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
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
how great things they ascribe to the body of Christ received if no barre be put which they understand of the Sacramental bread is very well known But as some have observed where poyson growes providence takes care that there be antidotes found so none of these ever appeared in the Church but some by the good hand of God have stood up in opposition How mightily did the Prophet Jeremy oppose himself against that over-high opinion that the Jewes in his time had of Circumcision Jer. 9.25 26. As also Paul making use of his authority against the Jewes in his time and disputing at large against it Rom. 2. And the Apostle Peter foreseeing it seems that Baptisme would be set up as high among Christians as ever Circumcision was among the Jewes makes it his businesse to prevent it Having affirmed that Baptisme saves he is careful to let us know that it is not by its own power but by the resurrection of Christ that is Faith in the Resurrection and further explains himself that it is not the outward act alone but as answered with an inward work that hath that power as you have heard And Popish Schoolmen making it their work as we have heard to advance Sacraments to that height Protestant Writers in a sull stream have appeared to set them on their right bottome and to make it appear what it is that Scripture attributes to them and what in their right use may be expected from them Calvin's words lib. 4. instit cap. 14. Sect. 14. are high and notable having opposed the doctrine of nuda signa which makes Sacraments to be bare and naked signs On the other hand saith he b Rursum admonendi sumus ut isti vim Sacramentorum enervant usumq prorsus evertunt ita ab adversâ parte stare alios qui arcanas nescio quas virtures Sacramentis affingunt quae nusquam illis à Deo insitae leguntur Quo errore periculosè falluntur simpliciores et imperiti dum et Dei dona quaerere docentur ubi reperiri minime possunt et à Deo sensim abstrahuntur ut pro ejus veritate meram amplexentur vanitatem Magno enim consensu Sophisticae Scholae tradiderunt Sacramenta novae legis hoc est quae in usu nunc sunt Ecclesiae justificare et conferre gratiam modo non ponamus obicem peccati mortalâ—s Quae sententia dici non potest quà m sit exitialis et pestilens eoque magis quod multis ante saeculis magna Ecclesiae jactura in bonâ orbis parte obtinuit Planè certe diabolica est nam dum justitiam cirra fidem pollicetur animas in exitium praecipites agit deinde quia justitiae causam à Sacramentis ducit miseras hominum mentés in terram sâ— apte sponte plus satis inclinatas hâc superstitione illigat ut in spectaculo rei corpore ae potius quam in Deo ipso acquiescant we are to be advertis'd that as those weaken the efficacy of Sacraments and utterly overthrow their use so there are others on the other hand that assign I know not what vertue to them such that we never read that God ever put into them which errour saith he dangerously deceives the simple and unlearned Whilest they are taught to seek the gifts of God where they cannot be found they are by degrees drawn from God to imbrace meer vanity instead of truth For the Schooles of Sophisters with great consent have taught that the Sacraments of the new law that is those that are now in use among Christians do Justifie and confer grace provided that we put no barre of mortal sin Which opinion saith he hath been of more deadly danger than can be spoken and so much the more because for many Ages to the great losse of the Church it hath prevailed It is certainly saith he devillish for whilest it promiseth Justification without Faith it casts soules headlong to destruction And upon that account because they derive the cause of righteousnesse or Justification from the Sacraments by this superstition they so ensnare the poor soules of men over-much of their own accord inclined to earth that they had rather rest in a corporeall element than in God himself This is his entrance upon the dispute That which he hath further upon it in four whole Sections is very well worth the reading The consent of other Writers of his time and that have followed after him as a cloud of witnesses might be produced but this as the Reader hath heard is already done to my hand And when some of reverend esteem and singularly deserving in the Church of God have gone overmuch on this hand as soon as it was carried abroad in Manuscripts a learned Manuscript of Mr. Gatakers met with it and afterwards appearing in print as a Posthumous work this as soon as it came to the Authors cognizance by his zeal to the truth followed it And let me here adde to that which hath been said that if nothing else yet experience might correct this over-high conceit of the work of Sacraments That which we evidently see is not wrought by Sacraments we cannot believe they are assign'd of God to work This Proposition hath certainly reason in it They certainly do that office which God hath assign'd and appointed them But we evidently see that they do not actually work all that they figure out even where according to these there is no bar put therefore there is no cause to believe that they are design'd of God for it Here I might instance in their failing in the work of remission of sin in Infants seeing when they come to growth we oft see them in that way of sin that stands not with actual forgivenesse But I know that many that here are adversaries confesse an intercision of Justification and therefore this is not against them and others that admit not that doctrine speak of a double Justification one for the state of Infancy another of those that are of growth upon their acceptation of Christ by faith and therefore though sins be remitted in Infancy and afterward upon their acting of sin charged here is no such intercision of justification which Arminians hold and their adversaries oppose I shall therefore wave this and instance in the failing of Baptisme in the work of regeneration which is as well figured out in Baptisme as that other of remission of sin Baptisme comes not alone to remove the guilt but also to correct the power of original corruption and so to work in us a freedome from the power of sin as well as the pardon of it And in case Baptisme effects this work how is it that sin in Infants is so apt to shew it self that as soon as they act they are so readily prone to act that which is evill When Saul said he had done the Commandment of the Lord Samuel had a confutation ready What means then sayes he this bleating of sheep and lowing of oxen in mine ears that
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
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
to make use of some one according to their own will when this assertion of his is as inconsistent with his own doctrine as Austins can be that upon a manifold account as might be shewen 1. He scarce knowes how to make it out that Circumcision was any remedy at all against Original sin seeing that Sacrament did not conferre grace by the work done but by the merit or disposition of the doer which is not found in infants 2. He himself confesses that many infants dye in their mothers wombe and yet have no remedy provided either in the law of nature or the old Law or Law of grace that is neither before the Law under the Law or in Gospel-times 3. Water is not alwayes at hand as he not absurdly hints though a Minister with them is scarce wanting who set up Midwives for the work and then the infant dyes remedilesse All this he thinks to help with a distinction c Quanquam enim non de singulis in particulari provideret ut eis efficaciter applicaretur romedium generaliter omnibus provisum tamen quantum in ipso est omnibus providet Though saith he God hath not provided for each one in particular that the remedy provided in general for all should be applyed to them yet he hath provided such a remedy as far as in him lyes But foreseeing that there would be some impediment to hinder the application of this Sacramental remedy to some this he permits This is a speech beseeming a Jesuit that God provided quantum in se a remedy as though it had been above him to have avoyded these impediments If the Jesuites position must stand that God is so tyed up with these limits that he cannot take away Original sin from infants without application of somewhat that is sensible He could have made such provision as he forbade Sampsons mother whilest with child the drinking of wine or strong drink or eating any unclean thing and that respective to the infant because he should be a Nazarite to God from the wombe to the day of his death Judg. 13.7 so he could have enjoyned the mother to have taken that which might through grace annext have had that efficacy in the infant in the wombe to take away Original sin as they conceive water hath on an infant new-born yea God is so far from doing what in him lyes respective to many infants for provision of a remedy of this nature that he orders that such a supposed remedy shall not be applyed He with much ado makes Circumcision a remedy to deliver from Original sin Pag. 51. Yet God took order in his Law that it should not be administred before the eighth day and in that interim between the birth and the eighth day it must needs be that many dyed and so by the law of Heaven they were debarred of a remedy through grace provided But here he is opposed by divers of his own party who hold that the faith of the Parent is sufficient to take away Original sin from the infant for which opinion he quotes Bonaventure Dist 1. Art 2. Quest 2. Rich. art 1. 5. 9. 1. 2. And Chamier lib. 1. cap. 8. de Sacramentis in genere Sect. 6. quotes also Vasquez for the same opinion These place merit in the Parents faith to work to the justification of the infant a merit not ex condiguo but ex congruo and for merit of this nature a faith informed void of Charity is sufficient say they Here our Author takes two exceptions against his friends 1. saith he d Sed hi authores in hoc falsum supponunt quia revera ad meritum de congruo non sufficit fides informis praesertim ad merendam alteri gratiam sanctitatem praeterea non satis explicant vim radicem hujus remedii quia ut esset infallibile quod necessarium est ut esset verum remedium non satis erat meritum de congruo quia non semper infallibiliter effectum habet sed necessaria erat divina promiscio hanc oportet ostendere They argue from a false ground for faith informed will not serve for this kind of merits especially to merit grace for another And secondly they do not as he saith sufficiently set forth the force and efficacy of this remedy To make it infallible as it must be if it be a true remedy merit de congruo is not sufficient seeing it hath not alwayes infallibly its effects But a Divine promise is necessary and this promise saith he they ought to shew that maintain it So that one part gives too much to the application of a sensible sign to the infant and the other over much to the merit of the Parent Abuleusis on Matth. 25. Quest 677. comes nearer to Bonaventure Richard Vasquez then to Suarez holding that infants before Circumcision were delivered from Original sin in that they were born of believers not requiring as Rivet observes Exer. 88. in Genes any application of faith in the Parents to the infants in any Sacrament for that work who might be dead before the Sacrament was administred to them The same opinion is undertaken of late in behalf of the infants of Christians to prove the infallibility of their salvation whether dying before or after Baptisme I have enough on my hands already and am not willing to launch out into this controversie I onely say 1. I find infants of believers not onely of the faith of the Elect but of visible profession in Covenant the Scripture is cleare for a Covenant in this latitude 2. That salvation according to Scripture wayes is within the verge of the Covenant and doth not go beyond it The Scripture leaves men out of Covenant in an hopeless condition 3. As there is salvation for all sorts and degrees of persons of age in Covenant but not to be extended to all of those sorts and degrees to reach every individual person so in a parallell way we may think of infants I know no text giving us universal assurance of their happiness in case there were I suppose there were much mare cause for believers to begge of God their infants death then with David in prayer to seek their life there being full assurance of their happiness dying and so much fear of their condemnation living to see the temptations to which in their growth they are subject We find salvation entailed upon qualifications of grace but not upon any age or period of life 4. There is as much found in Scripture giving us hopes of the salvation of the infants of all in Covenant as to their infant-state as to the infants of those that are most exact in keeping of Covenant As much is said for the honour of infants of Parents of a faith barely dogmatical as of the infants of those that are actually in grace and justified by faith The infants of all such yea of the worst of such are the servants of God
