Of Saving Faith, Section 6
SECT. VI.
Page 364. TO your third Reason I answer, 1. That I am not of your mind, nor do you prove it, that common Belief is made up but of two principal Ingredients, Notitia & Assensus: It hath as many Acts as saving Faith. An Affiance or resting on Christ, and on the Promise with some kind of consent of the Will, may be in this common Faith. [They stay themselves upon the God of Israel the Lord of Hoasts, &c. Isa 48. 2.]
2. I grant that a certain strength may be found in common Faith; but the strongest, greatest firmest, is even in degree below the weakest of a sound Believer. For, 1. As the difference (for ought I yet have heard) is not immediately discernable in the Acts of the Intellect themselves but in those of the Will, and so of the intellectual Acts by the Will; so the weakest Belief of the sanctified prevaileth with the Will, and overpowreth all resisting Arguments, when the strongest faith of others cannot do it. 2. And though the Grace infused into the Will it self, be a cause of this, yet doubtless the Intellectual Assent is also a cause; And therefore that Assent that can do more is surely the stronger. There is a difference even in strength and vigor, where there is so great a difference in the efficacy. What species soever it be of, that Light which will shew all visible things, (suppositis supponendis,) is a greater Light then that which either shews but greater things, or shews them but dimly. And that heat is greatest which will heat most, (caeteris paribus.) The unsanctified would not be so often called the Children of darkness, and said to be blind, and in darkness, and the sound Believers called the Children of light, and said to be in and of the Light, if we had not a greater light then they.
3. Nor do I believe that the Temporaries [Assent, is proportionable to the mediums that produce it,] (or that in some such, at lest produce it.) I think such Believers may have infallible media, and the very same as produce the saving faith of others (not including all causes as media, but the objective motives of our first faith.)
4. I grant what you say, pag. 365. That the lowest degree of saving faith is really our spiritual Life, justifies, &c. which the highest degree of common faith doth not.] Because the highest degree of common faith either leaves out some essential part of the object, or is lower and weaker then the lowest degree of saving faith is. And you must not take it for granted that it is the Intellectual Acts or Habits only where the difference lies which you express, or the cheif part of that d…fference. It is the Wills Act. (for such there is in faith) that doth most or much to this Acceptance, Justification, Sanctification, which you mention; which proceeds not only from the difference of Assent, but from the Grace which the Will it self also hath received.
5. A common knowledge I easily grant there is in the unsanctified, stronger in its kind then the knowledge of the Saints. That is, Gramatically and Logically they may have a far clearer understanding of the sense of words, and of terms of Art, and complex Objects, which are appointed to be the means of knowing the incomplex, and things themselves (as God, the Redeemer, Heaven, &c.) and may be able better to defend any sacred verity, and express their minds. And this you may call Acquired knowledge if you please, & in some sort say it remaineth a distinct thing from the other knowledge even in the sanctified: not but that it self also is in them sanctified & embodied with the rest of the new Man, but that the knowledge of words and Propositions, which is but an Instrumental, mediate, subservient part of knowledge, is not the same with the knowledge of the things themselves, even God, Christ, &c. But then I still maintain 1. That Temporary Believers may have more then this meer Disciplinary knowledge, even a certain illumination of the Spirit Revealing to them Christ himself, and the powers of the world to come, in some Degree, Heb. 6. 4. 2 Pet. 2 20, &c. some inward taste of the matter, as well as a Grammatical, and Logical knowledge of the words, and sense. 2. That as the Disciplinary knowledge of the sense of Propositions, in the sanctified and unsanctified do not quoad materiam differ by any Physical specification, so neither dath the common and special illumination or knowledge and taste of the subject matter, or incomplex object.
