laboured more than they all yet not I but the grace of God with me The Scripture calls us Workers in Gods Vineyard not Tools and Instruments Call the Labourers and give them their hire And again We shall all receive a reward according to our works Mark 16.20 They went forth and preached every where the Lord working with them 2 Cor. 6.1 We then as workers together with him beseech you that ye receive not the grace of God in vain But in vain they would receive it if they would not cooperate with it If St. Paul whom St. Chrysostome calls the best child of grace thought it no disparagement to the grace of God to say he was a worker together with God towards their Conversion how can it be a disparagement to the grace of God to say we together with God work out our own Salvation It were in vain to persuade us to do what God alone solely and wholly doth in us Now how many persuasions in Scripture do we meet withal To make you a new heart to put off the old man and to put on the new These plainly prove a liberty of Will and that we must work out our own Salvation or else safety it self will not save us How pathetically doth God wish the Conversion of sinners Jer. 13.27 O Jerusalem wilt thou not be made clean when shall it once be Oh that my people would have hearkned unto me for if Israel had walked in my ways c. Who reading such Texts can imagine that God did not expect mens co-operation or that the cause of their ruine was only because Grace was so slenderly offered by God that it proved ineffectual unto them when God says Jer. 51.9 We would have healed Babylon but she is not healed forsake her The judgment inflicted plainly shews God was not wanting to her but she was wanting to her self All Comminations and threatnings were in vain if the Will did not or could not cooperate with the grace of God How could men fall from grace if God leave us not to the mutability of the Will It would be in vain to exhort such to do their first works and threaten them if they did not if they were meerly passive in every act of saving grace nay certainly if God withdraw his grace it is meerly because we walk unworthy of it for to him that hath shall be given and he shall have more abundance but from him that hath not that is hath not well improved it shall be taken away even that which he hath Some men think they can never exalt the grace of God enough unless they debase the powers and light of Nature far more than Adam debased them by his Fall But the Law of Nature written in the heart is no less the Law of God than those Laws of God which are written in the Scripture else Murther and Adultery in the Heathen should not be sins for where there is no Law there is no Transgression Rom. 2.14 The Gentiles which have not the Law and do by nature the things contained in the Law shall judge the Circumcised which transgress the Law which place doth plainly shew unto us that the light of Nature is good as being the Candle of the Lord and that it is not wholly extinguished in us but only darkened by Adams Transgression I come now to answer those Arguments which are brought against this truth And first it is objected that Christ is said to fill all in all Ephes 1. ult My answer is These words are not to be so taken as if we were to do nothing at all towards our own Salvation for they are spoken figuratively where by a Synecdoche the chief part is put for the whole As suppose a man should say Towards a mans maintenance Money is all in all not but that Food and Rayment do maintain him more immediately but because these cannot usually be procured without Money that answering all things the saying is usual and none except against it Their second Argument is taken from verse 19. of that Chapter where the Apostle says We believe according to the working of his mighty power which he wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead Whence they infer the grace of Faith is wrought by an infinite power in the heart but we can contribute nothing to an infinite power therefore nothing towards our own Faith My answer is St. Pauls Faith and so of the Primitive Christians was not wrought only by means as ours now adays is but also by Miracles The Apostles preached and the Lord confirmed the Word with signs following Mark 16.20 which signs and wonders when the people saw they believed according to the working of this mighty power But our Faith now is not so wrought but only by hearing without seeing such an Almighty power to confirm the Doctrine yet are we never the less blessed but rather the more Thomas because thou hast seen thou hast believed blessed are they which have not seen and yet have believed Thirdly it is objected If the Will of man have power to assent or not assent to grace offered man shall do more towards his own Conversion than God for the act is more perfect than a meer power to act I answer although in a Metaphysical sense the act is more perfect than a meer power to act as the end of a thing is preferred before the means tending to it yet in a Moral sense it is