a person capable of salvation on our part required It is a penitent and petitioning Faith whereby we receive the Promises of mercy but we are not justified partly by prayer partly by Repentance and partly by Faith but that faith which stirreth up godly sorrow for sin and enforceth us to pray for pardon and salvation Faith is a necessary and lively instrument of Justification which is amongst the number of true causes not being a cause without which the thing is not done but a cause whereby it is done The cause without which a thing is not done is onely present in the action and doth nothing therein but as the eye is an active instrument for seeing and the eare for hearing so is faith also for justifying If it be demanded whose instrument it is It is the instrument of the soul wrought therein by the Holy Ghost and is the free gift of God In the Covenant of works works were required as the cause of life and happinesse but in the Covenant of grace though repentance be necessary and must accompany faith yet not repentance but faith onely is the cause of life The cause not efficient as works should have been if man had stood in the former Covenant but instrumentall onely for it is impossible that Christ the death and blood of Christ and our faith should be together the efficient or procuring causes of Justification or salvation Rom. 3.21 22 28 30. Gal. 2.16 17. Rom. 4.2 3. When the Apostle writeth that man is not justified by works or through works by the Law or through the Law opposing Faith and Works in the matter of Justification but not in respect of their presence Faith I say and works not faith and merits which could never be without doubt he excludes the efficiency and force of the Law and works in justifying But the particles By and Of do not in the same sense take Justification from the Law and Works in which they give it to faith For faith onely doth behold and receive the promises of life and mercy but the Law and Works respect the Commandments not the Promises of meer grace When therefore Justification and life is said to be by Faith it is manifestly signified that faith receiving the promise Deut. 7.12 10.12 Jer. 7.23 Lev. 19.17 18. Luk. 10.27 Mark 12.30 doth receive righteousnesse and life freely promised Obedience to all Gods Commandments is covenanted not as the cause of life but as the qualification and effect of faith and as the way to life Faith that imbraceth life is obediential and fruitful in all good works but in one sort faith is the cause of obedience and good works and in another of Justification and life eternal These it seeketh in the promises of the Covenant those it worketh and produceth as the cause doth the effect Faith was the efficient cause of that precious oblation in Abel Heb. 11.4 7 c. of reverence and preparing the Ark in Noah of obedience in Abraham but it was the instrument onely of their Justification For it doth not justifie as it produceth good works but as it receiveth Christ though it cannot receive Christ unlesse it bring forth good works A disposition to good works is necessary to Justification being the qualification of an active and lively faith Good works of all sorts are necessary to our continuance in the state of Justification and so to our final absolution if God give opportunity but they are not the cause of but onely a precedent qualification or condition to final forgivenesse and eternal blisse If then when we speak of the conditions of the Covenant of grace by condition we understand whatsoever is required on our part as precedent concomitant or subsequent to Justification repentance faith and obedience are all conditions but if by condition we understand what is required on our part as the cause of the good promised though onely instrumental faith or belief in the promises of free mercy is the onely condition Faith and works are opposed in the matter of Justification and salvation in the Covenant not that they cannot stand together in the same subject for they be inseparably united but because they cannot concur or meet together in one and the same Court to the Justification or absolution of man For in the Court of Justice according to the first Covenant either being just he is acquitted or unjust he is condemned But in the Court of mercy if thou receive the promise of pardon which is done by a lively faith thou art acquitted and set free and accepted as just and righteous but if thou believe not thou art sent over to the Court of Justice Thus far Mr. Ball. In which words of his the blood of Christ faith in his blood repentance and works have all of them their due place assigned them The blood of Christ as the alone efficient procuring cause Faith as the instrument giving interest and making application Repentance as a necessary qualification of the justified person in order to glory In this which is the good old Protestant doctrine God loseth nothing of his grace but all is free in the work Christ loseth nothing of his merit it stands alone as the procuring cause Faith receives all from Christ but takes nothing off from the free grace of God or Christs merits God loseth nothing of his Soveraignty and man is not at all dispensed with in his duty God is advanced in his goodnesse and Soveraignty man is kept humble thankful and in subjection no place being left for his pride or gap open for licentiousnesse A Digression concerning the Instrumentality of Faith in Justification HEre I cannot passe by that which Mr. Baxter hath animadverted on some passages of mine in the Treatise of the Covenant concerning the Instrumentality of Faith After I had spoke to our Justification by Faith in opposition to Justification by works in several Propositions of which he is not pleased to take any notice I infer pag. 80. These things considered I am truly sorry that Faith should be denyed to have the office or place of an instrument in our Justification nay scarce allowed to be called an instrument of our receiving Christ that justifies us Mr. Baxter not acquainting his Reader at all with the premises immediately falls upon this inference making himself somewhat merry with my professing my self to be truly sorry for this thing telling me I was as sorry that men called and so called faith the instrument of justification as you are that I deny it acquainting his Reader with his Reasons which he would have to be compared with mine which he passes over in silence 1. No Scripture doth sayes he either in the letter or sense call faith an instrument of Justification This the Reader must take on his word and it should further be considered whether he do not in the same page contradict himself where he saith It is onely the unfitnesse or impropriety of the phrase that he
teach the world that the onely justifying act of faith is the accepting of justification as merited by Christs blood or the accepting of Christs righteousnes to justifie them it is not hard for an unprejudic'd man to discern For my part in all my experience of the case of the ungodly that I have triall of I can find no commoner cause of their generall delusion and perdition then this very doctrine Answ To this I might have many things to say 1. It is the hard fate Desperate Conclusions inferr'd from right principles if I may say so of Christian Religion to have inferences of this kind drawn from her principles And yet the way of Christians hath not been either to desert the principles from which they are drawn nor yet to own or defend the inferences or conclusions that are drawn from them The Apostle affirming that the exaltation of Gods glory in not utterly casting of the Nation of the Jewes was eminently seen in their disloyalty and covenant-breaking with him Inference is presently made that covenant-breaking and disloyalty cannot then be blamed If the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie to his glory why yet am I also judged as a sinner That which advanceth Gods glory cannot be charged as a sin Bat covenant-breaking with God according to the Apostle addes to his glory and therefore it cannot be charged as a sin If answer be made that this exaltation of God in his glory is by accident and no thanks to him that breaks covenant but to the goodness of God that brings good out of evill From this inference is made also Let us then do evill that good may come which Conclusion was slanderously charged upon the Apostle Rom. 3. vers 8. The doctrine of Gods free election of some and passing by of others occasioned two dâ—sperate inferences 1. That there is then unrighteousness with God as deserting yea hating his creature without cause Rom. 9.14 2. That God then without reason finds a fault with his creature this being his will who can resist it Ro. 9.19 The wits of some have been indeed busied to put such a comment upon the Apostles words that no such inference as these with any colour or shew of reason can be drawn and thereby make it appear that their comment is utterly dissonant from the Text for from the Apostles doctrine these inferences in the judgement of blinded reason and rules held between creature and creature seem directly to follow as evidently