faile finally so neither did it faile totally as you surmise Secondly I answer that this prayer and speach of Christ as will plainly appeare by the context had reference principally to this very act of Peters deniall Christ had prayed for him that euen now when as Sathan did seeke to sift him as wheate in tempting of him to denie his Master that euen in this particular temptation his â—…aith might not faile in his heart though it did in his mouth So that this speach and prayer of Christ hauing reference to this very act of Peters deniall of him that his faith might not so much as faile in it you cannot without great wrong to Peter but greater iniury to Christ affirme that his faith did totally faile at this particular time and so this your replie is vaine and friuolous Secondly it is manifest that Peter did not fall totally from grace in denying Christ because he did it onely out of feare and infirmitie and not out of malice or infidelitie hee did it being forced to it by carnall feare and not with a full consent hee denied him onely in the flesh and in the tongue and not in the heart and soule Now all will grant that sinnes of infirmitie and not of malice That sinnes committed by the flesh against the consent and approbation of the spirit and the inward man doe neuer cast a man wholly downe from the state of grace or else none could stand in the state of grace so much as for one houre such a sinne was Peters as all the Fathers and others doe agree therefore this sinne of his though it were great and grieuous yet it could not wholly depriue him of the state of grace Thirdly it is euident that Peter fell not totally from the state of grace because one act of infidelity cannot destroy an whole habit of grace especially being in such a nature as Peters was For Peter here did not denie that Iesus was the Christ and Sauiour of the world hee did not denie that he was God equall with the Father hee did not denie any thing touching his Deity or humanity or which did crosse any Aâ—…ticle of faith he onely denies that he was personally acquainted with Christ or that he was one of his companions or followers and will you say that such a deniall of the personall knowledge of Christ as this did vtterly destroy that habit and seed of grace and faith which was in Peters heart when as he did beleeue in his heart that Iesus was the Christ the Sonne of the liuing God when as this was no sinne of infidelitie but of feare and did onely argue not want of faith but want of courage in Peter will you make this one acte of cowardice in Peter to abolish and destroy the very seed and habit of his faith especially since he had no sooner denied Christ with his mouth but he presently bleeds for it at the heart Certainly if you doe it it is a signe you want the grace of charity who judge so harshly of other mens sinnes and yet thinke so lightly of your owne Fourthly it is euident that Peter fell not totally from the state of grace by this his sinne both by his cariage in and after this his sinne For as Peter shewed his faith and loue to Christ in following him to the high Priests pallace when as all the other Disciples fled away so his vnwillingnesse to forsake Christ euen then when as he was suspected to bee one of his friends and followers which might haue brought him into danger did shew that hee did still affect and loue him in his heart euen then when as he denyed that he knew him with his mouth I would demand but this question of our Antagonists who doe so much presse this Example whether Peter euen at that very time when as hee denyed with an oath that he knew not Christ did not beleeue on him and relie on him as on his onely Lord and Sauiour in his heart If he did so as it is more then probable that he did by Iohn 6. 67 68. Math. 16. 16 17. and Luke 32. 32 33. and by this his action here in that he did not leaue him or forsake him then it is certaine that his faith did not vtterly saile him that the habit and seed of grace and faith were still within him and so he fell not from the state of grace If he did not thus if he did not relie vpon him for saluation but disclame him for his Sauiour let our Antagonists then proue the contrary by the Scriptures that I am sure they cannot doe and therefore I am not bound to beleeue their bare assertion for it Againe Peters cariage after this his sinne comâ—…itted proues that he did not totally fall from grace for no for had the Cocke crowen but hee presently remembers the words which Iesus spake vnto him and hee went forth and wept bitterly Iâ—… Peter had fallen totally from the state of grace by this his sinne if he had had no habit no seed and no remainders of grace left in him when as he had denyed Christ it had beene impossible for him to haue beene so apprehensiue and sensible of his sinne as now he was No sooner had he committed this sinne of his but presently the Cocke crowes no sooner had the Cocke crowen but forthwith he remembers the words of Christ and was deeply affected with this sinne of his Hee gâ—…eth out and weepes bitterly his repentance followes so soone â—…on his sinne that if his faith and ancient graces had not continued in him no new infused grace could haue come betweene his sinne and his repentance and therefore Peters carriage both in and after his sinne committed doth proue that he did not fall totally from grace by this his sinne Fistly I would demand this question of our Antagonists whether the other Disciples did not fall from graâ—…s well as Peter for they denyed him in deeds in flying from him hee denyed him but in words in saying that he knew him not If the other Disciples fell from grace in flying from him where then was the Church of God in what persons was it then existing if they fell not from grace in flying from him then neither Peter in denying of him Sixtly the Scriptures make no mention at all that Peter in denying Christ did fall from grace strange then that our Antagonists should so confidently affirme it vnlesse they haue it by some spetiall reuelation Is not this a strange kinde of presumption in men to determine and judge of other mens estates in such a resolute and peremptorie manner without a ground in Scripture for it is not this a kinde of folly and arrogancie in them to censure and judge of other mens estates which they neuer were acquainted with and in the meane time to neglect to sâ—…arch and trie their owne Sure I am the Scripture makes no mention that Peter fell from grace by this his sinne therefore
which are common to wicked men as well as to the Saints of God as prophecie learning the knowledge and interpretation of Scripture and tongues the working of miracles the discerning of spirits extraordinary skill in any art mysterie or science an heroicall valient and Kingly minde and spirit of which we may reade in the 1. Cor 12. 1 to the 12. Exod 35 30. to the end of the chapter Iudgees 14 19 cap 15 14 15. 1 Sam. 11 6 and cap. 16 13 14. Of such ordinary Graces as these this question is not intended for these may be both finally and totally lost Secondly there are sanctifying sauing and peculiar graces of Gods holy Spirit which are proper only to the elect children and saints of God such as are faith loue hope sauing and experimentall knowledge peace of conscience ioy in the holy Ghost and the like of which wee may reade Gal 5. 22 23. of these onely is our present question Now in these sanctifying sauing and peculiar graces there are two things to bee considered first there are the seedes and habits of these graces of which this question is only intended secondly there are the degrees the sence and feeling the acts and effects of these graces which are not within the verge and limits of our question As for the seedes and habits of the graces we hold that a truâ—… regenerate man can neither finally nor totally fall from them but as for degrees the sense and feeling the acts and effects of these sauing graces we hold that a regenerate man may fall from them and loose them for a time So that the question that is now to be disputed of is no more but this Whether those that are true beleeuers those that are once truly regenerate and grafted into Christ by a true and liuely faith and not only in outward shew may fall finally totally from the very seedes and habits not from the degrees the sense the acts and effects of the sauing sanctifying and peculiar graces and not of the ordinary and common graces of Gods holy Spirit wrought in their hearts and soules In this question there are three different opinions Some there are that hold that those that are once truly regenerated and put into the state of sauing grace may fall totally from the very seedes and habits of their graces but yet not finally that is they may so farre loose the very seedes and habits of these sauing graces for a time that there shall not be so much as any remainders of them left behinde insomuch that they neede a new insition and ingrafting into Christ againe but yet they hold that they can neuer fall finally from grace because that God hauing praedâ—…stinated them vnto life eternall and foreseeing this their fall doth alwaies out of his mercy raise them vp againe that so they may not perish finally but haue euerlasting life Others there are that hold that the true regenerate Saints of God and members of Iesus Christ may fall from the very seedes and habits of sauing grace not onely totally so as vtterly to loose these seedes habits of sauing grace for a time but finally to so as to loose them for euer and to perish euerlastingly in their sinnes Others they hold that the state of grace is such a permanent setled and well grounded estate that the seedes and habits of true and sauing grace are so rooted and fixed in the hearts and soules of all those in whom once they are begun in truth that they can neither totally for a time nor finally for euer fall from the state of grace or vtterly loose the seedes and habits of these sauing and peculiar graces that are within them The two first of these opinions I am now to refute as false wicked damnable and erroneous and the last opinion only will I maintaine as sound and orthodox Now because these two first opinions of a totall and a finall fall from grace are so wraped and included one within the other and haue so neere affinity one with the other that the same arguments and answers serue to defend them both and most of the arguments that serue to ouerthrow the one of them doe serue likewise for to subuert the other to auoide prolixity and tedious repetitions I will ioyne them both together and oppugne them both by maintaining this sound Orthodox and comfortable assertion which defeates them both That those who are once truly regenerated and ingrafted into Christ by a true and liuely