the letter and words exhibit that is the Grammar of the Scripture in conjunction with the scope context and concordance thereof that is with the Logick of the Scripture by mans reason to be questioned but reason is to be captivate to the authority thereof 2. I hope you doe not thinke of any way for obtaining the sence and minde of God otherwise then by the letter if an Angel from Heaven should preach any other Doctrine let him be accurst Goodwin Now if the Scriptures themselves be upon no other termes nor in any other case serviceable or usefull unto men for the tryall of Doctrines and Opinions but only as and when they are clearly understood by them it clearly followes that whatsoever is requisite and necessary to bring men to a true understanding of the Scriptures is of equall necessity for the distinguishing of Doctrines and to interpose or be made use of in all affaires and concernments in Religion if then the reasons judgements and understandings of men must of necessity interpose act argue debate and consider before the true sence and minde of God in any Scripture can be duly apprehended understood and beleeved by men it is a plaine case that these are to be used and to be interessed in whatsoever is of any religious consequence or concernment to us That the minde of God in the Scriptures cannot be duly apprehended received or beleeved by men but by the acting and working of their reasons mindes and understandings in order hereunto is evident from hence viz. because the minde of God cannot be thus apprehended or beleeved by men but by meanes of an intellectuall or rationall difference tasted or resented by them between this minde of his and all other mindes meanings or sences whatsoever that may be supposed to reside or be in the words Resbury If you was not a man whose eare is chain'd to the musicke of his owne Tongue you might spare the greatest part of your words and yet speake as much as you doe In what sence Reason is to be used in what sence to be laid aside we have seene already as likewise the use and necessity of the Word of God for begetting in mans understanding that intellectuall or rationall difference tasted or resented by him which you speake of the Word being the rule and light to the understanding as to matters of religion Goodwin For example If there be another sence to be given of such or such a passage of Scripture either contrary unto or differing from that which I conceive to be the minde of God here which hath the same rationall or intellectuall savour and taste with this that is which as well suits with the words agrees with the Context falls in with the scope and subject matter in hand is as accordable with Scripture-assertion elsewhere coâ—ports as clearly with the unquestionable Principles of reason and the like how is it possible for me in this case to conceive or beleeve especially with the certainty of faith that my sence is the minde of God and consequently the true sence of that place rather then that other which hath all the same Characters Symptomes and Arguments of being the minde of God which none hath therefore it must needs be by the exercise and acting of my reason and understanding and by the report which they make of their discoveries in their enquiries that I come regularly to conclude and to be satisfied that this is the minde of God in such or such a Scripture and none other Resbury 1 In our enquiries into the true meaning of any text of Scripture the word it selfe by the formes of expression scope context and agreement with Scripture-assertion elsewhere is our Card and compasse by which reason is to steere her enquiry not reason the Judge above or against the word 2 Such an example doe you here give and so doe you state it as it labours of a most evident contradiction For how is it possible that two different much lesse contrary sences should have the same intellectuall taste or savour should as well suit with the words agree with the context and have those other Characters which you name one as another Secondly suppose such a thing possible how is it yet possible that reason should determine which is the true sence If both sences have both Scripture and reason equally for them as is here supposed whence shall reason frame a judgement for this rather then that or for that rather then this I beleeve you made great haste when you made so little speed One thing further let me minde you of that wheras you begin with intellectual savour and taste and conclude with the unquestionable principles of reason you might in both have spared your paines for where the other Characters are found they will conclude the sence and if reason shall discerne them she must needs see there is reason to conclude with them Goodwin If it be here objected and demanded But is it meet or tolerable that the reason of man should judge in the things of God or that the understandings of men should umpire and determine in his affaires I answer 1 If God pleaseth to impart his minde and Counsels in his Word and writing unto men with an injunction and charge that they receive and owne them as from him and that they take heed they doe not mistake him or embrace either their owne conceits or the mindes of others in stead of his in this case for men to put a difference by way of judging and discerning between the minde of God and that which is not his minde is so farre from being an act of Authority Presumption or unseemly Vsurpation in men that it is a fruit of their deep loyalty submission and obedience unto God When Christ enjoyned the Disciples of the Pharisees and the Herodians to render unto Caesar the things which are Caesars and unto God the things which are Gods he did not only give them a warrant and Commission to judge and determine what and which were the things of God as well as which were the things of Caesar but laid a charge upon them also to put this warrant in execution and this not only by judging actually which were the things of God but by practising and acting also upon and according to this judgement 2 To judge of God and of the things of God in the sence we now speake is but to acknowledge owne and receive God and the things of God in their transcendent excellency goodnesse and truth and as differenced in their perfections respectively from all other beings and things the poorest and meanest subject that is may lawfully and without any just offence judge his Prince yea or him that is made a lawfull Iudge over him to be wise just bountifull c. at lest when there is sufficient ground for it Resbury Here according to your manner you spin out your discourse by triviall Objections and Answers for your answer it is true allowing