appears in the Apostles answer To come nearer to the business in hand the Apostle making it his work to advance Gods free grace in mans justification some feared lest their sin was above the grace of a pardon To satisfie these the Apostle tels them that where sin abounded grace doth super-abound Rom. 5.20 So that the greatness of their sin exalts the free grace and favour of God an inference is presently ready Let us then continue in sin that grace may abound Rom. 6.1 And here indeed was as fair and full encouragement to sin as any that you hold out in your objection against this doctrine this very use which you say is now made by wicked ones of this Doctrine generally taught by Protestants was made as is said in the Apostles times by the Gnosticks and others who maintained that it was enough to believe that Christ died for sin though a man liv'd in all wickedness and ungodliness How could this so soon spring in the Church but that carnal ones found some-what that would bear some colour on which they might bottom it as omne mendacium fundatur in aliquâ veritate as may be seen verified in the instances mentioned Let not Christian doctrin then be blamed upon the account of such desperate deductions and cursedly wrested inferences As soon as reformation began and this doctrine among others appeared it is well known what from the adversaries it suffered As it was laid to the Reformers charge that they made God the author of sin so that Gibieuf with his black mouth makes Calvin worse then the Manichees so also that they utterly laid aside all care and regard of good works or wayes of godliness and that upon account of their doctrine that faith alone justifies It is well known with what a belly they use to picture Luther as if his work had been alone to drink And Bellarmine taking upon him in the preface to his fourth Tome out of the Revelation to set out what a creature a Lutheran is saith that those that are addicted to their belly for the most part fall to them And their orator Turner in his elogie of Drunkenness applauds the Lutherans with a bene secistis in that they have lest the Catholique Church to betake themselves to that party How full their invectives were against Calvin and Beza and all of their opinion as enemies of all godliness and friends of prophanesse almost all books of popish writers may witnesse Those things are famous that Bellarmine out of Bolsecke and Colcheus quotes to this purpose Granatensis in his dedicatory Epistle before his Dux peccatorum having laid this down as a maxime that Holinesse and purity of doctrine is a certain mark and note of true faith and Religion and asserted that there hath been no sect from the beginning of the world if we run through all ages to be compared with Christians for doctrine of concernment to mans Moral conversation he enters comparison first with Heathenism then with Turcisme then with Judaisme after Christs comming and lastly takes notice of the lives of Hereticks in the primitive times of the Manichees out of Austin Of the Gnosticks out of Epiphanius Of the Carpocratians out of Austin then he fals upon his own times and saies The Heretiques of our own times are no more holy They that have fetch'd back the errors of faith of former Heretiques from hell are also diligent followers of their practices what holiness of life saith he is to be expected from the Lutherans that with their speciall faith have set open a door to all impiety and the wicked practices of the Calvinists are better known saith he then we desire and thereupon tels us two tales first that some that neighbour upon Geneva being demanded why they did not reject the Catholique and receive Genevas Gospel answerd That was not to be wondered at for said they the words and books of Calvinists stuff'd with lies and fraud are carried further then the narrative of their wickedness But to us say they that go every week to their Market it is well known to be a kingdome of hellish confusion and therefore their Gospell doth not take with us His next is of a certain Minister of theirs who a few years before went into Hungary petitioned a Bashaw of the Turks for liberty to preach their Gospel to the Christians that lived among the Turks under tribute and to perswade the said Bashaw to grant his Petition he began with many reasons
former as is concluded by Interpreters we must understand the like or somewhat much like it in the latter Man will have like immortality in sin as he had omniscience by sin Therefore he puts and keeps him out of Paradise that now being deprived of the thing he might not delude himself in the outward sign or Sacramental representation of it Sixthly It remains therefore that these trees were set apart of God from other trees of the garden for a Sacramental use having no more power of themselves to confer life or knowledge then water in Baptisme or bread and wine in the Lords Supper to conferre pardon of sin or spiritual life on the soul g Arbor igitur vitae non ab in sita vivificandi facultate sed à Sacramentali signifâ—câ—tione sic dicta est The tree of life was so called saith Wollebius not from any innate quickning faculty but from a Sacramental signification Paraeus indeed putting it to the question whether the tree of life be so called by reason of the effect that it had produced had man stood or by way of signification saith these two opinions in his judgment may be joyned and sayes h Sine dubio habitura erat haec arbor seu ut cibus seu ut medicina vim conservandi hominis sanitatem vitam ne corpora vergerent in senium aut sentirent defecâ—um donec in coelestem immortalitatem transirent Deinde data fuit homini in vitae Sacramentum The tree might give life as food or as physick and preserve from age till man should be translated into an heavenly immortality and then proceeds to shew how it is a Sacrament of life But sure these opinions are altogether inconsistent Sacraments are so signs that they are not physical causes of the thing that is signified If they had any such effect in nature then all mystery in the Sacrament ceased and there needed no word from God to clear it every man would know that food hath a natural tendency to life and physick to health if there were no Scripture If we were able to make it good that they were physical causes of life and knowledge then we must disclaime their Sacramental use but seeing that cannot appear and the contrary is evident This other must be asserted It may easily be made out that the tree of life was a Sacramen Man was to put forth his hand to eat of it as the Jewes did the Passeover and we do the Lords Supper i Voluit igitur hominem quoties fructum arboris illius gustaret in memoriam revorareunde vitam haberet ut se agnosceret non propria virtute sed Dei unius beneficio vivere Neqâ—e esse intrinsecum bonum ut vulgo loquuntur sed à Deo provenire And as often as he ate of it or had his eye upon it as Calvin well observes he was to remember from whom he received life and blisse and by whom he was preserved and upheld that he had no principle of life and blisse in himself but as he received it from God so by his favour and free Grace it was continued And to mind himself of his duty on what tearms he stood with God and upon what condition his life and blisse was continued whilest he sinned not he must not dye as long as obedience lasted he must enjoy a life in happiness Others add that it shadowed out Christ by whom both he and the Angels stood in happinesse but I have already spoke my thoughts to that particular But how to bring that other tree of the knowledge of good and evil so aptly to hold out the nature and use of a Sacrament is not so easie and I find many Interpreters asserting it but not any that I can meet with demonstrating it And it must be confest that this Sacrament did herein differ from all other Sacraments Those did consist in their use This in mans abstinence from it In this it is said thou shalt not eat In the Passeover and the Lords Supper the communitants must eat But God hath it in his power to institute Sacraments according to pleasure by way of prohibition as well as by way of injunction In other Sacraments in the due use men attain to the good that is promised In this by abstinence man should have avoyded the evil threatned In eating of the tree of life while man persisted in obedience he was assured of life that was a seal and pledge of it And while he abstained from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil he had like assurance of freedom from death This alone was a negative Sacrament and it was proper to this Sacrament onely that not the fruition of good but the avoydance of evil was the thing signified The reason of the name is the enquiry of many why it was called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil Some that would deny it to be any Sacrament say that it had the name from the natural effect that it was apt to produce being created to quicken or ripen man in the use of his reason conceiving that our first Parents were created weak in knowledge of an infant understanding And to know good and evil that is choose the good and refuse