Of Saving Faith, Title page – Errata
OF Saving Faith: That it is not only gradually, but specifically distinct from all Common FAITH.
The Agreement of Richard Baxter with that very Learned consenting Adversary, that hath maintained my Assertion by a pretended Confutation in the end of Serjeant Shephards Book of Sincerity and Hypocrisie.
With the Reasons of my Dissent in some passages that came in on the by.
Dr. Preston Golden Scepter, pag. 210. [Object. It seems then that the Knowledge of a carnal man and a regenerate man differ but in Degrees, not in Kind.] Answ. The want of Degrees here alters the kind; as in Numbers the Addition of a Degree alters the Species.
Read this point practically improved in Mr. Pinks excellent Sermons of Sincere Love to Christ, on Luke 14. 26. pag. 1. and pag. 33. &c.
LONDON, Printed by R. W. for Nevill Simmons Bookseller in Kederminster, and are to be sold by him there; and by Nathaniel Ekins at the Gun in Pauls Church-Yard. Anno Dom. 1658.
To the Worthy and much Honoured Mr. W. S. Serjeant at Law.
SIR,
YOU have very much honoured me in the choice of an Opponent: but I perceive by his Conclusion that he hath other business, and I am not altogether without. And therefore I intreat you the next time to choose me an Adversary that differs from me, or to give me leave to live at Peace. Or if he differ not, let him rather reprehend me for agreeing with him, than pretend a difference where there is none. If your learned Friend do think it as well worth his labor to prove us disagreed, as I thought it worth mine to prove us of a mind, if I live I shall be willing to read what he rejoyns; but if it come not of a greater Errand; I'le promise you no more. As to your own pious Labors, they are so honest and savory to me, that they tempted me to differ from you in one thing, and to think that [an Hypocrite cannot write or preach as well as a good Christian can] there being an unexpressible Spirituality that I savour in some men more thenothers: but I'le not stand to this. You give at least as much to the Hypocrite I think as ever I did; and you confirm it by much Scripture-evidence. But I must confess I th…nk not that all your Notes of sincerity are exact or will hold the Tryal; but ye they be usefull in many Cases. You affirm that Hypocrites have common Grace, even to the height expressed by you: but you say, It is not true Grace. Either its Grace or no Grace: if none, call it not common Grace, (or common Faith, Desire, Hope, Love, Joy; if it be none.) But if it be Grace, and not true Grace, then Ens & Verum non convertuntur. I maintain that it is not true saving Grace, but yet true common Grace: You maintain in the general that it is not true Grace, and yet its truly common Grace: There being then no Controversie that I see to be disputed between you and me, but whether Ens & Verum convertuntur, I crave pardon for my further silence, resolving rather to give you the best (though not to assent) than to dispute it: I remain
A great Esteemer of your Piety and many Labors, Richard Baxter. MARCH 31. 1658.
Reader, I suppose thee to have the Book at hand which I here deal with; and therefore have recited but the sum and principal Passages, and not every word; which thou …aist read in the Book it self.
The Contents.
SECT. 1. The Occasion of this Controversie. An Apologie for this friendly consenting Adversary, to them that are like to be offended with a pretended difference where there is none. fol. 1
Sect. 2. Our Agreement: The pertinency of my Impertinencies. Whether it was not some false Transcript of my words, that the learned Opponent was put to confute? The true Reason of my words in the Saints Rest which he writes against, with the meaning of them. Of my Improprieties and incongruities. The point feigned to be mine, which I expresly wrote against, and frequently. fol. 9
Sect. 3. Whether Acts of common Grace are Evangelically good? About the stating of the Question. Whether because common and special Grace specifically differ in Morality, it follows that they cannot congruously be said to differ only gradually in any other consideration? Nothing lower than a predominant degree in the matter is capable of the moral form of saving Faith, Love, &c. in specie. fol. 15
Sect. 4. Whether Grace be as properly and primarily in the Act as in the Habit? and which goes first, which is first to be enquired after? In what principles of habitual Grace it is that special and common Grace or Faith be only acquired by natural abilities with good Education and Industry, or to be infused or wrought by the Spirit as special Grace is? fol. 20
Sect. 5. Whether common Faith be Life? Why not so called? Whether Every Degree of accidental forms denominate the Subject? A further Explication of my meaning in this Controversie. fol. 31
