the Lord himself hath taught us by his holy Spirit in the Canonical Scriptures And therefore if the Scriptures be true this Doctrine cannot be false but is and must be true and it is very strange and wonderful if all true Christians be afraid to dye in the Faith of the true Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures We rather think that if they be not delirious but have the use of their Reason they are not true Christians but meer Hypocrites that renounce the foresaid Doctrine of Justification and are afraid to stand to it at Death We are sure that good Hezekiah was not afraid to stand to this Doctrine when he justly apprehended himself to be under the Sentence of Death since we find it written in Isa 38.3 4. That he prayed thus unto the Lord Remember now O Lord I beseech thee how I have walked before thee in Truth and with a perfect Heart and have done that which is good in thy sight c. And God was so far from being displeased with this his Prayer that he most graciously accepted it and shewed himself so well pleased with Hezekiah that he gave him a further Lease of his Life for fifteen years and Sealed the Lease with a Miracle a thing we do not find that ever the Lord did for any other Man before or since We have also read of many in History and have heard of others and have our selves known some who have not been afraid to stand to our Doctrine aforesaid at Death but have died comfortably in the Faith of it As for our selves we live in the Faith of it and desire to die also in the Faith of it and as we account it our Duty to stand to it in Life and at Death so we trust and hope that if the Lord be pleased to preserve to us the use of our Reason and to continue to us the Presence of his Spirit and Assistance of his Grace we shall be enabled to perform our Duty in owning at Death and if he call us to it in Sealing with our Blood the said true Doctrine of Justification which we have preached to his People in the time of our Life As for our Author we hope he agrees with us that Christs Righteousness is never to be renounced but always to be trusted to and relied upon as the cause of our Justification and Salvation both in Life and at Death What then would he have us to renounce If it be our own Merits he knows very well that we admit not the very possibility of any proper Merits of our own and that we renounce all Confidence in such a Chimera as much as he or any Man can do If it be our own good Acts or Works as the Cause of our Justification He may know by what we have said before that we renounce as much as he doth and something more too all causal Influence of any good Acts or Works of ours upon Justistification If it be Faiths being the Condition of Justification that he would have us to renounce That we can never do either in Life or at Death for the Reasons we have given before Besides he himself ascribes as much and we think something more to Faith in the matter of Justification than we do for he maintains Faith to be the Instrument of Justification and if it be a proper Instrument it must have an Instrumental Causality upon Justification and so must be an Instrumental Cause and to be an Instrumental Cause is more than to be a Receptive Condition of Justification If we may be afraid then to stand to it at Death that Faith is the Condition of Justification he may have more Cause to be afraid to stand to it at Death that Faith is the Instrument of Justification But we suspect his meaning is that we will and must be afraid to stand to it at Death that Repentance is a Condition necessary to Justification and that perseverance in Faith and in the Practice of Repentance and Holiness is necessary to the obtaining Possession of Eternal Salvation and if this be it indeed which he thinks we and all sensible men must be afraid to stand to at Death and therefore must renounce we cannot but judge the Man to be under a strong Delusion for First The Scripture is as full and clear for the Truth of these things as it is for the Truth of any other Article of the Christian Faith Secondly We have the Concurrent Judgment of Divines both Ancient and Modern agreeing with us in the same Truth as we have proved at large Thirdly We have heard of many and have known some who upon their Death-bed have bitterly lamented and bewailed that they had not repented of their Sins in time that for and through the Meritorious Righteousness of Christ they might have obtained Pardon and Justification but we never heard of or knew any who upon their Death-bed lamented and bewailed that they had repented too soon in order to their obtaining Pardon and Justification through Christs Meritorious Righteousness The like we may say of the Necessity of a Holy Life in Order to the obtaining of Eternal Salvation through Christ many have most lamentably bewailed on their Death-bed their own Folly and Wickedness in not preparing themselves for Happiness by the Practice of Holiness without which no Man shall see the Lord. But we could never hear of any who on their Death-bed lamented and bewailed that they had held the Erroneous Opinion that the sincere Practice of Holiness is necessary to the obtaining of Salvation and Happiness through the Merits and Mediation of Jesus Christ On the contrary the Generality of People that are serious and sensible they then acknowledge the Necessity of sincere Repentance in Order to the obtaining Pardon of Sin and the Necessity of Holiness in Order to the obtaining of Salvation and Happiness through Jesus Christ our Lord. So abominably false is it that no sensible man dare stand to our Doctrine at his Death that the quite contrary is true and no knowing sensible Man but will gladly stand to it and own it with all his Heart except such Nominal Christians as are Conscious to themselves that they are Hypocrites and unconverted Sinners and fear that if the Gospel be true they shall certainly be damned And therefore they may possibly some of them at least flatter themselves with the Hopes that God for Christs sake will Pardon and Justifie them before and without Repentance and save them without Holiness But we dare not humour such People nor flatter them however they may flatter themselves and therefore we must in faithfulness to Peoples Souls tell them from God that except they repent they shall perish and that without Holiness they shall never see the Lord so as to be Happy in the sight of him And for the Hypocrites Hope of being pardoned without Repentance and of being Happy without being Holy it shall certainly perish with himself His Hope shall be cut off and
requisite that in the Justification of a Sinner contrition be present and that necessarily charity and vertuous life must follow yet doth the Scripture attribute onely remission of sin unto the mercy of God which is given onely for the Merits of Christ and received solely by Faith Paul doth not exclude those vertues to be present but he excludeth the merits of those vertues and deriveth the cause of our acceptation into the grace of God onely for Christ. If we could all be so wise and humble as to learn of that holy Man and to follow him as he learned of and followed Christ and his Apostles we might yet defeat Satan as to the foresaid Plot that he is carrying on to ruine us But alas it grieves us to the heart that some Ministers by not watching against that most subtile malicious enemy of God and Man have suffered themselves to be imposed upon so far as to turn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Accusers of the Brethren who stand up for God and Man in opposition to Satan and faithfully tell the People that they must through Grace truly repent of their sins in order to obtain the pardon of them And particularly we are truly sorry that the Authour of the Letter from a Minister in the City c. should have medled in this matter and that he should become Accuser of the Brethren especially of those pious Young Men who gave themselves up to the work of the Ministry in difficult and dangerous times without any visible encouragement thereunto from any thing in this World and also against groat visible discouragements both from the World and the Devil What have those Younger Brethren done to provoke this Brother who is himself also one of the younger sort to