saith can neither finally nor totally fall from grace Infinite and many are the arguments which I might produce to proue this Orthodox and sound position which for order method and perspicuity sake I shall now reduce to seuen generall heads The first sort of arguments shall be taken from God himselfe the second from Christ the third from the holy Ghost the fourth from regenerate men themselues and from those priuiledges which they doe inioy the fifth from the Angells the sixth from the very nature of true and sauing grace and the seuenth from those many dangerous absurdities and consequences which else will necessarily follow vpon the contrary assertion First from God himselfe there are ten arguments which may be deduced to proue the totall and finall perseuerance of the Saints The first thing in God is that which makes for the finall perseuerance of all such as are once truly regenerated to wit Gods eternall purpose and immutable decree whereby hee hath elected and praedestinated all such as are truly regenerated and ingrafted into Iesus Christ by a true and liuely faith vnto eternall life From which eternall purpose and decree of God I haue this argument which neither hath already beene neither shall hereafter be once fully answered Those who by Gods eternall purpose and immutable decree are praedestinated and ordained to eternall life can neuer finally fall from grace But all those who are once truly regenerated and ingrafted into Christ by a tâ—…ue and liuely faith are by Gods eternall purpose and immutable decree praedestinated and ordained to eternall life therefore they can neuer finally fall from grace The maior proposition that can not be denyed for Gods eternall purpose and immutable decree cannot bee altered or changed this purpose of God according to election it shall stand firme for euer Psal 33 11. Rom 9 11. As he hath purposed so shall it stand and none shall disanull it Isay 14 24 27. this foundation of the Lord it abideth sure hauing the seale of God annexed to it 2 Tim 2 19 therefore it can not bee changed If you obiect that of the 2 Pet 1 10. where the Saints are exhorted to make their calling and election sure therefore their election is not so sure but it may be altered I answere that this Scripture hath not reference or relation to the calling and election themselues as they haue relation vnto God for election and vocation in themselues and as they haue reference vnto God they are
can haue any benefit or aduantage by them but when once the condition on our parts is in truth performed by God who workes it for vs then the promises and the things promised are our owne for euer without any further condition This we may see in these three seuerall promises of God Hee that repenteth hee that beleeueth hee that receiueth Iesus Christ shall be saued and shall not come into condemnation Marke 16 16. Iohn 1 12. cap. 3 17 18. cap. 5 24. Acts 2 37 38 39. cap. 3 19. and cap. 16. 30 31. Here it is true that these promises being conditionall and requiring something on our parts before wee shall inioy them wee by the assistance and helpe of God must first truly repent beleiue and receiue Iesus Christ before we shall be saued and freed from condemnation but when we haue once truly repented belieued and receiued Iesus Christ then we are saued and freed from condemnation for euer Now in these three generall promises I would haue you to obserue these two things which make much for my present purpose First that these three promises are the originall charters and assurances that giue vs interest right and title vnto heauen and eternall life and that all these other promises which belong vnto vs after we haue truly belieued repented and receiued Iesus Christ giue vs no new interest right and title to heauen and eternall life but onely serue for to confirme and strengthen that interest right and title to which wee had in them before by these three generall promises that so wee may inioy them with greater comfort and assurance I cannot better expresse it then by this similitude A man hath lands demised to him by a fine or by a deed indented and inrolled or some such originall conuaiance these very originall deedes without any other assurance doe giue him a full perfect and absolute right and interest in those lands Suppose now that after this deuise the party that sold those lands should make a generall release or confirmation of those lands vnto the party to whom they were deuised this release or confirmation giues him no new right or interest in these lands but onely serues to strengthen and confirme the old which was sure and safe enough before So it is heare these three originall promises when once wee doe truly beleiue repent and receiue Christ Iesus they are the originall charters that giue vs a full sure and perfect interest right and title to heauen and eternall life and all these other promises which God makes vnto vs either for himselfe or vs when once we are within the couenant and state of grace serue onely to strengthen and confirme our ancient interest right and title vnto heauen which was sure and safe before they giue vs no new interest right and title to it So that if a man doe but once truly beleiue repent and receiue Christ Iesus this makes him sure of heauen and eternall life though hee had no other promises to assure him but these Secondly obserue that saluation heauen and eternall life in these three radicall and originall promises are suspended onely and depend meerely vpon the performance of the conditions themselues and not vpon the perpetuall and continuall performance of them God doth not say if ye beleiue and beleiue for euer if yee repent and repent for euer if yee receiue Iesus Christ and receiue him for euer yee shall bee saued and haue euerlasting life no there is no such matter in the promises but if wee truly beleiue if we doe truly repent and receiue Christ Jesus in the sinceritie of our hearts though it be but once wee shall be saued and haue euerlasting life because that hee that doth truly beleiue truly repent and receiue Christ Iesus but once doth belieue repent and receiue Christ Iesus for euer he is passed from death to life for euer and shall not come into condemnation Iohn 5 24. Rom 8 1 2. and Marke 16. 16. Suppose a man should promise another an hundred pounds vpon condition that hee should marry his daughter or publikely recant those iniuries which he had done vnto him if there he doth marry his daughter but once or recant those iniuries in publike but once though hee doe not reitterate them hee shail haue the hundred pound because hee hath performed the condition So when as God doth promise vs saluation heauen and eternall life if we belieue râ—…pent and receiue Christ Iesus in sinceritie and in truth if once wee doe but truly beleiue repent and receiue Christ Iesus wee shall certainly be saued and haue heauen and euerlasting life because the condition on which these are suspended is performed I would aske but this question of any of our Antagonists whether any man may not safely make this argument with himselfe Euery one that doth truly belieue repent and receiue Christ Iesus shall be saued and haue euerlasting life But I my selfe do truly belieue repent and receiue Christ Iesus therefore I shall bee saued and haue euerlasting life If this be not a good argument then what benefit comfort or assurance can any Christian take from these or any other promises of the Gospell what claime interest or title can he lay to saluation heauen or eternall life or to what end doe these promises serue If it be a good argument as I thinke none can deny it then certainly heauen saluation and eternall life depend onely vpon the faith and repentance of men and their receiuing of Iesus Christ without any necessary relation to any inclusiue condition if they perseuere withall for he that doth but once truly beleiue repent and receiue Christ Iesus doth beleiue repent and receiue Christ for euer Certainly as Christ himselfe by dying vnto sinne but once is become the authour of eternall saluation to all truly penitent and beleiuing sinners and being raised from the dead dieth no more death hath no more dominion ouer him Rom 6 9 10. Hebr 5 9. cap. 7 27. and cap 9 25 28. So he that is but once truly regenerated and aliue to God through Iesus Christ our Lord dieth no more death hath no more dominion ouer him but he shall liue for euer vnto God and shall not come into condemnation Rom 6 7 to 12 Iohn 5 24. Rom 8 2. 1 Iohn 3 9 14. and Hebr 10 2. how then can he euer finally or â—…otally fall from grace Let all the deuils in hell or men in earth lay their heades together they shall neuer with all their wit and sophistrie delude or ouerthrow this plaine and pregnant truth Againe there are a second sort of promises which are proper peculiar only to those which are in truth regenerated and within the couenant and state of grace of which sort the greater part of all the promises which I haue formerly cited are which promises I haue proued giue them no new interest right or title vnto heauen and eternall life but onely serue to ratifie and confirme that
I know not any particular man sure I am that they are neither the best nor greatest nor yet the learnedest in our Church and therefore vnlesse that Mr. Mountague will arrogate and monopolize this title of the learnedest in the Church of England vnto himselfe alone which hee is very like to doe because he doth debase the chiefest worthies of our Church with such vile scandalous reproachfull and vnderualuing termes and checke correct reiect and vse them at his pleasure though alas good man hee is not worthy for to be their scholler hee must pardon vs though we beleeue him not in this That the learnedest in the Church of England haue alwayes held that faith once had may bee both totally and finally lost for you see that I haue proued it to be a meere forgery and vntruth that was neuer published and recorded by any member of the Church of England but himselfe But now Mr. Mountagne tells vs that they were the learnedest in the Church of England that drew composed and agreed the Articles in 52. and 62. that ratified them in 71. that confirmed them againe in 640. Well what if this be granted though perchance there might be some question of it All these saith hee haue and doe assent vnto Antiquity in this Tenent and subscribe it truly or in hypocrisie Well I grant it for all Antiquity as I haue formerly proued hath concurred with me in this assertion Yea but Mr. Mountague saith otherwise and therefore I must take his meaning not his words to wit that the learnedest in the Church of England haue agreed ratified and confirmed it that Faith once had may be both totally and finally lost But how doth this