in y ◠same verse if your eyes had not dazled you might haue seene that the Apostle after his thankes giuing for his deliuerance from the danger of that same bodie of death against which he had exclamed confesseth that euen then as touching his minde he serued the law of God but in his flesh the law of sinne Which place is as cleare as the sun-shine not onelie to shew the falshood of your first reason against our interpretation of the 7. to the Rom. but also to proue so your great shame the trueth of the generall assertion aforesaide namelie that The regenerate are not free frō sinne Yet these are not all the foiles you receiue by it for it cutteth likewise the throte of your second reason before it haue time to draw one breath of life for where you say Therefore after this he thanketh God in Christ that he was deliuered from that bodie of sinne which made him to doe that euil he would not and to leaue vndone the good he would You would make vs belieue that Paul in this place was a changed man so as he could no more sin vnwillinglie as before which purpose of yours now you sée is preuented and therefore your reason spoilde yet ere I passe I must admonish the Reader to consider of what spirite this sauoureth that in alledging the 25. verse which soundeth thus I thanke my God through Iesus Christ our Lord. Now therefore euen I in my minde doe serue the law of God but in my flesh the law of Sinne. He bringeth it out thus He thanketh God in Christ and so cutteth off all the rest but chopping into the roome thereof these wordes that he was deliuered from that bodie of sin which made him to do that euil he would not and to leaue vndone the good he would A sentence I confesse of like length but neither of like nature nor trueth If anie say for E. G. For now I vnderstand he is dead that he added that part not as to haue it taken for the wordes of scripture but the sense of the place I could easely admit that answere were it not for the sakes of some of his sect who as I vnderstand can not read at all and yet are very stiffe in his opinions I know not how they haue béene this way abused Besides it is not comuenient in citing of scripture to sow anie peeces of our owne into it without putting some partition wall betwixt or bringing in the seruant in some differing weed from his maister that the one be not taken for the other of the commers in Moreouer if hee bring those wordes for the meaning of the place yet hee is too impudent and blasphemous presuming to speake directlie against the spirite of God which it is cleare that hee doth when the text saith Paule had yet such an enimie of flesh about him as serued the law of sinne and this man saith Paule was now deliuered from that bodie of sinne as made him do the euil he would not Two thinges in their substance flat contrarie though chaunge of wordes at first would seeme to couer it But lest we should maruaile at this dealing he makes a custome of the matter for the next place he bringeth out of the beginning of the 8. chap. where hee would faine make S. Paule speake according to his humor for whereas the text is There is now therefore no condemnation to those that are in Christ Iesus which walke not according to the flesh but according to the spirite You must vnderstand it as it is thus paraphrasticallie deliuered by him To them which are in Christ Iesus there is no condemnation or no such bodie of death which is the cause of our condemnation for they walke not after the flesh as he was forced to doe by the law of sinne when as he did the euil he would not and left vndone the good hee would but they walke after the spirite and so doe the good they would His bolonesse here as before whether it sauour of Babilon or no I leaue it to the christian Reader to iudge But three thinges must be obserued and examined wherein beyond al reason warrant he abuseth this place of the Apostle First for the worde condemnation by that he wil haue vnderstoode the bodie of death therein without anie necessitie transforming the effect into the cause as though he would cōpel the holie ghost to speake for his purpose but without all probabilitie both forasmuch as that word is no where vsed in that sense as also this verse repeating the argument of the 5. chap. 1. verse of the same Epistle concerning iustification by faith onely proued by an argument drawne from the effectes toucheth nothing at all that speciall obiection which hee answereth in the latter ende of the 7. chapter whereby he was occasioned so to handle that conflict of the flesh and the spirite So that then we sée if E. G. would haue taken this worde condemnation in his naturall sense and not malitiously peruerted it as one that would wilfullie runne into the pit he should haue béene so farre off finding his bodie of death in it as that much rather the sunne shine of comfort would appeared vnto him to haue banished the night of dark discomfort that came vpon