more to your charge than your owne plaine wordes For are not these wordes plaine Paule neuer continued captiue vnto sinne after his regeneration neither gaue place vnto euill thoughts But now you make a protestation that you haue euer been free from such an heresie and your last writing did testifie much Touching your writing it was both last and first except your bare argument and there is no heede to take what ye say for your matter commeth foorth as the streame doth turne the wheele euen vnto contrary motions When before the rage of the streame turned the wheele to vtter the freedome of the Church then it must bee in such perfection that the regenerate is not partly held captiue vnto sinne nor giueth place vnto euill thoughts Now when the wheele must haue a contrarie motion to purge your selfe there commeth as violent a streame that way For here ye say the children of God after regeneration may commit any sinne except the sin against the holy ghost And you also affirme that they may commit sin of presumption and obstinate sinne In my iudgment you had neede of some fauourable exposition of your speech The regenerate doubtles as we haue examples in the scriptures may fall into grieuous sinnes and doe through frailtie but that it may be of presumption and obstinacie you must declare how filthie incest is not the sinne against the holy ghost nor if a man kill his Father Mother or Children No more is witchcraft and familiaritie with diuels Is it your meaning that the regenerate may of presumption and obstinacie committe these If not why doe you vtter such wordes and not make them plaine I spake vpon the place to the Romaines that the freedome of the Church in this world is but in parte and not perfect he cried out a fleshly libertie If I should haue spoken as he speaketh here what would he haue saide But hee now he is afraide least while hee hath washed himselfe ouer cleane from Anabaptisme he should ouerthrow Brownisme as indeede he doth And that is the cause whie hee tempereth his speech in the wordes following that although in Gods fight obstinat sinners may be regenerate and so his children yet not to men by outward profession but are to be cast foorth which I doe not denie and then for the least bowing downe to a false gouernement they are to be cast foorth This I omite as not the question betweene him and me and leaue his words to be considered of the reader But where he procéedeth in reasoning against me as if I held that obstinate grose sinners are not teo bee cast foorth by excommunication I maruaile from whence he can gather that But let vs come to S. Paule againe and see how master Greenwood excuseth his owne speech and condemneth mine It is out of doubt that as God is immortal doth begette by immortal seede as S. Peter speaketh so all which are borne of GOD and haue therefore receiued the spirite of regeneration can neuer loose that spirit Whosoeuer is borne of God doth not committe sinne because his seede abideth in him neither can he sinne because he is borne of God 1. Iohn 3. v. 9. From hence master Greenwood holdeth himselfe cleered and may well say that S. Paule after regeneration stoode not in any bondage to sinne nor gaue place vnto euill thoughts because he euer repented and the spirit of God in him did not nor could not cōsent or giue place vnto sinne His meaning then is this that the regeneration which is from the spirite cannot be in bondage to sinne and the graces of the spirite cannot consent or giue place vnto euill thoughts This is most true vnlesse a man will be so wicked as to holde that the grace of God may be in bondage and consent to the worke of the deuill If this had been the matter in question betweene vs and he had said no more it could not be reprooued But he proceedeth further and chargeth me with error that when S. Paule reasoneth of the olde man or corruption in him I will needes cōclude it of the new man or inner man or of the whole man My wordes are extant in print let all the Brownists sconne them and see whether they can without falsehood and lying gather from them that I conclude that the new man or inner man which is y e grace of regeneration is in bondage to sin or doth consent vnto euill thoughts the whole course of my wordes doth lay open the contrarie For I shew how Paule touching the inner man consented to the law of God And that in his minde that is in the regeneration he did serue the law of God What is it then which maketh master Greenwood so boldlie to accuse and so falsely Euen the mother of headdy boldnes and much falshood palpable ignorance For where I stand to affirme that paule a regenerate man stood yet in some captiuitie and bondage vnto sinne He doth imagine it will followe that I affirme the regeneration to be in bondage vnto sinne because Paul is the whole man and he that concludeth vpon the whole concludeth vpon euerie part In deede this is it which hath deceiued the Brownist and by which he thus laboureth to seduce others that where the Scripture calleth the regeneration or the graces of the spirit the new man and the inner man as it calleth the corruption of nature the olde man and the bodie of sinne he vnderstandeth it as though the person himselfe who is regenerate were called the new man or the inner man which is farre wide for the graces of the spirite the worke of the spirite the regeneration called the inner man are one thing and the man himselfe which is regenerat another The bodie and soule are Paul the regeneration called the inner man or the graces of the Spirite are not Paul himselfe but in Paul The soule bodie are Paul the corruption through concupiscence called the olde man is not Paul himselfe but is in Paul because the regeneration shall neuer be extinguished the regenerate are reckoned and esteemed after it not that the regeneration itselfe is either the man or a part of the man Dauid was a man regenerate he committed adulterie and murther the soule and bodie of Dauid sinned whole Dauid doth acknowledge himselfe a sinner that is he was a sinner both in bodie and soule and yet the regeneration the seede of God in him the graces of the Spirite which were as coles of fire for the time couered in the ashes did not sinne nor consent vnto euill thought Paul a regenerate man when he saith Autos ego I my selfe in the minde serue the lawe of God but in the flesh the lawe of sinne calleth not the regeneration I my selfe but his soule and bodie which were Paul then the bodie and soule of Paul in the minde that is so farre as they were regenerate did serue the lawe of God The same bodie and soule of Paul in