appeare O saith hee obsegnatis tabulis by the expresse words of the 16. Article so that now the second and the maine thing which I haue to proue is only this That the Articles of the Church of England but specially the 16. Article doe not proue Mr. Mountagues assertion of a totall and finall fall from gracâ—… This will euidently appeare first by the very title of the 16. Article which is only this of sinne after Baptisme The Title doubtlesse of euery Article compriseth the very pith scope and substance of the Article as well as the title of our Homilies doth of the Homilies else they were very injudicious and not the learnedest in the Church of England who imposed it and you an injudicious and shallow-pated scholler to draw arguments from titles as you haue done from the Title of an Homily if therefore this title and the 16. Article suite together the 16. Article must needs bee only intended of sinne after Baptisme and not of a totall or finall fall from grace Secondy as the title of the Article so the very words the very scope and end of the Article proue as much For the very scope and end of the 16. Article as any man that hath his eyes in his head may discerne at first was but to condemne two sorts of Heretickes First such as hold that after men are once regenerated they cannot sin as the Nouatians Iouinians and Catharists did and as some Brownists doe hauing reference to the 15. Article going immediatly before which concludes that all men besides Christ though regenerate were sinners Now this appeares by the conclusion of the 16. Article therefore they are to bee condemned which say they can no more sinne as long as they liue here Secondly to condemne such as denie place of forgiuenesse and reconciliation to such as commit any grosse and scandalous sinne after Baptisme though they are truly penitent for the same as the Montanists and Nouatians did in the primatiue Church and as some Anabaptists and Brownists doe now which appeares by the conclusion of the Article from the former praemises Therefore they are to be condemned which say they can no more sinne as long as they liue here or deny place of forgiuenesse to such as truly repent This then being the only substance end scope of our 16. Article to condemne these two sorts of heretickes there is nothing as yet to bee found in it which makes either for a totall or a finall fall from grace If then there be any thing in this Article making for it then it must needs be these bare words of the Article abstracted and wrested from their genuine and proper scope and sense After we haue receiued the holy Ghost wee may depart from grace giuen and fall into sinne and by the grace of God wee may rise againe and amend our liues But these words torment and racke them to the vtmost they warrant not this Doctrine of a totall or finall fall from grace at least they warrant it not in that declaratory and positiue manner and in plaine and expresse words as Mr. Mountague affirmes they doe For first here is not so much as one word of falling either totally or finally from the state of grace and justification into the state of death and damnation not so much as one word that faith once had may either totally or finally bee lost againe Now they are your owâ—… words Mr. Mountague the words are not direct which are not expresse so say I that is not the plaine positiue declaratorie and expresse Doctrine of the Articles which is not deliuered in positiue plaine absolute and expresse tearmes this Doctrine of a totall and finall fall from grace is not so deliuered in these words in this 16. Article therefore it is but your bare and wrested collection and not the expresse doctrine of the Article Secondly the very words themselues will not beare that doctrine which you would thrust vpon them in any good grammaticall construction For what good Grammarian is there that would giue this construction to these words After wee haue receiued the holy Ghost we may depart from grace giuen and fall into sinne that is wee may fall quite away from the state of grace into the state of damnation as if that euery departure from grace and euery fall into sinne were a falling totally from the state of grace Euery man I hope will grant that the committing of any sinne is a departure from grace in respect of that particular sinne be it but a sinne of infirmity he that commits the least sinne departs from grace and falls into sinne and yet hee doth not presently fall from the state of grace into the state of damnation A man may depart from the act of grace aud yet retaine the habit still a man may fall into finne and yet not fall from the state of grace into the state of damnation hee may recedere depart as our Article affirmes and yet not excedere fall quite away from grace giuen so that the very words will not necessarily no nor impliedly beare that sense the which you giue them because a man may depart from grace giuen and fall into sinne and yet not fall either totally or finally from the state of grace Secondly
the righteous neuer fall from grace yet God hath his end because his law and justice is declared by this place Lastly this commination is made generally to all as well to the elect of God as to any others now you your selues doe grant that those whom God himselfe hath elected to saluation ex praeuisa fide can neuer fall from grace and therefore this commination being made to them as well as to any others can neuer imply a fall from grace for then it should imply that the elect of God should fall from grace as well as others which is impossible by your owne confessions And thus much in answer to this first obiection Other answeres there are which are giuen to this place As first that this righteous man and righteousnesse here mentioned is only meant of hypocrites who haue onely an outward shew of righteousnes and seeme to be righteous in the sight of men and not of men that are truly righteous nor of true righteousnesse nor of such ai were habitually righteous but onely such as were actually righteous hauing onely the acts of righteousnesse but not the habit Others answer that those which are here meant are such as are truly righteous but yet the departing from righteousnesse here mentioned is onely intended of the acts but not of the habits of righteousnesse and grace and that by death in this place is onely meant a temporall death but not an eternall which temporall death being the punishment of sinne may bee common to the righteous and the wicked and is inflicted vpon righteous men oft times as a punishment for some sinne of theirs as we may see in the examples of Iosiah and Hezechiah 2 Chron 35 22. and Isay 38 1. but neuer the eternall death But these answers are lesse probable and come not so home as the others doe Wherefore I will passe them ouer and proceed to the second argument The second argument that may be made against me is taken from that of Paul 1 Cor 9 27. I keep vnder my body bring it into subiection least that by any meanes when I haue preached vnto others I my selfe should be a cast away From whence this argument is framed Paul who was a true regenerate man might become a reprobate or cast away Therefore such as are truly regenerated may fall from grace For answer to this argument I shall first of all denie the Anticedent For if you take a reprobate or cast-away in this place as opposite to one that is elected as you doe then the proposition is false and is not warranted by the text For hee that is elected to saluation can neuer become a reprobate in this sense because the foundation of the Lord abideth sure and his purpose according to election shall stand fast for euer 2 Tim 2 19. and Rom. 9. 11. Now that Paul did not feare to become a reprobate in this sense it is euident by these insuing reasons First because that Paul was alwaies sure and certaine of his saluation He was alwaies fully perswaded that neither tribulation distresse persecution famine nakednesse perill nor sword that neither death nor life nor Angells nor principalities nor powers nor things present nor things to come nor height nor depth nor any other creature should be able to seperate him from the loue of God which is in Christ Iesus his Lord. Hee was alwaies sure that whether he should liue or dye hee should liue and dye vnto the Lord and that when euer his earthly house of this tabernakle were dissolued hee should haue a building of God an house not made with hands eternall in the highest heauens hee was confident of his saluation and this his confidence made him willing to bee dissolued that so hee might bee present with the Lord. Hee knew whom hee had beleiued and that hee would surely keepe that which hee had committed to him against that day Whence hee doth boldly auouch this of himselfe The Lord shall deliuer mee from euery euill worke and will preserue mee to his beauenly kingdome And therefore a little before his death he triumphs ouer hell and death in this comfortable confident and triumphant speech I haue fought a good fight I haue finished my course I haue kept the faith henceforth is laide vp for mee a crowne of righteousnesse which God the righous iudge shall giue mee at that day Paul therefore could neuer feare that euer hee should become such a reprobate and cast-away as you intend because hee was so sure and so absolutely confidenr of his saluation Secondly Paul was sure that he could neuer fall away from the state of grace and become a reprobate in your sense because he knew that hee was praedestinated and elected to eternall life and therefore could not but be justified sanctified glorified for euer with God in heauen Paul knew very well that none of the elect of God could perish and hee also knew that himselfe was elected to saluation as we may see by Acts 9 15. Rom 1 1. cap. 8 30 33 35. cap. 9. 11. cap. 11. 7. 2 Cor. 1 21. cap. 5. 1. to 10. Gal. 1. 1. Ephes. 1. 3 4 5. 2 Tim 1. 13 14 16. 2 Tim. 1. 2 12. and Tit. 1. 1. Therefore hee could neuer feare to become such a reprobate as should bee damned and cast for euer into hell or such a reprobate as you inted and so the Antecedent is vntrue in the sense that you propound it If then you will take a reprobate and a cast-away for such a one as is blame worthy such a one as deserues reproose which is the genuine and proper sense of the word in this place then it makes nothing for your purpose For I grant that a regenerate man may deserue reproofe and blame for some miscariages or sins which he doth commit but yet if followes not therevpon that therefore he may fall from grace Paul he did indeauour to liue according to his doctrine least his auditours should haue just cause for to reproue him if he had done any thing in his practise which might crosse this doctrine for which hee should deserue reproofe yet it followes not that therefore he might fall away from the state of grace Wherefore if you take a reprobate or cast-away in the strictersense for one that is bound ouer to eternall condemnation then your Anticedent is false if in a more milde and larger sense for one that deserues reproofe then the Anticedent is true but the argument is false and followes not Secondly admit that Paul in this place doth vse this word reprobate or cast-away in the stricter sence for one that is vtterly forsaken of God and bound ouer to eternall condemnation then the argument followes not For Pauls meaning then is no more but this As God hath ordained that his Saints should perseuere so hee hath ordained the meanes by which they should perseuere as fasting prayer mortification and the like Now I vse