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
a body that darkens the place neer to it There are a third sort of signes of a middle nature that have their resemblance of the thing signified but in that indeterminate confused manner that they may rather be said to be fit to signifie that whereof they are signes then that of themselves without further declaration added they do signifie And such are the signes in Sacraments as Thomas Aquinas observes part 3. quaest 60. artic 6. and after him Bellarmine lib. 1. de Sacramentis in genere and Chamier gives his assent to both lib. 1. de Sacramentis in genere Cap. 11. Water hath a faculty to wash as also to refresh and cool when water is set apart for Baptisme though there be a fitnesse in it to signifie washing yet there must be a word to explain that it is to signifie washing and with it the thing that is cleansed 4. Ritual Fourthly They are not barely substantial signes but rituall also The outward elements do not barely signifie but the instituted actions likewise are significant In Circumcision the foreskin alone was not a sign but the cutting of it off in the way appointed of God seemes the chief in signification In the Passeover there is not onely a lamb but rosting eating c. all which are significant In Baptisme there is not onely water but the application of the person to the water in dipping or the water to the person by infusion or sprinkling The word in Scripture use comprizes any washing and therefore in Baptisme it is of it self indifferent In the Lords Supper there is not onely bread and wine but the bread is broke the bread and cup delivered receiving eating and drinking Some indeed question whether the breaking of the bread be any Sacramental rite or at all of the integrality of the Sacrament but all confesse that in case it be within an institution it is then necessary About the beginning of the reformation some that stood for the ejection of Ceremonies pleaded for sitting at the Lords Supper as an instituted Sacramental rite signifying our coheireship with Christ But others that in after times did manage the same cause saw that mistake and therefore urged not the necessity of sitting upon that account but onely did except against kneeling either as Idolatrous or carrying too great an appearance of it Fifthly They are distinguishing and differencing signes separating a people that receive them 5. Distinguâ—shing from all others that are not interessed in them so they have the nature of badges or cognizances Calvin justly rejects those that make the Sacraments no more but bare testimonies of our profession or distinguishing marks That as a Roman was known by his gown from a Grecian in his cloke and in Rome the several orders had their distinctions The Senatour was distinguished from the Knight by his Purple and the Knight from one of the Commonalty by his ring as with us a Knight of the Garter is distinguished by his blue Ribband and a Knight of the Bath by the red yet they cannot be denyed but that they have this distinguishing use By these Sacramental signes the people of God are known from others which is herein plain in that they are signes of the Covenant and by an usual metonomy called by the name of the Covenant Gen. 17.20 Act. 7.8 And therefore distinguished those that received them from all that are out of Covenant So Circumcision distinguished a Jew from all others A man in uncircumcision was an heathen Circumcision in the flesh did denominate a Jew outwardly as Circumcision of the heart which is that to which Circumcision in the letter did engage did denominate a man a Jew inwardly That which Circumcision was in this respect Baptisme is As soon as any joyned himself to Abrahams family and afterwards to the seed of Abraham in Covenant he was to be circumcised Gen. 17.13 Exod. 12.48 None were to be as one born in the land but a circumcised man As soon as any joyned himself to the body and society of Christians he was baptized so was Christs Commission Disciple all Nations baptizing them No sooner was Paul the Eunuch the Jaylour Lydia yea Simon Magus made disciples but they were forthwith baptized The Passeover as well as Circumcision the Lords Supper as well as Baptisme are distinguishing signes But these find men before-hand distinguished The preceding Sacraments whereby men are initiated and first enrolled are more properly distinguishing Sixthly They are congregating uniting and closing signes 6. Congregating this may seem contradictory to the former which makes them distinguishing and differencing To unite and difference are evidently contrary but these well enough agree the contradiction being not ad idem They are not the same that they unite and difference They distinguish men in Covenant from strangers and they unite men in Covenant as one among themselves A Souldiers Colours difference him from all other companies and unite him to those of that body into which he is received As Philosophers say of heat that it doth congregare homogenea and dissipare heterogenea gather together those things that are of a like and separate those that are of a different quality so it is with Sacraments This the Apostle takes for granted 1 Cor. 10.16 17 18 19 20 21. His business there is to take Christians off from joyning with heathens in their Idol-sacrifices because such joyning makes them one body with those Idolaters Which is clear in the 19 20 21. v. What say I then that the Idol is any thing or that which is offered in sacrifice to Idols is any thing but I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to Devlls and not to God and I would not that ye should have fellowship with Devils ye cannot drink of the Cup of the Lord and of the Cup of Devils ye cannot he partakers of the Lords Table and of the table of Devils And this he had also argued against Chap. 8. Vers 10. And he proves that this makes them one Idolatrous body with Gentiles in their sacrifices to Devls by way of an analogy with Christian and Jewish worship Because joyning in the Lords Supper to partake of one bread makes men one body Christian and partaking with Jewes after the flesh eating of their sacrifices made partakers of the Altar of the Jewes and one body Jewish vers 17 18. therefore joyning with heathens in their worship makes one body heathenish A text which some weakly enough have brought against mixt communions to prove that none must joyn with a bad man in a Christian Sacrament when it onely serves to prove that Christians may not joyn with Idolaters in the Devils Sacraments They difference us from all those that want and joyne us unto all those that enjoy these badges of a Christian profession 7. Engaging Seventhly They are engaging signes to answer the profession that we make the company or family to which we relate The name that we bear and
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
but then it would have been as arrogant Sixthly That he make some provision for tender and scrupulous consciences that shall admit his principles 1. In taking in of members into Church-fellowship as it is called A man without grace in a visible Church according to him is as a wooden leg in the body how great a deformity this is and how great a trouble to have such instead of those that are of flesh and bone it is easy to judge and yet how many of these necessarily will and must be received 2. In baptisme of Infants To baptize an Infant is with him not onely to espouse but to solemnize a full and actual marriage with Christ Jesus and that in words not de futuro but de praesenti and what further glory then they may expect from his hand I scarce can tell An illustrious Prince will have none but of noble and Royal blood and Christ will have none to be thus in marriage relation given to him but the seed of regenerate and graciously qualified persons How shall I get intelligence that this or that infant is descended of such a race where shall I learn his or her pedigree that I may thus give to Christ Iesus And in case probabilities must lead us we have need of further help then yet we see to judge of such probability Must we find those qualifications in the man who himself is for Baptisme or his child that may move us to conclude that in all reason and possible apparance here is a child of God or an Infant of a regenerate person Or will it serve our turn and satisfie our consciences that we cannot certainly conclude the contrary If the first be required it will put all the Ministers of Christ hard to it and prove such a snare that I know not how they will extricate themselves If the latter be that which we must receive here is then a loose rule for to lead in so high proceedings For men will be so laxe in their own marriage choice as for to take any into that society if they be not able to conclude her a strumpet or desperately wicked we have hitherto believed that Jesus Christ is pleased to receive in a greater latitude into visible relation Seventhly I desire Mr. Baxter to tell us how he hath mended the matter and provided for the honour and lustre of the Christian name or made up at all that gappe of which he speaks He saies the Church is bound to baptize as largely as I say men have right to Baptisme I think here he will find little or no difference and when he refuses none that I receive and where I say they have right he saies we are bound to baptize without right how will this make Christianity to look with any better face how much will Worcestershire Congregations where this is received exceed other Congregations where unanimously it is denyed I would have him to reflect on his 18th Argument and see whether the force of it be not evidently as much against hinself as it is against me against whom it is brought It is thus framed That doctrine which makes it the regular way in Baptisme for all men to promise that which they can neither sincerely promise nor perform is unsound But such is Mr. Blakes Ergo. And after much work to explain himself it comes to this that unregenerate men cannot resolve or sincerely promise to love believe or obey and therefore upon that account are without right to baptisme Let it be taken into consideration that when I say these men that in their present state are thus unable to love believe and obey have notwithstanding right to Baptisme and he saies that this inability notwithstanding they ought to be baptized how is the matter mended If my Doctrine upon this account be unsound his doctrine and practice will be found unsound likwise Mr. Baxter saith Vocation which is effectual onely to bring men to an outward profession of faith is larger then election and makes men such whom we are bound to baptize Eighthly I shall desire some Scripture text or cogent reason to make it appear that we are bound to baptize those that in the sight of God have no right to Baptisme the command given will argue with me their right unlesse I hear an injunction from heaven that notwithstanding their want of right we are to baptize them Peter argues the right of those Acts 10.47 for their admission to Baptisme which had been more then needed in case without any such right the water in Baptisme might have been applied unto them and I marvel that Mr. Baxter should so tenaciously hold to Philips speech to the Eunuch If thou believest with all thy heart thou mayest seeing he believes as well as I that faith short of this which he saies these words necessarily imply might have admitted him and put a necessity on Philip to have baptized him though it would not