the evil in the Hebrew phrase setting out the use of reason as Esay 7.16 Before the child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good They say this tree was to work them to this maturity in knowledge How false this is of our first Parents weaknesse in knowledge is clear by the names that man gave to all creatures upon sight as he had dominion over them so he understood the nature of them as also in that speech that he uttered concerning Eve when the Lord upon her creation brought her to him to give her in marriage The Wise man sayes that God made man upright Eccles 7.29 And this uprightnes comprizes mans whole conformity to God in all in which his image doth consist which was as the Apostle tells us in knowledge as in righteousnesse and true holinesse Col. 3.10 To avoid suspition of inclination to any such opinion some when they speak of mans first estate purposely avoid the word innocency and choose to use the word integrity And how unapt the fruit of a tree could possibly be in nature to produce any such effect that which was spoken concerning the tree of life being applyed hither may demonstrate And whence this opinion came but from the Devil I cannot tell who told our mother Eve that God did know that in the day that they eat thereof their eyes should be opened and they should be like unto gods knowing both good and evil Gen. 3.5 He was the first that vented it and she was the first that believed it when she saw that the tree was good for food and pleasant to the eye and a tree to be desired to make one wise she did take and eat thereof Gen. 3.6 The taste
that we receive as Sacraments whether extraordinary as the Cloud the Red-Sea Manna and the Rock which the Apostle parallells with Baptisme and the Lords Supper 1 Cor. 10.1 2. But also in the ordinary stated Sacraments by a standing law to be observed In Circumcision there was a foreskin to be cut off in the Passeover a Lambe to be eaten In Baptisme there is water to be applyed and in the Lords Supper bread and wine to be taken eaten and drunk God condescending in mercy to our weakness by earthly things to informe our judgments and strengthen our faith in that which is heavenly Though Papists are much put to it to find an outward sign in some of their Sacraments as indeed in some of them there is none at all yet they yeeld to this truth that Sacraments have their signs knowing that to be a true though not a full definition tnat a Sacrament is an outward visibie sign of an inward spiritual grace That we may come to a right understanding of Sacramental signs we must First know what a sign in general is Secondly the several sorts and kinds of signs so farre at least as will conduce to a right understanding of the point in hand and Lastly enquire what Sacramental signs are and their properties What is meant by a sign A sign Austin hath long since defined to be that which shewes it self to the senses and somewhat more besides it self to the understanding and in other words a Signum estres praeter speciem quam ingerit sensibus aliud aliquid ex sefaciens in cogitationem venire A sign is a thing which brings to mens thoughts another thing besides that which it offers to the senses As the Rain-bowe offers it self to the eyes we see the shape of it and the colours in it and brings the promise of God into our minds that the Floud shall no more return to destroy the earth It were an endless labour to undertake to lay down the several kinds of signes with all their sub-divisions I never saw such a Scheme of them but I have thought many more might be added to them Neque enim hujus generis quisquam enmeravit omnia nascuntur enim nova pro homi num arbitrio Pulling Deca 5. Ser. 6. A distribution of signs Natural signs yet those at least that are notable may be reduced to certayn heads Some are naturall some are prodigious and some are signs by institution Natural signs are those that of themselves and of their own nature are apt to signifie somewhat beyond themselves As smoke signifies fire a Rain-bowe showres palenese sickness Teares trouble and grief of mind of these Christ speaks Matth. 16.2 3. When it is evening ye say It will be fair weather for the skie is red and in the morning It will be foul weather to day for the skie is red and lowring Now these signes are sometimes as signes so also causes of the thing signified As the Sun beames in the dawning are a sign and also a cause of the day approaching The interposition of the Moon between us and the Sun and of the earth between the Sun and Moon foreseen in their motions are signs and causes of Eclipses Sometimes they are effects of the thing that they signifie As smoke is the effect of fire and paleness of diseases Some are barely signs and neither causes nor effects as the colour of the skie is no cause of rain but barely an indication that there are those watry vapours in the air that will dissolve themselves on the earth They may be effects of that which is the cause of the thing signified but not the effects of that which is a sign The Rain-bowe is an effect of that which is a cause of rain Rules for the right understanding of natural signs Remote causes are not signs Here we might lay down some rules or observations First Remote causes which have their effects at a great distance so that many things may interpose themselves as remoraes cannot be looked upon by any as signs When that book of common-prayer was imposed by authority upon Scotland upon counsel then over-much heeded it might have been easily concluded upon as a sign of troubles and dissensions in present there But no rational man could then have made it a prognostick of all those tragical stirs which in three Nations have already happened and we yet know not upon the flame kindled what may follow The spark then kindled might in probability have been quenched The Stars say our Stargazers have their influence upon mens bodies and by consequence indirectly upon the operations of their soules Hereupon by the posture of the Stars at mens birth they will conclude the trade of life in which men shall be employed the Arts that they shall profess the fortunes as the world calls them to which they shall be advanced and the very last period of their dayes But here so many things may interpose that the childs Genius supposedly thus disposed cannot sway all these things Parents friends wayes of Education thousands of obstacles and diversifications so intervene that no judgement can be given If more were granted then ever will be proved of the heavens influence on mens minds and bodies to incline or dispose them yet that of the Wise man would utterly spoyle all Predictions Eccles 9.11 The race is not to the swift nor the battel to the strong neither yet bread to the wise nor yet riches to men of understanding nor yet favour to men of skill but time and chance happeneth to them all Seeondly Partial causes in nature cannot be looked upon as signs Patrial causes are no signs but all must concurre that have any influence This if I do not mis-remember good Mr. Perkins doth set down in a similitude to this purpose The heat of an Hen sitting upon Eggs is the cause of a brood of young ones but suppose an Hen should sit on Eggs of divers kinds some of a Dove some of a Partridge some of a Phesant some of a Hawk some of a Kite who could now from the heat of the Hen give his judgement of what kind the birds should be that this heat would hatch would they not be different in kind according to the variety of subjects that this heat works upon If we see flint before us this is no sign of fire to be kindled unless we see steele with it nor yet flint and steele without tinder nor yet flint steele and tinder without a hand employed to strike fire all put together make up a sign and not otherwise To apply this to our purpose First Let it be granted that the heavens have their operations on mens bodies on earth no otherwise then the heat of the Hen hath for procreation of such a kind or the flint to the working of fire yet the heavens have their influence upon divers and diversified objects not diversified by their influence only but done to their hands