not always so neither doth man by accepting do more than God by offering his grace God gives us power to get Wealth say we get it are we more beholden now to our selves therefore than to God for our riches I trow not The case is the same in the point of grace when we have accepted of his goodness we ought to say Not unto us Lord not unto us but to thy name give the praise If a Benefactor give an indigent person a considerable sum of money and he accept it is he more beholden to himself for his acceptance than to the Donor for his kindness If so then their Argument is of force but not else Fourthly it is objected If the Will of man hath power to assent to grace offered and he do assent another hath the same grace offered and he doth not assent all the difference must needs come from mans Will and so he that believes and assents makes himself to differ from him that assents not contrary to that of the Apostle 1 Cor. 4.7 I confess this Argument hath stumbled many learned men as if the Apostle had spoken these words concerning the act of Conversion or of receiving sanctifying grace but it is spoken only concerning receiving Ministerial Offices in the Church See the first verse else Let a man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ and Stewards of the Mysteries of God 〈◊〉 he taxes as St. Ambrose well observes the pride and arrogancy of some Teachers who did insinuate into the people that
this unmerciful opinion are such as these First that of St. Paul in the ninth Chapter to the Romans ver 11. For the Children being not yet born neither having done good or evil that the purpose of God according to Election might stand not of works but of him that calleth it was said unto her the elder shall serve the younger as it is written Jacob have I loved but Esau have J hated You see say they before Jacob or Esau had done good or evil one was loved and the other hated My answer is First these words are not spoken of Jacob or Esaus persons but by a figure the person of either is put to represent and shadow out the condition of their Posterities Secondly the Election there mentioned is meant chiefly concerning things Temporal not things Eternal That that saying The elder shall serve the younger was not meant of their persons but of their Posterities may appear from Gen. 25.23 Two Nations are in thy Womb and two manner of People shall be separated from thy bowels and the one People shall be stronger than the other and the elder shall serve the younger Esau in his own person never served Jacob nay Jacob called Esau his Lord and bowed seven times to the ground before him Gen. 33.3 and was glad by a Present to obtain his peace of him If Esau had done so to Jacob how would they have triumphed in their personal sense Secondly that the love and hatred was meant chiefly concerning things temporal see Mal. 1.2 3. from whence the words were taken Was not Esau Jacobs Brother saith the Lord Yet I loved Jacob and I hated Esau and laid his Mountains and his Heritage waste for the Dragons of the Wilderness So that you plainly see the Apostle means not personal Election to eternal life or hatred to eternal death but of choosing Jacobs Posterity to be a greater Nation than the Off-spring of Esau meerly for his good pleasure which no man can justly speak against for he may do what he pleases with his own good blessings If it be said the temporal blessings on Jacob's Posterity did shadow out spiritual 't is not denied but they might and certainly to be brought so nigh unto God as to be his peculiar People in Covenant was a spiritual blessing and if all that were in Covenant were elected the Argument were of force but seeing they are not all Israel which were of Israel it falls to the ground The truth is the words are here used by the Apostle by way of Allegory and all that he accommodates them to is to shew that God might justly cast off the Jews the People of the elder Covenant of Works and take in the Gentiles those minors and youngers into the Covenant of grace in their rooms as may appear from Rom. 9.30 What shall we say then to these things That the Ghntiles which followed not after righteousness have attained to righteousness even the righteousness which is of faith But Israel which followed after the Law of righteousness hath not attained unto the Law of rightehusness Wherefore Because they sought it not by faith but as it were by the Works of the Law And this he makes the conclusion and is the chief if not the only thing he doth infer from the whole Allegory And what he says to Moses is most equal I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy that is it belongs to me to appoint upon what terms I will shew mercy and justifie men whether by the Law of Faith or by Works For as he that builds an Hospital hath an equitable right to appoint the qualifications of the persons that shall partake in his gift whether poor Children or Widows Aged persons or the like so it belongs to God to appoint upon what terms he will justifie men whether by the Law of Works