preaching of repentance first by chance or fortune but by the appointment and direction of Gods Spirit therefore must it bee vppon some good ground and if vpon some vpon what more likely then this viz that the duty of repentance was one of the first duties that was required to bee practised of them that were to be saued and before they could beleeue in Christ for saluation Their reasons likewise brought to ouerthrow my consequence are insufficient The first because though it be granted that when God calleth for any one grace none of the rest are excluded but included rather yet will not this prooue that in nature repentance goes before faith but onely that they both goe together in time and that both at one time they are wroght together Now for all this circumstance the worke of Repentance may in nature goe before faith in Christ The second because though that which is first placed bee not the first wroght in as much as that which is first in words may be last in sense yet for all this may repentance be first wrought seeing it is first taught because GOD vsually wrought graces as they were taught as hath beene shewed out of the Acts but euen now and therefore repentance may bee first both in sense as well as in wordes because it is first in nature as well as in words If they had giuen any reason why repentance could not bee first in sense or nature though it were so in words then had they indeed weakened my Argument but till then it is good enough The Exception But they will say Repentance was first preached because it was first felt The Apology I answere first if they could proue this to be the reason of their preaching it first I would discard my Argument and the probability it seemes to haue 2. I would faine know a reason why the duty of faith which is beleeuing in Christ of which the question is should not be as soone felt as the duty of repenting if the one be as truly wrought as the other Indeed the duties of repentance which are hearty sorrowe for past sinnes and purpose vnfained to leaue them are sooner felt then the comfort of faith which is assurance and perswasion of saluation by Christ but I can see no reason why the one habit or vertue should not be assoone perceiued and felt in the duties of it as the other The Exception But they vrge in their answere to this Argument that in my proofe hereof I contradict something deliuered else where for first in one place I say that repentance is the first grace that is wrought in men by preaching of the Gospell pag 261. and in another place I say that other graces goe before repâ—ntance pag 259. 260. Secondly there I speake of the practise of repentance assoone as it is wrought but in another I say that practise of repentance followes faith in Christ The Apology To the first I answere that I doe not say simply pa 262. that repentance goes before all grace for I neuer meant it went before a beliefe of the Gospell the contrary is euident by the state of the question pag 231. but onely that it goes before faith in Christ of the two that is Repentance and Faith Repentance is the first Besides all those graces that are saide else where to goe before Repentance doe but prepare to it so after a sort may be said to make vp but that grace of Repentance To the second supposed contradiction I answere that the imputation is vniust for where p. 261. l. 21. I speake of the practise of repentance as soone as it is wrought I onely meant the duty of repentance in the heart or the act of repenting as it is in the soule viz actuall sorrowing for past sinnes and resoluing to leaue them and in the latter place pag. 231. 21. 22. I speake of the practise of repentance in the life and conuersation that is of the effects and fruites of it when the inward purpose of the heart to leaue sinne is brought vnto an outward act and execution and therefore betwixt these no more then betwixt the other two is there any contradiction as is pretended either to the truth of Gods word or of mine owne opinion and this is sufficient to haue saide in defence of my six Arguments against that which by some hath beene obiected against my opinion The Arguments I haue already brought to prooue my opinion being defended against the exceptions of some It remaines that as yet they stand for good so that the maine question needes no more confirmation Notwithstanding it will not bee amisse by way of aduantage to adde one more to the former to driue the nayle to the head If repentance goe in nature before remission of sinnes then it goes in nature before Faith in Christ But repentance goes in nature before remission of sinnes Therefore repentance goes in nature before faith in Christ The consequence of the proposition viz repentance goes before faith because it goes before pardon I proue thus If repentance goe before remission of sinnes and not before faith in Christ then either it must goe hand in hand with iustifying faith or come betweene iustifying faith and iustification it selfe neither of which are true First repentance doth not goe hand in hand with iustifying faith first because then it should haue as great a hand in remission of sinne as faith in Christ or we must determine what part it hath in remission secondly they cannot answere so because they say repentance is a fruit of sanctification which followes iustification and therefore repentance cannot come before iustification with iustifying faith Secondly repentance doeth not come betweene iustifying faith and iustification it selfe for the one followes so immedâ—ately on the other that nothing can come betweene for no sooner can a sinner beleeue in Christ but immediatly he hath remission of his sinnes and is iustified The assumption viz Repentance goes before remission of sinnes I prooue by testimony of Scripture The testimonies of Scripture are these Deut 30.2 Ier. 18.8 4.4 26.3 Ezek. 18 21. Zech 1.3 Act. 2.38 3.19 26.18 1. Ioa. 1.7.9 wheÌ„ce I thus reason That which is required as a condition to be performed before wee obtaine pardon is before it in nature Repentance in all those is required of sinners as a condition to be performed before they obtaine pardon Therfore repentance is before remission of sins for it cannot be denied but that howsoeuer the end as apprehended possible to be had may stirre vp a man to vse the meanes which be in order to the obseruing thereof yet the meanes must needes in nature be before the actuall obtaining of the end neither can it bee denied but that Gods Spirit in the place afore named directs vs vnto repeÌ„tance as a means of obtaining forgiuenes by the apprehension of it appointing vs to vse the means to get it With this agrees the Doct of our Church
some other to the end it may appeare haue more and I will beginne with thâ— Doctrine of our owne Church of England which ought to preuaile with vs bâ—yond other testimonies of particular Dâ—uines Homily of saluation the 3. part How can a man haue this true faitâ— this sure trust and confidence in God thâ— by the merits of Christ his sinnes are foâ—giuen him and he receiued to the fauour 〈◊〉 God and to be partaker of the Kingdoâ— of Heauen when he liueth vngodly and dâ—nieth Christ in his deedes and in anothâ—â— Homily As he that readeth Caesars commentâ—ries Homily of faith the 1. part beleeueth the History of Caesar 〈◊〉 be true yet it is not properly sayd that 〈◊〉 beleeueth in Caesar of whom he seeketh 〈◊〉 helpe or benefit so he that beleeueth all thâ— is spoken of God in the Bible to be true and yet liueth so vngodly that hee cannot looke to enioy the promises and benefits of God Although it may be sayd that such a man hath a faith and beleefe to the word of God yet is it not properly sayd that he beleeueth in God or hath such a faith or trust in God whereby hee may surely looke for grace mercy and euerlasting life at Gods hands but rather for iudgement and punishment according to the demerits of his wicked life With this agrees the Common Prayer Booke The Common Prayer booke where in the forme of administring the Lords supper it exhorts the repentant onely to come to Christ that is to beleeue in him for saluation in these words Heare what comfortable words our Sauiour Christ sayth to all those that truely turne to him come vnto mee all yee that trauaile and be heauy laden and I will ease you So God leued the World that hee sent his onely begotten sonne that whosoeuer beleeues in him should not perish but haue euerlasting life According to which the Catechisme in the common Prayer booke requires those that are to be baptized and are to come to the Communion repentance or a stedfast purpose to leade a new life before a liuely faith in Gods mercy After the Doctrine of our Church shall follow the testimony of some learned Diuines and Preachers of our Church If you haue not found the Sonne saitâ— Mr. Foxe seeke for him by repentance seeke and yee shall find Mr. Foxe of Christ crucified fol. 16. B. in quarto repentance seeketâ— Christ faith findeth him and obedienâ—â— holds him This faith is a great state a Lady 〈◊〉 Dutches saith Mr. Latimer first shâ—â— hath a Gentleman Vsher that goeth beforâ— her Mr. Latimers fourth Sermon before K. Edward page 57. this Gentleman Vsher is called thâ— knowledge of sinne When we enter into oâ— hearts and acknowledge our faults anâ— stand not about to defend them hee is none of these winkers hee kickes not when heâ— heares his fault Now as the Gentleman vsher goes before her so she hath a trainâ— that commeth behinde her c. and these are the workes of our vocation viz. to bee good to his neighbour D. Halls workes page 147. of baptisme and to obey God c. Neuer will Christ come vnto that soule where the Herauld of Repentance hath not beene before The Key of Dauid pa. 27. printed at London 1610. in octa The Scriptures calls this worke of the Holy Ghost which is the beginning of our regeneration by the name of Repentancâ— euen the thing whereby wee are prepared to receiue the sanctification of faith And afterward It is most impossible for any one Ibid pa. 30. 31 to obtaine this confidence of grace except he first repent himselfe of his former life sincerely and from the bottome of his heart for euen as the faith of knowledge namely to beleeue without all doubt that God is and that he is a rewarder of all that seeke him in Iesus Christ and contrarily one that taketh vengeance on all those which turne away from him for all their sinnes and wickednesse which euer they committed as I say this faith must of necessity goe before true repentance towards God so our repentance namely that wee conuerting from our owne wayes unto God doe returne into the right way must needes goe before that faith of Iesus Christ and immediately after The beginning of the Gospell of God is repentance as it is written The beginning of the Gospell of Iesus Christ prepare you the way of the Lord viz. performe repentance and againe True Repentance towards Gods must of necessity goe before the faith of Iesus Christ and lastly Repentance is the first beginning and as it were the entry of our regeneration but faith is the very perfection and as it were the highest toppe of our Regeneration viz. the insculpture and engraving of the Holy Ghost whereby the repentant doth assuredly beleeue that all his iniquities are forgiuen and that he is vnited with God in euerlasting loue in Iesus Christ Next to the testimony of our Church and her Diuines I will produce the witnes of the Diuines of other Churches and first the ancient Doctors and Fathers and then the latter writers Of the auncient Doctors these shall suffice Iust Mart. qua 37. ad orthodoxos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The baptisme of Iohn which was the baptisme of repentance Acts 19.4 was saith Iustin Martir the beginning or entrance of the Gospell of Grace wherefore it was aboue the Law otherwise hee had not admitted them which had sinned according to the Law that hereby they might by repentance and faith in Christ receiue forgiuenesse of their sinnes comitted Tertul. lib de â—aptismo c. 10 â—uasi candidaâ—uâ— c. Tertullian speaking of the baptisme of Iohn saith that in those dayes therefore the baptisme of Repentance was acted as if the party baptized were thereby declared to bee a suter for remission and sanctification by Christ to follow after And in another place Tertul. lib de â—enitentia ss 6. The lauer of baptisme is the seale of faith which faith is begunne and commended by the faith of repentance VVith what teares sayth Basill oâ—ght that soule burdened with many sinnes depart from sinnes Basil mag quest compendio explicat quest 10. and with what hope and affection approach vnto God Respons first it ought to hate the former condemned life so that it ought euen to abhorre the remembrance of it and to detest it St. Chrysostome speaking of Iohns ministery and baptisme in the Wildernesse of Iudea saith thus Chrysostome in Matth 3. Homil. 10. Because hee came to Preach the baptisme of Repentance c he inferred for remission of sinnes as if hee should say I perswaded them to confesse their sinnes and to repent not altogether that they might be punished but that the more easily they might receiue the gift of remission for unles they had condemned themselues they had neuer sought for grace and not seeking for grace neither could they obtaine remission for this Baptisme prepares
