212. It is no true Power ad hoc which is put to overcome a Greater opposing Power We never had Power to overcome God or to act against his pre-moving pre-determination as Bradwardine truly saith 213. A man may be Able mediately to do that which he is not Able Immediately to do I mean he that can write with a Pen or move things with an Engine and so act but as a partial though Principal Cause may not be Able to write without a Pen nor to do the same alone as a Total Cause 214. And a man may have Power to do that Mediately and Hypothetically hereafter which he Cannot do Immediately that is at the present time He can learn to write and after can write who cannot write till he hath learnt Thus Infants have a remote Power of speaking and Infidels of believing 215. No man Doth all that he is truly and properly Able to do 216. No man doth all that he is Disposed and Habited to Sudden objects oft carry us againt strong Habits 217. A man ordinarily Willeth and Acteth according to the predominant Habits of his soul if he have objects and means 218. A man alwayes willeth that which he is soley disposed to will or most disposed to will at that moment and which he apprehendeth sub omnimoda ratione boni Much more if he were perfectly Habited to it in his Vitality Intellect and Will 219. No man acteth without the Essential fundamental Inclination to Good and to Natural felicity But a man may by sudden instigation and occasions will that which before he had no particular disposition to A Power may be without a Habit. 220. No Good mans Habits here are perfect in goodness 221. No Bad man here is at the worst nor destitute of all Moral Power to all things commanded him of God 222. A bare Moral Power which cometh not up to be an Inclination or Habit determineth not the Will of it self 223. Habits tend to the Wills determination per modum naturae ut appetitus But they are not sufficient to it or necessary determiners de eventu 224. Weak Habits are oft born down Strong ones rarely yet sometimes 225. An unholy soul is much more Impotent as to the great Internal Acts of Loving God delighting in him c. than to any meer external Act which the Natural Power extendeth to And so are the regenerate in that measure as they are unrenewed 226. But we are more able to Love or Will aright than to Work and Do aright because here both must concurr which requireth more Power than one alone E. g. to Rule the Thoughts aright requireth more Power than to be Willing to rule them 227. Yet in that measure that a man is Willing to do Good he is Morally able and more than able Because Morality being first seated in the will it is no farther Morally Good or Bad than it is Positively or Privatively Voluntary He that is sincerely Willing is sincerely Abole and he that is Perfectly Willing is perfectly able and more 228. Every mans Natural faculties may be called Moral Powers as to the Obligation as being obliged by God to Moral Good 229. And because Obligation presupposeth some true Power to obey mediately or immediately present or former when the Law was made therefore mans Natural faculties though undisposed are thus far called a moral power to the commanded act SECT XI Whether God bind Men to Impossibilities 230. THis leads us to the question Whether God bind men to Quaudo praeceptum supernaturale obligat non potest vitari peccatum contra illud absque auxilio gratiae Pet. à S. Joseph Thes Univers Theol. de auxiliis p. 83. Alliac Camerac 1. q. 14. R. saith 1. We cannot be bound to a simple impossibility 2. We may be bound to Will an Impossibility as that his sin past had not been though he doubt of this 4. He may be bound to that which is not in his power to do of himself So every one is bound habere gratiam quilibet viator fidem infusam tamen non est in creaturae potestate activâ things Impossible Where we must needs distinguish 1. Of disability Antecedent to the Law and Consequent 2. Mediate and Immediate 3. Between Impossibles as such and as Things Hated or Nilled 4. Between Primary and Secondary Moral acts And so I answer 231. 1. No Law of God or just men bindeth to things Naturally Impossible before the Law was made and broken by an Immediate obligation 232. A just Law may antecedently bind us mediately to that which is immediately impossible So he that cannot Read may be bound to Read mediately that is first to Learn and then to Read And Paul requireth men to work with their hands that they may have to give to him that needeth and then to give which yet before they have got it is impossible 233. The obligation of a Law ceaseth when the thing commanded becometh Impossible without the subjects fault 234. Every sin is Voluntarium-prohibitum And so far as Impossible things may be Voluntaria-prohibita which is all the doubt so far they may be sins 235. Gods Law is Antecedent to our practice and mediately ex parte sui bindeth us at once to all that we must do to the End of our Lives As if a Master in the Morning command his servant his work till night Therefore as if that servant purposely break his Spade or other Tools that he may not work he is not therefore so disobliged as to be guiltless even so when man by sin disableth himself to his commanded duty the Law is not changed but is still the same nor is he thereby excused 236. Here the Primary sin is that which contracted the Impotency The Secondary sin is the Impotency it self thus wilfully contracted and seated in the will The third rank is the not doing of all that was first commanded and the doing of all that was forbidden 237. But if it be not only a Moral Vicious Impotency that is contracted such as the habitual unwillingness in question but a Physical Impotency as if a man drunk himself stark mad or blind c. this is a sin and the consequent acts and omissions not simply in it self considered but secundum quid and participatively as it partaketh of the first sin which is described it self to be a Voluntary forbidden act disabling us to future duty and That a necessity contracted by our own fault as by drunkenness excuseth not from guilt see August l. de Natur. Grat. c. 67. Aquin. n. 4. d. 50. q. 2. a. 1. virtually containing a sinful life to the end 238. But if it be this Physical Impossibility that is contracted then though the Law change not yet the Subjects capacity being changed strictly and properly God is not said after to Oblige him by that Law because he is not Receptive and Capable of such new obligations And yet he is not disobliged as to his benefit For no man
necessary 1. If by the old Covenant or first Covenant you mean the conditional Promise Be perfect and live no sin since Adam's is against that conditional Promise because it ceased through mans incapacity upon the Fall And Christ died not only for the first sin 2. If by the first Covenant you mean the bare command of perfect perpetual Obedience Christ died for sins against that command which is still in force but not as a Covenant of Life given on that condition 3. If by the first Covenant you mean the punitive part of the Law of Innocency saying Thou shalt die if thou obey not perfectly So Christ died for all our Sins in the strictest sense even as we are condemnable for them by that Law And that part also of the Law continueth to make punishment our due in primo instanti though with an adjoyned remedy 4. If by the New Covenant you mean the meer preceptive part of Christ's supernaturally-revealed Law or of the foresaid Law of Nature as in the hands of Christ so Christ died for sins against the Law of Christ 2. If by the New Covenant or Law you mean the Promise and Threatening of Christs Law or either so Sin may be said to be against them in two senses 1. Objectively as they are neglected by us And so that Sin formally is only against the Precept and Christ died for it 2. Or as the Sin hath punishment threatened by the Sanction and no pardon given by the Promise And so Sin is in two senses also against the said Sanction that is 1. When it is such a Sin as the Promise giveth no pardon to conditionally And such as the commination peremptority condemneth the Sinner for to remediless misery And this Sin is the final non-perfâ—rmance of the Gospel-Condition Faith and Repentance And such only are fully obliged to suffer Hell by the commination of the Law of Grace And for such Sin Christ never died not because he never died for the person as to any other sin or for any benefit as some teach But because 1. He resolved never to die for that sin it self of final Unbelief Impenitence and Unholiness 2. And because he never died to satisfie his own Law of Grace and to take off its proper full obligation to final punishment but only to satisfie God instead of mans suffering what the Law of Works obliged him to 2. But there is also a mediate or conditional dueness of punishment according to the Law of Grace which is when a man by not believing and not-repenting at the present and by neglecting and resisting Grace doth so far forfeit all Grace and Salvation as that God may cut him off and cast him into Hell if he will not having peremptorily said that he will do it nor given men any assurance that he will not This man is not immediately and fully under the dueness of Hell fire but on supposition that God should first cut him off and then his Impenitence would be final which is the first case But this person is under all this guilt 1. Guilty of punishment not forgiven against the Law of Works 2. He is so far guilty of punishment according to the Law of Grace as 1. That no pardon is given him or due to him 2. And God may justly take away his Spirit and forsake him 3. And God may justly cut him â—â—â—â— 4. And if God should cut him off Hell will be his full immediate due 147. By this it further appeareth that we cannot be justified as personally Christ not capable of our kind of Obedience fulfilling all Righteousness in Christ Because we are all our life time principally under those great Duties of the Law of Grace which Christ neither did nor could do for us We are bound all our days to accept a Saviour to accept pardon of Sin and mortifying Grace to confess our Sins to repent of them and sorrow for them to labour in the use of all Means and Ordinances to mortifie them To do all our duties as Sinners in that manner as those must do that are in a Physicians hands for Cure To receive and apply Christ's Merits to that end to beg his Intercession and daily pardon To labour that imperfect Grace may be strengthened In a word Sin and a desire of healing so affect all that the Gospel commandeth us that Christ was not capable of any of this And if all this was undone till our Conversion and much of it undone after our Conversion and yet Christ never did it for us not we in him How can it be said that we are justified by fulfilling all the Law in and by Christ yea the Law of Nature still commandeth us to obey the Law of Grace supposing it made and revealed to us 148. The question whether Christ payed the Idem or the tantundem is hence also more fully resolved By payment is meant either Holiness or The Idem or Tantundem Suffering And 1. This sheweth that Christ's Obedience was not materially the same with ours as aforesaid 2. And I before proved that a great and the far greatest part of our punishment was such as Christ could never suffer either permitted Sin it self or desertion by the Spirit of Holiness or divine displeasure and hatred or accusations of Conscience c. 3. And the Law binding only the Sinner and not any Surety to suffer and every man personally to obey most clearly it is not Idem quâ—d debetur were it but meerly because it is not ejusdem or per eundem 149. Indeed solution of the Debt and satisfaction strictly taken thus â—iffer that satisfaction is solutio tantidem vel aequivalentis alias indebiâ—i And if Christ be said to have paid the very same duty and punishment which the Law required he is denied to have satisfied for our non-payâ—ent For a Law that is fully performed can require no more nor the Law-giver neither And therefore both Satisfaction and Pardon are shut â—ut 150. It is not properly the Law which is satisfied but the Law-giver â—s above Law as is said But yet improperly the Law may be said to be â—â—tisfied in that the ends of the Law-giver in it are obtained 151. Though I owe much thanks to God for what near thirty years go I learned from Grotius de satisfact yet I must say that in this great â—uestion whether Christ satisfied God for Sin as Domino absoluto vel â—â— parti laesae vel ut Rectori which he asserteth alone I take him to come â—â—ort of accurateness and soundness And that this is the truth God is to man 1. Dominus absolutus that is our Owner 2. Rector â—premus 3. Amicus Benefactor vel Pater finis Sin is against God in all these three Relations 1. As our Owner it is a denying him and â—lienating his own quoad usum 2. As Rector it breaketh his Law 3. As â—â—r Lover and End it is a departing from him For 1. As our Owner we we
Conditional Covenant of Grace for I talk of no other extendeth not universally to all men but that any men are yet lest under no other Law or conditional-promise or Covenant than that of Innocency For if that were true 1. Then God should be supposed to make men a promise of Life on a condition of present natural impossibility And to say to sinners If you be not sinners you shall live 2. And to oblige men to the same Impossibilities as the means of their salvation saying still to sinners I require you sinners that you be no sinners that you may be saved 3. Which is indeed to say that the case of all that are under the first Law of Innocency only is desperate and they have no more hope or remedy than the Devils 4. And then Christ had mistaken the matter himself when he commanded his Ministers to Preach this Gospel or Covenant to all the world and every humane Creature and tell them that If they believe they shall be saved and to offer them Baptism if they consent 5. And either Preachers must preach an untruth to many or else not know what man to preach to 6. But the actu-al force and obligation of the Covenant puts all out of doubt that the world is under a Law of Grace For what man that by siding hath not his understanding utterly distorted to look only on one side can say that none but the Elect are bound to Believe in Christ or to Repent of sin or to turn to God and this as a means of their salvation What man dare say that any Heathens in the World are under no obligation to use any means at all for the pardon of their sins or the recovery and saving of their souls What man dare say that it is no sin in them not to use any such means And what duty or sin can there be without a Law And what Law can bind men to accept of Grace and to seek it and use means for pardon renovation and salvation but the new Covenant or Law of Grace Sure the Law of Innocency hath no such obligation 7. Lastly And Gods usage of all the world puts the case past Controversie For he useth no man according to the meer Law of Innocency All the world have a great proportion of the Mercies of the New Covenant and therefore are not under the Covenant of Innocency alone Yet we maintain that the preceptive part of the Law of Innocency as to the future is still in force to all men Obey perfectly And that the penal part is so far in force as to make death in the first instant due for every sin But we add 1. That the Remedying pardoning Law being in force with it doth immediately dissolve that obligation and make it uneffectual to the punishment of believers 2. And that the Promising part of the Covenant of Innocency is utterly ceased by the cessation of mans capacity And therefore that the Preceptive part for perfection is now no Condition of Life to any man Two things I was wont in my Ignorance to say against the universal tenour of the new Covenant 1. That God distinguished and excluded some at the first making of it under the name of the Seed of the Serpent But 1. No Scripture giveth us the least ground to think that men equally guilty are some called the Seed of the Serpent and some of the Woman meerly as denominated from or distinguished by Gods own will or decree without any real difference in the persons 2. And if the Image of Satan in Original sin were it that denominated the Seed of the Serpent then all the world should be excluded because all are such before they are regenerate 3. Therefore it is plain that it is not meer Original sin that denominateth any one the Serpents Seed in the sence of that Text but a consequent rejection and opposition of the Mediator or Grace of the new Covenant 2. I was wont in my great Ignorance in my youth to think that All men were meerly under the first Covenant till Conversion and then they came under the second only But this was but Confusion To be under a Law or offered Covenant as the terms of life or death is one thing And so all are under a Law or Covenant of Grace and no man under the meer Law of Innocency obliged to perfection as the sole condition of life And to be obedient to this Law and a Consenter to this Covenant and so to be in the Covenant as Mutual is another thing And this is the case of Consenters only So that I may take it for granted that we are agreed that as to the first Edition of the Law of Grace to Adam and Noe it extendeth or is in force to all the world at least till by enmity against Grace they have made themselves desperate as the Serpents seed Yea then the Law of Grace is in force to them though they reject the Grace of it 2. And as to the last Edition of the Covenant of Grace by Christ 1. The tenour of it extendeth to all as is visible Matth. 28. 19. Mark 16. 16. Joh. 3. 16. 2. And Christ hath made it the office of his Ministers by his commission to promulgate and offer it to all 3. And whereas providence concurreth not to the universal execution we must all confess that Christ came not to put the world into a worse condition than he found them in If he did any no good by his Incarnation he would do them no harm Therefore they that never hear the Gospel are still under the first Edition of the Covenant made with Adam and Noah so far as it is unaltered I add that word because that so far as the Promise was to give salvation by the Messiah hereafter to be incarnate none is now bound to expect his future Incarnation because it is past But the same benefits that were due to believers before Christs incarnation are due since upon the true performance of so much of the condition as is still in force and not repealed 3. And we must needs agree that the Ignorance of the Apostles before Christs sufferings of his death sacrifice and resurrection doth shew that the faith of the Godly Jews then was far more general and less particular than the faith now required of Christians 4. And also that more was required then to be known particularly by the Jews that had the Scripture and Tradition to acquaint them with the Messiah to come than of the rest of the world that had not those distinct discoveries nor Abraham's promises made known unto them And how much Gen. 3. 15. might cause them to understand we may conjecture by the words At least this much was required of all that they believe that their sin deserveth punishment and misery and yet that God of his abundant mercy by his Wisdom securing his Truth and Justice will pardon sin and grant salvation to all that truly Believe and Trust in
every Man his Right and Due is included 338. It is not Gods will without the sign as is said nor the sign without his will but the sign as notifying and his will as notified that is a Law and Jus the Effect Gods will is the principal Cause and quasi Anima Legis and the sign is the instrumental Cause and quasi Corpus 339. The Sign reâ—pecteth these things 1. The matter due 2. The dueness or right 3. The will of God concerning or constituting it 4. The mind and will of man to whom this is signified Or 1. Gods will as the Efficient of Right 2. The matter and form of Right as Constituted 3. The mind and will of man as the terminus 340. These signs of Gods will are 1. Natural called the Law of Nature which is the Natura ordo rerum especially ipsius hominis as before described 2. By extraordinary Revelation The latter have the great advantage of plainness significandi rem praeceptam The former hath the fuller evidence of its Author and Original that it is indeed of God Both are his Laws to man 341. Laâ— Judgement and execution the three parts of Government differ in that 1. Law maketh the Debitum or Jus 2. Judgement determineth It is of great use for a Divine who handleth Gods Laws to understand the nature of Laws in genere as Suarez in praes de Legib. sheweth which Book is one of the best on that Subject that is extant among us of it by decâ—sive application 3. Execution distributeth according to it 342. The Jus vel Debitum instituted by the Law is twofold 1. A Subditis What shall be Due from the Subjects the Debitum Officii 2. Subditis what shall be Due to the Subjects viz. 1. Antecedently to their merits which is 1. The act of our Governing Benefactor 2. Or a Divider such was the Law for dividing the Israelites inheritances 2. Consequently which is by the Retributive part of the Law commonly called the Sanction which is 1. By the Premiant part what Reward shall be due 2. By the Penal what Punishment 343. Accordingly Laws have several parts 1. Precept and Prohibition making Duty 2. Retributive 1. Premiant 2. Penal called Gods Promises and Threats 3. And subservient or accidental 1. Narratives Historical Chronological c. 2. Pure Donations 3. Prophesies 4. Doctrinal 5. Exhortatory 6. Reprehensive c. 344. Though Debitum vel Jus facere be the formal operation of a Law which is to be Fundamentum Relationis yet the Act of the chief parts preceptive or penal is commonly called Obligation And so many say that obligare aut ad obedientiam aut ad poenam is all the action of a Law But Obligare is a Metaphor and therefore in dispute to be laid by or to give place to the proper terms And the Premiant act is not properly called obligation nor the penal act save in a secondary notion as he is â—bligatus ad poenam ferendam if judged who is first Reus poenae or to whom it is made Due by the Law 345. The â—bligation aut ad obedientiam aut ad poenam is not of equality in the disjunctive As if God were indifferent which we chose But it is primarily ad obedientiam and but subserviently ad poenam as a means against future disobedience and a securing the ends of Government in case of sin 346. But the Preceptive and the Premiant parts are each chief or final in several respects God Commandeth us a Course of Duty or Right action to this end that we may be Happy in his Love And he promiseth us first and giveth us after in foretaste this Happiness to draw us to Duty 347. But here is a wonderful inseparable twist and in the main an Identity God Ruleth us as a Father or Regent Benefactor All his Benefits are Free-gifts as to the Thing and Value But given 1. In an Order 2. And the rest as means to the ultimate In which respects they are a Reward or means to it His very Law is a Gift and a great Benefit Duty is the means to keep his first Gifts and to receive more The very doing of the duty is a receiving of the Reward the object of duty being felicitating As if feasting or accepting offered wealth or honour were our work Holiness is happiness in a great part And in our End or state of perfection all will be one To Love God Rejoice in Him and praise him will be both our duty and felicity means and end as it were in one 348. Whereas some say that if there were no Law sin would deserve punishment it is an errour For it is due only by Law But it 's true Of all the following distinctions note these words of Bonavent in 1. d. 4â— a. 1. q. 1. Voluntâ—â—em Dâ—i Antecedentem sâ—â— Conditionalem possiblâ—e â—â—â—â— non impleri at consequentem absolutam nequâ—â—uam Sâ—â—unâ—um Daâ—â—sc Voluntas benâ—pâ—aciti â—t â—apl Antecedens seu Conditionales consequous qua vult quantum in sâ— est omnium salutem alsoluta sive consequens quâ— determinate vult aliquid qâ—â—d noâ—it certitudin 〈…〉 Intelligendum â—â—â— nâ—llam Dei Voluntatem pâ—sse superari aut cassari Aliquam tamen posse non impâ—eri â—t antecedentem Aliqâ—â—m ut consequentem impossibile â—sse noâ— impleri â—â—â— impediâ—i Non â—tiam possibilâ— est Voluntatem Dei cassari Nam cassam diâ—itur aliquid dum priâ—â—tur eâ—â—ectu pâ—â—â—â—io ad quem est Voluntas autâ—â— nullo privatur esseciu ad quâ—m est pâ—â—pâ—ie Nam quod dicitur quod Deus vult omnes homiâ—â—s salvos fieri quantâ—m in sâ— est haec Voluntas non connotat salutem nec proprie est ad effectum salutâ—s sed connotat ordinatioâ—â—m naturae sive naturâ—m ordinabilâ—n ad salutâ—n â—â—â—â— niâ—il plus est diâ—â—re Deus vult istum salâ—â—â— fieri quantum in se est qâ—â—m Deâ— placuit dare isti â—â—â—â—ram per quam posset pâ—â—â—â—â—ire ad saâ—uâ—em quod Deus paraâ—â—â— esset juâ—â—re ita quod salus non deficit propâ—er deseâ—tum à pâ—nte Dei Therefore it connoteth also all the helps which God affordeth men that it 's due by the meer Law of Nature without any superadded Positive Laws 349. Gods will called Legislative or Governing is ever fulfilled in strict sence that is So much as is Gods part and the Laws part to do is ever done e. g. God saith Perfect obedience c. shall be Adams duty and it is done It is his Duty whether he will or not He saith To steal shall be sin and it is sin He saith He that believeth shall have right to Justification and Glory and he that believeth not shall be Filius mortis that is Death and Hell shall be his Due and so it is Thus strictly all Gods Will is done 350. But in the secondary remote sence every sin violateth the Will of God by breaking his Law For when he saith Obedience shall
what they are All created Justice and Holiness is such that is Good for Goodness is their essence because Gods efficient will made them so And then Gods final will taketh complacency in them or Loveth them because they are so But if they talk of Goodness or Justice c. as it is in God there is in him no effect and so no cause of himself or any thing in himself 642. But some things God maketh moral duties by the very work of Creation and Ordination of the World without any other Law And these are called Duties by the Law of Nature because the very Natura rerum is a Law that is a signification of Gods will constituting mans duty It is mans essence to be an Intellectual-free-agent It is impossible that such an agent Created of God should not be Gods Creature and Gods own and dispositively a Moral governable agent and that he should not owe God all that he is and hath and can do and that God should not have the Jus Dominii Imperii over him and Jus ad summum ejus Amorem * * * Deus non posset obligare nos ad hoc quod teneatur sibi non obedire Quaero enim an tenetur obedire an non si sic habetur propositum quia tenetur non tenetur quod est impossibile Consequentia patet Quia teneri non obedire est teneri ad aliquid Pet. de Alliaco 1. q. 14. T. Yet after he thinketh it possible for God to have made a Reasonable creature not obliged As if his very nature were not obligatory His instance of the Mad is vain for they are not actually Reasonable Ockam presumptuously concludeth that God could command a man to hate God and make it meritorious it being no contradiction His follower Greg. Arim. confuteth him And Cameracensis invalidateth the confutation and leaveth it doubtful But it is a contradiction to be a man and not obliged by Nature to Love God And a contradiction to be bound by nature to Love him and yet stante natura bound to hate him And a contradiction to hate God and be good or happy It is a contradiction to be a Created Man and not Gods Own and his obliged Subject and Beneficiary Therefore it is a contradiction that submission obedience and Love should not be his Moral duty and good and that self-alienation rebellion or disobedience and hatred should be no sins 643. To dispute then as he doth with Camero and his followers Whether it be good ex natura rei or by Gods meer free-will is a strange dispute and of most easie resolution Either they speak of Gods creating will or of some other subsequent Volition Man is made man by Gods free creating will And the foresaid Relations and duties are made such by making him Man And the duties of Love and Justice to others are made such by his Creators placing him in a world where his Neighbours are about him who are due objects as a part of the society This he himself confesseth pag. 329 330. like a Wheel in a Clock The Creators will is before Nature and therefore before natural duty as the Cause before the effect God could have made beasts instead of men who had owed him no more than beasts can do But from the Nature of a Man coexistent with God his said duties to God so necessarily result that it could not be otherwise nor did there need any subsequent act of Gods will to make that duty 644. But those that are not Duties by Nature must have moreover a Vid. Durand 1. d. 38. qi 4. n. 9 10 11. Scot. 3. d. 37. q. 1. Gabr. 3. d. 37. a. 2. Suarez de Legib. l. 2. c. 15. Aquin. 1 2. q. 94. a. 5. q. 100. a. 4. further act of Gods will as signified to make them so As the Mosaical Ceremonies our Sacraments c. 645. And many Natural Laws and duties are mutable towards one another because the very Nature and Natural Location or Order of the Things from which they did result are mutable And a word of God can make a change when yet before such antecedent mutation the duty must be duty still 646. As to Mr. Rutherfords oft saying that Omnis actus entitativus simplex est moraliter de se indifferens neque bonus neque malus And then that per actum simplicem he meaneth such as include not the object It is ludicrous or vain talk There is no such Act as hath not an object any more than physical form without matter Quicunque movet aliquid movet Quicunque intelligit aut vult aliquid intelligit aut vult vel seipsum vel aliud An Act without its object is but a partial or inadequate Generical conceptus of that Act which hath an object or an abstract partial notion of an act Why then doth he talk of that which is not Had he said that every act is in the first instant rationis or abstract-partial conception an Act in genere before it be intelligible as this or that act about this or that object he had spoken intelligibly as other men do 647. Such another question many called Arminians much use Whether Whether Justice c. be eternally good or have rationem boni aeternam Justice c. be eternally good Or An dentur rationes boni mali aeternae indispensabiles which needs no other solution than this last There is no such thing as an Universal existent per se and not in some Individual And so no such thing as Love Justice c. Bonum Malum which is not alicujus Justitia Bonum c. There was no Creature from Eternity being Just or unjust good or bad But Gods perfect Nature But that Gods own eternal perfection hath in it that root of humane virtue truth justice c. which therefore analogically have the same name our holiness being Gods Image I would prove to the Reader by this weighty reason Because else we have no certainty that Gods word is true For all our certainty is hence that God cannot lye But if Veracity be not in God we cannot prove that And if he have not that which is eminenter Justice mercy c. how can we prove that he hath Veracity might be called Eternally Just in that he must necessarily be Just if he had been a governour And necessarily was Just when he freely became a governour And also this proposition was Eternally true if there were eternally propositions Si Homines existerent Justitia in ipsis debita foret quandocunque Homines fuerint Justitia in ipsis debita fuerit But when all the sense of these questions is no more but what Duties are natural and what superadded called Positive and what natural duties are immutable and what mutable it 's an unhappiness that the world must be troubled with such uncouth forms of speech as make the question unintelligible till unravelled 648. As to
deceive themselves We hold it neither de facto nor de possibili and they hold it de possibili and not de facto viz that bare pardon and non imputation may put away the very being of sin and may save men Of which more afterwards But many others deny that sin can be remitted by extrinsick condonation See Cacer's Sum. The. 22. c. 2. They ordinarily take Remission for destroying the sin it self or passive as it 's called is not given us or made ours truly and properly in the thing it self but in the effects as was aforesaid for neither the same matter nor the same form is strictly ours 1. That neither of them is ours in a physical sence is undeniable If the Divine Righteousness were so ours we were Gods And a Habit an Act and a Passion materially cannot be removed from one subject to another nor the same be in divers subjects These are as palpable contradictions as Transubstantiation is And the Relative form is founded in the matter or subject and can no more be removed The paternity of a Generator and the paternity of an Adopter are not the same but two And a Relation is an accident also which perisheth when removed from the subject and in another is another 2. If it be said that both are ours Morally or Imputatively I answer It is true But that phrase is of large and doubtful signification 1. If the meaning be that The Covenant of Grace doth as certainly pardon or justifie us in the way and degree promised by it for the merit of Christs Righteousness in performing his Mediatorial Covenant with the Father as our own merit had it been possible would have done or our Innocency would have Justifyed us by the Covenant of Innocency this is true 2. But if the meaning be that Christs merit and satisfaction by perfect holiness and obedience and suffering are supposed or Reputed by God to have been inherent in us or done by us in our civil person in Christ or that in a sence natural or Legal we did all those things our selves or that God judgeth us so to have done by Judging Christ and us to be the same civil person or else that all the Benefits of Christs Righteousness shall as fully and immediately be ours as if we had been and done and suffered merited and satisfyed in and by Christ All this is false 120. For if this were so we could need no pardon for he that is reputed to be Innocent by fulfilling all the Law is reputed never to have sinned by omission or commission And he can have no pardon of sin who hath no sin to be pardoned Therefore such an Imputation of Christs Righteousness to us would make his satisfaction null or vain or certainly neither imputable to us nor useful for us 121. Some to avoid this do divide the Time of our Lives and suppose Christs sufferings to have satisfied and purchased pardon of our sins for all the Time before our Believing and his Righteousness to be imputed to us for the Time since our Believing But this is a humane fiction For our sins after believing must have pardon too by Christ's satisfaction And some distinguish of our Time and State under the two Covenants and say that Christ's satisfaction was for the pardon of our sins under the first Covenant which continued but till the promise made to Adam Gen. 3. 15. And so was for none but Adam's sin imputed to us and that after that all being under the new Covenant it condemneth none but the finally impenitent who scape not and so that Gods pardoning men since the new Covenant is but his preventing their need of pardon or else pardoning temporal punishments only But this is contrary to the Gospel which tells us that Christ dyed for our sins even all that ever are forgiven and that all are forgiven to believers and not the necessity of forgiveness prevented and not only Adam's sin as ours Nor only the temporal but the perpetual punishment And even temporal punishment is not due to the innocent 122. Some distinguish only of Actions and not of Time and say Christ's Sacrifice satisfyed for all our sins that they may be forgiven and his righteousness is imputed to us that we may be also accounted just But this is but either ambiguity or the fore-detected gross contradiction For if by Justice they mean Reputed sinlessness or perfectiâ—â— then these two cannot stand together For he that is supposed a Sinner is supposed not sinless or perfect And he that is supposed sinless cannot be supposed pardonable 123. Some think to avoid the contradiction by distinguishing only the moments of Nature and double respect of the same mans actions They say that we are first in order of Nature supposed to be Sinners and pardoned and then to be such as moreover need the reputation of Innocency or Righteousness which is added to pardon But 1. He that is pardoned all sins of omission and commission is accounted Innocent and Righteous as to any Guilt of punishment either of sence or Loss 2. And he that is after accounted Innocent and Just from his first being to that hour is judged never to have needed pardon And so they make God come with an after act and condemn his own foregoing act of error and injury or at least to contradict it and in the first instant to say I pardon this Sinner and in the second to say I now repute him one that never sinned or needed pardon 124. But the commonest way of such Divines is to say that Christs Righteousness is first imputed that is we are reputed to have perfectly obeyed and been habitually holy in Christ and then sin is next pardoned as a fruit of the merits of this But this is still but the oft detected contradiction that we are first accounted sinless and therefore our sins are forgiven us 125. Some say that the Law since the fall obligeth us both to obey and to suffer and not to one only else a Sinner bound to suffer should not be bound to obey Therefore Christ must do both for us But this is too gross for any man to utter that ever knew what Law and Government is Do they mean that as to the same Act and time the Law bindeth us to obey and suffer or for divers acts and instants of time Do they mean that the Law bound man both to perfection and suffering for perfection or to suffering for sin No man doubts but when one sin is committed and punishment deserved the Law is still the Law and bindeth men still to obey or suffer more the next moment and again to obey or suffer more the next moment But this concerneth not our question Did the Law bind Adam to obey and to suffer before he sinned Did it bind him both to obey and suffer for his new sin the next instant It 's true it bound him to suffer for his old sin but not for the next before it is
