(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
See other formats

Full text of "Of saving faith: that it is not only gradually, but specifically distinct from all common faith. The agreement of Richard Baxter with that very learned consenting adversary, that hath maintained my assertion by a pretended confutation in the end of Sarjeant Shephards book of Sincerity and hypocrisie. With the reasons of my dissent in some passages that came in on the by. Together with his addition to the seventh impression of The Saints everlasting rest .."


■ < V- 

\ V 

TM ■;/',■;■'.!■/■.' 




V / 


' \ 


Saving Faith: 

That -it \s not only gradually^ 

kft^ecifically diftincfl from all 
Comnion F a i t h. 

The Agreement of ^charj Baxter with 

m that very Learned confentingAdver^ 
iflyjt, that hath maintained my A ffertion by a 
pietctkled Confutation in the end of Serjeant 
fhep^arels^ook of Sincerity ztid Byjjocrifie, 

With^thfi^ JReafons of my Diffent in 
fomc paffages that came in on the by. 

T<>gether with his Addition to thcfeventh Im- 
tteffiot^of %\\^$MintsBverUjling REST, 

\ : — -— -^ — — — - — • 

:JDr, PrtftcnCcUtnScepttr , pag. 210. [ OhjiH. U feenH then that 
, the Knowledge of a carnal man and a regenerate man differ but 
V in Degrees, notinKind. ] Anf^. The want of Degrees here 
^ akers the kind $ as in Numbers the Addition of a Degree alters 

ibc Species. 
R««d this point pradically improved in Mr. Pinl^s excellent Sermons 
>' " rcirtLtvetcChrift, on Luke i4,^6,pag.i.Sindpsg.$i.(^c. 

/ 6* A^^jpSiV, Printed by iJ. W^.for Ntvil Simmons^ Bookfeller \n / 
Temfmirffter.&nd are to be fold by fohn Star key at the Jitter J 
at the Weft end of P^w/.f Church. 1658. 

i* «M^ *<&^ 



To the Worthy and much Honoured 
a5VfV. W^ S^ Serjeant at Larp^ . 

S I R, 

pU have very much honoured me m the 
' choice of an Opponent .• but I perceive 
by his Conclufion that he hath other 
bufinefsjand I am not altogether with- 
out. And therefore I intreat you the 
•next time to choofc me an Adverfary 
that differs from mc, or to give me leave to live at 
Peace. Or if he differ not, let him rather reprehend 
me for agreeing with him , than pretend a difference 
where there is none. If your learned Friend do think 
it as well worth his labor to prove us difagreed, as I 
thought it worth mine to prove us of a mind > if I live 
I (hall be willing to read what he rcjoyns^ but if 
it come not of a greater Errand , I'lc promife you 
no more. A s to your own pious Labors, they are fo 
honeft andfavoryto me, that they tempted me to 
differ from you in one thing, arfd tothink thatQ an 
Hypocrite cannot write or preach as well as a good 
Chriflian can]there being an unexprefsible Spiritua- 
litVfthat I favcurin fome men more thenothers ; but 

A 2 rie 

T^he Epi/lleVedicatory. 

rie not ftand to this. You give at leaft as much to the 
Hypocrite I think as ever I did ; and you confirm ic 
by much Scripture-evidence. But I muft confcfs I 
th'nknot that all your Notesof (incerity areexador 
wil» hold the Tryal •, but yec they be nfefull in many 
Cafes. You affirm that Hypocrites have common 
Giace, even to the height expreflcd by you; but 
you fay, It is not true Grace .Either its Grace or no 
Grace : if none, call it not common Grace,(or com- 
mon Faith, Defire, HopCj Love Joy* if it be none. ) 
But if it be Grace, and not true Grace, then Ens cJ* 
P^eruw non convert untttr* I maintain that it'is not true 
faving Grace , but yet true common Grace : You 
maintain in the general that it is not true Grace, and 
yet its truly common Grace : There being then no 
Controverfie that I fee to be difputed between you 
and me, but whether£»x eJ* Ferftm convertuntur ^ I 
crave pardon for my further filence, refolving rather 
to give you the beft( though not to aJTcnt) than to 
difputeit : I remain 

A greatEfteemer of your Piety 
and many .Labors, 

^^fejjs"^'' Richard Baxter. 

Rqider, Ifuppofe thtt to have tht Book 4l hanJUfhich I hen 
deal with : and therefore have recited hut the fttm anifrincifal 
Fajfages^andnot every ^ord ; which thoH maiji read in the Book 




The Contents. 

lECT. I. ThtOccafionefthU Controvirftt.An 
Apolegitfer this friesMy conftntipg Adverfarj^ 
to them that are lik^e to he ojendeA mth a pretend- 
ed difference where there is none. ">' • ^ 
ScA. 2. Our Agreement: The fertinencfof 
wylropertinencies. Whether it Vfamot fomt 
falfe Tranfcript of mj wordt^ that the learned Opponent ^ae 
put to confute ? The true Reafen of my words in the Saints 
Reft Vphichhe Writes again f, nith the mexning of them. Of 
mj Improprieties and incongruities. The point feigned to h 
mine , ^hich I exprtfly wrote againfl , and frequently, fol . 9 
St6t. 3. whether A^lt of common <j race e^e Evangelically 
good ? t/^ifout thefiating of the ^effion. Whether becaufe 
common andfpecial Qracefpecificallji differ in Moralitj/Jit fol- 
lo^t that they cannot congruoujly he f aid to dtffer only gradte- 
ally in any othtr confederation ? Nothing lo^er than a predo- 
minant degree in the matter it capable of the moral form of 
faving Faith^Love^ &c.in fpccic. fol 1 5 
Scd . 4. Whether Grace be at properly and primarily in the AB as 
in the tiabit ?and which goes firfi , which iafirji to be enquired 
after ? In what principles of habitual Grace it is that f pedal 
• and common Grace or Faith be only acquired by natural abilt^ 
ties ^tth good Education and Indufhj^ or to be infufed or 
"brought by the Spirit as fpecial Grace is} fol . 2 o 
S«d. 5. Whether common Faith be Life ? Why not fo called ? 
whether Every Degree of accidental forms denominate the 
SubjeB ? A further Explication of my meaning in this (^on- 
troverfie. fol. 31 
ScA. 6, whither the leafl fpecial Grace be not flronger than the 
grtateft common (jrace ? Whether the Temporaries Ajfentbt 
proportionable to the hltdiums that produce it ? Whether the 
. fhjfical forms can be named that fptcifit eemtHtn and fpecial 

A i graces? 

The Contents; 

Grace ? Intuitien of (pici/il Faith rwe of thi Mffertnotl 
Common Gract pre f are* h and difpoftth for fpecial Graced 
Argumeyitsfor the contrary anf^erej. Calvinsj Qualecunq; 
femen Hdei perdunc* ]] fVhtthtr thofe that have common 
(jrace.or tkofe that have it not^are more ordinarily converted^ 
what I mean hj common grace. The Concil. Araufic. againfi 
them t hit make common Grace to he meerly acquired by our 
[elves \ hut not againji any thing that I fay. Ho^far common 
grace thus dijpofeth to (pecial ? Thti Di^ofit ion further pre 
ved. The lofmg of common grace proves not the ffecificl^ 
d'fferenci, ^01,35 

Seft. 7. fFhsther it may he a faving Faith that takes the Scripm 
tare to he Gods TVerd<, hut upon prohahle motives or mediums ? 
ylnd whether the mediums here prove the fpecifick difference ? 
iVhether the immediate Revelation of the holy Qhofihe a Prf 
m'tfeyor UU/.edium, fpecifyi»g faving Faith ? And^hether all 
other he fallible and humane} Ten Reafons to prove that fuch a 
Revelation as is in quejiiony is not necejfary^ ( nor ordinarily 
exijient.) fol.50 

Se^. 8. fFhet her Hypocrites have no premifes for Faitht but 
fuch as are humane, dubious and fallible ? Six Reafons to prove 
that they h^ve better. Mere of the non-neceffity of demonflra- 
tive or infallible certain mediums, or evidence to prove the 
Scripture Gods word, as to the being of true Faith, ff^hether 
Fa'th he argumentative, crafimpie Adhejion, or Ajfiance ? 
Faith anatomized^ at to its divers ACis and ZJfes ,?« anf^er to 
this que fiion. fol.56 

Sed. 9. It is no Article of faving Faith, nor divine Faith at 
alii ( much lefs proving a fpecifick, d'jference )that I, A. B. am 
aBually]tiJiified,freed,pardoned,a^optedf and an Heir of He a 
vent proved by f^enty Reafons. fol.6^; 

Sed. 10. ^ made not Love ( ftriBly take** ) (he form of Faith 
That Affiance is in the rvill as well as in the Intelle^- Th 
enquiry made as of four fortsof Bdief I. l^he Belief of dizi 
Biftory, or Truth meerly as fuch. 2. Of dizine7 hreatmrgs. 
3 . Of divine PromifeSt &c. in general, 4. Of the Go/pel in 
fpecial. of ninefeveral AEis in the third^and ten in the fourth, 
apparent in the Anatomy . The ABs of Affiance in faving 


The Contents. 

JPahhi Ont on^Uat Tromfir crRevtalgr: Thi cthtr on 
Cltrifioi Sdviowr, 2{jnt of thefe i4 the Tinophorit Vehieh 
Rob. 'QAtOTxaaandttttOppontntfleAdagainfi. fol.72 

Sc&. II. Tht Prpttfttntt defended for placing AffiAKce or 
Tfufi in tht Will. Baronius'j rft^fl Arguments producUby 
the Oppotnt^ refelfed. Difference how far in the Will. There 
ii aliqoid fpei & amoris in Aj/ianee or Faith ^ and jetFatth is 
n9t nope er Lfve. iVetrMfi only for good. Eight Reafonspro' 
ving t/€giame i» the Will. fol.76 

Scft. 12. Some Propojitions containing wef opinion^ HoW 
far Love belongs to Faith, Et de fide formata cbaritate,w^/yi 
farj to ke obferved by the learned Adverfarj, ifht "^illnot loft 
hu labor in the next affautt on that SubieS. Of his Conclnfion^ 
mi MO dinger of a pajfionate railing Reply. The vanity of 
iftmant applofsfe^atU tilerabltneft ofmMnt Ctnfmret* foKSz 




(Reader, 1 intreat thee firft to corre(5l thefe Errata 
becaufe they are many and marr thclenfe, 

PAg.4./i». 3^. read b fi ie.p.j. I. it.hhit out and. ^.lol.i^.r.common Belief &fpecial. 
l.io. blotodt. it. ^4-r-ycad:p.ii.l.i4,:.that heie.^.ii.l.i^.i.ihattheyhave.p.i^.l. 
11. T.rhte.p.i^.'.S.r.'Villt.p.io.lii.i.SuareT^f.i^.l.^^'j.T.branches. p.r4./.3 j.r.M it. 
p.i^./ I j.blot out ly.p.ij.l.i^.r.of fpecial.p.iZ.l-i ^.r.ob.p.i i ./.r i .1 .«« rhriji.^.^ z./. 13. 
r.denompiate.p.^j .I.Z6.T. ex reprafentl. p.7 ^.l.^^r.fpeciei.l.uU.r.tts to be.p./^o.lj^ t.Hea- 
thens with, i.io.r. they l.iJ^.r.whUe. p.^z.l.iSx. prompti. /.ij.r. carn'n. P.44./.1. r.pre- 
feni. /. lo.r. Arts. p. 4^ .1. ii.r. w. /.37.r. (b<ir. p,47.;.iy r. heath. Li9-v.fcrue. p.49./. 
i^.v.lofmt. p. 50./. 13 .r.ffx. /. I f .r. /ay, fto. and for therefore r. /b. p. ^3 .^.10. r. recited. 
p.^4.'.9 r.byyfo that, p.^^.Z-jf- rbeUti!e.p.$6.l.to,ii. r.Opinion, nor Science, p.^7.1.6^ 
i.fitperficiaUy.p.6o-lis- ^-"f' ^-6^.1.10. blot oat w. p,tf8./.ult.blot out the. .69.1.^ i. r. 
Truth.p.j^.l.^.x. c'l^i. 1.7 .t.in Scripture.p.77 ,1. ii.r.the »pim$n..l.v9.T. of Affiance in the 
yeracity.p.7Z.l.it.h[ot OMteffenlial to hope.p.j^.l.io.vM'r.p.Zo.l.^. r.confine. l.i^.i.pofi- 
humors. p.8i/. a.r. threatnings. l.iz.r.oftveUas 0f the InielleCl. p.%l.l.^^,.t.rpllnt^fvor{. 
l.i^.r.I have firfi.l.^ 'i.T.fides.p.S^.l.i^x. that everyp.i6.LiS-^Me(hu(iiis.p.%7.l.tis.me. 

There are many mif-poimingt whicH marr the fcncc>which the T^ider may obferv6» 


E C T, 


'Et more contending work ? No : Whatfoevcr 
itmayfeem to thofc that judge of Books 
by their Titirs ; it is an acceptable amicable 
clofure of Confenters , and a Learned 
Defence of the Truths which I have been 
long too unlearncdly and unskilfully De- 
fending. And if fo many good and Learn- 
ed men have been fo deeply difpleafed with me, for maintain- 
ing the fpccifick Difference between common faith and 
thst which is proper to the Juftified ; Let them now prepare 
their paiienceortheir valour, when under my name) they are 
encountered by a ftronger hand. For my part , whatever mi- 
ftakes of my wriring* this Learned Author may be guilry of , 
ir fufficeth me to find him maintaining that Tru:h, which is de- 
fcrvedly precious to him and me, and which needeth fo much 
clearing in ti.efe times, that when we have done all, too many 
will remain unfatisfied. 

In the fecond Edition of a Book called The Sa'r.ts Re/}, J en- 
dctivoured according ro my weaknefs, to fhew the true differ-^ 
ence between the common Grace that may be found in the un- 
fanft fied, ard the fpecial Grace of the Saints which accom- 

li panieih 



panieth Salvation. After divers explicatory Propofitions, I 

aflerced ( in the eighth, ninth:Centh,elcventh and twelfth) Pro- 

pojition 8. that [God hath not in the Covenant fromiftd Jajiifica 

tion and S.dv^tion upn any meer 4^ or ^^s.confiiered without 

that degree andffttahlenefs to thtir OhjeEis, whfrein the (inceritj 

cf them as favtn£ doth confij}'] ('the foregoing Propofitions 

explain this) [] 9. Thzt there u no one Aii confiiered in its meer 

nainreandkjnd without its meafure and futablenefs to ttsOb- 

ptii ^hi:h a true Chrifiian muy ferform^ but an un/ound Chri/fi- 

a^ may ferformit alfo. ^ (S.g.An unfanftified man may efteera 

God as good-, and notionally as the chief Good ; but till we 

efteera him i. asthechiefcfl Good, 2. And that with fach an 

effcdual ferious prevalent eftimation, as may win the heart to 

the molt prevaknt or predominant Love, it will not fave us J 

[ Prop. I o. Thefupremacj of God and the Mediatottr in thefoal^ 

or the Precedency or preva/ency of hii Intereji in us, above the 

inter efi ofihejiejh^ or of inferiour good^ is the very point wherein 

mattrialty the fmcerity of our Graces as faving (i.e. as the) are 

conditions of fa/vations and not metr duties ) doth conffi, and fo 

16 the One mari^ by ^hichthofe mufi jf^^gs of their pates that 

-would not be deceived.] Prop, i t . ^^For herein the ftncerity of the 

AEl as fazing confifieth, in being futted to its adeqnate Ob}eSl * 

confi^xred tn its rejpe^s Which are ejfential to it as fuch an GbjeH,. 

cAnd fo to believe in ^Accept and Love Qod as God^and Chrifi as 

Chrijl, u the fmcerity ofthofe AUs : 'But this lyeth in "Believing^ 

Accepting and Loving Qod as the only fupreme Authority ^tcc. 

Ruhr and Good^ and Chri/i as the only Redeemer^ and fo our /o- 

ver^ign Lo^d^our Saviour^our Hy-sbtind^aidonr Head~\ (This I 

callea the moral fpecification of the Ad )[yro[).i2iTherefore 

the/incerity of favingGrace as fuvingjyeth materially,»ffr in the 

bare Nature of it, bur in the degree ; not in the degree con/idtred 

Ahfolutely in it fc(f but com\aYatively as it ii prevalent agai,j{i 

its contrary. "2 And among much more for explication I added, 

\_lmHf t:K jou^that jou mtiji flill diflingUiJh between u Pkyfical 

.or Natural (pecificatton, and a mor^.l : andremember , that our 

J^ufftion is only of a Phyfical differ ence^tvhich I deny^and not of a 

morale Which I make no doubt of. ]] And \_And further- 

inort obftrvCi that Jincerit) of Grace as favm^, lyeth in the degree^ 



f*ot forWdHy^ hut Of it were materUllj Secaufe the Pro. 

mifegiveth not falvation to the A^ Covfidered in its mter Be- 
ings and l^atural fincerity^ but ta the ^tl as futed to the OhjeU 
in its effentijtlrefptHs : and that futahlentfs efthe A^ to the form 
of its Ohje^ confideth only in a certain Degree of the 'y^H, feeing 
the /o'^ejl D'g^ee ca*iKOt befo fitted : thtrefore ^ faj that ftnce- 
ritj Ijeth muteriaHjf as it ^ere^ only ;« the Degree of ihoje *yiils^ 
And not in the bare Nature and'Bang of them.] 

