Apology Against the Exceptions of Black and Kendall, Section Baxter 69 – Section Blake 73
§. 69,
R. B. 1. WHen you oppoſe Virtually to Expreſly, you ſeem by Virtually to mean in ſenſe, though not in terms. If ſo, then your Syllogiſm is tautological. But take it in what ſenſe you will in any propriety, and I deny that it is Virtually written in Scripture, that you or I do Believe, or yet that you or I are Juſtified and ſhall be ſaved. Yet I confeſs that ſome Concluſions may be ſaid to be Interpretativè vel ſecundum loquutionem moralem in Scripture, when but one of the premiſes is there: but that is when the other is preſuppoſed as being as certain: but of this more anon, where you ſpeak of this ſubject more largely.
2. To your inſtance, I ſay, It is by Faith and natural knowledg mixt that you conclude you ſhall riſe again. The Concluſion participateth of both Premiſes, as to the ground of its certainty. That it doth ſequi, is a right gathered Concluſion, is known only by Reaſon, and not by Faith: that it is true, is known partly by Reaſon, and partly by Faith, when the Premiſes belong to both. Yet though in ſtrict ſenſe, it be thus mixt, in our ordinary diſcourſe we muſt denominate it from one of the Premiſes, and uſually from the more notable, alwaies from the more Debile. Scripture ſaith, All men ſhall riſe; Reaſon ſaith, you are a man. Though the Concluſion here par…e of both, yet it is moſt fitly ſaid to be de fide, both becauſe Scripture intended each particular man in the Univerſal; and becauſe it is ſuppoſed as known to all, that they are men; and therefore the other part is it that reſolveth the doubt, and is the notable and more debile part.
Its I know undoubted with you, that Concluſio ſequitur partem debiliorem. Now though Gods Word in it ſelf is moſt infallible, yet in reſpect of the evidence to us, it is generally acknowledged that it is far ſhort of natural principles, and objects of ſenſe, in ſo much that men have taken it for granted, that the objects of faith are not evident (of which I will not now ſtand to ſpeak what I think, but touch it anon). Therefore it being more evident that you are a man, then it is that all men ſhall riſe, it is fitteſt to ſay the Concluſion is de fide as the more debile part. But can we ſay ſo of the preſent Concluſion in queſtion? Have you a fuller evidence that you are a ſincere Believer, then you have that, All ſincere Believers are Juſtified? I have not for my part: But it ſeems by your following words that you have, or ſuppoſe others to have; to which I ſay▪ 3. If you have as evidently concluded that Faith is in your heart, (ſaving Faith) as that Reaſon is in your Soul, & know your ſelf to be a Believer as evidently as you know your ſelf to be a man, then your Concluſion may be denominated to be de fide, as a parte delibiore. But if this be not your caſe, it is moſt fit (for all the mixt intereſt of the Premiſes) to ſay that it is not de fide, but from the knowledge of your ſincerity in the Faith, as a parte debiliore. And if it be your caſe indeed, you are the happieſt man that ever I yet ſpake with. But I know that no man ordinarily can have ſuch evidence of his ſincerity; yet becauſe I will not ſpeak of you or others by my ſelf, nor judge others hearts to be as bad as my own, or as all thoſe that I have converſed with, we will if you pleaſe thus comprimize the difference: All thoſe whoſe evidence of ſinceritie is as cleer as the evidence of their Reaſon and manhood, yea or more then Scripture evidence, ſo that Gods Teſtimony is pars debilior in the Syllogiſm; theſe ſhall take the Concluſion, that they are Juſtified, to be de fide: and all the reſt ſhall take the Concluſion to be not de fide, but from the knowledge of themſelves: and then let the iſſue ſhew whether more will be of your mind or of mine. I think this a fair Agreement.
§. 70.
Mr. Bl. OTherwiſe (ſaith he) every man rightly Receiving the Seals, muſt needs certainly be Juſtified and ſaved. I ſee no danger in yielding this Concluſion; every man rightly receiving and improving the ſeals, muſt be ſaved and Juſtified. He that rightly receives the ſeals, receives Chriſt in the ſeals, and receiving Chriſt, he receives ſalvation. So he that rightly hears. Hear and your Souls ſhall live. Iſa. 55. So he that rightly prayes. Whoſoever calls on the name of the Lord ſhall be ſaved. Rom. 10.
§. 70.
R. B. 1. BY Rightly, I meant, having Right to it, and that only in foro Eccleſiae, and not Rectè. But I confeſs I ſhould have plainlyer expreſt my meaning. 2. …hether you here contradict not your Doctrine of Baptiſmal Faith, where you ſuppoſe Juſtifying Faith to be the thing promiſed by us in Baptiſm, and therefore not prerequiſite in it, I leave you to judge, and reſolve as by your explication.
§. 71.
Mr. Bl. ANd no man can groundedly adminiſter the Sacrament to any but himſelf, becauſe he can be certain of no mans Juſtification and Salvation; Ʋpon the ſame terms that he knows any man may be ſaved, upon the ſame he may give him the Sacrament ſealing this ſalvation. This argument as we heard before, is Bellarmines, and concludes indeed againſt Abſolute ſeals in the Sacrament, but not againſt Conditional ſealing, as is confeſſed by Proteſtant Divines.
§. 71.
R. B. 1. I know it not to be true of any man that he ſhall be ſaved. therefore I may not ſeal it to any, by your Conceſſion. God-Seals to no falſhood; I know not whether it be true or falſe that A. B. ſhall be ſaved. Yet it is on ſome of the Oppoſers principles that I now argue.