him in his sicknesse when as this place rather would haue told him there is no condemnation towardes thee if thou be Christes agréeably whereto the spirite saith in the 33. and 34. verses afterwarde who shall laye anie faultes against the elect of God It is God that iustifieth who is hee that shall condemne It is Christ that is dead yea rather that is risen againe who sitteth also at the right hand of God and entreateth for vs. The second thing I obserue is concerning these wordes They walke not after the flesh which walking he taketh to be al one with that S. Paule calleth the law of sinne in his members whereas he might aswell haue compared a beast vnto a man for by that other law in his members it is manifest he meant the power of sinne which gate oportunities manie times against him although in his inner man to his might he made resistance as all open eyes may sée both by the opposing of the law in the members to the inner man as also by the whole suite and circumstances of the text Contrariewise in the other place Paule speaketh of the minde giuing obedience to the law of the members which he calleth To walke according to the flesh as when there is no resistance made to sinne So that her◠the holie Ghost speaketh of a whole man willingly going after sin there of a man falling but sometimes through infirmitie also there he sheweth in what respect the law hath a worke of death in our mortal bodies according to the obiection in the 13. verse but here he teacheth a note to know our selues truly iustified by euen our sanctification according to the matters handled from
not delightfull to the flesh but if by flesh he meane whole Paul as by his next words It was a messenger of Sathan sent to buffet his flesh not to tempt him to sin he must néeds doo or elshée corrupteth the text then the first part of his argument is false where he saith Sin is delightfull to the flesh For it is proued before that sin is loathsome to the regenerate man and he doth it vnwillingly whensoeuer he falleth into sin So here we see this man would sophistically beguile vs with a failation of Homonymie Concerning that he saith This prick was a messenger of Satan sent to beat or buffet his flesh not to tempt him to sin Let the Reader note first that of is here rashly put in betwixt Messenger Sathan Secondly he sheweth his accustomed sawcines in restraining to a part that which the text attributeth to the whole as where Paul saith The Angell Sathan did buffet him E. G. saith He did buffet his flesh His meaning thereby hee sheweth soone after for he would haue vs to vnderstand by this prick and buffeting of Sathan nothing but the outward humblings and afflictions of Pauls bodie which afterward indéed he reckoneth vp as things wherein he made his profit and reioycing also But what reasons bringeth hée that the place must thus be vnderstood Forsooth Because Paul reioyced and tooke pleasure in these his infirmities which hee would neuer haue done if they had been vices and such fleshly infirmities as they speake of First marke his words Such fleshly infirmities as they speake of What may he mean by this think you If you read the first page of his book where he maketh a flood of slandrous spewings to drowne if it were possible all the sincerest Preachers of the Gospell in you shall sée he would haue the simple take it thus that our Preachers doo extenuate and hide the gréeuousnes and ouglenes of the grossest sinnes in the world with the nice and soft terme of infirmities which is so open a lie as it bewrayeth there was no feare of God before his eies Now for his reason if he will thus meane by infirmities whoredom drunkennes oppression c. We are so far from vnderstanding them to be anie cause of Pauls reioycing who was far from their infection as that we denie the temptations lust and eggings of sin which héere we take for the prick in his flesh or the buffets of Sathan which are by his continuall stirring vp those lusts of concupiscence yea or yet his infirmities indéed whereby he meaneth his weake condition and necessarie subiection vnto these things to bee anie true causes of his glorying no more if you remember well then the law could be truly said to be the cause of sin for that the naturall man was the more stirred vp to rebellion by it And yet it is true that Paul gloried in his infirmities not in respect that they were vncleannes in the sight of God for in that regard they humbled him and kept him from being proud of his reuelations but in respect that they were the waie that the Lord had chosen both to doo him best good and also to aduance his own power by for so he plainly expresseth it when he saith Therefore I glorie rather in my infirmities that the power of Christ might dwell in mee And the diuine answere it selfe said to him My grace is sufficient for thee for my power is made perfect through weaknes If beside this refutation of his reason some require more