefs appears not lovely to me on the review. For I finde though I have eafily born the charges of this Learned man, yet it is no very ufefuil work to the Reader that lie hath here called me to j aiui. 1 thought it not fit te so beyond my call. In the fiiil part 1 have little 10 do, but to obtrude his confidence, and to flicw that he meerly kigwcd me hisadver-fary, forgetting that oiieveca, ViStoria fineadverfarto brcvu eft latu : In the reft I have not much to do, but to open the vanity and fallacy of many words, and :o ftiew what a windy Triumph it is which folicweth fuch a windy Oppofuion^ and what his Reader owcth him, v, ho doih importareverba ($" fonuTti pro mcmlui .• And what can the Reader gain alfo by fuch a dilccvcry. 1 finde aifo, that though I rcfolved to forbear allhatfh language when 1 bcgua, that 1 have not fatiilud my fclf in the performance. For when I came to his ioeft iniurious wcrds, 1 could not tellhow toanlwer them but by ihcwing plainly what thty arc, and calling a Spade, a Spade; which cannot be done in fmccth and pkafing words j and I finde that I have ufed more Ironies thcr 1 dare approve cf. My rei'oluticn therefore iSj to ftifle this woik till 1 have a call to pt.blifliitj ar^ then toccirmit it to

fome

Ci443

fome moderate hand, lo correft all tha: fhall fecm too untnannerly. For though I think I have fpoken nothing but what Mr. B^. ou^ht to hear, yet I doubt whether it be not more then was fit for mc to I'peak. It is my purpofe therefore to deal wirh him no more, left I be drawn again to the fame inconvenience. For I finde I cannot Reply to fuch a man in fuch tcrmcs as I do to the Moderate and Candidc. Till his breath be Tweeter or founder I think it fafeft to fland further from him. When he difjorgeth his ftomack on mej I have not the skill of iha-king it oft Co mannerly, and cleanling my I'elf without his difgrace, as I could \vi(h I had. And if a man Itirre them not very tenderly, Tlus fatent(Icrcoramots. I finde alio that it is a very hard thing againft the guilty to fpeak both truly and pleafingly : For ncmini bUniitur VeritiS : and I have a natural inclination to fpeak nakedly and plainly j which being feconded with fome degree of opinion, ihac quiloquitur plane, loquitur fjni, may quickly occalion me to ftep too farre. But the principal caufe is, that! am truly aweary of the Warres of Divines: Many an opportunity and importunity have I put by, as finding here alfo, that Impendit hcUi funtprxmik mijorxt and efpecia'ly in this civil uncivil Warreof Brethren, the gainer ufually loleth : unlefs men could be brought to deal more with the AfiKer, and lefs with iVorii and CMcn. Contentions are both the Daughter and the Mother of Pride. They arc (as foot) the fuel of that flame that caufed them. If the contender be overcome, he glorieth not as a Chriflian in the Vidory of Truth, bu: repineth as a man at his own overthrow J and pro plumek noxk plumbtf irax gerit: If he feem to conquer/«/»fm7Mer/^it, and it doth pufl him up, and fo in-crcafe his vice, and hallen his ruine; for

Vjndicitt elatox juflaruinagndut. However it fcts men ufually on two eager a ftudying for their own Reputation f which is the way that god refolveth (hall ruine it: For he that will be great muft be the fervant of all, and he that will be wife muft become a fool, and he that will fave his honour muft lofe it: qui propsgdt nomen, perdit nomen. My foul ta> fteth an admirable fwcetncfi in Peace : The Churches Peace, the Concord of Brethren is ray daily ftudy, prayer and endeayour j which O that I were able any right way to promote i What I do that way, I do with pleafure: my greatell 2.eal doth carry me to it. But what I do in way of Controverfie, yea even when neceflitated, fothat I dare not forbear, leaft I (hould betray or wrong the Truth, yet is it grievous and ongratefull to mc : I have little pleafuce in it. I am refol-ved therefore to draw back from this work, as much as I finde confiftent with my Fidelity to the Truth of Chrift j and to do nothing in it till I am fatisfied of a Call that muft notberefifted. And when I follow God, I may fafely commit to him my Way and Labours: fo: I have found that he draweth forth nothing, which he knows not how to ufc for good. And the more any Brother is perfwaded that I tranfgrefs my bounds in writing too (harply, I inticat him the more to pray for the pardon of my fault, and the more watchfully to (hun phe like himfelf j and to joyn with me, and all the Churches friends, in daily and importunate requefts to God, that he would guideour feet into the way of Truth and Peace ; even of that Truth, which lying between excreams, is the only way to ftcdfaft Peace} and of that PcacCj which is the Means and End of Truth. Amen.

Kedermhjler, Auguft i'' 1653°.

'Postscript. Chnfiian\ Have been wilJing to hope diac my work of this kinde, and Reddert Iwiih this kinde .of mexi, wasalroofl at an end, and that God would in mercy grant me fome little vacancy for more profitable labors fofpr aft icall Theology)which I have longaffed:ed,and earneilly defired an opportunity to perform : But the unccfiant ailaults of contentious men do make me begin to lay afide fuch hopes;TIie enemy of truth is too fubtlc for me; It s like be doth conjcdure at the fliortnefs ofmy time, and therefore contriveth to force me upon other works tillmy glaffe is run. I have long forcfeen his plot, and yet I am not fibletodifappointhim : To quiet thefpiritsof the contentious is beyond my power; To bear in filence their Reproaches of my felf, and to fpend but little time or none in vindicating of any Intereit of mine own, this I have purpofed and promifed to my Brethren. But when 1 fee apparently that it is an intereft higher then mine that is aflaulted, and that Gods Truth and the fouls of men do command my endeavours for their defence, I have no power to forbear. Since the Printing of this Book, there is come to my hands a fecond Volume of M'^ G. Kcndals againft M'^ John Goodwin on the point of pcrfeverance; wherein he hath affaulted my Direclions for Peace of CcnfcU^f^ in a large Preface; and my Book of Rcft^ in a Digreffion ; Had he fallen on my jiphorlfmes again, I think I ftiouid have filentiy yeeided them up as a facrificeto his fcornjBut thofe other Pradicall Writings,! fup-pofe it my duty juftly to defend, i. Becaufe I know it is the Serpents malicious defign to make my Labours unprofitable to the Church . And feeing God in great mercy hath fatisfied me by experience, that how weak focver, they have been hitherto fuccefsfuli, 1 take it for no proud over, valuing them, but for a judgement upon experience, to conclude that it will be fome wrong to the Church of God and louls of men if I filentiy give way to this ferpentine defign. 2.1 have heard fuch Jealoufies and terrible accufations fprcad abroad by this fort of Divines againft my Writings, and efpecially my Directions for Peace, as caufcd me much to admire what the caule of the offence (hould be. Never could I hear but one particular accufationof it, which is the fliamelefle falfhood, that I was againft the dodrine of the Saivts Per* feverance ; to which I annexed an Apology to the fecond Edition. But Ifounditwasfurtherbuz'd into the heads of the people, that there were many other dangerous errors in it; But all was in generals, and I could never learn any of the particulars till now : Nay the people that were deterred from reading it,knevv none of the particulars them-felves, but took on truft from jealous fame that fuch there were. And I learned, that there is among fome Brethren of this/lrain,a Combina-

don, by ralfing fuch reports to dctcrrc the people from the reading of my writings.I confefs,upon all this I was not niuch forry for the event, that M' K- had in this book brought forth his acciifations,that at laft I mightknow my errors that I could never hear of beforc,& that 1 was at laft put into a capacity of making my defence; when if it had not been for this man I might have ftill been judged crroneous,(S«: neither I nor thofe that believed and reported it, could with all our diligence have learned "^herein'^ I under Hand that the fame fpirit doth fometime carry this learned man into the Pulpit,and there inftigate him to the hke etn-ploiment .wherewith he once tickled or netlcd the ears of the Auditory SitAldermatti-urj.Truly I never thought my namc,or defcription,wor-thy to be brought into a Pulpit, though in a way of oppofition. I thought none had thus over-honoured me but M"^ Tombs, nor durft I think my name capable of being the matter of fo honorable a triumj;rfi toM'^iC.as by the diligence he ufeth for a vidory he feemeth to cxped. But feeing he hath fo much advantage of the ground(and foratimc the winde,though not the Sun) when he manfully preacheth againft me at a hundred miles diftancejl muft give him the better there,and take him when he comes within my reach. And though I (hall be as be as brief as I can,yet fo much I intend,if God vouchfafe me time and ability, as (hall (hew you reafon to pity this Learned man,that ever his corruptions (hould lay him open to the preralency of thofe temptations which have ingaged him in fo unhappy a dehgn as to ferve the enemy of truth in employing his excellent parts in falle accufing and un juft defaming his brother that would fain live in peace,endeavouring to deprive mens fouls of the benefit of his labors,and that in his mercenary ferving the lufts of another,for a little vain-glory of applaufc he (hould fo wound his Reputation with the fobcr and godly, and make fuch work for an accufing confcience, as he hath once and again done; vea, that he (hould ftill fo much negled: the g^"^^ Command.as to become M"" Ejres fecond,and WCrandons third. And for thole Reverend Brethren,who have(from feveral parts) folicited me to forbear further Controverfal debates, left I be deprived of opportunity for more profitable works (whereto they importune me ) I profefs to them that I take it for the greateft afflidion of my life, thati amnecefiitated to this defenfive controverfal way of writing, & moft gladly would I be at pcace,if men would give me leave; and if they will but convince me,that I may lawfully be filent where the Truth of God,the fuccefs of all my former la-bors,and the good of men is fo nearly concerned, I fliall refolve on fi-ience; (For my own intereft I hope I can fubjed it toChrifts j ) But till theni muft crave their pardon, yea, and their compallion of mc,who ;im to my great trouble detained from a more pleafing kinde of work. Maj zi. 1654.

REader, To prevent the mifi^ike of ntyf€nfe,Ideftrethee to correEt thefe faults before thou rcAdefi ; mAnjfmaller there are which may he eaftly difcerned.

Errata in the Epiftic to C. G. whalj,

PAge 4. line 2j. read«ri>wfcufcfwi. l.pevuU- r. yourfelf. p.5.1. J^.for thtirt.jowr p.l. 1,7. iot miefervcdljf r. mre(ervcdljf.

Againft B/ake. Pag. 1.1.? i.for T. r. i.e. l.j.for (,'or. v. S-tn. p.6.1.45. for our faitb r. oneftitb- p.7. 1. 50, for former r, formall. p. i j. I.3 3. for recipiutur r. rectpitur. I.3 8. r. fo receivctb. p.}8. l.xz. r.wencoMnw^ar. p.46. l.i 1, iox fn. r. fo. p.6z. I.15. ioxmnnr. Anunregene-r*tcntan. p.85 {.^.iovfujtifuttonvjmpsfition or Inftitution. p.89.1 i j.r, cx/)c^ or</cr. p.91.1.33. r.njcfftivc p.91.1.14. for^MWr. pHr4 and ior fubtonditiotis r. fubconditione. p.97.1. It. r. though ;■» wdf.p«99.1.25. r. The^pojilejpcaliing. p. 100. l.jz. (orpmicw Urr.peculiar, p.104. \.ii. v.butfoceme. p. 117 x-yourfclf. p.118. l.)6.r. »ew<iB/. p.i jo. 1.41. blot out w.p.i J?. \.io.(otdidvigutf)v. dimmjh.p. 134.1.41. blot euc i^4f. p.136.1.5. for^.r. jM4t«er. 1.6. for«ft«r. ^«.p.i j8.1.2. foi/'w/r.y?<itc. p. 145. Un.r.f"/ ^I^o/fj Gtn.2.

Againft M"- K. Pag.4.1'lJ. r.j^mtw/. p.^.l.j I. x.-ncmini. p.19.1. antepenult, r. bcfouUed. p.iS. l.jo. forw'fojr. wroj. p 31.1.42. forifjcr. j/;c»i. p. $1. 1.J4 iox new r. enough, p.97. 1,45. r. ew beleevivg. p. loj. I.17. for gncejuU x. gratcfuU. p. 110.1. 31. r.;«i:/«»2, p. iM. [.9. X. whither.T^. iii.l.ij.r.c^acwifj.p.i i}.i.6.for o«/y r. w/;oi/;'. I.24. r, Of »ti»proi'Cj.p.i43.1.37. fox obtrude X ebtunde.

In the Epiftle before that againft L. Colvin.

Pas. 3.1.24. for/cur. x.beAr. ibid Prxf.Apol. p.3.1.18. for mecr r. »CCA p.4.1.13. r. reverfus. In the Contents p. 3.1.6. for Ttccree r. 'Degree.

Againft L. C.

P.194.1.3. r. before both. p. 224 1 2. r. worl^? and Difpojltio. p.229.1.i8. r. jieerly, p. 137. 1. 21. iox After you X. ofter thin p.i^o. \. 14. iox bccaufe x.btfiJes- p. 25 j. I.38.*' ♦orjiwr./oni. p.257 I i^. for fermerty x.jormil'y. p. 281,1.13. ioiCavell r. Ravell. 0.194.1.13. for Keldtivc r.decUrative. p.301.1 . 6. r. intinlum. P.3C9. l.antcpcn. for Horv X. Note, p.3 lo-1 ult. iox five de merito x. fine dcmeriio. p.3 i/j.. 1. 14. r. an inilrU" mcnt. p, 316.1.ult. x.falvo.

Againft Crandon.

Pdg. I 2. I36. for partiesX.partes, p.i 5.1.28. for cndlcjfex.ended, p.28 1.2.for Now r.'T^or, p. 3 5.1.6. for wfecrcjwr. wi^o«t.p.37.1.i4 i\^x jolid i.fol'd. p.5 5. [.&. iox that i.tbe. 1.14. r. obtrude.

WHatfoeverhathercciped main thefe Writings that is againft Meeknefle, Peace, and Brotherly Love, let it be all unfaid, and hereby revoked, and I defire the pardon ot it from God and Man.

Richard Baxti r. F. I N IS.

^chard Baxters

CONF VTATION

DISSERTATION

For the Juflification of Infidels:

Written by Ludiomaus Qolvinm ^

alias Ludoruicus Molm^uSy Dr. of Phyfick

and Hiftory-ProfcfTor in Oxford, i^tinft his Brother Cjrtu MoUmms.

Heb. 11.^,

But rff'ithout f*ifff it is impojjibletypleafe God.

Joh. J. i6^i7, i8.

For God fo loved the wovld that be gave his only begotten Sfn, that rvhofteve/- beli^veA in hirffy (houid not feri(h but have Everlaftmg Life.

Fdr God fent not hit Son into the world , toctndemnthevpoYldfbutthttthe world through hm might be f»vcd. Hethat belicvetb on him u not condemned i but he thatbe-lieveth not U mdemmd alrcMdyt bccMnfe he batb not believed in the ntme of the onlybe^ gotten Son cfGoL

4> 4* 4* *^ 4*

«f> cf> «f^ <f» f^

LONDON, Printed, by % W. Jmo Dm, i^j4.

ConciL Mikvitan* Can, J.&S. Contr, Fdagianos,

C. 7. J Tern flacHtt ut qnicHnque difcerit in Qratione'Domititcaidt9 I dicere fanEios Dimitte nobis Debita nofira j ut non profeipjis h»cdicant, qmanonefi eUjam nece^ariaijiaPetitio^ fed pro aliis , qui funt in [ho populo peccatores , ^ idea non dicere ttnumquemeiHe SanQo-rnm ; T)imitte mihi debita mea \fid^ Dimitte nobta debita nofira^ ut hoc pro aliii potitti quam pro fejufiut petere inteUigatur, Anathema jit.

C. 8. Item placuit nt quicHnque Verba ipfa Dominica Orationid , ubi dicimust Dimitte nobia debita nofira,iJ}a volunt a SanElii did ut humili-fer-i non veraciter hoc dicatur^ Anathema fit. ^luu enimferat or ant em, C^ non hominibtu fedipji Domino mentientem^ qui labii4 fibi dicit dimitti veBe^ & Ccrde dicit^ qu^fibi dimittantnr Dtbifa non habere .'

:^'.

^

. 4jj(!l^ 4)i^ ^ ^ j||^ j||^ jj(JU

Postscript.

Aving perceived by 4 friend that perufed thcfe Pd-j fersfmce thePrinting oj them,that the n,')^^%'ii» 5^; />.2 5 ^againfi iV/r.Blake, ir through too great brevi-' I tf like to be mifnnderfioodyl thought meet to addc^ this Explication, Idifiirtguifh between the Real Operations and Mutations on mans foul, byobje^S', and the Conveyance of Right to fever al Benefits b^ the Cotvenant of God. It is not the former that I f^eak of in that place. I confef that 4s the i^pprehcnfton of one of Cods Attributes, makes one effeEi on the foul, and the apprehen-fion of another makes another effect, fo the appnhcnfwn of Chrifii Kingdomei Righteoufnej?, Death, obedience, Intcrcepon, J^udge'^ ment, &c. do make alfo their fevcral Imprejiions according to the Nature of the thin^ apprehended. But I utterly deny that it is fo in Conveying Right to thefe, as much as I deny that J-ufl if cat ion is San&ification, or a Real Change of our ^*lities as it is. This therefore ts my ^Argument : If the i^fprchcnfion of Chrifis Righteoufnef, and no other Acl, fl)3uld (frilly be the ^t*slifying A^ of Faith, and that co nomine, becaufe it is the clfjeB of that apprehenficn rvhch is the matter of our ^Nullification, then it would follow, I, That the Apprehen fion of nothing elfe is the J^ufit fling Al^, 2. And that tve have Right to every other particular Mercy CO nomine, becaufe we apfrehcnd that Mercy, and fo our Right to every particular Benefit ofchnfl, were Received by a di' fttndi Adi of Faith, Butthe Confequnt is falfe, ihereforcfo is the Antecedent,

7 h: m\nox only t e quires f roof: which is proved by the tenour of the Cove?unt of Grace^hkh Giveth us Chrifi^ AndtvitJj Lm, dllthin^i: He chat hatbth€ Son hath Lilc: He chachditfV€tl8 on him (hall not periih, nor come into Condemnation. A$ many as Received him, tothem gave he power to brconie thefonsot Goj. ^oihxioncw.ire f^ithj which is the Eecei-vingoj Chrift xs he.U a^crcdt th^t is, tts our Sjiv'uffir 4>idKirig, is the Corjdtion of our Right to atl particular Benefils, Godlinefs hath the promife of this life, and that to come, Jt isawomAns taliing frtch a, wan for h. r Htts hand that Gives her firJi hitcrefi in him, A/^dihcnm aJlthat he hath : li is nop Acaf ting this hottfc^y and that Land, artdthaP Servant, &c. that gives her a diHintf right in them. 1 here is not swarrjingto allthefe, andaparticulir Acceptance of every of his Goods and Chattel requifite to a tight in them, thoughthere heto.aufeof thitn, 2. C/dnd the Opinion leing utterly unproved,iifufficiently confuted^. In what Book that 6vcr was xvritien have thefe nice di/Iinguifliers provtd their DO" Sirine hy Scripture or found rcafon?ht% non diflingiiitjCrgOjC^r. 5. /nd it difcovers its cavn abfurdtty : Fortf this he true, then to apprehend ch/ifts death is the only ati that gives right to that, and to apprehend h is obedience to that; and to apprehend Adoption iSihe cn'y aEh that gives right to that, andfoefall other bentfita.:. Sp that there fhould be one aci of Faith giving right to Chri/i him^-fetf, and another giving right to pardon, another to fentential purification, another to Adoption ^ another tithe Spirit and San^ ciification, another to vtf fever an ct, another to Glory: Tea one to e-Viry par ticttlar gift or part of S an cfifie alien ^ andont to th<^ pardon of every particular kno tvnfin that is pardoned: Om to iht Gofptlwrititn, another to the Minifiry, one to health, another to. life, and one to every blefing. And fo that a^ of. faith rvhkh Rtc^ves Adi)ptionfhould not ^ujlifie, nor that, whtch Rueives^, Chrifi himfetf neither diretily : hut only that whichrcctiveth^m-Sification, IVhereas it is one Reception, or Act erf faith rmtallf Uken ( Apprehcndtngthe entire ob]ecf) thatGodhA'h made the Condition of his Promife, S 0 that to apprehend Chrijl^as thf i?«-

mr

ficr cf Glory, duh oi wuch Uveavdi tur Jfijiifc^ticpc, as apprehending him as J«pfer : y^ndto Believe in him as cur San-Bifer And King, deth as Really cenduce to cur ^ujiif cation, artd as much, as the appehendif^g him as ene thai vettl pardon our fins* He that believeth fliall be iaved,^ thefmple Scripmedodirint. 4. And if all this were not^o, yet it is the apprehending cfchrift Oi King according to them J hen, that mvjl be the Pardoning and J'ufiif)inga6i, morethen Od a Sacrifice: For as Satisfier and a Rarifcme, he only rrientetheur Pardon and fufiif cation. But te pardon by Grant, is unqueflicnabl'j an a^ of Soveraignty asjuch: It king not the pardon of a private ir/juty, but apuhlick Crimea that we have tofpeak of. And to fuflifie by Plea is Chrijls a^ as an Advocate, and not as a Sacrifice. Andto fuflifie by fentence if Chrifls ati as fudge: So that if their own DoCfrine did hold {of the divirftfyirtg of ottr Right by the diverfity of the formal rea-(on of the objctf apprehended) then would it but infallibly prov^^ dgainfl them , that it is the Receiving of Chriflaf King and fudge that is the A^ of Pardoning and fu^ifvngfanh, morc^ then the Receiving him as a Sacrifice or Ranferne,

FINIS.

To my dearly Beloved;, and much

Honored and valued friend, Colonel S^lvanm Taylor,

Dear Friend,

Bough Providence bath long kept me from the fight of your face^ yet hath it maintained in me that unfeigned Love toy ft^ which many years ago it kindled. Our Vnion in Chrijl^and fi-mtiitude of Spirit continuing ? Local difiance is no Divifion. As iniqiaty in thefe latter days hath abottnded , fo hath the love of many waxed ctld • And when they grow fir ange, and cold to Chrifi the Center of Vnion ^ . no wonder if they do [o one to another. Tet at there is in true Saints a Perfeverance of all other Graces ^ foist ftere of Love to the Brethren. That 1 amyet no Apofiateas to my due affeliions to yenr felf.,1 would tvillingly acquaint you in part by thi^ Com-pellation^ and by direBing to you , and to the world with your name^ this writing. That I fpeak to youfo openly in the hear-ing of the world J Cuflom and Affe^ionaremy befi excufe. And that yet you may know I do not forget you^ I remember about i6 or I'J years agi^ 06 you were wont to exprefs your great difltkeof the people called Anttnomians, ( in London and iV^ir England then making head) fo you were wont to ^rofefs for your felfj that ^(?« conld not hearken or incline to thofc opinions which

The Epiftlc Dedicator} take men off from Duty to God, or which open a Cab to Licemioufncfs. Jndwdeedjou may be fare that cannot he of Cod which is agdinjl God : and that which is againjl Duty is Againjl the Law • andthatwh:ch is againfl the Law , is againfi the King and Law-giver. Take down Law and obedience , and you take down God from his Government of the World , of much as in man lys. But though obedience is none where it is denyed, yet thofe men will find that Law is Law flill for all their denyal : and though they can hinder the fulMing of the precept , becaufe obedience is Voluntary or none ; yet can they not hinder the fulfilling of the Threatning , becaufe the Penalty is fuffered involuntarily. The name of this party was firfl taken up from their oppofition to the Law '^ but in my judgement they do more dangeroufly oppofe the Gofpel or Law of Grace , then the pure tjHoral Law. For it is but a few of the wilder and more igno-rant fort that do deny all Law^ even as to the Regenerate : For that is^as If aid, plainly to deny God to be our Goverrtor , that is, to be our God'^ and is fo bruitifh A conceit againfi the Light of nature i that we need not much fear the prevalency of ft very far, while men keep in their wits : But it is only the Law of Mofcs^ or the Law of Works, or the Moral Law^ as given to Ada.w. or by Moks, which the more fober fort denyed: but the fame Moral Law^ as the Law of Chrifl, they do aUow. And this cur mo [I Learned oppofers of them, think to Her able. For in^ deeA though the Law of nature be flill Gods Law ^ and Chrifl defiroyed it not, but confirmed it, yet it flands not to the fame ends,nor on the fame terms altogether now as at firfl it did j that firji Promife ceafwg upon our firfl fin, and the remaining threatning ( annexed to the Precept ) being no longer Remedilefsy when by the Promife of Grace a Remedy was provided. And it is no great danger to fay, that even the Moral l,aw was abrogated as it was part of the matter of Mofcs Law, {the parts falling with the whole ^ andthe matttr with the form ^ not in themfelves and abfoluuly^ but As parts, and A$<hai Matter, j

a^

jfhe Epiftle Dedicatory. its long MS the fame Law is confcffedto be flill wfone^ 4s part of the Redeemers Law. Idortbt another opinion of theirs^ wherein many better men have by tneamelous fpecches encouraged them^ will do more then this agatnif the taw ^ I me an .^ the root^ the heart of all Ant mom unilm^ from whence all the reft doth unavoidably follow : and that is the mifunderjlanding of the nature and ufe of Chr/p$ Death and obedience , AK>d thinking that Chrift obeyed or facisficd by fufFrring, or both , as in ourPcrfonSjfochac the Law takes it, to all ends and ufcs , as done by us our felves, as when a man paycth a debt by his Delegate. This opinion, if I under [I and it ^ blots out Law and Gefpel at one dafh. The Gofpel^ for it is the ufe of that to be Cods itlflrument of conveying Pardon and Grace in Chrifi , and ^ bringing t4s into a Right to the benefits of his fuffering, andfo to thepoffefsion. But if m Law fenfe it was weonr felves ^ that either fully fatisfied or obeyed in Chyifl , then there needs none of all this, nor isttpofsible: For the benefit was aU oars ipfo faCio, upon the payment. What fujl/ce can requne more then the Idem in obligacione, the very Debt 5 or can refufe to give a prefent Acquittance upon fach a payment ? It overthrows the Law too-for if we have ^erfe City fulfilled it already in Chrifl , it cannot pofsibiy oblige tii IIIII to one aCi of obedience^ pro eo tempore, for that time which we arefuppofed to have fulfilled it for ; and that is to the end of this Ufe. Naj^ if we did but perfe5ily fear the penalty of the LawinChnJl.as [ome fuppofe, and that for all . the fins of our lives abfolutely without exception, then the Law cannot pofiblj oblige us in this life to Duty, any more then to Punifhme/it : heca'tfe it doth naturally oblige but disjunctively, either to Obedience or to Puniilimenc, and not to both, for the fame t:me : Nay it would be a contradiBion fo to fulfill the Penalty of the Law before the Violation , unlefs that fulfilling be taken in its cfTe morale to come after each particular fin , as It is the penalty of that fm •, andif fo, we mu[l not be fuppofed to have done it before. Its the bottom of all our Peace that the

The Epiftle Dedicatory. Lor^ "^'cftM fuffcrc^ for our ffttf, yea in our ft cad, as a ranfom i>y fac*ificCja)idh.itb7r}Adc[Ati.^fAffio}JtoGods Jufiice : But the mijtDiderftdndingof the nature and effccfs of that fat is faction ^ haihheeyj the breeder of this unhappy Se^ , and almofi all the Mor/flers that they have hitched, jhebefl things corrupted^ or ahuf.d^ ire eft worft, lUr:ce i< thi; epinion which I cppofe in this Book, that Wc nrc Juft ficd before wc believe , nay before we rill, nny before we arc born, nsy that it is an Immanent a<ftinG')d, (r.nd therefore eternal ) and that Infidels arc Jijftifi'd as Infidels.-/ ho^e *jO!( need not much argumentation a^air:ftfuih opinions as thefe^thcverj nature of javing Grace hsinz fefat. againfi them,that apraCiicat experienced chriflian doth hilar the very mention of theni^ as nature feeth a dead Corps.^ $r taftct h Gall^ or fmellcth a ft ink. The Spirit of Sanclification helpeth more (tga'rft fuch unholy Doctrines^ then much Learning ivithout it rvould do, Tet how y/Cc^'lfary a clear judgement is m conJKncI.'OfJivith Sr.nciifc.ition.and how far fome men have been carried th I' rvay.^ th.it once were the wonder of the world for their Zeal md Dil gcnce, th: (.id examples effome of our old friends^ norv lendinrmenin the Propagation of thefe Anti-Gofpel-fan-cicijdo too fully witmjs. Eni^land hath fccr within thejefew laji years^ th', Antmomian Boftrine as cffetfually brought into pra-ftifey and I hat which feemjed but a toiler able fpecnlation^ bring forth as real doleful effeBs^ as moll e'ver Nation did on earth: It h.tth a:peered amon^ us^whnt a power the judgement hath on the tle.irt and Life^andthat bad opinions are not jo innocent ai fome men ff^ppofe them : when it bri-geth menyand fuch men^ even to be R.inters, Shakers^ and I think,poffeffed with Devils. • /; was misbelief that made thePapiftf attempt thehtowing np of the Parliament^ and that made ths ^ews kill the Lord of Glory, And indeed our Nations fins arc legible Judgements • God hath given in his Teflimony agamft the Pride and Error ofProfejfors w Old England as wdl a$ Netv , and that fo vifiblyj that he that runs f/f^y read it. For my part I pfofefs the hand of God is (ocon^

fpicmt^-

The Epiftle Dedicatory.

ffichus tnboth^i that it much firengtfjens wj Faith in the nta'm cattfe of Chrijlianit), bj revealing the workings of afpecul Go-%'ernir)g Providence thereabout. I think the Ages to come will be as ready to doubt ef the Truth of our Reports of the Monflers in Ncxv^n^^\2n^\^ and the multitude of Profejjors turned Ranters here.^ and of their carriages and'ltze^, their Exta/tes and un-natnral fhakingi and other motions of the body^ the plain effects of A Diabolical Powery to which the^ are given up , as men are now ready to doubt of the former c^'trades of Chrtjl and his Vifaplcs: ^^Ind though the beginning of thefe mens wifcryy beft/ually Pride of their fuppofed Graces., leading them firjt to (eparationfrom their Brethen^and Contempt of their Guides ^ and next to Anabapt:f}ry^ {and even thefe have been fadly given up to mifcarriages < yet feldom are men thus evidently given over to a fpirit of madnefs , till they turn Antmomians and Libertines, when men willfo horribly ^bufe the So/i of God^ as to make him a friend to //;;, that hath dore and fuferedfo much to defiroy n, and to make his blood to be the ch/efefi defenfative of tranf-grefsion^andthepriceof a Lawlefs afsd Licentious life, which was jhed to demonflrate Gods hatre-iof fin, and'to purge the fouls of men from its Paver and Pollution ., when men do make thofe Sacramc/its'which fl)Ou!d ft'al up our Abrenunciationof fm , and our flrongefl engagement to the L ord in a Covenant of new obe-d'encCy tobe Sealsof an indulgence, more freely to tranfg^efs : w^^en they make the Spirit of hoinefs to he an unclean Sp:rit\ to take men off from Humiliation, Confefsion, Praying for Pardon, Laboring for Salvation, ^c. In a word , when they turn Gods ■Grace into meerwantonncfs and wnkcd^efs ^ and put God in the Likenefs of Satan,the Spirit of d:fobedience and rncleannefs ; Its no wonder then if God bear no longer, but do appear againfl ihcm from Heaven-, cxcomnnmicate thcm^ and deliver them up to Satan , the Spirit of Delufion.

Though the Lord Brooke's book of the Union of the Soul iwd Truth,contained the fpawnof'the worfl of thefe abomina-

The Epifllc Dedicarory. ticfjs, yet he hath Uft it en Record in hU Book agstnfl Epifcopacj] pag. 88, g9, 90. 9f. that th4t haitfttl people prophefiedof^ I Tim. 5. 1,2,3 4^'> 6.4rf »*f Papfis^SocintanSy Armmians, or theltkey but (aiihhe^ Bac if I be noc much miltakcn, fornc-whac beyond and wicl.in all theCc, that I fuppofc wiiich feems tothemtobetheSpirit^T\\\^ I conceive is the Bifis of all thcit Vaniiy, Pride and Iirolencc. They have the Spirit, and To know more then all the Ltarncd, Pious, Godly men in the World. They have ihe Spirit, they cannot (in, they cannot err : They will not pray but when that Spirit moves. Adultery is but an ad of the flcfh^but they arc all Spirit and no flcfh •, what (hould thefe men do with Natural AfiFedions, they are all Spirit: In this cafe, if they be TraytorSj High-minded,Heady, &c. who will wonder 1 what may they not be carryed up.to by the imagination of the Spirit ^ But let them take heed if they have any thing of God in them : let them be wife i.n this their day, for the time may come when it will be too late.In the mean time, I will fay as Peter did to Simon,Praj that{jftt bepofsible)thii rvickednefs of heart may be forgiven. If we look on the other part of their charadcr, Having a form of Godlinefs^ but de -TJyiftg the power thereof, creeping into the houfes of (til) women laden with divers lufls^^c. H )W can thefe be fpoken of Ar-minians, Socinians, or our Prelates r" &c. It feems very probable to me, that the Holy-Ghoft in this text points out fome fuel) as the Family of Love , the Antinomians, and Grindletonians are, if ^atleaft ) they are not much bely-cd. And to thefe I think every piece of this Charader will moft properly belong: Yea, andtheclofeofit alfo, or theiflTueof thatSed-, They (lull proceed no further, for their folly {hall be made manifeft to all men , which can hardly be underftood of Arminianifm , or Prelacy, fince that in fevcral names , this in fevcral dreffes hath been in the world above 1000 years. So far the Lord Brook 3 who

faith

The Epiftle Dedicatory. faithpig. SS.that This one Hcrcfie the Scripture forctcl-Icth of, which is not yet (perhaps) come 5 it may be it is now in the birth •, fure it is not far off.

Dear Sir^ As J blefs God that hath confirmed jeu in his Truth^ and kept pit fjfl m thefe fhaking times^ and manifefled pu approved when Hereftes did anfe , fs I muji confefs m'j feif pur debtor for theutmefl of m^ endeavors y for jour ft ability and pro-grefs • and if thefe Papers may be anj helps toit^ ijhall be glad. But fee that tt be your daily bufine ft to live upon that Truth which pu have owned: Many thoufands are of the true Rtligion^ that sre not true to that Religion. Orthodexnefs is cm of the delu-ders of hjpecrites: As if God would fave men meerly becaufe they know their mafters will! 7hey muft receive the Love of theTruth that would be faved^ • 2 Thef. 2.10, 11. For want of this we hd^vt ftenflfWtany givertup toftrongdelufions. They that tPiUnot let Truth imo theffeartydofooneft Ufeitdfutofthe Head: it likes not a Lodging in the Forch.Thegrt'at kndjglorioui things of Eternal lifey deferve betier entertainment then they find with the be ft. Truth enlight'eneth in the Head: but in the heart only dothit enliven^ comfort and confirm. To be Religious no further then the brain and tongue.^ is but to look on the Lighty and play with it^ which Gedfet them ufto work by^ and to guide them nmo Glory . / dm bUt ctrnnitnding to ym that which I have long loved and honored inyouy A working Faith, A Prapical Keligi-oufnefs, and a Deteftation of thofe Errors that are deftruClive to this. That God that bath brought yoH into this way^ and upheld you therein, I doubt not will eflahlifl) you and preferve you to the end: which is the prayer of him who iSy

An unfeigned friend to you^ Kederminftcr, if to any man^

(JMarchS,i6^^'

Rich. Baxter.

REader.whcn my Animadverfionswere in the Prefs, I received this following Letter, which • therefore annex , though my Papers being gone out of my hand, I cannot review them, to fee whether this require any alteration or addition.

R. B.

Reverend Sir,

BEing told to the eAnthorof the traSl de fidei partibus in Juftifica-tione , thdtjoH ^ere pleafed to take notice of it^ he wi/Jpt earnefily that)OH woftld li\eyvife take notice of fome errors committed in the Print' ing^ and of one notable omiffion by the Author.

The errors arepag. iS.line i6. Leg. promittitur Chriftum vcnturum, jp. 64, lift. 2./^^. cognicionis, p. 71./i«. 12.^ ij. dele qucmadmodum in prima reconciliatione, p. 76. lin. ly. leg.ut ut.

The omiffion ispag.90. line 5. after defertorem, add this Claufe ;

^uinimo -hmif^ianorum dogma Deus elegit credentes magis rationi confonAt^cjttam illud^quod vulgoorthodoxnm exijiimatur Deus Juftifi-cat fidelem : namejue rationi congruit ut ex plurtbut promifcue in medio pofitii optima ^uaejue eligantur'. ac abfoHum videtur ut cjuijantjufins efi fufiitia Chrtjiij jujiificetHr, & operiatur vefie^ qu^ jam acalcead caput communitHs & convefiitus eft; nam eo quod qui^ eftfidelis jam efi jufiifi-catus.

T is from jour humble Servant,

London, A/4r^/6 6. 1^54

L. Col.

The Apologetical'Treface.

^F any fufpeft me as addidcd to Contending, be-caufe J have confuted this Learned mans Dif-fcrtation, who medled not with me j or becaufe I have ufed a language fomewhat (harp, and unpleafant to the guilty , I give them this true account of my doings, both for the work, and for the manner, i, I muft not write for my felf, butforChrift and his Truth, and therefore muft do more for their vindication, then if it had been for my own. 2.1 Ihould hope it will be rather taken the better,becaufe it is no perfonal quarrel that doth inftigate me, and no honor of my own is concerned in the thing, 3.1 had newly written a Reply to Mr. G, Ke»» dal , by whom the Juftification of Infidels tAntamount (as he fpeaks ) is maintained ; and about the very day that I had finifhed it, this Dif-fertation was fent me; which coming in fuch a feafon, and with equal Confidence and Learning , endeavoring the promotion of the fame Caufe that I had been refuting, and carrying it in fome points higher then Mr. ivTfw^j/had done, I thought it not unnecelTary for me to annex a brief Confiitation of thisalfo. And indeed my thoughts were impelled to prefent aftion, and I fuddenly fct upon it, with an intent of doing no more, but only to cull out the ftrength of his chief arguments, and let.pafs the reft- Whereupon I did at firft pafs over the beginning of his book , and began about the difcovery of his judgement in the main point. But when I had begun , I perceived that it would not be convenient to leave out any part of it: for he might poflibly fay, I left out his ftrength, or that which was neccffary to the clearing of the reft: Whereupon I refolved to take him word by word. 4. My apprelienfions of the danger of that Doftrine, commonly known by the name of Antmomian, or Lihertine . are fuch as will not fuffer me to make light of it, or patiently to fit ftill in filence whileft the Gofpel is fubverted by it, and the fouls of poor people enticed to perdition. I confidently think that the main fubftance of the Gofpel

The Apolo^itiCiil'Preface. IS by too neccffary confquence overthrown by their miftakcs, and that our difference with molt of them about th'e Law , is but the fmaller part. 5. We were never fo much called out to contradid this way as now. Formerly it was only a few giddy ignorant fouls that went this way, that had fcarce parts or incereft, or plaufible pretence to do any great harm : and moft of their lives were a (hameto their Doftrine. The Pelagian and Semi-Pelagian fadion did get many learned abettors ; but the main body of tnis party conlifted of the illiterate ; But now (to the grief of the fober and Godly ) men are rifen up to defend this way of darknefs, who have fomething more of Learning and Piety to Credit and Countenance the Caufe that they engage in : And too far hath it already taken with many well-meaning lefs judicious men. 6. This Caufe hath ever tended to worfe, and led men into fuch wayes, as have made them the grief of their friends, and the great fcourgeof the Church of God : New England can give you a fad-Teftimony of this; Sec Mr. fVeUsBook of the rife and fall of Anti-nomianifm in New England. 7. In which Book, (and by full Teftimo-ny from men of Godlinefs, Credit, and Authority in that Land) I un-derftand fo much of Gods itrange Judgements from heaven againft that Party, that 1 dare not over-look or forget it; nor make light of thofe Errors which God makes not light of. My wit and learning may be much lefs then fome of theirs; and therefore men may lay. Why fhould we not fooner believe them then you? But as they difpute againft the Sun, even the moft cxprefs Word of God ; fo when the God of Heaven (hall fet in and determine the Caufe by fuch a miraculous Teftimony, or do fo much towards the determination as there was done , it muft be a Ph iraofo that muft (hut his eyes and go on. No wonder if the ftrain of the \^zvi-England Preachers, (^s Hooker^ Shephard ^ &c.) be fo contrary to the An-tinomian ftrain , when the hand of heaven hath fo interpofed in their Controverfie 1 But of this I have fpoken in my Book of Bapcifm, as noting Gods Judgements on both thefe Seds : But for the dangerous tendency of their Dodrine, there is no com-parifon between them : ( I mean fuch as only deny the Baptifm of Infants, and thefe : ) I fpeak not all this, as putting the Title of Libertine or Antinomian on this Learned man : For feeing it is but fome of their Dodrine which he maintaineth here, for ought I know he may not fee the Concatenation, and fo may be innocent in all the reft : But this part is of the nature of the

rcftri

The ty4pologetical-Preface, teft. *8.. J hope this Learned man cannot be offended with my writing for the thing, confidering that I do no more againit him, then he hath firil done againft his own Brother. If Brother write againft Brother, a ftranger may interpofe, with lefs appearance of any defedt or breach of Chriftian Moderation or Love. 9. Yea he confuted his Brothers Private Letters, and I confute but his Publick writings, which endanger the fafety of the Church and Truth ; I confefs, if I had been of his minde, I would rather have made fome writing already publick (of which he might have had enough ) the fubjed: of my confutation, then the private Letters of my own brother. 1 o. Yea, he knew that it was his brothers; but I knew not that this was his. 11. Yea, I hope this Learned man will rather give me thanks, then be offended : For I wrote for him intentionally, when I wrote againft him aftually. Little did I know that Ludiowdttu Colvintu, was LudovicMs Moll-nttii. The very name of Cjrus MoUtiahs , as being the Son of that man ( 'Peter MoUnnus ) whofe name muft ftill be venerable' to us all, did inftigate me to his Vindication. Befides his meet relation to the late learned Rivet • The names of thefe two men will be honorable while Chrift hath a Reformed Church in Europe. 12. Laftly, I faw more faid for the Juftification of unbelievers, and againft Juftification by Faith, in this Book which I confute, then I had before fecn in fuch order, and in fo narrow a room; and therefore I thought that the confutation of it might not be unufeful, but might fcrve inftead of the confutation of many, cfpecially it being written in fuch modeft language, which would occafion no wordy altercations or contentions. Thus I have given you my Apology for this undertaking.

Next for the manner of it, I have two queftions to fatisfie : I. Why I anfwered not more tenderly. 2. Why I anfwered a Latinc Book, in Englifli. i. For the former , the very truth is, in thefe two anfwers, i. I apprehend great evil and dangerous tendency in the Dodrine which I refift ; and therefore durft not fpcak of it too eafily or favorably. 2. As I have faid» I knew not the Author till it was too late : but rather by my zeal, for the name of MoltmuSf was more (harpened againft any adver-fary of that name. An Engliftiraan, I quickly perceived he was not ; and I fufpeded ^ohinM was a counterfeit name • but this ^' was fitter matter to raife jealoulies of a ftranger then Reverence;

t 11 2 ] cfpecially

The Afologet'iCAl-'Preface, ' '

cfpecially In thefe times. No reafon therefore can accufe my (harpcft pafTages as guilty of any difrefpeft to the learned Author of this Dif-fertation,when I knew not who he was. And indeed I have yet no fuch certainty, as flatly toconclude that he is the undoubted Author; but left any think I feign it, and fo wrong him, I (hall only give them my ( too late ) Intelligence, which was in two Letters : The one was in thefe words, T)tim Lond'wi itinerans diverfabar^ oecurrit miloi oh-viam Ludiomjcus Colvinus, fimtilejne Oedipus adjiitit <jui nomen illud ■Atjagrammati''-^i obfcuratum luce doriAvit^ac me ccrtiorem fecit in fro-priamformam refoivendo literas, Ludovicum Molinacum i» re Hj^orica apud OxonUyjJfs profejforemjignijicaye, 2(ecji»e cau/a certe nomini fuo coftftilium irifiuduit^ a tarn foedi Erroris Macula, : hodie domum , cum T)eo^ reverfas raptimperlegi : Et quantum mihifapit palatum^ plus yt-ritatis (fr Theologi£ famort4 fentio^ in Molina^i fragmentUy qudm inter omnes CoWim apparatHi. The Other was in thefe words, Ludioma^us. Colvinus is only (tranfverfts Liter is ) Ludovicus Molinacus, yt>ho ts the

very f^iuthor I thinly I need not add y that he U a Frenchman^

Petri Melinaei filifM , &c. the reft contained a Commendation of the Author, and his former writings againft Epifcopacy ( againft Biftiop Hall) and that this de Jufiificatione was againft his own Brother Cj^us Moltnauf^ Hving in TorkcJhire. And I think he that wrote this,did well Jinow it to be true.

The fecond ih'm^-de modo^ that fome may demand, is why I confute him in Englifh ? "T he true anfwer is this: I verily thought when I begun to have written but two or three fheets againft him, and annexed ihem to that againft Mr, Kendal then going to the Prefs; and it being to be bound with an Englifti Book, it would not have been tollerable to do it in Latin : Befides,it is the benefit of Engliflimen that I intend : and I hear not of any part of the world fo much tainted with the Do-ftrines which I gainfay, as Sn^Und is. That none may blame mc for unfaithfulncfsinTranflatinghim, I defire them that underftand the Latin tongue, to take his own words in his book , and then they need not truft to my translation ; Yet, though I did it very haftily I fup-pofe I have not done it unfaithfully. I have tranflated it aU,except the Epiftle to-Mr. Sadler.

I intended to have added in the end, feveral Arguments more then he anfwereth here, againft* the Juftification of Unbelievers, and a« many to prove that it is not inforo Ccnfcientia that we are faid fo oft in Ssripture to be Juftified by Faith:buE being called to another writingi

where-.

The Apologetical-Prefaci.

where I muft perform that, I will omit it here. I defirc the Reader alfo to underftand, that the difference betwixt us, and thofe that are for Jultification before Faith, doth not lye about Gods ]Decrees,or Immanent a<fts: but we prove that Juftification is none fuch. We do maintain as well as thry that God Decreed from eternity to Calijufti-fie, Sandifie and Save all his Chofen .• and thus far he loved them before they believed ; Had he not loved them before, he had not given Chriit for them,nor given them Faith. But as there is ver^' great difference between this Love, and that wherewith he Loveth them , when they are in Chrift by Faitli, fo this is not lultification, but a Purpofe of Juftif^'ing hereafter, which plainly intimates that men were not then Juflified. As the world was not created really, when it was but created in Gods Decree, nor is it aAually now burnt with fire, becaufe it is burntin GodsDecrec: forto beCr^-ij/fii/, or ^«^;?f in Decree^ is but this much : God hath Decreed to create, or hum the world ; and fo it is the objed of that Decree, but not of the ad decreed : but con-trarily it is a certain argument that the thing Decreed is not yet done; fo is it in the prefent cafe. It is certain that man is neither Pardoned , Juftificd, Sandified or Glorified, who is but yet Decreed to be fo ; for IiowcanGod befaid toDecreetodo that hereafter, which is done already? It is not therefore Gods T^lle Pnmre fimply that we enquire after, but his adual pardon or difcharge asLegiflator and Judge. This much I thought meet to add, becaufe fome that are againfl us, do bear their Reader in hand, as if we denyed Gods Eternal Decrees and Love to his Eled ; and as if there were no mean between their way , and the wayof the Pelagians.

Reader, though I meddle with no Controverfie but with great re-ludancy and diftafte , and am fo weary of it, that I was once refol-ving never to meddle in that way more,yet I am forced to fufpend fuch Reiolutions, and fo I fuppofe thou wilt approve my thoughts upon thefetwoConfiderations. t. As mans Intelled naturalhy abhorreth error, and a fandified man doth doubly abhor error in things Divine, fo doth he moft of all abhor the Corruption of the Vitals and thofe errors which have a potent influence upon the heart and Life, as thcfe which I oppofe moil evidently have.Miftakes u/e all have, and fhali have : but the more they flop the motions of heart and hand, the more dangerous are they. 2. As I have been long grieved at ttiegreat Error of almoft all the Churches, in extending too far thofe neceffary Do-drincsin which all Believers may have brotherly Communion and

Concor4.a;id making voncrovcrted points of lower moment to feem undoubted fruchs, or fo great neceilicy, that we muft defame and caft off thole chat own them not, and fo every one muft needs reduce all others to his opinion, as if his judgement were the infallible ftandard of verity, and fo we have proved too proud and uncharitable, while we would be Orthodox Overmuch ; fo I am much afraid wc are now like to fall into the other extream (perhaps God intends it for the cure of the former j ; and that the gap of Liberty will be for a while (^and but a while) too wide • And 1 doubt the fupprelTion of error will be fo far caft upon the Minirters alone, as if it did not belong to the Magi-ftrate, that it will be neceffary for us to do the more. And if it fo fall out, I hope the Lord will raife up Divines of accurate judgement, and able to defend his Truth againft all gainfayers, and will give them Refolution with boldnefs and diligence to go through the work: Efpc-cially I advife my Brethren, to prepare their weapons againft the Pa-pifts, and Socinians, and Antinomians, above all other Sefts.- and to Artbciate fpeedily , and carry on all their work in Unity, if ever they willfucceed. But the great thing that I forefee and lament, is this: while neceffity compels Minifters to ftudy, preach and write againft errors, the pradical part will be negledcd; and let them do what they can, experience will foon tell them, that Controverfie will lamentably cool their better zeal, and hinder the exercife of Faith and Love, and keep their hearts much outof Heaven,and from the ftudy of them-felvesJand fuch preaching wil ftarve up the power of Godlinefs in their hearers: and then ungodlinefs will again draw in errors, while we were laboring to keep them out. The Lord teach us therefore to take his Work together, and fo to do the leffer,as never to negled the greater; but ftill to regard the Heart and Life.

The

The Contents.

§. X. Rom. 3.22. Vindicaicd.

§.3. Rom. 3.24. V.iidicatcd. §. 4. Verfc ly. V'lvdUaUd. %. f. Verfc 17.31.

§. ^. Verfc 1(5. rmdicatcd-y xvhat j'^j^ify'H ^''^ nngtdly is.

J, 7. Rom. f. 18. l^.fuUcatcd. Ch,i(is formal Ju(iipcationvot oms. None a£luaUy

jianeri or Jufl before they Sxifi. Calvins Sxpofition of Rom. J. x8. for common

Grace. 5.8. Cimfifatiificdnot Ugaliy in our pe>fon, nor have wc right to hif r'tghteoufnefs

before Faith. §. 9. Rom. 5. i.ii'indicJted, 5. lo. Gal. 1. (^. vniduatca.

$.11. Ph;l. 3. ^. Tvith Calvins Expofition vindicated. §. iz. Aft. 13. 3, S. vindicated. The Dijfertors grofs abufe of Scripture, '§.13. and 14. More of his abufc opened. S. I 5. Tfce Diftrtorsfalfe and immodejl defence of Popdy. § . I ^, lam. z. God hath chofcn the rich in Faith, proves not EleCiion upon fore-

feen Faith. Chap. 4. §. t. Imputation, Remiffion, J uflification, how far one. $. z. Chrifts righteoufnefs but the caufe of oun. § . 3. Whether Rcmifsion be the whole of our Jufiification ? whether Chrifi giyetu any

greater filicity then was promifedto Adam ? whether a further meritofC'hriflibe-

fide fatufasteny were necefary to purchafe m Jufiification or Salvation ? $. 4. whether all Juftified by one afl ? andwhen. 5. y. How far God was reconciled immediately on Chripsfallsfaclien: and how far

to all men ^ $.6, and 7. z Cor,J. zi. and Hch.io.ze. vindicated. S. i. Col. 1. 13, 14, z Cor. y. 18. vindicated. More of immediate Reconciliation

en chrifts death : and whether pardon have degrees. §. 9 . The Difertor proved net pcrfe6lly bleS'ed. Tardon not perfect in this HfcjfuUy

proved. Judgement is more then bare Declaration, '$. I o. 0/" B om. 5, 19. AS men not guilty at the time gf Eidtmifa. §. II. 0/Ioh. 3.18,

§.11.0/ lolhuahs changed raiment^ Zach. 3. §.13. Amcfius vindicated.

§.14. Vikitor vindicated. •

§. ly. Kollock vindicated, §. 16. TheDi§ertorsfelf contradictions. §.17. TWSsfor theVifl'ertor,

§. 18. Chrift tool^not fin from the Jinnerymeerly ky tal^i)2g them on himfdf. §. ' 9 • Jufiification not an Immanent ah. TheD}j}'erto-rs contradiElions. §.20. Pardon what, and of how many forts ? Nolle Vimlrcjnot Juftification by

Faith. §, 21. If Vnion with Chrift went before fa'ithy it proves not that Jufiification doth

fo. Z>nionwith Chrin of divers forts,Vnion with C'hrifl is not before Faith, proi^ed iy 8 anguments. ^4U Graces -not from Chrift,as from the Head to Mcmbirs, but

jome to ma f^e them members. Hoivour life is in Chrift. Our life of Holynefs did never exi(l in Chrift. The Holy-Ghost, how given us; and how drvels m us. loh. ly.y.Gal. y. 22. vindicated. § z^. Of Infants, §^14. How far other Graces j as well as Tmb, go biforc Vnion with Chrift.

The Concents.

§. 15. Jafti^cation of Infidelsj at ill way to covfute /Irmnuns. The D'lffcriov ■^longs 0}'''ft i'^^'^ K'^ly^ Tiophcticaloffice, nvd Tikfily IntcrccJJion, typaend-if'.g to honor bis O'jjcfi/igs :yc.i wiOKgcttj bis death , if he deny that it procuiedfin tobeKemiffible. F.illfitufaitlun pa;doneth not mmtdiatcly. The Di£'titor tS M.tl^es JuftificatiOH by Faith to be ^i mini antfm.

§ x6. Giving Faitli is a Decree of executive Kimiljion, Lat not the full proper CofpcL Rcmiffinn. Luk. 1.77. abnfed by theDifJcrtor. irbcther David tvere pardor.cd be-fore Rcpcniance.

§ 17. The falft DocTiinCi that all true Repentance proceeds frcni the knowlcc'gc ot Remidion, concludes all thofc impenitent that want thn i^iowhdge, and leaves their coif.fort by ordinary rationtil means Impojfiblc. Luk. 7.38. r loh. 4. 9. vindicated.

§. 1S, Abfolutc fiifiificatioft not proved by ^bfolutc Vneation. The Differtor mam-tains that God Jushficththe ungodly, qua talcs, and confequenlly All the migodly^ and only the ungodly. His gyc:it abafe of Gal. 3.8, topiovethatCodfuJit-fietb Heathens. His abufe of Rom. ?. 6. Col. 1.21. Jitftifcation in Scripturek lifcd more re[iraincdly then reconciliation or rcmijjwn,

§. 19. The T>iijcrlor w^ii^m dying for finners, «» Immanent a'lofGod.Trovedthut Chrijl dyed to parchae us p.irdan and rccoriciiLition,Jnd not only conve,fton,that we mny feci that vre ivere before pardoned or reconciled. ?{one reconciled he fore they fallout.

Chap. 5. $. I. Rccottciliation of God to man, and man to God, opened: fomc texts vind.icaicd.

§ :. irlcthcr the Hgly-Ghoft and SanUificatien^go before Faith ? Our concordand difcordm this. Th^ DiJcrtor faith vfc arc Sons by gracc,givcn inChriflkcfore thevfo-rldbegan,

$ 4. Of loh. 3. i(^. I loh. 4. ID.

§. f. Of Jufiification in confcience.

§ 7 ■ Rel gion lycth not all m fomfort.

§. S. 'i'hc i/ccfiiiy ({ Faith and Obedience. How much their dcfcription of a p^ri-(iian lia:c who place almofl allin csmfurt and feeling, doth differ from the Scripture dcfcription.

§. 10. It. How fan ilification is put before fufiification.

§. 1 I. u'ha! I^indc of Condition F.iith is.

$ 14. Repentance a Conditim nf pardon as well as Faith.

5.15. Hs iriflalie about Conditions.

%. \6. Remision nevertheUfs fom Faith,bccaufe from Vnion with Cb'''*fi-

§.17. The reward never the more of debt becaufc Faith is the Condition, then if the gift had been Abfnluie.

§. 19. No nnundof Affurancc of pardon can by any man be produced ^ but ox the performance of the Condition : ?{o ground for the ff.fi acl of Faith in the Dijj'er-< * tors U\iy.

"Cliap. 6. §. I. Faith enters the definition of Jufiifffation.

§. 1. Faith X Legal, not natural Condition. _

f. 3. 'Dr. Hammond vindicatedfom the Difertors miPa^cs. The dcfparate conpi^ - ^uent »fhis Doflrine, hat a wielded man and Infidd, qua talis, is fujlified.

$.4- The D'ffcytors unhappy reconciliation of ?au\i-<nd lames . Neither P3i\xlnir lames do treat o^'mcerjuftificationin confcience or before men,proved.

S.^. A plain and brief explication $f the reafon ef Faiths intereft in Jufliffcat'ion,

Mm §. 7.8.5.

Th« Contcntf;

t 7 t. Q. ^''i Yt/i'^ns n^^'i I'.i lI'C (omt.ioj Dnctruic ff F-:ithi Jtifftfjini. § 11. 'rbe con-jmiim) ii\ il'c Covin-inti Ufidiiiais. 5 13' Bi'.caiuis, Ktcktrir.anjUifin vn<<'f.t/t£/. Chap'7. i. '. Th( D^j]'i-iJ'Szaincnn,'td'nce.

€ 1 Rom. 8. 3 o • W.i (Xpofuion maliCi all lo be damned that have not had Ajfurancf.

'thattheya.C'gltcoui. , , , j r -r-i r

€ 5 That R< m. 8. 3© nenkClclh not tic aider of pace, i Cor. ^.11. 1 Incl.

i. 13. I Tiiii. 1. 9- i I^'-- '• iofxpt^mcd. S»4!.T-'t fc.v^ t''-'(a'.iu}'gHon i iii.i^sim ra this'Jifr^ or thct to come, horv meant^and hor*

againsi the T>ifc;ior. S. S. Mir,ytiHihidefi'univctoA-mnoKua-f!.fm^hrrcccnfij',(dbythc 7)ijJiito\ €* f' A ncn ens no Oibicclof Ju^ificatto>i. Six .1 s ofOnds u-idr^xiidiiii and r\>:U mtnilotud, hjkcv]' wlAch[com to be n that the D (Jsitoi- caHs Juflijicntion. Hoiv fay our Cinwas iMputcd to Chili bi fere hti Incxnuit.oit. Hoivfar Chriflivas guilty If our fitly and by what oilig.itio». § 7. He undertakes the eovfiitaU():-t.o( Schirp'.U:, A^gftmifits ag/fin[l the Taprsfor

' jJ: (life at ion by Fdith alone. ■ § 8. 9.'o.J'« SchSi\f'iuia:gumentsdifend-d. §. 11. Calvin attd V ivet vivdicaud*

§* 13. 14. 15. More of Sd-\v:^\\i%a-gtim£nts bikfly defended, §' I 6. Ch'j(l intercedah for j/a,don andright lo Lfc. None properly Hchs vpbile lu-

adds or unborn i proved, e Infis Interccfuon vindicated. Gliap. 8.§. I. Z2nchyz}nd>calcd,ajbcingagainJttheJiifiificPtion of Infidels. 4. z. 3. riii\cd.ius and Tolhmisvind.'cat'd.

§i 4. Twifs and Maccoviiis cc'iifcjjed to be fo, the Juftificatien of Infidils.fhc'n great ' A:gitr'nnt fmfwcrcdi Except God were reconciicd to us, and had pardoncd"^ us,

licwu'il m»t give Us Faith. § ^,Vi:i).hkproLLdi'! hu Ticat.ifjtiflifcationfto be againfl the Jtijiification ^

uhbduveis, thot'gh btfare in his Vind. giat, he rvrs for it. %. 6. Mr. Walters ttflimexyfor Justification of labtluvtrsy bact^edrvith rreal^^rea-'fon. i'olanus, Cbamicr, &c. confcJJ'ed to fi>c/ii( famctwie the fame wr-y.

The

*> 4*- 4* ^ 4* 4> ^> ti> c|i 4) tj3. t^ u^ c^i 4> 4> j;> v.|> 43.4* »^.i1j <i> Aj?i i^ ?i i?i ia <^ ^ i?i f5> i?i • (ft ?5 ifi i?5 f^ i^ ^ ^ ^ j^ i^ j^

The Fragment of art Epifiie, which was thecAufeof thh DijfertatioM. ^^j^ Had not as yet heard of this new Controverfic about the nature of Juttification : I may freely fay, ihat it is not of fo great moment, that for it your Churches ought to be daftied one againlt another : For if it be more neerly examined,it confifteth more in words then in Dodnne; fome fay, that Faith goes before Juftification. Others on the contrary alfert that Jnftification goes before Faith : In my judgement it is eafie to agree the Diffenters; for as there are divers ads and motions of faith, fome go beforehand fome follow JulUfication. For the aft of Faith which accompanyeth Repentance,and whereby we implore the mercy of God and the Remiliion of fins, and fly to the death and righteouf-nefs of Chrift, doth without doubt, go before Juftification : But that aftof Faith, whereby we acquicfce in the perfwafion of forgivcnefs, doth follow Juftification, and is an effeft of the Holy Ghoft , which fealeth up to the Believer the promifes of the Gofpel, and beareth wit-nefs that he is the Son of God, and that through Chritt, his fins are pardoned to him; whence arifeth Peace and Tranquility ofconfcience, Rom. %. Being Juflifiedh) Faithftvehave peace ivith ^oii. Moreover> that this controverfic between you, may be compofed, it were neceifa-ry to determine what is meant by Juftification. Our Divines acknowledge that this name of Juftification, is forenfick, and that in this que-ftion, itfignifieth an aft of God the Judge, whereby he pronounceth Righteous,and Abfolveth from fin, one that is ungodly and a finner in himfelf,and obnoxious to his wrath, of his meer grace, for the pcr-feft obedience of Ghrift, received by Faith. This I think is a true dt?-finition of Juftification, as I have almoft in the fame words taken ii:o^ oiRom. 3. 22. &c. And this Juftification is fitly confidered in three di-ftinft feafons ■ i. In Gods Decree .- 2. When God doth aftiially pardon the believer: 3. In the life to come, when the fentence of Juftification (hail be pronounced in the laft Judgement. God be merciful to him in th.it dn^ 2 Tim. u J S. and AB. 3.19. Repent and he converted , that jour ftns may be blotted out when the times of refrepjing flniU come from the t,refence of the Lord , and he pjall fend Jeftu Chrif}^ who be fere Was preached to yoi\ Of the firft and third feafon, there can be no doubt,but that Juftification in decree doth go before aftual Faith, and Juftification at the laft day, follow it. But if you confider Juftification as it is

M m 2 aftually

7%e Fragment of an Spiflle^ &c.

adually beftowed on the believing finner, fomewhat (as T faidj of Faith goes before Juftification, and lomcwhat follows after it.

But as far as 1 can gather by your words, you do, with Dr. Trrifs ^ itttn to acknowledge no other jullilication, then that in Decree ; te wit, that free love of God, uhreM^ he embraced us in Chrift from eternity, and whereby he decreed to abl'olve us from fin, for his deatti and obedience ; and you feem to dilallow of the common diftindion of the De rce, and the execution of the Decree, ihit to me this diftindion fecmeth very good, and fpeaking properly. The Decree of juftifying is not jultification i no more then the Decree of Calling is Vocation ^ and the free Love of God whereby he loved us in Chrift before the foundations of the world,doth differ from 'trftification and Vocation, as the caufe from the effeds, the fpring head from the ftreams: and when the "^cripture doth fo cxprefly diltinguidi them, Rcm.Sjihom heforekne^^ G^c. [vtrf. 29,30J in that Golden Chain it feems to me, they ought not to be confounded : And as oft as the Scripture fpeaks of aftual RcmiQionof fins, wherein, as you confefs, confifteth Onr juftification, it referreth only to two feafons, to this life, and to that to come, Mat. \ i. It pjall not be forgiven i» thi< vrorld , nOr in the world to com^. And reafon confirmeth this: for properly, fins are forgiven, when tiiey may be puniflied, and the Penalty is Relaxed to him: but only in this life and that to come may they be punifhed : therefore only in thefe two feafons may they be remitted. But if fins muft be co/h-fidered only as/oz-frft'fw^ and not as to h forgiven , and Faith, as

yoo fay, iliould juftifie us only * relatively , and by rc-* n7J'J^'^''^'j vealing to ui that our fins are forgiven, then in vain foricvdiiivi: ^ould Chrift and his Apoftles exhort US fo frequently,

to feek of God forgivenefs of fin ; and a believer who bath once had a true fenfe of his Reconciliation and Juftification, ttj'ould no more have need for the time to come to implore Gods mercy even for his moft grievous fins. Do you think that David before bis adultery and n^urder was not juftified, and had the true fenfe of Gods Love ? i'o what purpofe then after thofe new fins,were fo many groans and tears ? If any man then had been tainted with Tn-ijfes Dodrine, might he not defcrvedly have fuggefted to him, fVhygroa)ieft thou fool} Vi'hy ^eggefl thoH for mercy and the vC(ipjir7g a^ay of thy fir.s ? Knowefi thoH not that uR thy fins were blotted out long ago ? And if your opinion were true. Repentance which follows Faith, that forrow according to God, that trembliag and fear, with which the Apoftle PhU. 2. would . have us to work out our falvatioflj ihould not be Difpofifions to falva^

ttOBj.

The Fragment of tin EplflU, ^c. tlon, faving, dod acceptable to God, but rather the fins of Faith' weakneffes, foolifh doubtirgs of Gods Love and our lalvation. And '\£ the llemi^llionof iiii were only the feeling of fin as remitted, why doch the Scripture never exhort us to ask this feeling, but to ask Ivemiiiion.? Certainly when P.te.'' faid to Stmon Ma^/fs^ (not dcfpairing of" his fal-vation ; Repent ofth >t thy wickedfi.ft, a>^dpray God^f perhaps^the t^onaht of thy hea^t m tr be f<>rgjn)en thee ; ]ie did not fpeak of Jultification as paft, but a? future.

I think therefore that we mull believe, that God doth indeed and properly Juftifie a believer and forgive him his fins, as often as after true Repentance and i aith in Chrifts merit, he giveth to his confcience aflurance that fuch and fucha fin is remitted, faying to him asChrift did to the P.iralif ick man , Be of good cheer ^ Sofi, thy (xns are forgiven tl'ite ; and that the ad: of juftification is reitetated, as oft as the mercifiil God by his Spirit pronounceth this judgement to the confcience. tor feeing, aswefaidjluitification isproperly the judgement of God whereby he pronounceth righteous him that belicvcth in Cbrill, through ChrilU righteoulneft,why are you unwilling to call this private fentence of ab-folution.whichGod pron<)unceth to every believer, by the name of Juftification? and when we have a Ifo the Devil and our confciences for Accufers, and Chrift for our Advocate, is it not alfo neceflary that we have God for our ludge, to abfolve us from thofe accufations ? as the Apoftle faith, Rom, 8. fVho/hifl Uj a»y thin7 to the ch^rge^ (frc. it is Goi that fujfifiieth ; feeing therefore the" Scripture fpcaketh of Tuftifkation as of a thing prcfent; and which is ftiH given us, and that God juftifieth us at prefenr, why abhor we the ftile of Scripture r>

You will fay, that Our fins wei*e forgiven formerly in Chrifts death, and that God was reconciled to us in Chrift-dying , and accepted his facrifice for the payment of our debts. But theanfwer is eafie: For we muft not confound the Impetration of falvation and remiftion of fins, with the Application of it: And although we do not with the Armi-nians extend the Impetration to more then the application,yet is it ccr-tin that they are things different both in time and nature : The Impetration was made by Chrift-dying fixteen hundred years ago, the ap-j)lication is made daily by the Holy-Ghoft: the Impetration was made on the Crofs, the Application in the heart of the Believer. And as the facrifice was one thing, and the fprinkling of the blood another, under the Law;fo under the Gofpel, Chrifts facrifice whereby he ob* tained for us Reconciliation and luftification, is one thing, and aftual Juftification whereby God by his Spirit rcfrefheth f'or fprinklcth) the confciences by Chrifts bloodj 4s another thing. Moreover, if in Chrifts

M m 5, death

The Fraime»t of an Epifile^ &c. death our fins had been adually forgiven , and wc aftually luftified,-what (hould Chrifts interteflion , and the prcfentationof his facrifice now profit us? Is it only, that we might have the fenfe? the giving of theispiritwould have been fufficient (for that): But the Scripture fpeaks more excellently and efficacioufly of Chrifts Intercefiion, and refers it not only to/ffAw^,but to true and adual lurtification, faying, ,that C hrifts blood fpeaketh better things then the blood of Abel; and that this blood is ftill fre(h and living ; and that becaufe Chrift alway liveth and intercedeth for the faithful, he can therefore perfedly fave all that come to God by him.

This difference of Impetration, from Application, and luftification, appeareth by the Scriptures diverfity of fpeech ; for when it fpeaks of Chrifts death, it faith, that Chrift dyed for enemies and finners ; but when fit fpeaks) of luftification, which is the Application of that death, it faith that God forgiveth fins to the penitent and Believer: Nor did I ever yet finde any place in Scripture, where it is faid that any mans fins were forgiven before he believe, and that a finner that is yet impenitent is Juftified. T'aul faith indeed, om. 4. that God luftifieth the ungodly ; but in the fame vcrfe, he tels us who the ungodly one is, that is. He that believeth in him that fujhfieth the ungodly; ■* That isj un- that is, one * ungodiv in himfelf, but righteous through iHJiifiabk. chriftsobedience,accepted by Faith. The Apoftlc alfo faith, Ron). 5. ThAt ^hen we rvtre enemei^rve >^eic- "reconciled but in the fame place he manifcftly diftinguiflieth the Reconciliation which we obtained in the death of Chrift, from favingfrom hts wrath ; whence it appeareth that the Apoftle by fufiificatton and Reconciliation doth mean the Impetration and Acquifition of Remiffion of fins. For to h faved from \^rath, and to he <dl;felvedfromJin/is ^iUogcther the fame thing If when we were enemies, \^e Were reconciled to God l;ji the death of h* Son, much more being reconciled^ fhall we be faved by hU life.

Hence it appeareth how infirm Dr. Twines Objedion is, Faith is Cjods Cj'f'', andproceedeth from Cod as propitious and appeafed by Chrifi: therefore We were Jtdjiified before Faith. For after the fame manner might icbj objefted. Saving Vocation if the gift ofGodappeafed by Chrif-^ :h(-refore rve rrere "fu/fified btfvre we wer^ called : which yet the Apoftle denyeth, K<i7w. 8. tf-hom he cu'led^ them he juftified. But the anfwer is very eafie, for God being appeafed in Chrift-dying, doth beftow on hisEled: the effeds of that Reconciliation, after many Ages, calling them, and Juftifying them in his own time.

This order therefore do I conceive in theOeconomie offalvation, which the Apoftle teacheth,/?(?>». 8. ffhom he foreknew^ ^c. For God

from

The Prdgment of an B^ifile, &c, ftom eternity, of his meer good pleafure, did choofe certain peifons to himfelf whom he would fave i for them he fent Chrift into the world : to them,being reconciled by the death of Chrift, that he might beitow on them the falvation which decreed, in time he called them, touching their hearts with true Repentance ;the penitent finner flyeth to Chrift by faith; he imploreth Gods mercy : Chrift intercedeth for the (inner : he oifercth the price of his facrifice : God the Father heareth: he accepteth his Sons Interceflion ; and on the beholding of * him, he pardoneth the * o,- ic. fins of the-Penitent and Believer •- and this llemiftion he fealeth to the heart by the Spirit^ whence comes the Peace and Joy of Vaith.

Theie things being thus determined, 3s it feemeth to me, according to Scripture, I cannot confent to your pofuionSjthat Juftification abk/lutciy goes before Faith; and that Faith is of not the detinition of jullif cadon, and that Faith doth only Jaftifte us, by revealing : for though we think not that we are luftified by Faith formally and meritorioufly , as if by its own Virtue it did lutlifieus before God, or merit abfolution, or, as the Arminians teach that God did accept Faith, as an Evangelical and Im-perfed obedience,for that rigorous and exaA obedience of the Law: Yei doth it luftifie us, as the Evangelical Condition,without which we fliould not be Juftified, and as an Inftrument whereby we apply to our felves the death of Chrift, by the vertue and merit whereof we are Juftified And that Faith and Repentance are prerequifite Conditions to Juftification and Remiftion of fins, is moft certain from Scripture : /UL i o. To him ffive all theTrophets\\>it!iefs^thM Wiofo^ver Ipcfieverh.&CC lAft. 15. Beit knoxvn tojottithat by him rvhoever htlievcth is Jnfl liedft-oyn 'Hthii^s^fron* rphich^ &c. Rom, I o. as he maketh this the Condition of the Law, r/c that doth thefe things fhall live •'« them ; on the other lide he pi iccth this as the Condition of the Gofpel, // than bduvt^ thou !7?.,?t-be (AveL Therefore even as man had been Juftined , if he had fulfilled the former Condition, fo alfo is it necefliiry that the Condition of the Gofpel being fulfilled, the man be Juftified ; though not by the Vcrcue or Merit of rfiac fulfilling. This being fo determined jt is paft doubt that Faith goes before Juftification: for in every Covenant the Conditions muft be performed, before the things promifcd in the Covenant be bertowed. Moreover, there is no true Repentance without Faith. But Repentance goes before Jufti-iication,, and is a neceflary Condition of the psrdon of fins, zy^ct. ^. AV-pent a.yid be converted ^th t your Jins m-ij be blotted cut. Moreover, Faith doth neceffarily accompany faving Vocation: but Vocation doth atlcaft, in order of nature, go before Juftification. ii'mm he c^lUd^ them he utfli-iied,Kom.^» therefore Faithy&.c. Befides,the Apoivle /?<?»». 3. doth ex-prefly teach, that a believing man is theobjei'^ of Juftification: verfe 20.

The Fragment of an EpifiU, &e\ Itiflifytng him that believeth in lefus. And therefore the Righteoufnefs by which we are Iuftified,is called, verfe az. The Kighteoufnefs try the Faith of leftu (^h-'ifi HKtoMl^anJ UP04 allthemthzt ^e/»ffvr. Whence it is plain,that you err from che tmch, when you fay chat Faith is not of the Definition of lultification. I will (ay more : 1 hough the Decree of luitifying do go before actual luftificacion, yet in the Decree,the Confideration of Faith goes firit; becaufe God hath decreed to pardon fin only to the penitent and believer: this the Apoftle teacheth verfe 25. faying, Th^u c/ad jet forth Chrtj} a propitiation through Faith. For God in the fame order Dc-creeth to execute things, in which he afterwrad executeth them : but according^ to the Aportle, he calleth before he luftifietb, 'om. 8. therefore in the Decree he firftconfidered man as called and believing, before, as .^uftified Add to this, that ifluftification did go before Faith and Repentance, God fliould forgive fin to the unbeliever and impenitent, contrary to Scripture , He that believeth on the Son^ hath everUjiing life ; he that bei.eveth not in the Sott,Jhall not fee Life, but the wrath of Cjod abtdeth on him : But the matter following fo eafily, carryeth me away too far.

R. B. I TkouglnitmcejfirytotratiflitethUEpilUe^ and put it in the beginning (though the anfucrer puts it in the end. ) i. That the Anftvcren words may be the better under(lond. z. For the much excellent ufcfull matter which it containeth. Md indeed it fufftcient'y cimfatcth f/ifliftcition from eternity ( though it is fo Antichnfl'ian a D<i£lrine^ thumiich morcm^y deservedly be faid againfi it. ) But yet^ I mu(l defire the Reader, not to fuppof,th.it I approve every word in it. i. I thinly he [pea\s in the beginning (its lil{C with a reiO'iCiling intent ) too gently and favourably of this monflrous Do^rnie, andm.\cs the dtf. fercnce lefs then it it. i« Hii great overfighty in my Judgement is, that he only ta^es notice of fcntcntinl fufl'/fication, which is the a^ of God^asjud^r^ ( be fides the decree, which is no Ju(lifir..nioii, ) and not at all of Legal or Tefiamentary ju(iification, whici) is the a£l of God as LcQ^ifl'ior, and Covenanter, and fee Donor, Jt is true, (hatfentential ]uflification is mofl finClly and fully (0 caUci : hut its as true that Legal or Covenant Juftification^is true Ju(li. ficaimn alfo,yoa and always goes before the former, and is that which the Scripture mofi con:' tfionly rr.cans, wbcnii fpcal(Sof Juflification by faith. D.vmcs call it^ Couftitutive juflifica*' tien. I. And heme this learned man is driven to place ^tiftification in the Spirits pronouncing a fenlcnccin our Confcienccs,which I have e'fcwhere proved large j to be a frrciit mi(lai{c,and of iU tendency. 4. He tai^cs notice of the Application of the impetcated benefits, by the ff>rit, but not 0fih.1t Application^ whereby the GofpeliOj Gods deed of gift.or Chrifls Tcflament^doih confer right In the Belicvy ', which is the Application by which Relative mercies arc gven. Tct after he d'ftingu'Jhcih hctrveen pardon, and the fenfe anifealingofit, which follows. 5. Icon-jc6lurc that he :s of the fame mind <u I , about filths i?iterc(l in our Juftification. For though be ctli It .1.1 fnjiruwcnt, it feems h: me.vis by Inflrumcnt^ but a fit rcceivng means or ail ; Jit bcin* o-d d.iry with Divines to ufc th ^t tcrm,>nany continue it., but in a Mctiph»ricalor im-proper fenci. For iha Icvacd 'n.rn doth fi-(l place its conditional office^and th^n the inflrumeu-tai/eeminglnml{> th.it but the material aptitude to the former: jnme other follow'ng exm prcffions a^fo intimate as much. 6. / confent not to what he aideth^about Gods decreeing things in the order that he executeth thcm^unlefs the meaning had been only this,He decreeth 0 execute them., in the order in which he doth execute them. But in the main the Epiflle is fuch asfljews the Auihx ^udiciou and Orthodox^ and faith more then aU the Libertines and An* t'Momiaas living will ever well anfwer, L.C.

t. C. Of the Pare of Faith in Juftification *. * ^'''^ " >

T^nnc, as to true fftfiifi-Ch A P. I. cation. .

The CAufe of erring in thU matter.

§. I.

iEc'ing the Do6l,ine of Jnfiificatien is. thefummeofoiirft:vat'!offj and the chief C^nfoUtionnfeiir Soids i Satan hath bc?it ha ca,e with all his {hcngth, lofiibftitute inflcad of Chnfh righteoi/fncjs, another that ieofc and unjiablCjthat cannot (landbefore the tribimalofGod •^fnch as the yapi(h have forged j and moreover to fade out or malic fuch as to the ivroJig of Gods K'^hleoiffne!} do give jd much 19 Faith , in Jnflifcat'wjy as to mal^c it, both to be before Elc^ton, as the Armi-nians do, and adcrt it to be antecedent to Chrifls faiisfi^ion and death,as that Inter-' polator of Armiiiianifmy Amyialdus, tcacheth. Andfo eafic is it to fpp into error in this poiiUy that cvcnjome of the ho'-y Fathers by occafion of the words Faith juftifiech, mifundcrflood, did give loo much to Faithy and inherent righteoiifnefs : Yea and a great part of Go^ly and'Lcxrned menyOtthis day of right jadgcmrnt in the other Articles of the DoJh'ine cf Faith , do fcem by writing and word, to joyn to Chrifls Rightcoiifncfi another efficient Caufe, though lefs principal j to wit, Faith j at thvigh chri'^s Rightc-mfncfs alone we< c notfufficicnt tojufiifie a mm at the Tribunal of God, itniefs Faub d-focbmc in to help It.

.Amovgthifc is t\yt mofi fimjits man Cyrus Molinaeus, whofc fcfife may be gathered by thcpagmcai of an Epiflle, which he wrote to his Brother , a ProfejTor in the Vnivsrfiiy of Oxford ; which controvcrfic he yet calls a mee, fighting offhaddows, or rather a ftrife about words, and not a matter of luch moment as that common Orifit-ans (fjou'd be troubled fir it. Tru'y though i t were afar greater contr over fie , it were meet that a Cirnfiian manjJjjuldfo judge of his brother in Chrift, as that in the mean time hcfliouldpray to God, and hope to find him atlafl »f the fame minde, as St. Paul promtfeth hi mfclf of the Phi\tpp'\ins ; and fo to deal with him, as with his dearefi natural brother, differing from his in Jiuigcmcnt ant opinion, whom he end:avoretb withall mtderation ofmindc and words to draw to himfclf.

But the whole controverfie throug'ily weighed^ and cxam'ncd by the louchfione of ti)e holy Scripture, I could not perfw.tde myfelftuat the controverfie is mecrly in words, but in Things, and of fo great moment, that I thinly the Doctrine of Jufi/fication by Faith, fuch as the Author (f the Efi^lc holdetk, doth either furnipj the Papijls and Arminians with weapons, »r, if not ft, andtfit be not agan^ found Doiirinc ^ at leaji it da,{neth a chief Article of on' Faith, and labors effayings not cfnfqnant to right rt(^f«nandcongruoftsfpeech. N n ^^ The

The ^uthm- «[ the Epifllc ecrtUndttb , ihat a man is feid propeyly tni witbcut M Ttottfy to be Juftificd by Faith, and that Faith is of the dcfiwtion of fufijfitation, and f» that rK.'nhath Ftiith irfure he is fgflificel.

But I do (crfi-intlyaFctJilhcd When lo liiniS:, i^ ihe fame as to Abfolvc , to Impure Chrifti Rjghtcoufncfs , to make K {:,h.cous , and to forgive fins j to declare or }>rcnouncc juft without mans bair : and whcnfocvcr Scripture fpeaksct tliat lightcoiirncfs ly which ai Gods Bar , and by God wcare made and ackncwkc'gcd )uft and heirs cf'Eitrnal Litc,ihwa a man can in no wife be faid to be juftificd by Faith ." According whereto wc judge, that a man is jufti-ficd before he havr Faiih, and that a man faithful or bejicvirg is not the adequate objcd of juflification, and that Faith hath no part fcr pJaccj in the Definition of juftificaiionjor of Reiv-ifTion of fins.

But rehen \.o]\i&\fiQ'i fitntfieth to }:t\c:i\ Chrifts Rightcoufnefs, to fliewlt , to make it known, to brino it to the knowledge of the undtrftanding and confci--cnce, then I grant that ly Faith, avd through Faith a n^aJi U jif(Iificd., in as much as ty Faith it is l^aoven to a maft, that Chy/fis Ki^Aepu^ncfs beio}ti.s to him.

§. I.

Ji. B. THc Author of this Difllrtation, fieely confcfllth in bis title page, that the opinion which lie oppofcth, and D. ja/oZ/^rfwin this tpiltk dc-fcndeth, is commonly accounted Orthodox : and 1 fliall ftcw that it is not wiih-cHt very great rtafon •, and that he fhould have been tender of departing from, the part which i^ commor ly judged Orthodox in fo great a point, without ftron-gci leafons tomovc hinijthcnany he produccth.

Tc£. 1.2. 1 willingiy with him dctcft the fubftitution of any Righteoufncfs of our own,or any othersinftcad of ibe Righteoufncfs of Chrift, tlioughl know we mufl have a pi.rfonal Gofpcl-Righteoiiinefs, fubordinate to that ot Chiift : which yet Chrifl alfomuft give us. I as freely rcjeft the Arminians making Faith (whether in it felt or Gods confidcration) to go before Elcdion : And! believe that v/e arc elcflcd ad fidem, as well as ad faluicm per fidem.

And it his Accufation cgainftyf/f^^/vr/dV/i be true , thzt he mai(^cth Faith anic-£tda?icoiiS to Cl/tifis fati'fafiun audticathyl as much d flike that at leaft as the former. I cannot fay, he /landers himjbccaufc 1 have not read every word that ever ^tnyyaldus wrote. But 1 muft Uy that I not only confidently believe that he flanders him, but take it for my duty fo to believe : and 1 leave my reafons to the cenfurc of the equal. J. I rni bcui d tobelicTcihe be ft of my Brother, tjli worfe be made appear, and not to receive an accufation "* And he brings without proof *. i. Amyraldus doth rot only frequently con-no proof. fefsthat Faith is the fruit of Chrifts death, (when yci Camcro

in Ep. tfrf. L. ^. looked on it as flowing immediately from Blcftion, as the gift of Chrift l.imfclf to the world, did Ircm Gods Love) but alio he doth in an Elaborate fearch difclofe to the world the dirfcrtncc bt» tween Chrifts procuring Faith, and his piocuring Rcmiftion and Salvation : which point well undcrftood would do more to ihe opening of many diffiucltics, and the compofing of ihofecontroverfics, then raoft confidcr. Its piuy that one ooinc is not more diligently enquired into.

C 17P ]

It is not well that * this dealing is the beginning of this Diffcrtacion : to cluige a man in print wich chAC which he writes againft, and that lb diligently. And I think with nolefs Verity, (though with far more fhcw of Verity) doth he call Amyraldns an Interpolator of Arminianifm." He is as little and kfs a friend to any error, who avoids tie contrary cx-tream, then he that runs into it. Were all our Brit-tilTi Divines in the Synod of "Vort Interpolators of Arminianifm > as alio the B/m/;^ Divines ? wno in the m.-in points went tlie fame w.iy ? For my part I diflencfrom Amyraldus in his Expolitionof Ka/r. 7, and in many other points •' But 1 think that Mr. Hoarddod\ take neither him nor Divin.int for his moft contemptible adverfaries : Nor do I think any Ar-miaion hath been more judicioufly and ftrongly an-fwercd (though not with fuch triimiphing words) then he hath btcn by them two. And Tilcnus ihoughc Camcio no friend to Arminianifm.The middle terms that thcfc men go on, doth give a man fuch exceeding advantage againft the Arminians,th.u I think no man clfe can fjlidly confute them. Pardon my confidenc: : I am fure I fee the vanity of my own arguingswhcn I was in the other cxtrcam.

After the Papifts, Arminians and Amyraldus^ his next charge is againft pWJf of the Fathers, for giv'm too much to F.iiib and inherent K'ghteoifacfs, It he had faid fo of almoft all the Fathers, I would not have contradicted him, at Icalt, meaning it of their unmeet phrafcs. But I lliould think that thofe who give it too little, and run into the other extrcam, lliould be the Icfs paflGonate for their way, when they read what was the judgement of all former ages of the Church : atlcaft tlicy {hould the kfs ccnfure their Brethren , who go not fo far as the Fathers went.

* nJ.fpecim.Animadverf. Gcner. part. 1, pa?, 3^. 40.41. He m.il^cs 'chrfflt Death to procure us Faithy as a final! caufey and faith that Chri(ls death is the caiifc of Faithy and that , Chriftus fidcm a Dco.no-bisccrre impennvit. And hoiv he can malic Faith then which he calls the m(ans,antcccdeat to Chrifis death which he calls the 0ocurini end,! linnw not. I conf ft I thinly that point may be yet far clear-(ycr opened then he hath done; but lf(ppofe that endeavor not vatn , though jhort.

»«ti i/^ L-un-i, .i/rv >■- --i ■ .j..-j.,..™»..^, vjy,u— — j.jthough Ufs p-iihLi-

pal, that is. Faith : as if Chrifis Righteoufntfs alone were not fuffcicnt to juftifi'e a matt at Gods Tnhmal, nnlcfs Faith be catcdin to help it. I confcfs I am of ti e

. • I •.I- 1, „-„..^r. T I J- II -- j:/Ti 1 !■ _

doevcry thing that belongs to Juftification. And you Vr\n\v S\lo!inaus the Author of the Epiftle proves Faith to be the condition of juftlfication; and I fup-pofe you Will grant that a condition,as fuch, is no efficient caufc j nordothitin the Icaft derogate from the honor of the purch.ifcr or donor : I pray you anfwer me thcfc few'^cftions. i. Whether, if a Kingfay to a Traytor , I will give thee free pardon and honor withall, ifthou wilt thankfully accept it and repent of thy Treafon ; yea, if his Son did purchafe this grant of his Father for the Traytor J is it now any diminution to the honor of the Kings pardon, or the P; inccs pur chafe J if wc fa y>thac without the Tray tors acceptance it (lull not be

Nn i eff«.(aual?

effcAual ? Or wotld you fay, that wc call his acceptance in to help the King re pardon hiiii, or the Prince to nitnt it r 1 put tlcfc Qucftions,bccaufe though you ifi termi, argut pgninft Faiths efficiency or innriinicnial caufuiion only,yet you after iLcwchat you jntciid it ap,ainft the ncctfliiy oi FaLih,asa ConditioHj//«f ^fW aoH : and you cdly drive rga.nft ikro/.77<fz.'} aflcition, and yet (ikncc tie main part ot it,here. Indeed ht nieniiontth I-aitls Inftrmrcntality too : butiiis attcr its otficc of a Condinon, intimating, that by an Infliument he intends but that l\.eccpti\c nature of Fa.ih, whereby it is naiuially apt to be the Condition of the heefi giftjand fo takes the word Inftrumentjimproperly or vulgar]y,and not Logically tor an efficient caulci and takes the conditionaiity to be the 'J^tiofYO' xnna of t-aichs inccreft in juftitication,

i, 1 further demand of you, whether if you be accufcd at Judgement of final Inipcnitency or Infidelity, it be a fufficient anfwer to lay Oriip T^ghUoufncfs Is [uffii lent for mc,wilhoi/t the I.elp «f my ortn Fauh. Or if the Accufci jfay. Its true, Chiifls R.ghteoufncfs is fufficient for thole that have part in it ; but thou hafl no pa;t in^tjwiil you be jtiHibcd againft ihs charge, by recurring to the fuffici-cncy ' thaLWill notbcrtri/fw, when thetjueftion is ofyuur intcrefl in it. For if all may make ihat anf\ver,then all may be Juflified.lf onely romc,thcy muft have fome reaf^nfor it'moie then AUi and they muft fhew their Title.

3. Doth not a rational juflification at the bar of your own confcience now require the lame method '"

4. Do not your leproachful accufatlons fall as much on God and his Gofpel, as on the Reformed Dcdnnc, or on Mulr,:.tens ' For its God that laith,i:fc that Eclkveth end i-> ba^u^cd Jhallbc favcd, end he that belUzcth notjhall be damned : War. i6. i6. And all thiyfljall be danrncdthat obeyed not the truthj but had pica fare in umightconf/icfs. z Thef. a. w. ^nd except yc "^pcvt ye jhall all lil{e-rvifc pciij}}. Luke 13, 3, j. Will you now reply to Chrifl, Lord, is not Thy Hightcoujncfs [ujficicn!, unlcfs tr>y Beliczing and Repenting be caUed in to help-it}

Page 4. I do y.cld it to you. as an undoubted Truth ,that the dif-i ^g- 4-5- fcitncc is notfmaU, nor only in words. And where you fay, that MoLneeus ^rhat UjthcTiotcfia/Uyyeathe Chriflian) DoBrine doth arm the Pa-fifts and Aitn'mians. I reply, i. Not againfV our felvcs, favc oncly as it is an occa/ion, which any wicked man may railc his abufe on j and as the world do make Chrift him lelf and the Gofpel, and as you do in this Dmertatjon make Chrif^s Klghii^oufnefs the occa/ion of your Licentious Dodrine : But I con-fefs againft you^and aga nft.all Lews , Turks and Infidels , our Doftrine doth fferjitbc ?apills ^nd Jimimwis. For what ycu addc, that a^/f/?/?// doth davlicn a chief ^drticlc of Faith : I fay, it is but of the Libertines Faith : and that it labors offpcecbis not confonaifit to reafon, I fay, whether that Reafon be found and Reafon indeed, we fhall fee by the proof of what you affirm.

Page J. You do not much fail in Reciting J^/o/i;;«fWi Dodrine, Thsl rag. J. 6, ^^^ If. faid pYCpcrly and without a Trope, to be Jufiifietl by Faith , and that Faith is of the definition of Jufiifiealien, as a BcUevint, man is the adtcquate ob-iect (f Jlifiification, andfu that mm hath Faith before he is Jufiified. Only remember that you muft diftinguifh between infants and adult, and between the per-fons Faith, and the parents Faith ; and that as to perfonal Faith, this is affirmed only of the adult; but as to parents Faith, of Infants aJfo. Ypur ownDoftrinc ( for that i& the bcft title 1 can give it) you Jay downthus.

Bat I do coyiUanllyafjcYi, that when to juf^'iCieyfignifies thefamc^ oi toabfoivcj to impute the Righteoufncfsof Chrift, to forgive fin,to declaie or pre- ^ nounce juft * without the Bar of man j and rvhenfoevcr Scripture Extra, fjcalisej that Rightcoujhch k) -a-hich wc ae by Cod at his Tiibuu.il, to'/ipitutcd and acl(^nowL'dgcdjnjt, and SovSy and hi its of eternal Lijc ; then m^n canin no fort be fiid to be JH^rficdby Faith : According to thcfv rvc judge that a mams Justified bcf»yehehaveTaith^andthatamanfa'itlfiilorbciiivWgisnot the adtcquaic objcci e( Jnftifuation^andthat l--aitb hathvo parts mthc difimtion of Jnfltficatiun, or Re-mijsion of ft'?. But vvlicn to Jnslific, (jgmfie'h tn reveal Chnjls nghteoufnefs, tnjhcw it, to inalie it l^norvn, to bring it to the i(n)w'cdge of the under(tafidi?ig and confcitncc; Then I gr^wt thai by Faith, and through Faith a man ts fnftified , as by Faith it is l^iioxvn to ft man that (^hrifis Rightconfnefs belongs to him. Adde to this your larger explication afterward, wherein you alibi t juftification to be an immanent adi and wc fhal! fee more of the face of this Antichiiftian Doftrine.

It is not fcafonable forme to fall upon your opinion here, while you do but barely name it, feeing I Oiall be called to it when you come to confirm it. I will next tell youalfo fomcwhat of my opinion, as you have laid down the Authors and your own, that the Reader may have all three together.

luftlfication aftivc, is firft Couftitutivc, which is a making juft, x. Tudicial, which is cither principal or fublcrvicnt. The principal is by the fcntence of the ludge, and that is i. Impioptr,per fc?it(ntia*?i conceptam ; ox i. Properly fo called: iV'^. Per fcntentiam prolatam. The fubfeivioii luftlfication, is i. Aircrcive, as by the witneffes. x. Apologctlcal, which is i.by denying falfe Accufations , cither de fado, or tie jure. 2. By Demonftrating, i. the true Rightcoufnefs of the Caufc firft, and fo of the pcrfon, 1. that therefore the perfon is to be fentcnced juft, or abfolved by the ludgc. Thefc few fcnfes of the terra luftlfication, which are moft pertinent to our bufincfs, I have taken from among many more. And now fo much of my opinion as is ofneccflity to be difcovered for the undcrftand-ing of what follows, take in thcie Conclufions.

Concl. I. Conftitutiveluftification goes before judicial; and is the firft Jufti-fication by Faith, yea the firft of all that Scripture mcntioncth.

concl. 2. The Principal elficient caufc of this iuftification is God : the inftru-mcntal is the Promifc or Grant of thj new Law or Covenant, conveying Right to us, as Gods Deed of Gift, or Chrifts Teftament. *. The fatisfadion of Chrift is the meritorious caufe, and as it wcie, the material. 3. The Condition fivte qua non, is i. The fole Faith of the finncr, that is, his Bclcf of the Gofpel, and thankful, loving acccp;ance of Chnft as he is there offered (in which Repentance is compriz.-d)-, for the inception of his juftificacion. 2. The continuance of this Faith, with the addiction of external fincere obedience, isncccffaiy to the confirmation and continuation of this juftification in this life. 4,1 he form of it, is to make juft by Donation , or Condonation.

Concl. 3 , It is the fame aifl of God that is called Conftitutive JuftificatJon,and pardon of/in;fo far as Juftification is taken as comprehending only the rcftoring of us to the happinefs that wjf^ll from: (bat if you take it for the fupcraddmg of fny degree or fort of blcfllng which we never loft, nor was given in the firft Covenant, then luftlfication containeth fo much more then Remiftion). Yet do they notionally or refpeAivcly differ , though not Really.

Coyicl, 4. Remiffion is taken in very many fenfcs as well as Juftification > as fomctimefor meernotrpunilhingjfomctimeformeer forbearance for a time j

N n 3, fome-

C i80

fomcdme for rcmirtion of pare of the penalty only; fomctlme for admlcting to a ticacy for full pardon, and delaying execution chat while : fomctime for a nolle pu/iirc, in him that before did intend to puniOi, or a meer mental Rtmiflion. In a word,allRcdoral pardon (diftinft from that of equals) is i. the Rcdors Civil, or Lcgal,orfiipralcg\l RciiiiflioMj wiicrcby he givccli//^i- ad Impi(n.:ctcm y v".7.. vdtoL.iUtn^vd paiii.il:rn. vcl C<>nd'ti'iit.iUtetfj:l Aofulu-c, vJdr p, te'citi^vcl m d.m. 2. The fcntcntial pardon of the Iudgc-,by which oui Right to Impunity is not onc-ly dcclarcdjas Ionic imagine, but Dccihvcly dctcumncd, and thereby fuily confirmed jfls no moie to be controverted, 3 . Remifio cxcciitiva, whereby fbeforeot aft!-r Icntencc j the p;:nalty is remitted in whole or part. This is alfo called pardon in Scripture. But the firft is that which iv theiull proper Remiffion of Tin , v!7^. that Scripture mentioneth moft. An Aclof God as Reftn> by his Gofpcl Grant diQulvtng the Obligation to pnnjhment [or gning *ight to impitnity) to a Belttvwt fm-ner,foy thcfal^e of Chrifts fat/sficUvri. The principal efficient caufe is God ) not as Abfjlutc Proprietory dircftiy, but as Redor. And by his derived power, Chrift as man as well as God, doth forgirc fins. 2. The Inftrumcnt is the Tefta-menr, Promilcj or Gofpcl-Grant, which is really Gods Act of Grace or Oblivion, and a pardoning Law. i. By an aft of Law are we obliged to punithmenr, and by an aft of Law (in the large fenfe) muft we be difoblSgcd. For codcm mo-do diJJ'ohit/ir obligntio quo contrahuur. z. Legal, or Civil afts are the proper means of conveying Right,as fuch ; Legal onlyjWhen it is from a Rcftor , as fuchj and Donatory, when from a Bcncfaftor,as I'uch. And God doth it as both, ssrefiorbcncfuiens. 3. We find an aft of Grace and Conditional pardon in the Gofpcl de faclOy and therefore cannot doubt of it, when we read it there.

3. Theobjcft is a believing fmner ; that is, being prcfuppofcd a finwcr,Faith is the Condition,as in naturals the Difpojicio materia : if it be one at age , it muft be his own Faith, if an infant, his paicnts, which repiitatively and legally is his own : and therefore it is nor abfuid to call intants fiddcs, faithful, rcputativeJy, no more then to call them Chriftians, or to caliche Infidels children, Infidels , which we may well do. 4. The formal aft of Rcmiflion is Difj'ohntg the obligation : or Relaxing it t or Giving Right to impunity ; which arc civil aftions. 5f. The Terminus Proximus of this aft of Diflolving, is 0 btigatio ad Tcen-tm^ that is, Guilt: or, as it is a Donation, the Terminus proximus is }iis ad impunitatcm ; For to Diflolvc the obligation to punilhmcnt,and 10 give a light to impunity to afinncr, isall one aft , containing two notions ; 6. The remote 7ow;»/,i-is Tfl?««/'ez;^ij/^, which we were obliged to, or the impunity given. For thcfc arc not as many dream, tl-.c necrcft term. And therefore Dr. Twijje and you fpeak unfoundly when you fay that Remifllon of fin i^ but nonptmirc : Yea, or but nolle punirCfi't you fpcak it ot Gods immanent Will of Purpofc, and not of his Will rfe'Pf^ito exprelTcd in his Covenant, or his Legiflativc Will, which Dr. Trviffe took fpccial notice of as in prxc:pto, and its piety he had not obfcrvcd it as will i.i the promife and Threatning, which confltitute the DcbitumprcMii & pana, as the Precept doth the Dehilum o;fieii.

This tberefoie being the proper aft of pardon, which hath the Ob'.ignLo .id pCBnvrii or the Jus adimpunitaiemi for its ncercfl: Terminus, it is evident, that the nameof a parclon is given tothc other forcmentioncd afts, lei's properly , for their participation in the nature of this proper pardon : cfpccially from their refpeft to the penalty it felf : which is here the ultimate term, and fo nonpitnirey

and

and nollepunhtjmcLy be,and are called pardon, impcrfeft cr participativejas containing part of the nature of full pardon in them^

Coficl. 5. Thuiigh Keniifilon and Juftificacjon be thus farone , yet the word Rciniflionis more pr'.nc'paliy and tmphatica Jl}' ]poktn in icfpcrtco the penalty remitted,and kfsct us imnicdisteterin , vf\. the obligaiion : but conuarily , JuIHfication doibmoie notabl) cxprelsthc rtfped to ihc obligation and right, and Icfs the i'cnalty, or Impunity it lelf, yet each term txpielltth or iignlficth both.

Com!. 6. Alfo the term juftificntion is moft properly uftd of the fcntcntial Ablolutlonac judccmcnc, and lomiwhat Icfi) propcr]y,ot the juftification in Law fcnfc, or by prcllnc imjuitaiion or Donation, (yet fitly of both ) But con-tiaiily Paidon is moft llriClly and propaiy applyed to Gods prcfent aft by the Law of Grace or l^tomifc , and lomcwhac kls properly, to the judicial fjntential abfolution ( thot:gh fitly too of" both, and Scripture ufeth them both \vaie'<. )

Concl. 7. The fentenccas conceived in Gods own breft , that is his eftecm-ing the (inner now juft, or his willing him now juft, is lefs properly called jufti-fying.

Concl. 8. If it were this ad that were meant in Scripture, yet muft it be differenced from his Decree, to juftihe,which was from eternity : and it muft be de-nomin-itcd a^ bfginnlBg in time; For though Gods own eftcnce, commonly called tiie iubftance of this ad, be eternal, yet the fuperaddcd rcfped to a new ob-icd, gives it the Denomination. And therefore it muft receive that Denomination rtc BofO, when the obieft begins. For itis abfuid , if you ask what is Gods iLffencCiZo fay, It is an Appiobation, Acceptation, Love to luftification of a fin-ner. Though fan^us fuluiUSy & in cfc volno& cognUo ^ might be laid to be loved of God from eternity, yet not in ej[c exiftcnii'.But in time he is firft hated "* '\n efjeexiflcnti, and afterward loved in cjj'c cx'isicnti, * Pfalm ^. as a Saint : he is firft efteemed by God uniuft, and after eftcemcd 4, 5. iuft, and accepted accordingly, and all this without any change in God: but the change of the obied ncctflitateth us to denominate Gods ads as new and various.

Cottclii. 9. As luftification per fcatcniiam J:uiiciiis the moft-perfed proper luftification,'fu we know of no fuch ad of God (propeily) but at the particular ludgemcnt aficj- death, and the laft General judgement.

Conctii. 10. Wlien it is ufually faid that our luftification is the impuiat'ion of Chri(isT{!ghtcoufncfs tons ; we muft diftinguilh of both terms , ot ad and obied. I. Chrifts l^ighteoiifnefs is taken either materially for that obedience, or fatisfadion, wh:rein his Rightcoufnefs might partly be Taid to confift : or tllc for the form of Rightcoufncfs it fclf, which is rclr.tive. 2. Alfo the matter, Chrifts fatisfadion and merit is faid to be Imputed or Given us, either immedi-asely in it fclf, or elfe inits cfFed. 3. Imputation fignlfies either i. Donation, 1, or Adiudication, and that wrn/^f-;y.'//i«/f«f</T polat:i. Hereupon 1 conclude as followeth,!. Chrifts Rignc.ouljiers formally is incommunicable to any other. Our Union with Chrift makes us not the fame perfon with him , to be the fame fubicd of the fanie AccidentjKi^/.jffCA'/'K/i. z. God doth not untruJy fuppofe or ludgc us to be what we are not, ol tu have done what we did nor, as to have fa-tisficd,or perfedly obeyed,or both, in or by C hrift. 3. Chrifls fatisfadion and merit was given or tendred ia iticlf co the Father,aiiU not to \.\s, 4. Remiflion

and~

and Righteoufncfs merited by Chrifts fatisfaftion is piren to us, and adiud^ed to us, and wc iudgcd riglucouis hereby. 5. Thisis the Riglitcoufncfs of God, and ot Chilft , as given and as mciited, as it is ours as the fubicds of it.

6. Cliiifts own Kightcourncfs materially may well bcfaid to be given us^and adjudged to U5,though not in it lclfimir,cdiatc]y,yctbccaufe it is tor our ufc and lake. As a father cnat gives 1 000 1. to buy land tor his Sun, may b>; laid to give him 1 ooo 1, though it were in land, and not immediately in money : or as one that glvcth 1000 1. to redeem a Captive , may be faid to give him 1000 I. in that he gave it tor him ; though the thing immediately given him be l.berty.

7. So th.\c both by Donation , and Adiudication, Chrifts Righteoufncfs is imputed to us, in the forementioned Icnfc. Ot which Ice B/,idjh.iw de Jul I fie.

tondu. 11, Chi ift luftificth us Ap()IogeticaIly,as our Adrocate, now and hereafter, but lententially as our ludge only.

ConcUc. 11, Apologetically, a man may iuftifiehimfclf, though yet he need a better Advocate,

Conclu. 13. The luftificationof confcicnccor any other/?f/ modnm Teftis, 1$ not that which ii ordinarily called Gods luftifrcation, but a means to it.

ConcU. 14. The luftification of confcience in this Lite, as an internal ludgc, isimpropcr, low, fallible oft-times', and is not that which Scripture means by luftification by Faith, or before God.

ConcUc. I y. There is no known way of Gods pafling a fentcncc within us, but by caufing our own underftanding or confcience to know and iudge that we arc iuft or iuftified : and this is not the luftification neither which Scripture trcates of, as Gods luftification of a finner.

Co-ncla. 16. Tne rightcoufnefsofhiscaufeis thcreafon why the pcrfonis lulli-ficdin iudgmcnt: and therefore in order goes fiiif,

Cundii. 17^ As God hath made two Covenants or Laws^and bo:h arc Kcgula. aCtienum &- fudicily and the New Law of Grace is but Lex jtarticular.is, and the Law of nature is Lex univerfalu, and the Law of Grace is but fubfervient to the Law of Nature , being Lex Rcmediansy purpofely ordained for the dillolving of its obligation to punilliment • fo alfo we have a twofold caufc to make good at judgement againft the Accufer : the one is,that though we are finncrs, ytt nor to be condemned by the Law, becaufc through Chiifts fatisfaiflion and the Go-fpcls free Prom,Ic or Grant, the obligation ot Ic is dillolved. To prove this as Chrifts blood and the Teftamcnts Donation, muft be produced and pk-adcd on one hand, io muft our peculiar intereft in this Grant be pl.adcd alio, as the Condition. And here comci in the fecond Caule wiiich is firft to be determined, ^/•^. feeing the Gofpel gives pardon and Life ro none but true Believers, whether we be fuch or not> ( yea lincere obedience for the continuation, and final abfolution, is pai t of the condition to be enquired aftcr^ And here in this caule , it is only the producing of our Faith, and Obedience,;, c. of our pcrlormanceof the Cou-ditiiins of the New Cuvenanr, thit will lerrc to juftifie us.

Conclu. 18, Now to review all ihcfe, and Ihcwwhat part Fai.h hath in our juftification , 1 fay, i. Faith is ftridly and properly a Condition , as the word is ufed in a civil fenfc,of our Conftitutive juftification by Gods written pardon, or Gofpel Grant, i. As to Gods internal Acceptation,or cftccming, or approving as juft, Faitli is a neceffary qualification of the obj:(fl, without which no Aft of Gods, Ti. e. his Effence indccd)cannot have ihcfc dcnominations,bicaufe they

are

are d€nomIn«€d ex connotatlono objcCii.So that here alfo Faith is Condiiiefme qui Hon in fenfu Haturaliy but not Civih. 3.Faith primarily, and obediencefccondarily, are proper Conditions without which God will not favc us, nor juftifie us by fcn-tenceinpublick judgement. 4. Sincere Faith, Repentance and Obedience (all that God hath made the Condition of our Juftification at Judgement and falva-tion) is'the very matter of confcicnces, or Gods Juftification ad inodnm Tcjlis, afferting dcfnfloj that we did perform the Condition, f. When we are accufcd before God, or Conlcicncc, of inccr fin,as fin fiiuply , or that the Law of works doth oblige Us to puniHimcnt j we muft plead the Gofpcl pardon in and ff>r the-blood of Ohrift : and this is our Juftiiia Caufte here. But when wc arc accufcd of final non-performance of the Conditioiis of the New Covenant, and fo of finallmp^nitcncy, Infidelity and Rebellion againft the Redeemer, here wc muft be juftificd by producing ourpcrformance of the Conditions, and denying the truth of the acciifation : and not by pleading that Chrift dyed for our final non-pcrfor mance of thtfe Conditions. So that here Faith and fincerc O-bedience is it fclf the very matter of our righteourncfs,to be pleaded. 6. At the inferior improper bar of confciencc herein this life, Faith hath feveral parts in oui' Juftification. In fome refpcd it is a part of the efficient Caufe : In feme rc-fpeft it is the Evidence : In fome refpcft it is the matter of our Juftification. So chat thcfe I think, are the offices of Faith.

Yet note, that when Faith or Obedience is faid to be fometime our material righteouinefs it felf, onwhich we muft be Iuftificd,that is not the leaft derogation to Chrifts fatisfadion or rightcoufnefs : For our perfonal performance is not our Justin VnivcrfaliSy nor any part of tlut by which the Law muft be an-fwercd, which condemneth all that perfeftly obey not. But it is onely our JtC' fUtia pa) ticularuJ and that fubordinateand fubfcwient to Chrift who is our /«-ftitia Z)nivCffa(is ■■> and firft to be produced that our Title to Chrift and Univer-fal Rightcoufncfs may be made good. If men or Devils accufc me of killing a mznn\ Indiai whom I never thought of j I may juftifie my fclf againft that falle Acpifation by denying it i and when this is the caufe und^i tryal, my own innocencY is my righteoufacfs : yet none will fay that this is a wrong to the Tighteoufnefs of Chrift. Clirifts righteoufncfi pardoneth my fins , and not my innocency or duty as fuch j nor will he pardon the final non-performance of the Cundkions of tiic New Cove^^aHM io any, nor died for thai end^ Note alio tluc though a wicked man may have Jiifiluam partic/dnrcfn in foro T}iv'ino, that is,may be falfly accufei j yet that will not fave him,for it is this only thing which the Gofpel makes the Condition of'Life, which is it that will be the great caufeof the day, to be enquired aftevjand which Abfolution or Condemnacion will follow upon.

Conclii. 12. Among all thtfe. It is principally Conftitutive Legal luftlfication, or Remiflion, and fentential luftification at judgement, which is meant in Scripture, where it is afcribed to Faith and Chrifts blood : though Apologetical by Chrift as our Advocate may be alfo implyed.

That Juftification by the Covenant-Grant Is firft In order,is evident j and that it is by Faith as the Condition is as evident. Alfo that luftification which is faid to be by faith ordinarily in Scripture,is the fame with Reiiiiflion of fin. But that it is moft properly it which is by the Covenant.' therefore, &c. The major fliallbe proved hereafter, where I findc this Author denying it.

Conclit, 10. Gods mccr Decree to pard»n or juftificj is no wherein Scripture

Oo called

/^

Called Pardon or lufllficationj nor in rcafon fo to be called : much lefs Is it that Pardon oi luftillcation which Sciiptuie ordinarily ircatsof. Nor is any a& of Cod upon Chrifts death, called our luftification, or pardon ; but onlyihatihc general Grant of pardon to all that will BcKcve, may well be faid to be a general Conditional pardon and juftihcation. But while it is but conditional, and the condition not performed, it is notaftual. Nor doth the Scripture call any man lufti cd in any one place, before upon the condition of his own or his parents Faith, he be luftihcd. (I put in the latter, to put by their cavil about infants.)

And thus I have given my fence before I confute yours, and the rather, be-' caufe in other Writers, I like not a mecr dcftiuilitive aiguing, though it be caficft, and may lave much labor to the opponent, yet it is not the beft to Editication : and bccaufc I hold nothing that I am afhamcd fliould fee the light j and with my baethrcn that diflcntfrom mc, 1 am f) far from hiding my opinion,that I moft fear, Icaft I ftiould not fully enough reveal it.

§. ^,

Pag. 7. L. C. TJO*' i» ihifurwcrfcvfe I concc'wtnoi horcby Faith a mtmmaybe •T rnade righteousy or ponotmccd riehtcons at Geds Tribunal , and hii fins fa.rdo7ied : but in the fccondjefife it is cnfie and of ebviom under (landing ta fay J that by Taithj^as a,c not remitted^ but made l{noTvn to be remitted.

"R.B. T Have now told ycuihat which you fay you conceive not, how it may be, nay more, it is an eafier intelligible Truth, how Faith rtiould be the Condition ot Gofpel pardon, and fcntcntial luftificaiion, then how it fliould reveal then'. For though it help to reveal them, yet the knowledge of luftifica-tion is that which wc call AlFurancc, and not, as the Libertines conceive, lufti-fying-Faith.

S. 3.

L. C. I. XT under other VhJne^ffioKS there lay the fame ambiguity avd homo-i- xymie, (_as aiePriede{}inaiion,Elcmon,0':^^on, Rcdempticni ^-iloptiony &c.) as is in the aiiion of Ju^ificationy it might as propcrfy be [did that we aie Elcclidby Faiihyor the no, Id created by Faith , bicaufe iy Faith rve lynow our felvcs to be ElefiiOr by Faith rve /j-wow that Codcreatcdthe Tro;/d;for the ^popie alfo faithy^ Thcf.2,j?,Thaivvc aieOEkft through belief of the Tiuih.AKd yet fom that p'acethe^uilor oj the F.piflk trouldnot cjjht that Faith isef the definition vf Elcnion, er that Elcciicn is by Faith. Therefore though to Juftific did eve-iy ychcre retain the fame f unification oj to Create, Elcft, Adept, do not vary theirs; J fee notythat rphen Paul faithy A man is Juftificd by Faith, thereby Faith is any morefct before Juflifi-cationor T{emifsicn of fnis, then Faith is by him made the caufe of EUHion , or that he had Icfs unfitly faid that omfms arc pardovcd by faith , rh» that we arc clewed

health, ' §;• 3.

I

C 187]

s. 3.

R. B. WE''^ yo" ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^*^ forcfee an argument that would be ufed againft you, but had not a caufe that made you capable of a tolerable An-fwer. We argue thus j If it were but the knowledge of Rcmiflion and luftifica-tion that is afciibedto Faith , then wj might as ficly be faid to be cleded by Faith, Redeemed by Faith,Crcatcd by Faith, as luftified by Faith: But the con« fcquent is falfc: therefore fo is the Antecedent.

The argument is unanfwerablc ; But let us fee the fliifts of this Author to evade it. i. That Eledl.on, Redemption, &c. vary not their fenfe, and arc n:t ufed in divers fenfcs, is a fallhood very notorious ! How oft is EicAion taken for the Adual choofing fome out of the world in time, by vocation > and at other-times (G/of/w thinks only £/>/;. t. but amil's) for the Eternal Decree > How oft is Redemption taken for the paying of the price of our deliverance ? yet how oft alfo for aftual Liberation > and thatfomctime as begun in this Life ; foinc-time in perfetftion hereafter, M^ilfori, Moitimus, Itiericus^T^avanel^tis, and all that open Scripture terms, will contradid this Diflcrtor. 3. If heobjcit. But Ek-flion and Redemption are never, or not ufually taken for the knowledge of Eledion and Redemption, as lullification is ufually taken for the knowledg;: o: luftification : Ianfwer,the later is eafier begged then proved or granttd, that ever luftification or Rcmifsion is fo taken , much Icfs ufually.

4. What reaion is there why the knowledge of eledion or redemption may not be called c'.edion and redemption, as well as the knowledge of luftification may be called luftification. y. Yea it would in us be fomcwhatmore luftifi. able to ufe that language then this latter. Becaufe eledion and redemption arc truly pre-exiftentto our knowledge of them ; and therefore we fhould borrow a name from fomewhat that truly is. But luftification pre-cxiftent to our Faith, ( in men at age ) is a d^jm^ra^ a Fidion, and therefore you borrow a name from that which never was. Scripture fpeaki of eledion and redemption before Faith; but never once of luftification b:fore Faith. 6. Your arguing from zThtf.z, 13. is fo notorious an abufe of the text,as fhcws either great weaknefs or immo-defty, to fpcak eafily of it. Suppofc that i*dyia.(iJLa 'Trvn/i^t.etlof x} Tis^/ aAg-Qfiaf tuuft be tranflated perfanfiificAlioncmfpiaius & (idem vattatu- yet you know it is not fimply eUcicd through Faith, but ilcfledto fahation threiigh[.inilifcation of the Sprrityittd belief of the Truth. You ftiould not have left out «> ntinfUv. By fignificth the nature of a means in order to fome end. God hath ekded us to be faved by the means of Faith. Here ialvation is the end of Faith , but fo is not Eledion. You might well have gathered hence that we are faved by faith, but what (hew of a ConduGon that we are elcdcd by Faith, as if Faith were a means ta Eledion, which is plainly in the text made the Confequent of it .• But when it is faid we are luftified ^> Faith, the word 7«^'jff^, plainly exprefled the end to which Faith is a means. If you do indeed think that in this Ipeech /«-ftificd {!tinds in the fame place as£/f(3frididin the former, then fuflificd muft: fignifie no Effcd or Conftqucnt of Faith at all, but a Caufe or Antecedent j for fo Elc5ted doth ; and then I piay you what doth by faith fignific,you will make utter non-fen fe of it. Laftly, dare you interpret i Thef. 1. 13. Ek^ed tofalvation through fan^ifcation,&c.i. c.V/cVnovJ our own Eledion through Sandification. 1 confefs Grotiui and fome Armlnians will fay that the text figni-fieib a temporal Ekdion following Faich ; (yet never dream of yourfenfe^

C',88 3

But 1 hope you will ncrfo Inrcrpret cl't* etjKvf, as if ilu; Apoftk mcanu/kJW the

begimwg Cod luv.h Truck %oh I^Kowyoiir BUimn. If you do, 1 fliall doubt you vviil next fo intcipKt/;<?w or b([oie t\'C foundations of ti;f world , which ii jo>n^d wiili. Elc^ion in othci Texts ot Sciiptuic.

§. 4.

L. C. 1. 'Y^ccaufeof ibetnor unotonlyintbchomonymic of the ivo-rd lu%'i-iyin^',Old alfo $f the word?a.'it\\y fvhich " "/^ ''^^'^W f'''^'' M ^'^'^ Vocti'neof the Gofpei,orfor thfobjcd of faith : Sorvhcn the Scripture faith Abi-a-ham WJ5 Ji:fificd by faith^ it u plain that it means3 Abraham was luftificd by Chrift die objcft of Falib, M Calvin and Rivet imrprctit.

§.4.

K. £. A Cecp difcovery you makeof thccaufcof our error. Who knows ••^ not that Faith is fometimc put for the Doftrine or objcft of faith ? But; would you have us believe tliat it is lb taken iii the text you cite, or in all texts that fpeak of Iiiflification by Faith ? then muft we firft renounce our rca-fon)& contra T^afio/icm nemo fobiiii^i ; and we niuil renounce the plain evident fenfc of Scripture, & contra Scri^-tHram nemo ^7;>i_/?i(7»«i •, and we muft renounce the expofition of the Church in all ages ; Et centra Eccleftam nemo pad-fiiui. We Well know that others as well as ^d/i-iw and 7{ivety fuppofe that Chrift the objeft of Faith is implyed in tlic word Faith , yea principally intended in the Apoftks difpute. But do they think therefore that cither Faith is not included, or that by Faith is meant not Faith,biit Chrift ? nothing lefs. If the quc-ftionbc whether fucha poor woman became rich and honorable by her own labor, or Ly marriage ( fuppofing fhemany a manof honor and riches ^ If J fay 7101 by her Labor or worl(y but by marriage : 1 do principally mean by her husband j iHJtthai isbut asitis implycd in the word Marriage ;• Sure I do not exclude marriage it fclf, nor put t\tc word marriage fimply for a husband : btit by connotation only. So doth Faith connote Chrift believed in, but doth not diredly iignific Chrift. Do you thhik that when James difputcs whether Faith only Juftific, that he mean;, whetlier Chrift only luftific ? Pcrufe his arguments, and ihink fo if you can. Divines ufe to fay, by Faith alone he means a dead Faith , and by Works,a working Faith. Do you ihiuli he means a dead Chrift and a ivorlining Chrift. And would the mentioning ot ^i/7z/;i7Wi luftific.ition by Chrift only, have done any thing to prove his conclufioH' Ipiay pcrufe Rom. ^.and fee what fenfc your Expofition puts upon ityverf. 3. Abraham believed God,and n rooi counted-, &c. U Bclicjcd put for Christ here > then how is it an aft ? Chrift is no afl: then how is God made the objcft ? vcrf^. Tokim that rvorlfCth not , bitt believeih o'lhimthat Juflificththcnngodly, &c. U bclievethf here/ignific Chrift^ then v;hat is meant by o«/;/w: li Chrift the objeft and aft both ? So verf. 11, I z, I 3, 14, I 6, 17, I 8. Againft hope he believed in hope. Is bcliczitig here put ^r Chrift, and not for Faith it felf:- So i 9, zo, 21.1 amaftiamed to argue any more in fo palpable a cafc,further then to intrcat the Reader that is not laclsfieda to pcjule the TcxtSj and alio the Hiftory in GcncJ/s , and if he can believe after

thisa

this, that It is Chrlftonely and not Faith that is meant by Faith, he is none of tTiofc't'liat I write for, t'c>/. ij, 14. the Aprftle applycs aJl thus. It was not vviitten for his like alone that.ic \vas imputed to him; but for us aho to whom it fliall be imputed, if \vc bcheve'on him that raifed up jcfus, &c. All l^i^ngS'*re here as plain againft you as can be imagined. The Objed Chrift is here expiclltd : Believing is niaiK ad, and therctoic not Chrift : Believing is it that is imputed. Believing is plainly made A Condition on mans part : im-^ paring is a thing to be done after Faith, and not done before j Itjhallbe i/fiputed, if vrc believe. Anddoyou think thofc texts that promifc Remiflion and Juftifi-cation to men if they will believe, and that whofoever bclievcth in him fliall receive rem;llion of fins, and be juftified from all things , &c. do mean Cbr'ifl only by b.jicving' Btlicvingis i.anaftthcn. 2. a duty of mans. ^.his condition, Chrift is not fo. 1 refer you for this, to what is already written by Mr. JFottoiJ, 2nd Mr, Goodwin of luftification : which I would not have you think you have anlwcrcd, by charging him with error in other things j which are nothiiag CO the queftion. Nay obferve the ingenuity of this Diflertor , who mentioncth Calvin^dit, istimating him to expound this text as he: when as Calvin on 7(pw.4.J. where tlje text is , hath not a word for him, ( nay how little for the connotation of the objeft which I before allowed, dircdly and cxprefly in comparifoft of what he faith for the ad) buton the contraiy much. He faith, Z.oa/5 qui cita-tur ex Gtn. ly. 6. fnwpiuse^. VbiVerbum Ciedendiy non ad farticuln,c aliqitod diftumvcftriagi 4^bctyfcd ad totiimfrJumftedns., ei^ adoptionis gratiavi qttam dicitur Abraham ji'<ic appychcndijjc. J^tarc Abraham Cfcdaidit nihil qiifim oUatamfibigra* t^am amt)lc^iti(',ntkrita. fit. Si hoc ilU imputatiiy,in fiisiitiamj fcquitnr nnnalittf ejfe Jupinii nifi quia Dei bonh-ite C^nfifus., omnta-ab-iffo fpernve aiidet. Hanc pro-miffKmis & fidei relationon neccjj'^iium cj? a4,fi.ituendam fuflitiamy intelligere : quo-niam eadam eft hie inter Deum & nos ratio^ qi'ite apud jimfconfultos , inter "Vatoitm & donatariiiny. T^eqiie enim Jii-fiitiam dtte-f eonfcq/u^ur, nifiqnia ficutiyEvangelii, Troinifflone nobis dcfertur^ ita ejus pnffefjhnetnfidc qita/i Cernimuf^

But perhaps he means on Gen. 15.^. that Calvin faith ai he intimates. Not a wordthece neither, butmuch againft him.Let thcfe words witnefs,D^zi^«c non mi-?iO/is (luporis quammpudefitiaefijquum hoc iUi imputatum fiu^e difitnr ^ in uifti-tiamidium fcnfam Comminifci quantfidcm .Abiahafuijjc pro fuflitia u^tudDcuwy &c. 7^c fane alia de Caufa nos fuflificat fides, nifi quia nos 'Dettrec-onciliai j mqut idfuomerito, fed dumgratiamnobh in piowi^onibusoblaiamKicipimus, &e. Nay he faith more then I d;irc by much, ^tiim dicit ^lofcsimputatam fuife Abrte fi' dcmpio Juflitia, nonfignificat islam fidem primam fuifje Ju[iitia Cn^^^^i ?"** cffi» cicns dicHur3 fed (ormihrn duntaxut.

L. C. 3. /^T^other caufe of'the En o-r is ^ that thy promifcuoufly

^* w.T^'c thofe to be * homonyma, wbic'r i/idccd are very * The fame

divtYs : fo when Juftification is an individual actioyi^ tvuhont us , words fignl-

Tvhich prenoitnccth usjuft^ortbefi^eofchifiyabjoliiti^ md pardon tying di-

cth fins, and is the imputation of RighieoufncCs ., Ntveythelefs hey vers things. aipi call by the n^me of Juftafication 'that iateyral an: of man,-where by he belieajcth in Godjandtrufieth that Chnfts obedience is impuitd to hifKjamii^iz^n him

C1903

R. S. r. Wnil you do fo much as fir your own Dodrine to this youi own dc« fciiptionof luftificacion,andto tellus by the next, what thi« extrinfick Pronunciation is ? You lay, that luftificacion is an immanent aft • And is fronoun:'ing iisjuft an immanent a^ ? I never heard of fuch a one ciil now. And ieeing it muft needs be a Tranfient aft, Will you defcribe that aft wheicby at Chrjfts deathjor from Eternity, God did pronounce you juft ? The fii ft that I know of, is the Covenant-Grant, wliich is a Conditional general luftiiication or pardon.

1. And will you do fo much by the next, as give us a Catalogue of forac of ihofcmen that call their believing, by the name of luftification. I never fatf any fuch paltage but one flip in a popular Sermon by a * Except in thofe Learned Dr. that knew better. " 1 know mat Confcfllons and ofyourorvntvay, Authors of all Countries fpeak othcrwifc. I mean , of thofe OftheTafifis, men who maintain the Dofti me which you oppofc i and call Faith the Condition of luftification , and an inftrument of luftification f that is, as I interpret the more judicious of them)-, A Receiving aft, metaphorically called an inftrument of receiving, not of effefting. Or till you have cited them, will you give us leave to take this for an injurious dealing againft the Ninth Ccmmandment,

5. ^.

Pag, 10. L. C. C'5 vphen Juftificanon is agfaciousfemence of the Judge , abfaU k3 v'mione obnoxious to wrMh andgm'ty of eternal death j yet da they confound the patefadion of that gracious {cntence made to the confc'unce of the guilty pcrfonbyfaithywith the A5tion of Godpgrformedrvithout him j at ieflthcyre' fer it to lu^ificAtion taken in the firfl fcnfe.

K. B. I. A Gain, defcribe that immanent aft , or any a A from eternity, or £\ from Chrifts death, whichn;ay be called , A gracious fenccncc of the Judge abfolving one guilty of eternal death, &c. i. Some do indeed give the fame name of Ju(iificatio» to that patcfaft ion which you mention, and fo do you, over and over. But who,or how many take it for the fame thing ? But that fure you mean not to charge them with when you fay , They mal{e thofe homony M

ma vphich are diverfiflima j I know not therefore what you char.ge them with, but ■

what you do your fclf. ^ ^ J

3. Wcdo, andiuftly do refer Faith to luftification before God. But I pray '.

you obferve ihefc 3 things, I. that by Ju^ificatlon we mean not any eternal aft of God,or ahy done before Faith, i. that by Faith , we mean not any mani-fcftation to our confciences chat we are iuftified : that is the Antinomian Pefcription of Faith , though it cannot be dcnycd but many of

our Divines formerly have been carried too far to fuch like ex-prefsions , in their oppofition to Popifli doubting. But by Faith we mean The ^jfait to the Truth of the Gojpel, and the accepting of an offered Chrift, 3. obfervc in what fenfe we refer this Faith to Iuftification before God. i. T,oxime& quoad rationem(tilmulem, as a Condition of that luftification, which is but Caufafimqua «oa : and remotely as apt to this office, being in its nature the acceptance ota free Gift, which is commonly called its Inftrumentality. Do not confute us before you undcrlland us.