the flesh that is in the corruption of nature remaining because regeneration is not full and perfect did serue the lawe of sinne for he saith I my selfe for both The flesh in this place is not Paul nor no part of Paul but the corruption of sinne spread ouer the bodie and soule of Paul Euen so the minde is not Paul nor anie part of Paul but the worke of Grace remaining the soule and bodie of Paul Now the Brownist not vnderstanding but as the Apopostle saith They would be Doctors of the law not knowing what they speake nor whereof they affirme 1. Timo 1. would haue vs beleeue him that Paul after regeneration was not in anie respect held captiue vnto sinne nor gaue place vnto euill thoughts because the grace of God in Paul was not in bondage vnto sinne nor consented Saint Paul saith I my selfe in the flesh serue the law of sinne which as I expounded in my former booke doth not prooue that sinne did raigne or that it is to be accounted such a seruice to sinne as is done on the other part to God because this is by violent tyrannie against the will so farre as the grace of regeneration hath reformed it and the seruice to the lawe of God is with delight and willingnesse This is the reason why he saith It is no longer I but the sinne that dwelleth in mee It is not reckened his sinne before God because hee doth hate it but yet it sticketh fast both in his soule and bodie It is no longer I that sinne The Brownistes exposition is to this effect It is no longer I that is the inner man or the graces of the spirit that doe it but sinne that dwelleth in me Did the grates of regeneration euer commit sinne or the inner man If not how can it be saide it is no longer I for nothing can be said to do no longer that hath not don before And wheÌ„ he saith but sin that dwelleth in me this in me is not in the regeneratioÌ„ for though sin dwel in man together with the works of grace yet is it no fitte speech to say sinne dwelleth in the regeneration Therefore this I when he saith it is no longer I that do it is not the inner man but the person of Paul consisting of soule and bodie How fondly then doth Maister Greenewood affirme that S. Paul in that place touching his bondage to sinne speaketh but of that which is called the olde man The olde man is the concupiscence and corruption of sinne Where I alleaged that Paul saith he saw a law in his members that did leade him captiue to the law of sinne hee saith I falsefie the text because it is leading me captiue and not did leade me captiue Paul speaketh in the time present least he might seeme to speake of a former estate which he was not in then And it was more effctuall to lay open the bondage to sinne which in some respect the regenerate are in though sinne haue not dominion ouer them for him to say at that instant holding me captiue then to say did leaue me captiue The cause why I put it in the time past is that Paul is deliuered long since The disciples sawe Iesus walking on the water doe I falsefie the text if I say they sawe Iesus did walke vpon the water But this is not all for this Brownist saith holding him captiue but it did not holde him What can bee a more flatte contradiction than this his reason is because there was a stronger that suffered not the law in his members to raigne The matter is not about a full dominion of sinne but whether the body and soule were not so yoaked still with it as to be forced to commit sinne Now let me haue an answere to this eyther from Maister Greenewood or any other Brownist whether the regeneration be perfect in any He will say I do hym great wrong to aske him such a question because he professeth the contrarie Well then answere also whether the freedome of Gods children from sinne while they liue here be perfect or but in part as the regeneration is If ye will say the freedome is perfect shew how there can be a perfect freedome from sinne by a sanctification which is but a part If ye say the freemdome is but in part and vnperfect as ye must needes say vnlesse ye will bee right Annabaptists indeede then tell me how it is possible that where the freedome is but in part that should be no bondage For what is the imperfection of freedome but that it taketh not away all bondage looke how farre the freedome commeth short of perfection so farre bondage doth remaine chuse whether part ye will to affirme eyther the freedome of Gods children from sinne while they liue here to be perfect or else to be vnperfect For if ye shall say the freedome is alreadie perfect as ye haue hetherto by affirming that the regenerate are in no bondage to sinne then shall ye continue in Annabaptistrie If ye denie the freedome of the regenerate to be perfect as yet which in deede is the sound truth then consider that howe much is wanting of perfect freedome so much remaineth of that bondage to sinne which as yet al stand vnder that line and acknowledge your madnes in affirming so directly contrarie to the Scriptures that Paul neuer continued captiue vnto sinne after regeneration nor gaue place vnto euill thoughtes FINIS Matth. 13 Matth. 3. 1. Timo. 5 Matth. 14 â—rgu 7.