to the clearing of this place to our side I wil adde two or thrée arguments moe out of the text it selfe to proue Pauls infirmitie in this place to be a sinful weaknes and not the outward pouertie reproches persecutions anguishes for Christ which he afterward remembreth First because those can bee vnderstood but of a bodely or outwarde weaknes but by this is ment a spirituall or inward weaknes which I proue by the very cause of this weaknes which is the prick there mentioned which being no outward thing but inwardly fastened in the flesh for so y ◠text giueth hath his proper effect not in outward abasing of the person in the eies of men for that doo those things that come to him from without but for that it inwardly reprocheth straineth and so abaseth him in the eies of the Lord. Herehence I gather my second argument in that this weaknes was such as humbled Paul in the sight of God so as though he had the comforts of excellent reuelations yet he durst not boast himselfe by them for the priuitie of his inward vncleannes which hée knew was open vnto the eies of the Lord. Now we know there is nothing in the worlde can make vs hang downe our heads before our God but sin only for concerning all outward persecutions and anguishes wée haue a recompencing comfort and ioy in the presence of our God euen in the mids of their enduring so as in them we are more then conquerours as the same Apostle testifieth in another place Therefore it must néeds bée vnderstood a sinfull infirmitie which Paul there acknowledged in himselfe My third argument I take from that that the Apostle prayed simply for the remouing of it which because it cannot be confirmed by a like example in all the scriptures naie is plainly disallowed by the practise of the Apostles Act. 5. v. 41. And by Paul himselfe likewise in sundrie places it proueth strongly that outward afflictions maie not be vnderstood thereby but that sinful weaknes which euen then remained in him And so thus we see this place wel agréeing with the former of the 7. to the Rom. And to proue the question of the regenerate mans weaknes equally with it Againe for further proofe of that question because by the word of two or thrée witnesses a matter standeth firme there is added vnto these a third place out of the Epistle to the Galathians in these words The flesh lusteth against the spirite and the spirite against the flesh and these are between themselues contraries so as you cannot doo whatsoeuer you would E. G. fearing y ◠light of this place would faine if he could at least make our eies dimmer in séeing it and thus he answereth The flesh indeed will lust in all men against the spirit but that it shall so preuaile against the spirite in the regenerate man that he shall not be abled by the spirit to do the things he would that I deny An answere not only false but frantick False I say two waies first in that he saith The flesh will lust in all men against the spirit as though all men had the spirit Secondly in that hée benieth That it can so preuaile against the spirit in the regenerate man as though he that hath the spirit of God is not a regenerate man Surely me think this geare hangeth togither like the words of a frantike man But here
then these conclusions 1. That the regenerate hath not whilest this life endureth full freedom of his will 2. That he sinneth manie times But now E. G. fearing lest his naturall man would not be entertained of vs according to his speach hetherto giuen out in his recommendation séeketh colour to enter his suite againe by most vntruely charging our ministers and that without offering anie proofe to teach That the inner man of the regenerate is the spirite of God Which I can not thinke he did as hauing receiued it either by speach or writing from any of account on our side but because the Adamant rockes of frée will and mans abilitie had such power to worke his shipwracke and therefore he laboureth not onely to ouerthrow our supposed opinion of the inner man but also aboue all to establish the naturall man with as manie prerogatiues as we giue the regenerate man concerning a sanctified life that so by that meanes his regenerate man might sit aboue the Stars attain to that in this life which we haue no promise for but in the life to come In answering whereunto I hope manie wordes will not bee looked for though he in this point be larger then ordinarie partly because I may not follow his humor where he fighteth with his shadow and partly also for that I haue alreadie set out the full proportion of the naturall man according to the scriptures First therfore in a word to satisfie the Reader concerning the false reporte of this man We are taught and do receiue it from the euidence of the word that the inner man is the whole man so farre forth as he is borne againe of God and wrought vpon and renewed by the holie Ghost whereby not onely his vnderstanding is enlightned to apprehend perceiue