active and passive is the meritorious cause of salvation and of all the means conducting thereunto So Colos 1.14 We have redemption through his bloud even the forgiveness of sins And 1 John 1.7 The bloud of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin And 1 Pet. 1.18 19. Knowing that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things as silver and gold from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers but with the precious bloud of Christ as of a lamb without blemish and without spot with many such like Texts Thirdly Faith is the instrumental cause that is to say the instrument whereby we receive Christ and apply his merits to us so John 1.12 As many as received him to them he gave power to become the sons of God even to them that believe on his name And Ephes 3.17 The Apostle saith that Christ dwells in our hearts by faith And hence it is our righteousnesse is called both the righteousness of faith Rom. 10.6 And the righteousnesse which is by faith Heb. 11.7 And the righteousnesse which is of God by faith Phil. 3.9 Fourthly and lastly Vocation and Justification and Sanctification and good works and eternal life and salvation are the joynt fruits and effects of the aforenamed causes successively following one another Vocacion Justification and Sanctification and good works are the first fruits and effects of the foresaid causes brought forth here in this life as numerous Texts of Scripture testifie which I need not recite because they are familiarly known and because I have mentioned divers of them formerly And Eternal Life and Salvation is the last fruit the consummation and ultimate end of all as it 's very often taught and testified Rom. 6.22 Being made free from sin and become servants to God ye have your fruit unto heliness and the end everlasting life And 1 Pet. 1.9 Receiving the end of your faith even the salvation of your souls These are the links of the golden chain of salvation and the order of the causes thereof as they are annexed and held forth to us in the word of God And in Rom. 8.30 they are summed up together though in fewer words Whom he did predestinate saith the Apostle them he also called and whom he called them he also justified and whom he justified them he also glorified And hence is Mr. Haggar's grosse error in his concatenation of the causes of salvation detected and confuted In that he makes sanctification and good works causes of salvation which are but fruits and effects of God's election and the merits of Christ apprehended by faith for they go before salvation only as necessary antecedents and as the appointed way to lead us to salvation and as preparatives for Heaven as hath been already declared but not as causes thereof 1. They are Via regnâ— but not causa regnandi So that as the way to any place is not the cause that brings any man to it though he must needs passe through the way to come to that place but the cause of his coming to it is his own will and motion So sanctification and good works though they be necessary antecedents to salvation so that we cannot passe to Heaven but through them yet they are not the causes which brings us thither but the causes thereof are the mercies of God and the merits of Christ apprehended by Faith And so I end this Controversie If now I have not untied the Gordian knots of these long debated Controversies so fully and openly as to give satisfaction to all whose thoughts have been formerly puzzled about them as I believe I shall not yet my labour will not be wholly lost in these regards First Because I have hereby declared my willingnesse to do the Church service to my power by putting my hand to the supportation of the truth of the gospel which these stormy times have so impetuously and vehemently shaken Secondly Because what I have delivered may happily give satisfaction to some and let them loose out of the briers of their hesitation that were doubtful before what opinion to incline to Thirdly Because this Essay may happily be an occasion to invite and induce some more Logical and Learned pen to publish a more Scholastick and plenary solution of them The fifth Controversie About Original sin THat I may the more fully discover and confute this error I will unfold these four points about the sin of our natures the sin wherein we are conceived and born which therefore all Orthodox Divines have fitly and properly called Original Sin First I will render a reason of the epithete why it is called Original Sin Secondly I will give a definition of the Sin what is Thirdly I will alledge some of the evident proofs of Scripture for the justification of it Fourthly I will frame some irrefragable and convincing arguments drawn out of Scripture to prove it by necessary and undeniable consequence The first Point opened THe sinful corruption or corrupt disposition of man's nature from the womb hath many epithetes or names given unto it in Scripture which denote and declare that it hath its original and beginning with man's conception and birth and therefore is fitly and properly termed Original Sin and so ever hath been for above this thousand years by all sound and learned Divines both ancient and modern For though it be not in terminis in these very words so called in Scripture yet hath it divers other epithetes and names there given it which are consignificant and import and imply the same sense and meaning with these words Original Sin amongst which take notice of these Rom. 6.6 It 's called The old man and the body of sin 1 Cor. 5.7 It 's termed The old leaven Rom. 7.17 The sin that dwelleth in us Rom. 7.23 The law in our members Rom. 7.24 The body of death Gal. 5.16 The lusts of the flesh Jam. 1.14 A man 's own lust In which Text in the next words following it is punctually distinguished from all actual sins as being expresly affirmed to be the procreant cause of all actual sin for the cause and the effects cannot be one and the same The second Point opened what original sin is ORiginal sin is a pravity vitiosity or vitious habit or corrupt disposition of man's nature from his first conception as a just punishment of all mens sin in Adam whereby they are born the children of wrath and become subject to death both of body and soul and also become prone to commit all actual sins Or thus Original sin is a pravity of man's nature from his first conception whereby he seems to be prone to all sin as a just punishment of Adam's sin or transgression whereof all men are guilty and for which all men are exposed and subjected to death both corporal and eternal Both these definitions have one and the same sense And from them ye may observe that there be three things in Original Sin or three parts of it The first