of my disputation where such weakenesse is discouered 4. I spend not my spirit to requite in kinde many vnkinde and some insolent termes in their Exceptions but onely trie my strength to vntie the knots of their obiections I meane not euery idle cavill about words or matter impertinent to the clearing of the maine question but to answere such reasons onely as make directest and strongest opposition to my Doctrine The maine purpose being good and the meane proceeding faire it remaines that I humbly pray the Reader to peruse my Apology with patience and without preiudice to compare reason with reason with prudence and without partiality and to iudge of truth by reason rather then by humaine authority This if they shall doe it is reasonable to request it it is equall to grant it It may come to passe through Gods blessing that hotte and confident opposers may bee cooled and conuinced that moderate and vnresolued Christians may be perswaded and satisfied That errour may be discerned confuted and auoided and the truth more cleared and confirmed which God the Father grant for his Sonne Iesus sake by the grace and wisedome of the Holy Spirit to his owne glory and his Churches good Amen Yours in the seruice of your Faith William Chibald To the Christian Reader MAny of the Ancients obserue that St. Iames perceiuing diuers vnstable Christians to sucke poison out of the sweetest flower of paradise by misinterpreting and peruerting St. Paules most wholesome and comfortable Doctrine of iustification by faith without workes wrote his Epistle after a sort purposedly to redresse that abuse and equally as it were to diuide betweene faith and workes Iam. 2.21 23 giuing them both their seuerall iustifications for these two truthes may and must stand together faith iustifies our workes before God but workes iustifies our faith before men Abacuc 2.4 Rom. 1.17 Iames 2.26 The iust shall liue by faith but faith it selfe must liue by workes for as the body without the spirit is dead so faith without workes is dead also That which mooued this Holy Apostle to presse so farre the necessity of workes as to attribute vnto them a kinde of iustification Iames 2.26 I verily perswade my self stird vp the meek spirit of the modest and learned Author of the Triall of Faith and this Apologie thereof so farre to inforce the necessitie of repentance as to giue it a kind of precedency to faith in Christ not any way to detract from the Dignity and Excellency of faith which hee must and doth acknowledge to be the mother and Queene of all Christian vertues August Enchir. ad Laurent Fides enim impetrat quod lex imperat but to keepe men from bearing to much on the right hand and sailing to neare to the dangerous rocke of presumption vpon which it is to be feared many more ordinarily make shipwracke of faith and a good conscience then vpon the other opposit to it of despaire ô quam multi cum hac spe ad aeternos labores bella descendunt how many goe to hell with a vaine hope of heauen whose chiefest cause of damnation is their false perswasion and groundlesse presumption of saluation To keepe all true beleeuers from this most dangerous rocke this Author chiefefly penned his treatise entituled The triall of Faith wherein hee discreetly aduiseth all that saile towards those pulchri portus faire hauens in heauen to endeauour to steare their course in the middle way betweene the two rockes aboue named and to this end substantially prooueth that noe man may relie on Christ with assured hope and confidence of saluation and remission of his sinnes before he find in himselfe a true sorrow for them and entertaine an vnfained purpose and desire to leaue them This I take to bee the scope and drift of his discourse which being tried by the touchstone of Gods word hath prooued pretious Doctrine not as some haue giuen out hay and stubble which tearmes better be fit their Weake exceptions against it I professe by weighing and pondering his positions arguments I finde no poysonous weede to lurke vnder his whosesome leaues If any Psylli or Marsi by any extraordinary exstractiue quality can sucke out any such venemous iuyce I am perswaded the Author will as much distaste and detest the same as my selfe do For I finde him ready and desirous to giue satisfaction not onely to moderate examiners of his tenets but also to violent and priudicat obiecters against it hanc libertatem petimusque damvsque vicissim The Apologist freely acknowledgeth a beleefe of Christ and the Gospell to goe before the begunne repentance he speaketh of nay farther also hee professeth that faith in Christ precedeth that repentance which the Diuines cōmonly handle in their common places vnder that Title they meaning therby new obedience and a setled course and measure of sanctification In which regard I aduise the violent opposers of his tenet seriously to consider whether their arguments against it come home or rather in the end proue not meere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 especially sith they cannot deny that remission of sinnes in Christs blood is no other wayes offered vnto vs in the Gospell then vpon condition of amendment and newnes of life The vndertaking therefore of the performance of this condition God enabling vs therevnto by his effectuall grace which is a purpose of newnesse of life must needes precede the laying claime or taking to our selues the benefit offered by laying hold on Christ and relying on him for this benefit of of remission of sinnes It is true a reward or benefit offered vpon a condition may be challenged and iustly receiued also before the condition be performed but not before the condition be agreed vpon and vndertaken to be performed A man that hath a lease dimised to him vpon condition to pay his rent and fence the grounds may take his lease and enioy some benefit by it before hee hath performed those couenants but not before he hath vndertaken by couenant to performe the same This vndertaking of the performance of the condition viz. newnesse of life what is it else but a purpose and holy promise to God of leauing our sinnes which purpose he who hath not wrought in him by regenerating grace doth still and cannot but hold on his former purpose to continue in his sinnes now for a man yet holding his purpose to continue in sin to trust to Christ or relie on him for the remission of them what is it else but presumption As for many incident or consequent questions which the nice-handling of this point may breede in refined wits as whether the beleefe of the Gospell which we call Historicall faith and a beleefe and affiance in Christ which is iustifying faith in an elect grow into on habit and whether a purpose of amendment before and the amendment of life or new obedience after faith in Christ belong to the same specificall vertue of repentance and whether the
shew mercy and how God by the light and helpe of it draweth him forward vntill hee beleeue for his owne part and in his owne person for these be his very wordes in the beginning of that discourse hee doeth lay downe sixe seuerall workes of the Spirit in six seuerall sections of that fourth chapter the heads of them are these and they are more at large there discoursed of 1 God makes them to beleeue their misery and to be troubled in minde for it 2 They consult in this case what to doe 3 They are broken hearted and humbled 4 They haue a secrete desire of forgiuenesse 5 They conferre and aske pardon 6 They forsake all for it and highly â—rize it and then they come to apply Christ and the promise to themselues which his iudgement is a sauing faith In like manner and to the same eâ— Maister Baynes speaking Maister Baynes briefe directions to a godly life how the knoâ—ledge of misery by sin and redemption Christ workes on a man towards faith Christ he saith thus 1 Hee is drawne by the secret worke the spirit to beleeue that the doctrine taugâ— doth concerne him 2 The Lord directeth him to enter iâ— further consideration with himselfe of and â—bout his present state and consulteth what doe in this extremity 3 From the former consultation bâ—commeth to this holy resolution that he 〈◊〉 not returne to his old wayes but in all huâ—lity meekenesse and holinesse say with 〈◊〉 Paule Lord what shall I doe 4 By this meanes he comes to an vnfâ—ned desire of forgiuenesse 5 With earnest humble and particulâ— confession of his sinnes hee powreth oâ— prayers to God for the pardon of them Christ 6 He hauing found this pearle prize it as it is worth and therefore selleth all thâ— he hath and biddeth farewell to his sweetâ— delights for the obtayning of it and then 〈◊〉 commeth to apply the Gospell to himselfâ— and sealeth vp his saluation in his heart Neither is this the opinion of these learned and holy preachers but of many other in our owne Church Mr. Elton in his Catechisme the foure principle Modell of Diuinity page 274 to 279. Mr. Wheatly of Regeneration ch â—4 Mr. Perkins Catechisme the fourth principle and the state of a Christian Sect. 6. to 16. The next thing to be considered is their reasons whereby they would proue that some of those preparations which I mention do not goe before faith in Christ and they are two The Exception Those preparations doe not go before faith in Christ 1. Because they doe not draw all men to beleeue in Christ in whom they are wrought for say they Gods cords do draw and haue alwayes irresistably comming ioyned with them 2. Because I my selfe in my Treatise say that some of them are effects and fruites of faith following it Therefore cannot they goe before it as preparations to which I will answere seuerally The Defence Their first reason To the first reason is of no force First because though those preparations do not in the euent draw all men to beleeue in Christ in whom they are wrought yet do they at one time or other draw all the elect so to do that are ordained vnto eternall life and to beleeue in him for that end For of these onely is the question Secondly if their reason were good then would it proue that a beleefe of the Gospell is none of Gods cords to draw men to beleeue in Christ nor the Preaching of the Gospell none of Gods meanes to worke faith in Christ for neither the one does draw al men so to come to Christ nor the other so worke faith in Christ in all that haue the one wrought in them or the other taught vnto them witnesse the Parable of the seede in the Gospell Mat. 11.19 to 28. Is not the act of generation Gods ordinance to the begetting of a child because a child is not begotten by euery hand acts I confesse Gods spirit doth not onely draw men to beleeue in Christ but also workes it in them actually at one time or other after those preparations but drawing men to beleeue or preparing them thereunto is a different action from his working of faith or enabling them to beleeue and in the elect comming followes drawing necessarily in respect of the euent Their second reason To the second reason whereby they would prooue that some of the preparations I name cannot goe before faith in Christ is of no power because though I say some of them may go before it in one respect yet may they follow in another Indeede I say that a feare of God goes before faith in Christ as a preparation to it page 222. and that a feare of God followes faith in Christ as an effect thereof page 304. but neither doe I say that a filiall feare is the preparation nor a seruile feare the effect though the faithfull after beleeuing in Christ doe feare to sinne for feare of condemnation else