Skip to main content

Full text of "Of saving faith: that it is not only gradually, but specifically distinct from all common faith. The agreement of Richard Baxter with that very learned consenting adversary, that hath maintained my assertion by a pretended confutation in the end of Sarjeant Shephards book of Sincerity and hypocrisie. With the reasons of my dissent in some passages that came in on the by. Together with his addition to the seventh impression of The Saints everlasting rest .."

See other formats 


^» 


■  <  V- 


\  V 


TM  ■;/',■;■'.!■/■.' 


'/■'V. 


-M^ 


*■ 


V  / 


t 


'  \ 


OF 


Saving  Faith: 


That -it  \s  not  only  gradually^ 

kft^ecifically  diftincfl  from  all 
Comnion   F  a  i  t  h. 

The  Agreement  of  ^charj  Baxter  with 

m  that  very  Learned  confentingAdver^ 
iflyjt,  that  hath  maintained  my  A ffertion  by  a 
pietctkled  Confutation  in  the  end  of  Serjeant 
fhep^arels^ook  of  Sincerity  ztid  Byjjocrifie, 

With^thfi^  JReafons  of  my  Diffent  in 
fomc  paffages  that  came  in  on  the  by. 

T<>gether  with  his  Addition  to  thcfeventh  Im- 
tteffiot^of  %\\^$MintsBverUjling  REST, 

\ : — -— -^ — — — - — • 

:JDr,  PrtftcnCcUtnScepttr ,  pag.  210.  [  OhjiH.  U  feenH  then  that 
,  the  Knowledge  of  a  carnal  man  and  a  regenerate  man  differ  but 
V  in  Degrees,  notinKind.  ]  Anf^.  The  want  of  Degrees  here 
^    akers  the  kind  $  as  in  Numbers  the  Addition  of  a  Degree  alters 

ibc  Species. 
R««d  this  point  pradically  improved  in  Mr.  Pinl^s  excellent  Sermons 
>'  "  rcirtLtvetcChrift,  on  Luke  i4,^6,pag.i.Sindpsg.$i.(^c. 

/  6*  A^^jpSiV,  Printed  by  iJ.  W^.for  Ntvil Simmons^  Bookfeller  \n     / 
Temfmirffter.&nd  are  to  be  fold  by  fohn  Star  key  at  the  Jitter      J 
at  the  Weft  end  of  P^w/.f  Church.         1658. 


i*      «M^  *<&^ 


t^ 


i' 


To  the  Worthy   and  much  Honoured 
a5VfV.  W^  S^  Serjeant  at  Larp^  . 


S  I    R, 

pU  have  very  much  honoured  me  m  the 
'  choice  of  an  Opponent  .•  but  I  perceive 
by  his  Conclufion  that  he  hath  other 
bufinefsjand  I  am  not  altogether  with- 
out. And  therefore  I  intreat  you  the 
•next  time  to  choofc  me  an  Adverfary 
that  differs  from  mc,  or  to  give  me  leave  to  live  at 
Peace.  Or  if  he  differ  not,  let  him  rather  reprehend 
me  for  agreeing  with  him  ,  than  pretend  a  difference 
where  there  is  none.  If  your  learned  Friend  do  think 
it  as  well  worth  his  labor  to  prove  us  difagreed,  as  I 
thought  it  worth  mine  to  prove  us  of  a  mind  >  if  I  live 
I  (hall  be  willing  to  read  what  he  rcjoyns^  but  if 
it  come  not  of  a  greater  Errand  ,  I'lc  promife  you 
no  more.  A  s  to  your  own  pious  Labors,  they  are  fo 
honeft  andfavoryto  me,  that  they  tempted  me  to 
differ  from  you  in  one  thing,  arfd  tothink  thatQ  an 
Hypocrite  cannot  write  or  preach  as  well  as  a  good 
Chriflian  can]there  being  an  unexprefsible  Spiritua- 
litVfthat  I  favcurin  fome  men  more  thenothers  ;  but 

A  2  rie 


T^he  Epi/lleVedicatory. 

rie  not  ftand  to  this.  You  give  at  leaft  as  much  to  the 
Hypocrite  I  think  as  ever  I  did ;  and  you  confirm  ic 
by  much  Scripture-evidence.  But  I  muft  confcfs  I 
th'nknot  that  all  your  Notesof  (incerity  areexador 
wil»  hold  the  Tryal  •,  but  yec  they  be  nfefull  in  many 
Cafes.  You  affirm  that  Hypocrites  have  common 
Giace,  even  to  the  height  expreflcd  by  you;  but 
you  fay,  It  is  not  true  Grace  .Either  its  Grace  or  no 
Grace :  if  none,  call  it  not  common  Grace,(or  com- 
mon Faith,  Defire,  HopCj  Love  Joy*  if  it  be  none. ) 
But  if  it  be  Grace,  and  not  true  Grace,  then  Ens  cJ* 
P^eruw  non  convert untttr*  I  maintain  that  it'is  not  true 
faving  Grace ,  but  yet  true  common  Grace :  You 
maintain  in  the  general  that  it  is  not  true  Grace,  and 
yet  its  truly  common  Grace :  There  being  then  no 
Controverfie  that  I  fee  to  be  difputed  between  you 
and  me,  but  whether£»x  eJ*  Ferftm  convertuntur  ^  I 
crave  pardon  for  my  further  filence,  refolving  rather 
to  give  you  the  beft(  though  not  to  aJTcnt)  than  to 
difputeit :       I  remain 

A  greatEfteemer  of  your  Piety 
and  many  .Labors, 

^^fejjs"^''  Richard  Baxter. 


Rqider,  Ifuppofe  thtt  to  have  tht  Book  4l  hanJUfhich  I  hen 
deal  with  :  and  therefore  have  recited  hut  the  fttm  anifrincifal 
Fajfages^andnot  every  ^ord ;  which  thoH  maiji  read  in  the  Book 
itfilf. 


The 


■J 


1 


The  Contents. 


lECT.  I.     ThtOccafionefthU  Controvirftt.An 
Apolegitfer  this  friesMy  conftntipg  Adverfarj^ 
to  them  that  are  lik^e  to  he  ojendeA  mth  a  pretend- 
ed difference  where  there  is  none.  ">'  •  ^ 
ScA.    2.     Our  Agreement:  The  fertinencfof 
wylropertinencies.    Whether  it  Vfamot  fomt 
falfe  Tranfcript  of  mj  wordt^  that  the  learned  Opponent  ^ae 
put  to  confute  ?  The  true  Reafen  of  my  words  in  the  Saints 
Reft  Vphichhe  Writes  again f,  nith  the  mexning  of  them.    Of 
mj  Improprieties  and  incongruities.    The  point  feigned  to  h 
mine ,  ^hich  I  exprtfly  wrote  againfl  ,  and  frequently,     fol .  9 
St6t.    3.    whether  A^lt  of  common  <j  race  e^e  Evangelically 
good  ?  t/^ifout  thefiating  of  the  ^effion.     Whether  becaufe 
common  andfpecial  Qracefpecificallji  differ  in  Moralitj/Jit  fol- 
lo^t  that  they  cannot  congruoujly  he  f aid  to  dtffer  only  gradte- 
ally  in  any  othtr  confederation  ?  Nothing  lo^er  than  a  predo- 
minant  degree  in  the  matter  it  capable  of  the  moral  form  of 
faving  Faith^Love^  &c.in  fpccic.                                 fol  1 5 
Scd .  4.  Whether  Grace  be  at  properly  and  primarily  in  the  AB  as 
in  the  tiabit  ?and  which  goes  firfi ,  which  iafirji  to  be  enquired 
after  ?  In  what  principles  of  habitual  Grace  it  is  that  f pedal 
•    and  common  Grace  or  Faith  be  only  acquired  by  natural  abilt^ 
ties  ^tth  good  Education  and  Indufhj^  or  to  be  infufed  or 
"brought  by  the  Spirit  as  fpecial  Grace  is}                     fol .  2  o 
S«d.  5.     Whether  common  Faith  be  Life  ?  Why  not  fo  called  ? 
whether  Every  Degree  of  accidental  forms  denominate  the 
SubjeB  ?  A  further  Explication  of  my  meaning  in  this  (^on- 
troverfie.                                                                  fol.  31 
ScA.  6,    whither  the  leafl  fpecial  Grace  be  not  flronger  than  the 
grtateft  common  (jrace  ?  Whether  the  Temporaries  Ajfentbt 
proportionable  to  the  hltdiums  that  produce  it  ?  Whether  the 
.    fhjfical  forms  can  be  named  that  fptcifit  eemtHtn  and  fpecial 

A  i  graces? 


The  Contents; 

Grace  ?  Intuitien  of  (pici/il  Faith  rwe  of  thi  Mffertnotl 
Common  Gract  pre f  are* h  and  difpoftth  for  fpecial  Graced 
Argumeyitsfor  the  contrary  anf^erej.  Calvinsj  Qualecunq; 
femen  Hdei  perdunc*  ]]  fVhtthtr  thofe  that  have  common 
(jrace.or  tkofe  that  have  it  not^are  more  ordinarily  converted^ 
what  I  mean  hj  common  grace.  The  Concil.  Araufic.  againfi 
them  t  hit  make  common  Grace  to  he  meerly  acquired  by  our 
[elves  \  hut  not  againji  any  thing  that  I  fay.  Ho^far  common 
grace  thus  dijpofeth  to  (pecial  ?  Thti  Di^ofit ion  further  pre 
ved.  The  lofmg  of  common  grace  proves  not  the  ffecificl^ 
d'fferenci,  ^01,35 

Seft.  7.  fFhsther  it  may  he  a  faving  Faith  that  takes  the  Scripm 
tare  to  he  Gods  TVerd<,  hut  upon  prohahle  motives  or  mediums  ? 
ylnd  whether  the  mediums  here  prove  the  fpecifick  difference  ? 
iVhether  the  immediate  Revelation  of  the  holy  Qhofihe  a  Prf 
m'tfeyor  UU/.edium,  fpecifyi»g  faving  Faith  ?  And^hether all 
other  he  fallible  and  humane}  Ten  Reafons  to  prove  that  fuch  a 
Revelation  as  is  in  quejiiony  is  not  necejfary^  (  nor  ordinarily 
exijient.)  fol.50 

Se^.  8.  fFhet her  Hypocrites  have  no  premifes  for  Faitht  but 
fuch  as  are  humane, dubious  and  fallible  ?  Six  Reafons  to  prove 
that  they  h^ve  better.  Mere  of  the  non-neceffity  of  demonflra- 
tive  or  infallible  certain  mediums,  or  evidence  to  prove  the 
Scripture  Gods  word,  as  to  the  being  of  true  Faith,  ff^hether 
Fa'th  he  argumentative,  crafimpie  Adhejion,  or  Ajfiance  ? 
Faith  anatomized^  at  to  its  divers  ACis  and  ZJfes ,?«  anf^er  to 
this  que fiion.  fol.56 

Sed.  9.      It  is  no  Article  of  faving  Faith,  nor  divine  Faith  at 
alii  (  much  lefs  proving  a  fpecifick,  d'jference  )that  I,  A.  B.  am 
aBually]tiJiified,freed,pardoned,a^optedf  and  an  Heir  of  He  a 
vent  proved  by  f^enty  Reafons.  fol.6^; 

Sed.   10.     ^  made  not  Love  (  ftriBly  take** )  (he  form  of  Faith 
That  Affiance  is  in  the  rvill  as  well  as  in  the  Intelle^-     Th 
enquiry  made  as  of  four  fortsof  Bdief  I.  l^he  Belief  of  dizi 
Biftory,  or  Truth  meerly  as  fuch.    2.  Of  dizine7  hreatmrgs. 
3 .  Of  divine  PromifeSt  &c.  in  general,    4.  Of  the  Go/pel  in 
fpecial.  of  ninefeveral  AEis  in  the  third^and  ten  in  the  fourth, 
apparent  in  the  Anatomy .    The  ABs  of  Affiance  in  faving 

Faith 


The  Contents. 

JPahhi  Ont  on^Uat  Tromfir  crRevtalgr:  Thi  cthtr  on 
Cltrifioi  Sdviowr,  2{jnt  of  thefe  i4  the  Tinophorit  Vehieh 
Rob.  'QAtOTxaaandttttOppontntfleAdagainfi.  fol.72 

Sc&.  II.  Tht  Prpttfttntt  defended  for  placing  AffiAKce  or 
Tfufi  in  tht  Will.  Baronius'j  rft^fl  Arguments  producUby 
the  Oppotnt^  refelfed.  Difference  how  far  in  the  Will.  There 
ii  aliqoid  fpei  &  amoris  in  Aj/ianee  or  Faith ^  and  jetFatth  is 
n9t  nope  er  Lfve.  iVetrMfi  only  for  good.  Eight  Reafonspro' 
ving  t/€giame  i»  the  Will.  fol.76 

Scft.  12.  Some  Propojitions  containing  wef  opinion^  HoW 
far  Love  belongs  to  Faith,  Et  de  fide  formata  cbaritate,w^/yi 
farj  to  ke  obferved  by  the  learned  Adverfarj,  ifht  "^illnot  loft 
hu  labor  in  the  next  affautt  on  that  SubieS.  Of  his  Conclnfion^ 
mi  MO  dinger  of  a  pajfionate  railing  Reply.  The  vanity  of 
iftmant  applofsfe^atU  tilerabltneft  ofmMnt  Ctnfmret*    foKSz 


Reader, 


r 


jL. 


(Reader,  1  intreat  thee  firft  to  corre(5l  thefe  Errata 
becaufe  they  are  many  and  marr  thclenfe, 

PAg.4./i».  3^. read  b  fi  ie.p.j. I.  it.hhit  out  and.  ^.lol.i^.r.common  Belief  &fpecial. 
l.io.  blotodt.  it.  ^4-r-ycad:p.ii.l.i4,:.that  heie.^.ii.l.i^.i.ihattheyhave.p.i^.l. 
11.  T.rhte.p.i^.'.S.r.'Villt.p.io.lii.i.SuareT^f.i^.l.^^'j.T.branches.  p.r4./.3  j.r.M  it. 
p.i^./  I  j.blot  out  ly.p.ij.l.i^.r.of  fpecial.p.iZ.l-i ^.r.ob.p.i  i ./.r  i .1 .««  rhriji.^.^ z./.  13. 
r.denompiate.p.^j  .I.Z6.T.  ex  reprafentl.  p.7  ^.l.^^r.fpeciei.l.uU.r.tts  to  be.p./^o.lj^  t.Hea- 
thens  with,  i.io.r.  they  l.iJ^.r.whUe.  p.^z.l.iSx. prompti.  /.ij.r.  carn'n.  P.44./.1.  r.pre- 
feni.  /.  lo.r.  Arts.  p.  4^  .1.  ii.r.  w.  /.37.r.  (b<ir.  p,47.;.iy  r.  heath.  Li9-v.fcrue.  p.49./. 
i^.v.lofmt.  p.  50./.  13 .r.ffx.  /.  I f  .r. /ay,  fto.  and  for  therefore  r.  /b.  p.  ^3 .^.10.  r. recited. 
p.^4.'.9  r.byyfo  that,  p.^^.Z-jf-  rbeUti!e.p.$6.l.to,ii.  r.Opinion,  nor  Science,  p.^7.1.6^ 
i.fitperficiaUy.p.6o-lis-  ^-"f'  ^-6^.1.10.  blot  oat  w.  p,tf8./.ult.blot  out  the.  .69.1.^  i.  r. 
Truth.p.j^.l.^.x.  c'l^i.  1.7  .t.in  Scripture.p.77 ,1.  ii.r.the  »pim$n..l.v9.T.  of  Affiance  in  the 
yeracity.p.7Z.l.it.h[ot  OMteffenlial  to  hope.p.j^.l.io.vM'r.p.Zo.l.^.  r.confine.  l.i^.i.pofi- 
humors.  p.8i/.  a.r.  threatnings.  l.iz.r.oftveUas  0f  the  InielleCl.  p.%l.l.^^,.t.rpllnt^fvor{. 
l.i^.r.I  have  firfi.l.^  'i.T.fides.p.S^.l.i^x.  that  everyp.i6.LiS-^Me(hu(iiis.p.%7.l.tis.me. 
f.^%.l,t%.v.lamentiftg-pZ$.l.i^.xtid.l.io.t.To.l.io.v.Armim;ii.p.^^.l.i6.r.anfiverable. 

There  are  many  mif-poimingt  whicH  marr  the  fcncc>which  the  T^ider  may  obferv6» 


(O 


E   C    T, 


I. 


'Et  more  contending  work  ?  No :  Whatfoevcr 
itmayfeem  to  thofc  that  judge  of  Books 
by  their  Titirs ;  it  is  an  acceptable  amicable 
clofure  of  Confenters  ,  and  a  Learned 
Defence  of  the  Truths  which  I  have  been 
long  too  unlearncdly  and  unskilfully  De- 
fending. And  if  fo  many  good  and  Learn- 
ed men  have  been  fo  deeply  difpleafed  with  me,  for  maintain- 
ing the  fpccifick  Difference  between  common  faith  and 
thst  which  is  proper  to  the  Juftified  ;  Let  them  now  prepare 
their  paiienceortheir  valour,  when  under  my  name)  they  are 
encountered  by  a  ftronger  hand.  For  my  part ,  whatever  mi- 
ftakes  of  my  wriring*  this  Learned  Author  may  be  guilry  of  , 
ir  fufficeth  me  to  find  him  maintaining  that  Tru:h,  which  is  de- 
fcrvedly  precious  to  him  and  me,  and  which  needeth  fo  much 
clearing  in  ti.efe  times,  that  when  we  have  done  all,  too  many 
will  remain  unfatisfied. 

In  the  fecond  Edition  of  a  Book  called  The  Sa'r.ts  Re/}, J  en- 
dctivoured  according  ro  my  weaknefs,  to  fhew  the  true  differ-^ 
ence  between  the  common  Grace  that  may  be  found  in  the  un- 
fanft  fied,  ard  the  fpecial  Grace  of  the  Saints  which  accom- 

li  panieih 


•vt 


CO 

panieth  Salvation.     After  divers  explicatory  Propofitions,  I 

aflerced  ( in  the  eighth, ninth:Centh,elcventh  and  twelfth)  Pro- 

pojition  8.  that  [God  hath  not  in  the  Covenant  fromiftd  Jajiifica 

tion  and  S.dv^tion  upn  any  meer  4^  or  ^^s.confiiered  without 

that  degree  andffttahlenefs  to  thtir  OhjeEis,  whfrein  the  (inceritj 

cf  them  as  favtn£  doth  confij}']    ('the  foregoing  Propofitions 

explain  this)  []  9.  Thzt  there  u  no  one  Aii  confiiered  in  its  meer 

nainreandkjnd  without  its  meafure  and  futablenefs    to  ttsOb- 

ptii  ^hi:h  a  true  Chrifiian  muy  ferform^  but  an  un/ound  Chri/fi- 

a^  may  ferformit  alfo.  ^   (S.g.An  unfanftified  man  may  efteera 

God  as  good-,  and  notionally  as  the  chief  Good  ;  but  till  we 

efteera  him  i.  asthechiefcfl  Good,  2.  And  that  with  fach  an 

effcdual  ferious  prevalent  eftimation,  as  may  win  the  heart  to 

the  molt  prevaknt  or  predominant  Love,  it  will  not  fave  us  J 

[  Prop.  I  o.  Thefupremacj  of  God  and  the  Mediatottr  in  thefoal^ 

or  the  Precedency  or  preva/ency  of  hii  Intereji  in  us,  above  the 

inter efi  ofihejiejh^  or  of  inferiour  good^  is  the  very  point  wherein 

mattrialty  the  fmcerity  of  our  Graces  as  faving  (i.e.  as  the)  are 

conditions  of  fa/vations  and  not  metr  duties  )  doth  conffi,  and  fo 

16  the  One  mari^  by  ^hichthofe  mufi  jf^^gs  of  their  pates   that 

-would  not  be  deceived.]  Prop,  i  t  .  ^^For  herein  the  ftncerity  of  the 

AEl  as  fazing confifieth, in  being futted  to  its  adeqnate  Ob}eSl  * 

confi^xred  tn  its  rejpe^s  Which  are  ejfential  to  it  as  fuch  an  GbjeH,. 

cAnd  fo  to  believe  in  ^Accept  and  Love  Qod  as  God^and  Chrifi  as 

Chrijl,  u  the  fmcerity  ofthofe  AUs  :    'But  this  lyeth  in  "Believing^ 

Accepting  and  Loving  Qod  as  the  only  fupreme  Authority  ^tcc. 

Ruhr  and  Good^  and  Chri/i  as  the  only  Redeemer^  and  fo  our  /o- 

ver^ign  Lo^d^our  Saviour^our  Hy-sbtind^aidonr  Head~\  (This  I 

callea  the  moral  fpecification  of  the  Ad  )[yro[).i2iTherefore 

the/incerity  of  favingGrace as  fuvingjyeth  materially,»ffr  in  the 

bare  Nature  of  it, bur  in  the  degree ;  not  in  the  degree  con/idtred 

Ahfolutely  in  it  fc(f  but  com\aYatively  as  it  ii  prevalent  agai,j{i 

its  contrary. "2  And  among  much  more  for  explication  I  added, 

\_lmHf  t:K  jou^that  jou  mtiji flill diflingUiJh  between  u  Pkyfical 

.or  Natural  (pecificatton,  and  a  mor^.l  :  andremember  ,  that  our 

J^ufftion  is  only  of  a  Phyfical  differ  ence^tvhich  I  deny^and  not  of  a 

morale  Which  I  make  no  doubt  of. ]]  And  \_And  further- 

inort  obftrvCi  that  Jincerit)  of  Grace  as  favm^, lyeth  in  the  degree^ 

not 


(5; 

f*ot  forWdHy^  hut  Of  it  were  materUllj Secaufe  the  Pro. 

mifegiveth  not  falvation  to  the  A^  Covfidered  in  its  mter  Be- 
ings and  l^atural  fincerity^  but  ta  the  ^tl  as  futed  to  the  OhjeU 
in  its  effentijtlrefptHs  :  and  that  futahlentfs  efthe  A^  to  the  form 
of  its  Ohje^  confideth  only  in  a  certain  Degree  of  the  'y^H,  feeing 
the  /o'^ejl  D'g^ee  ca*iKOt  befo  fitted  :  thtrefore  ^  faj  that  ftnce- 
ritj  Ijeth  muteriaHjf  as  it  ^ere^  only  ;« the  Degree  of  ihoje  *yiils^ 
And  not  in  the  bare  Nature  and'Bang  of  them.] 

By  th!«!  and  much  more  for  explication,  I  thought  I  had 
made  my  AfTertionincclligible,  while  I  maintained,  i.  That 
there  was  1  moral  TpeciHck  difference,  between  the  Graces  of 
the  Reqcn^rateanJ  o:h(:r<,  2.  That  only  the  Ads  of  faving 
Grace  were  fuited  to  the  very  c (fence  or  form  of  the  Objed  ; 
5.  And  that  it  was  only  miterially  and  Phyfically,  that  I  faid 
the  difference  lay  but  in  Degree  :  that  is,  a  gracious  Adion 
is  in  order  firft  (j»iJ  Prj)fi:un>,  a  natural  Being,  before  it  be 
quid  morale-  Oreifeour  Divines  would  not  fo  commonly  teach 
de  caufd  mail,  t  hat  God  is  the  Author  of  all  the  entity  of  the 
Ad,  but  not  of  the  evil:  Now  as  to  thePhyficalBeingof  the 
Ad,  anunfandificdmanmay  have  a  Belief  of  the  fame  truths 
as  the  fandified,  and  a  Love  to  the  fame  God,  and  a  Belief  in 
the  fame  Chrift,  and  a  Love  to  the  fame  Cfariftians ,  Sermons, 
Ordinances,  &c.  Yea  more  then  fo ,  they  may  notionaliy  ap- 
prehend the  fame  Reafons  for  Believing,  Loving,  c^c.  as  the 
fandified.  Butthey cannot effedually  apprehend tbcfe Rea- 
fons, and  therefore  do  not  eftecra  God  or  Love  him,  with  their 
highcft  predominant  eftimarion  and  Love,  nor  Believe  with  a 
faith  that  is  prevalent  againft  their  unbelief.  And  therefore 
morally,  ftridly,  properly.they  arc  to  be  faid  to  be  no  true  'Be* 
lievers^  not  to  love  God^Scc  becaufe  we  are  fpeaking  of  moral 
fubjeds,  and  of  that  faith  and  Love  which  is  thefamoftus  analo- 
gatum^  and  moft  properly  fo  called.  And  therefore  I  maintain- 
ed, thatall  theunfandified  are  called  Chriftiam,  BeJievers, 
C^c.  but  Equivocally,or  Analogically  :  Buc  yet  thar  the  faith 
and  Love^&c.  which  they  have  is  not  all  feigned,  but  true,  or 
Real  in  its  own  kind.  And  this  was  the  fura  of  my  Aflertions 
then. 

A  while  after  Dr.  Kendal  wrote  a  large  digrefiion  againft 

B  2  fome 


iO 


fomcpartof  my  Aflertionsrto  whom  when  I  had  prepared  half 
an  Anfwer,  at  his  own  peaceable  motion,  and  the  Reverend  Bi- 
fliop  V/herSf  we  agreed  on  a  mutual  filence,  as  moft  futable  to 
our  duties  and  the  good  of  the  Church.    But  before  this  A- 
greemenr,  I  had  printed  one  (heet  in  the  end  of  the  fifth  Ira- 
predion  of  the  S^iats  Rtfi^   in  which  I  more  fully  opened  my 
meaning,  and  (hewed  that  Dr.Ar*«^«/himfeifdid  feem  to  con- 
fent  to  what  I  had  aff tarred.    The  fame  (lieet  I  had  alfo  put  in- 
to the  prefs  to  be  affixed  to  my  ConfeflSon.    Befides  in  my  A- 
pologic  I  had  at  large  defended  againft  Mr.  5/4<^?,that  all  that 
will  be  regularly  Baptized  (  at  age  )  or  admitted  to  Church- 
communion  and  Sacraments  muft  make  a  credible  profefiion 
of  a  faving  faith  fpecifically  diftind  from  the  faich  of  the  unre- 
generate.    Hereupon  Mr.  ^/<!<;^e  in  his  Reply  had  manifefted 
much  difpleafure  againft  this  Affertion,  profefling  his  abhor- 
rence of  tic,  that  I  called  the  unjuftified  but  Equivocally  Belie- 
vers, Chriftians,  Difciples.    Hereupon   I  wrote  a  Volume  of 
Difputations  on  this  very  fubjcft  :  Proving  that  it  muft  be  the 
profeffion  of  a  Faith  fpecifically  diftind  from  that  of  the  un- 
fandified,  which  all  muft  profefs  that  we  muft  admit  to  the  Sa- 
craments; and  that  the  ungodly  are  but  Equivocally  called 
Believers,  Ghriftians,^r.     InotherTrcatifcsalfoIhad  infift- 
ed  on  the  fame.     And  yet  all  this  did  not  content  me,  becaufe 
I  heard  that  others  were  ftilldifcontentcd.  And  fomc  Reverend 
Learned  Minifters  of  other  Countries,told  me  with  admiration, 
that  though  I  had  fo  exprefly  maintained  a  moral  fpecifick  dif- 
ference between  common  &  fpecial  gracc,yet  they  never  fpoke 
with  one  offended  man  about  it,  that  ever  obferved  that,  or  un- 
derftood  me  :  but  perfwaded  people  confidently  that  I  denied 
any  fpecifick  difference  ;  and  had  put  the  queftion  without  any 
fuch  diftindion  or  limitation ,  whether  common  and  fpecial 
Grace  differ  only  Gradually,  or  fpecifically  ?  It  feemed  to  mc 
an  incredible  thing  that  fuch  dealing  fliould  be  fo  common  as 
they  told  me;  Butif  itwerepoffible,  I  thought  I  would  yet 
fpeak  plainer,  and  caufe  men  to  underftand  that  were  but  wil- 
ling; and  therefore  before  the  explicatory  flieet  that  was  print- 
ed in  the  end  of  the  fifth  and  fixth  impiefiions  of  the  Snints 
Refit  and  in  my  Conffffloft,  and  befides  both  the  forefaid  Vo- 
lumes 


CO 


hiraes  of  Difputations  ,  I  did  fomewhat  correfl  the  feventh 
impreflTion  of  the  Saintt  Refi ;  and  added  yet  another  expjica. 
Cory  (heet  in  the  end  of  ic.  So  chat  I  knew  not  what  I  could 
do  more,  to  be  underftood. 

And  now  afcer  all  this,  is  brought  to  my  hands  a  Book  of  a 
worthy  Gentkmans  writing,  Mr.  I'V.  S.  a  Serjeant  at  L  aw,  with 
an  Aditionalexercication  preccnded  to  be  written  againli  my 
Aflertion,by  a  very  Learned  man  ^  who  doth  not  only  overlook 
all  the  forementioned  Treatifes  and  explications,  but  the  very 
Queftionit  feif  whichldifcufled,  and  my  forementioned  Af- 
fertions :  feigning  me  to  maintain  this  general  unlimited  AfTer- 
tion,  that  [^  ^oww(?«rt»£:i  jpuialGract  dffer  only  (^ raduallj .~^ 
At  iirU  it  ftruck  me  irto  an  adrairationl  But  having  long  known 
what  man  is,  and  confidering  the  quality  and  employments  of 
the  worthy  Author,!  had  ftore  of  Apologies  prefen.ly  at  hand, 
lufficientwith  mecoescufeallthis,  and  bccaufe  I  think  they 
fhould  be  fufficient  with  ochers,  that  I  forefee  are  like  to  he 
ObjeAingagainft  fuch  kind  of  dealing  :    I  fliall  therefore  c  .:- 
prefs  them,  that  the  Reader  may  know,  that  as  we  are  both  i';r 
onecaufe,  fowe  are  far  fromany  perfonal  diftafts,  or  difavie- 
dion,  or  any  uncharitable  malicious  projeds  in  the  manage-' 
ment  thereof. 

Jf  unwritten  Tradition  may  but  be  taken  for  a  fufficient  Re- 
porter of  the  Auihors  Name,  (which  I  have  no  caufe  to  doubt 
of)  1  muft  lay,  that  he  is  one  that  1  have  honoured  and  very 
highly  efteemed  about  this  twenty  years, even  ever  fince  I  read 
hisfix  MetaphyficalExercitations,  and  (hould  have  thought 
it  a  very  great  honour  and  happinefs  to  have  been  but  one  of 
his  Pupils  .•  And  though  I  know  him  not  by  face,  1  have  reafon 
to  be  confident  that  no  uncharitable  defign  doth  dwell  in  the 
breaft  of  a  man  fo  Learned  ,  moderate  and  ingenuous  as  hejis 
commonly  fam*d  to  be.  And  therefore  as  long  as  we  both 
agree  in  Loving  and  defending  the  Truth  of  God  ,  the  matter 
is  the  Icfs  if  we  fhe  v  our  fv^lves  but  men  towards  one  another. 
Navjl  have  fome  reafon  to  call  it  a  happy  miftake  of  my  words 
and  meaning  in  him,  which  occafioned  the  communication  of 
this  Learned  Vindication  of  the  Truth  which  I  more  weakly 
and  unskilfully  afTcried.     And  1  make  no  doubt  but  the  princi- 

B  3  pall 


CO 


pat  fault  is  my  own,  who  by  fome  unfic  exprefHons  have 
hindred  fuch  j  Jdicious  men  from  undcrf\anding  me. 

Objed.  But  were  notfo  m^iny  Expltcaticnt  and  1)ifputatt~ 
ens  fujjiciettt  to  fatisfit  any  man  of  your  meiimng  ? 

jinf^.  What  Obligation  lay  on  this  learned  man  to  read 
or  take  notice  of  any  thing  of  mine  }  I  doubt  not  but  he  had 
better  work  to  do, 

Objed.  He  fhouU  have  founci  time  to  read  and  underjland 
a  mans  writings  ,  hfore  he  find  time  to  confute  them  upon  a  mif' 
under Jianding. 

Anfvf.  He  read  that  which  he  wrote  againft:  And  truly 
if  I  had  lived  in  the  publique  Library  at  Oxford^  I  ftiould 
have  been  loih  ray  felf  to  havecaft  away  ray  time  in  reading 
any  fuch  Difputations  or  Explications  as  thefe  of  raine.  If 
men  are  fo  unskilfull  that  they  cannot  in  fewer  words  fo  fpeak 
as  to  be  underftood  j  let  them  at  their  own  blame  be  mif- 
underftood. 

Objefl.  But  he/houldhavc  read  the  additional  Explications  in 
the  fame  'Book, 

An[w.  Its  like  he  never  fawanyof  thofe  Impreffions  that 
did  contain  them. 

Ob jed.  At  leafl  he  pjould  have  ohftrved  the  fcSlion  which  he 
confuted. 

^yif^.  So  he  did  :  For  pag.ni.  Heconfeffeth  thatlaf. 
fert,  [  thit  the  AUs  of  common  and  fpecial  Grnce^  as  they  Are 
morally  conftdered  do  difftr  fpecifcal/y ,and  not  only  in  degree*  ~\ 

Objcd.  fVhj  then  doth  he  ctntend  ?  If  he  agree,  Vchy  doth  he 
feem  todifer,  and  thin i^it  "Worthy  his  publique  Uhor  to  fcem  to 
dijfer,whcre  he  doth  not  ? 

Anfw,  I  fuppofeic  is  ray  terms  that  he  intends  his  Labor 
againft,  which  he  thought  might  be  unfit  and  fcem  to  intimate 
fomewhat  contrary  to  my  own  Aflertions; 

Objeft.  But  why  then  did  he  not  tell  us  that  it  was  words  only 
that  hefirove  about,  and  tell  ut  of  more  convenient  exprejjions 
inthtir  flead>  Nay,  PVhj  didije  overlook^  the  principal  terws  in 
your  Propffitlonfand  When  jou  fny  that  it  is  but  Materially,  and 
not  Formally,  thatjou  place  the  d  ference  in  degree  ;  why  doth 
hefitll  leave  out  Materially  ?  and  when  you  prof efs  to  fpeuk,only 


C7) 


of  fnch  a  Materui  Thyjicall  Grahtion^  Why  doth  he  make  the 
^'e>ider  believe  that  joufpeak^of  the  formal  difference^  andfmfly 
denjed  afpecificl^Mference  ? 

Anftv.  One  word  is  eafily  overlookt,  yea  many:  perhaps 
he  lookt  only  on  the  following  words,  where  in  fome  imprefii- 
ons  the  word  Materiallf  was  not  repeated,  (  as  being  before 
expreft  in  the  Propofition.  )  But  what  great  matter  is  it  if 
we  miftake  one  another,as  long  as  we  miftake  not  the  Truths  of 
God. 

Objcd.  Jt  tenfieth  hut  to  prfjudice  common  Readers ^a»dcaufe 
them  to  c^fi  aWay  mens  tabors^that  might  pnfit  them  for  Bre- 
thren to  multiply  ^narrelf,  andagainfi  them  ;  tfpecially  vthen  thtj 
corfefs  that  there  u  no  real  difference  to  occafion  if,  the  thing  it  the 
more  iv  thont  excufe. 

^irf\\>.  And  what  harm  is  it  to  the  Church  or  any  foul  to  be 
brought  to  a  fufpicion  or  d'ftiftof  any  thing  of  mine,  or  to 
have  any  of  my  writings  become  unprofitable  to  them  ?  Are 
there  not  more  enough,  more  ufefuil  and  Icfs  offenfive  in  cne 
world  ?  Through  the  Mercy  of  God  it  is  an  age  of  plenty, 
and  he  that  favoureth  not  one  mans  writings ,  may  favour  and 
be  faved  by  anothers.  I  confefs  fome  railing  rabious  men  have 
done  fome  wrong  to  our  common  Hearers,  by  teaching  them 
to  fly  from  their  Teachers  as  deceivers:  but  this  Reverend 
Man  is  an  enemy  to  fuch  waies;  and  therefore  I  know  not  why 
fuch  a  peaceable  collation  of  our  different  thoughts  or  ex- 
preliions  ftiould  be  fo  offenfive  as  I  find  it  ordinarily  to  be. 

QV)<t8s..But  was  not  this  work^fuficiently  doKe  ahead)  ?  (Vhat 
need  fuch  a  mnltitude  of  ft  ones  to  be  ca^  at  one  mans  words  ^  even 
atafeVi^finience/,yvhichthejclofe  W'lth  themf elves  rvhen  they 
have  done  ?  Is  net  that  reh'xch  ts  here  faid  the  fame  th.it  Dr, 
Kendil  had  faid  before  ?  Anci  what  r.eedthe  (ame  be  done  fo 
eft? 

Anfiv.  Many  witnefTes  give  the  ftronger  teftiraony  to  a 
Truth  ;  many  may  read  the  writings  of  this  learned  man , 
that  would  not  have  feencr  read  Dr.  K.  And  the  great  repu- 
tation of  fo  eminently  learned  anddifcreeta  manj  may  add 
m'jch  advantage  to  the  promoting  of  any  tiulh  which  he  (hall 
defend.  Or  elfe  Mr.  Tombei  would  not  have  printed  the  let- 
ter 


C8) 


ter  againft  infant-Bapiifm  f  which  fame  faith  was  written  by 
tliis  learned  hand  )  in  his  EpilUe  before  his  third  pare  of  An- 
tipedo-Baptifm  ;  but  that  thinking  the  Truth  was  on  his  fide, 
he  thought  it  would  be  fome  advantage  to  it,   that  fo  learned 
a  Pen  ftiould  put  &c{eleant»r  upon  the  Arguments  againft  it, 
faying,  [/  have  re  ad  what  my  learnt  A  ani  rvorthj  fnend  Dr.Him' 
mond  ,  Mr  Baxter  ,  asd  others  faj  in  defence  of  it  •,    and  I 
confefsy  I  wonder  not  a  little  that  men  of  fuch  great  f-irts,  Jhould 
fay  fo  much  to  fo  little  pftrpofe  ;  for  I  h^ve  not  yet  (em  anj  thing 
like  A*t  Argument  for  ir. 2  (Though  in  this  1  muft  ftill  profcfs 
my  Diflent   from  this  very  learned  worchy  man   )   Yet  in 
the  point  before  us ,  Irejoyce,  that  my  infirmities  haveocca- 
fioned  fuch  an  advantage  to  the  truth,  as  the  publcitionof 
his  Teftimony.     When  I  firft  received  his  Book,  I  was  bufie 
about  fatisfying  fome  Rcvcrend'Brethren,  that  were  difpieafed 
with  me  for  going  his  way  ;  and  therefore  received  it  with 
fome  gladncfs,  as  that  which  might  eafemc  of  fome  of  my 
burden,and  promote  the  fatisfadion  of  fome  of  the  offended. 
I  have  heard  fomewhat  that  caufeih  me  to  fufpect,  that  a  reve- 
rend Brother  intendeth  to  write  againft  my  fecond,  fourth, 
and  fifth  DifputatioHs  of  Right  to  Sacraments  .efpcchUy  the  laft, 
which  afTerteth  that  the  unrcgenerate  arc  but  equivocally  or 
analogically  called  Believers,  Chriftians.Difciples, Sanctified, 
^c.  If  any  be  upon  that  work  J  intreat  them  to  trie  firft  how 
they  can  confute  this  learned  Author;  viho  hath  done  the 
fame  work  better  (as  againft  me)  then  I  could  do.     For  I 
will  not  take  the  caufe  as  gone,  till  hi«  Reafons  are  anfwered 
as  well  as  mine.     (  Perhaps  I  vas  beholden  to  my  Appen- 
dixto  thatDifput.  for  a  Teftitrony  from  him  that  never  read 
it.) 

This  rauth  I  have  faid  to  let  both  PapiOs,  and  al!  other  A  d- 
verfaries  underftand  tha:  there  is  not  fo  much  diftance  among 
us,  for  them  to  reproach  us  with,  as  fome  of  our  concert  ati- 
ons  do  feem  to  import.  Fencing  is  not  a  fign  of  enmiry^though 
fightingbe  :  and  that  there  is  as  little  difagreement  in  our 
Judgements,  I  (hall  further  manifeft  by  a  perufal  of  t?^efe- 
veral  parts  of  this  pretended  Confutation  :  yet  freely  ac- 
knowledging as  I  g^  J  Thofe  differences  which  indeed  I 
find.  Sect. 


(p) 

S  E   C  T.    2. 

Tage  I.  TTEteI!su%    i.  That  hzbtllevenhe  difftrtr.ct  to 
XTXhe  mere  then  gradual,  and  fo  faid  I.  [2.   t^nJ 
th>it  wydifcourfedoth  r.ot  concludinq^lj  (vince  thecontra>-ji  ]]  nor 
did  it  ever  pretend  it  .-  Thus  far  wc  arc  agreed. 

T^^  2.{\e  }  ^'i.)Hch\lh{\n[[ To  prove  thAtcomfKOft  and  fpe- 
cial  grace  do  difer  o«lj ^radnallj^  I  reaftn^  J  as  fol/oW'eth.  But  I 
never  aiVerted  fuch  a  thing,  ind  therefore  never  reafoned  for 
it. It  was  but  overlooking  che  terms  [/l/4/frW//,J  and  [^hfi- 
cal  fptcificaticnt  -^  J  ar.d  lome  fuch  like,  thatcauled  thismi- 
ftikc. 