become their Accuser Some of us who are Older than they have known several of them these many years and yet never knew any evil by them nor heard any evil of them Since we first knew them it hath to us looked like a Token for good to his People in this Nation that the Lord hath raised up so many young men and hath spirited and to such a degree gifted them for the Ministry under such discouraging circumstances But now after all that God hath done for and by those Brethren notwithstanding the presence of God with them and the blessing of God upon their Labours up starts one who calls himself a Minister in the City and accuses them of being Corrupters of the pure Gospel of Christ of new vamping an Arminian Gospel and obtruding it on the People Let. pag. 10. to the certain peril of their Souls that believe it Yea he raiseth the Charge higher in pag. 13. and saith That Judicious Observers cannot but already perceive a coincidency between their cause and that of those two Pests of the Church Pelagius and Arminius and do fear more when c Here is an high Charge indeed but where is there any evidence for all this One would think that no Man who pretends such relation unto Christ and such seriousness in Christian Religion as this Man doth should dare thus to accuse his Brethren and fellow-Ministers of such horrid Crimes without clear and certain evidence whereby he can prove them guilty For if Men be suffered to accuse one another of atrocious Crimes without being obliged to prove their accusation no Man will be able to preserve his Good Name nor will it be possible for Men to live peaceably together in any Society Civil or Religious This Brother therefore ought to have been made to prove his accusation that the Churches might have been delivered from those young Hereticks if he had proved them to be such Or if he had failed in his proof that the Churches might know what spirit he is of who hath kindled a Fire in the Church by traducing the Ministers of Christ and falsely accusing them of Heresie But some may possibly say Hath he not by his printed Letter proved them guilty of Arminian and Pelagian Heresie To which we answer that no Man of Judgment who reads it can see any such proof in it nor indeed see just cause to harbour any such Thought of them if he but know the Men accused have heard their Doctrine and seen their manner of life and if withal he understand what Pelagianism and Arminianism are It is true he boldly accuses them of Arminianism and Pelagianism and of preaching a new Gospel and to make the simple People believe that his accusation is well grounded he saies that Judicious Observers perceive their cause to be coincident with that of Pelagius c. That they are reserved and do not yet speak out upon such and such points and that they hold such things as are utterly inconsistent with the Freeness of Gods Grace in Justifying Sinners by the Satisfaction and Merits of Christs Blood These things are often affirmed or insinuated throughout the Letter but none of them proved A Monster or a Man of Straw of his own making is set up to represent the Brethren and then he calls upon the People to come and see with what a Spirit of Zeal he hews it all in pieces This is a way of writing that is taking with weak well-meaning People Let. p. 14 15 30. and his holding Repentance not to be necessary in order to the obtaining pardon of sin may be pleasing to Satan and very taking with Hypocrites but no body of Judgment and Understanding can ever think that this is the way to prove the foresaid Accusation in matter of fact For our parts we have diligently considered every Paragraph of his Letter and in it all cannot find one proof of the said Accusation And after all we believe in our consciences that the Brethren accused are innocent of the Crime he lays to their charge Indeed we know assuredly that several of them are innocent thereof and till the contrary be proved and appear we must think so of them all We would have all Men to do so by us in case we were falsely accused and it is but just and reasonable that we do as we would be done by If we should happen to be mistaken as to any of the Brethren whose cause we plead we err on the safer side 1 Cor. 13.5 for charity thinketh no evil True Love will not suffer a Christian heart to entertain a deliberate Thought of his Brother that he is an ill Man or an Heretick without sufficient evidence that he is so We have met with no such evidence either in the aforesaid Letter or any where else and therefore we must still think that the accused Brethren are innocent of the Crime they are charged with and that the Accuser of them if he be a good man yet hath done a very ill thing in standering the Lords Ministers and we heartily pray God to give him repentance and forgiveness for Christs sake And that the World may see and that this Brother himself may see how rash and
Divines But cui bono to what good end and purpose did it serve to tell simple injudicious people that there are so many differences amongst Protestant Divines about Justification Whatever our Author may think of it others cannot but judge that this course tends rather to confound distract and unsettle injudicious people than to edify and stablish them in the Faith For it is not probable that there are many so very injudicious as to believe that he can lay the Spirits again which he hath raised we mean that he can infalliblydecide the Controversies which he hath brought upon the Stage before the People and so quiet the minds of those whom he hath perplexed and discomposed To us he seems not altogether so well qualified for deciding of Controversies and quieting peoples minds as for throwing dirt on his Brethren and calumniating them to the People as if they differed not from the Papists in holding Christs Righteousness to be the meritorious cause of Justification which if it be not a lye we are sure it is a swinging falsehood and a very great mistake Third Calumny HIS Third Calumny is to be seen in the 8th and 9th Pages of the Letter and it is That we deny the Headship of Christ and not only deny his Suretiship his being the Second Adam and a publick Person but also treat these things with contempt All which is utterly false and on the contrary we declare that with all our hearts we own Christs Headship and Suretiship his being the Second Adam and a Publick Person For his Headship we believe according to the Seventh Canon of the Synod of Dort on the first head of Doctrine concerning Divine Predestination Tâ—at Deus Christum ab reterno Mediatorem omnium Electorum caput salutisque fundamentum constituit God from eternity ordained Christ to be the Mediator and Head of all the Elect and the foundation of Salvation We believe also according to the Suffrage of our Brittain Divines read in and approved by the same Synod That Christ is the head and foundation of the Elect so that all saving Graces prepared in the Decree of Election are bestowed upon the Elect only for Christ and through Christ English Translation of the Suffrage p. 5 6. This was their Position upon which they say That God in the eternal Election of particular Men by one and the self same Act doth both assign Christ to be a head to them and also doth appoint them according to his good pleasure to be the Members of Christ to wit in time when they believed For his Suretiship doth this man think that he can make the simple People believe that we are so impious as to deny it and treat it with contempt when as the Apostle saith expresly that Jesus was made a Surety of a better Testament Heb. 7.22 But it may be our Author means that some of us deny the Aminomian notion of a Surety and treat their notion with contempt and indeed that may be but what then Doth it follow that therefore we deny Christs real and true Suretiship which God hath revealed in his Word for our Faith and Comfort Before that consequence be admitted our Author must prove that the Antinomian notion is the real true Scripture-notion of Christs Suretiship which we do indeed deny and contemn as a very false unscriptural notion and challenge him to prove it by Scripture As for Christs being the Second Adam it is an abominable falshood that we deny it or treat it with contempt so far are we from so doing that on the