Shadows Without Substance, Answer (2 of 3)

Shadows Without Substance · Answer (2 of 3)

p. 42For as for what he ſubjoyns, that ſome of the Diſciples ſhould ſtumble at thoſe words of our Saviour, becauſe they took them as I do, under a condition: and that our Saviour therefore told them, that the words he ſpake were Spirit: And what then? that they were not to be taken rherefore under a condition? as if in Spirituall things conditions could not be as well as in carnall; theſe things are ſo palpably abſurd, that it is a wonder how they could poſſibly find entrance, I ſay not, into any Schollers skull, but into any illiterate fellows head piece, unleſſe his brain-pan were not lightly crafied only, but clean crakt. For who is ſo voyd of common ſenſe, as not eaſily to apprehend, that the ground of their ſtartling at that paſſage, was not the taking of the words as conditionally conceived, which our Saviour no where waives; but theddCarnaliter intellexerunt, qod ſpir tualiter int…lligendum erat. Aug. in Ioan. 27 & de doctr. Chiſt. l 3. taking of that carnally, which was to be underſtood ſpiritually, was that wherein they were miſtaken, and which our Saviour meets with in that after-ſpeech. But ſome things, they ſay, are ſo apparant of themſelves, that tho it may well be deemed a fond labour to ſpend many words about proof of them, yeteeforeign, Epict. l. 1. c. 5. it is not ſo eaſie by argument to confirm them againſt an obſtinate opponent; not becauſe they are not of unqeſtionable truth, but becauſe they are of themſelves ſo clear, being in the nature of principles, that it is hard finding out a medium to prove them by, that is not leſſe clear then themſelves; as that two and two make four; and that contradictories ever divide truth and falſhood: And juſt ſuch are thoſe p. 43aſſertions that Mr S. here oppoſeth, that Collections may by conſeqence be framed from Scripture; that Conditions may be in ſpirituall things, as well as in carnall; that Conditionall particles imply a condition: that a Condition is where the whole nature of a condition is found.

But that this man herein ſtriveth againſt the clear light of truth ſhining into his ſoul, or within him rather by that candle of naturall reaſon that God hath ſet up in his ſoul; only to run counter to the Legaliſts, whom his ſoul ſo much abhorreth, may hereby appear, in that when this fit of oppoſition is a litle over, and this heat of paſſion ſomewhat alayed with him, and the man is come again now to himſelf, he freely of himſelf confeſſeth, thatffTreat. p. 163. the Gospel is formed up of exhortations, conditionall promiſes, &c. (unto which elſ-where objected, he returned not a word;) and what other promiſes but theſe, and ſuch as theſe, the Goſpel ſhould be made up of, I ſuppoſe Mr S. himſelf is not able to ſhew, nor do I believe that he meant any other. Howbeit, it may be, that out of ſome nice ſubtilty, tho he grant conditionall, he will deny condition, as in an other ſubject he ſeems to have ſome ſuch ſubtile reſerve, where, tho he uſe the word divinity, yet he ſcoft the title of a Divine: as I am enformed that ſome other alſo now do; but they perchance meerly for ſome want of Scholerſhip; but Mr S. a profeſſed Scholer, I am ſure, cannot be ignorant, that a Divine and Divinity, condition and conditionall are vocabula, yea and argumenta conjugata.

But however, Sir, lay aſide, if it be ſo offenſive to you, the term of condition: for to maintain ſtrif about words, is but a vain expence of time. Do you but acknowledge, that upon believing in Chriſt, repenting of ſin, and leading a new life, life and ſalvation may undoubtedly be attained; and that without theſe it cannot be had; and we ſhall herein be ſoon agreed: or if you dare, deny it, and ſo give our Saviour Chriſt himſelf and his Apoſtles the lye; whom I have ſhewed in expreſſe terms by teſtimonies unavoidable ſo to affirm.

But here you object;

1. ThatggReply p. 8. § 2. th…ſe that are Chriſts, do not repent and believe and obey, that they may be Chriſts; for God hath choſen us in him, and predeſtinated us unto the adoption of Children in Jeſus Chriſt.

But, Sir, 1. All this proves not that theſe things are not p. 44conditions of the Goſpel, or that any can have part in Chriſt without them.

iiGra…is hoc qoque pr…ſtitum eſt; gratis, qod ad t… att…et; n…m qu…ad …ll… n…n gratis: ſalvus fact…s es pro nihilo; ſed non de nihilo tamen, Bern. Ser. in Pſal. 90.Ps 902. The Apoſtle telleth us in expreſſe terms, thathhGal. 2.16.Gal 2:16 he believed in Chriſt, that he might be juſtified by Chriſt, thereby implying that he was not actually juſtified, or had part in the juſtification procured and purchaſed by the death of Chriſt, untill he believed. And albeit the ranſome, whereby we are freely (in regard of our ſelves) juſtified, be wholly in Chriſt Ieſus; yet is he ſaid to bekkRom 3.24.25.Rom 3:24Rom 3:25 ſet forth for an atonement unto us through faith in his blood; nor were thoſellRom. 11.23, 24.Rom 11:23Rom 11:24 branches of the w…ld Olive, which were taken to ſucceed in the roome of thoſe who were broken off, actually in Chriſt, butmmEpeſ 2.12. out of Chriſt, untill upon their believing they were engraffed into Chriſt.

3. AsnnEpeſ. 1.5. God hath predeſtinated us unto the adoption of ſonnes in Chriſt; (that is, to be adopted through Chriſt; as he is ſaid to have bleſſed us with all ſpirituall bleſſings in him) ſo hath he elected, them whom hee was pleaſed ſo to ſingle out in his counſel and purpoſe from eternity, ooIbid. v. 3.ppIam. 2.5.Jas 2:5to be rich in faith, ſaith one Apoſtle, qqEpheſ. 1.4.Eph 1:4to be holy and unblameable before him in love, ſaith an other Apoſtle, and the ſame again;rr2 Theſ. 2.13.2 Thess 2:13 he hath from the begining choſen you unto ſalvation, by the ſanctification of the Spirit and the beli…f of the truth; or by ſanctification of the Spirit and true Faith; nor can any man therefore have life and ſalvation without theſe.

2.ſſReply ibid. Conſider (ſay you) what ſtraits you bring the Gospel into; firſt y…u make life appearing to be had in the covenant of grace, as at firſt in the covenant of works; do this & live, ſo believe, repent, obey and live; thus runs your doctrine; nor can you with all your diſtinctions make faith in this conſideration leſſe then a work, and ſo put ſalvation upon a condition of works again. Is this free-grace?

I paſſe by your firſt here without a ſecond; we ſhall meet with the like again hereafter: as alſo, that to ſay believe and be ſaved; repent and be ſaved, is to put ſalvation upon a condition of works again. ttQ…d ille a…ud Co…icum A…lul. 1. Pactum non pactum eſt; p… ctum non pactum, ubi vobis lub…t.A condition is a condition, when it pleaſeth you and may ſeem to make for you: it is no condition, when you liſt to miſlike it, becauſe it will not ſerve your turn.

But 1. Sir, you ſhould do well, or ill rather (if you dare be ſo bold) to tell our Saviour, he hath brought the Goſpel into ſtraits by ſaying, aaMark. 16.16.Mark 16:16whoſoever doth not believe ſhall be damned, and bbIoh. ….24.unleſſe p. 45you believe in me, ye ſhall dy in your ſinnes, and, ccLuk. 13.3.5.Luke 13:3Luke 13:5unleſſe you repent you ſhall periſh: and, ddIoh. 6.53.John 6:53unleſſe ye eat my fleſh, and drink my blood, you have no life in you: and eeMath. 18.3.Matt 18:3unleſſe ye be converted, you ſhall not enter into the Kingdome of heaven: and, ffMath. 7.21.Matt 7:21none ſhall enter into the Kingdome, but he that doth the will of my Father in heaven: according whereunto alſo the Apoſtle, ggHeb. 5.9.Heb 5:9He is Author of ſalvation to all that obey him. Now ſuppoſe, Sir, we were not able to anſwer all your cavils, yet were we bound to ſtick cloſe to theſe truths ſo expreſly delivered and taught us by Chriſt, and not ſuffer our ſelves to be beaten off from them, by any exceptions, that any froward heart or wanton wit, ſhould to puzzel us, make againſt them. Be pleaſed therefore, Sir, to ſet us a while aſide, and if you luſt to be contending with Chriſt, adviſe or requeſt, (whither you pleaſe) him to conſider a litle better of the buſineſſe, what ſtreights he hath brought the Goſpel into, by theſe and other the like aſſertions; for we have no cauſe to doubt, but that he will own his own words; tho you may well have juſt cauſe to doubt, what thank you ſhall have from him, for qarelling with, and cavilling in this manner againſt them.

2. You ſay, that thus runns our doctrine; but we demand of you, whither Chriſts doctrine run ſo or no; whereunto you dare not return any direct anſwer, for you cannot deny it: onelyonly you tell us of a further myſtery, that is of late reveiled unto your ſelf and I know not who: which is all nothing to the purpoſe; nor doth any thing, that out of Scripture you have alleadged, at all croſſe or contradict that which you here call our doctrine, but is indeed Chriſts; as unleſſe you have ſo brazed your brow, that you have rubd all ſhame off it, you cannot but acknowledge; but whither you do or no, others ſeeing it thus laid in preciſe termes before you, will thereby eaſily know what to deem of you, unleſſe you ſo do.

3. ButhhReply ibid. we cannot, ſay you, with all our diſtinctions make faith in this conſideration leſſe then a work; and ſo put ſalvation upon a condition of works again.

1. The Apoſtle could diſtinguiſh, and doth diſtinguiſh, between faith and works: and we know therfore that in this buſineſſe they may be diſtinguiſhed, and are diſtinct; and tho we were not able to ſhew, how they are to be diſtinguiſhed, yet would not that prove, that diſtinguiſhed they could not be. But Sir, you are not able with all your Sophiſtry (for Logick you renounce) and fond flouriſhes, p. 46to take off that aſperſion which you have caſt upon the Apoſtle as if he therefore preached life to be had in the covenant of grace, … otherwiſe then as before in the covenant of works, becauſe he preſſeth faith as n ceſſary to the attaining of ſalvation by Chriſt: whereas he thereby in expreſſe terms diſtinguiſheth the two covenants, the one from the other; not by rejecting or excluding faith, but by taking it in, as oppoſed to works in that manner as in the former they were exacted; for theſe are his words:iiRom. 10.5, 6, 9.Rom 10:5Rom 10:6Rom 10:9 Moſes diſcribeth the righteouſneſſe which is of the Law, that the man which doeth theſe things, ſhall live by them. But the righteouſneſſe, which is of faith, ſpeaketh on this wiſe; — If thou confeſſe with thy mouth the Lord Jeſus, and ſhalt believe with thine heart, that God hath raiſed him from the dead, thou ſhalt be ſaved: and the words are ſo cleere, to evince his acknowledgment of that that you would fain faſten as an aſperſion upon us, that if the aſperſion be juſt, it muſt of neceſſity light as well on him as on us; andkkCernis nempe, cum q…bu… tua maledicta ſuſtineamus; cernis cum qibus nobis ſit cauſa communis, qam nulla conſideratione ſobria pulſare calumniis & expugnare conaris; cernis qam tibi pernici ſum ſit tam horribile crimen objicere talibus, & qam nobis glorioſum ſit qodlibet crimen audire cum talibus, Aug ad Iul. l. 1. c. 2. we are not unwilling with him to beare it.

2. Nor yet is this ſpoken, as if, according to your vain and peremptory ſentence paſt upon us, we were unable to diſtinguiſh between the act of faith reqired in the latter covenant, and works exacted in the former. For we might ſtop your mouth with your own words in your next paragraph, where you tell us, that faith is the glorious Goſpel work; and ſo point us to a diſtinction, that we might make ſome uſe of in this argument; but that we find you ſo flagging and fluttering too and fro, that we ſcarce know where to have you, or how to lay hold on you. The difference between theſe hath by our writers been long ſince obſerved, whereof from their writings you might eaſily have been enformed, had you deigned to conſult them: to wit, that in the Covenant of workes, works are conſidered, as in themſelves performed by the parties to be juſtified and to live, without reference unto ought done or to be done for them by any other: whereas in the Covenan of grace, Faith is required and conſidered, not as a work barely done by us, but as an inſtrument, or mean, whereby Chriſt is apprehended, & received, in whom is found, & by whom that is done whereby Gods juſtice is ſatisfied, and life eternall meritoriouſly procured for us; that which carieth the power and efficacy of all home to Chriſt. Now Sir, what a vaſt difference there is between theſe two may appear, if you will be but pleaſed to p. 47conſider, how farre theſe two propoſitions are aſunder, Pay your debt of a thouſand pounds, and be free; and, Rely on ſuch a friends ſatisfaction made for it, and be as free as if you had made full payment and ſatisfaction your ſelf. He is either very dim-ſighted, or wilfully wincks, that ſees not what diſtance there is between theſe two agreements, and how they ſuit with the two Covenants, that we to are diſtinguiſh: which Mr S. would here make to be a matter of ſo great difficulty that we muſt needs be nonpluſſed in it.

