the many excellent and heauenly graces wherewith the spirit of God beautifieth and enricheth the hearts of his Elect there is no one of more either necessity vnto saluation or importance for comfort and consolation then that of Iustifying Faith For as by the first Act of this faith our Iustification before God our peace with God our incorporation into the mysticall body of Christ Iesus our conuersion vnto God are first wrought and effected so by the consequent continued Acts of the same Fayth are wee being fallen dayly renewed and from both totall and finall falling away safely preserued and maintained This cōsidered me-thinkes no time can be better employed nor no paines more profitably taken then in the quest and enquiry of the true nature and definition of Iustifying Fayth And although I cannot deny but hee may haue fayth who cannot like a Logician define it and may haue the benefit of Iustification by it who cannot distinguinsh the nature of it yet this withall I boldly auerre that the ignorance hereof or a confused and indistinct apprehension of it disableth vs both from giuing and taking direct and euident comfort from it whereas a cleare and distinct knowledge thereof is able to satisfie and replenish with comfort any distressed or afflicted conscience For this cause haue I vndertaken so briefly and perspicuously as I can to set downe my opinion of the definition of Fayth perswading my selfe I doe not endeauouring at leastwise not to swarue from the wholesome doctrine of Christ and Gods word From the writings and doctrine of most learned and worthy Diuines peraduenture it doth and indeed it doth vary to whom although as farre farre inferior I owe all respect reuerence yet being Gods freeman I cannot endure to bee mans bond-man and sweare to all they say One Paphnutius sometime in the matter of Priests marriage preuailed against a whole Counsell of most learned and godly Bishops Socrat. l. 1. c. 8. and young Elihu may speake more oportunely pertinently then they that are much his Ancients Therefore as Nisus sayth in Virgill Neque hac nostris spectentur ab annis Aeneid l. 9. looke not how greene or how gray his head be that speaketh but let the touch of truth try all and what by it shall appeare to be base and counterfait refuse and reiect that which shall be found true and sound approue and embrace And that preiudice too strongly possesse thee not take my protestation that I neuer haue entertained this opinion rashly and inconsiderately but vpon mature aduise and deliberation nor broach it vpon a preposterous humour of nouelty or ambition to build vp mine owne credit existimation by the ruine and disparagement of so great Diuines for this were Subulâ leonem excipere to encounter a Lion with a bodkin as it is in the Prouerbe but vpon a sincere affection and desire to minister solid and found consolation to despayring and perplexed minds which as after shall appeare vpon this foundation may most firmely be raised And now trusting what I say shall be weighed in the ballance not of preiudice but vpright iudgement I leaue to preface any farther and come directly to the purprose Because I purpose not to raise my building very high I meane not to lay my foundation very deepe therefore neither will I play the Phylologer in shewing the diuers vses and acceptations of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Fides id est Faith or quote Ciceros Fiat quod dictum est or St. Augustines Fac quod dicis Offic. l. 1. to doe as a man sayes for the notation of Faith neither will I play the Phylosopher in discoursing of Physicall or Morall or Ciuill Faith wherein it were easie to wast much oile and paper nor lastly will I speake of that Theologicall Faith called Miraculous either in Agent or Patient which I take to bee none other then a diuine instinct for the working of a Miracle For albeit they who at the last day shall say Lord in thy name haue we not cast out Diuels may seeme to haue trusted in Miraculous Faith for Iustification Mat. 7.22.23 and acknowledgement of Christ yet notwithstanding neuer any controuersie about it hath exercised the Church of God To deferre your expectations therefore no farther three Faiths there seeme to be which lay claime and title to the priuiledge of justification giue me leaue to distinguish and denominate them according to their Obiects neither be offended if I handle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and giue new termes to old matters The first is Fides Historiae Historicall Faith which is an Assent of the mind vnto the truth of Gods word and specially the Gospell And this Faith whether it be according to the distinction of the Scoolemen Acquisite gotten by much hearing and experience without illumination or infused and reuealed by the spirit of illumination it hath no interest in the matter of Iustification For besides that it is absurd that so generall a Knowledge should iustify Acquisit Faith the Diuels haue according to that of St Iames Iam. 2. 19. The Diuels beleeue tremble Infused faith the Reprobates may haue as Balaam Iudas Magus Now the Scripture is plaine that justifying faith is propper and peculiar vnto the Elect and therefore Historicall faith cannot justifie The second is Fides Promissionum Faith of promises which is a Perswasion or Assurance that the promises of God made in Christ to wit Iustification Remission of sinnes Adoption Regeneration and finally Election it selfe and eternall Saluation doe particularly pertaine to me and are mine Now this although I deny not but in Scripture it is called faith and that euery Saint of God both may and ought to haue this particular perswasion and Assurance yet this I confidently deny that this perswasion is that which justifies a man before God and my reasons are these 1. If this were justifying Faith then whosoeuer liues and dyes without this particular Assurance he cannot be saued Heb. 11.6 Without faith it is impossible to please God But a man may be saued without it I instance in those our Brethren of Germanie who hold that faith may finally and totally fall away and consequently that there can be no certainty of Saluation whom yet the Church of God calleth and counteth brethren and it were vncharitable to censure of them otherwise Therefore or at leastwise probably Faith is not an Assurance 2. That which is in time after Iustifying Faith cannot be that faith This is vndeniable But this particular knowledge is in time after faith This I proue out of 1. Ioh. 5.13 These things haue I written vnto you that beleeue in the name of the Sonne of God that ye may know that ye haue eternall life Behold Beleeuing goes before and Knowledge comes after as for that which followeth in the same verse and that yee may beleeue I interpret it of Perseuerance growth in Faith Howsoeuer beleeuing Knowing are distinguished and
define it a Rest of the Will vpon Christ and his merits for Iustification and consequently Saluation In which Definition 1 That the Obiect of it is the Person or Personall merit of Christ the whole tenor of Scripture proues which runs thus Hee that beleeueth in mee shall not perish Ioh. 3.16 Ioh. 14.1 Ioh. 1.12 and Yee belieue also in me and As many as receiued him to them hee gaue power to bee the Sonnes of God that is to them that belieued in his Name and in six hundred places besides But if thou wilt be further informed see M. Foxe in the booke before quoted 2 That the Act of it is Fiducia Affiance I report me to all the words vsed in the originall of the old Testament as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to retire vnto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to deuolue or Roll vpon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to trust or put confidence in and all the rest and to the forme of words vsed in the new as Credere in Sperare in to beleeue and hope in or vpon 3 That it is Subiectiuely in the Will appeares by the Act for Fiducia Affiance without controuersie is in the Will as also by the Obiect Christ which implies not a Knowledge but Fiducia or Rest Ob. Fiducia Affiance is Spes roborata a confirmed Hope therefore if you make Faith to be Fiducia Affiance you make it likewise to be hope and vnskilfully confound two distinct vertues Ans I denie Fiducia Affiance to bee Hope although the Prince of Schoolemen Thomas of Watering and his followers haue heretofore taught it For 1 Hope looks to the End which is Saluation Affiance to the meanes which is Christs personall merit 2 The Act of Hope is expectare to looke out for the Act of Affiance is tuniti to leane on or rest vpon 3 Hope is of things that are future but Affiance of that which is present So yet Faith is Fiducia Affiance which I further confirme by S. Augustins authority Credere est amare In Ioh. 7. tract 29. amando in Deum tendere To belieue is to loue and by louing to moue vnto God expounding Amare by Confidere Loue by Affiance according to that Fathers vsuall phrase in his Tractates vpon Iohn Ob. Faith may be both Notitia Fiducia Knowledge and Affiance and so both in the Will and in the Understanding Ans It cannot bee because it is impossible for one and the same Habit to bee Subiectiuely in two seuerall Faculties of so different natures Indeed Bonauenture saith Hope is in both being Certi expectatio In 3. Scut citante Kemnit loco