By th!«! and much more for explication, I thought I had 
made my AfTertionincclligible, while I maintained, i. That 
there was 1 moral TpeciHck difference, between the Graces of 
the Reqcn^rateanJ o:h(:r<, 2. That only the Ads of faving 
Grace were fuited to the very c (fence or form of the Objed ; 
5. And that it was only miterially and Phyfically, that I faid 
the difference lay but in Degree : that is, a gracious Adion 
is in order firft (j»iJ Prj)fi:un>, a natural Being, before it be 
quid morale- Oreifeour Divines would not fo commonly teach 
de caufd mail, t hat God is the Author of all the entity of the 
Ad, but not of the evil: Now as to thePhyficalBeingof the 
Ad, anunfandificdmanmay have a Belief of the fame truths 
as the fandified, and a Love to the fame God, and a Belief in 
the fame Chrift, and a Love to the fame Cfariftians , Sermons, 
Ordinances, &c. Yea more then fo , they may notionaliy ap- 
prehend the fame Reafons for Believing, Loving, c^c. as the 
fandified. Butthey cannot effedually apprehend tbcfe Rea- 
fons, and therefore do not eftecra God or Love him, with their 
highcft predominant eftimarion and Love, nor Believe with a 
faith that is prevalent againft their unbelief. And therefore 
morally, ftridly, properly.they arc to be faid to be no true 'Be* 
lievers^ not to love God^Scc becaufe we are fpeaking of moral 
fubjeds, and of that faith and Love which is thefamoftus analo- 
gatum^ and moft properly fo called. And therefore I maintain- 
ed, thatall theunfandified are called Chriftiam, BeJievers, 
C^c. but Equivocally,or Analogically : Buc yet thar the faith 
and Love^&c. which they have is not all feigned, but true, or 
Real in its own kind. And this was the fura of my Aflertions 

A while after Dr. Kendal wrote a large digrefiion againft 

B 2 fome 


fomcpartof my Aflertionsrto whom when I had prepared half 
an Anfwer, at his own peaceable motion, and the Reverend Bi- 
fliop V/herSf we agreed on a mutual filence, as moft futable to 
our duties and the good of the Church. But before this A- 
greemenr, I had printed one (heet in the end of the fifth Ira- 
predion of the S^iats Rtfi^ in which I more fully opened my 
meaning, and (hewed that Dr.Ar*«^«/himfeifdid feem to con- 
fent to what I had aff tarred. The fame (lieet I had alfo put in- 
to the prefs to be affixed to my ConfeflSon. Befides in my A- 
pologic I had at large defended againft Mr. 5/4<^?,that all that 
will be regularly Baptized ( at age ) or admitted to Church- 
communion and Sacraments muft make a credible profefiion 
of a faving faith fpecifically diftind from the faich of the unre- 
generate. Hereupon Mr. ^/<!<;^e in his Reply had manifefted 
much difpleafure againft this Affertion, profefling his abhor- 
rence of tic, that I called the unjuftified but Equivocally Belie- 
vers, Chriftians, Difciples. Hereupon I wrote a Volume of 
Difputations on this very fubjcft : Proving that it muft be the 
profeffion of a Faith fpecifically diftind from that of the un- 
fandified, which all muft profefs that we muft admit to the Sa- 
craments; and that the ungodly are but Equivocally called 
Believers, Ghriftians,^r. InotherTrcatifcsalfoIhad infift- 
ed on the fame. And yet all this did not content me, becaufe 
I heard that others were ftilldifcontentcd. And fomc Reverend 
Learned Minifters of other Countries,told me with admiration, 
that though I had fo exprefly maintained a moral fpecifick dif- 
ference between common & fpecial gracc,yet they never fpoke 
with one offended man about it, that ever obferved that, or un- 
derftood me : but perfwaded people confidently that I denied 
any fpecifick difference ; and had put the queftion without any 
fuch diftindion or limitation , whether common and fpecial 
Grace differ only Gradually, or fpecifically ? It feemed to mc 
an incredible thing that fuch dealing fliould be fo common as 
they told me; Butif itwerepoffible, I thought I would yet 
fpeak plainer, and caufe men to underftand that were but wil- 
ling; and therefore before the explicatory flieet that was print- 
ed in the end of the fifth and fixth impiefiions of the Snints 
Refit and in my Conffffloft, and befides both the forefaid Vo- 


hiraes of Difputations , I did fomewhat correfl the feventh 
impreflTion of the Saintt Refi ; and added yet another expjica. 
Cory (heet in the end of ic. So chat I knew not what I could 
do more, to be underftood. 

And now afcer all this, is brought to my hands a Book of a 
worthy Gentkmans writing, Mr. I'V. S. a Serjeant at L aw, with 
an Aditionalexercication preccnded to be written againli my 
Aflertion,by a very Learned man ^ who doth not only overlook 
all the forementioned Treatifes and explications, but the very 
Queftionit feif whichldifcufled, and my forementioned Af- 
fertions : feigning me to maintain this general unlimited AfTer- 
tion, that [^ ^oww(?«rt»£:i jpuialGract dffer only (^ raduallj .~^ 
At iirU it ftruck me irto an adrairationl But having long known 
what man is, and confidering the quality and employments of 
the worthy Author,! had ftore of Apologies prefen.ly at hand, 
lufficientwith mecoescufeallthis, and bccaufe I think they 
fhould be fufficient with ochers, that I forefee are like to he 
ObjeAingagainft fuch kind of dealing : I fliall therefore c .:- 
prefs them, that the Reader may know, that as we are both i';r 
onecaufe, fowe are far fromany perfonal diftafts, or difavie- 
dion, or any uncharitable malicious projeds in the manage-' 
ment thereof. 

Jf unwritten Tradition may but be taken for a fufficient Re- 
porter of the Auihors Name, (which I have no caufe to doubt 
of) 1 muft lay, that he is one that 1 have honoured and very 
highly efteemed about this twenty years, even ever fince I read 
hisfix MetaphyficalExercitations, and (hould have thought 
it a very great honour and happinefs to have been but one of 
his Pupils .• And though I know him not by face, 1 have reafon 
to be confident that no uncharitable defign doth dwell in the 
breaft of a man fo Learned , moderate and ingenuous as hejis 
commonly fam*d to be. And therefore as long as we both 
agree in Loving and defending the Truth of God , the matter 
is the Icfs if we fhe v our fv^lves but men towards one another. 
Navjl have fome reafon to call it a happy miftake of my words 
and meaning in him, which occafioned the communication of 
this Learned Vindication of the Truth which I more weakly 
and unskilfully afTcried. And 1 make no doubt but the princi- 

B 3 pall 


pat fault is my own, who by fome unfic exprefHons have 
hindred fuch j Jdicious men from undcrf\anding me. 

Objed. But were notfo m^iny Expltcaticnt and 1)ifputatt~ 
ens fujjiciettt to fatisfit any man of your meiimng ? 

jinf^. What Obligation lay on this learned man to read 
or take notice of any thing of mine } I doubt not but he had 
better work to do, 

Objed. He fhouU have founci time to read and underjland 
a mans writings , hfore he find time to confute them upon a mif' 
under Jianding. 

Anfvf. He read that which he wrote againft: And truly 
if I had lived in the publique Library at Oxford^ I ftiould 
have been loih ray felf to havecaft away ray time in reading 
any fuch Difputations or Explications as thefe of raine. If 
men are fo unskilfull that they cannot in fewer words fo fpeak 
as to be underftood j let them at their own blame be mif- 

Objefl. But he/houldhavc read the additional Explications in 
the fame 'Book, 

An[w. Its like he never fawanyof thofe Impreffions that 
did contain them. 

Ob jed. At leafl he pjould have ohftrved the fcSlion which he 

^yif^. So he did : For pag.ni. Heconfeffeth thatlaf. 
fert, [ thit the AUs of common and fpecial Grnce^ as they Are 
morally conftdered do difftr fpecifcal/y ,and not only in degree* ~\ 

Objcd. fVhj then doth he ctntend ? If he agree, Vchy doth he 
feem todifer, and thin i^it "Worthy his publique Uhor to fcem to 
dijfer,whcre he doth not ? 

Anfw, I fuppofeic is ray terms that he intends his Labor 
againft, which he thought might be unfit and fcem to intimate 
fomewhat contrary to my own Aflertions; 

Objeft. But why then did he not tell us that it was words only 
that hefirove about, and tell ut of more convenient exprejjions 
inthtir flead> Nay, PVhj didije overlook^ the principal terws in 
your Propffitlonfand When jou fny that it is but Materially, and 
not Formally, thatjou place the d ference in degree ; why doth 
hefitll leave out Materially ? and when you prof efs to fpeuk,only 


of fnch a Materui Thyjicall Grahtion^ Why doth he make the 
^'e>ider believe that joufpeak^of the formal difference^ andfmfly 
denjed afpecificl^Mference ? 

Anftv. One word is eafily overlookt, yea many: perhaps 
he lookt only on the following words, where in fome imprefii- 
ons the word Materiallf was not repeated, ( as being before 
expreft in the Propofition. ) But what great matter is it if 
we miftake one another,as long as we miftake not the Truths of 

Objcd. Jt tenfieth hut to prfjudice common Readers ^a»dcaufe 
them to c^fi aWay mens tabors^that might pnfit them for Bre- 
thren to multiply ^narrelf, andagainfi them ; tfpecially vthen thtj 
corfefs that there u no real difference to occafion if, the thing it the 
more iv thont excufe. 

^irf\\>. And what harm is it to the Church or any foul to be 
brought to a fufpicion or d'ftiftof any thing of mine, or to 
have any of my writings become unprofitable to them ? Are 
there not more enough, more ufefuil and Icfs offenfive in cne 
world ? Through the Mercy of God it is an age of plenty, 
and he that favoureth not one mans writings , may favour and 
be faved by anothers. I confefs fome railing rabious men have 
done fome wrong to our common Hearers, by teaching them 
to fly from their Teachers as deceivers: but this Reverend 
Man is an enemy to fuch waies; and therefore I know not why 
fuch a peaceable collation of our different thoughts or ex- 
preliions ftiould be fo offenfive as I find it ordinarily to be. 

QV)<t8s..But was not this work^fuficiently doKe ahead) ? (Vhat 
need fuch a mnltitude of ft ones to be ca^ at one mans words ^ even 
atafeVi^finience/,yvhichthejclofe W'lth themf elves rvhen they 
have done ? Is net that reh'xch ts here faid the fame th.it Dr, 
Kendil had faid before ? Anci what r.eedthe (ame be done fo 

Anfiv. Many witnefTes give the ftronger teftiraony to a 
Truth ; many may read the writings of this learned man , 
that would not have feencr read Dr. K. And the great repu- 
tation of fo eminently learned anddifcreeta manj may add 
m'jch advantage to the promoting of any tiulh which he (hall 
defend. Or elfe Mr. Tombei would not have printed the let- 


ter againft infant-Bapiifm f which fame faith was written by 
tliis learned hand ) in his EpilUe before his third pare of An- 
tipedo-Baptifm ; but that thinking the Truth was on his fide, 
he thought it would be fome advantage to it, that fo learned 
a Pen ftiould put &c{eleant»r upon the Arguments againft it, 
faying, [/ have re ad what my learnt A ani rvorthj fnend Dr.Him' 
mond , Mr Baxter , asd others faj in defence of it •, and I 
confefsy I wonder not a little that men of fuch great f-irts, Jhould 
fay fo much to fo little pftrpofe ; for I h^ve not yet (em anj thing 
like A*t Argument for ir. 2 (Though in this 1 muft ftill profcfs 
my Diflent from this very learned worchy man ) Yet in 
the point before us , Irejoyce, that my infirmities haveocca- 
fioned fuch an advantage to the truth, as the publcitionof 
his Teftimony. When I firft received his Book, I was bufie 
about fatisfying fome Rcvcrend'Brethren, that were difpieafed 
with me for going his way ; and therefore received it with 
fome gladncfs, as that which might eafemc of fome of my 
burden,and promote the fatisfadion of fome of the offended. 
I have heard fomewhat that caufeih me to fufpect, that a reve- 
rend Brother intendeth to write againft my fecond, fourth, 
and fifth DifputatioHs of Right to Sacraments .efpcchUy the laft, 
which afTerteth that the unrcgenerate arc but equivocally or 
analogically called Believers, Chriftians.Difciples, Sanctified, 
^c. If any be upon that work J intreat them to trie firft how 
they can confute this learned Author; viho hath done the 
fame work better (as againft me) then I could do. For I 
will not take the caufe as gone, till hi« Reafons are anfwered 
as well as mine. ( Perhaps I vas beholden to my Appen- 
dixto thatDifput. for a Teftitrony from him that never read 

This rauth I have faid to let both PapiOs, and al! other A d- 
verfaries underftand tha: there is not fo much diftance among 
us, for them to reproach us with, as fome of our concert ati- 
ons do feem to import. Fencing is not a fign of enmiry^though 
fightingbe : and that there is as little difagreement in our 
Judgements, I (hall further manifeft by a perufal of t?^efe- 
veral parts of this pretended Confutation : yet freely ac- 
knowledging as I g^ J Thofe differences which indeed I 
find. Sect. 


S E C T. 2. 

Tage I. TTEteI!su% i. That hzbtllevenhe difftrtr.ct to 
XTXhe mere then gradual, and fo faid I. [2. t^nJ 
th>it wydifcourfedoth r.ot concludinq^lj (vince thecontra>-ji ]] nor 
did it ever pretend it .- Thus far wc arc agreed. 

T^^ 2.{\e } ^'i.)Hch\lh{\n[[ To prove thAtcomfKOft and fpe- 
cial grace do difer o«lj ^radnallj^ I reaftn^ J as fol/oW'eth. But I 
never aiVerted fuch a thing, ind therefore never reafoned for 
it. It was but overlooking che terms [/l/4/frW//,J and [^hfi- 
cal fptcificaticnt -^ J ar.d lome fuch like, thatcauled thismi- 

Here is culled ou: thofe m^ordsof mine, that were eafilieft 
roiftaken, and feverai coiifideracions added. As to the firft, 
we are Agreed (hat theQucftior. is not of Grace, as it is in 
GoJ, butinus, or of gracious acts as of us. But my weiknefs 
was fuch, That, i. I thought, ss a prefuppoled, thing to 
meet with fome that infifted on the name, I might have men- 
tioned exdufivcly this Grace which this Reverend Brother 
exdudeth, as I did. 2. I thought that ArKor CfmpUcer.tU 
vel accettatio divna, had denorn'r^atine f.vrr/«/fci been capa- 
ble of a gradsrion ; and that as truly, as we fay. God lovcch 
one man, and hateth another, and that he loveth him con- 
verted, whom he ffo) loved not unconverted, ( amore ccm*. 
pUcer.t<t,cr ijcceit.itlor.is jas truly might we fiy,that he loveth 
('with that loveja holier &^ore heavenly upright man, above 
a fcandalous weak Believer, that hath the lealt goodnefs and 
the m'lft fin that is confiftcnt with finceriry. j^utlamrc- 
folved fo far to ftope to the learninq of this Reverend man, as 
not to maintain this opinion againft him { though I may not be 
cured of fuch conceits fo foon as he defireth.) 