person or as fully representing us all the Gospel is over-turned There is no room for Repentance none for the satisfaction of Christ none for Faith in his blood nor for Pardon or prayer for Pardon or any Grace Act Duty or Ordinance Sacraments Confession or any thing which supposeth Sin To say that Adam's Law meant Do this by thy self or by Christ and thou shalt live is a Humane fiction not found in Scripture confounding the Law of Innocency with the Gospel And to say that the New Covenant maketh us one Person with Christ and then the Law of Adâ—â— doth justifie us is a double error We are not reputed one Person with Christ nor doth the first Covenant justifie any but the Person that performeth it But we maintain as well as they that the same Righteousness of God in himself is manifested in both Covenants and the same holy love of perfect Obedience and the ends of the first Covenant are secured by the second But the tenour and terms are not the same nor the Righteousness of the subject as denominated from those terms It is not the same Law which condemneth us and justifieth us nor that justifieth Christ and us nor is it the same Habits or Acts which are the immediâ—â—e fundamentum of the Relation of righteous in Christ and in us â—ough his Righteousness be the meritorious cause of ours And thereâ—â—re not the same with the thing merited 130. The Truth which they grope after and must reconcile them â—â—â—â— is as followeth Christ in his Sufferings did stand in the room of â—â—ners as their Sponsor and satisfied Justice as was said before And â—â—d had other ends yet to accomplish It was meet that the perfection â—his Law should be glorified by a perfect fulfilling of it by Christ â—en we had failed Satan was hereby confounded God pleased and â—noured Man shewed what he should have been and yet should do â—ns nature in Christ was thus actively and habitually perfected By all â—s Christ performed his Obedience to the mediatorial Law and his Herveus Natal quodlib 4. q. 14. could speak thus much better than many Protestants Sicut meritum Christi quantum ad actum quem exercuit non transit in alios transit tamen in alios quantum ad effectum illius meriti illis qui applicantur ad Christum mediantibus Sacramentis vel mediante fide propria Qui quidem effectus est Gratia quae est câ—ntraria culpae quae reddit hominem dignum vita aeterna Ita etiam demeritum Adae licet non transeat in alios quantum ad actum quem exercuit tamen transit quoad effectum culpae originalis quae est contraria gratiae reddit dignum poenae aeterna indignum vita aeterna How doth this differ from the soundest Protestants as to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to us or Adam's sin â—venant of Redemption and so acquired a right first to himself of giving â—t the purchased Benefits to Sinners by a new Law or Covenant of Grace â—â—d according to it By which Covenant only as his Instrument the â—her and Son give us Right to them in an Order there established â—â—â—â— that is there given to us Christ purchased for us by performing his â—n Covenant first with the Father by perfect Holiness and Obedience â—en in his Sacrifice on the Cross and by all that he undertook to do as Redeemer antecedently The Purchase was made for this Donation â— its end and is commensurate to it just so much as Christ hath given â—â—â—â— as to matter manner terms degree time c. he did purchase and â—rit for us and no more Had he antecedently done all that he did â—â—â—â— our person and we in him in Law sense the thing it self with its separable consequents and effects had been all ours ipso facto before and â—thout the donation or conveyance of a new Law or Covenant nor â—d they been ever given us upon terms and conditions when they were â—â—â—â— own before without those terms But now what is given us by the â—ew Covenant we have title to on this account because it was purâ—ased by the perfect Merit and Saerifice of Christ and so given us by â—m and by the Father So that it is ours as sure as if we had merited it â—r selves but not ours in the same order and measure and time and â—ms as if we had merited it our selves in our natural or legal perâ—ns For then it would have been all ours at once ipso facto even â—e merit it self and the fore-said effects We deserved punishment â—nd Christ was punished in our stead that we might be forgiven not â—mediately but on Covenant-terms we had forfeited Life by sin And â—hrist merited Life for us by his Perfection not in our persons but in â—e person of a Mediator which Life was to be given to us by the said â—ovenant The antecedent benefits such as the Covenant it self he â—veth absolutely and antecedently to any act of ours God reputeth all his Satisfaction and Merit of Christ to be as meet and effectual to proâ—ure us all these Benefits to be thus given as if we our selves had done and â—ffered And in this sense Christ's Righteousness is given us and made ours â—â—â—â— that it is given for us and we have the said benefits of it Not that God doth give us the very habits of Holiness which were in Christ nor â—he transient acts which he performed nor the very Sufferings which he â—nderwent nor the Relation of righteous satisfactory and meritorious as â—â—â—â— was that numerical Relation which immediately resulted from Christ's â—wn Habits Acts and Sufferings For such a translation of accidents is â—â—â—â— contradiction But God giving us all the effects or Salvation merited â—n it self properly is said also not unfitly to give us the Merit or Righteousness which procured them that is as it was paid to God for us to procure them even as he is said to give Christ himself antecedently â—â— our Faith to the World as a Saviour And thus Christ's Righteousness Merit and satisfaction may be said to be imputed to us in that it â—â— thus given us and thus truly reputed ours 131. But when the Text saith Rom. 4. 24. Righteousness is imputed â—â— us the meaning is no more but that God reputeth or judgeth us righteâ—â—â— though we have not the Righteousness of Innocency or of the Law â—â— Works which indeed is done for Christ's meritorious Righteousâ—â—â—â— procuring it But the Text speaketh not of Christ's personal Righteousâ—â—â—â— in matter or form imputed to us as being it self our own Impuâ—â—â—â— Righteousness to us is a consequent Act after Faith of God as Judâ—â— and not an antecedent donation 132. And it is true that formaliter non-punire praemiari â—â—â—punish and to Reward are not all one And in some cases a man may â—â— freed from punishment who is not rewarded But it is as true as is aâ—â—â— said 1. That Gods Salvation and
c. and the latter they call the formal nature of Grace viz. quatenus Deo gratiosi seu amati sumus So Alvarez de Aux disp 60. p. 275. Gratiam augeri in esse gratiae similiter charitas in esse charitatis nihil aliud est quam quod per illam acceptetur justus ad majorem gloriam By which he decideth the question whether Grace or Charity be increased by remiss acts or only by intense acts saying that 1. Gratia in esse gratiae similiter Charitas in esse Charitatis statim augentur etiam per actus remissos that is We are made more acceptable to God for greater glory But augmentum gratiae charitatis in esse Habitûs quod homo meretur per actus remissos dabitur postea in primo instanti glorificationis And it seems that so they sometimes take Charitas too both for the Habit and Act of our Love and for our Amability or Dearness to God Now this is ill done For these equivocal words signifie these not as one but as two distinct things Amor Amabilitas or Dearness are two things Though Love be materially our Loveliness yet not formally the latter being an obâ—ective relation resulting from the former Wisdom and Goodness are Inadequate conceptions of One God so all together are a more perfect expression of him than one of them alone Now in all these the former is still implyed in the latter as to the very sense of the word but not contrarily Power doth not alway signifie Wisdom or Love but Wisdom signifieth the wisdom of one Potent including power for there is Potentia Intellectiva And Will or Love include Power and Act. So Action may be without ORDER or Rectitude and Perfection but the order and perfection of Acts include or suppose the Acts. § 8. It is therefore the glory of Gods SAPIENTIAL work of Government which eminently shineth forth in the communications of Grace by the Spirit of Christ But not that Government which was fitted to the state of Innocency but that which stands nearer to the End as more demonstrating Love and tending more effectually to it § 9. Therefore it is much to be noted that all this frame of Grace as tending to Glory is usually called in Scripture The Kingdom of God and The Kingdom of Heaven Matth. 13. 45 c. which containeth the whole frame of Political Order and Government § 10. This Kingdom is the state of Relation between God and the Mediator as the Head or Ruler and Man as the Subject as he is to be guided by Grace to Glory God who is Physically neither Pars nor Totum maketh himself here as it were a Relative Part being the supream Head and the Mediator the supream official Head or general Administrator who hath under him a course of Political means for the accomplishment of this his work § 11. As Christ himself is the Head Means or second Cause so under him are Prophets and Apostles eminently qualified to make them fit to do this work so as tendeth to success § 12. These Prophets and Apostles were endued with that special infallible Spirit by which they certainly delivered Christs doctrine and actions and faithfully discharged all their trust § 13. They had the power of working Miracles many wayes to confirm their doctrine as the Truth of God Besides Christs Mâ—racles § 14. The Scriptures are Gods Record which they left us to be the continual standing signifier of his will § 15. In these Scriptures are his Doctrine to teach his precepts to make duty and oblige and forbid sin by prohibition his own and servants examples to move his threatnings to drive his promises to draw formed into a Covenant strongly to engage the Records also of his Judgements and Mercies upon others that they might every way be fitted to their sanctifying use § 16. He hath also instituted his Sacraments by which the mutual Covenant might be celebrated the more obligingly for its effects § 17. He hath appointed his ordinary Ministers as his standing officers through all generations to preach this word And he endoweth them with special gifts thereto and chargeth them vehemently to preach in season and out of season with urgency and importunity even to all mankind 2 Tim. 4. 1 2. Mat. 28. 19 20. whatever it cost them and whatever they undergoe § 18. He hath appointed also Prayer as his Means to obtain Grace by preparing the heart to a due receptivity by the excitation of desires after it And Praise and Thanksgiving to sweeten it to us in the review when we have received it § 19. He hath commanded exercises of humiliation confession bringing down the body to fit us to receive it by a due sense of our sins unworthiness and wants § 20. He hath appointed the publick assembling of his servants that concurse might augment the Sacred flame in the performance of all this Sacred work § 21. He hath instituted the Lords day to be wholly employed in such works and helps that it be not neglected and lightly done § 22. He hath commanded every private Christian to be a helper to others by conference exhortation and good example § 23. He hath made Pastoral discipline a great ordinance to promote the due performance of all the rest § 24. He hath commanded us by secret Meditation Consideration Examination c. to preach to our selves and night and day to think on Scripture God Christ Glory c. and to stir up all Gods graces in our selves and to reprove our selves for all our sins § 25. He hath made it the duty of Parents to teach their Children diligently his word lying down and rising up at home and abroad Deut. 6. 11. and to educate them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord having bound them first in Covenant to God and the Mediator § 26. He hath made it the duty of husband and wife to help each other herein and of masters to help their servants and all relations to sanctifie their places and opportunities to this use § 27. He doth by multitudes of mercies and deliverances further all this work to make known the more his Love to win the hearts of men § 28. He greatly promoteth it also by seasonable afflictions to humble the proud and awake the sleepy § 29. He maketh it mens great duty to tame the body and mortifie concupiscence and make no provision for the flesh to satisfie the lusts thereof Rom. 13. 13 14. 8. 13. Gal. 5. 21 22. § 30. He commandeth us to avoid the company of the wicked and to joyn in the Communion of Saints and walk with such as will be our helpers toward Heaven § 31. He commandeth us to avoid all Temptations of Satan and the world and flesh and to live in a continual war against them § 32. He maketh all the world about us the book or glass in which we may see our maker and his will yea even our own natures and every
returning Israelites 2. And especially that he would have such in the Christian Church as should be sanctified to him by his Spirit and have a new and tender â—eart And Predestination is well proved from the Text. But there is not a word to prove this to be the first Grace nor that Gods promise gave any man right to it but upon condition of believing For if Gods Decree Prophecy or general Promise saying absolutely I will do it did prove it to be the first Grace it would prove perserance such which is false The words prove no more but that God will do it § 7. And as this is no personal promise giving any man a right to the thing promised which he may claim but only foretelling what God will do or give to some so he hath other promises which are part of his Law of Grace and do give men Right to these same Benefits And so the Spirit of Sanctification and a new heart is promised on Condition of believing which therefore is the former special Grace § 8. If any therefore will prove that faith is given Absolutely they must not do it by those Texts which speak of Sanctification which faith is a condition of § 9. But as to the question it self Whether Faith be given absolutely or conditionally I answer 1. There is no absolute promise of faith made to any persons but only promissory predictions of some indeterminate unnamed persons that God will draw them and give them to Christ and they shall believe and live 2. All men have means and duty appointed them for the seeking of that Grace which may convert them 3. They are hereby bound to believe that if they so do they shall not lose their labour For God setteth men on no unprofitable work 4. Those that do this most faithfully and have most preparing grace are the likest to become believers and the ordinary receivers of special grace 5. Whether de nomine this encouragement shall be called a promise or equipollent let them contend that list 6. God can and doth suddenly convert some without such preparations or else give them both sorts of Grace immediately as once SECT XIX How God may be said to Cause the Acts of sin I Have said of this also so much before as that this Breviate here must serve It is ill said Profiteâ— mur incunctanter prorsus impeditum iri quod universi simpliciter Bonum est si impeditetur peccatum quoniam hâ—â— pactâ— impediretur patesactio Divinâ— misericordiâ— parcentis justitia vindicant is Quâ— quidem patesactio non minus universi Bonum censenda est quam qâ—â—libet alia câ—jusâ—ibet Del proprietatis in ipso tanquam in speculo relâ—cent is Twiss Vindic Grat. li. 1. p. 1. pag. 133. It is dangerous to talk so boldly of these mysteries Here seem to me many errors and confusions 1. It is false that God could not make known to the world that merciful nature which now pardoneth sin and that Justice which now punisheth if there had been no sin His Laws Promises and Threats do antecedently make them known And God could cause blessed Spirits to know all his perfections before there was any sin 2. Gods Holiness and Goodness is called Mercy and Justice by extrinsick denomination and connotation of sin and misery And if his Holiness and Goodness had been known as preventing all sin and misery men will think that he hath not proved that this had been Evil in the Universe or less Good 3. Posita Divina Volitione as the rule of Good it followeth I confess that it were evil not to have that will fulfilled But I deny that God willeth sin or its existence Therefore it is not Good because not Volitum à Deo It is sufficient that it is not so far evil as to be Absolutè Nolitum but only evil 1. As prohibitum 2. As hurtful to the sinner and to others Methinks they that maintain that sin is Privatio should not say that it is Positivè Volitum à Deo 4. All this dependeth on that curious question Could not God have made the World better than it is or at least as good with many alterations from what it is They that hold the first say that God freely made things no better than they are But had there been no Devils no Sin no Toads no disorder the world had been better that is a perfecter demonstration of Gods perfection But they that are more modest arâ— content with the latter and say that God freely made things as they are and not necessarily But it had been necessarily if no other way had been as good And that if God had pleased to shew his Goodness by preventing all sin it had been as Good and no loss or disparagement to the Universe 5. And he doth through all his Books beg the question Whether a meer occasion be a conducibâ—e medium and so good If he will stretch the word Medium so wide as to extend it to a meer evil sinâ— quo non or presupposed which hath not the least causality efficient material formal or final I will not strive for a word But conducibile noteth some kind and degree of Causality which sin hath not to the glorifying of God It is the destroying of sin that God is glorified by Where the malum amovendum is not the bonum conducibile but the ill state of the matter without which God had not glorified himself by this Act but by some other as well § 1. It must be well considered that God made mans Nature before he made any positive Laws for him And that the Law of Nature it self is in order of Nature after Nature though not in Time Man being first considerable as Man before he be considerable as obliged to duty And also that the Law both Natural and Positive is before mans obedience and sin So that as man is first in order of Nature Man and then Gods Governable Subject and then in order of Time obedient or disâ—bedient so God is first his Creator and then Naturâ— Motor and then his Governour by Legislation and then his Gracious Helper and lastly his Judge and Rewarder § 2. Therefore as Natural Being substance and faculties and Natural Motion are antecedent to Morality so Gods causation of both these is antecedent and therefore to be Creator Preserver and Motor is not to be the Cause of sin or of Virtuous acts as such § 3. God as Creator was not pleased to make all his creatures of one kind nor of one degree of excellence but in such variety as is wonderful to our observation Besides the innumerable species of beings and the innumerable parts of every compound being the dissimilitude of indviduals of the same species is admirable so that no two faces are perfectly like no nor no two Stones in the Street no two Trees Birds Beasts c. And therefore it is but consonant to the rest of his works that MAN is neither perfectly like
morally attracting even inwardly but also efficaciously and truly effecting that the will moved and excited of God determine it self and act well Answ We know what mans perswading and moral operations are a little But the difference between these interiour acts of God named by you no man knoweth You cannot prove that his Interiour swasion is not truly efficient of the act nor know you how God proâ—ureth our determination as to the mode of his interiour operation Your arbitrary names have no signification of your true formal conceptions of the matter This Controversie therefore is vain XVI The efficacy of the help of preventing grace and the infallible connexion of it with the free co-operation of the will is totally founded and taken as from its first root from the Omnipotency of God and from the absolute and efficacious decree of his will willing that the man whom he moveth be converted and work piously nor doth this efficacy any way depend no not as on a condition sine qua non on the future co-operation of the created will though the free act by which man persevereth depend effectively on his will moved by God Answ 1. I grant that all the good that cometh to pass is fore-decreed by God 2. But Gods meer will effecteth it not without his Power 3. His power effecteth it not from eternity before it is effected 4. You leave out one of the causal Attributes The effect of Grace is as well from the Wisdom of God as from his Will and Power 5. Gods act dependeth not on mans will But mans co-operation which is his own act you must confess dependeth on his will as the effect on the nearest efficient 6. The non-efficiency of sufficient Grace dependeth on the sinners will It was not meerly nor principally from an absolute efficacious Decree or predetermination of God that Adams will omitted his duty first or committed sin first And if any run to the common shadow that sin hath no efficient cause and man only is deficient I answer 1. He is the first Reputative Deficient though not culpable because under no Law who must be the first efficient of the contrary and is not As if Adams body had never had a soul God was the first Non-efficient Cause that is into whose will and non-agency the whole ratio defectus is to be resolved 2. Forget not that Alvarez himself saith lib. 6. disp 45. p. 210. Licet peccatum originale non sit pro formali aliquid positivum sed privativum peccatum tamen actuale est pro formali aliquid positivum causat in anima habitum vitii XVII Supposing effectual Grace in free-will it infallibly followeth that free-will will consent and act piously so that these two are incompossible that effectual Grace be in a man and that he actually dissent Answ True because it is not called properly effectual unless either 1. Because it effecteth 2. Or as it cometh from an absolute decree of effecting 3. Or is of such a nature and degree that it cannot but effect And in all these cases it is true But such Grace may be eventually uneffectual which had a sufficiency ex parte sui to effect XVIII The gift of perseverance as such and the efficacy of it dependeth not no not as on a Condition sine qua non on the co-operation of our free-will but on the absolute decree of God effecting mans perseverance Answ This needeth no other explication or observation but as aforesaid Only that the Jus ad gratiam quâ ad finem perseveremus is given on condition in the Gospel from how absolute a decree soever it proceed XIX Effectual aid and a Power of dissenting are compossible in the same subject and consist in the same will Answ True And remember that a true Power is that quâ verè possumus and not that faculty which could do this or that if God will predetermine it and otherwise cannot no more than the Sun can shine without him When God withholdeth the Influx necessary to action such a faculty is no true power as to that action in that State XX. By preventing Grace efficacious as aforesaid the Liberty of the will is not destroyed nor the actual use of it hindered but is wonderfully perfected and roborated Answ There is a Liberty that is perfected by some even necessitating Free-will in name is owned by you all I say as August Enchir. c. 105. Sic oportebat prius hominem fierl ut bene velle posset male nec gratis si bene nec impune si male postea vero sic erit ut male velle non possit Quia ordo praetermittendus non suit in quo Deus voluit ostendere quam bonum sit animal rationale quod etiam peccare possit quamvis sit melius quod peccare non possit predetermination of God And there is an inferiour Liberty of Imperfect Viators which some efficient Divine predetermination feigned by you would destroy And if God did by that insuperable premoving influx which omnipotently moveth all things predetermine all men and Devils to all the wicked Volitions and actions that ever were done with all the circumstances and as respecting every object comparatively so that no creature ever did nor can resist such a predetermination any easier than make a World this were to destroy the true Liberty of that Creature with his innocency and felicity however you may at pleasure put the name of Liberty on and deny the name of Necessity to such an absolutely necessitated Volition and act and then may say that they are premoved and predetermined to do the Act of all sin freely or constrained to do it without constraint and so the liberty of the will is established For I see not but cogere ad Volendum is as apt a phrase as cogere nolentem ad agendum when a will formerly innocent is irresistibly predetermined by physical efficiency to all those comparate circumstantiate acts which are forbidden in Gods Law and that on pain of mans damnation But note how wisely Alvarez left out the great difference about predetermining to the acts of sin from this summary of his disputations §. III. Of the three other wayes and I. Of the Jesuits way Quest AS you have past your judgement on Alvarez and his Dominican way tell us how much you think well or ill of in the other three wayes mentioned by Alvarez and recited by you sect 8 Answ I. I have said enough before to answer this Briefly as to the Jesuits way de scientia media 1. It is certain that God knoweth all that Vasquez in 1. Tho. q. 22. d. 99. c. 6 7. after the rejection of many opinions holds this the only way of Concord 1. Gods preventing operating grace is Vocatio Congrua with good cogitations and the primus motus voluntatis ante actum liberum 2. Gods co-operating Grace ad consensum liberum is neither before nor after our act but concomitant simul And so
and Arminians have run out into the contrary extream and so the difference hath been made and maintained So that with most Christians the controversie is not whether Christ be the Saviour of the World or died for all men but how far and in what sense he did so that this Article may agree with the rest of our Theology A. The sense is all If we agree not in sense we agree in nothing B. The few extream Contenders agree not in sense But the generality of Christians much more may I say Protestants do in all that is necessary to our common concord If really you differ tell me your self What do you hold that Christ purchased for all men more than the Synodists do Name me one benefit if you can A. You would perswade me that we differ not indeed 1. We hold that Christ procured and made the first Covenant of Grace with all Mankind in Adam and Noah and so do not the Synodists B. I think you can name few Protestants that deny it Beza himself in that Edit of his Annot. in Eph. 2. 12. which H. Stephanus printed 1588. saith This Covenant was made in the beginning Gen. 3. 15. with Adam and all that should be born of him and afterwards Gen. 9. 10. with Noah the other Parent of Mankind as we have else-where noted plainly they say that it is made to all men as a Law then promulgate to Adam and Noah even a Law of Grace which Mankind was put under And as an offered Covenant and conditional Promise But as 1. A mutual Covenant 2. And as giving right to Life it is made only with Consenters Tell me whether you differ from this sense A. No this sense is according to the Scriptures But moreover 2. We hold that the second Edition of the Covenant also is made to all B. It 's granted you that it 's made to all that hear it as far as aforesaid and that Ministers should do their best to preach it to all And do you hold any more A. No But 3. We hold that this Covenant pardoneth all mens sins on condition of Faith and Repentance and not only the Elect. B. So do they unanimously I told you Twisse twenty times over saith the same No man can deny that which is the very plain scope of the Covenant it self to pardon all if they will repent and believe A. 4. But We hold also that Christ purchased for all men sufficient Grace to enable them to repent and believe B. I told you that is the Controversie of the third and fourth Articles what Grace Christ giveth all he procured for all which is not here to be anticipated but opened in due place And if I then manifest that in that point also you differ not I shall prove that you differ not at all in these Points of Christ's Death and Universal Grace A. But they say That Christ died only for the Elect effectually and with a purpose to save them and purposed to save no other B. You carry back the Controversie to Gods Decrees which we dispacht before Tell me 1. Do you hold that all are saved by Christ A. No that 's none of the Controversie B. Why then quarrel you with them that say He died but for the Elect effectually when they mean but that he saveth no other A. But his death effected something for them viz. the new Covenant and common Grace though it effect not their Salvation B. Who denieth any of this not the Synod of Dort But 2. Do you hold that God absolutely purposed to save any by Christ that never are saved A. No but conditionally he purposed it B. Have we not before proved that your quarrel about conditional Decrees is but a strife about words in the dark A. But they say Christ died not equally for all B. Do you or dare you say otherwise your selves 1. You confess that his Death doth not equally save all 2. You confess that from eternity God fore-knew who would believe and be saved and who not Now the question is of equality of benefit before denied and equality of Intention And can you think that Christ as God at the time of his Death or before did equally intend or decree to save those that he fore-knew would neither believe nor be saved and those that he knew would believe and be saved You cannot you do not imagine this A. We do not But we say that as to Gods antecedent Will he both elected and redeemed all alike and the inequality is only in his consequent Will But the Synodists say otherwise B. 1. If you understand the distinction aright they say the same as you that is If you thus distinguish only of the Will of God as Rector or his governing Will and by the Antecedent Will mean only the Legislative which making our Duty goeth before our doing or not-doing it and by the consequent Will mean only the judicial which followeth Duty and Sin God dealeth equally by all men in the first as to the tenour of his Law though the different promulgation make a difference of Obligations but unequally in the second 2. And if you distinguish thus of his eternal Decrees either they respect Damnation or Salvation And by his Antecedent Will you mean that which goeth before the fore-sight of mans Will and by the consequent that which followeth this fore-sight Now 1. Have I not said enough to convince you that as it is Actus Agentis in God we cannot prove any diversity or priority But only ex connotatione objecti 2. And as to Damnation I have proved that they commonly agree with you that God decreeth not Sin but fore-seeth it and decreeth Damnation only as for fore-seen Sin What-ever Piscator and a few more say this is the common Doctrine of Protestants and Fathers 3. But as to Election dare you say your self that God decreeth to change no mans Will but upon fore-sight that the person himself will first change it * Vasqu and many Jesuits profess that Gods first Grace is given without any cause condition or occasion in man And saith Malderus in 12. Tho. q. 110. a. 1. pag. 469. Deus non praesupponit in creatura bonum quo ad ipsius dilectionem moveatur sicut voluntas hominis benefactoris sed bonum creaturae provenit ex voluntate Dei qui vocat ea quae non sunt tanquam ea quae sunt That is Gods efficient Will of Beneficence is first and then his final Will of complacence first God maketh us good and then loveth us as good If man change it first God need not to come after to change it If God change it first then he decreed first to change it and did not first fore-see it changed A. Neither But he fore-seeth mans concurrence or not-concurrence with his changing Act of Grace B. But can you think that he equally operateth on all and that all the inequality is in their concurrence Doth he do as much on every Persecutor
pâ—â—supponit opus miserecordiâ— in ea â—undatur tanquam iâ— prima radice quia ne procedatur in infinitum deveniendum est ad aliquid quod ex sola bonitate divinae voluntatis dâ—pendeat B. I hope you have no malignant desire to extenuate Gods Grace but are willing to acknowledge it to be as great and large as indeed it is if you can discern the proof C. God best knoweth how to honour himself B. Quest. 1. Do you think that all the World or all that shall perish yea or any part of the World is under the meer Curse of the Law of Innocency as violated by Adam without any remedy or mercy C. I think they are without real Remedy though not without all Mercy for a delay of punishment is mercy B. Quest 2. Do you think that they are only under the Curse of that Law as the Devils are without any possibility or offers of a remedy or that they are also still under the Covenant-Offers of Life upon condition of Innocency C. I cannot suppose God now to offer a man Life on condition he be no Sinner whom he knoweth to be a Sinner For such an Offer is equivalent to a sentence of Death or denial of Life Nor can I say that they are as desperate as the Devils because they know not the desperateness of their case B. Quest. 3. Do you think all the difference between them and Devils lieth in delay and ignorance of their misery Then the most ignorant and presumptuous of them is the least miserable though the most sinful which cannot be Quest 4. But do you think that no Meâ—cy is to be offered â—o such C. Yes because we know not who are Elect and who not B. Quest. 5. Are we to offer men mercy only as Elect or rather as Sinners and miserable under a Law of Grace and as Subjects of God obliged by that Law to accept it C. We offer it to all Sinners that the Elect may receive it B. Quest. 6. Are none but the Elect under a Law of Grace as the rule of their Duty their expectation and of Judgment C. Others may be under the Obligations of it but not under the Gâ—aâ—e of it B. Remember then 1. That they are not lawless 2. That they are not under that meer violated Law of Innocency Be innocent and live 3. That they are under the Obligations of the Law of Grace Quest 7. Is there any of them that are not bound to use certain means appointed of God in order towards their own Salvation C. They are bound to intend their own Salvation and with that intention to use some means But God intends it not B. Quest. 8. Doth God command men on pain of damnation to any vain endeavours or use of means C. He commandeth it not in vain for it shall make them unexcuseable 2. They are not to judge their endeavours vain because they know it not 3. But in the issue all will be in vain to them B. Quest 9. Would it be in vain to them if they really did the utmost that common Grace enableth any men to do C. It is not properly Grace to them and so not common 2. It would be in vain to them B. Quest 10. Is that vain which bringeth a man into the nearest preparation for special Grace and nearest to the Kingdom of God C. To the Elect it is not vain Nor to others for their sakes Nor to others as to the lessening of their pains in Hell But as to their Salvation it is B. Quest 11. Who would it be long of or be reputed the Cause if it be in vain C. Of themselves who are born in sin from Adam and are Unbelievers B. You suppose it impossible for them to believe and impossible for them not to be the Children of Adam They made not themselves and you suppose that for want of Grace they cannot believe Quest 12. When Death shall acquaint them with the impossibility that they were under do you think 1. That it will be the way of glorifying the Justice of God in Judgment to have the World know that he condemneth Sinners meerly because he will condemn them for that which they never had any more true power to avoid than to make a World 2. Or will their Consciences in Hell accuse them or torment them for that which they then know was naturally impossible and caused by God C. We know not how God will glorifie his Justice or how their Consciences will torment them It may be they shall then be as ignorant of the necessitating cause as now B. 1. Do you know it now and shall not they know it then 2. God telleth us the contrary That all hidden things shall be brought to light and that God will justifie his own proceedings by proving that mens destruction is of themselves that every mouth may be stopped and all the World be guilty before God And he calleth it his Righteousness in judging to give to every man according to his Works and that mens Consciences shall then excuse them or accuse them when God shall judge the secrets of their hearâ—s and not when he shall torment them by deceiving them Rom. 2. 2 Thess 1. 6 7 8 9 10. Matth 25. 7. 23 24. 2 Tim. 4. 8 9. Rom. 14. 10. Gen. 18. 24 25. Quest 13. Do you believe that none but the Elect have now any real mercy besides a delay of their future misery and hopes of its abatement C. I do For all things are to be judged of by the end And that is really no mercy which is not intended to a mans happiness but his misery As Afflictions are no evils to the Elect because they are intended and work together for their good B. Is the offer of Christ and Life no mercy Is all Gods patience and forbearance as a means to lead them to repentance no mercy Is all the teaching perswading intreating condescension of Christ no mercy See what error here you run into and how contrary to Scripture and to nature it self 1. You contradict Gods Word which frequently calleth them mercies Psal 145. 9. 106. 7. 45. Neh. 9. 19 27 28 31. Jon. 4. 2. Rom. 2. 4. Matth. 18. 33. Isa 63. 9. Ezek. 16. 2. You deny the chiefest part of mens duty even to accept of mercy to improve mercy to be thankful for mercy to be led by Gods good-ness to Repentance to use mercies as Gods Talents to his Glory c. If you say They know not but they are mercies you feign God to bind men to duty but by deceit It is as mercies and not as that which for ought they know may be mercies that they are to be valued used c. 3. You excuse men from the greatest aggravation of their sin even sinning against Mercies How can they sin against them that have none 4. You feign Gods Justice to be stragely glorified by damning men in Hell for ever for sinning against mercy who never had any
that we are commanded not only Thankfully to Accept but Thankfully to obey our Lord Redeemer and Saviour Lib. No. P. Quest 3. Date you deny that life or death eternal dependeth on this as a Condition or Moral means and that we shall be judged according to it Lib. No. I deny it not P. Quest 4. Is it not a Law that thus commandeth us and by which we must be judged Lib. Yes If it were no Law there were no duty and sin in belief and unbelief P. Quest 5. Is not a man so far just and justifyable by that Law as he keepeth it and justifyable against the charge of being one that must be Damned by producing the Condition of pardon and life performed Lib. Yes I deny it not P. Quest 6. And doth not the same Law virtually justifie the performer now whom it will justifie as the Rule of Judgement at last Lib. Yes no doubt P. Quest 7. And is not the Name of Righteousness many score times given in Scripture to our own actions done by Grace and measured by the New Covenant Lib. Yes I cannot deny it P. Why then while you deny neither Name nor Thing what wrangle you about And let me plainly tell you that such men as you by indiscreet ever-doing are not the least of Satans instruments to bring the Gospel under scandal and harden the world in Infidelity and the scorn of Christ while you would so describe the Christian Religion as if this were the very heart and summ of it Believe that all the Elect have fulfilled perfectly all Gods Law by another and that Christ did it as personating each of them and therefore no crime of their own is imputable to them nor any kind or degree of Goodness or Righteousness in and of themselves is at least required of God as any means or condition of their present or future justification by their Judge or as having any hand therein As if God were become indifferent what we all are so that Christ be but Righteous for us when as it was Christs grand design to restore lapsed man to God which he doth not only by Relative benefits but by Renewing them to his Image in love and holy obedience Lib. Have you not lately and oft been told that holiness and obedience are necessary now but it is to other Ends than to justifie us as for Cratitude c. P. 1. We easily grant it is for other Ends than Christs Merits were and not to justifie us as they do nor in that Causality They are not to purchase for us a free gift of pardon and life nor the Holy Ghost c. as Christ did 2. But again tell me Hath not Christ a Law that commandeth our obedience to those ends as Gratitude which you mention And is not the keeping that Law a thing that the same Law will so far justifie us for Yea a Condition that life dependeth on And if the Cause in Judgement be Have you kept it or not must you not in that be accordingly Justified or Condemned Give over cavilling against plain necessary truth Lib. By this you will fall in with the Papists who take Justification to be partly by Christs Righteousness and partly by our own and partly in pardon and partly in faith and holiness P. Tell not me of the Names of Papists or any to frighten me from plain Scripture truth 1. Why may not I rather say Why go you from all the antient Writers and Churches even Augustine himself by your new and contrary opinion Was true Justification unknown for so many hundred years after the Apostles 2. The most zealous Antipapists do confess that some Texts of Scripture do so take the word Justification And multitudes of Texts so take the words Righteous and Righteousness And he that will impartially consider them may find that more Texts than are by us so confessed do by Justifying mean Making us Just and so Accounting us on all these causes conjunct 1. As being Redeemed by Christs Merits 2. And freely pardoned 3. And having Right to life 4. And renewed to Gods love and Image 5. And so justifyable at the Bar of Grace by the Law of faith and liberty 3. And the reality of all the Matter of this Doctrine is past doubt if the Controversie de nomine Justificationis were not so decided CHAP. IV. Whether the Gospel be a Law of Christ Lib. III. YOu bring in your doctrine of personal Righteousness to Justification by feigning Christ to have made a new Law whereas the Gospel is but a Doctrine History and Promise and not a Law and so no Rule of Righteousness and Judgement And this many Protestants have asserted P. I have read some such sayings in some men And some I think meant no more but that Christ did only expound and not add to the Law of Nature called by them the Moral Law And these I have excused for their unhappy kind of expression But for the rest that mean as the words sound universally they subvert Christianity and as the Arrians denyed Christs Godhead so do they his Office and Government and are somewhat worse than the Quakers who say that the Spirit within us is the Law and Rule of Christ which is better than none I pray answer me Quest 1. Is Christ the King and Ruler of the Church Lib. Yes P. Quest 2. Is not Legislation the first and principal part of Government Lib. Yes P. Quest 3. Do not they then that deny Christs Legislation deny his Government Lib. Yes P. Quest 4. Is it not essential to Christ as Christ the name signifying Relatively his Office to be King Lib. Yes P. Quest 5. Do they not then by this deny Christ to be Christ Lib. No for they confess that he hath a Law but not that he made any since his birth P. We grant 1. That the Law of Nature now is His Law 2. And that the first Edition of the Law of Grace to Adam after the fall was his Law 3. And Moses Law was partly his But you will not say that we are under this last nor I hope that he hath no other than the two first Lib. Why what other can you prove P. It is the Name or the Thing that you deny for you use to confound the cases 1. Whether the name be fit judge by these Texts Gal. 6. 2. Bear ye one anothers burdens and so fulfil the Law of Christ James 1. 25. The perfect Law of Liberty Rom. 8. 2. The Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus c. Rom. 3. 27. Boasting is excluded By what Law Of Works Nay but by the Law of faith Mic. 4. 2. For the Law shall go out of Zion c. So Isa 2. 3. 8. 16 20. 42. 41. The Isles shall wait for his Law 1 Cor. 9. 21. We are under the Law to Christ Heb. 8. 10 16. I will put my Laws into their minds and hearts James 4. 12. There is one Law-giver c. Isa 33.