de iustif a certaine expectation Expectation being in the will certitude in the Vnderstanding But I answer that Certainty is the ground of diuine Hope but no part of the nature thereof as knowledge of a thing to be loue-worthy is the ground of loue for Ignoti nulla cupido no desire of that which is vnknowne but not of the nature of it and therefore as you cannot place Loue both in the Mind and Will no more may you Hope or Faith Ob. If Faith bee Fiducia Affiance then the wicked may haue it for Balaam desired the death of the righteous Num. 23.10 Mat. 13.20.21 and some receiue the Word with ioy belieuing but for a time Ans There is a double Affiance the one is sleight and superficiall and grounded on no other foundation then a generall apprehension that it is good to bee saued by Christ but leaue not their former course and embrace a new the other is setled and grounded hauing these precedents 1 A particular knowledge of our sinfull estate examined by the rule of Gods Word 2 An apprehension of Gods wrath and eternall death deserued by sinne 3 Vnfained sorrow for sinne with resolution of new life 4 A knowledge of Christ and here 1 Of his sufficiencie 2 His louing inuitation of all to rest on him for Iustification and Saluation These foure things going before if by the operation of Gods spirit shall afterward follow a rest vpon Iesus Christ for Iustification Saluation I pronounce this Rest to bee that Act which doth iustify before God So that these three Faiths shall bee as the three Propositions of a Categoricke Syllogisme Faith of Story being the Maior Faith of Person or Personall merit being the Assumption and Faith of Promises being the Conclusion on this wise De Whosoeuer shall as formerly is declared rest vpon the merits of Christ for his Iustification and Saluation he shall be iustified and saued This the Scripture affirmeth and to acknowledge the truth thereof is Historicall Faith ri But I doe so rest vpon Christ This the Conscience priuy to the sincerity of the heart assumeth which act of Resting I tearme Iustifying Faith j. Therefore I am iustified shall be saued And this is the Faith of Promise concluded of the former premisses and is the Assurance before mentioned To draw to a Conclusion concerning these three Faiths I adde farther that to the Faith of Story many doe not aspire namely such Paynims and Gentiles to whom God hath not vouchsafed the Ministery of the Word and meanes of knowledge yet many Reprobates doe liuing within the compasse and territory of the Church and remaine for all that vniustified Vnto the Faith of Person and that Affiance which I call sleight and superficiall many likewise of the vessels of wrath doe attaine but cannot goe one step farther whereas all and euery of the Elect rest on Christ in the second manner and vpon the precedents before specified and are thereby iustified Vnto the Faith of promise though the children of God may come and most do come yet some doubtlesse partly through the strength of flesh and mixture of infidelity with their Faith partly through the force and violence of temptation doe not nor dare not inferre the Conclusion and yet may be iustified Lastly and finally whereas Faith is distinguished into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 full Faith and little Faith I take it that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to bee restrained to Faith of Promise onely but that both are common to all three so that a weake assent vnto the story is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a strong assent is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a strong Affiance is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a weake Affiance is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a bold and confident inference of the Conclusion is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a fearefull and timerous inference is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But yet neither of them in the first doth iustifie although one of them of necessity must goe before Iustification nor yet in the third although 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may and ought to follow but in the second the least dramme of Affiance though it bee but as a graine of mustard-seed doth iustifie as perfectly as the greatest quantity because it receiues all Christ who is not capable of magis and minus more and
Saints with your niceties and falsities any longer for thus you reason No historicall Faith hath any interest in the matter of Iustification But firmely to belieue the truth of Gods Word and specially the Gospell is historicall Faith Therefore firmely to belieue the truth of Gods Word and specially the Gospell hath no interest in the matter of Iustification Good Sir I deny your Maior which you thus endeuour to proue ab absurdo enumeratione partium No generall knowledge shall haue any stroke in the matter of Iustification All historicall Faith is a generall knowledge Therefore no historicall Faith hath any interest in the matter of iustification Proue your Minor which I denie telling you moreouer that firmely to consent to the truth of Gods Word in genere and the Gospell in Specie is not a Generall knowledge but a Speciall knowledge and therefore I argue Such a speciall knowledge of the Gospell is the beginning of Faith Iustifying Mat. 13.11 Ioh. 17.3 Mat. 16.17 But firmely to consent to the truth of Gods Word and the Gospell is such a speciall knowledge ex confesso Therfore firmely to consent to the truth of Gods Word and especially the Gospell is the beginning of Iustifying Faith I. D. If you were as farre from hood-winking your owne eyes as I am from blearing the eies of others you might easily perceiue that now I deale against our common aduersaries the Papists and ouerthrow the iustification of their Historicall Faith by the chiefest arguments which Protestants vse But you after the manner of those Gladiators called Andabatae nor see nor care whom or what you strike and so mildly affected are you towards mee that so you may make some probable shew of endammaging or disaduantaging mee you reck not though through my sides you reach and wound the best Diuines of our Church yea and the common truth which wee all maintaine Neither doe I vse such circumguagues nor wiredraw my arguments into such a length as you beare vs in hand but hauing nakedly and plainely defined what Historicall Faith is I proue by two reasons that Faith so defined doth not iustifie the first whereof is this because it is absurd that so generall a Knowledge should iustifie So that your Ferio Syllogisme deserues a Ferula and vtterly to bee cashed as being no creature of mine but an idle figment of your owne and the next in Celarent for so you forme it although indeed it bee also in Ferio the Minor proposition and Conclusion notwithstanding your generall notes being but particular enuntiations is the onely Syllogisme intended by mee and including my first argument The Maior whereof it seemes you grant saying nothing vnto it and the Minor only you deny which I cannot but wonder at seeing both the Minor and Conclusion are vniuersally vouched by all the Diuines of our side The Conclusion is that Historicall Faith iustifies not So saith Hyperius De fide Hom. iustificandi There is a certaine Historicall Faith whereby those things which are propounded in holy writ are simply beleeued but yet is not applyed vnto Christ and the matter of our Saluation Loco de Fide The Minor is that Historicall Faith is a generall Knowledge So sayth Kemnitius There is a certaine generall Faith which vsually is tearmed Historicall and againe Historicall Faith is a generall assent holding in generall that the promise of the Gospell is true And M. Perkins Ser. caus c. 36. A generall Faith whereby they giue assent vnto the Gospell Neither doe I know any one of our Diuines that either in the Conclusion or the Minor doth gainsay them So that by the iudgement of these men both consenting to Gods Word in generall and to the Gospell in speciall is not a Speciall but Generall Knowledge and if the Speciality of the Gospell being but a part of the whole Scripture did specify Faith it would follow thereupon that there are as many Speciall Faiths as there are seuerall Articles of the Creed which were vnreasonable to imagine For that Faith which assenteth vnto the Gospell is no other then that which assenteth vnto the rest of holy Scripture and although it may principally respect that part of diuine truth yet doth it not only respect it nor is limited thereunto as vnto the proper adequate obiect thereof but vniuersally extendeth it selfe vnto all supernaturall reuealed verities whatsoeuer As for that Faith which our Diuines call Speciall is to be vnderstood of Faith of Promises wherby the Saints apply and appropriate them vnto themselues particularly and indiuidually assuring themselues of their present iustification and future saluation And the ignorance hereof as I ween is the cause why you turne generall into speciall and write of this matter so wildly and confusedly This notwithstanding very peremptorily you pronounce that Historiall Faith is a speciall Knowledge and thereupon Syllogistically inferre that it is the Beginning of Iustifying Faith to what end I wot not well vnlesse it bee to proue that it doth