As for repentance and new obedience; there is, as much difference between them and faith, in regard of its peculiar office, in this latter Covenant; ſo much more between them and works in the former.

1. Between them and faith, in the point of juſtification, or the diſcharge of a ſinner from the guilt of his ſinnes; for that, howſoever they are both reqired as conditions to be neceſſarily performed by all thoſe that expect life, or pardon of ſin, and ſalvation by Chriſt; yet neither of them comes in, as having any hand in the buſineſſe of our justification, or diſcharge of us from the guilt of our ſin; becauſe that neither do they caſt ought in toward the diſcharge of our debt, nor have they any peculiar act in the application of, or ſpeciall relation unto, that whereby our debt is diſcharged. Whereas our faith, tho it afford not the leaſt mite of it ſelf toward the making up of that price, wherewith our debt is to be diſcharged, yet it is that whereby wehhIoh. 1.12.John 1:12 receive Jeſus Chriſt and in him and with him the price by him paid for us, and whereby we truſt to him, and rely upon him, for the diſcharge of our debt by the merit of his ſufferings: in regard whereof it is called, asiiAct. 20.21. & 26.18.Acts 20:21Acts 26:18 faith on Chriſt, ſo more ſpecially,kkRom. 3.25.Rom 3:25 on his blood.

2. Between repentance and new obedience in the latter Covenant, and works in the former: for works in the former are required as fully and exactly anſwering Gods juſtice, and the utmoſt rigour of the Law: whereas in the latter, they are reqired, tho as neceſſary duties, and ſuch as without which none can expect ſalvation by Chriſt; yet not, as any way anſwering Gods jſtice, but as finding gracious acceptance with God, notwithſtanding their manifold defects, through his mercy in Ieſus Chriſt.

Thus Sir, you ſee, that ſuch ſely novices as we are eſteemed by p. 48you, yet are able to diſtinguiſh thoſe things, which you preſume impoſſible to be diſtinguiſhed, by ſuch ſhallow wits at leaſt as you conceive or conceit ours to be.

Now what hath been ſaid, being duly weighed, will meet with all, that is, by you here further objected.

For 4. to your firſt demand,ll… ibid. is this free grace? I ſhall crave leave, to return you a counter-demand: Suppoſe a King be content at the ſuit either of the parties themſelves, or ſome friend of theirs, to grant his gratious pardon to a company of notorious rebels that had riſen againſt him, ſet up ſome baſe deſperate rogue in his roome, done him all the deſpight and miſcheif they were able to do; and being apprehended, arraigned and condemned to ſuch death as by their wicked demerits they had moſt juſtly deſerved, upon condition that they aknowledge their offence, and their ſorrow for it, with purpoſe and promiſe of living loyally for time to come; whether you would deem this to be free grace, or no? Or, becauſe I may well doubt, that you would little regard what you ſay, to put off ought for the preſent; I ſhall not ſtick to referre it to any indifferent Reader whatſoever to determine, whether he were not a moſt ungratious wretch, that having his pardon on ſuch termes granted and ſigned him, ſhould in regard of thoſe conditions, deny it to be of free grace: and whether they do not blaſpheme Gods free-grace, that deny it to be free grace, if it be propounded on terms of belief, repentance and amendement of life; Sir, whatſoever you ſay of us, take heed how you tell Chriſt, that he doth not freely ſave you, if hee will not ſave you unleſſe you believe.

And for your next QeremmReply ibid., concerning faith granted to be a gift of God, whether this bee more free grace respectively to what we do, then the Covenant of works had; ſince that all the works wrought in us then were freely of God, and of free gift to, as Arminius you ſay, well obſerves, and we wrought only from a free-gift given.

To paſſe by many differences, that might be obſerved between the one Covenant and the other; not to ſtand to diſcuſſe what Arminius ſaith, who I ſuppoſe, would deliver his minde there cleerly then you here relate him. It is not denyed, but p. 49that whatſoever Adam wrought, or was reqired to be wrought by him, did proceed, and was to proceed from ſuch power and ability, as God together with his reaſonable ſoul at firſt freely conferred on him; but yet this proves not that there was no other difference between the one Covenant and the other; or that life promiſed is no more of free-grace in the one then in the other; ſince that ſuch exact working as might fully anſwer the juſtice of God was to life reqired in the one; whereas that which comes farre ſhort of it, is in and for Chriſt unto life accepted in the other.

And not frivolous only, but ſcandalous alſo is that which you further ſubjoyn.

nnReply ibid.Either place ſalvation upon a free botome, or elſe you make the New Covenant but an old covenant in new terms; inſtead of Do this and live; Believe this and live; repent and live; obey and live: and all this, is for want of reveiling the myſtery more fully.

This I ſay, is frivolous, becauſe as hath been ſhewed, ſalvations free botome is no way impeached by ſuch conditions as theſe reqired; ſcandalous, becauſe therein the Apoſtles doctrine is not covertly, but directly challenged as overthrowing and razing the very foundation of free-grace. For what is,ooAct. 16.32.Acts 16:32 Believe in the Lord Jeſus, and thou ſhalt be ſaved; but Believe and live? or what is,ppAct. 3.19.Acts 3:19 Repent, that your ſinnes may be done away, but Repent and live? or what is,qqHeb. 5.9.Heb 5:9 He is the Author of ſalvation to all that obey him; but obey and live? And I demand then what this amounts unto, and whither it be any better then blaſphemy to ſay, that the Apoſtles by ſuch their doctrine, did not place ſalvation upon a free-botome; but brought in the old Covenant again in new termes. Sir dare you ſay in your new reveiled myſtery, Believe not, and yet live; Repent not, and yet live; Obey not, and yet live? or believe, repent and obey; and yet be damned? underſtanding ſuch belief, repentance, and obedience, as the Apoſtels ſpeak of. If you dare, ſpeak it out that we may underſtand from you, what your myſteries are, and together with us give the holy Ghoſt the lye.

But in your wonted manner you proceed; andrrReply p. 8. § 3. to that, ſay you, that where we find faith only preached, and ſo ſalvation made p. 50ſhort work, it is becauſe we have but the Summa…ies; I agree with you that we have but the doctrine of the Apostles as Johns; of whom it is ſaid, he ſpake many other things in his exhortation to the people; It is true, we have much of what they ſaid, and we want much.

You miſrelate mee, Sir, as once before in this very paſſage.

1. I ſay not, that in the Apoſtles preaching ſalvation is made ſuch ſhort work; but thatſſAnſw. p. 9.11. you ſo make it, in cutting of all thoſe reqiſites elſe-where mentioned, and which are neceſſary and inſeparable attendants of true faith, that which alſo I expreſſe; but you deign not to take notice of.

2. I ſay not, that we have the doctrine of the Apoſtles, as Johns, &c. I ſay onelyonly, that wettAnſw. p. 15. have but the Summaries, or principall heads of ſome of their Sermons. Nor do I therefore herein agree with you, who ifuuVnciâ conceſſâ, libram totam tollitis, Optat. l. 2. one give you but an inch, I ſee, will ſoon take an ell; much leſſe, dare I to ſay as you do (which amounts to litle leſſe then blasphemy againſt the Scriptures ſufficiency) concerning their doctrine, (for that yours words manifeſtly imply) that much of it we have, and much we want. Of which manner of ſpeaking let others judge, and from what ſpirit it doth proceed.

vvReply p. 9. § ….Yet we have ſo much, ſay you, as may ſhew us, that according to the work of ſalvation in us, Faith is the work which gives moſt glory to God; Abraham believed and gave glory to God: they that believe give glory, and Faith of all the works of the ſpirit, is the glorious Goſpel work, Chriſt calls it the work indeed; this is the work that ye believe. So as the onelyonly reaſon, why we hear ſo much of faith in the Gospel, is not only and meerly as you inſinuate, becauſe we have but their Sermons in Summaries, nor becauſe of another reaſon of yours drawn from the qualifications of thoſe they preached to, that had other gifts and not Faith: but becauſe faith is of all ſpirituall encreaſings in us, the moſt gloriouſly working towards Chriſt; faith goes out and faith depends; and faith brings down Chriſt, and faith opens the riches, and faith believes home, all ſtrength, comfort, glory, peace, promiſes.

But Sir, what doeth all this glorious flouriſh here? or to what p. 51purpoſe is it here inſerted? doeth it either prove that life and ſalvation is not propounded in the Goſpel upon a condition of believing in Christ; or that repenting and amending are not to life eternall as neceſſarily reqired as it? If not, (for that is the ſubject we are about) this is all but a needleſſexxDe qâ vere u…u pa …p teſt i…lud Scaligeri, exe…c. 107. § 20. Decl… mati…nes (in diſputando) am…itioſorum opera, …tioſorum ci…i ſunt. declamatory digreſſion, whereby you endeavour cunningly to divert your reader, fr…m the matter that is in hand.

Yet let us ſee what it is you ſay.

1. That faith is a grace of great excellency, and moſt uſefull, is by no man denied; or that thereby we give glory as didaaRom. 4.20.Rom 4:20 Abraham to God: but that is not the reaſon, whybbRom. 3.28. & 5.1.Rom 3:28Rom 5:1 by faith we are ſaid to be juſtified; for to omit thatccIoſh. 7.19.Josh 7:19 by confeſſing out ſins we give glory to God & we bring glory to him both by ourddMath. 5.16.Matt 5:16 conſtant obedience in life, andeeIoh. 21.19. Phil. 1.20.John 21:19Phil 1:20 Chriſtian patience in death: this were to found life on the worth of the work; the excellency of the gift: and ſo other graces might as well lay claim to the ſame priviledg with it, as ſhall afterward appear: but becauſe it is that whereby weffIoh. 1.12.John 1:12 receive Chriſt, andggforeign Chryſoſt. in Gal. 220. make him our Chriſt; (according to that that you at length come to in the cloſe of this paragraph, tho els where again you fall from it, & wherein we conſent with you) that which is the peculiar office of faith, as was before ſaid. So that here, Sir, you runn your ſelfe on that rock, whereon even now you told us that we miſcaried, in placing the foundation of our juſtification and ſalvation on the eminency and excellency of ſomething in us.

…. Albeit faith be a glorious grace, yet I dare not ſay, that it is the moſt glorious of any of the graces of the Spirit; for ſhould I ſo ſay, I ſhould contradict the Apoſtle, (which tho you make no bones of, yet dare not we do) who expreſly tels us, thathh1 Cor. 13.13.1 Cor 13:13 love, or charity is greater then either faith or hope; and altho faith be the moſt uſefull and beneficiall grace to us, yet is it ſuch a grace as carieth us out of our ſelves, implying us to beiiforeign. Rom 5.6.Rom 5:6 impotent, inſolvent, very banckrupts, unable to contribute any one farthing toward the payment of our debts. And albeit thereby we give glory to God; yet by it are we bereaved and utterlykkRom. 3.27. & 4.1, 2. 1 Cor. 1.29.31.Rom 3:27Rom 4:1Rom 4:21 Cor 1:291 Cor 1:31 ſtripped of all glorying in our ſelves. Nor is the terme of glory therefore (to ſpeak exactly) the peculiar of this grace; which ſhall alſo ceaſe, p. 52and become uſeleſſe, together withllRom. 8.24.Rom 8:24 hope, her moſt proper fruit when glory ſhall come; when as yetmm1 Co. 13.8, 13.1 Cor 13:81 Cor 13:13 love, tho the laſt of the three in the Apoſtles recitall, yet pronounced the greateſt of the three, becauſe the longeſt laſter ſhall continue, and abide with us and in us for ever.

3. Chriſt, it is true, ſaith of Faith, nnIoh 6.2….John 6:2This is the work of God; that is, the work that God reqires of us, that we believe on him whom he ſent. But the ſame Chriſt tells us, thatooIo…. 15.12. this is his commandement, that we love one an other: andppI…h. 13.34. the new commandement: and that which he makesqq…oh 13.35. his cogniſance and the veryrrforeign. Chryſoſt. in Ioan. orat. 72. & i… H b. 31. At Baſil. apud Greg. Na…. foreign. Character of a Chriſtian; love therefore is the work of God, as well as Faith: andſſ1 Ioh 3.23.1 John 3:23 John joyneth them both together.

4. I give other reaſons, why faith alone is ſometime mentioned, which you paſſe by; but that which you ſay I give, is untrue; to wit, that thoſe they preached to, had others gifts, and not ſaith. ForttAnſw. p 13. neither of Paul nor of Cornelius, do I ſay that they wanted faith either of them, before that Ananias reſorted to the one, and Peter repaired to the other; nor do I omit that, which you cloſe with concerninguuAnſw p. 11. the peculiar office of faith. Concerning which this may further be added, that that howſoever the ſweete and comfortable effects of faith here mentioned may evince the beneficialneſſe of that grace unto our ſelves, yet they argue not any excellency or eminency above other graces ſimply conſidered, which in regard of their proper nature, and peculiar employments make us more beneficiall and uſefull to others. Faith is as the houſwife; Love as the Almoner: Faith brings all in, Love layeth all out: faith brings God and Chriſt home to us; love carieth us out, andxxAct. 20.24. & 21 13. Phil. 1.20, …1. & 2.17. 2 Cor. 12.15.Acts 20:24Acts 21:13Phil 1:20Phil 1:1Phil 2:172 Cor 12:15 expends us in all pious offices, unto the glory of God; and good of man.