world so that what light soever of truth what clear and sound principle or impressions of Reason or Understanding soever is since the fall to be found in any man is an expresse fâ—utt of the Grace that is given unto the world upon the account of Iesus Christ and is reinvested in the soule by the appropriated interposure of the spirit of God the gift whereof upon this account is so frequently and highly magnified in the Scriptures Yea not only the habituall residency of all principles of light and truth in the soule is to be attributed unto the Spirit of God as supporting and preserving them from defacement but also all the actings and movings of the rationall powers of the soule according to the exigency ducture and import of them as in all right apprehensions of things in all legitimate and sound reasonings and debates whether for confirmation of any truth or the confutation of any error or the like But Resbury Here we have a Question and an Answer for the Answer we have much to observe and contend against it 1 You say that you Answer to the heart of those c. then as is your perpetual manner upon this Argument you Cant in high words and generall expressions Briefly that you may answer to the heart of those that hold the truth against you You must Answer two things first that the soule must be renewed by habituall grace Secondly That so renewed it must be acted by effectuall grace 2 You grant the utter dissolution of the intellectual frame by Adams fall hereby no doubt you thinke to finde out an evasion from the charge of Pelagianisme We shall see how well you will acquit your selfe of this charge in the examination of your doctrine in the meane time here is deep silence about the will of man and about the sensual appetite do you grant the Will as to supernaturals wholly dispoiled as to naturals deeply wounded doe you deny the lustings of the sensuall appetite in the state of innocency against right reason Or do you with the Iesuiticall Schoole hold such lustings natural to that state 3 You lay down your maine doctrine that there is such a light vouch safed to all men by the procurement of Iesus Christ as that according to your former doctrine every man in the world may improve it to faith and repentance Here 1 We must take notice of an unsound dropping of your pen by the way and upon the by Christ you say raised up the Tabernacle of Adam this no doubt to insinuate that all men without exception are redeemed by him But by your leave Sir it is the Tabernacle of David that he raiseth up as he took upon him the seed of Abraham but men of unsound doctrines have no minde to hold fast the form of sound words 2 For the doctrine it self which you ground upon Ioh. 1. 9. It is such as that Scripture will not at all countenance 1. They give a very fair interpretation of the place and as to me it seems genuine who understand by this light natural Understanding and Reason bestowed upon man by Christ as God and mans Creator which natural light still remains though much obscured by the fall in man without which he was not man and of this light Christ as the Son of God and Author of nature is the Author unto every one borne into the World Thus Calvin and with him others resolving the place thus The Evangelist setting forth the divinity of Christ shewes him to have been the Creator of all things v. 3. And because man is the choicest peece of the creatures here below and wee are most affected with truths concerning our selves he set forth Christ not onely as the Author of being to all creatures in general v. 3. but particularly instanceth in man whose being iâ— of the best beings a life and this life of the best of lives a rationall and intellectuall In him was life he is life of himselfe and he is the spring or author of life to all living creatures more particularly of that life of light which the rational creature Man lives v. 4. the same light with that v. 9. The Author of which light the Creator of man Iohn testifies him to be giving witnesse to his God-head He that commeth after me is preferred before me for he was before me v. 15. Of this light Austine speakes Tract 2. in cap. 1. Ioan. This life was the light of men did hee say the light of beasts There is a certaine light of men whereby they differ from beasts Let us now see and understand what is this light of men Thou differest not from a beast but by thy Understanding whence art thou better then the beast from the image of God where is the image of God in the minde in the understanding If therefore thou beest better then a beast because thou hast a mind by which thou understandest what the beast cannot understand and thence thou art a man that thou art better then the beast The light of men is the light of minds the light of mindes is above minds and excels all minds This was that life by which all things were made here then the Creator of man is set forth his restorer 2 If we must suppose it supernaturall Light then must