iustify because as you conclude it is the beginning of that Faith But whatsoeuer your intent bee your argument I answer by distinguishing of the word Beginning For if you vnderstand thereby a Pre-requisite or Preparatiue vnto iustifying Faith you doe but fight with a shadow for in that sence I grant the Conclusion neither doth such a beginning of Iustifying Faith iustify If you meane thereby that it is Iustifying Faith inchoat and in a remisser degree then I deny your Maior and say that such a knowledge call it as you please generall or speciall is not the beginning of iustifying Faith If it were then Diuels and Reprobates hauing it should haue iustifying Faith which Gods Word attributes vnto the Elect onely Tit. 1.1 And if it bee true that Faith of person is the consummation of Iustifying Faith as in the former section you say it cannot bee that such a knowledge should bee the Beginning thereof vnlesse you will say that Accidents may passe from one Subiect to another which is against all Philosophy For Historicall Faith is in the Vnderstanding and Faith of Person is in the Will and therefore Faith of Story beginning in the Mind can haue no subsistence elsewhere and iustifying Faith being perfected in the Will cannot bee begunne in any other Subiect The passages quoted in the margent though you should rack them till they rent asunder yet will they not confesse what you alledge them for For how I pray you hang these things together To you it is giuen to know the mysteries of the Kingdome of heauen This is life euerlasting to know thee Flesh and Bloud hath not reuealed this vnto thee but my Father Ergo Such a knowledge is iustifying Faith begun This is too violent astraining of Scripture and as Volusian speaketh is not a sucking of milke but drawing of bloud from the dugs of the Church Ep. 1. ad Nic. 1. As for the Minor I haue already sufficiently demonstrated the falshood thereof only
it seemeth strange why you should take it as confessed For sure I am in expresse tearmes I haue affirmed the contrary neither can I guesse of what words you gather it vnlesse perhaps of that I say and specially the Gospell which were too ridiculous For that indeed confesseth the Gospell to bee a speciall part of Gods truth but not determining Faith onely thereunto it doth in no sort specifie it as is aboue fully proued N. B. Historicall Faith not diuided from the other two kinds but ioyned with thē is cause of Iustification Againe I would pray you to speake more learnedly and argue soundly For if you had said formerly No Historicall Faith only iustifieth c. We had been agreed For Historica Fides est causa iustificationis non solitaria sed socia non diuisa sed coniuncta But speaking thus absolutely you speake vnlearnedly Well thus you proceed leauing your Minor naked and exposed to the mercie of the World I. D Agreed quoth you Nay hee can hardly agree with mee that is at warre with himselfe and had I spoken neuer so learnedly and argued neuer so soundly yet I verily belieue you would haue quarrelled at it because I see you make contradiction of mee the onely rule of your speeches That there is but one Faith you say it is nouelty not to grant and that Faith only iustifies I think you dare not deny how is it then that in the margent forgetting your selfe you talke of three kinds of Faith which except my Arithmetike faile mee are more then one and ioyne fellowes with that in iustification in the body of your text which yet you confesse doth onely iustify But what is it that comes not within the sphere of your omnipotent Philosophie The power of your Logicke hath already contracted Vniuersall into Speciall and why then may not the subtlety of your Metaphysicke find a plurality also in an Vnity But to be plaine with you I say that Historicall Faith is so far from being a ioint cause that at all properly vnderstood of Iustification but onely as I haue said a Pre-requisite or Preparatiue thereunto True it is that Faith of Person is neuer Solitary but is euer conioyned with sundry other graces and among the rest with Historicall Faith yet are not their operations to bee confounded because in the same person they are conioyned Many seeds lye in my hand together yet euery one hath his seuerall and distinct vertue Faith of Person is neuer without Faith of Story yet it is Faith of Person which onely iustifies And as in the generation of man the Sensitiue soule goes before and prepares a fit organ for the infusion of the Reasonable and yet not the Sensitiue but the Reasonable only doth informe so in the reparation of man Faith of Story proceeds and makes way for the inducement of Faith of Person and yet not Faith of Story but Faith of Person only doth iustifie Now whether in speaking thus absolutely I haue spoken vnlearnedly as you say or no it skilleth not much seeing I am sure I haue spoken truly 1 Cor. 15.9 What euer I am by the grace of God I am and desire so to bee vnto his glory My want and inability I thanke God I know yet know I no cause why in this mediocrity of knowledge and speech I should in comparison with you any whit disable my selfe But sith as the Apostle saith knowledge puffeth vp 1 Cor. 8.1 God grant vs both the spirit of humility that denying our selues and all our learning wee may be content to bee wholly captiuated vnto the obedience of the Faith of Christ The Minor which you say I left naked and exposed to the mercy of the world was this that Historicall Faith is a generall knowledge which indeed in my Treatise I did forbeare to confirme not for want of sufficient proofes but presuming that so euident a truth would neuer haue beene denied But now I hope it appeares by what I haue aboue said to bee so well guarded with strength of reason and approbation of the learned that henceforward it need not feare the rigor of your opposition Treatise Acquisite Faith the Diuels haue according to that of Saint Iames The Diuels belieue and tremble Infused Faith the Reprobates may haue as Balaam Iudas Magus Now iustifying Faith is proper to the Elect and therefore historicall Faith cannot iustifie N. B. O yee noble Schollers marke this Syllogisme I haue made your arguments hitherto for you Master Downe and in this creeping and incroching argument tell you that you beg the matter in question For I deny that your definition of Historicall Faith is a generall knowledge but speciall and peculiar vnto the Elect in the beginning of their iustifying Faith conioyned with the Application and Resting vpon Christ and his merits And to bee plaine with you I tell you it is ridiculous yea blasphemous to say that Diuels haue Faith or that euer Balaam Iudas or Magus had Faith And so telleth you M. Caluin In Iac. 2.19 Ridiculum erit si quis Diabolos habere fidem dicat it is ridiculous for any man to say that Diuels haue Faith For there is but one Faith Eph. 4. and the other is spoken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abusiuely and by an equiuocation and is but a vulgar knowledge or rather peculiar shew by miracles c. as the same M. Caluin sheweth right learnedly 1 Cor. 13.2 Calu. ibid. and also telleth you Abundé constat totam hanc disputationem de fide non haberi it is plaine that this whole disputation Iam. 2. is not about Faith Let this therefore serue for an answer I pray you to your first distinction of Historicall Faith which you confound with a vulgar knowledge as appeareth before knowing this No man that finally contemneth this Speciall knowledge of Gods Word and specially the Gospell can be saued For hee can neuer haue the other two kinds of Faith spoken of before except he begin with this kind of Faith I. D. Surely I am very deeply beholding vnto your Mastership hauing so small skill in Logicke that you will bee pleased to forme my arguments and to shape them in so excellent fashion for mee But I beseech you spare your paines where you are like to reape little thanks for your labour Such officiousnesse in an aduersary is not without suspicion and if you may haue the hammering of my arguments your weakest answers I doubt not will be proofe inough against them Leaue me therfore I pray you to the meaning of my own weapons and looke you well vnto your owne defence for I feare mee you will hardly bee able to auoid the danger of them For thus I reason That Faith which Diuels and Reprobates haue iustifies not Historicall Faith Diuels and Reprobates haue Ergo Historicall Faith iustifies not Here you see nor creeping nor incroching but faire and plaine dealing and such as I am well content all noble Schollers marke it But let