have given him right to Baptisme His actual admission and not his right is there put to the question If these things be well considered Mr. Baxter may see cause to begin with a confutation of Mr. F. before he undertakes a defence and I suppose the Reader will see that he had small cause to censure my Arguments to be so dilute unlesse he himself had brought some of greater strength Lastly I would have Mr. Baxter seriously consider whether that which we have observed already out of him and might yet further be gathered may not make up a forcible Argument and conclusive of this title to Baptisme in those who yet rise not up to the Faith that is justifying when they are separate from Paganisme into fellowship with the visible Church as he asserts Saints Rest Part 4. Sect. 3. pag. 105. and with them their issue as he hath concluded from 1 Cor. 7.14 when they attain to graces real and true as we have seen from him I am sure the Apostle as hath been said Act. 10.47 argues from such qualifications to an interest in Baptisme when they have their interest in the Covenant of grace as a fruit of Christs death as he saith doubtlesse reprobates have Treatise of Infant-Baptisme pag. 224. when their Baptisme hath all that is essential to Gods sealing as he asserts it hath pag. 222. All of this laid together with more that may be taken up will in all indifferent Readers eyes conclude a title And further whether he have not spoken as much in plain words terminis terminantibus for the interest of unregenerate men or men of a meer visible profession in Baptisme let his words be considered Saints Rest Part 4. Sect. 3. pag. 104 105. Where giving holy and seasonable advice to beware the company of sensual and ungodly men he limits it with Cautions least it should be thought that he perswades as he rightly stiles it unto an ungodly separation he addes As I never found one word in Scripture where either Christ or his Apostles denyed admittance to
any man that desired to be a member of the Church though but onely professing to repent and believe so neither did I ever there find that any but convicted Hereticks or scandalous ones and that for the most part after due admonition were to be avoided or debarred our fellowship And whereas it is urged that they are to prove their interest to the priviledges that they lay claim to and not we to desprove it I answer If that were granted yet their meer sober professing to Repent and believe in Christ is a sufficient evidence of their interest to Church-membership and admittance thereto by Baptisme supposing them not admitted before and their being baptized persons if at age or members of the universal visible Church into which it is that they are baptized is sufficient evidence of their interest to the Supper till they do by heresie or scandall blot that evidence which evidence if they do produce yea though they are yet weak in the faith of Christ who is he that dare refuse to receive them And this after much doubting dispute and study of the Scriptures I speak as confidently as almost any truth of equall moment so plain is the Scripture in this point to a man that brings his understanding to the model of Scripture and doth not bring a model in his brain and reduce all he reads to that model What have I spoke more then here is said and did I ever speak with more and higher confidence I say that a faith which is short of justifying gives title to Baptisme and he sayes Such give sufficient evidence of their interest to Church-membership and consequently admittance to Baptisme so that if my doctrine herein be loose as he chargeth it the Reader will hardly find his to be fast and it heares not well to play fast and loose The evasion of equivocal will not here serve that will utterly spoyl the whole strength of his Caution and put men amain on this separation as it will contradict his assertion of their grace as real and true They will say They will have no fellowship with a dead Corps instead of a reall man for that is his expression of the difference between what is real and what is equivocal Neither can he here come off by the help of his distinction of forum Dei and forum Ecclesiae These gifts and graces from God these priviledges vouchsafed of God and purchased by Christ plainly enough speak a right in the sight of God Neither is there as we have heard in this Controversie any such distinction to be admitted I am therefore in this no further to blame then he hath been and if he see cause to recede from yet I see all reason to persist in my opinion SECT X. Proposition 8. FOr the Sacrament of the Lords Supper No such vast difference between baptisme and the Lords Supper that the one should be a priviledge of the Church visible and the other peculiar to the Church invisible there cannot be that vast difference and disproportion between it and baptisme that the one should be a priviledge of the Church visible and the other peculiar and proper to the Church invisible that all in the outward administration of the Covenant as some speak should be interessed in the one and onely those that come up to the termes of the Covenant should have any interest in the other Christ gave order that Disciples should be baptized Matth. 28.19 and he delivered his Supper to Disciples Matth. 26.26 27. and it is more then strange that disciples should be taken in that aequivocall way as to hold out all in outward profession confoederation and visible Church communion in the one as is almost generally agreed upon between Paedobaptists and their adversaries and to be restrayned to those that answer to their profession in the other so that in the administration of the one the dispensers have a firme rule to lead them viz. visibility of interest as Mr. Cobbet hath largely shewn in his Vindication pag. 52. Cou. 4. and in the other can have nothing for their guide but an invisible work left to their charity to conjecture Disciple therefore respective to either of the Sacraments which are outward visible ordinances and visible Church priviledges can be no more then a man of visible interest When Christ sate down to the Passeover it is said he sate down with the twelve onely they had right to eat of it in his company Exod. 12.3 being of his family And as he was eating he gave the Supper but then the phrase is changed he gave it to his Disciples onely the twelve were occasionally there but it was instituted in behalf of all Disciples of which the number could not be small considering how many John had made and baptized and Christ had made and baptized more then he though not in person but by his Disciples Joh. 4.1 2. A reverend brother makes this practice of Christ at the first institution and administration of the Supper to be a directory for future to receive such onely to it as are the Disciples of Christ To which I willingly condescend provided that the word be aright understood I know the word is sometimes taken in a restrayned sense for those that indeed do the duty of disciples Joh. 8.31 If ye continue in my word then are ye my Disciples indeed and Luke 14.33 Whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath he cannot be my Disciple As the word Israelite is sometimes taken for those that do the duty of Israelites and are such as Israelites ought to be Joh. 1.47 Behold an Israelite indeed in whom there is no guile when respective to fruition of Church ordinances of what nature soever all that were of Israel according to the flesh or visible Church-Members in Israel are expressed by it Disciple or Israelite is a man of outward Covenant interest The latitude of it according to Scripture expressions I have shewen Treatise of the Covenant pag. 208. All that were Christs family Disciples did eat of the Passeover with him Matth. 26.18 even Judas as is acknowledged and scarce to be doubted of but he did eat of the Supper It is more then strange that as a Disciple he should be taken into the Passeover and a few houres after as no Disciple should be put from the Supper The Lords Supper is for the building of those that Baptisme takes in But Baptisme takes into the Church visible Visible Church members have then interest in the Supper When Sacraments are in their use distinguished one for admittance into the Church and the other for growth one as the Sacrament of our birth and the other our nourishment most understand the first of admission into the Church visible well knowing that regeneration is not tyed to baptisme but the growth many will have to be in the Church invisible which inharmonious discord between Ordinances of the same kind cannnot be suffered To give notes of
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
it be left to a Ministers prudence according to Scripture-rule to manage it It is further said that this is to assume a power without any Object 6 warrant or power from Jesus Christ No text can be produced in which any such power is given To this I answer None that would take this power from the Minister can own this objection It is of equal force against any other hand Let them shew where any other is set up for it and we will presently yeeld it Those onely that are for promiscuous administration can with any pretended colour in this way object it and to these I suppose enough hath been spoken that it is a necessary result from that power that is given for administration of this Ordinance All Ordinances must be so dispensed that they may profit where profit cannot follow there is to be no dispensation Allegations for the power of the people taken into consideration As to the claime of those of the Congregational way before mentioned the former failing this falls with it They both agree that it is an act of jurisdiction in which one party will have all to vote the other onely the Eldership But when it appears that it is an act of prudence and not of juridick censure either of both are at losse for their interest If these have power by their vote to let in and keep from the Sacraments it is either as dispensers of these Mysteries or by vertue of a juridick power of rule and government vested in them That it is not as dispensers themselves will acknowledge for they cannot in a joynt way thus administer neither can it be by virtue of any juridick power of rule and government In case it were granted if all are in place of rule where then are those that are ruled and under government If every member be an eye where is the foot The Apostle salutes the Saints and those that rule over them Heb. 13.24 Here are no Saints but what are Rulers Obey them that are over you in the Lord saith the Apostle these must obey one another If these thus govern and this be an act of their government then no man must be admitted to the Supper but together with it he must be vested in Church-power and rule None must be a member unlesse he be a Commander Christ's Army must have all leaders no followers all Commanders no common Souldiers by this means either worthy Communicants must be shut out or men unfit for rule promoted seeing every godly man that hath the spirit of sanctity hath not presently a spirit of rule Hence will follow that confusion by the experience of many found and complained of by Mr. Blackwood Mr. Firmin and others not to be suspected of partiality And when they argue from their power in excommunication to their power in barring from this Ordinance as the antecedent is to be denyed so the consequent is false All the faithfull are not to decree excommunication The meeting together mentioned 1 Cor. 5.4 was not of members but officers there being more Congregations then one in Corinth as is justly presumed and in some Churches is undenyably proved and therefore their members could not meet about any act of government but officers onely So also the consequence is false and though excommunication were in their power yet the power of administration of Sacraments and mens admission may be in an other hand as a prudential act And so every part of the argument is found faultie It is true that excommunication being a juridical suspension from all Church-Communion and Participation in Church-priviledges comprizes in it suspension from the Lords Table as he that is cast out of the house is no more ordered for his diet in the house but kept from it Yet there may be a non-administration by the Minister where there is not any