Chron. 30.18 19. The good Lord pardon every one that prepareth his heart to seek God the Lord God of his fathers though he be not cleansed according to the purification of the Sanctuary The answer of the Lord we have ver 20. The Lord hearkened to Hezekiah and healed the people which doth either imply that they were struck of God for their sin as was Abimelech his wife and maid servants and were healed by Hezekiahs prayer as they by Abrahams or else that by their sin they were in danger of Gods hand and by Hezekiahs prayer preserved so that enough hath been said for this distinction between a first and second right a fundamental right and priviledg of actual admission There may be a true right when yet there is a barre that stands in force SECT V. Proposition 4. AS the fundamental right to Sacraments must be grounded on the written Word of God so the barre to actuall admission must be written likewise Fundamental right and bar to actual admission must be both written None may be admitted without known right their visible Covenant-title must appear in such case a seal would be put to a blank and the Ordinance prophaned It was therefore provided that no uncircumcised person must eat of the Passeover Exod. 12.48 and none in Covenant in right that stand in any visible relation to God without a known barre may be kept back There must be a reason seen of their admission and a reason seen of their suspension The sin of those of Ephraim Manasseh Issachar and Zebulon was that they ate of the Passeover otherwise then was written There was that barre upon them that according to the written Word they were not in present to eat of it He that gives warranty to his people to come must also put in the exception against those that are to be denyed No Person no Church must take in or refuse by their own power this were to Lord it over Gods heritage and an high usurpation of a power not put into their hands Stewards in great houses are to take in and hold back from the family not at their own will but according to their Masters pleasure SECT VI. Proposition 5. THis right unto or barre put to detain from Sacramental participation is not alwayes explicite and expresse Right unto or barre to detain from Sacramental participation is not alwayes and explicite it is sufficient that by a clear and full consequence from Scripture it may be deduced The fundamental title is clear and before cleared It is the Covenant that gives a title the outward Covenant is a sufficient title to all outward priviledges prove a Covenant made kept or not kept if not renounced and then a right stands The right unto or barre put to present acceptance is often more disputable which the written Word in expresse termes or by necessary consequence must also determine When those were kept back by reason of a touch of a dead body from eating the Passeover Num. 9. there was no expresse precept in the Law for such prohibition of them but seeing such were to be kept out of the Campe Num. 5.2 and they must be clean that eat of the offerings of the Lord they were evidently included and it appears that they saw it And when the Lord himself names those barres which in after times should withhold an Israelite from the Passeover the instances which he gives are no sufficient explicite enumeration It is there said that he that is in a journey could not eat of the Passeover neither could he that was in prison or imployed in war or under sicknesse One legal uncleanness is there named which did defile there were other defilements as well as that which disabled an Israelite actual participation Num. 5.2 Onely those that inferre such consequences must be able to make good their consequences and take heed of framing principles of their own and then deduce consequences from them were this heeded the door would not be set so wide open as many complaine not yet kept too narrow as perhaps there may be cause of complaint according to many mens rules though according to their practice perhaps there is no such great cause of grievance perhaps the grievance may be found on the other hand SECT VII Proposition 6. Rules for actuall admission and bars put in Old Testament times were more explicite and expresse IN Old Testament-times Scripture-rules for mens actual admission and barres put to detain them were more explicitely delivered When men according to the rule of the Sanctuary were to be received or denyed as other circumstances of like nature were then more punctually delivered and fitted to the Churches minority which was taught as a child with a feskue In Gospel-times when there is more light and the Church hath attained further growth as it doth not need so we do not find such punctual direction The nature and use of the Sacraments being known together with the end of their institution general Scripture-rules observed that all is to be done to edification and the end of the Ministerial function compared for the perfecting of the Saints for the edifying of the body of Christ It may be more easily collected to whom the Sacraments may be of use and to whom they will be unserviceable SECT VIII Proposition 7. Admission unto the Sacrament of initiation is facile THere being a double Sacrament in the Church both in the Old and New Testament one for initiation into the Church visible the other for confirmation one in which it is sufficient having a due title to be passive and the other such in which we must be active Admission unto the Sacrament of initiation seems more facile whether it be of grown persons in the first plantation of Churches upon conversion from Gentilisme Judaisme or any other way distinct from Christianity or of infants that are confederate with their parents and though some lay it down as a Maxime Adultorum eadem est ratio utriusque There is the same reason for admission of men of years to either Sacrament yet it is but gratis dictum Neither any Scripture text nor solid argument drawn from thence doth evince it Lesse is expected in a childs entry into the School or a youths matriculation into the University then in the time of growth and further proficiency Professed Disciples are taken into the Church by Baptisme to learn but they must be proficients as shall appear before they are able to make improvement of the Supper For infants there can be no barre at all for their initiation There is no barre to the initiation of infants in confederation on with their Parents They that hold that Sacraments conferre grace non ponenti obicem that is upon all such that put no barre or obstacle to it do withall conclude and undenyably if they can make good their Position that all infants in Baptisme are regenerate seeing they put no actuall barre either by sin or
and takes to other objects that is to me sufficient Or will it follow that either the Eunuch did or must necessarily be presumed to understand upon that little acquaintance that it seems he yet had in the Gospel the whole of those choyce observations or can it be any way certainly collected that such a Confession that he made was accompanied with a present saving work But Mr. Baxter hath singularly engaged me to him quoting those Texts John 11.25 26 27. John 1.49 50. 1 Joh. 4.15 he addes Here is more then right to Baptisme Then a man may have right to Baptisme that is short of those great priviledges of dwelling in God and being born of God and I scarce know what to say more for my own opinion It further followes If you think as you seem by your answer to do that a man may assent to the truth of the Gospel with all his heart and yet be void of justifying faith you do not lightly erre It followes not I think from any thing that I have said that I am in any such opinion That Expression is in Philips words and I have told you he might require de bene esse that which is not necessary to the esse of Baptisme But in case I be in any so heavy an Error I am thus holpen out of it Though an unregenerate man may believe as many truths as the regenerate yet not with all his heart Christ saith Matth. 13. The Word hath not rooting in him It is then granted that he may believe all truths and that which is added to prove that he cannot believe them with his whole heart is not with me convincing The Word had not root not because they did not intirely from the heart assent to it But because they received it not in the love of it They received the light to inform their judgments not any thorow heat for the warmth of their affections There followes Doubtlesse whether or no the practical understanding do unavoidably determine the will yet God doth not sanctifie the understanding truly and leave the will unsanctified which must be said if the dogmatical faith that is the Intellectual assent of a wicked man be as strong as that of a true believer Here is suggested that I say that the Intellectual assent of a wicked man is as strong as that of a true believer I know not where I have said it or any thing that implies it It may be a true assent though not of that strength But if I had said it will it thence follow that God doth sanctifie the understanding truly and leave the will unsanctified I trow not Is every strong Intellectual assent sanctified is every Intellectual assent which is of equal strength with that in the regenerate truly sanctified Clearnesse of light commands assent to truths when corruption of affections will not suffer that at least pro hic nunc that the goodnesse or bestnesse if I may so say should be believed I believe it is as strong in the Devils as in any Regenerate man in the world I know not how it fares with some whom God may exercise more gently respective to temptations and Satans Buffettings I am sure that there are those that would sometimes freely give up all that is dear to them in the world to be as clear in some fundamental truths as Satan himself he doubtlesse injects Scruples where himself is without scruple I know some question whether there be any such thing as faith in divels notwithstanding James saith The Devils believe and tremble But certain it is there is an Intellectual assent to Divine truth in the Devils as we may see Matth. 