22. 2. For Name and Thing note the terms of Equivalence and Connotation 1. All the Texts where Christ is called a King and his Kingdom named why should I needlesly recite them 2. All the Texts that mention his Commanding and Commandments the same which we mean by a Law Matth. 28. 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatever I have commanded you Acts 10. 42. 13. 47. Acts 10. 33. 1 Cor. 7. 10. John 15. 14. If ye do whatsoever I command you 17. These things I command you So John 15. 12. 14. 21 31. 1 Tim. 1. 1. Titus 1. 3. 1 John 3. 23. 4. 6. John 13. 34. 1 John 5. 3. 2. 4. 3. 24. 1 Cor. 14. 37. Acts 1. 2. Acts 17. 30. Blessed are they that do his Commandments c. Rev. 22. 14. 3. All the Texts that mention his Covenant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being a Legal institution Heb. 8. 6. He is the Mediator of a better Covenant 8. 13. 8. 10. 10. 16. 12. 24. Gal. 4. 24. 4. All those Texts that not only call him Lord of all but say that All power in Heaven and Earth is given to him therefore Legislative power Matth. 28. 18. and all Judgement committed to him John 5. 22. The Government is laid upon his shoulders and of the increase of his Government there shall be no end Isa 9. 6 7. 5. De re how can that man be a Christian that denyeth that Christ hath made us any Law and so denyeth his Kingdom and our obedience I argue from the definition That which hath the essential parts of a Law is a Law But Christ hath made that which hath the essential parts of a Law Therefore he hath made a Law The Major is past dispute The Minor I prove That which hath a Precept making Duty and a Promise and Threatning instituting the Retribution by Rewards and Punishments as an Instrument of Government hath all the Essentials of a Law But such is made by Christ Ergo The Minor which only needs proof I prove by parts and instances 1. There is a Command to believe in God as our Reconciled Father by Christ 2. To believe in Christ as Incarnate and the Mediator conceived by the Holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary fulfilling all righteousness dying buried for us justifying us by his blood rising ascending glorified interceding that will raise the dead and judge the world c. We are commanded to believe all the Gospel And to give up our selves to Christ in the Covenant of Baptism to trust in him to pray in his name c. We are commanded to believe in the Holy Ghost as the Spirit of Christ and to live in Communion with the Christian Church to observe the Lords day the first of the Week to preach and hear the Gospel to receive the Lords Supper to imitate Christ to receive his Apostles and Ministers to relieve his members as such to take Moses Law as abrogated or ceased And do you that are so strict in condemning all humane impositions as bold additions believe that Christ himself hath made no Laws for Ordination Sacraments Preaching Worship and why fear you adding then can one add to Nothing And what a lawless sort of persons are you if you will neither have Christ nor Man to make Laws for you 2. And as to Promises and Threats or Penalties of a far sorer punishment Heb. 10. I am ashamed to stand to prove them to you He that believeth shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned is sure a Law How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation See that ye reject not him that speaketh Heb. 4. 10. These mine enemies that would not that I should reign over them bring them hither and slay them before me Luke 19. 27. with abundance such Pardon here that my indignation suffereth me not to be longer or colder but shortly to tell you further that to deny Christs Law is 1. To deny him to be a King and to be Christ 2. To deny his Kingdom 3. And his Government 4. And his Gospel 5. And his Officers power both Kings and Pastors 6. And your own subjection 7. And all duty and obedience to him 8. And the being of all sin as against his Laws 9. And all Judgement according to his Laws 10. And all reward for keeping his Laws 11. And all punishment for breaking them 12. And all duty to preach learn or meditate on them 13. And all blame on such as silence such preaching 14. And indeed the very being of all Law and Government in the world For since the Promise Gen. 3. or at least now there is no Law of God in the world but what is the Redeemers Law Even the Law of Nature now is in his hand and is the Law of the Redeemer to lapsed Nature And all the world had a new Law of Grace made to Adam in the first Edition and the Church hath it now in the second Edition And now what part of Christianity do you not destroy Choose you now whether you will come off by confessing that you erred and differed from us but in a word not understood or whether you will allow us to take you for downright Hereticks And bethink you whether those rash and self-conceited Divines that have reviled Papists and Arminians for saying that Christs Gospel was a Law or that he made a new Law have done good service to the Christian or the Protestant Cause or have rather done much to harden the Rapists into a more confident conceit that Protestants are Hereticks CHAP. V. Whether Christ be the only Party in Covenant with God and not Believers or lapsed man Lib. IV. Mr next Charge it that you feign the Covenant to be made with us which is made only with Christ Do you not remember that even the Westminster Assembly say in their larger Catechism that The Covenant of Grace was made with Christ as the second Adam and in him with all the Elect as his seed But you feign it to be made with the Elect nay to others immediately and not only as Christs seed in him nor to Christ at all P. I will not waste time in expounding or censuring other mens words but as to the matter is it not a most shameful thing that a man of your profession and pretensions to knowledge should confound those two Covenants which children should be taught in their Catechism to distinguish By a Covenant here we mean 1. A Covenant offered and imposed which is also a Law 2. A Covenant consented to and mutual And now tell me Quest 1. Was it not a distinct Law that was made to us from that which Christ was obliged by I mean the Law of Grace and Faith Was Christ commanded to Repent of his sin or accept a Saviour or pray for pardon or mortifie his lusts or trust another to reconcile him to God or be Thankful for such mercies or any such like
more are Godly vulgar people ignorant and consequently erre in many things Even they that cry out against the vulgar Ignorance and insufficient Teachers know far less than they are Ignorant of themselves 5. He that mistakingly thinks any thing is Good or Bad Duty or Sin which is not so will be zealous in pursuit of his mistake if he be serious for God A good principle will hasten him on in a wrong way whatever it cost him 6. Ignorance and timerousness cause superstition which is a conceit that God is pleased by overdoing in external things and observances and laws of their own making and so they that make part of their own Religion superstitiously as most good people do in some things through ignorance will censure all others as Good or Bad by the measure of their own mistakes 7. He that thus mistakingly thinks that men sin when they do not will have a proportionable dislike of them and aversation from them And will be ready to speak as he thinks of them and so will be guilty of calumny and calling Evil Good and Good Evil. 8. The World will abound still with real evil and scandals And all parties will be faulty And usually the greater part of the Clergie in the Christian World will be guilty of so much Ignorance pride contentiousness worldliness and sensuality as will greatly grieve and offend good people And this will occasion alienation and separations even with Godly persons The sacrifice of the Lord was abhorred through the sins of Eli's sons The case of the Clergie at this day in the Greek Church in Moscovie Armenia Syria Abassia c. yea among too many of the German Churches is very lamentable by Ignorance and scandal And the corruption of the Roman Clergie was it that facilitated the revolt from the Papacy at Luther's reformation He that readeth Cornel. Mus Ferus Espencaeus Erasmus Alvan Pelagius Clemangis and such others describing their own Clergie and Jos Acosta of them in India c. will see much of the Cause of the Divisions in the World And all the old Writers that write against the Waldenses do make us understand that the ignorance and wickedness of the Clergie then was it that drove them from the Roman Church Saith Wicelius Meth. Concord c. 11. p. 39. Quum tales ad nullum honestius vitae institutum idonei sunt mirum sit si bonos sacerdotes praestabunt sic itaque procedente tempore regetur Ecclesia ab asinis praedicabunt imperitissimi misero populo quod nunquam didicerunt ipsi Adolescentes optimi quique abhorrent propterea ab instituto illo quod nolint suam libertatem sibi eripi c. I have oft said what caused St. Martin to separate during life from the Synodical Bishops about him And what Gildas saith of such that no excellent Christian will call them Ministers And it 's very observable not only as Dr. James in the Margin of Wicelius hath cited that there are many Canons against wicked Priests celebrating and Massing but Wicelius himself saith p. 17. Non admittantur sacra concubinariorum quos Deus pejus odit atque manifestarios incestus Meminerimus in Decretis Pontificum piè caveri Ne quis Missam ejus Presbyteri audiat quem scit indubitanter concubinam habere aut subintroductam mulierem And yet there are now men pretending to piety among Protestants that speak of and use those Godly persons more hatefully who refuse to hear such wicked Priests than they do those Priests themselves Light and Darkness have no Communion And the Church will alwayes have bad Ministers and Members And many good people through Ignorance will think that they should go further from them than they ought And will not distinguish between that private familiarity which is in their own power and that publick Church Communion which the Church Pastors are the guides and judges of And so the honesty and the ignorance of these good men meeting with the vulgar wickedness will be as the congress of fire and water and will occasion ruptures and parties in the Churches 9. The carnal Clergie will usually hate and persecute Godly zealous Preachers As even the case of Ph. Nerius and Baronius at Rome sheweth which had almost made disturbance And then sufferings will be a stronger temptation to hard thoughts and too much alienation than most are able well to overcome 10. And the Godly people will adhere to their Godly suffering Teachers and run further in bitterness against the carnal and persecuting party than their suffering Leaders do desire 11. Yet interest and temptations will prevail with too many of the sufferers to connive at the bitterness and alienation of the people if not to countenance it which they do not justifie And so the rupture will grow still greater 12. And all men have some Pride And Godliness being the best thing may become the object of Pride as well as Knowledge and Power And so many will affect to have their Piety Conspicuous and therefore to be singular or of some small party that is eminent and so by separation to stand at a more conspicuous distance from the vulgar sort of Christians than Christ would have them And so many a good man hath more of Pride in his profession and separation than he is aware of 13. And because Gods word and his last judgement and Heaven and Hell do make so great a difference between the Godly and ungodly it occasioneth many to think that they must difference men by their own censures and separations farther than indeed they ought 14. And it greatly promoteth Schisms that good people are unacquainted with Church-history and know not how just such Opinions and Schisms as their own have in former ages risen and how they have miscarryed and dyed and what have been their fruits 15. And few men have that humble sense as they ought of their own Ignorance and badness which would keep their suspicions and Censures more at home and make them more compassionate to others 16. And few love their Neighbours as themselves nor consider while they hate mens sin what is lovely in their Natures and Capacities of grace 17. And the Piety of almost all Sects of Christians on Earth is already corrupted with so many humane superstitious additions that few can escape the temptation of Censuring accordingly 18. And the Church will alwayes have many hypocrites who quiet their Consciences by adhering to the strictest Ministers and Churches instead of a mortified holy and heavenly heart and conversation 19. And lastly Persecution and hatred from others and the due Love of Godly persons tempteth too many Ministers to over-run their own judgements and follow the more censorious sort of persons further than they ought at least by connivence and to be ruled by those whom they should rule And thus Divisions are occasioned even by Piety it self II. But yet were the Principles of Division never so many and pernicious Interest might have led
be thy duty we use to say It is Gods will that we should obey him And so when we do not obey him we are said to Violate his will But this is but metonymically For that which is Gods will indeed is but that we shall be bound to obey whether we do or not And the event whether we shall or not de facto is not at all determined by the Law 351. Therefore if it were proved that God did Decree one thing and command the contrary it would not prove two contrary wills in God nor is there any great shew of a contradiction in it For to say I forbid Judas to hang himself and I decree that he shall hang himself are no contradictions It is but to say It shall be his Duty to preserve his life and Eventually he shall not preserve it All that is a mans Duty doth not come to pass And to determine of Duty is not to say It shall come to pass Otherwise Gods word were false whenever man sinned Nay in reality Augustine truly judged that by Gods Law Hell was Due to Paul unconverted and yet then he was a chosen Vessel and God Decreed to save him He thought that Perseverance was the Duty of some that after fell away and that Heaven was their Due on condition of perseverance till they fell away though not presently to be possessed and yet that God decreed that ipso permittente eventually they should fall away and perish 352. If a King made a Law that no man shall murder another and yet knoweth that a certain Traytor that hath broken Prison is like to fall into the hands of some Thieves or Enemies that will kill him If he be secretly willing that he be killed by them it is no contradiction The Law maketh it their duty not to Kill But it saith not that they shall not de eventu by way of Prognostication 353. But yet indeed God never doth command an act or forbid an act â—nd yet Decree that the same Act immediately commanded shall not be â—one or that the act directly forbidden shall be done Because sin is a thing â—hat God cannot decree or will of which anon 354. But the effect of the commanded or forbidden act is sometimes said â—o be commanded or forbidden And this may be contrarily decreed of God And men that think not truly of the matter think that this is to Decree a thing forbidden and so they err by such confused thoughts E. G. Gods command is that I shall relieve a poor man and not let him faâ—ish and that I shall heal the sick c. and yet God may decree that this â—oor man shall be famished and this sick man dye And yet no contradiction For indeed Relieving in effect is but the End of the Act which is commanded me and not the act it self I am bound to offer him â—elief But if one cannot take it and another will not yet I have done my duty And so in the other instance So God commanded Abraham â—o sacrifice his Son and yet decreed that he should not be sacrificed And â—his without any contradiction For the act that under that name was commanded Abraham and made his duty was not actual eventual sacriâ—icing For then it had been a duty to resist the Angel and do a thing â—mpossible But to consent and endeavour on his part to sacrifice his Son which he did So the preservation of our own and others lives is commanded us by God and yet at the same time mens death decreed Because the thing indeed commanded is not Preservation as it signifieth the effect and success but only Preservation as it signifieth our true endeavour So the Jews were forbidden to kill Christ and yet God decreed that Christ should be killed For the thing forbidden them was their own Consent and wicked act But the thing that God willed and decreed was only the effect without any Will of their Act that caused it unless in genere actus but only a permission of it Men of gross brains that cannot distinguish and judge accurately may blaspheme God in their ignorance in a case that to a discerning judgement is very plain 355. * * * Of which see Amyraldus against Spanhem de Grat. Universali The next distinction of Gods Will is into Absolute and Conditional which some Divines use and others condemn and say that God hath no Conditional Will The common answer which most Schoolmen and other Papists agree with the Protestants in is that there are Conditions rei volitae of the event of the thing Willed but no Conditions of the act of Volition in God As Aquinas saith of Causes †††De Vol. Conditionali authoritatibus rationibus pro eadem Vide Ruiz de Vol. Dei disp 20. But his assertion that Una creatura est Ratio movens tanquam objectum materiale secundario ut Deus velit aliam producere is a fiction though he lay his stress on it about the ordo decretorum For movere is causare and nothing doth cause or move God to act There are Rationes effectuum eorum ordinis but none of the efficient Acts of God in him If you say It is absurd to say that God had no Reason to will the creation of this world rather than another I answer That is an Act of efficient Wisdom above all Reason But to fetch Reasons from the object and thereby to be moved to Act is the part of the imperfect creature Reasoning properly is below God much more to be moved by extrinsick objective reasons Yet on this Ruiz disp 24. layeth a great fabrick and so men may draw twenty Schemes of Gods Reasonings as they variously fancy Deus vult hoc esse propter hoc non autem propter hoc vult hoc 1. There are both Causes and Conditions of the event willed of God 2. Denominatione extrinseca ex connotatione objecti his Will is hence called Conditional meaning but a Volition of Conditionals 356. That God willeth Conditions and Conditional Propositions and Grants is past all controversies For he willeth his own word which is his work But his word hath conditional promises and threats And as his word also may be called his will he hath a Conditional will because a Conditional word 357. Gods eternal Omniscience proveth that at no instant he had a will properly Conditional quoad actum Because he that at the same instant fore-knoweth whether the Condition would be done or not must needs have his will to be thereby absolute But yet if it had pleased God to suspend the Act of his own Volition upon a humane Condition it would not have exposed him at all to the charge either of mutability or dependence which is very clear For 1. It is presupposed his Will as Voluntas Essentia is unalterable and is not that of which we speak 2. But only his Volition as terminated on this or that object and so as haec volitio
no warning take what thou gettest by it Can you prove that it is his Will that this man eat the poyson prohibited 608. Next he citeth Augustines thred-bare sayings and blameth Aquinas and Arminius for denying his Authority and commendeth the greater reverence of Bellarmine And so Anselm Hugo c. Answ 1. We stick not on one mans Authority God holdeth not his Holiness and the Church its Religion on Augustines authority 2. Augustine hath ten times more plain enough for what I hold See the places cited in Paul Eiren. Triad Patrum 3. He knew it's like that Estius and many more expound Augustines words as terminating Gods Volition on his own permission and not on the sin or fieri 4. I think plainly that Augustine there spake not of inward Volitions but outward Acts and that not as Agentis but in passo or the effects And so it is true that no murder theft treason or other effect is produced in the world but what God positively decreeth shall be produced either by doing some effects himself as drowning the world or permitting sinners to do them while he causeth not their act but the Receptivity of the Passum and so the effect c. 609. Pag. 194. Retorting on Aquin. he thus argueth Because God doth will his own Goodness therefore it is necessary that God will that sin be done he permitting it For it is not to will his essential Goodness which needeth no acquisition but he willeth to manifest his Goodness But the evil of sin is not opposite to the manifesting of Gods Goodness Yea nothing is more * * * So Twiss contr Armin. pro Junio pag. 91. dissenteth from Jâ—niuâ— that saith peceatum ad rationem universi facere per accidens and saith Mibi vero dicendum videtur Peceatum conducibile esse per se ad bonum universi quatenus conducit ad illustrandos tales divinae majestatis radios And if so it must per se be Loved of God as Good Yet contr Corvin he saith that No sober man saith that sin is a medium of the execution of Reprobation but only the Permission of sin Reconcile them that can conducible to it than this I say to the manifesting of Gods Goodness by way of mercy in sparing or by way of Justice in punishing Answ Horresco recitans 1. Gods Volition of his Essential Goodness is his Necessary Volition 2. God hath no End to acquire but alwayes hath his end and is never without it 3. If God had necessarily willed the particular way of manifesting his Goodness then he doth all things necessarily and could do no otherwise and it seems by you could not manifest it without sin 4. Doth he not manifest his Goodness as much to the Innumerable Glorious Angels who never sinned And would it not have been as much manifested to us if we had been as they 5. The very indetermination of the will and its mediate Liberty is not the highest excellency of his Creatures It is better than the sensitive Necessity of Bruits and lower than the confirmed Necessity of the blessed It is our defectibility And the excellentest or Best of his works most honour Gods Goodness 6. Is it not the strongest temptation that men have in this world to doubt of or dishonour the Goodness of God to think how he permitteth the world to be drowned in wickedness and be so like to hell 7. Doth not Christ turn the Prayers of all Christians against your doctrine viz. that Gods name may be hallowed his Kingdom come and his will done on earth as it is in Heaven which is not by any sin 8. Do not your words tempt men to be indifferent to sin if not to love it if nothing be more conducible to honour Gods Goodness 9. Is not that conclusion a great wrong to Christ Scripture Ministry and Holiness as being no more conducible to manifest Gods Goodness than sin is 10. It is not true that sin is any Cause or true Means at all of glorifying God or doing any good It is but a presupposed Evil by delivering us from which God is glorified As your eating poyson may occasion the honour of an Antidote and Physicion It is no Cause or proper medium of it but only an occasion and mischief sine quo non But if God had not saved us from sin committed he could have glorified himself in saving us from committing it God loveth and is glorified most in that which is most like him as his Image which is the Holiest sinless soul To be a medium to Gods glory is to be good To be as conducible to it as any thing is to be as good as any thing save God and his glory But sin hath no Good much less such good Why else doth not God equally delight in sin and in the death of the wicked as in holiness repentance and our life seeing all things are for himself and that which glorifieth him most is best 11. Here also confusion causeth mischief one distinction might have scattered this mist viz. Between sin indeed and sin in notion Sin indeed or essence and existence never did good nor honoured God Sin in notion or in esse objectivo is no sin but the Matter of Vertue and 80 Joh. Ã Combis compend Theol. l. 3. c. 1. tells us that sin is profitable three wayes 1. Ut bene ordinatur ut fur in patibulo 2. Propter co-actionem amaritudinem 3. Propter mall considerationem And many popular Books say the like But this is but abusive language tending to deceive As if sin did good because punishing sin and repenting of it and hating it do good As if hating sin were sin Thus unhappily is the world troubled by abused words Holiness and doth much good When you say God knoweth sin from eternity you 'l say with Scotus that in esse cognito sin was in God from Eternity But so sin is not sin David saith My sin is ever before me Psal 51. And we daily Repent of it and confess it But this is but to have the Idea or conception of it in the mind and so it is not sin indeed but the notion of it which is in esse objectivo Else it would defile us to think of it and repent of it whereas thus sin objectively is the matter of the grace and duty of Repentance Hatred fear watchfulness prayer confession c. And so sin in esse objectivo as a grace may glorifie God 610. To Aquin. that saith Malum non est appetibile he saith that Malum moris quod opponitur bono est proprium uniuscujusque meum malum bono meo Though the sin of a man willing that which is forbidden him be his sin yet it followeth not that God may not will this Evil of another The Reason is because it is not forbidden to God to will it wherefore though it be evil and dishonest in man to will it to whom it is forbidden yet not to God And seeing
it 's clear 1. That in the first case the Motion will be if it be not hindered But that it is not caused by not-hindering it but by its proper moving causes In the second case the consequence of futurity is false And where the inclinations to good and evil that is to superiour and inferiour prohibited good are equal yea though antecedently somewhat unequal Yet bare permission ascertaineth not futurity 3. Much less in the third case where the soul must have positive help or provocation Sure he did not think that all or any ungodly men would infallibly Love God if God did but Permit them But Gods Permitting or not hindering sin may respect divers acts 1. Iâ— God continue not his natural support man will be no man but be aâ—â—â—â—lated and so will neither do good nor evil 2. If God uphold mans nâ—ture in its Integrity as it was in Adam and give him not Moral means and helps of Grace and his natural concurse Adams sin would have necessarily followed 3. If God give Adam both such support and means to stand and do no more Gods permission would not have inferred the certainty of Adams sin when he fell any more than before For God withdrew no grace from him which was necessary to his standing 4. Iâ— God give a lapsed sinful man Nature and common grace it followeth not necessarily because God doth no more that he will commit every sin that he is not further hindered from but it 's certain that he will not do the works to which special grace is necessary 5. If God give to the faithful the Holy Spirit and continue his influx necessary to the continuation of the Power and Habits of holy actions with necessary means and do no more this man will do some good and some evil and though he may be equally said to be Permitted to do this sin as another yet he may do one and not another 6. God totally permitteth no man to sin but hindereth them many wayes though he hinder not all alike 7. It 's possible for two men to have equal helps to duty and equal hinderances to sin or the same man at several times and yet for one to do the duty and forbear the sin and the other to commit the sin and omit the duty As many Schoolmen have copiously proved Yet in this case Permission would be the same thing to both But if you use the word Permission as connoting the Event then indeed you may say that the event from another cause will follow And Gods non-impedition will ab eventu actionis be extrinsecally denominated Permission in the one case and not in the other But this is but from your arbitrary use of the word 615. Next the Doctor assaulteth Durandus who thus argueth Gods will followeth only his approving Knowledge But he knoweth not sin approvingly being of purer eyes c. He answereth 1. God approveth that sin be though he approve not sin 2. God willeth the manifestation of his mercy and justice Ergo he willeth the existence of sin as that which is necessarily required to it To which I reply 1. The first answer is unproved and false God approveth not that sin be If he did few wicked men do more as Estiâ—s saith For it is not sin as sin or evil that they will but that it be for other ends which seem good 2. He phraseth it with his ad quâ—d necessario c. as if God first willed this manifestation of his Justice c. as the end and then sins existence as the means yea the necessary means But this is false as I have fully shewed 1. And his own opinion should confute it that maketh one Decree only de mediis And this particular Manifestation being some Acts of God and not God himself â—or the Complacency of his Will must needs be part of the media ad finem â—â—timum 2. And indeed sins existence is not a necessary means willed for â—ods glory but it is a presupposed mischief our Deliverance from which â—â— punishment for it is willed for his glory It is indeed necessary but â—â—ly necessitate existentiae in esse praecognito as a foreseen evil and so preâ—pposed to those acts of God which are the Means of his glory Therefore his assertion of a Notitia approbationis rei tanquam Bonae in â—nere Conducibilis etsi non honesti is detestable 616. Ibid. p. 196. He again saith that Though it be dishonest in the â—eature to sin because forbidden it is not dishonest in God to will that he â—â— it by his permission it being unice conducibile to his glory â—nsw 1. Fie upon this conducibile and unicè too 2. Fie upon this oft â—peated permittente non efficiente It is utterly lusory or immodest â—or a man that maintaineth that no sinner doth any thing in sinning but â—hat God as the first total cause predetermined his will to even as to all â—e entity in act and circumstances imaginable and that in all omissions â— was a natural Impossibility to have done one omitted act without this â—edetermining premotion And for the man that in the next saith that â—alum non est Objectum Volentis aut facientis but ipsa effectio rei I â—y for this man yet to say that the creature effecteth sin and God effecteth â— not is too too gross The common evasion is that sin is not any â—â—ing and therefore not effectible But why then do they say that the â—eature effecteth it when they have said and defended that the creaâ—re doth nothing but what God doth and what he unavoidably maketh â—â—m do 617. Durandus argueth that Sin cannot be judged convenient by a â—â—ght understanding Ergo not by God The Doctor answereth That â—es own sin cannot be judged convenient but anothers may He inâ—anceth 1. When a man willeth that an Usurer lend him money on usury â— When a Christian Prince willeth a Turk to swear to a League by Maâ—â—met 3. When God willed that Absalom should defile his Fathers Concuâ—nes And he addeth that for us to sin is contrary to our right reaâ—â—n because it is forbidden and hurtful to us But for God to will that â—e sin is not contrary to his right reason as not forbidden or hurtful â— him Repl. 1. No man should will unlawful usury He that willeth to Borâ—â—w though he cannot have it without usury doth not will the usury â—ut the money non-obstante usura As he that chooseth to travell with Blasphemer rather than to go alone in danger he doth not will his â—lasphemy but his company non obstante blasphemia 2. The same is to â—e said of swearing by Mahomet It is only the Oath as an Oath that is â—â— be willed and not as by Mahomet that is not willed but unwillingly â—â—dured 3. Absaloms instance is answered before God willed only â—avids punishment and the Passive Constupration as an effect of sin â—n a foresight of Absaloms active Volition and sin and not as
answer that the consequence holdeth not of a metaphorical improper Instrument who hath somewhat of his own which he hath not from the principal agent yea such have somewhat of Principal Causality and somewhat mixt of their own which they have not of God besides the nature of a pure instrument such are sinners to God Therefore it holds not that the horse halteth ergo the rider halteth no nor causeth it Thus insciously he unsaith what laboriously he writeth a Book to prove and the very same that I say The Rider doth not cause the halting as it is halting at all but only as it is Motion in genere so doth God by sinful acts That they are exercised on the forbidden object rather than another is not at all of God but that they are Actions in genere is of God 637. So p. 256. he well sayeth that the fault of the pen is not to be ascribed to the Writer nor the effect as from that fault nor of the Saw to the Sawyer And so of the Sabeans robbing Job And he asserteth p. 257. that Diabolus Impii homines sunt causae principales in actu peccandi And what need we more Remember then that sin is an effect and hath a Cause and to make man a Principal Cause in actu peccandi is not to deifie him And he saith p. 256. that if God were the moral impeller as a principal agent he were the principal cause of sin But if you mean by moral impulse only commanding it let others judge whether Physical premotion be not much more than command And whether I cause not my pen to write though I command it not And quoad terminum to impel a man physically to moral acts is moral impulse 638. But the plausiblest argument is Cap. 20. p. 261. viz. God willeth sin as it is a Punishment of sin * * * Vid. Aureol in 2. d. 37. p. 300 301. shewing six wayes how sin is a punishment of sin without God's willing the sin But if we make it sin he will make it be a punishment ergo he willeth that the sin come to pass or be And indeed Augustine saith much contr Julian to assert Gods willing of sin as a Punishment of sin But I answer this 1. Even these men themselves oft say that God willeth not the formale peccati but the materiale And forma dat nomen ergo he willeth not sin as a punishment in proper sence 2. Sin it self though denyed by many Arminians is verily a Punishment and more to the Sinner himself than to any other †††Gab. Bid in 2. d. 36. concludeth 1. Omne peccatum est poena 2. Non omnis culpa est peccati alterius poena viz. non prima 3. Omne peccatum posterius poena est prioris causa nisi ultimum fuerit posterioris And Bonavent there cited by him sheweth how sin bringeth poenam damni sensus And he sheweth there how each sin is its own punishment the formale peccati being first and the formale poena next in the same act And how the latter sin is the punishment of the former as being an effect of it For when we have cast away the Intention of the right end there is nothing sufficient to hinder more sin Biel. ib. In a word God antecedently so formed nature that if we will sin that sin shall be our misery and as a voluntary self-wounding cause our pain and let out our blood and life And it is the most difficult part of the question how God maketh sin a Punishment to the sinner himself which yet I have plainly opened before and here repeat it To be sin or disobedience and to be Punishment are no absolute entities but are two Relations of one and the same Act but not as referred to one and the same correlate God is not at all the Cause of the Act which is sinful in its forbidden mode and circumstances as Claudicatio equi before said but only in genere actus or hujus actus when two sins are compared But that the Act when done is sin and is punishment God is the Cause of both That is he maketh mans nature first and in that and by revelation his Law by which he first maketh mans duty and telleth him what shall be sin if he do it And next he doth by his threatning tell him that this sin it self shall be the sinners own misery if he do it As if as aforesaid God first made man of such a nature as that poyson would torment him ex natura rei And then commandeth him to avoid it And then threatneth that it shall torment and kill him if he eat it Here now God maketh the Man and the Law God maketh not the Act of sin as modified or oblique or as that circumstantiated act But when the act is caused by Man God by his Law causeth two Relations to result first that of sin and then that of punishment So that man first causeth the sinful act and then that it is quid prohibitum and quid poenale result from Gods Will and Law made before Now if God cause not that sin which is a punishment to our selves he causeth not that which is a punishment to others And yet supposing it he maketh it a punishment to us and them on several accounts 639. But though God cause not the sin yet when he hath before in his Law threatned to withhold his grace and spirit if we sin without which grace and spirit we will sin If God now for former sin do deny us or withhold that grace or help which we need to keep us out of it he is morally and improperly said to cause that sin as a punishment because that penally he refuseth or forbeareth to save us from it and so permitteth it as is said 640. The Arminians grosly erre if he cite them justly Remonst in Script Synod art 1. p. 202. saying that God may predetermine and pre-ordain the obstinate and rebellious to sin by his penal judgement and yet those sins are not be reckoned to them for sins nor increase their guilt unless the word sin be used equivocally For to have sin and no sin are contraries Whether God determine Ideots and Madmen to those acts which would be sin in others as he doth Bruits I leave to others 641. I am weary of pursuing this ungrateful dispute As to his controversie Q. Whether things be good because God willeth them or he will them because they are good against Camero cap. 22. Whether God will Justice and holiness because it is good or whether it be good because God willeth it It troubleth me to read bitter and tedious disputes about that which one easie distinction putteth past all controversie Of things ad extra Gods will is first the efficient and then the ultimate end as is oft said Gods will as efficient giveth first the Being and then the Order to all things or else they could never be
Rom. 6. 23. The wages of Sin is Death Rom. 5. 12. Death passed on alâ— for that all have sinned Rom. 2. 12. As many as have sinned withâ—â—â— Law shall perish without Law And we must pray for the pardon of aâ—â— Sin And unpardoned Sin will damn men These are the reasons â—â— this side They of the other Opinion say That the Gospel-Covenant sheweâ—â— Gods Nature as well as the first Law That God had not been unjust iâ—deed if he had permitted him to fall into great Sin and so to periâ—â— who committed the least for he so permitted Adam to commit the first that was before innocent But the Justice of God bound him not so it do nor would have damned a Lover of God for a small Sin no more than now That we must not feign a Law which we cannot prove That God changeth not his holy Nature and therefore not that Law which is the expression of it That Christ died for all Sin and all needs pardon but that proveth not that the least deserved death much less Hell but that by Christ's Death the deserved punishment must be remitted that all even Infants are guilty of mortal Sin in Adam The Death is the wages of that Sin which brought it but not of the least That Adam's Law was not severer than that by Moses which saith Dâ— this and live and yet condemned not men for smaller sins That God proclaimeth pardon of some Sin in the very Law of Nature as from his Nature Exod. 34. and the Second Commandment That Nature teacheth all the World to believe it That God said not to Adam â—â— the day that thou thinkest a vain thought but That thou eatest c. That mortal Sin is pardonable by Christ which else could not by the first Law but God could otherwise have pardoned a vain thought if he would That no Text of Scripture saith that every Sin deserveth Hell nor is threatned with Death And as the condition of the Penalty so the condition of the Promise to Adam is here also controverted by Divines 1. Some say that the condition of Life was personal perfect perpetual Obedience till â—â—â— change which God would make as he did by Henoch when it pleased him which seemeth to me the probablest Opinion 2. Others think that Adam was to have continued in Eden for ever under that same conditional Law which is less probable 3. Others think that had he over-come the first temptation but so far as to adhere and vanquish that is to continue the love of God and not to eat that Fruit or commit any other mortal Sin which of its nature killeth Love he had been confirmed as the promised Reward 4. I have lately met with an exceeding ingenious M. S. written partly against my self after others which asserteth 1. That the Glory of Justice is the end of Gods Government 2. That Do this perfectly and live or Sin at all and die are the constant terms of Justice under every Covenant 3. That if Adam had performed but one â—â— of Obedience by that Law he should have been rewarded with confirmation or the Holy Ghost as the Angels and with everlasting life 4. That now all our Reward is only the Act of Gods Justice giving â—â— life as merited by us in Christ on the terms of the Law that saith Do this and live Sin and die in whom we are perfectly innocent and rewardable and we have no rewardable Righteousness nor any to justifie us but perfect Innocency imputed because as not to be a Sinner is no merit of a Reward so pardon of Sin is no Title to a Reward c. It is not my present task to clear up all these Difficulties having done more towards it in my Methodus Theologiae but only so much as our present conciliatory work requireth But yet because I and the matter in hand are nearly concerned in the M. S. I shall briefly animadvert on all the substance of it having first said of the condition of the penalty but a few words I. I am loth to confound the certainties with the uncertainties in this matter 1. It is certain that Gods Law of Nature was mans first and principal Law to which the supernatural Revelations were added and comparatively few 2. It is certain that Gods Law was perfect and that both as the impress and expression of Gods perfect Wisdom and Holiness and as the Rule of Perfection to Adam And therefore that it obliged him to perfection 3. But this Perfection to which he was obliged was not at first all that his nature would be capable of at last It was not his duty the first hour of his life to Know or Do as much as after the longest time and experience and as much as in heavenly perfection But he was bound to Know and Love and Do at first as much as at that time his nature was capable of supposing necessary Concauses and Objects 4. This is summed up in Loving God with all the Heart Mind and Might But the All in maturity and after full experience and in Glory is more than the All in unexperienced juniority To know love and obey God to the utmost intention of his present natural Power supposing due Objects media and concauses was Adam's duty and all defectiveness herein was culpable or sin 5. All sin of its own nature deserveth punishment Therefore so would the least culpable thought or word in Adam or the least culpable defect in the extent or intention of any holy affection in him 6. It is certain that Adam's eating the forbidden Fruit or any one such sin as consisteth not with the predominancy of his Love to God as God in habit such as is now inconsistent with true Grace and is called mortal was to be punished with death temporal and eternal according to the Justice of that Law 7. They are different questions 1. What God might do 2. What he would do as decreed 3. What he must do as necessary because of Justice or Veracity to the breaker of that Law And it is clear that God might as an Act of Justice punish the least culpable thought or remissness of degree of Love with Annihilation or with any pain-everlasting which to the Sinner were no worse than Annihilation Because 1. Antecedently to his Law he might have done that much as an affliction without sin 2. And after he did no way that I know of oblige himself to the contrary to a Sinner before the Covenant of Grace 3. And having threatned punishment in general he might choose what punishment he saw fit 8. What God would do as decreed the prediction or the event only can tell us 9. That God must by necessity of Justice and Truth punish the least sinful thought or remissness with some degree of punishment according to that Law seemeth to me somewhat clear 1. And yet it is more clear that it is various degrees of punishment which are comprized in the word Death or Filius mortis
