and affirme one and the same sentence or proposition is plaine because I doe not in one place deny Christ hath not merited that faith should be our righteousnesse and iustifie vs and in another place say Christ hath merited that faith shall be our righteousnesse and iustifie vs for I onely say faith iustifies vs for the merit of Christ So that the same b Martin in Ram. logis l. 2 c. 2. Diasceps quando idem consequens de eodem antecedente affirmatur negatur consequent not being affirmed and denied of the same Antecedent in both propositions therefore can there be no contradiction betweene them and consequently no lie and therefore no periury But it may be the propositions in the seuerall bookes are the same in sense and effect therefore if in one place I deny that Christ hath merited that faith should iustifie vs and in another place affirme as much in effect then haue I contradicted and consequently periured and lied I answere I haue not in effect contradicted my selfe first because iustification in the first sentence is taken for our being iustified formally or for the nature and being thereof and for that very thing whereby man of a sinner is made iust and in this sense it is true I neuer wrote that Christ hath merited that faith should be our righteousnesse and iustifie vs. In the latter sentence iustification is taken efficiently for our being iustified as by an efficient cause and in this sence I might truely say without contradiction to the former the act of faith doth iustifie vs as the instrumentall efficient for the merit of Christ viz. apprehended thereby that is faith as an instrument apprehends and applies Chriâ—ts merits for our iustification by them and in this sense I say in my first Booke Trial pag. 178. â—in 1. Faith iustifies vs not as it is in vs but as it rests on Christ and in this sence speakes the Synod of Dort faith iustifies in as much as it apprehends the merits of Christ Synod of Dort in â—ng pa. 23. er 4 For euen as if I say a spoone feedes a childe my meaning is not that the spone is the foode and nourishment of the child but onely that it is the instrument whereby the foode and nourishment is reached and conueied to the childe and by which he receiues that food whereby he is nourished Euen so when I say Faith is our righteousnesse and iustifies vs I doe not meane that faith is that righteousnesse it selfe by which we shall be presented and stand righteous before God in his sight for that onely is the righteousnesse 〈◊〉 Christ actiue and passiue but that faith 〈◊〉 the instrument whereby the righteousnesse of Christ is reached and communicated vnto vs and whereby I receiue it to my iustification Of the manner of this participation and communion or imputation I haue declared my minde fully and plainely in the Defence Defence pa. 2â— to 30. to which I referre the Reader Secondly I answere In the first proposition my meaning is I neuer wrote that the merit of Christ is communicated to faith and that by communion therein faith iustifies vs as the Papists speake of the merits of our workes when they are dipt or died in Christs blood For then should faith either deserue or be the iustice whereby of sinners wee are made righteous both which are farre and â—uer were from my thoght the Lord knowes And in the second sentence my meaning is the merits of Christ come betweene our faith and iustification not to giue vertue vnto faith to iustifie vs but to leade vs vnto Christ by whose merit we may receiue that righteousnesse whereby of sinners we are made iust Triall pag. 199. and in this sense I say in my first Booke that faith iustifies vs rather then any other grace of God namely because it makes vs goe out of our selues to seeke to the all sufficiency of the death and obedience of Christ to rest and trust in him for iustification and saluation Ser. of saluation 〈◊〉 part the end according to the Homily as great and as godly a vertue as the liuely faith is yet it putteth vs from it selfe and remitteth or appointeth vs vnto Christ for to haue onely by him remission of our sinnes and iustification So that our faith in Christ as it were saith vnto vs thus It is not I that take away your sinnes but it is Christ onely and to him onely I send you for that purpose forsaking therein all your good vertues thoughts and workes and onely putting your trust in Christ The second instance by which he assayes to argue me of periury lying and contradiction is in my second Book I protest I neuer wrote in my first Booke that faith is our righteousnesse and yet in my first Booke I say faith is our righteousnesse I answere that this doth not argue me of periury lying and contradiction because I doe not speake of faith being our