vs see what you reioyne hereunto First you say I beg the matter in Question What matter that Historicall Faith is a generall knowledge but neither is that the matter now in Question neither doe I any way beg it For in this Syllogisme the Question is whether Historicall Faith doe iustify of your Question there appeares nor palme nor footstep which yet in the former section against your negatiue I haue proued to bee most true That which you adde if it bee not senselesse is contrary both to your selfe and vnto reason For saying that Historicall Faith is proper and speciall vnto the Elect in the beginning of their iustifying Faith you plainely distinguish it from iustifying Faith which is contrary to what you haue elsewhere said If you still confound them and make Historicall Faith the beginning of Iustifying Faith it is as if you should say the beginning of iustifying Faith is speciall and peculiar vnto the Elect in the beginning of their iustifying Faith which is altogether witlesse and senselesse Lastly to say that Historicall Faith which before was Generall and common as soone as it is conioyned with application and Resting on Christ becomes speciall and peculiar is vtterly void of reason For as Grace superadded vnto Nature in the Elect makes not Nature speciall and peculiar vnto them but that still it remaines common vnto all men so also Historicall Faith by accession of Iustifying Faith or Affiance changeth not its nature and becomes Speciall but as it was euermore continues Generall Generall I say both Obiectiuely as stretching it selfe vnto all supernaturall reuealed verities and Subiectiuely not being appropriated vnto the Elect onely but commonly incident vnto others also Secondly you deny the Minor telling mee plainely that it is ridiculous yea blasphemous to say that Diuels haue Faith or that euer Balaam Iudas or Magus had Faith If I should now temper my inke with some sharper ingredient and in the zeale of my affection say vnto you as the Angell sometime said vnto Satan Iude 9. The Lord rebuke thee it were no more then here you iustly deserue For it is not holy and learned men alone which yet were too impudent but euen the spirit of Wisdome and truth himselfe whom I tremble to speake it you charge with ridiculousnes and blasphemie For doth not the Holy Ghost by Saint Iames in expresse tearmes say The Diuels belieue and tremble and by Saint Luke Then Simon himselfe also belieued Iam. 2.19 Act. 8.13 and did not Balaam prophecying of Christ and Iudas preaching Christ assent vnto those truths wherewith they were illuminated And what Orthodoxe Diuine is there ancient or moderne who falling vpon this question doth not acknowledge that Diuels and Reprobates doe Historically belieue De vnico Bapt. cont Petil. c. 10. Saint Augustine is bold and compareth the Faith of Diuels confessing Christ Wee know thee who thou art euen the Sonne of God with that memorable confession of Peter Thou art the Christ the Sonne of the liuing God This confession saith hee was fruitfull vnto Peter but pernicious vnto the Diuels yet in both not false but true not to bee denied but acknowledged not to bee detested but approued And a little after hauing vouched that of Saint Iames the Diuels belieue and tremble and compared therewith the Faith of those who belieue the truth of God but liue wickedly Behold saith hee Wee haue found out of the Church not onely certaine men but Diuels also confessing the same Faith of one God yet both confirmed by the Apostles rather then denied Of the same iudgement are our latter writers That Faith is attributed to Simon Magus Inst lib. 3. ca. 2. §. 10. saith Caluin We vnderstand not with some that hee fained in words a Faith which was not in his heart but thinke rather that being ouercome by the Maiesty of the Gospell hee did in a sort belieue and acknowledge Christ to be the Author of Life and Saluation Simon saith Beza In Act. 8.13 On the Creed Ans to Rhem. T. in Iam. 2.6 belieued with Historicall Faith Historicall Faith saith Perkins is in the Diuell and his Angels Such a Faith saith Fulke as is in Diuels namely an acknowledging that there is one God and so likewise of all the rest of the Articles of Faith to bee true without trust or confidence in God Finally the whole Church of Auspurg Whereas Saint Iames saith Harm Confess the Diuels belieue and tremble hee speaketh of an Historicall Faith Now this Faith doth not iustifie for the Diuels and the wicked are cunning in the History Which last words I would wish you to note and obserue For if Historicall Faith bee no other then an assent of the Mind vnto the truth of Gods Word then Diuels and Reprobates so assenting yea being cunning in the Story must needs haue Historicall Faith Adde hereunto that if they doe not so much as Historically belieue then the sinnes which they commit against the Gospell are onely sinnes of ignorance and not against knowledge neither can they offend of malice or fall into that vnpardonable sinne which is against the Holy Ghost Mat. 12.32 Neither lastly can any bee said to haue made shipwracke of Faith which yet the Scripture saith some haue done 1 Tim. 1.19 vnlesse perhaps you will say a man may make shipwracke of that which hee neuer had So that now if I haue spoken ridiculously and blasphemously as you say you see what Schoolemasters haue deceiued me and vpon what reasons I haue been drawne into this folly and impiety or rather the world sees what folly it is in you thus against all reason to impute blasphemy and ridiculousnesse vnto the truth of God and the most glorious preachers and defenders thereof Yet Caluin you say telleth mee it is ridiculous to say that Diuels haue Faith and it is plaine that this whole disputation Iam. 2. is not about Faith But is it possible that Caluin should striue against the torrent of so maine authority or like the Philosopher of whom Aristotle speaketh forget his owne voice and vnsay that which he had formerly said Certainly if you wil giue him leaue to bee the interpreter of his owne meaning you shall find hee doth not For when hee denieth that Diuels haue Faith and that Saint Iames there disputeth of Faith hee vnderstandeth not Faith indefinitely but particularly iustifying Faith This is euident by his annotation on the twentieth verse In Iam. 2.20 Here saith hee is no disputation of the cause of Iustification whereby what other can hee meane then Iustifying Faith And when hee saith the dispute is not about Faith hee addeth forthwith but of a vulgar knowledge which conioyneth a man to God no more then the sight of the Sunne lifts him to Heauen Now what is that Faith which vnites vs vnto God but onely Iustifying Faith and what is this vulgar knowledge other then Historicall Faith by which the eye of the mind sees diuine truth
reasons for Other writers saith hee I so read that how much soeuer they excell in holinesse and learning Ep. 19. ad Hieron I doe not therfore thinke any thing to be true because they iudge so but because they perswade me either by those Canonicall Authors or by probable reason not abhorring from truth Bellarmine vpbraiding Illyricus for his Coniectures is thus answered by learned Iunius Contrà Bell. de transl impl 1. c. 11. Bee not so hot I pray you against humane coniectures In a word whether wee would modestly shew our owne opinion or refell anothers wee deale humanely saying it is a coniecture but to vpbraid humane coniectures is meere inhumanity Dan. Cham. de oecum Pont. Nay Daniel Chamier a very learned late writer in his booke de oecumenico Pontifice doth professedly distinguish his arguments into Scripture Coniecture and Testimony and will you therefore say of him as you doe vnto mee that hee doubted of the truth of his cause determined to ensnare poore silly Readers and walked not recto pectore with an vpright conscience Reioinder to Brist reply But so it is I vse the very words of D. Fulk being almost in the same tearmes cauilled withall by blundering Bristow When you can say nothing against my assertion your selfe you would make mee vncertaine of it and say that it is but a light suspicion of mine because in one place before I come to the sound proofe of it I say it is a probable coniecture And doth it follow therefore that I doubt of it because I offer a probable coniecture vnto other mens vnderstanding before by order of discourse I am brought to the manifest probation of it Well yet if Probable like you not those that follow are Necessary and I feare mee you will bee able to say little to them that leaue this without answer and the weaker the argument the more disgrace to bee graueld by it But my purpose in vsing both was for the more strength and perswasion for as Pindar saith It is the surest and safest way in a tempestuous night to cast out of the ship two ankers Olymp. