man could be truely imagined being elected to die in that estate but onely that they are appointed as preparations to Regeneration in the Elect who because they are ordained to that end which is eternall life and to the meanes of that end which is Faith therefore are they also predestinate to the meanes of this faith which are these preparations in which when they are they may be said to be in a condition some way different from men either meerely naturall or fully regenerate and consequently in a third condition some way different from meere grace or nature And so much for answere to the exceptions against the Rule it selfe Now followes the handling of the Rule The Tryall The Rule begins to be handled Page 219. viz. That a sauing Eaith c. The Exception The handling of the Rule The first point in handling the Ruâ— that is excepted against is a generall prâ—position that there be some preparatioâ— wrought in men by the Spirit before thâ— beleeue in Christ Against this there lie two exceptionâ— first that I doe not distinguish the gifts 〈◊〉 the Spirit which I say goe before Faith 〈◊〉 Christ as preparations to it nor shew whâ—ther they bee common graces to Reprobates or peculiar to the Elect doe tend nâ—cessarily vnto saluation and haue the promise secondly that the places alleadge by me to proue the generall proposition doe not proue it but onely this that Goâ— workes Faith in those in whom it iâ— wrought and that there is neither will noâ— deede in mans power to beleeue in Chrisâ— for saluation The Defence â—o the first â—xception To the first Exception I answere thaâ— though I doe not make all those same distinctions of the preparing graces which they desire yet doe I distinguish them aâ— much as is needfull for in the Treatise they are diuided into Legall and Euangelicall which is enough to my purpose secondly I say that to the prouing of the point in question there is no neede of such distinctions as they propound because in all that disputation I speake of working of those preparations in the Elect onely in whom onely a sauing Faith is wrought because they onely are to be saued page 224. line 17. So that as long as it is euident that the preparations to Faith that I speake of be ordinarily wrought in all the Elect that is in them that are of yeeres and discretion it is no matter though some of them be common to Reprobates with the Elect Act. 13.48 for as long as they are wrought in a Master Rogers 7. Treatises ch 4. pag. 9. Modell of Diuinitie pa. 278. them by Gods Spirit to prepare them to beleeue in Christ and that they may be saued therefore doe they necessarily tend vnto their saluation and consequently must be such as haue the promise being by Gods appointment ordeined as meanes to that end not in respect of themselues singly considered in themselues and in their owne nature but in a threefold consideration 1. In relation to the persons in whom they are wrought which are the Elect to whom saluation and the promise belongs 2. In respect of the ground from whence they proceed which is the loâ— of God in their election of which they aâ— the fruits and effects as well as iustify in faith it selfe 3. In reference to the end for whic they are wrought in men ordained vntâ— eternall life viz. to make them fit persons in whom Faith may be wrought foâ— the obtaining of that saluation to whicâ— they are elected So that as long as all Reprobates hauâ— not these preparations wrought in them but all the Elect haue As long as many reprobates haue but some of them but the Elect haue all ordinarily and as long as by Gods appointment they doe not tend to the saluation of the Reprobat because God neuer intended their saluation but of the Elect they doe therefore is there no neede of making the distinctions which they pretend and propound To the 2. Exception As touching the second exception my defence is this Both the Texts alleadged by me aâ—e expounded by the learned not of working Faith it selfe but of the preparations vnto Faith as shall appeare in the particulars Luk. 3.4 Tertullâ—an de de baptismo chap. 10. The first Text taken out of Saint Lukes Gospell speakes of Preparing the way to Christ which not onely Turtullian but Maister Caluin and Maister Piscator expound of preparing the way by repeÌ„tance preparing the way to Christ by repeÌ„tance is not the working of faith in men but working in them repentance to the end they may bee prepared to beleeue in Christ The words I shall haue occasion to cyte hereafter among the testimonies of the learned in proofe of the maine point therefore will I respite the cyting of them till then Ioa. 6.44 35. The second place of Scripture in Saint Iohns Gospell speakes of drawing men to come to Christ that is to beleeue in him which by the iudgement of the learned is not to bee interpreted of working faith in men but of preparing them to the worke of faith namely by illumination Caluins comment on Ioh. 6.44 Hee teacheth saith Caluin that those are drawn whose mindes he doth enlighten and whose hearts he doth bend and frame to the obedience of Christ That by the metaphor of drawing saith Piscator Piscators comment on Iohn 6.44 is vnderstood the illumination of the minde the Lord himselfe declareth where he saith euery man that hath heard and learned of the Father commeth to mee So that comming to Christ being beleeuing in him drawing to come being not comming it selfe nor illumination being faith it selfe therefore in the iudgement of those two learned men the Text of Iohn is not to be expounded as they haue saide but as I haue deliuered it This I hope is enough to confute that which they obiect against my interpretation of the Texts which I alleadged to prooue my generall proposition namely that there are some preparations wrought by the Spirit in men before they beleeue in Christ The generall proposition concerning preparations which was the first generall thing propounded in handling of the Rule The Tryall The cords by which God drawes man to beleeue c. The Exception The second generall herein was a speciall recitall of the particular preparations which and what they be which I say goe before faith in Christ This they first deny saying that there are none such Secondly they disproue it by giuing two reasons why there can bee none such or why some of them that I name can be none The Defence Against their bare Deniall I will onely oppose the testimonies of two learned Diuines of our owne time and countrey Maister Rogers Maister Baynes Maister Rogers speaking how the knowledge of mans misery by sinne Maister Rogers Treatise 7 8. c. 4. p. 9. ad 21. and of redemption by Christ doth worke in him on whom God will
but by hearing faith preached which is the meaning of that place Gal. 3.2 For at the preaching of the Gospell the Doctrine of faith and vpon the beleeuing thereof were they giuen Act. 10.41.44 2. The spirit of adoption is not giuen before faith in Christ for that is the grace which instrumentally and so onely giues vs prerogatiue and title to our adoption euen as it onely but instrumentally onely receiues Christ and his benefits Eph. 1.13 Gal. 3.26 Rom. 8.13 3. The gifts and graces of the spirit sufficient to saluation are not giuen before faith in Christ Heb. 11.6 Rom. 5.1 2. 