As to his fccord Confid. p^^. 523. Wc are fully agreed, 
that Grace is trr'zr^T^? r, and that if ever Titiui d.rA Sewpro- 
rnuhAd Grace, it wa« not in order of Nature, till after they 
were men. But Iconfefs I think ftill, that Grace to Adam 
was not alieftiii r:itt4r£ fuperadditfim^ unicfs \ou confine the 
word Natwe to his meer faculties, as diftinct from thofe right 

C , Difpofi'ions 


Difpoficions, which were natural to them, though fepara- 

In his third Condufion, hereceits fome of my words {Our 
VnderfianciiMgsancifVilsarefhjflicallythefunte^ &C. and faith 
that, [_ This Alfertion as '/« her« exprejfed, is eviitntl) untrue • 
for OUT Zander/Landings and fVils^ arefo far from he'wg the fame 
in fpccic^, &c. ] Still we are agreed whether he will or 
no. But did I write this falfe Affercion? yes, all faving one 
word, yea a finable, which is eafily overlookr. And 2. The 
falle meaning which the adjoined words do juftifie it from ; 
being fpeakingof the Matter of faving and common Grace, 
I thought it not impertinent to mention it as a common Con- 
ceilion, that all of us agree in •, [_ That common knowledge 
and fpecial cocnraon belief ^ and fpecially agree in this gene- 
ral Nature, that both are real knowledge and belief; and that 
our Uuderftandings and Wills are all Phyfically the fame, and 
that they agree in the general nature of an Act, yeafuch as 
(fubftantially atlcaft) have the fame Object. ] Thefe are 
the haynous words, or the fruits of my greateft weaknefi 
itfeemsjthat it is manifefted inthat difcourfc now here. i. This 
moft learned Author did both. Pag. ^^ 22. and p^^ 324. ftill 
leave out the word f A/l, ] (that's but a fillable. ^ And 
2. The more eafily feigneththat I fpeak of the underflan- 
ding and \Viili of the fame perfon, contrary to the drift and 
plain exprefsions of the dilcourfe which treats of the diffe- 
rence between the Grace of the regenerate and unregenerate : 
Becaufclfawthis exact Difputant J^ave out the word [ ////] 
more then once or twice, I was willing to have found that in 
fome one Impreffion the Printer had omitted it : but I am 
fruftrated of that conciliatory cscufc, finding it in the fecond, 
third, fourth, fifth, fixth and feventh ImprefTions ( which 
were all : For that difcourfc wasnoc in thefirrt. ) But yet 
I have one excufe : Perhaps the Reverend Confuter never 
reads the Book, but received thefe paHagestranfcibed by his 
Scholar , that may be more prone and willing to miltake. And 
jf I had laid, that the (aid faculties are but form^littr ^ vel 
dgnomi'1'itione extrinfeca^ diftinct from the foul,andfrom each 
other, he very well knows what great f^ore of company 1 had 



bad, and that of the highcft foorras in the fcools which mfghc 
have put fome honor on a perfon foinconriderablc as I: and 
every man of the third form,^ that calls the difference reall , is 
not in love with the notion of a fpecificke d)fference , 
though commonly they agree : But this is nothing to our DC' 

i'^£*3 2 5. He faith.That [[ thunnkts nothing to the prefect 
purpoft, nor akj "^ay proves that common indfavtfig Grace differ 
notfpfcificul-j. 1 

Anf\\>. <\\\ we are agreed, whether he will or r.o : Though it 
make not to the purpo'e, it may be mentioned exclufively.or 
as a common conceillon, prcfuppofed to the pu'-pofe as him- 
fcif hereinnocenciv menuoneth it : and if it will not prove 
that thcrs: \sno 'Difference^ it will (hew here that the Difference 
is not. 

But he faith, It is P(hoiIy'^mperttr.€nt^tcQ.'\ 
Anfw. I. See all you chat are adverfaries to the honor of 
ourUniry, that we ate fo far from difagreeing in Art'cies of 
faith, that we Will not fuffer fo much as an ImptrtimsKcy'wi 
one another without a reprehcnfion. 2. I amforry for an 
Impertinency.but I am glad that it is not falfe. 3. Its irapcr- 
percinenc to your ^«rp7/f,but not to mine. 

Once for all , this was my reafon of tbefe pafTagcs. i. I 
Knew by long experience, abundance of people that credibly 
and confidently profefledto have fome real undifembled de- 
fires to be I'ober.and ycc lived in drunkennefs ; and to be god- 
\v, and yet had little of i: in their practife, and to have & 
Love to the Rodlv, (and truly would do and fuffer fome- 
what for them , but yet loved the world and themfelves fo 
muchberter, that they would be at no great coftor danger 
for them : fuch a Love they profcft to Chrifthimfelf , and 
a credible profeUion they madgof a true dogmatical belief. 
And thefe men were many of them deeply pofleffed by mifta- 
king our Divines, that the leaft true ("or real) defire after 
Chritt or Grace, was laving • r.ice it f.'lf, and would certain- 
ly prove that the perfon fhauid be faved, fo that fome of them 
that lived in ordinary drunkeni cfs for many years, would after 
they had been drunk cry out oi their fin, a-nd be ready to tear 

C 2 their 


their hair, and profefs themfelvcs unworthy to come among 
Chriftiansj and yet ftill would profefs thactbey were confi- 
denc of pardon by the blood of Chrift, becaufe they were as 
certain as chat they lived, that they hated their fin as fin, and 
defircd tobegodly, and could wifh themfelvcs in theltaceof 
the bcft, and did believe all the word of God to be true, be* 
caufe it is God's that cannot lie, and had felt experimentally the 
fweetnefs and power of it on their hearts, and did truft on 
Chrift alone for Salvation.I do not feign this,but have found it 
in old and common Dfunkards,and fuch like,for many & many 
years together.Now the work that I had to do with thefe per- 
fons was to convince them that fuch good defires as are habi- 
tually, and in ordinary pradice conquered by flefhly, world- 
ly defires, will never prove the foul to be fandified : and 
fuch a Belief as is conquered by unbelief or fenfuality , will 
never prove a man to be juftjfied ; and fuch a love to God 
and the godly, as is conquered by a greater love to carnal felf, 
and the world, may ftand with a ftate of condemnation. O 
bat fay theyj^vf are certain that we di\femble not ; Thefe defires^ 
Utiief, Love^ &LC. Vpehaze. Should I fay^ that they lie, and 
have none fuch, they would never believe me, nor fliould I 
believe my felfjbecaufe I believe the Scripture, and the credible 
Pj ofeflions or" men. I conclude therefore they have that fuch 
ads as they affirm, and that they are Analogically good ( in 
moral fenfe, ) and come from the common Grace of Chrift : 
but that befides the Reality of thefe ads , they muft have 
them in fuch a predora nant degree, as is fuitcd in its Effentials 
to the Obj«A , and will overcome their contraries in the 
main ben' of heart and life, and p.ove predominant habitsin 
the foul, before they can hence conclude that they are fandi- 
fied : Where note, that the men that I fpeak of, trie not 
their ads by a futablenefs to the objed in its relative perfedi- 
ons, nor do they once know, or at left confider of the mo- 
ral refpedive formality of thefe Graces; but look all at the 
Ad as it isexercifed onGod, Chrift, Scripture, Saints, fub- 
llantialiy confidered, or if confidered as Good? True, &c. 
yet not efledualiy apprehended as the chief good, moft cer- 
tain neceffjry Truth, &c. Sothacitisthefubltance or mat- 


tcr C as its commorily called ) of their Bercf, Love , Defire, 
C^c. That our queftion with fuch men is about: And there- 
fore my bufinefs with them was to (hew them what it is in the 
C^fatttr and Subjiance of thefe Ads that is necefTary to prove 
them formallyyfpecificaHy Javincr^, viz, thatbel'des the right 
conceptions of the objed, the ad muft be in fuch a prevalent 
Dcgree.as will prove a predominant Habit in the fouliand that 
fuch uneflfcdual Actsas are before defcribed , may ftand wich 
a ttace of condemnation. Hereupon it is, that though Grace 
is fpecihed and tobedenominaied from its moral form; yet 
my bulincfsled meto prove that this moral form was incon- 
. fifter.t with any degree of the phyfical Act, but what was or- 
dinarily thus prevalent or predominant : And therefore to af- 
ert thaaiiis moral form did lie in a phyficaldegree of the 
matter, and that a lower fubdued degree of the Ad, was 
matter uncapable of fuch a form, though it was capable of 
the general Nature of ( an Analogical at left ) Vertue, Daty 
or moral Good, denominared from fome anlwerabler. .'is ro 
the Precept, ( at X^^ficundurnqnid) yet it was not capable 
of the fpccial form of that Faith , Love , Defirc, &c. to 
which God harh promifed Salvation, as the Condition, 

Reader, Once more I have as plainly given then my mean- 
ing as I can fpeak : Forgive jme thefe Repetitions and con- 
fiderthc occafion So that you fee, this Learned, Reverend 
man doth build all bis oppofitionon a raeer milhke/uppcfing 
me to fpeak of the Fcrm^ who fpoke only of the Na'-urc of 
the Ad, or the Thjfical AUtter ^ f as before exprelTed. ) 
And now I raa'-.e thee the Judge of my impertinences. 

The fame anf^cr fcrves to his fourth Confid.and bis Q quid 
hoc ai Ifhic.i Bovts, ~\ ( who have been fo long in the yoak 
that they are ready to lie down : ) and to his Qucflion 
I IVill it hffjce follow that all Btlitf, &C. are fpccifcall]/ (he 
fame? ] //«/»'. No. Wc are here agreed too : But it is no 
fuch new thing tocall either our faculties the fubjed matter 
of the Ads or the ^y^Sh the Afatter of our Graces but chat [ 
might pardonably fuppofv, that I might meet with fome fuch 
l1llv foul as would ufe fuch a notion : and if it will but follow, 
that [ /ntht<'. m'-ich , thire is r,o ph^/ical fpec'fick^d jfertfjce ] It: 
fervcth my ends. C 3 '^<*i- 


P4^^ 327. Confid.?. He again rcceiteth the famepaffage, 
that L TheZJnderflanding AndlVillare ]hyfiGall) the jAtne. ] 
And again, The third time leaves out Allt when I Paid, Our 
ZJnderftandings andl^Vill are fhyficAllj all the [awe: which more 
perfwades me that he never read the Book which he confutes, 
but tookhisy^W^rj tranfcrfpr, and fee ftill our happy Agree- 
ment. The charge here is but \^imprjpriety and i>'.congrHitj.'\ 
(And I heard ere now from one of his fcholars , that 1 could 
fcarcc ffeak^congruoujlj.) but I would I could have fpoken In- 
teUigthlj. But I am glad that I fpoke not falfe/^. The firfl In- 
congrtiitj or Impropriety is,that Lcall ail ourunderftandings and 
\N\\\s[Jtke fnbJlAnces~\ when they are but Accidents.^ But i. An 
Ad is but an Accident, and yet what more common phrafe, 
then ftibftantid AElm, when we diftinguifli it from the Moral 
Form. Read firft his own Exercitanon,(i^ mjilo. and then judge. 
2. I ventured long ago to tell him, my Reconcileablenefs to 
the Scotifis Nominals &c. and that I made it no Article of 
my faith ; that the faculties are Really diftind from the 
foul , and then they may be fubftances. For I am of 
their mind that think the foul is not a meer Accident. And 
if all the Rabbicsof that mind in the Popifti fchooleshavc no 
Authori-y,I may modeftly fay with one of our higeft Foorm at 
home \_^{od Phyhfophantur voluKtatem C \ntelUcitim^e^e dn- 
Oi Potential reipf a dtfiinElas^ dogma Philofophicum ejf , abomni- 
hti4haudrcceptHm, &Tbeologici4dogmatihi^ ^firwandU autin^ 
firmandi^ ^fundameHtum minime idcneum. Davenant Detcrm. 

My next incongruity is,that I fay they are of [_l{keffib/}afjce] 
having faid that they are Phyfically the fame. Anfrv. Had I 
faid that they are 7>(umericallj the fame, and yet [] of like nA- 
tures~\lhdidi{^o\itincongrno^Jl^. But O that I were as wife 
or Learned a man as they that ordinarily cafl a fp(cifi'\un ty by 
the name of \ a Itkenefs ; ) if the Latine [_fir»ilei] ht them nor, 
yetcheEnglifh ^Like~\ may. Forour[]Z?i^f]in En^lifli is mod 
ordinarily extended to exprefs [^afpecie!~] ( But think not that 
I am teaching you Englifh,butexcuting my incongruities as far 
asism.cct.J And if all this will not do, I Hill try to prevent 
your n-xc work in this kind , by (hewing you what a difcou- 



rageing cask is before you. If you will but write upon all the 
improprieties of my writings, it may put you to fuch a volu- 
minous toyl, as may make you repent it before you have done , 
and make your Reader think me fome worthy learned man, 
whofe very improper fpeeches deferve the obfervation of fo 
eminent a man, 

3. You next grant me that our feveral Underftandings and 
Will,arenotfpccifical!y diftind, J fo farftiiiwe are Agreed. 
But you fay [it fellows not hm thtir Aflt ma).'\ ftill wc are A- 
greed. And in iV. 5 . and 6. you fay, that ^ they do not only gra- 
dn^ll) differ,] ftill we arc Agreed, even in your inP ances. 

/'rf^.329. Your fixth Confid. rcciteth my opinion as you 
thought, but indeed not mine, ziz,. [_ that the difference u only 
gradual ^and not fp(cifcAl.'^ Again you leave out \_matcri<illj~^ 
and tlie other limiting exprcfllons : Ani why did I fay, [^Toh 
thought th J m ne 2 When ^^^-S 32. You confefs the contrary 
is mine. 

Yet here let me tell you once for all, tha: if my terms of [a 
Phji/ical fpec-.fca'.ioH ] on the reafon given of that Name, be 
judg: d by you improper (which I yet find you not affirm) I am 
refolvcd not to defend them againft you ^ but am ready with 
thankfulnefs to learn a fitter manner of exprcfiion , as verily 
believing my felf to be filter to be your fcholar, then your An- 
cagonift in Philofophy, efpecially the terms. 


\7'Our firft Reafon for my Opinion (pretended againR it) 
. is long ago agreed tQ ; Nay, fee the height of our Agree- 
ment : 1 have over aniover exprefled my confent to this part 
of your Ileafon, in which you know how currantly the fchool- 
mcnandour own Divines are againft you,i'/<. \T hut the Afts 
of common Qrace in the mrtgeneratet are not fo mt^ch at Evan- 
gdiciUy ^o')cL~\ !'uty£t that: I feem rot ro hold what I do not, 
i rrtull add, that ! mcjn thic they have not that Mora', good- 
11' f\ which in the firit and moft proper fenfe defcrvcs that De- 
nom'nation ^ but yet thic they are, not only lef evil^nor only 



YHAteriaUj goo\ ^ but alfo :hac they are ^io^tx.\^ good^ftcanmrn 
ejuiiy&intantHmi and that they have fuch an iAnatogicd 
^ooj'^fjO, as Accidence have an entity : which is not Nothing; 
And though they may ail be called fin, yet they have fomewhac 
in them that is better t en fin: or elfc you were to blame for 
calling them cowwow (i/r^cf : yea, I doubt not but fuch Ads as 
ycu fay are but fplendld^ peccata, have had from God a tempo- 
ral Reward ; yea and have been preparatory to the Reception 
of faving Grace. Some Duties God rcquireth of the unregc- 
nerate, as a means to their Repeneration, which Tome of them 
do perform. And the ugh he Accept them not fa far as to 
efteera them either conditions of Juftification, or Properties of 
the juftified, yet fo far doth he Accept them,as that ordinarily 
he judgeth and ufeth them as jiue-r for faring Grace then 
others. If they could do nothing towards their own fanftiii- 
ca'iion, God and his Minifters would have fpared many words 
that are ufed to them. And if there were no more I'kelyhood 
that they fhould find Grace in Hearing. Reading, confidera- 
tion, A?king it, c^c. then in doing nothing, or plunging them- 
felves in fin, we would fay lefs to them then we do, to put thera 
on fuch means. I hope you will not differ from me in this. 

Page-2,'^2. The explication of my mind , you cail aConfef- 
fion, and foconfefs [ th^tt ufon evident Reafon, I confefs that the 
ylfls ofcowfKO'i and fvtcial Grace , as they are morally confiierei, 
differ Jpecifica/Ij^ and not only gradually,'] So that if the Rea- 
der believe either you or me, we are agreed in thedecifionof 
the Quefton it felf. And then I can eafily excufc the oppofition 
of a profeft Confer.ter, though I underftand not the intent 
of it. 