contrary we do most firmly believe it and openly confess that as the First Adam was the cause of Sin and Death unto all who in the ordinary way of human Generation partake of the natural Bitth so Christ as the Second Adam is the cause of Righteousness and Life unto all who by Divine Regeneration partake of the Spiritual Birth But as no man suffers any actual prejudice by the first Adam before he be naturally begotten and generated so no man actually receives in himself any saving benefit from Christ as the Second Adam before he be Spiritually begotten and regenerated our meaning is that no man actually receives from Christ before the time of his Spiritual Regeneration any benefit that hath a necessary and infallible connexion with Salvation by the Constitution and Ordination of God Lastly That we deny and contemn Christs being a Publick Person is false So far are we from that That on the contrary we sincerely declare to all the World that we most firmly and stedfastly believe that Christ is a Publick Person that he is the publick Prophet Priest and King of the whole Catholick Church and that it is his proper incommunicable Glory to be such a publick Person Fourth Calumny HIS Fourth Calumny is that we teach such Doctrine in the point of Justification as neither we our selves nor any other sensible man dare stand to at Death This is to be seen in the 18th and 19th pages of his Letter If this were true we confess it might justly prejudice People against our Doctrine and give them and our selves too cause enough to suspect it to be false But this is like the rest utterly false and contrary to Experience For our Doctrine is as we have said often that Christs most perfect satisfactory Meritorious Righteousness is to us and all that are saved instead of that perfect sinless Righteousness which we ought to have had in our selves but since the fall neither have nor can have and that by and for the said Righteousness of Christ alone we are justified from the guilt of all our sins of Omission and Commission Original and Actual and are accepted as Righteous before God and receive a Right and Title to Eternal Life This is the only Righteousness which we crust to as the cause of our Justification this Righteousness we hold to be given unto us if through Grace we sincerely believe in Christ and repent of our sins and that on the account of this Righteousness we shall obtain eternal Life and Salvation if through Grace we persevere to the end in Faith and Repentance and in leading a holy Life as was before explained But on the contrary we maintain that the forsaid Righteousness of Christ is not given to any for their actual Justification before they first through Grace sincerely believe and repent and that none shall obtain eternal Life and Salvation on the account of Christs Righteousness but those who after they have first believed and repented do not Apostatize either totally or finally but in opposition to such Apostacy persevere in Faith repentance and holy Gospel-obedience unto Death This is the summ and substance of our whole Doctrine in the point of Justification Now why we or any sincere Christan should be afraid to stand to this Doctrine at the hour of death and in the day of Judgment it is above our Capacity to understand for this is the Doctrine which
it is the cause though Calvin Twiss Ames Rutherford c. have not spared to say and write that it is in some sense a cause an inferiour disposing cause c. but a duty and condition until the performing whereof God hath suspended the Gift of Eternal Life and Glory and to the Performers of which duty and condition he hath freely promised and according to his promise he graciously giveth Eternal Life and Glory for the sake of Christs meritorious Righteousness only And we desire it may be alwayes remembred that from this condition of sincere obedience we do by no means exclude but include the continued exercise of Faith in Christ as that which is the spring of it and which runs through all the parts of it as also we hold that it comprehends the continued practice of Repentance and Love to God and Man Such sincere Obedience we hold to be a condition to be performed on our part Ezek. 18.24 25. Heb. 10.38 for the obtaining of Eternal Life and Glory For we learn from the Scriptures of Truth that if any of God's People should apostatize from Faith in Christ fall from the Profession and Practice of Christs true Religion and give themselves up to the wilful commission of all manner of Abominations and dye in that state without Repentance they would lose their Right to Eternal Life be shut out of Heaven and cast down to Hell there to suffer the Vengeance of Eternal Fire Whereas on the contrary all that continue to the end in the exercise of Faith in Christ and in the practice of Repentance and Evangelical Obedience they have their Right to Life and Glory still continued to them and shall through God's Grace and Mercy and Christ's Righteousness and Merits be put into the full and eternal possession of it If our Authour should object and say that we suppose an impossibility from whence there is no right arguing for or against any thing We desire him to consider what Dr. Twiss sayes in the 29 Page of his Answer to the Book called The Synod of Dort and Arles reduced to practice His Words are When we say the elect Saints cannot fall from Grace this is spoken not in respect of any absolute impossibility but meerly upon supposition of God's upholding them And accordingly they are said to be kept by the power of God through Faith unto Salvation 1 Pet. 1.5 Now this impossibility of falling away from Grace in Scholastical account is but an Impossibility Secundum quid like as we say It is impossible that Antichrist should fall or the Jews be called till the time which God hath appointed is come for bringing forth these great and wonderful Works of his but the contrary is simply possible on either part Thus Twiss Our Answer then is that the Apostacy of a Saint is not simply and absolutely impossible Alas it is but too possible with respect to us considered in our selves but it is onely impossible in some respects to wit in respect of God's Purpose and Promise and Christ's Intercession c. And notwithstanding its being impossible in this sense yet we find it supposed and granted also to be possible in another sense And further we find that the Spirit of God in Holy Scripture supposes greater Impossibilities than that seems to be and rationally argues from them too Witness John 8.55 Gal. 1.8 If any should further object and say that hereby we destroy the Saints Assurance of Eternal Life and Glory by holding that their obtaining of it is suspended on a condition We Answer the consequence is false because those who are assured upon good Grounds that they are truly Converted and Justified by Faith in Christ's Blood See 1 Joh. 2.19 may from Holy Scripture be assured of the condition of perseverance through Grace in Faith Repentance and whatever God hath made necessary to their obtaining Eternal Life and Glory Indeed if our Glorification depended upon a Condition of which we could not be sure then neither could we be sure of Glorification it self But we believe and maintain that through Grace we may and ought to be sure of the Condition to wit of Perseverance and consequently that we may and ought to be sure of our future Glorification which is infallibly promised to perseverance in Faith and Holiness We know the Followers of Luther whom our Authour so much magnifies as if he were for him and his Party deny that a Saint can be absolutely sure ordinarily in this World that he shall be saved in the World to come It is true they maintain that a Saint may and ought to be absolutely sure that he is in a state of Grace and Salvation for the present but they deny and on their Principles must deny that he can have an absolute but onely a conditional assurance of his Eternal Salvation and Glorification because they say he cannot be absolutely sure that he shall not fall totally and finally from the state of Grace that he is now in If we should follow Luther or the Lutherans in this what a Clamour would our Authour raise against us how would he proclaim us to the World to be Arminians or Papists yet Luther was a blessed