the Holy Ghost would neuer diswade from it on that ground The like may be sayde of sorrow for sinne by comparing page 222. where it is a preparation to faith and page 301. where it is an effect of a sauing faith or rather of one that hath it for I do not say that sorrow for sinne on the same grounds altogether and in the same measure doth goe before and after faith in Christ and therefore their reason is but a Cauill and so I descend to the third generall thing against which they except in handling the sixt rule viz. the particular naming of a beginning of repentance to be one of those gifts of the spirit that prepare to faith in Christ Against this there are three exceptions 1 against the position it selfe 2 against the exposition of it and 3 against the handling of the position The Triall The position it selfe that repentâ—nce is one of those preparations The position it selfe is this Repentance is begunne before faith in Christ The Exception This position they dislike for two causes First because it implies a beginning of repentance before faith in Christ some space of time Secondly because it supposeth that repentance is begun at one time in some part of it and finished at anotheâ— in the residue The Apology To the 1. Exceptiâ—n I do indeede often vse the word Before to expresse the Precedency I meane but neither did I meane a precedency some space of time nor can they shew it by the words of the booke except I had added thereunto some other word as time space season or the like to giue light to such an interpretation which is not done in that whole disputation Or except the word Before in the English tongue did alwayes carry that sence onely which experience disprooues seeing one thing may be before another in nature as fire before heat in order as the second before the third In dignity as an Earle before a Baron and in worth as gold before siluer
As well as in time as the begetting of a childe is before his birth Secondly they had reason to interpret my meaning of a precedency in nature rather then in time because I made the beginning of repentance to be a meanes vnto Faith in Christ as is to bee seene by my two first Arguments and other places of the booke and therefore before it onely in the order of causes and consequently in the order of nature 2. Because in my disputation I oppose the common opinion and the receiued opinion concerning the precedency betwixt Repentance and Faith is that faith goes before repentance not in time but in nature therefore my opinion that contradicts theirs should be vnderstood of the same manner of precedency viz. that repentance goes before faith in order of Nature Thirdly though I meant a precedency in nature yet did I not meane that so much as the proofe of this namely a necessity of the being of repentance with faith in Christ For my chiefe intent was to shew that sinners cannot warrantably with any expectation of benefit by theiâ— faith beleeue in Christ for saluation except they repent when they doe the onâ— they must doe the other as appeares by this in that by way of exposition I say men cannot beleeue in Christ as long 〈◊〉 they liue in their sinnes page 244 line 27 and that I expound the word Before bâ— till or vntill page 279. line 26 27. 278 line 25 281. line 17.24 282. l. 25 27. and in other places In the fourth place If I say to my Tenant that owes me the rent of the two laâ— quarters you shall not bring mee the onâ— quarters rent before the other I will nâ— receiue the first before the last can it be hence concluded necessarily that I mean he shall bring his first quarters rent in timâ— precisely before the last may not my Tenant with as good reason conceiue my meaning to be that I will haue him bring both together and if he doe so may not he thinke I will be well content In like manner when I say sinners may not beleeue in Christ before they haue repented It cannot be necessarily concluded I meant they must repent some space of time before they beleeue in Christ They may with as good reason vnderstand they must doe both at one time when they beleeue in Christ they must repent and if they so doe it will be well pleasing to God Charity might haue taught them to interprete mee the best way rather then the worst Fifthly they that hold repentance and faith goe together in time but giue the precedency to faith in nature yet speake of the precedency of faith vnto repentance and when they speake of this precedency they say faith goes before repentance and why then may not I which hold repentance and faith goe together in time but giue the precedency to repentance in nature speake of this precedency and say repentance goes before faith why should I be vnderstood of predecency some space of time more then they and be blamed therefore rather then they Lastly if I may freely speake my minde I thinke it may be maintained that in some cases and in some persons in these dayes repentance in some degree may be wrought before faith in Christ some space of time according as those doctrines may be preached first or last in time and be made effectuall to the good of the hearers by Preaching for I could neuer yet conceiue how it crost any commandement or promise of God or hindered any duty or comfort of the faithfull or discountenanced the sincerity of profession or disparaged the perseuerance of the Elect in the estate of grace or derogated from the free grace of God in Christ or lifted vp man in any proud conceit of his owne free will as long as it is affirmed that repentance is but begunne onely that it is wrought by the Spirit onely and by the word onely and in the Elect onely and onely as an effect of their Election and only as a meanes to worke Gods will on them by disposing them to faith in Christ whereby they may be brought to that supernaturall end to which they are ordained in him and therefore there needed no such clamour as hath beene noysed about it supposing the position hath beene so vnderstood But it may be others see what I cannot they discerne more vntruth in the Doctrine then I and descry more mischiefe likely to ensue thereupon then I can apprehend else there is no reason they should be so violent in opposing it be it so then I hope it will appeare by their arguments against it Surely if the opinion were so absurde and dangerous I suppose the holy Scripâ—ure would affoord arguments many and strong enough to confute it and if they did I make no doubt but they would bee diligent enough to collect them and if they had I guesse shrowdly they would be forward enough to produce them let vs then take a view of them to the end wee may beleeue if it be possible The Exception Their Arguments are foure in number and I will propound them in due forme that their strength may bee better discerned The first Argument If all sauing graces bee wrought all at once and together so that when one is wrought the other is wrought also then is not repentance begun in time before a sauing faith But the first is true therefore the second The Assumption they prooue as shall be seene by and by The Defence 1 I answere If by sauing graces the meane such as are appointed by God 〈◊〉 saue sinners instrumentally then I deny tâ—â— consequence and grant the Assumptioâ— for though all such sauing graces suppâ—sing there were many of them weâ— wrought all at an instant so that when oâ— is wrought the other is wrought also yâ— might repentance be wrought in time bâ—fore all these for in this sense onely faitâ— in Christ is a sauing grace because it onelâ— apprehends and layes hold on the Sauioâ— Christ and his merits for saluation Repeâ—tance is no such sauing grace but if by sauing grace be meant either those that tenâ— to saluation or are wrought in all theâ— that shall be saued to make them person capable of saluation then I grant the coâ—sequence and deny the Assumption because some of these viz. illumination anâ— beliefe of the Gospell and the beginning oâ— repentance may in time be wrought before faith for ought this argument proue to the contrary But let vs see how they prooue the aâ—sumption in which lyeth the strength oâ— the Argument The Exception If regeneration be wrought all at once and together so that when one grace of regeneration is wrought all other of the same kind are wrought also then all sauing graces are wrought all at once and together But the one is true therefore the other The consequence they imagine is good because by the work of sauing graces men are regenerated
I meane Pag. 301. 303. the putting in practise in our liues and conuersations that which the heart hath purposed concerning the leauing of our sinnes to the end the sinceritie of our Repentance may appeare And so much for answere to their Arguments whereby they indeauoured to prooue against mee vpon a misconstruction of my meaning that repentance is not begun in time before faith in Christ and consequently for answer to their first Exception against my position touching the precedency of Repentance vnto Faith in Christ the second exception followes The Exception Against my position they except in the second place that saying Repentance is begun I imply it is begun in one port at one time and finished at another time in another The Apology I answere first Maister Perkins speakes of Repentance begunne in his Treatise of Repentance chap. 1. will they make the like exception against him secondly they haue giuen no reason why repentance cannot be so begun and perfected therefore is their exception of no worth but I will giue one reason why it mâ—y bee so wrought namely because I haue already proued that regeneration may be so wrought that is in one part of it which is illumination at one time and in another part which is sanctification at another And so much for clearing my position the exposition followes The exposition of my position consists in this that I meane by the Repentance I speake of a true purpose of heart to leaue our former euill liues c. The Exception These words say they define repenâ—ance The ezposition of the position but they thinke the definition â—aught 1. because it makes repentance â—onsist in the heart onely which should be â—n the whole man soule and body 2. beâ—ause it supposeth that truth and sincerity â—f heart can goe before faith in Christ 〈◊〉 because it implyes that true repenâ—ance may be before sauing grace or faith 〈◊〉 Christ 4. and lastly because in handâ—ing this point I say a man may die with his true repentance and not be saued to â—ll which I will answere in order The Apology I answere first To the first exception that I had reason to call â—rue repentance a true purpose of heart to â—eaue our former sinnes c. 1. because â—mpenitency or vnrepentance is a purpose of heart to goe on in our former euill â—ourses and to liue in them still 2. because Mr Perkins so describes the nature of it Mr. Perkins golden chaine chap. 39. Repentance sayth hee is when a sinner turneth to the Lord this is performed when as any one by the instruction of â—he Holy Ghost doth purpose will and desire and endeauor to relinquish his former sinnes and become a new man Secondly I had no reason to make repentance to consist in the body and outward actions 1. because repentance is 〈◊〉 vertue habit or quality and so I describâ— it which onely hath his seate in the soule heart will and affections and not in anâ— part of the body 2. because the repeâ—tance of the body as they speake is noâ— the vertue it selfe but the practise of it oâ— the actuall leauing of our former sinneâ— according to the purpose of our hearâ— Now this is not a part of repentance Math. 3.2 Acts 26.20 Modell of Diuinity pa. 290. Perkins gold chaine ch 37. Buc. iustit loc 30. pag. 289. bâ— an effect or fruites of that vertue and witâ— this agree not only the Scriptures but thâ— iudgement of many learned Diuines 〈◊〉 our owne and other Countries If they say that only is true repentance which bringeth forth a godly life I answere if by true repentance theâ— meane that which in the euent shall stanâ— for true before God which in this worlâ— shall helpe forward the assurance of ouâ— saluation and in the end be crowned witâ— Heauen then I say that is true repentancâ— which bringeth forth a good life But 〈◊〉 thereby be meant as I vnderstand it thâ— which in the nature of the thing is truâ— repentance that is Repentance withouâ— dissimulation then I say true repentance iâ— an hearty sorrow for past sinnes and 〈◊〉 true purpose to