Here  is  culled  ou:  thofe  m^ordsof  mine,  that  were  eafilieft 
roiftaken,  and  feverai  coiifideracions  added.  As  to  the  firft, 
we  are  Agreed  (hat  theQucftior.  is  not  of  Grace,  as  it  is  in 
GoJ,  butinus,  or  of  gracious  acts  as  of  us.  But  my  weiknefs 
was  fuch,  That,  i.  I  thought,  ss  a  prefuppoled,  thing  to 
meet  with  fome  that  infifted  on  the  name,  I  might  have  men- 
tioned exdufivcly  this  Grace  which  this  Reverend  Brother 
exdudeth,  as  I  did.  2.  I  thought  that  ArKor  CfmpUcer.tU 
vel  accettatio  divna,  had  denorn'r^atine  f.vrr/«/fci  been  capa- 
ble of  a  gradsrion  ;  and  that  as  truly,  as  we  fay.  God  lovcch 
one  man,  and  hateth  another,  and  that  he  loveth  him  con- 
verted, whom  he  ffo)  loved  not  unconverted,  (  amore  ccm*. 
pUcer.t<t,cr  ijcceit.itlor.is  jas  truly  might  we  fiy,that  he  loveth 
('with  that  loveja  holier  &^ore  heavenly  upright  man, above 
a  fcandalous  weak  Believer,  that  hath  the  lealt  goodnefs  and 
the  m'lft  fin  that  is  confiftcnt  with  finceriry.  j^utlamrc- 
folved  fo  far  to  ftope  to  the  learninq  of  this  Reverend  man,  as 
not  to  maintain  this  opinion  againft  him  {  though  I  may  not  be 
cured  of  fuch  conceits  fo  foon  as  he  defireth.) 

As  to  his  fccord  Confid.  p^^.  523.  Wc  are  fully  agreed, 
that  Grace  is  trr'zr^T^?  r,  and  that  if  ever  Titiui  d.rA  Sewpro- 
rnuhAd  Grace,  it  wa«  not  in  order  of  Nature,  till  after  they 
were  men.  But  Iconfefs  I  think  ftill,  that  Grace  to  Adam 
was  not  alieftiii  r:itt4r£  fuperadditfim^  unicfs  \ou  confine  the 
word  Natwe  to  his  meer  faculties,  as  diftinct  from  thofe  right 

C  ,   Difpofi'ions 


(10) 


Difpoficions,  which  were  natural  to  them,   though  fepara- 
ble. 

In  his  third  Condufion,  hereceits  fome  of  my  words  {Our 
VnderfianciiMgsancifVilsarefhjflicallythefunte^  &C.  and  faith 
that,  [_  This  Alfertion  as '/«  her«  exprejfed,  is  eviitntl)  untrue  • 
for  OUT  Zander/Landings  and  fVils^  arefo  far  from  he'wg  the  fame 
in  fpccic^,  &c.  ]  Still  we  are  agreed  whether  he  will  or 
no.  But  did  I  write  this  falfe  Affercion?  yes,  all  faving  one 
word,  yea  a  finable,  which  is  eafily  overlookr.  And  2.  The 
falle  meaning  which  the  adjoined  words  do  juftifie  it  from  ; 
being  fpeakingof  the  Matter  of  faving  and  common  Grace, 
I  thought  it  not  impertinent  to  mention  it  as  a  common  Con- 
ceilion,  that  all  of  us  agree  in  •,  [_  That  common  knowledge 
and  fpecial  cocnraon  belief  ^  and  fpecially  agree  in  this  gene- 
ral Nature,  that  both  are  real  knowledge  and  belief;  and  that 
our  Uuderftandings  and  Wills  are  all  Phyfically  the  fame,  and 
that  they  agree  in  the  general  nature  of  an  Act,  yeafuch  as 
(fubftantially  atlcaft)  have  the  fame  Object.  ]  Thefe  are 
the  haynous words,  or  the  fruits  of  my  greateft  weaknefi 
itfeemsjthat  it  is  manifefted  inthat  difcourfc  now  here.  i. This 
moft  learned  Author  did  both.  Pag.  ^^  22.  and  p^^  324.  ftill 
leave  out  the  word  f  A/l,  ]  (that's  but  a  fillable.  ^  And 
2.  The  more  eafily  feigneththat  I  fpeak  of  the  underflan- 
ding  and  \Viili  of  the  fame  perfon,  contrary  to  the  drift  and 
plain  exprefsions  of  the  dilcourfe  which  treats  of  the  diffe- 
rence between  the  Grace  of  the  regenerate  and  unregenerate  : 
Becaufclfawthis  exact  Difputant  J^ave  out  the  word  [  ////] 
more  then  once  or  twice,  I  was  willing  to  have  found  that  in 
fome  one  Impreffion  the  Printer  had  omitted  it  :  but  I  am 
fruftrated  of  that  conciliatory  cscufc,  finding  it  in  the  fecond, 
third,  fourth,  fifth,  fixth  and  feventh  ImprefTions  (  which 
were  all  :  For  that  difcourfc  wasnoc  in  thefirrt.  )  But  yet 
I  have  one  excufe  :  Perhaps  the  Reverend  Confuter  never 
reads  the  Book, but  received  thefe  paHagestranfcibed  by  his 
Scholar  ,  that  may  be  more  prone  and  willing  to  miltake.  And 
jf  I  had  laid,  that  the  (aid  faculties  are  but  form^littr  ^  vel 
dgnomi'1'itione  extrinfeca^  diftinct  from  the  foul,andfrom  each 
other,  he  very  well  knows  what  great  f^ore  of  company  1  had 

bad. 


(") 

bad,  and  that  of  the  highcft  foorras  in  the  fcools  which  mfghc 
have  put  fome  honor  on  a  perfon  foinconriderablc  as  I:  and 
every  man  of  the  third  form,^  that  calls  the  difference  reall ,  is 
not  in  love  with  the  notion  of  a  fpecificke  d)fference  , 
though  commonly  they  agree  :  But  this  is  nothing  to  our  DC' 
bate. 

i'^£*3  2  5.  He  faith.That  [[  thunnkts  nothing  to  the  prefect 
purpoft,  nor  akj  "^ay  proves  that  common  indfavtfig  Grace  differ 
notfpfcificul-j.  1 

Anf\\>.  <\\\  we  are  agreed, whether  he  will  or  r.o  :  Though  it 
make  not  to  the  purpo'e,  it  may  be  mentioned  exclufively.or 
as  a  common  conceillon,  prcfuppofed  to  the  pu'-pofe  as  him- 
fcif  hereinnocenciv  menuoneth  it  :  and  if  it  will  not  prove 
that  thcrs:  \sno  'Difference^  it  will  (hew  here  that  the  Difference 
is  not. 

But  he  faith,  It  is  P(hoiIy'^mperttr.€nt^tcQ.'\ 
Anfw.  I.  See  all  you  chat  are  adverfaries  to  the  honor  of 
ourUniry,  that  we  ate  fo  far  from  difagreeing  in  Art'cies  of 
faith,  that  we  Will  not  fuffer  fo  much  as  an  ImptrtimsKcy'wi 
one  another  without  a  reprehcnfion.  2.  I  amforry  for  an 
Impertinency.but  I  am  glad  that  it  is  not  falfe.  3.  Its  irapcr- 
percinenc  to  your  ^«rp7/f,but  not  to  mine. 

Once  for  all ,  this  was  my  reafon  of  tbefe  pafTagcs.  i.  I 
Knew  by  long  experience,  abundance  of  people  that  credibly 
and  confidently  profefledto  have  fome  real  undifembled  de- 
fires  to  be  I'ober.and  ycc  lived  in  drunkennefs ;  and  to  be  god- 
\v,  and  yet  had  little  of  i:  in  their  practife,  and  to  have  & 
Love  to  the  Rodlv,  (and  truly  would  do  and  fuffer  fome- 
what  for  them  ,  but  yet  loved  the  world  and  themfelves  fo 
muchberter,  that  they  would  be  at  no  great  coftor  danger 
for  them  :  fuch  a  Love  they  profcft  to  Chrifthimfelf ,  and 
a  credible  profeUion  they  madgof  a  true  dogmatical  belief. 
And  thefe  men  were  many  of  them  deeply  pofleffed  by  mifta- 
king  our  Divines,  that  the  leaft  true  ("or  real)  defire  after 
Chritt  or  Grace,  was  laving  •  r.ice  it  f.'lf,  and  would  certain- 
ly prove  that  the  perfon  fhauid  be  faved,  fo  that  fome  of  them 
that  lived  in  ordinary  drunkeni  cfs  for  many  years,  would  after 
they  had  been  drunk  cry  out  oi  their  fin,  a-nd  be  ready  to  tear 

C  2  their 


Cn; 


their  hair,  and  profefs  themfelvcs  unworthy  to  come  among 
Chriftiansj  and  yet  ftill  would  profefs  thactbey  were  confi- 
denc  of  pardon  by  the  blood  of  Chrift,  becaufe  they  were  as 
certain  as  chat  they  lived,  that  they  hated  their  fin  as  fin,  and 
defircd  tobegodly,  and  could  wifh  themfelvcs  in  theltaceof 
the  bcft,  and  did  believe  all  the  word  of  God  to  be  true,  be* 
caufe  it  is  God's  that  cannot  lie, and  had  felt  experimentally  the 
fweetnefs  and  power  of  it  on  their  hearts,  and  did  truft  on 
Chrift  alone  for  Salvation.I  do  not  feign  this,but  have  found  it 
in  old  and  common  Dfunkards,and  fuch  like,for  many  &  many 
years  together.Now  the  work  that  I  had  to  do  with  thefe  per- 
fons  was  to  convince  them  that  fuch  good  defires  as  are  habi- 
tually,   and  in  ordinary  pradice  conquered  by  flefhly,  world- 
ly defires,  will  never  prove  the  foul  to  be  fandified  :  and 
fuch  a  Belief  as  is  conquered  by  unbelief  or  fenfuality ,  will 
never  prove  a  man  to  be  juftjfied  ;  and  fuch  a  love  to  God 
and  the  godly,  as  is  conquered  by  a  greater  love  to  carnal  felf, 
and  the  world,  may  ftand  with  a  ftate  of  condemnation.    O 
bat  fay  theyj^vf  are  certain  that  we  di\femble  not  ;    Thefe  defires^ 
Utiief,  Love^  &LC.    Vpehaze.     Should  I  fay^  that  they  lie,  and 
have  none  fuch,   they  would  never  believe  me,  nor  fliould  I 
believe  my  felfjbecaufe  I  believe  the  Scripture,  and  the  credible 
Pj  ofeflions  or"  men.   I  conclude  therefore  they  have  that  fuch 
ads  as  they  affirm,  and  that  they  are  Analogically  good  ( in 
moral  fenfe,  )  and  come  from  the  common  Grace  of  Chrift  : 
but  that  befides  the  Reality  of  thefe  ads ,  they  muft  have 
them  in  fuch  a  predora  nant  degree, as  is  fuitcd  in  its  Effentials 
to  the  Obj«A  ,  and  will  overcome  their  contraries  in  the 
main  ben' of  heart  and  life,  and  p.ove  predominant  habitsin 
the  foul,    before  they  can  hence  conclude  that  they  are  fandi- 
fied  :  Where  note,   that  the  men  that  I  fpeak  of,  trie  not 
their  ads  by  a  futablenefs  to  the  objed  in  its  relative  perfedi- 
ons,    nor  do  they  once  know,  or  at  left  confider  of  the  mo- 
ral refpedive  formality  of  thefe  Graces;  but  look  all  at  the 
Ad  as  it  isexercifed  onGod,  Chrift,  Scripture,  Saints,  fub- 
llantialiy  confidered,  or  if  confidered  as  Good?  True,  &c. 
yet  not  efledualiy  apprehended  as  the  chief  good,  moft  cer- 
tain neceffjry  Truth,  &c.    Sothacitisthefubltance  or  mat- 
ter 


Ci3) 


tcr  C  as  its  commorily  called  )  of  their  Bercf,  Love ,  Defire, 
C^c.  That  our  queftion  with  fuch  men  is  about:    And  there- 
fore my  bufinefs  with  them  was  to  (hew  them  what  it  is  in  the 
C^fatttr  and  Subjiance  of  thefe  Ads  that  is  necefTary  to  prove 
them  formallyyfpecificaHy  Javincr^,  viz,  thatbel'des  the  right 
conceptions  of  the  objed,  the  ad  muft  be  in  fuch  a  prevalent 
Dcgree.as  will  prove  a  predominant  Habit  in  the  fouliand  that 
fuch  uneflfcdual  Actsas  are  before  defcribed  ,  may  ftand  wich 
a  ttace  of  condemnation.     Hereupon  it  is,  that  though  Grace 
is  fpecihed  and  tobedenominaied  from  its  moral  form;  yet 
my  bulincfsled  meto  prove  that  this  moral  form  was  incon- 
.  fifter.t  with  any  degree  of  the  phyfical  Act,  but  what  was  or- 
dinarily thus  prevalent  or  predominant  :  And  therefore  to  af- 
ert  thaaiiis  moral  form  did  lie  in  a  phyficaldegree  of  the 
matter,  and  that  a  lower  fubdued  degree  of  the  Ad,  was 
matter  uncapable  of  fuch  a  form,  though  it  was  capable  of 
the  general  Nature  of  (  an  Analogical  at  left  )  Vertue,  Daty 
or  moral  Good,  denominared  from  fome  anlwerabler. .'is  ro 
the  Precept,  (  at  X^^ficundurnqnid)  yet  it  was  not  capable 
of  the  fpccial  form  of  that  Faith ,  Love  ,  Defirc,   &c.   to 
which  God  harh  promifed  Salvation,  as  the  Condition, 

Reader,  Once  more  I  have  as  plainly  given  then  my  mean- 
ing as  I  can  fpeak  :  Forgive  jme  thefe  Repetitions  and  con- 
fiderthc  occafion  So  that  you  fee,  this  Learned,  Reverend 
man  doth  build  all  bis  oppofitionon  a  raeer  milhke/uppcfing 
me  to  fpeak  of  the  Fcrm^  who  fpoke  only  of  the  Na'-urc  of 
the  Ad,  or  the  Thjfical  AUtter  ^  f  as  before  exprelTed.  ) 
And  now  I  raa'-.e  thee  the  Judge  of  my  impertinences. 

The  fame  anf^cr  fcrves  to  his  fourth  Confid.and  bis  Q  quid 
hoc  ai  Ifhic.i  Bovts,  ~\  (  who  have  been  fo  long  in  the  yoak 
that  they  are  ready  to  lie  down  :  )  and  to  his  Qucflion 
I  IVill  it  hffjce  follow  that  all  Btlitf,  &C.  are  fpccifcall]/  (he 
fame?  ]  //«/»'.  No.  Wc  are  here  agreed  too  :  But  it  is  no 
fuch  new  thing  tocall  either  our  faculties  the  fubjed  matter 
of  the  Ads  or  the  ^y^Sh  the  Afatter  of  our  Graces  but  chat  [ 
might  pardonably  fuppofv,  that  I  might  meet  with  fome  fuch 
l1llv  foul  as  would  ufe  fuch  a  notion  :  and  if  it  will  but  follow, 
that  [  /ntht<'.  m'-ich  ,  thire  is  r,o ph^/ical  fpec'fick^d jfertfjce  ]  It: 
fervcth  my  ends.  C  3  '^<*i- 


CH) 


P4^^  327.  Confid.?.  He  again  rcceiteth  the  famepaffage, 
that  L  TheZJnderflanding  AndlVillare  ]hyfiGall)  the  jAtne.    ] 
And  again,  The  third  time  leaves  out  Allt  when  I  Paid,  Our 
ZJnderftandings  andl^Vill  are  fhyficAllj  all  the  [awe:  which  more 
perfwades  me  that  he  never  read  the  Book  which  he  confutes, 
but  tookhisy^W^rj  tranfcrfpr,  and  fee  ftill  our  happy  Agree- 
ment.   The  charge  here  is  but  \^imprjpriety  and  i>'.congrHitj.'\ 
(And  I  heard  ere  now  from  one  of  his  fcholars ,  that  1  could 
fcarcc  ffeak^congruoujlj.)  but  I  would  I  could  have  fpoken  In- 
teUigthlj.    But  I  am  glad  that  I  fpoke  not  falfe/^.    The  firfl  In- 
congrtiitj  or  Impropriety  is,that  Lcall  ail  ourunderftandings  and 
\N\\\s[Jtke  fnbJlAnces~\  when  they  are  but  Accidents.^  But  i.  An 
Ad  is  but  an  Accident,  and  yet  what  more  common  phrafe, 
then  ftibftantid  AElm,  when  we  diftinguifli  it  from  the  Moral 
Form. Read  firft  his  own  Exercitanon,(i^  mjilo.  and  then  judge. 
2.  I  ventured  long  ago  to  tell  him,   my  Reconcileablenefs  to 
the  Scotifis  Nominals  &c.  and  that  I  made  it  no  Article  of 
my  faith  ;    that   the  faculties  are    Really   diftind  from  the 
foul ,    and  then    they  may  be  fubftances.      For   I  am  of 
their  mind  that  think  the  foul  is  not  a  meer  Accident.    And 
if  all  the  Rabbicsof  that  mind  in  the  Popifti  fchooleshavc  no 
Authori-y,I  may  modeftly  fay  with  one  of  our  higeft  Foorm  at 
home  \_^{od Phyhfophantur  voluKtatem  C  \ntelUcitim^e^e  dn- 
Oi  Potential  reipf a  dtfiinElas^  dogma  Philofophicum  ejf ,  abomni- 
hti4haudrcceptHm,  &Tbeologici4dogmatihi^  ^firwandU  autin^ 
firmandi^ ^fundameHtum  minime  idcneum.  Davenant  Detcrm. 
CL?7.pag.i66.] 

My  next  incongruity  is,that  I  fay  they  are  of  [_l{keffib/}afjce] 
having  faid  that  they  are  Phyfically  the  fame.  Anfrv.  Had  I 
faid  that  they  are  7>(umericallj  the  fame,  and  yet  []  of  like  nA- 
tures~\lhdidi{^o\itincongrno^Jl^.  But  O that  I  were  as  wife 
or  Learned  a  man  as  they  that  ordinarily  cafl  a  fp(cifi'\un  ty  by 
the  name  of  \  a  Itkenefs ;  )  if  the  Latine  [_fir»ilei]  ht  them  nor, 
yetcheEnglifh  ^Like~\  may.  Forour[]Z?i^f]in  En^lifli  is  mod 
ordinarily  extended  to  exprefs  [^afpecie!~]  (  But  think  not  that 
I  am  teaching  you  Englifh,butexcuting  my  incongruities  as  far 
asism.cct.J  And  if  all  this  will  not  do,  I  Hill  try  to  prevent 
your  n-xc  work  in  this  kind  ,    by  (hewing  you  what  a  difcou- 

r?gcing 


C^T) 


rageing  cask  is  before  you.  If  you  will  but  write  upon  all  the 
improprieties  of  my  writings,  it  may  put  you  to  fuch  a  volu- 
minous toyl,  as  may  make  you  repent  it  before  you  have  done , 
and  make  your  Reader  think  me  fome  worthy  learned  man, 
whofe  very  improper  fpeeches  deferve  the  obfervation  of  fo 
eminent  a  man, 

3.  You  next  grant  me  that  our  feveral  Underftandings  and 
Will,arenotfpccifical!y  diftind,  J  fo  farftiiiwe  are  Agreed. 
But  you  fay  [it  fellows  not  hm  thtir  Aflt  ma).'\  ftill  wc  are  A- 
greed.  And  in  iV.  5 .  and  6.  you  fay,  that  ^  they  do  not  only gra- 
dn^ll)  differ,]  ftill  we  arc  Agreed,  even  in  your  inP ances. 

/'rf^.329.  Your  fixth  Confid.  rcciteth  my  opinion  as  you 
thought,  but  indeed  not  mine,  ziz,.  [_  that  the  difference  u  only 
gradual ^and not  fp(cifcAl.'^  Again  you  leave  out  \_matcri<illj~^ 
and  tlie  other  limiting  exprcfllons :  Ani  why  did  I  fay,  [^Toh 
thought  th  J  m  ne  2  When  ^^^-S  32.  You  confefs  the  contrary 
is  mine. 

Yet  here  let  me  tell  you  once  for  all,  tha:  if  my  terms  of  [a 
Phji/ical  fpec-.fca'.ioH  ]  on  the  reafon  given  of  that  Name,  be 
judg:  d  by  you  improper  (which  I  yet  find  you  not  affirm)  I  am 
refolvcd  not  to  defend  them  againft  you  ^  but  am  ready  with 
thankfulnefs  to  learn  a  fitter  manner  of  exprcfiion  ,  as  verily 
believing  my  felf  to  be  filter  to  be  your  fcholar,  then  your  An- 
cagonift  in  Philofophy,  efpecially  the  terms. 


S  E   CT.   III. 


\7'Our  firft  Reafon  for  my  Opinion  (pretended  againR  it) 
.  is  long  ago  agreed  tQ  ;  Nay,  fee  the  height  of  our  Agree- 
ment :  1  have  over  aniover  exprefled  my  confent  to  this  part 
of  your  Ileafon,  in  which  you  know  how  currantly  the  fchool- 
mcnandour  own  Divines  are  againft  you,i'/<.  \T hut  the  Afts 
of  common  Qrace  in  the  mrtgeneratet  are  not  fo  mt^ch  at  Evan- 
gdiciUy  ^o')cL~\  !'uty£t  that:  I  feem  rot  ro  hold  what  I  do  not, 
i  rrtull  add,  that !  mcjn  thic  they  have  not  that  Mora',  good- 
11' f\  which  in  the  firit  and  moft  proper  fenfe  defcrvcs  that  De- 
nom'nation  ^  but  yet  thic  they  are,  not  only  lef  evil^nor  only 

mateiiMlj 


(i5) 


YHAteriaUj goo\  ^  but  alfo  :hac  they  are  ^io^tx.\^ good^ftcanmrn 
ejuiiy&intantHmi  and  that  they   have  fuch  an  iAnatogicd 
^ooj'^fjO,  as  Accidence  have  an  entity  :  which  is  not  Nothing; 
And  though  they  may  ail  be  called  fin,  yet  they  have  fomewhac 
in  them  that  is  better  t  en  fin:  or  elfc  you  were  to  blame  for 
calling  them  cowwow  (i/r^cf :  yea,  I  doubt  not  but  fuch  Ads  as 
ycu  fay  are  but  fplendld^  peccata,  have  had  from  God  a  tempo- 
ral Reward ;  yea  and  have  been  preparatory  to  the  Reception 
of  faving  Grace.     Some  Duties  God  rcquireth  of  the  unregc- 
nerate,  as  a  means  to  their  Repeneration,  which  Tome  of  them 
do  perform.     And  the  ugh  he  Accept  them  not  fa  far  as  to 
efteera  them  either  conditions  of  Juftification,  or  Properties  of 
the  juftified,  yet  fo  far  doth  he  Accept  them,as  that  ordinarily 
he  judgeth  and  ufeth  them  as  jiue-r  for  faring  Grace  then 
others.    If  they  could  do  nothing  towards  their  own  fanftiii- 
ca'iion,  God  and  his  Minifters  would  have  fpared  many  words 
that  are  ufed  to  them.  And  if  there  were  no  more  I'kelyhood 
that  they  fhould  find  Grace  in  Hearing.  Reading,  confidera- 
tion,  A?king  it,  c^c.  then  in  doing  nothing,  or  plunging  them- 
felves  in  fin,  we  would  fay  lefs  to  them  then  we  do, to  put  thera 
on  fuch  means.     I  hope  you  will  not  differ  from  me  in  this. 

Page-2,'^2.  The  explication  of  my  mind  ,  you  cail  aConfef- 
fion,  and  foconfefs  [  th^tt  ufon  evident  Reafon,  I  confefs  that  the 
ylfls  ofcowfKO'i  and fvtcial Grace ,  as  they  are  morally  confiierei, 
differ  Jpecifica/Ij^  and  not  only  gradually,']  So  that  if  the  Rea- 
der believe  either  you  or  me,  we  are  agreed  in  thedecifionof 
the  Quefton  it  felf.  And  then  I  can  eafily  excufc  the  oppofition 
of  a  profeft  Confer.ter,  though  I  underftand  not  the  intent 
of  it. 

But  you  fay  thatQr^^«  the  ^^.eflion  is  put ^  ho\\>  common  ani 
f^tcial  Graces  differ  ?  the  ^'/^f<^-er  mujl  ever  be  Ajfi'-m^itlve^ 
r^^r  rkj^/jf-fr  fpecie,nongradu  folum.]  Anf».i.  \  thought 
that  Queflion  ^  How  cominoytar;dfptii!ilGrac£sdife^?'\  Had 
no:  been  capable  of  an  Afnrmation  or  Negation  :  Cat  if  my 
thoughts  were  improper,  1  fubmit.  2.  I  am  confident  that  m 
fenfe,  I  fhail  here  alio  agree  with  you  ,  whether  you  i^'ill  or 
no, 

I.  If  the  Ctceft'onbe  put  in  your  terms  J  confef?my  opini- 
on 


(17) 


onwasjthattlie  Anfwerfliouldbc  applied  to  the  comprehcn- 
fivencfsof  the  Qucftion  ,  and  I  fliould  fay  that  \^T hey  ^tfer 
forma'lj  tljw^&c  quafi  mattriallj,  thus  a>jdthtu~\  and  fo  fpeak  to 
both.  But  if  2.  theQaeftion  hadbeen,  [^  tvhethtr  common  and 
ffecial  Grace  do  difftr  jpedficallj.]  I  fhould  alwaies  affirm  it 
(fuppofing  but  fuch  a  ipecifick  difference,  as  between  fubftmce 
and  Accident, or  an  Egg  and  a  Bird,  or  3n  Embrio  and  a  Bcaft. 
remembnng  that  omne  (ttiUe eft  etiam  diJfimUe ,  leaft  1  be  mif- 
interpreted.)  For  when  we  fpeak  of  a  moral  fubjcd,  we  muft 
fuppole  the  Queftion  fimply  nut,  to  be  morally  meant  accord- 
ing to  the  na  ureofthe  (ubje::t  -.which  are  my  very  words  in 
fevcral  publifhed  wricings.  And  I  think  verily  that  this  is  all 
you  mean.  3  .But  this  w u  notbmg  to  my  Queftion.which  was 
Y^fVheiKer  mtitert(jf!y,oy  hj  t  phjfic.t'  foectfr'atton  ^common  and 
fpfcial  Grace  did  ff'er.'^  And  this  I  did  deny, and  thought  a  gra- 
dual difference  enough,  fuppofing  the  Ads  in  both  perforjs.to 
be  fuch  as  go  commonly  under  the  fame  name,  and  have  at  leaft 
fubftmtially  the  fame  object  (as  to  believe  the  Promife,Chrift, 
O-c.)  Now  1  apprehended  that  if  you  had  put  the  Queltion  to 
me.  [  ^/tfW  mart  and  be^jl  dijftr  quoad  Corpus ,  or  quoad  ani- 
roam  fenfitivam^'^f.]  the  anfwer  muft  not  be  the  fame  as  if 
you  had  fimply  a^kt  me,  how  man  and  beaft  diftr.']  Had  I  been 
askt,  ff^hfther  the  Love  of  a  fritter  and  of  a  Huiha^d  difer  fpe- 
cifi:a//y  as  to  the  mattir  ?  I  (hould  have  faid,iVo  (nor  perhaps 
gradually'  ;  )  but  yetformtlh,  in  a  civil  moral  fence,  they  dif- 
terfpectfica/ly,  (\  et  !  know  heres  greater  difference  in  the  mat- 
ter in  our  cafe).  Had  I  been  askt  1  PVkether  the  reverence  and 
heart-fuf'jenioxt,  which  I  have  to  a  Captain  a*}d  to  the  General,  to 
a  7  u  ft  ice  cf  Peace  ^  L'e(iteytant,8cc.  and  to  the  Soveraign^  do  dif- 
fer jjjcci^ca'lf  quoad  mareriam  :  1  I  fhould  have  faid  No,  but 
gradually.  But  yer  <j»ca^form4m  civile •n^they  diferfpecifically  ? 
Vet  I  am  ready  to  let  g  1  thefe  exprefifions  when  you  wil';l  muft 
profefs,  a  word  under  your  hand  would  havccaufed  me  to  dil- 
ufe  them  ,  wit'iouc  rbs  puhlck  work  that  you  are  put  upon, 
Do  but  tell  me  vou  d  flikc  the  phnifcs,and  you  (hall  never  hear 
(  without  fuch  Veceflitv  as  I  expeft  not )  that  ever  I  will 
publckly  nfe  thmmore.  I  hate  troubling  the  Church  with 
contendirjg  for  meet  words  at  leaft,    unlefs  I   were   bettet 

D  at 


Ci8) 


at  wording   my    conceptions  then   I   am. 

But  ft  ay,  I  find  my  felt  already  under  the  Obligation  ;  P^^. 
353.  You  plainly  fay,  Q  th4t  if  in  thiir  moral  can fidtration^  they 
fii/l  M§'er  fptcifica/iy  from  common  Qraces^  it  can  never  with  any 
cengruifj  he  affirmtdy  that  in  anjf  other  confideration  ,    they  d-^er 
onif  ^rAiuall)  ?  ]  Strange  .'  Why  fo  ?  Q  For  infiancej  Vphtn  tts 
faidthattn  tkeir  Natural  and  Phyficdl  confederation  ^  they  differ 
only  in  Dtiree  ;    /  Rffhi  that  the  A^t  of  the  fVi/i  and  Vnder- 
Jiandfng  in  that  confideration  are  not  faving  Graces  at  a//.]  You 
have  nienced  me,  when  I  have  done  with  this  account  of  my 
Diflent,  though  you  have  not  convinced  me,  (having  as  great 
advantage  as  moft  men  living  to  have  done  it,  in  my  efteem  of 
your  great  abilities.)  i .  If  this  Reafon  be  good  ,  then  I  muft 
fp:ak  of  nothing  butthe/rriw  of  any  Beina  -  nor  may  I  con- 
gruouHy  mention  any  material  or  Accidental  difference'     For 
ihey  are  not  denominated  from  matter  or  Accidents.  May  I  not 
fay  that  a  Crow  and  an  Oufel  are  of  one  colour,  becaufe  that 
qHA  color fiti  cbey  are  not  denominated  fuch.    May  I  not  fay 
that  a  Stpan  and  ajheep  quoad colorem  do  differ  only  gradually, 
though  ijttoadcolorem  they  are  not  a  Swan  orjheep  f    May  jj  not 
f&y ythAt  m at eriaUy  a  Ship  Sind  a  Barge  do  differ  but  gradual- 
ly, becaufe  ex  materia  they  are  not  a  Ship  or  Barge  ?  Or  that 
m^teriaff;  a  Dagger  and  a  fveor^  do  differ  but/r<»<:/«4^,becaurc 
ihAX.  ex  materia  ihf^^rtnoiQzWtd  a  f^ordor  dagger  ?     lam 
not  yet  convinced  of  ihefc  things ;  but  for  your  fake  I  purpofc 
to  fay  no  more  of  ic  publickiy. 

You  add,  \^A»d  therefore  if  it  he  granted  that  in  that  confide- 
ration they  differ  only  Cradnally^  )tt  it  ^ill  not  thence  foHow^that 
common  and  jpectat  Graces  differ  only  in  Degree ^^  Anf^.  Very 
true?  becanfethis  isanAffertion  of  them  ^ <»;»/;  ccnfidered, 
SLtidforma'ly,  and  not  limited  ad  materinm.  But  if  you  will 
grant  that  mater iaUy  they  differ  but  in  Degfee,  you  grant  my 
Propoficion  im  terminia  (as  to  that  rruch  J 

I  rather  fufped  that  when  the  bufincfs  is  well  opened,  the 
Difference  will  be  between  me  and  mot  that  are  offended 
with  m^  ^[rvhtt  her  indeed  they  mattrialiy  differ  fo  much  as  in  de- 
gree ?  And  they  will  fay, that  a  Lo^er  Degree  may  confifl  Vcith 
the  true  form :    And  then  men  will  fee  that  it  is  the'r  bringing 

Grace 


09) 


Grace  m*tt>iallj  lo^er  then  I  do ,  and  not  their  aivaxctng  it 
formally  higher  that  is  Our  Difference.  Sure  thac  Reverend 
Dodor  that  hath  already  oppofed  me  in  this  Point,  doth  harp 
upon  that  ftring.But  I  could  wifli  they  would  let  this  be  plainly 
underftood  :  I  think  not  faving  Grace  materially  fo  Lo^  a 
thing  as  they  :  AndformaSj  I  think  it  4s  high  as  thtj  do.  But  let 
fuch  underftand  that  it  is  towards  the/^w?  ob]eU^  that  the  A^s^ 
muft  be  compared,  and  not  as  exercifed  on  diferent  olfjefis.  A 
wicked  man  may  have  a  clearer  knowledge  of  earthly  things 
then  a  true  Chriftian  hath  o( God  and  Heaven  ;  but  not  fo  in* 
cenfe.and  powerful,  effedual  a  knowledge  oi God  and  Heavtn 
as  a  Chriftian  hath  :  fo  for  Belief  Defire,  Love,c^^. 

You  add  \Jhii  A^g^iment^  common  and  Jpecial 'Belief  m  thej 
A^e  Phyftcjllj cor.^ilered^differ only ^  gradually  :  thirefort  com- 
mon and  /fecial  graces  di^er  only  graJi^ally'J  in  plain  Snglijh,  k 
no  more  then  thi^^  [Thir.gs  ^'hich  are  no  Graces  at  all  di^er  onlj 
gradually,  therefore  common  aid  fpeciul  Graces  dtfftr  onlj  in 
Degree."^ 

Anfw.  But  the  condufion  is  yours  and  not  mine  •  or  equally 
renounced  by  you  and  me :  My  Propofition  was,th^c  Q  mute- 
rially  they  differ  but  in  Degree,']  And  in  plain  Englilli  thats  no 
fuch  thing  as  you  make  it  of  your  own  pleafure  ;  but  this  much 
[_Thfe  ihiyjgs  vphich  in  refpeSl  to  the  Precept  are  called  Tint  es  j 
a^d  in  rfjpefi  to  the  Prom  fe  are  called  Conditions  ^  do  yet  mate- 
rially d  ffir  but  in  Degree.  \  Of  [_thofe gracioHt  ry46ls  whchhave 
>4n.ilogica(lj  the  form  of  Dnties ,  and  fo  of  (graces  .  but  not  the 
Form  of  Conditions,  thit  is,  faving  Graces  do  jet  m^t:  really  dif- 
fer but  in  Degree  from  thofe  that  have  that  Form.  J  This  wai 
the  true  fence  of  my  Propofition.  And  whereas  I  put  [_as  fa- 
ving ^  in:o  it,  it  was  but  co  exprefs  t'nac  it  was  Grace  as  faving^ 
('refpedingthe  PromifcJ  and  not  Cjrace  as  meer  iuty  (  refpeit- 
ing  the  bare  Precept)  ^hofe  mtterial  Difference  I  enquired  af- 
ter. Only  I  think  thac  there  is  a  certain  Degree  of  the  Phy- 
ficil  AA  of  NeceHicy  to  make  it  the  matter  of  fuch  a  Form. 
For  ic  Will  diu'eli  in  no  other  marter.  Againft  this  the  late  Op- 
p  )nenrs  feem  to  mike  a  lower  Degree  of  matter  capable:  And 
tho^e  :hat  formerly  1  was  won:  to  converfe  with  did  think  thac 
a  hii]her  fort  of  matter  was  Neceflary  ,  of  whom  I  fpokeaf- 

D  2  ter 


(zo) 


ter  that  Propofiiion  :    of  which  more  anon  about  infufed 
Grace. 


Se  c  T.  IV. 

'Tplll  the  eighth  Confid.you  do  but  exprefs  your  further  Con- 
-^  rent. 

InConfid.  8./'<«_^.3  34.33J.  Youfay  [^that  common  and  ffe- 
clal  Graces  conjiji  not  fofiroierly  and  primarily  in  the  ACls  and 
txercife  of  Faith  And  Love  ^  &C.  04  in  the  Ha'Ats  and  principle 
from  whence  they  come,  fo  that  the graciottfnefs  th-tt  n  in  themu 
mt{a4fnares,^Q)  ipfis  adibus  originahter  intrinfeca,  ^c.  ] 
Anf^.  I.  I  require  forae  proof  before  I  believe  it,  tha-  Grace 
is  not  as  much  originally  intrinfick  in  the  Adt;  as  Habits? 
OurDvines  that  have  long  taught  us  that  the  Ad  ofFai.his 
it  that  Juftifies ;  ('and  alfo  that  the  Ads  of  Faith  and  Repen- 
tance, go  before  the  Habit,)  thought  oiherwife.     2.  For  ray 
part,  I  have  irons  enow  in  the  fire  ;   I  have  not  engaged  my 
iclf  in  this  Controverfie,  and  fee  no  reafon  why  I  (hould  [yvhe-. 
tberthe  I^abitor  AU  hfrfl  ?  I  long  thought  as  Pembbt  that 
the  Habit  was  firft.     But  fecond  thoughts  have  made  me  at 
Icaft  doubtful  ,  and  loofened  from  that  opinion;  and  finding 
chat  the  ftream  of  Proicftant  Divines  have  taken  VccAtion  to 
be  Antecedent  to  fanShficAtion  ,  and  that  Vocation  conceincth 
{p-ijjt^ve  fnmpt^)  the  A5is  of  faith  and  Rep^n'a  cf^^n<iifd»Oifi- 
ttontht  Habit  -^  I  have  refolved  that  without  further  Light,  I 
will  never  more  oppofe  this  opinion.     Its  a  probable  way  (as 
Camera  exprefTcih  it)  that  the  Holy  Ghoft  by  t  he  word  with- 
out ahabit,excireth  the  firft  Aft  by  the  means  of  the  prefented 
Objed  t  2LVtdi\\\zi  eodem  injlaiti  by  that  Ad  he  produccth  a 
Habit,  fo  that  only  in  order  cf  Nature  the  Ad  is  firft,  bur  not 
of  time :  The  Spirit  is  as  the  Hand  ,  the  Objed  and  Word  as 
the  Seal,  the  Ad  of  imprelfion  on  the  intelied  is  firft  in  order 
of  Nature,  and  fo  upon  the  Will  the  impre  (Ted  Act  and  Habit 
immediately  are  cflfeded  by  it.    i.We  u'e  tofay,  ih^tHabiitis 
imfuft  fe  habent  admoda-'^  accjdtji.o'uw  :    though  ibey  have  a 
higher  power  CiTectingthem^its  itrprobable  that  they  are  effe- 

ded 


ded  in  another  order.  zThisfuiteth  with  the  Nature  of  man* 
3. And  this  makes  the  word  the  Inftrument  ofthac  work,wherc' 
as  (  which  moves  me  very  much  )  according  to  the  contrary 
opinion,  the  Word  cannot  pofiibly  be  the  Inftrument,or  means 
of  our  Regeneration,  as  to  the  Habit,  but  only  a  fubfequenc 
means  to  excite  or  educe  the  Ad  ,   which  feems  againft  the 
ftream  of  Scripture,  and  Divines  of  all  Ages.      But  truly  my 
opinion  is,  that  as  the  W^W  hlorveth  ulcere  it  I'/leth^dcc.  fo  it 
evtry  ontthatis  b  rn  of  the  Sfirit  :  And  that  no  man  can  fo 
trace  the  Sprit  of  God  as  to  be  able  certainly  to  fay  whether 
the  Ad  or  Habit  of  Grace  be  Hrft.  But  it  feems  more  probable 
and  congruous  to  Scripture  to  place  the  ad  ft;  fi  in  Nature,  but 
in  one  instance  of  time.    But  I  will  not  contend  with  any  man 
that  thinks  otherwifc. 

2.1am  paft  doubt  that  the  Ads  of  Grace  are  firft  difcerned  : 
Nay  for  my  part,  I  know  not  what  it  means  to  difcern  any  Ha- 
bit in  my  felf  hu:  by  the  Ads.  And  therefore  the  Ads  in  that 
refpe-lt  muft  be  firft  fought  after. 

4  But  lam  thus  far  wholly  of  your  mind,  that  no  ad  can 
prove  a  man  truly  fandified.but  as  it  proves  a  Habit ;  and  that 
ungodly  men  may  by  ficknefs,  convidions  >  common  Grace, 
C^c.  be  carried  far  in  Ads:  and  that  our  principal  fatisfadion 
about  our  fincerity  is  by  finding  Predominant  Rooted  Habits, 
which  are  a3  a  New  Nature  to  the  foul. Thus  far  we  are  agreed. 
From  all  this  I  anfwcr  your  inference,  ^<«^.3  36.  That  he  that 
tn^uires^rvhether  common  Andfpecitl  Qraces  differ  [pec  i^cml I j-,  or 
only  gradually^  fhould  (if  he  will)  ration/tllj  proceed  fir ji ,  And 
princifaUy  encjuire  coKCtrmng  the  Habits,  ^c. 