such Church-censure A Christian in his minority suppose of the age of ten or twelve years is not upon the account of his minority to be excommunicated yet he is not of that age as to be admitted to the Lords Supper And whereas it is said that it is their dutie to avoid such in their converse that are thus denyed I answer that were it granted to be a Church-censure formally executed Mr. Rutherford hath sufficiently answered that their duty to avoid them under censure is no argument that they are to have an hand in the censure But being denyed to be any formal censure of the Church there needs no further answer and they are to avoid them no further then the manifestation of their condition according to Scripture-grounds gives them occasion So they must avoid children youth and all others that are not competently instructed in Gospel-wayes and according to the principles of many of them all those that are not highly vers'd in Christian Mysteries And as for crimes that carry the name of scandal the Minister is in a publick way to debar none but upon known manifest evidences openly seen of which any may be competent witnesses And in case they suffer wrong by the Ministers imprudence or otherwise they are not to suffer farther by other mens avoiding their society and communion The community of the faithful therefore having no power of juridick censure they have no colour of claime to it under any such a notion And being no formal censure Elderships that have that power are not formally qua rulers vested in it It therefore remains that it is an act of prudence in the dispenser and no act of jurisdiction in them that have right of censure or inflicting of penalty Some cautions are here needful for a right understanding and to avoid mistakes in that which hath been delivered Cautions to be observed in these proceedings 1. This which hath been spoken must not any way be understood Cauti 1 to be prejudicial to Church government or the power of Church censure For though Governours are not to be consulted before these seals be dispens'd yet government still stands in due power notwithstanding of this we have all cause to be tender seeing whilest some dispute in what hand to place it others take their advantage quite to abolish it But that Scripture speaks of a Government distinct from that which is in the hands of civil powers is a truth that carries such evidence that it can with no colour of truth be opposed As the Romans divided that state into Senatum populumque Romanum implying that some were in power of Governing and others were to yield subjection the Spirit of God himself makes like division of the state of Israel into Elders and people Ruth 4.9 So the Apostle to the Hebr. in like sort distinguisheth Christians Salute the Saints and those that rule over you Hebr. 13.24 Some were without any power for rule and these are styled Saints without any further addition others are in power for Government and these have their just title given them The same title that is given to
Bishops and Deacons without mention of ruling Elders as also from the distinct qualifications required in Bishops and Deacons with their wives and families when as to these Elders there is all silence may be more easily answered in case it appear that these had not any constant standing in this work I onely here say that on what bottome soever they stand this which I have said can nothing prejudice them 3. Neither must this exempt admission to or exclusion from Cauti 3 the Sacrament from all cognizance of Church power nor quite take it out of the verge of their censures Not to be wholly exempted from all cognâ—zance of Church-power though those in juridick place be not aforehand consulted or taken into association in it For though it be left solely to Pastors to discern those to whom they may distribute these Elements as it is to divide the Word and give every one his portion yet upon mal-administration they may be called to question If pro imperio they shall keep back those that are duly qualified or admit such that evidently according to Church-determination should be denyed they are liable to censure as they are for corruption or imprudence in doctrine And therefore it was well provided Canon 27. That he that shall repel any from the Sacrament upon complaint or being required by the Ordinary shall signifie the cause to him and therein obey his direction Presupposing Church power to be vested in him who for the most part was a meer lay person which might cause ruling Elders to stand more right in the eyes of some persons this was well determin'd Should Pastors be set up for this work without any appeal or controul it migbt then indeed be spoken to as a grievance Cauti 4 4. It is a Ministers wisdome if it may be to see with more eyes then his own A Ministers prudence to take in assistants and to take in to himself if they may be had assistants in this work especially to judge of men as to their conversations and to be witnesses of their promises and engagements in case admonition be needful for amendment and reformation More eyes see more then one and reason it self suggests the convenience of all helps to be taken in to lighten the burden Paul tells Timothy of the profession that he had made before many witnesses 1 Tim. 6.12 as a Motive to be constant An engagement made before witnesses carries authority with it and possesses with shame upon violation of it Thus the Pastor also shall in a great part avoid that charge of partiality that notwithstanding all circumspection he is like to suffer If any object that this is to set up officers pro arbitrio which will make way for the introduction of any upon like grounds of supposed prudence I answer this were somewhat if he should make over his power from himself by delegation being himself in office But discharging his duty in his own person he may doubtlesse take in all usefull helps Paul may make use of Tertius to write Epistles to Churches and yet not make him an Apostle Aaron and Hur may stay up Moses his hands and yet not usurp Cauti 5 Moses his place Where an Eldership is erected to imbrace them as helpers 5. Where an Eldership is erected then gladly to imbrace them as helpers in the work Happily they may think their power weakened and their right denyed in case they joyn not in it If the Pastor be of another judgement it is not yet his prudence to raise stirs about it If others come in as assistant to carry on what he might otherwise do alone he hath small cause of grievance it favours too much of arrogance and of the spirit of such as love preheminence to affect to be alone though it is ordinarily most seen in resolving and attempting to overrule all where a man confesses himself to be no more then in association with others And for those that refuse to come where an Eldership sits it argues too sullen an humour Were I an inhabitant in London or like place I should take my self to be bound to passe through all the Elderships there rather then hold out of Communion 6. In making scrutiny into the knowledge of them that offer Cauti 6 themselves to deal with all gentlenesse To proceed with all gentlenesse in tryall of mens knowledge especially towards such as have been of a more mean education many times such know that which they can scarce expresse and strength of affection is often seen in plain hearts without any great light Let these be holpen in their words and let speech be to them in words fitted to their capacity Let not a question be put of any thing save that which is needful to be known when it appears that the creation is known and particularly mans estate by creation in the image of God and his fall by sin and redemption through Christ so that the party can distinguish the Persons in the Trinity to give an account which of them is the Saviour of the world that each person is God the second God and man in assuming our nature and withall able to give an account of the death of Christ in satisfaction for sin our way of interest by believing the necessity of repentance and a new life as qualifications of those that shall be saved knowing the outward signs in the Sacrament and in some competent measure their signification and use Such may be exhorted with tendernesse to grow in knowledge but not to be kept back as ignorant ones 7. Neither is a Minister upon whisper of any scandal Not to refuse but upon known crimes Nos a Communione quemquam prohibere non possumus nisi aut sponte confessum aut in aliquo judicio Ecclesiatico vel seculari nominatum atque convictum to set Cauti 7 upon proof by witnesses much lesse to undertake the giving of oathes to that purpose as hath been observed out of Suarez But upon evidence of knowledge of a way in flagitious practices known to him and scarce doubted by any That of Austin is famous We can forbid none Communion unlesse he voluntarily make confession and be called and convicted in some Court either Ecclesiastical or Civil I know this is produced by some to prove that a single Minister may not in any case withhold the Sacrament from any person But this is a great mistake it onely proves that upon any particular charge it cannot be done without due proof and proof cannot be made without power of judicature either Civil or Ecclesiastical Aquinas quotes this of Austin Sum. 13. quaest 80. art 6. and yet he never doubted of the sole power of the Pastor in it It plainly thence appears that there were both Ecclesiastical and Civil Courts then appointed to take cognizance of crimes which some would make to be inconsistent And that Ministers did take occasion upon convictions there to deny Communion It doth no
eat of this bread or drink of this cup he must upon that account take care that they be so farre knowing as to do it If he must administer it for edification he should see so farre as he is able to discern whether they be in a capacity to be edified by it If this knowledg be wanting then by their own confession they are unmeet in case they be of knowledg it is easily signified and made known especially fundamental necessary principles being alone demanded Secondly Among other graces wilt not thou in this self-examination look for that grace of humility that of hungring after Christ Jesus evidenced in the love of his Ordinances If thou art wholly wanting in the grace of humility thou standest unfit for this Table God resists the proud The soul that is lift up is not right If once this be obtained then thou wilt as to thy guidance in heaven-way not be too high to obey those that are over thee in the Lord. Those speeches that we have heard of scorn and comparisons entred never came from an humble heart If thou wantest an hungring fervent affection after Christ Jesus thou then art not meet for this Table as being without a spiritual appetite If thou hast attained to it no such barres will be pleaded or spoken of to hold thee from it Hunger will break stone-walls iron-bars This is a hard weapon that will break through all obstacles For the manner some say The association of Elders in the work no warranty for absence If this were done by the Minister alone they could easily bear but others associated they do not like Ruling Lay-Elders they suppose are not of Gods institution To this I say First What do they say to all the Reformed Churches almost in the World that have that way of Discipline if thou wert a member of the Church there wouldest thou upon this account separate and leave Church-Communion Secondly What sayest thou of our Government in this Church when Bishops were in power who acted then in Government but Chancellors and Officials who were for the most part lay-persons If such could rule over a whole County perhaps three or four Counties three or four may then with the Minister have inspection into one Parish The 26 Canon required Ministers to keep back notorious offenders from the Sacrament and Canon 27. provided that he should give his reason upon complaint to the Ordinary and obey his direction This Ordinary was for the most part a Lay-person and he was set over both the Ministers and Communicants of many Congregations Thirdly In case any judge that according to Gospel-order no others should joyn with the Minister but that he should act alone in admission what prejudice is this to the Sacrament when he that is confessedly called to the work acts alone in