Sect. 6. Whether the least special Grace be not stronger than the greatest common Grace? Whether the Temporaries Assent be proportionable to the Mediums that produce it? Whether the physical forms can be named that specifie common and special Grace? Intuition of special Faith none of the difference. Common Grace prepareth and disposeth for special Grace. Arguments for the contrary answered. Calvins [Quasecun{que} semen fidei perdunt.] Whether those that have common Grace, or those that have it not, are more ordinarily converted? What I mean by common Grace. The Concil. Arausic. against them that make common Grace to be meerly acquired by our selves; but not against any thing that I say. How far common Grace thus disposeth to special? This Disposition further proved. The losing of common Grace proves not the specifick. difference. fol. 35
Sect. 7. Whether it may be a saving Faith that takes the Scripture to be Gods Word, but upon probable motives or mediums? And whether the mediums here prove the specifick difference? Whether the immediate Revelation of the holy Ghost be a Premise, or Medium, specifying saving Faith? And whether all other be fallible and humane? Ten Reasons to prove that such a Revelation as is in question, is not necessary, (nor ordinarily existent.) fol. 50
Sect. 8. Whether Hypocrites have no premises for Faith, but such as are humane, dubious and fallible? Six Reasons to prove that they have better. More of the non-necessity of demonstrative or infallible certain mediums, or evidence to prove the Scripture Gods word, as to the being of true Faith. Whether Faith be argumentative, or a simple Adhesion, or Affiance? Faith anatomized, as to its divers Acts and Ʋses, in answer to this question. fol. 56
Sect. 9. It is no Article of saving Faith; nor divine Faith at all, (much less proving a specifick difference) that I. A. B. a… actually justified, freed, pardoned, adopted, and an Heir of Heaven, proved by twenty Reasons. fol. 64
Sect. 10. I made not Love (strictly taken) the form of Faith That Affiance is in the Will as well as in the Intellect. The enquiry made as of four sorts of Belief. 1. The Belief of divine History, or Truth meerly as such. 2. Of divine Threatnings. 3. Of divine Promises, &c. in general, 4. Of the Gospel in special. Of nine several Acts in the third, and ten in the fourth, apparent in the Anatomy. The Acts of Affiance in saving Faith: One of God as Promiser or Revealer: The other on Christ as Saviour. None of these is the Plerophorie which Rob. Baronius and the Opponent plead against. fol. 72
Sect. 11. The Protestants defended for placing Affiance or Trust in the Will. Baronius's two Arguments produced by the Opponent, refelled. Difference how far in the Will. There is aliquid spei & amoris in Affiance or Faith, and yet Faith is not Hope or Love. We trust only for good. Eight Reasons proving Affiance in the Will. fol. 76
Sect. 12. Some Propositions containing my opinion, How far Love belongs to Faith, Et de fide formata charitate, necessary to be observed by the learned Adversary, if he will not lose his labor in the next assault on that Subject. Of his Conclusion, and no danger of a passionate railing Reply. The vanity of humane applause, and tolerableness of mans Censures. fol. 82
Reader, I intreat thee first to correct these ERRATA, because they are many and marr the sense.
PAg. 4. lin. 36. read beside. p. 7. l. 12. blot out and. p. 10. l. 14. r. common Belief & special. l. 20. blot out it. l. 34. r. read. p. 11. l. 14. r. that here. p. 12. l. 23. r. that they have. p. 13. l. 22. r. thee. p. 15. l. 8. r. Wills. p. 20. l 11. r. Suarez. p. 23. l. 4, 5. r. branches. p. 24. l. 35. r. is it. p. 26. l. 15. blot out ly. p. 27. l. 13. r. of special. p. 28. l. 35. r. ob. p. 31. l. 21. r. in Christ. p. 32. l. 13. r. denominate. p. 37. l. 26. r. ex re praesenti p. 39. l. 5. r. speciei. l. ult. r. us to be. p. 4…. l. 7. r. Heathens with. l. 10. r. they l. 34. r. while. p. 42. l. 18. r. prompti. l. 19. r. carnis. p. 44. l. 1. r. present. l. 10. r. Arts. p. 46. l. 12. r. is. l. 37. r. that. p. 47. l. 25 r. Death. l. 29. r. scrue. p. 49. l. 15. r. losing. p. 50. l. 13. r. its. l. 15. r. say, that. and for therefore r. so. p. 53. l. 10. r. recited. p. 54. l. 9 r. by, so that. p. 55. l. 35. r believe. p. 56. l. 20, 21. r. Opinion, nor Science. p. 57. l. 6. r. superficially. p. 60. l. 25. r. of. p. 64. l. 20. blot out in. p. 68. l. ult. blot out the. p. 69. l. 31. r. Truth. p. 73. l. 4. r. foreign. l. 7. r. in Scripture. p. 77. l. 12. r. the opinion. l. 29. r. of Affiance in the Veracity. p. 78. l. 32. blot out essential to hope. p. 79. l. 10. r. but. p. 80. l. 4. r. confine. l. 15. r. posthumous. p. 81. l. 2. r. threatnings. l. 12. r. as well as of the Intellect. p. 83. l. 23. r. want work. l. 25. r. I have first. l. 35. r. fides. p. 84. l. 25. r. that every. p. 86. l. 28. r. Heshusius. p. 87. l. 22. r. me. p. 88. l. 28. r. lamenting. p. 89. l. 14. and l. 20. r. To. l. 20. r. Arminius. p. 94. l. 16. r. answerable.
There are many mis-pointings which marr the sence, which the Reader may observe.