Anftv.'^MX.  i.You  muft  nottakeyour  Reafons(from  the  Ha- 
bits priority,  &c.  )  for  granted^  as  long  as  it  is  a  finguiar 
opinion  among  Proteftant?,  and  unproved.  2.  That  mult  be 
firft  enquired  aft  r,  wh  ch  is  firft,  (  and  only  intmedia'elyinfe^) 
difccrnable  :  butfuchis  the  ad  of  Grace,  and  not  the  habirj 
£rgo^(^c.  3  However,  If  you  will  confute  m.e,  ycumuft 
confu'e  the  pofition  that  I(  whether  rationally  or  irratio- 
nally )  difputed  for,  and  not  make  another  of  your  own  ,  and 
dii'pute  for  that,  andtskeit  for  a  ronfuration.  4.  But 'or 
my  part,  I  tike  not  the  Ads  and  Habits  fo  much  todiff.-r  ; 

D  3  but 


(11) 

but  (  a$  on  the  by  I  toucht  it  at  firft,  To  ^  I  (half  coofirnt  that 
yoa  put  both  hereafter  into  the  queftion  :  but  yet  remember, 
that  I  put  them  not  in  mine  at  firft. 

Pagt^lJ.  You  fay,  [iVe  are  no'i^  come  to  the  king  and  fcn»' 
daticn  of  this  C  ontr  over  fie  ^&c.^  which  you  lay  down  in  this 
Pofition,  The  habits  of f^ectal  dni[^favin^  Qr ace,  are  not  only 
grAdftnllj^  hut  fpecificallj  dijiinli  front  the  h:thits  and  A  Sis  of  all 
common  Grace  rvhatfoever.  ] 

^«/tf.  I.  I  am  wholly  on  your  fide  ;  and  where  you  have 
wrote  a  leaf  for  it,  I  think  I  have  written  many  :  fo  that  if 
bulk  might  go  for  worth  and  weight,  I  had  over-  merited  you 
in  this  Controverfie.  2.  But  I  intrcat  you,  if  you  delight  in 
this  kind  of  work,  that  hereafter  you  will  make  no  hinges  or 
foundations  of  controverfies  with  me  without  my  own  con- 
fent :  either  let  me  agree  with  you  in  the  ftatingof  the  queftir 
on,  or  elfe  pretend  not  that  you  difpure  againft  me. 

Your  reafons  to  page  349,  do  learnedly  militate  for  the 
Aflertion  that  I  maintain  :  and  though  fomc  words  on  the  by 
lie  not  fo  even  with  my  conceptions,  yet  I  tankfully  accept 
your  confent  in  the  main. 

Your  principal  pofition  alfo  pag.  5  ^  2.  is  the  fame  with  mine 
and  I  have  no  mind  to  quarrel  with  fo  faft  a  friend,  yet  I  am  fo 
far  off  Becayjfts  and  Maldonates  mind  ,  at  to  think  that  where 
miraculous  and  juftifying  faith  are  together ,  they  differ  no 
more  (  at  moft)  then  the  fenfitive  and  rational  foul  in  the  fame 
man.     But  I  am  not  of  their  mind,  that  they  are  not  feparable. 
And  for  hiftorical  Faith,  if  youmeantheaffentto  the  truth  of 
Scripture,  I  take  it  to  differ  from  juftifying  faich  af  much  as  the 
Intelled  doth  from  the  man,  and  no  more.    And  for  tempora- 
ry faith,  I  take  it  to  contain  (  oft  at  left  )  more  then  bare  Af- 
fenr,  and  to  be  a  fuperficial  common  AflTent,  Confent  and  Affi- 
ance,having  materially  allthe  Adsof  faving  faith,  but  none 
of  them  infincerity,  that  is  with  a  rooted  predominant  Habit, 
and  prevalent  effedual  Ads,  but  is  a  livelefs,  dreaming  ,  unef- 
fedual  thing.    But  this  on  the  by. 

To  your  reafons.  i.  I  confent  ^/>.ij^.  354. )  that  the  Z-Mf-r 
uftoiy  i  yet(asD'.  Harrisfainht)  hethanatural  tendcrnefs, 
fometiraes,  and  a  fupcrficia!  t.^ndernefs  from  common  Graces. 

2.  I 


C^3) 

z.  I  confent  that  Temporary  faith  hatb  not  ^deftk  of  earth  J 
or  [[  much  earthy  J  as  Chrift  faith,  OMat.i  3.5.  which  is  the 
fame  with  Q  no  root  ]  for  had  it  not  had  fuperHcial  rooting,  it 
had  never  come  to  a  blade  and  car.  What  infition  the  branch 
is  in  Chrift  not  bearing  frait  had,  i  John  15.  I  leave  to  fur- 
ther enquiry.    But  fome,how  they  are  faid  to  be  in  Chrift. 

3.  I  grant  that  the  Temporary  faith  brought  forth  no  fruit 
thitis  ncfpecial Fruit '  for  no  doubt,  but  it  may  bring  forth, 
much  common  fruit'  moft  think  fo  far,  as  that  fuch  maygtve 
their  bodies  to  be  barnt.  And  Mr.  Shcpheard  in  your  Book 
doth  mention  a  great  deal. 

4,  I  cafily  grant  alfo  that  Temporary  faith  is  cowardly,  and 
fails  in  trial :  in  all  this  we  are  agreed. 

Pai^e  35:9.    You  begin  your   mon  dijlintl  coyifirmations : 
Though  I  agree  with  you  in  the  caufe,  yet  nor  in  every  word  of 
yourConfitmatione.  Your  ^T^^\f(trtz\cc\%\n\_the  Nature  of 
the  Priiictp/es,<^  caufes  whence  they  jpring-^  Common  bilifbe'tng 
geni^itllj  an  accjHiyed  difpojition  or  Habit  prod  tee i   b)  the  ubilitj 
of  our  Natural  ZJnderlianding^affifted^ith  good  education  and 
indiiflry  :  but  javing  Faith  the  immediate  wnk.  of  the  Spirit : 
one  n  Habitus  acquifitu%  the  other  infufus.J     ftyinf.  f ,  Either 
you  mean  here  the  Extrin[ick^[_Principles a*id Caufe t^oi  the  //j- 
tri)j1ck..     If  the  Utrinfick^^  then  either  the  feul  ,  thefacu/tier^ 
or  the  Habiti :  not  the  Habits ;  For  its  thofc  that  are  now  the 
fubjeA  of  your  Qiieftionj  ^and  therefore  you  call  them  not  [the 
Pnnciptet  and  Caufei  ]  0    themfclves ,  though  you  might  call 
them  fo  as  to  the  Ads.     Not  the/^c«/r;>/,  nor  the /<?«/;  for 
you  yield  before  thatthe/<>«/or  faculties  of  Regenerate  and 
nnregenerate  differ  not  fpecifically .  It  is  therefore  the  extrin^ 
fick,  [principles  aid  Caufes']  that  you  meant.     And  if  fo  ,  it  is 
either  Qod  himfe/f, or  fome  AHion  of  God  .  hat  is  a  miUle  thing 
between  the  /Igey.t  and  the  EffeEl ,    or  h  is  the  In(l*umentat 
Caufe.  Notthe  ^njlrument  :     For     i.  You  exprcfs a  Higher 
cauie,    2.  and  chefame  wordistheinftrument  of  God  in  cau- 
fing  a  conamon  &  fpeciai  Faith:  the  fa  me  feed  fell  on  the  good 
ground  and  theftony.    Nor  is  it  God  hvmfelf  y^u  that  mean  : 
ior  hcisnotof  ny^fciV/,  much  lefs  of  (^t^rr^wt  (piciu,  as  he  is 
the  Principle  and  Caufe  of  different  effefts :  *^or  is  his  tvill  fo  : 

foe 


(H) 


for  his  Will  is  his  EfTencc.  Yet  I  would  ^as  aforefaid  J  confefs 
that  Denommatione  extrmfeca  ,  his  iViliot  Lovt  may  havedi> 
vers  Denommations ^  according  to  the  diverficy  of  fjf:'^/ .-  But 
yet  not  denominated  jpecificallj  divers  from  every  diftinct  j^fc»- 
ficAtion  in  the  effefts.  Nor  can  it  be  your  meaning,!  think,that 
fpecificalljidifiir>6i  Wilis  in  God  are  the  cattfes  :  For  you  fay 
fag.ZT.'^-  323.  \_The  favour  and  Love  of  Go  J  to  his  people  Comes 

not  no^  into  confiieration, 1 .  This  '{ifubje^ive  in  Deo, 

2.  "Becatife  the  Grace  of  God  in  this  notion  at  it  ftgnifieih  his  love 
toM  is  not  capable  of  any  degrees  j  the  Love  of  Qod ,  oi  all  other 
^Els  of  the  Divine  Nature^    being  lil^e  God  himfelf  abfolutelf 
Jimple  without  any  compofition  ejfentialor  gradual.]  Not  to  en- 
quire how  that  which  [«r  God  himfelf  can  be  /ike  God  himfelf,  ] 
Cfor  we  all  fpeak  incongraoufly  fometimes  )  from  hence  its 
plain  that  it  is  not  the  Love  of  god  as  in  himfelf  that  you  call 
\jhe  Principles  or  Catifes»]lt  remams  then  that  it  muft  be  feme 
A^ion  or  Emanation  intermediate  ,  or  as  pafling  from  God  to 
theeffed,  But thats  not  likely  neither  :  For   i.  You  feem  to 
be  moft  friendly  to  the  Thomtfts  in  other  points;  and  you  know 
that  they  and  many  more  (with  many  of  our  own  )  do  main' 
tain  that  there  is  no  more  Execution  or  Operation  neceffdry 
expurte'Deihwx.h^xi  meer  Velle ;  and  that  his  willing  the  tffed 
to  be  thu5  or  thus,  at  this  or  chat  time  exiftent. doth  produce  it. 
Z.    Your  felf  faid,  ttbi  fhp.    [  The  favour  and  Love  of  God  is 
fubjedive  in  Deo.  &terminacive  only  wnobis-]     5.  If  there 
bean  c/»fr/«fro»diftinft  abepera»te  (^reove^atd^   itisaC''^^- 
tnre  or  the  Creator  :  Not  the  Creator^  for  he  is  the  Agent  ;  if 
a  Creature,  they  that  will  prove  a  fpecifick  diffcrrence  in  it, muft 
firft  tell  Us  rvh-it  creature  it  is  ?  and  fhew  us  the  general  Nature 
of  it.     4.  Many  Philofophers  think  it  inconfiftenc  with  Gods 
immediate  Attingencie  and  Operation,  immediatione  vtrtutis 
^fuppoftci.  So  that  [  fcarce  think  that  in  this  you  place- the 
fpecifick  Difference, or  gather  them  to  betoto  ccelo  dflant^  as 
you  fay- 

But  itisnotimig'nablethat  you  may  mean  tooppofe  the 
extririfick  and intrinficl^  Caufes  in  the  different  perfons ,  as  if 
[_man!o^n  faculties  2  Were  the ciufeof  Temporary  isiizh,  and 
[^GodsVi^iH]  the caufe  of /4t/;»^  faith  ?  No,I  dare  notenterraia 

fuch 


c^o 


fuch  a  conjedure.For  1. 1  doubt  not  but  you  willyield^that  tern* 
porary  faith  could  not  be  produced  wiihouc  the  will  of  God  : 
At  leal>,  they  that  think  man  cannot  determine  his  own  will 
to  the  ad  of  lin,  till  God  dorh  phyfically  predetermine 't;  will 
I  hope  yield  that  man  cannot  Temporarily  Believe  without  the 
willof  God.     2.  And  I  reft  aflured  that  ycu  will  yield  that 
thatmanf  foul,  or  faculties,  is  the  fubjedof  both  common  and 
fpecial  Grace.    3 .  And  thar  the  faculties  sre  as  much  efficient 
iniheProdudionof  fpecial  Grnceasof  common.     So  that  if 
they  are  not  efficient  of  fpecial  Grace,  then  not  of  common. 
Of  which  more  anon.    4,  Or  if  that  were  denied,  yet  as  long 
as  they  have  both  the  jaine  willof  God  for  their  Original,  you 
confefs  one  to  have  as  High  a  Principle  as  the  other.     And 
though  fas  is  faidj  denomiyiatione  extrinfecd^  we  may  fay  thacic 
is  a  j^eci  U LovezbsLZ  is  thecaufcofone,  and  bu'  ^common  love 
that  IS  che  C3ufe  of  the  ocher,  f  becaufe  one  is  the  willing  a  fpe- 
cial good,  and  the  other  of  a  common  )  yet  it  is  ZJnity  that  is 
the  Original  of  muliipliciij.      One  Will   of  God    caufeth 
both. 

One  more  con  jedure  :  May  you  not  mean  that  Ct^t/iww*- 
diatlj  iahccaufeof //jfciW  fakh^and  (jod  by  the  Word  is  the 
caufe  of  Tewf o^<a>-j' fdith  ,  and  fo  oppofe  the  principal  canfe 
a'one^to  the  Principal  rriihthe  In^ruHtent?  No,  that  cannot 
be:  bccaufe  i.  As  long  as  God  is  the  Principal  caufe  of  both, 
by  the  fame  will,  the  ufe  ofan  Inft;ument  in  one  only  will  prove 
no  fpecifick Difference.  2.  Becaufe  our  Divines  (and  others, 
except  fome  EnthufiAJls)  are  commonly  agreed,  that  the  word 
is  the  Inftrument  of  working  faving  faith  a«  well  as  Tempora- 
ry (though  I  confefs  I  know  not  how  that  will  confift  with  their 
opinion,  that  fay  the  Habit  is  before  the  Ad,  feeing  it  is  fcarce 
conceiveable  how  the  Word  fhould  caufe  a  Habit  without  firft 
caufing  an  Ad.  j  3 .  Bcfides,  its  commonly  affirmed,  that  God 
doth  effed  immediatione  virtutis  r>~  f::ppfiti ,  as  wejl  when 
there  is  an  Inftrumcnt  as  when  there  is  none. 

I  am  therefore  left  uncertain  of  yourfcnfe  :  but  wh'ch  ever 
it  is,  I  fee  not  how  it  will  hold>  It  is  mo;t  likely  that  you  di- 
ftiiguifh  of  Gods  ymdm  operanii^  as  ro  fome  In^nxe^  or  cauf- 
till  AHion  between  the  Agent  and  the  Subjed,  becaufe  the  fr.- 

E  fufon 


(z5) 


faftoH ind  Ac<juifiii')n  mentioned, rather  Intimates  that  then  the 
other.  As  if  by  a  mcer  General  affiftance  or  concurfe  God 
caufed  Temporary  faith,  and  by  a  fpecial  coucurfc  or  afliftance 
or  Pf e-detcrmination  he  caufed  fpecial  faith .-  But  befides  what 
is  faid  before  to  that,  if  we  might  imagine  fuch  a  mediate  Be- 
ing between  God  and  the  efifed,  as  is  capable  of  fuch  a  diffe- 
rence as  you  exprefs,  yet  that  here  there  can  be  no  fuch  thing, 
will  appear  by  what  follows,  but  I  willfirftconfideryourown 
expreflions. 

You  fay,  that  [  common  'Beliefe  is  an  Ac t^uired  faith  produced 
hjtbeAbtlityofouro'^nuncitrllaftdiKgi,  ajfified  ^ithgoodedu- 
cation  and  indujfry.]  tyfnf^,  i.  There  is  oft  as  much  ufe  of 
our  own  underftandings,  induftry,  and  of  Education  for  a  fpe- 
cial faith  as  a  Temporary  ;  But  thefe  alone  will  not  ferve  turn 
ly.  2.  You  feem  here  and  all  along  this  Paragraph ,  flatly  to 
maintain  that  Temporary  faith  is  only  thus  of  our  felves,  or 
only  Acquired,  and  not  wrought  by  any  other  help  of  God, 
and  his  Spirit,  then  what  is  Generally  neccfliry  to  all  Ads. But 
that  common  or  temporary  Faith  is  the  work  of  Gods  Spirit 
t%  well  as  faving  faith,  is  moft  cxprefs  in  Scripture :  And  that  it 
may  ai  truly  be  called  Infnfed^  and  that  it  is  from  a  fpecial  a jp. 
y?/»«(r/ of  the  Spirit,  I  (hall  prove :  (fptcialil  fay,  asoppofed 
to  mier  aenera/ htip  or  concurfe ,  though  not  fpecial ,  as  that 
ft^nifieth  what  is  proper  to  the  fa  ved. )  i .  As  to  your  feif  you 
confefs,/><«^.358.  [that  there  are  many  common  Graces  of  the 

foul fometimes  immtditttly  and  extraordinarily  infitfedby 

(jod.]    And  if  fome  common  Graces  are  infufed,  you  are  much 
difabled  from  proving  that  the  Temporary  or  common  Grace^ 
of  the  beft  of  the  unregcncrate  is  not  infufed. 

2.  The  word  [/«/»y?o»]  being  a  Metaphor,  rauft  be  refolved 
into  that  proper  cxprefiion  which  you  will  own.  If  it  fignifies 
but  a  Collation,  Donation,  or  effe(^ual  operation  of  the  Holy 
Ghoft  then  common  Graces  are  /nfufed&s  well  as  proper.  If 
if  fignifie  an  Operation  without  means,  fo  neither  common  nor 
proper  Grace  is  ordinarily  infufed  f^t  Icaft  into  the  Adult.)  If 
ir  fignifie  that  which  is  Given  by  more  then  General  Provi- 
dence, andrequireth  more  then  our  own  induftry  and  Educa^ 
lion  (which  you  mention)  to  attain  it^then  this  common  Grace 

is 


(^7) 


H  fnfufed :  (  Wc  call  it  common,  not  becaufe  all  have  it ,  nor 
becaufea  Help  common  CO  all  is  enough  to  work  icj  but  be- 
caufe it  is  fo  common  to  the  uofandificd,  as  no:  to  be  proper  to 
the  Saints.  ) 

J.    1  know  no  Scripture  that  appropriatcth  the  Title  of  [/«- 
fttfed]  to  the  Grace  proper  to  the  Saints !  And  furc  I  am  that 
fome  meani  is  appomted  to  be  ufed  for  the  Acquifition  of  fpc- 
cial  Grace :  And  therefore  fo  far  as  thofe  means  fuccecdjt  may 
be  called  ^^c^uired^tis  weW  ^s  InfufeJ.    Prov.i.f^.  The  Pro- 
raife  of  Ittfmfion  and  Effufton^  \  I  will  pour  out  my  Spirit  to  you] 
is  either  meant  of  common  mercy  ^q,  d.  /  ^iS  pou'  out  the  tt/tch- 
ings  and  perfwaftont  of  my  ipiritto  joti^  in  mj  fVord  ^  and  tht 
ttachin^  of  my  iMmiliers.  ]    Or  elfe,  if  it  fpeak  of  InJHfion  efpt- 
C»4/C7r<«c*,itreqnircth[  Tttrnmgat  Qedt  Reproof  ~\  a«  a  meanes 
antecedent;  that  of //<«. 44  3.^,5.  &  foel-2.i^,2g.  are  com- 
monly expounded  of  common  as  well  ai  fpecial  Grace  :   and 
one  of  them  is  fo  expounded  by  the  Holy  Ghoft,  ^JZ/  2.17,18. 
Zech. 12.10   feems  to  fpeak  only  of  fpecial  Grace;  but  fome 
extend  it  further. 

4.  Certain  I  am  that  both  the  Gifts  of  Prophefie,  Tongues, 
Healing- c^r.  are  (7ti/f«,  yea  I»fufed  by  the  Spirit j   and  that 
Temporary  faith  is  the  Gift  of  the  Spirit,  and  not  meerly  Ac- 
quired as  you  defcribe.     This  therefore  is  the  main  thing  that 
yet  I  find  my  felf  to  differ  from  you  in  :  I  conceive  that  thofe 
chat  were  enliglrntd  ^  andtaflid  of  the  Heavenly  Gift ,  and  ^ire 
made  partakers  of  the  HolyGhofl ,    and  have  tafled  of  the  good 
irordofGod^  a'ldthe  po'^-^ertofthe^orldto  come  (had  more  then 
meeraquired  ^  As  or  Habits.     How  elfc  are  they  faid  to  be 
maiepirtikjers  of  tht  Holy  Ghoji  ?  And  how  arc  they  faid  j  to  be 
firMifiedby  the  blood ef  the  Covenant ^and  after  to  do  defpight  to 
the  fpiri't  of  Grace  ^  if  they  had  none  of  the  fpiricof  Grace  ? 
Heb. 10. !().&:  6.4,5,  '  fpeak  on  fuppofition  that  the  common 
Expofi'ion  be  found, that  takes  thefc  Texts  as  fpeaking  of  com- 
mon Grace.     I  confefsl  have  not  fuch  high  thoughts  of  mans 
fufficiency  a. of  himfeif  incftate  of  unrcgeneracie.is  to  think 
(as  you  here  feem  to  do)  thac  he  can  acquire  fuch  things  by  his 
ownunderftanding.  indiiHrVjind  by  Education,    without  the 
work  of  the  Spirit  of  Chrift,(yca  the  immediate  work  (though 

E  2  not 


(18-) 


not  without  means)  as  Scripture  tels  us  the  unregenerate  have 
poffcflcd.     I  think  their  Grace  is  cali  foboles  too;  and  that 
Nature  and  induftry  will  not  reach  fo  high  of  tbemfclvc$,or  by 
general  eoncurfe,    as  to  [iva/h  thefe  fjPine ,  andcaufe  them  to 
efcapethe  pollutions  of  the  ^orid^  through  the  kyo^Udge   of  the 
Lor tl  ani  Saviour  J efpu  (^hri(i^  2Pet.2.20  2I.  Toreceive  the 
H^ord  vp'th  J7,  Luke  8.1?.  and  helteve  for  a  while  :  John  2.  ^  3 . 
24.    To  fpare  citations  •,  fee  but  all  thofe  great  things  that  Mr. 
Shepheard  in  your  Book  afcribethto  Hypocrites,&  judge  whe- 
ther they  are  not  beyond  our  corrupt  nature  to  reach  by  way 
ofmeer  Aquifition?  WhenPWhath  [given lu  to underfi and, 
that  no  WAn  can  fay  that  Jefns  is  the  Lord^hm  by  the  Holy  Ghoji, 
1  Cor.  1 2. -i.    And  though  its  like  he  hath  refped  to  thofe  times 
of  perfecution,  when  confeffing  Chrift  was  the  way  to  fuffer- 
ing ,  yet  how  far  many  unfandificd  ones  have  gone  in  confef- 
fing him,and  fuffering  for  him,  I  need  not  tell  you.    [  There  are 
divtrfttiet  of  Gifts-,  but  thefn^ne  Spirit.   To  one  li  given  the  upord 
efwijdom  by  the  Spirit  j  to  another  the  ^'ord  of  Knowledge  by  the 
fume  Spirit :  to  another  faith  bj  the  fame  Spirit-         ^By  one 

Spirit  we  are  all  'Bupiiz.ed  into  one  Body i  Cor.  1 2.  7, 8,9, 

1 2,29.  I  find.  One  Spirit^  and  one  rvay  of  Giving  Gifti^  with- 
out your  diftindion  :  but  no  mention  of  any  fuch  gifts  with- 
out the  Spirit  by  our  own  Acquifition.SeeC7<i/.3.i.2,3,5.£'^i. 
5  9.  I  fohn  4.2,^. 

I  would  give  in  many  more  of  my  Reafons ,  but  they  lie  to- 
gether in  Gregor.  Ariminenf.  in  2.  fent.  Di/l. 26.27,  &  28.  j^ 
I.  fol  84. &c.  Who  againft  (omc^femipelagian  Moderns  main- 
'  taineth  [  i.  ^mdhomo  fecundum  prafentent  (latum,  (lante  in- 
fiuentta  Dei,  generali  non  potefl  per  liber  urn  arbitriftm,^  natura- 
'ltae']U6,ab  i.  fpecialiDei  auxilio  agere  alicjaem  aElumrnoraliter 
bonum.     2.  O/lendst  aliam  partem,  fuijfede  Articulii  damnatia 
*JPelagij'.   autfiinaliijttodifcordat,   mag^^  diviare   a  Catholica 
verttatecjHamdi'ium  Peltigj  (andyecfome  think  verily  they 
are  running  from  Belagtantfm,v/bi\Q  they  run  into  this  opinion) 
C^  ab  hoc  ipfam  non  ejfe  ab  aiiqito  Cfitkolico  fufUnendam.  5.   He 
folveth  the  arguments  brought  for  the  affirmative.  And  though 
in  defining  an  ad  morally  good ,  he  fpeaks  as  you  and  I  do, yet 
he  fblly  iets  you  know  that  he  fpeaks  of  the  afts  of  the  Repro- 
bate 


C^9) 

bate  themfcl  ves,  and  fuch  asantccedeJuftification,ortme  con- 
verfion  ;  and  therefore  infers  hence,  fo/.  85.  ^Mod  ntmo  foteji 
mertri  primam  gratiam  de  Condigno ,  ntc  etiam  de  corgruo  ■, 
coMtra  aliejuorum  fenteKtiam  modernorum  :  ]    adding   [  nomine 
ant  em  gratU^  non  folttm  fign^jico  gratiam  gratum  facientem,fed 
etiam  gratis  datamy&  Hmvtrjaliter  ^nodcun^^  Dei  (pectJtlt  aJ- 
juto/iftm  aibene  optrandum,  &c.]    Whereas  according  to  your 
wayofmeer  Aquifition  of  a  Temporary  faith  ;    men  may  do 
that  which  the  Papifts  call  meriting  ciecongmo  the  firft  Grace. 
Not  that  hed^nieth  fimply  that  which  they  call  meritum  de 
coftgruo,  but  that  any  have  it  without  the  adjtitorium  fptciale 
as  he  cals  it, in  oppofition  to  the  wflnenti»i  gtnerfiUs.  (  And  his 
Argument  is  confidcrable   :  Neme  potejt  habere  tiftte  primam 
gratiam^  aflum  Aiiijuem  liberi  arbitrij  non  culp^ibiltm  :  igitur  nf 
mode  cond\gy;o  vel  de  congrtto  poteji  mcreri  p  imam gratiam  : 
Tatet  confcijitentia :  tfttia  nu/Im  m'retur  mfi  per  aHm  liberi  ar- 
bitrij  ^   &certiim  tfi  quod  non  per  n/t^Him  culpabilem  rucretur 
gratiam^  fed  pontu  /  ce'tam.]    And  foLS'y.  C0/.4.  He  (hewi  h  : 
hefpeakseven  of  the  ads  of  Catechumens  and  luch  as  arc  m 
mortal  fin.  So  :  hat  it  is  not  only  the  Ads  that  are  proper  to  the 
Eled  thiths  fpeaksou     His  Argumcntsaremany  and  weigh- 
ty, which  I  lliall  not  recite  feeing  they  lie  before  you  ;  And  he 
confirms  it  largely  from  the  conlcnt  of  the  Ancients ,  Cyprian^ 
c^mbrofe,  Htereme^   Augujline^  Damafcen^  Projper^  Gregory^ 
Jftiore,^c.  And  confuteth  the  contrary  Reafons  wich  much 
ftrength,  which  Scotus^iin^  his  friend  Ock^amyAdam  and  others 
bring  for  the  contrary,  which  twel'e  Reafons  contain.  I  con- 
jedure  the  chief  ftrength  of  what  can  be  faid  for  that  caufe. 
Many  more  you  know  have  copioufly  done  the  fame  wor><:  but 
I  refer  you  to  onc,for  brevity  ,as  fpeaking  moft  that  fticks  in  my 
mind  againft  your  dodrinc  of  Natural  acquifition  of  the  Tem- 
porarie  faith  ;   which  Arimtmnfts  thought  is  PeUgianifm  or 
X^orfe,  though  i  intend  not  fo  to  charge  you. 

Laiily,  I  may  add,  that  if  you  are  ot  the  now  prevailing  opi- 
nion,that  no  Agent  natural  or  free  can  ad  without  the  Pre  de- 
termination of  God  as  the  firft  immediate  Phyfical  Caufe.  I 
cannot  fee  how  you  can  polTibly  fpecific  common  and  fpecial 
Grac:  fromihenunner  of  Divinc  produdion  ,  norwhy  all 

E  3  out 


C3o) 


our  ads  good  and  bad  are  not  equally  by  Infufttn.  Forthoagb 
you  may  change  the  name,  yet  that  which  you  call  ^nfufion  of 
fpecial  Grace,  can  do  no  more  then  fhj fie  ally  ^  immediately^  in 
fttferahlj  a*  the  caufa  prima  fmpliciter  »ecejfana^  determine  the 
^m  I  and  fo  much  is  faid  to  be  done  in  every  ad  of  temporary 
Faich,  yea  in  every  natural,)'ca  in  every  wicked  ad.  (Though 
I  muft  profefs  ray  felf  in  this  point  of  the  Judgement  of  ^4«- 
fcKtw^  which  the  forefaid  gre^.  Ar.  following  tyfugujline) 
before  him  thus  exprefleth  ,  that  [  Dem  jtiv*t  nos  ipfum  <iC- 
um  immediate  efficiendo^  &  non  fo/ttmjuvat  Dens  ad  bonum  pat" 
ttAliter  co-efficiendo ^  if  uod  ej}  modu4  Communis  ^tto  concurrit  ad 

CHJi4Jl:bet  creati  agerttii  quentlibet  fed Ad  proditElionem 

a^H4  mali  folftm  primo  modo  {per  inflftentiam  generalem)  Dem 
eoKCHrrit ;  qnia  nonfacit  voluntutem  agere  aBum  malum,  ftcut 
facit  earn  agere  a^ttm  botium.']  But  ad  hominem :  this  exception 
is  valid  againft  any  that  go  on  the  Pre-dcterminate  grounds. 

Let  the  Jefuits  then  call  ail  Temporaries,  Graces  [Habitut 
ac^Htfitoi  ^  crdinii  naturalist  Let  them  call  l\\\ifaitk)  but  [  /j- 
dem  humanam^  as  produced  by  the  power  of  humane  Caufes  ] 
as  you  fay  j  For  my  part  I  will  not  Pelagianizc  with  the  Jefu- 
its ;  nor  can  I  believe  what  you  further  repeat,  that  [common 
Belief  is  not  Divine  in  refpeU  of  the  Principles  from  whence  it 
fiowes,  but  generally  of  an  humane  defeent  andpedegree.]  I  do  not 
chink  that  we  are  fufficient  of  our  (elves  to  think  one  of  thefc 
good  thoughts  ofourfelves'^hxxt  that  all  our  fujfciencj  u  ofG^H^ 
Vpho  workith  in  m  both  to  mil  and  to  do ;  from  vohom  cemeth  eve- 
q^ood  gift^  even  fuch  as  the  Temporaries.  Yet  do  I  not  charge 
l_y ou  or  Suarez,  or  the  mzrj  others]  whoever  they  be,  to  be  mi- 
fiakjin  injour  Mttaihjficks:  Far  be  it  from  me  to  compare  with 
you  there.  Only  I  cannot  be  of  every  mans  mind  that  excelleth 
me  in  the  Metaphyficks. 


Se  CT. V 


C30 

Sect.  V. 

[Second.  \7  Our  fccond  Reafon  is  drawn  from  the  nature  and 
1    proper  Afts  of  both  qualities,  (  page 3,61.  ) 
f*v'ttig   Belief  is  the  firfi  fpiritual  tife^  but  common  3eiief  no 
pjrt  of  it.     1      Anfwcr.    This  Reafon  fcems  to  be  further 
fetcht  then  I  dare  allow  of,  if  you  mean  by  [[  The  nature  of 
the  quality  and  AHs  ]  the  matter  it  felf  For  if  the  t  erm  [  Lift  |, 
be  Metaphorical  here,  or  it  be  a  Civil  or  Moral  Life  that  is 
meanr,  then  I  (hall  allow  you,  that  only  fpccial  Cjrace  is  this 
fpecial'moral  Lift  :  but  if  you  (Lould  mean  a  natural  Lift,  or 
a  common  moral  Zf/ir,I  (hould  not  grant  that  all  but  the  Saints 
are  deftiture  of  thefe.     i.   You  cannot  prove  that  the  term 
Lift  may  not  be  given  to  common  faith  (  as  goodnefs  is ;  and 
as  Entity  is  to  Accidents  )  though  that  moft  eminent y^^c/V/  of 
Faith,   called  faving,  be  alfo  eminently  called  our  Life,  fori 
f\nd.\njMal.ii,  That  the  Here  ticks  or  Apoftates  there  menti- 
oned«,   are  (aid  10  be  tnice  dead  ^   and  plucked  up  hy  the  roots  ^ 
which  implyethjtbat  fome  kind  of  life  they  loft  which  once  they 
had,  and  the  feeilhht  fprung  up  by  the fiony  ground  and  among 
thorns  had  a  blade  that  had  fome  kind  of  life  ;  and  the  branches 
oj  C hri/i  thit9iTe f'ult/efs  yet  Either  not  ,  till  they  abide  no 
more  in  him^  John  15.26.     The  receiving  of  the  Jews  into  a 
Church-ftate  again  W?///  be[lifefrom  the  dead  ]Rom.  1 1 . 1 5  EK.tk, 
16.6.      And  its  called  a /^i/Jr,  that  the  backfliding  fall  from, 
E^ek,.  1 8.  and  33.11.    Bur  fuppofe  the  name  of  Life  be  im- 
proper to  give  to  the  Temporary  f  who  wants  no  doubt  the 
fpecial  Ltfe.  )   This  proves  not  a  phyfical  fpecifike  difference. 
And  to  tfie  Queflion,  [n^hy  common  belief  n  not  this  fpiritual 
Life  in  a  lefs  degree  ?  J 

I  anfw  BecauTe  it  is  a  matter  uncapable  of  that  moral  form 
which  is  denominated  Ltfe  ^  your  inftance  of  ^<i/or ,  being 
of  racer  phyfical  confideracion,i$  alien  and  impertinent :  your 
inf^ance  of  AVrrar/ is  more  pertinent.  And  to  that  J  anfwcr^ 
That  though  fortitudo  moralis  in  minori gradu  Jencminat  fub- 
jetiumfuum  forte ;  Yet  are  there  fome  degrees  of  the  matter, 
which  are   incapable  of  the  form  and  name  of  fortitude  j 

though 


(30 


^though  in  ourcare,the  lower  degree  is  capable  of  the  name  of 
Faith.yec  not  of  chc  fame  fpecifikc  forro,as  the  higher  degree  J 
Yea  forae  degree  of  fortitude^  overcome  by  a  far  greater  de- 
gree of  Cowardize,  may  not  denominate  the  fubjed  fimply 
forte ^    but  orA^  fuurtdHm  (juid  :  nay  if  the  queftion  be  fimply 
put,  whether  that  man  be  valiant  that  alvvaies  runs  away,  S-c, 
itis  fim[Jly  tobedenied,  though  he  may  have  fome  fmall  con- 
quered raeafure  of  fortitude,  becaufe  the  man  is  to  be  dcno- 
mina'ed  from  his  predominant  difpofiiions,and  therefore  to  be 
called  Pufilianimoui,  and  not  valiant.     Temperance,  Juftice, 
&c.  confift  in  a  certain  mediocrity  of  matter,  and  neither  of 
the  extreams  are  capable  of  the  form  :  And  where  fomewhat 
of  the  form  is,  it  will  not  ferve  to  dedominatc  the  man  againft 
a  contrary  predominant  vice.    One  man  may  be  fo  far  tempe- 
rate as  to  abftain  from  excefs  of  meat,  and  not  from  exccfs  of 
drink,  recreation,  c^c.    And  another  may  have  To  muchuni- 
vcrfal  Temperance  as  fliallrcftrain  him  for  a  few  daies,  and 
againft  fmall  Temptations,  but  yet  once  or  twice  a  week,  a 
ftronger  Temptation  leadeth  him  into  fornication,  gluttony, 
drunkennefs,  (^c.    If  you  ask  roc  whether  this  be  a  temperate 
man,  I  ftiould  fay  no,  but  an  intemperate  :  But  if  you  ask  me 
whether  there  be  any  degree  of  Temperance  in  him, and  ewhe- 
thf  r  /■»  tantnm^  oxfecnndum  ^nid^  he  be  temperate,!  (hould  fay 
yea. 

The  leaft  degree  of  Sub'ieElioK  or  Obedience  may  in  tantum 
vet  fecHndttmijHtdy  denominate  the  fubjed  accordingly;  but 
yet  fuch  fubje^ionand  obedience  as  is  due  to  a  Judge  or  7«- 
fiice  of  Pfdff ,denominateth  not  the  perfon  lojat  »rf:ti>jen^and 
Obedient  &s  is  neceffary  to  the  Soveraign  Po'^er,  As  all  Power 
of  government  denominatcth  the  Subj^A 'Potent  or  a  Govern 
nor.  Rut  there  is  none  but  a  certain  degree  (even  the  higheft) 
that  will  denominate  a  man  a  Soveraign  or  Majeftick  fimply. 
So  I  have  ^\\\  acknowledged  chat  the  very  fpecifick  form  and 
name  of  laving  Faith  is  not  agreeable  to  that  degree  which 
Temporarieshave,  though  a  lort  of  Paichitis,  and  is  called 
fo  in  Scripture. 

The  fum  of  all  my  difcourfes  on  this  Subjed  is  but  this.  To 
the  Effence  of  faving Faith,  hoveiSubjeSlioH^c^c.    Icis  ne-. 

ccfTjry 


C35) 


ceflary.     i.    That  the  Object  be  apprehended  in  all  its  cfl"«;n- 
tialRefpects.     2.   Thatthe  A«be  fointcnfe  and  fcrious,  and 
fuitable  to  this  Object  (  and  fo  the  habit  )as  tha":  it  m»y  be  ftat- 
ediy  predominant  in  the  man  againft  its  contrary.     Two  forts 
of  Faith  therefore  fall  (hort  of  be  ng  formally  thisfavingfaith. 
I.     The  one  is  theirs  that  do  ferioufly  believe  in  the  fame 
Chrift  pcrfonally  confidercd,   and  in  the  gcHerall  or  in  moft 
pMrts  of  hu  office^  a?  we  do  :  bat  they  leave  out  fomewhat  of 
the  OhjeSi^  that  iscffcntial  to  him  as  the  Saviour,  e  g.    They 
believe  in  him  asC^od  and  roan,  as  one  chit  hath  undertaken 
the  oSce  of  a  Redeemer  and  Mediator,  and  hath  died  tor  hn- 
ncr«,&  in  general  is  the  Prieif,Prophec  and  Kirg  of  the  Charch, 
and  a  J  ui^.ifier  and  Sandifier,  giving  Repentance  and  RemilTi- 
onof  fin;  but  withall,  when  it  comes  to  the  applicatory  con- 
fenting  parr,  thev  believe  not  in  him  as  their  King,  and  their 
SantSitier  by  his  Word  and  Spiri%  nor  as  one  that  (hall  lave 
them  from  their  raigning  (in.     Now  this  it  not  really  the  Chri- 
ftian  faith,  or  faving  faich,  becaufe  it  wanteth  an  effencial  part, 
it  being  effcntially  to  Chrift,  as  the  SAviour  ofertd^  and  the 
objeft  of  faving  fai;h  to  be  applicatorily  [cJ-T/j  Saximr  in  far- 
tic-th^for  the  p  irdoning  anddefireJitt^  of  mj  fi»t.']  Not  that  we 
have  a(turance,  that  he  will  eventually  be  fo  to  me  :  but  that  we 
our  felves  do  consent  that  he  befo  tou$.    As  a  Phyfician  is  not 
believed  in  by  me  (^  a  fick  Paricnc  )  asaPh\fician,unlefs  Icon- 
fent  that  he  is  my  Phjfiti^n^ind  that  he  cure  my  D>/(prf/^,tbough 
yet  I  msv  pofllbly  havedojbtsof  his  willingncfs,or  of  the  fuc- 
ceff.    As  the  A^  is  fpccified  by  the  Objed,  fo  thele  Believers 
have  a  faith  in  he  fame  Chrift  as  we,  but  fecunJum  cfuidy  and 
not  fi/:rf//,    and  therefore  fimply  •,    I  hey  are  not  Bel  evers 
in  the  Chrifliin  faving  fenfe  ,     or  if  they  believe  in  Chrift 
as  God  and  man  thac  will  pirdon  and  fanAirie,  but  not  as  a  Sa- 
crifice for  fin  ;  This  is  not  fimply  and  fully  (  taking  in  all  the 
KflVntiahofbis  ofTicc  j  the  fame  Chnft  thu  we  b-H  eve  in,and 
fonot  the  fame  Faith.     So  if  they  love  God  a?  gooo,but  not 
ss  the  only  fu'paffirg  fuperlanve  Cjood,  rhis  is  no:  to  love  hira 
rs  God  and  {o  not  to  love  the  fame  God  as  we  do. 