the administration of it And in case a Minister see it expedient to crave assistance in so weighty a businesse especially where he is cast upon a large Congregation for his further information and advice where then is the evill When Ministers this way go alone then it is auricular confession shrift and whatsoever prophanenesse can devise then partiality is objected that out of spleen they put men from this Ordinance when to avoid these even by consent help is chosen that on the other hand it is such a grievance The mixture of such that are supposed unworthy no warrantly for absence that it is thought a sufficient reason of mens absence These that we have hitherto seen are extreams on the one hand There are those of an opposite party that have their Objections likewise and would come as they say to this Table in case they could meet with suitable guests there and those onely that become such a Feast such that are holy and no other but looking for others there whom God never called they resolve upon that account to keep absent I answer 1. Let these take heed lest they take too much upon them in passing sentence upon all that come to joyn in this duty and think better upon it whether that or somewhat else ought not to be there their businesse 2. Whether they go not higher then the Word of God will bear them out in the principles that they lay for the qualification of such a one that is admittible to this Supper and take heed that their great ambition be not to find out a Church in that purity and glory that Christ hath altogether denyed to be enjoyed on earth 3. Where it is that they can have hopes to go to joyn where all give evidences of regeneration and no other are received These betake themselves all their dayes to the Society of Seekers As those under the famine of the Word threatened by the Prophet shall wander from Sea to Sea and from the North even to the East and shall run to and fro seeking the Word of the Lord So may these seeking a Church of their own fancying but shall find none But for more full satisfaction let these take these following Arguments into consideration Arguments evincing the lawfulnesse of communicating in mixt Congregations First There is never an approved example in all the Scripture of any one man that did separate or withdraw himself from an Ordinance which God hath enjoyned upon the account of the impurity or defilement either of him that did administer or of those that were to joyn in it It is true that it is said 1 Sam. 2.17 as the aggravation of the sin of Hophni and Phinehas the sons of Eli that men then and as appears for their sakes abhorred the offering of the Lord and therefore in all probability absented themselves from it but Elkanah and Hannah did not so as appears Chap. 1.3 7. and Mr. Hildersam Lect. 29 on John pag. 129. observes from Chap. 2.24 that it was their sin that made any such separation Secondly There are many approved Examples of the people of God to the contrary how much do we read in the Prophets of the peoples wickednesse and corruptions in the State Civill and Ecclesiastical yet which of them for that cause did make separation We see what company did resort to the house of God in Jeremy's time Jer. 7.9 10. and yet we see Jeremy ready when he had liberty to resort to it Jer. 36.5 Much was out of frame and little in due order in Christs time yet as he acknowledged that even then salvation was of the Jewes Joh. 4.22 they had then saving Ordinances among them so he held Communion with them as he religiously observed other Feasts so some have observed as we have heard that he kept four Passeovers after he appeared in publick for the work of mans Redemption Thirdly One mans sin must not keep another from a necessary enjoyned duty if one man will make himself by his prophane addresses guilty of Christs death another must not therefore forbear to shew forth his death This is such a duty and the sin of
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
tryal is our faith not barely the doctrine of faith as some would have it whereby we may conclude that we are of such a Church in which Christ is visibly resident in Ordinances but the grace of faith whereby he makes his abode in our soules The reason annexed is put by way of interrogation or question Know ye not your own selves how that Jesus Christ is in you except ye be reprobates which doth not imply that all are Reprobates that know not in present that Christ is in them but this is all that is implyed or can be gathered that Jesus Christ is in all that are not reprobates where reprobate is not yet opposed to the Elect as though all such were everlastingly cast-awayes in whom Christ is not in present But as the word is used Jer. 6.30 reprobate silver that is unfit for use or service so it is here taken such in present are not in a saving but in a lost condition and therefore it much concerns us to put this upon the tryal Motives to perswade to get assurance of this grace 1. Necessity of Faith For Motives to put men upon this work consider First the necessity of this grace and that upon a several account 1. Without Faith as you have heard we are without this righteousnesse None in unbelief can say of Christ Jehovah our righteousnesse All the good that Christ does unbelief loses so much good that Christ can do thee of so much unbelief strips thee The Apostle tells us of unsearchable riches in Christ Ephes 3.8 Such that none can summe up nor he that is highest in skill in Arithmetique calculate Christ is the Fathers Store-house Magazine or rich Exchequer The Father hath not a gift for any of his but he layes it up in Christ and a faith receives it from Christ Noah by faith was heir of this righteousnesse Heb. 11.7 The rest of the world wanting this grace went without this inheritance The rest of Canaan was lost by unbelief Heb. 3.18 The rest of heaven will be thus lost in like manner God hath chosen the poor of this world rich in faith heires of the Kingdome which he hath prepared for those that love him Jam. 2.5 The rich of this world destitute of this Faith make forfeiture of this Kingdome Is Christ a gift Faith receives him and unbelief is wanting Is Christ food Faith feeds upon him and unbelief is hunger-starved Is Christ rayment Faith puts him on and unbelief is naked Is Christ a Medicine Faith applyes him and unbelief languisheth Is Christ a laver Faith drencheth and douzeth it self in him and unbelief is filthy and defiled Is Christ a pardon Faith sues it out and unbelief lyeth under guilt Is Christ satisfaction Faith makes the plea and attains a discharge and unbelief remains indebted 2. Without Faith the soul is under the wrath of God and his ireful displeasure This is a necessary result from the former The man of unbelief wants that which might be interposed as an atonement and might stand as a skreen or shield for his guard And it is also fully laid down in Christ's words Joh. 3.36 He that believeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him What Zophar saith of the wicked man Job 20.29 This is his portion from God and the heritage appointed him of God that Christ sayes of unbelievers so long as they remain in unbelief so long wrath abides on them All by nature are the children of wrath having no other inheritance and the man of unbelief never gets from under wrath to attain any other portion This is an aggregate of all miseries when all is reckoned up that can be named to make miserable wrath comprizeth it all to the uttermost to infinitenesse As is the man so is his strength say Zeba and Zalmunna Judg. 8.21 As is God so is his wrath with this motive the Psalmist presseth to faith Psal 2.12 Thy sin hath merit enough to damne and thou hast not any interest in Christ to save or deliver He that is void of Faith and yet under no such feares it is not because there is no cause of feares but that such a soul is not awakened to see his fearful deplored and desperate condition If the rich glutton had seen Hell gaping for him and the Devil ready to hale and drag him he could not then have had any list to his every-dayes Gorgeous apparrel nor yet any appetite to his delicate fare That is the condition of secure sensual ones till Hell-fire flame about them they think they are sure of heaven 3. Without faith there is no benefit to be had or good to be found in any Ordinances No Ordinance is useful but either as it is improved by Faith already seated in the soul or as it is serviceable to the plantation of it No duty of any kind works to acceptance from an unbelievers hand Abel's sacrifice was accepted when Cain's could not gain acceptance Gen. 4.4 5. The Apostle shews us the reason of this difference Heb. 11.4 By faith Abel offered a more excellent sacrifice then Cain The Parable of the sower tells us how few profitable hearers of the Word there can be found and the Apostle gives the reason Heb. 4.2 The Word is not mixt with faith in those that hear it It is effectual alone in believers 1 Thess 2.13 and no more have audience in prayer then those that profit in hearing and there is one and the same reason of both Jam. 1.6 7. And that man is doubtlesse under an heavy Judgment that never gets good when he hears from God nor obtains his request when he seeks to God At the Lords Table they eat bread but feed not on Christ they take the Cup but have no interest in the blood of the new Covenant 4. Without faith nothing is done that God accepts The man and the work both displease Heb. 11.6 There must be a concurrence of all requisites to render a work good and acceptable But in an unbelievers work the matter of the work excepted all requisites are wanting The rise is from a fountain that is unclean and the unbelieving soul cannot go so high as to make the glory of God the end And the rule is above him in the work to look after 5. Without Faith the whole of man head breast and bowels are all open to Satan Faith is a Christians shield Ephes 6.16 and a shield is the defence not of one part but the guard of the whole A man without faith is a Souldier without armes and destitute of all power to make any manner of resistance Satan leads such an one at pleasure There is nothing of Christ nothing of grace nothing of the Spirit to stand up in opposition Some devils are not resisted without strength of faith Mark 9.29 No devil without faith can be vanquished or overcome Mot. 2 Secondly Consider the benefits of faith the glory that doth accompany it The benefits that
for life and power and so the life that we live in the flesh is by faith in Christ Jesus So that faith I suppose may be fitly defined to be A firm assent of mind to the whole truth of God in the way that he doth reveal it with an acceptation of all that good which God confers by Christ in the way that he doth tender it I know this grace is diversly held out and is so comprehensive that the full nature of it is not easily laid open A common definition of it is that it is A resting upon Christ alone for salvation purposely given to correct their mistake that have made assurance or a full perswasion that what Christ hath done I shall enjoy in particular to be of the nature and essence of faith But though this may vertually comprize all that is required in this grace yet it is no full and explicite definition of it for unlesse the understanding give its assent that salvation is alone by Christ the will cannot rest upon him for it This assent in that definition is presupposed But it is convenient that it should be expert Other things besides salvation are received by faith from Christ but salvation is the most eminent and principall and all other as by consequent depend upon it This that I have delivered is more explicitely full not onely virtually but expresly holds out all that faith compriseth And as all of those are here as we have heard convinced of unbelief that know not those necessary truths that God hath made known and upon that account can give no assent together with those that believe even in necessary and fundamentall doctrines otherwise then God hath revealed that pick and choose in doctrines of faith assenting or denying assent at pleasure So also all those that give other things the preheminence above Christ or at least take them in in coordination with him When Christ is offered in the Gospel to the soul and men are urged by his Ministers to