4. The gift of sanctification is not giuen before Faith in Christ But for all this will it not follow that before Faith in Christ the spirit is no way giuen the contrary may be seene in illumination and a beleefe of the Gospell for these are gifts of the spirit and therefore parts of spirituall life in some sense 1. because they are supernaturall all naturall men haue them not nor are they wrought by the worke of nature in any no not in the Elect 2. because blindenesse of minde and infidelity which is contrary thereto is a branch of spirituall death 3. The Spirit inhabitant cannot be in men before they haue faith in Christ but the Spirit assistant may and the exciting by assistance may Indeede Illumination and a beleefe of the Gospell are not spirituall life enough to saluation yet is it life enough by Gods blessing and further grace to produce Faith in Christ in the elect for within man and by the working of the Spirit there is no other worke but these and that which is wrought by these which perswades men to beleeue in Christ If illumination and a beleeue of the Gospell c. had no supernaturall life at all but were altogether dead workes then could they produce no such effect as faith and if they be not dead workes then haue they some life and if they haue some life then from the spirit and if from the spirit then may they be called branches of spirituall life and hee that hath them may be sayd to haue some spirituall life begunne in him because as hath beene sayd he hath some life in him more then naturall that is more then all naturall men haue The Exception There is no spirituall life begunne in men before Faith in Christ or faith in Christ is euery way the spirituall life of Christians because sanctification goes before iustification The Apology I answere in nature saanctification is begunne before iustification 1. because regeneration is begunne before iustification namely in illumination and other preparations as hath beene shewed before Secondly because faith it selfe is a sanctifying grace by their owne confession from Acts 15.9 and faith goes in nature before iustification Indeede iustification goes in nature before the perfection of our sanctification in all the parts of it and before the acceptation of it to saluation but iustification doth not go before any or euery measure of sanctification can any way be begunne The will of God in working is the Rule of perfection to the worke and then is it sayd to be perfect when it is wrought in part or in whole according to that perfection of parts or degrees which the Lord intends vnto it at seuerall times and by seuerall meanes The Lord is no way tied for shewing the perfection of his workemanshippe to finish a worke in all the parts of it at sundry times more then he is to finish it in all the degrees thereof at sundry times The Triall Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ The fift Obiection because repentance is a proper effect and fruite of the Gospell The Exception This Argument is disclaimed therefore is it vaine to spend time about it for if they will not acknowledge and confesse it I haue no reason to confute it any further Onely I would haue the world beleeue I doe not faine an enemy and then flourish against him For two learned and godly Ministers whose worthy workes are in print haue vsed the same They which bring this proposition Repentance is the proper effect and fruite of the Gospell beleeued to prooue that repentance is not begun before iustifying faith must be vnderstood to meane by a beleefe of the Gospell either that beleefe which is faith in Christ or that onely which is an assent vnto the truth of the Gospell If they meane by a beleefe of the Gospell faith in Christ then must it be their argument which I haue propounded to prooue that repentance goes not before faith in Christ If they meane but an assent to the truth of the Doctrine of the Gospell then doe they meane that no other faith goes before repentance but that and then haue they two Diuines of our owne lesse on their side then they thought they had and I haue two more on mine for I hold that a beleefe of the Gospell goes before repentance and repentance before faith in Christ and let this be enough for that fift Obiection the sixt followes The Triall Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ The sixt Obiection because it is not begunne before regeneration for regeneration is not begunne before faith in Christ This Argument was answered by denying the Antecedent viz. that Regeneration is not begunne before Faith in Christ and the reason of the consequence viz. that repentance is not begunne before regeneration The Exception For making good the Antecedent viz. this proposition regeneration is not begunne before faith in Christ they bring two reasons to which I will answere in order Regeneration is not begunne before Faith in Christ because it issues from Christ and from our vnion with him by faith 2. Corinth 5.17 Ephesians 2.10 Colo. 2.11 The Apology I answere first if by regeneration be meant our being made Gods children actually then I grant that our regeneration must needes flow from our vnion with him by faith but then it prooues not the Antecedent for the regeneration wee speake of is not our beeing actually made the sonnes of GOD but a worke of the Spirit beginning to fit vs for that but if by it they meane any or euery worke of the Spirit beginning to fit vs for regeneration and tending thereunto by GODS appointment as any worke of the Spirit in the vnderstanding or will of one that is elected to saluation to fit him for regeneration by faith then I say that such regeneration may be wrought before our actuall vnion with Christ by Faith and doth not issue from it It is true that Regeneration issues from Christ in the elect whether wee consider him as the efficient cause either by way of meriting it for vs or by working it in vs. Hebrewes 12.3 Ioan. 1.19 Ephesians 1.3 2.10 or as the finall cause Galath 4.19 But it is not true that regeneration so issues from Christ that there is not so much as any the least beginning of it wrought in
same grace of the spirit produce faith and repentance in the soule or a diuerse and whether the grace which produceth them produce them both in the same instaâ—t or diuerse and whether these diuers instances must bee diuers instances of time or of nature onely and lastly it being granted that faith and repentance are both produced in the same instant of time and nature whether the one beginneth to worke before the other and whether admitting that the worke of repentance is first felt in the soule before any worke of a iustifying faith yet that the worke of a iustifying faith may not be in the nature of the thing before it as the thunder in nature is before the lightning yet wee see the lightning before wee heare the thunder I say for these and the like subtilties I hold it needlesse and vnprofitable to imploy the haruest of our time in tithing thâ—se minutas decimas of minte and commin It sufficeth that we Ministers of the Gospell in our Preaching and Gods people in their hearing and all of vs in our practise follow the method vsed by the holy Ghost and beginne with Iohn Baptist and proceede to Christ beginne with terror and proceede to comfort beginne with sorrow for sinne and proceede to ioy in the Holy Ghost hauing first a sense of our sinne and searching deepe into our wounds and then applying to our selues the soueraigne salue of faith in Christs blood beeing first weary and heauy laden and then expecting to bee refreshed by Iesus Christ In whose bowells I ernestly beseech my brethren in the Ministry not to interfere nor hinder one another in their holy courses muchlesse virulently detract from the persons or labours one of another but to set aside all preiudicat opinion and allay all heate of passion and contestation Cyp. de zelo liuore Purgare mentem quam serpentinus liuor infecit amaritudinem omnem quae intus incedit Christi dulcedine lenire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as St. Paule exhorteth Ephes 4.15 1 Iohn 3.18 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as St. Iohn perswadeth that as we all agree in the loue of the same truth so wee may seeke and follow after the truth in loue Thine in the best beloued Christ Iesus Daniel Featly To the Author GOOD Sir I haue perused your little Treatise or Apology which you committed to me and I see no cause why you may not safely send it abroade into the world with his fellowes that haue seene the light allready for as for your conclusion in mine opinion it is sound and orthodox and as you explaine it to my thinking not much different from theirs who in wordes seeme to speake contrary And for your proofes and answeres though I hold not euery particulaâ— to be demonstratiue and certaine yet I thinke there is enough in them to evict the cause you stricte for Notwithstaâ—ding you must not make accompt that all men should presently yeeld to be of your opiniâ—n for sober minds may dissent from you and you from them without b each of charity or loue and fierie spiâ—its will dissent from you if it be for no other cause but only for that Salamanders cannot liue out of the fire But I would wish you to consider of that Rule of â—he Apostle 1 Cor. 11.16 If any man seeme to bee â—ontentious wee haue no such custome â—or the Churches of GOD and as much as may bee to imitate the stayed â—iscretion of wise Trauailers