that look upon the place that the Apostle to the end he might clear up the way how beleevers partake of the benefites of Christs death maketh a comparison betwixt Adam and Christ and so cleareth up how it is that all Mankinde is become Corrupt and that in and through the first Man Adam from whom this corruption is derived not by Imitation for they cannot imitate it who never heard of it and yet even they partake of this corruption therefore by real Participation of the guilt saying verse 12. as by one man sin entred into the world c. and that in him all sinned and afterward that upon this sin death passed upon all men and reigned even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgressions that is over infants that had not yet committed any actual sin and that judgment was by one to condemnation so that the fruit of this sin was Condemnation or Obnoxiousness to condemnation and that because by this one sin the posterity were made sinners 2. By Death here is meaned every kinde of death Temporal and Eternal and Spiritual for it is a death that reigned over Iâ—fants and is called Condemnation 3. we finde no person old or young that come of this first Adam by ordinary generation here excepted nay Infants are expresly enough included vers 14. 4. So that all the posterity of Adam young and old being in Adam their Natural and Federal Head partake of his sin having sinned in him and of the miseries or just punishment of that sin All this is so clear and manifest both from the very words and expressions of the Apostle and from his scope that who ever speak against this must do violence to the text and weaken the Apostles argueings This same passage did the ancients Augustine and others urge against the Pelagians as is to be seen in Vossij histor Pelag. Pag. 146 147. By this argument That sin which is so described to us by the Apostle that he sayeth is brought death upon all men that men sinned by it and were made sinners even they who could not as yet actually sin that thereby all became guilty of death and of condemnation that sin by imputation is the sin of the whole nature included in Adam and rendereth the whole nature obnoxious to death and to condemnation But the first sin of Adam is decribed to us by the Apostle c. Ergo That sin is the sin of nature because Adam did sustaine the person of all who potentially were in his Ioines and by vertue thereof all are liable to death the punishment thereof Vossius tels us moreover that the Ancients took much notice of Paul's calling Adam a Type and of the particle As and did hence gather that as the Obedience of Christ belongeth to all such as are spiritually begotten not by Imitation but by Imputation so the Disobedience of Adam is conveyed not by Imitation but by Imputation unto all such as corporally come of him They took notice also as he sheweth us of the particle By which did denote the Efficient cause of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom which saith that the posterity did sin in Adam or if it be rendered because or in as much or for which it will shew what is the Adequate cause of death and that it hath also place in Infants 19. Thus we have seen the Argument of the orthodox Church and its ground let us next see what he sâ—ith against it As concerning the words of the Apostle saith he the reason of the condemnation in whom all did sin that is in that seed or by occasion of that seed for no man is said to sin but in his owne person But I pray By what warrand may he foist-in words at his owne pleasure into the tâ—xt Is there the least mention made of seed in all the text Is not this intolerable boldness to deal so with the Scripâ—ures of Truth But if Infants be condemned because they sinned in or by occasion of that seed then that seed was imputed to them Yes he will say but that was when they began to sin in their owne persons No say I that cannot be because the text importeth no such thing yea it saith the contrary viz. that death which is included in the condemnation passed upon all men and reigned even over such as had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression that is had not as yet sinned actually So that his reason is directly against the Apostle and we have further above discovered its untruth He addeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aggreeth with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so sheweth how Adam by his sin gave entry to sin into the world and so death by sin entered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. by which viz. occasion or in which viz. death all others did sin i. e. actually in their persons viz. who were capable of sinning of which number Infants are not who are under no Law as was showne and where no Law is there is no transgression as the Apostle sayeth This upon the matter is the same that the old Pelagians said as Vossius sheweth us Hist. Pelag. Pag. 182.183 For they interpreted these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom all have sinned by sinning after example or Imitation and this man by sinning upon that Occasion when they become capable and the Socinians with Episcopius homologate with the Pelagians and have been abundantly answered by the orthodox who shew that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of Xenophon Aristophanes Demosthenes and other Greek Authors But For Answere unto this Quaker I would say 1. If 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 agree with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then the meaning must be this and so death passed upon all men in which death all men sinned and what sense can this make out May not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 agree as well to Man If not let him give us the least colour of reason either from the text or context 2. If Adam by his sin gave entry unto sin into the world this must be meaned of his first sin for the Apostle speaketh alwayes of one sin or of Offence in the singular number that Vers. 18. may be read by one offence And so sin entered not by Imitation nor yet by Occasion for his after sinnes might have laid the way for Imitation and have given Occasion as well as the first Yea more yea only for while the first sin was committed there were none to imitate him and if this had been the Apostles meaning he had spoken of sins in the plural number 3 If this had been the Apostles meaning he had not named One man and One man as a Type a Type of him that was to come for Eva's sin the Devils sin might also have been an Occasion 4. Hence it will follow thaâ— beleevers are made Righteous only upon Occasion of Christs Righteousness
of them He cannot deny but God did permit sin nor will he say that God could not have prevented sins coming into the world if He had pleased will he say that God did not foresee sinnes coming into the world If he did foresee it and might have hindered it if he had pleased and did not hinder it shall we say that sin came into the world whether he would or not And if he willed or decreed that sin should exist through his permission shall we call him the author of sin Then he must be the author of sin because he did not hinder sin effectually by his Omnipotency and then whatever we say of Reprobation whether we affirme it to be Absolute or upon sin Foreseen there is no remedie as to this for God must alwayes be the Author of sin But hallowed be his Name 6. The Decree of Reprobation putteth no man into a state of sin It is true the Execution theâ—eof presupposeth sin but hence it will no more follow that the decree of Reprobation placeth a man in sin than that the decree of Election doth so for the execution here presupposeth also mans being in sin 7. Where readeth he that expression among our divines that by vertue of the decree of Reprobation the Reprobat are secondarily led or to be led to destruction as the end The Lord leadeth no man to destruction but every reprobat runeth head long thither of his own accord and because the Lord hath designed and decreed to let them run-on and not restraine them by saving grace shall he therefore be the Author of their sinnes Then all the sins that are committed must be charged upon the Holy one of Israel because He did not prevent them by his grace And thus the devils may come in play and learne of this man to plead Excuse for themselves and lay the blame of all their wickedness upon God Sure this must be Develish doctrine 8. But what is it that God is the Author and Cause of His hujus doth not distinctly inform us That he is the Author and Cause of his own Act and Decree is most true But that he is the Cause and Author of sin as this man would inferre we see not the Antecedent from whence this Consequence can follow Beside that the Author of a thing is he by whose authority or judgment it is done or upon whose testimony it is beleeved for Cicero opposeth Authorem and dissuasorem and joineth these together as of the same import Hortator atque Author Consiliarius Author Suasor Author Plautus said Impero autorque sum Now dar this Man say that God Exhorteth Counseleth and perswadeth to sin Dar this Man say that we hold or tâ—at it followeth from our juâ—gment that by God's Authority Sentence and Swasion sin is committed Let him prove this and then carry the cause 9. In a word we referre this Man to the Apostle Paul Rom. 9 11 12 13. to receive his answere and let him dispute no more against us till he once take the boldness to confute that his inferring from our doctrine that God is the Author of sin is but the same which the Apostle saw would be deduced from his doctrine by men of corrupt mindes when he addeth by way of Objection vers â—4 Is there unrighteousness with God And if our answere will not satisfie him let him confute the Apostles answere for we but say the same viz. That God hath mercy on whom he will hardeneth whom he will And if for this cause our doctrine be blamed we cannot help it but must be content to be contradicted and if he make use of the reply used vers 19. we must give the returne which the Apostle giveth vers 20 21. And if all this will not satisfie we must leave him to the judgment of the great day when that God against whom these proud carpers thus reply shall answer them by himself put them to eternal silence and everlasting shame 17. Thereafter he citeth some sayings of Calvin Beza Zanchius Pareus Martyr Zuinglius Piscator out of which he would inferre that they allaiged God was the Author of sin All which and moe he might finde collected to his hand by Bellarmin and answered by the learned D. Twisse in his Vindiciae And therefore as also because this belongeth to a distinct question we need neither spend time in searcâ—ing out what truth is in all this not yet in vindicating of them One thing I shall say That among them all he shall not finde one that saith directly that God is the Author and Culpable Cause of sin and if he suppose that this may be drawn from their expressions I shall only reply That if there be any of them that giveth more real ground for such an Inference than the very Expressions used in Scripture I shall not owne them and if they say no more and yet are condemned by him as making God the Author of sin though they expresly deny it let him see how he shall vindicate the Spirit of Goâ— from the same charge or rather how in his blind boldnesse he charges the Spirit of God As for these passages of Scripture which our Divines aâ—duce against the Pelagians and Iesuites who ascribe unto God in the matâ—er of sin an Idle Provideâ—câ— aâ—d Permâ—ssion Bellarmine ranketh them up in five classes First Such as speak of God's Willing and Decreeing from eternity that sin shall exist such are Act. 2 23. 4 27. Esai 53 10. Second Such as import God's creating evil men for this end that his righteousness might shine forth in their punishment such are Prov. 16 4. 1 Sam. 2 25. Exod. 9 16. Rom. 9 17 21. Third Such as import God's setting of Satan and men to evil and useing of them as instruments to do that which could not be done without sin such are 1 King 22 20 23. Iob. 1 12. 2 6. 2 Sam. 16.10 24 1. Esai 5 26. 10 5 15. â—3 17. 19 2 4. Ier. 50 24 25. 51 11. Ezech. 12 13. Psal. 105 25. c. Fourth Such as speak of God's blinding hardening c. as Exod. 4.21 7 3 13. 9.12 10 1 20 27. 1â— 10. 14 4 8. Deut. 2 30. Iosu. 1â— 20. 1 Sam. 2 25. Iob. 12 16 20 24. Esai 19 14. 63 17. Ier. 20 7. Ioh. 12 3â— 40. Rom. 1 24 26 28. 9 18. 2 Thes. 2 11. c. Fift Such as import God's doing of those things which are evil as 2 Sam. 12 11. Luk. 2 34. Rom. 9 33. Esai 8 14. 28 16. Gen. 45 8. 1 King 11 31 37. 12 15 24. 2 King 9 3. 10 30. c. Now if he can adduce any testimony of our Divines whence he can with more probability inferre that God is the Author of sin I shall not as I said owne it And if such as are but consonant to the Scriptures do not please him
some other Abomination lurking under this To wit That this manifestation of the Father by the Son is not to be understood of a Gospel Manifestation but of a Natural Manifestation had in and by the works of Creation and so not of a Manifestation peculiar to the Church and people of God but of a Manifestation common to Heathens and all without the pale of the Church otherwise he shall hereby destroy what afterward he laboureth to build viz. the Universality of this Manifestation But whoever considereth the Scriptures by us cited shall finde that Christ meaneth a manifestation and declaration of the Father in and by the Gospel and Gospel Ordinances to the destruction of this mans Universality 9. He cometh § 6. to the clearing of his second Proposition viz. That there is no knowledge of the Son but by the Spirit And who will deny this as to that Knowledge which is truely and eventually saving of which Saving Certane and Necessary Knowledge his Proposition is to be understood as himself expresly showeth us with an Observandum and 1 Cor. 2 11 12. 12 3. whereby he proveth this are cleare enough but I see not the necessity of adduceing as a proof hereof Revel 3 20. behold I stand at the door c. Yet beside this Saving knowledge there is a Literal knowledge had by the common gifts of the Spirit which is also true in its kinde and though as to any Saving Effect it be Ineffectual yet we must not say with him Pag. 12. that the Spiritual Truths in the Gospel are as lies in the mouth of carnal persons for they are true even as to them Heb. 10 26. Some may sin wilfully after they have received the knowledg of the truth for whom no more sacrifice remaineth and 2 Pet. 2 20 21. Some may have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ and have known the way of righteousness who after they have known it turne from the holy commandement c. I cannot then say with him that this Knowledge of Christ is no more properly to be called a Knowledge of Christ than the speaking of a Parot is properly humane knowledge for I cannot think that when Christ sent Iudas to preach the Gospel it was as a man sending an ambassage by the hand of a Parot or that Balaam had no real knowledge of what was revealed unto him in his trance 10. But not insisting on this which is not much to the maine purpose I Observe that the thing which concerned him chiefly to clear up provâ— is not once touched by him here He should have proved tâ— us That this teaching of Christ by the Spirit is and was alwayes by Immediat Revelation that is by Enthusiasmes and such Extraordinary Wayes Nor doth he which is also remarkable distinguish betwixt Christs teaching by the Spirit in the Prophets of old and the Apostles of late and Christs own teaching Immediatly in his own Person while Incarnate which two the Apostle clearly differenceth Heb. 1 1 2. 2 3 4. Nor doth he speak any thing of Christs Mediat teaching whether by Apostles extraordinarily assisted or by Ordinary Ministers or by his Word nay by his language we might suppose that he excludeth these wayes from being wayes of Christ's teaching contrare to Math. 10 20. 1 Thes. 4 8. 2 Cor. 5 19 20. Mat. 28 18 19. and many other places 11. Let us proceed and see what he saith § 7. in confirmation of the third Proposition viz. That God did alwayes make himself manifest to the Sons of Men by the Spirit For this cause he would have us considering how God from the beginning did manifest himself in his creatures But our enquiry should be how he did manifest himself to his creatures These words in creaturis suis in his creatures cannot but be understood of the way of his manifesting himself But to Manifest Himself in or by the Creatures is not the same with Manifesting Hâ—mself in or by the Spirit For confirmation of his Proposition he adduceth Gen. 1.2 And the Spirit of the Lord moved upon the face of the waters Is not this a pregnant proof of Gods revealing his minde unto Men who were not yet created Bâ—t passing this ridiculous Argument which moreover perverteth the genuine meaning of the Spirit of the Lord in that passage let us see what he adduceth further I think faith he no man will deny that from Adam to Moses Gods communion with man was by immediat manifestation of the Spirit I answere Though it be true that Christ as the great Prophet of his Church did by the Spirit reveal the Counsel of God concerning mans salvation yet that he did this by the Spirit 's Immediat Revelation unto every Individual Person will never be proved now this being the matter that he would have us grant and which only maketh for his purpose he must prove it ere we assent to it That the Lord was pleased to reveal his mind Immedialy to Some and by them to Others from Adam to Moses we know but that every individual Person even of the people of God were advanced to this privilege I deny Yea even dureing that time we read in Scripture but little of these Manifestations We know what was spoken immediatly to Adam to Cain we read also of the Prophecy of Enâ—h in Iud's Epistle which yet was not any new Truth revealed we read also of what was revealed to Noah and to Abraham to Isaac and to Iacob and to soâ—e few others But what will all this make for his point Sure these few persons were not all that lived dureing that long tract of time what then became of the rest how were they instructed was it not Mediatly by those Patriarchs and selected Persons And did not the Fathers instruct their children from generation to generation that the right worship and knowledg of God might be propagated from hand to hand 12. This proof evincing nothing let us see the next afterward saith he in the times of the law the Lord spoke no other way to his children which cannot be denied by such who acknowledge the Scriptures to have been written by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost Answere That the Scriptures of the Old Test. were so written I grant That the persons imployed in that work had immediat Revelations to this end I grant Nay moreover I grant that all other true Prophets who were raised up of the Lord whose Prophecies the Lord thought not fit to make a part of the Canon of the Scriptures had Divine Inward and Immediat Revelations But this Reason is as childish as the preceeding Doth he think that this is enough to prove his point Doth he think that all the rest of the people of God in those generations had those Immediat Revelations or that this followeth as a clear consequence from his Argument What folly is here He might as well prove that all the people of this