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 6. Treatise 2. Arg. That which is in time after iustifying Faith cannot bee that Faith This is vndeniable But this Particular knowledge is in time after that Faith This I proue out of 1 Ioh. 5.13 These things haue I written vnto you that belieue in the name of the Sonne of God that yee may know that yee haue Eternall life Behold Belieuing goes before and Knowledge comes after As for that which followeth in the same verse and that yee may belieue I interprete it of Perseuerance and growth in Faith Howsoeuer Belieuing and Knowing are here distinguished and therefore are not all one N. B. I deny your Minor neither doth that place of S. Iohn helpe you ought as wee shall see anon I tell you that iustifying Faith is a Particular Knowledge though in other tearmes by vs vsed and by the Scripture set downe So that where you say a man first belieueth and then knoweth wee say hee beleeueth that is hee particularly knoweth apprehendeth and applieth Christ to himselfe perpetually and liuely to his saluation So that Belieuing and particular knowing himselfe to bee elected are one and that it is this knowledge thus I argue I. D. Before you come to bestow a word or two vpon the Minor which you deny you thinke it good like a cunning and subtle disputer flatly to deny the Conclusion and peremptorily to auouch the Contradictory vnto it then very prodigally to wast a multitude of words in the proofe thereof A maruelous policy I promise you vtterly disabling me from farther replying for as much as Logicke it selfe giues no precept how a man may reply vpon him who denies the Conclusion and taking the Contradictory thereof as granted goes about thereby to disproue the Premises For so doe you when you say Faith is a knowledge and therefore goes not afore knowledge my reason being contrarily framed thus Faith goes before knowledge therefore is not knowledge Doubtles had you not had the heart of Zenodotus Martial and the liuer of Crates as the Poet saith you could neuer haue stumbled vpon so politicke a deuise But let vs heare your reasons N. B. What soeuer iustifieth a man is Faith Darij Esa 53.11 But particular knowledge iustifieth a man Therfore particular knowledge is Faith I proue the Minor out of the Scripture By the knowledge of himselfe saith the Lord shall my righteous seruant justify many Lo M. Downe here the knowledge of Christ iustifieth a man and is the same in effect and working that Faith is and therefore are they both one which you make to bee twaine by distinction and originall Your speech helpeth Bellarmine that saith Faith may bee rather in ignorantiá implicitâ in an ignorance couched then in explicitâ cognitione a discouered knowledge Tom. 3. de iustif l. 5. c. 7. I. D. Iud. 14.18 Seeing here you plow with my heifer as Samson sometime said vnto the Philistines how is it that you read not my riddle also I meane hauing borrowed this Obiection from my Treatise why take you not from thence the answer also Surely that you vrge the one so eagerly and so diligently suppresse the other I know no cause but this you knew not how to reply vnto it and therefore I will by your fauor repeate the same againe vntil you find out some forcible reason to driue me from it The verbs of vnder standing and sence in the Hebrew tongue signifie not onely the acts of them but of the will and affections also So Psal 1.6 the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous And Depart I know you not And I will not heare see c. that is God will not so know heare see as to loue and approue And so may I interpret that of the Prophet Christ being so knowne as to bee embraced and rested on by the will shall iustifie many Adde now that it is neither necessary nor likely your Particular knowledge should bee here ment for the Obiect of the Prophets knowledge is no other then Christ but the Obiect of your knowledge is your owne selfe or your present state in grace and future Saluation And what a senselesse speech doe you put into the mouth of the Prophet for by your glosse it is as if hee should say My righteous seruant by making many to know that they are already iustified shall bring many vnto that which already they haue namely iustification But Esay had in him both the Spirit of Wisdome and the Tongue of Eloquence and therefore pardon me if I cannot thinke he vsed to speake non-sense like you Where you say my speech helpeth Bellarmine who saith Faith may bee rather in ignorantiâ implicitâ in an ignorance couched then in explicitâ cognitione a discouered knowledge First Bellarmine hath no such words neither I thinke did hee euer dreame
of an implicit or couched ignorance Of an implicit Faith we haue often heard and of a rude and confused apprehension the Iesuit in the place by you quoted speaketh but an implicit ignorance was neuer yet heard of and what meaning it may haue for my part I cannot see De iustif lib. 1. ca. 7. Bellarmines right words are these Faith is better defined by ignorance then knowledge which saying of his how my speech helpeth I would you had taken a little more paines to make it manifest For whence and how you should collect it I cannot tell except perhaps it bee thus I say that Faith is not a knowledge Ergo I say also it is an ignorance I answer therefore secondly that Bellarmine and I speake not of the same Faith for hee speaketh of Faith of Story and I of Faith of Person so that when I say Faith of Person is not a knowledge I cannot help him who saith Faith of Story is not a knowledge For as for Faith of Story you cannot bee ignorant that contrary vnto Bellarmine in my Treatise I haue called it a Generall knowledge so farre am I from defining it by ignorance with him And yet I would haue you to know also that when I say Faith of Story is a knowledge I meane not thereby Science of Conclusions acquired and gotten by demonstratiue proofe out of such principles as are of themselues knowne and euident For how can a man by the light of naturall reason aspire to the knowledge of that which is supernaturall and aboue reason But I vnderstand an explicit and distinct apprehension of the necessary Articles of Faith opposite vnto that brutish ignorance which Papists call implicite Faith and Blind obedience which distinct apprehension Bellarmine in the place before alledged denieth necessarily to bee required vnto Faith Farthermore I would faine know how this followes Faith is not knowledge Ergo it is Ignorance for by the same reason you may conclude Faith is not Hope Ergo it is Despaire or thus Earth is not fire Ergo it is water and so by your creation all things in the world shall bee one of two fire or water Metaph. 12. But you should remember that simple negation is positiue of nothing and that Priuations are reduced vnto that subiect whereunto their Habits doe belong whence it followeth that denying Faith to be in the Vnderstanding and so to be knowledge I deny it also to bee Ignorance N. B. Againe whatsoeuer bringeth life eternall bringeth iustification and is Faith But true knowledge of Iesus Christ bringeth life eternall Therefore true knowledge of Iesus Christ bringeth iustification and is Faith The Minor I proue out of the Words of Christ in S. Iohn Ioh. 17.3 Mel. Pez Arg. Theol. p. 3. notitia Es. 53. significat non solum agnitionem personae beneficiorum Christised etiam fiduciam quiescentem in Christo sicuti Ioh. 17. This is life eternall to know thee to bee the onely true Lord and him to bee Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent into the world The Maior is plaine whatsoeuer apprehendeth that last which is life Eternall apprehendeth the former as election and iustification c. But the knowledge of Christ apprehendeth eternall life Therefore it apprehendeth iustification But hence it followeth whatsoeuer apprehendeth iustification is Faith True knowledge of Jesus Christ apprehendeth iustification Therefore true knowledge of Christ is Faith and so consequently and conuersiuely Faith is knowledge and this knowledge is Faith Ioh. 19.25 Eph. 3.14.15.16.17.18 1 Cor. 13. And by this meanes Particular knowledge commeth not in time after faith but is Faith and is knowledge in the beginning in proceeding is knowledge and in the end is knowledge I. D. The Maior of your first Syllogisme that whatsoeuer bringeth life eternall bringeth iustification I deny You say it is plaine because whatsoeuer apprehendeth the last such as is eternall life apprehendeth the former also which is iustification But first what rule of Logicke allowes you thus to shift tearmes and to turne bringing of life and iustification into apprehending life and iustification For howsoeuer you seeme to vse them indifferently yet are they words of different significations and therefore confounding them thus you make not so much the truth of the Maior plaine as obscure the meaning thereof Againe chuse whether of these tearmes you please yet is it palpably false that Whatsoeuer bringeth or apprehendeth the last bringeth and apprehendeth also the former Rhetoricke brings a man to speake eloquently which is the latter yet it is Grammar not Rhetoricke that brings a man to speake congruè which is the former Physicke brings a man to the faculty of curing diseases which is the latter yet brings not to the knowledge of the nature of things for that belongs vnto the naturall Philosopher and according to the old saying where the Physiologer ends there the Physician begins So also in diuine matters Hope apprehends eternall life which is the latter for it is the proper obiect about which it is occupied it apprehendeth not iustification which is the former for then by your rule it should bee Faith it selfe that being faith as you say which apprehends iustification As therfore when diuerse needles are by the Loadstone trained one after another the vertue of the stone moueth the first the first the second and so of the rest but the third or second is no way the cause of the dependency of the first so in the concatenation of the causes of our saluation reckoned vp by the Apostle to wit Election Rom. 8.30 Vocation Iustification Glorification the former are mouers as it were vnto the latter but not the latter vnto the former The reason of all in a word is this because as I haue already shewed more is required vnto the maine end then vnto the subordinate meanes and therefore seeing saluation is the end Iustification the meanes not whatsoeuer is requisite vnto that is presently necessary vnto this The Minor that true knowledge of Iesus Christ bringeth eternall life I also deny For Particular assurance which is the knowledge you must here vnderstand or else you conclude not to the purpose bringeth not eternall life in as much as a man may be saued without it as we haue already sufficiently proued Neither doe the words of Christ in S. Iohn verify your Minor Ioh. 17.3 for by knowledge there he meaneth not your particular assurance and perswasion by which a man knowes he is iustified shall be saued but such a knowledge of Christ and his Gospell as is mingled with faith and worketh our wils to accept of Iesus Christ for our onely mediator And this knowledge is said to bee eternall life not because euery one that barely and nakedly knowes liues eternally for as wee haue shewed Reprobates and Diuels haue Historicall Faith but partly because no man can liue without it partly because by it the Spirit of God worketh in the Elect that Faith by