righteousnesse in the same sense and respect in both for in the first sentence righteousnesse must be taken properly and formally for that very iustice whereby men are made iust and righteous as by a forme and of sinners made righteous formally And in the second sentence righteousnesse is taken improperly for an attribute giuen to faith and it is the same with obedience which the Apostle Paule attributes to faith Romans 16.26 For beleeuing in Christ is obedience to that commandement of God which bids vs beleeue in Christ 1 Iohn 3.23 and not beleeuing in Christ is disobedience Iohn 3.36 and in this sense it is true faith is our righteousnesse Rom. 1.11 when it is wrought in vs as well as faith is ours when it is wrought in vs. And when I say faith is our righteousnesse I doe not meane it is the righteousnesse by which wee stand truely and formally righteous before GOD and in which wee shall bee presented pure and without spotte of sinne before Him but in this sense that it is all the righteousnesse and all the obedience which GOD workes in vs and requires of vs as an instrument apprehending to make vs capable of Christs righteousnesse According to the Doctrine of our Church Paul declareth here Rom. 3.25 Ser. of saluation part 1 toward the end nothing on the behalfe of man but onely a true and liuely faith Not that the act of faith is our formall righteousnesse and iustifies vs meritoriously for or by any worthinesse inherent in it selfe or infused thereunto by Christs merits but that it is called righteousnesse in a borrowed sense because it is only the instrument appointed by God whereby we are to apprehend and lay hold vpon Christs merits which are our righteousnesse and the onely meritorious cause of our iustification In the second accusation he doth argue me onely of lying and contradiction which he indeauours to do by this because in my second booke I say my first Booke was not a Treatise of
Faith is sinne because whatsoeuer is not of Christ is sinne for to be without faith and to be without Christ are all one The Apology I answere as touching acceptation vnto saluation it is all one in the euent to be without Christ the meritorious cause of saluation â—arke 16.16 as to bee without faith the instrumentall For a man cannot bee saued without either Mar. 16.16 But to all intents and purposes it is not all one to be without Christ and faith for it is not all one to the making of our actions to bee sinne in the nature of sin It is neither being without Christ nor faith that doth this for these only do cause that our actions bee not imputed for sinne vnto vs and not that they bee no sinns The sweruing from the law and Rule of God is that onely which makes an action sinfull The Exception Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne 1. Ioan. because whatsoeuer is done without spirituall life is sinne The Apology I answere How farre and in what sense faith in Christ is the spirituall life of Christians shall bee shewed God willing in the fourth obiection For the present it is enough for the answere of this obiection to say that it prooues idem per idem which is as much as to say it prooues nothing in the question for with them faith in Christ is the spirituall life of Christians as shall appeare in the fourth obiection and the spirituall life of Christians is faith as appeares by this obiection If with them faith be the spirituall life of Christians and if the spirituall life of Christians be faith then that Argument that prooues euery action sinfull that is done without spirituall life namely because it is done without faith and againe that Argument that prooues euery action sinfull that is done without faith namely because it is done without spiritual life I both their say arguments prooue nothing for vpon the matter in this question they begge the question The Tryall To conclude in answere to this Argument and for a reason of denying the consequence I sayd that though Repentance bee begun before faith yet it is not sinne for all that because a beliefe of the Gospel goes before faith in Christ yet is it not sinne The Exception This instance they offer to take away and giue three Reasons why an Historicall faith going before a sauing faith is sinne to which I will answere An Historicall faith without faith in Christ is sinne because it is no where alone required The Apology I answere First to the Antecedant that if 〈◊〉 by these wordes required alone be meant that a beliefe of the Gospel is so required alone in one place that there is no more else where required of men to their saluation then I confesse that a belief of the Gospel is no where required alone but if thereby be meant as it must be if it bee to purpose that there