we limit the Subject enlightned thus He enlightens every man that comes into this world who is enlightned that is there is no other fountaine of Light but he to all that are enlightned here we may fitly bring in that illustration of that eminent light Austin upon that text They shall all be taught of God who when he had according to truth interpreted it onely of the Sons of the Promise and the Vessels of Mercy according to Election he addes for further clearing But as we speake rightly when we say of any Schoole-master who is alone in the City this man teacheth all not because all learne but because none learn but of him whosoever doe there learne so we rightly say God teacheth all men to come to Christ not because all come but because no man comes otherwise Lib. de praedest Sanct. chap. 8. so here Christ enlightens every man that comes into this world not that every man coming into the world is enlightned but of all commers into the world whosoever is enlightned he alone is the enlightner though as I said the former interpretation seemes most genuine but whether the former or this or whatsoever other interpretation may be the truth it is evident that Mr. Goodwins who will have such a gift of illumination vouchsafed by Christ unto all as that every man may improve to faith and repentance cannot be the truth 1 From the context here for notwithstanding this light and enlightning such is the darknesse both of the world and of his owne the Iewes as comprehended not this light or rather laid no hold upon it as knew him not 〈◊〉 received him not these only excepted who 〈◊〉 distinction from
the Gospel RICHARD RESBURY An Answer to Mr. JOHN GOODWINS LETTER Vainly by him Entituled Confidence dismounted Sir WHy you had not my Answer sooner you may find in my Epistle to the Reader viz. Because I intended something else besides an Answer to your Letter which indeed I should not have answered at all but onely to make good the particulars of my charge which you challenge me to I shall therefore touch upon other things as no better than impertinent generally and hasten to that First you find some exception against my reflection upon you in the Title and Epistle of my former Book that you never saw my face never heard of my name before Your meaning I suppose is to render me a son of the Earth an obscure and worthless man I confess my self such an one But what if God will by the foolish and weak things of the World confound the Wise and Mighty You might have made this construction thence that I had no animosity against your person upon any private interest you having never done me harm neither which you mention as another aggravation but onely upon the publick interest of Truth and Christianity did I touch upon you Secondly whereas the main of your grief and distaste is that I have uttered hard sayings against the Truths of God If they had been Truths which you defended you had sayd something That which follows representing me according to the practice of the Heathen cloathing the Christians in Wolves and Bears skins c. As likewise your high scorn of my expectation to give any stop to your Gangrene may pass for a strain of Mr. Iohn Goodwins Rhetorique But whereas you charge the Truths of God by me maintained as monstrous Principles uncouth hard and horrid Notions concerning God this passage I must put amongst your consequentiall Blasphemies In the next place you declame against my Book as a dead Drug lying upon my hands it is now in the hands of men let it answer for it self But whereas you so magnifie your self as though you was another Luther a man of such name weight and worth that great preferment is little enough to discourage any to oppose you you are in a pleasing dream It is not unlikely but divers hands will be against you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what terme onely as an Ishmael 〈◊〉 â—…nitie After this you tell me it 〈◊〉 reasonably be thought by any thing in my Book that I ever looked so much as a line of your Book in the face I see your mighty reason deludes your self as much in your conjectures as it strives to do others in your Doctrines Truly Sir I was not so scared with your Medusa's head but I durst look upon it And still I must tell you there are those Truths maintained in that little Book of mine which overturn your Babel In the next place you tell me that I or some Factor of mine purchased the Outcries of two Diurnalists whereas indeed I neither knew nor thought of any such thing till I saw it done but howsoever it is a thing of common course and for ought I know without offence for them to give notice of such Books as are newly printed After this you fall into a raving fit of pride and bitterness where I leave you to come to your self Then you beseech me by the love I bear or pretend to bear to the Lord Christ which comparing your sweet water with your bitter I conceive a Pharicall prophanation of the name of Christ to tell with what goodness of Conscience c. I can say that the main Truths of God concerning his Electing and Redeeming Grace have been highly assaulted by you For answer I refer you to my instances of your consequential Blasphemies at the end of this my Rescript and so your admonition here subjoyned may pass After this you run your descants that I termed you an unhappy man But Sir to let aside your trifling I therefore call you an unhappy man because you are a bold instrument to serve Satan against the Truth and that not onely whiles you live but in after Ages too when your bones shall be as rotten in the Grave as your Errours are now in the World Next you tell me what a daring hand you have for the Truth Happy was you if you sayd true less unhappy if the contrary was not true That your hand is daring against the Truth For the Title of your Book Redemption Redeemed whether