6. You say much in general here, sounding as if you thought (beyond what your Thesis requireth you to prove) that there were a Physical specifick Difference in the matter. Because you do not plainly assert it, I will suppose it not to be your meaning: But if really it be so, and God shall direct you to any more of this work, I earnestly intreat you above all the rest of your undertaking to tell us plainly what the Physical Forms are that specifie and denominate these several sorts of Knowledge, Faith, Love, Desire, &c. That there is a moral specifick Difference we are agreed: If you assert a Physical, plainly describe and denominate each Form, (for I doubt not but we are agreed that a Form there must be thus to specifie and denominate.) I find Amesius (Assertion Theolog. de lum. Nat. & Grat.) Disclaiming a difference as to the Object, subject, or lumen deferens & de lucens objectum, &c. as he cals the medium; limiting the Controversie to the [Lumen disponens & elevans subjectum: ut recipiat] which he maintaineth must be supernatural, and so do I: but withall I maintain that somewhat of the supernatural Light is given to many of the unsanctified. And whereas he saith that one sort of knowledge is Disciplinary such as a blind man (born) hath of Light, and the other is Intuitive; ex representi & sensim perceptâ: 1. I am not convinced that any man in this life, doth intuitively or sensibly know God, or the Lord Jesus Christ God and man, or the invisible Glory, or Relative Benefits, such as pardon, Justification, Adoption, &c. And I am confident I have your consent. 2. And for the History or any Enunciation of the Scripture, which must be understood by a Grammatical and Logical knowledge, we are agreed. 3. It is nothing therefore in all the world, that I remember, that can fall into Controversie about this Intuitive knowledge, but the inward passions or actions of our own souls. That the soul doth know its own knowledge and Volition intuitively, is the opinion of some Schoolmen, and opposed by others. Upon which account perhaps those of the first sort, may also duplicate page duplicate page …ay, that a sanctified person may Intuitively see the sincerity or holy nature of his own knowledge. But 1. if that were so and a common thing, me thinks doubting of sincerity should not be so common with such. 2. Our affections and Wills are thought by many to be more properly said to be. felt, then intuitively known. 3. It is certain that the first act of saving faith can be no such thing as this: for a man must, at least in order of Nature, first have a saving faith, before he can intuitively see it in himself. 4. And this is nothing to our business: for it is not our own faith or love, or other inherent Graces, that is the Object of our saving Faith; but it is God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and the Promise, &c. which are not known by us intuitively or sensibly. (Though the Letter of the Promise is, yet the sense is not; much less the Truth.) Yet I make no doubt but a true Believer being once justified by faith, hath sometimes after such Peace with God, & shedding abroad of his Love in the heart, as gives him (not an intuitive or sensible knowledge of God himself immediatly, but) a lively Relish and feeling of those precious fruits and tokens of his Love, which may be called an experimental knowledge that God is, and that he is gracious, faithful, &c. Seeing him more clearly in this Glass of his Image on our own souls, then in our first faith we saw him in the meer extrinsick Glass of the Gospel, Works, &c. though in both the Spirit causeth the apprehension. 5. And if this were any thing to us, yet some inward tasts the unsanctified do attain. So that I cannot yet reach to understand, that between the Knowledge, Assent, &c. of the sanctified, and the highest Temporaries, there is Physically any specifick Difference, but only morally: but a very great gradual difference also Physically.
Your Similitude of the Light of the Sun and Moon, proves not that the matter of common and proper faith are s…ecififically-physically different, and then (whatever you intend it for) its not against me. It is the same Spirit that illuminateth both sorts; but the Sun and Moon are not the same Illuminating luminaries: Nor is it a thing fully agreed on, whether the Light of the Sun and Moon are specifically distinct; nor of the Heat of the Sun and of fire, Saith Ockam, Quodi l…b. 3 q. 21. fol. 48. [Effectus diversi ejusdem speciei, possunt esse à Causis diversarum specierum, licèt non idem effectus: patet de calore, qui potest esse ab igne & à sole.] His Application somewhat concerneth our Cause, [Ita est in proposito: Primus actus potest causari ab objecto sine habitu; & alius actus ejusdem specie, non potest causari nisi ab habitus,] (Therefore you cannot thence prove a specifick Difference of the Acts that one is from a gracious Habit, and the other not.)