• §.7. :.■—

Pag. 10. t, C. A ^'^ '^ " worthy the -fjot'tngi that Scripture faith indeed, that £^ we are luftificd by Faith, and it never affirmeth that fins are forgiven by Faith, n-hich yet might ai rvcH he, if to juftifie, and to forgive fins, did almay fiandin equal fignification. But feeing that one may be faid properly,and the other bin improperlyjit is plain that to juftifie by Fairh ( when tojuflifie is the fame as to forgive fins) is as improperly faid as to i'oigivt dns by Faith, ^nd therefore that tbejpccch to luftifie by Faith, that it may be properly fpolfcn^ mu(l fignifie fome-thing elfe then to remit fins by Faith j to rvity by the Grace ofFanl), to mal^e \noiv!t to the finner that by C'hrifts Righteoufnefs heis Jiiftified,and fo his fin forgiven.

$. 7.

R. B, I, npHIs is a notable argument,where the ConfeqUcni contradideth the Jl Antecedent^ If thefe two fpeeches to luftiBe by Faith, a?id to remit fin by Faith, be one of ihem u fed properly, and the other improperly (tine being in Scripture and the other not) andyctto fufufic and Remit fin be all one ; thcnibe one is fpol(en improperly as rvell as the other : Fut the Antecedent is true ; therefore. Ixhink this is your argument, which I will not laugh at , as remembiing what cafe fuch aigucrs have brought the Church into : nor will I confute it further, left I offend my Reader, and iofc time. 2. But do not you read of Remitting fins , if we believe ? and to do it on condition we believe , and to do it by Believing as a Condition is all one. Rom. 4. 6,7. th6 Apoftlc makes luftification by Faith,before mcntioned,to be the fame with for-givcncfs of fin. Act. i6. 18. That they m.tyrece'ive forgivencfs of fns , &c. through Faith that is in me. Here is receiving remiffion (not the bate knowledge of Rcniiffion ) through Faith, -^ /. ' 3. 3 8, 5p, Through this m.tn is preached to you the forgivencfs of fins; and by him all that btlieve are Jiifiifiedfrom aliilings from which yc could nut be Juffifi(d by the Law of Mofcs. Here tht y arc mauc all one. Act. I. S^. Repent and be baptised ftrr the Rcmiffion of fin \ and doubtlcfs Faith is principally intended in both thefe, bnptifm being the folcmn proftdion of Faith on our parts, and ur>belief being the fin that he pcrfwades them to Repent of. Acl. 10. 43. Through his name, ivhccvcr Bclicvth in himJhaU receive remiffion of fins. Here is as much as wc affirm. If you fay,lt faith not by believing^ I fay, when wc fay we are luftified by FaitbyVic n^an no more then this,nor doch Tatdmanmoxcyhutuut whoever bclicveth isjufliftd. Rom. 3. jy. ff'kom Ged

hnth

c^^5

hath fet forth to be a p/^p'itlatton through Faith in bis htOoi, to deckre his K'l^hteouf-nefsj for the rcmigi/m cf Jins that are fnfty &c. GjI. J. zi. But the Scripture hath concluded -all under fin, that the Promife by Faith of Jcfus C'hrift might be given ro them thpt believe.By proinifc here,no doubt,is meant thcgood Promif-ctl, and ch.1t is Rcmiffion of (in, as b:ii g oppofed to Concluding md,r fin, and this isgivcnAyFit/r/; ; And all arc before concluded under fin ; and therefore not jufffficd or forgiven.

3. We maintain that it is a proper fpecch to fay,;f'(? are ffy^ivenby or though IiiuhiasvicU^ihv.fytatiiJufiifi£dby.FuLlu^Aasi if you had never read in Scripture of 7(ftf/x/;«^ Ktmijfton of fin by faith, Alt. i6. 18. or forgiving by faithj ^t'-ioih not follow that it is therefore any fefs proper, then luftifying by Faith. Kor can your fclf give any reafon after your own way, wl\yone is not as proper as the other.

4. What if \vc were forced to confefs an impropriety In tTie Yfords,Jitjiified by faith 5 Mull it therefore ncedi be taken in your lenfe for maniftftation > Nothing lefs. If it were Icfs proper to fay by faith, as fecming to exprtfs a Caufe, yet we truly fay ; It rowans as by a Condition : Though jridced it is not improper.

§.

Eag.li. L. C,

A Nother caufe of Lbcewir is , that tbej vauldhave the aSls of '^* Remitting fins,and of Apprehending the T{em]jfion of fins , to be done together, and perpetuaSy to cohere : but tbofe things that do alway cohere, are nciihec the fame, nor is one alvfojes of the definition of the other : far the fame men would have Juflifieatum md Sau£fideationalrvay Companions, r*hc4 they plain' ly differ in the definition, yea they no way agree in the parts of the definition : But it JhaU after appear that the AUions of GtdKemittinifms, and of the Btlcivcr apprehending kemijfion of fius, an not alwayes Concomitant.

§. 8.

^. JS. I. TF you will deal fairly, diftinguiflr of Apprehending. We willcallly ■*• prove that Apprehenflon, as it fignifics but Aflcnt and Confcnr, or Acceptance, alwayes goes with , that is, before aftual Remlfsion ( in the aJuIt.) But apprehcnfion as it fignifieth the knowledge that (in Is already remitted, follows after itjGod knows howlong,fofnctiine longer,G^instim.- fhortertirac. z.Who ever argued (a.s you feem to accufe themj from ccnjlant coherence, to a neccjfhy of entringthe dcfinnion ; Iz l^i^thcr ftom the nccejfiiy of faith to Iiiflifcat^on.^.whcre^ roitfo cohcrcth-, and that as the immediate Condition qualifying the piattcr. 3. Your ControverfiejiT^jef/;f/• itjhoulderner the definition ofJu^iftcatioE'A^ of Imall moment S It muft, or muft not, according as you take the word JnfUfication'. If you intend to define ut Thyficus, only the luftifying aft, no doubt Faith muft not come in. If you intend forcftraincd a definition as ll*all contrin nothing but Caulesj Faith is none fuch : But if you intend a more full definition, ut Jmifcon-fuliHs Chiifiia/tus, which may fuUy delineate to the uncierftanding of your reader, the nature of the luftifying aft, (which is, Donatio ConditionaUs, c> non ^bfoluttt^

before

before the Condition be performed ; and is qu^ifiAbfolittacnly on the performance of that Condition) then it is Ik you Ihould put Faith into your Definition. I would you would mark vvhechcr Scripture ufe to Icare it out of its defcri-ptions.

4, The feparabillty of luftlfication from Faith ^in tlic adiilO wc (liall believe you will indeed make appear, i .Either when you have proved the juftification of infidels. 2. Or when by fafcinacion, you have put on our nofcs your fpeftaclcs, which caufc this ftrange apparition to your fclf.

§. 9.

Pag. 11.13. L, C. ''VHisalfo is a canfe of the error, that The caufe why Cbrifis Kightcoafnc(s is made l^aown to m and applycd, is made an efficient caufe of Jiislification, at IcH, Inflnimcntal and Ufs principal, what ? ii the Application ofchrifts T^ghtcoufncfs imputed to My andof Kcmijfton of fins, a caufc of Kemiffim ef ftns and vf Chrijls fatisfaiHioKy when Faith is not fa much as requircdy that Chrift may fatisfic for m ? '^f matters it that Faith is required that that fatii-fa£iion may be l^nown to us. If a. Prince abfolve a condemned ^lalcfafior by his written-par don, jhaU that pardon be the lefs valid,becaufe when it was written, the ^lalc-faiior l^ncwnolhijigof it? Or is it requifitc to the validity of the fentcnce of the Judge3 that theT)eftndant do Believe the Judge ?

§. 9.

R, B. I. TT cannot be denyed butfome, and too many have made the Do-■*■ ftrine of Juftification a ftumbling block, and given advantage to the Advcrfarics, by making Faith the proper inftruraental caufc of luftification. 1 defend them not, having fufficicntly oflFcnded them. But yet remember, thac for ought I can undcrftand, you have no great reafon to charge C. Molimeus with thatj nor many move of our Divines who uie the word Inflrument; becaufe they mean but this much,that Faith Jiiflificth not by D.ferving,()ut Receiving a free Gift, and fo I confent to them, fuppofing that ic includeth the ratwiem Condliionis as its neercft intercft. And lb they take not the word Inftrument properly, for ari Inftrumental Caufc.

2. You ftill give us your own erroneous defcription of Faith, as ours, as if ic were the makirg known, or the knowing of Chrift^ Rightcoufnefs, (to be ours: for fono doubi you mean : for I confcls it is one aft of Faitli, to alVcnc to the Teftimony of God concerning Chrifts Rightcoufncrs)indced wc callfaith thc^p-plication of that 7{ightecuf»efs'.bux. that is not for the mecr knowledge that its ours, but firft that it may be ours ; It is a Receptive Application of a Gift, and not a. Difcovcring of what we have already. Nay,how vainly do you take it for granted, and go away with it as undoubted, that, the Faith whicnwc treat of, isThe .Application of Chiijls Rightcoufnefs imputed, vi\. already > When you know, Cif you know alinoft any thing of this kindc ), that wc make Faith An Application, i.e. Aiccptation of that Kighteoufnefs,that U maybe imputed, i. e. by Donation aftual, and by adjudication. For that Imputation wc make to be the fame with luftlfication ; vi\. Imputation by the Gofpcl Donation; is luftification Confti-

P p tutive.

totJ-v*, or mslccs Hsfisft Rkhtfcrs ; and Imputaticn ^y adjudication , Joth Judlc?-sJly aJbfolvc u$, or dctermir.c us to b; F< i^hrccus. Ar.d ycu knew we make faith to go both bcfcrcihel'esds of juftifying.

3. t wt what an in-uricu$ intimaticn is it to joyn together Remiflion amJ Chrlfts fatlsfadion, and to intimate that we make faith^ or the Application ofChrifts rightecufnefs, aCaul'cof thrifti fatisfaQion ? who Is the Protiftant Divine that hath done fo- In what book and page do ycu find it' Tell us pundually if you can. We believe that Chrifts fatisfadion is the meritorious Caufc of our Remifllon, and not Remiffion it fclf, but long bchre it.

4 For your intimationj3s if we made it theufe of faith, that Remiflion or fatJsfadJ-on may be known to us : I anfw. i. It is not that Remiflion may be known , hut that the conditional icmiflion granted in the Ad of Oblivion or Grace, which is known, may become adual to us in particular by Acceptance : and fo that ic may be ours. z. And for fatisfadion, filth beiicvcth the truthofit, and accc-ptcth thefrul: of itj with him that performed ir.

5. How lame is your fimiliiuJe, fitted to ycur own maimed apprehenfions of the nature of the Golpel' the Princes pardon that you mention Is either Absolute or Conditional : Ifablokitc, 1 cjnfefs to you, it is valid before it be known or believed. But if you would have fpcke as one that underitandeth the Gofpel, you fhould have fiippofcd your Princes pardon to be conditional, and the Condition to betheAcceptanceof the Prince himfelf, as your Redeemer and Lord, and pardon but with him 5 and then you would eafily fee that you could not have rljhc either to feim or his pardon, but upon your Acceptance.

6. I confefs your arguing may prove that God might,if he had pleafed, have pardoned men that never knew of it. (Though fome Divines that I argue with maintain-the comraiy) and fo that faith is not of abfolute natural neccffityto all thaC'

fliould be pardoned. But then when God hath once made Jr Thaia>Koiigvicn, the Condition of his Gift, his Ordination hath made it ne-a.Tremifegives ceffaiy And where the Gofpel Is revealed, and Chrift offered, not Right, tilt ac' it is of natuial moral nectfljty that he be accepted i fofar as that cepicdu/ital/y. Sec you may eafily difcein it fit that no man fliould be pardoned by Sayius Clau.Reg. Chiift while he dtfpilcth him, and the means of pardon : no lib.c.6.p. 5 29, more then a Phylitian Ihould heal a naan (well In his wits ) that

530. i>. Z2, zji will not believe but that he is adeceiver.and that will not truft

him, nor take him for his Phyfitian.

7. For your ether fimilitude, it fliavs ycur miftake : You fuppofc It is be-Utving our fentential juftificatioii by the Judge to be true, that is made the juftifying ad ot faiih. But .hats faU'c ^ Ic is the believing the Ad of Grace, the Remedying Law } And accepting the Redeemer and his benefits , which is the Condition of final Abfolution, as well as of conflitutivc lullification, ¥tor the Law is Norma Judicii : and therefore that which makes a n.an juft In Law, will caufc the ludge to pronounce him luft. For the Ludge doth therefore pronounce hin* luft, bccaafc he is luft in Law.fence firft.

§. lu. I. C • ]\T®'' <^<> '% ^<^f^ ^'^t '^ taking amfs very manypFaca of ^cyiptme^and vsbich ?a.i3; -i-^ «j Tvell fr.'uou? the Papijls and Armnlans comcits j not unlilie thofe ykhithtbe Aulhw ofiloc.EfiJile did ky ktfou iih..foundation ;Jiuh. <a are thofe,

1. Wit&j

1 .Without faith no man can pleafe Cod^avd fo no man can beju(tified voUljout Paith^ which U a pre/equijite Condition of fu^i^catien. H'ith that weapon do the Arminiani affaultiUy to prove elc^ion to be offorefeen faith ■• mth the fame Jircngth as the words Gal. 2. z'^^.are cited, Weare thefons of God by faith, therefore we are Jufiificd by faith ' Forfooth fix hundred fuch places may be pyodueed, in which feemingly Faith, yea and Hollnefs of life, and Repentance feem to be made Comething anteccdaneous to, andtt Caufe of Election, Adoption, Jujiif cation and Salvation t when yet faith is only the Mam nifeflation and patcfaCtion, that we are thefons of God, that we are ele^ and [hall obtain falvation.

R. B.

§. 10.

. I. "T^One readier to cry out of Error, then the moft defperately feduced -L^and feducers. I IhiU never more take that for a note of the Orthodox, for the fake of many In this age. z. That thcfe texts as well favour the Papifts and Ar-mlnlans, as thofe that put faith before Juftificatlon, is fpoken more boldly then truly. Elcdion is not Gods Love of complacency in thcperfon as a prefent real objed of Love ; And therefore though men be elcd, i: follows not that they pleafe God .•" much Icfs quoad aHiones. Neither Papifts, Aiminians, nor you therefore can gather the leaft advantage from that text.

3. Let it be obferved that this Differtor doth confefs, that R% hundred fuch places may be produced : and if he can give any tolerable anfwer to any one of them,I am contented to forfeit the reputation of my Reafon.

4. It Is falfe that ever Holinefsoflifc Is made in Scripture antecedent to Adoption or jufiSHcation conftitutivCi as begun ; but it Is true that they arc fecondary Conditions of our Jurtlfication and Adoption , as continued and confumniace at Judgement; or as Conrad. Berlins and L. Crocitu fay, they arc Conditions of our not lofing the luflification once frec'ygiven : And this lames means in part, by Jufti-? fication by Works, I think.

J. Eledion is taken Jn Scripture in many fenfes : But when it is taken for Gods Decree, yea or for his temporal choofing his people out of the world by Vocation, let this Differtor fliew me If he can one text of Scripture th.'^t makes hollnefs^ faith or repentance to be Caufesofit, yea or anrcccdcnc at all j Tiii then I (hall lake this for another irregular pradice, conform to the tendency of their doftrine. One would think that the man did under hand leek credit to the Popi/Ti Caufe, which he feems to oppcfe by the contrary extrcam. For truly here Is fuch evidenc prevai icarlon, that may make one a little jealous j but that I will not fufped a ilran-ger without great caufe.

6. His lali Condafion hath two infiimities : the one is that Ir is agalnfl the fcopeand manifeft words of the Gofpel, The other i.^, that it hath nothing but his word to prove it. i. That faith and obedience are not only a patcfa£lloa and mafti" feflatioH ih.n we (h.iU obtain (alvjtion, but a Meaos^ that is, a Ccndicion the whole Church hath held till the Flaccians and Libertines did queftlonit : and methlnks no fober Chriftijns (hould deny ; And I came but lately from citing lo many texts to prove itj that it iiks me to do it again. Only thefe few I dcfirc the Reader to pcrufe, if he be fo blind as to doubt of it. Mat. 25. throughout. Gal. 6.7,8,9. Rom. 6.21. Jdwfi 3.18.and 4.7,8. z Ca/'. 9. 6,7, 8, 9,10. Hcb.6, 10. iTiw. 4. S.and 4'i. I\om, 8.15, Hat.^,iQ. Rom. a, f)^,7,io. A^i 10.35. i Tim^*i6i i M.?.7.

Pp a Ephi,

Epb. 6. 8. ^at. 71 ai,ii,i?, 14. lob. 16. 17. » Ctfy: ?. 10. i ftt. i.i«, 17. ?^i/ 4 17 1. T/w. 6. 18,19. I Cnr. 9. 25 16^17. Mat. 11. xi. r«i|f 13. 24, pfci/. i.ii. Wf/>.ii.2 6.and 10.55. MJt. 10.41,41. 1 Coy. J 8,14. and 9. 17. Col. ?> 13,74. 1/0^.3.12,2}. ichion. 34.21. Grw 21.16. PM9'«9>M 7v(X). 2. 14, KeadcTj 1 thciight it wciild be teciious toihec as well as mc to tranfcribc the words fcut of thefc many textSj much inore to form arguments i but if thou wilt beat the pains to icad ;h{m, if thou find not that Repentance and Obedience (much more evidently faith) domoreco our falvation then tomanifcft ir, then either thou or I are notoiioufly deluded. And if thou wilt but perufc thofe texts, where Chrifi prO' miftth falvation to men, it they will btiieve, and rcprehendeih them for unbelief, andfnjihj Te will vot come tome th:it yc may hrive life 1 Jch. 5.40. Yea, condemns them to Hell for not believing } If jet thou canft think that it is but a manifcfting fign that ChrifV fo command^th and cals men to, and piomifeth life upon, and con^ demneth men fcr want of, I muft ftlJl profefs that cither thou or I are deploratcly S^norant : and that the Scripture to mc is an unintelligible writing, if this mans dodiine betcHe.

-;■ I defiic the Reader alfo to weigh with me the tendency and natural iflaeoftfilj jAn:inomiandodrine : and thenbe oft'cnded with me, if thoucanft, for being fo much againtt ihcm. I am as tender of cenfurlng d'lrenters In tolerable differences as another, but 1 am not indificicnt to truth and falflioodj the Gofpel, and the fub-Tcrtersof it. Ycu find by this Differtor, that he wonders at men for thinking that Gods pardon is not valid, unlefs we know or believe it ! And he may as well fay, that a man may have right to falvation though he know it not • and its ttuc; for net knowing cur righ: dc{lrc)s it not. I pray thee, Reader, then tell me how this man is like to live, that thinks his faith doih only maoifeft his falvation, or right to it? dcubtlefshe will not give more to Love or V. oiks : fo that if he be an Infidel, if he be an Adulterer^ Drunkaid, or what is word, it is but his knowledge of his falvaticathat is dimiiiilhed, but his Right is never the lefs j fo that to get or keep f\ich right, he hath no means to ufe, but ligns to get. He hath nothing to do for falvation 1 If 1 know a man of thefe principles, I pioftfs, I will neither truft my purfc, my credit, my wife (it I had hci) nor my throat to him, further then I rauft whether I will or not. It may be he will pretend, that though he have nothing to do as a means to his falvation, yet he hath a ntvv nature that will not fuflfer him to do evil. But he that knows what mans foul and humane aft ions are,is more fober then to think that a rijihtcfhcicntmay fufiice wiihcut the end, knowing that thty arc educed and fpecififd by the tnd. Ifhe fay,that Gods Glory is his end : 1 anfwer, Gods Glory hath as little need of his faiih, as his own falvation hath. And he that knows i. How nccr man is to himfclf, and how infcparable the principle of fclf prefer vat Jon, and the loveorhimfi !t", and what is fbi, bonum,hi\ovnW\m^ and a. How Chrift him-feif in redeeming us, .ind God in all his merciful workings, iffpided cur falvation. J. And what direftions he hath given man in woiking out his falvation, »od what precepts ro ftrlvc for it, fig,ht for it, and feek It with violence } yea, that thji is'he main diift of ail ihe Scriptures, I fay he that knows but thcfe, I warrant ban will never more think of nukiiig Gods Glory his end, fo as to exclude his falvation ^ or that one without the otiM;i' is fufficicnt to make lucb imperfcd men as we so live as Ch'ilUans.

2« And Adoption it fclf is not only manifefted by faith,, but given on condltl-onof faitli, Job. 1.11,1 2. A^ many as recazed himy te ihcmgnvc hepbwcr to becomi ihefons of Qady iiMO to them thgf bcUfve n ijii Ham. It U aa incerpretatton of

too

too much liberty, to fay that by Power tt become hit faHi, is mcint Mamfefldtlon that we are already fans. Pardon me Reader^ If I be a little warm agalnft thsfe mortal doSrines. I dare fay, It is for God and thee j and not above ihe Caufe.

Paj. 14. L. C

FOi- iprdyjou,what mcpnctb Lhii phrafe^ We are the Sons of God by fahh, Z;;^/by faith we are certain of cur Adoption to be Tons ?

§. II.

K. B. I, TT meanethas itfpeaketh. Is It all one to ht Sons by fahh^znd to be fure *- by faith that we arc fans > He gireus Power on our Believing, which is the Condition, to become fons : li becoming fons, nothing but being fure that we were fons before? foherc ; The man would make us Believe that to be fons by faith,tnd to be fure we were fons before faith, fignifie one thing. I know not what Countrcyman he is } and therefore what this phrafe may fignifie in his language, I know not : but fure I am, in all languages that I underftand, to 6e, or kcomet doth not fignifie to be fure that rt>e were before.

:. Note alfo that it is a notorious faifliood that he intimates, as if believing were to be certain wc were fons, whereas Affurance is a fruit of faith,and fuch a fruit as many a thoufand Chtiftians know not in this lifej much lefsas foon as they are be» Ilevers. He feigns alfo Paul to fay to the ^alathians (of whom he had before fpoken fo (harplyand doubtfully) Ye arc aUthefons cf God^ihn: is, yoa all knoW certainly that ye arc the fons of God by faith in Clirift Icfus, whereas he will never prove ei^ ther that they were all certain, or that faith is fuch a Certainty.

|{. I defire the Reader to note how flily and filcntly he pafleth over the firft text, which he mentioneth as objeded againft him, Hcb. 11. 6. mthout faith it is ir/i' p«(jtole to pleafe God i To which he hath nothing to fay, but that Papifts and Arml-nians ufe it againft us.

§. 11.

Pag-14,15. L. C. ANdwhcn the Apejlk z Thef. x. i?. faith, that We are "^eleded through ianftification of the Spirit and belief of the Truth, what elfe ccn be the meaning ef the Holy man, then that the Regeneration and lUummationby which wc believe the Co/pel, arc certain figns of our E'c^itn >

§, 12.

S. B. I. C F E how he again is not afraid to leave out In cmTneiccv, as if It were •^ fimply clcCicd through(anClification and faith, and not clcH tofalvationy through fanClificafion and faith- 2. The meaning is as plain as humane language cm utter it, that, God hath chofen us to obtain falvation by the means of fanfti-fication and faith. From which, its true, we may confcquently conclude that we are sledcdJ when we poflcfs the fruits P P 3 §. i J •

1. C. ASwbenVet.i. Ep. i,z. faitb, that thefmhfulin Ponms, Galatia, &c.

Xa verc dcSlcd through the fandificaiion of tbcSphit ; vchjit elfe doth he imi-

WJ.'f, but that which SaiatPdioi dothf Andrvhcn the fofne V^ul i Thef. i. ^. faith,

chat be was certain of the E(e£lion o/"//;cTheffalonIans,kc4///c thei, faith &charuj were

^ manifefl to him: h.iw much rather * h^d the Theffilonians tbcmfelves

or mignc frenounced ofthemfelves that they were c!c£ledh fa'uhihccaufc they were

'^^ confcioHs of the worlf of faith and charity l(indled m thm hearts ? and

inlil^etnanner that by faith,their fins wrre forgiven, bccaufe their own faith gave ibcm

tefUmorryof the Remijjioa of their fins ?

§. I?.

i?. B. I. A Gain he ufethanother text as ill as the former : as if Pf^rr had faid •^^ fimply , they were eU£l through fan^ification of the Spirit, and fo dedion had been the endi and fanftlficatlon the means, when he (zhh, clcd accor-dtng to the forcl(nowlcigc of God the Father, through fan£i fication of the Spirit, unto obedience and fprinkUng efthe blood of lefut Chrifl ^ plainly making elcdion the Trincpium aad Spring of all that follows, and that ft was to obedience and Re* miffion, through the Spiicifanftificatlon that they were eledcd = orin fanfiificatl-onror Vo^inii\£.czx.\on:lvciyioi.ap.uTniCiJ.cLTo-.. Whether you do, as fome, take foreknowledge for the eternal Decree, and eledlon for temporal Afiual Chcofinj by effcdual Vocation i Orelfe take It for the eternal eledion, h varyeth not our prcfent Cafe In debate.

i. Nay fee how fully this text deftroys his Caufe '. which plainly faith vre are cleft by, or through, or In fanftlficatlon of the Spirit to Obedience and fprinkling cf the blood of Chrift. Where fprinkling of Chrlfts blood, means 1 emiffion, Jultifica* tion, or Purifying from Guilt by Chrifts blood applyed. (Though Gro'iui would have It othcrwlfe underftood, left itrtiould prove that the Holy Ghoft is given In order before Remlffion.^ Now If this be fo, then not only cledlon ,but the Hrft fan-dification of the Spirit, goes before Juftification j And then it is nelthu from etcr. nity, nor from Chriils death.

3. Whether you take eledion 1 Thcf. 1.4. for twnporal or eternal tledron; your Argument is Irregular j you might well have argued, that if Kja/ knew their eledion by their faith and charity, that they might have known ic themftlves alfo by their faith and charity. But to argue thus, Paul knew by their faith that they were eleded j therefore they might know tHat they are cleded by faith,msking faith in the Antecedent only the means of knowing, and in the Conftquent, the means of cledion ; this is abfurd. And if this be not your meaning (a: Icjft to picve an appearance of fuch a thing, where Indeed is none) then you fay nothing to the pur-pofe J we deny not but it may be faid, that a man by faith may know his cledion. Sue doth PaulgWc you thelcaft &cw of any more f

§. 14.

Pag. 1(5. L. C T Afi'y,as Viulfaying^ faith u cf the dcfl, meant not that faith it •*-^ the Qaufc I fEle6l'Oij^onhat a Believer h the adequate objeSlof ile5lm ; fo mull we accord ngly iudge of faith inrefpecl to Juftificatio/J.

§. 14.

R. B. AS if there were the leaft Appearance of likelihood in the feveralfpeechesi ■^ 1$ it all one to fay the faith of the c/f (2,anci to fay :ve are clewed by faith, as it is faid we arc juftjfied by faith I When do you read In Scripture, Godfo loved the troy Id that he give hu only fen, that whoever beluveth in him (hall he ek6kd ? as we reidyUhoevcrlcUevethfhaUfJot pcrifh^ Or where read you, that whoever beiieveth rhnll not be reprobate, zs vie rezd,ih3t tbeyJhaII not come into Condemnation, we tead of many promifes ot Remiflion it we will believe ; you read no proraife ofeledion if you will believe. We are faid to receive Remiflion of fins through faith .-but not to receive cleft ion through faith. I ferioufly profefs the evidence of Scripture is fo full, that faith is a means to Juftlficatlon^Remlflion and Salvation, and not only a mani-fel^ation of what is done alreadyjthat he that impartially perufeth itjand doth not believe this truth, I think he may do well to fearch whether he believe that Chrift is God, or that the GofpclJs true J if he be a man of competent intellcftuals. And confident lam a learned man could not be fo blinded, but bis willmuftbe deeply guilty of it.

Pag 17. L

. C Tivnhe chief Canfe of the Error is, that they make the faith rvhicb •L' they call Jufi/fyingto be fomcthmg different from Regeneration i vrhen yet the faith of the el'Misnot only conjunClrvith l-olinefsinone and the famefub-jeH , but if formaltly our Holinefs j not indeed the -whole, but a pait\ even as Hope and charity which arc equally the p, nils of the Spirit J Gal. 5.21. i. Part of the Commandments. J. »hiehhave incrcafes anddccreafes^ as it faUs out rvith every good Kior^. Bythiipart of the Error Regeneration it made to go before J:i(iifcation 5 For if Faith in Chrift go before fuflificcitionl it follows that RcgeneratioVytvhereof faith is the chief fart, doth alfn go before fuflijjctition. On the contrary, this error being ivcll difeo ncdy faith iviU only bold the firliplice in ihcranliof the three graces, in which Company we mud not thinly that piflifcatioa goes beforegood works and follows faith : Fo-r feeing failb hope ajtd ch-irity are Infeparable^ and luflif cation goes before good worl^s^ ii foU loT^s that liifiifuation muli ga before fai:!\

^ JS.

[200^

$. If.

^- 5. T7\7Hcn a man is in the daik, no wonder if lie grope and yet be loft; ' ' fo is this Diflertor even when he p;ct^iidcth to dilcovcr ihc chief caufe of our error. Wl this difcourfe needs hue th-fc two tafic diftiiiftions to dfco-vcr itsinliimiiy. l. Of Regeneration, r. Of good WorkN. Regeneration is taken fumctinie for the whole new ftate of a Behcver,which he enters upon in his firft change, z/'^. His new nature, new relations to his Head, Husband , Lord; When he chat is in Chrift is a new Creaturc,o]d things are paH.d away; behold all things are become new. In this large fcnfe, luftfiicition, and Renj.flion, and Adoption are parr of our Regeneration. 1 think in Scripture and in Fathers, the word is not feidom (comparatively to the other) taken in this fenfe. Sometime Regeneration fignifieth the work of the Spirit, working in the Soul the lirft fpecial Grace. Concjrning this , Divines are of three d.fFcrent judgements ;

1. Moftof ours fay thar Faith (or Repentance only with ic) ate fi.ft given in the feedjwhich is a begun habit : then in the aft, then we are united to Chrift : then wc arc juftified : then other h..bits of Hope, Love, &c. arc given. Sec Biihop Downam againft PfwWf. The firft they call Vocation, the laft Sanftifi-cation : and fome give the name of Regeneration to the firft , andfomctothe laft, yet making all thcfe go together, z. Mi:. Pcmble (from whom I received it, and held it faft till lately^ doth think, that the feed or habit of all Grace equally is given firft at once, and the afts only go one before another. 3. ^'^wgytf thinks that the Holy-Ghoft by the objeft (fet home more powerfully then man could do) and fo by the word, doth firft caufe the ad and habit of Faith, but in Order of nature the ad firft, and by chat ad a habit, and hereby other fa-cred ads and habits in order; and luftification follows immediately on our believing, by force of the loederal Donation. I think for my parr, the precife order and manner of Gods Work on the Soul is unfearchable : ( though this laft feem moft congruous to thj nature of mans Soul). The firft and laft way anfwcr your objcdion j that although Faiih, Hope and Charity be infeparablc, in time, yet not in order of nature." If you go P^;«i/i'i way, I fay , that they are all in femim before luftification : but the queftion is of the ad. Yea for my part, I grant it as undoubted Truth, that fomething of Love to Chrift and Hope in him, are not only concomitant with juftifying Faith, but the modification,or parts of it : it is no one ad that is called juftlfying-Faith , as it is not in one finglc confideration that the objcd is prefentcd and to be received. This Faith is, as an AlTcnt to the Tiutli ef the Gofpel, fo a Thai.kt'ul Loving Acceptance of Chrift as offered. C^i'vin mak:s fpernre the ad of juftilyino-Faith : in the place 1 cited a few leaves before. WhcnP<Wfpeaks of Faith as laving or juftifying, he ever implycth Hope and Love as to the fame objedj Chriftand Life. But why it is named from the aft of bellev-ng, I have elfcwhcre already given the reafon : When he diftinguiflieth Faith, Hope and Love, he takcth Faith in a more rcftrained lenfe ■• as/^?;«Ci doth alfo where he makes i: fcparable from juftifi;ntion and good Works.

And in this feme Regeneration doth ftill go before juftificatlon (in tlie adult.)

2. Youmuft diftjiguilli of good Works. As working is taken in the fenfe re-jeded by P<z/</, Kow. 4. 4. for works of proper merit, \vh;ch make the reward

to

lobe of Dcbc ai^d no: of Gcace, lo *v'c muft not once dream chat there Is fach * thing in the world. Bmc ^iK^Qrl(i are taken for good aftions , fo they are eithci Inward or Outward. Faith, Hope and Love, arc inward Good Works : and ihefe do go before Jitftification, iBut neither Scripture nor Fathers ufe the word 9o*d tVoiki in tl^t fenfe, ac leaft often j but only for outward Works of obedience. And fo GoodY/orksfequutuur jH3ifictttiminoHpreceduttt fitj^fica-aduvt, as Au^ia faith, they follow JuftiHcation. Y'ca you muft diftmguiih more exaftly of Inward Works. As in every Army or Common-wealth, the firft fundamental aft of him that will be a Member,Js, To confent to the Relation , and take fuch a man for his General or Sovcraign j and then after he muft Love , Honor and Obey him as fuch. The firft is not formally Obedience , but the con-fenting to his Sovcraignty that he may obey him, fo is it here : The Faith that iirft juftifieth us as a Condition,is the Taking Chrift for our Saviour and Lord-Redeemer : and Juftification followeth on this before any aft" of formal obedience tohira as fuch, internal or cxternali So that the Love to Chrift Accepted, which is a real part of that Acceptance (for Good cannot as Good be Accepted without LoTc^jgoes before laftification : but the Lore that followeth that Accc-ptai.ce, followeth our firft Juftification alfo : yet is it neceffary as the Condition of the Continuance of that luftification.

As for your faying, It is fart of the Commandments , thar i$ no reafon why ic may notbe the Condition of luftification. For it muft be o^:;;«w,Duty, in order of nature before it be a Condition.

And its as little to the bufinefs that Faith hath increafes and dccrcafes : feeing it is not the further Degrees, but the nicer /incerity, ^or fuch a Degree as makes 'I finccrc) which is tha Condition of juftification.

Pag.17,18. L. C. TjE.thtit ihmjudgeth of ValthyJhaUmore eafly fhift himfcff Jni 6ut of the hands of the Aiminlins ; jhnll give more glory t9 the Juflice of Gody tjliing that from Faiths whtch he may give to thegUriotu Grace and the Gracious Glory of God. For I rviU wiUifigly grant the Armimansy that Faith it an'0l(^y and p.rrt of our Obedience ; yea and that by that Faith we are JuHijied i hut declaratizely, and as Taith is a ^ieffengev to ctoffciencej of Peace, and Remifjion pf ftns : but n»t that Faith u formally imputed t» its far yighteoufaefs, or that we are fu-ftified by the habit or inherent quality ; which vcw>mt and ulcer »f the ^irminians •we touch notjhut avoid as much as any.

i(. B, A Carelcfs Reader would not think what notorlofus great errors arc in ^» thefe fraooth words, i. To your firft commodity I anfwer, fie vi-rat:!,&c. We have fomtwhat clfe to think of,then only to fly from Arminianifm. Truth borders clofe to error, and therefore clofe to Arminianifm, To be neer to error Isaiignof Truth. If youwillflyfurther, andgo to Antinomianifm, to avoid ArminianifTTi, you will go out of the afties into the fire. The next way to decide all wnuroYcrficsabout Scriptures between ui and the Papifts, were

(^<f with

[202 3

wlch the Infidels, to deny thcli Verity: But is that therefore the bcft way y bc-caufc it avoids Popery ' i. You arc quite miftakcn in your own fuppofition too. Going on falfe principles, difablcs any man to deal >\ith his advcrfaiy : and the difcovcring of our erroneous cxcrcams, hardens ihcm in theirs. I am confident fomc few fuch millakcsin fome D)Yincijh..chmultiplycd Armiinans, oi hard-ncd t'-cm: and tint ifourdifpi'.ters had go'\c no higher againftthcm,thcn Dave-n^nt , CiimcrOy Lud. C'fOOUh f^r then the Sjivjd of Doit hath done, wc had more cffcftually coniutcd th'.m.

5. To your fecond Commodity I fay, whcivnicn will devife ways of their own to l.onjr Gods Grace ai)d 1 u(lice, conciarytv) Govis way and Word , it is a goodly huiiorthey g'.vc hi:ii ; even the grcarcft difnono-. God befl knows what is honorable to himieIf, If caking all from F^ilthand Works, and giving it to God, had been the way, none of all thofc texts which 1 before heaped up, had fpokc as they do. What an honor were it to God to lay, that our Faith Accepts not Chrift and Life, but Chr;ft doth all hiinfclr ' Ic were but conform to this conceit, CO fay, that it is bcft fayj that Infidels, Pagans, Murderers, Adulterers, Lyers , Perjured, that live .nnd dye fuch, arc the objcA of luftification and Salvation , for then nothing is g ven to man , but all to God.

4. liut how niovc you chat it will Glorifie his Jufticj > when man is no objcfl of juftice ?• if he have not iome Conditions of Life or Dcach propounded co him.

You dangeroufly err inmakiiig Faith a pare of our obedience , if you mean it of Chriftian obedience, of our fiift Faith, as you muft. For it is the Taking Chrift for our Lord and Saviour, that for the future v/c may obey him : and To is an cng.igcmenc CO Obedience. All obedience is obedience to a Rcftor , fo taken to be. He muft therefore be fo taken, before he can be obeyed. Though how nmch of obedience to God as Creator, the T.iking him as Redeemer may have in itj I will not now ftand to enquire : but hire it is no aft of Chriftian obedience to God-Redccmerjbut the feed of all obedience followmg.And t"herc-Ibrc you will overftioot your lelf i;i granting this to the Arminians,

6, It hath troubled oifr Divines to flicw now Faith is no Work, and yet Jufti-fyeth. Some fay, thac it is a mcer Paflio , becaufc it is improperly or morally at beft called a Reception j thii is fond. Some fay, it is a work,but Juftifies only as an Inftrumcnt. This is as vain : for that which they call its inftrumcntality, is its Acceptance,and that is an aft:aad every pi opcr luftiumenr efFcftethiand ail efficiency is by Aftion. So that to fay, Ic is the Inftrument,is moft plainly to fay, Jcjuftifieth by working or Aftiiig, which is cjjicientu caufalUas. So that this opinion of Faiti.slnftrumenrality leads men into the faV^ie Conclufion which they ufe it Co avoid : waicli is no new thing with ill chofen means. I fay. Faith is no work in any of thefe f. ftnfes. I. as working is taken for perfeft obeying, for falvacion,according co the tenor of the Law of Nature, fo Faith is no work. 2. As working is taken for peiforming the Ceremonial task of the abrogated Law of Jl/o/>y, fo Faith is not working. 3. As working is taken forvi^orks dcferving a Pvewaid by Commutative juftice, as benefiting God, and fo making the reward of Debt and not of Grace: fo Faith is no work. But in none of thefe fenfcs are cur new obedience woiks neither. 4. But thac which I fnrcher note is this, thar works aic oFcen put for obediential works to God our Redeemer J and not in meer Phyfical fenfe for an Aft j or for an aft mccrly good CO our fclvcs, or good bccaufc ot che nature and chc objeft, or in obedience tQ God as Creator only. Now our^fiift Faith ii no fuch work. It is command-

ed, but we do It not co nomineyhcczul'c conmiandcdby God as Redeemer : for ic is the firft acknowledgement of his Authority and Confencto it, and our fiift confcnt to be fubjcifls •• and the Rcbrion niuft be tycd before any office of Relation can be pciformcd. As if yuu Ipeak to a pcrfcifl Atheift ( if there be fuch a thing) and per^wade him to bciitvc in G. d • his firft behef is no aft of obedience, but t'.ie A'Jcnt to Gods roveraigncy,and confcnt to obey hereafter. So is it with our fii ft Faith in the Redeemer, as to Chriftian obedience. But now all after good aftionsaicafti of obedience. 5. Alfo fometime the term iroyf^s figni-fyeth thofe Aftions which are done as our Duty (or on oilier accounts) to the good of fome other principally j and To it is dlftinguiihcd , from reccivmg that good that is freely given to our felvcs : in this fenfe alfo Faith is Rcceiving,and not Working j For it is but the Accepting Chrift and Life with lim, as offered CO us in the Gofpel. And though this Acceptance hiuft be fitted to the objcft,and fo Chrift muft be received in his moft honorable titlcs,and on honorable terms, yet the work thus modifycd, is biir the accepting of an offered Saviour, as that good which wc moft need for the healing and preventing of our mifery. So much to acquaint you how far you may yield that Faith is a woik^and how far not.

7. That Faith is the condition of our conftitutivc and fentcncial luftifica-tion before God, and not only of the Declaration to confcjencc, I mean to prove yet more fully before I leave you,

S. When you fay, Faith is not formally Imputed to us for RighteoufncfSf I do not underl^aiid you, IVighteoulncfs is two-fold, according to the two Covenants or Laws of God. The Rightcoufncfs of the firft materially is Pcrfeft Obedience. This wc have not ; nor doth God take our Faith to be fuch : But the fatisfaftion and merit of Chrift is to us inftead of it, as dilVolving the obligation to punifli-mcnt ^qiioad merunm) which wc for want of that Righteoufaels had contraftedj and fo js,as I may call \x.yO\xr Jufi'itia fro Icgalis^mhcczu^c it pleafcdnot God to give us this Righteoufnels immediately or abfolutclyjbut by the means of another Covenant, as the i.iftrumencot conveyance^ and that Covenant makes our Acceptance, its condition j therefore that Acceptance is our material particular fubordinare Righteoufnefs , fo .called by this new Covenant or Law of Grace : Though Chrifts Righteoufnefs may alfo be called the Righteoufnefs of the New Covenant in another rcfpeft, vi\. as the means of conveying and difco-vering it. So that as the performance of the condition of the New Covenant, may be called the Rigltcoufnels of that Covenant, fo Fajth is imputed, that is, truly eftccmcd and judged to be our Righteoufnefs. But if you ask whether this Faith be now inftjad of the perfeft obedience of the Law of nature > I anfwer, that obedience yvas confiderableas a mcritoiious work, and quoad rci valorem , or tile as our own perfonal Ad. In the former refpcd, only Chrifts fatisfaftion and merit is inftead of our peifeft obedience ; as being only of value to Juftific usforitfelf. But becaufc God will not make men partakers of that Righteouf- -nefs of Chrift, without fome Aft of his own, as a condition of his Right, therefore Faith hath now the formal -.lature of a condition in the new Covenant , as perfeft obedience had in the old .' that is. Faith is the condition of our intereft in Chrifts Righteoufnefs freely given us, as pcrfeft obedience was then the condition of continuing mans right in-paradice, and of any further Reward that God would lupperadd. And as God then required that perfeft obedience, fo he now requires of the finner hioilelfj only the performance of the conditions of|

C»04l •

ihc i^w Covenant: (which alfo he cnablcth his cicd to perform ), And thuc-far Faith is inftcadofpcifcft obedience, and no further : and this it the trucDo-^rinc of imputing Faith for Rightcoufnefs.

9, tor what you fay of the Habit and Inherent quxlity ; I fay, (though I onec-wrote othct wife upon truft) that, if not firft, yet at kaft after,tor our continued iuflification, the Habit of Faith is fufficient to be the condition of our Juftjfica-tion, when the aft is not performed (as when wc fleep); yet not as an Habit and quarKv ("nor the aft as an aftj but as the condition/oi/zjdtfjf, and as a Habitual Reception or Acceptance of Chrift and Life, sAft'ttudinailj. And this is the common Do (ft line of Protcftants (of whom many think infants ft> juftificd ) and no vcncmous ulcer of Aiminianifm.

Pag.18. L.C,

S. 17.

A 7^that Sc'iptrtreoppofeth Faith to Goodtrtil^^s t nndiayttb • thtm ly in the L/ifincfs of Jnfiification, is no ivovder , mm

much as among goodiroil^s, Faith only brinfeth to «ur confcience the glad tydings of oh; KetoncUiaiien^x. ^pplycth the benefits fiOCttYedbyChvi^^ 3. 9niy rcftith mOods L9ze; 4. Is the root of Good Worlds. Alfo becaitfe Faith is often tal^en for the Gofpet It felfi or the ghjefl of Faith j no wondery however faith and Jitjiificatitn be talfOiy ifFaithbciaclHdedinyuflificalion:,a}jdGood Worlis fhut out. Moreover^ though Faith it felf be agoodii'or\ j yet Faith and other good irori^^s are divided by coil' traij effcUs : for it raifeth the finner into hope nf T{cmi(fitn: but good H'arl(Sj even the moft cxa^l , do ca(i the finner into tenor y vfhen he revieweth hirnfelf and hit rvorifi ; foY then he dcfpaireth of himfelf and them : it increafeth the ofpofition that Faith doth give nothing to Cody but Receive: but Gjodirerl[i are 4tf it were Eucbariflicai facrificcs.

$. »7.

H. B. I. T Shewed in the fwrrtier ScAion, how far Faitb is diftind from Good * Works. But I conceive that the Apoftle in his frequent exclufion of Worksjcompared with Faith,doth mamly intend i .The Works o{ M^cs Law: • a.Specially as the Pharifes and other Jews dreamed of AppeaHng God by them for fin committed; 3. And that the perfcd obedience of theLay/of nature, is confequentially only excluded, as being ift finners a «tf»-f»5, there isnofuch thing •• and impcrfeft obedience is damning according to that Law : But it is not a Juftification, confiftingin perfcft innoccncy , that the Apoftle difputes againft, for the Jewi never dreamt of that : But a Juftification conHfting in RemiiTionof ifn, which they thought the tJiarc facrificcs and other Works of-ihc Law would procure. But that the Apoftle cxcludcth obedience to the Rx:-dccmer in fubordination to his Righteoufnefs, from being the Condition of our Juftification conftitutive as continued j or of our fentcntial Juftification at judgc-.Tient, is utterly falfe. It is moft evident in the whole fcope of his arguing , thai ^t is works as oppofed to Chrift, or Coordinate with Chrifts Righteoufnefs, that 'ledirptiteth againft ; but not direftly againft the works that ftand. in a neccHa-ry fibordinaiion to Chrift, as fijcb^ and keeping iliat ftatior.

'..Th*

C»oy3

1. The reafon that you firft give, is no reafon, but an abfurdlty , unlefs you mean, the offer aivi conditional Grant of Reconciliation in the Gofpel, through Chrifts blood : for Fauh cannot bring the report of A dual Reconciliation before ic is : and it is not before Faith, as fhall he fully proved. Befides many a thoufand are reconciled that yet have not the knowledge of it in confcienccj yet have they Faith in Chrift^ which is rcquifitc to that reconciliation. Juftify-ing Faith is another thing then the Affurance of Reconciliation, or luftification in confcicncc.

3. Love and Hope apply Chrifts benefits in part, and yet you exclude thcrrj-Therefore your fccond rcalon needs fome limitation.

4. Tlic like may be faid to your third reafon. Love is the Souls Complacency in God, and therefore reftcth in him. So doth Hope, and Truft.

5. Is Love no Root of Good Works > Or is it neceflary tliat Faith luftifie us inconfcience, and not Good Works, becaule Faith is the root of Good Works ? Rather as the fruits are more difccrnabic then the root •, fo Good Works (hould Juftifie us more then (or *s muchas^ Faith, if ic were only inconfcience that Faith juftified. You will never give a folid reafon, why Love, Hope, Repentance, and any true part of fanftification (hould not Juftifie us in as proper a (enfc as Faith, if it were only in confcicncc that Faith luftifi-cd us.

6. Your next tca.{ony becaufe Faith is oft tal^cn for the Cofpcl and objeif, is no anfwer as to all thofe common texts where Faith is not taken for the Gofpel or objcft.

7. For your next reafon, that TaUhraifcththc fifiHerinUt hope of ifcm'ijjiony but Good Woi\^ ca(l into tenor and defpai/j &c. I anhver, why may not fincere obedience as well as Faith,by way of manireftation,as fignSigive us hope of Rcmif-fxon ' furc the Apoftle faith, irc ^notv -xc arc tranfiatedfrom death to life, bcc.uffe yelove the Brethren. And if ye by the Spirit do Kiori'ifie the deeds of the body yc jhull livc»

8. Let the Reader but obferve whether this Doftrinatendeth. How vvcir arc - rhofe men like co obey Chrift, that think works of obedience, .even the bcft, do

caft us into terror and defpaii ? who then will not avoid them, that would avoid' defpair and terror ? Its true, if a man had no Chrift to look to, nor any renie-dying-Covcnant of Grace, but ftood on the nicer terms of the Law of Works, ihcn his works would drive him to defpair: He that hath no Saviour nor Pro-mifc to lookat,may welldefpairby his impcrfcftion and the finfulncfs of his works : And fo he might in his Faith too, becaufe of its jmperfcftion , if he looked at his Faith to be inftead of Chrift its objcd : But he that looks at his works in fubordination to Chrift only > and as accepted with God, who is well pleafcd withfuch facrifices , Hf^.15.10. and havingall the imperfcftions pardoned in Chrift,and as being Gods Love-tokens, and the conditions of our fal-vation, I think, need not be caft by them into terror or dcfpair, but may exceedingly rejoyce in ihcm, though he muftbc humbled for their imperfcAions.-7>a«/could fay, This is our rqoyc'nigy tlycTefiimony of our corifcienceSytkat in fm-flicity and Godly fincerity we have had our converfation among you.

9, Even now you put Hope among Good Works that follow rcmiffion .* and here you make it an aft or effcft of Faith, to Hope for Rcmiffion.

10, I pray you tell us which of your two forts of rcmiffion is this ? not the

Q^q 3 F.tcrnalj

Eternal, or from Chrifts dying : for that cannot be hoped for ; not that in con-fcicncc upon our fiift believing-, for that is already Vnown i if juftifyirg Faith be the knowledge of our luftiHcation, then every one that hath that Faiih,doth know that he ib luftificd ; And if fo, how can Faith raifc him into hope of tha[ rehich he hath alycaeiy > when the objcft of Hope is alway future ? And I think, this contradidcih your former and after defcriptions ot Faith .■ For to know our paft luftification, and to hope for it, do much differ. Yea if it be but that knov. ledge it felf o( it, which you mean we hope for : The aft and the objcd arc nocthc lamccbing.

$.18.

P«g. 10. L. C. JJfwrf it is that Divines will not have the fir si a6i of Faith i

whereby it receiveth Chrift, to Jujlifie as it is a iTorl^j AClion,

* Se habet ad mo- or Vertuej becaufe in that acl^ Faith * is oj a Patient or Rtci-

dum patientis, &c. picnt : But what is that (ratio entU; rcafon of bcnig by which

Faith is faid to Juftifie and to 7{emit fim is net yet manifeft.

§. i8.

K. B. pAith is an Afiicn ; but you may jf you plcafe call it a Patient or Rc-•* clpicnt, in that it is fiich an afticn acl T{cceptiomm Ti^ffivam ncajfa-ua, as that it is commonly called Kfftiiiwg it fclf in a moral knic •, becaufe there is no receiving without itj in a Phyficalfenfe. It is the "Difpufmo meralit materia.,

i. The rcafon of Faiths luftifyirig intercft, is manifcft,and a moft cafic Truth, if vain disputes had not pofllft mens mindes with fcducing Notions, to tuin them from ihcTruth. The neereft formal rcafon of Faiths intcrtft in our luftifica-tion,is,that it is the condition on which God in the Covenant hath given rcmif-fion or luftificaiion to us : The meer will of the free Donor hath dcfigncd it to this office, to whom itbclongethtomakcorcr tomtn his benefits on what terms hepleafe. The remote reafon, is Faiths Aptitude to this afligned office. How fhould a Saviour fitlycr convey himfelf and his bencllts , then on condition that men will acknowledge him to be their Saviour, and Accept of the Gift ? 1 have purpofcly put the Qjieftion to fome underftanding. Learned Gentlemen, who I knew had never then heard or read of the Controverfic among Divines, ( but only had out of Scripture, and ordinary writers and Teachers gathered folid knowledge in the main body of Divinity)i and I asked them. In what refpcft tbcy thought Faith, rather then any thing elle, did luftifie ? And confulting the Scriptuic and the nature of the thing, having no (oreftalling notions one way or other, they ftillanfwered to the fame effift , vi\. That it was becaufe God was plcafed to give us pardon on tliefc terms, and of his own good plcafure to appoint Faith to this dignity.

S. 15.

[207 3

§. 1?.

L. C.

N Or is it to be omittcdithat ScripturCito excite in m the gift of Grace, doth oft afcribc fo much to Good JVorl(SiFaith and our faving i^jtorvledgey that it m .lies them Ca//fcs, why God mal^ccb us partal^^as of the jQngdom gj Heaven: So vi-hcfi It IS ftiidf z Pet. 1.3. thai by the knowledge which we nave ot' God 3 is granted to us, whatfocver pertains to Life and Godllnefs ; its Wonder if in that comp-my^cmilfunsf fifi have not a place; fvoich l^nnvlcdge of God doih yet no ethcrivife kemit fitts:,thcii Faith Jnflifieth or rcmittcth finsi to yvity vffhcn by the l^norfi-ledgeof God, or by Faith, K:mijfton cf finis k.iioivn to us.

K. B. '*-piHis is not to prove, but ftill to beg the Queftion, 1. The knowledge JL of himthat bath callcdus ; in i Tet. 1. 3. is Faith it lelf, whichls a true knowledge and acknowledgement of Chrift , and God as reconciled by hiin, fo far as to give conditional pardon to others, and the Condition alio to his deft, initsfeafon. 2., You can make the Scripture fpeak what you lift, by your violatingconccits. God faith. He hath given us all thefe things by the knowledge ot Chrift, that is, by Faith. You fay , It is but the knowledge of thcfe things, and not the things themfelves that he fo givcth us. You expound Scripture by conrradifting it, at pleafure. And indeed, do you think , that it is but thj knowledge of our Good Works 3 or fanftity of Life, or of our growth in Grace, that is given us by faith, or this knowledge of God in Chrift j and not the things tlicmfelvcs ■> If you dare not fay fo of them, fay nor fo of Remillion.

§. io.

L. C. T A(ily, the Author of the Epijile, that be might avoid one cxtr cam , doth J—»* ■lUfi ifito another j aid while hcfeareth to confound J unification with Eleclion, doth commix San^lficalion, (sf which Faith is a principal part ,with Jufli-fication. For he will have Application, w'jich propcyly is an all of Faith, to belong to Juftificatio>?3 as a part to the whole ; malfiug, iflmiflai^e not y Imfclrationtobc Jufiification begun, and application to be Jupfic^v.ion Confummatc : But if the rea-fonbe rightly confidercd, that Impetration is coincident with Jufiificationor Reconciliation, which he confeQ'eih Chrift obtained for us by the facrifice of the (frofs : If this befo, what need is there of another reafon offparing by Application , when once the pardon of his crime is impctratcdfor the guilty ?

Srio,

I. lo.

p.. B.

IT is a fine world when men of fuch Doftrines cry out of cxireams, 1. But I. Kcmcmbcr thac here you confefs the confounding luftification with tle«ion is one cxcream. Whychcivdo you make ic to bean immanent aft? and Dr. Trvifs, to be eternal ?

i. The word-5/w^f^/ffrt:w»,orSanftiraony, ismoft commonly ufcd in Scripture, for the holynefs of our lives, or fomeprogreflGvelioIynefsof heart, following our hrft Faith. Whether youmiftakc the Author of ihc Epiftlc or no, 1 will leave to the Reader to enquire and judge J but furc i am, the reformed Churches generally, who maintain the Doftrinc of Juftificacion by Faith,which you oppofc, do not make Faith any part of luftification, (that were a ridiciilous ■• ancy) but a prcrcquifite thereto.

3. I doubt not but youmiftakc ^«/»»i. in fuppofing him to make Impe-tration to be begun luftification. It is indeed a Prifictfium yXhn is , a meritorious caufc of luftiBcation. But the meritorious Caufe is roc the effeft begun.

4. What though he confefs that Chrifts facrifice on the Crofs, obtained our Reconciliation ov luftification ? doth it follow cither that obtaining and the thing obtained, is all one ? or that there needs no more ? I anl'wer therefore, to your laft unworthy queftion : Though Chrift did Impetratc then our luftifi. cation, yet not then prefendy, nor abfolutely after to be conferred: but to be given firft, afterward in its feafon : ». But conditionally in the tenor of the Deed of Gift : though God decreed, and the dying-redeemer willed, that all cheElcft ftjouldl>e enabled (andcaufcd^ to perform the Condition. So that there was need afterward,that God fhould caufe us to perform it ; and that we fhould accordingly do it, that fo we might be pardoned and juftified in Gods way and order, according to the terms of his Covenant or Law of Liberty or Graccj which wcmuft be judged and juftified by. It is utterly unbefecming not only a Divine, but any fober knowing Chrjftian, that hath ever confidcrcd the fcope of die Gofpel,to put fuch a queftion as this, tf'hat need is there of another ratio par-ceiidi by appUcationt when once the pard»n of fia ii Impctratcd > If God fhould letloofe but horrors of confcience on you, yea or ficknefs of body, T hopeyoui prayers would intimate, that there is another ratio parcendi necclTary. Hath a periccuting Saui^ hater of God and goodncfsja wicked wretch that is a fti anger to the Covenant of Promife, without God in the world , and a childc of wrath, fuppofing this man elefta hath he no need of further remjflion or reconciliation or luftification, but only to know it ? nor {hould he pi ay for any more ? This is fo unlike tfce Dodrine of Chrifti that I dare boldly call it Anrichriftian Doftrinc.

CHAP.

CHAP. II. OfcheAfls of Faith.

S. I.

Pa£. ti. L. C. TlVi tbAt it may more clearly appear what fan faith obtalncth'm •'-' our fuftification, it will not be amifito rchearfeand explicate the aHs of a lively faith. There U therefore a threefold ah of faith j The firfi « that whereby by means of the Holy Gho{i^ the Believer feeth alt Righteoufncfi fulfilled in Chrifi and by Chrift ; that he dyed for finners i and that there ii no caufe why he (hould exempt hmfelf out tf the nnmber of tbo/e finners : And thUdireCl ahu a5live inre-fpid ofGody and the Divine influx, or of God giving faith^ but Pajjive in rcfpeH of man meiving.

§. I.

t. B' THIs aft of Affemto the Truth of the Gofjpcl concerning Chrlftsfatif-fa&lon, is indeed the firft, and ef flat necefllty, and part of juftlfying iaith : But let me give you thtfc two or three animadvernonS) i. Though we muu believe that Chrtft as Medlatcur did fulfil all righteoufnefs, yet we are not to be* lleve that he then juftiBcd us actually, or forgave our (ins i but contrarily, that he did not: the Scripture snaking that plain to us, paft doubt.

1. It is not enough to believe that Chrift ofatisHed for finners, as that I fee no Caufe to exclude my felf. But I muft fee Caufe to include my felf,and that upon certain Gcoands, which may be a lure fupport to faith j 0:herwife it will only war* rantme« HofrtfiK?/iex/e«»ji/e//fjr<;/«if«/,ortliat It may be true for ought I know to the contrary)that I am incladed;but it will be no warrant to me to believe my felf Inclu-<^d,nor for any Adion to which this is prefuppofed. And I think it is no faving faith to think and fay, It may be Chri(i dyed for me, and it m^ybe he did not ^ Ido ttet,}iat canpofjiblylfnowatprefcnt. It muft therefore be a general fatisfadicn, fufficlen: for K\\, that muft warrant this firft ad of faith.

l- It is ftrangc dodrine to fay that our Ad of faith is Adive as to Gods giving, and paffive in refped of man receiving, i. Anadive Power I have heard of. and fo if an Ad be taken for a power, or for a habit, or for the being which is tlelr fub-jedi you may call it adive ; but if you take it not pro A£lii ftcuvdo, you fu equf. vocate,thatfew will underftand you : and if you do, ItMnV an ji^ive aClh buca Tautologieat befl. 2. But a Paflive Ad isyet ftcanger, and that in rcfpcd ofus, who fure if I miftake not are the Agents. Do we perfwade men only to fuffer^ when we perfwade them to believe - Are unbelievers condemned for not fuffering only,or at all ? I pray you vouchfafe to tell us by the next, what it is that Faith fuffers, and from whom ^ If you had faid the perfon had been paHive,! (hould have believed you ; but that the Ad- ^ould be paflive is very new Logick to me. I know Acceptance of a Gifc b commonly called Rucciving^ but not infenfn rhyfico, as Rccipere e(l Pati •■

Rr but

but Morally and Mctonymlcaily, hbcinjanaa ncctffarlly Antecedent t« PaflSve Reception. Bu: your doSrinc here Is conform enough to the reft.

Paj. ij L. C. "T He fecond a^, adive andrefUx in refpcilof n$aH» is that wbere-by a fiHttci- becomes confcious ofhufm and mlferj^ and dlfeofft gredt a benefit, offered, and thence by the operation of the fame Spirit of Adoptiony doth move himfe/f toward Chnfi, tvitb Love, Ajlmce and Hope. The third AH u that vehereby faith aCleth by goud norl^s.

K, B I. TMs Tecond k&bic Ad In my opinion is more tfcen one,tiro,or three aftf. To be confcious of fin, Is one aft, it may be many hundred, according to the many hundred fins that we are confcious of. To be confcious of miferv is ancther ad at leali ; To be confcious of the greatnefs of the benefit (if you wlU call it Confcioufncfc) is another j and to know that It is oiered 1$ another. To move toward Chrifl, you confds comprehends many, vi^. Love, Affiance, and Hope. To move toward Chrift Indeed Is a general term 3 ire ufualljr call fakb, a coming to Chrift 5 and if meer moyIn£ toward him, contain ill thefc, Love, Affiance and Hope, then blame not me, if faith or coming to Chrift, be Infenfe falii to comprehend thcfe. Your third is but remotely an aft of faith. In that faltfc caufetiithe will to command the other faculties to do ihofc good works. Bui Sir* here is one ad which is implied in Love and Affiance, but properly called the Acceptance of an offered Chrift and 1 ife, or Confent to theofter and terms of the Covcnant,which is the great ad of juftlfying falth,whlch you feem much to overlook. Ai many ^s received him^te thim gave he powcTy &c. loh.i. ii,iz. Youfeem not t* be an Englifhrnan^hat if you underftand Englifli, if yon will read Dr. 'FreftonsVfotks well, he will better acquaint you with rhe nature of faith J Or In ffiorter room. If you will but read Mr. ScW^/oi Dally Walk on that fubjeft, you (hall fee juftlfying faith moft folidly defcribed ) and by our late reverend Aflcmbly In their Catechilm-wtll defined » as alio by Mr. Noiton oiNevp England in his Catechifm.

§. ?.

L. C. "Tlicfi/ft adoffaithyou have,Kom' 1.7-and Gal. i. i^Eph.i.13,14. In whom after ye believed {yphich vi>$rdsare foUoived with others belonging t» ihcfecondaH) ye wcrefealed with the holy Spirit of promifc. To the fame feconi ffdkdorgthewoids, > phef. j.17. and thofe Eohc[. j. la. In whom we have freedom and accefs with confidence by the faith of him j rvhich place u a Paraphrafe of the rvords, to be juftified by faith } To rpit^ it if the nature of true faith to move it felftowards Ch/i(i. There u an exprefs place Rom. 8.16, which exfrcffeth the ft* condaCl. The Spirit It felf wltnclfeth with our Spirit that we are the Sons of God. irhere the Spirit of God a£lingin our hearts by faithj not only witneffeth that we are Sons of Cod, but cattfetbm fimly to adhere to Cod, to hope in himj delist in

him^

|;»i», refi upmbimt »nd tmftto him. Hither pertain the words Gal. j. 5. and4.6. xphith place n^tly exhibiteth both the jccond a£l of faith , md the rvhole reafon of Juflipcation by faithi asifhefaidj Bccanfe God hath adopted youforfons, forgiven yourfinsj ami imputed the righteoufnefs of Chrlft, he would make you certain offo jrcat a benefir, by giving you precleus faith, which the Spirit of God hath created in your hearrs, by which ye reft in God the Father, and caft your cares on him, as into the bo[om of a Father, and have accefs to him with confidence.

rhe third a^Uftilfilledy rvhen (Tn. ^.S.) rvc confirm our faith by goodrvorlfis^ and faith vpgiketh by love : Gal. J. 5. Of the fame afl Sz. Paul, Kom. 8.11, Totvit, rvhen the Spirit ofchrift dxvilting in us by faith, promoteth the rvotli ofKt^cnvrationt qnieknethy fanSli^cth «i, avd creatctha new lifCf vfhojefuis: arerecit.d^ Gal. j.

in ibcfe a£ls and places true jfu(lifcation by faith it fct before our eyes : Thcfe are the a3s efjujlifying faith, but )iot of luflificaiion or Imputation ofchrifis righteouf-nefs ; yet arethefea^s truecff.Clsofju(lificationiOrthea6lionofGodrvhercby he abfol-veth the mifcrabie finncrj and imputcth to him Chrifts obedience.

§. ?.

R. B. ALL this Is to little purpofe,and much confufed,and Scriptures confidcnt-*^ ly expounded,without reafon,and ajalnft It. i.KoCT.i.i/.fignifieth more then bare Afl'ent. Proved ; The faith chat the juft live by, is more then bare Affent j bat the Apoftle there expnfly fpeaks of the faith which tlie luft fhall live by, there-: fore Gal i. 15. Gnds Rcvc.iinig Ch,ifl hi Paul, ajfo fignifieth more then Aifent. Eph, 1. 15,14. Is abufed. The firil words iignific nwDre then Aflcntjfor Believing in, or on Chrifi is more. Thole that you fay exprcfs the fecond ad of faith, do not fpeak at all of faith, any more then other graces j but of the Spirit of promifc, that is, the promlfed Spirit in general. Eph.i.vj. doth Indeed belong to your fecond ad whici is many ads. But by what liccnfe will you fay, Chrifts dwelling in our hearts^ is our knowledge that lie dwells there, or that we arc lufiifyed <* That £/fc. 5. iz. Is a parapfaiafe of Ju^ification by faith^ls your naked affirmation without any llicw of proof; whyave we bound to take your word? I doubt not but they are ads of faith, following jullihcacion by faith. Many j foul is juftificd by faith that wants boldnefs and confidence. But if the juftifying ad beherc,it doth not follow that there Is no more} or that thefe words are a paraphrafe of luftificacion by faith. Seeing here is no mention of juftification, or any thing of chat nature. Yet it is true, that its the nature of faith to m<"ve toward Chrift, or rather to come to Chrift, that is, propeily to accept hitn ascffered You do but feign of your own brain,that Kow.8.1^. exprcflcth yourlccond jultiiyingad. The Spirits witntflingobjedively,as attftimo-ny, or cfiicicntly,asChewing us our ftate,do ccme after juftitying faith. There is not a word of jultihcation. You nuke here hope, delight , &c. laftifying ads too. GM- 5. 5. fpeaks of He pc of the Reward which by faith we are txcitedto : I will mt exclude that ad fiom luftification, but you fhould not overlook the main ad. Acceptance vf Ch>i(l gicvn ,& Life />;/ji//',of which a'l the reli arc but modificatlon,3nd attendents. That itxt Gal. 16. which you fay exhibits the whole real'on of lufti-fication, never fpeaks of itatall. Adoption is a concomitant Relation with luftl-hcation, received on the fame condition of bith or acceptance, which is net here mentioned in the text, nor by yoti obfcrved. The Spirits crying/j^/)4 father, i«nf>

R r a whcic

where alleH jnftlfyng faith j but you fill! give us your dreams Inftcad of proof, and prefumc to tcU us, that texts fpcik what you Imagine them to fpcak, without gU ving us any proof of it. You prove not that the Jpirit may not enable us to cry Abm ba Father.wlthout glring us Aflurance of our jufiification:CThere may be the knowledge of Gods gracious Inclination, and conditional promifcs, and there maybe thence a filial defire, dcpendancc, lore, proceeding from juftifying faith, and yet no fuch AfTurance of adual Juftification.) muchlefs do you prove that this Aflurance is jurtifying faith : and leaft of all, that It is the fole or fitJl Juflifyinj ad.

1. You need not tell us that the aSs of Juftifying faith are not juftification, or lin> putation ; you do but flander us in Intimating that we fo teach. We only fay that they are the neceflary means to Juftification ('w^. Conditions^ therefore not lufti. fication it felf.

5. That faith, (at leaft our firft falthj Is an efl^d of luftlfication, is one of your falihoods nakedly affirmed, which you can never prove.

§. 4.

L: C. TJOy tbefe a£is ofrecunwg to Cbriflt yefting on him t repofingoll our cenfi--T dence in him , quieting our /elves in his Love , do nothing pertain to the a^s oftbfolving, pa/doning pn, or jkflifying. But plainly thefe a£ls, yea all the a£}^ of faith do fufiifie, robai luftlfying ft^nifiei the fame eu 10 make known, or give Tejitmony j even th: third a6l Juflifiethtrvhere good rvorl{S are the rvitneffes of our Faitb^ both at the bar ofconfcience^ and in the eyes of our neighbours.

§ 4.

R, B. I. TTHe firft Aflertion Is falfe. For faith pertalneth to Gods aft of Remli-■■• ting, as the condition pertalneth co the aft or moral efficacy of the Grant, Teftament, or Deed of Gift. 2. Youfeem to equal works with faith In luftifylng. For no doubt, but love, hope,obedtence,do by way of fign,dlreftly and certainly difcover our juftification. But then what reafon have you to fey^ that good works luftifie as witneflcs of our faich.^It feems fomewhat of the truth flicks litem In your mind, which thefe words difcover. Is it not becaufe Faith Is the primary Condition of our right, that Is, of our luftification, and Adoption, that therefore works muft witnefs its fincctity, and prove it to be that current faith which is the condition j and fj luftifie the perfon by luftlfying the faith ? No doubt but fincere obedL ence might otherwifc in your fcnfe difcover rcmiffion immediately as a fign, and not only by way of witnefling to the foundnefs of our faith.

L. C "%* 0, cover all thefe M^s, fuch as Incumbency, Sic, feeing they are the rvorl^ ^^'-ofgrace, and arc beftorvedfor thefatfc ofChiflt dojuppofc precedent Becon^ ciliation, and therefore jfuftification, ^nd that we werercceizredbefore n>e had the^ratt if thefe ads.

S. y.

iR. B. A very raw miftakcn Arguing to uphold a pernJcIous Error! AH woyl^i of ^* Grace be (lowed for Cbrift, do fuppofe luflification. But fuch Is this: therefore the major is falfc and unproved, i. Works of common grace bcHowed for Chrifts merits, do not fuppofe fuftification ; fuch as are, the giving of the Go-fpelj and other means} fanftlfying men by the blood of the Covenant, fo far as Apoftates were, Heb.io.if. i. Faith and Repentance are works of fpeclal grace bellowed for Chrifts fake } and yet fuppofe not antecedent luftification, nor Reconciliation full and aSual, but only in tantim, fecnvdum quid, and conditional. Your faying that ivewwcJCfcrffrf is ambiguous, i. Its true we were from eternity fo far loved of God, as that he decreed to give us In time all that good which we afterward receive, x. Its true> that before faith we are all redeemed from that necellity of perlfliingfor want of an expiatory facrifice, which before we lay under, or fliould have layen under without Chrifl. But what is this to luftification <> Nay Its true, that a Conditional ad of Remiffion was granted to all : but it is as true, that It dldnotaduallyremir, till the Condition was performed. So that all this Dilfer-tors other crrours proceed from his meer Ignorance of the nature of remiifion and luHiHcatlonf and of luftlfylng faith) and from his confounding the ads of Gods eternal Decree and Purpofe de rcrum cvmtu^ with his moral afts of Government, as Redor of the rational creature,conftltntlng jfm vol dcbitum Seneftcii, Pramii,& Penie, The ftrength of his argument muft lye In thls,chat God would not give fo great a mercy if he were not reconciled, To whichlanfwer i. It only follows, that he would not give it unlefs he loved us : and what is that Love, but his decretive Will to fave us ? Which yet may (land with his Hatred. (Not that Hatred which Is oppolite, vi\. A will and decree to damn us, but he hath a redoral love and hatred, as well as a decre> tive: His Love as Re^or, fecunditffi Leies, Is his Will, that fuch and fuch benefits fhall be our due according to that Law by which we muft be ludged 3 and fo he is qi(afiob!igatm,(o far as God can be obliged to the Creature) to confer them on lis, and that by his own Law or Promife. His Hatred as iWSor, is, when he wU« lech thit fuch a PuniHiment as Damnation fh.iU be our legal Due, according to that Law that we muft be ludged by j and is, as it were, obliged as ludge to execute It, if we be judged in that ftate. His ReconcillJtion as Redor, is, when upon the change of the finner, by his performance of the Conditions of the Covenant, his relation being changed, and God Is now In Law-fcnle related to him as a father, and is as it were, obliged by his own Law to remit and accept him ; yea doth by the ad of Grace or Law of Liberty, dilTolvc the obligation ro punithment of the Law of Works, which Is remiflion and luftification, and Co that wrath or puniHimcnt ceaf-eth to be due which was due before, and thrit falvacion is due which before was not. Thus God hath made Laws that can do and undo, bind and loofe, lave and damn. Condemn and I uftifie, as the (inner changeth, and all this withouc any change In God. But for this Differtor, or-luy oihe'jto dicam cf a rccnaciliationof God in re-fpcd of his decretive will <^^ cz^cn.'tf, is intolerable. Even Chrifts Deat-h made no change in Gods decree, but fulfilled them. I muft d.firc this Diflertor that he wi»I pardon me for prefuming to fpeak thus ii a teaching itratn : for he leaves me no other work. To confute his arguings is foejiie and Qisrta work, that It requireth in Ctoft places hoc a b^re denial of his crude aftirmtttons ^ bu; I am loath co leave the

Kr 3 R«dcr.

Keader ata non^plus, but would as well (hew him which Is the truth^ as tihlA Is ay rour. And if this learned man be humble enough to receive the Truth, he may -In thefe few words fee fo much light as may (hew him the vanity of his licentious conceits ^and arguiogSj though he may dcfire much more foe the full clearing of the

poIflC*

$.6.

L, C.

LAflly^tbefi ABs are thervOi)(S andcffctts of our grace, or our lufli ^cation. For example, the firji a6l of faith, andfo our firji Affiance doth not arlfc from fanSiif cation; no-r from fuch a promife whereby KemiJ/ion of fin ii fromifcd to thePcnUent, but from this Fromifervhereby chri[i it promt fed to come into the world, that be might be propitious to the miferable,and to fime>s.

§. 6.

R. B. I. TTHat the Ads of faith are the efFrfts of Grace, who buc a Pelagian "■■ will deny ? 2. But that they are all the tffeds of our luftification, who but they in the contrary extream would affirm r And fromfuch men who can exped proof? when yet there is a double neceffity of proof j one from the invalidity of their affirming words, who are become of fuchfufpeded credit : the other from the novelty and improbability of the thine affirmed

J. As fandification is taken for our progress in grace or fandity of Life, fo faith and affiance arife not (In the Brft ad at km) from fandification : but as It Is taken for the firft principle of our new life, or the operation of the Spirit in cauiing that principlcjfo our faith arifeth from fandification,as Pemblc ufeth the word.

4. What Reader can find cut'the force of your example? how your following words do any way conduce to (hew that faith is the effed of luftificacicn.

5. Your words are ambiguous about/ii;Aim/;«g/?-ow a promife. If you mean it objedively, that our firft faith.is not our Believing of the promife of Kemifjm, He. butofchrifts coming,Scc I fay, It muft believe both, though the latter firft in order of nature. But if you mean It f^cif^/f?-, that when Godglvethour fitft faith, it Is not in fulfilling this promife, but the other, I muft tell you, that you fpeak con-iufedly. For you (hould not contradiftinguKh the general promife ofCjods giving Chri[i to be merciful to ffiners, (rem the particular promife of giving remifljon only. Under-ftand that the word Promife fignificth j i. A difcovcry of Gods gracious Parpofe, which yet giveth no man right to the thing piomifed : 2. A proper Gift or Grant conferring right»eitherabfolutely at prefent, or abfolutely/?; W'fw, or conditionally. WhenGodonly faith/ucha thing 1 will do in the world, or for fome men whom I pleafe to choofe, this ihcws, as Prophecies do, that the thing fh-.U come to pafs j But no particular man ha:h any right to the benefit by this promife, nor can claim any. Gods promife of a Saviour to the world to dye for their Cms, and toluftifieand Glorific fome in time, gave no man right to luftfication or Gloty. Yet you may tiuly fay that Faltb, luftification. Glorification, and all , arc the fulfilling of that general promife. But if you go to a particular promife, 1 fay 1. Its true, that the giving of Faith is not the fulfilling of that Promife, Believe and be Jufli^ed : but the giving of luftification is. 2. The PromKetothe ded in general, of taking the hard heart out of their bodies (as it is commonly interpreted) is fulfilled in Gods giving us faith .'yet did chat promife give no fnan right

to

fo Faich before hand, J .God isnot in Covenant with any unbcIIevers,promlfing to give them Faith on any condition by them to be peifoimcd ; tor that would be plain Pelagi anifm to affirm. 4. 1 conclude therefore that God hath given to Chrjft his Elcft in fpecial, that by the Spirit Chrift might draw them to B^ Ijcve, and fo be faved : and he hath told us that his Eled fliall be thus drawn and faved : and if you pleafe you may call this a Covenant with Chrift, giving him right to the Elcd, and to do this work upon them, but it givech no perfonai right to Faith, to any individual finner, of which right himfelf fhal] be the fub-jcft : Nor is God in Covenant with any before they believe , as to be obliged to them to give them the blefling of Faith. So much for the difpelling of the mifts that you raife as you go , and to deliver the weaker Readers a little from your confufions and obfcuritics.

CHAP. III.

An ExpFication of ibme places that treat of Juliification;

§. I.

L. C. "TTHat it may the more clearly appear what parts Faith holdeth in JuHifica-ti&rty toe mufi run through feme places ^ rvhich mal^e mention of Jitftifica-tion J to which I bring not in my jclf an Interpretery but I put that fenfe to tbem, which feems to me to be more conform to the Divine JnteHeCl of the Scripture.

5. I.

R. B. T Know not whether this be contradidorynon-fcnfe, or Popery. Ifyou jL mean that the part efaa Interpreter is to Give a Judicial Dccifivelntcrpre-

tationywhereojyou give but a TcachlngyDireBive Interpretationytellingmenyour rea-fons of your fcnfc 5 then I undertake to prove againft you, that there is no fuch Interpreter on carLh,wbethcr Pope or General Council, or both together. But if

you intend not your felf any fuch Interpretation, then you contradift your felf, and (zy'm (.ffc^y I will not be an Interpreter, but 1 wiU Interpret j But by your

performance, I doubt the fenfe of your promife is ; IwiUnot give yoH aTij good reafonsfor what I holdybut Iw'U tell you my own oplmon ; which indeed is fo bad a way of Interpretingj cfpccially for you, that you do not amifs to deny it the name.

§ . i.

L, C. O Om. 3. ^^. TheRighteoufncfsof God,b7 the Fauh of Jefus Chrift, JA. upon all, and over all thtm th.it believe. The fenfe w, that the Kighteoufnc{s of God flowing into Believers of what f«rt focver, is revealed by the Dff-finne of the Gofpelj or is 1(novt>n by the gift of Faith, given tQ eviry Believer,

Cixe^a

fU,R, I, 'T'Hc Apoftic had in the former vcrfc faid, that Gods Rightcnufncfs * is manifcftcd : and in this verfc he comes to {hew what R'ghte-dufncls it is ihac is fo manitcftcd ; and he faith it is , even the 7{'ghtceiifn<.fs of Cod,-which ii b) the Faiih of Jefui Cbriftjunto aH 3 and upon all them that Believe. So that the Apoftk faith. It is by Fahh on Believers •, and the Diftcrtor faith , It is mam(e^edby the Bocliinc of the Go/pd, or l^nown by the Gift of Faith, i. But the man is ytt much more ovcrfeen : For what if it were manifeftation to Believers that is here fpokcn of, It is only Gods Rightcoufncfs, ( that is, the way of God for Juftifying nnners,with the denionftration of his own Jufticeand mercy) vvit-nefledby the Law and the Prophets, which is here faid to be manifcftcd. But it is not that you or I have pare in this R'ghteoufncfs. Do the Law and the Prophets witHcfs that L. C. is righteous ? God manifcftcth Chrifts Righteoufncfs, or his righteoufnefs provided for finners, or the righteous way of pardoning the guilty J I. By Chrifts Life, Death, Refurrcftion , &c. z. By his own and his Apoftles preaching. 3. By his Spir.ts efFcftualintcrnal Demonftration. And this maniteftmg is the fcry a^ whereby Godgivcthus our firft true Faith. But it may be long after this that he will raanifeft that wc have Faith, and are our felvcs truly righteous: However it is a different work.

$.3.

L, C. TTErfe 14. Being Iuftified freely by his Grace through the redem-V ption that is in Icfus Chrift, To wir, he ma^a Redempthn or Remif-fion of fm fbe the formal caufeof our Jufiification.

s. 3.

R. B, I. 'T'He prcpofition ^«,fignifieth not a formal Caufallty, but an cf-ficient, i. e. a meritorious. 2. Redemption is taken in Scripture fomctime for paying the Price, fometime for our adual Liberation. It is here taken in the former fenfe, and fo it goes before our luflification long, and is nocihcfamc withremiflion,as you faign. 3. In the latter fenfe you may as well fay it is the fame with our Glorification, and final abfolutlon after the re-fiirreftion : for that is part of our Liberation I think, and oft called by the name of redemption. 4. Wc yield you, that rcmiffion of fin is the formal Caufe of our luftification : and what is that to the advartage of your error i*

§. 4.

Cil73

L. C.

VErfciy. Whom God hath fee forth to be a propitiation through Faich in his blood, to declare liis righteoufncfs for remiflion of fins that arc paft, &c. This place is cleared by this Paraplnafey The Dodrine of the Gofpcljor the Gofpcl righteourncfs ( which is fometimc called by tlic name of Faith) declarcth that the blood of Chrift, flied for finners , is the propitiation by which God is reconciled to them : G/> Faith doth reveal, declare lefus Chrift to be righteoufncfs, and a propitiation tor fins, even thole committed before the publication of the Gofpel by the Evangelifts and Apoftlcs,

§. 4.

T^.S, I. A Frcr this manner of expounding you may make Scripture ^^ fpeak what you plcafe. I know not a read ye r way to fet up Popery, and pcrfwade men of the ncceffity of a ludge on eaitli to decide all differences about the meaning of Scripture , then thus to put on it an alien fcnfe , ^nd make people believe that the plaineft paffagcs of it are not to be undcrftood.

2. Would this Differtor have US receive his expofition , when he doth fo ill agree with himfelf ? and knows not himfelf yet what to Believe ? He here gives US three diftincl fcnles of the word Faith , i. He faith it is The DoSlrine of the Gofpel : z. Or the Gofpel Tljghteoufhefs : ( yet he feems tq put thcfe two as fynonimal : which isftrangc,asif Dodrine ^n^ Kighteoufncfs were all one. 3. And in his next Paraphrafc he takes it properly for Vaith it felf.

3. How dark or partial an Expofitor is this, (if I may focall him , that dif-claimcth being an Interpreter^ that when Scripture fpeaks of Faith in hk Bloody and that with a prcpofition before it, which {hews it to be a medium of a propitiation, doth yet make this to be fpoken of Gofpel Doftrine or Righteoufnefs. He tells us in a parenthcfis, that this is fometime called by the name of Faith. But mark, he durftnotfay, It is called Ta'ith in bis Bloody which is the phrafe in the text. -Let him ihew us, if he be able, where F^r/; i/i bis Blood is put for Gofpel Doclyinc, o, Righteoufnefs.

4. Who knows what he means by Gofpel righteoufnefs ? If he means ^7/i/?i OTVn Righteoufnefs , that confifteth partly in his bloodfhed : and fo he would make the fcnfe to be, the Righteoufnefs of Cbrifls fuffcring dccUreth that hii fuffhing is a propitiation. Doth fich expounding need confutation >

5. The text faith, God bath fet forth Chrift lobe a propiliatiott through Faith in his blood : plainly making Faith the means prerequifite to the adual propitiating or reconciling of God to us j and for djercmiffion of fins paji. But this Interpreter, ^ and no Interpreter) tranfpofetii Faith, joyniiig it with his manifelfta-tion as the means of that, when the text joynsit with Propitiation and Remif-fion, as the means to that. Yea he makes it go after remiflion, contrary to the txprcfs Text.

6. We doubt not but the Gofpel declarcth Chrift to be the propitiation, and facrificc. But will you by the next tell us , where in the Gofpel it is declared,

S f that

c»i8a

that L, Col. is righteous, or hath any part in Chrift ; or doth belong to that

number that you fuppofc Jiiftificd fo long ago.

7. May not the Gofpcl declare thxt fbnft is thepropit'nuion to men that have not Faith in his blood >

S. Seeing you cxpoaind fmspajl of thofc that were committed before the preaching of the Apoftles, and ( 1 fuppofe ) judge that it was at hii death that Chrift did propitiate; will you refolvc us, whether no fins were pardoned Ixfoic Chrifts death, fincc v^rfr7;» > and whether ycu arc of the 'J[oman Faith, tliat the Fathers before Chrift'were in Limbo ••

For I pray mark the next words, To declare , I fay, at thii time hii Right' tufncfs.

§. J.

I.e. X7^ the foSowin^ vcfcs 'Us plain that S. Paul by the Law of Faith, ««-I-' dcrUandcth cither the objc6l of Fai:h, or that Evangelical Qecpnomie Vfhich ii oppofcd to the ^lofa'cal : Thrzj and l\ verfs teach that. Thcfcnfeofthis is plain. Do we make void ihc true ufc of the Law, when wc dcclaicihc.Gofpcl' God forbid; but we rather ftablilh it.

§> 5.

R. li. I. "DUtwhatis this to the purpof- > The Law of Faith, and Ftdtl} -L* it fclf arcnot alionc ? vihuxi theLaicvof Faith /ignifie that ob-jeft or Oeconomic } doth it follow that Fnith doth fo too ? But the Law of faith is plain language,and aseafic, at Icaft, to be underftood, as t/jc Laro of n^or^is ; fo called, becaufe one makes Faith, and the other Works the condition of Life, And yet itisfcarcca fober Intcqnctatioa,to fay, that by the Law of works is meant the objcft of works.

z. You feign Faith to be put/or Gofpcl in the 3 i rerfc , and fay, Its plain. But that is no proof. Its true that the fenfe is the fame, which ever were expref-fcdjbccaufc one connoteth the otJier,and both arc here intended,^.^. Do wc mal^e void the Law, b)ma}(njg Faith the rvay of Jujiif cation and Life? God forbid. This is as plain as yours : and then why muft the words of the text be altered without need >

3. Butyouwould have done fomcthing to purpofe, if you liad proved that in verfc z6 and zSand 30. it is the objcd of Faith that is meant by believing and by Fgith.

§. 6. I^ C

. TPfle 1 6. verfe dothno niore^ac:ording to the Leiter, mal^e a Btliever to be the object of ftftificatioKjthcn-the fifth ijnfe of the following Chapi-tey: ( doib.malic) the'ungodly.

§. (J.

t^v}

§. 6,

7^. B. /'^Omc liiihcr,aIJthat are not willing to be deceived, and fee the way V_> of Licentious expounding the Scriptures ! when he meets with a Text that fpeaks fo cxprcfly ag.iinft him, that he

hath not a word to fay againft it, then he hath no Bcyi in loc, ilti^o refpii^u way left but to aitcmpc to fet the Scripture by the impiia cenfecitur, quum de ears (as we fay) and lay , The Letter oi' this vero coramDeoJujUiiaqHa-Text is no plainer on one lide, then another is on riturj quifquis vel in minima the other fide. Thus do the Romanifts to per- /ff/f aficc , copiparitur Ugis-fwadc the world of the neceflity of a Reconciler violate reus. of Scriptures.

1. ButI ftiall prove the falfncfs of whathe would here insinuate, by comparing both Texts. 1. Note that here is no poffibility left him in this Text for evading in his ordinary waycs. i. He cannot fay, that F^ufe is here put for the Gofpcl, both becaufe Declaration ik before diftinftly cxprtflbd as antecedent , and becaufe the Text ufeth not the term/a;/^, hut him that bclicveth in Jcfiis. z. Nor can he fay, that any other Declaration of Gods Rightcoufnefs is meant, for the fame reafons. 3. Nor can he fay that Gods Righteoufnefs it fclf is meant byour Believing: for thatalfois diftindly mentioned before it. 4. Nor can he fay that it is Chrift the objcA of Faith that is meant by the word believing , otherwifc then as connoted : for that objcft is diftinftly expreflcd alfo , that he m'iflH be the Jujiificr of him that Believethm Jcfm. Doth that man mean to make the word, the rule of his Faith, or his conceits the rule of the meaning of the word, ihit yet willdeny ihit he that Belicveth in Jefus y is the objeft of Juftification ? i. Now let us fee what the Text that he allcdgeth, may fay to the contrary j Kom. 4. J. Tohini that wnrlicth notybut beheveth onhim that jii-fiifi-cth the ungodly, his faith is counted for Righteoufnefs. Note here, i. If both texts be plain,~and both true : then certainly both muft be joyncd together, and not pncfct againft another. If one Text fay, Chrift juftificth the ungodly, and the other fay, he is the Jufli^erofhimthatBclicvcth in Jefus i then we muft fay, that thofc whom God juftiheth are both ungodly and believers : for both arc true : And therefore i. the ungodlinefs here meant, is fuch an ungodlinefs as *s found in true Believers, and not that which is in Infidels. 3. And the Text it fclf cxprcfly faith fo: and fliews that by ungodly here is meant one that is uajujl or unjuflifyabU according 10 the Law of ]yorlis'y and fuch are all the faithful to the death. And that this is the fenfe, appears, i. In that it is made cquipolent with him that Ivorl(Clh not. It is the ungodly that workcth nor^ that is juftified : now \t is paft doubt,that by tvo,\'^th noty is meant only Legal working for life ; i. Either in pcrfeft obeying i z.OrMofaical tasks j 3. Or works conceited meritorious \ and not that which Chrift faith is the work of God,to believe in him whom the Father hath lent. Joh. 6. 19. not that Faich which worketh by Love ( Gal. 5. <?. ) and by good works. Jam, 2. : 4. 2. Note tliat the Text exprefly faith, that the ungodly man here juftified, is one that Bclieveth in him that Ji{(li-fieth the ungodly; fo that it is an ungodly Believer only, that is,a Legally-unjuft Believer, that is here meant. 3. Note that the Text doth exprefly fay. His faith IS counted to him for righteoufnefs : to (hew that it is not only undone before "

S r 1 his

his Faichjbut Faith it felf hath a great 1 and in ir. What is meant by this, and how far it Ts FaTth It fclf, and how far it is Chrifts righreoufncfs * And bcf<hC in that is imputed, I have fully fluwcd clit where *, and Mr. Ca-ihis yol. tal{CY againft Salimaijh hath Ihewcd the caulelcfncfs of the quar-

rel among Divines of late about this. 4. Note alfo, that the Holy-Ghoft, as if he had toreleen how the Libertines would abufc the Scripture, doth fo exprcfs the luftification of the ungodly here, as to leave no room loi their cvafions : For as they cannot now lay, with any niodefty, that it is aji unbeliever that is here nitant, when God faith, I. It is he thai bclicvcthy and that i)n/"i7///.'i.s counted foi rightcoufnefs ; fo they cannot now with any modefty fay, that tills is but luftification in and by conlcicncc, or in our feeling only, or the knowledge that we were before luftificd, that ;s here meant : For the Text faith, ihcir faith u accounted or imputed to them fa,- righteeufncfs j ^nd fnrelytomi>ute or count forrightcoiifnefs , is notmecrly to make knuwn that wc were bcjorc righteous : and ic it God and not our fclvts by teeJing and con-fcicncc, that doth count ur impute it tor rightcou.'"iKrs. Nay verfe i, Itcr^-prcfly Uiews that it is luftificationZ></a>c Godi tliat is here fpnkcn of.

S J that you fee, iliis one Text which the Diftcrtor bi ings as fo exprcfs for his turn, doth fay fo much againft him, as might put the cafe out of doubt, if there Wltc no other fpoke to that end.

But yctfurtlicr confidcr , if it were proved that the word ungodly , is taken inoppofjtion to Gofpc| obedience, and not to legal pcrfeil. cbedience , y^t it maketh notiiingfor his caufetforic is undcnyablc that ungodly is cither the 7V>»m«i 'ii q.'io, or it is taken in fcnfitdivifo c^ non cur/ip{)fito, and faith implycd in luftification as conjunft. If a Phyfitian cure the fick, doth it follow that while they ar« fick, they are cured '- If you heal a wound, is it a wound when it is healed i> Chrift came to be a Phyfitian to the fick, and to call, not the righteous, but /in-ners: but it was from fin that he called thcm,and from ficknefs that he rccorcred them. He came to fctntiibcriy the Captives. Doih it follow that they were Gaptivcs when they Wcrc let at liberty ? This arguing is hkc the caufc for which it is ufed, vciy irregular.

S. 7.

L. C. D Om. 5. 18. As by one offence all men were condemned : (thai 1\. M ai to guilt) fobyone luftification ail men hare received luftification to Life.

Here ali things aye plain. Jnjliflcation or the Ihiput.itlon of Cbrifts Rigbteoufnefsj or that Ju(iification by rvhich all are judged jujlj is oppofid to the Imputation of the nffc/icc by which all men are co?idemnid; ^bfolution is oppofed to Condimnation : the fin of Adim to the Righteoufncfs of Chrift. The gift fr imputation vf the Riihteouf-nefs of Ckiiflj is made the caufe why tve arc judged lighteous before God, and our fins are forgiven as, for the ebtainingof eternal life, as the offence of Adam is made the cauie why all men are guilty of etc; nai death. Here is no account of F^ith at all: fo'r faith is not the imputation of Chrifis T^ghtcoufncfs j nor is it Rimiffum of fin, and fonot Ju^ificatioti. T^r is faith S^b^'ulution, nor a caufe or gift for which we arc judged righteous before God, But in the following verfe the moflfoimAl rcafon ofjufii-fixation is exprefed withoiH any regard to faith. As by the obedience of one man

many

[22X3

many were morle finners, foby the obcdkncc of one arc irany made R'iglitcoi.'?'. Jnibls opfofitiou. Faith hath 710 place : ¥oi not [mthybui the Rigijtccufinfi of Christ li oppofcd 10 the off'i/ue : and as Scfipiine no whue fiiih that we arc mr-de R'gi.tc-oui by finh , but by the obedience of death or blood of Cbnfl ; fo ivhcn to juftifie , IS the fame as to mal{C jufi aud abfolvc , neither doth Scripture any where fay, that we are Jnfiified or Abfolvcd by faith j but by Qnlfls Obedience , Death or Shod.

§. 7.

7^. B. I, r\^Hcthcr you do thus interpret as Bc^z and tlieClaramont-ineccp-py Gracolat. which'nc mentions on verfe 17. or whether you foljow the vulgar and almoft all other Tranflators that interpret J^i ivlt TctpArrjafxctjos per uniui ofi^ftjam veldcliHiany rather then/7f>- mam ojfcnj'aK ^ the matter is little or nothing to our prefcnr biifincrs. But you muft remember, that though.you are pleafcd to ti ar.flace both <f\lKsti^a, and J\udt.iei7ii by Jufl'ijisatto-i yet tjic firft figuificth only thofe material peitoimanccs for which we are juftificd, and the latter Juflificationitfelf. And therefore the vulgar, Pifcator and moft ochcis do rather choofc co exprcfs the firfl bv JuftUia then Ju^iificatioy as alfo our Jtiglilh Tranflatois do by the name of Rigincourncfs: And Bc^a that tranilatcb it by Jiifiificalio-, doth it with a wifli that he might have leave to call it Jiiftifi-camai or ^ufiificatnentum \ and will by no means adm't that it is of the faraj fig^ nification with J'UMoffti in this place , but that AiK'iXay.A ipfam Juflificationis nofirK niateriam hie dcclarat ab (fcilii) ncnipe illiim Chilli obcdicntiam cujui Impu-talio Hos Jnflos itiipfo ficit. If you a^k to what purpolc is this obvious note ^ I fay, to let you know that though the fame obedience and fufFcring of Chrift may be,as It wcrc,thc matter both of Chrifts rightcoufncfs and ours, as being the meritorious caufe of. ours, yet it is not thi- fame J^iKaiafK or luftiHcation formally, ( whetlicr you take it Aftively or Paffively) by which Chrift and wc arc luftificl; r.ut that material Righccoulncfs, J'iKulofjLct,by which Chrift wjs lufti-ficd bccaufe he performed it, doth not eo'/iominc hiftific us becaufc Chrift performed it, or qu.uinui perfonncd by Chrift, and fo accepted as fufficient faiisfadi-on or merit on his pate ; but co nsi'/iine bccauic it is impiitcd to us j which is not till our Acceptance : or bccauic for the fake of that fatisfadion and merit, wc are fo; given and juft.ficd when we p. 1 form the condition impofed by the free Donor upon us to that end. Ti:e ignorance of this one point, then which fcarcc any one tiling is more frequently and exprcfly delivered in the Scripcure,haih undone the Libertines.

z. What honeft rcafon have you to tranflate hi TsivTca apSfu<m!i U( /<-MiaiTtv (on)i,onincs homifiss acciperunt Jnftificatior.em ad i itcM > Where is the ^c-ct\)crunt m the Ttxr, or any thing, that intimates any fuch thing ? Adding to Gods Word, is not p;ovir,g your opinions. Chrifts merits may be in omnes bo-mincs ad Jupfcatioiiemvua:, in regard of the tendency , and ufc of them , as a plaifter is for a ('ore,and an inward medicine for fuch or fuch a fickncfs, before the application : yea further, as God hath abiblutely Decreed, that it fiiall be applyed and cfFeftual to this ufe in its feafon, i/ii^. when he hath caufed us to perform the condition of his gift. And yet it follows not that all men have received, yta or all the Ekd received chij, Righrcoufuers or luftificatjon already,

Sf 3 4. Nay,

[2«]

3. N.iy,will you plcflfc to norc , thatthc words in the ncxtvcrfc , which moft cxprcfly lets forth tlic compaiifon, are J'UeuoiKXTtTtt^foyreu*i'fft^oi : in the future tenfe , Jufii conflUiccntur lUi mulct: not ccnjlitcitifunt. So that Chrifts rglnconrntTs is the matter or meritorious caiifc, by and tor which the E\c& fijaU Ik all luftified in their fcafon, but not by which they arc luftified upon the oarc performance, or btforc they bcJicvc.

4. Tliis being fo, what honcft icafon had you totranflatc it ^<!»/Zi/««»/«i^ tor Confittuimiir '> I know that moft Interpreters judge that the futurc-tciifc is put for a continued prcfent tenfe, as GroZiw fpcaks : but that is an cxpofition, not a traiiflaiion ■■, tlicy dare not therefore put the prelent tenfe tor the tuturc, as CIS you do i andbcfidei it is but a conjcfture. It feems plainly to cxprcfsj that though Chrift be juftificd by hisrighteoufncfson the pctformancc, yet lb arc not all his Eleft j but it is only faid , They fjall be 3 in their fcafon. Be\a faith , that he read ML7A9A^{]iov7!ti in the future tenfe, in omnibus codi-abui.

5. You that imagine all fo plain for you in this Text, why cannot you flicw us one word that doth cxprefs or intimate that it was at the time of Chrift obeying or fuffering, or any time before our Fairh, that we are luftified by his Rightc-oufnefs ? llicw us if you can a word for this ! The text tells us, to our unlpcak-ablc comfort, that by ene mans obediencey many JhaU be made Righteous : but what is that to prove that they are fo already ? It compares the caules of death and life, but it raentionethnotobfcrvably the fcafon as a part of the comparifon, yet intimates it to be future, as to moft after Chrifts coming.

6. Or if you will needs have the comparifon extend to the time alfo, why do you not obferve that it utterly dcftroys your caufc > Was ever I, or any Reprobate Son of /4rf.iw adually guilty or condemned at the time oiSidams finning } doubilefs no : ^li non c(l, non cH Reus , z/el Condcmnattu ( unlcfs you dream of a guilt and condemnation which adjcdivcly is Tfi'/wzwwx W<OT<«/rfw.f j Guilt is an Accident, and the fubjeft muft fubfift, and therefore it muft cxift, and therefore it muft be extra caufas. But all Reprobates were not extra caufas when ^.^ dam finned; therefore they were not aftually guilty. May it not be cnough,that asthccaufeof themfelves was then in Adam, fo thecaufeoftheiifututc guilt was

"in him > and fuch a caufe as would infallibly make them guilty as foon as they did exift ? feeing none can bring a clean thing out of an unclean. I argue therefore hence againft yourfelf. As Guilt was derived from ^dam, fo is Kightcouf-ncfs from Chrift, (as to the fcafon ^j But guilt was derived from ^Adam, to none of his pofterity aftualiy , till they did cxift from him. Therefore Righteoufnefs is derived from Chrift to none of hisEleft, till they do exift in him.

7. For ought I know you muft on your terms, not only affcrt univerfal Redemption, but univeifaladual .uftification and Salvation. For you interpret it, All 7 C7i have icceived Juflffieaiion to Life ; why then do not all men live, as being luftifivQ to life > If you fay that by All, is meant All the Eleft onely •■, I do not believe it : both becaufe the exprefs words, and the fore of the comp.irilbn reach furtlicr 3 and in the 19. vcyfe the article added (hews it { 01 vof^^o} ) which t!-..'rcfoic ilf^'^^i and oilier^ ordinary tranflate, Jilimii-'ti, that is, ^ui pccm cato.escortfl tuii jU'U,dequ!bies ante. I conceive therefore, that the fcnfc is this ; ^s Adams fi'llj'n vpai the matter or caufe of the guilt of all maal^inde,fuppofing that they: eceive theirnainre from hiiloinSi in the oydinay way ef propo?ation y (winch

Chrift

Chrifidid net)fo is Chrifis fatisfaSlion and merit^the matter ty caufe of the Righteouf-ncfi of all rnan^mde, if they iviUbe united unto him.On\y here is the difference, that for the conveying.of Adams fin, there was no morcrcquJficc but a conveyance oi that nature, \vhich niuft be the lubjctt ot our guiJc; and To our bcint; propagated by him, is but C(?ffif!('/(jw/7/«/rt/« ; But IiiftificationconHs by way or Grnce i and therefore our Faith is Conditio arbitraria, <& morahs. And fo it may wtJl be laid that Chrifl dyed for the luftifying of all men Conditionally: which indeed is fo far out of doubt, that wc have under his hand, an Ad of Grace , which is a conditional pardon or Inftification of all. If any mans zeal for liis novel opinion ngainft this im-iverlal fatisfadion, do make him angry with me , I in-crcate him to give mc leave to be of Ca'vins opinion in the cxpofition of this icxr, whole words arc thcre,(ff),'«w/f«fw eJnniHW Gratiatfifach^quia omnibus cxpoftta eft, 7ionquod adamncs cxitnciiUif rcipfi ('that is, as to the adually polTcflion of Rc-miffion or falvation) niim-eifip.ijj'm cfi Chriflmpro pcccatis lotiui mundij atquc om-nlbjii indiffinnlcr Dci bcnignitiUe of'eriur, non tamcn omncs apprehcnd/mt. i. c. He makes Grace common to all, bccaufe itis expofcd toall : not that it isextcjided to all inthcthjng ir fcif : For though Chiift did fufFer for the lins of the whole world, and is, by the benignity of God ,. offered to all men indifferently, yet all men do not apprehend ( or receive) him. Mark, that C<:/w; takes not alt mar, and the whole ivorldbcvc, for the Ele<il only,

8. When you have told us that all is plain, in the points that we do not deny, v'i\. that ^W^W5 offence 8nd Chrifts Righteoufnefs, arc oppofed j that Abfo-lution and luftification are oppofed; you next come to your caufe, and tell us that Here /•' no mention cf T-aith. But I give you thefc anfwers to that, i. Is it excluded bccaufe not mentioned ? that is wild arguing, z, lean fhewyoumanya a text where our luftification by Faith is mentioned, .without any exprcfs mention of- ChrifV , Doth it followtherefore that Chrift Is there excluded ? I trow not. 3. Faith cxinnotes Chrift where ever wc are faid to be luflified by Faith: aiui Chrift connotes Faith, where ever w; arc faid to be luftified by Chrift. He that faith, I am ted^^f^f/Hrjmeans by wy»zp.7f-alfo : and he that laiuh , I am fed by my meat, means by my meat eaten, and not lying by. Though I know in our cafe the ncceflity of Faith is ex ordlnalione drjina pojitiva, and the nccellity of eating i^ ex ordMutionc naturali. 4. Here is no mention in the Text of our Propagation rrom-Adaifr: and.yeti: is^plaiixly implyed as the narural-conditioji , without wh ch we fhall not derive guijtfiom him (as Chrift did not). Soisfaich in Chrift inipjycd as the moral condition, without which we Ihall not receive luftification from Chrift. 5.But yet for all thi^,I Ho not believe yoUjthatbelievTng is not mentioned or regarded in the Text. Do you not find; the very next words, in the end of the J 7. veife to be thefe, Tij j Jlcyj£«? riii J^tKHiacrtwuf a«,u-, Ceipov]it, Sic. qiiidottumGratiteT{ecipiunt'> And we take receiv'ng the gift to be believing,aswc are taught/p/;. I. 11, ii. For though Phyfical piopc. Reception Is fafUon and not Action, yet Aat/ixCtt'^a fignificth fitft and properly thax Adiveconfcnt to the offered gi^t, which morally we cill I cccivHig , and fo im-plycth Pallivc Reception as its confcquent : as Giotius truly expounds the word here, hai/Xa,v6VTi(, id cfi,:^'i Vol iter uru Mcipere, & fie ace'cperiint, re jpf.i.

9. What need you tell the worltl that Faith U not impntauon of Ornjli.T^ifijtc-oufnefs, nor T^miffion of //>/, 7ior\,4bfoiution ? >vho faith it is. Nor ycc a caufe ((peaking Logically^ or gift for which (as the meritorious ca-jfc) we arc judged

riightcous ?.

C"43

righteous' would you thence gaihci J chai therefore Faith hath no place in the woiks' It is the Conditiony/«c qii.zmnyvthich is as fhcDcpofitio mnicrine :is that no place? Yea and when the qucftion is at Gods Tribunal, whether we were true Believers orno ? the (inccrity of our Faith will be the very/«/?/r;fl Cahfte nia-icriaDy, upon which the perfon niuft be luftified againft that accufation : which, as it fccins by the defciipci^nsof the Juigcincnc in Scripture, will be the grcac enquiry of that day.

10. Wren you again fay, \\\ix. the next vevfc givcth m the formal ^ cafm of JajiificaiioHytvnhout any mention ofFahh;l anrwer,Nor doth it mention our propagation from Adam, as having any place in our Guilt or Condemnation , and ycc implycs ;t certainly as the caufc without which we fliall not be guilty. But

. the thirg I juftly blame you for, is, that Iteming a Learned man, and therefore knowing f or fliould have known) that our Divines do ordinarily give this an-fwer,that yet it plcafed younot fo much as to take notice of it j but go on as fmoothly as if none had cveranfwered your objeftions.

11. When you [sy laft, that when to Juflife^ ftgaifictb lo mal{e Ji((l or ^bfohCj Scripture doth no -rvhoc fay that tve arc Jufificdby h'aith j 1 anfwer , i. This Is a mcer begging the queftiOn. t. Our Divines againft the Papifts have fo fully proved that juftifymg is taken for remitting fin and ablolving, where we arc faid to be luftified by Faith, that it is necdlcfs for me to do that work again. Yet fomething I may pel haps do before I conclude, on a fit occafion : but in the mean time, let the Reader obferve, how flily this confident Afl'ertor, did even now over-pafs i?<j/;7. 5.28.30, when he was purpofely fpeaking of the lenfe of the next verrcs,and in the general of thofc. And let the more unprejudiced thence judge, whether his aflcrtion here be true or falfe? -y. i8. Therefore tve conclude , that a man is Juftified by Faith , roithout the deeds of the Law. $.It is one God "which fhall Juflifie the circumcifon by Faith, and the uncircumcifton through Faith : One would think thcfe words (hould be plain enough to fatisfic.

§. 8.

L. C. T ^^/>j Chrijis obedience it our Juftification, which conpjleth in this , Not ■"-^ that we believe in Chrifty but that C'hrift was made fm ( or a facrtfice for Jin) inourfiead.

$.8.

R. B. '*-|-!His is the very root and mafter vein of all Antinomianifm, vi\. that J. Chiift did lo obey or fufFcr in our ftcad, as that in fcnfu Legalt vel C'ivili, it was our fclves that did it by him ; as if he had done it as our Delegate, and not as Mediator, and fo the benefit of it were ours, bccaufc the obedience qua pr^eftna is OUTS. Too many of our own Divines have fpoke lefs cauteloufly of this point then was meet, 1 ftiall now fay but this. I have more fully in other papers proved that this Doftrine overthrows the very Chriftian Religion, and is of more pcrr.icious confequencc, then moft ever were introduced by any Heretic ks into the Church. In particular, it leaves no room for any pardon of fin at all, feeing no Law can require more then the debr,or the very penalty thrcatned.

If thercfora we have paid the fame debt, or fufFered the fame penalty, though not in fenfn pbyjicoj yet in fcnfu Civiliy no more can be required ot us, nor is there any r6om for pardon. Beit known to you therefore, that Chrift did obey and fuffer in the perfon of a Mediator, and not in pcrfoiia dcitnquentisy though for the fins of the delinquent, ( bcirg obliged to fuftl-r by his voluntary undertaking) : and therefore his fuff.rings or obedience are none of ours, ns performed by him : but God was pleafed to make him our King on this Redemption Title, and by a new Aft or Law of Grace, to convey right to Chrift and his fufterings or merits, that if, as to the fruits ot thtm, on certain conditions, i. c. Of grateful, per.itcnt Acceptance i and of obediential Retention. The Gofpel oftcrs us Chrift for our head and hubband : and till we have Legal Right to him, on our Acceptance) we have none to luftiHcation or Lite.

§. 9-

L. C. "D Om. 5. I, Being luftlfied by Faith (or of Faith) we have peace JkV. with God. The (enfc isy cither After that it was known to us that Chrifts Rightcoufnefs belonged to us. Peace of confcience did thence arife j Oiy The Doftrine of the Gofpel, or Chrift himfelf by the Doftrine of the Gofpel, which is oft called in Scripture by the name of Faith, doth abfolve us from all guilt: whence arifeth peace of confcience and tranquility of minde , and affiance whereby we reft upon him. Or is the meaning rather^ Being luftified j we hav^ Peace with God', that is, we are reconciled to God , as Twifs thin^cth. -i;--^V:'5-

S.9.

R. B. TTHis Interpreter, who faith,he will be no Interpreter , doth interpret as if he interpreted not. i. How many fcr.fes will he devifc to make LigTi'tconfift with Daiknefs, and to obicurc, if poflibl. , words as plain as we could wilh. What hard words aic thelc. Being Juslifiid by faith, rvc have Tcace ■with God, that need all thcfc devices to explain them ? or rather,what clear expreflions are thefe for luftification by Faith , that this Learned man hath fo much ado to draw a curtain over them, or to ihut his eyes to keep out their light ?Herc are three fevcral waye^ that he attcmpteth to make them fie his turn, and all to little purpofc. For the firft, the text faith, Betng jHJiificd by Faith, and he faith, it means, ii1)en we l^netv tb.tt we iv:rejn.\itfiedyOr that C'bifts Rightcoufnefs Tv.w ours. As if doing a things and malting mliHow that it is done already , were all one j or as if G jj had given him a Co.nmillion to change his word at his pleasure ! Lethiin if he can, or any men living, flicw us but one Text, where liiftification is taken meerly for the making known to our felves that we were luftified before •' I lay, let him ihew it, and prove it, if he can,

2. I fuppofc it is in vain to tell hi.n, that Calvin^ B65^.i, with the generality of Interpreters, are againft his expofition } It is like he knows that already.

3. What a ftrange thing is it, that he doth not fee that both his two latter ex-pofitions do deftroy hi>Qwn caufe. For the fecond, If it be the Doftrine of the

T t Gofpel,

Corpcl, or CbiJftby that Doftrinc ihflidoih Juftific us, then his Rightcouf-nefi is not ours quapra^ita, but as given us by ihc Gofpii ; And then it muft be on the Gofjic] tcinis ] and Itthim lluw, it he be abk, where the GofpcJ Jufti-fiediaii) li,bdcl r If it be by ihc Dc^rincof the Cjolptl that Chiift uoch Ab-folvt uslrcni ill guilt, then it is not an immanent aft in Gcd, nor done before the GofpcJ IS pubj.lhcd, or cftablilhcd at leaft : Ni i can any Ly , that he here means a Ji.fl.hcation by incci nianilcftacion that we wire luftified for hccxpicfl"-cch h nifclt lo II.can it of ^bfuhifjg m f,om all guilt : The Dcdiinc that 1 maintain, is no other then this , I uat Chrift by the Golpil doch pardon us on condicion of our f aiih, and fo when we behcvc ('which aJfo is his. Woik).

Aiiu for his third Expofition which he afcribcth to Dr. Tm/}, what can be more cxpicfs againft boih Dr. 5w//f and hiinfelf ? For it it be Reconciliation with God, that is meant by Peace with God , then it is not only the manifeftation of oui Kcconciliaiion : Nor can it be then faid , that we are reconciled from Eternity, as 'Iwifs oft fauh we arc, fteii g the text faith, Hcnigjufiificd by Faiths wc have i'tacc with God } And if they fliould mean, that God was before Reconciled to Us, but we wcic not Reconciled to him tell we bcliere j 1 anfvfcr, i. If they mean it of our Paflive Kclativc Reconciliation, it is a coniradidion ; For God to Love nic, and yet I not to be Loved of him j and fo to be appcafcd or reconciled to me, and yet I not to be one to whom he is reconciled , are contra-difiions. 2. If they mean it of our Aftivc and Qualitative Reconciliation ,, that is the habit and ad of Love, Faith, &c. to God, then they crofs the text , which fpeaki ot Reconciliation with God : vid.Bi^am & Calvin, inloc. And the% they make luflification by faith to go before faith,which is contradidory.For the Souls Rccciiciliation to God, in th.s fcnfc, fas wrought on us by the Spiritjdoth confift in Faith as well as Love : And the luflification her fpokcn of, is luftifi-caiion by Faith : And fo their fenfc would be this. Bung Ju^ificd by faith , »UY Souls are inclined to God by Faith and Love. God is more merciful in plain CX-prcfling his minde to us, then fomc men would have him be.

S. 10.

i-. C. /^ Al, z. 16. W« know that man is not Juftified by the Works of the VJ Law,but by the Faith of Jcfus Chrift j we I fay have believed in. Jefus Chrift, that wc might be Juftified by the Faith ot Chrift, and not by the Works of the Law, becaufe that by the works of the Law Ihallno flelh be juftified. 1 do not thinly that any thing elfe u meant in thu place, then that it is the neerefl find ebiefejl f, uit of Faith, that Chiji may be ^norvn to tu, fvith all his bemfits j and that he ii not revealed to our confcicnces by the Goudnoii^s of a neve life , how exail

Jocver, but only by the gift of Faith, by which at a ^c^'cnger be-^ iniernuntium. itveen *, we are certain of "J^econciliation, and of i{(fnijJion of fin.

On is the Cofpel meant by Faiths that it may be oppofcd t» the wortis *f the Ltnvand Cermonies, which thejalfe Apojilts didrequiit to ie joynsd with the T(Uth ef Chiifi, or the Gofpel i

x»«ra

§. lo.

X. t. TF it were agalnft the moft dangerous errors that I were difputing, it A would be unfavory ro fome if I ftiould give the fictcft Epithets to fuch arguings, I fliall therefore leave the Reader te give what Epithets he pleafc, to fuch dealing with Gods (acred Word, as he here finds, i, You fee ftill the man is to feek himfclf, what may be the meaning of the text: but any thing wiU fcrve except the truth, z. It hath pleaftd the Holy-Ghoft no lels then three times in this one verfe, to ufe the word Jufuficd; bcfides the next verfe again. Yet doth this Differtor make nothing of all, but that we are by Faith certain of Reconciliation and Remiflion j what language fhould God ufe to convince fuch men as thefe of his meaning >

3. I would intreat the Reader to note how much thefe men differ from the Jews in the point of Juftification by Faith, or by Works ? It is but meerly in manifefting that we are Juftificd, that they give Faith the precedency : when no mans falvation lyeth on that. If a man be Juftified, though he cannot have the comfort of it till he know it, yet he may neverthelels be faved.

4. Yea, is it not falfe,that Works of a holy life reveal not our Juftification by Chrift ? and did not himfelf confefs as much before >

5. Its very true that the Work of Faith is, that Chrifl be^nown to u* tvlthhii benefits ; For to believe, is fo to know Chrift upon Gods Revelation, as to accept him i But its one thing to know Chrift and what he hath procured , and offercth to us, and fo to Accept him that he may be juftih^d by him : and another thing to know that he hath forgiven and Juftified us already,

6. Oblcivewhat Libertinifm is in the laft fhift (forlmuft remember. It muft not be called an Interpretation ) : Three times doth the Holy Ghoft ufe the word. Faith ej Jefia Chriji, andbdieving in Chnii , in the beginning of this one verfe : Yet doth he qucftion. Is it not the Golpcl that is meant by Faith ? If it be, this is the Paraphrafc , K/towing that as man is not Juftified by tlje lyorlii of the Laroy but by the Gofpcl, even we have ■ (rvhatjhall I fay ? ) Go-fpclj or GafpeUtdy in J'fm 0^'''^lh that we might be Juflificd by the Gefpet. But, ( if it be worth the while to ufe reafoning with this foi t of men, ) i. I intreat him by the next, to prove to me out of Scripture, that the word Faith of JcfiHy is ever takeh for the Gofpel > fpecially when luftifying is made the conilquent, as here it is > 1. If it were the Gofpcl that were meant by Faith , it would connote the i&. of our Faith : For therefore it is that the Gofpel is called Faith, be-caufc it is believed, ^nd the naine is transferred from the aft to the obj eft, 3; Doth this Differtor in confcicnce really think, that the Faith which here wc are faid to be juftificd by, is not an aft of mans > at Icaft that thefe words, Evert we have believed in Jcfus Cfeji^, doth not fignific our ad, but the Gofpel ? If he do, let him think fo ftill for me : for wordi Iigmfie nothing to him, but what he impofeth on them. 4. If he yield that believing injcfm ChiiQ, doth lignific our Faith) and not the Gofpel, then he muft confefs that our luftilScation by Faith here mentioned, follows our believing, feeing we therefore believe in Chrift, that we might be juftified by (he Faith of Chrift ?

Tt t §. 11;

L. C. T)Hil. 3.9. That I may be found in him, not having my own Righte--»- uufncls which is ot the Law, but that wnich is by the Faith ot IcTus Chriftjcven the Righieoufntrs which is of" God by Fairh. 5. Paul Jcemth in this placeyirjpjerf>^ to afjcrt that the a[l of bduvtng h of Go^d T^ghtcoufmfs. But Calvin on the pl^cejaith, thai themiude of the Apo(iU is to compare the trvoRightc onfncfj'ts together j One piopcr lo man j the other which is of God, and is obtaiiii<-cd by Faith j And a lilllc fl)rf>, that lie aflcittth die Rightcoulucfs of Faith to be of Gc d, is not only bccaufe Faith is Gods gift, but becaufc God juftifieth us of his own goodnefs, or becaufc by Faith wc receive the Rjghtcouinefs given us of God. To Vinti both the RighKonfnefs of Coelj andFailh , are equally Gods gifts j the one, rchich maizes us Kighuoits , the oihcry by rvhich we l;_now that this Rjghtc-Uifncfs belongs to y.i.

§. II.

R. B, I. \^Hen I fee the man name Calvin^ I fliould hope he hath fome regard to his judgement, but he confuteth quickly fuch thoughts ; but is itnotftrange that it the man could finde no words of cahm but what make againft him, that he would not rather filcncc then cite them ? You fee here are iwoclaufcsof Calv'incittAx In the firfl he faltji^ that the Righteoufnefs which is of GodjW obcamcdbyFanh ; ('not made knowji to be'already obtained by us ) In the fecond he faith,;/ is ghcn of Cod, and received by Faith , what more true and plain can be Ipokcn? or what more pertinent agalnfl the Libertines that plead for tnc luftificacion of Infidels ?

2. Yet doth this man adde in the conclufion, chat by Faith wc do but l^now that this Righteoufnifs belongs to i» ; and he fccms to intimate iksii Calvin and the text fo meant. As if Obtamnf^znd 7{cc(iv!ng,Weic but to know that wc, hare obtained and received.

3. Nay mark howhe leftoutthe end of Ci2/^'i?«f^l■ft fcntence , ("asfaithfully as he deals with the Text). C^.'w?;j words are ihcfc , Infigiis loctn fiquis certam JHJlitia fideidifirutioium habere cuplat,& tenere veram ejus naturam : And fo he fpeaks what here is cited, faying of the latter fort of Righteoufnefs, alteram ex Deo effe tradu, & per fidem obtincri ( this much he citeth^^ ac in fide Cbriffi rf-pofitam (this he kftout). ,r ; ' '

4. Mark alfo how plainly the Text is againft liisI^oJl/;ihc :,It faith', tjiat Rjghteoufacfs is by the Faith of Jefus chrift. The DifTerior faith, no :' It is 'but the knowkdge of Righteoufnefs that is by Faith ; Let him, if he can, prove that ever Righteoufnefs is put for the mccr knowledge of Righteoufnefs, as he would pretend that luftificaticn is put for the knowledge or manifcftationof luftifica-tion. Nay twice doth tlus Text immediately together tcU us,that this Riehtc ouihefs is by Faith.

L. C. Aft- M-38. Be it known to you, that by hiin aJl that believe arc ^A juftificd from all things, I'lom which yc could not be Juftificd by the Law of Mojes; He fcctfis to malic Faith a conditionpicrcquifue to Jnftifiiatwa ■• but what the [cnj'c of the place ii , Calvin on the place tcachcth j Vaul declarcth how men obwin the Righteoufnels of Chiift , even when they Receire it by Faith.

R. B. t Thoughtveiilythemanhadbecncontradidingus, and he is plead-X ing for us, and yicldcthall. Doth he not confels that Ca/x'W teacheih us Tauls fenic ? and doth not he cite Cdviliy faying.the fame as we, that Chrifts Kiglitcoufncfs is obtained by Faith ? 1 hope he doth not think that by Totian-tiiYy Cdvm means, that they may linoiv they have obtained while they tvere Infidels , yea while they were not at all. Nay, Calvin on this text exprclly faith, T/7fy remain imder giult who do not fly to Christ and fecli expiation from [ins in his deaths and that /;// Cod pardon ta we arc all enemies to him by fin, and Arc aU driven from the isjng-dom of Cody and addiSlcd to eternal death; and that this is the Rightcoiifnefs of faith, when God tal^es us for 'l{ightcous, in not imputingour fin to tu j Yea the next words to thofe which he citeth, are, quod auterd impitrat fidesy &c. So that Faith in his judgement obtaineth Righceoufnefs, and not only knoweth that we had it bcforej would this man be of Cahins m'lndc 3 our Concroverfie with him were at an end.

Reader, I love as little as another to turn my fpeech to the moving of afFe-dions, from meer argumentation : yet do I think it my duty to tell thee, that as Gods Word is holy, and is part of his name, fo he will not hold him guiltlefs that takesirin vain, and unievcrcntly abufeth it; that the bufinefs of a finners lufti-hcation and Salvation is of greater moment then to left about; and that it mcer-ly concerneth th^c to take heed upon what reafonings thou buildeft thy hopes. This man would periwade thee that God luiftifics Inhdels. 1 fay, God juflih.th none at age and ot difcretion, but Believers ( for ought is revealed to any man in his Word). 1 would not have thee taken with any aiguings of mine or his : but layby both a while, and in the fear of God, with prayer , humility and mipar-iiality,do butrcadthefe veiy texts that he himfclf hath here cited : and judge as in confcienccthou fecft caulc, whether they deny not the juftification of Infidels ? And when thou haft done, read his Comments, and judge but rationally,^ whether he fay any thing to purpofe , or do not ulk like a dreamer, or muclr worfcs 1 profcfs for my part, I never met with Papift that had neer fuch fhame-Icfs expomions of Scripture, andfo many together, and that if I could bring, my conlcience to fuch a liberty of expounding, I fhould be never the more of a Religion bccaufe of Scripture jbut might for all the plaineft pafTages of it , be as free to choofe my Religion, as if there were no fuch word : Nay, 1 fhould take nay.felf for one that believed nc^ Gods Word to be true ; For he that can believe that it is a word tliac will bendand yield to luch handiing as this 3 and bear

Tt 3 any

any fcnfe, though contrary to Its plains it importance, I rtiould think doth fcarcc heartily believe it to be the the Word ot God ; judgeot this DilTator, but by this one text expounded by him.

§. 15.

L. C. ^T^HUplace andfush lil^ey doth the Author of the EpifiU alledge i to prove M, that Faith ; yea Repentance and a holy Life do g« before Juftificatienj and that a believer is the objeB of Jufiification : juch are Aft. i f. 43. To him give all the Prophets witncfs, diar through his death ( Name itjhouidbe ) vvliofoevcr belicvcth in him,(hall receive rcmillion ot" fins: ^ndfuch as thcfey Repent and be converted, that your fins may be blotted out ; andyihc luftifier of him, that is of the Faith of lefus, Rom. 3. i<?. But that force of Arguments drawn from thefe places^ by which he thirds to bindc m, rve [hall eafily decline anon j as alfo what apper-tatneth to the object of Juftificatiorij which they woidd have to be a Believer.

S. 13.

«. B,

. I. I^Hat Faith and Repentance go before luftification, we affirm ; but that a Holy Life goeth before it, wc deny, and I remember not that Cy/-. »j;tf«/i»<fa4 hath any fuchword, for all your faying it; Indeed to our luftification as continued, and as confummate at the judgement. Good Works are antecedent, if there be time to do them.

i. Reader, mark the texts that are here made fo light of j whether thou couldeft wifli God to fpeak plainer, in affcrting Faith to go before Reraiffion,and to be the condition of it '•>

3. I believeyou willM);/^ rfec/*»f all thefe, who have got that unhappy declining art. But take heed of declining too much againft Light, and remember another day, that you were warned. You do it with more eafe then honefty.

. 5.14.

L. C. 1J9y In thefe places is denoted the (jitality of them whofe fins are for-* given.

%. 14*

R. B. TS this your bcft declining > i, The Scclprurc makes Rcmiffion con-"l fequential to Faith, fayingjSe/ify^ry (hall receive Remijjim ; and be converted that your fins maybe for giveny&c. And this man cafily declines all thefe, by faying,rhfttbyjZ>;i5, and/aayfec, is mtzni are already iox^iycnyq.d by faying the word is falfe. Is not this with more cafe then honcfty ' Nay th- Scripture faith. That whoever bcUeveth mty w condemned alreadyj and the wrath of Codabi' dfth on him, &c.

», Who would think by his words here, but he did at left yield that all men

that

C»30

that are already fbr|iven, are prefentJy qualified with Faith ? But its n© fuch matter. H< w can you fay Faith is the quality of the Juftified , when, if your Doftrine be nue, thty may be many a year vvitlicut Faith after luftification. Niy, when you fay, that God ji;ftifieih alwaycs before Faith j and therefore you ftiould rather fay. Infidelity is the quality of thofe that are forgiven. Nay when you hold that wc are ill juftified, when vre had no cjtiftcnce : and can Faith be the qual ty of chat which is nof, what a confciencc have you that can put by fuch pla'ui and frequent Scripture ccftimony, with fuch fhittsas thefc ?

§. If.

L. C. W/Ith fix hmdyed fuch T>araloz}fms and Tar a lid places as thefc, do the Tapijls maintain the merit of ivories, and Aiminians Elchim ftom forefectt Faith.

5. I J.

R. B. \4^ confciencc forbids me raifing jealoufies without clear ground of any man : But what man would not be jealous that this man were aPapiftunderan Antinomian Vizor, finding him under a ftrangename, in thefe daycs in England > Yea did I know tliat he had formerly been an enemy to Popery, did I know him, 1 would watch him , left be were fince perverted. Let any fobcr Reader judge, whether that man fbeing of good intelleftuals) who verily thinks the Pa pifts have fix hundred texts for merits (which is not once named in the Scripture ) fuch as thefc are for Faith going before Juftification , can choofe but think the Papifts in the right, if he believe the Scripture ? And what he faith of the Arminians, (of Eleftion on forefeen Faith) is a ppint of Popery too.

X. I am confident that this his aflertion is fo notorious a falfhood, and of fo hard a forehead, that few modeft Papifts will dare to own it themfelves : What man ! fix hundred fuch text for merits ; and Scripture never once mention it ? Either this pradife is Antinomian, as is your Doftrine, or elfe there is no Law for————.

L. C. 'T^Here is no lefs Jlrcngth in the words , lam. i. God hath chofen Be-lieversj to prove that Faith is pmcquiftte to Ele^ionythen in the words. Believers receive Rcmiflion of fins j to prove that Faith goes before Kcmijjton of fins.

$. K.

C*30

%.16.

