gifts of prayer does but offer a stinted form which is said commonly as to the hearers particular state and the stinting of the Object does not yet stint the Spirit however in his operation on the affections Praying alwaies with all manner of prayer and supplications in the Spirit Praying with the Spirit or by it in the last place is that we find in the dayes of the Apostles when they had extraordinary administrations of the Spirit in gifts that were miraculous insomuch that they spake with tongues and so preached and prayed Those that spake I apprehend understood not themselves what they delivered but every one in whose tongue they spake were edified and therefore we read of some that did interpret Those were such it is like as had skill in more tongues than their own or else in case there were none such the fame miraculous power might enable some for the interpretation as others to speak Thus praying with the Spirit is opposed to praying with the understanding and the Apostle prefers praying with the understanding before it There is no person had cause therefore to brag of this if he had it and there is none of any sect among us that pretend to it And so I think having said what I intended otherwise that neither the Gentleman nor I need to be put to any more words about it I will pray with the Spirit and I will pray with the understanding also CHAP. IV. Of the closer judgement of the Author in his sixth Chapter which is Arminian and of Election Free-will and Grace upon account of his opinion Of the salvability of Heathen and other incidental matters I Descend to his sixth Chapter which is to shew us who those are to whom the Spirit is promised and given These persons are Believers who yet are not holy persous This is his Notion They cannot be holy till they have the Spirit to sanctifie them and yet they must believe and pray because that is the condition upon which the Spirit is given The holy Spirit consequently and his special grace is necessary to Good works or sanctification but Believing is antecedent to it or must be in a mans power before it I must confess I am made sensible of the sagacity of this Author upon my reading this Chapter which I did not heed so much before and I perceive which way his mind is hankering It was this very light which carried St. Augustine so much in his first writings The doctrine of Pelagius at the first broaching consisted mainly in this point that God did give his grace according to mens merits This doctrine seemed to the Father too arrogant for man and derogatory to God That the grace of God and eternal life is given to some and not to others is manifest That the reason must be in regard of something that one man does and not another seemed to him undeniable That good works should be it appears against the Scripture not by works lest any man should boast Besides if a man should be allowed to be able to do any good works to merit Gods grace by the strength of nature what need were there of prayer for aid from God or the help of his Spirit Man should have need of industry here not prayer If not works then what must it be but that which is so often contradistinguished to works and that is Faith For the Scripture that saies not of Works but of Grace does say likewise It is of faith that it may be of Grace Here then is that which must be in mans power That a man could not do good works without grace St. Austine always asserted for this was his meaning when he saies that good works do not preceed but follow justification understanding by justifying the making a man just by inherent grace as the Schools do after him But that a man can believe if he will by the use of his natural faculties only is what he did maintain readily thinking no body could deny it According to this clear apprehension prehension as he then took it up he did proceed to his doctrine of Election which being defined by the Ancients before his time always ex praescientia he now determines to be of this Faith foreseen It must not be ex operibus praevisis because that will oppose grace but ex praevifa fide and that will salve all objections We are to conceive of other things to follow agreeably as Arminius that acute and I think pious Divine hath since taken up the notion when Augustine himself retracted it and upon his own stock improved it It is me now I must say something notable to see the seeds of the same light springing up in this Gentleman as formerly actuared two such searching Divines as Austin and Arminius were and I cannot therefore without guilt of disingenuity pass over any thing which he hath offered for the farther cultivation of it For doing this I observe he enters first upon an adventure to make some change of our terms in Divinity The state of nature and a state of Grace are terms that signifie Regeneration and Unregeneration with all men even in our practical Books and he will have us by a state of Nature to understand the state of a Heathen and by a state of Grace the state of every one under the Gospel The Gospel now bringing a man into this state a state of Grace he distinguishes of this Grace the Gospel brings And it is either that which goes before our Faith or follows it That which goes before he accounts it all Common Grace that which is given after it special Grace Ordinarily by the way that grace which is given to the Reprobate as well as to the Elect we call Common Grace and that which is peculiar to the Elect we call special grace whether before or after Faith But he offers his reason The Grace which the Gospel brings is either says he that which is given upon condition or that which is given upon none That which is conditional must be given only to some because it is some only perform that condition and that which is given but to some is special Grace That which is given upon no condition must be therefore or rather may be appropriated to all and so is Common Grace Thus he Theologizes when we ordinarily do not account it common grace because every one has it but because the Reprobate as well as the Elect have it and we do not call it special Grace only because some have it but because the Elect only have it so that that Grace which is given but to some if it be given to any Reprobate as well as the Elect we call not special but common Grace Well but these terms being premised that Grace now which he calls special the grace of the Gospel is promised on the condition of Faith It is Faith is the first thing upon which all depends If this be not in the power of every one the