of God immediatly so made known unto them for the only formal Object of their Faith But withall I say that all others who believed though still the Word and Authority of God was the formal Object of their Faith and ground of their Obedience had not this formal Object conveyed and made known unto them by Inward and Immediat Revelation and of this beside the manifest and unquestionable evidence of the thing it self we have Instances in that same Chapter dar he say that all who beleeved from the beginning that the Worlds were framed by the Word of God c. had this truth revealed unto them by God Immediatly either by Dreames or Vive Voice or the like where readeth he of Revelations Inward and Immediat made to Abel who yet by Faith offered unto God a more excellent Sacrifice than Cain Where readeth he to passe by others of the Inward Immediat Revelations upon which their faith was founded who through faith subdued Kingdomes wrought righteousness stopped the mouthes of lions Quenched the violence of fire escaped the edge of the sword out of weakness were made strong waxed valient in fight turned to flight the armies of the aliens received their dead raised to life againe were tortured not accepting deliverance that they might obtaine a better resurrection had tryal of cruel mockings and scourgings and moreover of bonds and imprisonments who were stoned sawne asunder were tempted were slaine with the sword who wandered about in sheep skins and goat skins being destitute afflicted tormented who wandered in deserts and in mountains and in dens and caves of the earth Where readeth he I say of such Revelations made to all these persons who yet had faith and by faith were they Encouraged Enabled Supported and Carried thorow 24. Bâ—cause he foresaw that some would Object That hence it would follow that there is no formal Object of faith now because the Lord doth not reveal his minde by Angels Dreames and Visions and the like Therefore he taketh notice of this Pag. 14. 15. but his answere is so confused and indistinct that you can hardly know what he would say He will not limite the power and liberty of God Wherein he doth wisely But will he say that God eiâ—her did or now doth reveal the whole Object of faith to all beleevers in suâ—h a manner He distinguisheth betwixt what is substantial and universal in the object of faith and what is circumstantial and accidental And hereby he either speaketh non-sense or destroyeth his owne cause for if the Immediat Revelation by those wayes mentioned was but accidental it cannot be called the formal Object of the faith of all believers He distinguisheth next betwixt what was obnoxious to doubting and what was not But he leaveth us in the mist while he explaineth Neither Then he tels us That these vive voices and dreames c. were the thing which they did believe and not the formal object or ground upon which they belâ—eved I should rather think that the word of Truth or Command which was made known unto them by vive voice or dreame c. was the Material Object not the Formal Object quod as he ignorantly speaketh or the thing which they were to believe and receive and that these dreames c. were but the manner of conveyance both of the material Object and of the Formal He addeth a serious truth viz. That they were not ignorant that the Devil could have formed sounds of words in the aire and delude the external senses by false apparitions and this dayly experience proveth Whereby he confirmeth what we formerly said and giveth us faire warning to take heed and beware of such Delusions I wish he and the rest of the Quakers would carry the impress of this Truth alwayes with them But how then was the formal Object of faith secured He answereth There was a secret testimony of the Spirit in their hearts perâ—wading thâ—m that these voices and visions were really from God But was this secret testimony distinct from that which came alongs with these Divine Voices and Dreames c If not what will he gaine hereby or against whom would he fight if it was distinct than it seemeth God's Immediat speaking by Voices Dreames Visions c. were not so clear and evident in themselves as to Compel Move and Bow the intellect that was well disposed by it's owne evidence and clearness unto an assent and were not so clear and evident as the common principles of natural Truthes are viz. That the whole is more than a part Two contradictories cannot be both true and false which move and bow the Minde to a natural Assent and thus he contradicteth what he said in his Thesis See above § 2. Moreover if the matter was so he must say that there was no more Objective Evidence and Clearness in Gods speaking by Voices Dreames c. than in the Devils speaking so for without this new testimony the Prophets themselves could put no difference betwixt the One and the Other Againe could not the Devil come with a false toaken aâ—d perswade the false Prophets that the voices and visions they had were really from God And may not the Devil do so now especially in such as are given up of God to strong delusions to believe a lie But what would he make of this falshood He would Inferre that this Inward Testimonâ— was the Principal and original Object of their faith A wilde assertion for thâ—s Inward Testimony should rather be called the Principal and Original Cause or thâ— Efficient Cause of faith than the Object of it for its use was according to his owne doctrine not to Declare immediatly the Object of then Faith but to work up their soul and minde to receive and close with the Object which was proposed in these Divine Dreames and Visions as that power which openeth the eyes of the blinde is not the formal Objâ—ct but the efficient Cause of the mans seeing the sun Then he addeth That these expressions The Lord spoke the word of the Lord came or was to such or such an one and the like will not evince that God spoke by audible voices and that he who asserteth it must prove it But we need neither Assert it nor Prove it for it is enough to us if these expressions signifie that singular way whatever it was which the Lord used in communicating his Minde to the Prophets and so a way distinct from that which he used with every individual private and particular Believer The answere to his formal argument with which the closeth this Paragraph may bâ— taken out of what is said and I need not spend time with repeating the same things 25. He cometh § 9. to the maine business the last Proposition viz. That the Object he should meane the formal Object of the faith of the Saints is alwaâ—es the same And thinketh he that any Christian will deny this which yet he must spend words about the proof of
Againe how could Christ and his Apostles confirme their doctrine by the Scriptures Press to a study and search of them Convince persons of errour by them and the like seing still this shift was as ready at hand for them to use as it is for the Quakers today I pray hâ—m to cleare me in these particulars if he can 13. But if the meaning of his Assertion be That we know only by the inward Testimoâ—y of the Spirit that the book of the Scriptures is indeed the word of God what will this helpe his cause Nothing at all for the Testimony of the Spirit is a true Testimony and if the Spirit testifie that that book is the Word of God that book must indeed be the Word of God and it must be the Word of God before that testimony be given to it for the Testimony doth not make it such but witnesseth it to be such and so before that Testimony of the Spirit come the will of God contained in that book must oblige us to Beleeve it and Obey it for what is the revealed will of God cannot but oblige such unto whom it is revealed But if it be said That even the will of God contained in the Scriptures cannot oblige us untill a new Revelation come to perswade us of the certainty that it is the will of God I answere Then 1. The Assertions of the God of truth and the Lawes and Commands of the Supream Lawgiver have no obleiging force upon us to Beleeve and Obey untill we be perswaded these Truths and Lawes are Divine and so the authority of the Lawes dependeth upon and is derived from the minde of the Subject and no more shall be law than he will 2. Then the Revelation of the minde of God doth not carry alongs with it its owne Evidence 3. Then the Second Revelation can as little carry alongs with it its own evidence as the First and we must have a Third to give us the perswasion of its certanety and the Third will stand in need of a Fourth and so in infinitum and hereby we shall never come to any certanty but still fluctuate notwithstanding of Revelations upon Revelations 14. He adduceth Apol. P. 36 37. Calv. Instit. Lib. 1. c. 7. s. 4 5. The French Confession of faith Art 4. The Belgick Confess Art 5. And the Confession framed at Westminster Cap. 1. S. 5. which last he cannot cite without a jibe at these worthy Divines thereby evidenceing what a Spirit acteth him But to the point I say 1. What is spoken here of the Spirit is in Opposition to the Testimony of Men or of the Church which the Romanists alleiged 2. They speak not of an Objective certanty as if before this perswasion wrought by the Spirit there was no ground to beleeve and receive these for the Scriptures of truth or as if indeed before this they had not been the Scriptures of truth but of a Subjective certanty and therefore they call it Perswasion and Assurance now this doth not create an Objective certainty but preâ—upposeth it and only helpeth the soul to see that Objective certainty and rest upon it with full Conviction and Assurance 3. They speak not of any Immediat Revelation or Inspiration but of an ordinary work of the Spirit efficiently effectuating this Perswasion and Assurance 4. They expresly tell us that this work of the Spirit is by and with the word and not an Inspiration distinct and seperated from it anâ— by the gracious effects of the word in and upon the hearts of People which evidently demonstrate the cause to be divine and that Word which hath such Powerful Noble and Divine Effects upon the soul to to be of a divine Original flowing from that Supream Verity or Veracity and from that Supream Authority and so to be purely divine 15. Though this be enough to discover the vanity of this mans Alleigance yet I shall for the Readers satisfaction a little further cleare the matter There are in the Scriptures such innate marks and evidences of divine Majesty Power and Authority whereby as Light and Heat prove and demonstrate themselves so the Scriptures evince themselves to be of God by their Light Life Power Majesty Divine which is also manifested by these particulars mentioned in our Confession of faith to wit The Heavenliness of the matter The Efficacy of the Doctrine The Majestie of the stile The Consent of all the parts The Scope of the whole which is to give all glory to God The full Discovery it maketh of the only Way of Mans salvation The many other Incomparable Excellencies and the Intire Perfection therof These are arguments which it carryeth alongs with it whereby it doth abundantly evince it self to be the word of God as the heavens declare themselves to be of God not by any voice or testimony but by the Characters of Infinite Power so legible upon them that all that run may read The Spirit in working up the soul unto a Conviction and Perswasion that the Scriptures are the word of God doth those things First He cleareth up the characters of divinity that are in the Scriptures formerly dark to the man through prejudice or other causes and so maketh the Object plaine and manifest Next He conveyeth light into the Minde whereby the man is enabled to discerne and perceive these Grounds and Evidences which are the characters of divinity as a man when clouds are removed and his eyes are opened to see the beames of light flowing from the body of the Sun is convinced and perswaded that the Sun is arisen in our horizon Now this work of the Spirit hath its various Measures and Degrees not to mention that which is truely saving whereby the man is not only Enabled to see the forementioned grounds to a conviction but through a gracious Work of the Spirit on the whole soul is made to close with these grounds with joy and delights and to accept of the Scriptures upon these Grounds with full perswasion of soul as having this truth that these Scriptures are the word of God deeply impressed oâ— his spirit and sealed by the Holy Ghost So that he embraceth them as the very word of God and closeth with them with all Reverence and cheerfull Submission of soul receiving with faith the Truths there delivered and submitting to the Commands thereof heartily and cheerfully through grace Not to mention this I say which as it respecteth the matter contained in the word and the sutable improvement thereof is not of our present concernment this work of the Spirit admits of degrees whether we consider the Object or Evidences which lye in the Scripture or the Subject the â—llumination of the minde to see the cleared Evidences and Grounds for to some the Grounds and Evidences may be more clear and unquestionable than to others and some may have a larger Illumination of understanding and so a greater capacity to see the divine Original of the Scriptures than others and
this that which at best is but of private interpretation that is an Issue of mens Fancies private Conceits and Enthusiasmes if not Satanical Illapses and Delusions This is also plaine from 1 Cor. 4 6. above what is written which implyeth that what is written is sufficient and full as also from Act. 20 27 35 comp with Act. 26 22 23. 27. These and what formerly hath been mentioned to this end and purpose this man thinketh good to overlook as if he had never heard of them We shall now try what he saith to others and First that plaine Testimony Esa. 8 20. to the Law and to the testimony if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them Whence we see that whoever they be that come to us pretending a divine Commission we must try what they say by this word which is called the Law and the Testimony and if they speak not according to it let their pretensions be never so high they are to be rejected as dark and as coming from darkness So that the Law and the Testimony is the Supreme Râ—le To this he saith we have not proven that by the Law and Testimony is meaned the Scriptures As if any that ever read the Bible could be ignorant what is all along meaned by these words But granting this he hath another reserve viz. That the Law was in a more special manner given to the jewes and more principally than to us And hence forsooth he will retort the Argument against us thus Seing they who were under the Old Covenant were to try all by the outward Law we who are under the new Covenant are to try all by the word of faith which is within us And thus the man rants in his reaving contradicting what was the great pillar of his discourse upon the preceeding Thesis and making differences without ground as we lately manifested and with all destroying by his owne expressions what he mainly intendeth For the Word of Faith that he speaketh of is distinct from Immediat Revelations and these words which he eyeth cited by Paul Rom. 10. were spoken to the people under the Law by Moses Deut. 30. v. 14. and so were true of them even then Hereby also he proveth more than he ought for if this Argument hold the Scriptures shall not be so much as a Lesse Principal and Subordinat Rule which yet he granted it to be or he must say the case is so altered under the New Testament that what was a Principal Rule then is now only subordinat but whence will this be Evinced And will it not hence appear probable that what is now Principal to us was Less Principal to them that is the Immemediat Testimony of the Spirit Let the man rid his feet here if he can as for the 70 Version we have nothing to do with it if he will lay any weight upon such a corrupt Version he should not challenge other versions that agree better with the Original But I wonder how the Man can think that that Version which saith the law was given for an help shoulâ— confirme his Opinion which is that the Law was given them as a Principal Rule even above the Spirits Revelations 27. Another argument to prove the Scriptures our supream Rule is usually taken from Christs saying to the Jewes Ioh. 5 39 search the Scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal life and they are they that testifie of me Where Câ—râ—st referreth them to the Scriptures that word of God which should have been abideing in them verse 38. as to a Rule whereby he was content that his doctrine should be tryed and judged and if even Christs Doctrines should be tryed by the Scriptures who will think it unreasonable that private Enthusiasmes should be so tryed and who can then deny this privilege of the Scripture to be our Rule what saith he to this passage He imagineth that Christ reproveth them for having too great a veneration for the Scriptures Quite contrare to vers 38 46 47. and to the very word of command search the Scriptures and to his owne Concession granting that it was their Principal Rule It is laid to their charge that they would not come to Christ and one Reason of their Unbeleefe is given viz. that they did not search the Scriptures which did testifie of Him that notwithstanding they professed acknowledged that the Scriptures pointed out the way to eternal life But againe he tels us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 search is by some taken to be in the Indicative mode and not in the Imperative Which forgery of Papists the cohesion and scope of the words doth abunâ—antly redargue and Tolet and Maldonat both confesse that Chrysostome Theoph. August and all weighty Authors except Cyril understand it imperatively To â—â—is passage of Christs here we might adde others where he confirmeth his doctrine by the Scriptures elsewhere cited and the following verses where he tels them that Moses by his writings should accuse them that their not beleeving of Moses's writings was a cause why they did not beleeve Christs words verse 45 46 47. we might adde also Paul and other Apostles proving their doctrine from the Scriptures and Paul's affirming that he spoke nothing but what Moses the Prophets said But these and the like have been cited already let us take notice but of what the Apostle Iames speaketh concerning this He accounts the Word of Truth that by which we are begotten Chap. 1 18. and Would have us doers of it and not hearers only otherwise we shall but deceive our selves vers 2â— 23. and then vers 25. calleth it the Perfect Law of liberty wherein we continueing and being not forgetful hearers but doers of the work we shall be blessed in our deed So Chap. 2 8. He calleth it the Royal law according to the Scriptures which say we should Love our Nieghbour as our selves and if we do otherwise we commit sin and are convinced of the Law as transgressours and vers 10 11. he sheweth us that by the Law he meaneth the decalogue See also Chap. 4 11 12 28. Another passage of Scripture confirming our point is Act. 17 11. where it is spoken to the commendation of the Beroans that they searched the Scriptures to see if Pauls doctrine did accord therewith which clearly expressed the Scriptures to be that Rule by which even the sayings of such as pretend Immediat Revelations ought to bâ— tryed though he thinketh that hence it will not follow that they are our Only and Supream Rule But he thinketh best to chant over againe his old Song viz. That these were Jewes to whom the Law and the Prophets were a Rule in a more special manner The uselesness of which Evasion hath been showne And further he must grant that these Christians were under the New Testament or Covenant and so cannot say that it is the Priviledge of Christians under the New Testament to be from under