who for â—eare of letting their iourney will not â—tand still and strike at euery dogge that â—arketh at them For as a Learned Writer vpon the â—ormer wordes of Saint Paule notes to â—ood purpose There will neuer bee an â—nd of quarrelling Nunquam enim contentionum erit finis si certando velis hominem pugnacem vincero qui centies victus nunquam fatigabitur Cal. in 5. Cor. 11.16 if you labour to get he mastery of him that is contentious â—ecause though hee bee an Hundreth â—imes foyled yet will hee neuer bee â—earied Wee haue all worke enough to doe in ecessary things and therefore howsoeuer kinde of necessity for satisfying the world aue forced you thus farre as to cleare hat hath beene obiected allready yet if â—ere shall come any new repetition of â—d Arguments or any futher friuoâ—us cauills your good howers may perâ—ps bee better spent then in pursuing â—ngling disputes which mine opinion notwithstanding I leaue to your discretioâ— to doe as occasion shall require and sâ— I leaue you and your labours to GODS blessed Protection and Mercy Yours euer in the Lord Iesus Henry Masoâ— An Apology for the precedency of Repentance vnto faith in Christ IN the Treatise called a Triall of Faith the Author intended to teach Christians to examine rhemselues whether they had a sauing Faith or no. As meanes to that end he propounded in the first booke certaine reasons to perswade vnto this Triall and in the second some rules to direct them therein Against the reasons there is no exceptions taken for ought I heare but against the rules onely nor yet against all but onely the first and the sixt rule That which hath been obiected against the first hath beene fully answered in a briefe defence not long since published and that which is excepted against in the sixt rule shall now God willing be cleared and satisfied in a further confirmation thereof In handling the sixt Rule of trying our Faith I did three things principally First I proued generally that there are some preparations wrought in men before they can beleeue in Christ whereby God drawes them thereunto page 219 220. namely that most vsually and ordinarily it is so Secondly and more specially I shewed what these preparations were viz. Some gifts and abilities wrought by the spirit of God in the vnderstanding and will of those whom the Lord hath a purpose to saue page 220 to 224. Thirdly and in particular I affirmed that a beginning of repentance is one of those preparations page 224 to 229. For making good of this third and last point I set downe this proposition to be discussed Repentance is begunne before faith in Christ 1. e Sinners beginne to sorrow for their sinnes and to purpose to leaue them before they can beleeue in Christ viz. So as to haue any benesit thereby First I proued this point by arguments secondly I cleared it by answering some obiections and lastly I applied it by making some further vse thereof Against these generall heads and many particular members of each there are I vnderstand exceptions taken by some and their exceptions to omitte longer introduction are either against the fixt rule it selfe or the handling of that rule not that they are propounded in these very words and method but that in substance and effect they import as much and therefore are they by mee reduced to these two heads for my more orderly proceeding and the Readers better vnderstanding The Triall of Faith The Rule
it selfe The Rule it selfe is layd downe in the eight Chapter of the second booke of my Treatise the 219 page in these words whether wast thou rightly prepared to beleeue in Christ by other gifts of the spirit which hee workes in men before they haue a sauing faith The Exception against the Triall This Rule say some in effect is idle because it pretends that men may try their faith by it but indeede no man can for say they all men are either regenerate or vnregenerate there is no third conditioâ— betwixt them and different from them and neither the one nor the other can try their faith by this rule Not the regenerate because there is no gift power quality disposition habit or affection other then sauing faith that is or can be sayd to be a preparatiue to regeneration Neither can vnregenerate meâ— try their faith because there is no gift in men vnregenerate whereby themselues or other can difference them from those that remaine in their naturall estate and that shall perish for euer The Apology for the Triall I answere first generally to both regenerate and vnregenerate that though by their exception they seeme to giue two different Reasons one for the regenerate and another for the vnregenerate yet the reason belongs to all equally because it denies either to the one or the other all or any preparations before faith or regeneration either to difference the regenerate from the vnregenerate or one vnregenerate man from another for euer Secondly I answere to their reason concerning the Regenerate that it is of no force why they may not try their faith by this Rule because it affirmes that there can be no preparations at all to Regeneration but faith it selfe which cannot be true because a beliefe of the Gospell which is a stedfast assent to the trueth of that doctrine is a gift of the Spirit It is not a sauing faith but a a Heb. 11.6 meanes to it yet is this beliefe a preparatiue to regeneration and therefore may a regenerate man try himselfe by some other gift then by a sauing faith as by a preparation to Regeneration and consequently try his faith by this rule Thirdly I answere touching the vnregenerate that their reason is vnsufficient why they may not try their faith by this rule because though they haue not a sauing faith as indeed they haue not yet may it not be in vaine for them to examine themselues concerning a sâ—uing faith by these preparations for they may thinke they haue it when indeed they haue not and so may deceiue themselues with a vaine presumptuous hope of saluation Now by this triall with these preparations they shall clearely discerne they haue it not for he that is farre from the preparation to faith must needes bee further of from faith it selfe he that hath not the lesser which is more common hath not the greater which is more rare whereupon they may bee occasioned considering the danger of being without faith and the benefite of hauing it to seeke in the vse of the meanes for it and by seeking to finde and obtaine it May not a man try whether hee haue a good lease or no if he haue any lease at all though his lease be not good yea if hee haue any writing which hee takes to be a lease though it be not may hee not try whether he haue a good lease or no Besides though vnregenerate men haue no such gift whereby they may bee differenced from such as remaine in their naturall estate and shall perish for euer yeâ— may they try whether they haue a sauing faith or no and by triall know they haue it not because they haue no such gift foâ— all that haue faith haue such a gift euer as the want of election into a Colledge shewes that a man is not fellow there though he haue no gift whereby to difference him from all that are fellowes oâ— schollers in that Colledge for all that are fellowes or schollers of a Colledge are elected into it If they had giuen some good reasoâ— why there can be no preparations at all to faith in Christ then had they spoken to purpose against my Rule but seeing they haue not done it therfore is the Rule good for the purpose to which I intended it for all their exception Fourthly touching the proofe of their exception viz that there is no third state or condition betwixt men regenerate and vnregenerate I answere that they bring no proofe of it therefore can I not allow of it and besides the contrary seemes to me very probable vnderstanding this to be their meaning as it must be if it be to purpose that there is no third condition betwixt a meere naturall man and one fully regenerate for I thinke a third condition somewhat different from both may bee assigned and giuen namely the condition of preparation which may be compared to the twy-light that is betwixt cleare day and darke night wherein whosoeuer is being elected may be said to be in his passage from the one which is meere nature the other which is perfect regeneration and betweene both that is some way forwarded vnto regeneration and about to enter into