which is not likely To perform one act of Love and Obedience is not so hard as to do it to the death though we lose our lives in the expressions of it Object But our first Faith giveth us Right to the Spirit of Confirmation and Immutability though more must be done for Perfection Answ 1. It appeareth then that Perfection and Glory is more than Confirmation 2. It is certain that the Regenerate are mutable as to the degrees of Grace and are far from Perfection at the first 3. The generality of the Fathers and ancient Churches thought that true Justification and Right to Heaven and true Love to God was lost by many And Austin himself and his Followers so thought 4. And they that think otherwise yet know that Glory is still given us quoad jus in the Promise on condition of our perseverance And we should hardly find so many Threatnings against them that fall away if all might so easily know that the first act of Obedience doth so fix us and give us in justice a Right to Immutability § 19. M. S. The Arguments to prove that any one Act had the pròmise of Immutability and Glory are these Argument 1. If God were to declare his rewarding Justice then he must reward one act Thus Bradwardiâ—â— also chideth his Master Lombard as inclining to Pelagius for holding that Adam could have forborn Sin by his Free-will without Gods spâ—dâ—l Grace that is his Will that so it should be which he saith was necessâ—ry before the Fall as well as since and that else Adam by once not sâ—â—ning when tempted had merited Confirmation as he saith the Angels did being tempted by Leviathan lib. 2. c. 10. An. 1. God was not obliged to any Reward but according to the tenor of his Law Prove that his Law promised Glory or Immutability for one act 2. Bonum est ex causis integris one act is but a small paâ—â— of a mans life The Promise was to the whole course only 3. God did reward every act His acceptance and the continuance of all â—he blessings of that Paradise and the comfort of his Love was a greâ—â— Reward § 20. M. S. If one act of Obedience deserved unchangeable Happinesâ— then God must bestow it But c. An. I deny the minor One act deserved it not No act deserved in Commutative Justice And no act deserved it of governing Justice but such as the Law antecedently made it due to § 21. M. S. Merit it is a fuitableness of the work to the wages â—â—â— that please God are under his good pleasure the fruit of which must be â—â—â— enjoying of his Spirits infinite assistance This Adam might have claimed â—â— Justice and gloried for one act deserveth a Reward An. This is sufficiently answered 1. Wages strictly taken is Mâ—â—â—â— given by a Proprietary commutatively It 's blasphemy to say that God can owe any Creature such for he can receive nothing but his own The word when used to us is improperly taken But praemium a Reward we have but no work deserveth that but by the ordinate Justice of the Law Some few Papists talk of a dignity ex proportione operâ—â— but the Scotists and the wisest of them deny any but 1. Ex congruitate 2. Ex pacto Your suitableness may signifie either 1. A congruity ad fines regiminis or else ad praemium qua promissum And thus it 's true But it 's not proved that any one act was such 2. Or it may â—ignifie a suitableness in proportion ex simplici dignitate operis obliging the Governor antecedently to his Law 2. Or obliging God as Proprietor to compensation And so it is untrue that Merit is a suitableness of the work to the wages here 2. It 's unproved that Gods pleasedness must ever be shewed by the Spirits infinite assistance or that one act deserved this It 's unlike that the Angels that kept not their first state did never one act of Obedience nor were never under Gods approbation Prov. 16. 7. When a mans ways please the Lord he maketh his Enemies to be at peace with him God saith This â—is a Reward You say less than eternal life is none 1 King 3. 10. The speech of Solomon pleased the Lord And yet one would think by his filthiness and Idolatry and forsaking God that he was not glorified nor made immutable With the Sacrifice of Alms God is well pleased Heb. 13. 16. Phil. 4. 18. and with relation-Relation-Duties Col. 3. 20. And yet all that did them even sincerely were not glorified then nor absolutely immutable § 22. M. S. Arg. 2. Unchangeable misery would have been the reward of one sin Ergo c. An. I deny the consequenâ—e Misery was threatned to one sin Glory was not promised to one act of Obedience Obedience during life is certainly due from Man to God He that denieth it him in one act denieth him his due But he that giveth it him in one act giveth him but little of his due Your Argument is like these The Souldier that is a Traytor in one act deserveth death Therefore he that watcheth or fighteth but once deserveth all his wages and honour The Son that curseth his Father once deserveth punishment Therefore he that obeyeth him once deserveth the Inheritance He that is bound to pay an hundred pound forfeiteth his Bond if he leave a penny unpaid Therefore he forfeits it not if he pay but a penny The Servant that is hired for a day or year doth forfeit his wages if he be idle or rebel an hour or a day Therefore he deserveth his wages if he do Service but an hour or a day The disease of one part may kill a man Therefore the health of one part only will keep a man alive He that is hired to build a House or a Ship well forfeits his wages for one hole or gross defect Therefore he deserveth his wages if he lay but one Brick or Board But bonum est ex causts integris § 23. M. S. His Sin is more his own than his Obedience Ans The assistance of the Spirit could not take place in the first act because not deserved And his Obedience would have been as much his own as his Sin An. This is quite beyond the Jesuites 1. It 's true that the rewarding gift or help of the Spirit for confirmation was not given Adam to his first act But it 's not true that he had no help of the Spirit If you will not call Gods necessary Grace which you said did sanctifie all his powers by the name of the Spirits help you must say It was the help of God the Father Son and Holy Spirit without which he could have done nothing 2. But can you think that God did as much to his Sin as to his Sanctification and caused it as much as he was ready to cause his first Obedience Should he have been no more beholden to God for his Holiness than for his Sin This is too indifferent
be justified by any act of Faith in specie besides the recumbency on his Righteousness to be imputed to us or by any numero besides the first will likely say that it is Justification by another Righteousness than that which the Scripture saith is imputed to us to be justified by the Imputation of any but the first Act of Christ's Obedience Or else that if all be imputed we have a redundancy of Righteousness and deserve many Heavens or one oftener than needs But when men have received some unsound Principles all things must be forced to comply with them § 37. M. S. Towards the end the M. S. summeth up my Assertions and setteth down some as contrary to them In reckoning up mine he sheweth candor and ingenuity and a good memory having not the Book at hand But I must advertise his Readers 1. That he taketh all from my Aphorisms the first Book I wrote in my youth when my Conceptions of these things were less digested wherefore I have above twenty years ago retracted that Book till I had leisure to correct it and have since more fully opened my judgment in my Confession and in my Disput of Justification and other Writings and most fully in my Methodus Theologiae unpublished 2. That he over-looketh my asserting our Adoption to be by the Merits of Christ's Active Obedience yea and our Justification too as well as by his Passive 3. That reciting my words that it is by Gods Will in the form of his Donation or Covenant that Faith hath that use to Justification which is nearest it viz. the formal Reason of a Condition he leaveth out my other assertion that Faith 's material disposition or aptitude to this form or office is the very nature of it as fitted to that use about its Object Christ which Gods design and our case required His Assertions as against me are as followeth § 28. M. S. 1. There is no way to Life but by Doing It is not enough that the Law be not dishonoured but it must be glorified An. Doing is a word of doubtful sense It 's one thing to Do all that the Law of Innocency required and another thing to do all that the Law of Grace maketh necessary to life It 's one thing to Do all our selves and another thing for a Mediator to merit Pardon and Life to be given conditionally by a new Covenant by Doing all in kind and much more than all that we should have done for us though not in our persons The way to Life now hath many parts 1. Christ's perfect habitual active and passive Righteousness fulfilling the Law of Innocency and the Law of Moses and the peculiar Law of the Mediator to merit Pardon Spirit Adoption and Glory to be given by the New Covenant on its terms 2. The said New Covenant as the donative Instrument and Law of Life and Pardon and Adoption by it 3. Our doing or performing the Conditions of the New Covenant by Grace But our personal Doing all according to the Law of Innocency really or reputatively to be justified by that Law is none of the way of Life which you think the only way And I hope we shall both meet there § 39. M. S. It 's clear as the light of the Sun that their fundamental distinction is absurd to make sinning and suffering equivalent to doing because he that hath born the utmost penalty hath done no more towards living than he that never sinned or suffered else Adam in Innocency should have been sentenced worthy of life If a Servant instead of his Service steal and restore it he meriteth not his wages c. An. 1. It 's certain that you mistake and wrong us I never put sinning among the things that are equivalent to doing or meriting Of this before 2. I doubt you noted not sufficiently that no Creature can merit commutatively as a Proprietor of God as a Servant doth his wages nor can have any thing of God but what in respect of such merit and the value of the thing is an absolute free Gift free as to commutation And that all Gods Laws of Life are but a prescription of the wise Order in which he will give his free benefits As a Father will give Lands to the Son that will behave himself decently and thankfully and not to the contemptuous Rebel So that as to commutation no Man or Angel hath other merit than not to commerit the contrary perdition God is never the better for our Doing If you dream of meriting commutatively from a Proprietor by work for wages I can soon tell you what we set up instead of such merit I hope you had no such thoughts but want of due distinguishing But as to Doing and Merit in respect to Paternal Justice that which I set instead of fulfilling the first Law is a◠aforesaid not sinning and suffering but 1. Christ's Satisfaction and the Merit of his compleat Righteousness 2. The Gift of Pardon and Life by a new conditional Covenant merited and made by him 3. Actual Pardon of all sin thereby 4. Actual Adoption 5. Our fulfilling the Condition of that Covenant that these may be ours And thus the Law was dishonoured by our Sin but is glorified by Christs Obedience and Satisfaction And Gospel-Justice but specially Mercy glorified in our personal Obedience to the Gospel without such Doing indeed Christ's as Principal in fulfilling the Law in the Person of a Mediator and ours as subordinate in obeying the Gospel there is no Glorification And I think this is plain truth But in your instance of a Servant deserving his wages you seem to look at Commutative Justice when we have to do only with governing Paternal Justice And you should have remembred that if the Servant do not his Work in order of governing Justice it is his crime And if he have no fault he hath no fault of Omission And he that hath no Sin of Omission hath done all his Duty and so deserved the Reward As for Adam 1. In the first instant of his life he was bound to no present Duty before he could do a moral Act. 2. But afterward I think he merited in tantum pro tempore and had not the Condition of the Promise been of further extent than one act he had merited life But a Reward for a years Duty is not merited by an hours § 40. M. S. There is a medium between just and unjust He was non-justus He was not actually just though habitually He had done nothing for which the Law could justifie him else why did he not live for ever An. 1. Habitual holiness fits a Soul for Glory where no more is due as if one die immediately And so it would have done Adam had God translated him instantly and made him no Law of actual Duty 2. But afterward that Adam in Innocency did that for which the Law would justifie him in tantum for that time He fulfilled all the Law for so long else he had
be Believed in and as they were to be subject and devoted to him And what mouth can surelier reveal him And Heb. 11. 6. Without faith it is impossible to please God for he that cometh to God must believe that God is and that he is the Rewarder of them that diligently seek him Act. 10. 34 35. Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons but in every Nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousness is accepted with him And John's and Christ's Preaching were Repent And Except ye Repent ye shall all perish And Christ was a Prince and a Saviour to give Repentance to Israel and Remission of Sins 26. The belief of the pardoning Mercy of God to the penitent and the recoverable state of Souls and the duty of Repenting and seeking pardon and mercy of God in order to Salvation in opposition to despair and neglect of all endeavours for recovery is so common to all Mankind that though self-love may make them hope inordinately for that which they would have to be true yet it is most apparent that it proceedeth from some Natural notion of God and is to be numbred with the Notitiae Communes which are past controversie with all Mankind 27. Therefore though the Law of Innocency was the Law of Nature in the first and eminent sence yet this Common notice of Gods pardoning Mercy and man's duty to Repent hope and seek Salvation may well be called The Law of lapsed Nature as the other is the Law of Innocent Nature For the Nature of God and the nature of Man with all circumstant Natures and the course of natural Providence running so much in the way of great restoring mercy do certifie mankind of the foresaid hopes and duties 28. For it is not as some have said an absurdity but a certain Truth that the Law of Nature is as far mutable as Nature it self is mutable For the Law of Nature commonly mis-described is nothing else but the Nature of Man and all other Creatures of God so far as per modum signâ— they notifie to us Gods Will appointing what shall be Due from us and To us as the instrument of Gods Government of Mankind Now this Notification is most by the Resultancy of duty from the Nature of Man compared with God and all the Creatures that he hath to do with And the very variety of circumstances as in the case of Adam's Childrens Marriages and ours c. may alter Nature's signification obligation and Law 29. That which is called the Covenant of Nature or Innocency was in the Main the very Law of Innocent Nature in all the parts of it 1. Nature being perfect revealed Man's Duty perfectly to obey 2. Nature declared Punishment to be due to sin yea to all sin And this punishment to be suitable to the nature of the Offender compared with the God offended and the injury done Especially that if men will undoe themselves by forsaking Life and Love and Joy and casting themselves into darkness diseasedness and misery when it is foreshewn them God is not bound to hinder or recover them 3. Nature telleth man that God who made his Soul a simple Intellectual spirit and Life it self though created and dependant intended not to annihilate it and that its noble faculties fitted to know God and Love him and Live to him perfectly in Immortality were made for this employment in Immortality and not in vain And that he that Naturally maketh it mans duty to hope and seek for Immortal happiness hath not made this hope or duty in vain Nor will fail or frustrate or destroy them that forfeit not their hopes So that the Covenant depends not alone upon supernatural Revelation 30. But that which Nature revealeth about the penalty is 1. Not that God of necessity must punish the loss of Innocency as highly as he may do 2. But that he may justly punish the Sinner in rigour by temporal spiritual and eternal miseries 3. And that the Ends of Government the honour of his Wisdom Goodness Power Truth and Justice and the order of the humane world do require that sin scape not free but some exemplary punishment be a Vindication of God and a warning to Man which our death afflictions and spiritual sufferings manifest in part and the sufferings of Christ more fully So that pardon and dispensing in part with his Right to punish us according to the Law first broken is no falshood in God nor any injustice nor any violation of his Law of Nature 31. The Law which God put all mankind under after the fall and the world without the Church is under still is the Preceptive part of the Law of Innocent Nature as de futuro the promise of it being ceased and the penalty not totally nullifyed but made remedyable by an act of oblivion or Conditional Covenant of Grace q. d. Thou shalt perfectly obey me for the time to come and every sin shall deserve everlasting punishment so far as that I might justly inflict it and will do it if it be not remitted But all thy sin shall be forgiven thee and thou shalt have the free gift of pardon and salvation if thou Believe in me thy merciful Saviour and repent and give up thy self to me to be saved and to be Mine by sincere obedience and Love 32. The deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt by Moses and their imbodying into a new Common-wealth with a Theocratical Government in a peculiar manner and a new body of Divine Laws were all done in performance of Gods Covenant with Abraham Isaac and Jacob separating their seed as Holy from all the world Not as if no other were Holy in the world but as the Priests and Levites were sanctified to stand nearer to God than the people and so specially Holy even so Israel was a Holy Nation as being nearer God by separation than the rest of the Nations of the world 33. The entire Law of God which the Israelitish Nation was under had all these parts 1. The remaining preceptive and directive part of the Law of Nature 2. The Universal Covenant of Grace made with all mankind in Adam and Noah and personally renewed to Abraham for himself and his posterity 3. The special promise to Abraham and his seed as a peculiar people of whom the Messiah should come 4. The body of the Law of Moses as a Law for that Common-wealth or Politie which was not so given to any other Common-wealth or Nation * * * Lâ—g Suarez de Lâ—g l. 9. who c. 6. distinguisheth of the Law strictly taken and so it hath not saith he promises of eternal felicity and the Law as including the promise to the Fathers and so it had such promises But those promises being the Soul of the Law should not by the Jews have ever been separated from the rest in their conceits of it 1. The first of these undoubtedly is still in force 2. The second is turned into the
committed And the obligation to duty goeth before the obligation to punishment for that same action because the action cometh between and the first is an act of Gods antecedent Will and the second of his consequent Will that is of the Retributive and not the Preceptive part of the Law And they note not that the question is not what obedience a man is bound to but what he performeth or must be reputed to have performed If they will speak so unaptly as to say that the Law commandeth Lapsed man not to have sin or imperfect man to have been perfect that is that the Command to day bindeth Adam ad praeteritum not to have sinned yesterday or bindeth to Impossibility in nature that existent sin should not be existent in all which I leave them to their â—iberty of words yet it is certain that no man hath perfectly obeyed for one year or day And therefore if Christ's perfect obedience and â—oliness be imputed to them from their first being then they are reâ—uted not-lapsed nor-sinners from the beginning and so not pardonaâ—le But if it be only for the time after sin that Christ's perfection is â—theirs after what sin must it be If after Adam's then we need no pardon of any but Adam's sin If after conversion then we need no pardon for sins after Conversion If after our last sin then Christ's perâ—ection is not imputed to us till after death 126. Others would come nearer the matter and say that we are â—eputed Righteous as fulfillers of the Law and yet reputed Sinners as Breakers of the Law and that though there be no medium in naturals between light and darkness life and death yet there is between a â—reaker of the Law and a fulfiller of it viz. a non-fulfiller and beâ—ween just and unjust that is not-just But this is a meer darkness There â—s a medium negative in a person as not obliged but none between Posiâ—ive and Privative in one obliged as such A stone is neither just nor â—rivatively unjust Nor a man about a thing never commanded or forâ—idden him But what 's this to the matter God's Law is pre-supposed we talk of nothing but Moral acts The Law forbiddeth Omissions and Commissions both are sin Do these men think that he is not reputed Positively just and not only not-unjust who is reputed never to have committed a sin nor left undone a duty in his life Can â—he Law be fulfilled more than so What is Righteousness if that be not Obj. Adam was neither just nor unjust in his first moment no nor till he sinned say some because till then he was not obliged to obey or at least to any meritorious act that is to love God Ans 1. Adam was in his first instant but Habitually just and not by Act because not obliged to impossibilities any more than an Infant or a stone But we speak only of obliged persons 2. It is not true that Adam was not obliged to obey and Love God before he sinned or that he never Loved God as God Obj. At least Adam merited not the Reward though he sinned not till then Ans 1. He merited what Reward he had viz. the continuance o his blessings first freely given but not an immutable state 2. It is yet unresolved what that was by which Adam must merit Immutability and Glory whether 1. Once obeying or consent to his full Covenant 2. Or once loving God 3. Or conquering once 4. Or eating of the tree of Life 5. Or presevering in perfect obedience to the end that is till God should translate him which is most likely His not Meriting Immutability before the time was no sin we confess 3. And we maintain as well as you that Christ hath not only satisfied for sin and merited pardon but also Merited Immâ—table Glory But consider 1. That Adam's not doing that which was to merit Glory was his sin of omission and to pardon that omission is to take him as a meriter of Glory 2. Therefore it must be somewhat more than he forfeited by that omission and his commission which cometh in by Christ's merit above forgiveness 3. That Christ merited all this both by his active passive and habitual Righteousness by which he merited pardon 4. That it was not we that merited it in him but he to give it us only on the terms of a Law of Grace 127. Yet some come nearer and say that To punish and not-Reward are not all one And so the respect that Sin hath to the deserved punishment needed pardon and satisfaction But our deserving the Reward needed Christ's perfect Obedience to be imputed In this there is somewhat of truth But you must avoid the errors that lie in the way and aâ—â— by most supposed truths 1. Remember that man can have nothing from God but what is a meer Gift as to the matter though it be a Reward as to the order and ends of collation And in this case punishment is damni as well as sensus And so the loss of the Reward is the principal part of Hell or Punishment So that if Christ's death hath pardonâ— our sins of Omission we are reputed to have done all our duty And if so we are reputed to have merited the Reward And if he pardon our â—â—â—â— as to all punishment of sense and loss he pardoneth them as to thâ—â— forfeiture of Heaven as a Gift if not as a Reward 128. But say they remission of sin is but part of Justification because a man may be forgiven and yet not reputed never to have broken the Law To put away guilt and to make one righteous are two thing Ans Still confusion Guilt is either of the fault as such or of the punishment and of the fault only as the cause of punishment If all gâ—â— both culpae poenae were done away that person were reputed poâ—â— righteous that is never to have omitted a Duty or committed a â—â— But indeed when only the Reatus poenae culpae quoad poenam is doâ— away the Reatus culpae in se remaineth And this Christ himself never taketh away no not in Heaven where for ever we shall be judged once to have sinned and not to be such as never sinned 129. And this seemeth the very core of their error that they thâ—â— Of this see wotton de Reconcil at large we must be justified in Christ by the Law of Innocency which justified Christ himself and that we are quit or washed simply from all guilt of fault as well as obligation to punishment which is a great untruth contrary to all the scope of the Gospel which assureth us that we are justified by the Law of Grace or Faith and not by the Law of Works That Christ freeth us from the curse and penalty of the Law which he could not do if we were reputed never to have deserved it as never being Sinners If we are reputed such as fulfilled the Law of Innocency by another in our civil
hatred and other punishment God then is reconciled because they are not objects of his hatred And to take away the Reatum poenae and the Reatum culpae non in se sed quoad poenam is all one and all that both sides mean if they understand what they say But to all eternity it will be true that we once sinned which none deny obedience 5. Or as if there were any obedience whose end is not Righteousness and Justification against the change of the contrary disobedience Do not these men obey that they may be so far righteous Or is not every man so far Righteous as he doth Righteousness Is not every man that loveth God justifiable as a Lover of him for so far as he loveth him 6. And is not Gratitude an end and a thing commanded by the Law If we obeyed perfectly in Christ we were perfectly thankful in Christ 7. But if they say that Christ fulfilled only the Law made to Adam for us and not his own Law of Grace and therefore that he obeyed for us only to the ends of that Law I answer 1. If the ends and matter of that Law be fulfilled by us in him our obedience to any other must be needless For he that is supposed never to have sinned need not use any means for pardon or remedy 2. By this rule Christ only fulfilled the Law for Adam and Eve and for us only as we were in them which is only Virtually and not Actually at all but not at all for us according to any obligation that ever fell upon our persons For 1. We were never personally bound to perfect personal perpetual obedience as the Condition of life For that Covenant as to the promise and condition ceased before any man was born 2. And all the duty in the world which â—â— are bound to is to be done for Evangelical ends for recovering Grace and unto Gratitude c. To say therefore that we are perfectly Righteous as having perfectly obeyed all Gods Law in Christ and yet that we are bound to obey all that Law that ever we were under to another end and that Christ obeyed for us only as to that which we were never under personally but virtually in Adam this is to say and unsay 8. Lastly they see not that their own answer implyeth the truth of what we assert and is the same that we give which their cause is uncapable of â—â— We say that Christ did indeed most perfectly obey the Law of Innocency so far for us and in our stead though not in our persons as that he hath vindicated the truth and glory of God and his Law by doing that which we should have done and did not And hath merited for us a better Covenant which obligeth us not at all to obey for the ends of the first Covenant viz. that our perfection might be our Righteousness or the condition of life but only to obey for the ends of the new Covenant for the obtaining and improving of Recovering Grace and Salvation by Christ freely given us which we our selves must do or perish 190. And whereas they tell us that We may as well say that man must not dye because Christ dyed for us as not obey because Christ obeyed for us They strangely use our reason against themselves and know it not For we say that we must dye because we did not perfectly either obey the Law or suffer all its penalty by Christ as our legal person But he suffered only to satisfie Justice in tantumâ— to this end that man himself suffering death and temporal afflictions and obeying the Law of Grace might be saved from all the rest of the punishment But if we had so fulfilled the Law as aforesaid by Doing or suffering we could not have dyed nor suffered the least affliction as a penalty For all punishment in the essence of the â—elation is for sin 191. And when they say that It is no more inconvenient to say that Christ was perfect in our person than that he satisfied in our person and we by him I answer 1. Both are false and subvert the Gospel as aforesaid 2. But yet we may fitly say that Christ suffered in the person of a Sinner but mark the sence 1. Suffering as penal belongeth to a Sinner as such But Satisfaction is an Effect of Christ's suffering which resulteth not from the meer suffering nor from the person of a Sinner but from the Will and Covenant of God made to that excellent person who was God and perfect Man So that it is not so aptly said He satisfyed as it is that he suffered in the person of a Sinner 2. Note that it is not any other man's person that we mean that Christ suffered in but his own And we mean that he took upon him the person of a Sinner himself in as much as he consented to suffer for Sin And so personating here is not meant becoming any other man's person in Law sense so as that other legally suffered what he did But it is only his own persons becoming a sufferer in the stead of Sinners for their Sins As the Apostle saith He was made sin for us so he might as truly have said He was made a sinner for us that is so far by Imputation as that he undertook to suffer as Sinners suffer and for their sins But because wordy controversies seeming real are the great troubleâ—s of the world lest any should think that we differ more than indeed we do I would fain bring the matter as far from under the ambiguity of words as possibly I can To which end I further add 1. That as we hold that Adam was the Natural Root or Parent of Mankind so also that Christ was the Foederal Root of all the saved and in several respects though not all a second Adam 2. Adam was but one single Natural person nor did God by error or arbitrary reputation esteem or account him to be any other than he was None of our persons were distinct persons in Adam nor those persons that now they are Therefore we were not so personally in him at his fall But all our persons are in time and mediately by our Progenitors derived lineally from him yet we deny not all Souls to be from God and all Bodies an accretion of the common Elements not as having been Persons existent in him but being Persons caused remotely by him Our present Persons were seminally or virtually in him which is as much as to say that not the Person but the Semen Personae vel virtus causalis was in him To be only Virtually or Causally or Seminally in Adam is in proper speech for that Person not really to have been in him For Causa non est effectus Virtus generativa non est Persona generata To be only Virtually in Adam is terminius diminuens as to personal inexistence and denyeth it And as Dr. Twisse hath oft well asserted It is our natural relation to Adam
I believe I grant it if 1. This be in it self as evident 2. And as certain to me as Gods Word is otherwise I deny it 236. Obj. A man cannot believe and not know that he believeth Ans But a man may sincerely believe and yet through ignorance either of the Scripture or himself be uncertain that indeed his Faith is sincere and not such as is common to the justified 237. Some Protestants by erring in this point and saying that justifying Faith is a certain perswasion or belief that we are justified and that it is Gods own Word that I or you are actually justified or are sincere Believers and that the believing it is properly fides Divina have greatly scandalized and hardened the Papists to our disgrace 238. And so have those that say that in the Creed the meaning of I believe the Remission of Sin is I believe that my sins are remitted actually And that all must thus believe 239. Some say that the Spirit within them saith that they are sincere Believers and the Word of the Spirit is the Word of God and to believâ— it is to believe God Ans This is the Enthâ—sâ—asts conceit which if true all such have prophetical Inspiration For the Spirit to bring any new word from God is one thing and to give us the Understanding Love and Obedience to such a Word is another thing The Spirit doth indeed assure us of our sincerity but not by a new Word from God to tell us so but 1. By giving us that sincere Faith it self 2. By acting it and increasing it 3. By helping us to know it 4. By giving us the love of God and other Graces 5. By giving us the comfort of all But the reception and perception of these internal Operations is not properly called a Belief of the Word of God Else when we make Gods Word the adequate Object of Faith we shall be still at an uncertainty what that Word is 240. Yet this perswasion that we are sincere and justified is divine where the Spirit causeth it but not a divine Faith Yea it is participatively of divine Faith because Gods Word is one of the premises though the weaker must denominate the conclusion * * * Of this see Albertinus's Disp at large 241. Obj. A Reprobate or Devil may believe all the Articles of Faith without application but justifying Faith applieth Christ and his benefits to our selves Ans It 's true But this application is not a certainty nor a perswasion nor a believing that I am justified no more than that I am glorified no nor that I shall be so neither But it is an accepting of Christ offered that I may be justified and saved So that here are all these applying acts in it 1. I believe that Christ as the Saviour of the World is my Saviour as he is all other mens and is not the Devils that is that he hath done that for me which he hath done for all mankind 2. I believe that he is offered to me personally in the Promise or Covenant of Grace on condition of believing-acceptance and that with and for all his purchased benefits and so for my Justification 3. I believe that if I so accept him I shall be justified 4. By true consent I do accordingly accept him to justifie sanctifie and save me But when all this is done 1. I do not believe that God hath said in his word that I am justified nor that my Faith is sincere 2. And my Faith is so weak that I may long doubt of that sincerity which I have and so of my Justification 3. And when I come to be certain of my Faith it is not by believing God as saying that I do certainly believe but by experience of its sincerity upon just trial by the Spirits help 242. No man can be sure that his Faith is sincere and saving who is not assured that it will help him to love God as God above all yea already doth so and that it mortifieth selfishness and will prevail with him to deny even life it self and all the world for Christ and Salvation So far as a man doubteth of any of this he must needs doubt of his own sincerity 243. So weak is Faith in most that are sincere and so little kept in exercise and so strong is sense and self and flesh and worldly bâ—its and interest and Satan's temptations that in my experience who have conversed with as many that are careful of their Souls as most have done I think it is a very small number that I could ever hear say I am certain of my Justification and Salvation But a great number who have lived in holy confidence hope and peace and some in great joy but most in tollerable fears and doubting and some few oppressed by those doubts So that certainty of Salvation is very rare 244. When Bellarmine saith that our assurance more belongeth to Hope than Faith and that it is but moral certainty by signs that we have of our Justification Sincerity and Salvation he so little differeth from the sense of almost all godly Protestants that were it not through other distances and partiality we had never read in Luther's days that for this one point alone we have cause enough of our alienation from the Romanists 245. They err on one extream who say that all are commanded to believe that they are justified or any as if it were Gods Word And they err on the other hand who command doubting or commend it as if it were a duty or a benefit And they speak the truth who say that our doubting of our own Sincerity and Justification if we are sincere is a sin of Infirmity and a Calamity proceeding from weakness of Faith Hope Love and Self-acquaintance which we should use all possible diligence to overcome But they that are not sincere are bound to know it And first to seek and get sincerity and then discern it 246. It is by the Spirit that all Christians must come to their assurance But not by the Spirit as speaking this in us as a word from God Thou art justified or shalt be saved or art sincere But by the aforesaid Acts The Spirit in us is first Christ's Agent Advocate and Witness to assure us that he is the Saviour of the World And next he is our Witness to assure us that we are Gods adopted Children which he doth by being in us Gods Mark and the Pledge First-Fruits and earnest of our heavenly Inheritance by effectual habituating our Souls to the predominant love of God and Holiness and Heaven Where-ever this Sanctification is there is the Evidence and Witness of our Adoption He that findeth by the Fruits that he hath the Spirit findeth the certain proof of his Justification and earnest of Glory SECT XVII Of Love as the end of Faith 247. This predominant Love of God and Holiness is so proper a Cui non unus idemque vitâ— scopus est hic