But you fay thatQr^^« the ^^.eflion is put ^ ho\\> common ani 
f^tcial Graces differ ? the ^'/^f<^-er mujl ever be Ajfi'-m^itlve^ 
r^^r rkj^/jf-fr fpecie,nongradu folum.] Anf».i. \ thought 
that Queflion ^ How cominoytar;dfptii!ilGrac£sdife^?'\ Had 
no: been capable of an Afnrmation or Negation : Cat if my 
thoughts were improper, 1 fubmit. 2. I am confident that m 
fenfe, I fhail here alio agree with you , whether you i^'ill or 

I. If the Ctceft'onbe put in your terms J confef?my opini- 


onwasjthattlie Anfwerfliouldbc applied to the comprehcn- 
fivencfsof the Qucftion , and I fliould fay that \^T hey ^tfer 
forma'lj tljw^&c quafi mattriallj, thus a>jdthtu~\ and fo fpeak to 
both. But if 2. theQaeftion hadbeen, [^ tvhethtr common and 
ffecial Grace do difftr jpedficallj.] I fhould alwaies affirm it 
(fuppofing but fuch a ipecifick difference, as between fubftmce 
and Accident, or an Egg and a Bird, or 3n Embrio and a Bcaft. 
remembnng that omne (ttiUe eft etiam diJfimUe , leaft 1 be mif- 
interpreted.) For when we fpeak of a moral fubjcd, we muft 
fuppole the Queftion fimply nut, to be morally meant accord- 
ing to the na ureofthe (ubje::t -.which are my very words in 
fevcral publifhed wricings. And I think verily that this is all 
you mean. 3 .But this w u notbmg to my Queftion.which was 
Y^fVheiKer mtitert(jf!y,oy hj t phjfic.t' foectfr'atton ^common and 
fpfcial Grace did ff'er.'^ And this I did deny, and thought a gra- 
dual difference enough, fuppofing the Ads in both perforjs.to 
be fuch as go commonly under the fame name, and have at leaft 
fubftmtially the fame object (as to believe the Promife,Chrift, 
O-c.) Now 1 apprehended that if you had put the Queltion to 
me. [ ^/tfW mart and be^jl dijftr quoad Corpus , or quoad ani- 
roam fenfitivam^'^f.] the anfwer muft not be the fame as if 
you had fimply a^kt me, how man and beaft diftr.'] Had I been 
askt, ff^hfther the Love of a fritter and of a Huiha^d difer fpe- 
cifi:a//y as to the mattir ? I (hould have faid,iVo (nor perhaps 
gradually' ; ) but yetformtlh, in a civil moral fence, they dif- 
terfpectfica/ly, (\ et ! know heres greater difference in the mat- 
ter in our cafe). Had I been askt 1 PVkether the reverence and 
heart-fuf'jenioxt, which I have to a Captain a*}d to the General, to 
a 7 u ft ice cf Peace ^ L'e(iteytant,8cc. and to the Soveraign^ do dif- 
fer jjjcci^ca'lf quoad mareriam : 1 I fhould have faid No, but 
gradually. But yer <j»ca^form4m civile •n^they diferfpecifically ? 
Vet I am ready to let g 1 thefe exprefifions when you wil';l muft 
profefs, a word under your hand would havccaufed me to dil- 
ufe them , wit'iouc rbs puhlck work that you are put upon, 
Do but tell me vou d flikc the phnifcs,and you (hall never hear 
( without fuch Veceflitv as I expeft not ) that ever I will 
publckly nfe thmmore. I hate troubling the Church with 
contendirjg for meet words at leaft, unlefs I were bettet 

D at 


at wording my conceptions then I am. 

But ft ay, I find my felt already under the Obligation ; P^^. 
353. You plainly fay, Q th4t if in thiir moral can fidtration^ they 
fii/l M§'er fptcifica/iy from common Qraces^ it can never with any 
cengruifj he affirmtdy that in anjf other confideration , they d-^er 
onif ^rAiuall) ? ] Strange .' Why fo ? Q For infiancej Vphtn tts 
faidthattn tkeir Natural and Phyficdl confederation ^ they differ 
only in Dtiree ; / Rffhi that the A^t of the fVi/i and Vnder- 
Jiandfng in that confideration are not faving Graces at a//.] You 
have nienced me, when I have done with this account of my 
Diflent, though you have not convinced me, (having as great 
advantage as moft men living to have done it, in my efteem of 
your great abilities.) i . If this Reafon be good , then I muft 
fp:ak of nothing butthe/rriw of any Beina - nor may I con- 
gruouHy mention any material or Accidental difference' For 
ihey are not denominated from matter or Accidents. May I not 
fay that a Crow and an Oufel are of one colour, becaufe that 
qHA color fiti cbey are not denominated fuch. May I not fay 
that a Stpan and ajheep quoad colorem do differ only gradually, 
though ijttoadcolorem they are not a Swan orjheep f May jj not 
f&y ythAt m at eriaUy a Ship Sind a Barge do differ but gradual- 
ly, becaufe ex materia they are not a Ship or Barge ? Or that 
m^teriaff; a Dagger and a fveor^ do differ but/r<»<:/«4^,becaurc 
ihAX. ex materia ihf^^rtnoiQzWtd a f^ordor dagger ? lam 
not yet convinced of ihefc things ; but for your fake I purpofc 
to fay no more of ic publickiy. 

You add, \^A»d therefore if it he granted that in that confide- 
ration they differ only Cradnally^ )tt it ^ill not thence foHow^that 
common and jpectat Graces differ only in Degree ^^ Anf^. Very 
true? becanfethis isanAffertion of them ^ <»;»/; ccnfidered, 
SLtidforma'ly, and not limited ad materinm. But if you will 
grant that mater iaUy they differ but in Degfee, you grant my 
Propoficion im terminia (as to that rruch J 

I rather fufped that when the bufincfs is well opened, the 
Difference will be between me and mot that are offended 
with m^ ^[rvhtt her indeed they mattrialiy differ fo much as in de- 
gree ? And they will fay, that a Lo^er Degree may confifl Vcith 
the true form : And then men will fee that it is the'r bringing 



Grace m*tt>iallj lo^er then I do , and not their aivaxctng it 
formally higher that is Our Difference. Sure thac Reverend 
Dodor that hath already oppofed me in this Point, doth harp 
upon that ftring.But I could wifli they would let this be plainly 
underftood : I think not faving Grace materially fo Lo^ a 
thing as they : AndformaSj I think it 4s high as thtj do. But let 
fuch underftand that it is towards the/^w? ob]eU^ that the A^s^ 
muft be compared, and not as exercifed on diferent olfjefis. A 
wicked man may have a clearer knowledge of earthly things 
then a true Chriftian hath o( God and Heaven ; but not fo in* 
cenfe.and powerful, effedual a knowledge oi God and Heavtn 
as a Chriftian hath : fo for Belief Defire, Love,c^^. 

You add \Jhii A^g^iment^ common and Jpecial 'Belief m thej 
A^e Phyftcjllj cor.^ilered^differ only ^ gradually : thirefort com- 
mon and /fecial graces di^er only graJi^ally'J in plain Snglijh, k 
no more then thi^^ [Thir.gs ^'hich are no Graces at all di^er onlj 
gradually, therefore common aid fpeciul Graces dtfftr onlj in 

Anfw. But the condufion is yours and not mine • or equally 
renounced by you and me : My Propofition was,th^c Q mute- 
rially they differ but in Degree,'] And in plain Englilli thats no 
fuch thing as you make it of your own pleafure ; but this much 
[_Thfe ihiyjgs vphich in refpeSl to the Precept are called Tint es j 
a^d in rfjpefi to the Prom fe are called Conditions ^ do yet mate- 
rially d ffir but in Degree. \ Of [_thofe gracioHt ry46ls whchhave 
>4n.ilogica(lj the form of Dnties , and fo of (graces . but not the 
Form of Conditions, thit is, faving Graces do jet m^t: really dif- 
fer but in Degree from thofe that have that Form. J This wai 
the true fence of my Propofition. And whereas I put [_as fa- 
ving ^ in:o it, it was but co exprefs t'nac it was Grace as faving^ 
('refpedingthe PromifcJ and not Cjrace as meer iuty ( refpeit- 
ing the bare Precept) ^hofe mtterial Difference I enquired af- 
ter. Only I think thac there is a certain Degree of the Phy- 
ficil AA of NeceHicy to make it the matter of fuch a Form. 
For ic Will diu'eli in no other marter. Againft this the late Op- 
p )nenrs feem to mike a lower Degree of matter capable: And 
tho^e :hat formerly 1 was won: to converfe with did think thac 
a hii]her fort of matter was Neceflary , of whom I fpokeaf- 

D 2 ter 


ter that Propofiiion : of which more anon about infufed 

Se c T. IV. 

'Tplll the eighth Confid.you do but exprefs your further Con- 
-^ rent. 

InConfid. 8./'<«_^.3 34.33J. Youfay [^that common and ffe- 
clal Graces conjiji not fofiroierly and primarily in the ACls and 
txercife of Faith And Love ^ &C. 04 in the Ha'Ats and principle 
from whence they come, fo that the graciottfnefs th-tt n in themu 
mt{a4fnares,^Q) ipfis adibus originahter intrinfeca, ^c. ] 
Anf^. I. I require forae proof before I believe it, tha- Grace 
is not as much originally intrinfick in the Adt; as Habits? 
OurDvines that have long taught us that the Ad ofFai.his 
it that Juftifies ; ('and alfo that the Ads of Faith and Repen- 
tance, go before the Habit,) thought oiherwife. 2. For ray 
part, I have irons enow in the fire ; I have not engaged my 
iclf in this Controverfie, and fee no reafon why I (hould [yvhe-. 
tberthe I^abitor AU hfrfl ? I long thought as Pembbt that 
the Habit was firft. But fecond thoughts have made me at 
Icaft doubtful , and loofened from that opinion; and finding 
chat the ftream of Proicftant Divines have taken VccAtion to 
be Antecedent to fanShficAtion , and that Vocation conceincth 
{p-ijjt^ve fnmpt^) the A5is of faith and Rep^n'a cf^^n<iifd»Oifi- 
ttontht Habit -^ I have refolved that without further Light, I 
will never more oppofe this opinion. Its a probable way (as 
Camera exprefTcih it) that the Holy Ghoft by t he word with- 
out ahabit,excireth the firft Aft by the means of the prefented 
Objed t 2LVtdi\\\zi eodem injlaiti by that Ad he produccth a 
Habit, fo that only in order cf Nature the Ad is firft, bur not 
of time : The Spirit is as the Hand , the Objed and Word as 
the Seal, the Ad of imprelfion on the intelied is firft in order 
of Nature, and fo upon the Will the impre (Ted Act and Habit 
immediately are cflfeded by it. i.We u'e tofay, ih^tHabiitis 
imfuft fe habent admoda-'^ accjdtji.o'uw : though ibey have a 
higher power CiTectingthem^its itrprobable that they are effe- 


ded in another order. zThisfuiteth with the Nature of man* 
3. And this makes the word the Inftrument ofthac work,wherc' 
as ( which moves me very much ) according to the contrary 
opinion, the Word cannot pofiibly be the Inftrument,or means 
of our Regeneration, as to the Habit, but only a fubfequenc 
means to excite or educe the Ad , which feems againft the 
ftream of Scripture, and Divines of all Ages. But truly my 
opinion is, that as the W^W hlorveth ulcere it I'/leth^dcc. fo it 
evtry ontthatis b rn of the Sfirit : And that no man can fo 
trace the Sprit of God as to be able certainly to fay whether 
the Ad or Habit of Grace be Hrft. But it feems more probable 
and congruous to Scripture to place the ad ft; fi in Nature, but 
in one instance of time. But I will not contend with any man 
that thinks otherwifc. 

2.1am paft doubt that the Ads of Grace are firft difcerned : 
Nay for my part, I know not what it means to difcern any Ha- 
bit in my felf hu: by the Ads. And therefore the Ads in that 
refpe-lt muft be firft fought after. 

4 But lam thus far wholly of your mind, that no ad can 
prove a man truly fandified.but as it proves a Habit ; and that 
ungodly men may by ficknefs, convidions > common Grace, 
C^c. be carried far in Ads: and that our principal fatisfadion 
about our fincerity is by finding Predominant Rooted Habits, 
which are a3 a New Nature to the foul. Thus far we are agreed. 
From all this I anfwcr your inference, ^<«^.3 36. That he that 
tn^uires^rvhether common Andfpecitl Qraces differ [pec i^cml I j-, or 
only gradually^ fhould (if he will) ration/tllj proceed fir ji , And 
princifaUy encjuire coKCtrmng the Habits, ^c. 

Anftv.'^MX. i.You muft nottakeyour Reafons(from the Ha- 
bits priority, &c. ) for granted^ as long as it is a finguiar 
opinion among Proteftant?, and unproved. 2. That mult be 
firft enquired aft r, wh ch is firft, ( and only intmedia'elyinfe^) 
difccrnable : butfuchis the ad of Grace, and not the habirj 
£rgo^(^c. 3 However, If you will confute m.e, ycumuft 
confu'e the pofition that I( whether rationally or irratio- 
nally ) difputed for, and not make another of your own , and 
dii'pute for that, andtskeit for a ronfuration. 4. But 'or 
my part, I tike not the Ads and Habits fo much todiff.-r ; 

D 3 but 


but ( a$ on the by I toucht it at firft, To ^ I (half coofirnt that 
yoa put both hereafter into the queftion : but yet remember, 
that I put them not in mine at firft. 

Pagt^lJ. You fay, [iVe are no'i^ come to the king and fcn»' 
daticn of this C ontr over fie ^&c.^ which you lay down in this 
Pofition, The habits of f^ectal dni[^favin^ Qr ace, are not only 
grAdftnllj^ hut fpecificallj dijiinli front the h:thits and A Sis of all 
common Grace rvhatfoever. ] 

^«/tf. I. I am wholly on your fide ; and where you have 
wrote a leaf for it, I think I have written many : fo that if 
bulk might go for worth and weight, I had over- merited you 
in this Controverfie. 2. But I intrcat you, if you delight in 
this kind of work, that hereafter you will make no hinges or 
foundations of controverfies with me without my own con- 
fent : either let me agree with you in the ftatingof the queftir 
on, or elfe pretend not that you difpure againft me. 

Your reafons to page 349, do learnedly militate for the 
Aflertion that I maintain : and though fomc words on the by 
lie not fo even with my conceptions, yet I tankfully accept 
your confent in the main. 

Your principal pofition alfo pag. 5 ^ 2. is the fame with mine 
and I have no mind to quarrel with fo faft a friend, yet I am fo 
far off Becayjfts and Maldonates mind , at to think that where 
miraculous and juftifying faith are together , they differ no 
more ( at moft) then the fenfitive and rational foul in the fame 
man. But I am not of their mind, that they are not feparable. 
And for hiftorical Faith, if youmeantheaffentto the truth of 
Scripture, I take it to differ from juftifying faich af much as the 
Intelled doth from the man, and no more. And for tempora- 
ry faith, I take it to contain ( oft at left ) more then bare Af- 
fenr, and to be a fuperficial common AflTent, Confent and Affi- 
ance,having materially allthe Adsof faving faith, but none 
of them infincerity, that is with a rooted predominant Habit, 
and prevalent effedual Ads, but is a livelefs, dreaming , unef- 
fedual thing. But this on the by. 

To your reafons. i. I confent ^/>.ij^. 354. ) that the Z-Mf-r 
uftoiy i yet(asD'. Harrisfainht) hethanatural tendcrnefs, 
fometiraes, and a fupcrficia! t.^ndernefs from common Graces. 

2. I 


z. I confent that Temporary faith hatb not ^deftk of earth J 
or [[ much earthy J as Chrift faith, OMat.i 3.5. which is the 
fame with Q no root ] for had it not had fuperHcial rooting, it 
had never come to a blade and car. What infition the branch 
is in Chrift not bearing frait had, i John 15. I leave to fur- 
ther enquiry. But fome,how they are faid to be in Chrift. 

3. I grant that the Temporary faith brought forth no fruit 
thitis ncfpecial Fruit ' for no doubt, but it may bring forth, 
much common fruit' moft think fo far, as that fuch maygtve 
their bodies to be barnt. And Mr. Shcpheard in your Book 
doth mention a great deal. 

4, I cafily grant alfo that Temporary faith is cowardly, and 
fails in trial : in all this we are agreed. 