and have â—othing of it Imputed unto them which though this man may account no way absurd yet all Orthoeox Christians will be of another minde 5 He speaks dubiously concerning the Import of these two words and knoweth not whether their meaning be by which occasion or in which death and we have seen that the meaning cannot be by which Occasion And it will further appear from this that Adams sin could be no Occasion to such as never heard of it and our nearest Parents sins should be a greater Occasion and further what could Paul's meâ—tioning an Occasion contribute to his designe 6. Paul asserts that death passed upon all men and giveth this as a ground thereof that all men had sinned but this Man perverteth the Apostles words and meaning and maketâ— the Apostle speak thus death passed upon all men because all men will sin actually when they become capable 7. The Apostle sheweth that death passed upon all men and reigned even over Infants and so supposeth that Infants had sinned otherwayes his argument vers 12. had been of no value for the Instance of Infants who are a great part of Mankinde had destroyed the Apostles reasoning if they bad not been included under all men 8. He is angry at the Orthodox as we sâ—all hear afterward for restricting the particle all or the words all men though it be according to the exigence of the context But here he excludeth a great part of Mankinde contrary to the whole scope and disigne of the Text yea and to the Apostles expresse including of Infants and making use of their Case as a confirmation of his point 9 If he exclude Infants from this sin he must exclude them also from all benefite in Christs Obedience and then where is his Universal Redemption and his Universal Grace whereof he speaketh in the following Theses 10 That Infants are capable of sinning in their Head is as clear as they are capable of dying for the sin of the Head this the Apostle proveth from their death and from death reigneing over them 11. But sayes he Infants are under no Law But the Apostâ—e sayes the contrare viz. that there was both Sin and Law before Moses dayes because death reigned even over Infants and consequently that Infants were under sin and therefore also under a Law for where there is no law there is no transgressiâ—n But this was the Law given to Adam as head of Mankinde which Law all transgressed when Adam transgressed because the whole Nature transgressed it Adam representing all as their Natural Root and by vertue of the Covenant in which he stood And thus we see how this Man perverteth and inverteth the Words and Arguments and Scope and All of the Apostle 12 If death was inflicted on old Persons because of their actual sins wherefore was death inflicted upon Infants Sure the Apostle maketh no distinction of Deaths nor doth he speak of distinct causes of Death but only mentioneth an universal Cause of an universal Effect sin the cause and death the effect and therefore if the effect come upon infants the cause must also come upon them or the Apostle argueth very loosly and he must impute cruelty injustice to his Maker 13. This addition of his to the text viz. who were capable of sinning is the same that Castalio made saying these to wit who in regaird of age could have sinned And in this he was no lesse bold with the text then our Quaker is for as we have seen and the text is clear it is not all these only that die but even such as come not to that age and the Apostle alwayes speaks of death as the wages of sin And when he here sayeth of Infants that they sinned not after the similitude of Adam's transgression he clearly intimateth that they sinned some other way viz. in Adam which also the 19. verse manifestly proveth 20. He taketh notice Next of our argument from Psal. 51 5. behold I was shapen in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive me where the Psalmist is exaggerating his iniquity before the Lord as all true penitents will do traceth his sin to the very Spring and Fountaine as to him viz. that Original Corruption which he brought into the world with him and shewing that even while he was a forming and warming as the word importeth in the womb this corruption did adhere to him so that the very masse out of which he was framed was corrupt and what greater proof could we desire of the originaâ—ed part of this Original Sin than is here The Ancient Fathers made use of this passage for the same end as Vossius sheweth us Hist. Pelag. Pag. 144.145 And some Jewes such as Aben Ezra Sal. Iarchi expound it of innate Concupiscence Now what saith this Quaker to this He cannot see our Infâ—rence and why so It seemeth to me sayes he that this iniquity and sin is rathâ—r ascribed to the parents than to the Infants for he sayeth in sin did my mother conceive me not my mother conceived me sinning Ans. Is not this a quick observation and worthy of a Quaker But the misery is it quite crosseth Davids designe This man must think that it was a great argument of Davids Sorrow and Repentance to lay iniquity upon his Parents now in all appearance dead but I should look upon this as no argument of a true penitent heart What could his upbraiding of his Father and Mother after this manner contribute to the aggravating of his own sin And that this is David's designe I think this Quaker will not deny if he but look upon the place and read over the Psalm or the first part of it Is not David about the confessing of his owne sin Read the title of the Psalm the preeceeding verse and see Is he not seeking pardon and remission of his own sin Or shall we suppose that he is praying for remission to the dead all Confession of sin to God is in reference to Remission and if David speak here only of his Parents sin he is tacitely seeking Remission If he speak of his Parents sin in begetting and warming him in the womb it must be as including himself at least as shareing thereof and this will prove that David had sin upon him from his very conception And by his answere he would seem to make marriage duties unlawful contrare to 1 Cor. 7 2 3 4 5. Heb. 13 4. He addeth another answere thus Such an interpretation would contradict the Scriptures formerly cited while it maketh infants to he hurt by their immediat parents sin And there is no mention here of Adam Answ. I do not prove hence that David was guilty of his immediat Parents sins but that original contagion doth so cleave to every ordinary Infant unless we could suppose some singular thing in David without all ground that in his very warming in his Mothers womb he is corrupted and albeit David make no mention here of Adam the
thing which we inferre is manifest viz. the originated sin or the corruption of nature which here David calleth Sin And if this Quaker think that this came from another Original than from Adam let him tell us what it is and not joyn in with the Manichees nor make God the Author and cause of sin if he can 21. Another of our Arguments is from that word of Paul's the wages of sin is death And seing infants die they must have sin as a procuring cause That death was and is a Punishment of sin we cleared above and the Apostle asserteth it here so manifestly calling it the Wages and due Desert that it must argue wonderful impudence in any to question it What sayeth this Quaker He granteth that death is a Consequence of the fall but denyeth that hence we can necessarily inferre iniquity to be in all those that are subject to death That is in plaine termes but the mans modesty dar not speak it out to say the Apostle speaketh not truth who ever imagined that wages were no more but a Consequent of the workmans labour If Death be the Wages and Reward and just Punishment of sin it can certanely be inflicted by the Righteous Judge of the world upon none but such as are guilty of sin How oft doth the Apostle speak of death as the just Desert and Punishment of sin Rom. 5 12 death entred by sin death passed on all for all had sinned suppose that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should not signifie in whom as it doth Marc. 2 vers 4. Luk. 5 vers 25.2 Cor. 5 vers 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being several times put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 9 10 15 1â— but did only import the Cause as Socinians would have it it would sufficiently confirme this that death is inflicted because of sin so vers 15. through the offence of one many be dead and this is called vers 16. judgmnt to condemnation and vers 17. by one mans offence or by one offence death reigned And vers 21. sin reigned unto death And then againe Chap. 6 23. for the wages of sin is death So likewise 1 Cor. 15 21.22 by man came death for as in Adam all die He addeth as a reason of his denyal that it might appear he did not contradict the Apostle without reason For sath he all the outward creation suffered detriment and ruine in some respect by Adam's fall and yet the herbes and trees c. are not therefore sinners Ans. Is not this a valide reason wherefore to reject death as a punishment of sin Nay seing the vanity under which the world groaneth because of sin is a punishment to all Mankinde to Infants as well as to Adult persons it is hence manifest that all are guilty of sin that is all mankinde who are capable of sin as trees and herbes are not But yet more he addeth to Confront the Apostle and sayeth death is no wages of sin to the saints but is gaine Phil. 1 v. 21. Answ. Why is death called an enemy and the last enemy 1 Cor. 15 v. 26. wâ—at meaneth that that when corruptible hath put on incorruption and mortal hath put on immortality death shall be swallowed up in victory 1 Cor. 15 vers 54. Because the Lord by grace through Jesus Christ hath taken the sting of death away and made it a passage to glory unto his owne shall we therefore look upon it in it self as no punishment of sin or as not coming into the world because of sin This will tend as much to prove that Adult persons are not sinful as that Infants have no sin and that a womans paines in child birth or a Mans purchaseing his bread with the sweat of his face c. are no punishments of sin Original or Actual because all these Paines Troubles Afflictions c. worke together for good to such as love God Rom. 8 vers 28. And so the Godly have no Punishments Chastisements Visitations Corrections or the like for sin though the Scripture say so in hundereds of places Here this Quaker joineth with Antinomians 22. He mentioneth another argument which as he thinketh fools only make use of which is this If Infants have no sin they must all be saved Well what replyeth he to this argument We will rather saith he admit this supposed absurdity as a Consequent of our doctrine then say that innumerable Infants perish eternally not for their owne but only for Adams fault But though he should not value such Absurdities notwithstanding he therein run wilder than Papists and joine with Anabaptists and some Pelagians Yet me thinks he should take heed of contradicting his owne doctrine for afterward we will heare of his pleading for Christs dying for all Mankinde And sure if that be true he must say that he died also for Infants and yet here he granteth that they will be all saved without Christ for they have no sin they have no need of a Saviour to save them from their sinnes But how can they be all saved seing they have the Seed of sin â—n them and the Spring of all actual sinnes and that seed of sin which in Scripture is called death and the body of death the old man and the old Adam as he himself speaketh Pag. 62 When Paul speaketh of the body of death Rom. 7 24. he looks upon it as that from which Christ must deliver him How will this Quaker reconcile these things The old man must be put off or we cannot enter into glory and if Infants have the old man how can they enter into glory And beside All in glory must sing the song of the Redeemed and praise him that hath redeemed them by his blood Revel 5 9 10. How can Infants do this who have never been washen from their sinnes in the blood of the lamb as never having had sin And Pag. 55. he told us that none of Adam's posterity had any good in them which he had not from whom they descended Adam then being deprived of his Original Righteousness none of his Posterity no not Infants can lay claim to that Righteousness how I pray can Infants go to heaven who want a righteousness The heaven then which they go to must be a heaven wherein dwelleth no Righteousness and what can this be but some new Limbus But to be more plaine with him It is not enough for him to say he may grant such a Consequence from his doctrine for we must have sure Scripture grounds ere we beleeve that all Infants even of Turks and Heathens shall certanely go to heaven The Scripture giveth more ground of hope of those that are within the Covenant I am sure than of those who are without what thinks he of the Infants of Sodom See Iud. vers 7. and of Coreh and his company not to mention the Infants of the old world And why doth the Scripture call the children of such as are without the church 1 Cor. 7 14. unclean
terminus without all respect to sin because by it persons are appointed to punishment for their sins and whatever God doth in time execute He râ—solved and determined from eternity to do the same in the self same manner As for the Execution of this decree in time in reference to the denying or not giving of Faith Repentance Regeneration or Gâ—ace to recover out of the state of sin we say this act is Absolute as hâ—s giving of Grace and Regeneration upon the one hand is free as the Scripture richly declareth so thâ— withhoâ—ding of this Mercy Grace is an act of his Absolute Soveraignity and Free Will who hath mercy on whom he will and hardeneth whom he will As concerning the act of inflicting spiritual Iudgments the forerunners of hell this being an act of Iustice is not without respect to sin its procureing cause as the Scriptures lately cited evidence The same we say of adjudging impenitent and wicked persons unto hell for this is an act of justice conforme to the established Law of God 10. Though what we have said might suffice upon our part for clearing of the truth which we owne yet because this Quaker rageth so much against Absolute Reprobation by which he doth not meane the actual Execution of this act but the Act it self we shall in short propose somethings which will serve for confirmation of what we say And 1. There is a certane Analogy betwixt the decree of Election the decree of Reprobation so that the one giveth light unto the other the one cannot be conceived without the other for where there is an Election of some there must be a Rejection of others so the one is opposite to the other from this it is manifest that if Election be Free Absolute so must Reprobation be for the objects of both are supposed to be in the same state condition equally represented in the minde of God or considered when the act passeth upon them none deserving Election more than the rest nor none more meriting Reprobation than the rest If then Election be not upon the account of any good foreseen in the elected more than in others whether it be Faith or Obedience or Perseverance in both to the end or whatever else can be imagined as all our Divines have showne writing against the Arminians it is manifest cleare that Reprobation cannot be upon the account of the Foresight of the contrary Sin foreseen or considered in Iudas could not be a cause moving God to Reprobat him more than Peter because the same was to be seen in Peter And the Apostle cleareth confirmeth this when he saith Rom. 9 11 12 13. for the children being not yet born neither having done any good or evil it was said unto her the Elder shall serve the Younger as it is written Iacob have I loved but Esau have I hated Which place 2. Doth further confirme what we say for here is a Discrimination made one Loved the other Hated that is one Elected the other Reprobated Rejected without any consideration had of good in the one or evil in the other as a procureing cause of these Acts of Gods will for both Iacob Esau are considered as being in a like condition yet unborn neither having done either good or evil 3. The supream wheel moving all is here said to be that the purpose of God according to election might stand not of works but of him that calleth so there can be no procureing cause of this in man The one was preferred to the other that the purpose of God according to Election might stand the other consequently was made to serve that the purpose of God according to Reprobation might stand 4. Works both good evil are here in plaine termes excluded not of works there are no works excepted if Election be without foreseen works Reprobation must be so also or we must say that the Apostle argueth not acuratly that the Spirit of the Lord in the Apostle doth not cleare explaine the point 5 Vers. 17. from the instance of Pharaoh of whom it is said that God even for this same purpose had raised him up that He might shâ—w his power in him c. the Apostle inferreth that God hardneth whom he will as well as from the instance of Iacob preferred to his brother Esau he inferred vers 15. 18. that he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy and that he hath compassion on whom he will have compassion 6. The Objection which the Apostle preoccupieth Vers. 19. Thou wilt say then why doth he yet find fault for who hath resisted his will doth manifestly speak the truth we plead for for if Election Reprobation were not absolute but upon foreseen works what place could this Objection have Why would the Apostle speak to an Objection that were no way pertinent Should there be any colour for any to propose this scruple if the good evil works of man were the ground of all 7. The Apostles reply confirmeth this when he sayeth Nay but O man who art thou that repliest or dispurest or it may be rendered responsats or carps against God Importing that it is high arrogance in the Clay creature to call Jehovah to its barre to judge or quarrel with or disput against God whatever he do according to the purpose of his own will But what ground were there for such a Pride-laying Man-humbling Mouth-stopping Creature-abaseing felling answere if all this matter did run upon the wheels of justice or had its rise from man or were ultimatly founded upon something in him 8. The answere added putteth the matter beyond all further dispute Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it why hast thou made me thus Hath not the potter power over the clay of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour and another unto dishonour Where we see That man is but as a lump of clay in the hands of the great Potter as there is nothing in one part of the same lump of clay calling inviteing or moving the potter to make of it a vessel unto honour or a vessel unto dishonour so is there nothing in man calling or moving God to make this man a vessel unto honour the other a vessel unto dishonour And next we see That all is ultimatly resolved into the pleasure of God as the Potters mere pleasure is the cause of the discrimination of vessels which he frameth out of the same lump 9. These words vers 22. further confirme our point for saith the Apostle what if God willing to shew his wrath and to make his power known endured with much long suffering the vessels of wrath fitted or made up for destruction c. Importing that it is so and that man hath nothing to say against it So we see That as the vessels of mercy are afore prepared unto glory so the vessels of wrath are afore prepared and
made up for destruction and that as the first is done that He might make known the riches of his glory so the last is done that He might shew his wrath and make his power known 10. Christ Mat. 11 25 26. referreth the Lords hiding of the Gospel-manifestations of life and salvation from some unto the good pleasure of God! and if this part of the execution of the decree of Reprobation be referred unto this Absolute Soveraignity good Pleasure of God as its first and only spring much more must the Decree it self be reduced to this only Fountain 11. The like we may observe from 1 Pet. 2.8 from Iud vers 4. from Revel 13 8 17 8. 12. We are told that the Lord added to the Church dayly such as should be saved Act. 2 47. and that as many as were ordained to eternal life believed Act. 13 48. where we see that the appointing some to be saved and ordaining them to eternal life is given as the prime ground and cause of their being added to the Church and Beleeving whence it followeth that the Lord did not adde others to the Church nor give them grace to Beleeve because he had not ordained and appointed them to life the consequence of the Negation is as manifest as the consequence of the Affirmation and is clearly intimated when the other is expressed 11. Thus the Scripture confirmeth our point we shall adde a few reasons as 1. No temporal thing such as is mans sin can be the cause of that which is Eternal as is God's act of Reprobation If it be said that the foresight of what is temporal may be the cause of an Eternal Decree I answere This cannot be for how is it imaginable That God's prescience should be the meritorious cause of his Decree can one eternal Act of God be the meritorious cause and of such a cause we speak here of another All the Eternal Acts of God are one and they are the same with himself how absurd is it then to imagine one to be the meritorious cause of another or the same act as terminated on one object to be the meritorious cause of it self as terminated upon another object If it be said that sin foreâ—een can be the cause of an Eternal act of Reprobation Answ. But sin can not be foreseen as a thing that shall exist without a previous decree concerning its existence by the permission of God and so sin must first be permitted or decreed to be by permission before any man can be Reprobated because of sin by this Objection and then when we suppose sin to be permitted by a decree I ask for what end is this decreed permission God decreeth nothing but for a certane end and what is His End in this is it that he may thereby be moved to Reprobat Then his intention of Reprobation is first for the intention of the End is before the Intention of the midss and how absurd and a theological is that to say that God intended an End and then he Intended Meanes to move him to intend that end Againe by this Assertion the decree of Permitting sin should be before the decree of Damning for sin and so we must imagine the same order in the decrees that we see in the things decreed while as how various soever the things decreed be the decrees themselvs are all one pure act in God who is actus purissimus simplicissimus and therefore sin foreseen can no more be the meritorious cause of the decree of Reprobating for sin than of the decree of Permitting sin And if we should imagine an order betwixt these two decrees of Permitting of sin and of Reprobating for sin it must be such an order as is betwixt the Intention of the End and of the Meanes and so the intention of Permitting sin being first should be of the End which is always first in intention and the intention of Reprobation being the last of these two should be of the Means and so we should be damned for sin that we might be Permitted to sin and that which is first in Intention as the End being last in Execution and that which is a Means being first it would follow that man should be first damned and then permitted to sin which is obviously false and absurd 2. if sin be the meritorious cause of Reprobation then it is so either by necessity of Nature or by the free Constitution of God But neither can be said as we saw above â— The decrees of God can have no more a cause than himself can have all the Acts of God's will being his Will and his Will being Himself we cannot imagine a cause in man of an act of his will more than of himself 4 we should reason proportionably of the decree of Election as we do of the decree of Reprobation as we saw the Apostle doing and so if sin foreseen be the cause of Reprobation grace foreseen must be the cause of Election against the whole Scripture and the Apostles expresse argueing Rom. 9. 5. That procureing cause of Reprobation God could have prevented or taken out of the way if he had pleased else we must imagine a stoical fate overpowering God himself If he might have taken it out of the way and did not can any reason hereof be given beside his owne good pleasure or his designe to manifest the glory of his justice in the just damnation of such and doth not this referre the decree of damning for sin ultimatly unto His good pleasure 6. what are those sinnes which are the procuring cause of Reprobation This man will not say that Original sin is the cause for he denieth it as we saw in the proceeding Chapter And what can that actual sin be and whatever be supposed it must be such as could be foreseen in no other otherwise the foresight thereof could not be the proper meritorious or moving cause why this man was Reprobated more then that man for what is to be foreseen in an Elect cannot be the meritorious cause why the other is Reprobated Againe whatever actual sin that be final Unbeleef or what you will it must either be such as God could have prevented or taken out of the way if he had pleased or not if the first be said then it is manifest that the decree of Reprobation can not ultimatly be resolved into sin as a procuring cause but into the good pleasure of God who would not take that sin out of the way nor prevent its being If this Last be said then God was under a fatal necessitie of decreeing and doing all which he decreed and did and could not hinder sin nor not create that man nor alter any one circumstance which did occasion that sin and thus God himself shall be bound by the fetters of a fatal Necessity yea and all this fatal Necessity shall have its rise from Man which were most absurd and blasphemous 7. if actual sinnes be the consequent of