the thinges that are of God but also his will and affections rightned to desire and to moue the members to the doing of them Which renewing because it is but in part in this life therefore is there a contrarietie and strife in the childe of God betwene this and his regenerate parte the one disposed according to God the other according to corrupt nature And this latter is according to his contrarie condition called the outward man which Paule setteth out by the terme of the other law in his mēbers whereby we vnderstand euen the whole man insomuch as he is borne corrupted and depraued from Adam Which distinction the scripture obserueth likewise in other places by the termes of New man and Old man E. G. chalengeth these partes as the natural mans right in common with the regenerate and putteth this for difference that the regenerate hath moreouer beside the inwarde and outwarde man the spirite of Christ Should I say this is strange stuffe and hetherto vnheard off in any sound congregation I shall moue those of his spirite nothing at all nay I feare me they take pleasure in walking alone making to them selues an Idoll of their owne conceipt and so their reioycing is naught but I will say this by the grace of God and make it good that the worde of the Lord alloweth no such diuision for his naturall man and therefore he shall not enioy What therefore bringeth E. G. to proue y ◠natural man to consist of these two partes First because whereas the holie Ghost doth bid the naturall man to cast off the old man he doth there plainely distinguish betweene the naturall man and the old man The place that he citeth for this is the 4. off the Epist to the Ephe. and 22. verse whereupon as though it were cleare for his cause he presumeth to interpret the meaning of that speach the old man for his purpose namely that by it is meant nothing els but the old and wicked conuersation and life of the naturall man But his reason is apparantly false and his conclusion heretical That his reason is false euerie man seeth that can read the 1. verse of the Epistle to the Ephe. vnlesse E. G. presuined so farre of his singuler cunning in conuaying that hee could bring his naturall man into y ◠mumber of the true saints and faithfull ones whom the Apostle called vppon in that Epistle to put off the old man If one say there were hipocrites among them not regenerated I striue not therein But then they must obserue withall that which I wish E. G. could haue considered in all the Apostles writings Namely that in regard of this mingling whilest they exhort they write that vnto all which can in déed take place but in the truelie sanctified And againe in dehorting they write manie things vnto all which can simply be verified but in the hipocrites And yet both these courses haue due effect in both these sortes of men By exhortation the hipocrites are made vnexcusable and by threatnings the children of God are made more watchfull as hereafter more largely Now where he saith The old man is nothing els but the wicked conuersation and life of the naturall man His breath is ranke of pelagian frée will whilest hereby he insinuatety yea and the law of contraries constraineth him to say that the new man is the new and godly conuersation of the naturall man Which though it be an absurditie hatefull inough to all that are but meanely exercised in the scriptures that the natural man should thus be adorned with frée wil yet it is so much more foule and odious in this man as that he giueth the naturall man in this place by consequence of the opposition some power both of willing and doing good and againe within the space of two leaues following spoileth him of the latter vtterlie So that he is not onely contrarie to vs in this case but to himselfe also that he might agrée with no bodie Another reason he would draw from these wordes of S. Peter For of whomsoeuer anie man is ouercome to him also in seruitude is he addicted Here saith E. G. the man that is in bondage must needes bee distinct from his corrupt nature to whom he is in bondage And out of the word ouercome he gathereth that there must néedes be a fight and resistance without which saith he there can be no conquest nor victorie This is but vngracious dealing with the scriptures Peter speaketh not there neither of a méere naturall man but of such as had a calling and reckoning in the cōgregation of the faithfull which because they bare the estimation of fighting the Lordes battailes together with his people though it were but in their owne conceipte if it had béene lawfull to haue dealt thus with comparisons E. G. might yet haue séene that it was not without cause the Apostle afforded them such a Phrase as being agréeable to their own sense might the more notably conuince them in their cōsciences of their most miserable case Especiallie this being no new guise or vnwonted thing in the scrip tures As namely where our Sauiour saith I