Now this adde I the rather, to take off your enſuing complaint of that, from which your ſelf here are not wholly free; to wit, that

aaReply ibid.Faith hath ſo much put upon it, as becomes a ſtumbling ſtone, and a rock of offence to many. Juſt fication, Imputation of Righteouſneſſe is put upon faith; Salvation upon Faith; as Chriſts p. 53bloud is put upon the wine; bb1 Cor. 10 16.1 Cor 10:16the Cup that we bleſſe, is it not the Communion of the blood of Chriſt? and Christs body upon the bread: ccIb…d.the bread that we break, is it not the communion of the body of Chriſt? and yet neither the wine, nor the bread, is his bloud or his body, no more then faith is either juſtification or righteouſneſſe; but ſuch a work as goes out most into him, and caryes the ſoule into him, who is righteouſneſſe and Juſtification to us. The word were no myſtery, if it were not thus ordered, and things ſo mingled, that t e Spirit onelyonly could diſcern and diſtinguiſh; the Papiſts ſtumble at works, becauſe they ſee not faith for works; and others ſtumble at faith, becauſe they ſ e not Christ for faith.

What all this ayms at, is hard to ſay: It concerns nothing, I am ſure, that Mrs S. and I had in debate. But let us rove a litle, to beare him company, and go along out with him into his impertinent excurſions and his intricate diſcourſes.

1. Truly Sir, I diſſent as much if not much more then your ſelf, from any that put too much upon faith; as ſome of the Ancients have done, making itddChryſ ſt in Rom. 4.Rom 4 a matter of more worth and excellency, then the keeping of all Gods commandements, from whom I have alſo thereineeAnimadv. in …ud. …ucii Scrip. de Iuſtif. part 1. Sect 9 n. 7. elſewhere teſtified my diſſent. But Sir, it is your ſelfe, rather then any of us, that trip at this ſtone, when you would have faith ſo much preſſed in the doctrine of ſalvation, in regard of the gloriouſneſſe and eminency of the grace it ſelf which to aſſert is not ſound.

2. As for the putting of juſtification, and imputation, to righteouſneſſe, and ſalvation upon faith, as Chriſts bloud is put upon the Cup, and Chriſts body upon the bread: I miſlike not much the reſemblance; tho it bee nothing exact, nor conceive well what it drives at. But Sir, who of us ever affirmed faith to bee either juſtification, or imputation to righteouſneſſe, or ſalvation? wee affirm with the Apoſtle, thatffRom. 5.1.Rom 5:1 wee are juſtified by Faith; andggEph 2.8.Eph 2:8 wee are ſaved by Faith; and thathhR…m. 4.9. Faith is imputed to righteouſneſſe. And in all this wee ſay p. 54no more then the Apoſtle himſelfe in expreſſe tearmes doth. Yea, even thoſe of us who maintain Faith to bee taken in a proper Senſe, and not by a Metonymicall Trope, as well in any one of thoſe phraſes as in another do not ſay any more then may well bee juſtified; nor do they differ at all in doctrine, ſo farre as I am able to conceive (and I love not to make differences, where I apprehend none) that ſay the one or the other; but contend onelyonly about the Analyſis of the Text, and the Grammaticall acception of one term in it: to make this clear, by ſome inſtances of the like kinde, when it is ſaid, This Childe is fed not by the breaſt but by hand: if one ſhall hold that the hand is in ſuch ſpeech taken in a proper ſenſe without trope or ſcheme for the hand of the dry Nurſe wherewith the child is fed, it being the instrument whereby meat is conveyed into the mouth of it: and another ſhall maintain, that the hand is there taken not properly, but by a trope or a metonymie, for the meat wherewith the child is indeed fed; becauſe the hand of it ſelfe hath no power to feed the child, but is ſaid to feed it as it hath relation to the meat; would any underſtanding man from hence conclude that they were of divers minds concerning the thing it ſelfe, and not rather that they diſſented in a qeſtion of Schoole-learning concerning the Analyſing of an Axiom, and the Grammaticall interpretation of a word in it? Or, when it is ſaid, The mouth feeds the body: if one ſhould contend that the mouth were taken for the meat, that goeth into the mouth, another for the mouth it ſelfe whereat the meat goes in; what difference were there in matter of judgement here between the one and the other concerning the thing it ſelfe? Or to make uſe of an inſtance given bykk…ubbert. collat. cum Bert. § 57. an eager ſtickler in this Argument, whollIbid. § 58. reckons up for his party a larger bead-roll of Writers, then I ſuppoſe, he is able to produce: Suppoſe a Painter holding out a Pencill ſhall ſay,mmSi dicis Pencillum dealbare parietem. This Pencill drew that Picture; if one ſhall affirm, that the word Pencill in ſuch a ſentence muſt not be taken properly for the Pencill it ſelf, but for the Picture-drawer himſelfe that made uſe of that p. 55pencill in the drawing of that picture, or for his hand that guided it in that work; or for the colours wherewith the picture was drawn; another, that the word pencill is to be taken properly, as well as the word picture, the one for that very inſtrument which the artiſt held in his hand, the other for the work he pointed to, when he ſo ſaid. I ſuppoſe, it would not be deemed, that there were any difference at all between them, concerning the thing intended, notwithſtanding the controverſie between them about the phraſe or form of ſpeech. In like manner concerning the word Faith in the fore mentioned forms (**Phraſes ſum aeqipollentes: Paraeus ad Rom. 4.3. Obſ. 3.Rom 4:3 which in effect come all to one) when ſome ſhall ſay, that the word is taken properly, for that grace, or that act of grace whereby wee apprehend Chriſt and his ſufferings,nnVide Calvin. & Lubbert. inſra. the meritorious cauſe or ſubject matter (term it whether you pleaſe) of our juſtification, or that whatſoever it be in Chriſt, for which wee are juſtified: others, that faith is by a Metonymie put for Chriſt, by whom, as our ſurety, having paid the full price for the diſcharge of our debt, and ſatisfied the juſtice of God for our ſins, wee are delivered from death, and have life purchaſed for us. here is no difference of judgement in what on either ſide is averred for matter of doctrine: a diſſenting onelyonly about the reſolution of a term uſed in thoſe axioms; and conſeqently (for ought yet I ſee) thus far forth a meerooforeign. wrangling about terms and words. And for my part, to declare my judgement herein, which I deſire I may do freely without offence to either party; it being, as I conceive, not any matter of faith, but a point onelyonly of School-learning. AsppVideatur Barthol. Keckerman. Syſtem. Logic. l. 1. c. 2. p. 395. by divers learned men of no ſmall note it is well-obſerved, that in thoſe Propoſitions, wherein Mr. S. doth here inſtance,qqMatt. 26.26.Matt 26:26 This bread is my body; rrIbid. 28, 29.This wine is my bloud: neither bread nor body are taken tropically, but properly, in the one; neither wine nor bloud likewiſe in the other: by the bread is meant the bread that Chriſt then brake; by body, that body that hung the next day on the croſſe: by wine that liqor of the grape that was then in the cup; by bloud, that very bloud of our Saviour that was ſhed upon the croſſe. All the impropriety of the ſpeech is in the predication, or in the copula, in the verb-ſubſtantive, that as a knot or a claſp coming between the two terms of either Propoſition, faſteneth them the one to the other,; which is to be underſtood not properly, as if the one were really and eſſentially p. 56the other; that which even theſſBellar. de Euchar. l. 3. c. 16. & 19. Papiſts themſelves are enforced to confeſſe, cannot ſo be; but figuratively or tropically, as implying the one to be typically, ſymbolically, or repreſentatively the other. So here in the forementioned Propoſitions, the word faith is taken for faith, as the wordttRom. 8.24.Rom 8:24 hope for hope in the like: all the impropriety of ſpeech, if any be, is in regard of the manner, how wee are ſaid to be juſtified by it, to live by it, to be ſaved by it, to have it imputed unto us for righteouſneſſe: all which indeed is to be underſtood not principally, immediately, meritoriouſly, in regard of any worth or dignity of it, or efficaciouſly, in regard of any power or efficacie in it ſelf; but mediately, ſubſerviently, organically, inſtrumentally, as it is a means to apprehend Chriſt, his ſatisfaction, and his ſufferings, by the price and merit whereof we are juſtified, and ſaved, and conſiſt as righteous in Gods ſight, and as it hath a ſpeciall reſpect and relation thereunto. Nor do the moſt of the teſtimonies in this controverſie uſually produced hold outaaLubb. ipſe. Ʋtroqe penicillo & albedine paries dealbatur; ſed non eodem modo: illo enim inſtrumentaliter, hac materialiter. Ita fide & juſtitia Chriſti homo juſtificatur: ſed non eodem modo: illo enim inſtrumentaliter, hac vero pene materialiter. any more; nor doe they therefore deny faith to be taken properly in the Propoſitions before propoſed. This the rather I here inſiſt on, becauſe I obſerve our late Antinomians to make a bad uſe of the other expoſition of ſome of thoſe Texts, to put by the neceſſity of faith unto juſtification: for ſo one of them;bbH. Den Confer. pag. 18. Wee are juſtified by faith; that is, by the object of our faith the bloud of Chriſt: (and ſoccRom. 3.25.Rom 3:25 through faith in his bloud, ſhould be through Chriſts bloud in his bloud) faith is taken for the object of faith, as hope for the object of hope, dd1 Tim. 1.1.1 Tim 1:1Chriſt our hope: To which purpoſe it grieves mee to finde in one of ours to confirm this tropicall expoſition, that forced interpretation of ſomewhat the like phraſe;eeRom. 8.24. Spe ſervati ſumus, i. e. Chriſto in quem ſperamus: Pemble of Juſtif. Sect. 2. cap. 1. At rectius Chryſoſt. foreign. Schol. Graec. foreign. Spe futurorum, Calvin. Salutem illam (de qa v. 23.) nondum reipſa, ſed ſpe obtineri, Martyr, & alii fere univerſi.Rom 8:24 Wee are ſaved by hope; that is, by Chriſt in whom wee hope. Howſoever, as in the former ſacramentall ſpeeches, thoſe of ours that take the words body and bloud properly, with an improper predication; and thoſe that take them improperly, with a proper enunciation, do not differ at all either from other in the doctrine of the Sacrament; and are as free and far off the one as the other, from thoſe two monſtrous opinions of Tranſubſtantiation and Conſubſtantiation: as alſo in expounding thoſe words of the p. 57Apoſtle,ff1 Cor. 10.4.1 Cor 10:4 The rock was Chriſt; albeit ſome underſtandggforeign. Chryſoſt. in 1 Cor. 10. & reliqui Graeci. Ambr. de Sacr. l. 5. c. 1. Jun. parallel. l. 2. par. 36. & alii.1 Cor 10 the word Rock tropically, the word Christ properly, the Verb was eſſentially: others take the word rock properly, the wordhhChriſtus, i. e. figura Chriſti. Rei nomen metaphorice transfertur ad ſignum: Calv. Sicut imago Herculis Hercules nominatur. Chriſt tropically, the Verb was eſſentially: a third ſortiiKeckerm. ubi ſup. Petra erat Chriſtus, in myſterio: Primaſ. Nec ſecus in omnibus illis locutionibus, Mat. 13.19, 20, 22, 23, 37, 38, 39. praedicata omnia proprie ſumuntur; verbum ſubſtantivum ſymbolice.Matt 13:19Matt 13:20Matt 13:22Matt 13:23Matt 13:37Matt 13:38Matt 13:39 take both the words rock and Chriſt properly, the Verb was onelyonly ſymbolically: yet do none of them differ in ought, either concerning the truth of the Story, or any doctrine of faith: in like manner thoſe that here preſſe a trope in the word faith, and thoſe that ſtand for the proper ſenſe of it, (ſo far forth as they proceed no further) doe not at all differ in any point of faith concerning juſtification, would they be pleaſed aright to underſtand one another. But Sir, there is none of us, either the one or the other that do (as you cloſely here would intimate) affirm faith to be either Juſtification or Imputation of righteouſneſſe; we diſtinguiſh theſe things warily one from another: and tho wee ſever not thoſe things that are not to be ſevered; yet wee diſtinguiſh thoſe things that are to be diſtinguiſhed, and are in their proper and genuine nature diſtinct: neither confounding juſtification with faith, nor faith (as ſome fantaſticall ſpiritskkTortuoſas Sophiſtae hujus figuras non admitto, qum dicit, Fidem eſſe Chriſtum. Inſcite fidem qae eſt inſtrumentum duntaxat percipiendae juſtitiae, dico miſceri cum Chriſto, qi materialis cauſa, tantiqe beneficii autor ſimul eſt & miniſter: Calvin. Inſtit. lib. 3. c. 11. Sect. 7. in Calvines time, by him then oppoſed) with Chriſt: which yet ſome treading in their ſteps, have endeavoured to doe in theſe dayes: But ſuch fanaticall fancies wee abhorre, and your enſuing cenſures therefore reach not us. Wee are neither of thoſe that cannot ſee faith for works, nor of thoſe that cannot ſee Chriſt for faith: a ſtrange prodigie, how men ſhould not ſee Chriſt for faith, when they ſee Chriſt by faith: nor are theſe things in the Goſpel ſo mingled, (as you would make men believe) but that wee can diſcern and diſtinguiſh them, without the help of that new ſpirit that undertakes now adayes to reveal ſuch matters of doctrine as the Apoſtles are pretended to have preached, but not to have left upon record. But Sir, wee may truly ſay, that you and yours are they that either cannot, or will not ſee the wood for trees; the conditions on which ſalvation by Chriſt is propounded, tho in the Goſpel they do every-where occurre, and offer themſelves, will ye, nill ye, to your eyes.