Reprobation and a mean whereby the execution thereof is brought about they cannot be the procureing cause thereof This is manifest But the former is true Therefore c. That the former is true is manifest from these words of Peter 1. Pet. 2 8. Where we see that these stumblers at the stumbling ston and disobedient persons were appointed or ordained thereunto So Ioh. 10 26 But ye beleeve not because ye are not of my sheep where it is manifest that their not beleeving was a clear consequent of their not being of his sheep So Rom. 11 7. Israel hath not obtained-but the Election and the rest were hardened So that it was from Election that such obtained as did obtaine and from Non-election that the rest obtained not but were hardened 8 Sin is the moving cause of Actual damnation If sin also be the moving cause of the decree of Reprobation It would follow that because of sin God decreed to damne because of sin which is strange language 12. Having premised these things we come now to take notice of what he saith we observed before one great mistake in his setâ—ing downe of our judgment as if God had determined the demonstration of his Iustice without any respâ—ct had to sin Then he saith as further declaring our opinion that God for perfecting of this did appoint that these miserable souls should necessarily sin Resp. Here are moe mistakes for first we say not that Reprobation imposeth any necessity of sinning The decree to punish for sin doth not impose a necessity on the sinner to sin nor yet the decree of denying grace whereby they might be delivered from their sin for that is only a decree of not delivering them out of that state wherein they have brought themselves under a necessity of sinning and so imposeth no necessity Next as to God's Decreeing or willing that sin should exist through his permission which doth not properly belong to this question neither doth that impose any absolute necessity or take away the liberty of Mans Will or the Contingency of events as to second causes And it would seem this man knoweth no difference betwixt an Absolute necessity and that necessity which is meerly Hypothetical But thirdly there is another mistake here for he would make his Reader beleeve that we said that all the necessity of sinning did flow from Reprobation as if no necessity of sinning arose from their sinful state wherein they are by the transgression of Adam Beside that we might observe how in this sentence he contradicteth what he said in the former He addeth That by his Iustice he might according to right rebuke and afflict This would import that according to our judgment Sin is permitted or decreed to exist the Lord permitting it as a Meane to the punishment as the End as if God intended punishment as an end and therefore suffered sin as a meanâ—s while as we look upon both the permission of sin and the punishment thereof as one meanes for the setting forth of the glory of divine Justice He proceedeth as declareing our opinion And therefore that God not only suffereth these to be obnoxiâ—us to this misery in many parts of the World by withdrawing the preaching of the Gospel and the knowledge of Christ. And here we finde some more mistakes for we say that all men by nature are into this state of sin and misery whether they hear the Gospel or not and so their obnoxiousness unto that misery dependeth not upon their want of preaching and of the knowledge of Christ though this be a necessary meane of delivering them out of it Againe his Therefore pointeth out another mistake for as we speak not thus so far less do we inferre this from what he mentioned before Thirdly his word subtrahendo withdrawing pointeth forth a third mistake for it will import that we say that the Gospel is once preached to every person yea and to every Reprobate for how else can it be said to be withdrawne And here is a further mistake when he addeth and the knowledge of Christ for hereby the Reader might think that we thought every Reprobat had the knowledge of Christ but because he was a Reprobat it was taken away from him and withdrawn He saith moreover that we say God even in these places where the Gospel is preached and salvation is offered by Christ withdraweth from them all grace whereby it was possible for them to apprehend the Gospel Here are also several mistakes for his subtraxisse importeth that God hath given to every one who heareth the Gospeâ— grace whereby they may imbrace the Gospel and then withdraweth it from the Reprobate because they are such where readeth he such language in the writtings of our Divines Next we say not as he here insinuateth that we do that the grace which God withholdeth from the Reprobat is that by which faith in the Gospel is meerly possible but that rather without which they cannot beleeve and with which they cannot but beleeve that is He withholdeth the grace of Faith which being his owne free gift Ephes. 2 8. He bestoweth it upon wâ—om He will for he blesseth with all spiritual blessings such as he hath chosen before the foundation of the world that they might be â—oly Ephes. 1 3 4. He proceedeth in relating our opinion thus Because by his own secret will he did decree that they should not obey and that the Gospel should never be effectual to their salvation and that without all respect had to their sin Where there arâ— other mistakes to be observed for first He no where readeth that Reprobation is a decreeing that men should not obey Next wheâ— our divines speak of God's decrees about sin they never utter their minde so bluntly as to say Goâ— decreed that they should not obey but thâ—y use to speak thus God willed or decreed that sin should exist he himself permitting it or as some He willed the permission of sin Thirdly here is another mistake for as to some who hear the Gospel and harden their hearts beyond ordinary God in Iustice giveth them up to the power of unbeleef as a Spiritual judicial stroke or taketh away the Gospel from them aâ—d so Non-churcheth them and this as a punishment and as the Lord doth so in time so he decreed to do so therefore there was some consideration of sin here though sin was no procureing or meritorious cause of the decree At length he concludeth and saith further as if it were our opinion that God decreed to send the Gospel to such as obey it not only to accumulate their damnation Where is another mistake as if this were God's End or his only End and as if we affirmed it were so while as both are most false and contradicted by what himself said a little before 13. Thus have we briefly considered his Representation of our Judgment and have found no fewer than twelue abuses and untruths so that no honest man can acknowledge
this for a true declaration of the truth which we maintaine and with this open discovery of his unfaire dealing might we rest satisfied because it is to be presumed his following reasons can conclude only against this he hath laid forth as our judgment but as we have showne This is not our judgment and therefore his Arâ—uments cannot touch us if they lavel at nothing but at this man of straw which he hath made for himself to shoot at Yet lest he boast as if we were not able to look his Reasons in the face we shall view them 14. He tels us that this is a new opinion there being no mention made thereof in the first four hundered yeers after Christ and that Augustin laid the first foundation thereof in his later writings out of zeal against the Pelagians and sowed some sayings which some have unhappily laid hâ—ld on to strengthen this errour whereby they contradict both truth and the sayings of Augustin and others Answ 1. This man would make us bâ—leeve that he had read all the Fathers that wrote before Augustine but we know whence he hath this for it is the old saying of Arminians But 2. This can conclude nothing against the Truth which we have seen asserted in the Scriptures of truth The Fathers in those ages had not to do with such hereticks as were the Pelagians Before that Enemy of the grace of God arose the Church was in pâ—ace as to these controversies and the Fathers had no occâ—sion to debate such questions as Pelagius afterwards gave occasion unto Can he evince that all the Fathers before Augustine were of a contrary opinion to what we maintaine 3. Is this mans Religion grounded upon the authority of men And will he beleeve no more than what the Father 's said in the first foure ages Let him follow what cisterns he pleaseth we will satisfie ourselves with the Word as the ground of our Faith and we do look upon the Apostles as more ancient than these Fathers and take their positive assertions as of more authority than the silence of these 4. Yet Augustine de dono persever Cap. 11. citeth Ambrose Nazianzen and Cyprian as concurring with him in the ground of his doctrine of Predestination 5. as concerning Augustine what this man groundlesly suggesteth of him is the same he said before when speaking of Original sin and there we answered it 6. what contradictions are in our doctrine either unto Truth or unto Augustine he hath not showne Augustine it is true in his later dayes and after more mature deliberation and consideration of the matter occasioned by his disputs with the Pelagians did retract somethings said by himself in his younger yeers But all this is for the further Confirmation of the truth which we owne The Reader who desireth more satisfaction concerning this matter of Antiquity as to this point may consult the learned D. Twisse against Mr Hoord Sect. 1. 15. He next tels us that the Dominicans imbraced this Opinion And so he giveth us to understand that he is more pleased with the doctrine of the Iesuites But all except Pelagian-Arminians confesse that in these points the Dominicans are preferable to the Iesuites who are more downe right Enemies to the grace of God And then with a crocodile tear as it were in his eye he tels us with an Alas that Calvin éspoused this opinion and addeth that he wronged his name much hereby But with none of the orthodox I am confident for as to what this Quaker and his Arminians say in this we value it not He addeth that hereby the Christian and Protestant Religion was defamed And yet the world heard of no such thing but by Papists Iesuites Arminians who is bound to regard their scandal who are blinde leaders of the blinde must truth be foresaken because these Enemies to the grace of God like it not He confesseth that the Synod oâ— Dort did defend our opinion but addeth that notwithstanding it is exploded by the major part of learned and pious men in all the Churches of Protestants We know indeed that too many nowadayes are turning from the truth and imbraceing Pelagian Iesuitical and Arminian errours but that they make up the major part we deny possibly he will take in the Lutherans but we account them not Reformed Protestants 16. But Pag. 66. he tels us he would not much regaird all this if our opinion had any ground in the word And we have shown that it hath good ground there Then he saith that it is most injurious unto God If this be true it must certanly be an Errour but how is this made good It maketh saith he God the Author of sin An heavy charge if true yet this is so clear thiâ—keth he as that two and one make three But a Quakers confidence following a blinde guide is no strong argument to us let us hear his reason If saith he the Lord decreed that these predestinate ones should perish having no respect unto their evil actions but out of his meer good pleasure and if he also decreed long before they did exist or in any capacity did either good or evil that they should be in these sins by which secondarily they were to be led unto that end who is the first Author and cause of this our God who so willed and decreed it then which there cannot be a more necessary consequence Answ. 1. The word Predestinate being usually taken in a good sense as meaned of these Elected to glory the man vents his gall in thus misapplying the word to render the truth Odious 2. Though no consideration of sin was or could be the Meritorious Moving or Procureing cause of God's eternal decree yet when he decreed to puniâ—h everlastingly thâ— Reprobat for their sinnes he cannot be said to have no respect to sin in his decree as he here alleigeth who considereth not well what he sayeth 3. Though he decreed to punish everlastingly for sin such and such persons and none else meerly out of his owne good will and pleasure yet he cannot be said to have had no respect to sin which punishment alwayes presupposeth and answereth unto 4 If God's decrees be not before man exist or do any good or evil they cannot be Eternal but Temporal and so this man is a Socinian and the decree of God concerning every individual person must exist when the man hath done good or evil and so as many men as many decrees nay according to this man the Lord can make no decree concerning the Everlasting state of man so long as he liveth and so not only we cannot but God himself cannot say to or of any man before the point of death that he is a Reprobate or an Elect what Apprehensions these men have of God I tremble to express 5. What he meaneth by these words ut in iniquitatibus illis versarentur I know not unless their meaning be as I have expressed it And what would he then make
the first sense and consideration the Gospel is in the hand of God alone for He hath made a certane firme connexion betwixt Grace Glory Faith and Salvation Justification and Sanctifiâ—ation Vocation Effectual and Justification and Adoption and betwixt all these and Final Redemption and Glorification And He in the time and manner which please him best worketh the one for bringing the other to passe He Calleth whom hâ— will and Iustifieth whom he will and Sanctifieth whom he will that he may Glorifie whom he will so that in this respect we must look on all these blessings as ordained for the same individual persons and look on the death of Christ the meriteing and procureing cause of these rich Favours and Blessings as only intended for them whom he intendeth to glorifie and must also look on the whole Gospel as intended for them But as to the Gospel considered in the second sense it is the Ministry and Word of Reconciliation committed unto Men 2 Cor 5 18 19. who as Ambassadours for Christ must pray in Christ's stead that people would be reconciled to God vers 20. The dispensation of the Gospel is committed unto them 1 Cor. 9 17. Ephes. 3 2. And because even these dispensators ministers of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4 1. being but men and unacquanted with the secrets of the Decrees and Counsels of God must speak to all indefinitely beseech all exhort all and every man without exception of those they are sent unto and laboure to present every man perfect in Christ and to wooe them to Christ and to espouse them to one husband that they may present them as a chaste virgin to Câ—rist 2 Cor. 11 2. Col. 1 25 28. It is then a groundless mistake to inferre the Universality of the Purpose of God from the Universality of the Offer or to think that Christ died for all and every one because ministers must dispense the word and hold forth Christ as an al sufficient mediator and command all and every one to whom they preach to beleeve and repent It is unreasonable to make the will of God as the supream and absolute Disposer of all things and his will as the only supream Lawgiver to be of the same complexion and latitude or to inferre the one from the other for that were to commensurate Duty with the Event as if nothing could come to passe but what were duty and nothing duty but what came to passe 58. Once more sixtly we would consider some further designe which the Lord hath in holding forth the matter in his Word and in the mouth of his Servants in such ample termes to wit to encourage poor souls to approach and lay hold upon the offer that is held forth in such indefinite termes that none upon any real ground may shift themselves from under the reach of the tender of the Gospel who have a minde to the bargain Hence it is not alwayes said that Christ died for the elect for poor souls under the conviction of guilt and assaulâ—ed with the feaâ—es of hell are ready enough to concluâ—e themselâ—es Reprobates and to hearken to the temptations of Satan suggesting this and so to their owne prejudice reason themselves out of the reach of Mercy and of the Merites of the death of Christ Therefore hath the Lord in the depth of his Wisdom and Goodness so contrived the letter of the Gospel that though there be sufficient evidence of the truth concernâ—ng the extent of the death of Christ as a price and a ransome to justice for the full comfort and establishâ—ng of the heaâ—ts of beleevers yet the matter is held forth in its Administration and Dispensation by men in such general termes as may give encouragement to such souls keep them from desperat despondency of Spirit for though they cannot see as neither are they warranted at the first to enquire and be anxious about it but to hearken to the word of command obey â—he call that they are among the number of the Elect yet they can see and are convinâ—ed that they are sinners and therefore is Christ said to die for the ungodly and for sinners Rom 5 6 8. and it is said that he came into the world to save sinners 1 Tim. 1 15. And if this should not satisfie as an awakened soul assaulâ—ed with temptations of Satan can devise many evasions and shifts to its owne hurt and disadvantage yet they cannot but croud themselves in among Men and men and women that will come are not excluded and among the World hence the world is mentined in this matter Ioh. 1 29. 3 16. 6 51. 1 Ioh. 2 2. Not that God designed or Christ came to die for the whole World or to take away the sinnes of the whole world or to be a propitiation for the whole world for this would say that he came to redeem Devils and to take away the sinnes of Beasts and Birds c because they come under the word World as well as men but that in the administration of the Gospeâ— which is not now confined to one land as of old to Iury Psal. 76 1. But is extended without restriction indefinitely to all nations Ministers may be allowed to offer peace in the Gospel to all indefinitely to whom they are sent to preach and people may be the more encouraged to come over difficulties and not to hearken to temptations to hold them aback from Christ the Peace maker Thus I suppose this difficulty is sufficiently taken out of the way 59. We proceed now to consider what he saith further Together with 1 Tim. 2. to which passage we have spoken he cited also Ioh. 3 16. would have us compare with it 1 Ioh. 4 9. all which he sayeth of both is this whosoever here is an indefinite terme whereby none are excluded And what can all this say An indefinite terme is not universal unless it be in a necessary matter as this is not 1 Ioh. 4 9. we are told that in this was manifested the love of God towards us because that God sent his only begotten son into the world that we might live through him Hâ—re is no indefinite terme nor is the world here the same with the world Ioh. â— 16. as every common understanding may see for here it denoteth the Habitable World which containeth inhabitants and in the other place it denoteth the Inhabitants themselves and beside I suppose he will not say that God sent his son into the habitable world out of this designe and intentation that all the inhabitants thereof should live through him that is live the life of Grace and of Glory for all men have not Faith and alâ— men will not be Saved and what should disappoâ—nt God of his Intentions is he not able to accomplish his Designes If it be said that mans unbeleefe standeth in the way I answere Though mans unbeleef standeth in the way of his owne salvation