right or no you shall be judged you say by a streighter Rule than my notion No doubt and that to your shame In the next place you tell me that I little know what Arminianism indeed meaneth If I be amongst those that know not the depths of Satan I am not much the worse but so much I know of it as I know that Arminius and Mr. Goodwin are Master and Scholar against the Truth of the Gospel Then you tax me for dictating rather than arguing Sir I was then doing another thing than taking your book to task I doubt not but you shall find that in this following discourse I have argued with you In the next place you resent it very deeply that I should pray that the Lord would rebuke you Our Saviour divers times rebuked his Disciples and Satan in one of his great Apostles why we may not pray that in Mr. Goodwin he would rebuke the spirit of Error I know not I think we pray it in effect as often as we pray that His Kingdom may come After this you challenge me to shew you where you at all much less seriously despise the peculiar Grace of God boldly bid defiance to it I answer the whole bent of your discours is both against it against Election the ground of it carried on with much defiance And even here where you would wipe off this spot you shew what an adversary you are to it by a famous contradiction You demonstrate you say the peculiarity of it that is in your interpretation the signal excellency glory of it to consist in this that it encompasseth the whole world about and particularly addresseth it self to every creature of Mankind A worthy demonstration peculiar because common such a thing is light because it is darkness Would any man have thought that Mr. Goodwins Logick could not distinguish between particular and peculiar And that what is common that is belonging to all suppose particularly presented and tendered should yet be peculiar that is belonging onely to some I do not much wonder that you have proved all Orthodox Writers of Primitive and Modern times to be with your self Pelagian forasmuch as you can prove one opposite species to be another therefore the same because opposite here is a way of demonstration which neither Euelide nor Archâ—â—ede ever dreamed of Concerning the saving Grace of God you say that we hold it so decreed to them that shall be saved that there is an absolute nenecessity for them to embrace it You knovv that we
your owne interpretation of the Apostles expresse doctrine here if you doe allow him above the natural man then you grant the word Supernaturall vertually in that sense wherein you formerly denyed it so that you are full of interwoven contradictions at every turne refuting your selfe 3 You deny here an utter incapacity of these things in the Natural man c. but such as he may out-grow according to the ordinary course of providence 1. Your Doctrine is evidently false 1. These things of the spirit of God are discerned by another light and another principle then the Natural man hath He neither knowes nor can know them saith the Apostle because they are spiritually discerned and this light of the spirit specifically distinct from the light of Reason in the Natural man as the light of reason is from the light of Sense in the bruit beast v. 11. And this spirit the world hath not therfore not the Natural man v. 12. Formerly he made such an observation as this his refuge that the Evangelist said not Darknesse could not but did not comprehend the light which how slender a refuge it was for him we there saw here the Apostle is expresse Cannot yet he attempts an evasion There is no end of this mans sophistry nor can be upon his principles that the Grammar and Logick of the Scripture must vaile to his Reason 2 Your Doctrine here as all along is purely Pelagian for you acknowledge no such incapacity in the Natural man of discovering all Gospel-truths leading to salvation but what by the diligent use of meanes hee may overgrow c. therefore of himselfe not onely may he make use of the means but so make use of them as that thence he shall certainly be savingly inlightened Which must bee one of these wayes 1 Either the seeds of naturall light shall hereby grow up into a saving light so Nature improves it selfe into Grace and this is according to your Doctrine that there is nothing supernatural in the efficacy of Grace and this is highly Pelagian for it makes Nature Grace Sub laude Naturae latent inimici Gratiae and Nature before this improvement must be Grace in the seed as by it it becomes grace in the fruit Or 2 By this use of means he shall procure the giving of saving light and grace from the hand of God which is still the Pelagian doctrine that the grace of God is given according to mans merits but still it is a Riddle to mee how you can allow thus much and make good your doctrine against the supernaturall efficacy of grace As for your glosse upon 1 Cor. 3. 1. It is evident the Apostle calls them carnall opposed to spiritual not absolutely as formerly he had opposed the natural man but in part therefore he addes by way of limitation babes in Christ but when he expostulates with them v. 3. are yee not carnall and walke according to max he there implies that the meer man is wholly carnall for as much as the weake Christian so farre as he is carnall he is according to man and wherein he walkes carnally he walkes according to man Goodwin 4 And lastly to the Objection concerning Heathen Philosophers and others of great parts and naturall endowments of reason wit understanding c. who either rejected the Gospell as a Fable as the Philosophers or else perverted and wrested the truth thereof in many things to their owne destruction and possibly to the destruction of others as Hereticks I answer when I affirme and teach that Reason or the intellectuall part of a man is competent to apprehend discerne