In your next, you relate me as objecting againſt you, thatllRepl. pag. 9, 10. Sect. 1. Chriſt and his Apoſtels never preached free-grace, without p. 58condition and qualification on our parts, Rom. 8.1. Matth. 5.8. &c.

Where Sir, mee thinks you grow wearie of your work; for you draw up whole pages into little more then a line. But Sir, you diſſemble mine Argument becauſe you felt where it pinched you, and knew not which way to rid your hands of it. The argument runs thus.

mmAnſ. p. 15.If the Goſpell propound and promiſe pardon of ſin and ſalvation without any condition at all required on our part; and all ſuch conditions and qualifications of beliefe, repentance and new obedience deſtroy the freeneſſe of Grace, then neither Chriſt, nor John Baptiſt, nor the Apoſtles preached either Goſpel or free-grace: for they thus preached, and propounded pardon of ſin and ſalvation upon ſuch terms from the firſt to the laſt; as I there at large ſhew by their expreſſe profeſſions and ſpeeches: and according to your grounds therefore they never preached free-grace.

Now out of this whole argument, you only pick one peice, letting paſſe all the reſt, with the proofs thereof, that it may not appeare to what purpoſe it was propounded; nor attemping once to take of the crime laid upon you, the ſtain whereof ſticks as cloſe to you and your tenents, as your fleſh to your bones, and your skin to your fleſh. OnelyOnly you annex two places, with an &c. thennMatth. 5.8.Matt 5:8 one whereof I produce not for the proof of ought I affirm: butooAnſw p. 14. to ſhew what your brother Eaton ſaith of it, who makes it a parcell of Chriſts Legall preaching; theppRom. 8.1.Rom 8:1 other indeed I alledge, butqqAnſw. p. 15. inſiſting principally, on the words of the twelfth and thirteenth verſes of that Chapter; which you ſaw ſo inconſiſtent with your preſumptuous novelties, that you liſted not to take notice of them.

Yet let us hear, what you ſay unto that which you have pitched upon.

rrRepl. p. 10. Sect. 1.They preached faith and repentance and obedience; 1. in degrees of revelation; the Goſpel came not all out at once in his glory. 2. not in parts, as wee have their doctrine, as you confeſſe they preached them: but all along in the New Teſtament there is more of their glory and fullneſſe reveiled concerning them. So as the degrees of reveiling, the parts and ſummaries of their ſermons, the fuller diſcovery in the whole New Teſtament, are thoſe things you conſider not: we onelyonly conſider; and ſo dare not preach the Goſpel ſo in p. 59halfs, in parts and qarters as you do; and yet will not beleive you do; which is ſo much worſe; you ſay you ſee, and therefore your ſinne remaineth.

But Sir, what is all this, to take off the edge of mine Argument, which cuts to the qick with you, convincing you, by neceſſary conſeqence, of blaſpheming the doctrine of Chriſt and his Apoſtels as teaching ſuch doctrine, as not onelyonly doth not hold out Goſpel, or free-grace, but doth utterly overthrow and take away the very truth and eſſence of either. For the conditions and qalifications here mentioned, which you denie not to have been taught by them, are ſuch, you ſay, as tho the Goſpel ſo propounded and preached may have ſome notion of free grace in it, yet it hath no truth thereof at all: the guilt whereof therefore you ſtand juſtly ſtill charged with, notwithſtanding ought, that beſide the point in qeſtion, you prate here to no purpoſe.

2. The two branches of your Anſwer, (for it ſeems you were in ſome perplexity, or diſturbance at leaſt, when you were puting pen to paper) do apparently enterfere, cut and croſſe the one the other. For if the Goſpel came not all at once to them, but was reveiled to them by d…grees; which you affirm in the firſt branch; then how could they chooſe but preach it in parts? which yet you denie in the latter branch. Thus Sir, your forces, likeſſSuoqe Marte cadant ſubiti per mutua vulnera fratres. Nafo Met. lib. 3. the men in the fable that ſprung up of the ſnakes teeth of Cadmus his ſowing, fall foul one on another, and deſtroy either other, without the help of any adverſe partie: for how could they preach it otherwiſe then it was reveiled? and if by peices reveiled to them, then ſure in peices preached by them.

3. Grant that ſome things were afterward reveiled to them, wherewith at firſt they were not made acquainted. Yet

1. there was at the firſt ſo much reveiled to them, and preached by them, as was ſufficient to convert and ſave ſouls: for to what end elſe was their preaching? Either therefore you muſt of neceſſity grant, that men may be converted and ſaved without notice of free grace, and Goſpel; (of free grace, or Goſpel, I ſay; for no Goſpel without grace, nor grace that is not free) or, that the Apoſtels, if by their miniſtery, they did at firſt convert p. 60any, then the doctrine of free-grace was reveiled to them and preached by them at firſt: which how could they do, if at the ſame time they preached that that was directly contrary to free-grace, and did take away the truth of it? unleſſe any man will be ſo void of reaſon and common ſence, as to ſay that the Apoſtles preached contradictories in the very ſelf ſame ſermons.

2. There was nothing in matter of doctrine afterward reveiled unto them, or taught by them, that croſſed or repealed ought, that had formerly been made known unto them, and by them made known to others. Divine revelations concerning matter of faith cannot poſſibly contradict one another, tho ſuch as yours are may both cotradict ſome contained in Gods word, and ſome other alſo of your own. what they taught at firſt was the truth of God, as well as what they taught at laſt: nor did they ever revers ought of what was taught at firſt by them, but continued teaching the ſame ſtill to the laſt. you and thoſe of your faction may have your reſerves, and your new-lights, controling and contradicting your former, as new fancies and falſhoodsttforeign. 2 Pet. 1.16.2 Pet 1:16 cunningly contrived, are either ſuggeſted to you, or forged by you; but with them it was not ſo. It was Gods truth they taught at firſt, and it was Gods truth they taught… at laſt; and if in proceſſe of time ought were further reveiled unto them, then at firſt, it could not, being truth, but of neceſſitie be conſonant to what at firſt was reveiled to them; foruuforeign. Ariſt. truth and truth cannot jar.

4. For what you ſay of their Summaries, hath been fully anſwered before: nor is it meet to trouble and tire the reader with needleſſe repetitions. But Sir, what you ſay, we conſider not, we do conſider and acknowledge as well as your ſelf; nor do wee reject, or refuſe, or forbare to preach ought that wee find reveiled in the word: and that therefore, which you here charg us with, is moſt falſe and a baſe calumnie, without ground or colour of truth. And here I challenge you to ſhew what point concerning free-grace, as it is revealed in the writings of the Apoſtles wee preach not, which unleſſe you can do, you muſt juſtly undergo the cenſure of one, that care not how you bely your brethren againſt your own knowledge and conſcience.

p. 615. For your vain boaſting of your only conſidering what you ſay we do not, and of your preaching the Goſpel in the full glory of it: if you preach it no otherwiſe then it is diſcovered and reveiled all along in the New Teſtament; there is none of us that blame you for it; it is our endeavour ſo to do; nor do wee reſtrain any from ſo doing, nor aſpers them when they do it. But Sir, if you ſhall preſum to peice out the preaching of the Goſpel, with ſome additionals of your own under pretence of ſome myſteries in theſe times reveiled, which in the Apoſtles times were not; or ſhall croſſe and contradict ought, as repugnant to, and deſtructive of free-grace, that was firſt or laſt taught by them, wee muſt of neceſſitie crave leave here to leave you; and not to abhorre onelyonly and abominate, but to oppoſe and impugn ſuch ungodly courſes, that others may not be perverted and poyſoned therewith.

6. For our preaching of the Goſpel in halfs, in parts and qarters: it is but a parcell of your ſcurrilous Rhetorik; which you are grown very rife in, ſince you layd down your Logick. And yet, Sir, ſtill you conſider not whom you ſtrike at, while you play thus upon us and our preaching; for you told us (if you have not already forgot what you ſaid) but even now, that the Apoſtles preached the Gospel in degrees of revelation; and that it was not all reveiled unto them at once: and if it were in halfs, and parts and qarters reveiled to them, then could they no otherwiſe preach it to others, then you are pleaſed to ſay that wee do; ſo by your own words you ſtand enforced to acknowledge that charging this (be it true, or falſe) as a fault upon us, you therein cenſure the Apoſtles together with us.

Mean while your reply is here made up, not by halvs and qarters, or by half-qarters, or qarter qarters, but by ſnips and ſhreds, letting paſſe the main pieces of mine Anſwer: for out of the next whole page and an half, you pick out onelyonly this pitance of one paſſage, aaRep. p. 10. Sect. 2.that Chriſts bloud is not to be filled out to rogues and dogs.

Wherein you deal, as in the former; neither relating my words as they lay before you; nor ſhewing on what occaſion I ſpeak what is there ſpoken.

p. 62bbOccaſion. word p 9.If you have faulted in ought, you ſay it is with filling that wine out Too freely; which yet you ſuppoſe the Maſter of the feaſt hath bidden you, Cant. 5.

ThisccAnſw. p. 16. I wiſh you to be well adviſed in; and ſhew you that the place produced by you, ſpeakes of wine reſerved for friends; which if a ſervant ſhould powre out to the dogs and hogs, or ſerve out to ſturdy rogues and vagrants at the dore, that ſhall refuſe to to com in, or to have any commerce or acquaintance with his Maſter, tho invited thereunto, he ſhould from his Maſter have ſmall thanks for his labour.

But neither doe you relate my words as they there lie, nor mention the occaſion of them, nor take any notice of my preſſing upon you the Too free filling out of the wine as unjuſtifiable, and the abuſe of the Text: nor your wicked, malicious, and uncharitable charging of us, as thoſe thatddTreat. p. 82. to exalt men, cry down Chriſt, recharged upon you: but paſſe them all over; being indeed not able either to juſtifie the one, or to make good the other.

Howbeit, let us hear what beſide the matter you ſay.

1.eeRepl. ubi ſup. Take heed you charge not Chriſt for being with Publicans and ſinners: You may upon this ground ſay hee preached falſe doctrine, becauſe hee ſaid, He came not to call the righteous, but ſinners.

But Sir, what is this to the Too free filling out of the wine ſpoken of in the Canticles? unleſſe this be a good Argument; Chriſt was with Publicans and ſinners: Ergo Maſter S. hath good warrant from that place of the Canticles to fill out the wine there ſpoken of too freely. Or, therefore the wine there ſpoken of, to which Chriſts friends alone are there invited, may by his ſervants be powred out to dogs and ſwine: and is there any colour of reaſon in ſuch kind of reaſoning? But I doe you wrong, you will ſay, in reqiring ſound reaſon from him who profeſſeth to have left his Logick. Howbeit Sir, give mee leave to tell you, that hee is an over-bold ſervant, who, becauſe hee hears his Maſter ſay, Come and drink my wine freely, my friends; ſhall preſume as in his Maſters name, to ſay, Come and drink both friends and foes: and becauſe he ſees his Maſter free of it to the one, ſhall laviſh it out therefore to the other.

p. 532. You deale with Scripture, as theffMatt. 4.6.Matt 4:6 Devill is commonly (how juſtly, I ſtand not to diſcuſſe) deemed to have done, when hee tempted our Saviour. As you clipt out the middle words from that paſſage of theggCant. 5.1.Song 5:1 Canticles; which might ſoon have ſtopt your mouth: ſo you pare away the latter end of our Saviours ſpeech here, which you knew would not ſtand for you; thathhMatth. 9.13.Matt 9:13 hee came to call ſinners to repentance. And you may doe well to remember, that the ſame our Lord and Maſter, who was in companie ſometimeiiMatth. 9.11.Matt 9:11 with Publicans and ſinners, yetkkMatth. 7.6.Matt 7:6 forbad his ſervants to give holy things to dogs, or to caſt pearls unto ſwine. And I ſuppoſe therefore, that I have better warrant for what I ſay from this injunction of our Saviour, then you have, or can have, for your profeſſed profuſeneſſe, from that ſpeech of his directed to his friends in the Canticles.

2. You ask,llRepl. ibid. What were all of us in our unregenerate condition? ſinners, or righteous perſons? unholy, or holy? men of faith, or unbelief? or not rather dead in treſpaſſes and ſins, till qickned with Christ?

