iustice but as it is an exercise or declaration or perfection of Faith 12 Concerning the word Faith sometimes it signifieth that sanctifying grace of Gods spirit whereby wee beleeue in or on God that is put all our affiance vpon God in Christ for Iustification and Saluation sometimes a naked assent or agreeing to all the truths contained in the Scripture specially such as are Euangelicall That is only of the Elect this the Diuels haue That either hath works following it as in Abraham or is great in child of works ready to trauell and bring forth if God giue time as in the theefe on the crosse This many times is without works and therefore dead and spiritles Of that S. Paul speaketh of this S. Iames. That sole but not solitary iustifies this being solitary iustifies not 13 In a word S. Paul speaks of the cause of Iustification S. Iames of the Effect S. Paul descends from the Cause to the Effect S. Iames ascends from the Effects to the Cause S. Paul resolues how wee may bee iustified S. Iames how wee may bee knowne to bee iustified S. Paul excludes works as being no Cause of Iustification S. Iames requires works as fruites of Iustification S. Paul denies works to go before them that are to bee iustified S. Iames affirmeth that they follow him that is iustified 14 Others distinguish and reconcile them thus Iustification is sometime vnderstood without implying Sanctification sometime as it implyeth also Sanctification with it In the former sence S. Paul taketh it when hee proueth that a man is iustified by Faith without works S. Iames in the latter when he concludeth that a man is iustified by works and not by Faith only And this I suppose to be a very sound interpretation 15 Howsoeuer that Faith alone without the works of the Law in the sence aboue deliuered doth iustifie these ancient Fathers auouch together with us Origen Cyprian Eusebius Caesariensis Hilarie Basil Chrysostome Ambrose Augustin Cyril Primasius Hesychius Gennadius Oecumenius whose direct and expresse words I can at any time produce Nay these late Papists also least it should be thought that none but Protestants hold it the Canons of Collein the authors of the booke offered by Caesar vnto the Protestant Collocutors in the assemblie of Ratisbon Pighius Cassander Stapulensis Peraldus Ferus and others who count themselues as good Catholiks as they that hold otherwise 16 And this only Faith is so sure an anchor of our soules and suchâ— fountaine of true comfort both in life and death that Charles the fift Steuen Gardiner Sir Christopher Blunt and sundrie others durst not at their death trust vnto their works but vnto Faith in Christ only And Cardinal Bellarmin after a long disputation touching the merit of works is faine to conclude that because of the vncertenty of our owne iustice and the danger of vaineglory the Safest course is to repose all our affiance in the only mercy and goodnes of God So that in his iudgement wee Protestants haue chosen the Safest course I for my part will neuer trust my soule vnto them who leauing so safe a course meane to hazard it through a more dangerous way OF THE AVTHORS AND AVTHORITY OF THE CREED AND WHY IT IS CALLED a Symbole THE inscription of the Creed seemes to father it on the holy Apostles calling it the Symbole of the Apostles So doe almost all the Fathers of the fourth age after Christ and downeward affirming that the Apostles hauing receiued the Holy Ghost at Ierusalem and being now ready to disperse themselues into all parts of the world to preach the Gospell thought it good before their parting to compile this Symbole that it might serue as a pledge of their vnity in the Faith and a canon for their doctrine and teaching Yea some of them proceed so farre as particularly to set downe what article was made by what Apostle whereof see Augustin in his hundred and fifteenth Sermon de tempore Now although it bee very hard for mee to sway against the streame of so maine authority yet can I not but doubt thereof Paraphr in Mat. Praef. and confesse with Erasmus I know not who made the Creed especially hauing so great probabilities for demonstrations I dare not call them that it should not bee done by the twelue Apostles For first were it compiled by them is it likely that Saint Luke writing the history of their Acts would haue omitted so principall a matter Sundry other things of farre lesse consequence hee hath carefully recorded but of this so important and weighty a businesse hee makes not so much as one word mention which certainly hee would neuer haue failed to doe had they done so Adde hereunto that not one of the ancient Fathers who liued within the three first Centuries of Christ speake of any such thing in any of their writings and yet they should best know it whose times were neerest vnto the Apostles This deep silence both of Saint Luke and all those ancient Doctors make it vnto mee more then probable that the Apostles neuer composed it Secondly as the silence of these worthies so the very language of the Creed conuinceth it to bee yonger then the Apostles For the word Catholike vsed in the Creed was not knowne in their time Can any man thinke that the Church should then bee called Catholike when it was not Catholike For when they say this Creed was compiled the Church was scarce begunne among the Iewes and the Apostles had no where as yet preached the Gospell among the Gentils But heare the expresse words of Pacianus Bishop of Barcilona Sed sub Apostolis Ad Sympronian Epist 1. inquies nemo Catholicus vocabatur Esto sic fuerit Vel illud indulge cum post Apostolos haereses extitissent diuersisque nominibus columbam Dei atque Reginam lacerare per partes scindere niterentur nonne cognomen suum plebs Apostolica postulabat quo incorrupti populi distingueret vnitatem neintemeratam Dei virginem error aliquorum per membra laceraret In the Apostles times you will say no man was called Catholicke Bee it so Yet by your leaue when after the Apostles heresies were risen vp and by diuersity of names they laboured to rent and teare in peeces the done and queene of God was it not requisite that those which were Apostolike should haue a sirname of their owne whereby the vnity of those that are vncorrupt might bee distinguished and the error of none might rent in peeces the immaculate virgin of God Thus hee Against which if it bee obiected that the Epistles of Iames Peter Iohn and Iude are called Catholicke I answer the Inscriptions and Subscriptions of the Epistles are not Apostolicall but added to them by some other and sometime vntruly Neither is there any reason they should bee so stiled aboue the rest For neither is the doctrine contained in them more Catholicke then of all the other Epistles neither were they written to all the
therefore are not one 3. That which in nature comes after Iustification cannot be Iustifying faith This appeares because Faith is the Efficient instrumentall cause of Iustification and euery Efficient by the rule of Logick is in nature before the Effect But this knowledge or Assurance is in nature after iustificatiō This I proue thus the truth of a proposition is alwayes in nature before the knowledge of the truth for Propositions are not therefore true because knowne so but they are first true and then knowne so Therefore this Proposition I know I am iustified spoken by on that is iustified must needs presuppose the partie before to be iustified Therefore this knowledge of Iustification in nature following Iustification it cannot be Iustifying faith 4. In conditionall promises there can be no Assurance of the thing promised before the performance of the condition V. G. This is a conditionall promise in the couenant of workes doe this and thou shalt liue life is promised but on condition of doing and therefore vntill we haue performed the condition we cannot nor may not looke that God should be reciprocall and giue vs life So in the couenant of grace iustification is promised but vpon condition of faith so sayth the Scripture beleeue and thy sinnes shall be forgiuen thee And therefore the condition of beleeuing must first be performed before we can assure our selues our sins are forgiuen If so then faith going before and Assurance following after Assurance cannot be justifying faith 5 That from whence followeth a blasphemous absurdity cannot be a truth for from truth nought but truth can be concluded But from this that faith is an Assurance such