Pai^e 35:9. You begin your mon dijlintl coyifirmations : 
Though I agree with you in the caufe, yet nor in every word of 
yourConfitmatione. Your ^T^^\f(trtz\cc\%\n\_the Nature of 
the Priiictp/es,<^ caufes whence they jpring-^ Common bilifbe'tng 
geni^itllj an accjHiyed difpojition or Habit prod tee i b) the ubilitj 
of our Natural ZJnderlianding^affifted^ith good education and 
indiiflry : but javing Faith the immediate wnk. of the Spirit : 
one n Habitus acquifitu% the other infufus.J ftyinf. f , Either 
you mean here the Extrin[ick^[_Principles a*id Caufe t^oi the //j- 
tri)j1ck.. If the Utrinfick^^ then either the feul , thefacu/tier^ 
or the Habiti : not the Habits ; For its thofc that are now the 
fubjeA of your Qiieftionj ^and therefore you call them not [the 
Pnnciptet and Caufei ] themfclves , though you might call 
them fo as to the Ads. Not the/^c«/r;>/, nor the /<?«/; for 
you yield before thatthe/<>«/or faculties of Regenerate and 
nnregenerate differ not fpecifically . It is therefore the extrin^ 
fick, [principles aid Caufes'] that you meant. And if fo , it is 
either Qod himfe/f, or fome AHion of God . hat is a miUle thing 
between the /Igey.t and the EffeEl , or h is the In(l*umentat 
Caufe. Notthe ^njlrument : For i. You exprcfs a Higher 
cauie, 2. and chefame wordistheinftrument of God in cau- 
fing a conamon & fpeciai Faith: the fa me feed fell on the good 
ground and theftony. Nor is it God hvmfelf y^u that mean : 
ior hcisnotof ny^fciV/, much lefs of (^t^rr^wt (piciu, as he is 
the Principle and Caufe of different effefts : *^or is his tvill fo : 



for his Will is his EfTencc. Yet I would ^as aforefaid J confefs 
that Denommatione extrmfeca , his iViliot Lovt may havedi> 
vers Denommations ^ according to the diverficy of fjf:'^/ .- But 
yet not denominated jpecificallj divers from every diftinct j^fc»- 
ficAtion in the effefts. Nor can it be your meaning,! think,that 
fpecificalljidifiir>6i Wilis in God are the cattfes : For you fay 
fag.ZT.'^- 323. \_The favour and Love of Go J to his people Comes 

not no^ into confiieration, 1 . This '{ifubje^ive in Deo, 

2. "Becatife the Grace of God in this notion at it ftgnifieih his love 
toM is not capable of any degrees j the Love of Qod , oi all other 
^Els of the Divine Nature^ being lil^e God himfelf abfolutelf 
Jimple without any compofition ejfentialor gradual.] Not to en- 
quire how that which [«r God himfelf can be /ike God himfelf, ] 
Cfor we all fpeak incongraoufly fometimes ) from hence its 
plain that it is not the Love of god as in himfelf that you call 
\jhe Principles or Catifes»]lt remams then that it muft be feme 
A^ion or Emanation intermediate , or as pafling from God to 
theeffed, But thats not likely neither : For i. You feem to 
be moft friendly to the Thomtfts in other points; and you know 
that they and many more (with many of our own ) do main' 
tain that there is no more Execution or Operation neceffdry 
expurte'Deihwx.h^xi meer Velle ; and that his willing the tffed 
to be thu5 or thus, at this or chat time exiftent. doth produce it. 
Z. Your felf faid, ttbi fhp. [ The favour and Love of God is 
fubjedive in Deo. &terminacive only wnobis-] 5. If there 
bean c/»fr/«fro»diftinft abepera»te (^reove^atd^ itisaC''^^- 
tnre or the Creator : Not the Creator^ for he is the Agent ; if 
a Creature, they that will prove a fpecifick diffcrrence in it, muft 
firft tell Us rvh-it creature it is ? and fhew us the general Nature 
of it. 4. Many Philofophers think it inconfiftenc with Gods 
immediate Attingencie and Operation, immediatione vtrtutis 
^fuppoftci. So that [ fcarce think that in this you place- the 
fpecifick Difference, or gather them to betoto ccelo dflant^ as 
you fay- 

But itisnotimig'nablethat you may mean tooppofe the 
extririfick and intrinficl^ Caufes in the different perfons , as if 
[_man!o^n faculties 2 Were the ciufeof Temporary isiizh, and 
[^GodsVi^iH] the caufe of /4t/;»^ faith ? No,I dare notenterraia 



fuch a conjedure.For 1. 1 doubt not but you willyield^that tern* 
porary faith could not be produced wiihouc the will of God : 
At leal>, they that think man cannot determine his own will 
to the ad of lin, till God dorh phyfically predetermine 't; will 
I hope yield that man cannot Temporarily Believe without the 
willof God. 2. And I reft aflured that ycu will yield that 
thatmanf foul, or faculties, is the fubjedof both common and 
fpecial Grace. 3 . And thar the faculties sre as much efficient 
iniheProdudionof fpecial Grnceasof common. So that if 
they are not efficient of fpecial Grace, then not of common. 
Of which more anon. 4, Or if that were denied, yet as long 
as they have both the jaine willof God for their Original, you 
confefs one to have as High a Principle as the other. And 
though fas is faidj denomiyiatione extrinfecd^ we may fay thacic 
is a j^eci U LovezbsLZ is thecaufcofone, and bu' ^common love 
that IS che C3ufe of the ocher, f becaufe one is the willing a fpe- 
cial good, and the other of a common ) yet it is ZJnity that is 
the Original of muliipliciij. One Will of God caufeth 

One more con jedure : May you not mean that Ct^t/iww*- 
diatlj iahccaufeof //jfciW fakh^and (jod by the Word is the 
caufe of Tewf o^<a>-j' fdith , and fo oppofe the principal canfe 
a'one^to the Principal rriihthe In^ruHtent? No, that cannot 
be: bccaufe i. As long as God is the Principal caufe of both, 
by the fame will, the ufe ofan Inft;ument in one only will prove 
no fpecifick Difference. 2. Becaufe our Divines (and others, 
except fome EnthufiAJls) are commonly agreed, that the word 
is the Inftrument of working faving faith a« well as Tempora- 
ry (though I confefs I know not how that will confift with their 
opinion, that fay the Habit is before the Ad, feeing it is fcarce 
conceiveable how the Word fhould caufe a Habit without firft 
caufing an Ad. j 3 . Bcfides, its commonly affirmed, that God 
doth effed immediatione virtutis r>~ f::ppfiti , as wejl when 
there is an Inftrumcnt as when there is none. 

I am therefore left uncertain of yourfcnfe : but wh'ch ever 
it is, I fee not how it will hold> It is mo;t likely that you di- 
ftiiguifh of Gods ymdm operanii^ as ro fome In^nxe^ or cauf- 
till AHion between the Agent and the Subjed, becaufe the fr.- 

E fufon 


faftoH ind Ac<juifiii')n mentioned, rather Intimates that then the 
other. As if by a mcer General affiftance or concurfe God 
caufed Temporary faith, and by a fpecial coucurfc or afliftance 
or Pf e-detcrmination he caufed fpecial faith .- But befides what 
is faid before to that, if we might imagine fuch a mediate Be- 
ing between God and the efifed, as is capable of fuch a diffe- 
rence as you exprefs, yet that here there can be no fuch thing, 
will appear by what follows, but I willfirftconfideryourown 

You fay, that [ common 'Beliefe is an Ac t^uired faith produced 
hjtbeAbtlityofouro'^nuncitrllaftdiKgi, ajfified ^ithgoodedu- 
cation and indujfry.] tyfnf^, i. There is oft as much ufe of 
our own underftandings, induftry, and of Education for a fpe- 
cial faith as a Temporary ; But thefe alone will not ferve turn 
ly. 2. You feem here and all along this Paragraph , flatly to 
maintain that Temporary faith is only thus of our felves, or 
only Acquired, and not wrought by any other help of God, 
and his Spirit, then what is Generally neccfliry to all Ads. But 
that common or temporary Faith is the work of Gods Spirit 
t% well as faving faith, is moft cxprefs in Scripture : And that it 
may ai truly be called Infnfed^ and that it is from a fpecial a jp. 
y?/»«(r/ of the Spirit, I (hall prove : (fptcialil fay, asoppofed 
to mier aenera/ htip or concurfe , though not fpecial , as that 
ft^nifieth what is proper to the fa ved. ) i . As to your feif you 
confefs,/><«^.358. [that there are many common Graces of the 

foul fometimes immtditttly and extraordinarily infitfedby 

(jod.] And if fome common Graces are infufed, you are much 
difabled from proving that the Temporary or common Grace^ 
of the beft of the unregcncrate is not infufed. 

2. The word [/«/»y?o»] being a Metaphor, rauft be refolved 
into that proper cxprefiion which you will own. If it fignifies 
but a Collation, Donation, or effe(^ual operation of the Holy 
Ghoft then common Graces are /nfufed&s well as proper. If 
if fignifie an Operation without means, fo neither common nor 
proper Grace is ordinarily infufed f^t Icaft into the Adult.) If 
ir fignifie that which is Given by more then General Provi- 
dence, andrequireth more then our own induftry and Educa^ 
lion (which you mention) to attain it^then this common Grace 



H fnfufed : ( Wc call it common, not becaufe all have it , nor 
becaufea Help common CO all is enough to work icj but be- 
caufe it is fo common to the uofandificd, as no: to be proper to 
the Saints. ) 

J. 1 know no Scripture that appropriatcth the Title of [/«- 
fttfed] to the Grace proper to the Saints ! And furc I am that 
fome meani is appomted to be ufed for the Acquifition of fpc- 
cial Grace : And therefore fo far as thofe means fuccecdjt may 
be called ^^c^uired^tis weW ^s InfufeJ. Prov.i.f^. The Pro- 
raife of Ittfmfion and Effufton^ \ I will pour out my Spirit to you] 
is either meant of common mercy ^q, d. / ^iS pou' out the tt/tch- 
ings and perfwaftont of my ipiritto joti^ in mj fVord ^ and tht 
ttachin^ of my iMmiliers. ] Or elfe, if it fpeak of InJHfion efpt- 
C»4/C7r<«c*,itreqnircth[ Tttrnmgat Qedt Reproof ~\ a« a meanes 
antecedent; that of //<«. 44 3.^,5. & foel-2.i^,2g. are com- 
monly expounded of common as well ai fpecial Grace : and 
one of them is fo expounded by the Holy Ghoft, ^JZ/ 2.17,18. 
Zech. 12.10 feems to fpeak only of fpecial Grace; but fome 
extend it further. 

4. Certain I am that both the Gifts of Prophefie, Tongues, 
Healing- c^r. are (7ti/f«, yea I»fufed by the Spirit j and that 
Temporary faith is the Gift of the Spirit, and not meerly Ac- 
quired as you defcribe. This therefore is the main thing that 
yet I find my felf to differ from you in : I conceive that thofe 
chat were enliglrntd ^ andtaflid of the Heavenly Gift , and ^ire 
made partakers of the HolyGhofl , and have tafled of the good 
irordofGod^ a'ldthe po'^-^ertofthe^orldto come (had more then 
meeraquired ^ As or Habits. How elfc are they faid to be 
maiepirtikjers of tht Holy Ghoji ? And how arc they faid j to be 
firMifiedby the blood ef the Covenant ^and after to do defpight to 
the fpiri't of Grace ^ if they had none of the fpiricof Grace ? 
Heb. 10. !().&: 6.4,5, ' fpeak on fuppofition that the common 
Expofi'ion be found, that takes thefc Texts as fpeaking of com- 
mon Grace. I confefsl have not fuch high thoughts of mans 
fufficiency a. of himfeif incftate of unrcgeneracie.is to think 
(as you here feem to do) thac he can acquire fuch things by his 
ownunderftanding. indiiHrVjind by Education, without the 
work of the Spirit of Chrift,(yca the immediate work (though 

E 2 not 


not without means) as Scripture tels us the unregenerate have 
poffcflcd. I think their Grace is cali foboles too; and that 
Nature and induftry will not reach fo high of tbemfclvc$,or by 
general eoncurfe, as to [iva/h thefe fjPine , andcaufe them to 
efcapethe pollutions of the ^orid^ through the kyo^Udge of the 
Lor tl ani Saviour J efpu (^hri(i^ 2Pet.2.20 2I. Toreceive the 
H^ord vp'th J7, Luke 8.1?. and helteve for a while : John 2. ^ 3 . 
24. To fpare citations •, fee but all thofe great things that Mr. 
Shepheard in your Book afcribethto Hypocrites,& judge whe- 
ther they are not beyond our corrupt nature to reach by way 
ofmeer Aquifition? WhenPWhath [given lu to underfi and, 
that no WAn can fay that Jefns is the Lord^hm by the Holy Ghoji, 
1 Cor. 1 2. -i. And though its like he hath refped to thofe times 
of perfecution, when confeffing Chrift was the way to fuffer- 
ing , yet how far many unfandificd ones have gone in confef- 
fing him,and fuffering for him, I need not tell you. [ There are 
divtrfttiet of Gifts-, but thefn^ne Spirit. To one li given the upord 
efwijdom by the Spirit j to another the ^'ord of Knowledge by the 
fume Spirit : to another faith bj the fame Spirit- ^By one 

Spirit we are all 'Bupiiz.ed into one Body i Cor. 1 2. 7, 8,9, 

1 2,29. I find. One Spirit^ and one rvay of Giving Gifti^ with- 
out your diftindion : but no mention of any fuch gifts with- 
out the Spirit by our own Acquifition.SeeC7<i/.3.i.2,3,5.£'^i. 
5 9. I fohn 4.2,^. 

I would give in many more of my Reafons , but they lie to- 
gether in Gregor. Ariminenf. in 2. fent. Di/l. 26.27, & 28. j^ 
I. fol 84. &c. Who againft (omc^femipelagian Moderns main- 
' taineth [ i. ^mdhomo fecundum prafentent (latum, (lante in- 
fiuentta Dei, generali non potefl per liber urn arbitriftm,^ natura- 
'ltae']U6,ab i. fpecialiDei auxilio agere alicjaem aElumrnoraliter 
bonum. 2. O/lendst aliam partem, fuijfede Articulii damnatia 
*JPelagij'. autfiinaliijttodifcordat, mag^^ diviare a Catholica 
verttatecjHamdi'ium Peltigj (andyecfome think verily they 
are running from Belagtantfm,v/bi\Q they run into this opinion) 
C^ ab hoc ipfam non ejfe ab aiiqito Cfitkolico fufUnendam. 5. He 
folveth the arguments brought for the affirmative. And though 
in defining an ad morally good , he fpeaks as you and I do, yet 
he fblly iets you know that he fpeaks of the afts of the Repro- 


bate themfcl ves, and fuch asantccedeJuftification,ortme con- 
verfion ; and therefore infers hence, fo/. 85. ^Mod ntmo foteji 
mertri primam gratiam de Condigno , ntc etiam de corgruo ■, 
coMtra aliejuorum fenteKtiam modernorum : ] adding [ nomine 
ant em gratU^ non folttm fign^jico gratiam gratum facientem,fed 
etiam gratis datamy& Hmvtrjaliter ^nodcun^^ Dei (pectJtlt aJ- 
juto/iftm aibene optrandum, &c.] Whereas according to your 
wayofmeer Aquifition of a Temporary faith ; men may do 
that which the Papifts call meriting ciecongmo the firft Grace. 
Not that hed^nieth fimply that which they call meritum de 
coftgruo, but that any have it without the adjtitorium fptciale 
as he cals it, in oppofition to the wflnenti»i gtnerfiUs. ( And his 
Argument is confidcrable : Neme potejt habere tiftte primam 
gratiam^ aflum Aiiijuem liberi arbitrij non culp^ibiltm : igitur nf 
mode cond\gy;o vel de congrtto poteji mcreri p imam gratiam : 
Tatet confcijitentia : tfttia nu/Im m'retur mfi per aHm liberi ar- 
bitrij ^ &certiim tfi quod non per n/t^Him culpabilem rucretur 
gratiam^ fed pontu / ce'tam.] And foLS'y. C0/.4. He (hewi h : 
hefpeakseven of the ads of Catechumens and luch as arc m 
mortal fin. So : hat it is not only the Ads that are proper to the 
Eled thiths fpeaksou His Argumcntsaremany and weigh- 
ty, which I lliall not recite feeing they lie before you ; And he 
confirms it largely from the conlcnt of the Ancients , Cyprian^ 
c^mbrofe, Htereme^ Augujline^ Damafcen^ Projper^ Gregory^ 
Jftiore,^c. And confuteth the contrary Reafons wich much 
ftrength, which Scotus^iin^ his friend Ock^amyAdam and others 
bring for the contrary, which twel'e Reafons contain. I con- 
jedure the chief ftrength of what can be faid for that caufe. 
Many more you know have copioufly done the fame wor><: but 
I refer you to onc,for brevity ,as fpeaking moft that fticks in my 
mind againft your dodrinc of Natural acquifition of the Tem- 
porarie faith ; which Arimtmnfts thought is PeUgianifm or 
X^orfe, though i intend not fo to charge you. 