and disparage him If God therefore were jealous of his Saints who are his friends and his best beloued to whom hee doth communicate his secrets and his will they would not nay they could not put their trust â—…n him Yea it would cause them for to call his promises and truth into question wherein hee hath promised to preserue them from Apostacie to keepe them from falling and to put his feare into their hearts that they should not depart from him and the like Wherefore they must and doe take all these Scriptures to be nothing else but so many motiues and incouragements both from the danger and the profit to stirre them vp to a finall constant vigilant circumspect and cheerefull perseuerance in grace which is the true the proper and only vse and end of them So that these objections and arguments which you â—…rame from these and such like Scriptures are but friuolous and idle they are but meere inconsequencies and come not to the purpose Lastly the Saints of God by the helpe and assistance of Gods Spirit doe aâ—…waies perforâ—…e these conditions they doe continue stedfast in the faith they doe perseuere vnto the end they are alwayes adding one grace vnto another they doe still hold on their way they still grow stronger and stronger they mount vp with wings as Eagles they runne and are not wearie they walke and doe not faint they walke in gods statutes and they keepe his iuagements and doe them Iob 17. 9. Isai. 49. 31. 〈◊〉 36. 27. therefore they shall neuer fall therefore they shall be saued so that these conditionall speeches proue only that they cannot fall from grace because that God doth alwayes inable them for to performe the conditions The eleuenth obiection which may be made against mee is that of Heb. 10. 35 38. Cast not away your confidence which hath great recompence of reward If any man draw backe my soule shall haue no pleasure in him From whence this argument may bee framed The Saints of God may cast away their confidence draw backe from God and loose Gods fauour therefore they may fall from grace I answer that the Antecedent is false and is not warranted by the text That the Saints of God may cast away their confidence I answer first that the text it selfe doth not warrant it For two reasons First because these words cast not away your confidence c. are nothig else but an earnest exhortation which the Apostle makes to the Hebrewes to cause them to continue constant in the faith and in the assurance of Gods loue to them mauger all those afflictions which did befall them they are nothing else but an exhortation vnto constancie and perseuerance in the state of grace and therefore they doe not imply a fall from grace All the argument that you can haue from these words in this sense is this The Hebrewes are exhorted to perseuere in grace therefore they may fall from grace which is but a nugatory and absurd inconsequent Secondly the Apostle tells vs in the former verse that these Hebrewes were assured of their saluation and that they knâ—…w that they had in heauen a farre better and induring substance then their earthly goods and possessions were therefore these subsequent words of the Apostle doe not necessarily intimate that these Hebrewes might fall from grace and so loose that heauenly substance and treasure of which they were assured for then this would contradict his former words and take away that certaintie of saluation which hee had attributed to them before Secondly admit that these Hebrewes might cast away their confidence and assurance of Gods loue and call their saluation into question in times of pressure affliction yet it followes not that therefore they might cast away their faith and those habits and seeds of grace which were within them for the strongest faith may doubt and stagger now and then and such as haue most grace may in times of pressure and temptation call Gods eternall loue and fauour to them â—…to question and yet their faith and graces may not faile Christians may cast away or loose their confidence and the comfortable assurance of Gods loue fauour for a time which is but a degree and fruite of faith though their faith and graces do habitually remaine within them Wherefore make the most you can of this exhortation your collection from it will bee onely this The Saints of God may loose the degrees and acts of grace therefore they may fall from the habits and state of grace which is but a meere Noniquitur For the other part of the Antecedent that the Saints of God may draw backe from God and so loose his fauour I answer that if you take this word draw backe for nothing else but the losse of the degrees of their loue and vnion vnto Christ which is not the meaning of the Apostle then I agree it But if you take it for a totall withdrawing of their soules froÌ„ God for a totall Apostacie and falling from God which is the true and proper meaning of the Apostle then I denie it because it is not warranted by the text For those that thus draw backe they are not any such as are true beleeuers and truly ingraâ—…ted into Iesus Christ but onely hypocrites and such as made an outward formall shew and profession of religion and had neuer any true and justifying faith at all within them which appeares most euidently by these two reasons taken from the very text it selfe The iust shall liue by faith but if any man draw backe my soule shall haue no pleasure in him The just men who haue a true and liuing faith are here put in opposition to those that haue it not but only in outward shew Those that haue this true and sauing faith they liue by it their faith doth liue and hold out euen in times of persecuâ—…ion it neuer dies nor yet expires those who haue not this true and liuing faith and yet make an outward profession and shew of faith in times of peace they alwaies doe and will draw backe in times of triall when persecution ariseth because of the word of God by and by they are offended like the stonie ground Math. 13. 2â—… they will rather draw backe from God then suffer for him therefore Gods soule shall haue no pleasure in them Which Antithesis betweene the iust who liue by faith and those that draw backe proues vndeniablie that such as draw backe are no true beleeuers who liue by faith but onely hypocrites and such beleeuers who had no truth of grace at all within them Secondly it is euidently proued by the Antithesis in the next insuing verse But wee that is wee who are true beleeuers are not of them who draw backe vnto perdition wee neuer fall from grace nor yet deny the profession of Gods name but of them that beleeue to the sauing of the soule our faith it alwaies continues to the end and wee doe alwaies
the Scriptures and if thou wilt but weigh them with a iudicious and impartiall eye thou shalt finde them so disioynted so incongruous so indigestlie so idle and absurd so full of inconsequies and grosse Nonsequiturs so palpably miscollected and incongruously wrested and extorted from the places which are cited for to warrant them that thou canst not choose but wonder at the injudiciousnesse and weaknesse of such as doe produce them For mine owne part I wonder how any that make a vaunt or shew of judgement wit or learning can be so strangely besotted and so much ouer-seene as to build a point of faith and doctrine vpon such slender and injuditious collections and grounds as these and to oppose a manifest and vndeniable truth with these weake childish absurd incongruous injudicious and ridiculous arguments and collections which children and schoole-boyes would blush to vrge Certainly if it were not that some of this sect haue a name of learning wit and judgement in the world I should thinke them very illiterate and simple very childish sottish and injudicious to produce such strange collections arguments and conceits as these against so euident and cleere a truth But what shall I say God himselfe hath besoâ—…ted them with these vaine delusions hee hath giuen them ouer to a reprobate and iniuditious sence to beleeue those lies and fancies of their owne because they would not receiue the loue of the truth and submit their wills and judgements to his word and hence it is that they are not ashamed to broach these vaine conceites these false collections and injuditious if not absurd and ridiculous arguments which they themselues would scoffe at deride and vtterly disclaime if they were in their right sences and had not their faces steeled with impudencie and boldnesse I mention this but as an Item on the by I now proceed to the insuing arguments The twentyfourth argument which may be produced against mee is that which is the very ground the very head roote and fountaine of this damnable and pernitious Error of the finall and totall Apostacie of the Saints and it is onely this A true regenerate Saint of God may commit a grosse and vnknowne sinne and dye before hee hath particularly repented of it Therefore he may fall away both finally and totally from the state of grace For answer to this grand and vnanswerable objection as our Antagonists repute it I shall deny the argument for the inconsequencie of it Now that this argument followes not it is euident by these insuing reasons First because it requires a particular and actuall repentance after euery knowen and grosse sinne that a true member of Christ commits as absolutely necessary to saluation which if I should admit it would necessarily follow that no man could bee saued First because that there is no man whatsoeuer that can particularly repent of all those particular and mortall sins which he hath committed from time to time Secondly because the most righteous men in the world doe no doubt commit some actuall and deadly sin or other in thought word and deed betweene the last minute instant of their death and their last actuall repentance of which sins they haue no time and space particularly to repent if therefore an actuall repentance were absolutely required after euery particular act of sinne that a child of God commitâ—… it would bee then impossible for any to bee saued a desperate and dismall consequent which would make the very stoutest of our Antagonists to quake and tremble if it were admitted to bee true as they pretend it for to bee Secondly this argument followes not because it would either bring in that Popish distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes when à s the least sinnes that any man can commit as idle words and thoughts are mortall and deadly in their owne proper nature as appeares by Deut. 27. 