an absurdity doth follow What is that That God commands a man to know an vntruth to assure himselfe of that which neuer shall be For God being truth cannot command falshood to be taken for truth Nether tell me here for who art thou that disputest with God for this is a ruled case in diuinity God cānot doe things which imply contradiction and therefore not make vntruth to be truth or knowledge error Now that this absurdity followes from hence thus I demonstrate it God commands the Reprobate to beleeue For Ioh. 18.8.9 for vnbeleefe the world shall bee condemned but no condemnation but for breach of a commandement 1 Ioh. 3.4 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sinne is the transgression of the law and therefore they are commanded to beleeue I aske you then what it is to beleeue you will say to know to assure Therefore God commands the Reprobates to know and bee assured But this is a blasphemous absurdity therefore is your opinion absurd which infers it 6. That which the wicked may haue cannot be iustifying faith for it is Fides Electorum the faith of the Elect. But the wicked may haue this perswasion yea and many haue beene most confidently perswaded that they are in the fauour of God You will say it is no true perswasion but I say if forme make truth they are as formally and therefore as truly perswaded of it as the godly And therefore if the godly are therefore and for this cause iustified because cause they are strongly perswaded that they are iustified then why should not the wicked likewise be iustified by his strong perswasion But in truth these kind of speeches are vnreasonable and senselesse and so the opinion cannot be reasonable These sixe reasons shall suffice for the present although many more might be added only from hence I gather this Corollary that if iustifying Faith be not a Knowledge or Assurance much lesse is it a full knowledge or full Assurance Nay though we should graunt it to be a knowledge yet is it against Logick to define it by the perfection of knowledg For as there is a strong tree so there is a brused reed as there is a burning lamp so there is smoking flaxe as there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Faith come to full age and maturity so there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Faith in the nonage and minority So therefore to define it were to exclude the weake Faith and to make the Definition narrower and of lesse latitude then the definite Besides it is a most discomfortable doctrine vnto a troubled mind and leads the directest way to desperation for so the palsie hand of Faith should not receiue Christ And were not this to quench fire with oile and to adde Aloes to wormwood and might not hee that thus comforteth be counted one of Iobs miserable comforters Ob. The godly are said to know and to be perswaded yea the Prophet saith Io. 3.14 Ioh. 17.3 Esa 53.11 Heb. 11.1 By his knowledge shall my righteous seruant iustifie many and Faith is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Subsistence and Euidence Ans First I graunt the godly may and ought to know but the question is not of their duty but what it is which iustifies them 2 Secondly to know and so likewise the Verbs of Sence in the Hebrew tongue vsually signifieth not onely an act of the Minde or outward Sence but of the Will and affection also So in the Psalme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal 1.6 Mat. 7.13 The Lord knoweth the way of the Righteous and in the Gospell Depart I know you not and elsewhere I will not heare see c. that is God will not so know heare see c. as in fauour to loue or approue And so doe I interprete that of the Prophet Christ being so knowne as to bee embraced and rested vpon by the Will shall iustify many 3 Thirdly that Definition in the eleuenth to the Hebrewes I deny with Peter Martyr and the rest of our Diuines to bee perfect but rather by the Effects to describe it And as for that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Subsistence whereon you seeme to stand take this first that the writers of the new Testament vse words in the same sence that the Seuentie Translators doe Secondly that that which in Hebrew is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expectation that the Septuagint turne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in Ruth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ruth 1.12 so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Hebrewes shall not be Subsistence but expectation or desire of things that are hoped for But of this umpliandum censeo I pronounce nothing only I conclude his second Faith not to be Iustifying Faith And because you shall not count me singular or alone in this point read M. Foxe in his booke de Christo gratis iustificante and you shall find him earnest against this opinion The third faith is Fides Persone or Personalis meriti Faith of Person or of Personall merit and of this I make the Obiect to be Christ the Mediator meriting the Act of it Fiducia a Rest or Deuolution the Subiect of it the facultie of the Will and not the Vnderstanding the next End of it Iustification the remote End eternall Saluation And thus I
which they are iustified and so come to eternall life But what say I vnto the Minor deliuered in other tearmes thus Knowledge of Christ apprehendeth eternall life I say first it is not the same Proposition because the tearmes are changed neither are they equipollent Secondly I grant it to bee true whether you meane by knowledge Dogmaticall Faith or Particular assurance for by the one doe we apprehend that there is an eternall life by the other that wee haue speciall interest in it Well then if it apprehendeth eternall life doth it not follow that therefore also it apprehendeth iustification No by no meanes for as wee haue aboue demonstrated it is not necessary that that which apprehendeth the latter should apprehend the former also And yet though I disallow the consequence the consequent I readily yeeld you that Particular knowledge apprehendeth iustification for so haue wee defined Faith of promise to be a perswasion or assurance that the promise of God made in Christ to wit iustification remission of sinnes adoption regeneration finally election it selfe and eternall saluation doe particularly pertaine vnto mee and are mine What gather you now of this Ergo say you it is iustifying Faith How so Because whatsoeuer apprehendeth iustification is iustifying Faith Nay contrarily whatsoeuer apprehendeth iustification it not iustifying Faith for apprehension followeth iustification no man apprehending himselfe to bee iustified vntill hee be iustified but Iustifying Faith is in nature before iustification that being the cause and this the effect And therefore vnlesse you will say that that which followeth is that which goeth before you cannot say that that which apprehendeth iustification is that which iustifieth To conclude therefore neither is Faith knowledge nor knowledge Faith but particular knowledge for ought you haue yet said or can say commeth in time after Faith But whereas finally you inferre that Faith is knowledge in the beginning knowledge in proceeding knowledge in the end besides that the foundation vpon which it is grounded is vntrue it is cleane contrary also to that which erewhile you affirmed that Faith is but one compounded of my three nice distinctions the first being the beginning the second the progresse the third the end For the third is Faith of Person and in the Will and is by your confession there the end of Faith yet here you say faith is knowledge in the end which things how they can stand together I see not vnlesse you will say that knowledge is in the Will and so confound the faculties and operations of the soule N. B. In Ioh. 1. Ep. c. 5. to 13. The place of Saint Iohn by you cited to proue your Minor in your argument maketh nothing for you because the Apostle speaketh of their increase of knowledge and not of the originall begetting of knowledge and so saith M. Caluin I. D. The text in the clearest tearmes that may bee distinguisheth betweene Belieuing and knowing and vnto that giueth the priority before this but your glosse confoundeth their natures and saith that the Apostle here speaketh onely of increase of knowledge Wo to the glosse that corrupteth the text for if this bee S. Iohns meaning it is as if hee should say I write vnto you that know that yee