8.29 Mark 3.11 Luk. 4.41 Acts 19.15 and yet there is no sanctification wrought And therefore though the wicked match the regenerate in assent in their understanding it will not follow that their understandings therefore are truly sanctified I am further referr'd to Dr. Downam against Mr. Pemble which is not in my hands and whether my answer be equal to silence as is in the close affirmed I must leave to the Reader to determine Advertisements given to Mr. Baxter touching his undertaking for Mr. Firmin IN a distinct Section Mr. Baxter lets us know how good a mind he had to have appeared in this cause for Mr. Firmin which wonderful change in him may well be my admiration All know that have looked into my Birth-priviledge that I delivered the same things there as in my Treatise of the Covenant I have asserted against Mr. Firmin and that past with Mr. Baxter if reports have not deceived me with good approbation I communicated to him a considerable part of my defence of it against Mr. T. his letter in Manuscripts and I blush not to tell the Reader that he applauded it And besides what I have produced already out of him I have a witnesse of reverend esteem that he hath said that I had given him in discourse full satisfaction of the title of unregenerate men or some phrase parâ—llell to Sacraments But in case upon change of judgment he will appear for Mr. Firmin in this particular and that meerly as he sayes in love of the truth least the reputation of man should cloud it and in love to the Church and the lustre of the Christian name lest this fearful gap should let in that pollution that may make Christianity seem no better then the other Religions of the world Further explaining himself For I fear this loose doctrine so he is pleased to call it of Baptisme will do more to the pollution of the Church then others loose doctrine of the Lords Supper or as much If upon these specious pretences he hath still a mind to it I shall crave leave to offer some words by way of advice to him First To reconcile himself to Mr. F. they being as yet so far from agreement either in judgment or in practice both of them are gone out of the road of the Reformed Churches but Mr. Baxters friend for whom he is about to undertake as to his judgment is yet in the lower form when he is in the upper Mr. F. requires not truth of grace to make a visible Church-member but declares himself very largely against it he requires not truth of grace in a parent to entitle his child in the right of Baptisme It is enough with him that he be a man of knowledge and free from scandal which he well knowes to be the case of many in unregeneration And though Mr. Baxter is thus gone beyond him in judgment yet he sits down far short of him in practice and sayes that we are bound to baptize all those that make an outward profession and consequently their children when Mr. F. upon tender conscienciously refuses many of them Mr. F. and I are as I suppose upon neerer terms of accord then Mr. F. and Mr. Baxter both of us agreeing that unregenerate men have their title and a faith that is short of justifying may
whatsoever is charged but enquire further what they deliver of the efficacy of it Thomas Aquinas Part 3. quaest 73. art 3. putting differences between Baptisme and the Lords Supper assignes this for one Baptisme is the beginning of spiritual life and the entrance of the Sacraments The Eucharist is the consummation of spiritual life and the end of all Sacraments And further The receiving of Baptisme is necessary to begin spiritual life The receiving of the Eucharist is necessary for the consummation of it The Councell of Florence quoted by Suarez disput 7. Quaest 62. saith By Baptisme we are spiritually born again and are nourished by the Divine Alimony of the Eucharist Suarez disput 63. Quaest 79. laies down this conclusion This Sacrament is not instituted per se to conferre the first grace and confirmes it by multiplicity of Authors and the Churches custome who never used to give the Sacrament unlesse it be to those whom she believes to be cleansed from sin by Baptisme or penance And thus argues it by reason The Sacrament saith he doth not suppose the effect that it serves to work but this Sacrament doth suppose the man to be just that receives it 2. Meat saith he is not ordayned of it self to quicken or raise the dead but to nourish or strengthen a man already alive But this Sacrament is instituted as meat and drink And though he after affirmes that this Sacrament sometimes and as by accident conferres the first grace which according to his principles he hath much a do to make out yet he acknowledges that many and grave Divines held the contrary quoting Gabriel Alensis Bonaventure and Major And their distinction is well enough known That as a Sacrifice offered it takes away sin but as a Sacrament received it onely nourishes and increases spiritual life By all which it appeares how farre those of that part are from assent to this position and no marvell when they will hold their communicants in that ignorance as to look after no more then consecration to inquire nothing into the institution The way of the Sacraments work as a visible Word as a demonstrative sign in the aggravation of sin and tender of pardon is to them a mystery As for the other part of the charge Nor oppose the unanimous judgement of Protestant Writers which is the opposition of the unanimous judgement of Protestant Authors I know many are produced speaking of the Sacraments as no causes of spiritual life or vessels to convey it but as seales and testimonies of Gods good will towards us To which I fully subscribe as after shall God willing appear But how farre most of them come short when they are throughly examined of that position which is laid down as their opinion That they are appointed to seal unto a man that saving interest in Christ and the Covenant of grace that he hath already may easily be demonstrated First That position hath that confusion in it that many of them will not own and is inconsistent almost with all their principles This makes interest in the Covenant of grace and interest in Christ which is understood of interest as a lively member the same when it is well known that they make Covenant-interest farre more large then interest in Christ see Mr. Cobbet in his Vindication pag. 48. quoting not alone Tertullian Cyprian Gregory Nazianzen Jerome Austin among the Ancient but also Amesius Chamier Luther Calvin Beza Pareus Peter Martyr Bucer Melanchton Mr. Philpot for this latitude of the Covenant Pareus who is not looked upon as any dissenting man from the rest of his brethren speaks fully When it was objected that all Israel was not in Covenant with God nor all the infants of Christians because some among them were and are reprobates he answeres To be in Covenant or to have interest in it is taken two waies either according to the right of Covenant or the benefit of it He is in Covenant that either obtaines the benefits of the Covenant which are pardon of sin Adoption regeneration salvation or which hath onely the right or outward symbole of the Covenant He applies his distinction that that proposition That no reprobate is in Covenant with God is onely true of the benefits of the Covenant which heretofore were and still are peculiar to the Elect but being understood of the right and outward symbole of the Covenant it is to be denyed for that indifferently belongs to all that are born in the Church among which many are reprobates as the event doth demonstrate neither is it lawful for the Church to exclude any that by their own impiety do not exclude themselves which Israelites in times past did and Apostatizing Christians now do to their greater damnation whether they be of those that by a true faith receive the benefits of the Covenant or whether they be those that remain hypocrites All of his practice must necessarily be of his judgement unless we believe that their practice militates against their principles And that this is the practise of the reformed Churches in general needs not to be shewn Secondly They cannot then baptize any upon the account of Covenant-holinesse but onely holinesse of regeneration This is plain If the right be theirs alone that have their interest as in Covenant so also in Christ onely these must be baptized or else we must baptize without right And that they do not onely baptize but dispute for Baptisme upon a bare Covenant-interest without any further title is manifest Thirdly This stands not with that which they hold concerning the way of the Sacraments sealing which according to them can be no evidence that he does believe as some assert evidences of faith must be in the soul and not in the Sacrament neither doth it absolutely make up to the soul the benefit of the Covenant then no man without infallible revelation such as it seems Ananias had concerning Paul could administer it It seals the benefits of the Covenant upon Gods terms and propositions which when the soul makes good there is Gods seal for performance That this is the judgement of Protestant Divines I have elsewhere declared Treatise of the Covenant pag. 35 36. so that their Doctrine of the Sacraments doth not oppose the position delivered Hitherto I have considered some generall charges against this position now I must look into some Arguments in form produced against it Several particular arguments answered First Sacraments say some are signes as appears in their definition and not causes of what they signifie signes declaring and shewing that we have Faith in Christ remission of sin by him and union with him To let that slip passe making them no causes because they are signes as though no signe were a cause of the thing signified This to me is as strange as new that Sacramental signes declare and shew that we have faith and remission of sins The Sacrament now in question is a signe of the body and blood of Christ