26. Ier. 17 9. Ezech. 18. 20. Math. 5. 28. cap. 12. 37 38. Acts 8. 22. Gal. 3. 10. and Ephes. 5. 3 7. Or else it would make euery sinne yea the very least sinne that a regenerate man commits to seuer and cut him off from Christ and to cast him downe from the state of grace For if any mortall sinne whatsoeuer may cut a man off from Christ and cast him downe from the state of grace as you affirme it may why then should not euery sinne doe it as well as any sinne Euery sin is alike mortall in it felfe and in its owne nature and therefore euery sinne as well ac any sinne should cut a man off from Christ and cast him downe from the state of grace That which makes any sinne to cut a man off from Christ is onely this that it is a mortall sinne now euery sinne is a like mortall in its owne essence and nature therefore euery sinne should cut a man off from Christ as well as any sinne where there is the same cause there must needes be the same effect Now you your selues doe grant that euery sinne which a Saint of God commits doth not seuer and cut him off from Christ and if it were not so in were impossible for any to be ingrafted into Christ or to be saued for before he could repent him of one sinne he would still commit another which would hinder his inscition into Christ and his inuesting into the state of grace his sinnes would come so fast and thicke vpon him that hee could neuer be ingrafted into Christ againe and so he could not be saued If therefore any deadly sinne that a Saint commits doth not seuer him from Christ and cast him downe from the state of grace then no sinne at all can doe it because all sinnes are alike mortall in their owne nature and so your argument doth not follow Thirdly this argument followes not because it would make the sinnes of regenerate men vtterly to abolish and roote out that immortall seede of grace which is planted in their hearts make them liable to eternall condemnation which cannot be For Saint Iohn doth certifie vs in expresse words in the 1 Iohn 3. 9. that whosoeuer is borne of God doth not commit sinne for his feede remaineth in him neither can bee sinne bâ—…cause bee is borne of God that is hee cannot sin vnto death or to extirpate that seede of grace which is within him The seed of grace is an incorruptible and immortall seed 1 Pet. 1. 23. therefore no sinnes which the Saints of God commit can suffocate or quite extinguish it True it is that the sinnes of Gods children may crosse hinder and in part suppresse the acts and fruites the increase and growth of grace for a time but yet they cannot quell nor quite extirpate that habit and seed of grace which is within them they cannot make them not to bee the sons of God the members of Christ or the elect of God and therefore the argument followes not Fourthly the argument followes not because it would make repentance to be
but a meere transient act and not an habituall grace or at least it would make habituall repentance to bee of no esteeme in the sight of God neither of which can bee admitted For if a new and fresh repentance bee necessarily required after euery particular knowne sinne as your argument surmiseth then either the sinne which is committed must destroy that habituall repentance which is in men or else the act of repentance after those knowne sinnes committed must be a fruit of that habituall repentance which was in them before or else it must be but a meere transient act or else it must follow that such as haue the habituall grace of true repentance in thē may be damned or put into the state of damnation for want of an outward act of this their habituall repentance at that particular time If the sinne committed doth destroy that habituall repentance which was in them then you will make one act of sinne to destroy an habit of grace which cannot bee If this actuall repentance after the sinne committed which you say doth cut men off from Christ and cast them downe from the state of grace bee but a fruite and effect of the former habit of r◅pentance that was in them then they were not totally cut off from Christ and cast downe from the state of grace for they had still the grace and habit of repentance in them If this actuall repentance afterwards proceed not from an habit of repentance which is wrought within them then you make repentance to bee but a meere transient act and not an habituall grace which is contrary to the Scriptures which doe make repentance to bee an habituall grace If you grant repentance to bee an habituall grace and yet maintaine that the Saints of God are in the state of damnation after any grosse sinne committed before their actuall repentance notwithstanding they haue the habituall grace of repentance in them then you make the habit of true repentance to wit the inward disposition and frame of the heart and soule the inward hatred and antipathie against sinne the inward tendernesse and the habituall sorrow and griefe of heart and soule the constant purpose of heart to forsake all sinne and to cleaue inseperablie to Christ to bee nothing wor◅h in the sight of God and to bee nothing auailable to the Sa◅nts when as it is onely the inward and habituall disposition and inclination of the heart and soule that God requires and regards as an acceptable and pleasing sacrifice vnto him neuer respecting the outward act of repentance vnlesse it proceed from that babit of repentance which is within vs as you may see at large 2◅ Chro. 34. 27 28. Ps. 51. 17. Isa. 57. 15. c. 61 1 2 3. Eze. 36. 26. Mal. 3. 14. Wherfore seeing that this argument would make repentance to be a meere transient act not an habituall grace and seeing it would make the habituall grace of true repentance to bee of no effect and not sufficient to free men from damnation it followes not Fifthly this argument followes not because it would breed a great fraction and interruption in a Christian mans estate a regenerate man might then bee one day in the state of grace another day in the state of damnation a third day saued a fourth day damned a fifth day written in the booke of life a sixth day rased out of it againe the state of grace should then beefull of fractions and interruptions full of inconstancie and ficklenesse whereas the Scripture doth informe vs that a regenerate mans estate is a constant stable setled permanent and immutable estate and so well grounded fixed rooted and established that it cannot be shaken moued or totally interrupted as you may read at large Psal. 125. 1. Psal. 37. 24. Psal. 89. 36 37. Ier. 31. 36 37. Math. 7. 24 25. Luke 6. 48. Iob. 36. 7. Heb. 12 28. Ephes. 3. 17. Col. 1. 23. cap. 2. 5 7. 2 Cor. 1 21. Rom. 5. 2. 1 Cor. 16. 23. 1 Cor. 1. 8. 2 Tim. 2. 19 and 1 Pet. 5. 10. wherefore your argument followes not Sixthly the argument followes not because it would seuere the meanes from the end or the end from the meanes it would seuere Gods absolute positiue and immutable decree and election from the meanes that should execute it and so it would make it to bee of no effect For if repentance bee the meanes which God hath appointed his children to obtaine saluation by as wee all know it is then that God who hath decreed that his elect chosen and true regenerated Saints should bee saued hath likewise decreed that they should still repent because else this decree of his could not be executed As God hath giuen Christ vnto his Saints and children so hee doth also together with him freely giue them all things that may tend to their saluation Romans 8. 32. as God hath giuen them life and godlinesse so hee hath giuen them all things that belong vnto them 2 Pet. 1. 4. all things that may preserue and keep them in them So that all whom God hath praedestinated to eternall life he hath likewise praedestinated them to all things that are needfull and requisite for to obtaine it else this praedestination and decree of his would be in vaine for want of meanes to execute it Wherefore God hauing praedestinated all such as are regenerated vnto etern all life hee hath likewise praedestinated them for to repent of all their sins and therefore this argument of yours which would seuer repentance from praedestination and suppose that a regenerate man elected to eternall life might die without repentance and so perish for euer must needes be false Seuenthly this argument followes not neither can it bee admitted because it would seuer and diuide those graces of Gods spirit which cannot bee disioyned It would seuer repentance from faith and loue from justification and adoption which cannot bee disioyned or seuered from the other For a man may commit a grosse sinne and yet haue true and sauing faith and loue within him still a man may bee stained with some foule and scandalous sinne and yet not loose his adoption and that seede of grace which is within him 1 Iohn 3. 9. If therefore such a man as is adopted and regenerated such a one as hath the seede of grace and the habit of faith and loue within him might fall from grace and perish as you pretend hee may then a man that is justified a man that hath true and sauing grace within him may bee damned and the graces of Gods spirit which are concatinated and lincked together by an inseperable vnion might bee seuered which were an absurd and an impossible thing Eightly this argument followes not because it derogates much from the merits and satisfaction of Iesus Christ it puts all vpon one act of repentance it makes our former repentance and justification by faith in Christ to bee nothing at all it takes away all from Christs satisfaction and