of the Messias And all these he shall certanely save And though his first coming was not to act the part of a judge to any of which he speaketh Ioh. 12 37. yet I trow his last coming will be in forme of a judge Mat. 24 30. 25 31 Luk. 9 26. 1 Thes. 4 16. Act. 17 31. 62. He citeth next 2 Pet 3 9. the Lord is long-suffering to us ward not willing that any should perish but that all should come unto repentance and tels us that it is like to Ezech. 33 ver 11. of which place we spoke in the preceding Chapter and then addeth That God's will taketh not effect the cause is from us which could not be if we had never been capable of salvation and if Christ had never died for us but had left us under a physical impossibility of salvation Answere 1 If these words be taken Universally what will this man do with those that outlive the day of their visitation as he speaketh and are hardâ—ned judicially of God and given up to a reprobate mind is the Lord willing that these should come unto Repentance if not what will he do with his Universality Againe what will he say to those whom God cutteth off in their younger yeers and of those He taketh away in the very act of sin as He did Nadab and Abihu the people of Sodom the Bethshemites Uzzah Zimri and Cosbi 2. If we be the Cause that God's will taketh not effect we must be stronger then God for this Will of God is not his Command but his will of Purpose And so He must be a weak God that can not effectuat what he willeth but can be hindered by weak man but the Scriptures speak other wayes of our God and tells us that he doth whatsoever he will and none can let or hinder him Dan. 4 35. Iob. 9 12. Esai 45 9. Psal 135 6. And that none hath resisted his will Rom. 9 20. 3. Free Will I see must be a very great and absolute Prince for upon it hang all the effects of God's will and Purpose and of the death of Christ so that if Free will be ill disposed none of God's gracious Purposes Promises or Decrees shall take effect and Christ for all his Death and Bloudshed shall not save one soul or see a seed and thus all the decrees of heaven are at Mans devotion and Christ must turne a petitioner and supplicat Lord Free will that He may see of the travail of his soul. O cursed Religion 4. But as to the passage in hand the matter is clear that Peter is not speaking of all and every man universally but of us that is of himself and these to whom he writeth and they are the same he wrote his first Epistle unto 2 Pet. 3 1. and them he stileth Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the father through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Iesus Christ 1 Pet. 1 2. Who were begotten againe to a lively hope by the resurrâ—ction of Iesus Christ from the dead vers 3. who were keepâ— by the power of God through faith unto salvation vers 5. who were lovers of Christ and beleeving did rejoyce with joy unspeakable and full of glory vers 8. Such as by Christ did beleeve in God vers 20 21. and had purified their souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren and were born againe c. vers 22 23. See Chap. 2 4 5 7 9 10 25. 2 Pet. 1 1 3 4 3 1 17 18. Thus the impertinency of this man in citeing this passage is manifest 63. He asketh what meaneth all the vehement Invitations Expostulations and Complaints in Scripture if there be no possibility of salvation and supposeth that this is to make God the Author of a stage play And thus the man raâ—teth in his reavings at this rate and all to dethrone the most High and spoile Him of his Principality and Supream Dominion that base man may be set down in the chaire of State and have the keyes of heaven and hell at his girdle by this Argument the Quaker would not only make the death of Christ a common thing but would destroy all the Decrees of God all Predestination and Election all Purposes of preventing any with mercy and all Absolute Pâ—omises But the mans attempt is vaine God will be God whether he will or not 2. We assert no Simple Impossibility of salvation to any but Hypothetical If God would give grace to all all should be saved and if He will not give grace to all must we quarrell with the Almighty Notwithstanding of God's decrees every one that perisheth perisheth willingly and of his owne fâ—ee choise God's decrees destroy not mans Free will nor take away the liberty and contingency of second causes but rather establish it as may appear from Prov. 16 33. Ioh. 19 11. Act. 2 23. 4 27 28. Mat. 17 12. 3. These Exhortations Expostulations c. respect the Gospel as it relateth to Gods will of precept and is the word of reconciliation dispensed by men and so hold forth what is mans Duty as we cleared above which must not be confounded with God's Purposes nor set up to dethrone them our duty is our duty by vertue of a command whatever God's purposes be Though God had purposed that Isaack should not be killed by his Father yet the word of command made it Abraham's duty to goe and offer him up 4 These Invitations and Expostulations c. respect only those to whom the Gospel is preached and so whatever this man can make out of them they can prove no Universal Redemption for we hear of no such expostulations with such as live without the sound of the Gospel And there are moe without the Church than within it not only under the Law but even now under the Gospel 5. This man I hope will not deny that God might if he pleased give grace to such as he expostulateth with whereby they might certainly be wrought up to a compliance with the word of Command And because it seemeth not good in his eyes to do so shall his Dispensations and the Ministry of his Gospel be looked upon as a stage play and a comoedie O! who art thou O man that will thus bring God to thy barr and passe such a shameful sentence upon his proceedings 6 God useth these Expostulations c. as meanes to bring home his Owne And as for Others though we would think to advocat their cause and condemne the Lord they and all that will take their part shall be found speachless in the day of accounts And God shall be glorified in his holy Justice whether vaine Man will or not 64. He citeth in the last place 1 Iâ—h 2 1 2. where Christ is said to be a Propitiation for the sinnes of the world And then he insulteth over such as would have only beleevers understood here by the word
Essence of God considered some other way whence it appeareth that all men are partakers of the very Essence of God though not as considered precisely in it self but some other way What blasphemy is wraped up here let any juâ—ge that will 5. But why may not this seed and light be meaned of the Nature and Essence of God simply in it self considered Because saith he that can not be divided into parts and measures being most pure and simple free of all composition and division so can neither be exstinguished nor wounded nor crucified nor killed by all the strength of men Ans. Yet it would seem by him that the Essence and Nature of God though not as considered simply in it self yet as considered some other way may be Divided into parts and Compounded and so Exstinguished Wounded Killed yea Crucified and I would only know of him in what respect we can so consider the Essence and Nature of God as that we may say of it it may can be Wounded Killed Crucified or Exstinguished He leaveth us here in the mist. 6. We have heard what he understandeth not by this Seed Light c. He tels us next what he understandeth by it viz. a Spiritual heavenly and invisible principle principium organ in which God as he is the Father the Son the Spirit dwelleth a measure of which divine and glorious life is in all as a seed which of its own nature inviteth and inlineth all to good and this saith he we call the vehicle of God the spiritual body of Christ the flesh and bloud of Christ which came out of heaven and of which all the Saints do eat and are nourished unto eternal life Here we have a mysterious revelation of their mysterious conceptions by which we can understand as little of their meaning as before for 1. What is this Principium this Principle Is it a principle of Natural Actions Or a principle of Gracious and Saving Actions If of Natural actions how doth it differ from the soul and the Faculties thereof If of saving and gracious actions how is it given to and implanted in every man how Atheistical and wicked soever he be The Scripture tels us of a principle of wickedness in every man by nature whereby they are inclined to all evil and only evil and that continually And we hear of the God of this world in them that are lost blinding their mindes 2 Cor. 4 4. and of the Prince of the power of the aire the Spirit that worketh in the children of disobedience Ephes 2 2. And that this is the common condition of all till they be quickened together with Christ and brought out of that state of death by faith in Christ Ephes. 2 3 4 5. and by beleeving the Gospel 2 Cor. 4 3 4. 2. How or what way is this to be called an Organ Of what is it an instrument or Organ Of God or of the Soul Instruments must be instruments of some principal cause Or is this word properly taken or improperly Is it a Suppositum or a Vertue and Principle superadded to the Suppositum siting it for action Or is it to the soul as our members and organs are to the body What he meaneth hereby he would do well to explaine for his expressions are dark and dubious and give no distinct sound 3. In what respect is this Principle and Organ called spiritual Is it spiritual as opposite to Carnal and Bodily as not being Corporeal Or as opposite to Natural Or as opposite to Sinful and Corrupt If he mean the first it may be nothing but the Soul or the Faculties or Natural Qualities thereof and so a meer natural thing But if he take it in the two letter senses how cometh it to passe that every one lying in their natural state are made partakers thereof It must be wrought by the special Operation of the Spirit and this special Operation of the Spirit is not common to all men breathing but is peculiar to the chosen ones and to beleevers as the whole Scripture informeth us 4. We may move the samâ— doubts touching the other two termes Celestial and Invisible The soul may be called Celestial as being immediatly created of God put into the body and it is Invisible as not being the object of our corporeal senses But it may be he taketh these termes in some other more limited sense 5. He saith God dwelleth in this Principle and Organ but how can that be That God is said to dwell among his people in respect of the signes of his Presence and of the effects of his Love Care and Tenderness of them we read Exod. 25 vers 8. 29 45 46. Numb 5 3. 35 34. Deut. 12 11. Ezra 6 12. Deut. 33 12. 1 King 6 13. Ezech. 43 7 9 Zech. 2.10 11. 1 Chron. 23 25. But this was not common to all Nations but was the special privilege of that people So we hear of God's of the Spirits and of Christs dwelling in the souls of his beloved and sanctified ones by more special significations of his Favour and gracious Workings of his Love Rom. 8 9 11. 2 Cor. 6 16. Ephes. 3 17. Revel 21 3. Ioh. 14 17. 1 Cor. 3 16. 2 Tim 1 14. 1 Ioh. 3 24. 4 12 15 16. But that this in dwelling of God or of his Spirit or of Christ is common to all men and not the peculiar privilege of the Saints the places cited do abundantly manifest to be false Of God's dwelling in such a Principle or Organ the Scripture maketh no mention and we must not be wise above what is wriâ—en He would do well to explaine this out of the Scriptures for we value not his dreames and phancies 6. What meaneth that expression That God dwelleth there as the Father as the Son and as the Spirit Doth God Father Son and Spirit dwell in all the ungodly Heathens Barbarians any other wayes than as He is omnipresent or by his Natural and Common works in and about them as in and about all his creatures who proportionably live move and have their being in Him as men and women have for all are his workmanship and get life and breath anâ— all things from him Act. 17 24 25 28. 14 15 But what meaneth that as the Father c. It may be he doth not acknowledge a Trinity of Persons in one Divine Essence as sure Other Quakers do not And then all the Trinity of Persons whereoâ— the Scripture speaketh must be nothing but some different unintelligible wayes of God's manifesting himself and dwelling in all and every one of Adam's posteritâ— and it may be too in all â—he Creatures sensible insensible 7. He calleth this a divine and glorious life whereof all are partakers in some measure It is a divine life indeed and glorious to have God dwelling in the soul in love and power But by vertue of what Covenant cometh He to dwell in every man Not sure
Gentiles and sheweth what persons they were and concludeth with the Jewes and then tels us Chap. 3 vers 9. that he had proved both Iewes and Gentiles that they are all under sin It is true he sayes the wrath of God is revealed from haven against all unrighteousness of men c. because that which may be known of God is manifest in them c. But what of this What is made known of God saith he is made known by the Gospel Ans. This is most false for the Law and Light of Nature with the works of Creation and Providence do make known much of God But this is not the Gospel of the grace of God whereby life and immortality is brought to light It is like indeed that this is all the Quakers Gospel Many things have we met with hitherto which confirmeth us in this Apprehension thisi expression here putteth it beyond all doubt Doth this Gospel manifest the righteousness of God from faith to faith Yes saith he that is it revealeth to the soul what is good just and equitable And as the soul receiveth and beleeveeth that divine righteousness it is more and more revealed from one measure to another Ans. What ignorant babling is this What effronted and bold playing with the word of God is this Is every thing that revealeth what is good just and equitable the Gospel Then the Law must be the Gospel Then Adam in innocency had the Gospel Then the dim light of nature is all the Quakers Gospel this is their Grace their Substantial thing their Light within their Seed Are they not then noble Divines And is their Religion any thing but heathenisme Is it not worse then Pelagianisme Socinianisme Arminianisme and Iesuitisme The following words cannot I confesse be well answered for they are nothing but a rabble of non-sense though fit lettuce for their lips And though he should say as some of them use to speak that I am in the witchcraft and cannot understand his meaning I must forbear noticeing of him and his tattles and see if any thing worth an answer followeth for though sayes he the outward creation declareth the power of God yet that which is known of God is revealed within by which inward revelation we are made fit to see and discerne the eternal power of the God head in the outward creation for if that inward revelation were not man could no more understand the invisible things of God by the visible and outward creation than a blinde man see colours c. Ans. 1. What is that Inward Revelation distinct from the Outward Revelation It is it may be the reception or actual intellection of what is outwardly revealed and so the Natural Faculties acting as such must be Evangelick Preachers and Inward Revealers with the Quakers 2. The text speaks of no such Inward Revelation distinct from what was had by the outward Creation For that which may be known of God was shewed unto them by the things which were made vers 19 20. 3. There is no more aptitude requisite to see and discerne God's eternal Power and God-head not the eternal power of the God-head as he speaketh in a natural way and Paul is not here speaking of a spiritual and saving way by the works of Creation than to have a natural faculty of Understanding and Reason freed of prejudices and contracted byasses and blindness for this matter is so deeply rooted in their mindes that will they nill they it cannot be thrust out 4. It seemeth by his simile that this Inward Revelation is the same to the actual understanding of these things that the eye of the body is to seeing and discerning of colours and so it is manifest that it can be nothing else but the inward faculty of the soul whereby such things are known and understood And so this Inward Faculty of the soul with the Light of Reason is the Quakers Preacher and Gospel Poor souls and what will this teach concerning the new Covenant and the way of salvation through a crucified Mediator Do the Quakers know no other Gospel then this whereof all the fruite was that it left the poor miserable heathen without excuse when they fell to their idolatrous courses O how are they to be pitied that under the clear manifestation of the Gospel do thus run back to the Heathens Theology that they may be made much more inexcusable then ever the Heathens were Do they glory so much in Paganisme 37. He tels us moreover that the Apostle saith first that that which is known of God or the knowledge of God is manifest in them and next that in and by that manifestation granted inwardly and received they were able to read and understand the power of God in visible things Answ. 1. By what authority maketh he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the knowledge of God one the same seing this is more comprehensive and of a larger latitude 2. I do not see the second thing in the Apostles words but I want the Quakers spectacles Then he very learnedly moveth an Objection thus if any should say That the external creation of it self without any inward supernatural and saving grace or seed did declare to a natural man that God is And will he deny this He must then contradict the Apostle But what answereth he What good I pray would that knowledge do if it did not also communicat to me what was the will of God and how I should do that that is acceptable to him Ans. And what would this answere say Either the Inward Revelation which the heathens had that I may speak in his language did also reveal what was the will of God c. Or not if not to what purpose is all this said If it did then the Apostle is quite out and destroyeth hereby his owne cause But I shall help the Quaker with a distinction That same Inward Revelation as he calleth it could and did reveal to the Heathens part of the will of God concerning duties legible by the Law of nature and written upon the creation of God but could reveal nothing of the mysteries of the Gospel because these did depend upon pure Revelation there being no lineaments thereof written upon the Creation nor no vestige thereof impressed in the heart of man Hence though the Heathens knew or might have known to have put a difference betwixt somethings good and evil yet they could never understand the Revelation of Iesus Christ in the Gospel All this cleareth further that the Quâ—kers know no otheâ— Gospel but what the Heathens by the Light of Nature did understand He citeth Pag. 104. Micah 6 8. But most impertinently For the Lord gave not that revelation of his will to the Heathens which he did to the Iewes Psal. 147 19 20. Then he citeth Pauls Words Rom. 1. The wrath of God is revealed against them who detained the truth of God in unrighteousness And what then Could not the Heathens oppresse make a