are iustified haue eternall life that yee may increase in knowing that yee haue eternall life and that yee may know yee are iustified and haue eternall life which how vnworthy it is the pen of an Apostle euery one easily seeth But Caluin you say interpreteth the place as you doe Bee it so yet is it not the name of Caluin how venerable soeuer that may sway this matter For seeing I professe to differ from him in the definition of Iustifying Faith hee defining it by knowledge I by Affiance you may not thinke it vnreasonable if in this point and the explication of such scriptures as may seeme to concerne it I desire rather to bee pressed with his reasons then borne downe with his authority But what saith Caluin Because there ought to bee dayly proceedings in Faith therefore he writes to them that belieue already that they may more firmely and certainly belieue Whereunto I willingly assent if you apply it as Beza in his annotations doth vnto the last clause of the verse and that yee may belieue for then the meaning without forcing or constraining the words will bee as if hee should say I write vnto you that belieue that belieuing yee may know yee haue eternall life knowing the same may constantly perseuere and proceed on in Belieuing For as the clouds poure downe raine to moisten the earth and the earth moistned sendeth vp vapours againe to make clouds so likewise Faith begets Assurance and Assurance being gotten doth againe confirme and strengthen faith And thus doe the Century-writers expound this place Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 4. p. 276. gathering from it that Cetainty of Saluation is an Effect of Faith and so euidently distinguishing knowledge from Faith Treatise 3. Arg. That which in nature comes after iustification cannot bee iustifying Faith This appeares because Faith is the Efficient Instrumentall cause of Iustification and euery Efficient by the rule of Logicke is in nature before the Effect But this knowledge or assurance is in nature after Iustification Ergo it is not Faith N. B. Your Minor is very false and so proued by my former arguments For particular knowledge and assurance of our saluation is not in nature after Faith but is Faith and wholy infused by the Spirit of God and begotten by hearing of the Word preached and commeth to act by degrees according to the measure of grace giuen of God For it is in Habitu sometime not in actu Faith habituall in power actuall in the deed of belieuing as when one sleepeth his beliefe is not in actu and yet hee liueth vnto God by his faith which liueth powerfully in him though not actually I. D. The Maior of my Syllogisme is vndeniable because as I haue said Faith is the cause of iustification For as D. Fulke saith vnto Bristow excluding it from Efficient causes Reioinder to Bristow p. 172. Seeing Scripture often affirmeth that God worketh in vs by Faith faith must needs be an instrumentall efficient when you haue said all that you can except you will teach vs new Grammar and Logicke The Minor therefore you say is very false and so proued by your former arguments But those arguments are already answered and thus I proue the Minor For as for the rest of your idle and wilde talke touching the infusion begetting degrees habit act of Faith I willingly passe ouer lest pursuing you in this course I seeme to run riot and play the wanton with you Treatise The truth of a Proposition is alwayes in nature before the knowledge of the truth for Propositions are not therefore true because they are knowne so but they are first true and knowne so Therefore this Proposition I know I am iustified spoken
or word Rest you shall hardly perswade mee that hee will take it for any other then the effect of true Iustifying Faith I. D. Neither is it your vaine surmising what Master Perkins would say Neither his expresse and direct saying that may be the decider of this controuersie How well that worthy man deserued of the Church of God wherein hee was like another Baptist both a shining and a burning torch Ioh. 5.35 I cannot bee ignorant who knew him so well and very vngratefull were I if I should not acknowledge to haue receiued a good part of that little skill I haue in my profession from his mouth hauing beene for sundry yeeres his ordinary auditor Yet because hee was not a Peter or a Paul nor so preserued from error by the Spirit of truth that hee could mistake in nothing I hope I may without arrogance and with reseruation of due reuerence honor vnto his worth in some points dissent from him And if you may seat Faith both in the vnderstanding and the will notwithstanding that M. Perkins place it only in the vnderstanding On the Creed affirming that it scarce standeth with reason that one single grace should inhere in two distinct faculties why may not I take the same liberty vnto my selfe and define Iustifying Faith by Affiance although M. Perkins would take it for no other then the Effect of Iustifying Faith for so indeed hee doth and I deny not but freely confesse that vpon the reasons aboue rendred I doe in this point altogether differ from him Neither yet did I say that I blanked him with my rare and cunning disputes for this is but the renewing of your old slander the vanity of which I haue already detected Onely it seemes that your best wine is wel-nie spent seeing now you serue your guests with these dregs and that you are driuen to a very narrow strait when you are faine to arme against me such base calumniations and fictions of your owne braine N. B. When you send me to Master Foxe in his Booke de Christo gratis justificante without citing the place where or the words what of mee your speech deserueth none answer but this I dare vndertake you abuse the writings of so reuerend a man I. D. The authority of Master Foxe was not vouched by me to iustify my Definition that Faith is Affiance but to ouerthrow yours who affirme that Faith is Assurance and therefore was placed as was fitting after those arguments which I vrged against you Neuerthelesse here it pleaseth you after your desultory and disorderly manner of disputing in a very vndue place to giue answer vnto it And the reason why with such violence you hale it hither as I guesse is this that not appearing where it should it may seeme to giue no euidence at all against your Assurance and being ordered where it should not it may seeme to bee but idly alledged as being of no force to maintaine my Affiance But yet let vs see what exceptions you take to eleuate this authority Because I cite not the place where nor the words what my speech you say deserues no answer I wisse M. Baxter that booke is not of such bulke but that perusing the titles of each Chapter you might soone haue found out the places by me intended and you know that the schedule I sent you being endited at Bristoll where I was farre from my bookes I could not possibly referre you vnto the very page and line as otherwise I would haue done But now because I haue the booke at hand I will set you downe his direct words and quote you the page where you may read them and then leaue you to bee iudge your selfe whether as you charge mee I abuse the writings of that reuerend man or hee agree with mee in this that Faith is not Assurance Foxe Master Foxe therefore in his booke de Christo gratis iustificante pag. 246 saith thus My iudgement and opinion is that this confidence of mercy and certainty of Saluation promised is a thing which ought to bee very neerely conioined with Faith and which euery one ought necessarily to apply vnto himselfe yet being most applied is not that which onely by it selfe properly and absolutely dischargeth vs of our sinnes and iustifies before God but that there is some other thing propounded in the Gospell which in nature goeth before this certainty and iustifieth before God For Faith vpon the Person of the Sonne of God whereby wee are first reconciled vnto God necessarily goes before Againe pag. 253. Although saith hee certainty and assurance of diuine grace which it selfe is sometime commended vnder the name of Faith bee very neerely ioined with Faith yet this assurance doth not properly import the cause of iustifying but receiueth it being brought neither worketh iustification but is rather wrought by it and maketh them certaine who by the Faith of Christ are iustified but it selfe iustifieth not And yet againe pag. 255. If the question bee of the cause which properly