2. I deſire you not to anſwer it as Bellarmines argument, but as mine, ſeeing you chooſe me to deal with. 3. The Argument makes as much againſt my aſſerting the Truth of your Concluſion, as the ſealing it: ſo that let your ſealing be Conditional or none at all, I may not ſo much as affirm to any man whoſe heart I know not, the Concluſion which you ſay I muſt ſeal. The Concluſion is Abſolute, Thou A. B. art Juſtified and ſhalt be ſaved; though the Major Propoſition, or or Univerſal Grant be conditional. Now if you will Seal this Abſolute Concluſion conditionally, then 1. you will ſin in the bare affirming it a true Concluſion, before you ſeal it, if you go but ſo fat. 2. What is the Condition that you mean? I ſuppoſe true Faith. But if ſo, then where there is not true Faith, thete you do not Actually ſeal: For a Conditional ſealing, is not Actual ſealing till the condition be performed; for the condition not performed ſuſpends the act. And then you have miſtaken in thinking that the Covenant is ſealed actually to the unregenerate or ungodly. But if you mean any thing ſhort of true Faith, how can you on that condition ſeal to any man, that he is Juſtified, and ſhall be ſaved. I do therefore rather chooſe to ſay, If thou Believe thou ſhalt be ſaved: and thus, as contained in the general Grant, I abſolutely ſeal; then to ſay, Thou ſhalt be ſaved, and this I ſeal if thou Believe. Though I ſay again, I make a ſmall matter of this, and ſuppoſe your meaning and mine is the ſame, for all theſe words.
4. Where you ſay, It concludes an Abſolute ſealing; I ſay, No, if it be but to a Conditional Grant, and if Abſolute Exhibition or Collation be not added to abſolute ſealing.
§. 72.
Mr. Bl. MR Baxter adds, I am ſorry to ſee what advantage many of our moſt learned Divines have given the Papiſts here, as one error draws on many, and leadeth a man into a Labyrinth of Abſurdities; being firſt miſtaken in the nature of Juſtifying Faith, thinking it conſiſts in a belief of the pardon of my own ſins (which is the Concluſion) have therefore thought that this is it which the Sacrament ſealeth. And when the Papiſts alledge that it is nowhere written, that ſuch or ſuch a man is Juſtified; we anſwer them that it being written, that He that Believeth is juſtified, this is equivalent. But Mr. Baxte… doubtleſs knows that many Divines who are out of that error concerning the nature of Juſtifying Faith, and have learned to diſtinguiſh between Faith in the Eſſence of it and Aſſurance; yet are confidently perſwaded that the Sacrament ſeals this Concluſion, knowing that the Sacrament ſealeth what the Covenant promiſeth to the perſons in Covenant, and upon the ſame terms as the Covenant doth promiſe it. Now the Covenant promiſeth forgiveneſs of ſins (as Mr. Baxter confeſſes) conditionally, and this to all in Covenant, and this the Sacrament ſealeth.
§. 72.
R. B. 1. IF there be any that miſtake but in one of thoſe points, when others miſtake in them all, thoſe are not the men meant that I ſpeak of. I intended not every man that held your opinion, but only thoſe that held it on the ground and with the worſer conſequent or defence which I expreſſed. 2. I ſhall know whom you mean, when I ſee the Authors and place in them cited. 3. I think moſt of our great tranſmarine Divines who write of it againſt the Papiſts, do own that which you acknowledge an error; and what advantage that will give the Papiſts, who are ſo ready to take a Confutation of one Doctrine of the Proteſtants for a Confutation of all, you may eaſily conjecture. 4. This Concluſion many confeſs ſealed, If thou A. B. do believe, thou ſhalt be ſaved: but not this Concluſion, Thou A. B ſhalt be ſaved. 5. I have ſhewed you that it is one thing to ſeal to the Promiſe for form and matter, and another thing to ſeal to the perſons Right to the thing promiſed. This actual Right is but the end, which is not obtained, till Delivered or offered; Reception and actual Collation go before; and then is not the ſubjectum obſignatum. Your argument I conceive doth nothing for your cauſe, yea is wholly for mine. Your Concluſion is, therefore this the Sacrament ſealeth; what is this? why Forgiveneſs of ſins Conditionally, and this to all in Covenant. Here 1. you ſeem to yield that it is not the Abſolute but Conditional Promiſe which is ſealed, which is the main thing that I ſtood on: 2. You ſeem to apply the word Conditionally to forgiveneſs, and n… to ſealing: and ſo to confeſs that the ſealing is actual; and if actual, then not meerly conditional. For to ſay I conditionally ſeal, is to ſay, It ſhall be no ſeal, till the performance of the Condition. But you ſeem to confeſs it a ſeal before of Conditional forgiveneſs. 3. You ſeem to acknowledge the general Promiſe ſealed, though with application to particular perſons.
§. 73.
Mr. Bl. ANd as it is an error to hold that to believe my ſins are forgiven, is of the nature or eſſence of Faith, as though none did believe but thoſe that had attained ſuch aſſurance, (true Faith hath aſſurance in purſuit only, ſometimes, and not alwaies in poſſeſsion) So on the other hand it is a miſtake to ſay, that it is no work of Faith. The Apoſtle calls it the full aſſurance of Faith, Heb. 10.22. and deſcribeth Faith to be the ſubſtance of things hoped for; Faith realizeth ſalvation which we have in hope to the Soul. A Deſcription of Faith (ſaith Dr. Ameſius out of a Schoolman) by one of the moſt eminent acts that it produceth; therefore I take that to be a good anſwer that is here charged with error, that when it is written, He that Believeth is Juſtified, it is equivalent, as though it were ſuch or ſuch a man is Juſtified, in caſe with aſſured grounds and infallible Demonſtrations he can make it good to his own ſelf that he believeth.