mediation who is made vnto vs of God righteousnesse and iustication and redemption 1 Cor. 1. 30. 31. and suspendeth all vpon our actuall repentance which is contrary to the Scriptures For when a man is once truly regenerated and ingrafted into Christ though hee doth afterwards commit sinne yet this sin of his is not imputed to him because God lookes vpon him as hee is in Christ who hath fully satisfied for all his sinnes both past present and to come Hence is that of the 1 Iohn 2. 1 2. If any man sinne wee haue an aduocate with the Father Iesus Christ the righteous and hee is the propitiation for our sinnes Christ Iesus bee is our ransome and attonment Rom. 3. 24 25. and cap. 5. 11. it is hee that iustifieth who is he that condemneth Those who are once in him there is no condemnation due vnto them though they sinne Rom. 7. 25. cap. 8. 1. the law of the spirit of life in Christ bath made them free from the law of sinne and death Rom. 8. 2. and therefore they cannot perish for want of one particular act of repentance for one particular act of sinne as you pretend vnlesse that you will derogate much from the merits and satisfaction of Christ death Ninthly the Antecedent is false because it would make one act of sinne for to destroy an whole habit of grace which cannot bee for if it bee true of naturall acquisite and artificiall habits that one or two acts that are contrary to them cannot destroy them and that they are so setled rooted and grounded in those subiects in which they are that they are hard for to be lost againe or rooted out much more must it be true of diuine spirituall coelestiall and infused habits which are wrought in mens hearts by the holy Ghost that they cannot be rased or vtterly abolished by one actuall sinne or two especially when as they are not committed with a full consent Lastly I answer that this argument followes not because it doth suppose that true grace a grosse notorious and knowne sin can neuer stand together which is false and contrary to the Scriptures True it is that truth of grace and the whole body power and dominion of sinne can neuer stand together they are incompatible and cannot stand together vpon equall tearmes but yet vpon vnequall and different tearmes they may Truth of grace it cannot stand together with the dominion of sinne and satan or with the power and strength of sinne but where the kingedome of sin and Satan is shaken and brought vnder where the power and strength of sinne is curbed weakned mortified and subdued by the power and strength of grace where sin and Satan are subordinate to grace as they are in all the true regenerate Saints of God who haue crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts thereof there they are not incompatible they may stand both together There is no man in the world so thoroughly mortified and sanctified but there are still some remainders of the dody of sinne some parts of the old man left within him Euery regenerate man hath flesh in him as well as spirit and the one of these is alwaies lusting and striuing against the other so that they cannot doe the things they would Gal. 5. 16 17. See this in holy Paul Rom. 7. 15. to the end I know saith hee that in mee that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing For to will is present with mee but how to performe that which is good I find not For the good that I would I do not but the euill that I would not that I do I finde then a law that when I would doe good euill is present with mee for I delight in the law of God after the inward man but I see another law in my members â—…arring against the law of my minde and bringing mee into captiuity to the law of finne which is my members which makes mee to cry out O wretched man that I am who shall deliuer me from the body of this death I thanke God through Iesus Christ. So then with the minde I my selfe doe serue the law of God but with my flesh the law of sinne Paul had a body of sinne within him not wholly mortified and subdued and yet it stood together with his graces and with his inwardman So Dauid and Peter they committed grieuous sinnes and yet they stood together with their graces as I shall proue anon The Churches of Ephesus Pergamus Thyatira they fell into such scandalous and grosse sins as made God angry with them and yet they did not fall from grace for they did labour still in the Lords worke without fainting they did hold fast his name and suffer persecution for his sake they did not deny the faith but they kept their faith their charity and patience still of which God takes speciall notice and their last workes were more then their first Reu. 2. 3. to 21. These Churches they had many great sinnes within them and yet they had many excellent and pretious graces ioyned with them Iehoâ—…aphat may commit a great siâ—…ne against the Lord in helping of the vngodly and in louing those that hate the Lord and yet there are good things found within him still 2 Chron. 19. 2 3. The acts of great infamous and notorious sinnes doe sometimes meete and stand together in the Saints of God but the dominion and the power the strength and babits of those finnes doe neuer The Saints of God may commit such grosse and scandalous sins which are in their owne nature peccata 〈◊〉 â—…alutis vastantia 〈◊〉 as Augustine and 〈◊〉 stile them but yet they neuer doe so wast their consciences and spoile their graces as to roote out the very feeds and habits of their graces to cut them off from Christ and to disturbe them in their state of grace because they neuer doe commit them with an absolute and full consent and will they neuer commit them out of a deliberate purpose and setled resolution but the very bent and frame of their hearts and soules and of their inward man which is their selfe is alwaies set and bent against them and turned to the Lord they hate their sinnes and resolue against them from their soules though now and then out of the strength of the temptation and out of the policy of satan they are suddainely foyled though not vtterly cast downe and conquered with them Wherefore seeing that this argument doth suppose that the seeds the habits and the truth of grace can neuer stand together with the acts of any grosse and knowne sinne which is but a meere fiction and notion of our Antagonists being ex diametro opposite to the expresse testimonie of the Scriptures and hauing nothing else but their ipsi diximus to warrant it there is just cause for to deny it both for the inconsequencies and falsenesse of it But because this very argument as I am informed hath
Saint of God commit any grosse and knowne sinne let him haue but an vpright and syncere heart which is fully and resolutely set and bent against all sinne and stedfastly set and fixed vpon God with a desire to cleaue fast and close to him and to doe his will in all things let him haue but an humble a broken and a contrite heart within him which trembles at Gods word and is thorowly affected with the grosse and generall apprehension of his owne vilenesse though he neuer pitch particularly vpon this sinne of his nor humble his soule before the Lord for this his sinne yet I dare be bold to say that this generall repentance of his and this inward frame bent and disposition of his heart and soule shall sufficiently cleanse and purifie his soule from this his sinne and saue him so that he shall neuer die or perish for it for it is the inward and habituall repentance the inward frame bent and disposition of the soule that God respects more then the outward act as wee may see by that of Dauid Psal. 32. 5. I said I will confesse my transgressions vnto the Lord and so thou for gaâ—…est the iniquity of my sinne the inward purpose and disposition of 〈◊〉 heart for to repent was sufficient to moue God to forgiue his sinne before his outward actuall and particular repentance was expressed Which proues that though a particular confession and actuall humiliation bee very fit and requisite and necessary after euery grosse and knowne sinne which the Saints commit yet it is not absolutely necessary to saluation for an inward disposition purpose of the heart for to repent or a generall repentance and humiliation without this particular will serue the turne But of this see more in the fourth answer to this argument as it was first propounded Fourthly a particular outward and actuall repentance for these sinnes of theirs is not absolutely required of them as necessary to saluation because God in his mercy will passe by these actuall sinnes or acts of sinnes and take no notice of them if they doe chance to forget to repent and humble their soules particularly for them for God is a God that passeth by the transgressions of his people as well as their lesser sinnes hee out of his charity and loue vnto his Saints doth couer euen a multitude of their sinnes and take no notice of them when as they forget for to repent particularly of them So true is that of Bernard that the sin of the Saints of God vel punitur 〈◊〉 poenitentia vel in charitate absconditur it is either punished with condigne repentance or hid in mercy I could adde more reasons for to proue that there is no absolute necessity of a particular repentance for euery grosse and knowne sinne but I will passe them ouer and referre you to the answers which are giuen to this argument as it is first propounded and objected For the last clause of this objection that a regenerate man may dye in the very act of sin as hee may murther himselfe or God may smite him sudainly in the act of any other sinne before his actuall repentance or any other repentance else and therefore he may dye and perish in his sinnes and so fall finally from grace I answer that the argument followes not For let any one that is a true regenerate Saint of God be taken away in the very act of any knowne sinne before it is possible for him to repent I make no doubt or scruple of it but that he shall as surely be saued as if he had liued to haue repented of it and that for these reasons First because this saint of God was truly praedestinated to eternall life and therefore he cannot but be saued or else it would follow that a man who is absolutely praedestinated to eternall life might yet bee damned which can neuer be proued or admitted Secondly because Christ hath promised that none of his sheepe shall perish that none of his Saints and children shall be confounded but that they shall be sure of heauen and eternall life Iohn 10. 28. Isay. 45. 17. Iohn 5. 24. and cap. 6. 39. 