Page 367. You add, that [Common faith is not any disposition, moral or Evangelical, whereby the subject that hath it, is or can be disposed (in the way we now speak of) for the introduction of the Habit of saving Faith.]
Answ. [The way you now speak of] Are words that refer to so many or uncertain passages, that thence I will conclude, that you mean some way which we disown as well as you, though I fully know not what you mean. But that common Grace is preparatory to special, is so commonly held by Protestants, (especially practical Divines) and so plain in Scripture and Reason, that I shall not trouble you with many words about it. 1. He that useth Gods appointed means as well as he can, i… more disposed for the blessing of those means, then the wilfull despiser or neglecter of them. 2. He that is neerer Christ is more disposed to come to him by faith, then he that is at a further distance. 3. He that doth not so much resist the Spirit, but with some seriousness beggeth for the Spirit and for saving Grace is better disposed for it, then such as obstinatly resist or scorn it.
Your first Argument is, from our Death in sin: the dead are undisposed: I answer, As dead they are so: But 1. It is such a Death as hath a Natural Life, and Reasonable soul, and moral Vertues and common Graces conjoined: and by these the dead may be Disposed, though not by death, nor as dead: Allow your simile its dissimilitudes. 2. A condemned Traytor thats dead in Law, may by humble supplication do somewhat to dispose himself for pardon, and Life: though I know our case requireth much more. As I said, God would not have appointed any means for an unregenerate man to use in order to his Conversion, if the use of them did no whit dispose us be converted. I say the more of this, because I am greatly troubled with two sorts of people in my own Parish that are harping on this string, [We cannot give Grace to our selves, nor be saved without it; nor can we have it till God give it us: which if he will do, we shall be saved: if he will not, all that we can do will not help it.) This is the main objection that Satan hath furnished 1. some Apostate Heathens, that speak it in design. 2. And many of the ignorant and prophane that thus are setled in a neglect and contempt of the means of Grace: Its as good say we lie dead in our pleasures till God will give us Life, as lie dead in Prayers and Hearing Sermons, and forbearing our Delights; for we can do nothing to the quickening of our selves.
Your second Reason is, [That our new birth is a new Creation, which is ex materia indisposita.] Answ. It is a new creation ordinarily in materia disposita: Adams soul was created in a Disposed or prepared Body. The Rational soul is created in the Embrio in the womb, in a disposed body, yea many Philosophers would perswade us, not only in a body that hath first a vegetative, but a sensitive soul. Sure I am God can appoint men a course of means in which they shall wait for his New Creation, and ordinarily bless his own means and make a lesser blessing a Disposition to a greater, though all this be little to our first Controversie. For when I call the common faith [a Disposition] I talk not of Dispositions preparatory to further Grace.
To your third Reason I answer, 1. Some common Grace is as solely and wholly a gracious and supernatural work, as saving Grace: yet men may have a Dispositon to that, therefore to this. 2. The highest Grace of the unregenerate is very ill supposed by you to be but a [natural or artificial product of our understandings.] A lower supernatural Grace may be a Disposition towards a higher supernatural Grace. Mans corrupted heart seems too much exalted by you, wile you call him Dead, and yet think he can Acquire the highest Graces of Temporary Believers without supernatural Grace. Why then do you call it common [Grace.] You know who taught men to call … by the name of Grace.
In your fourth Reason, you run again on the same supposition, that [our own understandings helped by education, learning and industry, can acquire common faith.] Even the highest of the Temporary (which you must mean, or you say nothing.) Against which I again refer you to the foresaid Disputation of Ariminensis, who thinks he proves this Pelagianism or worse. It is not only saving Grace that is infused. 2. Infused supernatural common Grace is no more of our selves, then infused supernatural special Grace. 3. To say that Gods common Grace disposeth us for special Grace, is no more to say that [it is of our selves] then it is, if we say that a less Degree of special Grace disposeth us to a greater Degree (Though in other respects the cases differ.) Do you as fully agree with Paul, 2 Cor. 3. 5. that [we are not suffic…ent of our selves to think any thing as of our selves, but our sufficiency is of God, and Phil, 2. 13. That it is God that worketh in us both to will and to do] with the rest before cited, and then we shall not differ in this. For I easily believe that faith and saving Grace is not of our selves, but the gift of God.