2.  The  other  fort  of  the  iinfcund  are  fuch  as  do  apprehend 
Ch  ift  under  all  the  fame  confideracions  as  f6und  Believers  do, 

F  and 


(H) 


\ 


and  do  apprehend  Qod  as  the  chief  fuperlative  jjood,  and  have 
Tome  anfwerablemotrons  of  the  Will  and  Affedions .-  but  it  is 
but  by  a  notional  fuperficial,uneffedual  apprehenfion  ;    and 
hath  but  an  anfwtrahle  confent ^2ind  is  overtopped  and  maftered 
by  a  contrary  Hal>ie  and  ^n:ion  of  the  loul ;   either  as  the  un- 
belief is  more  then  the  Btlief^znd  therefore  rules  the  heart  and 
Life,  or  as  the  regard  to  the  Crcature,is  more  then  the  regard 
to  Chrift  (  for  want  of  fo  effeftual  and  operative  an  apprehen- 
(lon  of  his  Truth  and  Gocdnefs  as  we  have  of  the  Creature, ) 
and  confi  quently  the  Heart  is  carried  our  more  to  the  creature 
then  to  Chrift  or  to  the  Father.    This  is  not  the  Chriftian  faith, 
bccaufe  it  is  not  an  intenfe  &  ferious  ad  or  habir,fuch  as  is  fie  to 
denominare  the  man      He  doth  not  believe  or  love  God  hear- 
tily .^t  all :  A  I'elief  and  Love  indeed  he  hath,  but  morally  and 
reput^cively  it  is  as  Kone,for  God  will  take  it  as  noKe^  as  to  anyr 
fciving  benejit'.^ox  he  that  hath  more  Vnbeli^fthtn'Beltff^Ks  not 
^\m^\'<j  z  Believe, hut^nynheUever  :   He  that  hath  more  a- 
verfnejs  then  Love  is  fimply  no  Lover  :  H'.r  that  haeh  more  Jif- 
loya-tj  and  *T>ifobedience  then  loyalty  and  obedience^  is  not  fimply 
to  be  called  Lojal  and  obedient  at  all.     He  that  confidering  all 
thingSjfees  reafon  to  hate  his  fin,and  hath  feme  mind  and  Will 
againft  if,  and  yet  bath  in  other  refpects  more  mind  to  it,  and 
more  will  to  keep  it  then  to  leave  it,  \%  fimply  impenittni,  and 
hath  no  Repcntar.ce.     And  yet  a  real  fubdued  motion  of  Belief, 
Derire,Love,  Repentance  there  may  be  in  all  thefc  pcifons  , 
and  fuch  as  fometimes  in  Act  will  feem  prevalent ,    though 
Habitually,  and  in  the  courfe  of  >4'f?/o«  -hey  are  not  fo.     As 
fin  in  Act  Teemed  prevalent  for  a  time  in  ''Dsvid,  when  in  Ha- 
bit and  the  bent  of  life  it  was  not  fo, 

Suppofe  a  Souldier  take  fuch  a  man  for  his  general,  and 
obey  him  ordinarily  as  a  General,  and  yet  being  corrupted  by 
the  General  of  the  fnem;e«,  hatha  prevalent  Will  or  Pur- 
pofe  to  defcrthim,  betray  him,  and  do  hima  mifchief  u/hen 
time  fcrves.  This  man  is  in  a  fort  a  "^ouldier  and  obedient  but 
deferve-'h  hanging  rather  then  Rewatd.  '^o  much  more  for 
explicariop,  and  to  fliewyou'why  a  common  fnirh  i?  not  cal- 
led by  the  name  of  our  fpiritual  life  (  the  perfon  that  hath  it , 
being  (Hll  under  eondemnsiCjon,  and  in  a  ftate  of  death  :     yea 

why 


(?o 


why  it  is  not  to  be  called  the  Chrittian  fai:h,  nor  the  perion  a 
Chriftiafl,but  Analogically,  ;.    .    ,   .. 


Se  c  T.  VI. 

Pa£e^6^.  T^O  your  third  Reafon  I  anfwer,  i.  That  I 
X  am  not  of  your  mmd,  nor  do  you  prove  it, 
that  common  Belief  is  made  up  but  of  two  principal  ingredi- 
ents, Notnia  &  Apnfm  :  It  hath  as  many  Ads  as  faving 
Fai:b.  An  AHiar.ce  or  relling  nn  Chrift,.  and  on  the  Promife 
with  lome  kind  of  confent  of  the  Will,  may  be  in  this  common 
Faith-  L  T^'^y  fi^")  thtri elves  r-pon  the  God  of  1/rael^tloe  Lord 
cfHoap^  &c.   7/4*182.  ] 

7.  I  grant  that  a  certain  llrength  may  be  found  in  common 
Faich  ;  bur  the  ftrongcir,  greatei^  firmeft,iseven  in  degree  be- 
low the  ueakcft  of  a  lound  Believer.     For,     i.  Asth^:diffe- 
rence  (for  ought  I  yet  have  heard  )  is  not  immedcately  difcer- 
nable  in  the  Aftsof  the  Intelled  themfelve*;  but  in  thofeof  the 
Wil!,and  fo  of  the  mtelledual  Afts  by  the  Will ;  fo  the  weak- 
eft  Belief  of  the  fandificd  ptevailech  with  the  Will,  and  over- 
powrech  all  refifting  Arguments,  when  the  ftrongeft  faith  of 
others  cannot  do-it.     2.    And  though  the  Grace  infufed  into 
the  Will  It  ftVfjbe  a  caufe  of  this ,  yet  doubrlefs  the  Tntelledual 
AfTent  is  alfoa  caufe  ■,  And  therefore  that  Affent  that  can  do 
more  i<  furely  the  ftronger.     There  is  a  difference  even  in- 
ftrcngth  and  vigor  ,  where  there  is  fo  great  a  difference  in  the 
efficacy.    What  y/7fc»V/ foever  It  be  of,  that  Light  which  will 
fhew  all  villble  things,  (  fuppcfun fupp'jy.en.i:-!,)  is  a  greater 
tight  then  that  which  either  ftiews  but  greater  things,or  (hews 
them  but  dimly.     And  that  heat  is  greiteft  which  will  heat 
m>ift,  (  C£terisp.zrihui.    )     The  unlandihed  would  not  be  fo 
often  cilled  the  Ch:/^rcnofd.irh7ffs,  and  faid  to  be /-A^^,  and 
indarkr.cfs,  and  the  found  Believers  called  the  CkHdrin  ofii^ht^ 
and  faid  to  be  ir,  r,»d  of  the  Light,  if  we  had  not  a  greater  light 
ihwi  they. 

3.  Nor  d  )  1  believe  that  the  Temporaries  [_  AfTent,  is  pro- 
portionable to  the  mediums  that  produce  it,  J     (or  that  in 

-    F  2  fome 


<i'>6') 


fomefnch,  at  left  produce  ir.  )  J  thick  fuch  Believers  may 
have  infallible  mtdtj^  and  the  very  fame  as  produce  the  faving 
fditb  of  others  f  not  including  all  caufes  as  fw*<^ia,  but  the  o^- 
jeHivt  Motives  of  our  firft  faith.  ) 

4.  I  grant  what  you  fay,  pag.^6$.  That  the  loweft  degree 
of  favin^  faith  is  really  our  fpiritual  i  ifejuftifies  &c.  which 
the  higl>feft  degree  of  common  faith  doth  not.  ]]  Becaufe  the 
highe^  degree  of  common  faith  either  leaves  out  fomc  efTen- 
tial  pdrt  of  the  object,  or  is  lower  and  weaker  then  ihe  low- 
eft  degree  of  faving  faith  is.  And  you  muftnot  take  it  for 
granted  that  it  is  the  Intellectual  Acts  or  Habits  only  where 
the  difference  lies  which  you  cxpreA,  or  the  cheif  part  of  that 
d  fference.  It  is  the  Wills  Act.  (  for  fuch  there  is  in  faith) 
that  doth  moft  or  much  to  this  Acceptance Juftification,  Sanc- 
tification,  which  you  mention  j  which  proceeds  not  only  from 
the  difference  of  Aflcnt.buc  from  the  Grace  which  the  W»ll  it 
felf  alfo  hath  received. 

5.  A  common  knowledge  I  eafily  Rrant  there  is  in  the  un- 
fandified,  ftronger  in  its  kind  then  the  knowledge  of  the  Saints. 
That  i$)Gramatically  and  Logically  they  (nay  hare  a  far  clearer 
undcrflanding  of  the  fenfc  of  words,  and  of  terms  of  Art,and 
complex  Objeds ,  which  arc  appointed  to  be  the  means  of 
knowing  the  incomplex,  and  things  themfelves  (  as  God  ,  the 
Redeemer,  Heaven,(^r.  jand  may  be  able  becter  to  defend  any 
facrcd  verity,  and  exprefs  th.ir  minds.  And  this  you  may  call 
Mqftire^  k»orf>ledge  if  you  pleafe,  &  in  fome  fort  fay  it  remain- 
cth  a  diftindl  thing  from  the  other  knowledge  even  in  thefan- 
dified'.not  but  that  it  felf  alfo  is  in  them  fandified  &  embodied 
with  the  refl  of  the  new  Man,  but  that  the  Knowledge  of  words 
and  Propofitions,  which  is  but  an  Inftrumental,  mediate,  fub- 
fervienr  part  of  knowledge,  is  not  the  fame  with  the  knowledge 
of  the  things  themfelyes.cven  God,Chrift,(^<:.  But  then  I  ftill 
maintain  i .  That  Temporary  Believers  may  have  more  then  this 
rneer  Difciplinary  knowledge,even  a  certain  illumination  of  the 
Spirit  Revealing  to  them  C  hrift  himrelf,and  the  powers  of  (he 
world  to  come,in  fome  Degree, H^/'.6. 4.  z  Per.i  20,&c.  fome 
inward  tafle  of  the  matter,  as  well  as  a  L.rammatical,and  Logi- 
cal knowledge  of  the  words,  and  fenfe.  2.  That  as  the  Difci- 
vlmA^j  knowledge  of  the  fenfe  of  PropoficionSj  in  the  fandifi- 

ed 


C?7) 


cd  and  unfandified  do  not  qnc^dmattriam  differ  by  any  Phy- 
fical  rpecification,  fo  neither  dath  the  common  and  fpecialiWM' 
mioation  or  knowledge  and  tafte  of  the  fubjcct  matter,  or  in- 
complcx  object. 

C,  You  fay  much  in  general  herc,founding  ai  if  you  thought 
Cbcyond  what  your  Thefis  requireth  you  to  prove  jthat  there 
were  a  Phyfical  fpecifick  Difftrencc  in  the  matcer.  Becaufe  you 
do  not  plainly  affert  it,  1  will  fuppofe  it  not  to  be  your  mean- 
ing .-  Hut  if  really  it  be  fo,  and  God  (hall  direct  you  to  any 
more  of  this  work,  I  earneftly  intreat  you  above  all  the  relt  of 
your  underraking  to  tell  us  plainly  rvhat  the  Phyfical  Forms  are 
that  /pecifie  and  denominate  thefe  feverat  Jorts  of  Knj^'ledge^ 
Fai:h,  Love^  Defire^  &c.     That  there  is  a  »»<?>•<«/  Ipecihck  Dif- 
ference we  are  agreed  :  If  you  aflert  a  P/j;'y7"cj/,plainly  defcribe 
and  denominate  each  Form,('for  I  doubt  not  but  we  are  agreed 
that  a  Form  there  muft  be  thus  to  fpccifie  and  denominate.  )  I 
Fn  J  Amffiiu  (  .^IJertion  Theolog.  de  lum.  ?{at.(^  Grat.  )   Dis- 
claiming a  difference  as  to  the  Object,  fubject ,  or  lumen  deft- 
r''nj  cr  de 'Ucet}so'^J!Elum,8cc.  2iS  he ci\s  the  meditim;   limitmg 
the  Controverlie  to  the  ^Lumen  difpontns  c^  eltvans  fnLjtEl~ 
um:  ut  recipi.it]   which  he  maintaineth  muft  be  fupcrnaturai, 
and  fo  do  I :  but  withall  I  maintain  thatfomewhat  of  the  fu- 
pernatural  Li^htis  given  to  many  of  the  unfanctified.     And 
whereas  he  faith  that  one  fort  of  knowledge  is  Difciplinary  fuch 
as  a  blind  man(born)  hith  of  Light ,  and  ihe  other  is  /«/«i- 
tive -^  exreprefenti  ^  fet^ftmpercept'i  :    i.  I  am  not  convinced 
that  any  min  in  this  life,doth  intuitively  or  fendbly  know  God, 
or  the  Lord  Jefus  Chrift  God  and  man  ,  or  the  invifihle  Glory, 
or  Relative  Benefits,  fu.h  as  pardon,  Juftification,  Adoption, 
^c.  And  I  am  confident  I  have  your  confent.    2.  And  tor  the 
Hiftory  or  any  Enunciation  of  the  Scipture,  which  muft  be 
undcrftood  by  a  Grammatical  and  Logical  knowledge,  we  are 
agreed. 3.  It  is  nothing  therefore  in  all  the  world,that  I  remem- 
ber, that  can  fall  into  Controvcrfie  about  this  Intuitive  l^ow 
/fdj^z-jbuttheinwird  pafllon^or  actions  of  our  own  lou's. That 
the  (oul  do'h  know  its  own  knowledge  and  Volition  mruilive- 
Iv,  is  the  opinion  of  fome  Schoolmen  ,  and  oppofed  by  others. 
Upon  which  account  perhaps  thofe  of  the  firft  fort ,  may  alfo 

F  »  fay. 


C?8) 

fa\r,that  a  fanftified  perfonmiy  Itjtuitively  fee  the  fincerity  or 
holy  nature  of  his  own  knowledge.  Buc  i.  if  that  were,  io 
and  a  common  thinp,  mc  chinks  doubting  of  finccrity  (hould 
not  be  fo  common  with  fuch.  2.  Our  affedions  and  Wills 
are  thought  by  many  to  be  more  properly  faid  to  be  fe/t  ^  then 
intHitivdy  known,  3 .  It  is  certain  that  the  firft  ad  of  faving 
faith  can  be  no  fuch  thing  as  this :  foramanmuft,  at  leaft  io 
order  of  Nature,  firft  have  a  faving  faith,  before  he  can  iKtui- 
r»z/tf/7  fee  it  in  himfelf.  4.  And  this  is  nothing  to  our  bufinefs  : 
for  it  is  not  our  own  faith  or  love,  or  other  inherent  Graces, 
that  is  the  Objed  of  our  faving  Faith  ;  buc  it  is  God  the  Fa- 
ther, Son  and  Holy  Ghoft,and  the  Proraife,  c^r .  which  arc  noE 
known  by  us  mtHitivel)  otfenfibly.  (  Though  the  Letter  of  the 
Proraife  is,  yet  the  fenfe  is  not  j  much  lefs  the  Truth.  )  Yet  I 
make  no  doubt  but  a  true  Believer  being  once  juftified  by  faith, 
hath  fometimes  after  fuch  Peace  with  God,  &  (bedding  abroad 
of  his  Love  in  the  heart,  as  gives  him  (not  an  intuitive  or  fen- 
y»^/^ knowledge  of  Godhimlielf  immediatly,bucj  a  lively  Re- 
lifh  and  feeling  of  thofe  precious  fruits  and  tokens  of  his  Love, 
which  may  be  called  an  experimental  knowledge  that  God  if-, 
and  that  he  is  gracious,  faithful, ^c.  Seeing  him  more  dearly 
in  this  Glafs  of  his  Image  on  our  own  fouls ,  then  in  our  firtt 
faith  we  faw  him  in  the  meer  extrinfick  Glafs  of  the  Gofpel, 
Works, ^f.  though  in  both  the  Spirit  caufech  the  {ipprehenfi-' 
on.  5.  And  if  this  were  any  thing  to  us,  yet  fome  inward  tails 
the  unfar.dified  do  attain.  So  that  I  cannot  yet  reach  to  un- 
derftand,  that  between  the  Knowledge,  AfTent,  &c-.  of  the  fan- 
dificd.andthe  higheft  lemporaries,  there  is  Phyficallyany 
fpecifick  Difference,  butonly  morally  :  but  a  very  great  gra- 
dual difference alfo  Phyfically. 

Your  Similicude  of  the  Light  of  the  Sun  and  Moon  ,  proves 
not  that  the  matter  of  common  and  proper  fiiih  are  f  eafi- 
fca!iy-ph)ftcallj  different ,  and  then  (  whatever  ^ou  inrend  ic 
forjitsnotagainft  rac.  It  is  the  fame  Spirit  that  illuminatech 
both  forts ;  but  the  Sun  and  Moon  are  not  the  fame  lliiiminac- 
ing  luminar'cs  :  Nor  is  it  a  thing  fully  agreed  015,  whether  the 
Light  of  the  Sun  and  Moon  are  fpccifically  dif^incc ;  nor  of  the 
HeaE  of  the  Sun  and  of  fire.  S.iich  Ock^m,  Qj^id.  /if.^.cj.  21. 


1 


-J 


C39) 


foL 4 8 .  \_E^eUm  diverji  tjuftltm  fpecielt  pojfuMt  ejfe  a  Cdufts  di- 
verfarum  ffecierum,  licit  »on  idem  effecftu  :  patei  ds  cdore^tjm 
potefi  ef[e  ab  i^ne  &  a  fole.'\  His  Application  fornewhat  con- 
cernech  our  Caufe,  [^  Ita  efi  in  propifito  .-  Prmpts  aE}uj  potij} 
caufAriAbohii^ofinthabttu.-^  f^aliuaEliisejufdemfptcie^  vcn 
p  teji  Ciiuffirinijiab  habitu^  1  (  Therefore  you  cannot  thence 
prove  a  fpecifick  Difference  of  the  Acts, that  one  is  from  a  gra- 
cfODs  Habit,and  the  other  nor. ) 

Pti^e  367.  You  add,  that  [_Common  faith  u  rot  a*iy  difp!>Jiti' 
cn^moralor  Evan/elical,  wherebjf  the  fttbjeB  that  hath  tt,  ts  or 
can  be  difpofed  (in  the  W?<«;  rvt  nA\  fpea\of  )  for  the  introdttUion 
eftke  Habit  of  fdv%*-'i  Faith.^ 

yJnfrv.  \  The  ttvj-  yopt  woW  fpeak,  of]  Are  words  that  refer  to 
fo  many  or  uncertain  paffages,  that  thence  I  will  conclude,that 
you  mean  forae  way  which  we  difownasv^cllas  you,  though  I 
fully  know  not  what  you  mean. But  that  common  C3race  is  pre- 
paratory to  fpecial,  is  fo  commonly  held  by  P/ oteftants,  (Q\rit- 
tially  practical  Divines  j  and  fo  plain  in  Scripture  and  Rcaf.in, 
that  i  fhall  not  trouble  you  with  many  words  about  it.    i.  He 
that  ufeth  Gods  appointed  means  as  well  as  he  can,  i  more  dif- 
pofed for  the  hi .  fling  of  thofe  means,  then  the  wilfull  defpifer 
or  negjecter  of  them.     2.  Heihat  isKff>fr  C^^^/?  is  more  dif- 
pofed to  come  to  him  by  faith,  then  he  that  is  at  a  further  di- 
ftance.     3,  He  that  doth  not  fo  much  refift  the  Spirit,  but  uith 
fomc  f.rioufnefs  bcggeth  for  the  Spirit  and  for  faving  Grace  is 
better  difpofed  for  it,  then  fuch  as  obftinatly  refiit  or  fcorn 
it. 

Your  firft  Argument  is,  from  our  Death  infm  :  the  dead  are 
undifpofed:  I  anfwer,  y^i  ly/^^^  they  are  fo  :  But  i.  It  is  fuch 
a  Titath  as  hath  a  N-'turJ  Lfe.^nd  Reafonable  foul,  and  moral 
Vertues  and  common  Graces  conjoined  :  and  by  thefc  the 
dead  may  be  Di''pofcd,though  not  by  death,  nor  as  dead  :  Al- 
low your /j>w/7^  its  «/'^»j»/.r;*:f/.  z.  A  condemned  Traytor 
thats  dead  m  Law,  m ly  by  humble  fupplication  do  fomeuhat  to 
difpnfe  hirnftlf for  pardon, and  Life  :  thcughl  know  our  c:\fe 
req'^ircth  much  more.  As  I  faid  God  would  not  h^ve  appoint- 
ed ^ny  means  for  ai  unrcgenera'viem^n  V)  ufe  in  order  to  his 
Converfion,  if  the  ufe  of  them  did  no  whit  difpofe  u^  be  con- 

,         verted.. 


(.^o) 


verted.  I  fay  theraore  ofchis,  becaufel  am  greatly  troubled 
with  two  forts  of  people  in  my  own  Partfli  that  are  harping 
on  this  firing,  [^fVe  cannot  gtve  grace  to  our  fehest  mr  be  faved 
Tvitbout  it ;  nor  can  >^e  have  it  till  GoAgtvt  it  tu  :  which  if  he  rvill 
do,  weJhAll  he  faved  :  if  he  rvill  not ,  a'l  that  we  can  do  will  not 
helpit.)  This  is  the  main  objection  chat  Satan  hath  furnifhed 
I .  fome  Apoftate  Heathens,  that  fpeak  it  in  dtfign.  2.  And 
many  of  the  ignorant  and  prophane  that  thus  are  fetled  in  a 
neglect  and  contempt  of  the  means  of  Grace  :  Its  as  good  fay 
we  lie  deadinour  plea fures  till  God  will  giveos  Life,  as  lie 
dead  in  Prayers  and  Hearing  Sermons  ,  and  forbearing  our 
Delights  J  for  we  can  do  nothing  to  the  quickening  of  our 
felves. 

Your  fecond  Reafon  is,  [That  our  »?*  birth  U  a  ne^  Crea- 
tio»^  which  ia  ex  mtteria  indifpojita.]  ^«/tt'.  Ic  is  a  new  crea- 
tion ordinarily  in  materta  difpo^ta  :  i^dnms  foul  was  created 
in  a  Difpofcd  or  prepared  Body.  The  Rational  foul  is  created 
in  the  Embrio  in  the  womb,  in  a  difpofed  body,  yea  many  Phi- 
lofophcrs  would  perfwade  us,  not  only  in  a  body  that  hath  firft 
a  vegetative,  but  a  fenfitive  foul.  Sure  I  am  God  can  appoint 
men  a  couife  of  meins  in  which  they  (hall  wait  for  his  New 
Creation,  and  ordinarily  blefs  his  own  means, and  make  a  lefTer 
blefsing  a  Difpofiiionto  a  greater,  though  all  this  be  little  to 
our  firftControvet(ie.  For  when  I  call  the  common  faith  [a 
DifpofcioK]  I  talk  t^ot  of  Difpoficions  preparatory  to  lurcher 
Grace. 

To  your  third  Re  *  fon  I  anfwer,  i.  Some  common  Grace 
is  as  foicly  and  wholly  a  gracious  and  fupernatural  work,  as  fa- 
ving  Grace  :  yet  men  may  have  a  Difpofiton  to  that  ,  there- 
fore  to  this.  ^.  The  higheft  Grace  of  theunregenerate  is  ve- 
ry ill  fuppofed  by  you  tobe  but  i^Hiitttral or  artificial p^odti'T  of 
our  t^nderflanMngs.]  A  \ower  fu  pernatural  Grace  may  be  a  Dif 
pofition  towards  a  higher  fupe'^natural  Grace.  Manscorrup:ed 
heart  feems  too  fFuch  exalced  by  you,  wile  you  call  him  DeaJ^ 
and  yet  think  he  can  Acquire  the  higheft  Graces  of  Temporary 
Believe^^s  without  fupevnatural  Grace.  Why  then  do  ycu  call 
it  common  [Grace.]  You  know  who  tau  ght  men  to  call  nature 
by  the  name  of  Grace. 

Iti 


(40 


In  your  fourth  Reafon,you  ran  again  on  the  iamc  fuppoiici- 
0n,thac  [our  oS»n  underflandings  helped bj  edficttionjtarn'.ngand 
indnflrj^  can  acquire  common  faith.  J  Even  the  hij;hcft  of  the 
Temporary(which  you  muft  mean,or  you  fay  nothings)  Agamft 
which  I  again  refer  you  to  the  forcfaid  Difputation  of  e^rtwi- 
ntnftt^  who  thinks  he  proves  this  PeUgiar.ilm.oT  worfe.  It  is  not 
onlyfaving  Grace  that  is  infufed.  2.  Infufed  fupernatural 
common  Grace  is  no  more  of  our  felve?,  then  infufed  fuperna- 
tural fpecial  Grace.  3.  To  fay  that  .Gods  common  Grace 
difpofeth  us  for  fpecial  Grace  is  no  more  to  fay  that  [it  U  of  our 
felves~\  then  it  is,  if  we  fiy  ch  jc  a  lefs  Degree  of  fpecial  Grace 
difpofech  us  co  a  greater  Degreef  Though  in  other  refpeds  the 
caGes  diffor.)  Do  you  as  fully  agree  with  Paul,  2  Cor.^.'y,  that 
[we  are  not  ftiffic  ent  cfeur  feives  toihink.  ^*fy  thing  at  of  our 
ftlves^bnt  our  fuffiuer.cj  is  fifGoj,  and  PAJ/,i.i3.  Th^t  it  it 
God  that  ^crkftliin  m  bo'h  to  \'\v/laidto  do^  with  the  reft  before 
cited,  and  then  we  ("hall  not  differ  in  this.  For  I  eafily  believe 
that  faith  and  faving  Grace  is  not  of  our  felves ,  but  the  gift  of 
God. 

To  your  fifth  I  f.iy,  I  am  of  your  mind,  that  [  F^itb  «  not 
p'om  fed ui on  any  precedent  condition  Sec]  The  iy^r^Hniant 
think  o:herivife.  Your  Confequenc  taken  of  moral  fpccificati- 
on,  Irtiligranc  :  but  taken  of  Phyfical,  feems  to  go  inro  the 
contrary  extreara.There  are  certain!/  DifpofitionSjWhere  there 
are  no  CovenantCondiiion?.  See  what  of  this  I  have  faid  out 
of  Chem'Vt'ui  in  anfwer  to  Mr. Tombes  Aiimidverfions^in  the 
Difputarion  o^Jttfi  fica-ton^  if  you  feecaufe. 

To  your  fixth  I  fay,  i.  That  no  carnal  manner  tcmporary,fo 
pleaf.nhGol,  as  that  tlie  perfon  is  accepted  intoSon-ihip  or 
Reconciliation  •,  or thead  onbcf.v^^if7<?,  rerea  dible^(2iX.\G^^ 
with  any  etcrnil  Keward)  Though  fome  think  that  [^Giving  a 
ct4^  of  cold  wafer  to  a  Difclple  in  th  name  of  a  Difciple  ,  may  be 
done  by  a  Temporary  that  would  not  faff^r  much  for  Chrift  ; 
yet  I  cannot  fay  th  it  the  Texc  is  not  to  be  expounded  of  fuch 
a  givmq,  as  comes  from  faving  Love  to  Chrift  )  But  yet  ftcun- 
(itiii  (jHid  or  tn  ttntum:  A  min  unregeneratc  may  do  that 
which  is  fo  far  pieafingto  God,  as  that  he  will  oft  times  and 
ordin.>r.ly  deal  the  better  with  him  in  outward  Kefpeds,  and 

C  deal 


(  40 


deat  the  better  with  li'm  for  his  foul.    If  God  bid  him  Head,. 
Hear,  Pray,  Conlider,  or  enquire  of  Minifters,  as  he  bid  Cor. 
ndim  fend  for  P(ter,Qi  bid  them  fearch  the  Scripcnre  daily, ct-^^. 
he  is  better  pleafed  that  men  do  thus  ufe  his  means,  then  that 
they  defpifc  or  negled  them;    and  in  this  way  he  ufually  gives 
his  Grace.    And  thofe  that  have  the  beft  common  Difpofition, 
he  ufudliy  takes  as  moft  prepared  for  faving  Grace.    Our 
Hooker^  John  Rogers^  and  other  Preachers  ordinarily  thought 
fo,  when  they  preacht  fo  much  for  preparatory  works  to  Con- 
verHon:  naming  Humiliation,  Defire,fome  Hope  (^c.  I  leave 
you  to  expound  that,  AEls  ij.ii^ii.   [_  Tkfft  (  Bertan  Jews) 
yXeremore  NOBLE  then  thofe  in  Theflalonica  ,  >,;  that  they 
reeeiveitht  (Vord  nifh  allrea^inefs  of  min^^    and  fe arched  tie 
Scriptures  daily  )^htther  thcfe  thhgs  '^ere  fo  :   THSRSFOR^ 
mayy  of  them  Believed.'^  Though  C^i/z/iw  thinks  that  it  was  net 
the  fearchers  but  others  because  of  them,  that  are  faid  [thtre- 
fore  to  Bel'xevje]  (Which  feems  not  the  moft  likely  fence.)    Yet 
he  thinks  that  [hicfrimtuefiadfihw  ittgrejfus ,  ut  prorttptiji- 
fKUt  ai  [esjuendum  y  &  ahdxcuto  propria  curni  fen fu  Oodles  nos 
'Chrtfto  &  morigeros  prtehamfts.]    Ard  how  many  Volumes 
had  been  written  againft  me  if  Ihad  faid  huz  is  Calvin  (i^ld^ 
in  A^  17.12.    \^  Non  fpernenda  ef}  hac  virtui  feduUtM  ^  ad) 
e^itain  'intintos  ffiijfe  p'aaicat  Lucu  fiieles  in  pdei  fnz  cowfir- 
irhatiofkm  ^  iftulti  enim  ejui  prirc'pio  ebtillfuntj  fiatimje  ignavia 
iiedenteu  dUmnitlla  p'^ofeUHs  cur  a  t^nguntur^  ejM(iIecftng,^fiiei 
femen  perduntf]    So  that  Cti/f'w  thought  common  Grace  was 
fuch  a  Preparation  or  Difpofition,  as  might  be  called  f  a  Seed 
•cfFaith.^'Bm  it  were  an  endlefs  task  to  cite  all  Protcflan:sthac 
write  for  this  Preparatory  Grace. 
.  2.  I  fui'ther  anfwer,  that  carnal  men  may  have  much  in 
them  that  i$  not  carnal   even  the  common  graces  of  thcSfirir, 
and  ibefe  are  not  enmity  to  God,  ihoiigh  the  carnal  mind  be  •, 
nor  is  ^  od  an  enemy  to  them . 

To  your  feventh  I  anfwer.  i.  That  though  rot  Hypocrites 
as  fuch,  or  Devils  be  prepared  for  Gface.  ^et  inch  as  [^(>fgin 
in  the  Sp  rit2  arsd  have  thehigheft  graces  thai;  the  unfanctified 
may  have,  arefofar  difpofed  for  moic,  fs  that  tl'ty  do  much 
m-ore   (irdinar)ly^  receive  faving  Grs(ce,tt;e;)  others  do. 

!  But 


(43) 


ijutyoufay,  [  IftheGofpelistrue,  Its  cviicntlj  otkerWt/e^ 
j>nd  (reneriiily  thofe  have  hten  converted  to  ChriJU^r.itj  \^h:ch  had 
notjuch  meafures  of  Knoiv ledge  aK^  common  (jr  ces :  Vrhen  thofe 
have  notxirhich  ha<J,  as  r^ff  Pharifees,    err.      Ai  fwer,  that 
the  Gofpel  is  true,  I  hope  we  ate  agreed  ;    though  we  are 
too  much  unacquainted  our  felvcs  with  the  nature  of  our  own 
faith  by  which  we  do  btheveir.      And  yc  I  am  ccmfidently 
perfwaded  that  my  AfiVrtion  here  Is  truer  ih^'n  yours,  unlefs 
(asits  like)  by  this  common  Grace,  you  ftili  mean  ano[l>er 
thing  then  I  do.     I  do  not  thirk  that  ^^riji.t/i  or  oWf*?,  or 
the  Sc'  ibes  or  Fharifecs  had  much  of  the  common  Grace  that 
I  fpeak  of,  much  Icfs.  the  highell  meafur?.     T'lat  is  not  the 
hightft  and  moft  dilpofitivc  tominion  •  Jiacc    which  coi  fifteth 
in  Artsordifciplinary  knowledge  n  being  scj-i  in:ed  with  chc 
Letters  an  J  Words ,  and  Pro;)Olh'ionsof  the  Law  ;  much  lefs 
where  it  is  joined  with  proud  ftlf-tonct  ;tcdncl«,  and  prefum- 
ption  and  i'elf.dclufion,  bci' g  fetded     ly  the  miftaking  of 
ihtir  parts  and  formaiincs  for  true  godlincU  /  )  in  a  conceit 
that  they  are  already  fand.ficd,  anl  fo  bccom  the  moft  ne- 
gligent of  ail  others  in  making  out  ro  Ch.  'ft  for  Sanctification: 
The  men  that  I  fpeak  of  ttiar  have  a  difpoficive  comcnon 
Grace  are  other  kmd  of  folks  then  you  kera  to  talk  of.    They 
are  fuch  as  are  asfar  abafc-d  in  the  feeling  of  their  fin  and  mi- 
fcry,  and  humbled  by  Attrition,  (  as  the  Papiftscall  it)  and 
cr^  out  of  their  fin  and  folly,  and  day  and  night  do  beg  for 
Grace  and  Mercy  ;  As  common  Grace  will  carry  them  to  io. 
And  far  it  will  carry  them.    And  they  are  fuch  as  like  the  word 
and  waiesof  God,  and  think  his  fcrvants  the  beft  andhappi- 
eft  mcn,ard  have  many  a  wi(h  that  they  were  fuch  therafelves, 
and  that  avoid  as  much  of  grofs  and  wilfull  finning,  and  con- 
tinue as  much  in  hearing,  reading  the  word,  enquiring  confi- 
dcrarion,  as  common  Grace  may  bring  them  to  do,  and  they 
are  fuch  as  have  as  much  belief  of  the  Gofptl,  and  as  much 
dcfire  after  Chrift  and  holinefs,  and  heaven,  and  as  much  love 
to  God  and  tlie  Redeemer,  and  the  Saints,  as  common  grace 
canlead  them  to.     And  wi  hall, that  have  ei:her  a  knowledge 
that  yet  they  are  fliort  of  true  Chriftianity,or  at  l-^ft,  are  much 
afraid  of  it,  (which  no  dqubt  but  common  Grace  may  bring 

G  z  item 


C4-4-) 


them  to.  )  And  therefore  are  under  a  prudent  Impaticncy 
till  faving  Grace  come  in,  and  the  Spirit  have  fcaledthemup 
to  the  day  of  Redemption,  and  are  crying  out,  ff'hat  fhall  xve 
do  to  befaved}  Thele  are  chey  that  I  fpeak  of,  and  not  proud 
Th/i^ifets  or  unfandified  Philolophers,  or  learned  felf-efteem- 
ing  men,  that  make  themfclves  believe,  that  they  haveinfu- 
fed  rpecial  Grace, becaufe  they  can  talk  of  it -.And  that  are  fur- 
ther from  thrift  in  the  capical  fins  of  heart  r«bellion.  Pride  , 
vain-glory,  Hypocrifiej  Worldlinefs,  if  not  fenfuality,  then 
moft  other  men,  Ics  none  of  thefe  men  for  all  their  Ads, 
5cience?,Languages,  &c.  That  I  fuppofe  to  have  the  higheft 
common  Grace.  Your  Inftances  therefore  are  not  to  the 
purpole  and  your  condufion, />.  373.  iseither  impertinent  or 
very  unfound. 

I  know  that  the  conceit  that  common  Grace  is  faving,may 
make  the  condition  (5f  fuch  perfons  more  dangerous  ,  then  of 
fomc  fcandalousfinners  that  are  eafilyer  convinced.     But,  i. 
Thofe  perfons  that  are  f)  conceited,  are  far  from  the  height 
of  common  Grace, as  r/:;<r//tff/ are  commonly  inwardly  more 
wicked  then  many  of  the  fcandalou?.2.And  it  is  not  the  com- 
mon Grace  ,   but  the  mif-conceit  for  wsnt  of  more  that  is 
-the  caufe  of  the  danger  of  fnch  men.  Even  fpecial  Grace  it  feif 
may  bcabufed:For  though  /^uji'm  and  the  Schoolmen  pucirin 
their  definition,thatitisfuchL^»^  ntwomale  utitHr^  ^  yet  that 
muft  be  meant  t^cientlj  and  not  ohjUeivtlj :  For  T  chmk  a  man 
may  he  proud  of  his  Grace,  and  fo  objedively  mifufe  it  ; 
much  more  may  common  Grace  be  mifufed  ;  and  yet  it  proves 
it  not  to  be  no  Difpofition  to  fpecial  '^race. 

The  Cayion.  6.  Concil  i  Ar^uftcanif  which  you  cite,  is  >t  kafl: 
as  fully  confented  to  by  me  as  by  you,  viz,  [  That  thofe  that 
think  that  Mercy  is  given  to  men  that  Without  the  Grace  of  Cjod 
do  i>eiieve,fVi/i,defire  aKdl^Ko:k^^  &  confejfeth  not  that  it  is  j^iven 
us  from  Cjod  hy  the  infufion  and  tnfpiration  of  the  holy  Cj  hoji  in 
us^te  believe t  ^illj  and  be  able  to  do  allthsfe  things  as  we  ouqh  , 
&c.  refill  the  A^oflle.  ]  But  I  will  dcfire  you  to  conilder 
what  the  fame  council  faith  of  the  opinion,  which  jou  Teem 
to  propugn  before  you  goon  in  ir.  The  next  Can.-],  faith, 
|[5;  (^tiii  pernatura  vigorembonftm  alitjuod  ^ftodaJ  faint  em  per- 
tinet  vita  aterna,    Sec.    Harttico  fallitt^r  fpiritf* ,  mn  intelligent 

vocertp 


vocem  Del  in  Evange'io  dicer.ti^i^  fine  me  nihil  potej^is  facere  : 
&  iUud«y4foAoli ,  Non  <juod  iJonei  fuwus  cogitArc  alitftdd  a 
nobis ^  &c.  3     And  Canon,  z'^t      T^mohabet  de  [no  mfimrn' 
daciftm  (^  peccatum.     Si^uis  autemhcmo  habct  'vtrltAtem  at^ 
juftittam,  ah  t/lo  fontt  eJl,(JHem  ciebemns  j'tire^  &C.    ~\  And  (^an, 
1  6.     Nemo  ex  eo  ^uod  videtur  habere  glonetar^  taK^uam  r,on 
acctperit  ,    attt  ideofe  pntet  accepiffe,  <jkia  iitera  extri>tfecns  le- 
Ittt  /egitffr^apparuit^  &CC.     ]      Ca^.^.   Si^uuperi>ivocatio»em 
humanam  gr^tta  Dei  dicit  poffe  cenferri ,  non  atfttm  ipfam  f/a 
tiam  facere  ut  invocetftr  a  nobi^^  contradicit   y^po/ioio^&ic.  ']  If 
therefore  the  common  Grace  in  qucftion,  be  bonum  alicjuod 
tfHodad  fiilutem  pertittetyOT  if  it  be  but  aliju  d  cogUare,  or  if  ic 
may  be  called  invocation  for  Grace  or  be  better  then  mendaci* 
urn  cr  ptccatum.     This  Councill   thought  it  Pelagianifm  to 
afcnbeit  to  our  mecr  Naturals  v\ithouc  Grace.    This  you  ob- 
ferve,  p^g  375.    But  fo  that  you  would  limit  difpofitive  or 
preparing  Grace,  to  that  which  the  Schoolmen  call  preventi>tg 
(jrAce^  even  faving  faith  wirh  love  :   but  f  as  fometime  tiiey 
call  all  that  preventing  Grace  that  goes  before  Juftification 
and  merit  of  congruicy,  as  they  call  it  fo.  )    Arminenfn  ubi  /«- 
pm^  hath  fully  proved  that  they  with  the  Fathers  afcnbc  much 
of  that  Cjracethatis  found  in  the  unjuflified  to  the  fpecial 
Grace  of  God  ,  (  as  fpecial  is  dif^ir.ft  from    general  influ- 
ence. )     And  therefore  take  heed  left  while  pag.ij6.   you 
would  bring  the  opinion  which  you  argue  againlt,  under  the 
fufpicion  of  Pelagianifm  1    &c.     You  run  not  into  the  fime  ;; 
(  Whcih  yet  I  intend  not  to  charge  you  wi:h.  )     Caranz^a 
thinks,  the  Ccstncill   ^ranf.  fpeaks  only  of  fpecial  faving 
Grace  as  out  of  mans  power  ;   but  he  confeffeth  that  many 
Moderns  think  otherwife. 