Man and most Orthodox Divine because in his Commentary on the Galathians he seems to hold with our Authour in some things though in other things of greater importance he be against him and us too But Holy Scripture is the Rule and Measure of our Faith in these and all other Religious Matters and according to the Prescript thereof we believe profess and preach to the People that as Christ purchased all Grace for us by his Blood so he gives it unto us by his Spirit in the use of his appointed Means and what Saving Grace he once gives unto his People he never wholly takes away from them again and that if at any time they fall into Sin against Knowledge and Conscience he raises them up again by causing them to renew their Faith and Repentance and never wholly leaves them nor forsakes them but gives them still more Grace according to their need and by Grace prepares them for and at last brings them unto Glory Thus we desire and endeavour to Preach Christ and now we appeal to all who have any Conscience of Truth and Honesty whether we neglect to Preach Christ or whether in the preaching of Christ we set up any thing in co-ordination with him yea whether we be not so far from it that on the contrary we make all subordinate to him and derive all Grace from him not only the Grace of Justification and Glorification which are promised on Condition of Faith Repentance and sincere Obedience but also the Grace of effectual Vocation Faith and Repentance in a Word all the Grace whereby we perform the whole condition of the Covenant from first to last From the premisses it may manifestly appear to any that are not stark blind that we do not hold Faith Repentance and
between him and those who do not love to say that Faith is an Instrumental Cause is more verbal than real for he doth not say that Faith is the Instrumental cause of our Justification that indeed had been to ascribe too much unto Faith but the Instrumental cause receiving Christ and his Righteousness upon which follows Justification now we all acknowledge Faith to be of an apprehensive receptive nature and that it is the Instrumental means whereby we apprehend and receive Christ and his Righteousness that we may be Justified and our using that Instrumental means as the Lord hath appointed is the receptive condition to which the Promise of Justification is made Here then seems to be a meer difference in words when we mean the same thing Lastly for sincere Obedience he holds it to be in some sense a cause of obtaining Eternal Life which is more than we have ascribed to it in calling it a Condition for a Condition as such hath no causal Influence Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 1. pag. 199. His own Words in the said Book are these Our Obedience indeed is not the principal or meritorious cause of Eternal Life For we receive the right of this life and the life also it self from the Grace and Gift of God for the sake of Christ apprehended by faith Rom 6.23 The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. But yet it is a cause some way administring helping and moving forward towards the possession of this life whereof we had the right before for which reason it is called the way in which we walk to Heaven Eph. 2.10 And it promotes our life both of its own nature because it is some degree of life it self still tending to perfection and also by vertue of God's Promise who hath promised Eternal Life to those who walk in his Commandments Gal. 6.8 He that soweth to the spirit shall of the spirit reap life everlasting For though all our Obedience while we live here is imperfect and contaminated with some mixture of sin Gal. 5.17 The flesh lusts against the spirit yet through Christ it is so acceptable unto God that it is crowned with a most great reward The Promises therefore made to the Obedience of the Faithful are not Legal but Evangelical although by some they are said to be of a mixt nature In all this Ames ascribes as much to sincere Obedience and makes it as necessary to Salvation as we do If we say it is a Condition he sayes it is in some sort a Cause of obtaining the poffession of Eternal Salvation And sure to be so a Cause is as much at least as to be a Condition Next let us see what Dr. Twiss faith to these things Indeed he is so clearly on our side that if the Authour of the Letter had been acquainted with his Writings he would have been wiser than to have mentioned his Name in this Cause For thus he writes We say that pardon of sin and salvation of Souls are Benefits purchased by the death of Christ to be enjoyed by Men but how Answer to a Booke called The Synod of Dort and Arles reduced to practice pag. 16. not absolutely but conditionally to wit in case and onely in case they believe For like as God doth not confer these on any of ripe years unless they believe so Christ hath not merited that they should be conferred on any but such as believe and accordingly profess that Christ dyed for all that is to obtain pardon of sin and salvation of Soul for all but how not absolutely whether they believe or no but onely conditionally to wit provided they do believe in Christ Again Men are called upon to believe and promised Ibid. pag. 28. that upon their Faith they shall obtain the Grace of Remission of sins and Salvation and these Graces may be said to be offered unto all upon Condition of faith Again As touching the Benefits of pardon of sin Ibid. page 152. and Salvation procured by Christs death we say that Christ died to procure these for all and every one but how not absolutely for then all and every one should be saved but conditionally to wit upon Condition of faith so that if all and every one should believe in Christ all and every one should be saved Again It is untrue that we must have a sufficient assurance Ibid. pag. 154. that Christ died to procure pardon of sin and salvation of soul absolutely for him whom we go about to comfort it is enough that Christ died to procure these Benefits for him conditionally to wit in case he believe and repent and of this we have a most sufficient assurance Again We say not here that any thing becomes true Ibid. pag. 163. by the Faith of him that believes it but onely this that the benefit which is procured for all and every one upon a Condition becomes his and peculiarly his alone who performeth the Condition Again Now Eternal Life we know Ibid. pag. 171. is ordained by God to be the portion of Men not whether they believe or not whether they persevere in Faith Holiness and Repentance or no but onely of such as believe repent and are studious of good Works for it is ordained to be bestowed on Men by way of reward of their Faith Repentance and good Works Again The Promises assured by Baptism Ibid. pag. 189. according to the Rule of God's Word I find to be of two sorts Some are of Benefits procured unto us by Christ which are to be conferred on us conditionally they of this first sort are Justification and Salvation for Abraham received Circumcision as a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith Circumcision therefore was an assurance of Justification to be had by Faith if such were Circumcision to the Jews we have good reason to conceive that such is Baptism unto us Christians for as that was unto them so this is the Sacrament of Regeneration unto us And good reason the Sacraments which are Seals of the Covenant should assure that unto us which the word of the Covenant doth make Promise of Now the word of the Covenant of Grace doth promise unto us both Remission of sin and Salvation upon Faith in Christ This by our Doctrine we promise unto all and assure unto all as well as they do by theirs If all and every one should believe we nothing doubt but they should be justified and saved On the other side if not one of ripe years should believe I presume our Adversaries will confess that not one of them should be saved Again Justification and Salvation is promised in the Word Ibid. pag. 190. and assured in the Sacraments upon performance of a Condition on Mans part Now the Condition of Justification and Salvation we all acknowledge to be Faith Thus Dr. Twiss frequently in the foresaid Book And that this was his setled Judgment will appear by what he wrote afterwards in the Year