Gods Kingdome and yet not actually admitted thereunto as one conceiued not borne or in the birth not quite brought forth for as we read of some that were entred into Gods Kingdome and were * Mat. 13.38 children thereof and of some that were * Eph 2.13.14 farre from it so doe wee reade of some that were * Mark 12 34. not farre from the Kingdome of God and that * Mat. 23.13 were entring in or about to enter but not quite in I know there are but two places to bee enioyed by men after this life Heauen and Hell and but two sorts of persons to inherit them Elect and Reprobate yet may the Elect before they come into Heauen be said to passe through a threefold condition the first of meere nature in which there are no workes of the Spirit toward Regeneration The second of Preparation wherein there bee some gifts of the Spirit bestowed on them to dispose them to Regeneration And the third is the full worke of Regeneration it selfe And I can see no reason in the world why this should be counted a Paradox or strange position seeing ordinarily all they that are of age passe through this preparation Mat. 11.28 All that come to Christ and beleeue in him must be weary and heauy laden And as long as it is confest first that these d spositions preparing vnto Regeneration are not the worke of nature but Gods Spirit else they would bee in all meere naturall men and euen in the very Elect when they continue in their state of â—eere nature which experience disproues â—econdly that they are not wrought â—y the Spirit alwayes but then of purpose when the time of their effectuall calling is â—ome thirdly that they are not sufficient â—o saluation if a
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
and borne of the Spirit The Assumption they will prooue anone The Defence I answere by granting the consequence of the proposition but by denying the Assumption and that for this â—eason Illumination of the minde and vnderstanding with the knowledge of the mystery of the Gospell in Christ is a grace of Regeneration as well as the sanctifying of the will and affections yet may illumination be wrought in time before sanctification in the Elect because it is wrought in the reprobates without sanctification at all and therefore regeneration is not wrought all at once and together as they hauâ— alleaged That Illumination is a gracâ— of Regeneration I prooue first because it is a part of the new man Colos 3.10 Eph. 1.17 Eph. 4.23.24 Act. 26.19 Eph. 1 18. 21. secondly it is a part of the renuing Gods image iâ— vs thirdly it is a part of our turning anâ— conuersion fourthly because it is a part 〈◊〉 our spirituall quickening But let vs heare how they prooue thâ— Assumption The Exception If all Gods workes be perfect in theiâ— seuerall kindes so that when part of theâ— is wrought the other is wrought also then is regeneration wrought all at oncâ— and together so that when one gracâ— thereof is wrought all other of the same kind are wrought also at the same time But the first is true therefore the second The consequence they take for good because regeneration is one of the workeâ— of God that argue his perfection in working yea one of the chiefest of them The Assumption they thinke needes no proofe The Apology I answere by granting the consequence but by denying the Assumption 1. Because the Creation of the world was not perfected in all the parts thereof all at once but successiiuely and in sixe dayes 2. The creation â—f Adam was not for his soule was created and put into his body in likelihood in time after his body was framed 3. Sexin lacte dies ter sunt in sanguine trinibis seni carnem ter seni membra figurant The generation of man man which is Gods worke is not perfected all at one instant for neither is the body perfect all at one instant but in some dayes and weekes after the child is conceiued and begotten nor is the soule put into the body as soone as it is begotten and conceiued but some dayes and weekes after the child is conceiued and begotten for the man is not perfect till both soule and body be vnited together fourthly Iesus Christ doth frame the Church and make it perfect not all at once and together but successiuely by calling one member after another and adding them thereunto Act. 2.47 Heb. 11.40 Eph. 4.12 I grant all Gods workes are perfect in their seuerall kindes with that perfection which God intends them at seuerall time but one time they may be imperfect in regard of the whole for vnto some part that are already wrought others may bâ— added at other times when God pleaseth I grant also that if by regeneration thâ— meane Gods making a man actually hâ— childe then is regeneration wrought all one instant and together for that graâ— that giues him prerogatiue to bee God sonne viz faith in Christ is wrought all 〈◊〉 once and together but if by regeneratioâ— be meant euery or any grace of the Spiâ— tending or disposing thereunto or aâ— part of regeneration then I say regeneration may be begun in one part at one timâ— and perfected in another grace at anotheâ— time as hath beene shewed in the instand of Illumination and Sanctification but â—uen now and as may be further declareâ— by peace of conscience and ioy in the holâ— Ghost which are graces of regeneratioâ— yet are not wrought all at one instant wiâ— faith in Christ at least not in all men bâ— some time after Neither can this bee any way a dispâ—ragement to God which workes it thuâ— if hee please so to worke seeing his wiâ— caÌ„not disparage his power nor his pleasuâ— his wisedome therefore their first Aâ—gument is not strange enough to proue the question the second followes The Exception If a true change of the heart The second Argument cannot bee begun in time before a sauing faith then repentance cannot be begun in time before a sauing faith But the one is true therefore the oâ—her The consequence they say is good because repentance is a true change of the heart the Assumption they proue The Defence I answere if by a true change of the heart be meant the change of the whole soule in all the parts and powers thereof â—hen I deny the consequence and grant the Assumption For the repentance I speake of is not such a change But if thereby he meant an hearty sorrow for sinne and a true change of the purpose of the heart without hypocrisie to leaue sinne then I grant the consequence and deny the Asâ—umption for this change of the heart may â—e begunne in time before a sauing faith But they proue their Assumption thus The Exception If the beginning of a true change 〈◊〉 the heart do presuppose that faith in Chriâ— death and resurrection goes in time befoâ— this change then a true change of thâ— heart cannot bee begunne in time before sauing faith But the first is true therefore the sâ—cond The consequence they thinke none wiâ— deny The assumption they offer to prooâ— out of my booke where page 301 refrâ—ning sinne is made a fruite of faith anâ— page 310. we are sayd to draw downe veâ—tue from Christs death to die vnto sinnâ— and from his resurrection to walke in neâ—nesse of life The Apology I answere 1. generally that this argumeâ— directly crosseth the first Argument for sauing graces be wrought all at once aâ— together then cannot a true change of tâ— heart presuppose faith in Christ death to goe before this change in time Secony and more particularly I answere thâ— The consequence I grant the assumption I deny for I doe not say which is the question that at the first conuersion when the heart beginnes first to be changed this change doth presuppose faith in Christ to be in it at the same instant and that there can be no refraining of sinne in any measure so much as begunne till there bee in men faith in Christ whereby they drawe downe vertue from his death and resurrection c. But I onely affirme there that refraining of sinne for conscience sake in sincerity and in a setled and constant course is a fruite of faith and requires vertue from Christs death and resurrection to bee drawne downe by faith in Christ and so doth power to mortifie our corrupt nature in the lusts of it and to quicken vs in our new man to cheerefull constant and conscionable new obedience require and presuppose this faith in Christs death and resurrection faith that Christs obedience Actiue and Passive hath merited pardon and that if we repent and beleeue therein wee shall be pardoned is with Gods Spirit sufficient
