Holiness The Holiness of Christs Humane Nature and of Angels and Saints in Heaven is as much the Creators as is his Works of Mercy and Justice And Gods glory shineth as much in them And it is the glory of his Goodness if not of Mercy which preventeth sin and misery yea and of Mercy too For though mercy relate to misery it is as well to possible misery prevented as to existeââ misery removed And if he speak not of Subjects but Proprietors the Boâum Creaturae is also Creatoris SECT XIX The same doctrine in Rutherford de providentia confuted 625. I Have been too long in confuting this Digression of Dr. Twisse which is contrary to the commonest doctrine of Protestants and The summ of their opinion I think soundeth not well in Christians ears The summ of which is this Neither God nor Devil do will sin as it is evil but God is the first willer of its existence because it is in its own nature summe unice conducibile to the manifestation of his Justice and mercy And willing and Loving being all one in God he thus singularly Loveth the existence of sin above its contrary holiness for this end And by Predetermining premotion which he much more largely writeth for elsewhere he causeth as the first total Cause all that man Causeth But it is sin in man because forbidden him but not in God because not forbidden him And therefore God is not to be said to cause sin though he cause all that is caused but to permit it because he causeth it not in himself nor is he to be called a Deficient cause of our omissions because he is not bound to Actuate us but man is to be called the efficient and deficient cause because he is under an obliging Law Though God made that Law And though he can no more than a stone act without physical predetermination nor forbear acting when so acted yet he is to be called free because he is actually willing or his will doth act and because he is predetermined by none but God This is the true sence of their opinion as opened by themselves I shall now briefly consider what Rutherford saith to the same sence 626. Cap. 15. pag. 186. To Annatus charging Twisse as denying Gods permission of sin because he maketh him the * * * Nec omnino negari potest Voluntatem Dei esse Causam rerum omnium quas fieri velit Twiss recitante etiam Rutherf de Prov. c. 15. p. 186. See all their Reasons for Gods causing sin or willing its existence answered by Ruiz de Vol. Dei disp 26. p. 262 263 264 265. As also against Gods predetermining to the immediate materiale peccati disp 27. p. 270 c. disp 28 29 30 c. usque ad p. 580. As to the common saying that God willeth not sin as sin all men will confess Dr. Twiss often that neither doth a wicked man do so Peccans ut sic non intendit peccatum quoad illud quod est formale in peccato seu carentiam conformitatis sed intendit actum ut est in genere moris inquit Aureolus in 2. d. 42. a. 3. pag. 319. I will not conceal a more difficult argument than most of theirs which may occurr to others God caused e. g. in Nathanaâl Peter c. this act of saith before Christs coming the Messiah is to come hereafter When Christ was come this was false and so evil God still caused the faith which he gave them Therefore he caused an untrue belief and evil and that supernaturally But I answ 1. God caused the habit of their faith and the act The nature of the habit was in general A belief of all divine revelations and in special A belief in the promised Messiah The termination of the act on the Messiah as future rather than as Incarnate required nothing positive in the Habit The same Habit served to both acts unless the latter being for the nobler act had some addition but the former needed none 2. And that this Habit might bring forth the act in that circumstance no more was necessary but 1. Gods word Christus venturus est 2. And Gods influx on the habited faculty to cause it to act according to that habit So that when God had reversed that word Christus venturus est he was no longer the cause determining the mind to believe that word but only the cause that the habit of faith was still towards Christ But not at all sub ratione venturi For the determining word was called in and it was an imperfection not to know so much where it was not a sin Cause of the Act the Liberty and the Prohibition and to Cause is not to Permit he hath no better answer than to say that God doth not permit the Act nor the Evil of the Act but he permitteth the evil act and 2. To say that the Dominicans and Jesuits hold the same as he Which is to jest with holy things and not to argue As if he said God made neither the soul nor the body and yet he made the man What! is it as it 's said that non animased unio est vita so Doth God permit the Union of Actum and Malâm No that he pretendeth not 627. To prove that God willeth the existence of sin he bringeth the instance of Joseph's case Gen. 45. To which I say that the text saith not at all that God willed the Will or Act or Sin of Joseph's brethren but only the Venditio passiva or effect and the consequents Nay only the consequents are mentioned in the Texts His replyes to the answers prove no more than the five things which I before asserted about sin Nothing so much deceiveth them as not distinguishing between the sinful act and the effect or passion when they are called by the same name as Selling Killing c. 628. His next instance is of Christs death of which I said enough before But 1. He understandeth his adversaries as ascribing only the Consequents of Crucifixion to Gods will which is his mistake It is Crucifixion it self passivè sumpta which they ascribe to it some of them at least And let men too wise against God deride it as much as they will God can will and Love that Christ be Crucified and yet hate and not will the will and act of the Crucifiers but only foresee it as aforesaid And let them jeer God as Idle or asleep if he neither will nor effectually nill the sin we will believe it to be his perfection and liberty which they so deride 2. And whereas he addeth that Active Verbs are used as Gen. 45. Misit me Deus Isa 53. Deus voluit eum conterere Zech. 13. Ego percutiam Pastorem and God delivered Christ to death I answer It is too too gross to perswade us hence that any of these Texts say that God willeth the sinners will or Act. God sent me speaketh Gods act that is his disposal
it he could never have the thing promised for that were to have God and not to have him nor yet his necessary disposition for fruition for without holiness he is not a capable disposed recipient of Salvation The rest of his arguments run all upon this error as iâ love and holiness were only the means and not the end and Salvation given SECT XVI Of assurance of Pardon Justification and Salvation And whether it be Faith 224. The Faith by which we are justified is not a believing that ââââ justified but a believing that we may be justified Not a believing tââ Christ is ours more than other mens or that we shall be saved but â believing in Christ that he may be ours and we may be saved by him 225. There is assurance in this Faith not assurance that we are sâcere or shall be saved But assurance that Gods Promises and all ââ Words are true and that he will perform them and that Christ ââ the Saviour of the world and that the love of God is our End ââââ Happiness and that all this is offered to us in Christ even Pardon âââ Life as well as others which offer Faith accepteth truly But the Believer is oft uncertain of the sincerity of his own belief and so of ââ Salvation 226. How much certainty we have of Divine Revelation and Scripture verity I have so fully opened in many Tractates and lastly in oââ I know that the learned Conciliator Guiliel Forbes doth confidently charge them as guilty of confusion who place Faith in more faculties than one and that call it Fiducia But I doubt not but the error is his own which tendeth to confusion by not distinguishing a meer physical act from a moral or political which is made up of many physical acts And if he or Bishop Gror. Downame Camero or any that go that way had been put to tell what one physical act they will confine Christian justifying Faith to they would have âound themselves in confusion To say It is assent denieth not but that it must be an assent to many verities And this assent signifieth at once a belief that God is true and that this is his word and that this word is true He that saith It is a belief of the assertion for the oredibility of the Asâertor can scarce prove that he nameth but one Act And I know no such assent which ââââ bit essentially contain a trusting to the word of the Assertor or Testifier called Fiducâa Can you believe a âaââ âoââââ be true because he is credible and not trust his credibility so far as believing him importeth It is a contradiction Fâââ eredentis is nothing but a trusting to the Fides dicentis and they are Relatives as Act and Object Though I grant that ââââ is also a quietting applicatory Trust or Fiducia which is but the exercise of Faith as supposing me to see my ãâ¦ã Promise which cometh after our first believing in which we see but our receptive capacity that the Promise ãâ¦ã with the rest of Mankind and the thing promised is offered to me called The certainty of Christianity without Popery that I will not here repeat it further than to say that it is not a perfect apprehension which we call our certainty nor yet an uneffectual doubtful one But such âââ as will carry a man on confidence of Gods Word to a holy life and ââ the forsaking of all other hopes even life it self for the hopes which ââ given us by Christ which yet may have several degrees in several persons But objective certainty which is the evidence of verity is mâââ full than our subjective certainty for want of our due receptivity ââ us and is still the same in it self though not equally brought or reveaââ to all 227. Even doubting of the truth of the Scripture and Christianity may stand with saving Faith and Salvation when it is not predominant nor so great as to keep us from the said forsaking all for Christ and Heaven 228. Doubting of mans own Salvation is not always from weakness of Faith directly much less is it the want of Faith it self âoâ sometime a man may doubt meerly as doubting of the sincerity of ââ own Faith and not at all doubting of the truth of the Word of God But when it is the doubting whether the promises be sure which makeâ a man doubt whether he shall be saved this doubting is the debility ââ Faith 229. The same may be said of dispair That dispair is from the weakness or want of Faith which cometh from an unbelief of the truth of the Promise And that also is pernicious dispair which from what Cause soever is so great as to take men off the use of necessary means to attain Salvation But that dispair which cometh from overmuch self-condemning and a conceit that a mans heart is false and not that Gods Promise is false may stand with true Faith and Salvation if it be not so great as to take him off the use of necessary means 230. No man ordinarily can be assured of his Salvation or Justification without extraordinary Revelation but by being assured first of the âruth of Gods Promise and of his own sincerity in believing For his assurance is of the conclusion of this argument Whosoever sincerely believeth and repenteth is justified But I sincerely believe and repent âherefore I am justified And the weakness of the apprehension of either of the premises is ever in the conclusion which always followeth partem debiliorem 231. There are therefore but two sorts of men who can believe that they are justified by a Faith properly called Divine that is which is a belief of Gods Word herein 1. Those that God revealeth it to by proâhetical or extraordinary Revelation if there be any such 2. Those who are more certain of their own sincere Faith than they are that Gods Word it self is true if any such there be in the world For with all others the certainty of the sincerity of their own Faith being weakest âhe conclusion followeth it 232. If any man can possibly doubt more of the truth of Gods Word âhan of the soundness of his own Faith though that mans Faith may be called Divine it is no honour to it because it hath so much doubting of Gods Word mixed with belief And it 's like his greater assurance of his belief of it is but his error or infirmity 233. Ordinarily therefore no Christians can believe fide Divina that they are justified and shall be saved that is this is no Word of God but a conclusion of which one of the premises only and that the stronger is Gods Word 234. To say that he that believeth shall be saved is equivalent to this I shall be saved is not true nor reasonable seeing I believe is not Gods Word nor so certain as Gods Word And one of the premises is not equal to both 245. When they say That it 's all one when I am sure that
I believe I grant it if 1. This be in it self as evident 2. And as certain to me as Gods Word is otherwise I deny it 236. Obj. A man cannot believe and not know that he believeth Ans But a man may sincerely believe and yet through ignorance either of the Scripture or himself be uncertain that indeed his Faith is sincere and not such as is common to the justified 237. Some Protestants by erring in this point and saying that justifying Faith is a certain perswasion or belief that we are justified and that it is Gods own Word that I or you are actually justified or are sincere Believers and that the believing it is properly fides Divina have greatly scandalized and hardened the Papists to our disgrace 238. And so have those that say that in the Creed the meaning of I believe the Remission of Sin is I believe that my sins are remitted actually And that all must thus believe 239. Some say that the Spirit within them saith that they are sincere Believers and the Word of the Spirit is the Word of God and to believâ it is to believe God Ans This is the Enthâsâasts conceit which if true all such have prophetical Inspiration For the Spirit to bring any new word from God is one thing and to give us the Understanding Love and Obedience to such a Word is another thing The Spirit doth indeed assure us of our sincerity but not by a new Word from God to tell us so but 1. By giving us that sincere Faith it self 2. By acting it and increasing it 3. By helping us to know it 4. By giving us the love of God and other Graces 5. By giving us the comfort of all But the reception and perception of these internal Operations is not properly called a Belief of the Word of God Else when we make Gods Word the adequate Object of Faith we shall be still at an uncertainty what that Word is 240. Yet this perswasion that we are sincere and justified is divine where the Spirit causeth it but not a divine Faith Yea it is participatively of divine Faith because Gods Word is one of the premises though the weaker must denominate the conclusion * * * Of this see Albertinus's Disp at large 241. Obj. A Reprobate or Devil may believe all the Articles of Faith without application but justifying Faith applieth Christ and his benefits to our selves Ans It 's true But this application is not a certainty nor a perswasion nor a believing that I am justified no more than that I am glorified no nor that I shall be so neither But it is an accepting of Christ offered that I may be justified and saved So that here are all these applying acts in it 1. I believe that Christ as the Saviour of the World is my Saviour as he is all other mens and is not the Devils that is that he hath done that for me which he hath done for all mankind 2. I believe that he is offered to me personally in the Promise or Covenant of Grace on condition of believing-acceptance and that with and for all his purchased benefits and so for my Justification 3. I believe that if I so accept him I shall be justified 4. By true consent I do accordingly accept him to justifie sanctifie and save me But when all this is done 1. I do not believe that God hath said in his word that I am justified nor that my Faith is sincere 2. And my Faith is so weak that I may long doubt of that sincerity which I have and so of my Justification 3. And when I come to be certain of my Faith it is not by believing God as saying that I do certainly believe but by experience of its sincerity upon just trial by the Spirits help 242. No man can be sure that his Faith is sincere and saving who is not assured that it will help him to love God as God above all yea already doth so and that it mortifieth selfishness and will prevail with him to deny even life it self and all the world for Christ and Salvation So far as a man doubteth of any of this he must needs doubt of his own sincerity 243. So weak is Faith in most that are sincere and so little kept in exercise and so strong is sense and self and flesh and worldly bâits and interest and Satan's temptations that in my experience who have conversed with as many that are careful of their Souls as most have done I think it is a very small number that I could ever hear say I am certain of my Justification and Salvation But a great number who have lived in holy confidence hope and peace and some in great joy but most in tollerable fears and doubting and some few oppressed by those doubts So that certainty of Salvation is very rare 244. When Bellarmine saith that our assurance more belongeth to Hope than Faith and that it is but moral certainty by signs that we have of our Justification Sincerity and Salvation he so little differeth from the sense of almost all godly Protestants that were it not through other distances and partiality we had never read in Luther's days that for this one point alone we have cause enough of our alienation from the Romanists 245. They err on one extream who say that all are commanded to believe that they are justified or any as if it were Gods Word And they err on the other hand who command doubting or commend it as if it were a duty or a benefit And they speak the truth who say that our doubting of our own Sincerity and Justification if we are sincere is a sin of Infirmity and a Calamity proceeding from weakness of Faith Hope Love and Self-acquaintance which we should use all possible diligence to overcome But they that are not sincere are bound to know it And first to seek and get sincerity and then discern it 246. It is by the Spirit that all Christians must come to their assurance But not by the Spirit as speaking this in us as a word from God Thou art justified or shalt be saved or art sincere But by the aforesaid Acts The Spirit in us is first Christ's Agent Advocate and Witness to assure us that he is the Saviour of the World And next he is our Witness to assure us that we are Gods adopted Children which he doth by being in us Gods Mark and the Pledge First-Fruits and earnest of our heavenly Inheritance by effectual habituating our Souls to the predominant love of God and Holiness and Heaven Where-ever this Sanctification is there is the Evidence and Witness of our Adoption He that findeth by the Fruits that he hath the Spirit findeth the certain proof of his Justification and earnest of Glory SECT XVII Of Love as the end of Faith 247. This predominant Love of God and Holiness is so proper a Cui non unus idemque vitâ scopus est hic
are wrought by common grace and that it is special acts and habits overcoming the flesh and world which are wrought by special grace So that those firemen that are resolved that yet differ they will and implacably differ and their adversaries shall be enemies of Gods Grace whether they will or not are yet defective in that acuteness and pregnancy of wit which is necessary to pretend a real disagreement and are forced to say that they disagree when they have not wit enough to seem to prove it to any but those that take their cholerick zeal and reproach for proof For in this there is no difference among us 6. Obj. At least we can prove that we differ in this about the effects that one side make Gods gracious habits given to believers to be such as may be lost and dye and the other do not Answ That is no difference You still want wit to make differences though you want not will For both sides are agreed that perseverance ariseth not from the meer nature of the Habit of grace but from Gods superadded sustentation For Adam and the faln Angels had as is commonly held such kind of habitual grace as we though objectively differing 7. Seeing there is no difference on Gods part as they all conclude Resistible grace and irresistible sufficient and effectual can have no difference but in the very effect or event and the connotation of mans Power or impotency to the contrary I know as I have said that not only the Dominicans and Calvinists but Suarez and other Jesuits say that Effectual Grace is such ex parte principii as is forcibler for faith as the effect But they contradict themselves who confidently say that besides that effect it is nothing but Gods essence which hath no degrees or real differences And mans power of Resistance and frustration is none as to Gods will and essence but only as to the effect When he could have done otherwise 8. The same Vanity they declare in the question Whether the same degree of Divine Grace help or operation would Convert one man as doth another or would Convert as doth not Convert When they are agreed that the effect is not the same and that the cause hath no degrees of difference 9. And though it 's past mans understanding to comprehend how all the various effects in the world should be produced without the least diversity in the Cause Will or Action ex parte agentis and that Velle salvare Petrum velle damnare Judam should be perfectly the same Volition ex parte Volentis yet it is the liker to be true because man cannot comprehend it as long as he hath no evidence to prove that it is not true For God is incomprehensible 10. Seeing then that we must concent 1. That God Decreed to do all that he doth and properly and absolutely no more 2. And that Christs death is the cause of all that it effecteth and properly of no more Of which the conditional gift of pardon and life is part And so that all the Controversie 1. Of Decree 2. Of Redemption is resolved into that of the effects 3. And seeing all the effects are such whose difference we little differ about if at all and ex parte Dei agentis they agree that there is no difference where then is the Difference among all the contenders §. II. Alvarez his Epitome in Twenty Propositions considered BUt that all this may more plainly appear I will recite the Twenty Conclusions which Alvarez in his Epilogus giveth us as the summ of all his Book one hundred twenty one Disputations And I shall tell you how far they are all to be consented to * Thus Bradwardine concludeth his Book with thirty six errors and as many verities which he would have the Church especially that of Rome determine But leaving out the most unsavoury parts or expressions of his own judgement Whether God be the chief necessitating Cause of all sin is none of them I. Free-will in lapsed nature cannot without the help of grace do a moral work which by co-operation of the supernatural End shall be truly good and a work of Virtue so as that by the doer it be referred to God beloved simply above all as to the ultimate natural End Answ It is granted and more that though all natural men have one sort of Grace given them yet I think this cannot be done without special saving grace II. Man by the sole strength of nature cannot assent to all supernatural mysteries propounded and explained to him as revealed of God or because revealed of God so as the formal reason of his belief is Divine revelation Answ It 's true He must have commoner grace to believe them dogmatically and uneffectually and special saving grace to believe them practically and savingly III. Not only faith it self but also the first beginning of faith proceedeth from the help of grace and not from the strength of Nature only Answ Very true IV. The free-will of man in lapsed Nature cannot without the help of Grace Love God above all simply even as he is the author of Nature Answ It 's true V. Man in lapsed Nature without the help of Grace cannot fulfill all the precepts even of the Law of Nature nor overcome any great difficulty and temptation even for any little time which it is necessary to overcome for the keeping of that Law Answ True Therefore they have some Grace that do it VI. There is no Law nor ever was made by God of his giving the actual helps of preventing grace to them that do all that is in them by the sole faculty of nature nor hath Christ merited or would have any such Law Answ True For he giveth some common grace to all men antecedently without any condition on their part And though he give to those that use their common grace to the utmost or near it sufficient encouragement to go on and hope that such endeavour shall not be in vain as to the obtaining of peculiar grace yet de nomine vel definitione Whether this encouragement shall be called a Law or a Promise or neither we contend not VII God by his helping grace floweth into free-will by premoving it that it may co-operate and also truly-efficiently together with the same free-will causeth its pious operation Answ It 's true But all adjuvant grace produceth not the second effect which floweth from both Causes of which before and after VIII When God by his exciting Grace striketh and toucheth the hearts of men he doth not expect that the will by its innate liberty begin its motion by Consenting But God by adjuvant grace effecteth that it freely and infallibly Consent Answ It 's true of all that do consent But God hath a degree of exciting and adjuvant grace which are Necessary and give the posse Velle which cause not the act through mans defect And though God expect not that effect as one that is deceived
RICHARD BAXTER'S Catholick Theologie PLAIN PURE PEACEABLE FOR PACIFICATION Of the DOGMATICAL WORD-WARRIOURS Who 1. By contending about things unrevealed or not understood 2. And by taking VERBAL differences for REAL and their arbitrary Notions for necessary Sacred Truths deceived and deceiving by Ambiguous unexplained WORDS have long been the Shame of the Christian Religion a Scandal and hardning to unbelievers the Incendiaries Dividers and Distracters of the Church the occasion of State Discords and Wars the Corrupters of the Christian Faith and the Subverters of their own Souls and their followers calling them to a blind Zeal and Wrathful Warfare against true Piety Love and Peace and teaching them to censure backbite slander and prate against each other for things which they never understood In Three BOOKS I. PACIFYING PRINCIPLES about Gods Decrees Fore-Knowledge Providence Operations Redemption Grace Mans Power Free-will Justification Merits Certainty of Salvation Perseverance c. II. A PACIFYING PRAXIS or Dialogue about the Five Articles Justification c. Proving that men here contend almost only about Ambiguous words and unrevealed things III. PACIFYING DISPUTATIONS against some Real Errors which hinder Reconciliation viz. About Physical Predetermination Original Sin the extent of Redemption Sufficient Grace Imputation of Righteousness c. Written chiefly for Posterity when sad Experience hath taught men to hate Theological Logical Wars and to love and seek and call for Peace Ex Bello Pax. LONDON Printed by Robert White for Nevill Simmons at the Princes Arms in S t. Pauls Church-yard MDCLXXV I intreat the WRATHFUL CONTENTIOUS ZEALOUS DOGMATISTS conscientiously to study these Texts of Scripture MATTH 28. 19 20. Go Teach all Nations Baptizing them into the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you Mar. 16. 16. He that believeth and is Baptized shall be saved Acts 11. 26. The Disciples were called Christians 1 Cor. 15. 1 2 3 4. I declare to you the Gospel which I preached to you which also you have received and wherein ye stand by which also ye are saved if ye keep in memory what I preached to you unless ye have believed in vain That Christ dyed for our sins and that he was buryed and that he rose again the third day 2 Tim. 1. 13. Hold fast the FORM of sound words which thou hast heard of me in FAITH and LOVE which is in Christ Jesus 1 John 4. 15. Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God God dwelleth in him and he in God Rom. 10. 9 10. If thou confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in thy Heart that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved For with the Heart man believeth unto Righteousness and with the Mouth confession is made to salvation Acts 8. 37. If thou believest with all thy heart thou maist be baptized And he said I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God Rom. 14. 1. 17 18 19. Him that is weak in the Faith receive but not to doubtful disputations For the Kingdom of God is not meat and drink but Righteousness Peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God and approved of men Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace and things wherewith one may edifie another Rom. 15. 5 6 7. Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be like minded one towards another or mind the same thing one with another according to Christ Jesus That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorifie God Wherefore Receive ye one another as Christ also received us to the glory of God 1 Tim. 1. 3 4 5. Charge some that they teach NO OTHER doctrine nor give heed to fables and endless Genealogies which minister Questions rather than godly edifying which is in faith Now the End of the Commandment is Charity out of a pure heart and of a good conscience and of faith unfeigned From which some having swerved have turned aside to vain janglings 1 Tim. 6. 3 4 5 6. If any man teach OTHERWISE and consent not to wholsome words the words of our Lord Jesus Christ and to the doctrine which is according to Godliness he is PROUD KNOWING NOTHING but DOTING about Questions and STRIFES of WORDS whereof cometh envy strife railings evil surmisings perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth supposing that gain is godliness or thinking that godliness is advantage from such turn away 2 Tim. 2. 22 23 24. Follow righteousness saith charity peace with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart But foolish and unlearned Questions avoid knowing that they do gender strifes and the servant of the Lord must not strive V. 15 16 17. Study to shew thy self approved unto God a workman that needeth not be ashamed RIGHTLY DIVIDING the word of truth But shun profane and vain bablings for they will increase to more ungodliness and their word will eat as doth a canker 2 Tim. 2. 14. Charging them before the Lord that they STRIVE not about WORDS to no profit to the subverting of the hearers 1 Cor. 8. 2 3. If any man think that he knoweth any thing he knoweth nothing as he ought to know But if any man LOVE GOD the same is KNOWN OF HIM Jam. 3. 1 13 c. My Brethren Be not Many Masters knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation Who is a wise man and indued with knowledge among you Let him shew out of a good conversation his WORKS with meekness of wisdom But if ye have bitter zeal or envying and strife in your hearts Glory not and Lye not against the truth This WISDOM descendeth not from above but is earthly sensual devilish For where envying and strife is there is confusion and every evil work But the wisdom from above is first pure then peaceable gentle easie to be intreated full of mercy and good fruits without partiality and without hypocrisie And the fruit of Righteousness is sown in Peace of them that make Peace Acts 15. 28. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us But not to Church-Tyrants Dogmatists or superstitious ones to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things Phil. 3. 15 16 17. Let us as many as be perfect be thus minded and if in any thing ye be otherwise or diversly or contrarily minded God shall reveal even this unto you Nevertheless whereto we have already attained let us walk by the same rule let us mind the same thing Phil. 2. 1 2 3 4. If there be any consolation in Christ if any comfort of love if any fellowship of the Spirit if any bowels and mercies fulfil ye my joy that ye be like minded having the same Love being of one accord of one mind Let nothing be done through strife or vain glory but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other
positivas causas To which what I have said is a sufficient answer And 1. Sometimes they have not but only the cessation of a causation 2. They never have a positive efficient of themselves for nothing is not made but only a positive remover of the cause of that which the subject is deprived of or an interposer or hinderer of the causation of it e. g. of Light or life And death hath no cause but that which ceaseth the causes of life Reprobation is commonly looked at in the two most notable parts as called 1. Gods Reprobating men to unbelief and impenitency 2. His Reprobating men to final damnation The last of these also is considered in the execution 1. As Privative 2. As Positive called Poena damni sensus And both especially the Privative part are considerable 1. As executed by man himself on himself freely 2. Or as executed by God Concerning each of these observe 512. 1. Not to Believe and Repent is no real entity And not to Give faith and Repentance as is said is no real entity And to Permit Infedelity and Impenitency is no real entity as is proved And not to Decree the Giving of saith and the hindering of unbelief is nothing And most clearly besides these four nothings nothing can be proved either existent or needful All that cometh to pass will come to pass without any more ado Therefore 513. As far as any mortal man can prove God hath no such Act of Reprobation at all as is 1. Either a Decree that a man shall not eventually Repent 2. Or a Decree not to give him Repentance 3. Or a Decree to Permit his Impenitence 4. Nor can we prove an after Volition of his own former non Volition which is asserted by Scotus But the three first we have great reason to lay by and so not only to say as Davenant that this part of Reprobation is an Act negative quoad objectum but that it is no Act and there is no other Reprobation as to this part save 1. Gods not decreeing to give faith 2. And his not giving it 514. 2. And as to Damnation so much of it as consisteth in sin it self God no otherwise causeth than as he doth all sin which is properly not at all It being but the Act as an act which he causeth as the Cause of Nature and not as sinfully qualified and so no more decreeth this than other sin 515. And most men little think how much of damnation lyeth in sin it self and the privative consequents which need no other cause 1. To be ignorant of God and Goodness 2. To be void of the Love of God and Holiness and Holy persons and all the Holy employment of Heaven 3. To be thereby void of all the Delights of Holy ones which consist in such Knowledge Love and Employment Praise Obedience and holy Communion 4. To be uncapable of the Reception of Divine complacency as he that maketh himself blind is uncapable of the light or he that maketh himself unlovely is uncapable of immediate Love 5. To be defiled and diseased with all kind of sinful lusts and malignity and made like the Devil 6. To have all sorts of Lusts in violence when they can have no fewel or satisfaction and so to be tormented with these lusts To have extream selfishness and Pride when they have cast themselves into the utmost shame and misery 7. To see that no Creature can deliver them and to despair of ever being better as having no hope from God or any other 8. To see or know that others enjoy the Glory and everlasting felicity which they have lost 9. To think how easily once they might have attained it and how it was offered freely to their choice 10. To think of all the solicitations of mercy that importuned them and all the time and means they had 11. To think for how base a vanity they lost it and that misery was their wilful choice 12. To be tormented with envy and malice against God that forsaketh them and against his Saints And to feel conscience awakened setting home all their former folly All this is nothing but sin and its own effects which hath no Causation at all from God but to continue the nature which he gave them and is not bound to destroy And how great a part of hell is this 516. Nay we know not how much sensible Pain may be the consequent of their own sin without any other Act of God than his common continuation of nature it self As a man that eateth Arsnick or unwholsome meat is tormented by it without any other act of God than as the universal Cause of Nature 517. All this much of Damnation then being meerly the work of the sinner himself so far as there is no Act of God in the execution so far no man can prove any Positive Act of Volition or Decree 518. But 1. As God in these is the universal cause of Nature and so of natural acts 2. And as in other instances he actually further punisheth them 3. And as he actually made that Law which made these penalties the sinners due so far God hath a Positive Decree and Volition that these persons shall be damned And moreover as improperly or morally his not sanctifying them and not saving them is called his Act and is really their penalty even so may his not-willing to save or glorifie them be called his Decree and will to damn them if you will 519. By this time we are ready to answer our first question What are the objects of these several acta of God so far as connotatively we must call them several And 1. * * * Besides all before cited against Volitions de nihilo see Ruiz de Vol. Dei disp 6. §. 1. p. 36. Antiquorum gravissimi sentiunt Deum non omnia Velle sed ea duntarat bona quae in aliqua differentia temporis existunt proinde possibilia que nunquam futura sunt non amari à Deo ââââ Mala inde Deum not esse omni-volentem nâllam creaturam à Deo amari necessario Ita Albertus Alexand. Boââvent Richard Gaby Bannez Zumel Molina Valentia Scotus Against which he bringeth frivolous reasons and asserteth that God willeth as a material object the Goodness which the Creature would have if it were made and this as to all Creatures which never will be What putid contradictions are here to will Goodness which is no Goodness of all Creatures which are no Creatures as material objects which are nothings God willeth his own Power whence man calleth that Possible which is nothing But was there from Eternity any Possibles not-future to be willed What was there from Eternity but God And are all theâe Nothings God himself Gods not giving the Gospel to any persons is no Act and so hath no object But reductively or improperly the object is Man sinning against the grace of the first edition of the Law of Grace that is These are the
case 661. I intreat the Reader that is inclining to any extreams but to read âover first those short answers of Prosper ad Capitulâ Gallorum and ad Objectiones Vincent And most of the Sententiae de Capit. I shall think it worthy my labour to recite to force them on the Readers observation and let him see the highest old Doctrine of Gods Decrees Sent. 1. Whoever saith that by Gods Predestination as by fatal necessity men compelled into sins are constrained to death is not a Catholick For Gods Predestination doth by no means make men bad nor is the cause of any mans sin Sent. sup 2. He that saith that the Grace of Baptism received doth not take away Original sin from them that are not predestinated to life is not a Catholick For the Sacrament of Baptism by which all sins He meaneth that those that sincerely covenanted with God in Baptism were truly pardoned though he thought some of them fell away and perished are blotted out is true even in them who will not remain in the truth and for them that are not predestinated unto life Sent. sup 3. He that saith that they that are not predestinated to life though they were in Christ regenerated by Baptism and have lived piously and justly it profitteth them nothing but they are so long reserved till they fall to ruine and they are not taken out of this life till this happen to them as if the ruine of such men were to be referred to Gods constitution is not a Catholick For God doth not therefore prolong the time of any mans age that by long living he should fall to ruine and in his long living fall from the right âaith seeing long life is to be numbered with the gifts of God by which a man should be better and not worse Sent. sup 4. He that saith that all are not called to Grace if he speak of such as Christ is not declared to is not to be reprehended Sent. sup 5. He that saith that they that are called are not equally called but some that they might believe and some that they might not believe as if to any man the Vocation were the cause of his not believing saith not right For though faith be not but by Gods Gift and Mans Will yet Infidelity is by mans will alone Sent. 6. He that saith that Pree-will in Man is Nothing but it 's Gods predestination which worketh in men whether it be to good or to evil is not a Catholick For Gods Grace doth not abolish mans choice or free-will but perfecteth it and revoketh and reduceth it into the way from error that that which was bad by its own liberty may by the operation of Gods Spirit be made right And Gods predestination is alwayes in Good which knoweth how either to pardon with the praise of mercy or punish with the praise of Justice the sin which is committed by mans will alone Sent. 7. He that saith that God for this cause giveth not Perseverance to some of his Children whom he regenerated in Christ to whom he gave faith hope and Love because by Gods fore-knowledge and predestination they were not differenced from the mass of perdition If he mean that God endowed these men in Goodness but would not have them remain in it and that he was the cause of their târning away he judgeth contrary to the Justice of God For though Gods Omnipotence could have given the grace of standing to them that will fall yet his grace doth not first forsake them before they have forsaken it And because he foresaw that they would do this by a Voluntary desertion therefore he had them not in the Election of Predestination Sent. 8. He that saith that God would not have all men saved but a certain number that are predestinate speaketh hardlier of the altitude of Gods unsearchable grace than he should speak Who would have all men to be saved and to come to the acknowledgement of the truth and fulfilleth the purpose of his will on them whom being foreknown he predestinated and being predestinate he called being called he justified and being justified he glorified Losing nothing of the fulness of the Gentiles and of all the seed of Israel for whom the eternal Kingdom was prepared in Christ before the foundation of the World For all the World is chosen out of all the World And out of all men all men are adopted So that they that are saved are therefore saved because God would have them saved and they that perish do perish because they deserve to perish Sent. 9. He that saith that our Saviour was not Crucified for the Redemption of the whole World looketh not to the Virtue of the Sacrament that is Sacrifice but to the part or participation of the unbelievers When as the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ is the Price of the whole World From which Price they are Aliens who being either delighted in their Captivity will not be redeemed or when they are redeemed return again to the same Captivity For the Word of the Lord falleth not nor is the redemption of the World evacuated For though the World in the vessels of wrath knew not God yet the World in the vessels of mercy knew him Which God without their preceding Merits took out of the power of darkness and translated into the Kingdom of the Son of his Love Sent. 10. He that saith that God substracteth from some the preaching of the Gospel lest perceiving the preaching of the Gospel they should be saved may decline the envy of the objection by the paââonage of our Saviour himself who would not work Miracles with some that he saith would have believed had they seen them And he forbad his Apostles to preach to some people and now suffereth some Nations to live without his Grace Sent. 11. He that saith that God by his Power compelleth men to sin is deservedly reprehended For God who is the Author of Justice and Goodness and all whose Statutes and Commands are against sin is not to be thought to compell any to sin and precipitate them from innocency into crimes But if there be any of so profound impiety as that they are reckoned to be beyond the remedy of correction they receive not an increase of their iniquity from God but are made ââââ by themselves because they deserved to be left of God and given up to themselves and to deceivers for their former sins that so their sin should be a punishment of their sin Sent. 12. He that saith that obedience is withdrawn from some that are called and live piously and righteously that they may cease to obey doth think ill of Gods Goodness and Justice as seeming to constrain the godly to ungodliness and to take away good mens innocency from them When as He is the Giver and Keeper of godliness and innocency He therefore that adhereth to God is acted by the Spirit of God but he that departeth from God doth fall from his obedience
or cease it by his own will Sent. 13. He that saith that some men are not made by God to this end that they might obtain eternal life but that they might be the ornaments of their times and for the good of others would speak better if he said that God who is the Creator of all men maketh not them in vain who he foreseeth will not be partakers of life eternal Because even in bad men nature is Gods good work and Justice in their damnation is laudable But he cannot well be blamed that saith that even by the condition of such the World is adorned * * * But not by their sin iâ self and that those that hurt themselves by their own iniquity are born for the good of others For the multitude of the ungodly though innumerable is not disgraceful or a deformity to the World or unprofitable to the Kingdom of God seeing that by their propagation cometh the generation that is to be regenerate and by tolerating and loving them Gods people become the more illustrious Sent. 14. He that saith that they that believe not the preaching of the Gospel are unbelievers by Gods predestination and that God so decreed that they that believe not be unbelievers by his appointment or decree is not a Catholick For as Faith which worketh by Love is Gods gift so unbelief is none of Gods constitution Because God knoweth how to ordain Punishment for sin but not sin it self And it followeth not that what he remitteth not he committeth The predestinate therefore liveth by the faith which is given him The non-predestinate perish by Voluntary and not constrained infidelity Sent. 15. He that saith that Foreknowledge is the same with predestination doubtless in our good works conjoyneth or mixeth those two For what we have of Gods gift and is said to be foreknown must needs be predestinate And what is said to be predestinate must needs be foreknown But in our evil works only the foreknowledge of God must be understood Because as he foreknew and predestinated the things which he doth himself and giveth us to do so he FOREKNEW ONLY and DID NOT PREDESTINATE the things which he neither doth himself nor requireth us to do SECT XXI Prosper 's answers ad Object Vincent 662. I Will crave the Readers patience while I add the summ of hiâ Answers also to some of the Objections of Vincentius Obj. 1. That Christ died not for all Resp His death is a remedy in it self sufficient to profit all but if it be not taken it will not heal Obj. 2. That God would not have all saved though they would Resp We must sincerely believe and profess that God would have all saved That many perish is by the merit of them that perish That many are saved is the gift of him that saved them For that the guilty are damned is Gods inculpable justice that the guilty are justified is Gods unspeakable grace Obj. 3. That God made most of mankind that they might perish for ever Resp God is the Creator of all men but No man is made by him that he might perish For the cause of being born is one and the cause of perishing is another That men are born is Gods gift that they perish is the sinners desert He maketh men that they may be men Obj. 4. That the most of men are made of God not to do Gods will but the Devils Resp It is madness and against reason to say that it is by Gods will that Gods will is not done and that the damner of the Devil and his servants would have the Devil served Obj. 5. That God is the author of our sin in that he maketh mens wills evil and maketh a substance which by natural motion cannot but sin Resp This objection they make because we hold original sin and misery But we hold that whatever is of Nature is of God and none of that which is contrary to Nature But sin is contrary to nature from whence cometh death and all that is of death God is the author of no mans sin but the Creator of his Nature which voluntarily sinned when it had Power not to sin and by his own will man subjected himself to the deceiver And it is not by Natural but by Captive Motion that he liveth in sin till he die to sin and live to God which without grace he cannot do Obj. 6. That God maketh in men such a will as is in Devils that of its own motion can and will do nothing but evil Resp The whole world lyeth in wickedness But even very bad men may be reconciled and Devils cannot And God put not evil affections in men Obj. 7. That it is Gods will that a great part of Christians neither will nor can be saved Resp If you speak of them who forsaking the Godliness of a Christian conversation and faith do irrevocably pass over into prophane errours and damnable manners it 's doubtless that having such a will they will not be saved and as long as they will not be saved they cannot be saved But it is by no means to be believed that such men fell into this desperate case by the will of God when rather God lifteth up all that fall For no man is raised or established but by his Grace It is therefore Gods will that they continue in a good will And he forsaketh no man before that man forsake him and converteth many that do forsake him Obj. 8. That God will not have all Catholicks to persevere in the Catholick faith but will have a great part of them to apostatize from it Resp The same answer serveth to this blasphemy as to the former Obj. 9. That God would have a great part of the Saints to fall from the purpose of holiness * * * The Reader must note that their common opinion then was that some true Saints do fall away and perish Resp This madness also needeth no other answer Obj. 10. That Adulteries and corrupting consecrate Virgins do come to pass because God predestinated them to fall Resp It is a detestable and abominable opinion which believeth God to be the author of any mans evil will or evil action whose predestination or decree is never without Goodness and Justice â â â That is of nothing but good and just For all the wayes of God are mercy and truth Adulteries and Corruptions of Virgins God knoweth not how to institute but to damn not to dispose * * * That is ut sint but to punish Which evils when men commit they serve their own lusts Gods predestination neither exciteth perswadeth or impelleth the fall malignity or lusts of sinners but plainly predestinateth his own Judgement by which he will reward every one according to what he hath done whether good or evil which Judgement would never be if men sinned by the will of God But be it will And every man whom the discerning of Gods knowledge shall set