mind with Augustine and Prosper If this had not been Augustine's Doctrine the predeterminant Dominicans had never maintained it as his against the Jesuits which you may see in Alvarez Disput 107. and many others Much less would Jansenius * * * Yea and Bradwardine who speaketh more harshly than Alvarez and yet asserteth falling away from true Grace though not Predestinationâ— or Gods Will to save And Janseniusâ— To. 1. li. 5. c. 22 23. p. 126 127 128. proveth that the difference between Augustine and Pelagius lay not about free Pardon or infused habits of Grace which Pelagius confessed though many charge him with the contrary who understand him not But that Pelagius confessed not the necessity of that actual Adjutorium Gratiae specialis to keep us from future sin and to do our duty besides pardon of former Sin and infused habitual Grace By which it appeareth that Augâ—stiâ—â— and he agreed that Remission of Sin and infused habits may be lost and that Augustine said perseverance upon Gods Will or Election and his actual help or adjutorium conservans the zealous Follower of Augustine so perfectly acquainted with his Works have so thought and said and so propugned it See him at large in his Augustin de Grat. Christi lib. 9. cap. 7. pag. 392 393 c. lib. 3. c. 20. pag. 163 164. Though I make no doubt but our Divines at Dort knew this to be Augustine's professed judgment yet in their Judic de Persever I find three Sentences cited by them out of Augustine as making for the contrary by which I suppose they intended to prove him doubtful or wavering But 1. Three doubtful passages as to the sense are not to be set against a mans open frequently professed judgment thus expounded and followed by all his Disciples 2. Let us examine the Texts 1. The last of the three is de Correp Grat. cap. 9. But though Davenant be that Divine whom I honour for judgment above all or almost all since the Apostles days yet I must say that in this they all dealt very negligently or partially For in that place Augustine professedly distinguisheth of Sons of God predestinate and not predestinate and saith Nec nos moveat quod filiis suis quibusdam Deus not dat istam perseverantiam Absit enim ut iâ—a esset si de illis praedestinatis essent secundum propositum vocatis qui vere sunt filii promissionis Nam isti cum pie vivunt dicuntur filii Dei sed quoniam victuri sunt impiè in eadem impietate morituri non eos dicit filios Dei praescientia Dei And expounding ex nobis exierunt sed non erant ex nobis c. ait Quid aliud dicunt nisi non erant filii etiam quando erant in professione nomine filiorum Non quia justitiam simulaverunt sed quia in ea non permanserunt Neque enim ait nam si fuissent ex nobis veram non fictam justitiam tenuissent utique nobiscum sed si fuissent ex nobis permanissent utique nobiscum In bono illos volebat proculdubio manere Erant itaque in bono sed quia in eo non permanserunt non erant ex nobis non erant ex numero filiorum Nam non perit filius promissionis sed filius perditionis Filiis suis non praedestinatis Deus perseverantiam non dedit Et rursus quos dicimus inimicos ejus vel parvulos filios inimicorum ejus quoscunque eorum sic regeneraturus est ut in ea side quae per dilectionem operatur hanc vitam finiant jam antequam hoc fiat in illa praedestinatione sunt filii ejus dati sunt Christo filio ejus ut non pereant sed habeant vitam aeternam Quia ergo non habuerunt perseverantiam sicut non vere Discipuli Christi ita non vere filii Dei fuerunt etiam quando esse videbantur ita vocabantur Apud cum hoc non sunt cui notum est quod futuri sunt id est ex bonis mali Propter hoc Apostolus cum dixisset scimus quoniam diligentibus Deum omnia co-operantur in bonum sciens nonnullos diligere Deum in eo bono usque in finem non permanere mox addit His qui secundum propositum vocati sunt c vid. reliqua Now the words which our Divines cite are these afore-cited which say They were not the Sons of God that fell away When nothing can be plainlier uttered by the pen of man I think than that Augustine affirmeth them to be Sons as to their sincerity of Faith which worketh by love but not to be Sons by predestination And that not all that are sincere in Faith and Love are Sons in the most eminent sense but that part of them who are predestinated to perseverance and the inheritance and that nothing but predestination and perseverance was wanting to their Salvation He that doubteth whether this was Augustine's sense when he hath read him may doubt of almost any thing which he is unwilling to believe The next Text is cited as Cont. Adult I suppose they mean Adversarios and it 's false printed Legis et Prophet l. 2. c. 2. But I can there find nothing of any such Subject much less sense The only Text therefore of all cited by them out of Augustine remaineth which giveth any shew of favour to their Theses and that is cited contra Julian Pelag. l. 5. c. 3. In cap. 4. I find the words viz. Istorum reproborum neminem adducit Deus ad poenitentiam salubrem et spiritualem qua homo in Christo reconciliatur Deo This is all that I find dubious in him Now whether these few words better declare his judgment than whole Chapters and Discourses you may judge And whether the constant tenour of his Doctrine do not direct us to conclude that this is here his sense viz. that he calleth that poenitentiam salubrem which effectually bringeth men to Salvation and which endureth to the end as such And by a man in Christ means not as aforesaid a man given to Christ with a decree to save him and by reconciliatur Deo he mean not one that is so reconciled as to be a predestinate Son decreed to Glory Historical Truth must not be denied nor doth doctrinal Truth need historical falshood for its defence nor can agree with it This undoubtedly was Augustin's mind Only one more Text they cite out of Ambrose de Jacob vilâ— beata li. 1. cap. 6. But Ambrose is of his Disciple Augustine's mind The words are Quis audeat accusare quos electos divino cernis judicio Nunquid Deus Pater ipse qui contulit potest dona sua rescindere quos adoptione suscepit eos a paterni affectus gratia relegare But 1. There Ambrose expresly speaketh of the Elect only 2. And if he had not such words as these are usualy spoken by the Fathers
efficaciter volens omnia seipsum alia quum Deo placcbit perdere ut impleatur Sancta voluntas Dei Quod etiam nulli creaturae nec ipsâ—sibi libero aliquo amore adhaeret in se in Deo propter Deum Quae volunt as multo est purior laudabilior quam volunt as perferendi pro Christo Martyrium pro spe assequendi vitam aeternam Et certe longe aliud est optare aut Velle quam sic Deum amare de facto sic affectum esse sic efficaciter velle sicut opto desidero efficax Velle Scientiae seu ad scientiam Sed ubi efficaciter id vellem manum ad aratrum mittens labori vigiliis id genus operis non parcerem Si ponatur per Revelationem certiorari non nego sic certum fieri posse Nec expedit hominem nisi valde sciens doct us fuerit de his multum se tentare quoniam difficilimum est proprias affectiones metiri But sure these fruits grow not on any common stock and the Heirs of Heaven and Hell are not so like as to be undiscernable nor Gods promises such as no man can be sure that he hath a right to them It is enough that these things do prove assurance difficult and rare SECT XX. What Repentance for particular Sins is necessary to pardon 292. But the very Act of Repentance hath such various degrees that those also here deserve our consideration For he that hath the habit of holiness no doubt hath some degree of Repentance secretly stirring in him before it cometh to deep repentance and open confession I do not think that David was without all remorse and repentance till Nathan spake to him though his Repentance was not such as the quality of his sin required And it is not every remorse nor every degree of Repentance which is sufficient to prove a Soul sanctified that is habitually possessed with that love of God and the hatred of Sin And such at least the act must be 293. In gross known Sin Repentance is not true unless it contain a Resolution presently to forsake it He that is unresolved though he have much remorse and trouble of mind is not truly penitent Nor he that is resolved only to forsake it sometime hereafter or when he hath sinned once more but not at the present 294. And as this is true of actual Repentance so a true Habit must be such as is the Habit of such acts even a habitual love to present holiness and a habitual hatred to present Sin which in the course of our lives doth actually resolve us and preserve us however a violent temptation do interrupt that course 295. But whether every known Sin of the smallest sort in it self have always such Resolutions of present forsaking it in all that are truly penitent is a harder question Many a godly man is frequently angry sinfully and sluggish sinfully and daily useth some idle words and ungoverned and idle thoughts and is sinfully remiss in the degrees of every duty and knoweth all this to be Sin And if he resolved presently to do so no more he would not do so again so frequently as he doth In such a case it is exceeding hard to judge of a man's repentance And yet When Petavius out of Aquin. Elench Ther. Vincent c. 29. p. 109 c. Distinguisheth Peccatum a Culpa and saith that all Sin is not Culpa it is but a trifling with an equivocal or analogical sence of Peccatum And his citation of Augustine there is upon a misinterpretation which the Reader may easily perceive alas whose case is it not we have a dislike of the Sin and a wish that we were delivered from it But that is but a desire that we loved it less and hated it more and proveth not that our hatred is sufficient For many a man that liveth in gross Sin doth wish that his heart were turned from it and did not love it when it is not so turned And why will the same wish then serve about lesser Sins And yet if present Resolution against every small Sin be necessary to pardon even of known Sins alas who is pardoned 296. And if the case must be resolved by the material magnitude or smallness of the Sin what bounds shall we ever be able to assign and what understanding is able to distinguish between the Sin so great which must be presently resolved against ex necessitate medii to pardon and the Sin so small as may be pardoned without such Resolution whether in speech every idle word be such If not whether every idle jeast or every lascivious word or passionate word or backbiting word the ordinary Sin of many strict Professors or every sinful Oath or Curse or Slander who can say it is this and not that And so in all commissions and omissions 297. And it will still remain exceeding difficult what Resolutions against Sin will prove true Repentance For as many a child under correction so many an adult Sinner on his Sick bed or under a terrifying Sermon or conviction not only seemeth but doubtless is as passionately resolved at the present to forsake his Sin as a Godly man is if not more and yet quickly loseth all that Resolution and liveth in the Sin which he resolved to forsake 298. By this it would seem that it is not true Resolution which causeth not the ordinary forsaking of the Sin For to Resolve to day and Sin to morrow is but to play with Sin and not to repent or mortifie it And yet if actual forsaking be necessary of All Sin who then is penitent or can be saved For there is no man that doth good and sinneth Jam. 3. 2. not And in many things we offend all Who leaveth all the idle thoughts and words and negligence c. which he knoweth to be Sin And the most understanding men then would be very hardly saved who know almost all Sin in comparison of the ignorant who know it not 299. And yet no doubt those Sins which are materially small may have such circumstances as may make them more malignant than some greater in the matter As when they are committed through malignant contrivances and ends or in gross contempt or negligence So that this also maketh the decision of the case more difficult 300. And it will be hard not only to know which and how great the Sins must be which are unpardoned if lived in without forsaking or without resolving to forsake them presently if known but also how great and what Sins unknown may stand with saving Grace For surely if men should ignorantly reproach or reject God or Christ or the Holy Ghost or live in Murder Adultery Perjury c. not knowing them to be Sins this would not stand with saving Grace And yet to live in some unknown Sin may 301. And it is as hard to know how oft a gross Sin may be committed in consistence with true habitual
Grace And how oft the Resolution of the will may change without the loss of holy habits The teâ—â—pter will say to David or Peter If once why not twice If twice why not thrice And who but God can say just how oft And yet to set no bounds confoundeth the just and unjust good and bad and maketh Sanctification but a name And to say that Peter's Faith did totally fail or that he was holy deprived of wholly love or saving Grace is rash and an unlikely thing 302. And it must be remembred that the Will is always in the time of sinning more for the committing the Sin than against it actually or else it would not be committed And in omissions it is not prevalently for the Duty else it would be done And if it were Habitually so too as to a holy or a sinful life the person were unholy And when the will known by the practice is sometime actually more for a gross Sin than against it and daily actually more for some small Sins than against them it is wonderous hard here to discern certainly that the contrary habit is our state 303. And it addeth to the difficulty that it is hard to be sure whether the Habit of Love and Holiness may not be predominant and yet the very Habit of some one Sin as well as the act be stronger than the contrary habit For a daily use of the acts seemeth to prove a prevalent Habit. As a Habit of Anger of vain jeasting c. And if a very Habit of one Sin may be prevalent though not of all others it will be hard to say either how great that Sin may be and so whether a Habit of Lust of Pride of Covetousness may stand with Grace in that prevalency or yet how many Sins may be so habitually prevalent in a sanctified man But if no one what shall those think of themselves that live in the daily act of smaller Sins before-mentioned And that they erre who tell us that all Sin is equally mortified in the Habit common experience fully proveth But such men use not to distinguish between the General habit of Love to Good and Hatred to evil which is as the trunk of the Tree to the branches which may have their particular Cankers and Diseases and is indeed Virtually a Habit of all Good and against all Evil and the particular Habits of Good and Evil which are also found in every Soul 304. Yea the difficulty is yet greater by our ignorance of the very nature of a Habit of the will or of that Inclination of it to Good or Evil which is antecedent to the Act which he that hath read the Schoolmen and Metaphysicks or ever well studyed it himself will discern to be tantum non out of the reach of our understandings That it is a Dispositive promptitude to Act we feel But whether that Disposition be it self a secret unobserved Immanent Act disposing to the more open perceptible Act for the Soul is never out of Action and certainly hath at one instant several Acts of which that de fine is oft unobserved and yet most powerful As a Traveller that is taken up with other thoughts and talk would never hold on his way if the end were not actually intended though he feel it not or whether it be the Natural Inclination of the Will corroborated and what that Inclination is whether it lie much in a Receptive disposition of the acted faculties by which they are still ready to receive the Active motion of the Agent power as the Receptivity of the fuel causeth the greatness and constancy of a flame or the opening of the window the shining in of the Sun or the composition of the adapted wheels causeth the Clock or Watch to be easily and truly moved by the poise or spring or what else it is that we call a Habit is not so easily known as unstudied confident Disputers think So that judicious Mr. Truman Tract of Impaten Nat. Mor. seemed to despair of clear understanding it And whether an Infants Principle of Holiness be Quid morale which never came from any act nor is the particular Habit of any act any more than the Inclinatio naturalis ad bonum qua bonum with abundance of other difficulties about Habits These all make our case the harder to be resolved SECT XXI The solution of all the former difficulties in part 305. Of all these difficulties I have no better solution besides what is aforesaid than as followeth 1. That a Dispositive Inclination of the Will to God and actual Holiness is like to the Inclinatio naturalis ad bonum foelicitatem saving that it is not ours ab origine in our lapsed state and that it is more moveable and separable from the Soul And so is quiddam naturae though not quaedam natura called The Divine and new nature in us and is to the Soul what Health is to the man And is the great Moral Principle within us and is acceptable to God as being the Rectitude of his noble creature * * * As to the Papists continual calumnies that we call men just whose continued wickedness is but hid and not imputed and without inherent justice we abhor both their confusion and their calumny and distinctly give them this short account 1. We hold a conditional universal pardon of all 2. But no actual pardon of the destructive punishment nor non-impuration of Sin till men are truly converted from a wicked heart and life to the love of God by Faith and Repentance 3. And then all Sin inconsistent with the prevalent love of God and a holy just and sober life is mortified and ceaseth 4. But such infirmities as you call Venial Sins continue and all our Goodness is culpably imperfect 5. Though the destructive punishment be pardoned the Reatus culpae in se continueth for ever that is It is an everlasting truth that we once sinned 6. Our pardon and our Renovation are freely given us by Grace for the sake of the satisfaction merits and intercession of Christ whose perfect Righteousnesse fulfilled that Law that man had broken 7. In which sense his perfect Righteousness is said by Protestants to be Imputed to us because he did it and suffered for us in the person of a Mediator and so it was the Meritorious cause of all our Justification Grace and Glory And what hath any Papist or other wrangler against any of this Yeâ— we reject their loose Doctrine that say as Pot. as Joseph Theol. Spec. l. 4. c. 10. p. 511. De potentia absoluta Gratia habitualis potest simul esse iâ— eodeâ— subjecto meaning in a predominant degree cum peccato mortali sive actuali sive habituali For as I said before against Okam and Scotus on that point they are inconâ—istent contraries as life and not-living light and darkness and their proofs of the contrary are frivolous See Scot. in 4. d. 16. Aliac in 1. 99. Greg. Armin. in 1.
d. 17. q. 1. â— 2. Gabr. ibid. Radâ— 2. p. Cont. 19. Suarez in 3. p. To. 4. Disp 9. Sect. 3. n. 8. all for this opinion And against it Aureol in 1. d. 1â— Ruard a. Sect. 5. That a man cannot be just sine Justitia inhaerente por potentiam Dei absolutam Pet. de Lorâ—a saith in 2. 2. q. 24. a. 12. d. 22. as the Protestants do that Peocatum Mortalâ— actuale meaning some one act of a heinous Sin may consist with Grace and the Habit of Charity but not the Habit of such a Sin that is in predominancy See Malderus opinion 1. 2. q. 113. a. 2. 8. p. 574 c. who saith that Dâ—us remitâ—endo offersam delet peccati maculam and that Macula is but the privation of Grace quatenus facit hominem Dâ—o gratum that is of Acceptability or Loveliness And accordingly he expoundeth the nature of Remission of Sin as I said before And Brianson in 4. q. 8. fol. 115. C. D. diligently enquiring what it is that remaineth after the Sin committed can find nothing but 1. The Habit or privation of a good habit 2. And the Guilt which he calleth Reatum culpae quae est qâ—â—dam obligatio ad poenam debitam illi culpae Illa n obligatio est quâ—dam Relatio realis non fundata super actum culpae sed super essentiam aâ—imâ— non nisi ut culpae actualis est praevia which is just the Protestant opinion who say that the Guilt is done away by forgiveness and the Habit by Renovation calling one Justification and the other Sanctification But we better distinguish Reatum câ—spae in sâ— Reatum pâ—â—ae sâ—u culpae ut ad poenam One is the Reality of my being a Sinner or one that did Sin This is never done away The other is the obligation to punishment for that Sin This is remitted and virtually containing all good actions and being the operation of the Spirit by which he is said to dwell in believers 306. 2. That this Rectitude or Holy Nature is first and radically active in our Complacency or Displicency Love or Hatred And that what a man Habitually loveth that his Will is habitually inclined to And against that which he habitually hateth 307. 3. That yet in acting this inclination worketh freely and always is specified by the conduct of the Intellect which must tell us what is Good and Evil Amiable and Hateful 308. 4. That Love and Hatred being practical Habits do ever engage the will in such Practical Resolutions as are answerable to their nature and degree 309. 5. That no Resolution will prove Holy Love and Inclination but that which is fixed as proceeding from a fixed principle which is like a new Nature in us 310. 6. That this Resolution is first de fine The Soul loving God and its own felicity in his eternal Love and Glory is first firmly Resolved to adhere to God and that felicity and to prosecute it to the last in all necessary means 311. 7. That next the Soul firmly resolved of the use of means in general is resolved also to choose and cleave to Jesus Christ as the Head and Summary of all means as the Physician is as to Physick And â—o resolveth to adhere to all the Essentials of Godliness and Christianity 312. 8. That all this is done by the Intellects discerning of those solid Reasons which prove to us the excellency necessity and possibility of all the foresaid ends and objects And he that knoweth not fixing and â—olding Reasons for his Resolutions cannot be expected to have fixed Resolutions 313. 9. That these general Inclinations Love and Resolutions for God for Means in general for Christ and all the Essentials of Godliness and Christianity are constant in the Godly and virtually contain a Love of and Resolution for every known duty and against every known Sin but not actually And these continue to shew themselves in adhering practically to these Objects and in the Practice of a Godly Life 314. 10. That therefore Sin as Sin is hateful to every true Christian and Godliness as such lovely And that in respect of this radical general Habit every true Christians love to God and Good is more than his averseness and his hatred to Sin more than his love or Inclination to the created Good for which it is loved For no man loveth Sin as Evil 315. 11. That the Inferior sort of Means and Good appear not always in their worth or necessity to the believer Besides his Ignorance the remnants of Concupiscence may pervert his Judgment so far as to doubt of some means whether they are absolutely necessary or at least mihi hic nunc And this failing of the Intellect may embolden the Will to some degrees of negligence even of known duties And so we may doubt of some Sins whether they are Sins and of others whether they are so great as to be inconsistent with Gods love and our Salvation and by that failing of the Intellect to be emboldened to commit them while yet we adhere to God and holiness in the main as such And so small Sins are ofter committed and with less reluctancy than greater because we think that their badness and danger is not so great And though at other times we be more sensible of both yet in the time of Temptation that apprehension may be altered For the mind of a Godly man is more mutable about the Means than about the End and about the smaller sort of Means and Sins than about the greater And when the opinion changeth not yet the practical judgment may change or when it is not turned it may be suspended Or truth may be apprehended with less quickening lively feeling and then it will not sufficiently work As a loud call doth suscitate us to action when a negligent whisper is neglected And upon some of these accounts known sins when small may more stand with Grace and be ofter committed and more dully repented of than greater 316. 12. And as we must distinguish of Sins as more or less dreadful and dangerous and of duty as more or less necessary at least in our apprehension so also of Sins which are more or less within the power of a willing mind to leave them Some Sins are such as that the forsaking of them requireth little more than a willing mind As to forsake lewd Company Taverns Play-houses Harlots Drunkenness Theft Oppression Persecution Perjury Deceit c. Meer will though instigated by lust committeth them And a will that is but truly bent against them may easily as to power cast them off Whoever committeth them doth it because he will do it And to live in the frequent committing of these is a greater sign of want of Holy habits or Grace than of others For there are other Sins which besides willingness require great power and care and labour to forsake them As to keep a just order in our Thoughts to keep them from vain objects to keep
our tongues from accustomed vain words to restrain strong passions upon great provocations especially to forsake Sins of privation and omission such as are unbelief as mixed with a weak Faith and fears mixed with hopes and coldness of desire and prayer and sluggishness of labour and endeavour c. A man may be truly willing to be stronger in all Grace and to do all duty better and to forsake all such Sins as these when yet through the meer weakness of his Graces or Spiritual life he cannot so exactly watch nor so diligently labour nor so patiently hold out as the case requireth Though it be not a Physical but a Moral power which he wanteth and that culpably yet such Sins may more consist with true Grace than the former and therefore are called â—â—â—s of Infirmity 317. 13. When Ignorance of Truth Duty or Sin cometh from an â—willingness to know it or an unwillingness to use the known means â— help us to the knowledge of it the neglect of such an unknown â—ruth or Duty and the committing of such an unknown Sin is to be â—dged of according to the measure of the foresaid willingness or â—nwillingness 318. 14. For he is not sincerely willing to know a Truth to do a â—uty to forsake a Sin who is not willing to use the known necessary â—eaus appointed for these ends For he vilifieth God and Holiness who â—inketh them not worthy the seeking by such means To say would love God and please him and be saved if I could do it â—ith a wish or without these means is no saving desire 119. 15. And to desire to be delivered from Sin and to hate it â— Sin and yet to love it for the pleasure so much more as that the â—terest of God and Heaven in us is not strong enough to make us haâ—â—tually willing both to leave it and to avoid the temptations and â—se the pleasure but men had rather keep it than leave it on these â—rms this is no sincere repentance nor sign of a holy heart or life 320. 16. Even the Habit of a particular lesser Sin as of jeasting â—â—le words idle thoughts c. may be stronger than the contrary parâ—â—cular habit I think and thereby a man may habitually and actually live â—â—d die in the Sin and yet that habit not prevail against the radical â—â—bit of Holiness of Faith Hope Love and Obedience in the â—â—ain 321. 17. A present full Resolution against Sins that are Great and of â—ie desertion to a willing mind is essential to Repentance as is also a â—â—esent Resolution for great and necessary Duties and to forsake some â—â—aller Sins though it be necessary necessitate praecepti I think is not â—â—sential to saving Conversion and Repentance and necessary necessitate â—edii to Salvation 322. 18. He that committeth a Gross sin that is a Sin evidently â—reat and in the power of a willing mind to forbear so often as â—oth shew that habitually he more loveth it than hateth it and had â—ther keep it than leave it doth shew thereby that all his professed â—epentance for it is unsound and his heart unsanctified and that he â—ath yet no actual pardon from God 323. Therefore those among the Papists who absolve such from their â—ns who commit Fornication or Drunkenness once a month at least â—r once in many months or often and come between and say I Repent â—o but delude them For the nature of those Sins is such that he that â— converted to an habitual hatred of them more than he hath a love â—o them cannot return to them so oft And he that doth not so hate â—hem doth not truly repent And even their Hildebrand Greg. 7. â—â— a Council at Rome expresly saith that neither false Baptism nor false â—a feigned and unsound Repentance do put away Sin 324. 19. The chief tryal of a man's Holiness and Repentance is by â—he main scope and business of his life especially in the positive part â—nd next in the oppositive when a man is conscious that God and Hoâ—iness and Heaven are his great end which are dearer to him and more â—owerful with him than all things sensible and the interest of the flesh â—nd when he can and doth deliberately forsake all when they stand in â—pposition to or competition with God and Glory and so as to the course of his life doth live by Faith and not by sense this is the true evidence of true Conversion and no Sins are damning which consist with this 325. 20. But because the truth of this must be discerned not only by present Sense and Resolution but by practice to prove that Resolution true therefore no man can be certain of the sincerity of his own heart and resolutions and repentance but by the practice of willing universal obedience forsaking gross and wilful Sinning performing â—â—cessary duty striving to overcome infirmities and heartily desiring perfect Holiness upon terms of Mortification Self-denyal and diligâ—â— use of means 326. Therefore much sinning will at least breed much doubtfulness and uncertainty of Justification and Salvation and till it be forsaken no such certainty will be had SECT XXII Few certain of Salvation The Consequents of this in order to our Concord herein 327. I conclude therefore that certainty of Justification and sincerity is not the lot of the weakest or weaker sort of Christians but of the strong confirmed Christians only By weak Christians I mean not those that have weakest natural parts and common gifts as Learning Memory Utterance c. But those that have the weakest Faith Hope Love Humility c. For Grace is not certainly discernable 1. In the least degree 2. When it is little in action 3. When it is much clouded and oft I wonder that worthy Deodate and Tronchinus in their suffrages at Dort say pag. 49 50. Notitiam sensum certitudinem istius Decreti Deus electis in hac vita largitur modo mensura tempore quo ipsi placet Ncc ullus est electus qui aetate rationis capace non ante mortem certissiman istius decreti persuasionem per Spiritum Sanctum accipiat I hope they mean but an effect objectively certain The many Texts cited by them else prove it not conquered by its contrary But only when 1. It is strong and in a good degree 2. And much in act 3. And conquereth opposition 328. Therefore few Christians have Assurance at the first or of a considerable time because few are strong at first 329. Yea therefore few ever attain to certainty who are sincere because most are still weak and few come to strength and a great degree and to much activity and great conquest of all the contrary Sins of heart and life 330. This being the case about certainty of Justification as to the certainty of perseverance might a man judge by the conveniencies of the truth it would draw us to think that the middle way of the Dominicans and some others were the right viz. 1. That
consider that though he be Almighty yet he doth not all that he can do nor do his works equally manifest his Omnipotency And there are these causes for Limiting his operations in the effects § 2. 1. * * * Gemina operatio Providentiae reperitur partim naturalis partim voluntaria Naturalis per occultam Dei administrationem quae etiam lignis herbis dat incrementum Voluntaria vero per Angelorum opera hominum Vid. catera August de Genesi ad lit l. 8. cap. 9. plura li. 9. cap. 15. The chief cause is his Wisdom and Free-will It is his Will to do what he doth and to do no more which hath no cause § 3. 2. Another cause is that God operateth by Jesus Christ whose Humanity is finite being a Creature and God worketh according to the Instrument or medium As he shineth by the Sun Moon or Stars according to their several natures and not according to his meer omnipotency so doth he communicate Grace by Jesus Christ § 4. †††Mark 6. 5. He Christ could there do no mighty work because of their unbelief and 7. 24. He could not be hid and 1. 45. Jesus could no more openly enter into the City with many such places all speak of an Ordinate power working not ad ultimum posse And Christ by Office being King and Prophet will operate upon certain terms which in his Sapiential Government he sets down And God will not violate those terms § 5. 3. Also under Christ there are many subordinate Causes There are his Word Preachers and all the forementioned means and helps and Christ will work according to these means Though he tye not himself from doing more or otherwise I have proved that this is his usual way And the effect will be limited according to these second causes § 6. As the Sun shineth on us first in and through the air which abateth somewhat of its force and then through the exhalations and then through the glass window and each maketh some alteration as to the effect on us so is it in this case § 7. 4. But the notable limitation is the foresaid Indisposition of the Receiver Every eye hath a tunicle which the Suns light must penetrate But he that hath a suffusion or he that winketh hath a greater impediment to limit the effect so is it with the various degrees of Indisposition or moral incapacity which yet be nothing if God did work ad ultimum posse and did not as aforesaid work according to his free will and second causes SECT VII Of the Resistibility of Grace § 1. TO Resist Grace signifieth 1. Either Not-to Receive it Passively * * * Ruiz de Vol. Dei disp 1◠§. 6. p. 187. distinguisheth of Gods will 1. As to its ratio totalis including not only the viâ— aut causalitas effectiva but also the formal reason of Volitio effiâ—ax which includeth the prescience of future contingents And so he saith It is never resisted 2. Secundum partialem inadaequatam rationem praecise ut causa efficiens nostrorum actuum liberorum prout offert motiva confert causas secundas suum concursum abstrahendo à formalissima ratione Volitionis efficacis quae quidditativè supponit formalissimam rationem praescientiae c. Et ita etiam in sensu composito cum tota causalitate illius in actu primo ut praecisus ab actu secundo potest non sortiri effectum as a stone receiveth not the rain ad intus or as oyl resisteth water or hard things receive not impressions as the soft 2. Or Not-to-Receive-Actually which is Receptio Moralis as a man receiveth not a gift who consenteth not or as he resisteth the light who will not open his eyes The bare Not-Consenting with the Will or not using the senses or organs not opening the hand c. is such a Resisting 3. Or an Active opposition which is more As a man resisteth an Enemy with heart or hand or a man by Nolition and not only Non-volition resisteth a suiter § 2. Mans sinful soul resisteth Gods gracious operations all these wayes 1. It is Passively become undisposed to Reception And thus he is said to have a hard heart of stone and a seared conscience and to be dead and past feeling Eph. 4. 18 19. 2. 1 2. 2. It doth not do what it can do morally to receive grace that is it doth not Conari or suscitate it self to be willing of it 3. Yea it doth Positively resist by Action and is unwilling of Gods gracious operations And this is twofold 1. By willing the contrary and prosecuting carnal interest over-loving the pleasures of the flesh and so turning away from the motions of grace 2. And therefore by an enmity to that grace and work which would †††Bradwardine li. 1. c. 1. cor 8. p. 5. proveth that Gods will is universaliter efficax nec impedibilis frustrabilis aut defectibilis which we grant as to his will as it is efficient and not meerly final and complacite But yet the Schoolmen that say he is not Omnivolens give reason for it convert him and take him off his chosen Idols § 3. No creature by resisting God doth abate or retund his essential Power or Activity nor make any thing properly difficult to him § 4. All the Elect resist Grace before it overcome and convert them And all our lives after we resist it too commonly when it exciteth us to duty and draweth us from sin § 5. He that repenteth not of his Resisting of Gods Spirit and Grace doth not understand and well repent of his sin § 6. All Resisting is not Overcoming All Resist grace but all overcome it not that is do not frustrate it as to the due effect § 7. There are several Degrees of yielding to Gods motions and operations and so several degrees of overcoming He is fully overcome by it who yieldeth to it wholly He overcometh it in some part who yieldeth to it but in part And because Gods grace moveth us to more than we ordinarily yield to therefore we do ordinarily overcome it in too great measure even when we are happily overcome by it § 8. God worketh not alike on all sometime as on Paul he so suddenly changeth the mind and will as that at once he both produceth the Act of mans consent and also taketh away even the moral though not the natural power to the contrary in the antecedent instant So that no man ever denyeth consent who is so moved And sometimes he procureth Actual Consent by such an operation as in the antecedent instant might have been resisted and overcome there being a Moral Power to the contrary So that there is Actually-Converting Grace which was superable in the antecedent instant as to Moral power and there is such a converting Grace as no man ever doth overcome § 9. Gods grace when it prevaileth doth not take away but determine
of the Holy Ghost which is specially promised in the Gospel to believers For there are 1. Many common works of the Spirit 2. And the special effect of faith it self before it § 2. This gift of the Holy Ghost unto Believers was formerly two fold the Gift of Miracles or wonders and of special Holiness of which the latter continueth to the end of the world § 3. The spirit is Given to Believers in several respects conjunct 1. In that he is Given to Christ their Head with whom by Union they are Relatively one Body 2. In that He is Given to them by the Baptismal Covenant in special Relation to their own persons to be their sanctifier In which respect they are Baptized into the name of the Holy Ghost as being now in Covenant theirs 3. In that he worketh in them the Acts and Habits of Holiness even of Love to God and to his Image and helpeth them in all duties and against all temptations enemies and sins But not that his essence is more in them than elsewhere but his Operations from those Relations § 4. This Gift of the spirit is the great priviledge of believers and of Gospel times in the eminent degree and He is the great Agent Advocate and witness of Christ in us the divine nature and name of God and his mark upon us our witness earnest pledge and first-fruits of life eternal and the great difference between Christs living members and the unregenerate world § 5. So powerful and fixed is this Habitual Holiness or Love of God for that is the summ of it that though it be no substance nor alter not mans species nor operate not by natural necessitating determination yet it strongly and constantly inclineth the soul per modum nature to the act of Love and so emulateth nature that it is called in Scripture the Divine Nature and the new man § 6. The greatest blessing in this world is to have more of this Spirit and the greatest punishment to be for saken by the spirit and deprived of it And believers themselves must fear most lest they should quench and grieve the spirit and be punished with any measure of its desertion And their great work is to cherish it carefully and obey it faithfully and constantly § 7. The word Infusion as to Habits being metaphorical is ambiguous 1. If the question be Whether Habits be so Infused as that they are caused without Means we must deny it ordinarily 2. If it be Whether they are not at all procured by any cogitations desires or preparatory duties of our own to fit us to receive them It is to be denyed as to the ordinary way 3. If the question be Whether the Act of faith do ever go before the Habit as a cause of it It must be affirmed of the ordinary case 4. If it be Whether the Habit ever go before the Act we must say that some Impulse disposing to it doth And God can cause a Habit before the Act But we cannot prove that he ever doth so much less that it is his ordinary way § 8. Whence it is plain that ordinarily All Infused Habits are so far also Acquired as that they follow means and the Act But all Acquired Habits are not such as are called Infused § 9. The difference is in this that Habits are said to be Infused when the Holy Ghost doth excite the soul to the Act and by that Act unto a setled Habit by such a special powerful Impulse as would not follow Gods ordinary operation by meer natural second Causes As the seal set home on the wax by a strong hand maketh a deep impression more than when it 's laid on lightly by a child so are sacred objects and means and motives when set home by the spirit allowing for the differences of the things § 10. Whether in every true Believer a fixed Habit of Love instantaneously follow the first act of true faith though weak or whether in many God only give after the first act so small an increase of the Disposition as is short of the true nature of a habit till increased by frequent acts is a case that I think more difficult than needful to resolve § 11. That which God worketh in Infants is a seminal fixed disposition But I cannot prove that it is a proper Habit. § 12. Whether Adams Natural sanity or sanctity antecedent to his first Act was to be called more properly a Habit or only a seminal disposition I leave to others But if his and Infants be to be called Habits you must say that they are only certain General Habits such as Health in the Body and not those particular Habits which are strictly so called § 13. The nature of a Habit is not well known to mortal men We know that it is a strong and fixed Disposition to prompt and facile action of this or that special sort But what that Disposition is we well know not That is whether it be the robur of the essential virtues or faculties of the soul Intellection Will Activity And if so wherein that second Gradus Virtutis which is not essential differeth from the first that is And whether it be any thing else than a secret constant Act in and by which the soul is excited to more sensible acts it 's hard to know But certain I am that besides those Acts which taking in somewhat of Imagination or sense are ordinarily perceived by us which are our ordinary conversation the soul hath also some deep secret fixed acts which make no use of sense or Imagination or none that is observed and yet are the ruling acts of the man Such commonly is the Intentio finis which operateth constantly without memory or observation in all use of means As a travailer on his journey keepeth on his way while he seemeth wholly taken up with the occurrences company and talk of his way and thinketh not sensibly of his end And yet had he not an unobserved Intention of it he would not go on And night and day the soul hath this secret insensible sort of Action § 14. As when a spark of fire is blown up to a flame and the excited Act doth tend to more and the more it burneth caeteris paribus the more it is strongly inclined to burn And yet no man can say that here is any new Matter that was not before existent nor that the second degree of fire is not of the same nature with the first nor that there is any thing but nature and action which inclineth it to more action And yet how the same essence before not perceived is suddenly blown up by Action to such observable appearance and effects is past the power of man to understand aright So some such thing there is in the present case allowing for the difference of natures and kinds of operation SECT XVII Whether man be meerly Passive as to the first special Grace § 1. Answ 1. THe Nature of mans soul is to