the Condition of it It is clear also that he held as we do that God by his Special Grace purchased for us by Christ and given to us for Christ's sake enables us and all the Elect to perform the Condition of Faith and Repentance and that effectually and infallibly As for the Non-Elect who do not perform the Condition he says the reason the culpable reason of that is because they will not and though it be true also that they cannot yet that is not a meer Physical but a moral cannot which ariseth from the evil disposition of their minds and affections whereby they will not That this was Dr. Twiss his Judgment is evident by these following Testimonies of his quoted out of the same Book Observe we farther how this Authour confounds impotency moral Ibid. p. 155 156. which consisteth in the corruption of mans powers natural and impotency natural which consisteth in bereaving him of power natural The Lord tells us by his Prophet Jeremiah cap. 13.23 That like as a Blackamore cannot change his skin nor a Leopard his spots no more can they do good that are accustomed unto evil Now if a man taken in stealth shall plead thus before a Judge My Lord I beseech you have compassion upon me for I have so long time inured my hands to pilfering that now I cannot forbear it will this be accepted as a good plea to save him from the Gallows As for Faith It is well known that Divines distinguish between fides acquisita and sides infusa acquired and infused Faith That we may call a Faith naturally acquired which is found in carnal Persons whether Prophane or Hypoâ—ritical And this to wit the infused is a Faith inspired by God's Spirit The object of each is all one and a Man may suffer Martyrdom for the one as well as for the other which manifesseth the pertinacious adherence thereunto And it appears that all Professions have had their Martyrs Albeit it be not in the power of Nature to believe side infusa with an inspired Faith yet it is in the power of nature to believe the Gospel side acquisitâ with an acquired Faith which depends partly upon a mans Education and partly upon reason considering the credibility of the Christian way by light of natural observations above all other ways in the World And when men refuse to embrace the Gospel not so much because of the incredibility of it but because it is not congruous to their natural affections as our Saviour tells the Jews light came into the World and men loved darkness Father than light because their deeds are evil John 3.19 Is there any reason why their condemnation should be any whit the easier for this Neither have I ever read or heard it taught by any that 〈◊〉 shall be damned for not believing with an infused Faith which is as much as to say because Goâ—d hath not regenerated them but either because they have refused to believe or else if they have embraced the Gospel for not living answerable thereunto which also is in their power quoad exteriorem vitae emendationem As to the outward Reformation of their Life though it be not in their power to regenerate their wills and change their hearts any more than it is to illuminate their minds Yet I never read that any mans damnation was any whit the more encreased for not performing these acts Again The Man bereaved of his eyes hath a will to read and consequently it is no fault for not reading For all sin is in the Will But it is not so in not obeying either Law or Gospel Ibid. page 170. If a Man had a will to obey and believe but he could not in such a case it were unreasonable he should be punished But in the case of disobedience unto God we speak of all the fault is in the will voluntarily and wilfully they neither will obey the one nor the other Like as they that have accustomed themselves to do evil cannot do good as a Blackamoor cannot change his skin yet with this difference that man is never a whit the more excusable or less punishable for not doing that which is good not so the Blackamoor for not changing his skin But such is the shameful issue of them that confound Impotency Moral with Impotency Natural as if there were no difference c. Again To the Rule of Law objected by Mr. Hoard That contractus sub conditione impraestabili nullus aestimatur a Contract or Promise made upon a condition not performable by the Party Ibid. p. 185 186. is esteemed none at all Twiss answers thus Conditio impraestabilis a Condition not performable is there such as cannot be performed by reason of Impotency Natural but the Impotency we speak of in the case between God and Man is merely Impotency Moral to wit therefore they cannot because they will not were it not for the Corruption of their Will no Power were wanting in Man to Believe and Repent Again Dost thou complain thou hast no power to believe but I pray thee tell me hast thou any will to believe If thou neither hast nor ever hadst any will to believe Ibid. p. 219 220. what a shamesul and unreasonable thing is it to complain that thou hast no power to believe St. Paul had a most gratious will but he sound in himself no power to do what he would but what is the issue of this complaint To sly in the face of God Nothing less But to confess his own wretchedness and flee unto God in this manner who shall deliver me from the body of this death And receiving a Gracious Answer concerning this concludes with thanks I thank God through my Lord Jesus Christ If I have a will to believe to repent I have no cause to complain but to run rather unto God with thanks for this and pray him to give that power which I find wanting in me And indeed this impotency of believing and infidelity the fruit of Natural Corruption common to all is merely a moral impotency and the very ground of it is the Corruption of the Will Therefore men cannot believe cannot repent cannot do any thing pleasing unto God because they will not they have no delight therein but all their delight is Carnal Sensual and because they are in the flesh they cannot please God and because of the hardness of their hearts they cannot repent Sin is unto them as a sweet Mirsel unto an Epicure which he rolleth under his Tongue This and much more to this purpose hath Twiss in his Book against Hoard And that this was his setled Judgment is evident by what he writes in his defence of the Doctrine of the Synod of Dort It is true that it is not in the power of man to add unto the word the efficacy of God's Spirit page 122 123. and it is as true that a carnal man hath no desire that God would add the efficacy of his Spirit
cause of the eternal ruin of the Souls of the Generality of them to whom or amongst whom the Gospel is preached John 3.19 4. That there are certain Internal Spiritual Effects wrought in and upon the Souls of Men whereof the Word preached is the immediate Instrumental cause which ordinarily do precede the work of Regeneration or real Conversion unto God And they are reduceable unto Three Heads 1. Illumination 2. Conviction 3. Reformation The first of these respects the Mind only The second the Mind Conscience and Affections And the third the Life and Conversation These are attained by the inward influence of the Holy Spirit upon mens Souls concurring with the Word to make it effectual unto those ends All these things may be wrought in the minds of men by the dispensation of the Word and yet the work of Regeneration be never perfected in them Yea although they are good in themselves and fruits of the kindness of God towards us they may not only be lost as unto any Spiritual advantage but also be abused to our great disadvantage Then Pag. 196. The Dectrine says he concerning these things hath been variously handled distinguished and applyed by many Learned Divines and Faithful Ministers of the Gospel Unto that Light which they received into them from the infallible Word of God they soined those experiences which they had observed in their own hearts and the Consciences of others with whom they had to do which were suitable thereunto And in the dispensation of this truth according to the measure of the gift of the Grace of Christ which they severally received they had an useful and fruitful Ministery in the World to the Converting of many unto God ☞ But we have lived to see all these things decried and rejected Thus Dr. Owen concerning Dispositions previous to Regeneration