leaue the same If I describe faith in Christ by it office â—s it iustifies then I will say it is a grace of God whereby a sinner trusts vnto Christ for saluation But if I describe it as it may â—e distinguished from the faith of hypoâ—rites that shall faile them then will I say â—t is a grace of God that workes by loue â—nd stirres vp vnto good workes yet is â—ot working by loue and stirring vp to good workes of the nature of Faith as it â—ustifies though it bee of the nature of that faith which iustifies but an effect of that which doth iustifie or rather a fruite of him that is iustified by faith by which he is declared and manifested to be iustified in Gods sight Euen so if I describe repentance properly and by the nature which it hath as a vertue or holy quality distinct from other graces and vertuous habits I will say it is a grace of God whereby sinners sorrow heartily for their past sinnes and purpose vnfeinedly to leaue them But if I discribe it so as it may be differenced from the repentance of hypocrites which will faile them then I will say it is a grace of God whereby a sinner sorrowing for his sinnes and purposing to leaue them doth accordingly leaue them and amenâ— his life yet is not this amendment of liâ— a part of repentance the vertue it seâ— but a effect of it and an fruite of him that hath it in his heart which the repentance of his heart is â—â—clared by the efficacy of it vnto salâ—tion And indeede to speake as the truâ— is though in respect of the inward natuâ— of the vertue it selfe and as it is seated the heart that is true repentance which iâ— sorrow for sinnes past and a purpose leaue them yet in respect of efficacy vâ— saluation in the euent and in respect manifestation that onely is true repâ—tance and is declared so to bee whiâ— bringeth forth a good life And if a mâ— may not perswade himselfe hee is â—â—ued though hee beleeue in Chriâ— except this faith bee accompanied 〈◊〉 him with inward fruites of other grâ—ces and outward fruites of a holy lifâ— then may not a man perswade himselâ— that hee hath repented vnto saluation 〈◊〉 the heart except his inward repentanâ— in sorrowing for sinnes and purposiâ— to leaue them be accompanied with outward amendment of life But they bring two reasons to proâ— that true repentance is not this true purpose of heart c. The Exception Reason 1 True repentance is not a true purpose of heart to leaue our former sinnes c. because this purpose may fayle but true repentance cannot faile The Apology I answere 1. that if wee consider this purpose and repentance onely in the nature of them they may faile for there is nothing in their nature as
True but not directly or immediately as if it were the hand to lay hold thereupon or the instrument to receiue it for that is faith onely which laies hold vpon Christ the Sauiour himselfe and receiues him but because it is a way and meanes together with other preparing graces to fit vs for faith whereby wee are entitled to Christ and all his benefits euen as Heauen is promised to patience to loue aâ—d new obedience Ioa 3.16 Rom. 1.17 because in the Elect they are fruits of faith to which it is promised directly and immediately as the hand and instrument to apply and apprehend it The repentance I speake of viz sorrow for sinne and purpose to leaue it is auaileable to saluation that is to qualifie vs for it but not that whosoeuer hath this and no more grace shall be saued and forgiuen for what then should become of faith in Christ but because in the Elect they which haue this wrought in them as a preparation to faith shall in time haue faith wrought in them also to the end they may be saued Philip. 1. for God will perfect his worke in them when he begins it Now I come to the third and last thing propounded about the position it selfe of the precedâ—â—cy of repentance The handling of the position vnto faith in Christ which is the handling of the position which is done three wayes 1. by prouing it 2. by clearing of it and 3. by applying it The Triall The point is prooued two wayes first by the testimony of a learned Diuine sâ—condly by reasons taken from Scripturâ— and none of all these like them The Exception The proouing of the point or portion by testimony The testimony is Mr. Perkins and â—gainst it they except two wayes first thâ— say I mistake the meaning of the authoâ— for hee is not vnderstood to speake of râ—pentance before or without faith in Chrâ— but with it secondly though I had nâ— mistaken his meaning yet is it but one siâ—gle testimony because I had no more anâ— thirdly that his minde concerning thâ— point is not there declared directly and 〈◊〉 set purpose as it is else where but occâ—sionally and by the way onely in anotheâ— discourse and that it is deliuered in 〈◊〉 booke that he neuer perused before he died but was put out after his death The Apology I answere to the end wee may rightly conceiue To the first Exception and distinctly vâ—derstand thâ— meaning of Mr. Perkins in the words alleadged wee must take three things foâ— granted which cannot be denied first thaâ— he speakes of a certaine order betwixt that repenting and beleeuing and the laying hold of the promise there spoken of 2. That hee sayth the order he speakes of iâ— Gods order 3. That the order of God about repenting beleeuing laying hold of the promise is to be obserued in Baptisme This being premised In the next place wee come to speake what the order is in Mr. Perkins Iudgement namely whether repenting go before beleeuing or beleeuing before repenting Some say his meaning is first beleeue and lay hold of the promise then repent of your sinnes I say first beleeue the Gospell then repent of your sinnes then by hold of the promise of forgiuenesse and eternall life by faith in Christ For their coniecture at his meaning they giue no reason but against it my reason is this If their coniecture were right then the beleeuing hee speakes of and the laying hold of the promises were all one faith but that cannot be Mr. Perkins minde because he euidently distinguisheth betwixt them for the beleeuing he speakes of he ioyes with repenting and the beleeuing that he ioynes with repenting he distinguisheth from laying hold of the promises that shall be made cleare thus The beleeuing that hee ioynes with repenting makes men Christs Disciples that appeares page 257. Col. 1. B. in these words marke first it is sayd make them my Disciples by calling them to beleeue aâ—â— repent and the making men Christs Disciples by calling them to beleeue and repent doth in the order there spoken of bâ— Mr. Perkins go before laying hold of thâ— promises because speaking of prophaâ—â— men that do not consider the order whicâ— God vseth in couenanting with men iâ— Baptisme he sayth they deale prepostâ—rously ouerslipping the commandement oâ— repenting and beleeuing and in the firsâ— place lay hold of promises made to them iâ— Baptisme ibid Col. 2. B. So that if the order of God peruerted by prophane man be in Mr. Perkins opinion first to lay hold of the promises and then to beleeue and repent then the order of God rightly kept by the godly must needes be first to obserue the commandment of God by beleeuing and repenting that is first to beleeue the Gospell and repent and then to lay hold of the promises that is by faith in Christ to rest and rely on his merits for saluation the rather is this true because in the same place Col. 2. C. and vpon the former words he inferres that which I haue cited in my Treatise viz. wee must as good Disciples obey the commandement which bids vs turne and beleeue before we can haue any benefit or profit by the promise of God c. Obiect 1 Oh but say they he meanes not repenting without beleeuing in Christ Solut. True vnderstanding it in respect of time not of order for repentance may be with faith in time and without it in nature but the question is of the precedency of repentance to faith not in time but in nature M. Perkins meaning in that place say I is that by the order of God which is the order of nature repenting goeth before laying hold of the promise and therefore repentance by his iudgment in that place must goe before faith in Christ For in his opinion faith in Christ is a laying hold or an apprehending for a mans selfe Perk. on the Reue. ch 2. v. 14. and an Iud. v. 1. or applying the promises of God in Christ Obiect 2 Oh but say they Mr. Perkins ioynes repentance with beleeuing therefore the repentance he meanes is not without faith but with it True Solut. but the beleeuing he ioynes with repentance is not sauing faith for that is laying hold of the promises by faith in Christ which he disioynes from beleeuing ioyned with repenting but a beleefe of the Gospell which is the meanes of repentance pag. 257. Col. 1. A. Col. 2. B. Because in the second place they except against this testimony that it is therefore in sufficient because it is but one anâ— it is therefore but one because I had 〈◊〉 more therefore now will I shew why cited but one and that I haue more I brought but one testimony because thought it enough in regard it was the tâ—stimony of so learned godly a Diuine 〈◊〉 our age and Country whose workes praiâ— him in the gates of our Ierusalem And now will I adde vnto that oâ—
the way to another Baptisme that is of Christ and therefore he saide that they should beleeue in one that was to come after himselfe Next to the ancient Doctors follow the latter but learned Diuines Let vs saith Caluin prepare the way Caluins comment on Luke 3.4 that is leauing our sinnes which stoppe the way to the Kingdome of God let vs giue accesse vnto his grace â—elancth proâ—gom on â—e Epistle to â—â—e Romans Iustification saith Melanctâ—on ought to be vnderstood of the good will of God accepting vs not infusing into vâ— habits that is vertues and yet there ought to be vertues in vs because the Gospell preacheth Repentance and Faith cannot be but in RepentaÌ„ce therfore to the end our faith may be increased â—â—scators commentary on Luk. 3.4 our repentance must be increased That Christ may come into vs saith Piscator as our Sauiour wee must prepare the way vnto him by true Repentance by bringing forth fruits worthy of Repentance Faith saith Rolloc doth alwayes follow a heart deiected and contrite in the sight of sinne and and misery Rollocks commentary on Ioa. 5.44 Dietericus Instit Catecheticae pag 241. de aenitentia Good workes follow Faith but Faith is in none but thâ—se that are conuerted I know well that they alleadge many testimonies against me both out of ancient and latter writers but being well considered they make nothing against me therefore one answere will serue for all for if they say Faith goes before Repentance they speake either of a beliefe of the word or of amendment of life When they speake of Faith which is a beliefe of the Word then the sense is a sinner must beleeue the threatning of the Word to the impenitent and the promises of it to the repentant before hee will sorrow for his sinnes or purpose to leaue them and to this purpose spake Clemens Alexandrinus of the precedency of Faith vnto Repentance saying Cleâ— Alexandâ— Stro â— 2 lâ— et graece p 7 Repentance is the office and worke of Faith for vnlesse a sinner belieue that there was sinne wherewith he was formerly held he will not be remoued and vnlesse he beleeue that punishment hangeth ouer his head which offendeth and that saluation is promised for him that liueth according to the coÌ„mandements he will not be changed Answerable to which is that knowne place of St. Ambrose Ambros de penitentia l. 1. c. 1 No man can repent rightly but hee that hopes for pardon In like manner when they speake of repentance that is amendment of life their meaning is a sinner must belieue in Christ before he amend his life Augus Se d tempore Seâ— 7. Hom 10. Gal 5.6 and practise new obedience and in this sense is St Augustine to be vnderstood where hee speakes of Repentance saying Nothing makes true Pepentance but the hatred of sinne and the loue of God the fire of this sacrifice is loue for that repentance that proceeds from the loue of God must proceed from faith in Christ for faith workes by loue Gal 5.6 but faith workes not by loue our first repentancâ— at our first conuersion which is sorrow for sinne and purpose to leaue it but amendment of life which followes faith Farre bee it from mee to presume to blame those worthy Authours for speaking promiscuously of Repentance the vertue