subscribe unto the things of God and of the Gospell my meaning is not to affirme withall that therefore men of these endowments though never so excellently enriched with them must of necessity apprehend discerne or subscribe unto these things Reason and understanding even of the greatest advance in man will serve men for other ends and purposes besides the apprehension and discerning the things of God in the Gospell and may accordingly be improved and imployed by them yea they may be imployed against the Gospell and made to warre and fight against the truth of it it is a saying of knowne truth concerning all things that have not an essentiall connexion with a mans soveraigne good Nil prodest quod non laedere possit idem i. e. Nothing there is so profitable But to doe mischiefe is as able Because some men suffer themselves to be bewitched with a corrupt desire of drawing away Disciples after them and for the fulfilling of such a Lust speake perverse things as the Apostle speaketh it doth not fellow from hence that therefore they were in no capacity or in no possibility of speaking the truth and refraining from the teaching of perverse things Aristotle speaking of riches saith That it is unpossible that he should have them who takes no care to have them So are we to conceive of the knowledge and true discerning of the things of God in the Gospell in what capacity soever men are either for ability or meanes otherwise for attaining them it is unpossible that ever they should actually attaine to them unlesse they be carefull and shall bend the strength of their mindes and understandings in order to the attainment of them Now the Heathen Philosophers more generally became vaine in their imaginations as the Apostle speaketh i. e. they spent themselves the strength of their parts time and opportunities upon matters of a low or secondary concernment and which they apprehended to have a more ready and certaine connexion with their owne honour and esteeme amongst men and did not charge themselves their gifts or parts with that worthy and blessed designe which the Apostle calls the having of God in acknowledgement upon this their unnaturall unthankfulnesse towards God uttering it selfe in their addition of themselves to studies speculations and enquiries of a selfe concernment with the neglect of him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their foolish heart was darkned Concerning Hereticks it is a common Notion amongst us that these from time to tâ—me were turned aside from the way of truth by some uncleane Spirit or other as Pride Ambition Envie Voluptuousnesse or the like if these Spirits once enter into a man they will soone call in and take unto themselves other spirits worse then themselves I meane spirits of errour and delusion to advocate for them and plead their cause as for the mistakes and miscarriages in judgement of good men upright in the maine with God and the Gospell about some particular points they are to be resolved into several causes of which we shal not now speake particularly only this I shall say whatsoever any mans errour or mistake in judgement is about the things of the Gospell it is not to be imputed to any deficiency on Gods part in the vouchsafement of meanes unto him competent and sufficient as well for the guiding into as for the keeping of his judgement in the way
I try this touch-stone I answer By it selfe as the rule by reason as the eye enlightned and guided by this rule according to the Grammar and the Logick of it He objects That it is impossible to prove the truth or disprove an errour meerly by the Scriptures because still the question will be about the sence of the Scripture I answer By the Scripture alone as the rule by reason as making use of this rule but so as in making use thereof it be guided by this rule and resolves all conclusions into the authority of this rule is the truth to be proved or errours disproved and the sence of whatsoever controverted text discussed and cleared As for that which you adde about irrationall last and grating upon reason c. for as much as you doe not object reason to the Word but oppose it thereunto and advance it there-above and will have reason the touch-stone of the Word beside and above the Word you shew your selfe as formerly a most impure and prophane Socinian by all good men to be abhor'd and whilst you plead so much for reason you are a man mad with reason no way solving those difficulties which you pretend upon supposition that the Scripture shall be the touch-stone for let us suppose reason the touch-stone must you not be at the same losse your adversary denying that to be according to the principles and grounds of reason which you affirme to be according to them But here is no such difficulty as you pretend for allowing the Scripture the Touch-stone you shall by some Scripture-truthes wherein both your selfe and adversary agree cleare the controverted text and resute his errours about it that he must either yeeld to the truth therein or deny what he affirmed and overthrow his owne foundations Goodwin The reason hereof is clearly asserted by the Apostle in these words For God is not the Author of confusion but of peace from whence it appeares that God is not divided in himselfe or contradictious to himselfe so as to write or assert that in one Booke as in that of the Scriptures which he denieth or opposeth in another as viz. That of Nature or of the fleshly tables of the heart of man but whatsoever he writeth or speaketh in the one he writeth or speaketh nothing in the other but what is fairly and fully consistent with it Resbury A doughty reason God is not the Author of confusion true but man is who hath so corrupted his reason as he hath night for a vision and gropes in the darke like a blinde man It is one thing what