And Sir, what tends this Qeſtion to? Who denies, or makes doubt, but thatmmEph. 2.1, 5.Eph 2:1Eph 2:5 we were all ſuch, untill God qickned us with Chriſt? and yet how were any of us fitted to taſte, or able to drink of that pretious ſpirituall liqour, before we were ſo qickned? But in ſtead hereof you might have been pleaſed to conſider what you found objectednnAnſ. p. 17. a little after, againſt your ſecond Aſſertion, which you there waiv; it ſeems, unable to anſwer. Nos actum non agimus.

Your next work is to juſtifie ſome of the Aſſertions in your Treatiſe excepted againſt, as warping too much toward the way of thoſe thatooJude 4.Jude 1:4 turn Gods grace into wantonneſſe; ſome whereof you take notice of, and ſeek to ſalve; others you leave to ſhift as they may for themſelves.

The firſt is, thatppTreat. p. 102. The promiſes belong to ſinners as ſinners; not as repenting or humbled ſinners.

The ſecond, thatqqTreat. p. 186. None ever received Chriſt, but in a ſinfull condition.

In juſtification hereof, you give us a large reply, (tho not anſwering at all the objections rrAnſw. p. 17.made againſt either, nor ſhewing how what you ſay is appliable to either) in theſe words.

p. 54ſſReply p. 11.To whom doe all promiſes belong firſt, but to Chriſt? and from whom to us, but from Chriſt? and what are the elect and choſen in him, before they are called and beleeve, but ſinners as ſinners? doe you look that men ſhould be firſt whole for the Phyſitian, or righteous for pardon of ſin, or juſtified for Chriſt, or rather ſinners, unrighteous, ungodly? while we were yet ſinners, Chriſt died for us: Hee died for the ungodly. Christ is the Phyſitian, the righteouſneſſe, the ſanctification: and makes them beloved, that were not beloved; and to obtaine mercy, that had not obtained mercy; and ſaints that were ſinners; and ſpirituall who were carnall: So as we looke at Chriſt and the promiſes coming to men in their ſins. But thoſe men were beloved of God in Chriſt, who ſuffered for ſins before: ſo as they begin not now to be loved, but to be made to love: God begins not to be reconciled to them, but they begin to be reconciled to him, ttRom. 5.Rom 5the love of God being ſhed abroad in their hearts by the Spirit which is now given unto them. So as wee looking at perſons as choſen in Chriſt; and at their ſins, as born by Chriſt in his body on the tree, we ſee nothing in perſons to hinder them from the Gospel and offers of grace there; be they never ſo ſinfull to us, or themſelves, they are not ſo to him who hath choſen them, nor to him in whom they are choſen. And this is the myſtery, why Chriſt is offered to ſinners, or rogues, or whatſoever you call them; uuRom. 11.28.Rom 11:28They are, as touching the election, beloved for the Fathers ſake: I ſpeak of ſuch to whom Chriſt gives power to receive him, and believe on him, and become the ſons of God: and Chriſt finds them out in their ſins, and viſits them who ſit in the region and ſhadow of death; and them that are darkneſſe, he makes light in the Lord.

Sir, All this long diſcourſe of yours concerning Gods election of men in Chrſt; the eſtate they were in when Chriſt died for them; Gods reconciling them to him, & loving them before they loved him, &c. Doe not all prove, that the promiſes of the Goſpel, to wit, of pardon of ſin and ſalvation, doe belong to finners as ſinners, and not as repentant and humbled ſinners, xxMat. 11.28.Matt 11:28ſuch alone as Chriſt invites, and promiſes to refreſh: nor doe you frame hence any formall argument, whereunto a direct anſwer might be duely ſhaped and returned: but heap us up a pile of words, affording no premiſes, from which what you ſhould prove, can be neceſſarily concluded.

For, (to paſſe by that your uncouth phraſe, of all the promiſes belonging p. 55firſt to Chriſt: not unlike that which you have elſewhere, thataaTreat. p. 125. God makes no covenant with man, but with Chriſt. tho wee deny not, but thatbb2 Cor. 1.19.2 Cor 1:19 Gods promiſes are all yea and Amen in Chriſt) Election and Predectination either of Chriſts, or of any other in or unto Chriſt, muſt be diſtinguiſhed from the actuall exhibition of Chriſt, either by his incarnation, or by the application of him unto any. Ascc1 Pet. 1.20.1 Pet 1:20 Chriſt was pred…ſtinate to be made man, and to ſuffer, from eternitie; but was not actually exhibited, ddGal. 4 4.Gal 4:4untill that ſet time that God had before appointed: ſo GodeeEph. 1.4.Eph 1:4 elects men from eternity, heeffRom. 8.29, 30.Rom 8:29Rom 8:30 calls and converts them in time; heeggEph. 1.5.Eph 1:5 predeſtinates them to be adopted, (it is the Apoſtles own language) but hee doth not actually adopt, untill hee give them power tohhJohn 1.12.John 1:12 receive Chriſt, in whom they are adopted: hee determineth to juſtifie them from all eternity; but hee doth not actually juſtifie them, untill he work faith in them,iiRom. 5.1.Rom 5:1 whereby they are juſtified, and whereby theykkGal. 2.16.Gal 2:16 beleeve that they may be juſtified, as the Apoſtle ſpeaks of himſelf; thereby implying, that hee was not juſtified untill hee beleeved: Hee decrees to pardon and remit ſins from eternity; (forllActs 15.18.Acts 15:18 from the beginning were all Gods works known to himſelfe, and reſolved upon with himſelf) but doth not actually remit or releaſe ſin, untill hee give grace to repent; which in the Gospel phraſe and method mmLuk. 24.47. Acts 3.19. & 8.22.Luke 24:47Acts 3:19Acts 8:22goes conſtantly before pardon; and ſo doth in nature, tho not in time: Hee purpoſeth from all eternitie to ſanctifie all his, who are therefore ſaid to bennEph. 1.4.Eph 1:4 elect thereunto; and yet were they not, nor could be actually ſanctified before they were, nor were for a long time after they were, many of them, it may be the moſt. Nor will it avail to object, as ſome doe, that ſanctification is a tranſient act, and cauſeth a reall change in the perſon of the party ſanctified, which juſtification doth not; for juſtification doth the like; tho not in the perſon; yet in the ſtate and condition of the party juſtified; and may in that regard be termed a tranſient act alſo. Howſoever for School-terms it be, ſure it is, that juſtification and adoption are herein both alike: and ſince that the Apoſtle, in ſaying that we wereooEph. 1.5.Eph 1:5 predeſtinate to be adopted, doth thereby imply, that the very act of adoption is no more from eternity, then the act of ſanctification, or the act of ſalvation, unto whichpp2 Theſ. 2.13.2 Thess 2:13 through ſanctification, wee are ſaid to be elect: the like may we concerning juſtification, from thoſe words of his juſtly conclude. p. 56Wee grant then, that from eternitie God purpoſed to beſtow Chriſt on his elect: but wee ſay withall, (and that with good warrant from Gods word) that Chriſt is not actually exhibited unto any of them to be his, untill he work faith in them whereby they may receive him, that he may become theirs. The elect Epheſians were out of Chriſt, andqqEpheſ. 2.12.Eph 2:12 without Chriſt, untill they beleeved; nor doth hee beſtow faith on any, without repentance and humiliation, which are two unſeparable companions of it, and ſpring all three from the ſame principle of ſpirituall life. Nor doth all therefore that here you ſay, either confirm your aſſertion, that the promiſes of the Gospel belong to ſinners as ſinners, and not as penitent or humbled ſinners; or to juſtifie your offers of grace, and gratious promiſes propounded in the Goſpel, unto ſinners, tho never ſo ſinfull, either to your ſelf, or in themſelves, as belonging unto them: becauſe rrRom. 11.28.Rom 11:28as touching election, they are beloved for the Fathers ſake; (another of your uncouth phraſes, and Scriptures groſſely miſ-applied) unleſſe you make your tender thereof to them, if they beleeve and repent; (nor doth Chriſt offer them otherwiſe) or dare preſume to ſay, as of the Theſſalonians the Apoſtle, thatſſ1 Theſ. 1.4.1 Thess 1:4 you know them to be elect, tho they be not converted, but lie wallowing ſtill in their ſins.

But for the point it ſelfe a little further: If the promiſes of the Goſpel belong to ſinners as ſinners, not as penitent and humbled ſinners, then to all ſinners, whether penitent or impenitent; and as well tottLuk 7.30.Luke 7:30 thoſe Phariſees and Lawyers that contemned the counſell of God againſt themſelves, and refuſed to repent and beleeve upon Johns preaching; as touuMat. 21.32.Matt 21:32 the Publicans and harlots, who did thereupon beleeve and repent: and as well to thexxMat. 12.31. Mar 3.29, 30Matt 12:31Mark 3:29Mark 3:30 Phariſees that blaſphemed againſt the holy Ghoſt, as toyyLuk 7.37, 38Luke 7:37Luke 7:38 that woman, whoever ſhee was (for that it waszzLuk. 8.2.Luke 8:2 Mary Magdalen is a groundleſſe, and tho commonly received, no probable opinion) who having been formerly of looſe and lewd life, teſtified her repentance and inward humiliation by thoſe offices performed about the feet of our Saviour. For if they b…long to ſinners as ſinners; then ſinners as ſinners may lay claim to them, as having right to, and intereſt in them: and being ſo abſolute, eſpecially as you have formerly avowed, free from all condition whatſoever, they ſhall undoubtedly, whether they repent or no, be made good to them: and ſo all ſinners, even the whole world, according to your aſſertion p. 57(not differing from what out of another of your ſtrain was before recited) ſhall be ſaved.

Again, If the promiſes of life and ſalvation be made to ſinners ſimply and abſolutely as ſuch, without any reſpect to faith, repentance, humiliation, and the like (for wee will waiv the word of condition at preſent, becauſe it is ſo unpleaſing to you) what meaneth the mention of theſe things in the propounding of the promiſes? for I hope you will not return me that anſwer that a Doctor of ſome note ſometime did, preſſing an exception made in a**Matt. 19.9.Matt 19:9 propoſition of our Saviours, that they were etioſa verba; and being charged with the guilt of no ſmall crime for ſo ſaying, to ſalve the matter, ſaid, his meaning was, that they were but as ſome expletive particles in Greek…, uſed in a kind of elegancy, onelyonly to make up the ſentence. But Sir, I hope, whatſoever you think, if you doe think at leaſt as you write, you will not be ſo bold, as in expreſſe termes to avow, that the mention of faith, and repentance, and humiliation, and the like in the promiſes, is but idle and ſuperfluous matter, inſerted to make ſome ſhew of a conditionall promiſe, where nothing leſſe then any ſuch mattter is intended: and much leſſe, that thoſe menaces annexed uſually to the promiſes, and denounced againſt all thoſe that do not beleeve, repent, and be humbled, are ſuch. Which yet unleſſe they ſo be, it will neceſſarily follow, that promiſes doe not belong to any ſinners, but ſuch as are ſo qualified as was above-ſaid: And indeed, to whom otherwiſe ſhall the comminations appertain? Certainly, you cannot ſay, that both the promiſes and the menaces belong to the ſame perſons, and that the ſame perſons have a like right to, and an intereſt in either; for that implies a contradiction: And if the menaces doe belong to all that doe not beleeve, repent, and be humbled; then what manner of ſinners the promiſes belong to, any man by juſt conſequence may eaſily apprehend.

Nor Sir, is it therefore anyaaReply Concluſ. p 17. ſporting with a poor wounded conſcience, (for there is no ſporting matter in it) to tell any, in way of diſcovery of the evill and unſound courſes of thoſe who teach them, to reaſon thus; God will ſave ſinners: But I am a ſinner: Therefore God will ſave mee: which manner of reaſoning you ſeem to approve, and is agreeable to the principles and grounds that you here lay: To tell them, I ſay, that they may p. 58with as good ground reaſon thus, God will damn ſinners: But I am a ſinner: Therefore God will damn mee. No Sir, It was one warping to your way, that endeavoured to make a wound where none was; as Mountebanks doe ſometimes in their own fleſh, thereby to make way for their own counterfeit plaſters, the efficacy whereof the party juſtly miſdoubted; and ſeeing it further by ſuch a parallell ſhewed to be vain and ridiculous, repoſed her ſelf quietly on her former grounds again, wherein he endeavoured to diſturb her. Which if it were a fallacie, as you affirm it to be, nor was it propounded for any other; then that other, being of the very ſame form and ſtamp with it, muſt admit the ſame cenſure: and how can it be other then (if not a falſe, yet) an uncertain Concluſion at leaſt, that is grounded upon a fallacie? yea, how other then certainly falſe that hath no other ground but a fallacy? or what is the endeavouring to ſatisfie people with fallacies in matters concerning their ſouls ſtate and ſafety, other then to teach them to build their faith upon falſhoods? This is not therefore as you ſay,bbConcluſ. ibid. by the uſe of Logick to caſt a miſt on the promiſes of the Goſpel to ſinners: but by the help of Logick to diſpell ſuch miſts as are by your party raiſed, to daſell mens eyes, that they may not diſcern what ſinners they are that have part in thoſe promiſes. And it is idle therefore to demand here again, clipping and paring our Saviours ſpeeches,ccIbid. Know yee not that Chriſt came to call ſinners? (yea, but you know alſo what followeth,ddMatt. 9.13.Matt 9:13 to call ſinners to repentance) to ſave ſinners? but not, unleſſe they repent: foreeLuk. 13.3, 5.Luke 13:3Luke 13:5 unleſſe they repent they ſhall periſh, notwithſtanding his coming to ſave; himſelfe ſaith it.