apt Exposition of some Texts as I think he deserves if I had examined them well enough to do it Again I have not declared my scope in the discourse I have about the Natural and Spiritual man in the beginning of the Book If one imagine my scope to be only to confute this Author he will make little of me and less of himself My scope is not to invalidate the Interpretation he brings which I acknowledge fair nor to advance the other which I impute to the Friendly Debater because I took my first hint from him but in the cultivation of it any man may see in whose mind it is harbored Nor do I confirm the Doctors against this Authors opposition to prefer it before either But I do impartially endeavour the elucidation of the place as a searcher after Truth to this end that he who hath the best faculty of discerning may have all the light I have to his own to make judgement This is not the manner ordinarily of others And this I do also that by such indifferency of mine I may put some discountenance upon the over-peremptoriness of this worthy Young man who when he sees his own Notion to be reasonable does forget that the Doctors or mine may be reasonable also Another thing is this Vnto the Objection against the salvability of Heathen because Salvation is by Christ and they have no Faith in Christ and no knowledge of him I have omitted something at large that I must give you intimation of here in a little Salvation is by Christ I have determined I suppose well in that he hath procured a Law of Grace by which we are governed and shall be judged and so long as the Heathen or all the world are under that government of grace as well as we Salvation must come to them upon the same account of Christ as it does to us if any of them perform the Condition And what if the Heathen knows not this that it is Christ that hath procured this remedying Law for us and them yet is that nothing as to the truth of the thing for so it is and those that live well have the benefit of it If a ransom be gathered for the Slave at Algiers he is freed from his slavery no less for that because he knowes not the Friends that did it The Disciples were partakers of Redemption by Christ when they knew nothing of his Sacrifice till after his death and resurrection And what did the Jews know if the Disciples knew no more For Faith then As there is a threefold Administration of the Covenant of grace according to the state of the Heathen the Jew and the Christian according to what I have said So is there a threefold Faith in regard to these three Administrations of it Faith is diversified according to its Objects or the Revelations which man has from God I have not room here for Explanation Though a Heathen hath not that Faith as is required of the Christian under the third promulgation of the Covenant or was of the Jew under the second yet hath he such a faith as belongs to the first and so long as that faith he has does work by love or by sincere obedience to God it will justifie him as ours will And this is the meaning of that Text But now is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith The righteousness of God is the righteousness of this Covenant which hath been ever a foot as in my Paper of the Covenants I shew and from faith to faith is from the faith which was sufficient in the first and second to that which is now required in the third and last Promulgution of it I have not said this full enough but it is necessary to be intimated And in the the room that is left I must give notice that I let these sheets be a sticht Book that my Papers of the Middle Way may be bound up with them because they are of the same Nature There was four of these Papers about five sheets a piece Of Election and Redemption Of Justification Of the Covenant Law and Gospel and Of Perfection They are compleat none of them without one another for what I found wanting in one Paper I took liberty to supply in the next though of another Subject My work is to dig the Metal the Refiner is another Trade The Point of Justification that got out first from me is not perfectly stated till the Reader hath read both the six and seven first leaves of the Covenants and the beginning of Perfection These 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 together I entituled Mediocria and from 〈…〉 in these present Sheets I do once or twice call those who are for the Middle way in these Points Mediocrians There are several places in them very needful for him to see that reads these present Disquisitions but six or seven first leaves of the Paper of the Covenants Law and Gospel before I come to treat those Subjects themselves I suppose to be most necessary though the last Point I think most maturely stated Those twenty sheets and these fourteen together will make a sufficient bound Book J. H. ERRATA Page 58. line 31. for discernings read deservings p. 92. l. ult for dy r. body