37. Sect. IV. Of the Law of Grace or New Covenant in the last Edition The Nature Conditions and yet free Donations of it pag. 42. Sect. V. Of the giving of the Holy Ghost His common and special Works The extent of the New Covenant Of the state of those that have not the Gospel And what Law they are under pag. 45. Sect. VI. How far Christ died for all and how far not pag. 51. Sect. VII The antecedent and consequent Will of God explained Of Justification by Faith What faith it is and what it doth pag. 54. Sect. VIII Of Justification by Christ's Righteousness imputed The false sense of Imputation opened and fully confuted The true sense asserted Whether Christ paid our Idem or Tantundem Whether he made his Satisfaction to God only as to a Rector or as Dominus vel pars laesa or how pag. 59. Sect. IX Of the sorts of Justification And first of constitutive Justification Of Righteousness How far it is or is not in our own habits or acts What Right the Covenant giveth the baptized to following helps and degrees of Grace Further what must be in our selves Mans holiness is no dishonour to Gods Grace How far Christ strippeth us of our own Righteousness More against the false sense of Imputation Objections answered pag. 69. Sect. X. Of Merit The case plainly and briefly decided The Gospel-Condition or Merit is but the accepting a free Gift according to its nature Whether we may trust to our own Faith Repentance Holiness The last Argument for the false sense of Imputation answered pag. 79. Sect. XI How Faith justifieth whether as an Instrument pag. 82. Sect. XII How far Repentance is a Condition of the Covenant And what it is Whether Faith or it be first How Faith and Love differ pag. 83. Sect. XIII Of the degrees of Pardon and Justification Whether losable And whether future sins be pardoned pag. 85. Sect. XIV Of Justification by Sentence of the Judge What it is ibid. Sect. XV. Of initial executive Pardon or Justification in Sanctificatiâ How far necessary yet imperfect pag. 86. Sect. XVI Of assurance of Pardon Of doubting Whether it be Dâââ Faith to believe ones own Justification or Salvation The Spââ Testimony pag. 88. Sect. XVII Of love to God as the end of Faith and foretast of Heâââ pag. 91. Sect. XVIII Of Perseverance and its certainty in order to the comfortââ certainty of Salvation Few certain of Justification and ââââ of Perseverance The words of the Synod of Dort The ââ ther 's Judgment about certainty of perseverance pag. 93 Sect. XIX Of mortal Sin or such as will not stand with the love of Gââ and a state of Justification pag. 103. Sect. XX. What Repentance for particular sins is necessary to parââ pag. 106. Sect. XXI Some solution of all the former difficulties in twenty Propââons 108. Sect. XXII Few certain of Salvation The reconciling consequents of âââ pag. 112. Sect. XXIII The case of Perseverance further opened and applied pag. 113. Sect. XXIV The sum and scope of this Discourse of Certainty pag. 116. Sect. XXV Degrees of falling and danger pag. 118. Sect. XXVI Of final Justification at Judgment More of the Agreemâââ Paul and James about Justification by Works pag. 119. Sect. XXVII Of the number of the glorified and the damned pag. 123. A PREMONITION MY work at present is but to lay down so much of the Christian Doctrine briefly as is necessary to be understood for the reconciling of the Controversies about Predestination Providence Grace and Free-will And therefore pass over âany other weighty Points and must not stand largely to prove all âs I go which carrieth its own evidence The true nature of the first âaw or Covenant deserveth a more accurate discussion than I can here âake and much passeth as certain with some which hath but little âroof And here I meet with these different Opinions 1. Some say that the âondition of the first Covenant was not Innocency but sincerity And âat Innocency was only a Duty necessary necessitate praecepti but not âedii or that it was ut medium necessary ad melius esse or to some cerââin degrees of felicity whereof it was a condition but not to felicity it ââlf And that the Covenant of Grace doth herein agree with it both âf them damning man only for mortal sin and punishing them tempoââlly only for venial sin And he seemeth to be of this mind who saith ââat Do this and live or Innocency or Works was the Condition only âf Moses Law but that Adhere and Vanquish was the Condition of the ârst Covenant But these are ambiguous unsatisfactory terms If the âeaning be Adhere to God and his Law by perfect Innocency and vanâuish all temptations to Sin this is the same with that Innocency which âe say was the Condition But if he mean only Adhere to me sinâerely by love as thy Ultimate End and vanquish all temptations which âould draw thee from me to another Ultimate End or God this is âhe same with the first opinion which many Papists seem to hold 2. But the more common Opinion is that which I assert That Innoâency was the Condition not only of Life eternal but of all the beâefits of Gods Covenant and the least sin the forfeiture of all They that are for the first Opinion think that if Adam had committed âut a small or venial sin as a sinful thought or desire after the forbidden âruit without the act or full consent it had been against Gods natural Goodness and Justice to have condemned him to Hell for it And conâquently that Christ died not to pardon the pains of Hell as due for such ââttle sins but only temporal smaller punishments But God best knoweth his own Nature And nature telleth us That âll sin deserveth punishment And he that sinneth so far removeth his âeart from God and forfeiteth his Spirit or Grace And he that hath ânce so turned from God in the least degree cannot of himself return âor heal himself and had no promise of Gods Grace to do it And âherefore it is not to be supposed that he should sin no more but such a âinute sin for greater will come in presently at that breach unless God âecover him which he was not in Justice bound to do And no one knowâth so well as God how much malignity is in the smallest sin And it was as âasie for sinless Adam to have continued sinless as for carnal men now âo forbear gross sin And he that sinneth deserveth not Heaven or Life ând there are divers degrees of punishment in Hell according to the degrees of Sin And Christ died for all our sins therefore they dâ every one deserve death which consisted not with a right to Life therefore not with a right to Heaven And an immortal Soul was not naturally to be annihilated therefore to live in some punishment as separated And Rom. 3. 9. all were under Sin yet all had not gross Sââ
sinned by Omission 3. But that Law giving life eternal only to Obedience to the end of his time of trial he merited not that life by initial Obedience This was initial imperfect Righteousness wanting perseverance but not a medium between Just and Unjust except as Just signifieth the merit of Life by persevering Righteousness to the last And so I never denied but in a disobliged Subject there is a medium Adam was not bound to do a years work the first hour and so was neither just nor privatively unjust as to the future years work but as to what he was presently obliged to he was either Righteous or a Sinner Here you come short of necessary accurateness Perseverance is a part of our Condition of Glorification Yet he that is not dead is just if he be a Believer and obedient And if God now call him by death he shall be glorified But he hath not now done all that is to be done till his death if he live longer So that his Right to the present possession of Glory before death is not justifiable but his Right in case he now die is § 41. M. S. Faith ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã credere cannot be put in exchange for fac hoc and therefore justified only as it relateth to him who hath suffered and done for all that will receive him An. 1. Exchange is an ambiguous word Here is no proper exchange Faith is not a fulfilling of the Law of Innocency nor so reputed by God Christ did both satisfie for our not-fulfilling it and also by that and by fulfilling it himself not in our persons but his own did merit the free Gift of Life to us to be ours upon new Covenant terms and Faith and Repentance are the Conditions of that New Covenant and so are that Duty which is laid on our selves to do instead of perfect Obedience supposing Christ's Satisfaction and Merits which are instead of it quoad precium or principally as our said acts are instead of it as to what is necessary in our selves And the Apostle who so oft saith Faith is imputed to us for Righteousness doth neither by Faith mean Christ nor mean that Faith is imputed as a fulfilling the Law of Works But that having no such merit of our own or Righteousness our believing in him that hath satisfied and merited for us is reckoned to us instead of a Righteousness or Merit as being all that now is necessary to our Justification in our selves our persevering Obedience being afterward necessary to our Glory 2. No doubt Faith relateth to Christ and here connoteth him as its Object It were not Christian Faith else But it is also related to the New Covenant as its Condition and in that form hath its place to our Justification which cannot be denied Therefore you untruly say Only as relating to Christ and your words confute your self You say Who hath suffered and done for all that will receive him You speak either of secret Decree and that giveth no Right or of Covenant Donation And to say He and his benefits are given in Covenant to all that will receive him is all one as to say The Covenant giveth them on condition that we receive him which is true § 42. M. S. 5. It is impossible that the terms of the Covenant of Grace can be any other than they are because nothing but receiving him can make him mine An. 1. That proveth not that Faith is not the Condition but that it needs must be so 2. It is impossible now the Covenant is so made viz. ex necessitate existentiae But that God could have made it no otherwise is not a thing for man to say 3. Confound not passive Reception with active moral Reception Justificari is passively to receive Justification and to be first related to Christ as mine or to be one that he is given to is passively to receive Christ Active moral receiving is the Wills consenting thus to have him on all his terms and is the means of the other It is this and not the other that is Faith And could not God possibly have made Christ ours by any alteration of the terms sure they that confine Faith to the receiving of Christs imputable Righteousness will grant that God could possibly have put one act more of Faith into the Condition or onâ act of Gratitude Desire Love or Repentance And Dr. Twisse thinks he could have given a man a Right to Life without Christ's Satisfaction and to Christ without Faith and that so he doth to Infants § 43. M. S. There is no Righteousness in point of Justification but only in conformity to the Rule Do this that only brings a man under the approving Will of God An. 1. But what is the Do this that you mean Adam's Law said Do this and live Moses Law said Do this and live The Law given to Christ said Do and suffer this and I will give thee Power over all Flesh to give eternal life to as many as I give thee and believe The Law of Christ to Sinners saith Do this and live This is the work of God that ye believe c. But all these Doings are different for all that It 's an unknown Faith or Repentance which is no Act or Duty 2. There is no Righteousness but the conformity to the Rule of Righteousness if you speak only of that Righteousness which is of that species But there is another sort He that is justifiable is just so far If Satan say Thou art condeânandus to be damned to Hell and shut out of Heaven for breaking the Law of Works I must deny it not by saying I did not break it but keep it by another or I did not deserve damnation but by alledging He that is pardoned is not to suffer any pain of sense or loss I am pardoned by the New covenant through the Merit of the Satisfaction and perfect Righteousness of Christ Adam's Law will not justifie you nor Moses's Law neither The Law requireth personal perfect Obedience It never said Thou or another for thee shalt obey It knoweth no Surety To give a Surety and to accept his suretiship is the act of the Law Giver as above his Law not fulfilling that Law but securing the ends of Government and of it by another way To pardon a Sin and Penalty is not to fulfil the Law that threatened it but to dispense with it which Justice can do upon a valuable consideration securing the ends of Government And Veracity is not impeached by it For 1. The sense of silius mortis is Death shall be thy due and so it was 2. And death was actually inflicted on man himself though not all that which he deserved If the Law of Innocency justifie you you need no Redeemer you need no Pardon you need no New Covenant to justifie you nor can it do it 3. We are justified by Doing though not by our fulfilling the Law of Works by our selves or another We are justified
by two sortâ of Doing Principally by the Merit of Christ's perfect Righteousness and subordinately by our fulfilling the Conditions of the Covenant of Grace which Baptism celebrateth 4. Gods Will approveth of all that is good so far as it is good It approveth of habitual Holiness in Adam and would have done in his Infants had he stood and doth so in all Christians now And I will believe that Christ before he actually obeyed was under Gods approving Will. But not as one that had merited by Obedience For God doth not suppose any to do that which they do not nor oblige them to do to-morrows work to-day § 44. M. S. The issue in a word is 1. Suffering for Sin is not doing nor equivalent in point of Justification 2. Nor can God having satisfaction for what was done cross to his Law lay aside that in order to the conveying of Life and substitute believing instead of it Therefore Faith justifieth ratione objecti only Now we Do in another Christ instead of doing in our own persons An. I doubt this is another Gospel than the Apostles delivered us though I hope that practically we meet in one 1. To the first I answer It 's true but you do ill to intimate that we think otherwise Suffering by the Sinner never satisfieth because it must be everlasting Suffering by Christ satisfieth not meerly as suffering but as the voluntary suffering of God-Man aptly glorifying Justice and Love and securing the ends of Government This Satisfaction is not equivalent to doing in Justification For Doing all required would have justified us against this Charge Thou art a Sinner by Omission and Commission and thou hast deserved Death and hast not deserved Life according to the Law of Works Against this Charge I look for no Justification but confess it is all true But Christ's Satisfaction justifieth us against this Charge God must damn thee by paine of loss and sense or else he is not just because thou hast deserved it And Christ's perfect Righteousness also justifieth us against this Charge God must damn thee and deny thee life because thou didst not merit it by perfect Obedience The Justifier says No because Christ's Merit in Doing and Suffering hath glorified the Law and Justice of God instead of my Merit and hath procured us Pardon and Life given by the New Covenant 2. To the second I answer 1. God did not lay aside his first Covenant but man by sin did lay it aside by making the Condition impossible 2. You overturn the Gospel too much by thinking that the Law is not laid aside as a Covenant or Promise though I grant that the Precept as a Rule of Life continues To say that the sense of Adam's Law was Thou or another Christ for thee shalt obey And that we are justified by that Law is to confound Law and Gospel and make a Gospel of that Law and make the Covenant of Works not to condemn us or both to condemn and justifie and to feign man to live and be judged by the Covenant that is ceased God saith now to no man living Be innocent and so merit life that thou maist live And God doth not repute us innocent at all 3. To the third I answer It is notoriously untrue that Faith justifieth only ratione objecti unless you mean that efficiently it justifieth not at all which is true For we are justified by it also ratione foederis because that which is materially Faith in Christ a justifying Saviour and so connoteth its Object as the meritorious Cause of the free Gift and Pardon is by reason of this aptitude made the Condition of that New Covenant or Gift which is its nearest interest or reason of our being justified by it And it is the Law of Grace by which we must be judged and justified And at that Bar the question which Life or Death dependeth on will be supposing Christ's Merits whether we are penitent Believers or impenitent Unbelievers and so have part in Christ or not And if Satan accuse us as being impenitent Unbelievers and the question be whether we have true Faith or not my Opinion is that we cannot be herein justified by pleading the Object when the Act is questioned and saying That Christ fulfilled that Law unless you could prove that he justifieth impenitent Infidels and as Saltmarsh said repented and believed for us But the grand Case remaineth Whether we are justified by the Law of Innocency by fulfilling it and meriting in another without any sort of doing of our own by our selves Mr. Wotton Mr. Gataker and abundance more have long ago said much to confute your Error besides Mr. Bradshaw whom you name But I add I. I have before proved that by the deeds or sentence of the Law of Adam or Moses no man can be justified 1. He that hath sinned against it cannot be justified as not having sinned For factum infectum fieri is impossible to God himself 2. The Law that condemneth us doth not justifie us 3. What Paul Rom. 3. 4. frequently saith against Justification by the Law of Moses will hold here a fortiori And Christ keeping Moses Law as far as he was capable of Obligation that also would else have been imputed and so we should have been justified by that Law also which the Scripture copiously denieth He that saith He hath no sin deceiveth himself and is a lyar and the truth is not in him And the Law of Adam justifieth no man that hath sin II. We did not fulfil it and merit in Christ But Christ did in the Person of a Mediator voluntarily undertaking it on his Fathers terms and not as our Instrument or in our Persons I have else-where given abundance of Arguments against that which I must not here repeat This Author took notice of my Objection that he that is reputed perfectly Innocent and Obedient is uncapable of Pardon and needeth no satisfaction or remitting or rewarding Covenant besides that which he kept but answereth it not This subverteth the Gospel and Religion Quer. If there be no Reward nor Life but of Justice and no Reward but for Christ's Merits and all Believers equally merited in Christ as fulfilling all the Law 1. Whence cometh the inequality of Grace and Glory 2. How come any Believers to be left long under sins and weakness of Grace and temporal punishments III. The Merits of Christ have procured us the New Covenant sealed in Baptism by which we have a new Rule offiicii judicii for such is every Law Christ is not the only Subject of God He made us not lawless or Rebels God still ruleth the Church by a Law or Covenant This is the Law or Covenant of Grace Deny this Covenant and you deny the Gospel This Covenant or Law obligeth us to Duty And it promiseth and giveth Pardon and Life in and with Christ This Covenant hath Conditions various conditions of various Benefits Our first true consent which Baptism celebrateth that is
our first believing and repenting is the condition of our first Union with Christ and our Pardon and Adoption and the Spirit Our sincere Love and Obedience to the end and over-coming is the further condition of our final Justification at Judgment and our Glory This Covenant we are now under and by this we must be finally judged justified or condemned No man shall be saved unless if at age he personally perform the conditions of this Covenant And every one shall be saved that doth Faith Repentance Love to our Redeemer Gratitude Prayer sincere Obedience are all such Doing as by this Covenant are made the necessary means of Glory But not such Doing as Paul opposeth to the Jews as maketh the Reward not of Grace but of Debt The Author of this Law is just His Justice will give to the performers of the Condition all that he hath promised The Scripture oft useth all these Titles 1. That of Reward as being the state of the benefits retributed 2. That of Justice as being the principle of Reward 3. That of Works as being the matter rewarded even our personal Works wrought by Grace and not only those which Christ did 4. That of worthiness or merit as being the relation of the Work and Person to the Reward 5. That of Righteousness as being the state of the Person performing these Works as pronounced by the New Covenant If I prove not all these by express Scripture believe your new Gospel I. It is Reward Heb. 11. 6. He that cometh to God must believe that God is and that he is the Rewarder of them that diligently seek him It 's he second Article of Faith Prov. 13. 13. Mat. 6. 4. Himself shall Reward thee openly and vers 6. 18. Prov. 25. 22. Mat. 16. 27. Then shall âe reward every man according to his Works even Christ when he cometh ân Glory with his Angels If you say He meaneth his Works done by Christ read Mat. 25. and believe it if you can So Rev. 22. 12. 2 Joh. 8. Heb. 11. 26. Col. 3. 24. Ye shall receive the Reward of the Inheâitance Col. 2. 18. 1 Cor. 9. 17 18. 1 Cor. 3. 8 14. Luke 6. 35. Mat. â 12 46. 10. 41 42. Prov. 11. 18. Psal 19. 11. 58. 11. Heb. 10. â5 II. Gospel paternal Justice rewardeth men supposing Christ's Merits â Tim. 4. 8. A Crown of Righteousness which the Lord the righteous Judge shall give me and not to me only but to all them that love his appearing Rom. 2. 5. The righteous Judgment of God who shall give to every man according to his Works To them that by patient continuance in well-doing c. 2 Thess 1. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11. Psal 67. 4. 46. 10. Psal 11. 7. Gen. 18. 23 24 c. And multitudes of other places Heb. 6. 10. God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love 1 Joh. 1. 9. If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive our sins c. Isa 45. 22. III. The thing rewarded is called Works done by man not legally âustifiable but evangelically Mat. 16. 27. Rev. 2. 26. Rev. 14. 13. 20. 12 13. Jam. 2. 21 24 25 26. Rev. 2. 2 9 13 19. 3. 1 2 8 15. Heb. 6. 10. Rev. 22. 12. 1 Cor. 15. last And it 's called Doing 2 Thess 3. 13. and Gal. 6. 9. Rom. 2. 7. 2 Cor. 5. 10. Heb. 10. 36. Mat. 25. 21 â3 12. 50. 7. 22 23. 6. 1 2. Luke 8. 21. Joh. 13. 17. Col. 3. 23 24. Heb. 13. 21. Rev. 22. 14. And keeping his Word or Commandments 1 Joh. 3. 22. and 1 Joh. 2. 3. and Joh. 15. 10. 14 15 16. Dan. 9. 4. Eccles 12. 13. Prov. 4. 4. Exod. 20. 6. Deut. 5. 29. Ezez 18. 21 c. And Obeying Heb. 5. 9. He is the Author of eternal Salvation to all them that obey him Acts 5. 22. Rom. 6. 16. Obedience unto Righteousness c. IV. The Relative aptitude of the Work for the Reward is called Worâhiness or Merit and the performer Worthy evangelically not legally And ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã primarily signifieth that which preponderateth in the ballance but cannot note here any worth or merit by commutation but that aptitude which resulteth from the goodness of the action as related to the Promise Rev. 3. 4. A few which have not defiled their Garments and they shall walk with me in white for they are worthy 2 Thess 1. 5 6. The righteous Judgment of God that ye may be counted worthy of the Kingdom of God for which you suffer Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense to you that are troubled rest with us 11. That God would count you worthy of this calling Luke 20. 35. They which be counted worthy to obtain that World 21 36. That ye may be accounted worthy to escape and stand before the Son of Man So Eph. 4. 1. Col. 1. 10. 1 Thess 2. 12. Mat. 10. 37 38. V. The title of Relation given to the Works and Persons evangelically is Righteousness or Justice 1 Joh. 3. 7. He that doth Righteousness is righteous Matth. 25. 46. The righteous into life eternal 21. Well done good and faithful Servant v. 35. For I was hungred and ye c. Mat. 13. 43. Mat. 10. 41. Ezek. 18. 20 24. 33. 12 13 18. Rom. 6. 16. 8. 10. 1 Cor. 15. 21. Eph. 5. 9. 6. 14. 2 Tim. 4. 8. Heb. 11. 33. 2 Cor. 9. 9. And the godly are called Righteous in relation to their Hearts and Doings near an hundred times if not much more in Scripture though but in subordination to Christ's meritorious Righteousness and but secundââ quid and not simpliciter See the Texts further recited in my Confession of Faith And now he that considering all this believes 1. That Christ is no King 2. Or we no Subjects 3. Or that he hath no Law of Grace or Covenant which we are under 4. Or that this Law or Covenant will not justifie them that perform that Condition from legal-executive damnation by giving them Pardon and Right to Life for the Merits of Christ 5. And that Faith Repentance and persevering holy Obedience will not materially justifie any man that hath theâ from the charge of having no part in Christ because of Infidelity Impenitency Unholiness or Apostacy 6. Or that he that performeth the Gospel-Conditions shall not be judged rewardable or evangelically worthy of the promised Reward 7. Or that the same thing which as Good and a Benefit is a Gift absolutely free against commutative Merit is not yet quoad ordinem conferendi recipiândi a true Reward 8. And so that we have no Reward for any Works but what Christ did in his own Person 9. And that the Judgment-Day will be to try whether Christ did his part or not and so to judge him and not to try whether we have part in him and did our parts or not by repenting believing
loving obeying and overcoming and so to justifie us primarily by his Merits and Covenant and subordinately by our performance of the Conditions And 10. He that believes that instead of all this we our selves did by Christ as our legal Person both keep all the Law of Works from first to last and merit Life and also satisfie Gods Justice for not keeping the Law and so redeem our selves or suffer in Christ for our own Sins and purchase Pardon and Salvation for our selves 11. Or that God accounteth us so to have done what we did not 12. And so that it is the Law of Works and Innocency by which we our selves are justified 13. And that for meriting in Christ we are fixed presently in the immutable state of eternal life which is the Reward 14. And that this is not a Reward to Christ only but to us as Meriters in him He that can believe all this with abundance more of the Libertine new Gospel-Doctrine commonly called Antinomian which dependeth on it doth quite differ from my Faith who believe that Christ suffered satisfied fulfilled the Law and merited in the Person of a free Mediator only fulfilling all his own mediatorial Law or Covenant and receiving his Reward and freely upon these Merits and his Power received making a Deed of Gift of Himself and Life Pardon Adoption Spirit and Glory to all that truly consent to his Covenant and overcoming do persevere therein and perform sincere Obedience to the last by which Law or Covenant he will judge men at last that is will justifie or condemn them And this short and plain Doctrine of Faith is it which I am constrained by the full and plain testimony of the Scriptures to embrace And I never yet saw any thing against it which is not easily confuted though my life is not like to be long enough nor am I idle enough to write against all that have written against me In conclusion I must give notice to the Reader that there are many great and weighty Points of great difficulty concerning our LOVE to GOD and the order of it in respect to Faith Repentance the love of our selves and our felicity and our love to Creatures c. which I pass by in this Treatise as having spoken with some care of them in my Christian Directory in the Appendix to the Chap. Of loving God in Tom. 1. And if that seem too intricate to any as being too long in brief I suppose that the Thomists grosly err in placing beatitude chiefly in the Intellect and their Reasons especially as Medina useth them are very weak and the Scotists are more sound who place it in the Will and those other most sound who place it in the perfection of the whole man actively but objectively in God And most plainly that very plain judicious School-man Aegidius Romanus Quodlib 3. Qu. 18. p. 187 188. who saith in short 1. That God is the final Object simply 2. That the love of God or velle is the final act or beatitude formaliter 3. That beatitude or rather the ratio finis is principally in the Object and next in the Act 4. That subserviently or quodam genere the visio Dei is the Object and the velle videre Deum the Act. See also Aegidius Quodl 4. qu. 11. clearly proving three ways that we must love God above our selves yea and not properly for our selves but for himself and our selves and all things for him But 1. I think he mistaketh in saying that the Act of the Will is not the Object of the Will and so that Visio and not Amor are felicity objective For as Amesius saith Dicimus omnium gentium consensu volo velle and one Act may be the Volition of the next and a complacency in that past And what doth a Believer will more than perfectly to love God next to God himself And Amo Amore is an Act that we have full experience of 2. And I am past all doubt that Beatitudo nostra qua talis is not the principal end of man but God 1. In his own Perfection or God-head 2. The fulfilling or pleasing of the Divine Will 3. The Glory of Gods Image or Perfections as shining 1. In the Universe 2. And therein most eminently in the glorified Society 3. And therein most eminently in the Person of Christ 4. And next in all those that are most excellent in their Order 5. And among them in our selves our holiness and felicity And this but in our own rank and place For our Perfection and Unity with Christ and the glorified will end all that narrow corrupt selfishness which now maketh men dream that they are chiefly their own ends that is their own gods and that their Beatitude is the highest final notion as if God were to be loved chiefly for our selves as the means of our Beatitude It being worth the considering whether it be not a wrong to God to love him at all sub ratione medii to our selves as an end though we must love him as the first Efficient of all our Good and our Great Benefactor our selves and benefits being but means to Him though yet not He but many of his Gifts may be loved as means to our Happiness and that and all things for God himself Among the Scotists Rada well openeth this Case and the worst of them all in 4. Sent. de Beatitud is far better than Dr. Stern the Dublin Physitian in his Medela Animae and too many more novel immature Disputers who would make our Happiness the chiefest end both of our selves and God meerly because that God can have no addition of Felicity A reason vainly excluding such other respects as men that write of such Subjects should not be ignorant of especially when they reproach the School-men and save themselves the labour of understanding them when though they are too presumptuous and curious yet one Rada one Aegid Column Rom. one Joseph Angles c. hath more clear explication of such Difficulties as they presumptuously tamper with than an hundred of our late Oratorical Novelists who are proud of their undigested new Philosophy and their unripe daring Wits THE Second Part. OF GODS GOVERNMENT AND MORAL WORKS SECT I. The first Law 1. GOd the free Creator Lord and Benefactor of the world was pleased to make his Creatures of various ranks and among the Rational to make Man a free undetermined self-determining Agent not fixed by Necessity in Love and Obedience but left with a Power of Loving and Obeying which he could use or not use that so he might be a fit subject of Gods Moral Government by Laws and perswasions in this world in order to a more fixed state of holiness Not but that Angelical Confirmation had been better for us But it pleased not God to compose the universe of Creatures only of the noblest order 2. When God exerciseth only a Moral not-determining operation upon this world of Free Agents it is not any dishonour to his
be Believed in and as they were to be subject and devoted to him And what mouth can surelier reveal him And Heb. 11. 6. Without faith it is impossible to please God for he that cometh to God must believe that God is and that he is the Rewarder of them that diligently seek him Act. 10. 34 35. Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons but in every Nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousness is accepted with him And John's and Christ's Preaching were Repent And Except ye Repent ye shall all perish And Christ was a Prince and a Saviour to give Repentance to Israel and Remission of Sins 26. The belief of the pardoning Mercy of God to the penitent and the recoverable state of Souls and the duty of Repenting and seeking pardon and mercy of God in order to Salvation in opposition to despair and neglect of all endeavours for recovery is so common to all Mankind that though self-love may make them hope inordinately for that which they would have to be true yet it is most apparent that it proceedeth from some Natural notion of God and is to be numbred with the Notitiae Communes which are past controversie with all Mankind 27. Therefore though the Law of Innocency was the Law of Nature in the first and eminent sence yet this Common notice of Gods pardoning Mercy and man's duty to Repent hope and seek Salvation may well be called The Law of lapsed Nature as the other is the Law of Innocent Nature For the Nature of God and the nature of Man with all circumstant Natures and the course of natural Providence running so much in the way of great restoring mercy do certifie mankind of the foresaid hopes and duties 28. For it is not as some have said an absurdity but a certain Truth that the Law of Nature is as far mutable as Nature it self is mutable For the Law of Nature commonly mis-described is nothing else but the Nature of Man and all other Creatures of God so far as per modum signâ they notifie to us Gods Will appointing what shall be Due from us and To us as the instrument of Gods Government of Mankind Now this Notification is most by the Resultancy of duty from the Nature of Man compared with God and all the Creatures that he hath to do with And the very variety of circumstances as in the case of Adam's Childrens Marriages and ours c. may alter Nature's signification obligation and Law 29. That which is called the Covenant of Nature or Innocency was in the Main the very Law of Innocent Nature in all the parts of it 1. Nature being perfect revealed Man's Duty perfectly to obey 2. Nature declared Punishment to be due to sin yea to all sin And this punishment to be suitable to the nature of the Offender compared with the God offended and the injury done Especially that if men will undoe themselves by forsaking Life and Love and Joy and casting themselves into darkness diseasedness and misery when it is foreshewn them God is not bound to hinder or recover them 3. Nature telleth man that God who made his Soul a simple Intellectual spirit and Life it self though created and dependant intended not to annihilate it and that its noble faculties fitted to know God and Love him and Live to him perfectly in Immortality were made for this employment in Immortality and not in vain And that he that Naturally maketh it mans duty to hope and seek for Immortal happiness hath not made this hope or duty in vain Nor will fail or frustrate or destroy them that forfeit not their hopes So that the Covenant depends not alone upon supernatural Revelation 30. But that which Nature revealeth about the penalty is 1. Not that God of necessity must punish the loss of Innocency as highly as he may do 2. But that he may justly punish the Sinner in rigour by temporal spiritual and eternal miseries 3. And that the Ends of Government the honour of his Wisdom Goodness Power Truth and Justice and the order of the humane world do require that sin scape not free but some exemplary punishment be a Vindication of God and a warning to Man which our death afflictions and spiritual sufferings manifest in part and the sufferings of Christ more fully So that pardon and dispensing in part with his Right to punish us according to the Law first broken is no falshood in God nor any injustice nor any violation of his Law of Nature 31. The Law which God put all mankind under after the fall and the world without the Church is under still is the Preceptive part of the Law of Innocent Nature as de futuro the promise of it being ceased and the penalty not totally nullifyed but made remedyable by an act of oblivion or Conditional Covenant of Grace q. d. Thou shalt perfectly obey me for the time to come and every sin shall deserve everlasting punishment so far as that I might justly inflict it and will do it if it be not remitted But all thy sin shall be forgiven thee and thou shalt have the free gift of pardon and salvation if thou Believe in me thy merciful Saviour and repent and give up thy self to me to be saved and to be Mine by sincere obedience and Love 32. The deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt by Moses and their imbodying into a new Common-wealth with a Theocratical Government in a peculiar manner and a new body of Divine Laws were all done in performance of Gods Covenant with Abraham Isaac and Jacob separating their seed as Holy from all the world Not as if no other were Holy in the world but as the Priests and Levites were sanctified to stand nearer to God than the people and so specially Holy even so Israel was a Holy Nation as being nearer God by separation than the rest of the Nations of the world 33. The entire Law of God which the Israelitish Nation was under had all these parts 1. The remaining preceptive and directive part of the Law of Nature 2. The Universal Covenant of Grace made with all mankind in Adam and Noah and personally renewed to Abraham for himself and his posterity 3. The special promise to Abraham and his seed as a peculiar people of whom the Messiah should come 4. The body of the Law of Moses as a Law for that Common-wealth or Politie which was not so given to any other Common-wealth or Nation * * * Lâg Suarez de Lâg l. 9. who c. 6. distinguisheth of the Law strictly taken and so it hath not saith he promises of eternal felicity and the Law as including the promise to the Fathers and so it had such promises But those promises being the Soul of the Law should not by the Jews have ever been separated from the rest in their conceits of it 1. The first of these undoubtedly is still in force 2. The second is turned into the
in his Gospel to have a Law The case is sad that any in opposition to others should run into such an Antinomian extream They are unlike to be good Preachers of Christ's Law who maintain that he hath no Law And there can be no sin against it nor expectation of being judged by it if he have none And he is no King and Ruler if he have no Law But yet let the Papists forbear iâââing and remember that the true meaning of most of them is no more than to assert what Suarez himself propugneth viz. that besides Revelations and the Duties thence naturally resulting by natural Law and the Sacraments Christ hath no other Laws And both Suarez and they are here to blame for the Papists that are by some accused for calling the Gospel a Law do also give too little honour to Christ's Laws It beseemeth none of them to use such ill Language what-ever they mean If they should say that the King is no Law-Giver and hath no Laws they would wrong him by that Language as denying his Royalty how well soever they should interpret it For the Legislative-Power is the principal essential part of Soveraignty But if any really deny Christ to be a Law-Giver and when he hath done reproacheth the Papists and Arminians for contradicting it it is but as the blind reproaching the purblind for seeing when they that give most to the Laws of Christ among these Contenders do give too little The Baptismal-Covenant is a Law as imposed and as imposing the Covenant-Duties and as determining the conditions of Life and Death according to which men must live and shall be judged yea it is the most famous Law which Conscience hath to do with Though it be a Covenant as consented to in the contract That Sinners have terms of Life and Death and offered Remedies against all their Guilt and greatest Punishments and Means prescribed and Duties commanded in order to their recovery when the Law of Innocency condemneth them especially the obeying of the Ministry and Word and Holy Spirit of Christ prescribing them his way of cure as their Physician all this is a Law of Grace even the Law of Liberty and the Law of the Spirit of Life which freeth us from the Law of Sin and Death Christ's Law consisteth of two parts as is said 1. The Law of Nature called by many moral as commanding the love of God and its attendent Duties not now to an innocent man but to a condemned-recovering Sinner as the health to which his Physician doth restore him 2. And the remedying Law which is more proper to the Redeemer called the Law of Faith which appointeth us the terms and means of our recovery which is 1. Supernatural as to the Revelation of the matter and reasons of it and the foundation of all in Christ's Work of Redemption and his Legislation 2. But as to the obligation or efficiency of mans duty it is both natural and supernatural at once that is when it is presupposed that Christ hath done suffered and offered to our acceptance all that is so asserted of him in the Gospel 1. Nature obligeth us to believe it upon evidence of credibility and to accept it and thankfully improve it 2. Christ as the Fathers Administrator and our King hath positively commanded us the same Were it not for wearying the Reader and my self I would here answer all that Suarez saith de Legib. li. 10. c. 2. to prove that no praeceptum positivum morale is added by Christ And I would easily prove that as some parts of Nature are unalterable and accordingly natural Duty so some things of Nature are mutable and so is that natural Duty which is founded on them And Christ hath by supernatural Performances and Revelations made such changes in the nature of things as inferreth new natural Obligations Were the Devils redeemed and Grace now offered them nature would make it their duty to accept it In sum it is a sufficient confutation of all Suarez's Reasons to say that they run upon this false supposition that Nature and supernatural Precept may not both oblige man to the same duty and that God cannot lay two Obligations on us to the same action For all that he laboureth is to prove that supposing the Revelation Nature bindeth us to believe all the Christian Articles to preach and hear and pray to God by Christ to love our Redeemer and be thankful c. and that the Gospel is thus fitted to lapsed Nature as the first Law was to innocent Nature All which I like very well and take it for a great honour to Christ and the Gospel that it is so suited to the natural necessity and state of fallen and miserable man and may be called the Law of sinful Nature But Suarez himself had before proved that Moses's Decalogue was both a Declaration of what Nature bound men to and yet also the matter of a new Precept of God And why could he not see the same of the Gospel it being so evident that it containeth Christ's Commands And the very sum of our Ministry is 1. To disciple and baptize all Nations c. 2. And then to teach them to observe all that Christ commanded And indeed Suarez confesseth p. 816. That Christ did by new commanding add new Obligations to the duties of Nature though he deny that Christ added any positive Precept as to the moral matter commanded by the Law of Nature And by this instance you may see how near some men agree that seem much to differ But as to them that insist on it that the Gospel and New Covenant are no Laws and that we have none from Christ but the Decalogue and Old Testament were I to write against them to purpose I would plentifully prove them Subverters of Christianity it self and give full evidence against them to any that believe the holy Scriptures And contrarily I would prove that there are no Divine Laws but what are truly the Laws of our Redeemer now in the world and that all Infidels are ruled and shall be judged by a Law of Grace though not of the last evangelical Edition and that he that feareth not breaking the Laws of Christ shall hear at last Those mine Enemies that would not that I should Reign over them bring them hither and slay them before me Luk. 19. 27. a a a That Christ is truly a King and so a Law-Giver and hath proper Laws and not only Doctrine and how great an injury some Protestants have doâe the Church by denying besides the Antinomians See Suarâz de Leg. l. 10. c. 1. whose proofs of the thing are unanswerable And I have long ago proved it in other Writings But Suarâz asserting that Christ's Law is only Moral and Ceremonial in the Sacraments and not judicial doth plainly confess that God never instituted the Papacy and their Discipline Yea he saith c. 2. p. 812. Christus in sua lâge nihil de praecâptis judicialibus statuit etiam
si in Ecclesia Christi ut talis est aliquae leges judiciales siât necessariae ad politicum regimen Ecclesiasticum quod suo modo spirituale est nihilominus noluit Christus dominus per se ipsum illas leges ferre sed id Vicariis suis commisit potestatem ad illas ferendas eis tribuendo Et ideo illae Leges non sub Lege Divina sed sub canonica computantur Prâprie igitur loquendo de Lege divina nova in illa non inveniuntur praecepta judicialia So that Christ never made the Papacy nor any of its Laws But indeed he appointed Baptism as our Church-entrance and more than a Ceremony and the state of Câuâch Officers and their work and discipline Mat. 18. And what his Spirit did in the Apostles he did in another sort than he doth by any ordinary Ministers that have but the Spirits ordinary help b b b Aquinas and many other Papists âoyn with some late Secâaâies and say that it 's the Spirits Operation on the Heart that is the Lex nova and that it is not written But he could not deny but that yet the Gospel is Lex nova Scripta But falsly de nomine taketh this but for the secondary sense of the lâx which is the first and that the obliging Law and the other the effects of it as various as persons are that have it and not the Rule of Obligation And else-where I have shewed also de Lege natura As to the question Whether Christ's Law be exterior insignis vocal and written or in the Heart by the Spirit Suarez truly saith That lex imperans is in signis in Scripture words but lex impellens is the Spirit which though here the chief yet is not properly but metaphorically called a Law pag. 819. li. 1. in principio Though he add that it was eight years before the Gospel was written by Matthew and longer by the rest and that all that time and since it is written in the Heart But memory may retain a vocal Law before the Heart by love and subjection do receive it 61. In this Law or Covenant is made a free universal Deed of Gift of Christ first and of Pardon Spirit and Glory in and by him to all Mankind without exception who will believingly accept it in its true nature as it is offered therein Or If they will so accept it as Believers 62. This Covenant is to be preached by Christ's Ministers and men invited to believe and consent And all that so do are to profess that consent by a solemn Covenant in their Baptism and so to give up themselves devotedly to God the Father Son and Holy Ghost renouncing the Devil Flesh and World 63. For Faith in God the Father is as essential a part of that Faith which we must profess in Baptism and is called commonly justifying as Faith in Christ is And so is Faith in the Holy Ghost in its place For it is not possible to believe in Christ without believing first in God to whom he is the way and with whom he is our Mediator nor to believe in him fully as Christ unless we believe in him as giving us the sanctifying Spirit 64. This Covenant is nevertheless free as to the donation of the Gifts for being conditional For the Condition is not the purchase procurement by efficient causality or any way a proper cause of the Gift as given but only a dispositive cause of our reception of it and of the Gift as received It is a removens prohibens The Condition as imposed and as the mode of the Promise is only a suspension of the Donation and Right till it be performed The Condition as performed is a removing the suspension And so it is a receiving cause which is but dispositio materiae receptivae of which more in due place 65. And the Gift is nevertheless free because the Condition is but such as is morally-antecedently necessary to the reception of free Gifts For though physical Donation oft make its own way and pre-require not such Conditions as these at least yet moral Donation by Deed of Gift supposeth that the person will receive it and despising or unthankful refusal or turning it against the Donor nullifieth such a Donation in the Civil Laws of men 66. And the Benefits are nevertheless conditionally given though the Spirit of Christ cause us to perform the Condition For they are called conditional from the mode or form of the Covenant which giveth men Right to Christ and Life expresly on condition of believing 67. Though this believing be sometimes described as the assent of the Intellect and sometimes as the consent of the Will and sometime as a practical affiance trusting Christ as a Saviour to save us with Soul and Body to the renouncing and letting go all other trust Yet when ever Justification and Life is promised to Faith all these three are the essential parts of it 68. The clearest discovery of the true nature of Gods Covenant with man and of that Faith by which we partake of the benefits of it is in Baptism it self which hath ever been the entrance of men into Gods Covenant as consented to and mutual and so into a visible state of Christianity and membership of Christ and the Catholick Church And therefore it is happy for us that Christ so expresly delivered the form of the Baptismal Covenant and the Universal Church hath so safely in her practice kept it 69. This Baptismal Covenant which is conditional and the consent to which doth make us Christians must be still distinguished from the Covenant between the Father and Christ or his Law of Redemption And God promiseth not to us all that he promiseth to Christ for us nor giveth all to us which he giveth to him 70. And it must be distinguished from Gods meer Predictions concerning his Elect that he will call them renew them and save them or if those Predictions run in the form of a Promise either as they are promises to Christ concerning the Elect or as promises to the Church in general how God will perfect it still they give no man a Law-Title or Right to any of the Benefits till he is a Believer They justifie and pardon no man And so they must not be confounded with the Baptismal Covenant which is Gods stated Instrument of Justification and of Government and the Law by which he will Judge us at the last 71. This Baptismal Covenant is the character and test by which we must judge who are Christians and members of the Catholick Church of Christ and not by their Subjection to a pretended vicarious universal Monarch And this is the character with consent to his relation there by which every mans fitness for membership in a particular Church must be judged of And not by other Covenants besides that consent and proofs of Conversion not here included And this containeth the true Characters by which every man may know himself