and amendment of life the fruite thereof there is warrant enough from Scripture phrase so to speake in regard that where the one is the other also is or shall be in due time in the Elect for the one is the way to the other the repentance of the heart is the meanes to the repentance of the life that is amendment of the life But I blame those that oppose my opinion for producing such testimonies against mee when either they speake not of the same faith or not of the same repentance that I doe for touching faith they speak of a beleefe of the word and I of beleeuing in Christ and as for repentance I speake of the vertue it selfe they of the fruite of that vertue I of the purpose they of the practise my repentance is inward in the heart their outward in the life mine in the affections their in the actions for I haue often and plainely affirmed that a beliefe of the Word and Gospell goes before any repentance Ionah 3 5. and that faith in Christ goes before the practise of repentance in amendment of life and in the mortifying of our sinfull nature that it breake not out to the committing of the same sinnes againe To the third and last exception I answere that those allegations doe rather fortifie the testimony for mee then any way weaken it To the third 〈◊〉 last exception against the testimony out oâ— Mr. Perkins and make rather against them that alleadge it for first in that it is vrged the point was deliuered but in a passage only where he had no such cause to discourse of that matter this shewes that hee had the better minde to deliuer it belike because he thought it needfull and profitable to be opened and that hee was more confident in the trueth thereof secondly In that it is said the booke out of which the testimony was taken was the last of his writings which hee had not leasure to peruse and that it was put out after his death this implies that hee wrote that booke when he was of most sound and setled iudgement and that therefore the Doctrine in question was most free from exception and least needed correction and therefore howsoeuer there may seeme some contradiction in his other workes to that which is here deliuered yet must the last writing be esteemed a retractation of the first rather then the first of his writings should be produced against this last for the confutation of it And thus much of handling the point in question by proouing it and of proouing it by the testimonies of men now followes the proouing of it by arguments taken from Scripture which of the six generals was the fourth point propoundâ—d to bee obserued in discussing this question The Arguments are in number six but in weight they are all found too light We will examine their exceptions in order The Triall Repentance is begunne before Faith in Christ The first Argument because the Repentance of the Publicans and Harlots Mat. 21.31 was begunne before their Faith and theirs was true Repentance and sauing Faith The Exception To this they answere by granting that the Repentance and Faith of the Publicans and Harlâ—t were true and sauing but by denying that their repentance was to their Faith as a meanes to an end for say they the Text in Mathew shewes this onely that the Pharisees perseuered in their infidelity and abode in their vnbeliefe though the Publicans and Harlots beleeued or that the Pharisees neither repented not beleeued though the Publicans and Harlots did both before whom they should haue gone into
the Kingdome of Heauen and giuen them an example to follow The Apology This answere I will take away by prouing that the Repentance of the uPblicans and Harlots was to their Faith as a meanes to an end and this I will make good two wayes first by the context of the place and a reason drawne out of it secondly by the iudgement of the learned First the context or the precedent and subsequent matter of that place prooues my interpretation because the condition of the Publicans touching entring into Gods Kingdome is amplified Ver. 28. and 29. by a parable of a sonne who when he was bidden by his father to goe into the Vineyard and worke the Text faith He said he would not but afterward he repented and went ver 29. Now because by that sonne is meant the Publicans and of that sonne it is saide not onely and barely he went though hee said hee would not but that hee repented and went therefore this shewes not onely and barely he went but that therefore he went because he repented first of his not going formerly and of his saying he would not goe and therefore consequently will it follow that thâ— holy Ghost thereby meant not onely aâ— barely that the Publicans repented aâ— beleeued but that therefore they beleeueâ— because they repented first of their otheâ— sinnes for as the repenting of the sonne fâ— his not going and of his saying hee woulâ— not goe was a cause why hee went aâ— was a meanes vnto it for sorrow for past fault and purpose to leaue it musâ— needes be a meanes to the amending of it so the repenting of the Publicans anâ— Harlots for their sinnes in time past was 〈◊〉 cause and meanes of their beleeuing iâ— Christ afterward and therefore was to iâ— as a meanes to an end and consequently was in nature before it The rather is this true because wheâ— the holy Ghost comes to speake of the Scribes and Pharisees described by the other sonne which said he would and went not ver 30. he saith they repented not afterward that they might beleeue what lesse can hence be gathered but that therefore they did not beleeue in Christ viz because they did not first repent of their former wicked liues nor were prickt in heart for them nor purposed to leaue them Secondly I prooue my interpretation by the iudgement of the learned namely that the repentance of the Publicans was to their faith as a meanes to an end For in expresse words Mr. Beza sayth Bezae annot on Math. 21.32 that the repentance there spoken of was a way to the faith there mentioned I dispute not now what repentance Beza meanes Iter igitur ad fidem est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I haue prooued it to be true repentance in my Treatise and the reasons are not answered and besides now the point is granted by them Secondly Morton of repentance the argument of it toward the end Mr. Morton a learned Diuine of our Country doth so expound the words Matthew 21.32 you did not repent to beleeue or that yee might haue beleeued and thereupon concludes that repentance is distinguished from sanctification as being but a preparation thereunto For if the Pharisies did not repent to beleeue or that they might beleeue then on the contrary the Publicans did repent to beleeue or that they might beleeue and consequently their repentance was to their faith as a meanes to an end And verily if the words had gone thus in the verse they beleeued to repent or that they might repent I beleeue they would haue concluded quickly that their faith was to their repentance as a meanes to an end and consequently as a cause of an effect and therefore in nature before which is more then that they continued their beleefe or that they both repenâ— and beleeued Wherefore my exposition hauing wâ—rant from the grammer of the text agreâ—ment with the scope of the place and coâ—sent with the opinion of the learned aâ— their 's being but a bare affirmatioÌ„ therefoâ— I hope it wil hence easily follow that 〈◊〉 Doctrine grounded thereon concerniâ— the precedency of repentance to faith 〈◊〉 nature is warrantable consequently 〈◊〉 first Argument to proue it good for ougâ— hath yet beene shewed to the contrary The Triall Repentance is begunne before faith 〈◊〉 Christ The second argument because God giues men repentanâ— to the end they may beleeue in Christ 1. Tim. 2.25 The Exception To this second Argument they answer that it prooues not the question becausâ— the text of Scripture on which it is founded is not rightly expounded For say they by acknowledging the truth in Timothy 1. not meant beleeuing in Christ as I haue expounded it but professing the truth not onely in word but in life and conuersation accompanied with an inward change The Apology In defence of my interpretation I haue giuen foure reasons to three of which they answere let vs examine the validity of their answeres in order The Triall First by acknowledging the truth in Timothy is meant beleeuing in Christ because by it wee come out of the snares of the Diuell that is of the Diuells children are made the children of God The Exception This they say is not a good reason because wee come out of the snares of the Diuell by repentance as well as by faith The Apology Vpon this I reply that this instance ouerthrowes not my reason because recouering out of the snare of the Diuell is a translation from being the Diuels child to be Gods childe Now we are not made Gods children by repentance but prepared to be Gods children but it is directly sayd so of a Ioa. 1.12 Gal. 3.26 faith It is plainely sayd of faith in Christ that b 1 Ioan. 5.4 5. it is the victory whereby wee ouercome the world c 2. Pe 2 20. To the acknowledging of our Lord and sauiour Iesus Christ is attributed the escaping of the pollutions of the world namely for time to come d 2 Pe. 1.3 Through the knowledge of Christ is giuen all things which appertaine to life and godlines namely to doe good workes and to performe new obedience in a setled sincere course which are no where sayd of repentance The Triall Secondly by acknowledging of the truth in Tymothy is meant faith in Christ because in other places Coloss 2.2 1 Tim. 2.4 Eph. 4.13 this faith is expressed by this Phrase The Exception To this reason they answere that though in other Scriptures a sauing faith be expressed by that phrase of acknowledging the truth yet heere in Tymothy it cannot Why because this exposition cannot stand with the analogy of faith and why forsooth because repentance cannot stand without faith in Christ or be without it The Apology By this answere a blinde man may see that they take it for granted that if by acknowledging the truth be meant beleeuing in Christ it cannot be auoyded but repentance must go before faith in
Christ To the end therefore that they may preuent this they will disprooue my interpretation saying that by acknowledging the truth in Timothy is not meant faith in Christ why because it cannot Why can it not be so meant because it is against the analogy of faith why is it against the analogy of faith because repentance cannot be without faith what is this but to runne in a ring and to hunt Counter without proouing any thing who sees not that this is to beg the question and vpon the matter to prooue â—dem per idem mouere non promouere I prooue repentance goes before faith â—n Christ because repentance goes beâ—ore the acknowledging of the truth â—hich is a sauing faith They answere â—e reason is not good because by acknowâ—edging the truth there cannot be meant â—aith in Christ why cannot faith in Christ â—e meant there because repentance is not â—efore or without faith in Christ The Triall Thirdly by acknowledging of the truth in Timothy is meant faith in Christ because it is called the faith of the elect Timâ— 1.1 for onely the elect haue a sauing faith because onely the elect haue a Sauiour and are saued by him The Exception To this they answer by denying my interpretation of the Epistle to Titus for say they the Apostle doth not there explicate what he meant by acknowledging of the truth namely the faith of the elect For those words doe not shew what the faith of the elect is but distinguish it from the faith of the elect The Apology Vpon this I reioyne in this manner 1. Ancient Interpreters both a Gagneius Guilliaudus Papists and b Calvin Beza Piscatur Protestants doe expound the words as I doe that the latter are put exegetically for the interpretation of the former 2 My Aduersaries barely say the wordes distinguish and not interpret without any reason of their affirmation and therefore it is not good 3 If those wordes acknowledging of the truth be a distinction betweene the former words viz. the faith of the elect then do they distinguish two faiths then do they distinguish the faith of the elect which is a sauing faith from an acknowledging of the truth or an assent vnto it which is an Historicall faith then by acknowledging the truth must be meant an Historicall faith but by the acknowledging the truth in Timothy cannot be meant an Historicall faith because an Historicall