or by the Law of Faith and seeing neither Works nor Faith can deserve it at his hands Justification is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy God hath reason enough for all his doings but in distributing mercies which have no foundation in merit he need give no account or reason of it but his Will And so likewise for his judgments upon Pharaoh here used as a Type of the obstinate Jews although God had reason enough to raise him up I suppose out of the former Plague to reserve him for a more famous overthrow because the Hebrew hath it I have made thee stand The Septuagint hath it for this cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou hast been preserved till now The Chaldee Paraphrase and Junius so likewise explain it And although God had reason enough to find fault with him for hardening of his heart though now judicially hardened and he could not help it yet the Apostle waves these Reasons and says Nay but O man who art thou that repliest against God As if he had said it is intolerable presumption to quarrel at the ways of God as unequal when they clearly appear to be his You ought rather with reverence to presume there is wisdom and righteousness in them though you through ignorance cannot comprehend them For as his power in forming man ought not to be found fault withal and none ought to say Why hast thou made me thus So neither his Justice which is as infinite as his Power and renders to men only according to their Works A second Scripture is this Hath not the Potter power over the Clay of the same lump to make one vessel to honour another to dishonour Ver. 21. Whence they infer God is the Potter we the Clay the Elect are the Vessels of honour the Reprobates the Vessels of wrath and dishonour and if God make a Vessel of wrath shall the thing framed say to him that framed it Why hast thou made me thus To this I answer We are indeed in Gods Hands as the Clay in the hand of the Potter and when he framed man of the dust of the earth he might have made him the tail and not the head of the Creation he might have moulded us Dogs or Swine or loathsom Serpents and in that sense Vessels of dishonour but to make us Vessels of wrath and in that sense Vessels of dishonour so the good God could not make us no more than he can lie or be cruel or deny himself The nature of God cannot come so nigh the nature of the Devil as to be a Murtherer from the beginning There can be no Vessel of wrath without sin Ephes 5.6 For these things sake having fore-mentioned many sins he saith the wrath of God comes upon the Children of disobedience But we cannot be sinful as we come out of his hands and therefore cannot come out of his hands Vessels of wrath he like the good tree cannot bring forth corrupt fruit Jer. 2.21 God doth avouch he never made a degenerate Plant Yet I had planted thee a noble Vine wholly a right seed The
Christ on condition it might do his brethren good to salvation why should we be such envious and churlish Creatures as to shut up the bowels of Christ against the greatest part of mankind which he was pleased to open to every man in the world that would receive him If this Doctrine did shut them out of Christ or from being partakers of the benefits of his Death and Passion well might their zeal be kindled against it but seeing that it debars no man from their right declares Gods abundant love sets forth Christs diffusive charity to the whole race of Mankind what just cause of so much heat and passion against it Wherefore if any come unto you bringing this Doctrine that Christ died only for one of a City or two of a Tribe of which two he is always one in his own opinion you may be sure pity his ignorance and bid him not Godspeed Pray unto God to open his eyes to see the wonderful things of his Law to take away the spirit of pride from him which makes him put himself amongst the number of them Christ died for and shut out his Brethren I come now to answer those Arguments which they bring to establish this uncomfortable Doctrine that Christ died for all men is a comfortable Doctrine to every man and every man upon hearing and believing of it can infer then certainly he died for me But if he died but for a few there is just cause of doubting for every man whether he be amongst the number of the few and unless God give a particular assurance it cannot certainly be known The Arguments which are brought against this truth are these The first is taken out of John 17.9 I pray for them I pray not for the world whence they argue thus Those that Christ would not pray for surely he would not die for but he prayed only for the Elect therefore he died only for the Elect. I answer This was a peculiar Prayer which Christ made in behalf only of the Apostles as will appear by the Contents of the Chapter read the Contents and you will see it is so Christ prayeth to the Father that he will glorifie him that 's the Contents to the sixth verse to preserve his Apostles in unity and truth that 's the Contents to the twentieth verse and therefore