or therefore others did not understand them and savingly beleeve them who will receive any of these consequences But mary her self understood not somethings not yet the Apostles And what then did they not understand so much as was then revealed and necessary to salvation And did they not understand after Information Poor man he goeth far to fetch waâ—er to no purpose Will any thing here said bring the least reliefe unto his desperat cause and prove that Heathens now without the Church can be saved without the knowledge of Christ Quakers can dream waking I see 12. But Pag. 118. § 27. he saith that several of the Gentiles by this inward light were sensible of the dammage that came by Adam's fall Answ. And what then were they also sensibâ—e of the advantage that came by Iesus Christ and will all that are sensible of their dammage suffered by Adam's sin be saved This is a wide door to salvation indeed but the Scripture tels us no such thing His citeing of a â—aying of Plato and another of Pithagoras and a third of Plotinus and a fourth of we know not whom whether truely or not is uncertain not doth he name the places where they say so that some who might be so curious as to know the truth might try is to as good purpose as if he did thresh the water for whatever apprehensions these Heathens had of the misery of man and â—et a very small knowledge and reason considering what was obvious to all their eyes might soon have made them say all that he citeth of them here viz. that mens soul is fallen into a dark cave where it converseth with shadowes And that man wandereth in the earth as a stranger exiled from God and that mans soul is like an extinct coal and that the souls wings are clipt so as it cannot flee to God He tels us nothing of their apprehensions of a way of Redemption out of that misery and the knowledge of this we say is necessary unto Salvation Yes in the following words he tels us that they also knew Christ as a remedy to deliver them though not under that denomination Then sure they had not this knowledge by Revelation For divine Revelation would have given the knowledge of Christ under the right denomination but by natures light And if Natures Light will lead people to a crucified Christ we may burne the bible But how proveth he this He tels us that Seneca Epist. 41. speaks of an holy Spirit that is in us that teacheth us as we receive him What is in this true or false â— cannot judge at present not having that book by me only I must tell him that the Scriptures speak of no holy ghost in every man And that the Holy Ghost and Christ Immanuel God-man is not one and the same and that faith in Christ is required unto salvation And might noâ— Seneca meane hereby Reason which the Scriptures tell us is now corrupt and carnal and an enemy to the Gospel Sure that passage he citeth next of Cicero's out of Lactan. Too long here to translate and insert is speaking of nothing as the words cleare but of Reason and it is expresly called so recta ratio given to every man Is this the Quakers Gospel-Teacher Saviour Christ and Redeemer Why doth he else where seem to cry out against the Socinians When here he cryeth up so much with them and with heathens pure Reason Is this the Holy Ghost that acts leads and guides them and teacheth them all their divinity poor souls Are they so in love with paganisme that for its sake they will renunce all Christianity 13. There is a mighty argument following which must be noticed it is this The Heathens call this Reason or I know not what wisdom and this is the name that is given to Christ in the Scriptures Prov. 1 20. 8 9 34. Ergo what Therefore tâ—e Heathens knew Christ. Is not this a noble argument well becoming such as pretend to rare light and knowledg and to nothing lesse then Revelations and Inspirations It is no wonder that they say Christ is in them for they are possessours â—f wisdom and Christ is called wisdom Did he neâ—er read that the wisdom of this world is foolishness and that the world by wisdom knew not God And was this Christ because he is elsewhere called wisdome did he never read that God would destroy the wisdom of the wise and is the meaning of this that God would destroy Christ because Christ is somewhere called wisdom What notions of men destracted or rather judicially given up of God are these Hence saith he further such among the Gentiles as left that which was evil and turned to that which was good and justice were called Philosophers that is lovers of wisdom But what if he be mistaken in the ground or reason of this name given or assumed And whether he be mistaken or not what can he make of it Belike he would say They were lovers of Christ for Christ is called wisdom Is not this man a noble advocat for Heathens and worthy of his hire Are not these all very strong arguments to prove that Heathens knew Christ though not under that notion and therefore may be saved But Phocilides who knoweth where said saith he that that was best wisdom which was had by inspiration of God And could not blinde nature have told him so much Was this such an excellent piece of knowledge that it may truely be called saving And was this the knowledge of Christ under some other denomination Could not the devil say as much And may he therefore also be saved What were this mans thoughts busied about when he wrote these things was he dreaming Or in a rapture of Quakerisme or sunck into his introversion where he lost all humane Reason 13. Then Pag. 119. he saith he could produce many such But to what purpose To prove saith he that they knew Christ by his work working in them by which they were turned frâ—m unrighteousness to righteousness and made lovers of his power and whereby they felt themselves delivered from evil If this be the conclusion that he would proâ—e why hath he not brought one testimony to this end what he hath hithertill adduced agreeth as well with this conclusion as harp doth with harrow But the Apâ—stle he addeth saith they did shew the work of the law written in their hearts and therefore as all were doers of the law so without doubt they were justified We spoke to this before and this man is tedious in his repetitions for want of arguments only I note that I see now he concludeth that all the Heathens were saved for they were all â—ith him doers of the law and that because they had all the work of the law written in their hearts and so were all justified Happy Heathens if so and if so it were better to be Heathens than Christians for all Christians are not justified and saved though they have
holy sayes he as is the root they come from and therefore God accepts them and justifieth us in them and rewardeth us for them of his proper and free grace But the question is whether they be perfect and can stand before the tribunal of Justice and so become any part of that Righteousness answering the Law which requireth perfect conformity in all points which is the formal objective reason of our Justification before God whose judgment is according to truth 18. Thus we have seen his explication of their Opinion which in short is this That the formal objective reason or as he with others speak the formal cause of Justification is a Principle of grace within or Christ formed there that is the spring and principle of good works which is begun sanctification This I say is it according to his words but if we â—emember what was said to this above and consider what this Christ within is according to the Quakers principles we shall finde that in this point their judgment is more dâ—testable than is that of Papists for this Christ within is formed of meer Nature and that without any assistance of divine grace by the meer Rational power and will of man yeelding unto the dictats of that Light which is as well in pagans that scarce have the use of reason as in Christians and in all alike and so it is a Christ formed within whereof Pagans Turks and Indians that never heard nor never shall heare the least sound of the Gospel are capable and by vertue whereof they as well as Christians can come to be justified So that in short the justification which Quakers maintaine is a Pagan-justification resulting from a Pagan-sanctification and if this be not many degrees more damnable abominable then the doctrine of Tridentine Papists let any of understanding judge 19. After this he layeth downe three Propositions the confirmation of which will as he thinketh prove his point The first is this Pag. 129. The Obedience and Passion of Christ is that whereby the soul obtaineth remission of sins in that it is the cause prâ—curing that grace and seed by whose inward operations Christ is formed within and the soul is made conforme unto it and so just and justified And in respect of this capacity and offer of gracâ— God is said to be reconciled not that he is actually râ—conciled or justifieth any or holdeth any justified who remaineth in his sins ungodly impure and unjust Ans. 1. To say that the obedience and suffering of Christ procureth remission of sins in that it procureth that grace and seed c. is but a Socinian and Arminian untruth destroying the Satisfaction of Christ and upon the mater saying that Christ by his Obedience and Death did not fully discharge the debt of all those that are justified did not make a Proper Real and Full Satisfaction to justice in their behalf contrare to Rom. 5 8 9 10 19. 1 Tim. 2 5 6. Heb. 10 10 14. Dan. 9 24 25. Esai 53 4 5 6 10 11 12. Nor doth the Scripture speak so of the mater see Ephes. 1 7. In whom we have redemption through his blood the forgiveness of sins So Col. 1 14. See also Col. 2 13. Ephes. 4 32 Mat. 9 2 5. Mark 2 59. Luk. 5 20 23. 7 48. Mat. 26 28. Heb. 9 22. It is true the methode of the Gospel requireth that the Persons be first united to Christ by faith before they can obtaine these benefites of his Redemption but this is not the thing he speaketh of 2. This grace and seed is with him common to all flesh But the Scriptures tell us not as we have showne above that Christ's righteousness was for all or that all receive grace by vertue thereof 3. Christ formed within by the inward operations of that grace and seed which is common to Pagans is but a Natural Christ and Birth for such as the cause is such must the effect be And so what followeth upon this is but a Pagan righteousness and Justification 4. It is false as we have already manifested that God is said to be Reconciled only in respect of this capacity and offer of grace 5. We say not that God justifieth any remaining in their sinnes yet we grant that the Justified may commit sinnes and thereby fall under God's fatherly displeasure Psal. 89 31 32 33. 51 7 8 9.10 11 12. 32 5. 1 Cor. 11 30 32. Luk. 1 20. Mat. 26 75. and yet withall remaine in the state of Justification Luk. 22 32. Heb. 10 24. for we approve not of Antinomians in this mater 20. The Proposition we have heard and what he would properly assert thereby we are yet to learne Possibly his proofs will help us to understand it The first proof Pag. 130. us from Rom. 3 25. Here sayes he the Apostle showeth the efficacy of Christâ—s death viz. that by it and faith in it remission of by past sinnes is obtained And what then This is it in which and for which the long suffering of God is exercised toward men And what then Therefore though men by their dayly sinnes deserve eternal death yet by vertue of the sacrifice of Christ grace and the seed of God move them in love dureing the day of their visitation that they may be redeemed from evil Here are Quakers dreames whereof the text maketh no mention and dreames that have no sense but with men of distracted braines 21. We are nothing the wiser by this proof let us see the next If God saith he should be totally reconciled unto men and repute them just while they were actually unjust why doth he so oft complean of his people as Esai 59 2. where there is perfect and compleat reconciliation there is no separation or it will follow that sins can make no separation and that their good works and worst sinnes are the same in Gods account This giveth too great liberty to sin And in the margine he saith he speaketh not here of persons not yet converted whom Antinomians their adversaries say were justified from the beginning but of persons converted according to Protestants who may fall into grievous sinnes and yet are said by them to remaine perfectly and wholly justified Answ. 1. Here beginne we to understand something of his Proposition and of its designe And for answere we say That there is a twofold unrighteousness one of State or of Person another of Condition and particular Actions As to the first no unrighteous person is justified because before Justification he must be cloathed with the imputed righteousness of Christ and so constituted just and in Justification declared just because constituted just And as to the second though such an one as committeth sin be in so far unrighteous as to his actions and in that not justified or approven of God Yet being united to Christ by faith and thereby put in a justified state he remaineth in Gods account a justified person as to his State which
Renovation is but upon the minde and this Formation of Christ is but a Revelation in the minde But where is the work of grace upon the will This would say that the Papists opinion is more tolerable then this for they include graces seated in the will 5. Where doth the Scripture speak of Justification after this manner We are oft said to be justified by faith but never are we said to be justified by such a Revelation 6. Therefore I may as confidently affirme that this his sensation is but a sensible delusion of Satan the grand enemy of the Grace of God and of the Gospel 34. Yet he goeth about to prove this and tels us first that this methode of salvation is set down by Paul Rom. 5 10. for saith he The Apostle doth signify that reconciliation is made by the death of Christ. Ans. This is true of that Reconciliation which is actual and is had by faith in the death of Christ but not of that Reconciliation which he imagineth whereby to wit God is prone to Receive and Redeem man What next He affirmeth Iustification that is Salvation to be in Christs life Ans. And what ground is there for this Interpretation seing the sense is obvious to wit that seing by the propitiatory death of Christ beleevers laying hold upon him by faith are brought into a state of Peace and Reconciliation with God they need not fear but they shall be brought thorow all difficulties and steps to the enjoyment of life eternal and full salvation Christ being now alive to bestow all that he hath purchased What more He saith That this life of Christ is something inward and spiritual in the heart whereby he is renewed and brought out of death where naturally he lay and raised up and revived unto God the same Apostle sheweth Ephes. 2 5. Ans. This is nothing but a palpable perversion of the words of the Apostle for the life can no more be understood here of some inward thing wrought in man than Christ's death can be so interpreted And if he had so expounded the words he had spoke more like himself above as also more like other Quakers who talk of Christs sufferings and death c. as all done within man 2. That the Apostle Ephes. 2 5. is speaking of beleevers being by grace quickened together with Christ and risen together with him c. is true But what saith this for the corrupt glosse of Rom. 5 10. where the life of Christ is only spoken of and that as it by which beleevers may be assured of their salvation 3. What is there in all this for Justification by the Revelation of Christ within reforming the minde c Hath the man forgote his Conclusion already Ay but sayes he the Apostle mentioneth a Revelation of this inward life 2 Cor. 4 10 11. and this inward life is that whereby he said we were justified Ans. The life of Christ is indeed said by Paul 2. Cor. 4 10 11. to be made manifest in and by its effects supporting carrying the persecuted Apostles through so many miseries and deaths But who except a Quaker could say that the Apostle sayes we are justified by this life And what vestige is there of this in the Apostles words 35. In the next place he citeth Tit. 3 5. And hence thus argueth we are justified by that by which we are saved Ans. Yes by the grace of God we are freely justified and saved and that without works of righteousness which we have done Here the Apostle sayes he moreover doth manifestly ascribe the immediat cause of Iustification unto the inward work of regeneration that is to Christ revealed in the soul by which we are formally accepted of God Ans. 1. What immediat cause is this That a soul must be wrought up to faith in Christ before it can be justified we grant and that this faith must be wrought by the operation of the Spirit is also true But that this faith or any other work of the Spirit in the soul is the Formal Objective Cause of Justification the Apostle saith neither here nor elsewhere 2. To say that we are formally accepted of God that is as fully righteous with a righteousness answering the Law in all points and satisfying justice for bâ—gones as he must meane or he speaketh not to the point by this work of Regeneration is but a jejune begging of what is yet in question sure there is no word of this here 36. In the third place he citeth 2 Cor. 13 5. And saith That it appeareth here how earnestly the Apostle would that they should know Christ in them Ans. The Apostle to the end that the Corinthians who at the instigation of false Teachers were beginning to have undervalueing thoughts of him might be convinced that he was an Apostle of Christ and so continue in esteeming of him as such doth here presse them to goe in to their owne hearts and see if there were any fruits and effects of Christ's living among them by his Spirit through his ministrie that if not they might not account themselves Christians but persons rejected And what would this say It appeareth hence 2. sayes he that the cause of reprobation or of non-justification was the want of the inhabitation of Christ revealed And by the rule of contraries where Christ is inwardly known and revealed there the persons are approven and justified And nothing can be more cleare Ans. 1. By what rule law or authority doth he make Reprobation and No-Jusâ—ification equipollent terms This must be licentiâ Quakerorum whereby they have a privilege contrare to Scripture and all Reason to coine words phrases and opinions in divinity at their pleasure 2. The want of the effects and evidences of Christ dwellâ—ng in them by his Spirit is not here given as the cause of their being in an evil state reâ—ected and disapproved of God but as a mark and evidence And marks and evidences are not alwayes taken from the Immediat Nearest and Formal cause 3. It is very true that by the rule of contraries where Christ is indeed revealed and working in the soul that soul is justified but it is most false that therefore Christ revealed in the soul is the Formal Cause or to speak more properly the Formal Objective Reason of Justification for himself said above that good works were properly the effects and fruits of â—ustification and yet he knoweth the fruits and effects may be an evidence of the cause in being 4. And so there is nothing more plaine and evident then that this citation is impertinent and his argueing therefrom a non sequitur and that he is still the old man a Quaker-disputant 37. As a parallel place he citeth Pag. 142 Gal. 4 19. And saith this Christ is the inward hope of glory Col. 1 27 28. And what is the hope of Glory must be that to which we nextly and immediatly lean unto in Iustification Answ. And how is this proven We must beleeve it
because he saith it and so there is an end When the Apostle saith Phil. 1 v. 28. And in nothing terrified by your adversaries which is to you an evident toaken of salvation he pointed at something which might be looked upon as a ground for hope of glory must we also leane to that in justification After some lines wherein after his usual manner he must extravage he saith And such as feel Christ after this manner raised and reigning in them have a true ground of hope to beleeve that they are justified Which is very true because these works of Christ are inseparable fruites and effects of Justification After some few words againe to no purpose he tels us that Borhaeus Claudius Albericus Inuncunanus Essius three whose books I never saw and whose names I never heard before I read this Quakers book are for Justification by this Revelation And he calleth them Protestants but if so I have read of some Papists more sound then they are if their meaning be one and the same with this Quakers And finally he citeth some words of Mr. Baxters Aphorismes But he cannot be ignorant that Mr Baxters notions in this particular are little satisfying beside that Mr Baxter himself will have none citeing that book as expressing his plaine and full meaning And if he would put the mater to the issue of tryal by humane testimony we should give him Twenty for one 38. Now followeth his Third proposition wherein he asserteth two things first That good works seing they naturally proceed from this birth as heat from the fire are absolutely necessary unto justification as a causa sine qua non in which we are justified and without which we cannot be justified Secondly That such good works are pure and perfect These he cometh to prove Pag. 144. c. And they would appear to be a contradiction for seing good works are the fruites of this birth and by the birth we are justified good works must follow justification and so cannot be a cause no not a causa sine qua non for even a causa sine qua non must be before the effect Againe what is that to say in which we are justified Is the meaning only that these works are approven of God we upon the account of them so farr as they are done according to a Gospel rule What will this say for justification of State whereof we are here speaking finally How can it be said that without good works we cannot be justified seing we are justified by the Birth and the Birth is but the cause of good works and so it hath been said that good works are the Effects and Consequences of Justification This would suspend justification until good works appeared so we should be justified by the Biâ—th only Initially or in a preparatory way but not fully And further in this he is worse then Papists who will not say that the good works by which we are justified are such as can stand before Gods tribunal if He follow the strick rigour of Law and not the Gospels admixture of mercy 39. Let us hear his proofs The first is our of Iames 2. whence he frameth this Argument If no man be justified without faith and no faith be lively and valide unto justification without works then works are necessary unto justification But the former is true c. Answ. 1. Though it be true that no man at least come to yeers of discretion is justified without faith as an instrumental cause laying hold on and applying Christ and his righteousness yet this faith is not the Causa formalis objectiva of justification and far less can works be a part of this cauâ—e seing they are but fruites and consequences of this faith 2. These words and no faith is lively and valide unto justification without works may admit of a double sense either the meaning may be that no faith is valide unto justification but that which is true and lively and apt to produce good works or that no faith is valide unto justification but that which is actually produceing good works and in so far as it is attended with good works If the first be the meaning then it is apparent that good works cannot be said to be necessary unto justification as a cause thereof for it may be in actual â—eing when they are but in potentia If the last be the true sense this place of Iames will not evince it for Abraham was justified before he offered up his Son Isaac And then it would follow that no man is justified in his sleep or when he is not actually doing some good work 3. Thus we see and the place of Iames is clear for it that good works are only necessary in the person justified and necessary to prove the truth and reality of a justifâ—ing faith to the man self and to others And so notwithstanding hereof that is alwayes true that the Scripture saith Abraham beleeved God and it was imputed to him for righteousness Iames 2 23. Gen. 15 6. Rom. 4 3. Gal. 3 6. 40. His second proof is from several Scriptures as Heb. 12 14. Mat. 7 21. Iohn 13 17. 1 Cor. 7 19. Revel 22 1â— and he thus frameth it If these only shall enter into the Kingdom who do the will of the Father if these only be called wise builders blessed that do the sayings of Christ c. then good works are necessary to salvation and to justification The former is true c. Answ. Not to quarrel at the Proposition as containing words in it which are not in the places cited We shortly answ that not one of these places speak of Justification or mention the necessity of works thereunto But only of their necessity unto final salvation which we deny not And if his Argument hold no man shall be justified before he be in heaven All therefore that can hence be concluded is that good works are necessary in the person justified in order to glory but not that they are necessary unto justification 41. These two are all his arguments and how slender proofs they are of what he undertook to prove let any judge He cometh in the next place § 10. to answere some Objections The first is taken from Luk. 17 10. When ye have done all that is commanded say we are unprofitable servants Which is a clear proof that our works being but a doing of that which is commanded and so a doing of duty and such as bring no advantage unto God as a reparation of his Glory or satisfaction to his justice for the wrongs done and therefore can have no interest in that which is the causa formalis objectiva of our justification or in that which we must lean to as the ground of our justification before God or in that upon which we may expect absolution from the sentence of the Law and freedom from the wrath and curse of God due for the breach of