We read in the Book of Exodus that when God commanded the Israelites to contribute to the building of the Tabernacle Moses was directed to take their offerings that gave them willingly with their (b) Exod. 25.2 hearts This made David give this charge to his son Solomon And thou Solomon my son know thou the God of thy father and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing (c) 1 Chro. 28.9 mind And himself to promise God to sacrifice freely unto (d) Psal 54.6 him And to professe his delight in his (e) Psal 119.143 commandements This is oft required also elsewhere in the word of God If ye be willing and obedient saith the Lord ye shall eat the good of the (a) Isa 1.19 Land And God loves a cheerful giver saith the (b) 2 Cor. 9.9 Apostle Fourthly and lastly Obedience must be constant continued unto the end without giving over or it 's frustrate and lost so saith our Saviour No man having put his hand to the Plough and looking back is fit for the Kingdom of (c) Luke 9.62 God For the righteous bring forth fruit in old (d) Psal 92.14 age Hence are thâ—se and many such like sentences of Scripture Blessed are they that keep judgement and do righteousnesse at all (e) Psal 106.3 times And He that shall endure to the end the same shall be (f) Mat. 24.13 saved And We are delivered out of the hands of our enemies that we might serve God without fear in holiness and righteousnesse before him all the days of our (g) Luke 1.74 75. life I will close up all with that exhortation of S. Paul to the Corinthians Therefore my beloved brethren be we stedfast unmoveable always abounding in the work of the Lord and so our labour shall not be in vain in the (h) 1 Cor. 15.58 Lord. So be it FINIS A DISCUSSION AND DECISSION OF SOME GREAT CONTROVERSIES IN RELIGION BEING An Antidote against some Erroneous Pamphlets Published of late to the suppression of God's Truth The Contents whereof followeth in the next Page By THO. GERY B.D. and Rector of Barwell in Leicestershire Beloved believe not every spirit but try the spirits whether they are of God because many false Prophets are gone out into the world 1 John 4.1 LONDON Printed for N. Webb and W. Grantham 1657. The Contents 1. Controversie About God's election of men to eternall life and salvation whether or no it be grounded upon the fore-sight of their faith and obedience 2. Controversie About the universality of Christ's Redemption 3. Controversie About the power of Man's free-will 4. Controversie About the Merit of good works 5. Controversie About Original sin 6. Controversie About Tithes A Preface to the Reader HAving a Pamplet accidentally put into my hands twisted of inconsequences incongruities and misapplications and depravations of holy Scripture entituled The order of causes Of God's foreknowledge election and predestination and of mans salvation or damnation I thought I might do a charitable work to detect the impostures of it Especially considering that it had gotten some entertainment with some persons within mine own charge and cure For albeit there be little hope of prevailing with these false teachers in these times especially which have so long connived at their erroneous and seditious courses to renounce their errors though never so fairly and fully confuted as who have resolved to hold the conclusion whether the premises be true or false which every Novice in Logick knows to be an absurdity to be hissed at yet may this detection of their falcies in some measure prevent the further diffusion and spreading of their pernicious errors which is the fole end wherefore these plain ensuing lines were hastily compiled and penned And in this regard the courteous Reader is intreated to vouchsafe a candid and benevolent construction of them as which upon more mature deliberation might either have been kept private or appearing in publique might happily have been clad in a more sightly dresse which is the humble request of A Friend and Servant to all that follow the truth in love THOMAS GERY IT hath ever been the artifice and deceitfull dealing of Hereticks to pick out some such Texts of Scripture wherewith to cloak their errors as by their false interpretation of them in not comparing them with other Texts of Scripture treating of the same subject might afford some colour and countenance unto them Thus the old Serpent the first deviser of this fallacy dealt with our blessed Saviour when he tempted him in the Wildernesse he alledged a piece of Scripture out of Psalm 91.11 where it 's said He shall give his Angels charge over thee to keep thee and skips over the next words in all thy ways and so goeth to the 12. verse as knowing that the words which he left out would quite alter the Text from that purpose for which he alledged the same And thus deal the Heretical Sectaries and Separatists that are of late started up They alledge some sayings of Scripture which considered by themselves without any reference had to other Texts of Scripture which afford light to the right meaning of them seem at the first superficial view of them to speak something for them about some of their erroneous Tenets whereas compared with other sayings of Scripture where the same point is more fully and plainly expressed they make nothing at all for proof of that for which they are alledged as shall be discovered in some particulars in this ensuing Treatise Amongst a Fardle of their palpable and prodigious Errors some whereof are utterly unworthy the refutation being manifest contradictions of holy Scripture As their denial of Faith to be the gift of God which I have heard to proceed out of the mouth of divers of no small esteem amongst them with incredible impudence I have here undertaken the confutation of these six of which some are Popish which I find in the fornamed book and in another which I shall hereafter mention 1. They affirm That God's election of men to salvation is from his fore-sight of their Faith and Obedience Or as some of them phrase it from his fore-sight of their Sanctification and Good Works 2. That Christ's Redemption is universall extending it self to all men in the World indiscriminatim indifferently 3. That men have Free-will to repent and believe and so may be saved if they will 4. That Good Works or Obedience are meritorious causes of salvation 5. That children are not born in sin 6. That the payment of Tithes to the Ministers of the Gospel is not agreeable to Scripture Now that these are false Tenents not justifiable from Scripture but repugnant unto it I shall I hope make manifest to all that are not byassed with prejudice And because I am not to enter the Lists and contest with pertinacious Adversaries who sometime will neither hear right Reason nor yield to Scripture but as they themselves shall expound