faith cannot follow repentance in nature but goe before it for the acknowledging the truth there spoken whateuer it bee doth follow the repentance there spoken of because it is thereunto as an effect vnto a cause or as an end to a meanes for so much they confesse themselues in their exposition of the sence of that place which in their Iudgement and words runs thus that God may giue them repentance that those which now oppose the truth may be wonne to the profession of it So that either those words the acknowledging of the truth must not distinguish that which is meant by them from the faith of the elect and by them must be meant an Historicall faith and then repentance must goe before an Historicall faith or a beleefe of the Gospell or the acknowledging the truth doth interpret the nature of the faith of the elect there spoken of and then repentance must go before the faith of the elect vtrum horum and so much in defence of the reasons of my exposition of the text to Timothy wherein my second Argument is grounded now a word onely in answere to their Interpretation of the place The Exception By acknowledging the truth 2. Tim. 2.25 must be meant say they the profession of the truth and their reason is because in Peter the phrase is so to bee taken 2. Peter 2.21 The Apology I answere 1. Neither do they bring any good reason why the phrase must be so vnderstood in Peter nor if they did could that proue it must be so vnderstood in Paul nor haue they giuen any good reason from the text of Paul of their exposition and therefore their interpretation without reasons for it is not so good as mine with reasons 2 In that place Paul speakes of the conuersion of Infidels in this conuersion a beleefe of the Gospell hath the first place then repentance then faith in Christ then profession as a fruite of faith but if their exposition of the words acknowledging the truth by professing of the truth were good profession must go in the first place for there is no mention at all of any other so that either by those words cannot be meant profession of the truth or men must professe the truth at their first conuersion before they haue either an Historicall or sauing faith 3 In their owne words they expound what profession they meane viz. not onely in word but in life and conuersation accompanied with an inward change Now hereby they confound repentance and acknowledging the truth which are different for the one is a meanes to the other whatsoeuer is meant by them for what is repentance in their iudgement but an outward and inward change of soule and body of words and workes The Triall Repentance is begunne before faith in Christ The third Arment because men cannot beleeue in Christ as long as they liue in their sinnes Ioa. 5.44 The Exception This Argument they say prooues not the question for it onely prooues that a man must repent of his sinnes as soone as he beleeues in Christ and not that he must repent before he beleeues The Apology To this I say that had I intended to prooue a precedency of repentance vnto faith in Christ some space of time then I confesse this answere had beene sufficient to that Argument because as it is propounded it prooues no more but forasmuch as my purpose was not so much but lesse viz. a precedency in nature only therefore is not the answere to purpose and consequently for all that it is sound and good for two things may be in time as soone one as another and yet in nature the one may goe before the other as fire and heate a father and a childe else how can they with any colour hold faith and repentance to be together in time and yet faith to go before it in nature and in order of causes Though my Argument be good as it is in the Treatise for all that which they haue answered vnto it yet as I shall now propound it it shall be more strong If liuing in sinne go before not beleeuing in Christ as a cause and meanes thereof then repenting of sin goes before beleeuing in Christ as a cause and meanes thereof But the first is true therefore the second The consequence is good because to liue in sinne and to repent are contrary so are not to beleeue in Christ and to beleeue in him so that if vnrepentance impenitency or liuing in sinne be a meanes and cause of not beleeuing and to be a
meanes and cause of a thing goes before it in nature then penitency repentance or not liuing in sinne is a meanes and cause of beleeuing in Christ and consequently goes before it in nature The Assumption I prooue by Ioan. 5.44 Thomas Aqui. Caluin Musâ—nlus Illiricus Rollocrus Piscatori commentary on the place where by the iudgement of learned Interpreters the Holy Ghost assignes this for a reason and cause of the infidelity of the Scribes and Pharisees and why they beleeued not in Christ viz. they liued in worldly pride ambition and couetuousnesse And if this were truely verified of them in those dayes then may it be sayd of men in these dayes that liuing in their sinnes is a cause why they beleeue not in Christ and consequently leauing of mens sinnes viz. in purpose is some cause or meanes of beleeuing in Christ and therefore goes before it in nature The Triall The fourth argument Repentance is begunne before faith in Christ at the first conuersion because sinners must first repent of their sinnes committed after their first conuersion before they can trust in Christ for the pardon of them The Exception To this they answere by denying the antecedent for say they both the habit of faith and some acts of it viz. vniting and ingrafting into Christ receiuing and apprehending Christ doe goe before repentance secondly by denying the consequence because through repenting after the first conuersion in nature goes before faith in Christ yet doth it not follow it must so do at the first conuersion The Apology First their answere to my Antecedent had beene to purpose if they had prooued by some good reason that in nature and order of working the habit of faith had gone before the habit of repentance or that the act of faith which is beleeuing in CHRIST had gone before the act of repenting that is of sorrowing for past sinnes and purposing to leaue them but seeing they doe neither of these the Antecedent is good They say indeede that these acts of faith viz. vniting and ingrafting into Christ receiuing and apprehending Christ go before repentance but neither is this to purpose except they prooued they were all one with the act of beleeuing in Christ for of that act is the question nor doe they prooue what they say for they doe barely affirme it nor do I thinke it possible to be proued because in nature I thinke it impossible for any vnrepentant sinner to be vnited to Christ ingrafted vnto him and made a member of his misticall body Indeede vpon another occasion they say repentance goes before these acts of faith viz. perswasion and assurance of saluation and praying for pardon and yet else where in effect they deny it where they say to beleeue in Christ is to be perswaded and assured of saluation by Christ and that no man can pray for this pardon of his sinnes before he haue faith in Christ Mr. Eltons Catechisme 4. principle Mr. Perk. state of a Christian Sect. 14. Mr. Rogers Mr. Baynes as is cited before the first of which points hath beene confuted by me in my Treatise and the second is contradicted by other Diuines where they say praying for pardon of sinnes goes before the application of faith and the perswasion of Gods loue in Christ If they had giuen any reason of their deniâ—ll of the consequence of this Argument that had beene sound it would haue answered my Argument but seeing they haue not good cause why they cannot therefore is the Argument as yet good because as yet it is vnanswered And indeede I know not how they should answere it as long as the habit of repentance and faith in Christ are the same vertues both at and after mens first conuersion for nature and vse and so are the acts of repenting and beleeuing in Christ If any man can giue me a good reason why the spirit of God should not incite men to repent and beleeue in Christ iâ— the same manner and order at the first conuersion as he doth after it when through weaknesse they fall and offend God theâ— would I say the consequence of my Argument were weake and consequently mâ— argument but because I thinke they cannot for if they could they would therefore as yet is my fourth Argument good â—â—â—ect But they say this Argument implieâ— a successiue working of saith by God anâ— of pardoning sinnes as if a Christiaâ— ceased to beleeue when he falleth into anâ— grosse sinne after his first conuersion anâ— that therefore faith must bee wrought a new in them and be pardoned a new I answere to the first that though I do not meane that the habit of faith is lost Solut. by the committing of any enormous sin and therefore there is no feare of neede to haue it planted in them againe yet doe I thinke that a sinner falling into enormous sinne doth not exercise his faith nor vse the act of it and he may in some sort be sayd for a time to loose the vse and exercise of this beleeuing in Christ and that therefore after such a fall the Spirit of God must incite him vp againe to the vse thereof before he can trust in Christ and that the spirit doth not thus incite a sinner to trust vntill he haue stir'd him to repent of those great sins which he hath coÌ„mitted And as touching the second member of their exception concerning successiue pardoning of sinnes I can see no reason why we should euery day aske pardon of our sinnes if God did not pardon them euery day I see not why this may not be called successiue pardoning Math. 6.11 12. for if the godly sin euery day must repent and beleeue in Christ euery day and craue pardon of the sinnes of euery day then will God forgiue euery day speaking after the Scripture phrase and then there is a daily and successiue pardoning The Triall Repentance may bee begunne before Faith in Christ The fift Argument because as great a worke as the beginning of repentance is wrought before it The Exception To this Argument they answere that iâ— is naught because it is founded vpon a false supposition viz as if I perswadeâ— my selfe they thought that therefore repentance was not wrought before faith iâ— Christ because it could not be so wroughâ— by God as if they thought any too hard to hard the Lord and therfore first or lasâ— wrought The Apology Vpon this I reply thus first as they vse so they muse because they thinke meanely of mee therefore doe they perswade themselues I doe the like by them as if my shooe were of their last or as if they knew they deserued I shuld so iudge of them but the Lord knoweth I had neuer such an imagination of them or so meane a conceit of their iudgement that they should thinke that simply God could worke it so by his absolute power but that by his actuall power which is limited by his will he cannot that is