as is said were in a state of Salvation when under Christ's own teaching they believed not many great Articles now essential to the Christian Faith So that all set together will tell us that the conclusion of the certain damnation of all without the Jewish and the Christian Church seemeth not very desirable either as to the Glory of the good and gracious God nor as to the good of Mankind And therefore we should not propend that way in a case of doubtful arguing And I desire the Reader impartially to consider though Abraham knew not till God told him how bad Sodom was yet when he asketh of God to spare it if there were but fifty Righteous in it whether he do not imply that he thought most other Cities of that bigness had at least fifty righteous if not more For when God told him that he would destroy it for the cry of their sins he must needs judge it worse than ordinary And was Abraham more ignorant than we the Father of the Faithful a Prophet that saw Christ's day and rejoyâed 93. It is a certain truth that as God the Creator so Christ the Redeemer doth extend his mercy farther than he himself is known And as the Sââ sendeth some light to the world before it riseth and is seen it self so doth Christ send many excellent Gifts of his Grace to those that know him not as Incarnate And when all the world is delivered into his hand we have reason to believe that the mercies which Philosophers and all others in the world had were communicated by him as the second Person or Wisdom and Word undertaking mans Redemption first and as the Word Incarnate after 94. Those ancient Fathers of the Church who lived near the Apostles times as Clem Alex. c. who believed that some without the Church were saved were never condemned for it as Hereticks no not by the busie condemning Ages SECT VI. Of Universal Redemption 95. By what hath been said it appeareth how far Christ may be said to have died for all Certainly de re all that Christ giveth to all which is the fruits of his Death he procured for all by his death whatever we say of conditional Intentions he certainly intended to give all that he giveth But all these following particulars are given by Christ either to all or to more than the Elect. 1. The Humane Nature common to all is advanced and brought nigh to God in Christ's Incarnation 2. Christ's Sacrifice for Sin and his perfect Holiness are so far satisfactory and meritorious for all men as that they render Christ a meet Object for that Faith in him which is commanded men and no man shall be damned for want of the satisfactoriness of Christ's Sacrifice or for want of a Saviour to die for him and fulfil all Righteousness but only for the abusing or refusing of his Mercy 3. Christ's conquest of the Devil and the World hath made man's conquests of them the more easie or possible And his Victory over Death and his Resurrection hath procured a Resurrection to all the World 4. All men are his Subjects by Obligation as he is the Redeemer and so are under his healing saving kind of Government 5. A clearer revelation of Life and Immortality is made by him even to those that perish And they have far greater helps than else they would have had to set their hearts on a better World 6. Especially a Law of Grace is made by Christ for all the world In the last Edition to all Joh. 1. 11 12. 3. 16 17 18 19. 1 Joh. 5. 10 11. that hear the Gospel and in the first to all the rest By the Promise of which as by an Act of Oblivion or Instrument of Donation God hath Enacted and Given a full Pardon of all Sin to all Mankind with Reconciliation Adoption and Right to Christ and Heaven on condition of their acceptance of it as offered them So that men are pardoned and justified by that Instrument or Gift if they will believe and will not unthankfully reject their Mercies 7. Apostles and ordinary Ministers were appointed to preach this Gospel to all the World and make the Offer of Christ and Life to all men without exception 8. The Matth. 28. 19. Mark 16. 16. execution of the violated Law of Innocency is forborn to all men in the greatest part Judgments kept off and they kept out of Hell while they have time and means to prepare for their Salvation 9. Many and great Mercies which signifie Gods goodness and lead towards Repentance are given to all the world even mercies forfeited by sins against the Law of Innocency and given by the Grace of our Redeemer 10. It is made all mens duty to believe the Revelation made to theâ to repent to accept more mercy and to seek their own Salvation And such duty is not the smallest mercy 11. He hath recorded his Word and Grace in the holy Scriptures which all are allowed to use for their good He hath filled his Doctrine or Gospel with such powerful convincing Reasons and Perswasions which have a tendency to convince men and convert them 12. He secondeth his Word by many such Providences in his Works his Mercies his Afflictions as greatly Act. 14. 17. 17. 27 28. Rom. 1. 19 21. Rom. 2. tend to win mens Souls 13. He hath left his excellent Example to the world which greatly tendeth to mens Conviction and Salvation 14. He hath appointed several Church-Ordinances which are mercies to more than the Elect as is the visible communion also which they have with the Upright and their examples prayers c. 15. To all these he addeth an obligation on all Christians to do their best to convert and save all others 16. And the Office of Magistrates under Christ is appointed for these saving uses to promote the Salvation of the people 17. Death it self is now turned into a medicinal means by the prospect of it to convert and save men 18. Usually Gods patitience alloweth men time of Repentance and taketh them not at the first denial that they may consider and correct their former error 19. Remedies are offered men fetcht from Satan and Sin it self The Tempter by the malice of his temptations oft detecteth his owâ fraud and mens danger A natural enmity against Devils and all that is known to be of them is put into all Mankind And Sin hath a sting to the Flesh it self and is madâ such a misery to Sinners even in this life as may much tend to alienate and deter them from it And the world it self is made such a palpable vanity and smart vexation as tendeth to drive men to look out for a better and not to love it above God 20. Lastly To all these means there are certain internal motions and strivings of the Spirit of Christ which he commonly vouchsafeth mââ in some degree and which irritate Conscience to do its office and which if men will
he will have all condemned whom he doth condemn But then it must be understood that this distinction iâ not applyed to the Will of God as he is meerly an Absolute Proprietary or Benefactor but as he is the King or Rector of the world and so his Legislation is his Antecedent Will and his Judgment is his Consequent Will And no man of Religion can deny either that Gods Law is the signification of his Will or his Will signifyed or that his Judgment and ââcution is his Will declared or that Gods Law of Grace doth conditionally give pardon and salvation to all antecedently to man's performance or rejection of the condition or that God condemneth Infidels consequently to their Infidelity The Law Antecedently to Mans part acted saith He that believeth shall be saved and the Sentence consequently to his fact saith Judas an unbeliever or impenitent shall perish And thus the distinction hath no doubt or difficulty 103. God by commanding faith and repentance and making theâ necessary conditions of Justification and by commanding perseverance and threatning the Justified and Sanctified with damnation if they fââ away and making perseverance a condition of Salvation doth thereby provide a convenient means for the performance of his own Decree of giving Faith and Repentance and perseverance to his Elect For he effecteth his ends by suitable moral means and such is this Law and Covenant to provoke man to due fear and care and obedience that he may be wrought on as a man 104. To be justifyed by Faith in general agreeth to the ages before Of Justification by Faith c. Christ's Incarnation and those since But so doth not the special kind of faith by which they are justifyed For much more is Essential to that faith which we must be justifyed by to them that are under the last edition of the Covenant of Grace than was or is to them that were under the first alone Abraham believed not all our essential Articles of faith 105. To be justified by faith in Paul's sence is all one as to be justified What that Faith is by becoming Christians To be a Believer a Disciple and a Christian are all one in the Gospel sence 106. The faith by which we are justified as is aforesaid is best understood The Controversie between the Papists and us about Justification is agitated iâ vain till we agree of the sence of the words Justification and Remission As I said elsewhere they take not only Justification for a qualitative change such as we call Sanctification but Remission of Sin for they know not what themselves most of them talk as if it were a putting away the Sin in its essence which can be meant of nothing but the Habit for the fact cannot be infectum Others seem to take it for remitting the punishment also with that change Malderus most plainly in 1. 2. q. 113. a. 1. and p. 567. saith that Remission of Sin is Ablatio Reatus culpae At esse longe aliud quam Nolle illud punire non enim tantum facit Hominem non puniri sed etiam non esse Poena dignum Minus tamen est quam in amicitiam recipi though yet no man is in a middle state neque Dâi amicus neque inimicus yet cogitations possunt seterari Peccata Remittere idem est quod non imputare si hoc non accipias pro dissimulare sed pro desinere esse offensum cum per Remissionem Deo non imputante est quasi non fuerit By this you may see that these Papists hold the same with those Protestants whom they seem most to resist and cannot hide it But 1. It will be true to eternity that Peter sinned 2. To say so is to blame him 3 His sin deserv'd death 4. The Law and the nature of sin past are the same after pardon as before 5. God doth not change his mind of sin 6. Gods offence or displeasure is not a passion or mutable but his essence as denomina ed from the object to be his Velle punire and Justice that must punish 7. For God to be appeased and no more offended is but his Nolle punire peccatorem and not to be obliged in Justice to punish him but by his Covenant related to him as one that will not punish 8. This change is in the sinner becoming not punishable 9. That is not worthy of it in the Gospel-sence though worthy by the Law of Innocency 10. All this is but that the Reatus pâna culpae quantum ad poenam is remitted but not the Reatus culpae simpliciter in se And thus we are all agreed by the Baptismal Covenant and is essentially a Believing Fiducial consent to our Covenant relation to God the Father Son and Holy Ghost as our Reconciled Creator and Father our Saviour and our Sanctifyer connoting the forsaking of all inconsistents For it must needs be the same faith by which we have right to the benefits of that Covenant and by which we are justified because we have our remission and justification by the Instrumental donation of the Covenant it being one of the benefits given by it But Practical Faith or Believing-consent is our condition of receiving our Covenant right to all the benefits in general therefore to Justification in particular 107. The Phrases of Justifying faith and Faith justifying us are humane and not Scriptural at all And though they may be well used with explicatory caution as being well meant yet they are more lyable to mislead men than the Scripture phrase that we are justified by Faith Because the former phrases are apter to insinuate an Efficiency than the other whereas faith is no efficient cause of our Justification nor any other act of Man And the Scripture that speaketh of Justification by Faith sometime useth the phrase ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which no more signifyeth any Instrumental efficiency of Justification than ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ex operibus And though sometime ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã be used it is to signifie no more than that God hath appointed it to be the Medium of our Justification as a condition but not as any efficient cause 108. The Faith by which we are justified as I touched before hath God the Father for its object as essentially as Christ the Saviour as the said Baptismal Covenant sheweth and that not only secondarily as Christ being the Mediator and way to the Father our faith in Christ connoteth the final object but also directly and primarily as the Father is the first in Trinity and as Creator first related to us and as the end is first in our intention Joh. 17. 3. This is life eternal to know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou bast sent Joh. 13. 1. Let not your hearts be troubled you believe in God believe also in me 109. And as essential is it to this Faith to believe in Christ as the Purchaser of Holiness and Heaven as to
believe in him as the purchaser of pardon and to believe in him as the Teacher and Ruler of the Church as to believe in him as the justifyer of believers The inseparableness of these acts is commonly confessed 110. Indeed it is essential to this faith 1. To be the act of the three essential faculties of man's Soul the Vital Power the Intellect and the Will 2. And to have for its object God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and that in Christ all that is essential to him as a Saviour be its object And therefore 1. That it be an Assent Consent and practical Affiance 2. That it be a believing in Christ as God and Man and as the Teacher Priest and King of the Church revealing the Gospel reconciling us to God and Ruling us in order to Salvation 111. To say that some one only of these parts of Christ's office as they are Concept us inadaequati of a Saviour is the only object of justifying faith and to say that justifying faith is only one Act of the Soul or many acts of one only faculty or to say that we are justified only by such a one and that to expect to be justified by Assent Consent and Affiance or by believing in Christ as our Teacher and Ruler as well as Priest and as a justifying Judg as well as a Justifying Sacrifice and as a fulfiller of the Law is to expect justification by Works as Paul denyeth it This is a vain distinguishing a falsifying the Doctrine of faith and justification a departing from the Scripture simplicity by corrupting seeming subtility and one of those humane inventions which have wronged the Church And it is no wiser than to say that when we speak of taking or receiving a Man to be a Husband a Physician a King it is but one physical aâ of the Soul that is meant or about one only physical conception in the object which is inadequate Whereas all such Moral or Civil acts coâtain many physical acts and are suited to all things in the object which are essential to it in its moral or civil nature or relation 112. And it is but the same deluding subtility and vain curiosity ââ a playing with deceitful words to say that we are justified by faith Quatenus recipit Christi Justitiam As it believeth in Christ's Sacrifice and perfect obedience only and not As it believeth in him as Teacher Ruler Sanctifier Judg or as he intercedeth for us in Heaven c. when the Scripture saith no such thing at all but simply maketh faith in Christ supposing Faith in God the Father to be that by which we must be justified 113. This distinction is founded in another falshood supposed which is that the effects of all Christ's saving works are as distinctly to be ascribed to several Receiving Acts of faith as they are to the several procuriâ acts of Christ the object of faith which is another corrupting additioâ to God's Word One part of the work of our Salvation was done by Christ's humiliation and another by him in his exaltation one by his overcoming the Devil and another by his overcoming the World one by his Cross another by his Grave another by his Resurrection another by his ascension another by his making the new Covenant another by his sending the Spirit another by his sending the Apostles another by his intercession in Heaven another will be done by our Resurrection and another by his last Judgment and our Glorification one by hiâ as an obeying-subject another as a Sacrifice for sin many by him as a Prâphet many as a Priest and many as a King and Judge But to say therefore that our acts of faith as Receptive have as various respects to the effects or benefits and that we are justified by him only as we believe iâ him as Righteous or a Justifyer and that we are adopted as we believe in him in another respect and sanctifyed as we believe in hiâ in another respect c. these are the dreams of corrupting curiosity For that Christ who by all these several works hath done all the office of a Redeemer to procure these several effects is preached and offered to us to be entirely as such a Redeemer believed in and received and upon the condition of such an entire faith only Christ and all these benefits conjunctly are by one Covenant given us and no otherwise And believing in Christ as Christ who by all those acts hath himself procured us this Covenant and these gifts is that by which we are justified as it is one undivided faith And the quatenus here as to Christ's own procurement of the effects hath its place but as to the Act of our faith and Christ as the object constituting that faith there is no such diversity or order to be feigned as if the several effects were accordingly to be ascribed to our several Believings or Receiving acts 114. The ambiguity of the very word Receiving hath drawn many into this error Receiving signifyeth sometimes a Physical reception which is meerly Passive or the Relation of the Patient as such to the Act and Agent And this is twofold 1. The Reception of a real being and so to be sanctified is to Receive Sanctification 2. The Reception of a Relation such as all Jus Right to a thing is and so to be pardoned justified and adopted and to Receive pardon justification and adoption is all one 2. Sometimes it signifyeth Moral or Civil receiving which is nothing but 1. The consent of the mind called Acceptance 2. And as to corporeal objects sometime the voluntary act of the body as the Hand taking that which is offered Now if the Receiving in question were physical either rei vel juris ad rem then indeed it would be so neerly related to the thing received which as received is no object because Receiving so is no act as that this quatenus in question might be applyed to it For it may well be said I receive Justification quatenus Justificatus sum as I By this you see the answer to what Mr. Lawson in his excellent Theopolitica hath said against me on this point Of which see fullyer my answer to Mr. Warner in my Disputes of Justification am justified and I receive Sanctification as I am sanctified and vice versa for they are but various words signifying the same thing But of Moral Receiving the case is otherwise For this is not physical Reception but only a Moral Act which is made a necessary medium or Condition to Physical Reception and thence is called Receiving so Accepting or Consenting is a moral means or condition of that Having or Possessing which is consequential And this Acceptance hath relation immediately to the thing as Given only to be made ours according to the Will of the Giver and not made ours according to the order of the things given That is 1. The Ratio proprietatis the Reason that they are ours is the will of the Donor
justified by Faith it connoteth and includeth that we are justified by Christ and his Sacrifice Merits and Covenant respectively believed in But yet it is not Christ nor his Sacrifice or Merits or Promise that is meant by the word Faith It was a gross abuse of the Text so to expound it Faith connoteth the Object but it is not Christ that is called Faith 140. But the meaning is that man having forfeited Life Christ's Righteousness habitual active and passive hath merited that it shall be given us as a free Gift but yet regularly under a Law But the Law maketh nothing but believing acceptance the condition of our Right and he that doth that much shall without perfection be esteemed and used as righteous for the sake of the said Righteousness of Christ So that in point of Merit as to the value of the thing Christ's Righteousnesâ is instead of our Innocency But as to the order of collation something being still to be required of us as a condition of Right so our Faith now is instead of our Innocency as being all that is laid on us instead of ââ that we may have right to Justification And to assign this condition oâ our part Paul saith That Faith is imputed to us for righteousness To deny this sense is to use violence with the Text. 141. Christ's Righteousness is made ours as our Sins were made his which is not in themselves as is aforesaid God forbid we should think that Christ was ever reputed by God to be a Sinner a Blasphemer a Murderer an Enemy to God and Goodness one that had Satan's Image and was his Servant a Persecutor of himself c. But only our sin was imputed to him as to the punishment deserved that is he assumed the Reatum poenae the punishment and a dueness occasioned by our sin but made his own by his voluntary sponsion But never had he the reaâum culpae in its self but meerly as aforesaid respectively to the punishment Even so we have the Righteousness of Christ not in its self as Proprietors of it but in relation to the effects that is we have the effects even our Justification and other benefits as purchased by it and for its sake And as our guilt or obligation to punishment was not Christ's till his voluntary sponsion or consent did make it so Even so his Righteousness is not ours in the effects till our voluntary consent accept it Because iâ is not a natural but a contracted Relation that is between Christ and us And as it is not a strict propriety in Christ's Righteousness that we have so it is much less a plenary and absolute propriety nor have we it in the Relation of a meritorious cause to all uses as if it had been fully our own but only limitedly to those uses which God accepted it for and hath assigned to it in the Gospel that is it is but a certain sort and measure of mercies that are given us from it in Gods time and way 142. To the asserting of the rigid sense of Imputation they are necessitated to say that which supposeth Gods repute of the matter to be false that is that he reputeth us to have done that in and by Christ which we never did by him But God judgeth nothing to be otherwise than it is that he judgeth Christ to have been the Sponsor and Mediator and in that person to have done and suffered as he did is because it is true But he judgeth him not to have been the legal Person of the Sinner and as many persons as there be redeemed Sinners in the world because that is not true 143. They say that what the Surety doth the Debtor doth in Law-sense and to judge so is not to err But there are several sorts of Sureties much more of Instruments in paying a Debt 1. There be free Sureties who are not obliged to the Debtor as his Dependents and these either by counter-security or by right of the thing may recover all of the Debtor again And therefore the Law supposeth not the Debtor to have payed the Debt by them but that the Creditor made them both Joynt-Debtors for his own security 2. There are Sureties antecedently and Sureties consequently One that before the Debt doth conditionally make himself a Joynt-Debtor in case the Principal pay it not And there is a Surety more properly called an undertaking-Friend who after payeth the Debt being disobliged before Christ was not a Surety of the first sort in Law-sense And if you call Gods Decrees which are his Essence Suretiship your liberty of words changeth not the case 3. There is a Surety who payeth the Debt in the name and person of the principal Debtor And he is not properly called a Surety but an Agent or Substitute And Christ was none such nor is any proper Surety such And there is a Surety which by the Creditors consent doth pay the Debt in his own name agreeing that the chief Debtor shall have no benefit by it but from him as he shall give it on certain terms And this was Christ's case 4. There is a Surety that payeth the same debt that was due from the Principal And there is a Surety or Friend that undertaketh only to make the Creditor satisfaction because the Debtor cannot pay And this is the case 5. Lastly There is a pay-master that is the Debtors Instrument whether Servant Delegate or whoever at his command or request doth pay it in his name and person And this is not the case And there is a proper Surety who is a third person and no Instrument and payeth it in his own name though for another This as I said is the case and therefore it is not we that paid it Therefore to the Objection I say that to judge Christ such an Instrument or Delegate of ours or Surety that did all in our legal person is to misjudge and err as is proved which God cannot do 144. Christ did and suffered in the common nature of man though not in the person of each Sinner And mans nature is so far redeemed by him that for the meer Original Sin of nature alone no man shall perish unless he add the rejection of Grace of which somewhat is said before But yet as Nature existeth only in persons so it is all persons who have this much benefit and more But that he merited and satisfied in our Nature is a proper speech and truer than that he did it in our persons 145. But all this similitude of a Creditor and Debtor is to be limited in the application according to the great difference of Sin and Debt which will infer a great diversity in the consequents which may easily be collected by the Reader 146. As to the great and weighty question whether Christ died for How far Christ died for sins against the Law of Grace sins against the New Covenant or only for those against the old I answer Distinction is here notoriously
may be called 1. A Receiving Cause 2. And a mediââ or dispositive Cause of the effect Justification as Received but not as Given As I said Dr. Twisse chooseth to call it But this causa Dispositiva is pââ of the causa Materialis viz. Qua disposita A cause or more properly a condition why I receive Justification and by receiving it am Justified which is their meaning who call it A Passive Instrument that is A ââceiving Instrument 199. The plain easie truth is that Faiths Nature which is to be ââlieving Acceptance of Christ and Life offered on that Condition being ââ very essence is but its Aptitude to the office it hath to our Justification by which the Question is answered why did God promise us Christ and Life ââ the Condition of faith rather than another Because of the congruity of its Nature to that office But the formal Reason of its office as to our Justification is Its Being the performed Condition of the Covenant And if God had chosen another condition a condition it would have been Now the true notion in Law being a Condition Logicians would call this improperly a Receiving cause and more properly A Receptive Disposition of the matter reducing it to Physical notions But the most proper term is the plainest We are justified by that faith which is the Believing Practical Acceptance of God the Father Son and Holy Ghost as Given us on that condition in the Baptismal Covenant because or as it is made by God the condition of his Gift thereby Understand this plain doctrine and you have the plain truth 200. They that say contrarily that Faith justifieth proximately as it is an Instrument or a Receiving Accepting act and not as a Condition of the Covenant do evidently choose that which they vehemently oppose viz. that the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã credere justifieth For the very ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã credere or the ââââ of Faith is to be an Acceptance of Christ given But if they will to avoid this say that By Faith they mean Christ believed in then they say that by Receiving Christ they mean not the receiving of him but Christ himself And why then do they not say so but trouble the world with such unintelligible phrases But to open the senselessness and coâsequents of that Doctrine would but offend All know that Chriââââ the object is connoted as essential to the act of Faith SECT XII How Repentance is joyned with Faith 201. Repentance is a Dispositio materiae recipientis too and a part of the condition of the Covenant And so far a Material or dispositive Receiving Cause But not an Acceptance of the Gift formally in its averting act 202. Faith and Repentance are words used in Scripture in divers significations Saith Malderus Gu. Amesius a parte recedit ab antiquo Calvinismo quiae requirit ad justitiam bonae operâ tanquam conditionem praerequisitam quod âtiam extendit ad ipsam âlectionem See here how little the Papists understand us As Faith is sometimes taken for bare Assent as Jam. 2. and usually for Affiance or Trust and always when it denominateth a Christian or Justified Believer as such it essentially includeth all the three parts Assent Consent and Affiance but yet denominateth the whole by a word which principally signifieth One act which commonly is Affiance as including the other two so Repentance is sometime taken comprehensively for the whole Conversion of a Sinner to God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and so it includeth Faith in the narrower sence and is the same thing as Faith in the larger sence but express'd under another formal notion Sometimes it is taken more narrowly and that 1. As to the Act. 2. As to the Object 1. As to the Act and so the word Repentance signifieth only the Aversion of the Soul from evil by sorrow and change of mind And this is the strict formal notion of the word though usually it be taken more largely as including also the Conversion of the Soul to Good which is the usual Scripture and Theological sense though the word it self do chiefly signifie the Averting act 2. As to the Object 1. Repentance sometime signifieth the Turning of the Soul from Sin and Idols to God as God And so Repentance towards God is distinguished from Faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ 2. And sometimes it signifieth only the turning of the Soul and life from some particular Sin 203. Repentance as it is the turning of the Soul from sin and Idols * The Papists take Repentance it self to be part of the Remission of Sins And let the Reader note for the fuller opening of what I have said of their darkness thereabouts that Jansenius Aug. To. 1. li. 5. c. 22. p. 126. maketh four things to be inseparably conteined in Remission though distinguishable 1. The Conversion of the Soul to God 2. The abstersion of the Macula or filth 3. Reconciliation or the remission of Gods offence 4. The relaxation of the aeternal punishment That all these are then at once given us we are all agreed But whether the name Remission or Pardon of sin âe meet for them all we disagree Is it not visible then how unhappily we strive about words wheâ we talk like men of several Languages But all is but removation and remitting the penalty of which Gods offense is the first part And Macula is either the sin it self or the relative consequents to God is the same with Faith in God in the large Covenant-sence and includeth Faith in God in the narrower sence Repentance as it is our Turning from Infidelity to Christianity is the same with Faith in Christ in the large Covenant-saving-sence and includeth Faith in Christ in the narrower sence as it is meer Assent Repentance as it is a Turning from the Flesh to the Holy Ghost as our Sanctifyer is the same thing as our Faith in the Holy Ghost in the large Covenant sence and includeth Faith in the Holy Ghost in the narrower sence But when they are the same thing the ratio nominis or formal notion is not the same As man's mind is not so happy as to conceive of all things that are one by one entire single Conception so we are not so happy in our language as to have words enough to express things entirely by one name but we must have several words to express our inadequate conceptions by And so that is called Repentance as the Souls motion from the Terminus a quo which is called sometimes Faith or Affiance and sometimes Love from the motion of the Soul to the Terminus ad quem though the Motus be the same But when Faith and Repentance are distinguished as several parts of the Condition of the new Covenant the common sence is that Repentance signifieth the Conversion of the Soul from Sin and Idols to God as God which is or includeth Faith in God And Faith signifieth specially Faith in Christ as the Mediator and way
elect and should persevere So that they denied all certainty of Salvation by ordinary means And that none of all the Greek or Latin Fathers then or long after went further from the Pelagians than Augustine did I think I need not perswade any that hath read them 259. This historical Truth is useful to be known From whence I infer that it is possible for Christians to live in setled peace and comfort in respect to their heavenly Felicity without a certainty of perseverance and Salvation For to think that no Papists no Greeks no Arminians no Protestant Lutherans nor any of the ancient holy Doctors nor any of all the Martyrs or other Christians of their judgment did attain to such holy peace and comfort is unreasonable and contrary to all Church-History and to experience 260. And though it were a far more joyful state to have proper certainty yet reason and experience in other cases tell us that without certainty a man may live a joyful and peaceable life where probability is strong enough to remove all reasonable cause of fearfulness though there be a possibility of the worst As we see that men in youth and health though they may possibly die or fall into torments the next hour yet do not therefore cast off comfort and live in such trouble as they would do if they had probable cause to expect it There is no wife living is certain that her own Husband will not murder her the next night nor no Child certain that the Parents will not cast them off or kill them nor no Friend certain that his dearest Friend will not do so And yet few but melancholy people will therefore take up sorrow and cast away all their comfort in life and peace and in these Friends Even these persons are their trust and joy There is no man sure but he may be executed among Malefactors And yet while there is no reason to expect it a man may live a comfortable life There is no man certain that he himself shall not fall into a particular crime of Murder Theft Perjury or the like And yet we live not therefore uncomfortably For mens affections follow the powerfullest cause 261. Hence also I conclude that certainly the denial of certainty of persevering and Salvation is not a thing that should break the love peace or concord of the Christian Churches or for which they should cast off or revile each other For what sober man could do so by all those that I have instanced in 262. It is a shameful self-delusion of some Disputers who think when they have once believed that certainty of Salvation may be had that they are then certain themselves or next to certain of their own Salvation But he that hath no more certainty to be rich or healthful thaâ to believe that Health and Riches may be got is far from having them 263. Who was more full of confidence and joy than Luther who speaketh more against the Papists commanding men to doubt of the pardon of sin who speaketh of a higher Faith than he on Galat. Yet he with Melancthon and all the first Protestants in the August Confess Art 11. saith They damn the Anabaptists who deny that those that are once justified can again lose the Holy Ghost 264. If Adam in Innocency had neither solid comfort or cause of such the state that we fell from was not so good as we commonly believe But Adam had no assurance of his perseverance in that state For he fell from it 265. No man as is said is certain that he shall not fall into such a Vid. Judic Theol. Palat. de persever in Synod Dord p. 1. pag. 208. pr. 3. hainous sin as Peter David c. did 266. The Synod of Dort saith By such enormous sins they greatly offend God they incur the guilt of death they grieve the Holy Ghost they interrupt the exercise of Faith they most grievously wound Conscience sometimes they lose the sense of Grace for a time till by serious Repentance returning into the way Gods fatherly countenance again shine upon them And the Brittish Divines in their Synodic Explic. say They contract damnable guilt and lose their present aptitude to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven Adding So that while they remain in that state of Impenitence they neither ought nor can perswade themselves otherwise than that they art obnoxious to death Rom. 8. 13. If ye live after the flesh ye shall die For they are bound in a capital Crime by the desert whereof according to Gods Ordination they are subject to death though they be not yet delivered to death nor shall be if we respect Gods fatherly love but shall be pluckt out of this sin that so they may be pluckt out of the guilt of death Lastly For their present condition they lose their aptitude to enter into Heaven c. And Thes 4. p. 193. Gods unmovable ordination requireth that a Believer thus exorbitant do first return into the way by renovation of Faith and the act of Repentance before he can be brought to the ways end which is the heavenly Kingdom By the Decree of Election the faithful are so predestinated to the end that they can no otherwise be brought to it than by Gods instituted means as by the Kings high way And Gods Decrees of the means and of the end and order of events are as firm and certain as those of the end and of the events themselves If any man therefore go on in a way contrary to Gods Ordination as the broad way of uncleanness and impenitence which directly leadeth to Hell he can never come that way to Heaven Yea if death surprize him wandering in Luk. 13. 3 5. 1 Cor. 6. 9. Heb. 12. 14. 2 Tim. 2. 19. Act. 27. 31. that out-way he cannot but fall into everlasting death This is the constant and clear voice of the Scripture As Paul said of those in the Ship c. Act. 27. 31. It is certain that David and Peter Gods Elect Servants were to come to Heaven But it is as certain that if one had remained impenitent in his Adultery and Murder and the other in his denial of Christ and perjury neither of them could have been saved Providence and Mercy unty this knot by providing that no elect person die in that state in which according to any Ordination of Gods Will he should have been shut out of Heaven And Thes 5. In that interspace which is between the guilt of sin contracted by a grievous sin and the renewed act of Faith and Repentance such a Sinner standeth a person to be damned by his own desert but by Christ's Merit and Gods firm purpose a person to be saved but not before by excited Faith and Repentance he hath obtained pardon is he actually absolved But in such guilt the condition of the Faithful and of the Wicked is not the same To the Unbelievers is wanting the inward principle of Faith without which the
many had such distinctions of Believers But the weak and the strong or confirmed all distinguish 281. But the other side had need as much to be perswaded to pacifick moderation in their censures And first They say that it is an intollerable opinion which is confessedly contrary to all the ancientest Churches of Christ And by Vincent Lerinens rule quod ab omnibus ubique sâmper such singularity or novelty must be heresie or certain error at the least I answer 1. They that assert this certain perseverance of all the justified do believe that the Churches planted by the Apostles were of their mind which they gather from the Scripture 2. The foresaid Rule holdeth indeed in things so universally received as Essentials of Religion and Necessary Articles of Faith and Practice without which men cannot be saved But Universality of Consent in a doubtful or unnecessary opinion or practice may possibly be erroneous and may oft lawfully be deserted It was once and beyond the investigation of its original the practice of the Universal Church that there should be no Adoration by Genuflexion on any Lords Day or on any Week day between Easter and Whitsunday And this commanded in the Great Council of Nice and the Canons of Trull And yet the Papists themselves have now forsaken it To distinguish as is usual between such Canons of Practice and points of meer doctrine and to make consent of Antiquity more obligatory in the latter is but vanity For where a point of Practice is founded in an oportet or supposition of Divine or Apostolical authority it must needs be at least as obligatory as a meer Doctrinal so founded For all Precepts include Doctrines and all Obedience includeth Faith Though all Doctrine be not Preceptive nor all Belief for immediate practice For every Divine Precept includeth this assertion This God commandeth And that God commandeth it is de fide and then it must be obeyed for Gods Authority as it is first believed for his Veracity All therefore that can be said is that this practice was not taken to be by a Divine universal Law unchangeable but by universal Custom of the Church And so may there be a consent in unnecessary and questionable Doctrinals as there hath been for the peripatetick Philosophy almost The opinions of the Souls corporeity of the Millennium of the lust of Daemons that there were no Antipodes to say nothing of some that Augustinâ opposed were little less than universally owned of some ages And I doubt many Texts of Scripture for want of perfect Translations and skill in the original Tongues were universally misinterpreted 282. And the common objection which maketh the greatest noise is a meer injurious pievish cavil or slander viz. when they say You lead men to all wickedness by teaching that let them commit never such heinous Sin they are sure that they cannot fall from Grace nor lose their Justification For it 's commonly acknowledged that if any man should fall into a state of Sin inconsistent with the love of God he would lose his justification and right to Heaven and that without any change in God And they constantly hold that Gods decree de fine mediis is one and that he decreeth of his Elect that They shall persevere in love and holiness and be saved and not that they shall be saved whether they persevere in holiness or not And that they are no surer to be saved than they are to persevere in holiness SECT XIX Of Mortal Sin or what Sin will not stand with Saving Grace 283. But as to the question How great the Sin must be which is inconsistent with true love to God or holiness that belongeth to the Controversie about Mortal and Venial Sin where the difficulty is as great to one side as another so great that not only Pious Gerson but many another have confessed it too hard for them well to solve 284. In general It is certain that all Sin is so far Mortal as to deserve Vid. Le Blank de Pece Mort. Ven. 2 Disp Death according to the Law of Nature and Innocency and so far as to make us need a pardon Though not so far as to be inconsistent with spiritual life and justification and right to Glory and to make damnation due to us according to the Law of Grace And Prâtestants confess Vid. Rob. Baronim de Peccat Mort. Ven. The best I know on the Subject the distinction of Mortal and Venial Sin under the name of Wickedness or Reigning Sin and Sin of Infirmity in this sence that Mortal Sin is that which is inconsistent with true Faith Repentance Love Justification and right to life and is never pardoned till the person be changed by true conversion But Venial Sin or Infirmity is that which consisteth Vid. Episcopii Resp ad Quâst 64. q. 18. pag. 19. with all these aforesaid and is presently pardoned by the Covenant of Grace upon the actual or habitual Repentance or hatred of it in the Sinners 285. It is certain that the interruption of the Act of Divine Love will not prove a Sin to be Mortal For though I detest such conclusions as the Jansenist gathereth from the Jesuites Morals that loving God once or Davenant de Justit Actuali cap. 35. Saith that Sin may be called Mortal in three degrees 1. Because it is never pardoned as the Blasphemy of the Holy Ghost 2. Those which bring novum reatum mortis sed remissibilem upon repentance And such he maketh all such gross Sin acted as is mentioned 1 Cor. 6. and Gal. 5. which be they that the Papists call Mortal Sin 3. The daily infirmities of the faithful which in rigour of Justice deserve death but are pardoned by Grace twice in a man's life or once a month may save him yet it is certain that the love of God is not always notably acted by any It is interrupted in our sleep and in common studies and businesses which take up the whole man And therefore if a Sin as sinful study interrupt it that will not prove it a Mortal sin 286. And it is certain that a sin is not therefore Mortal because it diminisheth the Habit of Love For that may be in those that still are the justified Children of God 287. There are two Degrees of Mortality in Sin as our Divines at Dort do more than intimate and those of Breme there The one is when sin putteth a man into the same state as to the Love of God which he or any other was in in the next degree before true Justification or Sanctification or Conversion which is when the Habit of Divine Love and all other saving Grace is so far lost as that Habitually the Creature is more loved than the Creator If any do fall thus far which is the controversie then it 's granted that their Justification Adoption and right to Heaven is lost But while God is habitually dearest to the Soul and Sin is
in the heart and so maketh the Creed to be more properly this Law than the Scriptures as being written only on particular occasions But though we thankfully confess that the essentials of Christianity are so plain and few as may be remembred yet the Creed is contained and explained in the Scripture and without written Records our Faith would have been but ill preserved as experience and reason prove 7. That their Law as such discovered sin but gave not the Spirit of Grace to overcome it Insomuch as though he himself desired perfectly to fulfil it without sin yet he could not but was under a captivity that is a moral necessity of imperfection or sins of infirmity from which only the Grace of Christ could as to guilt and power deliver him 8. That no man ever came to Heaven by that way of merit which they dreamed of but all by the way of Redemption Grace free Gift and pardoning Mercy Therefore their conceit that they were just in the main and forgiven their sins and so justifiable by the meer dignity of Mose's Law which they kept and by the Works of the Law and not by the free Gift Pardon and Grace of a Redeemer and by the Faith and practical belief of that Gift and acceptance of it with thankful penitent obedient hearts was a pernicious errour But the true way of Righteousness was to become true Christians that is with such a penitent thankful accepting practical belief or affiance to believe in God as the Giver of Salvation in Christ as the Redeemer and his Spirit as our Life and Sanctifier and to accept Christ and all his procured Benefits Justification and Life as purchased by his Sacrifice and meritorious Righteousness and given in the New Covenant on this condition and so to give up our selves to his whole saving-work as to the Physician of our Souls and only Mediator with God This is the sum of Paul's Doctrine on this point 363. I say again therefore for any man to say that some one physical act either assent or consent or affiance upon one particular Object Christ's Righteousness as offered us is the instrumental cause of our Justification and that to look to be justified by any other act of Faith on Christ or on the Father or Holy Ghost or on Heaven the final Object God in Glory or secondarily as subsequent parts of the condition of Salvation by Repentance by praying for Pardon by forgiving others by Obedience to Christ c. is to look to be justified by Works in the sense that Paul excludeth them this is but to abuse the Gospel and the Church by a scandalous misinterpretation of a great part of the New Testament 364. St. James therefore having to do with some who thought that Leg. Placeum in Thes Salvin de hâsce Vol. 1. Conrad Bergium in Prax. Cathol â e Blank Thes de Just and our Mr. Gibbon's Serm. Of Justif in the Morning-Exercises at Giles in the Fields Paraeus de Justif Cont. Bellarm. l. 2. c. 7. p. 469. Nos imputari nobis Christi justitiam ut per âam formaliter justi nominâmâr simus neque diximus unquam neque sentimus ut aliquoties jam ostendimus Id enim pugnaret non minus cum recta ratione quam si reus in judicio absolutus diceret se clementia judicis donantis sibi vitam formaliter justum esse c. the bare profession of Christianity was Christianity and that Faith was a meer assent to the Truth and that to believe that the Gospel is true and trust to be justified by Christ was enough to Justification without Holiness and fruitful Lives and that their sin and barrenness hindered not their Justification so that they thus believed perhaps misunderstanding Paul's Epistles doth convince them that they were mistaken and that when God spake of Justification by Faith without the Works of the Law he never meant a Faith that containeth not a resolution to obey him in whom we believe nor that is separated from actual Obedience in the prosecution But that as we must be justified by our Faith against the charge of being Infidels so must we be justified by our Gospel personal holiness and sincere Obedience against the charge that we are unholy and wicked or impenitent or Hypocrites or else we shall never be adjudged to Salvation that is justified by God 365. All this then is past controversie among considerate understanding men 1. That Works justifie us not as perfect according to the Covenant of Innocence because we have them not 2. That the Works or keeping of Mose's Law as conceited sufficient or as set in opposition against or competition with a Saviour or free Gift or any otherwise than as the exercises of meer Obedience under Christ as Mary ââchary Elizabeth Simeon John Baptist David c. used them could justifie no man 3. That consequently no other Works set up either in the said opposition or competition or as any thing of Merit or worth is ascribed to them which is proper to Christ or any part of the honour of Gods free Gift can justifie no man nor any other way than as meer conditions and exercises of thankful obedience or acceptance in pure subordination to God's Mercy and Christ's Merits and the free Gift But that Works are not excluded from being conditions of our justification or the matter of it in any of these following respects 1. That Faith it self which is our act and an act of Obedience to God and is the âiducial accepting belief in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost for the benefits of the Covenant is the condition of our first Covenant-right to these Benefits 2. That this Faith is not actual Obedience to Christ as Christ at first but only to God as God But it is the Souls subjection to Christ as Christ which is our Covenant-consent to our future Obedience and virtually though not actually containeth our future Obedience in it 3. That there is somewhat of love consent or willingness of Desire of Hope of Repentance which goeth to make up this moral work of Faith as it is the condition even our first Christianity it self 4. That as the making of a Covenant is for the performing of it and subjection is for Obedience and Marriage for conjugal Duties so our said first Covenanting-Faith is for our future Faith Hope Comfort and grateful Obedience and Holiness And these are the secondary parts of the condition of Salvation And so are the secondary parts of our Justifications condition as continued or not-lost and consummate For to justifie us is as is said to justifie our Right to Impunity and Glory â That as is said our own performance of the condition of the free Gift of Impunity and Glory by the New Covenant purchased by Christ's Righteousness is the thing to be tried and judged in Gods judgment And therefore we must so far be then justified from the charge of âot performing that condition of
481. An Concordia liberi arbitrii cum gratia pâssit demonstrari naturali ratione vel cum Infallibilitate Praescientiae Providentiae praedestinationis Divinae Where he tells you that one opinion of some Catholicks is that It is certain by the doctrine of faith that man hath Free-will but it cannot be proved by natural reason The second opinion is contrary that It is not only evident to natural reason that man hath free-will but also the concord of it with the infallibility of Divine prescience and providence may easily and clearly be made out by Scientia Media which is the Jesuites way But the third opinion which he defendeth is that Free-will may be evidently known and proved by natural reason alone But how the actual use of it consisteth with the infallibility of the prescience providence and predestination of God and with the efficacy of the helps of grace cannot be perfectly known or comprehended by natural light alone and therefore the reason of it must be Believed and the understanding captivated to the obedience of Faith Where note 1. That though he say perfectè he proveth that it cannot be known by that which is below a perfect knowledge 2. And that he denyeth not only a practical saving knowledge but a proper theoretical or dogmatical knowledge For this he citeth those words of Cajetan at large in 1. p. q. 22. art 4. which many others cite and commend In ignorantia sola quietem invenio c. And there is no man besides Alvarez higher for the Dominicans way of Absolute predetermination than D. Bannes who is of Cajetans opinion in 1. p. q. 23. art 5. 2. 2. q. 10. art 1. Siquis non intelligit quomodo usus liberi arbitrii sit liber nihilominus sit effectus jam praedefinitus à Divina providentia oportet eum credere Primum omnium debuisset credere quod aiunt se non posse intelligere Credimus enim Catholicum mysterium Trinitatis etiamsi non intelligamus And Alvarez citeth Calvin lib. de aetern Dei praedest cont Pigh p. 136. saying Siquis hoc mentis suae captu superius esse excipiat idem de me fateor Sed quid mirum si modulum nostrum imcomprehensibilis immensa Dei majestas exsuperet Atqui tantum abest ut pro carnis ratione explicandum suscipiam sublime istud reconditúmque arcanum ut quod initio praefatus sum assiduè in memoriam redire velim desipere qui plus scire appetunt quà m Deus revelaverit Quare nos potiùs docta ignorantia delectet quam intemperans ebria plus quam Deus permittit curiositas What Augustine confesseth you may see a little in Alvar. ib. p. 482 483. but more in himself often What Suarez Hurtado Mendoz. and other the most subtil philosophical Divines confess commonly of the incomprehensibility of these things and the darkness and uncertainty of our conceptions I have elsewhere partly cited and any that readeth them may find Now all this being so notorious and their ignorance commonly confessed may I not confidently inferr 1. That then seeing all must be reconciled by Believing we must have nothing obtruded on us herein which is not to be proved by the Word of God What the Word saith of Predetermination of the manner of Gods operation on second causes and influx on souls and of the nature of his first effect or Vis Impressa c. we will receive But yet men must not snatch up a metaphorical expression in one or a few Texts and urge that against the frequent and plain expressions of the Scripture of the spirits Operation on souls Christ himself saith which is more than all forecited The wind bloweth where it listeth and ye hear the sound thereof but ye know not whence it cometh and whither it goeth so is every one that is born of the spirit But as for the operations of God by the word preached and other means and the Holy Ghosts operation by and with those means and the Holy Ghosts indwelââng and operating after in Believers these are frequently asserted in Gods Word And that all Christs members have his Spirit regenerating illuminating quickning sanctifying them both as he is in Covenant with them to be the sanctifier of their souls and as the Love of God and all his Graces are by him caused in us all this is sure But if men will go further with us and give us as many distinctions of Gods Grace as Alvarez doth and tell us that besides God himself one of them simultaneous operation is nothing but mans act and another previous motion is somewhat else but no man knoweth what but may be named motio Virtuosa though it be neither God nor a quality nor a humane act And then will dispute how much of this some thing this motio virtuosa will serve to such an effect and how much to another and how and by what reason it is efficacious and will build on his assertions such a systeme of consequents as shall make up the doctrines of a sect or party which shall set up with this stock to militate against the Love and unity of Christians this is the course that I oppugn Once more Let the Reader note that the waies of reconciling Grace and Free-will as Alvarez mentioneth them are these four I. The Jesuits way by scientia media which I need not recite to the Learned but think it meet to recite Alvarez words of their description of Grace Supponunt gratiam praevenientem excitantem esse formaliter actiones quasdam vitales quas Deus in nobis sine nobis operatur sine nobis inquam libere co-operantibus non tamen sine nobis vitaliter efficienter concurrentibus consistere in illustratione illuminatione Intellectus atque excitatione suasione voluntatis quae efficienter procedunt ab intellectu voluntate non quidem ut Libera sed ut Natura est quamvis antecedenter dependeant à Voluntate ut Liberum arbitrium est quatenus viz. ex ejus libertate fuit dependens quod homo compararet notitias mysteriorum fidei vel eorum quae facienda erant accedendo ad praedicatores vel alio modo eos propriâ industriâ acquirendo quibus notitiis Deus se insereret eas elevando suo speciali influxu ut supernaturales sint quales ad salutem oportet sic sortiantur naturam gratiae praevenientis Suppositâ ergo Illuminatione quâ Deus illuminat Intellectum proponit Voluntati bonum ut sibi conveniens affirmant quod statim absque ulla libertate oritur merè naturaliter in voluntate motus affectionis ad bonum sibi propositum quo motu allicitur quasi invitatur ad amandum illud bonum imperandum potentiis executivis ut illud exequantur ut v. g. ad imperandum intellectui ut assentiatur rebus fidei propositis explicatis In his ergo duobus motibus viz. in illustratione Intellectus affectione