To your fifth I say, I am of your mind, that [Faith is not promised us on any precedent condition &c.] The Arminians think otherwise. Your Consequent taken of moral specification, I still grant: but taken of Physical, seems to go into the contrary extream. There are certainly Dispositions, where there are no Covenant Conditions. See what of this I have said out of Chemnitius in answer to Mr. Tombes Animadversions, in the Disputation of Justification, if you see cause.
To your sixth I say, 1. That no carnal man, or temporary, so pleaseth God, as that the person is accepted into Son-ship or Reconciliation; or the action be ex pacto, rewa…dable, (at least with any eternal Reward) Though some think that [Giving a cup of cold water to a Disciple in the name of a Disciple, may be done by a Temporary that would not suffer much for Christ; yet I cannot say that the Text is not to be expounded of such a giving, as comes from saving Love to Christ) But yet secundum quid or in tantum: A man unregenerate may do that which is so far pleasing to God, as that he will oft…times and …rdinarly deal the better with him in outward Respects, and deal the better with h…m for his soul. If God bid him Read, Hear, Pray, Consider, or enquire of Ministers, as he bid Cornelius send for Peter, or bid them search the Scripture daily, &c. he is better pleased that men do thus use his means, then that they despise or neglect them; and in this way he usually gives his Grace. And those that have the best common Disposition, he usually takes as most prepared for saving Grace. Our Hooker, John Rogers, and other Preachers ordinarily thought so, when they preacht so much for preparatory works to Conversion: naming Humiliation, Desire, some Hope, &c. I leave you to expound that, Acts 17. 11, 12. [These (Berean Jews) were more NOBLE then those in Thessalonica, in that they received the Word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so: THEREFORE many of them Believed.] Though Calvin thinks that it was not the searchers but others because of them, that are said [therefore to Believe] (which seems not the most likely sence.) Yet he thinks that [hic primus est ad fidem ingressus, ut prorupti simus ad sequendum, & abdicato proprio carni sensu dociles nos Christo & morigeros praebeamus.] And how many Volumes had been written against me if I had said but as Calvin (…bid, in Act. 17. 12. [Non spernenda est haec virtus sedulitas, ad) quam intentos fuisse praedicat Lucas fideles in fidei suae confirmationem; multi enim qui principio ebulliunt, statim se ignaviae dedentes, dum nulla profectus cu…a tanguntur, qualecun{que} fidei semen perdunt.] So that Calvin thought common Grace was such a Preparation or Disposition, as might be called [a Seed of Faith.] But it were an endless task to cite all Protestants that write for this Preparatory Grace.
2. I further answer, that carnal men may have much in them that is not carnal even the common graces of the Spirit, and these are not enmity to God, though the carnal mind be; nor is God an enemy to them.
To your seventh I answer. 1. That though not Hypocrites as such, or Devils be prepared for Grace, yet such as [begin in the Spirit] and have the highest graces that the unsanctified may have, are so far disposed for more, as that they do much more ordinarily receive saving Grace, then others do.
