^» ■ < 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 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. ^/ 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)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. <\\\ 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 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 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 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 ] themfclves , though you might call them fo as to the Ads. Not the/^c«/r;>/, nor the /«/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^-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<«^.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<: 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 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^\'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 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^^if7r.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 haer 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/:;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 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:/(?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>-}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,j Premifes or Motives to ReVeve the Divinity of that Word^ but fuch oi I named : ] 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 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 '- Rea. 8 The Doftrine that mnkes Juftification, Adopti- on, ^c. to go before fsith, and be the portion of Infidels, isunfound : hut (uch i39, 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/««io'T^< cvT 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.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,/> 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? 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 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 mould 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 (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 }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