over to any such powers But exclusion from and admission to other Ordinances of eminent height and excellency to which all are not promiscuously admitted as private Fasts and doubtful disputations Matth. 9. Rom. 14. is left to prudence and not to the exercise of any juridick power Ergo. Reason 10 Lastly If this be an act of jurisdiction to admit to the Sacrament and keep off from it then there must be a Law of Jesus Christ in it a Gospel-Ordinance for it This is plain Jesus Christ hath not left to his Officers an arbitrary Goverment he hath left no Commission to rule at pleasure as they are to speak so they are to act according to his will and pleasure known But no such Law no such Ordinance of Jesus Christ is found in Scriptures A command we have in the Gospel for administration of Sacraments as well Baptisme as the Lords Supper and Covenant-interest is our Directory as you have heard to lead us to those that have fundamental interest in them But concerning exclusion of any thus enrighted there is nothing by way of Ordinance written Therefore this can be no act of jurisdiction The Assumption is that which many will question It lyes upon them then to quote this Law to make known this Ordinance of Jesus Christ But instead of that I shall shew upon what grounds it yet appears to me that there is none at all If any such be it is either in plain and full words exprest such as the Law given to Israel to put out of the Camp every leper and every one that hath an issue or is defiled by the dead Numb 5.1 2. or else it must be such as is deduced by fair consequence from the nature and use of the Sacrament or preparation to it or benefit received by it That there is no Ordinance in such plain full words needs not to be doubted In all that enquiry into this so much controverted businesse it would have been long since produced In case it be deduced from any such consequence as hath been spoken it will hardly be made good to be an instituted Law or constituted Ordinance Mr. Firmin hath well excepted against the proof of institutions by syllogismes though to his great disadvantage in that dispute of a Church-Covenant Where there is an Ordinance in power as there was for exclusion from the Passeover proof may be made up by consequence for the latitude to discern who those be that are within the verge of it and concerned in it But consequences will hardly prove the enacting and instituting of it I shall be willing to gratifie Mr. Tombs in this that parity of reason will set up no institution A good cause is wronged when Ordinances of this nature are pretended and cannot be produced and on the other hand when a Ministeriall prudence in the Stewards of Christ is undervalued which might supply it Let it be granted that there is no Ordinance to debar an unexcommunicated man from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper yet a promiscuous admission will not follow when the end and use of the Sacrament is considered it will appear to them that have the care and charge about it that some are not in a present aptitude for it There is command for the preaching of the Word in a way to edification 1 Cor. 143 12. yet the particular way of application suitable to mens capacities so as to give milk to babes and children and strong meat to those of growth that have their senses exercised to discern between good and evil is not done by any vertue of any specifick particular institution but the Ministers prudence VVhich prudence was exercised by Paul 1 Cor. 3.1 2. Heb. 5.12 by Christ himself Joh. 16 12. There is no Ordinance for admission to or exclusion from private Fasts or punctual direction who are to be called and received or who past by yet our Saviour Christ from the high nature of the duty concludes that it is not for novices in the faith And as it is a point of prudence not to put a piece of new cloth in an old garment unwrought cloth some understand there will be a double inconvenience the weaknesse of the one will not bear the strength of the other and so the rent that was before will be made greater and the whole garment become uncomely and unsuitable nor yet to put new wine which is windy and working into old bottles the weaknesse of such a vessel being not able to bear it so neither had it been a point of prudence in our Saviour Christ to have put such an austere discipline upon the necks of his newly entred disciples Matth. 7.6 vindicated If any shall object that Text Matth. 7.6 Give not that which is holy unto dogs neither cast ye pearles before swine as I know it is produced as an Ordinance for the withholding of this Sacrament from those that are ignorant and scandalous I shall desire the Reader for answer to take it into consideration whether it be not more agreeable to the Text to make it an exhortation to an holy prudential circumspection in the dispensation of holy things in general whether in a private or a publick way then to make it a distinct peculiar Ordinance about any one piece or part of worship Making it a peculiar Ordinance we shall run our selves upon inextricable difficulties Our Saviour laying it down in an indefinite way All whatsoever that is holy must there be understood and pearles and holy things are the same one being exegetical of the other holy things excelling other things as far as pearles excel acorns And by doggs and swine both which were unclean in the Law we must understand all that Scripture comprehends under those names they are both put for one 2 Pet. 1.21 and so the result of all is that no person in visible uncleannesse must taste of any thing that is holy From which it followes that as Christ thought it not fit at that present to gratifie a Heathen with a miracle when he said It is not meet to take the childrens bread and cast it unto doggs Matth. 15.26 So it will at no time be meet or lawfull to preach the Gospel to any heathen or impenitent and unclean Christian they being no other then dogs or swine and the Gospel the most precious of holy pearles but understanding it as an exhortation to Christian prudence and observing the reason added lest they trample them under feet and turn again and rent you these absurdities and snares will be avoided and the result of all will be onely this that the holy things of God and rich Gospel-pearles are not to be communicated where there is no possible expectation of doing good But all the issue of it will evidently be danger to him that doth impart them and all scorn and contempt of the holy things themselve which was the Apostles way of dealing when the Jewes were filled with envy contradicting and blaspheming Act. 13. and is
them making them to think that this is all that can be said for them Mr. Fuller in his history of holy warre lib 3. cap. 20. quoting out of Reinerius a charge against the Albigenses that they gave no reverence to holy places answers It is true And then gives in this for a reason because most in that age ran riot in adoring of Churches as if some inherent holinesse was ceiled to their roof or plaistered to their walls yea such as might more ingratiate with God the persons and prayers of people there assembled Let men take heed that they raise not Sacraments above the honour that Scripture gives them with like successe as these did places of publick holy assemblies a good cause hath not a greater adversary then a weak argument taken up in the defence of it This argument I confesse had it ground to stand upon might be of force for the battery of Anabaptisme but having no Scripture-bottome it presently falls before any adversary and Anabaptisme gathers strength by the fall of it 3. As to the argument it self tending to evince the uselessenesse of infant-Baptisme it may very fitly be parallelled with that Objection made against Pauls doctrine Rom. 3.1 when he had made it his great businesse to set circumcision on its right bottom and declared that it was not efficacious in the way that they expected and that it was without use for salvation unlesse it were answered with the Circumcision of the heart an objection presently is raised What profit is there then of Circumcision so these likewise when Sacraments are not raised to that height as the Schoolmen have advanced them to be instruments of conveyance of grace by the work done and as they expect from them they presently demand what profit