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
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
they are in themselues considered that can keepe them from failing but considering them in relation to the ground from whence they proceede which is election to the end for which they are wrought in the elect which is to make them persons capable of the saluation vnto which they are elected or to the efficient cause which is the spirit who perfects his graces begunne so they cannot fayle totally and finally for in the elect this purpose of repentance is seconded with practise accordingly in the euent 2. Repentance not dissembled of which I speake may fayle both of the end which is eternall life and of the effect which is amendment of life For a mâ—â— not hauing receiued the grace of perseâ—rance may giue ouer this purpose and â—turne to his former sinnes and consequeâ—ly faile of eternall life as may be suppoâ—â— in Ahab and the Niniuites The Exception Reason 2 True repentance is not a true purpâ— of heart to leaue our former sinnes because this purpose may bee in Reprâ—bates but true repentance cannot bee them The Apology I answere as to the former argumeâ—â— that true repentance or aâ— purpose 〈◊〉 heart to leaue our former sinnes not dâ—sembled may be in Reprobates as Ahabs case though true repentance whiâ— brings forth new obedience in the liâ— constantly conscionably and sincerely caâ—not So that for all this I might warraâ—â—ably describe the true repentance I speaâ— of by a true purpose of the heart to leâ— our former euill wayes I did not write a Treatise of Repâ—â—tance but of Faith of repentance in 〈◊〉 Treatise I spake but by the way and occâ—sionally therefore was it not needfulâ— should define repentance precisely a description if it would serue the turne If of set purpose I had treated of that common place I would haue defined it otherwise then I haue done and I would haue shewed that the obiect of it is sinne onely and sinnes past for of that onely must a man repent for the doing whereof in time past he must be sorry and the doing whereof hee must leaue in time to come and what can that bee but sinne onely that is 2. Cor. 12.21 Act. 18.22 Reuela 2.22 sinne past for there is no reason wee should repent of them before wee haue committed them though wee must endeauour to preuent them before we haue committed them And if I had directly meant to define repentance I would haue left out of that which they call my definition some words which are in and haue put in some other which are left out That which I would haue left out which is in should haue beene these wordes viz. and purpose to serue God better for indeede they be but a consequence following vpon our purpose of leauing our former sinnes or rather an amplification of it by the contrary then any part of the nature of repentance the obâ—ect whereof is onely sinne and therefore not new seruing of God That which would haue inserted into the Definitioâ— which is left out should haue beene thes words is a godly sorrow for sinne for thâ— is the first part of repentance as shall 〈◊〉 seene by and by If any aske me why I meant to deâ—cribe repentance as I did I answere 1. I added the formâ— words not because I meant thereby 〈◊〉 describe any part of repentance but bâ—cause they containe a necessary consequeâ—â— and effect following vpon our purpose 〈◊〉 leauing our former sinnes For to what 〈◊〉 should we purpose to leaue our sinnes 〈◊〉 time past excepr we resolued in time 〈◊〉 come to serue God better how shall thâ— former be manifested without the latteâ— 2. I omitted the other words not becauâ—â— I thought not sorrow for sinne to be aâ— part of repentance which shall be shewâ— by and by but because purpose to leaâ— past sinnes necessarily presupposeth sorroâ— for the committing of them else whâ— should make a man to resolue to leaâ— them but the sorrow of his heart for 〈◊〉 doing thereof 3. I onely described repâ—tance by a purpose of the heart to leaue 〈◊〉 former sinnes not because I thought tâ—â— to be all requisite in repentance but bâ—cause this purpose and resolution is the last act of the heart as it repents or the last act of repentance as it is seated in the heart Now that the nature of Repentaance consists in two things vix vnfained sorrow of heart for sinnes already committed and purpose of heart not to commit the same againe to prooue this I shall not need to produce testimonies of Scripture for common sence teacheth vs that Repentance in men concerning things in the world hath for the obiect of it things hurtfull â—nely that is that either are such or seeme to vs to be such I meane wee feare or feele for something that we haue done and that our Repentance for the things that we haue done and for the doing whereof wee are sensible of such hurt consists in sorrow for the doing thereof and in purpose to doe so no more if it were to be done againe I will make it plaine by a familiar example I want a conuenient house hereupon I purpose to build one I conferre with workemen about it and the charge of the building I am told it will cost mee but three hundred pound vpon this charge I reckon and goe about it but before it be finished I finde it will cost mee foure hundred pound when I see this I repent oâ— the building of my house that is it irkeâ— me it vexes me and makes me sorry foâ— the cost I haue bestowed on it and not only so but I wish it were vndone and resolue if it were to doe againe I would neuer build it yea I purpose neuer to vndeâ—take the building of a house againe but will be sure it shall cost me no more then expect In like manner for a long time a sinnâ— goes on in an euill course of life withoâ—â— feare of Hell and with a presumptuouâ— hope of Heauen at length when the timâ— of his conuersion is come the Lord is pleased to let him see the folly and fowlenesâ— of his sinnes the danger of his course if 〈◊〉 goe on and the benefit of his repentanceâ— he returne these considerations belieued and laid to heart makes him repent that iâ— to be heartily sorry yea prickt in heart fâ—â— his euill life past and to resolue to liue 〈◊〉 longer in them yea that now hee woulâ— not doe the same things againe if the were to be committed and were not aâ— ready done and thus much be enough 〈◊〉 haue written in defence of those wordâ— wherein I describe the nature of the truâ— repentance which I say goeth before faitâ— in Christ and for answere to the first Exception against the Exposition the second followes The second exception likewise is idle To the second Exception for whereas for the ground of it it is imagined and alleadged that there can be no manner of sincerity in a mans actions before
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
iustification from the guilt of sinne secondly they shew that though it could not bee prooued by that place of the Acts that Faith purifies in that manner yet by reason from other Scriptures doe they indeauour to prooue it to which I will answere in order The Text Acts 15 9. is to be vnderstood of purifying by sanctification as well as by iustification because it is Faith in Christs blood and Christs blood purifies both wayes The Apology The reason is not good because it takes for graunted that wheresoeuer the holy Ghost speakes of cleansing by Christs blood both must be vnderstood The contrary is cleare by these places Ro. 3.18 5.9 Eph. 1.7 1. Pet. 1 9. Ioa. 1.7.9 which must bee vnderstood onely of one viz purifying by iustification for though Legall purifyings taught both and Christs blood bee effectuall to the Elect in both kindes yet will it not follow to be so vnderstood euery where of both and that the holy Ghost meanes both and therefore not Act. 15.9 Besides the Text Acts 15.9 by the precedent subsequent matter shewes clearely it meanes but one viz iustification in that the words are an answer in part to a question that questioÌ„ was not whether sinners were sanctified but whether or no they were iustified by faith in Christ Men are not to make the Scripture a nose of waxe to say euery thing in euery place specially when it expounds it selfe directly of what purifying it speakes and the point of purifying by sanctification is not denied to faith simply for I confesse it may be prooued by another Text but onely to bee meant there viz Acts 15.9 The