glory though we must alwayes lament our shortcoming and run to the bloud of Iesus that the defilement cleaving to our best works may be purged away Nor do we think that this hyperbolick expression of the penitent church will warrant any to caâ—l all the work of the Spirit of God in his people sordide and filthy rags What is of God should be acknowledged good acceptable though the defilements that adhere to the best of God's works in us here because of our continueing corruption and because of the lustings of the flesh in us should be mourned over and keep us humble One thing I would further note here That if our Gospel-works be such why are we not Justified because of them as well as in them He further answereth pag. 149. § 12 That though it were granted that the best of men are imperfect Yet God can produce perfect works in them by his Spirit Ans. the qustion is not what God can do but what he doth God can make all his perfect Yet the supposition made saith he doth not so He hath thought it fit for his owne glory so to work in his Saints as they may have so long as they are here a body of death to wrestle with and occasion to pray dayly forgive us our sinnes and to run to the fountaine opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Ierusalem for sin and for uncleanness that they may be washen He proceedeth The Spirit of God is not capable of a blot and therefore all Christ's works wrought in his children are pure and perfect Ans. The Spirit it is true is not capable of pollution yet his works as received by us and as we are the formal actors of them are obnoxious to pollution And doth not the Scripture tell us that God first beginneth a good work in us and afterward perfecteth it Phil. 1 6. How can then all the works of Christ in us be perfect And if it were so his children here should be as holy as they will be in heaven for what is higher than perfection Thus we see this man will outstripe Bellarm. who confessed that our actual righteousness was imperfect because of the admixtion of venial faults and stood in need of dayly remission And will run the length of bold Vasques who thinketh that such have no need of remission in 1. 2. Disp. 204. c. 2. 3. He further argueth It would then follow that the miracles and works of the Apostles themselves as the conversion of the Gentiles gathering of Churches writting of Scripture and giving of themselves to the death for Christ were defiled with sin Ans. we must distinguish betwixt these works which were extraordinary I meane as to the manner of their performance and so peculiar to such extraordinary persons in which they were not in a manner formal actors but passive organs such as working of miracles and writting of Scripture in these the Apostles moved as they were immediatly Acted Inspired and Led of the Spirit so that these were not properly their formal acts And these which are of a more ordinary nature wherein they were more formal actors through the assistance of the Spirit whether in works belonging to their office as preaching and gathering of Churches or in works of Christianity as giving themselvs to the death and the like As to the first sort we may grant that they were undefiled as being pure acts of the Spirit wherein the Apostles were but organs used by the Spirit as he saw meet But as to others I see no absurdity to say that they needed to use that petition forgive us our sinnes The Apostle Paul had his infirmities and weakneses a body of death that made him cry out wo is me miserableman and was thereby made to do what he would not and hindered from doing what he would Rom. 7 The Apostle Iames saith in many things we offend all Iam. 3 2. and the Apostle Iohn saith 1 Ioh. 1 8. that if we say that we have no sin we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us 43. Thereafter he giveth unto works an instrumental part in Iustification which is true of faith laying hold on the righteousness of Christ the only Objective Formal cause of Justification but cannot agree to works But he citeth some Protestants assenting to this as Polanus Symphon c. 27. whose words if understood of after pardon that is of sinnes committed after Justification as they may containe nothing but truth and that truth which we question not acknowledging that even iustified persons before remission of after sins must repent confesse and mourne for their sinnes and act faith on Christ. Zanchius in the words he citeth is expresly speaking of salvation not of Justification and to this end he might cite all the Protestants that I know of Amesius is speaking of the same As for Mr Baxter I have told already that his notions about Justification are not acceptable to all As for what he addeth about the word merite I shall not contend only I would say that seing it sounds so ill because of the common and known abuse thereof by Papists the less we use it the better seing Verba valent usu 44. Nor shall I say much against his conclusion of this mater Only while he tels us that such may confidently appear before God who sensible of their owne unworthiness and of the unprofitableness of all their works and endeavours c. did apply themselves unto the light within and suffered that grace to work in them and thereby are renewed quickened and have Christ risen in them and working in them to will to do having thus put on Christ and being clothed with him and made partakers of his righteousness When I say he speaketh thus he but cheateth his Reader giving him faire words and no more for as we have formerly seen in the examination of his Principles This light is but a Pelagian Grace if not worse common to all men Scythian and Barbarian And by vertue of this light without the least help of the grace of God for of grace assisting far lesse regenerating such as are in nature and so beginning every good work there is not in his writings the least mention if the man will but yeeld and of power and full ability to do this he maketh no question he becometh regenerated begotten of God partaker of the divine nature and what not And this is this Mans Sanctification and foundation of Justification whereof Pagans and Barbarians who never did nor never shall hear of Câ—rist are as capable as such who live within the visible Church and that without any new grace communicated by that which is borne with them Let the Reader now Judge what a Regeneration and Sanctification can flow from this which is in every man and what Justification that can be which is founded hereupon And whether or not this be a sure bottom to stand upon and with confidence to rest upon
think that this were indeed enough to satisfie us but see what the Apostle addeth further to enforce this for it is not permitted unto them to speak to wit in the Churches as if he had said they have no allowance thereunto permission or tollerance And as if all this were not enough he addeth all that is permitted unto them is to be under obedience as also saith the Law Whereby he giveth us to understand that woman their speaking in the Churches is inconsistent with that subjection that the Law of God hath laid upon them And withall he insinuateth that speaking in the Churches is an authoritative thing and therefore no way allowed unto Women whose proper deportment according to the institution and Law of God is subjection and to be under obedience Nay he will not suffer them so much as to ask questions under colour of learning in the Churches lest that should make way for their usurping of Authoriâ—y and taking upon them to speak wiâ—h Authority for he addeth vers 35. And if they will learne any thing let them ask their husbands at home And so even at home he enâ—oyneth them to ask contrare to what was practised by Mrs Hutchison in N. England called by some the American Iezabel who had her weekly lectures in her owne house and there broached her Familistical and Antinomian errors to the no small trouble of the Church of N. England Nay he addeth that it was contrary to that modesty and shamefastness that is the ornament of women for saith he it is a shame for women to speak in the Church What Patrons and abettors then of Immodesty and Shamlesness must Quakers be that plead for Womens speaking in the â—hurches 2. It is considerable also what the Apostle addeth in the following verses to confirme this injunction concerning Women as also his former directions which he had given to regulate the abuses of that Church What saith he came the word of God out from you Or came it unto you only Are ye the first and the last and so the only Christians that are Or must ye give Laws to all the â—hurches of Christ And must they all follow you Let the Quakers look to this who as to the particular we are now about would make us beleeve that the word of God came out from them and that it came to them only and not to any Church Primitive or Subsequent beside themselves Further vers 37 he sayes if any man think himself to be a Prophet or spiritual let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandements of the Lord. Let our Quaker ruminate upon this and let all of them take notice of it for when they contradict this expresse injunction of the Apostle they declare themselves say what they will to the contrary to be neither Prophets nor spiritual and further we see that what Paul spoke concerning this silence of women in the Church was the commandement of the Lord. And therefore is obligeing to all Churches who will owne any relation to Christ their Lord and Head and consequently the Quakers rejecting this commandement of the Lord renunce in so far their Interest in and Relation to the Lord as their Head and Lawgiver And the next words vers 38. But if any man be ignorant let him be ignorant have their owne weight also as if he had said if any will not yet for all this acquiesce let him take his pleasure no more needs be said for his conviction he is wilfully ignorant and he must remaine so And so say we in this particular if the Quakers will remaine ignorant we cannot helpe it we must follow our rule and declare them inconvinceable and so leave them 3. Another expresse passage we have against this Practice and Opinion of the Quakers 1 Tim. 2 11 14. Let the women learne in silence with all subjection but I suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the man but to be in silence Where we may see That Teaching publickly is an act of authority and that it is inconsistent with that silence and subjection which is enjoyned to women And therefore the Apostle as a faithful servant of Christ will not give way to it and acquants Timothy herewith that he may suppress any such practice where it is or hinder it if men would set it up Nor is this all for he addeth his reasons saying for Adam was first formed then Eve Whereby he teacheth us That such a practice is contrary to the Law of Creation the Law writâ—en upon the Creation and the Way and Method of Creaâ—ion which the Lord was pleased to follow and thâ—reby give Documents and Significations of his will to man This practice then of the Quakers must be unnatural and a plaine saying that God created Eve first and then Adam And further the Apostle addeth And Adam was not deceived but the woman being deceived was in the transgression That is the woman being immediatly first deceived by Satan was the cause occasion of Adams transgressing therefore was her subjection to the man laid further upon her as a more grievous weight and burthen as a part of her punishment The Quakers then who would have women usurping Authority and Teaching in the Church do seek to annul the sentence past upon Women by the just Lord for Eve's being the cause of Adam's sinning and do in a manner declare that that sentence was unjust and that Eve was not the devils instrument to cause Adam sinne Let them see to it for it draweth deeper than they are aware 4. Let us now see what he sayes for this Seing saith he Pag. 210. male and female are one in Christ and seing he giveth his Spirit to one as well as to another when the Lord moveth in women by his Spirit we think it no way unlawful for them to preach in the meetings of God's people Answ. 1. That there is neither male nor female as there is neither Jew nor Greek but all are one in Christ we grant in reference to the privileges of the Covenant now under the Gospel dispensation in opposition to what was under the Law for of this Paul speaks Gal. 3 28. But that therefore women may as well Preach in the Assemblies of the Church as men is a Quakers consequence having no connexion nor appearance of reason 2. That God giveth his sanctifying Spirit to women as well as to men is very true but that he moveth in them for any such end as he here mentioneth is simply denied And by this we may see what sentence to passe upon these irregular motions which they talk so much of If the Spirit of God move in women it will be to prompt them to duty that is to keep silence in the Church and not to Teach there or to usurpe authority but to learne in subjection remembering what her sex is called to by the law of God and what that punishment is that
10. He proceedeth After the pouring forth of the Spirit Act. 2 4. they are said to speak as the holy Ghost gave utterance and not what they had studied Ans. It is very true The Apostles then gote their divinity and knowledge in the mysteries of the Gospel miraculously taught them by immediat Infusion and withall gote the gift of tongues to speak to all people and languages And such as would expect such teaching now may as well expect the extraordinary gift of tongues which the Apostles gote And who seeth not how absurd this is Beside what was granted to the Apostles was not granted to all the Church Officers in those dayes no not to Evangelists who were extraordinary let be to ordinary Pastours and Doctors Nay none of all the extraordinary officers had all that the Apostles had One thing I would learne of hâ—m Can he tell me when and wherâ— theâ—e Apostles did Introvert to the gift within them in order to the obtaining of these rare qualifications or to the preaching of the word If he cannot do this he will finde no ground for his methode in this that is said of the Apostles They were infallible and acted by an infallible Spirit in their Teachings and Writings thinks he that this is expected or required of all Ministers now Or thinks he that his Quaker-Pratters are such Whatever he may dreame the Christian world may see the contrary What he citeth out of Lambertus I freely assent unto for my part 11. Next he tels us Pag. 250. § 19. That our way of preaching is hurtful and destructive because contrare to the nature of the Christian and Apostolicke Miniâ—trie 1 Cor. 1 17. Wherein It is not by the motion and acting of the Spirit but by mens Invention and eloquence by natural strength and acquired learning the Apostles preaching was not so 1 Cor. 2 3 4 5. Ans. The Spirit helping by ordinary meanes is not contrary to himself helping in an extraoâ—dinary way The Apostles way was peculiar to themselves It is a groundless imagination to think that all that is spoken by dependence upon God in the use of ordinary meanes and not by immediat Inspiration is wisdom of words making the Cross of Christ of none effect or is entiseing words of mans wisdome opposite to the demonstration of the Spirit and of power If any man study painted words and rhetorick to darken the wisdom of Goâ— in this mystery I will not approve of it but to study to finde out acceptable words as the Preacher did Eccles. 12 10. And words to render the Gospel plaine and intelligible to the hearers with a single dependance on God for his assistance herein I shall never think that Paul condemned this But sayes he the Preachers themselves confess that they are strangers to the Spirit of God and to his Operations Ans. Not all I hope though I hope also that none of them will with these bold and blasphemous Quakers pretend to immediat Inspirations This Quaker it seemeth knoweth nothing of the workings of the Spirit of God in and by meanes and will have all by immediat Revelations and Inspirations and before he want these he will go to the Devil to get them as Saul did go to the witch at Endor when the Lord would not answere him by the meanes then usual 12. Againe he sayes Pag. 251. It is contrare to the order and methode of the primitive Church 1 Cor. 14 20. c. Not considering that these were extraordinary Prophets Readeth he that these Prophets did Introvert into the light within them to get these Revelations However we see that Quakers are all Prophets in their owne account But sure I am they are not Prophets of the living God nor are the Revelations which they boast of divine but diabolick His last argum is that by our way the Spirit of God is excluded What way He tels us not and we can not beleeve him But he addeth And the natural wisdom and learning of man is exalted This is his mistake which he could see if the beam were out of his eye All their learning and wisdome is the pure product of Nature if not worse as we have oftentimes manifested for it cometh not from the Spirit of God neither mediatly nor immediatly but riseth out of the dung hill of nature and is extracted thence by the natural strength of man and all its works and effects are like the cause and original except where the Devil getteth in his finger in a more immediat way This is sayes he the chiefe and great cause why preachings are so unfruitful Poor man knoweth he no better Did not Christ and his Apostles preach to many that were not converted thereby Thinks he that the only cause why our preachings are so unfruitful is because we preach not by Inspiration And are their preachments so fruitful It may be too fruitful but that is no proof to me that they preach by the true Revelations and Inspirations of God for I read that when the Lord sends strong delusions men will beleeve a lie I read that all the world wondered after the Beaâ—t I have heard it said too that all the world became Arian All the world is not yet become Quakers see also what is said 2 Pet. 2 1 2 3. Yea sayes he according to this doctrine the Devil himself may and ought to be heard seing he knoweth the notion of truth and excelleth any of them in learning and eloquence we see when the Devil confessed the truth Christ rejected his testimony Ans Why doth the man thus speak untruth Do we say that every one though he were the Devil if he speak truth should be heard What countenance doâ—h our opinion in this matter give to this dreame I should think his judgment speaketh fairer for it for I trow the Devil needs noâ— study nor read books but can give out Revelations and Enthusiasmes as many as you will And be it in whomsoever he speaketh by Revelations or Inspirations or Enthuâ—iasmes Quaker or other Christ and his Apostles will reject his testimony though it should be true upon the matter And therefore after the example of Christ and his Apostle Paul we receive no testimony from Quakers themselves giving such palpable evidences of the Devil speaking in them and by them 13. To an Objection taken from the experience of all ages since the Apostles dayes to wit that God by his Spirit hath concurred with our way of preaching to the conversion and edification of many He answereth § 20. thus That though he will not deny this yet it will not follow that that practice was good more then it was good for Paul to go to Damascus to persecute the Saints because he did meet with Christ in the way Answ. His simile is a dissimilitude and hath no correspondence with the thing in hand Our Argument is That since the Apostles dayes and the ceasing of extraordinary gifts there hath been no other way of preaching but