But you say, [If the Gospel is true, Its evidently otherwise, and generally those have been converted to Christianity which had not such measures of Knowledge and common Gr…ces: when those have not which had, as the Pharisees, &c. Answer, That the Gospel is true, I hope we are agreed: though we are too much unacquainted our selves with the nature of our own faith by which we do believe it. And yet I am confidently perswaded that my Assertion here is truer then yours, unless (as its like) by this common Grace, you still mean another thing then I do. I do not think that Aristotle or Galen, or the Scribes or Pharisees had much of the common Grace that I speak of, much less the highest measure. That is not the highest and most dispositive common Grace, which consisteth in Arts or disciplinary knowledge, in being acquainted with the Letters and Words, and Propositions of the Law; much less where it is joined with proud self-conceitedness, and presumption and self, delusion, being settled (by the mistaking of their parts and formalities for true godliness,') in a conceit that they are already sanctified, and so becom the most negligent of all others in making out to Christ for Sanctification: The men that I speak of that have a dispositive common Grace are other kind of folks then you seem to talk of. They are such as are as far abased in the feeling of their sin and misery, and humbled by Attrition, (as the Papists call it) and cry out of their sin and folly, and day and night do beg for Grace and Mercy; As common Grace will carry them to do. And far it will carry them. And they are such as like the word and waies of God, and think his servants the best and happiest men, and have many a wish that they were such themselves, and that avoid as much of gross and wilfull sinning, and continue as much in hearing, reading the word, enquiring consideration, as common Grace may bring them to do, and they are such as have as much belief of the Gospel, and as much desire after Christ and holiness, and heaven, and as much love to God and the Redeemer, and the Saints, as common grace can lead them to. And wi…hall, that have either a knowledge that yet they are short of true Christianity, or at lest, are much afraid of it, (which no doubt but common Grace may bring them to.) And therefore are under a prudent Impatiency till saving Grace come in, and the Spirit have sealed them up to the day of Redemption, and are crying out, What shall we do to be saved? These are they that I speak of, and not proud Pharisees or unsanctified Philosophers, or learned self-esteeming men, that make themselves believe, that they have infused special Grace, because they can talk of it: And that are further from Christ in the capital sins of heart rebellion, Pride, vain-glory, Hypocrisie; Worldliness, if not sensuality, then most other men. Its none of these men for all their Acts, Sciences, Languages, &c. That I suppose to have the highest common Grace. Your Instances therefore are not to the purpose and your conclusion. p. 373. is either impertinent or very unsound.
I know that the conceit that common Grace is saving, may make the condition of such persons more dangerous, then of some scandalous sinners that are easilyer convinced. But, 1. Those persons that are so conceited, are far from the height of common Grace, as Pharisees are commonly inwardly more wicked then many of the scandalous. 2. And it is not the common Grace, but the mis-conceit. for want of more that is the cause of the danger of such men. Even special Grace it self may be abused: For though Austin and the Schoolmen put it in their definition, that it is such [quâ nemo malè utitur,] yet that must be meant efficiently and not objcteively: For I think a man may be proud of his Grace, and so objectively misuse it: much more may common Grace be misused; and yet it proves it not to be no Disposition to special Grace.
The Canon. 6. Concil. i. Arausicani, which you cite, is at least as fully consented to by me as by you, viz. [That those that think that Mercy is given to men that without the Grace of God do believe, Will, desire and knock; & confesseth not that it is given us from God by the infusion and inspiration of the holy Ghost in us, to believe, will, and be able to do all these things as we ought, &c. resist the Apostle.] But I will desire you to consider what the same council saith of the opinion, which you seem to propugn before you go on in it. The next Can. 7. saith, [Si quis per naturae vigorem bonum aliquod quod ad salutem pertinet vitae aeternae, &c. Haeretico fallitur spiritu, non intelligens vocem Dei in Evangelio dicentis, sine me nihil potestis facere: & illud Apostoli, Non quod idonei sumus cogitare aliquid a nobis, &c.] And Canon. 22. Nemo habet de suo nisi mendacium & peccatum. Siquis autem homo habet veritatem at{que} justitiam, ab illo fonte est, quem debemus sitire, &c.] And Can. 16. Nemo ex eo quod videtur habere glorietur, tanquam non acceperit, aut ideo se putet accepisse, quia litera extrinsecus velut legitur, apparuit, &c.] Can. 3. Siquis per invocationem humanam gratia Dei dicit posse conferri, non autem ipsam gra tiam facere ut invocetur à nobis, contradicit Apostolo, &c.] If therefore the common Grace in question, be bonum aliquod quod ad salutem pertinet, or if it be but aliquid cogitare, or if it may be called invocation for Grace, or be better then mendacium & peccatum. This Councill thought it Pelagianism to ascribe it to our meer Naturals without Grace. This you observe, pag 375. But so that you would limit dispositive or preparing Grace, to that which the Schoolmen call preventing Grace, even saving …aith with love: but (as sometime they call all that preventing Grace that goes before Justification and merit of congruity, as they call it so.) Arminensit ubi supra, hath fully proved that they with the Fathers ascribe much of that Grace that is found in the unjustified to the special Grace of God, (as special is distinct from general influence.) And therefore take heed lest while pag. 376. you would bring the opinion which you argue against, under the suspicion of Pelagianism, &c. You run not into the same: (Whcih yet I intend not to charge you with.) Caranza thinks, the Councill Arans. speaks only of special saving Grace as out of mans power; but he confesseth that many Moderns think otherwise.