desires are sundrie one mooued more in one thing another in another thing some come more fitter to pray for this and some for that It is most certaine that neither the prescipt forme nor the preacher can see into these seuerall estates of mens mindes consciences or to the desires which they are most fit and prepared to expresse neither is that so much to bee regarded seeing that which should be fittest for one part should not be so fit for another but they must euery one frame himselfe to pray for al things which the assemblie doth pray for which are necessarie to be praied for at al times and of all persons Shall any man say I am not prepared to begge these things therefore they be not fit for me Let him not be so wicked but stirre vp himselfe rather to begge them with the congregation Shall any be so foolish as to say wee knowe these things before I am not mooued with them men for the most part do but repeat them of custome Nay rather let him striue against such impietie and say the things are not any thing the lesse precious which wee craue because wee heare them often or knowe them before or that many abuse them and therefore we indeuour to begge them earnestlie with all faithful ones in the assemblie seeing they bee such as are needfull to be praied for In the rest I leaue the reader to compare his booke with my former The last Argument The prayers of such Ministers and people as stand vnder a false gouernment are not acceptable Those Ministers which stand subiect to the Bishops and their Courts are subiect to a false gouernment and to Antichrist I did referre the answere of these to the third and fourth accusation but yet I did take some exception as my booke sheweth The Brownist in replying here is in great distemper I will let all his words passe and come to the matter I alleaged out of the Epistle to the Romanes Chapt. 7. that S. Paule was held in some bondage and therefore that Ierusalem from aboue is not in this world so free but that she and all her children are in some spirituall bondage At this he did crie out of Atheisme carnal Libertinisme affirming that S. Paule neuer continued captiue vnto sinne after regeneration neither gaue place vnto euill thoughts Where I haue iustly charged him with very foule matter which now labouring to wash away he doth bemire himselfe First he crieth out of wrong in diuers things without any cause Such as do touch the question of gouernment and the blasts he bloweth that way I doo here omit because his fellowes doo make replie as he mentioneth vnto those things and I must then answere Onely I deale with him now touching the place to the Romanes He willeth if I haue any common honestie to let his former answer be seene I promise ye it will be small to your credite and honestie let whosoeuer see it seeing ye doo in shameles manner crie out of wresting and I knowe not what Against my reason out of the words of Saint Paule denie if ye haue the forehead these to bee your words And now say you that Scripture which the Apostle hath set downe in the anguish of his soule concerning the inward strife of the flesh and the spirit you shamefully peruert to your owne condemnation except you repent for Paule neuer continued captiue vnto sinne after his regeneration neither gaue place vnto euill thoughts Paule speaketh there of the vnperfectnes of his owne righteousnes which maketh the lawe deadlie vnto him I will thinke you a fleshlie Libertine if you recāt not this doctrine What Atheist would thus haue defended his owne grosse sinnes Thus farre go your wordes and now let such as haue knowledge iudge what wrong I haue done ye Let them looke vpon that which I haue published and see whether I haue wrested your words or set downe any vnsound poynt of doctrine as you would yet accuse me and doo importunatelie crie out but now your words are in the light and your answere also which ye cannot vse such shifts to excuse You lay open the disagreement betweene you and me First you cannot agree to this that the regenerate may be sayd to stand in any bondage to sinne You cannot conclude against it but bring in another saying and so draw a conclusion And that is how I also affirme that one standing in bondage to open knowne sinne may in that estate bee accepted and communicated with as the seruant of Christ by outward profession both at one instant which is as to say wee may bee to mans sight the seruant of the diuell and the seruant of Christ both at one time by outward profession So none should bee excommunicate none without the world and the Church light and darknes Christ and Belial should bee mingled together Well then I aske this question both of your selfe and of your fellowes whether there be any one of ye that can stand foorth and say I see no sinne in my selfe but so soone as I haue espied I ouercome and am not at all led by it Tell me further whether ye haue not this that ye may say there is euil alwayes in ye which you cannot be rid of and that doth holde ye fast and presse ye Do ye not leaue the good vndone and commit euill and such euil as is alwayes present in ye Doe not ye find great sinnes that ye stand vnder as not able to come out of If any Brownist shall deny he is such or in this estate he can be but a proud hypocrite If yee confesse it what doe you but confesse some bondage Let me aske ye further is there any of ye which dare stand foorth and say I am not a sinner in the sight of men I stand not holden vnder any outward sinne the Brownist must aunswere these questions for he holdeth that men can not outwardly appeare sinners and be the seruants of Christ at one instant What beastly geare is this There is sinne that appeareth in the best men at al times in gesture in words in deedes in negligence in wants yea a thousand waies who is able to indure y e trial of Gods law euen in that which outwardly doth appeare in him for an howre And will yee cast foorth all in whome there appeareth sinne that he dooth abide in The grose open sinners I confesse which contemne and giue offence are to be cast foorth but are those which abide within at any time free from open sinne couetousnesse is a foule sinne so is pride selfe loue and wrath Doe all Brownists so fully shine in brightnes before men that in none of these nor any other they can bee discerned to be sinners Doth all vertue shine foorth in them And touching that which I charged you withall looke better now vpon your owne speech If there bee any modestie in ye it will be hard for ye to deny but that I haue layde no