the earth shall swear by the God of truth he answereth That it was usual with the Prophets to express the great duties of the Gospel times in Mosaick termes as Ier. 31 38 39 40. Ezech. 36 25. 40. Esa. 45 23. And what the Prophet here speaketh of swearing Paul interpreteth it of confessing Rom. 14 11. Answ. That the Prophets use this way I confess But see no ground for this from Ier. 31 38. c. where the Prophet is foretelling the rebuilding of Iâ—rusalem which was accomplished in the dayes of Nehemiah And that Ezech. 36 25. is but a poor ground Nor doth that place Esai 45 23. give any countenance unto this though the Apostle Rom. 14 11. useth another word for swearing which is but exegitical thereof and the same upon the mater The only doubt remaineth whether swearing was properly ceremonial or not which the Apostles frequent practice mentioned in the preceeding argument and other arguments mentioned and to be mentioned evince not to have been ceremonial And there is more ground to make the bowing of the knee ceremonial then swearing by the name of the Lord. 12. In the tenth place he mentioneth that argument taken from Heb. 6 16. For men verily swear by the greater and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife he answereth Pag. 359. That Paul only sheweth what men in those dayes of controversie were wont to do but not what they should have done nor what the Saints did Answ. This being a practice not of any one age or people but of all ages and people whereby a principal end of swearing to wit the ending of a controversie and the right manner of going about it to wit in swearing by the greater is held forth and this being brought-in hereas an argument from the less to the more as if the Apostle had said if we believe a man who by nature is a liar when he sweareth and confirmeth what he saith by attesting God how much more ought we to believe God who is truth it self when he sweareth by himself having no greater to swear by sheweth the lawfulness and usefulness of this practice So that if this had been or were in it self a thing â—imply evil the Apostles argument would want its due force and cause men question if ever Gâ—d did or would swear it being such a sinful and an abominable thing â—roceeding from the Devil And so the whole argument and conclusion of the Apostle should be annulled and the maine pillar of our assurance and hope sâ—aken And though this differeth from these instances 1 Cor. 9 ver 24. and Luk. 14 vers 31. which he adduceth to invalidate this Yet neither can he prove that these are simply sinful and unlawful in all cases 13. As for the argument he proposeth next I owne it not and so am less concerned in his answere Only I would know what he meaneth by that expression a Christian whom God hath called unto his essential verity may no way swear What meaneth he by this essential verity And was not Paul called thereunto whatever it be How came it then that he did swear some way Were not the holy men of old called unto this essential verity how came it then that they did also sweare Such as Abraham Gen. 21 24. Iacob Gen 31 53. Ioseph Gen 47 35. Moses Iosh. 14 9. David 1 Sam. 20 3. 24 22 Ionathan 1 Sam. 20 16. Eliah 1 King 17 1. Gedaliah 2 King 25 24. Asa. 2 Chron. 15 14. Obadiah 1 King 18 10. Elisha 2 King 2 6 Are not Angels called unto this essential verity How came it then that they did swear Dan. 12 17. Revel 10 5 6 He citeth some passages of some heathens Pag. 360. who would not swear And what can this prove And what will Pythagoras prohibition evince Or Socrates his requireing that mens words should be firmer than oaths Or Plato's appearing against it These and the like may be good arguments for him whose Religion is but Paganish but have no force with us though I grant these and the like may shame Christians who regard even oathes so little He hath Pag. 361. a number of bare citations of places of some Fathers and Others without giving us their words any who hath these books may peruse them and see what they say All that I shall say is this Though it be true that many of the Fathers did in this assent to Pelagius yet the more common opinion was that Christians might in some cases lawfully sweare which they grounded upon the practice of Paul See Vossius Hist. Pelag. lib. 5. par 2. Antith 1. Pag. 513. c. And let the Reader peruse the citations he hath there adduced and he will see that some of this Quakers citations and Authors are against himself such as Cyprian Tertullian Augustine Polycarp and others The primitive Christians would not swear it is true neither by the Genius nor by the fortune of the Emperious See Tertul. Apol. Cap. 31. and from this some might gather that they would not swear at all which was certainly a mistake And we read that the Primitive Christians did sweare to be faithful to the Emperour as Vossius sheweth out of Vegetius lib 2. Cap. 5. Arnobius lib. 4. see also Dio in M. Antonino Tertul. de Cor. mil. c. 1. Eusebii histor lib 5. c. 5. He sheweth also how they used to sweare by the Eucharist out of Eusebii Histor. lib. 6. Chap. 35 The last argument which he mentioneth is not worth the naming and so I leave it 14. For a Conclusion to this let us take notice that Augustine was only labouring to keep oft unnecessary oathes and would have one and other shuning what they could the giving of oathes But would not simply condemne the taking or giving of oathes in weighty maters even under the Gospel And therefore speaking upon that sermon of Christ on the mount and having mentioned the expressions of Paul formerly spoken of he addeth Ita intelligitur praecepisse Deum ne Iuretur ne quisquam sicut bonum appetat jusjurandum assiduitate jurandi ad perjurium per consuetudinem delabatur Quapropter qui intelligit non in bonis sed necessariis jurationem habendam refrenet se quantum potest ut non eâ uâ—atur nisi necessitate cum videt pigros esse homines ad credendum quod ets utile est credere nisi juratione firmetur CHAP. XXXI Of Civil Honour 1. BEside what belongeth properly to Civil Honour of which we are now to speak there are other two particulars which he is pleased to speak something to in his Vindication of his last Thesis to wit against Vanity Prodigality in apparel and against Comoedies and such Playes concerning which I minde to be no adversary unto him only I must say he must be very affronted and shameless to suppose let be to say That all his Adversaries contenâ— for these as lawful and as no way contrary to Christian Religion
is not broken off by these sinnes This may be further cleared when we come to speak of perseverence 2. Not to insist on Esai 59. and other such Scripture places which may be understood of the generality and body of a Church which are Gods people by profession but not by real union through faith and so speak nothing to the point in hand We say that sin in the justified though it maketh a separation from God in respect of his fatherly smileing countenance so procureth fatherly displeasure wrath and anger and sad chaftnings Yet maketh not a separation from the state of favour nor putteth them againe into that state of separation wherein they were before conversion 3. We grant that sins in the Regenerat can so far make a separation as that by such sinnes the regenerat may incurre Gods displeasure Esa. 64 5 6 9. 2 Sam. 11 27. grieve the Spirit of God Ephes. 4 30. lose some measure of their graces and comforts Psal. 51 8 10 12. Revel 2.4 Cant. 5 2 3 4 6. have their consciences wounded Psal. 37 3 4 51 8. and bring temporal judgments on themselves 1 Cor. 11 32. Psal. 89 ver 31 32. 4. Hence we see a manifest difference betwixt their best works and worst sinnes even in Gods account 5. And also we see how false it is to say that our doctrine openeth a door to licentiousness 6. Though he call Antinomians his adversaries Yet he and they agree in this principal thing against the Orthodox that both say there is no difference to be put betwixt God's Fatherly-displeasure and his Law-wrath 22. His third argument followeth which in summe is this The Gospel requireth faith and repentance and other like conditions before Iustification which is in vaine if we be justified before Ans. This saith something against Antinomians who plead for a Justification before faith But the man knoweth that we are not of that judgment for our Confession of faith saith Chap. 11. § 4. That though God did from all eternity decree to justifie all the elect Gal. 3 8 1 Pet. 1 2 19 20 Rom. 8 30 and Christ did in the fulness of time die for their sinnes and rise againe for their Iustification Gal. 4 4. 1 Tim. 2 6. Rom. 4 25. yet they are not justified until the holy Spirit doth in due time actually apply Christ unto them Col. 1 21 22. Gal. 2 16. Tit. 3 4 5 6 7. What followeth in that Page 131. speaketh nothing against us for we maintaine not Antinomian doctrine But Pag. 132. he saith that the Intercession of Christ should be made vaine and unnecessary if he should pray for such as are already reconciled and perfectly justified Ans. Neither doth this make against us for we say not with Antinomians that sinnes not yet committed are actually pardoned And as for the state of Reconciliation and Justification which we owne as it maketh not after-sinnes to be already pardoned so it rather establisheth the use and necessity of Christs intercession to the end they who are justified may obtaine remission of these after-sins after the Gospel methode that is after they have repented of them and gone by faith to the bloud of Christ and that they may get grace to recover them out of sin by Faith and Repentance And this may serve for confutation of what followeth being nothing but a repetition of his corrupt doctrine and a renewed act of his wonted manner of perverting Scripture to the countenancing of his dreames without any coloure of verity 23. He sayes next he will answere Objections and proposeth one Pag. 133. § 6. And that he saith is taken from 2 Cor. 5 18 19. whence he sayes they and who these are he telleth not inferre that Christ perfected totally the work of reconciliation while he was upon the earth Ans. If the meaning of the Objection be that Christ did so perfect the work of reconciliation on earth that there was nothing to be done by man in order to his actual Justification and reconciliation with God we owne it not And by his answere it seemeth this is the meaning thereof Of the place we spoke above and rejected his corrupt sense thereof which here againe he repeateth The next Objection is from vers 21. and he thus frameth it As our sin is imputed to Christ so is his Righteousness imputed to us though we be not just and we are just only by imputation as Christ was a sinner How this is brought in here I see not but he must take his liberty Let us hear what he answereth Albeit saith he Christ is said to have borne our sinnes and to have suffered for them and to be reputed among men for a sinner Yet God did not repute him a sinner for he was holy Ans. That Christ was personally and inherently holy is very true and that God looked upon him as such is true also but yet as a Cautioner taking on the debt of his people he became imputatively a sinner And the Father constituting him thus a cautioner in the room and place of the chosen ones is here said to have made him sin who knew no sin that we through him might be made the righteousness of God He addeth Nor did Christ die that we might be accounted just though no more really just than Christ was really unjust Ans. Nor do we speak so but this we say as Christ who was inherently and personally holy Yet as our Cautioner was by imputation accounted a sinner our sinnes being laid upon him and caused to meet upon him as Esa. 53 6. So though we be unrighteous in ourselves and inherently sinful and guilty Yet by imputation of Christs righteousness we are really accounted just He proceedeth If we be made just as Christ was a sinner by imputation then as there was not the least sin in Christ so there is no necessity for the least righteousness in us Answ. Neither is there any necessity of our righteousness if we except faith closeing with Christ in order to our becoming Righteous by imputation or being justified upon that account But as to other ends and uses he knoweth we plead for a necessity of inherent righteousness He saith This is to be understood only in that he did undergo torments in soul and body which were due to our sins that we might be partakers of that grace which he by suffering obteaned for us by the operations of which grace we are made the righteousness of God in him Ans. This is said but not proven and is contradictory to the native import of the words and scope of the place His undergoing the punishment due to our sinnes as our Sponsor and Cautioner presupposeth his standing in our room and being charged with our guilt else he could not have suffered and payed our debt as our Surety He proveth That this righteousness is meaned of infused righteousness because the Apostle speaketh of such a righteousness in the 14 15 16. verses of the following
Chapter Answ. This Argument is fit for a Quaker and for a desperat cause but a wise man will laugh at it But saith he There should be concord betwixt light and darkness and betwixt righteousness unrighteousness if men were said to be in Christ by an imputative righteousness without them while they are actually unjust Ans. He knoweth that though we say persons are justified only by a righteousness imputed whereby they are declared to be really righteous in the sight of God accepted of as such Yet we say with all that the same persoâ—s are really sanctified that sanctification is inseparably joyned with Justification And so the discord is in his owne imagination But he loveth to drink in Bellarmines muddy waters He saith that Christ would never in all his sermons have people resting upon such a righteousness but did alwayes recommend to them good works as instruments of Iustification Ans. This is a notorious untruth See Ioh. 6 29. 9 35 36. 10 38. 12 36. 14 1. 16 9. Nor do we regard his saying that to his observation there is no mention of the imputed righteousness of Christ in the Scriptures For his observation is small and of little worth But were he as much acquanted with the Scriptures as he is with Popish writers and Quakers vanities he would be in case to speak otherwayes However we know this is Bellarm argument de Iustif. lib. 2. c 7. And Protestants have abundantly confuted it pointing him to Rom. 4 5 6 11. 5 18 19. 2 Cor. 5 19 21. Rom. 3 23 24 25 27 28. Ier. 23 6. 1 Cor. 1 30. 24. His second proposition followeth Pag. 135. which is this That by this inward birth or Christ formed within we are formally justified That is in Bellarmines words That Inherent righteousness is the formal cause of our Iustification Let us heare what way our Quaker proveth this He adduceth 1 Cor 6 11. which is Bellarm. 3. Argument But what saith he of this place Iustification here saith he must be understood of making really just And if by really just he mean inherently just as he must or speak non-sense I enquire why so Otherwise saith he washing and Sanctification must be also understood imputatively What necessity is there for this for saith he in the foregoing verses the Apostle was shewing how no unrighteous person shall inherite the Kingdom of God Very good what then And here he subsumeth saying such were some of you c. And what then And because they were now washen and sanctified therefore they were also justified Though this may be true in one sense to wit that their sanctification and washing was a proof and evidence that they were justified because all justified persons are also sanctified and washen Yet it is not true in the Quakers sense to wit that by their Sanctification they were justified that is really made inherently just and thereupon justified And where findeth he his because and therefore in the text He proceedeth for if this justification were not real And who saith that it is imaginary or a fictitious thing He should have said if this justification were not a making inherently holy then it might be said that the Corinthians not having left their evil courses but abideing in them were justified Ans. This consequence is false and hath no appearance of truth in it we say with him that there was a real change upon the Corinthians and that their faith was not a meer fruitless assent but this real change was in Sanctification and not in Justification 25. He tels us next very gravely that he could never read or see nor with any colour of reason conceive what could evince justification to be here taken imputatively And what wonder seing no man ever spoke of a justification here taken imputatively As if there were two justifications one real another imputative will he name the man that speaketh so But if his meaning be that he never read nor saw nor could conceive what could evince Justification to be taken here in the orthodox sense We cannot help it for when men put out their own eyes or give up themselves to the Devil that he may do it what remedy Justification with we being alwayes at least most rarely otherwise in Scripture taken in a farensical sense And though it were granted that here and some where else it did import the same that sanctification doth yet this man could not hence prove that the word Iustification did never signifie another thing seing one and the same word may signify various things in Scripture nor could he hence prove that this was the proper import of the word seing the Apostle is not here defineing the nature of Justification but shewing what a change was made upon them both a real and relative 26. But as a learned grammarian he tels us that the word Iustificare is either derived from the substantive Iustitia or from the adjective Iustus and both these are used to signify truely really not suppositively that vertue of the soul which is expressed by the word Iustitia Yea the adjective Iustus signifieth a man in whom that vertue is for not only is it a great impropriety but a lie to call a man just who is suppositivly and not really such And Iustisico formed from Iustitia signifieth him who is made just seing it is but a composition of the verb Facio and of the adjective Iustus and so Iustifico is Iustum facio I make just and Iustificatus is justus facius made just â—o all which I Ans. 1. If this man would have given us a seasonable taste of his gammatical pulp he should have showne us that the Hebrew and Greek words which are rendered in the latine by Iustifico and Iustificatus have this import that he would prove the latine words to have for whatever he may think with Bellarmine who hath helped him here of the latine vulgar version as it is called we do not account it authentick So that though all that he hath said were true it would prove nothing but that these latine words were not fit enough to expresse the Hebrew and Greek words by 2. But he must know that use is the master of words and that they goe not alwayes by the rules of etymology and he cannot but know that Iustifico and Iustificatus do usually import a judicial or juridical absolution by the sentence of a judge from what was laid to the charge of the impanelled as they do also signify in our owne language When do we say that a man is justified by infused justice Or let him tell me when or in what sentences we use these words when we would signifie thereby infusion of righteousness or making just Let him consider these passages of Scripture see how his sense will agree Exod. 23 7 Deut 25 1 2. 2 Sam. 15 4. 1 King 8 3â— Psal. 82 3. Esai 5 22. 50 8. Luk. 7 29. 10 29.