to apply it as it is applied in the Argument is to wrest the Scripture to a sense it never intended These words I pray for them I pray not for the world c. are meant only of the Disciples and not of all the Elect in opposition to the wicked of the world as may appear by the Context verse the sixth I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world ver 12. Those which thou gavest me I have kept and none of them is lost but the son of perdition It is impossible that the former words should signifie all the Elect in opposition to the wicked for all the Elect had not yet heard of Christ or that the latter onght to be so taken seeing he says one of them is lost which it is impossible that any of the Elect should be Verse 18. As thou hast sent me into the world viz. to preach the Gospel so have I sent them into the world This cannot be meant of all the Elect for are all Apostles all Preachers of the Gospel And lastly if at the ninth verse he prayed for all the Elect of the world in opposition to the wicked of the world as is contended for how comes he to say at the twentieth verse Neither pray I for these alone Nay the following words shew apparently that at the ninth verse he meant the Apostles only for he adds But for them also that shall believe through their word A second Scripture is this I am the good shepherd a good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep Mark say they he doth not say he lays down his life for the Goats but for the Sheep I answer That Christ laid down his life for the Elect this place doth prove indeed but it doth not prove that he laid down his life for none but the Elect surely it doth may some say because none else are mentioned I grant none else mentioned in that place but they are in other places of Scripture but if that were a good way of arguing I will prove he died for none but for the wicked Rom. 5.6 In due time Christ died for the ungodly I pray who resemble the ungodly most Sheep or Goats Certainly the Goats why he died for the ungodly therefore for Goats and not for the Sheep according to their way of arguing Thirdly they object the Apostle in Rom. 5.15 says The gift by grace which is by one man Jesus Christ hath abounded unto many he doth not say to all I answer Many in that place signifies all as will appear by the Antithesis or opposition By the offence of one many he says are dead many there is the same with all for it were absurd to say some as coming out of Adams Loyns are not dead and if it signifie all in one place it must do so too in the other or the Antithesis would be defective and you would spoil the Grammar of the place If in any other place many signifie not all but part only as it may where it is said My righteous servant shall justifie many it is not because he did not die for them but because they would not believe in him He came to his own but his own received him not but as many as received him to them he gave power to become the Sons of God Fourthly it is objected Christ fore-knew they would not be saved by him now what wise man will pay a price for a Captive when he knows before-hand the Captive will not accept of it or will come out of slavery but will be bored because he loves his Master To that I answer My thoughts are not your thoughts nor my ways your ways saith the Lord. They may as well question Gods wisdom why he would be at such pains to send his Prophets of old rising up early and sending them to those he knew before-hand would not hear them Ezek. 3.4 God told Ezekiel before-hand they would not hear yet saith God they shall know that a Prophet hath been amongst them So God will one day make the wicked know that he sent his Son to redeem them both from wrath and their vain Conversation and they judged themselves unworthy of everlasting life God in his wisdom saw it good to send light into the world even to the wicked of the world although he foresaw they would love darkness more than light because their deeds were evil And so have I done with their Arguments grounded meerly upon mistakes To conclude By the Parable of the King making a great Supper and inviting Guests that would not come it appears God provides all things requisite to
reward and the like may be intituled to our Prayers Thirdly He assisting us with inward motions carrying forth our affections with zeal and fervency further than naturally they would tend may in this sense be stiled the Author of our Prayers As wicked men giving place to the Devil Satan carries forth their malice into murder and raises storms of passions in their Souls even as the Wind raises the Waves of the Sea even so on the contrary a man applying his heart to seek the Lord and call upon his Name the Holy Ghost aids him by his grace to make powerful Supplications with sighs and groans which cannot be uttered Now every adopted child of God the Apostle witnesses Gal. 4.6 hath these aids and assistances of the Holy Ghost in their Prayers stirring up their hearts to cry Abba Father thus and thus only they that are the Sons of