is our head but he governs us by his Spirit which is infused though I think no habit be and when we are lead by this Spirit as there is Rule there is Influence and this Union must be Real and Mystical and not that which is Political only Suppose a man whâ—se head was high as the Heavens yet so long as the same soul animates all the members the feet as in the head it is one man Christ our head is in Heaven and we on earth yet as the same Spirit is in us which is in him the head and members make one dy nay in the words of the Scripture one Christ O Agrippa believest thou the Prophets O thou Author of this Book against Dr. Owen Believest thou these mysteries of the Christian Religion I know that thou believest For the later sort There is one place in his Book where we have two of his pernicious errors together The Doctor belike hath said that though a man should reform his life and be changed from vice to vertue and that by hearing the word preached This is the most I count he saies and which may be exemplified in Herod who heard John and did many things yet if there be not an habitual righteousness infufed it signifies nothing to regeneration To this purpose is it only and altogether the Doctor speaks Hereupon this Gentleman breaks out and challenges him before his own party as he speaks and before the world for contradicting the Scripture He that doeth Righteousness is born of God and then charges him with Pelagianism He professes he is in earnest and that this is rank Pelagianism that the Doctor allows so much to be done without saving grace I have the more reason to be moved at this because a certain person of quality and of a ready judgement having this Author by him turned me to this place as if the Doctor was much to be blamed when I must needs say that this Gentleman hath no where exposed himself so much in his Book as here where he endeavours to expose the Doctor There is no man that reads practical Divines that lay down characters of the truly godly man the sound Believer and how far the Hypocrite may go but does know they speak commonly as the Doctor does and there are few one would think so inconsiderate or raw but should also know here how to distinguish so easily as between the matter of what is done and the manner of the performance Good works may be considered quoad operis substamtiam or quoad modum quo ordinaniur id vuam aevernam There is no good act no not the least that can be done is performed in that manner as it ought or as it is required to be accepted in order to salvation but a man must be born of God according to his text and have the assistance of the Spirit But for the matter of the work or of our duty this Author must consider better that the Regenerate and Unrepenerate are alike as to that One can hear and pray and give alms and abstain from evil as well as the Other and many times the veryest Hippocrite pretends most Nay what saies this Gentleman to Socrates Aristides Epimomdas Plato Plutark Cato What saies he to Almanzor that Mahomet in Einperor whose life is set out by Sir Walter Rayleigh in a little Book for such singular vertues especially as to his goodness and righteousness that I find him not paralleld by any Christian Will this Author censure Sir Walter for a Pelagian for such a narration or will he make me one if I believe it Or will he come over here and when he hath placed such in a state of Nature and so out of a state of Grace will he allow an Heathen or Mahometan to be a regeherate person Hath the Gentleman read Ruiz or one such a kind of Schoolman as he all over Let him see when they have denied against pelagius all ability in man to do any thing even but to give an occasion which is active and not passive only to infuse in us their justifying grace whether they are also ignorant of some such distinction It is no Pelagianism in the Schools to say a man can do many things civily morally good through the power of nature education custome for company sake for glory but it is so to say he can do any thing without preventing grace in order to his justification There is no need therefore of such vehemence nor of any such expressions he uses otherwhere I will desire the Doctor to consider whether the Father of lies be not the representative of such shameful Writers as he is the example of These kind of words are not well There is a great deal of acrimony I see with a little truth mixt methinks like the fire and hail that ran together in one of the Egyptian Plagues in the Books of many late rising adversaries to this learned pious and reverend person It were happy if the opprobrious words of the prejudicate would make thewise mend their faults It were well also if such an inconsiderate confident piece of elation of mind as here indeed is be but repressed with the shame and blushes of another Let the righteous smite me it shall be a kindness and let him reprove me it shall be an oyle and not break my head CHAP. VII Of Dr. Owen's Book of Justification and of the reconciliation of St. Paul and St. James and the Imputation of Christ's righteousness upon his account HAving said this for the Doctor I have a little now also to say to him I was reading his later Book of Justification when this Author came to my hands and I had thought of making some remarks upon it I am not satisfied with what he hath offered for the reconciliation of St. James and Paul on that subject This is the reason I suppose that is the most solid why so many do choose here of late to go with the mediocrian or steer the middle way in that point I perceive that Dr. Tully with our first Reformed Divines and this excellent Doctor are for distinguishing of Faith and Justification but will not let us by no means distinguish of Works for the reconciliation of the Apostles I do wonder at this The Apostle James and the Apostle Paul do both agree that we are justified by Faith The one saies we conclude that a man is justified by Faith and the other saies also it is by Faith Their seeming difference is only about works when one saies by Faith without Works and the other by Faith and Works also And how then comes it to pass that we must not distinguish of Works but of Justification and Faith to compose the difficulty I will offer the Doctor therefore here one Argument under his favour which shall be but one and that not as others have so far as I know for then it were like he had already weighed it It is this That Justification which St. Paul