But we ſhall not need ſtand longer to debate the matter with you; your ſelfe in the cloſe are pleaſed to cloſe with us, and after all your long excurſion, and heaps of impertinent diſcourſe, to conclude againſt your ſelfe. For when you ſay,ffReply, ibid. You ſpeak of ſuch, to whom Chriſt gives power to receive him, and to beleeve on him: It is juſt as much as if you had ſaid, Not of ſinners as ſinners, but ſuch ſinners as have power given them to receive Chriſt, and beleeve on him. And do, or can any but repentant and humbled ſinners ſo doe? And yet your ſecond Aſſertion excepted againſt, implies that they may. But thus Sir, as the common ſaying is, When you have given, as you ſuppoſe it, a great deale p. 59of good milk, much matter to little purpoſe; at length with your heel you kick down the pail, and ſpill all: Or rather, to ſhew us your skill at fast and looſe, ggforeign. Aeſ…hyl.Gypſie-like, you knit us a number of knots; and then to eaſe us of the labour, with whom you deem them indiſſoluble, you looſe them all again your ſelfe in a trice. And all therefore that hath been here ſaid, is rather to ſatisfie others, then to anſwer ought that you oppoſe, your ſelfe having in fine ſo concluded the matter, that no other anſwer needs then your own.

But paſſe wee on to your third Aſſertion, wherein you either deride, or pitie them as**Treat. p. 171, 173. melancholick creatures, who ſuppoſe that God may be provoked to wrath by his childrens ſins, and may chaſtiſe them for the ſame. In defence whereof you reply thus with a multitude of queries.

hhRep. p. 11, 94.Can God be as the ſonne of man? Is there any variableneſſe or ſhadow of change with him? Can hee love, and not love? Doth hee hate perſons, or ſins? Is hee ſaid to chaſtiſe as fathers, otherwiſe then in expreſſions after the manner of men; becauſe of the infirmities of our fleſh? muſt we conceive ſo of God, as of one another? Can he be provoked for ſins done and aboliſhed? Hath Chriſt taken away all the ſin of his? Hath he born all upon his body, or no? Speak we of anger otherwiſe then by way of alluſion and allegory, as a Father, &c. and is that, He is a Father, after the manner of men? Or, ſpeaks he not in the old Teſtament according to the revelation of himſelf there, and in the new Teſtament of himſelfe now, only becauſe of our infirmitie, and his own manner of appearing? which is not yet ſo, but we may bear him in ſuch expreſſions; and yet not ſo in ſuch expreſſions, but we may ſee more of him and his love, and the glory of ſalvation in other expreſſions: and not make up ſuch a love as you commonly doe, of Benevolence and Complacence.

iiforeign, praecipit Ariſt. Top. l. 6. c. 1. foreign.The manner of thoſe that would not have ſomething diſcovered, iskkGen. 31.34. Joſh. 2.6. Acum in acere. Scal. de ſubt. ex. 216.Gen 31:34Josh 2:6 to hide it in a heap of ſome heterogeneous matter. In like manner doe you Sir, your anſwer here to the point charged upon you, in a multitude of impertinent demands; and hook in ſuch things here, (without any removall of it) that belong to another place. It would be but loſt labour, tho it might render you ridiculous, to take the ſubject matter of your ſeverall demands, and by making mediums of them, ſhew how your Aſſertions are proved by them. Letting that paſſe therefore, eſpecialy p. 60dealing with one that renounceth reaſoning, I ſhall return diſtinct anſwers to each of them in order.

1. God may be, and is in ſome things as the ſon of man: for proof whereof I turn you over tollAnſwer, p. 19. mine Anſwer, and the Arguments there uſed: which if you meant to reply to, you ought to refute. Nor is it a ſound reaſoning or good conſequence, God in ſome things, to wit, ſuch as argue ſome imperfection or faultineſſe, is not like unto man, nor can do as man doth; he is not like man mmTit. 1.2.Titus 1:2to lye, or nnNum. 23.19. 1 Sam. 15.29.Num 23:191 Sam 15:29to repent, or oo2 Tim 2.13. foreign, Greg. Naz. ad Eunom. 4. Hae… poſſe, non potentia ſed impotentia eſt. Anſelm. proſol. cap. 7.2 Tim 2:13to deny himſelfe, he cannot lie, or repent, or deny himſelf, as man ſometime doth: Therefore he is in nothing like to man, nor can he do in ought as man doth: Or, therefore hee is not like man in being provoked to wrath by his children, or in chastiſing them when they do amiſſe. Sir, your Logick, had you not left it, or laid it aſide, would have taught you, that**Syllogizari non eſt ex particulari. a particular will not inferre an univerſall; nor one particular an other.

2. Tho there beppJam. 1.17.Jas 1:17 no variableneſſe or ſhadow of change with God in regard of his eſſence, and nature; or in regard of his affection to good or evill, as if at ſome time he ſhould diſlike and diſallow ſin, and at other times like and allow it, yea,qqIbid. v. 13. tempt and incline to it: that which the Apoſtle in thoſe words principally aimed at; which is not commonly obſerved: Yet in regard of his diſpoſition and diſpenſations toward the creature, hee carrieth himſelfe in divers and various waies; hee loved, liked, approved of, and was well pleaſed with thoſe Angels before they fell, while they continued in their originall eſtate, whom yetrr2 Pet. 2.4. Jude 6.2 Pet 2:4Jude 1:6 after their apoſtaſie, hee hated, abhorred, diſapproved, and ſo far forth was diſpleaſed with, as to adjudge unto eternall torments, and throw them headlong into hell.

3. Tho God cannot both love, and not love; (taking love in both members alike) or love and hate; for that implies a contradiction: yet may he**Amat & iraſcitur, dici poteſt: Amat & e…it, dici non poteſt, Aug. homil. 5. & 40. love and be angry too; yea, therefore be be angry, becauſe hee loves. As a father may be very angry with that childe whom hee loves moſt deerly; yea, be the more angry with him, becauſe he loves him ſo deerly.

4. God bothſſPſal. 45.7. Zech. 8.17.Ps 45:7Zech 8:17 hates ſinne, andttPro. 6.16, 19. Pſal. 5.5. & 11.5. Zech. 11.8.Prov 6:16Prov 6:19Ps 5:5Ps 11:5Zech 11:8 hates perſons for ſin: and hates ſin in thoſe alſo whoſe perſons he loves.

5. God is truely and really ſaid to chastiſe his, as parents doe children, by inflicting on them reall and penall things in way of correction for their ſins, therein intending their amendment, and p. 61to make them examples unto others. And hee that intendeth to doe this, had need ſhut his eyes very cloſe, that hee may not diſcerne that bright Sun-ſhine of light, that through the whole word of God ever and anon breaks out, and in moſt conſpicuous manner off…re…h it ſelfe to his eye-ſight, able to pierce and ſtrike through the very eye-lids of thoſe that ſhall ſtrive to wink ſtrongeſt.

6. God m…y be provoked by thoſe very ſins, the guilt whereof is a…oliſhed and done away in Christ; foruuExod. 4.14.Exod 4:14 Moſes his andxx2 Sam. 11.27.2 Sam 11:27 Davids were; and yet was God provoked by them.

7. T…o Chriſt hath taken away all the ſins of his, and by his ſufferings made ſatifaction unto Gods juſtice for them, yet doth it not thence follow, that God therefore cannot either be angry with any of thoſe, for whoſe ſins Chriſt hath ſatisfied; or out of his paternall indignation and diſpleaſure chaſtiſe them for their wilfull overſights and defaults. What hee hath done, we know he can and may doe; and that the one doth no way croſſe the other, nor inferr or enforce a forbearance of the other. Davids ſins, in his adulterie, murther, and numbring the people, were ſatisfied for, and taken away by Chriſt, as well asaaMatt. 26.70, 75.Matt 26:70Matt 26:75 Peters in the denyall of his Maſter, or the ſins of any other Saint; and yet how ſharplybb2 Sam. 12.10, 11, 13, 14. & 24.10, 15.2 Sam 12:102 Sam 12:112 Sam 12:132 Sam 12:142 Sam 24:102 Sam 24:15 God chaſtiſed him for the ſame, hee felt, and byccPſal. 32.3 4. & 38 1, 2, 3. & 51.8, 14.Ps 32:3 his own acknowledgements wee know. Nor can all your ſlie ſhifts ſerve to ſhield you from the guilt of palpable o…ſtinacie, in oppoſing ſo expreſſe and cleer Scripture; or to cover and conceale ei…her the nakedneſſe and ſham…fulneſſe of your cauſe, or the ſhameleſneſſe of your faces in the maintenance of it, and of thoſe things that doe of neceſſity thence enſue. It was not the end of Chriſts ſufferings to free any of thoſe for whom hee ſuffered, from God his and their Fathers uſefull and needfull chaſtiſements, which are profeſſed to proceedddProv. 3.12. Heb 12.6.Prov 3:12Heb 12:6 from his love, and to beeePſ…l 9.12. Heb. 12.10, 11.Ps 50:9Ps 50:12Heb 12:10Heb 12:11 for their good: much leſſe was this the end of his ſatisfaction for their ſins, that they might have the rains let out looſe to them, and ſo to lie on their necks, that they might freely follow the ſwinge of their corrupt nature, or the remainders of it ſtill abiding within them, (which you confeſſe to be ſo powerfull,ffTreat. p. 51, 59, 62. as to carry them oft into the ſame, and thoſe great ſins) without check or controll. But Sir, what this doctrine tends to, all men may ſoon ſee; and as well thoſe that abhorre p. 62it, as thoſe that are willing with open arms to entertain it. Nor have any cauſe to wonder, that all ſorts of looſe people doe by whole ſhoals flock to, and run after thoſe that teach it. In many of whom, what dreadfull and diſmall effects it hath had, tho I could give hideous inſtances, yet I forbear to relate, and proceed to the reſt of your demands.

8. I apprehend not any allegory yea or alluſion in the words, As a father, &…. Whether you underſtand thereby thoſe words cited by mee, inggAnſwer, p. 19. mine Animadverſion on your eighth Aſſertion, which you ſeeem here to be nibling at,hhPſa. 103.13.Ps 103:13 As a father pities his children; ſo the Lord pitieth them that fear him: or whether you have an eye to thoſe of Solomon; iiProv. 3.12.Prov 3:12Whom the Lord loves, hee chaſtiſeth; as the father doth the ſon whom hee delights in. The ſame with that of Moſes, kkDeut. 8.5.Deut 8:5As a man chaſteneth his ſon, ſo the Lord thy God chaſteneth thee. And indeed, what allegory or alluſion is there in either? What Scholer is there ſo ſimple, that is not able to diſtinguiſh between either an alluſion or an allegory, and a direct, plain, and expreſſe ſimilitude? But Mr. S. it ſeems, together with his Logick, that does him ſo many ſhrewd turns, hath caſt off all his School-learning, that hee may the better comply with thoſe Sectaries, who with open mouth cry it all down in theſe daies.

9. That anger is in proprietie of ſpeech given unto God, tho both Stoicks and Epicures of oldllNec bene premeritis capitur, nec tangitur ira, Lucr. l. 1. & 2. denied it, is bymmIta eo ſenſu, quo Scripturae dant illam Deo, vere & proprie ei attribuitur. Zanc. de attri. lib. 4. c. 6. q. 1. Theſ. 1. Deus peccatoribus tam electis qam reprobis iraſcitur. Ib. Theſ. 2.1 Thess 1 ſome good Divines avowed. But not to ſtand upon that, but leave it to diſpute in the Schooles. Albeit that anger be not ſuch in God, as it is in man, no more then love or hatred; which yet are not denied to be ſpoken properly of God: and indeed, if the one, (which I ſuppoſe no man ever doubted of) by neceſſary conſequence then the other: Yet the effects of anger, as well as of love and hatred, may be, and are the ſame uſually with God, that they are with men. As men out of love doe good to thoſe whom they love; and out of anger and diſpleaſure chaſtiſe thoſe whom they are diſpleaſed with; andnnGen. 27.41. 2 Sam. 13.22, 28. Qem qiſqe odit, periiſſe expetit, Cic. Offic. l. 2. 1 Joh. 3.15.Gen 27:412 Sam 13:222 Sam 13:281 John 3:15 ſeek to deſtroy thoſe whom they hate: ſo doth God likewiſeooPſal. 11.7.Ps 11:7 do good to thoſe whom hee loves; andppPſal. 89.32.Ps 89:32 chaſtiſeth thoſe whom hee is diſpleaſed with; andqqPſal. 5.5, 6. & 11.5, 6.Ps 5:5Ps 5:6Ps 11:5Ps 11:6 deſtroyes thoſe whom hee hates. Which (tho you ſeem bold enough to ſay any thing to ſupport your own principles, yet Ile hope) you dare not deny.

p. 6310. What you tell us in an intricate diſcourſe, like a man in a wood, that hath loſt himſelfe, and knows not how to get out, of expreſſions diverſe in the old Teſtament and in the New, is idle and frivolous, and not at all to the purpoſe. For,

1. Thoſe expreſſions and actions of this kinde, recorded in the old Teſtament, were not meer fictions and fancies, as you would make them; as if God were not at all diſpleaſed with David for his adultery, nor was it indeed at all evill in his eye, (as of Abrahams deniall of his wife your brother Eaton rrHony-comb, c. 5. p. 79, 80.affirms) but that hee made ſome ſhew or ſemblance onelyonly, as if hee were offended; when as yet hee liked well enough what David had done, or was not, at leaſt in regard of it, the leſſe pleaſed with him. But Sir, the Scripture expreſly tels us, thatſſ2 Sam. 11.27.2 Sam 11:27 the thing that David had done was evill in Gods eyes: and David himſelfe found and felt to his ſmart, that Gods diſpleaſure toward him was no imaginary matter, but the fruits and effects of it reall arguments of tru wrath.