God wrote upon the nature of Man in his Creation who made man upright another thing what man hath written upon his owne nature by the Fall who hath found out to himselfe many inventions what the Devill likewise hath written upon his minde by deluding suggestions You may remember formerly a peice of discourse much like this of yours by your elder Brother the Collator with whom Prosper hath to doe confounding the state of Man by Creation with his condition since the Fall and Prospers answer to him It is admirable to see how the same spirit that possest Pelagius and his Disciples of old speakes the same things and useth the same Arguments in Mr. Goodwin One borne out of due time so many Ages after In the praise of five things did they craftily couch their sacrilegious Doctrine at so great enmity with the Grace of God as Aug. observes Lib. 3. contra duas Epist. Pelagian viz. In the praise of the Creature of Marriage of the Law of Free-will and of the Saints How oft doe we heare Mr. Goodwin extolling man and the noble faculties of reason understanding c. in man and here from the Law of Nature and from the Wisdome of God hee thinkes to extoll the reason of blinde corrupt wretched selfe-confounded man against the Grace of God I hinted to you before what a faire offer you made against Originall sinne I beleeve your Doctrine about it is That it is wholly taken off from man by that glorious vouchsafement of light you told us of by Iesus Christ to every one that comes into this world but your darknesse about that light and the darknesse of Man-kinde about things of the Spirit of God that light notwithstanding we have lately seen As for the fleshly tables of the heart we know no such but in the regenerate when the Lord shall have taken away the heart of stone and given an heart of flesh Ezek. 36. You may remember how Austin concludes hence as formerly we alledged him that the will of man is wholly adverse and inflexible unto good before the effectuall and peculiar worke of regeneration and where then shall be that provoking and stirring up of reason understanding c. you tell us of so often in the Naturall man We told you before how ill-pleasing it was to you to hold fast the for me of found words I doe not wonder at it it is not for your advantage I perceive if we might have a new Scripture see forth by your superlative reason we should have the text much altered for the Tabernaâ—le of David the Tabernacle of Adam for the heart of stone the fleshly tables of the heart Goodwin Vpon this account it is a grave and worthy advertisement of Master Perkins in his Epistle before his Treatise of Predestination It is saith he also requisite that this Doctrine he speakes of Predestination Election and Reprobation agree with the 〈…〉 of coâ—â—on reason and of that knowledge of God which may be obtained by the light of Nature In 〈◊〉 â—…ing of his â—e â—â—â—arly supposeth That whatâ—… should be taught by any in the mysterious and high pâ—…ts of Predistination otherwise then according to the Scriptures and the truth may be clearly disproved by this viz. The disagreement of it with the câ—…on grounds of reason and of that knowledge of God which the light of Nature shineth into the hearts of men if himselfe had kept close to this Principle of his owne in drawing up his judgement in the point of Predostination the world had received a fâ—rre diffâ—ring and better account from his â—en of this subject then now it hath But if his sence were That the heights and depths of Religion for so we may call the Doctrines of Election and Reprobation c. 〈◊〉 nothing in them but what agrees with the grounds and principles of common reason and with the Diâ—â—ates of Nature in men and consequently may be measured discerned and judged of by these he did not conceive that matters of a more facile and ordinary consideration were above the capacity and apprehension of reason Resbury For Master Perkins his Testimony and your Descant upon it you doe but wander 1. He builds the doctrine of Predestination upon the Word of God in opposition to the judgements of men his words are these The Doctrine of Predestination and of the Grace of God is to be built
which springs from it yet no such body shal spring from those seeds in the soyl of an unregenerate soul partly through darknes error and partly through pravity and perversnes therefore your conclusion here is most impertinent wherein you so insist upon the goodnesse of these seeds in their owne Nature and in reference to their Author God as you over-look the badnesse of man the subject of them through the corruption of his Nature so full of darknesse falsehood and enmity against the truth of God as thence these seeds must needs rot under the clods except the soyle be supernaturally changed CHAP. XVII Goodwin COncerning the mystery of the Trinity the incarnation of God or the Son of God the conception of a Virgin with some other points of like consideration commonly pretended to be against or at least above and out of the reach and apprehension of Reason I clearly Answer 1 That they are every whit as much yea upon the same termes out of the reach of faith as of Reason For how can I beleeve at least upon good grounds â—…d as it becommeth a Christian to beleeve that which I have no reason nor am capable of apprehending any reason nay for which there is no reason why I should beleeve it If it be said I am bound to beleeve the doctâ—ines specified because they are revealed by God I answer That this is a rationall ground whereof my Reason and Understanding are throughly capable why I should beleeve them the light of Nature clearly informeth me that what God revealeth or speaketh must needs be true and consequently worthy and meet to be beleeved If it be further said But Reason is not able to apprehend or conceive how three