whose sense upon the whole we have here briefly and faithfully represented unto all into whose hands this may come And in the first and latter part of this long quotation we have transcribed his own words By all which we see that Dr. Owen received and approved as true good and useful the foresaid Doctrine of the English Divines at the Synod of Dort concerning Dispositions and Preparations before Regeneration and seems to have said it with some grief that he had lived to see all these things decryed and rejected to wit by some Arminian Divines of the Church of England And would it not have grieved him a little more to have seen all these things decryed and rejected also by Nonconformists that pretend to be the only party of Protestants who adhere to the old pure Doctrine of the best Reformed Churches when at the same time and in the same thing they join with the new Divines as Dr. Owen expresly calls them that is with the Arminians against the Synod of Dort and the old Doctrine of the Church of England But you may say doth our Author do so doth he decry and reject those Preparations and Dispositions before Regeneration and Conversion which our Divines maintained in the Synod of Dort and which Dr. Owen maintained after them against modern Arminians We answer if he doth not decry and reject them what means all that which he writes in the 12 page of his Letter against all Preparations and Dispositions before a saving and justifying Faith Surely he took wrong measures if the thought that those dispositions might be admitted before Regeneration and Conversion but not before a saving and justifying Faith For it is simply impossible and implyes a contradiction that they can be before Regeneration and first saving Conversion but they must be also before saving and justifying Faith So that either he must contradict himself after his usual manner if he hold the foresaid dispositions to be before Regeneration and Conversion but not before saving justifying Faith or if he affirm that they are neither before Regeneration and Conversion nor yet before saving Faith which is necessarily implyed in Regeneration and Conversion then indeed he doth not contradict himself but he doth that which is worse he contradicts the Truth and the Synod of Dort with Dr. Ames Dr. Twiss and Dr. Owen who all maintain this Truth that the said preparatory dispositions are before Regeneration and Conversion and so before a saving justifying Faith If he says that he doth not deny them to be before Regeneration and Saving Justifying Faith nor to be dispositive thereunto but that he only denies them to be dispositive unto Justification We Answer 1. That then he yields the Cause and comes over to us for we do not say that any thing before Regeneration and saving justifying Faith is or can be immediately Dispositive unto Justification but that the foresaid Preparations are Dispositive unto Regeneration and Conversion which are in Order before Justification 2. Then he is as much bound to Answer his own Argument against their being Dispositive unto Justification as we are for his Argument is this that nothing a Man doth before saving justifying Faith can dispose him for Justification because it is all Sin and Sin can never dispose a Man for Justification Now if this be true if all that a Man doth before saving justifying Faith be Sin if it be vain labour and an Acting of Sin and therefore cannot dispose him for Justification then for the same Reason it cannot dispose him for Regeneration and saving justifying Faith for it is self-evident that that which is vain labour and nothing but Sin can no more dispose a Man for Regeneration than for Justification Indeed Sin can dispose a Man for nothing but for Sin and Punishment and if that which is vain labour could dispose a Man for Regeneration and Conversion it would at once be both vain labour and not vain labour it would be vain labour for so it is said and supposed to be and it would not be vain labour because it disposes a Man for Regeneration and Conversion and that is not vain labour which is useful to so good an end as the Regenerating and Converting of a Man is But 1. our Author Objects the 13th Article of the Church of England To which we Answer 1. That the English Divines at the Synod of Dort understood the Articles of their own Church much better than our Author doth and yet they found nothing in the 13th Article against Dispositions before Conversion wrought in Sinners by the Word and Spirit of Christ 2. The Article speaks only of Works done by Infidels without any Grace of Christ at all and without any Inspiration of the Spirit Now it is Confessed that such Works are not pleasant to God See the 10th Art nor are they Dispositive unto Regeneration and Conversion But the Works which the Synod of Dort Ames Twiss and Owen affirm to be Preparatory and Dispofitive unto Regeneration and Conversion are not such Works they are not works done by the meer Power of Nature without any supernatural Grace at all but they are Works done
if he be ignorant of this matter of fact let not his ignorance make him boldly deny it before he know what evidence there is for the Truth of it We give him these two Arguments to prove the Truth of this matter of fact that Pelagius denyed universal Redemption 1. It is known and acknowledged by all who have any understanding of these matters and our Author himself knows it That Pelagius denyed Original sin from whence it follows by necessary Consequence that he must needs also deny Universal Redemption of all Mankind For Infants that dye in their Infancy before they commit any actual sin are a considerable part of Mankind the Infants who from the beginning of the World have dyed and who daily do dy and hereafter will be dying to the Worlds end and that both within and without the Church before they commit any actual sin will make up a vast number even many Millions of the race of Mankind But Pelagius denyed that these Infants who so dye in their Infancy have any sin either Original or Actual to be redeemed from and therefore he must needs deny also that they were Redeemed and consequently he must needs deny universal Redemption of all Mankind Where there is no manner of sin there is no manner of punishment due for sin and consequently no room for Redemption by the Blood and Death of Christ either from sin or punishment But Pelagius denied that Infants who dy in their Infancy have any manner of sin or that any manner of punishment is due to them for their sin Therefore Pelagius denyed that such Infants are Redeemed by the Blood and Death of Christ either from sin or punishment and consequently he denied universal Redemption 2. Our Second Argument to prove the truth of this matter of Fact is from the testimony of Augustin who is a very competent witness because he lived at the same time with Pelagius and wrote against him and confuted his Errors and Heresies Now Augustin in his writings against Pelagius and his Disciples testifies plainly that they denyed universal Redemption on the account aforesaid For thus he writes Contra duas Epistolas Pelagianorum lib. 2. ad Bonifacium cap. 2. Manichaei dicunt Deum bonum non omnium naturarum esse creatorem Pelagiani dicunt Deum non esse omnium aetatum in hominibus mundatorem salvatorem liberatorem Catholica utrosque redarguit c. The Manicheans say That the good God is not the Creator of all natures The Pelagians say That God is not the Purifier the Saviour the Deliverer or Redeemer of all Ages among men But the Catholick Church refutes them both defending both against the Manichaeans the Creature of God least any nature should be denyed to be made by him and also against the Pelagians that the human nature which is lost in all Ages might be sought out and saved Again the same Augustin in several other of his Books proves against the Pelagians from 2 Cor. 5.14 both that all mankind even Infants who dy in their Infancy Lib. 20. de Civit. dei cap. 6. contra Julian lib. 6. cap. 4. are guilty of Original sin and also that in some sense all are Redeemed by the death of Christ In the Second Book of his imperfect Work against Julian a Pelagian Bishop Chap. 28. having alledged 2 Cor. 5.14 15. We thus judge that if one died for all then were all dead And that he died