is no place of Scripture in which the duty of beleeuing the Gospell is onely taught and that in euery place where beleeuing the Gospell is onely taught beleeuing in Christ is taught also then I deny it for the Scripture doth not teach euery duty in euery place except wee shall obserue no rules of Art in expounding Scripture Secondly to the consequence I answer that though beleeuing the Gospell were no where alone required yet will it not be sinne for all that because it is a duty in the word commanded to be performed of all the Elect to make them capable of saluation and no such thing can be sinne God doth require of men that which is taught them and as it is taught and sometimes it may fall out a Preacher by occasion of his text or in a Catechisme lecture may onely teach men to beleeue the Gospell vpon Gods owne authority shall we say the Minister sinnes in teaching it alone or the people in learning it alone at that time not hauing then a sauing Faith Surely God is not a hard man that takes vp where he layes not downe Luk. 17.21 nor requires that which hee doeth not teach or offer to worke The Exception An Historicall Faith without Faith in Christ is sinne because God requires more Faith then this The Apology To the consequence I answere that though God require more Faith then the beliefe of the Gospell of them that shall be saued yet is not this sinne when it is alone without a sauing Faith for God requires more then godly sorrow of a Repentant sinner viz an vnfained purpose to leaue his sinnes and in time to practise new obedience Is therefore godly sorrow for sinne sinne indeed in a man because as yet hee hath not a godly purpose to leaue his sinnes wrought in him surely such Diuinitie can neuer doe good in the Church of Christ The Exception An historicall faith without faith in Christ is sinne because it may bee in Reprobates The Apology It cannot bee denied but a beliefe of the Gospell may bee in Reprobates yet will it therefore follow to bee sinne Math. was â—he gift of miracles sinne in the Reprobates because it was in them surely no. It is not the hauing of the gifts of the Spirit that makes them to bee sinne to reprobates or in them but the not vsing of them well to the honour of God and the good of the Church and it is their contenting of themselues onely with those when they should labour for other and more that causeth them to be sins in reprobates for as they be had so they come from God and as they come from God so they are good and as they are good they cannot be sinne though as they are in them not vsed at all or not well vsed or not enough vsed or abused they may prooue sinne in them yet simply because they are in them or as they are in them they are not and so much in answere to their Defence of their first obiection against my Doctrine of the precedency of Repentance vnto Faith in Christ The Triall Repentance is not begun before Faith in Christ The second Obiection because then it should proceede out of an heart vnpurified for the heart is purified by Faith Act. 15.9 To this I answered that it proues not the question because the proofe of it out of the Acts is not to purpose first because it doeth not at all speake of purifying by sanctification of which the question is but by iustification of which it is not secondly though it had spoken of purifying by sanctification yet doth it not prooue that Faith so purifieth the heart that till Faith in Christ come there is not so much as the least measure of this purifying begunne for so is the Antecedent to bee vnderstood The Exception To make their Argument good they bring reasons first they prooue that the Text in the Acts is to be vnderstood of purifying by sanctification from the filth of sinne as well as by
but by hearing faith preached which is the meaning of that place Gal. 3.2 For at the preaching of the Gospell the Doctrine of faith and vpon the beleeuing thereof were they giuen Act. 10.41.44 2. The spirit of adoption is not giuen before faith in Christ for that is the grace which instrumentally and so onely giues vs prerogatiue and title to our adoption euen as it onely but instrumentally onely receiues Christ and his benefits Eph. 1.13 Gal. 3.26 Rom. 8.13 3. The gifts and graces of the spirit sufficient to saluation are not giuen before faith in Christ Heb. 11.6 Rom. 5.1 2. 