For  my  part,  though  all  this  new  Controverfie  of  difpofi- 
tive Grace  do  little  concern  that  which  I  alTerted,  which  you 
undertook  to  oppofe,  yet  theRcafons  which  I  give  herein 
the  beginning  of  this  Quefton.  with  the  concur  rent  Judge- 
ment of  IVotertant  Dirines,  and  above  all,  the  plain  ahd  fre- 
quent pafTiges  of  Scripture  do  facisfie  me,  that  common  Grace 
is  truly  preparative  and  difpofitive  to  faving  Grace  ^  not  as 
one  degree  of  the  id^mzffxcus  in  moraluj  difpofeth  to  another 

G  J  d^'grec 


C^6) 


degree,  (for  this  we  area  greed  againft  J     Bur,    i.  Asitisa 
lefs  nnpreparedncfs  and  undifpoiednefs  then  a  worfe  eilate. 
2.     As  it  removcth  many  and  great   Impediments.     3.  As 
It  is  a  ufe  of  the  means  appointed  by  God  for  obtaining  his  Ca- 
ving Grace.4.  As  it  is  intantum  or  frcundurnqniddt.  thing  plea- 
fing  to  God. and  loved  by  himyea.  &  as  he  loveth  fuch  as  have 
it  more  then  thofe  that  arc  without  it,with  the  love  of  Compla- 
ccncie  and  Acceptation  ,  To  as  it  is  aftate  much  nearer  Chrift 
then  other  mens  ofobftinarcwickedncfs  nre  ir;  in  thcfe  five  re- 
fpeds  I  think  it  prepareth  &  difpofeth  to  faving  grace.  Though 
I  think  not  that  this  fame  common  Grace  is  the  very  thing  that 
it  turned  by  any  Improvement  of  ours,  or  elevation  of  the 
Spirit  into  faving  Grace.     But  this  much  lam  fatisfied  of. 
(between  the  Arminian  &  the  contrary  exftreamj  i  .That  God 
hath  not  entered  into  Covenant  or  Promife  with  any  unrcge- 
nerate  man  to  give  him  faving  Grace  upon  any  condition  to  be 
performed  withour  it.     2.  Rut  yet  thit  heharh  commanded 
him  toufecertainmc-.nst>  obtain  it,and  to  avoid  the  refittance 
and  hindrances.     3.    And  that  a  very  Command  to  ufe  fuch 
means  as  means,    is  i  ftrongiy  incouraging  intimation,  that 
God  will  not  deny  men  the  end  and  blefling,  that  ufe  the 
means  as  well  as  they  can.     For  it  is  certain,  that  heappoint- 
cth  no  meansin  vain.     4.  That  unfanftified  men  may  do  lefs 
evil  and  more  good  then  they  do,  and  particularly  in  the  ufe 
of  thofe  means.     5.  And  that  they  have  fo  much  encourage- 
ment, f  though  no  Promife)  to  the  ufe  of  thofe  means,  that 
they  are  left  unexcufable  (  not  only  as  originally  difablcd, 
but)  as  wilfully  gracelefs,  and  even  at  the  Bar  of  v^  race  (  or 
the  Redeemer, )  if  they  negleft  them-     6.  *And  that  no  man 
can  ftand  out,  and  fay^  I  did  the  beft  that  ever  I  could  to  eb- 
tain  faving  Grace ,  and  yet   went  without  it   becauTe  God 
would  not  give  it  me. This  much  I  am  fatisfied  of^as  to  prepara- 
tory Grace. 

And  yet  my  Controverfies  with  the  late  Reverend  Servant 
of  Chrift,  Mr.  ^i<^>ke  and  others,  do  tell  me  to  my  trouble, 
that  fome  Proreftants  that  are  no  ^rmimans^  g')  fo  rr.uch  fur- 
ther in  this  then  J;  then  they  would  have  it  ft  principal  ufe  of 
Bapcifm,  the  Lords  Supper,e^r.  to  receive  thefe  men  of  com- 
mon 


C+7) 


mon  grace  (chough  they  fecm  not  to  have  more,  or  fay  fomc, 
profelsnomorc  )  and  advance  them  to  Saving  Grace.  And 
that  it  is  the  firft  vifible  Church-ftace  according  to  Divine  infti- 
ctition,  by  which  men  muft  pafs  into  the  invifible  Church  of 
the  landified.  But  I  fee  1  (hdlhave  your  vote  a^ainft  this 
way. 

But  yet  really  I  fliould  think  (  if  I  were  of  your  opinion 
about  Baptifn),.  if  ls\T,Tomhes  Letter  be  yours,  )  that  men 
fhuuid  ordinarily  be  a  while  (^atechttmeyts  before  they  are  Bap- 
tzed:  And  according  to  the  Opinion  I  am  of  (for  Infant 
Baptifmj  if  I  were  (as  the  ^ncicn:  Churches  were  ^  among 
Heathens ,  where  a  principal  part  of  the  Baptized  muft  be 
adult,  (thouphi  would  not  ncedlelly  delay  a  through  Con- 
vert, yet)  I  fliould  thmk  that  commonly  the  Ihte  of  C-.v- 
chumcns  muft  be  a  Preparatory  ftace;  and  that  the  Ctit-.chu- 
merss  were  to  be  fuppofed  in  a  more  difpofed  ftate,  thee  mcft 
that  ftood  ac  greater  diftance. 

I  do  verily  think  that  a  man  of  the  Highefl  knowledge  and 
Belief  of  fin  and  miicry  ,  Chrift  and  Mercy,  God  and  Glory, 
that  common  gr.ice  can  reach  to,  with  the  highert  Love,  De- 
fires, Humiliation,  Fear,  ConfelTion,  Petition,  Obedience,  that 
common  grace  can  re ich  to,  is  in  all  the  five  Refpcds  fore- 
mentioned,  more  Difpofed  for  Saving  Grace  ,   and  Prepared, 
thenone  that  is  an  Apoft.ite,  or  under  the  fin  againfl  the  Holy 
GhoO,  or  unco  Duty,  or  one  that  heareth  and  hatetlt  the  M.-- 
nifter  and  the  Word  ,  or  that  fo  hateth  that  he  will  not  bear  : 
and  that  cerfecuteth  godlinefs  ou:  of  hatred  to  it,  and  liveth 
in  wilfull  Driinkennefs,  Murder,  Whoredom, c^-c.    I  know  not 
what  men  may  feem  out  of  their  own  Principles,  and  fome  mif- 
incerpreted  Texts,  but  fure  I  am  I  Hnd  in  experience  (nch  an 
exceeding  difference  between  the  fucccfs  of  mv  Labours  on 
the  more  humble  confi  ierate,  teichablc  fort  of  people  ,    that 
arcnot  drowr/d  in  wilful  w.ckednefs  and  fenfu^Lty  with  the 
worft  :   and  the  old  felf-conceiced,if;nor3njcperfons,    and  the 
proud  and  haughty  Spirit*,  and  old  drunkards  ,  and  fu.h  hke 
rooted  iVnfualifts,  th;it  there  is  no  comparifonio  be  made: 
anj  I  am  fully  fatiifted  ro  pcrfwa-le  Thiev°«,  Adu!:era*s,Drur-- 
kards, Sccrners at  £odlincrs,.N:gIeders  ard  defpjfcri  ofmean?, 

and- 


(4-S) 


and  profeffcd  Infidels,rather  to  come  out  of  thcfc  fins, and  ufe 
the  means,  ann  believe  the  Scripture  to  be  true,  though  but 
with  a  Dogmatical  Faith,  then  co  conciue  as  they  are.  And  I 
(hall  take  fuch  Believers,  and  Reformers,  to  be  more  prepared 
.  and  Difpofed  for  Saving  Grace,  then  they  were  before.  And  I 
hopethisisnoHerefie. 

J^ure  I  amthat  y/^rt^;>d  that  wasalmoft  perfwaded  to  be  a 
Chriftian,  was  neerer  it  and  better  difpofed  then  the  haters  of 
Chriftianity,     And  I  am  fare  that  Chrift  was  well  able  to  re- 
folve  our  Controverfie,  and  that  he  told  the  Saibe^  Ma'\  \i. 
34.  Thouart  not f^r  from  the  Kingdom  of  Cjod :  ]  acquainting 
us  that  there  is  a  ftatethats  neer  and  next  to  the  ftate  of  Grace, 
when  other  men  are  further  oflF.     And  as  fure  1  am  that  he 
that  faid,  {^All  this  Ihxve  obferved  from  my  youth  ]  wa?  Loved 
by  Chrift,  and  told  that  he  yet  ladled  one  thing,  CMark.  1 0.21, 
and  that  this  is  a  better  difpoficion  to  Grace,  then  they  that  are 
not  fo  much  loved^  are  in,  and  that  lack,  more  things  :  Though 
yetevenfuch  w<7  ^(7  a^V4; /<7''r<7ft'/«/,   through  the  porverful 
temptation  of  Riches^  Luke  i.  17.    It  was  the  work  of  f^bn  to 
make  ready  a  people  prepared  for  the  Lord.']     And  if  fuch  were 
not  more  undifpofed  to  receive  true  Grace,  we  fliould  not  fo 
ofthavcheardthatthreatning,cJ^rty/^.4.i2.  AEisi^.ij.  [The 
heart  of  this  people  are  ^axedgrofs  ,    and  their  ears  are  dull  of 
hearings  and  their  eyes  b-ive  they  clofed,  lefi  thf)  f^ouldfee  ^ith 
their  ey-s^  and  hear  Vcith  their  ears ,    and  under  lland  with  their 
heartland  /hoaldife  converted  ^  ay  d  I  /hould  heal  them.]  This  was 
not  the  ftate  of  all  the  unconverted.    Tjre  and  Sydon  were  not 
fo  undifpofed  for  Grace,  as  C^^f^»4«w  was.    But  enough  of 
this,  unlefs  I  were  fure  that  there  were  any  real  difference  be- 
tween us.     I  fpsak  but  to  your  words ,  at  they  may  he  inter- 
preted by  any  Readers,  to  oppofe  the  Truths  which  I  aflert, 
imagining  that  your  felf  intend  it  not,  however  you  might  mi- 
ftake  mc, 

To  your  fourth  Rcafon  pag.']'j6. 1  anfwer^  i.  We  are  A- 
greed  ftill  of  the  Condufion. 

2.  But  I  ftill  think  you  are  very  much  our,in  taking  th;  high- 
eft*  common  Grace  to  be  but  fuch  as  the  knowledge  of 
TongueSjC^f.  which  you  there  mention,  and  to  be  but  [_  the 

prcdiSi 


(4-9) 

poduEl  of  our  natural  Hyider ft  anilirgs,  advanced  h  educaun  and 
Indtt(irj^now  fince  'JMirucles  are  ceafed.  |  For  diougb  Edu- 
cation and  induftry  be  a  means  to  common  and  fpecial  Grace, 
yet  without  the  help  and  Gift  of  the  Spirit,  men  can  have  nei- 
ther fpecial  Gracc^  nor  that  common  grace  which  I  fpeak  of. 
I  much  fear  left  many  Learned.  Civil,  Orthodox  men,  do  take 
common  grace  to  be  fpecial,  and  fa  delude  their  own  fouU,  in 
the  trial  of  therafclves.  Mr.  Shepheard  hath  told  you  from 
many  Scriptures  (  in  your  Book  )  of  higher  ihirn^s  then  thefe 
you  mention, that  Hypocrites  or  Temporaries  may  attain. And 
all  that  they. had  from  the  Spirit  in  the  Primitire  times,  was  not 
only  the  power  of  Miracle?  as  is  (hewed  :  therefore  they  may 
have  more  from  the  Spirit  now. 

5  1  do  no:  thmkyour  Confequencc  good,  that  the  loofing 
of  one.and  not  loofeninq,  or  not  loofablcncfs,  of  the  other, 
will  prove  a  fpecifick  difference.  For  i .  There  are  many  com- 
mon gifts  in  man  that  sue  no  more  lofcable  then  faving  Grace. 
2.  And  on  the  other  fide,  it  is  not  from  the  mccr  Nature  of 
inherent  Grace  that  it  cannot  be  loft;  but  from  the  Divine 
Decree,  Love  and  engagement  (of  which  1  have  fpoken  in  a 
Difcourfe  of  Perfeverance,  )  For  i^dam  had  faving  Grace, 
eventhe  I  mage  of  God,  and  yet  loft  it  ;  yet  I  believe  the  Apo- 
ftle,  that  it  is  becaufe  the  fee  J  of  God  remaineth  in  us ;  but  I 
think  it  is  not  a  good  Argument,  that  becaufe  it  is  the  feed,  or 
fuch  a  Seed,  therefore  it  will  remain  :  but  ic  Remaineth  in  us, 
becaufe  the  Love  of  GodinChrift,  and  the  operation  of  the 
Spirit  caufeth  it  to  Remain.  For  t^Jam  had  a  Seed  of  the  fame 
Nature,  and  yet  it  did  not  Remain  in  hi  m. 


H  Sect 


S  E   C  T.    VII. 

Paie  sSo.lTO  your  fifcli  Reafon,  i.  I  grant  both  your 
Conclufion  ftill,  and  chat  Haifits  are  diflinguifh- 
ed  fpecificalli/  when  the  formal  Objeds  arc  fodiftind.  2.  And 
I  am  of  the  fame  mind  with  Roi>.'Baronim ^2is  you  cice  him;  that 
no  man  but  the  Regenerate  is  truly  a  Divine  or  Chriftian,  and 
hath  properly  Theologie,  but  only  Analogically  :  Though 
perhaps  I  may  havccenfures  enough  for  coming  fo  nccr  to  you 
in  this,  for  all  y  u  think  me  co  differ  fo  much  from  you.  It  is 
but  the  fame  thing  that  Difpit.  5.  of  Right  to  Sacraments  I 
maintained.  3.  But  lam  not  yet  fatisfied  that  faving  faith 
believes  many  things  or  any  thing  materially,  which  a  common 
faith  doth  not  bdieve  in  his  manner,  of  which  more  anon. 

4.  That  which  is  the  formal  Objed  of  the  Ad  of  Faith,  is  it 
you  fay,  fpecifierh  the  Habit :  and  therefore  you  afterward  dc- 
fcribe  it  as  refpeding  the  Ad.  But  it  is  not  all  the  Motives  and 
M  dtA.  that  are  the  formal  ob jeds  of  the  ad  of  Paith  >,  but  ic 
is  the  Veracity  of  the  Reveller ^  or  Speaker,  or  Teftifier.  He  that 
bdieveth  the  fame  material  Truths  becaufe  of  the  Veracity  of 
God  the  Revealer,  hath  a  true  Divine  faith  ?  though  in  regard 
of  the  Motives  or  Media  by  which  men  difcern  or  are  pcrfwad- 
ed,  thit  the  Revelation  is  indeed  Divine ,  there  may  be  differ- 
ences between  feveral  true  Believers ,  and  fome  of  them  may 
makcufeof  infufficient  or  miftaken  mediums  or  motives.    If 
you  deny  this,yhu  will  leave  but  few  Chriftians  among  Chri- 
ftian?, and  perhaps  not  any  of  the  ignorant  fort ;    nay  perhaps 
not  one  at  all  in  the  world,  as  to  their  firft  Adof  Faith, if  your 
following  grounds  be  annexed      For  my  part,  if  I  fee  a  poor 
Chriftian  that  believeth  all  the  Articles  of  the  faith,   becaufe 
God  hath  Revealed  them,  who  he  is  fully  perfwaded  cannot 
lie,  to  be  yet  at  a  lofs  as  to  the  dfeMa  or  A^ctives  that  fiiould 
perfwade  him  to  take  the  Scripture  to  b,*  a  Divine  Revihtion  • 
or  if  he  Receive  this  bq:  on  infiifficient  grounds  or  Receive  the 
Articles  of  f^aith  by  Tradition  without  Scripture  and  yet  j^ive 
uph'mfilf  hereupon  to  the  Obedience  of  the  Dof^nne  which 
he  recciveth,  i  (liall  take  him  to  be  a  r^eliever  or  Chriftian  in- 
deed. 


(50 


deed.  Mtiny  thoufands  believe  the  Doflrinc  of  Scripture  up- 
on Gods  credit ,  and  therefore  wi.  ha  D.  vine  Faith  ,  that  arc 
not  able  to  give  you  fuch  proofs  of  the  Revelation  being  Di- 
vine, as  the  caufc  requires  or  dtfeives. 

5.  The  Divine  Veracity  is  fofar  known  by  men  ,  as  they 
know  indeed  that  there  is  a  God;  For  a  lying  god  is  not  God, 
but  an  Idol.  A  nd  fo  far  as  common  grace  may  lead  men  from 
Atheifin,  fo  far  it  may  lead  them  to  believe  upon.tbe  credit  of 
God,  or  to  acknowledge  Gods  Veracity,  and  fo  to  Believe  the 
Gofpel  ^j'fZ)it/»>f.7,  when  they  once  take  the  Gofpcl  to  be  the 
Word  of  God.  So  that  the  faith  of  Temporaries  may  have 
the  fame  ohje^um  forma/e,  as  the  faich  of  Saints  :  that  is,the 
Veracity  of  God  .-  And  the  /1:/(?<iij  to  prove  the  Revelation 
Divine,  aie  not  the  formal  objed  of  faith;  though  the  Reve- 
lation be  of  necei^\:y,&s  a  Condition  fi-ne  i^«4  «o« ,  to  the  ad  of 
Faith,  as  PromM/^atton  of  a  Lnv  is  to  the  ^^  of  Obedience. 
Of  this  I  have  fpoken  more  largely  in  the  Treface  to  part,!,  of 
the  Saints  Refi. 

6.  Where  you  fay  fug.  381.  f  Tha^  faving  Faith  u  built  oh 
better  Princiflts^M  froceeiing  from  the  Spirit  ofChrifi  and  be- 
ir.g  built  upon  h'4  tmtrediate  Revelation  and  Teflimonj^  &c.]  I 
y'lnf'iftr^  I  doubt  I  differ  from  you  more  in  this,  theninlhe 
Condufion.  I  have  m  the  fiift  and  fecond  part  of  my  7>w^ 
agatKfi  Irfidelitjf,  (peciiiWy  ^p-^g.^ 2. part.  2.  §2.  and  through 
that  part  purpofely  (hewed  how  much  I  afcribe  to  the  Spirits 
Teftimony  in  our  Belief.  As  alfo  in  the  Saints  Rifi^pjtrt.z.pag. 
1 97.  f  '  mprefTion  7.  j  r.a.  ^  i .  and  in  the  Preface  to  that  part : 
and  irs  fully  and  Judicioufly  handled  by  the  ^Irryrald  in  Thif, 
Salm.  Jol.i,  pag.  121.  Jhef.  de  Tefllmoti.  Sprit.  And  by 
Rob.  Btroniut  in  Apodtx.  ad  Turnbull.  p<«^-73  3.  I  readily 
yield  that  the  illumination  of  the  Spirit  is  neceffiry,  and  that 
when  once  men  have  Received  theimprcfsof  the  Word,  and 
the  <  mape  of  God  by  the  Spirit  on  their  hearts,  they  iiave  then 
inrhemfelve«a  Ahdium  whence  they  may  conclude  that  Scri- 
p'ure  i?  the  Word  of  <>-od.    But  your  plain  Dodrine  is  [that 

ommon  Srlief  hath  only  An  uncertain  fallible  AIcdtHm  ^  and  aU 
fuvtng  ^,}ith  hath  a  certain  infallible  'J^Tedium^  and  that  tithe 
Tejlimofy    immedinte)  of  the  Spirit  ^i'.hiH  tu,    Now  I.  HetC 

Ha  I 


(50 


I  may  well  cake  it  for  granted  that  by  this  Tcftlmony  ,   yon 
mean  not  the  Spirit  as  a  mcer  efficient  caufe,  giving  us  the  Rc- 
dified  power  of  Believing,  or  the  Habit,  or  exciting  and  edu- 
cing the  Aft,  as  a  Predetermining,  or  other  efficienc  caufe  ; 
For  as  we  all  confefs  this  Medicinal  Grace  and  efficient  illumi- 
nation as  well  as  you  •,  So  this  is  none  of  the  Concroverfie,nor 
the  thing  that  you  exprefs.    Its  one  thing  to  give  us  eyes  and 
Sight  and  to  cure  their  difeafes,  and  fet  open  the  windows, 
and  anoiher  thing  to  propofe  an  Objcd,  or  to  fee  in  our  ftead. 
We  confefs  that  the  Holy  Ghofl  gives  u?  the  moral  power  or 
Habit,  and  educeththc  Ad,  and  fo  efficiently  caufeth  as  to 
fee,  and  that  fufficienc  Objeds  and  Reafons  for  Believing  are 
Uid  before  all  men  that  have  but  a  fufficient  internal  Sight. 
But  your  Teliimony  which  is  made  the  Aiedinm ,  muft  needs 
be  fuppofed  to  be  an  objeElive  Medium  or  E-vidtKce,  or  an  in- 
tertjal  Affirmation  or  EnttKciatioM -,  as  by  another  within  us    as 
faying  \TkisiithefVorclofGod,  orthuntrue^   byway  of  full 
Tertimony,  not  only  opening  the  eyes  to  fee  the  evidence  al- 
ready extant  in  the  Word,  d-c  but  alfj  being  it  felfiheevi- 
dence,as  a  full  inartificial  Argument,  and  as  an  inward  witnefs 
that  is  to  be  believed  himfelf,  and  not  only  caufeth  us  to  believe 
a  former  word.     Now  that  befides  all  thcefficient  illumination 
that  caufeth  us  to  believe  the  Divine  Teflimony  or  Enunciati- 
ons already  extant  in  the  Word,  there  is  no  fuch  inward  word 
of  the  Spirit  objeftively  nccefTary  as  the  A^ediumo^ om  Belief 
to  the  Being  of  Saving  Faith,  and  to  prove  its  SpecificJi  differ- 
ence ;  befides  what  is  faid  j    1  briefly  add,  thefe  few  Reafons, 
1 .  This  Dodrine  is  Papall  or  worfe^makinq  the  Word  of  God 
infufficient  in  fmgenere^  to  the  ufe  it  is  ordained  for.     i  know 
that  in  other  kind  of  Caufality,  it  is  no  difparagement  to  the 
Scripture,  to  fay  that  it  is  not  fufficient :  but  it  is  fufficient  in  its 
own  kind  ;  which  is  to  contein  the  matter  of  our  Faith,and  ob- 
jedive  Teftimony  ofGod  thereto,    And  tbouj^h  we  yield  that 
theTranfcript  or  effect  of  this  word  on  the  heart  is  objectively 
ufeful,  as  well  as  efficiently,  to  confirm  us  in  the  Faith  as  a  fe- 
condary  Teftimony,  yet  it  is  not  the  prime  Teftimony, nor  Ne- 
^effary  to  fupply  any  defed  in  it  :  nor  is  Scripture  in  that  kind 
infufficient  without  it  .to  afford  us  a  valid  Mcdmm  for  Belief : 

Many 


C50 


many  Papifts,  (  of  whom  Baronhs  againft  TurnhuSuf  treat«! 
at  large  )  do  indeed  fuppofe  fuch  an  infpiration  or  immediate 
Tcftiraony  neceffary  in  the  Pope  or  Church  to  afcerrain  u.«  that 
the  Scripture  is  the  word  of  God  ;  but  we  are*  not  of  tnac 
mind. 

2.  If  the  objenive  medium  be  uttered  by  a  voice  as  it  were, 
or  any  thing  anfwerable  wi:hin  us,  either  it  is  aliunde^  fctchc 
and  receitcd  from  without,  that  is,  from  Scripture,  or  i:  is 
primarily  from  the  inward  Teftifier,  Ifthefirft,  then  the /^m'- 
ptue  Medium  is  I'ufficient,  for  it  is  the  fame  receiced  within  ; 
and  fo  the  common  and  faving  faith  have  the  fame  Afedium, 
If  the  later,  then  it  is  mtti  Iiffiration  p>-cpheiiiai^  and  fo  , 
I.  None  fhouldbeChriftiansO!  faved  but  Prophets,  which 
is  Euthuft  fm^  and  more,  2.  And  the  ordinarv  way  of  mens 
Converfion  fhould  be  without  the  word, or  ihe  word  be  unne- 
cefTary  to  it.  For  whit  need  another  tell  me  that  by  a  fallible 
way  ,  which  the  Spirit  within  doth  primarily  u:ter  by  an  itifal- 
libleTeftimony. 

3.  The  holy  Scripture  is  the  meaiftm  of  the  common  Be- 
liever, (  as  Gods  veracity  is  his  formal  objed.  )  But  the  ho- 
ly Scripture  is  no  uncertain,  humane, fallible  Medium,  as  you 
fay  the  Temporaries  is. 

4.  Your  DoArine,(ai  your  words  import,    doth  excufe  all 
Infidels  before  God  as  guiltlefs  -.For  if  there  be  not  propound* 
ed  to  them  in  Scriprure.nor  any  other  Iway  ,  a  certain  Divne, 
infallible  objedive  Medium  of  Belief  ^thcn  cannot  they  be  ob- 
liged to  believe.      For  to  believe  without  a  neceifary  Ob- 
jedis  naturally  impoflible.     And  though  moral  Impotency, 
which  is  but  their  vicioufnefs,  do  not  escufc,  yet  natural  Im- 
potency  ac  left ,  not  caufed  by  fin  ,  doth   excufe.       That 
their  underftandings  are  fo  blind,  astohavenetd  of  ihelllu- 
minarion  of  the  Sprit,  to  enlighten  them  to  fee  a  futficient 
Objefl  or  'jA'^.edtum  o\  Belief,  this  is  there  own  fault,   t.ut  that 
they  cannot  fee  or  believe  without  a  certain  Aded  am  or  objed, 
this  is  no  more  tiieir  fault,  tlien  it  is  that  they  fee  rot  non  ex- 
iftcnrs ,  ortbat  which  is  a  thoufand  miles  of,  orthat  they  can- 
not fee  it  in  the  dark. 

5.  According  to  your  Dodrine,  molt  of  the  Chriftians  in  the 

H  5  world. 


(54-; 


world,  and  all  that  I  know  (  as  far  a;  I  can  learn  )  muft  be  un- 
chriftcned,  and  caft  into  a  ftatc  of  Condemnation.  For 
though  I  know  many  chat  have  fachaTeftimouy  of  the  Spi- 
rit as  I  have  dcfcribed  in  ray  Treat,  againft  Infidelity,  T^artz. 
Yet  I  never  knew  one  that  had  any  other,  that  is,  that  had 
an  immediate  word  uttered  by  the  Spiric  within  him,  diftinft 
from  Scripture,  which  his  firft  faith  was  refolved  into,  as  the 
Medium  that  muft  fpecifie  it.  At  left,  it  is  a  terrible  DoArine, 
to  put  poor  Chriftians  on  the  rack,  fo  by  that,  few  will  ever 
know  that  they  have  faith,  if  they  muft  prove  it  fpecified  by 
a  Prophetick  Revelation.  And  if  you  make  any  difference 
between  this,  and  the  Revelation  of  the  Pcophcts,  let  us  know 
wherein  the  difference  liech. 

6.  The  undoubted  fruit  of  this  Do6lrinc  received,  would 
be  the  inflation  of  audacious,  fiery,  fantaftick  fpirited  men,thac 
are  ready  to  think  that  allftrongimpulfes  within  them  are  of 
the  Spirit  of  God ,  as  poor  humble  Chriftians  that  feel  no 
fuch  thing,  muft  fall  into  defpair,  for  as  they  feel  it  not,  fo 
they  know  not  how  to  come  to  the  feeling  of  ir. 

7.  If  this  inward  Teftimony  be  the  certain  Medium  of 
knowingtheScripturetobcthe  wordof  God,  then  either  all 
the  Scripture  or  but  part:  If  but  part,  which  part,  and  why 
one  part  rather  then  another  ?  If  all,  whence  is  it  that  never 
any  of  the  millions  of  Chriftians  have  from  this  inward  Teft:i- 
mony  taught  us  which  Books  be  canonical,  and  which  not.* 
but  all  go  for  that  to  other  Teftimonies  or  Media. 

8.  If  we  have  infallible  certain  Media ^  to  prove  the  Scrip- 
ture to  be  the  true  word  of  God  without  any  internal  MtJUnm 
as  nrceffary ,  (  fuppofing  the  efficient  Illumination  of  our 
minds  by  the  Spirit  to  fee  the  Ul'ledia  already  extant)  then  the 
fuppofed  Medium  of  the  Spirits  ImmediateTefiimovy ^  \s  not  of 
necefilty  to  faving  Faith.  But  that  the  Antecedent  is  true, 
is  mnnifeft  thus :  we  can  without  that  inward  ^ordot  Meiittm^ 
(hew  fufficient  proof,  i.  That  all  that  God  faith  is  true.  2.  And 
that  the  Scripture  is  his  word.  And  3.  Confeqnently  chat 
all  in  Scripture  is  true.  Srgo.  &c.  i.  That  God  i«;  Tf>-<a;v, 
and  cannot  lie,  is  as  eafie  to  prove  as  that  he  is  God.  2.  That 
the  Scripture  is  his  word,  is  proved  by  certain  Argilmcnts ,  by 


CT5) 


Eufebini,  Angtifti»e^  and  many  other  Fathers,  by  FlciKusi 
yives,  DupiejftJ^  Grotiw,  Davenport^  C^arhut^  Camero  ,  Po/m- 
»«^,  and  an  hundred  more.  Yet  flill  we  maintain,  i.  1  hat  a 
natural  Light  is  neceffary  to  fuch  a  belief  of  thi?,  as  tJie  mecr 
natural  man  may  reach.  2.  A  common  Illumination  is  nc- 
cefTary  to '  he  higher  apprehenfions,  and  faith  of  the  tempora- 
ry. 3.  And  a  fpecial  Illumination  is  neceffary  to  faving  Be- 
lief. 

9.  If  we  are  in  doubt  of  an  inward  word  o(  Teflimnny, 
wheth;'r  it  be  from  the  Spirit  of  God  or  not,  how  fhall  we 
know  but  by  trying  the  Spirits,  and  how  fhall  we  tre  hen, 
but  by  the  Word  ?  The  word  therefore  is  a  ruffi:ient  A^feJi- 
««,(' though  not  fuffigient  to  enlighten  us  to  difcern  it.  ) 

10.  The  meiiuTU  that  is  an  inward  objei^ive  Teftimony, 
muft  befomeword,  or  fomc  work  of  f he  Spirit  on  the  loul, 
A  word  diftinft  from  a  work  :  the  common  experience  of  ik- 
lievers doth  denv,or  not  know,fuch  a  work,that  isthcobje.H.ve 
motive,   rauli  be  m  order  before  the  Faith  that  is  cau^eJ  bv  it: 
But  before  the  firft  Ad  of  laving  Faith  ,  there  is  no  fuch  exi  e- 
ricnce  or  objedive  motive  or  c^^fj'f«w  in  the  foul  :  therefore 
the  hrft  ad  of  faving  Faith  is  not  thus  fpccified  ;  and  therefore 
it  is  not  neceffary  to  the  fpecificarion.  Yea,  and  thus  there 
ll^ould  no  man  ever  be  bound  to  believe,  becaufe  he  muft  have 
that  inward  experiment,  Word,  Afedmnfy  or  Monve  excant 
in  him,  before  he  firlt  believe  (  if  this  were  neccfTiry  as  is 
faid  )  anJ\ct  its  certain  that  no  man  hath  that  experiment. 
Medium,  &c.    til!  he  do  believe  :  forlnfidels  have  it  not.. 

I  confefs  that  a  fanftified  man  hath  an  inw.ird  Principle  and 
Habit,  which  others  have  not,  and  that  for  confirmation  af- 
ter his  firrt  belief,  the  experience  of  that  may  be  afubfervient 
Mediufi.  But  I  k  low  not  of  any  one  Article  of  Faith,  or 
anyy^/f-^j'/wobj  dive  for  thcdifcerning  of  that  Truth  which 
isnccert'iry  to  a  Tiving  Faith,  which  Temporaries  have  not 
fome  knowledge  of.  They  know  all  the  fame  Ardcle^  of 
faith,  and  believed  them  by  the  fame  Medii-,  though  no:  by 
the  fame  il'un'rated/andined  minds,  and  not  with  a  faith  of 
the  ftme  fpecies  /u'V/^Pemble  truly,  (  vindidj^*'-jr.it.psg.2i5  ) 
'But  it  mu(i  be  diligent :j  ob/erved^^'hxt  kj>}d  of  Xjvdution  and 

ttdi- 


C5^) 


tejiimonj  of  the  Spirit  It  is^  "thereby  »/  may  bcfaidto  be  ajfttred 
of  the  Scriptures  d'vi:e  Truth,  It  is  not  arty  inward  [uggtfiion 
and  infplration  different  from  thofe  Rvelations  that  are  in  the' 
Scriptures  themfelvest  at  if  the  Spirit  did  by  a  fecond  -,  private 
particular  Revelation  ajfure  me  of  the  Truth  of  thefe  former  re- 
velations Wide  in  the  Scriptures  :  ^e  have  no  Warrant  for  any 
fuch  private  Revelation  now^  nor  is  there  any  need  of  them,  HoW 
then  doth-the  hoi/  Qhofi  reveal  to  us  the  Truth  of  Scriptures  ?  I 
anfwery  by  removing  thofe  impediments  that  hitidred^  and  bj  be- 
fio'^ing  thofe  Graces  that  maizes  us  capable  of  this  Knowledge, 

There's    a  twofold  Impediment,    i  .Ignorance. l.Corrupti" 

on, •  This  holy  Spirit  cureth  the.   i.  By  Illumination  refioring 

our  decayed  under  ft  anding,  The  fecond  by  San^lt^cation^ 

infufing  into  our  'De fires  and  Affe^ions  fame  ^Degrees  of  their 

primitive  Holyneft. — -pag-Zid.  Other  inward  and  fecret 

Revelations  of  the  Spirit  we  acknowledge  not  inthii  Bufinefs.  ] 


Sect.  V  1 1 1. 

ASto  your  paffagcs,  ^^t^.^^a,  383.  about  opinion  and 
fciencc.  i .  Faith  is  commonly  faid  to  be  neither  opinino 
nor  Sciences ;  (Though  for  my  own  part,[  have  given  my  rea- 
fons  for  its  evidence  againft  Barcnius  and  Rada^  Apol.  Part  i. 
pag.ii^.  c^c.  and  againft  Hurtado'm  Treat,  againft  Infidel. 
Dcterra.  pag.6Z-  Franfc.  Mayco,  and  many  others  maintain 
it  to  be  evident  and  demonftrable.  Ariminenfis^  and  many 
more  with  him  deny  it,  faying,  (  ut  ty^rmine>if.  contra  Man- 
con  )  that  it  hath  evidenUam  credibilitatU  ,  non  autem  certitu- 
dinid :  which  fatisfieth  not  me  :  but  if  it  hold  ,  it  may  (hew 
the  impertinency  or  invalidity  of  your  arguing.  2  If  Faith 
muft  h2ive2Lfcientific.ll  medium,  or  if  a  credible  medis^m  be 
enough  and  diftind,  yet  ftill  this  ^^f<KV»»w  is  extant  to  theun- 
fandified  in  the  word  of  God,  without  an  inward  propheti- 
cal lofpiration.  And  though  they  fee  it  not  favmgly,  yet 
they  fee  it  fuperticialiy  ,  and  with  a  common  faith.  Jt  was 
the  fame  Reafons  that  prevailed  with  many  of  the  fandificd 
and  the  Temporaries  to  believe,  but  not  apprehended  by  the 

fame 


CT7) 

fame  faith.  Amtffu  {uh<fupra)  tells  us  ihn  we  ire  paft  cuedi- 
on  :  that  in  the  Lumen  df fir  ens  cifjefftfm  as  he  calls  it  there  is 
no  difference.  It  was  the  fame  Seed  that  fell  Tnd  grew  among 
the  thorns,  and  in  rhc  ftony  ground,  as  in  the  good  ground, 
though  it  had  not  the  fame  ground  and  enreitammenc ,  being 
received  but  fuperhcientiy  mto  the  one  ,  and  being  over- tope 
andchoaken  with  predominant  enemies  in  the  other.  If  an 
unfani^iSed  Divine  may  ftudy,  preach  and  defend  every  Afe- 
diftm  neceffjry  to  Saving  Faith,  then  may  they  have  fome  ap- 
prehenfiou  andufeof  every  fuch  Medium  ^  but  the  former  is 
true  :  Ergo . 

Where  therefore  you  fay,  f^^g. :  83.  \.\\^x[hljpocrite\  ancHm- 
pfous  perfoKS  hiveni  P  rem  fen  0  infer  '  the  Articles  of  Faith) 
but  fuch  .IS  are  Humane  4tid  dubioHi  andpi'cbjble.]  I  exceed- 
ingly D.ffentinthis  pirt  cular.  They  may  have  all  the  fame 
Prrwi/^' asyou  may  have  at  your  firft  Believing.  You  had 
Help  and  Light  to  caufe  you  to  fee  the  premifes  which  they  had 
not,  but  you  had.no  Premf^'es  more  then  they  rray  have.  They 
have  the  fame  Word  as  you.  He  that  Believes  becaufe  of 
Gods  Veracity,  and  his  Scrip:ure  Revelation,  believes  upon 
Premifes  ,  that  are  better  then  humane  dubious, and  probable  : 
but  thus  may  Temporaries  btlieve  ;  Ergo . 

But  you  ask,  \'f  hat  Afediumt  and  Motives  have  thej  to  bt- 
Heve  that  to  be  Gods  iVord.  For  their  A[[ent  to  the  Divine 
Truth  of  God-  iVord  can  be  no  firmer  and  certain  then  the  Pre- 
mifes which  infer  th.-it  Affeni ;  Novf  Hypocrites  neither  have  nor 
can  hive  a>,j  Premifes  or  Motives  to  ReVeve  the  Divinity  of  that 
Word^  but  fuch  oi  I  named :  ]  <ty4nfrp.  Far  ami  from  the  Be- 
lief of  this  Dodrine.  i.  Ail  the  Arguments  to  prove  the 
Scripture  to  be  Gods  Word,  wh'ch  all  the  forenamcd  Writers 
uf",  and  Tempr>raries  Read,  and  ftudy  and  preach  ,  (' befides 
the  inward  Teftimony  which  you  plead  for  J  are  more  then 
Humine,  Probable  and  dubiou?.  But  all  thefe  may  a  Tempo- 
rary u^em  his  way  :   Erj^is . 

2  All  the  Premfes  that  yru  had  for  your  firft  Bel'ef  that 
Scrin'-u''e  was<^joJs  Vord.a  Temporary  may  have  :  For  you 
hid  a  work  or  word  of  the  Sp  rit  to  be  made  ufe  of  as  a  Pre- 
mife  to  infer  Iklicffromj  before  you  believed.     But  your  firft 

I  Premifes 


Premifes  (to  your  Saving  Belief^  were  not  fuch  as  yon  De- 

fcribe  Ergo . 

3.  Ta\c  heed  of  daftiing  out  the  Chriftian  faith  at  a  blow, 
and  giving  up  the  caufe  to  the  Infidels.  For,  if  the  inward 
Teflimony  of  the  Spirt  which  you  mention  and  precend  to, 
be  no  furer  a  Meiiium  or  Premife  ,  to  infer  Scripture  to  be 
Gods  Word  from,  then  feme  of  the  other  that  you  affirm  to  be 
but  dubious,  humane  or  probable  then  according  ro  you, there 
is  no  Argument  for  Scripture,  that  is  better  then  lb  :  But  the 
Antecedent  is  certain.  For  all  thofe  Arguments  mentioned 
by  the  forcciced  Writers,  from  that  Imrirfick,  Light ^  by  which 
the  Scripture, as  the  Sun  is  feen,  and  from  Frophe/ies  fhlfilled^ 
uncontrohleei  Miracles  Sealing  it,^c.  are  as  fure,  as  any  a  man 
before  his  firft  believing  or  in  the  Ad, (yea  or  after)  can  fetch 
from  Within  him  :  (Though  ftiU  he  mult  have  a  L'ght  within 
him  from  the  Spirit  to  fee  them  :  which  is  none  of  h  s  Premi- 
fes J  Yei,  if  in.vardHolmefs  orthe  Spirits  Ttftimony  be  the 
only  Evidence,  yet  that  Holincfs  and  Spirit  *n  all  the  fandifi- 
ed,  (  which  is  mor.  then  in  one  man)  is  one  o' the  Trr wi,^/ or 
a  J'/*^/«/»  which  an  unfandified  man  may  ufe  :  And  though 
he  have  not  the  experimental  knowledge  of  ic,  and  fo  not  the 
fame  manner  of  apprehenfion,  yet  the  Viedium  is  the  fame. 

And  what  a  Task  do  you  fet  the  Preachers  of  the  Gofpel 
here  and  what  a  cafe  do  you  leave  their  Hearers  in  ?  If  there 
hti\o  Prent'fes  but  this  of  an  inward  Teftimony,  better  then 
humane,  dubious, (^t:.  then  no  man  breathing  can  produce  any 
better  to  unbelievers  to  perfwade  themto  bel  eve.  But  they 
muft  fay,  ['/>  h^ve  yiolnf.rilihle^  cirtain  Medium  to  prove  Scri- 
pture to  be  true,  or  C^'  ijitanity  to  he  true  :  but  only  ttuwane^  du" 
biom  Premi'^es.}  For  his  own  inward  Teftimony  his  Hearers 
have  nor,  nor  can  know  it  but  by 'Believing  him,  which  is  a 
far  more  uncertain  way  then  that  you  call  uncertain.  And 
how  then  fhall  we  exped  that  men  believe  us  ?  This  is  it  that 
Knot  and  other  Papifls  falfely  charge  on  our  Religion  that  we 
have  no  infalliblecertaintyof  it. 

5.  The  A-poftles  and  Evangelifts  did  produce  infallible  Pr^- 
w*/^/ for  faith,  befides  the  inward  Teflimony  of  the  Spirit  in 
the  Hearers:  therefore  there  is  other  infallible  Pnviifes  to  be 
produced.  6.Few 


(5P) 


6.  Few  good  Chriftians  do  believe  upon  the  Premi/c  or  A/e- 
Ji»m  of  the  feiiimony  you  mention  (  thougli  "by  the  Spirit* 
work  eSiciendy  they  do  ?  )  Therefore  it  is  not  of  necellr  y  to 
the  fpecifying  of  Saving  Faith. 