it It will be expedient for me to premise certain Theological conclusions or principles which all Orthodox Divines unanimously and univocally have acknowledged to be undoubted Truths as Praecognita and Canons to have recourse unto for the decision and determination of any Controversie as need shall require which if they deny to assent unto they are not to be disputed with as the proverb speaks Contra negantem principia non est disputandum There 's no disputation to be held with him that will deny the principles of Art The Principles I think fit to premise are these four 1. That the Canonical Scripture is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is authentical and creditable of it self 2. That there is no contradictions in the Canonical Scripture 3. That the same makes and so by consequence alloweth to be made distinction between things that sometime in Scripture have the same denomination This appears by many instances in Scripture whereof I will name these three Fear Faith and Sorrow First About Fear the Scripture mentioneth a fear which is gracious and godly which the learned have termed Filial and a Fear which is gracelesse which the learned have termed Servile of this we have an example in 2 Kings 17.33 34. where it 's said of the Babylonians in the former verse that they feared God and then in the latter verse that they feared him not Whence it 's evident that a distinction must be made of the fear of God whereof some is a Gracious Fear and some a Gracelesse otherwise there would be a contradiction between the two verses which Scripture admits not Secondly About Faith The Scripture doth distinguish it into these two sorts namely a Faith that hath Works and a Faith that is without works which it also calleth a dead faith James 2.17 Faith if it have no Works is dead being alone Thirdly About Sorrow The Scripture speaks of a godly sorrow for sin and a worldly sorrow in 2 Cor. 7.10 Godly sorrow worketh Repentance to salvation but the sorrow of the World worketh death Hereby it 's clear that a distinction is sometimes to be made betwixt things that have the same denomination The fourth Principle which I shall premise is this That seeming contradictions in Scripture are so to be expounded by help of other Texts either speaking of the same point or otherwise that they may symphonize and accord together Which help the Scripture affords in one place or other If our Adversaries will yield to be tryed about the forementioned Controversies by these old Canons which have been universally received for undoubted truths by all Christian Churches in primitive times when the waters ran clearest from under the Threshold of the Sanctuary I shall adventure to bear the disgrace if I do not convince them of error about each Controversie that I have before named The first Controversie handled About Election THeir first Error that I shall undertake to confute is their assertion That God's election of men unto salvation is grounded upon his foresight of their Faith and Obedience or sanctification and Good Works That is that he electeth such and such men to life and salvation because he foreseeth that they will believe and walk in obedience to his Commandements This Assertion I shall prove to be an error by these four Arguments The first Argument If men shall therefore believe because they are elected and ordained to eternal life then they are not elected and ordained to eternal life because they will believe This consequence cannot be denied by any intelligent man But men shall therefore believe because they are elected and ordained to eternal life and therefore are not elected and ordained to it because they will believe The Assumption I prove out of Acts 13.48 where it 's said That as many as were ordained to eternall life believed Here Faith is made the fruit and effect of election to eternal life and therefore cannot be the cause of it for nothing can be the cause and effect too of one and the same thing My second Argument is this If men be elected or chosen that they may be holy then their election must needs be the ground and cause of their holinesse and sanctification But men are elected that they may be holy so saith the Scripture Ephes 1.4 He hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the World that we should be holy and without blame before him in love Therefore Election is the ground and cause of holinesse or sanctification and not holinesse the ground and cause of election The third Argument If the good pleasure of God's will be the ground and first cause of mens election and predestination to salvation then God's fore-sight of their Sanctification and Good Works cannot be the first cause and ground thereof This consequence is undeniable But the good pleasure of God's will is the first cause and ground of mens election and predestination to salvation Therefore God's fore-sight of their sanctification and Good Works cannot be the first cause and ground thereof The A sumption I prove from these two Texts of Scripture passing by many other to the same purpose Rom. 9.11 S. Paul there affirms That the purpose of God according to Election stands not of Works but of him that calleth Where works are denied and Gods will affirmed to be the cause of election And Ephes 1.5 and again verse 11. the good pleasure of God's will is made the ground and cause of mens election to salvation The words in the fift verse are these Having predestinated us to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ unto himself according to the good pleasure of his will And the words in the 11. verse are these In whom also we have obtained an inheritance being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the councel of his own will If the Adversaries answer that Election may be according to the good pleasure of God's will and yet the good pleasure of his will may not be the cause of Election To this I reply That the Apostle makes it plain in the 11. verse that he speaks of the good pleasure of God's will as the cause of Election by the addition of these last words in the verse Who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will For if he worketh all things after the counsel of his own will then Election is necessarily one of those things which he worketh after the councel of his own will and therefore the counsell of his own will must needs be the cause thereof The fourth Argument is this If Good Works be no causes of salvation then neither of election unto salvation this is plain because Election is the cause of Salvation But Good Works are no causes of salvation and therefore no causes of Election The minor Proposition or Assumption is proved by Ephes 2.8 9 verses where the Apostle saith By grace ye are saved through faith and that not of your selves it is the