iustifieth from sinne I answer it is that Faith not whereby wee belieue that wee are iustified but whereby wee belieue in Christ the Sonne of God Thus M. Foxe and thus by M. Foxe it appeareth as I affirmed that in this point I am not singular and alone Yet to preuent captious cauils you may bee pleased to vnderstand that the Latin word vsed by Master Foxe to wit Fiducia I haue in my translation englished Confidence and Assurance not that I was afraid lest rendring it Affiance hee might seeme to exclude my affiance also from the Definition of Faith for had hee done so it were nothing to mee hauing shewed that hee denies Faith to be Assurance which was all I there affirmed of him but because if you marke his words attentiuely you shall find that by Fiducia hee vnderstands not Affiance but confident Perswasion or Assurance for hee doth euer confound it with Certainty and expresly defines it to bee that whereby wee are assured of our iustification by Christ So doth Melancthon also and Kemnitius and many others vnderstanding by Fiducia a firme Perswasion that our sinnes are certainly remitted by the propitiation of Christ and all the benefits of the promise of grace giuen communicated and applyed vnto vs. So that vnlesse I would haue depraued my authors meaning I could not translate otherwise then I haue done N. B. Now thinke not that I hold that a man ordinarily saued may be saued without relying vpon Christ Iesus for I hold the cleane contrary viz. that true Iustifying Faith assuring a man in spirituall knowledge of his owne saluation in Iesus Christ worketh and causeth a sweet rest and reposing of the whole soule vpon Christ and his Merits But I deny that this Rest is Faith or this Faith Rest no more then the tree can be the fruite or the fruite the tree I. D. That no man can ordinarily bee saued without Relying vpon Christ I grant for according to my
Treatise I haue expresly shewed the contrary For first touching the Negatiue that Faith is not Assurance I vouched therein the authority of that reuerend and worthy man of God M. Foxe whose words anon you shall heare at large In the meane season it behooueth you if you will bee beleeued in this point to produce the cloud of witnesses you so much boast of that wee may heare whether they will depose the contradictory hereunto namely that Faith is Assurance For howsoeuer you say you haue no fewer then All yet it may bee when all comes to all you will proue as ill stored of testimonies as the wise man of Athens was of shipping who being not worth the poorest shallop in the harbor bare himselfe notwithstanding for owner of all the gallies that arriued therein And surely hauing throughly searched your Answer to this purpose I find the nūber by you cited so small that I need not much skill in Arithmetike to summe them vp for the totall amounts to no more then an Vnity and all your Authors are but one Caluin once alledged in the front thereof Vnto whom I denie not but you might haue ioyned some other of the later Writers but what are they to all both old and new for 1600. yeeres For as for the ancient Fathers not one of them so farre as I can learne affirmeth the iustifying act of Faith to be Assurance and among the Moderne it is more then manifest that a good part of them flatly denyeth it So that being backed of so few and yet craking so loudly of All Ter. Eunuch act 4. Scen. 7. you play right the glorious Souldier in the Comedie who hauing but foure men in all the world bestirred himselfe so busily with three of them as if hee had been mustering a whole Legion and at length missing the fourth gallantly demaunded where all the rest were Againe touching the Affirmatiue that Faith is Affiance I quoted that passage of S. Augustin To beleeue is to loue ad by louing to moue vnto God In my Treatise De morib Eccl. ca. 15. Now Loue by which that Father vsually defineth Vertue properly is not an act of Faith because of Charity Charity Faith being two different and distinct Habits 1 Cor. 13.13 And therefore by Loue you are to vnderstand generally an act of the will it being an affection of that Facultie as if in plainer tearmes he should haue said To belieue is that act of the Will whereby we moue vnto God Which elsewhere he expresseth more clearly saying He that commeth vnwillingly beleeueth not In Ioh. 6. tract 26. and he that beleeueth not commeth not for we run not vnto Christ by walking but beleeuing neither come we by the motion of the body but by the wil of the heart So that Faith being in S. Augustins iudgement an act or motion of the Will what other can it bee then Affiance 12. q. 40. a. 2. ad 2. For as Thomas sayth that motion in the appetite which immediately followeth Desire to obtaine that good which wee esteeme possible to be obtained is Affiance Adde vnto him Theophylact Hee that with great affection beleeueth In Marc. 11. stretcheth out his heart towards God And what doth it It is vnited vnto him and the heart enflamed gathereth great certainty that it shall obtaine his desires Where by the way obserue that certainty is concluded out of Faith and therefore can no more bee Faith then the Conclusion can bee one of the Premises Serm. de Sancto Andr. So Barnard To beleeue in God is to set all our hope in him And our Diuines in the Conference of Altemburg define it by Affiance in the Heart and Will In a word all those who seat it only or principally in the will Colloq Altemb accord with mee For although defining it popularly they put vsually into their Descriptions Assent vnto supernaturall verities which is an act of the mind yet making not that but Affiance only the proper act that iustifies they doe in effect fully accord and agree with me So that you see I am not driuen to so neere an exigent but vnto your one I can oppose more then you are aware of And yet had I farre more I would not vpon presumption either of their number or authority say vnto you Ep. 11. inter ep Aug. as Hierome sometime wrote vnto Augustin Suffer me I pray thee to erre with such men and sith you see I haue so many companions in error with mee you ought to bring forth one at least that ioynes with you For who is he that would willingly erre with whomsoeuer or how many soeuer 2 Pet. 1.19 But hauing as S. Peter speaketh a more sure word of the Prophets for my warrant I rather conclude with that free and ingenuous answer of Augustin to Hierom More testimonies I thinke might I easily haue found if I had read much Epist 19. but the Apostle Paul shall bee vnto mee insteed of them all yea aboue them all N. B. Let vs therefore see what you affirme and wee agree to be our iustifying Faith and how you impugne it Fides iustificans in adultis quae sit Iustifying Faith agreed vpon vs both as holden by the Church We agree both in this that iustifying Faith as we hold it and you deny it is A certaine knowledge infused into the hearts of the elect by the Holy Ghost by which they constantly agree to all things reuealed in the Word of God and also a firme Assurance whereby euery one of the Elect relieth vpon the Promises of Christ fully resoluing that Christ with all his merits are giuen to him for iustification and eternall life Now as you deny this to bee iustifying Faith so againe let vs see what you count iustifying Faith to bee M. Downes iustifying Faith Iustifying Faith is a rest of mans will vpon Christ and his merits of Iustification and Saluation The validity of your definition wee will view anon by Gods help in the meane season let vs see with what engins of rare wit and solid Syllogismes you endeuour to ouerthrow the former definition of ours consisting vpon the generall Word the causes the effects the proper Subiect and Adiuncts or essentiall Properties I. D. Your second cogitations I see are wiser then the first and now you shoot with far better aime then erewhile missing not much of the right state of the Question For the Definition here attributed vnto me is I confesse that which I defend and the other assumed vnto your selfe is that also which I impugne I meane so farre forth as it makes Knowledge the Generall Word and Particular Assurance the Act or as you tearme it the adiunct or essentiall Propertie For otherwise that causally it is from the Holy Ghost subiectiuely in the elect and effectuall vnto Iustification is not questioned by mee but equally acknowledged of vs both Now the validity of my definition you say you will view