For my part, though all this new Controversie of dispositive Grace do little concern that which I asserted, which you undertook to oppose, yet the Reasons which I gave here in the beginning of this Question, with the concurrent Judgement of Protestant Divines, and above all, the plain and frequent passages of Scripture do satisfie me, that common Grace is truly preparative and dispositive to saving Grace, not as one degree of the same species in morality disposeth to another degree, (for this we are agreed against.) But, 1. As it is a less unpreparedness and undisposedness then a worse estate. 2. As it removeth many and great Impediments. 3. As it is a use of the means appointed by God for obtaining his saving Grace. 4. As it is in tantum or secundum quid a thing pleasing to God, and loved by himyea, & as he loveth such as have it more then those that are without it, with the love of Complacencie and Acceptation, so as it is a state much nearer Christ then other mens of obstinate wickedness are in; in these five respects I think it prepareth & disposeth to saving grace. Though I think not that this same common Grace is the very thing that it turned by any Improvement of ours, or elevation of the Spirit into saving Grace. But this much I am satisfied of. (between the Arminian & the contrary exstream) 1. That God hath not entered into Covenant or Promise with any unregenerate man to give him saving Grace upon any condition to be performed without it. 2. But yet that he hath commanded him to use certain means to obtain it, and to avoid the resistance and hindrances. 3. And that a very Command to use such means as means, is a strongly incouraging intimation, that God will not deny men the end and blessing, that use the means as well as they can. For it is certain, that he appointeth no means in vain. 4. That unsanctified men may do less evil and more good then they do, and particularly in the use of those means. 5. And that they have so much encouragement, (though no Promise) to the use of those means, that they are left unexcusable (not only as originally disabled, but) as wilfully graceless, and even at the Bar of Grace (or the Redeemer,) if they neglect them. 6. And that no man can stand out, and say, I did the best that ever I could to obtain saving Grace, and yet went without it because God would not give it me. This much I am satisfied of, as to preparatory Grace.
And yet my Controversies with the late Reverend Servant of Christ, Mr. Blake and others, do tell me to my trouble, that some Protestants that are no Arminians, go so much further in this then I; then they would have it a principal use of Baptism, the Lords Supper, &c. to receive these men of common grace (though they seem not to have more, or say some, profess no more) and advance them to Saving Grace. And that it is the first visible Church state according to Divine institution, by which men must pass into the invisible Church of the sanctified. But I see I shall have your vote against this way.
But yet really I should think (if I were of your opinion about Baptism, if Mr. Tombes Letter be yours,) that men should ordinarily be a while Catechumens before they are Bapt…zed: And according to the Opinion I am of (for Infant Baptism) if I were (as the Ancient Churches were) among Heathens, where a principal part of the Baptized must be adult, (though I would not needlesly delay a through Convert, yet) I should think that commonly the state of Catechumens must be a Preparatory state; and that the Catechumens were to be supposed in a more disposed state, then most that stood at greater distance.