gift of God Not of works lest any man should boast And again Tit. 3.5 Not by works of righteousnesse which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the holy Ghost The Advesaries answer That these and such like Texts are spoken of works before regeneration To which I reply that in Tit. 3.5 the Apostle expresly nominates works of righteousnesse and denies them to be any causes of salvation but there be no works of righteousnesse before regeneration for then an evill tree should bring forth good fruit which our Saviour denies Matth. 7.18 And therefore even good works after regeneration are in Scripture denied to be any causes of salvation Hereof I shall have occasion to speak more largely hereafter and therefore will not insist any longer in the illustration of it Before I proceed to the next Controversie I will display the weak argumentation of Mr. Henry Haggar for defence of election from fore-seen sanctification by his straining Scripture from its proper sense and in not comparing it with other Scripture where the genuine and proper sense is clearly explained He toils himself to prove the said point because it 's said in 2 Thes 2.13 that men are chosen to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and therefore thence collects that they are not chosen before they are sanctified by the Spirit which is a very inconsequent collection for it doth not follow that because men are choto salvation through sanctification of the Spirit that therefore sanctification of the Spirit is the cause of their election or that therefore it precedes their election but that therefore sanctification is a necessary antecedent way and means through which they must be brought to salvation whereto they are elected as the way to any place is not the cause of a man his coming thither but only a necessary requisite to be observed of him And thus this Text fitly agrees with other Texts of Scripture as that before mentioned Ephes 1.4 where it 's said That we are chosen that we should be holy which Text he hath waved and never mentioned at all but as Satan alledged the words of the Psalmist leaving out a part as knowing it would disclose his wresting and perverting the true sense of the other Text which he alledged And so he neglects the premised rule of expounding Scripture by Scripture which is of necessity to be observed to find out the true sense and meaning of any Text that is ambiguous or may be variously expounded He alledgeth also the 1 Pet. 1.2 where it 's said That men are elected according to the foreknowledge of God the Father through sanctification of the Spirit Whence he collects that God knows men first before he doth elect them To this I answer First That God's prescience or foreknowledge of men and his election of them are in him together and one and the same act for all his attributes are himself and whatsoever is said to be in him is himself as it hath ever been acknowledged by all learned Divines But in humane apprehension of them his decrees precede his prescience for he doth not decree things to come because he foresees them but foresees them because he hath decreed them as is colligible from S. Paul's speech before named Ephes 4.11 where he affirms that God worketh all things according to the Counsell of his own will whence it 's manifest that his own will is the first cause of all his works and not his prescience though his prescience do concur with his will Secondly I answer That the foreknowledge of God there mentioned is a foreknowledged with approbation for the original word which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifies fore knowledgement as all men of learning know which implies a concurence of his election and approbation with his foreknowledge of men and not any precedence of his knowledge before his approbation and election of them And this affords an answer also to that place which is brought by some of the adversaries for defence of election from foreseen faith and holinesse in Rom. 8.29 where it 's said that whom God did foreknow he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son where the Greek verb which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies properly fore-acknowledged which intimates an election either with it or before the foreknowledge and besides the words following lead to this sense in that the Apostle expresseth that the predestination which he mentioneth as a sequell of God's foreknowledge is a predestination to be conformed to the image of his Son that is to be holy as Christ is holy A predestination to holinesse cannot be a predestination for holinesse as was shewed before He alledgeth but one Text of Scripture more about this point which is in the fourth Page of his discourse and which he abuseth very sufficiently as he doth the two former and that is Ephes 1.11 and 12. verses where the Apostle speaketh of himself and others that they were predestinated that they should be to the praise of God's glory who first trusted in Christ Whence he ridiculously collecteth that they did first trust in Christ before they were predestinated Whereas the priority or precedency of their faith there mentioned by the Apostle hath no relation at all to their predestination in Grammatical construction but to the faith of the Ephesians that were Greeks or Gentiles and called to the faith of Christ after Paul and the other Apostles that were Jews as appears evidently by the next verse where the Apostle adds In whom also ye trusted after that ye heard the word of truth As if he should have said In whom we trusted first and then ye afterwards which agrees also with other Scripture as Rom. 1.16 where the Apostle saith that the Gospel is the power of God to salvation to every one that believeth to the Jew first and also to the Greek The second Controversie Of the Vniversality of Christ's Redemption TO decide and determine this controversie I must first state the question aright between us and the adversaries To speak nothing of the word All which sometimes is put for all sorts of men and sometimes for all particular men of all sorts Seeing we acknowledge that Christ died not only for all sorts of men but for all of all sorts that do repent and believe The controversie depends upon these three Quaeries 1. Whether Christ died for unbelievers at all or not 2. Whether he died for them in as full and ample sense as for believers 3. In what sense he died for them and in what sense he died not for them To the first quaery or question I answer affirmatively for my part that Christ died for unbelievers in some sense To the second I answer negatively scil that he died not for unbelievers in as full and ample sense as for believers which I prove from Scripture three ways First Because it 's said sometime in