receive him for life and happinesse the things of the world are still ready to make tender of themselves The lust of the eyes the lust of the flesh the pride of life that is profits pleasures honours When these are hugged prosecuted and followed Christ is refused and slighted A covetous man will make sail of Christ for a piece of silver he will lay out more strength of affection to compasse earth in the way of a calling then to compasse Christ in Ordinances The man of pleasures will sell Christ for his cups for his sports for his wantonnesse the like we may say of the man of honours He that for the cause of Christ can forsake and abjure all is the onely man in whom Christ by faith makes his residence The necessary nourishment of faith Thus we have seen the two first wayes for the tryal of faith the third followes which is The means appointed for the nourishment and strength of it It cannot live unlesse in the use of means it be kept up Declensions are apt to appear in soul as well as in body He observes little about his spiritual estate that does not see his faith oftentimes apt to languish as well as his health And though we be kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation yet it is in the use of means and not otherwise He therefore that lives in faith is careful in the use of means to keep faith alive The means appointed of God for this end are especially the Word Sacraments and Prayer The Word 1. The Word is food as well as seed as it plants so it waters as it begins so it perfects the work of grace When Paul left the Ephesians whom he had begotten to the faith through the Gospel he leaves them this Legacy Act. 20.32 We are born again of the immortal seed of the Word 1 Pet. 1.23 and as new born babes we must desire the sincere milk of the Word that we may grow thereby 1 Pet. 2.2 No man ever knew a child live without the breast or other suitable means for nourishment Nor men of strength without answerable sustenance no more can a man in grace live without the Word of grace Our imaginations and carnal reasonings will be stirring and working and faith hath not a more deadly enemie The Word which is the sword of the Spirit must beat those down and hold them under 2 Cor. 10.5 The word of promise underproppes our faith and must be frequently heard diligently heeded or else it cannot be upheld Those therefore that prize the Word as a child the dug esteeming it with Job as their ordinary food Job 23.12 and to this end to keep life in their souls faith in their hearts here is a sign both of life and growth but when it is with men as with Israel in the wildernesse their soul loatheth this heavenly Manna as light bread having their appetite far better pleased with other things their ear being of the temper of Jeremies hearers The Word of the Lord is a reproach to them they have no delight in it Jer. 6.10 these never had faith in the power and life And all they that lose in their love to the Word lose also in their faith Many here might be convinced to be wanting in this righteousnesse upon their want of faith to intrest themselves in it 1. Those that take themselves to be above any necessity of hearing having learnt as they think so much that they may now well lay aside their teachers God vouchsafing of grace those gifts for the perfecting of the Saints having gained as they think perfection they matter no more intermedling with them If these could shew us any Scripture-Saint that ever reached to this height or ever set upon any such resolution or if they could give such experience to all that know them that they might know that they want nothing of the highest top of perfection then they said something But when the highest of Saints that we read of in the Word highly prized the Word and the more high they were the more high prize they put upon it and these that upon this pretence reject it proclaime to the vvorld many vvants in their souls even in that vvhich lyeth at the very bottome of faith and is of greatest necessity to the being of it their knovvledge being but in part in most of these very lovv and little or nothing vvhere most should be knovvn vve may vvell conclude that all this talke of perfection is vain Take tvvo persons the one of them talking and boasting of vvealth the other labouring hard in tillage or trade to gain vvealth and if you can tell whether of these the talker or the labourer is like to encrease in substance then you have determined the question whether these unruly talkers that boast of faith or those that diligently attend on Ordinances for gaining of it are more richly stored with it 2. Those that neglect to hear or
well as now in act the effect must needs be likewise But it was from that time and not before that it was appointed as a sign and under that consideration we find it mentioned and largely spoke to Gen. 9.8 Gen. 9.8 c. opened and following verses God spake unto Noah and to his sons with him saying And I behold I establish my Covenant with you and with your seed after you And with every living creature that is with you of the fowl of the cattel and of every beast of the earth with you from all that go out of the Ark to every beast of the earth And I will establish my Covenant with you neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood neither shall there be any more a flood to destroy the earth And God said This is the token of the Covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you for perpetual generations I do set my bowe in the cloud and it shall be for a token of a Covenant between me and the earth And it shall come to passe when I bring a cloud over the earth that the bowe shall be seen in the cloud And I will remember my Covenant which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh and the bowe shall be in the cloud And I will look upon it that I may remember the everlasting Covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth And God said unto Noah This is the token of the Covenant which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth In which words we may observe 1. A Covenant entred 2. The sign whereby it is ratified and confirmed In the Covenant it self we see 1. The parties in Covenant God on one part Noah his sonnes their seed every Living Creature on the other part 2. The Rainbowe hath respect to a Covenant improperly so called The nature of this Covenant absolute and not conditional as Pareus observes and therefore it is a Covenant improperly so called as appears upon a double account First In that it is absolute when a Covenant properly so called hath its conditions as elsewhere I have largely shewed Secondly In that beasts and birds that are here parties in Covenant are subjects capable of receiving mercies but not of entering into Covenant no more then the stones of the field are of capacity to enter league with man as Job 5.23 or to be witnesses in any cause as Josh 24.17 therefore as a bare command is called a Covenant Jer. 34.13 as a bare seal is also so called Gen. 17.10 so promises elswhere called a Covenant likewise all of them in an improper sense In the Covenant we see the mercy promised ver 11. not to cut off all flesh any more by a flood In the sign for ratification and confirmation we may see 1. The Author 2. The sign it self the appearance of a bowe 3. The place of situation the Cloud 4. The way of signification and that is by institution as appears in that God sets it for that very end Some make the Rainbowe a natural sign of that which the text saith is signified by it which according to them is not that which is generally understood that God will destroy the world no more by water but onely that no such deluge shall at that time come when the Rainbowe appears seeing it is a sign that the Sunne hath got victory over any such clouds that might have tendency to such a deluge So Cajetan as he is quoted by Rivet exercit in Gen. who yet as Rivet observes contradicts himself in that he saies any deluge of such kind must needs be supernatural It might then come upon the earth from the hand of God at the instant time that the bowe appears any such natural cause notwithstanding It is then The Rainbow an instituted sign no natural but an instituted sign to give assurance of the fulfilling of this promise Upon sight of this bowe we may call to mind that it is of free grace that all flesh does not perish and that the waters that are so useful to us do not presently destroy us and to assure our selves that through grace we shall be kept from perishing Pareus saies that the Jewes upon the appearance of the rainbowe used to go out and make such expresse acknowledgments But open professions of that nature are in danger to turn to ostentation and meer formality which yet must not hold us from our duty in humility confidence and praise to make observation of it Correspondencyes observed by some in the Rainbow with the promise Some find fit correspondencies in the Rainbowe to signifie and seal this mercy First Because of the place which is in the clouds of heaven whence came the rain that drowned the world before Secondly Because the bowe is bended upward towards God not towards the Creature below as when it is taken in hand to shoot at a mark nor is there in the bowe any arrow which is said to be made ready upon the string when hurt is intended Psal 11.2 Thirdly because the Rainbowe appeareth commonly with rain and so where men might begin to fear the judgment there they may take comfort against it in that it is a sign of his Covenant for safety Fourthly because the Rainbowe appears not but when there is a clearnesse and brightnesse in some part of the skie but at the generall flood it was all black with rain Fifthly That the Rainbowe consisting of divers colours by the watery colour is represented the overwhelming rain past and not to return and by the fiery colour is prefigured the destruction of the World by the element of fire as is foretold 2 Pet. 3.10 Sixthly Because the Rainbowe where it toucheth upon any shrubs leaveth a very sweet and fragant smell behind as some Naturalists observe it holds out the pleasant acceptation of God as a sweet smelling savour in his nostrils But seeing that these are not taught us in the Word but found out by men and Zanchy saies of them that they are piae but parum firmae I shall passe them by And to wind up all that we have to say of this thing How far the Rainbowe is Sacramental we see First How farre there is an agreement between the Rainbowe and the Sacrament The Rainbowe we see 1. Is a sign 2. A sign not natural but by institution 3. The institution is of God 4. It is to signifie and seal a promise made of God How far it falls short of a Sacrament Thus farre it is of Sacramental use yet it falls short of a Sacrament properly so called in several particulars 1. Sacraments are signes and seales of a Covenant properly so called but here is no Covenant but such as is Synechdochically and improperly