I do verily think that a man of the Highest knowledge and Belief of sin and misery, Christ and Mercy, God and Glory, that common grace can reach to, with the highest Love, Desires, Humiliation, Fear, Confession, Petition, Obedience, that common grace can reach to, is in all the five Respects forementioned, more Disposed for Saving Grace, and Prepared, then one that is an Apostate, or under the sin against the Holy Ghost, or unto Duty or one that heareth and hateth the Minister and the Word, or that so hateth that he will not hear: and that persecuteth godliness out of hatred to it, and liveth in wilfull Drunkenness, Murder, Whoredom, &c. I know not what men may seem out of their own Principles, and some misinterpreted Texts, but sure I am I find in experience such an exceeding difference between the success of my Labours on the more humble considerate, teachable sort of people, that are not drown'd in wilful wickedness and sensuality with the worst: and the old self-conceited, ignorant persons, and the proud and haughty Spirits, and old drunkards, and such like rooted sensualists, that there is no comparison to be made: and I am fully satisfied to perswade Thieves, Adulterers, Drunkards, Scorners at godliness, Neglecters and despisers of means, and professed Infidels, rather to come out of these sins, and use the means, ann believe the Scripture to be true, though but with a Dogmatical Faith, then to continue as they are. And I shall take such Believers, and Reformers, to be more prepared and Disposed for Saving Grace, then they were before. And I hope this is no Heresie.
Sure I am that Agrippa that was almost perswaded to be a Christian, was neerer it and better disposed then the haters of Christianity. And I am sure that Christ was well able to resolve our Controversie, and that he told the Scribe, Mark 12. 34. Thou art not far from the Kingdom of God:] acquainting us that there is a state thats neer and next to the state of Grace, when other men are further off. And as sure I am that he that said, [All this I have observed from my youth] was Loved by Christ, and told that he yet lacked one thing, Mark. 10. 21. and that this is a better disposition to Grace, then they that are not so much loved, are in, and that lack more things: Though yet even such may go away sorrowful, through the powerful temptation of Riches, Luke 1. 17. It was the work of John to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.] And if such were not more undisposed to receive true Grace, we should not so oft have heard that threatning, Mark. 4. 12. Acts 28. 27. [The heart of this people are waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed, lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.] This was not the state of all the unconverted. Tyre and Sydon were not so undisposed for Grace, as Capernaum was. But enough of this, unless I were sure that there were any real difference between us. I speak but to your words, as they may be interpreted by any Readers, to oppose the Truths which I assert, imagining that your self intend it not, however you might mistake me.
To your fourth Reason pag. 376. I answer, 1. We are Agreed still of the Conclusion.
2. But I still think you are very much out, in taking the highest common Grace to be but such as the knowledge of Tongues, &c. which you there mention, and to be but [the product of our natural understandings, advanced by education and Industry, now since Miracles are ceased.] For though Education and industry be a means to common and special Grace, yet without the help and Gift of the Spirit, men can have neither special Grace, nor that common grace which I speak of. I much fear lest many Learned, Civil, Orthodox men, do take common grace to be special, and so delude their own souls, in the trial of themselves. Mr. Shepheard hath told you from many Scriptures (in your Book) of higher things then these you mention, that Hypocrites or Temporaries may attain. And all that they had from the Spirit in the Primitive times, was not only the power of Miracles, as is shewed: therefore they may have more from the Spirit now.
3. I do not think your Consequence good, that the loosing of one, and not loosening, or not loosableness, of the other, will prove a specifick difference. For 1. There are many common gifts in man that are no more loseable then saving Grace. 2. And on the other side, it is not from the meer Nature of inherent Grace that it cannot be lost; but from the Divine Decree, Love and engagement (of which I have spoken in a Discourse of Perseverance,) For Adam had saving Grace, even the Image of God, and yet lost it: yet I believe the Apostle, that it is because the seed of God remaineth in us; but I think it is not a good Argument, that because it is the seed, or such a Seed, therefore it will remain: but it Remaineth in us, because the Love of God in Christ, and the operation of the Spirit causeth it to Remain. For Adam had a Seed of the same Nature, and yet it did not Remain in him.