for all c. He adds Unde colligitur quod dicit Apostolus ergo omnes mortui sunt pro omnibus mortuus est Dic apertè mortui parvuli non sunt qui peccatum nullum habem morte pro se Christi in quâ baptizentur non opus habent Jam dic evidenter quod latenter sentis quoniam saâ—is prodis tuâ disputatione quod sentis From which words we gather or inferr for what the Apostle saith Therefore all are dead and he Christ died for them all say plainly Infanâ—s are not dead who have no sin They have no need of the death of Christ for them into which they should be baptized Now speak out evidently that which thou thinkest secretly for thou do'st sufficiently discover by thy Disputation what it is that thou thinkest By this and the forgoing passage of Augustin it is very evident that the Pelagians first denied that Infants had any Original sin Secondly That Christ died for Infants to Redeem them either from sin or punishment of sin For though they declined to speak out and say plainly that Christ died not for Infants yet they really believed and held it for a truth that he did not dy for Infants to Redeem them because they were not guilty of any evil either of sin or punishment from which they could be Redeemed By these two Arguments our Author and others may plainly see that the Pelagians denied universal Redemption by the blood-shedding and death of Christ And this being so how is it possible that we should be middle-way-men who hold universal Redemption and yet that our cause should be Coincident with that of Pelagius who denied universal Redemption Surely our Author cannot think both these things to be true of us without supposing us to believe both parts of a contradiction at once But whatever he himself may be able to do as to believing of contradictions he is greatly mistaken if he think that we have so strong a Faith or so wide a Swallow For we that know our selves much better than he doth declare sincerely that we were never Masters of such a Faith as can believe known contradictions and that we could never make both ends of a contradiction meet so as to be able to swallow them down both at once Either then our Author knew that the Pelagians deny Original sin and universal Redemption or he knew it not if he knew that they deny both how can he be excused from lying against his Conscience in telling the World in Print such a known untruth and contradictious falshood that we are Middle-way-men and that our cause is Coincident with that of Pelagius that is that we are for the middle-way and the extreme way for the middle-way and not for the middle-way at the same time But if he knew not what the cause of Pelagius was and is with what Faith and Conscience could he say that our cause is Coincident or is the same with the cause of Pelagius Is it lawful for him and his judicious Observers to defame the Ministers of Christ and to charge them with Pelagian Heresie and Confederacy with Pelagian Hereticks when they do not well know what the Pelagian Heresie was Hath our Author a priviledge boldly to affirm what he doth not know nor understand And is he fit to inform the people of that which he is ignorant of and wherein he needs to be informed himself We expect the People for whose Information he pretends to write will be more just and reasonable than to believe the Calumnies
wherewith this man either maliciously or ignorantly asperses us especially when they may clearly see that his Calumnies do not hang together but are inconsistent and contradict one another which is a sure mark whereby to know a Calumniator and false witness Mark 14.56 We do not positively say that he doth thus calumniate us out of meer malice but we are sure it is and must be either out of malice or ignorance and we willingly incline to the more charitable which is the safer side that he doth it rather out of pure ignorance and blind zeal than out of meer malice and Cain-like hatred of his Brethren But whatever moved him to it the thing it self is unwarrantable and injurious for which he must give an account to that God who is an infinitely more judicious Observer than he or any of his party and who as he observes all our opinions and practices so he judges always aright according to the true merits of every cause and in this cause we can with a good conscience lift up our face to the Lord our God and say Lord thou whose understanding is infinite and from whom nothing can be hid and who hast infinite power and right to punish us with everlasting destruction if we now lye to thee and dissemble with thee thou knowest that our cause is not Coincident with the cause of Pelagius and that this man doth Calumniate us in saying that judicious Observers cannot but perceive that they are coincident To thee O God we appeal from this false Accuser of the Brethren and unto thee we referr our cause to judge between us and this man whether it be coincident or the same with that of Pelagius But it may be our Author will object and say That if our cause be not coincident with that of Pelagius yet it is at least coincident with that of Arminius We answer that neither is that true For 1. Our Author and those of his way commonly say that the cause of Arminius and Pelagius is all one and therefore if they say true in that and do not calumniate Arminius our cause cannot possibly be coincident with the cause of Arminius unless it be also coincident with that of Pelagius they being both one and the same 2. Our Author saith That we are for the middle-way between the Arminians and the Orthodox as he calls them If that be true our cause must lye in the mid-way between the two extremes and then it is impossible to be Coincident with the cause of Arminius for that is one of the extremes and it is evident by ocular demonstration that the middle cannot be the same with either of the sides and so cannot be coincident with either of the extremes If our Author say that we are come off from the middle-way and are come over to Arminius and so are now on the other extreme and wrong side in opposition to the Orthodox who are on the extreme right side We Answer 1. If that be true and he know it then he is guilty of a gross lye in saying that our cause is coincident with that of Arminius and so that we are Arminians and yet that we are for a middle-way between the Arminians and the Orthodox If he will have us to be Arminians he must not if he be a true honest man say that we are for a middle-way between the Arminians and the Orthodox 2. If we be come over from the middle-way unto the Arminian extreme we desire our Author to tell us when it was and how long it is since and how he knows that we are come over to the Arminian extreme for we profess sincerely that we know none of these things We neither know when it was nor how long it is since nor do we know that we are yet come over or ever shall come over to the Arminian extreme Indeed we dare not pretend to any certain Knowledge of Future Contingents that are not revealed to us yet we trust in our God through Jesus Christ that by the Grace of his Spirit he will keep us so firm and fixed in the Truth of his Word that we shall never go over to the Arminian extream And since we know certainly what we are for the present as to this matter we can safely and with a good Conscience call Heaven and Earth to Record this day against this standerer that we are not Arminians and that he doth very sinfully reproach and calumniate us in saying that we corrupt Christs pure Gospel and obtrude on People a new Arminian Gospel to the certain Peril of their Souls and that our Cause is Coincident with that of Arminius But 3. Though according to the Light which God hath given us by his Word and Spirit we believe that the Arminians erre from the Truth in many things and we do from our Hearts dissent from their Errours yet we hold our selves bound in Conscience as we must answer to God at Death and Judgment not to calumniate them nor any other Erroneous Brethren and therefore we cannot in Conscience say that whilest the Arminians keep within the compass of the five Articles wherein they differed from our Divines at the Synod of Dort their cause is coincident with the cause of Pelagius We do indeed think that something and too much of Pelagianism or Semipelagianism is implied in and