Exception Secondly the Text Acts 15.9 Is to be vnderstood of purifying by sanctification as wel as by iustification because it speaks of purifying by sauing and sauing comprehends sanctification as well as iustification The Apology The reason is not good because it is not true which is supposed that wheresoeuer the holy Ghost speakes of sauing viz spiritually he comprehends both for these Texts Rom. 5.9 1. Cor. 5.5 Io. 5.20 are vnderstood of sauing by iustification onely Indeed they that are saued are sanctified yet where sauing faith is attributed to any it doth not follow that there by sauing should be meant sactifying The Exception Thirdly Act. 15.9 must bee vnderstood of purifying both wayes because sanctification is directly attributed vnto faith Acts 26.18 The Apology I answere first that if it be a good rule to expound one Scripture by another and the darker by the plainer then may the Text Act. 26.18 be expounded by Acts 15.9 for the circumstances of the Text in the 26. chap. doe not shew of what purifying it meanes but the scope of the place in the 15. Acts doth And therefore the clearer Acts 15. should expound the darker in the 26. chapter the rather because in the 26. chapter sanctification is expressed by other wordes of turning them from darkenesse to light and from the power of Sathan to God and therefore for all this Acts 15.9 must not be vnderstood of purifying by sanctification Secondly I deny not but faith in some sense sanctifies vs viz as it teacheth it Tit. 2.11 as it stirres vp to it by the comforts thereof Rom 121. Ioa. 2. but neither will it be prooued from thence that therefore purifying Acts 15.9 must be meant of purifying by sanctification because it is so vnderstood Acts. 26 18. vnlesse the Apostle had in both places spoken of the same matter vpon the same occasion and to the same end in both which cannot bee verified of these two places in the Acts. Nor yet will it follow that before faith doe sanctifie the heart it is totally impure with the filth of sinne notwithstanding any graces of the Spirit wrought therein which is the point to be proued in the Antecedent Indeed vpon saying we are iustified by faith it will thereupon follow that wee are totally vniustified that is actually before we beleeue in Christ but in saying wee are sanctified by faith it will not thereupon follow that we are totally vnsanctified before faith come and the Reason is because faith by it office doeth more properly iustifie then sanctifie and iustification doeth not suscipere magis minus aâ— sanctification doth neither is wrought by parts and degrees as sanctification is The Exception In the last place they alleadge that many learned and sound Diuines doe expound Act. 15.9 of sanctification The Apology I grant it but not to prooue an absolute and totall impurity in mans heart before Faith as they doe but that there is not purity enough to saluation without Faith in Christ and that it stirres vp the heart of a man more to labour for an increase of sanctification begun But though they had yet doe not I thinke it reasonable or possible for euery Writer among the Protestants in these dayes to maintaine euery position in Diuinity of â—xposition of Scripture that hath beene giuen and deliuered by others in former times To conclude If a man bee elected in Christ and for his sake before he be actually in him or haue any faith in him why may they not for his sake also bee in part sanctified before Christ bee actually in them by Faith or Faith bee wrought in them actually The Exception The second thing vndertaken for the proofe of this their Argument is that by Reasons from other places of Scripture it may be prooued that Faith doeth sanctifie as well as iustifie though it cannot from Acts 15.9 The reasons they bring are three and I will answere them all briefely and in one answere Faith say thy doth purifie by sanctification as wâ—ll as by iustification first because it is Faith in Christs blood which purifies both wayes secondly because the larger Catechisme saith so thirdly because I my selfe say so in my Treatise The Apology To all these three Reasons I answere that neither any one singly nor all of them ioyntly prooue the point in question which is that Faith so sanctifies the heart that there is not so much as the least measure of sanctification begunne in the heart till faith bee wrought for at the most they prooue that which I deny not but confesse as well as they that faith in in Christ teacheth sanctification increaseth it and makes it acceptable to our saluation The Exception Obiect 1 Oh but say they before Christ bee in men there can bee no sanctification in them and before faith be in them Christ cannot be in them The Apology Solut. Before Faith be in men Christ is not in them actually by his sufficient sauing grace but Christ may be in men some way namely by his wisedome and enlightning grace before faith in Christ bee in them Before Christ bee in men there is not sanctification enough in measure nor sufficient vnto acceptation for our saluation wrought in vs but before Christ be in vs actually by faith sanctification may be begunne by the preparations and dispositions to
regeneration If God be mooued for his infinite mercy and free grace in Christ to bestow faith vpon sinners when as yet Christ is not in them actually why may hee not vpon the same grounds and for the same reasons for Christs sake begin sanctification in them when as yet Christ is not actually in them The Exception Obiect 2 Oh but say they how can sanctification be wrought before they haue faith in Christ whereby they drawe downe vertue from his sanctification to that end The Apology I answere First 1. Cor. 1.30 Christ is made vnto vs wisedome as well as sanctification and illumination of one Elect descends from Christs wisedome vpon them and this discends before faith in Christ Why then may not a beginning of sanctification All our good is from Christ but all is not drawne from Christ by faith for preuenting grace is not so drawne Are wee not called before we are iustified Rom. 8.30 In like manner all that is drawne is not from Christ as ours by iustifying faith for faith it selfe is not so drawne for that faith should bee before and after it selfe and if faith be not so drawne why should Repentance Secondly For the Spirit blowes where when and as it lists so in what measure and order it pleaseth him to beginne and finish the work so that as long as the begining of Repentance and sanctification in the preparations though before faith in Christ be not attributed to the worke of Natute or good vse of our owne Free-wil but onely to the worke of the Spirit in the Elect which yet is not sufficient to saluation nor acceptable thereunto without faith in Christ I can see no inconuenience in holding a beginning of Repentance or sanctification in the dispositions thereunto before faith and that therefore it will not follow that the Elect are wholly impure before faith in Christ in whom those preparations to Regeneration and faith in Christ are so wrought as I haue sayd Indeed some challenge mee for bordering vpon Pelaganisme and Poperie as if I diuided some part of Repentance betwixt the worke of the Spirit and of Nature because I said Nature onely doth nâ—â— worke the preparations to Repentance and Faith recited Pag. 222. l. 24. But how they can conclude it thence against me 〈◊〉 cannot see and therefore doe I referre it them to conclude and to the iudicious Reader indifferently to determine This I am sure I abhor Palaganisme and Popery and I haue often and plainely affirmed them al to be the work of the Spirit in the Elect and haue denied them to bee the worke of Nature yea I haue giuen reasons for it both in my Treatise and in my Apologie Indeed I say Pag. 258. that by the light of Nature a man may know many actions bee doth to bee sinne and that hee ought to repent of them and leaue them yea that hereby many are mooued for a time to refraine some euill actions But this prooues not that to repent or to bee prepared to repent is the gift of Nature I haue often affirmed that the worke of all those preparations is the worke of Gods Spirit in the elect If they can bring any place out of my Book where I say any one of them is the worke of Nature in them that doe repent then may they pooue my supposed Diuision In the meane time such