his overlooking and undervaluing Gods Design in Making and Governing free Intellectual agents by his Sapiential Moral Directive way He supposeth this way to be so much below that of Physical Motion and Determination as that it is not to be considered but as an instrument thereof As if it were unworthy of God to give any creature a Meer Power Liberty Law and Moral Means alone and not to Necessitate him Positively or Negatively to Obey or Disobey And this looking only at Physical Good Being and Motion and thereby thinking lightly of Sapiential Regency is the summ as of his so of Hobbes Spinosa's Alvarez Bradwardines Twisses Rutherfords and the rest of the Predeterminants errors herein And had not I other thoughts of this one thing I should come over to their Opinion For I confess the case to be of very great difficulty § 28. I think that as the Divine Life and Power glorifieth it self eminently in the Causation of the Being Motion and Life of the creatures so the Divine Wisdom eminently glorifieth it self in the Order of all things and in the Moral Directive Sapiential Regiment of Intellectual free agents And that Gods Laws and Doctrine are the Image of his Wisdom and an admirable harmonious and beautiful frame And that all would think so and be wonderfully delighted in them were they compleatly printed on our Minds and Hearts § 29. II. And accordingly I think that the glory of his governing Wisdom and Punishing and Rewarding Justice is a great and notable part of that glory which man must give him now and for ever And that this Justice is not his physical using all things according to their physical aptitude only But his Judging and Executing according to that moral aptitude commonly called Merit by Punishments and Rewards And that to deny God the glory of all this is no small error in a Philosopher or Divine § 30. III. Accordingly I think that God made man a free self-determining agent that he might be capable of such Sapiential Rule And that it is a great Honour to God to make so noble a Nature as hath a Power to determine its own elections And though such are not of the highest rank of Creatures they are far above the lowest And that God who we see delighteth to make up beauty and harmony of diversities doth delight in the Sapiential Moral Government of this free sort of Creatures And though man be not Independent yet to be so far like God himself as to be a kind of first-determiner of many of his own Volitions and Nolitions is part of Gods Natural Image on Man § 31. IV. Accordingly I take Duty to be Rewardable and Laudable and sin to be odious as it is the Act of a free agent And that the Nature of Moral Good and Evil consisteth not in its being the meer effect of physical premotion but in being a Voluntary Conformity or Disconformity to the Sapiential Rule of duty by a free agent that had Power to do otherwise § 32. V. Free-will then is not only the same with willing it self or a meer agency according to Nature by the premotion of the first determining necessitating Mover It is not only such a freedom as Fire Water Beasts and every moved thing hath to be moved according to the first Moyers action which is in the will of man But it is a Power to be a first determining Specifier of its own acts as Moral Not that it is never predetermined but that it can do this § 33. VI. Accordingly I judge of Guilt and Shame and the Accusation of Conscience which will not be a bare discerning what God made us do or be but what we voluntarily did or were when we could do otherwise § 34. VII And I am past all doubt that he grosly mistaketh the nature and distinction of Law and Gospel 1. To think that Gods Law when it is not accompained with physical predetermination is but to shew us that we are creatures that cannot but sin 2. Yea hereby he wrongeth the glory of the Creator that made no creature with a power to do any thing but evil unless predetermined physically thereto 3. It 's gross to say that all the Doctrine of Redemption and Faith and Justification by Christ as a meer signum Letter or Law is the Law or Covenant of Works and so that every Command is the Covenant of Works and Physical Efficiency of Good in us is the Gospel or Covenant of Grace For that which we call the Gospel is not true if this be true For this Gospel is a preached word spoken by mans mouth which some believe and some believe not but reject and disobey and therefore perish Matth. 4. 23. 11. 5. 24. 14. 26. 13. Mark 16. 15. Luke 4. 18. 1 Cor. 9. 14 16 18. Heh 4. 2. 1 Pet. 1. 25. 1 Pet. 4. 6. 2. Thess 1. 8 10 11. Matth. 13. 10. Acts. 13. 7. It is a Law by which men shall be judged to life or death Rom. 2. 16. Mar. 16. 15 16. 2 Thes 1. 8. Rom. 10. 16. John 3. 19 20 21. 2 Cor. 4. 3 4. It is a word which some pervert Gal. 1. 7. and many sin against Gal. 2. 14. 1 Pet. 4. 17. The rejecters of it are to speed worse than Sodom and Gomorrah and they cannot escape that neglect so great salvation Whereas by his description 1. No man ever yet sinned against the Gospel or Covenant of Grace For it is not that Covenant or Gospel further than it is a physical effect on the soul 2. And every Heathen that hath any good effect on his soul by Common Grace hath so much Gospel 3. Yea why is not then all Gods Creation being a physical effect the Covenant of Grace if that he doth be it and all that he commandeth as such be the Law of Works 4. And how then can the Law of Works and Grace be two if every proper Law be the Law of Works For a Law is sub genere signi and a produced event is another thing 5. And what sense will be found throughout the Scripture if we must hold that It is the Covenant or Law of Works which telleth us that the Law of Works is abolished and calleth us to believe in Christ for free Justification and not to expect Justification by the Works of the Law and offereth us pardon and life in Christ c. But I will add no more seeing the plainness of the matter makes it needless § 35. The truth is he distinguisheth between the Law and the effect of the Law and Spirit of God and calleth one the Law of Works and the other the Gospel whereas the Scripture only maketh it the excellency of the Gospel that by it the Spirit effectually worketh on the soul more usually and more excellently and no meer Law of Works or Grace will renew us without the Spirit § 36. VIII And if Redemption be nothing but Physical efficiency by Christ who as a creating Mediator
act of man 5. Though Dr. Twisse so frequently inculcate Quod prius est intentione posterius est executione he saith that it is but de fine medâ—is and not de mediiâ— inter se and that no medium is properly Gods End and then nothing but himself is his End and he glorieth as the discoverer of this Truth that all the means are one to God and therefore have but one Decree so that he reduceth all Gods Decrees to two 1. Of his Glory as his End 2. Of all the means thereto as one 6. And other learned mens Writings I have seen who come after him and seek to prove that the Decree de fine mediis are but one and consequently that there is no such order to be feigned among them 7. The plain truth is Gods Will is the beginning and end of all And all the World are the means of accomplishing and pleasing it And it is always fulfilled and pleased though not always by the same means And God loveth no Creature finally for it self but for Himself as his Perfection shineth in it and as it fulfilleth his Will And to feign any other Order of Intention and Election de fine mediiâ— in God is presumptuous much more to lay our frames of them and tye God hereto and trouble the Church with contending for such Models But the Order of Execution is intelligible in part to man And we are sure that God eternally intended to execute his Will in that Order in which in time he doth it And therefore this is the only necessary and the sufficient method of Gods Decrees which man can investigate 8. We deny therefore that God decreeth or willeth to damn any before he fore-seeth their Sin or that he decreeth to damn any but as impenitent Sinners or that the damnation of any man is his End or See this question handled by Vasqu 1. Tho. q. 19. d. 82. c. 4. 5. 6. that instantia secundum â—rdinem objectorum inter se assignanda sunt non ex sola Dei voluntate that he decreeth any mans sin or that he decreeth not to give them Grace or that Sin or not giving Grace or not believing c. need a Decree being nothing much more that these are decreed as means to Gods Glory But if you speak de fine 1. As that which man is bound to intend 2. Or as a meer effect so no doubt all things have their relation use and order to each other The sixth Crimination A. You deny all conditional Decrees in God and so make them all absolute and consequently arbitrary meerly because God will do it B. Do you think we differ in this You dare not profess your dissent Lâ—g Twiss Vind. Grat. li. 1. Digres 1. de Elect. p. 151. Et Episcopii Instit Theol. li. 4. Sect. 6. cap. 6. pag. 412 41â— from any of this following explication of our sense 1. Gods Will is the Cause and End of the whole Creation And what ever pleaseth him to do he doth whatsoever it pleaseth him shall come to pass it shall come to pass and what ever he is pleased to make our Duty by a Law is made our Duty All that God doth and commandeth is Arbitrary His Wisdom indeed and his Will concur but his Ends are within himself and his Will is the end of his Will so far as it may be said to have an end Arbitrariness and self-willedness is Gods Perfection which is mans Sin and Usurpation If you will stretch to that impropriety as to say that He willeth it because his Understanding seeth it fittest to be willed and so make Causes and Effects in God yet must you add that the fitness or goodness so understood is the Aptitudinal congruency to his Will 2. We affirm that God hath many Decrees which are conditional in respect of the thing decreed * Inquit Twissus Vind. Grat. li. 1. de elect Dig. 3. p. 163. Aquinas diserte asserit Deum velle hoc esse propter hoc sed non propter hoc velle hoc p. 1. q. 19. â— 1. c. ad primam voluntatem Dei rationabilem esse non quod aliquid sit Deo causa volendi sed in quantum vult unum esse propter aliud Et q. 23. â— 5. c. Eodem modâ— produxiâ—uâ— Bonaventâ—ram Scotum Durandum conspirantibus animis â—adem per omnia quod ad hunc apicem attinâ—t pâ—ofitentes Vide quae addit ex suare sio ibid p. 164. So Dr. Twisse frequently tells you He maketh one thing a means and a condition of the event of another And we say that God hath conditional Promises and Threatnings If thou confess with thy mouth and believe in thy heart c. thou shalt be saved And we believe that Gods Will made these Promises and Threats and that they are the true signs of his Will And that he will fulfil them And so far he hath a conditional Will and conditional expressions of his Will 3. But as to the Act of Volition we believe that his Wills are eternal and have no proper condition of their existence or not existing because being existent they are Necessary necessitate existentiae e. g. God never had such a Will as this If thou repent I will purpose or will to pardon thee if thou repent or to make the pardoning conditional promise But If thou repent I will pardon thee and whether thou repent or not I will conditionally pardon thee or make that Covenant which saith I will pardon thee if thou repent our Acts are the Conditions of Gods Gifts and Acts but not of his Will as suspended on those Acts. 4. Sure this is your own sentiment For you deny not that God knoweth from eternity whether the condition of each Event will it self be or not And if so it must be only the condition of the Event and not of his Decree For he that e. g. willeth absolutely that all shall perish that repent not and knoweth certainly that Judas will not repent doth thenceforth absolutely Will that Judas shall perish though only that he perish conditionally For that Will is no longer suspended on a Condition but it is the Event only that is suspended At least you must say that it is passed into a certainty equal to an absolute Will 5. But we will come as near as truth will lead us If by a Condition you mean only that Condition of the event which is not a suspender of Gods Decree but only a constituent qualification of the Object so I grant to you that though Gods Will as it signifieth his Essence or his essential Principle of operation in it self have no cause or condition yet as it is extrinsically denominated the Volition or Nolition of this or that the Object hath its Conditions that is qualifications without which Gods Will is not so denominable And so Gods Will hath its Conditions of complacency or displicency in the Creature without which he cannot truly be said to be
doth not only give all men leave and liberty to be holy but offereth them Life and giveth every man his choice whether he will repent and live or refuse Grace and perish And much more then Liberty he giveth them by Commands Threatnings Promises Mercies Means Helps Intreaties Afflictions c. urging them to repent and live XVII And this political Liberty containeth a freedom from all punishment from God to those that cause it not by wilful sin And more than so a certainty of the Reward of Glory XVIII Besides these fore-mentioned Liberties natural and political there is also an ethical or moral Liberty from sinful Habits and Acts And of that we hold that every man is delivered from these sinful Habits and Acts so far as he hath and useth Gods Grace And so that the sanctified are delivered from the reign or servitude of sin XIX And we hold that yet the habits of Grace do not necessitate this or that particular act of Obedience or Love but it is too possible to sin by Omission or Commission notwithstanding these habits XX. And we hold that the ordinary habits of Vice in the wicked do not absolutely necessitate them to this or that sinful Commission in particular at least not to very many sins but that it is possible for them to do some Duties and forbear many sins notwithstanding Original and superadded pravity XXI I add to the XI Sect. before as an instance that mans Will is not by any natural necessity determined to will it s own felicity by the comparate electing Act of the Will but hath Power and Liberty to refuse or nill it This many will think strange but I am sure that it is true For man was made and redeemed and is sanctified for a higher End than his own felicity yea more than one even the Glory and Pleasing of God and the common Good And reason telleth me undoubtedly that I ought to love that best which is best in it self and that if my annihilation would conduce to the saving or happiness of the World or of one Kingdom or of thousands of Persons I ought to consent to it for such ends yea were it but to keep the Earth from perishing and the Sun from being useless to this World And though God in mercy hath so united my felicity with his Glory and the common Good that there never will be use for such an option or choice yet it followeth not thence that I may not say that hypothetically if I were put to it such a thing is possible and would be due And as Paul said I could wish my self accurst from Christ for my Brethrens sake the Jews not I do wish it but would this save them I could wish it because the salvation of thousands and their Service to God is better than Ours even so may we Annihilation is inconsistent with Felicity But Annihilation might and should be chosen before the Annihilation of the World or the perdition of millions if God had called us to it Yea Christ that saith It were good for that man that he had never been born implyeth that a damned man would choose it as a minus malum yea many a one that I have known my self desired it Therefore it is a thing that the Will may do XXII And as another Instance I need not prove that the bonum sensibile which is necessarily loved or willed by some complacency or simple Volition is not necessarily chosen but may freely be rejected Otherwise no sin scarce could be avoided All these sorts or Acts of Free-will we hold and are agreed on And are we yet unfit for concord and coalition for want of acknowledging the freedom of the Will A. I must confess that you have acknowledged much B. And I confess that so have you on the other side I pray you now tell me where lieth our disagreement A. You overwhelm me with Distinctions and numerous particulars so that I suspect you do but by this dust intend to blind our eyes A man may make any thing good by such minute distinguishing and atomizing matters to make them imperceptible Did you deal plainly I could answer you B. Is this an answer fit for a learned or ingenuous man Is confusion plainness with you such plainness too many plani have deceived the Church with and set well-meaning Christians together by the ears so that the Christian World hath long pleased the Devil and found him sport as fighting-Dogs and Cocks do to men and all by the cheats of ignorant confusion Kingdoms and Factions fight about words which they never understood Like the consulting Physicians who could not agree whether their Patieâ—ts Ischury should be cured by Succinum or by Electrum or by Carabe or by Ambarum and the poor man died because they could not consent If I distinguish vainly or falsly sine differentia cannot you shew where the vanity or falshood is How can you tell it is false or vain if you know not where the falshood or vanity is Will you say It is somewhere but I know not where Let that answer from others then to all your reasonings seem sufficient Your reason is false and your argument naught but we know not were the falshood lyeth A ready confutation fit for our Church-troublers I have purposely in the First Book given you all the distinctions about Liberty which I use in an orderly Table that you may easily understand them by seeing them together so that if there be falshood or vanity in them they are open to your easie search and view Tell me what freedom is denied you or else for shame contend no more A. They hold that Original Sin doth necessitate all the unregenerate to do evil and to forbear good so that they cannot possibly forbear Sins of Commission or Omission II. They hold that Grace doth irresistibly neâ—â—ssitate the Elect to believe and love God and forbear Sin so that they cannot do otherwise B. I. Stay a little 1. You must distinguish of several sorts of Good and Evil 2. And of several sorts of Necessity 1. I hope you will not think it false vain or curious to distinguish between 1. An ungodly course of Life and some one particular act of Sin 2. The omission of the predominant Love of God and a course of holy living and special saving acts and the omission of this or that commanded act 2. And I hope I may advise you to distinguish between 1. A constrained Necessity against our Will and a voluntary Necessity of diseased vicious inclination 2. And between a necessity in sensu composito and in sensu diviso 3. And between an uncurable and a curable necessity And then I answer I. We hold that an ungodly man by his Original and superadded pravity is so strongly and fixedly inclined to a sensual ungodly life that in sensu composito while he is such he will certainly live such a life in the main course of it And do not you think so too
Deum quoque Affectus nostros partem illam sensitivam corrigere bonis desideriis quorum objecta monstrat intellectuo actus vero imperat voluntas afficere Quibus affectibus magis magisque correctis castigatis in ordinem redactis promptior facilior ac minus impedita postmodum redditur voluntas ad exerâ—endos pietatis actus non usque adeo ut ante reluctantibus affectibus lege illa in membris belligerante Qui asserunt eum quem Deus movet ad actum bunc necessario aut illum necessario agere Alij vero pertendunt nulla proprie dicta necessitate illum ad agendum impelli Verbis quidem discrepant idem autem reipsa seâ—tiunt Blank de Libertat Absol Thes 22. See his proof following They deny the Unregenerate to have any power to believe repent or to do any good And so they feign God to command men things impossible and to condemn men for that as Sin which they could not possibly avoid and for not doing that which they could no more do than make a World and so to put men under a necessity of sinning and being damned B. This is in sense the same with that about Liberty fore-going though under the other notion of Power But the truth is it is the very core and true sum of all our Controversies and if I prove this to be nothing but words I shall prove them all so about the four first Articles I will here take it for granted that you speak not of any meer Passive or Obediential Power as it 's called but of a proper active Power and that truly so called and not only hypothetically on supposition of things to make it up which are not existent nor to be supposed I know of nothing in the Soul of man for our enquiry but 1. The natural-faculties or virtues inclined naturally to their necessary Objects 2. The right disposition or adventitious inclination or habits of these faculties 3. And the Acts. Tell me first Do you know of any more A. Not that I can remember B. It is therefore the Faculties or Dispositions that we differ about or nothing For it is not the Acts Tell me then Quest. 1. Do you â—now of any that deny all mens Souls to have the three faculties of Active Power or Life Intellection and Volition which the Thomists say are Accidents immediately and inseparably emaning from the Essence and the Scotists better say are the very formal Essence of the Soul it self without one of which a man is no man A. No none doubt of this in sense though some number them as three and some but as two B. Do we differ about the second Do you believe that a Drunkard hath the habit of Sobriety or a Fornicator of Chastity or at least that an ungodly man hath a holy habit or disposition to love God and trust him above all and to believe in Christ and repent of Sin and live in Holiness A. No no man saith that he hath such a habit But he hath a power to do them though not a habit B. Is it any thing that you call a power besides the natural faculties and their habits or dispositions A. No but the natural faculty is still a power to believe love God live holily c. without a habit B. Do you not believe that an ungodly man is disposed yea habituated to the contrary viz. To a fleshly and worldly mind and life and against a life of Faith and holy Love A. Yes at least some are And I will not deny Original Sin and therefore grant such a dispositive pravity in all though not so much as in some is superadded But yet these ill dispositions and habits are not so strong but that the Sinner can for all that believe and repent c. B. No doubt but if he believe not it is not for want of natural faculties He hath an Intellect a Will and a vital and executive power And these all have that force or strength of natural activity which is necessary to Faith Love and every holy Duty For these are the unalterable Essence or Properties of man as man And if Sin deprived us of them it should change our Species And if Grace gave them it should restore our Species and we should be men by Grace only and not by Nature But you confess that these powers want their right disposition to act A. But yet I say that this undisposed ill-disposed Soul is able to act contrary to its accidental disposition B. I tell you once for all that the shaming and ending of all the Controversies between the Synodists and moderate Arminians or Jesuites lieth in the true opening of the ambiguity of this one syllable Can And unhappy is the Church when its Pastors have neither skill nor love enough to forbear torturing and distracting it by one poor ambiguous syllable not understood by the Contenders But to compel you to conviction Quest. 1. Do you mean by Can or Able or Power any thing besides the natural faculty and the disposition A. No I mean the natural faculty as related to this Act or Object now in question e. g. believing and loving God B. Quest 2. Is not natural strength or power a thing belonging to man as man which Sin destroyeth not and Grace restoreth not And have not all the Churches disowned Illyricus * Beâ—a angrily calleth him Turpis iste Illyricus and Peucer and Strigelius and other Disciples of Melanchthon have defended the moral causation of Grace against him and such Lutherans who went too much the other way though a very learned laborious godly Divine for making Original Sin the substance of the Soul it self A. All this is granted you B. Quest 3. Therefore if Adam had natural power to love God and if the sanctified have it yet doth it not follow that all men have it Because it belongeth to man as man and is not changed by Sin and Grace except in its Dispositions and Acts A. Thus you make all the wicked able to love God B. Yes As to that sort of Ability which is but the natural faculty they are all able but there is somewhat else they want A. But the Name Power you confess your self is Relative to something that is to be done or to an Act with its Object And when the natural faculty is not changed but is the same in all men yet the Relation of Power in it may be changed as by a change of the Object * Casp Peucer Histor Carcerum against the Lutherans physical motion asserteth pag. 720. That Concurrentibus in conversione his tribus causis verbo spiritu S. volantate hominis agentibus suo loeo ordine viribus in homint quamqam ex se natura sua prorsus invalidis ad spiritualia rationalibus tamen inter se differentibus eoque ordine quo conditae sunâ— a sp sancto per media verbi sacramentorum in ordinato Legitimo singulorum
Volitions is done by a suitable external means As by a more clear and lively awakening Ministry by some notable Providence especially by surprizing sufferings and distress A Thief when he is taken or judged a Fornicator when he is found in the shame of his Sin a Prodigal in Jail or want a Drunkard or Glutton when he is brought by it to the Gout or other pain and sickness c. have quite other apprehensions usually of the folly of sinning than ever you could bring them to before by any other the certainest convictions VII As we are certain by experience that the Acts called Intellection and Volition now are such operations of the Soul as ever stir and use the Spirits and we perceive both together as if it were a compound operation and know not by experience what any Knowledge or Volition is which useth not the Spirits so we find by true experience that the suscitation of the said Spirits or igneous particles in us much conduceth to the suscitation of the faculties of the Soul By which fervent speaking and awakening Providences do much And also that they that have clear and quick Spirits are easiliest awakened VIII We find also by experience that the internal sensitive faculty hath a great share in these effectual operations For the certainest apprehensions of the Intellect work but defectively on the Will unless they are accompanied with or stir up some Sense Affection or Passion either Fear Hope Love Desire Delight Anger or some other proper passion And Volitions themselves are but sluggish uneffectual Acts as to the imperium or command of the executive Powers or Thoughts unless they stir up some Passion to their aid And therefore lifeless wishes are common with sluggish and unreformed men IX The Spirit of God can and we have reason to think sometime doth stir up the faculties of the Soul to holy Cogitations Apprehensions and Volitions without any other means known to us than what the person before used uneffectually And when means are effectual to sanctifying Acts it is principally by the operation of the Holy Ghost and less principally the aptitude of the means X. The first received influx ad actum is not it which we call a Habit For a Habit is a fixed promptitude to act XI An habit in the Intellect is skill or intellectual promptitude to Act rightly and easily An habit in the Will is inclination and love it self radicated or aversation and radicated hatred And a habit in the vital executive Power is a promptitude and vivacity to the right executing of the Wills commands and first exciting it to act XII A habit infused is of the same Species with acquired habits though it be otherwise caused and of a more excellent use And in both we have reason to think that the Act goeth before the Habit Though the Holy Ghost can fix a Habit by one Act when acquired Habits are caused but by custom or many Acts. XIII In the strict sense as Acts so Habits are specified by their Objects and are not found but in such Species But in a larger sense and less proper we may say that there are more universal Habits not denominated at all from any sort of Objects that is the right Diposition of the Soul to its due operations But this is but an inadequate universal conception of the same Habit and not another thing I think XIV A habit of the Intellect about Principles is a Disposition to the knowledge of conclusions or consequents And a habit of the Will ad finem is a Disposition to the choice and use of the known means but not strictly a habit to them XV. Motion tendeth to further motion One Act of the Soul disposeth it to or furthereth another And as water that hath got a Chanel and is set in motion floweth still the same way and fire by burning the more forcibly proceedeth to burn so the Soul by acting the more readily holdeth on that course of action XVI The Soul hath at once more Acts than one and upon more Objects As at once it understandeth and willeth so at once it operateth on and towards the end and on and in the means But one of them specially ad finem is usually deep and not observed sensibly by the Agent And the other is uppermost and using the sense and fantasie more and the Spirits is easily perceived And so a man in his travel hath a deep unobserved but most constant and ruling Knowledge and Volition of his end or home though yet he seem to himself seldom to think of it but only of things obvious in his way XVII By all this its easie to perceive how hard it is to have the formal knowledge of the quiddity of a Habit when we have presupposed all this before-said 1. That the Soul is essentially of an active nature and as naturally contrary or averse to cessation or non-action as a stone is to action 2. And that it hath inseparably in its nature an inclination to Truth and Goodness as such and to its own felicity 3. And that it hath multitudes of exciting Objects and extraordinarily awakening Preachers and Providences specially dangers and sufferings naturally apt to excite the Soul into act 4. And that it hath the use of the sense and sensitive passions which things sensible are apt to excite by which it may be it self excited 5. And that it hath a certain degree of necessity of knowing by simple perception things received by the sense and fantasie men may know much of Good and Evil Duty Sin Danger whether they will or not 6. And that the Will hath a natural inclination to follow the Intellects apprehensions about Good or Evil in its Volitions and Nolitions though not always necessarily 7. And that the Soul excited to one Act is the more apt to another of the same sort 8. And that a cursus actionum with the fore-said inclinations is like a course of corporal motions which strongly tendeth to continuation so that they that are accustomed to do evil hardly do well 9. And that the potentiae secundae the sensitive powers and the Spirits by custom attain the same propensity to that way of action in themselves and so become to the active Intellect and Will what the Chanel worn by course is to the Torrent or River which with the natural gravity causeth the continuance of its course that same way Or as a Horse trained by custom who hath got his own peculiar habit is to the Rider 10. And that the Soul hath its profound or not noted Action which is constant and maketh so little use of the spirits sense imagination or passion as that it is unobserved while it is predominant such as is the aforesaid intention of the end in the use of means And doubtless the Soul is never unactive an instant no not in sleep but hath this kind of deep insensible action It is knowing it self loving it self intending its own Felicity deeply secretly insensibly
diabolo voluntate se dedit a quo judicium voluntatis depravatum est non ablatum Non enim homo voluntate sed voluntatis sanitate privatus est cum a diabolo spoliaretur cum igitur homo ad pietatem redit non alia in co creatur substantia sed eadem quae fuerat labefactata reparâ—tur The answer to the former might serve to this But still I see that Names must be our quarrel Is the question of the Thing or of the Name whether it be to be called Good 1. As to the thing they deny not that there are first notices and common principles of morality in all mens understandings 2. Nor that the Intellect is inclined to truth as truth 3. Nor that the Will is inclined to good as good 4. Nor that natural Conscience doth somewhat for God and Duty and against Sin in bad men 5. Nor that a Heathen may have as much good as experience proveth some of them to have had as Antonine Alexander Severus Cato Cicero Seneca Epictetus Plutarch Socrates Plato c. 6. Nor that common Grace when the Gospel cometh may prepare them for special Grace and make them almost sanctified Believers In a word almost all agree that 1. Nature as now upheld by Mercy may have all the good aforesaid 2. That common Grace with the Gospel may go further 3. And that it prepareth for special saving Grace If you deny this you accuse them contrary to the fullest evidence that you could expect whilst our British Divines at Dort tell you so largely how far universal or common Grace goeth in this preparing work and when there are such a multitude of Treatises written by the strictest English Antiarminians on two Subjects 1. Of preparation to Conversion 2. How far an Hypocrite or unregenerate Person may go in Christianity the Title of one of Perkins's Books 2. But if it be de nomine whether this may be called good it is a question unfit to trouble the Church with All are agreed that is materially something commanded by God partly conformable to the Law of Nature or Scripture and that it tendeth towards the well-fare of him that hath it and of others and is better than its contrary But if we mâ—st set up a metaphysical Theater to dispute de ratione Boni by that time on as good reason we have prosecuted our disputes de ratione entis uniâ—s veri also we may fall out with all that agree not in Suarez his Metaphysicks or at least in Aquinas or Buridanes's Ethicks I pray you begin your self and tell me what is bonum goodness in your question A. You shall not tempt me into so difficult a metaphysical or moral dispute which I know the learned are so little agreed in For you would but make use of it to insult over me B. And yet is this one of your Accusations of your Brethren that they agree not with you in the sense of such a word as you dare not definitively tell your own sense of Moral good in man is his conformity to the holy regulating Will of God by resignation of our selves to him as our Owner subjection to him as our Ruler and love to him as our End or perfect Good with all the exercise of these Now 1. In the strictest sense men say Bonâ—mest ex causis integris and so where there is any sin there is not good in that sense that is unmixed perfect good And in that with a more transcendent sense Christ saith That none is good save God only I hope you will not quarrel with him for it And yet the Papists commonly reproach the Protestants as teaching that all that we do is sin and no good because we say that all is mixt with sin and imperfectly good I profess for my self that I never loved trusted feared obeyed God in all my life without imperfection And I take that imperfection of my love to God c. to be the great and grievous sin of my Soul so that I groan out all my days the last dying-words of Arch-bishop Usher Lord forgive my Sins of Omission And if the School-men almost agree that moral evil is privatio boni me-thinks a Papist should hardly dream that his greatest Faith and Love have no degree of such privation 2. But as the word Good signifieth that which is sincerely so though imperfectly being more predominant in heart and life than the contrary evil and proveth the persons acceptation with God and right to Salvation and is the imperfect Image of Gods holiness repaired so all and only the sanctified are good 3. But in the third sense as goodness signifieth such Inclinations and Actions as are good but in a low degree and bad predominantly so none deny but bad men have some good Inclinations and Actions And de nomine here Divines agree not either Protestants or Papists some and most commonly call all such Actions good in their degree Others say That quia finis deest none of it is to be called properly good It may end all to say that it is good analogically as accidens is ens or secundum quid though not simpliciter The fourth Crimination A. * So do the Jesuites as you may see in Vasqu in 1. Tho. q. 23. passive They damn multitudes of Infants for Original Sin which they could not avoid yea and the Adult too as necessitated by it to sin for the prevention or cure of which they have no remedy especially all the Heathen World in comparison of which from Adam's days till now the rest are very few so that they make the World to be made or born purposely for unavoidable damnation in Hell fire B. Here are several things which must be distinctly spoken to I. Of Infants II. Of the state of the Heathen World III. Of the necessity of sinning IV. Of the necessity of punishment for sin Of these in order 1. For the case of Infants there are three questions to be handled 1. Whether they have Original Sin 2. Whether they are worthy of punishment for it 3. Whether they are punished for it and how many and how 1. For the first I have proved in a peculiar Disputation that Infants have Original Sin that is moral Pravity in disposition with their participation in the guilt of Adam's sin as being seminally and virtually in him And I find you not yet denying it 2. For the second no Christian doubteth I think but that all sin deserveth punishment But the desert of Actual Sin and of Original Sin are as different as the nature of the sin Habitual or Dispositive Pravity is a Dispositive preparation or worthiness of punishment And actual Sin is an actual preparation for it but all deserve it that is are Subjects morally fit for it to demonstrate holy Justice 3. For the third Scripture and experience put it past controversie that Infants suffer For 1. They are deprived of the Spirit of Holiness as quickly appeareth by their early practice