And affirm as to infants at least that they are uselesse 4. That answer which Paul gives to his Questionists that demanded what profit is there of Circumcision I give to those that demand what profit is there of infant-Baptisme Having asserted in general Much every way he answers more punctually instancing in one eminent priviledge that virtually comprized all the external priviledges enjoyned by Israel as Church-members chiefly that to them were committed the Oracles of God It was said before that these priviledges in all Sacraments are either actually conferred or infallibly evidenced In Baptisme a true title is legally conferred Upon account of our baptisme we have an orderly and legall right and title to all succeeding Church-priviledges as the Jewes had done upon account of their Circumcision though there be not alwayes an aptitude for actual admission to them or improvement of them Upon this ground infants have 1. Their share and interest in all the prayers made for the Church collectively even in all that are preferred to God by his people for Zion and Jerusalem This was the duty of every son of Zion Psal 122.6 This was the faithfulls practice Psal 51.18 and in these infants as Church-members had their interest on this account infants were brought to Christ Priviledges following upon infant-baptisme That he might put his hands upon them and pray Matth. 19.13 2. They have their share in the blessings of the Church we see with what solemnity it was to be done Num. 6.22 c. The Lord spake unto Moses saying Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons saying On this wise ye shall blesse the children of Israel saying unto them The Lord blesse thee and keep thee c. and they shall put my Name upon the children of Israel and I will blesse them Infants had their share here and upon this account infants were blessed of Christ Mar. 10.16 3. Their relation to God by virtue of Covenant-interest is hereby evidenced and ratified How transcendent a priviledge this is to have the Lord for our God we see Psal 144.15 having reckoned up several mercies the Psalmist concludes Happy is the people that is in such a case yea happy is that people whose God is the Lord This is the priviledge of every infant that upon Covenant title is baptized God will not suffer their enemies to passe without vengeance As it was an acceptable work to dash the infants of Babylon against the stones Psal 137.9 being a seed growing up against God so it is as displeasing and provoking to harme these that are a seed dedicated unto and growing up for God 4. Baptisme teaches them to know as soon as they are of capacity to learn to whom they belong what Master they are to serve and in what School they are to be trained 5. A necessity is seen to get the knowledge of Christ and timely to walk in his wayes 6. A delight is wrought in them towards those in whose communion they are bred and that own them as theirs whereas being debarred in childhood from this society and denyed this badge it is the way to bring them to maligne them each one is apt to love those of his owne fraternity and on the contrary to study the opposition of others 7. The aggravation of their sin presently rings in their ears by reason of the favour they receive from God the society into which they are incorporated when their conversation doth not in some measure answer their profession 8. Parents here see a strong engagement to bring them up for Christ whom they have thus dedicated to him and put into the fellowship of those who are his Saints and members When they have brought forth children unto God they see their sin heightned in giving them to Moloch or any other besides God and there is no example of any believing parent in all the Scripture bringing up a child for Covenant but in Covenant with the Lord. These alone though more might be added might stop the mouthes of all that insultingly move this question 5. That which in present does not but hereafter may work upon the understanding is not vain and uselesse when it is done That was not vain which Christ did to Peter Joh. 13.17 when he said unto him What I do thou knowest not now but thou shalt know hereafter 6. Seals of purchases taken in infants names are of use to infants though during infancy they know not how to make actual improvement themselves of them If Baptisme hath its actual use in behalf of infants whilest infants as hath been shewed and remains with them to be improved by their understanding and faith when they come to maturity it cannot be thought to be vain and uselesse SECT IV. A Corollary from the former doctrine THen it followes by way of necessary Corollary from that which hath been said Answer to Sacramental engagementsâ— ncessary to salvation that unlesse the soul answer to Sacramental engagements Sacraments are not efficacious for salvation to the receivers This is a clear result from that which hath been said and is fully delivered by the Apostle 1 Pet. 3.21 speaking of the Arke of Noah wherein few that is eight souls were saved by water he
sets himself professedly against this use of Sacraments and will not have them to serve by way of seal for confirmation of our faith in particular And this he endeavours with five several Arguments SECT II. Objections against the former doctrine 1. IF Sacraments confirm our faith by way of seal or after the Object 1 manner of miracles then Sacraments must be better known and more efficacious to perswade to Faith than the Word But nothing can be more efficacious for perswasion than the Word of God and experience tells us that words are better understood than dumb signes and Sacraments compared to the Word are as dumb signes Answ 1. The assumption here should have been Nohting is Answ 1 either more easily known or more eminently efficacious than the Word But the former is left out lest it should give check to their doctrine of obscurity of Scriptures and instead of making the Word easily intelligible he contents himself to say that it is more intelligible than nods or dumb shews when yet dumb signs or such nods are better known and more easily understood as we have experience sufficient than the Word of God or any other word whatsoever in an unknown language 2. If this Argument be of force then nothing else in the Answ 2 world but the bare Word of promise revealed in Scripture is any way serviceable for more full assurance of the thing given in promise Not onely Gideons Ezekiah's and Ahaz his signs but the oath also made to Abraham was superfluous All these had the Word of God and unlesse the signs given them and the oath made to them were more efficacious then the Word which as he sayes nothing is according to him they are all superfluous 3. Comparison is not to be made between the Word and Answ 3 Sacraments whether of those considered apart is more efficacious Then the preheminence is to be given to the Word as Bellarmine sayes Luther acknowledgeth but enquiry is to be made whether the Word together with Sacraments annext to it be not more efficacious by reason of our weaknesse and inclinations to diffidence than the Word without any such visible ratification Nothing can be more firm than the promise of God seeing God cannot lye Tit. 1.2 His Oath is no more valid then his Word yet God willing more abundantly to shew unto the heires of promise the immutability of his counsel confirm'd it by an oath That by two immutable things in which it was impossible for God to lye we might have strong consolation Object 2 2. The nature of Sacraments cannot any where be better understood than from his words that is the authour of them But in the Holy Scriptures they are no where called seales of Promises but instruments of Justification Ergo. Answ 1 Answ 1. If this Proposition stand then some at least of the Sacraments of Rome and most of their Sacramentals must fall seeing by Thomas Aquinas his acknowledgment they are not to be found in Scriptures Answ 2 2. There is nothing more false then this assumption as abundantly hath been declared and the Text in hand is a sufficient witnesse Object 3 3. If Sacraments be onely seales of the promise of grace then either they are superfluous or else of very slender use and benefit for we have more Testimonies far more efficacious Good works are better signes and testimonies of righteousnesse obtained then washing with water or taking of the Eucharist which may be received Hypocritically Answ 1 Answ 1. If this Argument be of any force then wheresoever there is one witnesse to speak in any cause all the other are vain and superfluous and so that of the Apostle will fall to the ground At the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established Answ 2 2. It is well that works are made a witnesse of assurance then this way at least assurance may be had which he and his party are wont to deny Answ 3 3. Works are not Testimonies instituted of God for this end as Amesius observes but of their own nature they evidence our fitnesse for glory and as fruits of our faith as Whitaker speaks And those which Bellarmine uses to make the best of works Almes Fasting and Prayer may be hypocritically