Saints with your niceties and falsities any longer for thus you reason No historicall Faith hath any interest in the matter of Iustification But firmely to belieue the truth of Gods Word and specially the Gospell is historicall Faith Therefore firmely to belieue the truth of Gods Word and specially the Gospell hath no interest in the matter of Iustification Good Sir I deny your Maior which you thus endeuour to proue ab absurdo enumeratione partium No generall knowledge shall haue any stroke in the matter of Iustification All historicall Faith is a generall knowledge Therefore no historicall Faith hath any interest in the matter of iustification Proue your Minor which I denie telling you moreouer that firmely to consent to the truth of Gods Word in genere and the Gospell in Specie is not a Generall knowledge but a Speciall knowledge and therefore I argue Such a speciall knowledge of the Gospell is the beginning of Faith Iustifying Mat. 13.11 Ioh. 17.3 Mat. 16.17 But firmely to consent to the truth of Gods Word and the Gospell is such a speciall knowledge ex confesso Therfore firmely to consent to the truth of Gods Word and especially the Gospell is the beginning of Iustifying Faith I. D. If you were as farre from hood-winking your owne eyes as I am from blearing the eies of others you might easily perceiue that now I deale against our common aduersaries the Papists and ouerthrow the iustification of their Historicall Faith by the chiefest arguments which Protestants vse But you after the manner of those Gladiators called Andabatae nor see nor care whom or what you strike and so mildly affected are you towards mee that so you may make some probable shew of endammaging or disaduantaging mee you reck not though through my sides you reach and wound the best Diuines of our Church yea and the common truth which wee all maintaine Neither doe I vse such circumguagues nor wiredraw my arguments into such a length as you beare vs in hand but hauing nakedly and plainely defined what Historicall Faith is I proue by two reasons that Faith so defined doth not iustifie the first whereof is this because it is absurd that so generall a Knowledge should iustifie So that your Ferio Syllogisme deserues a Ferula and vtterly to bee cashed as being no creature of mine but an idle figment of your owne and the next in Celarent for so you forme it although indeed it bee also in Ferio the Minor proposition and Conclusion notwithstanding your generall notes being but particular enuntiations is the onely Syllogisme intended by mee and including my first argument The Maior whereof it seemes you grant saying nothing vnto it and the Minor only you deny which I cannot but wonder at seeing both the Minor and Conclusion are vniuersally vouched by all the Diuines of our side The Conclusion is that Historicall Faith iustifies not So saith Hyperius De fide Hom. iustificandi There is a certaine Historicall Faith whereby those things which are propounded in holy writ are simply beleeued but yet is not applyed vnto Christ and the matter of our Saluation Loco de Fide The Minor is that Historicall Faith is a generall Knowledge So sayth Kemnitius There is a certaine generall Faith which vsually is tearmed Historicall and againe Historicall Faith is a generall assent holding in generall that the promise of the Gospell is true And M. Perkins Ser. caus c. 36. A generall Faith whereby they giue assent vnto the Gospell Neither doe I know any one of our Diuines that either in the Conclusion or the Minor doth gainsay them So that by the iudgement of these men both consenting to Gods Word in generall and to the Gospell in speciall is not a Speciall but Generall Knowledge and if the Speciality of the Gospell being but a part of the whole Scripture did specify Faith it would follow thereupon that there are as many Speciall Faiths as there are seuerall Articles of the Creed which were vnreasonable to imagine For that Faith which assenteth vnto the Gospell is no other then that which assenteth vnto the rest of holy Scripture and although it may principally respect that part of diuine truth yet doth it not only respect it nor is limited thereunto as vnto the proper adequate obiect thereof but vniuersally extendeth it selfe vnto all supernaturall reuealed verities whatsoeuer As for that Faith which our Diuines call Speciall is to be vnderstood of Faith of Promises wherby the Saints apply and appropriate them vnto themselues particularly and indiuidually assuring themselues of their present iustification and future saluation And the ignorance hereof as I ween is the cause why you turne generall into speciall and write of this matter so wildly and confusedly This notwithstanding very peremptorily you pronounce that Historiall Faith is a speciall Knowledge and thereupon Syllogistically inferre that it is the Beginning of Iustifying Faith to what end I wot not well vnlesse it bee to proue that it doth iustify because as you conclude it is the beginning of that Faith But whatsoeuer your intent bee your argument I answer by distinguishing of the word Beginning For if you vnderstand thereby a Pre-requisite or Preparatiue vnto iustifying Faith you doe but fight with a shadow for in that sence I grant the Conclusion neither doth such a beginning of Iustifying Faith iustify If you meane thereby that it is Iustifying Faith inchoat and in a remisser degree then I deny your Maior and say that such a knowledge call it as you please generall or speciall is not the beginning of iustifying Faith If it were then Diuels and Reprobates hauing it should haue iustifying Faith which Gods Word attributes vnto the Elect onely Tit. 1.1 And if it bee true that Faith of person is the consummation of Iustifying Faith as in the former section you say it cannot bee that such a knowledge should bee the Beginning thereof vnlesse you will say that Accidents may passe from one Subiect to another which is against all Philosophy For Historicall Faith is in the Vnderstanding and Faith of Person is in the Will and therefore Faith of Story beginning in the Mind can haue no subsistence elsewhere and iustifying Faith being perfected in the Will cannot bee begunne in any other Subiect The passages quoted in the margent though you should rack them till they rent asunder yet will they not confesse what you alledge them for For how I pray you hang these things together To you it is giuen to know the mysteries of the Kingdome of heauen This is life euerlasting to know thee Flesh and Bloud hath not reuealed this vnto thee but my Father Ergo Such a knowledge is iustifying Faith begun This is too violent astraining of Scripture and as Volusian speaketh is not a sucking of milke but drawing of bloud from the dugs of the Church Ep. 1. ad Nic. 1. As for the Minor I haue already sufficiently demonstrated the falshood thereof only
it seemeth strange why you should take it as confessed For sure I am in expresse tearmes I haue affirmed the contrary neither can I guesse of what words you gather it vnlesse perhaps of that I say and specially the Gospell which were too ridiculous For that indeed confesseth the Gospell to bee a speciall part of Gods truth but not determining Faith onely thereunto it doth in no sort specifie it as is aboue fully proued N. B. Historicall Faith not diuided from the other two kinds but ioyned with thē is cause of Iustification Againe I would pray you to speake more learnedly and argue soundly For if you had said formerly No Historicall Faith only iustifieth c. We had been agreed For Historica Fides est causa iustificationis non solitaria sed socia non diuisa sed coniuncta But speaking thus absolutely you speake vnlearnedly Well thus you proceed leauing your Minor naked and exposed to the mercie of the World I. D Agreed quoth you Nay hee can hardly agree with mee that is at warre with himselfe and had I spoken neuer so learnedly and argued neuer so soundly yet I verily belieue you would haue quarrelled at it because I see you make contradiction of mee the onely rule of your speeches That there is but one Faith you say it is nouelty not to grant and that Faith only iustifies I think you dare not deny how is it then that in the margent forgetting your selfe you talke of three kinds of Faith which except my Arithmetike faile mee are more then one and ioyne fellowes with that in iustification in the body of your text which yet you confesse doth onely iustify But what is it that