Where world in the first place signifies the earth in the second place men on the earth 2 Cor. 5.21 Him that knew no sin he made sin for us Where in the first place sin is taken properly in the latter place by a Metonymy 2 Chron. 35.24 And they brought him to Jerusalem and he died and was buried in one of the sepulchres of his Fathers and all Judah and Jerusalem mourned for Josiah In the first place Jerusalem is taken for the City in the second place for the Inhabitants of it And so also Matth. 2.1 3. There came wisemen from the east to Jerusalem When Herod the King heard these things he was troubled and all Jerusalem with him With further instances which there may be seen concluding that therefore the supposition of the adversaries is false that the repetition of the same word must be allwaies in the same sense 3. No doubt say you but Paul and James handle two distinct questions but not the two that you here expresse Paul speaks of meritorious works which make the reward of debt and not of grace if you will believe his own description of them Rom. 4.4 But James speaks of no such works but of such as have a consistency with grace and a necessary subordination to it I prove it The works that James speaks of we must endeavour for and perform or perish Paul excludes not only works of merit but all works from Justification supposing time but the works that Paul speaks of no man must endeavour or once imagine that he can perform viz. such as make the reward to be of debt and not of grace To this I answer 1. That if Paul speaks only of meritorious works then according to you he speaks of no works at all for there are none such no not in Angels Confess Chap. 3. § 6 Paul speaks in the place quoted of works where there is a reward of debt and yet speaks not as I conceive of works of merit seeing as he mentions none such so there are none such He exclude then works to which a reward is due vi promissi rather then meriti As Eph. 2. he excludes boasting of works done by the help of grace for there is a matter of boasting in these as we see in the Pharisee Luk. 18.11 2. If Paul had here spoken of works of merit and I must believe him so elsewhere he speaks of other works and there both you and I are to believe him likewise 1. He speaks and excludes all the works that we have done Tit. 3.5 Which he universally opposes to Justification by free grace v. 7. and it is of faith that it may be of grace Rom. 4.16 2. He speaks of and excludes all those works or that righteousnesse which is not the righteousnesse of God by faith Phil. 8.8 9. that is all the righteousness that is inherent in us and not in Christ alone and made ours by faith therefore he is called the Lord our Righteousnesse Jer. 23.6 and said to be made of God unto us righteousnesse 1 Cor. 1.30 3. He speaks of and excludes all those works which the Law commands Rom. 3.20 Now there is no work of grace but the Law gives it in charge yea the Law commands to take in grace wheresoever there is a tender of it for our assistance Requiring a duty it requires all necessary helps to it And therefore Chemnitius observes that when the Apostle excludes the works of the Law from Justification his intention is to exclude the highest and noblest not only done by Pharisees or unregenerate persons but Abraham David or the most eminent convents 4. He speaks of and excludes all those works that any man in the highest pitch of grace can attain unto in the place quoted 1 Cor. 4.4 I know nothing by my self yet I am not thereby Justified He knew no matter of condemnation say you sensu Evangelico he then kept up to that which God in the Gospel-Covenant calls for And yet he is not thereby justified Though God will not condemne a man of that integrity through grace yet this doth not justifie This place saith Cartwright on the words is the death of your Justification by works For if Paul knew nothing by himself in that wherein the Corinthians might suppose him most guilty and was not so much as in that point Justified before God who is he that dares to Justifie himself before God in any work And Fulk on the words Paul doth acknowledge that he is not Justified by his faithfull service and labour in the Gospel therefore no man can be Justified by his works done of grace in as great perfection as can be done of mortall man If the whole discharge of Paules ministeriall function wherein he took heed to himself and to his doctrines was not such where by he could be Justified How then could Abraham be justified in offering Isaack or Rahab in her hiding of the spies If the Apostle therefore do exclude works of merit we see what works he also excludes with it You futher say Paul speaks indeed of faith collaterally but of Christs merits and free grace directly and purposely So that the chief part of Pauls controversie was Whether we are justified freely through Christs merits or through our own meritorious works But James question is Whether we are Justified by faith alone or by faith with obedience accompanying it and both as subordinate to Christs merits Answ Some will think that you judge faith not worthy to be named but on the bie Who can be of your mind that reads the Apostle speaking so often Paul treats diversly and industriously of Justification by faith and so fully to the office of faith in Justistification but that his scope is no lesse to shew what justifies ex parte nostri which it still faith then what that is that justifies ex parte Dei which is grace or ex parte Christi which is his blood or merit Pauls question you say is of the meritorious cause of our Justification James his question of the condition on our part If you are in the right Paul certainly was much defective in his Logick We think the question in debate is to be put into the Conclusion see how he concludes Rom. 3.28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the works of the Law Inferences are made and consectaries drawn from that which is mainly in dispute and not from that which is collaterally mentioned and upon the bie onely touched upon Now he concludes from the doctrine of Justification by faith mentioning as we see Justification ex parte nostri peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ Rom. 5.1 You further say Paul speaks of Justification in toto both in the beginning and progresse but especially in the beginning but James speaks only of Justification as continued and consummate and not as begun For both Abrahams and every mans was begun before works of obedience I Answer
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
many more Adversaries then you His work was published before yours and if you intended to publish no other doctrine How could you know that yours was like to blast your reputation with most Divines as in your Printed Letter you tell Mr. Tombs Pag. 409 When his work has mâ—ch advanc'd and not blasted his reputation at all In this Apology you tell me Pag. 16. of four great errors of the Protestant party in the doctrine of Jâ—stification aâ—quitting English Râ—form rs in one of them only And all except that one Davenant is as guilly as any The first is That the formall cause of our Righteousnesse is the formall Righteousnesss of Jesus Christ as suffering and perfectly obeying for us And if this be an error no man is more chargeable then he with it He makes this the title of his 28. Chap. de Justit habit (a) Imputatam Christi obedientiam esse causam formalem Justificationis nostrae probatur The imputed Righteousnesse of Christ is proved to be the formall cause of our Justification Making it good in that Chapter by 11. Arguments and answering contrary objections Having confirm'd it with Arguments he proceeds in the next Chapter to back it with Authorities And quoting Justin Martyr in the first place he thus comments upon him (b) Hic aptrtè doc et Justinus Martyr non modo mortem satisfactionem imputati ad poenam delendam sed ipsam conversationem ejus seu obedientiam activam imputari nobis ad peccatum obliterandum Here Justin Martyr doth evidently teach that noâ— only the death and satisfaction of Christ is imputed to us to take away our punishment but also his conversation and active obedience is imputed to us to take away sin Pag. 374. The like we may find Pag. 378. upon occasion of quotation out of Cyrillus Alexandrinus The next error charged upon Protestants by you is about the way and manner of our participation of this Righteousnesse which the Divines say is by imputation And so Davenant says as we have already heard asserting against Bellarmine the greatest necessity as he speaks of it Pag. 32. Quoting against him Scriptures for it explaining Protestants meaning in it (c) Nos vero hâc imputatione justificationem sitam putamus non eo nomine solum quod Christus nos regit justitiâ suâ sed multò magìs quia donat nos justitiâ suà Neque dicimus Deum nos pro justis habere solummodo quia tectos conspicit justitia Redemptoris nostri sed quia ex sua ordinatione omnes credentes atque in unam personam cum Christo coalescentes justitiae ejus obedidientiae veré participes factos We think saith he that Justification is placed in this imputation not only because Christs covers us with his Righteousnesse but much rather because he freely conferrs his righteousnesse upon us Neither do we say that God accounts us as just only because he sees us Cloathed with the Righteousnesse of our Redeemer but because he sees by his own ordination all believers united into Christ as one person made truly partakers of his obedience But perhaps you are most offended with that which you put in the close of your Charge of this error upon Reformers That we are hereby namely by imputation of this Righteousnesse esteemed legaliter to have fulfilled the Law in Christ Which in your account is so high an error that with you it is one of the pillars of Antinomianisme And qâ—oting these words from a Reverend Brother whom sometimes at least you have had in high esteem That as in Christs suffering we were lookt upon by God as suffering in him So by Christs obeying of the Law we are beheld as fulfilling the Law in him You appeaâ—e to youâ— Reader whether it be true or tolerable Yoâ— seem to think that the naming it is enough to work a deep dislike if not detestation of it And if Davenant here be not as blame-worthy as he I am much mistaken See his third Argument for confirmation of his Thesis before mentioned Pag. 364. (d) Deus ex intuitu obedien 〈◊〉 per Christum praestitae usque ad mortem crucis nos liberavit à poenâ debitá legis transgressoribus imputando nobis hanc alterius satisfactionem perinde ac si nostra fuisset Ergo ex intuitu obedientiae per Christum praestitae usque ad impletionem legis nos donabit illis beneficiis quae promittuntur legis observatoribus imputando nimirum nobis hanc alterius justitiam quasi etiam nostra esset God in beholding the obedience performed by Christ even to the death of the Crosse delivers us from the punishment due to the transgressors of the Law imputing this satisfaction of another to us even as though it had been ours Therefore in beholding the obedience of Christ yeelded even to the fulfilling of the Law he confers these benefits upon us which are promised to the observers of the Law that is by imputing to us this righteousnesse of another as though it were ours And much more to this purpose And afterwards further explaining himself he sayth (e) Quemadmodum iutuitu imputatae satisfactionis Deus nos liberat ab ira poena quasi nos illam satisfactionem in propriis personis exhibuissemus Sic intuitu legis à Christo pro nobis impletae acceptat nos ad vitam proemium gloriae quasi nos nostrâ personali justitiâ legem implevissemus As upon sight of this imputed satisfaction God doth deliver us from wrath and punishment as though we had made satisfaction in our own persons So upon sight of the Law fulfilled by Christ for us he accepts us unto life and glory as though with our own personall Righteousnesse we had fulfilled the Law The third error which is charged upon Protestants is that from which English Reformers are acquitted The fourth is About the formall reason of faiths interest in Justification Which Protestant Reformers say as you observe from them is as the instrument This indeed Davenant doth not put to the question and purposely handle that I know as he does the former Yet we find him fully asserting it Answering Bellarmines objection that (f) Instrumentalem semper agnoscit non autem formalem nisi quatenus sub nomine fidei includit objectum fide comprehensum Quasi diceret Christi obedientiam fide apprehensam esse causam formalem Justificationis nostrae Luther made faith the formall cause of Justification he saith that Luther alwaies acknowledged it the instrumentall but not the formall unlesse under the name of faith he include the object apprehended by faith as though he should say that the obedience of Christ apprehended by faith is the formall cause of our Justification Where we plainly see Davenants mind 1. That that which apprehends and applies the righteousness of Christ for justification is the instrumentall cause in it 2. That faith apprehends and applies this righteousness of Christ for