Laiily, I may add, that if you are ot the now prevailing opi- 
nion, that no Agent natural or free can ad without the Pre de- 
termination of God as the firft immediate Phyfical Caufe. I 
cannot fee how you can polTibly fpecific common and fpecial 
Grac: fromihenunner of Divinc produdion , norwhy all 

E 3 out 


our ads good and bad are not equally by Infufttn. Forthoagb 
you may change the name, yet that which you call ^nfufion of 
fpecial Grace, can do no more then fhj fie ally ^ immediately^ in 
fttferahlj a* the caufa prima fmpliciter »ecejfana^ determine the 
^m I and fo much is faid to be done in every ad of temporary 
Faich, yea in every natural,)'ca in every wicked ad. (Though 
I muft profefs ray felf in this point of the Judgement of ^4«- 
fcKtw^ which the forefaid gre^. Ar. following tyfugujline) 
before him thus exprefleth , that [ Dem jtiv*t nos ipfum <iC- 
um immediate efficiendo^ & non fo/ttmjuvat Dens ad bonum pat" 
ttAliter co-efficiendo ^ if uod ej} modu4 Communis ^tto concurrit ad 

CHJi4Jl:bet creati agerttii quentlibet fed Ad proditElionem 

a^H4 mali folftm primo modo {per inflftentiam generalem) Dem 
eoKCHrrit ; qnia nonfacit voluntutem agere aBum malum, ftcut 
facit earn agere a^ttm botium.'] But ad hominem : this exception 
is valid againft any that go on the Pre-dcterminate grounds. 

Let the Jefuits then call ail Temporaries, Graces [Habitut 
ac^Htfitoi ^ crdinii naturalist Let them call l\\\ifaitk) but [ /j- 
dem humanam^ as produced by the power of humane Caufes ] 
as you fay j For my part I will not Pelagianizc with the Jefu- 
its ; nor can I believe what you further repeat, that [common 
Belief is not Divine in refpeU of the Principles from whence it 
fiowes, but generally of an humane defeent andpedegree.] I do not 
chink that we are fufficient of our (elves to think one of thefc 
good thoughts ofourfelves'^hxxt that all our fujfciencj u ofG^H^ 
Vpho workith in m both to mil and to do ; from vohom cemeth eve- 
q^ood gift^ even fuch as the Temporaries. Yet do I not charge 
l_y ou or Suarez, or the mzrj others] whoever they be, to be mi- 
fiakjin injour Mttaihjficks: Far be it from me to compare with 
you there. Only I cannot be of every mans mind that excelleth 
me in the Metaphyficks. 

Se CT. V 


Sect. V. 

[Second. \7 Our fccond Reafon is drawn from the nature and 
1 proper Afts of both qualities, ( page 3,61. ) 
f*v'ttig Belief is the firfi fpiritual tife^ but common 3eiief no 
pjrt of it. 1 Anfwcr. This Reafon fcems to be further 
fetcht then I dare allow of, if you mean by [[ The nature of 
the quality and AHs ] the matter it felf For if the t erm [ Lift |, 
be Metaphorical here, or it be a Civil or Moral Life that is 
meanr, then I (hall allow you, that only fpccial Cjrace is this 
fpecial'moral Lift : but if you (Lould mean a natural Lift, or 
a common moral Zf/ir,I (hould not grant that all but the Saints 
are deftiture of thefe. i. You cannot prove that the term 
Lift may not be given to common faith ( as goodnefs is ; and 
as Entity is to Accidents ) though that moft eminent y^^c/V/ of 
Faith, called faving, be alfo eminently called our Life, fori 
f\nd.\njMal.ii, That the Here ticks or Apoftates there menti- 
oned «, are (aid 10 be tnice dead ^ and plucked up hy the roots ^ 
which implyethjtbat fome kind of life they loft which once they 
had, and the feeilhht fprung up by the fiony ground and among 
thorns had a blade that had fome kind of life ; and the branches 
oj C hri/i thit9iTe f'ult/efs yet Either not , till they abide no 
more in him^ John 15.26. The receiving of the Jews into a 
Church-ftate again W?/// be[lifefrom the dead ]Rom. 1 1 . 1 5 EK.tk, 
16.6. And its called a /^i/Jr, that the backfliding fall from, 
E^ek,. 1 8. and 33.11. Bur fuppofe the name of Life be im- 
proper to give to the Temporary f who wants no doubt the 
fpecial Ltfe. ) This proves not a phyfical fpecifike difference. 
And to tfie Queflion, [n^hy common belief n not this fpiritual 
Life in a lefs degree ? J 

I anfw BecauTe it is a matter uncapable of that moral form 
which is denominated Ltfe ^ your inftance of ^<i/or , being 
of racer phyfical confideracion,i$ alien and impertinent : your 
inf^ance of AVrrar/ is more pertinent. And to that J anfwcr^ 
That though fortitudo moralis in minori gradu Jencminat fub- 
jetiumfuum forte ; Yet are there fome degrees of the matter, 
which are incapable of the form and name of fortitude j 



^though in ourcare,the lower degree is capable of the name of 
Faith.yec not of chc fame fpecifikc forro,as the higher degree J 
Yea forae degree of fortitude^ overcome by a far greater de- 
gree of Cowardize, may not denominate the fubjed fimply 
forte ^ but orA^ fuurtdHm (juid : nay if the queftion be fimply 
put, whether that man be valiant that alvvaies runs away, S-c, 
itis fim[Jly tobedenied, though he may have fome fmall con- 
quered raeafure of fortitude, becaufe the man is to be dcno- 
mina'ed from his predominant difpofiiions,and therefore to be 
called Pufilianimoui, and not valiant. Temperance, Juftice, 
&c. confift in a certain mediocrity of matter, and neither of 
the extreams are capable of the form : And where fomewhat 
of the form is, it will not ferve to dedominatc the man againft 
a contrary predominant vice. One man may be fo far tempe- 
rate as to abftain from excefs of meat, and not from exccfs of 
drink, recreation, c^c. And another may have To muchuni- 
vcrfal Temperance as fliallrcftrain him for a few daies, and 
againft fmall Temptations, but yet once or twice a week, a 
ftronger Temptation leadeth him into fornication, gluttony, 
drunkennefs, (^c. If you ask roc whether this be a temperate 
man, I ftiould fay no, but an intemperate : But if you ask me 
whether there be any degree of Temperance in him, and ewhe- 
thf r /■» tantnm^ oxfecnndum ^nid^ he be temperate,! (hould fay 

The leaft degree of Sub'ieElioK or Obedience may in tantum 
vet fecHndttmijHtdy denominate the fubjed accordingly; but 
yet fuch fubje^ionand obedience as is due to a Judge or 7«- 
fiice of Pfdff ,denominateth not the perfon lojat »rf:ti>jen^and 
Obedient &s is neceffary to the Soveraign Po'^er, As all Power 
of government denominatcth the Subj^A 'Potent or a Govern 
nor. Rut there is none but a certain degree (even the higheft) 
that will denominate a man a Soveraign or Majeftick fimply. 
So I have ^\\\ acknowledged chat the very fpecifick form and 
name of laving Faith is not agreeable to that degree which 
Temporarieshave, though a lort of Paichitis, and is called 
fo in Scripture. 

The fum of all my difcourfes on this Subjed is but this. To 
the Effence of faving Faith, hoveiSubjeSlioH^c^c. Icis ne-. 



ceflary. i. That the Object be apprehended in all its cfl"«;n- 
tialRefpects. 2. Thatthe A«be fointcnfe and fcrious, and 
fuitable to this Object ( and fo the habit )as tha": it m»y be ftat- 
ediy predominant in the man againft its contrary. Two forts 
of Faith therefore fall (hort of be ng formally thisfavingfaith. 
I. The one is theirs that do ferioufly believe in the fame 
Chrift pcrfonally confidercd, and in the gcHerall or in moft 
pMrts of hu office^ a? we do : bat they leave out fomewhat of 
the OhjeSi^ that iscffcntial to him as the Saviour, e g. They 
believe in him asC^od and roan, as one chit hath undertaken 
the oSce of a Redeemer and Mediator, and hath died tor hn- 
ncr«,& in general is the Prieif,Prophec and Kirg of the Charch, 
and a J ui^.ifier and Sandifier, giving Repentance and RemilTi- 
onof fin; but withall, when it comes to the applicatory con- 
fenting parr, thev believe not in him as their King, and their 
SantSitier by his Word and Spiri% nor as one that (hall lave 
them from their raigning (in. Now this it not really the Chri- 
ftian faith, or faving faich, becaufe it wanteth an effencial part, 
it being effcntially to Chrift, as the SAviour ofertd^ and the 
objeft of faving fai;h to be applicatorily [cJ-T/j Saximr in far- 
tic-th^for the p irdoning anddefireJitt^ of mj fi»t.'] Not that we 
have a(turance, that he will eventually be fo to me : but that we 
our felves do consent that he befo tou$. As a Phyfician is not 
believed in by me (^ a fick Paricnc ) asaPh\fician,unlefs Icon- 
fent that he is my Phjfiti^n^ind that he cure my D>/(prf/^,tbough 
yet I msv pofllbly havedojbtsof his willingncfs,or of the fuc- 
ceff. As the A^ is fpccified by the Objed, fo thele Believers 
have a faith in he fame Chrift as we, but fecunJum cfuidy and 
not fi/:rf//, and therefore fimply •, I hey are not Bel evers 
in the Chrifliin faving fenfe , or if they believe in Chrift 
as God and man thac will pirdon and fanAirie, but not as a Sa- 
crifice for fin ; This is not fimply and fully ( taking in all the 
KflVntiahofbis ofTicc j the fame Chnft thu we b-H eve in,and 
fonot the fame Faith. So if they love God a? gooo,but not 
ss the only fu'paffirg fuperlanve Cjood, rhis is no: to love hira 
rs God and {o not to love the fame God as we do. 

2. The other fort of the iinfcund are fuch as do apprehend 
Ch ift under all the fame confideracions as f6und Believers do, 

F and 



and do apprehend Qod as the chief fuperlative jjood, and have 
Tome anfwerablemotrons of the Will and Affedions .- but it is 
but by a notional fuperficial,uneffedual apprehenfion ; and 
hath but an anfwtrahle confent ^2ind is overtopped and maftered 
by a contrary Hal>ie and ^n:ion of the loul ; either as the un- 
belief is more then the Btlief^znd therefore rules the heart and 
Life, or as the regard to the Crcature,is more then the regard 
to Chrift ( for want of fo effeftual and operative an apprehen- 
(lon of his Truth and Gocdnefs as we have of the Creature, ) 
and confi quently the Heart is carried our more to the creature 
then to Chrift or to the Father. This is not the Chriftian faith, 
bccaufe it is not an intenfe & ferious ad or habir,fuch as is fie to 
denominare the man He doth not believe or love God hear- 
tily .^t all : A I'elief and Love indeed he hath, but morally and 
reput^cively it is as Kone,for God will take it as noKe^ as to anyr 
fciving benejit'.^ox he that hath more Vnbeli^fthtn'Beltff^Ks not 
^\m^\'<j z Believe, hut^nynheUever : He that hath more a- 
verfnejs then Love is fimply no Lover : H'.r that haeh more Jif- 
loya-tj and *T>ifobedience then loyalty and obedience^ is not fimply 
to be called Lojal and obedient at all. He that confidering all 
thingSjfees reafon to hate his fin,and hath feme mind and Will 
againft if, and yet bath in other refpects more mind to it, and 
more will to keep it then to leave it, \% fimply impenittni, and 
hath no Repcntar.ce. And yet a real fubdued motion of Belief, 
Derire,Love, Repentance there may be in all thefc pcifons , 
and fuch as fometimes in Act will feem prevalent , though 
Habitually, and in the courfe of >4'f?/o« -hey are not fo. As 
fin in Act Teemed prevalent for a time in ''Dsvid, when in Ha- 
bit and the bent of life it was not fo, 

Suppofe a Souldier take fuch a man for his general, and 
obey him ordinarily as a General, and yet being corrupted by 
the General of the fnem;e«, hatha prevalent Will or Pur- 
pofe to defcrthim, betray him, and do hima mifchief u/hen 
time fcrves. This man is in a fort a "^ouldier and obedient but 
deferve-'h hanging rather then Rewatd. '^o much more for 
explicariop, and to fliewyou'why a common fnirh i? not cal- 
led by the name of our fpiritual life ( the perfon that hath it , 
being (Hll under eondemnsiCjon, and in a ftate of death : yea 



why it is not to be called the Chrittian fai:h, nor the perion a 
Chriftiafl,but Analogically, ;. . , .. 

Se c T. VI. 

Pa£e^6^. T^O your third Reafon I anfwer, i. That I 
X am not of your mmd, nor do you prove it, 
that common Belief is made up but of two principal ingredi- 
ents, Notnia & Apnfm : It hath as many Ads as faving 
Fai:b. An AHiar.ce or relling nn Chrift,. and on the Promife 
with lome kind of confent of the Will, may be in this common 
Faith- L T^'^y fi^") thtri elves r-pon the God of 1/rael^tloe Lord 
cfHoap^ &c. 7/4*182. ] 

7. I grant that a certain llrength may be found in common 
Faich ; bur the ftrongcir, greatei^ firmeft,iseven in degree be- 
low the ueakcft of a lound Believer. For, i. Asth^:diffe- 
rence (for ought I yet have heard ) is not immedcately difcer- 
nable in the Aftsof the Intelled themfelve*; but in thofeof the 
Wil!,and fo of the mtelledual Afts by the Will ; fo the weak- 
eft Belief of the fandificd ptevailech with the Will, and over- 
powrech all refifting Arguments, when the ftrongeft faith of 
others cannot do-it. 2. And though the Grace infufed into 
the Will It ftVfjbe a caufe of this , yet doubrlefs the Tntelledual 
AfTent is alfoa caufe ■, And therefore that Affent that can do 
more i< furely the ftronger. There is a difference even in- 
ftrcngth and vigor , where there is fo great a difference in the 
efficacy. What y/7fc»V/ foever It be of, that Light which will 
fhew all villble things, ( fuppcfun fupp'jy.en.i:-!,) is a greater 
tight then that which either ftiews but greater things,or (hews 
them but dimly. And that heat is greiteft which will heat 
m>ift, ( C£terisp.zrihui. ) The unlandihed would not be fo 
often cilled the Ch:/^rcnofd.irh7ffs, and faid to be /-A^^, and 
indarkr.cfs, and the found Believers called the CkHdrin ofii^ht^ 
and faid to be ir, r,»d of the Light, if we had not a greater light 
ihwi they. 

3. Nor d ) 1 believe that the Temporaries [_ AfTent, is pro- 
portionable to the mediums that produce it, J (or that in 

- F 2 fome 


fomefnch, at left produce ir. ) J thick fuch Believers may 
have infallible mtdtj^ and the very fame as produce the faving 
fditb of others f not including all caufes as fw*<^ia, but the o^- 
jeHivt Motives of our firft faith. ) 

4. I grant what you fay, pag.^6$. That the loweft degree 
of favin^ faith is really our fpiritual i ifejuftifies &c. which 
the higl>feft degree of common faith doth not. ]] Becaufe the 
highe^ degree of common faith either leaves out fomc efTen- 
tial pdrt of the object, or is lower and weaker then ihe low- 
eft degree of faving faith is. And you muftnot take it for 
granted that it is the Intellectual Acts or Habits only where 
the difference lies which you cxpreA, or the cheif part of that 
d fference. It is the Wills Act. ( for fuch there is in faith) 
that doth moft or much to this Acceptance Juftification, Sanc- 
tification, which you mention j which proceeds not only from 
the difference of Aflcnt.buc from the Grace which the W»ll it 
felf alfo hath received. 

5. A common knowledge I eafily Rrant there is in the un- 
fandified, ftronger in its kind then the knowledge of the Saints. 
That i$)Gramatically and Logically they (nay hare a far clearer 
undcrflanding of the fenfc of words, and of terms of Art,and 
complex Objeds , which arc appointed to be the means of 
knowing the incomplex, and things themfelves ( as God , the 
Redeemer, Heaven,(^r. jand may be able becter to defend any 
facrcd verity, and exprefs th.ir minds. And this you may call 
Mqftire^ k»orf>ledge if you pleafe, & in fome fort fay it remain- 
cth a diftindl thing from the other knowledge even in thefan- 
dified'.not but that it felf alfo is in them fandified & embodied 
with the refl of the new Man, but that the Knowledge of words 
and Propofitions, which is but an Inftrumental, mediate, fub- 
fervienr part of knowledge, is not the fame with the knowledge 
of the things themfelyes.cven God,Chrift,(^<:. But then I ftill 
maintain i . That Temporary Believers may have more then this 
rneer Difciplinary knowledge,even a certain illumination of the 
Spirit Revealing to them C hrift himrelf,and the powers of (he 
world to come,in fome Degree, H^/'.6. 4. z Per.i 20,&c. fome 
inward tafle of the matter, as well as a L.rammatical,and Logi- 
cal knowledge of the words, and fenfe. 2. That as the Difci- 
vlmA^j knowledge of the fenfe of PropoficionSj in the fandifi- 



cd and unfandified do not qnc^dmattriam differ by any Phy- 
fical rpecification, fo neither dath the common and fpecialiWM' 
mioation or knowledge and tafte of the fubjcct matter, or in- 
complcx object. 