comes not within the sphere of your omnipotent Philosophie The power of your Logicke hath already contracted Vniuersall into Speciall and why then may not the subtlety of your Metaphysicke find a plurality also in an Vnity But to be plaine with you I say that Historicall Faith is so far from being a ioint cause that at all properly vnderstood of Iustification but onely as I haue said a Pre-requisite or Preparatiue thereunto True it is that Faith of Person is neuer Solitary but is euer conioyned with sundry other graces and among the rest with Historicall Faith yet are not their operations to bee confounded because in the same person they are conioyned Many seeds lye in my hand together yet euery one hath his seuerall and distinct vertue Faith of Person is neuer without Faith of Story yet it is Faith of Person which onely iustifies And as in the generation of man the Sensitiue soule goes before and prepares a fit organ for the infusion of the Reasonable and yet not the Sensitiue but the Reasonable only doth informe so in the reparation of man Faith of Story proceeds and makes way for the inducement of Faith of Person and yet not Faith of Story but Faith of Person only doth iustifie Now whether in speaking thus absolutely I haue spoken vnlearnedly as you say or no it skilleth not much seeing I am sure I haue spoken truly 1 Cor. 15.9 What euer I am by the grace of God I am and desire so to bee vnto his glory My want and inability I thanke God I know yet know I no cause why in this mediocrity of knowledge and speech I should in comparison with you any whit disable my selfe But sith as the Apostle saith knowledge puffeth vp 1 Cor. 8.1 God grant vs both the spirit of humility that denying our selues and all our learning wee may be content to bee wholly captiuated vnto the obedience of the Faith of Christ The Minor which you say I left naked and exposed to the mercy of the world was this that Historicall Faith is a generall knowledge which indeed in my Treatise I did forbeare to confirme not for want of sufficient proofes but presuming that so euident a truth would neuer haue beene denied But now I hope it appeares by what I haue aboue said to bee so well guarded with strength of reason and approbation of the learned that henceforward it need not feare the rigor of your opposition Treatise Acquisite Faith the Diuels haue according to that of Saint Iames The Diuels belieue and tremble Infused Faith the Reprobates may haue as Balaam Iudas Magus Now iustifying Faith is proper to the Elect and therefore historicall Faith cannot iustifie N. B. O yee noble Schollers marke this Syllogisme I haue made your arguments hitherto for you Master Downe and in this creeping and incroching argument tell you that you beg the matter in question For I deny that your definition of Historicall Faith is a generall knowledge but speciall and peculiar vnto the Elect in the beginning of their iustifying Faith conioyned with the Application and Resting vpon Christ and his merits And to bee plaine with you I tell you it is ridiculous yea blasphemous to say that Diuels haue Faith or that euer Balaam Iudas or Magus had Faith And so telleth you M. Caluin In Iac. 2.19 Ridiculum erit si quis Diabolos habere fidem dicat it is ridiculous for any man to say that Diuels haue Faith For there is but one Faith Eph. 4. and the other is spoken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abusiuely and by an equiuocation and is but a vulgar knowledge or rather peculiar shew by miracles c. as the same M. Caluin sheweth right learnedly 1 Cor. 13.2 Calu. ibid. and also telleth you Abundé constat totam hanc disputationem de fide non haberi it is plaine that this whole disputation Iam. 2. is not about Faith Let this therefore serue for an answer I pray you to your first distinction of Historicall Faith which you confound with a vulgar knowledge as appeareth before knowing this No man that finally contemneth this Speciall knowledge of Gods Word and specially the Gospell can be saued For hee can neuer haue the other two kinds of Faith spoken of before except he begin with this kind of Faith I. D. Surely I am very deeply beholding vnto your Mastership hauing so small skill in Logicke that you will bee pleased to forme my arguments and to shape them in so excellent fashion for mee But I beseech you spare your paines where you are like to reape little thanks for your labour Such officiousnesse in an aduersary is not without suspicion and if you may haue the hammering of my arguments your weakest answers I doubt not will be proofe inough against them Leaue me therfore I pray you to the meaning of my own weapons and looke you well vnto your owne defence for I feare mee you will hardly bee able to auoid the danger of them For thus I reason That Faith which Diuels and Reprobates haue iustifies not Historicall Faith Diuels and Reprobates haue Ergo Historicall Faith iustifies not Here you see nor creeping nor incroching but faire and plaine dealing and such as I am well content all noble Schollers marke it But let
of an implicit or couched ignorance Of an implicit Faith we haue often heard and of a rude and confused apprehension the Iesuit in the place by you quoted speaketh but an implicit ignorance was neuer yet heard of and what meaning it may haue for my part I cannot see De iustif lib. 1. ca. 7. Bellarmines right words are these Faith is better defined by ignorance then knowledge which saying of his how my speech helpeth I would you had taken a little more paines to make it manifest For whence and how you should collect it I cannot tell except perhaps it bee thus I say that Faith is not a knowledge Ergo I say also it is an ignorance I answer therefore secondly that Bellarmine and I speake not of the same Faith for hee speaketh of Faith of Story and I of Faith of Person so that when I say Faith of Person is not a knowledge I cannot help him who saith Faith of Story is not a knowledge For as for Faith of Story you cannot bee ignorant that contrary vnto Bellarmine in my Treatise I haue called it a Generall knowledge so farre am I from defining it by ignorance with him And yet I would haue you to know also that when I say Faith of Story is a knowledge I meane not thereby Science of Conclusions acquired and gotten by demonstratiue proofe out of such principles as are of themselues knowne and euident For how can a man by the light of naturall reason aspire to the knowledge of that which is supernaturall and aboue reason But I vnderstand an explicit and distinct apprehension of the necessary Articles of Faith opposite vnto that brutish ignorance which Papists call implicite Faith and Blind obedience which distinct apprehension Bellarmine in the place before alledged denieth necessarily to bee required vnto Faith Farthermore I would faine know how this followes Faith is not knowledge Ergo it is Ignorance for by the same reason you may conclude Faith is not Hope Ergo it is Despaire or thus Earth is not fire Ergo it is water and so by your creation all things in the world shall bee one of two fire or water Metaph. 12. But you should remember that simple negation is positiue of nothing and that Priuations are reduced vnto that subiect whereunto their Habits doe belong whence it followeth that denying Faith to be in the Vnderstanding and so to be knowledge I deny it also to bee Ignorance N. B. Againe whatsoeuer bringeth life eternall bringeth iustification and is Faith But true knowledge of Iesus Christ bringeth life eternall Therefore true knowledge of Iesus Christ bringeth iustification and is Faith The Minor I proue out of the Words of Christ in S. Iohn Ioh. 17.3 Mel. Pez Arg. Theol. p. 3. notitia Es. 53. significat non solum agnitionem personae beneficiorum Christised etiam fiduciam quiescentem in Christo sicuti Ioh. 17. This is life eternall to know thee to bee the onely true Lord and him to bee Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent into the world The Maior is plaine whatsoeuer apprehendeth that last which is life Eternall apprehendeth the former as election and iustification c. But the knowledge of Christ apprehendeth eternall life Therefore it apprehendeth iustification But hence it followeth whatsoeuer apprehendeth iustification is Faith True knowledge of Jesus Christ apprehendeth iustification Therefore true knowledge of Christ is Faith and so consequently and conuersiuely Faith is knowledge and this