justification and consequently with him Faith is the instrument So also Determinat 37. pag. 165. (g) Huic fiduciae in Christum mediatorem tribuimus instrumentalem vim justificandi potius quam illi actui hominis peccatoris Quia constat eo modo justificari homines quo gloria divina maximè illustretur honor salutis nostrae ad solum Deum referatur Atqui ab aliis virtutibus aut operibus statuunt hominem justifioari in justificationis negotio gloriam salutis humanae non integram Deo relinquunt sed merito suo aliquâ ex parte adscribunt We attribute saith he this instrumentall power of justification to this trust in Christ the Mediator rather then to any other act of sinning man because it is manifest that men are justified that way by which the glory of God may be most illustrated and the honour of our salvation given to God alone But they that affirm that man is justified by other vertues or works do not leave the whole glory of man's savation in justification alone to God but ascribe some part unto themselves You are highly displeased with all those that will have no other condition of our justification at the day of judgement then affiance in Christ's righteousness If you allow faith to begin it yet you will have works at any hand to perfect it Here he is as full as anywhere against you Quoting two passages out of Hilary Chap. 29. p. 377. Of which we may make use anon he thus expresseth himself (h) Solent Jesuitae justificationem fidei ascribere sed non solo Hunc errorem taxat Hilarius quando dicit Sola fides justificat Initium etiam justificationis fidei tribuunt sed non consummationem Atille longè aliter justum fides consummat Jesuites are wont to ascribe justification to faith but not to faith alone Hilary taxes this error when he saith Faith alone justifies They attribute saith he the beginning of justification to faith but not the consummation But Hilary far otherwise Faith consummates the just We have heard your sense of the danger of that opinion That faith in Christ as giving himself in Satisfaction for us is alone the justifying act And we shall hear how confident you are that all antiquity is against it as against the instrumentality of faith in justification and the interest of works as consummate in judgement If you please to read Davenants 37. Determinat You shall see him as fully against you as Chemnitius Amesius Prideaux Bernard Anselmus or any other that you can look upon as your greatest adversaries My third argument to assert this position laid down Sect. 2. of this Postscript he there makes his first which I saw not till I was come hither else I might have made other use of it And see how he expresses himself pag. 164. (i) Jam quod spectat ad pro prium illud speciale objectum in quod fides respicit eo ipso articulo quo accipit justificationem à Deo certum est in historicâ narratione creationis aut gubernationis non posse animam ream invenire hanc peccatorum remissionem Vnde Aquinas In ipsâ justificatione peccatoris non est necesse ut cogitentur caeteri articuli sed solum cogitetur Deus peccata remittens Deinde in mandatis comminationibus legis multo minùs invenitur hoc speciale objectum Nam talis consideratio ex se nihil gignit quam terrores c. Restant igitur dulces promissiones Evangelicae de favore gratuitâ peccati remissione per propter Mediatorem in quas dum fides respicit peccator fiduciam concipit in hunc oblatum sibi Mediatorem recumbit divinae misericordiae se justificandum subjicit atque inde justificationis beneficium protinùs consequitur Now as to that speciall proper object at which faith looks in that very instant in which it receives justification from God it is certain that the guilty soul can not find remission of sins in the historicall narrative of creation or providence Whence Aquinas In the justification of a sinner it is not necessary that other articles be thought upon but that God be thought upon pardoning sin And in the commands and threats of the Law this speciall object is much less found For this consideration begets nothing else but terrors c. Therefore the sweet Evangelicall promises of the favour and free pardon of sin by and for the mediatour onely remain upon which whil'st faith looks the sinner conceives hope relies upon this mediator offered to him yields himself to divine mercy for justification and thereby attains the benefit of justification And this he backs with three Arguments You tell me Apol. p. 24. It must needs be known that the faith which is the justifying condition is terminated on Christ himself as the object and not on his Righteousness which he gives in remission Giving in your reasons To which in their due place I have spoke And you may see Davenant as full against you here as any where ca. 23. de Justit habit p. 317. (k) Accipere autem dicimur hoc donum manu fidei quae applicat nobis Christi justitiam non ut nostra fiat per modum infusionis aut inhaesionis sed per modum imputationis Atque demiror Papist as non posse intelligere quomodo per fidem Christi justitia nobis applicetur qui putant se intelligere quo modo per indulgentias Pontificias Christi sanctorum merita sive vivis sive mortuis assigentur We are said to receive this gift by the hand of faith which applies to us the righteousness of Christ not that it should be made ours way of infusion or inhesion but by way of imputation And I wonder saith he that Papists cannot understand how the righteousness of Christ is applied to us by faith who think that they understand how by the Popes indulgencies the merits of Christs and the Saints are applied to the quick and dead As also chap. 28. p. 371. (l) Nihil usitatius quam causae applicanti illud tribuere quod propriè immediatè pertinet ad rem applicatam Quia igitur fides apprehendit applicat nobis Christi justitiam id fidei ipsi tribuitur quod reipsa Christo debetur There is nothing more usual then to ascribe that to the cause applying which properly and immediately belongs to the thing applyed Therefore because faith apprehends and applies the righteousness of Christ to us that is attributed to faith that indeed is due to Christ Where we plainly see that according to him Faith applies the righteousness of Christ and that it is an applying cause and what cause except instrumentall I cannot imagine Much more might be brought out of this Reverend Author to this purpose But this is enough to let us see that there is not any so fair and full accord between you And if I should be put to name two
other he threats and these we expect or fear according as we answer in Covenant-keeping or fail through breach of it Herein I explained my self Chap. 5. pag. 21. and this sure was your mind when you wrote your Aphorismes where you say Faith and Repentance are Gods part that he will perform in one Covenant and made our conditions in another The bestowing of them then is no condition of God in that Covenant where they are conditions required from us You say in a Parenthesis if I understand you that our action of believing is called Gods condition by the Querist though improperly yet in a language very common in Mr. Bl's Treatise I desire instances to make this appear that it is thus common in my Treatise You say Thus much being premised I reply more particularly 1. I will yet say that God hath such an absolute promise as well as a conditionall till you give me beâ—ter reasons of your deniall or your questioning whether Scripture will bear it Answ It seems you perceive that I do not plainly deny it Arguments offered against an absolute Covenant I have reasons so far preponderating at least that I dare not assert it I shall adventure upon one that makes towards a denial Meer gracious predictions or prophecies de eventu what God will do are no absolute promises how generally soever so taken This I think is plain There is a difference betwixt a meer prediction and a promise or a prophecie de eventu what God will do and a promise But these that are generlly taken to be absolute promises are according to you meer gracious perdictions what God will do Aphor. pag. 9. Prophecies de eventu what God will do Append. pag. 44. Ergo. I shall adventure to second it with another Promises properly so called have some determinate object to whom they are made and who may receive consolation from them This appears Heb. 6.17 18. But in these absolute promises generally so called there is no determinate object to whom they are made or that possibly can receive consolation from them This is plain They are made as you say to the Elect and being made to them they are made as you further say to we know not who and so none can receive consolation from them No man can aforehand say as you observe that he shall have a new and soft heart because God hath promised it For he cannot know that it is promis'd to him Therefore these are no promises properly so called You adde I shall yet say that the giving of our faith and Repentance is the matter of that absolute promise Answ That it is the matter of that which you have called Gods prediction or prophecie de eventu what shall fall out and now do call an absolute promise I do easily grant And so according to your self it is not the matter of the conditionall proper Covenant of which we speak which is enough for me against you in the thing in question You further say my argument to the contrary hath little in it to compell you to a change Answ My argument it seems found you changed I cannot see you the same here as at least I thought I saw you in your Aphorisms Your Major say you is Whose acts they are his conditions they are In your reply you seem to grant it understood negatively but affirmatively you say the proposition holds not universally but put not in your exception But afterwards you put in an â—xcâ—ption as understood negatively Nor negatively do's it hold say you speaking de actione quâ est quid donandum Answ I think it holds nothing less then if there be quid agendum as well is quid dandum in case the action be matter of duty You say further to your Minor I could better answer if I could find it Expecting say you that it should have been this But our faith and Repentance are not Gods acts And observing that I say That this rises not to make them formally Gods acts and not ours leaving out all that to which the Relative This refers you know best for what reason Your Reader may suspect That it is to perswade that I deny which seems your great design here that God hath any hand in it I was censured before for giving too mâ—ch to the Spirit of God in the work of Sanctification when I would have the denomination to be given to him and not to man in that work And here I am brought in as ascribing nothing to Gods Spirit because I seem to say that Faith and Repentance are mans acts and not Gods Where you further except against me as over cautelous in speaking the two propositions copulatively It is enough you say to prove them Gods conditions and ours if they be Gods actions and ours Which will be I think a disproof if it be once made good of that which in your answer to your Querists you have said where you say That they are Gods part that he hath discovered that he will perform in one Covenant and they are made our conditions in another They are not then Gods conditions and ours in the same Covenant I am well enough content that you make them God's conditions and not ours in the improper unconditionate Covenant so that you will grant that they are our conditions and not Gods in the proper conditionate Covenant of which we now speak When I say that this rises not to make them formally Gods acts and not ours You say the word formally may do much to help me out And I say it is well that I have some help that way for I fear your great design here is to hedge me in or else you had not opposed me where my business is not to oppose but to defend you And here you come in with an objection to purpose It is hard to know whether your formally respect a natural or moral form Where we have Logick niceties enow But to let these pass I think no man but your self would have mentioned nature or morality here My meaning is only that formali modo loquendi they have their denomination from man and not from God You further observe that I say They are our acts c. God believes not c. Yielding that to believe is our act you object that to move us effectually to believe as a superior cause is not our work but Gods Answ Sure you do not think that ever I thought that the work of a superior cause above man is the work of man And you may plainly see that I speak as much in words that you leave out for God's more superior causality in this work as you do You say Let it be so to believe is our work and our condition It follows not that it is not Gods But me thinks this necessarily follows I never heard that in any bargain the condition of the one party was the condition of the other And your Reader will think that you have here much forgot