4. The gift of sanctification is not giuen before Faith in Christ But for all this will it not follow that before Faith in Christ the spirit is no way giuen the contrary may be seene in illumination and a beleefe of the Gospell for these are gifts of the spirit and therefore parts of spirituall life in some sense 1. because they are supernaturall all naturall men haue them not nor are they wrought by the worke of nature in any no not in the Elect 2. because blindenesse of minde and infidelity which is contrary thereto is a branch of spirituall death 3. The Spirit inhabitant cannot be in men before they haue faith in Christ but the Spirit assistant may and the exciting by assistance may Indeede Illumination and a beleefe of the Gospell are not spirituall life enough to saluation yet is it life enough by Gods blessing and further grace to produce Faith in Christ in the elect for within man and by the working of the Spirit there is no other worke but these and that which is wrought by these which perswades men to beleeue in Christ If illumination and a beleeue of the Gospell c. had no supernaturall life at all but were altogether dead workes then could they produce no such effect as faith and if they be not dead workes then haue they some life and if they haue some life then from the spirit and if from the spirit then may they be called branches of spirituall life and hee that hath them may be sayd to haue some spirituall life begunne in him because as hath beene sayd he hath some life in him more then naturall that is more then all naturall men haue The Exception There is no spirituall life begunne in men before Faith in Christ or faith in Christ is euery way the spirituall life of Christians because sanctification goes before iustification The Apology I answere in nature saanctification is begunne before iustification 1. because regeneration is begunne before iustification namely in illumination and other preparations as hath beene shewed before Secondly because faith it selfe is a sanctifying grace by their owne confession from Acts 15.9 and faith goes in nature before iustification Indeede iustification goes in nature before the perfection of our sanctification in all the parts of it and before the acceptation of it to saluation but iustification doth not go before any or euery measure of sanctification can any way be begunne The will of God in working is the Rule of perfection to the worke and then is it sayd to be perfect when it is wrought in part or in whole according to that perfection of parts or degrees which the Lord intends vnto it at seuerall times and by seuerall meanes The Lord is no way tied for shewing the perfection of his workemanshippe to finish a worke in all the parts of it at sundry times more then he is to finish it in all the degrees thereof at sundry times The Triall Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ The fift Obiection because repentance is a proper effect and fruite of the Gospell The Exception This Argument is disclaimed therefore is it vaine to spend time about it for if they will not acknowledge and confesse it I haue no reason to confute it any further Onely I would haue the world beleeue I doe not faine an enemy and then flourish against him For two learned and godly Ministers whose worthy workes are in print haue vsed the same They which bring this proposition Repentance is the proper effect and fruite of the Gospell beleeued to prooue that repentance is not begun before iustifying faith must be vnderstood to meane by a beleefe of the Gospell either that beleefe which is faith in Christ or that onely which is an assent vnto the truth of the Gospell If they meane by a beleefe of the Gospell faith in Christ then must it be their argument which I haue propounded to prooue that repentance goes not before faith in Christ If they meane but an assent to the truth of the Doctrine of the Gospell then doe they meane that no other faith goes before repentance but that and then haue they two Diuines of our owne lesse on their side then they thought they had and I haue two more on mine for I hold that a beleefe of the Gospell goes before repentance and repentance before faith in Christ and let this be enough for that fift Obiection the sixt followes The Triall Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ The sixt Obiection because it is not begunne before regeneration for regeneration is not begunne before faith in Christ This Argument was answered by denying the Antecedent viz. that Regeneration is not begunne before Faith in Christ and the reason of the consequence viz. that repentance is not begunne before regeneration The Exception For making good the Antecedent viz. this proposition regeneration is not begunne before faith in Christ they bring two reasons to which I will answere in order Regeneration is not begunne before Faith in Christ because it issues from Christ and from our vnion with him by faith 2. Corinth 5.17 Ephesians 2.10 Colo. 2.11 The Apology I answere first if by regeneration be meant our being made Gods children actually then I grant that our