knowledge is Faith Ioh. 19.25 Eph. 3.14.15.16.17.18 1 Cor. 13. And by this meanes Particular knowledge commeth not in time after faith but is Faith and is knowledge in the beginning in proceeding is knowledge and in the end is knowledge I. D. The Maior of your first Syllogisme that whatsoeuer bringeth life eternall bringeth iustification I deny You say it is plaine because whatsoeuer apprehendeth the last such as is eternall life apprehendeth the former also which is iustification But first what rule of Logicke allowes you thus to shift tearmes and to turne bringing of life and iustification into apprehending life and iustification For howsoeuer you seeme to vse them indifferently yet are they words of different significations and therefore confounding them thus you make not so much the truth of the Maior plaine as obscure the meaning thereof Againe chuse whether of these tearmes you please yet is it palpably false that Whatsoeuer bringeth or apprehendeth the last bringeth and apprehendeth also the former Rhetoricke brings a man to speake eloquently which is the latter yet it is Grammar not Rhetoricke that brings a man to speake congruè which is the former Physicke brings a man to the faculty of curing diseases which is the latter yet brings not to the knowledge of the nature of things for that belongs vnto the naturall Philosopher and according to the old saying where the Physiologer ends there the Physician begins So also in diuine matters Hope apprehends eternall life which is the latter for it is the proper obiect about which it is occupied it apprehendeth not iustification which is the former for then by your rule it should bee Faith it selfe that being faith as you say which apprehends iustification As therfore when diuerse needles are by the Loadstone trained one after another the vertue of the stone moueth the first the first the second and so of the rest but the third or second is no way the cause of the dependency of the first so in the concatenation of the causes of our saluation reckoned vp by the Apostle to wit Election Rom. 8.30 Vocation Iustification Glorification the former are mouers as it were vnto the latter but not the latter vnto the former The reason of all in a word is this because as I haue already shewed more is required vnto the maine end then vnto the subordinate meanes and therefore seeing saluation is the end Iustification the meanes not whatsoeuer is requisite vnto that is presently necessary vnto this The Minor that true knowledge of Iesus Christ bringeth eternall life I also deny For Particular assurance which is the knowledge you must here vnderstand or else you conclude not to the purpose bringeth not eternall life in as much as a man may be saued without it as we haue already sufficiently proued Neither doe the words of Christ in S. Iohn verify your Minor Ioh. 17.3 for by knowledge there he meaneth not your particular assurance and perswasion by which a man knowes he is iustified shall be saued but such a knowledge of Christ and his Gospell as is mingled with faith and worketh our wils to accept of Iesus Christ for our onely mediator And this knowledge is said to bee eternall life not because euery one that barely and nakedly knowes liues eternally for as wee haue shewed Reprobates and Diuels haue Historicall Faith but partly because no man can liue without it partly because by it the Spirit of God worketh in the Elect that Faith by
saith effectually called and they onely who are effectually called are iustified and shall bee glorified And if it were possible that they should bee saued then were there change in the vnchangeable decree of God which hath finally reiected them which is impossible 7. Hee that commands a Reprobate that is not iustified and shall neuer bee saued to belieue that hee is iustified and shall be saued implieth a Contradiction therein and makes Falshood to bee Truth and Faith errour For according to that infallible maxime Falshood is not vnder Faith and therefore if the Obiect bee Falshood it is not Faith which apprehendeth it for true if it bee Faith Falshood is not the Obiect thereof So that hee which commands that false Proposition to bee belieued makes that to bee Faith which cannot beare the definition of Faith and that to bee the Obiect which is not the Obiect thereof that is as I said makes Faith to bee error and Falshood Truth which are contradictories 8. God therefore neither doth nor can so command neither is it impure or impious to affirme so much being in the Word of God so manifestly reuealed Impious rather and blasphemous is it to say the contrary for it imputes impotency and weaknes vnto God making him to say Yea and Nay and to auouch that for truth which is euidently false 9. But this opinion that Faith is an Assurance infers this blasphemous absurdity For as I haue shewed God cōmands all men euen Reprobates to belieue now to belieue as you say is to bee assured of iustification and Saluation Ergo God commands the Reprobate to be assured of his Iustification and Saluation which is absurd 10. Absurd therefore is that opinion that Faith is Assurance which infers it For from truth no absurdity or blasphemie but onely truth can follow These few Positions I pray thee Gentle Reader consider diligently and compare Master Baxters reply with them and then bee iudge whether hee paint not gourds as it is in the Prouerbe and talke cleane beside the purpose Those places of Scripture which you desire may bee well waighed and then by mee either answered or reuerenced I haue according to your desire duly examined and doe from my heart adore them as being the words of the Eternall Verity and this answer doe I giue vnto them that not one of them touches the question in debate betwixt vs. Rom. 11.23 The first telleth vs that the Iewes if they persist not in infidelity shall againe by the power of God bee ingrafted Gal. 3.22 the second that the Scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne that the promise by the Faith of Iesus Christ might bee giuen to them that Belieue both which argue against your selfe that Faith is the condition of the Promise the third saith that as many as were ordained vnto eternall life belieued Act. 13.48 2. Thess 3.2 Mat. 13.11 the fourth that euery man hath not Faith the fift that to know the mysteries of the kingdome of Heauen is giuen to some and denied to other some by which three it is cleere that Reprobates doe not belieue Prou. 16.4 Rom. 9.18.19.20 but the Elect onely the sixt affirmeth that God made the wicked for the euill day the last that God sheweth mercy vpon whome hee will and hardneth also whome he will and that in this point there is no disputing with God intimating therein that there is both an Election and Reprobation and that both depend vpon the good pleasure of God But not one of them proueth that God commandeth a Reprobate to assure himselfe of his present iustification and future Saluation which is the matter in question and therefore I hope I may notwithstanding them all freely conclude that as God cannot command to doe that which is vniust because hee is iustice it selfe so he cannot command to belieue that which is vntrue because hee is truth it selfe Neither doe I I trust so concluding grieue the Spirit of God although perhaps therein I greeue your stubborne spirit which hath I feare me throughout this reply too much rebelled against the light and therefore take heed lest you your selfe greeue the Spirit of God Eph. 4.30 wherewith the elect are sealed vnto the day of Redemption Treatise Arg. 6. That which the wicked may haue cannot bee iustifying Faith for it is The Faith of the Elect But the wicked may haue this Perswasion yea and many haue beene most confidently perswaded that they are in the fauour of God You will say it is true Perswasion But I say if forme make truth they are as formally and therefore as truly perswaded of it as the godly If the Godly then are therefore and for this cause iustified because they are strongly perswaded they are Iustified then why should not the wicked likewise bee iustified by his strong Perswasion But in truth these kind of speeches are vnreasonable and senselesse and so that opinion cannot be reasonable N. B. Many die and are saued that haue not a full Perswasion and assurance of their Saluation yet are saued by Faith I will answer you when you shew mee the man that so did die and was saued and How you know that hee had at his death no full Assurance of his Saluation in Christ Iesu and yet had Faith and when you proue that there is at the houre of death when the elect are made without spot or wrinkle in the Saints of God a doubtfull Faith I. D. That many Reprobates and wicked men are strongly perswaded they are in the grace and fauor of God nothing is more cleere and manifest Prou. 30.12 There is a generation saith Salomon that are cleane in their owne eyes and yet are not washed from their filthinesse Reu. 3.17 And the Angell of the Church of Laodicea saith of himselfe that hee is rich and growne to great wealth and had need of nothing Vers 14. Vers 17. and yet in the iudgement of him that is Amen the faithfull and true witnesse was wretched and miserable Inst l. 3. c. 2. §. 