Laftly,  I  again  enter  my  DifTcnt  alfo  from  your  great  Sup. 
pofitionof  the  Neceflity  of  infall  ble  Prtmtfts  to  a  Saving 
Belief  of  Scrip'ure  being  Gods  Word.  The  word  of  Reve- 
lation, is  it  felf  but  the  Means  of  our  Faith  ;  the  Eflentials  of 
our  faith  are  the  matter  and  Form  fas  we  may  call  them  :  )  the 
eflential  material '  ^bj'c^fl  is  the  particular  Articles  of  Faith  Ef- 
fential  to  C  hriftianitv  r  the  formal  Objeft  is  Divine  Veracity  ; 
that  Scriprureis  thcWord  of  God,  is  neither  the  formal  Ob- 
ject, nor  any  eHential  part  of  the  material  Objed  ;  but  fas  I 
la,d^  it  i'  necefTiry  as  a  Cot^Gttion  fine  (j»a  non^  or  a  {JMedium^ 
that  the  Matter  be  Revealed  as  from  God  by  Scripture,  or 
fas  before  the  writing)  by  feme  other  way,  as  Promulgation  of 
a  Law  is  neccflary  to  obedience.  Now  as  a  manmuft  hear 
the  Law  proir.ulgate,and  believe  that  it  is  really  the  Sovcraigns 
Ad  and  will  before  he  can  obey  it ;  So  we  muft  bear  or  Read 
the  Word,  and  be  perfwaded  that  it  is  the  Word  of  God  before 
we  can  fide  Divwa  believe  it.  But  yet  as  a  man  may  by  meer 
Report,  or  by  the  Badge  on  his  Coat,  on  fome  meer  probable 
Reafon,  think  this  to  be  the  Herauld  authorized  to  Proclaim 
this  Law,  and  yet  a;  long ?.s he  takes  it  to  be  the  Kings  Law, 
and  re  erenceth and  obeyetb  it  as  his,  he  peitormeth  the  loy- 
al Obedience  of  a  true  Subjeft,  and  perhaps  better  then  fome 
Lawyers  that  were  at  the  making  of  it :  So  he  that  hearcth  the 
Gofpel,'  and  is  perfwaded  that  it  is  Gods  Word  ,  though  but 
on  wc'k  or  probable  f^rounds,  and  yet  doth  therefore  believe 
it  becaufe  of  his  confidence  in  Gods  Veracity  whom  he  takes 
to  be  the  Revealer,hath  a  true  Divine  Faith.  For  there  is  both 
the  material  and  formal  Objed  :  the  true  Article?  of  faith  are 
believed,  and  therefore  believed  becaufe  God  that  cannot  lie 
is  the  Aurhorof  them:  And  that  he  <s  the  Author, is  fiift  anob. 
jedof  Knowledge,  and  but  Ucondanly  of  Belief.  For  the 
two  Principles  of  faith  [ThjtGod uTrne^  and  that  th^-<  is  hit 
iVnrdj.  are  inordcr  firft  to  heknown,and  thenthe  Adof  faith 
is  built  on  them  :  Though  fecondarily  they  are  both  the  objed 

I  2  of 


(<5o) 


of  Belief  it  fclfj  And  if  you  muft  of  Nccefiicy  to  theeflcnce 
of  your  Faith,  liavc  demonflrations.or  fciencifical,  or  infallible 
y''rr^«'/^/ apprehended  to  prove  that  the  ^JMedmrn  the  Scrip- 
ture is  of  ood  J   the  1  muft  you  have  ftill  as  good  and  certain 
'Tremifts,  for  the  proof  of  every  one  of  thofe  Primjes  •  which 
is  not  necefTiiry.     I  confefs  the  beiter  Evidence  we  have  of  the 
truth  of  Scripture,  the  ftronger  our  faith  is  Ike  to  be.     But 
the  millions  of  Chriftians  that  take  it  to  be  the  Word  of  God 
upon  the  common  vote  of  che  Church  and  their  Tcacher$,wi:h 
probable  intrinfick  Arguments ;    and  yet  therefore  firmly  be- 
lieve it  becaufe  of  Gods  Veracity  may  have  a  faving  faith,     if 
1  deny  thj«,  I   muft  unchurch  and  unchriftian  almoft  all ,  or 
the  far  greateft  part  of  the  Churches  and  Chriftians  in  the 
world. 

I  muft  here  expeft  that  it  be  objcfted  to  me ,  that  F^hlo  is 
Argumentative  (wh^t  need  yon  elje  talk^  of  Premifes  )  and  the 
canclftjion  cannot  excel  in  certainty^  the  We^kjr  of  the  Premifes  , 
mr  be  mo'e  Divine,  ^nf^.  This  calls  for  a  whole  Digreflion 
that  it  may  befatisfaflorily  anfwered  :  But  btcaufeall  this  is 
befidesour  main  Qieftion,  I  will  content  my  felf  with  this  ftiort 
touch. 

It  is  a  very  great  Controverfie  among  Divines ,    whether 
Faith  be  by  Argumentation,  and  the  Receprion  of  a  Conclufi- 
on  as  rcfuking  from  the  Pr/mifet,  or  ^  fimple  Ad  ;  and  whe- 
ther it  have  a  certainty  and  Evidence  or  not.   In  a  word  ,   as 
Faith  hath  its  material  and  formal  Objcd,  lb  hath  it  its  mate- 
rial and  formal  parts  to  conl\itute  it.    And  as  the  material  ob  - 
jeds  are  the  EfT^^ntial  Articles  of  the  Chriftian  faith  (  confi- 
deringnojv  but  the  Affenting  part  of  Faith)  So  the  Belief  of 
thefe  Articles  is  the  effential  matter  of  Faith  :  And  as  the  for- 
mal Objed  is  Gods  Veracity  ,  fo  the  form  of  this  Faith  ,    is 
a  crediting  or  Believing  God  as  God  ;    And  as  the  Reveluion 
is  the  Copula  or  bond  of  both  thefe  Ob)cA«,  fo  the  Recepti- 
on of  the  Revelation  is  the  conjundion  of  the  Matcer  and 
form  of  Faith.     In  the  ends  and  ufes  of  Faith  there  is  confi- 
derable    i.  The  Acceptabknefsof  it  to  God.     2.  The  fatif- 
fadorinefs,  and  operative  force  with  our  felves  ,    According- 
ly is  its  nature  mix:  and  fuitable,  having  fome what  of  the  will^ . 

and 


(61) 


jfnd  fomewhatofthc/«/*i?f/7,Thewi7/hath  i.  ^n^ffiaKceo^the 
Vtracltj  ofGoJtht  Author, 7.  Andi  an  acceptance  of  the  Good  that 
is  offered  in  the  material  Objed  :  the  former  belongs  to  faith 
tKgenert:  the  latter  alfo  to  the  Chriftian  Faith  ,  or  the  Belief 
of  any  Promile,  inffecie.   The  Veracity  of  God,  which  is  the 
formal  Objed,  is  the  Rcfult  of  his  three  grand  Attributes,  his 
infinite  Power,  Wifdom  and  Goodnefs.   fhefe  are  Effential  to 
God  as  God.  Becaufehe  b  O-wwipj/^wf,  he  will  not  break  bis 
word  through  any  »w/)(7/rK£7  to  fulfill  it  :  Becaufchc  is  r^ioji 
X^ifcy  he  will  not  break  it  through  ignorance.  i3ecaufe  he  is  i^^fi- 
w/>f/j^(7(?o^,  he  will  not  breakit  by  unfaithftt/neft  ,  fraf*d  iyju- 
y?/cf,&\    The  laft  of  thefe  Attributes  is  moft  eminent  in  f'era- 
c.tj.     Accordingly,  the/orwi/ad  of  Faith,  which  is  the  6V- 
ving  creixt  to  (Jok  conteineth  in  it,  or  fuppoftth  both  a  perfwa- 
fion  or  affent  to  the  Truth  of  this  in  God,  (even  that  he  is 
God  j  and  a  ;/o»f  Ajfe^ionofthe  tt'/7/,by  which  we  have  a  Com- 
p/4fe«nf  and  clofurc  with,and  an  /^ffi^nce  inthU  Veracity  of 
God  :   A'l  miy  be  comprehended  in  Affiance.  I  am  nocT'eak- 
in:;of  Ajfi4*;ce  in  the  Redeemer  to  do  the  works  of  his  Orfice 
for  us :  thit  belongs  to  Faith  »«  y^rcjf  :   but  of  y^j^  ^«cf  in  the 
Po^er^  tVifiom^Goodnefs^  and  fo  in  the  VerA  itj  or  F:delitj  of 
God-Revea!ing  or  Prom  fing  :  which  belongs  to  Divine  taith 
in  Genwrdl(whcn  good  it  in  the  matter,  and  when  it  is  a  g'-acej 
This  voluntary  Affiince  in  Gods  Veracity ,   being  the  formal 
Ad  of  Faith-  (together  with  the  Acceptance  of  the  good  in 
the  fpeciil  Objed,;  is  it  wherein  the  Acceptablenefs  of  Faith, 
toGod  confifteth)  f)  that  hence  you  fee,   that  faith  formally 
at  fai.b,   is  not  rhe  A  (Tent  to  the  conclufion  of  this  Argumenc 
[fVnat  ever  God  fd  t!j  is  true  :  hxt  tjoii  Q  od  faith,  therefore  thu  U 
true:  ^  but  it  is  this  AffiAtce  in  Godr  Veracity.     But  Faich  as 
comprehending  matter  and  form, is  both.  Alfo  that  faith  is  Ac- 
ceftuble  to  God  ,    as  it  is  fuch   an  Affiance  in  his  Veracity. 
And  thus  it  needeth  no  formal  Argumentation  :    or  no  more 
then  to  conclude  thit  God  cannot  lie,  becaufe  he  is  moll  pow- 
erfull,w.f;  and  good.     But  now  as  to  the  fatisfadory  and  ope- 
rative u'e  of  filth  about  the  material  objed,  there  it  prcceed- 
eth  Argumentitively,  and  is  called  an  ^ffent  to  the  on-  lufion, 
and  it  hath  alway  before  us  (  objedivcly  offered  )  fuch  evi- 

I  5  dence: 


C6z) 


dence  of  certainty,  that  where  it  is  rightly  apprehended  ,  it  is 
of  the  natarc  of  ^>cience  ^  (  but  advanced  by  the  formal  Aft 
of  Affiance,  by  which  ic  is  informed  to  be  more  AcctpubU 
then  any  bare  Science.  )  But  multitude!,  and  moft  by  far  dif- 
cern  not  this  evidence  fo  clearly  ,  as  may  make  it  fcientifical 
to  them.    Nay  many  may  difcern  but  part  of  it  ( to  prove  that 
Scripture  or  thefe  Articles  are  the  word  of  God  )  or  fome  few 
of  the  weaker  evidences  of  thefe  Revelations,  or  if  they  have 
the  moft  demonftrative  or  certain  evidences,  yet  they  appre- 
hend them  not  as  fuch,  but  fo  weakly,  that  perhaps  their  af- 
furance  or  belief  of  the  Truth  of  the  word,  may  not  exceed 
a  ftrong  probability.    The  ftronger  any  mans  AfTenttothe 
matter  is,  the  more  fatisfadion  he  hath  in  his  mind,  (  and  ct- 
ttris  parihw  )  the  more  operative  and  effcdual  his  faith  is  like 
to  be,  and  fo  to  procure  further  Acceptance.    But  yet  be  ic 
never  fo  weak,  if  it  be  fincere,  it  receives  an  acceptablenefs 
from  the  formal  Aft  of  holy  Affiance  in  Gods  veracity  that 
informs  it,  that  we  may  difcern  the  material  part  to  be  fincere. 
It  is  not  necefTary  that  we  find  out,  that  it  was  by  a  certain  in- 
fallible Divine  A^edium^  that  we  took  the  Scripture  to  be  the 
word  of  God  (  and  indeed  many  a  one  that  fees  it  by  fuch  evi- 
dence ,  may  yet  fee  fo  little  of  the  nature  and  force  of  that 
evidence,   that  his  mif-apprehenfion  or  dark  and  weak  appre- 
henfion  may  make  it  as  unfatisfaftory  and  uneffeftual  to  him, 
as  great  probabilities  clearly  apprehended  may  be  to  another ) 
but  as  a  humane  Belief  of  our  Teachers  is  an  ordinary  prepa- 
rative or  concommitant(  if  not  fomepart.  )   So  where  the 
formal  Aft  is  firm  and  true  (  which  makes  it  acceptable  )  and 
the  material  objeft  entirely  apprehended  inallitsefTcntials, 
the  degree  of  apprehenfion  is  next  moft  regardable  to  difcern 
the  fincerity  j  and  becaufe  the  ufe  of  this  macerial  Aft  is  fo  far 
to  fatisfie  us,  as  to  lead  up  the  Will  to  the  acceptance  of  Chrift 
offered,  and  to  rlofe  with  the  felicity  promifed,  and  to  be  ope- 
rative in  us ;  therefore  the  beft  way  to  Judge  of  the  fincerity 
of  the  Affent,  is,  If  ic  prevail  habitually,  and  in  the  ccurfe  of 
our  lives  aftually,  with  our  Wills  to  sccept  Chrift  as  Chrift^ 
and  Love  God  and  Heaven  as  fuch,  and  fo  to  prefer  them  be- 
fore all  things  in  the  world.     As  Dr.  Jackfon  (of  faving  faith  ) 

faith. 


C^5) 


fiith;  what  ever  doubtings  there  may  be ,  or  weaknefs  of  be~ 
lief,  even  concerning  the  Truth  of  Scripture ,  and  the  pro- 
mifed  Glory:  yet  he  that  isfofar  pcrfwaded  of  it,  as  that  he 
is  refolved  to  venture  all  upon  it,  and  rather  to  let  go  fin  and 
pleafurc,  profit  and  honor,    life  and  all,  then  venture  the  lofs 
of  what  is  promifed,  and  the  fufFering  of  what  is  threarncd  : 
This  isa  faving  Acceptable  faith,  for  all  the  weaknefs  in  the 
evidence  or  apprchenfion.     This  Anatomy  of  faith  I  give  to 
make  my  fenfe  as  intelligible  to  the  Reader  as  is  poUible.    To 
which  add  the  Preface  to  the  fecond  part  of  the  Saints  Reft, 
the  Preface   to  my  Treat,  againft  Infidelity  ,   and  you  will 
fee  moft  that  I  have  to  fay  concerning  this  particular  Sub- 
jed. 

As  to  what  you  add  to  this  till  p-«^.  3  94.  to  prove  that  Be- 
lievers have  the  Spirit,  its  eafily  granted  :  but  the  Queftionis 
not  fo  {general,  nor  of  the  word  ^  Tefimt'iny  J  in  general,  but 
of  fuch  a  Tcftmony  as  fliali  be  the  Medium  or  '7'temife^(rom 
which  objcdvely  the  firft  Avt  of  faving  faith  muft  neccffr  ly 
be  fpecified,  which  I  deny.  Ina  whole  Trcatife  (  ag^mft  In- 
fidelity ,'  1  have  pleaded  for  the  witnefs  of  the  Spuit  to  the 
Truth  of  Chrift:anicy. 

P'^^f  3  9  %  Your  fixth  Reafon  is,  that  [  elfe  the  unre£e»erMte 
Varetts  tntlf  fracijui  a^.d  'Bilievcrs  as  the  Saints.   ^ 

W«/iV.Your  Reafon  is  good  in  my  opinion:thougt)  tbofe  that 
d  fpute  againft  me  muft  difclaim  it,  who  fiy  that  i\w  unreg^  ne- 
ratearc  called  in  Scripcure  Siints,Believer«,juftir;ed  Sons  ,0  c. 
and  that  not  equivocally  Taking  faith  for  that  which  i*  truly 
Chriftian  and  faving,  you  might  eafily  have  known  if  ^  ou  hid 
defircd  it,  that  1  confent  to  your  conclufion,  that  the  unrege- 
nerate  do  not  believe.  But  yet  with  another  fort  of  faich, 
they  do  believe ;  and  in  this  I  fuppofc  we  ar  e  agreed,  bccaufe 
we  believe  Chrift.  And  this  other  fort  is  diflfererced  but  as 
aforefaid.  And  that  its  true  in  its  kind,  I  hope  will  benocon- 
trovcrfie  between  you  and  me  ,  though  I  know  not  whe  her 
Mr.  .9/^/^/>^f/i''d' and  I  are  fo  fir  agreed  but  I  dare  venru'ero 
fay  thatyouand  I  arc,that  f«/ (^  T'fr/yrw  co-ve^-tumur.  A^d 
therefore  doubtlefs  you  that  call  it  fo  ohtr\[_cvmmon  Qr^ce  ^>  d 
faith  ]  do  take  it  to  be  [  true  commov  CJrace  and  Faith.  ^     To 

gratifie 


gratifie  you  with  additions  to  your  double Teftimony,;>  398. 
from  Calvin  and  Baror,ius^  I  have  heretofore  produced  3  3  for 
the  fame  Conclufion,  (  Difput,  5.  of  Sacram, )  and  fixry  more 
for  another  of  the  fame  Importance.  Yet  do  I  not  intend  by  this 
to  blame  you,  for  bringing  your  two  witneffes  forth  as  againft 
me,  who  had  openly  produced  fo  many  fcorc  againft  the  fame 
Doi^^rine  that  you  charge  me  with ;  for  you  might  have  Rca- 
fons  for  it  that  I  know  not  of,  or  at  left  be  excufabJe  by  your 
mif-information. 

S  E  c  T .  I X. 

Page  398.     V?  OU  let  fall  a  point  of  great  moment  where- 
1   in  I  have  long  differed  from  you, f/?:,  [  That 
Regenerdttmenbj  favingfaith  helieve  that  Chriji  hath  already 
fatisfiedfor  thdrfws^fo  as  the  debt  is  pfiid,  and  t he j  freed,  that  he 
hath  reconciled  hii  Father  to  them^  that  their  Jlnsare  pardonei-^ 
or  they jfiftified-,  that  they  are  Sons  of  Qod  here^  or  Jhall  be  Heirs 
of  Heaven  hereafter.  ]     And  all  thefe  you  fay.  [  The  common 
Believer Sy  neither  do y  nor  tspon  any  juji ground  can  believe.  ]] 
And  fo  at  laft  we  have  Many  Articles  of  faith,  in  which  the  re- 
generate believe  and  others  cannot :  andiffo,  the  difference 
is  more  material  then  I  thought  it :     but  I  am  pretty  well  fa. 
tisfied  long  ago  ;  that  this  Dodrine  is  much  contrary  to  the 
Gofpel,and  the  nature  of  faving  faih. 

Had  you  fpoken  only  of  that  Conditional  pardon  and  Jufti- 
fication,  &c.  That  is  given  in  the  Gofpel  to  all  that  hear  ir, 
that  maybe  believed  by  theunregenerate,  as  your  foregoing 
CXpreffions  teftifie  [  Thej  may  really  believe  the  ^hole  hi/fcry  of 
the  Scrpitureto  be  true^  J  But  you  mean  not  this,  butplunly 
fpeak  of  adual  freedom.  Reconciliation,  Pardon,  Juflificari- 
on,  Adoption,  and  futurity  of  Glorification,  And  of  thefe 
I  am  fully  fatisfied  that  they  are  no  Articles  of  divine  faith  at 
ill.  But  yet  it  is  rone  of  ray  purpofe  to  enter  the  lifts  witli 
you  about  it,  though  it  be  a  point  of  exceeding  weight.  I 
have  in  my  Apol.  to  Mr.  'BUkfi  m)  DlreSl:ons  for  ^Peace  of 
Con/ciencet   and  in  the  Saints  Re/i,  and  many  o:her  wrirtings 

givtn 


(<^0 

given  fome  of  my  Reafons  already  againfl  this  opinion  :  and 
chefore  may  be  here  the  more  excufed. And  as  long  as  the  ccfti- 
mony  of  our  great  Divines  at  T)ort  ftands  on  Record  againft 
you,  and  the  ftream  of  our  prcfent  Divines  is  againft  you  , 
in  point  of  Authority  I  have  the  advantage  of  you,  though 
Chamier^  Calvin,  znd  fome  more  tranfmarine  Divines  be  on 
your  fide,or  feem  to  be  fo.Mr.1)o\'t'«  long  fince  effcdtuallycon 
fiited  one  of  my  name  that  held  your  opinion :  And  1  muft  con- 
fefs  ]  the  mote  incline  to  think  that  faving  faith  is  no  fuch  thing 
asyoudefcribe,  becaufe  fuch  a  multitude  of  holy  men  (that 
doubclelshave  faving  faith  )  do  deny  that  it  is  any  fucb  thing : 
But  ^ct  cocaftin  a  breviateof  n^y  Reafons,  (  that  faving  faith 
is  not  the  divine  Belief,  that  we  aread^ually  freed, pardoned  , 
juftirted,  Adopted  and  Heirs  ot  Heaven)  may  breed  no  quarel. 

RtAfon  I.  The  Gofpel  containeth  all  the  neceflary  mate- 
rial Objeds  of  faving  faith  .-  The  Gofpel  containeth  none  of 
thcfe  propofitionsforementioned^that  you  or  I, or  ^J.B.  &c. 
issdually  juftified,  Adopred,  ^c.  )  therefore  none  of  thefc 
propofitions  are  the  objeds  of  fiving  faith. 

The  ^'O^el  fufficiency  in  this  is  believed  by  n\\  Proteftants 
that  I  know,  and  by  many  Papifts  as  to  neceflary  At  tides  of 
faith.  If  any  deny  thcMinorJet  himfhewmeihe  Ttxr  tf  at 
faith  he  is  juflified  or  adopted  exprcfly,  or  by  nc ceff-ry  con- 
fcqucnce-  If  any  fay  that  it  is  a  Confequcnce  from 'he  I'rc- 
mifes,  whereof  one  is  in  Scripture  ,  and  the  other  in  us;  I 
have  anfwercd  this  to  Mr.  B/.ike  t  that  this  makes  it  not  pure- 
ly </fyj<)^,  nor  at  all  to  b«  denominated  ^(r^v^jUnlcfs  the  word 
cf  the  Gofpel  were  iht  dtffilipu  prxwtjforuw. 

Rea.  2.  If  this  which  you  mention  were  the  difference 
between  a  faving  and  a  temporary  faith,  then  the  difference 
(houlfi  bc,thac  one  believeth  only  the  written  word,  or  the 
Gofpel. &  the  other  the(faving  faith  )believcs  al.fo  an  unwritten 
word,  and  zhn  which  is  not  in  the  Gofpel.  But  this  is  not  the 
difference,  Srfo.^c. 

Rta.  3.  The  material  objeft  of  faving  faith  is  propound- 
ed by  God  to  all   men  that  hear  the  Gofpel^    and  all  com- 

K  iranded 


inanded  to  believe  it.     But  this  •,    (  that  they  are  adually 
jaihfied,  &c. )  IS  not  To,  ner  all  commanded  to  believe  it, 

If  it  were  all  mens  duty,  feme  muft  believe  a  faifhood.  If 
you  fay  that  it  wouldbe  a  Truthconfequently,  if  they  could 
believe  if.l  anfwer.lt  muft  be  a  truth  antecedently, or  elfe  the 
firft  ad  of  faith  is  falfe.If  you  fay,that  men  are  firft  commandr 
ed  to  repent  and  then  believe,  I  anfwer;  No  repenting  without 
faith  will  prove  them  juftified  :  therefore  upon  no  fuch  re- 
penting may  they  believe  they  arc  juftified.  If  you  fay  fomc 
other  Aft  offaith  goes  firft,  and  juftifiethus  ,  I  anfwer  ^  Then 
ic  is  that  other  A  d  that  is  juftifying  faith. 

Rea.  4.  The  unbelief  that  condemneth  men  is  not  the  not 
believing  that  they  are  already  juftified, Adopted,  ^c.  There- 
fore the  faith  that  faveth  men  is  not  the  believing  that  they 
are  juftified, Adopted,  &c.  for  they  are  contraries. 

Uea.  5.  The  material  Objcdof  divine  faith  (  of  afTent  ) 
h  feme  word  of  God ,  at  left  written  or  unwritten.  But 
the  Articles  mentioned  by  you,  are  (  as  to  the  Church  ordi- 
narily )  no  word  of  God,  written  nor  unwritten  :  therefore 
they  are  not  the  Objed  of  divine  faith.  If  they  be  in  the 
written  word,  let  it  be  produced ;  which  cannot  be  done.  If 
it  be  an  unwritten  word  (  in  the  heart  )  they  that  affirm  ic 
muft  produce  or  prove  it,  which  they  cannot  do.  And  the 
common  experience  of  Believers  is,  ^as  fsras  I  can  learn  from 
themfelves  )  that  thtre  is  no  fuch  things  for  though  they  know 
of  a  Spirit  effecting  faith  in  them,  that  is,  caufing  them  to  be- 
lieve an  Objed  already  revealed,  yet  they  know  of  none,  pro- 
pounding a  new  word  or  Object  of  faith  to  be  believed  as  the 
Gofpel  is.  The  cffcds  of  the  Spirit  indeied  (  Faith,  Love, 
&c  )  are  the  Objeds  of  a  reflex  knowledge  (as  its  called  j  but 
not  of  Faith:  though  they  confequentiaily  confirm  us  in  the 
Faith,  having  therefore  no  ordinary  divine  word  in  us,  wc  can 
have  no  divine  faith. 

Rea.  6.  If  our  own  inward  Gracf  she  the  objed  of  faving 
Faith,  then  are  we  faved  by  believing  in  our  felve?,  or  fome- 
what  of  our  felves,    (  vUt  That  we  are  juftified,  adopted. 


-c. 


■uc.   )  But  the  Ccnfequcnt  is  untrue  ,  therefore  (o  is  the 
Antecedent.   Saving  faith  is  a  believing  in  Chrift. 

Fej.  7.  That  whxh  no  man  hath  before  his  firft  believing 
cannot  be  thcmarcnal  Objedof  his  firft  faving faith  (  and 
tbeicfore  fpecihech  It  not,  nor  is  e/Tential  toit.  y  But  no  man 
hath  before  his  firft  believing  either  adual  Juftification,  Adop- 
tion, c^c.  Thereforeneitherof  rhefecan  betheobjedt  ofouc 
firft  favmg  faith.  The  Major  is  pliin,  beeaufe  the  objed  is 
before  ihe  <*  d.  The  Minor  is  proved,  in  that  Unbelievers  are 
not  juftified,  Adopted,  o>'- 

Rea.  8  The  Doftrine  that  mnkes  Juftification,  Adopti- 
on, ^c.  to  go  before  fsith,  and  be  the  portion  of  Infidels, 
isunfound  :  hut  (uch  i<i|your5:.  For  menmuft  havethcfe  be- 
fore they  can  truly  believe  that  they  have  thesi,  and  fo  before 
your  faving  faith. 

Re*.  9  If  that  1  be  bound  to  believe  ( to  Salvation  )  that 
I  am  adually  juftihed,  then  either  that  I  am  juftified  by  faith 
or  without  faith  :  not  without ,  for  that's  againft  the  Gof- 
peI;not  by  faith  for  I  yet  have  it  not  at  firft  ,  and  after  either  I 
am  bound  to  believe  that  I  do  believe  or  not ,  ifnocftill  the 
condufion  will  not  be  defiJe,  becaufe  my  believing  (which 
isnot  byawordof  God  affirmed  is  :he  pars  defp.iiar  o{  ihQ 
Premifes.If  1  am  bound  to  believe  that  I  do  believe, then  alfo 
muft  I  be  be  bound  to  believe,  that  f  believe ,  that  I  do 
believe,  and  fo  on  :  for  why  fhould  I  be  bound  to  believe  one 
Belief,  and  not  to  believe  another,  even  th  it  Belief  alfo.  Ic 
was  never  known  thai  faith  was  its  owne  fpecifying  Ob- 
jed. 

Rea.  10.  If  my  own  inwnrd  qu^lificdtions  orreceivings 
from  the  Spirit  are  the  Objcd  of  faving  Faith  ,  and  the  Gof- 
pelthe  Ot?je(f^of  common  fath;  Tl^en  common  Faith  hath 
a  perfed  Objcd,  and  faving  frith  (  where  ic  differs  from  i:  ) 
hath  an  imperfed  Objedl :  (  for  fuch  is  both  our  fandificati- 
on,  andou:  J'jftirtcation  at  left,  as  reveiledtou  ,  orthcRe- 
velitionof  our  J'jft.fication.    ;     But  the  Cor,kqi:nr  is  un- 

K  2  forini  ; 


C^8) 

found,  therefore  fo  is  the  Antecedent.  I  dare  not  compare  my 
fnward  evidences  with  the  Gofpel. 

Rea.  II.  If  the  Spirits  inwards  Teftimony  that  lam  Jufti- 
fied.  Adopted,  &c^  betheobjed  offaving  faith,  then  one 
true  Chriftian  hath  more  to  believe,and  another  lefs.and  there 
are  as  great  variety  of  ObjcAs  as  of  Chriftians^  and  fomc  are 
bound  to  believe  much  feldomer,  as  well  as  iefsjthen  others  : 
(  For  be  that  hath  not  the  Objed  is  not  bound  to  believe 
it :  but  fome  Chriftians  (  at  moft  )  have  it  but  feldom,  and  but 
little  •,  )  But  the  Confequent  is  untrue ,  therefore  fo  is  the 
Antecedent.  Though  Chriftians  have  feveral  degrees  and  fea- 
fons  of  exerciHng  faith ,  yet  they  are  bound  to  exercife  ic 
more  and  oftner  then  they  do.  And  it  is  not  made  impolTible 
foe  wane  of  a  word  to  be  the  Objed. 

Rei*,  12.  Alfo  it  would  follow  that  the  fame  man  is  one 
day  bound  to  believe  (  if  there  be  fuch  a  Teftimony  )  and 
another  day  not :  and  perhaps  another  moneib  or  year :  yea 
perhaps  fome  (hould  never  be  bound  to  believe  :  for  none  have 
chat  Teftimony  conClant,  and  many  Chriftians  never  have  that 
at  all,  which  is  unfitly  called  an  inward  word  or  Revelation ; 
that  we  are  adopted  by  immediate  Teftimony.    But^r. 

Rta.  I  J.  C  Though  the  Spirit  work  faith,  yet  )  the  tefti- 
fying  fealing  Spirit  is  given  to  Believers  and  after  faith,  there- 
fore faving  faith  goeth  before  it,  and  is  without  it. 

Bea.  14.  If  out  own  Adoption ,  Juftification,  &c.  be 
the  Objcds  of  our  faving  Faith,  and  it  be  an  Article  of  Faith 
that  you  are  juftified,  &c.  then  to  doubt  of  your  Juftifica- 
tion, Adoption^c^r.  is  to  doubt  of  the  word  of  God  :  and  to 
deny  your  own  Juftification,is  to  deny  the  word  ofGod,and  fo 
all  that  you  thus  fpeak  againftyourfelvesin  your  doubtings 
you  fpeak  againft  the  Truth  of  the  word  of  God  :  But  the 
Confequent  is  unfound,  Ergo.&cc, 

Kea.  15.  0«r  inward  real  Graces  are  the  Objf  As  of  our 
ftnowledge  by  the  reflexion  for  as  fome  fay,  by  irtuition.^ 

There- 


C^p) 


Therefore  they  are  not  the  Objects  of  faving  faith.  For 
though  the  fame  thing  as  extrinfecally  revealed  may  be  the 
Object  of  bolbjbecaufe  of  different  Revelations,  yet  I  fuppofc 
fuch  different  intrinfick  Revelations,  will  not  here  be  pretend- 
ed ;  nor  is  it  necefTary  that  when  the  Spirit  hath  firft  given  us 
Grace,  and  then  by  an  inward  light  and  cfRciency  ,  caufcd  us 
to  perceive  it,  and  know  that  we  have  it,  he  (hould  after  give 
us  an  immediate  word  to  tell  us  of  that  which  he  had  before 
caufedustoknow  ("ashecaufeth  usto  difceinextrinlick  Ob- 
U&s. ) 

Rea.  1 6.  The  Articles  of  faving  faith  may  be  exprefled  in 
the  Churches  Creed  ,  but  fo  cannot  thefe  new  Articles  that 
you  mention  :  For  there  muft  be  the  names  of  fo  many,  and 
fuch  individual  pcrfons,  as  cannot  be  known  j  nor  will  it  be 
certain.  For  you  will  not  be  content  with  the  general,  that 
he  that  htlieveth  pjdl  be  faved ;  but  there  muft  be  in  your 
Creed,  Yl  am  juftified,  Adopted Jicc.^  which  who  can  kno^v  but 
they  that  have  it?  And  fo  their  Creed  is  utterly  uncertain  to 
the  Church,  yea  and  every  man  hath  a  diftind  Creed  of  his 
own  ;  There  being  one  Article  in  it  (  that  he  idjftftified  )  that 
no  man  eife  is  bound  to  believe  :  and  fo  there  muft  be  as  many 
Creeds  as  Believers. 

Re^.  17.  The  Articles  and  Objedof  faving  faith  may  be 
preached  to  foroe  (  at  left  )  that  are  uncalled,  and  they  requi- 
red to  believe:  But  your  Objed  and  Articles  can  be  preached 
torn  man,  therefor?  they  are  not  the  Articles  and  Objedsof 
faving  faith.  No  one  unconverted  man  in  the  world  can  be 
calleJonto  believe  that  he  is  juftified,  unlefs  he  be  called  to 
bdieve  an  untruth,  or  according  to  the  Antinomian  Dodrine 
of  Juftification  before  Faith,he  can  have  no  knowledge  or  dif- 
covcry  firft  that  it  is  the  true. 

Rea.  18.  Were  your  Articles  neceffjry  Objefls  of  a  faving 
Fairh,  then  all  prefumptuous  ungodly  perfons  are  juftified  for 
not  believing  f  yea  and  all  others.  )  For,  i.  Its  as  natural 
ImpofTibiiity  (  as  is  aforefaid  )  to  believe  without  an  Objeft,  as 

K  3  CO 


C7°) 


to  fee  without  '^un  or  Light.  The  holieft  man  could  not  do  it, 
2.,  And  prefumptuous  perfons  have  the  Ad  ;  and  its  not  long 
of  them  that  there  is  no  obje^^  for  it :  They  are  confident  that 
ihey  are  juftificd,  Adopted,  ^c.  But  yon  fay  [  Thej  do  not  or 
cannot  l/elieve  it.]  But  why  is  that  ?  Becaufe  they  Relieve  not, 
even  when  they  do  hlieve  it.  I  mean,  f  having  no  word  of  Re- 
velation, jthe  name  of  Belicfis  not  due  to  the  Adt  :  but  thats 
not  long  of  them.  They  are  confident  that  God  hath  Juftifi- 
ed  them  and  will  fave  them,  as  well  as  you.  Though  you  fay 
you  have  a  word  for  i:  within  you,  which  they  have  not. 

Reafon  ip.  The  Scripture  te'ileth  us  an  hundred  times  over  of 
another  Faith  as  certainly  faving  without  your  Articles:  there- 
fore thcfe  Articles  are  not  neceffary  to  faving  Faith  ,  to  cite 
but  a  few  Texts,  Kom.  1 0.8,9,  lo,  1 1.   C^^**^  ^  ^^^  ''^"^^  of  faith 
\iQhichree  preachf  that  if  thou  fhilt  confefs  with  fhj  momh  the 
Lordfefm,  and  (halt  believe  in  thy  heart  that  Godraifed  him 
from  the  dead^ thou  fhtlthe  faved:  for  tviththe  heart  man  be- 
lieveth  unto  Right eyufnefs^Siic.^     Here  note    i.  that  this  is  the 
Word  that  is  faid  to  be  in  the  heart,  z/fr/ 8.    And  2.  yet  it  i$ 
the  fame  that  the  Apoftles  preached.    Now  the  ApoiHcs  did 
not  preach  to  men  fuch  Articles  as  yours,  viz..    [Tou  are  a'rea- 
dj  aSlnnlly  jufliped,  Adcpttd^&cc.']  by  name  :  but  only  this  con- 
ditional Juftification  here  mentioned.  It  is  a  Btlteiini  to  Righ^ 
teoHJnefs^  and  not  a  'Believing  that  ^eare  Righteou*  which  they 
preach  and  require  ;  It  is  a  Relieving  Chri/is  RefurreBion^Scc, 
and  not  q\xx  o'^'n  hontfly  or  felicity  or  pardon^  Sec.  So  thit  this 
fame  word  which  is  prcacht  by  the  Apoftles,  is  it  that  is  in  the 
heart,  and  not  another  Gofptl  or  Word  of  God  •,  viz   [^  Thott 
ty^.  B,  artjr{f}ifed.~\  So  Joh'i  1. 12.  ^^sm^nj  a*  rcctived  him, 
to  them  gave  he  power  to  become  the  Sons  of  God,  even  to  them 
th^theltevein  hu  name.^    They  muft  believe  that  they  may  be- 
come Sons ;  which  is  not  a  believing  that  they  a^e  fo^i^  Rom. 
4.24.   Faith  \  (hall beimputedto  wfor  Right€Oufn-ff^  if^e  be- 
lieve on  ht^n  that  raffed  up  (efMOHr  Lord  from  thi  dead.  \     This 
h  :!ie  faving  Fairh,  which  is  imputed  to  us  for  Riglueoufnefs  ; 
and-.therevfore  is  not  a  B'^lieving  that  we  are  righ  eous.e^^if 
i'S'38>39,  Forgivenefs  of  fir,  14  preached thr ottgh  Chri(l, and  by 
■'■^  '%  \        '   ■  -  him 


C70 

him  a'l  that  helteve art  Jftjlifigdfrom  all  t kings. ^Si.c.[Thi^  believe 
before  they  are  juftified,  and  therefore  not  that  they  are  juftifi- 
cd.But  I  havefaid  enough  of  this  heretofore  in  roy  Confeflion. 

Reafon  lo.  All  the  Articles  of  the  true  faving  Chriftian  faith, 
have  been  ftill  owned  by  the  Catholick  Church;    Thefe  Ar- 
ticles that  you  mention  have  not  been  ftill  owned  by  the  Ca- 
tholick Church  ,  eherefore  they  are  not  Articles  of  rrue  faving 
Fdith.  They  are  not  to  be  found  in  the  Creeds  of  the  Church, 
nor  Writings  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church  ,    therefore  they 
are  not  owned  by  the  Church.     All  in  the  Creed  that  is  pre- 
tended is.the  [I Believe^  with  [the  Kemijfion  offtis,^  which  is  not 
[]  ^  believt  that  my  fins  are  Alrendy  remitted  :    For  the  Citechti- 
mens  were  to  profefs  this  faith  ,  anfl  all  were  bound  to  believe 
it,  O.her  Reafons  I  have  given  elfwhere. 

1  caft  inallchele  Reafonshaftily,  not  improved  as  I  ftiould 
d  v),  if  I  were  ro  make  a  Defence  of  the  Truth  j  but  to  give  you 
an  account  of  the  c.ujfe  of  my  Diflcnt,  becaufe  I  find  this  tic 
principal  point  of  all  our  DifF<;rence. 

Yet  that  we  feem  not  to  differ  more  then  we  do,!  muft  again 
refer  you  10  my  Treatife  of  the  Splits  ^Unefs  within  tu  to  the 
Truth  of  Chri/hanity,  ^  2.  &c.   to  know  ray  Cjncefiions.    To 
which  I  alio  add.  that  all  that  believe  in  Chrift,   do  believe  in 
him  far  R^em'-Jfrm  oj  their  own  ftn\  and  do  by  confent  ^^ccept 
him  ana  pardon  offered  hy  and  ^ith  him  :  and  when  they  profefs 
to  be  Believers,  they  profefs  thofePrf»»*y^j  from  whence  they 
may  conclude  that  they  arc  pardoned  :    And  fo  far  as  they 
know  that  they  fincercly  believe,  they  ma,  and  ought  to  con- 
clude thac  they  are  pardoned.  Yet  its  not  a  Word  of  God,much 
Icfs  an  Arcide  of  faving  Faith. 


S  E  G  T 


C70 

Sect.  X. 

7>rf^r  3  9p.Vr On  next  inftance  in  iAcceptanct  ani  Love  t§ 
\  Chriji.  And  I  grant  you  ftill  the  condufian, 
that  thcfe  are  not  in  the  unregenerace  in  the  (Ame  fpecies  as 
in  the  Saints.  But  that  there  is  a  Love  and  Acceptance  true 
in  its  kind  ,  andbow  it  materially  differs  from  chat  in  true  Be- 
lievers, I  have  oft  (hewed,  and  (hall  do  here  further  in  my  Ad- 
ditional Explication. 

I  faid  in  my  Aphorifras ,  that  [_  the  Acceptance  of  an  ofered 
Chrif  is  the  ejfenml  Form  ofjuflifjing  Faith.]  (  not  of  Faith 
ingenerci)  and  you  fay  that  I  faid  fo  of  [Love.]  I  know  there 
is  Love  in  Acceptance^  or  Coa/eut,  or  Choyce  :  but  if  I  might 
havechofen,  I  had  rather  you  had  charged  me  wich  what  \  in- 
deed wrote,  then  with  what  you  imagine  may  be  implied  in 
ic. 

Page^o^.  Your  eighth  Reafon  for  the  Caufe  that  I  main- 
tain, is  found  and  undeniable. 

Hence  you  pafs/Jj^t  404,  to  another  Controvcrfie,  anfwer- 
ing  thisObjedion  [^Love  may  he  Ej[^*itialt9  faith^  hecaufe  its 
agreed  that  Fiducia  is  an  All  of  Fair h^  andthat  in  the  JVill^  and 
not  only  Mr.  Baxter,  but  Bellarmine/««<i  miiny  reformed  Divines 
fayfo.'^  Anf^.  I.  liookt  in  ^<r//<irw/«f,  and  find  him  with 
the  common  vote  of  Schoolmen,  and  Divines  placing  Fiducia 
in  the  will,  but  fo  far  is  he  from  making  it  an  Ad  of  Faith,  that 
the  Pofitionthat  he  is  the-e  proving  is,  that  [fides  non  eft  fi  in- 
cia,]  againft  the  Proteftants,  and  concludes  as  you  ,  that  that 
fiducia  ex  fide  oritur  ,  non  pot ejl  e^e  idem  cum  fide.  Sure  you 
did  not  indeed  mean  to  prove  hence  that  BeUurmine  is  of  the 
Proteftant  opinion  which  he  writes  againft.  1  fuppofe  your 
intent  was  to  limit  his  confent  to  the  laft  claufe  of  the  Subjedt 
of  Affiance. 