We haue a perpetuall rule saith the Homily appointed vnto vs which ought to be obserued and kept at all times Ser. of repentance 1. part in the beginning and there is none other way whereby the wrath of God may be pacified and his anger asswaged that the fiercenesse of his fury may depart and bee remooued and taken away where he saith But now therefore saith the Lord Ioel. 2.14 returne vnto me It is not without great importance that the Prophet speaketh so for hee had afore set foorth at large vnto them the horible vengeance of God which no man was able to abide and so he doth moue them to repentance to obtaine mercy Answerable to this is the Catechisme appointed to be taught in publick schooles where he saith Nowels Catch in quar fol. 5. Repentance is most necessary for sinners to the obtaining of the mercy of God and afterward Fol. 47. 48. sinners for the obtaining of pardon haue need of repentance And hereunto consents Doctor White Doct. Franc s Whites defenceÌ„ pag. 17. where he saith Ordinarily before the Lord forgiueth fowle enormous monstrous sins a sinner beginneth to detest forsake them I might and could heape vp many other testimonies both out of the Fathers and latter Writers for the further proofe thereof but that I thinke it needlesse for I suppose my aduersaries will not deny it and if they grant that repentance in nature goes before pardon then must they grant also that it goes in nature before faith in Christ Act. 10.43 for we beleeue in Christ for pardon The Triall The first Obiection Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ for then it should be sinne for whatsoeuer is before faith is without it and whatsoeuer is without faith is sinne Rom. 14. c. This they call a solid and sound Argugument but it hath nothing but a sound and shew of truth or proofe as hath and shall appeare yet more clearely God willing To this Argument I answered by denying the Antecedent viz whatsoeuer is without Faith in Christ is sinne and because the supposed truth of this proposition stands vpon the interpretation of a place of Scripture Rom 14. therefore did I answere they did not rightly expound it first because the faith mentioned in the place alleadged is not faith in Christ the Faith vnderstood in the question but another kinde of Faith viz a perswasion to the conscience of warrant to doe the things wee doe The Exception To make good their interpretation of Romans 14. vlt. and consequently their Antecedent they now bring testimonies of Diuines and reasons from Scripture First say they the text hath beene a thousand times vrged by the learned against the Pelagians and Papists in this sense The Apology I answere first it cannot be denied but the text Rom. 14. vlt. hath beene expounded by many Diuines of faith in Christ but neither do the ancients so interpret it Patres fidem scientiam libertatis exponunt quae conscientiaÌ„ precedit vel bonam vel malam eam facit Calvin Iustit l 3. c. 13. ss 17. Zanchiusde operibus Dei lib. 4. chap. 1. pag. 420 Paraeas ad Rom. c. 14. ver vlt. A learned Diuine of Germany vpon the same place confesseth as much in his commentary Nor do all the latter Interpreters For Caluin in his commentary vpon that place and in his institutions expounds it as I doe and Zanchius Nor if they did all interpret it one after another may their exposition be admitted against or besides the interpretation which the Holy Ghost in the precedent and subsequent verses of the text giues of that place it selfe which is the same with that I haue alleadged That this interpretation of Rom. 14. vlt is not to be vnderstood of Faith in Christ but of another faith as I haue alleadged is euident by considering that v. 2. of the same chapter Paul speakes of beleeuing that I may eate this or that meate vers 5. of esteeming one day aboue another or all dayes alike and of full perswasion in our mindes about the obseruation of them verse 14. of knowledge and perswasion concerning thâ—â— cleanenesse or vncleanesse of meates that iâ— the lawfulnes or the vnlawfulnesse of theâ— to be eaten verse 22. of hauing faith with our selues which is opposed to doubting or feare and lastly verse 23 the verse out of which the words are quoted of allowing or condemning our selues in the things wee do Neither of all which haue any affinity with the nature of a sauing faith which is the casting of our selues oâ— Christ and the relying on his merits for saluation or the beleeuing in his name for it of which there is not one word in the whole Chapter Besides the Apostle Rom. 14.23 doth not deliuer a rule for all our morall actions that are either commanded or forbidden the rule whereof is his written law but for those actions that be in nature such as those of which he speakes in that place viz. indifferent actions in themselues neither simply commanded nor forbidden neitheâ— good or euill which may prooue in the euent either good or euill according as his opinion iudgement â—nd conscience is of the lawfulnesse or vnâ—â—wfulnesse of them Now in these actiâ—ns for the giuing of vs a warrant to do â—r not to doe them there is no neede of â—aith in Christ the perswasion or beleefe â—â—at wee haue in our conscience by the â—â—ght of nature true reason or the word is â—â—le enough to warrant vs in the doing of â—hem or leauing of them vndone and this 〈◊〉 that faith whereof Paul speakes ver 23 Rom. 14. Adde vnto these two reasons this for a third the Apostle doth not in the place cited set downe a Rule how any or all our actions may be accepted of God vnto saluation in which case he must haue treated of faith in Christ without which it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 Heb. 11.6 but. how we may know whether in our owne conscience our actions are warrantable for vs to doe them or to leaue them vndone Now in this case there is no neede of faith in Christ the perswasion or beleefe that wee haue vppon the former grounds of nature reason or the word do warrant vs in the doing or not doing of them because these tell vs and we beleeue it for truth that they be not vnlawfull and forbidden actions In my Treatise I haue giuen one reasoâ— more why in that place of the Romans by faith should not be meant faith in Christ but a beleefe of warrant to our consciences for the things we do namely becausâ— though a true beleeuer in Christ haâ—â— faith in him yet he sinnes in the actions 〈◊〉 doth if hee haue not another faith theâ— this viz. a warrant to his conscience for the thing hee doth vppon some good grounds for he cannot chuse but sinne thaâ— rushly rusheth vpon the doing of somâ—thing not being perswaded
he may lawfully do it but doubting hereof But this Argâ—ment was not touched as being too hot for them So that it appearing by these reason that the meaning of those words whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne is not this that whatsoeuer a man doth before he beleeue in Christ he sinnes but whatsoeuer a man doth doubting he doth ill or fearing hee doth not well or not being well resolued in his minde it may lawfull be done either in it selfe or by him and yet will venture to do it he sinnes saith the Apostle because this acton is not of faith that is not of that faith of which he speakes Secondly I answere that they which vrge this place in this sense to proue whatsouer is without faith in Christ is sinne doe not well reseruing reuerence to their learning otherwayes for the Doctrine of 〈◊〉 text must be according to the sense of the words rightly expounded If then this place being rightly expounded speake not of beleefe in Christ then must no Doctrine concerning this beleefe be raised out of that text Rom. 14.23 except we wil make the Scripture say any thing any where which is presumption Thirdly I answere they which vrge this place against the Papists they do it â—o disprooue their will worship deuised by man without warrant of the word and such poynts as theis and in this case the text may be alledged against them because all such worshippe is without faith that is a man can haue no beleefe or perswasion to his conscience that he may lawfully vse it but in our question there is no talke of matters of this kinde and therefore their alleaging of it is no disparagement to my interpretation or defence to their Argument The Exception But they offer now to prooue their exposition by reasons to the end their Antecedent may be made good thereby to which I will answere seuerally The Apostle Rom. 14.23 speakes of faith in Christ To the first reason because he speakes of that faith which is faith of meates or of liberty from meates and this is a sauing faith because they that beleeue in Christ haâ—â— this liberty by faith The Apology I answere first it is supposed that tâ—â— faith spoken of in the place quoted is 〈◊〉 faith of liberty from meates but it is 〈◊〉 this onely but faith of bondage conceâ—ning meates for they are bound by thâ— text to abstaine from eating of theâ— they haue not that faith there meaâ— though they had a sauing faith as wâ— as they haue liberty to eate them tâ—â— haue the faith there spoken of when thâ— haue a sauing faith also else by their ruâ—â— man that eates of any meate sinnes not â—â—uing faith in Christ which is absurd sâ—condly though he had spoken onely faith of liberty from meates c. yet dâ— he not say there that they haue this libeâ— by faith in Christ which is the maâ— question as shall appeare by these tâ—â— reasons First they haue this liberty to eateâ— the meates there spoken of that haue a bâ—leefe and perswasion to their conscienâ—â— from some good grounds that they 〈◊〉 lawfully eate of them for this is the faâ— there spoken of as hath beene shewed 〈◊〉 three reasons euen now and this is not faith in Christ 2 by faith in Christ all the elect haue liberty a like from sinne hell and the diuell c that are bound by them but the Apostle speakes of a liberty from a bondage with which all men are not bound for all men were not bound with the bondage of obseruing of dayes and meates but the Iewes onely and Proselites and therefore not all Christians but the Iewish Christians haue liberty by the faith spoken from the things to which they are bound and consequently the faith there spoken of must be not a sauing faith which pertaines to all Christians Iewes and Gentiles but a faith which pertaines to Christians which were bound to the law of abstinence viz. a beleefe or perswasion of liberty to eate the meate there spoken of though otherwise forbidden Besides if it would follow that because only beleeuers in Christ haue liberty from meates therefore the faith there spoken of Rom. 14.23 is faith of liberty from meates then by a like consequence might it follow but absurdly that because onely beleeuers in Christ are saued and sanctified therefore faith in Christ is sanctification and saluation The Exception Secondly the Apostle Rom. 14.23 speakes of faith in Christ To the second reason because hee speakes of that faith whereby we are perswaded we haue warrant and precept for liberty out of the word of God for thâ—â— is a sauing faith The Apology I answere the reason is not good because this faith whereby we are perswaded we haue warrant and precept from the word for liberty out of the word of God suppose it be for Christian liberty else I can make no sense of the word a but a perswasion of a truth or an assured assent in my opinion and iudgement of the truth of this Doctrine and this can be but an Historicall faith it is not a sauing faith The Exception But they will obiect though the Apostle Rom. 14.23 do not directly intend to speake of faith in Christ yet by a consequence the Doctrine may be true from that place for if whatsoeuer be without a perswasion to our conscience and this beleefe be a sinne then much more whatsoeuer is without faith in Christ which is a more excellent Faith and more necessarie then this The Apology I deny the consequence except the want and absence of the one faith made an action to be sinne as well as the want and absence of the other This cannot be First because then I know not how it can be auoyded but that the presence of faith in Christ should make an Action not to be sinne which is absurd in as much as faith in Christ doth not cause an action to bee no sinne but not to be imputed for sinne vnto vs for our condemnation Secondly because that which makes an action to be no sinne is the likenesse and neernesse it hath with the Rule of Gods will prescribed for the doing thereof which in morall actions commanded or forbidden is the Law of God and in indifferent actions which are neither commaunded nor forbidden is this Faith whereof the Apostle speakes Rom. 14. viz. a perswasion or beliefe wee may doe or may not doe them neither of which is faith in Christ Indeed faith in Christ is more necessary and excellent vnto saluation then this perswasion but this perswasion is more proper and necessary then faith in Christ to warrant vnto our consciences the actions that wee haue to doe that bee indifferent But it may bee though the Doctrine be neither directly nor by necessarie consequence to bee prooued from the text to the Romanes yet by other Reasons taken from other places it may be Let vs heare and try them The Exception Whatsoeuer is not of