defectus talis potestatis non est aliud quam duritia malâ voluntatis à qua suscepta recedere non posse non est aliud quam tenaciter nolle Nature teacheth all the world so much to difference between mans Voluntary and Involuntary Acts and Habits as to take the first to be directly laudable or culpable as being not only virtuous or vicious but in their relations to the Rule to be Virtue or Vice it self and the more men have of a vicious obstinacy and voluntariness in evil the more all mankând condemn and hate them Whereas involuntary necessity is every-where taken for a just excuse yea a necessit as volendi in a mad man or a phrenetick or melancholy person maketh them the objects of mens compassion And this Light and Law of humane nature is not to be rejected because it may seem hard to answer the sophisms of those that would confound these sorts of Power and Impotency § 13. Therefore of a man that is no otherwise unable to Love God e. g. but only because or in that directly or indirectly he will not that is is Dispositively Actually and Habitually Unwilling it is more proper and intelligible to say that he will not than that he cannot Though we may also say He cannot when we mean but that he will not But the most explicatory words are best § 14. No man-shall be able so far to accuse God and excuse himself justly at last as to say I was truly willing to have Christ and Life as offered me but I could not or I was truly willing to leave my sins and worââly vanities and to live a holy life to God but I could not Yea Augustine and Twisse say more that no man can truly say I would believe but cannot which yet I think needeth some limiting explication § 15. Obj. But though all men Can have Christ or faith if they will yet the unregenerate are unable to be willing Answ By Unable you must 1. Either mean that they want the Natural Power or faculty of willing it 2. Or that they want some naturally necessary concause or object without which this faculty is no formal Power ad hoâ 3. Or that the Will is not well Disposed so to Act. 1. The first no man will say that taketh an unbeliever for a Man 2. The second no man will say that will not by Hobbes his physical necessitation turn Religion into a name or nothing or the natural motâon of an Engine called Man 3. And the third which is the truth must be named as it is In Controversies which exercise so great animosities and ââââal zeal as this doth in the Churches it is an injurious thing to use sedââing improper names when the more plain and intelligible are at hand Hereafter speak plainly in your contendings and instead of Cannot say An unconverted man will not believe and his will is viciously undisposed to it yea ill-disposed against it Hold to this that we may understand each other or confess that you quarrel about a word § 16. Obj. The Scripture useth the word Cannot Can a Blackâore change his skin c. Answ 1. The text may as fitly at least be translated Will a Blackmore change his skin c. Yet the word Cannot is brought in in the application for here it is all one That is the meaning is that some custome in sin doth cause such a setled Ill disposition or Habit as without special Grace is never overcome Which signifieth no more than a rââted wilfulness and Love of sin and enmity to Good 2. But the meaning is not to affirm these two sorts of Impotency to be of the same nature An Ethiopian cannot change his skin were he never so willing and he cannot be willing to change it without Grace But you cannot say that an accustomed sinner cannot learn to do good were he never so willing nor yet that he can be as easily willing as the Ethiopian nor as hardly made willing as the Leopard 3. Figurative speeches are frequent in Scripture and may alike be used by us in the like cases But in Controversies a trope is an equivocal till explained and must not be used without necessity and explication 4. Where the text once saith They could not believe or repent it saith many and many times They would not 5. The phrase They could not believe because Esaias saith c. Joh. 12. 39. notoriously speaketh but of an Impossibilitas Logica consequentiae and not of a physical disability in themselves though it intimateth a setled wilfulness 6. When it 's said Act. 4. 14. They could say nothing against it it signifieth not a want of physical power but mediate advantage It 's said of Christ Mark 1. 45. He could no more enter into the City 6. 5. He could there do no mighty work because of their unbelief 7. 24. He could not be hid Isa 5. 4. What could have been done more to my Vineyard Jer. 15. 1. My mind could not be towards this people Mark 3. 20. They could not so much as eat bread 1. Thes 3. 1. When we could no longer forbear c. 1 Joh. 3. 9. He cannot sin Heb. 9. 5. Of which we cannot now speak particularly Act. 4. 16. We cannot deny it And 19. 36. These things cannot be spoken against Joh. 7. 7. The world cannot hate you Luk. 11. 7. I cannot rise and give thee and yet he did Luk. 14. 20. I have marryed a wife therefore I cannot come Mar. 2. 19. They cannot fast Neh. 6. 3. I cannot come down So Gen. 34. 14. 44. 26. 2 Cor. 13. 8. Numb 22. 18. 24. 13. Jos 24. 19. 1 Sam. 25. 17. Psal 77. 4. and other places I think you will not say it is natural and utter disability that is here spoken of No nor of God when it is said that He cannot deny himself or Lye 2 Tim. 2. 13. Tit. 1. 2. We must therefore explain such doubtful words before we draw controverted conclusions from them as supposing them falsly to be univocal § 17. The same Natural faculty may by the Alteration of objects and means become formally a Power or no power ad hoc vel illud And when Nature made it a faculty Grace can make it a formal power to this or that without changing it in it self at all in many instances or cases § 18. Men have a power even moral to the use of many means which God hath appointed for the begetting of faith before they have a moral power to believe § 19. God hath appointed or commanded to all men the use of certain duties and means for their Recovery by faith and repentance unto God And there is no man that is not obliged to use such means nor any man that is to use them in despâir of success The very command being some signification of Gods will that obedience shall not be in vain Whether the name of an Implicite Promise be apt for that command I leave to those
Some of you will grant that as motion causeth motion by contact of bodies so the first effect on the soul can cause the second And others of you will deny it and say that Gods Actions being diversified only by the diversity of effects and objects that which causeth the second effect is to be denominated a second Action and not the same numerically which caused the first no nor specifically if the effects specifically differ And so as scholastick wits here exercise their curiosity without respect to Arminianism or Calvinism you will here fall into notional Controversies in the way § 20. 2. But granting that the first effect is that efficacious Grace which must cause the second how shall we know what the first effect is and what the second Gods Grace like the Sun is still shining though we are not still receiving it When it worketh but the commoner sort of effects these tend to more and more The first Gracious effect may be forty years before Conversion But this is not your meaning But I suppose you will say that it is the first special effect or gratia operata that is proper to the saved which you mean But to pass by that Augustine Prosper Fulgentius much more their predecessors held that sincere faith Love holiness Justification present right to Life if they so dyed are not proper to the saved but that some lose all these If you say but proper to the Justified or Sanctified or Converted or it be the first effect which is proprium Justificandis which you mean Are we agreed what that is § 21. Either the first effect on the soul or the first Gratia operata is the Act of faith it self or somewhat antecedent If the Act as many subtilly maintain then it were a foolish question to ask Whether the Act of faith be Effectual to cause it self and How Therefore it must be somewhat antecedent or we can find no matter for our Controversie de efficacia Gratiae ad credendum § 22. If somewhat antecedent to the Act it is either a Disposition or Infused Habit or an Impression Impulse or Influx which is neither Disposition nor Habit. * * * Dico 1. Non certo constare ex divinis literis esse hujusmodi Habitus supernaturales 2. At baptizatis infunditur Gratia âo sensu quod efficiuntur Dâo grati consortes divinae naturae renati 3. Conceditur Dei adjutorium ut credamus velimuâ diligamus per inspirationem infusionem spiritus sancti 4. Dei adjutorium desuper infusum est omnino necessarium ut credamus diligamus c. non tantum ut facilius credamus Medina in 12. q. 51. p. 282. See many definitions of a Habit confuted in Medina 1. 2. p. 271. and that which he resteth in is Aristotles Qualitas quâ rectè vel malè afficimur § 23. 1. A proper Habit of faith it is not Though Mr. Pemble singularly seem so to think yet he meaneth but a seminal disposition And it 's commonly held that the Habit is given by sanctification after the Act given in Vocation 2. But if it were otherwise the Habit is not alwayes sufficient to ascertain the Act. For holy men oft sin against a Habit and believers do not alwayes exercise it Habits Incline per modum naturae but do not certainly determine to the act 3. And of a Disposition it must be so said much more § 24. 2. And if it be an Impulse or Influxus Receptus as I think we must affirm this is but a general notion of which our understanding is very crude or small A meer Motus it is not For as was said in the beginning the Divine Influx is threefold viz. From Vital-Activity or Power Wisdom and Love to Life Light and Love in man Now as I said if there be no such Impulse besides the Life Light and Love produced our Controversie is at an end For these are not efficacious or efficient of themselves But if such a different Impulse there be it 's hard to know what it is in man I conceive it best expressed by all these inadequate notions conjunct 1. An inward urgency to this threefold act which is called in the Schools both auxilium concurse and Influx 2. By which Urgency the soul is more Disposed to the Act in hoc ordine than it was before 3. Which Disposition containeth in it a Moral Power to that Act so ordered and somewhat more even some Inclination to perform it If any man can tell me better what that Divine Impulse is which is antecedent to mans Act I am willing to learn § 25. Now if this be the question Whether this Divine Impulse which is the first effect of Gods spirit be of its own nature efficacious to produce According to Jansenius the first Grace is Necessary Delectation or Love in act before that which is free and full And if so then there is no grace causing this grace and so none to be the subject of this question Whether it be more or less sufficient or effectual operating or co-operating grace which maketh one man love God initially rather than another For it is no Grace bâ Gods essential will this Love be the first Grace and no received Impulse antecedent to it our Faith Love c. as the second effect I answer 1. Sometimes Gods Impulse is so Great as propriâ vi doth change mind and will and overcome resistance and procure our act 2. Sometimes it is so strong as that it prevaileth against the contrary ill-disposition so far as to give man a Moral Power to the Act with some Inclination which yet contrary habits and temptations do overcome and the Act doth not follow which yet was not for want of Power to have done it And this is called sufficient Grace 3. We have great reason to believe that as in some Instances Gods greater Impress is the chief differencing Cause so in other Instances an equal Impulse of God on unequally disposed subjects doth produce the Act of faith c. in one of them which it produceth not in the other through the incapacity of the recipient 4. Therefore there is a double degree of efficacy or Vis One which only so far moveth and helpeth the will as that it can do the act and sometime doth it without more Another which is so strong as that the second effect alwayes followeth it 5. But whenever the Act of faith is produced by force or Impulse more or less God is the first and principal cause of it and man but the second and the praise of it is accordingly due And I think this decision accommodateth both sides of our contenders § 26. The foresaid Impulse or first effect is only the work of God and the means and not ours But the Act of Faith Love c. is Gods work and ours and ours as Free-agents Therefore that Impulse of God which is Aptitudinally efficacious on supposition of mans due reception and self-excitation
is oft not Actually effectual for want of that Voluntary Reception and self-excitation § 27. As to the various effects of Grace fore-mentioned 1. As to the preparation of Means and Gracious medicine Christ the Covenant c. Grace is efficient of it self and doth it 2. As to the first Impulse or Impress on the soul God certainly effecteth it in some degree wherever his spirit worketh on the soul 3. Some Urgency and some degree of disposition to the act is constantly contained in this Impulse And usually it giveth a moral power to the Immediate Act-required 4. The Act of faith sometimes followeth this Impulse through its invincible force And sometime it followeth it through its sufficient force and the due Reception * * * Omne agens requirit de necessitate aliquam dispositionem in suo passo Maximè si illud pà ssum habeat dispositiones actionâ illius agentis contrarias ut patet de igne c. Ergo cum Gratia non sit minus inmo magis quam naturalis forma Certum est quod Gratia requirit majorem dispositionem in passo Et voco illam dispositionem Libertatem arbitrii sui Deo submittere se ad alteram partem declinare scilicet ad volendum Gratiam recipere dolere de culpa commissa voluntarie libere per attritionem Brianson in 4. q. 8. cor 3. fol. 152. This is just the doctrine of our Protestant Preachers supposing that Common Grace must make this preparation which the Papists grant of the subject And sometimes it followeth it not at all through the Recipients indisposition 5. The Habit of faith ever followeth a special Act through the powerful operation of the Holy Ghost But usually it goeth not before the Act Man hath not a fixed Habit to promptitude and facility of believing before he believeth but after 6. The Habit ordinarily procureth following acts by the way of Inclination but not necessarily nor alwayes For by strong temptations Habits are oft born down § 28. If the question then be Whence Gods Grace is Aptitudinally and Potentially efficacious able and fit to effect It is because God is God that he is Able and his Impulse is such because he maketh it such And if the question be Whence Grace is Actually efficient of its first effect the Impulse It is because God will so do and his will hath no Cause being the first Cause And if the question be Whence Grace is Actually efficient of mans faith It is by its Impelling man to believe But if you ask Whence faith it self is or of what cause is it an effect I answer of God as the first cause and the Means as his Instrument and of the Believer as a free second Cause And if the question be Why sufficient Grace which is Effectual ad Posse is not effectual ad agere It is because being but sufficient mans Indisposition and wilful neglect or opposition maketh him an unfit Receiver § 29. There being nothing then but Gods essence and the means antecedent to the first effect on the soul and that effect ever following where God worketh and the second effect being the effect both of God by the first and of man as a free agent the questions unde efficatia Gratiae and unde effectus are thus healingly answered § 30. Obj. But the will of God is the first differencing and effectual Cause And that not as it is his essence but as it is terminated on the Creature and decreeth such an effect Answ 1. It is no will but his essence which is so terminated or decretive 2. That termination maketh no difference at all that 's real in the will of God but only in the effect or object 3. What is the difference then between Gods will simply in it self and as willing from eternity a thing not yet existent None really at all And that which is not yet being Nothing what Relative Connotative and Denominative difference such Nothings can make on the will of God besides the variety of imperfect notions in mans frail Intellect let the wise consider § 31. From whence it is that School-divines after Augustine say that with God there is no futurum velpraeteritum no fore-knowledge or fore-decrees properly because no difference of time but only knowledge and will of things as present § 32. Yet Gods Vital Activity Knowledge and Will as he himself is the object of them have a Greater distinction because to be self-living self-knowing and self-loving are his Essential Acts on himself the eternal object which made many Ancients account them the Trinity of persons And also to Will an existent Creature is an extrinsick denomination from existence But to will that which is not that man shall be that he shall believe hereafter c. as it is nothing really different from Gods essence so it is but an extrinsick denomination of his essence from nothing SECT XVI Of Infused Habits and the Holy Ghost Given us The Schoolmen that speak most for the necessity of Infused Habits cannot agree what use they are for Aureolus supposeth chiefly for the right circumstantiating of Acts rather than for promptitude to them and pleasure in them And when all is said they give men but small comfort from them saying as Aureolus Brianson c. that no man can be sure that he hath them seeing acquired Habits may do the same things that Infused do Utrum Beatitudo supernaturalis hujus vitae sit magis in Habitibus quam in operationibus vid. Suarez Metaph. disp 44. sect 8. n. 18. Molina 1. p. q. 12. ar 5. disp 2. ar 2. pro habitibus Sed contra inquit Aegid de Sancta Praesentatione Li. 4. de beatit q. 5. a. 3. pâ 471. His non obstantibus oppositum affirmant omnes Theologi qui bac de re scripserunt nec videtur posse de hoc dubitari And yet Alens 2. p. q. 104. m. 3. Aquin. 1. 2. q. 51. a. 2. ad 3. q. 63. a. 2. ad 3. Valentiââ To. disp 4. q. 3. punct 2. c. are for preferring Habits Idem Aegid de Praesentat li. 4. p. 443 444. tells us that by Grace God is Present in the soul as his Temple otherwise than by Immensity and sustentation But his praesentia Amicitia can mean nothing but the special effects of Gods Love Nostrâ tempestate non solum est temerarium periculosum sed ferè hareticum habitus insusos negare Nam Concil Vienens c. universi Theologi uno consensu affirmant dari habitus insusos Medina in 1. 2. q. 51. a. 4. 282. But Soto li. 2. de nat grat c. 17 18. saith that the Concil Trid. purposely forbore to define the case of infused habits Let the Reader note that Jansenius proveth that Pelagius himself asserted infused Habits given in baptism and that without merit Jans Aug. To. 1. li. 5. c. 22. p. 126. § 1. EVery operation of the Holy Ghost is not the Giving
be an Active Spirit * Indifferentia Voluntatis in ordine ad auxilium praevium est indifferentia passiva caeterum in ordint ad actum liberum quâm producit praedeterminata tali motionâ praevia indifferentia Voluntatis est activa libera Alvarez de Aux disp 23. pag. 115. and therefore what ever it receiveth it receiveth it as it is in that nature 2. But the same soul is Passive as well as Active and that in the prior instant of nature For it must receive from God the first cause which made the Greek antient Doctors and many of the Latines say as Damascene in sense though in grosser words that the soul in respect to bodies was immaterial or incorporeal but it was material in respect of God § 2. Not only in its Receiving the Spirits first Impulse to Believe the soul is Passive before it is Active but also in its Reception of every sort of Divine Influx even to every natural act So that in this there is no difference between Conversion and any common act For the soul is first passive in allâ even in receiving that Natural Influx by which we Live and Move and Be. § 3. But the soul which is passive in Receiving Gods Impulse to believe the first effect is Active in the producing of its own Act of believing which is the effect of many Concauses And as I said It is not the Habit of faith properly so called which it passively Receiveth before the Act. SECT XVIII Whether the first Grace and the New and Soft Heart be Promised and Given Absolutely or on any Condition on our part And so of faith it self Answ § 1. BY the first Grace is meant either simply the first or the first special renewing Grace on the soul proper to them that shall be Justified Of the first Grace simply there is no Condition for it is given Universally to all viz. a Reprieval a Law of Grace a Redeemer c. And after this there is much common personal mercy given conditionally and much absolutely to all or some * * * And as to the first moving inward Grace see how copiously the Jesuit Ruiz as Vasquez and others proveth that it hath no initium in us no not an occasion or disposition much less merit for which it is given And he reasoneth from the Names Creation Generation by the seed of God resuscitation and Gods being found of them that sought him not and from the Cause of the difference between man and man De pradest Tr. 3. disp 18. â 4 5 6 7 8 c. p. 227 228 c. Even Medina 12. p. 596. is so hesitant as to say Esse probabilem sententiam Doctorum quod facienti quod in se est ex facultate naturae Deus ex sua misericordia nunquam denegat gratiam Sed dico quod probabilius est magis consentaneum sanctis patriâus praeclpuâ Augustino non esse Legem infallibilem quod homini pââatori facienti quod in se est ex facultate natura continub conferatur gratia Nam si esser Lex infallibilis certè initium bona pars justificationis esset à nobis c. Thus the Papists herein differ as much as the Protestants among themselves § 2. It seemeth to me an error which by oversight I was long entangled in my self to think that by the new and soft heart is meant the first special Grace For most Divines agree that it is proper sanctification which is meant by it as distinct from antecedent Vocation Vid. Ames Medul de Vocat Rolloc de Vocat Bishop G. Downame against Pemble Hookers Souls Vocation Joh. Rogers of faith and many others In Vocation they suppose the Act of Faith and Repentance suscitated by the Spirit and thereupon a Covenant-Relation to Christ and to the Holy Ghost with Regenerating Sanctifying Habits âo be given And I see no reason to be singular herein § 3. That faith is by the Law of Grace made a Condition of this Sanctification and the Spirit promised us if we will believe and so the Spirit given to us by Covenant in Baptism when we believe is plain ill Scripture and the commonest doctrine of all Divines § 4. Therefore if it be this Spirit of Sanctification that is meant by the New the Tender the Circumcised heart it is not promised and given absolutely but on condition of faith § 5. Let us peruse the several Texts where it is promised Dent. 30. 1 2 3 6. When thou shalt call to mind among all the Nations and shalt return unto the Lord thy God and obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day thou and thy children with ââ thy heart and all thy soul that then the Lord thy God will turn thy cââtivity And the Lord thy God will circumcise thy heart and the heart of thy seed to Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul that thou maist live Here it is a Grace consequent to a condition even to much obedience which is described And Deut. 10. 16. it is a command Circumcise the foreskin of your hearts and be no more stiff-necked Jer. 32. 36 37 c. I will gather them out of all Countreys whither I have driven them and will bring them again into this place and I will cause them to dwell safely and they shall be my people and I will be their God and I will give them one heart and one way that they may fear me for ever So Ezek. 11. 16 17 18 19 20. And Ezek. 36. 25 26 27 28 29. In all which there is a promissory Prophecy how great a deliverance God would give the Nation of the Jews both for body and soul And their temporal return and liberty is promised and prophesied in the same manner as a new heart is But here is not a syllable to prove that this is the first special Grace any more than perseverance is which in the same manner is promised in Jer. 32. 40. I will put my fear in their hearts and they shall not depart To say nothing how far in the first sense this was National to the Jews nor how the performance did expound it For doubtless it is performed the Text it self premiseth I will be their God and they shall be my people with other mercies And no doubt but Faith and Repentance go before this Covenant-Relation to God and therefore before the following gift of the Spirit ver 9. and Ch. 11. 19. And Ezek. 18. 31. the same is commanded Cast away from you all your transgressions whereby ye have transgressed and make you a new heart and a new spirit § 6. The promissory Prophecy of Jer. 31. 31 c. is recited by the Penman of Heb. 8. 8 c. to prove the cessation of the old Jewish Câvenant and that a better should succeed And this much is easily proved out of both 1. That God would certainly have a holy people among the
returning Israelites 2. And especially that he would have such in the Christian Church as should be sanctified to him by his Spirit and have a new and tender âeart And Predestination is well proved from the Text. But there is not a word to prove this to be the first Grace nor that Gods promise gave any man right to it but upon condition of believing For if Gods Decree Prophecy or general Promise saying absolutely I will do it did prove it to be the first Grace it would prove perserance such which is false The words prove no more but that God will do it § 7. And as this is no personal promise giving any man a right to the thing promised which he may claim but only foretelling what God will do or give to some so he hath other promises which are part of his Law of Grace and do give men Right to these same Benefits And so the Spirit of Sanctification and a new heart is promised on Condition of believing which therefore is the former special Grace § 8. If any therefore will prove that faith is given Absolutely they must not do it by those Texts which speak of Sanctification which faith is a condition of § 9. But as to the question it self Whether Faith be given absolutely or conditionally I answer 1. There is no absolute promise of faith made to any persons but only promissory predictions of some indeterminate unnamed persons that God will draw them and give them to Christ and they shall believe and live 2. All men have means and duty appointed them for the seeking of that Grace which may convert them 3. They are hereby bound to believe that if they so do they shall not lose their labour For God setteth men on no unprofitable work 4. Those that do this most faithfully and have most preparing grace are the likest to become believers and the ordinary receivers of special grace 5. Whether de nomine this encouragement shall be called a promise or equipollent let them contend that list 6. God can and doth suddenly convert some without such preparations or else give them both sorts of Grace immediately as once SECT XIX How God may be said to Cause the Acts of sin I Have said of this also so much before as that this Breviate here must serve It is ill said Profiteâ mur incunctanter prorsus impeditum iri quod universi simpliciter Bonum est si impeditetur peccatum quoniam hââ pactâ impediretur patesactio Divinâ misericordiâ parcentis justitia vindicant is Quâ quidem patesactio non minus universi Bonum censenda est quam qââlibet alia câjusâibet Del proprietatis in ipso tanquam in speculo relâcent is Twiss Vindic Grat. li. 1. p. 1. pag. 133. It is dangerous to talk so boldly of these mysteries Here seem to me many errors and confusions 1. It is false that God could not make known to the world that merciful nature which now pardoneth sin and that Justice which now punisheth if there had been no sin His Laws Promises and Threats do antecedently make them known And God could cause blessed Spirits to know all his perfections before there was any sin 2. Gods Holiness and Goodness is called Mercy and Justice by extrinsick denomination and connotation of sin and misery And if his Holiness and Goodness had been known as preventing all sin and misery men will think that he hath not proved that this had been Evil in the Universe or less Good 3. Posita Divina Volitione as the rule of Good it followeth I confess that it were evil not to have that will fulfilled But I deny that God willeth sin or its existence Therefore it is not Good because not Volitum à Deo It is sufficient that it is not so far evil as to be Absolutè Nolitum but only evil 1. As prohibitum 2. As hurtful to the sinner and to others Methinks they that maintain that sin is Privatio should not say that it is Positivè Volitum à Deo 4. All this dependeth on that curious question Could not God have made the World better than it is or at least as good with many alterations from what it is They that hold the first say that God freely made things no better than they are But had there been no Devils no Sin no Toads no disorder the world had been better that is a perfecter demonstration of Gods perfection But they that are more modest arâ content with the latter and say that God freely made things as they are and not necessarily But it had been necessarily if no other way had been as good And that if God had pleased to shew his Goodness by preventing all sin it had been as Good and no loss or disparagement to the Universe 5. And he doth through all his Books beg the question Whether a meer occasion be a conducibâe medium and so good If he will stretch the word Medium so wide as to extend it to a meer evil sinâ quo non or presupposed which hath not the least causality efficient material formal or final I will not strive for a word But conducibile noteth some kind and degree of Causality which sin hath not to the glorifying of God It is the destroying of sin that God is glorified by Where the malum amovendum is not the bonum conducibile but the ill state of the matter without which God had not glorified himself by this Act but by some other as well § 1. It must be well considered that God made mans Nature before he made any positive Laws for him And that the Law of Nature it self is in order of Nature after Nature though not in Time Man being first considerable as Man before he be considerable as obliged to duty And also that the Law both Natural and Positive is before mans obedience and sin So that as man is first in order of Nature Man and then Gods Governable Subject and then in order of Time obedient or disâbedient so God is first his Creator and then Naturâ Motor and then his Governour by Legislation and then his Gracious Helper and lastly his Judge and Rewarder § 2. Therefore as Natural Being substance and faculties and Natural Motion are antecedent to Morality so Gods causation of both these is antecedent and therefore to be Creator Preserver and Motor is not to be the Cause of sin or of Virtuous acts as such § 3. God as Creator was not pleased to make all his creatures of one kind nor of one degree of excellence but in such variety as is wonderful to our observation Besides the innumerable species of beings and the innumerable parts of every compound being the dissimilitude of indviduals of the same species is admirable so that no two faces are perfectly like no nor no two Stones in the Street no two Trees Birds Beasts c. And therefore it is but consonant to the rest of his works that MAN is neither perfectly like
sort of grace We may presume of many things as received from our Teachers but it is hard to prove that Adam the next moment after his sin was totally deprived of all degrees of love to God and goodness and so was privatively as bad as Devils or that all mankind are naturally so Though I believe that it was of grace even Gods first pardoning act as our Redeemer not so totally to execute the Law nor take away his grace and leave man to the utmost penalty of his sin but to keep nature from being as bad as else it would have been But sure Man is Man still and not a Devil And I speak with few or none that seem not to have some liking of God and goodness or Justice as such though they love not God or goodness as contrary to their fleshly lusts nor love God as their Sanctifier and Ultimate End And thus the Carnal Mind is Enmity to God being not subject to his Law though this be consistent with loving him secundum quid IV. I believe him that there is a faith such as the Devils which may be without Justification both in habit and act But that the same Faith which after justifieth can be many years Habitually before Justification that is Sanctification as he meaneth it I believe not Seeing God hath promised that all that believe thus shall be justified and have his Spirit V. Jansenius seems to me to set too light by Habitual Grace as if it were some common thing in comparison of the Act Whereas I take a Habit of love to God to differ from an act either as a Spring or Rivolet from a drop or as Honesty from an honest act or Learning from a learned exercise or as a fixed friendly Inclination which is like to Nature differeth from a friendly action and to be more excellent than a particular act XVIII His judgement of the Matter of the Reward that it is but God himself seen and perfectly loved for himself is of great use But yet it is both lawful and ex individuationis principiis ex natura humana necessary that we take and desire this as our own felicity and so under God intend our selves And quoad rationem praemii it is the Reward of a Rewardable state or work and therefore of the free act of a creature not meerly necessitated It may be a gift without Respect to our Liberty and Obedience but not a reward But it is both a gift and a Reward XIX That Fear and its effects are good and yet not of Christs grace that they are of Gods Spirit but not the Spirit given by Christ but the grace of some other Providence All this I take for unsound and injurious to Christ and grace Where doth the Scripture tell us since the fall of any grace given to the World but by the Redeemer who is Head over all things to his Church If you say that God can give men the grace to fear him and depart from evil without a Saviour or Mediator how can you prove that he may not do so by the rest Either he giveth this grace as Rector according to his Laws or not If not then on the same reason you may feign that most men are not his subject nor under any Law of God and so sin not nor are punishable If yea then it is according to the Law of Innocency or of Grace For if Moses Law as Jewish be called a third it is nothing to our case If it be by a Law of grace it is Christs Law either of the first Edition called the Promise or of the second called the Gospel The Spirit and grace in various measures given by both are of Christ It 's a dangerous assertion that there is any yea so much grace which is not Christs It prejudiceth me against Jansenius's Opinion that it should cast him on such absurdities as to deny so much of the grace of Christ while he pretendeth to honour it and to set up such a feigned way and sort of grace without a Saviour and yet speak so hardly of the Pelagians as he doth for wronging grace 2. As Fear is one of mans natural passions though but subservient to love so the sanctifying of it is one part of the Work of Christs Spirit 3. I am sure Christ himself commandeth Fear Luke 12. 4 5. Heb. 4. 1. 12. 28 29. passim And is it our own Legal Righteousness to obey the commands of Christ Indeed if Fear were all or had no conjunct hope and love it would be Legal and shew the Spirit of bondage from which Christ delivereth us by the Spirit of Power and Love and a sound mind which are the fruits of the Spirit of Adoption For Moses Law separated by the Infidel Jews from the Law of Grace or Promise of a Justifying Mediator could have no better effects than Fear But Abraham that believed and foresaw Christs day rejoyced in that Faith and yet had a Law of obedience which had its penalty and so hath the Law of Grace which we obey XX. Of Free-will I have said enough before Natural Liberty as distinct from the Moral freedom from sin and ill disposition is sure more than meer Voluntariness And I think if God gave Satan or man power to take away from a Saint all his Habitual and Actual love of God and goodness whilest antecedently the person did hate such a change and pray against it by making him willing of evil and making a Devil of him remedilesly he would take away or cross the Natural as well as the Moral Liberty of his will though it were Willingness that were caused If any think otherwise remember that it is but de nomine for de re we are agreed that such a change would be our great misery XXI I take it to be the commendation of Jansenius that he renounceth the Dominicans Physical Efficient Predetermining Premotion as naturally necessary to all actions natural and free But his habitation converse and worldly interest tempted him factiously to calumniate Calvin lest he himself should become odious with his own party and so miss of his expected success which hath prevailed also with Gibieuf Arnoldus and most other Papists to do the like when they differ from their Brethren XXII He well saith that Permission of the first sin is no effect of Reprobation But his ordination of Gods acts into this Before and that After and so his differencing the Election of Angels and men I fear hath somewhat in it presumptuous and unproved In conclusion I much mislike in Jansenius 1. His contempt of the Sacred Scriptures as being not properly Christs Laws but some odd occasional Writings his Laws being only in the heart and tradition 2. His slighting of Habitual Grace comparatively which yet is indeed Christs Law and Gods Image in the heart 3. His âeigning a new or odd sort of grace fear which is none of the grace of Christ no not preparatory to his higher
What man can do further opened p. 114. Crim. 3. Holding free will to good p. 121. A manifold Liberty evinced by many Questions p. 122. Whether any that use it not have liberty to believe p. 124 125. Crim. 4. That men are not dead in sin p. 125. Crim. 5. That man is not meerly passive in his first conversion p. 126. Crim 6. None damned for Adam's sin only p. 128. The seventh days Conference Of Sufficient and Effectual Grace Crim. 1. Of the Armin. Denying sufficient Grace they damn men for meer Impossibilities p. 130. Had Adam sufficient Grace p. 132. Of the 13th Artic. of the Church of England p. 133. How God willeth mens Salvation p. 134. Crim. 2. Making Grace unresistible p. 136. How far they do so The eighth days Conference Crim. 1. Of the Calv. They assert universal sufficient Grace p. 139. Queries evincing Common Grace p. 139. The greatness of their error that deny it p. 141. Doth this satisfie while God that can save men will not p. 143. What Grace and what sufficient Grace is p. 145. Whether the same measure of Grace called meerly sufficient be ever effectual p. 148. What the Grace in that question is Whether a vis impressa Of determination by God and by the Intellect p. 151 152 153. Crim. 2. By Grace they mean Nature as Pelagius p. 156. What Nature is Grace how far supernatural p. 158. Crim. 3. Making Grace but a Moral swasion p. 160. Physical operation what p. 162. Crim. 4. They hold faith to be acquired and not infused p. 162. What acquired and infused means p. 163. Dr. Twisse about this noted p. 167 c. Crim. 5. They hold Grace given according to works or preparation p. 169. Crim. 6. They make the Will to have no sin or Grace p. 171. Crim. 7. They make Grace resistible p. 172. The case further opened p. 173 174 c. Is there any universal second cause of Grace under God as the Sun in Nature which worketh resistibly and God by it ad modum recipientis p. 177. Christ how far such ib. Crim. 8. They make mans Will to make himself to differ c. p. 180. What differing is what the causes as to believing ib. How far God worketh by universal Grace p. 185. Who made thee to differ opened p. 186. Crim. 9. Man's will maketh Gods Grace effectual and not Gods p. 186. Whence Grace is effectual p. 189. Differencing Grace what p. 192. It not all the question of the Divine Impress p. 193 194. The case summarily opened p. 196. The ninth days Conference Of Perseverance The Arm. Crim. 1. They make fear and care to be folly p. 198. Crim. 2. They cherish all sin p. 200. Crim. 3. Their Doctrine is uncomfortable on pretence of confuting p. 200 201. Both sides charge each other thus A middle way about Perseverance avoiding both p. 204. Crim. 4. They dishonour Gods Image making heinous sin consistent with it p. 204. Crim. 5. Immodesty and singularity contradicting all the ancient Church p. 206. Crim. 6. Contradicting express Scripture p. 207. The tenth days Conference The Calv. Criminations about Perseverance Crim. 1. They overthrow the comfort of believers that deny Perseverance p. 208. What comfort may be had by such p. 211. Crim. 2. and 3. They make God or his Covenant mutable p. 212. Crim. 4. They deny the Promise of Perseverance p. 213. Crim. 5. They infer a second Regeneration p. 214. Crim. 6. They go against the Doctrine of Augustine c. p. 215. The just extenuation of this last controversie p. 215. The eleventh days Conference with a Libertine called Antinomian vindicating sound Doctrine against divers accusations Chap. 1. Whether we must call men to come to Christ without Preparation p. 220. Chap. 2. Of denying our own Righteousness p. 223. Personal Righteousness necessary p. 224. Of Reward and worthiness or Merit p. 225. The truth largely opened about merit and reward p. 230. Reasons for it p. 232 c. Ch. 3. Whether our own Righteousness conduce to our Justification Or we are any way justified by it p. 238. Ch. 4. Whether the Gospel be a Law of Christ p. 243. Ch. 5. Whether Christ and not we be the only party in Covenant with God p. 245. Ch. 6. Whether the new Covenant have conditions p. 247. Ch. 7. Whether justifying faith be a believing in Christ as Teacher Ruler c. or only a receiving his Righteousness p. 251. Ch. 8. Of Faiths Justifying Instrumentally p. 251. Ch. 9. Whether Faith it self be Imputed for Righteousness p. 252. Ch. 10. Whether it be a change in God to justifie the before unjustified p. 256. Ch. 11. Whether a justified man should fear becoming unjustified ibid. Ch. 12. Of mans power to believe and our calling the unregenerate to Duty p. 258. Ch. 13. Of the witness of the Spirit and of Evidences of Justification p. 261. The Conclusion The twelfth days Conference with a learned Lutherane Whether the difference among Christians about Merit be as great as some think it p. 263. Some Protestants and the late Lecturers Reasons against Merit proposed p. 265. and the case opened Of the Doctrine of the Council of Trent p. 266 c. Of condignity p. 267. The Doctrine of Vega Scotus Waldensis Eckius Marsilius Bellarmine Greg. Armin. Durand Brugens Cusanus Stapleton Bradwardine Soto Bonaventure st Clara and all the Schoolmen as he judgeth Carthus Cassander p. 270. Holiness and Glory a greater gift than Glory without holiness p. 271. Aquinas judgment His confusion occasioned by his opinion that the new Law is that which is in the heart and not written viz. the Spirit as the Quakers hold ib. Vasquez denyeth Commutative Justice in God with all the School Doctors 17 of them cited He confuteth it even as to Christ He denyeth proper Distributive Justice also in God citing Bonavent Scotus Durand Palud Gabriel Alexand. Aquin. c. p. 272 c. Aquinas sense in Carbo's words p. 275. Many Schoolmen deny as much as Legal or Governing Justice in God Ruiz citeth for this Argent Bassol Suarez Pesant Suarez saith God's promises are but naked Assertions declaring his Will Durand that promises signifie not obligation Greg. Armin. That the Crown is no Debt but of free Ordination Marsil That God is no Debtor but free Giver Scotus Major Ricard deny God to be a Debtor by his promise but hold that Merits are such by Promise Ruiz saith against Suarez That Promises are more than Assertions but that God's obligation is to himself p. 276. Medina against Meriting Remission p. 277. Against Preparation p. 277. Contarenus judgment Fisher's of Rochester p. 278. The words of Tolet p. 280. The thirteenth days Conference with a Sectary Of the great errors sin and danger which many Ignorant Professors fall into on the pretence of abhorring and avoiding Popery p. 283. The sins of such as Calumniate sound Teachers as favouring Popery p. 285. Errors vended by some Protestants through an injudicious opposition to
the moderatest that he * Vid. Episcopii Resp ad qu. 64. qu. 33. pag. 32. âbi dicit Deum decrevisse ut Judaei Christum e medio tolleren ex praescientia quod id liberâ voluntate facturi essent atque inde praedictiones certas natas esse decreed the event that Sin should come to pass ipso permittente quamvis non efficiente or at least that he decreed his permission of it B. I. The first sort are those few whom I in the beginning renounced of whom the Dominicans and good Dr. Twisse and Rutherford his Follower de providentia are the chief I easily confess to you that God made the Law and God made man and God maketh the Objects and God causeth the Act as a natural Act in genere by a natural general concourse And if it could be also proved that God were the chief efficient Determiner of the Will and that by necessitation to this Act or Object comparatively rather than to that e. g. that David willed the Acts which were Murder and Adultery I could never deny that God is the chief Author of the Sin For the formal reason of Sin is Relative viz. Its disconformity to the Law of God And the Relation resulteth without any new Act or Agent Posito fundamento omni absoluto And neither God nor Man do or can do more to cause the Relation And Dr. Twisse and Rutherford so far saw this that the up-shot of all their Vindication is 1. That God causeth not sin as sin but as a means to his Glory 2. That God is under no Law as we are and therefore can be no Author of Sin But to the first I answer It 's one thing to will Sin as Sin and another thing to cause Sin as Sin We charge them not with inferring that God willeth Sin as Sin but Nullus est Catholicus qui ignoret peccatum non esse effectum praedestinationis etiam si praedestinatus occasionem ex eo saepius capiat suae salutis Nam cum Deus causa peccati esse nequeat efficitur ut Deus peccatum nulla ratione praedestinare possit Neque actus ipse peccati secundum esse naturale non est effectus praedestinationis quamvis sit hoc modo effectus divinae voluntatis Vasquez in Tho. 1. q. 23. cap. 2. disp 93. if he will it and cause it for another end he causeth the formal nature of Sin that we may not play with the ambiguity of Quatenus and that 's as much as man doth For Sinners do not all if any will sin as sin under this formal notion as it is a breach of the Law of God and displeaseth him but as it bringeth them some seeming good And by doing evil for that good they are Sinners To the second we do not charge the Dominicans with making God a Sinner But with making him the chief cause of the sin of man even in its form II. But this is nothing to the Calvinists in general Therefore I say that your selves hold the same that they do in this point Q. 1. Do not all the Jesuites and Arminius hold That God is the Decreer of what he is the Author of And that God is the Author of the Act as an Act natural in the general See but Rob. Baronius his Metaphysicks and Bellarmine whom he followeth A. That is nothing to the moral specification of the Act. B. And Dr. Twisse hath oft enough told you where Arminius saith That God would have Ahab to fill up the measure of his Sin A. That is not that he willed the sin but that Ahab having made himself wicked God decreed not to stop him but let him go on B. Either you mean that the Object of Gods Decree was but his own permission as the Arminians use to say or else that it was the Sin it self matter and form permitted not because it is sin or evil for so man oft willeth it not at least but as an occasion of Gods Glory Arminius his words import the latter And then you go as high as Dr. Twisse or Rutherford But if you say that it was but a rash word of Arminius which you stand not to to make plain and short work with you I am so far from being liable to your charge that I charge you as presumptuous if not erroneous in saying that God decreeth or willeth to permit Sin And I assert 1. That God doth not Decree the form of Sin as Sin 2. Nor yet the event of that form for any good end For Ut peccatum eveniat is but peccatum futurum and what is it to decree Sin but to decree that it shall be Nor 3. Hath he decreed that this Act which is the Sin shall come to pass in its comparative circumstantiated state from whence it is that Sin in its form resulteth And so Augustines saying so much decantate by Dr. Twisse and others * As Bradwardine who also tells us That if God damn the Innocent his Will is the rule of justice and equity But I think they that so describe his Justice do rather think that none are damned than that the Innocent are or may be as an act of Justice whatever a meer Proprietor may do is not found that nothing cometh to pass but what God willeth either effecting it or permitting it It cometh to pass without Gods willing it or decreeing it so that he permitteth it but decreeth not that it shall come to pass Not that it is against his contrary absolute Decree but as Lombard from other places in Austin telleth you plainly God neither willeth that it shall be because it is sin nor properly and simply willeth that it shall not be for his Will is not overcome 4. Yea he cannot be proved to decree his own permission Because to permit is but not to hinder which is nothing but a negation And we have no ground to feign that God hath Volitions or Decrees of nothing or of negations So that I say that Sin cometh to pass without Gods Decree of the event or of his permission Though not without his Decree of the good which cometh by it of which more when I speak to the other extream And of this also more anon The third Crimination A. III. You make God necessitate mens sin and damnation by your negative decrees as well as others by their positive For you hold That no man can believe and repent but such as God decreeth to give Faith and Repentance to And no man can do any more good than God decreeth that he shall do And some say that God decreeth Not to give men any more Grace than he giveth them which is a Decree objectively negative de non dando And you and others say That he doth not Decree to give them more And so as a stone is not culpable for not flying no more are Sinners not elected for not believing and obeying God * Note what Vasquez granteth in 1. Tho. q. 23. a. 5.