regeneration must needes flow from our vnion with him by faith but then it prooues not the Antecedent for the regeneration wee speake of is not our beeing actually made the sonnes of GOD but a worke of the Spirit beginning to fit vs for that but if by it they meane any or euery worke of the Spirit beginning to fit vs for regeneration and tending thereunto by GODS appointment as any worke of the Spirit in the vnderstanding or will of one that is elected to saluation to fit him for regeneration by faith then I say that such regeneration may be wrought before our actuall vnion with Christ by Faith and doth not issue from it It is true that Regeneration issues from Christ in the elect whether wee consider him as the efficient cause either by way of meriting it for vs or by working it in vs. Hebrewes 12.3 Ioan. 1.19 Ephesians 1.3 2.10 or as the finall cause Galath 4.19 But it is not true that regeneration so issues from Christ that there is not so much as any the least beginning of it wrought in
almost printed I deemed that GOD by his prouidence would haue me defend my selfe for the credit of my Ministery which is as tender as the apple of mine eye that cannot endure little motes of disgrace vniustly to dimme it much lesse such great beames of slander to put it out if it were possible Pudet hac opprobria nobis Et dici potnisse non potuisse refelli If the accusations were true it were better my booke were burnt in Paules Church-yard then sold there it were fitter for me to stand at a stake in Smithfield then in a Pulpet in the Church and if they be not true then is it not meete to suffer simple people to be seduced to beleeue them nor my selfe to be traduced by the report and beleefe of them neither of which can be auoyded without some answere Whether they be true or no I referre to the Christian Reader to determine when he hath read ouer the Defence of my Triall of Faith and this Apology for it In this action and accusation I will be but a Defendant I will not giue rebuke for rebuke 1. Pet. 3.9 onely I say the Lord rebuke him This is not my rebuke but the Lords nor is it against him but for him the Lord knoweth euen for his vnfeined humiliation and consolation in Christ Iesus And so letting passe in modesty the very words of the accusation as offensiue to moderate eares I proceede to answere the matter and first the heresie and blasphemy The heresie and blasphemy is instanced in three particulars 1. The first hereticall and blasphemous position is this Triall of faith p. 41. li. 30. I say Faith in Christ is the onely condition of the couenant of grace that is required of all those that are capable of saluation I answere this is not heresie nor blasphemy because the Doctrine of our Church sayth as much where it sayth Articles of religion in Q Elizabeths time Art 11. Ser. of saluation 1 part toward the end that we are iustified by faith onely is a most wholesome Doctrine and that Paule deelareth nothing Rom. 3.25 vpon the behalfe of man Concerning his iustification but onely a true and a liuely faith and afterward faith doth not shut out repentance hope loue dread and the feare of God to be ioyned with faith in euery man that is iustified but it shutteth them out from the office of instifying 2. A second Hereticall blasphemous Doctrine is I say God as soueraigne Lord of all can appoint what meanes hee will to make vs capable of life Neither is this an hereticall and blasphemous position because the power of God is to be considered two wayes Perk. gold chai ch 3. either actually or absolutely Gods absolute power is that by which hee can doe more then either he doth or will doe Math. 3.9 Phillip 3.29 Gods actuall power is that by which he causeth all things to be which hee freely willeth Psal 135.6 Now then where I say God as soueraigne Lord of all can appoint what meanes hee will to make vs capable of life I do not speake of his actuall power but of his absolute for I doe not meane Though the Lord hath actually willed and appointed that faith in Christ shall be the meanes to make vs capable of eternall life that is instrumentally onely and in no sense meritoriously yet God as soueraigne Lord of all can now appoint another meanes to make vs capable thereof as he would straine his wit to interpreat me But my meaning is which is euident by the context that before the Lord appointed and willed that faith in Christ should be that meanes by his absolute power as soueraigne Lord of all hee might haue appointed any other grace to haue beene the meanes instrumentally and conditionally to haue made vs capable of Heauen If God by his absolute power can do more then either he doth or will as is confest out of Mr. Perkins then in case God had not willed