■ R. B, ^ Nothcr very imtnodeft falfhood, I. Who knows not how frequently ^^ the word Eftn is taken for Gods Temporal Ekftion by the ad of -Vocacionj by which he doth, as Chrift faith of another temporal Eledion, Take one and foifakc another in the fame houfc, of the lame bIood,and bed, and im -ployraent. And lo God is laid by/dw« i. J. To have chofcn (thai «, by aclual vocallon) the fooruf the wotid (lobe) /ichin Faithyandheirsof the Kjn^dom p;-o-mifd,&cc. not as you unfaithfully read it, Go(i/;af/7 cbofen Uelicvcis ; as if there Wire no mention to what he had chofcn them, or what manner of Eicdion it i$. 1. Suppofc it be granted you, that it is the eternal EleAion that is here meant: what (hew of tiuch doth it put on your words, if you fpcak of the whole work of Elcftion ? Though Gods Decree be but one in it fcif, as to the ad , whichis himfelf ; yet feeing it is denominated from the objed which it refpcds, and to our capacity muft be conceived of and cxprcfl'cd as fevcral ads, fo therefore Divines ufe to diftingullh between the Decree of glorifying , and the Decree of Giving Faith and Renewing Grace : and they tell you that the fiift , vin^, the Decree of glorifying hath for its ob')cdia Believer perfevcrmgi that is, God Dc-crecthtegloryfic none but fuch, and thofe Individuals that he will gloryfie arc fuchj and rewarded as fuch : But the objed of the former ad, h an unbeliever i Or elfe how could God be faid to Decree to give him Faith, But this doth not intimate that forcfeen Faith is the caufe of the Decree of glorifying, but that Faith is Decreed to be the condition of glorification. So that Gods Decree of glorifying is about a Believer, i. r. to glorifie Believers : but his Decree of giving Faith, is about unbelievers. Now thcfe being divevfificd but for our ap-prchcnfion, and being in it felf one Decree, when you (peak of the Decree of Elcdion, without fuch diftindion, you cannot,fay, that it is ex fide picvifa^ be-caufe it is adfidemt as well as adfalutem. And fo much to your unrcverent abufe of Gods Word.

CHAP. nil.

Of the A6ls of God Juttifying.

I« II I I I I ■! , -m I

§. 1.

L. C. /^F thefe we muft fie what they are, when and vfhether they be done to-

V_7 gcLher and at once ? Moft of the fincircr Divines will have thefe

a6ls to be two. Imputation of Onijls Rightcoufnef, and-i^mij/ion of fm ; and that

they an divers farts of Jitfitfication : Tct form will have than di^niil in word

MlyiOndnot in being ^ ft that fithe-r of them tal^en alone May expyefs the nature of Juftifiatitn J vf>hich they fay U manifcft in Rom. 4.^> 7. irbcrethe Apodle frofeffcdly handling tbit Argument, ufeth remitting fin and Imputing ChrJfts righteoufncfs, as equipollent } and that the diftin£iionrcfpeileth not the Integrant parts of fufiifieationi but the two terms i quo 8c ad quern ; which they thui iUuJlrate,M by one and the fame a£l the ditrl^nefs u driven out of the air, and the tight introduced into the air ; fo cn/ztf godly man is by one and the fame a£l of luftification abfolvcd from guilt, Md pronounced. Iu[i,

§. I.

R. B> I. pirftjoesoneand thefame adofthc Law ofgrace,whIch pardoneth the -L (in, and conftituceth us righteous ; for all is but to make us nonebligatos adpeenam : And then foilowcth the ad that you mention, Abfolvlng from guilt,i';^. by fentence and pronounclngjuft : for what is It to pronounce Iuft,but to pronounce not guilty quoad pxnam ? 2. That Remiffion and luftification are one thing, though under notions a little differing, taken from fevcral refpids, is fo largely proved by Par*tu and many other Divines, that I (hall fay nothing to it. Thofe judicious Divines that do argue for a difference, do either prove but fuch a notional difference (one name more diredlyrefpeding the punirtiment, tbe other the Accu. fation and Oblisatlon, as the Terminut Iquo i ) or clfe they take remlfllon for the legal difcharge or difobllging; and luftification foe the femential •' whereas tbefe are two forts of Remifnon and Juftification both.

L. C. T Confefs that I rather (lide into the opinion of the farmery yea am drawn in* A to ity though unwilling, {or whether I will or no) feeing in the bufmefs of fdvation^ it is fafer to admit thofe things which may be believed without wrong to Gods truth^then tofeemanywhit to detra£l from it : andthe method which the Author of the EpifUe giveth in his Catechifm,doth mofi pleafe me : for there he fo conjoyncth the righte-, oufaefs ofGhrifl with the rcmifjien of fin y as that this (hoiildbe the efefl of the former y or of the perfcfl obedience which chrifl performed to the Father, And which he chiefly te(lified in dymgiOfferinghimfelfa facrifice propitiatory for thefns of men.

§. z'. K. B. 1

VNder pretence of giving more to this or that part of divine truth or ope-ratlonsjmany recede from the truth.and breaking Gods facred frame of doftrine, they let in many errors which they never dreamt of. 2. I never faw the AU' thors Catcchirm- but I like the order expreffed as well as you can do: & wilh that one truth were but well recetved,that Chrifts fuftring ind obedience is but the caufe of our re* miffion,3nd fo of our formal rIghteoufncfs,& not remiflion or our formal righteoufncfs it felf,(though our material it may be called) : and this is enough to overthrow yout whole frame ' as Al^edim (ilthfib-rifts righteoufnefs is our righteoufnefs (aafally,

V u net

jtttfoYMAltu Bma$tWslJtliemcrhorIoHsCaurc, fo tlie ImmcdUte effidmt maft

intervene between the Impulfive meritorious Caufc and the tffea, and therefore Chrlfts rlehtcoufnefs doth not co nomine luftifie us aaually,bccaufe It Is the mcrltorl. ous Caufe i or doth no: prefently luAifie us as foon as performed.

§. 3.

L. C. jyVL* tvUhoia thUmnhodt it Is not tobcdcnycdibefHesttat, * (^tra 13 Scripture pbcctheur Rightcoitfnefs as to themofipart^ inre-

mi[fm offras, that alfo thi Divnfs rvho embrace two farti of Juliification, tire incon fide/till) drcwn to lean more to one of them.

In the Tra£latcofthe true rcafon of Chiftian Fucification nfcribedto John Calvin.ci. dc Jaftif. p. 9, Who doubteth bu: the whole RIghteoufnefs of man,to which he muft sroft, is contained Inthe frecremiffionof fins ? avd al'ntle afte-ft Defervedly doth Pd«/Include the righteoufncfs of faith, funplyin remiffion of fins, faying, that It ts defcribed by David^ when he pronounced the man bkffed to whom fin is not Imputed : and certainly the blcffednefs that Djz-ii^ mentioncthj flows from righceouf-jiefs. It follows therefore that we are therefore juft,becaufe our fins are not Imputed to us.

RivetDialyfi, p. 88. lpca((!Vg of the twofold Grace we receive from chrifl^ faith^ ThefewehavefiomChriftj who Is made to us righteoufnefs through the remlfli^ on of fin, and fanftlficatlon, by the working of his bpirit in ui.

The fame Rivet frayfcth Caflandcrs words ^. 90. It is faid, and It Is p»R contro. verfie,that the righteoufnefs by which we are juftified confiftcth in remiffion of fins ; that Is, when for the merit of Chiifts fuffering which he underwent for our fake, our fins are not Imputed to us : which is nothing clfe then the very merit of Chrift to be Imputed to us to the remiflion of fins.

T/;c/'<7Wf WK'»fc» Animadvcrf. onGioi. annot. p. 31. faith^ /ft/?/MelanShon conflam'ly taugkt, that luftification fignlfieth Remiflion of fins, or the Acceptation ofthepcrfontoevcrlafting life.

Thcfixtccnth Article 0} the Corfcffm of the French Churches it cxprefi^We believe tiiat our whole righteoufnefs is founded in remiffion of fins j In which alfo our felicity confifteth, as D^^ivid faith: Exclkntly Bernard ferm. 25. In Cantlc. Mans righteoufnefs is Gods indulgence ; The fame man , Gods righteoufnefs is.not to fin, the righteoufnefs of man is, for Righteoufnefs * not to be im-* Itfhould puced.

be fin furc. And indeed the holy Scripture doth for the mofi part, not only place our

Righteoufnefs and Blejfednefs in the Kemijfton offm j but alfo fetcheth mofi. exhortntiorts to fanffity from the Confidcration of Chrjfts death ; when yet the Rtghteouf" nefs of Cf^riftin fulfiUingthe Law might fc cm a far (harper fpur to thefludyofa holy an Anew Lifc^ which oui Lord didpafdly accompiijly. It is not light which •$/Paal faithy Rom. 6. 7. that he that is dead is luftificd (or freed) from fin; m if he tvf>uid teach m thcfc two mofi weighty things. 1. That ckifis fu^tring and dying dotb-JH^t fie and free U4 from the gHiU offm, x. Thciwe being dead in Chnfi and crucified mih him i arc fo freed fom fin., that it (haU not reign in ut ' which two benefits in, 'ivhich allour righseottfnefs dnb confiflj de flow from the me death of cbnfl.

§ 3.

R. S. t. AS to the queftion,whether Remi'flion be the whole of our luftificatlon ? ^^bfjflyand plainly.thJsfeemstomethc truth. Firft Itmuft beknown whether Chrift give us any other or higher felicity then >i^dw had Jn pofftflionor Inpotnife, upon Condition of perfevcrance in pcrfcd obedience? If thisqueilion be determined NcgativclVjthen luftlfication is wholly comprehended in remiflion of fin ; For feeing Remifsion frecth us from the Penalty of loIs,as well asof fenfe,it re* ftoteth us to rhc Tame condition, not only as wc ivcre in (for It is not only Original fin rha? Ss forgiv-n) but as we (hould have been in If we had perfevered In our firft Integrity,'hat ls> Jf we had not finned. But ifrhequeftion be determined aflirma* lively, tii'.t Chrift did procure us a higher felicity then the fi.ft Covenant promlfed, th«n we muft further confider this much : w:?^. I hat the word luHificatlon is taken for Legator 9cntentiallnAi{iciilon : and in both it Is taken either moreftrlQly, or more comprchenfively. luftificatlon In Law fenfCj orconftltutlvein the Atldtefi fenfc^ Is only the making us righteous of unrighteous; and that 1$ only the remifsi^ on of our fin or guilt, and fo putting us In the ftate we (hould be In if we had never finned. luftlficationconftltutive Inthemorecomprehcnfivc fenfe, contains thead-. ditlon of all thofe higher benefits purchafed by Chrift ; (fuppofing there are fuch,) that Is, It is the putting us into a right to all that felicity which God will beftow on the 'uft in Chrift. So luftificatlon at judgement is ftriftly taken^ The Abfolu-tlon of a finner from ihc Accufation of Guilt, that is. Obligation to punilhmenc of l^fs and fenfe ; But largely taken, It is alfo the adjudging him to a greater Glo:; ry, or the abfolving him from the falfc accufation of having no right to that greater Gloiy. If you ask my opinion of this, I am loath to determine fo doubtful a Cafe ; Bat k feems moft probable to me, that the felicity that /idam (hould have had, and that which Chrift will give us, are of the fame nature } becaufe the Nature and Capacity of man is the fame. But what gradual or Accidental difference there is, God knows, for I do not. But I fuppofe that the term Juflifiation in Scrlptute, is commonly taken in the former ftrifter fcnfCj for meer remilTion of fin, or making us relatively righteous of unrighteous J yet fo as to connote, or imply the concurrence of fome fpccial Gol'pel-prlviledges } which when particularly Intended, are ra« ther exprefTid by Adoption,Mcr?;bcr(hip e[Chnfl, &c, then by Juftification.

By this alfo it may be difcerned, whether there were any meritorious obedience of Chrift necefliry, befides that which was for fatlsfadion of luftlcc, and reftorlngus Into tlie ftate that we fliould have been in. It wc had not finned. To our ftrid luftificatlon and Reftauration, no more but fatijfadion was necefTary : But if there be any degree of felicity fuperadded which the firft Covenant gave not, then thequeftion is yet mote difficult, as to that part. But then firft It muft be known that God being well plcafed with Cfarifts very fatisfaftlon, as Glorifying him more then the finners ownfufterings would have done, might give power to his r'on to florlfie his Members with a higher then the firft Glory^even for that his fatisfaftlcn ; There is nothlngto hinder God from a larger (hewing of mercy, when his Jufticc is once fatlsfied.We muft not feign God to be fo backward todogood,as if he would or could do nothing for us, but nhat is bought with a price ; when once the bar or impediment is removed, i. And we muft remember that it could not be the Law of Works that madcChrifts further ('fuppofed^ merit, beyond that oifatUfadlon, ne-

V u i ctflary

ctffiry for our Glorification. For mecr rcmlfllon, through the merit of mcer ft-lisndion (which is by obeying to the death;) \\as fufficlcnt to reftorc us toourrlght cffeliciry which the Law could give : And if Chrift giTC us any more, it being net the Law that gives ir, or ever gavclt, fo the Law is not it that reauirctli anew pur. chafeof it tobcmade. j. And therefore it is not by way of Legal Righteoufneis to be impu:ed to us that Chrifts further obeying in ou ftead could be ncceffary, when the work of fatisfaftion was once performed : For what Law reqnired fuch a rightc-toufnefb ^ But thefc things defcrve more punQual explication in feafori. I thoujht not to fay this much, but I hope the judicious Reader will not think it in vain.

I. For your colleAions from i?ow. 6.7. 1. If you mean that ChriH freed u$ from guilt at the time of his death, it isyourgroundlefs fancy. Ic was his will that the lU bcratlonthen purchafcd, (hould be made onrs by a new Law on certain conditions, a. If fin (hill not reign rn us who are dead in Chrift, then why make you ihofeto beluftified by Chrart in whom fin raigneth ? Are they juftifiedby him, and yet not dead wich him ? j- How falls it from your Pen that the not»raigning of fin in us, i) one cf thofe t»YO b.'ncfits of Chrifts death, In which all our rJghteoufncfs doth conGfl ? fure thats a Mghrccufnefs that we hid not while we were Infidels or unre-g*nerate ? much Icfs from the time of Chrifts death ? (otherwife then negatiyely, as iin raigneth not in a non-em-^ but Error is oblivious 3 and oblivion fclf-contra-dicing.

§. 4.

L- C. \y\7Hen ibcfcaBi are do7ie. Ictus fcCifvhcthcr tvhen we are elelled? »r ▼ * tbcn when rvc believe ? 0/ m foon as Chrift veoi prom'tfcd to be Medi' at our i which more agucth to the verily of faith.

But nhcnfoever tbefe aCls be dme^if ihey be dme in one a£l,it U theme fufficiemly evitr ced, thu theaflof luflification preccdelhfaith in Chrift; Othcnvifeive mufi fuppofe-thut the a£l of luflification u reite, atcd, and that luflification ru welt (U faith hath its' increafinj and declmings^ (oriuiermijfians,y

§. 4.

K B. I. "VyV 7'^at hopes was I In, when I firft faw this quelilon ftarted, thatwe ▼ ' (hould have ! ad his opinion, and theptoofof it in the anfwcr : But the man feems indiftircnt what opinion he be ofj fo he be not of that which 1$ commonly accounted orthodox. Let the time of luflification be either when we arc ele(aed (that Is, before time), or when Chrift waspromifed, fo it be not when we believe, he is content. I pray the Reader not to forget hereafter, 1. That here he doth not make the time to beat Chrifts deatli, but the firft promife. 2, That he doth not mean by this promife Gods decree of giving Chrlft, whieh was from eterni' ty j for he diftingui/hcth It from the time of Eledlon. It is therefore at the promife after AdafjshWj that he fuppofeth we were adually pardoned and luftified. j. But then is not this a new way, and diflikcd by his own party,to make this to be an immanent ad <■ As if immanent aQj were no elder then fince Adam! fall > which his. Dr. Tw.'fs would have taught him are from eternity ^ But of this more anon, s. To your faying they arc don««w<i<2//, inoaeza, J fay, thatjhc conditional

general .^

general pardon wis indeed one aft, and at the. fame fcafon enaSed as you imagine i-when God madcthat aft of grace. But this pardoncth and jaftifieth notAaually, fill the Condition be performed ; why did you fay never a word to prove it one aft, but nakedly affirm It ? But do you mean that all men are luftified liy one Ad ? or only each particular man > If the former, I acknonrledge it, as to one Phyfical Aft of llegiflitlon, which doth but conditionally Itiftifie : But it is not by oneCl-vil or Moral Aft : For this one Law performeth many thoul'and Legal ads, and producetheffeds, according to the will of the Legiflator.

7. Faith goes before Juftificationj and what llicw of ftrength is there In your reafon to the contrary ? You fay^ Then Jullifcation rnnji be reiterated, and mieaje^ and dccrcajc. I anfwer. If you mean that one man will be juftified to day, and another to morrow, what inconvenience follows that ? If you mean it of the fame man, jou muft diftinguifh between juftifying a man from a ftate of fin and wrath, and juftifying him from the guilt of a particular fin only. The former is done but once when he believeth i The later is done daily }, and what doubt of this ? or what inconvenience follows it ? yet will It not follow that luftificatlon Increafcth and dc-crcafeth as faith doth. For our luftification confifteth in our right to Impunity: And the Teftament gives us this right upon the fincerity of our faith, and not upon the degree } and therefore the decreafe of it alters not our right as long as It Is fo muchas tobcfincetc. Indeed the Antinomianjuftification by faith in meer mani. feftation doth rife and fall, and I think after you we rife and lye down again^ more or lefs 5 at leaft with many*

rtt

,-." »

y

L. C. ''THe wordi of St. Vi\i\ are pWm : Col. i.zo. Itpleafed the Father to rccon-cile all things to himfelf, both things inE»rth, and things in Heaven, having made Peace by the blood of his Crofs. Then are the Elect lufi/ficd together and »t once, ivhcii Reconciled : and then Reconciled rvbcn be made peace by the b'oodof tht Crdfs.

K. B. I. TTBres no talk in the Text of Juftifying j and that we arc then luftl-^^ fied when Reconciled, you fliould have proved, and not nakedly affirmed ; For without diftingulHiing of reconciliation, It is falfe. a. Though God isneverfaid toluftifieus fromChrifts death, yet It may be well faid, that he then reconciled all things tohinafelf. For i. The Price of Reconciliation was given and taken, and (oqua>Uum ad prctium^ icwas done. 2. Godwasfo far adualUy reconciled, as to deliver all men from the Legal necelfiiy of perilhing they were in before, fo thit they are not under a remedilefs Obligation for want of an expiatory facrificej and he hath put them that were helplefs, on the ufe of means for recovery, z. Yea he hath adually granted a full free conditional pardon to all} and the Condition is but acceptance of his gift fChtift and Life) ; which is fo reafonable , that among men fuch gifts do pafs as abfolute , fuppofing the Legatary, or delinquent will not bt famad^asto refufe it. And thus Chrift may be faid to have reconciled all the world to God,in that he hath done It^i. ^anr

y u 3 turn

turn ad pretiim .' i. ^imtum in fe , as Satlsfier j j." And God bth granted It

quantum in fc asLcgiflitor of the new Law. Bu:mark my limhatJonJ. i. I fay not thac Chrift hsth done it quantum in fe as Redeemer abfoiutcly. For the w«rk of Redemption comprJxeth alfo his fpecial intent in dying for the Infallible falvation of his chofcn. 2. Nor do I fay, that God hath done It quantum infe abfoIutcly,4>ut only as Legiflitor, or Donor of remiflion by the Teftamcnt or Deed of gift to all that will accept it. For he doth more for his chofen } but In another rcrped } even as the erernal cleAor of them, and as Intending the work of redemption to the infallible acccnripilfliment of this clcftion-ends. So char you fee, God haring as Covenant Donor or Legiflator, and as fending his Son to fatisge, and Chrift alfo as mcer facisfieti done quantum infe to the work of Reconciliation, and R.emi(rion,and Juftificatloni and fo much as in rcafon there (hould be no ftop left (in gur Acceptance) , It is not unnfual, nor unfit langinge, to call this by the name of recon-conciliatlon i yea or remlffion : And 1 know men of Angular Learning and Judgement that fay> This Is the meaning of £/»fc. 1.7. and other like texts j and that this 1$ truly Ktmijfio inchoata, In that (in is made remiflible as to perfed pardon, and fo much ddne towards It, as Chrift hath done.

z. But ftiU icmuft be acknowledged, that It Is not adual reconciliation or re« mifiton yet for all this, till the Condition be performed. This Is a known cafe among men, If a company of Rebels be fallen under the ccnfure of the Law and Condemned for Traytors, and the Prince undergo fome publike (hamej for luftlce fake, for their redemption, upon confideratlan whereof, the King grants them a general Aft of Oblivion, pardoning all that will return to their Allegiance, and accept of his pardon, and the Princes favour. It Is here no unmeet fpeech, nor un» ufualtofay, The King hath pardoned them all ; or the King Is reconciled to them, becaufe it is conditionally done, and quantum infe, In that regard. But yet no man is adtially pardoned or reconciled till he perform the Condition. So if you will call the paying of the Price, and the general ad of pardon, a reconciling or pardoning, Ivtill not contend with you, on condition i. That you acknowledge this I* yet no Adual pardon, nor reconcllfation ^except in tatjtum & fccundum quid) z. And that this Is common to the unbelieving and.non»eled that perlfh ; and 3. That this Is not the luftificatlon by faith, which Icripturc mentioneth j yet of this is meant that i Ctf/r^. 19,io. And fo Hci*. 1. j. And fo what If 1 (hould yield that this Text is Co/, i. 10. I eafily confcfs that Chrifts death and univerfal fatif. fadion, and alfo the general Conditional aft of grace or pardon^ do go before faith ; but fo doth not adual pardon-

2. But though this anfwer be enough, yet Indeed there is nothing in the text that •urgethmeto this much : For the text faith not, that cither Peace was made, or reconciliation jbft at the time of Chrifts death : bu: only mentioneth the caufcs of peace and reconciliation whenever attained 5 Chrift may do it by the blood of his Crofs, as the meritorious Caufe though the efted follow not of long after.

J. But indced,the former daule (having made peace) fccmeth to Intimate an immediate cffed (w-^ having paid the Price, and brought God into a Covenant of grace with man, which is a degree of peace and reconciliation^^ But the latter CJaufe feems to intimate a diftant effedj vi\. reconciliation upon adual application and reception of the benefits.

J. Many Expoficors think, that It is but the bringing the Gentile world Into the Church, or making peace between them and the Jews, andclofing them in one body, that is here meant.

C 255]

I have been the larger in explaining this text, efpcdally fn opening thedoarlne of that degree of ReconciUation,whlch is the immediate and general frwit of Chrifts dea h, becaufe I mean not to reptat it o{t, but to referr you hither when other texts of the like nature are dlfcuffed. And remember that here is no mention of juftifi-c*itionor Remiflion.

§. 6,

L. C. *irnc words are plain alfo^ i Cer. J. ii. He made him fin for us, who knc\y A no fin, that we might be made tiic riglitcoufnefs of God in him.

§. 6.

R. B. T^O thefe words make any mention of our being luftified when Chrift fuf-M-J fered ? It only ttis us to what end he was made fin for us .• but not when the end is attained. He dyed to Glorlfie us, as well as luftlfie us ; and yet we are not glorified when be dyed-

§.7.

L^ C. nro wki he ivoi made jin vfbm he bai-e mr dlfeafeSy Ifa. ??. tmd then ive * were Juftlfycd together afid at once, the fins of the El^3 being cafi upon bim, and the oblatm being per formed^ Heb.io. 10. For one Sacrifice being offered fo^ Cms for ever^ andfo they beixg perfeHcd J in lilie mamcr,for ever,V!>hom hefan^iifiedj ht hfct at theright baud of Cod. v. 12,1 j,14.

§. 7.

R. B. I. TpHat we were then luftified togetherj you do but affirm,and not prove, i. I/J55. hath not a word to that end} the laying our fins on him, is not the taking them off from us i as Dr. c,i/j5 vainly imagined, g Heb. 10. 10. makes againft you^awd not for you. It is through Chtifts death that we are fanfii-fied i but whether at his death, nay many rhoufand years before, is ehc qocftion. The 14. tell us I. That Chrift perfedcd them for ever by his oflFering , but nor ac the lime of that offering, or prefently/j'trv >^£/<jw'5 fall, z Nay it faith. It is them that are fandificd, thathcpcrfeded j Therefore not the unfandlfied, nor till they arcfanftified. Or if the fanQificatlcn here fpoken of be a common fanaification^ fo named from the Legal Purifications j then the fenfis can be but this, Ch/ijlhath by once dyingmade a fiifficunt expiation for fin, whereby the tvorld a-refofarcleanfed as to be brought nccrcr to Gndi and taidcr anew Covenant of Grace : ondthc expiation that ■ behathtbiu made is fuj^cient, and hath perfc6l!y done for them the wit,l{ of cxpiaf^n^ and there ncedcih 710 more. But If fanftifylng and pcrfetting be meant cither of iuft<-fying or renewing, then they may be by chnfis Sacrifice in their feafons, bur nm .^t the lime of that facrificC' Youknow wearc nor pcifided till Glory, ('at l<-?ft not while we a'c Infidels or unborn) , andyct you fuppofe us then perfeftedaf ycu fup. pofc the effeds mentioned in this Tcsc^ to be 3iDmcdiatcly concomitant or confe-nucnt to Ckriils fKriHc£» S. 8.

S. 8.

I- C. XA 0, cover it U provedt becaufe the Scripture frequently fpcal^'mg of Rcmifjt-*-^^ on offin^Jaith that they ere pardoned to us together and at once. See Co!. »3,i4. and 1 Cor. ^.i9. where he faith not that we mc Reconciled in chrift-^ hut that ve were Reconciled in chrifl heretofore. The ne*t words are clear, God was in Chrift reconciling the world to himrdf, not Imputing to them their fins.

§. 8.

K. B. I. VOurAffertionCs like the reft, bold as well asfalfe. To fay that 5f/i-•■■ pture frequently faith thU > when it never once faith It, is not well done. Indeed it faith that our-paft fins and prefent ate at once forgiven, and that is all that then is fin t but wliere is there one word of God that faith, that God pardonetfa fin before it is committed ? much lefs all future fun at once } which I know Is your meaning.

2. Col. 2. I J. faith, God hid forgiven them alltrefpaffes i But doth it fay, He had forgiven them what were no trelpaflcs, as being not committed ? There is no mention of forgiving all that wiU be a Trefpafs, but only all that is a Trefpafs.

;. zCor, f. iS. I have expounded before^ i. It is paft all doubt, manlfeftei In the verytexc^ that it is not adual full reconciliation and {remlfllon that is here mentioned; the Apoftle ezprefly affirming that the meflage of Reconciliation was committed to them, and that they were bmbafiadours In Chriits Head to befeech men to be reconciled ; (hewing that yet it was not done. a.It is plain therefore that its Reconciliation f.v/)<3r/f Dfi,on'fuppofition of their Acceptance ; that i( Is Gods providing and accepting the price of Reconciliation, and giving'a free pardon to All upon Condition of accepting the Gift f Chrift and Life) this is the reconciling and not imputing fin ; And though this be not adual reconciliation and remif-(ion, plenary and proper, yet I fhewed you before that It Is not unfitly fo called : what man will think a Kings Pardon to a Traytor on Condition of^ Acceptance, and Keturning to his Allegiance, to be unworthy the name of a Pardon > would not any man fay the King hath pardoned him ? And yet it is not an adual effedual pardon till accepted, and the Condition performed. Yea had there been no Condition exprtlfed i yet Acceptance Is naturally implyed among men, and the Refufcr fuppo-fcd to have violated a Condition fo naturally reafonabie, that he forfeits his hopes of the benefit.

Though Pardon in Law fenfe fully difcharging us from Guilt,and giving us right to Impunity, be in its own kind compleat at once, as to all paft finsj yet there are many if eps towards that full Pardon^which may be well called Pardon too.which yet are common to the ungodly and non-cled. God may well be faid not to impute fin to the world, when he is paying fo dear a Price for their fin, & ufing (uch a means for reconcillacion,and giving pardon on fo free and reafonable terms. Befides, there Is, as Gods Legal pardoning^and his fentential pirdonlng,foa third fort,even his executive pardoning, which is but not punlfliing or remitting the Punlihment, (though not the Obligation to punifhment ) This is very variable,and hath divers degrees j and thus God may punlfh one day, and forgive the next,that is not puniOiand punUh the next

again ;

Chi]

again •, yea and punilli one fin morcj or Icfs t But efpecially when God ta^cs off", or remkteththe puniftiment as a means to Reconciliation, and holdeth ftiU the rod, while he offers us full pardon , even his lb doing is a degree of adual pardon ; Though it be not the full legal pardon, which diffolveth the obligation to punishment, yet is it a true adual executive pardon , in fome degree. The plain truth is, it hath done the Church much wrong, that Divines have not rightly underflood the nature of pardon , f though an Article of the Creed ) j And have too crudely alFerted that it hath no Degrees ; and have laid the grounds of thofe fancies which the Antinomians have built up. Even that Legal pardon which 1 called plenary and complcat in its kind , is yet jmpcrfcft in regard to what follows, nor is it a fit fpeech without cKplication, to fay that our pardon in this life is perfed.

§. 9 L. C

• A^'^ *"*'" David/2ii/fc, that He is bleflld whofe fins are forgiven j it •^ IS certain that he fpeal^s of a pofeH Bkjj'tdnefs; that a, -when all fins are Remitted.

§. 9.

^ S. 1. CjLlrc this man lives in fomc Paradife, where ever it is, that thinks '^ he haih pcrfc.fl blclFednefs already. If he lived my life, he would not think fo, though 1 blefs the Lord of my Comforts, I am not without fome tflfts of his Love : I had hoped he had not been fo far tainted. But I am confident, (let a manbut kcephis fenfesjind in his wit 3 and it is as curable an error as moft he could have fain upoa : Nor do I think, if he be fober, that he will think he is pcifcdly blcffed one feven years together ; Except (which I al-moft forgot) he fhould be fo unhappy as to think, that there is no Bleflednefs after this Life. But 1 will not fufpcft him of that Infidelity.

i. If youarcperfcftly Blefted, fliew it by your perfeft holincfs, and perfed knowlcdgejor clfe they are more credulous then I that will believe you. Such darknefs and falfhoods as this book is ftuflfed with, do convince me that you are not perfcdly blcffed.

3. Nor did it cvercomeinto D-iyirff minde, to imagine men perfedly blef-fed on earth. Cannot a man be called bleffcd, bccaufe of a Right to perfed Blcflcdncfs, ("which yet is but a conditional Right, and in it felf Lofablc, though God will fee that we lofc it not) , but you muft fondly thence gather, that he is perfedly blefled. Let the bunch of Grapes fuffice, without dreaming of Heaven upon Ear^h.

4. No, nor is it perfedRemiflionthat 7)(n^»rfrpeaks of, nor that any niaii enjoys in this life. For i. Many fins arc yet to be pardoned, which are not committed. 2,. Our prefent pardon by Donation in Law fenfe, is but conditional ; as to the continuance and perfedion of it : There are CoruUtiones nm amit-tendiy conditions of not lofing what we hare : and conditions of adual pardon for particular fins when committed, that arc yec co be performed. We muft

X X t»

fothJttctuiWicvc ftili Habitually, and again aftually, and Repent, and Con-fcrs>and Pray for pardon ; And doubclefs a conditional pardon is nocof fu par-fed ?. kindc, as an aWolutc one. 5 . Our pardon which gives us right to impiini-ly is as.to£omc parts ot the puniOiment, but:» ^/c/»»for the future, and not (k praftnti. God never by any paidon diddifcharge us from aJl puniihmcnc in this-life, nor give Rght to immediate pcrfcd.Impuniiy, but only to immediate Im-puniiy,asto the dcftroyingpunilhmcnt, and to the fanftification and fruits of Cafligatory punilhments, and to a perfcft impunity in the life to come. This is truc/and plain in Scripture, ai> can be dcfued, however prejudiced men may rc^ jcftit : As Scripture callcth wicked niens punillmients Chaftifenients, and Godly mcni fuftlringsPuniflimcnts, fo that which we commonly call PateriKil Charfifcmcnt, is a Species of Punilhment, 4. Our executive pardon (which I fo call, bccaufc God gives it as Hxicutioner of Jufljce, remitting that Execution) is not pcrfcd in this life, for niiich puniOiment is yet to be fuffered, and the laft enemy Death, mud yet do execution on m j and our very lying in the duft till the Rcfurrcftion, is a punillimcntj and the fin it fclf that adhcreth tons, is, maintained to be a puniilnncnt of former fin, by many Divines that arc not partial for me, in this cafe. 5. The finalAbfolution which we fhall have at the great judgement, is the moft perfed pardon of all: and this is yet behind.And whereas lonie fay, chat this is properly no pardon nor juftificationj but a Declaring that wc were pardoned and JuftiCed before, I anfwcr, i. They contradift the Scripture, that calls it both blotting out fin, and juftification. ^flf. 3.19, That your fins may be Hotted outj when the time of reffcfhini comes, &c. Rom. 3. 4. Mat, I z,. 37, By thy w-ords fbalt thou be Jniitficd, 2. And though fuch a Declaration, may be called luftification, yet what ignorance do chefc men fhew of the nature. of judgement, to think it doth but bareiy'dcclare > Dctermming, is more then Declaring. By Law, i. c.the remedying Ad of Giacc we have our Jm adlmpw ni[iitc)X.&) rAGlofiam nt Domtnm&-Cou^ttMtum : our conOicutcd Right .• and by luagcment Abfolving us, wc have our Jim judicatum, &T>ctermini!tionc fid-' bililuMi Our right put out of all qucftionandcontravcrHefor the future , not-withftandiiig the malice of all Accuic:s.

Ido not heap up Scriptures to prove the Imperfcifiion of Pardbn In this life, when thcfc five notorious dcfcds may put it out of doubt with the impartial Reader •, and when ev^ry man may turn 10 his Concordance and fiiidc enough. Mark but that z I{ing. z\. 4. which yet mcntioncth another imperfed Pardon , 'ul\. when God will lave the finncr, and yet retain fomc of the punifliment to be inflidcd cvcnon Poflcrity, as he did by j\ian,ifl'ch; Snrcly at the Command-inait of the Lord, came this upon ludah, to amove them out of his fi^ht, for the fmt of Manafl'ch, according 10 all that he did, and atfo fiv the im0cent blood that heficd (for he filled Jerufalcm with innocent blood) which the Lord rvoiUdnot pardon : and mark another kinde of imperfed Pardon in tautMn only, and not in totumy "Hjim. 14. 19,10, ii, Z2.J 33. Tardou ibcfecch thee, the mquitypf this people, &c. and the Lord faid, I haze pardoned according to thy word : Bnt as truly as J live, alli the earth JbaMbe filled with the Glory ofthiLofd, BecaHfe all thofcmen •which have fecn my Glory and my ySMiraclcs, winch I'did in Egypt, and in the ml-dcrnefs, andhave tempted me, now thefe ten iimos,andhave not har^ned to my Voicey fmcly they (ball not fee the Laiid which Ifiva/c mto their Fathers, neither Jhall any of them thAt provoked mi fee it^ Such plainly ivasa)fli4Wi cafe, iSamiz. 10,11,11, 11,14, God/orgivipg the prcfciK death da€"CohiiHfcJf>and the ctcrnaj punUh-

Cms!

mcnr, bmnotall the tempora,Ij)unin\iucnc. However fomc in oppofitionto the Papifts, have run into the contrary cxtream in denying this, yet plain Scripture and experience will make men believe;\vhen prejudice and partiality, which hotdifputes have bred, is cured or allayed.

S. 10.

L. C **r^H'(Te is no fmaU reeight in the words, Rom. f, 19. As by the contu-A. macy ot one man many arc made finners , fo by the obedience of one, many are made righteoHs. ^s if hepjduld fay ; As by the lin of ^dam many arc condemned, lo by the obedience ok Chrift only, manyare luftified \ that it htxy bejpol^c of ftrcnfuii and judicial ^fis, inboib cafes,piiji and ft'formed m one a6l i oi the opp«(iuon teachcth ktrvecn the Ju(tified by Ch'iijis obedience; and thcguihy of damnaaonfor the fin ef Adam : for as the fin of Adam doth by o?ic ad involve fojkrity tu the f/me gtaltt fo the T(itJhteottfncfs of Cbrifi hath by one aft Juftificd tlye fimersyfor whom he dyed.

5. lo.

T^.B, A LL this I have anfwered already jwhat a fancy is it for this man to ^* think, that all ^dams poftcrity are guilty at once, even before they are his pofterityorfubjefts capable of Guilt ?They arc all guilty of one aft j but not all confticuccd fo By one acloi application. So are we all righteous through one fatisfaAionof Chrift, (which yet was more thenoneaft) , but not allby oneapplicatoryad. Cannot you diftingullh both in Guilt and Rcmiffion the meritorious or material Caufe, from the immediate Efficient ? The former is one to us all, and at once caufed in it felt. The latter is as divers aj the perfons. Nor is there a word in the text to intimate your conceits. Yea again you boldly put conftituuntur peccatores, for Cottflitucntur, and when you have done , tell us it fpeaksof ads paft. If ever you deal in this kindemorc, cither fpeak to none but your Difciples that will take your word, be it true orfalfe j or clfe affirm lefs, and prove more.

§. II.

L. C. 'pLytf^e likeoppofition as Joh. 3.18. theUlieveris in Ul(f manner tal(en ta ^ be J unified already,as the unbeliever is txprefly faldyfor that reafen, be-Cdufe he believeth not to be condemned already x Toe as ht that believetb not is already condemned, fo he that believetb is already Juflified : but if tve believe the Author if tbeEpi(ile,tben ts a mm firjl J uflified when hs believe th in Qmft,

X X 1 S, Zl,

§.ii.

^. E. Triis yo''3-fpeaks of the Time of Rcccptionof luft.'ficatJon : but that T^m. j. doth fpeak of the meritorious Caufe dircftly , and but imply the time of our participation.

z. Arc not this mans eyes ftrangcly (hut, that he can neither fee himfelf, nor the text focxprclly fpcaking ag,ainft himfclf i- How can he bclievingly recite a text that faith. He that beiuvcti) not ii condcrmicd already y and yet maintain that thousands that bel.evc not, arc luftified already ? Yea and fee that luftificatioa and Condemnation are coiitraiics t vca and gather hence that a man is juftificd already that belicvcth > yea and gather hence chat men are condemned co ipfb tfuod nm crcdant i But it he mean only, that he is condemned in confcience, as he means falfly, feeing many a wicked mans bl.nded confcience condemnethihim not ( ye are they that luftifie your felves, &c.) So poor unbelievers will finde to theii coftj.that itisanothcr kinde of Condemnation thtn that of confcience, that they are obnoxious to, and lye under : for the wrath of God abidcth on them : and the Dificrror cxprcflcth it by ]am pcrdiriom adjudicaiju. But Oh what difte-rcnce is there between the Libertines and the. Gofpel ? the Gofpel calls the unbelievers, men condemned already, Children of wrath, ftrangers to the Covenant of Promifc, without hope, without God in the world, &c. And this man faith a little before, not only that they are pardoned, and juftified, but Biefled j yca,have pcrfecJ Blefednefs: If all the wicked that are elcft, are perfedly Blcfled> even in heaven,while they are whoring , perjured, killing the Saints, &c. how much have wc been millaken in the unhappincfs of an unrcgcncrate eftate ? and in perfwading men out of it, or to be fo humbled for it afterward ? I cannot perceive by Pauls defcriptionof his former ftatc, that he thought himfelf perfcdly Biefled in it } nor were ihc Godly of my old acquaintance wont to think or fpeak fo of their former ftate : whatever our Religious profane Libertines may now do. Bear with my (harpnefs, for I dare not repent it,f» far (hortis :H(ji ihcCaufe.,

5. 11.

L. C. "fi^Or ii thtre Ufsprevitbintkexifiontlat is Zich. S. vokere the aci of i^ Jufiijicatipn n si^ilful/y expcjjcd : The Angel anfwering^ fppkc tp tbera that ftpod before him,faying, Take away the filthy GarrtTcntsirom hira : and to him he faid,Behold I have caufed thine iniquity to pafs from thee, and I will cloath thee with changed rayment :Hi.Yf in one cCl aretaf^cn away thepUhj GarmcntJ; and ckan raymtm Ufut en.

3, §-. «».

CH5]

§. 11.

S. TTHoiigh I believe not that it is/(;;/7;«d/jj firft luftjfication that is here txpclLd, much Icfs an aA done, when ^^/;/was yet in Paradilc yet I mai vail what the man means to talk of Inch fticngth in this text for him andmakefucha floiiiifli with it, when he could faftcn no fcnfe on it himfeh'^ (who yet goes as far that way as moft) but what we grant as treely as he. Who denyeth that at once (whether at one aft or no) our filthy garments are taken away, and clean garments put on } But doth this prove that we ihall nev^r more fall in the dirt, nor c-itch x fpot, nor need Chrifts blood any more to purge us from our fins f"

You have feen how the Dlffcrtor did Ludiomm agcre^ with the facred Scripture I think as bad as if he had made a Stage-play of it ; we muft next fee how lie dealeth with Divines. I confefs he may finde more footing for an error in mens words then Gods y and *mcn may well bear abufe from him, that dare abufc God himfclf.

I-. C. ^OundDivines accordwith Scripture. Amefius de luftif. Thef. $"•. O luftification admits of no degrees, but is perfcA in one aft. together and at once , although as to the manifcftaaion, fenfe and efFefts it hath divers degrees, ^^?<i/» Thef.iy.?(pt only thepaflpnsoftbe Juftified are forgiven,.. but {Ufa in fame fort thefuime. Num. 13.15. He beholdeth not iniquity injacoby nortranfgieflion in///<2c/. Againy Thof. i^. The J/tftificddaily beg forgivenef tf finy that the fcnfe andmanifcflmon of it may be more and more perceived y as par' ticuiarfirjs rcqidrc.

§. 13.

7^. B. 1. COnieunhappy men pickupalltheJnfirmiticsand miftakcs of ex-O ccllent Divines, and make a Religion of them , or rather make them a pretence to their errors; Our late Divines againft: tlic Antinomians, have particularly dealt with thefe paflages of Doctor Amesy and have ihewed the un-fitnefs of his exprcffions.

2. But what is this to prove the luftification of Infidels ' You know Ameji^t faith, and many a time faitji, that we are not aftually liiftlficd till wc Believe, if therefore he do make luftification done at once , it is^ not before wc believe.

3. Amefiuiin the firft paflr.ge fpcaks of luftification from a finful ftate , not from a finful aft 3 and faith it is perfcd, as to all paft fins j but if he mean as to-future,, he errcth.

4. Nay he (hews that he doth not ; (i/c heonfy faith of future fins, that they are aliquo modoy remitted,and fo fay J too, as before at large, ^liquo modoy is a krgQword. Thisflicws that he took them not to be codim m$do 3 as fully for-

Xx 3 given

^ven as paft fins were j and therefore that Rcmiffion was not pcrfcft as to all lin. Hclaitii, VuiuiA fcccataziitudiicr tantumj & in fubjtCiOiUox. Fo>malncr & in fife, nm'nteniuY,

y. You deal as youufewhh the i J. Tfef/". mentioning one rcafon only of our asking pardon>as if that were all that ^^wf/w mentioncdjwhci\ he hath two more.

6. it you will learn of him , I pray you Icarn the 14. \6. lo. i z. Thcf. Eft duttmhiec Juflificatio propter Chrijiu/»i mn abfolute confidcratum, quo ftr.fu ChrilhiS etuimcilCiiufaipfMsVocaiionii: fed propter pmftum fide apprehinfuMi qute fidts ziocationemfcqnilur taiquam cjj'itlum : undc & Juftitia dicitur cjfc ex fide, Rom. 9. 30. 10. 6. & Juftificanoper fidem, Rom. 3 . 28. Thef. i 6. Niquc cjl (proprie lo-qiuruiv')ffe(i(dnfidueia,quaRcmij]ioiumpeccatorum& ipfam Jujiifitauomm ap' prehendmui : Fides enim Jnjiificans pHcedit Jiifitfica.-* That is too much, tioncm ipfam, * iit Caufafuitm effl'cfum : fed fides Jii^ifi-ii a bui Cauditio. catloncm apprchtndens,necc§xno picfuppomt ac fequitur

Jufiificationem,ut aClus objcUiim. And I piay learn of him,Tk/; 10, what pardon is, and then you will Tee that he includeih not pcrfeft Rcmiflfion of all temporal punishment in it, Ju(i*ficatio abfolvit a peccato& mof-te, 7imimmediate toUendo ciUpam , aitt maciUam, aiit omnia efjc.ia peccati j fed ob-ligatieBcm& Reatum ad mortem aternam fubeundam , Rom. 8.1,33,34. And I could wifh thofc that think Chrifts Righceoufnefs in formahfua ratione, is made ours by Imputation, would learn the Thef, 1 z. Cbrifti Jiijlnia in JufUficatione fi-dciibm Imputaiur, qiiatcnm ejm rmrito jKfti coram Deo repiaamnr. Phil. 3.9, bo much for Amefius.

§. 14.

L, C. T)lC:ator wCtfp. 6. map. inOrat.Demin. Hie potifwmum pctimus ut •L cordibus noftris per fpiritum fanftum pcrfuadeat quod nobis re-raifcrlt pcccaia noftra propter Chriftum. Here rve fpecialty asl^ that he vrouUlby the Holy Ghoji perfvoade our hearts that he hath forgiven our ftns through Chrifl.

§. 14.

21. B. T^Ifiator is as fairly dealt with as the former. Thefc words which are put J- alone by you, as if they contained Ti/c^toi^j full fenfc, are but an addition to his former part of the explication, which is this, Remitte : id e^, Condona : noli pofiulare ; nobis per folutioncm aittjatisfa^ioHcm : deniqnc neU nos propter pcccaiafiojira punirc ; And in the Analyfis, ^gitur in pcnultima. (pettaone) de peicatorum praEtcricorum,e^ a nobis admljjhim abolnione. What a friend F/]-cator is to the juftification of Infidels, among a hundred phccs, I will ihew you cut of one mRom.i.iz,iS,&cc.Obfcrvanda hicfunt Cauf^e Ju{lifitationif,fivc Jufli-tixilliiiscifjm refpeilu coram 7) eo Ju[iificamur. Caufa efficicns principalis ^ agens cji Dens. Caufa cfficiens ad agendum impellcns interna ejl Gratia & fufiitia feu Veritas Dei. Caufa efficiens ad agendum imiKllens externa {qu^ctiam yocari potefl caufa Inflrtmentalis extra nos") efl Redemptie facia per C'hrifium , vir, per fanguincm lUius. Htec I 'fionnuUu vacatur Juflina iiokra materia, &c. C^ttfa, In-ftrumcntalis in nobh eft fides qua Kedmpt'mm i^am feu faikfaaionem Chrifiiapp/e-

heHniWfift

hcndimm^ TomaeURmlfi) Vcccatorm, Ftnis eft Dcclamio J4'^U<f Pel So much for Pifcator.

L C "D Ollock Traft. dcluftif. ivhcJi ive asli Rmi/Jhn ef fin, we do'not

' XV ask tbe benefit it [elf, as tiot yet given, but vpc asl^ theincreafe of our confidence, and the ai^flkmmi of the benefit which k by Faith, and them-creafcof Faith.

§. IS.

K B J Have not that piece of KoUoc^ at hand, to fee how he is ufcd .* but certain I am, that no Divine of name, that ever wrote, was a greater adverfary to this mans EXtidrine, of the luftification of Infidels, then l^Uock was : he being one of the principal leaders for that method of putting Faith after Vocation, before Juftification and Regencration,or Sandification, as Trvlfs obfetves, e. s;. in Colof. i. 14. Jam per efficacem,'v(Kationem,tran{latiin regnum fUii del & 'ipff infirti per fidetn, redimimur a peccato & m«rtc \ fed proprim accedi-mitt ad T^fgem no(l>'Ufn Chriflimcique inferimur per fidem& incorporamur : Infec ti autem &mcorporati in e$, hanrimus ex eo tanquam Caplte noftro omnem gru-tiam. The fame he repeats again, fhewing that Remiffion and Juftification flow from our Union with Chrift,which is by Faith ; and the like moft frequently in other places.

§, 16.

L C. i^Od doth forgive Believers their finsy as a Father doth to his bchvidfm-, ^ /t Pa thcr even offended is a Father : andafon, though certain of his Fathers good will, doth not ceafe to aslihimtheforghcnefs of his faults : but if it were abfuid for him whcm God hathfovgiviii hisfniito ask forgivenefs of fin of God, it would lik'^w'tfe fecm as abfurdfor one that hath Faith to ask t-hc gift of Faith , as one that is wholly deftUute of it. But when a Believer asketh that which he hath already, he asketh thefenfe of the Grace ef Gods prefence, which God doth give more i Uusirioiify to the ptfiitcnt. Certainly he that asketh Kemijfim of fm , even thereby ■. hath the marks of fm,bcing already forgiven; and yet ought not thereby to be the more remifsinfi'eki^gbothKemijjionand Faith, ^ndfecingitwere in vain asked, which may not be expetlcd,w: mujl needs think ^'■'^^ ^^■'^^ ^ dcfervedly granted which roe may UwfuUy ask '> ^''**' ^'^^^ ^^'^ Vromifcs to the penitent and believers are nn in vain , as. Afti 3. 19. andfuch as the Author of the EpflU ucgethy to Prove that the aH of faith _gqethb^ore Re/fiiJJion 4 f^^*

l*J^'

L»48 3

§. I^.

R. B. I, 'T'Hc mans mouth condemns himfclf againft his will. He faith, God doth foig'vc BclievcySy as aFatbery&c. when he is proving that God forgivcth Infidels, oi" no Believers, yea no men now but only men future.

i. For my part 1 ask not only for the lenfc of that Faith and Grace which I have y but alio i. the incrcafeot'ic, z. the continuance and peifeverancc, 3, And thecxcrcifc of it. What kindc of prayers doth this man make, that askcth only the feeling of Grace ! Did not I tell you, that an Antinomian Faith will caulc Antinomian Piety and pradtife i^

3. 1 thouglit it had been paft doubt tha;t it is abfurdforhim that knows he hath Faith, to ask for it, as one that h plainly dtfi'uute of it. And fo it is in cale of pardon. I will abk for both, but not as one plainly dcftitute. 1 ask for the continuance of former Iuftificarion,and for the addition of aftual pardon for each panicular following fin j but not as one that was never pardoned before.

4. He doth ftill Lndioncm agerc j and here moft vainly : to tell us that a man (hould be never the more remifs in begging pardon and Grace, becaufe he asketh but the feeling of that which he hath already : q. d. Ton niujl not asl^ for pardoUy yet yon mifl as\for it never the more l^emifly. Pcihaps he means, >o« muft life the word Pardony as much and as lend as if you did meany Tar don indeed, as you fpeal^ •, and fo of Faith. Or elfe he means, you mu(l ask thefeelingof Grace and Par ion as eamcfUy as if you were asking Grace and pardon itfelf. But who can do fo ? to ask as earneftly for a fmaller mercy as for a greater ?

$. 17.

L. C. 'TTWi^sdcerratUySefi. 9. Ift our Juftificationwc receive of God, not only the Remiflion of fins paft , but of future : that is , we are afcertaincd of the Remiflion of them. For the Internal aft of God, whereby he willeth to remit fin, nor the aft of remitting, that is, not Imputing, cannot be renovated in God : Nor is it probable that Juftification is oft renewed afrefli : otherwife how (hall that be tiUe, Whom he Jufiifiedy he Glorified ? I judge it moft certain, thatxowhomfocver God once remitteth fin, he forgivcth him alwayes his fins, of what fort and how great foevcr^ the pronunciation of which abfo-lution, is oft repeated from Gods Word to the penitent, and the feeliiig of this Divinefavor isnotcver alike ftrongin Believers, but is obfcurcd and debilitated by reafon of emergent fins, or is ftrengthened and revived again, as repentance Ls again renewed. Andif the aii of Juftification be not renewed ; it is not credik!*, when we asl^ pardon of fmsy that roe asl^, or are commajided. to as^ the reite~ rtuion of the a£i of Kemiffton of finy or reiterated Ju^ification.

The fame many ad Per^, Vindiciasy Frtef It is beyond controverfie that Remiflion of fin,as it is an immanent aft in God, gocth before both our Faith and Repentance : but to us it is not known but by Faith j the confidence alfo whereof is further much confirmed by repentance,

tMPj

$. 17.

2^. B. T Will not do as you do, pretend thofe to be for me , who arc againft A me ." I confefs Dr. Tw/jis on your fide in this point: and his rea-fons no better then yours. 1. I fay as well as you, that luftification from a ftatc ot" guile, is not reiterated 1 but particular Remiflion, and luftification from the guilt of pai cicular fins, is frequently performed.

S. 18.

L. C. P £j/o» confemeth rvitb Tefiimtny.

I. C^ri^ ^^ Mediator, asf«m as he was powifed to be Mediator. If Mediatory then a Surety : if a Surety ithen did he tat^e m himfe/f the fns of aU for vfhom he was a pledge.

S. 18.

K, S. VOur Reafonproccedcth from a fad ignorance of the very nature of Chrlfts furetyiliip and undertaking. This one point is ( as 1 faid before^ the matter vein of all Antinomianifm. Chrifts fufferings were for the fins of all for whom he was Surety ; and fo far he took their fins on him, as to bear a voluntary penalty to demouftrate Gods Juftice for chofe fins. But he took thetn rK)t off the finner, by the aft of taking them on himfelf .* but fuffered for them with this intent and refoliuion, chat they (hould have no aftual pardon by it, till they (hould believe in him, that is, AlTentto his word, and accept him for their Lord and Saviour : and on thcfe terms wn s his fatisfaft ion accepted by his Father. Difprovc this Doftnne, and I will quickly and plainly prove that alJ men fliallbefavcd > which is as falfeas yours. Ex intentme 'Dei & Chrifti pro nobis fimplici'er & abfo'.utepraflita cjl fatUfaSlio anteqicam tredamits: at ea non Im-putaturnnb^ litfiuUumindeconfcquammpniifquam credamta: Hinc fidei Conditio ad Rcmiffkncm pcccatorum & vitam aternam prtercquiritnr. Sjfenitts defatUfa£f^ l.i.Sca. f. c. 3. p. 341.

$.19.

L. C. ^

IVpfication is an immanent all ofGody done in an tn^nt,whieh puts no' thing in the Juftifirdy though in the adtdt it neceffarily createth Tmh% AS Va'ith doth Good mrl^s: For Ktmfjion ofJinsisanefeHof Chrijls detth^ as Faith U of T^miJJion of fm.

S\ !$•

Cijol

§. 19.

K. B. TS tlii« arguing > and (Viall fuch words be caHed Bcafons ? whtt abun--l dance ot ftrange paffagcs cic heic huddled up together ? I. That luftificac.on is an immanent aft, i. And yet done in an inftant. 3. That it putsnorhing in the luftified. 4. Yet it crcatcth Faith in the adulc, and Faith is an.ffcdof Rcniiflionof fin. All notorioufiy talfc, and of veiy dangerous con. fcquencc. Let us pcrufc them in order.

1. If luftificatton be an immanent aftj then your Dr. Trvifs will tclj you , it muft needs be from eternity, and have no beginning. And if fo, 1 would know of you at prcfent, but thcfe two things: i. Wi y you fay it is done when the l?romifc was tiift made '■>■ was the Promile made from eternity ? i. Whether you do not exclude the Death and all the merits and intcrceflion of Chr;ft,as well as Faith ^ furely Chrifts death and merits were in time , and that which IS in time, can' ot be thccaufe of that which was from ctcrnicy ? Bccaufc they tell as, that Gods immanent afts are his Elfence, even God himfelf. And I think, Chrifts merits were not the caufe of Gods Eflence, Will you not be angry if I defire the Reader but to confidcr well, whether this be not confcqucn-lially infidelity it fclf ? aniwhether Antinomiansmay not much fitter be called Anti-Chriftians,or Anti-Gofpellers > Can he be a Chriftian that denyeth all Chrifts merits of obedience or lurfcring, and his Refurrcftion, Afcenfion, and Intcrceflion, to be any caufcs of our Remifsion, or luftification , but only of our feeling of it ? And can he take Chrifts death or merits to be any caufe, who takes luftification to bean immanent ad from eternity ? Thefc are no jcfting matters.

2. But what a ftrange immanent aft is that which is done in an inftant ? But it may be you call eternity one inftant, as fome do.

3. Itis.raoftfalfe that luftification put nothing in the luftified. It puts in him a rightio Impunity, and to the blcfsings that belong to it : It puts on him a new Relation : It difobligeth him as to puniftiment.

4. And what a ftrange immanentaft is that which creareth Faith Pan immanent creating aft'Yea exprefly it is faid,ihatit putteth nothing in the lujftified : and yet itcreateth Faith, Belike Faith is taken to be nothing ; and then it is, fuitabie to the luftification which they luppofe it to know or make known j n% that luftification is fuitabie to the fins by it remitted. Sin which is no fin, pardoned by a pardon which is no pardon, made known or perceived by a Faith which is nothing,

I, Bvu that Faith is the effeft ("yta or the confcquent cither) of Remifsion of iin, is fo fully contrary to the common language of the Gofpcl, that me thinks, thisJPiffertor ftiould not have judged his bare word a fufficient proof of it.

Lo C. J Said it is an immanent ARion % Tor l^miffion offin^ if you refpe5i the

quiddity i is nothing elft then allegation of pimifiin) cm ; So therefore

to remiifin,ii nothing slfe but /» mu to ?uni^; -which a£t was immanent in God,

C»5I]

and foUorveth not Tdithjnor'U found to terminate in its the operation of the Uofy Gbdft: but that which by the operation of the Holy-Ghofi doth come to His is nothing

hut Faith or thefeelingof Gods favor.

S. 20.

R. B, V[0 wonder if all your difcouife of the fcafon and way of RemKTion, be vain and erroneousj when you know not what Remiflfion of Im is. I (hall be bold therefore i. totcll you betccr what it is, and i. to iVi-w you the error of your fpecches. i. The former having done before, I need only to repeat what is there laid. God doth Remit fin > i. AsRcftor, by his lignal pardon, z/j\. The Law of Grace, or the Promifc, per modum Donations. 2. Ai Judgejby his Sentence. 3. As Executioner, which is by not punilhing. The tirft aft dotn diflblve the obligation to Punilhment, and give us Right to Impunity. The i. ad doth determine finally our controverted Right, and put it paft all further controvcilie : The third ad doth take oft", or keep off the punilhment ic felf : which hath various degrees, according to the variety of punilh-mencs. Not one of thefe is an immanent ad, but all three Redoial. Faith is the Condition fiuc qua non^ of the firft and fccond , and of the third as to. the Eternal deftroying punilhment , but not as to all punilhment. God may give manyraercics to Infidels, and fo remit proportionably much penalty to them, in this third fcnfe. Yea what ever mercy he gives them proportionably , doth he truly remit penalty : and fo in giving them Faith it felt and the Spirit, he doth really remit the penalty of infidelity and privation of the Spirit, which were the penalty of former fins. In this fenfe, Remiflion is not a mecr Relative change, but a real: but in the two firft fcnfes, it is only Relative. So mucii infewwordsof thetue nature of pa don. O.ily I adde that the pardon fpoken fo much of in the Gofpel, proper to Believers, and the immediate confecjuent of Faith, isthe firft, vi\. the giving Jmadimpunitaicm, diflolving the obligation to punilhment, and the executive Liberation from deftrudive and eternal punilhment, anncxt thereto, though a fufpcnli in went before it. To which is added the publick lentencee in its fealon at judgement, which is the perfcdion of our R'.latve pardon, and our moft proper plenary Juftification j and laftly is added out adual Liberation by Glorification, in execution of that fentcnce, which puti, g an end to all the LlT-r degrees ot penalty , ( death , rottennefs , fin,&c.) which were not till then fully remitted to Believers, is it felf our moft perfed imal executive Remiflion. And io our fins Ihali be per-fedly blotted ouc , when that blelfed day of refrelhing comes.

1. Now to yjurdefiaitioas, i. You make nothing of contradiding your felf even in definitions. I ,You tell us ihit the qaiddity of pardon , is nothing but a i^cgitionof' punip}mcnt. 2. You tell us in the very nexc words,that to remit fin, is nothing but 5>(o//c punire. But do you think that Nonp:i?iiiCj and Nolle pu-nirc is all one > I know Di-. Txv'i.fs calki thus before you, fo unhappy a thing is it for that man to have a miftaken guide , that is necelsitated or difpofed only to follow i and cannot fee his own w.iy. 1 fuppofe it drew Dr. Twifs into many other miftakcs about Juftification,that he knew not the nature of it, or of pardon of fin.

But let us confidenhem fcverally, i,?(pnpiinirej not to punilhj is but the

Yy 2 Exc-

Executive pardon, and the other cwo arc more principally callcJ pardon t an4 ihe i. 7{pn putiirCy is fuch a pardon as Reprobates have in fomc degree for fomc fcafoii, paft all doubt. The wicked ftiould be pardoned the torments of hcU, as well as the Godly, as long as they live in prolperity on earth. But who wiU queftion whether there be not a further pardon befides Non-punire, that finds ic written in Gods Word. Will not fight put it out of doubt ? And that there is a fcntcntial Abfolution yet remaining, 1 hope for all this you (hall know by experience.

1. Now to your fecond definition. I have {hewed you ali cady that there arc two forts of pardon befides Nott-punirCt and three bcfiJes 'SoUe-punire, I {hall now further (hew you that NolL-punireiis no pardon at all: and that thus, i. pardon hath either guilrjpuni{hmcnt,or the guilty/or its objeft.There is a T^oUe-pu-nhe that hath none of thefe for its objeft. Therefore there is a T^oUe-pumre which is not pardon of fin. The minor is proved, of Gods eternal HoUe-funirt , when there was neither fin, guilt, nor finner, nor puni{hmcnt.

z. Argument, Pardon is not an eternal ad j iioUe-funire is aa eternal aft j therefore NoUe-punire is not pardon.

3. Argument, Pardon is the fruit of Chri{ls blood. NoUe-puttire fbcing eternal) is not the fruit of Chrifts blood, therefore.

4. Argument, Pardon is not the fame with Eleftion> PrcdefHnation, the Decree of faving or not punifliing. NoUe-pmre is the fame with this Decree j therefore NoUe punire is not pardon.

And if nopardonatall, then judge how ingcnioufly the Diiltrtor faith that P'ardon « nothing clfe.

Yet as I have faid this much on grounds commonly owned; fo let me concede fomewhat on a further ground. My opinion is, that Gods EflTence {hould neither be named an Aftion ( in our prclent fcnfe ) \n gcncre^ nor yelle or IfoUe m Specie y but refpedivcly to fomeobjed. Take "^oUe piniire then for UoUe in-fi'igerc pcenam \tim deb'itam ,o.nA(ox.\\t oh}c^(peenaacbita) being qu»ad ejjereale, in Time, fo Gods ycUc or 'NoUc which do rcfpcft it in cfJ€ really are to be denominated as in time, or as beginning : and thus his y'efle or Nolle may be called a fort of Rcmifsion alfo, anda confcquent of Chrifls death and mans Faith .' Though the Eflenc; of God which we fo denominate, is eternal.

2. But in the next pafTagc you have one of the mofl monftrous fuppofitiona inchafe,thatevcr I heard from the mouth of a Chriftianjz-i^. thatthis immanent aft of God doth not Terminate in m the operationef the Holy-Ghofi ; Did ever any of your adverfarics fay it did ' or doth it follow any of their Doftrines ? that man that fhould fay, that the Holy-Ghoft by his operation on us doth produce an immanent ad of God, as his Terminus , would be thought to be befides hira-fclf ( if he be taken for learned ) by all that fhould hear and underftand his words, I confcfs you have an cafie difputeof this.

3. That Faith ( Ju{lifying j is the feeling of Gods favor (if you mean his fpccial favor to the Believer himfclf^ is but your conceit, and eafier faid then proved.

L. C.

H/fk/- pcitaineth, that that afliott much differs from tranfient a^iom^ which put a real mutation in the object as are ConverfiortiVivificatioVy &c. which are eff'c6icd within m: but by the aft of Belicviagt RemiJJion of fin is not effeUed , but received : fiot fo of Vivification , and Sm£lification, which by faith are offered in ut. But Jiiftificationii not done by Faith, but by Faith u revealed and {n«rvn.

K. B» THe laft is a crude falfc aflcrtion, ofc repeated. The reft is true, buc nothing to youi- advantage. For chough Faith do not efFeft Juftifi-cation, yet is it the Condition, fine qua non a Deo per Legem Gratia cpcitur. God j>ardoneth no man (aduJtj by the Gofpel ad of donacionjor condonation, till they iirft believe.

L. C. J. ^He reifonof okrVnion with Chrifi, requireth that we be Juftifiedbe-A fore we do Believe, at left in priority of nature and order , ;/ not of time. ^U Graces flow from the Vmon of the JHembers ofChrifl with Chrift the head: and therefore Faith, J©h. i J. y. Without me ye can do nothing: It u as if he had faid 5 llnlefs ye are firft united and ingraffed into me, ye cannot believe. For be that is not graff'ed into chriH, can perform no aS or worii •' ^<:nce it is that Faiths Gal. f ,11. flowethfrom that Union. Nor do I conceive h$w

the graft and the trcefbould grow into one * life, and bring * Vitan\ forte pro vltem, forth leaves and fruits conjunct by a common life, unkfs

they are firfl j'eyned together by infttion. He that hath the Son, hath life j ijoh.uii.

$. 3,2.

K. B. I, ALL this makes agalnft your fclf. For if it were fo that Union with ^»^ Chrift went before Faith ; yet if they that have the Son have life, and the graft when it is in the tree hath the life of the tree , how then can they remain in the flavery of the Dlvel, whom you fuppofe to have been )ufti-ficd in Chrift fince/4rfiiW5 being in P/ti'^J^iyi' ? And if you would yield that the difference is not in time but nature, your error were not fo dangerous : as long as juftification and Faith begin in an inftant together, you cannot plead for the Juftificacion of Infidels fo long before.

i. If we granted you that Union with Chrift goeth before Faith, how do you ihcncc prove that Faith goes not before Juftification ? Forfooth, becaufe all life

C*543 .

flows from Union with Chiift j what is that to ihc qucftion ? If wc yield thac •Faith and juftification do both flow from Union with Chrift, may not yet Faith be in order ot" nature the firft ? why (hould you run away with fuch an unproved Conclu(ion, as if lufliScation muit needs be flrftj bccaufc boca flow trom one root, Union with Chrift.

3. I Utterly deny that Union goes before Faith. Asyoumay know the ftream of Proceftanc Divines goes againft you, fodoth Scripture plaijrly ; and then 1 kfs value mans contradiding icafons. The grcatcft task here is co expound what Union with Chrift is. There is a manifold Union chat wc have with Chrift, 1. The firft is a Relative Union, he being oui Head , Husband, King, and wc being his incorporate Members, his Spoufe and Subjefts ; and fo both make one Myftical petfon , that is j one Corporation, Family , Common-wcakh. I. A Union iiuentionar, (uch as is between every objeft and theintelled, or will of man that is exercifcd about it, by knowing, willing, &c. 3. A Union of fimilitude, ( largely not properly called Union) : fo Chrift being holy, and his people like him, may be faid to be one with him. 4. A Union of Concord : when Chrift and we do agree in judgement,and aft"edion,and aftion. This is but imperfeft here. Thus the Primitive Chriftians were of one heart and Soul, and had one Table, one Purfe. This doth Chrift very much intend in his prayer , Joh. 17. That they may be onCj&c. andone in me: that is, may agree in one and the fame Doftrine that I have taught them ( though this is not all ) : and fo may have one heart, that what one Loveth the other Loveih,and what one hateth the other hateth : when Chrift and man are at peace, and of one minde , they may be faid to be all one. j, A Union of Friendfhip or InternalafFcdion: fo we are faid to be one with thofe that we ftrongly love, and they are faid to dwell in our minds by cogitation,and in our hearts by Love and Delight : So Chrift dwels in our hciris,Anima eji ubi amat.6.A Union of Familiarity ,or as to the cfFefts of Friendfliip : when men arc ftill together, and communicate to one another, they are laid to be one, becaufe they ftiew the cftcds of that Internal Frlendftiip before mentioned •" fo Chrift and we are one. 7. A Union (in a large fcnfe ) through communication of the excellencies of his fpiritual nature j giving us the Holy-Ghoft : and fo animating u& with his own Life. Yet this makes us not one Perfon natural with Chrift, nor one Divine Nature and Eflcnce. The Father is a Conveyer of the fame nature to his Son, and all creatures to their young, and yet are not the fame perfon, or fuppofite. Yet wc are not fo nccr : for Chrift doth not polTefs us in ftrid fenfe with Gods Eflcnce or Nature j but i. with a Nature called Divine, becaufe it is eminently of God, and inclined to Divine things, and fitted for them. i. With Right to Chrift, who hath the Divine nature. The Sun doth generate all inferior Animates , and yet not make them Suns.

This laft Union, by communication of Spirit, is not properly fpokcn of all that have the Wotks of that Spirit, in any kinde or mcafure , no nor of all the favirig Work. The Spirit hath three operations : The fiift to convince and draw men ncercr towards Chrift wh-^ are far from him : This is a common Work, and thus many are made partakers of the HolyGhoft, as alfo by miraculous Gifts, who yet may not fitly be faid to be united to Chrift. The fecond is the drawing men to Chrift , and caufing them to Accept him ; and this is giving them Faith; It is not the language of Scripture, to call this a ftate of

Union

C i55]

Union with Clirift , or to fay that men before Believing in order of nature arc ont with Chrift. The thiid is the Spirits indwelling, being given to the Believer as his Sanftyfier and Guide , by relation and refidence or operation : This is it that Scripture calls the giving us the Holy-Ghoft ; but whether it be the ncereft reafon why we are called one with Cluift, I dare not determine. It' there be any neercr Union yet then I have mentioned, ( as 1 dare not fay flatly there is none , lo I muft lay) 1 know it not. Only 1 abhor that proud and blalphcmous fancy of them that fay , we arc real beams , fpaiks, parts of the God head, or of the Eflencc of God , or pcrfonally one with Chnft.

Now of all thefc forts of Union, I fuppofc the fi: ft is that which is chiefly hinted in Scripture ; mcluding the reft as confequcnts and cfFcds of it. And this Union is after Faith , and fo arc all the reft, except the fccond (which is little to our bufinefs) and the lad in the two firft branches of it, or communications of Spirit ; which arc not fitly called Union. If any will needs fay, that the Spirits working Faith in us , is a Union of the Soul to Chrift J then i. 1 fhill yield, that is before Faith: z. But I (hall not agree with them of tlie fitncfs of the term Union applyed to that ftate, nor do I know that ever Scripture fo ufcth it : 3. Much Icfs that this is the Union which Scripture fo frequently hinteth to us. I come now to prove tlut Union is after Faith.

Argument i. We are United to Chrift as to our Husband in marriage Covenant. But it is by Fahh that wc are fo United , and not before it therefore : Faith is but our Confent, which is part of the marriage-Union'£p/!% J. 30, 3Ij3^-*8,z9. ire are members of hubody^of his flrjh, and of bis lones. Thcynvo jhall be one flc^. I fpcal^ of Chriji and the Church, Now Marriage before mutual Confent here is none. I have cfpoufed yOH, fdtb?3L\i\ito one iiiitband ; th.it is, by drawing them to Believe inChrift,

z. That which caufeth the Dwelling of Chrift in our hearts, caufeth our Uni-tine'to him 5 and that which goes before one, goes before the other : (for Chrifts dwelling in us is a term to exprefs our Union by) ; But Chrift doth dwell in our hearts by Faith. Sfh. 3. i y.ihtrefore we are imited to him by Faith.

3, If the Life of Chrift in us be by Faith, then fo is,our Union with him : But the former is true, Thil. i. 9. Gal. z. 10. Chriftliveth in me; and the life ■which I now live in the fcjh, I live by the Fanh of the Son of Cod.

4, If Faith be before our Adoption, then it is before our Union with Chrift', (for being United to him who is the Son, we have by sn immediate rcfultnncy the relation of fins and Coheirs) : bnt Faith is before our Adoption, therefore ;

fob. T. ii.^smanyos received h}m,to them gave he power to become the Sons of God, c'i(n to them that believe mhis name. Gal. 3. z6. Tc areall the Sons of God

by Faith in Chrift Jefus. . ^, .„ . . r ,,

5, If Faith follow not our receiving Chnft, then it follows not our Union with him': But Faith (the begining of itj is not after our receiving Chrift, therefore i The major is plain,in that we receive Chrift into Union, and Mairiage-Cove-nant: and Scriptmc never fpeaks of Union before. The minor is plain, in that Faith is our Aftive Rece iving it felf, prcrcquifite to our Paflive , that is, to our Right in him, as our Husband and Head, Joh. 1. i v. Cot. 1. 6. Asje have T^-tiivedChriajefmtheLordyfovpalkyetnhim.

6- Faith doth not follow our Coming :o Chnft that v^e may have life rfoi'ic is ihftt Coming: it fcif) tliereforc k followe£« nw our ttnion * with

[25^3

•rich Mm. /<?&. y. terf. 40. Ye will not come to me that ye may fore IlfeJ Job. 6 44,4 f. if J mxn an com: torn: {'hit u, believe) except the Father that bath fevt me drove hl:n i vli^. by the Spirit } therefore the Spirits drawing is in order before our coming to Chrift^ aiidwc are noc in Scclptarcfcnfe united to hlm^ be; fore we come to him.

7. Wc are not united to Chrift till we eat him as the bread of Life (for thct fijaN fjcth the Incorporstlon and Union^ But It it by faith that we eat him, or feed on him. Joh.6. 48^49^50,51, J J. Exccptyceat Ihc fir(h oftf)e fcnof man, a?td d'ln^hu bloody ye have no life inyou. J^^ 57. He that eatelh my fl.Jh and {Linl(eib m bloud, dwtUctb m mc^ and I in him. As the Hying Father hithfent me, tnd I life by the Father, fo he that eatch me, eTcnhellnlllivcby me. So Yen". J4i ??,J^»J7> 4°- *y fiith we joyn our Tclycs to Chtift and his Church, and fo are members of his body,i Cor. i». 17. and being joyned to him, are one Spirit. iCor-tf. 17. If weare not joyned or united to the Church before Faithjthcn not to Chrl(i(for we are made members of the body and head at one tdt) But we are not united to the Chnrch nor made members of it before faith ; therefore. 1 iie Minor is eafie to be proved by very many Scriptures. And Cbrift Is head of none but the body, the Church J Co/. 1.18. and a.ij. Efh. I. XI, and 4.15. \6. and j. aj.

Much more might be laid to prove that fairh goes before all that union with Chrlft which Scripcure doth ever mention. And it Is enough, that no one text can be cited to prove that any man is united to Chrift before faith ; and therefore It ought noc to be afHrmed. But I come at length to your reafoiu.

i.You fay All ^. rices fioxvfrom Vniou of the Members with the Head,there fore faitb j I deny your Antcccdentjand therefore your confequent. 1. The Grace of PredeftI* nation flowed not from Chrift as Head. a. Nor the Grace of Redemption, 3. Nor the Gofpel it felf, nor the preaching of It. 4. Not any of thofc common Graces of the Spitit by which men are brought near Chrift ; fome are made partakers of the HolyGhoft, and are Inllghtened, and taft of the Heavenly Gift, and the Powers of the woild to come, and ate fandified by the blood of the Covenant, and yet are noc united to Chrift ; Hcb. 6. and 10. and fome efcape the poUotions of the world through the knowledge of Chrift, and yet are not united to himi ts Peter tell us. And faith i: felf Is not that life that flows Into us as Members (I mean ftlU our firft faith) proved : That which makes us members, is not given us as already members, but as to be made Aich : Eut faith make us members j Therefore. If you deny the Minor, I ask you as Paul, nhat communion hath light with darlf^nefs, or Chrijl Tvith an Infidel f I ftill confefs that faith is a Grace of Chrift, and a fpeclal Grace: but not givfn to his Members, but to make them Members.

Nay [ will convince you on your own principles. Tell me whether the Spirit which Chiiil gives to work the firft feith, be given as from the Head to Members, oc not ? If it be, then men are united to him, not only b« fore faith,but befcre the Spirit be given to work faith; which I hope Is againft your own doftrlne. If not, then the Spit it to work faith is a gift that flows not from Chrift as Head unto Members, And if Chrift can give the Spirit to men that are not yet his Members, why may be not as well give faith to them i The truth is, as In the natural body , fj in the myftical, thi noble parts (the head and heart) being firft formed, do then form the reft : Chrift Is our head and heart, our principle of being 5 and he makes his own members by fending forth his Word and Spirit, and drawing and joy-nrngthcmto himfelf. Now that ad whereby he makes members , is not from him as the head to members already made, but as the head drawing to him ani forming his own members ; we are then in fierit noc in fado e^^ members.

Noc

Nor Is tfcif any depreffing of the nobility of fait& .• we do not fay that i^ dm come to Chrlft except the Father draw him : we acknowledge that all Grace i$ fromChrifi, but not all givjn to memb<rrs ; but i. Some given to prepare men to be members, i. An*, fomc to make them members. 5. And then the v<i\ to them as members for coniinujnce, growth and exeicife. Ititbe faiJ, as Mr. ^cmUc doth, thattaith is net the aft of a dead foul, but of a living. I anfwcr, i. Faith is as Amcftia faith, P>»wfl» acltu znU fphicuaHi : But there is a Life flows from Chilfttodrawmctito him, andfo njturally goes before Union with him. As there goes force frsm the Load dor.;.' to the Iron fii ft ro draw it to icfelfjand then to detain itthsre ; fothai the Iron receives of the forcible attraftivc operation of the Stone before It is joyned with the Stone i In doth the foul receive life from Chrift to come to him for union, and tfjcn to be cojuinued and nourifhed in him, 2, Faith is a vi* tal afti but whether firft fiom a h^bft of new life in our felres which miy denominate us habitually living, ao man living can telJ, I think. Whether the Spirit do withoutlnfufingahabitfirft excite and ciufe a potent ad of faiih, and by that aS, a habit (as Camera thinks) , hlmfeit beirg in ftcad of a habit to the firft aft j or whether he do give at once tht habit and ^^Gij or the habit firft, will never be known till the nature of habits and afts, and of th** foul it fclf be better known, and the way of the Spirit be fullyer revealed, which now is as the wind, btotvlngyvhcre it lift, but tve {(fiorv notrvhence itcomcth,or whither it goetb^ that is^ its way of motion ; fo is tvtty one that k born ofrhc Spirit, joh. j.

If any fay as Mr. Pe;:^blc- that thtt e is a twofold union : one of the Iplrit on Chrifts part, and the other of faith on our part, and that the Rili is before faith, and the fc. cond Is by faith j I anfwer, we agree with thofe men that fay fo in the matter, but we difftr only in the word union. We agree that the work of the Spirit caufing faith is before faith ; but we think that it li not the phrafe ni Scripture to call that a union on Chriits part. The union that Scripture mentions, Is a moral and myftical unionj caufed by mutual confcnt, fuch as is between man and wife, and the members and head of a Body Politick . and a real natural Communication of Spirit and Life there is alfo : yet I dare not fay, fuch as is from a natural head to the members } Fori, Scripture metaphors muft not be ftretched beyond the Intended points ofiimilitude, left we run into dangerous conceptions and exprcflions.

2. 'hough the holy Ghoft be given to men to work life, iixi to be the prefcrver of it,yet thofe facred habits and ads which are our rtal fpiritual JifCjOr the fouls Rcdi-tude, are fuch as nevei were formerly cxifting in Chrifl hlmfclf, asthefpirits were In the natural body that are communicated from thi heart a,id brain to the members .• I know here are two weighty queftions under hand* !\ow our Life is in Chrift? and how the Holy Ghoft is fald to be given to us > For the 6rft, our Life Is in Chtift, I. Caufally, as the efFed in the Caufe of iti Being and Confervation. z. Ob* jedlvely,feeing that our Life is exercifed on him,and the welfare of It confifteth in the enjoyment of God In him. And fo our life is hid with Chtift In God both as the Cauic (which is latent oft when the effert appeareth) and as the Glorious fruition of the bleffed Objed is yet unrevealed to u?, that Glory being jet with Chrlft in Godi but beyond our reach. And Chiiftis here faid to live in us, i. Caufally, in that his Spirit caufeth our new Life, and fo Is faid alfo to live in us j i. Objedive-ly, as we do by Faith and Love embrace him, 5. civiUtc/, as a man poiTifltth a houfeata diftance by his goods and fervants, which is In Law.fenfe to dwell in ir. But I dare not fay, that this very habitual or adaal Grace or Life, which I now hare was once exiftent in Chrift 5 Foriffo, it was either his humane nature or his

Z z Divine:

DKinc: but our Grace wnrnelther God nor man before it came to us. As the foui was in God, but Canfa!ly, and not founally fxifting before it was In us ('whatw ever many in tkefc daies fay, that thir.k they arc eternal, and Gods^ , fo was our Life cfGrace inChrift J loi Grace in us, is a created quality or ad, and there-fore was not the Creator, nor a Creature before it was created. It had no being, but caufal J before it WIS in us, and therefoe was not fiift in Chrift ; Though there is In him a Life fpecifically fin a larger fenfe) the fame ; but not numerically.

And for the fecond Qucftion, in a word, I conceive that the mnnnerof the Ho. ly Ghofts dwelling as well a$ his working in us, is inccmpiehenfiblc to us now j Only ih s much we may conceive, i • That the Holy Ghoft is {aid to be given to usj when he is given to be the Caufe of our firfl faith, and to draw our hearts to Cbrlil ( but F dciibt whether in Scripture this be ever called the giving of the Holy Ghofl. a. Tl?e Holy Ghoft is given us, when he is given in Relation to us, to b< our Guide and Sanftifier, as a Guardian or Tutor is given to a Child, and may be faid to be their Tutor or Guardian, even when he is not teachirj or doing any thing to him ; fo even when we feel not the Spirit work (yea fliould it ceafe to work, as it doth not wholly j yet by this Relation might ihc Holy Ghoft be faid to be given us, and we to hive him •, He hath tjkcn charge of us as Chrifts members, to guide, fanftifie, prefervcand excite us. Thus the Angels under the Holy Ghoft alfo, take charge of us. Thus Dr. OrbeUU and f( me other Schoolmen expound the giving of rhc Holy Ghoft. 2. The Holy Ghoft is given us, when the effeds of him arc given us, x/j^. Inch effcds as follow our engrafting into Chrift. And fo the Graces of the Spirit are ofc called the Spirit. But 1 think the Spirit is commonly in Scripture faid to b« given us in the fecond fcnfc, connoting the firft, and efpecially the third. Andfo the Spirit is ufually diftingAilHied from rhe Gifts of the SpJrit, efpecially In the mat* tcroffandificacion. But I digrefs too far-

z. You next alledge/fc/; 15.5. to whichi anfwerj we grant that without Chrift we can do nothing ; but it follows not that without union with him we can do nothing. 2.. If thofe words are to be txpounded (as fome do, and as I think they ought) of continued union with Chrift, yet mark that Chrift fpeaks it only to thofe tkat were In him already, and the full fenfe of the words is but this. If ye depart, or becut cflffrom rae, yc aredead and can donothirg, as the branch is when Ic is broken cfF from the tree. I ut yet this is no dtnyal, that they thatwere never \n him can by his Spirit come to him. They mult come to him that they may have life, Jok 5.40. They do cometo Chrift that are dr.^wn by the Father^ /fl^. 6.44^45. The father draws them,and grafFs them into Cbtlft ■■> though of themfelves they cannot do that.

3. Therefore your paraphrafe Is unfound, mkfsye are firfi united and cvgraffcd mo me, yc cannoi believe.

4. And too crudely do you fay,that fuch can perform no afl j what not go,or fpeak, yea or believe for a time, and receive the word with loy, and taft the powers of the tvorld to come, and iorfake and ffcape the pollutions of the world through luft, &c< thefc are ads. But if youfpeak of the fpec«;il Grace, yetl have difproved it in the fenfe you in:end.

5. Gal. 5. 21. faith not faith is a fruit of union with Chrift, but a fruit of the Spirit J Now the Spirit fii ft draws men to Chnft , and then animates them as his members, i. Nor is ic faid, that cur fii ft ad of Believing is the faith meant in that Text j but the habitual fidelity of the foul to Chrift. But we readily grant that all faich is the fruh of the Spiiit (whether meant in that ttzt oc not^ ; but not

ill, a fruit of our union with Chrift : thefirft ad unitcth us to Chrift, the rtft flow from union.

6. To your fimlUtudc I fay; Inficlonby your confcffion goes before growth 5 and Faith is the fouls ingrafting into Chrift. Mr. Tho. Hook'^r fpeaks all this at larfc.

7. I Joh. 5. iijiz. Is a moft full place agalnft your felf. For the text (hews thic Giddothby a deed ofGlfCj give Chrift and eternal life in him, to the world j and that they that believe not, that is, receive not this Gift^make God a Lyar .- and fo they that have the Son fthat is, that do believe, and fo come to Chrift whtn the reft would notj have Lifej w^. 1. Habituilly, i. Right to eternal life j fo that It Is not the firft ad of coming to Chrift by faith that Is here called Life, but the follow, lug Life, \Yhich in the contcT' is plainly diftind from that. I have ftood the longer on ;his,becaufe all the appearance of your ftrcngth lyes in it, and it Is of moment. Yet again remember, i.That if all were granted, (that union is before falth^ it is no p;jof chu luftificition is before faith, z. If both were granted, It only proves that they differ in order of nature, being both in the fame inftant of time; and what Is this to your Caufe, of the luftificatlon of men before they were born ?

§. ij.

L. C. ^Hat ifpeali MtofthatVnion which appearcth in ck6llnfa7its, which are *- members ofchrilif and therefore united to Chri/l by the Spirit of chrij^, though not yet fruitful in faith and good worlds.

§. aj.

R. B. T^He faith of the parent is the Condition of the Infants relative union to Chrift as a member of him, and the Church his body. i. Whether you are certain of any further union In Infants, Khali better know when I fee your proofs. In the mean time, I have told you my thoughts In my Epiftle Accomodato-ry to l^K.Ecdford^ in the end of the third Edition ofmybookof Baptifm, whither I refer you.

L. C

Moreover faith cannot be called the Inurnment of that Vnion, unlefs it be put before vnion ■ and feeing faith cannot be inflrumental un!efs it draw with itintothefocietyoftheworl^f the other Graces, it mufi he faid that union with Chrift is not only after faith, but after goodwor^s > for Good worlds cannot be fcparated from faith, and therefore all graces are called by the name of the fundi fication of the Spirit ^ I Pet. i.i. as being in one infant together t and at once infufed into the fouU

Zz £ §. 24%

S. 24.

IL S- T Aniwercd this fully once before. Neitker Fairh ncr any Grace go before A the giving of the Spirit towoik them. Cut faich modified with Love and GratJ-ude, and whittver aft ii ncctlTaiv to the I-lcception of ihe Objeft, chrifi and Ijfc accordine to its lutu'.c, do go before our union with Chrift Relative, and In Scripture-fcn(efoc&!Icd. For faiihin the Gofpei, w^en Juftification Is afcrlbcd to ir, andvrhen Chrift hitnfelf Is made tbcobjectj dothc mprehcnd fomeadof Love. Por Ch'.ift muft be received a< Chrillj or he is not received to luftification •, And thttcforc astheObjeft hith ic« necfflaiy Qualifications, fo muftthe aft. c. ^. if Chrill be not received as Goodj he is not truly received at all ; But the foul canrot receive Good as Good, wir.Vijt Love. Put then you do ill to call thifc Good workf, 3f you intend to fpeak in the fenfe as Scripture doth, when it dlf^inguifheth Faith from good works. For Faith and Love in their firft Ivecef'tion of Chrift are not fo muchassfts ofChriftian CbtiUcnce : but only the Acceptance of a Chrift robe obeyed « as Marriage Confent in the woman is nor an aft of a wife, orof nutrimo-nial fidelity or obedience j but the Contraft which obligeth to that for the future. It is the Spirits working by the advantage of our felf lovC: defire of feWcltyj fear of mifery, and difcovery ol tufficiency in Chrift for our falvation, that firft briogs us to faith , but aoi by the Authority of Ckrift commanding it; for we are but now acknowledging him cur Cotnmanderjand confentlngto his Government.

lylyenyou jay, Giihd'.iO;lii caviiotbc fcpa;-ntcdf',nm Fa'uh, I fay. In Scripture-fenfe they raay fo. want of opporfunity, as when one is afleep; however they are in order of nature after it. Laftly, all Grace may be called thefanftifiation of the Spirit, though all be not w:oU{^htat once. Or if all be iniinofeminc called a Habit, yet Mr. Vemhlc binifclf will confcfs, they aft not all at once j fo that the aftj of other Graces jaay follow vvhatever the Iced do. And moft 1 xpoGtors take fanftlficatlon, even ia I Vet. 1.1, as well as iu orher Scriptures, for the work of the Spirit following faith, and tliftinft from Vocati«n, and that in the Tk/r. once, where fanftlficatlon hpu: fiirt, it ii but atranfpofitlon of the words, but of that more anon. And In that place of Pttcr^ it feems to be put after obedience and fprinkling of Chrlfts blood. And Bcc^a judgeth thit by Foreknowledge there is meant Fredcftlnatlon, by Election is meant Vocation, which is aftual Eleftlon 5 and by fanftlficatlon is meant, the fepiration of Believers from the refi of the (pcrilhing) world.

i

§. M.

L,. C. 4. XyX/^ »mjl needs admit Rer/vjfim of Cm kfoit faiih ;' nonvhba l^ecncr V V frvorddowccuttlcibiudtoftbcArmmiauit ('{fining bothKecoH' cilablenefs aud net Rcioncil'uiian by Qb/'ifts d(aib, andpfteutiai Rem'iffion in Cbrifls deatbi andnotAnual. For Chiftdycdnoi to ma^e Kcmif^onoffim poffiblc i nor only toim^ctratc RcmiJfio»i biitnQiiaUytoreniUihcfmsofihecU6l-, arid confer Kattiffton of-fins : Did no tour Lord Jcfta when he ttfjcdyit lca(i fatufie for all the clcCif paying a (:iU fAce for the fins of all the electa Did he only obtam in ha death, that the eleB §iaU at' iiun remiffion of fins rvhcn thcyfhould believe bcreaftcr in chrift ? ivhat if they never cam to a^c^ [JjaIi their falvation end rmijfim U fu/pcnded on faith which tbeyfhall

mvtt .

L»^l3

, , „ „ , - , , ,^ of the Ar-

KifiianSi with whom Aet\ii\ KemiSion^ znd luftification, and RedemptJon do befall none but Believers, and fuch as have the Spirit of Chrift,

§. ij.

" B. ^[c viliintvhia- '. Tf you had nothing elfe to do but cut the

^ throats of Arminlans, the next way were to deny Chrill, his death, and grace altogether : and the fubjeft being denied, their predications do vanilh.

1. Reconciliation and Rcmiflion fccundum quidzr\6 conditional, as 1 have told you, go before faith : Bcfides, moral and natural Poflibility and Impcflibilitymuft bediuinouiHtcd. OurRemiflion was always poffible in the later fenfe ^or elfe it could not be future) bur not in the foimer. A moral Impcffiblllty p/o/fw/Joyf, rcbuijic flmtibiu-, Chrift removed by his death : Now what if the Arminians fay, this is all ? muft we needs either fiy that this was none of theeffedofChiifts death, or that there is as much to be afciibcd to his death immediately as you do ? fin was patdonable before Chrifts death, andmi^htbe pardoned upon fuppofition of fatif-fafiicn to luftice ; Now luf^ice isfatisfied, fo far as to pardon it to all that will believe. \ilinoYi ^ziAonzhlt in (cn[n proximo^ which before was fo but in fcnfu rc-moimc. Nay now It Is pardoned conditionally, and the Condition Is nothlnj but the Acceptance of the full gift- The Arminians give too little to Chrifts death, as well as they do to Gods decree, while thty make both the tleded, and the redeemed to infallible pardon and falvation. to be no Individuals, but Believers in general, affirming that Chrifts death may have its full end, though none were faved by it r (thus our Divines report them, and fome fay fo^ we affirm that as God in eleainij, io Chrift in dying did intend the infallible pardoning and laving of all that are pardoned and faved i but yet that as he did not thertfort pardon oi fave thena at the timeof hlsfledion, (I mean from eternity) fo neither doth he pardon or glorife •hem at the time of Chrifls death. It ma> be ptocutcd as a thing infallibly to be enjoyed initsfcafon, that is fufficicnt againft the ArmlnianSjand yet it was nor done . ^: the death of Chrift, that is your error on the other extreme. You think ycu honour Chrift much by ycur dcftrinej but indeed ycu much dilhonour him} For whs: you afiiibe to his d:ath, you take from his Inre ctfllon, and from the continued exerciic of his Kingly. Prielily and Prophetical office. The Scripture faith, he is now able to fave to the uunoft all that come to God by him; and makes it the great wo;k of his office a^uaily to fave them. You will have all thi? done by Chrifts death (I think all or move then Scripture fpeaksofj , and .iothingLft forhlmtodo nowin tlic cxercifeof thefecfticcs, but manifcftation. How can Chrifts death any other way procure our pardon then by way of fatisfaftion and merit? And we acknowledge as much this way, as can be defircd, that is, that C^bnlts fatisfaftion and merit is full and perfctft, and have done all th-ir part to the rcmiliion of (in. Ic leems then you give no more to Chrifts merit then wt, but only give all that which *.T€ afcribciohis inxerceflioHjas tc nocatjfe, orelUtoGods will alone 5 which yec ■

Will not hit right, In that we afcrlbe alfo to Gods Will a pcrfcdion of Ciufatlon in ' *ur'^''^'> ^^ ^' ^^"^'^^ offi.cas King to grant upon his death, the ad of Grace ^obfcurely upon his Jcath undertaken, p'ain'y upon hi. fuffcrlngand refurredion^ andiherebv topirdon men firlt conditional y, and th^n adually, and to be pftiti-oned for Pa-don from day to day j It is his office as i'rophct, to teach us the way andmcjnsof obtaining pardon and falvKicn. It is his office as Priift, to make continuil intcrcrffi n and to appear before God for us j and as our .idvocatc, he Iuftifiethu?apolLgetically againft all Accufationj And at the Jaft ludgemcnt he will fully abfolve us. Is it any honoar to Chrift, if you will pretend to give him the greater honour cf his death, andiobhimof aim ft all ihe reft; Niy you wrong htsveryfufferings, wh:n ycufay^ cbnfl d)cdmt to make Remtfi:on of fn pofubte, though not to make Jt abfoiarely poflible, (for fo it was before) yet to make it rtmiffiblc in a neerer fenfe, Chiift did dye; though this was not all, will you fay thii was none of the ends of his death? If there we-e not fome Impc-oiment of Rcmiffion, (vir^. unfatisfied luftlce, ) which Chrifts dfath did re-move, it will be hard for you to tell us how It was neceffiry at all, or how it (hould pardon us.

Z' You deal not ingenuoufly norhoncftly, te make that to be Armlnianifm, which the generality of the Antiarminians, except Antinomians,do hold as well as they ; and which the Synod oiDort thit condemned the Arminians doth profefs, and withthcm the national or Church-conftflions of all the reformed : v \. that finis not pardoned, nor ram luftified before faith. This dealing doth bu: difable and indiipofe men to believe you hereafter.

5. To your Queftlons I fay, Chrift hath made full fatisfaaion ; But It Is i. $a-tJifadion ftrifiiy fo called, which is hut folutio tantldem, and not folutio ipfius debi-iii or to fpeak properly, fuppUcium ip^u4 delinquentu : and therefore It was/i/«/w Recufabilu^ a refufable payment or fatisfadionj and therefore dotb not ipfofa£lo difcharge us, but on what terms the K efior pleafe. z. And it was never the will of the Redeemer or the offended Redor, that by this fatisfadlon any (hould be adu-ally pardoned or juftifieJ, (being at agej till they do believe. And beyond their wills the (atisfadion cannot effed any thing. The not underftandlng of ChriQs fa» tlsfadion, its nature and eflfcds, leadeth men into the Antlnomian dodrlncs aboTC anything. The conceit that fatisfadion as fuch, muft needs abfolve the finncr ip/ir fa£lo upon the payment, is a defperate error, which you may fee confuted In our Divines againft the Socinians at large } Effcnim in his defence of Grotim, Johan. funi-M and others. But Gyoum dcfatlsfail. alone, well ftudycd,without prejudice,might profit fome Divines more then many years ftudy of many large volumes hath hitherto done. (\t was written before his dtfedion.) . 4. 10 your queftion of dying in Infancy^ I anfwer, i. The parents faith is the condition of the Inlantsintcreft In Chrift. 2. IfGod had made pergonal faith necefla. ry to all, be would have favcd all bled Infants from death, till they come to age and believe.

5 Your paraphrafe on John B.ipt'ills words which you fuppofe unfound or abfurd, is very common in many other Scriptures : Did you never read the like from Chrift himfelf, that whoever bclieveth in him fhall not perilh, (hall be faved; fhall receive rerfiifllonof fins f &c. For the fenfe of the lext, I fuppofe it fpeaks of taking away fin only, ju.intumridpi-etiu-i^ Chrift having done all that belonged to him as fatif-fier^ for taking it away. But if you will needs unJerftand it of adual proper remif-fion^eti m;iy tc.l you chat the text faiih, no; when Chrift takes away the fins of the

world,

C2<53

1

world, but only that he takes them away.N -w our (jueftlon ls>whcn, and whether ab-folu!eiy,oron a condition.

6. As to the other ttxc you cite, I anfwer, It is a vain thing to fuppofe that we arc tofubftituteZ'c//fz/Oi for^«j, as if believers had no fins. And mult every texr thattels us v»hy snd for what Chrift fufJered, needs tell us the qualification of the perfons that fliall-have the benefit? and the condition on which the efFeft is attain^ ed ? Is it not enough that an hundred other texts tell it us ?

7. And its Very hard dealing to make as plain a Truth as any Is In Gods word to be Armlnlanifm, xvc^. that Chrift Ihed his blood for the remiffion of the fins of Believers , and that none but believers (at age) have Remiffion and luftification. Had I a defign to credit Arminianifm, I know not how to do It better then as you dOjIfmcnhad fo little wit as to believe me. Could you make the world believe once, that the dodtine of luftification byfaith, or RemiHionof the fins of believers, is Armianifmor Popery, and that your dodrine of the Aflual juftification of Infidels, or of men that arc no men, is the Proteftant Dodrine, what man would not turn Papiftor Arminiani and akhor the contrary, that ever well lludyed the Saipture ?

§. z6.

L. C. \)\7h/V& Ophmnifrvc mufl vccelve^ rvc mufl pUce Rcmijfionoffmsi both ' ' before and after faith yondihe giving of the holy Ghoft : For feeing faith and the giving of the holy Chofi are cffcds of Fcmiffion of fm, and the nghteoulnejs of Chrifi imputed tom, we }nu(i mai^e another a6l ofRcmiffim of fins to be after faith, and the giving of the holy Ghoft : and fo fnflificc<tion and Rcmifsion of pns (hall not be done together and at once, It is axvondcr thevcfo'fe what moved the Author of the Epi file to prnneuncc^ That God decreed to pardon fins only to the believer and penitent. 1 thought hitherto that a man doth believe and repent, because God hath pardoned him through and for Chrid. Zachary, Luke i. 77 rnalfCth the l(noxvledge offalvation, and fhFanh and Repentance^ to be the cffeCl of Remifston of fins s for therefore doth he undergo Repentance^ becaitfe hn fins were forgiven him •. Davids Grand Crime of Adultery and Murthcrt tvm fir P fo, given^ before he repented of the faa. * .

§. i6.

R. B. 11 T have fully told you already what Remifllon gees before faith. If i- you will call unbelief> a Funifhsncnt, and will call rhc barcremc-valof that unbelief, a Remitting of that particular punilliment , fuch an executive, improper, particular Remiflion we confefs not going befor? (airh but being the very fame thing with the giving of faith. But if you foeak of 3 proper Remiflion by Covenant Grant, In the Gofpcl fenfe, whereby ^ od difobligiJth the (inner from the fuflfering of eternal death, and the finne harh a^aual right to Impunity (as to that fufftiring) , this fellows faith j and yoa will never while, you breath, prove that faith is the eHtd of this RemifTion.

x.This

a. ThisgrcatRtniiffion of a ftaccof fin, is done together and at once ; but Rcmiflionot particular following fins, doth follow tliis,and the great Icntcntial Remiflion follows both. Net is it any dangerous or nccdkfs ti.ing to contra-dift your Jiif;ificniienyftmnl &Jcmly if you oihcrAvllc imdcrftand ic, and cxprels it unlimitcdly.

z. And (that wc may wonder together ) I do wonder^ thst you do not wonder as much at Scripture and Chriftianity itlcif, as at the Author of the Hpirtlc, f(.r the pa'.ljge you mention. And the btft proof ihat I fiadt of your contraiy aflertion, is^that^fcK hithc: to theught it,

5. You dcfadlyabnfc Lul^e i. 77. as you do other Scripture, as much as tnoft that ever I read. You fay, Z.-fcfj/t/y mulcts the l^m-n^lcdee oj S.ihaiio>t.,andf) ofFaitt} and T{cpcntan(Cy to be the cjjcCl of 'I{cmifjion of firs : net a tiuc wcrd. i. It is not the knowledge of Safv^ttoHybut Snlvation k fclf; which {•> thcic made the tftlA or end of Rcmilsion ; Togivci^nowledgc of Sa/variufi tohtf pcop.'e by the Rcmil~, Cm of their fin: thit is. To nzcnl to thcw, that God by ch,ift in!/ Jave them by RcmUting their fins : and nox. tomai^e them l^now iyjoigiving tbioi, ihat GodwiU fave them. As Bc\a inloc. faith, Remiffion of fin is the very m.vincr by which God the Father faveth ii6 in his Son, as Paul teacheth, Rom. 4.7. i. Nor is Fajih or Repentance the fame thing with the knowledge of Salvation : if by it you mean of our own being aftually laved, or that we Ihall be faved .' though Faith is the knowledge of Chrifl who doth fave us, and of what he hath done towardsic j which may be both called Salvation.

4. 75rtX'7/j cafe affords your opinion as little countenance ? For r. Dtfti^ wa« a Believer before, and repented of fin in general; and this was not his firft faith or repentance : He totally loft not his Habitual Faith and RcpentiTnce by his fin. i. Yet do you raflrly and without any proof fay even of his particular pardon, that it went before his Repentance of the fad. Fori, you are not lure that he repented not, till Kathan fpoketo him : I make no qucftion but he did, bccaufe it is the nature of true Hibitual Repentance, ro .iCt more or Icfs when the fin is known, and this could riot be unknown to him : But us plain that his Repentance was not fo great and evident as after, nor his heart fo humbled as it was meet for fuch a fin. i. When Nathan did fpeak to him, he never pronounced his forgivenefs, till 'David firft cryed out, / have finned a^ainfi the Lord, i Sam IX. 13, Andhowemincntly that pardon rcfpcAcd the temporal punilh-ment of Davidhy death,is not obfcure;fo that the juft feafon of the Rcmifsion of the eternal punifhment, is not mentioned in chat text ;.but muft needs be tipon the performance of the condition.

§. 17.

L. C. 'T^7(ue Repentance arifcthfom the confcimcc of Gods mercy,for givwg many jins to thefmncr ; fuch as vcas the mournful cond lion of the tvoman, Luc. 7.38. voho loved much, repented, wept much, becaufe jfefus chrifl had forgiven much. -Qur Love to God which n'C moft manifcft when we repinttdoth fetch its original from thefcnfc of Godi Love to «5, ai John teacheth, i Epift, 4. 9.

§. !/•

C»«JJ

K. B, I, Dither you mean. All true repentance , or only feme. The firftis C< falfe J the latter nothing to the purpofc. No doubt the fcnfc of aftual patdon may incrcafe Repentance : But the fiiftGofpel Repentance according to Gods order, is from the knowledge ot Gods Love and Mercy in giving Chvift to be a fufficicnt facrificc tor fins , and in giving pardon through Chrifttohim f as to all) on condition of Acceptance. This great, but general mercy mentioned Job. 3. 1 6. is the rife of the firft Evangelical Repentance , if it proceed as It ought : with which iJconjoyiicd the fenle of mifcry , and fear of Gods wrath ; When will you prove that all thefe, together with Convidion of the evil of iin , the woithand n.ccfsityof holynels, and the defirablcncfs of Celeftialhappincfsabove fciifual things, may not ^ by the Spirits help) produce a true change of mi;idc and forrow for fin, without the fcnfc of the actual Remifsion of my own fins >

i. How contrary go you to Scripture, which bids us Repent and be Baptized for Remifsion ot fin, and piomifeth Remifsion, if wc repent v and you fay, repentance muftarife from the knowledge of remifsion 5 as if wc could not truly repent till God have forgiven us, and wc know it ?

3, Both you and all that go your way, are fad Comforters to the moft poor diftreflcd confciences: For whereas moft or many of them have not the feehng or knowledge of tiie pardon of their fins, you will conclude them all impenitent) and fo to lye under all the curfcs that b J long to the Impenitent. But it will be long before all the Libertines living w.ll prove all thofc poor Chriftians Impenitent that have not the k lowlcdgc that their fins are forgiven.

4. You teach men to go the wrong way CO AflUrance, and confequcntly to be without it. For whereas God tcacheth them to judge of their pardon by their repentance, telling them that the fins of the penitent are forgiven, you contrari-ly teach them to judge of their Repentance by the knowledge of pardon : and this is a thing that cannot be known by ordmary means , before Repentance be knovvnj both bccaufc it is an afl of God, which can be no othcrwife known to us, then he r^ vcalcth it, and bccaufe he hath revealed it to be the confequent of re-pentancci having given it in his Word on the Condition vt repentance , and to no Impenitent ones. So that according to your method, no man (hall ever have Afl'urance that his fins are pardoned, till God will reveal it to him from heaven by extraordinary Revelation .* fot he onift know his Remifsion without any figns of it, (whereof Repentance and Faith are the iiri\) and that is by no natyral or ordinary means. It would puztle you to give a fenfible interpretation of thofe Scriptures iliat call people to the ttyal of their ftatcs, to examine whether Chtift be in them, or whether they be Reprobates , if this be the way of tryal ? for though I can try and examine my own heart, to difcover the ads of Repentance and Faith, and the knowledge of remifsion, yet I know not how to fcarch or try immediately, whether God hath forgiven me, that I may know it, other-wife then in the word,which forgiveth me but on Condition ot my Faith and repentance. Ejfe I muft examine God, and not my ielf. All tryal is by fome evidence : where the thing is Inch as is not theobjcft of fenfe it felf, or knowledge immediately, {&pi'M5infcrjfuqnaminifnctte^u) it muft be dilcerneil

A a a by

by fomcwhat that is known. Our pardon and rightcoufncfs arc relations, and therefore not difccinabic immediately in ihcnifclvcs. Indeed it is evident, that the knowledge of pardon which you iiiakc-to be nectflary before true Repentance , is rwt a knowledge that comes by tryal , examination, or any rational way of difcovcry , but by dircft c^ttraordinary Rcvelation^om heaven. ^-

5, And then fee the fruits of thisDoftrine. One part of the Godly (that have not AfTurancc) muft remain in diftrcfs of mindc •, and muft not hare Af-fiirnncc, co yiomine, bccaufc they have it not already : Others will be lookmg for thcfc revelations of pardon, and fo deluded with every conceit and fancy ot thciv own, or by thofe common fuggcflions of Satan, whereby he perfwadcs the moft of the world that they are forgiven. And all will be taken oft' the duty of examination, and the life of Gc>ds means for a rational way of Afl'urancc : how idireAly icndeth this Doftrinc to Confufion, Delufion, and Perdition of Souls ?

<^. The Woman Uil^. 7. Lort»l and wept much, becaufc much was forgiven ; Doth it follow therefore Ihe never repented truly till ihe knew much was tor-given ? what llicw of fuch a confcqucncc ?

7. 1 Job. 4,9. hath not a word to your purpofe. i. The Text fpeaks only of Gods general Love in giving his Son, mentioned/o/;. 3. 16. and not at «11 of our actual torg.vencfs, x Mvch lefs of our knowledge of that forgivcnefs. 3. The nc xt vcrfe indeed fnich , Herein is LovCy not that we loved God , but tliat he loved Ui -J but i. It is only the Love of fending his Son to be the propitisKion for our fins, that is mentioned, and not the aftual pardon of them. i. Though a furtiicr Love went before oiirs,!//^. his Love of Elcftion, and intent to give us Faith, and lo Rem-fsion snd Salvation, yet that is not known to us when we firfl repent, nor doth the text intimate any fuch thing. That general Love ot God, in giving his Son tube the Saviour of the world, which lome elevate and make nothing of, haih enough in it, if well confidered, to fill the heart witli Repentance and Love : yea and is appointed to be the great means to that endj and then fore is not fo vain as they make it.

S. i8.

L.C 5.T5"Z^//fcf 4,7 of BtUev'm is fo far from go'ujg before the act of Remitting -L' pHSy that in the very acts of caf/ing^janatfying^quici^n^Hfr, &c. which Are thought 10 mal[e a real mutation in the C^^Ued^ Sanciifcdi &c. God doth not ally but on afub}e£t dcjtitute; and Gods anions are conycrftint about an object void of a. C'ondi:ionor Vertueprere()uifnc. Tiie Kinidom of God n received of Infantsy inno-(ent by thefole igrwance of evil, not by the l(nowUdgt of good,before they grow up to manhood. Godraifitb and qmclineth the dead : he comnMnicaieth the Spirit to unbelievers, that they may biluvc: ^ad ru Vocation is an a^ of Gods mercy cxercifcd an the miferablcj fo he calleth theflupid andptggijh, who thmli of nothing lefs then going to Chrift : he tranflateth them from the I{iKgdom of Satan, and from dav^nefs 1.0 light ; There is at leafl the ht^e rcapm , though much more flrong in the all of Juflification. God Jufiifieth the ungodly as ungodly,not in a divided, but a compound fenfe ; Rom, 4. 5, For he cannot be called ungodly that hath Faith in the Lord.

Jefuj.

Jcfus. He alfo Jitftlfieth Elhn'icksy Gal. 3.8. Without ftrtngth ; and ungodly i 1{om. f. ^. As yet fmncrs: vfij. 8. Enemies : ^'C//. 10. For then were we reconciled* when we were enemies, finncrs, ftiangers and open enemies. Coi. i.ii. Tor what cm be more abfurdly fpo^cu then to T^concUc fyiends. God by remitting fiUi declareth 10 the fmncrs that himfelf iijiifty and he unjttfi : But of the ebjtd of Juki' fieation in Specie, rvcpjall deal aficrwards.

7^. B. I. "YHcre is no truih,noi likclyhood of mith in your confcqucncc , thzt there IS the fame Rcafon J and firengcr, ef Jn(iification , as of Vocation^ being without a prercquifite Condition. The deciding of this muft be from the tenor of the Promife ; Vocation is not givenby a Conditional Pro-mifc (only means prefcribed men to be ufed for it) , but it flows from Eleftion and Redemption, as joyned with Elcttion, revealed in an abfolute Prediftion or Promife, 1-will,talie the haid heart out of their bodies, and give them hearts of flejh, a new heart, &c. Concrarily Remiffion is promifed only on Condition of Faith and Repentance. And therefore to fay the rcaforris like , when God hath made it fo unlike in the tenor of his Covenant, is to exalt your fancies above the L aw. God gives the firft (though not alwayes, nor ufualJy without preparations of the heart, which are qualifications to fit the fubjed) : yet without any prc-requifitc Condition (properly fo called in Law-fcnfe J on our part j But doth ic tollow that he gives the fecond Grace fo too ? luftification is not the firft Grace.

1. You fay, God fif [iificth I mpios mi Impios; xhcungodly as fuch. If you mean but f/«w/»i/)^*,whilcfuch, you lay true, taking the word ungodly j as the text doth,for unjuft or finners : but you lay more.* and a moft ungodly Do-ftrineit is that you dclivcr,as ever came,I think, from the mouth of a Chriftian: To juftific the ungodly as fuch, ^«.: talcs, is to juftifie all that are ungodly : for douhtleisa quatcnits .:domnc valet Confeqncvtia. And if God Iuftifie all the ungodly, then he will fave all the ungodly. A fair Doftrine to preach to the world I Nay add but the fcnfe in which you take the word «;?go<i/)', vi^. for one unrc-gcnerate, and that hath not the true fear of God, and it will appear more mon-rtrous J that God ]uftifiethall the ungodly, as fuch : And fo the world muft-be taught, that as long as they are ungodly, there is no danger nor pofsibility of their damnation } for God Juftifieth them qua impii, as ungodly ; but if they turn Godly, what will become of them, when it is at ungodly only that God luftificth men.

3. Where you fay,i( is not in adividedjbut compound fcnfe: I anfwcr. Its true, becaufe by ungodly^\s meant unjuflyor finn^s: But prove that by mgodlyy is meant unfanClificdy and 1 will prove it to be in fenfu divlfo.

4. Where you fay,Hc can?wt be cahcd ungodly, that htith Faith; I anfwcr. Not in cur common Evangelical fcnfe, but in a legal fenfe , in which the Apoftle there fpcaks, (according to the Law of works) he may, and is : ungodly being there, but a fmner and unjuft. Bi:Cidcs,quoad aClionesvitx extcrnas proxime precedentes.j as to his converfaiion next forcgomg,hc is ungodly in your fenfe when firft lufti-ficdi but not as to his heart, nor prefent life : ( for while he repcnteth, he fu-fpcndcth hisformcrexercife of fuch evils, though he muft have time to pra-

[»«*]

o

Hifc good). For all your naked dcnyal, he is called urgodly, as afintwr, wh is yet Evang,clicaliy Godly, and a believer. And how gio/ly deal you with God, to fay be camot be fo called , when God calls, him fo in the text cited ? Arc not the words. He that Bclicveth m him that Jujiifieth the ungodly } It is thensn ungodly Believer, that is there mentioned, that isj on« unjuftifiable according to the Law ot Works.

5. In giofsabufing the text 6al. J. 8. you difclofc more of the meaning of yourDoarine. You (^ay, God Jufiificth Hcath(?is : you mean while HcathtNS, plainly. A comfortable Doftnnc for Heathens, if the Author could prove it ; But they fliall have a Judge that is of another minde- : and then it js not a Libertine Do^or that can favc them, when God condemns them. What a vain thing make you all the Gcfpcl to be, which callcth men to Faith and Repentance that they may be juftifi.d ? and what a fmal] matter make you of Chriftianiiy it fclf ? when God Juftificth Heathens : yea, and in this (as you faid before) they aic blefled with a pcrfcft blcilednefs > Oh what difference between the Scripture language and yours ? May you not as fobcijy fay fiom ^lat. 21. 31. That Publicans and Harlots flull enter into the-Kingdom of Heaven? when its plain by the parable foregoirg,that Chrift means thole that then were,or before had been Publicans and Harlots, but after repented and were converted. I know you not, nor know I of what Country or langu. ge you arc, nor what world you inhabice ; but if you Jive in this world, kt them that know you, obfcrve you buc a few years, and I conjcftiire they (hall findc you cither recanting thcfe conceits, or elfe forfaking the Scriptures as true or fufficicnr,ro palpabJy are your Doftrincs contrary to it.

z. But as to this text, could you be ignorant that it fpeaks/»/?«/« divifo ? t. It faith not that God doih Iiiftifie the Heathens ; but the Scripture ffreficing that Cod vcoiddjuftific them : that is, the heathen part of the world diftinA from the lews ; 1. Why left you out that part of thefentence thatconfoundeth your interpretation ? That God would Jiiftifie the Hcaihcn through Faith. If Faith be the means through which he will Juftifie them, then they are Believers when he .luftificth them. Do you not love the Truth, that you will thus hide and wink at the exprefs words of the text '

6. As bad almort do you uCc T{p»i. 5. ^. to fpeak an open untruth of trhc text, as if it faid, that God luftificth//if ufigod'y without (Irengtb, when it only faith, irlea we woe yec without ftrcngihy in due time Chrifl dyed for the ungodly. As if Chrifts dying for t'nem,and luflifying them were all one, or done at once. And perhaps ungodly, is there alfo taken ior/r/incrs,

7. And fo it is expounded vcrfe 8. which you unworthily again apply to lufti-ficarion, when the Text fpeaks it only of Chrifts dying for them. Yctwc doubt not but all are finncrs that are luftified ; what therefore is. that to your advantage?

8. For CuL 1.11. (and fo i C^r, f. 18.) I have fpoken enough before j how far we Tterereconciled before Faith.

9. Its calily granted you, that ic is abfurd to talk of Reconciling friends ( fo far as they are friends ) : Did ever any oi us fay or dream that men are friends toGod, before they are reconciled or made friends ? But what is this to prove that Believing, thatis,Accepting the Reconciler and Reconciliation offered, is Slot the Condition, in order going before Reconciliation ? To reconcile a Be-licycr^ is not fo abfurd a phrafc^as to reconcile a friend. For though every Believer

Hever be afriend, yet that Is, bccaufe believing is mAdc the Condition of Reconciliation, and lb frlendfhip relative rcfuits upon ir^ from the gift to the receiver.

I o. Let me here on the by tell you once for all, (that you run not on a mi-ftake; that luftification in the Scripture ule of the word, it a ftridcrtciin then leniiflion or reconciliation ; reconciliation isloinctinie tak.n for fo much as Chiift didonthe CroTs, though it be not full aduai reconciliation j But fo is luftification nevei taken : rcmifllon [s fomctiuie taken , as is faid, for partial execuiive remillion, going before luftification ^but luftification is never fo taken. Yet rcmifllon is moft ul'ually taken for the Legal Condonation or Remillion of the guile of eternal puniflmient , and lo it is the fame thing ( notionaliy differing m fome fmallrefpcd_^ as luftification. But there is a leruiision in Scripture fenl'e, that goes before Faith, yea wliich thofc may have that perilh, (or lUc they could have no mercy; for every mercy remittcth fome degree of thcii punilhr mcnt). But Conftitutlve luftification i.s proper to Believers.

$, 19.

L. C. TK^^ ''^' immmcnt aits of God, performed lontljer andat once, as to E-iJ left, to luftific, to dye for finners, are carried to their objch in a. divers refpe^. So Chrifi dyed as ivcUfor hi! funds as hif enemies : for his friends, be-saufe Godalrcady iovedthem, and badalrcaoy Judificdthcm: but he dyed for hH enemies, bccaufe they lovcd not Cod, nor were yet converted to the.Faith, that they might have thefenfe of that Lovc, But in whatrefpedfocvir the aRs of Rcmfton of Jin, yea Vocation,S an^ificatioJi, &c. are done, ihty are carried to an objecl dcjiitutc of a prerequifite Condition.that the aClion may p-romot^ it fcif into ad.

^' *• \A7'^^ ^° ^^^ Church or Soul that pradically entertains this Do-V V arme. i. his untrue aid Antichriftian, that luftification is an immanent aA of God .' For then it is from eternity, and then Chiifts death is nocaufeof it, nor any other work of Chrifts Mediatorlhip whatfoever. is not this good Chriftianity }

1-. Did ever the ear of man before tliis time, hear, that to die for finners is an immanentad of God .? If God dye,and dying be anaft (both which may have a good fcnfe) yet let it not be an immanent aft.

3, He faith, God already loved, and had J njii fed them-. before Chrift dyed for them, and therefore they were his friends. If he mean it of Chrifts undertaking to die for them, and when he was promifcd in the Garden to Udam 'vi\. that before this they were fo luftified, then you may fee how much he fets by Chrifts death, while he pretends to cxtoll it to the detriment of the honor of all the reft of his mediatory adions that follow for the conferring of this fruit of his death. And by faying. It is an immanent ad, he feems fo to mean. And then I would know of him, whether this be not down-right Socinianifm ? But if he mean it of Chrifts adual dying,,then its true that he dyed for fome that were reconciled by virtue of thatcUath.as undertaken. But yzt in ordine civili,

C^^3

Chiifts death goes before thcii rcconcihaion, and hi dyed for none but enemies.

4. But his not words leave mc no hopes of ihi$ latter being his fcnfc. For all the enmity that he acknowledged in thofe that Chrift dyed tor, is this^ that They Lovidrot Go/f, mr vfere yet converted to the Faith, that they might have the fcnfe of thai Love. Sec Hltc all you thac linvc favorable thoighrsof the Ant'nom'r n Do-dtinc,and think vciily il at it i.x:oUcth Chrift and Giacc, what the true face of ir is, and whether you are lend. Here is your honoring of the Mcuiatoi Ihip of Chrift : Ail thar you leave Chrift to do, incoming into the world. Obeying, Dying, Ri/ing, Interceding, Giving out the Spirit, &c. is not to reconcile God to us, nor to procure our Juftification, for we hat! thefe before , but only to caufc us to LoNcGod , and be converted, that we may have the fcnfe of that Love. Whether this Rel gion may be called Chiiftianity or not, I w'ill not now determine ; but 1 would dcfire the owners of it, to anfwer me thefe two or three quc-ftions. •

I. How if can.with any.truth be faid that Chrift dyed for our fins, and fuftc-rcd for us, and wa s a facrificc for us, and for our fins, and an ottonenient and pro-pitiation for our fins, and bore our fins in his body on the tree, and was a ran-Ibm for us, with many the like, if he dyed not to procure us Reconciliation or IuftificatJon,butonIy the fenfeof what was done before ? i. What rcafoncan you give why Chrift fhould dye for us,if it were only to procure us to Love God, and feel his Love ? Is it not the work of the Holy-Ghoft tocaufe thefe in us ? If there be no need of Chrifts death for fatisfadion, reconciliation of God to man, or luftification, what need is there of it for fanftification and comfort (on that fuppofitionj ? why might not God have as well caufed us to love him , and feel his Love, without Chrifts death, as with it > 3. Do you not feign God to be cruel and blood thitily, that when Jufticc doth not at all require it for remiflion, will yet require the blood of the innocent, yea his own Son } 4. Yea do you not feign God to be lothcr to reveal his Love, then to Love us, and to reveal Juftifi-cation,then to Juftifie us; when he will juftifie us for nothing, but will not reveal it, unlcfs his Son will purchafe it with his innocent blood } 5. Is it not a Popifli or far more ridiculous contradidion, to feign us to be pardoned or juftified before, and yet to have none of the puniftimem removed, but to lye under all the un-hoJynefs of our nature ( which is in fome refpcd a punilbment, as left on us ) and under the fenfe of Gods wrath > what is Hell but a ftate of fin, and the Icnfc of Gods wrath' would it be any comfort to any of the damned to have fuch a luftification, as fhallnot remove fin or mifery in the fenfe of Gods wrath ? What is it that hindrcth man from the lull fenfe of Love, and coniinueth fufferings on him, and keeps him io long out of heaven, if he were abfolutcly and perfeftly pardoned from eternity ? 6. What cxpofition give you of all thole texts that dc-Icribc the mifery of an unregcncrate eftate •• and exprefs the nccefsity of holy-nefs'BucI will add no more of this now. A lovc of Elcdion we acknowledge from eternity, but not of reconciliation, and luftification. Itisasftrangc a thing for a man to be reconciled before ever he fell out with him, as you laid it was to reconcile friends.

To your laft claufc I anfwcred before. The firft Grace of Vocation hath a prcrcqiiifitt condition, though oft preparations, and alwaycs fome means which ihtperfon is obliged to ufc for it ; But luftification and right to Salvation arc not the firft Grace, but arc given on condition of Faith and repentance.

CHAP.

CHAP. V.

Of the Concurfc of the AAs.

$. 1.

L. C. "pH^ Concurfc a twofold Rcconci Uation doth illnflrate. The fiyjl, by which * G^nd IS reconciled to us : The fecondy by which wc are reconciled to Cod, Of the firji T^concUUt'tony Paul j];c^^-.f, vchc7i he faith, that wc were reconciled when Tvcwcre enemies, Rom. j. lo. Col. i.ii.i Cor. f.18,19. but of the fecondhe fpenl^cthiu thencxiverfe, Webcfccch you, that yc will be reconciled to God • ■ivh'ich ii done wl.^n wc apprehend the firfi Rccon£iliation,aud l^now God Bcnevolmtta w. By and for Chrifts obedience God u reconciled to us, but by Faith are wc reconciled to God. He that belie vcth on ihc Son, hath Life, yea, fecth Life, Joh. 3.3^. and. can cry Abba Father: he that is Co reconciled hath pcaee with God. i^^om.' $. i. "

l ijili jji -

X, B. T)Econciliation is a returning to friendship from enmity, or falling out* enmity is ^zs fcicntia ad fcibile) ckhei & d.\!^poRtion, andfoa quality of the minde,oran ad therefrom ; orelfeit imports the-Relation to the ob-jcd. Reconciliation is firft the removal of the ad and difpofition of the mindc contrary to friendlhip j and z. the removal hereupon of the relation from the objcd : whena manccafcthto hate me, andbc mycncmy, I ccafcto be hated by him, and to be his enemy relatively and objedively. And then if I have a hatred or adual enmity to him, this rcquircth the like change.

The enmity that God hath to man and his reconciliation from this enmity, are notasinman, difpofitions and mutations. Buti. There is fomcwhat in God, which we cannot better conceive of or cxprcfs, thtn under thefc notions, though improper, z. Gods Eflcncehath various and mutable Denominations from the various and mutable rclpcd of objeds thereto. So that as mans nature is Lovely or Hateful, God is Denominated as Loving or Hatmghim. 3 .But principally, God as Redor, is faid to be at enmity and to hate , where he is by his Law and vindidive Jufticc, as it were, obliged or engaged to ufc ti.at man as an enemy, if he fo continue ; or may, at left, ule him as an enemy at prelent, according to his Laws- or to fpcak more properly, when in Law fuch dealing is due to man from God, as men ufc to receive from enemies. Contrarily, Gods reconciliation is, the change ot relations, and Legal obligations, ^'i^. when that punillrmcnt is no longer Due to iis, according to the tenor of Gods Law, the obligation being diffolvcd, and when fuch dealing is our due by the Law of Grace, as is to be expcded from friends. Thus much to Ihew you a little more of the nature of reconciliation, then y(>ur dcfedive diftindion; which is worn thred-bare by the Antinomians, doth flicv..

To apply this, God is not tcconciilcd to us by a mutAtion in himfelf, but by a

C»r*J

mutation in us .the objcfts > and by the new Law-ftatCj that wc ftand in cowards him : whence you may cafily lec,Lf you love the truth, i. That God is not reconciled to us from eternity j nor from the firft Promilc, nor from Chrifts death adually : but only when wc are by Fahh, under the Promifc, and not before. 1. That the great reconciliation of man to God, which Scripture fpeaks of, ii, objeftivc and relative ; and is the fame thing>and done by the fame ad, as is Gods reconciliicion to us, only rcfpcftiTely differing; that aft that caul-cth you to ccafc hating me, caufeth mcto ccafc to be hated by you. Our great reconciliation with God, purch.\fed by Chrift, and given in the proraifcjis our being hated by ban r.o more,or ceafing to be pafhvcly and objcftivcly his enemies. 3. Our reconciliation AAive and Qualitative ,vhcreby our own minds are rccon-ciJeJ to God, conteineth the whole work of Saniftification on the heart, from our new birth to our death. 4. The firfl part or degiec of our mental rcconciUaiion to God goes in order of nature, but not of time, before Gods reconciliation to us, and our objcAive, paflivc relative reconciliation with God, For indeed our mental reconciliation in its finccre beginning, is nothing but our Faith and repentance, which arc the condition of the other. And Gods reconciliation to us, is the fame thing with our forgivencfs and Juftlfication,all under diftinft notions. And our great relative reconciliation to God, is our being pardoned and juftified. 5. Yet the rcconclliition quoadpretiuMy &[cciindum quid, which is heretofore dc-fcribcd, is long before all this .' even from Chrifts death undertaken , and the cnafting of the Law of Grace. But that is to us but Conditional, not Aftual reconciliation. Having told you my rainde, I will take an account of you is.

I. PaiU in 7{om. $. 10. feems to me tofpeak of aftual reconciliation of God to us,and us to him, following Faith : though he fay, we were reconciled Bjt Chrifts death> he faith not At Chrifts death. If you will needs have it otherwife, then is it but the conditional reconciliation fofedcfcribcd, Co/. 1. n.and i-Cor. J. 18, I have fpoke to twice before. For the 10. verfcj I fuppofe Paul befcccheth them Hrft in order of nature to believe,and fo be mentally reconciled, but principally intending in the woxd Reconciledj their relative pafsive Reconciliation, q. d. Seeing Cod hath fo far laid down his difplcafurey as not to Leave yowr Souls remedilefs^ but to provide himfetf a Saviour for youy and fo hath received a fuffltientfacrijice and fatisfahion to his JuHice for you,and hath given you a CBnditional pardon in his Gofpcly and fo is on hii part fully reconciled to yoUyfo you TvlU but ^Accept Chrift and T^con-ciiiation offered) and hath commlfftoncd us to be fetch you to this Acceptance ^ we do as bis Embafflidorsybefecch you to yield to the[creafonable tcrmsy that fo ynu may be pardoned and reconciled to him, and he may tal^e you aClnxlly and fully for his friends.

1. What you talk of doing itywhen ree apprehend T^cconciliation, and God benevolent to Hf^ii you mean it of aftual full Reconciliation apprehended, 1 have oft enough contutcd : If of conditional reconciliation it is true.

3. When you fay. By and for Chrifts obedience Cod is reconciled to us. i. Why then faid you before. It was an immanent aft ? and that the thing which Chrifts death doth, is to cure that enmity which confifts in our not Loving Gody and not fcclmghis Love. i. God is not aftually reconciled by Chrifts death till we believe.