have said to A. before and I think you favour them too much and make their Errors to seem smaller than they are B. Do you follow the same method that he did Begin with the same Point and suppose me an Arminian for this time and tell me the worst that you have against their Opinions not medling with the Pelagians who deny Original Sin nor with the rash or odd sayings of particular men and let us try how wide you can prove the difference here to be and whether all be not resolved into the Controversies of Grace and Free-will The first Crimination C. I. They destroy the comfort of the Faithful by * Episcop ubi postea p. 414. Nullo modo sequitur quod ad gloriam prius fuerant electi quam crederent denying that God did certainly and immutably elect individual persons to Salvation B. You mistake them They hold that he did certainly and immutably elect particular persons to Salvation They hold that he foreknoweth what motions means and circumstances will eventually take with mens Wills without such necessitation as is inconsistent with their liberty and that to certain persons he immutably decreeth to vouchsafe them all those means and motions and that he then fore-seeth that De certo numero electorum salvandorum de hoc opinionem Catharini Thomistarum c. vide in Vasqu in 1. Tho. q. 23. d. 101. c. 1 2 3. these will prevail and that they will believe yea decreeth that they shall thus prevail and so decreeth that all those persons shall be justified And in like manner that he fore-seeth what means and motions will prevail to their perseverance and that he decreeth to give them those means and motions and that by them they shall eventually presevere and shall infallibly be saved The moderate Jesuites and Arminians and Lutherans do maintain and will grant all this And all this is from eternity And is not here then an eternal ascertaining immutable Election of individuals The second Crimination C. II. * Qui habet gratiam efficacem ad conversionem aut fidem praeordinatus est ad conversionem et fidem Malderus 1. 2. q. 111. a. 3. p. 519. They feign an election of â Vid. Episcop Instit Theol. li. 4. sect 5. cap. 6. p. 413. Things instead of an election of Persons and say that Election is Gods Decree to make Faith the condition of Salvation And so they bring in an indefinite Election of Universals or Species of persons that God decreeth to save Believers damn Unbelievers B. Doth any Christian deny any of this * Restat ergo ut voluntates eligantur sed voluntas ipsa nise aliquid occurat quod delectet atque invitet animum moveri nullo mâdo potest Hoc autem ut occurrat non est in bominis potestate August lib. 1. ad Simplician q. 2. 1. That God hath de facto made Faith the condition of life is visible in the Gospel And what God did in time from eternity he decreed to do Therefore he decreed to make Faith the condition of life 2. That God hath in his Covenant made a Deed of Gift of Christ and Life to all true Believers and of Heaven to all that so persevere and that he hath promised to perform this Covenant is visible in the Scripture Therefore God decreed to do this from eternity even to justifie Believers and glorifie persevering Believers Make not the world believe that any of us question this But if you mean that they deny all other Decrees of Election and extend it not to individual persons you mistake them Read but Molina Suarez Vasquez Penottus and other Jesuites and you will see it And so you may in Arminius himself They hold an Election of Individuals as I last described it in the way of their scientia media besides the Election of Believers in general See also our Playfaire on the Point The third Crimination C. III. They deny any Decree or Will of God to give men the first special Grace effectually to make them believe and repent but only that he decreeth to give them sufficient Grace which their own Wills must make effectual * They commonly acknowledge a preventing operating Grace âquam Deus in nobis sine nobis operatur But the Ratio efficaciae is controverted among them B. Did not I tell you that all the Controversie of Predestination is resolved into that of effectual Grace Such Grace as he giveth men such he decreed to give them This all consess But what it is that denominateth Grace effectual we are to consider in its proper place Only let me here tell you that all will grant you of whom I now speak that God decreeth to give men that special Grace which shall cause them to repent and believe But on what terms and in what manner it so causeth it is afterward to be handled * See Ruiz de praedef d. 6. sect 4 5. proving Faith Perseverance c. to come from Gods Decree The fourth Crimination C. Their Doctrine de * Of this see more in the first Book scientia media on which they ground their Opinions of Gods Decrees is many ways injurious to God and is a fiction not to be made good B. 1. I doubt all sides are over temerarious in their distribution of Gods Decrees and Volitions But 1. All are agreed that ex parte Dei Volentis there is no real difference in his Volitions nor ex parte Dei scientis in his knowledge For so his Knowledge and Will are his Essence 2. All agree that ex parte objecti cogniti decreti there is a real difference 3. All must agree that in Gods Intellection and Volitions as denominated ab extra viz. ab objectis there is a relative or denominative difference 4. Ex parte objecti there is no man can question but that this Proposition If John have such and such means and helps he will believe doth differ from this Proposition It is convenient and good that John shall believe and from this John will believe 5. If you are against mincing Gods Knowledge into such scraps as these various objective Propositions do infer you must be against the old distinction into scientiam simplicis Intelligentiae scientiam purae visionis For no doubt but God knoweth all things how various soever unâ intuitu with one simple knowledge ex parte sui though it be by our weakness denominated many even innumerable ex relatione objectiva vol terminatione rei in quam transit Doth not God with one Act know Convenients Desirables and Futures And cannot I here copiously thetoricate against you for your first and second sort of Divine Knowledge as well as you do against them de scientia media 6. It is agreed that God knoweth all things to be what indeed they are and not otherwise 7. It is agreed that God knoweth not as man doth by Names Propositions or Syllogisms And yet that
God knoweth all Names Notions Propositions and Syllogisms with their modes as they are the measures organs or actings of Humane Understandings 8. â I refer the Reader to Blank de Concord lib. cum âecretis 1. Thes 25. c. where by citing their own words at large he proveth that the most famous and resolute Antiarminians were for this scientia media conditionata viz. Fr. Gomarrus Arminius's chief Antagonist in Mat. 11. 21. Antonius Walaeus loc com de sctent Dei pag. 160. Paulus Ferrius Scholast Orth. vindic p. 203 209 210. Besides Rob. Baronius Metaph. sect 12. disp 2. num 55 56. who in his last days was nearest to the Arminians as appeareth in those Metaphysicks And Jo. Strangius l. 3. c. 13. p 675. nameth also Lud. Crocius Dyodecad dis 7. It is therefore undeniable to all Christians that the thing which they call * Could Alvarez and his fellows well prove that the permission of the first sin is an effect of Reprobation as the word is used in a fit and ordinary sense they would do more to overthrow the Doctrine de scientia media circa malum than is yet done But they fail in their attempts of proving this Of which after scientia media is as certainly in God as is the scientia simplicis Intelligenâiae Purae visionis that is that God knoweth the truth of all true conditional Propositions and knoweth what would be done by such and such causes or upon such and such alterations if they were put Doth any Christian doubt of this 9. Whether this should be called scientia media is a question de nomine and that of no great importance and not at all de re 10. Whether it be of any necessity or use in this Controversie is a question only about the order of argumentation as long as the thing it self is confessed to be true 11. Some that cashier it as an useless Engine in this matter do go as far from you as the Jesuites and Arminians who use it As you may see at large in Ludov. Ã Dola and Durandus himself 12. I am one that fear Presumption both in their and your distributions of the Knowledge and Decrees of God and dread the taking of his Name in vain And one that think that we need not the notion of scientia media for our satisfactory explication of these matters But as the truth of the thing is confessed so if it be applied only to the Doctrine of Reprobation as it is commonly called and not at least always to the Doctrine of Election I see no untruth that it inferreth nor no real difference that it will prove between us The fifth Crimination C. They deny absolute Reprobation at least and say that God reprobateth no men but upon fore-sight of sin And so that he hath no Decree that men shall sin nor that he will permit them to sin nor that they shall do the act in particular which is sin As if God had not decreed the hardening of Pharaohs heart the sin of Sihon of Rehoboam of the Jews in killing Christ c. B. 1. I told you before Reprobation is a word that signifieth several acts You dare not but grant them that God decreeth or willeth to damn no man but for sin and as a Sinner And this is the same thing that they mean 2. If by Reprobation you mean Gods Decree to give them no Faith or Repentance 1. You must prove that God hath such a Decree or Will for a meer negation where not-decreeing or not-willing to give them Grace will do as much 2. All Christians must needs confess that God made a Covenant of Grace with fallen Mankind in Adam and Noah And that no man is now under the meer Obligations of the Law and Covenant of Innocency which saith Be perfect and live sin and die for ever And that there is some common mercy extended to all the World which obligeth them to repent in order to Salvation He subverteth Scripture and all experience that denieth this Therefore all must grant that God denieth no special Grace to any but the abusers of this common Grace And he decreeth to do but what he doth * Thus our Brittish Diviâes at Dârt in their suffrage on Ar. 3. at large Therefore the persons whom he decreeth to deny special Grace to are none but the abusers of common Grace or the rejecters of that special Grace when offered 3. If by Reprobation you mean Gods Will or Decree to permit them to sin and perish willfully 1. You can prove no such Decree or Will Because permission being a negation or nothing needs it not but will be as certainly without it upon a bare not decreeing to hinder them from sin 2. And you mistake in saying that Arminius denieth it For he * Arminius himself expresly professeth that in case God permits a man velle pâccatum necâsse est ut nullo argumentorum geneâe persuadeatur ad volendum Exam. Perk. pag. 153. Dr. Twisse against Hoord li. 1. pag. 70. saith with you That God decreeth his own permission 3. You must take the pains to distinguish between negative and privative Unbelief and between negative and privative not-hindring Sin or not-giving Faith Negative Unbelief is meer not-believing And so none of us did believe from eternity or before we were born He that is not believeth not nor yet in the first instant that the Promise and Law of Faith was given us Our unbelief is not sin or privative but on supposition that we are men and have reason and have a Law and Object of Faith And Gods permitting us in this negative Non-belief is not to be called a privative but only a negative permission For God did from eternity so permit me to be no man and no Believer and yet this was not Reprobation So God did negatively not hinder Adams first sin but not privatively because not penally for any evil done nor yet by denying him any thing that was naturally or morally his due Therefore this was not an Act of Reprobation But when the New Covenant of Grace and the common Grace of the Covenant are once given men and they are obliged to believe then sometimes God penally denieth them Grace and that is all which the Arâinians put against absolute denial because this denial is only for mens fore-going sin But he also still negatively only and not privatively or penally denieth some Grace to some yea to all And that is only such Grace as is neither morally their due nor naturally due or necessary to them And the denial of such is no Act of Reprobation 4. If by Reprobation you mean meerly Gods Preterition that is his âât-willing or not-decreeing to give men Grace 1. Not to Will or Decree is nothing And how can you call nothing absolute or conditional These are the modes of Acts and not of not-acting or of nothing All grant that Gods non-agency non-volition not-decreeing hath no cause much
Pardon and Salvation on condition they will repent and believe but he died moreover for the Elect to procure and give them Faith and Repentance also Know you not that Paraeus in his Irenicon saith That the Sins of all the World lay on Christ on the Cross as the cause of his Death Know you not that it is the commonest Doctrine of the Protestants That Christ died for all men as to the sufficiency of his death but for the Elect only as to the efficiency of Salvation And what can you say more or less than those few words signifie Know you not that the Synod at Dort it self saith That Christ's satisfaction is of infinite value and price abundantly sufficient to expiate the Sins of all the World and that the Promise is That whosoever believeth shall not perish And this is to be preached to all And that many yet repent not believe not but perish is not through any defect or insufficiency of Christ's Sacrifice but by their own default Musculus his words for Universal Redemption are Loc. Commun c. de Redemp Gen. hum p. mihi 326. c. Redemptio est generis humani Geââs humanum Complectitur non unam aut alteram Gentem sed mundum âniversum omnes viz. totius orbis nationes cunctos homines à primo usque ad novissimum Generaliter est omnium Scimus non omnes Redemptionis hujus fieri participes Verum illorum perditio qui non servantur haud quaquam impedit * It seems there were but few in Bradwardin's days who were of his mind in confessing the antecedent natural impossibility of any ones Salvation or any good act which cometh not to pass seeing li. 3. c. 29. p. 735. he answereth them that say why should the Opinion of a few trouble the Church and the far greater number that is against it by referring them to the paucity of wise men and Believers and saying that truth must be preached for the few Elect that will receive it And p. 737. tells us how Aristophanes contrary to the six Judges appointed by Ptolomy did adjudge the Crown to that Poet that the people liked worst quo minus Universalis vocetur Redemptio Resolutio illa telluris qua passim omnia ad germinandum astate solvuntur recte Universalis dicitur etiamsi multae arbores non germinent c. Anno Jubilâo Generalis omnium servorum liberatio erat etiamsi multi in servitute maâââtes gratiam liberationis respuebant Ad eum modum habet Redemptio istageneris humani Quod illam homines reprobi deploratè impii non accipiunt neque defectu fit Gratiae Dei neque justum est ut illa propter filios perditionis Gloriam ac titulum UNIVERS ALIS REDEMPTIONIS amittat cum sit parata cunctis omnes ad illam vocentur c. sic cuim cavebimus ne Catholicae Gratiae Gloriam obscuremus in arctum Constringamus vel cum phanaticis hominibus neminem prorsus damnari dicaâus Bullinger A. You may spare your labour of citing Bullinger and Musculus or Melanchthon or Bucer or such moderate men But what are they to the rigid Calvinists B. Calvin saith in Rom. 5. 18. Communem omnium gratiam facit quia omnibus exposita est Non quod ad omnes extendatur reipsa Nam si passus est Christus pro peccatis totius mundi atque omnibus Indifferenter Dei benignitate offertur non tamen omnes apprehendunt And in 1 Cor. 8. 11. Dictum memorabile quo docemur quam Chara esse debeat nobis fratrum salus nec omnium modo sed singulorum quando prounoquoque fusus est sanguis Christi And in 2 Pet. 2. 1. Non immerito dicuntur Christum abnegare à quo redempti sunt And in 1 Joh. 2. 2. He saith That qui dicunt Christum sufficienter pro toto mundo passum esse sed pro elect is tantum efficaciter say true and that which commonly obtaineth in the Schools though he otherwise expound that Text. A. You need not cite Calvin Grotius said truly that he had his Lucida intervalla and though Amyraldus seek to defend him from self-contradiction Petavius calls him all to nought for it But what can you say for your high Antiarminians such as Paraeus Molinaeus c. B. Paraeus let all mark it saith Irenic cap. 24. pag. 142. Quod Christus pro solis electis satisfecit ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã est vel falsa accusatio Omnium peccata Christus portavit dissolvit expiavit si magnitudinem pretii seu ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sufficientiam spectemus Non omnium sed tantum fidelium si ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã efficaciam fructum applicationem To which he citeth Ambrose Innocent Lyra adding Juxta hunc intellectum nulla est dissensio Art 6. itidem ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã est vel falsa accusatio Promissiones Gratiae sunt Universales pertinentque ad omnes quoad praedicationem invitationem mandatum credendi And on 2 Pet. 2. 1. Erant Redempti respectu sufficientiae ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. Molinaeus Anatom Arminianis saith cap. 27. sect 8 9. When we say that Christ died for all men we take it thus that the Death of Christ is sufficient to save whosoever do believe yea and that it is sufficient to save all men if all men in the whole World did believe in him And that the cause why all men are not saved is not in the insufficiency of the Death of Christ but in the wickedness and incredulity of man Finally Christ may be said to reconcile all men to God by his Death after the same manner that we say the Sun doth enlighten the eyes of all men though many are blind many sleep and many are hid in darkness c. That most methodical acute Divine Georg. Sohnius saith Tom. 1. Thes de Justific mihi pag. 104. Satisfactio illa justitia pro omnium temporum hominibus omnium hominum peccatis peccatorum omnium cum culpa tum poena sufficit quia ab infinita persona dependet Matth. 18. 11. 12. 31. Rom. 5. 18. 8. 32. 2 Cor. 5. 15. 1 Tim. 2. 6. 1 Joh. 1. 7. 2. 2. Tit. 2. 14. Errant igitur qui Christum pro omnibus hominibus passum esse negant A. But such violent men as Zanchy the grand Patron of the impossibility of falling away talk not at this rate B. Zanchy saith Thes Vol. 3. fine Thes 13. 16. de Volunt Dei Eadem de causa dici non potest Dei voluntatem proprie simpliciter fuisse ut Christus pro salute omnium moreretur id est ut omnis per ejus mortem servaretur ac proinde Christum secundum propositum patris pro salute omnium mortuum esse sed tantum ut loquuntur sufficienter Caeterum damnari etiam illi non possunt qui spectata revelata voluntate Dei docent Deum velle omnes homines salvos
fieri Christum pro salute omnium hominum mortuum esse neutrum velle peccatum cum haec omnia sint verissima And de Relig. Christ fid cap. 12. Thes 2. Credimus Mar. 16. 16. licet omnibus hominibus per Evangelii praedicationem Gratia Redemptionis salus ac vita aeterna à Deo dispensanda serio proponantur quod enim permulti hujus non siunt participes ipsorum sit vitio culpa reipsa tamen non communicari nisi electis vocatis A. What ever these hold I am sure your English Calvinists hold otherwise B. Have you not read Bishop Usher's Tract for Universal Redemption Have you not read Davenant's Dissert de morte Christi so oft mentioned Have you not read the Life of Dr. Preston and how in the Dispute with Dr. White he maintained Universal Redemption Mr. William Fenner in his Hidden Manna brings in Cain saying Christ died not for me c. and answereth Mentiris Cain Christ died for thee It would be too long to cite all D. Rob. Abbot de Verit. Grat. Christi pag. 35 36 37. Huic disputatiâni dabit initium Ambrosis Sententia in Luc. c. 7. l. 6. Etsi Christus pro omnibus passus est specialiter tamen pro nobis passus est Quibus verbis apertè significat ita Christum pro omnibus mortuum ut tamen in morte Christi hand omnes pares existimandi sunt Communiter quidem pro omnibus mortuum viz. pro omnibus satisfacere voluisse dignitate pretii esto Christum in promiscuo sensu generis humani se aliquo modo pro Judae dedisse c. Neque enim Christus qua homo partitionem hominum vel discretionem ullam instituit ut quemquam dici possit à mortis suae beneficio excepisse qui hac quidem ratione pro persequentibus crucifigentibus promisono patrem rogat nostro quod sit exemplo Quod certe dolere non potnisset nisi pro illis quoque quantum ex homine crucem obire statuisset I told you before what Dr. Twisse saith twenty times over That Christ died to purchase Pardon for all if they will believe conditionally but for the Elect to purchase them also Faith it self The Annotations called the Assemblies say on Heb. 10. 29. Sanctified by the Blood By which their sins were pardoned in regard of that meritorious sufficient Satisfaction purchased by it Abundance more I could easily cite A. But they do but juggle and cheat the World with the Vizor of a Doctrine that cannot endure the Light For by sufficiens pretium some say they mean but sufficiens si pretium fuisset and no price at all B. Those be but a few odd conceited persons driven by you into extreams They profess that Christ hath sufficiently satisfied for all and purchased them effectually a conditional Pardon They call not that a sufficient price and satisfaction which is none at all A. But we agree not as to Gods intent of the benefits to all B. 1. That concerneth the Decrees 2. The sober * Quod ad magnitudinem potentiam pretii quod ad unam pertinet causam generis humani sanguis Christi est redemptio totius mundi sed qui hoc seculum sine fide Christi sine regenerationis sacramento pertranseunt Redemptionis alieni sunt Cum ergo per unam omnium naturam omnium causam a Domino nostro in veritate susceptam redempti recte omnes dicantur non tamen omnes captivitate sunt eruti Redemptionis proprietas haud dubium penes illos est qui sunt membra a Christi This of August Rivet approveth of disp 6. de Remp. p 100. But it 's cleaâ that by Redemption in the last part August meaneth actual liberatition from Captivity which no doubt is proper to the Elect. Papists agree and say just the very same as the Synod See Estius in 3. Sent. d. 19. sect 3. Tapperus Art 6. Malderus Antisynod p. 23 24. Fr. Sonnius demonstr Relig. Christ l. 3. c. 19. â Vid. Vasquez To. 1. in 1. disp 97. c. 2. 3. Rivet citeth these Disp 6. de Redempt And he himself makes Christ's death even partly effectual for all And will you be more contentious and violent than all the sober Papists and Calvinists Know * Saith Vasquez in 1. Tho. q. 23. a. 8. d. 95. c. 3. Cum omnes simul essemus eodem modo in primo parente damnati eandem sententiam subituri non omnes sed quidam ex illa coââuni massa fuimus separati gratia congrua efficaci usque ad finem vitae ergo quidam fuimus prae aliis electi sed gratia qua fuimus separati ne cum aliis damnati maneremus suit per Christum ergo per Christum a communi massa electi sumus Quod si ita in âââpore factum est nemo ambigat in praescientia âodem modo fuisse decretum Neque vero ut quispiam sit causa eligendi aliquem ex multis damnatis apus est ut ipse ità sit causa relinquendi alios obnoxios poenae c. Christus causa suit nostra electionis ut non-nulli potius eligerentur quam alii Quia peculiari ratione merita sua ipsis applicavit pro eis oravit ex iis qui post incarnationem ejus fuerunt ego non dubito Christum peculiari oratione voluntate merita sua illis applicesse qui predestinati electi fuerunt ac propterea eos potius quam alios electos predestinââos fuisse De quibusdam hoc certissimum est Luc. 22. Christus oravit pro Petro c. Et. Joh. 1â Non pro mundo rogo sed c. Quis autem âââ are audeat Christum hac oratione vere meruisse Apostolis gratiam congruam efficacem qua usque in finem perseverarent c. you not how excellently our British Divines in the Synod of Dort have opened this and as well the three Breme Divines but above âll most clearly and briefly the learned Matthius Martinius there But I will name no more when it is the whole of the famous Dallaeus his Apolog. Cont. Spanhem Part. 4. To. 1. to shew the consent of Protestants herein And when his whole Second Tomeâ is to cite the very words of an hundred and twenty Fathers and Councils for Universal Redemption and Grace Theophylact being the last and sixty three Protestant Churches and Writers that speak for it to whom I could add many more A. If this be so how cometh it to be a Controversie B. A few particular men on each side that run into extreams when once engaged run on further and make a great noise while sober men in silence pity them And so with some the greatest and the lowdest are taken to speak the common sense And thus Spanhemius Maccoviâs and a few much inferior to them in learning here in England have kept up the Contention And several of the Jesuites Lutherans
equally prepared as he did on Saul Doth he call all to follow him as effectually ex parte sui as he did Peter Andrew c. who presently left all and followed him Did Christ himself preach to all Nations or only to the Circumcision Were not the sins of the Jews as much aggravated as those of Tyre and Sidon Sodom and Gomorrah or the Indians why else should it go worse with them in the day of Judgment and why else would Tyre and Sidon have repented if they had but had their means were they not then as much prepard for mercy Doth God equally send the Gospel to all Nations and Persons equally unworthy Can you confute St. Paul Rom. 9. Or can you give any reason why God must shew equal mercy unto all A. Yes because else he is a respecter of persons * Ruiz a Jesuite confesseth de Vol. Dei disp 20. sect 6. p. 226. That according to Augustine Christ so died for all as that he had a special intent of saving his Elect for whose sake as being among the rest it is that he died and prayed for all in common Aug. in Tract 31. in Joan. c. 7. Non debebant desperare pro quibus Dominus in cruce pendens dignatus est or are videbat quosdam suos inter multos alienos Illis jam petebat veniam a quibus adhuc accipiebat injuriam Non enim attendebat quod ab ipsis moriebatur sed quia pro ipsis moriebatur He that would know Augustines mind herein may find it fully in Jansenius or in the Trias Patrum de gratia c. B. I fully confuted this before 1. Respecting persons is the fault of a Rector as such especially as Judge And so God dealeth equally his Law being Norma officii judicii as to all But no man ever yet took either 1. A Proprietor Dominus absolutus 2. Or a Benefactor to be obliged to equality to all Must you needs use all your Grounds Trees Goods Cattel c. equally Must you needs make all men equally your bosom-Friends your Heirs your Beneficiaries who are equally worthy in themselves Must you needs give equally to all the poor that are of equal need and merit All this is contrary to the common sense and usage of Mankind 2. And in a Judge respecting persons is the vice of them that deal unequally with men for some by-respect unworthy of such a difference As for Birth Beauty Wealth Power Eloquence Parts Wit Kindred or any selfish interest to pervert Justice or deal partially But God maketh no difference on such accounts Yea a Judge himself or a King when he acteth not as a Judge but as a King above Laws or as a Benefactor may reprieve or pardon one Thief rather than an other yea and choose that which is the most learned strong wise and capable of future Service to the Common-wealth A. This seemeth a wrong to the rest that are not so used B. Would it do the Thief that is hanged any good to have the other unpardoned Would it ease their pains in Hell to have the company of all those that be in Heaven If it be no wrong to them to suffer themselves nothing but envy can call it a wrong to them to have others escape Had they love to others as themselves it would be some comfort to them to think that others are in Joy and Glory A. At least this is a real difference between the Parties B. 1. The School-men and many learned Jesuites as I have proved Lib. 1. make it not a difference And will you called Arminians or Lutherans go further from your Protestant Brethren than the learned Papists and Jesuites themselves go Are you not ashamed of this 2. The Papists can bear with one another in these Points and live in communion in one Church though the Jansenists Case hath had more than ordinary heats and stirs And yet the Dominicans go higher and further in the Controversie of Predetermination from the Jesuites than the Synodists do And are you more fierce or unpeaceable than they 3. But remember here once for all that you were not able to name any one benefit which Christ's death procured for all other than the Synodists hold as well as you But only you charge them as asserting more to the Elect. They give more you say to some but not less to all 4. And all this lieth in the point of Intention and Divine Decrees which was sufficiently reconciled before But you have by all this entised me to mingle various Controversies and to anticipate that of Grace and Free-will which is to be handled by it self in due place But I have a word more to give you by way of caution if you will think on it A. What 's that B. What will you say if Episcopius Arminius Corvinus are the men that deny most Universal Redemption while the Synod maintaineth it How can Christ die for the sins of any Infants in proper sense if they have no sin and deserve no punishment Or be a Saviour to save them from sin and punishment that have none The second Crimination A. By denying common Redemption they deny the express words of 1 Joh. 4. 14. ãâ¦ã guish of the phrase of dying for us that we may not cheat our selves by confounding things that differ To die for us or for all is to die for our benefit or for the benefit of all Now these benefits are of a different nature whereof some are bestowed only conditionally though for Christs sake and they are the pardon of sin and Salvation These God doth confer only on the condition of Faith and Repentance Now I am ready to profess and that I suppose as out of the mouth of all our Divines that every one who heareth the Gospel without distinction between Elect and Reprobate is bound to believe that Christ died for him so far as to procure both the pardon of his sins and Salvation in case he believe and repent But there are other benefits that Christ merited for us viz. Faith and Repentance c. Twisse against Hord li. 1. p. 154. Scripture which saith That Christ tasted death for every man Heb. 2. 9. That he is the Saviour of the World Joh. 4. 12. That he is the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the World Joh. 1. 29. That he died for all that they which live should live to him that died for them 2 Cor. 5. 14 15. That God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself 2 Cor. 5. 19 20. That he is the Saviour of all men especially of them that believe 1 Tim. 4. 10. That the Grace of God which bringeth Salvation to all men hath appeared Tit. 2. 11 12. That he is the Propitiation for our Sins and not for ours only but for the sins of the whole World 1 Joh. 2. 2. with much more to the same purpose And do these men deal sincerely with God and the Scripture that can distort all
this to their own sense And do they not use such violence with Gods Word and their Consciences as that on these terms they may make their own Religion and believe what they list Do they not plainly shew that they take not their Faith from God but from their Teachers and believe as the Church believeth which they joyn with Had it been but one or two Texts or had they been obscurely uttered a good man might have thought that he must reduce their sense to the many and more plain But to oppugn the plain Gospel it self hath no exâuse B. You are sharp against other mens Errors and other men against yours But I have proved to you that the Synod and the generality of the Protestant Churches in their Confessions deny not any thing which these Texts say They hold a common Redemption as well as you our very Children are taught in their Catechism distinctly to believe 1. In God the Father who made them and all the World 2. In God the Son who redeemed them and all Mankind 3. And in God the Holy Ghost who sanctifieth them and all the Elect People of God This is the good old Doctrine plain and true and that which Austin taught A. I am sure many of their Writers expresly oppugn common Redemption and even Jasenius the Papist who joyneth with them denieth it and saith that Augustine denied it Therefore we stand not to his authority B. 1. As for Augustine and some Protestants they oft deny that Christ redeemeth any but the Faithful because the word Redemption is ambiguous and sometimes taken for the price or ransome paid and often for the very liberation of the captive Sinner And when ever Austin denieth common Redemption he taketh Redemption in this last sense for actual deliverance But he asserteth it in the first sense that Christ died for all Yea he thought his death is actually applied to the true Justification and Sanctification of some Reprobates that fall away and perish though the Elect only are so redeemed as to be saved Read your self Augustine Prosper and Fulgentius and you will see this with your own eyes 2. I have oft told you it is our Protestant Confessions and not some singular or private Writers that you must know their Doctrine by 3. Even those few Writers differ more from you in terms than in sense For 1. Many of them will confess all the same benefits by Christ to men in common which you assert Few of them will deny that Salvation is tendered to all mens acceptance and brought to the choosing or refusing of their own Wills And you seem to them to say no greater matters as for the Elect. But they say that Christ purchased Faith it self for the Elect only of which in due place 2. And so with them the Controversie is 1. About Gods Decree or Intent of saving men by Christ 2. And of giving them Faith Tell me one word that you except against in the Synod in this Article A. I except against sect 8. where they say that Fuit hoc Dei patris liberrimum consilium gratiosissima voluntas atque intentio ut mortis pretiosissimae filii sui vivifica salvifica efficacia sese exereret in omnibus electis ad eos solos fide justificante donandos per eam ad salutem infallibiliter perducendos hoc est voluit Deus ut Christus per sanguinem crucis quo novum foedus confirmavit ex omni populo gente tribu lingua eos omnes solos qui ab aeterno ad salutem electi a patre ipsi dati sunt efficaciter redimeret fide donaret ab omnibus peccatis sanguine suo mundaret ad finem usque fideliter custodiret tandem absque omni labe macula gloriosos coram se sisteret B. Very good This is all in the Canons that you can except against And 1. You see that this is only about Gods Intention or Decree And so you differ not at all by your own confession in the Article of Redemption as distinct from that of the Decrees 2. Is it the inclusion of the Elect in this Intention that you except against So will no sober Jesuite Do you think that Christ was resolved certainly to justifie and glorifie no man at all The Semipelagians will not say so You say not so your selves Only some of you say it is but upon fore-sight of Faith and by the consequent will of which I have said enough before But do you think that Christ when he was on the Cross had no full purpose to save those infallibly * Episcopius in Institut Theol. li. 4. cap. 5. pag. 410. confesseth that the opinion of Election may consist with that of universal Grace which he propugned who he fore-knew would believe yea and to cause some men to believe Those that come to him are drawn by the Father and Faith is the Gift of God Ephes 2. 8. Who giveth us all things pertaining to life and godliness 2 Pet. 1. 3. Even to will and to do of his good pleasure Phil. 2. 13. To some it is given to believe Phil. 1. 29. But of this enough before 3. But I suppose it is only the word Solos in all the Canons that you except against And dare or will you say that God did absolutely intend and decree to sanctifie and glorifie all men by Christ or any one that is not glorified A. But their meaning is that all the rest which are most of the World are left out of Gods Election even unto sin and damnation meerly because God would so have it and not from any ill desert of theirs any more than was in the Elect which appeareth in that as Episcopius noteth â Instit Theol. l. 4. cap. 5. sect 5. p. 410. They that say the Fall or Sin is quid praevisum fore-seen in Reprobation yet deny that it is any * The Jesuites themselves as Vasquâz and many others ordinarily say that nothing in man can be any cause of Gods Decrees cause of Reprobation And then all cometh to one whether God reprobate a Sinner or an innocent person as to the cause B. You have nothing about Redemption I perceive still to controvert but about Gods Decrees If we must go back to them review your words and see how you cheat your selves into distast of you know not what by meer confusion for want of accurate Scholastick Heads I except not Episcopius himself notwithstanding men of his own measure think otherwise 1. Whereas you talk of leaving out either you mean non-Election or positive exclusion If the last it 's false not only the Scotists but some Protestants as Ferrius in Scholast Orthodox and others assert but a negation here And Davenant and the Synod assert but a negative Decree quoad objectum which is but as much as Arminius propugneth who while he maintaineth that God decreeth not sin but only his own permission of sin which is the Synods sense
Universal Grace which is the very express Covenant of Grace it self that all men are already through Christs satisfaction reconciled to God and pardoned if they will believe or that a conditional pardon is already given to the World And to deny this is to deny the Gospel and Christianity it self and to be no Christians B. You would make your selves and others believe that they deny that which they never dreamed of denying Like him that dreamed that he was wounded and call'd out for something to stop the blood Do not all Protestaents profess to believe that Covenant and conditional Pardon as well as you Do they not preach it constantly and administer Baptism in the same terms as you do who denieth that all are reconciled if they will believe A. But by that they mean only exclusively that all are not reconciled or pardoned because all believe not And not inclusively that all men are conditionally pardoned already B. You mistake and slander them Do they not read the very express pardon made already in Gods Word That Whoever believeth shall not perish c. Joh. 3. 16. Mark 16. 16 Do they not all acknowledge that this is a Law of God an Act of Oblivion Enacted long ago by God And is not this visible written Promise or Law of Grace an existent conditional pardon of all No man of sense and understanding and faith denieth it A. But they say that in making it Gods secret intent was that none but the Elect should have any saving benefit of it * What say others less Malderus in 1. 2. q. 111. a. 3. d. 5. p. 486. Cum de Redemptore dando Deus constituisset ut secerneret illos quos elegit eum rerum ordinem elegit in quo certi quos voluit homines a reliquis discernerentur cosque pro beneplacito suo ad nullum bonum usum liberi arbitrii respiciens ad vitam aeterâam praedestinavit talemque tis gratiam decrevit cum qua certissimo infallibiliter ad regnum pervenirent Reliquos autem qui ex illo numero non sunt reliquit non quidem sint omni auxilio Gratiae sicut juste potuisset propter Adae peccatum sed cum auxiliis gratiae secundi Adae ad ipsos derivandis in ordine ac cursu rerum jam electo Et videns scieâtia visionis hos in peccato vitam finire reprobavit eos statuit in aeternum punire a regno excludere Thus the Jesuites ordinarily And what is here considerably different from the Synod of Doât If the name of sufficient Grace be the quarrel call it Gratia efficax ad posse and all is ended B. 1. Still you are returning to the dispatched Controversie of the Decrees which is a confession that you disser not otherwise about Redemption 2. Do not you your selves hold the same which you quarrel with 1. Inclusively they hold that the Elect shall be saved by Christ And do you deny it 2. As to the exclusion of others they hold that God decreed not any mans Infidelity and Sin but fore-seeing their Infidelity and Sin decreed that they should not be saved by Christ but perish And do not you say the same Away with these contentious dreams A. I am sure I can name you divers that say otherwise B. It is the Synod still and the common Confessions and Doctrine of the Churches which you have to do with Tell not me of singular men The Doctrine of the Church of England I told you out of the Catechism The Synods words I recited And remember as Dallaeus tells Spanhemius that Davenant with the rest of the British Divines Martinius and the other Breme Divines who all gave their suffrages and writ for Universal Redemption did yet all subscribe in the Synod And therefore undoubtedly understood that no words of the Canons were contrary to their sense of Universal Redemption The later famous Helvetian confession saith We teach and believe that this Jesus Christ our Lord is the only and eternal Saviour of Mankind yea and of the whole world upon which words the English Collector of the Confessions giveth us a ridiculous Observation that he thinks they meant the restoring of the world at last contrary to the context As if he had not known that Musculus Bullinger c. were for Universal Redemption But that I be not over-tedious I pray you peruse in Dallaei Apolog. To. 2. the citations out of the Confessions and Catechisms and Liturgies of the Reformed Churches viz. Of Berne August Bohem. Helvert Saxon. Anglic. Palatin Synod Dord Colloq Torun with a multitude of Protestant Divines The fourth Crimination A. They make it impossible for any man to believe in Christ at first by a rational and true Faith For his dying for men being the Object of Faith must be before the Act. And no man by their way can know that Christ died for him till he is a Believer and yet they say that our first saving Faith must be a believing and trusting in Christ as one that died for us So that men must stay till they believe that Christ died for them that they may have reason to believe that he died for them For before the first Faith or belief of it they can have none B. You still make the world believe that men hold that which they do not This concerneth not the Churches but some singular men The common Protestant Doctrine is That Christ by his Death hath procured the universal conditional Gift of Pardon and Life contained in the Covenant of Grace Mark 16. 16. Joh. 3. 16 c. And that his death was thus far efficient by which it is sufficient for the actual Justification and Salvation of penitent Believers And that this is it that men must first believe and so accept of an offered Saviour for Justification and Life and give up themselves to him in the baptismal Covenant which when they do they are justified and adopted having right to and union with Christ and in him right to the Covenant-benefits And then Christ's death which was sufficient by its efficiency of Satisfaction Merit and the Covenant-grant becometh efficient of Justification c. And are not you and they agreed in this I confess that many singular Divines have given you this occasion But what 's that to the Churches The fifth Crimination A. They tell men that they must believe a Lye or an unrevealed thing that by believing it it may become true and they may be saved and ese they shall be damned For they say that Christ died for none but the Elect And yet that others also are bound to believe that he died for them And because they believe not this Lye God will damn them But if they did believe it it would be true As if the Objective Truth were not before the belief of it B. This also is but your quarrel with singular men and not with the Churches unless you wrong them Their common Doctrine is that no man
scope of the Gospel must not be reduced to your feigned sense of one obscurer Text. 2. But doth the Text tell us that he died not for the world as it tells us that he prayed not for them Or doth it tell us that he died for no more than he then prayed for Or rather are not these your own Inventions 3. But where doth the Text say that Christ never prayed for any but the Elect yea or that he prayed not at all for the world though he put not up that particular prayer for the world Look on the Text and you will see that he speaketh there only of the Disciples that followed him on Earth And that he prayed not in that Petition for all his Elect only And therefore he after addeth vers 20. Neither pray 1 for these alone but for them also which shall believe in me through their word And what was the prayer That they may be one and kept from the evil of the world which is a blessing peculiar to his Disciples But it is manifest that Christ had other prayers for the world even for many ungodly men yea for Reprobates For 1. On the Cross he prayeth for his Persecutors Father forgive them And it is mens own invention to say that he meaneth none but the Elect We must not unnecessarily limit where the Word limiteth not And Stephen made Christ his Pattern And it is gross fiction to say that Stephen prayed for none but the Elect. C. Doth not Christ say That his Father heard him always and can you imagine that he prayed for that which God denied him B. 2. My next Answer should have prevented that Objection which is that what God giveth to the World for Christ's sake that Christ may well be said to pray for For it is the fruit of his Mediation But God giveth much Pardon and many Mercies to the World for Christ's sake 1. He giveth them an Act of Oblivion of conditional pardon of the eternal punishment which Christ purchased and therefore prayed for * Ambros de Paradis c. 8. Venerat Dominus Jesus omnes salvos sacere peccatores etiam circa impios ostendere suam debuit voluntatem ideo nec proditurum debuit praeterire ut adverterent omnes quod in electione etiam proditoris suâ servandorum omnium insigne praetendit Quod in Deo fuit ostendit omnibus quod omnes voluit liberare Nec tamen dico quia praevaricationem nesciebat futuram immo quia sciebat assero Sed non ideo pertuntis proditoris invidiam in se debuit derivare ut ascriberetur Deo quod uterque sit lapsus Chrysost Tom. 3. hom 9. de land Pauli Ipse quidem vult omnes salves sieri at non omnium voluntas ejus voluntati obsequitur neque ab to aliquis cogitur unde ad Jerusalem c. Deus paratus est ad salvandum hominem non involuntarium neque non volentem 2. He giveth them much Actual pardon of temporal punishments for Christ's sake All the Life Health Time Gospel Means and Mercies which ever he giveth them are such as deserved full punishment would have deprived them of And therefore they are all acts of executive pardon of that punishment 3. And this very Chapter containeth a prayer for the World viz. vers 21 23. That the World may believe and know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them If you say that by the World here is meant only the Elect I answer 1. Your word is no Proof 2. That they are prayed for to believe and know c. is no proof For many did believe that God sent Christ that yet were not saved This soundeth but as a common Act of Faith 3. And note that here the world is contradistinguished not only from Apostles but those after-mentioned that should believe by their word and it is prayed That the world may know that God loveth those that believe in him which may extend both to the Conversion of such as then are unconverted and to the conviction of others such as are the common members of the visible Church at least As the Spirit is sent to convince the world of Sin and Righteousness and Judgment 4. And it is not to be granted you without proof that by the World is meant all Reprobates as such For Judas is before distinguished from the World as one given to Christ when yet he was a Reprobate But either it may be the World of present Unbelievers whom Christ prayeth for else-where though not there Or the World of final professed Infidels and Enemies of the Church as distinct from both Elect and Reprobate in the Church And several expressions of Christ's before of the Worlds hating and persecuting his Apostles seem not applicable to every Hypocrite who prophesieth and casteth out Devils in his Name and perhaps suffereth for his Truth and excellently defendeth it and hath some love to Believers The fifth Crimination C. They make Christ to merit only Pardon and Salvation to Believers but not to have purchased Faith it self for any man And by that way no one that he died for would be saved For Faith is the necessary Gift of God And if Christ purchased not that all the rest would be in vain B. 1. Let us not here confound the Controversie de nomine de re That Christ died to purchase the Act of Faith for us is no Scripture-phrase so far as I know If therefore it be only the phrase which they refuse you may well bear with them But as to the matter they do not deny any of these things 1. That Christ is the Author and Perfecter of our Faith as Faith signifieth the Christian Religion or the Objects and Doctrine of Faith 2. That our own actual and habitual Faith is the Gift of God Though the controversies about the manner of giving it are to be afterward decided 3. That all that Christ giveth his Sacrifice procured and therefore it procured Faith All this is commonly granted by most School-men Papists Lutherans and moderate Arminians But 2. It must be considered that Christ did not die to purchase Faith as immediately and on the same account as to satisfie for Sin and purchase us impunity or Redemption The proper direct reason of his Sufferings was to demonstrate the Justice of God against Sin instead of mans own suffering for it and thereby to procure Pardon We may well conceive Christ promising to the Father as it were I will suffer for Sinners that they may not suffer But you will hardly describe his Undertaking thus I will die if thou will give men Faith or I will give thee so much of my Blood for so much Faith But because he knew that without Grace no man would believe and accept his Gift therefore he whose Sufferings were primarily satisfaction for Sin were secondarily meritorious of the means to bring men to the intended ând that is of the Word and Spirit by which Christ causeth Sinners to
believe so that Faith is a fruit of the Death of Christ in a remoter secondary sense And in all this Name me any Christian Churches that are disagreed C. To bring it only to a mans free will whether he will believe or not is not to give him Faith and to purchase no more is not to purchase it B. Do you not perceive that here you divert to the Controversies of the Decrees and of effectual Grace Of the first we have said enough already of the other after in due place The sixth Crimination C. They feign Christ to purchase only a conditional Pardon Justification and Salvation and so to leave it uncertain to the corrupt Will of man whether any shall be saved or not B. This also concerneth the Decrees and is fully answered before 1. That Christ hath purchased and God given a conditional Act of Oblivion or Pardon and Life to all is the very Gospel it self and to be questioned by no Believers 2. None of them all do suppose Christ to die at uncertainties as to the success for they suppose that he fore-knew the success from eternity 3. They suppose not that the success was undecreed For they that presuppose fore-sight of mans concurrence yet assert an * Episcop Instit Theol. l. 4. sect 5. cap. 6. Certum est posito decreto conditionato omnes ac singulos qui vel ad vitam electi sunt vel ad mortem reprobati recte ab aeterno praedestinatos dici posse debere eternal Decree of his Conversion upon such fore-sight And it is not on the fore-sight of Faith that they say God decreeth to give men Faith but on fore-sight that the will of the Sinner will concur or not obstinately resist the Spirit that is drawing him to believe And the Jesuites and Arminians by their Scientia media do hold God to be the chief cause of mens believing For they say That God foreseeing that man will believe if he have such a measure of help and such means and circumstances doth freely decree to give him that help of the Spirit and those means by which he knoweth it will be done So that here is no uncertainty but different thoughts of the ascertaining decrees and ways 4. And lib. 1. I have shewed you that not only the Schoolmen but Bellarmine Ruiz Suarez and many of the most famous Jesuites do assert effectual Grace to be such both ex voluntate operantis and ex vi operationis absolutely And where then is this feigned difference The seventh Crimination C. They make Christ to do no more for Peter than for Judas for those in Heaven than for those in Hell while they say that he died equally for all B. * Vasq in 1. Thom. q. 23. a. 8. disp 94. c. 2. Perantiqua Theologorum sententia quam ego Catholicam existimo est non solum Christum nobis meritum ut a Deo diligeremur praedestinaremur per gratiam ejus ad gloriam sed etiam ut eligeremur ex massa perditionis electione gratiae suae Note that he speaketh only of the effect of Gods Decree and so it is all one as to say that differencing Grace is merited by Christ which is that which you would have Equality here is meant either of his Intention or of the benefits given Those benefits are of several sorts 1. No doubt but they err who feign God equally to decree and Christ to intend the eventual absolute Salvation of all 2. And they err that say that he bestoweth equal benefits on all even in this life yea antecedently to mans Will But the New Covenant or conditional Promise doth equally as to the tenor of it give Pardon and Right to Life to all But who is it that holdeth this equality of Intention or Benefit Not the greater part of the School-men or other Papists no not the learnedst Jesuites Not the Lutheran Churches But some few Arminians that run into one extream as you do into the other Nay how can they hold an equality of Intention when they confess that upon foreknowledge of their Unbelief the condemnation of many was eternally decreed C. Yes they hold that antecedently to fore-sight Gods Intention is equal B. 1. That fore-sight it self is from eternity 2. Who can frame out Orders of antecedency in the mind of God between his fore-sight and his Will without confessing great darkness and impropriety of Speech 3. And he that first giveth man to believe and will doth not first foresee that he will believe and will before he decree to give it him The eighth Crimination C. They make Christ's sheep to know him before he know his sheep that is to believe before he decree to give them Faith B. This is but the same in sense with what is before answered And it belongeth to the controversie of Gods Decrees They all say that God decreeth to give them sufficient Grace to enable them to believe before he fore-seeth their belief And most say more as is aforesaid The ninth Crimination C. Some of them say that Christ's Death did actually deliver * Vid. Episcop Resp ad qu. 64. qu. 38. supposing the Salvation of all that die in Infancy all men in the World from the guilt of Original Sin and so that none perish for Original Sin because what Adam did Christ undid B. You can name no Church that doth hold such Doctrine And we have nothing to do with singular odd Persons 1. Millions were unborn when Christ died and were not guilty of Original sin till afterwards and therefore were not capable of Pardon 2. The Papists who damn unbaptized Infants cannot be of that Opinion 3. What Adam brought upon us Christ did deliver us from upon his terms and in his way and by his degrees but not immediately He hath given all men a conditional Pardon of Original Sin as he hath done of Actual and no other The Unregenerate are under the guilt of all Sin whatsoever 4. But it is certain that no man except Infants doth perish for Original Sin alone For all men at age have other sins And it being certain that God offereth all men a recovery or remedy mediately or immediately it is certain that Infants perish not meerly for Adam's sin iâputed as a remediless evil but that their non-liberation or not being pardoned and saved is long of their Parents Unbelief and not entering them into the Covenant of God who is the God of the Faithful and their Seed The tenth Crimination C. They make Christ to have died for the Serpents Seed against whom the enmity is proclaimed when the new Covenant was first made Gen. 3. 15. B. 1. If by the Serpents Seed you mean such as are Gods Enemies no doubt but Christ died for them Rom. 5. 1. to 12 c. What need reconciliation else 2. If by the Serpents Seed you mean Reprobates as such you can never prove it to be the meaning of the Text. 3. If you mean fore-seen final