which they are iustified and so come to eternall life But what say I vnto the Minor deliuered in other tearmes thus Knowledge of Christ apprehendeth eternall life I say first it is not the same Proposition because the tearmes are changed neither are they equipollent Secondly I grant it to bee true whether you meane by knowledge Dogmaticall Faith or Particular assurance for by the one doe we apprehend that there is an eternall life by the other that wee haue speciall interest in it Well then if it apprehendeth eternall life doth it not follow that therefore also it apprehendeth iustification No by no meanes for as wee haue aboue demonstrated it is not necessary that that which apprehendeth the latter should apprehend the former also And yet though I disallow the consequence the consequent I readily yeeld you that Particular knowledge apprehendeth iustification for so haue wee defined Faith of promise to be a perswasion or assurance that the promise of God made in Christ to wit iustification remission of sinnes adoption regeneration finally election it selfe and eternall saluation doe particularly pertaine vnto mee and are mine What gather you now of this Ergo say you it is iustifying Faith How so Because whatsoeuer apprehendeth iustification is iustifying Faith Nay contrarily whatsoeuer apprehendeth iustification it not iustifying Faith for apprehension followeth iustification no man apprehending himselfe to bee iustified vntill hee be iustified but Iustifying Faith is in nature before iustification that being the cause and this the effect And therefore vnlesse you will say that that which followeth is that which goeth before you cannot say that that which apprehendeth iustification is that which iustifieth To conclude therefore neither is Faith knowledge nor knowledge Faith but particular knowledge for ought you haue yet said or can say commeth in time after Faith But whereas finally you inferre that Faith is knowledge in the beginning knowledge in proceeding knowledge in the end besides that the foundation vpon which it is grounded is vntrue it is cleane contrary also to that which erewhile you affirmed that Faith is but one compounded of my three nice distinctions the first being the beginning the second the progresse the third the end For the third is Faith of Person and in the Will and is by your confession there the end of Faith yet here you say faith is knowledge in the end which things how they can stand together I see not vnlesse you will say that knowledge is in the Will and so confound the faculties and operations of the soule N. B. In Ioh. 1. Ep. c. 5. to 13. The place of Saint Iohn by you cited to proue your Minor in your argument maketh nothing for you because the Apostle speaketh of their increase of knowledge and not of the originall begetting of knowledge and so saith M. Caluin I. D. The text in the clearest tearmes that may bee distinguisheth betweene Belieuing and knowing and vnto that giueth the priority before this but your glosse confoundeth their natures and saith that the Apostle here speaketh onely of increase of knowledge Wo to the glosse that corrupteth the text for if this bee S. Iohns meaning it is as if hee should say I write vnto you that know that yee are iustified haue eternall life that yee may increase in knowing that yee haue eternall life and that yee may know yee are iustified and haue eternall life which how vnworthy it is the pen of an Apostle euery one easily seeth But Caluin you say interpreteth the place as you doe Bee it so yet is it not the name of Caluin how venerable soeuer that may sway this matter For seeing I professe to differ from him in the definition of Iustifying Faith hee defining it by knowledge I by Affiance you may not thinke it vnreasonable if in this point and the explication of such scriptures as may seeme to concerne it I desire rather to bee pressed with his reasons then borne downe with his authority But what saith Caluin Because there ought to bee dayly proceedings in Faith therefore he writes to them that belieue already that they may more firmely and certainly belieue Whereunto I willingly assent if you apply it as Beza in his annotations doth vnto the last clause of the verse and that yee may belieue for then the meaning without forcing or constraining the words will bee as if hee should say I write vnto you that belieue that belieuing yee may know yee haue eternall life knowing the same may constantly perseuere and proceed on in Belieuing For as the clouds poure downe raine to moisten the earth and the earth moistned sendeth vp vapours againe to make clouds so likewise Faith begets Assurance and Assurance being gotten doth againe confirme and strengthen faith And thus doe the Century-writers expound this place Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 4. p. 276. gathering from it that Cetainty of Saluation is an Effect of Faith and so euidently distinguishing knowledge from Faith Treatise 3. Arg. That which in nature comes after iustification cannot bee iustifying Faith This appeares because Faith is the Efficient Instrumentall cause of Iustification and euery Efficient by the rule of Logicke is in nature before the Effect But this knowledge or assurance is in nature after Iustification Ergo it is not Faith N. B. Your Minor is very false and so proued by my former arguments For particular knowledge and assurance of our saluation is not in nature after Faith but is Faith and wholy infused by the Spirit of God and begotten by hearing of the Word preached and commeth to act by degrees according to the measure of grace giuen of God For it is in Habitu sometime not in actu Faith habituall in power actuall in the deed of belieuing as when one sleepeth his beliefe is not in actu and yet hee liueth vnto God by his faith which liueth powerfully in him though not actually I. D. The Maior of my Syllogisme is vndeniable because as I haue said Faith is the cause of iustification For as D. Fulke saith vnto Bristow excluding it from Efficient causes Reioinder to Bristow p. 172. Seeing Scripture often affirmeth that God worketh in vs by Faith faith must needs be an instrumentall efficient when you haue said all that you can except you will teach vs new Grammar and Logicke The Minor therefore you say is very false and so proued by your former arguments But those arguments are already answered and thus I proue the Minor For as for the rest of your idle and wilde talke touching the infusion begetting degrees habit act of Faith I willingly passe ouer lest pursuing you in this course I seeme to run riot and play the wanton with you Treatise The truth of a Proposition is alwayes in nature before the knowledge of the truth for Propositions are not therefore true because they are knowne so but they are first true and knowne so Therefore this Proposition I know I am iustified spoken
therefore are not one 3. That which in nature comes after Iustification cannot be Iustifying faith This appeares because Faith is the Efficient instrumentall cause of Iustification and euery Efficient by the rule of Logick is in nature before the Effect But this knowledge or Assurance is in nature after iustificatiō This I proue thus the truth of a proposition is alwayes in nature before the knowledge of the truth for Propositions are not therefore true because knowne so but they are first true and then knowne so Therefore this Proposition I know I am iustified spoken by on that is iustified must needs presuppose the partie before to be iustified Therefore this knowledge of Iustification in nature following Iustification it cannot be Iustifying faith 4. In conditionall promises there can be no Assurance of the thing promised before the performance of the condition V. G. This is a conditionall promise in the couenant of workes doe this and thou shalt liue life is promised but on condition of doing and therefore vntill we haue performed the condition we cannot nor may not looke that God should be reciprocall and giue vs life So in the couenant of grace iustification is promised but vpon condition of faith so sayth the Scripture beleeue and thy sinnes shall be forgiuen thee And therefore the condition of beleeuing must first be performed before we can assure our selues our sins are forgiuen If so then faith going before and Assurance following after Assurance cannot be justifying faith 5 That from whence followeth a blasphemous absurdity cannot be a truth for from truth nought but truth can