speaks of is that Justification which we have in that Text of Genesis where it is said And Abraham believed and it was accounted to him for Righteousness Or That Juslification Paul speaks of is that Imputation of Faith for righteousness which is spoken of in that Text in Genesis That Justification which St. James speaks of is that Justification which we have in that Text in Genesis Or is that Imputation of Faith for Righteousness as is spoken of in that Text in Genesis Therefore St. Pauls justification and St. James justification are the same Justification Again That Faith which St. Paul speaks of is the Faith that is spoken of in that Text in Genesis or the same Faith as was imputed to Abraham for righteousness in that place That Faith which St. James speaks of is the same Faith which is spoken of in that Text in Genesis Or the same Faith that was imputed to Abraham for righteousness in that place Therefore the faith that St. Paul speaks of and the faith which St. James speaks of is the same faith also And when the Faith is the same and the Justification the same we must distinguish of Works then out of question to reconcile these Scriptures Of Works then let us distinguish and the distinction is this There are Works which are inconsistent with Grace and Pardon so that if we had them we should have no need of Christ's righteousness or sacrifice but the doing of them would make the reward to be of debt or make life to be due out of district justice He that doeth them shall live in them That is Works which the Law requires unto Justification And these are the Works St. Paul speaks of and the reasons which he alleadges why we are not justified by these Works is because no man hath them This is that which he apparently urges for he ascends in his dispute from the Law of Moses to the Law of Nature which concerns both Jew and Gentile in his three first Chapters to the Romans so that if any man be justified it must be without them Therefore we conclude saies he that by faith without them that is without having them a man is justified There are then Works also which are consistent with Pardon and Mercy though we have them so that when we have done these we do need the righteousness and satisfaction of our Redeemer to cover their imperfection and for acceptation of our persons no less than if we had Faith alone without any and these are Works of sincerity required of us in the Gospel It is no wayes derogatory I say to Gods Grace and Christs Merits for a man to be justified by these works any more than to be justified by Faith alone in regard to Debt or Merit upon which account St. Paul excludes works in his Disputation It is of these Works I must say as the Apostle saies it is of Faith that it may be of Grace And these are the Works St. James speaks of when he saies By Faith and Works also that is all one as by a Faith working by Love in Pauls words otherwhere And the being justified by Faith working by Love or by a Faith productive of Works or by these Works and Faith also which being such Works as fall short of the Law and do need grace and forgiveness for their acceptation with God is all one with St Pauls by Faith without works of the Law or without such as the Law requires unto justification Thus are Paul and James reconciled I will advance hence then my former argument That justification by Faith without works which St. Paul speaks of is that Justification or that Imputation of Abrahams Faith for righteousness which is spoken of in that Text in Genesis That justification by Works and Faith also which St. James speaks of is that Justification or that Imputation of Abrahams faith for righteousness which is spoken of in that Text in Genesis Therefore St. Pauls justification by faith without works and St. James justification by faith and works also or by works and not by faith only is the same in the two Apostles The medium upon which all three Syllogisms depend is the Apostles citing the same Text both of them for that which either of them assert while one saies by faith without works and the other by works and not by faith only The major and minor therefore in all three are undeniable and in the conclusion of the last I am sure the Doctor and I shall agree together I have another thing to offer to the thoughts of the Dr. that whereas he tells us of a Commutation between Christ and us in his taking upon him our sins and our partaking of his righteousness I do apprehend this expression and doctrine to be Christian holy and good according to the sense of that Text He was made sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of God in him and the like places But only there is a difference to be put between the use of the notion against the Socinians in the point of Satisfaction and the use of it against the Mediocreans in the point of Justification I do believe such a Commutation as the Dr. speaks of is necessary to that great work which Christ undertook for Mankind as it concerns the whole world in the procuring Reconciliation and Life for all upon the terms of the Redeemer for if he had not taken on him our sins to suffer in our behalf which is his being made sin for us and fulfilled the whole Law also for us that God might without dishonour to him as Rector dispense with it so as to impute to us our faith and imperfect obedience for righteousness which is our being made the righteousness of God in him there would have been no satisfaction offered and consequently no Reconciliation or Redemption But as for such a Commutation in the point of Justification which concerns particular Believers I am yet to learn what to make of it from this Reverend person To enquire then to the bottom the foundation of this Commutation is laid I see by him in the Mystical Union between Christ and his Members which must pertain therefore only to such and that as a fruit or effect of the Spirit of Christ given to them if it be so to that end When this indeed is a thing that does not belong at all to the operation of the Third person of the Trinity but to the work of the Son and the arbitrary ordination of the Father Whatsoever influence Christ hath upon the soul as our Head by the operation of the Holy Ghost or whatsoever is an effect of the Spirit when once given for uniting us to him it must have this Union for its ground or foundation But whatsoever arises to us from Christ another way and is no effect of the Spirit it may not be ascribed without contradiction to that spring from whence it comes not The Dr. judges right that such a