Deum quoque Affectus nostros partem illam sensitivam corrigere bonis desideriis quorum objecta monstrat intellectuo actus vero imperat voluntas afficere Quibus affectibus magis magisque correctis castigatis in ordinem redactis promptior facilior ac minus impedita postmodum redditur voluntas ad exerâendos pietatis actus non usque adeo ut ante reluctantibus affectibus lege illa in membris belligerante Qui asserunt eum quem Deus movet ad actum bunc necessario aut illum necessario agere Alij vero pertendunt nulla proprie dicta necessitate illum ad agendum impelli Verbis quidem discrepant idem autem reipsa seâtiunt Blank de Libertat Absol Thes 22. See his proof following They deny the Unregenerate to have any power to believe repent or to do any good And so they feign God to command men things impossible and to condemn men for that as Sin which they could not possibly avoid and for not doing that which they could no more do than make a World and so to put men under a necessity of sinning and being damned B. This is in sense the same with that about Liberty fore-going though under the other notion of Power But the truth is it is the very core and true sum of all our Controversies and if I prove this to be nothing but words I shall prove them all so about the four first Articles I will here take it for granted that you speak not of any meer Passive or Obediential Power as it 's called but of a proper active Power and that truly so called and not only hypothetically on supposition of things to make it up which are not existent nor to be supposed I know of nothing in the Soul of man for our enquiry but 1. The natural-faculties or virtues inclined naturally to their necessary Objects 2. The right disposition or adventitious inclination or habits of these faculties 3. And the Acts. Tell me first Do you know of any more A. Not that I can remember B. It is therefore the Faculties or Dispositions that we differ about or nothing For it is not the Acts Tell me then Quest. 1. Do you ânow of any that deny all mens Souls to have the three faculties of Active Power or Life Intellection and Volition which the Thomists say are Accidents immediately and inseparably emaning from the Essence and the Scotists better say are the very formal Essence of the Soul it self without one of which a man is no man A. No none doubt of this in sense though some number them as three and some but as two B. Do we differ about the second Do you believe that a Drunkard hath the habit of Sobriety or a Fornicator of Chastity or at least that an ungodly man hath a holy habit or disposition to love God and trust him above all and to believe in Christ and repent of Sin and live in Holiness A. No no man saith that he hath such a habit But he hath a power to do them though not a habit B. Is it any thing that you call a power besides the natural faculties and their habits or dispositions A. No but the natural faculty is still a power to believe love God live holily c. without a habit B. Do you not believe that an ungodly man is disposed yea habituated to the contrary viz. To a fleshly and worldly mind and life and against a life of Faith and holy Love A. Yes at least some are And I will not deny Original Sin and therefore grant such a dispositive pravity in all though not so much as in some is superadded But yet these ill dispositions and habits are not so strong but that the Sinner can for all that believe and repent c. B. No doubt but if he believe not it is not for want of natural faculties He hath an Intellect a Will and a vital and executive power And these all have that force or strength of natural activity which is necessary to Faith Love and every holy Duty For these are the unalterable Essence or Properties of man as man And if Sin deprived us of them it should change our Species And if Grace gave them it should restore our Species and we should be men by Grace only and not by Nature But you confess that these powers want their right disposition to act A. But yet I say that this undisposed ill-disposed Soul is able to act contrary to its accidental disposition B. I tell you once for all that the shaming and ending of all the Controversies between the Synodists and moderate Arminians or Jesuites lieth in the true opening of the ambiguity of this one syllable Can And unhappy is the Church when its Pastors have neither skill nor love enough to forbear torturing and distracting it by one poor ambiguous syllable not understood by the Contenders But to compel you to conviction Quest. 1. Do you mean by Can or Able or Power any thing besides the natural faculty and the disposition A. No I mean the natural faculty as related to this Act or Object now in question e. g. believing and loving God B. Quest 2. Is not natural strength or power a thing belonging to man as man which Sin destroyeth not and Grace restoreth not And have not all the Churches disowned Illyricus * Beâa angrily calleth him Turpis iste Illyricus and Peucer and Strigelius and other Disciples of Melanchthon have defended the moral causation of Grace against him and such Lutherans who went too much the other way though a very learned laborious godly Divine for making Original Sin the substance of the Soul it self A. All this is granted you B. Quest 3. Therefore if Adam had natural power to love God and if the sanctified have it yet doth it not follow that all men have it Because it belongeth to man as man and is not changed by Sin and Grace except in its Dispositions and Acts A. Thus you make all the wicked able to love God B. Yes As to that sort of Ability which is but the natural faculty they are all able but there is somewhat else they want A. But the Name Power you confess your self is Relative to something that is to be done or to an Act with its Object And when the natural faculty is not changed but is the same in all men yet the Relation of Power in it may be changed as by a change of the Object * Casp Peucer Histor Carcerum against the Lutherans physical motion asserteth pag. 720. That Concurrentibus in conversione his tribus causis verbo spiritu S. volantate hominis agentibus suo loeo ordine viribus in homint quamqam ex se natura sua prorsus invalidis ad spiritualia rationalibus tamen inter se differentibus eoque ordine quo conditae sunâ a sp sancto per media verbi sacramentorum in ordinato Legitimo singulorum
usu ut in auditâ verbi cum attentione meditatione virâute sua efficaci singulis excitis liberrime sine coactionis impulsu raptâ nova luce accensa in mente nova vero virtute voluntati communicata c. Qui assentiuntur obsequântur spiritui sancto virtute ejusdem id faciunt non tamen sine actione motu annixu Id. p. 722. Still note that the Grace called sufficient is that which giveth the Power without the Act Therefore as many things concur to denominate us able so do they to sufficiency of Grace Malderus in 12. qu. 111. â 3. d. 3. saith Recte quidam eruditus annotavit neque praedicationem aut excitationem externam neque internam illuminationem intellectus simpliciter esse gratiam sufficientem quamvis in sâo genere quaeque sufficiens dici potest c. sed voluntas per boni affectus aspirationem supernaturali motione excitanda est Our Bradward shortneth all the Controversie li. 13. cor p. 208 109. telling us that Gods Will is the cause of every future and so of the future form of sin and that if there were no God there would be no Impossibile Whereas I think there would be nothing but impossibles For it would be impossible that any thing should ever be But there would be no propositions de impossibili Nay he talks of a non-posse esse impossibile and calls this mirum corrollarium Adrian Quodl 3. fol. 16. Quis duplicitur potest crederese a peccatis abstinere non posse 1. Quod non posset sine speciali Dei gratia adjutorio sic non errat 2. Absolute credendo se non abstinere posse a peccata aut non posse ad vitandum peccata a Deo sufficiens auxilium impetraââ etiamsi fecerit quod in se est Et hic error est species infidelitatis opposita fidei ad quam obligatur credendo Deum juste pie miscricorditer mundum gubernare Illi-enim manifestissime repugnat apud nunquemque sanae mentis Deum homini imputare ad culpam ad quod vitandum nec dedit nec dare paratus est sufficientem facultatem homini inquam facienti totum quod in se est medium helps concauses c. B. You say true But remember still that this is from no change in the natural faculty as you confess For it was never in any man a power e. g. to act without dependance on God nor to act without an Object in Specie nor to act on an incongruous uncapable Object nor without a due medium and necessary concauses Now if you mean that the change is not on mans faculties but on the Objects Medium Causes c. that men do not love God while unholy you are notoriously mistaken For it is Sin that hindereth And God is the same God and Christ the same Christ and the Word the same and oft the preaching the same to a Believer and an Unbeliever So that though outward helps and hinderances do much the inward cause is most considerable And if all were right within it were no sin in us to be disabled by outward changes It is no sin not to hear without a Preacher or not to see that which is invisible or not to understand that which is not Intelligible or not to love that which is not Amiable or that which is by distance or unfit mediums made no Object of our Acts no more than not to touch the Moon or not to see into the bowels of the Earth Therefore though it 's true that the Will is related as a power to capable Objects and not as a power to things that by incapacity are no Objects yet the change that is made on it self by Sin and Grace doth not make it no power and a power in this natural essential sense It is one thing that is called natural power or faculty and another thing that is called Aright disposition or habit Therefore as to the first the Soul of every man hath a true natural power to repent believe and love God and they omit it not for want of natural power but of something else A. Call it then a moral power if you will B. We must so call it But you must know what that is It is not a power of the same sort with the natural power The very word Power is equivocal or analogous to them Else Grace should increase the Essence of the Soul or make a man to be more a man than he was before And Dr. Twisse derideth the Arminians for saying that potentia fundatur in potentia viz. Moralis in naturali which were very just if it were powers of the same kind that were spoken of but now being otherwise it is unjust for no doubt but potentia moralis is in potentia naturali as health is in the Body Quest 4. But I further ask you Do you think that any men do now in an unregenerate state love God above all and live a holy heavenly life yea or effectually and savingly believe by the meer power of their natural faculties till they are changed A. No that 's a contradiction to be unholy and holy I am none of those Pelagians that make Grace unnecessary to mans cure B. Are you not convinced then that where the natural power is existent something is wanting without which the acts of Holiness will not be performed Tell me then what that is A. That which is wanting to a man that hath sufficient Grace is nothing but his own Concurrence or Will For without any special Grace differing from sufficient he can believe But that which is wanting to them that have it not is sufficient Grace it self for believing which they want for abusing the antecedent Grace sufficient for preparation B. We speak not now of Grace as efficient ex parte Dei agentis But of Grace as it is in us or an effect of the former what is it in man that is wanting to believing Is it a natural Power or a right Disposition or what A. Till a man have sufficient Grace to believe it is proper strength or power it self that he wanteth and sufficient Grace is such a power But when he hath it he wanteth nothing but the Act which he can excite and doth not B. I confess I find Arminius Arnoldus Corvinus and others granting that all men are unable to believe till Grace enable them and more than so saith Arnoldus There is more strength or power necessary now to believe in Christ than was necessary to Adam to keep all the Law partly because of the mysteriousness of Faith and partly because we must first be restored to a new ability which requireth more power than to keep what we had A sly equivocation turning the question from the potentia operata to the potentia operans If it did require more power in the efficient so to renew us it followeth not that he thereby putteth more power into us than Adam had But Gods Power hath no degrees
the moral pravity of the Will hath divers degrees And the same degree of received help from God will not cure it in one that will in another The godly have some of it and the ungodly more and some of them more than others But we use to call it absolutely a moral impotency when the indisposition of the Soul is such as that none such ever do believe and consent without more help of Grace than yet they have received And we use to say that he is morally able or hath power whose indisposition is not so great nor Grace so small but that some in that case by that same help do believe and consent though it be rarely But that power is morally called impotency which no man ever reduceth to act XXXIV This moral Power is yet short both of Act and Habit For a Habit is not only a power to Act but to Act promptly and easily and aright XXXV By all this you may partly see how to answer the common questions about mens power or impotency to believe and to love God Quest 1. Is every man able to believe and love God Answ Every man hath that natural faculty which hath sufficient of that sort of power called natural to do it supposing necessary concurrents Quest 2. Is any man naturally able without Divine support and concurse and without necessary Objects Concauses and Media Answ No no more than to make himself an Angel He never had such power in Innocency Quest 3. * That Potentia peccandi is of God see Aureolus in 2. d. 44. art 2. pag. 327. 328. Utrum praeceptâ supernaturalia possit bomo servare fine speciaâi auxilio gratiae Resp Quod non quia ipsa nequeânt servari nisi eliciendo actus insusarum virtutum c. Carera sum Theol. 2. 2. c. 1. And what would you have higher than his q. 4. a. 1. An lâmen supernaturale infusum fidei fit tota virtus agendi actum fidei Resp Ass-Quia actus fidei est quoad omnem rationem âodum substantiam denominationem quidditatem supernaturalis ejus vita in actu secundo supernaturalis Deum authorem supernaturalem attingens nec continetur intra vires ordinem naturae intellectus creatus suaptâ natura est ad illam improportionatus p. 38. 39. So other Thomists But here wanteth some explication of supernaturality Yea they assert ut idem ibid. p. 39 c. That the Intellect hath not so much as a potentia obedientialis activa but only passiva to the act of Faith but conceive that the supernatural infused Grace of Faith is as necessary to enable the faculty to that act as the faculty to the Essence of the Soul therein Though yet they grant that the Intellect is causa fidei principalis as the essence is which yet can do nothing but by the faculty And thus they make potentiam fundari in potentia which Dr. Twisse denieth But a hard question troubleth some of the School-men seeing saith is wholly supernatural and Gods work and it was so in the Jews that believed that Christ was to come if that Faith continued in any some time after as in Nathanael c. Whether God still caused it when it became false as he did before which must needs put them upon some exception They say How it is fides humana but per opporentiam divinam Dâus omnium dominus efficere potest ut quis âliâââecidat finâ paccââo Idem ibid. But a further answer may and must be given which will be useful to the Case before us when conside ed. Of which in due place Is a man able to sin if God Decree he shall not or able to forbear sin or obey if God fore-know that he will not Answ Yes for God is not supposed to decree or fore-see that he shall not be able nay if God fore-see that he will not do what he can it inferreth that he can But the event is a logical impossibility that is it is not true that it will be Quest 4. Is the Intellect truly informed able to set right an habitually undisposed Will Answ It is able to do that towards it which on a better disposed Will would be effectual But not to produce the effect Quest 5. Is a power not excited to Act able to do that act Answ The question is Whether a power not excited be a power Yes It is a Power but such as will not act till excited Quest 6. Is that Grace which exciteth our Powers another second Power Answ It is the excitation of a Power or a received impulse Call it Power or what you will so you trouble not the Church with a needless wrangling about a Name when there are others as fit Quest 7. Is a Habit a Power Answ It is somewhat not well known by man But we know that it is less than the natural Power in point of substantiality as being but an Accident But it is more than both natural and moral power in order of perfection to the act For to be able and prompt is more than to be meerly able Quest 8. Is a hindered Power truly a Power Answ If the hinderance be such as the faculty is not able to overcome it is not formally a power ad hoc But otherwise it is Quest 9. Can God make a man able without any change on himself to do that which he was unable for Answ Yes If his disability lay in the want of extrinsick Concauses Objects or Media Quest 10. May a meer change of the Understanding enable the Will to do what it could not do Answ Not what it had not a natural Power to do But what it wanted but a moral power or disposition to do it may in two cases 1. If God do powerfully illuminate the Understanding and by the Understanding powerfully operate on the Will Or in ordinary cases if the understandings acts be clear and strong 2. If the Will it self be not obstinately before ill disposed Quest 11. Is an unwilling Will able to excite or change it self Answ Even in the point of believing it hath natural power and liberty to act otherwise than it doth even to turn it self from the act of Unbelief to the act of Faith But being undisposed and ill disposed it will not do that which it hath a natural self-determining power to do till God assist it or turn it by his Grace Quest 12. Can any man believe that Will Answ 1. A man that knoweth not the Gospel or what to believe upon a general rumor of it may wish that he had it knew it and believed it And yet cannot believe it indeed till he know what to believe 2. A man that perceiveth not the evidence of verity or credibility in the Gospel and therefore believeth it not to be true may for the end and matter wish he could see evidence of truth and believe it And yet is not able till he see it And a Believer that believeth it weakly may
preparation to his Grace A man that is unregenerate may so far seek mercy in a returning degree yet short of saving Grace as that it shall not be in vain Even an Ahab had experience of this And so had Nineve and many others And why else do you still confess a state of preparatory Grace Is Gods preparatory Grace abominable to him Doth Christ give abominable Grace or is preparation to Conversion an abominable thing 2. But the Text speaketh of a wicked man as wicked He that goeth on in a wicked life and thinketh by Sacrifice and Prayers to pacifie God and make him amends his Sacrifice and Prayers are abominable But wicked men may have somewhat in them that is better than wickedness They may have such a belief that God is and that he is a Rewarder of them that diligently seek him yea such a Faith in Jesus Christ as shall move them to that sort of repentance and reformation as that they shall be almost true Christians and not far from the Kingdom of God And the wicked man that doth this doth it not as wicked but by common Grace And though it be so far abominable as not to prove him justified it is not so far abominable as to be all in vain C. But when you have said all yet they have no Promise B. 1. You know I suppose how hard it is to understand certainly many Texts of Scripture whether they be Promises to such or not Matth. 7. 8. Every one that asketh receiveth and he that seeketh findeth c. Lam. 3. 25. The Lord is good to the Soul that seeketh him Amos 5. 4. Seek me and ye shall live Luke 11. 13. God will give the holy Spirit to them that ask him c. I only say that there is difficulty in these and such other Texts 2. But you confess that God hath formerly made Promises of Church-Priviledges and of temporal things to unsanctified men Therefore if he did make a Promise of further helps of Grace to them that well use former helps it were no more incongruous And 3. Truly I understand not what it is that moveth some men to be so much against such a conception that God should make any Promise of further Mercy to the obedient use of former Mercy when it is so agreeable to his Rectorship and Bounty and to the common interest of Mankind 4. But yet I assert no such Promise All that I plead for is that you will state the difference aright as it is and not misreport it as if it were greater C. How is it that you would have it stated B. 1. You are all agreed that by Nature man can do natural actions and by common Grace he can do the actions of common Grace and by special Grace he can do the acts of special Grace Are you not all agreed of this much C. Yes this cannot be denied B. 2. And you are agreed that the acts of common Grace are such as consist in a commanded seeking of or preparing for special Grace C. Yes that also is agreed on B. 3. And you are agreed that the best state of common Grace is in the nature of the thing certainly and always a state of preparation or greater moral aptitude for special Grace whether it certainly follow or not C. Yes that is not denied neither B. The difference then is but this One Party saith That God hath signified certainly his Will to give special Grace to them that so seek it by common Grace as to come up to the highest degree of preparation And that this signification of his Will is a Promise The other Party saith That God by commanding such to seek his special Grace and beseeching and exhorting them thereto and giving them abundant means and helps doth signifie his Will that they shall not labour in vain if they do it and giveth them so much encouragement and hope as that none hath cause of remissness by dispair but all are unexcusable that shall neglect such means and hopes But that this is not a proper Promise because it giveth them not a right C. You have truly stated the difference And I confess that if I were comforting an afflicted Conscience ready to dispair I should tell such that a Command to seek Mercy implyeth a certainty that he that so seeketh it shall find it And if we could but say to men as the people to the blind man Behold he calleth thee It would be near to a promise that he will heal them B. But forget not that all this is but your anticipation of the Controversies about Grace or Gods Promises and is no part of the Controversie about mans power or corruption C. But there is a further difference yet For they say That mans Will hath power to resist the Grace of God and frustrate it which else would be effectual if man did not overcome it B. You have brought the Controversie now to a strange kind of power and further confirm me that this empty CAN is the sum of the Controversie which is nothing but a sound This which you call power is nothing but natural power as morally corrupt and impotent If it be non-agendo that you mean they can resist as by not-believing not loving God c. What power is necessary to it Is it an act of power not to love God Next say that a dead man hath power not to live and a dumb man hath power to be silent and a blind man is able not to see If it be agendo that you mean that they resist the act as an act in genere is an act of that natural power which God himself giveth upholdeth and by universal concurse acteth and so far it is no resistance But as that act hath the prohibited Object rather than another so it is sin And your meaning is that they say Man can sin And indeed is this the Controversie Have you been blaming the Arminians advancing mans natural Power and Will and now do you become the advancers of it Who advanceth or praiseth man more He that saith He can sin Or he that saith He cannot sin Even now you pleaded that men cannot believe and will you now plead that they cannot choose but believe Is it a power to sin that you accuse them for asserting C. They cannot believe without special Grace But they cannot choose but believe if they have it B. It 's true Because it is not that which we call special Grace if it cause them not to believe And so it were a contradiction to say That they have Faith and they have not Faith But this cannot choose is not an impotency for to believe is an act of power But it is meerly the name of a logical impossibility that these two should consist He believeth and he believeth not He that by Grace believeth hath that natural power which of it self is able not to believe if you will call it ability But it is power determined to believe and so
stir up their distast of others B. The question may have three several senses of passiveness as man is considered 1. In his Nature 2. In his Action And therein 1. In the reception of the Divine Influx 2. In the acting thereupon And so the questions are 1. VVhether mans Soul be an active nature or passive matter only 2. VVhether mans Soul be meerly passive in the reception of the Divine Influx ad agendum 3. VVhether mans Soul be meerly passive in its own first act of Faith or Repentance Tell me Are not these three distinct questions And are they not all that you can devise unless you will make another whether we are merly passive in the preparatory part And are you not now ashamed to confess that you need any answer to any one of these three questions I. All the world is agreed save the Hobbists and Somatists and Sadduces that mans Soul is not meer passive nature but is an active nature inclined to Action as passive Elements are to non-action And that when God moveth it he moveth not Earth Water or Air but a Spirit whose nature is self-moving as fire under the first mover II. All the world is agreed that the Soul and all Spirits are not so purely and meerly active as God is but are partly and first passive and that they do and needs must be receptive of the Divine Influx before they can act For all Creatures depend on the first Cause and both Being Nature and Action would cease if Gods emanation to it ceased And all the world agreeth that no man before Conversion or after doth any act of Faith Love c. no nor eating and drinking and going c. but he is in the first instant passive as influenced by God before he is active Who ever doubted whether physice recipere be pati Did you ever know such a man III. All the world is agreed that man is not meerly passive when he acteth An Act is an Act sure And to believe repent and love is an Act and an act of mans Soul And Scotus who thinketh that immanent Act are qualities as we think of habits yet thinketh that the Soul is truly active antecedently to that quality Where now is there any room for a Controversie C. You would make me believe that we are very ignorant Wranglers that make a noise in our dream and will not suffer others to rest Do not the Arminians say that man concurreth with God to the first act of his own Faith yea that he maketh Gods Grace effectual B. You shall not again tempt me to anticipate the question of effectual Grace though enough is said before to it as far as this Objection is concerned in it Gods Influx on the Soul is one thing mans natural faculty receiving that Influx passively is another And mans Act is another To thrust in here a general word man concurreth and so to run away from clear and necessary distinction is not the part of a man of knowledge Did ever man yet deny that man herein concurreth as aforesaid 1. Man concurreth not to make his Soul nor to continue it in being or power 2. Man concurreth not as any efficient of Gods Influx on his Soul ad agendum 3. But man receptively or passively concurreth as a Receiver of that Influx 4. And man actively thereupon concurreth to believe and repent Is not all this true But you would tempt the Arminians to say that it is you and not they that are herein to be accused For what mean you else by confining the Controversie to the first act of Faith or to our first Conversion Would you make men believe that a converted man is not as truly passive in believing loving God c. as the unconverted is Must not the holiest person be passive in receiving the Divine Influx on his Soul before he do any holy Act You seem to deny this and then you are the person that err by ascribing too much to man If not shew the difference C. There is a habit of Faith goeth before the first Act And it is in respect to that habit that the Arminians say we are active procurers of it which we deny But the godly operate from a habit B. You speak a private Opinion of your own brain against the sense of the Concordant Churches Where doth Scripture say that a habit of Faith goeth before the first Act Mr. Pemble * Vind. Gratâ saith so indeed yet he sometime calleth that but a Seed which at other times he calleth a habit Dr. Ames in his Medulla contradicteth it Bishop Downame * In the end of his Treatise Of Perseverance Le Blank de diss Grat. 2. Thes 22. speaking of our being passive as to operating Grace saith truly Non videntur hac in parte Reformati a sanioribus inter Scholasticos dissentire licet aliis verbis mentem suam exprimant The School-men and Protestants little differ in the method of operations of Grace and all are drawn by Controversies too near curiosity beyond their reach hath written a large Confutation of Mr. Pemble The generality of Protestant Divines contradict it and thus with Rollock de Vocat distinguish Vocation from Sanctification that they suppose Vocation to cause the first act of Faith and Repentance and Sanctification to give us the fixed habit the act intervening Mr. Tho. Hooker is large upon it in his Souls Vocation Will you start one mans Opinion which Calvinists and Arminians are against and feign this to be a difference between Calvinists and Arminians And perhaps Mr. Pemble himself by his first semen or habit meaneth no more than the Divine Influx ad actum received I have before told you how unsearchable the nature of that Influx is and how hard it is to know the true nature of an Habit. C. But Mr. Pemble saith It is the Spirit that is given before we believe B. Away with Ambiguity By the Spirit is meant either the meer received Influx of the Spirit ad agendum and so it is granted Bad men receive the Spirits Influx to such acts as he moveth them to Or else you mean the foresaid fixed Habits and Dispositions to a ready and facile ordinary Operation Or else you mean the Spirit given relatively by Covenant undertaking to be the Sanctifier and Preserver of the Soul In both these latter senses the Spirit is not given before the first act of Faith to Infidels They have not the fixed habits of Holiness Love Hope Obedience c. Otherwise they were holy Infidels No Scripture speaketh it nay contrarily it promiseth the Spirit as to Believers and affirmeth it given after Faith Eph. 1. 13. Joh. 14. 17. 15. 26. Gal. 3. 14. 4. 6. Joh. 7. 39. And that the Holy Ghost is not given in Covenant to Infidels I need not prove to them that will not baptize Infidels The sixth Crimination C. They hold that none are damned only for Adam's sin imputed * Yes Vasqu and other
sincerity to desire more For if the Regenerate have not Grace enough surely the Unregenerate have not 2. But in this Controversie the Dominicans and Jesuites by sufficient mean that which giveth the posse agere that is so much as is of absolute necessity to the act without which it cannot be done and with which alone it can or may be done And in this sense the Protestants generally and the Synod of Dort particularly deny not that there is such a thing as sufficient Grace I have oft told you that 1. They confess it in the instance of Adam 2. They confess it in the case of common Grace enabling men to common preparatory duty which many are able to do and do not as I have evinced before in many instances and the Synod and specially the British and Breme Divines assert 3. And as to the point of Faith it self whether any unregenerate man have sufficient Grace to believe which is not effectual I find few medling much with it 4. But they commonly I think agree that all regenerate men themselves have sufficient Grace for many an act of Faith Love Obedience which they never do Is it not one of the Opinions which at Dort and frequently these Divines reject as falsly imputed to them that a man can do no more good and forbear no more evil than he doth And if he can do more he hath power to do more And power to act is that which is called sufficient Grace Therefore I need not trouble you any more with this Controversie seeing under both the notions of Power and Liberty it is decided and confessed by you to be so before Remember that all sufficient Grace is effectual but not effectual to the act It doth efficere potentiam enableth men to act but doth not cause the act it self unless it be efficax ad actum as well as ad potentiam How ordinarily do they profess the possibility of doing more than is done by godly and ungodly and that all the power that men have is not reduced into act Yea when some assert Predetermination it self they say that it doth not destroy Liberty or Power ad contrarium but only determine it A. It is bad enough that they deny all sufficient Grace to believe that is not effectual though not to other acts B. You wrong them They do not so Have I not told you now that they commonly grant that even the godly themselves have sufficient Grace to believe which is not effectual as to many an act of Faith And as to Unbelievers 1. They say that all have not Grace sufficient or necessary to believe And so say the Arminians 2. But whether any one have or no who believe not they rather leave it to the Searcher of hearts as an unknown thing to them than deny it But they seem to infer that it is most likely to be so in that 1. It is so with the godly themselves 2. And with all other men as to other acts of common Grace And they all agree as I said before that no man is denied power to believe savingly but for not using as he could his antecedent commoner Grace And I think neither Party knoweth more than this and in this both are agreed And he that will assert his uncertain Conjectures and then pretend that this is a Church-Controversie is the maker but not the ender of Controversies A. Some of them stick not to say that Adam himself had not Grace sufficient to stand or forbear sinning and if so then there is none such B. We have nothing to do with any odd persons words Who is it that never speaketh amiss I confess Dr. Twisse Vind. Grat. l. 1. par 3. de Reprob sect 2. pag. Vol. minor 306. saith Gratiam ad peccatum vitandum necessariam duplicem esse dicimus aliam ad posse vitare peccatum aliam ad pecatum actu vitandum illa est Gratia Regenerationis Altera non in est homini per modum habitus sed per modum passionis est motio quaedam gratiosa in voluntatem influens ad omnem sanctam actionem extimulans And so one or two say that Adam had Grace necessary ad posse stare non autem ad actum But this is but a few mens odd Opinion contrary to plain truth I mean If by necessary ad actum be meant in the proper School-sense not all that is conducible to ascertain it but that sine quo esse non potest it is a contradiction to say that men have the power to Act and yet want that which is necessary to the Act that is that without which they cannot Act. It is plainly They Can and They Cannot For we talk not de potentia passiva which a Stone Tree or a Beast or a mad Man have This distinguishing of things that differ not must be detected as well as confusion avoided To say a man can believe or hath power to believe and yet wants that without which he cannot believe is palpable contradiction And where he maketh Regeneration to give the posse before the Act he speaketh obscurely or unsoundly Gods active Influx on the Will exciting it to Act is at least part of his Regenerating Grace A man is not Regenerate before he ever actually believed or repânted though he first receive the Divine Influx ad agendum Nor can he prove that any proper habit goeth before the first act And whether it do or not most certainly the nature faculty and the habit and all together is truly and formally no power ad hoc to believe or love God or do any good without Gods necessary Influx Concurse or exciting Grace No more than a Plant hath a power to fructifie without the Sun or Earth Of Gods help ad bene esse we speak not But to say that Gods exciting Grace is necessary ad actum without which the Act cannot be and yet that we have a power to do that Act without that Grace is still a contradiction This is potentia hypothetica aequivoca a term fit to play with But it is true power where nothing of absolute necessity sine quo non esse potest is wanting which our Divines do commonly confess that Adam had and that all men good and bad have to more good than they do Therefore I find not that you are in that disagreed And Dr. Twisse as I told you oft and vehemently professeth Vindic. Grat. de Amis Grat. Cont. Bellar. pag. Vol. Minor 230. c. 2. 232. that man hath no necessity of sinning ex decreto but logical consequentiae But if it were true that we wanted that Grace which is absolutely necessary to avoid sin it must needs follow that such are under an absolute present necessity consequentis also of sinning as much as of dying when God ceaseth to continue life And if he mean that the Decree necessitateth not sin but the denying of necessary Grace doth he should have said so Andr. Rivet Disput 7. de
Grat. Univers p. 113. saith Sed non quemadmodum Pomificii alii qui eorum sententiam vel sequuntur vel interpolant nobis imponunt ita ut plane negemus sufficientis Gratiae phrasin posse usurpari aut dicamus nullam esse sufficientem ullo modo quae efficax non sit vel nullam esse efficacem quae ad conversionem salutem non sit efficax Id tantum dicimus non dari omnibus talem Gratiam sufficientem quae ita moveat omnium hominum voluntates ut sit in potestate electionis motioni aut obtemperare aut resâagari adeoque nullum esse qui per talem gratiam non possit ad salutem pervenire Deumque id velle omnibus intendere You see that he will own no more but the denial of a universal sufficient Grace for Salvation intended of God to all men And you your selves confess 1. That God intendeth not Salvation for all men unless conditionally if they believe and repent which from eternity he knew before he made them that they would not 2. And that all men have not sufficient Grace to Salvation no nor to believe but only to make them better and bring them nearer it and prepare them for it which some call Grace mediately sufficient to Salvation but that 's an improper Speech as long as for want of their Obedience they never attain to much that is absolutely necessary For my part I doubt not to assert 1. That no man in the World hath Grace sufficient for Salvation that is Glorification an hour before he dieth For he cannot be saved without more that is without the Grace of perseverance to the end But every believing Penitent hath Grace sufficient and effectual to give him a present Right to Salvation And 2. I add that there is no such thing as Grace sufficient to Salvation which is not effectual and doth not save Seeing all that persevere in holiness are saved and they that do not have not Grace sufficient that is necessary to Salvation 3. And I add that no man hath Grace sufficient to give him a Right to Christ and Pardon and Salvation which is not effectual and doth not procure it For every penitent true Believer hath that Right to Christ Pardon and Life And he that is not a penitent Believer hath not Grace sufficient to obtain that Right A. Yes if he have sufficient to help him to believe B. Not so unless he actually believe For is not Faith in act somewhat more than power to believe When you confess that men are damned that have the Power but not that have the Act. A. Yes but man causeth the Act oft when God hath given only the Power and necessary concurse to the production of the Act. B. Corvinus and others of you ordinarily confess that Faith it self is the Gift of God and that Faith is more than a power to believe And we denominate Gods Grace by the various effects Therefore I may say that a man that hath Grace sufficient to believe yet hath not Grace sufficient to Justification till he have 1. The Grace of Faith 2. And so the Grace of the moral donation of the Covenant which is the justifying pardoning Instrument A. You seem then to deny sufficient Grace your self B. I assert 1. That godly men have power or sufficient Grace to many acts of Faith Love and Duty which they never do 2. And that all men by common Grace or sufficient are able to do better than they do in preparation for special Grace 3. And that they are bound so to do in order to their Salvation And so that all men have some helps and Grace in its kind sufficient to enable them to seek Salvation and that God will not forsake them till they forsake him * But I am not able to prove what Vasqu asserteth in 1. Tho. q. 23. disp 98. c. 4. Nunquam occurrere nobis obligationem praecepti aut tentationem sine sufficienti cogitatione qua hanc vincere illud observare possimus Loquor de praeceptâ affirmativâ cui non solum tempuâ adest quo solet obligare sed etiam cujus obligatio memoriae occurrit And he addeth a great untruth Nam si nulla illius in mentem subiret cogitatio nulla nobis ejus obligatio inâumberet unless by sufficient Grace he meant meer natural power and by cogitation the natural power of cogitation this is odious As if a man were bound by no. Law of God or Man if he could but make himself ignorant contemptuous and wicked enough never so much as to think of iâ A. But doth not your Church of England Art 13. say Works done before the Grace of Christ and the Inspiration of his Spirit are not pleasant to God forasmuch as they spring noâ of Faith in Jesu Christ neither do they make men meet to receive Grace or as the School Authors say deserve Grace of congruity yea rather for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done we doubt not but they have the nature of sin B. This Article is intended against merit of congruity in the works of wicked men And it is certain that all their works are sin in that they are in defectiveness of ends and manner and in perverseness the violations of the Law of God as to pray to God only to be saved from Hell without love to God and Holiness or hatred of Sin to give Alms for the same ends c. where the love of God the true end is left out the action must needs be sin But we say not that it is only sin or totally sin It is good and pleasing to God secundum quid though not simpliciter And such Actions as are sin by deficiency may have a tendeney to better Actions and so to Salvation by that good that is in them He that in meer love to his own Soul will pray hear meditate avoid sin c. is in a likelier way to Grace and Life than he that will do none of this And 2. The Authors of the Artiâle by merit of congruity meant somewhat more than preparation for Conversion For no English Divines I think have denied that 3. And by Works done they meant such as the Papists taught men too much to trust in as giving Alms building Hospitals going on Pilgrimages c. which went under the notion of Sacrifices and Oblations under the old Law when God said He abhorâd the Sacrifice of the Wicked and bid them be readier to hear than to offer the Sacrifice of Fools But it is not I think Soul-humbling Repentance Confession begging for Grace considering their Ways hearing the Word c. though but such as preparatory Grace may do which they meant by Works 4. And that is not done without Grace and the Spirit of Christ which is done but by his common Grace And yet I could wish the Article had been better worded But if you will see the consent of an
a sweet connatural manner like as an effectual perswader doth not forcing the Will but preserving its liberty and as the Arminians speak not irresistibly or by necessitation leaving the act to be contingent 4. But withal it is most certain that God operateth on the Mind and Will it self and not on the Preacher of the Word only 5. But no mortal man knoweth how nor is able to comprehend his way of operation 11. But next tell me what you mean by Physical which is the other branch of your distinction C. What should I mean but Natural by Real Contact attingency or influx on the Recipient B. 1. God is above Nature and not included in your Physicks How then do you call his operations Physical ex parte agentis No Physicks pretend to treat of God 2. Contact and proper attingency belongeth to Bodies But God is not a Body and therefore the Contact or Influx by which he operateth is utterly unknown to mortal man any farther than that it is by his Essence 3. God is immense and essentially every where and therefore such a Metaphysical Attingency or Contact as may be spoken of him he hath to all things in the world and therefore must do all that he any way doth in such attingency C. Explain it and resolve it your self if you like not my Explication B. Gods operations are called Physical or Moral 1. In regard of God the Agent 2. In regard of the means or second causes 3. Or in respect of the effect I. In respect of God the Agent they are not properly either Physical or Moral but transcendently they are above both for they are his Essence The Papists who are most for meer moral operations in this Controversie yet have such strange opinions about the physical operations of Sacraments e. g. Baptism on Infants as that they make them to be instruments of Miracles the Miracle being first wrought upon them e. g. the water and then on the receiver Yea they seem to make God to operate miraculously with every Sacrament and Will which is the transcendent Head of all operations and causes Physical and Moral II. As to the Means or second Causes those acts of God that have no such means or causes are not here concerned And as for all those that have such means no doubt but they are to be called both Physical and Moral for Morality is but Modality or Relation ex rerum ordine And all Order Mode and Relation is Alicujus entis ordo Modus Relatio And e. g. preaching the Gospel is such an act of a Physical and Moral Agent as is it self both Physical and Moral Man is quaedam natura and yet Intellectual and Free And his act is quid physicum in genere entis and yet quid morale in genere moris imputanda juxta lâegem morum III. And as to the Effect it is no doubt both quid physicum for Faith is actus realis and quid morale For it is morale bonum ita reputanda And will any Arminian deny any of this that understandeth words Where then is your difference in this C. But when you dispute about Pre-determination you can say it is not Physical what mean you by it then B. We marvail that men should say that God physically pre-determineth the Will to all acts of sin in the specifying circumstances when as he pre-determineth it not really to them at all either physically or morally So that it is here a Real efficient motion of God to the evil act which we deny C. And it is a Real efficient motion of God to the act of Faith and Repentance which we assert and mean by the word Physical B. And this your Adversaries will not deny and so you are in this agreed The fourth Crimination C. I doubt they hold not Faith to be infused but acquired whereas Arminius professeth Faith and Repentance Nisi Deo dante haberi non posse Exam. Perk. pag. 57. and that both of them are denied to the Reprobates by the Decree of Reprobation See his own words At Deus statuit Dâereto reprobationis reprobis fidem poenitentiam non dare concedo lubens illam assumptionem sed recte intellectam Twisse against Hord p. 70. l. 1. Dr. Twisse sheweth the difference to be so great that an unjustified person may have an Acquired Faith about the same objects when yet only an Infused Faith will justifie B. 1. Tell not me what you Doubt but what you Prove unless you mean no more than to tell me of your injustice and uncharitableness I find the Jesuites and Lutherans commonly asserting an Infused Faith and I have met with few Arminians if any that deny it though the word be not so much in use with them 2. But because you that are the Accuser are supposed to understand what you speak against I pray help me to understand it Quest 1. What mean you by Acquired Faith C. That which we our selves get by our use of means and consideration B. Quest. 2. Is there any man in his wits that denieth Faith to be the effect of consideration Do you not think what and why you must believe and even believe in and by Thinking or Considering Do you believe and not think what or why C. No but it is by Infusion that we have those thoughts B. Infused Faith then is by Infused Thoughts Be it so but then it is not without Thoughts or Consideration But further Quest 3. Is there any Christian that denieth that Faith cometh by hearing and the use of the means which God hath appointed us I pray you hear Dr. Twisse against Hord pag. 169. God in his Covenant of Grace requireth obedience to salvation but of his Free Grace undertakes to regenerate them and work them to obedience But how agreeable to their rational natures that is by admonition instruction exhortation that is to work Faith and Repentance by exhorting and perswading them to repentance All this he performs by his Ministers Do you not believe that the Apostles were sent to open mens eyes and turn them from darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto God Acts 26. 17 18. And that Ministers must The Schoolmen-men and even the Jesuites ordinarily profess the necessity of infused Grace yea many of them in a higher sense than many Protestants dare own Even Molina himself asserteth the supernaturarality of Grace thus Ut consensus liberi arbitrii Deo excitanti vocanti per gratiam praevenientem nihil in re sit qd non supernaturale quod non simul a Deo emaâet non solum tanquam ab allicâente excitante invitante ad id arbitrinm sed etiam tanquam a co-operanee per auxilium gratiae And he pronounceth Anathema on them that affirm Consensum arbitrii nostri Deo excitanti vocanti per auxilium Gratiae praevenientis esse actum naturalem aut posse elici sine auxilio co-operatione ejusdem praevenientis Gratiae
never read that any mans damnation was any whit the more increased for not performing these acts And again page 170. It is true there is a Faith infused by the Spirit of God in regeneration But who ever said that any man was damned because he doth not believe with such a Faith As much as to say that non-regeneration is the meritorious cause of damnation C. I am amazed at this especially his supposing that no man ever said that which I thought no man of us had denied B. I would think that his meaning is that men are not condemned for want of Gods infusing act but their own believing act or for the privation of Infusion but for the privation of Faith or of Faith not quatenus infused but as they ought to have believed without infusion But he was not so wanting in accurateness but that he knew how to have exprest himself had that been his meaning And then I know not how his words will consist with this sense I never read that any mans damnation was the more increased for not performing these acts where changing their own hearts is one And whoever said that any man was damned because he did not believe with such a Faith Here it is the Faith as such which is supposed spoken of the privation whereof is not the meritorious cause of damnation And indeed though the power of this Faith would have been in us had there been no Sin or Saviour yet there would have been no obligation to believe in Christ as Mediator And therefore if the Law of Innocency had stood alone even the want of an acquired Faith in Christ would have been no sin But this is the unhappiness of such as must read Controversial Writings There is no end of searching after the Writers meaning But the thing it self I think is plain c. that only an effectual special Faith will save us and it is such a Faith of which Christ speaketh Mat. 16. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned though he believe with any other Faith whatsoever which he calleth acquired Perhaps this his opinion hath some dependance on what he saith before ibid. He punisheth the disobedient with eternal death True but according to what Covenant Not according to the Covenant of Grace that is only a Covenant for Salvation but according to the Covenant of the Law the Covenant of Works Woful error and confusion The Covenant of the Law is almost as bad a phrase as the Covenant of the Covenant 1. Gods Law of Innocency was a Law and Covenant in several respects 2. So was the Jewish Law which Paul meaneth by the Law of Works 3. So is the Christian Law of Christ and of Grace No man is now condemned by the Jewish Law of Works as such it being ceased and never did it bind the Gentile world The Law of Nature and of Innocency indeed condemneth the disobedient but the Law or Covenant of Christ or of Grace doth condemn them to much sorer punishment Luke 19. 27. Those mine enemies that would not I should reign c. Mark 16. 16. He that believeth not shall be damned Heb. 10. 29. Mat. 25. throughout But this confounding of the Covenants I must not here rectifie But yet I hope he meant only that men suffer not for want of Gods Regenerating Infusing Act but for want of their own act of Faith The fifth Crimination C. I find Dr. Twisse ibid. alibi saepe charging it on them as holding that Grace is given according to Works which is Pelagianism For they think that God looketh at some preparation in the Receiver and giveth it to some because they are prepared for it and denieth it to others because they are unprepared whereas it is not in him that willeth nor in him that runneth but in him that of his meer good pleasure sheweth mercy B. There is enough said of this after about differencing and effectual Grace But if we must say more I ask you Quest. 1. Do you by this phrase according to Works mean to urge the Scripture that speaketh in that phrase in its proper sense or do you Vulgatum illud facientâ quod in se est Deus non denegat Gratiam intelligitur de faciente ââ gratia auxilie Pet. â S. Joseph Thes Univers de auxil pag. 83. Idem pag. 90. Nequidem ipsius Christi opera fuerunt actu meretoria citra promissiânem Dei usi ex se essent valoris inâââiti which needeth explication only use the phrase in some other sense of your own C. I use Scripture phrase in Scripture sense because I rest on its Authority B. Quest 2. Are we not also saved without Works in Scripture sense And would it be contrary to Paul to say we that we are saved by Works yea or according to them in that sense that he speaketh of them See James 2. 14 c. Tit. 3. 5. Ephes 2. 5 8 9. Gal. 3. 2. 5. 10. Acts 15. 11. c. and 16. 31. Rom. 5. 10 And yet saved according to Works in another sense James 2. 14 c. Phil. 2. 12. Gal. 6. 4. Rom. 20. 12 13. 2 Cor. 5. 10. C. In several senses of Works we deny it not B. Quest 3. At least you will grant that we are not justified by Works and yet that we are justified by Faith yea in another sense by Works Quest 4. Is not believing and repenting in order to Justification and all holy obedience in order to Salvation as truly opââ a work and in a far nobler sense than preparation for Faith is C. That cannot be denied B. Then you cannot affirm that the phrase not according to Workâ which excludeth not Faith Repentance holy Obedience to justification and salvation doth intend the exclusion of all preparation in order to Conversion or Faith in Christ when by Works excluded it meaneth the same thing or sort in all C. But saith Dr. Twisse ibid. page 154. Pardon and Salvation God doth confirm only on condition of Faith and Repentance But ââ for Faith and Repentance doth God confer them conditionally also If so whatsoever be the condition let them look to it how they can avoid the making of Grace to wit the Grace of Faith and Repentance to be given according to Works B. I know he frequently saith the same But 1. I speak now only of the sense of that Scripture and say that this goeth upon a most false and dangerous supposition that Justification and Salvation are given according to Works though Faith and Repentance be not whereas in the sense of Works there meant by Paul no man can be justified by Works And though Christ saith This is the work of God that ye believe in him whom the Father hath sent yet it is not that which Paul meaneth Let not therefore Scripture words be abused to mislead mens understandings 2. But as to the matter of the Controversie I spoke to it enough