11. and poore and blind and naked Yea Experience it selfe saith Caluin sheweth that Reprobates sometime are affected with the like feeling almost that the elect are that in their owne iudgement they differ nothing at all from the Elect. Such is the deceitfulnesse of mans heart and the blindnesse of his selfe-loue that it makes him easily ouerweene himselfe and to promise peace vnto his soule when hee is in the ready way vnto destruction You will say that the Perswasion of the Reprobate and wicked is built vpon a false and erronious ground and therfore is Presumption rather then true Assurance For answer hereunto consider that the Elect of God before his Iustification is but a wicked man whence Diuines vse to call it The Iustification of the wicked warranted therein by that of Saint Paul Rom. 4.5 To him that worketh not but belieueth in him that iustifieth the wicked his faith is imputed vnto
righteousnesse Rom. 3.28 Consider moreouer that Faith as a cause goeth before Iustification for wee are iustified by Faith and therefore if the Elect bee wicked before his iustification hee must needs much more bee wicked before the first act of his Belieuing In regard whereof Saint Augustin saith Enar. in Ps 311 Know thou that Faith when it was giuen thee found thee a sinner These things being so as without controuersie they are I then demand of you if Faith bee Assurance what ground hath the Elect for his Assurance in the first Act of his Faith more then the Reprobates and wicked haue Certainly vnlesse you will flye with the Anabaptists vnto I know not what Enthusiasms and sudden reuelations grounded vpon no arguments formerly by the Holy Ghost imprinted in the soule you cannot possibly shew any seeing before Faith they lie together in the same masse of corruption and are alike liable vnto eternall damnation Now vnto this argument thus enlarged and explaned let vs see what answer you returne When I can shew the man that died without Assurance and was saued and how I know at his death hee had no full Perswasion and can proue that there is at the houre of death in the Saints a Doubtfull Faith then you say you will answer mee What M. Baxter and not till then Suppose I cannot satisfy your demands as indeed who knoweth what is in the heart of man at the houre of his death shall my argument therefore for euer stand vnanswered Declar. of Spir. Desert And yet M. Perkins telleth you that When a Professor of the Gospell shall despaire at his end men are to leaue secret iudgements vnto God and charitably iudge the best of him and hee instanceth in one M. Chambers who in his sicknesse grieuously despaired and cried out that hee was damned yet saith hee it is not for any to note him with the blacke marke of a Reprobate The like censure elsewhere giueth he of Francis Spiera Yea further saith hee When a Professor of the Gospell shall make away himselfe though it bee a fearefull case yet still the same opinion must bee carried So that it seemes by this learned mans iudgement who for ought I know is not singular herein but followeth the common opinion of other Diuines that it is possible for a man to die in Faith and so to bee saued and yet to die in Despaire and so without Assurance whence it followeth necessarily that Faith is not Assurance But this answer of yours Antholog l. 2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 brings mee in minde of a pretie Epigram of Nicarchus which you may read in the Greeke anthologie A deafe man commences sute against another deafe man before a deafe iudge the plaintife pleads that the defendant owes him fiue months rent for his house the defendant answers for himselfe that hee had been grinding at mill all night the Iudge looking vpon them why contend yee thus good fellowes quoth hee is shee not mother to you both then keepe her both hardly Semblable hereunto is your answer for as if you were as blind as they were deafe and had not eyes in your head to read my writing when I speake of onions as it is in the Prouerbe you answer of garlicke and roue the whole heauen wide from the marke you should shoot at I say that the wicked may bee strongly perswaded and therefore Faith is not a Perswasion you like the deafe defendant reply that you haue beene grinding at mill all night telling mee I shall then receiue answer when I shew the man that died without Perswasion and yet was saued by Faith and other such stuffe of the same stampe Verily I am perswaded if old Sibyl or Oedipus or any other that hath anciently been esteemed for reading riddles should reuiue againe yet would they not bee able with all their cunning to deuise how to accommodate and fit this answer to any part of my argument For mine owne part I can make of it nor fish nor flesh nor good red herring and therefore not troubling my selfe with your follies here I leaue it as I found it vnkith vnkist as they say N. B. And in the meane time I will hasten to your Definition of Faith which you call the third kinde of Faith and onely Iustifying Faith I. D. Soft and faire no hast but good you post away so fast vnto the Definition that you leaue something behind you vnanswered which desires and deserues your further consideration For first I proue vnto you that Faith cannot be a full Perswasion certaine Assurance partly because it is not so much as Assurance partly because such Fulnes agrees not to little Faith and so makes the definition narrower and of lesse latitude then the definite and partly because it is a most discomfortable doctrine to weake Christians who finding this strength of Assurance wanting in themselues may doubt whether they haue any Faith at all if Faith bee no other then a full Assurance and firme resolution Againe I answer certaine obiections the chiefest you can haue against mee and that with such generall solutions as will cut off almost any reason you can oppose vnto mee These things being of such importance and consequence should not thus haue beene balked and husht vp in silence for while they stand vnstirred and vntoucht you cannot reasonably bee thought either fully to haue satisfied my arguments or sufficiently to haue maintained your owne cause Out of doubt therefore it would haue been much better for your credit to haue made lesse hast and more good speed for tripping away so fast and leauing matters of such weight vtterly vnanswered all the Schollers in our Countrey to blow backe your owne scoffe into your owne face will thinke the worse of your haste so long as they liue for this tricke To conclude this point whereas there are two many faults as Simplicius saith too vsually committed in the disputation and determination of Questions it appeareth by what I haue now said that you haue hitherto grossely faulted in the former For you doe but reiect and deny my Conclusions without refuting the confirmations I bring for them and so if not altogether alienate from you yet leaue in suspence and doubt the mind euen of those who otherwise might bee of the same opinion with you Now if you offend likewise in the second and doe not in the remainder of your Reply vtterly raze and ouerthrow the foundations of my Doctrine but suffer them to stand vnshaken and vnmoued you shall both leaue the thirst of your readers expectation vnquenched and vnsatisfied and proue your selfe but a bragging and boasting Pyrgopolinices threatning much and performing nothing Let vs therefore take a view hereof and see what you haue to say against the definition which I giue to Iustifying Faith Treatise The third Faith is Faith of Person or Personall Merit and of this Faith I make the Obiect to bee Christ the Mediator meriting the