promised in Luke in regard to all its effects and operations if that which the Author saies in two Chapters about it be valid and so the difficulty returns How shall a man have the Spirit for this operation or effect before faith and yet faith be the condition of the Spirit and its operations If he say that the grace which he calls common or the Spirit as not promised does work in a man truly one sort of faith or so much of a saving faith as goes to the condition of the promise and that another sort of faith then or so much more as is lacking to our faith does flow as the effect only thereof from the promise after when we perform this condition he will be put very hard to it in such a work as was that of Pauls conversion and be forced to more curiosity than enough in so critical a determination In the fifth place I have one argument to advance against this Doctrine of his which is known Arminian I will urge but one because it is the common cause and he may find out as many more as he will in others It is this If there be that grace which he calls common vouchsafed to all under the Gospel without any difference of election so that there is the same and no other prepared for him that believes and for him that believes not which common grace then is left to the liberty of the will of every individual person to co-operate with it or not and as a man does so or does not he brings himself into a state of Salvation or remains in a state of wrath this is the opinion then must Man himself or then must the Will of every man for himself make the difference between him and another But this according to the judgement of most after Austin is flat against the Scripture Who hath made thee to daffer from another and what is there O man that thou hast not received I must add by way of strength to the Argument that upon this Hypothesis it follows that that which is the less only or least conducing to mans Salvation is attributed to God and that which is the greater and most conducive thereunto is ascribed to man himself It is more to believe and repent than it is to have power to believe and repent The promise of Life and Salvation is not made to him that is enabled to believe but to him that does believe and obey the Gospel Now by the Arminian doctrine there is this grace carefully provided which shall enable every man to believe and repent so that the fault shall not lye on God if they do not but on a mans own will but the will or willing it self must arise from that liberty which they are as careful to reserve unto man That which is the lesser thing then I say the ability through divine Help Assistance or Grace which is sufficient for the impowring every one to believe and be saved is ascribed to God and acknowledged from him but that which is the greater which is the chief that which does the work the act it self of willing of believing and performing the terms of the Gospel is made the effect of mans own free-will And yet farther to confirm the same argument The power to do is one thing and the will and doing another The grace one thing and the co-operating with it another If we have power now or assistance only from God and the will be of our selves then is there something even this willing it self this believing it self this will to believe or co-operating with this common grace that is the greatest thing which we have not received but is of our selves or from our own strength I do not doubt but I may press this yet more closely if this Author should give the occasion and I must advise him heartily to be very considerate what he answers to this argument because I have pickt it out as that which I take to be the most momentous of any which are ordinarily urged by the Orthodox in this matter I will close it up with that Text Work out your salvation with fear and trembling saies the Apostle This implies that a man hath power or that if he will work he can It is in vain to exhort any to do that which is not in their power That which is less than the power to do if we will is I count in man but that which is the greater the willing and doing is aliunde of God as it appears in the words following For it is God that worketh in us to will and to do of his good pleasure So contrary are my apprehensions here to this Gentlemans A man must have power he thinks by all means from God to this end he brings in his common grace but the will must be of himself I think now quite otherwise that power is of nature for that is the less and to reduce that power unto act to will and to do that is of grace for that is the greater or that which is most It is not of him that willeth and runneth to wit that he wills and and runs saies the Father but of God that sheweth mercy In the sixth place then I have a mind to tell him some little of what I think of this grace he calls common The term Grace we must know which is all one with Favour does import a respect shewn to some which is not to others and does horein differ from Justice which respects no person above another but does distribute that which is due to every one without partiality It is otherwise in Grace for there are two things quite contrary must go to the making any thing a matter of Favour it must be a thing not due or of right for then there is place to exercise Justice but not Grace and it must be given out of Choice it must be vouchsafed to one and not another when it is due to neither When this Author then and the Schools do speak of a Grace that is Common and Universal they seem to be teachers of something wherein they understand not what they speak or whereof they affirm There is the grace of the Gospel or that Grace which the Gospel publishes which brings Salvation to all men the Objective grace of it consisting in that faithful saying worthy of all acceptation that Christ died for sinners or that those that believe and repent shall be saved or that God is Good and those who turn to him though they have sinned shall find merey which is the substance of the whole two Testaments and that indeed is Universal and belongs alike to all the world There is no man or woman or no people but they are under the Law of Grace purchased by Christ for life and salvation I have said and say that the Gospel of this Grace or the discovery of it is so far universal also as there are none but by tradition from their Parents or