that Faith in Christ should be this meanes he might by his absolute power haue appointed any other meanes and consequently what meanes he would to make vs capable of life For that action which depends vpon Gods free will or ordination that by his absolute power he could haue done otherwise for that is the nature of free-will to do so as that they might haue done otherwise but the appointing of the meanes to make vs capable of saluation depends vpon Gods free-will and ordination therefore he might haue done otherwise and consequently by his absolute power he could haue appointed what meanes he would to make vs capable of saluation And that the appointing of the meanes to make vs capable of saluation depends on the free-will and ordination of God appeares because the merits of Chrâ—st depend therevpon according to that of Mr. Caluin Christ could not deserue any thing but by the good pleasure of God Caluin Iustit l. 2 1. 17. the 1. but because hee was appointed to this purpose with his sacrifice to appease the wrath of God and with his obedience to put away our offences c. Now if this be true in the meritorious cause of our saluation which doth purchase it much more is it in the instrumental which makes vs but persons capable of it now it is procured by him and so much for clearing the second supposed heresie and blasphemy The third hereticall blasphemous position is this that I say the act of faith which is beleeuing in Christ doth iustifie vs and is our righteousnesse Of this sentence I wil not say much here because I haue maintained it to be sound Doctrine in my sense in a priuate writing to himselfe which he promised to answere but yet hath not performed it as also in a publike defence in print and in the view of the world which was perused and also allowed by two very learned and godly Doctors of Diuinity for that end which I humbly pray the Reader to peruse for his satisfaction if hee be doubtfull euen as this Apology also hath beene prooued and approued by the same worthy Diuines And so I passe from the heresie and blasphemy with which he charges me to the periury lying and contradiction which is instanced by two particulars The first instance to prooue the periury lying and contradiction is this viz. because in my second Booke I protest I neuer wrote that Christ hath merited that faith should be our righteousnesse and iustifie vs Defence pag. 35. and yet in my first booke I say the act of faith iustifies vs for the merit of Christ Triall page 196. I answere in these two sentences I doe neither forsweare nor lye nor contradict my selfe because I do not affirme and deny one and the same proposition That I doe not in the two sentences forenamed Arist deinter lib 1. chap. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ram. logi l. 2. cha 2. contradictio est quando idem axioma affirmatur negatùr deny
they are in themselues considered that can keepe them from failing but considering them in relation to the ground from whence they proceede which is election to the end for which they are wrought in the elect which is to make them persons capable of the saluation vnto which they are elected or to the efficient cause which is the spirit who perfects his graces begunne so they cannot fayle totally and finally for in the elect this purpose of repentance is seconded with practise accordingly in the euent 2. Repentance not dissembled of which I speake may fayle both of the end which is eternall life and of the effect which is amendment of life For a mâ—â— not hauing receiued the grace of perseâ—rance may giue ouer this purpose and â—turne to his former sinnes and consequeâ—ly faile of eternall life as may be suppoâ—â— in Ahab and the Niniuites The Exception Reason 2 True repentance is not a true purpâ— of heart to leaue our former sinnes because this purpose may bee in Reprâ—bates but true repentance cannot bee them The Apology I answere as to the former argumeâ—â— that true repentance or aâ— purpose 〈◊〉 heart to leaue our former sinnes not dâ—sembled may be in Reprobates as Ahabs case though true repentance whiâ— brings forth new obedience in the liâ— constantly conscionably and sincerely caâ—not So that for all this I might warraâ—â—ably describe the true repentance I speaâ— of by a true purpose of the heart to leâ— our former euill wayes I did not write a Treatise of Repâ—â—tance but of Faith of repentance in 〈◊〉 Treatise I spake but by the way and occâ—sionally therefore was it not needfulâ— should define repentance precisely a description if it would serue the turne If of set purpose I had treated of that common place I would haue defined it otherwise then I haue done and I would haue shewed that the obiect of it is sinne