God pray by the Spirit of God Now seeing the Spirit of Prayer and Supplication consists chiefly in a fervent application of the mind to the thing that is desired and to Almighty God of whom it is desired It necessarily follows that words that are known and fitted to mens understandings are soonest received into their hearts and aptest to carry along with them judicious and fervent affections But it is objected That a set Form of Prayer makes an ignorant Ministry a School-boy may read a Prayer out of a Book To that I answer experience proves it hath not done so for the gravest and learnedest Scholars are for it There are other Offices for the Minister which require his diligence and his study First his diligence to Catechize the Children visit the Sick Secondly His study to divice the Word of truth aright comfort the weak stop the mouths of gainsayers so that he hath matter enough to exercise his parts about although he strive not to attain to that extempore way of uttering any thing before God which wise Solomon never admired And as for what you say concerning the School-boy the same objection might have been brought against Gods Priests in the Old Law that a Burcher might have kill'd a Lamb or a Sheep for Sacrifice as well as they But was that any disparagement to the Priest No more is this to Gods Minister that another can read Prayers as well as he seeing it is his Office and not theirs to do it But it is objected A set Form is superfluous for Nature will teach any man to shew his grief and a Lazer need not read out of a Book pray heal my Arm or my Log no more needs a man that is sensible of the plague of his own heart a set Form of Prayer in a Book To that my answer is twofold First Even poor lazer people to move others to pity and compassion will study pathetical Expressions and use humble deportment and great importunity and yet find all little enough to move compassion Will they do this for their Bodies and shall not we be more earnest for our Souls Secondly There is a vast difference betwixt a Private Prayer and a Publick Prayer a Private Prayer points to the sore of a mans own heart in this or that particular whereof perhaps all circumstances considered not one of many is guilty but a Publick Prayer ought to be so composed that it may concern all the Congregation and all the People may say Amen to it Now for a man to pray out of the sense of his own wants only may be a good Prayer for his private devotion but it cannot be so proper or so profitable for the Publick as a set Form wherein the Composers consider the usual wants of all Mankind If a man were to prefer a Petition to his Prince would he speak extempore Why what thou wouldst not offer to him thou oughtest not to offer to God Mal. 1.8 the reason is full of moral equity God is a greater King than he If you would be ashamed or afraid to bring indigested stuff to the one much more should you be so affected to bring abortive Conceptions before the other We may as well pray a set Prayer by the Spirit as sing a set Psalm by the Spirit Now even their own practice bearing witness these men can sing a set Psalm by the Spirit I mean after a gracious manner so that nothing but inadvertency to their own custom makes them grant the one and deny the other Indeed they do well in singing David's Psalms and they follow the example of Hezekiah therein who commanded to sing praises with the words of David and Asaph I could wish for the future that their Prayers were of the same nature with their Praises for these few Reasons with which I will conclude this discourse First A man may as well know before-hand with what words to pray as to what sense Secondly They that pray not the same words do use mostly to pray for the same things in other words As that God would forgive their sins avert his judgments strengthen their weak graces weaken their strong corruptions and the like Thirdly Because these are most for the edification of the People who by often hearing of the same Prayer can commit it to memory and used to the same Liturgy can joyn and answer in many pathetical Responsals Now all things in Publick ought to be done to Edification Fourthly An extempore Prayer may likewise hinder the devotion of the Minister as well as of the People for his understanding may be so taken up in thinking what to say next that he may be very formal as to his heart and many times will be forced to be so for fear he should be out Fifthly Our experience hath shewed us that their Method hath been confused their Tautologies many their Traulisms absurd their Sense none of the best their Passions vented and the Dreadful Name of God so lightly so frequently and so unnecessarily used in them that many understanding men because of them have been ready to abhor the Sacrifice of the Lord and could seldom or never say Amen to them Whereas in a set Form we are sure before-hand there is nothing put up in Petition but what is fit for Man to ask or God to give and therefore we can heartily without any hesitancy say Amen to it FINIS