2.  You  might  well  fay  many  Reformed  Divines  are  for  the 
point  which  you  artault ;  foric  is  fo  common,  thatwi;h  Papifls 
and  our  felves,  it  goes  commonly  as  the  Proteftant  caufe. 

As  to  your  firft  Reafon  f  and  your  whole  caufe)  you  utterly 
miflake  and  mif- report  the  caufe.    It  is  not  a  ^^n^ct^o^U  that 

Proceftants 


(70 

Proteftanrs  commonly  mean  by  Affiance  ,  no  nor  a  Tn-ni^riirK 
neither  as  that  word  moftufuallyfignifiech  the  confidence  or 
perfwafion  of  the  inrclled  in  a  high  Degree.  But  ic  is  the  ve- 
ry t/stj  or  Faith  icfelf,  which  we  commonly  exprefs  in  Englifll 
by  ^CreditfM^.,  or  giving  credit  to  a  man  ;  Trujting  him,  or  ha- 
vin(T  affiance  in  him.\  And  therefore  our  Divines  do  common- 
ly maintain  agiinft  the  Papifts  that  Tn-vjc-ty  f^f  infcnptttm  fig- 
niixQth  fi he tjmpJMere  ;  and  fiJem  habere  i  which  is  our  W^'- 
ance.  And  our  Tranflitors  thought  fure  that  to  Trnjl  in  GoJ, 
andtohopetKhim^RsaW  one,  (  and  fo  to  Truft  or  Hope  in 
Chrift)  when  they  fo  ordinarily  tranflate  gx^r^  by  Trufting, 
as  in  Lhl{€  24,21.  Hu-a  -j  ri?^-n^o-riv  on aurli  &c. The  fenfe  alfo 
(hewsicisnotH'^p?  as  commonly  defined  that  is  here  meant. 

So  Alatth.l  -,21.  &  Ront.l<^.\l.\\(!d  'l^  rcioVcfjuLTi  a.n'^i^m  i^rntist 
Andin  h^s  ISjme  flMllth'  Gentiles  triifl.  And  the  firft  Belie- 
vers oi  the  S^hcfiA-^s  Paul  calleth  7 »<«:?* oHA^>io'T^<  cvT<yXj/$?y, 
thtfe  th. -It  fir  (I  trtified  in  Cb^i/},  which  is  ail  ons  in  Tauis  fenfe 
with  believing  in  him  ;  for  in  the  next  ver(e  [c*  wOTS^i/^acTsfJ 
isufedasSynonimal,  to  fignifie  the  fame  thing.  And  fo  in 
I  7'/w.4.io.&6.i7.  Pi./.i.i  9  and  other  places ,  our  Tran- 
flators  call  this  [  Truftini^  in  God,  '2  which  is  our  Affiance  ;  and 
undoubtedly  an  ad  of  the  Will.  And  when  ether  words  (as 
frequently)  are  ufed,  it  is  the  fame  thing  that  is  intended  in 
many  places  of  Scripture,  which  our  Tranflators  call  [^  Trnfl' 
ing  in  ^oi.]  Now  bcfides  your  Pierophory  or  PcrfwaQon,  there 
is  in  the  nature  of  faving  faith  not  only  another  Affiance  ,  buc 
a  double  Affiance  elfential  to  it  in  fome  degree  :  as  1  fliall  take 
the  liberty  according  to  my  apprehenfion  to  open  it. 

Belief  is  either  volitntary  and  4  Dutyy  or  involuntary^  and  no 
mord  good.  The  latter  is  the  faith  of  the  Devils,  and  all  that 
believe  the  Truths  of  God  as  things  that  are  again'l  them,  and 
would  not  have  them  to  be  :rue,  and  perhaps  had  ra:her  noc 
believe  them  (for  the  underilanding  is  not  free  in  it  felf. )  This 
kmd  of  belief  is  meerly  of  the  Intelled  .-  The  voluntary  vcr- 
tuous  Behef  of  God,  is  either  of  fome  things  that  we  appre- 
hend SiSTneer/ji  True,  and  having  no  Other  good  in  them  as  to 
us  but  the  Truth  (nor  perhaps  toothers)  There  <ir*  no  fuch 
Revelations ;  but  yet  our  apprehcnfioni  may  be  fuch  of  them. 

L  Here 


C7+) 


Here  Truih  it  felf  is  a  certain  fort  of  Good.    And  thus  the  Tn- 
telled  rcceivethchefe  Truths,  but  not  alone  :  For  the  Will 
hath  a  double  concurrence,    i.  Looking  with  Complacency  on 
the  good  of  vericy  Revealed,    2.  Looking^ith  a  Complacen- 
cial  Affiance  or  Truft  to  the  Veracity  of  God  the  Author  or 
Revealer.   Thusit  is  that  we  believe  fome  Hiftories.  1 1.    Or 
this  voluntary  Belief  is  of  things  hurtfftl  torn  ,  in  our  appre- 
henfion,  as  in  cafe  of  our  belief  of  Threatnings.  Here  the  Will 
hath  an  Averfnefs  to  the  material  Ohjt^l  ,  but  Hill  hath  a  com- 
placency  joined  with  it  both  in  the  Cjt*ieral  Qood  of  Verity^ 
even  as  in  a  Threatning,  and  a  Complacency  in,  and  voluntary 
approbation  of  the  Veracity  of  God  in  his  Threatnings.  Thus 
it  ought  to  be:    And  this  compliance  of  the  Will  with  Gods 
Veracity  in  a  Threatning,  is  not  commonly  called  Affiance; 
but  a  confenting  or  Complaccncial  Approbation.    III.     This 
Belief  hath  foractirae  a  Revelation  apparently  good  to  us,  (ot 
to  the  Church,  or  our  Brethren  and  Gods  honour)  for  its  Ob- 
jed.     Thus  all  merciful  Narratives,  Offers  and  Promifes,  are 
believed?   And  here  are  thefe  Ads.    i.  The  Intelkd  appre- 
hendeththe  Veracity  of  God- Revealing.   2.  The  Will  hath  a 
Gomplacencial  Approbation  of  this  Veracity  of  God  as  good 
in  it  felf  and  a  Divine  perfection.    3.  The  Intelled  Appre- 
hendeth  the  Letter  and  fcnfe  of  the  Revelation.   4.  And  the 
Truth  of  it  as  proceeding  from  Divine  Verity  it  felf.    5.  And 
the  Goodnef^-  of  it  as  its  Truth  in  General.    6.  And  the  fpecial 
Goodnefs  of  it  from  the  Matter  in  fpecial.    7.  And  the  Will 
concurreth  in  thefe  Apprehcnfions  by  Commanding  the  Intel- 
led  according  to  that  Degree  as  the  ads  are  Impirate.  ^  And 
the  Will  hath  a  fpecial  e^ffi^nce  or  TruJ}  ( together  with  the 
Intellcdacquiefcing  herein)  in  the  Feracitjf  of  the  Revealer  as 
it  refpedeth  this  fpecial  Ob jed.    For  as  9    The  fame  Will 
hSith  a.  C  omplacexicyy  or  Cofjfent  or  ^iceptance^  as  to  the  Good 
Revealed,  Trentifed,  Offered  t,  fo  it  hath  an  anfwerable  rcfped 
to  the  Power,  Wifdom  and  fpecialgoodneff  of  God  that  pro- 
raifeth;  and  fo  looking  at  his  Veracity(the  refult  of  thefe  three) 
as  the  Foundation  and  formal  Objed  of  his  faith  ,    he  muft 
netdslook  at  it  with  a  fpecial  Volition,  which   we  commonly 
call  Affiance  or  Truft  y  and  this  laft  is  the  very  Act  that  is  cal- 

Std 


C70 


led  by  the  name  of  fiJes^  or  fi  .'uda.  or  /tffiuKCi  ,  comprehcnd- 
mg  the  reft,  but  fo  as  that  they  are  all  denominated  ufualjy 
from  this  as  the  perfcdive  Ad.  And  this  is  the  Affiance  ,  thac 
we  fay  iscflenrial  to  Kaith  in  general  as  it  hath  a  Promife,  for 
its  material  Objed,  and  which  is  directly  fignified  by  -n^^.-Jtiv  di 
I'm  t)v  &iov ,  To  truft  a  mins  word,  or  to  credit  him^  or  take 
his  word, <5r  truft  his  credit,  and  to  believe  him,  andhave  Affi- 
ance in  him,  are  all  one.  IV.  The  fpecial  faith  of  the  Gofpel 
called  faith  in  Chrift,  contcineth  allthcfe  nine  Acts  aforefaid, 
and  a  tenth  fuperadded  which  is  a  fpecial  Affiancein  Jefus 
Chnft  as  theSaviour  to  do  the  works  of  his  undertaken  Office, 
in  our  Salvation. ^o  that  all  thefe  ten  Acts  are  n  faving  faith, as 
they  are  diftinguii"hed  by  the  feveral  objeds  •,  which  yet  are  all 
but  one  fairh  in  a  moral  fenfe.and  all  thele  but  the  fevefal  parts 
of  the  Object.  He  that  denieth  this,  rruft  in  equity  except 
againft  thofc  particular  Acts  that  he  thinks  may  be  left  out. 

By  this  much  I  have  told  you  what  acts  of  the  Intellect,  and 
what  of  the  Will  are  in  faith,  and  what  Affiance  is  in  it  :  Tvo 
a^sof^ffiiKceiTeinhvm^  faich.  Thefirllisan  Affiance^  or 
Trufi  in^  or  criditing  ofQcd  a*  the  Promifer,  becaufe  ofhti  Verd- 
city  :  This  is  in  the  genw.  The  fccond  is,  J»  Affiarct  in  the 
Redttntfr  as  fack^  by  which  we  Truft  in  him  for  the  effects  and 
E;ids  of  his  Office.  And  this  is  efTential  to  the  Chndtan  faith 
tn  fp*cie.  All  thcfe  are  comprized  in  thefe  three  General  acts. 
I,  Afjent.  2.  Conftnt  or  Accevtsnce.  3.  Ajfia»ct.  This /rf/? 
Ajfiance  in  the  'JKeaiatou*-^  is  not  the  fame  with  the  General 
e^jfia»ce  in  God  xs  Promifer, hdor^  mentioned.  This  is  the  act 
that  was  commanded  the  Jaylor^  (comprizing  the  reft)  AEi,  1 6. 

51.  -n^v^cv  om  Tov  Ky'fjd'  Ir?7K:'  X^idv  ;c^  (Tw  n  tji  ^c.]  To  thefc 
is  Adoption  given,  J-ohn  I.I2.  ~o'ii'^<;{vi7tv  mho  "^viym.  avr^,  ~]So 
^(7w.4.5  and  i?.i4.  ^  p^ffim. 

Now  the  Plerophorie  that  you  call  Affiwce,  is  either  an  Af- 
furance  or  Cor.fi  hnt  pet f\\'afion  of  our  own  particular  ftate  of 
Grace-  or  of  our  particular  Acceprance  with  God  in  our  ad- 
drefT:?,  or  clfe  feme  high  Degree  only  of  the  forcmentioned 
Affiinceor  AfTient.  Now  it  is  none  of  thefe  that  \V^  call  Af- 
fiwce,  when  we  make  it  elTential  to  faving  faith.  .fmeftHj  (hews 
fomewhat  of  the  difference  in  C^tedHl.Tbeolog.  /  i.  ca.&I.z. 

.  L    2  ,.;^.J. 


€(ip.$.  Where  alfo  be  largely  proveth  faith  to  be  in  the  Will  5 
and  yet  your  forementioned  fpecial  Articles  are  none  of  its  ob- 
jed  ;  Ajftnfus  veto  fpecialmjuo  (iattanius  Deum  ejfe  nojirum 
DeuminChriflo  ^  noae[i  a^Hs  f>  inks  pdei  ^  fed  aUus  ex  fic^e 
tminans.  Nu/ia  eninf  eji  m^j  '^  in  te  qu >m  aha ctn'unio  Axjff* 
veritatis^  nee  verior  fj'-^s  w^prehtr  f)^  untecfuim  te  ad  Diurti  'ide 
fingtiUriter  appUcaveris,  faith  Ptmh/^J'^it^iic,  Grjf.pug.  26O. 
^that  kind  of  fiducU  which  ^e  cull  Ajfurarce,  and  full  perf\\)a. 
jionofthe  pardon  of  our  ftn<^  u  a  fruit  of  the  other  Fiducia  ^  or 
Trufiinguntothe  Promife  It ftif^  whertin  flands  the  proper  A6i 
cf  Jtifiifjii^g  Faith.  Ani  it  follows  it  not  al^Mjes  prefentlf-^  but 
after  fame  long  time,  after  much  pains  tak.^n  in  the  exercife  of 
Faith  a'^d  other  Graces. 1^  But  that  the  other  i^taWw  is  effen- 
tial  to  fiaith  he  proves  by  feveral  Arguments^  pig.  2$'^'  (In 
whicli  our  more  voluminous  Difputants  againft  Popery  are 
much  more  copious.)  knipag.ijo.iji.  Where  in  the  Mar- 
gin he  faith,  '^It  is  an  erroneotts  curio  ft- j  to  make  Ftducia  a  (^on- 
feqnent  of  Fides,  and  to  fuy  therefore  1  trttji  a  m-An  btcaufe  I  be- 
iieve  the  truth  of  hit  promife,  that  he  ^ill  do  what  he  fajes ;  thtr^e 
can  beno  goodconfiruBionof  fuch  a  frying:  for  it  is  as  much  as 
this  ^   /  tru^  him  bicaufe  I  trujl  him.&cc] 

And  thus  your  firft  Cenfure  is  anfwercd :  Affiance  isefTentiai 
to  true  faith. 

Sect.  XI. 

P4£^4c6.T70ur  fecond  anfvver  of  the  Objedion  you  chofc 
X  is,  byalleadging  from  Rob.  B'Tonitis  two  Rea- 
fonsto  prove  that /'fWwc/^is  not  in  the  VVili,  The  firft  is  \'Be- 
caufe  D  ffdence  is  not  in  the  tVill.  ]  Anfrv.  Fiduci.i  is  an  ad  both 
of  the  Uriderftanding  and  Wjll,and  Dijjiilence'\sk3.ted  in  both^ 
Dj^^'««inthe  Will  israolily  a  Privation  of  the  Truftand  Af- 
fiance aforementioned. Your  Argument  from  Baronim  to  prove 
it  only  in  the  Undcrftanding  is  ^  f  becmfe  m?n  may  diilrufi 
themfelvesi  whi-chfignifieth  not  ah^tred.&CC  ]  Anf-^v.  i.  Though 
it  fignifiesno  hdtrcd  oraverfation  ,  it  may  fignifie  a  Privation 
ofthe  Truftandboldnef«,  andexpedation  of  the  willand  un- 
dcrftanding both,  li  Hti  and/r//rbeads  of  the  will,  then  fo 

may 


C77.) 

may  Affiance.  Do  you  think  Hope  is  in  the  will  or  not  ?  I  do 
not  think  you  will  be  fo  lingular  ?s  ro  deny  ir.  And  then  I 
would  asfv  whether  Dtfpiir  be  in  the  Will  ?  if  Defp^.tr  be  ,  fo 
may  Dijjlder.ce.  And  here  I  may  pur  you  to  anfwcr  your  own 
Argument.  hu\2inDefpav^thQi  himfelf  and  hi*  own  affairs, 
without  Hatred  or  Avcrianon  •  therefore  Dcfpair  is  not  in  the 
Will.  If  you  fay  there  is  a  certain  Averfation  of  the  will  from 
the  evil  ot  his  affairs,  in  Defpair  I  (hall  fay,  it  may  b»:  as  tiuly 
faid  of  that  Ditiidence  which  is  a  full  contrary  to  Tiuil.lf  you 
fay  thatDclpjir  isinthe  will,  asa  Privation  of  Hope,  I  lliali 
fay  then  fo  is  this  Diffi  Jenre  as  a  Privation  of  Fruft. 

Page  407,  You  confirm  the  inopinion  o^  B^roniui  from  the 
[  the  ufe  of  mediums  to  breed  Cor-fidence  ~]  But,  i .  That  proves 
9,^^ince^  as  Its  taken  for  ftrengrh  of  Aff-nt  to  be  in  .he  In- 
tclled,  but  not  as  taken  for  the^  ucm' a-^uie.cenct  or  fx^i^ia- 
r;(7«of  the  Will.  2.  It  proveth  Jjfii»ce  in  the  Scn;^ture- 
fenfe  ("  a?  taken  for  faith)  to  be  in  the  underft  iniiinf  hut  r.oc 
to  be  in  the  underttanding  alone  :For  arfiance  as  hope  15  a.com- 
plicace  Aft  of  the  Intelle^i  and  Will  >  not  phv  fically  en?  ,  hue 
morally  one,  and  Phyfically  fo  admirably  complicate,  ttuc  its 
ve;  y  hard  to  diftinguifh  them. 

Page  40S.  You  give  us  54r<7«t«i  his  fecond  Argument  [/* 
fr,rrrahter  ejfet  oHhs  volnyitattSy  r.il  <.iiH<^  cfjen^tia'n  at  ft.  ertum, 
feu  amor  ob]eEli :  cr  muUi  afn(,nt  <^  dtfiierant  ohjr^lum^ijui  non 
lo^bcyitfAucAyn:    ofr.     ^ 

Ar.f,  The  Confequence  is  without  all  appearance  of  Truth  in 
my  eyes  jfor  it  is  the  material  objeft  ;  whofe  love  he  and  you 
doblainly  fpeakof  :  but  the  love  of  the  marenal  objed  as  the 
end  IS  prefuppofed  to  the  Ad  of  the  Affiance  in  ve-acirv  snd 
word  of  the  Promifer  as  the  means  :  and  it  is  fiom  this  lormai 
objed,that  Affmnce  is  denominated  I  donor  tru(i  the  paydon  of 
fin  J ufi i5 catiiK ,  Adoptla T ^  though  I  love  and  dcfne  tl  em  :  huQ 
J  tru :'i  Gods  Promife,  becaufe  ot  his  veracity  for  ihe  pardon  of 
fin:  But  if  the  Promifei:  ielf  betheobjed  vvh:ch  youmearijvtc 
I  anfwer.  i  .My  love  to  the  Promife  is  becaufe  of  ihe  good  pro- 
m.fcd,&  therefore  prlmirily  to  the  bcrtfi^ami  bur  fcccundat ily 
to  the  Promife-.  bu:  my  TrufV  is  primarily  i;i  Godsvero'  ity  and 
next  in  the  Promfcasthe  produd  of  that -veracity,  and  not  at 
ail  in  the  benefit,    but  for  the  benefit  promifed  ;  Hove  the 

L  3  be- 


(78) 


Benefit  or  good  promifed  formally,  and  I  love  thePromifc 
for  the  benefits  fake  finally,  and  as  mediatly  participating 
of  the  goodnefs  loved.  But  I  truft  in  the  Divine  veracity  for- 
mally, and  inthcPromife  fecondanly,  as  partaking  of  ic  as 
the  matter  in  which  it  is  cKprelt :  Kut  the  good  of  the  benefit  is 
only  finally  pertinent  to  Affiance,  and  the  good  of  the  Pro- 
mife  as  the  means  to  that  end. 

2.  I  further  anf^er  to  this  (  and  at  once  to  the  confirmati- 
on of  the  Minot^j  that  there  is  alicjuid  deftderii  ^  amoris  in 
affiance^  and  efTential  to  it,  as  there  \^ ali^ttidbonii{^tnuz\\w 
the  objed.  But  being  a  compound  ad,  it  follows,  not  that 
it  muft  be  denominated  Love  or  Defire,  or  that  it  is  r.il  nlmd, 
Eventhedivineveracicy  is  the  formal  ohjed  of  affiance,  not 
limply,  butasthe  Author  and  Informer  of  a  Proraife  of  good 
things :  For  it  is  not  called  the  objed  of  affiance ;  if  it  produce 
only  an  alTertion  that  maketh  to  our  hurt.  And  the  Promife  is 
the  objedof  affiance  as  a  relative  thing  that  hath  refped  at 
once  both  to  the  veracity  of  the  Promifer  and  the  gAod  that 
is  promifed.  Hope  hath  fomewhat  of  Love  and  fomewhatof 
Defire  in  it  effenrially,  And  yet  it  is  riot  to  be  called  Love  or 
Defire  no  more  then  a  man  is  co  be  called  [  Reafon  or  IntelieSl^ 
or: fVillj  or  z^adj,  or  a  Souh.  fo  faith  hath  fomewhat  of 
Hope  and  of  Love  in  it  ,  and  yet  is  not  to  be  called  Love  or 
Hope:  of  which  more  anon.  .•» 

To  the  confirming  Reafon  I  anfwer  ;  Its  true  that  many 
love  and  defire  that  which  they  have  no  affiance  or  truft  to  ob- 
tain :  and  that  proves  that  Love  and  Defire  are  not  terms 
convertible  with  Affiance  or  Faith  :  but  it  proves  not  that  affi- 
ance or  faith  hath  no  participation  of  Love  or  Defire.  There  is 
Love  effential  to  all  Defire  :  &  yet  a  man  may  love  that  which 
he  defirerh  not  ('if  he  have  it  air  ady,  )  though  he  cannot  de- 
Tire  that  which  he  loveth  not  There  is  Love  &  defire  efTential- 
ly  in  hope,  and  yet  effential  to  hope,  a  man  may  love  &c  defire 
that  which  he  hopeth  not  for.  There  is  expedation  eflential  to 
Hope  and  yet  I  may  exped  that  (as  a  hurt  or  injury,  jwhich  I 
hope  not  for.  And  ye:  you  will  tell  me  thjat  which  I  know  not. if 
you  tell  me  of  any  thing  efientiil  to  Hope  befides  this  defire 
C(6  irehending  love  &  expedadon:  I  take  it  to  be  a  compound 
of  Defire  and  expedationfor  atmoft  with  fome  acquiefcencc 

and 


Cl9) 


and  plea  'ore  of  die  mind  conjunct. )  Yet  neither  <^  thena  alone 
is  Hope. 

pjgt  409.  You  add  a  third  Reafon  to  prove  that  Affiance 
is  not  in  the  Will,  from  \_  the  ufe  of  the  words  in  all  goud  Au- 
thon  :  ]  But  what  words  ?    TA)i?:?3.i«  and  -T^-n/i-^s-K  j    but 

1 .  Amtff'U  (  C^'fedulM  i .  nblfup.  )  tells  you  that  even  thefe. 
words  in  feverai    Texts  of  Scripture    fign  fie   lavirg    faith 

2.  But  what's  this  to  our  Queftion,  youlhould  have  limited 
it  to  one  fort  of  Affiance,  and  not  have  fpoke  ibus  of  ali  Affi- 
ance in  general, nor  of  that  which  Protcftants  plead  for  m  ipeci- 
al.  Prove  it  if  you  can  that  mTiv'nv  eii  rDv  0£si',  or  the  englifh 
Trufting,  or  Affiance,  or  the  Latinc  fiduciuor  fides,  arc  not 
ads  of  the  Will.  And  of  this,  we  call  not  for  proof  from 
prophane  Authors,  bat  facred,  as  knowing  that  '^^'^^  and  ■^' 
9Ev.^t'  is  not  the  fame  thing  with  them  and  with  the  Scriptures : 
See  Mr. Qarai^rj  Cnnnsy  pag.  383,584  385.  And  a^ainft 
Pfochemm  di  novi  itijhymenti  (Ijlo^  /?4^.88,89  .  where  he  ci- 
teth  abundance  of  Scripture  Texts,  where -^p^  and  ^'^.■-'e-iv  e^i 
are  u  fed  for  Fiith  and  Affiance,  or  Truft  to  his  Wod  that 
promifeth  us  fome  good, which  is  no:  the  ufe  of  the  words  with 
prophane  Writers.  And  of  your  own  fenfe  of  fi-Juci.t,  fee 
Chamier  defiie^  li.  11.  chap.  11.  in  Ta^jjl.  And  iL/€mefii 
BeHarmint.  Entrv.it.  Tortt.di.  ^.z^and  3.  proving  that  faith  is 
yifflance^^nd  cap.  i,  eking  Ciird-C'}»tareni*r^  Alex.tnd.'^les^ 
Bonivent^  Dnrandut,  C  diet  an  ^  affirming  it  to  be  in  the  Will 
as  well  as  the  Intclle(?^.  To  conclude  therefore  your  PUroi  ho- 
rie  is  not  ^aiwaies  at  left)in  the  Will,but  ^ies  vel fiaNcu,TruJ}^ 
Affiince.Faith  arc  in  the  Inrellcd  and  Will. 

You  conclude  that  ['H^/(>j/4/>fr'^//r/5>i/,  (Jj4ll (lUlfjjth^t 
fiducia  is  i»  the  tyill^  I  rvdl  not  fij  be  is  impHde^t^  bat  fu^e  a.  lit 
tleth:>i^)^fillnotmik^el:i/n  blufj.  ^ 

Anftv.  For  my  part  I  was  naturally  fufficiently  baflifull, 
bu'my  Brethren  have  notably  afiifted  me  in  the  cure  of  it: 
But  I  muftconfcrs  that  I  fee  nothing  yet  in  your  Argumen:?, 
nor  in  the  hadnels  of  my  caufe  or  company  to  make  ms  bluQi. 
N'uch  more  hath  been  faid  by  'Bcl/.irmine  zni  mnny  more,, 
fince  this  controverfie  begun  amongus ;  then  you  have  here 
faid  •,    andyci  almoft  all  Proteftant  Divines  that  ever  I  read 

or 


(8o) 


or  heard' of  (excepting  very  few  noted  for  fingularity)  do 
without  blulning  hold  to  the  old  caufe  in  this  point,  aflercing 
Faith  to  be  efTentiall/  pJacta,  and  in  the  Will :  And  the  k\» 
that  confirm  it  to  the  Intelleft,  do  moftof  them  make  that 
Intelleduai  AlTent  to  contain  anintclleduall  Affiance. 

And  for  Baronitis,  whofereafons,  you  urge,  he  was  young 
and  raw  when  he  wrote  thofeexercitations,  and  fince  that  did 
change  his  mind  in  many  particulars ;  as  you  may  forinftance 
fee  in  your  point  of  the  Spirits  Teftimony,  which  in  bis  D*/- 
fut.  agiinfi  TurnbfillHs ,  he  o:herwifc  handleth  then  here.     I 
ever  lookt  (  fince  I  had  any  acquaintance  with  them  and  thofe 
matters  J  on  hisexcrcitations,  as  the  unripe  fruits  of  an  ex- 
cellent wit ;    and  valued  then  more  for  what  they  promifcd 
and  attempted,  (  then  in  many  points )  for  what  they  perfor- 
med :  but  his  after-labors,  even  the  poll- humours  have  fo 
much  more  Maturity  and  folidity  of  conceptions ,  that  I  rauft 
fay  it  is  pitty  they  had  not  been  more  perfeded,  and  God 
had  not  longer  fpared  us  that  man  ,  whofe  Judgement  I  value 
as  highly  as  almoft  any  mans  fince  the  primitive  times  of  the 
Church.     But  whatreafon  gives  he  why  fiiucia\n\\\s  kcon^ 
fenfe  is  not  an  Ad  but  effed  of  faith  ?  viz.  [_  m  accfpitur  pro 
interna  accjuiefcentia  in  divina  benevolentia  ^gratia.  ,  per  qttarn 
totiabilUpena.emHi^  &c.     ]     ^^^^233.       Or  rather  as  it  is 
an  Acquiefcence  in  the  veracity  of  the  Promifer.     You  know 
alfo  that  he  is  put  to  defend  his  fingularity  by  anfwering  thefe 
Objedions.      []  Sifi^ncia  eji  in  intelUnu  nondiffert  ah  ajfenfu^ 
ut  hoc  rcpHgnatl^o3rin<£  omnium  Orthodoxorum,  ^  p-^^^-  2  4I» 
Et  nnllu^  ftnijHamOrthodoxiiiTheologHi  dixit  fidnciatft  ejje  af- 
fenfum  am  judicium  mentis '  ^    P^^^'    2,42.     Iconfefs  I  have 
long  taken  thofe  pafTages  of  ^<«='^>'/f«/ which  you  alledge,  for 
fome  of  his  chifeft  overfights :  and  I  yet  fee  no  caufe  to  thio^k 
otherwife. 

Among  others  f  commonly  given  by  our  Divines)  thefe 
following  reafons  move  meto  think  that  Affiance  as  fir.nified 
h'^  ■THT^.vu'j  Hi  tIv  Qioi;  c^c.  in  Scripture,  and  by  ourenglifli 
word  Trtif}^  is  in  the  Will  as  well  as  in  the  Intellect. 

,  Reafon 


(81) 


Ren.  I,  If  Affiance  or  Truft  be  only  in  the  Intellect,  then 
may  we  bcfaid  to  put  our  Truft  or  Affiance  in  threacning, 
whofe  Object  is  feme  mifchiefcous  :  but  this  is «« ?«<!;>««», 
and  fo  the  Confequent  is  falfe,  thtrefore  fo  is  the  Antece- 
dent. 

R:a.  2.  The  Gofpel  or  Promifcjas  the  Object  of  our  faith 
or  Truft,  are  eflentially  good  as  well  as  true  :  therefore 
faith  muft  be  eflentially  in  the  Will  as  well  as  the  Intel- 
leer. 

ReA.  5.  Chrift  himfelf  as  he  is  the  Object  of  our  faith  or 
Truft,  is  good  as  well  as  true  :  therefore  that  faith  muft  be 
the  act  of  the  Will  as  well  Intellect. 

Ret*.  4.  Jurtification,  Adoption,  Glorification,  and  the 
other  benefits,  which  by  faith  are  to  be  received,  are  offered  as 
good, therefore  the  receiving  of  them  belongs  to  the  Will- 

Rea.  5.  Hope  and  Defpare  are  not  only  in  the  Intellect, 
therefore  Affiance  is  not  only  in  the  Intellect,  for  they  differ 
very  mrrowly.  Our  Divines,  rharhiery  ^■imefui4  ,  and  other 
ordinarily  make  all  hope  to  be  fidftcuy  though  not  all  ficlucia 
to  be  hope,  making  this  the  difference,  t\\^l[.ht  jilncia  fide  in 
about  the  object  as  prelent,  and  the  fiduci^  ffei  about  the 
chjefl  4S  future. 

Rea-  6.  fr»»  and  c/'/*  are  Ads  of  the  Will :  But  one  or  both 
ihefe  are  in  Affiance,  therefore  Ajfiavce  is  an  Act  of  the  Will. 
For  the  Minor,  at  God  is  the  perfect  Fountain  of  all  Verity, 
and  his  V'^eracity  is  his  Divine  pcrfeccion  ;  fo  the  foul  in  Affi- 
ance doth /r«f,  in  fome  initial  fort  which  Viators  arecapabk 
of,  enjoy  God  in  this  his  perfection.  For  A  (fiance  is  a  certain 
Ar^uitfceKce  ar.d  CcmplaceMcie  o(  the  (oul  in  Gods  veracity. 
2.  And  as  his  Promife  is  the  means  of  the  benefitto  be  re- 
ceivecl,fo  the  Will  doth  by  affiance  ufe  this  Promife  to  its  end. 
Rea.  7.  Veracity  which  is  the  formal  object  of  Faith,  is 
as  much  the  Refult  of  Gods  infinite  goodnefp,  as  of  his  Wif- 
dom  and  Power  :  Thefore  it  is  by  faith  or  truft  as  neceflari- 
ly  reftcd  on  by  the  Will  as  the  underftanding. 

Ohjetl.  Then  the  Belief  of  athreatning  is  Ajfance. 
An[^.  No  :   There  goes  more  then  meer  veracity  and  re- 
velation,to  the  Object  of  Affiance.Ic  is  faith  in  general,if  iher* 

M  be 


(81) 


bebuctbefe,  and  when  we  believe  a  threatning  :  But  all  faith 
is  not  Affiance;  It  is  not  Truft  or  Affiance  unlefs  it  be  fome  de- 
(irable  thing  that  is  revealed,  and  then  in  relation  to  that  ouc 
Credence  or  Belief  in  the  Divine  veracity  is  thus  named;  even 
when  both  thefe  obje6ls  do  concur.  2.  Yet  I  add  that  a 
chriftian  Belief>  even  of  the  threatniugsof  God,  muft  be  vo- 
luntary and  contain  a  Complacency  of  the  Will  in  the  Will 
and  veracity  of  Cod,  though  not  in  the  eviJ  threatned,  and 
chough  fo  it  be  not  called  Truft.  And  they  that  believe  any 
Jruth  in  voluntarily  upon  the  credit  of  Gods  veracity,  taking 
no  degree  of  complacency  in  his  veracity  or  Witl,have  not  true 
faith  ingenercj  fave  analogically  or  fecundum  qdU. 

Rea»  8.  Scripture  being  a  Dodrine  of  morality,  and  not 
«f  mcer  Phyficks ,  is  morally  to  be  underftood  :  and  there- 
fore according  to  the  common  ufe  of  thefe  words  in  morality, 
Truft)  Faith,  Affiance  are  not  to  be  limited  to  any  one  phyli- 
cal  Ad,  nor  any  one  faculty  of  the  foul,  ror  to  be  fliut  out 
of  the  Will,  If  this  Town  were  all  infefled  with  the  Plague, 
and  only  one  Pbydcian  able  to  cure  them ;  if  he  offer  them  to 
do  it  freely,  and  fome  flander  him  as  a  Deceiver,  and  he  tell 
them  again.  If  you  will  truft  me  I  will  cure  you ;  All  the  world 
will  underftand  here  that  by  trufting  him,  he  means  both  the 
truft  of  the  underftanding  and  the  Will,  arifing  from  fome 
fatisfadion  both  of  his  ability  and  honefty,and  fo  taking  him 
for  our  Phyfitian,  and  putting  our  lives  into  his  hand:and  fo  in 
other  cafes. 


Sect.  XII. 

YOU  conclude,  p^g*  410.  with  thefe  cenfures.  [^  i.  That 
this  AiTertion  [^common  and  fpecial  Grace  are  ejftntialljf 
the  fame.  ]  Is  not  only  erroneous,  but  far  mora  dange« 
rous  then  many,  nay  moft  men  think.  J  Anfwer.The  more 
dangerous  you  take  it  to  be,  the  loather  you  fhould  have  been, 
after  fo  many  explications  and  Difputations  for  your  own  opi- 
on  Written  by  me)  to  have  openly  fuggcftedthat  I  maintain 
the  very  fame  thing  thac  I  deny  and  write  againft. 

2'  You 


C83) 


1.  You  CiYtpag.  41 1 .  [  That  the  other  propofthn^  that  Cha- 
rity is  efentta^-  to  JHJlijying  faith  ^  is  a  \\>orje  nfifi^k^e  then  the  for- 
nter^in  refpeEl of  the  many  ill  Confe^uencts  ^  &c.  ]  Anfwcr  •, 
As  you  purpofc  [  To  manifefi  this^  Wihen  there  u  Kiccjfitj  or 
any  jufi  opjiortHfiity  to  doit.  ]  as  you  after  fay,  and  thereby 
put  us  in  hopes  of  more  of  your  labors ;  fo  I  think  you  are  the 
Judge  of  neceffity  and  opportunity,and  feeing  either  will  ferve, 
1  hope  you  will  not  want  the  later,  if  you  do  the  former.  Bos 
I  would  defire  you  that  if  God  (hall  call  you  to  this  work, and 
fatisficyou  that  it  is  the  beft  improvement  of  your  precious 
time  to  fpcnd  in  the  confutation  of  any  errors  of  mine,  that 
you  would  do  me  that  great  fnvour  astounderftand  me  f  if  I 
fpeak  intelligibly  )  before  you  confute  me,  and  to  charge  me 
with  no  opinions  but  my  own,  and  that  as  delivered  in  my  own 
word?,and  that  taken  together  as  they  mike  up  the  full  fenfe, 
era:  left  that  you  will  not  confute  any  opinion  asraine,whichl 
have  written  purpofely  againftiand  alfo  that  you  fix  not  on  my 
Aphorifms,  tilla  correded  edition  come  forth  ;  the  fubftance 
of  the  fame  Doftrine  being  more  plainly  cxprcfftd  by  me  in 
many  other  books.  And  if  this  be  the  opinion  that  ycu  are 
arguing  againft,  I  intreat  you  to  fay  no  more  as  my  words, 
[[  that  love  is  the  ejfential  fcrm  of  faith -,  ]  But  that  you 
may  neither  work  want  ,  if  you  are  deftinated  hereunto ,  noc 
yet  lofe  your  labor  ;  I  will  before  hand  tell  you  my  opinion, 
how  far  love  belongs  to  faith  J  when  I  firft  told  you.  i.  That 
I  refolve  by  God»  affiltance  to  fay  no  more  in  fubftance  ,  then 
is  the  common  Dodrincof  Proteflants,  asfar  aslcanunder- 
ftand  it  i  and  therefore  will  have  company  in  my  caufe.  j.That 
I  will  nat  fay  fo  much  in  terms  as  many  of  the  raoft  famous 
Pro'eftants  do  ^   I  will  inftance  but  in  two. 

Chamier  Panftrat.  Tom  j.li.  \i.De  fideyCi^.^.  proving  faith 
to  be  in  thcVVill,  hath  this  Argument.  [$.  i5.  Efi  &  hoc 
ArgHmfjttH^i  ctrtHiH  :  Omnu  amor  efi  aBm  voluntatii.  At  fdes 
efi  amor  .Er  no  e(i  a^'H  volant  at  is:  Major  per  fe  vera  df  cogntta; 
Mi'ior  prchatur,  ijHia  vera  fide^  e/}  ea  y  ojuc  credit  in  Dtum,  at 
credere  in  Z)f«»w,'j/?  amare  Deum.  Augoftinus,  in  Pfal.  1 50,  Hoc 
ffi  credere  »«  ChrtjJum^dUi^tre  ^hnfittm.Et  j«  Johan,trad.29- 
,^id  ef}  credere  in  Diii?(^redendo  am^rec^  vero  viBus  hoc  ar- 

M  i  gnmenxo 


(84) 


gnmtnto  Gropperus  in  Enchiridio ,  &c.   ]      and  fo  he  cites 
him  as  confenting. 

\\\t  0lhtT\s,  Adacchoviuf^  who,  i.  Colle^.Difput.Jefu- 
fiific.  Difp.  i4.§.io,i  1.12,1 3.  anfwcring C<«f»fro'j  objedion, 
that  by  placing  faith  in  the  Will  we  confound  it  with  Love, 
anfwercth,  [  That  the  love  of  Complacency  is  required  in  faith, 
to  Its  ohjeSi.  H^wcr  Chenjnitus  on  Melanfthons  Com.  pUces^ 
fag.660^  faith,  \_  Faith  is  fftch  a  knorvledge  in  the  mind^  to 
which  followeth  ajfent  in  the  JVill^  and  a  motion  of  the  heart  ap- 
prehending and  apply ing  to  it  felf  with  de fire  and  ^^ fiance,  that 
ohjeEi  which  is  manifefted  to  he  good,  fo  that  it  refttth  in  it  : 
Obje^.  ^ut  thus  faith  is  confounded  ^ith  Charity  :  ^hich 
t^o  the  Holy  (j  hofl  difiing/ti/heth  fpecially,  i  Cor.  1 3 ,  y^«/*. 
Charity  there  is  confidered^  as  it  is  carried  to  Qod  and  our  neigh- 
bour ^and  not  as  it  is  earned  to  Chnfi  as  the  meritorious  caufe^and 
the  benefits  by  him  obtained  and  promifed  to  us  in  him,  ^hich  is 
the  Charity  or  Love  of  faith,  and  is  dijiingui/ied  from  the  for' 
mer.  ]  Here  he  proceeds  to  (hew  the  difference.  Now 
my  Judgement  which  you  have  to  oppofe  (  if  that  be  your 
work  )  is  this. 

1 .1  take  it  as  a  certain  and  weighty  Truth  that  faving  faith  is 
in  the  Will  as  well  as  the  Underftanding:  and  fo  do  the  ftream 
of  Proteftants ;  though  yet  I  highly  honour  Chamero^  and 
the  French  Divines  of  his  mind,  that  think  otherwife. 

2.  I  think  the  very  Adof  the  Will  is  not  properly  called 
Love,    according  to  the  received  ufeof  that  word. 

3. 1  think  that  all  gracious  Love  is  not  the  thing  dircdiy 
meant  by  the  Apoftle  ,  when  he  extolleth  Charity  as  the 
everlafting  Grace. 