2. The very ſame expreſſions are found in the new Teſtament: and it is extreme impudence for any man to denie it; the proofs of it are ſo pregnant. Which beingttAnſ. p. 18, 19. in mine Anſwer, ſome of them repreſented unto you, you diſſemble: and after your uſuall manner, both here and elſe-where, having jumpt clean over the premiſſes, give a ſnap at the Concluſion; or faſten your fang on the Propoſition in queſtion, not regarding, or taking notice at all of the proof.

As for the diſtinction between Love of benevolence, and love of complacence, it is ſufficient for you to jeer it: you do not ſo much as attempt to refute or remove it. But this is the uſuall manner of your reply both here and elſe-where.

But wee paſſe on to your new demands, tending to the juſtification of your fourth Aſſertion, and the removall of mine Animadverſion on it.

uuReply p. 12.Did David or Peter, ſay you, make up their peace with God by repentance? Is there any that makes peace but one Jeſus Chriſt, who makes peace through the bloud of his croſſe? Can repentance make peace? Is there any ſacrifice for ſin but that which was once offered, and is called by the Apoſtle xxHebr. 9.28. & 10.12.Heb 9:28Heb 10:12one ſacrifice for ſin for ever?

I anſwer, 1. David and Peter did both of them make up again that breach that they had made between God and them p. 64by their ſins, and did make their peace again with God by their repentance. If you will not believ mee herein, you may believyyPſal. 32.5.Ps 32:5 Davia himſelf, if you ſo pleaſe: and you muſt give us leave to beleeve him whether you will or no.

2. Chriſt is the onelyonly peace-maker, who zzCol. 1.20.Col 1:20by the bloud of his croſſe hath made our peace, by aaEph. 2.14, 15.Eph 2:14Eph 2:15aboliſhing the enmity that was between God and us. And yet in that peace ſo purchaſed, without faith, repentance, and new obedience can no man have any part.

3. By renewed repentance, ſuchbb2 Sam. 24.17, 25. 1 Chro. 21.16, 17, 27.2 Sam 24:172 Sam 24:251 Chr 21:161 Chr 21:171 Chr 21:27 breaches may be made up, and peace repaired, in regard of Gods fatherly diſpleaſure, that beleevers have contracted by their ſins.

4. There isccHeb. 9.26, 28Heb 9:26Heb 9:28 no ſacrifice for ſin, whereby the condemning guilt of it is, or can be removed, or ſatisfaction is, or can be made unto the juſtice of God for it, but that of Chriſt only: and yet isddPſal. 51.17.Ps 51:17 a broken heart, and a contrite ſpirit ſuch a ſacrifice as finds acceptance with God, as well in theſe times as in Davids dayes. And Sir, if you goe on to teach men, as you doe, otherwiſe; you diſſwade them from that which God himſelf is ſaid toee2 Chron. 7.13, 14.2 Chr 7:132 Chr 7:14 expect, andffPſal. 34.18. & 51.17.Ps 34:18Ps 51:17 accept of, and which hee himſelf doth profeſſe toggIſa. 57.15. & 66.2.Isa 57:15Isa 66:2 reſpect, andhhPſa. 147.11.Ps 147:11 delight in.

But you adde a little further, to gratifie us herein, thatiiReply, ibid. Repentance, obedience, &c. may make way for the peace made already for ſin, that is, in ſuch working of ſpirit, the love of God in the face of Jeſus Chriſt may ſhine upon the ſoul more freely and fully; and the more the ſpirit abounds in the fruits of it, the more joy and peace flows into the ſoul, and the more the ſoul looks Chriſt in the face; ſo as peace with God is not made, but more revealed by the Spirit in obedience and love, &c.

Sir, You heap up, after your wonted manner, many words, little or nothing at all to what is objected to you, or againſt you; but much wilde diſcourſe beſide the mark or the matter, to lead your Reader aſide from attending the preſent diſpute. The Queſtion is, Whether God be not truly diſpleaſed with a believer fallen into wilfull groſſe ſins, and whether hee were not ſo with David upon ſome of his ſins, untill hee was humbled for them, and repented of them. And what is all this that you tell us of here, roving to and fro, as one that were treading a maze, unto the refuting of ought that is objected againſt you, or the making good of ought aſſerted by you, whereunto exception is here taken.

p. 65In the next place you paſſe from your fourth Aſſertion excepted againſt, to the ſeventh; skipping over, among other things, that of which it wil not be amiſſe to mind, if not your ſelf, yet the Reader; to wit, that

kkTreat. p. 44.Nothing can trouble the quiet & peace of any ſoul, but the taking in of the law, and the accuſings and condemnations of it. And that

llIbid.All trouble for ſin ariſeth from the obligement of the Law demanding ſatisfaction of the ſoul for the breach of it.

Which doctrine, how wholeſome it is, let others judge. I repeat not again what I havemmAnſ. p. 18. there ſaid to it.

Out of mine Animadverſion on his ſeventh Aſſertion, hee culs out this a little to dally with, that I ſay,

nnAnſ. p. 19.God loves us alſo for his own graces in us, and our exerciſes of the ſame.

And having picked out of it a principall particle, the word alſo, (which made the Propoſition adverſe to his, wherein hee denies, thatooTreat. p. 80. God loves us for ought in our ſelves: which yet by expreſſe teſtimony of Scripture I there ſhew to be agreeable to truth) that ſo hee may find ſomewhat to cavill with; hee thus replies,

ppRep. p. 12, 95.I thought hee had loved us too in himſelf: and from that love given Chriſt for us; and yet loved us in Chriſt too. Can any thing without God be a cauſe of Gods love,? Doth God love us as we love one another, from complexions and features without? Or loves hee not rather thus? God is love, and therefore wee are made, and redeemed, and ſanctified: not becauſe wee are ſanctified, therefore hee loves us. Wee love him becauſe he firſt loved us: hee loved us, becauſe he loved us; and not becauſe we love him, not becauſe of any ſpirituall complexion or feature in us, becauſe of his image upon us: that is but an earneſt of his love to us, that is onelyonly given us, becauſe hee loved us. He loves us from his will, not from without; for tho wee are like him, yet we are not himſelf: and he loves us as in Chriſt and himſelf.

Sir, tho you have left your Logick, yet you have not loſt your Rhetorick: How plentifull can you be in the proving of that that no body denies you; and in dilating of your own denied Aſſertions; not once offering to anſwer the objections made againſt them?

For Sir, whatſoever you thought heretofore, or think ſtill, p. 66I do not think it, but am ſure of it, that you do nothing here but trifle, in ſetting up an imaginary oppoſition,qqforeign, Plato leg. l. 8. foreign. Lucian. de Sect. a man of ſtraw of your own making, and then exerciſing your ſelf in ſhooting ſome ſhafts at it, as if you wanted other work.

But You had thought that God had loved us too in himſelfe. And good Sir, keep you ſtill in that thought. Who queſtioneth you for it? Who ever denied it? Or what is it to my Propoſition, if you reſtore mee my ſtollen goods, if you return it again what you filcht out of it? And yet as you propound it, it is no whit inconſiſtent with that which to no purpoſe you give us your thoughts of. For tho my Propoſition, as I delivered it, contradicted your Aſſertion; yet as your ſelf have now framed it, it is not at all diſproved by that which in theſe words you oppoſe againſt it. God may love us for his graces, and yet love us in himſelf. This ſhaft therefore, tho a ſound one, doth not ſo much as ſtrike at, much leſſe faſten on, or pierce the mark that you ſet up to ſhoot at, the man that your ſelf made to encounter with.

Some other rotten reedy ones there are, that you make uſe of here, which though they hit it, yet they hurt it not; they hurt no body but your ſelf.

For it is not true that you ſay, that God doth not love us becauſe wee are ſanctified: nor doth hee love us becauſe wee love him. And did you not profeſſe to have given over your Logick, I might tell you, that theſe are no good conſequences: God loves us before wee love him: Therefore hee doth not rrLibenter Dei amor noſtrum, quem praevenit, ſubſeqitur. Bern. Ep. 107.love us when wee love him, even for the loving of him. And, God ſanctified us becauſe hee loved us; hee loves us not therefore when wee are holy, becauſe wee are holy, and becauſe wee are lovely, which before ſſAmarus eſt non amandus. Idem de Deo dilig.wee were not. For what hindreth, but that the ſame effect of love may become an object of that love, whereof it was at firſt an effect? tt1 John 4.10.1 John 4:10God loves us before wee love him, without reſpect to ought in us: anduuIbid. v. 17. wee love him becauſe hee ſo loved us: and God loves us again for our loving of him. And this our Saviour himſelf aſſures us of, as you were toldxxAnſ p. 19. before; and I am compelled again to mind you of, becauſe like one of thoſe, who have no very gracefull title given them in the Schools, you deny the cloſe of the Argument, and diſpute againſt the Concluſion; letting the forepart, the promiſſes, wherein the proof of it conſiſts, ſtand untoucht p. 67and unſpoken to. For our bleſſed Saviour in expreſſe words tels us, not onelyonly thatyyPro. 8.17.Prov 8:17 hee loves thoſe that love him; but thatzzJoh 16.27.John 16:27 the Father loves them, becauſe they love him, and believ on him: as hee ſaith elſe-where of himſelf, thataaJohn 10.17.John 10:17 Therefore the Father loved him, becauſe hee laid down his life for his ſheep. Thus you ſee Sir, how either for want of Logick, or for ſome ſelfiſh humour, you ſtick not again to give our Saviour the lie, tho you were formerly told of it; and your work here ſhould have been, either the cleering your ſelf if you could, or (which had been the better and more Chriſtian courſe) the crying peccavi, and confeſſing your fault; rather then the troubling of your ſelf and your Readers with a tedious diſcourſe and needleſſe diſpute about a fained oppoſition of your own ſetting up, by mangling of my Propoſition; and attracting a further guilt by a renewed oppoſition in more direct terms to our Saviours own expreſſe Aſſertion.

As ſilly a ſhift, and ſorry a ſhaft is that that enſueth: that tho wee are like him, yet wee are not himſelf: And what then? Cannot God therefore love us for his image in us? Yea, but the reaſon annexed will (I hope) make all cock-ſure: Hee loves us as in Chriſt, and himſelfe. I may ſtill ask, and what then? for this is alſo as little to the purpoſe as the reſt.

It is true indeed that you ſay, God loves us not as wee love one another, from complexion and feature without: forbb1 Sam. 16.7.1 Sam 16:7 God ſees not as man ſees, as hee ſometime told Samuel: Man looks on the outward appearance; but God looks on the heart. And doth hee not love therefore for complexions and features within?ccPſal. 11.7.Ps 11:7 The Lord is righteous, and loves righteouſneſſe; and theddPſal. 146.5.Ps 146:5 righteous for their righteouſneſſe. And hee eePſ. 147.10, 11.Ps 147:10Ps 147:11delights, tho not in an horſes ſtrength, or in any mans legs, yet in thoſe that fear him, and truſt in his mercy. For what, think wee, but for that their fear of him, and confidence in him? and for what hee delights in them, for that ſure hee loves them: for how can hee delight in that that hee loves not? But I fear, I may juſtly incurre blame and cenſure, for ſpending time, and waſting words, in labouring to prove that by argument, ffSiquidem videtur hoc eſſe, qod Plut. foreign. Quale enim eſt, die non eſſe contentum, niſi igniculus aliqis alluxerit? Aut qod poteſt in hac …laritate habere ſcintilla momentum, Sep. Ep. 92.which our Saviour himſelf hath ſo expreſſely averred, as if his word were not of it ſelfe all-ſufficient p. 68proof for it, and able to bear down all contrary cavils; and attract that guilt that I charge Mr. S. with, in endeavouringggIn rebus apretis argumentari, tam eſt ſtultum, quam in clariſſimum Solem …umen inferre, Fabius lib. 1. cap. 13. Et Fabio prior Ariſtoteles, foreign, Stob. cap. 4. by reaſon upon reaſon to confirm that, which, till theſe dayes, no man in his right wits and ſober minde, ever made doubt of, much leſſe denied. But you ſee what exigences mens prodigious conceits, and their obſtinacie in them enforceth us unto.