wresting of a mans writing sauours neither of loue nor iudgement The Triall Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ because then it should be acceptable without faith The third Obiection but no grace can be acceptable to God without faith Heb 11.6 The Exception This Argument they say I can neuer answere but whether I haue or no or now shâ—ll let the Reader iudge The Apology To this Argument I answered that iâ— prooues not the question because thâ— Text out of the Epistle to the Hebreweâ— prooues not the Argument for both quâ—stion and Argument are to be vndâ—rstooâ— of pleasing of God any or euery way bâ— the proofe out of the Epistle to the Hâ—brewes is of pleasing God one way onely viz vnto saluation To remooue my answere and maintaine their owne argument they shoulâ— haue done two things First they should haue taken away mâ— distinction in one of the members thereâ— concerning acceptablenesse and sheweâ— that no repentance can be any way acceâ—table without faith in Christ But beliâ— it was too hard a tasâ—e for some repetance is not at all acceptable vnto saâ—uaâ—on as Ahabs and the Ninivites and yâ— the same Repentance without Faith 〈◊〉 Christ is some way acceptable vnto Goâ— namely to the auerting of a temporâ— Iudgement as in the same exâ—mples Secondly they should haue prooued that the Text alleadged out of the Epistle to the Hebrewes to prooue their argument is to be vnderstood of a sauing faith only for of that only is the question which is not done I grant the Apostle in that chapter speakes of a sauing faith vers 5. but it seemes that in the verse alleaged he speaks but of an assent to the truth of the two propositions following in the next verse viz that God is or there is a God secondly that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him for he that doubts of either of these cannot please God at all for how should he please God that beleeues not there is a God But neither of these haue they done and therefore for all this the argument is vnsound The Exception Oh but will they say though the Text Heb 11.6 doe not prooue that all our actions done wiehout faith are euery way vnacceptable yet may it bee prooued by reasons taken from Scripture let vs heare them and answere them in order Without faith all our actions are euery way vnacceptable because without Christ they are euery way vnacceptable I answere first there is some pleasing God without Christ to the obtaining of some blessings as the examples of Ahab and the Ninivites and Iehu shew and as the example of Cyrus will easily prooue Isay 44.28 45.1.2.3 Secondly I answere that this reason begges the question because to bee without faith and to be without Christ makes an vnacceptablenes to one and the same end viz vnto saluation and not any or euery way as the proofe should be Faith in Christ makes vs acceptable to God with that acceptablenesse to which we are elected in Christ which hee hath purchased and which faith apprehendeth but this is acceptablenes to saluation for spiritual and heauenly things are the treasures of the couenant of grace to which we are elected by the father which are purchased by the Sonne and which wee receiue instrumentally by Faith The Exception But without Faith in Christ all our actions are euery way vnacceptable because they are euery way sinne no sinne can any way please God The Apology I answere though all our actions done before faith in Christ are vnauaileable to euerlasting life yet are they not sinne Is
vs till wee bee actually vnited to him by Faith which is the question The contrary may bee seene in illumination a beleefe of the Gospell and vocation which are and may bee wrought in the elect before this vnion Romans 8.20 though they tend to regeneration or rather are a branch and member thereof and there can noe inconuenience follow hereupon as long as the regeneration begunne before this actuall vnion is the worke of the spirit in the elect and for Christs sake that shall be perfected in due time appointed by God for that end The Exception Secondly they prooue that regeneration is not begunne before faith in Christ because I my selfe say as much in my treatise pag. 310. The Apology I answere by acknowledging that faith in Christ becomes effectuall to bring forth good workes and new obedience in a holy life and to beget in vs other Christian graces as hope ioy peace newnesse of heart and vprightnesse c. which are the fruites of faith in Christ and it becomes thus effectuall by our vnion with Christ through faith but I doe not there affirme which is alleaged and is the point to bee prooued that no grace tending to regeneration as a disposition to it is wtought before this our vnion and therefore for all these two reasons their last Argument is weake and insufficient As I haue added to my six arguments one more in defence of my opinion so will I adde one more obiection which is an argument of theirs against it and it is this The Exception If faith in Christ goe before loue and loue before repentance then faith goes before repentance But faith in Christ goes before loue and loue before repentance Therefore faith goes before repentance The consequence they thinke is good because that which goes before the cause goes before the effect ergo if faith go before the cause of repentance which is loue then must it goe before repentance which is the fruite of loue The Assumption they prooue in the parts of it 1 Faith goes before loue because faith workes by loue Gal. 5.6 2 Loue goes before repentance for the doctrine of the Church of England sayth so The Apology I answere 1. If by loue be meant any kinde of loue to God then I grant the consequence and deny the assumption But if thereby bee meant that loue of God which proceedeth from our actuall being beloued of God in Christ and our apprehending of the same in our owne perticular iustification then I deny the consequence and grant the assumption Some loue of God may be before iustifiing faith for God is the obiect of loue and God may bee conceiued and apprehended as louing not onely in many temporall blessings but euen in some spiritual before men beleeue in Christ For God may be apprehended louing in sending his sonne to purchase redemption for man and manifesting in the meanes a possibility of obtaining our share therein vpon repentance and faith in Christ and as preparing vâ— by some workes of Gods Spirit to faith in Christ and if we may be some way affected towards God vpon these considerations and grounds before faith in Christ then may there be some loue before faith and if our loue to God bee suteable to such preparing workes of Gods Spirit as haue yer bin past vpon vs and such good as hath bin manifested to vâ— from God I say such loue is true in it kind as being answerable to that which God aimes at in such meanes though not with that perfection which is requisite to saluation immediately yet with that which is requisite by way of disposition and preparatorily But that loue of God which proceedeth from the receiuing and apprehension of our iustification is a fruit of faith in Christ and followes it 2. I answer that if by repentance be meant the practise of amendment of life and new obedience then the loue of God goes before repentance but if by repentance be meant hearty sorrow for sinne past and true purpose to leaue it then I say the loue of God doth not go before repentance Touching the first part of their asumption out of the Galathians that faith goes before loue I say it is not to purpose because it proues not that faith goes before all loue but only that loue which proceeds from our first beeing beloued of God which we apprehend by faith in Christ Neither is the doctrine of the Church of England out of the Homilies rightly alleaged to proue the 2 part of their assumption viz. that repentance hath an ingredient charity that repentance is a fruite of the loue of God for the repentance the Homily speakes of is not repentance strictly taken viz. sorrow for sinne and purpose of leauing it of which I speake but the whole worke of Gods Spirit on man to make him capable of iustification and salvation or the whole conuersion of man in minde and will in affections and actions inward and outward and this appeares in that it makes foure parts of repentance there spoken of viz. 1. Sorrow for sinne 2. acknowledgment and