should bee really and essentially one and the same how a virgin should conceive and bring forth a Son c. I Answer That no faith or beleefe in such things as these is required of me nor would be accepted with God iâ— case it were in me above what I am able by Reason to apprehend and understand As I am not able by my Reason to apprehend the particular and distinct manner how the three persons subsist in one and the same divine Nature and Essence So neither am I bound to beleeve it that which I am bound to beleeve in this point is only this That there are three who doe thus subsist I mean in the same divine essence and for this my Reason is apprehensive enough why I should beleeve viz. Because God himselfe hath revealed it as hath been said If I should confidently beleeve any thing more or further concerning the Trinity of persons commonly so called and there is the same reason of the other points mentioned then what I know upon the cleare account of my Reason and Understanding it would be presumption in me and not faith and I should contract the guilt of those whom the Apostle chargeth with in truding or advancing themselves into the things which they have not seen i. e. rationally apprehended and understood But Resbury 1 Whereas you say these mysteries here mentioned of the Trinity Incarnation and the virgins conception are pretended to be against at least above Reason it seemes you deny even these to be above the reach of Reason in fallen man which yet in your discourse immediately insuing you grant in deed though not in termes but contradictions are no rare things in your discourse 2 Whereas you say they are every whit as much yea upon the same termes out of the reach of Faith as of Reason 1 It is false for Faith hath the proper and immediate ground of beleeving them the authority of the Word revealing them But Reason hath not an immediate ground of discerning them viz. such a light as whereby they of themselves are visible to the naturall understanding therefore when they are within the reach of Faith yet are they not within the reach of Reason upon the same termes 2 You equivocate for seeming to carry on your former doctrine you relinquish it Formerly you made Reason the touchstone of the Scriptures and whatsoever text of Scripture should not be found to agree with Reason and to be relished by it must be rejected here you make the Scripture to be above the tryall of Reason as appeares by that which followes For how can I beleeve c If it be said I am bound c. This is a rationall ground c. the light of Nature c. Here you grant that Reason is to beleeve what the word affirmes meerly for the authority of the word But 1. This is contrary to your former doctrine requiring that Reason finde a rationall tast and savour in the thing it selfe to bee beleeved 2. Here Reason beleeves rather then discernes the thing beleeved it discernes the ground of beleeving but not the nature or manner of the thing beleeved therefore as before the thing beleeved is not upon the same terms out of the reach of Faith as of Reason 3 Whereas you object That Reason is not able to apprehend or conceive how three should be really and essentially one and the same c. and then answer no faith or beleefe in such things as these is required c. Let me aske you this one thing Is it not a fruit of naturall corruption by the fall that we apprehend no more towards the distinct knowledge of these things If so then are you bound to know and knowing to beleeve more of them and your discourse about beleeving more then you apprehend how unacceptable it would be fals to the ground But here againe you discover that Popish Pelagian leaven that God hath no right to require of man any more then man hath power to performe as formerly you argued from the command of God to the faculty of man As for your Interpretation of Colos. 2. 18. I cannot receive it intruding into the things which they have not seen is in true interpretation which they have not seen in the doctrine of the Scriptures Goodwin 2 If it be yet demanded but is it not contrary to the grounds of Nature and so to Principles of Reason that a virgin should conceive a childe and if so how can such a doctrine according to what you have asserted be received as from God or as a truth I Answer It is no wayes contrary to Reason nor to any principle thereof that God should be able to make a virgin to conceive but very consonant thereunto 〈◊〉 the Apostle Paul supposed it credible enough as we lately heard even in the eye of Reason that God should make the earth bring forth her dead alive indeed that a virgin should conceive in a naturall way or according to the course of ordinary providence is contrary unto Reason but this Religion requireth not of any man to beleeve nor doth it bear hard at all upon any Principle of Reason that God should be willing to doe every whit as great and strange a thing as thaâ— I mean as
to cause a virgin to conceive for the accomplishment of so great and glorious a designe as the saving of a lost world Nor is it contrary to Reason or any Principle thereof that God or the first Being being infinite should have a manner of sulsisting or being far different from the manner of subsistence which is appropriate to all created and finite beings or that this manner of subsisting which is proper unto him should be unto men incomprehensible But most consonant it is to Principles of Reason when God himselfe hath pleased so farre to reveale that appropriate and incomprehensible manner of his subsisting as to declare and say that he subsisteth in three that men should accordingly beleeve it so to be So that most certaine it is there is nothing in Christian Religion which so far as it concerneth men to know and beleeve but what fairly and friendly comports with that Reason and Understanding which