Faith is sinne because whatsoeuer is not of Christ is sinne for to be without faith and to be without Christ are all one The Apology I answere as touching acceptation vnto saluation it is all one in the euent to be without Christ the meritorious cause of saluation â—arke 16.16 as to bee without faith the instrumentall For a man cannot bee saued without either Mar. 16.16 But to all intents and purposes it is not all one to be without Christ and faith for it is not all one to the making of our actions to bee sinne in the nature of sin It is neither being without Christ nor faith that doth this for these only do cause that our actions bee not imputed for sinne vnto vs and not that they bee no sinns The sweruing from the law and Rule of God is that onely which makes an action sinfull The Exception Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne 1. Ioan. because whatsoeuer is done without spirituall life is sinne The Apology I answere How farre and in what sense faith in Christ is the spirituall life of Christians shall bee shewed God willing in the fourth obiection For the present it is enough for the answere of this obiection to say that it prooues idem per idem which is as much as to say it prooues nothing in the question for with them faith in Christ is the spirituall life of Christians as shall appeare in the fourth obiection and the spirituall life of Christians is faith as appeares by this obiection If with them faith be the spirituall life of Christians and if the spirituall life of Christians be faith then that Argument that prooues euery action sinfull that is done without spirituall life namely because it is done without faith and againe that Argument that prooues euery action sinfull that is done without faith namely because it is done without spiritual life I both their say arguments prooue nothing for vpon the matter in this question they begge the question The Tryall To conclude in answere to this Argument and for a reason of denying the consequence I sayd that though Repentance bee begun before faith yet it is not sinne for all that because a beliefe of the Gospel goes before faith in Christ yet is it not sinne The Exception This instance they offer to take away and giue three Reasons why an Historicall faith going before a sauing faith is sinne to which I will answere An Historicall faith without faith in Christ is sinne because it is no where alone required The Apology I answere First to the Antecedant that if 〈◊〉 by these wordes required alone be meant that a beliefe of the Gospel is so required alone in one place that there is no more else where required of men to their saluation then I confesse that a belief of the Gospel is no where required alone but if thereby be meant as it must be if it bee to purpose that there is no place of Scripture in which the duty of beleeuing the Gospell is onely taught and that in euery place where beleeuing the Gospell is onely taught beleeuing in Christ is taught also then I deny it for the Scripture doth not teach euery duty in euery place except wee shall obserue no rules of Art in expounding Scripture Secondly to the consequence I answer that though beleeuing the Gospell were no where alone required yet will it not be sinne for all that because it is a duty in the word commanded to be performed of all the Elect to make them capable of saluation and no such thing can be sinne God doth require of men that which is taught them and as it is taught and sometimes it may fall out a Preacher by occasion of his text or in a Catechisme lecture may onely teach men to beleeue the Gospell vpon Gods owne authority shall we say the Minister sinnes in teaching it alone or the people in learning it alone at that time not hauing then a sauing Faith Surely God is not a hard man that takes vp where he layes not downe Luk. 17.21 nor requires that which hee doeth not teach or offer to worke The Exception An Historicall Faith without Faith in Christ is sinne because God requires more Faith then this The Apology To the consequence I answere that though God require more Faith then the beliefe of the Gospell of them that shall be saued yet is not this sinne when it is alone without a sauing Faith for God requires more then godly sorrow of a Repentant sinner viz an vnfained purpose to leaue his sinnes and in time to practise new obedience Is therefore godly sorrow for sinne sinne indeed in a man because as yet hee hath not a godly purpose to leaue his sinnes wrought in him surely such Diuinitie can neuer doe good in the Church of Christ The Exception An historicall faith without faith in Christ is sinne because it may bee in Reprobates The Apology It cannot bee denied but a beliefe of the Gospell may bee in Reprobates yet will it therefore follow to bee sinne Math. was â—he gift of miracles sinne in the Reprobates because it was in them surely no. It is not the hauing of the gifts of the Spirit that makes them to bee sinne to reprobates or in them but the not vsing of them well to the honour of God and the good of the Church and it is their contenting of themselues onely with those when they should labour for other and more that causeth them to be sins in reprobates for as they be had so they come from God and as they come from God so they are good and as they are good they cannot be sinne though as they are in them not vsed at all or not well vsed or not enough vsed or abused they may prooue sinne in them yet simply because they are in them or as they are in them they are not and so much in answere to their Defence of their first obiection against my Doctrine of the precedency of Repentance vnto Faith in Christ The Triall Repentance is not begun before Faith in Christ The second Obiection because then it should proceede out of an heart vnpurified for the heart is purified by Faith Act. 15.9 To this I answered that it proues not the question because the proofe of it out of the Acts is not to purpose first because it doeth not at all speake of purifying by sanctification of which the question is but by iustification of which it is not secondly though it had spoken of purifying by sanctification yet doth it not prooue that Faith so purifieth the heart that till Faith in Christ come there is not so much as the least measure of this purifying begunne for so is the Antecedent to bee vnderstood The Exception To make their Argument good they bring reasons first they prooue that the Text in the Acts is to be vnderstood of purifying by sanctification from the filth of sinne as well as by
by any strength of nature before sauing faith as a beliefe of the Gospell sight of his sinnes feare of damnation c. Secondly to the proofe of this argument out of the Epistle to of the Galathians I answere first that where they say it is the spirituall life of the soule euery way I answere that neither doth the Apostle say so nor doe they prooue it sufficiently I haue saide enough to the contrary pag 178. which is not answered secondly I answere that sauing faith is the life of a Christian in respect of iustification and sanctification not in respect of whatsoeuer is in him which is not natural The Exception To maintaine their argument now they iudeauour to proue two things first that the text Gal 2.20 is to be vnderstood of spirituall life euery way Secondly that though it could not be prooued from that place yet might it bee prooued by sufficient reasons grounded on other Scripture that faith in Christ is the spirituall life of Christians euery way To prooue the first concerning that Text to the Galathians they bring this reason The life spoken of Gallat 2.20 is life by saluation therefore by iustification and fanctification therefore euery way The Apology I answer Paules liuing by faith must be vnderstood of such a life as is attributed vnto others by faith in the same chapter and epistle but to others viz. all the elect in the same chapter is attributed the life of iustification and life is expounded thereof onely Chap. 2.16 3.11 and therefore the life which Paule liued by faith spoken of in the 2. chapter and 20. must be the life of iustification onely and not of sanctification at all The Exception Oh but will they say I my selfe in my Treatise say that the text Gallat 2.20 is vnderstood of spirituall life vnto iustification and saluation pag. 278. The Apology True but by mine owne words it is euident what saluation I meane viz. Iustification or forgiuenesse of sinnes or sauing from hell not saluation which comprehends sanctification as they would interpret me Besides neither the word saue nor Sauiour is vsed in all the Epistle to the Galathians therefore cannot be vnderstood of such a saluation Adde to this that when we say Christ is our Sauiour we do not meane he is our sanctifier but one that keepes vs from hell and brings vs to heauen For the power of sinne is a distinct thing from the punishment and as the power of sinne is taken away by sanctification onely so is the punishment by iustification onely saluation is vnderstood of Iustification and of that which as a consequence follows on it our glorification Oh but may they say Pauls liuing by faith ver 10. was the same with his liuing to God ver 19. and that is the life of sanctification I answere liuing to God ver 19. must either be the same with liuing in his fauor and free grace by Christ and then it is alâ— one wtih beeing iustified by God through faith ver 16. or else it must bee opposed vnto death to the Law and death to the Law is in his meaning renouncing it to iustification as being vnable to keepe it and by keeping it to bee iustified by iâ— and therefore liuing vnto God is seeking vnto the meanes appointed by him foâ— iustification and liuing in his sight by faitâ— in his free grace 2. If by those wordâ— were vnderstood I am sanctified by faith then must the meaning of them bee to this effect in that I haue had any motions to holinesse preparations to sanctification or any the least inclinatioÌ„ therunto I haue had it by the faith of Iesus Christ before I beleeued in Christ I had not the least beginning thereof in any kinde but this is contradicted by other Texts of Scripture where it is sayd of S. Paul He was taught according to the perfect maner of the Fathers Act. 2.23 and was zealous towards God and that hee had liued in all good conscience before God vntiâ— that day Namely according to the light hee had by the Law and the Prophets 3. Suppose it could be prooued that Paul lyued vnto God any way before hee belieued in Christ yet will not this prooue he had no beginning at all of spiritual life before hee beleiued in Christ for to liue to God is a plaine fruit of sauing faith and a man may haue fome spirituall life begun in some sense and not liue to God Lastly though it could be proued that Paul had no spirituall liâ—e begun in him before he beleeued in Christ yet wil not his example proue that no man hath any spirituall life begunne in him before hee beleeue in Christ inasmuch as Pâ—ules conuersion was extraordinary for the gifts and graces of the spirit needfull to saluation where in all likly hood wrought in him at once and together in an enthusiasme so are they not vsuall in all men and women in these dayes but one after another successiuely Sermon after Sermon and weeke after weeke and so much for answere touching their proofe out of the epistle to the Gallathians the first thing propounded to make good their Argument The Exception The second followes which is to proue that faith in Christ is the spirituall life of Christians euery way and that there is no spirituall life begunne in men before they beleiue in Christ and their reasons are foure to which I will answere seuerally There is no spirituall life begunne in men before faith in Christ because till then then they are dead in sinnes and trespasses The Apology I answere in him that is dead in trespasses and sinnes there is no spirituall life of iustification or sanctification but in him in whom repentance is begunne and other preparations there is somewhat more then that which is naturall whereby in some sort he is in a middle estate although indeede he be still a naturall man because nature hath the predominancy in him and in this state he continues till he be regenerate in all parts which is assoone as he beleeues in Christ and in this state was Nicodemus Ioa. 3. who came to Christ was taught of him that which was not naturall was wrought in him and yet he had not a sauing faith The Exception There is no spirituall life begunne in men before faith in Christ because till then they haue not Christ The Apology The reason is not good because though before faith in Christ they haue not Christ in his righteousnesse to their iustification and in his sanctification to their sanctification and full conuersion both of heart and life yet may they in whom repentance is begunne and these preparations haue him in them some way viz. in his wisedome to their Illumination and the beginning of their conuersion The Exception There is no spirituall life begunne in men before faith in Christ because till then they haue not the spirit Gal. 3.2 I answere 1 the extraordinary gifts of the spirit were not giuen