C, You fay much in general herc,founding ai if you thought 
Cbcyond what your Thefis requireth you to prove jthat there 
were a Phyfical fpecifick Difftrencc in the matcer. Becaufe you 
do not plainly affert it, 1 will fuppofe it not to be your mean- 
ing .- Hut if really it be fo, and God (hall direct you to any 
more of this work, I earneftly intreat you above all the relt of 
your underraking to tell us plainly rvhat the Phyfical Forms are 
that /pecifie and denominate thefe feverat Jorts of Knj^'ledge^ 
Fai:h, Love^ Defire^ &c. That there is a »»<?>•<«/ Ipecihck Dif- 
ference we are agreed : If you aflert a P/j;'y7"cj/,plainly defcribe 
and denominate each Form,('for I doubt not but we are agreed 
that a Form there muft be thus to fpccifie and denominate. ) I 
Fn J Amffiiu ( .^IJertion Theolog. de lum. ?{at.(^ Grat. ) Dis- 
claiming a difference as to the Object, fubject , or lumen deft- 
r''nj cr de 'Ucet}so'^J!Elum,8cc. 2iS he ci\s the meditim; limitmg 
the Controverlie to the ^Lumen difpontns c^ eltvans fnLjtEl~ 
um: ut recipi.it] which he maintaineth muft be fupcrnaturai, 
and fo do I : but withall I maintain thatfomewhat of the fu- 
pernatural Li^htis given to many of the unfanctified. And 
whereas he faith that one fort of knowledge is Difciplinary fuch 
as a blind man(born) hith of Light , and ihe other is /«/«i- 
tive -^ exreprefenti ^ fet^ftmpercept'i : i. I am not convinced 
that any min in this life,doth intuitively or fendbly know God, 
or the Lord Jefus Chrift God and man , or the invifihle Glory, 
or Relative Benefits, fu.h as pardon, Juftification, Adoption, 
^c. And I am confident I have your confent. 2. And tor the 
Hiftory or any Enunciation of the Scipture, which muft be 
undcrftood by a Grammatical and Logical knowledge, we are 
agreed. 3. It is nothing therefore in all the world,that I remem- 
ber, that can fall into Controvcrfie about this Intuitive l^ow 
/fdj^z-jbuttheinwird pafllon^or actions of our own lou's. That 
the (oul do'h know its own knowledge and Volition mruilive- 
Iv, is the opinion of fome Schoolmen , and oppofed by others. 
Upon which account perhaps thofe of the firft fort , may alfo 

F » fay. 


fa\r,that a fanftified perfonmiy Itjtuitively fee the fincerity or 
holy nature of his own knowledge. Buc i. if that were, io 
and a common thinp, mc chinks doubting of finccrity (hould 
not be fo common with fuch. 2. Our affedions and Wills 
are thought by many to be more properly faid to be fe/t ^ then 
intHitivdy known, 3 . It is certain that the firft ad of faving 
faith can be no fuch thing as this : foramanmuft, at leaft io 
order of Nature, firft have a faving faith, before he can iKtui- 
r»z/tf/7 fee it in himfelf. 4. And this is nothing to our bufinefs : 
for it is not our own faith or love, or other inherent Graces, 
that is the Objed of our faving Faith ; buc it is God the Fa- 
ther, Son and Holy Ghoft,and the Proraife, c^r . which arc noE 
known by us mtHitivel) otfenfibly. ( Though the Letter of the 
Proraife is, yet the fenfe is not j much lefs the Truth. ) Yet I 
make no doubt but a true Believer being once juftified by faith, 
hath fometimes after fuch Peace with God, & (bedding abroad 
of his Love in the heart, as gives him (not an intuitive or fen- 
y»^/^ knowledge of Godhimlielf immediatly,bucj a lively Re- 
lifh and feeling of thofe precious fruits and tokens of his Love, 
which may be called an experimental knowledge that God if-, 
and that he is gracious, faithful, ^c. Seeing him more dearly 
in this Glafs of his Image on our own fouls , then in our firtt 
faith we faw him in the meer extrinfick Glafs of the Gofpel, 
Works, ^f. though in both the Spirit caufech the {ipprehenfi-' 
on. 5. And if this were any thing to us, yet fome inward tails 
the unfar.dified do attain. So that I cannot yet reach to un- 
derftand, that between the Knowledge, AfTent, &c-. of the fan- 
dificd.andthe higheft lemporaries, there is Phyficallyany 
fpecifick Difference, butonly morally : but a very great gra- 
dual difference alfo Phyfically. 

Your Similicude of the Light of the Sun and Moon , proves 
not that the matter of common and proper fiiih are f eafi- 
fca!iy-ph)ftcallj different , and then ( whatever ^ou inrend ic 
forjitsnotagainft rac. It is the fame Spirit that illuminatech 
both forts ; but the Sun and Moon are not the fame lliiiminac- 
ing luminar'cs : Nor is it a thing fully agreed 015, whether the 
Light of the Sun and Moon are fpccifically dif^incc ; nor of the 
HeaE of the Sun and of fire. S.iich Ock^m, Qj^id. /if.^.cj. 21. 




foL 4 8 . \_E^eUm diverji tjuftltm fpecielt pojfuMt ejfe a Cdufts di- 
verfarum ffecierum, licit »on idem effecftu : patei ds cdore^tjm 
potefi ef[e ab i^ne & a fole.'\ His Application fornewhat con- 
cernech our Caufe, [^ Ita efi in propifito .- Prmpts aE}uj potij} 
caufAriAbohii^ofinthabttu.-^ f^aliuaEliisejufdemfptcie^ vcn 
p teji Ciiuffirinijiab habitu^ 1 ( Therefore you cannot thence 
prove a fpecifick Difference of the Acts, that one is from a gra- 
cfODs Habit,and the other nor. ) 

Pti^e 367. You add, that [_Common faith u rot a*iy difp!>Jiti' 
cn^moralor Evan/elical, wherebjf the fttbjeB that hath tt, ts or 
can be difpofed (in the W?<«; rvt nA\ fpea\of ) for the introdttUion 
eftke Habit of fdv%*-'i Faith.^ 

yJnfrv. \ The ttvj- yopt woW fpeak, of] Are words that refer to 
fo many or uncertain paffages, that thence I will conclude,that 
you mean forae way which we difownasv^cllas you, though I 
fully know not what you mean. But that common C3race is pre- 
paratory to fpecial, is fo commonly held by P/ oteftants, (Q\rit- 
tially practical Divines j and fo plain in Scripture and Rcaf.in, 
that i fhall not trouble you with many words about it. i. He 
that ufeth Gods appointed means as well as he can, i more dif- 
pofed for the hi . fling of thofe means, then the wilfull defpifer 
or negjecter of them. 2. Heihat isKff>fr C^^^/? is more dif- 
pofed to come to him by faith, then he that is at a further di- 
ftance. 3, He that doth not fo much refift the Spirit, but uith 
fomc f.rioufnefs bcggeth for the Spirit and for faving Grace is 
better difpofed for it, then fuch as obftinatly refiit or fcorn 

Your firft Argument is, from our Death infm : the dead are 
undifpofed: I anfwer, y^i ly/^^^ they are fo : But i. It is fuch 
a Titath as hath a N-'turJ Lfe.^nd Reafonable foul, and moral 
Vertues and common Graces conjoined : and by thefc the 
dead may be Di''pofcd,though not by death, nor as dead : Al- 
low your /j>w/7^ its «/'^»j»/.r;*:f/. z. A condemned Traytor 
thats dead m Law, m ly by humble fupplication do fomeuhat to 
difpnfe hirnftlf for pardon, and Life : thcughl know our c:\fe 
req'^ircth much more. As I faid God would not h^ve appoint- 
ed ^ny means for ai unrcgenera'viem^n V) ufe in order to his 
Converfion, if the ufe of them did no whit difpofe u^ be con- 

, verted.. 


verted. I fay theraore ofchis, becaufel am greatly troubled 
with two forts of people in my own Partfli that are harping 
on this firing, [^fVe cannot gtve grace to our fehest mr be faved 
Tvitbout it ; nor can >^e have it till GoAgtvt it tu : which if he rvill 
do, weJhAll he faved : if he rvill not , a'l that we can do will not 
helpit.) This is the main objection chat Satan hath furnifhed 
I . fome Apoftate Heathens, that fpeak it in dtfign. 2. And 
many of the ignorant and prophane that thus are fetled in a 
neglect and contempt of the means of Grace : Its as good fay 
we lie deadinour plea fures till God will giveos Life, as lie 
dead in Prayers and Hearing Sermons , and forbearing our 
Delights J for we can do nothing to the quickening of our 

Your fecond Reafon is, [That our »?* birth U a ne^ Crea- 
tio»^ which ia ex mtteria indifpojita.] ^«/tt'. Ic is a new crea- 
tion ordinarily in materta difpo^ta : i^dnms foul was created 
in a Difpofcd or prepared Body. The Rational foul is created 
in the Embrio in the womb, in a difpofed body, yea many Phi- 
lofophcrs would perfwade us, not only in a body that hath firft 
a vegetative, but a fenfitive foul. Sure I am God can appoint 
men a couife of meins in which they (hall wait for his New 
Creation, and ordinarily blefs his own means, and make a lefTer 
blefsing a Difpofiiionto a greater, though all this be little to 
our firftControvet(ie. For when I call the common faith [a 
DifpofcioK] I talk t^ot of Difpoficions preparatory to lurcher 

To your third Re * fon I anfwer, i. Some common Grace 
is as foicly and wholly a gracious and fupernatural work, as fa- 
ving Grace : yet men may have a Difpofiton to that , there- 
fore to this. ^. The higheft Grace of theunregenerate is ve- 
ry ill fuppofed by you tobe but i^Hiitttral or artificial p^odti'T of 
our t^nderflanMngs.] A \ower fu pernatural Grace may be a Dif 
pofition towards a higher fupe'^natural Grace. Manscorrup:ed 
heart feems too fFuch exalced by you, wile you call him DeaJ^ 
and yet think he can Acquire the higheft Graces of Temporary 
Believe^^s without fupevnatural Grace. Why then do ycu call 
it common [Grace.] You know who tau ght men to call nature 
by the name of Grace. 



In your fourth Reafon,you ran again on the iamc fuppoiici- 
0n,thac [our oS»n underflandings helped bj edficttionjtarn'.ngand 
indnflrj^ can acquire common faith. J Even the hij;hcft of the 
Temporary(which you muft mean,or you fay nothings) Agamft 
which I again refer you to the forcfaid Difputation of e^rtwi- 
ntnftt^ who thinks he proves this PeUgiar.ilm.oT worfe. It is not 
onlyfaving Grace that is infufed. 2. Infufed fupernatural 
common Grace is no more of our felve?, then infufed fuperna- 
tural fpecial Grace. 3. To fay that .Gods common Grace 
difpofeth us for fpecial Grace is no more to fay that [it U of our 
felves~\ then it is, if we fiy ch jc a lefs Degree of fpecial Grace 
difpofech us co a greater Degreef Though in other refpeds the 
caGes diffor.) Do you as fully agree with Paul, 2 Cor.^.'y, that 
[we are not ftiffic ent cfeur feives toihink. ^*fy thing at of our 
ftlves^bnt our fuffiuer.cj is fifGoj, and PAJ/,i.i3. Th^t it it 
God that ^crkftliin m bo'h to \'\v/laidto do^ with the reft before 
cited, and then we ("hall not differ in this. For I eafily believe 
that faith and faving Grace is not of our felves , but the gift of 

To your fifth I f.iy, I am of your mind, that [ F^itb « not 
p'om fed ui on any precedent condition Sec] The iy^r^Hniant 
think o:herivife. Your Confequenc taken of moral fpccificati- 
on, Irtiligranc : but taken of Phyfical, feems to go inro the 
contrary extreara.There are certain!/ DifpofitionSjWhere there 
are no CovenantCondiiion?. See what of this I have faid out 
of Chem'Vt'ui in anfwer to Mr. Tombes Aiimidverfions^in the 
Difputarion o^Jttfi fica-ton^ if you feecaufe. 

To your fixth I fay, i. That no carnal manner tcmporary,fo 
pleaf.nhGol, as that tlie perfon is accepted intoSon-ihip or 
Reconciliation •, or thead onbcf.v^^if7<?, rerea dible^(2iX.\G^^ 
with any etcrnil Keward) Though fome think that [^Giving a 
ct4^ of cold wafer to a Difclple in th name of a Difciple , may be 
done by a Temporary that would not faff^r much for Chrift ; 
yet I cannot fay th it the Texc is not to be expounded of fuch 
a givmq, as comes from faving Love to Chrift ) But yet ftcun- 
(itiii (jHid or tn ttntum: A min unregeneratc may do that 
which is fo far pieafingto God, as that he will oft times and 
ordin.>r.ly deal the better with him in outward Kefpeds, and 

C deal 

( 40 

deat the better with li'm for his foul. If God bid him Head,. 
Hear, Pray, Conlider, or enquire of Minifters, as he bid Cor. 
ndim fend for P(ter,Qi bid them fearch the Scripcnre daily, ct-^^. 
he is better pleafed that men do thus ufe his means, then that 
they defpifc or negled them; and in this way he ufually gives 
his Grace. And thofe that have the beft common Difpofition, 
he ufudliy takes as moft prepared for faving Grace. Our 
Hooker^ John Rogers^ and other Preachers ordinarily thought 
fo, when they preacht fo much for preparatory works to Con- 
verHon: naming Humiliation, Defire,fome Hope (^c. I leave 
you to expound that, AEls ij.ii^ii. [_ Tkfft ( Bertan Jews) 
yXeremore NOBLE then thofe in Theflalonica , >,; that they 
reeeiveitht (Vord nifh allrea^inefs of min^^ and fe arched tie 
Scriptures daily )^htther thcfe thhgs '^ere fo : THSRSFOR^ 
mayy of them Believed.'^ Though C^i/z/iw thinks that it was net 
the fearchers but others because of them, that are faid [thtre- 
fore to Bel'xevje] (Which feems not the moft likely fence.) Yet 
he thinks that [hicfrimtuefiadfihw ittgrejfus , ut prorttptiji- 
fKUt ai [esjuendum y & ahdxcuto propria curni fen fu Oodles nos 
'Chrtfto & morigeros prtehamfts.] Ard how many Volumes 
had been written againft me if Ihad faid huz is Calvin (i^ld^ 
in A^ 17.12. \^ Non fpernenda ef} hac virtui feduUtM ^ ad) 
e^itain 'intintos ffiijfe p'aaicat Lucu fiieles in pdei fnz cowfir- 
irhatiofkm ^ iftulti enim ejui prirc'pio ebtillfuntj fiatimje ignavia 
iiedenteu dUmnitlla p'^ofeUHs cur a t^nguntur^ ejM(iIecftng,^fiiei 
femen perduntf] So that Cti/f'w thought common Grace was 
fuch a Preparation or Difpofition, as might be called f a Seed 
•cfFaith.^'Bm it were an endlefs task to cite all Protcflan:sthac 
write for this Preparatory Grace. 
. 2. I fui'ther anfwer, that carnal men may have much in 
them that i$ not carnal even the common graces of thcSfirir, 
and ibefe are not enmity to God, ihoiigh the carnal mind be •, 
nor is ^ od an enemy to them . 

To your feventh I anfwer. i. That though rot Hypocrites 
as fuch, or Devils be prepared for Gface. ^et inch as [^(>fgin 
in the Sp rit2 arsd have thehigheft graces thai; the unfanctified 
may have, arefofar difpofed for moic, fs that tl'ty do much 
m-ore (irdinar)ly^ receive faving Grs(ce,tt;e;) others do. 