40. Now all those that are once truly regenerated and ingrafted into Christ though they are taken away in the very act of sinne before any â—…epentance at all are the true Saints and sheepe of Christ and therefore they doe not therefore they cannot perish in this their sin Thirdly it must needs be so because God will neuer require impossibilities at his childrens hands nor take the strictest course and greatest aduantage against them for their sinnes Now it it Gods owne act to take away the Saints in their sinnes and it was impossible for them to repent at all of this their sinne in respect of their sodaine surprisall if they had had space time to haue repented no doubt but that they would haue repented them of this their sinne and therefore God seising on them before they could repent wee should exceedingly eclispe the riches of Gods mercy and of his gratious dealing with his Saints in affirming that they should be damned when as they had not space to repent Fourthly it must needs be so because this one act of sinne as I haue proued to the full before it doth not seuere and cut them off from Christ or destroy out of them those habits and seeds of grace which are planted and setled in their hearts it doth not put them into a state of death and damnation or cause their gracious and louing Father who is alwaies ready to pardon and to pitty them to disinherite them and cast them off especially seeing they neuer sinne against him out of precogitated malice or out of the setled purpose and resolution of their hearts and therefore though death doth cut them downe in this very act of sinne they cannot perish in this act but their soules are vndoubtedly saued and receiued into mercy Fifthly it must needs bee so because this one act of sin it doth not take away their justification or make them not to be justified but only in respect of this particular act it reuiues not all their former sins againe and therefore it puts them notinto the state of death and damnation a man may be an holy religious man he may offend in many things yet hee may be holy and vpright in Gods sight and estimation in respect of the constant holinesse and integrity of his life though not in respect of those particular sinnes of his Now God he alwaies lookes vnto the inward frame and disposition the inward integritie and synceritie of the heart to the constant tenor and carriage of his Saints and not vnto their particular fayles and slips if their hearts and the constant tenor and carriage of their liues be syncere holy blamelesse and vnspotted God estimates and rates them according vnto this and takes no notice of their priuate slips hee values them according to their
grace and inward not according to their sins and outward man and therefore God taking them away in the very act not in the habit and the trade of sin he will estimate and reward them according to their graces and their inward man according to the inward purpose bent and clination of their soules according to the constant course and practise of their liues and not according to that particular and priuate act of sinne in which they dye so that they doe not perish euerlastingly for this act of sinne but they are certainly receiued vnto life euerlasting Sixthly the theefe which neuer did repent in all his life before was saued on the Crosse euen at the last gaspe and period of his life therefore that God and Sauiour who was so mercifull to saue a sinner that neuer was a Saint at the very last gaspe will alwaies be so gratious so louing and compassionate as to saue a sinner at the last which was a Saint a friend a brother and a best beloued vnto him before Lastly to shut vp all in a word or two Admit that an actuall and particular repentance were required as a thing absolutely necessary to saluation of all the true regenerate Saints of God after any grosse and knowne sinne committed by them yet then I say that when God doth take away any of his Saints in the very act of sinne hee doth in that very instance which hee takes them in giue them such an actuall particular repentance as shall saue their soules for hee hath praedestinated them vnto euerlasting life and therefore hauing predestinated them vnto the end he doth likewise predestinate them vnto the meanes for to obtaine it Wherefore as it is altogether impossible for to depriue them of the end so likewise is it impossible to depriue them of the meanes which are annexed inseparably vnto it and therfore put the worst you can imagine yet we may safely say that God doth alwayes giue his Saints this actuall repentance euen in the very point and instant when he cuts them off which the Pseudolut herans and those that defend only a totall fall from grace without a finall doe confesse and teach And therefore notwithstanding all those sinnes they doe commit notwithstanding their lying in sinne for a time or their dying in sin I meane in the act not in the habit and trade of some particular sin without any actuall or particular repentance for that sinne of theirs they neither fall finally nor yet totally from the state of grace This is the maine and principall argument this is the very knot and hinge of the question and therefore pardon me good Reader though I haue beene so prolix and tedious in my answer to it The twentie fiue Argument or obiection that is made against me is That a true regenerate Saint of God may bee excommunicated therefore he may fall from grace I answer that the Argument doth not follow For though excommunication may seuer a Saint of God from the societie of the faithfull and the visible Church of God for a time to humble him for his sinne and to make him more circumspect in his carriage for the time to come yet it neuer doth dissect or cut him off from Christ nay it doth not wholly seuer and cut him off from being a member of the visible Church for then he ought not to be assayled or admitted into the visible Church againe vnlesse he were rebaptized and during the time of this his excommunication he should be no better and no more a Christian than a Turke or Heathen man neither of which can be admitted and therefore this excommunication if you take it in the true and primatiue vse of it not as it is now commonly abused and made a common proces vpon pettie and trifling occasions it only suspends men from being partakers of the priuiledges of the Church it neuer cuts them off from being members of it This is the opinion of Mr. Hooker in his third booke of Ecclesiasticall policie cap. 1. pag. 88. of Bishop Abbot in his answer to Mr Thompsons Diatriba cap. 16. of Mr. Caluin in the 14. booke of his Institutions cap. 12. section 9. 10. of Marlorat in his Exposition vpon the 1 Cor. 5. 5. And I know not any Diuines either Moderne or Ancient of any note or credite that doe affirme the contrarie and therefore your Argument followes not The twenty sixe Argument which may bee made against me is this All Infants which are baptized they are by this their baptisme truly regenerated and ingrafted into Christ and yet we see that many of them doe afterwards fall totally and finally from grace Therefore those who are once truly regenerated and ingrafted into Christ by a true and liuely faith may fall from grace The Argument is taken for granted and therefore the Antecedent is only to be proued This our Antagonists indeuour for to doe by Scripture and by the authoritie and Doctrine of our Church of England The maine place of Scripture which is alledged is that of Gal. 3. 27. As many of you as haue beene baptized into Christ haue put on Christ which they say is full in point And that this is also the Doctrine of the Church of England is proued by the forme of baptisme recorded in our Common prayer Booke where the Minister before baptisme reciting how Christ did blesse the little children that were brought vnto them and rebuke his Disciples for hindering such as would bring them to him doth from hence exhort the people in these insuing words Doubt not therefore but earnestly beleeue that hee will likewise fauourably receiue these present Infants that he will imbrace them with the armes of his mercie that hee will giue vnto them the blessing of eternall life and make them partakers of his euerlasting kingdome And againe when as the childe is baptized there is this forme of thanks-giuing there prescribed to vs. Wee yeeld thee hearty thankes most mercifull Father that it hath pleased thee to regenerate this Infant with thy holy Spirit to receiue him for thine owne childe by adoption and to incorporate him into thy holy congregation Which words doe fully proue that all such Infants as are baptized are truly regenerated and so the Antecedent is fully proued to bee true Because this is an argument in which our Antagonists doe much triumph and boast as if wee were not able to vndergoe the charge and vigor of it I shall indeauour to giue a full and satisfactorie answer to it in which I shall bee forced to bee somewhat large and tedious in respect of those many particulars which I am to giue an answer to I will reduce them vnto these foure heads First I shall denie that all Infants that are baptized are truly regenerated and inwardly ingrafted into Christ by vertue of their baptisme Secondly I shall affirme that the place of the Galathians proues it not nor yet any other têxt of Scripture Thirdly I shall
in them to change them and regenerate them Secondly admit that faith is not necessarily required to make Baptisme effectuall yet all Infants nay most Insants that are baptized are not regenerated by their baptisme because they are not all elected and ordained to eternall life The meanes of grace and the Spirit of grace which accompanies them doe neuer worke powerfully and effectually vpon any but vpon such as are predestinated and ordained to eternall life as you may see expresly by Acts 2. 39 c. 13. 48. Rom. 8. 28 29. 30. cap. 11. 5. 7. 8. Ephes. 1. 4. 5. and Tit. 1. 1. now all Infants that are baptized are not predestinated to eternall life for then they could neuer perish or fall from grace and therefore baptisme and the holy Ghost doe not worke effectually on them to regenerate them But you will say if Infants that are baptized are not regenerated to what end and purpose is their baptisme To this I answer first that though baptisme doth not truly regenerate all Infants that are baptised and ingraft them truly into Christ yet it is of much vse and purpose to them For first it seales all the promises and couenants of God vnto them and giues them an interest and right vnto them if they will imbrace them when they come to yeares Secondly it makes them Christians and incorporates them into the Church making them visible members of the visible Church and giuing them an interest in all those priuiledges which the Church inioyes Thirdly when men are once in truth regenerated it makes the match betweene Christ and them to be of greater validitie it increaseth and strengthened their faith and knits them closer vnto God it makes them more carefull to auoide all kinde of sinne and to obey and serue the Lord in all things the very remembrance of that vow and couenant which they haue made to God in baptisme will make them more diligent and carefull for to please the Lord and to resigne and giue vp their selues wholly vnto him Fourthly I answer that though Infants that are baptized are not truly regenerated by their baptisme that is they are not so farre regenerated as to haue any habit stocke and seed of true and sauing grace wrought within them yet those whom God hath ordained to eternall life are so farre cleansed and washed by their baptisme from the guilt of originall sinne that if they die in their infancie before their actuall regeneration and reall conuersion vnto God they shall bee saued and therefore though Infants are not really and truly regenerated by their baptisme yet they receiue much fruite and benefit by it in these foure respects and so it is not to no purpose Secondly I answer that the end of baptisme is not to regenerate men neither was regeneration the end why baptisme was instituted For if baptisme had beene instituted of purpose to regenerate men then men in the Apostles times should alwayes haue beene baptized before they did beleeue but men in the Apostles times that were not formerly conuerted vnto Christ nor borne of Christian parents were not to be baptized before they did belieue as is euident by Marke 16 16. and by the example of the Eunuch of the 3000. conuerts of Cornelius the laylor and others as you may see Acts 2. 