the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but of God In which words the Spirit of God expressing a perfect distribution of all the powers and forces that are or can be in man excludes them all from this work and ascribes it to the alone will of God for it neither proceedeth from the bloud of man that is from any prerogative of natural propagation or generation which was wont to be the Pharisees vain brag and oftentation We are Abraham's peed for a which they were sharply reproved by John Baptist Matth. 3.9 Nor doth it proceed from the will of the flesh that is from the natural strength of mans corrupt will nor yet from the will of man that is of such a man whose corrupt will is corrected bettered and amended either by the help of the common grace of God or by the acquisition of humane learning or by his own wise observation and experience for this force the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 carrieth with it which is here used and so in like manner doth the Latine word uir by which it 's also translated in the Latine from none of these forces in man doth this worke proceed and these are all the forces in man's will but they are all excluded and God alone is made the Author and Procreant cause thereof A second testimony that I shall produce for proof of this Truth is in Ephes 2.8 9 10 verses where the Apostle speaks thus to the Ephesians By grace ye are saâ—ed through faith and that not of your selves it is the gift of God not of works lest any man should boast For we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them In which words the Apostle strives to annihilate our selves about this work and to take away all pretences of our cooperation with God therein For first He saith It 's not of our selves and then he saith It 's not of works lest any man should boast but there were matter of boasting if our selves were co-workers with God herein And then he addeth to remove all scruple about it that we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works Where note that he doth not say his workmanship renewed or repaired though that be true too but his workmanship created The Apostle as it may seem did pick out this word on purpose which he again also useth speaking of this work in the 4 Chapter following and 24. v. his words are Put on the new man which after God is created in righteousnesse and true holiness that he might altogether exclude all cooperation herein with God on our part for to create is the proper act of God and no creature can have any hand therein There be many other pregnant and punctual proofs of Scripture for this point As Ezek. 36.26 A new heart will I give you and a new spirit will I put within you and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh and I will give you a heart of flesh If God make all new and take away all the old then is there none of the old left to help to make it self new Philip. 2.13 It 's God that worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure Therefore the Will works not till God first work upon it 2 Cor. 3.5 We are not sufficient of our selves to think any thing as of our selves but our sufficiency is of God If we be not sufficient of our selves to think that which is good then not to will it for Voluntas sequitur intellectum the Will follows the Thought Jam. 1.18 Of his good will begat he us by the word of truth If of his own will then not by help of our will But to avoid prolixity and tediousnesse which I ever disliked I will rest satisfied with the quotation of those few proofs of Scripture which I have already cited pretermitting a number more of like sort as hoping they may satisfie the unprejudiced Reader because they are so clear and convincing I have not yet done with this Controversie but have something more to say about it And that is to invalidate the main Argument or objection which is brought by them of the Adversarie part against this truth for I read of no other of any force which is this It 's said by them That men are called upon in Scripture to turn to God very often which if they have not power of themselves to do the commandment is unjust and needless for Nemo tenetur ad impossibile To this I return a five-fold solution or answer First That though we have no power so to do now as we are fallen in Adam yet did God give us so much grace in our first creation as would have impowred us hereunto if we our selves had not lost it And therefore is it no severity or injustice for God to require that at our hands which he once gave us power to do though now we cannot do it because we our selves have made our selves unable to do it and not God And here I desire the Reader to take notice how unfit a comparison one of our Adversaries in this point hath used though cryed up for a man of learning who chargeth God with as great severity bidding us to turn unto him if we have not of our selves now freedome of will so to do as for a man to cut off another man's legs and then bid him run But by his leave for all his great learning the case is not alike but varies and fails in the main point of all which is this In that God gave man legs to run the ways of his commandments before he bad him run which he hath cut off himself God gave man power to do all that he requires at his hand and man hath bereaved himself thereof And therefore it 's neither injustice nor severity in God to require of man what he once gave him power to do though now he be unable because he hath disabled himself If God had made man unable the comparison might have held but seeing man made himself unable the comparison halteth Secondly I answer that God's commandments do not alway import what we can do but what we should they do not always argue our ability but our duty As for example to instance but in one particular of many We are commanded to love the Lord our God with all the heart and with all the soul and our neighbours as our selves This we cannot do in that fulsse that the Law requires yet it is not severity in God to require it of us because he once impowred us unto it namely in our first creation And the case is the same about our conversion Thirdly I answer that God requires it though we cannot of our selves do it that we may be put in mind to crave his aid who only is able to make us to do it This reason is given by S.