before No man can deny but that God usually prepareth the Soul fer Conversion by a common sort of Grace And though he may do what he list with his own and extraordinarily may in an instant convert the most unprepared malignant obdurate person yet that is not his usual way And some that think otherwise are led into the mistake by thinking that a man is converted when he hath suddenly some terrifying humbling preparation which endeth in conversion Whether he convert all that are brought to the very highest and nearest degree of preparation I know not nor perhaps you neither But that usually he converteth all such we have very great reason to think probable And that he hath not commanded men to seek his special Grace in vain So that whether it be a proper promise on Gods part or only an encouragement short of proper promise I told you before is a hard question But we maintain that it is not that proper mutual Covenant which maketh a Christian and is celebrated in Baptism and giveth Salvation If one of old John Rogers's Thomas Hooker's or Robert Bolton's hearers when they were vehemently urging preparatory humiliation desire endeavour c. should have said to them Sir you play the Arminian and contradict St. Paul who saith that Grace is not given according to Ista âââdia nemini Deus destââââ propter vel secundum morita ipsius sed ex pura puta Gratia Nemini etiam denegat nisi juste propter gracedentia peecata Armin. Disp Privat Thes 41. Sect. 10. Adrian VI. Quodl 3. q. 1. fol. 21. expoundeth Habenti dabitur thus Qui habet verbi Dei amorem ut illuc mentis intuitum dirigat dabitur ei sensus intelligendi qui non habet verbi Dei amorem auferetur ab eo naturalis capacitas intelligend c Works Therefore God will give it me never the more for such preparations what would you have said to him The truth is practical Preachers in these practical cases are carried with full sail into that truth which Disputers would wrangle out of Doors But as for any workâ meritorious in point of commutative Justice yâa or of any full and proper Covenant of God giving a proper Right to the Sinner upon which he may claim special Grace as his due I know of none such before true Conversion though Gods commands and general promises give men sufficient encouragement C. But what say you to Rom. 9. It is not in him that willeth or runneth c. B. I do not love to expound hard Texts unsatisfactorily by scraps I will give you God willing a Paraphrase of the Chapter together by it self I suppose you have read John Goodwin's and Dr. Hammonds Paraphrase At present it may suffice to say 1. That the meaning is not that he that would have Christ and Grace and Holiness is no fitter for it than he that would not have them nor that he that seeketh them is no fitter for them than he that rejecteth themânor that he that believeth is no fitter for Justification than ân Iâfidel nor he that is holy any fitter for Heaven than the unholy nor yet that he that heareth meditateth prayeth aâ he can and attaineth the highest degree of common Grace is no fitter or likelier for Faith or special Grace than he that despiseth it and the means of it 2. But the meaning is that God of his free mercy câlled the Gentiles that were further from him than the Jews and may give both the Gospel and the Grace of the Gospel to one and take it from or not give it to another when both of them are equally unworthy of it by their sin So that the first and principal cause that differenceâha Jacob from an Esau is not that Jacob before Gods Grace did will and rân deâire and seek Grace but that Mercy begun with him and gave him though as unworthy as Esau both commonner and special Grace which caused him to will and run And yet for all that both are supposed to have forfeited mercy by sinning against it and it is in him that willeth not and runneth not that the cause of his misery and privation of mercy is to be found Yea in many an instance where mercy and helps are given by an equality a wicked man may make himself to differ by his sin and wilfully become worse than others C. At least you must here confess that de facto we do really differ from each other in this point B. All they that hold all that Doctrine of Preparation for Conversion which you find in the suffrages of the British Divines in the Synod of Dort do not that I know of differ from many of the Lutherans and Jesuites nor from many of the Arminians herein while by the name of merit of Congruity used by some and Preparation by the other no more is meant than they there assert And as to the question of a promise or no promise I shew'd you before how small the difference is yea with some it is but de nomine while one calleth that a Promise which another calleth but a half promise with Mr. Cotton or a precept to use means with sufficient encouragement when perhaps in the description of the thing they agree So that among the most and sober practical Preachers I yet see no real difference in sense at all about the necessity of preparatory Grace The sixth Crimination C. For ought I can understand some of them acknowledge no Corruption nor Grace in the Will as having no Habits but meer Indifferency or Liberty but think that the illuminating of the understanding is enough to change the will * The Remonstrants say Synod circ art 3. 4 p. 15. Voluntatem iâsuper Deus in obsequium suum fle ctit ad actuâ fidei obedientiâ ita inclinat per spiritum suum sanctum verbo utentem ut voluntas per illam operationem non solum possit obedire âed obediat quoties obedit non ex se anâ per se aut a se B. 1. These are a few odd persons that differ from the generality of your Adversaries and I am not to justifie all that every man writeth 2. But even of these I suppose the meaning of the most is but this that sin began inthe Intellect and there Grace must begin and that God worketh on the will but mediante Intellectu And these Camero held as well as they and so do many more And these seem to differ not about the necessity of Grace but the manner of its conveyance to the will whether it be only by the intellect 3. And as the wind bloweth where it listeth and we hear its sound but know not whence it cometh or whither it goeth so is every one that is born of the Spirit We know that the will is vitiated as ill as the understanding and needeth Grace as much as it and that God is as near to the one in his operations as to the
will in the use of such Power as he hath is a condition sine qua non ut dispositio Gratiae receptiva ordinarily 8. But that God is not tied to this but may extraordinarily do otherwise 9. But that this * Ruiz de praedif tr 3. d. 18. p. 222. Resp dispositiones proximas proâertionatas ad gratiam nââil ob esse quidditati gratiae quoniam ex prima radice nascuntur ex prima gratia quae absque ulla dispositione quasi creata est a Deo sine materia At pugnabit cum quidditate gratiae quaelibet dispositio etiam remota si ab illa sumit initium gratia ita ut prima gratia detur intuitu talis dispositionis Iâ not this enough pre-requisite disposition and the concurse of mans will is only the use of a power freely before given of God with all necessary helps to use it 10. And therefore that God is from first to last the first cause of all that 's good in man though not the only cause and that of himself man can do nothing Have I not taken your meaning right B. Yes so far as you have recited it C. But methinks yet you answer not the great question which Camero baffled Tilenus with It is not why Paul believeth Nor why Nero believeth not as singly considered But comparatively why Paul believeth rather than Nero Speak to that B. Camero and Tilenus were great and excellent wits But if you can forgive the Truth I must add that which they said nothing to which will prove that a few degrees more of acuteness might have shortned or better ended their dispute It is the Comparatio personarum that is now the subject of that Controversie why this man rather than that as compared Here then we are to consider 1. The Comparabilitas 2. The Ipsa Comparatio 1. The question as to the first is either 1. Whether there was antecedently any such ratio comparandi in them as might be a reason or motive to God himself quoad actum ex parte agentis why he should decree to give or actually give Faith to one man rather than to another 2. Or else whether there were any such difference antecedent as might be Ratio discriminis ineffectis the reason why one received or had Faith and the other not II. And then quoad actum comparandi the question is whether God in his Decree or mind did truly compare the persons antecedently and say not only I will cause this man to believe and say I will not cause that man to believe or not say I will But also said I will cause this man to believe rather than that To these several questions then I answer 1. Negatively to the first For Gods acts ex parte agentis are his essence and as he hath no cause but is the cause of all things so thus far nothing in the world is a causal reason or motive to God He willeth because he willeth or rather without cause II. To the second There are in the Creatures different capacities for terminating Godâ will and action objectively and accordingly denominating his Volitions and Actions variously And so this question must be divided into three 1. Whether always 2. Whether ordinarily 3. Whether sometimes there be an objective ratio comparabilitatis and of preferring one before another as to the effect of believing or why Gods operation should effect Faith rather in this man than in that To which I answer Ad primum 1. There are nearest Reasons in the immediate aptitude of the receiver Such as is the highest degree of preparing Grace in one which another hath not And there are remote reasons or aptitudes As e. g. A man of great learning wit and zeal or some other remote aptitude will be a fitter person for Gods work than another when he believeth 2. It is not known to any mortal man what different aptitudes in both these kinds God the only heart-searcher seeth which no man can see And therefore this question cannot certainly be answered as to both sorts 3. But as far as our blind eyes can reach it seemeth most probable to us that God doth not always effect Faith according to the degrees of receptive aptitude of either sort Because we see that sometimes he suddenly calleth very great sinners and also some that are silly and little serviceable in the world But yet what special aptitudes God may see in them we know not Ad secundum Qu. I answer That it is Gods ordinary way to give Faith according to the first sort of predisposition alone were there no difference in the last that is To those that have the highest degrees of moral preparation or Common Grace I take to be a certain truth 1. Because in all Gods Works we see that he operateth by degrees in order and on predisposed matter and that efficit juxta dispositionem recipientis 2. But specially because he hath himself appointed a course of means for the obtaining of his special Grace to be used by all men And he cannot be thought to do all this in vain nor to set men on doing their part in vain And all practical Divines who preach so much for the souls preparation are of this mind that such preparation is the ordinary predisposition Ad Qu. 3. I answer That at least sometimes it is so is past question with any sober man For it is a contradiction to call it preparing Grace or Disposition and yet to say that by it no man is made ever the more receptive or nearlier capable of Faith or special Grace So much to the two questions de Comparabilitate * Mark what Bannes himself saith of Common Grace in q. 23. pag. 274. Pie credi potest quod omnibus venientibus ad usum rationis Deus opem aliquam ferat supernaturali quodam auxilio secreto instigante ad operandum bonum 2. Si vera est opinio Thomae c. necesse est dicâre quod omnis qui justificatur receperit gratiam praeparantem saltem prius natura quam praeceptum naturale adimpleverit 3. Quotiescunque aliquis pecâat speciale peccatum contra supernaturale praeceptum vel fidei vel pânitântiae c. necesse est ut ille de facto receperit aliquam divinam inspirationem illuminantis Dei dut vocantis aut incitantis ad fidem c. Immo necesse est hominem tangi aliqua supernaturali inspiratione ut nullam âabtat excusationem Possibile est seâundam legem ordinariam quemlibet dum est in hac vita salvari Dâus paratus est dare omnibus quamdiu sunt in hâc vita auxilium quo fiant potentes converti immo auxilium specialius quo convertaâtur si velint I cite this because for his Doctrine of Predetermiâation Protestants much value Banâes a boasting Author who thanketh God that their King burneth Protestants Indeed the Dominioââs commonly confess sufficient Grace which is not effectual III. But as to the third question
equality with the wise Do we not see that as man is so is his strength and work operari sequitur esse The strong do as the strong and the weak judge and do as the weak Why else doth God give men strength of Grace sure they that think the habit of Grace must needs be before any act will not hold that all our lives after the Acts from immediate divine production go beyond the degree of the habits We know that God is the chief cause of our perseverance and all our works that are good But he causeth them by disposing and quickening strengthening illuminating and sanctifying our faculties to do them which is habitual Grace B. What is your own judgment in this point A. Our judgment is 1. That he that truly at the present preferreth the pleasing of God and his Salvation before all this World is sincere and justified 2. That of these some have well setled apprehensions and resolutions but others have such shallow Conceptions and weak Resolutions as that a very strong Temptation would change their minds and overcome them 3. But if they escape such Temptation and be not overcome they shall be saved For God will not damn men for possible Sin and Apostacy which they were never guilty of but only for that which they did commit 4. And that it is no certain sign of hypocrisie that they would have fallen away had their Temptations been great but only a proof that they were weak 5. Else to pray Lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil should be rather discover not our sincerity or hypocrisie by temptation 6. Therefore God useth to proportion mens trials to their strength And that young and weak Believers may persevere he exposeth them not antecedently to their provocation to great Temptations as he doth the strong Even as while a young Tree hath little rooting it hath also but a little top else had it the top of a great Tree and but the roots of a Plant the first great Wind would overturn it 7. Even strong Christians might possibly have some Temptations which would over-match their strength and turn them from Christ if God should not keep them from such Temptations 8. Therefore there are some Temptations so far above the very nature of man by such Grace as is not a meer Miracle to be overcome as that God doth not suffer Mankind to be tried with them As to be most exquisitely tormented many moneths or a longer time And in that unusual trial of the poor Christians in Japon though many endured those torments many weeks yet nature could not sustain them to the last but when they had suffered as much as many Smithfield burnings to death at last almost all denied Christ so that Christianity is now there extirpated Now if Rogers Bradford Hooper shewed sincerity by suffering death why should we not think that these did so that suffered far more than they though afterward the degree was greater than their strength 9. We hold that Gods Punishments and Mercies to men in this World are very much exercised in either permitting or not permitting great Temptations * The same Bradwardine l. 2. c. 16. holdeth that the cause of the damneds obstinacy in sin is not only themselves and Gods not-willing to cure and save them but also Gods positive Will by which their obstinate wills are for ever continued in the act But I see not why we should assert Gods positive Will of Sin in Hell or Earth when his not-effectual willing to cure it is enough And that for great sin he oft delivereth men up to Satan and giveth him the greater power over them Yea that the nature of sin it self is such as giveth greater advantage to the Tempter As he that will with Achan look on the wedge of Gold or that will please his tast with delicious Drinks and Meats or that will permit his eyes immodest Spectacles hath thereby let in the Devil into his Imagination and will not easily thence cast him out And on the other side he that pleaseth God and conquereth one Temptation obtaineth that Grace by which he is much saved from the next and the Tempter is the more disadvantaged and restrained 10. Lastly We therefore hold That seeing Temptations do not only try our sincerity or hypocrisie else we should desire them for self-examination but also tend to change mens minds and make them worse the way to persevere is to pray against and avoid Temptations and resist those that cannot be avoided This is our judgment In which you see that we hold that all weak Christians that are sincere may have assurance of their present Justification though they are not strong enough to stand the greatest trials And that they may well hope that God will save them from over strong Temptations while they sincerely do his Will B. But Christ saith That he that forsaketh not all that he hath and hateth not his own life cannot be his Disciple And what greater trial can there be than the loss of life it self A. Though some taking it to be hard that none are true Christians that would not be Martyrs were they tried have said that this Text speaketh de necessitate praecepti non medii You must grow up to this at last if you will be my Disciples yet I will not so force the Text but say as you do But 1. There are far stronger Temptations than the love of Life Though not from Interest yet from false reasonings which may deceive the judgment And one that would die for Christ while he believeth in him may possibly have so strong Temptations to unbelief as shall exceed in danger his fear of death 2. And all men that at the present would forsake Life and all for Christ yet have not the same fixedness of Resolution nor the same degree of Faith and Love No doubt but the Martyrs in the same flames had various degrees of Grace Now a less firm and fixed measure may be loosened by degrees or shaken by Seducers and mutable man may after be overcome by that same Temptation which once he could have overcome So that I accuse their Doctrine as utterly inconsistent with true Christian Comfort on both these account And such is the success of those men that will overdo and devise means of their own for extraordinary comforts which God never gave them B. The comfort of poor Christians it seems standeth but on slippery terms in the Opinion of both sides while each Party thinks that there is no true comfort in the others way * Whether we may be morally sure of our present Justification the Papists Doctors agree not among themselves Bellarmine and many others affirm it and others deny it as Aureolus cited by Brianson in 4. q. 4. fol. 36. and others that say no man can know whether his Habits are infused But doth not experience confute you Do you not see that many have true Christian comfort that are not of
reason to vex himself with any such fears as consist not with a life of greater hope and peace and comfort And that living by faith on Christ and his Spirit and General promise they should comfortably Trust him with their souls 5. It 's granted that the more Faith Love Holiness and obedience any hath the nearer they may come to full assurance of persevering and may live the more confident and joyful lives 6. Many with Austin hold an Antecedent absolute special Election to faith and perseverance and that no such elect ones fall away 7. Many hold that besides Election a degree of Grace called Confirmation doth settle some in a certainty of perseverance and neither the Elect nor Confirmed fall away And that the confirmed may be certain of their own election perseverance and salvation And this seemeth to be the opinion of Origen Macarius and divers Antients Even that God doth with Believers as he did with the Angels and Adam to whom he would have given confirming Grace had he at first overcome And where faith hath kindled so much LOVE to God and Heaven and Holiness as that it is become a Divine nature in the soul and operateth as the Love of Children to Parents above meer Reason as a fixed Habit like a nature then Grace seemeth to some Confirmed and not loseable All these Concessions laid together and more which I could fetch from the most learned Schoolmen do shew that though here the difference be real it is in a point and a degree where humane frailty and the difficulty and the non-necessity of a fuller understanding it do fully prove to all sober self-knowing loving believers that it is their duty to bear with one another without the quenching of brotherly Love or denying Christian-communion to each other But the wicked will do wickedly and none of the wicked will understand but the wise shall understand Dan. 12. 10. The Eleventh Dayes CONFERENCE Of Christs Righteousness imputed of Faith Justification and mans duty their several parts to a Christians Comfort Speakers Saul Paul a Libertine Teacher CHAP. I. S. SIR I am now come to you in a greater straight than I was in before I have met with a Teacher that tells me you are a deceiver and have all this while misled me and have taught me to build upon the sand of my own Righteousness and set me on doing to my own undoing and that I have not built on the Righteousness of Christ and therefore all will end in my overthrow and ruine I was not able to answer him And I have prevailed with him to come to you that I may hear you speak together P. Did not I tell you before-hand of such temptations and give you instructions for your preservation against them S. I confess you did But I find my self insufficient to use them without help when it comes to tryal P. The truth is Infant Christians will still need the help of their Elders and of Christs Ministers when they have been never so well fore-armed as you need a Physicion in your sickness after all the preventing directions which he can give you And you have done well to bring him and to hear both sides together Had you trusted to your own understanding and only disputed it out privately with himself you might have been enfnared to your danger I shall willingly conferr with him on these two conditions 1. That you remember that it is You and not Him that I am to satisfie and therefore when I have satified you I have done For to follow him as long as he will talk will waste more time than we have to spare 2. That when you are delivered from this snare you will remember that you must meet with many more such in the world The Anabaptist will say as much to you for his way and the Papist much more for his way And most of them will affright you with the danger of damnation if you turn not to them Therefore when ever you are assaulted by any of them bring them to me and hear us together as you now do Lib. I am sorry to see how you abuse poor souls and build them not on Christ but on themselves What a deal have you said to this man of Doing and of Working and how little of Believing You have set him on tasks of Duty and he thinketh now to Do this and Live and to be saved in his own doings his repenting his praying his keeping the Lords day c. while the poor man knoweth not Jesus Christ and submitteth not to the Righteousness of God You will needs be a Teacher of the Law and bring back poor souls to bondage that Christ may profit them nothing but trusting to their own works and righteousness for life they may fall from grace and be found in their nakedness and sin P. Sir these General exclamations do but tell us that there is something that you differ from us in but tell us not what If you are a lover of truth and will speak to edification tell us distinctly what are the points of our doctrine which you dislike and let us debate them one by one Lib. Among many others the chief are these I. That you must not have men come to Christ till they are prepared II. That you set men on Repenting and Doing and Working for salvation and so teach them to trust in a Righteousness of their own and do not tell them that All Christs Righteousness is ours being imputed to us and that Believing is our Conversion to which you are to call men If they Believe they have a perfect Righteousness in Christ III. That you overthrow the Gospel in making it a Law IV. And you make the new Covenant to be made with us when Christ is the only party in Covenant with God V. And you make the new Covenant to have Conditions and so to be the same with the old VI. You make Justifying faith to be a believing in Christ as a Teacher and Law-giver that you may lead in works and not a meer Believing in him for Righteousness VII You make Faith to justifie as a condition of our performance and not meerly an Instrument of our Justification or apprehending Christ VIII You make faith in it self to be imputed to us for Righteousness and not Christ only the object of faith IX That God is made Mutable by you and forgiveth and justifieth them when they believe whom he did not justifie from eternity X. That a justified man must be afraid lest his sin should unjustifie him again XI You make men think that they are able to believe of themselves XII You call men to Duttes and to Mortification before they believe and are regenerate XIII Instead of the Witness of the Spirit you comfort men by the Evidence of their own holiness and righteousness These with abundance more are the errors by which you corrupt and deceive poor souls P. Because Christ would have his Servants as Teachable as
Justification Quest 2. Shew me how many of these six hundred Texts do not speak of such Inherent or Performed personal Righteousness as is distinct from such as you describe in your sense of Imputation Try whether one of twenty or forty or an hundred have such a sence Lib. Not if such false teachers as you must be the expositor of them P. Let us try some of them and be you the expositor 1 Joh. â 29. every one which doth Righteousness is born of God 1 Joh. 3. 7 10. he That personal Righteousness is necessary that doth Righteousness is righteous Whosoever doth not righteousness is not of God Lib. You choose out those texts which countenance your own ends P. My question is but Whether Gods word talk of any Righteousness which consisteth in any thing that is in or of our selves Lib. Yes that cannot be denyed But not in order to our Justification P. Of the use we must speak ânon Quest 3. I next ask you then Wâââther all these texts be not True and whether we may not speak ãâ¦ã Lib. Yes We question not the Truth but the meaning of the ãâ¦ã P. Quest 4. Is this Righteousness aâ such in that ãâ¦ã have it abominable to God Doth not God command it and requireââ to obey his Laws sincerely And doth he hate the obedience of his ââââ Is not Holiness his Nature and Image in us And doth he hate his Image and the Divine Nature Is it not the mark of a Malignant to be a Hater of Holiness yea of the Devil himself And can you think that God ââââ Hater of Holiness What I he that hath said Be holy for I am ââââ and Without Holiness none shall see God Lib. If you were not an unholy deociver you would not intimate by such questions as if I took God to be a Hater of Holiness P. Is it not Holiness which the Scripture and we mean by Inherent Righteousness Lib. But God hateth it not as Holiness but as mixt with sin P. Do you Believe and Love God sincerely and Love the Godly or not Lib. Better than such as you do or else wo to me P. And doth God Hate all your Faith and Love because it is mixt with sin If he do What difference between it and wickedness or between you and a wicked man God can but hate what they do and doth he so by all that you do also Why then may not your Neighbours imitate God and hate all that you do why may they not then deride and persecute you for that which is hateful to God For shame never more blame then your scorners or persecutors Lib. I do not say that God hateth my Faith Love Humility and patience as such but as mixt with sin Therefore properly it is sin that God hateth and not my Faith and Love it self P. And is all come to this What mean you then to rail at us that say the same We all say that God hateth our sin and the faulty imperfection of our holiness and obedience and what say you more Lib. But you say not that God hateth your Righteousness for the sin that cleaveth to it though not for it self as we do Your Goodness is like an Apple faln into the dirt or poysoned and you are for wiping it and keeping it but God and wise men abhor it for the filth and cast it away P. Then it seems you cast away all Love to God and man all faith all honesty and obedience chastity and temperance because sin cleaveth to it Lib. By casting it away I do not mean giving over to Love God and obey him and turning wickedly to the contrary but I mean that I count it dung in order to my Justification P. I perceive by Teaching me you are but Learning to speak your self I further ask you Doth not God Love the Faith Love Obedience and Holiness of his servants notwithstanding all their faults and imperfections Joh. 16. 27. The Father himself loveth you because you have Loved me and believed c. 2 Cor. 9. 7. God loveth a cheerful giver Psal 11. 7. The righteous Lord Loveth righteousness with many the like passages Doth he not Love his Image Lib. That is because we are in Christ and our persons and graces and duties are accepted all in him being perfumed with his righteousness and all our sins and imperfections pardoned and covered thereby And as our Graces are the works of the holy Ghost and not primarily as ours P. Are you come so far already All this is held not only by us but by the Papists also You confess then that for the merits of Christs Righteousness our sins are pardoned and not only our persons but our faith Love and obedience accepted and loved though culpably imperfect and mixt with sin And so all your noise is come to nothing and you say as we II. But having found that we must have Inherent Righteousness let us Of Reward and Worâthiness or Merit next consider What use we may make of it and how far it may and must be valued and trusted to And Quest 1. Tell me whether God hath made any promise of a Reward to it or not Turn to the word Reward in your Concordance if you remember not the Texts and see Lib. Your Legal principles and spirits makes the Scripture a snare and a stumbling block to you as Christ himself is When God talketh of Reward metaphorically you take it properly as if we could merit any thing of God P. I only ask you Whether God hath promised us a Reward Lib. Yes But it is a Reward properly to Christ by whose grace we live and not to our selves P. When Christ saith Great is your Reward in Heaven and your father shall reward you openly Matth. 5. 12. 6. 4 6. and you shall not lose your reward and Heb. 11. 26. he had an eye to the recompence of reward and Heb. 11. 6. God is a Rewarder of them that diligently seek him c. is the meaning Great is Christs Reward in Heaven and God will reward Christ openly and is a Rewarder of Christ only as diligently seeking him c. Lib. You would make me ridiculous I mean that it is for Christs Merits or Righteousness which he did himself and not for any thing in us or done by us that we are rewarded P. Say you so Doth diligent seeking him Heb. 11. 6. and praying and giving alms in secret Matth. 6. 1 2 3 4. and suffering for Christ Matth. 5. 11 12. and feeding visiting c. Christ in his members Matth. 25. c. mean only that which Christ did and not we Is it Christs prayers and almes and charity and sufferings that the text meaneth Look over many such texts and judge Lib. Still you would make my words contemptible It is our duties that are rewarded but it is not for themselves or any worth that is in them but for the merits of Christ only P. If God have no respect
ãâã ãâã which most properly signifieth wages which sounds as more than praemium a Reward yet we wholly grant you that this is figuratively used and that no man deserveth wages or any thing commutatively of God But every Scripture Metaphor hath its reason And the reason of this is evident Though God cannot be Profited he can be Pleased And his Will or Pleasure is the End of all his Government and Works And he is Pleased most in that which doth the World the Church and our selves the most good for in that he is most glorified Now he so maketh his Laws and Promises as if our own and other mens good were his and his Reward for our Pleasing by Order Justice and Goodness he calleth wages metaphorically being instead of profiting him XV. By all which it is most obvious that we are not at all the less but the more beholden to God for the Merit or Rewardableness of our actions For as all the Benefit is free Gift so it is of his Grace that we do any thing that is good and that he accepteth it as Rewardable And if it be any honour to a man to be good rather than bad and the Righteous be more excellent than his neighbour it is an addition of mercy that God will honour those that honour him and commandeth others so to do Psal 15. 4. XVI And now the case is very plain both that Reward and Rewardableness called Merit there is and why it is and must be so 1. How can God be a Governour and have a Law and be a Judge and Righteous in all this if faith and godliness be not Rewardable It is the second Article in our faith and next believing that There is a God that He is the Rewarder of them that diligently seek him Heb. 11. 6. And when you would extirpate all faith and godliness on pretence of crying down Merit you may see what over-doing tends to 2. The very nature of all Gods Laws and Promises evidently inferr a Reward Without it there were no such thing as Faith Hope Desire Joy Content forsaking all Psal 19. 11. In keeping them there is great reward 58. 11. Verily there is a Reward for the righteous 3. There is notoriously a Reward even in this life Matth. 19. 29. Who would change the profit and pleasure of a holy life here for that of the unholy 4. Reward and Rewardableness are found in the very Law of Nature it self In that we are made for God as our end and it is God himself who is our Reward And holiness hath a natural tendency to happiness yea is the beginning of it it self And as God is said in Nature to make sin punishable in that he hath so formed Nature that sin shall bring suffering in and with it as poyson brings pain and death so in Nature he hath made our duty and holiness Rewardable in forming man so that health peace and happiness shall be in and after it Prov. 9. 12. If thou be wise thou art wise for thy self 5. The Light of Nature teacheth Parents Masters Princes and all Governours to take Goodness to be Rewardable and Crimes to be punishable And nothing is more universally approved by the common notices of humane nature than Justice or abhorred than Injustice Nature saith as 2 Sam. 23. 31. He that ruleth over men must be just And as Isa 10. 1. Wo to them that decree unrighteous decrees And as Prov. 17. 13. Whoso rewardeth evil for good evil shall not depart from his house Conscience will rebuke him that rewardeth evil to him that deserved it not Psal 7. 4. The better any man is the more he is for Justice and abhorreth the unjust and Alexander Severus and Antonine and such Just Princes and Judges are honoured by all Subjects and Historians And as all Power is of God and Rulers are but his Officers Rom. 13. 4 5 6. so their Righteous Government is but the inferiour part of Gods own Government as the King governeth by his Judges and Justices And therefore it is God that Rewardeth and Punisheth by them And indeed by the same reason that men deny a Reward to duty the faultiness being pardoned through Christ they would inferr that there is no Punishment for sin But God saith Isa 3. 10 11. Say to the Righteous It shall be well with him and say to the wicked It shall be ill with him He will plentifully reward the proud doers Psal 31. 23. Yea they reward evil to themselves Isa 3. 9. 6. Holiness is Gods Image and the product of the Holy Ghost and the Devil and Malignants labour to dishonour it And contrarily God honoureth it and by his Rewards will honour it openly before the world Matth. 6. 4 6. And Christ will come in glory to be glorified in his Saints and admired in all them that believe even because they have believed 2 Thess 1. 6 7 8 9 10 11. 7. God will Govern man according to mans nature and capacity else what need of Scripture Ministry c. And man is naturally a Lover of himself and God will make him know that he hath no need of him but it is himself that shall be the gainer if he obey and the loser if he sin even to Cain after his first sin God saith If thou do well shalt thou not be accepted but if thou do evil sin lyeth at the door Man is an Intellectual and free agent and therefore God will set before him life and death good and evil Deut. 30. 15. and whether they will hear or not hear he will send his word Ezek. 2. 5. and they shall be told of such Motives as should suffice to prevail with men of reason 8. Man hath many and great Temptations to overcome And as they work morally toward his deceit and ruine so God will suitably give him such Moral motives as are fittest to move him to resist them And therefore he will offer man so full and sure and glorious a Reward as is fit to disgrace all the offers of the Devil and will make men know that his Rewards are such as no pleasure or profit of sin should stand in any competition with Yea he himself who is God Allsufficient will be our exceeding great Reward Gen. 15. 1. No wonder if Moses like other believers despised the honours of Pharaoh's Court and chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season because he had respect to the recompence of reward Heb. 11. 25 26. And Paul went towards death rejoycing in these hopes that having fought a good fight and finished his course henceforth a Crown of Righteousness was laid up for him by God the Righteous Judge 2 Tim. 4. 8. who is not unrighteous to forget his servants work and labour of Love And all believers are therefore stedfast and unmoveable alwayes abounding in the work of the Lord as knowing that their labour is not in vain in the Lord 1 Cor.
or Nay to these two questions 1. Do you allow of the use of the word Worthy Lib. Yes because it is in Scripture P. 2. Do you deny it to be true in the sense I have opened that is that we have that worthiness which is nothing but a Moral aptitude for that promised Reward which as to the worth of it is but Gods free gift merited for us by Christ and is only a Fathers Reward as to the ordering of it as our Governour even a Reward of grateful Children Lib. No I cannot deny this sense to be sound P. Then you grant both Name and Thing And are not you ashamed then to have so long traduced and reviled such as hold and say but that which you are forced to justifie and to make poor souls believe that works are cryed up and Christ is injured and mens salvation hazarded by it when yet you confess that all is true in word and sense Lib. But when the Papists abuse such phrases to error though the Scripture use them we must do it sparingly and with caution P. 1. But is that a good reason for you to revile those that use them in the Scripture sense 2. And if you will forsake Scripture words as oft as men misuse them it will be in the power of any Hereticks to drive you from all Scripture phrase by abusing all 3. And how can you more effectually promote Popery than by forsaking Scripture language and leaving it to their possession and use Will not men think then that the Scripture sense is liker to be with them than with you Were it not better for you to hold to the Word of God and only detect and disclaim mens ill expositions of it CHAP. III. Whether our own Righteousness be any way necessary and conducible to our Justification before God Or Whether we are any way justified by it and how far Lib. BUt if I grant you that salvation is the Reward of our own faith and holiness I shall never grant you that we are Righteous by it before God or that it is any part of that Righteousness by which we are justified for that is only the Righteousness of Christ P. I hope you are not willing to wrangle about words not understood Quest 1. Do you think that the words Righteous Righteousness and Justification have but one sense in Scriptures and in our common use Lib. No you proved more before P. Quest 2. If the Devil or Men or a mistaking Conscience should say that you or any Saint is an Infidel or hath no faith how must you be justified against that charge Lib. By denying it and by maintaining that I do believe P. Very good Then faith it self as faith doth so far justifie you And Quest 3. If you be charged to be Impenitent and never to have truly Repented how must you be justified against that charge Lib. By denying it and averring that I did Repent P. So then your Repentance it self must so far justifie you And Quest 4. If you are charged to have been an ungodly person to the last or not to have loved God or your neighbour not to have called on God nor confessed Christ before men nor to have fed clothed and visited him as you could in his members or not to have mortified your fleshly lusts but to have lived after the flesh in murder theft whoredom drunkenness c. What is your righteousness against this accusation Lib. I must defend my self against a lye by denying it to be true I must be so far justified that is vindicated against Calumny by my innocency in those points P. Very good so far then you must be justified by your godliness love obedience mortification innocency and works And what if you be charged as an Hypocrite to have done all that you did in meer dissimulation how must you be therein justified Lib. By denying the charge and appeal to God that I was sincere P. So then your sincerity is so far your justifying righteousness And what if you are charged with Apostasie that you fell from Grace must you not be justified by pleading your Perseverance Lib. These are none of the Justification which the Scripture speaketh of which is only against true accusations and not against false ones P. Say you so What if one be truly accused that he hath no part in Christ and that his sin is unpardoned or that he is under the guilt of damnation by the obligation both of the Old Covenant and the New or that he never truly repented or believed or that he is unsanctified and never sincerely obeyed Christ c. Is this man justifiable Lib. No I say not that all men are justifyable But who ever is Justified in Scripture sense is justified only from a true Accusation P. What is that true Accusation Lib. That he is a sinner and deserveth damnation according to the Law and that he hath no righteousness of his own P. Must he not confess all this to be True if it be True And is not confessing the Guilt which he is accused of contrary to justifying him Do you not see here what Confusion you cast your self into for want of noting the various senses of Justification If by Justifying we mean Making an unjust man just then it is true that he is justified from his Guilt that is he is pardoned and he is justified from the Laws condemnation that is a man condemned by the Law is pardoned and he is justified from his reigning sin that is he is sanctified But this Justification is not opposite to Accusation but to Being unjust But if you speak of Justification by Plea or Sentence it is contrary to Accusation of Guilt And so no man is justified that is not Just or Guiltless in the point of which he is accused God will by no means clear the guilty or justifie the unjust Exod. 34. 7 8. nor say of the wicked Thou art Righteous Prov. 24. 24. 1 Pet. 1. 17. 2. 23. Jer. 11. 20. Rom. 1. 32. 2. 2. But that you are quite mistaken in saying that Scripture never mentioneth Justifying man from a false accusation these and many such Texts shew Rom. 8. 33. Isa 50. 8. Prov. 17. 15. 1 Kings 8. 32. James 2. 21 24 25. Rom. 2. 13. Luke 7. 29. Matth. 11. 19. 12. 37. Isa 43. 9. 26. Luke 10. 29. 16. 15. Deut. 25. 1. Exod. 23. 7 c. And how widely differ you from most Protestant Divines who say that Justification is a Judicial Sentence of God as Judge Though indeed it is of divers sorts Lib. But it is not Scripture Justification unless it be perfect And all that we do is Imperfect To justifie him in some one thing is not Justification by faith but another thing P. 1. No doubt but Scripture mentioneth both particular Justification as to some particular causes and a more large Justification from all things that would damn him in Hell And this latter is the Great Justification by
faith mentioned so oft in Scripture that is Upon and by believing we are first made just by free-given pardon and right to life and true sanctification with it and we are sentenced just because so first made just But this is not without our Faith and Repentance 2. And that Faith and Repentance are a Righteousness Evangelical that is a performance of the conditions on which the Covenant of Grace doth freely give us right to Christ pardon and life and so are the Constitutive causes of that subordinate Justification Lib. But your subordinate Righteousness hath no hand in our Justification P. This is but singing over the old Song by one that will not consider what is answered Have you thought on all the Texts even now cited Hath faith no hand in our Justification Hath the performance of a Condition and the Moral Disposition of the Receiver no hand in the Reception of a Gift What think you is the meaning of Christs words Matth. 12. By thy words thou shalt be justified and by thy words thou shalt be condemned What meaneth St. James that a man is justified by works and not by faith only Are men justified by that which hath no hand in their Justification Lib. Christ meaneth before men and so doth James and not before God P. This is notoriously false as contrary to the plain Text Christ speaketh of the Account to be given of our words in the day of Judgement vers 36. And James speaketh of that which men are saved by vers 14. and that Justification which Abraham had and that in an instance where Man did not justifie him and of that which was faiths life and perfection vers 17 22. and of Gods imputing faith for righteousness as to a friend of God vers 23. And is this nothing but Justification before men Lib. This is not the justifying of the man but of his faith P. 1. You contradict the Text which saith Abraham Rahab A man is justified by Works 2. You contradict your self For if the faith be justified the man is justified to be a true believer For how could a man that fulfilled the Law as Christ and Angels did be justified but by justifying his actions And how can he that fulfilleth the Gospel conditions be justified in that point but by justifying that he fulfilled them Lib. At least I may say that this is not the great and notable Justification which is only by Christs Righteousness P. We are not contending for its preheminence but its truth and necessity in a subordinate place Indeed we have one Justification by our Judges sentence which hath many parts and causes God as Donor is one cause and God as Judge another And Christ as meriting is the only meritorious cause of the Justifying Gift and Covenant and Christ as Intercessor another cause and Christ as Judge another And our Righteousness as it is our Right to Impunity and life another and our faith and Repentance are conditions All this is sure Lib. But the Justification by faith is our Universal Justification and that can be only by Christs Righteousness And we are not to trust to a Righteousness mixt of Christs and ours nor doth Christs Righteousness need to be patcht up with our menstruous rags P. 1. No question but Christs Righteousness is perfect and ours imperfect and ours is no patch or supplement to Christs He is not made righteous by our righteousness but we by his 2. But that which is perfect in him is not made perfectly ours nor formally ours in it self as distinct from its merited effects It is not ours as it is Christs Christ that is our Righteousness is also made of God to us wisdom and sanctification And will you say therefore that we are not to be Wise or Holy by any Wisdom or Holiness of our own for fear of adding our patch to Christs 3. You use to say that Christs Righteousness is ours as Adams sin is ours and say some as Adams Righteousness would have been had he persevered But 1. Adams Righteousness would have indeed made an Infant initially just by propagation that is the innocent Child of an innocent Parent But as soon as that Infant had the use of Reason and Choice he must also have a Righteousness of his own or perish And this is no patch to Adams righteousness And indeed in his Infancy he must have a seminal Holiness of his own to justifie him as well as the relation of a Son of Adam 2. So also though we are guilty of Adams sin by propagation yet we have with that guilt 1. An inherent pravity of our own 2. And at age our actual sin And both these are our unrighteousness as well as Adams sin imputed to us Even so Christ the second Adam is a Root of a righteous seed Our Contract by faith is as to him what our Natural propagation is as to Adam that is the Condition of our Interest in his merits We have as believers an initial righteousness in our relation to Christ But we have also from him 1. Inherent habitual righteousness 2. The actual righteousness of faith and true obedience and love And these have their proper use and office without which we must perish 4. And I must tell you that the word Universal is too big to be properly given to any mans justification or righteousness but Christs Properly he only is Universally justified or righteous who hath no unrighteousness at all imputable to him and is justifyable in all things But the best believer 1. Was once a sinner originally 2. Did oft sin actually 3. Hath still sin in him 4. And for some sin may be punished by the Magistrate 5. And for sin is judged and punished by chastisements and death by God 6. And the earth still cursed for our sake 7. Yea which is worst of all we are still under the penaâty of some privations alas how great of Gods Spirit and its Grace and our Communion with God And all this must be confessed And such a one is not Universally justified or just Lib. But still our own Righteousness doth but make us such as thankful persons must be for their Justification by Christ and is no part of that Justification by faith For if faith it self be that Righteousness we have not faith by faith and faith is not imputed to faith but Christs Righteousness is it that is imputed P. Of Imputation in due place 1. What need you talk against that which none of us assert Do we not all hold that our personal Gospel-Righteousness is subordinate to Christs and is by his Gift as ouâ Wisdom and Sanctisication is Who dreameth that our faith is any part of Christs Righteousness But why do you waste time in vain cavilling against plain certain truth Is there any thing in Name or Thing asserted by us that you can deny or question Quest 1. Do you deny that Scripture commandeth us to Believe that we may be justified Lib. No. P. Quest 2. Or
not by such talk as this believe either that God Rewardeth himself or that he Rewardeth not us But we easily grant that he rewardeth us for nothing which cometh not from his free bounty For no creature can have any other good 2. But if Faith and Love and Obedience be not commanded to us but only given us then they are no Duties but Gifts only and unbelief hatred of God and disobedience is no sin nor brings no punishment Lib. At least they are no Conditions of the Covenant P. Do you think that they are any proper Means of our Justification and Salvation as their End or not Lib. Yes I dare not say that they are no means at all Faith and Repentance are Means of our Pardon and Holiness and Perseverance of our Glorification P. What sort of means do you take them to be Lib. They are such Gifts of God as in order must go before Salvation P. Going before signifieth only Antecedency and not any Means Lib. One Gift maketh us fit for a thankful improvement of another P. This speaketh them only to be a Means to our Thankful improvement and not to our Right to the things to be improved Lib. I do not think that they are a means of our Right or title P. Rev. 22. 14. Blessed are they that do his Commandments that they may have Right to the tree of life c. Lib. It may be translated that wash their garments and that they may have power upon as Dr. Hammond noteth P. 1. The Alexandrian Copy which giveth him this occasion is singular and not be set against all other though the Vulgar Latin go the same way Beza who yet thinks that a transposition of two Verses hath darkned these Texts this Book being negligently used because many for a time took it not for an Apostolical Writing or Canonical yet saith that it is contra omnium Graecorum codicum fidem that the Vulgar goeth 2. But all 's one in sense For to wash their Garments is to be sanctified or purified from sin and not only from guilt of punishment And ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã signifieth such a Power as we call Authority oâ Right usually But what maketh you deny Conditions on mans part Lib. Because 1. It is supposed that a condition is profitable to him that requireth it 2. It is some Cause of the benefit 3. It is to be done by the performers own strength whereas God giving âs Faith that can be no condition on our part which is first a Gift from him that requireth it For to give it first maketh it no condition of ours P. Here we see what it is to quarrell about ambiguous Words No one of these is true that you say of the common nature of a condition or at least as we mean by that word 1. Civilians define a Condition to be Lex addita negotio qua donec praestetur eventum suspendit As it is Required it is only Modus promissionis donationis vel contractus as Performed it is only a Removal of an Impediment and a Disposition of the Receiver So that as the Non-performance is but the suspension of a Causation so the performance of a Condition as such is no Cause efficient But it is dispositio subjecti which you may call a necessary Modus of a Material Cause as the Recipient may improperly be called Dr. Twisse therefore calleth faith Caâsa justificationis dispositiva 2. So it be an act of our own it is no way necessary that it be done without the Commanders help or gift For he that giveth us to believe doth give it by this means even by commanding it and making it a Condition of his further benefits that so he may induce us as rational free agents to perform it ex intuitu mercedis or by the motive of the end or benefit For he causeth it by suitable means And no doubt but faith and the rest are free acts of ours though caused by Gods grace 3. And it is accidental to a Condition that it be any way commodious to the Imposer What profit is it to a Father that his Child put off his Hat and say I thank you And yet he may make that a condition of his gift What profit is it to a free Physicion that the Patient observe his order in taking his Medicines And yet he may give them on that condition But yet I will add that as usually men make that the condition of a Gift or Contract which the person obliged is backward else to perform and that which is somewhat either for the Donor or Contracters Interest or the Ends of his contract so God who taketh his Glory and Pleasure in his Childrens Good to be as his Interest and the End of his Gifts and knoweth how backward we are to our duty doth on these accounts impose on us our duty and conditions his Pleasure and Glory being instead of his Commodity But if If be a conditional Particle and if Gods suspending by the tenour of his Donation our Right to Justification upon our free believing and our Right to Salvation on our free obedience do prove Conditionality as it doth all that we mean then you see that the new Covenant hath conditions Lib. Doth not God promise us the first Grace even to take the hard heart out of our bodies and give us hearts of flesh and new hearts c. And I pray what condition can the first grace have unless you will run in infinitum to seek Conditions of Conditions P. 1. This is a Cause of great moment of which I have my self had darker thoughts than now I have 1. If one Benefit of the Covenant have no Condition viz. the first will it follow that none of the rest are given upon condition May not God in Baptism give us a Right of special Relation to the Father Son and Holy Ghost his Love Grace and Communion Pardon Adoption and Glory on condition of Faith and Repentance and yet himself give us that Faith and Repentance which is the condition of the rest 2. But upon fuller consideration it will appear that It is not the first Grace that those promises mean by a new and soft heart For who ever will examine them shall find that the Texts mention Conditions and also antecedent Grace And indeed A new and soft heart is but the same thing which the New Testament calleth Sanctification And yet that Sanctification is promised as consequent to Faith as its condition And our ordinary Divines do accordingly distinguish of Vocation and Sanctification holding that in Vocation the Act of Faith and Repentance are caused by Gods Grace before proper Habits and that Sanctification is the Habits specially of Love and Holiness following them vid. Ames Medull de Vocat Rolloc de Vocat Hookers Souls Vocat Humil. Rogers of Faith c. And this is the new and fleshy heart But what need we more to prove that Covenant Conditional which I mean when it is nothing