4, Our Faith is the Antecedent and Condition of Gods reconciliation to us, and the formal rcafon of our mental reconciliation to him (a-s is our Love alfo) ,io that we aic not mentally reconciled by Faith, as the efficient of our firft mental reconciliation , but formally J and as efficient of what follows.

'l-foh. i.^S. Is nor meant of the bare fcnfe of love .• huihethat btl'icvtth on the fen hath life. i. He hath Chrift the fountain and caufe of Life : i.Hc hath a new fplrltu-al Life of Inherent grace, j. But principally, (^as to the text^ he hath the Rtlacivc Life ofIuftification,andrlght to eternal life, in feeing and enjoying God. Buc for your fourth, Ic is anunfoundand uncomfortable addition; to drive thoufands of poor Chriftlans to conclu<ie they havene faithj becaufe they have not the peace and Icnfe of Love which you vainly make the nature or inff parable efifcd of true faith.

6. 1 have lately explained that of the Spirit ot Adoption, crying Abba Father, in another book.

7./?#w.5.i. fcems tome to fpeakof objeSiveRelative Peace with Godjand not mental peace^as ifa potent adversary ceafe war with us,we are faid to hav« peace with them.

2.

L. C, TTHf ftrfl ReconcUhtton it the Caufe of thefecwd : For that we arc the fans ■^ of God U the Caufe that he gives ui the Spirit. Gal. 4 ^. Becaufe ye are fonSj God hath fent forth the Spirit of hit fon into your hearts, to cry Abba Father, to Tv'Uf yearcfom by that Grtcegivefi in chrift before the world did begin.

R.M' I. THe Spirit ia'f cripture is faid to be given us after our fitHbelievIng, and fo after our luRification and Adoption. That we may know how far we agree or differ in this point, I will tell you firft how far we confent about the Matter, and thentbatwe have a further controverfie about the words, i. We grant thar the common works of Grace upon unbelievers or unfound beHev€rs,bring. Ing them nigh to the Kingdom of God,and making them almoft Ch-iftianj,and giving them fome Illumination, and taft of the heavenly Gift, and of tfit good woi^ofGod, and the powers of the world to come, and to receive the word with Joy , and believe for a time , all thefe are tiie woiks of the Koly Ghoft : and fo far the Holy GhoA may be faid to be given them , and they are faid to be partakers of the holy Ghoft , Hcb. 6. 4. 2. We grant that tht Gift of working mitacles, calling outDevils: Ice. which many unfound believers had, wasthe workof tiie Holy Ghoft, and fothey are partakers of him. ?. We grant that it is the Holy Ghofl that caufeih us to believe to luitification^and woiketh in us the firft Grace j and thus we may fay, the Holy Ghofl is given us favingly bc« fore our luftification. 4. We further affirm, that after our believing,the holy Ghoft is given to us in a more eminent manner then ever before, i. Relatively, as undertaking to be our guide and fan^ifier, and to polfefs us for Chrift, and fecure his Intereft in us: 2. And Really to do theIewoiks;f3n6if\ ing us in a more eminent fort then in the firft ad of Believing j and-helping us in duties, and againft temptations, and ftrivingin us againft the flefli. 5. We affirm that thislaft giving of the Holy Ghoft is after our believing in order of nature, and faith is the Condition upon which it is promifed : 6. As alfo that the forementioned Gift of Miracles.is uiually if not ever in Scripture found to be confequential to faith,either found orunfcund. Thus much for the thing. Now for the name, i. I fuppofe t'natthe common fcnfe of this phrafe inScripture,o/"^ix/itf^ the holy 0 hoU^ is of futh a giving as follows faith ;

B b b And

And that the Spirits working the firft Grace, hnot ufualiy (nor at all that I know of) called the Gift of the Holy Gboll. $o that when you read of Gods giving us his Spirit, his meant ofoncof the former works, v':-^. the fandifylng work, or tht work of miricleSj both following faith : (the one In unfcund Profeflbrs following only an unfound faith) Thus the Holy Ghoft is fjid to dwell in our hearts,and work In uSj &c. whereas in working us to believe the Spirit, Is not faid to dwell in us^ nor to be given us ; but only to open our hearts, to draw us to Chrlft, as fignlfyfng, as Mr. Tbo. Hoolicy faith, the Spirirs making Its way into our hearts, or his opening the door,as It were, that he may come In and dwell in us. Or may the reafon be accord» Ing to erne-fa's Judgement} that the Spirit at firft exciteth an nd of faith without a foregoing Habit, and by that aft, forcibly, but congruoufly caufed, he doth caufc a Habit : and therefore it being nds more directly then Habits that we arc commanded and exhorted to, and God working on man In a way agreeable to his nature (Infufed Habits being caufed ad modum acquifitorum, as is commonly faid) , it feeraeth beft to God to deal with us as free rational agents, and to command us to beHeTe,and exhort us to It, while we arc yet without any habit of faith ) and withall to make it the Condition of his promife, on which we fliall receive, as Juftification, fo habitual Grace; andfoby the precept and promife without, and by his Spirit powerfully wot king within, to caufe the firft afi in his deft, and thereby the habit ; and fo it Is only upon the receiving of this habit, that the Holy Ghoft is faid In Scripture to be given us, and to (^well in us. And this opinion fecms beft to fulte with the common Dodrme of the reformed Churches, who generally make Vocation to be the effeaing of faith and repentance, (or faith alcnc fay fome) and Remif-fion and Juftification to be next, and Sandification^dlftind from Vocation, to be next: fo that when Mr. Pcmblc begun another way of conceiving and crpreffing this 4»ork, Bllliop DoroiiAffi wrote agalntt It as an Innovation. 1 was long a zealous follower of Mr. Per/ibie in this point, as appears in the firft part of my book of Reft in the thid Edition whereof 1 have partly revoked it ; not as now refolved of the rightnefs of any other way, buc as apprehending the thing either unrevealcd, or at Icaft uncertain to me. But this is paft doubt, that the term/i»(^/j9f/r//o« is ufually taken in Scripture, not for the giving of the firft Grace of faith, but for fome follow. Jng fort or degree of change in our heart5 and lives; ('and perhaps much refpeding the adual Covenant of Dedication, and the Relation of being dedicate or feparated to God.) And It is as certain that the ordinary meaning of Scripture, when it fpeaks of our receiving the Spirit, is not of the Spirit to work faith at firft^ but of fome eminent habirual change and gift foUowi.'^.g faith, as Its Condition.

This I will now prove from fome Scriptures, Eph. i. i j. In whom al/o after ye believed, ye rpcre fealcd with the holy Spint of promije ("that is, thcpromifed Spirit^ Gal. 5. 14. Tbat the blefsingof Ah.nbum might cotxc on the Gemtes throng}) Jefui Chrift : that we might receive the pfomifc of the Spirit (i.e. the promifcd Spirit) thrattgh faith. Prov. i. zj. T urn you nt my reproof i behold 1 will pour out my Spirit untoyou^ &c. Aft. 19.1. l^nvc ye received the Holy Ghofl (inceye believed^ &c. vcr.6. Joh. 7. ^9. ThU he [pake of the Spirit ^ which they that believe on him (hould receive ^ firr the Holy Cfhofl was not yd given betaufe that Jcfm veas not yet glorified j verf. 5 8. He tbat bclieveih on me^as the Scripture hath faid, out of ha belly fhall flow rivers of livmgwater- By this time you may fee the fcnfc of the Text alledgcd liy the Differ-jor, Gal. 4. 6. And becaufeyeareSons, God hathfent forth the Sphit of his Son into your hearts^ crying Abba, Taihcr i This therefore mofl evidently fpeaks of a giving mtheSpirtr, i((.K faith, and not before at, as he would unreafonably perfwadeus.

For

C^75]

For that Adoption U confequentJal to faith, is as true as Gods word. Gal. 3. 16. ye are aU the children of Cod by faith in Chrifl Jcfm. ]oh. i, 12. As many as received hif»i to them gave he porver to become the Sons of Gody even to them that believe in bit name.

J. There Is yet one claufe to b: anrwercd, that isfo monfirous, that I know noc well what to make of h. Uchhhye arc Sons by that Gracc^ given in Chrift Jefut be* fore the tvorld did btg!n i as makingthis theparaphrafeof G<7/. j ^. Here it appears, I. That he takes us to be fons before the world began. 2-Th»t he takes us to have received Grace in Chrift before the world began. The former Is confuted by all that is, and will be faid againft juftification from eternity ; Forluftification and Adoption go infeparably together. Thefecondlsa myfterie beyond my conceiving : How we (hould have Grace givtn us from eternity f or how it is given in Chrift from eternity ? I believe that we are elefted from eternity ; and that we are cleded In Chrift, that 1$, elcdcdtobe lovely, wel pleafing to God, juftified and fared in Chrift : but not In the Arminian fenfe, that God confidereth us as In Chrift before heeledethus, or that men conlidered in Chrift are the only objeft ofEledlon : for I fuppofe thitihcytreele^ed to k inChiift, and to believe^ and this is the difcriminating Eledlon principally. (See Dr. Tmfs Vind. Digrcfs. of this fpeech ; c'eScd m Chrifti) But though weareeleded In Chrift, as is faid, yet how can Grace,even Adoption, be then given us In Chrift^when Chrift was not mediator, norwe fubjeds toreceire it> Decreeing to give it, is not giving : And decreeing from eternity that Duvid (hould be Gods Ton, did no more adopt him or make him a Ton from eternity,then dccrecirg that he Ihould be King of ifracl^midt him king from eternity. 3. By thiS we fee what hold there is of this mans words ; Before he thought Ic moft agreeable to the Scripture •, to fay that It was from the firft giving of the promife that we are Iui^i6ed : and now he falch. It is before the world began, that the Grace of Adoption was given us In Chrift. It may be he will fay that the firft pro-mile was given before the world begin too, and reduce all our Theologie to one ad, vi\. Gods Decree. 4 Aid when i compare this with his former fpeech, when he cals chiills dying for finncs, an Immanent ad, I begin to fufpcft that he thinks Chrift dyed before the world begun too, even as he thinks we were adopted and re* ceived Grace in him I Hut the truth Is, a delufory , vertiginous dodrine muft be accordingly delivered : When men are fo far once out of their way, they ate moithied and loft.

5.5.

L. C. "QvttheplaceGal.i.iS. Ye are all the fons of God by faith bebngeth to the •D effeil 9f the fii-ft Reconciliation y for therehe fpeal^sofour ReconcitiationiOr the Manifcjlation of the firjl Reconcitiatm.

—

K. B. T have explained the fenfe. There Is no Adoption mentioned In Scripture 1 which is from eternity.

Bbb a S. 4.

C»7^3

$.4.

L. C. ITHefirflKtcondUationmaybccaUcd Original^ of whhh\6\\. 3. 16. and\ loh,. 4.10. Thefecond A6lual, which it pcr/oitncdin our Conjcimces.

§ 4--

R, B. 1. AN<1 tn this your daiknefs, you-do not fee tfce true aftaal $cripture-Re-*iconclHationand luftificationby faltbjClftier asat firft In LawIenfe>or3s at laft in fcncence, which is neither of thefe (Though the firft only Is called Reconciliation, the latter is the fulleft luftification) i. Mark that hefecms to yield that, bis Immanent Original Reconciliation Is not Adual : Andiffo, it Is but potential and improper. ?. What faith Jo/;. 3.16^. of Reconciliation ? not a word. Butof fo loving the world as to give his fon,ffejr whoever belnvcth fljoitldnol pcriflj. 4. i loh. 4, 10. faith but thus, Hertin is Love : not that wc loved God, but th.ii he loved uSf and Cent hii fon to be the propitiation for our pns j Is here any thing of Reconciliation ? I defirc the Differtor to be informed, i. That God did from Eternity fend his fon to be a propitiation for fin, but In the fulnefs of time : 2. That If he had, yet we are not Adually but Conditionally Reconciled or luftlfied, as foon as Chrlft wasfenta propitiation, j. That Gods eternal Love is not his being reconciled or juftifying us. 4. That he doth but dreaWj when he thinks of reconciliation before any falling out.

L. C. T) 0th Reconciliatlo?is doth TviKs thus exhibit to ki, Vindlcvp. 196. So God ■D reconciled us to himfclf In Cfcrlft as to the truth of the thing : but In hUMinifters hath he put the word of reconciliation, as to the manlfcftation of the ftme precious truth t fo when we were enemies are we faid to be reconciled to God as to the truth of the thing j which yet Is not done but by tfce preaching of the Go-fpel, as to the patefadion and faving communication of the ume crutb.

§. v.

R. B. THe fame Anfwers confute Dr. Ta'f/'jj that confute you : Forfuch paflages * as thcfe was he queftloned in the Affembly. He was fo taken up with the dodrinc of the Decrees and Divine knowledge^and other School-points, that I mor< thenfufpeft he was very litple fcen in this part of Theologle, about fatlsfaaion, re-miflion juftiBcation^i a$ evidently appears Iq bis writings.

§. C

C^77 3

§. 6.

L. C. A T'ter the exawplar of the Comuffe oft hcfe r,£ls In rcconcUiation, roe eafily fuf-■^ * fer the a£is of lufiificai'iotj to be cxfcrihcd', yea nc thinly ih.it it dearly exhibits the whole formal -icajonof lufifcatio^i. "Ihatis^ in the fir (I reconciLation, Qfri^s rightcoufxcfs was ours, both in the i/ncnti»n and furpofe of God, and in,the prformanc. of the Mediator ; The Kightcoufncrs ofcbrifl is imputed to Ki,yca applyed to m, even before futb and repentance; but in tl)e (ecotid icconciliatio};, upon the comngof faith, at length vec acl^notvkd^^e and pcrcc've the Love ofGed tovcards ut in Chrift lef$u : whence the rigbtcoufncfs of chri(i n [aid to be imputed to lu by faithy bccaufe it u by faith only linotvH to be imputed to »t of God } and then nrf we faid to he Iu[ii§ed by that l{ind of iufiificaiion and abfolution from our finsy which b-recdeth peace in our Ccnfcicn-ces ; For God hath fct up a tribunal In our Coijfciences, in which after a fort u done Condemnation, Remiffion of fm, fufiificition and Abfolntion i which then foil owe th faith : and according to this fcnfe lufiificatien u by faith : for in that tribunal of Confcicnce, God doth according to hit Lew charge U4 at guilty, caji m down^ torment U*y at length by-the mercy of God, and the Holy Cho[l operating, by liindling faith in ow hearts, the confcicnce ercQed and fccure in the fatisf.iHion ofchrifi in which it yefleth, pronounceth that his ^ns are forgiven for Chrift j but thU Jufiification is not a decretoij abfolution » biu only a pronucleiation that its k^own to him that his fins are remitted for Chrift.

§. 6.

R. B. A ^ L tfc'S is but a rehearfal of what is before, and commonly by the An-■«^ tinomians long ago delivered, CO which I have already lutficiently an. fwercd ; and am loth to tire the Reader with needlefs things. Only brieflyl add, I. That Gods purpofe and intention, and Chrifts facrifice, did lay the ground on which his righteoafnefs fhould be ours in feafon j but did not make it ours till then, nor give us any aSual right to it. You may as well feize on yom fathers Lands before he is dead, and (ay, God purpofed it fliould be mine when you are dead, and therefore it is mine before : Nor is it only knowledge in Confcience that Is wanting, as this Diflertor dreamsi but firft there is wanting a true right in fenfe of Law, and the diffolution of the obligation to punifliment which from the violated Law was on us. 2. All this luftification in Confcience I have manifcftcdj and God willing,' fliall fullyer do, to be none of that which Scripture cals luftification by faith } but a thing far feparable, and of incomparably Icfs concernment as to our falvarion.

§. 7.

I. C. Tl'V^ in that luftification ly faitht orfecond Reconciliation, faith atid rcpcn-

•■-' tanceis not required that Chrifl may fatu fie fof us, as in the firft Rrconcili'

ation i but that that fatisftflon of Chrift already performed may be l{?iown to ut,

and by tbc tafte and txpcrime of%tsfrva(nefs^ our confciences may be rareaud and pro*

vo}(ed to th^nkfulncfs to God and the (ludy of good woy\s. But God who bkjfeth us rv}tb aU fp^rititnlb'.cjjlnii in Chnjl, never gives one Grace without anotker^ atlenfl, intht adult, inrvhoiL conlicnca be bcgcttcthjanh^end givrthikm a ffiritual feelitgi whereby the] know ihmfd-uci juHifiei, and therefore ferioufly rejoice.

§.7.

K. B. T His is but the fame fong. i. Faith is not given thac Chrlft may fatisficfor us, nor yet that we may feci that we arc juftified, firft or principally, buc that Chrift and his ijencfits may be ours, that we may have life in him. i, God gl. vethChrift and luftificationtothofc that are not fure they arc juftifiedminy a year after, and perhaps never while they live here j. This man Is of a jocund religion, that fupp .feth almcft all to cohliA in rejoycing j But the fpirltual praftical Chrifti-an feels more need of other Graces then of Joy.

§. 8.

L. C, (^Od could have redeemed, Iit^iftedandfavedhUeleBby Chrifl, without gi» ving them thiifeelingoffavour, oiitfals out to Infants and the deaf-^ but fuchUthe goodnefs and the greataefs of Gods mercies to the adult, that he accountt it net enough to juiiife them by Chrift, unlcfs he alfo give them fure arguments, affuring them of their ElcClton and. J unification. The argument which far moft (irongly pcrfwades them, u Faithjorthat iTiwoidTeftipiony, of which i Joh. j. lo. by which wcl^uowthat have eternal life. v. 13.

§. 8.

R. B. I. QOd both could, and doth fave many a thoufand without giving them in this life the feeling and afl'urance of their being luftiBed : buc whatever he can do; he will fave none ('for ought wc can know by his word) cither Infants or Adult, without giving fuch a perfonal Intcteft In Chrift and luftificatl* on which they had not by Ele^ion or Chrifts death alone or before that time. z.God could have made him that is man now, to have been another creature : but making him Man> he makes him a Creature nccefifarily to be ruled,and te be ruled by a Law, ^r\Axh^itL^^ vaM^pydciferejpramiare&punire. if it be fuited to mans ftatc ; and God muft needs be his fupremeReftor, This being To, God can do nothing incun-venient, nor contrary to good order j nor can he,bclng Redor, rule imperfcdly or amifs : much lefs be unjuft. And therefore God having mad? a Law for rewarding the faithful, and puniihing the unfaithful, it Isaprefumptuousthing ffo fpeak calS ly) to Imagine that God can Cpunirti the faithful, or^ reward the unfalthTul : Nay, a Reward it cannot be, Ifhefavcthem : that Isacontradidion. For the reward re-lateth to the Duty. But Gods Law giveth falvatlon per modum pnemii, as a reward, as Dr. Tn'i/j tels you often, and Scripture more oit : therefore he cannot fo give Ic to the unfaithful. I hope it is agreed on by all that take Gods word to be true, that he will not, and in a moral fenCe cannot reward 6nal Infidels wlchialvation; If you fay. He might have made other Laws, I anfff. i. Thefe things are much above us, to

deccrmlne

determine of too boldly, i. Bat ftfeemshehath fictej his Laws to our nature and condition; and that the Law of Grace 1$ as txaftly fitted to the nature and ftate of fain loft mankind, as tbe Lawof Niturc was tothe ftateof perfe<a man. And therefore an alteration muftprefuppofe an alteration of our nature and condition. How. ever^ Gods will may fatisfie thefober, without difputing his Power.

g. But let mc tell you, though a man migkt be brought to Heaven without the Feeling and Aflurance you mention, (and multitudes are fo whatever you fay) yet it Is a concradidion for an unfandificd man to be faved in Heaven, For what Is falvition and felicity, but the blcfled fruition of God by Love and loy, and pray-fing him for ever Z And how can the haters of God do this? It Is therefore ofab* folute ncceflicy ex nHard rci, that in order of nature at leaft, men be holy and lovers of God. before they can be faved and happy.

4. You lliew great ingratitude for Gods mercy in your luftlfication by faith San. dification, and your Union and Communion whh Chrift, to reduce all thefe Into the narrow compafs of meer feeling and aflurance of Gods favour : which you fay^ God might have faved us without : And yet you pretend to extoU this his mercy j But I pray you more impartially lay all together! fuppofe an eled man, living as*"*?-lomon, In all worldly contents, having whatfoever his luftful greedy flelh can defirc to feed its raging Appethc } and for God and his foUl he never thinks of them, and perhaps believes not that there Is any life after this, or if he do, Is confident that he fliall be faved. Suppofe another elcd man lyetli in Jobs fores, or la^^y** his poverty, or Pdw/'j labors or fufferlngs, or fpends his dales In pain, fcorn^difgracc, or Im-prlfonment! Is It fuch an obfcrvable mercy as you defcribc It, for the former eled man to be converted, and brought into the ftate of the latter, meerly for the comfort of I: ? I confefs it is, if God give the latter much fpirltual comfort, yea but a little. But then confider, i. I doubt whether you will makethe world believe It ? and whether this way of preaching would ever fave a foul,to tell them^ Si;s, yvhUeyou arevphsremoiigerSy drufj^ards^ mwdcws, haters of Cod, yon may be truly lullifiedj and as much beloved of God, as if you tvere weaned from the ivor Id^ and mortified the fkfhi hut you cannot feci your owaHafpinefs. i. Yea, I will be bold to fay to the comfort or (uppcrt of the drooplnffouis of many true believers, that there arc many ifi a ftate of faving Grace, that have more fears and terrors from God then comfotts, and many faved, that have not alTurance of Salvation, yea that dye In horror; and I had rather be in the cafe of fome that have fo died, then of any Libertine that ever I yet knew. Laftly, obferve how unlike your dcfcription ofthe fandified is to that of Gods word I I know the Gofpel is ofitfelf the way to fill the foul with loyand Peace In believing, and that many Believers rejoyce with Toy unfpeakable and full of Glory .- but the great difference between the fandified and unfandified, Is iv far f.om being principally placed In iheir comforts and feelings of mercy to themfclves In fpecial, that they often think on God and are troubled, their fpirits are full of an-j^ulfh, they cry and God feemctb not to regard, bur to (hut out their complaints, their moifture Is as the drought of Summer ; all the night long chey water their couch with tears; theiibonesconlum. by their dally complaining j they are forced to cy out. My God, why haft thouforfaken mc I haft thou forgotten to be me.ciful, and fliut up thy loving kindnefs In difplcafure I All this was D.ivids cafe 3 God feemeth to be their Entmy, and to wnti. bitter things againft them, and to feal up their iniquities, and tofet them as a mark to (liooc at, as he- ^lid hy Job. They are diftrclftd, afflidcd, perfecuted, tormented, Ti^Paul, and rh fe HCi? ii. and this was not ex-« prcfljf for prefent comfort^ but for a better refurrediou/ and their refpedto the re-

compcncc-

compencc of Reward :Tfiey endured the afflidions of thisprefcntlifc, as not wor^ thy to be compared with the Joy that (hall be revealed hereafter. U-^v.m is at the door in fores, when the rich man fares dellcioufly. Was Chrift of your mind ? did he think the main difference in their prefent condition ('bcfides that without ihcai, which the clcCt have before Converfion^ was in their Comfort ? Remember [on, faith Abraham, that thou in thy life time receivcdfl pleaJiirCj but I-aiarus pain; but now contrarirytfe ihou art tormented, and he u comforted y now he is comforted. Te pjjB. jvecp and lament^ and the tvorldfhiU rejoyce (faith Chad) but your forror* fiuU be turned into ley. Bleffcd a/eye thatrvcep, for ye (hali laugh : Ble (fed are ye that mourns fo, you (hill be comfortedi at leaft, when the times of refrclhinjis come from the prefence of the Lord j but till then the bridegroom is taken from us, and therefore we fliill mourn They that fowin tears^ reap In loy j and God will then wipe away all tears from their eyes. For my part, I think the life of a Chriftian, as prefctl. bed by God, is the joyfulleft lifeon earth j but I amfofar from making all or moft of Gods mercy to me, in and fince Converlion to confift in comfortable feelings, that if he would help mc to lore him more, and give up my felf more faith-; fully to him, and mortifie my corruptions, and make me more truly obedie.it and ferviceable to him, and more to addift my felf to his Glory, and put me in a ftate of fafety for cverlafling, methinks I could value it highly, though I had no great comfort .' or methinks r would now choofe that condition, though I (hoald have no certainty or feeling of my own felicity, before a ftate of lefs Grace, and more feeling. Howercr I am fure fafety without feeling of Comfort, is an unfpeakable mercy.

§. 9.

L. C. J^Vahermore as our remiffion of fins U not fufpendcd on faith (vch'uh jet -■- it rvould be if by faith fins were forgiven) , fo neither do the faithful fay that they are more or lefs lujlified by thefenfe of Gods favours ; they judge nothing to be imputed to them for righteoufnefs, but that which is mojl perfe£l i fuch as the rightc-oufnefs of Chri^y ivherervith being covered, i. They are fet righteous before the Tribu^, nal of God. ^- They tul^c not themfelves to be lufl by their own rightcoufnefs, but another s. ^. And that eternal, ^. iihich God doth not command, but decree^ and to whUh be doth not exhort men. Now when faith hath'none of thefe i isimperfcfly ii ours^ and not anothers^ *nd that for a time 07ily, having its ncceffcs and receffes i and u com-_ manded, and God exhorts u* to it : no wonder if in the Righieoufnefs by which we are Jufiified with God, the fimier do lean on Chrifts Righteoufnefs alone; according to the faying of Ciffiader,aUcdged and praifed 6y'RiyettDh\y[.p.^z.The faithful foul doth net lean on this righteoufnefs, but to the fole righteoufnefs of Chrift given to us. if hence it foUows^that only that righteoufnefs doth juft/fie mj on whiib we mu(l refl, lis wonder i^Elihu Job H-from ver. i:; .to the 18. do not give m an iltu(lrion4 idea of a fmner and mifcrablc man luflified by faith i to wity when Confcicncei * He into whofe Are recreated by confidence of Spiritual favity , and remif-hands it is put. fion of fins which the Seqnefter * of Peace hath obtained for hiWj andfignified to bim.

§.9.

C aSi]

K. B, I. 'yOiirluftificacion In feeling ('which is your fecond; cannot be de-* nyedtorifeandfallcvciy day, as feeling doth. i. No man is righteous at Gods bar, by Chrifts death, till he believe or be brought into Covenant with him, nor hath any right to Chrift till then, (not Infants, but on the Condition of their parents Faich). 3. All this is nothing to the purpofe. For who denyeth that it is only the rightcoufncfs of Chrift given us , that we miift reft on, and that can juftific us againft the accufation of the Law ? But our quc-ftion is,whether this be not oftcrcd to men to be accepted by Faith ? and whether any man have it aftually given him, fo as to have right in it in Law-fenfe, before he believe ? or could plead it at Gods bar ? Chrifts righteoufncfs only is the meritorious caiifc or matter ot our luftification againft the Laws accufation : but yet Faith is the condition fine qua. rion of our right to it.

4. And imderftand that, when the qucftion is whether we have performed this condition or no ? ('which is like to be the turning point) then Faith it felf is therighteoufnefsby which only we can be juftified, (with repentance, fincere obedience and perlcverance, which are the full condition of final abfolution ) , againft any that accu feus of non-performance. But this is not a fort of richte* oufnefs co-ordinate with Chrifts, to fupply its defers ; but an inferior particular Righteoufnefs, fubordinate to Chrifts,that itmay be firft made, and then proved to be ours. And thus far as a condition of our Right in Chrift, wc may reft on it: butnot otherwife. '

S. 10.

remitting fins, and of Faith apprehending remifton of Cms, that JunifirJ,, ' be performed, do make not only the aa of Faith Jit rcpiianjl^^^^ ^%

of remitting fins. They are the words of the i. W'/rfS/f R'''"^ tance^^cs before luftification, and isancceflary clLnTi^;:

a Ih

§. 10.

71. B. J Have faid enough before to ftiew you the reafon of this. Thev do J. with the Scripture, take fanftification, not for thefirft fl rh -.n^^

^'^^ minde;

minde : Changing the mlndc from infidelity to Faith is believing. And if It were not fo, yet you know that Scripture j^uts repentance as well as Faith, before rcmifsion and Iiiftification : yea and repentance is oft placed before Faith : Did you never read, Tc Repented neijthat ye might Believe.

$. II.

L. C T^O doiibt3by the fame cottfequencCi as vehen a Prince giveth thi dignity of iX. a Senator on'yyto one that hath money, it foUmvs that money is the condition antecedent of obtanung the Senators dignity.

§.ii.

K. J, >^0 doubt} your words are falfe. Your Senators money is not, as you put the ciici Conditio cizi/ij^, but Faith is: It is not Conditio pokfla-tivayid (fi, yoliintadavclMoralis : but Faith is. I willtell you trulycr hoW it is, if you wUJ hear me. It is as a Prince that haihranfomed a condemned woman, doth offer her himfelf to be her husband, and her life to be faved ( it being put intohis hands upon the ranfom) upon condition that (he will take him for her husband and redeemer, and repent of her Treafon for which fhe was condemned, and ask the King mercy: clfc fhefliallperifh, if flic refufe this offer, (which yet Chrift will caiife his chofcn to accept.)

§. II.

L. C. 'T'Hia thtycavel {or undo) tvhatthey had begun ; not only putting Rcpeu' tancc before Jitflification, but San£lification alfo, -which colhfrehendeth almofl Repnitahcc alone ; thus troublwgthc order of the rings of the gdldeh Qiain-i Rom. 8. -^o.where Ju^ifying is put bcjore S rtnflifying.

S. li.

K. B. I. *-jpHe firft part of the charge is anfwcrcd already, i. The Word _l Sanflifying is not mentioned at all in the Golden Chain, Rom. 9. 30. And if you mean the thing aird not the Word J i. You give us but your bare word, and we take it not to be fpci edible as to pcrfwade us without rcafon. 3. You contradid your leader Mr. Pimble,v/ho makes Sanftification there to be cohtprircd in Vocation, and put before luftification. 4, The truth is, the word 5<7«f7^/A'is large, and may comprehend all three, Vocation, luftWcation, and Ncwnefs (ji life, /with {lability of Grace ) •• and fo the Apoftle did not cx-prefs it there by liamej as comprehended in the other ads. As it fignifics our firft change, it is the Gurc with Vocation •, as it fignifieth ournew relations , it is at left partly, in luftification : But the common Scripture ufe of the word is for (pur Devotions to God, bolynefs ot heart and life,following Faith, and fo fome •Divines take ic, ( with the Papilfts) to be in luftification, hue moft to be there

com-

comprlxed In glorification ; and Ionic ^o be omitted : which words fo ever you take it co be exprefled in, the diftercncc is. but about the name : for the Thing and Order, t)ivines are almoft all agreed (till Mr. Tcmblc) j and therefore do not diforder that Chain.

§.I3.

L. C. J\^t itisthegreatellPaYalogifm of the ^mbor of the Bpiftle , to infer O that Jitflification cannot be defined, but Fa'nbmnfibe concluded in it, becaufe the an, of Cbrift T^em'utlng fm, and Faith apprehending Rcmiffion of (ins, are done together (if they be fo ) : For Ju(lification bath a definition different from SanJiification , thouih they Are foconncxcd, that one cannot be conceived without the other. lnltl{e manner ChriliianViriueSy as Goodncfii Taticnce, Humility y though in deedj andinl(indc unlike, do yet fomuiually help each other , and are fo connexed, that they cannot be [eparated in a Believer : fo Faith camot be fcparatcd frotn good Worlds y which yet are in their definition differenced among themfelvesy and from Faith, •'

S. 13.

K* B» I. XlOchingbutmiftakesftill! It is not becaufe Faith and Juftifica-tion go together, that Faith is put in the Definition, but becaufe Juftificaiion is performed by a conditional promife, and Faith is the condition, X. How far Faith muft,or muft not enter the definition of Juftification, Ilhewed in the beginning ; even as the word definition is taken.

$. 14.

L. C. JS'^i'^bcrrnore when the Author of the EpifUe faith, that Faith is a Con-Mi dition prereqiiifite to the forgivenefs of fins, it is mervail that he mak^tb not the re fi of the grace s'of the Sand ifying Spirit, tutvell Conditions to for-

givenefs of fins > feeing all me equally the Condition of the New-Covenant j deed the Condition of merity but, as theyfpcal( of qualification.

not m-

§. 14.

K.^' ^' "TNld he not make Repentance a part of the prerequifice Condition JJ/ too ? and did not you complain of it, and fay that Sandifica-tion contein?d almoft nothing but repentance ? And yet now you ftend wondering that he brings not in the reft. X, Fflith,as it is the f^ffent to the Verity of the Word, and as it is a belief fufficient to the working of iniraclcs, is in Scripture diftind from Hope and Love. But Faith as ft is the Accepting of Chrift and Life in him as oftercd in the Gofpcl, and fo is the Condition of IitftifiCation, is taken in a moral or political fenfe, as the word Marriage is , or as Talking a man to bcmv Phylitian, or ray Soveraign, or my Tutor,or the like : and fo it ^ ' Ccc i cow-

<^omprcl:cnclcth Love to Chrift fo Taken, and Hope of the Glory for which we Take him. This is true, though fomc carping wits quancl with it, who give up their undcrftandings more to their Party and Leading men , then to the Scripture ; Yea this is a truth of great neceffity, for the expediting of many difficulties in Theologie.

3. The Covenant promifcthfevcral bleflings : Faith ( \n the forefaid fenfc ) and repentance are its Conditions of our begun Juftification, Obedience aftuaJ is the condition of its continuance, or non amlttoidte annexed to the continuance, of Faith : Asa wife hath right in her husbands eftaie at firft upon marriage con-fent J but to the continuance of it, fliemuft alfo perform her marriage Covenant, of fidelity.

§; 1;.

L. C. T^Or the Mediator of the T^^ew Covenant took upon h'm to ncate Faith, -T T^cpentance, Fear, Humility, fincerc Obedience, and the rcfl of the a£ls of T{egencration, in them whom he brings in the focicty of the Coveyiam to God. ire muftmt therefore thinly that Faith alone k the Condition of the New Covenant,Jeeing that contradificth the Scripture: For Deut. 6. ^.to love God with all our hearty and ■with all our ftrength , ii the. Condition of the Covenant j and Jcr. 31. 40. I will make an everlafting Covenant with them,to do them good, and I will put my fear in their hearts ; So Gen. i 7. i, Sanility and integrity oj life are made the Condition of the Covenant.

§. IS.

R. B. TTHis learned man cither knows not what a Condition is in Jenfu legali vet Civiii, or elfe he difTembles it (which is unlikely) .• He takes the condition of the Covenant to be whatfoever Chrift hath undertaken to work in us, and God promifed to give (if his words (hew his mindc) : But thofe are Gods Conditions and not ours,which we are fpeaking of ; our condition is that which God hath impofed on us to be done, as that without which we fhall not have the thing promifed, and fofufpendeth the efficacy of the promife till we have performed it.

§. i<f.

L. C. Tyut il iifo far ffombeing true, that T^mifion of fins is giv<noH condition *-» of Faith or'Ucpentance, that God is not fo much as a helper to the penitent and thtrfiy, under a Law or Condition, or for a Condition, either of Repentance, w deftre of Grace and any graciom gift, which is created ; but for the Vnion of the faithful Soul with Chnfi, Gal. 3, z ^.

[*85]

R. B. TJEre is nothing but crude unproved afTcrtions, fitter to tire a Reader, a1 clicn to convince him ; i. Did you never readTuch proniilcs as thclc, jfa. 5 y. lyi. Ho every one that thufictby come to the waters^ &c. T^cv. i ^. whoever jvill J let him tal^c of the waters of Life f,ce/y, &c. To him that halh Jhall be given wich m any the like, which I would ftand to produce if I thought it worth the labor.

2, If real changes were not given on conditioji, it would not follow that Relative arc not.

3.1 know not what you me^nt to cite Gal. 3.2^. unlefs to contradift and dif-prove your own opinion, Te are all the Childrcu of God by Faith in Chrifi JefiiSy therefore Remiflion or Divine help is not given on condition of Faith, A gallant inference.

4. You oppofc things that arc conjund. Our Llnlon wich Chrift , is the Virtual Donation of the blcfling it felf. All being Virtually or Caufallvin him: as the wife hath all her honor and riches in and with her husband (ftic being before a beggar) j and yet her own marriage confcnt, or taking that man for her husband, is the condition on her part of enjoyning him and all that he hath. So is it in our cafe. It is therefore as putid and fenlelcfs an aflertion , to fay it is not by Faith, but by Union with Chrift, as to (ay in the former cafe j It is not by her marrying him, or taking him for her husband, but by man iage-Union with him, that a woman hath Right to the Dignities and Riches of her husband. But this way of letting Gods truths by the ears, and oppoling the feveral links of his Chain, one againft another, and faying, It is not ThiSy but This ; when it is bferrh, is the Antjnonmian way of illuminating the world.

S. 17.

L. C. C'^/"'' the thing promifed jhould be of Debty and not of Grace : For that d :viiich is promised under a certain condition and Lavpy afterward when the Condition'^fa'filied, haih the force of a debt.

§.17.

R, B. W^OiTc and worfe ! i. A thing is faid to be of debt, either when its due, '^ becaufe freely given ; or when due, becaufc defervcd by the worth of fomething given for it. Paul denyeth the icward to be of debt only in the Intter fenfc, and not in the former. It is not fo of debt, as not to be of grace. But if this DIflertor would have us believe that the reward non Vcbctur, is not due to us at all, by Promife and gift, then i. he makes it no reward: 2. Then he muft deny that there is fuclia thing as any Promife or Gift of God : For it is a ftrnnge gift that naakes not the thing due, by giving, 3, Thcii what hath the man talked all this whikj of our Juftification in Chrift, and cur part in his Rigbteouf-ncfsbcfoie Faiib, li no fuch tihngbe dv»e at all ? 4., Then God cannot in lufticc

Ccc 3 pardon

pardon or fare any manj becaufc it is lufticc lo give every man h's right or due: And if no man have right to Chrift, ard t > the reward as his due, (by gift) then God ca:inot adjudge that to h.ai, which is not due to him. Whereas Scripture faith , that God glvcth us Heaven a^ a Rewaid, and that a$ a K ghteous ludgc , and. that he is not unjuft to forget our work and labor of love, with many the hke.

•- 2. He tells us that that which is promifed on a condition, hath the force of a Debt, «lien:r.ccondition is fulfilled. What an intollerabic inclination is herel Hither he fpcaks of Duties in general, orof debt as oppofed to grace. If the former, is it pofliblc that fo learned a man l>ioi;ld think, that a conditional gift doth any more make the chirig given, to be due or debt, then an Abfolutc ! would itnothavebeen debtor due, if God had faid ,•/ do p.t,don the (ins of all w^« 5 without any condition ? If he mean it of Debt merited by the value of the work , and fo oppofed to grace, I anfwer him ; When the condition is a mcritorioui work, by its value defcrving the reward, then his Dodrine is true. But when the Condition is no fuch work at all, but the accepting of the free gift according to its nature, and that you fhall not throw it away, or tread the pearl under your feet, nor fpit in the face of him tha: gives it , doth this make the debt to be not of Grace ? Let Scripture language decide the calc. It makes me pitty the poor unftudyed Chriftiaiis in many parts of Snglajtd 3 to fee with what filly cavils they are deluded.

$. 18.

L. C. 'Y He gifts of God, puh tu Gods continual help, the increafe of Faith and

Grace, confoUtion in the heart of the contrite, yea eternal fahation it

[elf J vfhich foilotv upon the precedent coUa:itn of Faith and Repentance , are not cow

ferred on ui,as to the given Conditions of Faith, repc7itance,hitmili-

* Compotes, ty, &c. but becaufe vee are united to Chri(l: fer we are not by tbcfe

gifts made the more * pojj'ejfors of the Vromifc, but by them tcve are

made fo much more certain of the gift of the thing promifed; fo, not becaufe I thirft,

therefore do I challenge to myfelf the promtfe; but thirft doth impeU me tkc^fntre ar-

dently to quench my thirfl ; and I mufi'Defre, that wkh Defire, not for ^efixt of

grace;my confcience may perfwade me that GodrviUbe.propiti$us fme.

J—

K, 'B, I. /^Ods gifts or our afts, are no reafons moving him to give more, VJ who being immutable cannot be moved : but they are. not only preparations to following gifts, but conditions on which God in his Law of Grace hath promifed the following gifts ; which he hath done to excite and engage us the more to the performance, z. We are therefore upon the petfor-mance of the Condition, not only fnoralway) made certain of the thing promifed, but alway put into a Right, and into poOeflion of Juftification, which coi> lifteth but in a Right.

3. The word For, is equivocal. I cxpeft not Gods favor or pardon , for my Faith or dcfire as the meritorious caufe : But I cxpeft it upon, and fo for them, as mecr Conditions of a free gift. You trifle with unexplained words.

C*87 3

s. I?.

L. C. J ?{, /ii^f wanner, not for flw> degrees of Faith ^ humility, fclf-denyd^ hopCy&c. do I expect [he thing promiftd j /?«f with thefe 1 ardently rcquc{i (or dc-J/re) that the thing given or promifed maybe more cleanly l^tiown to wc, and that I am ai^Memberof Chrtjl, and that the fruits of the niyUical Vnwnjhall alfo redound to me. Cod who hath made t he Covenant of Grace with his owtiy moved by no confidcration-, toveth his own, but for himfclf: he uhucth them to Chripyhc mal^cth them by a new life conformable to Chrijls death : and createth and confirmeth in the hearts of Believers the gifts of Grace. Ifa. f?. 2. i, ii.that at he hath given us the fumm of the matter, even Chrift, together alfo in Chrift he may give m the reft of his gifts for an over-flits i of which gifts theprtfit and fruits are very great; for though tiey be not a catije or argument,on which rcjii?ig,Ipromife my felf Salvatloji, yet do they compell me to Chriji the fountain, that pom him 1 may drinl^ with open mouth : and may place my hope of Salvation,not in any condition of Faith or Repentance; but in Chrift as dead for finners, with whom 1 rccl{pn my felf the chief; denying all Righteoufnefs howfoever called, befides Chrifls Kighteoufnefs ; and alfo denying ali unrighteoufmfs, when I fy to the altar of Salvntim.

K. B, A ifOftof this is fully anfwcred, and I will have fome compalfion on IVl the Reader. I. It is not Scripture-fcnfe or langusgc ro fay, all gifts arc given with Chrift as overplus : indeed outward things are laid to be fo given : ,r\iat, ^.33. but if pardon, fandification and falvation be but an overplus, how came Chrift to dye for the procuring them, and to piopoundhimfelf flill in the Gofpel to be received as a means to thefc ? The end is not given with the means by way of overplus. I know that in fome refpcft Chiift alfo is the end ot them.

3. We place no hope of falvation in any woiks as meritorious, or co-ordinate with Chrift, but only as fubordinate to him, and as fuch means as himfclf hath been pleafed to conftitute them.

4. 1 dare provoke this man, whoever he be, on his principles, to produce any rational ground of his expeftation of Salvation, or a durance of his p-irdon , if he fetch it not from his performance of the condition of the promifc. He will, I am certain, be prefenily driven tonon-renfe, or to bottom his affuranct upon Enthufiafms, or inward perfw-'fions, which have noreafonto fupportthcm, or prove them folid. If any word of God be the ground of your aifurance , it is eidier an Abfolure promifc or a Conditioiial. Ifa Conditional, you can have no more alTurancc of your right in the thing promifed, ihcn you hav*: firftafliirance that you perform the Condition. As if it be on ihispiomiic , whoever bcliiveth ii Juflifedfrom aUthings, &c. orJhall net per:(h , but have evcrbfling life. You can hence have no more afluranceof being [uftificd or favedjthen you hav. firft aflurance that you believe in the fcHfc as thofe tc xts require it. If it be an abfo-iutc proraifeihat aflureth you, cither it is general to all, or fpccial to you. If to

all.

all, then all {Kallbef.ivcJas well as you, (and the r ignorance of it will not hijidcr It). It" it be a rpecial promifc to you, thcw cither you arc named in it, (whichisnotinmy Bibic,'that I know of) or you ire but dcfciibcd. If dc-fciibcd cither by a common charaiftcr (and tha: will not dlftinguiJh you from others) oibya fpccialj and then cither that fpccial c'araftcr is lomc condition performed ( and then wc arc where wc were) or foin'. jnhcrent qualifying mark-' but that yau w 11 not affirm, for then yen muft equally try by that, and fofar reft on chAr, If y:)Li ny , It is as one of t'.ie Elcd, or one that Chrlft dyed for more then oilicv.s, ihj qu.ftiun recalls how you know your felr to be ElcA, or one th.1t Chiilt fu Jycd tor. The ihift which I conjcrture yo\i wiii fly to, is this. You will believe fii ft that it is true, and then it you can do fo, it is certain it was true; for God will not enable any to believe themfelves in Chrift, Juftided or XlcAjthat arc not. But i. Thoulands believe it falfly, and all our preaching will not cure tlils prcfuniption in them. i. Then the firlt aft of your belief was falfc or oroundlcis, and not a rational belief. For the objed,as fueh, is before the aft; and it is not a ti uc aft that is not fitted to the objeft. If at fif^fl you believe it .to b: true, without any reafon of that belicfc, or any evidence of truth in the objeft, then it is an irrational aft : nay indeed you cannot do it: you muft apprehend fome truth in the objeft, and (ce fomc lliewof reafon to make you believe it, or you cannot believe it. Bcfidcs, all the wicked about you are commanded to believe as well as you : and it is certainly a truth which God commandeth them to believe. God c nimandcth no man to believe falflioods. And it is the fame thing which they and you are commanded to believe : therefore it is certain that it is not that you are Eleft,or that you are Juftificd and fliallbefaved : for tliis is falfe of many. It is therefore to believe the Truth of the Gofpel, and Accept Chrift and Life oftcred in it, as offered ; by fo doing you perform the Condition of the gift or promifc: and fo have right to ChnfV and Lite: upon the review of tliis performance you may know groundcdly and rationally that you areluftificd: No other way can you know it: Men will be reafonablc \shilc they arc men ; Grace makes them not bruits, but more rational: Do not therefore lay mens duty and comfort in fuch a Faith as hath no bottom, nor you can give no rcafjn for,but fay I do believe, becaufc I will believe ; or I believe it true, becaufcl would have it to be true: and fo lead nun to nicer dreams, or make extraordinary revelations the way of ordinary comfort, and fo leave the generality of humble fouls in diftrefs,that have no fuch revelations. Thefe vain Do-ftrines will not hold long. And if tlicy be right, our common prophane people, thatgenerally believe they arc pardoned by Chrift, becaufc they would have it fo, arc in a better Condition then I took them to be in. I ferioufly profefs, to n-.y bcft obfervation it appears to me, that the Antinomian Doftrine is the very fame in ahnoft every point, which I finde naturally faflned in the hearts of the common prop[ianeniulticudcs,and that in all my difcouffcs with them I find, that though the ignorant cannot mouth it fo plaufibly , nor talk not fo much of free Grace,yet have they the fame tenets, and all men are naturally of the Antinomian Relgion ^ and that very work of Preachers (when Chiifts death and the Promifc of pardon and Lit": is once revealed j is principally the cure of natural Antinomianifm ; and this is that wc call the work of converfion. I do not wonder therefore if thefe men would have the Miniftry down,whcn their very daily work is to root out their Religion from the Souls of men.

CHAP.

L^m

CHAP. VI,

That a finncc and ungodly man, and not the fa'ithfull and believer, is the adequate ObjeA of Jultification.

§. I.

L. C. "D ■^'t let Hi in the mean time aii their party ivho will have Faitb^ Repentance, *Ju New-life, and ail the as of Regeneration logo before, not only the ads of Jufiification, but alfo ofEteCiion, in Nature,Order, and Tune : I contend that it agrc-ethnotfi) much as with that opinion, that a believing man be the Objed ofjufli-fication, or faith be the mlhumcvtal canfc of/iiftijicanon, or ofRcmifsiou of fms ; or that It enter the dcfrunon of J uft;fie at ion; And that this ts abhorrent from right r£ajin and ^riflotelica! Difcipltne : For if I would be of their opinion, I would eaftly grant that it rightly follows ^ ihAt Faith, T^petuance, &c. arc a caufc fine qua iion, and prerequiffte cofiduions, and which arc fiiprofcd to Oe in them (hat are J unified: But I would deny that it thence follows, thai Juflification rejpeflcth a man btlieving end penitent, as the adequate ubjcci of juflification, whofc adequate obje, rather is a. /inner, an ungodly man,yea an incrcdulom man, and an Infidel {though otherwife faith' full andof an imblamcable life ) inasmuch as in thebcji, the feeds of incredulity lye hid. Mai-.9 .14. anil fin n the off'-fj/riag of Infidelity : For every aflion both Natural and Moral n carried to the ob)cil according to the formal Reafon : /o a PLyfitian confi-dcrcthamannotinicfpcctof -T^aiionabdity or T{ifibilityi but of Sanability : In lilfC manner the action of Remitting fin is carried to its objcJI, after the formal redfhn of the objcB, to wit, to a finncr capable ofl{emtfsion, and not as endowed with faith and T{e pent ancc.

§. I.

K,B. ». A LL chis a do to bring forth a poor pctitio principii, era contra--^^didion. You confefsasmuch as wc dcitrc, that the tpmiai leafon of the Objeft is : A (inner capable of Remifsion : We doubt not but you mean an Immediate capacity .* And wc fay, that you beg the qutftion in the next words, which concradift the former : and jiot as endowed with faith and T^cpentancc. When will you once prove that an Impenitent InSdtl is a fuiner immediately capable of Juftification. You have but one way to attempt it, and that is by proving the Scripture not to be truc,which (b frequently fays otherwife. No man is immediately capable of the benefit given by a conditional Donation or a^ of Grace, buc he that hath performed the condition. But Juftificatipn and Remifsion is a benefit given by a conditional Donation or ad of Grace ( and faith is the condition ) therefore, &c,

1. I have fpoke already to the queftion, whether faith muft enter the Definition of Juftification : It enters not the Definition of Juftification in General, nor of any other fpccics, butof thisfpccics, even Evangelical Juftification, confift-

;ng InRcmlfiion of/Tn, orfcmcntial Abfolution, It doth enter the Definition ^damzndthc Angels might be luftificd without faith in Chtift, and fo was Chrift hlmfch" ( In the fence that we now fpcak of) but man cannot • and it being the condition of the gift, mull enter the Definition.

5. X.

L. C. *SJ[0' wdr(f/-5 it that faith and TicpcnLnnce are fuppofcdtobe firfiintbe IX Subjcd before he be Juftified. Suppofc a Trincc choofe none into his Coimfel but a. r/ionyed man j 1 do not think it thence fottowi that money and the nmm riches are the formal canfc, the ImpulJivCy IndufiivCi Inirinficlj^^or Extrinficli for -which he is chofcn among the C'oMfclIors, when the Prince, as when he chofe Titius into the Senate , had rcfpid to the mans Judgement cxcrcifed by much experience and his Prudence meet to handle the great biijincjs of the Common wealth; but the fMtns riches were no more the caufe that Titius was admitted, then that he 'livetb U of a found body, nor is either blind or lame, iq hinder him from beint^ in the Senate : Vfihich conditions found or fuppofcd in Titius jCowW not be the object to which the Trinc'e applied himfelf when he chofe him Coiinfcllor.

§. a.

7^. B, T Was troubled once alrea'iywlth your monied man, let who will be ■■• troubled with him again for mc : and for Titiui, as I ken not the man To I have nothing ro do with him, nor he, for any thing I can pcicicvc,with our bufinefs. Dobiiidiftinguifli between a natural condition, which jsaquahfica-tion of the matter, anl a Legal or Civil condition properly fo calkd, which iwor:i\\)'c\wi.\\'n(:t\\ ex ord'.naliotie donantis vet legiflatoris, and you have anfwcr enough.Our condition is exprcilcd in the Law or Tcftanicnt,and fo was noiTilins his money, nor his life, healthj or limbs. Morals fuppofe naturals, and conft.tutc them not.

S. 3.

L. C. ^Hrit mPfmoHsman, arid everyway moft learned, Dr. Hammond ; hut "■■ w\.o fams to mc mure addicted to the conceits of the ArminianSjpn' this : ret neverthelifs in his Cathechifm, though he mal^c Faith , Repentance; Tea all the ans of Sayiclification to go before Juflification or T{cmiffion of fm as Conditions, 'dualities, and ^! all f cations, as he fpcah^^s, ncccjfa.y and prercquifite in the fubieoTo be Juftificd; Yet dot h he ex dude faith or a udicvcr from the definition of Ju 'iification^ and deaieth faUhtobe an Irifl.umcnt or canfc of Jufiification : Tor he'will have

Jnjiification lo be an afi of Cod which u done * without us: but let * Extra nos. u» here him fpc.ili, though'not m his countrey language wherein he

wrote hi^ Catcchifm. n-hat is Jujllfication ? 7(. It is Gods .icc.-pring our perfons, and not imnutine our fins, his covering or pardoning our iniquitits,,his being fo reconciled unto linners that he determines not to punlfli us eternally.

nhaf li the cau'e of Jufiification } /(.-Gods free mercy to us in Chrifl revealed in the New Covenant, ,^.^ .

' what the Inflrimmtalcaiife > 7^. As aiilnftrumcnt is logically and properly taken, and fignifics an infciior Icfs principal efficient caufe, fo nothing in us can have any th-ng to do (i.e. any kind ot phyfical eflSciency) in this work i neither is it imaginaL<lt it ihould, it beirg a work of Gods upon us, without us,concerning us, but not within us at all. And if you mark luftification being in plain terms but the accepting our pcrfons, and pardoning of fins, it would be very improper and hai fli to uffiini, that our works or any thing, even our faith it felf,fliould accept our pcrfons, or pardon our fins, though in never fo interior a Notion ; which yet they muft,if they were Inftrumcntal in our Juftification.Tis true indccd,thofe nccelfary qualifications which the Gofpcl requires in us are conditions, or moral Inftrumcnts, without which wc Ihall not be Juftificd \ but thofe are not properly called inftrumcnts or caufes.

what are thofe qualificniions ?

R. Faith, Repentance, Firm purpofe of anew lifc,and the reft of thofe Graces upon which in the Gofpel pardon i* proinifcd theChriftiani all comprizablein the new Creature, Converfion, Regeneration, &c.

TiiUy accordiug to this opinion^ ifujiy man rvcyc more tX-aSi in hisforepaft life then Paul or lob -was,yet would J If i fly maim am {aiit ii humane to (lip) that God doth nou Jn.(i!fiC him as a believer,but as ungodly andafimer^yca as an Injidel : For a Prince doth 7M)t free from pumjljmeiit id good mafi,but a guiliy(or 1>elinqncnt:)So God in remit' ting fin cenfidercth not man as a believer or penitent,but obnoxious : to concludeyitfeems as unfit a fpccch to fay that God forgiveth fin to a beiuver and to the faithfully as to affirm, that a father pardoneth a Sony not as erring^biit as obedient \ or that the adequate ebjek of the Father chaftifing his Stny is a Son as obedient^and not asforfal(ing his dH4y,

S. 3.

R.B. I. TT is the fame Doftrine for the fubftance that thefc words of Dr.H^iff-

*-/Monds do exprefs, which I maintain againft you. Let thofe that alfcrt a

proper Inftrumcntalityand efficiency of faith to luftification, fee to ilicmfclves,

1. You do not well to fay that Dx.Hammond exdudeth faith from the Definition of juftification. For you may cafily fee that he never intended thofe words for a Definition of juftification, muchlefs in the moft comprehenfiyc fence, but » difcoveryof the nature of the raear aft of juftifying in it iclf confidcred.

3. Let us agree of the order, nature and office of faith in juftification, and wc vrill freely give you leave to put it in your Dcfinition,or leave it out,as you pleafc^: This is but a fmall and frivolous buSnefs.

4. You do with great refolution profcfs to maintain, that which you perform with lamentable infirmity, nor doth your performance any whit anfwer your undertaking , to prove that God juftifics a man as an infidel : and for -all yoar talk of Ariftotelical Difciplinc,you do utterly fail our cxpcftations of the fruits of it, in your proof.Here's not a word of Argument that 1 canfind,for what you will fa ftifly maintain.

1. Youmuft diftinguifti bct>veen a man as he needs pardon; aitd as atnanashe fliall receive pardon. The gviiliy, as guilty, need pardon, and not as Bclicrers : the penitent and believers as they are the pcrfons to whom the promifc is madcj dull receive pardon, and not any other guilty pcrfons.

a. You muft diftinguilh between the ohjeft of Punilhment > of Obliga*

Dd4 3, c;oi|

ijojrcopuiiiffnncnr, and of condemnation, and the objeft of ImpunityjRcmifE-on and Juftification. The objcd of piiniilimcnt is the guilty , the objcd of Obligation to punilhrncnr, or fubjcft ot guilt, is a finncrjas having oflfcndcd a penal Law: The objcdoi Impunity, Rcmiflion, JuftiHcation, isa guilty finncr too j. but thats not all,nor enough to make him an vhjcd immcdiatly capable of thcfc ads. The fubjcft of Impunity ( as we now take it) is a pardoned fmner ( call him Subjcd or Objcd j wc muft allow fomc impiopricty from the imperfcdion of the thing, ) The Objeft of Rcmiflion and conftitutive Juftification, is a believing finntr. Can you prove it enough to make a man an Adequate objeft of Remifiion, that he hath in him the matter to be remitted ? If you confider him before Godi aft of Grace was paflcd, and fo it is true, it is enough that he is a guilty finner, for whom Chiift died ( for I muft tell you that muft go in to a tiill Definition too : ) But if you fpcak not of an objeft of the conditional pardon in the Law or piomifc, but of the aftual pardon by that promifc becoming tftcftual, as no dciibt you do, then it is a bclit ving finner that is the Adequate objeft. Thcic is the mattri.i lanovaiday the Tcrmnui a quo inhinijas he is guilty; But there will not be the actual removal, th*e motm ab hoc termino adlibcraliommy Jujlitiam, Jm adlt/ipimiLitiffi, till the condition of faith be performed, and this condition being not a mecr naturally-prcrcquifite qualification, but a proper condition in Law-fence, cxprcfled fully in the words of the Covenant or Law, it follows that by lb doing the Law hath made it of that moral neceffityj that a fin-ncr is no adequate object of juftification without it.

• But you fay, ^Vrincc doLh net free fiom futtijhmcitta goodman^ but a guilty, I anfwtr, Ir your Princes pardon beabfolute, lie frceth a nicer ofFendor; but thats not our cafe: But if he paidon a Traytor on condition he come in and thankfully accept a paidon, and return to his allegiance, then there are twe things confidcrablc in him whom he pardons to make him a fit objeft. That hc need ir,and therefore be guilty ; and that he be in the nearcft capacity of receiving ir, and fo that hc perforin the condition. Sj God confidercih us both as guilty^ and fo needing pardon, and as believers in Chrift, and fo fit for it on ■ t'Ac ttttns on which hc was pleafcd to confer it in his Law. ■ Where you fay what an unfit or unrcafonable fpeech it is to fay, that God par-d&ncthfinsto Believers : Confider whether you accufenot the Holy Ghoft, who knew better how to fpeak then you c.ui teach him.

To your further fimilitude I fay, It is no fit Ipcech to fay that God forgiveth us our obedience or our faith, or forgiveth a believer for believing : Nor for to fay a father forgiveth his fons obedience. But if that father fay, kneel down and ask mc forgivenefs, and I will forgive thee : it is no unfit fpeech to fay that the father forgiveth an offending fubmifliye childjthat is, forgiveth his offence upon his fubmillion.

Your laft fpeech difcovers moic infirmity then wifdom would have had you, manifeft. Is it as unrcafonable a fpeech to lay ; Godpardenctb fn to a believery as to fay, that the adequate obicft of the fathers Chaftifing his fon, isafonas obedlentj and not as faulty t V/hither will not partiality carry men ? Befidcs that all this ftiikes at the face of Scripture, what an unworthy trick of a learned dif-putant is it, to take fogrofsa point for granted, and run away with it fo cafily, as if pardoning required no more in the obicft to make it adequate, then chafti-^ng doth. -Is it ufual even with men to chaftife and pardon in the fame refpcft ? J^ men paidon their children:, or Princes-.their trayterous Subicfts, mearly as

oflcndors?

ofFcndoi-s' They punlfli them as ofFendors ; but they will have a further reafon

of pardoning them •, fuie lam, God pardoncth not men as finnersj but as redeemed believing finners.

And if you ftill fay ihat he pardonctb us ^s Infidels (telling us before of the formal reafon herein J then I again dcfirc you to tell us why all finners, or alt Infidels arc not pardoned ? I know the word q/t.i or quatcnm may be fo taken largely, as that the confcqucnce, nd o?;?«clhall not hold: but as youexprelly fay : it is according to the formal reafon,as the afl if carried to the objcCl : fo a quaic-ntis ad omm valet cenfrqiicjttia j and fo all Infid.ls nnift be Juflificd. Nay, infidelity muft be the reafon of the predicate, and fo wc muft therefore call them Juft.fiedjbecaufe iiifidels. For as Goc/f»i/<5 faith, Lcxic, Philof.pag, ^06. Redii-plicatio cxigii, ut YcduphcatHtn (it canfa cur pradicatum prima &■ aqi(a:c infu fubjciio.

£>i/ateniis or qua ( 2s Goclcn.ibid. ) is ufed to exprcfs. i. Suhjeflum pnffionis primum ( and fo the ob/eft of aftion ) lb we muft fay, Peccator redcmptm fideliSj ■vcl fide Chri^o conjuriilnsy is the Objcft and Subjcft ot Jiiftification. i.^ci fignifcat cauj'am pradtcati 7i parte ftibje£ti : And fo we muft fay that, ride/is qui fi'dclif, vclVcccaior-rcdcmplM-fidclisqua fidelis Jkfljficatkr. For though fiith be no proper caufc of Juftification, yet being conditio donationu , it may be the caiija pr£dica?idi Subjcdum Jiiflificatiim. 3. J^^.i', fignifiethihe formnl reafon ofconlidcring. 4. And the condition. The Objeuum materiale is man offending: the objeftum for male is mifcr-rcdcmptta-cycdins. For all ihcfe concur arf rationem objeftiformalcmi bur not all on the fame reafon arc appointed hereto : Gods Iiiihianent ^dish^ve no objcffi(mformalc,:is ours have (without him ^ as really fpccifying them, and being the reafon of them : But his legal moral anions have that in the obie A which may be called, ratio formal! ('as have his immanent afts ^«oarfi/fWowi?wtioK^«? cxmw/?c<7«i alfo, & refpefiive. ) Redemption ib a meritorious caufc, and taith but a condition : Chrift and Rcmiflion being given to the Redeemed on that condition, it doth therefore enter the formal leafon of the obied ; as fine qua ?mj, <&- cum qua.

Note alfo that wcfpeak not of the Oi/c<fif«^i quad, for that is juft, but of the objeclum cuiy and that is as exprcflcd. From all this it appears what an Antichr* • ftian Doftrinc it is to fay that an Infidel,as fuch,is the adequate obicA of lufti-fication : For then every infidel, becaufe an infidel, muft be faid to be luftified. Note alio, that all this is fpokcn of Conftitutive luftifiraticn or paidon: For the formal objeft of fentcntial Juftification is J/ifins. God fo luftifieth not any but the 1 ightcous, and curfeth thofe that do oihcrwile.

§. ^.

L. C. TIT what is fud,it appcarctbtvith vrhat monvnncvccs the ufualBofir'me'of Jitftifcation by futh if urged : andcontrar:!y ho:v apt th<:t- is nhicb rvc ex-. h'lb'itCi (fpcciaHy in that it recencilcth Paul rvitj lames, wbfc fcntences p.cmingly diffhing^have hitherto tormented.commentators : For what intricacy will there be^if we fay that both Faith and Good-wo,\s do Juftific, ia that faith witnefetk cur i^e-conciliation^ and works witnefs to our faith, cithc r in om Confcievces or before men ? Of what need is there to labour fo anxioufly to prove agi:]',ifi the Vapifts that faith clone JuMnhy -when that Gocd-vfO'h^^ ^''«^^ ( <''' *^<^ maaner ) equally Jufiifie^ -

If in both pgrtSj to Ju^ijk , fignifie to mimf , Reveal , Judge ? But If on hot,i parts to Juftifiey bnhcfam attoKemt fin^ andimtutc Cff-'fii Riihtcoufmfsy then ndther faith alincy vorgood-'Worlis lio Juliific, unlcjs faith be tal^cnfo, iht tbje^tof faitb.

$. 4.

Xi ^» p Very man is naturally plcafcd with his own inventions and Notions, A-'and lb arc you, it fccnis, to the very great overvaluing of ihcm : I confcfs thcDoftrinc of luftification isfo inconveniently explained in fomc parts by too many that might poflibly give you and many otlicis lo imith oftcncc as might occafion your error : but you are fo far from clcapuig thofe inconvcni-•enccs as you imagine, that you arc run from the Sauds into the Gulf, from the Allicb into the Fire, mto incomparably greater evils then thcy^ fccking to cure an inconvenience with a mifchicf. For my part I fee no great appearance of any contradidion between Pa///and/^wcj, as 1 have cJfcwhcre declared. But your way, I am paft all doubt, contradiftcth them both, while you think to reconcile ^hem ; yea, you quite rcjcft the vciy fubjeft of their difputtv j not fpcaking of, ^cacxprcfly exploding the luftification that they treat ot ; You lay , iiorlis wit-v(fs to faith : And why do not they in your way as well witncfs dircdiy to lufti-fication, as faith doth ? Nay, you profefs that for your declarative luftification, they do luftifie propemodam ex 4cqiio. But djd Paul think fo ? or is this any fuch clear Reconciling Taul and James ^ You do not fully tell us, whether they fpcak of your Immanent, or your Relative luftification ; and jyet you recon-■cilethera? You fay. If we fpcak of the former, they luftifie almoft equally? Is that any fatibfaftory interpreiine of Pj«/, that faith, Jf of froil(Sy then not of ■Grace i* and that a man is Julh^d by Faith without the n'oil^soj the Law. Buc you do indeed ftem to determine that its your declarative luftification that they fpcak of i For you add: If rve fay thai both faith and worli Jufl:ficy &c. in our C'onfcitnces or before men : But it \% put paft all doubt in tlic Ttxc, that it is noc ■meer luftification in Confcience or before men, that either Taid or James fpcak of, I have fo often manifcftcd that to others in divers private writings, that I am loth to take this fl ght occafion to do It again. Only in a word i. for 7>/i*/, he faith, Kom. 3. i>. lo. Whatfocvcr the Law faith, it faith to them that arc under the Law, that every mouth may be flopped, and all the world may become guilty before God: Here you fee that the guilt is, i. Before God. z. By legal obligation. Thtrefore by the deeds of the Law fhali no fUJh beju[i:fied in hk ftght^ for by the Lavf is the l^nowledgc of pn : Here you ice alfo that firft it is before God, X. And by a Civil kind of aft, that wc are luftifiedj or as it is i^tr. 17. By the Law ofTaith : And ver.iZ. whai he had faid : A man is Juftifiedby faith rvithiut then>orl(softhat Law: Ire adds: Is he the Godof the Jews only,d7-c. And 3. It it one God that jhall Ju^ifie t he Circumcifion by faith, and the Vncircumci fion through faith: So that you fee it is luftification by God, and in Gods fight that r(Z«/mentioneth : And therefore Chap. ^. 3,f,^, 8cc. it is calLd imputing RigoUoufnefs, Jufiif)i'^gthe ungodly, for^riviytg f/n^&c. Sec alfoi/fr. 16. 14.

AndVr: James, I. Hefpcaksof fuch a luftifying as is equivalent to /<ii'/m|;, orof the fame nature, ver. 14. cap.z. (^an Faith fave him? It is not only in oar Confciencts, and before mcn> that faith or works .lave, 2. He fpeaks of

AWaham^

'Abrahams luftlficatlon, which was before God, and not only In Conicicncc, and before men ? fpecially for fuch an aft as men would condemn him for, and wasdonc in private. 3. He fpeaks of imputing to Riglucoulncfs, in.15. ani ihatib bwfore God, for it is he that impuccth. 4. He makes it equivalent to being the fiicnd ofGod'. and that is a change of Relation. Much more might be added.

Yea you might cafily fee, if you arc willing, that it is no fuch low poor bu-fincfs, as luftihcacion in Confckncc or before men, that the Scripture talks of; but of that which our Salvation lyeth on. We arc net thereby luftificd , as T4/^ faith, though we know nothiiig by our fclvcs, that is, Confcicncc is not the decider of thccontrovcrfic, whether wc arc juft or unjuft, or fliall live or dye ; Wc have one that judgcth us.,cven the Lord. It is his prerogative : and it is his high and honorable judgement, that Scripture commonly fpeaks of 9 Yea always when it dircdcth us what to do to be juftificd, or tells us of luftih'-cationby faith. And for men y it is alfo a fmall thing to us to be ludged by man, or at mans day or ludgenicnt. See i Cor. 4. 3,4,^. While therefore you pretend to reconcile/•<!«/and/tf/»M, you fpcak of a luftification that neither of them meddle with, nor honor with that name.

In reconciling us with the Papifts you deal as flippcrily. I am thought by fome to fay too much for Works my ielf: But I muft make another kind of difference both between Faith and Works, and between Protcftants and Papifts herein, then you do, or then your Propemoditm ex aquo do intimate.

Well, it is undoubtedly certain that luftification in Scripture fignifietb, to remit Sin^ and to conftitutc Righteous, and to judge righteous by fentcncc. How then will you reconcile us and the Papiftt ? Why, i. For Judgingi it is one of the fences wherein you fay. Faith and Works do \\x^\^c propcmedum ex aquo: And doubtlefs this is the higheft and noblcft luftification, but I am not of your mind, if you take Works as Vaul doth.

1. But if to fifftifie , fignifie , to Remit fin , or impute K'ghteottfncfs ( you fay ) mither filth alone , nor Jmks Juflifie : A fair Reconciliation, cither of TAiU and James i or of Proteftant and Papifts.^ vvhats this but to fay plainly; Hoth Paul and lames, both Froteflasis and Papijisj are out ? Ton both fpeall fHfly-' on faith it is only Faith, and the other, it is alfo Woik}i when rfidccd it is neither. This is the way to reconcile Lyars and Quirrellers, to chide them and fay, you are both Knaves •, But this is not an honeft way-of Reconciling Gods word, where the difference is only in our mifappre-hcnfion.

Yet let mc remember you of one thing, that for my part I rather ufe the-Phrafe, Juftified by faith : then that , faith yuflifieth. 1. Bccaufe the Scripture ftill ufcth the former, but never, that I know, the later, i. Bccaufe, the one feemcth more to intend an efficiency in faith ( which I deny ) and the > other but a conditionally, which I maintain. For we may be faid to be luftificd by the condition, as well as by the efficient. And therefore when ever I ufe the Phrafe, faith Jnjiifieth : I do it in imitatioa of others, b«(;..take it in thclatter fence.

S^f*

C*^6]

§. 5.

L. C. T /4{l'y fthen this Method of teaching J/((lifi'catlon by faltbytitihing more foHtid ^andmore clear \ there is nothing thatufethiiolence iviththc Intellefl-, or contraaicttth right reafon : as that fiyingdoih^ faith torgivcih fins, or luftificth objectively : to the iindcrflanding whereof^ as well as to the diljolviHg of that peripatctical ( fayng ) ^^ form is edited c poccntia matcrise : there ts need of the wit of an Oedipus. For it w not pofsible to difccin the falfity or verity of a propofitiony whoft terms you can neither undeyfland ay art no-r together, and in which the definition is more obfcure then the thing defined.

7{; B. t Will not Juftifie or excufc the Phrafes which you accufe: and 1 X think it as unfit as you can do, for men to make themfclves a Religion of words not intelligibJe, and to be angry with the World foi qucftioning that which themfclves did never undeiftand : But foi your own extolled Method J I think ferioufly, that it is thcmoft falfe and diffonant from Gods word> and from the very nature of Juftificatlon, that ever was yet to my knowledge publifhed by fober Chriftians ; and. far more unfound and dangerous then either Ofianders or the Paptfts i though I was in my youth inciinmg to your opinion. As for your fnatch at the Peripatctick Doftrine of the education of the form e potentia matt/ntjl can better forbear you in Philofophical Novelties then in Theological.

L. C. I. rXOcfc faith ma^e us righteom either for the Virtue and digrilty of the »-Jobjeki or by Participation of the Virtue which the ebjcil commie Tucateth with faith ^ I conceive not that faith ddth either way Juftifie : For a created thing cannot have farce to produce anefeH-, fiich asKemilfionof fin is^ which agreeth only to an eternal and iticreattd eb,e£ly which force yet they will have it to have ^neither from it fclf nor from tije Objen, ^{either doth faith juftifie or forgive fin by participation of Virtue which the obieR commnmcatctb with faith, for then fatthfljould formally Juftifie.

R. B, /^Hrift was not the guilty perfon, nor did he fo bear the very perfon V-^of any man in fufFering, as that in LaW-fcncc wearefaid tofufferor fatisfie in him : But in the third perfon of a Mediator, taking on him the pu-niflin^entof our fins, he made by facrifice fatisfaftion to luftice, to this end, and thus far,tliat the finners might be delivered into his hands as their redeemer, and chat by « new Law of Grace the benefits of his fuftbrjngs might b^made

tip?]

over to ihcm. It Is therefore on]y by this Law that any man hath ilglitto Chrift and his righteoufnefs ; It pleafed the Father and the Redeemer to make this Law conditional!; but with a condition fitted to the honoring of free-grace, vi^. that men (hall accept the gift as it is offered, and glorihc God in the penitent confcffion of their fins, and praying for pardon. Though Chrift will caufe all his Eleft to perform this condition, yet the Law is general, impo-fing the condition, and promifing the benefit thereupon to all: it being fecrec internal grace flowing hom Elcdion, and from Chrifts deatli, as concatenated with Elcdion, thit makes the firft difference: But the Grace given by Chrift 3s Lcgiflator makes not that difference, nor any at all, till it find this difference made by temporal Elcftion, (that is, internal vocation^ the fruit of eternal. It being therefore Gods will that Chnft fliould be given, and life in him, only by a New-Law, which ha:h a condition, and not abfolutely, it thence follows from the mecr will of the free donor, that Faith and Repentance have the Inte-reft of a condition in our Juftificaiion, ::id this is the formal reafon of Its Juftify-ingUi(tofyeak vulgarly) or of our being juftified by it (to fpeak with Scripture.)

And for thofc fencelcfs'men that think it derogatory from Free grace, that Juftification be given on fuch a condition, it is as much as to fay, Jt derogattlh fiomGoAsgiAcc to require yoii to gloiijichu Gracey topioclaimkfrce, to confefsyou dcfervc not) andfo condemn yoiirfelvcs, to mI{ it as free Grace ; m a word. If God give you Grace in the Cavenanty on condition you rvill accept ity and honor tbefreencfs of it, hereby it is dijhnnond. Is not this a fenfclefs conceit' God meant fo to pardon finncrs, as principally in the gift to look to his honor, and impofc on them conditions both honorable to the giver, and fitted to the necefllty and R»i-fery of the receiver, and (o to deliver the guilty, as not to make him Mafterlefs or Lawlefs. Thus I have (hewed you my judgement, why and in what refpeft we arc Juftificd by faich.

1. Your laft words, then faith fjo aid formally Ju(lifie,(hcvi you to hold another error,that Chrifts righteoufnefs doth formally luftifie. The righteoufnefs given by Chrift doth, that is, Rcmiflion of fin : but for Chrifts own rightcoumefs, it is but the meritorious caufc of that Rcmiflion, or Jus ad impunitatem & ad T^cgnurn, which is our Righteoufnefs formally. This you feemed once to profefs, when you faid youconfcntcd to the Author in his Gatechlfc .' But when men undcrftand not themfelves, there is no hold of ihcni.

S.7.

L.C. i.W/Ili tbcyfayyVaith Jujlifictb as itapprehevdeih chrift ? Butrohen the chief benefit in Chrift which we apprehend is RimiJJion of fin itfelfy it tviSfol' tow, that faith Juftificth or remitieth frAybecaufc it apprehcndcth T{emijfion of fin.

n -^^ '■ — II I

§. 7.

K.B. T Confefs that is the common Dodrinc : which I like not, as commonly expreffed : but you fay little againft it. Plainly, and truly, faith is appointed to this office, becaufc of its fitncfs for it, in the nature of the aft,as being ihc acceptance of Chtift firft, and life in him freely given : But the neareft for-

£ e c mal

mal rcftfon of its intcrcA in our luftification,' is this^ thacic is a condition of ihe giftj fo made by rhc will of the Donor.

S. 8.

L. C. S,'l^Erbaps that li appichcnderc doth mal^e Jufty and remit fin : which •*• feeing it is an d£l or action of faith moving itfdf to Chrijl the obje/f end this a6l is net the fiyft and diredfrom chrifi to the foul, but the re flexed andftcmd from the fold to Chrift, by which ail it rclyeth on Chnft, and reftcth in his love j what fan that appnhenfion be, be fide the virtue, aClion or worl^ which are in, or are done in the believer, unlefs lo zfftchcnd be the fjme as to believe !> On both fides it will foUow^ither that a quality, aaion or work that arc in men, do forgive fms; or (if to apprehend, be to believe) that faith juftifies becaufc it is faith in cbrifl; which is as abfurd.

§. 8.

R, ^.|^0 doubt the laft is their fence, whom you difpute againft,that faith, as •*X Faith in Chrift luftifies : And if they expounded it only of ics Aptitude to the office, it were true; but feeing they do go further, I leave them to defend themfelves, for I cannot.

S. 9.

L.C. 4.r\0^fc any virtue flow into faith from Chrifls T^ghteoufnefs , which virtue *^doth imprint in faith a power of/u(hfying or for giving fmsfbut the Papifts put the li^e power into their worlds.

K.B, A Good caufe is a great advantage. I confcfsyoumay faymuchagalnft "•WL this common miftake.

$. 10.

L.C.' S' T^ they fay, faith is the internal Inftrumcnt of Application, it is that which 1 / wontd have; For that Application is faith itfclf, at Icaft a fccond a£l of true faith,attdthe principal fo-r mal reajou of faith: yet is notamanjuftified or made juft by it, but only trufteth that he is Juft: I undtiftand application in refpcft ofmm;For inrefpeCl of God application ii the fame with imputation of T^ighteoufnefs.

$. 10.

S. lo.

K, *. A^'^ this is true; only underftand, that the main aft of Faith is to •** accept an offered Chrift, firft Believing him to be the Chrift j and not to iruft that we are juftiSed.

f

§. II.

L. C. ^.T Aftly, Faith « not the Inftmmcnt of T^mfsion of fnsj unlcfs it be made ■w the efficient caufcythough Ufs principdywhy Godfomvethjins ; doth an eternal eauje need a temporary nod tranfient Injirument to produce"an eternal effect ? But its -wonder that Godjhonldneed this Injhument to remit fwywhen even an earthly 'Prince hath no need of the faith of a condemned manyto whom by his pardon hegranteth iifeUhouih to his vital life itisneccjj'ary that he know the truth'of the written pardon: but this IS nothing tothcafiofthePrit}ce,theaiHofvohofe pardon is not (ufpended on any mans belief: nor hath he need to the giving of pardon,that any condition be found in himiMhch Ufs doth the mofi great God pre-rcquirc faithyor ufe it as an inftiument ta forgive fin.

§. II.

7(. B, ^J'Our reafons have force enough, i. Againft the Inftrumental efficiency * of faith, i. And againft its having intereft in Remillion prexime ex naturaaClus, &n9ncxvoiu7t:atc ordimntis: But further againft faith being the affigned cohdiiion,you fay notnaig, but a crude affirmation in the end. God hath no need of our faith to forgive usj But God doth all things in wifdom,and he fa»» it fitteft to draw men to Repent and Believe by giving them Remiflion upon thefeconditions, that fo the reward might allure theai to the duty. God works on man as man:Evcn where omiiJpotency worketh Graccjic is by rational meanst Bcfides, do you think it honorable to the redeemer to fay to tlie world: I wiU Jufiifie and fave you^though you will not believe in me, but tal^e me for a deceiver j and though you dcfpife wc, fpit in my face; Tou cannot have life but in and with me ; and you fljiU have me whether you Will or no. Thefe be not terms honorable to Godj nor fit tor man.

Note alfo thatyoudomoft erroneoufly call luftifjcation ttn eternal effect x This utterly denicth Chrift as Mediator to be any caufe of it j and fo what is it, but to deny Chrift! even the Lord that bought you. This is a matter of greater moment then the ordering of our Notions about faiths intereft in luftifying.

L. C. JfEt this difference there is between God and theV/mcey that the Primes

pardon is not always followed with repemancCybut Gody in that heamitteth

finy doth thereby give Vaith and anew heart. But the example that I have in hand

doth well txprefs the nature of Jufiification by (aith, Suppofe the miferable man de-

Eee i tamed

C3003

7ah>.cei In the T>u>tgCon , cxpc^lng daily tbe execution of the horribte fenttnce f tc thiivdicd on his hiacf, and in a few days delay comes from the Prince^agood Me§tn-gcr biinging a Pardon, (ora{l) of Grace: rviU he therefore tlnnl( he rvasabjohed und feed fiom punifhment, bccaufc he gave credit to the Prince ? Or who will believe that the Trince did absolve the Deittu^nent by that faith whereby be believed that the Pardon w-u not invalid.

S. I*.

R. B. T Et ihofc that you charge, defend themfclves as they can: On]y I *-^ niuft tell you, that in your fimilitude you farmiftake the cak : You Tuppofc your Princes pardon to beabfolutc, and then believing can do nothing but comfort the man : But the Gofpel pardoning Aft is Conditional. Rather lliould you put the cafe as I did before. A woman is condemned for Trcafon : The Kings Ton loveth her, though a Traitor and Beggar, and pays her Ranfome, and fendeth a Meflcnger with a Pardon, on thcfc terms ; If thou wilt thankfnlly and lovingly ad^nowledge the favour I have (hewed m Redeeming thee^ and wilt accept me both for thy Husband and Lord^andretum to thy aUegiancey 1 will pardon and fave thee: if not ^ thou fhult dye a far foarer death for thy Ingratitude : This is nearer our cafe.

L. C. l?{t'o this ^lethod alfo do the Ajfertors of the vulgar opinion incogitantty *■ fiide. Bucanus Loc. 3 I. dc luftif, Qu. zo. Mai^eth the Subject of Juftificationto be the Sle^fbifure the ConSitutioaof thetvorld'^ ^ndQu.ij. tbe mattcrnot prepared, to wit, ungodly and Jin?iers. See LUfin Catechcf. Qu. ^o. where he maizes a double Application. 1. The Imputation of Chrisls Righteeufnefs in ycfpcct of God. 2. The a£l it fclf of believing in reffeCl of U4, whereby we certainly truH, that Chrifls obedience is Imputed and given to m of God. Idem <^. 61. faith. We are luftitied by Faith alone," becaufc we are luftified by ch« Objeft of Faith alone : A little after, Faith is CorrclativeJy taken: by Faith alone; that is, by Chrifts merit alone, wcare luftified. What? That m-'i'fiy-, iheugh of the fame opinion with Llrfin, among thcfe Keckerman, do maS^t t-^o Jii'^ificatioYis, and T{-g^'teoufncfjes ; o?ie Active, the other Pafsive, which is improperly called Righieouf'itjs, feeing it is only the feeling of the Relive, and its T^ccptim.

K. B. "yJOw fcem to me, either not to under ftand the Authors you alledge, or wilfully wrong at ieaft two of tnem. i .Bucanui faithjSo// ele^i ante cen-Jiitutionem mundi Juftificantur? But whats that for you? He never faid, that they wcic only confidcrcd as eJeft,or that jt wasihe eleft,as eleft,that were the formal or adeiquate objeft of Juftification;or that mecr Eleftion before faith made them ihe objeft :much Icfs that before the worliwas made,tbey were Juftified^For yout

fecond

feCond-faytng of BKf^'/Ji^j I know not wi.fether he mean to number o !y the two diftinft ccnlidciations ot ilic bibjcA «!'InftiHcation, or alio to di-ftineuilh ot the lime, and of two luilificarions received, one by urgotily, ihc Other by Bclcvers. It" ihc lormcr be hii fcnct, it is luftifiablc^ ii the late;, 1 excufcitnot.

"ZZ/y/w doth only Icfi fitly in thofc words c>.prefs tlic nature of faith injuft.fi-cation, which yet prcknily he better txjil i.itth : But he takcih not Gods Application to be fioin Eccinicy, nor at all before our fath adually, but only conditionally, and after it aftually: his words arc ihefe : Vt/amquc applua-tior.cm ficccljc ejiconcurrcrc. Dcnf crim hac hge nobis appluat Jufutiam Chri(U pcy mputationcm J ut nos ipfi queq.ie cam nobis appl:ccmui per fidtm. Ltiwifi (mm aliqir.s nltcri offcrat bcncficiuniy tamcn fi is cuioffe,tur idnon Occiput ^ nonif-fi appLcatiiy, nee fit ctus bcmficiitm. Sine nofiia igitur applicatione, Divina appli-cati0 7micfiy & tamenTttpa ctiamc(l a Deo. This is found Doftrinc. Its true, in the next words he laithj Gods Application ot Chrjfts ratisfaftiojn to us is beforeouis: and fo it is, i. It tantiini: lo far as to give us Giaceto believe, which is a fruit of Chrifts merits, i. And to give us a conditional Pardon and Grant of jufti'ication and life. 3. But not to give aftualpardon and juftjfica-tion, till attcr our believing.

The fecond paffage cited by you out oiZ>,fin is true .• But fair dealing would have confeffcd that it is but part of'o'/////^ Explication : And fo, no doubt when we are faid tobe juftified by faith alone, itii Chrifts merits connoted that arc principally intended i but not only; For faiih quoad conditwncmls intended as of neceflity to our right to Chrift, but Chrift only is intended as the Gtis-faftory Meritorious cauie. And therefore i;?//;; adds. i. ^kia prop, jus a^us fidei cfi apprchcTidcc & fibi applicarc Juftitiam Chrifti : Immo fides nihil efi aiutd^quam Accepti» & apprchenfio Jufinia alien.-^^cu mcriti chrifti in Evaupclii promiffiotie nobis obUti, &c. And he gives the rcaion why we fay fide fiila. i~ Ta txprefs that it isgiatiSi &c. i. Vt omnia opera & mcit.i nnfiray vcl alicna - C'anfa. Jiifttficatiouii cxcliida}Jtnr,&c. J Vtnminodo ov.ne nofiiummcntum, fed cf^am ipfa fides cxditdaiui ab to quod fide accipitur ; & fit fajficf, folafidc, id eft, r. on wc-rendofedtantHmaccipicndoy JiiSiifiCi''fnuy,&c. 4. "^l ifitcUifainY Ntccffitoi fideiad Jusiificationim; Etfciatny, smi quidcmjMe'iiio fidei, fed tamenxonnifi fide ^4C' cipicnte Ju(litiam Chiijiii nos Juflificari; quia fidci a..nsproprius eji, Ju[litiam cam Accipcrc.

To all this I fubfcribe C fuppofing it the principal aft of Faith to accept Chrift himfelf. 3 And if this will fatisfie thofe that quarrel with me for afcrib-ing too much to woiks, or for Levelling Faith and wuiks,l again fay,! wijlingly fubi'cribc to ir.

For what you fpeak of two forts.of Juftjtlcacion, Aftive and Paflivc., ir foems you underftand net thofc you cup at. DivJncs ordinarily mean by it no more then this, that Juftification fignifieth cither the ai"^ or the Taminus, 3nd cffc^i the Ju (it fie arc, or Juflificari. Can you qunrrrl at this? Doth God 3uftificaman(l/i^ii;^) andytt he is not Juft ficd (T^jjivc-) I cont'tfs Maccflviusy a leader of your fraternity;^ makes another kind ot difference, and will have Aftive luftificatlon to go manv a hundred years before Paflivc ; and much more fuch wilde flufFhe haihin his Antinomian I'/'f/fi of luftification, (which 1 had once thqught to haye confuted, but that 1 confidercd it is but the fame matter that 1 haVchcic ccrfutCii in you, and that other Divines have already

E e e 3 confuted.

CsoO

confuted, as Mr. Bu-gefs, Mr. ifnodbridge, Mr. G?>f agalnft Crlfpe, lAt. Bedford agalnft the Am'inomiavs, Mr. G/jr/i/t«againft Sahmaijh, and many more.; As for I(/^r;^-C',»;<J«,)'ou quarrel with him to your diflionor, his words arc unqutftionable, in the knee 1 mentioned, i. Vox jfiiftificationis intcyditm AUlvCy inttrdum Tcf-f/ve fignificat. Relive fignificat Abfoliitioncmy five a£li'.in qiaqtii Ab(oivn : Paf-fiicve.b fignificat Abfalutioncm qua aliquis abfolvilur, five rcccpuoUitn ut fu dicam ^bfoluiioms. PUraquc ijufmodi vBCobula Active fimul &Tajfivc Significant. 1/t Ridcf/iptio , &c. You may Ice chat by reception, ]\iclieYman doth not mean. Faith, which is Rcceptio Mmalis Acfiva mpreprie fte dida : But our jH^ficariy which is Ricepiio 7{_ainratis Pafjiz .i propric fie diCla.

As for their common diftindion of righteoufnefs into AAive and Paffive, that is another bufinels, and is taken from the dirferent matter in which Righteoufnefs confifteth, and is commonlly ufed about Chrifts righteoufnefs j which I need not fay any more about> upon fo flight an occafion.

But it is your very great miftake to think that our Divines mean , by Paflive luftification, that which you call, the fence of Jupfication. Till you better underftand them, if you will take my Counicl, contradid them no more. Yet I will not undertake to vindicate all.' For as others err as well asyoUj fo fonie that write for the Truth, do write before they well underftand the matter, as well as you j and all of us know but in part, and therefore ihall unavoidably err in part.

CHAP. VII.

Obje6lion$ are Anfwered.

§. r.

L. C. 'T'Hf only fight of thffe thhigs that we have brought) might difsipate all Obje-Ctieni: Tct left we omit any thing that jhoiM Illuftyate fo tveighiy a quc-ftm) I am wiUingconciftly to anfrvcr them alfo.

§. I.

R. B. "C Ithcr you much overvalue your own reafonings, or elfc I much under-*-^ value them : which if I do, it is not through an unwillingncfs to fee the truth, but from an utter difability to difccrn any fuch convincing evidence in your words. Nay 1 do not think you can more admire that we are not convinced by you, then I do admire how any tender confcienc*t man, that ever foberly read the Bible, and bclievcth it to be true, can be of your mind! And yet the great experience of my own and orhers frailty, the darkncfs of mans In-telled,the power of prejudice and fcif-conceitednefs,and the too great paucity of judicious difcerning men,doth much abate myadmiration.'And fliould I hear even learned men, and fuch as once fcemcd Religious, as confident againft the Deity of Chrift, the truth of Scripture, the Immortality of the foul, and the obedience

to

C303]

ca God In the ufc of ordinances^ as you arc confident of the jufiificatlon of Infidels 9«;i Infidels, experience hath taught me ihatthe wonder is notfo great as I once took It to be. Though you think that the fight of what you havefaid ftould be fo potent, having viewed ail as Impartially as I could, I find much fmoak, enough to draw tears from a tender eye , to think what toyes can delude the Godly, but little light to acquaint us with the Truth. Your whole difcourfe feems to raeto fpeak with Demtratet lungs, that do mhltum ffirArej & parum valere.

L. C.

I. TT it OhjeHed^that lujlificatim is put after yocauon» Rom. 8.50^

•■■ Anfw. Defervedly is it donCyif luftification there fignifie the declaration or mamfcflAt'ton that we are Infi, For there U no dcmbt but Cod doth work '^^^ '*""'^ 'f Converfiott in us^ and tranftateth tu from darknefs to light, and from the poxvcr of Si' tan to the J{ingdom ofGod, before that he do fullyy and with fuU ajfiirance mfmuate and infiil into eur hearts that the Righteoufnefs of chrifi belongeth to U4, and ihtt ws are indeed in the Kingdom of God.

§. a.

K. B. VOu fay but if this be the fenfe ; but what i/lt be not ? It Is a matter of no»

^ thing with you to make a Scripture,or contradid Itiln ftead of expounding

It I and when God faicb It is Inftificadon, for you to fay, It is the aifuiance of our

luftification. Will you be content with this one Reafon agalnft your expoficion ?

Ifyourexpofitionbe truei then all that live and dye wtchout Aflurance of their own luftification are certainly damned. But all that fo live and dye are not certainly damned 1 Therefore your cxpofition is falfe.

The Coarequenceofthe major I prove thus. AU chofethat live and dye without theluftificacioQ mentioned in that Text, arc certainly damned j Therefore if the luftification there mentioned be the AiTurance of luiiificacion, as you expound iti Then all that dye without that Affurance are certainly damned. The AnteccdentI prove thus. All that dye without Vocation, and that are not predeftinated, are cf tainly damned i But all that live and dye without the luftification there meant, do dye without Vocation , and were not predeftinate j " hcrefore they are certainly damned. The Major you will grant, except you hold that Infidels are faved, v hile fuch, as wellas luftlfiedas fuch ; yea though you do fohold, yet I conjedure chat you will not hold that the non-prcdeftinate are fav.d. The M inor is part doubt in the text, ivhom he prcdefiinnted them he Caileiy whom he Called them he lufiificd.

§. 5.

L. C. 2. Xyot though to Tuftlfie here did fgnifie to mpute Chriffs Righteoufnefs^ and •D/o remit fins yt would not hinder that Calling r* here before Tuflifying: For the/Ipoftles in reciting Gods worlds do not always ob'.yve the order of nature,or of time -y foi Cor. 6. 11. Sanflfication goes before luflification i and rThef. * i?. San^ificatlon of the Spirit Is- put before the Belief of the Truth; whAt ^ that

I Tim,'

CsoO

I TIxxj. 1.9. location fellows the {}vifig of Sdvutm^ andt P«iir 10. FoCationit put before ElUlion.

R. g.

s. ?.

I. TT fectnsthcnj if ihclToly Ghoft fpcaknot of things In the fame order A as they are wrought once or twice, ormore,\ou will never believe that he hath any rc;:3rd to order acal!; and then we muft go look for foiHe other School-mifter to reach us the order of Gotls works, 1 here may be great Reafon fometlme to mention :h3t li'ft, which Is wrought laft, and fometime to difregard the order > but yet liciibtlcfs the Holy Ghofl doth teach us that order, or it is not known.

I. And for this text.you call It your fclf before,the golden chain j and it is evident that it IS the full intent of the Holy Ghoft in it, to fhcw the order and concatenation of chefe feveral works; and 1 think you cannot find another text in Scripture, where 1 is more exidiy and of purpofc done. If therefore we may not here cxped a certain obfervaticn of the Order, I think you cannot tell where we may cxped it. Would you not think hJtn blinded by partiality that fliould deny, that from this text we may prove that Predcflination goes before Vocation ? or that Vocation and lufllficatlon goes before Glorification ? what then may we think of you, that deny that It can be proved from this text, that Vocation goes before luftificatlonj when the evidence Is the very fame for thi one as for the other.

Moreover I pray you mark one thing, That in this text the perfon Uexprefly noted by every one of the precedent afis to be qualified for the fubfequcnt, and fo the obied of the following ad is one that hath received the precedent. Who doth God call ? Why the predeflinated. Whom doth he luftlfie ? The Called. Whom doth he glorifie ? The Juftified, To my undcrftanding this text is fo plain agalnfl you, that were there no more, 1 could not be of your opinion, without ftrongcr arguments then y')U bring.

And Withal confidcr, that this text doth but fecond the current of the precedent parts of Scripture, which exprefly make vocation and faith to be Means to our jufti-^ ficatlon and forgivcnefs of fin.

Though this much may well ferver yet to the particular texts cited by you, I add this ; 1. That in i Cor.6. 11. Ca/vw faith, expreffeth but one thing in the three tcims, that is., it was bn: the Apoftlcs intent to tell them God had delivered them from that finful ff ate ; and therefore there was no need of noting the order of working.

z. 1 am perfwaded that your felf do think, that Sandificatlon there is taken for the firft work of fpecial GracCjin giving the feed of the new Life 5 And If that be fo, then I he order obferved is exad 3 for we maintain that luflification follows fuch a Sandlficacion.

3. A mm that dlfclaims the popilh fcnfcof the word Juftifylng ordlnarily^may yec poflibly think that this text takes it for a progrefs in real holinefsjand fay as Grotius in loc, B'.i)t'!r:^itie[lis& dcmdc acccpiflis SfirnumfanSlumy & majores quotidie in liifli-t'tap)oii-cf[Aifcci(ils. T^amitaiUnd iJ^iy^id^ji hoc locofumi fuadet ordo^ &idem fcnfitt in A pec- 11 ► 11.

As for 2 Thefi.ii.l anfwer,i.Tf Sandification be taken for the firft workof faying Grace, then the oder is fuch as you would defire. Doubtlefs the Spirit caufeth our faith,3nJ therefore i;s cauGng work h in order of nature before chccfied' i. But for

my

mypart)! fuppofefandi^catlon Is taken asufually In Scripture, lichee for that cbang« which follows faith, or clfc for the whole change of heart and life, whereof fa ich is but the very enterance or firfl ad, and fo ate diftinguiftied as the Door and the Houfe. Andlfay that the Apoftle here fpoke in exad order ; foi hcfpokenotofthe order of execution, but of intention. Godhath fiom the bcghmhif^ (hofcnyoutofalvatien^ through fan6lificat'ion of the Spirit and belief of the truth ^ i, c. tie hath chofenyou tobejaved or glorified bj fanB'ificatlon, andtobejanClifird by faith t when Scripture fpeaks dcordineut decreto,^% here^ when it fpeaks of elcdion, it cibCervech oft cheoi'4ec of Intention.

That in i Tim. 1.9, Is in perfeS order : For by faring is meant fo much of fal-ratlon as they had before and in Vocation, whereof the lacter pai t is the fame as Vc* cation, q. d. who hath favediuby Chrifts fatisfa^lion from being Remcdikfly rKiferable, and hath alfo faved us from the fois of the world in which we lived, by calling m to Holi-nefs. Or if you v»ill take falvation for Glorification (which they yet had not) yec chercafon of the Apoflles order may be this j teaching them in udng Gods mercies as motives to Gratitude, to begin at the end which is the grcateft, and fo proceed to the means, which cannot be fully feen, but in the end firft feen,

And for that in 1 Pr/.i.io. the order is moftexadascan b! wilhed. The Apoftle 2s not fpeaking which was wrought firft, but which was tobemadefure firfl ; And how (hould he then fpeak in better order,then to fay,G;^c .1'/ diiigencr to nial^eyour Cah ling andElcClion fitre ' i. e. make your Calling fure firft and thereby your EleAion. For none can know his eledion before or without the knowledge of his Calling.

§.4.

L. C. I. "TUatofM^i.itohjc^ed. This kind of fin fliall not be forgiven, neither

in this life,nor in that t* come.

Anfw. That cither the Holy Gboft doth fpcal^ and deal of mercy here performed, and in

the wtrld to com" to be declared, oi Famous Keignolds doih interpret it, praeleft. 172*

17 J. Of which ii more probable, the fenfe of the place is, that he that blafphemeth

aiaiKflthe Holy Ghoft P^ali be puni(hcd, not only in: b:s prefeut life, but alfo at the day

of Judgement^ and to evcrlajling: town, finis tal^cn for the punishment of fin, aselfe-

iKhcyCi fin for .i facrifice fur fin ; and it ihall not be forgiven liim for ever, U the fame^

«helhaUbe eternally punilhed. Now he that U punijhed tverlaflingly, was bcforre

adjudged to that fame deftmUiOn ^ the Wj ath of God did re (I upon him, andfo his pns

wcr: before retained J in the li\e fort, as the Glorification of the faithful is a certain

figu that hu fins were before forgiven, and that ^od was reconciled to him before he en-

)oyed the celeftial Glory, For as it m:iy come to pafs that the blafpbetncr may for a time be

unpunifhcd, towhomyetatthu timeGodhad not forgiven his

* I think It rtiould fius t fomay it fall out, that at what time God punifijcth him,

bCj were Remitted. y:t then Gods angtr rejieth not on hinti hut long before, hit fins

were * not remitted.

Fff §.4.

Cso^]

§ 4.

K, B. I. VOu takt no nT)tIceat all of the forceofthe Argument, from the 1 text expounded. The text makes not only Remiflion after this life, ■but Remlffron In this life to be future. // [Ijall not be forgiven in tbislife^ having before (aid of other fms, thcy{J}i!!bcfo,-(:^'-vc>>, ir\<i noz^tbcy are foygivcn. Now let it be only Ramjfto cxcciitiva, that is, nonpumn, or let it be Judicial Remiflion by fen-tence thit is meant in the life to come j yet that it is Remiflion by Legal diflblution of the obligation to punilhment, which is in this life, I have proved, and Ihall do further God willing •, fo that you have faid nothing at all to the Argument, z. Yet in that'whichjou have faid there is a fu'l acknowledgement, that non pmure. Is not the fole or great Remiflion of Hn, contrary to what you feemed to hold but even now, (for you hold that either nvn pun'ire, ot nolle funiYty is the only remiflion ^

J. Dr. Rcignolcis In the preUQ. cited, labours to prove againft BcUarminCy that wf/-ther in thiiife, nor th.it to come, means wciifr without intimating any future remiflion Your expofition, he pj.iU be puniffjcd m this lifd and that to come, Is good for the latter pirt, but fcarce found for the former ^ For though all men living arc pu-^ifeed in this life, yet thctcxt feems to fpeak of fomc more then ordinary puniih-ment for that Blafphemy : which yet is fomewhat doubtful, whether God be obliged ftiU to execute in this life, or do execute on fuch. I fuppofe the meaning is accord. Ingtothe plain lettei of the text. There Is as I have faid, a threefold Remiflion: tbcfirft, bytheAft of Grace, is in rhisllfe : The fecond by the fentence of the ludge (the full luftlficatlon) is after thli life. The third, i/i^. not exewting the Ptmininient deferved, is partly in this life, but Principally in that to come. Now Chrift faith. He that Blafphcmeth the Holy Ghoft (halLnot have cither the Legal patdon inthis l.ifc,nor thefentcntial or executive pardon in the Life to comcithough ■whether he have any of the executive Kemiffion inthislife,! determinciwt. Thus ic appears tow you have quite overlooked the Argument from this texc.

§. 5.

L. C. '/S.Ndinclcedbyihcfohnhn.ufihi^ObjcUi6n,thefnppon inliki: tnanncrfalsy -^ tvhuh HYC [ttcht from fb many places of Serif litre, ia which they thinlf it proved, th^t the oils f remitting fi4\ are reiterated; and that God doth pardon fin all our life time ^ even aftur a tnan is endowed with true faith, Jo that there is no need to fly to the eyfUcation before breught, to wit, that God doth daily pardon finy in that he vouchftifcih us the feeling of pardon; «/ that when we dail^ asl[ of Godthe forgivenefs afftn,weoi]lyail{the confidence ofKemiffton, and the application of the benefit which is done b^ faith^ and theinarcafe of faith For feeing almofl every where in holy Scripture^ to remit fin, <a/7^ to punilh , are oppofiie: it is plains that to remit fin, and not to puniHij fl«f/topunilli, and not to remit ^m, are parallels ^ and therefore it may well be-faid. that Gnd doth through a mum whole life forgive him his fins, in as much as he ddlh not punijh him ; and that wc do no lefs pioufly and properly ailf daily of God re-mi ffionoj fin, bccaufe by that Petition we ai!( that we may not be punifhed, and that 'Qsd wohldnot infliflm m> bow faithful foevo-^ the. (IripeswhUh we de/erve. Bat-ifat

my

Do?]

enyiim to remit fin, and to punlHi are not oppofte] as hfils out rvbcn to punilb U voe meant of eternal pun'ifhmcntt but of temporal pimfhrnent for a particular fin, fuih at Di^lds in the matter of \lrhk, ihcnzo remit fin, it not the fame as not to puniflij but it fignificth, to declare Ged to be propitiout and bemvoknty and that he will not txaCi eternal punishment. Thebifiory ofDzvldp^ews thiit towhom^nhen David had declared that God had pardoned hi4 enormous jfin i thereby he would have undtrfloed^ that David roas not fallen from the K>7igdom, at $aul^ nor from iht faveur tfCody nor that Godrvould require of him eternal pu7u(hme7tt : But not that God remitted hU fin inthatlenfe, as thjt he (J)ouldnot be punifhcd for fin in tbii life. In what fence foever, there tvas Rcafon for Di\ld to bcgremif/ion offintvith ayes and lamentatroNy whether he prayed thiU God would give him the fenfe of his favour ^ or not to be eternally pttnilJjcdt or clfe begged of God the re > oval of the temporaiy Puwjhment.

S. 5.

R, B. I. TF the folutlon of an oLjedlon not folved can do fo much, its ftrange.' i z. What you here add, doth fay nothing a: allj(nor that before neither) agalnft anew .'ft of pardon, rcfultingf om the Law ofGracej upon every new aft of fin repented of. When God makes a Law or ftanding Grant,that every believer con^ fefpnghis finy and ail(mg pardon through Chrifly (hM be forgiven. This fame Law doth by a new moral aftion remit erery fin after it is committed , on thefe terms performed.

5. You do in part in this difcourfe fay the fame with thofe that youoppcfe. And indeed there is more folidity, ludgement and fobriety in this Seftion, them I have yet found in all your book ; For though you do not take notice of the Lejal Remif-fion, which is the main, and oft renewed, and which we daily beg in prayer, be-caufe prayer is one part of the Condition of our full obtaining it} yet thefe fcveral cturhsare well acknowledged in this Scftion. i. Thatbefides the Decree of pardon (from eternity, which Is no pardon) and the finfe of pardon (which is no pardon, further then as it is the removing the contrary fenfe, which is a punllhmenc, and giving that mercy, whofe privation is a punifhment^ , there is alfo a pardoning In this life by not executing defervcd puniihment. And indeed every metcy that we receive, is (uch a pardoning as this. 2. That God may thus renew pardon again and again, as oft as he forbcareth, to puniHi upon our provocations , This is plainly intimated. J. That we may beg for this renewed pardon^ ccnfifting in impunity; which is much more then to pray for meer feeling of pardon.4 It is implycd tliat God may thus pardon fin more or lefs in the fame pardon, yea the fame fin, as he remit-tethmorcor lefs of the puniihment. 5. It Is implyed that a Reprobate may be par* doned, fo far as any puniihment In this life is remitted to him . though this be a fmal! degree of pardon comparatively. 6. You confefs rhat God may remit the eter*-nal puniihment, and yet not remit ill the temporal. This is true, but not only the Antinomians, but fome of our ownDlvines will be angry with you for it. 7.Y0U con-fefs,tfaat our chaftifements in this life, fuch as David iuSatd are indeed puni/h-mcnts. 8 Yea and confider I pray you one confcquence of your dodi ine here. If DiWmaybc puniihcdforfin (as you fay) notwirhltanding Chrifts furctylhip and fatisfadion i then i Chrift did not fot3k« the puniihment of our fins on him, as thereby to take it totally offfrom us j »■ Yea then all Kemafion is nor ours eo nomi' tiCy only becaule Chcift dyed torus, without any further ad for giviaeiitous j

Fffi clfc

eife w*y dowepray for it? }. Much Icfs can it truly be fald in Law-fcnfcthat we obeyed or fatiififd in Chrift, or that it ij equally cars, as if wc had done it : For If ifchidperfediyciihcr obeyed or Satisfied, GodcouU not in lufticc have punifhed us (3$ Tw;/} oft conftffcth) : though he nilght hivc tormfntedus, yet it would have been no punllhment. 4. And if it ftand well wth GodiluRiceto punifli a Dj. T^ii for the fin that Chrlft hath fatisfied for, then as iti no fcund arguing, chrifl hath fatufied: tbenfme the fin he failsficdfoi isittti'nt:di much Icis it is eo nomine^ and at that timcietniticd, (o it may on the fame grounds kand with Gods Juftlcc^ to dtlay any adaal RemiflTionat all, (which giveth Legal right to Impunity^ to the Delin-cjuentj till the Condition oi his Covenant be pctfornied. Thefe confequences (dcftrudivc to the foundation of Antinomianifm>) are unavoidable from your own concetfions. And indeed this one Scdion gives me hope that you hive yet fo much light and Capacity of Truth,as that upon Confideration, you will fee your former

miltakes.

§. 6.

L. C i- \T is ObjcHedi that it is abfu/dfor a man to be Unified before be cxifi,

Anfw. Gods aHions and a^ls are convey fant even about objeils^that yet are not,bin arcf.atirc,md have an effe cognitum * m Gods under{laMding^ * Or in re- to vphom all his wo/lis are knoivn from eternity, Aft.i j. 18. and there*-fped of God. fore men : fur example \ Cod imputed to Qhrifi the fms of all the eleSl^ rck'O^tvcre, nre^andare to come, as foon as he rvas promifedto be Medi'. &t.ar ; thouej) v^hen tUepromife was made, he ivas not yet man : In lil^e manner Cod im' puled Chnlis {atisfiCuon to all , rvhofe fins he transferred upon Chrifi , rvbeiher they were bortj,or vol yet born J. and he freed {or difcharged) them from imputAiion-of fm^ and indued them ■»:tbChii(ii Righteoitfnefs.

§.6.

K, B, "yHis Sedion is as unlike the forraer,as if they had not come from the fame man. i. Either you mean, that all or fome of Gods Aftlons have objcds notfxiftcnt. Ifftl! i then nothing more falfe : Prefervatlon, Deliverance from af-flidioni. Vocation, San6tification,Glorification, Affliding, with multitudes more, arrforc abeut objects that do cx.ft If ycu mean it but oifome of Gods aftions, h }s nothing to the point, unlcfs you would have (hewed us that Juflificatlon is one of them , which you fay nothing to prove. Gods works arc all foreknown : faw only as foreknown they arc not the objeft of all his adions. Gods aftionsarc Immanent or Tranfient. The former areei her moft ftrlftlyfocalled, which do not. Tranfire ne quidem objeWve, of which God himfelf is the objed: thefe belong net 10 our purpofe : or elfe they are more largely and impetfedly fuch : when ihty zre obje&tvs iranfeuniest & tffMivc^ {ycl quoad ffftQum) Immanentes^i. e.in fcnfu iirgat.vo. Thrfe are cithtr the ads of Gods Knowledge, or his Will ffo far as . we can conceive of them) Though wc muft not affirm a real diverfityj yet to our conceiving they are diflind, and fo denominated from the objeds which rcfped chem. Divines arc bold to difiinguilh thefe tfeus. (i,) The firft of thefe ads of G,od5 } fco oar undcrftandinj^ i* Ms fcicUii fimpUcis. Intelligentite , whereby he

kno¥ts,.

knawswhatis poflible, convenitnt, and what would be nponfiippofirtonoffuch' orfuchcaufes put : Thus God knew tHe l-ofljbility of our luftificatJon, ana its conveniency a-s a means to Ws Glory, before he dtcreed it f'ln the oi der thjt Divines have laid the frame.) I fuppofe this is not t! c ad that you call luftification. (i) Next to ihis, is Gods wilit'nat thefe or thofe things fliall be, in (uch a time and order, and manner. Me thinks you Hiould not mean this ad i Becaufe the objed of this ad is not io much as crgnUum in /uturum (for, fay Divines k muft be made future fitft by VoUtion, before it can be known as fuch) , buc»nly cogvi-turn lit pjfibile'i and cut ofihe infinite number of PoflTibles, It is but a finite num-bler that are \vill(?d to be future. :. Becaufe Futuruin is terminus diminucKs quoad cffc ■fculc) and therefore to will the Futurirlon of cur luftification, is not to Iiiftifie. f j^Ncxt is placed Gods Kno^nltdge puxe vifionii: which though one in it felf (as are his knowledge and will) yet muft needs be diftinguKlicd to our underflanding from the Uate of the objcds refpeding it; And therefore the knowledge of things future, as luchjis madethe next ad-This canoot make for your opinion-, both becaufe It is an ad of the IhtcUcd, and Itftlfication (as fcenis to me^ in your fenfe,is an ad of the will J and becaufe the objed of it is but fninrum y M\d doubtlefs to know that We fliall be luftificd, is inclufively roknowthat we arenot luftified.

Ihe next ad (the fourth , ) is the Will of God dc frttfentinrum exijlcn-tia pr'nmj which is cjjcHive firft , and is it which we call creation or the pro-dudion of any thiOgj and fo afcribe it to omnipotency , in that Gods very Will is omnipotent This is faidto be the fame ad with his firft will </e m-«w futit^ riiiofie , only denominatione cxtrinfeca. differenced to our apprehenfion (and fo we might as well fay of tht reft ) hi [uturum e5^ cxificns are not all one, fo wt denominate thefe ads as not all one. And the three former ads are eternal but this laft we denominate as being in tiirte. Irtiould conjcdure that this Is not it that you mean by luftification. i. Becaufe it is not ordinary :o mention this with any diftindion from the former j moft divines catling all immanent ads eternal, i. Bc« caufe this hath not for its objed a meer rjje f<7»;;;r/<w, but an c(le rcale j Gods Will being piodudive of its objed ; atid it being fii ft the cfFod, before it is properly the objed. This-t'lcrefore cannot be it that you here mean by luftification in this an. fwer. 3 And Indeed this concurs in time with thj exiftence of the thing willed, as Creat'o & Crcatur* are codim momcnto. The fifth ad of God is his jclmtta vifJms area ohicCium lam cXiJItvs, moft ftridly called his intunivc lifmv'Ctigc ; which though it be in fubflance the fame with )i\s fcicntia futurorum fand fo are all his Immanent adsj <jtx.zsfiituya&cxTfimtia6.\Sir, fo muft we extrinfically denominate thefe ads as different. By this God knoweth all things to be, that are, ('and by the like r,d, all things to be paft, that are paft.^ This I fuppofe is not the juftificarion you intend, both becaufe it Is an intellcdual ad, and becaufe it follows tht: cxiftencc of our jufti • fication. When the ad that you mention, hath only an rf/e fog<?»;/w for its objed. The fixch Ad of God in order is, \he ad of his will about objeds already cx-Iftcnt. Ihis dcnominntionc cxtrlnfeed. is differenced ncccfTirily from the former; and is Gods Complacency in thegoodnel's of his own Works, and his Difplaccncy atthe evil of fin. This ad ntakes not itsownobj«.das the former, though fome School Divines fay, otmeDci vcUc c(l cffi6livnm ^ but is that defcribed after the Creation, that God Rcflcd, &c. in other places where God is fald to be vod-fkafcd. Nowhere that Gods will may be faid to have on objed. i. Immediate or neerell; 2$ isthc Qpality of Holinefsinthc foul, whenGodeitherprodaccth it or loveth ic 1. Remote, ftjch is ihc foul jo vyhich God Is producing or implanting that Quality.

Fff ? As

•As for Gods cresting or caafin j accidents,! include it in the fourth afi,a$ well as bis ciufing fubftanccs. Now 1 fuppofc this lift Is not your meaning neither; for this followeth our firtt luftificatlon. What therefore you mean by that laftification whofe objed Js but (ffe Cognuum^ I do not know.

You f^e it is only imminent aiSs that arc about objcds as in cjje cegnho, and not all thofc nciihcr ; and this is no immanent aft. And for tranlicnt ads, a» you deny luftification to he fuch, fo 1 fuppofc ycu will afligo them an exiftent objcd, either m fieri ^ or in fa^i) c(fc. The ttuth is, lultification is Gods ad by his Law of Grace (as is oft faid^ wkich conteincth in it thefe feveral ads j i. The neertft to the efF.'^ is the moral Ad of the Law, as a Law or Deed of Gift. i. The conc:-mi-lant is the fourth ad before mentioned, asapplycd to this effcd. For though ic be called by fome an inmanent afi, becaufe it is Gods yiUe, yet by rnoft a tranfienc ad, in that it doth produce an tffcA ad extra. Kt\diodenomimtionee*twi{eta^vit fay that God, by the Law of Grace, as his Inftrument, doth yolendo produce out ludiScation at that time when it is produced. 3. To this may be added Gods willing that Law which is his Inftrument and his miking it; that is, his Le|;inirion: which yet is in time before its tff"'d, and efFedeth not til the condition be perfo mcd.

4- And Gods approbation or eftimative juftification immediately follows our being firflluftified.

Now to your example about imputation of fin to Chrift ; fee how you prove nothing, yea mar your caufe by It. i It is no Scripture phra[s,that fin was Imputed to Chrift : and though I admit In the fence as our Dinnes ordinarily ufe It^ yet that fenfe is not the fame in which the Scripture ufeth the word Imputation, z. I know he was made fin for us . but that was in time j even when he fuffcred ; for as you before fay. Cm is put for a facrifice for fin. I know alfo that he bore our ini. guities ; that is, the punilhment of them 3 but that was not before his incarnation.

3. I perceive it is Chrifts humane nature not yet txiftent, which you fay God imputed fin to. And then whatever you mean by Imputation, It is plain, you cannoc mean it> that Chrill was made really guilty in his humane narure ; Foi omnc acci-deme(ifybjc£li accidcns. Reatu* e(i Acctdens. Therefore Guilt could not cxiit in a fubjed not exiftent, nor yet without a fubjed. All therefore that you can reafonably mean is but this, That the fecond perfon in the TrinUy, m the Divine nature^ hdving f,om ctermty wiUed to be in time the Redeemer of the world i did partly from the (late of fain man^and partly by C ods promife^ from that time {and not before) (land related as one that was engaged to ajfume mans nature in the fulnefs of time, and in it to be a faoifce for the expiation of fin, upon the forcconf deration of which facrifice to be made^ God then made a Covmmt of Grace with manlinjdj'ardoning thrm for the fai^e of that future fat hfa{lion, as having .iwclTc morale by ycrtue of the under talkers Con/en t, and the Fathers Acceptance. This is the truth, and all that you can well mean. And in all this there is no guilt on the humane nature not yet cxifting, nor any thing like It; If any obligation is to be fuppjfed before the Incarnation, it is only on the Divine naturCj and not on the humane.

4. But let us make the b .ft of your Anfwer ^feeing it is your beft, ) and fuppofc you argued thus, if chrift might be Gu!'ty of, or punifh'd for pnnotyct exiftent, then fo may wc be )uftificd from a Guilt fwt exifling . But, &c Thtreforc^&c To which I rCply. As you muft dlftinguifh betvveetn the e^e cogmtum, and the cQ'e reale^ fo of theiacter you mutt diftinguifh between the efe naturale exiftem, and the cffe morale exiftens. 2. You muft diftlngulfli between proper guilt ev obligntionc Legis, &• ex me* rito fcccati, and improper Guilt ex obligatione fponfionis proprice, five dc merito. And

fo

C3"3

folfiy, i.Chrift was never properly and tiuly guilty. 2. Nor did God judge fcim fo to be. 5. Nor did the L.1W ever oblige him to punilhment. 4 I r was therefore ex ^a?;-fhie p7 opriiion\y thM Chriftwas i/bligtd to Itfler, even to fuftl-r what we had de-fervedi to free us ficra it. s Nor was it the lame pDiiifhii.cnt formally that we fhould 'h^vc(uS:redi'ufcnfu n.uuiall vcl/r,o:>Ui y but only the frme mattiially ('and that but in fomc part) , and the TaniunAem vcl t/£f//<:iWf«j moially. 6. T his being fo, it appears that it was not the "fame formal guilt which lay on Chr'ft, tl at lieth or Ihould havelayncn-nny oftheeKa ; much Ids on each man, as you feem to fuppofe. 7. If yoadeny all this, and would fuppolethat Chrift had taken upoi: him the very Demerit and Guilt of our fin,and not th;. puniihmenr only, yet conlider that his con-trad or confent to undertake it, might give it an rjje morale as to him and to that punilhment, and the mttr foreknowledge of it might fuffice to procue that confenc or voluntary undertaking v\hich jave it the moral being fo far. But it will rot follow that our fin can be puniihed or pardoned te our felves before It is in being ••becaufe we have given no fuch confcnt to make as gu.lty, as Chrlft gave In his undertaking: and without Guilt there can be no Remiffion j for Rcmljio c(l Rcatu* Kem'ijfio. i do therefore deny both the Antecedent and conftquercr of the forcmentifned argument.

Further note hcre,th3t you make our Guilt and luftification before we were to have no more reality then Chrifts guilt ('or the eff.d of that which you call imputation of out (in tohlmj had in his humane nature before It had a being : But that was none at all, properly and really.

. Note alfo that you make this Imputation to be but from the firft promifc, and ykt before you make It an Immanent ad, and to be before the world was made.

But the great anfwer that I five you is this: that your conUqucnce is not found 5 Though all you fay of Gods imputing fin to Chrift were true, yet its not true,that in like manner God did then impute Chrifts fatisfaftion to us, nor gave us anydif-charge from guilt. Itwas the will of the fatherand fon him felf that Chriii (hould then fuff.r for us j and it was their will that we (hould not be difcharged, nor lu|ll-fitd thereby till we were in Chrift by faith. And the efficacy of ChrTfts fatisfjftion can go no further then his own and his fathers will I fiall fay more to this argument anon.

§. 7.

out £C

ymii'i:: eb'.iquely rather touch k5, then Ikike us^ J rvlll b, IngfotKC of

L. C. C :4a. plu's Argumenti irawn out a icngth^hjf ivhkh he prove* that Riiih abne ^ Iitfiipes,though theydire^lymU'r.stc againfl the Pap-[is ; yet icciufe they rather touch k5, thc?i firiiic us, J vnili b< ir.gfotKe of tiem to exA>r.ination.

§ -7.

3,. B. TT fecmsyou feel the Arguments touch ycu;ih;-are brought agalnft the i Papifts.And though I (hould think tbatthe Antinomians and th^^y-are far enough afunder, even In the t«o txtreams, yet I contefs I wondered to find Dr. Baily (of whoai I made no doubt then but that he was a P3pift,as fince he hath dc:la» red himfelf.) In the conference between the-late King and the Marquels oi}i'orcc-{icr^ to declarehlmfelf In the point of Jufti/ication.in the pur? Antinomian.ftraln, accofd-ljag,to tbc very fcopc of this book of yours.

C3XO

§. 8,

L. C. ^g.

^'g.i. T^Hc prcmlfe or things promifcd cannot be received but by * faith alone: 7^ot.4.i6, Cal.^.ii. But Rcmiflion ot fin, Reconciliation, Juftification are the promifcs: Therefore juftification is by faith alone.

Anfw. That argument pie-jcs vothingbut that Godf promifcs are liwam to m by Faith J but Tfot that they are made by Faith. For thepromife U not made by Faith.

§.8.

S. B. ir\.^/«r f^yii/zw. It proves ( fuppofing the Divine conftitution ^ that

as offered.

the good promifcd ftrall not be ours de jure^ till we accept Chnfl:

S.9.

TN the fame manner as we obtain Remiffion of ilns^ arc we all

L. C. <y4rg. z.

Juftificd ; But only by faith in Chrift do wc obtain Remiffion of fins: He proves the minor : As we apprehend Chrift, fo do we obtain Remi!-fionoffins: But we apprehend Chrift the Mediator by faich alone." chereforc by faith alone do we obtain Remiffion of fins.

Anfw, The M.-jor of the fecond Syllogifm is denied : Tor tve do not obtain T^cmifsion ef fins in the fame manner m we apprehend Chri(l : For we do not obtain, but apprehend T{cmifsion of fins by faith.

$.9.

K.B. W7EE do accept Chrift as Lord and Saviour, which is the condition • of our aftual pardon. The word .Apirehend, is too much ufcd by Divines : Buc they mean not as you, an apprehending that we are already pardoned, but an accepting Chrift and pardon as an offered gift.

§. lo.

L. C. ^rf. 3 ."D Y that which Chrifts Righreouficfs is imputed to us only, by D that wc are juftificd : But by faith alone is Chrifts Rightcoui-ncfs imputed to us,Kow.3.2-2,18.

Anfw. In thefe places V2u\ fpcal^s of Gods Righteoufncfs, which by Faiths or by theDoCirincof ihe Gofpcl is revealed; Bin of thefe places above: Nar doth the Scripture any where fay^tUt C'hrifts Riglteoufnefs is imputed by F vrMthoiigh by an A-curologtp and Synccckcbe I would not de>iy,biu it may be faid'^^it CbriflsKivltt nfnefi is imputed to ta by faith: to mtyos by faith the Ho'.y Ghofi gives wt a tefu:ndny that cha^s

rightc-

rlghteoHfncfs kUngs to mc ; Toy m that jcnce, even Salvation m obtained by Taithj and we are eleSIed by Faith.

as and

§. lo.

R. B. r Have anfwcrcd all this oft enough. I ferioufly profcTs, as much *• I am for a toleration of diflcntcrs, if you ihouid live near mCj a preach this DoArinc, that you are favcdby Faith (much more by obedience) no further thenas a ti-ftimony to afllire you that you fliall be favedj and thac it had no whit of the nature of a means to theobtain'ng Salvation It felf: Or that wc are faved no more by faith then we arc cleftcd by Faith ( which you fccm to intimate ^ 1 would avoid you after a firft and fecund admonition, and I would take heed of trufling you, or expcft^ig much good fruits of this Do-ftrine in your life. But all the hope that 1 have of the Salvation of many in thcfc times that hold damnable errors, is this : I hope they receive them butfpecula* tivcly, and that the triuh lies nearer their haris, which is received pradically : and ip live contrary to their dcfparate opinions,

§.ir.

JL. C. Afg^ 4. r>Y what alone wc have accefs to the Father, by that alone arc 4-^ wc Juftificd ; But only by Faith in Chrift have wc ac-Ccfs CO the Fafhcr.

Anfw. That accefs to the Father k a [econd act of faith, which after Chri(i is revealed in us, is carried to God by Faith and Levc,

$. II.

K. B. npHc Text cited by Scharpiiis, is Rom. <).%, which faith that by Faith we were brought into this Grace ; (i. c. ftate of Gods favour) wherein we now ftand. In other places, by accefs to God, is meant alfo the LiberiyjFavorj and Privikdge of drawing near him, and is Reconciliation it felf. Your anfwer is nothing to the pu; pofc.

L. C. Aig. f. IDY that only are we Juftified, by which ^ibraham the Father of •D the faithtull was Juftified : But Abrah.im was Juftified by Faith aloni,

Anfw. Tl)c rind nfcr tors of Juftification by Faith (fay) thatthc words of the Apofllc here are w be interpreted Synecdochically,fo as that faith is tdl^enfo- the Gofpel, er for Chri(l himfe^' the objcff of our F^iith : butfecingthe wordy he bthcvcd, at Calvin witncfjethy ii not to be retrained to the bare aCtof believing, but to the whole Covenmt of Salvation and Grace of Adoption which Abraham did apprehend by

G g g fAlth,

Uubf Ifee net thai any thing CJn be dfavmffem thu place, but that free Aitptian was Abrahams true Righieoufitefs, th.it hchcVicrtd flwuid here me an he ^is a Cover nanccr or be was In Covenant i And Calvin on the place teachetbjhat wc do no other-wife obtain rlghtcoulncfs, then bccaufc we do by faith as It were fee the poffeffion of It i that u, we obtain Rmijfuin bj fanh, when by faith ive fee that our fm are remitted by God. Rivet dlalyf. p. io8. taknh faith for the objcUof faith i, and Apolo-let. p 57. The Apoftle fahh that we arc juftified by faith, or that faith Is• Imputed for righteoufnefs, bccaufc that Is the proper objeft of faith In the matter of luftlficatl-on, whereby we believe, that God having accepted Chrifts fatlsfaftion, doth g^lvc us rcmiffion of (in$,and Is reconciled to us.

K. B. "THIs is anfwered already, i. Moft Interpreters d6 take/<Ji/fe to mean Cfcr-i/2 no othcrwife then by Connotation, including and principally Intending Chrlft. i-No man more cxprtfly agalnft you then Ca/ww. I have before (hewed your abufe of him, and feeing you are not alhamcd to repeat It} I mufl needs tell you, that you are a moft partial unworthy handler of Auhors. Let the Reader ludge. In the Brft place, Calvin fpcaking agalnft them,thac to avoid luftlficition by faith* would expound that of Abraham only of a particular luftificationariOng from a particular ad of faith, believing one (ingle word of promife about Ifaac^ he faith) that ycrbumcrcdendlnon ad partlculare all^uod diSium re(lrlngi debety fed ad totum falutU fxdus & adoptlonU Gratlam, ^uim dicitur Abraham fide Mpprehendiffe > that Is, ob-jcftively J it ought not to be relbained to one faying of God, aslfit were butthat one that AhiAbam is commended for belfeving, but the whole Covenant. Now what doth this Diflcrtor but fay, that Calvin faith, the word Believed is not to be re-ftrained.ro the ba,e nCl of tciitving^ and fo puts out ad partlculare dllquod di^umj and puts in ad nudum i£lntn credendi. Did ever Calvin or any man elfe think that the ad -can be without an objed ? Can a man credere^ tamen nihil credere ?

In the next pbcc, Calvin exprefly fpeaks againft his doftrlrw, yet doth he I .Leave out the former fentence that fully rticws It. 1.Leave out the the middle words of the very fentence which he ciceth 3. And mifunderftand even thofe he citeth, or draw others to mifunderftand them. Calvins words next before are thefe, Hone pro-tnifftoncm & fidei Relatlonem necejarium eft ad flatucndam luflltiam inteSlgere ; quoni-em eadem cfihic Inter Deum & nos ntio, qua apud Jurlsconfultos inter Datorem & DO' .mtarlum ■ Then follow the words which he cites, Neque enim Jufiltiam aliter con", fcquimur^ nl(i quia ftcuti Evangclii piomi/Jtone nobu deftnur , ita ejnt poffefsionem fide quaficernimu». Where note, 1. He leaves o\xt Sicutl Evangelii promlfsione nobit dfcrtur, without which the reft cannot be undcrftood, this (pcaklag of theoffer^ and the reft of the Acceptance, i. Puts n:fi quia ejus poffefsionem fide quafi cermmus, as If Calvin by Cernimus meant the knowledge of a Poffeffion before obtained j and as ifthis Differtordid not know that Voffefslonem cernrre, Is to enter upon, or take;. poffeffion ? and the context exprefly (hews this to be calvim fcnfe.