by consequence follows from their Principles but that doth not make their cause to be Coincident with the cause of Pelagius Therefore our most Judicious and Consciencious Divines do not scruple to declare Pelagianism to be a Heresie against the very Foundation of Christian Religion But as for Arminianism keeping within the Compass of the five Articles their Consciences will not suffer them to say that it is one or more Fundamental Errors or Heresies this might be sufficiently proved by many Testimonies of our Divines but instead of all that might be alledged we shall Content our selves at present with the Testimony of that famous General Assembly of the Church of Scotland which in the Year 1638. at Glasgow deposed all their Bishops though that Assembly had accused many of their Bishops of Arminianism yet did they not say that Arminianism was as bad as and Coincident with Pelagianism and that it was a Fundamental Heresie They were so far from saying so that in the seventh Session November 28. the Moderator Mr. Henderson in the Face and with the Approbation of the Assembly gave this Moderate Answer unto a Politick Objection of Dr. Balcanquel who appeared there for the Bishops Controversias omnes c. That all the Controversies especially if they exceed not the limits of the five controverted Articles between the Arminians and Anti-Arminians or Calvinists neither were nor are about Fundamental Doctrines that indeed the Arminians erred grievously but that he and the Synod were not yet perswaded that all Heterodoxies that is that all Erroneous Doctrines Hist motuum in regno Scotiae Dantisci An. 1641. p. 100 101. are
Spirit So that we are compleat in him who is our head our living and life-giving head in whom it pleased the Father that all fulness should dwell that out of his fulness we might receive and grace for grace Now will any man of Conscience who hath a competent Understanding of the controversies between us and the Papists say that they give as much to Christ in the point of the Justification of a Sinner as here we do and ever did We ascribe all satisfaction for sin both with respect to eternal and temporal punishment unto Christ and his righteousness We likewise ascribe unto Christ and his righteousness all merit of every good thing whatsoever all merit of pardon of sin of right to eternal life and of eternal life it self and all the degrees of it all merit of whatsoever Grace here and of eternal Glory hereafter Dare any man say that the Papists do all this that they ascribe all satisfaction and all merit unto Christ and his Righteousness And that as we so they deny that men do satisfie Gods justice for sin with respect to any punishment and that they properly merit any the least grace or favour at the hands of God We think no Protestant especially that is a Minister of Christs Gospel will be so impudent or so far imitate the Father of Lyes as to affirm these things to be true which all the World know or may know to be notoriously false There are indeed some Papists for instance Bellarmin lib. 2. da justif cap. 7 Who in dispute grant so much to us that they may seem unto some who do not throughly understand their principles to have yielded the whole cause to us And therefore some of our famous Divines as Dr. Downhame Prideaux Rivet Le Blanc Turretin have not stuck to say that Bellarmin there grants the very thing which Protestants plead for and he had disputed against and that if he would stand to those few words and not contradict them again there might be an end of that Dispute about the imputation of Christs Righteousness Turret Inst part 2. loc 16. p. 709. After Turretin had quoted Bellarmin saying That if the Protestants would have this only that Christs merits are imputed to us because they are given to us by God and we may offer them to the Father for our sins because Christ took upon him the burden of satisfying for us and reconciling us to God the Father their opinion or judgment would be right He adds immediately after this Concession and Confession of Bellarmin Atqui nihil aliud volumus nam quod addit nos velle ita imputari nobis Christi justitiam ut per eam formaliter justi nominemur simus hoc gratis falsò supponit ex praeposterâ suâ bypothesi de justificatione morali Yea but or surely we would have no other thing but what Bellarmin hath here granted us for as to that which he adds that we would have Christs Rigteousness so imputed to us that by it we may be denominated and may be formally Righteous he supposeth it without proof and falsely upon their perverse and preposterous Hypothesis concerning a moral Justification Thus Turretin writes of the Concession and Confession of Bellarmin and other Papists Then he proceeds to shew that notwithstanding those good words of theirs whereby they seem to come over to us yet they and we are never the nearer but remain at as great distance as before because by Gods imputing to us Christs merits in order to Justification they mean that for the sake of Christs merits imputed to us God infuses Grace into us by which infused Grace it is that we are justified according to their principles Whereas we hold that Christs merits are so imputed and communicated to us ut sint causa meritoria sola nosirae justificationis nec ulla alia detur justitia propter quam absolvimur in conspectu dei that they are the alone meritorious cause of our Justification neither is there any other Righteousness for which we are absolved in the sight of God Thus Turretin shews that notwithstanding the seeming agreement between Protestants and Papists in the point of Justification yet the reall difference remains still But how doth he shew it Doth he shew the difference by denying that Christs Righteosness is the meritorious cause of our Justification because the Papists affirm it to be so in some sense No no Turretin hath left that unto our Author to do if he please but he shews that there is a great difference in the point of justification between us and them 1. In that we hold Christs Righteousness to be the meritorious cause of Justification in another sense than they hold it so to be 2. In that we hold Christs Righteousness exclusively of all other to be the only meritorious cause of Justification whereas the Papists deny this and affirm that men are first formally jnstified before God by infused Grace and Justice and that by the exercise of that infused Grace and Inherent Justice they themselves do merit their further Justification in this World and eternal Life and Glory in the World to come And we think this is a very considerable difference Yet this is far from being all the difference for Monsieur Claude who was one of those Divines whom our Author calls middle-way-men in his defence of the Reformation shews Claudes Historical defence of the Reformation par 2. ch 6. p. 217 218. c. that notwithstanding the agreement that there may be in some things between Protestants and Papists in the point of Justification there still remain no less than twelve differences relating to that point whereof many are very considerable we pray all who desire satisfaction in this matter to consult the place in Monsieur Claudes Book which we referr to especially let those who can consult the original in which all is clear whereas some things are obscure and hardly intelligible in the Translation there a man may see the true reason why our first Reformers laid so great stress upon the Controversies they had with the Chuch of Rome about the Article of Justification and that they then had and we at this day still have great cause so to do and yet amongst all those Controversies which Claude observes to be between us and Rome upon that Article there is not a word of that Dispute about the matter and form of Justification about which our Author in his great Wisdom thought fit to inform the ordinary plain people who either want time or judgment to peruse large and learned Tractates Letter p. 35. with p. 6. The man it seems would have the people to think that surely he is mighty well acquainted with all the opinions that have been in the Church and that he can inform them of them all and tell them to a hair which is right and which is wrong therefore he reckons up so many Controversies as have been and are among Reformed