but the Baptismal Covenant where sure the condition is notorious and every Baptizing Minister prerequireth the profession of it CHAP. VII Whether Justifying Faith be a Believing in Christ as a Teacher Lord c. or only a Receiving of his Righteousness P. VI. AS to this your sixth Charge I have said so much elsewhere in my Disputations of Justification and in other Books that I cannot justifie the tiring of Readers by repeating it And will say now but this little following 1. That Paul doth not distinguish between justifying faith and saving faith but excludeth the Works excluded by him from being the causes either of Justification or Salvation 2. That if Receiving Christs Righteousness be meant by them properly and physically it is no sort of faith at all but only the effect of the donation which they call Justificari or passive Justification But if it mean a moral metonymical Reception that is nothing but Consent to have the offered gift And if only Consent to have Christs Righteousness be Justifying faith then all the Assenting part is excluded in which Scripture much placeth it and most Divines in part and many in whole besides Camâro and his followers And so also all the Affiance or Fiducial âcts are excluded which almost all include even that which they call Recumbency being distinct from Consent 3. All these acts following are essential to Justifying faith as well as this Consent to be Justified 1. An Assenting belief in God in the baptismal sense 2. An Assent to the truth of Christs Person Office and Doctrine 3. A belief in the Holy Ghost 4. A belief of Pardon Sanctification and Glory as possible purchased and offered by Christ 5. A Consent that God be our God in Christ 6. And a Consent that Christ be our Teacher 7. And our King and Ruler 8. And our Intercessor 9. And our Judge and Justifier by sentence and as our Advocate 10. A belief of his Resurrection Power and Glory 11. A Trusting to the Father and the Son according to these forementioned Offices 12. A Consent to be Sanctified by the Holy Ghost 4. Plainly our Justifying and Saving Faith in Pauls sense is the same thing with our Christianity or becoming Christians And the same thing with our Baptismal faith and consent 5. To believe in Christ as Christ is in Scripture Justifying faith But to accept his righteousness only and not to believe in him as our Lord and our Teacher and Intercessor c. as aforesaid is not to believe in him as Christ 6. In my Answer ubi sup to Mr. Warner and elsewhere I have detected the fraud of their quibling distinction who say that All this is in faith quae justificat but not quà justificat as supposing a falshood that any act of faith quà talis justifieth 7. They that say that only our Acceptance of Christs Imputed Righteousness is the Justifying act of faith and that to expect to be Justified by any other viz. by Believing in God the Father and the Holy Ghost and believing a Heaven hereafter and believing the Truth of the Gospel and of Christs Resurrection Ascension Glory c. and by taking him for our Teacher Ruler Intercessor c. is to expect Justification by Works in Pauls disclaimed sense and so to fall from Grace I say they that thus teach do go so far towards the subverting of the Gospel and making a Gospel or Religion of their own as that I must tell them to move them to repentance not only the adding of Ceremonies is a small corruption in comparison of this but many that in Epiphanius are numbred with Hereticks had far lesser errors than this is CHAP. VIII Of Faiths Justifying as an Instrument P. VII ANd I have said so much in the foresaid Disputations of Justification and other Books of Faiths Instrumentality and the reason of its Justifying interest that I cannot perswade my self now to talk it out with you all over again but only to say 1. That I have fully oft proved from many plain Scriptures that pardon and salvation are given with Christ in the Covenant of Grace on Condition of a penitent believing fiducial acceptance And therefore that it is most certain that faith is a Condition of our Justification and so to be profest in Baptism 2. The name of An Instrument given to faith and its Justifying as an Instrument are of mens devising and not in Gods Word 3. But as to the sense It is certain that faith is no Instrument of our Justification Gods or Mans if it be meant properly of an Instrumental efficient cause 4. But if it be taken Metaphorically for an Act whose Nature or essence is An Acceptance of a free Gift and so by Instrumentality be meant the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã credere that is Faith 's very Essence in specie then no doubt it is what it is 5. Or if by an Instrument be meant A Moral aptitude or Disposition of the person to be justified answerable to the Dispositio Recipientis vel materiae in Physicks then it is such an Instrument But how well this is worded and what cause there is to contend for a word both of humane invention and metaphorical and this as if it were a weighty Doctrine I leave to sober judgements 6. But it is certain that the Accepting Act of faith is but its Aptitude to be the condition of the Gift and therefore that its being made by Christ the Condition is its Moral nearest interest in our Justification CHAP. IX Whether Faith it self be imputed for Righteousness Lib. VIII WHat do you but subvert the Gospel when you put faith instead of Christ or of his Righteousness When the Scripture saith that we are justified by Christs Righteousness Imputed to us you say it is by faith imputed P. Do you think any sober Christians here really differ or is it only about the Names and Notions Which ever it be 1. Of the name Is it not oft said that Faith is and shall be imputed for Righteousness Rom. 4. 22 23 24. James 2. 23. Lib. Yes I must grant the words but not your meaning P. Where doth the Scripture say that Christs Righteousness is Imputed to us Remember that it is only the Name that I ask you of Lib. It saith that Righteousness is Imputed and what Righteousness âan it be but Christs P. I tell you still it is only the phrase or words that we are first trying Are these the same words Righteousness is Imputed and Christs Righteousness is Imputed If not where are these latter words in Scripture Lib. Grant that the words are not and your words are P. Then the question is Whether Scripture phrase or mans invented phrase be the better and safer in a controvertible case And next Whether you should deny or quarrel at the Scripture saying that faith is imputed to us for righteousness and not rather confute our misexpounding it if we do so Lib. Well Let us examine the sense then What
Righteousness is it but Christs that is said to be imputed to us P. It is none but what we have from Christ But the phrase of Imputing supposeth it ours And the meaning is no more but that we are reputed Righteous And the causes are not included in the phrase of Imputing righteousness to us but in the words before and after As Imputing sin to us and not Imputing it is but to Repute reckon or judge us sinners or by sin guilty of punishment or not guilty so is it here So that it is supposed 1. That Righteousness that is This Relation of being Righteous is the thing imputed 2. Christs Righteousness is the meritorious cause 3. The Gospel Donation is the instrumental Cause 4. Our Faith in Christ is the condition and as such the subordinate matter necessary on our parts And that faith is imputed for Righteousness plainly meaneth but this that Christ having merited and satisfied for us all that is now required on our part to denominate or primarily constitute us Righteous is to be true Believers in him or true Christians And I further ask you Do you thus paraphrase the words Faith that is Christs Righteousness is imputed to us for righteousness Lib. Yes I do so because the act is put for the object P. Were it so said but once and otherwise oft you had some colour for this But when it is never said Christs Righteousness is imputed to us and so oft said Faith is imputed for righteousness how shall ever the Scripture be understood at this rate if still by faith it mean not faith at all but Christs righteousness And why must not all other places that mention faith be so understood also But read the Texts and set all together and see what sense thus will be made of it Rom. 4. 3. What saith the Scripture Abraham believed God and it that is not his believing but Christs Righteousness was Imputed to him for righteousness Is this a sober and modest paraphrase or a shameless violence Doth not it refer to believing God before mentioned Vers 4 5. To him that worketh is the reward not reckoned or imputed of Grace but of debt But to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly his faith that is not his faith but Christs righteousness is counted for righteousness Is this a modest Exposition Vers 10 11. We say that Faith that is not faith but Christs righteousness was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness How then was it that is not his faith but Christs righteousness reckoned In uncircumcision And he received the sign of circumcision a seal of the righteousness of the fiath that is not of the faith but of the righteousness of Christs righteousness which he had being uncircumcised that he might be the Father of them that believe that righteousness that is Christs might be imputed to them also who walk in the steps of that faith which Abraham had c. doth faith here also signifie no faith Vers 13. When the promise is said to be through the righteousness of faith and Vers 14. faith made void is it no faith that is here also meant by faith And Vers 16. It is of faith to that seed which is of the faith of Abraham is not faith indeed here meant by the word faith So Vers 18 19 20 21. Who against hope believed And being not weak in faith he staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief but was strong in faith And being fully perswaded that what he had promised he was able to perform is it no faith that is meant in all these words yea or no act of faith but accepting the righteousness of Christ So next Vers 22. And therefore it was imputed to him for Righteousness that is Not his faith but by It is meant only Christs Righteousness though it was faith that was over and over mentioned as the antecedent So Vers 23 24. It was not written for his sake only that it that is not faith but Christs righteousness was imputed to him But for us also to whom it that is not faith shall be imputed if we believe is not that faith neither on him that is God the Father that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead which is a distinct act from Consenting to have his righteousness who was delivered to death for our offences and was raised again for our Justification Is the meaning that we are justified by the Imputation of Christs Resurrection so to us as that in Law sense we rose again in him and by Rising fulfilled the Law of Innocency I will not for shame and weariness thus go over other such Texts but I must be so faithful as to say that if good men and wise men and men that cry down the Papists and others for adding to Gods Word and corrupting it and calling it a Nose of Wax and introducing new Articles of faith will yet own such Expositions as these and accuse those that own them not they are as great Instances as most I remember except the defenders of Transubstantiation how far education or custom or humane dependance or faction and partiality and prejudice may blind the reason of professed Christians and godly men And that man that dare lay his comforts and hopes of justification and life upon such expositions of Gods Word should be modest in crying down the false hopes of others and reproving them that build upon the sand Lib. You have made a long discourse to make us odious upon a false supposition We do not say that in all or any of those Texts by faith is not meant faith but only that it is not faith as faith or as an act of ours but as connoting its object the Righteousness of Christ P. 1. Alas a great number of better men than you have too oft and plainly said without distinction that Faith is not imputed to us for righteousness I hope they meant better than they spake but I would it could be hid from the world that these words are not only in the Independents Savoy Confession but even in the Confession of the Westminster Assembly cap. 11. Not by imputing faith it self the act of believing or any other Evangelical obedience to them as their Righteousness but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ to them So also in the larger Catechism Not as if the Grace of faith or any act thereof were imputed to him for his Justification How well soever they may mean Gods oft repeated Word should rather have been expounded than denyed 2. But what mean your cloudy words It is not faith as faith but as connoting the object They that cannot speak clearly seldom clearly understand what to speak The Question is Whether it be really and properly Faith that is meant in all these Texts or whether it be only Christs righteousness If you say that It is both in several respects you grant then that it is saith it self in one respect that is
imputed to us for righteousness If it be only the object and not faith why is it so often called faith believing being perswaded c. Will you say that It is not faith as an act of ours only Whoever dreamt it was For à quatenus ad omne If as an act then every act even plowing and walking and sinning would justifie us Will you say that It is not Faith as a Moral Virtue or Good act only Who saith it is For then every moral good act would justifie men Do you say that It is not by faith as faith in genere It is granted you For else à quatenus ad omne any act of faith would justifie even believing that there is a Hell Will you say that it is not any other species of faith besides our baptismal faith We grant it you But if you will also say that It is not this species even the Christian faith neither that is meant but only the object of it then 1. Why say you that it is Faith as connoting the object contradicting your self for if be not faith at all it is not faith as connoting that which is not doth not connote 2. And why say you that it is not faith it self essentially Is not the object essential as an object to the act in specie Is it not essential to our Christian faith to be a Believing in Christ 3. But what sober unprejudiced Christian that readeth the Text throughout and hath not been instructed to pervert it can choose but see that it is Faith it self that the Apostle speaketh of and that it is our personal Relation of Righteousness that it is said to be imputed for And who can believe that this is the sense Abrahams faith was imputed to him for Christs Righteousness or this either His faith that is Christs Righteousness and not his faith was imputed to him for Christs Righteousness Undoubtedly by faith is meant faith and by Righteousness is meant our own Relation But it is most easie to discern that the plain sense is Christ being presupposed the Meriter of our Justification and Salvation which he hath given the world conditionally by a Law of Grace or Covenant Donation by which now he ruleth and judgeth us all that this Covenant Gift or Law requireth on our part to make us Righteous and entitle us to the Spirit and everlasting life is that as Pânitent Believers we accept Christ and life according to the nature ends and uses of the gift and this also by his grace Reader hold close to this plain Doctrine which most of the lower sort of Christians know who have not faln into perverters hands and youâ will have more solid and practical and peaceable truth about this point than either Dr. Thomas Tullie or Maccovius or Mr. Crandââ or Dr. Crispe or the Marrow of Modern Divinity * Written by an honest Barber Mr. Fisher as is said and applauded by divers Independent Divines or Paul Hobson or Mr. Saltmarsh or any such Writers do teach you in their learned Net-work Treatises by which being Wise or Orthodox overmuch being themselves entangled and confounded by incongruous notions of mans invention they are liker to entangle and confound you than to shew you the best method and grounds for the peace of an understanding dying man Christs Righteousness is Imputed or Reckoned to be as it is the total sole Meritorious Cause of all that Grace and Glory given us in and by the Conditional Law or Covenant of Grace and of our Grace for performance of the Conditions and it needeth nothing at all of ours to make it perfect to this use nor hath our faith any such supplemental Office But this condition of our part in Christ and of our Right to his Covenant-gifts must be performed and the sentence of Absolution or Condemnation life or death must be passed on us accordingly it being not Christ but we by this very Law that are to be Judged Justified or Condemned And this is the Condemnation that light is come into the World and men loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil But to as many as Received him he gave Right to become the Sons of God even to them that believe in his name And there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the Flesh but after the Spirit For being perfected he is become the Author of eternal Salvation to all them that obey him And it is not they that cry Lord Lord that shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven but he that doth the will of our heavenly Father For Godliness hath the promise of the life that now is and of that to come CHAP. X. Whether Gods justifying those to day that were yesterday unjustified signifie any change in God P. IX OF this also I have said so much in my Apologie to Dr. Kendall and in the two first parts of this Book before that I shall now put you off with this short notice 1. There is nothing changed or new in God That which on his part is in God the Cause of our Justification is his eternal simple essence 2. But Gods Essence Understanding or Will considered simply in it self is not to be called Mans Justification But the effect produced by it And partly the extrinsick object as terminating Gods act and so by extrinsick denomination or connotation Gods Essential Intellect and Will is said de novo to justifie But it is only man that is really changed 3. The New effect in man from which God is said de novo to justifie him is 1. A new Right or Relation to Christ pardon and life and to the Father and the Holy Ghost 2. A new objective termination of Gods estimation acceptance and complacency And 3. A new heart hereupon at the same instant given us I think none of this is from eternity And that as God did de novo make the world and judge it existent and love and order it as existent without any change in him as also millions of creatures proceed from his simple Unity so is it here And this needeth no more words with knowing or teachable men And to others there is no end CHAP. XI Whether a Justified man should be afraid of becoming unjustified Lâb THis fear of losing our justification which you teach men is most injurious to Gods free grace and immutability and a rack for Conscience to destroy mens peace P. I have said so much of this before about Perseverance and Assurance as forbiddeth me tedious repetitions Here needeth no more but this explication of the matter which you confound 1. Fear is either Causeful or Causeless 2. Fear is either such as hindereth comfort or such as helpeth it 3. Fear is either a Duty or an unavoidable natural passion or a sin of unavoidable infirmity or a more deadly or heinous sin 4. It 's one thing to cause and cherish Fear and another thing to teach men that cannot avoid
to sin entertained we must go as far from sin as we can But poor deceived souls run into it under the conceit of going far enough from it and sometimes into greater than they avoid S. What sin have such Protestants run into in their opposition to Popery P. I will tell you some I. In Doctrine and II. In the consequentâ and practice I. It is more than one injudicious Protestant Divine that hath printed such unfound Opinions as these in opposition to Popery for want of judgement 1. While they plead against the Romish false Tradition they have weakned faith by denying that necessary use of Historical Tradition of Scripture which Christianity doth suppose As others have denyed the necessary use of Reason unto faith 2. They have wronged the Church by undervaluing the Tradition of the Creed and the Essentials of Christianity by many means besides the Scriptures 3. They have much wronged the Protestant Cause by denying the perpetual Visibility of the Church and almost given it away as I have shewed against Johnson 4. And their dânyal of its Universality and confining it long to the Waldenses and such others is an exceeding injury to the Church and Truth 5. And so is some mens over-doing as for the Scripture who teach men that they can be no surer of Christianity as delivered many years in Baptism before any of the New Testament was written than they are that there is no one error in all the Bible by the carelesness of the Scribes and Printers nor any humane frailty in the phrase 6. And also their feigning the Scripture perfection to consist in its being a particular determiner of all those circumstances of which it is only a general rule 7. And those that make every form of prayer or Ceremony to be Antichristian 8. And those that make Justifying faith to be a certainty or full perswasion that we are elected and pardoned and shall be saved 9. And those that say that To believe that I am justified is to believe Gods Word or âides divina either as most say because one of the premises is in Scripture or as excellent Chamier saith because the Witness of the Spirit is Gods Word 10. And those that say All that have true faith are sure they have such as Keckerman and too many others 11. Those that deny Christ to have made any Law 12. And those also that assert Imputation of Christs Righteousness in that sense which I have proved to subvert the Gospel 13. And those that deny Faith it self to be Imputed for righteousness 14. And those that deny that there is any personal Evangelical Righteousness in our selves that is any way necessary to our Justification 15. And those that lay all the stress of Faiths Justifying us on the notion of Instrumental efficiency 16. And those that say we are Justified by no act of faith but its receiving Christs Righteousness and all other acts of faith are the Worâs by which none is justified 17. And those that say that Evangelical obedience is not meritorious as it signifieth only Rewardable in point of Paternal Evangelical Governing Justice and as all the antient Fathers used that word because we merit not by Commutation 18. And those that say that man hath no free-will at all of any sort to spiritual good 19. And those that say that Christ was in Gods reputation the greatest sinner or wicked man Adulterer Murderer hater of God in all the world 20. And those that say that he suffered in soul Pain altogether of the same kind with those that the damned suffer in Hââ 21. And those that in opposition to the Popish Government Confession Austerities and several acts of Worship do run into the conârary extream against due Government Confession Austerities c. And those that from dark uncertainty or à minus notiâ do gather many conclusions against known truth I pass by such as the Antinomians who as I have proved subveât the Gospel it self by running into the contrary extream from Popeâââ S. You are as âad as Parker or the Debate-maker that thâs lây sâândal on the Reformers themselves If these were their faults you ââââ cover them and not open them This had been enough for â Romish Râbshakeh P. You know not what it is that you say This is to aâhoââââââtance and to preferr the honour of man before the honour of God yea to let the shame be cast on Gods Word and Religion lest the erroâ of ââââ be shamed But all men are lyars that is fallible and God is ââââ He that confesseth and forsaketh his sin shall have mercy but he that hideth it shall not prosper Are there not with you even with you also saith the Prophet sins against the Lord our God Why hath God recorded in Scripture the faults of so many of his servants and fomeâ them to such open Confessions Did Paul wrong Peter and ââââ Gal. â or the Ministry when he said All seek their own thingâ and noâe the things of Jesus Christ or did the Evangelists wrong all âhe Disciples by saying that They all forsook him and fled or James all Cââstians saying In many things we offend âll I think the Prouâ Impeâitence of many Professors that will not confess sin nor endure to be ââled to it lest Religion be dishonoured is that great dishonour to Religion which God hath been long punishing us for When such evils have ââââ held and done as our age hath known either it must be said that they are not evil or that they are If we deny it and say they are God ââââ and mâns duty we feign God and Scripture and Religion to be for all that evil which is to blaspheme If we say It is evil we must saââ that we are the guilty causes of it God will teach Ministers and Professors instead of Pharisaical self-justification to take open shame to themselves that he and Religion may be vindicated before he will deliver us from shame and sorrow And he that will save his honour against this shame shall lose it and he that will thus lose it and cast it away shall most effectually recover it S. I think you would fain perswade us that Protestants are as bad as Papists and perswade us into the Roman Tents P. That is but your pievish inference But little do you know how much of Popery it self you have while you think that you hate it more than I. S. You would make me believe any thing if you make me think that I have more of Popery than you P. 1. Do not you agree with them in consining the Catholick Church to one Sect or Party only They to their Sect and You to yours 2. Do you not agree with them in your vehement condemnation of dissenters only they excommunicate and burn them and you deny them your communion and reproach them But their charity extendeth much further than yours and you condemn more dissenters than they do 3. Do you not agree with them in
much as that the form exist C. Dr. Twisse saith No. B. And if it were but the Act that existed doth not Gods Law make it sin by forbidding it and so cause the Essence C. Yes B. And if you say that God willeth the existence of the form of Sin why say you that he doth not cause it Is not his Will effective or is it any more contrary to his Holiness to cause it than to will or love it C. He causeth the existence but not the form or existence B. What jugling is this in such tremendous matters 1. What is it to cause the form but to cause that it exist To cause it to be is all the causing that it can have 2. And you confess that Gods Law by forbidding it maketh it sin in specie when it existeth Remember that you say that it is not only the matter but the form of sin which God willeth and causeth to exist And is it not a contradiction to call it evil and yet say that God willeth it when his Will is the Rule of Goodness C. It is not evil to God but to us B. So Dr. Twisse saith And to be evil to us even mans sin or damnaââân is not evil to God And so God is the great Lover of Sin and Damnation But why then is he said to hate it And is it not an Enemy to God and contrary to his Holiness Why did Christ die for that which God so loved C. Sin is nothing and therefore God causeth it not B. 1. Relations and Privations have their Causes and so hath Sin 2. Else man cannot be condemned for causing it The Synod of Dort and Reformed Churches teach no such Doctrine But it ââ such as you that tempt the Arminians to revile them and say that you describe God in the shape of the Devil and much worse as loving and causing sin and misery more than he that so the love of God may be extinguished C. I think we must leave these Mysteries to God B. But good Brother though I have stopt your mouth and censures of your Brethren in this and such matters do you expect that every âonest Christian must be able to discuss all your Logical Fallacies or else go with you for unsound and heterodox And have you dealt fairly by the Church of God to borrow from the School-men such snares for mens Consciences And must every man be perswaded that God is the greatest lover and willer from eternity of every wicked Act that is not able to answer your smoaky Sophisms about futurition and its eternal cause with such like I tell you the Serpent hath beguiled us as Eve and turned men from the simplicity that is in Christ C. I pray briefly give me the sum of what you drive at B. The sum is That though every Party and almost every person of each Party have odd notions of his own and peculiar weapons to wound his Brothers Reputation with and militate against Love and Concord and manifest the Pride of his self-conceited Understanding yet all sober Christians I think are agreed in all this Controversie of Gods Decrees in all that is truly necessary to our brotherly love and peace That is All grant that God decreed to do all that he doth and to give all the Grace and Mercy which at any time he giveth whether to all or some And that he absolutely and properly decreed no more But improperly he may be said to will an event in tantum when he willeth only to do so much or so much which naturally conduceth towards it though he know that it will never come to pass But what it is that God actually doth or giveth in time is all the controversie which is to be spoken of in the third Chapter And were it not for your tenaciousness of contentious notions I needed to have said no more than these few words here of Gods Decrees THE Third Days Conference With an ARMINIAN of Universal and Special REDEMPTION A. The second Article of our Difference is so fundamental and âomen tous and our distance so great that I cannot believe that you can say any thing sufficient to reconcile us B. They that study Controversie as such are apt every where to finâ matter of Quarrel and weapons of Contention but they that seeâ peace do find out the terms and means of peace as sure and easie in them selves which Contenders cannot see Tell me in a word Are not all Parties agreed that Christ by his Merits and Sufferings procured for men all mercies which he giveth them ââââ and no more but as he may be said to procure them that which he offereth and bringeth to their choice which is properly to procâre them that offer or the benefit as offered A. Yes I think both sides will grant this that he purchased all that he giveth and absolutely or fully no more B. Why then all the Controversie is what he giveth men and that belongeth to the third and fourth Articles And so I might dismiss this at the beginning but for your expectations But what is it that maketh you think the difference so great The first Crimination A. 1. The Calvinists and Synodists deny Christ's very Office as he is the Saviour of the World and the second Adam the Redeemer of Mankind and the Mediator between God and Man And all this they confine to a small part of the World * Malderus in 1. 2. q. 111. a. 3. d. 5. m. 1. p. 487. Non existimo opinionem illam Calvinisticam quae negat pro omnibus singulis Christâm mortuum esse tolerandam esse nec inter studiosos varitaris debere obtinere locum opinionem qui non perinde admittunt quod omnibus in Adamo lapsis iterum sit via salutis facta possibilis per Christum quod habeant per Christum in actu primo paratum vel in actu secundo datum sufficiens auxilium gratiae quo saltem media'e salvari possint c. B. Have you never read what Musculus hath written in Loc. Commun and Bullinger in his Decades for universal Redemption Have you not read the plain words of Calvin cited by Amyraldus in Defens Doct. Calvin though Petavius rail at him for it most furiously Have you not read the writings of Joh. Bergius Conrad Bergius Lud. Crocius Calixtus of Camero and his Followers at Saumers of Testardus Dallaeus Blondel's Preface c. for Universal Redemption Have you not read in the writings of Bishop Rob. Abbots Bishop Carelton Arch-bishop Usher Bishop Hall Dr. Sam. Ward c. their judgments for it Have you not read Bishop Davenant's excellent Dissertation for it de morte Christi Know you not that it was the judgment of Dr. Preston Mr. W. Whateley Mr. W. Fenner and many excellent Divines among us Know you not that Dr. Twisse himself I believe twenty if not forty times over in his Works saith That Christ so far died for all as to procure and give them
in his first act of Faith is bound to believe that he is Elect or that Christ died for him any more than for lost Mankind But that he must first believe that Christ by his Death hath so far satisfied and merited for Mankind in general as to procure the universal conditional Gift of Christ Pardon and Life And that they must believe that this is procured for and offered to themselves as well as other Sinners And hereupon they are to accept this free Gift and so it is theirs What lye or unrevealed matter is in this or what difference about it among the Churches The sixth Crimination A. They disable Ministers rationally to preach the Gospel For if Christ died for none but the Elect and no Minister know the Elect they know not whom to offer and preach Christ to For the objective Gift must go before the offer And that which is to be offered to every Sinner is A Christ that hath already died and satisfied for him and not one that is to die and satisfie for him yet if he will believe Therefore the very offer is as much as to say Accept Christ as one that hath satisfied for thee And so they make the very preaching of the Gospel a lye to most B. I will not answer you as some that say they tell not men that they are Elect and that Christ died for them but that if they will believe then it is a sign that they are Elect and Christ died for them And they may offer him to all that some may accept him For I say as you do that it is a Christ that hath already made satisfaction and thereby is become a sufficient Saviour who is to be offered to men And the being of the Gift is before the offer of it in nature But I say again that you fight against straglers in a Cause which the Churches are not concerned in They say that it is a Christ who died for all as to sufficiency who is to be offered to men that he may efficiently save them The seventh Crimination A. They leave most men in the World as remediless as the Devils who had no Redeemer whereas God judgeth the wicked at last as Rejecters of his remedying Grace If Christ died not for them what differ they from the Devils in point of hope B. I will not answer you as some that though Christ died not for them yet they know it not and the offer differenceth their Case For still I confess that none is to be offered to men but a Christ that was already offered to God for them and hath made satisfaction But again I tell you that you fight with a shadow and feign the Churches to differ from you because some singular persons do so The eighth Crimination A. They harden men in impenitency for the most damning sin even denying the Lord that bought them For they tell all the Reprobates that they never sinned against a Christ that died for them B. All this is the old fiction and concerneth only some singular men The ninth Crimination A. They would exempt the Infidel World from much of the torments of Hell For he that in Hell knoweth that Christ never died for him especially adding that God unresistibly predetermined him to sin and unbelief cannot rationally have an accusing Conscience for his not accepting a Gift that never had a Being B. I will not repeat the same answer as oft as you call for it by the same false supposition Let them answer it that are concerned The tenth Crimination A. They teach the World abominable Ingratitude and reproachfully deny a great deal of the Grace and Mercy of Christ and the fruits of his Death and Sacrifice For they teach men that all the Mercies given to any besides the Elect were no fruits of the death of Christ for them nor were at all by him purchased for them yea that they are no Mercies to them at all because God eternally decreed that they should turn them into sin and suffer the more for the abuse of them for ever And so all the rest of the World may say that they are not at all beholden to the death of Christ for their Lives Liberties offers of Grace and all other Mercies B. Let them answer you that are concerned in the Charge The Reformed Churches hold That Mercy is to be judged of by its nature and tendency in it self and not by mans abuse and that God decreed no mans abuse of it and that all the Mercies given to Mankind since the forfeiture of all by Adam's sin are procured and given by Christ as the Intercessor and Redeemer of the World and that wicked men justly are deprived of life for rejecting it and suffer Hell for abusing Mercy and refusing Heaven The eleventh Crimination A. They are Anti-christian half-Infidels For they deny Christs Kingdom as to its far greatest part For when the Scripture telleth us That to this end he both died rose and revived that he might be Lord both of the dead and living Rom. 14. 9. And that the Father hath committed all Judgment that is Government to the Son Joh. 5. 22. And given him all power in Heaven and Earth Matth. 28. 18. And that his dying for all obligeth all men not to live to themselves but to him that died for them 2 Cor. 5. And so that he hath by his death acquired a jus Dominii Imperii over all Mankind they deny him his Crown and Dignity even this Right of Dominion and Empire as Redeemer and deny the World to be obliged to subjection to him as their Redeemer And so make that Rebellion for which they shall perish Luke 19. 27. to be no sin B. The Protestant Churches hold all that you charge them with denying It 's a pitiful work to caluminate that you may divide Tell those singular men of all this that are guilty of it The twelfth Crimination A. They make Christ to come on so narrow a design into the World as if they would tempt Unbelievers to despise him Even to die for none in all the World for 4000 years save a very few of the little Country of Judaea which was mostly wicked and even since the Church was Catholick but for a few called the Elect. B. 1. If you and they differ about the conditions of Salvation say so and tell the World the difference If you do not but are agreed that it is Faith Repentance and Holiness what are all these Objections but fighting by fictions against Concord and Peace They never held that none out of Judaea were saved And how many in the World are holy Believers they pretend not to judge They believe that all that are holy are saved by Christ in all Ages and Nations of the World And that all the Order and Government and common Mercies of the World with the offers of Grace and Salvation to them that wilfully refuse it are all to be ascribed to the death and procurement
Faith is become necessary when a man hath it necessitate existentiae But the asserting power to sin and to be an Unbeliever I will never charge on the Arminians when I would blame them for advancing man C. But it is a power to overcome Gods Grace which they assert B. Read but Dr. Twisse his judgment of Resistance and you will call it no more an overcoming any otherwise than a weight overcometh my strength which I can lift up and will not But I tell you I will not be cheated with ambiguous words 1. Either you mean an active or passive overcoming 2. And either you mean an overcoming of Gods utmost exerted Power by a greater Power or you mean an overcoming of Gods Will and his Power exerted with an absolute Will of efficiency or you mean the non-efficiency or non-prevalency of such an Act of God as cometh without any Decree or absolute Will of prevailing but with a Will of leaving the success to mans free Will as in Adam's case 1. Speaking improperly you may say that all men that are not softened convinced converted by the means which God thereto appointeth overcome God in that they overcome the means 2. Thus in not-repenting not-believing not-loving c. the less power any man hath the more he passively overcometh as a hard stone overcometh the Hammer that breaketh it not 3. No Arminian holdeth that man is stronger than God and overcometh his Power by a greater Power Out of Bedlam none have such thoughts that are awake 4. None of them think that any Act of Gods Power is overcome or is unsuccessful which is exercised with his absolute Will or Decree of prevailing or of the effect 5. But they think that in some cases yea ordinarily Gods Will is freely to exert no more of his power towards the causing of a commanded act than what shall give man a power to obey with some assisting motives and leave the success or effect to his free Will That God doth so sometimes is proved by the case of Adam Now whether you will call this overcoming or not and whether you will say Adam overcame Gods Grace or Gods Grace overcame not Adam's Will is but a Logomachy The thing in question is nothing but sinning against that degree of Grace which enabled man to have done better But all this belongeth to the controversie of Grace and not of mans power unless you think sin a powerful honourable act C. At least in this they over-value mans power in that they hold That mans Will hath power to determine the influx of God and so man shall rule his Maker when Gods influx or premotion shall but leave it to the Will of man what shall be the success B. This toucheth physical predetermination and needeth no other answer than is oft given 1. You wrong them They hold not all properly that mans Will determineth Gods Will either as to the essence of the Divine Will or as to the Act connoting the meer Object But only that it can determine of a common effect which Gods and mans Free-Will would produce if both concur 2. They do not think that mâââ Will hath any the âleast operation causally on Gods Will in it self but only that variations are made by variety of recipient dispositions where the influx of the Agent is universal and equal And so that mans receptive indisposition may be a cause that Gods Influx work not the same effect on him which it would do on a disposed subject 3. And they say not this of Gods absolute Will and Power but of his power operating restraiâedly by his own free Will when he will exert no more than what shall be successful only on a free concurring and disposed Subject and not on a resisting undisposed one It pleaseth God that the Sun shall operate but with a common Operation variable in the effects by the various disposition of Recipients The Flowers spring and are sweet and Weeds stink Trees grow and Stones grow not humanity is acted by it in men and not in Fruits God could have made the Influx of this Sun to have been causa specialis and to have turned a Weed into a Rose or a Stone into a Tree if he had pleased but he doth not Now will you say that we are erroneous and over magnifie the recipient if we say that its disposition is the cause of much of this diversity and that the stone is stronger than the Sun and overcometh it No the Sun did all that was properly intended Its beams came down on the Stone as well as on the Animals and Plants It warmed it though it did not quicken it So God doth his work on the Will of Sinners His Influx is terminated on their Will and had he sent it with a resolution to convert him it should have done it But seeing he sent it limitedly only to enable a man to Will and to concur so far as shall prevail if he do what his own Will is able to do by self-excitation it s no overcoming God if the man sin Once more I say that men that fear God should be very cautelous what they say in all Controversiès which are resolved into the nature of Divine Volitions and their way of efficiency Seeing 1. Will in God is not the same thing as in man an Appetite 2. It s own determination and the way of its determining us are confessed by the subtilest to be utterly unsearchable Saith Vasquez in Thom. q. 19. disp 80. p. 503. Quo autem pacto Deus seipsum determinet ad hoc potius quam ad illud ineffabile sane est nisi-quod nostro modo intelligendi intelligimus essentiam Dei quae est ejus voluntas habere circa futura peculiarem rationem voluntatis cum respectu illo rationis Et ideo dixi in hac controversia intelligi posse certa ratiocinatione Quid not sit Quid tamen sit quo pacto voluntas determinetur explicari non posse So that what Gods Act of willing or working is besides his essence and the effect they all confess that they are ignorant And yet shall the more ignorant contend The third Crimination C. They hold free-will to good that unregenate men have free-will Austin li. 1. de Gân Contr. Manich. c. 3. professeth That all men may believe if they will and justifieth it in his Retractations But if the Will of man be corrupt and averse from believing we justly say such a man cannot believe yet this is an impotency moral only which is to be distinguished from impotency natural For notwiâhstanding this it may be truly said that all men may believe if they will And herein consists the natural Liberty of the Will The moral Liberty consisteth rather in a sanctified inclination unto that which is good whereby it is freed from the power of Sin and Satan c. But I never find that Arminians do distinguâsh these Twisse against Hoord li â p. ââ without Gods special Grace and
from their lawfuiler imployments that they may hear in season and call Martha to choose Maries part and those that say They cannot come because of their Oxen Farms and Business to change that mind Lib. Yes no doubt of it Zaccheus must be in Christs way P. Quest 4. Must we not perswade them to take heed how and what they hear and to set their hearts to all Gods Words and to see that they despise not him that speaketh but he that hath ears to hear let him hear and to consider of the truth and weight of all and to search the Scriptures to see whether the things be so Lib. I deny none of this P. Quest 5. May we not perswade them to come and talk and reason the case with Friends or Ministers that we may convince them Lib. Yes no doubt as well as to hear in publick P. Quest 6. May we not Catechise them and teach them the Principles of Christianity that they may understand them Lib. Yes as to the Matter but to teach them your forms of Questions and Answers is but formality and deceit P. What May we not teach them the words of Christ and Scripture How shall the matter be understood without words And what better words than the words of Scripture Lib. But a Form of the same words is but formality P. Hath God forbid us to use the same Are Children and ignorant people fit to understand the mysteries of God if you speak them every time in new or other words or can they so remember them And when the use of words is to signifie Things and the Matter is one and the same for we have but one God and Christ and Gospel what wild work will you make of it if you speak the same things every time in other words Are all those words equally fit to signifie the same Things Certainly some particular words are more fitted to each matter than other And should not the fittest be most used Doth not Christ deliver us a form of Baptism and a form of the administration of his last Supper and a form of Prayer Are there not forms prescribed in Gods Word of the Priests Benediction and what the people shall say when they offer Sacrifice Are not all the Psalms forms of Prayer and Praise and were indeed the Liturgie of the Jews Doth not Joel put a form of prayer into the mouths of Penitents Doth not Paul teach us to use Psalms and Hymns and Spiritual Songs singing and making melody in our hearts to the Lord Eph. 5. 19. Doubtless it is not only Davids Psalms that are meant by these three words but Hymns and Songs fitted to Gospel Worship And if you would have none of them premeditated nor be twice the same words you would soon make your self ridiculous to the world If you say that this Precept was for them that could do so being filled with the Spirit I answer 1. It 's true that they had their extraordinary endowments which made a difference in the manner as also in Praying and Preaching But shall we dream that therefore the same duties belong not to us to be performed in the best manner that we can 2. A man may from the Spirit pour out his soul to God in forms of Prayer and Praise though the words were premeditated In a word if you would have all forms of Creeds Prayer Praise and administration of Sacraments and Catechisms cast away you are an enemy to Gods true Worship and the safety and edification of the Church yea you must cast away all the Scriptures which are Gods form of instruction recorded for the Churches use to the end of the World Quest 6. But I further ask you May we not perswade bad men to examine themselves and to find know and confess that they are bad and ungodly and to lament it Lib. Yes that cannot be denyed P. Quest 7. And may we not perswade them to believe that there is a God and that the Scripture is his Word and true and that Christ is the Messias Lib. Yes the Devils believe all this P. Quest 8. And may we not exhort them to Repent and Turn to God and so to believe in Christ as to receive him and give up themselves unto him Lib. Yes you may exhort them but they cannot do it of themselves P. Must we exhort them to nothing but what they can do of themselves Quest 9. Is not Exhortation Gods means to bring them to Repentance and Faith in Christ Lib. Yes I deny none of this But that which you abuse men by 1. Is bidding the ungodly pray when the prayers of the wicked are abominable to God And 2. In that you do not first call them to believe and come to Christ before they do any other duty P. 1. You granted me before that hearing and considering and searching the Scripture and other things named are to be done before Believing in Christ by those that are yet unbelievers He that believeth that there is a God must behave himself accordingly in obeying God 2. Men that believe in Christ but by Assent that he is truly the Christ and the Gospel true and that there is a life to come surely if they love themselves must do somewhat in order to a fuller Justifying Belief 3. And are you so much against the very Law of Nature worse than the Seamen that bid Jonas call upon his God worse than the Ninevites and than almost all mankind as that you would have no men pray but godly men Did not Peter bid Simon Magus repent and pray Acts 8. And doth not God command the wicked Isa 55. to seek the Lord while he may be found and call upon him while he is near Should no graceless man ask Wisdom of God who giveth liberally to all men and upbraideth not James 1. and giveth his Spirit to them that ask it Must they not pray for Grace Faith and Repentance that want them 4. But yet let me remember you that we use not to exhort men to draw nigh to God with the lips alone nor to pray without Desire For Praying is but Desiring and presenting that Desire to God And when we bid men pray for Grace we bid them desire it And so bid them Repent and Pray Believe and Pray for Praying is a Returning act And if we may not call them to pray we may not call them to Turn to God Mr. Eliot in New England teacheth the Indians another lesson whose great work is to call them to pray and the title that his Converts have is the Praying Indians Lib. But without faith it is impossible to please God or do any thing which is not abominable to him P. 1. But it is not impossible for one to have a common and temporary faith and another a saving faith 2. And one that believeth that God is and that he is the rewarder of them that diligently seek him and this not savingly may yet less displease God and be less abominable than
he was before without it and also may do something that tendeth as a means to that Faith by which he may please him 1. A total unbeliever and a wicked man as wicked whose prayers are animated with wicked principles and ends utterly displeaseth God and his prayers and all such actions are abominable 2. A convinced wicked man that doth somewhat from self-love for his own salvation and specially one that is not far from the Kingdom of God in the use of common grace is less abominable and pleaseth God secundum quid or less displeaseth him or seeketh that grace with which he may please him And Christ is said to love such a man Mark 10. 21. 3. But only the true Penitent believer so pleaseth him as to be an Adopted heir of life CHAP. XIII Of the Witness of the Spirit and Evidences of Justification P. XII I Will spend no more time with you on this than briefly to open your error and then to tell you what we hold as certain truth I. It is your gross Error to oppose Evidences to the Witness of the Spirit for in the principal respect they are the same as you may find by studying these Texts well Rom. 8. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 16 23. 1 Cor. 6. 17. 12. 4 12 13. 2 Cor. 3. 3. 4. 13. 12. 18. Gal. 4. 6. 5. 5 16 17 18 25. 2 Tim. 1. 7. John 3. 3 5 6. Eph. 1. 18. 2. 18 22. 4. 3 4 16 23. 5. 9 18. 2 Thess 2. 13. 1 Pet. 1. 2 22. 1 John 3. 24. 4. 13. Zech. 12. 10. Rom. 7. 6. Ezek. 11. 19. 18. 31. 36. 26. Eph. 1. 13 c. Our having the Spirit and our being sanctified by the Spirit are the Witness Seal Pledge Earnest and First Fruits and the Evidence of our Adoption and Right to life It is not chiefly An inward voice or perswasion that we are Gods Children that is the Witness But II. As a mans Rational soul doth witness that he is a Man so the Spirit of holiness witnesseth that we are Christians and adopted 1. Constitutively making us such 2. And thereby differencing us from all that are not such 3. And then helping us to discern that we are such As the Reasonable soul perceiveth it self 4. And helping us to exercise our Grace that it may be the more discernable 5. And lastly Comforting us by such Exercise and discerning As Life and the Intellectual Nature are pleasing to themselves The Conclusion P. ANd now Saul what think you of the Cavils that have puzled and troubled you Have you heard any thing that should change your mind S. I have heard that from you that confirmeth and satisfieth me But I have heard that from L. which grieveth my very soul 1. To think what temptations and perplexing tryals poor ignorant Religious people are assaulted by and how hard a thing it must needs be for such to escape deceit and sin and great distractions 2. To think in how sad a condition the Church of God is that besides what they suffer from men of Violence and the flatteries of the World must be thus troubled and ensnared by men of high professions of Religion and even drawn to corrupt the Word of God and almost to preach another Gospel 3. And that ever men of such professions should be guilty of so much evil We to the World because of offences and wo to them by whom they come P. Alas it is no new thing Do you not remember that Paul had such and worse to deal with Read Gal. 1. 3 4. Read Rev. 2. 3. Jude 2 Pet. 2. James 2. 3. Acts 15 c. and you will see that even those purest times when they had Apostolical Gifts and Authority to restrain and settle them were yet thus tryed and troubled by men of high pretensions so that Paul wisheth that they were cut off that trouble them and Christ proclaimeth the hatred of his soul against the Doctrine of the Nicolaitans and Paul tells the Corinthians that Heresies must be among them that those which are approved may be manifested among them and the Ephesians Acts 20. 30. that of their own selves should men arise speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them And ever since in all Ages to this day the Church hath been as Christ on the Cross between two Thieves between the Tyrannical and the Superstitious Heretical dividing sort of professed Christians But hold fast plain primitive SIMPLICITY and serious PRACTICE of a sober righteous godly and peaceable life and you will get safe through all such snares The Twelfth Dayes CONFERENCE L. A Lutheran R. A Reconciler Whether the Difference between Papists Arminians Lutherans and Calvinists about Mans Merits be as Great as many think it L. I Am greatly scandalized by a Sermon that you lately preached in London in which you said as many good people assure me that the difference between the Protestants and the Papists was little more than in meer words The City ringeth of it and it is a common scandal and offence R. Seeing you heard it not you are unfit to receive satisfaction about it save only by telling you that the Report is false and that which I said of some particular Controversies only they seign to be spoken of all or most or others But of this when you bring one that heard it I will give you a further account L. However I perceive by your words and writings that you extenuate our difference about Mans Merits And what is there that we more differ from the Papists about than Merits and from the Arminians than their placing our Righteousness in our own Believing and Repenting Is there any thing that more evacuateth the Righteousness of Christ and destroyeth the honour of free grace and justly entitleth them to the name of Antichristian R. Forget not that before I further discourse with you I premise that I speak not a word to justifie or excuse the Papists in general or any one of them in particular for any unsound word about this subject nor to abate your just dislike of any of their errors And before we proceed I desire your promise that you will hear and speak with as little partiality passion and unrighteousness as you can for to lay by all I cannot expect and that you will be true to what evidence of truth shall appear to you L. Do you think that I love not Truth and Sobriety Why do you so suspect me R. Alas how strange are our hearts oft to themselves and how much of our own ignorance temerity passion and unjust partiality is there in many a cause which we sinfully father upon God and his Truth and Grace But in order to our better understanding I ask your answer to these Questions Quest 1. Had you rather it did truly appear to you that the Papists and Arminians do less differ from us than most conceive or