c. 30. Ipse est omnis boni principium causa sine ejus co-operatione auxilio impossibile est bonum velle vel facere In nobis autem est vel permanere in virtute sequi Deum vocantem vel recâ—dere a virtute quod est fieri in malitia se qui diabolum Idem ibid. to be no Grace if by it a man could forbear no sin nor do any good B. Quest 10. Cannot every man desire to be happy and to escape Hell C. Yes For all do it in some sort or other B. Quest. 11. Cannot some men without Holiness forbear Murder Treason Theft Adultery and pass by a Tavern-door when they go in C. Yes for we see many forbear such sins and therefore more might do it B. Quest 12. Cannot such a one go to a Sermon and read good Books when he goeth to a Tavern or a Play-house C. Hobbes will say no who thinks that every Volotion is necessitated as the motion of a Watch is by the Spring but so will not I. He cannot be willing to attend Gods Ordinances as the godly do but he can will to use them sometimes in his manner B. Quest 13. Cannot he by common Grace understand the meaning of the words heard or read and remember them C. Yes and be a famous Expositer and Preacher too B. Quest 14. Cannot a man by common Grace know that he is a Sinner and miserable by sin and that he needeth Mercy and a Saviour C. Yes or else he could not despair with Judas B. Quest 15. Cannot he think of his own sinful and miserable condition yea and think how to get out of it and be saved C. Yes dispairing men cannot forget it And a wicked Preacher for common ends can force his thoughts most of the year to meditate on Gods Word and holy things B. Quest 16. Can he not wish and desire that he had mercy and a Saviour and so much Grace as to keep him from Hell and so make him happy when he must go hence And can he not by some earnest prayers speak out these desires C. Yes All men have not saving Grace that go but so far B. Quest 17. Cannot a man by common Grace do all that which our Divines commonly say an Hypocrite may do or a half or almost Christian such as Mr. Perkins Bolton Rogers Hooker Mead Bifield and abundance more describe C. Yes they that have so much common Grace can go so far B. Quest. 18. Are not the best of these men by common Grace more prepared for Conversion than some others C. Yes else what good did that Grace do them and why should we write as Mr. Hooker of the Souls preparation for Christ and Christ told one Thou art not far from the Kingdom of God B. Quest 19. Doth God command all these men to use the means of their full Conversion and Salvation utterly in vain C. No it is not in vain if he bless them to whom he will B. Quest 20. Lastly Then tell me if you acknowledge all these CANS or Powers what is the power which you deny C. A power to things spiritually good B. Ambiguous words must not destroy Love and Churches What mean you by Spiritual C. That which is done by Gods Spirit to spiritual ends and in a spiritual manner B. Here are three things The Efficient the End the Manner 1. Is not the Spirit of God the Author of common Grace C. Yes that is not denied by any B. 2. If by a spiritual end you mean the foresaid saving of the Soul from Hell you confess common Grace may give it If you mean loving and intending God above all do not the Arminians say as well as you that none but the Regenerate can do it C. I confess they do Quum actus ille fidei non sit in potestate hominis naturalis carnalis animalis peccatoris eumque nemo praestare possit nisi per gratiam Dei omnis autem Gratia Dei secundum voluntatem Dei administretur voluntatem quam apud se ab aeterno habuit c. Armin. Disp Privat Thes 41. Sect. 1. p. 30â— Aegid Colum. Quodlib 2. qu. 29. pag. 121. Cum bona habeant duplex esse scil Naturale supernaturale Dicendum est quod sine gratia habituali possimus bona agere quoad esse naturale non quod supernaturale Secundum sanctorum sententiam etsi sine Gratia possimus facere bona non tamen bene neâ— mereri per illa c. B. 3. What mean you by a spiritual manner If you mean it of doing all from that love to God and intention of that end the answer is the same C. Man can do nothing of himself without God B. Did ever man in his wits think otherwise Was it ever a controversie whether we have any power that is not both given and still maintained by God All the question is but how God giveth it and not whether we have it without him One thinketh that he giveth more by the way of Nature than others do And another thinks that he giveth more by the way of common Grace than others do Mistake not your self you ascribe no more to God than any even Pelagian doth but only he ascribeth more to God by the way of natural conveyance than you do I only except the Dominican Predeterminants that ascribe all mans circumstantiated Volitions to God Lay therefore the controversie where it is C. But we can do nothing without Christ and Grace B. I am more for that than you are I doubt you think that we can do the works of Nature without Christ For I find that many of you will not have so much as Magistracy to depend upon him derivatively But all things are now delivered into his hands and Nature is reprived and continued by some degree of Grace that is of Mercy contrary to Merit But tell me do men do that without Christ which they do by his common Grace C. The words signifie Joh. 15. Out of me ye can do nothing B. And do you differ about that Do not you before confess how far men out of Christ as to regeneration may go Come to the point and tell me where you differ C. We differ here that they think that God hath promised saving Grace to men prepared by common Grace and we say No. B. Very good Is all come but to this Tell me what is this to the question of mans power or impotency This is only about Gods Word Quest 1. Do you not believe that God hath made it the duty of all the Unregenerate to desire and beg and seek his special regenerating Grace and use means to get it and avoid impediments C. Yes it is their duty otherwise the omission of it were not their Sin B. Quest. 2. Hath God commanded them to do all this in vain C. I told you that it is not in vain if he convert but some few of them B. My question was not whether
Objects C. I say not so For Objects are not efficient B. True as Objects they are not Therefore they effect not Therefore they do not necessitate properly which is an efficiency Indeed they are but causae quasi materiales actus in specie seu individuo and constitute it and no act is without its Object But they effect it not C. Doth not the Sun effect our sight by its light B. Yes but not as a meer Object for so it only terminateth and constituteth it as the matter But it causeth it efficiently as an Agent C. Well! I will suppose that so far as a wicked man is necessitated to sin it is his pravity that doth it circa objectum ut sine quo non and not the Object it self efficiently and in proper speech B. Quest 9. Is the Will efficiently necessitated by the senses or phantasie C. No otherwise than as by the Objects which they do present B. Quest. 10. Is it so necessitated by the Passions C. I know not whether I may say the Passions do it or its own pravity when the passions do disturb and tempt it B. Quest 11. Is it so necessitated by the Intellect C. So Camero and several others thought and consequently by the Objects But I have many reasons against that Opinion quoad media in comparate elections But the Intellect may necessitate it circa finem 2. And quoad media in specificatione etsi non quoad exercitium actus B. 1. Quoad finem it is not the Intellect that necessitateth but the natural inclination of the Will Intellection is but a previous act sine quo non 2. Where there is no exercitium actus there is no specification Therefore you can only say Non specificatur sine ductu intellectus but the Will can prevent that ductum intellectus if not suspend its act also after it Quest 12. Can any one but God by force impress ill habits on the Will C. No we were miserable if any could make us wicked B. Quest 13. Will God ever make any such evil habits in the Will C. As a habit he may cause it but not as evil B. Quest 14. Do you think that a Sinner is necessitated to every sin that he committeth or to every Duty which he omitteth so that he could not do otherwise C. I think he is under a necessity of sinning but I cannot say it of every sin which he committeth B. You before granted many things to be in the power of the Will And can you deny that power to be free that the same things are in its liberty I will tire you no more but desire you 1. To peruse all your former concessions about mans power And 2. To peruse all the twenty Concessions of A. Confer 5. Criminat 1. where he denieth Free-will in all those senses and then tell me where is the difference C. They think that our freedom is inconsistent with necessity but so do not we who think that Decree and Predetermination do necessitate B. I have forced you before to confess your concord here A Logical necessitas consequentiae in ordine probationis Arminius and almost all men confess doth result from meer prescience And Dr. Twisse professeth that neither the Protestants or the School-men hold any other necessity to result from Decree or Predetermination C. But the pravity of the wicked necessitateth their Wills to evil B. 1. Not to all evil For 1. Men commit not all 2. And you before confessed that men can do more good and less evil than they do 2. The truth is as I distinguished power before into Physical and Moral so must we do Liberty and Necessity The Will hath its physical Liberty and is free from physical necessitation in all the sin that men commit and in all the good they do I think though not from all Divine predetermining necessitation to good Men do not good and evil as Bruits do their acts But the Will hath a kind of moral necessity of doing evil by radicated habits and hath no further moral Liberty than it is freed from the power of those evil inclinations But these habits necessitate not physically but morally and that only to some sin but not to all A man can act contrary to a good or evil habit as common experience proveth But because mens Volitions and Actions are ordinarily or much agreeable to their fixed inclining habits therefore we use to say that morally such can do no better meaning that they will not C. But sure you would not have me believe that there is no difference betwein us and the Arminians in the point of Free-Will B. If there be any either you know it and can name it your self or you know it not and then may be ashamed to contend about it Quest 1. Tell me plainly Is not all the Liberty which you deny a moral Liberty a malo from sinful dispositions of the Soul C. There is much dispute about Liberty from Divine predetermination But I will not meddle any further with that I never contended against any Free-will but freedom from sinful habits as supposed to be in men more than it is B. Quest 2. Do you not hold then that all men have Free-will so far as they have effectual Grace and Sanctification C. Yes in that degree For voluntas per gratiam liberata est libera B. Quest 3. Do the Arminians hold that the VVills of the graceless and unsanctified are freed from sinful habits and so are morally free to holy acts C. No I confess they do not Corvinus and others oft say that it is Grace that giveth us the vires credendi which we had not before But some of them deny any habits to be in the Will But these say the Understanding must be enlightned before we are able to choose aright B. Quest. 4. Doth not common Grace give men a moral Liberty to common good from all necessitating inclinations to the contrary C. Igranted it before as to Power and therefore must as to Liberty B. Where then is the difference between you C. I take it to be here that the Arminians and Jesuites say that the Wills of the Unregenerate are not only free to common preparatory good acts but to the special acts of Faith and true Repentance and Conversion unto God which we deny B. Either you mean this of all unregenerate men or but of some 1. Of all they say it not For the Synod of Dort chargeth them but with saying that men can use their naturals so as by degrees to come up to Faith They commonly hold that ordinarily the Will must be prepared by commoner Grace before it morally can believe though such are freely Unbelievers having a natural liberty or power to the contrary though undisposed and have a moral power and liberty to some preparatory acts 2. But if you mean it of those that are come up to the highest preparatory acts and also have Gods Grace ad posse credere where there is the
so doing it was not a Will but bruitish Appetite B. The Understanding said truly It is pleasant and Appetible and so the Will in its initial desire sinned not But that it looked no further and excited not the Intellect to remember and it self to desire more to please God was by an abuse of its power and liberty of self-determining and so the sensible good prevailed because the superior good was forgotten and neglected And the Will may thus suspend its act after an intellectual perception without being bruitish though it so â—ar disobey Reason its guide C. These things are exceeding intricate and difficult for all that you say B. They are so * The same I say of objective and intellectual necessitation of the Will saith H. Kipping truly Inst Philos Nat. li. 9. c. 10. pag. 416. Errant Scholae reformatâ— doctores qui asserunt voluntatem ad actum suum determinari a judicio intellectus ita ut voluntatic libertas nulla sit constricta vero sit ad intellectus ductum a quo semper determinatur Joh. Camero Mart. Schogkius Hornbeck Maccovius Heerbord Hos prolixe bene refellit Episcopius But forget not that the great difficulty is between us and the Hobbists or Infidels and Fatists and not between the true Christians among themselves as to our present Controversies I confess that the confuting of their Opinion that all Volitions are necessitated unavoidably by Gods Operation is a far harder work than the reconciling of the Lutherans and Calvinists who go upon no such Principles Tell me Is this it that you would come to or not If you once perswade me that God causeth all sinful Volitions as necessarily as he causeth a Tree to grow and that man can no more avoid them and that liberty of Will signifieth no more than velle or not nolens velle and so that God is the prime irresistible cause of all Sin as much as of all Good so far as it is capable of a Cause I must needs next believe 1. That God hateth not his own Work yea that he loveth it 2. That he hateth no man for it 3. That moral Good and Evil is nothing in man but such as obeying or disobeying proportionably in a Horse or Dog 4. Yea far less because man doth â—ut as my pen which writeth as I move it in respect to God But so is not my Horse or Dog to me 5. And how then to judge of all the Scripture the Ministry of the Incarnation and Death of Christ of the Duties of a Christian life of Hell c. it 's easie to perceive viz. That as God differenceth Men and Toads meerly because he will do so even so doth he the good and the bad in the World and that Sin is no evil any way but to our selves and that God is as much the cause of it as of Sickness and is as well pleased with the Worlds Infidelity and Impiety as with the Churches Sanctity And that he will no otherwise damn men for Sin than erbitarily to make such baser than others as Dogs are than men Benedictus Spinosa hath given you the Consectaries more at large O how heartlesly should I preach and pray how carelesly should I live if once you brought me to this Opinion that all sin is the unresistible Work of God so far as it is a work as much as holiness is C. If there be no middle between Free-will and this Impiety as I confess I cannot disprove your Consectaries it's time for us to turn our studies against the common Enemies of all Religion and Morality instead of contending with one another specially when they have so much to say B. And do you think they do well and friendly by the Church who take these mens part and own their Cause in the foundation and entangle poor Souls in such intricate difficulties when we that know not the least of Gods Creatures or the mysteries of any of his Works do little know all the quick and intricate actions of our own Souls In a word man hath more power to good than he useth and that power is called sufficient or necessary Grace to the act though there be many difficulties which no one of either side can resolve The second Crimination C. But I fear many of them with Pelagius by GRACE do mean nothing So Dr. Twisse frequently repeateth that meeâ— posse credere is but Nature and not Grace because it is equally a posse non credere But 1. A natural power reprieved by Grace and preserved and given for gracious ends 2. And many and great helps of Grace to excite and rectifie it may be called an effect of Grace but Nature it self at least when they speak of the Heathens who they say have some kind of Grace B. Turn your eyes a little from the name of Pelagius and every thing else that useth to blind Disputers with prejudice and partiality and then answer me these following questions Quest. 1. Do you think that Mercy contrary to sinful Commerit is not properly Grace C. I confess it is B. Quest. 2. Is not the whole frame of Humane Nature and our Utensils put into the hand and power of Christ the Redeemer to be managed by him to his Mediatory ends Joh. 17. 2. Math. 28. 19 20. Joh. 13. 3. Ephes 1. 22 23. Phil. 2. 7 8 9 10 11 12. For this end he died rose and revived that he might be Lord both of the Dead and Living Rom. 14. 9. Joh. 5. 22 23 24. The Father judgeth no man but hath committed all Judgment to the Son c. And is not the very reprieval of the World from deserved ruine and misery so many thousand years an Act of Grace and Nature now continued used and improved by Grace and so far may be said to be of Grace C. This is plain truth and must not be denied B. Quest 3. Is it not undeserved Mercy to all Mankind that ever since Adam's Sentence Gen. 3. 15. they are all ruled by a Law of Grace and not the Law of Innocency alone and by that Law of Grace must all be judged C. If you before evinced that any thing is truly mercy to the Reprobate I must confess it But I have not before so much thought of this what Law the World is under as the case deserveth But I remember Camero in the fragments of his dispute with Courcellaeus taken by Testardus though he deny not that the Covenant of Grace was made with all mankind in Adam and Noah yet saith That by or for their nearer Parents sins the Infants of Infidels are out of that Covenant B. 1. It 's well you note that it is not only Augustine Enchir. ad Laâ—rent and I that are for the Imputation of nearer Parents sin in some Vid. Pet. Martyr in Rom. 5. confessing Augustine's judgment sort as well as Adam's 2. He speaketh there of the Covenant as mutual and not as a Law or an offered Covenant or Divine
received But they lay the certainty of our perseverance on Gods Decree and Promise Now say they God did not decree that it should be non-possibile but only that it should be non-futurum And so that he hath promised the non-futurity but not an impossibility of falling away 3. And yet they sometimes use the term impossible here But how 1. Say they There is a logical impossibilitas consequentiae And so there is on supposition of meer prescience and prediction For do but make this one of the premises God fore-knoweth that Paul will persevere and it is impossible this conclusion should be true Paul will not persevere But yet this may be nevertheless true It is possible for Paul to fall away But this impossibility of consequence in order of arguing is nothing to the impossibilitas rei in respect to the Causes 2. And also they say that there is impossibilitas hypothetica supposing that man willfully reject not Grace Gods Power it self is so engaged to defend him against Satan and all Enemies that it is impossible for them to overcome God and destroy him But here impossible is related to the power of Enemies only It is a thing that Satan hath not Power to do to conquer Grace 3. But when the question is of the Power of the Person himself they say It is unfit to say that he is unable to fall away or that it is impossible in respect to his own Power 1. Because that to fall away is an effect of Impotency and not of Power 2. Because God will not so operate by his Grace as to make a man unable to sin but unwilling and actually to keep him from it So that Grace doth not make us impotent to resist it and make it really impossible to us to fall away but maketh us able and willing to stand and causeth us freely de facto to persevere 3. And I must tell you that your Crimination is grounded on a lame and faulty recitation of their Opinion you name but half of it instead of the whole which is That the sanctified never fall away from the due fear and care and endeavour of persevering and consequently not from Sanctification or Justification And will you infer that a man needeth not fear care or live holily if certainly he shall do so A. Yes what need I take care of that which I shall certainly do B. That is what need you take care if you certainly shall take care A. What need I trouble my own head about that which God will do what-ever I do If he undertake to ascertain it I may leave it to him B. You talk contradictions God doth not undertake to secure your Salvation whether you will or not or care or not or labour or not But to cause you to will to care and labour And you say If God will make me willing I need not be willing If God will make me think of it and care and labour for it I need not think of it or care or labour for it The Sun need not shine if God will make it shine You need not eat if God decree that you shall eat Are not these weak Contradictions A. But as weak as you make it the Contradiction is their own For they first make God to make their falling away to be impossible or certainly non-futurum and yet say that he will make them fear it that is to perform an Act without the proper Object As if God decreed that they should fear Good as Good or love Evil as Evil No man can fear that which neither is nor is taken to be fearful An impossible or certainty non-future hurt is not fearful or an Object of fear unless to a mad man B. There were much weight in what you say but for that which you leave out 1. That objective certainty may be separated from subjective certainty that is men may be uncertain of that which is certain in it self 2. Yea few of the Godly have a strong assurance of their sincerity and Justification 3. And no man in this life hath a perfect assurance no more than other perfect Graces 4. And every mans faith it self in Gods Promises and fidelity is imperfect Therefore while all these are imperfect and not only so but liable to sad assaults and interruptions and decays 5. Yea and the person liable to such hainous sins as look terribly towards Apostacy you cannot say that fear is needless For though God decree the certainty of their perseverance that proveth not that they are perfectly certain of it A. But God will not found our Duty on our Sin nor command men to fear because through sinful weakness they do fear B. God will not make our Sin to be our Duty in sensu conjuncto 1. But God will make Duty on supposition that Sin maketh it necessary If you sin God will make sorrow and confession your Duty which would else be none 2. Yea more the same Act may be a Duty and a Sin in several respects And so may fear of Hell be A. Stay there Do you not then make God the Author of Sin For if he cause the Act as a Duty when it is caused it will prove a Sin too B. You mistake Two Causes may cause two Modes and Relations of the same Act and one not at all cause that which the other causeth God causeth every Act in genere act us which is sinful and yet causeth not the deficiency or exorbitancy of it As the Rider maketh the Horse go but not to go lamely God knowing our uncertainty of our own Election and Sincerity may make it our Duty by a wise and careful fear to avoid our own danger And yet that fear may not only come also from some ignorance and unbelief in our selves but have sinful degrees and so have that in it which God is not the cause of The second Crimination A. Their Doctrine tendeth to the indulgence of all sin * One would think that the Doctrine asserting the loss of Justification by mortal sin were stricter than the Calvinists But judge by the Jesuites Doctrine who teach that a man in mortal sin or unconverted may de congrâ—o merit Justification Ruiz de praedest exad d. 19. â—ect 4. p. 242. Ad meritum congrui non requiritur personam esse simpliciter Deo gratam quin potiâ—s propter peccatum mortale fit inimica Dei nihilâ—minus actus fidei alii qui ex side procedunt secundum se grati sunt quantum sufficit ut justificationem de congruo mereantur opera namque fraternae charitatis Heb. 13. miserccordiae sunt ut sacrificia quibus Deum per mortale peccatum amissum promeremur reconciliatum accipere 1 Joh. 1. si confiteamur c. So that Gods Justice is bound to be reconciled to and Justifie a wicked enemy for an Alms or for Confession Is not this an easie cure of enmity But the promise is made only câ—teris patibus to true Believers already
Justification Quest 2. Shew me how many of these six hundred Texts do not speak of such Inherent or Performed personal Righteousness as is distinct from such as you describe in your sense of Imputation Try whether one of twenty or forty or an hundred have such a sence Lib. Not if such false teachers as you must be the expositor of them P. Let us try some of them and be you the expositor 1 Joh. â— 29. every one which doth Righteousness is born of God 1 Joh. 3. 7 10. he That personal Righteousness is necessary that doth Righteousness is righteous Whosoever doth not righteousness is not of God Lib. You choose out those texts which countenance your own ends P. My question is but Whether Gods word talk of any Righteousness which consisteth in any thing that is in or of our selves Lib. Yes that cannot be denyed But not in order to our Justification P. Of the use we must speak â—non Quest 3. I next ask you then Wâ—â—â—ther all these texts be not True and whether we may not speak 〈…〉 Lib. Yes We question not the Truth but the meaning of the 〈…〉 P. Quest 4. Is this Righteousness aâ— such in that 〈…〉 have it abominable to God Doth not God command it and requireâ—â— to obey his Laws sincerely And doth he hate the obedience of his â—â—â—â— Is not Holiness his Nature and Image in us And doth he hate his Image and the Divine Nature Is it not the mark of a Malignant to be a Hater of Holiness yea of the Devil himself And can you think that God â—â—â—â— Hater of Holiness What I he that hath said Be holy for I am â—â—â—â— and Without Holiness none shall see God Lib. If you were not an unholy deociver you would not intimate by such questions as if I took God to be a Hater of Holiness P. Is it not Holiness which the Scripture and we mean by Inherent Righteousness Lib. But God hateth it not as Holiness but as mixt with sin P. Do you Believe and Love God sincerely and Love the Godly or not Lib. Better than such as you do or else wo to me P. And doth God Hate all your Faith and Love because it is mixt with sin If he do What difference between it and wickedness or between you and a wicked man God can but hate what they do and doth he so by all that you do also Why then may not your Neighbours imitate God and hate all that you do why may they not then deride and persecute you for that which is hateful to God For shame never more blame then your scorners or persecutors Lib. I do not say that God hateth my Faith Love Humility and patience as such but as mixt with sin Therefore properly it is sin that God hateth and not my Faith and Love it self P. And is all come to this What mean you then to rail at us that say the same We all say that God hateth our sin and the faulty imperfection of our holiness and obedience and what say you more Lib. But you say not that God hateth your Righteousness for the sin that cleaveth to it though not for it self as we do Your Goodness is like an Apple faln into the dirt or poysoned and you are for wiping it and keeping it but God and wise men abhor it for the filth and cast it away P. Then it seems you cast away all Love to God and man all faith all honesty and obedience chastity and temperance because sin cleaveth to it Lib. By casting it away I do not mean giving over to Love God and obey him and turning wickedly to the contrary but I mean that I count it dung in order to my Justification P. I perceive by Teaching me you are but Learning to speak your self I further ask you Doth not God Love the Faith Love Obedience and Holiness of his servants notwithstanding all their faults and imperfections Joh. 16. 27. The Father himself loveth you because you have Loved me and believed c. 2 Cor. 9. 7. God loveth a cheerful giver Psal 11. 7. The righteous Lord Loveth righteousness with many the like passages Doth he not Love his Image Lib. That is because we are in Christ and our persons and graces and duties are accepted all in him being perfumed with his righteousness and all our sins and imperfections pardoned and covered thereby And as our Graces are the works of the holy Ghost and not primarily as ours P. Are you come so far already All this is held not only by us but by the Papists also You confess then that for the merits of Christs Righteousness our sins are pardoned and not only our persons but our faith Love and obedience accepted and loved though culpably imperfect and mixt with sin And so all your noise is come to nothing and you say as we II. But having found that we must have Inherent Righteousness let us Of Reward and Worâ—thiness or Merit next consider What use we may make of it and how far it may and must be valued and trusted to And Quest 1. Tell me whether God hath made any promise of a Reward to it or not Turn to the word Reward in your Concordance if you remember not the Texts and see Lib. Your Legal principles and spirits makes the Scripture a snare and a stumbling block to you as Christ himself is When God talketh of Reward metaphorically you take it properly as if we could merit any thing of God P. I only ask you Whether God hath promised us a Reward Lib. Yes But it is a Reward properly to Christ by whose grace we live and not to our selves P. When Christ saith Great is your Reward in Heaven and your father shall reward you openly Matth. 5. 12. 6. 4 6. and you shall not lose your reward and Heb. 11. 26. he had an eye to the recompence of reward and Heb. 11. 6. God is a Rewarder of them that diligently seek him c. is the meaning Great is Christs Reward in Heaven and God will reward Christ openly and is a Rewarder of Christ only as diligently seeking him c. Lib. You would make me ridiculous I mean that it is for Christs Merits or Righteousness which he did himself and not for any thing in us or done by us that we are rewarded P. Say you so Doth diligent seeking him Heb. 11. 6. and praying and giving alms in secret Matth. 6. 1 2 3 4. and suffering for Christ Matth. 5. 11 12. and feeding visiting c. Christ in his members Matth. 25. c. mean only that which Christ did and not we Is it Christs prayers and almes and charity and sufferings that the text meaneth Look over many such texts and judge Lib. Still you would make my words contemptible It is our duties that are rewarded but it is not for themselves or any worth that is in them but for the merits of Christ only P. If God have no respect
to anything in our duties in his reward tell me 1. Why are they said so oft to Please him and we are commanded to do those things that Please him and 1 Joh. he heareth us because we do those things that Please him 2. And why then doth he not as well for Christs merits or Righteousness reward our sinning our folly and vanity our idleness our dreams or all our natural indifferent actions as our Love and holiness 3. And why do you and all men regard or reward a loving thankful obedient child more than one that will scorn you and spit in your face And why do all Princes and Rulers make any difference between the righteous and the wicked a rogue and an honest man And why do Churches so strictly try the Godliness of their members Why do you make any difference in your Communion What meaneth Church discipline And why are you your selves so desirous to be esteemed Godly persons and differenced from others if God himself do make no difference And how is the righteous more excellent than his neighbour and called Gods jewels and the apple of his eye his peculiar people a holy Nation and his treasure And why is it made the mark of a faithful man Psal 15. 4. that a vile person is contemned in his eyes but he honoureth them that fear the Lord if there be nothing in holiness and obedience any more than in sin for God to reward Lib. You delight to make me seem foolish by your Cavilling You might easily understand that I did not mean that good works are no more Rewardable than Idleness or Evil But that they are not rewarded for their proper worthiness as being faulty and so unjustifiable with God but it is for the merits of the Righteousness of Christ imputed to believers P. When you understand what you should say you will speak intelligibly But be not angry that your confusion is laid open to you About Merit and Imputation we must speak distinctly afterwards That no works of ours are Rewardable till their faultiness is pardoned nor Rewardable according to the Law of Innocency nor upon any terms but those of the Covenant of Grace which freely giveth salvation to penitent believing accepters which free gift and acceptance of our duties is purchased by the meritorious righteousness of Christ all this we hold as fast as you do We dream not of any access to God but by a Mediator nor of any acceptance of our selves or our duties works or righteousness but on the account of Christs merits and intercession by which the sins of our best works are pardoned and life eternal freely given to obedient believers Of the worthiness of our works we must speak more anon Lib. I smell whereabout you are You make us hear the Pope that is in your belly You mean as the Papists that Christ hath merited that your works shall be meritorious P. Hath not Christ Merited that our holy Love and obedience be Rewarded Lib. Yes but what 's that to Merit P. Hath he not by his Merit made them Rewardable Lib. Yes or else how can they be Rewarded P. Do you not know that by Merit the Papists themselves profess that they mean nothing but Rewardableness At least do we Protestants mean anything else by it Lib. What the Papists or you mean you best know your selves but I know what you say And you both talk like the ignorant enemies of Grace P. Do you include the Jansenists who say that all Christs Grace now is nothing but his irrestible efficient operation of Holy Love in the soul and that God moveth us to it necessarily or insuperably and that he now giveth no Grace meerly sufficient which is not effectual or meerly effectual to make us Able but also to make us Act and that now he leaveth nothing to our Free-will in Christs gracious operations but giveth in act all the Will and all the merit that men have and that Fear and obedience of a Law written is our own Legal Righteousness though it respect the new Law but Christs Righteousness which he giveth us as distinct from our Legal Righteousness is only his Spirit or Love put into the heart Lib. I do not believe that any Papist is so much for free grace P. But if you deny it and the book be opened and it found there written is it nothing to you to be found in falshood Lib. But I say not as Jansenius that it is the Law written in us but Christs Righteousness imputed to us which is our Righteousness P. Did you not even now confess an Inherent Righteousness Lib. Yes but not to our Justification P. Of that more anon By Justification they mean Making us holy Lib. But Jansenius is not a common Papist why tell you me of him P. My business here is not to justifie the Papists but to understand your mind I do not think you know what the Papists hold in it Lib. I am not ashamed to be a stranger to their Books But I will bring one when you will that shall open the abomination of their doctrine of merit Till then it 's you to whom I speak P. Content we will make another dayes work of that Tell me then whether it be Names or Things that you make so much ado about Lib. Both we like not ill names and worse false doctrine P. What are the Names that displease you Is Reward or Rewardableness one Lib. No if you will understand them well For they are Scripture words P. Is worthiness one of them Lib. Yes if you will say that we are worthy of the Reward or of salvation P. Do you not know that the Scripture usually so speaketh Rev. 3. 4. They shall walk with me in white for they are worthy 2 Thes 1. 5 11. Worthy of the Kingdom of God 1 Thes 2. 12. Walk worthy of God Luke 20. 35. That are accounted worthy to obtain that world 21. 36. That you may be counted worthy to scape all these things and to stand c. Matth. 10. 11. Enquire who in it is worthy 13. If the house be worthy let your peace remain If it be not worthy let your peace return 37. He that loveth Father or Mother more than me is not worthy of me Matth. 22. 8. They which were bidden were not worthy Acts 13. 46. Ye judge your selves unworthy of everlasting life Is not this Scripture Lib. By Worthy the Text meaneth not merit but fitness to receive P. Our question is not now of the Meaning but the Name you know Lib. I am not against the Scripture names if well understood P. Merit is a name I perceive that you are against And we make so small a matter of words that you shall choose any other name of the same signification and we will forbear this rather than offend you But yet tell me Q. 1. What if the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were translated Deserving and Merit would it not be as
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which most properly signifieth wages which sounds as more than praemium a Reward yet we wholly grant you that this is figuratively used and that no man deserveth wages or any thing commutatively of God But every Scripture Metaphor hath its reason And the reason of this is evident Though God cannot be Profited he can be Pleased And his Will or Pleasure is the End of all his Government and Works And he is Pleased most in that which doth the World the Church and our selves the most good for in that he is most glorified Now he so maketh his Laws and Promises as if our own and other mens good were his and his Reward for our Pleasing by Order Justice and Goodness he calleth wages metaphorically being instead of profiting him XV. By all which it is most obvious that we are not at all the less but the more beholden to God for the Merit or Rewardableness of our actions For as all the Benefit is free Gift so it is of his Grace that we do any thing that is good and that he accepteth it as Rewardable And if it be any honour to a man to be good rather than bad and the Righteous be more excellent than his neighbour it is an addition of mercy that God will honour those that honour him and commandeth others so to do Psal 15. 4. XVI And now the case is very plain both that Reward and Rewardableness called Merit there is and why it is and must be so 1. How can God be a Governour and have a Law and be a Judge and Righteous in all this if faith and godliness be not Rewardable It is the second Article in our faith and next believing that There is a God that He is the Rewarder of them that diligently seek him Heb. 11. 6. And when you would extirpate all faith and godliness on pretence of crying down Merit you may see what over-doing tends to 2. The very nature of all Gods Laws and Promises evidently inferr a Reward Without it there were no such thing as Faith Hope Desire Joy Content forsaking all Psal 19. 11. In keeping them there is great reward 58. 11. Verily there is a Reward for the righteous 3. There is notoriously a Reward even in this life Matth. 19. 29. Who would change the profit and pleasure of a holy life here for that of the unholy 4. Reward and Rewardableness are found in the very Law of Nature it self In that we are made for God as our end and it is God himself who is our Reward And holiness hath a natural tendency to happiness yea is the beginning of it it self And as God is said in Nature to make sin punishable in that he hath so formed Nature that sin shall bring suffering in and with it as poyson brings pain and death so in Nature he hath made our duty and holiness Rewardable in forming man so that health peace and happiness shall be in and after it Prov. 9. 12. If thou be wise thou art wise for thy self 5. The Light of Nature teacheth Parents Masters Princes and all Governours to take Goodness to be Rewardable and Crimes to be punishable And nothing is more universally approved by the common notices of humane nature than Justice or abhorred than Injustice Nature saith as 2 Sam. 23. 31. He that ruleth over men must be just And as Isa 10. 1. Wo to them that decree unrighteous decrees And as Prov. 17. 13. Whoso rewardeth evil for good evil shall not depart from his house Conscience will rebuke him that rewardeth evil to him that deserved it not Psal 7. 4. The better any man is the more he is for Justice and abhorreth the unjust and Alexander Severus and Antonine and such Just Princes and Judges are honoured by all Subjects and Historians And as all Power is of God and Rulers are but his Officers Rom. 13. 4 5 6. so their Righteous Government is but the inferiour part of Gods own Government as the King governeth by his Judges and Justices And therefore it is God that Rewardeth and Punisheth by them And indeed by the same reason that men deny a Reward to duty the faultiness being pardoned through Christ they would inferr that there is no Punishment for sin But God saith Isa 3. 10 11. Say to the Righteous It shall be well with him and say to the wicked It shall be ill with him He will plentifully reward the proud doers Psal 31. 23. Yea they reward evil to themselves Isa 3. 9. 6. Holiness is Gods Image and the product of the Holy Ghost and the Devil and Malignants labour to dishonour it And contrarily God honoureth it and by his Rewards will honour it openly before the world Matth. 6. 4 6. And Christ will come in glory to be glorified in his Saints and admired in all them that believe even because they have believed 2 Thess 1. 6 7 8 9 10 11. 7. God will Govern man according to mans nature and capacity else what need of Scripture Ministry c. And man is naturally a Lover of himself and God will make him know that he hath no need of him but it is himself that shall be the gainer if he obey and the loser if he sin even to Cain after his first sin God saith If thou do well shalt thou not be accepted but if thou do evil sin lyeth at the door Man is an Intellectual and free agent and therefore God will set before him life and death good and evil Deut. 30. 15. and whether they will hear or not hear he will send his word Ezek. 2. 5. and they shall be told of such Motives as should suffice to prevail with men of reason 8. Man hath many and great Temptations to overcome And as they work morally toward his deceit and ruine so God will suitably give him such Moral motives as are fittest to move him to resist them And therefore he will offer man so full and sure and glorious a Reward as is fit to disgrace all the offers of the Devil and will make men know that his Rewards are such as no pleasure or profit of sin should stand in any competition with Yea he himself who is God Allsufficient will be our exceeding great Reward Gen. 15. 1. No wonder if Moses like other believers despised the honours of Pharaoh's Court and chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season because he had respect to the recompence of reward Heb. 11. 25 26. And Paul went towards death rejoycing in these hopes that having fought a good fight and finished his course henceforth a Crown of Righteousness was laid up for him by God the Righteous Judge 2 Tim. 4. 8. who is not unrighteous to forget his servants work and labour of Love And all believers are therefore stedfast and unmoveable alwayes abounding in the work of the Lord as knowing that their labour is not in vain in the Lord 1 Cor.