Augustine in these words Jubet Deus quae non possumus ut noverimus quae ab illo petere debemus God commands us what we cannot do to intimate unto us what we ought to crave of him namely what we cannot do of our selves And hence are those many prayers of several sorts of persons in the Scripture as Psalm 51.10 Create in me a clean heart O Lord and renew a right spirit within me And Jer. 31.18 Convert thou me and I shall be converted And Lament 5.21 Turn thou us unto thee O Lord and we shall be turned Fourthly I answer that God commands us this though we cannot do it of our selves that we may be excited to use such means as are by God's ordinance and appointment conducible and available thereunto and which we have of our selves power to use which are Prayer the Word and the Sacraments for his calling to us to repent and return unto him is a provocation or calling to us to use such means as he hath appointed to produce the same in us Fifthly and lastly I answer That such commands aim not only at our first conversion but at our secondary and subsequent returns to God when after our first conversion we prevaricate and digress from him in which secondary return mans will cooperates with the grace of God as formerly hath beeen said And therefore God's invitation of men to these returns wherein their wills have some ability to cooperate with his grace is not vain or needlesse but very efficacious to allure and induce them thereunto Not to tire the Reader with any further dispute about this controversie I will close it up with the addition of these two reasons to the former Arguments to induce all persons to adhere to this opinion as the safest which I have here asserted First because this opinion makes a clearer reconciliation of those Texts of Scripture which hold forth a seeming contradiction about this point then the other doth for according to the other opinon they are not reconciled without some scruple Secondly because this opinion ascribes most glory to God to whom all glory belongs wherein there is no danger though men detract from themselves For to detract from nature and give to grace is no danger but to detract from grace and give to nature cannot but be dangerous This was the saying of Peter Lumbard and is of all acknowledged and owned for truth The fourth Controversie About the merit of good works THe Papists opinion about this and Mr. Haggar's in affirming good works to be causes of salvation which both they do and he also in the 9. page of his forenamed discourse hath so little appearance of truth that it deserves to be exploded rather then refuted And I have good ground for what I affirm First Because it 's so apparently repugnant to Scripture as to Ephes 2.8.9 where it 's said By grace ye are saved through faith and that not of your selves it is the gift of God not of works lest any should boast And Tit. 3.5 Not by the works of righteousnesse which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us And whereas to salve up the discord between Paul's affirmation and theirs they make a distinction of good works of which some say they go before justification and some follow after it and St. Paul they say speaks of those that go before but they speak of such as follow after and therefore they do not contradict him I have formerly declared namely in my 4th Argument about the first Controversie in page the 20. that the Apostle speaks of the same good works which they speak of namely of good works after justification and regeneration And therefore they are herein contradictors of holy Scripture Another ground for what I affirmed before is this Because I never had conference with any Papist yet and I have conferred with many in my time but they all disclaimed the merit of their own works when upon occasion of discourse I have charged them with this grosse Tenet I have yet a third ground for what I said and that is because I find Bellarmine their Arch champion after his affirmation of the merit of good works and that they are true causes of salvation and that some confidence may be placed in them in his book of Controversies namely Libr. 5. cap. 7. de Justificat to give men counsel within ten lines after to put no confidence in their merits but in the alone mercy and benignity of God as the safest way So that there is no great necessity to confute this opinion of the merit of works seeing themselves do distrust it and after a sort desert it But yet some short confutation of this palpable error I will deliver which I hope shall sufficiently convince it And the first Argument I frame thus Argument 1. IF eternal life or salvation be Gods gfit then it is not merited by man's good works so the Apostle argues Rom. 11.6 If it be of grace it is no more of works But eternal life is God's gift so saith our Saviour Luke 12.32 Fear not little flock for it is your Father's pleasure to give you a Kingdom where note that it 's said to be a gift and from no other motive but from his own good pleasure And John 10.27 My sheep hear my voice and I know them they follow me and I give unto them eternal life And saith S. Paul Rom. 6.23 The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Therefore eternal life is not merited by man's good works Argument 2. IF all the good works which possibly we can do be due debt to Almighty God then can they not merit Heaven at his hand for merit and debt cannot stand together a man cannot be said to merit by paying that which he oweth But they are due debts so our Saviour teacheth Luke 17. â—0 When ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you say We are unprofitable servants we have done that which was our duty to do Therefore they cannot merit Argument 3. IF our good works be not properly our own but proceed from the grace of God which worketh them in us and by us then can they not be said to merit from God though they may merit from others because we return no more to God then what we have received from him we give him but a cluster of grapes out of his own Vineyard and water out of his own Fountain If any man discern not the necessity of this consequent it 's for want of perspicacity in his own understanding and not for want of truth in the consequence And Bellarmine doth acknowledge it in Libr. 5. cap. 15. De Grat. Lib. Arb. Good works are not properly our own but proceed from the grace of God which worketh the same in us and by us so it 's said Isa 26.12 Lord thou wilt ordain peace for us for thou also hast wrought all our works in us