God hath given unto man and what by a diligent and conscientious use of these noble faculties be may come to know and beleeve at least so far as to salve his great interest of salvation Resbury This Section is of the same stamp with the former the sum of it is this That it is agreeable to Reason to conceive of God that he is and that he can doe above the course of Nature and comprehension of Reason and that when God shall declare that such is his being and his doings such it is likewise agreeable to Reason to beleeve him upon his word But 1 Who denies this but Mr. Goodwin and his associates in error This is the very Doctrine of your adversaries against which you dispute 2 This no way agrees with your former Doctrines 1. That which affirmes that all men have that light of Reason and Understanding which according to Gods dispensation towards all men they may improve to saving Faith and Repentance For saving Faith requires the knowledge of these mysteries which you grant here come onely so far within the reach of Reason as that when God hath revealed them it is rational to beleeve his Word without which Reason could never find them out But the greatest part of the men of the world have not the Scriptures 2. That which affirmes Reason to bee the touchstone of the Scriptures you said but lately of Predestination that whatsoever should be taught about it otherwise then according to the Scriptures and the truth might be clearly disproved by the grounds of common Reason You affirme page 16. That whatsoever doctrine or saying beares hard or fals foule upon any undoubted Principle or ground of Reason within you must of necessity be an errour Now this principle and ground of Reason must be such as in the account of men generally passeth for such a principle or ground Now doubtlesse that three should be essentially one bears hard upon whatsoever grounds of Reason in you or any man since the fall That a Virgin should conceive beares hard likewise upon Reason I am sure it did so in the blessed virgin her selfe Luk. 1. 34. therefore according to your doctrine formerly laid downe these mysteries should be rejected and indeed the whole doctrine of godlinesse which the Apostle tels us is a great mystery and therefore beares hard upon Reason Neither do you salve your former discourse when you say it doth not bear hard upon any principle of Reason that God should be willing to doe as strange a thing as to cause a virgin to conceive For because the thing it selfe beares so hard upon Reason and is so strange therefore according to your former doctrine the word affirming it should be rejected So for the manner of his subsistence three in one because it bears so hard upon Reason as you here grant that it is incomprehensible according to your former doctrine it ought not to be beleeved as you know upon that very account your good friends the Socinians beleeve it not But when you meet with such instances as you dare not deny as these now in hand and yet they cannot be made to close with your doctrine then you wind out of your owne doctrine it selfe yet so as you would seem still to hold it In other instances as about Election and Reprobation Redemption Renovation the perseverance of the Saints you will hold stifly to your grand doctrine of the preheminence of Reason because the doctrine of personall election and reprobation and the dominion of God therein relisheth not with your Reason because the dependance of redemption upon election and the doctrine of the Saints perseverance and of the efficacy and peculiarity of grace relish not with your Reason therefore they must be rejected though the Scriptures be as evident for them as for the Trinity and Incarnation And hee that should argue with you as you doe here that it is not contrary to Reason neither doth it bear hard upon any principle of Reason that God should have a dominion to man incomprehensible would be rejected by you upon this account that such a Doctrine it selfe was not according to Reason Look over your conclusion concerning the unchangeable love of God to the Saints and your questioning of the Scriptures in case they either in terms or by just consequence avouch the same pag. 335. of your book formerly alleadged and tell me if it be not as I say As for the close of your Section 1. That there is nothing in Christian Religion c. but what fairly comports c. To this I oppose this assertion formerly made good That in Christian Religion there are many things above many things crosse to mans corrupt Reason 2. That by a diligent and conscientious use c. I have formerly shewed at large what putid Pelagianisme is here obtruded Goodwin 2 Looke how many precepts exhortations admâ—nitions I stand charged by God to submit unto and practise I am under so many charges and engagements from him likewise to exercise my Reason and understanding 1. To apprehend aright the mind of God in every of these respectively left when he injoyneth me one thing I through mistake should doe another 2. To consider how when and in what cases I am commanded by him to doe this or that 3. And lastly to passe by other particulars To gather together and call up upon my soul all such motives and considerations which I am able whereby to provoke stir up and strengthen my self to the execution and performance of all things accordingly When God commandeth me to strive to enter in at the streight gate to seek his kingdome and the righteousnesse thereof in the first place To labor for the meat which endureth to everlasting life To bee a man in understanding To omit other precepts of like nature without number he commandeth me consequentially and with a direct clear and necessary implication to rise up in the might of my reason understanding in order to the performance of these things nor am I capable of performing the