not by such talk as this believe either that God Rewardeth himself or that he Rewardeth not us But we easily grant that he rewardeth us for nothing which cometh not from his free bounty For no creature can have any other good 2. But if Faith and Love and Obedience be not commanded to us but only given us then they are no Duties but Gifts only and unbelief hatred of God and disobedience is no sin nor brings no punishment Lib. At least they are no Conditions of the Covenant P. Do you think that they are any proper Means of our Justification and Salvation as their End or not Lib. Yes I dare not say that they are no means at all Faith and Repentance are Means of our Pardon and Holiness and Perseverance of our Glorification P. What sort of means do you take them to be Lib. They are such Gifts of God as in order must go before Salvation P. Going before signifieth only Antecedency and not any Means Lib. One Gift maketh us fit for a thankful improvement of another P. This speaketh them only to be a Means to our Thankful improvement and not to our Right to the things to be improved Lib. I do not think that they are a means of our Right or title P. Rev. 22. 14. Blessed are they that do his Commandments that they may have Right to the tree of life c. Lib. It may be translated that wash their garments and that they may have power upon as Dr. Hammond noteth P. 1. The Alexandrian Copy which giveth him this occasion is singular and not be set against all other though the Vulgar Latin go the same way Beza who yet thinks that a transposition of two Verses hath darkned these Texts this Book being negligently used because many for a time took it not for an Apostolical Writing or Canonical yet saith that it is contra omnium Graecorum codicum fidem that the Vulgar goeth 2. But all 's one in sense For to wash their Garments is to be sanctified or purified from sin and not only from guilt of punishment And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth such a Power as we call Authority oâ— Right usually But what maketh you deny Conditions on mans part Lib. Because 1. It is supposed that a condition is profitable to him that requireth it 2. It is some Cause of the benefit 3. It is to be done by the performers own strength whereas God giving â—s Faith that can be no condition on our part which is first a Gift from him that requireth it For to give it first maketh it no condition of ours P. Here we see what it is to quarrell about ambiguous Words No one of these is true that you say of the common nature of a condition or at least as we mean by that word 1. Civilians define a Condition to be Lex addita negotio qua donec praestetur eventum suspendit As it is Required it is only Modus promissionis donationis vel contractus as Performed it is only a Removal of an Impediment and a Disposition of the Receiver So that as the Non-performance is but the suspension of a Causation so the performance of a Condition as such is no Cause efficient But it is dispositio subjecti which you may call a necessary Modus of a Material Cause as the Recipient may improperly be called Dr. Twisse therefore calleth faith Caâ—sa justificationis dispositiva 2. So it be an act of our own it is no way necessary that it be done without the Commanders help or gift For he that giveth us to believe doth give it by this means even by commanding it and making it a Condition of his further benefits that so he may induce us as rational free agents to perform it ex intuitu mercedis or by the motive of the end or benefit For he causeth it by suitable means And no doubt but faith and the rest are free acts of ours though caused by Gods grace 3. And it is accidental to a Condition that it be any way commodious to the Imposer What profit is it to a Father that his Child put off his Hat and say I thank you And yet he may make that a condition of his gift What profit is it to a free Physicion that the Patient observe his order in taking his Medicines And yet he may give them on that condition But yet I will add that as usually men make that the condition of a Gift or Contract which the person obliged is backward else to perform and that which is somewhat either for the Donor or Contracters Interest or the Ends of his contract so God who taketh his Glory and Pleasure in his Childrens Good to be as his Interest and the End of his Gifts and knoweth how backward we are to our duty doth on these accounts impose on us our duty and conditions his Pleasure and Glory being instead of his Commodity But if If be a conditional Particle and if Gods suspending by the tenour of his Donation our Right to Justification upon our free believing and our Right to Salvation on our free obedience do prove Conditionality as it doth all that we mean then you see that the new Covenant hath conditions Lib. Doth not God promise us the first Grace even to take the hard heart out of our bodies and give us hearts of flesh and new hearts c. And I pray what condition can the first grace have unless you will run in infinitum to seek Conditions of Conditions P. 1. This is a Cause of great moment of which I have my self had darker thoughts than now I have 1. If one Benefit of the Covenant have no Condition viz. the first will it follow that none of the rest are given upon condition May not God in Baptism give us a Right of special Relation to the Father Son and Holy Ghost his Love Grace and Communion Pardon Adoption and Glory on condition of Faith and Repentance and yet himself give us that Faith and Repentance which is the condition of the rest 2. But upon fuller consideration it will appear that It is not the first Grace that those promises mean by a new and soft heart For who ever will examine them shall find that the Texts mention Conditions and also antecedent Grace And indeed A new and soft heart is but the same thing which the New Testament calleth Sanctification And yet that Sanctification is promised as consequent to Faith as its condition And our ordinary Divines do accordingly distinguish of Vocation and Sanctification holding that in Vocation the Act of Faith and Repentance are caused by Gods Grace before proper Habits and that Sanctification is the Habits specially of Love and Holiness following them vid. Ames Medull de Vocat Rolloc de Vocat Hookers Souls Vocat Humil. Rogers of Faith c. And this is the new and fleshy heart But what need we more to prove that Covenant Conditional which I mean when it is nothing
imputed to us for righteousness If it be only the object and not faith why is it so often called faith believing being perswaded c. Will you say that It is not faith as an act of ours only Whoever dreamt it was For à quatenus ad omne If as an act then every act even plowing and walking and sinning would justifie us Will you say that It is not Faith as a Moral Virtue or Good act only Who saith it is For then every moral good act would justifie men Do you say that It is not by faith as faith in genere It is granted you For else à quatenus ad omne any act of faith would justifie even believing that there is a Hell Will you say that it is not any other species of faith besides our baptismal faith We grant it you But if you will also say that It is not this species even the Christian faith neither that is meant but only the object of it then 1. Why say you that it is Faith as connoting the object contradicting your self for if be not faith at all it is not faith as connoting that which is not doth not connote 2. And why say you that it is not faith it self essentially Is not the object essential as an object to the act in specie Is it not essential to our Christian faith to be a Believing in Christ 3. But what sober unprejudiced Christian that readeth the Text throughout and hath not been instructed to pervert it can choose but see that it is Faith it self that the Apostle speaketh of and that it is our personal Relation of Righteousness that it is said to be imputed for And who can believe that this is the sense Abrahams faith was imputed to him for Christs Righteousness or this either His faith that is Christs Righteousness and not his faith was imputed to him for Christs Righteousness Undoubtedly by faith is meant faith and by Righteousness is meant our own Relation But it is most easie to discern that the plain sense is Christ being presupposed the Meriter of our Justification and Salvation which he hath given the world conditionally by a Law of Grace or Covenant Donation by which now he ruleth and judgeth us all that this Covenant Gift or Law requireth on our part to make us Righteous and entitle us to the Spirit and everlasting life is that as Pâ—nitent Believers we accept Christ and life according to the nature ends and uses of the gift and this also by his grace Reader hold close to this plain Doctrine which most of the lower sort of Christians know who have not faln into perverters hands and youâ— will have more solid and practical and peaceable truth about this point than either Dr. Thomas Tullie or Maccovius or Mr. Crandâ—â— or Dr. Crispe or the Marrow of Modern Divinity * Written by an honest Barber Mr. Fisher as is said and applauded by divers Independent Divines or Paul Hobson or Mr. Saltmarsh or any such Writers do teach you in their learned Net-work Treatises by which being Wise or Orthodox overmuch being themselves entangled and confounded by incongruous notions of mans invention they are liker to entangle and confound you than to shew you the best method and grounds for the peace of an understanding dying man Christs Righteousness is Imputed or Reckoned to be as it is the total sole Meritorious Cause of all that Grace and Glory given us in and by the Conditional Law or Covenant of Grace and of our Grace for performance of the Conditions and it needeth nothing at all of ours to make it perfect to this use nor hath our faith any such supplemental Office But this condition of our part in Christ and of our Right to his Covenant-gifts must be performed and the sentence of Absolution or Condemnation life or death must be passed on us accordingly it being not Christ but we by this very Law that are to be Judged Justified or Condemned And this is the Condemnation that light is come into the World and men loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil But to as many as Received him he gave Right to become the Sons of God even to them that believe in his name And there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the Flesh but after the Spirit For being perfected he is become the Author of eternal Salvation to all them that obey him And it is not they that cry Lord Lord that shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven but he that doth the will of our heavenly Father For Godliness hath the promise of the life that now is and of that to come CHAP. X. Whether Gods justifying those to day that were yesterday unjustified signifie any change in God P. IX OF this also I have said so much in my Apologie to Dr. Kendall and in the two first parts of this Book before that I shall now put you off with this short notice 1. There is nothing changed or new in God That which on his part is in God the Cause of our Justification is his eternal simple essence 2. But Gods Essence Understanding or Will considered simply in it self is not to be called Mans Justification But the effect produced by it And partly the extrinsick object as terminating Gods act and so by extrinsick denomination or connotation Gods Essential Intellect and Will is said de novo to justifie But it is only man that is really changed 3. The New effect in man from which God is said de novo to justifie him is 1. A new Right or Relation to Christ pardon and life and to the Father and the Holy Ghost 2. A new objective termination of Gods estimation acceptance and complacency And 3. A new heart hereupon at the same instant given us I think none of this is from eternity And that as God did de novo make the world and judge it existent and love and order it as existent without any change in him as also millions of creatures proceed from his simple Unity so is it here And this needeth no more words with knowing or teachable men And to others there is no end CHAP. XI Whether a Justified man should be afraid of becoming unjustified Lâ—b THis fear of losing our justification which you teach men is most injurious to Gods free grace and immutability and a rack for Conscience to destroy mens peace P. I have said so much of this before about Perseverance and Assurance as forbiddeth me tedious repetitions Here needeth no more but this explication of the matter which you confound 1. Fear is either Causeful or Causeless 2. Fear is either such as hindereth comfort or such as helpeth it 3. Fear is either a Duty or an unavoidable natural passion or a sin of unavoidable infirmity or a more deadly or heinous sin 4. It 's one thing to cause and cherish Fear and another thing to teach men that cannot avoid
it how to deal by it And now I assert 1. Too many are confident that they are justified who ought not only to Fear that they are not but to know it 2. Too many that are Justified fall into such decayes of Grace and heinous sin as that it becometh thereupon their duty to fear lest their hearts should deceive them and they prove unjustified till they rise by repentance and revived Faith The uncertainty becoming unavoidable some Fear in an uncertain person is a duty without which he would shew a contempt of God and his salvation 3. Too many Justified persons have Grace so weak and unactive and sin so strong as that in that case both uncertainty and fears are unavoidable to them A Certainty beyond fear supposeth a very high proportionable degree of all other Graces For the new creature in the chief parts useth to increase or decrease together But few have such high degrees of Grace 4. A fear of particular great and heinous sins which must be Repented of if you will be saved must be moderately feared by all Christians none being certain that they shall escape them 5. A believing lively apprehension of the dreadfulness of Gods Judgement as he is a consuming fire and one that can cast soul and body into Hell with so much as is necessary to vigilancy and labour for prevention is all mens duty Luke 12. 4 5. Heb. 12. 28 29. And on this consideration if we will serve God acceptably it must be with reverence and godly fear And we must keep under our bodies with Paul and bring them into subjection lest having preached or professed we should yet be cast awayes 6. Needful cleansing repenting and preventing fear doth secure and further our comforts by removing the sin and danger that would hinder them 7. All our enemies and dangers are not overcome till the end And danger must be escaped by moderate fear God who brings his servants over all their dangers will save them by a sober fear and vigilancy and not by fearlesness of the evil 8. But all that fear which includeth error or unbelief or distrust of Christ is sinful and to be resisted with all our care And the more distrust the greater is the sin 9. All Fear that driveth from Christ and faith and hope and love and true consolation we cry down daily as injurious to God and man 10. We teach all Christians to contend with utmost diligence to get up to the highest Trust Love Joy Thanksgiving and Praise as the proper Evangelical excellency nearest Heaven and to get as fast as they can above that fear which hath torment which is cast out as love groweth perfect and to pray and seek for the Spirit of Adoption of Power and Love and a sound mind instead of the Spirit of fear and bondage And not to place too much of their Religion in that very fear which in its season is a duty much less in hurtful sinful fear But alwayes and in all things to Rejoyce in the Lord with Love and Gratitude and confidently to cast all their cares on him 11. But as all men here are imperfect in Holiness Faith and Assurance and in their doubts some fear of the event besides meer reverence of God is their duty so we teach men how so to live in an uncertain fearing state as safeliest to get above it 12. And we know that sin wickedness presumption self-deceit and pride are so common in the world that Fear is very needful to the most and we have cause to call with Paul to many proud Professors Be not high minded but fear even lest God should cut them off as he did the Jews and Having a promise of entring into his rest let us fear lest any of us come short of it Heb. 4. 1. And Christ thrice over reciteth his urgent exhortatory words Luke 12 4 5. I say to you my friends I will tell you whom you shall fear Fear him who when he hath killed hath power to cast into Hell yea I say unto you the third time fear him Is not this authority full and these words plain and very earnest even to his friends 13. And it is not fit to make such a Doctrine a fundamental certainty which we find none of all the Churches of Christ held from the Apostles dayes for many and many hundred years that ever I could read or hear of I mean that all the Justified persevere Be it never so clear to you that which now is and so long was thought so far from clear and sure to the Churches of Christ as it is no fit foundation for the Churches Concord so neither for a Christians everlasting hopes to be so much laid on it as by some they are CHAP. XII Of Mans Power to believe and of calling the unregenerate to Duty P. X. XI OF the first of these I have said so much before that I will here pass it by And as to the second you are a man of pernicious principles and downright heretical and damnable if indeed you would have us call no unregenerate persons to any duty whatsoever Answer me these Questions Quest 1. Would you not have your Wife Children and Servants taught that it is their duty to love honour and obey you and your neighbours to deal justly with you and the Rulers to protect you and the Judges to do you Justice Lib. I speak only of Religious and not Civil duties P. You are indifferent it seemeth as to the Interest of Gods honour and mens salvation Let those alone so be it your own interest be secured Duty to you must be preached but not to God But would you not have them taught to do you service as to the Lord and as such as from him shall have punishment or reward and to submit themselves to the Higher Powers for conscience sake as to the Ministers of God and â—o Honour Father and Mother in obedience to God and that by his reward their dayes may be long Should not all be done to the Glory of God Lib. Yes it should be but the wicked cannot do it Therefore they must be first made Godly and the Heart renewed that the life may be amended P. We are as much and more for Heart-work and for beginning there than you are â—â— we know that God accepteth not the hypocrite that draweth near him and honoureth him with the lips when the heart is far from him The outward actions are no further Good or Bad than they are â—â—â—â— or from the Will The Divine Nature and Image of God and life of the new creature is the new heart by the Love of God shed abroad upon it by the Holy Ghost But Quest 2. Are we to call men to no duty at all to the getting of a new heart Should we not perswade them to hear Gods Word Lib. Yeâ— How shall they believe unless they hear P. Quest 3. Must we call them from the Tavern Ale-house Gaming-house Play-house Whore-house yea
them without any fitness which would good men more dislike I think that the first is but the very thing that most of the School Doctors mean And that we at once abhorr their words and abhorr the contrary as they are variously presented to men Quest 2. And I ask you Whether do you think it a greater Grace or Gift of God to give a man that Holiness which shall fit him for Heaven or as they call it Merit it or to give him Heaven without such Holy fitness or merit L. Heaven without Holiness is a contradiction But if God could make a beast or bad man Happy without it doubtless yet both is more than one I had rather God would make me here fit for Heaven by holiness than not and so all Christians But we all take Merit to signifie somewhat which profiteth God and which is our own and not of his gift and grace In which I see we are mistaken R. Doubtless as that God who can relieve your poor or sick friend without you sheweth you a double favour if he will make you his instrument in relieving him so if he cause you to work out your own salvation it is a greater mercy than if he would carry you asleep to Heaven And it 's strange that men that know that all that we have is of God should think his grace dishonoured by giving us the greater mercy But to return to my account of the Papists I will mention Aquinas farther because you know who numbreth him with the grosser sort 1. 2. q. 114. a. 1. He concludeth that man meriteth not at all of God according to absolute or simple Justice which goeth by equality sed secundum divinae ordinationis quandam praesuppositionem as man obtaineth that as a reward by his operation for which God gave him the operative virtue And so that here is but modus quidam Justitiae as a Father hath to a Child and merit only secundum quid at non simpliciter And he addeth that our voluntary doing our duty is our merit not as profiting God but manifesting his glory and pleasing his will and so God is not a Debtor to us but to his own will or to himself And a. 2. he concludeth that without Grace even man in innocency much less in sin could thus merit life eternal When after therefore he speaks for merit of condignity as the acts are from the Holy Ghost it is such a merit as aforesaid that he meaneth But the first Grace he saith none meriteth But I desire you for the understanding of Aquinas and such others to take notice that the foundation of many confused speeches of theirs is their confused notions of Gods Laws or Covenants For Aquin. q. 106. a. 1. doth go the way of Mr. Sterry and Sr. H. Vane and the Quakers and conclude that the New Law of Grace is not written but in the heart that is that Lex nova principaliter est ipsa gratia spiritus sancti in corde fidelium scripta because unaquaeque illud videtur esse quod in ea est potissimum and so that Lex scripta is called a Law secondarily as a means to the former Now this is gross abuse of an equivocal word by a vain pretence For the word Law doth not first signifie another thing because that other is most excellent but less excellent things as media ad finem have their proper notions And the world knoweth that the famosius significatum here is a Law ut signum voluntatis imperantis constituens debitum as an instrument of Government And that Sanctity of heart is the effect of the doctrine and a disposition to obey and is called a Law but in tropical sense But indeed Paul oft describeth the Gospel as in the heart and the Law as a thing But that contradicts not what I say but it was because the New Testament was not then much of it if any written and received in the Churches as Gods Law But Baptism expounded by word of mouth in the three Articles was the Christianity which Paul bid Timothy keep and commit to faithful men that might teach it The Christian Religion was by word committed to mens memory first and so to their hearts before it was put in writing But yet it was primarily and properly a Law ut signum obligans and but metonymically as the soul was holy by it The Law was one thing even in the mind and memory and the Love of God and it another though called a Law But from this notion that the old Law was a writing and the new Law was the spirit in us no wonder if Aquinas gathered that the word Justifie chiefly signified to make us Good and holy persons and that our Holiness being our real aptitude for our Glorifying and pleasing God and so for our Happiness therein was to be called our merit meaning thereby but that same fitness for the End oâ— Reward which Scripture calleth worthiness and all religious Preachers and people among us zealously defend in other notions where the Papists are forgotten L. It can never enter into my thoughts that so many Godly Learned Protestants would make odious the Papists if some of them at least meant no worse R. Know you not that judicious George Major was made the head of Hereticks by Gallus Amsdorfius c. for but saying Bona opera sunt necessaria ad salutem Read your Schlusselburgius of his heresie and judge as you see cause But whereas our Divines in confuting merit do still describe it as of commutative justice and not as of paternal Governing distributive Justice according to the Law of Grace I will yet tell you what is said by Vasquez the Jesuite in 1 Thom. qu. 21. disp 83. c. 1. 2. sequent Which when you have read I will appeal to common Reason and Christianity 1. Whether it be not a sinful thing for ignorant Protestants to take it upon one anothers reports that the Papists hold that doctrine of merits which they do not and so to make them unjustly more erroneous and odious than they are 2. Whether it be not a very sinful serving of the Devil for unlearned Divines that have read little of the Papists writings to backbite and calumniate those of us who truly state the Controversie and narrow the differences as if we made the Papists better than they are and took their parts meerly because we would have no good men belye them 3. Whether it be not the way to harden and increase the Papists to find such false dealing among their adversaries Cap. 1. Vasquez falls upon some late Doctors who say that Commutative Justice is properly and formally in God yet they say that it is not in God as it is in men nor as including any imperfection In the second Chapter he maintaineth that Commutative Justice is not in God according to propriety of speech and that this is the judgement of all the former School Doctors to a man He citeth many
being superstitious by a great deal of self-made Duty and Sin only theirs and yours are not in the same things They say Touch not taste not handle not some things and you other things while you say that God hath forbidden forms of prayer and many lawful circumstances of Worship and other such like And I now intreat you and all the servants of Christ soberly to consider whether a wild injudicious calling sound Doctrine and Practices Antichristian and using that name as a bugbear for want of solid argument and an injudicious running from Papists into the contrary errors and extreams hath not brought on many the guilt and misery which in all the following particulars I shall open to you 1. Such men have corrupted the Gospel of Christ by bringing in many doctrinal errors and opening a door to the heretical to bring in more Almost all the Libertine Antinomian errors have come in by an injudicious opposition to Popery as if they were the Vindication of Election Free Grace Christs Righteousness Justification by faith Perseverance against mans Works and Merits And it is not to be denyed that the said Libertine Doctrines do more contradict the Doctrine of the Gospel even Christianity it self than the Doctrine of the Papists about the same subjects do I know this to be true who ever is offended at it Aquinas Scotus Gabriel Bellarmine Pererids Tolet yea Vasquez Suarez and Molina are not near so erroneous about Justification Grace Faith and good works as Richardson Randal Sympson Towne Crispe Saltmarsh and many such others are Yet how many Religious people have I known that have gloried in these errors as the sweet discoveries of free grace 2. Such erroneous extreams in opposition to Popery have greatly dishonoured the Reformers and Reformation When it cannot be denyed but such and such errors are found among them it maketh all the Reformation suspected as Illyricus his Doctrine of the substantiality of sin and the non-necessity of Good works to salvation and as Andr. Osianders Doctrine of Justification by Gods essential righteousness did and as many harsh passages in Piscator and Maccovins do to name no more besides those before named What a stir have our later Divines still with the Papists in defending some few harsh sayings of Luther Calvin and Beza about the Cause of sin and some such subjects But downright errors cannot be defended 3. Your injudicious opposition greatly hardneth the Papists and hindereth their conviction When they find some errours in your writings as that all are bound to believe that they are elected and Justified that this is the sense of the Article I believe the forgiveness of sin that this is sides divina that we are Reputed of God to have fulfilled all the Law of Innocency habitually and actually in and by Christ c. and then when they read that such men lay the great stress of the Reformation upon these as the very cause of our rejecting Rome and the artiouli stantisaut cadentis Ecclesiae what can more harden them to a confidence that we are hereticks and that they are in the right As I have known the persons that had been in danger of turning Papists if the errour of Transubstantiation and some few more had not been so palpable as to resolve them These men cannot be in the right even so many Papists were like to have turned Protestants had they not met with some notorious errours in such injudicious adversaries 4. Yea we too very well know that your extremities have occasioned divers Protestants to turn Papists Yea some Learned men and such as have zealously run through many Sects in opposition to Popery themselves And some of my acquaintance that went as far in the profession of Godliness as most that I have known They have been so confounded to find partly palpable errours taken for sound doctrine and sound doctrine railed at as Popery and partly to see the shameful diversity and contentions of all the Sects among themselves that it hath drawn them to think that there is no prosperity of the Church and Godliness to be expected but where there is unity and Concord and no Unity and Concord to be hoped for among Protestants And therefore they must return for it to Rome And Grotius professeth that it was this that moved him to go so far towards them as he did And I must needs say that I believe from my very heart that the shameful divisions contentions backbitings revilings censurings persecutions errours and scandals of Protestants among themselves is a far stronger temptation to turn men to Popery than any thing that is to be found among the Papists to turn men to it and that many are thus driven to it that would not have been drawn 5. And by calling good and lawful if not necessary things Antichristian and Popish you have made Religious people ridiculous and a scorn to many that have more wit than Conscience as if we were all such humorous Novices as would run mad by being frightned with the name of Antichrist And as they deride you for it as Fanatical so they the less fear Popery it self 6. And by these extremities you corrupt the peoples minds with a wrathful and contentious kind of Religion which â—s easily taken up in comparison of a holy and heavenly mind When you should kindle in them a zeal for Love and Good Works the mark of Gods peculiar people you are killing Love and kindling wrath Gunpowder may be set on fire without so much blowing of the coal Long experience assureth us that a siding angry contentious zeal is easily kindled but a lively faith a confirmed hope of Glory a Love to God and man needs more ado S. Stay a little in the midst of your reproofs Would you perswade us to a Union with Antichrist and to live in Love and Concord with the members of the Devil Are not the Papists such Have you no way to reconcile us to Rome but by pleading for Love and peace Must we not contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the Saints and not be Lukewarm to the doctrines of Jezabel that seduceth the people of God to Idolatry P. 1. Were you perswadable I would perswade you not ignorantly to contradict the truth of God and call it Popery nor to set up certain false or incongruous notions and pretend them great and necessary verities nor to make a stir for some odd unsound opinions received upon trust from those that you thought best of and to buzz abroad suspicious of Popery against those that have more understanding and conscience than to imitate you nor to fly in the faces of Gods faithfullest servants much less to use your tongues to backbite them as if they were Antichristian because they are not as shamefully ignorant and deceived as you are And I would perswade you to study and digest well what you take the boldness to speak against and not to talk confidently and furiously against that which you never