Rivets words fptak of Chrlft connoted by faith, and principally intended by the Apoftle, but not as excluding the ad of faith . perhaps Rivet excludeth It from being any pan of the Ifi[litia impHtata ^ but be includcch Ic as a Con^th fmt

qiUnim, ofcbelmpucacton} and cliat is exprefled fnthe next words before, which th€ Differtor leaves out i Uctikhy Ntnmputantur autemaduMHoncredefitibuti fed (reientibm.

§ iJ

L. C Arg. 6, THey that are not luftificd but by faith In lefus Chrlft^ are luftified by faith alone. But none Is luftificd bur by faith In lefus Chrift, Gal. i. i6. Therefore i

Anfw. Nothing! s thence concludedy but that we are luftified either by faith, w the obiefl offaitby or as Chrifis Rigbteoufne/i ii made l^notpn to w.

§■ '^

R. B. TT is one thing to have Chrlfts Rlghteoufnefs made known to us, and •i- another thing to have our Imereft in It made known. I doubt not yoa mean the later; and then I rauft needs fay, that both thcfe Interpretations are agiinft To clear light of Scripture Evidence that it (hews your will faulty as well as your intelled : as I have fufiiciently manifefied, and more (hall do, Cod willing.

S. '4.

L. C. Arg. 7. TTHat which Chrift faith he requires alone on our parts to there-* ceJving of his benefits and oraee, that alone and always luftk fieth: lut he requireth faith only to receive thefe, M*r. y. ?6. Luk. 8.50. Afar.p.ao.' Anfw, chrift doth not reqnue faith that n>e may be Juftified, that is^ that Chrifis Kightcoufficfs may be imputed to U4 i but thu k may be l^nawn to ut that cbrifis Righte^ tufnefs belongeth to us ; for that which rece,vis Gods benefits ^ it not of our righteoujnefs.

5. 14.

R. B. 1. "p He anfwcr is an ctprefs contradiaion of the text: Rom'. 4- H> iXiH>*4«

And therefore it was imputed to him for Rightefufnefs ; Now it wM not written for hisfalfe only that it wax imputed to him } But for us alfo, to whom it (hiW be imputed if ivc believe en him thaf raifedup our L§rd lefus from the dead.

1. To your reafon I fay, Faith is the condition of our univerfal Righteoufnels by Chrift; and thereby it felf becomes a particular fubordinate Rlghtcoufiiefe, by which we muft ft and or fall in judgement.

Ggg a §• «5'

§ ij.

L, C. A,g. 8. "D Y what we are the fons of God, and have peace with him, by that ■Donly and always arc we Itrilifiedj But by faith only have wc thefc. Anfw .So far are vpefaid lo k the fons of God. by Janb^as faith dUlatuh that tvt ait hit fons.

^

§ J?-

B,. B IS It not in vain to urge fuch men with Scriptures ?May they not as well fay, that what Scripture fpcakcth of the woilds Creation, Chiifls death and RefurreQlon, was all meant only of our kno\Vlcdge of it, cr of an appearance to us ? Godfaithj Te are all the ferns of God by faith'i The Diflertor faith, Faith oiily tellctb you that you are hUfom before ', God faith. He gave thcmPoTver to becotne the fons of God^ even to as many as believe, &c. 1 he Diff-rtor faith, He onlf makes liHorvn that rps rvcrefons before. If this be not to profane Gods word, ind ufe the name of God againft God, I know what is.

Li C. A Gitalcr ObjeClion is brought from the Intercefsion o( Chr'ifi ; Forifchrifi ■^ dttily intercede^ then lajiification U not yet fiuiPjed, nor is done in one ail.

1 mftve/jChrifl deth inHcaven reprefent his performedfacrifiee^exfnted fms, * Ad Jus avd fvck'-th that believers be admitted to * aright of the Kjngdom, (but regni. fiot that they may be made heirs of the Kingdom, er believers) an/ji in the

mean time that the forte and merit ofChrifts death be aplycd to ut: For conti* nunUy are the Jatisfacli^n of Chnfl end his obedience, the price of Redemption fo before Co^s eyesythat God gives «« nothing but for the falie thereof j alfo Chrifl interccdeth to fX-cite in ut Groans that canot be uttered, Rom.8.i6. and to offer our prayers and thanhj-givihgsto God;rvhich he doth by ma\ing them grnic full and acceptable to him : Lafl'y, Chrifi ifitercedeth to that end, that they who by his fatitfaHion are righteous, may be con-ferxed in Grace.

/?. B, TT had been more policy to have fiknced this Cbjeftioh, theh to fiarC thus

ilhamedyour caufeby fuch ananfwcr. i.You fay Chrift feekethor petltionttfi

tfcat Believers be admitted <i<i/«< >rg«i i If you will hold to thefe words in the full

proper fenfe as here without limitation you fecm to cake them) all is deilroycd that you

have

have fald, and mate agreed. For If by Jw Regnl you me an/wj ad regnum, RJ^ht to the Kingdom^ yea or but Include this as part of your meaning, you yield a!l eke caufc 11 deiire no xtiQti-1 or to give IM ^d icgiium h the juftify ing a^, or at leaft cdn. comltaiit Infepara'.'ly. To luftifie is to give Ins ad iwfunitatcmtOX Juflum con[inuere, I. e. non reimfcet/c : and then to fentencc him accordingly, and then to ufc him accordingly. The firft is luftification by faith here, or our firftadual luftification. Funifliment Is of lofs and of pain; Pwita dmnf is owr lofs of Right to,and enjoyment fcf the K ingdom f fo far as Miffi fliould have had it on his obedience to the firft Law ) To remit our Pcen.i dtmni,xhcrefotc is to give us liu ad regitumjind Co this is a part of lufliiication: fo much as Chrift hath fuperadded to what Adam was capable of, is ftill givcH with the reft, and never before it j fo that it is paft doubt, that if Chrift do latcrcedc that we may have Jfiu rcgni , then he Intcrcedeth thit we may be luftifie^.

Rut if you have made this word but a cover for your deceitful erroneous fcnfe, and will fa>', that you mean rot ltd ad Rcgnum, hut Im in Rrg>;o, you will but plead againft Chrlfti intcrceflion,by which I hope he is pleading for you j And if you dare fay (as you fecmto drive at it here) that Chrift doth not intercede for your l^ijhtto the Kingdom, nor for your pardon or luftification, you will flicw how you advance Chrift and free Grace j and I hope elfewiicre more fully to manifeft your error. Btfidesjas the Kingdom confiftcth in Righteoufncfs, the giving of one is the giving of the other.

4. You fay Chrift feeketh mt thnt ticy be wide Heirs of the Kingdom. This Is another diflionourable derogation from Chrifts Intcrcctficn, and a falfehood, rob. bing himofthcGldi7 of his free Grace. You here donfefs that it is for Chrilts merits rcpvefentcd to the father, thathegiv^s us all things. All then that is given us aftttjor at our believing,mult be given fonhoft merits reprcfented, ana that rcprc*. fentatlon is Interceifijn, as you fay .* N nv I fln'l (hew you that we were not Heirs before we were born, or before wc believe-, Tl.ough itill I acknowledge that wc were dellinjted to reign before tlie world was nnde, and our Right purchafed into Chiidshandi to difpofe of to us in feafon ; and if this were enough to dinominace us heirs, then arc we heirs before j But this is not enough ; feeing an Heir is one that hith a natural or dona; Jve Right in diem, an aSuil right, though noc to the prefent fruition of the inheritance (and thou£,h forfeitable) But fo have wot Infidels : and Scripture doth ufe the word Heirs as appropriate to Btlieverx at Icaft ordinarily- Gal. 4. 7. J/ a Son, then an Heir, (hews that thcfe go together: BiitiiU by fyitJ)lhmivcha'vc power to bi come the Su^iofGod •" 3o^. 1. 11, There* fore, &c. Hcb. 11.7. I'iosh by faith, Sic. became bur of the Righicoiifncfs wijicb is by faith. Rom. 8. 17. ifch/ldicn, then h.'irs \ Therefore not heirs till ChdJien. Gal. ?. i6,''~9. Yc arc all the Children of God by faith in Chrift leftu. Andtf )ebe Chrifts , then are yc Abrahams feed, and heirs ncc^id hg to the p/omife, >'-.\l Heirs art.-ib.ahaf'^s [ncii, and Abr^.h.U/jis thw'Fat)ier of thi faithful, and not of Inhiicls. Tit. I . ^yi,7.Hc favcd ui by the Wifliing of Resiencration^and roiemng of the Holy Ghufi, Set. That being lujliftcd by ha G)ace, we (hou'd tfc imde HekSf according to the-/;/?•>? of Eternal Life, to a plain man this kzms undoubtedly to fpe.jk , rhat luftificition, andmalfiilgus Heir.<; art concomitant or confequent to Regeneration. y^n. z. 5, The tick in fakh are Heirs of the Kingdom. Heb, 1. '-4.'H'ho(haUbQ bcirs oi fxivation.

^i, Y6i» fay thit Ch-iftid»tli no' f«k that they may bi made believers: If you mean,

Ggg 3' he -

C 318]

he dot! not Intercede tliat thofc that arc believers already be made bcKcrerSj 1 know not to what purpofe you mention fuch a contradidlon But if you mean, as Is moft probable by yowr words, that Chrift doth not intercede for Ub before we be> iJeve,that we maybe midc bellcvcrSj then you taice faith to be no fruit of Chrifls Intercfflion : But then why (hould you think any other Grace, any more then faith, a fruit of it. If it beafruit of ChrlUs merits, It mull be a fruit of his Inteiccflion J for his intecceflion is the pleading for the fruits of his merits ) luc I hope vou will not fay Chrifts merits procured not our faith} nor yet that we believed before v*c were born, and therefore needed no Tnterccflion for collation of the benefit.

4. You yield that Chrift Intercedcth hat the force and mem tfbu death be applyed to ui. And by merit you muft mean, either the thing merited, and by applfed, be» ftowed : or elfe you muft mean the merit is fo far applyed, as that we ihall have the food merited. Now doubtlefs pardon of fin and Juftification is the fruit of Chrifts merit j therefore he inteicedeth that we onay have thefe f for that we had them before, is yet unproved.^

y. You (ij chiifl intercedeth to excite in us umnerablegroans. But i. May he not intercede for pardon too? 2. What muft we groan for according to your dodrine ? not pardon and luftification, for that we had already ; And for falvacion, if what wre do be but (igns of our falvation ^ then our Prayers can be no means ; 1 herefote Me may not ufe prayer as a means to falvation. And for fandification, If that be but a fign It felf, then the means to that iign is of the lefs ufe. So that when you} take down the matter of our prayer, then you tell us, Chrift Intercedes for tuiutterable {roans, that Is, groans for comfort.

Laftly,where you fay,Chrift offers our prayers, It muft not be any prayers for luftl-ficatlon, no nor pardon of daily Hn, but for the feeling of it; only for non>pu-filfhlng I remember you granted we may pray, not feeing how that contradlded the reft. The Turn of your anfwer I take to be a denyal that Chrift Incercedeth for our Remlftion or luftification, which perhaps I (hall fay more to prore eliie. where.

CHAP. VIII. The Teftimonies of Divines not of lowed note.

§. I.

L, C. 'THatourZitichyis for the fame way of delivering {thedo^ime of) lufiifi-cationbyfaithf 14 hence evident^ in that he atfo admittetb a certain fan^i' ^■(otion in the eleU before they are born : For on Ephefiins i. 5 He admits M double yivification 5 o«e, rvhich u once rvrougbt in our Head Jefta Chrift, and inournamei the other rvhich is continually done in this prefent life j the words are S Both muft be confidcred, fiift in Cbtift,then in us ; as to the firft,(3od quickenech us

in the perfon of Chrlft, when by the death of Chrlft our hn being expiated* he ficcd fiom the guile of internal death, and endowed with right of a Cclcftialand Eternal lite, all the elcd, as many as were from the Creation of the world, and will be to the end, as members of Chrift, confidcred in them their head.

S I.

^- ^' \S7 ^^^ '* ^'^^ rcafon of your citing thcfe Authors ? If to make us believe that the ordinary Orthodox Divines go your way, your Title page, and all our knowledge contradiftcth you. If to perfwadc us that at leaft, Zancbj^ Jljledius and Toffanus were of your mind, the contrary is undeniable, by the laigtr plainer paff:igcs of their writings. If to perfwadc us that they contradift thcmfelvcs, that is no great advantage to you ?

1. z.t»(;/;>fpeaks here in terms not convenient, and which I will notjuftifie^ bccaufc they agree not with Scripture,

z. Yet it is plain that Zanchy means not adual luftification, LiberacioHj Rcniiflion \ But that which ^mefms calls Virtual. Now though Scripture fpeak of no Virtual Juftification, yet if any man will ufc that word, and withall open his meaning, that he intendeth not adual juftification, butfucha luftification as is in Caujii only, thecfteft itfclf not yet exifting, I would noc much contend about the word , though fuch new ufe of words is dangerous.

3. That ZMcby meant no more, and was in judgement againft you, a hundred places in his writings fully prove. The next words to ihofe cited by you , are t'nefe : In aobii vcro ipfs nos Reapfe vivificaty hoc prima vtvifsationis genertj cum donxtes fide in Cbtijlum, donat itiam Rcmifsiofte Pcccarorum, & JuflitittChrifii imputationCi & ita Jujlificat. Tunc cmm Re ipfa libtramur Riatu mortis tttemte^ , & dommurjuYC vita aekjiii a;^. Divinte : dictnte chrifio, Joh, J.

O.i the fame Chapter vcr. 8. he is moietulland exprefs , in fo much that he faith, Faith receives Grace , and Grace in the adult cannot be without faith.

Soon t Joh. I, Loc. de Rcmifs. he handleth this yet more fully : And to the fourth Qucftion : To whom fins are remitted, he concludes that, ^anqttafn omnibus hominibus offhatur Rimifvo pcccamum, re vera tamcn fcccata non rcmittiy nifi E'e :iiy fidclibiis, noa aittcm Infidclibus : its qui fiint in EccUfta^ vion aulcm its qiu[Hnt extra ecclefiam. And to the fifth queftion. By what means fin is Remitted ? Having flicwcd well that all is given in Chrift, and none but with him, and that the Gofpel is the external Inftrumcnt of Donation ; and the fpirit the internal (as he calls it,) fo he makes mans heart the Inflrumentum in quo, and Hearing, and Believing the Infirumciit.x per qU(e, of our reception (Though I fuppofehe uleththcterm Inftiumcnt improperly, yet it fticws his judgenienc againft you fully. ) Yea he faith, fine fide Rectpi pcccatorum 7{emfsio nm potc^ : Though I will not dilTcnible, that he defcribes juftifying faith but too like you, in which more of thofe times were tor you, then are now. To the /jxrh'^e-ftlon. On what conditions Rcmillionof fins is offered and beftowed > hehath an excellent difcourfc ( which I would thofc would pcrufc that think I afcribc more then the reformed Divmes do to Works, or other Graces bcfides Faith ^

?her«^

Therein he llicWs that pardon is given on condition. T. Of true and conftant Rcptnt-Jncc, a. Of conf.flion. 3. Ot toigiving others. And he very well anlwers, ihc Objection, that if pardon have ail thcfc conditions, then it is not of freeGratr. 'MiJ attcr pazc ( mih;) J3. he faith. Fides impct/at Rcmifsicncm en.aik/K ^ ccatc urn-, and fai'.h that bciipiurc iffiinicih abfolutc,/(>//i^cw/>fa<i-tti urn Rf.»'j(iicm u im\>i a arc.

And in his Co^nppiaiufnTi'Colog. page 7$S vol.S . he Cx.ih,^it7ntalibct Sau. i-We fiHt FiiuDci : bite tamcn codttioncI'iiifcr funt^ quamdiu in ^lortali corpere habitant^ in fine Fcccatorurn R:ff>i{sione cm/ijiere mqueant coram Deo > and fticws chat fins are daily pardoned.

Nay he is lo far from thinking that all our Rghtcoufncfs was received at Chrifti death, that he affirnnth tliat out Woiks themfelvcs arc imputed for Righteourntfs,the finfulncl's being pardoned.i//ii.Loc.««rfffiwo de Ji^fiific.p 793,

Ai:d Loco iioiio dc pcenitent. page 7 ^4. Tota vita noflia ftmper laUniin & < fcnius RcmifsiQUcptccdtooim. Remijsio auum Fcccaionimnsjiconuniiinifi pixn'ncnuhus; Ergo , fempcr paniientia nobis epus efl fi rcm'ifiionem pccccaiorum ajfequi

Vitiff.US.

And in his Chriftian Rdlg. Fid. which he commends as thcwoikof hi? experienced age, cap. 17. Thijf.6. he profcflah to believe, thac<r^/» Chrillo'/i* lyiveha%cT{cdcmpUoni RemifsiBnj&c. fo only the clecf, endowed with true rcpen-tfiitcc and faith, and ^rajfcd into thrift as members to the head, are par talkers of iti though YCV.ifsion be dec'arcAor offered to all: And Thcjf. i. He (hews what it is to Remit fin, and addeth, Et ms cum in oratione petimits remitti nobis debim iiofira, non folum pctir/iusnos a cidpa abfolvi y Et iniqititatem nobii non imputari, '■jerum etiaMpccnun & condcnmationem,nobii propter iniquitatem debit am,condonariy tali<jj nos rcatu ac dcbito liberari. But I have been too long on Zanchy, and therefore will be briefer with the reft.

S. 1.

L. C. A Lflcdius in the fupplcment added to the cad o/Chamiers rvorl^s, p. 204, . X\ t^'hen Bellarmine impugned the San^ity of the Doctrine of Protcflants, ^nd pyroducedthatDo6lrmc as the greatt^ParadoXi to wit, that I am luftificdby faith, and yet that Juftifying faith is to Believe that I am ptji, rrhich, faith Bd-Jarminc, « aiainft yeafon. Alftcdius among other things afjfwcreth , that Chri3 toidthe Eleft tiie li{e one per fun ^and thcrefoye that the Elett are Originally Jiifiificd in Chnft before Gody and at hfi by faith are Juflificdy feeing Faith is the Injlritmcm by Tvhicb the rigjiteeufnefs of Christ is received.

§.1.

i^. 23. XLTicdiiis plainly {hcwcth you that by \\.\ii\?^c^t\on Originaliter y he

. 4^ mcaneih not adual luftification, but taketh that Origin.ilitcr, as ter-

rinuidiminuetiSyiito aftual luflification: which is as much aj to fay, that the 0-

rito vil CMfa Juftificationis jm exisiit: As when we fay, ^'e were eternally

Jupfied

C3»3

Juflified in Gods Decyee : the meaning is, }Ve were ctemaUy Decreed to be Juflifhd, chacis, wewere not juftified, or elfe we could not be predeftinated CO it.

i. I confefs others have fpoken too miftakingly of Chrift and we being one pcrfon in his obedience andfuffcrings, as if he had been our inftrument or Delegate j which is the very foundation of the Antinomian frame, and Alflcdiui ^eaks too like them, and in language not fit, but fulJy (hews he is not of their mind in many places.

3. And that he is not of yours, that and many other places fully (how. As for example, Diflind. Thcolog. caf. 25. 5, 37. Fides eft p/ior JujUfi-cmone non tempore fed mtura. : £^ enim C^ufa Juftijicationis orgamca : So in his Vefinit, Theol. de Rcmifs. & Juftific. & Tafs'tm. Yet I confefs hcfpeaksy de Juftificaiione ante temporay which is but Gods Decree to lufti-fie us.

$.3.

t,, C. 'TOjJanus Eplft. ad Vorfimm : You confound luftification with the *, Application : For all the Elcd are juftified in Chrift, if you rc-fped his merit, before they were born ) and fo before we believe, we are lufti-fied and Redeemed in Chrift.

S. 5.

7^. B. I" Have not this of Toj5^««5 by mc, and therefore cannot examine this 1. Allegation, nor is it any great matter. For I. I am fure he ordinarily fpcaks for juftification by faith, i. It is no wonder to have Divines let fall inconvenient expreflions> and

ftriftly irreconcilable j fpecially about juftification by faith.

3. Nor is it any wonder if this Oiflcrtor pervert and abufe the Authors he

allcdgeth.

But for thefe words, as cited, they are but an improper ufe of the word,

Juhification, For it is here a diminutive term, ns to adual luftification. To be

juftified qmad meritum, is to have Chrift merit our juftification j as to be

yxQiAtA quoaddecrttuvii is to have God decree tojuftifieus: But merit being a

Moral caufe, may go long before the efted.

Hhli S.4.

L. C

C3"3

$. 4.

. 'T'Wifs u (xprcfSi and mth him Maccovuis, fty'-ng almojl tlte fame thlnp as he: For r/'W Maccovious, difp. S.dc Jultjfic. God cadowcth none but the Juftificd ^\ith his lioly Spirit and wirh faith : For imlcis God had foaccepted Ui in Chrift, and for Cbriftheen propiiioiis to usj he would not at all have given us t'fteftual Grace, by wh.chwc ihould believe m Chrift : chcrefoiE alTo before faith God was reconciled to us j Foj" he {^ivcs us not faith, unlcis he be firft icconcJcd and propitious- What is ipokcn gives light to thefc and. other Phra'.cs: A mail is not juftiiied but by faith in jcfus Chrift. We believe in Chrift that we may be luftificd, Gal.z. »^. that \vc may be luftified by iaith, Cal. 3. Z4, For the fence of thcfe Phrafes is, by that thing which faith apprehcndcth, that is, his fatisfadicxn for fins, aiid Jiisnicxir, Wi aie4uili£ed before God i that is, wc know and feel by faith that we ate righteous before God, who hath forgiven us our fins, ani given us right ot eternal life, for tl>e bloody fatisfaftion of Chrift, and his imputed rig'.ueoufnefs i and by much the jHorc faith incrcalcth, by fo much che more dothchc feeling of juftjficatLon, or laigcr fruitariiCj^flW. 1. 17.

Tow will eb]cfi. Scripture oft tauheth that vaejirc Jufiificd hy Fakha therefti^ •we vpcre not Jufiificd bcforCy but arc then Jufiifiei whai wf are endowed with fr.Uh.

i A-rriwer/Jww Twife : 4hat' vigblcaufiufs of Cha(l v>as pcrf&r^ned /•*• m beftiC eur faith, but was not in fnlfjjionours as to fence and the l{norvkdge of fo great a benefit : For this l^notvUdgc arifctb and proccekcth through faith.

Idem difp. 10. A man is J unified before he haze faith; andvfhcnhe is faid to be Jufiificd by faiih, icad by faith to receive remijjion of finsy and Mhcritance among the SanQiJiedy it is nothing elfe but to l^mrp that he *s Jufiifitd.

K. B. W^E well know that ^accovhu ifcnd Dr. Twifs were of the Antino-mian tJaithin tlris poiiu,aiid chficcfore wc arenoc fo immodcftas W Jjo about io contraiiia you in that, or perfwadethe world of tiic conaarjr ; xhc £UBC aiifwas that fatishc yaui arguiugs, do fatisfie theirs.

As for this great Argument of MACCuviiis , I koow kis alfo Dr. Tvpiffcs Ivlaftcr argument, That God would not have given us faith, unlcfs we were Hrft Pardoned, luftified and Reconciled. And might not the good men havcfeen cafily,. that it will as well follow. God would nor have given his fon lefus Chrift-to d -e for the world, unlcfs they had been firft Patdoncd, luftified and Reconciled* And thus Chrift n:uft dic,pqly.to make them know that they were Pardoned ariSf luftificd, ( which he might "have told them as well from the Pulpic as from the Crofs, ) and not to Merit it, or to faitisfic for their fins. And thus Socini-anifui, ifnotlnfidclitya is the natural ifluc of Aminomianifm. And all this is,

bccaufc.

becaufe men wljl not hold to Scripture, but fei up their vain rcafonings againft it, yea when they have received a falfc Model or Platform of Thcologie in their brains, and then will ftretch all Scriptures to fpeak their fence, ar.d feivc their turns.

S. f.

L. C. ipEmblc, an Englijhman , a man exceeding 7{cverendj and cmf^knaM •*• inDo^tmCi ^ of the fame opinio?), in hi^worfiof Jiiftificationj page 1x4, The Eleft not yet converted arc aftually luftificd , and freed from the guilt of fin, by the death of Chrift, and fo God rcputeth and taketh themasdifcharged, and having accepted of fatisfa^tion, isadually reconciled to thcra.

% B, ¥ Belicre there is no fuch thing mTemble of luftification at all: But 1. in his book called Vindic, Gratite, he hath fuch a thing, though not at that page (with me) But its known Mv.Temblc was young when he delivered this, (dying about thirty,) and his Treatife of luftification came from a througher confidcration ot that point, and in that he wholly lays by (and fcems to reclaim) his former conceit. For here he induftrioufly proves that luftification is oppofite to Acculation and Condemnation, and defineth it, fi^g- *?• cap, z. ^ Gracious aCi of God whereby he abfilves a believing fmner accufedat the Tribunal»[ hU Jn^icey pronouncing him jufi, and acquitting him of all pmfh-ment for Chrijls falie. ( Though indeed he is conftituted juft for Chrifts fake, before he is fo pionounccd.) And he maintains it, that The condition required in fuch asJhaUbe partaker ofthuGrace offufiipcationiis true faith,vphere unto God hdih ordinarily annexed this great Triviledge j that by faith, and faith only a fmner JhaU be J unified, pag. 1*. ^nAihAx. the tenor of the Covenant of Grace is. Believe in the Lord fe'ui, and thou jhalt befaved; the condition of thit Covenant is faith ; the performance v^hercof diffhs from the performance of the condition of the other Covenant. Dothisand ViveyisacompaflofpHreJuflicc, whcreintvages is givenbyDebty &c. Believe this and live, « aCompaElof freehand pureft Mercy, wherein the reward of eternal life is given hs in favour for ( mark for) that which bears nat the leafi proportion of worth with it, fo that he which performs the condition, cannot yet demand the wages a* due unto him in fevtrity ofJufUce,but only by the Grace of a freer promife,thc fulfilling of which he may humbly (he for.This is true and found Doftrinc. paf. 13. and pag. 14. But in that other proportion (a man is Jufiifiedby faith ) wemuft underjtandali things T^elatively^ thus-. Ajinncr is Juftificd in the fight i^ Godfrtm all fmandpunijhmcnt, by Faith, that is, by the obedience of Jefm Chrijl believed on, a7id embraced by a true faith ; Which a6l of the Juftificatimof a fmner. Although it be properly the only work ofGod,fa-r the only mtrit ofChrOlyyct is it rightly afcribidtofaith,a-4d it alonCy Fofafinuchas faith is that main condition of that

H h h 1 New

Mew Covcntkm yYvhieh as wc mitfl perform if we will be Ju^ifiedyfo by the performawt thccofwc aref.nd to obtain J unification and Life. Tor when God by Grace hath enabled M to pcifuim the conditionofb*:ltezif'e,thcn wc do begin to enjoy the benefit of the covenant : bo he adds as the iccond rcal'on : i. Faith and no other Grace dircCily re§f<Sls, the piomifs of the Gofpel, accepting what God offers^&c. By this you may fee both that luftificacjonisa confcquent ot faith, and in what fence faith luftifics, i.e^ I. Diicrtly and formally, as the condition of the Covenant performed. i.Morc remotely, as the rcalonof its Aptitude to that Office, Its accepting Relative nature, that is, that it bring the receiving of a free gift, was fitted to be the condition of our right to Chrill who is given as a free gift. This lafl ('even the nature of faith as faith ) is it that is commonly called the inftrumcntality of it in lufti-fying, which is but the fccondary, and not the ncareft rcafon why we arc lufti-licd by it: and foTfwfr/f pag. 57. Faith Jufiifies us only as a condition rttjmed of us ; and one Inurnment embracing Chrips Righteoufnep ; that is, an inftrumcnc improperly fo called, not an eftcicnt Inftrumcntal caufc.

So that you fee Pembles more digcfted thoughts did rcjcft your opinion which

he firft eniatained.

5 ^.

I.. C. /^ Eorge Walker, one of the late delegates from the City o/"London to the ■ vjr ^§embly^ a rigid diftndor of the Pi^shytciun itifcipline, andamofi. Jharp contender for Cuds righnoufnefs againft John Goodwin the Arminian, in bit, Catechifmts express.

<^'^fi. How arc the Eleft luftified, and their fins forgiven > R. They are JuTt fed and their fins forgiven by faith ^ not at it is en Inftrumcntal cM^iandameans by which they arc conftitutcdrighteous before Ged;but Oi faith is the hand of the foid, receiving and applying to thcmfclves Chrifts rigbteoufnefsjthAt thtnci-, they may perceive and feci that thty arc Righteous.

J^elt. Can any man be juftificd before he aAually believe > R. If we take Ju(iification m the proper and moftprincipal fente, tu it is the tifl of God alone communicating the rightcoufnefs^ andfaiisfaCtion ef Chrift with the eleily thenit mult be (onfe^ed that man is Juftificd before he per form atiy a^ of believing : M is evident in Infants ^and thnfe that are not yet called: or by the example of a Noble mans fon^ who though he have full right to the I'ojjefsionjyet ^nowtth not yet his own goods.

But if we take Juflification in a fcsondary fence, for the a£l whereby the Elefl do mingle wor^s "with God , receiving and applying to thcmfelves the free gift ofrightcouf-nefsi and poffcfsing itj then a£lual believing goeth before J unification as an Infirumen-tall caufe^ by which God Juflifits them in feeling and internal perception : But if we take Juflification in a Judiciary and forenftck fnce, for Declaration, and proof, md pronunciation , then not only aclual faith , but 7(epentance , and all works of Piety, mufigo before af^fguvtents and Teftitttotties convincing of the. T^emijfioft sf^ fins.

Cl»53

X, 5. j" Will not feck to take from you the advantage of Mr. Jf'all^rs tcfiimo-ny:But as I cannot fpcak in cxcufc ot itjfo 1 wi]] fay but this ag^iiift it; It is his miftake,as it is yoursjand without proof. And for his inftance ot a Noble mans Son that haih full right to the Polkffion,! fayjit is dcflruftivc to Rtligion, and contrary to the very Scope of Gods word, to affirm that Infidels tied have full right to the poffcflion j Yea,or any proper tiuc right: Though I eafily grant that they are prcdcftinated to the right and the Pofltflion, and that Chrift hath a light by Redemption, to give thcin a right in feafon, r.nd fo the price is. paid already. And 1 again fjy, that even of conftituting us juft before God, and judging us juftfententially, faith is the means and antecedent, that is, the condition: And how far obedience hath a hand, efpccially in that lafl, which Mr. ?lW('C(-mencioncth, I have llicwed clfcwhcre.

And thus 1 have perufed your Teftimonies, wherein I find, fome of our. Divines firft mentioned, y^u deal fcarce fairly with, and the reft arc but chrec or four that were known to be of your fide,as different from the reft. And I con-fcfs fome great Divines fpeak miftakingly and inconveniently on thefe points. If. I ihould fay, that the Doftiine of Chrjfts latisfaftion, and of Juftification, hath been yet fcarce clearly delivered by all or moft, the differences and con-trovcrfies amongour fdvcs would too evidently prove it. And though I have nomijidto ccedic your bad caufe, nor yet to difcredit any learned Divines: Yet I nnift confefs, that belidcs Twiyi, M.ucovim, Tcmblc, (acfirft^ and Mr. Wall^cr, who are downright for you, 1 could tell you of more great names that unadvifcdly fay, Juftification is before Faith,on this poor ground, that the Aft, muft needs prcfuppofe the Objcft : So Tolanm in E^cl^, AnA^o Cbamierh\m~. felf. Sam. ^arefins CoUcgJoc. II. §.58. ,

Who yet in other * places contradict this * This comes through a mfapprehenft' and thcmfelves. As if it were Juftification on ufihe nature efiuflificatioUyCifici of that were the ol>jcd of Juftifying faith •• Jupfying failh. Tit they are far when indeed it is Chrift himfelf, whom from thi'/iliing that wc arc J unified we receive, that we may be juftificd. Or in time before faith, tnuchUfs before-if you will call Juftification the Objetft, it ..wc arc born.

is not Juftification in being, but as orfered. Tempore vix prior eft, cimi

that by acceptance it may exift : As if a paruminterftitiipofTit concipi, &c. PrinccofFer topardon aTraytor, it is not Tantum abeft ut adiva noftra an aftual pardon, but a conditional, that luftificatio Natalcs noftro prcce-it may become aftual, which he acccpteth: dat , ut nonnulli fomniant aur Though a written pardon be called a Vocationt noftia prior fit, &c. pardon, as a written Prayer is called a inquit j^/^^ryr/^. Ibid. pag.z^T^ Prayer, yet it doth not formally-aft 01;

pardon, till we believe, being but before a conditional grant, which will be aftual upon the performance of the condition. And fo, I doubt not, God hath pardoned all, in the tenor of the New Covenant, when yet it is not all that are aAually forgiven. Qbjeaumfidiijunificamisefi Omfius qui pcfcficptejlfervare

H.hh 3 erams

omrci pfYipfum dctedcutn (fd Dcuwy atcj. adco Dtuspcr ipfum pyopitlus: RcniJJto f rcaioiiim & [elm ipfo a- h t.tba applicata, non e(l Oqctlum fida, (cdeffe{ius Cati' f.qtuvi. And:. hncniuss UlIui!. Grcti\ lib. i. $ J. cap. 3. p.'g.34i.

Cocciiu'5 and Cleppmbiog'u:^ give you coo much countenance, by ihcu milappic-hcnfloni ot the Doctrine of chc Covenant. I'or my own part, 1 am as willing wc flwulil layby the words of men ( though the unanimous vote of the Churcn of

Ctii.fttlll * i/Zt^»wdai.s, isnotcontcmp-'/f/o turned rrund, f-eni n Papifl tible,)as you arcjSt to remit all that advan-to a LidliCian, andii'dicc to m ^in- rage ihat we have againft you in this kind, tifiGKi.iT?, and ihitiit (m Ihcy jjid, fo be it wc may try the caufc by the plain fffr a B(hopiici;j to the interimy and word of God. And 1 much rcjoycc in his jo to a Fat>ifl ^ga'm, and then Ic was mercy,that hath made thelc things lo plain in ftacu quo ; And this is the firft in hik word : Were many other contro-Antivo/nian thnt aver I read of; His verted points, but necr fo plainly deliver-follormrs may fame of them dance the cd as this, I fhould not doubt but the lad famt round', if the Jcfiutcs can but comcntions of the Churches would have lead them en by the vofe as they have been lels about them, and they would have begun, been as unanimous in them as ihey are in

this; I am confident, at Icaft, that my own Intclleft would be much more quieted then it is: For, I blefs God, in thele matters it is not a little fatisfied. And truly, I think, ("and its fad to confider ) iJiat it may be faid of many Scriptures that fpeak of luftiHcation, as 1 have read, notonlyt;^/a/i&nzi/,but fome ProteftantExpofitors faying of fome Controverted Texts: This Text had been plain, if none had expounded it: And as I have heard many a one fay of their health; / had been a found man in lil(^e!yb$od, if it bad not been for Vbyfitians t the curing of a difeafe which J bad but in conceit, hath brought m me many, which novo I have indeed. I think verily, that thofc Godly Chriftians that have by Pradical Divinity been brought to faving Grace, and never heard much of thcfccontrovcifics about the place of faith, compared with Repentance and Obedience in matter of Remiflion, luftification and Salvation, but what the bare words of Scripture do exprefs, haveufually founder apprehcnfions of the bufinefs then they that have read controverfies of it, and thereby have perverted their undcrftandings by adhering to parties, and making ufeof<?//fK^ unlcriptural Notions. And 1 think the prefent difturbed, divided, cxafperated Churches, may fay as the Emperor Hadrian when he was dying .* Turba mcdi' corum meperdidit; ft pace Do£lerum ita dicam, & femptr Salv.i honore ^iini-(irali.

FINIS.

(

^

l^he T^refact^.

Think it not inconvenient to give tliee fome advertifement ofthe occafion ofihis n^riting. Having met with^Sermon oiH^S^WocSridgt Paftor of Nervhury, forjuftification by tahh, and againft thejuftificacion of Infidels,! law fo much worth in a narrow room, which caufed me toblefsG6d that his ebmch: had fucha and efpctialty Nnvhurj who had fp

man.

excellenriy^earned a Paftor before, who tad ^-«rfjiiftaken fo much in this very Point; and witf{5ftl in the Epiftlc of a ^*^^imail Book that I firice prfftted/o commend it

i

to others : M"^ $jre of Salifiury was offended it fecms at this; and in an Anfvj^er to M^ Wooclr-hridge,nt^\y publi(hed,wkh an Epiftle ot M"" Owvwj prefixed, he was pleafed to fpeak of me,what thou haft here aufwered.

In his Epiftle againtt me,he tellech us of one M*^ Crar.Acn ofHawfh pj'ire that £ hath now in the Prefs « large and iuU Anfwer to my Paradoxical! Aphorifmej.] The Charadcr that M'^ ijrf gives of this man is, That he is [[^ a faithful! fervant of the Lord Jefi:s,\=;^ workman '-that needs not to be afhamed,3 This is good news if »t be true : fio^QF then he will not write fo many things thatdelcr\e (hame,'*asareia this book of M'" Sjrc^s. But by his wifli that oiher.'-[^ol more ftrength and far greater helps J may by him be prcTvokcd to fhame, I aai afraid what the fruit of his Weaknefs mc.y prove. I confefe I have fceavd neer this twelvemoneth, that this man i.ath been ''about this work. The laft I heard, informed me, that \_ he is againft theMora-hty'of the Sabboth in Dodrinc and Prit^ice noconoufly, and one tfi«fcxalls it Legall preaching to Conj^e^ men of finneand mifery. and fUppofed to be of M"^ fjrfV Judgment for the juAificationoi Unberevers; and that he having communicated it to M^ Mjre, wa.n ^

A 2

0

/

gone with him to London, to print a large Anfwer not only to my AphorifmeSjbut PafTages in my other Books; His book ^^i)out a hundred (heets, andfome fix Shillings price, having more leaves then Arguments, but moft liberally pouring forth the Titles of Papift, Jefuite,c^f. which is both the Logick and the Rhetorick of it. Alfo ihat he had written to the Eniinentelt MniilUrs in feverall Counties, whom he took to be molt difaffeded to my Aphorifmes, to dcfirc them for themfelves and friends to take off his Books, which way is much by fome dillafted. I can fay nothing of him of my own knowledge, nor of his Book till I fee it. But if thefe two men be Brethren in a party, and M^ Ityre fo much the more efteemed, as I hear ; the Reader then may fee what to exped by this. I have purpofely ha-fted the Reply to this, that Vl"^ Crandon may before hif Book come forth, confider better of fome things wherein he (hall findc his Brother overfhot himfelf, and corred what may tend to his hurt: for I would prevent his llnne. And I do hereby inform thee. Reader, that as foon as ever M"^ Crandoft's Book doth come to my hands, feeing the fcope of it is to revile me as a Papift, I purpofe to print a plain Confeflion of my Faith, and fpecially how much I afcribe to Works, and how farre I am from Arminianifme alfo, which thefe Brethren do accufe me of, and I fhall do it in as little room as I can; and then fhall leave it to thy choice, whether thou wilt bcftow fix Pence to underftand my true Belief and Profe/lion, or fix Shillings and fix weeks reading ( at leaft ) to have thy ears charmed with the delicious notes of Papift,Jefuit,Arminian,Socinian, and what not of thatkinde > If I finde the Book worth the anfwering, I know not but I may attempt it at large if ever I have time ( which is not like,) But if it be according to my information of it, I (hall not trouble my felf or thee. It is my lot to be troubled by two forts of men, commonly called Anabaptifts and Antinomians, becaufe I was called by God to Vindicate his truth againft them. There came but lately to my hands two of one fort, and the report of a third that are written againft me, yi'^ Fiffjer, Vi^ Hugger, dLXxdW Keje-^ but when I found them fraught witti-non-fenfe,and reviling, I laid them by, and never mean to meddle with them more. M"^ Ejre and Mf Crandon take the next turn : what one hath done I have feen : what the other will do, I know not but by report. But for my own part, I confefs I had a hundred times rather encounter with this party then the former : Becaufe I do not apprehend neer fo much danger in the opinion of Re-baptizing, or not Baptizing Infants, as in the other, I confefs this

alfo

alfo bath been ftrangely followed with fpirltual Judgements: But I fuppofe the main caufc is, becaufcitopcneth the door to Separations, Contendings, and fo Contempt of the Miniitry that arc againlt it: but it is hard to fee in the nature of the meer Opinions fuch hai-nous evils as we h^ve feen attend it. But for the other, in my Judgment they do as dangeroufly fubvert the very tcnour of the Gofpel as well as the Law (and much more) as any Seft that I have known, that hath fuch men to countenance it. I confefs alfo that I do apprehend fome more duty lie on us now to re/ift that way, then hath been ever heretofore : For it was formerly a very rare thing to meet with a man of Learning or confiderable Judgement, of that way: What men had D'Tay/or to deal with? D^ Crijp, Eaton, Town, were the chiefeft Champions fince, whom W Bnrgep, WCeree, M^ Bedford have confuted. At laft Den, Paul Hob/on, M^ Saltmurjh took the Chair : The later ftrangely cryed up by many ignorant "fouls, and his weaknefs laid open by that Excellent, Learned, Reverend M"^ 6V/?/^fr. But now Libcrtinifm grows into better Rcputati-on. It makes a greater noife in City and Countrey ; yea and men of forfie name for Learning, are the Patrons of no fmall portion of it. Lately came forth a Latme DiiTertation of LMdiom^ns Colvtnus^ alias, Lfidovicus 'sjifo/inatu Afed.Do(^or and Hiftory Profcffour in Oxford, written againft his own Brother Cjrut Moli/i£u^ a Minifter. I anfwered it, before I knew the Authour -, and had no fooner fiui-(hed it, but I received this of M"" Ejres. I profefs the defirc oi my foul is fo great for the Unit)' of Bretfiren and the Churches Peace, that I could heartily wifti both contendings and dividing Titles as much as may be laid afide : And therefore for thofe Reverend Brethren that hold but the more tolerable part of Antinoraianifm, I would not have them called by that name. But for the reft, to be tender of the credit of fuch pernicious errours, and to indulge them by favourable titles, is plainly to betray the Gofpel, and mens fouls.

For my part, if Iftiouldnot preach againft the opinion of the Libertines, I could not preach agamft prophaneneffe : When I look back on the Sermons which I preached m.any years ago, meerly to work mens hearts to Chrift, never thinking of the Libertine Con-troverfies, I finde they were the very fame things that I am fain to preach now againft thefeDifputers. I was feign to prove to them' their natural mifery, and that before believiag they were children of wrath, and all their fins were unpardoned, with the neceftity of

A 3 Faith^

Faith, Repentance and Confeilion, for pardon: and the neceflity of faithfull Endeavours for the attaining of Salvation; together with ihc neceflity of Renewing Repentance, and begging pardon through the bloud of Chrift, when we fall. Lay by all thefe and fuch like which the Libertines difputeagainlV, awdwhat have we al-molt to preach to thofe that will not have Cnrift to Reign over them? Truly I tindeas farre as I can difcern, that moll of the prophanc people in every Parifh where yet I have liv'd, are Antinomians; They are born and bred fuch j and it is the very natural Religion of men, that have but the advantage to believe traditionally in Chrift : I mean, their corrupt nature carneth them without any teaching to make this uf? of Chritt and the Gofpel. And almoft all the (uccefTc of my Labours which hath fo much comforted me, hath been in bringing men from natural Antinomianifin or L^bertinifm, to true Repentance and faving Faith in Chiift, And therefore (hould I now tide with them, I mulT unfay what I have been long faying tVora the plain word of God, to the ungodly that I have preached to. BlefTcd be God that the Church hath fuch writings for plain men to reade, as Hookers, BoltoMS, Perkins, Dbds, Rogers, fVhatelej/', HilderJ}}ai^s, ^c. which are written in a founder ihain : -Yea that we'have fuch writings as j'i^^f/, Preftons, Bajnes, Sic.to (heivthem, that Con-fciences may be Pacified without Antinomianifm. ■' <

I am no Prophet; but I confefle I am fo confident that the pre-valency of this Sed will be but of fliort continuance, that I do not much fear them For though nature be ready enough to befriend it, yet two difadvantagcs they runne upon, that will infallibly daOi them all in pieces, as foon as the ftorm of Temptation is allayed. Firft, They contradid the experiences of the fouls of Believers j and the very nature of the New-man is againft them : The greateft pare of the Spirits work on the Soul is againft Libertinifm and the reft againft Popery and Pelagianifm ; fuppofing the prerequifitc foundation laid. And furcly the workings of the Spirit arc unrcfiitable, and fhall bear down thefe natural conceits before ic. The conteft between the Gofpel and Libertinifm in the (^hurch, is like the Conteft between the Spirit and the flefh within us, and goes much on the fame terms: and Chrift will be Conquerour and bring forth J'jdge-ment unto Vi(^ory,in both. Sound-hearted Chriftians, chat be not only tif kled with Sermons, but fandified by the Spirit, will not long be drawn from fuch apparent Truths, and fweet and needFuU Dmies,, by fcix bare names of Free-grace: nor will they deny Free-grace,

and

L

iiidche glory of Chriftslntercefiioa and Kingdom, upon an empty pretence of magnifying his death j. when chat very magnifying is but i diftionour. A found-hearted Chriftian I am perfwaded hach feme-hing within him that potently ftrives againit Libertinifm and Pela-'ianifm. For example, In prayer, Let a Libertine tell him, [[Your nns were all pardoned before you were born, and therefore you mnft not pray for pardon, but for the Feeling of pardon 5 J He hach a fpiric of prayer within, andafecret impuUe to bewail his finnes, und make out to God for Remiffion, that will not let him obey thofe delufions. So if a Pelagian (hould fay [The Power is in thy own Will to pteafeGod,and Love and fear him.] The new nature of a Chrittian doth contradid this, and is inclining him ftill to beg grace of God, which is a real confeffion of his own infufficiency. Yea though this Chriftian fhould be tainted with either of thefe Deluli-on$ I am perfwaded even while fpeculativcly he holdeth them and talks for them, yet other principles lie deeper in his heart, and are fecretly working him a contrary way, even co pray for pardon, contrary to the Libertine, and for prevailing Grace, concrary co the Pelagian. ^i''' ' i'/i"r-'^<'.'- •

Another Rock the Libertines run againft that will fliortly dafh them all to pieces: and that is [] the clear light of exprefs Scripture.] So plainly hath God been pleafed to reveal his minde in thefe cafes, that though a few may (hut their eyes by prejudice, moft will fee: and if they are blindfolded a while, it is not like to be long. If all Difputers fail us, as long as plain honeft Chriftians have but recobrfc to the Word of God, it will convince them atlaft, and (hew them the Error. For example, in this very Difcourfe ( by one of the rationaleft men of that way thatl have met with ) what plain Itght doth(hine in his face! what palpable abufe is he forced toe fter to the Scriptures ? So that I dare truft a Reader of any competent judf^ement and honefty, that is noc deeply foreftalled, to confiite him by the bare reading and obfervacion of the Text. As for in-'ftancc. That to be juihried by faith, is to be juftificd by Chrill, without faith. So f^T.^z he expounds Gal.2.16. [jTh^t we might he jn~ Jltfied bj the faith of Chrift~\ i.e. That it might be maniteft that we were juftified betore vyehad faidi in Chrilt. But that's common: fag.^l- That texti?ow.i>;30. which modcxadly and purpofely ex-pre(reth the order of Gods works, \jvhom he called them he jtifiified^ is put off but thus, i'. The order ot words in Scripture do not ihew the order and dependance of things, err. 2. TheApoftle's fcopc

here

here is not to fhew in what or^er chcfc benefits are beftowecf, ^e. 3. I fee no inconvenience ac all,in faying that the Apolile here fpeaks of Juftification as declared and terminated in confcience,which fomc Learned men ( M"^ On>en and M"" Kendall) do make the fcrmale of Juftification. But more groffely, pxg. 44. he expounds Rom.j,.!^. ^Rifrhteoufnefs (JmU oe imfuted to tis if we heleeve.~\ i. He faith, '' [_ The particle [_tj ] is not conditional, but declarative, defcribing " him to whom rhe benffit belongs.] Yet one would think that it might hence be gathered atlealt, that This benefit belongs not to Infidels: But to avoid that too, this is his Paraphrafe, " [^cf.d.Httt'. " by we may know and be aflured that Chrifts righteoulnefs is im-" puted to us,^^^.] The Apoftle faith [_It Jhallbe impnted, if we h-leevc.~\ Mf Eyre faith [^We know by this that it was imputed before.] To put the time part for the time prefent, and a Declarative for a Conditional, is the way of fueh bold Interpreters, as make their own faith. But tcnder-confcienc't Chriftians will not long fuffer you fo to make their faith, though you may your own.

Bcfides fuch Expofitions, the Book contains Conclufions fo contrary I. To plainreafon : 2. To known Truths in Divinity : 3.To the new nature or inclination of Beleevcrs: 4. To his own profef-fions ; that though itching ears may be pleafed by it, and for the bait of [[the name of Free Grace] it maybe fwallowed down, yet when Judgement, Affedion and Pradice fhoulddigeftic, the humble foul will vomit it up again. 1 will give you but a brief touch of his dealing in the four refpeds mentioned.

1. Againft common reafon and ufe, he affirms that Q If it have any condition, it is not free] and takes M"" walkers patronage, f.gi . and applauds and repeats M"" ATf;/^*?//grofs Difcourfe, which would give much more of the honour and thanks to the Beleevcr, then the Giver, and repeats his ^(f//2» example, \_Codblefs her father and mother, rvho taught her to reade.~\ Yea this grofs conceit is the very foul of his Difcourfe J by which it may appear how bruitiflilyit is animated. Butlhaveproved tohim, thatathingmay befreethatis conditional. Donatio, Ahfolttta, Pttra, and Gvatuita be not all one, or ^ equipollent terms.

2. And contrary to all found Divinity, fag.ii4f. he affirms that [] Chrifts death vjsis folutio ejufdem, becauleChrift was held in the fame obligation that we were under : (7<r/.4>3,4. he wm made under the Law ; not another, but the very fame.] Either he means here Qhe fame obligation to duty] or Qthc fame obligation to puni(h-

ment.J

menr.^ If the former, whtt & pzo^i is here that Cbriih fuflabg i« folHtio ejufdem ? When the Law obligetk a man to duty, can you thence prove that it obligeth him to puni(hment ? then Adam before his fall, and Chrift as an innocent creature, and the Angels ijs heaven are obliged to punifhmcnt. But its like he means the later : And then i. It is moft unfound and dangerous dodrine, to fay no more: Chrifts obligation was ^o»fi6fiis preprint, the obligation of Contrad or Confent, and as a creature of the fpeciai command of his Father thereto : Oar obligation is violate Legi^. Obligation to punishment is guilt; our guilt was Rcatm cHlp<&& p^en^, fropur cul-pam, ex chHgatiinc legk: Chrifts gailt is but Reatw p£fi£ propter eul- ' pamnofimm, ex 'volsint.irU fufcepticnc. Chriil was ohligattft adeaft" dewpamm (the fame in value) but not, e.i4atn obligations. 2. And bow doth 6al.^. 3,4. prove it ? Who can think that it means, Chrift was made under the curfe of the Law ? He was indeed made a curfc for us by undergoing the penalty; but aotfaid to be made under the curfe, nor under the Law as curfing, but as obliging^to duty: though its granted that it was part of his humiliation to undertake that usk ofccremonious duty.

§0^4^.191. he faith, ** QLet them confider whether it be more ct-'* fie for a man that is dead in finne, to believe in Chrift, to love **God,^<r. then it was for Ad^tm in his innocency, &c. toabftain " from the fruit of one tree, when he had a thoufand befides as gooi '* as that: there can be no condition imagined more facile and fea-" fable then-«4W4w/was.3 This is againft them that fay, Evangelical conditions are eafier then Legal works. Where he fcems plainly co think, that it was net perfed obedience internal or external that was the condition of Life to Adam, but only the not eating of that tree, asd fo he makes it the eafieft thing imaginable. Do you not fee how admirably he exalteth the Gofpel above the Law, and Chrifts eafie yoak and burden, and his commands that are not grievous, above that which Adam was under ? Is it not admirable to fee that thefe men muft needs have the new Covenant to have no condition, left it be not free, and thofc muft be cried down as enemies fto free Grace,and Legal Preachers, that teach the necellity of faith and repentance to remiflion of finnes, when yet the more rigorous Law of nature, ^Do thu and Live, the condition of e^<(iMW, is Ae moft eafie imaginable? And what thoughts hath he of Adapts fin, If ye fee not the Apoftacy from God to the creature, unbelief, and many hainous fins were in it, as well as eating of that Tree ?

B S.Again^

3- Againft all found Divinity, and the tery fcnfe of a gracious foul, he hach naany do(ftrines which the godly will be ready to tremble at. As fng. 111. *'QThat the Elect Corinthjans had no more " Right to falvation afrer their Believing tlven they had before.] You, fee in this mans judgement what we preath for, and what is the ftate of a natural man, yea of the verieft Rebel, Whoremor.ger, Murderer, thatisHleift : he may have more Knowledge of his happinefs after, but he hath no more right to falvation then before. Why fay our Divines then that futh are not in a ftate of falvation ?

So/J.^^. 103. he faith, "QThoi.ghmen will notiraputc or charge

" fin upon themfelves when there is not a Law to convince them of

" it, yet it follows not but God did impure fin to men before there

" was any Law promi]lged,or before the fin was actually committed.

" For what is Gods hatmg of a perfon hue his imputing of fm, or his'

" will to punifh him for his fin? J Thirs Gods pretention or non-

cledion, called hatred, is confounded with his hatred of Juftice and

aAual difpieafure : and God is made to impute fin to the innocent

who have no fin, yea to them that are not: Wh'en as Imputation

of fin is but either the eftimation and judging of a finner to be a fin-

ner, or the adjudication of punifhmcnt for (hat fin, or the execur

tion of that punifiiment: ail whicli follow the ad of fin; and fo

he makes Gods ad: ot Imputation to be both untrue and unjult; but

that indeed he gives the name of Imputatiorn to the eternal Decree,

to which God i.ever gave it.

So;>/:^.Oi. he faith, concerning all that Chrift died for, tliough yet Infidels and Wicked, that "[[Divine Jiiftice cannot charge up-" on them any of their fins, nor infiid upon tliem the Icafl of thole *' puniftiments which their fins deferve; but contrarily he beholds " them as perfons perfedly righteous, and accordingly deals with " them as fuch who have no fin at all in his fight.] What humble foul would not tremble to fay this of hirafelf now regenerate ; much moreoftheuTircgenerate? Mufl God beunjutt if heinfhd On us the ki^ji fy.nifhment for fin ? And yet Scripture fay fo oft that God puniftieth his people, in exprefs words ? If it be p^na propter culpam it is puni{hmem : and is none of your pain, lofTes, crofTes, fuch? 1$ not the fmalnefs of your knowledge, love,(^c. and the remnant of fin, as fuffcred upon you, a puniihment ? nor death, nor the bodies remaining in the grave? Are not chaitifcraents a j^ff;V/ of punifli-" ment ? Is not a man punifiied when he is hangM for a fin ? yea and that by God as well as man ? What man dare fay, QLord, if thou

hadft

hadft laidthcleaft punifliment on my bodyjbeforc Convcrfion, even in the height of my fin, thou hadft been unjuft ? yea or if yet thou doit..]] Was there no punilhmentin the dominion of fin, and the want of the fenfe of Gods favour, which they make to be the contrary to Remiflion and Juftification ? The Lord deliver poor fouls from fuch Dodrines as thefe ! Yea fo far as they have grace, fo far they ire delivered. And I hope M' Ejre fpcaks againft his own heart, by the condud: of his fancy , and the inftigation of his contentious pailion.

4, Is it not againft his own pretence, that he faich, in his Epiftle to the parliament, "[[Though God doth effe<ftually move and per-" fwade mens hearts^yet he doth nor Nercliitate them to believe and " embrace the truth.] Would you think and readc tliis that the man were fo zealous againit the Arminians, when I,who am called Papift and Arminian, do think, that God doth faeffedually move men to believe, as thereby to necefiitate them? Though ftill hedothcaufc us to do it iiheye, though mcejjfiyio, and fo necellitate us, as that the ad is ftill contingent in Jt felf, as from our will.

So ^^^f.i 17. he hath thefe words, " Q Idare fay, a more unfonnd *' Aflertwn cannot be picked out of the Papifts or Arminians, then " this is, that faich ( taking it as he doth, in a proper (enfe ) hath the *' fame place in tlie Covenant of G'ace, as works have in the Cove-" nant of WorksJ Where mark, that M"" fVcod^ridie fpeaks only of the flace oi faith, and not of the worth, nac'.ire, dignity, nor full ufe, as if it properly or fully Iiad the fame ofticc as works', bur the fame order in the Covenant. And then ft'c i. Whether this man doth not make Papifts oi chc gencn-ality of the Protelbnt Ciiurches, and Writers? 2. Or make the Papiftsasfoundas thcProteftants. 3. Of what credit this mans word is, that uftiers it in with fuch confidence,. []I dare fay it,]) and v^hether the reafon why he dares fay that and lo many more fuch things, may not be becaufe he thinks all's" pardoned already, even before he bcleeved. 4. He pretendeth M^ Venthle to be of his Judgement j yet fee whether he make not M"^ Pemble to hold as unlound dodrmc, as any can be picked out of the Writings of Papifts or Arminians ? I may well bear his heavy charge, when M''Pfw^/f-muft bear it, who faies, Treat, of J'^/;/. pag,23. [] There are two Covenants that Qod hath made ^ith man. By one of ^'hich, And l?j no ether means in the WorJd, falvation is to be obtained, The one is the Covenant of f-Vor^s, the tenottr ^'hereof is []Do this and thou flialt live, &c.~] The other i^ the Covenant of Graec, thetemur

B 2 "^here^

^Jnreofu [Bclccve in the Lord Jefos, and thou (halt be Uvedy^e.^ The condititn ofthU Covenant is Faith.~] And fo goes on to (bew that the performance and nature of Faith and Works differ; but here gives them the fame place of a condition in the Covenant. And fag. 22. he faith, [_The condition re^uiredin fuch as Jhall he partakers of this orace ofj-hfiificaticn is trne faith, Vcherefiftto Gedhath ordinarily annexed this great pri viledge. That hj faith and faith onlj ajinner f;all be juflifcd.~]

So pag.2c6. he enfnares himfclf in an objeftion, which he cannot anfwer, as.I doubt not but NU pvoodbridge will fully fhew him, when he hath fifted what is the adequate objed of that l^fenfuf intelleciM and amplextu voluntatis which M"" Eyre acknowledgeth. But I muft ask pardon of M"^ fVoodbridge for thus anticipating his work. Reader, do but ftudy God and thy own heart, and keep a tender confcience, and an upright life, and ^ little knowledge more may prcferve thee from being a Libertine.

One thing I forgot, which I now adde. To intreat M^ Ejre and his partakers, to tell me, upon their grounds. Whether God do accept of the Works as well as the Perfon of an Eled Infidel ? If .'they fay. No: How then are they in Chrift, and Godperfedly pleafed with them ? and all the finfulneffe of thofe works forgiven > Doth not God accept ofthat work in which there is no fin imputed ? but all'pardoned ? HOthing but the finfulnefTe can hinder his Acceptance ofit ? And where then is their vain diftindion (that God is pleafed with the perfon and not the work ) by which they anfwer us when we tell them truly, that without faith it is impojfible to fleafc God i Hcb.ii.6

^v

THE

§■?,.

Aiore about our p^rfon^ll RighteoHjnefs. Mj Judgment About Jtijiift' c.ilioM hj our perfonaf/ Righteonfuefs opened in 12. Cunelufions.

M^ JE^ Arguments againfi perjon.ili Righteoufnejs in fufiificatiort rfw-fivered: Paul excludes not all U'^ri^f: nor aU that Debt which is bj free Cuift ofpromife. JVhat 'fitftificAtion bj iFurkj ?^n\jpeaks againfi.

JVhether Protejhntx ackno'tvledging an Evringellcall inherent Righ' tC6ufnefs,do not CO nomine acknon>/edge that Wf are Jftftijiedbj it at far ad do?

Ad^ ^. gives up hin Caufe, confeffing that it is Chrifi and not We that are thefubjefis of f unification before We are born:No addition to Chrifis Righteoufnefs to be fujiified bj faith or perfonall Righteoufnefs iafubor-dination to it. Jmperfeci faith tnaj be the Condition of the pardon of its own ImperfBions. How faith is fallen for the obje^, in the matter of fu -Jkfcatiofj.

§.6.

JVhether I include fVorks in IF ait h f

§•7.

AH Conditions are not Aforall Caufes^no nor anj qua Coyiditions.. Ai^ E. denjing Chrifis death to be the Canfe of Gods fufiifjing,makfs it as much a line qua non as ever I did,and much more. He is defired to expedite, How Chrifis death can be the Aferitorious Caufe rei vplitct Without Cauftng the aftuni volencis ? All the effefls o/EleAing Love are fjotgiven,by,through a!sdfor Chrifi, viz. as the Meritorious Caufe.

§.8. Af^ E^ uncharitable Cenfure of M^ J. Woodbridge. How our Divines deny Dijpofitions and preparations to JufiijicatioK,

§9-His urging the invinciblenejfe of Ad^ O^^^sAnfwer,about RecQucili-at ion being an Immediate ejfcU of Chrifis death.

§■ lo. His citation of At Strong. Proved againfi him ( which piay ferve t6 the like of Ai^ Owen) that it is not of neceffitj that a Condition be quoad even Cum unknown to the prumifer ; and th<n God hath Condition a II Promifes and Threats though the Condition be firekKown at to the event.

§.ll. Al!^ ^yres proved a notorious fianderer, in fajihg, ihut ihc-Tapifis afcribe no more meritoufnefs to Workj then I do,~\ by the tefiwway t/fStcl-larnFiine,Aquinas,4»flfyl/'Perkins, as a tafi tiiilcometo A4.^ Crandon. AdanygroJJe p^Jfages ofhi^'Bookjire alfo opened ifiibe T^reface.

§.i.

CO

§. I.

Rcjtrend Brother,

Lately received a Book ot" your writing (whereof I hatl before' intclli{;cncc hvthc weekly News bnok) entitle !. ['^ufitj/cauoii without (^ovdittns, or The free ^iiJiificMtovofa Jt'tncr'] a^ainft M' Woodbridgc, M'' Qrivford an^ my Iclf, as Al!ei tors oi Conditional ^:'{}iJication. Ycm- fcope is to prove the Jnilihcatioii ot Infi>1c!s, or of the E:c6l before Faitii, an.i b.tore tley arc men, it 1 I'ndciftai^.d you. McihlnltSj there appears in youc lints, much move Piety, Candor and Jiidgcm;nt,-then I am won: to meet vvith'in menof your Way } tiiou^h with mixed cifcovtvies of tco.nmchdefcft, cfp.cjaliy inthetwolaft. Foe my own pirt, 1 blcfs God, I have at lart Ictr-ed to !cie a'nd honour aChriitian as a Chriltian ; and therefore al! ihai are Chrirtians J though they have rlrat withaUthat is oilplealing to Cliriil, and rnuft be ic to tne. This Deb: I confcfs I owe you J Chiill in yiu is ncverihclcfs Chrift, bccaufe of your' frailties ; and though he delay much of the awe of your diltempcrs, I ho}"£ he will induetime accomplifli i: j and when ihe remnants of your dukricfs are removed, vou will fee that tru:h which now you fee no:. 1 ouL;ht not to defpifc ycu fcr thefc infirmitieSj when I am daily groaning under them my klf; and am in ihc hands of the fame Phyfuion j and am fo confcirus ot a nectflltyof his tender handling. If Chiilt would no: take me with all my faultS; and diftin^uidi betwixt his own and mine, between me and my fiws, an.^ put up mi.iy a thoulat^.d provocations, 1 were lolh And ou^h: I not to honou.- Chiilt in you, and fee his amiab'encfs through the clouds of luch humane frailties, whiLJi ycu as wt'l as your llnfuU Biethren, are yet liable to ? Yet as Chril'i loves mvlins never the more (that is, hares them ncTerthelifs) for all his incompichcniible love to ii5e, no more will he allow me to love >ours. And as I muft not thir.k well of them, fo neither muft Ifpeakwcll of them. If I Ihould not millake tha: for your fin which is none, I fuppole I fhall have your free confentto acquaint you with it: And if I miftake not tbofe for your Errours which are none, I fuppofe you will confent thatl warnall thofe that reade your 13ook, to take heed of them and rejcft them. For I fuppofe you are Virtually contrary to thofe Opinions which you AAuallyhoKl and maintain, and thofe Pradiles which A<5tua!ly you venture to tommir. I take ij therefore for my duty, as to maniftll your Errcuis with a. hatred to them, becaufc they arc againlt Chriit i fo with Chiiliian charity to your felf, bccaufcyou intended well, and arc Virtually for Chrill, even when you do

mcfl

moft a§«inft him. Foe I pefccive you haye a zeid for Ghrift, ckough k leeus co me,a©taccordingte knowledge: And though fomc of your opinions, I much feifjiredcftrmfliYe of Fiiniamcn'.al$,and would no: ftand with faUation, if they were fully reduced to prafttcc, yet Iperceirc great rcafon of hopes in the reft of yoiK Writings, and by that good which I have heard of you, that you hold tbcra but'fpcculativcly, and that in the main you Live contrary to the natarai tcnaency of your opinions. I remember therefore that I am wri;ing to a Brother that I muft live within Evcrlafting Glory, where we (hall be both otoneminde, when wcwc pctfeded in Knowledge : I remember that I am Writing againft fuch fins as ace

JardonodiathebleodofChrift; and as will be very fiioitly renounced by your fcif, and a^ainft which you will b« incomparably more zealous thenT can now bcj •nd will fpcak more difgracefullyof them then now Imuftdo. If in the mean lime ycu are confident in the dirk, and angry with ihofe that would do you ^ood, yea and abufe them who walk not according to your conceits} it i:i no wonder> conGdering what man is, even the beft of the Saints while they ii/c in the fie(h : Being my ielf liable to the fame diftemperii I crave your pardon, if I fhallany way injure you in thefe foUowing lines.

The fabftancc of your Book I perceive isagainft "i^V iVioibridge i tA'Cunfori and I are brought in but on the by, but fo as that you deal with him bur in'the beginning, and with me almoft throughout. I (hall not anticipate M^ ffctdbridg/t, and therefore intend not the anfwering of your Book, but ce give you a brief acctunt of my thoughts, of fo much of it as concerns my fclf.

Your firft onfet is in your third Epiftle. My title is lA UUing man in tbefe times:'] when I hare neither worldly advantages, nor emincncy of Abilities, nor yci opportunities, to be much Leadin( to any but my own charge. I live I believe as retiredly as you, doiftred up in obfcnrity, daily exercifed with the chaftifemonta of my Lord, and waiting for my change, and minding little to be the Leader of any, furtherthcn tohelp thcmto heaven to the atmoft of my power. And for leiklingof men into any Parties, from the Unhyof Chriftians, my foal ic poircf-fed with as deep a deteflition of it, as of moft fins that the world is guilty of. And I think no man did ever yet come to you, and fay, that I once laboured with him to brine him to any private opinion of my own: My Writings contain all my fault of that kinde, tliat I know of. And for them, I dcfire you and all men to tmderflaad me, not as pereaiptorily afirming every thing that I fpeak in difficult Controverfies, to be infallible Verities, but only as giving you my own opinion of it, and leaving you and all Readers to accept or rejed it, according to the eri-dcnce. If what i I'peak, have evidence of Truth, yoti cannot darken it by what you fay agaiaft my perfon : If it have none, my perfon bath no advantage, to make my opinion taking with the world.

The matter which you urft charge me with is, my commendation of M. iVtU-bridgci Book in the Bpiflle to my DireHiion: for Somfort. And your felf arc plea-fed to give M. }Vooibrii^e your free commendations for the CQiiaeocy of hit natural and acquired parts, even to be as Ssul above his Brethren : and that you ktm to . confine his worth to thefe, as if in fpiricuals the matter were othcrwii'e, will make hiscaufe never the worfe before his Judge, You adde tl»at " [It is not to be won-«dred at that M. B. hath given this fuperlative eRcomium to M. fP'oodbrid^g'i Ser-** mon i he knew well enough that it would rebound upon himfrlfj },I.IV. being a *' foa of his own faith, and this notion of his, but a fpatk from out ofM. 34xt<r'a '^ forge.] Rc/l. i. Thus do bad caHfes hang together, and the fcotencss of the

OblWiout

Oblivious dcftroy each other. My great imperfcdioni are corfihionly Itriown * M' }V. you coafefj to be as Siulahosc his Brethren ; What likelihooal then of hi* receiving thcfe things,from me? i. If you fpeak of thecaule in hand, do y«u ferioully think that I am the firft that hath (aid, that [_lvfidcli ire jwtjuflificd'] oc that [_(he ElcB are not juftifcdtiUthey have faith.'] Think you that Mr.^-necdto come to fuch a one as 1, to learn that which the Church hath held ever lindc it was called Chriitian ? J. Truly I never faw M.t.fVoatiifrtdget nor did there ever a meflagc or word in writing pafs between ui J nay ( living here obfcureiy out of thcobfervation of things remote) I had never to my knowledge heard of him, till I (aw his Book. But when I did fee, expede Herculem, 1 law luchdifcovcries in ic of a ciear underftandingj which caufed me to blel's fiod for fuch a man, and in fpecial that you hid-drawn him out into the world j nor am I forry much for this your Anlwer to him, as no: doubting but ic will draw forth yet more of Gods precious gifts, which he is fumlHifd with for his Church : I alio much rejoyce^i in that providence of God which had made bim fucceHbrat Hervbrny to Dr.rw/j|/f, giving that people a man fo found, and fo able to inform tbem better, in that one point, wherein the Debtor did fo miftakc. And indeed Sir, I lliould take it foe agrcat privilcdgc, were 1 ncai him, to be the Auditor and Scholar of fo Judicious a man j and I doubt nor you will finde, that he is well able to manitift youc miftakes to the world. And I confefs I honour him yet more then I did, iincc you tell me in this Book (which I knew not before) that Mr. Tir^er wa« his Grandfather} the name of that man for his Labours and Patience (and efpecially that excellent Trc3tile^cPc/ccn/«J being very precious tome. 4. And for youc intimation of my feli-locking in commending his Book ; you knew it is ouc Mafters prerogative to be the Searcher of hearts. Do not you know that an honell: man may value thole moft that are of his ownminde ? NaynjM/J do^caterisparibuii forelfc hecannat value a man for the fake of Gods Truth : For did wa not w^tf it to be truth, we could not be of that mindc our felvcs. Doth not this raife youc eitiraation of the Learned commendcr of yoar Book, and of others whom you oft quote ? Would you have envied the praifes of Mr. tV. or his Labours, if he had been of your opinion ? Do as you would be done by : Would vou have been offended if I had as much commended you and yours ?

You addc " [I fuppofe Mr. Baxter's prail'esor difpraifes are not greatly regar-''^dcdby fober-minided Chriftiaos, who have obferved how highly he magnifies " ^.Qoodvtin with others of his notion, and how flightingly he mentions Dt.Twijfe " and al\ our Prorcftant Divines that differ from hun.]

Rcpl. I confefs in refped of ability of judging of mens Learning, and the worth of fupcrlative Divines above my reach, my praife is fmall addition to any mans honour: But whether my conlcience be fo fraall that fober-mindcd Chrifti-ansncithiry^ow/in«r/:/o regard my words, mull be determined by my Judge, to whofeblcfledand more equitable fentencc 1 am approaching. And lo farrc as I am guilty of Error or partiality, I beg his pardon ( for its according to my Judgc-mcntfotodo.) For the hi'j,h magnifying of ^».Coo</»'/» which you mention, I dchre the lime and the words may be conlidered i and then I think he that would then envy him fach a commendation, is more partial then I anij though I were as contrary to him as you. I thought it had been only unmannerly language to my Brethrenthat I had been blamed for : but it feeins i^s prailing tliem too, if it be againft the intereil of the advcrfe party. Have you ever heard me praile him for any evil ? If you have, fpeak it ouc; If not, give mc leave to love a ChriUian as

C »Cbri»

M

1 Chriftianj and a mans Parts and Labours Co farrc ks they dcfcrve, and to ben6ar fo much of Chrilt as I fee in any. But how plainly da you ftill confute your fclf ? You inri.Tiaie that my commending men is bccaofe I am of the lame mindc : an4 yet you know or ihould do, that I do in that Tcry place profefs my own Jtjdgemcnt JO be contrary to that of Mr. Goodwin anJthercft ihcrcnamedj and that I only reprehend men for their bitterncfs and contempt ef them. Now Sir, if your con-fciencc will warrant you in fuch dealing as this, to lay I commend men as oj my totim, { if you mean mine) even when I purpolely exprefs my opinion to be a-gainli tfaemjand write againll theirs, it is not of the fame complexion asmincis,a$ bad as I am.

And ai little truth is thtrt in your words of my flighting Dr. TvpijS, yea and all cur Protellant Divines '. Which be the words Sir that are guilty of that charge ? F«r Dr. Tvfif I have honoured few men living more formerly j and much honour bis Name and Labours ftill j though I rcjoyce that I am got out of the Uiare of one or two of his miftakcs. You are no Papift 1 hope 5 and therefore do not think a man flighted that is not taken to be infallible, or perfed. But of this I have faid enough to Mx.V^cndill, Thercft of your Accufauonj (as to all Pro-tcftant Divines that difltr from me) is either a breach of the ninth Commandment, or elfc my Tongue or Pen hath feme where Ipekcn quite contrary to my heart.

I marvcll at your next fpecches, that " [Mr. W. throughout ail his Sermon, " never fo much as hintedjhow or m what fenl'e we arc juitified by faith.] When-as he doth it as folidly ( in my weak judgement) as ever I read in any Divine ? Nay when your felfbcftow Tome labour to confuic him : Doth he not tell you it juftifies us by the way of a condition, though Naturally Adive, yet morally as it were Pafiive, qualifying us for Godsjfrec Juftification by his Covenant ? To thig purpofe, but mere largelyjl well remember he ipcaks. How then durll you (ay.and publilh to the world, that he never hinted how or in what Icnfc wc arc jultilicd by faith ? Sure Brother, this is not well done.

Next you fay of me, that '' [ His advice to all Chriflians to buy one ofthcfc <* Sermons, argues rather his conceit of himfclf, then lis charity to them.] T-epl Both thcfe fins, fflf-conccitcdnels and want of charicy, are latent in the heart, and by the Searcher of hearts it is that Imuilbe tried, whofe high prerogative, my opinion is, you Ihould not ufurp. Truly brother, I have as much reafonto value Truth, io far as I know it, as you or othtr men ; and as little rea-fon as many to be byalled in my fccking it. I dare fay, 1 dearly love it, and that thefearching for it doihcoft me fomcwhat ? If 1 know ir cot, it is not bccaufe I would not know it if I could. It is my hourly itudied,and daily prayers, and if I kn<:w any other lawfull poflible way to attain it, how gladly would I ufe it,though it were to the lols of all 1 have in the world, or though the Truth were contrary 10 my former opinions, or tboua;h it would lubjed: me re ihc hatred of my deardt friends! He that knows my heart, knows that I fpc;<k my heart, if I know it my fclf. Nor do 1 take this for any high commcndar)\ ws > ror mans intellcft (as furtkifmve voluntary) doth Will Truth as its proper natural objctt. I mean, it woulu know things as they are (where carnal 'nicicil arul enmity caufeth not the perverting of the foul herein.) Ai.d Idoiioc findeinmy fltjhthc leaft oppofition to your opinion.

Where you addc yourreafon ''[That he dares take upon liim the Office of a

" Uuiverfal Di<^a[or 10 prefcribt n«3C only to bis J^edcrminj{eriafii, but to all private

- • ' " Chriilians

'f Chiiftians whatBooki they {hall reade,] Re//, If by Iprcfmhing] you mean [ccmmaQdiiir,] all men know that I am no Commandci-j and therefore my commands were more likely to be derided then obeyed. If you mean [advifing] Why ■lay I aot dare to do that ? 1$ that the work of a Di<flator ? If I may advife in ochcr points of diuy, I know not why I may not do the like in this- Ihavcadvi-fed CO the reading of other Books (asttar, I thiokj againft your opinion ) Btlton, Ferliitts,Hfoktr,'Freji9«,Scc. yet none crer charged me with [daring to picfcribc asaDiftacor.] However you know my word w^ill not rake much, and therefore you need net be fo much oflended. And tor all the diftindions which you are pleafed to take as He'fring-bones, I doubt not but to mean Chriftians, that Book may be profitable : and that may prove happy food to others, which you call Foifon.

Youadde " [ As for the title of Antinomianifm which he beftows upon our *' dodrine, it is no great Hamler out of Mr. Sixtfr's mouth, with whom an An-'^ tinomian and an Antipapilt aic terminicOTivcrtibikt.'^

Repl. I. To begin with your lail becaufe it is the reafon of the former: It ''$ written, Thiujhalt not bite thy brother in thy bcirt,butjhalt in Avy mfs rebulic thy neigh-k9ur sndnotfufer fittttpenbimjLtv. 19.17* I perceive by your words that you are Paftor of a Gathered Church (asitscall'd) were I one of your ncer commmuni-on, I lliould openly defire fatisfadion concerning thefe words, not as to my fclf for the wrong, but as to the Church, that otherwife if you prove impenitent, we might avoid you. My rcafons are, becaufe God hath faid, ThmP^alt vot bearfillc witnejSigiinji thyneigkbour. And Lev. 19. ri. Te J})sUnct fleal, neither ded faljly, neither lye one to atstbcr. Dcur.ip.i^,!^. Behold, ifthcmtreji keapl(evfitnc^,ani hath tefiifedfaljly sgaiMJl his brother -, theuJhuU ye do tinto him at he bid thought to hive ioneunto his brother. And I fuppofe you would avoid communion vrith a Papftjand have men fo to do. Prov-6. 16,' 9. Six things doth the Lord hdte, ya [even are abo^ miuatioH to him: j4 pr»ud look, ^ ^Jifigtovgae, — a fulfe mtttcjS thst fpex{cth lies, and him thxt fowah dtfcord Among brethren. Prov. 19.5. j4 f.illcrvitr.ej? jhllnot bettvpu-nijhed, andhethitfJiCafietbliesJl}*Unotefcdp<. So ver.^. Prov. 14.^. & 11 i?' Kcv.

2a. I?. iVtihoutare andvfbofoever lovctb tnd maticths lye. Pfal.i $.i,»,j?. Lori

who fl)alUbide intby Tjhemicle ? itho (lull drtdl in thy h»ly Hill f HethntvoiUicthuf-rightly indvtorfiethrighteoufncj?, and {J>ej{eth the truth inhishe^rt. Now as to the fa(S I prove it thus ; If with mean Antipapiii and an Antinomianbe termini cOTt" vertibiles, or all one, then I take all Antipapills for Antinoraians. But the later is fali'e : Therefore fo is the former. All the Churches of France, 'Belgii, Bohemia, Helvetia, Scotland, England, Sic. who lubfcribed the Harmony ot Confcfllans, or owned them: All cui Reveicnd Aflemblies that made the lateConfeffion cf ¥airh and Cacechilms, and all that own them: All that fubl'cribcd the Synod of Dort, 1 take for Ant papifts, and yetltakethem not for Antinomians, no nor aoymanfor an Antinomian who beleivethany one of allthcfe : Therefore I take not all Aiuipapifts for Antinomians- Again, cither you fpeak of my heart or of my lan.:ua;c. Forthela-cr, fliew where, or prove when I faid that Papilis and Antinomians arc tcrvtintcowcrtibiles, exprefly or implicitly, and then call mc « Ujndercr and fparc not. If ycu (peak ot my Thoughts, ] kncJw them better thea you, and J profefsthcm to beothcrwirc. Nay in the very particulars wherein J differ or fcem to differ from my BrcthrcH, J have received large Aniniadverfiorw from very many Learned men, and J pcofcfs to take not one of them all for an An-tinomian. So much for your ground-wotk. Now to your ftrufturc.

C t As

As for the term [Antinsmian] Jccnfcfs J think it more fitly applied to the Pradicc of thofc whom J have known, of that way, then tothd Dodrinc ; For whereas the name is taken from one of the leaft of their great Errors, it fttould have rather been taken from the greater. For my part J hcarcily wifh that among thofe wUofe opinions unfit them not for the Cummunion of Saints, ar.d lutfice not to Excommunicate them, all names of Parties or of Reproach were urttrly laid afide } and would willingly concribuie my bcft endeavours to thac end, -ind heartily joyn with you in your motion to the Parliament that a Penalty mii;ht rdlrain fuch Dividing wayes. But yet >. while men go commonly under fuch a name, we car. fcarce tell how to make known whom we fpeak of, but by th; name or a defcriptioD cv^uipoUcnt. 2. And J take a full Antinomian tobeone thac is unfit for Chrillian communion, as hibvcrting the very lubftance of Chriftian Religion. But J confcfs J think it fitter to call them Anti^ofpcllers, or Antichriftian, or Libertines, then Autinomiaas : And becaufe it is the old and fie name, hereafter J will ufc rather the name of Lticr^Nfj, But for fober moderate men, which are but half Antinomians, homing but the lefs dangerous part of their opinions, and diCclaiming the reft, (though they are flirewdly concatenated) and not feeing that the reft do follow them, truly, as J dare not difafleA them, nor would avoid communion with them, fo neither would J havethem called Antiaomians, further then to themtelves to convince them of their participation inthatiinfuli way,as the name may be ufed in a courfc of arguing. And ofthcfc J hope you are one : and J hope it is no worlc with lome of your partakerj.

But Sir, methinks you have fome very ftrangc paflages in your Epiftle Dedicatory about thefc things; J would warn you to learch your heart whether the later part of the fecond page of that Epiftle, be not the venting of pure malice, and a trampling upon men that have more to fay againft you, then you feem to take notice of. But the thing] mean is i. Your moll dangerous doftrine. a. Your moft palpable fcU-concradidion by word and deed. i. In the bottom of the third page in your parenthefis " [ Nor canjexcufc their connivence at any of thole *' evils that are contrary to the Law of nature,] You feem to teach thac the Ma-giftrate fliould punifh no other evils > for thefc words, following a difcouife againil force in matter of Religion, can bear no other fenfe that J know of. But is this your friendfliip to Chrilt, thac you wauld have the Magiftrate be indifterentto him and Mahomet or Antichiift ? What ? not command rhe preaching of Chrift ? and punifh the ncgled of it in thofe that fliould do it ? Nor hinder men from preaching againft Chril^, or calling him a Deceiver, or blafpheming the holy Ghoft ? nor for preaching up Mahomet? Is this your friendlhipro the Parlia, ment as to draw them into rucii a guilt, which would caufe God to cui fe them and eaft them out, and make their names hateful! to the Chriftian world ^ Is this your lovie to the Churches of Chrift, that you would have this deluge of guilt and confufion let in upon uj ? Methinks the very thoughts of fuch a doleful! ftate of the Church, fliould make your heart faci ! Is this your love to your native Land, to open upon it fuch a Floodgate of defolation ? And is this your love to the fouls of men toproftitute them toal! deludeis? If you think that truth is fo difcer-nable togood ahd bad, thatifalmay but fpeak :here is no great danger / do but open your eyes and Judge by the experience which thefe times afford you! You-can fcarce get men to receive the truth rhat hear none concrad; Aing it: How much Icfs when they have ten fpeakino againft it,fo« onctliac ipeaks for ic, and that with iuch fubtilty asthey cannot refill ? ;A ' Nay,

C7]

Nay, Sir, I had hcped that you wh© do To let fly anneas a Papift, would hot have proved fuch a friend to Popery. Would you have Popery have Lfberty ia England again in all the Points of it that are not againft the Light of Nature ? Truly you fhcw me but what I faw before I that all over-deing is undoing I and that none would fooner let in Popery then thofc rhat fly to the contrary cxtrcam. But fhall I tell you Sir > If once they have full liberty here as you have, I think ycu ij'ill fince, tbat their numbers and ptcvalency will cloud your fcft, and all the reft of the Icds in England. And as very a Papift as 1 am, I would far rather joyn with you 'o iceep them out j and would intreat you tor the Peace of your own Confcience that you would uniay this again, and write a recantation of it to the Pailiamcnr.

I would have you alfo toconfider your ftrange Coniradiftions to your own words.

I. Yeu would have Names of Obloquy, and in particular that oi AntmmtMs, reftiaincd by Penalties. But is it againlt the light of nature for amanthatiain Judgment againft you, to call you Antinomian ? It the Religion or doftjine may be tolerated, why may not the NaminS; of men accordingly ? You will allow men to Do Evil, but not to be called Evil Doers/ Wh«;ie the Light of Nature reach-eth not the Thing, me thinks it thould not reach ihc Name ! He that (hould judge you a Herctick, and thinks it his duty to luake it known, fecth not by the light of Nature that he may-noi Call you fo.

a. May not the Lord Jefus ( tor whom youfeem tealous ) have fome of that favour from you, or refped, or tendcrnefs of his Name and Honour, which you would have your felf? If the Parliament muft lay a Penalty on them that wili call you Antiftomian, I pray you put in one word with it, that they may lay a P«r nalty on any that will Call Chritt a Deceiver, or reproach his Holy Name, or doAiine, orwayesj or weuld fet up Mahomet or Annchrifl againft him j whe-tJierthisbe againft the light of Nature er no. At Icalt it is againft the light of Nature todefpife God ; and Chrift faith, He tbit deffifcth yiu (his Minillcrs ) de^ifcth mc, And. he that dejpifeth mcje^ifeth htm tbatfent mc,

I. If all thcfe Names rauft be reftrayned by Penalties, then I doubt the Name of Papift muft be reftraynedjand Socinian too : And would you indeed have a Law made topunil'h all that call men Papifts or Socinians ? and yet Teem fo zealous againft them. Still the Overdoing Enemies, are the greateft friends, to Popery and othei Errors.

4. But how comes it to pafs that I muft be fo frequently with you a Papift, Socinian,Amiinian, and yet it is a fin to be reftrayned by Penalties to ale Names of obloquy ? But you thew us plainly what kinde of Liberty of Confcience it is that men a.e now for: A Liberty for them and others to abnfe Chrift, his truth, and their Brethren: but a reftiaint of fpeaking againft their reputation. It feems though you fpcak generally, it was the Name of Antinomian or Libertine that you meant. Truly Sitjthough M' Jf^eodbridgi, Mr. (^ranford ard I, defervc not fo ijDuch reipeft at your hands, yet mc thinks the Parliament Jelerved founder advice, and better and more carefull language of you then this ? Yoii fticuld net have be-fpokenthem with fuch Contradidions and dangerous In;imations.

You proceed wi;h fnethus L'' Let him flicw us any gneChurch or fingle per-*' fonjacccunted Orthodox ti'Iihis prefcnt age, that did not I.old fome, ycamoft " of thofe Points which hccails Antinoraianifme, and I will ppeuly acknowledge *'I hare done himwiong: otherwife let him be looked upon as a flanderer »*id

C 3 ««revilcr

m

f^rtviier of all the Proteltan*. Chuchcs, who unicr a fiicw of fricnJiliip, bath ca-** licavourcd toexpok them co the iccrn aiivl obloquy of tb«ir cacmics.

Kept. I wiilinjjty llami to your motion : But 1 mult needs fay, that the tfmpter haih much foiled you, when ho prevailed with you tu wiitcthelc and the followJf>g words I and to add inipudcncy to fallliood and ihiider: for fo jc is. You ihould have cited my words which you lay this char*^c upon, o;-cite I know not what to vindicate j foi I know not what you mean, iiu: obieivcthat thequelhon bctwesQ us is not. Whether any of the reformed Churches do diiFcr from me in any thing, or, Whether I errc therein ? Bur, Whether they hold any, yea moft of thofc opi-nionswhichl call Antinomianil'me ? Would you make men believe that all the Proteftant Churches arc of your opinion ? This is to put out mens ayes, and kid rhcm renounce both fenfc and reafon. I will call no man an Antinomian that doth hold the doftdncs of the mofl Impcrfcd Confefllon in all the Harmony : Nay,I provoke you if ycu arc ab!e to name one man in the 6rft,fecondjthird,fourth or fii'th Century, yea or for a thoufand if not fourteen hundred years after Chrift, that held any two, yea one, of the opinions which I evercall'd Aiuinomianifme ? except it were lomc that were notorious Hereticks. Till then, I fuppofe it is not ikc Accufed, but the Accufer that is reputed the Calumniator till he make good his charge.

You proceed, l"CMr.B- ( the better to engage his Reader) tells him hisdo-*' Arine is of a middle ftr3in,as if all the reformed Churches had hitherto been in " an extream,in this fundamental! point of our J uttihcation.]

Rep. I. Though Jullincation be a fundamcntall, yet fo is not every point that soncernctbit<

a. I hope you will not perfwade ns that all the Proteftant Churches are for the JuftificatioBoflnfiids ! unles it be by taking the name of Protellant Churches from.all that will not fay as you.

J. What Divine of note can you name, but doth in one thing or other, differ from the greater part ? I think but few. Yet we do not for thac one Point lepa-rate him from the reft. And let me add to th« former Sfftion, that if it be proved of any one or more of our Divines, that they hold one or two lelV:r points of Anti-nomianifme, I think it not fi: therefore to call them An inomians. I will not call ZdKclby a Papift, becaufc he denied the Pope co be The Antichrift : orbecaui'eof his lo much differencing ^ohm Bapdlme and Chrifts: nor will 1 call him an A-nabaptift, bccaufe he thought that thofe in ACisi^. were twice bapii7eJ, al-ledging fo many Fathers of hisminde. The like I may fay of many another.

4. No wonder if anydodrine that avoideth your extream be contemned by you: It hath alwaybecnlo with men incxtreams. But the day is coming when moderation and Truth ( which lieth between extrcams ) will be better regarded.

5. Asformy [ engaging my Reader ] which you talk of; 1 kn.r,v rot whether it difcover more of the fccrcts of your own heart or mine : lure T am you knov not mine,biit fliould know your own : And if you fpcak according to yours, I will fpeak according to mine, and thats this; that I love Gods Truth, ano Lhceforc would propagate it; and I lore mens fouls, and therefore would 00 the-.n all the good that I can : but tor any advantage that I aimc at to my felf by evgjgair men tome, befides the doing of my duty, 1 yet know it not. Nny I muR-needs reckon upon the lo(s of nicnsclleem before I refolveto crofs them in thei;-opinions.

You proceed like the reft [ " I am furc he gives as much unto Works and Ief« " uma ChiiU then the Papifts do.] " Ref,

T.ep. AfalfewitnefJhiKtotbeuTipumJljed, and ktbst^eiketh lies/halt Mte^dpe, Fnv.19.5- Review the texts before cited. TrulyjSir, I cannot think you durft fin thus without rtiamc and tear, it you had no: been hardened in fecurity, b» thinking your fins were forgiven before you were bojn ! What good will all your Argumcn-iS do to p-'ovcto ai.y man, that your dodltine cncourascth not men in fin, wiiile they f);all fee you run en in it in boldly ? What hear v/Qwerdi foij when we fte comrarv dccdt f hi- i.e PapiJts have done as much againil their Religion, by Powder plots,! iCi fon.jlying, as by theiv very erroneous doftrinesjamong thof« that judge by fuch experiences j fo have the men cf your fed done, to the wonder of obfervcrs. Whether ycur wr^rds hcie be crue or not, I fliall refer the Reader to my Reply to Mr.CritWo7>,whither Ireferve ir.

You add [" He makes Works by Virtue ct Gods Promifes and Covenant, to be " the meritorious Caufcs of J unification and b«lvation, and in no other fenfe do " the Papifts affirm it.]

Kfp. Thou JJjalt not bear falfervitvcJS dgji?t(l th) nfighbour. It is a harfh provoking kind of anfwering, tor to give a brother a plain wjcTitirw.- and therefore I love not to deal with thofc fayings, that will admit of no other anfwer in tcrmcs or fenfc. If the ninth Command cmcnt be Law, then this prafticcof yoursis Antinomian. Produce that place j exprcfs thofe words cf mine, which may make good this charge. 1 have ever protcflcd that our beft works arc not in the lealt degree meritorious, no not cf a bit of bread, much lefsof Juilihcation and falvation. There never fell from my pen fuch a word as you charge me with, and yet you dare do ir. One wcuid \hink-'that common wit Ihould have told you, that when the falfhood of fucb paflages iefMo arc dilcovered, it fliould redound to your own Ihame, and confctjuently to the great prejudice of your Caufe. Nay T durft not acknowledge any Carnality in.faith to our Jultification, and therefore in that Point adventured to difter from many Brethren : Yet doth this man fay, that I [ mukfi JVorl^s by Viv tue ofQods Promifeatii Covcmnty mcritorioue Caufcs cf^ufitjlcation. And mark what an occafion he takes of tbisflander. In the i6.Thcf. o( my ^hor. Ipurpofely fpcak againft thcdodrine of Merit j flicwing that properly no works of ours can be called Meritorious, but in the end did concede that Improperly they may: This I did, becaufe the Fathers for many hundred years afrer Chrift ufe the word Mcrit,ia application to mans works j and becaufe all our Divines that ever I read againft the Pii^ith,ve»iinccontndiceme, do anfwer that the Fathers ufcd the word !Merit improperly. Put thefe three things I ever profcfled in fpcech and writing on ail occaUons. 1. That no a^lsor worksof ours are Meritorious Caufesof falvation, much kis of Juftification. z. That therefore the word Merit cannot be applied to them, hut Improperly. 3. That therefore it is not fit toufefomuch asthe wo;d. And though when wc read it in the Councils or Fathcrs,wemuft in-icrpiCt it with a due reverence to them, yet is it fit to be excluded among our fclves. Yet fhould I meet with any godly,fobcr man of a contrary judgmen'-, that thought the name might be ufed while he interprets it in the fame fer.fc which tbc Reformed Churches hold, 1 would not approve of that mans opinion of the ufe of the word, but yet 1 would not for the bare word pretend that wc arc of difierem Rc-ligionSjor do difta in tbc Thing which he exprefkih by that word. I fliould think it very unjuft ifl liiould report all of my brother, whicbnuybc faidcfhim Improperly. iilDavidlAy, All men are Ly or s, meaning, not able to helpintimcof need, and thcretorc not to be trulted in, as being fallacious j may I therefore cail cyery man that I fpeak with a Lyat ? VVha; is there :<hat may not be fpokenof you

truly

truly in Impiopiiety ? But fuppofe you would hive maic the worft of my words that malice cuuld have done wii.boutexprefs tallhood, Ihould you not then have taken up with m / ovtn words, without chc addition of your forgeries ? I faid that CThis is Imp: u,\r!y called Merit,] Buc I neve: laid that [ our works are the Rle-ritorioui Cc'.ici of Jultificatiori or I'alvation.] For a* I have Itill maintained thsc they are NoCau es at all, To in faying that they are called Merit Improperly, I fay, they aic no Caufes Meritorious : no more then a dufa fine qui atn is a true Caufc, becaufe it is Improperly lo called. Na> I never once faid, that as to cue Juftification begun, that works arc fo much as exitlent, but alway maintained that we are truly and fully a$ from all fins paft Juftificd by faith, before W«rks of cx-ttrnall obedience are in being.

The next words [ " and in no other fenfe do the Papifts affirm it,] is another notorious falfhood : which if it were in Dodrinals only, Icouldanlwer it with, 3 cold Mcgatur; but thus to multiply falihoods one after another, Teems a faa pradice from a godly man. He might well know, it indeed he know what tha Papifts hold, that they are of feverall parties among therafelvcs differing about this Point, yet all of them except iValdenfis, or vtry few more, do maintain the fitnefs of the word Merit: molt aflcrt both Merit of Congruity before Rcgcneration,and Merit of Condignity after j and Scotia and a few more that reduce all to the right by promife are rejcdcd by the reft, who affirm a Merit of value or proportion : And our own Divines generally approve of them that hold only CMeritum expaSfo, as to the thing, denying only the fitnefs of the name, and that this is any proper Merit. This all Divines know to be true that have read the Pipifts «Tritings and ours againil them. And yet this man did not fear tp fay, that £ in no other fenfc do the Papifts affirm it,] yea and that I [give as much to Works and lefs to Chrift then the Papifts:] I ihall purpofcly delay my particular proof of the contrary till I fpeak to Mr.Cratidon-

Nay a little before he faith of mc [" Its like he thinks, that the Papifts arc " much neerer the line of truth then any ©f them,]/.e. of all the Proteltant Churches. Here are two fins as evident as his fenfe, vi^. faUc-fpeaking and uncharita-blenefs.

A little before he faid, he [ feaicth the men oiI^cdcrminjler ar«fed but withllt-" tie better food,] yet did this man never hear me preach, never fee my face, and yet can cenfure my teaching I Nay had he but enquired of me, he might have learned ho\y little I meddle with Controverfie in the Pulpit: Or if I did, and did all erroneoufty, yet I read the Scripture to them, I publifh the doftrine of the Creed and Catechifme, is all ih'ispoifon orcboik) wMt at he fpeaks ? Judge of the affc^ion and praftico of this man by the Apoftles marks, i Cor. !}.j,4 5,657. and fee what Charity he hath: Chmty thmkcth »« evil: But how much oi his own fur-mifing hath he vented in a few linej ? And yet he proceeds as frefti and fcarlcfs as before.

For he adds ['*I muft needs fay, I never met with that Papift, which calls " Q\\n^ z^ne({UA uon ('i.i. a Caufe which effefts nothing, ) of our luftificatiua.]

Rep. Would yau not think here that the man did intimate tiiat I fay tiiis, and but this of Chrift ? But mark th: Cafe. In Tbef.^6. p. iij. I fpcak only of Chrifts fatisfaftion, and not of any other work of Chrilt: And I fay that ir hath feverall wayes of Caufing our Juftification. i. That it is the M ritorious Caufc, I fay, I know few but Socinians will deny. a. That it is alfo the P incipall Civile fue qiu mn, ai Removing Impcdimencs: wichall^ fticw, (hacllo call it

only in rcfpcft of its Phyficall operation, but as to Morall Dignity, I plead for itt prchemincnce. Now what doth this man but lay down this word alone, that I call Chrill the Caufa fine qua iion, and leave out that I call bis facisfadion the Meritorious Caufe, and allow it the prchemincnce in Morall reipcd. Nay mark that himfcU" makes Juitification to be from Eternity, and not at all Caufed or procured by ChriUs death quoad nBum volctitis, but only quoad rem volitam : And let any man tell me what he can poflibiy afcribcto Chiiiis iaiisfadion on thofc termcs move thin I do in the place that he carps at. Thole things that arc but Caufii ftHC quanonin (enfi phyfico, are of lint;ul3r Morall Caufalicy, and io I fhcwcd that Cbriils death is s but that faich is fo a cdu(Ji fine qua non, as to have no Morall Cauiality at all, as being bu: the Accepting ot a tree Gift. Ttiefc things are fo |ar from Popery, that they accord with tlic opinions of his own Patrons, as exprcO'cd hereabouts, and yet this uian faith he never met with Papift that faid fo.

He next proceeds to compare my dodrine with fome Portions oi^ardiners in Foxes Martjrelogy. I have not the book at this time in my itudy to examine his dealing, but to his Pohtions I ihall anfwer particularly, thus. i. /^lltheeftefts of Chrifts Pafllon have not a Condition: The fatisfadionof Jufticc, the making of the new Covenant, the iealing it with Miracles, the publifliing it to the world, and preaching it now to any Nation or Perfcn, and the firlt Grace of faith and repentance i all thefe are given abfolutely, and not made over upon any Condition on mans part. But Juftification, Rcmiirion, Adoption and Salvation, are given Conditionally. 2. His fccond Polition hath its anfwer in thefirft. 3. The third is falfe J for faith is the Condition it fclf, and not fomcwhat antecedent by which we muft know it, unlels he fpcak of any common faith which helpcth a man to perceive the need of faving faith ■■, or unlets he fpeak of the Condition of our Glorification or Juitification as confummatc.which is linceie o-bedicnce, in fubferviency to faith and concomitancy with it. 4. To the fourth, I will believe that faith is the Gift ot God, if all the Papilts living believe it, and that by this Gift, I do well in believing in order of nature, but not ot time, before I am Juftified. 5. And fo that [ do well toward the attainment of julli-jfication j But not of Juftification in the Popiih fenfe, which comprchcndeth fan-ftification even in the fiill ad , for fo 1 do not well betovc it, fo as any of my adions are Accepted of God in Chrift, and their Infirmities pardoned } but only as an unbeliever may comparatively be laid to Do well in coming to hear the word, rather then ingoing to an alehoufe. 6 1 believe that Faith and Charity thrive together : I am a Papi't if this be Popery ; that Viith works by Love. I do not jhink it found dodrine, that to the Attai;i!ticntof Jullification isrtquired Faith and Chari:y, without limitations and explication : For th .ugh a Love to Chrilk "the Objcd is cilauiall to that Faith that mult Accept him ( for let men fay what they will, Chrift muft be Accepted as Good, and Good cannot be Accepted withcLit Love,) yet Charity ufually fignifies that Grace, as extended to all other objcds of Love, as well as an oft'ered Chrift, and fo the Propolition is falfe,uft-derftood of ou; fiil^ being jullified,as the word[AuaiBmenc]lhewc$ it is. 8. The eighth Pi-opoUcion it falfe. If only the bcginnnig be free, then the reft is not tree. 9. The ninth is anlwered in the tortser. 10. The tenth I never heard Prote-iHnz iiny in fenfu di-jifo i I believe that God gives the grace of Repentance to men in deadly finne, even to all that have it, and I know not elfe how they iliould have it i and that this Rcj^entance is a Co/idiuon of Juftifieatioa, in the Pro-

D teftanc

(«ft«m fcnfe,but not in the Popifti fenfe,thac if,of the firft renewing of our natures. And now Brother I would I had given you all I have in the world, yea twenty livesjif I had foraany to lay down, on condition you could but make it good, that thcPapifts erreno more then this j yea no more then thcfc words of G^riiwrj in their obvious Icnfe, But if you would be believed in crediting the Papifis, yoa muft get you Readers that never read their writings, or that have readaonebuc (nchis the liicCbriJliAn^Moierator, that tells you by Merit they mean nothing but rewardablcnefs. If you will make all the Papifts Orthodox to prove me a Papift, youl fliew how much your extremities hurt their Caufc. For my part, 1 fay again, would I had loit my life lo that it were true, I would no more remove fcom the truth becaufe the Papifts own it, then I would deny God bccaufe they profcfshim. And if you can make me believe that the Papifts are as Orthodox men as you pretend them to be, you will but exceedingly glad my heartj and not a whit remove me from my own opinion. Thefebe but words to atfright fuch children that receive their faithon the credit of man, and that mud know what the Papifts hold, that they may be contrary, before they canteJl what to hold thcmfelves. Thefcmove not men that wait for tfic Law at thcmouthofChrift, and that attend the Spirit for Illumination by theliudyof the word, and go to the Law and to the Tcftimony, and call no man Mafler on earth. The woift you can do by fuch Toyes of malice, are but to diminifti my reputation, withfa-Aiousmen, that follow parties for their faith, and know not what the Unity of the faith means, nor what it is to depend for teaching upon Chrift. Though thefc men may be godly and zealous« and fuch at I dearly love, yet were it not for being made uncapable of doing them good, and diminifhing Godsinterett and their benefit, by the diminution of nice, I think you would not much aiTault me with thcfe weapons, if you knew how little I value their eftcem, when I cannot have it with Innocency and Truth. Brother, I am proud and (infuU the Lord knows as well as ethers : but yet I can truly fay, that I have bent my ftudies and vigilancy againft the (in of Pride above mott others, for divers years paft, and that I have flood fo long on the brink of the grave and the door of eternity, that I can with very little trouble bear all the quarrels and contempts of men. How fmall a matter is it tome to be judged by man, who am daily looking to be called to the barrc of God ? I am almofl out of this wrangling cenforious world, and knov» its Gods Approbation which I muiHUnd by, and then think of me all as you pleafc > if God juftifie me,! care not for your condemning me. But you proceed.

C " And for his choice notion of Juftification by Works as they are our nevr " Covenant-Righteoufnefs, I finde it was a fhift of the Papifts long ago,(i;'(.]]

Rep. You are very unfit to parallell the Papifts and me, who for ought Iper-ccive underttand neither of us. I need not tell Divines that read them the Papifts opinion : but for my own I fay fiill that we are juftificd firft, without fo much aa the prefeace of Works, and finally without their Caufality : but yet had rather expound ^ames, then deny the truth of his words. Nor do I acknowledge arijr Univerfall Rightcoufnefsbut Chrifts, confiftingin theremiftionof fins- Only! think n»tthat Chrift died to pardon my Faith and Love as fuch, but to pardon the infirmity of them ; to forgive my fins as fins, and not my duty as duty, and therefore that we have a particular Righteoufnefs by which in fubordination to Chrifts as being only the Condition of our Enjoying it, we may be faid to be ju-fiified. Sutofthefethingsmercfully God willing hereafter.

He adds £ " I ih^U not tra<;c Mr.X. any further;^ there being now in the Prefsj

« as I aftj informed, a large and full Anfwcr to his Paradoticall Aphoriimcs, by a « faithfull fervant of the Lord Jcfiw M' Cnndon sf Fiwtej in Hmpfkire^ a Work-<< Bian chat need not be afbamed.]

Kef. Of this book I have fpokc in the Epiftlc cnongh. Why fpcalc you of it as a ftrange matter [ as I am informed ?] Its long fince I was ioformcd of your being with him at Lonion, a» combined together in the fame Caufe, and promoting each others work j one againft ^U.jVooibriige.ihz other againft me.

Your next ftiewes your modefty,in calling fuch books [ " farre more dangerous «then the Ranters Blafphemous Pamphlets ] and intimating that they are Popifh and Arminian, anyhow Reigiiolds,^mal(cri,I>ttvtMntfTrideAuxwould, not have endured them.] Would you make the world believe that ihefc men were of yoiu minde for the juftification of Infidels ? Truly if you will be of the fame minde ac thefemen were, though I may difter from you in feme point of Method ot Words, yet I vmII never oppofe you nor write againft yeu, if you will but give me leave to forbear. My differences with thcfe men are nothing to my differences with you. Nay yot might have known if you would, that Davctunt maintains the Conditio-nalicy of fincerc obedience to the Continuance of our Juftification in the fame termes as I do. And fo much to your Epiftle. Now to your Ttcatifc.

THi firft place that I obferve you falling on ane, it Pag.i^. aboui CHactoviuij where you fay [ " Though one of our late viriters (Mr .2. ^Pf.P' ^47 J mcn-" tiens this Dodors opinion witli much contempt and ofcicancy, calling bis Af--" feriions ftrange, fenfelefs and abhorred (which is the lefs to be regarded, feeing ** he nfually metes cut the fame meafurc unto all men elfe, whofe Notions do not f* fquare with his own mold.]

Kef. Tboujhdlt not bearfilfe witutf Agmft thy neighhur. My words ofMxceovm doftrine I refer to the confideration of any that are impartial!: for my pare I can-not repent of them, any more then for faying that whetcdom or drunkenncfs arc to be abhorred. But that I [ ufaally mete out the fame meal'ure to allmenelfc whofe Notions fquare not with my mold,] is a grofs untruth, which any man that cenverfeth with me, and bath read my writings,niay quickly know. But lei*s bear your proof.

[ ";As D' Ttw/?, Mr.JVtflker, and them that held the Imputation of Chrifts ''adtive Righteoulncfs, whom he calls A fort of Ignorant and unftudied y DivineS;6r<-

Kef. Divers more grofs falfhoods in thefc few wordsjarc added to the reft. I am loath to call you Antinomian, but if the ninth Commandcment be Law, I am furc you make as bold to break it, if that be Antinomianifme, asmoft that I have dealt with. I. Why did you not quote the place where I [mete out the fame meal'ure] toDr.rw//?? Mr. I(;ewi4//accufeihme of flighting him indeed ? and what is my language? why I call him [ that moft excellent famous Divine.] Bu« I judge bimtomiftake in faying Rcmiflion of fin is from ecernity|: that is, I judge him not Infallible nor free from error: Thus Proteiiants abufe all men,and Papifts all fave the Pope and his Gencrall Councell. i. For Mr. tf^dlier I ^confefs I fpeke undifcreetly, as having no call to meddle with him, and I hereby revoke it, and do repent it, that I intimated him to be /|wr4W, and that I mcdlcd with hii Rcw^-

D » Buc

But yet I will take no man for a competent J«dge of my fault, that hath not read his Book againft Mr. Goodwin, and M:. GAtaiicrs Book againft him in Defence of 'M.x.lVotton. g. It is here intimated, that the caufe of my fpcech was his differing from ray mold : that is, as he meaiis my opinions (for indeed the Scripture is my mold ; Whereas the reafon of my wcr ;s againft M--. ffallicr, was his exceeding hard language to his Brethren > which as being agiinii love and peace, I fo far reprehended, as to fay [ He llrongly reviled and weakly difputed] when in dif-courfe and Piilpie he had done fo much tor above lo years, agaixill fuch learned, choice fervants of God,as Mn.lf^otton, M^-Budfiaw^Scc. and wljen in the Piefs the termc Heretick, b\z(phtmci,(yc. are lo familiar j and he even proceeds to the Carfe of Anathema Maran-atha. But what if I fpokcunreverently to this Reverend man,iii faying he Reviled ? is it jull that I be accufed ofdoing fo to all men, or any others, when I never was guilty ? 4. Next I am charged with the like, as to [" them that hold the Imputation of ChrifU adive Rightcoufnefs.] Another fallhood, a> thus without limitation exprelfed : For I there profcfled to hold it my felf, aspart of fatisfadion, and 1 hold it as Meritorious of all that higher felicity then the firft Covenant gave (if there be any iuch :) But it was only one fort or fenfe of Imputation there explained which 1 fpoke againll. 5. Another untruth itiSjthatI [call thefe, A fort of Ignorant unlludied Dirines :] The words are ihefe [" Themaintaineriof it, befidefomc Able men, arc the vulgar fort of un-'' ftudied Divines, who having not ability or diligence to fearch deep into fo pro-" found a Controverfi.e, do ftill hold that opinion which is mod common and in "credit.] Where I divide thofe that are for this way into two forts ;.fomft Abie men,and others the common unttudied Divines that take it on credit: And this is a known truth that too many Iuch there are, that fo receive even much of their" Religion : As if you did not think fo your lelf of the moil that are againft your particular opinion? Do you not think they go for company againft you ? Sol do not call all Ignonnt that go that way, nor any man bccaufc he goes that way.

You adde oiMucovim [" I dare fay his Arguments in this particular will not *' fcem fo weak and ridiculous as Mr. Baxter makes them, to an indifferent reader "that ftiall compare them with the exceptions that he hath fhaped unto them. Sharp Cenfures are but dull Anlwer*.]

Repl. I am not defuous to biaft the reputation of that Lcarncd.man,if I were of any power to do it. But I confefs his Do(5lrine in the matter of Jullification I would have all friends of mine avoid i and I took it for ray duty fo to tell them : which I know not why you fliould be lo offended ar. I luppofc you know how the Synod of Corf judged of his harfti language in another cafe, wherein he cppo-fcd Lnbbertus.

And feeing I am thus brought to take notice of the Witnefl'cs that you produce as for your Caufe j gi^e me leave a little to review than.

Th£ hrft is Mr.Pemble:Bax. as Mr.Pewi/c is for you in his l^ini. Gut. io when he came purpofcly to treat of that fubjcd,it feems he changed his judgment: For in his Trut. of^uftificuti9n,hc faith as much of that as moll oi your advcrfaics: I pray you read him Tdij;. jf.c.x. dcp.ii, z j, 14, J7. and then you will lure boaft of M.PewWcnomore : If he were once of your minde and afterward rcjeded it, as he feems fully to have done, that is no great credit to i .

Yourfecond is Mr .Rutherford, who you fay hath faid as much as any of you. Will you give the Reader leave to judge how far }A.7{^ithcr^ ord was for you, by thefe words «f bis own^ written after a fuller knowledge of the men of your Se^ ', In his

Tri^

TriaUnd Triumph ef Faith, ^iE^.^^, Serm.8. hcanfwers thefe ObjcAions (zs a-gainft his firft wordSj wherein ke affertcth that [ The condition of the Covenant is faith.* Holinefs and (andiftcation the Condition cf the Covenanters.) Thii I>o was the condition cf the Covenant of Works } This Bcline is the condition of this Covenant.]

lObj.i. But feme teach that this Covenant hath no Condition at all, fo Dr. ^r?^c and other Libertines.] lOhj i. Irvillputniy lavpinyourinwardpartr, is no condition to be performed by uj, but by Goc only.] [Ofc/.4- Believing and obedience is bur a confequent of the Cover ant, not an Antecedent : fo I muft believe upon other grounds) but not in way of the condition of the Covenant, for in that tenour I am to do nothing.] [.Obj. ^ . The Covenant is Gods love to man ro take him to himfelf, and that before the chiloren do good or il'j and to him that work-eth is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt,] lobj.6. Our ad of believing is a work, and no work can be a condition ot the Covenant of grace: yea Chrifi alone juftifieth: Faith is not Chiift, nor any partner with him in the work ; yea we are juftl'fied before we bcleeve, and faiih only fcrveth for the niani-feftationofjuftificationto our confcience, for we beliere no lie, when we believe we are judificd, but a truth j then it mutt be true, that we arcjuftified before we believe.] Thefe M'Rwfcfr/iJri anfwcrs as the Libertines Objeftions. It would be too tedious to recite his Anfwers, only feme of that to the laft I will recire.

He faith,p-^9:,6o',6i,6i. [ Chrift alono as the meritorious caufe jufiifietb, and his imputed .Ri^tfteoufnels as the formall caufe : and this way Chrift alone juftifieth the PatriarchSjtJT'c. and all believers before they be born, but this is buc the fountain ready to walli : but believe it Chrift wafheth not, while we be fcul, O'c.nor is his Name Oitr Rtghtcoafmfs while we be finflers(f.c.unrencwed.) i Men not born cannot be the objeft of adual Righteoufnefs; the unborn childe needeth no adual application of Chiifts tyc-falve, gold, righteoufnefs : Now Juftificati-cn is a real favour applied t© us in time, juft as Sanftifieation in the New blith, O-'c. We cannot be jnftificd before we belceve. i. We arc damned before w» bel«cve,5po&.5. 2. He that is juftified is glorified, Row.8.30. j. We are born and by nature the fons of wrath, Epfc.1.2,7. KcOT.7.5,6. &6.14. 4, Byfaithwe are only united to Chrift, poiltfled of him, Chril^ dwelling; in us,eir'C' J- This Juftification without faith cafteth loofethe Covenant, I will be y curbed. But here's a condition, God is not bound and wc free: Therefore this is the other part, Tepjallbcmy pceple. Now it is taught by Libertines, that there can be no clofing with Chrift in a prcmifethat hath a qualification or condition exprcflcd, and that conditional Promifcs are Legal, tT'c. (Here he rejcdcth Conditions, 1. In the Arminianfcnfe, as they arc the vvoik of Free-will not aded by the predetermining grace of Chrift. 2. In the Popilb fenfe, as they are meritorious, as work of wages: and lo I rejed them too.) 6. '^aul in the Epiftles to the Ro-TKiJU and Cjdntians, takes it for granted that Jaft fication is a work done in time, rranfient on us, not an immanent and eternal adicn, remaining either in God from eternity, or perforiJied by Chrii^on the Crofs before we believe, and fo never takcth on him to prove that we arc juftified before we cither do the works of the Law, or believe in Jefus Chrift, but that we are juftified by faith, ^c and faith is not the naked Maniftftation of our Juftification, fo as we are juftified before we have faith : Satisfadion is indeed giren to Juftice by Chrift on the Crols, for all our fins before we believe, and before any juftified pcnon who lived this 1J00 years was born J butjalasj that is not Juftification, buc only the metitori-

CI63

eus cauCe ef it: chat is, as tf one (hould fay, This wall is white fince cb« Cre&tloA «f the world, though this very day only it was whiced, becaufe whiienel's was in the world fince the Creation.

Andtbat you may know the true nature of Juftificacion, and M' I{CHd4U and yon may fee what others fay of the nature of the aft as well as M' tf^»oibridge and I, xnark the next words [ Juflification is a Forenfical fentencc in time pronoanced iutheGo^el, and applied to metiovf, and never till the inilant Now, that I be-leevc : Its not formally an aft of the underflanding to know a truth concerning myfelfj But its an heart-adherence of the affeftions to Chrifl as the Saviour of Tinners, it the prefcnce of which a fcntence of free abfolution is pronounced : Sup-pofe the Prince have it in bis minde to pardon twenty malefaftors 3 his grace is the ctmfe why they are pardoned, yet are they never inLaw pardoned, fo as they can in Law plead immunity till they can produce their Princes royal fealed pardon.^ ' SoSerm. i8.pi|. 148. [Nay give me leave t« fay, that Antinomians make Jufti-fication and free grace their common place of Divinity^ as if they only had feen the vifions of the Almighty and no other, but they are utterly ignorant thereof: For they confound and mix what the word diftinguifhctii, becaufe ^u3ifi$stioni( enljaRemovslof finneby aLarv-vfjy, (0 thst inLtm it caanat aftuallycondemn.] Sofi^.ip. [JuliiBcation frecth m inthklifc from ailLiW'guilt sHdObhgation to wrath, which is but the fecond aft of fin.] Sofig.i^i. [All which are true in a Law-fenfe, and in a Legal and Moral freedom from fin, tT'c.}^ and [For they are in their aftual guile as touching the Lavf-fiing, and power, as no finnes, &c. Xcmovcdund taken 3iSva.yquO(iiaHuAUmretaumeternxm$rti,(, in their Law.dc«eric and guilt,(i7'f. This is a Law-removal of fin.] So oft ^4^. 154* &.pfiE[int: Stp> 161. fpeaking of Chriiis fufferings [ This threefold taking away of fins I clear from Scripture, i. Chrift caketh away our fins on the Crofs^/U^it/ve//, and by way of merit, whileas he fufterethfor our fftis onthe Crofs. So^^.i.^^. iC^r. 5.11. 1 Pet.x.x4. Ifa.^ 1.10. Now this was the paying of a ranfomforus, and a Legal iranflation of the eternal punifliment of our fins, but it is not Jaftifica-tion, nor ever called Juflification: there is a fort of imputation of fin to Chrifl bere, and a fumme paid for me ; but, with leave, 'bJoftrmatl imputMion, no forcn-ficall, and no pcrfonal Law-reckoning to me who am not yet born, farre lefs cited before a Tribunal and abfolved from fin : When Chrift had compleatly paid this fumrae, Chrifl was juftified Legally, as a publique perfon, and all his feed F««-damentally, !Meritori9uJlj, CMfatively, but not in their perfons. There is a fecond removal of fin, when the believer is juftified by faith. This which is formally thejuftifieation of the believing finner, the Believers perfon is Accepted, Reconciled, Juftified, and really tranflatcd by iLtttv cbdnge, from one ftatc to another.]

I have been the longer in reciting M' Rutherferi's words, i. Becaufe of them-felvestheyfuffice to confute your Opinion. 2. Becaufe you fo talk of [the Pro-icftam Divines and Churches,] and yet of thofe few that you produce for you, it may appear whar they judge of your Caufc. 3. That your allegations may be un-derftood hereafter by yonr Reader,

Your third D' Twifs, and alio Miccvum,! acknowledge are for you in the point BOW inqueflion.

Mr. P^r^er's wards imply no more then Rutherforis, vix. That in Chrifts Ju-ftification we were juftified unfiUy ; but that is a term of diminution, as to the formal Juftification j for till it be extrAtaufas it doth not exiH : and it it an improper ufe of th« word Juftification. Cbl'

Chmier I have oft nered tohav« fomc paffagcs that make for yoMrOpiaion ; b« that he contradiftcth them elfcwherc, I think is not hard to manifcft. I will not deny the truth for the credit of the man.

(^Alvin is fo exprefs and frequent againft you as few men more. I came but HOW from citing feme paflages to that end againft LuiitmxmColwnuit and therefore will not now lofe tine in doing it again, when all men that will reade bis Books may quickly findc that he was no friend to the Juftification of Infidels. I marvel! rather that you had not cited Zuivglm, who indeed is blamed for leaning that way, and called SenecA by fuch a Chriftian name ( unlefs perhaps he was deceived by Hiertme, as Hicrome was by his counterfeit Epiftle,and thought Senccx a believer indeed-) And you might have alleadged an inclination in Erafmta for you, who could Icarceforbcai faying, San^eSiKratesorapronobU. (^'alvin's v/ordi mean but this much ( which you cite ) that feeing God offercth Rcmiflion and we do but Accept it by faith, therefore God doing his part in offering it,he faith that re^eHu Dei fujiJfiuUofidtnprtcedit^ihfiugh we are not aftually juftified till after. For that offer is common to Infidels. In that very Difcourfc Calvin bath many pafloges againft you : As pag. (mibifot.) j^o. Nosautemmeminerimuajidei tutu-ram d Cbrijit nftimxndsm effe .• quia qutd nobis offert Vem in (^rijtf, non nififde re-cipimw. Proinde quicquid nobis e(l Cbrijius idadfdem transfcrtnr,qu£noscompotes (3^ ehrijii (^ omnium cjMsbonorumfacit. Nf^; alitervemm cjfctiUudfobiinnif,fidemno' fir am ejfeviSortam, qua mundtu vincitur, ttifi nos in Cbriftum infercrct quxfolaa ejl munii vilfor.']

Zanchj in the words cited by you ufeth inconvenient expreffions, but that he is fully againft you, ismaaifeft in many places of his Writing. But I have newly Vindicated Zanthy from Ludiomaua Colvinut , who urgeth the fame words as you do.

So I have done Aljtedim too, and therefore fhall fayno more of him.

So alfo have I vindicated jdmepm againft the fame (^olvinus: and as for this te-ftimony which you adde more then be, vi^-ex Jnti(ynodal.f.i6'{. his laUquo weio] infavorem re{iituti,hy which he there expoundeth reconciliation,is fo ftretch-ing a word,as may well be yielded true : for it will let in as improper a reconciliation as yours : but yet w^we/Tw will not ufe the word Juftification fo improperly, at leaft without difcovering the impropriety.

5 ?•

T He next bout that you bavtwitb me is pxg.%$. when you have done with Mr. ^urgef. And you there fall on to fome purpofc, thus : " [Mr. Bix-*<rer's charaftor of an Antinomian will bring,all our Protcftant Writers undec " thiscenfure.]

KepL Still morefallhood ! Is the ninth Commiandment blotted out of your Decalogue, as the fecond out of the Papifts ? Or think you that you are under no Law j or that Cod fees no iniquity iif you, fo as to bate it ?

But let's hear your pro©f. " [For with him they are Antinom'ans who hold " (I.) That our Evangcjical Righteoufnefs is without us in Chrift, or perforaied " by him and not by our felvcs.]

K(pl. Here are more untruths then one in thefe words alfo. i. I sever faid that ihcy who denied this were Antinomians^ but that it was apiece of Antinomian

Mian do^rlnc, mi chat the Aminomians did deny it: Nay left any (hould think that I accounted all Ancinomians that avc efiliided at chis> I added [and fomc that are no AntinomianSj^c. p.109 ] I call not all Antinomians thac hold any oncof their doift.inci. x. It is uiurue that all our Proteltant \Vi iters are agakift this ( as I have fully fliewed elfcwhcrc) yea or any one accounted Orthodox that ever I met with, as to the lenfeof my words : For though Tome of thcin will not allow the name of Rlgbteoufucj! :o our faith and obedience ( though the Scripture ufeth it twenty and twenty times I think) and others commonly will call it Righ-teoufnefs, but will not I'ay that we arc righteous or jultified by it. (A ftrangc Righteottfners that doth not make righteous fermxUter, as it is a lirange exiftent whitencfs, that makes no man white, and a flrange honefty or goodnels, or no-bility, that makes no man honert, good or neble ;) yet do all the P.o:cftants that ever I met with yield to my explicatory Propofuion, which I purpot'cly annexed, that none might miilake me and quarrell abeut words, vi^. [ Though Chriil performed the conditions of the Law and lacisfied for our Kon-performance, yet it is our felves that muft perform the conditions of the Gofpel,] i.e. by the grace of God. Who deny this but your own Sed, and a few Divines, that in that point joyn with you in makijig the aew Covenant to have no Condition: who arc but very few indeed comparatively. Nay of the very Libertines, the firit that I remember that taught men when they doubted of the truth of their faith or repentance, to comfort themlelves with this perfwahon, that Chrift hath beleeved and repented for them, was Saltmirjl) j againft whom Mr. (jitil{er hath teld you more truth then I perceive yeu are willing to learn. 3. Here is added to tiiefe open untruths a fecret calumny: For you deliver it in general terms, as if I did hold that which Divines commonly call our Evangelical Righteoulnefs to be in our Telves and not in Chrift. When as I purpofely explained my felf, to avoid all ftrife about words, thatas Chrids Righteoufnels is called Evangelical, becaufc the Gofpel revealeth and giveth it J fo our righteoufnefs Evangelical is without us. This you bide, to make the Reader that fceth but your words to think that I hold Tome monflrous thing. Be it known therefore to you and all men, That I trull on that Righteoufnels of Chrift which is without me Materially, and formally copfifteth in my Right to Impunity and te the l^ingdom of Glory ; and that I acknowledge norighteoufnefs within me conlifting in faith, repentance or obedience, but only A particular Righteoufnefs required by the new Covenant in mecr fubordina-tion to Chrifts RighteouTnefsj as the condition on which it i$ made ours i which isfirft in order of nature a mcer condition of our full righteoulnefs in Chrift, and then fecondarily a particular Righteoufnefs it lelf, when the Ciuie comes to trial, Whether we did perform tha: condition or noti If you do not underftand thefe few words, I intreat you either to ftudy them till you do,or elfe forbear any more to reproach that which you underftand not: and do not intimate me to be an Infidel, in denying Chrifts Righteournets.

You proceed, " £ Or ^2.) that Juftificatioais a free aA of God without any " condition on our part for the obtaining of it.J

Rep. This is in fenfe the fame with thi^^former. Here alfo is more untruths then one intimated or exprefled (Iconfefs they fall To thick from you, that I doubt I fhall bethought a railer by your party, and too rtiarp by others, for numbring them to you, and dcfiring you to repent.) i. I only laid that [the Antinomians think grace cannot be .free if there be any condition on our part for enjoying it.] But doth it folloWj that becaufe I fay, [the Antinomians lay fo] that therefore I

fay

C>9]

fay C they are Antinbmian$ who do fay fo.] The Papifts lay, Epifcopacy is a fuperiour.ocder to Presbytery: but [they are not therefore Papifts thst fhall fo fay, unkfs there be fomewhat clfe fo to denominate them.] z. Do not all the Learned men into vvhofc hands your Book Oiall fall, know tiiat it is falfe, that the Proteftants do hold the opinion which 1 here call Antinomian ? Do not the Con-feflions of the Churches, and the generaliiy of Divines make faith thecanditioa of the Covenant, and yet maintain it to be free? If you will fpeak untruths hereafter, for your credit lake, do it more modcftly and wjiily, and open not your fliame in the fight of the world. I: were no great wifdora in me or this occafiontohcapup the Tcftimonies of Churche* and Divines, in a cal'e fo wcl! known.

You adde, "[Orelfc (?.) that Juftification is an immanent ad, and con-*'fequcntly from eternity, which was the judgement of iAljUd,'^cmhU,Tvfif, *'Rutherford, Sec.}

Rep. I think there are at Icait two untruths and a half here loo. i. Whethet ii were KM</;fr/flrJ's judgement, let the Reader judge by what is written out of him before- z. Of y^//iei 11'peak as afore I laid againtt Colvims. j, It is half true oiTemblc, in that he was once of that opinion, and but half true, bccaulc in hij Treat, of '^ufttfiutiBu he fully aflerteth ours. 4. What are thcfe four men to all the Piottllant Writcts which you affirmed I would bring under this cen-fure ?