performed likewise Answ 4 4. This witnesse or seal of Sacraments is not a distinct witnesse or seal from that which the Jesuit here produces but stands in co-ordination with it or rather in subordination to it It is upon the answer of a good conscience not otherwise that Sacraments give this witnesse 4. If Sacraments seal by way of particular application for support Object 4 Faith then it is in vain to baptize Infants But Lutherans are wholly for Infant-baptisme Ans 1. We may learn of Bellarmine that Protestants at least Answ 1 think that this doctrine and Infant-baptisme will well stand together 2. The Apostle was certainly able to have given a satisfying Answ 2 answer to this Objection seeing he tells us that Circumcision was a seal of the righteousnesse of Faith and yet himself was circumcised the eighth day Phil. 3.5 It is of equal strength against Infant-circumcision as against baptisme 5. If Sacraments be seales of grace which in particular is conferred Object 5 upon any then oftentimes they are false viz. when the Sacrament is given to a man who pretends to believe and indeed doth not believe and so it were unlawful to baptize any lest we should cause God to give witnesse to a lye for we certainly know of none whether they believe truly or onely pretend it Ans Our Adversary here prevents us Answ and puts an answer into our mouthes Perhaps saith he they will say That the Sacrament is a seal or testimony of grace not absolutely but if he that doth receive the Sacrament do believe the promise And this indeed is their Answer as out of Amesius Whitaker Vorstius Pareus Dr. Reynolds Mr. Rutherford I have shewn to which may be added that full Testimony out of Dr. Slater before mentioned As for those that will have the Covenant to be absolute and the seales to be put without any respect had to any condition against the full stream of Protestant Writers I shall desire them to help us to any other satisfying answer to this Argument I must confesse that in case I be once convinced that the work of Sacraments is to ratifie Gods promise in an absolute way as the Rainbowe do's that God will no more destroy the World by water without respect had to any condition at all And that a seal is put to a blank in case any unregenerate person be baptized or admitted to the Lords Table I must either be holpen with further light than I can yet see or else I think I shall never more adventure upon Baptisme or the Lords Supper And Bellarmine supposing that this will be our answer can bring nothing more to avoid 〈◊〉 then two speeches of Luther and one of Melancton nothing at all to
speaking of agenda and not credenda and that here should be any rule de agendis but the precept determining of duty or that the promise There is a righteousness in an imperfect conformity to the Law or any act that goes along with the promise which what it means I cannot imagine should be any rule of our actions I never heard but from your mouth And for your inference That all our Actions and Habits comming short of the precept determining of duty no man therefore hath a righteousness consisting in this conformity I should think all but your self would take to be a Non sequitur There is a righteousness in conformity to the precept which yet fals short of a full and perfect conformity Look I pray you upon Zacharie and Elizabeth that have this praise in the Gospel that they were both righteous before God and by what rule this righteousness had its denomination let the Text be consulted If walking in all the ordinances and commandements of God blameless give men the denomination of righteousness then there is a righteousness in conformity to the precept But walking in all the commandments and ordinances of God denominates men righteous Ergo doing righteousness denominates righteous He that doth righteousness is righteous 1 John 4.7 And what should be the rule of doing but the precept I cannot imagine If we break the precept when we sin the precept is our rule but we break the precept when we sin 1 John 5.4 Abel hath often that Testimony to be righteous and that because his works were righteous 1 John 3.12 And so Lot in like manner 2 Pet. 2.8 there is a righteousness then in conformity to the Law of works though not to the covenant of works Zachary saies We are redeemed to serve without fear in holiness and righteousness before God B. concedimus renatos diligere deum proximum sed imperfectè diligere per consequens imperfectè legem implere Luk. 1.74 75. And this righteousness is not without its rule and hath no other rule then that which Zacharies righteousness had in the sixth verse of the same Chapter There is an imperfect fulfilling of the Law and so an imperfect righteousness in conformity to it b We grant saith Davenant that the regenerate love God and their neighbour but they love imperfectly and by consequence they fulfil the Law imperfectly de Justit actuali p. 551. And if you acknowledge an imperfection in Pauls frame as you say you do you then acknowledge an imperfect fulfilling of the Law and an imperfect conformity to the Law It is in reference to the Law that he had his imperfections and gradual inconformity He delights he saies in the Law in the inward man but sees an opposite power drawing him aside and he quotes the precept and not the promise annex'd Thou shalt not covet to which in such imperfection he conformed I added in my Treatise Whereas a charge of ignorance is laid even upon learned Teachers that commonly understand the word Righteousness and Righteous as it refers to the old Rule I profess my self to have little of their learning but I am wholly theirs in this ignorance I know no other Rule but the old Rule the Rule of the Moral Law that is with me a Rule a perfect Rule and the only Rule Here you first complain of want of candor in me in not repeating all that you spoke and if is but this once that I know that I am thus charged And the sense I think is full in those words that I do set down Secondly you go about to clear your self from some aspersions concerning harsh speeches used by you against learned Divines in which you say you speak not to me but to others standing thus charged by them and not by me In which I am well content that you should stand as right in your Readers eyes as you can desire and shall forbear to rake further into that ulcer Thirdly you take me to task and are content to put my name at length As for Mr. Blake's profession that he hath little of their learning but is wholly theirs in this ignorance I did still think otherwise of him and durst not to have describ'd him But yet my acquaintance with him is not so great as that I should pretend to know him better then he knows himself and I dare not judge but he speaks as he thinks Good Sir say it over again that it may be known from an hand of your eminence that I say my learning is little and that I speak it not more modestly then truly neither do you know how much I suffer that it is no more Yet least the cause in which I appear should suffer with me or rather in me let me assume so much boldnesse as to tell you that I yet think that that little which through grace I have obtained may serve to satisfie those arguments which this piece of yours holds forth against me I have been often confounded with your multitude but never perceived my self shatter'd by your strength not that my learning is equall with yours I know my self better then to enter such comparisons but your cause is unequall to mine Your advantage is not so great against me in the greatnesse of your abilities as mine against you in the goodnesse of the cause It would often go ill with a good cause if the most able Advocates should not sometimes be worsted in the presence of impartiall Judges Should you and I make exchange So that I were to appear in the cause that you maintain and you in that which I defend a weaker then you would easily do that which I think you have not yet done But your willingnesse is observable to take a hint from my mouth to strip me of all the learning of these learned men charged with intolerable ignorance and leave their ignorance only with me as the whole you are willing to allow me Yet in the next place you engage me to you in your endeavours to help me out of my ignorance in this Let me be hold to shew him say you part of that which he sayth he is wholly ignorant of That our personall inherent Righteousnesse is not denominated from the old Law or Covenant as if we were called righteous besides our imputed Righteousness only because our Sanctification and good works have some imperfect agreement to the Law of works But I were ignorant indeed if you could surprize me with your confounding of these terms Law and Covenant Those two I take much to differ In your Aphorisms where you think you speak most full and here complain that I omitted somewhat of that which you there said you have the word Law and the word Rule But I hear not of the word Covenant at all But here Law and Covenant are confounded as though every Law were a Covenant and every Covenant a Law And I were yet more in ignorance if I should let your Syllogisms pass