And Phil. 2.13 It 's God that gives to will and to work of his good pleasure Therefore the conclusion is true Argument 4. IF our good works be not every way responsible suitable to the Law of God which requires them at our hands then can they not be meritorious this is clear But they are not so Therefore they cannot merit That they are not answerable and agreeable to God's Law is most evident because they are imperfect and defective whereas the Law of God is perfect as David affirms Psalm 19.7 Now that they are imperfect and defective it 's divers times affirmed in Scripture Isa 64.6 All our righteousnesses are as filthy rags Rom. 7.18 To will is present with me but how to perform that which is good I find not And again in the 21. verse When I would do good evill is present with me Argument 5. IF there be no analogy and proportion between eternal life and our good works then cannot our good works merit eternal life This consequence is a clear truth in reason for a reward is to be adequated and proportioned unto the work But there is no analogy and proportion between eternal life and good works for the reward of eternal life is infinite but man's good works are finite and finiti ad infinitum nulla est proportio between a finite thing and an infinite there is no proportion Therefore the Conclusion holds That eternal life cannot be merited by mens good works I will answer the main Argument for the merit of works so I will conclude concerning this Controversie It 's alledged for defence of the merit of works That the Scripture affirms that they shall be rewarded with eternal life and that very often as Matth. 5.11 Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you c. Rejoyce and be exceeding glad for great is your reward in Heaven Luke 14.14 When thou makest a feast call the poor c. and thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just Heb. 11.26 It 's said That Moses esteemed the rebuke of Christ greater riches then the treasures of Egypt becaus behad respect unto the recompence of reward And oft elsewhere eternal life is called a reward which say the Adversaries imports the merit of good works because merces meritum reward and merit are relatives To this I answer That there is a double reward 1. A reward of merit or debt and 2. A reward of mercy or favour And this distinction is not devised or coyned by man's wit nor hewen out of the quarry of his brain but is framed by the holy Ghost himself Rom. 4.4 where it 's thus written Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt where he bath made an apparent distribution of reward in these two sorts 1. A reward of grace and 2. A reward of debt Now eternal life is a reward of grace mercy or favour and not a reward of debt or merit as the Texts before quoted demonstrate scil Luke 12.32 John 10 28. Rom. 6.23 In all which places it's called the gift of God and a gift proceeding from his own pleasure and therefore can be no debt that God oweth to men for their good works for a gift and debt are so dissentaneous that they cannot consist together nor be predicated of one and the same subject And hence it is that though God hath oft promised to reward such as do good works with everlasting life that he may provoke all men unto them yet it is nowhere said that they shall be rewarded for them for that might have been interpreted to have intimated and imported some merit in them but the Scripture in mentioning God's reward of good works useth this phrase That they shall be rewarded according to their works which intimates the reward to be given of God's mercy and not to be obtained by man's merits Thus it 's expressed Psalm 62.12 Vnto thee O Lord belongeth mercy for thou renderest to every man according to his works Matth. 16.27 The Son of man shall come in the glory of the Father with his Angels and then he shall reward every man according to his works 2 Cor. 5.10 We must all appear before the tribunal seat of Christ that every man may receive according to that he hath done whether it be good or bad Rev. 20.12 13. verses It 's twice said of the dead that they were judged according to their works and in Chapter the 22 and verse the 12. Beheld saith Christ I come quickly and my reward is with me to give to every man according as his work shall be This is the constant expression of Scripture in speaking of the reward of good works to phrase it according to works and no where for them lest men should presume to ascribe some merit unto them And this makes it evident that the Popish distinction of the merit of condignity and the merit of congruity is but a meer gingle and shift to evade the force of the former Arguments against the merit of good works for the merit of congruity which they attribute to good works proceeds from mercy as they confesse themselves and therefore cannot properly be called merit for mercy and merit are contradistinct and inconsistent it 's the very affirmation of Scripture Rom. 11.6 If by grace then it 's no more of works otherwise grace is no more grace but if it be of works then is it no more grace otherwise work is no more work Here the Apostle makes a flat opposition between grace and works and there is the very same opposition between mercy and merit which hath forced that confession from Bellarmine which hath oft dropped from his pen in his book of Controversies Merita nostra sunt Dei munera The like was S. Bernard his confession to Almighty God Meritum meum est misericordia tua my merit is thy mercy Both which are agreeable to the sentence of S. Augustine in his Book of Homiles in Homil. the 14 Quum bona â—pera nostra remunerat Deus non merita nostra sed sua dona coronat When God rewardeth our good works he crowns his own gifts and not our merits From this premised discourse I deduct this corolary or capitulation of the causes of salvation as they are in order manifested in Scripture First God's free grace and love is the primary and principal efficient cause of election unto salvation This is justified by these Texts beside many other Rom. 11.5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace Ephes 1.5 Having predestinated us to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of his will And again in the 11. verse following of the same Chapter In whom also we have obtained an inheritance being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsell of his own will Secondly Christ's obedience