4.  I  think  that  Faith,  Hope,and  Charity,arc  three  diftirft 
Graces. 

5.1  fuppofe that  this  nobleGraceof  Charity  is  ihefimple 
Love  of  the  Deity,  as  our  beginning  and  end,  and  all,  and 
of  all  things  elfe  for  his  fake,  as  he  appcareth  in  them  :  or  the 
Complacency  of  the  foul  in  God  as  our  God.  Creator,  Re- 
deemer, SanSificr  and  Felicity,  or  as  the  chief  good.  And 
that  the  lawful!  Love  of  our  felves,  and  of  food,  rayment, 
wealth,  book«,Sermons,  humiliation  Duties,  ^c,  may  parti- 
cipate 


CS5) 


cipate  of  fome  beams  from  this  higheft  Charity ,but  is  not  dircft- 
ly  the  thing  it  fclf.  And  that  faith  is  thefi^iuci.il  Affent  before 
defcribcd;  and  that  Hope  \%iht  fiducial  ^tfirous  exf elation  oi 
the  promifed  Glory, and  the  future  blcflings  that  are  its  necefTa- 
ry  Foregoers. 

6.  I  fuppofe  that  thefe  moral  afts  and  habits  SiTctotitu  homi- 
nu^  and  not  to  be  confined  to |any  one  faculty,  as  meer  fimple 
phyfical  Ads,  at  left  not  ordinarily. 

7.  I  fuppofe  that  as  there  is  (  as  aforefaid  )  alicjHid  dileEli* 
9yiis\Q  Dcfire»  and  yet  it  is  to  be  called  Dcfire  and  not  Love ; 
and  aliifuid  dUeFiioMt'i  in  Hope  eflentially,  and  yet  Hope  is  not 
Love,  nor  fo  to  be  denominated  •,  every  Grace  being  denomi- 
nated not  from  all  that  is  in  it,  but  from  that  which  is  eminent 
and  fpecialinit,  as  to  the  Object ;  cvQn(o  there  \s  aiitfHtd  fdei 
infpt^  &  aliqmd  fffi  in  fide ^  &  aliejmd  amoris  in  fide  (^  (pe, 
and  yet  Faith  is  not  Hope, nor  Hope  Faith,  nor  Love  Faith. 

8.  The  Schoolmen  having  fome  of  them  taken  up  a  cuftom 
of  diftinguifliing  between  Love  in  the  affection  and  in  the  Will, 
and  of  calling  all  volition  by  the  name  of  rational  Love  :  if  any 
be  refolved  to  ufe  their  language,  and  to  call  the  very  act  of 
Affiance,  or  of  choice,  or  of  confent,  or   Acceptance  of  an 
offered  Saviour  by  the  name  of  Love,  though  1  will  ufe  the  an- 
cient terms  and  not  his,  yet  for  the  thing  fignificd  I  firmly 
hold,thatitisase(rential  to  faving  Faith  in  Chrift,  asthelntei- 
Jccts  Affent  is ;  and  that  i$  Davenant  fpeaks,  Faith  begins  in 
the  Intellect  by  AfTent,  and  is  compleated  intheWill  by  the 
Acceptance  of  the  offered  Saviour.  But  this  acceptance  (  or  if 
you  will  needs  call  it  Love  )  to  Chrift  as  the  Mediator  or  Way 
to  the  Father,  doth  much  diff"er  from  the  formentioned  Love  of 
God  as  our  chief  good  and  ultimate  end. 

9.  We  are  not  faid  in '  cripture  to  be  juftified  by  Hope  or  by 
Charity,  but  by  fai'h  :  butitisfocha  faith  as  hath  alttftiid fpei 
er  Amorii  in  it :  and  will  operate  by  thefe  Graces. 

10.  Whatfenfefoevcr  the  Schoolmen  make  of  their  diftin- 
dion  of  fides  i':fo"mif,&  format  a  Charitate^sti  in  this  following 
fence  it  may  truly  be  faid,  that  the  Love  of  God  doth  as  it  were 
animate  all  Graces  and  Duties  whatfoever:  that  is,  not  as  they 
are  particularatcidcnrs  which  have  every  one  ,  no  doubt,  their 

M  ?  own 


Own  form ;  but  as  they  are  Right  Means  to  the  End :  For  as  the 
Refped  to  the  end  is  eflential  to  the  means  as  means ,  ("though 
not  to  the  Aft  that  materially  is  that  means,  )  and  the  end  in- 
tended or  Loved  is  the  caufe  of  the  means,  (it  being  the  very  na- 
ture of  a  6nal  caufe  to  be  anntum  &  eiefiieratum  effcaciter  ab 
ejficieftte,  propter  quo^  amatumfit  efeQas-,  as  Ocl^iim  ^uodlih.  4. 
qti.i.  &in  fsntypjiffim:)  So  the  Lovc  of  God  asour  end,muft 
have  the  fame  effentiall  refpeft  and  influence  into  all  the  means 
that  are  inu[u  truly  and  acceptably  fuch  ,  as  the  Fntentio  finis 
bath  into  all  ordinary  means  whatfoevcr.  If  this  be  the  fenfe  of 
fi<lei  informii  ^  formats  charitate^  I  think  the  diftinftion  of  very 
great  ufe  and  moment :  For  I  think  that  no  Prayer,Study,  Aim?, 
fuffering,is  any  further  truly  and  fully  moralized  or  Theological, 
or  Rchgious,  that  is,  are  acceptable  means  to  our  fruition  of 
God  (which  is  our  Salvation)  then  it  iscaufed  and  animated  by 
the  Intention  of  God  as  our  End^  which  is  the  Love  of  God*  and  fo 
chat  faith  in  Chrift,and  Repentance,  and  Obedience,  are  all  wr- 
diate  Graccs,and  muft  be  thus  caufed  and  animated  by  the  Love 
ofGod(yecfo,  as  that  in  fome  refpect  faich  goeth  before  this 
Lovc,  and  in  forac  refpecc  Love  before  this  faith ,  which  having 
lately  occafion  to  difcufs,T  (hall  not  here  digrefs  again  to  do  it.) 
Of  this  I  have  faid  fomewhat  in  my  annexed  Explicatory  Pro- 
pofitions.  I  confefs  I  never  underftood  whether  any  Papifts  took 
their  diftinccion  in  this  fenfe .-  But  I  remember  Aquinas  and  fome 
other  of  them  fay  fomething  that  bendeth  that  way, chough  tliey 
feem  not  clear  in  it.  And  fo  much  tor  my  fenfe,that  you  may  not 
aflault  me  next  in  the  dark. 

If  you  join  with  the  Lutheran  Hethufiut  whom  you  cite  in 
detefttng  them  th^t  mix  Faith  and  Love  in  the  a^  of  Jttlii'} canon 
you  will  dereft  the  Generality  of  Proteftants  ,  who  mix  that  is 
conjoin  them  in  rhe  act,  though  not  to  the  act  of  juftification 
as  of  equal  ufe .-  efpccialiy  if  you  call  ail  acts  of  the  W  1!  towards 
Good,  by  the  name  of  Love  ^  for  then  they  commonly  make 
them  one. 

Asforthe  Hereticksyoumeniion,;>.4ii.4T2,  Ihaveno  bufi. 
nefs  with  them,  Tie  liudy  Gods  word,  and  there  is  no  Herelie. 
And  for  the  right  underhand  ng  of  it ,  I  have  exccedtng  great 
caufe  to  diHruft  my  felf,  and  depend  on  the  gracipus  teaching  of 

his 


CSy) 


his  Spirit.  But  I  am  refolved  co  be  as  impartial  at  I  can,wich  re- 
fpccc  CO  the  Judgement  of  the  Catholick  Church  of  Chrift. 

Af  to  your  conclufion,/><if  .41  ? .  &c.  I  freely  confefs  that  when 
fuch  unlearned  fcriblers  as  we,  impune  ,  &  inftlici  pnerptrio  as 
you  fpeak,  do  tire  the  ('yet  unfatiable)  prefs, unhappily  bringing 
forth  our  impertinencies  (I  leave  the  impious  and  monftrous  Hc- 
refies  to  the  facherj  or  the  finders  to  dtfpofe  of  J  it  were  unwor- 
thy dealing  if  fuch  as  you  (houid  be  denied  liberty,  to  cleanfe  & 
favethe  Church  from  our  Errors.  And  for  my  one  part ,  as  I 
think  not  my  felf  meet  to  fpeak  when  I  may  be  your  hearer,fo  lec 
my  travail  be  never  fo  hard,  if  there  were  but  one  prefs  in  £«- 
gland ^  which  offered  me  its  help  to  deliver  me  of  my  impertinen- 
cies, I  were  much  to  blame  if  I  would  not  readily  difcharge  it 
for  your  fervice,  there  being  not  many  whofe  judgement  fconje- 
fluring  by  vour  Exercirations  )  I  have  preferred  before  yours. 
And  therefore  I  take  it  for  an  honour  (  though  not  to  have  been 
miftakenby  you,  nor  to  have  been  the  eccafion  of  your  fo  much 
trouble,  yet)  that  I  have  the  encouragement  of  fo  much  of  your 
Confent,  and  thar  you  condcfcend  to  be  at  fo  much  paini  with 
me,whcre  you  did  but  think  I  had  differed  from  you. 

Though  you  chofe  to  conceal  your  name  ,  yet  Tradition  ha- 
ving publifhed  it,  your  labour  is  to  be  a  great  deal  the  more  ac- 
ceptable for  the  Authors  fake.  And  if  you  defpair  of  my  Conver- 
fion  by  it,  its  more  likely  to  bc,becaufe  of  theunteachablenefs  of 
roy  dull  underftanding,  them  from  the  impcrfedion  of  your  Ar- 
guments, had  you  but  aimed  at  the  right  mark.  And  where  I  dif- 
fent  with  confidence  becaufc  of  my  Reafons  that  feem  fomewhat 
cogent,  yet  is  it  with  a  mixture  of  felf- diffidence, when,  I  think 
what  a  perfon  I  diflentfrom. 

And  for  your  Refolution  [to  ott'»  ank  vindicate  your  Writing  if 
9CC'i/ion  ^f  .^  It  were  ftrange  if  any  thing  of  yours  (hould  be  un- 
worthy to  be  owned  by  you  •,  but  inftead  of  a  vindication,  were 
I  your  advifcr.you  (hould  fcarch  after  fome  of  my  greater  errors, 
and  AfTault  me  rather  in  another  point  (  if  this  be  your  Harveft 
work^)  at  leafl  in  fomething  where  really  we  differ, left  the  world 
think  that  we  are  not  in  good  fadncfs,  and  difpute  not  ex  animo. 
But  yet  1  leave  this  to  your  graver  judgement,  being  fo  far  from 
deprecating  any  of  your  labours  to  favc  men  from  the  danger  of 


C88) 


my  opinions,  as  that  I  am  tempted  to  be  a  little  proud  that  I  am 
chaftifcd  by  fo  learned  and  eminent  a  man  ;  and  can  promife  you 
that  your  tight  (hall  be  welcome  co  me,and  your  rebukes  not  al- 
together loft.  '^\ll^Ql[the  explication  and  confirmation  of  my  ntTV 
untrue  Hrpothe/it]&s  you  call  it.  you  fpeak  fo  much  too  late,thac 
I  confefslhavc  nottheskilto  fpeak  much  plainer  then  I  have 
alreadydone:  I  have  here  done  fomething,  but  its  little  but 
what  was  done  before.  And  for  the  conprmation^^ou  have  faved 
me  that  labour. 

Had  I  known  which  are  the  [bj-mifiakes']  in  yours>  which  you 

would  not  have  fcverely  toucht ,  I  (hould  have  paft  them  over 

withoutany  touch  at  all :  Butiflhadnotexprcflcdmy  DifTcnt 

from  you  on  thofe  pointjthat  you  bring  in  on  the  by  ,  I  ihould 

have  had  nothing  to  fay ,   but  to  have  joined  with  you  againft 

that  i?<?;vffr  whoever  he  be,  whom  you  aflault.  And,  taking  rae 

forfo  angry  a  fellow  as  your  fuppofitions  of  a  paffionate  Reply 

do  intimate,  Iknewnot  whether  you  let  not  fall  thefe  pafTages 

on  the  by,  left  I  (houldjlikc  the  angry  man  in  Seneca ^  have  falU  n 

upon  you  for  faying  ftill  as  I  fay,  and  bid  you  differ  from  me  in 

fome'^hat  that  rve  maj  be  t'^o.Sj.m^ertineYiciet^  dare  not  promife 

you  to  avoid  :  But  1  were  very  unworthy  if  I  would  be  paffio- 

nate  with  fo  learned  and  fober  a  man  as  you.    But  had  I  to  do 

with  a  paffionate  man,  I  (hould  exped  to  be  charged  with  paffi- 

on  when  ever  I  make  him  angry  ;  as  if  nothing  but  anger  could 

provoke  anger.  Even  Agitation  with  preflure  foraetime  fees  the 

Turners  wood  on  fire.  When  I  have  bin  readier  to  nod  then  to 

be  Angry,  yet  if  I  have  fitted  z/fr^drf^«/,  I  have  oft  been  called 

angry , when  the  Truth  is,  I  am  daily  lamented  that  my  pituitous 

bram  and  languid  fpirits,  have  deprived  me  of  the  paflion  thac 

once  I  had ;  and  which  I  daily  find  the  want  of  in  my  ftupidity. 

But  at  leaft  I  fhall  promife  you,  that  if  I  be  \}mT^ertintnt\\[t  very 

Pofition  and  Defign.of  my  whole  Book  (hall  not  be  Imfertiner.t^ 

nor  left  to  the  Vindication  of  a  TS^on-Putartm.    \<mi  ^rayirt 

and  pny  I  (hall  need  I  doubt  not, and  gratefully  accept,  '"ut  you 

(hall  not  ha-e  the  excufc  of  a  'V  affionAte  Re^lj  to  deprive  us  of 

your  Labours.  Asfor  your  Ability  not  to  Riply  ;  your  p  tnl  b9nM 

horas  non  fit  perdere,  and  your  other  buf»efs,  I  have  the  Imttden' 

€j  as  to  v:c  with  you,  and  purpofe  (o  far  to  overgo  you  >  as  that 

yoa 


(89) 

you  flial!  fee  Iwm  able  to  he  fdtnt^  though  your  writings  be  ne- 
ver fo  frte  from  Pujfnn^  if  cbey  concern  not  me  or  the  cauleof 
God,any  more  then  this  that  you  have  written    And  if  by  your 
fore- intimations  o^l^Railmg  Rbttorick  fg'^^fy**^g  nothing  but  ^ant 
ofRejfon^^  your  Readers  (hall  be  brought  into  a  conceit  chat 
they  even  hear  me  Rail  before  I  fpeak,  I  intend  to  be  fo  long  (i- 
Icnt  till  I  have  awaked  thera  by  faying  nothing,  and  made  thera 
know  that  they  did  but  dream.    And  whether  I  be  reputed  Rea- 
fonablc  or  unreafonabIe,Paffionate  or  Calme,Erroneous  or  Or- 
thodox though  I  undervalue  not  the  Judgement  of  worthy  men. 
yet  am  I  fo  necr  another  kind  of  Judgement,  that  I  have  the  left 
regard  to  (pare  for  this.  Even  good  and  learned  men  do  judge 
of  Perfons  exceeding  varioufly,  as  the  variety  of  their  prejudice, 
and  interefts  leads  them.     So  the  Great  and  dmons  Scaiiger, 
Frattf.  Junitu  was  fo  great  a  man  that  [_  Ah  ^p^flolorum  tempo- 
rihut  huEienPu  parem  Theologum  nuHnm  vUijfe  fectt/um]  was 
hisElogic  {referente  conjlantino  L.EwptroMr,)  But  to  the  great 
and  famous  Dr.  7W>/r,  bow  unacquainted  is  be  with  School-Di- 
vinity ?  How  unmeet  for  fuch  Difputations  ?  How  ovcr-witted 
by  Arminiaus  ?  How  obfcure  and  what  not  ?  So  our  excellent 
Biftiop  HaU,  be  was  ^J'he  Glory  o/Leyden,  the  Oracle  of  Textual 
«ni  fchool'divimtjt  richin  LanguageSi  fiibtile  in  Sfiinguljkhg, 
andin  A'-gument  wvircihle.]  Epift.  7.    And  to  the  great  TkuA- 
»Hs,bcwiiiyirdefultorioiMgenio,  (juimulta  ConAtut  ^  an  ad/e- 
cutuj  fit  ijttod  molitbatur^  doElorum  trit  judicium.  ]  Hift.  To.  3. 
1  7P-1  What  can  be  more  contrary  then  the  cenfures  of  thefc 
men  ?  Who  more  Learned,  more  modcft,and  faithful  in  reports, 
then  the  two  that  are  on  the  one  fide ,  and  the  two  that  are  on 
the  other  ?  How  vain  a  thing  is  the  efteem  and  applaufe  of  men  I 
weftandor  fall  to  the  Judgement  of  the  moft  Great  infallible 
God.  They  that  take  him  fincerely  for  their  God  ,  do  take  him 
as  Enough  for  them.  And  they  that  findjnot  enough  in  him,  will 
never  be  fatisfied. 

CMdrch  J I .  N 

1658. 


FINIS. 


(PO) 


Yj  Eader,  Becaufe  many  that  have  bought  the  former  Edi- 
XVtions  of  my  Book  cal  led  the  Saints  Rijl,  do  grudge  that  I 
have  annexed  a  Sheet  to  the  feventhlmpreflion,  on  this  Sub- 
jeft,  which  was  not  in  the  former,  that  they  may  have  it  here 
without  buying  that  Book  again,  I  (hall  here  alfo  annex  it. 


To  the  R  EADER. 


Reader, 

A/nfi)  loath  to  leave  thee  under  any  mifluke  of  mV 

I  meaninginthisfoint^  that  I  Piall yet  make  fomt 

^  further  attempt  f^  the  explaining  of  it.     t^nd 

whereas  I unelerfl and  that  fame  Readers  fay  th^t 

thM nice dijiinguifhingdoth but p:iz,z,le  men  :  and 

others  ^illfurnotfalfely  tp  give  out  ^th-it  I  make  commonGrace 

and  f fecial  to  difer  only  gradually  ^ind  not  fpeciflcally,  in  deffight 

of  my  exprefi  ajferting  of  the  contrary  ;  /  intrea'.ethe  firfl  fort  to 

tear  that  leaf  out  of  the  Book,  which  fptakj  ofthid  Sul^jiB,  that  it 

may  not  trouble  them^  or  to  be  patient  while  we  fpeak.afew  \\>ords 

to  other S'^  that  underjiand  that  which  they  are  but  puzzled  ^ith. 

And  I  defire  the  ftcond  fort  once  rm\e  to  remember,     i .  Tha^  I 

fiill  affirm  that  common  Grace  andfpecial  <io  differ  by  a  moral Jpe' 

cifick  difference,  and  not  a  graciual  only.     2.  But  that  this  moral 

fpecifick.  dijferer.ce  dothmattrially  confift  in  a  Phyjical  Gradual 

Jiff'erfnce.^  .  And  it  being  a  Moral  fubje^  that  we  have  in  hand; 

cur  terms  mufi  be  accordingly  nfed  and  underflood->  and  therefore 

it  is  mofi  proper  ^hen  ^e  fpeak^  of  uny  unfa^iBified  man,   to  fay 

that  [  he  is  not  a  Believer,  he  hath  no  faith  ,  he  hath  no  Love  to 

Cod.Sic.']  becauje  ^e  are  fnppofedto  fpeAkjo»ly  of  a  true  Chriflian 

fiving  JAtth,  Love^diC.  ]]     4.  'But  jet  when  it  is  l^m'^'n  that  we 

fpeak^  of  another  faith  and  love  ^  Wv  may  Well  fay  that  an  unfan^ii- 


fie^wavlsfAthtljtfe:  ani^henvfe  er quire  of  tke  difference^  W* 
mnflbe  as  exaB  as  fejfible^  in  Jhetvingrvktrein  it  Ijeth  ,  lejl  rve 
delude  the  h)fpocrite,  atid  trouble  the  Regenerate.  That  the  Faith, 
and  Love^anci  SanEtitj  of  the  Vngodlj  are  bat  Equivocally  or  A- 
nologically  focalled^-in  reffe^  to  the  Faith  and  Love  cf  the  Saixtt 
I  have  proved  in  mj  f ft h  Difpittatijn  of  K'lght  to  Sacrament^. 

That  ^h'tch  I  fha'l  now  add  to  wake  my  jenfe  as  plain  as  lean^ 
pjall  be  thefefolloxfirg  DifiinUion '  and  Propofitions. 

tl'e  mttfi  clijlingttiJJ}  betrreen,  i .  Tho/e  Graciottt  a^j  that  are 
about  our  End^  and  thofe  that  are  about  the  means.  2.  'Between 
Qod  confiderci  generally  as  Godi  indcoKfiJered  in  his  [ever  al  pro  ~ 
perties  a^d  attributes  /iijlir.Blj.  -^nd  Chrijl  confiJered  perfonally, 
and  confidercd  fully  in  the  p-nts  ofhu  Office^  'Whether  the  ejfentiat 
or  integral  p.irtf.  3.  Eetvteen  the  Qoodnefs  ofQod  is  himfelf  con- 
sidered, and  as  fuitable  unto  us,  4.  BetXX'een  the  fim^le  aU  eft  hi 
Jntellei},andtheccmp'iringa6i.  5.  'BetWe^'n  the  fiynple  Velleity^ 
of  the  rvi{',  aid  the  choice  th.it  fo/lorveth  the  Comperate  aEl  of  the 
Jntelltfi.  6.  Betvoeen  the  Speculative  and  PraHicalaSt  of  the 
InteUe^.  7.  yind  between  the  AEliof  the  trill  thatvnfW'er  theje 
trvo,  8.  'Bttwecfi  an  S^dth^t  is  ultimate  t  but  not  principal  and 
prevalent ^  and  an  End  that  is  ZJltimate  and  chief  alfo. 

Prop.  I.  ^n  tinfanSltfied  man  may  Love  him  that  is  the  true 
God^  and  believe  in  that  Per  [on  whotsjefui  Ch  ifi^the  Redeemer. 
This  is  pafi  controverfe  among  us. 

Prop.  2.  An  ur.gody  man  may  love  Qod  as  the  Caufe  of  his 
^Profpfrity  in  the  World. 

Prop.;.  He  may  k»ovp  that  his  evtrlaflinghappinefs  is  at  the 
dijpofeof  (jod^  andmiy  believe  him  to  be  merciful  and  ready  to  do 
g'iod^  a^ii  that  to  him.  Anacorifequently  may  h^ive  fome  love  to 
him  as  thus  Gracious  and  Merciful. 

Prop-  4.  He  may  by  a  fmple  apprehenfor.  knor^  that  (jod  Is 
Cfoodinhimfeif^  and  CJoodttrfs  it  felfy  and  prea:h  this  to  others. 
e^nd  coyftq-sently  may  have  in  his  ivill  a  con  fen  t  or  ^iUingaefs 
hereof,  that  Gcd  be  whit  he  m,  even  infinite  Goodnefs. 

Prop.  5.  He  m^yhavca  fimple  Apprehenfion  that  God fhwld 
beGlori'ied^andh)ncKredby  tht  creatures  :  and  fo  may  have  a 
fimpte  Velletty  thit  be  m^y  be  Glorified. 

P;op.  6.  He  m^y  have  aCer.fnl  dim  apprthtnfion  that  ever- 

N  2  '  lafiirg 


(9^y 

la^ittg  Hafptntfi  conftfleth  in  thi  fight  of  the  Glorj  of  god,  aniiik 
hislovt  and  favour  and  heavenly  Kingdom  ;  andfo  may  hdve 
fame  love  to  him  ad  thus  apprehended. 

Prop.  7.  He  waj  compare  God  and  the  creature  together^  and 
htuve  't  /  eculative  or  fiferficitnlknorvledge  that  (Jodis  better  then 
the  crcaiare^  ana  better  to  him  ;  a^dmay  write  and  preach  thU  to 
others  :  And  fo  may  have  an  anf^erable  fuperficial unefe6lual 
Velleitj  or  lo ve  to  him^  even  ai  thus  conpJered. 

Prop.  8.  One  and  the  fame  m»n  may  have  t^o  contrary  Zflti' 
mate  endi  of  h^  pur.icuUr.  Anions ;  Even  the  fleafmg  of  Qoi^ 
ard  the  f  leafing  ofhu  flfjh  :  proved. 

Argument,  i.  If  the  fame  heart  may  he  partly  fanUified  and 
partly  uofanSli^ed  (th^t  n ,  in  fame  degree)  then  it  may  have  tW9> 
contrary  ends :  Or  if  the  fame  man  may  have  fiefh  and^^inl^  tben^ 
he  may  have  two  contrary  Vltiitiate  ends^    'But  the  Antecedent- 

iscertain^lc.rgo -fofara^  aman  is  carnal  and  U»fan5tified,. 

fleP3'pltafingandciTm\k\i  is  his  End. 

Argam.  2.  If  the  fame  man  might  not  have  two  cmtrary  Vl' 
timate  ends y  then  the  godly  fboulJtnever fin  but  in  the  mif-choofingy. 
ofthe  means ^  or  abating  the 'Degrees  of  love  to  God  :   But  tht 

conffqnentis  falft  and  againfi  experiencet  Ergo. Peter  did- 

not  only  mifchoofe  a  Wfans  to  Gods  Glory  when  he  denied  his  md', 
fier .    A  godly  man  Vehen  heu  drawn  to  eat  or  dri»kjoo  much-,  doth  < 
it  not  onljM  amiflaken  means  to  Glorifie  God,  but  Vliimately  to. 
pleafe  bisfiefij.  Either  David  in  Adultery  did  de fire  fie  fit-pita fing  ' 
for  itfelf^  or  for  fame  other  end.  If  for  it  felft  then  it  Vca4  his  Vh 
timxte  end  in  that  ati  :  Ifforfome^hat  elfit  as  hii  end^  For  what ^ 
Tfo  one  ^lllfay  his  end  vfOi  Gpds  Glory.     A^d there  is.  nothing  elfe^- 
to  be  it. 

Prop.  9.  There  «  a  continual  firiving  between  theft  treo  con^s 
trary  ends  where  they  are^  One  drawing  one  Way,  and  the  other  tht 
other  way -^  andfometimeone,  fometimes  tht  other  prevailing  fn> 
particular  aSf. 

Prop  10.    But  yet,  every  man  hath  ine  only  Prevalent  Vlti*. 
mate  end,  which  uto  he  called  Finis  hominis,  or  is  the  chief  Vlti' 
mHe  End  of  the  Habitual  Predominant  Inclination  or  Difpofitio»^ 
of  his  foul^and  of  the  tenour  or  bent  of  his  courfe  of  life.    And  that  ^ 
•wh'wbjots  againfi  this  Habitual  bent:,  iifaid  to  h  the  Ad:  [mt  of 

1  ^/Wb 


C93) 


him,  but  of  fomtthing  in  him]  that  li,  not  of  that  predominant  Mf^ 
f^fftion  which  JhouU  dtnominttte  the  man  to  be  Godly  or  u^. godly ^ 
bnt  of  fame  fttbdntd  difpoficion  th^t  by  accident  hath  got  fomf 
advantage^ 

Prop.  II.  As  Godly  men  have  God  for  their  end.  m  to  the  pre 
dominant  habit  of  their  fouls,  and  bent  of  their  livfs,foall  kicked 
men  m  the  ^orld  have  the  creature  and  c  Am  il- ft  If  for  their  end,  at 
to  the  'Predominant  Habit  of  their  hearts,  and  bent  of  their  lives : 
fa  that  this  is  /imply  to  be  caRtd  their  feveral  end,  Vfhich  is  ths^ 
Ruling  end^and  hith  the  jreaxtjl  Intereft  in  thtm  i  But  jet  us  car- 
nal felfts  a  fubdued,rt filing  end  in  the  Godly  ^prevailing  in  fomt^ 
particular  A[iioyiS',{as  istoofure,)fo  God  a>td  Salvation  may  be  a 
a  fiifieciyabufedfubjeSled e*jdofthe  ungodly  that  have  but  common 
Grace,  and  may  prevail  again(i  thefirfh  in  fome  particular  out'' 
ward  AEiions. 

This  H  evident  in  the  foregoing  Propojltions.lf  a  m<n  by  common- 
'  (jrMt  may  have  fuch  a  fimple  and  fu^erfciA  apprehenfion  of  God  ^ 
M  is  before  mentioned^krsoxving  htm  to  be  good  in  himfelf,  yea  bejl, ' 
and  good  andbefl  to  him,rvhen  ytt  4t  thtfame  time  he  hith  a  more 
deep  predominant  habitual  apprebettf  en  that  the  Creature  it  bejh 
for  him,then  certainly  he  may  have  afubd^ed  Love  to  God  as  befi 
inbimfelfandtohim,  that's  anf^trahle  to  this  fup erf: ial  k^ov^ 
ledge^  and  ccnjifieth  rvrth  a  preaomirant  habitual  Love  to  the 
Creature  and  car ral  Self  .  I^oulddtji'^e  every  IHvine  to  be 
wart  that  he  tell  not^the  hnfoiUili fed, -that  whoever  hath  the  leafi 
degree  of  Love  to  Qodfof  himff  If'  cr  not  as  a  means  to  carnal 
ends ^  Jh all  ctrtairJy  bfi^fuved  i  F&r  he  '^ould  certairly deceiv^- 
manj  thoufand  mi/erable. 'fouls  that  fi>ould per iWade  them  ofthfe. 
He  thatbtJiiif£thth^th4keAja^t>d,believeth  that  hejs  the  chief 
Good, and  befi  for  hi?ipif  ht  could Jee  his  G lory ^andfufym joy  his 
Love  f^r  ever  :  And  .many  a  "dcii  krd  mandoth  preach  all  thu  ,  and 
think^oi  htfpeakji  but  ittswll  but  "ivith  a  fuper^iial opi/'.ianativt 
Beliefs  '^''hich  u  ma(}-er<d  bym«re  (Irong  apvreherfons  of  a  con- 
traryGood;  .\nd  fe  they  lovi  but  \^iih  a  fstpe'ficiai  Lovejhu's  an* 
f^erable  t-o*i  meir  opinior.ativt  Beliefs  and  u  c  ncfuersd  by  a  more 
potent  Love  to  the  contrary,     .'io  that  jirittlyif  jcu  denominate 
not  that  fmgle  ali  ^  nor  jhe  pirfon  as  xhtu  dtfpo/ed,   but  thebeni  of 
his  afethons,  or  the  ?ct[onaccordirfg  io  )^hat  tadetdhs  n  in  tht 


> 


(P4) 


Trihm'mant  hahit  of  hU  Soul  -^fo  it  isfittefttofay  that  the gocl- 
ly  loveth  not  the  v>orI^,  nor  the  th'mgi  of  the  worlds  and  the  wicl^- 
edloveth  not  God,r}er  the  thingi  of  Godoifuch. 

Prop.      12.  The  ft r.c ere  intending  of  the  end,  d'nh  concur 
to  conftitutc  a  ftncere  choice  of  the  means.     And  therefore  the 
Schoolmen  f^j^  that  Charitj  (  or  Love  toGod  )  in  for  met  h  all 
other  Graces :  not  being  the  form  of  them  as  fuch  or  fuch  A6t%or 
Habits,  but  as grAciovis  means :  As  the  means  art  effentially  as 
mtans  (ov  the  end,  and  fo  an rm ate d  by  it -^  fe  the  mediate  cjAEls 
of  Grace  as  mediate^  are  effentialiy  animated  by  the  love  of  the 
endy  and  participate  of  it.     In  thtsfenfe  their  i^oHrine  of  the  in-- 
forming  of  other  (Jraas  by  hve^is  not  only  true^  but  of  very  great 
Tveight,  and  giveth  light  to  r*ia»y  other  points.  And  Thm  as  men 
of  common  Grace  have  onlj  an  abufed^fubdued  l^ill  or  Love  to 
God  as  their  end,  th^t*s  conquered  by  thecontrary,fo  they  have  bat 
an  unApjftver able  faith  in  Chriji^as  the  ^^ay  to  Gqd  the  Father  ^ 
and  an   anfvcsrable  ufe  of  all  other  means  ,  which  will    never  ' 
bring  thjem  to  attain  the  end  that  isfofttperfic'tally  and  Mneffe^Hal- 
ly  apprehended  and  intended.     I  deftre  the  learned  Reader  toper— 
ufe  weil  thefirfi  Dijputation  of  Rada  for  Scotus,'3«  this  cjnejiion^ 
Prop.  11. The  ACi  of  Love  or  Faith  areconfiderable.i.Ph)' 
Jically '.  I.  In  general  as  Faith  and  Love.   2.1n  fpecial,  as  this 
Faith  and  Love  about' this  objeB^  the  Father  and  the  Son.     And 
thus  by  common  Grace  men  may  have  True  Faith  and  Love;  th^t 
is,  fuchasis  phyficaHy  a  true  or  real  A61.  2,They  are  cg^ftder- 
able  morally  :  and  that,  I .  Either  as  Duty  anp^ering  a  Precept 
j~  believe  and  love  God.  )  And  thus  they  have  an    analogical 
defe^ive  Morality  inthem^  andfoarethatfar-^fiKCere  or  true -^ 
but  »9t  that  fame  true  Love  or  faith  in  fpecie  raorali  tt'^ic/j  the 
{^ommandrequireth.  For  it  commandethusto  lovtGsd  above  all, 
8CC.  3  .They  are  confUerable  as  conditions  of  the  l^romfm  ani  E  - 
videncet  of  fplritual  life  in  thefonl^and  thus  vpickjdmcr}  by  com' 
man  Grace  are  never  made  Partakers  of  them.  Thij  h'^ve  y,ot  the 
things  themfelves.     Thtir  Faith  and  Live  is  not  tht  f^me  thing 
which  hath  the  Promifesmadstothemin  the  Ct'o/pei ;  and  fc  aye 
not  fue  or  JtKcerc. 

Prop.  14.  Bf  con/mcn  Craccymen  may  love  God  unitr  the 
Notion  of  the  chiefe(}  good^^nd  moji  de fir  able  otl ,  andjct  n:t  ni'h 

th^it 


thjt  L'ive  which  the  chief ejl  good  muji  be  loved  Vfitb  •,  iifjj  there 
fore  it  14  notmoralljf  ftncereorftiviyig. 
"  PJ^^*^5*  There  una  not  ion  whiitfocver  that  a  true  Chrifii' 

%-     an  hxth  of  God,-  and  no  ^ord  thAt  he  can  fpeal^of  him  but  an  un  • 
reget^ey-ate  man  may  have  fome  apprehen/ion  of  that  fame  notion^ 
ndfpeal^fJiojen'ords  ;  and  know  everj  propofition  concerning  God 
nd  Chrifi  iii  Redeemer^  rvhich  a  godly  man  may  kr}ow:attd  fo  m  <y 
tve  fome  love  to  God,  or  faith  inChrift  in  th^t  fame  notinn  : 
hottgh  not  W'ith  fuch  a  clear  (fftBual  apprekenfton  and  lively 
foTverfHll  Icve^oi  thefanRiped  have. 
Ob]ef,l.  He  cannot  love  God  as  hisend.Anfw/cr./^^tff'^roW 
efore  thi.it  hemsfj  with  a  fuperficial lOitffeRual  fubduedLove* 

Obj'.Fl.  Hecannot  love  him  as  the  chief  good.  ^nfiv.Ihave 
roved  that  he^pMy  love  him  ur.der  that  notim.  though  not  with 
'that  love  which  the  chief  Good  mUjl  be  loved  with. 

ObjeSl.  He  cannot  believe  in  Ghrift,  or  defire  him, as  a  Savi- 
our to  free  him  frgm  every  fin.  ^"infiv.  7^t  with  a  prevaltnt 
faith  or  dtfire-^felr  flillhe  hath  more  love  then  averfenefs  to  that 
fin '^  and thir efore  more  Averfenefs  then  love  to  Chrifi"  as  fuch  : 
But  amn  gen^fil  he  ^a)  wijb  to  be  free  from  a!lfin,fo  in  p.irtica- 
iarhemayh^veuneffe^lual^Hfheitobefromhis  mofi  beloved  fn 
in  feveral  rejpe^-t. 

Obje^i  l)#c  not  to  be  free  from  fin  as  fin,  or  as  againft  God. 
Anf.Tfs:Amiiyt  by  common  ^race  may  k^orv  that  Jin  asfin  u  evilf 
and  therefore  may  have  uneffe&ttal  ^i/hes  to  be  freed  from  h  as 
fuch  :  but  at  the  {ame  time  he  hath  granger  appyehenfonj  of  the 
ple^fure^ppofit^r  credit  that  it  brings  him^    a>}i  this  prevaileth. 
Indeed  mens  carnal  inie^-efl  which  tn  ftn  they  love,  is  not  its  Oppofi- 
tion  to  God^noy  the  form  il  nature  offin.T^oubtlcfs  afl  men  that  are 
ftngodly  do  not  therefore  love  fin-,becaufe  it  it  fin  ^C^  againflGod^at 
leji  this  is  not  f^  total  in  them  ,  but  that  there  may  be  a  fubdued 
MiK^  to  the  contriiry^a^d  di[l'ke  of  fin  as  aguinj}  God.  Many  a  com- 
mon d'-unk.ard  I  h4ve  k»o^n  that  when  he  hath  heard  cr  talkp  of  fin 
C^a4  fin, as  again fl  Cod,  hath  crjed  out  agaiufi  himfelf^and  w.'pt  as 
if  he  abhorred  it :  and  yet  gore  on  in  it  for  thepleafure  of  thefiefh. 
Objcff,  But  where  then  .s  mans  natural  enmity  to  God  and 
Hii^inefs  ?     Anf-.p.   i.  Its  doubtfull  whether  man  nr:tHralh  hath 
an  enmity  to  (jo{  a;d  H<.li»( f  ^covfidered fimpl) -yor  only  confidered 
AS  being  agatnfi  ma^j  carnal  intereft.Zr  But  Were  tbeformir  pro- 
ved^ ' 


CS^6) 


w 


pedjyrt  common  Grace  ahatith  that  enmity,  an^givesmenmif^ 
tlttncorrnptsd  nature  dcth.  .:>,.'  I 

ObiiEl.  But  the  expcrif  nee  of  the  godly  tellcth  tfagpthatq 
is  another  kind  of  Light  and  Love  which  they  have  afc||^[|(i«l 
Vcrfion  then  before.  An.i.h  it  not  all  Con-verts  that  can  ]tidge^ 
by  experience  in  this-ybecAufe  all  have  not  hadcommm^^ce  in  thrl 
higheji  ^  or  any  gre^tobferved  meafure  before  coHverfion^i.  ItD 
hard  for  any  to  make  that  experiment  y  becaufe  we  kno^  not  in  ouA 
change  jttfi  ^hen  common  Grace  left  andfpecial  Grace  began.  3  .A 
Phyftcal  gradual  difference  maybe  as  great  as  th  At  which  joun 
experience  teltjou  of       Have  you  experience  of  common  light] 
and  love  before  converfion,  and  of  another  fincp  ^hich  diferethl 
from  it^more  then  the  greatefi  flame  from  a  fpark  rand  more  then] 
theff*n'Jhine  at  noon  from  the  fmilight  ^hen  ycH  cannot  know  a' 
man  f  Or  more  then  the  fight  of  the  cured  blind.n»an  ,  thatfaw 
clearly  from  that  by  "^hch  hejaiv  men  Lkf  trees  ^ ;  or  more  then: 
the  pain  of  thefirappaiofrrm  the  fmaUefi  prick  of  a  pin.  \ 

Obje6i.  But  it  is  not  common  gifts  that  are^  workt  up  to  bel 
fpeciai  Grace ;  one  j(^*c<>/ is  not  turned  into  another,  Anfw: 
True  ;  ImperfeBien  is  not  turned  materially  into  pfrfe5iio^.  The' 
damning  of  the  day  is  not  materially  turned  into  ^he greater  light 
at  noon.  But  a  greater  light  fuperveneth^  and  is  aolded  to  the  lefj. 
The  blind  mans  feeing  men  Uke  trees ^  was  not  it  th^t  ^as  thepcr- 
fe^foffowittg  fight, but  an  additional  light  ^as  it* 

ObjeEl,  But  fpeciai  Grace  is  the  divine  Nature,  the  image 
of  God,  the  new  Creature,e^c.and  therefore  doth  differ  more 
from  common.  Anf^^.  leafil/yield  the  Antecedent , but  deny  the 
Confequence.  The  difference  is  as  admirably  gr fat  as  thefe  -terms 
exprefs^thoughitbe  but  amoral  fpecifickdtfference.* 

Reader,  I  will  trouble  thee  no  more,  but  to  entreat  thce^,  if 
chou  be  of  another  mind,  to  differ  from  me  wittj,out  breach  of 
Charity,  as  I  do  from  thee,  and  to  remember  th^r  I' obtrude  not 
my  explications  on  anyjand  if  I  have  done  thee  wrong.it  is  but 
by  telling  thee  my  thoughts,  which  thou  haft  liberty  to  accept 
or  rejed  as  thou  feeft  caufe.  But  again,I  intreat  thee  rather  lay 
this  b7;  or  tear  it  out  of  the  book,  then  it  (hould  he  any  flum- 
bJing  block  in  thy  way,  or  hinder  thee  from  profiting  by  what 
thou  readeft.  The  Lord  increafe  our  Light  and  Life,and  Ldi^ 


\ 


wmm 


>'y 


"!* 


-f  "  s. 


■^ 


'H. 


^ 


u. 


# 


r;   .  A  ■  -» 


:i^.< 


'■■■\  -v 


Im-.- 


-'.-^w  •  < 


^4-:ii