be concluded But from this that faith is an Assurance such an absurdity doth follow What is that That God commands a man to know an vntruth to assure himselfe of that which neuer shall be For God being truth cannot command falshood to be taken for truth Nether tell me here for who art thou that disputest with God for this is a ruled case in diuinity God cānot doe things which imply contradiction and therefore not make vntruth to be truth or knowledge error Now that this absurdity followes from hence thus I demonstrate it God commands the Reprobate to beleeue For Ioh. 18.8.9 for vnbeleefe the world shall bee condemned but no condemnation but for breach of a commandement 1 Ioh. 3.4 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sinne is the transgression of the law and therefore they are commanded to beleeue I aske you then what it is to beleeue you will say to know to assure Therefore God commands the Reprobates to know and bee assured But this is a blasphemous absurdity therefore is your opinion absurd which infers it 6. That which the wicked may haue cannot be iustifying faith for it is Fides Electorum the faith of the Elect. But the wicked may haue this perswasion yea and many haue beene most confidently perswaded that they are in the fauour of God You will say it is no true perswasion but I say if forme make truth they are as formally and therefore as truly perswaded of it as the godly And therefore if the godly are therefore and for this cause iustified because cause they are strongly perswaded that they are iustified then why should not the wicked likewise be iustified by his strong perswasion But in truth these kind of speeches are vnreasonable and senselesse and so the opinion cannot be reasonable These sixe reasons shall suffice for the present although many more might be added only from hence I gather this Corollary that if iustifying Faith be not a Knowledge or Assurance much lesse is it a full knowledge or full Assurance Nay though we should graunt it to be a knowledge yet is it against Logick to define it by the perfection of knowledg For as there is a strong tree so there is a brused reed as there is a burning lamp so there is smoking flaxe as there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Faith come to full age and maturity so there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Faith in the nonage and minority So therefore to define it were to exclude the weake Faith and to make the Definition narrower and of lesse latitude then the definite Besides it is a most discomfortable doctrine vnto a troubled mind and leads the directest way to desperation for so the palsie hand of Faith should not receiue Christ And were not this to quench fire with oile and to adde Aloes to wormwood and might not hee that thus comforteth be counted one of Iobs miserable comforters Ob. The godly are said to know and to be perswaded yea the Prophet saith Io. 3.14 Ioh. 17.3 Esa 53.11 Heb. 11.1 By his knowledge shall my righteous seruant iustifie many and Faith is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Subsistence and Euidence Ans First I graunt the godly may and ought to know but the question is not of their duty but what it is which iustifies them 2 Secondly to know and so likewise the Verbs of Sence in the Hebrew tongue vsually signifieth not onely an act of the Minde or outward Sence but of the Will and affection also So in the Psalme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal 1.6 Mat. 7.13 The Lord knoweth the way of the Righteous and in the Gospell Depart I know you not and elsewhere I will not heare see c. that is God will not so know heare see c. as in fauour to loue or approue And so doe I interprete that of the Prophet Christ being so knowne as to bee embraced and rested vpon by the Will shall iustify many 3 Thirdly that Definition in the eleuenth to the Hebrewes I deny with Peter Martyr and the rest of our Diuines to bee perfect but rather by the Effects to describe it And as for that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Subsistence whereon you seeme to stand take this first that the writers of the new Testament vse words in the same sence that the Seuentie Translators doe Secondly that that which in Hebrew is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expectation that the Septuagint turne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in Ruth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ruth 1.12 so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Hebrewes shall not be Subsistence but expectation or desire of things that are hoped for But of this umpliandum censeo I pronounce nothing only I conclude his second Faith not to be Iustifying Faith And because you shall not count me singular or alone in this point read M. Foxe in his booke de Christo gratis iustificante and you shall find him earnest against this opinion The third faith is Fides Persone or Personalis meriti Faith of Person or of Personall merit and of this I make the Obiect to be Christ the Mediator meriting the Act of it Fiducia a Rest or Deuolution the Subiect of it the facultie of the Will and not the Vnderstanding the next End of it Iustification the remote End eternall Saluation And thus I
the mercie of God I. D. The Minor which in the former section you denied namely that Faith goes before iustification and Assurance followes after in my Treatise I thus proued because Iustification is promised vpon condition of Belieuing and seeing in Conditionall promises there can bee no Assurāce of the thing promised before the performāce of the Condition therfore in this promise we must Belieue before we can be iustified and be iustified before we can be assured we are iustified Now to this you say it is rather an encouragement then a Promise vpon condition as if it were impossible that Promise vpon condition might bee an encouragement Whereas me thinkes a Generall doth greatly encourage his Souldiers when he promiseth vnto them preferment and reward vpon condition of some peece of seruice well performed 1 Cron. 11.6 And Ioab peraduenture would not haue beene so forward and venturous in the battell vnlesse Dauid had promised the office of chiefe Captaine vpon condition of smiting the Iebusites But you haue reasons for your saying more then a good many for here like another Tertullian euery word almost you speake is a Demonstration First all the Church of God in all ages affirmeth with you and yet as shall plentifully appeare in the next Section the Church of God neuer vnderstood but that Remission of sinnes was promised vpon condition of Faith But as Anaxagoras when hee was driuen to his shifts and could not finde out the reason of some things was wont to say it was the doing of Nous euen so when you haue boldly affirmed that which you can by no meanes proue it is your manner desperately to auouch that it is the saying of the Church Secondly you say this speech Belieue and thy sinnes shall bee forgiuen thee is all one with this Thy sinnes bee forgiuen thee therefore bee of good comfort Which happily wee may thinke not to be altogether so witlesse if also you can perswade vs that a Physician saying vnto his Patient Vse carefully the course of Phisicke I shall prescribe vnto you and you shall surely recouer of your sicknesse meaneth thereby no other then as if hee should say Bee of good cheere for thou art already recouered of thy sicknesse Lastly by this meanes you say both the former and the latter to wit Forgiuenesse of sinnes and Beliefe may bee ascribed to the mercy of God As if Promise of Remission of sinnes vpon condition of Faith were any way derogatory vnto the Mercy of God but that both the one and the other may this notwithstanding bee ascribed thereunto For if when God out of his soueraigne authority commaundeth to Belieue it bee neuerthelesse of his grace that wee can and doe Belieue according to that of S. Augustin Giue what thou commandest and command what thou wilt why when out of his mercy hee promiseth Forgiuenesse if we doe Belieue should it not bee ascribed vnto the same his mercy that we doe performe the condition and Belieue But who knowes the salt that is in you Eupolis You are the onely Pericles of this age Suada sits vpon your lips and you alone leaue a sting behind you For had it not been for this threefold cord of yours I could neuer so easily haue been drawne from this truth N. B. Farthermore where you bring for the confirmation of your Minor to proue Iustification to bee conditionall with the Papists this place of Math. cap. 9. v. 2. M. Downes falshood in citing construing and adding to the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Confide fili remissa sunt tibi peccata tua Bee of good comfort Sonne thy sinnes bee forgiuen thee you wrest it first to tell vs that Christ said to him Thy sinnes be forgiuen thee if thou wilt bee of good comfort which is false and no part of Christs meaning but rather the contrary bidding the man sicke of the Palsie be of good comfort because his sinnes being the cause of his disease were forgiuen him Tom. 9. in Mat. In Mat. c. 9. This could Saint Hierome haue told you yea Chrysostome and Master Caluin Erasmus and the Greeke Scholiast But what may wee expect will bee the sequell of this if you bee not hindred in your course Well you haue a