You adde, " [ Or (4.) that we mufl not perform ^uty For life and falvatioHj '^ but horn life and falvation : or that we mulf not make the attaining of Juilifi-*' carion or falvation the end of our endeavours, but obey in Tbankfulnefsjand be-" caufe we arc jufliiied and faved, t^c]

Rep. I. In theplace quoted pd^. 14. is no Uich ihing in any of the four Editions of that Book. Burl wcil remember the Icnfc of molt of ic about p. i ;\ or i". and that I largely prove it in the Appendix of my vip/'or. z. But indeed dare you fay, that all (or any) Proteftant Wri^cti^rdo.ht^it'thjs I'oint ? Now God forbid ! If theydidj I protefs feiioully I would fcarce be tilled^ Protcllant if they held but that one Hrrour alone. Did not you know in this Point, that noa only Learned men, but the ordinary lent ot Chriftians canflilprovc you ? I rippeal toall honeft men, women and children of undcrilandiiig, that ule to rcade Dod, ToUoiiiPerfiins, Prcllou,Hoolicr, Rogers, lVhcatlj/,Scc. What fay you Siis ? Do thefe Writers teach you that you mult ule no endcavouis for your falvation ? that you muft do nothing tor cternaUife ? N.iy do they teach you that the vc.y unre^cnsrate muft do nothing toobtain the lift of c,race ? j. Truly I hoped well in the beginning thad you bad not been near lo far ^Di>e your felf, as to own this defpcraic opinion. The Lord keep you from pradifmg it, or, 1 think, you are a loft man. 4 Yet let mc tell you, that I*furtbcr believe, i That thankfulncfs and Love rtiould be the cbiefcll fpring of duty. z. Yea even with the unrcgeneratc, our firft labour Ihould be when we have convinced them of fin and mifeiy, and the truth of the Gofpclj to poflcfsih-m with thanks and love for that common redemption which I fuppofc you deny j 1 rrean there is matter in CbiiftscommoK love in his fatisfadion, for us'.opUad wi'.h iiniicrs tor giaii'ude (before afiuranceof fpecial love) though they have not hearts to perceive it to purpole, till Gjd open their hearts by bii Spirit. J. The principle of our new f]i)iii:ual life is it that Chriltians muft ad from, in their whole courfe. Thus tar 1 fay we muft act frcm life and love. 4. And alfo, fcom Gods love antecedent to ou.s.

E Von

C»oy

You concludcj " [Now 1« tny ma« wfco ij moiatu\y tcffcd in o»r ftow-•* ftant Wrireri but fpetk on whom this Arrow fals: Imijbt inftanct^n nwipy " otlicrs, bi*t I will not put the Reader to i'o much tro«iblc.]

Rt^. Now let any mas who bath read tbc ninth Commandnent; and the words of Chrift, Bjf thdr fi-uitt ye JhaU ifnovptbtm, judge i. Whether it be not hit duty to lament th« finfull Hate ot thi» Brother, and to pray God to forgive bits (though I know not whether he will pray fo for himUlf.) x. And to pity poor Chriftians that ihall heat and reade the confident words of fuch men, and have not meanstodifcern their vanity, j. And judge whether that be not a bad opinion that can earangle even a godly maninfuchacourlcof (in: And whether we ought not all to take heed of believing that we were juftified before we, were born, ortnat wc ought to do nothing for our own falvajionj or that pardon is given without any condition, Co much as Acceptance. For my pan I impute thcfe faults to the Opinion firft,and to the man bat as from thence. And it may be Gods will to permit him to pra^ice according to the teodeixcy of bis Dotftrine even in the Book wherein he maiiuaineth it,that thofe that cannot unJerftand his errours in tbem> lelves^ay fee them in their efie&s.

§. 4.

THe next bout that you have with me you begin thus, pig.x9' " [ He may " if he will compare his doAriiie with W Baxter'i notions ( whom Mr. ^. •^ follows at the very heels ) Tbef. 56, 16^71^0. in his ^pb. who denies, That •* Chrifts obedience is the material, the imputation of his Righteoufncfs the fo** "malcaufeof our JuUification, or that faith is thcinfiiument by which we io " receive it.]

Rep. What an unhappy name ia mine to your mouth, that is fcldom mentioned without (in ! i. I did not deny Ciui&s obedicoce to be the material caufc in the fenfe as Divines commonly fo calkd it > and therefore not abl'olutely and without explication, as you recite it: But i. As matter is proper to fubftance, Co Jufti-iication being an accident hath no matter. Arc not you of tbefameminde ? a> At accidents do inhere in the fubjed, fo the fubjc^ is commnjily called their 49atter: In this fenl'e too our Riehteoufnefs or jullification paflive is not in Chrifts Righteoufnefs, but in our ielves, and To our felves are the matter: for I think i: is we that are juftified. Nor do I believe yet that it is one aft whereby Chrift and wc are juftified. There is then no other proper matter of oar Juftifi-cation (the later being not properly fo called it felf.) 3. But yet as wur Divines coromooly call Chrifts Righteoufnefs of fatisfadien the matter of ours, becaufe j| is tbe matter that merited it, foam I well content to do, andfolwillinglypro* fefs that our righteoufnefs is materially out of us, in Chrifts fatisfadion: and therefore I there faid that they fpeak nearer the matter that call it [the matter of our Righteoufnefs] then they that call it the matter of our a&ive Juftifi-cation.

a. Youf next charge is that I deny Imputation to be the form. i. I both gram it aad deny it, as you underftand the words. I did in that place take the wordlmputawcnin one ontly fenfe, for Donation, and fo faid, it was rather in or<i«rQf nature befere Jufti£cation, i.e. femential: and fo faith many another. 2.. Bpt I would dcfire you and all men to take n«ic« that thofc two pages z x 8,a 19.

rajf ret-

C»t3

1 have much akered^ ss 6ndin» the expreffidns unHr, and therafore i9 f«ftik them. And I fay i. That Imputation is taken either for Donition or Adjudication, and that memall, by meereftimationj or Judicial by fentencc t. That Juftification is Conftitutivc, or Sentential. And fo I judge i. That Imputation of Chrifti Righteoufnefs taken for Donation is the form of conftitutivc Juftification (Active Donation of Adivc Juftification, and Paflivc Donation of Pal2ive}ufti6catioB.) %. That fcntential adjudication of ChritU Ri§htcoufneff to us, is the form of our fcntenrial Juftification. 3. And tha: after the manner of men, or by cxtrinfick denomination 4 m%itAteobj(ciii it may be faid, that God doth impute righteoufncfj to u> by mental eftimaiion or acceptation, or approbation, when he looks on us as then Righteous and not before, and therefore may be faid then to begin fo to efteem, accept or approre us, becaufc before there was no eb}t& for an ad of fuch denomination. And this may be called the form of a men-tall Juftification. So in all three fcnfes I fay that Imputation is the form of Ju^ ftification, but not one fort of Imputation the form of aaother fcrt of Juftification } which was ail that I there meant to deny, but unfitly exprcfled ra^ minde, as in fomc other places of that Book, for which I have ever fincc Cupp fed it.

3. Kow far I deny faith to be the inftrumem, I refar the Reader to my Reply to Mr.S/i^c and iAv.J^endaU. You a litJc after cculd fay, You thought I ar^uc* rationally in that when it fitted your turn.

Youadde, •* [ He plainly afcribcsthc famckiadeof Caufality to Chrift *tii " faith, making them to differ Ontjf fccundum mAgU ifs" miniu, that Chrift is the fiM " qua, nonpriiuipalis, and faitii ihcjine quanon minus prinupdif.']

Jlep. I. More calumny and untruth, i. I laid l()hriJiffMfffi!fm,'] you fay [Chrift:] as if Chrift caufcd no other way but by latistaftion- »• The word [On//] is your notorious forgery. 3. I did in the fame place cxprefly fly thac Chrifts fatisfaftion is rhc Meritorious Caufe, and fine qui Hon, in feveral refpcAt;

4. It was only in fexfu pbjftco that I ca.!ed it Ubfa fttiequintn ^and fo do jfouf bcft friends, in fenfc) but a moral caufe, yea of highcft dignity I aflerted it to be*

5. I atfirmcd that faith was no moral cauft at all. And now let the Reader judg^ of your Vcracity,and whether you recite not my Words ju ft as, you know who^ is commonly faid to have cited Scripture to Chrift,

You adjoyn in a parenthcfis, " [He might have lifted fin in the fame raink,^ "which coo, is zfincqujntn of our Juftification.]

Rep. I. 'Every thin^j jhequa non res cxtHet,'\s not Cdufs fine qud non. Though this have no true caufality, ye; it is a mediumddfucm, and kath a tendency to the cf-fed, by which it doth fo far emulate canfaliry that it rcceiveth the nature. But who ever called privation CJufafH fine qua ner, ? and yet it is Trincipium (tniqut non. Sin in being is the true caufe »f gr.ilt : and guilt is the walcrxa rc»iev<SKi<i, or the rwBjjrttji^o of Juftification, it being the very thing that remifllon doth deftroy : even as life doth deaths or light darkncfs. x. What it you had I'poke fcnfe in this ? yet what had it been ro the ftrcn^thcning of your accufation '■f Would you have your Reader bdievrthat I make fin ro be the meritorious caufe of oui Juftification, ortohaverhatDigaity inmora! ca\ifation which laicribed to the faiisfadioa of Chrift?

N«act you fay, " [That faith and works in a larger fenfc are meritorious caufes ''oflifcandblcflcdncfs.]

Kep, Another falfe witncfs: I mcationcd merit in a larger improper fcnfe : (H

E z all

C>0

all Divines that evec I reaJ againft the Papills on chat Point do) bnt ncv«r calUd tlicm [aMeritorJoujcaufe] that I know of. Why would you print Tucb things, which you knew might be difcovcrcd ? It may be you will fay. It is all one. I anfwcr, i. You ihould then have faid that I fpeak to thatlcnfc, and not that I Ipeak fe .- Nay you (bould have put down my own words, and ict't the Reader to judge of the fcnl'ej and not put your own fcnfc on them, and then fay, I fpeak fo. z. It is no: a'l one. For in donyin;^ ihcm to be pioper'.y Mcrir, I deny them to be any way caufing by that Merit : therefore you feign mc to yield to a fuithei imp'ropricty'tlien I didjor clfe to falle Jotftrine, j. Bat will you go tell the world whit is my Judeemen:, becaufe I take, he word A/mf in-the Fathers in a larger imprcpev fenfe ? Chrift called Pf/cr Satan, for his carnal counlel : Will you determine thence that Chrift judged Peter to be the devil ? T>jvid was a worm and no man In improper lenfe ; Mul} tic needs be laflu by you for fpeaking talie dcdrinc in fo faying ? Wi'l you accui'e Chrift of Errour for faying, He is the Vine, and his Father the Husbandman? He is the Way, the Dooi, the Shepherd, ^ir*!; J* The word Reward is oft enough tifed in Scripture, and fo is the word [ If^onby ,-] and yet you conclude they are both ufvd impropeily: And will you therefore fay that Chrift was a Papift, orSociniarij or Erroneous, foruiin-; thofc words improperly? Having fpoken I'o much to your Head, let mc fay this to your Heart: Brother,you engaged yourfelf in Baptifm to fight agaii.l^ the devil: your life is or-fliould beacon inual combat againft him : How comes it to pafs then that you have fo learned his arciiling art, when you lliould have Icar^ii^u of Chrift to, be IfUy znA\.6h-Jt jour brother, and to {pcal^thetrutb I I do fei^cufly advilc you;co repent of thele waies, and to bethink you whether your opinioty-encvuia,,e you pot hc.eiD. If you rcjc<5l tliis wholfom advice, take heed tji^t'it rile not up againft you in Judgement, ana if youprcccedin luch courits impenirentjy, take heed left thofe (Ins prove unpardoned hcieafter,which you lay were pardoned before you believed or repented or were born. B^cauTe I dtfircitmay not be fo, therefore doT warn you.

Pil. 30. you fayj " [ Too many of oui Piotcftancs ( fetting aGdc the word 'f Merit,which yet M'B. thinks may be admitted) do tread direftly in their fteps j *' they afcribe as much to works as Papilis do,]

Rep. I, It fecms then other Protcftants are as much Papifts herein as 1, in fcnfe, though not in word. a. Another flander you arc guilty of ( I fay Guilty,for all you fay its pardoned bcfare committed.) Did ever I fay [The word Merit may be admitted.] Shew where if you can. I faid indeed that in that large improper fenfe [Worics may be called Merits,] thereby intending no mord adntijfton of it : bat only a capacity in the term, to fignifie fuch a thing by improper ufe. But I never faid that it is no fin in them that do ufe wo.ds fo improperly, or that [ it may be admitted.] For my part, I think the danger is 16 great, that the very ufe of the word is to be avoided by us, except in Intcrpretaions of others, or with them that will ufe it whether we will or not i and fo we muft Ipeak to men in their own language fometime, or fay nothing. 3. Better men ihea you or I, have uled the word Merit, even the Church of Chrift, the Councils and Fathers for 1400 years and more : And yiuftiti that moft eminently vindicated the glory of free grace, yet never difufed this word himfelf. If I have finned therefore but as all the Church hath done fo long, and in its fpring, I hope I am no Papift. 4. I would again have you and all men take notice how thefe Overdoing men are the grcateft Undoers. How could this man credit Popery more almoft then he doth ? As bad

as

ail am ( which is bad I confefs) yet if hecovild make allmy nci|hb«»r$ believe that Papifts beTuchas I, he would do more to make them Papifts, tbenfuchar-guings as this Book contains would undo. And I think fome Ralers that now may be in the minde to deny Papifts tbcjiberty of their Religion, cr at leaft of pleaching toothersj would grant them bothj if they thouj^ht tha: the Religionof Papifts were no worfc then mine? So the argument woiird run thus > R. 2. is a Papift : But he fhould have liberty : Thcrcfcrc Papifh (hould have liberty. But yet this is not that I aim at: But that he fhould place Pcpery in a thing which the Church hath ufcd for fo many hundred ycaiSj even as high as any Ecclcfiaftical Hil^ory or Writing can give us light, is not this the way to make all turn Papifts, and fay. Hath Chrift had no Church but Papifts fo long ? then we w ill be Papifts too : For fure the Head bad ftill a Body. Well, when God will heal his Chu-.ches divifions, he will teach men moderation.

'T'He next aiVaul: I meet v\ith.isp.Jo^p.[f.?. "Seme of out late Divines (who •* ^' feem todifciaim the dodrincof the Pipifts and Arminians ) fay the ve-ry « fame j who explain thcmlclvcs to this ctfcft. That faith doth juftific as a Ccn-« ditionjor antecedent qualification, tywhichwc aie made capable of being Ju-«'ftifiedj3ccording tothe order and Conftitiitioh of Gcd : The fulfilling of wh'ch " Condition lay they is our Evangclicall Rightcoufr.els, whereby we arc jultified <* in the fighiof God. Mr.BJXfcr is fo fond of this notion, thar although in one " place he findes faivlt with the length of cur Creeds and ConfcfTions.yct he v/ould "have this made an Article of the Crccdj a part of cur Childrens Catcchii'mes-, '^ and to be believed by every man that is a Chriftian, fo apt are we to fmile upon "our own babes.3

R(p. More of the old language ftill: i. Is this [ the very fame] as the Papifts and Arminians hold, which you fay it is the very fitr.c with, v/^. [ that Go J foe Chrifts fake accounts our imperfetl: faithjto be p(.rfe<ft Rightcouinds ? You know ibey take not [ perfe(ft Righteoufnefs ] for Rightcoufncfs on'y tha: hatha formall Metaphylicall perfeftion of Entity as 1 do. 'You fay [Their opinion isjthat Gcd in the Covenant of Grace requires faith which in his gracirus Acceptation ftands in fiead of that obedience to the Moral! Law which we ou^h: to perform.] But I fay that Chrifts fatisfaif^ion isiniicad of that obedience, in that it is in ftead of our fufFering for difobedience. You credit the Papifts and Arminians ftill, if you can prove that their opinion is the very lame with this. Do they renounce Merit ? and do no: our Divines generally make that the point of our difference about Juftification by Works ? r/^. Whether the merit of Good Works juftific? which I heartily and conftantly deny.

1. I have told you before, that 1 fay, tha: we are no otherwife juftified by the Evangelicall Righteoufnefs in queftion, then in necclfary lubortiinaticn to Chriits own Righteoufnefs, as the Cohdition of our Legal title to it, of his own appointing. This you conceal.

3. It is another fidion,that it is this Notion that I would have an Article of the Creed ( if you mean th^l^tioncs fecund c, yea or thcfrim£ direftly.) For I told you that I fpoke of the Matter and not thephrafe: I: is the fubftance of thedo-ftiincj vii' That wc muft bcUevc owkUes, and not think we may be excufed, as

E 3 having

4. For my pact as I am conddeac i; is ioiplied in the Creed, fait Aiall be af Crcc4 whilcl bccathc, by tlicgracc of GjJ. And I thialc Chrift put it into ct»4 Cic£.i if ever he made a Creed: fur« it is the fumme or principail Iieads of (<b4 G )rp»n which he fen: liis Difciplcs to preach to the \T.orId, and I :hiiik :hic }$ fit* of ihe Creed: and what that was is eridenr, iSWir.itf. i^. HetbifBekewth i»iit b^ptiid JhdU be (xvtd, Mi be th*t bcUevetb n»t fiiUbe lunnei. And it was th| Creed that was laUjjlu them before bapril'me : aadthatwas. Repent and BtUcue fw Tcmiffionof fitts.

You add [ " Though I honour Mr. "Bttxter for kis excellent parts, yc I muft " fufpcnd my Aflent to his new Creed.]

Kcp.i. N 3 newer then the Scripture, nay elder then Scripture,for it is as old as the Covenant of Grace, i. I had rather be without your Honour, then you fhould be without the Truth : not that I much care whether you be of my opi-nion,asruch i but that I care for your falvation. But my hope is, that though you take not faith to be a Condition of Salvation, yet you do Beleeve on other Grounds j and if you havethat which is the Condition, I doubt not but you may be faved,though you know it not to be the Condition; And if you think you may not Endeavour for falvation, jkK you do enieivmr it, and i3/#ri» while you fay the contrary that it may not be done, I doubt not of your fafety, becaufc you boltl that Pradically which you deny fpeculatively. But I muft tell you, that heihac thinks,thougb but rpeculatircly,that he ought not ti do it, is in great danger of bein^ drawn to omit it.

You proceed ['^ I fliall prove anon that faith ij not faii to juftifie as aa Aoce* "cedent Condition,which qualifivis us for Juftificati«n : but at prefeat I thallon-** ly render him the reafons of my disbelief, why I cannot look uponfaith astbac « Evangelicall Rtghteoufncfsjby which we are juftified. I fliall not infift upon ir, "though it be not altogether unconiiderable, that this notion is Guilty of to» "much confederacy with the foienamcd enemies of the Chriftian faith : For *• though it is no good argument to fay, that Papifts, SocinianSj^c. do holi this *' or ihatjthereforc it isnat true ; yet it will follow that luch and fuch Tenets h»r« " been held by Pipiftsj^c. and unanimoudy oppofed by our Pcoteftam writecs i " therefore they ought to be the more fufpeftedjand cfpc^ially fucli tenets of theirsj *f as have been the chief points in difference between us and thera,as this is.]

Rep. I. I (hall as readily fufptft fuch points as bear your del'crjption, as you. a. It is untrue that this is fuch, quoxiterminos, much more qtuuifenfum. All out Divines maintain an Inherent Ri^hteoufnefs, and in the fame fcnfc as they (fo far as I uaderftani them of chief note) do deny them to juftific us, Ideny^ it too.

You add [ " Our Brethren that have flatted this Notion, do take faith astht «' o-.hers do, in a prop.:r Ctaic, they attribute as much to the 71 credere, as BelUf' " minc,ArminiKi,ox any other. Faith i: fclf ( faith Mr. 2-} is our ^Righteoufnefs: " Theic was never any Papill To abfurd as to fay, that our Faith, L©ve,^c. arc *^ perftft legall Riohteoufntfs j but that God juiiciomifericBrdix,MnjufiiM,ioth " account and accept of it intlead of perfect rightcoufncfs. For ray part 1 muft *' confefs that I can fee no differenca between them but ia expreflions. The Pa -'• pifts do acknowledge the fatisfadion of Chrirt, and that be is the mcritcjcious ''Caufeof ourjuftificati^n. They fay indeed that we arc not juftified by the '^ Rightcoufncfs of Chrift Imputed, but by a Rightcoufocfs inhcr«ne in us, or

"righ-

C»53

•• ri«,hucos aftioiiJ f erfeimcd by «$. And whai io wr Brethren fay Icfs tlwo xh'n ? « But I ftiall follow ihii parallel! no funbcr-

7{fp. I. What do they fav lefs then ihUj who maintain Imputed Rightebufnefi, vjij.Iels then thofc ihat deny it ? Tie put another quiflion upon this of yours: ^heth«r a Qucftion can be lalfc ? A Logician will lay. It cannot be falfc > an«l yet a Divine will fay, It tnaybe tncndtuiimi and yet both fay tiuc: Isr.otihat ftrangc t i. 1 delire the Reader to excufe me frcmthe trouble of enumerating tU the untruihj in thefe linct ( for 1 am aweary of that work, and its to little profit,) and to exptft my full faiisfaftion to this Parallellj in my Reply to Mr. Cran-don^ii God willj) where I (hall ftiew h'm whether I be a PapiA or an Arminian : and whether his tongue and his brothers be any flander.

You proceed [ §.<. *' The Rcafons which turn the fcales of my judgment «' againftthis Notion, that our faith or faithful! adicnjj are that Evangclicall *' Rightcoufncfsjby which wc ate juftificd,Are]

Rep. Before 1 weigh your Reafons, I v ill do the Reader that favour which you deny him, vi%- To let him know a little better the Rate of the Qjjeftion, and what it is that I maintain.

Undcrftand therefore Reader,tbat I hold tfcefe Conclufioni(which I fiiall fuilier cpen, God willing, in Reply to "MzXrandov.) i. That Gods Univerlall Law of Nature rcquirethof usperfift Obedience, on Pain of eternall death if we perform it not, a. We all tinned, and Icwcie liable to that Death, j. Chrift became the Mediator, and ttept between us and the full execution, and took the penalty upon himfelf, and became a facrifice to cflcndcd Jufticc, and a Ranfome for the finners. 4. Upon this he acquiecd l^cvum ^ui Vomimi (^ NovHtn ^ta Imperii ©vcr all men > being now the Sovcraiga ot ihc wot Id as Redeemer, as luperaddcd to the fotmcr Dominion andSovciaignty w ich ihe Father, ben and holy Ghcft had as Creator. J. As Cbi^ft the Anointed and Scvei aien Redeemer, he made LegttxKetttdiante»i, An Ad of Oblivion^ A new Law, vi\. A Law of Grace » thereby Granting free pardon, JuHificaiicn, Adoptic*i, ard right to Glory to all that will fincercljr Repent and Bclceve in him ; and Pcampicrily Concluding tbofe to CYcrlafiing death that will nor. 6- This Repenting and Beleeving is nothing but A Renting fo heartily to the Tmthof the Cofpel, a thereupon to Accept the Lord Jefus Chrift and 1 ife in him.as he is cflcred, V7\. As a pardoner by Grateful! Confent and Confidence, as Good to us, by Love 5 as Soveraign by giving up our fclvcs to him for Guidance, and to take him for the Phyfuionnf our fculs, to reft en him, and apply his fhaiptft plaifters and take hisbittcrcft medicines, and which are moft ungrateful! to He fh and blood (and not to beleeve that the cure is done already :) and, as a f-ce gift we rauft accept this Grace, with confeffion of our own utter undcfcrving, and cur defert of eternal wrath, and therefore with Repevur.ce to the glory of him that Jrcclj/Uvtih us : and laftly, as he i$ the Purchafcr, Giver, and Conductor to the wn/ccHeverlafting Glory, which is the great End for which we do receive him 5 without rcfpeft to which End, faith were no faving faith. 6. Rcmiffionand Juftificationby ChriftsSatisfadi-on and Merit, being given us by a New Lsw, which hath its Precepts and Penalty, wc are obliged by this Law to pcrfeim thefe Conditions, and fhall be judged by this Law, whether we have performed them or no. In which judgemcntjhe that is accufcd not to have performed them, i.e. to bean unbeliever and Rebel againft the Lord Redeemer, muft plead his own aftual performance, and deny the accu-fatio n. And therefore that jjciformance i£ the ^ujlitk aufa, the righteoufnefs of

thac

Cl6]

xhn h'scaiifcj and of hispcrfon fo fatrc. 7, In rcfpeft 10 this perfonal New Covciian- Rii;hteoufnc('s, the Scripture doth twenty times, i£ not twenty more, c.i \ men Righteous r yea even in the dcfcripiionot' the Judgement, A/ot.ij.iaft.

^. As this New Law is but Lex pirtkuUrlt Kcmcdans, properly fubordinatc to the Law of Nature, fo this perfo; al Righteoiilnefs, is not our ^uQiUiumvcrfAlU,

"Ijif: a particular Righieoufnefs, fubordinatc to the Rightcoufncls of the Lord Je-^ws. 9. There bcin^ therefore a twofjlJ Jullification cr Righrcoufncfs, principal and lubordinatCj one which anfwcrs the Law of nature, the other which anfwciS the falfcchar^ic of not performing the condition of the Law of Grace, one in ChrlAs Satisfadicn and Merit, the other incur faith and rcpcntaace, one

"cbnlilHn; in the Pardon of all our fin and the Right to Impunity and the Kingdom j the other in our having the true condition of pardon and rij|,ht} Itfoliows that wlien the queflion is of Juftificationinthc firft Icnfe, and of the matter (as wecalli:) of that Juliification, i.e- the thing for which we are jullified merit»-rioiilly, that we muit then conclude that it is only Chrilts Righteoafncfs that is our Juiiifi-'arion or our Righteoufncfs > and that faith or repentance is not the lealt part of t: Bu: if the Queltion be only of the meet lubordinate Righteoufncfs an! Jultification, then we rauft fay that our ownfaithand repentance, and not Chiifts^aiisfadion is that Righteoufncfs: For it is adebafingof Chrifts Righ-teoufncf'., to b:ing it folow i and it is no other exalting of faith then God haih in his Covenant exalted it, to raile it fo high, as to be thus fubordinatc to Cbrifts Ri.hccoufncfsj that i: may become ours. 10. In regard of the firft great Jufti-fication of a finner confifting in Remiffion of fin \conUitutive) and fcntcntial abfolvin» him from euilt. Faith or any work of mans is but the condition fine qui r.on, and not the leaft part of that Righteoufncfs (as is faid ) But in regard of that fubordinatc Juffification which is but a means to the former, faith and rc-penraiKc arc onr Righteoufncfs it felfj fo that faith is fi. (I in order of nature but a conditions but ftcondarily, when the cafe at Ju.lgemcnt is. Whether we have performed that condition or not, then confcqucntially it is owr fubordinatc particular Righrcoufnefs. 11. No man can pcifovtn this condition without Gods fpecial grace, i 2. It was the intent and abfolice Will, yea and undertaking of Chrift dying, tocaufeall the Eleft of God infallibly to perform this condition. Thus Reader I have anticipated fome part of what I intended to fay in my An-Iwcr to M' Qrj,Hiiont as being unwilling to delay thy information, or be guilty of the continuance of thy prejudice againft the trutii. I confcfs I have lately received Aniniadverfi jns from Learned men, againft the thing here laid down,i//i^. a perfonal Righteoufncfs j but Gods Word is lo plain and mens rcafons againit it in my eyes fo weak, that Iain more then ever confirmed in it. I equally hate vain diltindion and confufion : Bu: todiftinguilh between the Law of naturc,an*i the Law of grace, between Chcifts Righteoufncfs imputed, and the condition of Imputation, and fo between our primary Righteoufnefs and our fubordinatc Righteoufncfs, I think are no vain djftindions. Let's make it plain by afimilitudc. In a time of Rcbc'lion, upon the Princes interceflion and faiiifadion. An Aii of grace is granted, that whoever will acknowledge the Princes favour and the K'ngSj and Accept a pardon, iTiall be forgiven and fhall not die. Is ic not one thing here toaccufeaman as a Traytor, and another thing to accule him of not accepting the pardon i and are not thefe two causes referring to two Laws ? yec one fubordinatc to the othc , ani not coordinate. When he isaccufcd of Trcalon, be is juftificJ by the Ad of G.acc : and this is his Titulm ddLibcntioncm. But

when

C*73

when it is but one Traytor of many that Acccpteththe A & of Grace, and he is accufed ofn(5?j-acccptancc, and the cafe to be decided fals tobethis, VVhetherthc Aft of Grace give that man any Right to Impunity ? then bccaufc itwasacon-ditienal aft, he muit be here juftified by pleading that he did perform the condition. And fo that Juftification which is but fubordinate, and in order of dignity but fecondary, as a means to the former, is yet in order of Pica at Judgement to go before it, as ihe means mult be before the end.

If thou be unprejudiced, Readcrjand lovefl the truth, I fliould ihiok that I need hot lav much to M' Ej/re's Arguments, having given thee in thefc Conclufions, fo clear a groun^^ of anfwcring them all j But I lliail briefly take an account of them, and fo return to M' Ejre: Who thus begins.

*' [ I. If we arc not luflihed by our own works, thcnour belceving, tiT'f. is not '^tha: Ev?.iigelical righteoulncls by which we arc juftified: But we arcnotjufti-*' ficd by cur own works: Therefore.]

Rep. I>tftin.,ui(li of works, anddil^inguiih of juftifying. i. That Juftification whicH ccnlilleth in remiffion of lin, is not in our own faiifi J but that which corlUt(!i.nin,perlormingfhe conditicn of rcmiilion is. a. Woks aie takjn cither as'J <z«/ doih (which he dtfcribcth Rom. 4.4- iVbich nia^c the reward to be not of grace but of debt: Or as JiWJCfdoth, in nccciVary luboruinanon to Chrift. In the former fanfc I deny your confequcnce j In the later Icnle I deny your »i/-flor or antecedent. And if you fay thatTrfw/ Uippofeih that All works do make the reward to be of debt i I anfwer, 1. T hen .^4»jc* faith we arc juitified by im-poffibiliiy, or by unlawful; waics. The worksthat Jiwicjmentions are polllble and law full: works that make the reward to be of debt are impoiliblc, and the'attempt of fuchunlawfull: Therefore there are fome works which do not make the reward to be of debt. i. The fame Taul that faith we are jullified by Chrilt, faith oft enough that we are juftified by faith, and that faith is and (hall be imputed to us for RighteouCnefs.

z. PrfM/takes works for Meritorious aftionsdeferving wages. Faith isno fuch work J therefore on that ground ftill 1 deny your confequencc.

J. You muft diftinguiHi of theword. [by] when yon lay. We arc, or are not juftified [by] faith. Itsone thingto be jultificd [by] faith, as the matter ot ouc Righteoufnefs. So we deny it, as to our great principal Juftification. And its another thing to be juftified [by] faith as a meerly fubordinate condition /fne qu4 mn.' and fo PauI {ii[[ includeth it as plain as a man can fpeak. Still faying, Wc are juftified by faith. Tbisanfwers fully the Texts cited by you; and is another anfwcrthcn that of the Papifts to which you here Reply. Yet to your anfwcrsto thelaft, {xhu Others fiy. It U not-worlis of the Livf, but gojpcl.) Imuftgiveyou tliefe brief Notes (fuppofingthat the words you anfwer arc none of mine till better explained, limited and reformed.)

To your firft, I fay, dtlfinguit Lex. Puul and ^xmes elfe will hardly be reconciled .* Yea Faw/himfelf diltinguiflierh, by punftual exprcQing the works of the Law, 01 telling you he means only works that make the rcxvird to be uot ofgrdcC bnt of debt} and taking in faith as that by which we arc j.uil:ihLd.

I0 your fccond, you fpeak very daikly and dangcroally: and againft you I return. If fa;*/exclude all Debt which follows upon promife, then he excludes all that follows upon an abfolute promifc, as well as upon a conditional : But the Confcquent is falfc, therefore fo is the Antecedent. The reafon of the conte-gucnp is clear. Either you mean that this is [Fiom the promilc as a promife] or

F •■ elf§

C»81

<lfe [ From the promifc as conditi«»al.] If the formerj then ir follows an tbfo^ lute pt-omife as much as a conditional} and then you muft deny all Gods promi-fcjj and then you will be againft the Golpel indeed. If the later, then I fay. That thcpromlfc j«i conditional,'ivcs no right J diliinguifh of conditions: Some arc of fuch value as to be Meritorious: thefe caufc the debt by Merit : Others hare too meriting value (as the acceptance ofafreegih:) thefe areno caufes lomuch as Moral, but meer conditions. And whoever knows what a condition in Law-fcnfe is, knows that as fuch,i: only fufpends the aft of a Teftament or ^other gift, till it be perforir.cdj but doth not caule it, when it is performed.

To your third, it is anfwcred already.

To your fourth, fee my anlwer to M'^ Blake. Alfo, The Gofpel is a fubordinat* Law, and the matter of its precept is taken out ef the general Law of nature ; but informed with a new prosiife. Adams body was earth > but yet to be diftinguifh-ed from common earth,and worthy of another name, when it was informed with a new form, even his foul. I doubt you will not apprehend well what thefe fhort ex-preffions contain, unlefs you will pleafe to confider and digeft them.

To your fifth Taulta iurgen^t, a Chriftian Jew, on f/mi.addM Lyrani Anntt. tels ustharhisCountreymcns opinion was, that God denominated a man righteous or wicked according to the greater part of his wotks. If he had more good works then bad, he was Righteous: clfc nor. The Jews did not think to be jufti-fied by pei feft unfinning obedience : for they were to confefs Cn, and facrifice for it. But they thought that their facrifices themfelves and their good wotki might fo procure the pardon of their fins, or prevail againft their evil works, that they looked not for righteoufnefs to Chrift the end of the Law. This is the Juftifica-tion by works which ^aul argues againft dircftly j and only confequentially a /ortrorewc may gather it, as of perfeft obedience, which is tous impoflible, asic maybe fuppofed to juftifie us from the charge [of being Tinners.] Yet becaufe their obedience was not perfeft, Paul might well convince them that it could not juftifie when they erred in thinking, that impcrfeft obedience, by the help of facrifices, might juftifie.

1. Your fccond Argument Is this, "[ z. If the righteoufnels whereby we arc '^juftifiedbe a perfeft Righteoufnes, then we arc not juftified by our obedience *' to Gofpel precepts : But,^f. Therefore.]

This is anfwered in the former,by the fame diftinftions.Thc righteoufnes whereby we are juftified as [by the Matter, or Meritorious caufe] is perfeft : and therefore faith or obedience is not fuch. But the righteoufnefs whereby we are juftified as a meer conditiQn,and confequentially a righteoufnefs fubordinate to the former, isnot perfeft 5 and therefore of this your confequence fails. All your following words therefore to this,aremeerly befide the Point and vain. I never doubted of that, Whether any impcrfeft thing can be our univerfal grand Righteoufnefs ? no doubt it cannot: But you ftiould prove that it cannot be a fubordinate conditional particular Righteoufnefs.

You do here confefs that our Proteftant Divines do call inherent Holjncfs, E-vangelical Righteoufnefs : Very good : I defire tio more then thofe words contain : Yet I prayyouconfcfs that the Scripture commonly cals it fo before them. i.Certain! y/Mj'ittm^cr/67* ;«^»/c4r;, asto conftitutive Juftification is all one. He therefore that is righteous is doubtlcfs juftified conflitutive. And doubtlefsto be fehten-cedjuft, and to be juftified by lentence, is all one. And he thatisfirftjuft by conftitutionj muft needs be juftified by fcntcncc. But then all this is but in tantumt

fo

fo far as he is juft, fo far he is undoubtedly jufiificitiutm^itmvi, (^ jujlifundus ftrfmenUOMi anci (as I faid before) ia it not as ftrjiaga a liohteoufiicfs which makej not a man righteous ;■7l^«w«»l, ( I Ipcalf of» foroial Making) as a White-, nelstha: pjakes not white, or zl^tiemtus that makes not ^^rem .' a. Do not all men know that (as M' Bnifluw hiih) a very reprobate may have fome particular rightcourners ? If you accuit^udAs of killing the man that was flain yeiUr-day, he is righteous as to this cauie. VVhy then Ihould you think the name of Richteoufncis fo intollcrable, when applied to faith and obcdieacc.

O bur { faith a Learned man to me) then you afciibe biJt fuch a kirdeof righ-teoufnefs to faith and obedience, as a reprobate may havf ? that's a fair advancement to faith, jinf. i. Meibinks then you (hotild not fjiy I am a r.ipiil;and give too much to faith ? t liut conHder, though both may have a jujiitiotn pmikU^arem, yet to one it is in a cafe of no advantage to him ; but inthe other it is Aconditiori of his eternal felicity, and lo made by the Law of God. When falvation lies ofl one as a condition,and not on the ether, I think there ismuchdifteience.

Now to your third Argument where you lay, " [ If the lighteoufnefs wha-eby *'weatc juliifieti be the rightcoufnefs of God, then yve aie pot juftified by oup «« obedience to Golpel-prccepts: Bucjtr'f- Therefore,]

Rep. All is of Gods gift. But in your fenfe I fay, Our fubordinate particular cenditional Righteoufnefs,is net the Righteoufnefs performed by God without us: The word [t^] therefore, and Ijujlifed^ and iRightfoufneJS'] muft be diftinguilh-? cd as before. All the relt of your words on this need no other anfwer, and I deiirc not to tire the Reader. The righteoufnefs mentioned i^fut.xs. wasperfonal: fp was that which ^iiMwfpeaks of when helaith, iVc Are jupficd hy w^rks: andtha? which ^oiba mentions, when he faith, Hctbit /iotb RflhtcoufnejS if Rightcoui: »nd fourty more.

Your fourth Argument is this, " [ If we are not juflilaed by two righteouCnel-" fcs exifting in two diftind fubjeds, then Gur obedience to Gofpel-precepts is <fnot that righteoufnefs whereby we are juftificd : But,t7'c. Therefore.] -• -Rep. I. To the Antecedent I fay, of two coordinate righteoufnefles it is true > but of two, whereof one is coordinate and the other fubordinate, itisfalfe, that there is not two. i. But formally they are both in one fubjed : for it is We that «re Righteous by Chriiis Righteoufnefs; that is, by that which is Chrifts materially, and in another numericall form ; for furcly one Accident is not in two fub-jtfts. But I fay, Materially one is in Chrift, and the other in us.

And here I remember an odd paflage that you have, pig.7. which I ihallrecite, ** [ It doth not follow that Chrifts Righteoufnefs cannot be imputed to us, before *' we have an adual crcvtted being, becaufe Accidents cannot fubfift without their *' fubjcds ; for as much as imputed righteoufnefs is not an accident inherent in us, *' and confequently doth not neccQ'arily require ourexiflencc. Chrill is the ful>>/:d '^ of this Righteoufnefs, and the imputation of it as an ad of God.]

Rep. Hear all you that have been feduced by l>VE}re to believe that m;in was juftified befcre he was bnrn : Here heexplaincth his mindeto you. He faidCwiwj but he meant [(^Arr/i] If it be not we but Chrift that is the fubjed, thendoubt-lefs it is not wc but (^'<7r//t that hath the Accident, and that is to be denominated by it : And then it is Chiift that was righteous before we were born, and not \vc. Or elfc Chrift makes us righteous, and yet we are not Righteous, or we are righteous and net righteous at once (even when we are not men) and that in refpcdof the fame rightcoufuerS' When I reaJe fuch palfa^cs as thefe^ I undciftand the

F 1 meaning

meaoinj of your Patrons, that wonder mcnrtiouM feck to bring Gods Truthi down to the rcafon of man : fie. we mull become bruits that wc may become Chri-ftians (a horrid thing to fpcak }) and we mult put out the eye ot reafon, that we may fee wtth faith,which is the only fupcrnatural elevation ot reafon.

But you have an Argument pag.^7. to prove the affumption of yourlaftj vi^, " [If by Cbrifts.righteonfncfs alone we arc made perfcdly juft and righteous in *'the fight of Godj then there is no other rigbteoofncfs which concurres wi.h hii *'to car Juftification : For what ncedi an addition to that which is perfect? But (^c. Therefore.] All is granted, if you fpeak of the matter or form of our principal Righteoufncfs J The addition of a condition is through no dci'cdt «r imperfedion in it : but God hath made it necefTary to our participation cf that which was not done by our fclves but by another. It is not true that we arc made righteous by Chiifts Righteoufnefs till the condition be performed : but when it is performed, we are juftified perfcdly by Chrifts Righteoufnefs alone, as to the principal general Juftification > the condition performed being but a fubfcrvient particular Righteoufnefs. I would you would well confidcr, that Chrift died to pardon nothing but our finnes, and that he that bath nothing but finne, is not pardoned.

Youaddc, ^'[ If we be juftificd partly by Chrifts Righteoufnefs and partly by *' our own, then our faith for Juftification mult rely partly upon Chrifts Rightc-** oufnefs and partly upon our felves : BuZiO'c. Therefore.]

Rep. I deny the Confequencc. It is the relying on Chrift that is our fubordi-nate righteoufnefs it felfj and therefore is fuch becaufc it is made the condition cf our part in Chrift ; They are not coordinate, nor is faith.our principal Righteoufnefs, butof a lower fort. God hath faid, that if by faith wc receive Chrift, we fliall be juftificd, and our faith (hall be imputed to us for righreoufnefs : but he hath never faid. If we will reft on our own faith, we fhall be righteous : For then refting on that faith would be a third lore of righteoufnefs fubordinatc to faith it felf. Thcfc be but raw fancies.

Your fifth Argument is, " [ That which overthrows the main difference bc-" twcen the Law and the Gofpel, ought not to be admitted : for the confounding " them will open an inlet to innumerable crroursj nay by this means the Gofpel " it felf will become a mccr Cypher,(ir'f. But the making our obedience to Gofpel* *' precepts the rightecufncfs whereby we arc jultified, overthrows the main difiie-" rence between the Law and the Gofpel: Therefore. For herein ftands the chief "agreement and difference between the Law and Gofpel : They agree in this, ''That to Juftification Jboth do require the perfect fulfilling of the Law ; but "herein they differ. That the Law requireth to Juftification, a righteoufnefs in-" herent in us, and perfcd obedience to be performed in our own perfons: The " Gofpel reveals for our Juftification the perfed righteoufnefs of another, even of ** Chrift, which is accepted in their behalf tha^ do beleevcin him-^^c."]

Rep. Thcfe words which you cite out of Bifhop Z»owx<;d»i, fay as I fay in full fenfe J and lay nothing to confirm your minor, which I deny, if you fpeak but of a fubordinatc particular righteoufnefs: elfe I grant all. Do I fay tbatweareju-ftifiedby perfed obedience, which ZJownfeiWJ fpeaks of ? yea or by any incoordination with Chrift ? If you undeiftood the difference your I'elf between the Law and Gofpel, you wculdcorreft all thcfc errours, and be a wifcr man then I think cither you or I are now. I pray you do me the favour as to confult but Mr. Pemble of Juftification, in the place cited even now ( feeing you fuppofe him to be your

own.

own,but ic fecmi difclaimed you a linle before he weot to heaven) and fee how he difFerenccth the Law and the Gofpel.

You fay, " [ A dcfcft in degrees is a fin againfl the Gofpel, O'c.'] Kep. It is not a 7»o«-performaBGc of the Gofpel condition, and thenitisno hin-dcrarice toour Juftification by it. Some Learned men have much bonfted of that Argument I Obedience is it felf impcrfcSi, and thereforeca7i?iot be the condition of our ^ufttficatton (as confummatcat fudgcmevt, or continued ) for thcnvehat Jhall pardon the defects of 11."] As if imperfcd obedience might no: be the condition of the pardon ot its own imperfedions ( fubordinate to faith, asisfaid:) May not an ira-perfeft faith be the condition of the pardon of its own imperfeftions ?

But to Mr. Eyre, who having done with nu-, addcs, " [ Now briefly my fcnfe " of this Propolition, [Ife arejitjiijied bj fditb^ is no other then that which hath *' been given by all our ancient Proteftaat Divines, who take faith herein obje-*' ftively, not properly, (^c.^

Rep. Our Divines take faith objcdively, when the matter of our righteoufnefs is fpoken of i but how ? Only by connotation of the objeft > and not by exclufion of faith it fclf: as ifthcwoid i faith'] fignified Chrirt. Elfc you would fa It en a ftrangc fenfcon Fj.'//, when it is faid lIfwehclieveitJI}aUbeimputedtowal[o,2 doth the word believe flandforthc word [c7;n/J ?] But this our Divines have (o fully confuted, that I will fay no more to ir but this. That if by [_bHieving'] be i«)t meant [Believing] but Ichrift'] when it is fo many and many times rehear-fed , I. Scripture is made the mofl ufelefs unintelligible writing in the world, when no man can know the fenfe by the words a hundred times repeated. For your faying that Taulhy [faith] means noi faith, is no evidence to convince me. O how glad are the Papifts of fuch expofuions as yours, that may convince men that none can underftand the Scripture without a Judge of its fenfc. a. And then, why might it not as well be faid that a manis juliified by feeing Chrift, or 'hearing him, or hearing of him, or any other aft, as well as Believing, if it be not Beleeving that is meant, where it is fpoken ? But I will not anticipate Mr. Woodbridgc in his work.

§. 6.

THc next aflaulc that I meet with is pdg.^o.^i, where you fay, " [Mr. fl. '* {Thef.70.') includes all works of obedience to Evangelical precepts in the <'definition of faith, in which fenfe I prefume no Papill will deny that we are *' juttified by faith alone, taking it as he doth for fidesjormata, or faith animated ^' with charity and other Good works.]

Rep. Here is at leail one untruth expreil'cd, and another implied, i. Thereis no mention in thofe words of mine of obedience to all Evangelical precepts : but only of that finccre obedience which is made by God the condition of falvation. Now obedience may be fincere, and yet not be to all precepts which are in the Gofpel: Many a lelfer particular duty may be unknown to one that obeys fin-cerely : Mr. Eyre is bound by the Gofpel to believe that faith goes before Juftifi-cation, and yet he knows not this ; may he not for all that obey finccrely ? The Gofpel requireih Baptifm, and I think of Infants J yet it will not follow that no man is fincercly cbedicnt that is unbaptized, as miltaking it to be now no duty, or that is againft Iniam-Baptifaij on the like niiltake.

f $■ .*• You.

. •%, Yon intimate that it is our firft jullifying faith, or faith ftridlr taken that 1 here defcribc; and To adJc your parallell of ihc Pjipiftj. But honelty riquired you to have confclTed on the contrary, that I had before ipokc of faith in the proper ftridlcnfc, as it i$ the condition upon which every man recciveth the rcmif-fion of all the (ioi paft of his whole life, and that Juilificaiion jMMiyJi/uw, which fome call univcrfal JulHfication, as diftinft from particular Jullification and Re-miflion following upon every new fin : and that in the words which you cite I only defcribedfaich in a more large improper fenfe, and as it is theconditiononly of our glorification,and final Jullification in the great Judgement. Why Ihould youcoa-ceal tbis,and imply the contrary ?

§. 7.

THe next touch that I findc is ^^-'94. where you tell Mr, Tf^. < [ i. If faith " were a condition morally difpofing us for Juftification, we ftiould then be ^^ concurrent caufes with the Merits of Chrift in procwine our Juftificaiion : for *' the Merits of Chrift are not a Phyfical but a moral caulc, which obtain their ^' eflFeft by vertue of that Covenant which was made between him and the Father: *'now by afcribing unto faith a moral caufal influxinour Juftification^we doclcar-'My put it iHCoicwjjenerccdtt/"^ with the blood of Chrift: which I hope Mr. if. " will berter confider of, before he engage too far in Mr. B^xtcrj caufe.]

Rep. Becaufe you arc pleafed to make it my caufcj I will be bold to give my Reply. There are very palp^iblc errors delivered with confidence in thefe words. I.You confound moral Vifpofitig, and moral Caufing: All di^ofing is not cAufittg* X. You raoft falfly fuppofe that we afcribe to faith £a moral cautal influx in Justification .] and do nothing to prove it.

J. All is grounded on that grols Error, That [all Civil or Legal conditionSj are Moral caufes,] which is fo farrc from truth that the clean contrary is true. [No Civil or Legal condition, qua talU, is a moral caufe ] »• A condition oAly while unperformed fufpcndeth the aft of the Law or Tcftament, that is, It was the Will of the Legiflator or Tcftator, or Donor, that his Law, Tcftament,C7'f. fhould aftjOr efteft when the condition is performed, and not before : but not that it fliould be any caufe : no more then ^«d«iox;cn/t<i/Ci the time is a caufe. 2. A condition is but mm/4 ^««j«i«OK; therefore it is no moral caufe. Yet its true that among men,moJt conditions in another refpeft are moral <aulcs j but none of them, an conditions. Men ule to make fomewhat a condition (though not alway) which is of Worth tothemielves, and fo hath fomewhat in the nature of the thing whicn is meritorious (when the condition is not cafual, but Poteftativc or mixf:) and this is a moral caufe, not' as it is a condition, but as meritorioi'j. Would you have the world believe, without better maniftltation, that you are fo excellent a Lawyer, that we muit take your word againlt common lenfe, and ths common judgement of men that fhould be wifer in their own profefllon ? You know fure that its common in the Civil Law to have cafes of fuch cafual conditions, as can-' t^t be caufall ? As [if fuch a Ship come into fuch a Hirbour, fuch a day] being .'^ojbing to the Donors advantage. [If fuch a fon live to fuch an age, he fhall havfi lach Lands.] [If the afrrow that is (hot up, fall within fuch afpace.] And the like is true in Poteftativc conditions ( as they call them) that is, voluntary; [I give thcc a pardon on condition thou wilt accept it; or not lefuie ii; or not un-

. > graiefuUy

i

C333

gratefully abufe me whenl have given kthee : not fpitinmy face: not fetk Hiy life, ruine, diihonom,(s'c.'] None of thcfc arc Meritorious^ and therefore none of them caufa).

4. Have you never obfervcd that your friend Dfrjv/jff doth nor once or twice, but ordinarily, affirm that faith is a condition and medium of our Juftification, and that Good works are caufa difpofitiva, and praparatoria fdutis f I may tell you more of hisminde hereafter.

One thing more in this Seftion I dcfire your refoiution of. You here fay, that [the Merits of Chrift are not a PhyCcal but a Moral caufe :] upon which I would know J r. Donotyou take as much from it as I, and make the Merits of Chrift as much a caufa finequanoninfenfu pbyfici, as I ? For what can you do more then fay it is no Phyfical caufe at all ? And with what jufticc or modcfty then could you before pretend that I am worfe in this very point then the Papills them-felvcs, when I am Rft^ worfe then you ? A moral caufality I allow icj as well as you.

Nay fccondly give me leave to enquire whether in deed and truth you do allow it a moral caufality of our Juftification at all: In your pag. 66. youanfwcr a fhrewd Objcftionj which would prove you near to infidelity, vi\. "[That <f you make void the Death of Chrift: for if Juftification be an immanent "ad in God, it is antecedent not only to faithj but to the Merits of Chrift, "which is contrary to many Scriptures, that do afcribe our Jnfiification to his «'blood, as to a meritorious caufe.3 To which you Anfwer, [That although *f Gods will not to punifh be antecedent to the death of Chrift: j yet for all we may ^ be faid to be juftified in him, becaufe the whole effeft of that Will is by and "for the fake of Chrift. As though eleftiag love precede the confideration of " Chrift, Jofc.5.16, yet are we faid to be chofcn in him, Eph.i.^. becaufe all ** the cflTcfts dt that Love, are given by and through and for him. Gods not "punijhiitg ns, is the fruits of his death: yet his Will not to punifh, is antecc-** dent thereunto.

Rep. Tbisdiftinftionof./iffaj v(»/e«<*f, and resvoUta, we have oft here on fuch cccafions. But i. Do not you here make our aftive Juftification to be no fruit of Chrifts Merits at all, but only our paflive ? Now if you would publiih this doftrine nakedly, Tbizjufiifcau$jufltfcans, or Gods aftive Juftification, is not at all procured by Chrift, it would be more candid and open dealing, then you ufc while you pretend fo much to exalt Chrifts Merit, in your denying the parts or in-tereft of faith and obedience.

I. Surely then we muft findc out another Aftive Juftification, whereof Chrifts Merits are the caufe, as well as of the paflivejif we will be ruled by Scripture > and this your Brethren have done, for which you oppofe them.

5. I would commend it to your conlideration, Whether it be not a work worth your labour, the next time you fet uponthefe imployments, to open'to us like a Philofopher and Divine, how and in what fenfe and refpeft it is, that the Merits of Chrift can caufe the cflFeft and not the sd ? the rem Folium, and not the aHuai Volendi ? And how Chrifts Merits can be a moral caufe, or a meriting caufcjand yet not caufe the ad of God? Merit you know is reckoned among the remote effic-entsof our pardon and fanftification and falvation. Now if God be the nearer efficient, howcanMerit which is the remote, caufe tbefe efFefts, and not caufe Gods ad ? I would intreat you to anfwer ft, as to all thcfecfteds, even Sandi-ficaiion and Olorification as well as pardon. You know alfojl fuppofc,that Mcrii

C34]

11 accounted one of the Procitardical Icfi-ptinclpal efficients; Now the nature ofthiscaufc is to incite the principal caufe Ai agendum cxinnCicMy. And Merit is faidtobethat which moveththe agent aiidtonem reideniam. Now If Chrifti Merits move not God as a P-ocataraicalcaufe, then how are they truly meritorious caul'cs ? You know alfo, 1 doubt nor, that A moralcxufing in fuch cafes as ours about Tolontary Agents, doth conliflin an argumentative, ebjedive, or the likemoralmovingof the Agent. Now how can Chriftj Merits be moral caufes herCj and work nothing upon God the principal Caufc ? when this moral caufe is a remote caufcj and a remote caufe producetb the efted meiil aufapropinquioref I do not hereby conclude mylclfthat Gads Will was moved by Chrifts Merit*: but thee is another weHgc then yours by which we mull cleave this knotty block j which if I tell you of, its like you will be prejudiced againft it, becaufe it is from me ; but if you will lludy to expedite the bufinefi 'your telf a little better then here you have done, it may reduce you to a better minde in the main. But if it fhould prove upon thefeconfiderations, that you do contradift yoar fclf, and do indeed deny Chvift to be any caufe, fomuch as Moral and Meritorious of Juftification adive oi paflive, of the ActuAvdentU or ^svoliu, then I think you have been an unhappy exaUer of Chrill, while your zeal carried you againil the intcreft of faith.

And mtthinks it fliould be fcarce favoury to a friend of Chrifl and an cxaltcr of hisMetiti, to have them made no more a caufe of our Juftification, then of our Elcdion 5 that is, of the efFcds of both which arc in timCjbut of neither of theair felves which are from eternity.

And I take it but for private Theology that [all the effeds of eleding love arc given by, through and for Chrift.] Whereby you plainly intimate him to be the wcmorzoaj caufe of the gjift^i, which you deny of the >45. But i. the giving of Chrill himfelf is no fmall cfFed of eleding love, and yet not given for and through himfelf. Chrift was not y iven to Merit, for the fake of his Merit, as any eificienc caule. ». ^itfw and the Creation I think were not made upon the procurement of Cbrifts Merits. 3. Nor was man endowed then with the Image of God. 4- Nor made Lord of the inferiour creatures, f. Nor placed in a Paradife. 6. Nor had the promile of immortality and felicity, if he finned not j upon the procurement of the Merits of Chrift. Yet all ihefe were effeds of eleding love, being all means for the attainment of the ends of elcdion. 13nt many fuch things as thefe your Reader muft bear with you in, unlefs he be a lefs fcrupulous man thac can fwallow all.

§. 8.

THe nextplace thati findcmyfelf fnaptat ispi^.ioi. where you fay, "[He " gives usa youthfull frolike to ftiew his gallantry, like Mr. Sjxfrr's chal-'* lengc, [ Let the Antinomuns j]):vp one Scripture rvhicb fpcalis of ^iijiiJicMten fom *<eterniiy.'] The Antinomians, faith lie (m^.IV) the Antipapiib and Anti-*'armiua(is he means) may rcade their eyes out, before they produce ui one " Texti tor any other Juftification in Scripture, which is not by Faith or " W >rki.]

Rep. This requires fmall anfwer. i. Why cou'd not fuch a rude challenge as thisj oacc provoke you to open your Bible and tranfcribe one Text to that fenfe ?

Had

Had not one fuch Text been as fooncitcdj as all this Book vvihten ? But fome-ihing is wanting ? He that cannot fay what he (hould, mail fay what he c4»,rachcr then yield or fay nothing.

2. I perceive it is no: only I that am a Papift or Arminian with you, or with whom an Antinomian fignifies an Antipipirt, and an Anciarminian ? Mr./fooi-i«igc fals under the fame iaih. But, Sir, while the Harmony of Confeflions, and the Synod of Port, and the late Confefllon of our Aflcmbly are vifible, the world hath a better carader to know a Papill and Arminian by, then yours j and will hardly be perl'waded that all arc Papills ansl Arminians that hold not the eternity of Juftification or Remiflion, and that it is before the death and purchatie of Chrlft, er that hold not that we are juftified before we are men, or pardoned before we have lianed } no nor all thofe that hold not the Juftification of Infidels.

But I perceive you are not fparjng of your accufations of thofe that are not of your party and opinion j when piig.^4. you do fo let fly at his Brother M' ^ohn Weoibridge, forfooth " [ as no hearty friend to gathering and reforming Church-*' es, as deferring a Congregation in Mexv EngUni, whereof he was Paftor, to *' become a Parifh-Panon in the Old. ; and not only fo, but hath ftood to main-" tain that Parifhes arc true Churches,] And you fay, [Its like his Parfonage is " better, (s'c']

Where i. you venture to caft your cenfure upon the hidden thoughts of a mans heart, which is Gods prerogative: iVbo art thou tb it judgefi another mans fervant ? Do you know that it was a better Parfonage that is the cauleof what you mention ? You that dare do this, daredonnore. 2. If you deny that any Parifhes, yea that many hundred Parifhes in England are true Churches, you do more then judge a particular Brother, and more then you are ever able tomake*ood, and more then tlie Brethren of 7»{/w England would affirm. But I perceive your errour is not afingleone,not only in Dodriaals: Separation will not perform in the condufion, what the Leading Dividers do promife.

Pag.^^,90, Though I am not named, yet perhaps concerneti, I am fure the truth is, where you fay, " [Idefire the Reader to obferve how much Mr. I^> is ''^ beholden to a Popifli Tenent, oppofed ( by all our Proteftant VVri:e. s) ro fup-" port hiscaufe, which is {_That faith goa before fujlification to dzf^ofcus for it.1 *f J5f//arwj;«c undertakes to fro\e,(^c. Againll whom all our Proteltant l3ivine» '' which my little Library hath obtained, do unanimoufly affirm, that taiih doth " not difpofe or prepare us for Juftification.]

Kep. Like Caufe, like carriage in maintaining it. i. I fuppofe you know that our Divines do fpeak it of Juftification in the Popifli fcnfe, which con'pri-zcth fandification and faith it felf. But this you would not fee or have your Reader fee : This isbd:pf<i^<l»i. 2. I fuppofe you know that our Divines by [Dif-pofition and preparation] do mean by way of condition Jfne qui non ; and fo y«ur Brethren teach as well as you, that faith the firft grace, is given without any pi e-rcqaifite condition on our parts, properly fo called j the contrary is'au-hr by Pelagians, Jefuitcs and Arminians j but your pious fraud did hide this too Is deceiving the bcft Teaching ? for errour it is, but not for truth. Do you not know that the honeft women of your Congregation that ever read Mr Hooi{crs Souls preparation for Cbriji, and SouLs efccfial f^ocation, zni Souls ^ujiificjtioif, 01 M .^3. Rogers of Faith, or Mr.2o/tou, Perl{ivs, or the like honeft old Praftical Divines, conld quickly canfatc your general aliertion, and tcU you. Si: our Library is larger then yours, for all thcfc Divines do tell us of apreparationncccliary to jufti-

G licaiion,

Cj<3

fication, yea to faith It Iclf; yea and they make this the great ncccffary doftriuc for the breaking of hard hearts, and confuting the prefumptions of the prophane. It is worth the obfcrvation ofcrery honcli Chriftian, howprophannefs and An-tinomianifm, Jo run hand in hand, andfpeak wiih one tongue, an.1 put our Divines to one and the fame labour. Ho that in this point of prepaiation for Chrift, and many others, we miift confute the fame conceits of both, j. Nay fuie yoa know that the generality of thefe Divines of ours, do make faith a condition, and motl of them an inftrument of our Jultification : and an efficient caufe is a little more then a paflive preparation in fcvfu morali, by the aft of faith.

§• 9-

^ He next place that I linde my name in is p:^. i45' (and divers other places in •■ the margin ) " [Our reconciliation is an immediate efted of the death of "Chrift, as Mr. Owen hath invincibly proved in his Anfwer to £ux((rr,p._j4.] Thus you : and oft that Anfwer and Mr.I^caiu//*» is cited.

To which I fay but this. I fo far abhorre content'on, and thirfl after thC' Churches Peace, that I did impofc it as a penalty on my felf, not to anfwer that Book of Mr.OvPtns, till J faw a clear call proving it my duty, becaufe I had been foolifhly drawn to be the beginner of the Controverfie : But I would not hate you therefore talk of lluvinciblcproof ^ of fuch Tenets as thefe. Were that Reverend man and I to joyn Wit to Wit, and Learning to Learning, and the conteft depended OH the ftrength of the Conteflers, I fhould eafily yield that he were invincible by fuch a one as I, and that the congrefs between him and me would be as une'jual, as I too haftily faid it would have been between Mr. Ball and him. But when I fee what an advantage the Truth yields to a weak Defender, and confider the difadvantagc tha: he bath cafl himfelfupon in that Book, I mutt profefs to you, that I take it for as eafie a thing to Anfwer it fufficicntly, almoft as to write fo much paper as that Anfwer will take up. You force me by your frequent references to that Book to fay this much, which elfe 1 would not have faid, leaft I ftiould cxafperate. And for Mr.I^ewiia//1 have told youmy thoughts of hi« Learned Notions more at lar?e.

TpHe next paffage that toucheth me that I meet with, ispig.ij^- wher-e yo» fajr, '* "[ A Learned man of the late Aflembly in a Sermon before the Parliament "thenfitting declared, that diKthe Promife* of the New Covenant arcAbfolut^ " not only citra meritum, but citnconiitionem, without any prerequired conditions "of us: amongft many other places he cites this Text (Mr.5'tfo;»g Serm. i Sim. *' 1.30.) Befides this I might adde abundance more : But I believe Mr. Bixtcr is "inUar omnium wkh Mi.hP'.']

Rep. 1. I believe the plain Texts of Gods Word, not to be evaded with mode-ily, is inSar omnium with Mr.lf^oodbridgc. He that reads his digefted Sermon,and your acknowledgement of his fupercminent parts, natural and acquired, will nee believe that he takes his doftrine on trufl from any man, muchlcfs from fuch a nan as I* 1, It is great immodelly in ycu, if you intend hereby to pecfwadc

" the

Cj73

the world, that it is my (ingular opinion that the New Covenim hath conditi-ons, yea or that the current of the Reformed Divines, and Churches do not ex-pieflely contradift your conceit. For me to prove this, were as ncedlcfs as to heap upteftimonies to prove that the Proteftant Divines do hold that the Scripture is Gods Word. He that is ignorant of their judgement in this, let him be ignorant ftillforme. I except here three or four late VVriters 3 efpecially thofe three Frd-vc^ueransMaccoviui, Qocccita and Cloppcnburgtui 3. But for Mr. Strong, I can fay nothing, as having not his Sermon at hand j but what I have heard ot the piety, Judgement and Moderation of that Learned man, and what I findecf your bold-nefs in this Book in frequent untruths, I confefs doth make me refolve rather to believe you wrong him, till I fliall fee the words; though not peremptorily to conclude it and charge you with ir. I have oft my feit maintained that the promifc ofthefiift Grace is Abfolute 5 but I rtiail never beleeve that <t//the promifes of the New Covenant are Abfolute, as long as I take Gods Word for my Rule, which I hope will be till death. But here I muitgive you fome Animadverlions on your defcriptions of a Condition, p<i5.184.

Andtothefiifl (out of Dr.^un'c//) I lay, that it be appointed for fufpending the efficacy of the ad or grant, is indecd-elTcntial to a condition : But that it be Uncertain is mceily Accidentall s Uncertain is put foe Contingent, becaufc what is contingent is ufnally among men uncertain i It means an uncertainty in lUturA rei, when iinny tend ad e([evcl?ioncjfe i and not that it be acfu incertHtn, ideH, ignotumVo7tMeri. Contingent things may be certain to God j and yet contingent in themfclves Hill .* As D' Twij? ott faith, He hath dctrccd not only that contingent things (hall come to pafs, but contingcntu contingenter eventura. So doth he /orf<t'"'n'that contingent things fliall contingently come to pafs. Yet while ihey are contingent they are the fit matter for a condition, though he {oreknow them. An unbeliever himfelf knows not that he fliall believe. And if a man had a fpirit of Propheiic to foreknow fuch future events, do you think that makes him uncapable of making a conditional contraft ? If a Piophct had aHoufeor Land to fett, might he not make a Legal conditional Contrad, becaule he foreknows the Rene will be paid ? Yon may as well fay, God fliould make no Law, becaufe he foreknows it will be fulfilled, or men will do the thing commanded • But may he not therefore oblige them to do it ? And if fo, by a precept, I fee not but the cafe is the fame as to a fandion, and condition which iseflcntial to that fan-dion.

And I muft further tell you that you muft not feparatc what God hath conjoyn* cd. As he foreknows that we will perform the condition, fo he foreknows that it will be a condition by his conftitution before we perform it. For we cannot perform a condition which is nocondition. And God did not foreknow that we (hould meerly perform the iJ? of believing, but that we fliould perform the ««i;-tfon of believing: even as he did not only foreknow thac we fliould perform thei^ of faith, htitths duty of faith,and therefore that it nniil firlt be a duty.

Moreover I would know whether ever God thteathied ane.cd man or not in his Law, yea or the reprobate ? If not, i. How faid he to Ad^m, In the day thtu eatcfl thoujhiltdjci z. Then the firl} Law had no thicatning (then which nothing morefalfc) or clfcyiijw was not elcd. 5. How then are unbelievers condemned already. 4. There are an hundred exprefs threarniiigs in the Word, 5. The contrary opinion is Antinomianilm indeed, to take believers to be not at all threat-ced by the Law. 6. At leaft are they not threatncd with temporal puriifliments,

C383

or chaftiremcnrs ? 7. And then wicked reprobates are not threatned, which is faire.

If you grant the threatning to ibc Eleft or others, then it is cither a conditional threatning or Ablolutc : If Abfolutc then thcytnufl bear it: thcreis noefcapc j nor arc all abfolutc to them that muft bear it. If conditional: then cither God knows whether thty will commit that fin which is the condition of the threatning, or he doth not. The later you will difdaim I dotabt not; The former grants thac there may be a con-lirion which is yet certainly foreknown to God.

You will finde the Prophet Jeremy making a conditional contrad by Gods appointment, in a cafe wherein God had before revealed to him the event.

If (as Dr. TreJjS hath well proved ) the fame thing may be necefl'ary and contingent, then the fame thing may be neceliary, foreknown, and yet conditionally given cue or threatned in Law.

It is a moft dangerous courfe of Divines to fet Gods Decrees, Foreknowledge or Difpofal of Events, in oppofnion to his moral Reftorftiip, ifthea(Ssof one muft be inconfiftent with the ads of the other. Let me fpcak it out, though to the provocation cf the contemptuous and felfconceircd, thac this one grand mi-ftake, hath introduced molt of their Errors, and fccdeth moft of your contentions. They cannot reconcile the ads of Gods Abfolure Daminion, with the moral ads of Regiment; nor can they fee in what a dillind fcries they ftand.

The like Anfwer fervestothe fame word [_iNcertum'] in the next definition of Cool{e. Your two later I wholly allow of, interpreting Iby performance'] to racaa [_up07i performance.'] Your condufion fig. 1S5. is falfe, that OmnU conditio ante-cedens ejl effcciiva. Though 1 remember chamicr hath fuch a word, but enough to the contrary.

I have fpoke thus much of this, that you may alfo fee, that thouoh the Truths, in Mr.O»cw Bodk are Invincible, yet the Miftakes are not j and if you willcon-fider it well, I think you will finde that the pulling out of this one Pin, hath cau-fed hisFabrick to fall in pieces. For my part I profefs to follow my confciencc, which upon the moft impartial fearch of Scripture that I am able to make, doth tell me that the Scripture doth fo evidently contain conditional threatnings and promifes tothe Elcd, that to deny it, would be, to me, to renounce my under-ilanding, and proclaim Scripture to be utterly unintelligible, which were to be no Word of God.

YEt you have not done with me : for pig.190. you fall on without fear or—— that the end may be like the beginning. You (ay, " [ i. Thac the Papifis '* afl'ert no o:her works and condition to be neceflary toour Juftitication and 6al-*^ vation then v^hat our advcrfaiies do. 2. Neither Papills ncr Arminians do *' afcribe any more Mcritorioufnefs to Works then our opponents^fj/ir. And in this "fenfeMr.B^wcfCr will tell you that the pcrfjnners of a condition may be faid to " merit the Reward. The Papifts never pleaded for Merit upon any other ac-" count.]

Rep-. I. If this be true our Divines are nocorious liars and flandercrs 10 frequently to charge them with more. Which yet I had rather of the two believe of Mr. EjTCtiicnof them, if I muftncedsdo one. i. If this be true, the Papifts are

notorious

notorious Ijari and flandercrsj to wrong one another fo much as they doj by aC-firmingmore of one another. 5. If this be true, doth not Mr. E^refpeak better of the Papifts then we arc ufe to hear ? and fhould not all honcft men be glad to hear thai fo great a part of Chriftendomj are farre better men then we took them for. 4- Doth not this intimate; Why may notthePapifts be encouraged and have liberty in Evgknd as we, R. 2. and a hundred Divines that fay as much as he ? Efpccially it ycu compare this pafTagc with what he faith to Mr, JV. pat;.! i 7. iJdare fay a more unfmid AJfertiev anvot be picked out of the JVritings cither 0/ Papijls «r iArmintim then this is."] And vvhy then fhould not we be refpcded alike, if vvc be corrupted alike ? Whether he mean that we lliould be reftrajned as they, I know not well j but by his Epiflle to the Parliament it is likcr he means that they fhould have Liberty as well as we. You that are Mr.Ejrehis neigl bours, wrong him forely if you think him a friend to Popery, you may fee the Papifts will endure you to call Mr Jf. and I and all the Reformed Churches, Papilts, if you will but open thedoor and letthemin, and help them in weakniog our hands andrefifting us in the work of Chrifl.

You adde, " [Though Mr. 2. feems to mince the matter, calling his conditi-*^ OTiihui a fine qua von, and a Pepper corn-CiT'tr. he attributes as much, ifnotmore <f to Works then the Papiftsj Arminiansand Socinians have done. The Papifts " will not fay that Works do merit io a ftricT: and proper fenfe.3

Rep. Pro.i^.J. AfilfevpitncfjhAUnothcunpunijlicd, and he that fpeafieth lies JljaU notcfcape. Though I delay this bufinefs purpoicly till I come to Mr. Crand9n, yet I will give the Reader one word here beforehand.

I. Out of one of their own ; TcUarminc (Printed 77/^o//J.8>m6o$.) pig.ij^j, 2568J&C, cap^ij.l.S. dc^ujiific thus determincth this Ctncftion, IVtrumopera Bou&fmt CMeritorii ex condigno ratiojie pA^i tantum ? an rations operii tantum i an ra-tione utriufqi ^2 Media fcutcntis nobis vidcturprobabilior, quxdocct, Opera bona ^ufto-rum ^eritoril ijfe vitte teternte ex condigno, rationc Pa^i (3' operii ftmut, &c,] And p.2570.1571. hebringcth fevcn Arguments to prove that in opereb»n«ex^ratiA procedente, eft qttadam proportio O' xqualito/s ad premium viix aterna. And li. i .c.a i. pjg.2208,2209. he cndeavoureth to prove ICMcritum dc congruo fundari in diqua Dignitate operii petita quam inpromijjione.'] JuJj^c now Reader, what credit is to be given to Mr. Eyre's words ? and bow dangerous a thing this Antinomianconceit is, that fin is all pardoned before we repent or are born. Durft fuch a pious man as this clfe over and over, even here on one page repeat in Print fo notorious a falflioed ? and fay, [Neither Papifts nor Arminians afcribc any more Mcrito-rioufntfs to Works] then wcdo ? Nay that [I attribute asmuch, ifnotmoreto Works then the Papifts] Was Bellarmitc no Papift ? Ic^eny all Merit to our Faith or Works; unlefs by the word [Merit] you mean fomcw hat that is noc Merit. Doth TeUarmine do fo ? Nay he laith again here [The Papift never pleaded for !Merit upon any other Account] thai cxpu^o. The Lord pardon this auda. cious falflibod to ycu Brother, and humble you for it.

But if Be//.ir»j;nc be no Papift with you, what fay you by Jquinas ? See him iia.q.i 14 art. \.c.(^ art.^.c. [Si confidtntur(ccundum (operii fubfljnitia7n(^ fecundum quod procedit (x libcro arbitrio. fic von pttejt ibi e(fc condigmtas propter maximum ivx. qualitatcm: iedejUbicongruttas propter qiundam AquahtMcmproportiom. Si atem loquamur de opcre Meritor io fecundim qaod procedit ex gratia Spiritta fancli, fic eft Meri' torium -iita aurna excovdtgno: fic cnim Valor mtriti aitenditur fecmdum 'dnulcm Sfir rittts fundi movent is nos in vitam atcrnam, & c. ]

G 5, S^he

J. The worW Irnows that the Papifts have commonly maintained (I-faynot, every mail of them ) the Mjiic of congruity, the very nattiic of which they orcii-narily alHrm to be from the rcfpcd of the work it fclf, and not from the Pad ot Piomirc.

4- Our Divinfs commonly charge them w'th more. 'Tcrlihts Reformed Cdtbol. o/5Wcr;r,/'o/.i.p.574j545.faith, [The Popifli Church placethMci its wirliin man, making two forts thereof: the Merit of.the pc.lon, and the Merit of the work: The Merit of the work is a dignity or excellency in the work, whereby it is made fit and enabled to defervc Life Evcrlaiiing fo'- the doer: And Works as they teach are mcriccrious two waies, r. By covenant, becaufc G ■id hath made a promife of Reward to them. i. By their own dignity : For Chilli hath merited that our Works might merit; And this is the fubftancc of their Dodrine.] So far Feriiins.

I will adde no more, but leave it to th^ confideration of Mr. Ej-rc's Church-membcrsj whether fcr this publiquc (inne, they ought not to admonifli him, and defire him publiquelyto profefs his repentance ? If not, let them atleaft fee the evil fruits of his Dodrine, and that ad his words are not to bcbeleeved. Its fcarce likely that he will make much more confcicnce of an untruth in the Pulpit, then in the Prefs} the later being the moft pablique, and therefore (hould be moft advifed and cautelous w;iy of delivering our niindes.

Yet he is at it a-ain before he come* to the end of the fame Page, faying, " [But '^now Mr. B goes a flcp beyond them, in that heafcribesa Mcritorioufnefs to *' Works, which the Arminiar.s and Socinians have not dared to do.]

Kcp. I am glad this is the laft place where I findemy felf named. For I love not above all Writings to deal with thofc which are capab'e of no other Anfwer for fubllance, then that one iVori by which the fellow confuted all BcUirmine. Mcthinks it fouls my mouth, fo much as to tell you what your wordi are j and it cannot but be unfavouty and unprofitable to the Reader j and therefore I ihall fay jio more to you J but heartily defire the Lord to recover and forgive you, and to that end to make you ask forgivenefs bcleevingly and penitently, and to that end to convince you • hat you are guilty, till forgivenefs come, and that no Infidels or Impenitent Rebels are forgiven : And I heartily defire that if you preach this to your people, which you publifh in this Book, the fad efleds of it may never appear in thtir hearts and lives, but that Gods truth may lye neerer their hearts and prevail, and the face of your doArine may not be feen in the face of your hearers canvcrfation or yqur own.

FINIS.

Emu.

PRef.pag.7.Iin.penult. forj'c roade he. In the Contents, 1.^. for Anabupuft. r. An-tipipiji. p.j.l.4j.for Papiftst.AntipdpiJlf.^.ii.i.i.iocniture tMmc. p.jS.l.i j.for

:^:

■St-

Novemb. %6. 1^53,

Reader,

UNderfltind that for all the hot Words betrveen us, M'^ Eyrc and I are agreed, if he he a man to be believed. Fcr pag.67. he hath thefe ^ords, [[However were the thing it felf granted. That there was in God from Everlafting an Abfolute, Fixed and Immutable Will never to deal with his people according to their fins, but to deal with them as Righteous pcrfons, this Controverfie were ended.]]

Suffcfiyia that it is in regard of eternal funipiment that he jj?eaks, and net of meer Legal Obligations, ConviBions or Condemnations bj Larv, Confcience, or Men {in all "^'hich reJpeBs God deals not with the unrigh-teofu as with righteous men) J do grant the whole, and here fnbfcribe my concejpon : andfo ifOH^ E- be a man of hii word, The Controverfie U Ended.

^c^. Baxter.

^c. ^ ^ '/ ' ' j> <r r y ^ * J (,

^" tv/

^

•<

o^,

■' '>!, ^l ^, t f^-- ^

/■ 7 ~ ^ .\

'•, r tB» »^ >;.

U

■> c

'h

.f , (. c

J < -7 ). I M TTTT^e. 9 /t if *• ,

1 V.-- ,. /, '»■'

-^ \ I V'

r » >

' 7

-/^'V^.:-r^:^:.,

k'i^'^

T 0 STS C "B^ITT.

m;, i i/-

Reader,

£ca^(( M' Eyre hathilepicdtPy to alUadge M' Ru-therfcrds 5'^w^rwfA;/ fcr his oiinien, Ittitrcat thee U get atsairc^de a juU Vslun^coJ itlr Ruthcrfords (which J had forgotten rvhcn 1 cited thcfe words before)€Allcd Q A Survey ol the Spiritual Antichrift: opening the Scc^^s ot Famitifm and Antinomianifm, agamji: W SzXx.-mar fl)^ 34'^ Dell, Town, 1> Crifpe, H. Den/Eaton, (^r. in fdhichii^rc'vededihe Hjcat)d Sprtng.eJ AmmtMAnSj £drns^ lifisy Libertinesid>LC.'}

jt is fifit miy ^ agairtfl M' Ey re'j 7efiffiof9y that I defire this of thee, btit efpecjal/y htcauje it is tne efthe fuUefi hoeks that I kmw extdntt AgAtnfi the Errors ofthisSe^-, andverj nfe/ttlit9thc^ godly in thejefeducingtims.

H

UMADEIt^

%^, E A V E %^

Since this Book was Printed I am able to give thee a more certain account of M^ Crundons Learned Examination of my A-phorifms : If thou wouldll know the Contents, Tie cell thee the main fubftance of his Book in one word^viz,.{^Thjt I am a Papifi, and one of the Worfer fort of them too.~}^ This one difh adorned with i;he flowers of Billingsgate llhetorick, and fawced with many hundred palpable falfhoods, is the precious feaft which M^ Ejre hath invited thee to. But if thou think that! cell thee this for my own. ends, and as envying thee fuch felicity as the reading of his Volume, take chy courfe, and believe me when thou haft unod^FiJher^Haggar; Rejes,M^ Ejre, and all that have opened their mouths agalnlt me, are butmeal-mouthM fellows to chis M"" Crandon. Kuc If it work an thee as it did on me, ihou wilt have fome mirch at leift for thy m'o-ney : For I confefs I was not able Co forbear laughter to fee the ridiculous montljer come forth, and ad fuch a Tragedy before my face: Nor caJi yet forbear when I caft my eye on it, and chink how ferioufly che man perfwades me that I am a Papift. But then remember that chy mirch muft coft chee forrow, as mine doth, when I con-fider chad laugh ac che fignes of a mans mifery, and at chat which difcovereth our common depravednefs, and che mifery of our poor people chac muft be both corrupted and diftrafted by fuch Teachers asthefe. But if thou have a mindeto learn M^ Cr<iW?»'sEthicks, or Theology, take them and make thy beft of them j but I pray theeexpeft not that ever I (hould particularly Reply to it, till I have fo much time chat I know not how better to fpend, or dare give an account to God of fuch an expence of k^ and till I am more mdined to ftirie m fuch a puddle as that is. If thou be not able to confute M"^ Cr;«;7;/o«'s ftrong lines without my help, its not long of me, nor can I have while to help thee, though I pity thee : Yet left thou fay I ftiift it off", I intend God willing, to give thee that which fhall be the maccer of an Anfwer, co the exceptions of him and many others, even a plain and full Confellion of ra^ Faith, and efpeciallyin the

Point

Point inqueftion: How much ir;.fl„f I r i aftons in the work of JuZfia o„ > " ch fo ''"."^" °^ ^"V ^^'-mam charges of M' Cr. and U, Ene »!» ""■'^\"'°'-^ agamfl .he to lament, that Opinion, Fadion and P.ffi ^"Z """ "">? ^^^^i , ans fo cruel to thefr own'confa „"« ,s . °"' """"j''' "'^''^ Chrilu ftall convince thee, that whaLver the'rfl K "l"^''*'"''"" : Wl the nmth Commandment is ufSbut SLk ^ 't"'''^«ft''« La," fecond .s by the Pap.fts. For all theV "rvn,"r" ''V''^™> ""^ ^''^ the,r zealous pretendings to the honour \'I "' ' ^'"'n hope, by mean well ,n the main :"And hen I defire rhT^u"^^> '''^' 'hey confider, what crooked p.eces tie bell of us a " '^'''''" ^od to ■ «"3'y pardon of (in, and what grea ca.nt.V "''" "^^<i«'ehave

ofdarknefseveninreacherstherK ^ "'''''''""<'^"«'

great mjuries from one another if <■.,' '" P"^ "P many and

the Church: and not onl^triiitl rr/'P'*^ 1"^ "i"'""^'^^ ^ butalfo to pray for them in^mitfe ^fZtf77';^"^Z^'^-' them, for,hey know »„ v^.,, ,i , -, a„ .''°™. C-P^Mf'-, >Ww Clawed h,s Brother with this comm^ti.i^'^"S'> M^ E,n Lh

» I mtreat M' Cr. to fee that he be nbt^^^V"' ^' '•^^'■"""^■2 Yet warrant; ForM^f. cannotfecure ^SKtT^^f'^'^^'^1'^^ though he may do fomewhatto deftrnfUr^ from future fhame, modefty. Iffuchamafs of Ruling AccS^T" "^'"» P^^^^" Revdmgtwiited together, bethelor"of rA'u^V'' ^'^"derand notbeafhamed] IconfelilknowZ, »lf ^^''''"^'' '^at need Of: and muft ^ that fuchmenare norn'"'!"?^?'^ ^' '*^med there were no Law, andfo noTanfeZn "h''''^^°i'- ^''^''^ "^ they need not be a(hamed: Or haf thev ll ''""S.'''P™^« 'h" finnewas perfeftly pardoned before rhV f™^"'' '''«^'l 'heir that they need not be afhamed t &r aX''' *"""> ^ "'""'^ VieW finne: and therefore mull ceafe udL , Ti'^P""'*"™' fof

Impen.te„yand,t„pudencyhTvcn?^5fStiS:"'''''°''- «"

FIN rs.

a.

'/V--V. yr:,

.V

</

— ^

ijfT

——-yet -

r.

)' >

:< 4

'i - - ^

!:^

•i>- - ■( ^-

% -^ -^

m

c^i'^ /n-^

>-

t 7 ..' r ^/

A N

nfavoLiry Volume

O F

ANATOMIZED:

nos'egay

OF THE

Clioiceft Flowers in that G a r d e n,

Prefented to

U'fO S ET H CJ\rL

B Y

1 Co R.4. j,4,y. !

But with me it U A very (mill thing thit I fl}ouli he judged cfyeu, or of mins judgement: ! Tea 1 judge not my cwnfelf. Fir I linorvvoihirg by my fclf, yet am I not htrtby , juftificd : but he that judgcih mc, is the Lord. Tbcrej'orc judge mtbir.g before the time, . untiU the Lord come, veho both will brirg to Light the biddenthijgscf dirli%cj?, and i will make Manifc^ the C6unfcls of the hearts. ' j

LONDON, 1

Printed by nA. -JAt. for Thomas Vnderhill at tie Anchor and ! Bible in Vduls Churdi-yard , and Francis Tjton ac the three Daggers in FUctJiren, 1654,

ro THE %§AVS%

Reader:

Suppofe I owe thee an Account,both of the Reafons which drew ibrdi this following Reply, and why it is transferred hither from its proper place.For the firll; I was once purpofed never to have written one line by way of particular Reply to M'' Crandon : and I think i fnould have continued tha: Refolution, if there had been no more but his own writing to have called me to fuch a work. The firft fighc that I had of itjWas only of the midft of the book, before the EpiiUes or the end were annexed : But when I faw M"" O^rj/zEpittle Commendatory, I apprehended it my duty to endeavour the fatisfad:ion of fo Reverend a man, and to let him knowthatldiflentnocfrom him without,atleaft,a(hewof Rcafon.

2. I had written much of my ConfefTion, before I faw this Epiftie of M'"C^»j//; And upon the fight hereof I added i. SomeCondu-fions more then I had before done, of my judgement about Juftifica-tion by faith- and how far I take in or leave out works. 2. Some Condufions containing my judgcment,how far believers arc freed or not freed from the Law:" Becaufe thefe are the two great points wherein I perceive I offend M^ Carjil, and the Fundamentals of a Chriftians Comfort, which he fuppofeth Mi^O'. to have vindicated.

3. And then I thought it fit to adjoyn n\j Reafons which forced me to dilTent from the judgement of M"^ Carjl! concerning the fub-ftancc of the book which he conimcndeth. All this fell in, in the midft of my ConfeiTion, and while I fct down things as they came to hand and occafions cali'd from them, I prefently made a medley work:

And finding upon the review when I had finifhed my Confe/fion, thar this contending piece would difturb the Reader in his courfe, r^nd was like to be n che carkafs of Amiifa to the purfuing Ifraelitesy 2 Sam.io. 12.1 thoughc it bcft to remove it out of the way, and place it here with the reft of its conforts.

And if tlie Uylc of this writing Teem too harfli to thee, I will not juiliHeit, butonly acquaint chee with thefe two things for the guidance of thy cenlure : i. That I had not skill enough to findeout any gentler ternies which would be fuicable to the m.accer. Truth requires that I call things as they are ; though modefty require that we ufe the deanlielt ccrmes we can about an uncleanly bufinefs; which I tliink you will f.iy I have not wholly negleded, if you compare irn-parcially his words and mine, and difcern aright the occafion of my jpeethcs. 2. That this was all \f ritten ( and moll of my Confeilion ) before I hea'd of M^ Cr-tndons death: and I had fome hopes of bringing him 10 Repentance. But had I been to have written it again when he was dead,I Ihould have ftudied yet harder for more gentle termes, though they had been lels fitted to the quality of the fubjed. I hope the Lord hath forgiven him the many and great finnes of his Volume,as the rell of his life ; as I daily pray for pardon to my felf for the fjjlings of my dodrine, for matter and manner, as well as of my life. -The pain and languifhing in which I am writing thefe lines, af-fure me that I am hailing after him apace; and I hope to finde him in thatXingdome of Peace, where no flanders or Reproaches,or any failings will be owned; and where we (hall both partake of thac perfed Light, which will caufe us to difown our former errours, and whefi both our Sandification, and our pardon and Juftification will be found moreperfed, then when we firft believed, even by thofe that vehemently denied and difdairaedit, and defamed me as a feducer for affirming fuch a thing. I doubt not but we (hall then finde a greater difference between Heaven and earth, between Chrifts Hofpitall, and the Fathers pcrfed Kingdom, then thispaf-lionate felf-cunceited generation will now believe.

If any think that upon the hearing of M"^ Crandons death, I (hould have been at the pains of altering the whole ftile 0^ this writing to a gentler flrain, I only fay, i. I had not leifure becaufe of extreme weaknefs, and greater works. 2. I had not much will to it, becaufe when r am gone hence as well as M'' Crandoyi, his writing will remain in the hands of men that knew neither him nor me : And chough I perceive thac this age which knew us both doth diltaflfully rejed his

opprobrious

opprobrious, calumniating Volume, and make my Reply unneccfTa^ ry as to them; Yet when a generation (hall arife that knew neither ofus, they may eafily be drawn to Credit him, if his Fal (hood be not plainly laid open to their view. As I hope God hath forgiven him more liilly then he was forgiven before he was born, fo I be-feech the fame God of mercy to pardon whatfoever I have here or elfewhere committcd,againft his Truth,and the Love of my Brethren, and with the reft of my finnes, to bury them in e vcriafting oblivion.

i^edeminfier, March } i. 1^5 4.

R.Sl

67" (t ciiveHtz,e<l min atfd prodigy of nature, ^ith much more fuch fearful Blajphemj I 27 falfe reports of mj ^ords all together.

Sect.V. a Reply to all (JUr.Qt^ anfwers to mj Arguments, t9 trove that our fofferings are Tf*»i/hments, and ftrine the meritoriom Canfe ( '^hkh he denieth: ) Where Mr. Gary 11 may fee how he vindica-teth Fundament all Truths.

Se ct .VI. An Appeal to Scripture in the point, fttany Texts pro-duccdj^^'ith twelve J^ueres ; for Olfr. C3.ry\s further fat i^fadion.

Sect .VII. My Reafons tendered to Mr.CzryW^ that Mr.Cv^ vin^ dication offufiification by faith without Works ( the other Point mentio' tied by yi/r.Caryll ) « not profitable to the Church of God, mr Worthy the publike view. Firfi, Becaufe he granteth the main Point in que-flioH after his fiercefi contradiftion ; Proved in many particulars, e^ Confutation of hisfi^ion of many and great differences between our Divines and me, about the Word[_ConditiQns.~\ His falfe doflrine,tha t they that have not the Qojpel, tire bound tofeek^fufiification andfalvation by the Works of the Law or Natural Righteoufnefs : With more «fthe like.

Sect .Vill. cJT/y next Reafon to Mr.QdxyW : becaufe they are none of my doctrines or Words Which ^r.Crandon doth confute, but the mecr forgeries of his own brain. The fubfiance of all his bookjoerein,e.xaminedy and found, a meerpackj>f falfe Reports. The vanity of his afcribingfo much humane learning to me, and his copiopu InveSlive againfi the ufe offuch Learning in Theologie. His felf-contradifiing. His vain Charge againfi mCiOi pleading for an Implicit faith of the People in their Teach" ers.

To

To the Reverend

M f 0 S E T H C J ^r L,

Preacher of the

Gofpel of Christ.

Reverend Sir,

T is the great refpeft I bear to your Name, for the good things of the Spine that I have heard' of you, and feen in your Writings, which occafioned me' comrary to my former Refolutions, to fay fo much to W Crandon, as here you will finde : Not that I defpifedthe man, but judged the uncleanly matter unfit for Agitation, as being liker more to Annoy then to Edifie. As many Reverend and Godly Brethren have told me, they more wonder at your Epiftle, then all M^ Cr's Book; fo do I feel my felfmore obliged by a line of yours to be at the pains of tendring you fatisfadion, then I did by all his Volume of falftioods and reproaches, ofone line in Reply.

Sir, both you and I are ftiort of Heaven, and therefore Imper-fcft • and Know but in part, and therefore fallible. Though I will not befoprcfumptuous as to conclude with confidence thatlamin the right, and you in the wrong; yet to fuppofeyou under a pof-fibility of Erring, I hope is no injury; nor to make an Enquiry whether it be you or I tnat adually Erre. I have fuch eyes upon me as our Mafter had, that will conclude him a friend of Publicans

and

mm

and Tinners; and a wine-bibber, if he come eating and drinking; and him to have a devil that comes not fo. If I fay, I am in the right, and you and others crre, I am fure to hear the titles of Proud, Arrogant and Self-conceited; If I think that modefty andconfci* ©ufncfs of our prefent darknefs and imperfedion , require fome abatement of my confidence, and in fufpition of my felf and efti-mation of your judgement, I fhould feem but to be dubious, and queftion the verity of what I deliver, I am fure to be called a Scep-tick, and Heretical Queftionift, that looks for new light, and re-maineth in a fluctuation. Seeing I muft unavoidably be one of thefeforts, Ihaverefolved to be the later: and toprofefsto you, that my Intelled lieth open to the force of what evidence you Ihall be pleafed to afford me. If therefore, as you feem to judge me an Oppofcr of the Fundamentals of a ChriftiansConfolation, you will but put forth your helping hand to deliver me from fuch Errors^ Ihopelfhall not through oblHnacy hinder the fuccefs, but (hall as well digeft your Inftrudions as my low degree of the Spirit and his Graces will enable me. I have in my Confeffion enlarged the difclofure of my thoughts for your fatisfaftion ; to which 1 imme-diatly fubjoyned thefe Reafons of my diflent from your Judgement about W Cr^ Book; which upon review I removed hither, as unfit for that place. I fubmit them both to your Confideration, and defire your own Reprehenfion of their Errours. A page from yourfeif (which doubtlefs will be with much Clearnefs, and convincing Evidence and Candor) may do more with me, then the fending forth of many fuch Volumes, as that is which is honoured with your Name and Commendations. And I cannot doubt but that as the love of Truth could make you the Midwife of a Volume of falfe Accufations and Reproaches, fo will the fame Affe-dion caufe you to be the Auchour of fome brief Informations, whereby your Graying Brother may be recovered ; It being a more defirable work to Reduce, then to befriend any flandcrs and defamations, though with the modelled feeming to difrelifti them ; and it being (in my Judgement) an eafier task for you, by a few clear Scriptures and Reafons to bring me to a Recantation, then by twenty Commendatory Preflices, to make fuch a Book as that, appear to fober unprejudiced men, a Vindication of Fundamental Truths, and profitable to Gods Church. I befeech you interpret not my words as a challenge of Difpute, but as the requeft of an earned lover of the Truth, who prayes for it, (tudieth for it in

K pain

Eain and vceaknefs night and day, and wonld thankfully accept your elp to difcover it; and is confident that you think you have very clear evidence againft my Dodrine, before you would proceed to do as you have done; and will be ready to communicate that Evidence for my Recovery: Or if you (hould finde that you have erred ( bear with the fuppofition ) I remain confident that your pious minde will finde no reft, till you have righted Gods Truth and your Brother as publiquely as you have wronged them, and left as legible a Teftimony to Pofterity of your Repentance as of your finne; as beleeving that Non Remittitur Peccathm niji refit' tnatur cibUtum. Or if you fliould think it Popery that fuch Good Works be judged Conditions of your Remifiion, yet I doubt not but you will regard them as neceflary fignes of the fincerity of yonr Repentance, and that of your Faith.

SECT.

CO

SECT. I

Hough all Gods Truths are precious, yet ContentioH is to me lo grievous, that I did many years 32,0 unfeign-edly groan forth.he com^Aiint oi Summcrhjrdt, o^« me mijcrum tundcm Itbcr^bit ab ijia rixofa Tbcolegia! and 1 approved of B«c/;o/ccrj Refolution, and fublcri-bed to his commendation, «^f cum cximiu a TDco diy-rtbui(ffetdecoratiii, in cerumen tamen cum Rabiojis iUm fcculi Thcologii dcfccndcre nolun: T)efti, in{uit 7)'^uturc, cccpt fupputirc, * Sec. * Saints Reft, Littfe did I then think that I muft P.4/'J^94j95

drink fodeep of this bitter Cup, and be ncceflltated to wait my daies of languilliing, in a work which I fo detcfted, and was fo fully Refolved againft. liut he that Made us mull Rule us} and hethat puttcth us in the Vineyard muft meafure out our Work : I may not with ^omh turn my back, becaufe the work mav feem ungratcfjll: It he let mc to labour among the thorns, which cann It be taken with hanJs, but the man that (hall rosch th;m muft be fenced with iron, and the ftaft of a Spear ( x 5'4W.i j.6,7.) Yea though the befl cf them VIeve 06 a briar, and themofl uprightJlurper thcnathorn beige (Mic.7,4-) yet hare we a gracious Miiter, his work is good, his end will fatisfie us i we fliall then have the Giapes and Figs, which thorns and thililes would not yield us. So great have been my negleds of God and his Spirit, fo little is my love to him, and the Life to come, that I am rety confcicuj of my unworthinefs, not only of htaven it felf, but of living fo near to heaven in my thoughts, and of fo much delight in its forecafts, as in more peaceable and praftical liudies I might have found. I thought kven years a^o I had been even entering into the promifcd Land of Reft : and It Teemed good to the Lord, to detain mc in the wildernefs, and to exercife mc in ungratefull skiimillics on the borders j and that not wi:h enemies, but with Brethren. If ^fcUnc{hon longed for heaven that he might be delivered a RabicThc-ologorum ! If thefaid 6«f';o/c£r met with fuch RabioftsThcelogii, qui tirrcpu ex di-quibas voculiicilumniandt materiJ, h^refcof ivfimulare^ truduccre optimum virumnoa erubcfcerent i Fruftru obtcjlante ip(o, dcxire data, dcxire accipcrenti Theic's great reafon that I a worfcr man, lo farre below them in all kinde of woith, fliould patiently bear as much as they. And though 1 dare no morerefclve to avoid fuch employments, nor darcrunne from my Colours, or fell Gods Truth, for ^he eafe

CO

of my minuc; yet the (harpnefsof this laftalTauIt, and the fcnfibledecayes of my frail riefli, dopiitnic fomcwhat out of fear rf being called out to much mere of this unp!caGr>5 work : (though I cx{Ha fomc men mould do their parts in provocation.)

Thac which I am now to do is to fatisfic M' Q'^tyl, that hij Reafors arc not fufiicient for thccmilTion of fuch a Volume as a Vinciica:ion cf Truths Fundamental to our Comfoit, and asprcfiabic to the Church of God, and worthy the pubiike view. For I conceive tha: the judg^-ment of fo Revc;cnd a man is no: by fi-len.ce to be contemned.

And i.Mahiniis the R-eafons of his commendarion are unfacisfaftory. i.That it is lar^e is no commcndirion, unlefs i; be Good as wtil as Great. For of evils thcleilt ik to be p'cfcrred- 2. T.'iat it is Elaborate proves it bu: a more a^grava-ced (innej if that labour Ic belH'Viei to do evil. But I confefs I fj c nothin'' but the writing thit need to c-ft much labour: Sinnc tioweth eafily from depraved nature, and is oft born withou: any great travel or the helo of a midwife : and the better part of this book nerd not coli much ftudy j- All the quiftion then is, Whether l>\'Cr. [do Maintain and Vindicate ar.y Doifirinals of I'uch moment, and fo Fundamental in Religion for the comfort of fouls, that any E;]ay tendin^^ to the clearing of them, much more this Large and Elaborate Difcourfe, is profi-table to the Church of God^ciT'c] as l-lx. (^aryl fuppofcth. And i. no Fundamentals can be vindicated againfi me which I did not cppofe ; And if I oppofed any fuch, it was either in deed and knfcj or in words and fceming. Not meerly in words; For i. itisfenfeand no: meer words which are Fundamentals, a. I meet with few that will deny my terms to be the terms of Scripture, in the main matters in queftion. Who denieththat Sciipture calleth our fufterings puniHi-ments! or that it faith, {^BythyrvordsthoujhiUbepijiifiei'] and lA man h jufti-fedby rvorlirttid notbyfuith onl}.'\ z. And if it be in fenfe that 1 havedenied Fundamentals, I ihall wait in hope that Mr.Qaryl will evince it, efpecially now I have given him my fenfe more fully : And in the mean rime I Hiall freely acquaint him with fomeof thofc Reafons which make me to think oihcrwife then he doth of Mr. C'r's Difcourfe J and make that labour fo unprofitable tome, which Mr. Cur. judgeth profitable to the Church of God. And in doing this, as I will noc purpofely bawlk any momentous paflages in him j fo Iwiilhavefo much com-paffion on the Reader and my felf, as not to recite or confute the greater part of his Railings and Calumniations; but will choole ont thofe paflages where he recapitulateth his Accufations, and where the chiefefl ftrength of his Argu-mencj fcem to lyc. And the firft Reafon of my diiVent from Mr. drjl is this :

i.Falfhoods or books abounding witii fal(hoods,are not profitable to the Church of God, (^ anlds per accidcnsj nor worthy the publique view. But Mt. (^nndons Book aboundeth and fwarmeth with tallhocds: Therefore I think ic unprofitabic to the Church of God, and unworthy the publique view.

1 know it is unfavoury language for Minifters to give each other the Lyc : But I think it might be as meet to call a Lye by its proper nam.c, as Swearing, Drun-tcnnefsor Whoredom by theirs, when the cafe is fo grol'i as that the oflendouc ought to be openly convinced. And for the minor, I do fcrioufly, deliberately, and folemnly profcfsinthc word of a ChriftianandMinifler of the Gofpcl, that of all the Theological Writings that ever I faw, 1 did never fee any one, to the utmofl qf my remembrance, either of Papift, Sccinianj Anabaptift, or any Prorcftant,

that

en

that did necrfo much abound with untruths as to matter of faftj a Mr. (^fondoKj Book doth. One of the neeieft to it that ever I favv was Harding the Papift i and Staplcton, Martyn, Biflicp CJimpijn,Scc. are not fparjng that way j but farre fhorc o{ Mr. Cratidon, it I be able to difcern : It is not Dcdrinal Erroursthat I call untruths, thcfc arc fitter to be confuted by argument then refelled with fuchlanguage ; I ut it is [untiu:hs about matter of fad :] And whether the man «iid it withan ineciition to dcceivej 1 pvefume not to judge, as not knowing (bis face much Icfs ) his heart: But that they are palpable untruths in matter of faft, and flanders and calumnies, I averts. I now opened the Book of purpofe, and without choice took the page that prefented it felt to me, and I counted lifteen untruths in matter of fad, by way of flanJer, in one page. 1 da vsmembcr but very few leaves in all the book that I have obferved ( and I have run over the greater pan ) which have not many the like. So that according to the number of the pages, I do confidently con edure that there can be no lefs then fomethoufands in the whole Book. And if any fay, that 1 am an incompetent JudgCj as being a party, I aniwcr, i. I take not on me to be a deciding Judge, but a Difcerner. z, I think 1 am theablell On eavtii todilcern it. Fur his calumnies are moit of them of one of thefe two torts: Either charging me to write what I never writ, or thought : Or elfe (which is the moll common) fearching my heart, and charging me to think what I never thought, and to mean what I never meant, and telling the world my defignes and intentions, which my foul was never acquainted with : So that when he meetcth with a palTage that hediiliketh, in Head of confuting the words and fenfe of them, he prcfently lals on an enquiry into my thoughts, and tels the world with down right aftivmations, what 1 think and intend, and that this or that is my defign in it, as it it were he that made my heart and mult judge it. Yea when he meets with words which heliketb,thediflcrence of his oppoiition isbutfmalli for he prefcntlv tels the world, that 1 lubtilly hide my minde, and mean not as I fpeik, or I have this or that refervc, fo that Popery it mufl be in the iilue howfoevcr. In a word, one fahliood and calumny doth animate the Bosk from end toend, which is, that I am a Papilt, yea and noneof the moderate fort of Papills, but of the groffclf and vvorll j and no: only th?t I am of the fame opinion with the Papifts in the point of JuUificacion, but that I am aflat Papirt, and am fubrilly endeavouring to bring as many to Rome with mc as I can s and the Ar-miniansare, as it were, behindc me, and I would diaw ihem on after me to be Papiflstoo. Yea he dcfcribeth, according to his confident conjedlure, how I was made a Papift, and what Books they were that turned me to them, and how,in his Preface, in thcic words: [''But finding him a man of excellent, both natural ''and acquired parts, of a very rational brain, delighted more in depths then in *'ftiallows, in the Logical deep and ferious, then in the lighter and fuperficiary "partsof Learning j 1 conceive him to have been carried out by his own gcjiitts '''to the reading of the deepcit Scholaftick Writers, with the purpofeihat l^irgil " once applied himfclf to rhe reading of Ennius, though not with the fame fuccels. '' The purpofe cf both probably v. as to fetch out i flcrarcgcmmam^ a jewel out of " the dunghill : Buctliisma.j meeting with Learning pertcdly agreeing with his " natural gcvixi, became impotent to obtain his puvpofc } for being delighted wi-h " the dunghill, he hath made it bis fphere and element: the depth of rationality " which he found in hi'Authors, hath drawn and captivated him totheir molt " curled opinions.] Would you tftink that this were a man that never faw me, nor knows what my iludies have been, nor ever was informed by anyone that doth

K 3 know?

C4]

know ? Niy he ofcen tells his Readers, tha: I took fuch ani fuch things oot of the Jeluices and other Papifts > yea in the miin points that he dcaleth againft, he tells them, I had all from the Papills, ani he can tell them wlurc I hid i:, and undertakes to ftiew them the very place whence I fetcht it. when he rtiall be called thereto. Yea wh;n I cite Scrip-.areJ, he telli them coiifiJcnt!/, I feccht them not out of the Bible, but out of the Papifts and Jefuites, as I found them cited to my hand. What Reply am I capable of making to tliis man ? If 1 deny all thii > hisanfwer is ready, I am not to be believed, 1 fubtilly and dillcmblingly l.iJe my Religion,or deny the Truth. Do:h he indeed know my thoughts, fo much better then I, or the way of my Itudies ? I was bold to mention in the Append, how thole things that wtre excepted againll as n Mvolty, were made known to me in my folitudeand weaknefs, when I had no books but my Bible with me, and that in that cafe fludying the Scripture alone, I thought I faw more in one fortnight then of many moncths before: yet left any fliould think that I hereby would encourage men to call off ftudies and read no book but the Bible, and contemn all humane Learning, and writings of Fathers and Modern Divines, and wait only on the Spirit,withou: fuch means, 1 added,that I did not hereby judge books necdlefs, and that 1 Ihould aot my Iclf have been fo capable of improving thofe folitary hours in Itudying the Scrip:urc, if I had read no o:hcr books before : And how doth this man interpret thefe words ? Why,whereas I mentioned my profiting [in a fortnight] hcdoubt*th not toconclude, that I vouchfafed the Scripture but a fortnights Itudy, as if it had b;cn then no longer, and as if I had contemned and not ftudied ir, thcrcfl of my life,as being too low for my iludics. And from the Caution that I put in abjut former Reading ( becaulc we were then where I was, pertered with fome Teachers, that perfwadcd men to read no books but the Bible,) he gathers, that it was Jefuites and Papifls, that I had read before, and then brought it out. Hath a man any Piea againlt fnch an Accufer of the H«art,which man can jullifiw by ? Or maft be not only Appeal to the Judge of hearts. As ^ab, and Paul in his Epiflles, did by folennne Oathei, Appeal from Accufers and talfe furmifers, to that Record in Heaven, and that Omnifctent VVitncfs, fo do I take it to be my du.y, in fuch a cafe as this is, to Appeal from M.cr. that only pre-tendeth to kno*v my heart to the A.I knowing God that is acquainted with it indeed, who made it, and I think poiT-iled it with that Light, for which I fuffer thefe Reproaches; and deliberately and in his fear I do fulemnly profelle } I. That if I were a Papiit the world (hould loon know itj for 1 hate thedillcm-blingof my Religion ; and ( as I faid ) I fcorn that Religion that is a juft caufc of Ihame, or that will not brin^ him ofi'on gainful! tcrmes, that fhall fuffer in the defence of it. And whether I iiave ever gone that way that fhanneth danger and fufferings in the world, and whether my Confcicncc haih Hooped for the fccuring ot my flelh, I delire them to judge that have known rre in thecouife of my Life and Miniftry before thewarrcs, and that luve been my alTociatcs in the warres. z. And for the particular in quelHon, I do before the fame heart-fearching Go J profefs, that thefe things that the Accufer writes,are falle j and that 1 did not, to the utmoft of my remembrance, learn,or borrow,or tranfcribc from Jeluite$,or any other Papift, one liiic,or word in ihat book(but what I have cited ih'tm for,which is as I remember, but once the name uf •)Cotus and D'OrbcUh, in 2 comriun qut-rtion of Philofophy, and Suxre^ once or twice in a comnon point of M:taphy-licks or Logick, and one trivial fentence in the Epiitle out ot/'f'/j/tf j^ mrdidl tranfcribc one Tex: of Scripture out of any of them : Nay that 1 had read then

but

C5]

tut very few Jefuites on any fubjeft, and to this day, their books are an exceeding fmall part of my reading ; feme Schoolmen I confel's 1 have read ( and Tome few Jefuit€S,) but the main part of my fir A time was fpent in reading Englifh Pro-tcitants, and my next in Latine ProteftantSj and my later years have bcea mainly fpent in the Fathers and Ancient writers: Awd I further profefs before the fame Godj that I remember not one Point ot Religion wherein the Papitts and Prote-ftants differ, wherein the readingof any Schoolmanj Jefuite or other Papift, or conferring wich any of them, haih changed my judgement from the Proteitants to them. And 1 renew the fame proftflionj that the pointSjOr method,or termes in that book of Aphorifmesjwhich caufe the great offence, and are charged by others with Noveltyjand by Mr.(^r. with Popery, I did not to my utmoft remembrance, receive from any Book or Pcrfon in the world 5 but only upon former ftudy.of the Scriptures, fome undigelted conceptions ftuck in my minde, and ac the time of my conceiving and entertaining thole Notions ( about the Nature and Ncceflity of a twofold Righteoufnefsjand many the like ) I was in a ftrange place, where I had no book but my Bible ( and a Concordance, I think,and two or three Phyfick books were with or near me,) and that in extream wcaknels, I was preparing my own thoughts for my remove to God, and thereupon began for my own ufe, to write thole things which I hare fjncc publillicd in a bouk cntituled 1 heSaiuts Rf/fj and when I came to that place which is now at p.i^.68, and 71. in the 4'''Edit. I was urged, partly by the occuning difficulty, and partly by aqucllion put to me, torefolvCj In what lenfe it is that men arc called Righteous, and publikely Ju-iiified at the day of Judgement in reference to the Improvement of their Talents, and the feedingjViluingjdoathin^.Crc of Chrift ? and in what fenfe Chrift gives this as the Realon of the fcntencc. The expounding of Matih.i^. was the task, which I was let upon : which as I ferioully Tec my Iclf to underiland, I found fo great difficulties as drove mc to God again and again j and thereupon fo great light that I could not refift i fo that I folcmrly profelVc that it was partly on my knees, and partly in diligent confideration of the naked Text ( when 1 had not fo much as Authours or the thought of them with me ) that I received the fub-ftancc of the forc-mentionci particulars. An over-pewring Light (1 thought) did fuddenly giveme aclear apprchaifion of ihofe things, which I had oft reached after before in vain. Whereupon I iuddenly wrote down the bare Propofitions ( fo many of them a^ concerns Righteoafncfs and Juftification,) and fo let them lye by tae long after. And then tailing into further lawguilliing, and into more confident cxpe(flations of death, I rcvifcdthem, and thruft them oat too haftily and undigel^ed, little thinking to have lived fo long to have reviewed them j and lo, having none about me, to afford mc fuch afliftance or advice as had been nicer, and I being unckcquainted with the ticklifli captious humour of the world, never doubted of mens favourable acceptance, or toleration of its imperfections, thcre-' upon too limply andrafh'y ruflied into the Prefs,fcarce knowing what I did, and I confefs,did by ovcrlight and hafte incur the guilt of fcverall harili exprcflions,and fome unmeet, and that might feem to a fufpicious reader, Riorc unfound then they were in my intention, and fo did give caulc of juft oftcnce to pious and judicious men. Yet little thought I but my brethren would have dealt as friendly and compaflionatcly by mc and mine infirmities, as I fliould have done in the like cafe by theirs: but with fome it proved otherwile. Yetjict mc addjthat where I fay I ufed no Authors, Papifts or Proteftanf, for the forementioned Thefcs, I fay not fo for all in the explications: Two I muft confefs my fclf much to have

profited

C<5]

profited by in that dodrine J the one is Mr.BridJIjiVf, the oihcr is Grotitit deft-tiffaHione, a book wriucn while he remained with the orthodox, and approved much by thcmj and defended by E(fcv:ia againft Crc/ZrKj; Yet had F almoft finifli* ed thofe Aphoril'mcs before ever 1 read a leaf of Grflrm, havin:; only heard of him by no encouraging fame j and being at that time in fpecch with Mr. Towtf/ upon his high commendations of it, I borrowed it of him to pcrufe, and found it fully to anfrt'cr his commendations: and I confcfs, I learned more out of it, then I did out of any book except the ScriptureSjOf many a year before.

Little did I think to trouble men with this tedious Narrative : but I have no other Reply left to MwCrandons unmanly confident affirmations, ofmytakin<' it word by word, from the Jefuites and Papifts, yea the very Texts of Scripture which I cited.

But fuppofe Mr Cr. had a Toleration to write a Volume of falfe Acfufations againft me, my poor opinion is (which I fiibmit to better judgements) that Mr. Caryl iTiould more have difrclifhed his abufe and flandcrous reports of others far more worthy then I, then to judge fuch a work to be profitable to the Church.

To begin with the loweft ( bccaufe but a fingle inan ) how inhumanely deal-eth he with that holy, Learned man of God Mr. ^ohn Bill ? a man fo far beyond the reach of flanderous tongues, both fo Holineis,Learning, Abilities of all forts efpecially of Difputationj foundnefsof judgement, and diftance from the very appearance of fucli Matter of Reproach ? Yet doth this man once fall on himjC.i4. part.i. pig.z^iyipp. telling men that ['^he heard long fince that this Mr.fiatf ** feeing falhionablenefs and formality tending fomc»vhat to the Popifh outfidc-"^ nefs in Religion was the way to preferment, had before his death fomewhat de-'' dined ;] yet he will here be fo charitable when he hath printed this report, not to entertain it, till he fee the grounds. But before he cndeth, his little modcfty ts quitefpentj zndpdm.psg. zoj, he falls ob again in thefe words [" If elfewhert " he contradifts himfelf 1 fhali oppofe BsU againft Ball; yea ^dU in afflidions "when he lived by faith, and had nothing elfe but Chrill apprehended by faith ''to fupport his troubled foul, to Bill now railed to a profpcrous ftate in the "world, and who feeing the Court infettcd with Popery, Socinianifme and Ar-"minianifme, and no other bridge to preferment fo effeduall as fome fhew of *f bending at leaft to thefe wayes, might polfibly as far asconfcience would per-" mit him, make ufc of the language there held moft authentickj I fay, of the "language, for I cannot condemn his dodrine allcdged In his three foliotvine " TeitimonieSjif taken in a good fenfe. But his ambiguity of words,feem to (peak " him only to have had alevell to fomewhat elfc belides the fupportin^' of the « Truthje^c] Unworthy man ! to pub'.ifli fuch bafc furmifes and flandcrs of the dead I to talk of his eying a Court infcdcd with Popcry,Socinianirme and Armi-nianifme,for preferment, and making a bridgo to that in his writings, that never law the light till he was dead ? He that was known to live ( and dye ) a Non-conformift,in a poor houfc,a poor habitja poor maintenance of about 2 o"' per an.'m an obfcurc Village, and tcaciiing fchool all the week for a further fupply, defer-ving as highefteem and honour as the bcil Bilhop in EngUnd, yet looking after no higher things, but living comfortably and profperoufly with thefe. Did this man dcfervc fuch AccuTations as thefe to be publifhed AUihU xons raifcdef againft his precious naniC; whichcnvy iliall never be able bimfor writing agumji to fret and difparage, but fli.ill be honourable in EvgUnd ,&e Sepitmifts. while the Englifli tongue and the CbrilHan faith fhali here

abide.

C73

abide. I marvell this man hid no moie wit > if he would needs vent bis flanders, that he chofe HOC fome forrainers to be the fubjeft of fuch language, whom the EngUlh knew only by fame, and could not therefore fo well difprove him. Doth he think that he will get any credit by fuch talcs, in Stafordfjire, Chcjlnre, London, oranywhsr* that his name was known ? efpecia'ly whik thofe holy, upri^^hc, worthy fcrvants of ChriftjISlr.L4n^/cX,Mr.v4/7;,Mr.Coo^,&c. are yet living to vindicate him, who were his familiar acquaintance, and with him in the worll times maintained ihcir Integrity.

So Tur. I. piig.^9- he lets fly at fome Miniftcrs that have in that point rpoke(he faith ) almoft the fame things with me j and adds [J' It hath filled my I'pirit with " fadnefs,to hear not only in the pulpits of the Country,but of the City of Loudon, ** pronounced by the mouthcs of fome in grtat eltecm, both for Piety and Learn-*Mng, that tofaygoddothtiotpuntJJjhis Saints for their ftns it flit Antinomimfme t " and affirmed that tbe Jffli^ions of believers Arepumjhmcntsfor their ftme. 1 btfcech "thefe men to conGder whom they here explode as Antinomians ? whether be-*' fides the Apoftles and Fathers of the Primitive Church, they do no: brand all " the Reformed Churches, and their Champions againlt the Papifts, with this ig-" nominy ? Whether there be any one Article of Chrillian SLeligion, that hath " more ftoutly defended by thcfe againft the Papifts, then tlii* which heat of zeal " without knowledge ( or confideration at leafl ) hath of late called Antinomian ? " Let them produce any befides the Socinian and Arminian Sophiiler*', that have « ftumbled at this doftrine as ofFenfive.]

Here I offer it to your confideration, i.Whether he do not exprcflymake thefe Lo»i<J» Minifters of great eftcem, to take part with the Papiits againfl Protc-llants, even in that one Article of Chriflian Religion which they have fo fioutly defendcd,as none more ? z. Yea againll all the Reformed Churches. 3. Yea in a point that none (that they can produce ) befides Socinians and Arminians have Humbled at: fo that there are great itore of Socinians, Arminians and Pa-pifls in the world,it feems. 4. Whether he involve them not in all the Curfes and Blafphemous, and Popilh Confcqucnts, which he there chargeth on me for the fame opinion ? 5. Whether this man did remember to make ufe of his Mo-defty, whenhedurft publjfhto the world, i. That it is the Apoltlcs, i.Fathers, 3. All the Reformed Churches, that deny believers fufferings to be pu-nifhments ? When i. The Apoftlcs have never a word to that end, I dare confidently affirm : nay they have much againfl it: affirming them to be chaflife-ments, which are a fpeciesof punifhmcnt j and that they are theeffefts of finne, and of the provocation of God to jsaloulie and anger, and we are judged of tfie Lord when we are chaftencd, and that our Gad being a confuming fi e, and a judgcrof his People, muft be ferved with fear, and not provoked to angcrjC^J. 1. Did not the man know, that by this Allcrtion of the Fathers, he did prcllitutc the credit of his Reading, or Veracitv, or both, to the Icorn and pity, of all that ever took notice of the fenfe of the Fathers herein ? Did he think to be believed in fuch Alfcrtions, by any men that arc able to open their books, and try the truth of his favings ? when it is a known cafe, that the gcneraliiy of the Fathers are judged by the racil eminent Proteilants, to go but too farre in;o the concvary extream. And thcnigh I would intcipicc them as favourably and modctfly as I caii, yet indeedjthcir tcrmes at lealt are not to be exculed. As for his judging the real of'.hefc Divines to be without knowledge cr confideration, it is but the mild part of his ccnfurc 6, And is ic not fleecing immodel^y in him, to talk of all the

en

Reformed Churches, and challenging them to produce any bcfiJes Socinians and Armini3nS;(yc? Hath the man read all Proteftant Writert, that he durlt make fuch a confident challenge ? I have now I am writing thiSjtbc Teftimonics ot (aft I remember,) abcut zo or jOjthac call believers iuftcrings.puniftiments, lying by mcj whicli I collfftcd on other occafions : And I think it cafic to have as many more. Cut to what purpofe I I confefs many ancient and fome later Proteftantf, do lay that believers fufterings are not punifhrnents, bat chaftifements, taking the word Pjniflimcnt in a reftraincJ fenfe for meer Vindictive Punifhment ( as it if commonly called .) But what man that ever read Philofopherj Divines, Lawyers, of the nature of PunifliraentjCan be ignorant that Chattilement is a fpecies ef Pu-nifcment ? I dare not challenge M"^ Qranden to produce any but Libertines that ever denied it, for little do I know how many fuch books as his own may lurk in the world that I nevei faw, and hope never fhall fee j but if he will name a man ( whole name is not a fcourgeor trouble to the ears of the fober ) that ever gave a Definition of Punifhmentm Gfnirc, which did not comprehend Chaftifem-ent or Paternal Corredion as a Ipecies, I will accept it as a novelty, and thank him for (hewing me that which I,never faw befoie, though 1 rcjed the thingasa vanity.

And it is but a cenforious reproach with a pretence of fome more modefty,which th« late Reverend Aflembly receive at his hands in the feventh page of his Epiftle Dedic, in thefe words, ["BefidesI have been told, that fome of the late Rcve-*'rend Synod difrelifhed tbedodrine ( that }uftification is an Immanent aft in "God, and aftually compleated in the Redemption which is by Chrift and in *'Chrift, both thefe before we believe, as^^g.j.) but cannot finde that any one •* of them hath publilhed his Reafons for fuch a difrelifh. And charity will not " permit me, to harbour the lightefl imaoination, that aay one of thofe grave Di-*f vines called and fclefted out of the who.e Nation, for their eminency in Godli-*'ncfs and Learning, fhould without any means ufed for information and convi-" ftion, exercife a tyranny over the confciences of their iefl'er Brethren, to force " them into an implicite faith to believe as themfelves believe > fpecially when do-**ingit, they ftiall put out that, which they think at leaft to be the light of the *« word in their confcience, and in confencing with them without hearing a " Reafon , they fhall difl'ent from others ( whom their modcfty will confefle "to be of no lefle defervings in the Church) who have given their Rea-« fons.]

But mightthcy not debate thccafe with "Dx.TmJS, and give him their reafona within their ownwals, without fuch tyranny on ourconfcienceSjOr giving us thofe Reafons ? They do tell you what Scripture Juftification is in their Confeflion and Catechifm, and give you their Reafons for it, if Gods Word may go for Reafons, and prove that it follows faith : But they never ofiTered violence to your Confcience, it it lead you to believe that there is another, ortwo,3uitifications before this. Or if you think i: fuch a wrong to Confcience, to affert that [Rcmiflion of iinne and Accepting us as Righteous] do follow faith, it is Gods Word, which they produce, that you muli lay the charge on. Had they reftrained you from faying, that another J uflification'is an Immanent aft, its like they would have given you Scripture Rcaftn for it.

But all thisagainft Mr. BiU, the teMionMinifters, and the Aflembly, isa fmal matter to that flood of reproach which he pours out on the moft of the Miniflers oiEn^Un4, in the 11, and i i- f*gc of his Piefacc to the Reader^ lo© long tokbe all

Cj>3 _

reciteJ. [ " That fince the heat of Comroverfie betvfecti as aad the Piplfts aboac " it, abated, this Doftrine (of Juftification) founded in few Puipirs, which be-" fore founded in all, that the Piafriict, as they termed it, prevailed every where, a " godly deceit to withhold from the people the knowledge of the liberty which they *^' have by Chrift, left rhey fhould turn it into licentioufnefs. That as this pious *' fraud paflcd from hand \o hand among Minifters, many of them while they *^ were deceiving, were thcmfclvei deceived, and verily thought it the right art of '■■ profitable preaching to hold out the Law and keep in theGofpel, to waOi the ^'utter part of the cup and platter, leaving that which is within full of guilt and <^ corruption. Hence it came to pafs that the Law by many was turned to a twofold ♦^ufe, likethefword of Achilles, Sec. fuch repentances for Ilnne, fuch degrees of *'Contrition and Reformation, prcfcribed out of the Law, which being pradi-'^ced, pardon of finne and eternal life muft needs follow. Thus man was made *' not only his own condemnor, but his own Saviour alfo j his evil works in tranf-<^ greffing the Law purfuing him with vengeance, and his returning by repentance *' to good works in (trift obedience to the Law, reftoring him to life and falvation, f* In mean while Chrift was left in a corner to look upon all, but without interpo. "fition of his operation or Partion. Sometimes indeed much might be beard of *^the riches of Gods grace, of the efficacy of Chrifts merits to fave the chief of *' finncrs j fo that the people might even fee the door of heaven open to them: but '^ in conclufion, the Preacher, as if he had been deputed to the office of the Che-'* rubims, Ge». z.«/t. tokeep the way of the tree of Life, with his flaming fword "turning every way, affrighted the poor fouls from all hope of entring, crying, ^^TroculhiTtc, proculiteprophini, no prophaneor unclean perlon hath right to med-" die with this grace. Norfiiftthey mull have fuch heart preparations, purifi-" cations, and prejacent qualifications, before they draw near to partake of mercy ; " muft firft cleanfe and cure themfelves, and then come to Chrift afterwards, muft " be cloathed with an inherent Righteoufnefs firft, a«d then expcft to be cloathed *^iipon with aRighteoufnefs imputed. Such hath been, and ftillisthe dodrinc '* delivered in many Congregations within this Nation. I neither fain nor aggra-'* vate. It is that whereof my felf not without grief, have been ofc an ear wicnefs, " and that from the mouths of very zealous Minifters And I fear the Lord hath a " Controverfie againft the Miniftry, and wi 1 more yet obfcuteand vilifie many of " them, for their obfcuring of bis Grace and his Chrift.]

I. And who are thcfe zealous Minifters that muft bear all this thunder of reproach and ihreatning ? It feeras it is all faving [a few :] for he cxceptcth but [a few Pulpits.] And whoraay tl'ofe few be, is not hard toconjefture. I know no men that he is fo likely to mean, as fuch as Mr.'^ohn Rogers of 'DcdhitA, Mr Fen^ vcr, l>U.Tho.Hoolicr, M):.Tho.Shephird, McBoUoiij and the generality of cur old folid foul-fearching Preachers, that go the lame way : Of whom 1 will fay but one word to him, and one toothers. To him, That he would confcionably ob-fervc whether the Labours of thefc Reverend, FaichfuU Servants of Chrift, have not been bleflVd with another kinde of fucccfs, then the Labours of D:.Qri^, Mr. Vcn, Mr.RajiduU, Mr. SdUmarfi}, Mi'. Town, or any of that ftrain : unltfs he will deal by them and their converts, as by me, and fay, that they brought men to the Pjpe and the Devil, and not to Chrilt. As Mr. ^hepbirdh'nhy GoihiJhgiven [» full iibUjfing on this vejy of breaching, and. ikcmojl Cjodly brjc (o gcttcrally approved It from txpcrientej, tlut one wsuld ihinfi we jhoid.l never hive becti put fo to pkai for it.

Cio3

z. And it ijobfevvable/that he laics all this Accafation on us of obfcuiing Chrift [fince iheceatingof theheat of ControYcrfic] Ic feems it is the heat of Controverfic that fittt gave life to his way of revealing Chrift, and that muft keep life in it: and for want of the heat of Controvcrfie, i: will die. Its part doubc then, that he hath done his part to keep lite in it. Truly in my belt obfcrvation, the heat of ControvcrGe drives men loextreams, while it fets even wife and "ood menaifudyingj what to fiy againft the adverfary, and how to draw all to the ftrcngthcningof theircaufe : and when in happy peace men have leifure fobcrly to review fuch arguings, and can patiently hear all fides fpeak, and are withall put to try thtir own dodrines on their own and the peoples fpirits, and to fee them fi^ truly reduced to pradifc, then it is that men come home by repentance to Truth, and Moderation, which Controverfic lolt , and fober Pradice findeth again. 2, To others therefore I again give my advice, that they highly value, ar^ diligently reade thefe praftical, fcarching Authours; and what ever fuch men as this may judge of fuch Preachers or Writers, be thankfuU for them as the greateft blef-ling of this age, wherein it excelleth other ages, as this Land doth other Nations. I wocldnotadvife Countrey people of Vulgar capacities to trouble their heads with much Controvei fie, no ivDt againfl the Antinomifljthcmklvcs. But as a better prefervativc I would c^ery family that hath a care ot fpiritual things, would Ixit keep in their houfcs, hands and hearts> feur or five of our old folid lucccfsfuU praftical Divines, and I (houldno: fear the prcvalency of Antinnmianifm : Efpe-cially get Mr. Pittkes fire Sermons, Mr. }Vhhficld, Mr. Rogcn Dodrineof Faith and Love: Mr. Boltons and Mr. T.Hoefiers Works, Mr. Fcnnert, Mr. IJ'hatcUys New birth, T)od on the Commandments, and ( as a full Confutation of all their Libertinifm in a pradical fliain) Mr, Sbcpbird, efpecially his Sound. IBelccvir, a Book that well anfwers the Title, in giving the true caradcr of fuch.

g. I know not how large Mr. Crandoni acquaintance may be in Etigland heyond mine: but I have been in many Counties, if not by farrc the molt j and I fhall be bold to leave my contrary obfervation to polierity, for the Vindication of the Minifiry, fo farre as my credit will go : And I muff profefs ferioufly, that though I have frequently and heartily lamented the great number of weak or worldly, or negligent ^Unifiers in many parts, yet did 1 never hear, to my beft remembrance any one man, no not of the worft that ever I heard, except the late wandrin" Se-daries, I. That ever preached any pardon of fin, but by the Bloodfhed and Merits of Jefus Chrill, and the free grace of God : 2. Or that ever did tell men that they muft merit pardon or lite themfelves. g. Or that ever told men they could by their own ftrcngth fo prepare themfelves for pardon, as that pardon muft needs follow. 4. Or that ever made any preparations or works a Price for the purchafingof Chrift or Grace. 5. Or that ever preached the Law and not the Gofpel. 6. Or that ever ( fo farrc as I could difccrn) did by that which he cals a pious fraud, conceale from the people their Liberty by Chrift. 7. Or that taught them only to wafli the outfide. 8. Or that ever fent men to Works in ftead of Chrift. 9. Or that ever told them th:^t their Convcrfion or Reformation, did fo much as joyn with Chrift in fatisfying or mtriring. 10. Yea that ever kept poor finncrs from the Tree of Life, or the wounded foul from comfort, tx.ept thofc that fpoke againft their wounding. 11. Or that ever told them they muft firft cure themfelves and then come to Chrift. 12. Or that ever obfcured Chrift and Grace out of defign ( fo fame as I was able to difcern,) but only out of weaknefs,

all

C M 3

all having not the fame mcarure of ability in preaching the Gofptl: Not one maa ^id I ever hear that was guilty of any one ©f thele accufations, fo farrc as 1 could poflibly perceive. Nay Ifolemnly profefs, that in all my daies, fince I under-ftood any thing, of rhefe matters, the thing that all the carnal and fcandalous and formall Preachers about usj were blamed, and cenfured for, by all the godly of my *^ acquaintance ( till the VVarrcs^ was their too liberal giving out pardon and free grace and hope of falvation to the ungodly, and making the gate wider and the way broader then Chrift had made ir, and preaching comfort fo generally, that all the wicked might take it to thcmfelvcs; and that the generality of Godly, Conl'ci-onable Minifters went the contrary way, fearching^differencingjdriving to through humiliation, and broakennels of heartj and Reformation of Life, and were very cautelousin all their oft'crs of pardon, left the prophane flicuM fnatch ir, to whom it belonged not : and that this was the only pi caching that godly people then loved (fo far as my accjuaintenca extended ) and that wicked men hated, and for which they reproached the Preachers as Puritans and Prccilians, and were ufe to fay, that they would make men mad. This Tei^imony I leave againft Mr. (^randons reproach of the E»g/i/7; Miniitry jnho thinks it not enough to get into the feat of the fcorners, when God hath with thunderbolts liruck them out to the ground before his eyes, but he darcth alfo from that feat, to denounce [ " a Controverfie tfrom -*'the Lord againft the Miniftry, that he will more yet obfcurc and vililie many ** of them, for their obfcuring of his Grace, and his Chrift] And no wonder if he that dare pafs this fentence as from God, dare alfo execute that which he takes to be Godi will, and fo do bend bimfclf to obfcure and villific that Mi-niftry.