onely and sinnes past for of that onely must a man repent for the doing whereof in time past he must be sorry and the doing whereof hee must leaue in time to come and what can that bee but sinne onely that is 2. Cor. 12.21 Act. 18.22 Reuela 2.22 sinne past for there is no reason wee should repent of them before wee haue committed them though wee must endeauour to preuent them before we haue committed them And if I had directly meant to define repentance I would haue left out of that which they call my definition some words which are in and haue put in some other which are left out That which I would haue left out which is in should haue beene these wordes viz. and purpose to serue God better for indeede they be but a consequence following vpon our purpose of leauing our former sinnes or rather an amplification of it by the contrary then any part of the nature of repentance the obâ—ect whereof is onely sinne and therefore not new seruing of God That which would haue inserted into the Definitioâ— which is left out should haue beene thes words is a godly sorrow for sinne for thâ— is the first part of repentance as shall 〈◊〉 seene by and by If any aske me why I meant to deâ—cribe repentance as I did I answere 1. I added the formâ— words not because I meant thereby 〈◊〉 describe any part of repentance but bâ—cause they containe a necessary consequeâ—â— and effect following vpon our purpose 〈◊〉 leauing our former sinnes For to what 〈◊〉 should we purpose to leaue our sinnes 〈◊〉 time past excepr we resolued in time 〈◊〉 come to serue God better how shall thâ— former be manifested without the latteâ— 2. I omitted the other words not becauâ—â— I thought not sorrow for sinne to be aâ— part of repentance which shall be shewâ— by and by but because purpose to leaâ— past sinnes necessarily presupposeth sorroâ— for the committing of them else whâ— should make a man to resolue to leaâ— them but the sorrow of his heart for 〈◊〉 doing thereof 3. I onely described repâ—tance by a purpose of the heart to leaue 〈◊〉 former sinnes not because I thought tâ—â— to be all requisite in repentance but bâ—cause this purpose and resolution is the last act of the heart as it repents or the last act of repentance as it is seated in the heart Now that the nature of Repentaance consists in two things vix vnfained sorrow of heart for sinnes already committed and purpose of heart not to commit the same againe to prooue this I shall not need to produce testimonies of Scripture for common sence teacheth vs that Repentance in men concerning things in the world hath for the obiect of it things hurtfull â—nely that is that either are such or seeme to vs to be such I meane wee feare or feele for something that we haue done and that our Repentance for the things that we haue done and for the doing whereof wee are sensible of such hurt consists in sorrow for the doing thereof and in purpose to doe so no more if it were to be done againe I will make it plaine by a familiar example I want a conuenient house hereupon I purpose to build one I conferre with workemen about it and the charge of the building I am told it will cost mee but three hundred pound vpon this charge I reckon and goe about it but before it be finished I finde it will cost mee foure hundred pound when I see this I repent oâ— the building of my house that is it irkeâ— me it vexes me and makes me sorry foâ— the cost I haue bestowed on it and not only so but I wish it were vndone and resolue if it were to doe againe I would neuer build it yea I purpose neuer to vndeâ—take the building of a house againe but will be sure it shall cost me no more then expect In like manner for a long time a sinnâ— goes on in an euill course of life withoâ—â— feare of Hell and with a presumptuouâ— hope of Heauen at length when the timâ— of his conuersion is come the Lord is pleased to let him see the folly and fowlenesâ— of his sinnes the danger of his course if 〈◊〉 goe on and the benefit of his repentanceâ— he returne these considerations belieued and laid to heart makes him repent that iâ— to be heartily sorry yea prickt in heart fâ—â— his euill life past and to resolue to liue 〈◊〉 longer in them yea that now hee woulâ— not doe the same things againe if the were to be committed and were not aâ— ready done and thus much be enough 〈◊〉 haue written in defence of those wordâ— wherein I describe the nature of the truâ— repentance which I say goeth before faitâ— in Christ and for answere to the first Exception against the Exposition the second followes The second exception likewise is idle To the second Exception for whereas for the ground of it it is imagined and alleadged that there can be no manner of sincerity in a mans actions before