Yet one thing, I confeſſe wee are here beholden to him for; but that I doubt, hee wiſheth it had not dr…pt out of his pen. Hee ſaith, that Gods image upon us, is an earnest of his love to us; onelyonly given us, becauſe hee loved us. For if Gods image renewed in us, be an earneſt of his love to us; then may it give us good aſſurance of his love. For to what end is …n earneſt given, but to aſſure the party to whom it is given of that whereof it is an earneſt? and …hen ſanctification by his own ground and grant here, is a ſound and ſure evidence of juſt fi…ation; unleſſe any man will undertake to give better aſſurance then Gods earnest. And yet with what baſe, broad, and opprobrious terms this aſſurance hath been vilified and reproached by him, ſhall in his due place appear. But thus the adverſaries of Gods truth are ſometime by a ſecret providence induced, ere they are aware, to give teſtimonie thereunto.

Concerning your eighth Aſſ…rtion, and the Animadverſion on it, which you were pidling with a little before, you return us here nothing more then you there …ad, ſave a Magiſt…ri…ll and cenſorious reprehenſion of all others beſide your ſelf and thoſe of your ſide, in theſe words:

hhRep. p. 12, 13.Whereas you ſay, G d is as man, and as a Father: I hope you mean not as in him… lf, but as in his wayes of ſpeaking and appearing to us; and if ſo, we are agreed. But your taking things more in the letter then in the ſpirit, makes your divinity leſſe divine, and your conceptions more like things of men, then of God. This makes the glory …f the G…ſp…l ſo legall and carnall, when wee riſe no higher then the ba…e l…tter of Scripture, not the inſpiration by which it came: All Scripture being given by inſpiration.

Where Sir, 1. You mangle my ſayings after your wonted guiſe. I ſay onelyonly,iiAnſ. p. 19. In ſome things hee is as man: and what I ſay, I render reaſons for, more then one; and inſtance in ſuch things as you oppoſe: all which you take no notice of. A p. 69worthy manner of replying: ſuch as the meaneſt, I ſay not, Scholar, but perſon whatſoever of common capacity, might well be aſhamed of.

2. I ſhew that hee is ſo; not in wayes of ſpeaking and appearing onelyonly, as you ſpeak, (as if in deed and truth hee were nothing leſſe then what hee ſeemed to be, and in ſuch ſpeakings were pretended) but in reality and truth.

3. Cleer your ſelf if you can, from guilt of blaſphemie, for averring, thatkkExod. 34 6.Exod 34:6 God in way of ſpeaking and appearance only proclaimed himſelf to Moſes, a God mercifull, and gracious, ſlow to wrath, and abundant in goodneſſe and truth: and that Moſes in way of ſpeaking and appearance onelyonly told the people, what ſo ſeriouſly hee adviſed them tollD…ut. 8.5. conſider, that as a man chaſteneth his ſon, ſo God chaſtened them: And that the Pſalmiſt ſpake in the like ſtrain, when hee ſaith,mmPſa. 103.13.Ps 103:13 As a father pitieth his children, ſo the Lord pitieth thoſe that fear him; for that is the inſtance I there bring, which you were nibling at here before.

4. Sir, we dare not allegorize the Scriptures, where the letter of it yeelds us a cleer and proper ſenſe: much leſſe expect ſuch new inſpirations as the Enthuſiaſts of our times, whom you ſeem over-much to comply with, pretend, that they may obtrude on us their vain and profane fancies in ſtead of Gods ſacred Oracles.

5. What you conclude with, that Scripture was given by inſpiration, who denies? but what followeth thence, I beſeech you? that therefore wee muſt riſe higher then the letter of the Scripture, and expect ſome new revelation for the raiſing of ſome other ſpirituall ſenſe of it then the letter will afford? This is a way to drawnnQod de Rabbinis Judaicis, Conſtant. Emperat. ad Dan. 10.1. De noſtris etiam qibuſdam, Sixt. Amam. videndus Antibarb. Bibl. l. 1. err. 7. pag. 256. &c.Dan 10:1 quidlibet ex quolibet, and to make the ScriptureooNaſum cereum, uti Pontificii. a noſe of wax, that men may wind and turn which way they liſt, as their quaint fancies and wanton wits are pleaſed to play with it: for Sir, was notpp2 Tim. 3.16.2 Tim 3:16 every parcell of Scripture, whether Hiſtoricall or Doctrinall, given by inſpiration, as well as any one of it? But this is not unlike that idle dotage of the Jewiſh Doctors, who tell us, that**Menach. in Gen. 29.Gen 29 every Scripture hath ſeventy ſeverall faces or ſenſes: and the Popiſh conceit of four ſeverall ſorts of interpretation of Scripture; which our Writers do juſtly oppoſe.

Nor could I therefore, I confeſſe, without much grief of p. 70mind, yea and ſome kind of godly (I hope) indignation, read what I lately lighted on, among ſome Treatiſes of a Proteſtant Writer of no ſmall note, lately publiſhed; aqqL. C. Exercitatio ad locum Zoharis. large diſcourſe, wherein this myſticall manner of expounding plain and hiſtoricall paſſages of Scripture by I know not what analogicall and allegoricall ſenſes, is not juſtified onelyonly, but highly commended: and a great deale of pains taken in relating, tranſlating, and unfolding, for a pattern thereof, a moſt abſurd, ridiculous, and putid explication, or profanation rather, of ſomerrGen. 2.4, 5, 6Gen 2:4Gen 2:5Gen 2:6 few verſes in a paſſage of Moſes concerning the creation, taken out of one of thoſe Jewiſh brainſick, and fantaſticall Writers. And truly, I could not but wonder not a little, that one of that learning and piety, that I preſume him to be of, nor dare otherwiſe to deem, (and whom ever ſince I have been acquainted with his Writings, I have ever in either regard reverendly eſteemed, and ſtill ſhall) could induce his minde to undertake ſuch a work, as to commend to ſtudents in Divinity that courſe and practice, wherein hee could not but know, how fouly divers of the Ancients had failed and faulted, and whereby ſome of them had taken occaſion to broach and bring in many erroneous, both fond and impious conceits: or could endure to waſte ſo much precious time and ſerious ſtudy, in beating out and laying open that intricate texture and prolix train of moſt uncouth and unſavoury fancies, wherewith that addle-headed Writer hath cloyed and clogged that Scripture; the very bare reading whereof were enough to turn any judicious mans ſtomack, and alone ſufficient to make a religious ſpirit zealous and jealous of preſerving Gods ſacred oracles in their genuine purity and ſimplicity, to abhorre and abomitate ſuch irreverent and irreligious abuſe of them, in writhing and wrigling them to and fro, as ſomeſſNihil qaerendum in verbis, niſi loqentium voluntas, cui demonſtrandae invigilare debent omnes veridici enarratores, Aug. de conſ. Evang. lib. 2. cap. 46. Myſterium ex rebus qibuſvis obviis & apertis effodere, eorum eſt qi via hominum pervulgata ſapere faſtidiunt, qae res ſaepe excidit in febriculoſam putiditatem. Cun. de Rep. Hebr. lib. 3. cap. 5. puppet-like artifice, to make them expreſſe varietie of forms and ſhapes, as ſuch did, this one while, and that another, things as much diſcrepant one from another, as all of them from the truth of the text: and**foreign, Marc. Imp. l. 7. Sect. 3. qae nervorum, ſive verticillorum opera pro tractantis arbitrio attracta citaqe varias ſubinde figuras exprimebant. De his Ariſt. nom. de mund. c. 6. Xenoph. in Sympoſ. Petron. in Satyr. wringing that out of them, that they p. 71neither ſpeak directly, nor by juſt conſequence flows from them, nor can be proved ever to havettLitera ſua…iter excutienda & non more captivorum acerbe torquenda, donec reſtituat, qod non accepit. Joan. Sarisb. Metalog. l. 3. c. 1. been intended in them. This I thought good to give an item of by the way, the rather, becauſe I perceive too much liberty in theſe licentious times taken by divers, and the people much applauding them, who play and dally with Scripture, to fiſh and fetch out of it ſome abſtruſe myſteries, and ſtrange crotchets, beyond ordinary apprehenſion; dealing nothing ſo religiouſly with Gods word, as any ſober-minded man would doe with any humane Autor of any profeſſion,uuInterpretis profeſſio eſt, non qo ipſe diſertus appareat, ſed qo eum qi lecturus eſt, faciat intelligere, qomodo ipſe intellexit, qi ſcripſit. Hieron. ad Marcel. de Rhet. Commentatoris officium eſt, non qid ipſe velit, ſed qid ſentiat ille quem interpretatur, exponere. Idem de Jovin. Apolog. 1. whom hee were to open and expound. As for your abuſe Sir, of this Scripture teſtimony concerning Scripture, were but your words brought into a Syllogiſticall form, it would plainly appear how impertinently and ridiculouſly it is by you here produced. And for your cenſure paſt on our way of handling Scripture, I will ſay no more but this, that if wee ſhould take that courſe of dealing with Scripture, that your ſelf and ſome of yours do, our Divinitie would not onelyonly be leſſe divine, but much more fantaſticall then (wee bleſſe God for it) as yet it is.

From theſe Aſſertions you paſſe to others excepted againſt, which are ſpecially concerning Faith.

The firſt whereof is this, that

wwTreat. p. 94.Faith is truly and ſimply this, A being perſwaded more or leſſe of Chriſts love.

This being excepted againſt as containing no more then any man, the wickedeſt and moſt profane may have: and indeed, who almoſt hath not? Your Reply is only in a poor chiding way; that no whit ſalves the looſneſſe and unſoundneſſe of ſuch a libertiniſh and licentious Aſſertion; thus:

xxRepl. p. 13. Sect. 6.I pray you miſtake not. Can all beleeve from the Spirit? Can all be more or leſſe ſpiritually perſwaded? Doe I ſpeak of any perſwaſion of Chriſts love which is not ſpirituall? Deceive not your ſelf nor your Reader, nor wrong your Author. Or do I ſpeak of Faith abſtracted from all Repentance, Obedience? &c. Why deal you thus?

1. Sir, all your pitifull complaint of wrong done you is idle and frivolous. I wrong you not, I miſrelate you not: but give you your own words entirely as I find them in you. If any other miſtake you, and by miſtaking of you be incouraged to ſooth p. 72up themſelves with a vain conceit of being poſſeſſed of true faith, when indeed there is no ſuch matter; your ſelf is to be blamed, who by ſuch ſpeeches as theſe give ground to ſuch a pernicious error, by not ſpeaking your mind more fully and plainly, (if you meant one thing and ſpake another;) and ſtand guilty of the bloud of the ſouls of ſuch as ſhall, or may periſh by ſuch miſtake.

2. If when you profeſſe to deliver your minde truly and plainly, yet you mean otherwiſe then you ſpeak, and ſpeak otherwiſe then you mean, (as it was ſaid of a couple,yyPontificem nunqam qod diceret facere, Valentinum nunqam qod faceret dicere, Guicciard. l. 1. the father and the ſon, of no very good note either) how ſhall we know when your ſpeeches and your meanings concur?

3. Can all believ from the Spirit? No Sir, none can believ from the Spirit, but thoſe alone that believ from Gods word. But many, that have no ground of belief from Gods word, but from ſuch principles as without warrant from it, you and yours infuſe into them, nor ever had ought of Gods ſpirit in them, may yet have ſuch a perſwaſion as you here mention. And wee therefore tax this for an unſound Aſſertion, and a rotten principle, the ſame term that youzzTreat. p. 85. brand ſome notes of Aſſurance with, which yet you cannot but confeſſe to be found in Gods word. And to mend the matter, you afterward tell us, thataaTreat. p. 92. none ought to qeſtion whether they believ or not: and ſo diſſwade thoſe that have ſwallowed down this your poyſonfull principle, from examining whether their faith be true and ſound or no. And it is an abſurd thing for you to ask, whether you ſpeak of any perſwaſion of Chriſts love that is not ſpirituall, when not onelyonly you ſay, perſwaſion in generall, making no mention of ſpirituall, but forbid any to try it, whether it be ſpirituall or no.

4. But, Can all be more or leſſe ſpiritually perſwaded?

1. Where is that ſpiritually in your text? If it were in your breſt, as a ſecret reſerv, (which is yourbbRepl pag. 2. Sect. 1, 4. vain plea concerning ſome words of mine abuſed by you, where you were as by the finger pointed to my meaning, not concealed, but expreſſed) like a back-door, or a ſtarting hole, for you to ſlip out at, when occaſion ſhould be, and your ſelf cloſely purſued, and hard preſſed with it: You doe but juggle with us, and delude your Reader, that you may make our doctrine herein not complying with yours, to bee deemed too ſtrict, as deviſed on purpoſe to pinch p. 75men andccTreat. p. 37. keep them in pain, to make the cure after the more admired.