4. What Grace is itthatthcfe Minifleis fay. No prophane perfon hath right to meddle with ? "Wherein they play the part of the Cheiitbims and keep men " from the Tree of Life ? Is it the grace of fanftification ? No, he dares not yet to fay ir, that they tell men they mull not yet be fanftlfied becaufe they are fio-phane ? Is it the grace of faith ? Certainly he never hcai d the Miniilei s fo commonly fay. None of you that are prophane pcrfons muR believe in Chrift for Rc-miflion of imne. Indeed thefc two things he might hear, for we mull preach them, I. That no prophane man can acceptor believe in an oflered Chriil to pardon and Juftification, till he feel the need of Chrift, by feeling tlie evil of linne and miiery. i. That no prophane pcrfon ought while prr.phane to believe that his finne is adually pardoned, and he juftiiied by Chrift : And if this be the quar-rell, I i'ay. It is prefumptionand not faith that fuch keep men from, and it is Sa-tans moll potent delulions, and not Gods graces, tha; we would deftroy. Hue ?. It feems it is the grace of pardon it felf that he fpcaks of: And indeed do Minifters fo commonly tell the prophane that they mull net take the grace of pardon ? In the Libertine Icnfcthey do: for fo, Tali^ing is but to believe or conceit that they arepardoricdsilrcidy : But in the Scripture fenfe, they do not, but call the prophane to take pardon, that is, to accept it on Gods terms of faith and repentance} to Take Chrift, and whole Chrift firtt, and pardon with him : And hath God a controverfie with us, and will make us vile for preaching this doftrine ? Dare any bu: a Libertine fay to all the prophane. Believe that you arc all pardoned, and sduaily )uftifi:d without exception ? Or would hehave the Gofpclthat ve muit preach to be only this : Believe that all Gods E\c£t only are pardoned, w hethcr proph^me or not prophane ? This would be as terrible a dcftrinc, and drive thctn, as fiC {peaks, from the Tree of Life, as much as ours: for how long would it be before

he tfould tcl! tbeM, which aic the Elcft and which not: And if believing that the EleA (Jiall bc.faved, would favc, without any pcrfonal application, why might no: the devils be i'aved, who,nodoubt, bcliere that the Elcd fhall be faved. For my part, Imuftprofcr$, 1 findc it no hard matter to perlwaJc any common prophane people chat their linnes are forgiven by free grace through Chrifts blood, and ihac they (hall be faved ; but all the difficulty lies in deftroying fuch perfwafionij and breaking down their falfe faith and hope j and very hardly and lieavily doth that w»rkgo on r and if Mt.Crindon take the contrary courfe, I am confident his preaching hath more, ( I dare not fay better) fuccefs then mine, and his Converts are more numerous, unlcfs a prophane preliimptuous heart, be not the fame thine ir\H4Dii>Jhire, as in other Countfics. But I beltow too many words on fo plain a cafe.

To recite all the grofs calumnies and (hamclefs forgeries of that "Book, would be a weary and ungratefuU task to the Writer, and no better to the Reader, and muft indeed be a tranfcribing of no Imall part of his Book, if not the farre greateft ? What a [olemn fidion have we in the third page of his Epi^.Vcd. That I have my [ " circumforaneous Legates, which having their Provinces aligned either 'of one or more Counties, are flill circling and compafTing them j firlt to dif-"perfe this his myftery of iniquity with fuch acuratenefs, that there may be no " one that hath the repute of a pious Gentleman or Miniller, a ftranger to it : and '' then by their frequent vifitaticns, to examine how the "BixUriin faith thrives in " each perfon and to hold them fixtd to it: Thcfe returning once in fix or feven " moneths out of their circuits to their grand Mafler, may poflibly fpeak in things ^' that they know not, what they think may be plaufible to him.]

Conform to this are his following words in the fame Epift, ['^i. It fprant' *'" from other mens, yea Minifters, too much admiration and almoft adoration oi " him, when from all parts there was fuch concourfe in a way of Pil^iimaoc to *^ hi«n, to blefs him, or be blelTed by him, and the admirers returned to the de-" ceiving of others, withnolefs applaufe and triumph, then thq Twr/f from vific-" ing the fhrine of their ■7flahomet,S<.Q.']

Would any think this man lived at fuch a diftance from me, and knew fo Httle of what he faith ? when he prctcndeth to know our very difcourfes, contrivances andcorrefpondences ? I liand not on the vifible envy that he exprelleth j but what an impudent falHiood is the fubftance of the ftory ? I confefs, with thanks to God and chemjthat I have fomctime the favour otmy Brcthnens Tifitations,for an hour era night, from fevcral parties J but it is for the moft par:, but when they pafs this way as travellers J it being ufual with Minifters, fo farre to Hiew love to each other. But I dofolemnly profefs (for I have no other way to clear my felf)

1. That I never fent man, or provoked man to promote that Bookj or any fini;u' lar opinions of mine, or any of thofe that I am judged to differ in from theconi-non way, any other way then the generality of godly Minilters promote them.

2. That I never asked any man living ( to the utmolt of my memory, and I am Yery confident of it, in this) whether Minifters or Gentlemen, or who, or how many, did favour that Book, or any fingular opinion of mine, or any fo called.

3. That I never asked fo much as one man, to my utmolt remembranze, that came tome, H nv be liked that Book, or whether himfelf were of my minde in th€ points in Controverfie between me and my Brethren. 4. That to this day I do not fomucli as know the Judgements of thofe Reverend Brethren, or anyone pf them, that ever came to me out of that County where Mr.Cr. dwels, or any neighbour

Cij3

bour County, and of very few in England, that ever came to me from any parr. Except it be thofe that diflent, and carae to give me their exceptions, f. That Mr. Crandons neighbours, whom it feems he raifeth this llander ofjare men of another fpirit, then to drive a trade of venting new Opinions, or Errours : and that ic is not that Book which he deals againit, but my other Labours that 1 have had their thanks for ( t<^ the beft or my remembrance :) yea that their Conference is upon Prafticals, wholly bending anoiherway, then the Accufcrof the Biethrcn dreams of. 6. Yea I will adde further ( bccaufe it feems Mi-(^Vmdon knows rhem) that I know not one Miniftcr of Httmpjhirc or JViltjhre who hath been with me, and with whom I have any familiarity ( except oncjwho medled not with me on fuch things ) but ikcy have by their Letters pcrfwaded me from Controverfie to Pradical Writings, yea and fome of them have dealt as freely wiih rac ( when by mifundcrftanding that ward in my Virc^iom fcrTcace ef^^afc. they fufpcftcd me to waver in the point cf Perfcvcrance ) as any other men have dor.v', 7. Thac -Iknownoneof any part in Evgland that 1 have any familiar correfpondence with, but men reputed Godly, and none that ever vifited me purpofely (as Minifters, for familiarity or acquaintance ) but mecrly on that account j nor do I ever ufe to ^ have much difcoarfe with any of them about any fuch Opinions j nor is it Opini-onatiftsthat arc my familiars. 8. That I ufe to mention that Book of /\pho-rifmes as fparingly as I can, to any, being truly artiamed of it (and willingly fo publifhmy fclf) foritsindigefted paflages and-imperfedions. 9, That when I am forced to fpcakof it, it is commonly by way of accufation, or confcfiionof my Raflinefs, and that efpecially for the didafl of fome Brethren (which I never dreamt of before hand) I do repent that ever I publiflied it, and fo do hereby pro-fefs. 10. That thisismy courfe with neighbour Minifters, as well as ftrangers. Let any man living that can, witnefs againft me, that I fet upon him to draw him to any opinion of mine, wherein I differ from the generality of my Brethren, or am fuppoled fo to do. 11. Yea let any man of my own Congregation, witnefs againu me, if they can, that I have beftowed one quarter or half quarter of an hoursdifcourfe with them to,'that end : What I preach publiquely the Town and Country knows, ii. Yea I have hindered very many from the reading of that Book J both of my neighbours and young Schollars in the Univerfitics, that any whit depended on me for advice. 13. And befides all this I have fupprefled it, from being again Printed, this five years or thereabout, contrary to the importunity of multitudes of Letters; when there was n£ver but a thouiand Printed in all, astheBookfellerstold me. Lay all this together, which I folcmnly profefs to be the truth, and then judge of the truth of this mans long forged ftory, of Legares, and Circuits, and Examinations, and the driving on fuch a laborious cnterprife, for propagation of my Opinions, as he adventured to affirm and engage his Credit on ! Doth this man know what Ipirit it is that acluarcs him ? If I have any opinion differing from others, 1 think he hath leldom known any man, that ever was lefle zealous in propagating fuch Opinions. Oh that 1 knew how to further the Unity and i^cacc of the Church, and to clofc our wounds, on the condition that Book were burnt that M.Cr.i?i.'.'o;i is fo angry at. But I will not for five times the p ice of Mr. Cfs Volume, undertake to enumerate one half the grofs falffioods in matter of faft, which he confideniiy affinr.eth. This then is my firft Reafon, which I tender to Mr. Caryl,why I think the Church is not like to get any great profit by this Bookof his, and tfaat it was not worthy of the Publkk view. . r SECT..

C'4]

SECT. II.

MY fccond Rcafon is this, Thic book which rs (o filled from end to end with Hailing, fconiin^ and Raving words, thic it is hud fo much as to finde the vtry icnic at the n\.uii> KeaionSjin I'uch an age as this is, when men need not pick up Truths ou: of mens excrements, d jth feem to me unprohtable to ihc Church, and unworthy to be publick : Bat fach is M' Crsnions bonk : Therefore.

I confds my Conlcience would have received more then luch a [little Check] as >1' ^'ir/i received, if I had been defircd to approve or applaud fuch a book,thou^h it had been ajainil mine Enemy that it hid been written ( or elfc I know nothing of mineown heart.) It would furc have been [a Check] efl'oftuall to the iufpcn* din^ ot my Approbation ? I have not read a'.l the book ( nor ever mean to do,) but i have pcruied the farre greateft part : and in molt places, if not almoft all, tha; Iceming reafon which he produceth, is Co buried in aheap of Raging language, that I mult read a great deal, before I can finde it. And To conftant is he, and io violent in this laniuage, upon no apparent caufe given him, that I truly profcfs, 1 cannot butqiKllion whether the mins brain be found or crackt, and ibe next I meet with that knowes him, I ihill enquire better of it.

Bat 1 fappofe WCir^l will I'ay, thai for all this his book will be profi:ablc to the Church of Gjd, for the Dodrines fake that it containeth : But is found Do-«S:ine grown fo rare in EngUnd, that it can be had from no cleanlier a hand then this ? Are all our fob;;r Divines turned Hcreticks ? And are all the old books that delivered found Dodiine, loft or burnt. Sure when a Chriftian may gather all the found Dodrine of this book from 500 more, where it is cleanlier delivered, it is not profitable toGods Church to have the fame delivered, in fuch infernall language. Are you fure that moft or all Readers, will receive no hurt by fuch a Volume of falfcand Railing words ? and that they who take the truth, will not take the filth and all ? Had Mr. Crindons great friend defired rac (0 to approve of fuch a book written againlt Mr. Jar// ( fuppofiug him of my judgemeat and me of his,) I think I lliould have taken it for a task of no more honour, then to have pind my name upon his clofe Itool, to invite men to it as fit matter for publick food J and to tell them, that though it b: matter of ill Refentment, yet i: was Gjod till he concotl.'d it, and perhaps there may be an Apple or two in the bottom if yoacan fi ide them. The words may feera unmannerly : but if our Righ-teoul'ncis be as Mcnltruousraggs, and the Sacrifices of wicked men be Dang, in the language of God, I think this UnrighteouSjImpure Fardell,may patiently bear the fame denominations.

B j: perhaps M'Ciry/.nay fay, Though all the found Dodrinc of this book be common, yet it is wordiy of the publike view, and profitable to the Church, foe the confu-.ation ot my Errors, and prefervngmcn from '.he danger of intcdion. To which 1 lay, i. Will not the fame found Doftrine as it lay before in lober mens writingSjprcferve them better ? i. I do not believe that any one mm will be prefervcd b/ the Argumentative part of his book : If the Reproaches preftrve them not,by filing their aft^dion^, they are like to be neverthclefs in danger for this book. J- But becaii e this is the All that can be faid, I will (though contrary to my form;r purpjics) giveataft to Mr.Cary/of the force of this Authors Vindi-citm ofihz Tru.hjSud Cjnfuiauon ot the Errors ; and it ftiall be the moft fub-

Aantiall

Ci53

ftantiall part of bis bpok thac I will take notice of, in wiiich you may be able to .jodge of the reft.

SECT. HI.

THc firft thing that I will do, Ihall be to give you a taft of that Truth which he Vindicatethj and the I'econd (hall be to thew you the ftrength of his Confutations of my gieateil Errors.

I. InhisEpiftle Dedicatory, his two firfl Points which he feeks tOTindicate from the Charge of AntinomianilmCjare thus cxprclTed [" i. Juiiification i« an " Immanent aft in God i as aftually Compleated in the Redcmpdon which is by *'Chrifl, and in Chrift, both thefe before we believe. If he meant that Gods Immanent aft is Compleated by Chrilt, it would according to himfclf make God himfelf Incompleat till Chrift Compleat him : But, his meaning is, I be-leeve, that Juftification in Generall, and not that fort or aft is Compleated in and by Chrift before we believe i and if Co, then it is as compleat to Infidels as to Chriftians : But bccaul'e he puts in a Referve afterwards, for caution [As far as I holdit] let us fcarch how far he holds it. And pig. io6. he faith [*'4. Faithic "felf ( much lei's any other qualification, gift or aft ) is not a Condition of J u-" ftificarion;?i/oroPc/: there Chiift pleaded our discharge by his blood, and itill *' maketh inteiccfllon for us : but a means or Inftrument by which we receive 5* Chrift Jcfus, and the Righteoufnefs and Juiiification that is in him to our " lelvet tor coniolaxion and falvation infers coufciaitix.'] So then wc are faved in foro confcicntlx by h'nh) and iit foioDei wkhon: it. Yet he forgot that cllewbere hecaiis it, forum Dei in confcicucc, as being of a better found. And pig.ii6. be faith [^'Tbat the blood ot Chrift is fufficient to Compleat our Juftification bc-"foicGsd, and that this is its own work ; but that there are other Neceilaries "tojuftifieus in our lelves and our own apprehenfions, which being fuppofcd " the work is endlefs. So pjg.89. ["Though as tothemlelves and their own *' judgements, and as to thcai^^nehenlicns of iwcn, they are under the Law, under '•^ wrath, yet in Chrift they have done their Law, their Iniquities pail, prefcnc '•'and to come are biortcd out, their peace made, and they r;.concilcd to God.] i*'*5'J54- He heaps up abuUvely fcverailtex:s of Scripture [as giving tcftimony of our juftification in Chrift before faith entred to purifie our heartSjtT-'c] and anncxeth [and all this before we had a being.(iT'c] when yet there is not lomuch as mention of ]uUifi:ation in any text but one that he citeth, and that one is abu-i"ed j the wotds [being now Juftified ] biing made to be [ when wc were enemies we were Juftified 5] and were nothing for him, if they had been fo, as I have have fhewed z^zinii Colvinui: Many other pallsges manit'eft his opinion, thac Jultification is trom Etcinity, and compleated before wc were born, and that by faith, is but in our own Conlcic^ce,to lave us there.

From heace it muft needs follow, that no cleft perfon, though an Infidel!, may Confcfs any other Guilt orMifery but that which is oppofite to Juftification ia Coni'cicnce ; and that they mut^ not Pray foi-any other Juftification or pardon, and that they muft not be beholden to Chrift, nor thank him for any other pi:-don or Juftification received fince they believed or were born, but only this in Confciencej with abundance of the like coiUcqucnts, of which 1 intend to fay more anon.

U But

But thefe are not all his miftakej. Pun i.^ag.io^, he faith that the faying of Bernard [" Fu rcgni fititf,KonCaufj. rcgiundti lome do,3nd all Hiould thus conftrat: " not that they are the way to the Kingdom above, Chiiil alone being this way, ** but they are the way of the Saints which arc Chrifts fpirituall Kingdome.] As if Bcrniri by f'ji Rc^nt, meant the Kingdom now within us, when hcoppolethit to CdufdRcgnundi! But fee what anoppofuion he makes between [the way to the Kingdom above ] and [the way of the Saims !] As if it might not, yea muft not be both 1 As if he ftiauld fay to a traveller [ that is not the way to fuch or fuch a place, but it is the way o/the traveller ] The word [m»4;] implicth no more lUcn to have the nature of a Means to that End : and this man will have Chrift only tobethe»4j' to the Kingdom above I as if FaithjLovCjObedience, Promifes,Sa-cramcnts, other Ordinances, were no Means to the Kingdom above, and fo that our falvation there were no End of any of thefe : and as if nothing elfe can be the way in fubordination to Chrilt becaufc Chrill is the only way. Thefe words miy be toyes to feme, and may pleafe thole ears that Jo by the opinions which they call Orthodox, as others iu thefe times do by the opinions which are novcll and heterodox, even place their Religion in holding fuch opinions : but I dcfire God to freferve his Church from the pradifing of them, as fmall a matter as they may fecm to he : He that makes not Heaven hij End, and knoweth of no Means to it,but Cbrirt, never knew Chrill aright, nor ftiallncTcr come there. This I lay, because 1 believe God.

^art i.pugJ9i. That [" Chrift hath not Merited from Gods Naturall, but " his ordinate Juftice, not iti thcyjni?,but in the large fenfe :] and this he makes " the ground of his bold Aftirmation, [" That I do equallixe the Merits of mans, " with the Merits of Chrifts Righteoufnefs.] For the firft part of his Allcrtion, I had rather Mr. Owe« miglit tchool him, by h'uhicDiatribJc^ufHtiavindicitrice, then I difpiueit with him : For the later, I know what I fhould have ( juftly) heard, if I had faid that Chrift merited not in the ftrid, but in the large fenfe. The large fenfe which I there expreis, is when there's no value in the thing, but mecrly thepromife of the Donorjthat can be any Caufc of that called Merit j and when it makes not the Reward to be of Debt, but meerly of Grace. And indeed is that man orthodox, and a vindicater of Chrift ani his Merits againft Popcry,that affirmeth that Chrift hath no othervvife merited then thus ? I will not ask, Whether this be confiltent with Chriftianity it felf: But I that am, with this man the great enemy of free Grace, doprofefs to believe, that it was the Value of Chrifts performance that made it Meritorious, as it was a moft excellent Means to the attainment of Gods Ends ; and that it made the Rsward to be of Debt to Chrift, and not of meer Grace ; and that it was Merit in the ftrifteft fenfe, even on the tcrmcs of Commutative Juftice, cocfidering it as undertaken and dignified by the fecond Perfon in Trinity, who was never obliged by fubjeftion but bv voluntary fponfion j and that afterward as performed by God-man, under the Law, it was ftriftly and properly meritorious from Diftributive Juftice. See then how the Vindicators of free Gracc,do Maintain it by Denying it,and rhe fuppofed enemies of it acknowledge and maintain it '• And whether this D'oArine be Profitable to the Church of God,and worthy of the publick viuw ?

fart i.pag ixo,ixi. Yoh may fee more how he advanceth Chrift in the work of our Juitification. He tells mc that ["He will deny my Affcrtion [that *'Chrifts fatisfaftion is the Meritorious Caufe of Juftification] unlefs 1 will *' grant him thefe 4 or 5 fuppoHtions. 1. That io farre as Juftification is an aft

« Et«rnali

C«7]

" Eternall and*€mman«nr in GoJ, Chrifts fatisfaftion is not the Mciitoiious "Caufcofit. 1. If in fome other refped it be the Meritorious Caufe, that God *'doth therein merit of himfelf. j. That this Merit mui^ in no wife hinder but ** thsR the entire benefit ef J aftification muft come to u$ freely without money or " price, 4. That it is but unproperly termed Merit,even then when it refpedcth " the difcharge which God giveth into a mans conicienccj^^'f. J- That Chrifts " fatisfadion is more properly to be called Gods foundation of this our new Re-*' lation of Juttificd perfons, upon which he hath inabled himfelf to Juftifie us in *' Mercy,without any feeming diminution of his Jufticc and truth.] You fee bow how far Chrift hath merited our Juftification, according to this zealous Patron of his Merits. i« The Immanent Juftification, he neither did nor could merit: asf.ji'l. he faith again, and he faith I willand muft graRt it: But I conjeftuie ( for itsa highbuCnefs) that Gods cflcncc is hui T)cuomiMtionecxtrinfcc.i caWcd. [ Juftifying] or [luch or fuch an immanent aft ••] and that this extrinlick Dcn»-mination may orindcnovo, and not be eternall > becaufe of the newnefs of the objeft : it being a denomination from Rclationj which is not fubjefted properly in God as Related to the objcft really, but in the objefts Relation to God, from whence it is only dcnominatively and rationally given to Gad : This is the do-ftrine oi Aquinas,Caprcol«i,:ind the reft of that Tribe,and the other Schoolmen in gieateft credit ( Papifts J confefs, but ) owned alio by thofe Proteftants that are the greateftadverfaries to the Arminian Caufc : This being fo, even the Immanent Juftification, if there be any fo to be called ( as the Efteeming and Accepting us asjRighteous) is the effeft of Chrifts MeritSjand the Confcquent of faith : (Though 1 eafily acknowledge, the Eternall Decree to Juitific, is not fo.) And do not our Divines of thcAlfembly, in the Catec-hifme and Confeflion, define Juftification by Remiflion znd >iActepWig us as Righteous? And Accepting is taken for an Immanent Aft ( and is,unlels you take it improperly for the Accep- *tl tanceof the Law it felf, rather then of the Law-giver.) And yet they affirm it to follow faith,and t© be the fruit of Chrifts Merit.

I. But this Juftification Mr.CwwisMdenieth to proceed from Chrifts Merits, and the fscond here named is but [ the difcharge given in to Gonfcience :] and in refpeft to this he faith, it is but improperly termed merit. Is not Chrifts Merit then well advanced ? Juftification io God he mcriteth not at all} Juftification in Gonfcience he mcriteth but [improperly.]

But perhaps you will fay, He might yet properly Merit a third Juftification not there mentioned, ii\. his own as thcpublick perfon, and ours in him- I anfwcr, 1. There is no fuch thing as our Juftification in Chrift,properIy fo called j (and the phrafe that 1 nfed that way,I have already publiftied my revocation of. 2. He that knowes no Juftification of us perfonally^but Immanent in God from eternity, and Tranfient in Gonfcience, will likely acknowledge no other toChrift; andfo the Juftification of Chrift himfelf as the publick perfon, is either Immanent, and that, fay they, he merited not; or tranficnt in the Gonfcience of Chrift, and that is but unprepcrly called Merit. A fair Advancement of Chriits Merit. Thus ovei-docrs are the molt fuccefsfull undoers.

But fuppofc that be had acknowledged the moft proper Meriting of Juftification in Gonfcience, (both in iheConfciencc of Chrift, if he will fo fpeak, and of us i) is this a fair dignifying of the Merit of Chrift ? what! to Merit no Juftification but that in Gonfcience ; I afl'ure Mr. Caryl, I that am taken by bim for the op-pofer [ of Juftification by Chrifts fatiifaftion alone without woiks ] do give in-

M J comparably

Ci83

ccmparaWy mnrc then this fo hi* (atUfadion alone without work<. And (hou'd I *iite I'ucU a Volume to mai;itain that Chrill McTitci only Jrft fica:ion in Con-fcicncc, my confcicnce would tell i«e I cculJ not well be jufiificd trom the Itrpu-tacion of either Sociiiinnifme D;]uc!ailme. Wee to him that hath not amcrcnc-ced'ary Jiiltification in Law, gcin^ before that in Confcicnce, and a mure noble Juftification in GoJs fcntence followin.; after it.

And fccin' it is but Juilifican^jn in Conlcience that he afcrilvth to faith, how can he exclude other gi-aces ft^m it, when they may csidencc Jurtificarion to^he Confcicnce as we'l as faith ? and it isnot Juftifying taith it icU that is^he Receiving of this fenfe of Cr^mfort or Peace.called juftification in Confcicnce, (thoui;h it Receive Chri'l that gives it,) but it is dircftly the Internall fenfe, and fcHf. rcflcding Knowlcdgejthac is the Reception of this kinde of juIlitication.And how much the men of thefe principles are forced to give to Works, to Juftific in Con-fcience,Ti3y be fecn in Colvinm and others.

I had thought to have Hiewed you more of his Dcflrincs, to try whether they areprofi:ablerothc Church of God : but I am weary of thus much: anddeubtthe Reader wi;l be fo to. Yet let mc give you a taft of the humility and modefty of his lan^uaiie of the hish God.

Sect, i v.

P4rt 1. p^gioi. Agalnfl my Conditional! Juftification, he thus argueth } l'^ I. Wtiatfoever (innes of whatfoeverpeifons were Imputed to Chrift,and for " which lie hath made full fatisfadion to Gods Jufticc, thefe are no moie Impa-*f tedjbut for ever remitted in Chrift Abfolutely and unconditionally to them who ^' were the committers thereof. But all the finnes of all the Ele(5t, and of them on. 5« Iv, and not of the worlds were Imputed to Chrift, and he hath made full fatif-*^ fadion;2i/<; Therefore.] The Propofition is a dclpeiateerrour, offuchconfe-quence, as is feariull to confider : yet is faid by this man [ to be clear,unlefs w« will pronounce God to be unjuft.] See .^erc a little more of the face of his found Dc(ftrine ! T<iH/faith, Rcm.^.i^. that faith fhall be Imputed to us for Righte-oufncfsjif we lelicve,] and till Righteoufncfs is Imputed finne is Imputed, Paul faith, tb^t God hathpmt up all under fninc, that the promife in^efiu (^'hriji might beto them that believe: Chrilt faih, Hethxtbclie'cethnot, U condemned dreudy, and the rvratk ofGedabidetb on him- How frequently doth Scripture defcribc the mifery of an unrcgenerate mans cftate, that he is bj nature the childe ofwruih, that fuchitre firxngers to the (^'ovemnt of^romife, rvithout Hepe, mihout God in the tvorld (at leafl the Gentile part,) and ftill they Receive Remiftlon, and Juftification, and Adoption, when they believe. Yet this man dare fay, That no finne is ever Imputed more to thefe men,thoagh Infidels,if Eleftjbccaufe Chrift hath fatijfied, but they are all Abfolutely and unconditionally Remitted to them who were the committers thereof.] So that if this be true,no Elc«^ Infide'.l, is capable of any pardon of finne from his youth to his death, all being done in Chrift before ( except afTuring us in Confcicnce of it:) and fothey have no fuch pardon to pray for, defir£, endeavour after,or acknowledge. Do rtot call this Dodrine Libertinifme, leaft you wrong it,or be a Papift for fo doing.

Bucjherc is his proof. That ["God is unjuft, if any finne be Imputed to any . "main, which wai before Imputed to Chrift, and hefatisfied for.] He faith

[ft For

[" Fcr if he (houM Impute: to the cftcndcr any etx finoc, which was Imputed to ''Chriftj and for which Chiift hath fully faiisficd Gods Juliice, then Hiould '3 God be unjuft in taking vengeance twice of the fame ljnnC;<irt'. contrary to the ''^ equity of his luftice,and infallibility of his TiuthjCi7C.] Stc how high a charge this Brother of cuiSjthii durtjihis earth-worm^dare lay againlt the Almighty God, even as high,as of Injuflice and untruthj flioiild he but Impute cnc fintuU word or thought to an Infidcll or Paganjthat iseled.

But yet this is his more humble and meeker language. Tag $^.^art.i. He fals on measa Papift, for faying that i. Seme pait of the curtc (that is,the evil threatncd for finnc ) is executed on the whole man, foul and body. i. Thattill thcrefurreftion, all the(.fti.fts of finne, and Law and wrath will not be removed. J. That there is no unpardoned iinne in the death of Believers which fliall procure further judgement, and fo no hatred in ir, though there be anger. I recite the words as he rakes them together in his order; But let this fland at prefent. What if I affirm thai the death of the Godly is a penal effld of finncj and the law and Gods wrath ? ( i^ill maintaining that this which is of it felf a penal evil, is fantftified by Gcd for their good, he maketh all their chaftifcments to be their advantage, and the efftfls of his anger arc means to prcveRt that deftriidion which is the cft'tift of his haaed to them that fuffcr it :) Wliat if 1 fay that their death may be from Gods anger yet from his love as prevalent, and that there is no unpardoned finne in that death, to bring further judgement on them ? Why you fhall hear what thanks this man would give God for fuch a mercy as his eternal falvation, fuppofing that there be any finne, law and anger the caufe of his death. He faith ["A glorious privilcd,;e no doubt ! fuch as, according to our ufual *' Proverb, a man iray findc at Billiufg-ite for a box on the ear, from the worfl of *^ men that he meets with I When a man hath in revengcfuU ft^iry perfecuted his " hated neighbour wi:h all the ffrckcs and flo.ms of wrath and milchief, and after **^ many years perfecution, ba:h at latl flaugktcred him, and trampled his dead '' corps into the mire and duff, now at lalt he ccalcth from hatred, and is but an-*'gry with his poor relicks, foi gives him all the reft, when he can do no mere "to him, and forgivencfs can do Iiim no good. Such tender mercies ofciuclty(a$ " the wife man terms them, Prov. 11.10.) do:h\M'Bjxur hercai'ctibe unto God, *'in his gracious dealings with believers for ChiiiU fake, v;^. to perfecute them "with alltheftroaks of bis wrath, and all thecurks of the Law, all their life "time, fparing neither their body nor foul, and at lait with great indignation to "deftroythem, and trample theii bodies into th; earth, duft and rottennefs, yea '* and their foals vvhithcr he lil^, and under what torments he lift, andaftcrthis " (fo remarkable is his love) he will bate them no more, but be angry with them " Itill. When they are dead and can offend no more, and God hath inflidcd up-" on them all his judgements, that he can ir.fiid no more, now their fins fhall be " fo pardoned that they fhall Itifiler no more, no more then ail, which they already " fufler. Who denies this'o be the veryquinteffence of mercy and fpirits of love, *'whenM'BJxter hath fi defined it, and held it forth to us a$ the moftcelcftial *« comfort that we fhall findc in death. There is, faith he, no unpardoned (in in " the death of Believers that fliall procur: further judgement.]

The Lord pardon the great h?.dnefsot'my heart, that trembleth no more at the moft horrid blafpheming of his facred Name I and that is no more deeply aflc-fted with leal for God, ond compaflicn to the man that durft ufc this direful! language 1 U it fhoiild prove true, that the chaftifemcnts and death of the Saints are

M 3 penalties,

Cio3

Penalties, and thoagh Tanftified to their good, are yet inthemfclvcs evH, and f(J fu IS evil, the eScdk of Gods difpleafure and wrath } dare man therefore vomit oat all thcfc horrid reproaches againft the God of heaven ! Is God aj bad as the worft of men for this ? Would the worft of men for a box on the ear, bellow ever-lafting falvadon on us, bcfidcs a.I the unfpcakablc riches of nieicj, which (for all ihcfe penal challifemcnts) we receive in this life? Doth God no more tlien the worft of men would do for nothing, if he give us his Chi ill to redeem us from the curfc that wc were fallen under by our finne, and to become the Phyfician of our wounded, dcfilad fouls, and to undertake the perfect cure (thoHgh he will not finish it till death ) giving us his Spiritj remitting our fins perfcdly at theprclcnr, as to allthedeftrudivepuniihment, and making a faving Medicine of all checa-ftlgatory punidiment which remains ? Is i: nothing to be delivered from GoJi burning jcaloufie and hatred which he bearcthtoall the workers of iniquity, and from eternal Hamcs which clfe we muft have undergone ? The Lord pity and watch over the hearts of his people ! or elfe whither will they run ! O fad cafe, to hear a Chriftian zealot fpeak the language of a Rabjhulieh. He will fay, no doubt, he intends thele but againft me, as the confequents of mydodrine: But fhould the dreadfull God be thusdefperately charged, in cafe my fuppofition were true I And hath he not reafon, at leaft, to take it as difpHcable,when the Scripture fpeaks it in moft exprefs terras, fo frequently as it doth ? How commonly doth it call cur fufferings, chaftifements, and puniihments, and exprefs God as angry with his People, and make their finne the caufe ! See the texts cited before in my Con-feffion. And befide the fcarfull language here given to God, what a multitude of falfe Accufations, palpable falftioods are here heaped up and charged on me, as if it were my dodrine, ('whether direflly or confequentially.) i. The fcornfull term of [A glorious priviledge !] implies afalfhood, ai if heaven were no fuch thing. 2. That he may have the like of the worft of men for a box on the car, is as falfe as horrid. 5. That God perfecuteth his people in revengetull fury,or that lever fo taught, is as falfe. 4- That it is with all the ftrokes and ftorms of wrath and mifchief; when I ftill profcffed that it is but the Remnants of the fruits of finne, moderated by Paternal aftedions of abundant Love. f. That God having flaughtercd us, tramplcth our dead corps in the mire and duft j all expref-fing revcngefull enmity. 6. That he ceafeth then from hatred j when the man himfelf is forced to take notice, that I deny God to do any thing in hatred to his people, but in anger and love a» fathers chaftifc, fpeaking of the affed from the cftedj and fo the love ftill greater then the anger. 7. That he feigns me to make God angry with his reliques: when I never fo faid j though now I will fay, thac our bodies being fo many years in the duft, when elfe they Hiould have been in Pa-vadife, is penal, and fo farre may be faid to be an cfted of Gods anger, as it is penal. 8. Thar God then forgives'him the reft,when lie can do no more to him, is a fcorn of falvation, and a falftiood : What ! can God do no more to a man when he is dead ! Cannot he raife his body to torments, and torment his foul,and ftiut him evcrlaftingly out of his glory 1 What defperate words are thefe ! ^.That forgivenefs can then do him no good, is as falfe, unlefs the Everlafting fruition of God, and the efcape of damnation be no good. 10. As falfe and horrid is it,that fuch dealing is cruelty, or that I charge Gods tender mercies to be cruelty, as he ▼ilcly applies Prov.n.io. to God, which defcribeth the wicked. 11. Here-peats the fame falAiood again, that I make God to perfecute them with all the ncoaks of his wrath, i x. And with all the curfcs of the Law : as if we were delivered

lirered from no curfc, if our caftigations are in any mcafure penal. 13. Aj fal/^ h it, that I fay, He fparctb neither their bodies nor fouls ! when he uncon-ceivably fpareth them in hij fharpeft chaftifements ! Is there no fparing, if there beany penalty? 14- As falfe that I fay, he doihatlafl in great indignation, deflroythem: Thoughdcath deftroy the body, I called it not a deftroying the man, nor faid God did it in great indignation. IJ. Nor did I fay he tramples their bodies to rottennefs. x 6. Nor did I ever fay, he trampleth their fouls whither be lift: for hisliflistoglorifie, and not tramplethem. 17. Muchiefsfaki I, that he trampleth them to what torments he lift, when I exprefly faid, they had no further punifhments, a-ndelfcwhere proved by twenty Arguments againft the Soeinians, that they go immcdiatly to blcffcdncfs with Chrirt. 18. After the fcorn at Gods love, the next words are as faU'e, that I fay, He will hate them no more, asif I faid that he hated them till then, or faid not the contrary. 19. And as falfc that I fay, He will be angry with them (till. 10. Its not true that the dead can offend no more, if they arc fuch as lie under all Gods judgements. n.Its falfethati fay, God inflidechon them All hisjudgcmcn:s. zz. Or that he can Infli(ft nomorc. ij. Orthst they have fuffercd all already. 14. Or that I ever faid diredly or canfcquentially, that this is all the Comfort wc rtiall findein death. All thefc arc asfa'fc, as that the Sunnc is meer darknefs. Yet the very next words add more of the fame nature. 15. Helaicb,! fay not abfolutcly there is no unpardoned linne on the Saints afterdcath, but none fo unpardoned : when my words were chefe : [" There is no unpardoned (inne in ir^ which lliall procure *' further ludgement, and fo no hatred, though there be anger.] And I think in Scripture fenie, no linne is unpardoned, when the finner harh Abfolute Right to Glory and Impunity, at prefcnt for the foul, and in item for the body to be with Chrift. x6. Next he addcth, That [" I deny not,but rather imply, their finnes *' to be yet ftill unpardoned, to the holding on them thofc ludgcments already in-*' Aided : a comfort that the Devils and Reprobates in Hell ihall no: want after " the very day of ludgement in the midft of thofc flames fire] 27-Hc makes me to affirm that the foal fhall fuffer till the Refunedtion: And thus he goes on in falf-hoods ai thick almofl as lines, and fomctimcs more ' Contrary to my exprefs words from which hewould forcethcm. When I fay, that In thedeath of believers, that iSjon dying believers, there is no unpardoned finne, which fhall procure further ludgement,befides or afterdcath it felf j hefalfly chargeth me to fay, that even the foul fuffcreth after j when I bavemany years ago in my book of R«/f by twenty Arguments (as ij faid) [roved thattbcy go to reft with Chrilt.

But I am fallen before I intended it on the fecond part of my task, to fhew Mr. CAryl how this man vindicateth the truth againlt me. And becaufc I am caft on this point, and this is the firft point tbac Mr. ^^07/mentions as vindicated againft me, I will proceed a little further to try the fscccls of his attempts.

I. That v^bich is Vindicated by moft direfull blaiphcmings of tiie Name of God, is not well Vindicated : But fech is Mr.^r's fuppofcd Vindication of truth, t» I have begun t« (hew ; and if you will readc on, you may findc him proceed in the fame rage.

His third charge againft thisDcftrine ( that Believers fufferingsare punifh-mcnts) isthis; He faith, [" It is fcandalouato the grace and mercy of God,^c. *'making flames of fury to break out fremtbcvecy bDwelsof hiscompafIi«n, that

''poor

**^(>oribu!s believing what he faith, wil! b: ape to fly from Goi as from a Sat an,

'' and from his Gol^el difpenfations, as from death and hell jc felf. When they '"hcai-bim to b: iDblooiv, totake dtligh: in curling, crulhin_j, rending, tearing " and tormenting in foal and body, unro death, and after death, his own fons and '•^ daugh'.ers, and that under a profelVion of grace and love to them, wha;pdi&-" rencecanthey conceire to be between fuch a God and thc-JQtvil ? If tflere %t *^ fuch bitternels in his Lov:, who will dcfire the Lculi idfW^hcsrhereof ? If his^ *'^r.nes ot embracing be fuch Lions paws, who will not Jknn all union, ail draw-'Mngnigh to him, cir'f-] The nex: Accufation is this. [4. It is flanderous to '' the jultice of God, i. By acculing it thei^cto infliA the curfe, wrath and judgc-''ments, where he imputcth no finne. a. By charging it to receive full fatisfa-**dion for our debt, from Chrill our Surety, and afterward when all is paid to "require fatisfadion from us toi. A piece of injuftice io odious to the li^t of "nature it klf, that Mr. Baxter would account him a prodigy of Nature, a De-" villizcd man that ihould fo do, yet hath he the bee to charge the m A\ righteous *''God therewith.] Thus he proceedeth, heaping up more of thefe dircfull con-fequents, as he imagineth, to the number of ten. Thefc words I confider firft as they are a charge againlt God, and fecondly, as acharge agninll me. i.What will you call that man, thatdurll lay all thi> to the charge of God, fuppofing he did deal with man as hardly as I expreflcd ? Suppofe Goi did lay all the evil that we bear upon us as penal, yet fanftifying this to our advantage, and faving us for ever J (hall the creature conclude to the face of G id, that he is cruel, bloudy, delighting in tormenting foul and body, and that there's little or no diiVerence between him anJ the Devil ? and his love and union not to be dellred, e^t i I pro-feismyfiefh trembleth at the writing and thinking of thefe words ? What if ic weretrue ( fordifputation fake he will fu.e give us leave to fappofe it) thatafter ail Chiifts lacisfadion, Gad lliould infliift the penalty of a toothach, or oflick-nefs, or of temporal death on ourfelvcs, rtiall 'uft and adits Itand up, and tell God, thu none but a proiigie of-^^Ijnuri, a2)cviUi^€dmiu would do[0, anongmen ! O ChrilHans look to your hearts', you fee what fruits the corrupt feed that is-there latent would bring forth,if God (hould leave you to your felves. Did I think that God hid had a creature on the earth, that durft have uucred fuch words, till the Ranters lately arofe, and till I now read them in thi; Book ? Did I think there had been a Preacher of the Gslpel, zealous for the honour of Gods grace, that durll have fpoke thus ? O (InfuU man, whither art thou fallen ? O patient God, what indignities doft thou pu: up ! Open your eyes, whoever of you are ef this mans opinion, that there is no penal efFids of linne remaining on us, and fee whether you need any further proof, then the legible demonftration of his own hideous rcproachesof the Almighty ^ Is the withdrawing of the Spirit of God, fo farre, as that all this finnc Hiould follow no puniftiment ? Is all this horrid hnne the fruit of nothing bu: Love in God ? Is farmer fm no caufc of this ? O blinded man that can believe it.

1. As all thefe are made the dodrinc which I deliver, and he faith, I charge the righteous God therewith, I have but one anfwer, That tbeAccuferis the moit monllrous falfe fpeaker that ever I had to do with. Here are almolt a$ many untruths as lines Itill, Where and when did I ever fay, that God rcquircth(itUfx^ion 9fus, 0: thzz Godrvjs kioody, or too^i delight in curjing, crujhing,rendi)ig,teawig,tor-mentingloidinibody unto death and after death, of hit own children, and that under a profcjfionofGracexniLove? Nay where faid I that ever hedoth, though without

C»j3

out delight, torment them after death ? Nay how exprefly have I denied all this here ? Befidcs what I have largelier written of AfHidions and Death, in my Book of Reft, Part i'^, ^hup. iz. and Tart ^. chjp.i. which I defire the Reader to fee, if he would know whether this mans Accufations be true oc falfe.

My fecbnd Reafon therefore which I give M' (^aryl againft the profitablenefsof this Vindication is this. To heap up a multitude of Lies is not a Vindication of Fundamental Truth, profitable to the Church of God : But fuch is this Vindication of Mr. Crrfwiew; Therefore.

I troubled my felf and the Reader to number zj even now in one piece of a leaf, there being more on the fame leaf: And how many are in the next? It goes againft my minde, and is unfavoury to me, fo much as to name the fault of this Volume : but I multprofefs that I never faw a Theological difcouife (to my beft remembrance) that might be fo fufficiently anfwcred almoft from end to end (in the points of difference) with one word, CMentirU (as BeUArmine was once an-fwered) as this Book of Mr.Cr's.

And becaufe this is the great point of oficnce, I will go back to his ftating the Qucftion,and his arguings and Anfwers to my Arguments.

SECT. V.

PAg.l I. he poureth out his raving terms for not right ftating the Queftion, and thereupon he will ftate it better, and deal with me as anoppofcr ofthe new Queltion of his ftating, and not of that which I ftated my felf: I piofefled only to dilfent from them that deny our fufterings to be any lort of punifhrnents, or the moral eftcfts of linne, or to proceed from Gods anger or chreatning. Vor as I maintain on one hand, that they are but meer chaftifements, having more good in them by Accidenr then evil in themfelves, and therefore more of Gods love then his wrath j f0 I maintain that ftill as they are evil of themfelves, and as farre as they are penal, our finne and Gods anger and threat are the caufes of them.

Yet here I confefs two faults that I committed in that Difpute. The firft was in wronging the Reformed Divines, by making the opinion which I oppole to be more commonly held by them then indeed it is. But the Reafons of my miftake were i. That I had not then read fo many that fpeak otherwife as fincc 1 have done : 2. 1 had laft been reading two or three of great Name that fpcak in that language, and I fo much fixed on their words, that I enquired not witn lufficienc diligence into the words of others. This I do now rcverfe, as finding that it is very common among the Reformed Divines to hold and maintain that our Affli-ftions are Penal. The fecond thing which I now difapprove is, that I ufed the word [Curfe] though I exprefled that I meant nothing by it, but either any part of the Threatning, er any part of the evil Threatned : and though the Scripture it felf do frequently apply the word [Curfe] even to chaftifements upon Believers, as I have proved before at large : Yet becaufe our common ufe of the word [Curfe] is fuch as intimatethfome Revenging, Dcfhuftivc PuniHimenr, that may denominate the man Accurfed, I thinklfhould Lave forborn it, and hereafter purpofe fo to do. Though I ever profefled that it is utterly unfit to call Believers Accurfed, though their penalty might be called lome part of the Curfe > becaufe the Perfon is to be Denominated from that which is Predominant: and

N the

Cm:

the Ciirfe or Evil is but ccmparativcly fmall, and in the way of certain Cure » but the Good of Bleffing is fo gicatj that the weakcll Chiiftian is a Blcfled Man.

But Mr. Cr. would perfwade m^pig.i i. that the Reformed Divines that I op-pofed in that Point, are of his minde, [ " That our Sufferings are Chaftifcments " and Trials flowing from the fame Grace and Love, by which Chrill himfelf, "and the Redemption we have by him, illLicdj(i;'(;.'] What grofs contradidions doth this man hold ? v;^. That our Sufferings are Chaftifemenrs, and yet i. no Puniflimenis, 2. nor for finne, j. nor from Gods Wrath ? I eafily confefs that they picceed from Gods Love ; Did I not maintain that in the Papers which he writes againft ? But fo tarrc as they arc Evil and Penal they proceed not from his Love i but only fo farrc as they are Medicinal and Means intended to our further bentfit. Did ever man on earth, before this man, know fuch a thing as chaltife-ment which was not for finne as the Meritorious Caufe ? or which was no whic Penal ? Its as palpable a contradiftion as to fay. This Papsr hath whitenefs, and this Ink hath blacknefsj but neither of them hath Coloui : or th:it Mr. ^r. is a Man, but not an Animal.

I muft defire the Reader therefore well to obferve thefctwo things, i. What is indeed the Judgement of our Divines and Churches in this point. 2. What is Mr. Cran^ow Judgement, and the true flate of the ControvGrlie between him and me. I. The Reformed Churches and Divines do very frequently give the name of Penalty to cur Chaftifemcnts: But yet Pet. Martyr and fomcmorein theic Difputings with the Papifts, do deny them to be Punifhments. But then mark, that the rcafon is bccaufe they did appropriate the name of Punilhincnt to one ficcici, which we call Dcflrudive, Vindidive Punifhment: fothat it was but the Name and not the Thing that they denied : For they if ill give it the definition of Punifliment, and confefs it to be a natuial evil (ufually involuntary ) infiifted for a moral evil: and then linnc is its meii:oiioiis caul'e, as i; is evil. And it is undeniable that thefe Divines did very unjuiiiy deny the name of the gcnxs to one {jjccies, and where they give the definition. VVliethtr the heat of Diipuration were the caufe of ;his ( which Mr. Qr. fo muchafcribeth his opinion of Juflification tp) or what elfc, I will not judge j but as herein they contra.di(ffed multitudes of their Brethren, fo did they concradid all Philofophers and Lawyers, or any other Politicians, that ever I read or heard ot-, or I think, ever fliall do. But ftill this it but a verbal difference. 2. But it is a Real Difference between us and Mr. Cnnion. The true flate of the Controverfie you may gather partly from what is cited out of him before, wliere he makes it fo horrid, prodigious and devillifli a thing, to inflid any punifliment on us, to i'atisfie for thofe finncs that Chrifl hath fatisfied fcr, wichall (falfly) fuppofing that all punilliment is Satisfa-Gory to Jullice : But fully doth hecxprels hismiude, p4^. 41. in thefe words, i^ L iVegnnt a Bclkvcrs finnc to be oft the Occafion, Mvcr the proptr Qiok of hit

On the contrary, I maintain that finnc is ever the meritorious caufe of all his cafligatoiy fufterings, fo farre as they arc penal, and that penal tncy arc fo farreas evil (at leafl ufually) and that evil they are of themi'clves, notwithltanding ths greater accidental good which (hall follow them.

Here then is the true {fate of the Qutftion between Mr. Cr. and me : and for ray part I undertook to maintain no moic in fcnfe, then this : and who can engage me to more againft my will, I know no:. 1 again profefs, that though my own

opinion

C»5]

opinion be, thatthefc Cbaftifements (efpecially death, finne (as aconfcqaenr of the withdrawing of the Spirit) and lofs of Communion with God in fo greac a meafurc, and the decaics of grace) are partly the remnants of the (curie, as I then called it, or) threatncdand inflided Penalty of the firft Law, as the evil that Chritt our Phyiuian is curing, and by degrees taking oft, and partly the cf-fefts of the threatning of the Law of Grace, in execution of Paternal Juftice ; yec I will not contend with any man, rvlm Larv they ctme from, whether the Moral Law, or the Law of Grace, fo they will but yield that linne is the Meiitorious Caule, and fome Law c( God is the Caufc by its Commination j and Paternal difpiealureand Juftice in God,is the caufefo farreas ic is penal and evil.Or if they grant any one of thtlc,I take i: as the granting of all.

Now when this is the true itate of thcQiicftion, fee how honcftly Mr. ^r. fta-teth itjp-Jj;.}!. J J. i. He faith ["Ic is agreed on both fides, that thecurfeis *^ the penalty, or the revenging judgement, or an efted of Gods revenging wrath^ *' by the execution vvhereot he takeih fatisfaftion to his Juftice upon tranlgreflbri, *^ for the breach of his Law ; fo Mr.2. makes it out;p 17.]

The fimple Reader, feeing fuch a man as Mr. Car;/commend the Vindication ofthcfe points, may eahly think. All this is lure true j when there are as many falfhoOi's as lines. My words which he referres you to, as agreeing to all this, arc thefconly, [This Covenant being foon by man violated, the threatning muft be fulfilled, and i'o the penalty fuffered] (thefe words (hould have b.en added [un-Icfs futficient fatisfadion were made to God.]) i. 1 never faid that the cuife or penalty now in queftion, is The penalty abfolutely confiJercd, or the whole penalty, but a part of that penalty, comparatively exceeding fmall, managed by the Phyfitians hands for oar cure. 2. Is here ever a word of mine that mentioneth [Revenging Juftice ?] I maintain that fo fmall apart of the penalty, ufcd by a father as a means to fave us from the whole, is not Revenging Juftice, (as the word is commonly taken, for that Juftice which will have the luine of the often-dour, or that afflidion where it is intended to do him more hurt then good ) but it is Paternal Juftice that now difpofeth it. 3. Nor did 1 there or ever fay. It is aneffcftofGods Revenging Wrath. 4. Nor did I there 0: ever agree, that ia excel tion hereof God takwth any fatisfadion to his Juftice. Compare ray words with his, and fee if there be ever fuch a word as any of thefe.

His r5cx: v/ords, asexprefting how far we are agreed, are thefe [_" i. That the «f Juftice of God is fo fully fatisficd, by thiscurfe or penalty, as by a compleac fuli-•f filling of all the rightcou(iicf> which the Lawrequireth,/).*?, jo.J

To \\hich I Reply, 1, If the Reader will perufemy Book in the pages quoted, he fliall finde no fuch word there. I only fpeak there of Chrifts fatisfadion, and not of any luftering, or execution at all. I Jo not think that the fufteiings of the damned do fatisfie Juftice properly J for if Juftice were fatisfied they fhould be freed, i. If I iiad faid the words that he citeth of the whole Penalty, doth he well and tru'y in applying it to an inconfiderable part turned to good ? Will it follow that becaufe 1 teach that Juftice is fatisfied when the whole penalty of eternal damnation is born, therefore it is (atisfied if G^d leave on us but the leaft parr, though for our own advantage ? 3. He cannot be content to pu: untruths on me, b'lt he addcih vcu fenfe to it : when itc fpcaks of the fatisfadion of Juftice by fuftcrin2,he can mean none but punifliiiig luftice : And did I eve'-(.iy that this juftice is as ful!v i'jti,tied by bearing the curfe, as by iu'.iilling a!! Ri.hti'oufncis which it requireth? This were to implv, that Punicn: cu Viadidivc juftice

if fathfitd alfo by Obedience, or fulfilling Righteoufneflcj which waj iieTcr before heard of. Obedience is the fulfilling of the Precept, and not of the

Thrcar.

His third and fourth agreed Propcfuions are [That Chrift hath fatiifiedjand tljat God is fatisfied fully.] Which I eafily agree to, fuppofmg flill that the ful-ncfsof Chiilbl'a:isfaaionbejudc;ed of from the true ends of it, and not by feigned ends. It was never the end of Chrifts fatiifadionjimmediatly to cfted our full deliverance, but to bring us into Chrifts Kingdom of grace firft, tha: in the time of this life he mit^ht perform the cure, and fo deliver us Perfect into the Fathers Kin;,dom of Glory. The fame God that received fatisfact ion, received it with this intent and to this end, that we might be delivered by degrees from the penal efl:'.'(5ls of our fiime, and finnc it felf, and might be brought under a lighter burden and eaficr yoak, even a Law of Grace, which hath its Comminations as well as its Promifcs, yea fomc Comminations to Believers for their mifcarriages, and the principal penahy of this Law is, more or lefs, a 7;(?«-liberation from the penalty or mifcry that we had brought on our I'elves by violating the Law of Nature, or Works, or the Moral Law (call it which you will.) So that asthe so»-liberation from eternal torments is its penalty executed on the finally impenitent, fo the «o»-liberation from fome degrees of finnc, of outward and inward temporal penalties, and death it felf, is its penalty executed on Believers for their finnes. So that God never intended in receiving fatisfadion, to free them prefently from all penalty, even caftigatory as well as deftruftive j nor to leave them Lawlefs, nor under a Law that had no Commination, or none that Ihould be executed on them. Th« greai ignorance of this one point, and the mifunderftanding of the Doftrlne of Chrifts fatisfaftion h the very Hear: of all the Antincmian Errours. I told you before that even the Authour of the Mdrrove of Modern \iJivinity approved by Mr. Car) I, and here Vindicated (in his common way) by Mr. Cr. doth confefle our Chaftifcments to be Penalties of the Law of Chrift executed on us for fvnne.

Becaufe it is a weighty point, and if Mr. ^r. be cured it mul^ be here, from whence all the reft of his miftakcs do feem to rife, I will propound to his Confide-ration thcfe things following, as a few of my rcafons againft his way.

1. He feemcth to me to confound the Kingdom of Glory and of Grace, or noc to undiftftaixl the difference. God hath three Kingdoms, in Q)ccie,o\tx mankinde, whereof the firft two arc on earth and the third in heaven (though in regard of the Identity of the Sovcraign, fubjedsj^c they maybe called all one :) Thefe are grounded on a threefold "^m I>ommi(3' Imperii, Right of Propriety and Government : vi\. His Creation, Redemption, and Railing and Glorifying us. The firft was the Kingt'om of God over Perfeft man, and is never called the Kingdom of the Son, or the Mediatour, or Redeemer: This endured but till the fall of man. The fccond is the Kingdom of the Son, or Redeemer, which is diftin-guifhcd from the reft by the Foundation of Right ( General Redemption) by its Ends, Laws, State of the fubjedSjfiT'c. The work and end of this Kingdom, is to eHeft mans cure and recovery, and to bring the lapfed difobedient creature, to a perfeft Conformity and Obedience to God again ; fo that this whole Kingdom, from firft to laft, will be imployed in Recovery and Cure, and when that i« fi-niflied, the Son then (hall deliver up the Kingdom to the Father, i Cor.if. 14, xf,i7. not laying by his humane Nature, Authority or Honour, but that jj^rnVj of Goyernment which was Medicinal, ReftoriTtive, and for Reduftion of the dif-

obed'icnc

c»7:

obedient to God that iftade them j and Co as a Conqacring Gcneril, as a Phyfi-tian that hath fioiftied the Cure, fo will the Kingdom of Chrift then ceafe, his woik being done, and the Reftored delivered Spctlefs to the Father: And then it fliall be the Kingdom of the Father, of God, again, in the fullcft fenfc.

Now Mr.Cr. fuppofing that Chrifts fatisfaftion hath fet us prefently on as good termsasif we had never linned, and perfefteth our Hate, as to all guilt and pu-nilhment, and that upon the very lacrifice offered, doth hereby confound the Kingdom of Grace and Glory ( a fmall miftakc !) and while he takes himfelf to beperfeded ( in thofe particulars, though not in holinefs) he dcftroycth Chrifts Kingdom, and dreameth that he is in another,that the good man never yet did fee. Perftdion is referved to the Kingdom of Perfeftion. If he have no puniHiment to ftiffcr, then be is certainly in heaven already: Unlefle robe out of heaven fo Ic/igj and to be without more Communion with God, and without perfeftion of holinefs, be no Panaddmni: which I will not yc: believe.

X. If God may juftly Threaten damnation to them for whom Chrift hath fa-tisfied, then he may juftly execute the penalty of feme bodily fufferings and death : But the Antecedent is true : therefore fo is the Confcquent. [_Exccpt ye Repent, jeJ]}sU aUlil{evi)ife pcrifi): If ye Itve after the fiejb ye Pull die: If any man dravt bacfit hisfouljhallhivenopleafureinhim: Luk. 15.5. Rom.8,15. Heb.10.38. witbmuK titudes of the like,arc undeniably conditional Threatsto the Redeemed, as well as thofe fuppofed to be unredeemed.

3. Nay doth not Mr. Cr's direfiiU charge againft God, ifhefliould punirti us for the fame iinne that Chrift fatisfied for, as evidently fall upon God for his very Threatnings ? For an unjuft Law, is no more juftinable then an unjuft execution. And if the leaft execution of penalty were fo unjuft and vile a thing as he makes itjmuft not the Threatning of incomparably more, be fo much more inju-fticcin the Law ? But I willadde nomoreof this, but proceed to Mt.O. enumeration of oar Agreements.

5. The fifth is, " That Affli^ions are incident to Believers. The fixth is, " That thcfe AfHiftions have in them a fmart and bicternefs, as they befall the " Stints, fo that ofttimes in their apprehcnfion the very wrath and curfe Teems to " be in them.]

But here's no Agreement, that any of this is for fin, and fo is a Chaftifement, which is ever Penal.

[" The difference then (taith Mr. Cr.) betwixt him and us, confifts princi-*'pally in thefe two things, i. Whether when Chrift hath by doing their Law, ''paying their debt, and bearing their curfe, fatisfied the juftice of God for <* the finnes of Believers, wben God hath accepted the fatisfadion given, when " Believers have by faith apprehended and laid hold on it, they do yet re-*' main liable to the curfe of the Law in whole or in pare to be intlided on "them.]

1. Here he fraudulently would make the Reader believe that it is only the cafe of Believers that is in Qucftion, when he hath poured forth fuch dircfuU Accufa-tions againft God, if he punifti any man for that which Chrift hath latisfied for ; whether he be a Believer, or yat an Infidell, varies net the cafe. i. Hefalflyma--keth the Queftion to concern the wWc curfe of the Law, or part, when it only coucerneth the fmalleft part for a fmall time. 3. He fafteneth upon the terin [Curfe] thinking the found will fomewhat advantage himj and lettetb pafle

N 3 the

the t«rms that I more Aequently ufed, as the Threatning, the Anger of Goi/^c, Now doth he let the Reader know that by the Ciirfe I explained my felf to mean fomc I'mall part of the Threatned cvilj fandified to a greater good. He proceeds.

[" 1. Whether the Affliftions which God inflideth on believers in this lifcjare "the cffeds of Gods Revenging J urticcj the Curfe which the Law threatnetb, ''and fo coDlcquently, whether af-er ihat God hath taken full fatisfaftion from *' Chrilt, he coth in whole or in part require and take I'atisfadion from them al-^'io. M'Baxter with the Papills andAvminians maintains the affirmative of " both thcfc queftionjjwe the Negative : H*; iaich that i. After Chrili hath born *' the Curie of the Law for believers, they are liable to bear it in whole or in pare "thcmfclvesalfo. z. That the affliftions which they fuffer are from the Reveng-" ing Jufticeof Gjd, the efteds and Curfe of the Law, Vindidive Puniftimcnt "oflinne, full of the wrath cf God } as inhis anfwer to thethird quelUonhede-*' clares himlelf.]

Are we not like to difpute fairly, when intheilate of theQueftion we have fuch aheap of forgeries ? How falfe is ic that ever I faid i. That our Afflidions arc the eftcds of Gods Revenging lulHce ? a. Or Vindidivc Punilliments. 3. Orfullof the Wrath of God. As all thcfe are the fidions of the falfe Accufer, and never fpokcn or written by me, lo neither do I hold them to be from Vindidivc lufticc in any other lenfe then Paternal Chaftifements are.

Upon this Calumniation, called a ftating of thcQueftion, he proceeds to his proofs t'or his opinion, from fome Scriptures abufed, and others that cxprefiy con-demn his caufe, calling our fufterings, the Chaftifements of Children. And did Mr. (^rarion ever know a Father thaftifc his childe for no fault, in mccr Love, or without any fault as the meritorious caufe bu: only the occalion? I will no: trouble the Readers Paricnce with his vain Reafonings.

Next he proccedeth to anfwer my Argutncnts : p.jS.c.tJ. To the firfl from Ge;i.j.7j to lo. hefaith ["Hcmuftiiiil prove that they were believers, which a *'meer and dark promulgation of a Saviour, Gcw.J.i J.doth no: evince ( for many *' thoufands have had the G jfpel more fully and clearly preached to them,yet have '^continued in unbirlief. 2, That the fufferings to which his quotations dircd '^ were inflid.-d upon them as a Curfe by Gods revenging Juftice.] To which I Reply ; i. If liis Caufe have fo ticklifh a (landing, that it muit fall unlefs tAdum and Eve were Infidels, I fuppofe it will ftand but in the judgement of a very few. 2. I thought according to hisdodrine, the very entring of that Covenant of Grace v/i:h them, would have proved them dedj and the promifin'^ of a Saviour forthem. 2. I took it as undeniable, that the fcntencc Gf«j. was not palfcd upon one man only pcrfonaliy confi.lcrcd, but on mankinde or the whole nature that fhould be derived from him in the ordinary way of propagation : and that thence it is that women have llili pai.i in chiidbearing, and the earth b/in^cth forth briars, and tin: men leturn to du(t. To the fccond I Reply, wliar he foifteih in of Revenging julticc, I did not engage my fclf to p.ove, and he hath no aurhority by falfe Accufanons to impofc it on me to prove it. 2. That it was Gods fen-tence on (infallman, aJju Iging him to the perfonali fufferingof fo much oftlie Djath before that was before thrcaciied to b'lrci for his (inne, is a thiii^ that nccd-ethnot proof with any that read the tcx:, but I'uchas ^I'c.Cnnion. For his anfwer out o( /■Jujft'n M\dS.i.iecl fomewhtrec'.rc given, 1 will not trouble my Uli to fcek for ir.

To

Z^9l

To the fecond he gives no better an anfwer. Hefaith [" that the wicked feel " all thoic foirows that he mcntioneih, and bear the cutfe and hatred of Grd in ^^thenij is not denied. But the godly liave their part in the fame foirowes, yec " they bear no: the curfe and hatred of God therein.]

1. Mark here that he grantcth all that ever I pleaded for, as to the wickod, and denieth it only of the^;;odly. And atcncneof the wicked E (c! :ind Redeemed? Doth he not here make himfclf guilty of all thofe hi<^ecus Accufations of the Almighty which he after chargeth en me ? furely Chrift fatisfied for the fins cf wicked men : and if God may yet hate them and punifti them,l hope yow wiiinomorc compare him to [a prodigie of nature;adivclliic'd man] for (o doing.

1. Hclearnedly confutethme;by faying as I lay. That thecodly bear not Gods hatred in their fuffcrings. 3. Oncemore tor all, to put an end to your vain clamours from the word [Curfe] I grant that as the Curfe fignificth any cflid of Gods hatred to the perfon, or any dtflruftivc punifhmentj that Chrift hath taken it all away, and there is none of it in the fuffcrings of the godly. But as [the Cwrfe ] fignifieth any part of the penalry threatncd, I deny tha: the whole is fo removed. But the queftion between us fliculd bc,Whctlier our fufierings are penal, and finne bethecaufe or only thecccadonj as himfclf exp.efleth it ? all the Railings to the end of that Scftion I pafs.

To the third of mine he anfvvereth, That [" there is nothing in it I?ut a wre-'f fting of Scriptures from their proper fenfc,e<r(r.] Andfi.ft to I Ccr.i'^.ii,2i. F or fincc bjimaji came death, fo by man came alfo the rcfurrc^ion from the dead. For as in Adam All dye, cvenjo inChrifi jhall All be made alive. He laich this is wreficd, vi\. by citing the place. The lumme of his anfwer is, That [" licre is not any *' mention of the Death of believers, much leis of the Cwrle and wrach in their ''deathj but that the meaning is this, As in Adam all dye, i.e. All that live and *' die in Adam perifli hopelcfly and cvcrlaltingly : fo in Chrijl allfoall be made alive, "/.c.All that arctranflatedout of^i/dwinto Chrilf.] This is his fetiing richt the Text that I wrefted, by citing the place to prove that we die in ^dam a bodily or temporall death, i. 1 wrel^edi:, by judging that the words lAll die^ is meanc [All die] as it fpeaketh. He fets all right by laying that by [W//] is meant [only them that pcriflieverlaltingly.] 2. I wreficd the Text,by judging that lAUJhall be made alive'] meancth [All] indeed as it fpeaketh. And he rightcth it by faying, tha: by All is meant none but believers. 5. I \v re lied the text, by hippoiiog thac theApolfle is here exprefling the Mifery and Death that Chrift raileth us from, to intimate that it being part of our Deliverance, we a; e to value it accordinf;ly : and fo that he meaneth plainly I Adam killed us, and Chrift llevivc":h us.] "^He righteththc Text,by expounding all thisjss not fpeaking of any Death that Chrift doth Recover us from, but that which the damned only muft fuftor. 4. I wrcHcd the Text, by fuppofing that when the Apoitleraentioncth [All dying, and All Riling] he means the {amc AU. He luppoleth that he obfcurely changeththe fub)eit or pcrfons, and means none of the fame. 5. 1 wrefted the Text, by fup-pofing'that the Apoftle by T)eatb,mc3n: the fame Dtarh,in both places j and thac when he faith, Ty man alfo came RefurrcHion from death, he meant a Rcfurrtdion f:om the fame Death that he laithcame by man in the ioregoing wovds.Mv.Crand. vindicateth the Text from my abiuc, by fuppofing tjiat the Apoftle tquivocatcth here, and means one thing by Death in one lenience, and another in the next. 6. I thought that this much had been plainly intimated in the caulall irri^Jy 5^ : [ fmcc cr bccaufe, bj miji cme death, fo by man came alfo the rcfuruilion. To fuch a

fimplc

fimple man as I, the caufall JecUreih ch3t ics the Tame death he fpeak$of> and tbatelfc it would not conclude win: he intended- 7. I thought the Apoftlc had been direftly proving the Rcfuircdion of them he fpeaks of^oppofed to their deathj and but confeq jcntially the Salvation that followeth it. 8. Yea I thought it was the Relurredion in Gcnerall that the feducers and fcduced among the ^(5n«i'i4ii/ qucltioned, thittbctc rva no T^^furreciton.vei:. i z. and not only the Refurredion of thetaithtullj as granting a Rcfurttdion to Damnation and none to Salvation. 9. Yet I doubted not but it was finally to the confolation of the faithful! who Ihall live aher the Rafurreftion in happinefs, that the Apoftle fpeaksthisj and therefore applieth it ihll co them : Buc I fuppofed that the thing chat he was proving dire^iy was the Refurreftion of allman, or that there is a Refurredion, (though he fpeak no: to allj) that from hence the faithfull might receive their confolation, feeing there muft needs then be a Refurreftion for them.

ToRom.6.1^. Thewiigcsofjinneisdcaib,S{.c. hcanfwereth, ["Who doubteth '' but it is fo to them that are under the Guilt and Dominion of finne ? But whac "is this to believers?] Iconfcfs the Apottle extenieth it alio to eternall death where it is fuft'ered, but fo as including temporall alfo, and that even of all thac fufter it. For his fcope is not to (licw how God dcalech with the wicked and how wi;h the godly i only or chicH/: bit what are the different fruits of grace and finne. So that death is thereward of finne^whofe death foever it be. The Apoftle doth not fay, The wages of finne is the death of unbelievers only : and I will noc limit where I finde not the word limit it felf. And you may take Death for the fubjed and wages ©f finne] for the predicate, ovvfiiges ioi: ihtfubjcH, and death for the predicate j the difterence is fraalU Oew.g. and other Scriptures that affure us that even the death of the godly is the wages of finne, do teach us to expound this Text.

5. To the next Text i Cor.i '.30,31,^1. he faith[isaspatasthc two former] Tor tbU uufe rmny are iifiufi_and ficfi among you,and manj/Jleep: Per if rve rvouli judgt ourfelves,reejl)ould not be judged. But vehcn we are judged we are cbaflened of the Lor it that we fhouU not be condemned with the world. A fimple man would think it im-poffiblc to fpeak plainer, to prove that finne is the caufe of the ficknefs, death, chaftifement and judgement of them that are not condemned with the world. But M' Crandon faith [" The Apoftle writes to a vifiblc Church, in which it appears *' there were fome true, and fome formall temporary believers. Cbrift is in the " midtt of ihis Church difpenfing his Difciplinc, The trije believers by the con-" tagion of the formall profeflbrs had fomewhat prophaned the Lords Table, by ^'refortingto it fomewhat diforderly. The other had totally violated it by coming *'to it drunken (and fo were worfe then bcafts) from their own tables. Here now *'hadChrift inflifted chaftifements of ficknefs andweaknefs, for humbling and *' amending thofe that were his > but death and vengeance upon them, that while *' they protelled faith in him, yet were indeed difpofers of him and his Ordinan-" ces: what is this to the curfe of the Law upon believers ? Therefore 1 fhall add " to Mi.'Baxters [And if fo] my [and if fo :] if fo that wrefting of Scripture will " ferve the turn, Mr.2. will furely have the water run in his ground, and his fancy ** ftandjthough Godstruth thereby fall to the earth.

This Vindication may be thought profitable to the Church by Mr.Car. but not by me, fovr thefe Reafons. 1. The Apoftle doth a$ exprefly as the tongue of a man can rpeak,fay it of thofe men that are not condemned with the world, i.Thac they arc chailened of God ( and therefore puniftied.) 2,. That they are Judged of

the Lord: j. That felf-/u(igi'ng would prevent it (and therefore itisptnalh) 4 That the matter of this judgement or chaiUfement was, ficknefs and weakneu on fome^and death on others, j. That finne was the eaufe: Fortbiscaufe. And (hall I believe him then that faith finne is but the occafion and no proper caufe ?

1. Though there were foimalifts ifl the Church, tke Apoftlcdoth hcreasufu-ally elfewhere, befpealc them all as believers. 5. For all the greatnefs of the fin, here is not a word in the text cenfuring any of them whora he fpeaks of as Reprobates : the quality of the finne doth no more prove them fojthen Vivids and Lott »nd Solomons did prove them fuch. 4. What word in the text intimates that it was the Eled tbat the ficknefs was laid on, and the Reprobates that the death was laid on ? 5. He is forced to yield that the ficknefs and weaknefs was laid on the godly: And is not that as much as the caufe needeth that I defend, as long as the Holy Ghoft faith, that \,for thh cau[e fomc arc pi^lj And. weMi ] and that we are judgeti of the Lord and challened,that we might not be condemned with the world. For my dart I believe Gods word, and thcrcfere cannot take fuch palpable contra-di Aing of it, for a profitable Vindication : I defire no more but that any Reader, not willing to erre, do but reade the bare text, and chufe whether he will take notice of any explications of mine; and if he cannot there finde, that finne is the caufe of the godlies chaftifements, and that they are judged of God, let him beMr.Cr'sdifcipleforme. Yet fee the confidence of the man, that can conclude i'uch unworthy cvafions aad perverting of the Text, with fuch triunnphanc fcornes.

4. To my fsurth, where I fay [It is manifeft that our fuflferings are in theiir own nature evils to us, and the fandifying of them to us taketh not away their natural evil, but only pioduceth by it, as by an occafion, a greater good : Doubt-lefs fo far as it is the efied of fin, it is evil, and the cfted alfo of the Law.] His tmfwer is twefold.

1. That he knows not what I mean by evil. A fudicious anfwer, wort&y the publick view. He knows not what kinde of evil malumpante Is, when I called ij natural evil in the words before him. But he that would not know, cannot un-«lerftand i

And let the Reader judge, whether the man take notice in his charges againft me, of what I here and elfewhere confefs, vi^. That £thisevilis fandifiedto us, and God produceth byjt a greater good.]

1. Hij next anfwer is, [ " We deny it to be the effeft of finne, as the merito-" rious caufe thereof, fo that the fuffering of a believer Ihould be the curfe or re-*' venging puniflimcnt for his finne.]

Can you tell by this, whether he abfolutcly deny finne to be the meritorious caufe, or no? His [fo that] would feem a reliridion i but indeed is but by the found to divert the odium from himfelf on me. This his next words Ihew, before cited [We grant a Believers finne to be oft the occafion, never the proper caufe of a Believers fufferings.] This proper caufe denied, is that before named A Meritorious Caufe : and thats a caufe proper enough of fuch an efted as the formal nature of puniflimcnt is. It feems undeniable then, that this Vindicatourdoth not ufctoconfcfs that his finnesdcfcrve any cf thecaftigauons that God layethon him, or any other that he taketh for a true Believer: It fcems he dare tdl God in his fufferings. Lord,no finnes of misc have deferved any of this a: thy hands I I dare not doTfo. I have lived in the fchool of AlHidion from my youth, and am writing thefe words in great pain and weaknefs: and I duiil never tell God, I

dererved It not: Nor do I think fucb priying and preaching weuld be'pfofiitble CO our Congregation}} tnd therefore I think not that fucb Books are profitable to the Church of God.

To my fifth he faub, [ " We deny not the fufFerings of Believers to be oft ia-" Scripture afcribed to gods Anger ; But it is after the manner of meoj (i;'c. not «thai God hath paffions: x. Inrefpedof the fuflFerers apprehenfion, who beting weak ia faJth, and too much ptejudiced by fcnfe, is apt for a feafon fomc-" time* in great trials to conclude himfelf caft out of Gods favour, and overwhelm " med with his wraih and fury. Not that it is fo really ; for God hath forgiven " their (inncs. Therefore after his forgiving to retain wrath and anger, may be " afcribed to malicious men, whom we (hall hear faying, I vii[[ forgive, but never f^ forget him : But in no wife to the moft righteous God,(Ji;'f.]

This Vindicacioi) is like the reft. Firft heconfeffeth that Scripture afcribeth cur fuffciings to Gods wrath : And what,mBft Scripture be caft by when it fitteth not his turn, as if God knew not how tofpeak of himfelf to us f Who would think that this were the fame man that heaped up fo many leaves againft humane Learn* ing, and noi fticking to the fimplicity of the Scripture I

And ( to his firft ) What though anger be not properly in God * no more it Hatred, PJeafurc, Difpleafure, Love, or, I think, any humane ad I But there is fomewhat in God, which tie propoundeth to our conceptions under thefe Nations till we are capable of higher, i- Let us, as is ufual, fay,that denomination is ta^ ken from the efFed : There is that done by God to bis children, which is aa effed of wrath in men, that is, puniftiing them. j. Why did he not apply this anfwer ofhis to all that flood of Accufation, when he anon doth fo mouth it, a-gainft God, as furious, and pouring out bis wrath, ^( ? Could he not fay, Go4 hath no paffion ? 4. Is it fitter for us to leain to fpeak of God or of Mr. Cr ? If the Scripture fay, that our fuflferings are from Gods wrath j am I a Papift for fay.-ing fo ? 1 will keep clofe to the Scripturt language as near as I can, for all Mr.Cr's higher conceptions.

To his fecond I fay, The godly too oft think that there is more of Gods Anger and lefs love in their fufFerings then there is: But doth it follow that there is thero-forenoneatallof his anger in them ? 2. Who dare think that bccaufe deluded men do falfly imagine that Gods chaftifcmenta are cffcds of his anger, therefore God himfelf will a hundred times over fay fo too, and fit bis fpeecb to the faife fpecches or conceptions of erring men ?

Let Mr. Cr. therefore not renounce the judgement of the word, or elfe not renounce the nama of an Aminomian: And then let him foberly (if poflible ) tell us, Whether God do us Good (as fucb) in Wrath and Anger ? and vfhether it be not fome Penal evil that is afcribed to Gods Wrath ? Light will'be Light, though there were no creatures in the world but Batti and Owles.

My fixtbReafonwas, [They arc called Punifhmcnts in Scripture: therefore wc may call them fo.] And I cited many Texts. To this he anfwereth, [«' I will •' not fall into a Aoj;»f«t;yjca', a ftrife about words and namts. Let Mr. B. a^ree " with us in the Matter, and wc will not ftick to clofe with him in the Name and "Words. Let him deny all Malignity and Curfe in the fufferings of the godly, '(and to do hima plcafure we will call them Punifhments as he doth.]

Sec how mildc the man is when there is no remedy ! i. Then, If by Malignity and Curfe he mean^ any cffcd of Gods Hatred^ or any Dcftrudiv* Punifh-

jneat,,

mcnt, I ylcMed ro him before he defired it. I never falJ there fns Malignity in them : I oft fay,Thcy are chaftifcmcntijfanftified to our Greater good. But if he mean I muft deny that they are for fmne as the Meritorious Caufe, and from Paternal Jufticc and Anger, and from the Threatning, or have any Penal evil in them, then this is the fumme of his Anfwer, q.d. I confefj God cals them Pu-niftimcms; and let Mr. B. grant that they arc not Punifhmcnts, and then we will (to pleafehim) fpealc as God doth, and call them that which they are not. ». Batwhat arc Names for, but to fignifie Things ? And if God mean not that thev are Punifhmcnts when h« fo callcth thcm,then how fliall we know his mind ? J. What hacbMr.Cr.againft me but Words ? Howelfe doth he know my mind ? If then my words be Scripture words, for ought he knows I may have the Scripture meaning. 4. Atleaft let him give me leave tofpeakasGod doth, and blame my words no more when they arc his: Nor let him fay that all thefc arc BeHarwwM and the Jcfuites words, yea Scriptures taken out of them, and thereupon rejed them. If God fay, They arc Punifliracnts, I will believe it, and fay fo to.

I imreat the Reader to'confider, whether fuch anfwers as this, be not a yicldJnz of the Caufe : and whether after fuch Conceflions, it befeemed him to ufc fuch direful! language againft God, as afterward he doth, in cafe he do punilh us for Gnne: and whether this man adhere as clofe to Scripture as he doth pretend.

In the feventh, I did by oveifight put the word [ Afflidion "] in ftead of [Chaftifement:] upon which he infultetb, at if I had fpoke the moft detcftabl© Herefie: andtelsusof [a pack of little fenfe, and much arrogance, a compound of abfurdity and prefumption.] Blot out s/^ffliHion, and put in Cbaftifement, and I hope this horrid evil is cured.

z. Note that yet here he can tell that I mean [evil of PuniHiment] but even now when he fliould hare anfwercd he knew not what I meant.

}. He addeth that [ " If I had faid Chaftifements arc in their own nature fo <' qualified, we fhould have born with it: but he fhunncth that word as a Rock « upon whichhc might have daftiedtheCurfe,©'c.]

See after and berore fuch hideous outcries, that yet the man and I mud be friends. Hee'l bear with me if I fay the fame of Cba(tifements, and a little wit and charity might have fufficed ^to aflure him, that that was my meaning, z. How then could I dafh the Curfe on it, when I mean but Cbijiifements by the CurfCm J. Howfalfly faith he that I/hunt he word 0}/Lliifemntt, when it is Printed in my Book before his eyes, and himfelf thence recited it ? 4. But are we indeed now agreed, as we feem ? I am content hereafter to forbear the word [Curfe] and to ufc the word [Chaftifements] more frequently. But for all this we are agreed but in words, andnot indeed : Fcr by Chaftifements I mean as Ifpeak, Cb^'fementt, which are penalties for fin,to the AmcnJment of the firmer: but by Chijlifements,hc means contrariIy,that they are no ChajUfcmcnts, no penalty for fin as the Meritorious Caufe.

That which follows in that Seftion, needs no other anfwcrthenis given, it being nothing but his mouthing the word Qirfe, toafalfc interpretation of my fenfe : and an Acculation that [I infinuate, that they deny all Tain in the faftcr-ings of believers,] which is but another of his untruths. I contend againft thote that deny our chaftifements to be TtfHJOT, formal Punifliment j but I never infi-nuated that any man denied them to be piin or hurts. Upon this he annexeth a

CJ41

<louWe charge: i. My [ " abafing opinion ef others in the fupcrlatire eonfidence ««ihat I have of my fdf, and in my felf, thinking almoftall others to be meet *' Terr^ flies, clods of clay incomparifon of my felf,6rc.] And how is all this proved ? Why [ 1 fcake out my abfurdities as Oracles.] If every man that fpeaks Abfurdities be fo hainoufly proud and contemptuous, where will this good man ihcw bis face ? But vihere did I tell him that I took my abfurdities fer Oracles ? The fumme of his Argument muft be this: He that onceby ov«rfightcalleth Ghaftifcments by the name of Afflidions, hath an abafing opinion of o-thers in a fuperlative felf-confidence. But fo did I: Therefore. Hegawrmijot Deminc,

The fccond charge is my ["fufpending ConfciencCi that while I pretend w "^ truth, yet I take the reins by any abfurd falfe tricks to fubvert it.] I will leave this and a hundred and hundred more, for him to Anfwer, who juftifietb the Slandered againft the Accafer. Let the Reader findc out the ground of Ym. charge if he can.

But the great ftorm is poured out on me for asking this Qucflion, [What Rea-foncan be given why God ftiould not do us all that good without our fufferings which now he doth by them, if there were not finne, and wrath,and Law in them ? Sure he could better us by eaficr means.] Let the Accufer know that is not afcen-ding into the Chair of God to judge him: It is but fpeaking his Revealed will. He hath revealed himfclf to be Good, and to do Good, and to have no pleafure in mens fuffcrlngs and death: Nay he bath oft told us, that cur finne is the caufc, and if it were not for that, he would not chaften us. Have not I good ground to conclude then, that if we did judge out felves,we fhould not be judged of the Lord, in Chaftiiements ^ and that he would do us all that good without Caftigation, which he now doth by it, if it were not for hnnc. Nay the man himfelf coafef-feth finne to be oft the Occafiov, though he deny it to be the proper Caufe.

In the eighth place, I fhewed that the Scriptures commonly brought againii this, do only prove a predominancy of Love in our Chaftifemems, but not that there is no Anger or finne the Caufc. To this there is nothing but rage, which I cannot well anfwer I confefs. But for my fpeaking of Love and Anger mixt in Goi,(ifc. he tels me I [ " make God to be in a commotion againft himfelf, to " carry fire iu one haad, and water in the other, to fight with the right hand a-" gainft the left, fometimes the one and fometimes the other overcoming, (^c, an " excellent Difputer to have ftood alway at MAreitrts elbow, prompting him with " arguments to prove this God a Malignant and envious God, the Authour of all "evil tomankindCjCirff.] So that for God to have Love and Anger to the fame perfon in feveral refpefts, it feemslaies him open to thefe morcdirefull reproaches of a worm I Its well for us that we ferve a patient God. This man did but even now confefs that our fufferings are faid in Scripture to come from Gods wrath^and himfelf maintaineth that they come from his Love. And muft not this man then either lay all thefe Blafphcmies to the charge of Scripture, or take tham to himfelf, or both ? Dare he deny that it is the language of the Holy Ghoft, that God doth chaften us bccaufe he lovcth us, and alfo becaufe he is Angry or difpleafed ? This we muft hear, for fpeaking as the Scripture. Nay is there any Divine that ever wrote of this fubjec^, that is not of the fame minde ? None but Libertines that ever I knew of.

And for fetting God againft himfelf in commotion, let him know that as we ff eak of God) as Scripture doth after the manner of man^ fo we ftill acknowledge

the.

CbsD

the impropriety of all fiich attributions, and defire to fepanfate from God, fo mucb of tliem as implicth imperfeftion, and yet wewillufc thefe notions till we arc perfed and capable of better; As alfo that it is ( fay Divines ) by extrinfecall denomination that thefe Aft'eftions are attributed to Godj and fo we may well ai-tcibuce to him various Afie&ions at once, as fafciy as any at all: He knowes bow to love his childe and be angry with him both at oncc,in feverall refpeds, wherein incurring all this Reproach.

And mufl God be termed [ Malignant and Envious, and the Author of aU Evil] if he Puniflain Anger, even when Love is predominant 1 The Lord ia mercy pardon all this language to this man I I would intreat the Reader to mark thefe two things, i. Arc thefe men fit to tell us that we make Goi the auciior of all evil, when we have fuch indignation for pleajiing againlt fome of their ftrain, for the vindication of Ood,as not being the author of finnc ? and when themfelves do commonly maintain it with fuch zeal, that God doth by an Immediate Phy-iicall c£cient premocion, predetermine mans will to every ad that is Gnfuilj which he choofeth j and that by unrcCftible power, z. Should thefe men charge us to make God Malignant, £nvious,(;<;'a for punilTting his children in Anger, though for their Good, with greater Love, when yet we muft bear fuch a flood oi Keproach from them, becaufe we will not deny that ChriH died, for any but the cle^, and will not believe that the reft of men have oo more fatisfadion made by him for their Hnnc then the Devils have, when yet the fame fuffering was fufH> cient to have been a facisfadion for all I Yat^God forbid, that I fhould charge the contrary minded^ with fuch Accufattons, though the Caufe be incomparably greater.

Here be fcornethat my citing i Cor. 15.$$,$^. But thefe words well confider-ed,I think, evince all that I have maintained on this point* Th« Htpg of death is pnne, i.e. finne animates it, to do what it doth aoainu us: the jirength of finnc is the Law: that is,the Threatningof the Law, which I called the Curfe ! But we may triumph over death as conquerouts in Chriftjaod fay^O dejthjwhcre it thy liing! OgfAvcwhcreisthjviHory I Not that the full adual conqueQ; over it is paQ I but wc have it in promife, and faith can forefce ir, and make it as prcfeot; for it certainly will be. For the 54 verfe faith. So vfkentbif corruptible pall have put on in-eorraptkn, and tbit mortall Jhall have put on immortality. Then pmll be brought to fa^ the faying that U writtcutVcath U fwallowed up in viHory. Mark that the vidory is not till then. Yet fo farre as unpardoned iinne obliging to eternall puniHiment, and leaving ander enmity to God,is the ftingjfo farre it is taken out before.

In the 9^''I inftanced 1. Dea:h. x. Sinne. The former out of 1 C^r.t^.z6, The laji enemy thatjhall be deflroyed is death. I luppofed the meaning to be ihis [ihe lalt of the enemies of the Churches felicity:] Chrift being by Office our Redeemer, his work is to refcueus from all the calamity that we had brought on our felves, and againft all enemies that would hinder our recovery. Now one and the laft part of the work is, by Refurredion to rcftore us from the duft,and fo cure the iaft penal calamity that we lay under for finnc, and to tiniHi his cure and con-quelt. Mc-Crandou underftandeth it thus, that [" when all Ghiifts enemies are " lent to hell, then death it felf fhall be deftroyed, becaufe there is no more ufc of **it. As if it were ao ad of Liberation to the Saiats by a Refurredion that is here fpoken of, but an end of killing tfee Reprobates: contrary 10 the fcopcof the chapter. Whofe expofition now is right, Mt.Crandons or mine? Certainly his, ifyou will not judge him paft all modeily in his confidence: For hcfaith[''That

''this is the propsr meaning of this Texr, a blindc man may fee ( better pcrhips "then a feeing tnan) and confcquendy fee i: to be finfally wrcfledby M Bixter.'} I leave my feU then to the ccnfure of the blinJc/ecinj there is no cfcaping it: anil I leave them to follow this confident cxpcfi'.or.

r. To my fecond Inftance, That all our corruption of heart, (hall not bccu* red till death, be faith he hath fpoken before ; I5at as I finJc rtot whM:e(and mean not more to fearch^ fo I mult needs think that fomevvhac is :he matter that made himkercfo fparingofhis words. I findc himnotfo lliort winJcJ,3ndconcifcclfc-wherc: and he could not but know that I laid grea: ftrcfs on this Inftance. Truly he that thinks Mr.^ri/iie« is ^erkGt when he hach read this his Vjlumejftiall freely enjoy his opinion for me : And he that thinkch tha: the withdrawing of the Spirit, whence foUoweth'fcandalous finneSjdecay of Grace,of Love, Faith,Humi-lity,67'f. and this to the death ( which may befall a Saint,) is no penal cvill, nor is caufed by our finne, nor by G ids Anger or Griaving the Spirit, but only from Gods Love, this man hath not thofe thoughts of finne and Grace as I have > nor I think as he (hould hare.

In the tenth place I brought a General Reafon, from the tcnour of the word, when itmentioneth the freedom that we have byChriil fromtcraporailpunifli-ments: vi^. that it doth not make him prefently to take them all off, but only to manage them for our beft advantage ( in order to our fanSity and Recorcry.) A man would think ihefe words fhould be pardonable : Yet the charge of Impu-dency3Blafphemy,(i7'<r. is heaped upon them in words at length, and not in figures. Nay he pretendeth me to be fo wJiolly dellitute of any Scripture for this ( when yet I had given fo many before, which himfelf plainly confcffeth, to call our fuf-ferings Puniftiments from Gods wrath,67'c.) that he faith I" that curfe is de-*'nonanced againft my felf, Rev.ii..i^t'9' -^'^ plagues on him that fliall add " any thingjC^c] Which o( my words arc Additions ? i. That Chrift takes not prefently all penalty for finne ofFhis people, all the fore-cited texts and a hundred more manifcft. x. That all are in his power or hands, many Scriptures exprefs, that fay, JU thingj arc delivered into bk bxuds, Joh. i j. j. and All power in Heaven and earth is given him, and the Father hath committed aU judgement to him, and he it the Lord and I^ing.Scc. g. That he managcth thefe penalties for our advantage, I thought Mr.Cr4ni«n cauld not deny (ifheyeelded but that there are fttch things.) Yet faith he [no drop of Scripture hath a relirti of it.]

For the Texts he citeth, I confefs with joy that Chrift hath delivered lafrom the curfe of the Law, being made'a curfe for us: that is, quoad pretium, he hath done it perfeftly in hisfuftering: quoad aHualem liberationem, he hath delivered u« from the aduall obligation to eternall punifhment, and from our prefent ftate of enmity to Godjthen when we firft believe : and as to a perfcft freedom from all temporall chaftifements, as he hath freed us quoadpretiitm, fo he hath given us a promife of perfeft aduall freedom in a very fliort time } alas, it is as nothing, till the day of our Redemption come, and we fhall finne and fuffer no more : This is I think, a fufficient Redeeming us from the Curfe. And that there is no condemnitiou to them tbitar^, in Chrift, I gladly acknowledge. But my opinion ftill is, that there may not only be Caftigatory Punishments where there is no condemnation, but alfo that even therefore arenfejudged andchuftened, thatveemight not becoudcmued with the world : And I think this is Scripture f«r all thefe hot words.

Yetdoih he here proceed to accufe my arguing ['*■ as tending to the abafing, "• annihilating and even unchriUing of Chritl, as purchafing to himfelf a Mono-

"poiy

" poly of CurfingjfirT.] with more of the like. Alas, muft our dear Lord bear alt this reproach from his poor creaturei, unlefs he deliver them at the very prelenc from all puniflimem for finnc, though managed to their own advantage, and continued for their own neceflary ufe ? Muft Chrift be no Chrilt, if we fufter but one lafti for finne '. Me thinks his farftified ones fhould be more humble and thank-full, and ftiould confefj it infinite mercy, if they were in hell but for fuch a moment as this life, much more to lye under fatherly corredions,and then be advanced to cternall Glory 1 So much for that Chapter.

In the next Chapter is all that fearfoU lang«agc againft God that I before mentioned, with more the.like, which I am aweary of reciting : And naultitudes offalihoods do fill up moft leaves. Thefe laft words of mine (that Afflidions are managed by Chrift to our advantage and good, he mentions againp4g.54. and addeth ["What means he by this advantage and good ? Not our purifying and " betteringjCT'c. as we hold ; for this as we have feen he ftiakcs oft'as a lingle folid " fuppofition with a kinde ofApige.'} Hath he the face of a Chiiftian and Preacher of the Gefpel, that dare heap up fuch ftiamelefs falfhoods ? Finde but the leaft word in any writing of mine, where there is any fuch thing as he accufeth me of, and then believe him and fpare not. It is paft the power of my imagination, to conjcfture whence he ftiould have the leaft appearance of it.

1 dare not for all this fay of him as he is bold to do of me, pJg.58. [« He feems " tome to be foleft of God, deftitute of his Spirit, that he can lee no further then *' a racer naturall man in Ipirituall things, and fo following the letter, ai>d fcarcc ** the letter, without the fpirit of the Word, he can think of no other way to Hap-" pineft,but that which the inftinft of nature fuggeftcth, namely a mans own wil-" ling,running and procurements.]

You fee a man that knows me not can fuppofc me a meer Pagan. When I un-derftand that WiUingio have Chrift, and Running to obey him, are inconfiftent with his being the Way to my HappincfSjiben I may be of your Religion and Charity too.

I will conclude this point with thefe two or three Obfervations. ». After all his Accafations,as if I made God— (I am afraid to recite his words fo eft,) yet, for ought I know this man faith not one word lels then I do, of the fufferings of the godly, but only denieth finne to be ihecaufe, and that they proceed from the threat and Gods anger. He cannot deny but we are fickjweakjfintulljcnjoy little of God in comparifon of what we fha;l,(;?'c. Do I,name any one thing that we fuffer which he denieth ? What Mercy doth he proclaim then more then 1 ? Doth he fay, it is for our our advantage, having more of Gods Love in his anger, and none of his hatred ? fo do 1, Doih heiay, that there is no Anger of God in it? HeconfefTcth the Scripture faith the contrary ; Yea but he faith, there is no Curfe ? If he mean, deftruftive punifhment, or that which tendcth more to our hurt, then our good, I deny it too. If he mean any penall nature, that is, not to make the Mercy greater, but finnc to have no hand in our fuftering, laying all on God himfelf. And doth that man fo highly advance free Giace, that faith [God killeth osmecrly of his own will without any defert of ours as the caufe,] more then he that faith, he doth it forour own finne ? And for any Good that God in-tendeih us, andcfltdeth byafflidion, I do not yet finde where he afcribeth any more to it then I do. So that all thefe hideous outcries,are not of the mifcrj,which both alike,! thinkjConfefs J bu: oftheCauleof it: whether God do ic becatife of our fin as the Meritorious Caufcjor without any defac of our felves,

i.Ygu,

a. You may fee pig. ^9- ( »s is Taid ) that he powreth out all thefe AceuCitions «onfequcnrially,agaJnfttheL«jifl« EHvines as againft mc; whojas he faith [fpeak ^Imott the fame thing with mc] and fay [that to fay God doth not punilh hi« Saints for their (innC5,is flat Antinomianifme.]

Sect. VI.

To conclude,As I have faid all this ( more thcnl intended) to fatlsfie M'Ci-rjl, that this book, no not for its vindication of this point, is not profitable to the Church ef Godjor wonhy of puWick view j fo bcfides all that is faid, I will recite here (ome more of the woids of God, and leave you to judge of the worth ef this Vindication.

And I. Let us fee whether finne be theCaufc of our caftigations or punifli-ments, as I fay, or only the Occafion, as the Vindicator faith 3 prcmiUng this 0^ much, that it is no great credit to us, the Guides and Teachers of the flocks of Cbrift, to put one another upon fuch tasks as thefe, to prove tbit PtM eflpecci' »t piena, that all punifhment or chaftiferrcnt is for fome feult, when it is the \evy fonnalii ratio ptnjt: and I hope there is no filly woman in our Congregations but knowesit, except the diligence of feducers have put out ths Light of Nature in them: and if I muft either put out the Ligfac of Nature or be a Pa-piii, the cafe feems hard.

2 Sam.12.9,10,11,11,15,14. I0>erefore hafttbou de^i^ed theCommnndementof the Lord to do evil in hU fight ? thou haft fiiUcd Vriah the Hittite with the fveord,Scc. Now therefore tbefvperdJhiU never depart from thine boufe, becaufe thou haft de&ifed me, andh^Sltafienthervife^Scc. Thus faitb the Lord, I rviU raife ap evil agiinfttbee out of thine own houfe, and I will tii^e thy wives be fore thine eyes,hcc. Verf 13,14. The Lord alfo hxth put twiy thy fiHne, thou fl)ilt not die. Howbeit, becaufe by tbU deed thou baft gwen great oceafion to the enemies of the Lord tt) blajpheme, the cbilde Alfo that if bom umo thee jhallfurely die.

The cafe oiManaJfeb znd the Jfraclitcs. Numb. 14. I mentioned before, Numb.iz.io,ii,i2. A aronlooiied upon Miriam, and behold ftjew/ys Uprom. And Aaron faid to !Mofet, Alas my Lord! I beftech thee lay not thefiune upon u«, wherein we have dine fooltjhly,Sic.

Numb. 17.3. Our Father died in tbewilderneJS, and he was not in the company of them that gathered thcmfelves together againft the Lord in the company of Corah, but died in bU ownfinfteand had vofonnes.

I King.8.J 5,54.35,58. jVhcn thy people I fnel be (mitten down before theencmy, becaufe they hrje finned againft thee, and Jhall turn agaia.Scc. then bear thou in Hcaveu and forgive the ^nvc of thy people Ifracl , and bring again unto the land. Sec. }Vben Heaven ii Jhut up,ani there is no rain becaufe they have finned agaipft thee; tfthcy pray towards this place and con'^ef? thy Name, and turn from their finne whenthou affli^cft them: Then hear thou in Heaven ^aud forgive the finne of thy fervsnt,and tfthy people /fruel, that thou teaih them the good wjj'.&c

Lam.4.6. For ihepunijhment of the iniquity of the daughter of people, ts greater then the punijlmient of the ftnue sf Soiome,8cc. Lam. 554 iVhereforc doih a living man complain ? a man for the punijhment of his finne. Let ua fcarch and try our wjyes,Sic. v.42. ti'e havetnnlgreffcd,and have rebeUtd,xhouhiU not pardoned.

Pfal. 38.1,1,5. Thert is no (oundjief in my fiefo becaufe of thine anger,neither is there

Zi9l

dnyreBinmjboaes becjafeofmyfinne. For mine iniquities ire ^^one over mj beAi,8cc. verf. 18. For I rvill decUre mine iniquity, I will be forry for my fin.

Pfal. 31. 4j 5. Por day and night thy hand wits henvy upon me, Sec. I acfinovfledged my finneunto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I (aid I vetll cenfejS my tranfgre^ions unto the Lord, and thou fergaveft the iniquity of my fin.

Read Pfal.$i.i. Dan.9.f. IVc have finned and committed iniquity,8cc. verl.j. Whither thou hsft driven them becaufe of their trefpajS rvbich they have trefpajfed againji thee. O Lord to la belongeth confufiou offjce,to our l^vigs,to our TrtHces,to our Fathers, becaufe wc have finned againft thee. Vcif. i r. Therefore the curfe it poured upon tts,8cc. becaufe wc have finned againji him. Verf. 14. Therefore hath the Lord watched upon the evil, dud brought it upon us: for the Lord our God is righteous in all bis wor^s which he dothtfor vpc obeyed not his voice. So verf-16.

Exod.j 1. J4. blcverthelefin the day when I vifit,l will vifit their fin upon them.

Numb.jz.zg. Be furc your fin will fiadc you out.

1 King.11.1 r. JheLordfatdtoSolormin, Fofafmuchasthiiisdoneoftbec,andth3u haft net l^ept my Covenant and my fiatutes which I commanded thee, I will fnrely rend the fyingdemJTomthee,&ic. Read the Chapter.

Joh. 5.14. 'Behold thou art mide while: finne no n ore lejl a worfi thing come unto thee.

1 J ob.5 16. If any man fee his brother fin a fin which is not unto death,htJhaU asli,ani bcf}?allgive him life for them that fin not unto death.

Jam. 5 ■ I J, I (J. And the prayer of faith jhillfave the (idi, and the LordfluU raife hint up, and if he have committed fins, thyjlull be jorgwen htm. QonfefS your faults one to another,and pray one for another that ye may be healed.

Heb. J. 17, But with whom was he grieved forty years ? rvas it not with them that had finned,whofe carfi^ijfcj fell in the wildernefS i

Rom. s. 11. Wherefore as by one man fin cntrtd into the veorld,And death by finne, and fo death pajfed upon all men for that all have finned.

5cc iSam.14. Job J5.i7,i8,tirc. - Micah.7.9. I will bear the indignation of the Lord,becaufe I have finned againfl him.

Ezra^.ig. And after allthat is come upon tu for ourevildeeds, andfor our great tre^af, feeing that thou our Qod haft, punifhed ui,lcf then our iniquities do deferve, &c.

See Neh. 1.6,8,9. Jer. 5. z 5. Jour iniquities have turned arvaj tbefe things, and your fins have withholden good things from you.

. Jolh. 14.19. Hcit an holy God ; he is a jealous God, be will not forgive your tranf-greffiom nor your fins.

■ E-xod.ij.xi. Beware ofbim, and obey his voice,provoke him not: for he will not pardon your t ranfgrtjfions Jor my name Uin bim .

Lev.26.18,X4,28. I wiU punij]} youyet feven timet more for your fins.

I Cor.5.5. To deliver fncb a one to Satan for the deftruSiion eftheficjh,tbat the^irit may be farjed in the day of the Lord^efus.

Ifa.4o.i,i. Comfortyccomfortye my pcoplc,fauhyotir GodyScc. Her iniquity ispar-> doncd } forfije hath received of the Lords band double for all her fins.

Jcr.go.ii, 14,15. Fori am with thee faith the Lord to fave thee: though I ma{e t fuU end of all nations whither I have fcattered tbcc, ytt will I not maiie a full end of thee : but I wiUcOrrtH thee in meafure,and wiU not leave thee altogether unpunijhed. Verf. 14. For I have wounded thee with the wound of an enemy,with the cbafttfcmentofa cruel one, for t/;e multitude if thine iniquity, becaufe thy fins wcrcencreafcd. Verf. i j. ;;% Cfycft thou for thincAffitclion^ thy forrowis incurable for the multitude of thine iniquity,

T becaufe

C40]

kcanfe thy ftm rttre increifed, I hnvc douc thcfc things to thee.

Mic. 1. ?• For the trjrfgrejfton of'fiioh U all thk.and for the fins of the btufe oflfrael.

Lev. 16.41,4 i. ]f then their uncircumcifed hurts be humbled,and they then accept the pumjhment 0/ their iniquity, then will 1 remember my Covemnt -with f^ob, and alfo mj Covemnt with Ifaac, and alfo my Cevemnt rvith tAbrAbjm,Scc.

PraI.j9.»o,ii. Remove thy 9rojliaT»ay from me3 I am confumed by the blow of thine hind • IVhen thou vfith rebulies doeU corrcH man for iniquity, thou mal{e[t his beauty U con(ume,Scc.

Pfal .8 9 5 Oj J I, J i. If his children forfalie my Ljtv, and xvalli not in my judgemeHts: if they brej^imyjiitutesand ^eepmt my Commandcmentt -, then rviU I vifittheirtratif-grcffion with the rod, and their iniquity wiihftripes.

Ifrhisbe not enough to prove fin the Caufcof our Punifhmcnt, and that we are really puniflicd for finj I undertake to bring fortj and forty more textSjWhcn 1 fee it nccelfary.

i. Next let us fee whether this Punifhment come from Gods Anger or

wrath.

Numb, I >.9,10. tAndthe Anger of the Lord was liindledagaittji them (Aaron and Miriam ) afid behold Miriam became leprous,as /now.

I King.i 1.9,11. tAnd the Lord was angry with SoUmon,becaufcbh heart was turned from thcLordGod ofIfracl,Sic.

Pfal. 3 O.J. His avgcr endureth but for a moment.

Pfal. 3 8. J. There is no feundneJS in myfiejl) becaufe of thine anger.

Pial 74.1. iVhy doth thine avgerfmoaliagajnjlthefhecp of thy pafiure?

Pral.78.49. He cajiuptnthem thefier:ene(S of his anger, wraih, and indignation, and trouble, by fending evil Angels among them. He made a way to his anger, be ^arei not their foul from dcath.butgavc their life over to thepcjiilence.

Pfal.8j.i,3,4,j. Thou hi(i forgiven the iniquity of thy people, thou hajl covered all their Jin. Thou baft taken away all thy wrath, thou haft turned thy [elf from the fierce-mf of thine anger. Turn ws 0 God of our falvation, and caufe thine anger toward us to teafe. IVUt thou be angry with m for ever ? wilt thou draw tut thine anger to all generations ?

Pfal.^.i. 0 Lord rebuke me not in thine anger, neither chaftenmein thy hot dif^ fkafure,

Pfal. 9 3.7) 8,11. For we are con fumed by thine anger, and by thy wrath are we trou* bled. Thou haft fet our iniquities before thee, ourfecret fins in the light of thy countenance. Who }inoweth the power of thine anger,Sac.

Pfal, 1 o }.8 j9, 1 o. 4 low to anger audplenteout in mercy. He will not alwayes chide, neither will he l^eep his anger for ever. He hath not dealt with m after eurftns,6cc.

Ifa.5. If. and 41.15. He pour ei out on him the fury of his anger,Sic. ^cr.ij.jS. and 36.6.and 41.18. Lam.a.i,6,ir jii. and 3.43. Thou haft covered with anger, andpcrfecutcdus,Si.c. and 4.11. The Lord haib acccmpltjhed his fury, and poured om his fierce anger,fife. Jon. 3,9.

Exod. 4. 1 4. The anger of the Lord wot hjndled againft Mofcs,8cc.

a Sam.6 7. The anger of the Lord liindlcdagainiiV'{\a}),8cc. i Chron,i3.io.

Deut.1.37. and 4.21. The Lord was angry with me f»r your fa^i^s,8cc. Diut.^.io. And the Lord was very angry with Aaron to have deftroyed hitn,SLc.

Ezra 9.14. Should we again break thy Commandemcuts,SLc. wouldft thou mt be 4»-gry with m, till thou hiH confumed ui,8i.c.

Pial. 88.1 6, Thy fierce wrath goeib over mt,tby terrors hive cut me off,

V«rC.7.

VciT.7. Thy rvmb lynb bird upon me, and thou bifl dfflicfed me w'ub ill thy wive/. Viil I o 1.9,1 o. For I have eaten ajhes Hie bread, and mingled my drinfi with wetf-ing, becaufe of thine indtgnttion and thy wrath,Sec.

Mulcicud^s more ibere be of cbe like to thcfe in Ssripcure s bm this M'(7r4»ios denieth not.

J, Yea Gods Jealoul5e,fury,indignation, ara made in Scripcare the Caufe of our fufferingf.

Pfal.79.^ ^^^^ *^y iealoufie burn like fire,Sec ? i C0r.10.12. Vo we provost the Lord to jealoufie ? are we ftronger then he f Jort1.14.19. Dan.p.ifi. Ltttbyfury be turned away,Sec. Lam.2.4. He poured euthif fury lil{efire,Scc. zni^.ii. Mich. 7.9. lie bear the indignation of the Lord, becaufe I have finned againji him. P. al. 101. lO. with many mote like places.

4. Our fufferings arc called Gods Judgements. iGor.ii.ji. When wt art judged,we are thaUcned of the Lord,Scc. Pl'al. 119.1 lo. / am afraid of thy judgements. I Pet.4.17' The time is come that judgement muft begin at the houfe o/Goi,&c. (Some interpret this, as pcrtormed in this iife,fome of the laft judgement. J. Oui fuftl-rings arc called Plagues in Scripture. Pfal.7 J. 5,14- Tbcy are not plagued like other men,8cc. AU the day long have I been plagued,andchajUned every morning.

6. Yea,lee whether or nOjGod himfelfwill teach us to call our fufferings Cur-fes,or not: and think as ill of this phrafe as Mr.Cr. doth. Dan.9.11. Tea all Ifraelbaihtranfgreffed,Scc. therefore the curfc if poured upon us, CC' Gen.17.1iji J. Joni.6.i8. j^eepyeurfclvesfl'9mtheaccurfedthing,lcjiycmak'e your (elves accmfei when ye ta^e ojthe accurfed ihing,and maf^e theCamp of Ifrael a curfe^ and troubleit. Jfa.4J-i7,^8. Thy firji father hath finned, and thy teachers havctranf-greffcd agaivjl me, therefore I hive profaned the Princes of the fankuary, and have given ^acob to the curfe and Ifrael to reproaches. Jcr.14.9. and if.18. Zach.S.ij. Jsye were a curfe among the heathen.O houfe effudib,and houfe of Ifrael, fo will I faveyou and yefhall be a blejftng. Mai. j .y. Te are curfed with a curfe, for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation: (Doubtlefs among thcle people, had God his chofcn ( or no where) though involved too far in the fins of the times ) Mal.a.i. I will fend 4 curfe uponyou, and will curfe your bleffings, jca I have curfed them already, &c. ( It is not certain or probable that all thel'e Pi icfts were repiobaces.) Nay it is the laft word in the old Teftament, Left I eomc andfmite the earth wtthacurfe.

And remarkable is that Rev 12. j. And there Jhatl be no more curfe, but the Throne cfOodandtheLambJl}allbeiHit: To fhew when thecuile ftiall wholly ceafe.

Jo(h.9.i J. Now therefore ye are cur fed,and there jhall none o;you be freed f-om being bondmen, andhewcrs efwood,Scc. ( yet might they be freed from damnation-) ^jh. 7. it. The children of Ifrael turned their badii before their enemies, becaufe they were dccurfed.

And fee what the Scripture faith of fome other termes as offenfivc to Mr. Craii' dom$ this.

Lev. 16.15. I will fend a fword uponysu, which fjall avenge the quarrell of my Cove-^ nant. i Thef4.6, That no man go beyond and defraud hk brother in any mattery becaufe th^it the Lord is the avenger of all (ueb, as weal fo have forewarned you andteBified. (And a godly man may be drawn to defraud. Kew.j.4' lieifthe!Minifterofgod,t revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil.

Pial.99.8. Thouanfweredfithem OLordourGod: thouwsfi iGodthat forgaveft then, though tboti ^01 ^e^ vengeance on their inventions.

p 1 I-will

I will not weary the Reader with adding more, but conclude with thefe two or three Queries following.

J^.i. Whether jult Governours be not Gods Minifters, afting by his Com-miflion, and that which they do juftly, he doth by them, as the Soverai^ne by his Minifter?

^.2. Whether juft Laws be not Gods Laws, and Juftice in execution be not Gods Juftice, who hathfaid. Vengeance is mine: the Righteous Lord loveth Ri-^htcoufnefs ?

^^.j. Whether godly mcnought not to be panifliedjeven with death or excommunication if they ^eferve it ? and may not poflib'.y delerve fuch punishment ?

.1^.4. Whether then te teach that Chrifts fatisiaftion iMth freed us from all punilhment and execution of juftice ( Gods juftice by his Miniftcrs,) benotdc-ftruftive to the being of Chriftian Magiftrates and their Government, and Chri-ftian Minifters and their Government ?

«^.5. Whether then it be not deftiudlve to the being of all Chriftian focietics, either Churches or Commonwealths ? as long as government and penalties are of fuch necefTuy to their being ?

•^.6. Whether this doftrine do not make it the work of Chrifts fatisfaaion, to take men from under Gods governmentjand fo to be mafterlefs rebelsjor god« to our felves ? feeing government here is by Law : and the generall nature of a Law is to oblige to obedience or punifhment in cafe of difobedience ? And if God be difabled ^rom making or executing any penall Law, on his fubjcdsjat all, how is he their governour ? while man is finfuU and imperfeft, needing a government by penall Laws. Nay its conlidcrable, whether the doiSrine of thefe men do not difable God from making a meer precept, though without execution of a penalty, feeing the Law obligeth but autddobedientum, ant ai penum; aut hoc a^ere, aut hot pati, and not both to obey and fuftcr too, ( as to the fame time, and the fame Nu-mericall ad ;) yet I know that fatisfaftion as maintained by the Orthodox, that underftand its nature and order,hath no fuch confequcncc.

»^.7. Whether the forefaid dodrine, do not make Chrifts fatisfadion, deftru-dive of,or inconfiftent with his Kingdom and Lordfliip, on the forefaid grounds ?

«^.8. Whether they that affirm that God inflideth onus, all the fufferings which we undergo, without any deferving caufe on our part j or they that fay, he intiidecb them for our Iin ( withall making them medicinall for our cure,) do more honour Gods free grace, wifedom and juftice ? Both agreeing as to the matter of fuffering.

^u.9. Whether the maintainers of the forefaid dodrine, go not againft the light of nature ^ and the full ftream of many hundred plain Scripture texts ? And then Whether they indeed make Scripture the judge as they pretend to do ?

•^10. Whether ( confidering all the forecited Scriptures) it befit to fay, without any rettridion or limitation, thatparilon offinne is ablolutely perfed before death ? while there are yet more finnes to be pardoned, and penalties to be fuffered ?

•V ,^.11. Whether (upon all the forementioned confiderations) it appear not, that they who teach that we did legally obey or fatisfie pcrfedly inChrift, orthatChrift hath fo fatisfied for all owr fins, as that God cannot ( nor Chrift himfelf,) inflid the leaft penalty on the Redeemed, without injufticc ( as requiring fatisfadion twice for our (in,) 1 fay whether thefe turn not the grace of God into liccntioulnefsj and the dodrine of Redemption into a dodrine of Rebellion,

fub verting

C4?3

fubvcrtiflcT all government of God and man ? and making him the grcate-ft fricni to fia,tbat died to dcftroy it ? -

^u.iz. Whethei this afotcfaid be not cne ofthedcftrines which our late Charter ot this Commcnwealthj lArt.i^. hath excepted from liberty and prote^onj under the terme [Licentioufnefs ?]

M'Crandons two following Chapters sbcut the force of the Law, have nothing in them worthy a Reply, which is not before confuted in my Ccnclufions. Only that he feignethmeto feign, that feme teach the Law of Woiks to be abrogate to Believers, and others to all the world, and he infultingly fcorns me for iuchlying infinuations : when as thefoimcr laying is common in Englifli Writers, and forthclater, as Learned, Judicious Animadvcilicns en my Aphorifmes as ever I received, do almofl wholly maintain, that the Covenant or Law of Woiks i» properly Abrogated to all the world. And as the name is given to the whole from thepromifory part,I my fclf do now maintain, that there is no fiich thing as a Covenant of Works now in being to any on earth.

The Texts that Mr. CwwiioTi cites Cdp.8. Ipeak of the Mofajcal Law. And fo much for that Point.

SECT. VU.

I Have given Mr. Caryl fome of my Rcafons why I judge not Mr. Crandons Vindication of our freedom from the curfe of the Law to be profitable to the Church of God, and worthy the publique view. I ftiall give fome few Rea-fonsalfowhy I judge fo of his Vindication of our lullification by faith without works, which is the other point for which Mr. I'dryl elteemeth and com-mendeth it.

Andthcfummc of my Reafons are thefe i. Becaitfe he granteth the main points in qucftion, or which I allerr. 2. H« makes my aflertions to be what they arc not, and heapeth up fuch a multitude of falfe Aceufations, and thenbeftow-eih his labour in confuting his own forgeries, and that with copious fcorn and railing, that 1 appeal to any fober Reader, who will beat the pains to examine his book by mine, whether his Volume can have any Title I'o proper as Liber MendiciorHm 67* eonvitiorum. 3. Yea he often contradideth his own Confutations.

1. The firft of thefe Reafons (that he granteth'what I feck) 1 thusmanifeft. «^ That our Gofpel-obedience is frequently in Scripture called our Rightcoxifnefs, and the performers in rcfped to it called Righteous, he cannot, he doth not deny. For he yet confefleth the Scripture to be true.

2. The thing then that he deniethis, that we are juflified by that Righteouf-ncfs. Here theQueftion muft be either i. Of our, Univerfal Juftification at Judgement againft all Aceufations. 2. Or of a particTularJuftification at Judgement (or in this life) againlt the particular Accufaiion of being Infidels, and Impenitent Rebels. 3. Of that Juilification at our firfl believing, which wholly confificth in (ot only fignifieth) Remiflionof finne,and Accepting us as pardoned. 4. For the cenftituting of us Righteous Inherently, or perfonally in wn*H»i, fo farre as indeed we are, by that pcrfonal Righteoufncfs, which the Scripture afcribeth to us.

For the firft of thefe, as it isnot that which he ufuailjtfpeaks of, fo I affirm

P 5 that

C44]

thit our Hon Keimmortis and ^tainrttmium i«our Righteoufnefs formally: and our Tide is the Covenmc G.anc > and the Condition of that Tide is our faith, repentance, fincerc obedience and pcrfercrancc (as to the Jadicial abfoluti-onand pofleflian of die Kingdom j) and the Righieoulncfs of Chrift is the fole Meritorioas Caufe.

i. As to the fecond, I affirm that when the Qacftion is, Whether we have truly performed the Condition ? and that is the point to be decided, then oar own performance is fo farre our Righccoufners: fo that the fame performance which as to out main final Juftificadon, is but a condidon of our Juftification, and not out Juilice it felf: Yet in this fubreivient preparatory Juftifisation, which is bu: ^ujlificatiopjirticuUris, it comes to be ihe^ujiitiA Cauf/e materially it felf (whether any fuch ad be, I have (pokebefore, and its evident in Mit.i^. &-5W4r.it.

37,ere)

3. For the third, it is that fcnfe in which Mr. Qr. takes Juftification, as pcr-fefted in Confcience on our believing, which was pcrfeded inforo Dei before we were born. Now here I grant him as much or more then he defireth : vi'^. That obedience to Chrift doth not fo jultifie us i nay that it is not then in Being, but follows that Juftification. Indeed I affirm that when we are jultificd before and without fuch obedience, yet it is a QjLufdfinc qui »6n, fubordinate to faith, of our continuance in a juftified ftate, or of not-lofing our Juftification j but here I affirm it to be bat a Condition, and no Caufe, much Ids the Matter or Meritorious Caufe of our Righteoufnefs,

4. As to the foarth I know not any fober man that will deny it, but that if to conftitute Juft, may be called juftifying, then that Inherent Righteoufncfs which conftituteth us Righteous Co farre, doth fo farre juftifie us as our Righteoufncfs. But this is a Righteoufnefs that is fo farre from juftifying us at Gsds Barre againft the Accufation of Guilt of death, that it will not merit the pardon ofonefinne, and fervech but tointitleus to Chrift, by whofe Merits we are fo juftified.

So that ia fummethe Qucftion between Mr. Cr. and me can be no more then this. Whether Obedience to the Redeemer, be a condition of continuing ornot-lofing our Juftification, given before it ^ and a condition of our Juftification at Judgement or not ? Now let us fee what he faith to this.

And firft for the foundation of the whole bufinefs, whereas I argued from the true nature of Chrifts Satisfaftion, that God might notwithftaading Chrifts fuflfering for us, give us the benefits of it, but upon a condition appointed by /j^ him felf. Mr.Cr. Pxrt i.pag.i 17. grants it in tbefe words [Becaufe our Juftification is an ad proceeding from the meer and free will of God and of Chrift, ic wasthereforeintheir power after payment made by Chrift and accepted by the Father in our behalf, to Covenant and accomplilh our difchargc, either forthwith or a long time after, either fimply or upon Conditions.] This Mr. Cr. not denying doth falfly accufe me of arguing a poJSe ad ejfe, and cals it A mad Argumentation. I only by this argued for the 'Tojfe, whi<:h I think was with good fucccfs, when it hath forced that mans Pen to concede it, who before durfi liken God to [ aprodigieofnature, adevillized man] if he fhouldby any puniftiment on us require (as he cals it) fatisfaftion for the fame finnestbat Chrift hath already fatisficd for. As for the adual conveyance of the gift of Juftification fub condttione, by way of condition, I proved that otherwaics, by a multitude of Scri-pturesi and if I did not prove it indeed^ let Mr. (^r, call me a mad Arguer,

and

an^ fpare not. B« itmcmber that here the Te/c is granted, vli^. that for all thepaymem made by Chrift and Accepted by the Father, it was neverthelcfs in the power of God and his Chrift, to difchargc us fimply or on condition, fndden-ly or Jong after.

2. Well; Let us next fee what he faith of the condition it felf, and whether Juftification be granted Conditionally in th« tenour of the Covenant or not.

Pag-149. he faith, [ " Yea in this point I (hould be totally filenr, becau-fc *'Mr. 2. in woids fpeaks no more here, then what fome of our moil foufid and "godly Divines have fpoken before him, that faith is the Condition of Juftifi-*'cation, were it that Mr. 2. tneaneth as they mean. For though in the beft *« meaning of the belt men, (he propriety cf the terms or phrafe may be much quc-" ftioncd, and give occafion of much difpute, yet traverfing Controverfics about *^ words, when there is agreement in the fubRance to which both parties drive, " isinmy apprehenfion a bulinefs fo farre tending to diftradion and breach of " union among the Saints^ that it is the lait and leaft trade, I am confident, that "ever will bctall me to drive.] Exore tuo,Scc. O modefty^! who would eafily have believed that a man in his wits could polTibly ha-ve been fo ignorant of his own heart, and write fuch a Volume as this, and know no more what he hath done? But perhaps the word [Saints] will be (cmc falve to his credits for he hath before pronounced me forfaken oi God, and dcIHtutc of the Spirit, as a mcer natural man, ^c. But here you fee that my words arc juftificd by the Accufec bimUlf fo farrc as to be the fame with the words of the fcundeft and godlici^ Divines : and he addes [" But in this point though Mr.2.here fpeaks in words "what fome of ours have faid, and do fay ft ill, and that without any detriment, " that I can fee, totheGofpelj yet his meaning and theirs are in no lefs antipa-" thy then a Hawk and a Heron, and that as in other leiVer fo principally inthefe " particulars of moment.] Lets hear now the principal difference. [ i. By faith '' they mean our Application, or faith as it is our Inftrument of applying ChviiV, "andthcgracc of God in Chrift to our Juftification: He by ftrith means not " only the7i<;rerfcr«a$ a part of our inherent Ri^hteoufnefs, butas a gentrall and *< common word, that comprizeth within it felt all good qualificaiions and good " works whatfoever, as elfewhere, and fpecially in and under his 70, & 71. fhcfit « be declarcthhimfelfjfo that he makes, and under the watdfuhf) undcvl^andcth *' allthefc as equal conditions with faith, of our Jultificarion.]

Here's the firft principal difference': More plainly this ; M"" Cf> fpeaks truly and charitably of the words of our Divines, btvt fallfly and maliciDufly of mine. A vride difference 1 Bat i. What's all this tothepnint of Coiuiitionality ? It items then we differ not in that, whether the Covenant be conditional? orwhc-ther faith be the Condition ? and fo whether Juftification be conditionally s.ran-ted ? but only what that faith is which is the condition ? At leaft, here he mcn-tioneth no other difference, but de Materi.t.

I, Do they, hy fiUtb, mean [ our Application '] lb do I, ifthc Accepunct of a free gift be Application. And are wc not yet agreed ?

3. But they mean faith [as it is our inftrument of applying ClirllV; JiTc ]' Its pity a man that fo abhorreth contending about words, fhould lay io great a ftrefs on the word [Inftrument.] But feeing the man himfclf here cals it not the inftrument of Juftification, but only of applying Chrift, why flwaldw* differ, when I ojcnly profcffed pj^ i2,i,izz. thatldernot fo much.

ftick

:4<3

ftick at this fpcech, though I judge ic not proper. I will contend with no man for calling it our Injirumcnt of receiving Chiilt, largely, vulgarly, or metaphorically fo called : My queftion was Whether ic juftifie M an inlhument ? Is not ati that our Divines mean by the word Inl^ruinen-: comprized in :he nature of the aftoffaiih, as cxercifed on its objcft ? and is not this a(a confclTcd to be the Acceptance of Chrill freely given ? All this I confers as much as any o^ them. And are we not then agreed in the Matter ? By [ Inftrument ] they mean a Receiving of the thing Given : and I confefs faith is fuch a Receiving.

4. Welljbutwhat is ic that I mean, if Mr. ^r. fpeak true ? 1. [ I mean the Tz credere.'] And do not thole that he mentionech mean ic too ? I thought it had been the ad of fairh which they call Application, Apprehenlion, and an Inftrument ? If it be the Habit} 1 will agree with them too : If neither ad nor habit, what is it ? and why do they call it faith ?

5. But if Mr Cr, would intimate that I make the li credere to juftifie formally as fuch, fub hM niitne, I do as conftancly deny it, as he is conftant in falfe accu-fing. Nayconfider whether they that make faith quiinjlrumeatum to juftifie, do not make the iz erederc in (^rijium to jultifie as fuch ? For adion is the caufality of the inftrument in effeding, and this is the adion : Ic is tt; credere in Chriflum which they call inftrumcntality. I fay ft ill tv credere, that is. Faith is the matter of the condition, but juftifies noc as fuch, but as a condition appointed to this office in the inftrument of conveyance by the free giver.

6. Thcfameanfwerferves to the next charge [as a part of our inherent Righ-tcoufnefs.] Had he left out [as] and meant thac fides ^«<e,faith which is a part of our inherent Righteoufnefsjis alfo a condition of our Juftification,I (hould own it, and think all our Divines will do fo too : If not, I would gladly know what faith ic is that they mean : For if it be no part of our inherent rightcoufncfs, it is abfo-lutely a finne : And I confefs chats none of my fenfe, that God jultifieth us by a forbidden ad.

But he puts in his quitenus to fliew you that he forgettetb not his old trade j as if I made faith io juftifie or co be che condition of our Juftincation, qua ^uftitiii inherensi whereas clean centrarily,I cake it to be our inherent Rightcoufncfs in a peculiar fen fe, a pofteriore, becaufe it is our fulfilling of the condition? and that it'juftifieth (in our Remiflion, and Acceptation with God) not as Richte-Gufnefs but as the Condition. ( I faid no more then this in my Book : but now I adde, that if any Accufe us of being Infidels, againft that particular Accufacion faith. mull juftifie us as the particular Rightcoufnefs of our caufe.) So that here is a mear falfe accufation .of Mr. Cr's. and no opinion of mine: Nor could the man fhew a line or word of mine thac contained any fuck thing.

Two grofsfalfltsodsmore follow, as if they were my fenfe of the point. i.That I take faith in a general fenfe here as comprizing all good qualifications and good works whatfoever. i. And thefe as equal conditions with faith of our Juftifica-tion.] I. I maintained indeed that jultifying fajth hath more ads-natural then one, vi^. both the aifent of theintelled and confencof the will, as is afore explained : but I made ic concain none but what are a Reception of Chrift as oflered in the Gofpel. I comprized love in it indeed : not all love that is a grace; but thatitmuftbe a Felle, a loving acceptance of C^riit, of which I am ready 10 give a fuller account then I ihall now ftand to do. But that I comprehended all

good

C473

goo<! works, is M'Cr'y own. I ftill contradifltinguiflicd juftjfying faith from obedience to Cbrift, and made obedience a fruit of faith. Its true, I made fubjedion eflcntial to faith : For to take Chrift as King,is fubjcfting our felvcs to him : But I ever maintain, that to engage my fclf as a fubjeft, is in «rdcr before my obeying as a fubjcft, and is the caufc of it.

1 confefs alio, that I mentioned fcveral ads, ( as Repenting, begging pardon, ft^c.) which though they are not faith, are yet implied as attendants, when wc arc faid to be julHfied by faith: but as I made not thefeto be faith. To I never laid To much as that of all obedience, or any obedience to Chrift, at leall, as fich.

I alio confefs that I faid that faich is fometime taken yet in a larger fenfe, as containing all Gofpcl-proper obedience : bu: I do not fay that ever faith is fotalccn when vve are faid to be jultificd by it. So that Mr. Cranio^/fidl-ons are more naked, then to fecm credible to any that will examine before they believe.