confession of it 3. faith in Christ and 4. amendment of life in which sense it is no maruell if hee include loue and charity in repentance soe that there is no reason to conclude thence that loue is included in repentance strictly taken as I do except they meane by loue some affection to God for making it possible for vs to bee saued and prouiding a meanes to that end and not a loue of God for our being actually saued or meane by repentance amendment of life for this is a fruite of loue and in this sence it is that St. Augustine speakes to this effect Many do daily say they are sinners and yet still they delight to sinne this is but profession not amendment the soule is accused not healed the offence is pronounced not taken away August 10. tom Ser. 7. de tempore nothing makes true repentance but the hatred of sinne and loue of God the fire of this sacrifice is loue Now at length I draw homeward toward a conclusion of the whole namely to the last thing propounded in handling this point of the precedency of repentance vnto faith in Christ which is the vse and application I made thereof in my Treatise with which as with the rest there is fault found It will not be worth my labour to confute muchlesse recite the particular faults and aberations they espie therein The applying of the point because the answere vnto them will little serue to the cleering of the Doctrine it selfe partly because that which I should write in confutation thereof must be gathered out of that I haue already sayd in this Defence and partly also because the whole frame of those exceptions will of it selfe vpon my Defence fall to the ground For I thinke they would neuer haue written against the application but vpon a supposition that the point whereupon it was raysed is vnsound for
the vse of a Doctrine is good or bad according as the nature of the Doctrine is true or false as wel as if it be proper natural or streined and impertinent Now then if it may appeare as I hope it shall to all that are willing and able to iudge that I haue answered all their exceptions then doth my Doctrine touching the precedency of repentance vnto Faith in Christ as yet stand vpright and consequently the application thereof by way of confutation instruction reprehension exhortation and consolation must goe for currant being naturall to the point and not wrested As it will not bee needefull for mee to defend all those vses so neither to inlarge them onely I would adde out more to the other fiue and cleere one of them which I haue already made That which I would adde to the other should bee by way of caution which is to aduertise the Christian Reader that in perusing this my Defence and meditating on the point it selfe he would not doe either the one or the other with a minde onely intent to vnderstand the truth of the point but with a heart to bee affected with the truth when it is vnderstood not labouring so much to enquire whether of repentance or Faith the one or the other goes before in nature or in time as whether they haue them both or no and how they may get them both both being necessary in their kinde vnto saluation That vse which I would cleare should be the fourth whence as also from other places in the Treatise viz. page 226. 233 234. some collect that I make that faith not to be sauing faith which is not wrought after Repentance To this I answere far be it from me to imagine must lesse to determine that a true faith in Christ supposing it to be true cannot be a sauing Faith For Faith in CHRIST is a true sauing Faith let it bee wrought by the Spirit of GOD when it will before or after repentance for I thinke the hand of the Lord is not to bee tyed in as much as hee may worke how and when hee will with and by the vsuall meanes and ordinarily or without them or against them and extraordinarily But this I say that for as much as it hath appeared that vsually and in the common order of Gods working generally and in his ordinary course God prepares men to beleeue in Christ by the fore-worke of some graces tending to it and that many will presumptuously say and perswade they beleeue in Christ when indeede they doe not and therefore to restraine men from presumption I say that such persons may not perswade themselues as yet they hauâ— a sauing faith 233. such may be conceiued not to haue a sauing faith 234. not when they had it indeed but when they thought they had it and had it not for how can a man look for benefit by beleeuing in Christ that continues in a purpose of sinning And that this is so may appeare because in that vse I speake onely of carnall Gospellers who cannot haue a sauing faith indeede yet may they presume they haue it May not a Minister of the Gospell knowing that Preaching is the way and meanes to worke faith in Christ viz. ordinarily reprooue carnall Gospellers that neglect and contemne hearing of Sermons and yet thinke they haue faith in Christ may they not say that their faith us not a sauing faith viz. because they submit noâ— themselues to the ordinary meanes which should beget it may not they say safely and truely that their faith is not a sauing faith though God can and will and somtime doth worke a sauing faith without these meanes viz. extraordinarily why then may not I say that the faith of carnall Gospellers is not true sauing faith seeing they were neuer prepared to beleeue in Christ by the dispositions which Gods holy Spirit workes ordinarily in those in whom he begets a sauing saith though sometime God can and will in an enthusiasme and sodaine rapture worke a sauing faith without these preparations Surely yea for not Gods extraordinary wayes and workes but his ordinary are the pathes wherein wee must walke the rule by which we must proceede and the Touch by which wee must try our selues in cases of this nature To conclude By that which is written in this Apology the Christian Reader may discerne the materiall Exceptions against my Doctrine and the Defence of my Doctrine against those Exceptions I know full well that a Maister of Defence would haue put by these thrusts with more skill or haue beaten them backe with more strength but I am onely a learner in this Schoole and therefore onely as a Scholler in this faculty pro meo marte arte I haue playd my prize That which by Gods prouidence I haue seene materially obiected against my Doctrine I haue with Gods grace answered the pertinency and sufficiency of which answere I referre to the more learned and iudicious Readers to be determined Some obiect my Doctrine is new but I answere it is not a new but a renewed Doctrine Witnesse my testimonies and reasons It is not new though it seeme new it skills not how new a doctrine be so it be true As it is not good to receiue euery Doctrine for this is to be carried about with euery blast Eph. 4 14. So neither is it safe to reiect euery Doctrine which seemes new for this was the errour of the Iewes who refused the Gospell because to their iudgement it seemed a new Doctrine Acts 17.19 The way to preuent errour by mistaking is to follow the rule of the Apostle Prooue all things 1. Thes 5.21 22 hold fast that which is good abstaine from all apperance of euill that is Examine the Doctrines you heare by the word of God and if after Triall they euidently appeare to your iudgement to be good sound imbrace and hold them fast if naught and erronious reiect and let them go If any man after Triall shall dissent from me in this opinion I will not be offended so he dissent as a brother in iudgement and opinion and not in loue and affection and so from answering Exceptions to my booke in one point I proceede and conclude with a remouall of some imputations against it in another the Authors in both not being the same There came to my hands very lately certaine papers containing an accusation against me concerning my first Booke called A Triall of Faith and my second A Defence thereof The things layd to my charge are no lesse then periury lying and contradiction heresie blasphemy and aequivocation as if my booke were a mirrour of errours and absurdities and my selfe a monster of Ministers The matters being so foule and the opportunity so faire to purge my selfe I thought good to adde a sew leaues for the clearing of my innocency herein For in that these papers were brought me not knowing of them nor looking after them when this booke was