37 38. cap. 8. 36. to 40. cap. 10. 44. to the end and cap 16. 31. 33. 34. therefore the end of baptisme is not regeneration for then men should haue beene baptized before they did beleâ—…us that so they might be regenerated and not haue beene regenerated by 〈◊〉 first before they had beene baptized Againe if the principall and chiefe end of Baptisme had beene for to regenerate men then those men who were regenerated should not haue bin baptized because they were regenerated before for their baptisme had bin 〈◊〉 meerely superfluous but those who haue bin truly regenerated haue bin afterwards baptized as you may see by these expresse testimonies of Scripture Mat. 3. 6. Acts 2. 37. 38. ca 8. 36. to 40. ca. 10. 44. to the end Acts 16. 14. 15. 31. 33. 34. therefore the end why baptisme was instituted was not for to 〈◊〉 men Why then may you say was baptisme instituted I answer that it was instituted to theâ—…s ends First it was instituted in the place of circumcision to the intent that it might seale the couenant and promises of God vnto the Gentiles as circumcision did vnto the Iewes for which reade Acts 2. 39 and Rom. 4. 11. Secondly it was instituted as a type and signe to 〈◊〉 vnto vs that as the water it selfe which wee vse in baptisme dâ—…th wash away the filth of our bodies so the blood of Iesus Christ doth wash and purge away the filth and corruption of our bodies and the sin of our soules as you may see Rom. 4. 11 Tit. 3. 5. Col. 2. 11 12. 1 Pet. 3. 21. and 1 Iohn 1. 7 9. Thirdly it was 〈◊〉 to incorporate men into the visible Church and to interest them into the priuiledges and benefits which the Church injoyes Mat. 28. 19. Act. 2. 37. 38 39. 〈◊〉 18. 19. Fourthly it was instituted to distinguish Christians from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Heatâ—… on mon 〈◊〉 it is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christians where by they are distinguished from Turkes and Infidels it is the outward 〈◊〉 and seale whereby they are knowne to belong to Christ. Lastly it was instituted to knit men faster and to bring them 〈◊〉 vnto 〈◊〉 and to make them more 〈◊〉 and carefull for 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 him to abandon and auoide all kinde of sinne and to sticke more fast and close vnto the truth by considering that vow and conenant which they made to God when as they were baptized as you may see Rom 6. 1. to 9. Gal. 3. 27. Math. 28. 19 20. and 1 Cor 1. 13. these were the many ends why baptisme was instituted and not of purpose to regenerate men and therefore though children are not regenerated by their baptisme yet they must be baptized in obedience to Christs institution and to these seuerall ends which are vsefull profitable and comfortable And thus much for the first thing the which I vndertooke to answer that all infants that are baptized are not regenerated I come now to the second to proue that Gal. 3. 27. As many of you as haue beene baptised into Christ haue put on Christ makes not against me For first I say that it is one thing to be baptized into Christ and another thing to be baptized in the name of Christ to be baptized into Christ is to be incorporated and ingrafted into Christ by faith as appeares by verse 26. 28. for yee are all the children of God not by baptisme but by faith in Christ Iesus and yee are all one in Christ so that the connection of these words with the precedent and subsequent verses proues that to bee baptized into Christ is not to bee baptized with
I may safely say he did not fall from grace and may well aduise our Antagonists to search and trie their owne estates and to forbeare to censure and determine Peters till the Scriptures haue defined it Lastly that Peter fell fell not totally from the state of grace in denying Christ it is the expresse determination and resolution of most Diuines both ancient and moderne So it is resolued by Tertullian De fuga in Persecutione lib. cap. 3. by Origin Hom. 4. in Psal. 36. et Hom. 3. in Math. by Hilarie in Psal. 54. by Basilius Magnut de Humilitate sermo by Chrysostome Homil. 88. in Math. by Augustine de Corrept et Gratia lib. cap. 6. 7. Contra Mendatinm ad Consentium cap. 6. by Prosper in his Epist. de Liberâ—… Arbitrio ad Ruffinum pag. 12 〈◊〉 Leo de Passione Dom. sermo 3. 9. by Gregorius Magnus Hom. 15. in Ezech. et Morral lib. 25. cap. 11. by Anselme in Hebr. 6. 4 5 6. by Theophylact in Luke 22. 32. by Bernard De natura et dignitate amoris diuini cap. 6. by Luther in John 17. Enarratio in magno Comment in cap 5. ad Galatas by Melanethon in 1 Cor. 10. by Bucer in Psal 1. in Rom. 7. by Tyndall in his Treatise of the manner of our Election by Zanchius Caluin Pareus Marâ—… 〈◊〉 Abbot and by all other moderne writers of our side yea and by most Pontificians to and therefore wee may rest in their judgements and not preferre the sentence and opinion of euery factious Noueller before them who hath nothing else but his owne words and fancie for his warrant Now wee haue sufficiently proued that Peter fell not totally from grace by this his sinne I will answer the reasons that are obiected to the contrary For the first of them that such as deny Christ haue not the spirit of Christ and that Christ will also deny them I answer that it is true of such as deny Christ wilfully of such as deny him both in word and deede of such as will not submit themselues vnto him and will not suffer for the profession of his name Now Perer hee denies Christ only in words but not in heart and in deede hee denies him out of feare and that but for a fit not out of disobedience malice or meere infidelity hee denyed only the knowledge of his person not his diety his offices and his attributes hee denied him because God left him to himselfe to humble him for his former arrogancie and pride and not for want of loue and will to Christ and therefore these Scriptures reach not vnto Peter especially seeing he had no sooner denied Christ but hee repented of it presently euen with great griefe and sorrow of heart To the second objection that Peter wanted a new conuersion vnto Christ therefore hee was fallen quite away from grace I answer that this conuersion here meant by Christ is not a conuersion from a state of sin death and damnation vnto a state of grace or a conuersion from infidelity to faith for in the same verse Christ tells Peter that hee had prayed for him that his faith might not faile and then these words follow vpon it and thou when thou art conuerted strengthen thy brethren which connection by this coniunction copulatiue and with the former words proues that Peters conuersion here was only a conuersion from that sinne of his in denying of Christ to a confession and profession of his name and not a conuersion from infidelity to faith and so doe the most and best expound it So that notwithstanding all these cauils it is plaine and euident that Peter fell not from the state of grace and so his example makes for vs not against vs and is as farre from your purpose as Peter was falling from the state of grace The sixth Example is Iudas Iudas was once a true regenerate man and in the state of grace but hee fell totally and finally from grace Therefore others may fall so to I answer that the Major is false For first Iudas was excluded from the number of beleeuers euen by Christ himselfe Iohn 6. 68 69 70 71. For there when as Peter in the name of all the other Disciples had testified his faith beleife in Christ Christ to cleare this scruple that Iudas had neuer any true and justifying faith in him no not at that very time giues this answer vnto the 12 haue I not chosen you twelue and one of you is not shall be a deuill this saith the Euangelist hee spake of Iudas Iscariot which should afterwards betray him If Iudas were then a Deuill where then was that true grace and faith the which you speake of True it is the diuills themselues beleeue and tremble Iam 2 19. it may be Iudas did so to but yet that Iudas who was a Deuill or that the Diuells haue any true grace and justifying faith within them I thinke that none but Diuills dare affirme Secondly Christ himselfe stiles Iudas the sonne of perdition Iohn 17. 12. and therefore hee being but a vessell of wrath fitted for destruction was neuer truly regenerated Thirdly hee was alwaies couetous he loued the bagge better then the poore at first and that made him loue it better then Christ himselfe at last and therefore he had neuer any truth of grace within him But our Antagonists object that Iudas was chosen of Christ and giuen vnto him of God Ioh. 6. 70. and 17. 12. therfore hee was regenerated and in the state of grace Surely these acute opponents who leaue no stone vnmoued know Iudas better then Christ euer did hee neuer tooke him but for a deuill and a sonne of perdition they like the ancient Caianites mentioned by Epiphanius adore him for a Saint whether Christ or they are to bee beleeued bee you the judges But to answer this objection I say that this election and choise of Iudas was only to an office to be a Disciple not a Saint which is euident first by expresse Scriptures as Mar. 3. 14. Luke 6. 13. Acts 1. 20. Iohn 6. 70. where Iudas is mentioned among the number of those twelue whom Christ did chuse not to bee his Saints but his Disciples Secondly it is euident that Iudas was not chosen to be a Saint but a Disciple because hee was only chosen by Christ not in Christ. Now all those who are chosen to bee Saints are chosen by God the Father in Iesus Christ not by him before the foundations of the world were laide not when Christ was on earth Ephes. 1. 4. therefore Iudas being chosen by Christ only not by the Father that in the daies of Christs abode on earth not from all eternity must needes bee elected and chosen to an office only and not to be a Saint Thirdly Iudas was appointed and prophecied of long before Christs comming or his owne being that he should betray Christ and therefore hee was