And his laft is as falfe: for though I fay that Repentance is a Condition as well as faith, ( which yet I never faid o?ail good works) yet I never faid it was [ aa equal condition with faith.] Nay I did purpofely attempt to open how thole-other A^ij ftood in lubordinatioQ to faith, which are made conditions with it in the Gofpel i and therefore fitted to be conditions, becaule they ncceflarily appertain to faith, it being the tfccffunfc of Chrift, and th(y making it a right reception, as to the Moral Modifications.

So that for all M'CrinioMi falfe accafations, I am not here manifefted to differ from the Divines in queftion, fo much as about the matter of the Condition > much lefs the form } or Whether Juftification be given on Condition or not. His next difference is this.

[i. "By [Condition] they mean that which being once attained and once ** fixed upon Chrift , fpeaks us abfolutely juftified for ever. So that in calling 'f faith a Condition of Juftification, they naean, we cannot be juftified without ** it, bu: having once by faith apprehended Chrift, we arc by it united and joined " to Chtift, and by force of our union with him, are thenceforth abfolutely and *'irrevocably pardoned and accepted as Righteous in 3ods fi^ht.]

Now he comes to the formal difference between me and others, about the nature of a Condition, having fpoken before only of a feigned difference in the na-ttjrc of Faith. And what difference doth he here fliew ? not a word that I can finde, as if we did at all differ deformali ranone conditionis. What my fenfe is of the word Condition, I have fhewed in my Reply to Mr.S/ji^c. I take it in fenfu Civili, as a Moral condition, agreeable to the nature of the fubjed, and not fer a meer natural qualification called a condition by fomej as the drincfs of the wood, and its proximity to the fire is its condition of burning. The difference that he here feigneth between me and others, is only of the fufticiency of this condition to the perpetuating of the efted of the Donor in Juffification, and not of the formal nature of a Condition. Remember therefore that for all Mr. ^rJM^es can fay, I take the word Condition in the fame fenfe, as Reformed Divines ordina*, riiy do.

And for the difference that he feigneth, who knows his meaning ? either he mcan$ oHly that a man once juftified, fhall never lofc his Faith and Juftification i and if fo, he plaies but the old game of falie acculing, 'n feigning me to deny ir. Orelfehe means, that the tenourof the Covenant isfuch, asgiveth a perpetual

Q_ pardon

C48]

pardon of all finnespaftj prefcnt and to come,on condition only of that firftad of faith ? If fo, I. 1 le tell him my diflenc. i. Why I think our Divines do not fo judge as he feigneth them to do.

I. My opinion is^ that the Reafon why Belieyers lofc not Juftification, it from Gods ininiu:ab!c Decree of Eledion, and the Tpecia! purpofc •f Chrill in his fa-crifice, to eftctt infallibly the falvacion of all I'uch, as are chofcnand given him by the Fa'.hertobc fo faved : as alfo from lome difcoveries of this Wiil r Decree of God, int^.eWord, which may be callc-i promircs. But witha;l I believe that thi Lav/of Grace, or the promife, which doth convey our Juiiihcation is one and the fur.:, and not changed by our believing, and therefore continueth to juftifi; ci:iy Believers : and fliould wa ceafe believing that promife would ceafc juft'.fying : and that we do not ceafc believing is from the forementloncd caufes, and not uom thit promife. So that the fame God that decreed to maintain the faith of his chofen people to the death (that is, of all Believers in fincerity) did yet think meec for the right government of the world, and for the fuiting of his dealings to the condition of man, to makeover the right to this benefit by a conditional general ad of pardon, or Law of Grace, which would condemn and not juftifie them if they fhould turn unbelievers ; Though by his fecret grace he wiil keep them from fucb Apoftacy, yet Threatnings and conditional Pcomifes arc his moral means thereto, which he fees meet to ufe : And if the fpccial work of the fpirit excluded, or included not moral means; then would it exclude, or not include the Word, Sacraments, and all other as well as this. So that the conditi-onality of the promife is nothing againft the C^irtaintyof perfeverancc : And Mr. QrAuions xeal in making the dodrine of Conditions to be damning ( as he ellewhere doth ) doth but make the plain Dodrine.and Gofpel of Chriltto be damning.

z. The Reafons why I conceive our Divines mean as I in this, are thefc : 1, Becaufe it is evidently the Truth of God ( which I will not believe them to deny till I needs muft.) And that it is ttuth, I prove now by thefe three Arguments only. I. In that the Scripture promife of falvation is ftill Conditional j yea Overcoming and Continuing to the end are made its Conditions. And he that fliould lofe his right to Salvation would lofe his Juilification ; if Right to Salvation (». e. Glorification) be not part oi Juftification itfelf: yea praying for pardon, forgiving others, repenting, arc made conditions frequently of renewed pardon, i. If Jultificarion were given in the promife to be perpetual on condition of our fir ft bcleeving only, then all after-ad > or habits of faith fliould not be luftifying faith, nor fliould any man have juitifying faith after the firft minute of his firft bcleeving: which let him beleeve that can forme. 3. If Juftification were Abfolutely given as perpetual, or God gave us a pardon of all fin part, prefent and to come, at our firft bcleeving, then his threatnini; us with damnation, if we fliould Apoftatize, would be a Threatning to break liis own promife, ortorevcrfe that which he gave us an irrcvcifible Right to. But thats not true : Therefore I take it for granted that yix.Crdndon is not yet fo '^aire gone as to deny that God any where ihreatneth his people, if they Apoftatize j ( though he will preferve them from it, makinj^ the threatning his moral mci us of preferva-lion :j If he IhjulJ; I would difpute no more with him out of the Bible, but from fome principles whiCti he will acknowledge. I know God may Decicc to give us perfeverancc, and'cvcal that Decree, which Revelation, (or Pollicitation if you will) declare to us that if he fliould not accompiilh it, he were mutable s and yet

he

C49l

he may give ui Right to out final Abfoluncn and Salration, buc on condirioa * and in ihefe there is no contradidion > bccaufe Purpofcs and Pollicitaiions(w hich are di&ind A promtffionibgi) gire no Right: befidcs other realons that are at hand. But to fay, [I now give thee abfolute final irreferfible Juftification from all hnnc paft, prcfcnt and to come] and at the fame time to make a Law which laith to the fame man [If thou draw back my foul (hall have no pleafure in thee,] fccms to be . acontradiftion (though he (houldrcfolve to maintain him in the faith ;) beraufc in the later, he threatens on a (Condition to take away that which is fuppofed to have been given hina abfolutely and irreverfibly : For to be in Law undc a conditional threat of iofing it^ftiews that in Law the continuance of our poflcirion Is but conditional.

The fecond Reafon that perfwades me that our Divines do not think that our firft belceving doth give us in Law fenfe, an irreverfible Title to final Juitifica-tion, nor an abfolute pardon of all fins to come, or abfolute Juftification as to the continuance, is this: Becaufe they commonly teach that no fin is pardoned before it is committed : Inpotemia velvirmeCaufie, i'omt {&% Amef.) fay they are : buc not Aftually.

A third Reafon is, Becaufe the fame Divines commonly affirm renewed repentance, faith, prayer for pardon, (^(. to be conditions of the renewed pardon of known (efpecially grofs) fins.

A fourth Reafon is, Becaufe they do commonly affirm that faith juftifieth, noc only in the firft aft, but to our lives end j aad that we mufl go to Chriit by faith for daily pardon.

A fifth Reafon is, Becaufe many of our moft Learned Divines do maintain that Juftification is a continued aft, and not fo fimul&femel as to be ended qimi aSlum ^ujiificanteMas (ooms begun. See Bi{hopPow7/4mc of Juftification, proving this at large. And Mr. CrAnion himfelf durft not deny it. So that I think ic is manifeftj that not only de formdi ratione Ctndiuonk our Divines fay the fame ss I, and I as they, but alfo ic [t^cicntii primiaSfusfdei ad coutinuandam ^uftificatiO' wewjwhich is the thing wherein he feigns adifFcrcnce.Now let usfee what he makei 10 be my opinion,when I have owned theirs.

Headdes [''He ca!s it fo a condition, as that it continues ftiil a condition, *'jullifying us only conditionally and not abfolutely : fo that it leaves our eftate ** ftill one and the fame ; no more juftified and pardoned when Beleeveri, then " when unbelievers. Forby the fatisfaftion of Cbrifl, we are before faith com-" cth conditionally juftified if wc beleeve, and when faith is come we remain ftill '* but conditionally juftified if we believe, our fafety being as loofe and uncer-*' tain then as before, depending ftill upon the refidcnce and abode of faith in as, ." as before it did upon the poffibility of its future ingeneration into us and afting ** in us, and that we are no longer juftified then when we beleeve and obey : fo " that Isy bclecvingand unbeleering, obeying and rebelling, wc may be juftified ** and unjuftified again a thoufand times before wcdie j and how often after, *'himfelf expreflcs not. I need not mention more: thefc two diflercnces are '^enough to declare, that though here he fpeak in the fame tone with fome of *' our Divines, yet his Judgement no more agrees with theirs, then the Pope wi:h *'L«f/;cr and C4/-J/W, E//w/tf with Prfw/, SimonMagia viiihTcter, or the Scribes •' and Pharifees with Chrift.]

Here is little but what one denial doth honeftly and fufficicmly anfweti it being fofalfe.

Q I 1. Its

[503

I. Its falfc, v»bcrc he makes mc to deny that wc are abfolutely juftlficd, and aflcrt only a condicional Juftification. For though I once faid that the difchargc or jartifying Law remains conditional ftill, yet lever cxprefled my felf to hold that wc arc aftually and abfolutcly inajullificd ftate as foon as we believe,anddid we die in that moment fliould be faved : only,I fayjthat in the tenour oi the Law. the future continuance is conditional if we continue here.

1. It is fpoken in Mr.Crandons Dialcft, in antipathy to the ninth Commandment, that I ["leave our eltate one and the fame, no more juftified and par-'^ doned when Believers then when unbelievers.] Let any tnimal T^ttionsU be judge, whether a pardoned Traytor be in no better cafe then an unpardoned, becaufe if he turn Traytor again he (hall die for all his former pardon. If a PriHce oft'er himfeif in marriage to one poor condemned woman, and (he refufe him and delivercnce offered with him; and he ofFereth the fame to another, and flie ac-cepteth the ofter and is married to him ; Is this laft in no better a cafe who is made a Princefs, then the former that lies in Jail, looking for the Aflizes to be executed, becaufe that if fhe be unfaithfull, and leek her husbands life, or play the Adulterefs, (he ihall be divorced again ? A Landlord offereih two poor men, thjic if they will but Accept his cuttcfie, and once a year in ftead of Rent, put off their hats and thank him, they fhall have a Leafe.of a large Revenew. The one refu^ feth the offer, and thereupon hath neither Leafe, Houfe nor Land : The other acceptethit, and is pur in poflefllon, and his Leafe fealed : Is this man in the very fame cafe as he was, and as the other is, and no more a Tenant, becaufe he holdeth his Leafe upon the Condition of an aft of Homage ? ( I'le name the Pepper corn no more, for 7)oeg overheard me the laft time.) ^

5. Hisreafon is reafonlcfs: [Both before snJ after,he faith,it is Conditional.] But Sir, before the whole Right and poncflien is only condicional, and not adual at all ; but after the Right and Poiicifion for the prelent is aftual, and only the continuance is Conditional: Is that all one ^

4. Where he talks of [our fafety being as loofe and uncertain as before.] > .He feigneth me to make it uncertain, when I affirm that it is certain in it Iclf and to God, then and before, upon the foundation of Gods Decree, i. Doth not himfeif make it as uncertain as before ? that is, as certain before as then ?

5. The like fidion of his venturous brain is that following, that I make this Certainty to depend on our faith, which I ever judged to depend on Gods Decree.

6. And worfe is the next, that I fav [we are no longer juflified then we be lieve and obey,] which the man never found a word for in my vVritiniS : cjfc flee ping men ihouli be unjultified. Nay that wasonereafon ftill that I had a-gainft inllruracntaliiy being the formal reafon of faith* intereflin Juftification, and conditionality is that Intercft.: becaufe the former being a meer Phyfical in-lereft, we can be no longer juftlfiedthen we arc believing, and faith no longer an iiiflrumcm, and conreqiently no longer luftifying then it 'ideth : but the later being a Moral Legal Intcrcft, may fuffice to the cftcct propter beneplicitum 7)ona» tork even when the aft is intermitted : for it repuiativelv continuech while the Habit conttHutih. But if Mr. Crundon think ihat in cafe he fhould turn Infidel agairi, he fhould continue juftified, 1 will not believe bim as credible a man as he i .

7. Another forgery of his it is, tha: I teach that we may by believing and tin-b'dieving be juftified and unjuftified again a tboufand times before we die.] When

Iftill.

C50

Xftill affirm that God will prcferveus from turning unbelievers, flotwlihftanding theconciitionality of this promifcjyea by the means ofthi$ conditioaaliiy to excite us to vi tlancy and care for pcrfcverance.

8. VVha.: h<r faith about being unpardoned In the life toiomc, is but the intimation of ri -iculous malice, which cannot lie latent for a tew IrneSj even where ic confcfTetb n wanceth mauer to work on.

Ail this iaul together, I fhould noi dtubt to convince Mr. ^rJoioR. were his black chcJ.ler but a while allayed, that ihc Pope, zndElimAS, and Simon Mugust and the Pharifces, ftnll ai, be favtd, if thcv ciiftei lio mo.e from ChiiU, from Pgter znd Tuul, from (^alvis and Luther, then I do from the Rcfo:ined Divines about the conditionality of thepromifc of JuIlification>or the meaviing cf the word Condition.

Further hear him make bis own Confeflion, pjg.j 56. ["We have granted *'before the promulgation and oficr of JulUficatioii by thcGofpel tobecondi-''tional: but thegift and being of it to be AbfolutCjCT'c.] Cenccdoicitum : You and I are agreed : I plead for no more but that the Tenour of the Gofpel-promifc, (which is the oflFer, and the gift in an adive fenfe) is conditional: andfojufti-fication aftual none at all till we believe: but when we believe, the gift in a Paffive fenfe is abfolute, and in an Aftive fenfe abfolute or equivalent j as I did before explain my thoughts. You fee then what is like to become of Mr. Cr*ndon, who holdetb this dodrine of Condition^^ which he faith will condition me to damnation.

p. 1,04. The next place where I finde him undertaking a fuller difcovery of the difference between the Proteftant Divines, and me a Papift, in this Point, and how farre they make Works to be Conditions, he puttcth down their Judgement (as be takes it) inthefe Propofitions. [" i. They grant that the promulgation *' of Righteoufnefs and Life is to be made Univerfally and Conditionally to all: " God knoweth who are his : but the Heralds of his Grace know not. Therefore " by the commandof Chrifliheyavetoteftific this Word of Life to all without •'exception, promtiing upon conoition of believing, in the Name and by the *' Wordof Chriit,Righteoufnefsand Salvation. In the mean time they maintain, *' Chrift hath fatisftedoiily for thofc chat the Father hath given him, fo efFedual-'My as that by vertueof Chrifts r'ui chafe they {hall receive power from above to •' believe unto falvation.]

KcfU Isit not ftrangc that even in the Point of Univerfal Redemption, and Conditional pardoning of all, the Papifls and Proteitants fhould fo fully accord ? Shall they both be damned ? cr both be iavcd ? and the Accufer prove falfe ? I profefs my felf wholly to agree to all this, as being accordiiigto my Judgement. The fecond is

[" i. They arc wont oft tj ufc the word ^alvition ( as the Scripture alfo *• deth ) for Glorification hereafter : and fo take it as a dillinft thing from " Juftification, and involve into the Salvation more then into the condition of *'Jultification.

Hi'.herto I am a Proteftant flill: For even fo do I, underftanding not Jiiftifi-cation at Judgement, which hath t lie fame conditions wi:h Glorification, butas they do, ourjuft^ficaticn upon oar firft bclievine, by which v/e receive aftually the pardon of all ©ur iuis, Reconciliation with God, and Title to Glorification. Let us hear the reft.

[ " S. By the word (^ndition they underftand oft all the neccflary Antecedents,

Q.J "and

[50

•* an4 fotnciimcsalfo the ncceflTary Confequcnts of Juftification and falration. Bat ■** lOjas theyrcrmc fuch Antecedents the Conditions, without which going before, "thefe ends cannot be attained; and thofcConfequents, the Conditions without ** which follow ini •■j cannot attain the certain knowledge that we arc julHfied ♦' and inrighted to glory.]

I doubt the PioteiLnts anon will be made two-fold more the children of damnation then I. For it leemsihey hold two forts of ConditionSjand I but one : and if my one iort, will condition me to, condemnation, as he fpeaks; what will that and more do ? I am wlioUy a ProtelUnt in holding An.ecedents Condition, but Con-fcquent I know nu..'. But who would have thought that I had come fhort of Mr. CrandoH and the Proteftants, where he makes me to go beyond them as farreas thejel'uites? I confefs C^jmifr makes a diltinftion of Conditions into Antecedent and Confequcnt, but confcffing (juftly) the unfitnefs of the termes,and ufing them in a farre other fcnfc then here Mr Crandon doth ( of which more in the tclti-monics in the end.) Nay Mr.Craudtn makes his own conditions An:ecedent,while he names them Confequent: for when he calls them [Conditions without which we know not our Juftification] Tbey are plainly made Antecedent Conditions of that Knowledge, but no Conditions at all of luftification it felf. I confefs alfo that there are {inChumiers i'en(c) Conditions following the Benefit, but they arc not Conditions as Confequem,nor of the Benefit as paft, but of the continuance of that Benefit, which continuance is ftill future. Alfo let Mr.Crasioa know that 1 fpeak demordibm, and therefore of Conditions in a morall or Law fcnfe, and not utmerm Phyficus, ofnaiurall, neccflaiy qualifications as fuch: (as its a condition of my Believing that I have my hearing or other fenfes, and the ufe of reafonjCiT'c.) that were but a ridiculous tranfition from one Genus or fubjed to another. And thus it feems I am hitherto a Proteftant,at the worft.

The fourth followeth ['^ 4.That as oft as they fpeak of the Conditions of Ju-*'ftificatien, they mean the Juftification of the new Covenant, not the Juftifi-*' cation irr.manent in God, or that which Mr.6. calletb^Chrifls own Juftification ** as the p'lblick pcrfon-]

Rep. Sydo I; yea I acknowledge no fuch thing as a juftification of any man properly Tt called, either eternall, or in Chrifts Juftification: though I ufed that laft tern r once, fpeakiMg as in their language to whom I fpake. Hi:herto yet I am a Protellai/'-jand uifFcr not from others here meationed.

Tne fifth of M^Crandons Propofitions is this [" $. They utterly deny Morall '^ obedience and Gcod-works to be in any other fenfe a Condition of Juftifica-" tion,but as it is a Confec^uent thereof to evidence it.]

Rep. I. I will anon,God willing, prove this to be falfc asfo generally delivered, paft all doubt: For this is exprefly to deny it to be any Condition of Juftification at all, and to make it only a Condition of our dilcerning thar wearc juflificd. And a fign ns fuch is not a morall Condition, x. But yet taking Juftification only for Gods putting us into a juftified,pardoncd ftate at the fiift, and not as ex-teniiveto the continuance of that Juftification, or to our juftification at the judgement, fo I confefs more then Mr. Cr4Mio7i bcredcfiieth, vi"^. that Moiallobedi-ence,and good works, are no conditions of that Juftification at all, but meer con-fcquents and fignes of ic. And becaufe I am confident that MwCrandoH and many Proteftant Divines do founderftand the word Juftification, ia this difpute, therefore I think X may cake my felf of thcit minde in the thing, and fo farre yet no Papift.

The

Thcfixth Propofition foiloweth: SikhMr.Crdnden " They Jeny allCauia-5' lity of Good works to falvation.

Kep.i. Taking falvation generally as comprehending fandification and con-folarion,thisisnoc true. i. But taking it for the Right to Glorification ( as I doubt not but Mr.Crjnio» doth) and I as confidently deny it as they : which if Mr Cnndon will not know when he readeth it, thats not my fault. So that hitherto yet I am no Papift.

The fevcnth Propofition is this," Much more a concaufality in the fame kindc " wi:hfai:hand the I'atisfadionof Chrift.

Rep. This would intimate as if I give to works what Proteftants are here faid to deny. But its untrue, i. For faithjl deny it to have any proper caufality as to our juftificacion or right to lalvation : and tiovv can 1 then give works a concaufa-lity ? But you ftumble not at luch ftraws as this.

». I affirm Chrift to be the meritorious criufcj and works to be no caufejnor any condition of our juftification at firft, anc but conditions iubordina'C to faith, of our juftification at judgement, and the non-amiiTion of it in this lite; and this not as works in PmIs fenfe, but in "^imcs't fenic.

But I know the thing that the man looks at ( with little ingenuity ) is that I once faid, that Chriftsfatistadion was as ameritc.ious caufe, (o afinequAnovt But that was in fevcrall r^fpcds, and I wub thcmleivcs give any more to it at all: But did I not then and ftill maintain that lK.iifa<^ion re be alio the meiitcrious caufe ? But of this I have faid enough to Ml Ejrc. Yet then I am no Pa^-itl.

The eighth Propofition is this £ " Moll of all, tijat they in any rationail fenfc merit ic]

Rep. Little matter from without will fervc a Spider to make a net. I have ever difdaimed Merit. I have faid fourty times more for it in this book, only lo moderate th: over- lealous againil the phrale In Fathers and ProtcflantSj then ever I faid in any book or Sermon before. Nor did I ever fay that it may be ufed in a ra» tionall fenfe : but faid when I was pleading againft Merit, that yet in a large improper fenfcj our performance of the condition may be called worthincls and Merit: Not that it may lawfully be fo called, but that the word improperly ufed may fig-nifie fuch a thing. What M:(^randenvii\\ call a rationail fenfe, little do I know : only I know that I ufe not much Ratiocination in finding our the meaning of the words, more then to finde how they have been ufed. Cuitom helps me more then Reafoning from any thing in the word, to know the meaning of ir. I take words tobe arbitrary fignes,and not naturall fignes : And if cuitom will but change, and call [bread] a ftone, and a ftone bread, 1 will not cenfure i: as irrationail, much lefs, asPopery : And for the irraaonall Fathers and Churches that ufed the word Merit for fo many hundred years, and the irratianall Proteflants that ufed it i-n the Auguftine Confeflion, and the irrationail Calvin, Sucer,Szc. as well as Luther, LMeUnHkotiyScc. that did fubfcribe it, and all che irrationail Protcflant Churches that adhere to it to this day, I fay for all thefc I am more willing to cxcufe them, and confult with Charity then fp.ccMifh Zciljfor the underftanding of them, then to imitate thcm,or approve tlieir ufe ot the word. Thus far therefore I lee not that I am a Paj-'ill.

The ninth Propofition foUoweth [_'' Or that as they make up the Inherent *' Rightnefs of man to be a collaterall with the faciifice of, or righteoufncls which " is by Chrifl to falvation } fo that we are faved by wotks,for works jas by Chriii, "and for Chrift. Ail this dirt they leave toMr.B. tolickoff from the nails ot"

"the

" the Icfuitcs, bidding defiance againft it,a$ a curfcd dodrinc

Never did it once enter into ray ttioughci, or fall from my mouth or pen, that ouv Inheient Righteoufnefs is collateral! with Chrifts facrificeand Righteoufnefs, tol'alvadon '. or that we are favcd by and foi works, as by and for Chrill ! If 1 mull be affirmed to hold this or any thing that this man will fay I hold, and made a Papii^ whc;h:r I will or no,wha '■ .ncdy.

Theieareall the P.apufiitioni -'lercin heexpreffeth the judgement of Protc-ftan: Divines as differing from mc > and now I leave it to any fober Chriltian to compaie them togethei, and ju.!.;*. of the difference: only fuppofing that my own profcflTion of n;/ belief is in jrc; to be credited then M:.(^randont recicall of it according to his own inrention. And I -defirc Mr. Crandon to confidcr, whether the fear of the Lord were opciarive in his fpirit, when he durit indnuatc or plainly affirm that I hold all thefe things which ha faith [ they bid defiance to as a curfed dodrinc?] when he (aid [ they leave all this dirt to mCj^C] Did he remember the ninth Commandementandthcday of judgement, when he wrote this and fiichaV lameof the like ?

Headdetiuicxt [" What they underftand then of Works as a condition of fal-*'vation is in this coiuprired, that to falvation already attained, they have the *'relation of anaJjundjConfcqiientaBd efted : But to the falvation hereafter to be " attained, the relation of an adjund, antecedent and difponent, as alfo of an ar-'^ gument confiraiing the hope and aflurance thereof.]

Rep. Thii is my very fenlc alfo i and yet mull 1 be a Papifl whether I will or no ? Only Imuft tell M.-.Criindon, i. That he doth not in thefe words give u$ any thing of the nacure of the Condition,but only the reafons why it ismtde a Condition ; and our Divines do call it a condition, and without doubt did know what a Condition is, better then any man can learn from thefe words of his. z. That I ufe not to call Works [a Condition of falvation already obtained,] nor do I know any fuch Condition, but know it is a contradidion. Yet I fay as he, that the? are anAiJund.ConfequcntandEffed. j. But I add, that they are part of that falvation it felf. I think our love to God,our hatred of finne, our new obedience arc parts of our begun Recovery,Health or Salvation,and not only Adjufids Con-fecjuemsand Effeds. 4- To bean Adjund, antecedent and difponent to future falvation, is full as much as ever I gave to any ads of man: (though thefe words arc but an ill favoured definition of a Condition.

And now I here appeal to any moderate man, whether Mr.Crandcn make not all Pioteftant Divines and himfelf as much Papift asme ? I profefs to afcribe no more to works, then to be, as he fpeaks, to be [AntecedentjDifponent Adjundi to future falvation] or to Difpole the pcrfon thereto ; This much he makctt; all Proteltants to hold as well as I : Doth he not then dame, thera and himfelf as much as me ? I confefs my felf blinde and ignorant of the Engli(h tengue if he do not.

If you fay [You make them Conditions difponent to Juftification,and Co doth not be,] I anfwer. Not to the Receiving of a ftate of juftificationj nor never did: but only to the Continuing or not lofing that llate, and to our particular re-mifTion of and juftification from particular fins when they are committed. And a',1 this is future : efpeciallythe juftification at judgement. Ojj. But Mr. Crandon dothtake Juiiificationtobeperfedat firft, and fo to have no need of thcfc Conditions. Auf. ItisaperfedRemiflionof allfinnethat thenisfinnc: butifMr. Cranden dare think or fa/, i. That we need not Chrift or Graccjiior are beholden

to

10 God to continue that Juftification, 2. Or to Remit particular finncs when wc commit them, j. Or to juftifia us at judgement, 4. Or that tiiefe are not part* of our future falvation ; I am fure our Proteftant Divines will renouUcc him, and dare not or do not fay any fuch thing,but the clean contrary.

He next adds [" They exprcfsthemfclvcs ufually in the phrafeof that Father " ( though pofllbly mifundcrftood by forac ) via Regnifunt, «6n caufa regnandi: ** which lomc do,all fhould thus conftruc j not that they arc the way to the Kine-'' dooi above, Chrift alone being this way j but, they are that way of the Saints " which are Chrifts fpirituall Kingdom.]

Rep. i: That good worki are vU Regni, is as much as ever I held. A way hath the nature of a Means to the end, and I knaw no lower means then mecr conditions. 1. If our Divines mean as thisman faithj that [Works are not the way to the Kingdom above, but of che Saints who arc Chriils Kingdom,] then I pro-fefs my felf unable to undcrftand them : in the mean time I dare aver that this man doth unworthily abufe them, and doth abtrude upon us a ridiculous piece of non-fenfe, which I opened before. 3. Doth he not here contradid what he faid in the foregoing words? There he faith that [Works are Difponent Adjunds to future falvaiiDn,]Here he faith [They are not the way to the Kingdom above."J Is not the Kingdom above, our falvation which yet remains to be attained ^ and doth [ a way ] fignifie here any more thca [ an Antecedent, Difponent, Condition ?]

Will you hear now how this man concludes his paralltU ? in thefe words ["Let " now the vaft difference and contrariety in To many particulars, between Mr.Brfx-*'tfr/and thefe Divines opinions, about this queflion be confidered, and then lee " it be judged whether Mr.B<2Xfer had not taken his leave of all baftifuUncfs, when " he would impofe on his Readers an opinion that he delivers upon this argument " nothing but what they had taught before him.]

To which I only add ; 1. Let the words be (hewed where I fought to im-pofed that opinion, z. If I had, letthedift'erences indeed be weighed as he de-(ires, and let the forehead of this man be judged of as it ftiall be found. I think I have Hicwed that he here granteth as much as I deiire in this point of the Condi-lionality of Works i and makes the Proteftantstodo the like.

Let us follow him yet further. F<irt 1.^45.141,143,144. you (hall findehim in four Propofitions granting as much to mansadions for life and lalvation (though with felf-contradidions intermixt) as that for which I am charged with Popery. I will not weaiy the Reader with the rcherfall of the words j he that will,may read them in his book. Nay he granteth more then I defirejOr indeed then is true and fafc. His firft Propofition begins thus [" We grant that they which are wholly *' under the old Covenant, having never the Gofpel revealed to them, are Bound ** to feek luftificaiion and falvation by the works of the Law or naturall Righic-"oufnefsftill.

Rep. A vile and falfe aflcrtion, and of defperatc confcquence. I prove the contrary thus:

I He that is bound to acknowledge that he hath lolt all pofllbility of juftification and falvation, without fomc fupeinaturall remedy, is not bound to feek juftification andfalvationby the works of the Law : But thofe that have not theGo-Ipcl, are bound to acknowledge that they have loft all pofl'ibiliry of juliificatioa and falvation, without fome lupernaturall remedy. Therefore. ^ By the light of nature they may fee that they are finners, and that finnc defcrveth

R dea^h

death, and thatjufticemuft be done (^ Set W Owen de ^ujlit. Vtndknt.) and this light of nacure they are bound to improve.

i. No man is bound to a naturall impofllbility : Forafinner to bejuftified and faved by ;hc Law^or naturall rightcoufncfs, is a naturall iT<poflibilitY ( it being a contradift ion^to be a Anncrjand to bejuftified by that Law that condemneth all iinners* ) Tbciefore.

Though men :naybe bound to morall impoflibilities, when they have made a Duty impcffible by difablinj themfelves, yet not to naturall impoflibilitits, nor to believe contradiftions. He that is bound to believe it impoffible for the Law of nature to jjUihc him, is not bound to feekjisftificationbythat Law ; Bucall finncis are To : ound : Therefore.

3. N J man is b.- -ir.' to rob God of his honour, and overlook the righteous fen-tence of his juu^cnic-;: For a condemned (inner to feck yet to bejuftified by the Law thatcondernncd him^istorob God of bis honor^and to overlook the righteous fentence of his judgement: Therefore.

Such men being under condemnation already, are bound to acknowledge their mifcry, and give God theolory of his juftice, and to defpair of ever being jufti-fied by that Law which condemned them.

4. No man is bound to go the way clean contrary to his falvation ; For a finnet condemned already, to feek juftification by that Law, is to go the way clean aon« trary co to his falvation. Therefore.

Such feeking would carry him further from God, and faften him under a greatet* guilt. He is at that time bound,as to confefs his finne and mifery,fo to enquire far andncer after any dilcoveries of Gods way of Mercy, and to hearken after Lij,ht, to fee if it bepoflible to findcout the way of Grace, and in the meantime, to be led to Repentance by the mercies and long-fuftcring of God, and not to feek Juftification and falvation, where he is bound to defpair of ever finding it. Let none call this man an Antinomsanjin this point,where he prcacheth the Law in fo deftrudive a fenre,a$ would be the everlafting ruinc of thofe that obey him.

T4« x.pig.\ I a. H& granteth [" i.That the whole world that hath not heard of " Chrift fhall be judged according to their works to life or death.i.The whole bulk "ofprofeired Chriftians fhall be judged according to their works^^T'c J.That the *fvery Saints as compared one with another (hail be judged according to their *^ works, i.e. flia'lbe adjudged to glo'-y in fcverall meafures above, according to *f thefeverallmeafures of their fervicesand fuffcringshereje]?'*;.] See the reft. One WRuld think this man were a Papift as grofs as I am. But what's the difference ? Why I. He faith, this is [the fentcnce of judgement, but not the juftiiying fen-tence !] If he have found out a fentence of judgement, which dothneither jufti-fienor condemn,he hath done like himfelf,5W<J^ 12.36,57.

2. He faith [ It is not according to Works as a Condition.] As what then ? If the word [According to] htiakcn fecuudumfubjeifijiaturam, i.e. infenfuforenjiy I appeal to any man that hath eyes in his head, whether it can figtiifie any thing lower then a Condition ? And here he blatterethout a deal of hij language of darknefs j that evil works cannot be the condition of juftification, and therefore we arc not juftificd by works at judgement as by a Condi.ionjas I affirmed j with more fuch ihiff which I am aweary of reading over, and will not add the trouble oi-. reciting.

T<«rt i.pag^ijo. When I had fhewed that I did confefs faiths Receptive natnre ( as having Chrift for the objeft ) to be the remote reafoa of its Intereft in our

Juftification^

JuftificatioB,asbcine its Aptitnde to that office i but maintained that the necrcft or formall Reafon of its Intereft is, its being the condition of the promifc, freely by God defigned to this offict > See how he confureth me, [" The queftion con-"troverted between us and the Papilts firft, and in thcle later times the Aimi-" nians alfo, is not Whether Gods Inflitucing of faich in Chri<\j0r elfe the ading *'of faith fo Inftitutcd, be one the formall, and the other the Remote reafon why " it juftifieth ? but whether fo Inftituted of God to be the mean or Inftrumcnt of « ]uflification,it doth juftifie by virtue received from Chrift ics objeft, or elfe by " its own virtue as it is a good work, orasit is an ad of riglucoufnefsperformsd <^ in obedience to Gods Commandments. That which they maintain isjthat faith « juftifieth by vircue of its objed Chrift, denying rhe Papifts wo.k, and the Ar-" minians ad. If Mr.B. did labour more for truth thin for vidoiy, we ftiould noc " finde in him Co much fraud, and fo littie of fincerity. I: is not Ghrifts, but An-« tichrifts kingdom, that is maintained by thcpillarageof ftiifts and fophifmes. <' Let him not aftonifti the poor Saints of Chrift with words that they cannot un-*' dcrftand, obfcuring the truth with nccdlcl's terms of Art.] And fo he proceeds in his accullomed Rhetorick. m.

Let the Judicious here be judge, i. Whechcr he do not grant all that I defire : and that is indeed, the main point oppofed by moft in my book, vi\. That faiths apprehenlion, i e. faith as faith,or as faith in Chrift, is not the formal! Reafon of its Intereft in Juftificatlon, but only the Remote, and Gods Inftitucing it tothe office of juftifying, is the formall or neereft reafon. If I underftand himhegrant-eththis} or denicth it not : and I delire no more. 2, When he hath proclaimed me a Papiftjhc vomits out his reproaches againft me, becaufe I will not maintain the Popifti or Arrainian Caufei telling us that this is net the Queftion between the Papifts and us, and fo I am guilty of [ much fraud, little fincerity, upholdifig Antichrifts Kingdom by the pillarageofftiiftSj] with much of the like, becaufe I will not maintain the Papifts dodrine, nor ftate the queftion as they do, 3. When I do folemnly profefs, that I do now difclaim and deteft, and have ftill difclaim-ed and deteftcd,the dodrine of the Papifts and Arminians, as himfelf here layes it down ( whether it be theirs or nojl leave to him.) I never thought that faith juftifieth [ by its own virtue as it is a good work, or as it is an ad of Righteouf-nefs performed in obedience to Gods commands j] but as it is by the free donor made the condition of our Juftification, And thus I fully wrote in that book which he oppoftth ; and yet doth this man load me with Reproaches, for not maintaining the opinions which I wrote againft, i.e. for not being a Papift in dodrine, when he hath told the world that I am one. If ever man in the Church of Chriiijbcfore me,hid fuch an adverfary a& chis,l confefsjhis name and firname is to mc unknown.

As for what kc adds, of [faiths juftifying by virtue received from Chrift its objed ] I will believe it when I fee Scripture for ic, or icnfc in it. I beleeve that Chrift juftifieth, but I believe not that as he is faiths objcd, he coveycth virtue into itjto juftifie. It teems the man is of the Papifts opinion himfelf, for ought I fee by hin">,atier all thisnoife againft me,for not owning it ; If faith receive virtue from Chrift to juftifie, then faun hath in ir felf ( (o received ) a virtue to juftifie: But this man affirmcthit to be the Proteftant dodrine, that faith doth juftifie by virtue received from Chrift its objed : Therefore,

If faich receive fuch Tirtuc,doubclefs it hath the virtue in it fclf which it hath received.

R a I. It

Ej8]

». If ftith juftlfic by a received virtue, it fceins its made a Caufc of our JuftifT-(cation ( for virtue is excrcil'ed by way of caufality, to produce the effed,) But faith is not the Caufe of Juftification: Therefore. •

J. If faith receive this virtue from Ghrift its objeft as its objcd, then faith a$ faith, that is, as this faith, dothjuftifie; (for it is cflcntial to the ad/n/Jfcie to have fuch or fuch an objcd ;) But the Antecedent is falfe : therefore fo is the Confequent.

See now how well M'CrawioBidc&rine takes down man in the work of Juftifi. cation, and frecth it felf from the mifchicfs which it pretcndetb to oppofe ! Even as errors ufe to do.

For my part, 1 fay not that faith receives virtue from Chrift to juftific, bccaufe it is no Scripture phrafe, and left I intimate in it a Caufall Intereit of our Juftification : much lefs do I fay that it receives it from Chrift as its objeft, that is,that it is in faith,as faith: But I fay, that the place or Intercft which faith hath in Juftification is two-fold : One remote and Aptitudinall: this it receives from God as the New Creator, or Author of our faith. The other is its nccrcit or formall Intereft,and that is,its being the Condition of thepromife ( as the former wasita Receptive nature,) And this it receives from God,a$ Proraifer,Donorjor Legifla-tor of the Law of Grace,or ad of obedience and pardon.

Part 1. pag.i6,i7,ii. He firft chargeth me with dealing worfc then Belisrmine: What's the crime ? In not manifefting what I mean by Repentance. Then he faith [" All the Scriptures which have the leaft flicw or found of fpeaking for me, " I have them,in part from B€lUrmine,vihom I here fellow, and ia part from other *f Jcfuites and Friars that controvcrfally handle the Popifh Juftification againft *' us.3 In all which if there be one true word, let me be ftigmatizcd for the moft Impudent Lyer, that ever dared to write of holy things. Yea if ever I took one text or word out oiTcUirminCtor any Papiftjor any but the Bible,of all that he here mcntioncth.

Then he proceedeth totell u$[" what the Scriptures mean by Rcpantance,whcn ''they holdfortli the Promifeot Life upon Condition of Repentance to finncrs,] ( A Condition it feems it is then,how damnable foever it is in me to fay fo.) And fitit he tells you, that thefc texts fpeak fomttimc of a Legall, and fomctime of an Evangelicall Repentance. And of the Legal he faith-thus [ A Legal, confifting *' meerly in a feeling of humiliation and contrition for, hatred againftj departing " from finne, and applying of the endeavours to all morall virtue and obedience. '^This is a meerly morall Repentance, derivable from the ftrength of na-*' turall confcience, illuminated by the Law and common knowledge of Gods will *'and nature. In this fcnfe is the word taken in moft of the Scriptures quoted *' from the old Teftament, and fome alfo of thofe polTibly that are quoted out of y the new.

Rep. O holy dodrine,and far from Arminianifme 1 Naturall ftrength can do all this : O that it could but do one thing more i even perfwadc men that they are Juftifi^d and /hall be faved, and then what need of Grace ? But according to this Charaftcrl muft change my judgement of moft of my neighbours: FormoTt of the Ticious ignorant people, will believe that they are juftified and fliall be faved, let me fay what 1 can : but thofe that M' Crandon here defcribeth [ that are humbled, and hate finne, and depart from it, and apply their endeavours to all morall virtue and obedience ] are much more rare, and fuch as I had better thoughts of. If hatred of finnc, and endeavours of univerfall obedience may come from nature, I

confefs

confefs Nature li not fo bad as I fuppofed it, nor Free will fo much captivated and corruptcd^as we Papifts and Arminians did imagine. At leaft he might have yielded to the ncceflity of a common Grace for this much,if not a fpecial: and fucha common grace at ftiall work upon the will, and not only give that Light which he mentioneth to natural Confcience.

But he addes, that ["the Life by thefe Scriptures prcmifcd, is not the life of " Juftification or ef fpiritual and fupcrnatural blelkdncfs, but that which the ad-"minillration under the Law is wont to call Life, Vi^. i. The fruition of the " Land of Cimanvihich prefigured the life and reft both of Giace and Glory. « i. Of the bleffingj of health, honour, peace, plenty, fafety and other temporal '* benefits promifed to the obedient in the Land of (^avAitn.']

Rep. I will not enter the Controvcrfie, what the Life was that was promifed by Mofes Law, as fuch ; But as I doubt not, but it was Eternal Life that was promifed in the firft Law, fo I doubt not but the old Teftament aboundeth with Gofpel promifes of eternal Life: and that thcfc are fuch, at leaft many of them, which make Repentance the Condition of Life, as the Gofpel it fclf alfo doth. Will Mr. Cr. bloc out all the Gofpel part of the old Teftament at a darti, which promifeth life to the penitent, yea and tell us the like of fome places in the Ntw.

Gonfidcr alfo what a mean kinde of Repentance this man feigneth God to require in the Old Teftament, even fuch as natural ftrength may perform ; orelfe what ftrength of nature and freedome of will men had then, that could Repent-without fupcrnatural Grace : and what an cafie Law that wasjwhich Prf«/accounted fuch an intollerable yoakof bondage, which required but fuch a repentance^ which natural ftrength may perform I

But I forget my task, which is not now to rake in the channel of Mr. Crandt^s Errours, but to difcoverhisconccflions of as much as I need. The main Errour that I am fuppofed guilty of, is bringing other ads under the name of faith, to be with it the conditions of Juftification or Salvation, though but in a fubordinati-cn to it: Let the Reader that regards the bufinefs, mark thefe following words of Mr. (^r. pag.28,i9,go, and fee whether he prove not my defendour. [ " z.Thofe ^'Scriptures which he quotes that offer Life upon condition ef Evangelical Rc-'fpentance, do not make for him, any more then the former: For Gofpel Rc-''pentanceis taken cither in a large or in a ftrid fcnl'e. In the more large fenfc *'it is the fame with Cenverfion oi Regeneratioti, and ofttimes equipollent and the " fame thing with faith, though fome little conlider it to be fo; And this is as "oft as Repentance is put for the One and Whole thing required on our part «' to put us into the adual and fenfiblc pofleflion of the Grace and Life of the *'Gofpel: a$i5W4K^.j.i. iMarfi6. ii. Repent jor the l^tngdom of God if At Iwid. " The fummc of their preaching was, Repent: So Lulie ij. j. 5. Except ye Re-" pent, ye jl}iUalllUicivifeperijh:tnd 24.47.and many other of the Scriptures which *'hequoteth.]

Here we fee Repentance thatisthe condition of. Life is thefamething with Converfion, Regeneration and Faith. Hear him go on.

[ " In all thefe places Repentance containeth^r/w4r;7)' the change of our Rela-*' tion, and but fecondarily of our qualifications and manners.]

It was not for nothing that the man did make fo long an Oration againft humane Learning ufed in thefe Divines things: he would, he muft 1 mean, have liberty to fpeakcontradiftions. Here isaftrange precept of God, that requires mcii LPrimaiJly to change their Relations, and but Secondarily their Qualifica-

R 3 tions .

tions and Manners.] An imaginary impoffible change, like the Libertines faith that is made the caufc of it. Was there ever a Relation Primarily ic4uired3 before that ad which is its Foundations or ever a R.'!a:ion without fome Foundation firftlaid? or did ever any Law require the change of Relation, before the change of ad< or qualities ^ I know no: what fuch a Relation is. If he fay, As in Marriage it is farft required of the woman that fhe take the Relation ot fuch a mans Wife, fo of men coming to Chriit it is firft required tha^ they be Related to him, as his Members; I anfwcr, It was never heard that either of them W3s primarily required. It is Marriage Confent and Covenanting that is firft required as the Funi^metitum of the Marriage Relation : Aad it is the Confent and Covenant to be the Difciples of Chrift, that is firft required, before the Relation of Difciples. Shall we feign God, or any wife man to teach and command a natural Impoftbi-iity, fuch as is a Relation before that in which it is founded, or the ritiofuniindii Our afts muft be changed before we are juftified or related as Members of Chrift, whatever thefe men fay : We muft have the aft of Faith and Repentance, and fo farre the old and hard heart taken out of us, and a heart of flefh and a new hearc given us : eUe that will prove a conditional promife. But he proceeds thus, t" It is a quidam motus in which aSii agimm,hdn2, moved by Gods Spirit we move} 1$ not this a ftrange Relation that is a qnidam motta in which aSliAgimm ? It fhall never have my Vote to ftand in the old predicament of Relation : nor any of the ten: but (hall have the honour o( making an eleventh predicament, or elfc be Tranfccndental. He goes on, I ^^ The Terminus i quo in this motion is felf,our " fclf-^ighteoufnefsand felf-confidences from which wc turn no lefs then from " our polluted felf, finfull felf, and finfull waies. The Termiitut ad quem is G6d, " the grace of God inviting us. The Medium per quod is the Lord Cbriil, through " whom we have accefs to the Father, for Remiflion firft, and then for Sanftifi-«'cation alio.] And after [What will ye call this obedience to the faith, this " doling of his heart with Chrift in ftead of further dafhing againft him ? '' Was it not bis Convcrfion f his Repentance ? Or is the promife of Lifcj I mean, <'the Life of Juftification, made to any other Repentance befidcs this? In this " fenfc therefore Repentance is not a quid diflinSIum, athingdiftind from, but <f one and the fame with juftifying faith ; or if it be objefted that it is fomewhac *'larger then juftifying faith, I fliall not contend, but acknowledge that it com-<f prehends Whole faith, both qua ^ujlifciit and quASanSfificut. Yet this hin-'^ders not but that thcfe two phrafes, Repentance to Life and Rcmiffion of finj, " and Faith to Life and RemifTion of fins, are in the language of the holy Ghoft ** one and the fame. ]

You fee then that juftifying faith ia Mr. Crando7if fenfe, is Converfion of the heart from Self and felf-confidence to Chrift, and the fame with Repentance, and he will not deny but that Repentance contains more then juftifying faith, even Whole faith. What faith this man Icfs then I here? but only that I maintain that it is only ^7;()/c/j/j^ that isthe Condition of Juftification : and that faith as faith doth neither juitifie nor fandifie, though both follow it. Yet hear him further, [" Where Repentance is taken in a ftridcr fenfe, and fome of the Scri-" ptuic which he quotes feem to promife Remiflion of fin, or Life to it, wc muft *' neceffarily underft:ind of every fuch Scriptures that it fpeaketii of the Repen-**tance which is aduated in our fiift Converfion, Calling, or after it. That ••^ which is in our fifft Converfion or Calling, when it is taken in a ftrid fenfe, " is not as in the former fenfe put as the whole thing required on qur parts, but

" feems

*f fccms in words a coerdinate with faith to intereft us in the Rightccufncfs and «f Life which are by Chrift. Such are thefe Scriptures, Repevt and believe the ^'Go^cl: Repentance tovards god and fxith towards the Lord fefu6 Cfcr»/f, Mar. i. " 15. ASi'io.ii. and many other. But in thefe Repentance and Faith togethcrj ff make np no more then in other Scriptures, either Faith alone or Repentance " alone in their larger fenfe import: and fo Repentance is taken for felf-denial, "felt-abhorring, lelf-fubduing, and Faith for embracing Chi ift : bcth thefe arc «f repentance or faith in their larger kn(c:,(^c. And Repentance here is no di-*f ftind thing from Faith, nor Faith from Repentance > and fo in naming thefe *' two the holy Ghoft nameth not two gifts of Orace, but two ads of the fame gift *'of Giaccin us.]

You lee here Mr-Crandon confeflcth that Repentance is in Scripture fo made the Conditionof Juftificationjthat it feemsin words acootdinate with faith, that it is indeed faith it fclf : that it is a felf-denying, felf-abhorr;ng,and fclf-lubduing j and fo thefe ads are the conditions of Juftification. How eafily,were he like other men, could I prove to him, that in this Converfion, it is not only felf, as oppofue toChrilts Righteoufnefs, that this Repentance turns us from? When himfelf makes Chrift but the A/fi/ttw, and God the TermtntaAdqucm of the change, no doubt then it is from Self as oppofite to this Terminta ad quern; and that is, as we arc our own Idols, and efteemcd, honoured, loved, plealed, before God ; and this clTcntially contains a turning from all thole things (worldly pleafures, profits and honours) by which this 5"c//doth plcafe it felf above God ; and fo the cleaving to God as our only happineis and ultimate End, as well asto Chriit asthe Way. See now what a deal is here taken in, and whether his own conccfllon lead him not into that damnable Popery which he takes me to be in.

But let us fee the very bottom of the whole bufinefs: Doth he indeed make this Converlion, this felf-denying, felf-abhorring, felf-fubduing, all juftifying ads, and that equal with faith it felf? Jult as faras Ido, if I can underftand him ! That is, that faith is the only apprehending ad, and is the principal part of the Condition, and Repentance, felf-denial, felt-fubduing, are required or made conditional, butasrequifite to our right believing •• Only he gives more to faith in appearance, then I do ; Hear hi* words [ " Though tbele two ads rauft *'needs cooperate together, w'^. the calling out of Self, and the receiving of "Chrift, yet it is the later alone that doth properly and inftrumentally juftifie, '^ byreceiving the Juitiiier and his Righteoufnefs. The former ad doth but diJ}o-''ncremateriam ( as one faith not too catechreftically ) dc th but put a man, as it " weie, intoa juftifiable pofture and capacity j doth but obitemtoUere, pluck out *' and caft away the barre that might faften the door againft Ch: ilis entrancej and *< this it doth not as a diftind virtue from faith, but as a fubfcrvient ad of taith " to its receiving o£ Chrift.]

Is it not pity that thi» man and I muft be of two Religions, when we hold the fame thing in the great point of difference ? We differ in being of oncmindc. He faiththe fame thati more largely explicate and maintain. Here is not a faith of one finglead, but of many. Here is as .much given to Repentance as ever I gave to it or any ad of man, that is, to difpofe the matter and remove the barre. And yet muft J be a Papift and he a Proteftant ? But here's thcdiftcrence, ] deny faith to be the Inltrumint of Juftification, and fo give lefs to it then he : But if Ido, I give fo much the lefs to man, when I give to the lower ad no mere t.hen he gives to the higheft. State the cafe right then, and let the dificrence lie where

U

r62]

it is: M' (^ruioH and I aie agreed that the fubfervicnt ad dsth but H^wereni^ UrismindttUereobtcem : wc are agreed that Faith is a receiving of Chrift for Life; but he faith that one ad is an inftrutncnt of jultifying, and this I ^cny. Nay but Itay a while : Though I difter horn others I am reconciled with Mr. Crxnion inthisallo: For Jullification with him, is but Juftifacation in fenfa, and in/era (^ovfcientia: and I confcfs that Faith may be called an Inttrument, or fome efficient caufc of that kindeof Juftification. Is there yet any remaining dificrencc ? Doth not Mr. CriHiowmakeonead lubordinatc, and the other fupcriour, when I malce them coordinate ( Faith and Repentance ?) No: I fay as he for that: It is receiving Chrift that ia the Principal aft : it is in fubordination to this thac Repentance, felf-denial, fclf-abhorring, felf-fubduing are required and made the condition : Only give me leave to add alfo, The averfion of the foul from fin, or worldly Idolij and converfion to God, ai our chiefcft good, muft findeaplace ia Repentance or Faith, or both.

Can you bethink you of any thing elfe wherein you would wifh Mr.(ydndon and me agreed ? Yes, that one point before named. He makei Juftification by faith (to fay nothing of his other two bcfsre faith) to be in faro Confcientite, and in our fcnfc of former Juftification, and I make it to be, a tiate or right in Law, (whe* ther we feel it or not;) by which we have the obligation to puniJhmcnt aftually diflblved, or right to impunity given us. Stay a little, and fee whether ftlr. Cr. and I be not friends whether he will or no. Reade P^rt. 1.^4^.5x4. thefc words having recited many Texts of the Evangelifts, that call Juihfication by the name •f Life, he addeth [ In all which and many other Texts of this Evangelift none ^eu^ can deny but by Life is to be underftood chiefly, if not Only, Life in L«w,tbe Life of ''-^ ^ujlifation.-l '

What lay you to this ? are we not yet agreed ? No: Mr. Qrindon doth up ani down, made his Life in Law to confift in the fenfe of pardon in Confcience. A wonderful! Law title, which confifteth in the fenfc of Confcience ! A ftranee Relation that 1$ the fame thing with an internal Partion or Aftion I But we muft bear now and then with a contradidion in an Authour that is at fuch mortal odds with Philofophy. Here then is the difference. Mr. (7riwrfo« confeiretb all that I defice, that Juftification by faith is chiefly if not only that in Law : but he fuper-addeth elfewhcrc, that even this fame is the feeling of pardon in confcience: whereas I take this to be as palpable a contradiftion, as to fay, ^aternitas, filiatio ^us,Vebttum,d(.c. are Paflionsor Aftioni in Confcience. I take them to be two things, both fcparable and frequently feparated, and that the fame man that is pardoned and juftified in Law, is yet ofttimes unfenfible and ignorant of that benefit.

And now I leave it to foberconfideration, Whether this Book of Mr. Crandons which grantcth what it oppofeth, and yet poureth out upon aie fuch a ftorm of reproach, for that which he openly owneth hirafelf, be a profitable piece for the Church of God, and worthy the publike view, or a juit Vindication of the Fundamentals of a Chriftians Comfort. 1 have faid as much as I mean to do on that Reafon to the contrary, drawn from his Conccffions. I now come to the next, which is drawn from his falfe Accufations, and making that to be my Dodrine which never entered into my thoughtSj nor ever fill from my Mouth «s Pen.

SECT.

z^n

SECT. VIII.

TF it be none of my Dodrincsj but his own forgeries, about which Mt.CHndon beftoweth moft (if not almoft all ) of his labour in Confutation, then his Book is not profitable to the Church of God, nor worthy the publike view : And whether the Antecedent be true, or no, though 1 refolve not to trouble my felf and the Reader with fo large a trial, as the recital of moft of his Book would be, yet I ihall give you a tafte of the fubftance of what he chargcth on me i and this for Mr. Caryl's fatisfadion.

You have teen nofmallpart of his dealing with me this way, in what hath been faid already : The bell way to fee the relt with leaft trouble is, to take it from thofe places where he fummcsup my Errors, and fpcaks more diredly to the point, for in other places you will fcarcc ijuickly finde the matter it is fo buried in heaps of perfonal Reproach.

Turt i.pJig-7^- he heapeth up many of my fuppofcd Errours: The fiift he fcornfully reports thus. ["i. That they (the ElcdSaints) have fo large a dif-*'charge from the rigour of the Law as any of the worlt Reprobates.]

Rcpl. If he intend an equalityjhow proves he that this is any D> d'ine of mine ? Becaufe I fay the Law of Works is not to them Abrogated. Doth not the Af-fembly fay as much in the place beforecitcd? As for the term [Covenant of Works] I have fhewed in what fenfe 1 take that to be cealed, or continued, which we call by that name. Are all Rcpiobates a(flu.ir:y pardoned, as Believers are? is this man a Divine, and doth n^t know that it ihc Law were noc in force to oblige to punilhment there could be no pardon ? For tiow can an obligation be diflblved that is no obligation ? But he thinks we are pardoned from Eternity.

His next is [_" i. That they have no morcdifcharge from the Laws curfe then " the worft of Reprobates.] Repl. Would youriiink any Chiillian duifl fpeak fuch Accufations without any truth ? There is not a true word in any of his charge. Hear the proof, which he ufliers in with this fcorn. [ " Muft we not "■ account him a Saint that hath a faftidious flomack, or fore mouth that cannot " relifli thefe dainties ? The former Concufion he reachcth to us in thefc words, "fofarrcis the Law difpcnfed with to all, as to fufpend the rigorous execution of '^ it for a time, and a liberation and difcharge conditional procured and granted *^ them. J'im fumus ergopires: In this the Sons of God are in as good a cafe as *' the reprobates, and fomewhat before the devils.]

Repl. Its true that the Saints in heaven are in as good a cafe as Reprobates : but 10 what purpofe Ipcaks he this, but to intimate that I make them to be in no better a cafe? Is it not pity that any man that picacheththe Gofpel, fhould be yet ignorant of the truth of thole two aflertions of mine T;hich he here brings in ? 1. Should a Preacher of the Gofpel dare to fay, that reprobates are dea': with at prefent according to the utmofl rig ur of the Law ? and to cell them that God never (hewed them any mercy lince thi Fall? and therefore they owe him no thanks for any mercy, nor is i heir finne aggravated by any mercy, nor fhould his mercy and longfufFering leadeihem to repentance ? Would this Preacher honour Free Grace, or cdifie fouls ? 2,. How can that man preach the Gofpel that know-cth not that it containcth a Gineral Conditional Difcharge ? even on the condi-

S tion

tion of Repenting and Believing ? He adcieth [" Thelatei Condufien in thefe «^ wortlj, liu: an Abl'olutc diichs^rge ij^rat^c^to no man in this life ; ^am fiimm *^ ergo pares. Yet have we as large cauTe oT'exul'ting and joy in the holy Ghoft, as " ttic reprobates, that (as tar as we can diLccrn) we arc no neercr to hell then the " children of hell, whcle inheritance js in hell for ever.]

Rcpl. I have befoic flicwed, that by [ an Abfolutc JDifcharge] in the words thit he cavps at, I meant not LihcrdtiOKCm Fdjfivxm, fed activam ; not pardon as if is curs, Ijuc th^ graat ofpardon in the word : and fo I lay ftillj that the word containetha Conditional pardon to all, and no Abfnlutc pardon to any, that is, no ad of pavdon that is in Abfoiiue terms, Tom which any receive an aftual Rc-miflion. And in regard of Paffive pardon or dikharge, 1 maintain this alfojthat tilldeath the condnuanceof it is fliil conditional. But lever pbinly affirmed, that all Believers are Adually and fo Abfoluielv pardoned as to all their finne, (for that to come is yet no finue :) though the pardoning aft remain ftill the.fame intheGofpel in Conditional terms, yet when we perform the condition by believing, the cfied is adual and to farrc abfolute. And can he prove that Reprobates are in Gods favour, and have all their fins pardoned, yea and fliall be kept by grace from falling away, which I affirm of the Eleft ? You fee the truth and ground then of thefe Accufations.

He proceeds thuJ [ ^^ To prove the later Aflcrtion, that none are, that Bc-" lievers are not Abfokuely difcharged from the Law as a Covenant of Works "in this life, he borroweth matter from Pelagians, Papiih, Sociniani, Ar-" minians, and the whole rabble of profeflcd enemies to the grace of God in "Chiii.]

Repl. Not a true word.

After fome railing linesjhe next addes, [ " The Popifli Errors which he brings '^ as an addition toconfiim,that Believers areduiing life under the Law,are thefe: «? I. That they which are in Chrift have not their lins fullypardonedj neither are " thcmfelres wholly juflified in this world.]

RepL Very falfe : fhcw any fuch words of mine. I flill affirm that they which are in Chrill havs their finnes fully pardoned, that is, all finne paft, and prcfenc fully pardoned as to eternal punifhment : though caftigatory punlfhment may remain, and though future (inncs are not yet pardoned. And I aflirm that we are wholly juftified in this world, as Juftification is taken for Remiflion of finne, or Right to impunity and to life ; But I confefs it is my opinion that the great day of Judgement (hall not be till you and I arc dead 3 and that the Juftification which we fhall there have, is our moft full and compleat Juftification : And therefore I faid, that in itskinde Jullificaicn here is perfcft, but it is not the moft pcrfeifl kinde of Juftification. And therefore it is not fit to fay without explication, that any mans prefent pardon or J uftification is perfeft. An eafie truth, the Lord knows, if men were not blinded with prejudice : when we arc taught to pray for daily pardon. ,

He next addeth [ '' i. That whofoevcrfliail be juftified in the world to come, '^mult procure it'by his own willing, running and perfevering in this world.] I^pl' Shew any fuch words of mine. If [Procuring] fignifie [Caufing] it is fallCj and ever by me difclaimed ; but if it fignifie no more but that our willing, run ling and perfevering arc Conditions without which none (hall be then juftified, 1 fay. Its pity any Preacher of the Gofpel fliould be ignorant 0/ it.

His

His thud follows ["j. That they which are in Chrlft may fall away and be " damned.] Rcpl. A moft ioimodeft falfhood : when I ever maintahaed the contrary, yea in that very Bjok.

["4. Thatno man while he lives can be certain of falvation.] Repl. Shew where 1 tvcr laid fo, or bear the name of a ihaoielci's flandcrcr. I have largely prayed the contrary in my Book of Rcll.

([ " 5. To this he addcth one woiiCj then any Popilh or Socinian herefie, as " proper to himfelf snd from himlelf alone : vt^ That a.l believerSjnotwithltand-" ing Chrilh latiifa<ftion fer them, no:wi.hftanding their pcifcvering faith "in him, yet mult be at latt damned for ever.] Rcpl. Go on: for 1 am a-vvcary and adiamed of mentioning your fauhs. We lliall now hear the proof.

[ « The firil he exprefly affirmeth, (^c. ] Rcpl. As is before explained only.

["So that in this life there is no dilcharge, bat a conditional promifc that <f portibly we may in the world to come be diicharged.] Repl. Very faU'e : VVc are aftually discharged as to all hn pall: but conditionally for the future : and our Juftificationinthclifetocome, as you fpeak, is not only Poffible but Certain ; How ill befeems it you,co make lo light,and fuch a fcorn of Juftification in the life to come? You will value it more one day.

The fecond he proves, becaule I fay. We muft .'continue to perform the conditions, and addes, [," And lo it is by our own ftrong and lafting endeavouvs, that "after the world is ended our Iinnes may be pollibly forgiven, and we fayed.]. Rcpl. It is no othetwii'e by our endeavours then as by conditions of GoiiS making : Himfclf contclieth Faith and Repentance to be conditions: and mult not we continue Believers and penitent, if we will bcfaved? He that will reade ftfjr.iy. Rev. 2. & J. may anfwer this without my help.

["J. That they that are in Chrill may fall away, and be damned, if they *' continue in their apoltacy, or may after their many apoltacies, oft renew again " their union with Chi ilt, and fo at lalt be juftified, be fpeaks out fully, in tel-" ling us, [ It is not one Inllantanecus ad of believing , but a continued <'faith,, that fliall quite dilcharge us: that no longer are we difcharged then *' we are Believers > dnd when we ceal'etobelievcjthe Law is itillin force and con-'' demncth.]

Repl. I. The laft words of minchefalfifieth : I fay, 7/w^ Hiould ceafe to believe, the Law is ia force, and wonldcondemn us j and laywithai'., that God will caufe his people to perfeverc. He faincthme to fay [ ^7;c,j wc cealc to belie YCjtir'c*] 2.' Whether my words contain any fuch thiiic, as he l'a:.al fpeak cue fully, or whether all be raeer forgery, I leave to any man that cais rcaie Englilh and underltand it. If God threaten his own people, if they draw back, his foul fliall have noplcalurein them, and this as a means tc puivi *« chcmfrom Apofta-cy, will this man fay that God fjci/{^i OKt/M///, thattliey fall away? Cann)- God make a Conditional grant, as certainly to be accompliltied as anabloiu;e ? One would think that this man judged us to be from under all Law and Govern-mcnr. '

He next faith, ["IfI argue from impoflibilities, it tnakes notformypur-'* pole] and concludeth, [But he avgueth as ti om a poffible and ufual caie. I T{Spl. Still falU: it IS p^lllble ill the nature of the thin^ in it felt cwnfiuc.ed, out it never comes to pals > and the threatning and Conditional it y of the Promilc,

S z is

1$ one means of God to hinder i: from coming to pafs.

The fourth, [" That none can in this life be certain of falvation] he faiih ** [depends on the former : for if we cannot be certain of our Perfeveiance, wc "cannot be certain of Eternal Happinefs.] Rcpl. A confcionable way of Ac-cufation ! co mak« one falfhood of your own feigning to be mine, and then gather more out of i:. Produce a word where ever I laid, that none can be certain of Perieverance or Salvation I or elfe confefs your felt to be, what this Volume proclaims you.

His fifth flander (that all Believers ihall be <Jamned) he will needs have me affirm in laying ihey are under a Covenant of Works: of which I have o-pencd my minde before fo fully, that I will not with fuch a raving Difputer fay any more.

He undertakes here alfo to declare the grounds of thefe my Errours, which he *'faith [ arc principally thefe two i. That taith as an infufed iiift of grace, *'and a part of our inherent Righteoufnefs, doth juftifie, eirc-] Repl. Never fuch a thing came into my thoughrSj to own it, or believe ir. 1 have ftill thought, that the fame faitii which is a gift of gtacc, and part of our inherent Righteoufnefs julHfieth, that is, It is the condition or our pardon: bnt never did I :hinkit was OS futh a gift of grace, but only as a condition of Gods free conftitution.

The I'econd follows [ " i. That faith and all thofe irs concomitants, with '* their fruits and eftefti dep:nd upon our free will, to gain and retain, refufe ** and lofe them, at thepleafure and luft of our corrupt free wi I.] Repl, How dare this man heap up iuch things as thefe and believe there is a God that hatcth falfhood 1 1 believe that corrupt free will rcfufech Chritl, but orily fanftified free will acceptcth him ; and that fanftificationof it is from Gods Ipecial grace, on whom free will and all things depend. Yet I believe that none have Chrill, o: pardon, or heaven againtt their wilj, that is, continuing unwilling. Nor do I know that ever in any writing I gave the man any occafnn of thofe faife reports, nor doth he once tell us whence he fetcheth them, bu: only boldly faith. It is (o.

But the p;incipal place where I fiade hitn gather together my Errours, is Trfr/ 2,pi^.7.7i,i75,i74. When 1 had cxprefly profefled that I take not any aft of mans to jullifie us, [ i. Not as works (imply confidered. i. Not as Legal works. 3. Not as Meritorious works. 4. Not as good works which God is pleafed with. f. But as conditions to which the free Lawgiver hath promifed juflification and Life : and that I dare not give fo much to any aft of man, as is ufually given to faith, to fay that it jiiftifieth Ai it apprehendeth Chrifl, which is its intrinfecai Nature, and Elfence , and fo faith as faith fliould juftifie, whereas I give all the honour to the free Donor who hath conflituted this the condition oi his gift-] Mr. Crmion gives this following anfwer hereto.

["All this hath been oft and fully examined before in its place a[fo,and how lit-*'tie truth there is in any part or parcel thereof difcovcred. It would be wcari-** ncfs to the flefh and vexation to the Spirit, but to look fo often upon hir <* great GoddeQe, his Queen of Heaven, CO N. J) IT 10 M, ashe blefleth her. " O that his Confcience had been fo well acquainted with Chrili, as his fancy *^is with this Idol 1 he would not then have pellercd the Church with Iuch an **^ imaginary Deity, nor proHitutcd all that is called God, at the feet of fuch a *^ rro{eTpm.'\

Repl.

[673

Kepi. IfMv.CAfylf think this a Vindication of Goes Truth, and profitable to the Church, he is not of my Judgement: Nor have I any Anfwer for it ncwj but to mindc the Reader, that the genera!i:y of Reformed Divines do lay the fame of this Conditiemltty as I doj and that the mouth that lo reproacheth itj-doih acknowledge their ufc of the word in the fame^fenfc as 1 ufe it.

He proceeds, [" 1 am weary any more to^^attend to him, making the Will of *' God, i. e. God willing, Conditional j and fothc Immutable God, a Conditi-*'onal God, the falvation of Chrill Conditional, and fo Chiiii a conditional *'Saviour i or the witnefs and fcal ot Chrifi a conditional feal and witnefi, and *' fothc holy Gholi a conditional Spirit of Adop.ion 5 or the Goipel of Righ-'^tcoufnefs, Forgivenefs and Life, a conditional Gofpel, and confequently 'f nulling all thel'e, and pronouncing them no God, no Chiiit, uo hcly Ghoftj " no Gofpel.]

It is a moil fad confiJeration that the worfl of the foos of men fliould be givert up to fuch a fpiiit as animatcth thelc lines : Was thcie ever a man called a Pro-tcltant Divine'that durlt fay, that there was no conditional Promifcs or Threats in the Word of God ? Nay, \o not the Antinomians themfcivcs confei's fome,evcn when they cavil a^ainlt Ccndiiions ? as M\. Gdtjiicr hath manifcllcd even in SdUmtlrJ}} himfelf. Doth that man know what the bib^e is that k oweth no conditional Promiles or Threats in it ? And do every one of tlicfe in Scripture make God a conditional God, and Chrift a conditional Chi ill, ci7C- and Null God, Chrift,the holy Ghoi>,and Gofpel ? I profcfj 1 a.imirethat Mr. C4r;/du»ll think fuch a Book worthy the Public's view that laies this highdt Blafphemy to the charge of all Chriltian Divines in the world, ( unlefs the Libertines are fuch :) Mt'(^iiry.l know< that all our Divines affiim God to have Conditional promil'is and threats J and knows that there are (uch things iiidccJ in the S.ripture; and yet could he findc in his heart to be the Midwife of that Book that lliall proclaim allthefe Divines, yea and Scripture it felf to Null Gad, Chiilf, the holy Gholf, and the Goipel ? and pronounce them noG.'d, no Chrill, e:7'c- lure he will not fay, It fals only on me : For if 1 pronounce Gjd to be n-o God, becaufe he hath a Conditional p.omife or threatning, then fo doth every Divine, fa doth Scripture that faith the fame. And he that dare ftand out and fiy. There is no conditional promife or threatning in Scripture, let him lend mc his Name and his Reafons, and if I manifeft himnot un.vorthy to be a Preacher of the Gofpel, let me be the common fcorn of Divines. Had I laid that Gods Will de rerum evnitu had been Conditional, and that fo as that there are conditions of the ad of his Willon which he willeth or not willcth, and net only ccnditioi;s rcivo/uff, of the ihingwilled, then this mouth might have been opened thus, wi:h more Ihcw ot reafon, and lefs impudency : but when it is only a Condi:icnal Promife and Threatning that I fpeak of, what anfwer fliould one mak^ to fuch a man. Did not 1 tell him where even Dr. TrviJS haththefe words following ? [ ''Cjtr. Voffiu* *'intrrpretcth the Will of God touching the falvation of all, of a Conditional *'Will, thus: God will have all to be laved, to wit, in cafe they believe r v;hich *'Conditional Will, in this fenfe, neither tAujiin AiA, nordowcdtny. Confii. " Sy nod. 7)ort ind jirfesreduB. to fvz^. pag.6\,'] And fj^. 145,144 [*'lwil-*'lingly profefs that Chrift died for All in rei'p-.ft of procuring the benefit (of *'pardon and falvation) Conditionally, on conJi;icn of their faith.] And a-gainft Mr. Cotton, pag.7i- [ " Still you prove that which no man denieth ( msrli *' HoTOin) vi%* That Cod purpofcd Life to the world upow Condition of oljc-'

S 3 diencc •

-tJ

»'dienceand Repentance, prcjvidcd that you uiiderftand it tfght, vi^,. that Obc-*' diencc and Repcn:ancc is ordained of God as a Condition of Life, not ofGodj "purpofe.] And againft Armitt. yinitc.Orat. l.z. part.i.Crim.i %.6. pAg.vol. M0Mr.44l. ['* I con^^^s ^'^'vacioiij and lo pardon and Adoption areotlered to <'All and fingular men, on Condition chcy believej^c And fo I deny not that ".Redemption i» fo farre obtained for ad and tvcry man.] Til fe with eight more places I ci:ed and rcferd to D' Tw/j? in rhc bo:)k wWwh he oppoicth, I would not mention any Divines words in fucti a com ron rhing, but that I know this fort of men do more then ordinarily reverence D' TtPijS, to: his favouring them in cwoot three opinions.

;'i;He next proceeds to ["mind the Reader of two things, i. That both the " whole and every leatl fragment of all that ii here coUedcd, whether we look to " the fubftancc or Artifice uud abou: it, is not his, but borrowed partly from *'thePapifts, partly from the Socinians, and their Apes the Arminians, as hath " been before fhewed : and if I ihall be called thereto, I am ready more fully to " fhew, by quoting the Authors out of whom he hath tranfcribed All,almoft word *' for word,to his ufe.]

!t>^R€p. If there be one true word in thefe lines; if ever I tranfcribed or borrowed a word of what he mentions from Papift,Socinian or Arminian, let me never more beknown by any other name, then, The moH impudent Lyir. If all be falfc———.

Next, after a torrent of gumbleftoole oratory, perfwading his Reader not to believe me, when I profefs my own belief, feeing my words are [falfe fallacious flatteries,] he heaps up thefc following Accufations, to prove that I am not to be believed.

[" I. He maketh our Rightcoufnefs of works, and Chrifts fatisfaftory Righ-'^ teoufnciSjCoordinate and collateral! in the procurement of our Juftification ; the " one as abfolutely necelfary as the other to the attainment of this end : the one to ^^parchafea poffibility of Juftification J the other to render that which was but *'in po(libility,aduall andeffedaall to us : Both fatisfadory : th:oneas a fuffi-*' cieut fine and payment, the other as fatisfaftory Rent and homage. Aph.Thef.17,

Rtpl. A h'ap of inventions of his own brain, which he well ufhcreth in witha NuUti fides verbis i. Never were my thoughts or pen guilty of making, that is, judging and alVerting, either our works to be any proper caufes of ourjuififica-lion at all, or ( mu;h lefs ) coordinate and collaterall with Chrifls Righ^eoufnefs. Pinde fuch a word, and burn the book at the market-Crois. z. I take faith and obedience to be Abfoiutcly necclVary to their ends, and Chrifls Righteoufnefs to its end ; but never though: that they had the fame office towards the attainment of tha: end, or that they had at all the fame neerell ends. It fhould feem the man iS eSanicd that I m:ike fiith and obedience of Ablolute ncceflity ; that is, that In-fideli and Rebel* may not be favcd. Such a Volume as he hath written, doth well fuit with the opinion, t-hat Infidels are juil:fied, and neither faith of Abfolate ne-cefli:y to our. firll ilateof julUfication, nor obedience to chat at judgement. Yec do I make a great difference between the Reafons of the Ncceffity of Chrifts fa-tisfadion, and the Neceffi:y of our faith and obedience • B.u itill I fuppofe both Abfolutely N-ceflary on fuppofition of Gods O dinarion. Should I fay otherwifc to pleafcthe Antinomians who would have elcft Infidels be juftified, I fli>5u!d by others be thought an Arminian, as pleading for the poflioilicy of the juftification of tbofs Infidclsj chat never heard the Ci^fpcl. Its hard pleafing all this kind of

men.

men. "J. I never faid cither that cur Jullification was but in PcfTibility before our faith 5 northat Chiift purchaftd but a P( fTibility: Thefe are ftill kis fcailcl's forgeries. Daturtcrtiw!^. Though our Juflificaticn were not Afluall before faith, yet it was moicihcn Pofliblcjfor it was Infallibly and In-;miuab!y Futtre. That's all that I knew of it ( ar.d thai it v as iKamfa ;J he il.ai Isnc.wcs more, let hiai reveal it. 4. I never thcu£,ht that [ cm RiJuccufncfs of works did render that juftificaticn aftuall and cftcduall tousj v.hich waj but Pcffiblc.] For 1. This Rendring cftcfti-all plainly ipcaks a caufaliiyj which 1 ftill denied toanyeftof GUIS as to Juftificaxicn. a. 7 maintained that cur Jullifii-ancn is ;.cliial! and ef-kduall upon the Condition of cur faith alone^ before wciks of obedience 3 and that they arc but the Conditions of cur not-lcfing itj and of that at judgcn-.cnr. 5. Never did I think or fay thtt cur faith or woiks weic faristcdlcry for any finne committcdj3s Chrifts fuflcrings were. 6. There, is not a word in ihe p!aces that he cites for any of thcfc his forgeries. 7> Yta in the lic^page \\ hicli he ci;cth, raihng an oi/«wfrom the word [ Rent] / putpoicly explaincii iriy the ughts tobe thcfej that our faith and obedience was Vequiicd a:^ hcniate in ackuo.wledg-ment of the freeGiacecf the Deliverer 3 but have not the kixH riitiOiicmprctijt and left any fViculdtliink cthcrwilc becaule 7 ufed the word [ Rent] when 7 mentioned the (Imilitude of a Pepper-cornj I did ( as diftinguifiiing betv^cen a Rene that had in it r^tioncm prctij, and a Rent that had'nothing but mccr Acknowlcdge-■ment ) exprefsmy mindc in thefe words, which he refers tOj which 1 am net afha-med to recite, that the Reader may lee whether they contain thst which lie boldly avers they do. [Two things are confiderable in this Debt ol Righcccufnefs: The Valucj and the pcrfonall performance or Inrcrcft. The Fulue oi Chi ills fatisfa-^ion is Imputed to us in ffcad of the Value of a perfeS obedience of cur own performing i and the l^dlue of our faith is not fo Imputed : But becaul'e there muft be fome perfonall performance of homage, therefore the perl'onall perfcrntance of faith lliall be impucedtouSj for a fufficicnt pcrionall payment, as if we had paid the full Rent, becaufe Chrift whom we believe in, hath paid it, and he will take this for fatisfaftory homage : lo it is in point ot perfonall performance, and not of ValuCjthat faith is Imputed.^ Can you finde in thefe words thai which he acci^-icththemof? Only he eagerly falLus ontlicword t fatisfaftory homage ] chirring to make the Reader believe, that I make this homage fatisfadory in the I'jnie fenfc as I do Chrilts fufFerings ? whenas one is a proper fatisfaftion to vindi(fiivc Juflice, A Kedditio aquivd'.ntU aLinitdditi, as the Schoolmen-and Dr-v4?7jcj define fatisfaftion. The other is but Vcfi.krium in tinUim implcrc : to he fatisfa~ Bory, was with me, but w he /cccpublc, and hereafter 1 will be more cautclousj when I confider what fnarlers I mult convcife wi:h.

He proceeds in the uext words thus [^* 2,. He puts both in the fame orderand ''kind of Caufes, making our Ri^^htecufncfs and ChriUs latisfadioii to be both "theCiiM/ijJncjianof/jThef. 56. For although he names faith tl.ere, yet himfeli "declares hiinlelf under faith, to mean and comprehend obedience aUo. This •' Civility Alone he vouchfafeth to Chrift, that he names Chrifts faiisfadion bc-*'fore our faith or obedience, becaufe it feems, that is the elder. Bur in cruder. Power and Authority to the producing of this cffeft, Chrift hath?iO prehc-' " mincncc given him above men.]

KcpL The Lord pardon this audacious,fcarlcfs freaking of untrtt'is; and flicw you the finfuUnefs of it, that it may be pardoned. \. I did exprefiy in thcfame place affirm, that Chrifts fatisfaftion is the meritorious Caufe of our pardon,

and-

'70]

and ihat faith is not j yet thiJ preacher of the Gofpel dare before the Lordj^write and publiOi to the world, that [ in order, Power and Authority to the producing ofthiscftcd, Chrill hath no prehcminence given him above man ] and that I [vouchfafc Chrift this Civility Alone] to be firft Bamed,^f. Lord ! what will men becon4e» if thou Uave them tothcmfelves ?

X. I do not find* that ever the man doth once dare to accufe this fayino of falf-hood ( that Chrifts fatisfaftion is in one reined i Csufa fine qua non,) for all the reproach he poureth out upon it. It removeth impediments : Bvery fuperior contains its inferior: had I laid, I: W3$ no moie then fo, or not affi^ned more to it well miiht he have fpoken to my Reproach.

J. Nay, for ought 1 feCjhe and his party give no more to it, then as to 4 C'^ufa fine qua non,as I have (hewed elfcvvhere.

4. Yea how can they that fay Juftification is an Immanent ad of God from Eternity, give fo much to Chriftsdeath, for :he attaining it, as to a <;«f/4/in« qua non )

His next words are thcfe [" j. He affirms mans Righceoufnefs to be as Pcrfeft *'a$ Chrifts Righteoufncfs in order to Juftification : vt^. bothperfed [ in Cut re-"vere'] Chrifts Righteoufnefs pcrfed to do its work, and mans to its werk : or " (as he explains himfelf) bo:h perfed, in the perfcdion of fufficiency in order " to its end. So that here alio is a parity : no efficiency h\ Chrifts Righteoufnefs "■without mans, nor in mans without Chrifts to juftifie ; But when the two per-''fedions meet, if neither lofe its perfedion, they may after the world is ended ^'perfcd our Juftification, The] z^p.iii. In the meanwhile, till our works be " added toChrilis latisfadion, what he faith of faith, that he every where impli-** eth of the fatisfadionof Chrilt, that it is dead being alone, as to the ufc and ^'purpofeofjuftifying ; and fo as works make faith alive, fo they make Chrifts *^ latisfadion alive, as to the attainment of its end,Juftification.]

Kepi. Did not I tell you how thefe men ufed the ninth Commandment ? 1. So far was I from faying that [ Mans Righteoufnefs is as perfed as Chrifts Rii^h-teoufnefj in order to Juftification ] that I expreQy mention at leaft fire refpeds in which our Righteoufnels is Imperfed, when I afcribe Abfolute Perfedion to Chrifts. 1. All the perfedion that I give our Righteoufnefs, as you may fee in the page cited by him, is but thefe two : i. A metaphycfiall perfedion of being (this he had more brains then to deny.) i. A perfedion of fufficiency in order to its end, vi\. to be the Condition of our Juftification,(i^c. this End it ftiall per-fedly attain.] N.ver did any man queftion this that vouchfafcd me his animad-veffionSjtill now. Mr.2/i^e, you may fee acknowledgeth it in his book. If out faith be a Means to our Juftification, and be not lutficient in its own place, to the attainment of the End whereto it is a MeanSjWhat will followjbut that wc muft all psrilh, and that God hath appointed an Infuffi:ient Means to Juftification, or clfe that i: is not a Neceflary Means ? Though ihey that think Infidels are Jufti-fied, take it for no Means,yet Piotcftants do.

}. Is it true that he faith, that then [here's a parity ?] What if Chrifts Righteouinefs will not juftifi: without mans faith, no more then fairh without Chnits Rij,h;eoufnels J doth ,hat make any parity in Caufality ordignity ? The \\\ciiQiu[i fine qua non, may have as much faid for it j the nobleft cfticient eftc-de.h no: wi.hoa: K : and f0 i; i»heie: when yet the Condidon cffcdcth no: at all, lo far is it fi om a pari-y.

4. Doth he that dare write I'uch a Volume of untruths and railing accufations

as

C7iD

as this, yet infift on it fo confiiiencly that he is perfsdly juftifieJ ? And doth he not vdluminoufly calumniate with the greater aaJacicy, becaiife he ruppofech thac fo long ago he was perfedly juftified, trotn all the iinnes in this world committed. I believe, and fliall belicvetill deatn, thac the moll perteft luttification will be at the great Judcment J and that I muft be juftified in this lite from more finnes, then I was jurtifi.:d from at my livft bclieving,or die periih.

5. He falfly affirms that I fay, VVoiks make alive Chritls farisfadion as to the attainment of Juftification,or that I imply thio. And it hath in it more untruths then one. For i. I never atcribcd any Caufaliiy to works. 2,. I never made them fomuch as Conditions of ourfi.il juilified Itate. bu: atfimi that on ouin:cer Repenting and Believing, i.e. Accepting Chrilt as offered in the Golpcl, we are ju-ilified before works j and that the Righteoufnefs of ours which conlillcth in our fulhlling of the Conditions of the new Covenant, is to be found in laich alone without works, at our firil being juftified, feeing it alone without works, is the Condition of our firft being juftified. j. And though! dare not layjthat Chrifts fati$fa<flion doth juftifie witiiout our faith ( that is, it juttifieth not InhJclj ) ycc I fay I. That this is not through any Infufficiency or laiperfcdion in it r butbe-caufc it was never the will of the Father or Redeemer, that any infidel,or Refufec of ChriftjWhilc fuch, (hould be juftified by his fatisfr^dion. 2. That yet Ct rifts fatisfadion is bcforefaith, cfleduall to other ends, thoagh not to juftifie : vi^.to fufpend execution of jufticc, to procure us the new Covenant, and the promulgation of ir,and the preaching of the Gofpeijand to procure us alfo Grace to BclievCj that fo we may be juftified : To mc,this is not contemptible.

His next words are thus [ "4. That works juftifie in the fame kindc of caufa» " lity and procureraent with faith, not only proving faith to be found, but them-** felves being in the fame obligation with faith, not idle concomitants,only ftand-*' ing by while faith doth all ( which fome fools might imagin tlat he meaneth, '* when he calls them only Neceflary Antecedents of Juftification, p. u-i) nay "they are concomitants with faith, in the very ad of procuring it, and in that " kind of caufality which they h3v«,p. 199,300.]

Rep. I. Here are many fhreds of my words difmembred from that which muft manifeft their fenfe 3 and in all this he conceals that I cxprefs and maintain that all this procurement is by no proper Caufality, but by meer Conditionality as Caufn fine quA lion, ^• He infinuates untruly inhisparenthefis, that I give more to them than to be Neceflary Ar.tecedents (that this Scdion may have fomevffhac like the reft) whenas I ever took a Condition to be but an Amecedei>t, though I take not every Antecedent to be a Condition.

His next words arc th^fe ["5« They do all this As they are Works. Even faith "it fclf juftifieth as it is an ad of ours. Appeni.p.^o. and As a Moiall Duty. ** Append.p. loi. S) Ho all other Morall Duties iK they arc parts of our fincerc obc-" dienceto Chrift /t/i ]

Kcpl. Here arc in this Sidionfour Prcpofitions, as affirmed by me j and the pages cited where I affirm them. If ever a one of tliefe were ever fpoken or meanc by me, and if j!1 thcfe Acculations be not downright falllioods ofhisowndcvifing, then i know not what 1 have thought or wrote.

For the firft [ They do all this as they are works ] I not only never fpoke, but do lo exprefly affirm thecontraiy, iji\. that ic is oulv as the fiee Donor hath made the Conditions of his Guift, that I even now catt the man by it into fuch a chafc^ that he charged me with [ Bleflijig this Condition as the Queen of Heaven,

T making

C70

making it my Idol!, profUjuting all that is called God at the feet of it, making God no Godj Chrift noCbrift, the holyGhcft nobdyGhcft, andthcGoipel noGofp*! by it:] and yet doth this man in anl'wer to thel'arae Scdion, charge roc to affirm, that [They do all this, that iSjjultifie and (i.\e,/^s they arc Works.] As if we had given two diftind Formal Reafons of their Intercft incur J unification, er as it^he faw not that this is a plain contradidion I

The feccnc* Propofirion heciteth my book as affirming. You fliall hear both, «nd judge of the mans Credit. He faith I affirm [" That even Faith it felt ju-'f ftificiii As it is an Adofour>] and cites Append.p.^o. Ail the words there concerning, it rhar he ran refer to, are thefe [ Ani we arc ftill faid to be JuUified by faith, whKh is an \Gt -^^ouis.] This was fpoken to prove that we maylawfully Ad for Lift^as wc.i ;% from Life. This Credible Divine makes nothing to turn [ vebkh U an AH of ourt ] in:o iAi tt is in Aci of Mrs,"] and to affirm that I lay the later when I lay the former. As if the Matter and form, or the Materiall and formall Intcrelt v»ere all one. If I had faid thai [ M'Cundon whofe word is of k) little creditjii a Preacher of the Gofpclj] is this all one as to fay, that [a$ fuch a onc,he is 3 Preacher of the Gofpel ? Or if I fay that [ he who is a Preacher of the Gofpel fpeaks untruths by the hundreds,] it is not all one as to fay that [As a Prcachci of the Gofpel he fpeaks untruths.]

His thud Piopi-luion which he faith I affirm is [ that As a Morall Duty faith juIHHps.] And the fourth, that fo do all other Morall Duties as they are parts of ourfincerc obedience to Chrift.] For both thefe he cites ^^p. p. loi. The words there arc thtfc [ I have folly proved that Morall Duties as parts of our fincerc obedience to Chrift, are part of the Condition of our falvation, and for it to be performed. And even faith is a Morall Duty.] The words arc in anfwer to the Marrow of Modern Divinity, which faith [ when in Scripture there is any Morall work Commanded to be done, either for eichuing of punilhment, or upon pro-mife of any reward temporall or eternall,(ir'c. there is to be wnderflood the voice of the Law] I (hew that this opinion turns all the fubftancc of GhriflsGovenanc into the Law : and that Morall Duties as they are the Matter of cur linccre obedience to Chrift, are part of the Condition of Salvation. Do 1 therefore (ay, that as part of our obedience they juftifie us ? Mark i. That I fpeak nothercof Ju-ftification,but Salvation. 2. That I fpeak not of the Formall Nature ofaCon-dition, but of the Matter ®f theCondition of Salvation. And fuppoling ir proved, that fincere obedience to Chrift is made by Gad, part of the Matter ot the Condition of Salvation, I confequently affirmed that feme Morall Duies, though not y^j fuch, yet as parvs of our fincerc obedience, are part of the Condition, that is,of the Matter of the Condition of falvation. I never intended [ as ] 10 exprefs the formall reafon of its Intereft in our Juftification, having frequently expreli the contrary. ■*

And for his third Propofition j Is it all one for me to fay [ And even faith is a Morall Duty] which arc my words: and to fay that [ even faith it felfjuftitieth Asa Morall Duty] which he feigneth me to fay ? I cannot believe that fuch heaps of palpable forgery,are vindications of fundaoienttll truth,profitablc to the Church •f God,and worthy the publike view.

His next words are ["6. That we are juftifi.'d not only by Works, Afhp. " JOG. and according to our works, but aU'o j"^cr ourwerlis, p.JiO. That good works are a Ground and Reafen of it;/i. i x 1.]

Kcpl.i. Whether the two firft fayings be accufed or no, I know not: If they be,

the

C7J]

theholy Ghoft i$ Accufcd that ufeth them. For the third,That we are juftified/or ourworksj if I had fo delivered my mindc, be could have interpreted it no other-wife, thcnfo farre a* [for] may exprcfs the Intertft of a Condition, feeing I fo oft profefs to give thein no more. But my words which he refers to, are only aqueftion upon JWiWft.a J.J4,3$. Where Chrift ^ives the reafon of hij fcn-icnccthus ] For I vpm hungry and jufcdme^Scc.l Now I defire to note, that I never faid, that we are juttified F«r Works, asihc Meretorious Caufe, nor that our Conttitutive J unification in this Life is/"or them, at all: but I fpeakoniy ot Juftification at Jutigcmenr, and mention [for] asthcReafon o{ the fenterKe only : and not as any Caufe of our Right in MfWonoaeitci the Bleffedncfs to which wc arc fenrcnced.FoT that which is but in the end, uni o-a Condition and no CauCc of otir Right to the Benefit, yet may thrr of outs fay, be the Reafon of the fentence, when the performance of rhat th^t rve ate (xvei Condition is the thing queltioncd. Lm^c faith[Bc«H/it thou hiji for jVor^sof obe-beenfaithfiiU in a very //«/f,&c.] I faid not fo much as that, nor dicncc, though not as many other Scriptures fay.But I have to do with fuch an Ac- a/i Mcrittrioia. cufer, as I have no hope topleafe without Rcnounctng the language of Chrift,and of all fobcr Divines.T^r^KJ his expofition is this,which 1 de-fire the Reader to compare with my VofctylAd(^aufalem enim dicojfignifcurequidcm Cdufsm, verumnonMeritoramRegni, fed 'DecUratorum^ufiafejitenciJi ajudtccpro-Utfi) jureovibtcsregnumadjudicari, quis operibta (e vcre ovesh.c.fideles cffedccUrx-verint.^ So that in Paraus his judgment it is a Caufe of the fentence, though not of their Right to the Kingdom. But becaufe the fame opinion is found in other menjwhichis Popeiiyinme J I will fparc mens Names and words, but undertake to prove againfl any advcrfary, that fincere obedience is one ground or reafon of the fentence of Jufiification at the iaft Judgment : andthat if any man be accufed to be an InfiJsU or a Rebell againft the Lord that bought him,the faith and obedience of that man jnuft be a ground and reafon of his JuftificatioujOihe ihall periHi. His next words are thus [" *. Thac we are Juflificd For our Works, that is, "For the Merit of them. Not Merit in the moft proper znh ftrift fenfc.^c. " [ But fo farre as it is PofGble for aperfeft man to have, Mirited under the Co-"vcnant ot Works] he may now Merit alfo under the Cdvcnant of Grace by his

«W.rikSj(5'f-]

Repl. 1 have (Tiewed at large before, ihit ^Adam, or a perfeft man under the Covenant of W'jrks, was Capable of a much further Meriting, and in lefs unfit-nefs and Impropriety of fpeecii: Never did I fpcak any fuch words as the Accu-fcr chargcth mc with, ciiher in the place cited by him, or clfwherc. The words that are theoccalion of hi* charge 1 have vindicated before againll him,andagainft My.Eyre: nor did I ever read to my rcmerabrance one Proteliant writer againft the Papills on that point, tha^ faith not as much for Merit as I did. I do expcft from my great Accuferahe facher of Lycsj more malice, then from this man : buc 1 never cxped fuch untruth? to be by Jiimfclf immcdia-ly charged upon me, in judgment, as luppofiughe bath more wit and IcfsLibcrcy,. ' ,'_■

Thusl havcanfweredj I think, the fummc of his book, a? to'themain matt^f. of JuUificatroii by Woiks >. for hecontradcth the ve-no,-pe of his charge into thefe heals; and af;cV liiiufj'iti orstoryj tnskes this chansnge':, [''* Let now any of hi's *' Difciplcs produce ( I will not. fay one Ar.miniah,' but ") one Socinian, Papirf> " yea or Jew, that afciibcs more to Works th:'n this man, in Derogation Mnrn ** Chrift and ©race, elfe let him ceafc to'Be a folToweVof him^ or openly arfd'

T z «ingcnioully

" ingenioufly profefsthat he followcshim as aJcw,Papift or Socinian : and con-*' fcquently tliac he hath made noc M' B. but M' 2' matters his maftcr alfo in the *f dodrine of Juftihcation : And that in advancing fclf (o hijih, as to affirm *' be Meriicth no lei's fully and properly then Chrift himfelf hath or could hare "done.]

M' Ciryl ibinks this book worthy the publick view : I think hini fo unworthy anAiifwtr, iha: as I will let this pal's without, fo I profefs upon the review I fhouid be aihaincd that ever I laid a word to him, were it not that I take my felf bound even 10 do the bafcil work that is law full, to fatisfie fuch men as I take Mr. /'iZ// cobe : And intrcar ihj Reader to pardon my abuling of his paacnce with iiich a taskjas Ioai as I am thus neccflltatcd.

Were it nut for tyriiig :u Reader and my felf, I mi^ht go ov^r the reft of Mr. Cnndous Book, and Hiew then how like it is to this much : but truly I have not fo much time or patience to fpare. Yet a few mpre tails let me give you. Tirt i. p.zc 5. he faith [ '. Thcn,.i'l the Teltimonies of DcTwiJi, 'fumaa.Pxrjiut, Fifa-" tor,JretiM,li^iUct,^h.'£nr^cf, are here compiled, to tell them that are no friends " to the odrine of Grace, ctiat all thefe Divines coul'ent with him in his do-" dine, fi'.ilot a UniverfallCondidonall Redemption and J uftihcation purcha-*^ led by Chulf, wichputany more efF^dual fatisiadion made to the Jullice of *' God, for f.hem that fliall be faved then for them that fhall be damned j and *' 2. That Morall obedience and good works are Concaules or collateral! Conditions v.iui faith to iuftification.]

Repl. Can the wit of man imagin wherure this man fliould be occafioned tode-vife thefe tiiin;^s ? Where in all ir.y writings did ever I hint fuch a thing, as chat there is no more cfied Jal faiisfadlion made for the faved, then for the damned ? or fuppofc Chrift to die ecju ally for all ? Much lam I'ure I have faid againlt it, but nothing for it. 2. And how can I make faith and works Concaul'es, when I ever deny them both to be any Cau cs ?

Pun i.p-7i' Becaufe I faid ths: [ fomc think the Covenant of Works isrc» pealed to all the world, and the Covenant of Grace alone in force,] he lets fly at measaLyar, wiihatorrent of reproach faying [''thofc chat hold this ( moft *'probably ) aie fome Utopians, that Mr.B, alone and no other cither man 01: " Angel be-fiJcs him have had acquaintance with, or the happinefs to know their *f opinion : I'oihic Mr.fi. might have done well to have taken a fecond voyage in-*'to the Land oF£Hrop/4,. either to have joyned with them, or difpu:ed againfl '• them on their happy turfe^cir'c- This Nation among all hath not fuch bug-beais ''^ and phrene;icks. that I know, who maintain luch an alTertion. (But it is one of "Mr.S'fubtilties to feign fuch Ghofts and phantai'mcsof men to fight againfl, "thereby taking the advaniagc fecretly and unei'pied (ash- hopcih^) to eretft 'f more curfed.and monftrous.alTcrtions O'c']

Repl. Should a man vex or laugh at fuch acreature asthisis? or rather piiy him. M.itll (snthe midll offo much bjhn-is,anal.inguif]ung wcaknefs, fpend fo much of my precious time, as I hive done, in writing againlt that opinion, with mofl Learned, Judicious men ? and now mud I and the world be pcrl'wadei that they arc but Ghoftsjand there is na fuch opinion i* I would he could have per* fwaded them and me of this fooncr, and fpared me all that labour ! Have I lach Tolumes of it pro and COH. and now is there no fuch thing ? Have I b.en contend-in^ all this w'jile with Ghofts ? They arc fuch Ghofts, as write more Rcafon in a page, then 1 have yet fecn in all his volume. And I can prove that one of thefe

volumes

C7S]

volumes thata Reverend^ Learned and much honoured Brother wrote to me for that Opinionj was carried to Oxford and (hewed in more CoUcdges then one, and xo fomeof Mr. (^randon's friends, or Mr. Eyre's at leaft : and do thofe friends of theirs dwell in Eulo^/ii' oris this my Hdion and fubtilty ? Metbinks this is hard meafure.

Part.I. p 300. When I faid [ I believe that the juftifiedby faith, never do or

fhall fall away,] asbef re he flatly affirmed that I fay. They do fall away, fo

here he faith ["What can wethink can be his meaning but this, that they that

** are fentenced once to Life, in the day of Judgement, and arc alieacy G!o:ified,

MVnehher do, nor fhall fall away ?]

""•^'McthinksiUll this is har(S nualure : and if the grand Accufer hsd ufcd mc thus, Ifhould have thought he had dealt more diftioncilly with me then with mcft others-Tig. 511. Psrt I. he fpeaksthui l"Ohj. Yes he rcfetrcs the entire praife of " Merit itill to Ghrifts farisfadion alone. Anjiv. Not fo ; for though in words ** he loinetirae allertuth Chrifts fatisfaftion to be the Merit of our Juftification, *fyet he makts the Worthincfs of our own Rightcoufnefs to be that which " makes bo; li Chrifts Merit and Juftification merited to be ours, and I'o wc ou> •'merit Chrirt, dclervin^ not only Jultification, butChriftthc Mcriter, and the •'merit ofChrifttobe made ours. In thi? he is worfe then the Papifts. 'fhey " ^ive the praile of cur Merit to Chrilt : he hath merited (lay they) a power to <' our Works to Merit : This man contrarywifc, that neither Chr its Merits, nor <' Juftiiicacion the fruit of it, becomes ours till wc by our Mtrits and Worthinels, ** have put oui felves into the pofleflion of it: fo according to the Papifts the effi-<^cacy of mans merits depends upon Chrifts Merits ; according to Mr.Bjxfcr the *' efficacy of Chritti Merits (as to this or that ^uUificd pcrfon) depends upon a " mans own Merits.]

Rcpl. All this he dare Print, though lever renounced mans Mcri.s, never owned fo much as the nime, muchlels the thing, never to this day thought or faid that man deferred one bit of bread, much lels that hedefervcd Chrift, his Merits, and our Juftification : never faid fo much as that faith or any aft of mans doth make Chrift and his Righteoufncfs ours, but only that they fhall not be curs before or without faith, nor continue curs without true obedience: and this very condition I ever maintained to be a fruit of Chrifts Merits. By this way am 1 confuted by this man-

P^S- J^5)S^4 H<^ '^'^5 heavy charges on me, nnlefs I will hold that Infants' are jurtificd withost faith, habitual or aftual, thitiking in that initance he hath got a proof of Juftification before and without faith : When I have fo largely in my Book of Baptifm, not only given my Judgement, but proofs that the Parents faith is the condition of the Intants Juftification, and therefore it is not without faith that ihey are juftified.

Tir. i.p,j^9. He mentioneth that vain charge which is thefumme of much of *'his Bock, thusj [ His meaning is, that it (faith) only fo farrc juftifies as "it fulfilleth the condition. But rhroughouc our whole life according to his ''principles, wc are but fulfilling, hare not fu'fillcd the condition of ;hc new "Covenant; theiefore throughout our whole life t".e are but in juftifying, not "juftified,(i;'c.]

Rtpl. In the firft moment of our true believing wc have fulfilled the whole Condition of ouraftual Juftification from all finncthen committed, and i'o of our

T 3 being

C7<5]

being in a jaftifi "d ftate: Bat wc have not then fulfilled all tb« Condition of our Jultificiaonac judgement, if we livclonger, noryetof out noa-amiffionof out juftificd ftate.

^in I. pig. j8i. ht queftioQj, [" How afcer Mr. B-'xtfr*s principles can ^'Cbrirts Ri^hieouruefs hi faiJ to be ours by Divine D-aacion and Icnputa-"tion, when he holds it no ocherwife by GDdsDonaaon our<, tbenthc wildc " Goofe is his ? his if he can catch her, and as long ai he can hold her: I'o his, " a» it is every ones clfc, as well as his if they can take and hold her. For (he i$ " the worlds Goofe, and pioper to none, before one ha;h taken her, and no longet*^ '^ that ones then while he holds her j it' he lee her gOjiTie is tlie worlds Goofe agaih*' " If Mr.B'sRighteoufncfsbellablifliedupon fuch a Law, Donation and Impu-" tation, let it be his not mine.]

Kepi. But that God who is found of them that fought him nor, may yet be fo meicifuU as to give you apart in that Righteoulnci's which you renounce : though not while you renounce it knowingly, yet while you do it ignorantly, aad know not what you fay: Yet if a Papift ftiauld fay, [ Let not that imputed Righteoufnefs be mine, which is given by a conditional piomile,] I fhould be thought a Papilt if I allowed them the charity that I here allow my friend Mr. Cnniin. Cannot God give us Chrift and his Righteoufnefs by a Conditional promife, without all this reproach and cantempt of his gift ? Efpecjally when the Condition is but Acceptance of the free gift according to its nature and ufe ? and when Godgivethhis Elect the Condition it felf? To catch his wilde Goofe is a work of Art, and perhaps to moft of natural inculpable impolllbility, nor is fhe fent as a gift to them. To Receive an offered Chrill is 'an aft of mcer Con-fent or Willingnefs, Phyfically impoflible to none, and Morally only through mens own fault; and Chrift is fent as a gift to all that will Accept him,and grace is given to the Eled to Accept him. Is i: a Truth then that he he:e chargcth me with ? Methinks he fhould have born fo much Reverence, at leaft, to the unanimous Judgement of Pioteftant Divines, who maintain tha: Chrift and his Righteoufnefs is given us by a Conditional promife, as not to renounce the Righteoufnefs that they all look to be favcdby, nor to caft in their face this wilde Goofe fcorn.

P^ll^l- he faith [ ^'Mr. B. makes and laies his own principles of Religion, " and from them he battereth Chrift and his AoGtnnZyt's'c. i. How ftiall it appear '^ otherwife then by Mr. B^s own magifterial didates that juftitying faith is no-" thing elfe but the receiving of Chrift ?

Ktpl. I. Is this a mount to batter Chrift from? i. Did I fay it was no* 'thing elfe? becaufe I faid. It is the receiving of Clirift ? j. Is this a fie charge from him that feigneth me to comprizs all good woLks as Uicli in this faith ? 4. 1$ it not the words of God, and not my magifterial didite? ^ab.i.ii. Asmi*y as reciivei h!m,Scc. 5. Is it the Aflemblies magifterial didaic, to define it, The receiving of Chrift as be is offered in tbc Go^tli See their proof in the Catechifm from Scriptures.

He addes [ " 2. Why elfe doth he make it fimply and only a quality or ad of '^ thefoul, withou: theaijedionof its original from above, bui toingenerate into '' the mindes of men an opinion, that it hath its cmanancy and riic trom nature, *' from free will, that every man may have and aft it, if and when he will, apdchac " it is not infufcd of Gad, to be,, (^c ]

Kepi, Yet no more regard CO the ninth Commandment? O learned Vindication

tion of Fundamental Trwbs, bycroud«of fliamclefs falrtioods 1 Doththceffi«i-em enter the definition of a habit ? or fpccially the manner of cfFcding ? Del deny the infufion of faith, or affirm it to be of nature, if 1 tell you not how God works it, when it nothing concerns the matter in handjbut would be a digrcflion ? I fuppofe Satan himfelf would not have thus acculcd me, without a fairer c©louc then this is.

What he holdeth himfelf ( befide what is faid before) you may ke pdg. i^?' how farrewcarejuflified by faith, ["Faith is not the (^au(a fitie qux non oi our «* Jufiification in God, no nor yet in Chiifts Juftification;Crc. for thcfc are An-" tecedaneous to our faith, and cur faith not an Anitc.dcnt to it. At the Utmcjl "it can be hut iheCaufa fnieqaAnon of Gods declaring and evidencing of our felves " to Gur felves juflified.]

Repi Doth M' Caryl chink this a^ Vindicating Gods Truth ? Ntxtjfaith he, £ " And this JuUification M' B- i"o difdaineth and fnuflj at, that he will not own *' it, much lefs mention it. Yet can he not with a'l his Sophiflry name any other *' ad of JuUification in this life, whereof faith can be proved to be the Antecc* " dent, Odcdium, or Cau[a fine qua now.]

Rep I. Do I indeed difdain Gods declaring me to my felf to be jufiified, be-cauf« I take it not to be the Juftificacion by faith ? Good proof of his Accufa-tion ! I difdain it nor, but beg daily for it asachoife blefling'- i. How can he fay [ I difdain it] and yet [mention it not :] Was not reafon or memory here wanting ? 3. Its untrue that I mendon it nor, for I do give my reafons that it is not [ the Juftification by faith which Scripture means.] 4. 1 thought it had been more to Own it, then to Mention it, and not lefs. 5. Is not here afoul defeft of mode fly to fay, that [with all tny Sophil^ry I cannot name any other Aft of Juftificationjtir'c.] When I did not only name another, but fland more particularly on the explication of it, then almoll any one thing in the Book ? vi^. The aft of God by his Covenant or Law of grace, conveying to us a Right to Chvifl, Impunity, and Glory, and fo changing our relation j (whether our felves do feel it or not.)

T4g.54i. he faith, when I anfwcr the objeftion that fome make, that faith is a Paflive inftrumcnt, [''Let himnamefome one of his [feme] that have fo *^ objefted a Paflive inftrumentef Juftification, or elfelcave us to conclude, that ''the objeftion is of his own head, partly to take advantage thereby yet further *'to take his partime in his Logical and Metaphyfical Learnina;, which may ''pofTibly pieafe him, but never juilific or fave him > and partly by iTiewing *' the weaknefs of the objeftion, to gull his unwary Reader with an opinion «' of the weaknefle of their Caufc, who arc forced with fuch Egyptian "reeds, for lack of better Pillars, to fuftain it. It is one of the jefuites "principles to fetch arms indifferently, cither from Heaven or Hell, to Itorm "theCinurch and Truth ©f Chrilt, and to promote the holy Mother harlot of « Rome]

Kcfl. 1. The charge is heavy : Do you hear how I am proved to promote the Harlot of Rome, as a Jefuice, to fetch amies from Hellj^c. and for what? for faying that fome objcft [that faith is a Paflive inihument ?] And did I lie and feign this ? There is but two that I kntjw of, that have wrote againfl me on that Point, M' J^endall and Mt.BUlie, and the firfl mofl triumphantly difputes for itjthough he fay. They need it not: and the later owns it, maintains, and I'oberly difpuicthfor it; So that it is not tha Imallcit part of my Papers now

in the Prcfs to anfwcr thctn. Was CTcr man in the world fo befet as I ? that rauft be wearied and grieved with writing againlt luch opinioni en one fide j and on the other fide, be accounted a Jefuicc, that fetches arms from Hell to maintain the Harlot of Rome, for laying tiiat any man ever made fjch an ob-jcdion ?

z. Let Mr. J^csiiK and Mr. BUl^e fee how this man befriends their Caufcj that cals it fuch a weak objedion and Egyptian Reed.

J. And le: the moderate Reader confidcr by luch inftancci, as this, and a former of the like kindc that I gave him, how impoflibleit is for mc to pleafeall, or beelieemed Orthodox by all: wiicn one part ufeth thole objedionsj which another fends me to Rome, if not to hell, for faying that any man ufcth. They muft better agree among themfelvcs before I can pleafe them all.

Part i.p.ii4 he askcth [ '' Whether is the more arrogant doftrine, fhe Pa-*^pilfsj(irc. or Mr. jBixfcr's that faith, Works as Concaufcs with, not fruits of *'taith, that flow from no other Grace, but Fclagim his Moral fwafion, with-** out any Phyficall Renovation and change upon the Will, (as for di-" flinSions fake fome of our Divines are wont to exprefs themfclves ) do fo ''merit ?]

Rcpl. It is a wonder to mc that a man that truly believes that there is a God in heaven, and a day of Judgement, fhould have the heart and face to write fuch things, and leave them on Record againft himfelf to all ages: I thought aman could not have thttruc fear of God, that had ufed but now and then to fwear in apaflSon, or lye for an advantage: but I fee I muft judge better of one that feareth not before God, to ftudy and heap up in fuch a Volume, and publifh deliberately and impenitently to the world, luch falfe Accufations as a modeft Pagan would fcorn to be guilty of. I. The firft fentence here is, that I fay [Werks are Concaufes] when I not only never faiJ it, but denied both faith and Works to be any Caul'es. 2. The next is [not fruits of faith ;] I ever maintain them to be fruits of faith j but its not poffible that he can hold them to Merit ai fruitJ of faith, that holds them not to Merit at all. j. The third fcntence is that I fay [they flow from no other Grace, but Peligm his Moral fwafion ;] I dare challenge him that tempted you toTJtter thefe words, to prove if he can, that ever I faid them, or any fuch thing. 4. The next words are [without any Phyfi-cal Renovation and change upon the Will.] .Shew fuch a word in any Writing of mine, and burn the Book. I confefs I have elfcwhere faid this, that The rvinde blorveth where it lift, and xce hear the found thereof, but ^«ow not vthence it cometh, er vchiiher itgoeth i fo is every mxnthit isboriiof the Spirit: and that hethatknow-eth not how hisewn mcmbeis were formed in the womb, knowetb not the my-Iferious way of the Spirits working on the foul, and ificiefore what name bcft fuiteth it, Morall, Phyficall, or both in feveral rcfpeds, let them tell that know: but that it is fpccial, cfF^dual, infallibly prevailing G:ace, on the will, I ever maintained. ?. The next ai]ertion is, that I lay, thcfe works [doMerit] yea [fo Merit] as the Papifts afllirm ; both which arc lliamelefs falflioods, agaiqft my conftantprofeflion. But his nex'words give you the proof of all this.

["If Mr. 2. means any thing elfe by Grace, he conceals it as a myftery from '^ us, and will not throughout his whole Book give one hint of it; but makes man " in his own natural and moral qualificaaoni the Mcritcr of his own Juftification •*{>yChrift.]

J. Before

C79]

• t. Before he wrices that [I faid ic] add now be proves it in that I faid not the contrary. Do I deny all that I fay not, when its quite befide my fubjed ? I w»$ ■Vfvitingof no fuchmatterj as the manner of weiking Grace. 3. Even thii is but like the reftj for I do in that Book maintain a fpecial efledual Grace to the Elfd, flowing from Gods abfslate decree, and which is the fulfilling of that abfolutepromifej of rakin* the heart of Hone from us, elT'"^' 4- Isicnot enougli that I do this in other Books, fincc, though I did ic not in that ? f. Yet doth he in the fame breath here venture to lay again, that I C*'inake man in *'his own natural and moral qualifications, the Mcriter of bis own Juflifi-*'cation by Chrilt.] I profcfs I am ready in charity to hope the man is not well in his witts j for as I had rather he had loA his wiccs then bis confci-ence and common honefty, fo mcthinks a fober man fhould hardly be fo prodigall of bis own Reputation, as to publirti fuch a Volume to' the world: and it allonilheth me to think that fuch a man as Mr. (^Aryl, caii judge it Profitable to the Church of God, and worthy the Publikc view, unlefle it be to ihew men, what the Dodrine of this fort of men is by its fruits, and to detcrre then^ thereby from the entertainment of fuch Opi» nions. , j ^ ,

In ^hc ncxt.JPagc he begirds* TParelUi ^etwcenmcand the ^apifts; liljt! to the reft : • , ' , .,..,'

I. Moft of his quotations from them are general, withoac telling usthe^^ar* ticular place : and they may feek it that lift, and have nothing elfe to do,

z. Many of the words of the Papifts cited, are the fame that our Divines approve of, and ordinarily cite for our poftrine againft the reft of the Papifts.

3. Heplais with theambig-uitjr of the word [ Juftification] and'wlien th^ Papilts are known to mean it of fanftification, he parallels it as tnc famedoi^rinc; with mine, who ufe it as the Protettantsdo, for a Relative change : And fo ^f parallels the Papifts dodrine of firft and fecond Juftification, with mine of our being firft jaftified, and our fo continuing, or being juftificd alfo at Judgcmcnj. >: •■ •"...»

4. Thofe few fayings of the Papifts which particularly he direfts as'to, are fome of them nothing to the purpofe, fome of them raoft viUly abufcd : For example , he ^oth with unufual exadnels quote "BiUurmine, for thefc words [_ " Good works are the Conditions.of Juftification without which Chrifts fa» *'tisfadion is not applied to us.] VVhere I intreac the Reader to note the front of the man. i. This opinion fie/iir»7a«e mentions as Erroneous, and rejeftsir. I. He teU you it is the opinion oi Mtchuel Bdita, whofe name is enough to Hiew that it is mentioned in diflikc. j. It is commonly known that the Pope hirafclif condemned ihiiMuhuelBaius, wnh a long lift of his O.nnions (filling divers pages in,4.<'),,a$ Erroneous cr Herciicall, and forced the faid iaiUi (as the Jeluites boSiit a:aintt the Dominicani) to iecrint them all, 4. There is not one word about Juftjiicat)on in the place in Bc/Zarmzwc, but that is falfly added by this man. 5. The fecond Opinion which BcUarminc n^cs as probable is, that there arc two fatisfadlions, one of Chiifts, and one of ours,'and one depending on the other, and this for the honour of man .as well a Chrift, ihough one might have fufficed.. f. The third yvay wTilcn BcUirminc chqafah as moli piobableis, I'^od uM iantum fifdcluiUs [dtUftiStio, (^ Cilfit nc/fri] that there is but one aduall Satisfadion, and this is ours. !;> this my Da* diiuc i

U But

C8o3

Bat perhaps you wil\ fay, Mr.Cr. confefleth BcUambie to diffcnt ? I anfwcrjHc doth fo : but hear how : in thefe words: [ <* Of this Opinion BelUrmine if^rm-** £th fomc of his fellows to be, and findes ho fault with it or themj only himfclf ** takes up what fcemed to him more probable.]

Kb;. O face pa ft blushing 1 i. ^elUrmire talks of no fellows, but faies this is the opinion of fome, and names only MkbMl B^m.

I. Hcaddcth thcfc wor^^s [/M Michael Baius lib.de Indulg.cult. ^utt fen-teatii erronea mihi viictur~\ which opinion fccms to me Erroneous. Is this lo finde no fault with it ?

9. Yea he thus argucth a»ainft it [ Hum Scriptura (^ pAtrespaJftm vocitttnoftrd epeu[itUfi^imcs iiT pcccmramKeie-^bUonet-y T>ftndc fi ptufl homojuftmfuU •<*:fi-bm mcreri de condigno vitttm xttrnAntt eur mn fAtitfacere pro pana tempornliy quod r/f minia f Is this nothing ?

4. If he had found no faqlt, the name of 'Bum had been dirparagcmem c-«nough.

Should 1 give you an account of the reft of his quotations of the Papiflsj I fliould have fmall thanks from the Reader, for tiring his patience.

$, Thofe words which in his paiellcl he placeth as mine, are fome of them none of mincj but his own forgeries > fome of them diftnembred fcfaps; fome of them intermixt wiih twice as many of his own, or frequently with fome of his own, to pervert ihefdnfej and fome of them plain truths confeffedby all, with his falfe interpretations and coUcdions adjoyned. For example, p.^iS. be thus citeth my words; [ "^ We are ftili faid to be juftified by faith, which *<•!$ an ad of ours. tAfpcnd. pag.So. Moral duties are part of the Condition "of our Salvation5 and fork to be performed: And even Faith is a Moral «Du:y.]

Hfp. VVas there ever Proteftant that'denied any of this, or accounted it Popery 5 But hear his colLeftion how he makes it Popery. [ " So that according to ** Mr. B's dodrinc, Moral works and duties, alone, aafuch, arc required of hs to <'Juftificatlon: and not faith it felf this way ufefull but dtf a moral work arid duty, ^^ p.8o.

0 hard forehead ! Hedurftputin [alone] and [asfuch] and that [ faith it felf is not ufefull, but m a moral work or duty] out of his own brain, and make it. mine, to parellcl me with Papifts ! Well '• I have for Mr. Cttryls fatif-fadion gone thu> farre to ihcw how he confutcth my Dodrine, and Vin-dicateth Fundamentals: but my Patience will not hold out, nor my Con* fcience iuffcr me to waite my time, in faying much more to fuch a man. And if any man will judge of his Parellel, without turning to the Au-thours and to my words, but will believe what this man faith of them or me, without trial, I appeal from him, as a feduced incompetent Judge.

1 had thought to have performed the third part of my task, and hate (hewed you a multitude of his Contradiftionf j but I'le but give you a very brief laftc. You heard before how he made me [ as a Jefuite fetching arms from Hell, to promoe the Mother Harlot of Rome] for faying, that any body doth objcd that faith is a Paffive Inftrument. Yet fee whether himfelf io not fo, pig.Z^o. in thefe words, ["Did we hereby make man the dufi " prtximA, yet it is but the C'^'^JA proximo, inftrumvitAlk P'^jJivA of his Juftifi-^^ nation.

Part

C80

fam. p.^t- He complins of mcai Gallopiag after me ro the very Litfftft ef Jiome, and lurming with bead and flioulders tfaronging who ftiall be focmoft. And in his Epiftlcs, what admiration and dolefull complainw 6ndc we, for the fuc-cefs of my dodriue. Yecp^g.izi. hcfaith [It ishisown, and poflibly may continue his own co the worlds end, all men clfe proving themlclves too wife or too foolifli to joyn with hiciin this hii i'peculation ] that is, of a two-fold Rightcouf-

I am loath it (hould preve true, that be dare fwear an untruth as well as fpeak u,not will I affirm it. Bu: let it be confidered by the fober,what fear of God is ma-niftfted, in the very beginning of his book in the Epiftle Dedicatory : In the 5thand6=''^a'^ts he comes to clear himfelf from the charge of Antinomianifme, which he rfiuuccth tofouihtaJs: The twofirfthe thus conjoynes [''i- Jufti-** fication as an Immanent ad in God > as adually compleared in the Redem-"ptien V hich is by Chrift and in Chtill i both thelc before we believe.] And concerning this he iaith, that fo farre as he holdeth and hath declared himfelf to hold them ( a cautelous addidou > but I have before ihcwed how farre that is) (." 1. They are or feera at leaii to be grounded on Scripture : a. They ate ex-"prcfly and boldly aflerted by many oi the mofl conlpicuoas Divines in Piety *' and Learnisig that any of the Proteftani Churches have enjoyed ever fine* the << Reformation. ;. And that without the contradidion or exception of any " Church or Orthodox writer for well nigh a hundred years made againft it: ''A great and probable argument that it was th« Common Judgment of all tb« " Churches.]

7{sp. Matic here the height of Immodefty. i. Would this one man perfwade all ths lober Diy'intsoiEitgUnif to whom he Dedicateth his Book, that this is true ? Which is the hundred years fpace that he means ? Not before the Reformation no doubt. Not the lail hundred, no doubt, wherein fomany have con-:radifted them. It is moft probable he means the firft hundred after the Reformation : andiffo, who is the man that he hath yet named to us that is for hii opinion? or have his more learned partakers truly cited any orthodox Divine that for a hundred yean after the Reformation, did bold it ? I remember not tbac I have fecn any cited. I have obferved my felf in Chamicr and PoLxntu, a word ec two, founding expreily for Juftification before faith, but 1 think they were a hundred years after the Reformation begun : much more were ^accoviuSt D'TwijS and Mi. Pemble, But let it be when he pleafcthat the hundred years begin > doth not theChriliian world know, that if not all Churches and Eminent writers, yet feme at leail ever fince the Reformation, have Riaintainedj that none aj-c Juftified till they believe ? and without limitation denied thas there is any fuch thing as Juftification before faith, either of Ir^fidels, or «oa-exiftents I much lefs, a juiiificacion Compleated in Chrifll Mul^ we, caa we all believe, that there hath been a hundred years Gnce the Reformation wherein no one orthodox Wricer denied Jultification before faith ? Yea that others writ for it that while, and no man exccp:ed againft it • Have we not their books at hand to evince the falfhood of this! For my part, according to my fmall Reading the cican contrary is true, and much more then that : I know not of any man, till PeUms onExek.. and Chamiers Paufinu were written that ever let fall a word for their opinion, that 1 now ^-cmeinbcr j ( tbouih one or two words there are inZ«Mib/, and a few mote, lyable to mifconitrudion:) But

C8»3

Jknow that it is the currant doftrinc of the Protcftants till that time (andfince, excepting a few Tuch a« aforenamed ) that there is nojuilitication of Infidels, or before faith : And if from the Apoftlcs dayes till the Reformation be can name any one Orthodox writer, that ever was of his opinion j I will confels he hath read that which I never did.

z. But fuppofe ail this were nothing, let any fober man tell me, how it is pof^ fiblc for this man knowinily to fay or fwcar, and that abfolutely without the leaft limitation or exception, that it was [without the Contradidion or exception of any Church or Orthodox writer for well nigh a hundred years, made againft it] Could this man poflibly know every Contradiftion or exception that any Church in the Chriltian world, did for nigh a hundred years make againft it ? or hath he read all the books that every Orthodox writer hath written in that time? yea when he confefleth his fo fmall reading in the following lines, as I thought few men pretendiag to Thcologie, had been guilty of. It is therefore both unqueftionably falle, that there was no contradiding or excepting Divines ( when there were any of his way to contradid,) and moft certain that he could not have known it, if it had been true } there being many a hundred books that he never read or faw.

Yet feepi^.io, of that Epift. how he Seals up all with a folcnrn Snd dreadfull Oath: faying C I have no more to fay on this fubjeifl; and what I have faid *'hath been before him that being omnifcicntknoweth that I have fpokenfing-'^^ly the whole Truth, and nothin;^ but the Truth ;] Here is anappeal to God^, ^vatakinghim to witnefs. And if this be the whole Truth, how corns wc to have fo much more of his minde afterward on this point ?

I will mention but two points more of his vanity : The firfl is in his filly a-fcribing fo much humane Learning tome, whtnMr.J^endiiU might have given him a truer Information of me ; Had 1 as much Learning asMr.Qrandon iaith I have, and as much Piety as lAvI^cniiU concedcth, fine I were iome excellent pcrfon, farre better then I am : And if 1 be not only as unlearned as Mr I^. doth intimate, but alfo as Impious and dannnable afeducer as Mr.Crjjj^icw.doth make me, I were one of theunhappieft men on earth. Theteltimony of thefc twa Witncfles doth ill agree. But the vanity ihat I mean of Mr.Cwnitm is upon this occafion, to write fo laborioufly againft the ufe of humane Learning in Divinity: Between eleven and tWelve Leaves hel'pendsaf.ainft it in his^piftle: The fecond Chapter is much againft it: The third Chapter is almoft all a-gainft it. Alas friend. Learning and I be not fo ncer akin, but that you may fpare it, and yet be revenged on me, and pour out your gall againil me to the full. ^

• The laft vanity that I will fliew you, is his firft Chapter ( for 1 thought it fittcft to read him backward r) I had wrote thefe words inthcEpiftle to my hearers; [who] I hope do underttand, that to take upon rruit from your Teachers, what you cannot yet fee in its own evidence, is lefs abfurd, and more neceflary then many do imaL;in ] Upon thefe words he will prove me to hold the doftrine of Implicit faith. The many fenfelcfs cavils: the faife accu-fations without the Icaft ground, whicii are ui that Chapter : I will no: fo abufe the Readers Patience a$ to recite. For the thing it felf I fay but thefe two things: '. My judgement is that all ihat will be faved muft believe the Fun* damcmals cxpiiciiely: and that as much more as they can reach to know : and

that

tliac they ffiould ufe all diligence to know as much as may be, and fo fliould their Teachers to help them to it: and that no Teacher muft be believed againftthc known fenfe of Gods word : But yet, that they who know the fundamentals by a Divine faith,fliould as Learners believe their Teachers in the reft with a humane faith, fo far as they have no fufficient cafe of jealoul'ie or unbelief: and that the body of oar auditors muft take much upon Truft from their Teachers, or they 3ve undone. They that would fee more of my thoughts on this point, Iretcrtheiw to what I have written on it, in my Method for PeitccofConfcience, and in the fecond part of my book of iif/f, and in the Preface to that Part. If they that cannot Read believe not their Teachers, how know they that he reades true, or that there is fuch a thing as a Bible in the world ! How fhall others know that the Scripture is true tranflated, or the fame book that is in the HebicvV and G.ecki* or that there is any at all in the Hebrew and Greek ? or that we have now th« fame books that the Prophets and Apoftlesdid write?or that ever thev wrote any ?

1. Let me be bold to tell my opinion to my*Brethieu of theMinifliy, that though I deny them to have either Creditor Authority againft rhc known word of God, ytt fo great is their Credit and Authority, even as Teachers and Guides of the Church in Cafes agreeable to the word, and in Cafes to the people doubt-full and unknown, and in Cafes left by the word to their determination, (the word determining them bu: Generally ) that I think the Ignorance of this Truth, hath been the main Caufe of our fad Confufions and ich\(mcs In EtigUnd, and that the Minitiers have been Guilty of it, partly by an overmodelt concealing their Authority, and partly by an indifcrcet oppofuion to the Papirts errour of the Authority of the Church : And T think that till we havcb.t'.cr taught even our godly People, what Credit and Obedience is due to their Teachers and fpi-rituall Guides, the Churches of Engknd fhall never have Peace or any good eftablifhed order: I fay a^ain, we arebrckeii for want of the knowledge of this Truth, and till this be knownj we lliall never be well boand up and «»^ healed.

But bccaufe M' Qratdorih one that I had rather come to a reference with, then to a difpute, if he pleafe our dift'erence may be thus compromized according toour various principles. Becaufe it is agreeable to my Opinions, I fliall defire that'my hearers would believe me fidchumaui as a faithful! Teacher, when I am (hewing them what they know not, that they may learn > and not take me for a Lyar,when ever I fpeak any word that they know not thcmfelves as well as I, and confe-tjucntly have need to be taught. But for lAx.Cnndons hearers or Readers, Icaft they fhoulJ make a Papift of him, or themfclves, let them believe him in nothing that they know not to be true before hetcld it them, or fee not clcer proof of in the evidence which he bringeth. Ard if they arc at anytime afl'aulted wjiha Temptation, further to believe him j let them but open his book at randome, and read but one page with judgment and ttyall, yea half a leaf well chewed and concofted, I doubt not may oflcdually fave them from this Temptation to Popery, and reflorcthem totheu Inciedu i:y ; Probitumeji.

%

And thus I have performed the mottunfitoury task that ever I did attempt: If any think I have done it too briefly, I fliall defire his ov/n more Patient lungs to traverfe the reft by the help ot thefe Infofmations which I have given him : and fo let him juduc of it as he findcdacaufc.

C843 I

■>--r .--ktr i~;.»ai ..i.:>.u u:_j.^ c

Ic ihall fuflScc ma to prefem thcfe Rcafons to M' Cirfl, which hinder me front .

btlicving, that M'Crindon ha.h V.crc Vindicated the Truth of God, muchlcfs theFundaaiemaU of i CLtiAiankComtort, or that this his large and elaborate Volume is Prohubieio the Church of Goj, aad Worthy Coraajendatioa to the Publick View : or that it is likely ta add one cubit to the flatuite of any mans Reputation that (hall I'o Commend ic, or to advance that Name whick Poftcrity jhall finde affixcdj or to give one Grain of folid Peace to the Conference of any thathathfecrctly or openly Promoted it. This Judgment I pafs, ai Imptnialiy as I can, and am fomcwhac confident the Event will con^rm it> and Conrince the Incredulous.

FINIS,

i

-a-—- .-.i*.

/J ^ J^ : -■ . .iL^

^.

X-