mind to doe mischiefe but you want power as spake Plutarch to one Harm in Mat. 9. Archidamus Zeuxidis filius in Plut. M. Downe falsly translating the Greeke text and so I Hope shall The second point which I challenge you in is false translating of the Greeke text contrary to the words themselues and all the world for 1600. yeares You translate Mat. 9. v. 2. Crede fili remittentur tibi peccata tua Sonne belieue and then thy sinnes shall bee forgiuen thee when you should haue said with Saint Hierome Ambrose Beda Caluin Beza Erasm and the Church of England Sonne bee of good comfort thy sinnes bee already forgiuen thee The Greeke word can by no meanes signifie to Belieue but rather to bee confident or Bold to trust to and not to Belieue in as Opibus confidere Cicero to trust to his riches not to belieue in his riches to assure my selfe that they shall benefit mee not to belieue in them as my God to saue mee Beside the Greeke word to Belieue is farre off another name and nature Againe by what authority doe you translate Thy sinnes shall bee forgiuen thee when you should say thy sinnes are forgiuen thee Haue you any commission in contemptum omnium Grammaticorum to change tenses also as you take vpon you vnder pretence of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to coine Distinctions But I may easily spie your drift you would needs parget your rotten cause and miserable Minor with this vntempered morter Well all the Schollers in our countrey will thinke the worse of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as long as they liue for this tricke M. Downe addeth to the Scripture But what intolerable impudency is this and beyond all the rest to adde the word or coniunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to the Scripture saying by your commission 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Belieue Sonne and then thy sinnes shall be forgiuen thee Quite contrary is this to your knowledge and conscience Apoc. 22. Bethinke you therefore what a fearefull iudgement you incurre and craue mercy at the hand of God while you haue time confesse your errour and cancell your commission so shall you haue the Church your Mother and her Children your Brethren and friends I. D. That which in the former section you spake but lispingly here you deliuer more plainely and articularly for there you say it is rather an encouragement but now you affirme peremptorily they are none but Papists that hold Iustification to bee conditionall to such extremities straits am I driuen that I am faine to borrow aide and assistance of the common aduersary But if I bee mistaken herein I hope I shall the more easily find pardon because
the Word and Spirit wee acknowledge him in generall to bee the Mediator and admit him in particular to bee our Mediator So that there is a double Receiuing of Christ the one is by the Vnderstanding the other is by the Will Christ is receiued by the Vnderstanding when wee Belieue historically yeelding and assenting vnto the truth of the Gospell the summe wherof is that Iesus is the Christ For when the Apostle saith 1 Tim. 1.15 This is a true saying and by all meanes worthy to bee receiued that Christ Iesus came into the world to saue sinners what can hee meane by receiuing other then assenting that it is true and when our Sauiour saith vnto the Apostle Act. 22.18 They will not receiue thy witnesse concerning me what else can he vnderstand then this that they would not giue credit vnto his testimony concerning Redemption and Saluation by Christ This Receiuing though it bee of such absolute necessity vnto life that no man can possibly be saued without it yet is it not of such power and efficacy that whosoeuer so receiueth shall infallibly bee saued For as we haue shewed The Diuels so belieue and tremble and many who are inlightned Iam. 2.19 Heb. 6.4 10.26 and haue receiued the knowledge of the truth perish notwithstanding eternally in their sinnes Besides therefore this Receiuing of Christ by the Vnderstanding there is a Receiuing of him also by the Will which is done by particular application when in the sincerity of our hearts we accept and make choice of him alone to bee our Mediator that is to say to bee vnto vs a Prophet a Priest and a King Wee accept him to bee our Prophet when wee admit him to be our teacher and absolutely submit our selues vnto his teaching Wee accept him to bee our Priest when wee rest and repose our selues vpon his Sacrifice and intercession for the washing away of our sinnes Finally wee accept him to bee our King when wee put our selues wholly and onely vnder his gouernment and subiect our wils vnto his will desiring that in all things it alone may bee done by vs. And this accepting of Christ by the Will is that very Receiuing of him which Saint Iohn here meaneth Ioh. 1.12 For first whosoeuer thus accepteth of him hath without question withall bestowed on him the same power and prerogatiue which hee affirmeth to bee giuen to as many as receiue him namely to bee made the Sonnes of God Againe that Receiuing is vnderstood which is opposed vnto the Iewes nor Receiuing Ioh. 1.11 for hauing said He came vnto his owne that is vnto the Iewes and his owne receiued him not immediatly it is added But as many as receiued him c. How then did the Iewes not receiue him onely in not assenting vnto this that hee was the Messias Indeed this was the ground why sundry of them receiued him not but their not-receiuing of him was no other then that Act of their Will whereby they refused to submit themselues vnto him as vnto the Messias This doth our Sauiour intimate Ioh. 5.43 when hee saith vnto them I am come in my Fathers Name and you receiue mee not if another come in his owne Name him Will you receiue that is him will you admit and accept for your Messias But plainly doth hee expresse it when in the Parable hee bringeth them in resolutely and directly saying Wee will not haue this man raigne ouer vs as also when hee saith vnto them Luc. 19.14 Mat. 23.37 How often would I haue gathered thy children together as the hen gathereth her chickens vnder her wings and yee would not Besides diuerse there were of them euen of the Scribes and Pharisees and Priests who knew right well that hee was the Christ Mat. 21.38 Mat. 22.30.31 for so much doe the Husbandmen themselues cōfesse in the Parable when they say This is the Heire and how could our Sauiour iustly charge them with that irremissible sinne against the Holy Ghost vnlesse they had knowne him to bee so These then knowing him to bee the Messias and yet not receiuing him what can this not-receiuing be other then their will full reiecting and refusing of him against their knowledge and against their conscience Vpon all which it followeth that this being not-receiuing receiuing opposed thereunto must needs bee that Act of the Will whereby wee accept of Christ to bee our Mediator that is to say our Prophet to instruct vs our Priest to make atonement for vs our King to rule and gouerne vs. And because Belieuing and Receiuing are as we haue shewed all one it followeth also necessarily that to Belieue in Christ is nothing else then so to accept him To grow therefore at length vnto an issue you see that according to promise I haue demonstrated vnto you first that those tearmes both of the old and new Testament mentioned in my Treatise import that Act of Faith whereby wee stand iustified before God secondly what is the true proper and naturall meaning and signification of these tearmes and that therefore thirdly by the word Rest in my Definition I vnderstand no other thing then that which these words import and signify Wherefore I must intreate you in the residue of your Reply to speake vnto this meaning otherwise you shall but spend your breath in vaine and wrestle not with mee but with your owne shadow Neuerthelesse if any shall thinke it fitter insteed of the word Rest to substitute any other of these tearmes I forbid him not for so doing he shall differ from mee in word onely and not in sense And to speake ingenuously and freely seeing to expresse the Act of Faith speciall choice is made in the New Testament of Belieuing in or vpon and this againe is expounded by such Receiujng as is before described happily it were not amisse aboue all the rest to preferre this and to define Faith by that Act of the Will whereby wee accept Christ to bee our Mediator for iustification and consequently Saluation The rather because it seemes more fully and plainely to set forth the nature of that Act by which wee are iustified and more apt and fit to resolue many doubts which may be moued touching iustification For as Vrsinus a right worthy Diuine obserueth Admonit de lib. Concord Faith iustifieth no otherwise then as it is an acceptation and application of the merit of Christ which is the proper Act of Faith alone and so very Faith itselfe These things thus premised let vs now in the Name of God proceed to the examination of what you haue replied and opposed against my definition N. B. I answer a man may rest his will vpon Christ and his merits and yet bee damned for want of Sanctification and so consequently may bee damned hauing Iustifying Faith which is absurd therefore is your Definition absurd I. D. Here Master Baxter and in the rest of your answers insuing you waue flote vp and downe