death of the body for as the soule gives naturall life to the body so the image of God namely righteousnesse and holinesse gives spirituall life to the soule and without which the soul is spiritually dead as Ephes 2.1 Colos 2.13 and divers other Texts of Scripture witnesse where mention is made of a death in sin You that were dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh hath he quickened c. whence by undeniable consequence it follows that where there is a deprivation of the spiritual life of righteousnesse and holinesse there must needs follow a spiritual death in sin Now if they deny grace righteousnesse and holinesse to be the life of the soul I refer them to the view of these three Texts of Scripture omitting many other where it 's expreslly asserted Prov. 3.21 22. Keep sound wisedom and discretion so shall they be life unto thy soul And Rom. 8.6 To be carnally minded is death but to be spiritually minded is life And Rom. 8.10 The spirit is life because of righteousness that is The soul is alive spiritually because of righteousnesse Argument 3. THey whom Christ came to save are sinners So saith our Saviour himself Matth. 9.13 I came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance And S. Paul Rom. 5.6 Christ died for the ungodly And 1 Tim. 1.15 Christ Jesus came into the World to save sinners And this must needs be so in reason for where there is no sin there is no need of a Saviour But Christ came to save Infants as well as men of years Therefore they are sinners Now that Christ came to save Infants as well as men of years appears by Scripture these two ways 1. Because he died for all men as oft the Scripture affirms 1 Tim. 2.6 He gave himself a ransome for all Heb. 2.9 He tasted death for every man For whether all in these and the like Texts of Scripture be taken for all sorts of men only or for all of all sorts Infants must needs be included amongst them for they are one sort of men 2. Because he invited children to come unto him or to be brought unto him as is said Marke 10.14 which intimates that he came into the world to save them as well as men of years I will add one argument more for proof of this point to which the wit of man though prompted by the cunning suggestion of the old serpent cannot devise a satisfactory answer Argument 4. THey which are by nature children of wrath are by nature sinners But all men are by nature children of wrath so saith the Apostle Ephes 2.3 Therefore all men are by nature sinners and so consequently Infants The first proposition is all that I have to prove for the assumption is S. Paul's own affirmation And I find it the constant doctrine of holy Scripture both in the Old and New Testament which evermore teacheth sin to be the only cause of God's anger and wrath And this in reason must needs be so because all things else were his own works which were all good yea very good as we read in Gen. 1.31 And sin only was the Divel's work the enemy of God and all goodnesse and therefore sin only is said to provoke God's anger and wrath The testimonies of Scripture are so numerous for this that I will name but this one of a thomsand Rom. 1.18 The wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousnesse of men And how oft God is said in Scripture to have been provoked to anger by the sins of the people of Israel none can be ignorant I will add but one thing more about this argument and so I will conclude it The forenamed Text in Eph. 2.3 with what is deducible from it where it is affirmed that we are all by nature the children of wrath puzleth the Anabaptists not a little and puts them to their shifts to frame such an exposition thereof as may not impugn their own false Tenet about original sin This may appear from that exposition which the forementioned Mr. Brown hath made of that Text in the 6. page of his book that I named before where he thus expounds it By nature saith he is understood first the matter and form of our bodies which are good and principally the light that God hath placed in man Now that this is a novel false and irrational interpretation of this Text I thus discover If by nature here be understood nothing but what is good namely the matter and form of our bodies and the light that God hath placed in us then how can it make us the children of wrath as here it 's said of it for nothing that 's good can make us children of wrath It 's sin only which was first brought forth by Satan and nothing else that provokes God's wrath as formerly was proved By nature therefore in this place of necessity must be understood something that is sinful for else it could not make us children of wrath as hath been shewed which can be nothing else but that vitiosity pravity and corrupt disposition which from our first birth and being is propagated into our bodies and souls by natural generation For though it were granted that by nature here be meant the substance of our souls and bodies yet of necessity it must be also granted as hath been now proved that it 's meant of them not as pure and free from any sin but as vitiated and depraved therewith from their first union and conjunction together into one individual It remains therefore a sure and sacred truth inviolable and infringible and not to be contradicted but by obstinacy or impudence it self That children are born in sin The sixth Controversie About Tithes THere is an obsteperous clamour raised against Tithes by the Anabaptistical teachers who yet for the most part lay as heavy a burthen upon their disciples and put them to as great cost and charges as is equivalent to Tithes And this in all probability they have broached and ventilated to get the better morsel for themselves For this they find by experience that the way to insinuate with the common people and to winde themselves into their bosomes is to preach pleasing things unto them and especially such as sound for their profit be it right or wrong To stop their mouths if it may be if not yet to justifie the practise of paying and receiving Tithes I will first make it appear that it stands with equity and justice that Ministers of the Gospel have allowance and recompence for performing their work of the Ministery and such an allowance as may afford them a competent and comfortable livelihood and subsistence Secondly I shall make it appear That it stands with equity and justice that they have Tithes for their allowance 1. The former I shall prove both by Scripture and force of reason By Scripture I shall prove it both in the Old Testament and in the New First