! But 


ijutyoufay, [ IftheGofpelistrue, Its cviicntlj otkerWt/e^ 
j>nd (reneriiily thofe have hten converted to ChriJU^r.itj \^h:ch had 
notjuch meafures of Knoiv ledge aK^ common (jr ces : Vrhen thofe 
have notxirhich ha<J, as r^ff Pharifees, err. Ai fwer, that 
the Gofpel is true, I hope we ate agreed ; though we are 
too much unacquainted our felvcs with the nature of our own 
faith by which we do btheveir. And yc I am ccmfidently 
perfwaded that my AfiVrtion here Is truer ih^'n yours, unlefs 
(asits like) by this common Grace, you ftili mean ano[l>er 
thing then I do. I do not thirk that ^^riji.t/i or oWf*?, or 
the Sc' ibes or Fharifecs had much of the common Grace that 
I fpeak of, much Icfs. the highell meafur?. T'lat is not the 
hightft and moft dilpofitivc tominion • Jiacc which coi fifteth 
in Artsordifciplinary knowledge n being scj-i in:ed with chc 
Letters an J Words , and Pro;)Olh'ionsof the Law ; much lefs 
where it is joined with proud ftlf-tonct ;tcdncl«, and prefum- 
ption and i'elf.dclufion, bci' g fetded ly the miftaking of 
ihtir parts and formaiincs for true godlincU / ) in a conceit 
that they are already fand.ficd, anl fo bccom the moft ne- 
gligent of ail others in making out ro Ch. 'ft for Sanctification: 
The men that I fpeak of ttiar have a difpoficive comcnon 
Grace are other kmd of folks then you kera to talk of. They 
are fuch as are asfar abafc-d in the feeling of their fin and mi- 
fcry, and humbled by Attrition, ( as the Papiftscall it) and 
cr^ out of their fin and folly, and day and night do beg for 
Grace and Mercy ; As common Grace will carry them to io. 
And far it will carry them. And they are fuch as like the word 
and waiesof God, and think his fcrvants the beft andhappi- 
eft mcn,ard have many a wi(h that they were fuch therafelves, 
and that avoid as much of grofs and wilfull finning, and con- 
tinue as much in hearing, reading the word, enquiring confi- 
dcrarion, as common Grace may bring them to do, and they 
are fuch as have as much belief of the Gofptl, and as much 
dcfire after Chrift and holinefs, and heaven, and as much love 
to God and tlie Redeemer, and the Saints, as common grace 
canlead them to. And wi hall, that have ei:her a knowledge 
that yet they are fliort of true Chriftianity,or at l-^ft, are much 
afraid of it, (which no dqubt but common Grace may bring 

G z item 


them to. ) And therefore are under a prudent Impaticncy 
till faving Grace come in, and the Spirit have fcaledthemup 
to the day of Redemption, and are crying out, ff'hat fhall xve 
do to befaved} Thele are chey that I fpeak of, and not proud 
Th/i^ifets or unfandified Philolophers, or learned felf-efteem- 
ing men, that make themfclves believe, that they haveinfu- 
fed rpecial Grace, becaufe they can talk of it -.And that are fur- 
ther from thrift in the capical fins of heart r«bellion. Pride , 
vain-glory, Hypocrifiej Worldlinefs, if not fenfuality, then 
moft other men, Ics none of thefe men for all their Ads, 
5cience?,Languages, &c. That I fuppofe to have the higheft 
common Grace. Your Inftances therefore are not to the 
purpole and your condufion, />. 373. iseither impertinent or 
very unfound. 

I know that the conceit that common Grace is faving,may 
make the condition (5f fuch perfons more dangerous , then of 
fomc fcandalousfinners that are eafilyer convinced. But, i. 
Thofe perfons that are f) conceited, are far from the height 
of common Grace, as r/:;<r//tff/ are commonly inwardly more 
wicked then many of the fcandalou?.2.And it is not the com- 
mon Grace , but the mif-conceit for wsnt of more that is 
-the caufe of the danger of fnch men. Even fpecial Grace it feif 
may bcabufed:For though /^uji'm and the Schoolmen pucirin 
their definition,thatitisfuchL^»^ ntwomale utitHr^ ^ yet that 
muft be meant t^cientlj and not ohjUeivtlj : For T chmk a man 
may he proud of his Grace, and fo objedively mifufe it ; 
much more may common Grace be mifufed ; and yet it proves 
it not to be no Difpofition to fpecial '^race. 

The Cayion. 6. Concil i Ar^uftcanif which you cite, is >t kafl: 
as fully confented to by me as by you, viz, [ That thofe that 
think that Mercy is given to men that Without the Grace of Cjod 
do i>eiieve,fVi/i,defire aKdl^Ko:k^^ & confejfeth not that it is j^iven 
us from Cjod hy the infufion and tnfpiration of the holy Cj hoji in 
us^te believe t ^illj and be able to do allthsfe things as we ouqh , 
&c. refill the A^oflle. ] But I will dcfire you to conilder 
what the fame council faith of the opinion, which jou Teem 
to propugn before you goon in ir. The next Can.-], faith, 
|[5; (^tiii pernatura vigorembonftm alitjuod ^ftodaJ faint em per- 
tinet vita aterna, Sec. Harttico fallitt^r fpiritf* , mn intelligent 


vocem Del in Evange'io dicer.ti^i^ fine me nihil potej^is facere : 
& iUud«y4foAoli , Non <juod iJonei fuwus cogitArc alitftdd a 
nobis ^ &c. 3 And Canon, z'^t T^mohabet de [no mfimrn' 
daciftm (^ peccatum. Si^uis autemhcmo habct 'vtrltAtem at^ 
juftittam, ah t/lo fontt eJl,(JHem ciebemns j'tire^ &C. ~\ And (^an, 
1 6. Nemo ex eo ^uod videtur habere glonetar^ taK^uam r,on 
acctperit , attt ideofe pntet accepiffe, <jkia iitera extri>tfecns le- 
Ittt /egitffr^apparuit^ &CC. ] Ca^.^. Si^uuperi>ivocatio»em 
humanam gr^tta Dei dicit poffe cenferri , non atfttm ipfam f/a 
tiam facere ut invocetftr a nobi^^ contradicit y^po/ioio^&ic. '] If 
therefore the common Grace in qucftion, be bonum alicjuod 
tfHodad fiilutem pertittetyOT if it be but aliju d cogUare, or if ic 
may be called invocation for Grace or be better then mendaci* 
urn cr ptccatum. This Councill thought it Pelagianifm to 
afcnbeit to our mecr Naturals v\ithouc Grace. This you ob- 
ferve, p^g 375. But fo that you would limit difpofitive or 
preparing Grace, to that which the Schoolmen call preventi>tg 
(jrAce^ even faving faith wirh love : but f as fometime tiiey 
call all that preventing Grace that goes before Juftification 
and merit of congruicy, as they call it fo. ) Arminenfn ubi /«- 
pm^ hath fully proved that they with the Fathers afcnbc much 
of that Cjracethatis found in the unjuflified to the fpecial 
Grace of God , ( as fpecial is dif^ir.ft from general influ- 
ence. ) And therefore take heed left while pag.ij6. you 
would bring the opinion which you argue againlt, under the 
fufpicion of Pelagianifm 1 &c. You run not into the fime ;; 
( Whcih yet I intend not to charge you wi:h. ) Caranz^a 
thinks, the Ccstncill ^ranf. fpeaks only of fpecial faving 
Grace as out of mans power ; but he confeffeth that many 
Moderns think otherwife. 

For my part, though all this new Controverfie of difpofi- 
tive Grace do little concern that which I alTerted, which you 
undertook to oppofe, yet theRcafons which I give herein 
the beginning of this Quefton. with the concur rent Judge- 
ment of IVotertant Dirines, and above all, the plain ahd fre- 
quent pafTiges of Scripture do facisfie me, that common Grace 
is truly preparative and difpofitive to faving Grace ^ not as 
one degree of the id^mzffxcus in moraluj difpofeth to another 

G J d^'grec 


degree, (for this we area greed againft J Bur, i. Asitisa 
lefs nnpreparedncfs and undifpoiednefs then a worfe eilate. 
2. As it removcth many and great Impediments. 3. As 
It is a ufe of the means appointed by God for obtaining his Ca- 
ving Grace.4. As it is intantum or frcundurnqniddt. thing plea- 
fing to God. and loved by himyea. & as he loveth fuch as have 
it more then thofe that arc without it,with the love of Compla- 
ccncie and Acceptation , To as it is aftate much nearer Chrift 
then other mens ofobftinarcwickedncfs nre ir; in thcfe five re- 
fpeds I think it prepareth & difpofeth to faving grace. Though 
I think not that this fame common Grace is the very thing that 
it turned by any Improvement of ours, or elevation of the 
Spirit into faving Grace. But this much lam fatisfied of. 
(between the Arminian & the contrary exftreamj i .That God 
hath not entered into Covenant or Promife with any unrcge- 
nerate man to give him faving Grace upon any condition to be 
performed withour it. 2. Rut yet thit heharh commanded 
him toufecertainmc-.nst> obtain it,and to avoid the refittance 
and hindrances. 3. And that a very Command to ufe fuch 
means as means, is i ftrongiy incouraging intimation, that 
God will not deny men the end and blefling, that ufe the 
means as well as they can. For it is certain, that heappoint- 
cth no meansin vain. 4. That unfanftified men may do lefs 
evil and more good then they do, and particularly in the ufe 
of thofe means. 5. And that they have fo much encourage- 
ment, f though no Promife) to the ufe of thofe means, that 
they are left unexcufable ( not only as originally difablcd, 
but) as wilfully gracelefs, and even at the Bar of v^ race ( or 
the Redeemer, ) if they negleft them- 6. *And that no man 
can ftand out, and fay^ I did the beft that ever I could to eb- 
tain faving Grace , and yet went without it becauTe God 
would not give it me. This much I am fatisfied of^as to prepara- 
tory Grace. 

And yet my Controverfies with the late Reverend Servant 
of Chrift, Mr. ^i<^>ke and others, do tell me to my trouble, 
that fome Proreftants that are no ^rmimans^ g') fo rr.uch fur- 
ther in this then J; then they would have it ft principal ufe of 
Bapcifm, the Lords Supper,e^r. to receive thefe men of com- 


mon grace (chough they fecm not to have more, or fay fomc, 
profelsnomorc ) and advance them to Saving Grace. And 
that it is the firft vifible Church-ftace according to Divine infti- 
ctition, by which men muft pafs into the invifible Church of 
the landified. But I fee 1 (hdlhave your vote a^ainft this 

But yet really I fliould think ( if I were of your opinion 
about Baptifn),. if ls\T,Tomhes Letter be yours, ) that men 
fhuuid ordinarily be a while (^atechttmeyts before they are Bap- 
tzed: And according to the Opinion I am of (for Infant 
Baptifmj if I were (as the ^ncicn: Churches were ^ among 
Heathens , where a principal part of the Baptized muft be 
adult, (thouphi would not ncedlelly delay a through Con- 
vert, yet) I fliould thmk that commonly the Ihte of C-.v- 
chumcns muft be a Preparatory ftace; and that the Ctit-.chu- 
merss were to be fuppofed in a more difpofed ftate, thee mcft 
that ftood ac greater diftance. 

I do verily think that a man of the Highefl knowledge and 
Belief of fin and miicry , Chrift and Mercy, God and Glory, 
that common gr.ice can reach to, with the highert Love, De- 
fires, Humiliation, Fear, ConfelTion, Petition, Obedience, that 
common grace can re ich to, is in all the five Refpcds fore- 
mentioned, more Difpofed for Saving Grace , and Prepared, 
thenone that is an Apoft.ite, or under the fin againfl the Holy 
GhoO, or unco Duty, or one that heareth and hatetlt the M.-- 
nifter and the Word , or that fo hateth that he will not bear : 
and that cerfecuteth godlinefs ou: of hatred to it, and liveth 
in wilfull Driinkennefs, Murder, Whoredom, c^-c. I know not 
what men may feem out of their own Principles, and fome mif- 
incerpreted Texts, but fure I am I Hnd in experience (nch an 
exceeding difference between the fucccfs of mv Labours on 
the more humble confi ierate, teichablc fort of people , that 
arcnot drowr/d in wilful w.ckednefs and fenfu^Lty with the 
worft : and the old felf-conceiced,if;nor3njcperfons, and the 
proud and haughty Spirit*, and old drunkards , and fu.h hke 
rooted iVnfualifts, th;it there is no comparifonio be made: 
anj I am fully fatiifted ro pcrfwa-le Thiev°«, Adu!:era*s,Drur-- 
kards, Sccrners at £odlincrs,.N:gIeders ard defpjfcri ofmean?, 



and profeffcd Infidels,rather to come out of thcfc fins, and ufe 
the means, ann believe the Scripture to be true, though but 
with a Dogmatical Faith, then co conciue as they are. And I 
(hall take fuch Believers, and Reformers, to be more prepared 
. and Difpofed for Saving Grace, then they were before. And I 

J^ure I amthat y/^rt^;>d that wasalmoft perfwaded to be a 
Chriftian, was neerer it and better difpofed then the haters of 
Chriftianity, And I am fare that Chrift was well able to re- 
folve our Controverfie, and that he told the Saibe^ Ma'\ \i. 
34. Thouart not f^r from the Kingdom of Cjod : ] acquainting 
us that there is a ftatethats neer and next to the ftate of Grace, 
when other men are further oflF. And as fure 1 am that he 
that faid, {^All this Ihxve obferved from my youth ] wa? Loved 
by Chrift, and told that he yet ladled one thing, CMark. 1 0.21, 
and that this is a better difpoficion to Grace, then they that are 
not fo much loved^ are in, and that lack, more things : Though 
yetevenfuch w<7 ^(7 a^V4; /<7''r<7ft'/«/, through the porverful 
temptation of Riches^ Luke i. 17. It was the work of f^bn to 
make ready a people prepared for the Lord.'] And if fuch were 
not more undifpofed to receive true Grace, we fliould not fo 
ofthavcheardthatthreatning,cJ^rty/^.4.i2. AEisi^.ij. [The 
heart of this people are ^axedgrofs , and their ears are dull of 
hearings and their eyes b-ive they clofed, lefi thf) f^ouldfee ^ith 
their ey-s^ and hear Vcith their ears , and under lland with their 
heartland /hoaldife converted ^ ay d I /hould heal them.] This was 
not the ftate of all the unconverted. Tjre and Sydon were not 
fo undifpofed for Grace, as C^^f^»4«w was. But enough of 
this, unlefs I were fure that there were any real difference be- 
tween us. I fpsak but to your words , at they may he inter- 
preted by any Readers, to oppofe the Truths which I aflert, 
imagining that your felf intend it not, however you might mi- 
ftake mc, 

To your fourth Rcafon pag.']'j6. 1 anfwer^ i. We are A- 
greed ftill of the Condufion. 

2. But I ftill think you are very much our,in taking th; high- 
eft* common Grace to be but fuch as the knowledge of 
TongueSjC^f. which you there mention, and to be but [_ the 



poduEl of our natural Hyider ft anilirgs, advanced h educaun and 
Indtt(irj^now fince 'JMirucles are ceafed. | For diougb Edu- 
cation and induftry be a means to common and fpecial Grace, 
yet without the help and Gift of the Spirit, men can have nei- 
ther fpecial Gracc^ nor that common grace which I fpeak of. 
I much fear left many Learned. Civil, Orthodox men, do take 
common grace to be fpecial, and fa delude their own fouU, in 
the trial of therafclves. Mr. Shepheard hath told you from 
many Scriptures ( in your Book ) of higher ihirn^s then thefe 
you mention, that Hypocrites or Temporaries may attain. And 
all that they. had from the Spirit in the Primitire times, was not 
only the power of Miracle? as is (hewed : therefore they may 
have more from the Spirit now. 

5 1 do no: thmkyour Confequencc good, that the loofing 
of one.and not loofeninq, or not loofablcncfs, of the other, 
will prove a fpecifick difference. For i . There are many com- 
mon gifts in man that sue no more lofcable then faving Grace. 
2. And on the other fide, it is not from the mccr Nature of 
inherent Grace that it cannot be loft; but from the Divine 
Decree, Love and engagement (of which 1 have fpoken in a 
Difcourfe of Perfeverance, ) For i^dam had faving Grace, 
eventhe I mage of God, and yet loft it ; yet I believe the Apo- 
ftle, that it is becaufe the fee J of God remaineth in us ; but I 
think it is not a good Argument, that becaufe it is the feed, or 
fuch a Seed, therefore it will remain : but ic Remaineth in us, 
becaufe the Love of GodinChrift, and the operation of the 
Spirit caufeth it to Remain. For t^Jam had a Seed of the fame 
Nature, and yet it did not Remain in hi m. 

H Sect 

S E C T. VII. 

Paie sSo.lTO your fifcli Reafon, i. I grant both your 
Conclufion ftill, and chat Haifits are diflinguifh- 
ed fpecificalli/ when the formal Objeds arc fodiftind. 2. And 
I am of the fame mind with Roi>.'Baronim ^2is you cice him; that 
no man but the Regenerate is truly a Divine or Chriftian, and 
hath properly Theologie, but only Analogically : Though 
perhaps I may havccenfures enough for coming fo nccr to you 
in this, for all y u think me co differ fo much from you. It is 
but the fame thing that Difpit. 5. of Right to Sacraments I 
maintained. 3. But lam not yet fatisfied that faving faith 
believes many things or any thing materially, which a common 
faith doth not bdieve in his manner, of which more anon. 

4. That which is the formal Objed of the Ad of Faith, is it 
you fay, fpecifierh the Habit : and therefore you afterward dc- 
fcribe it as refpeding the Ad. But it is not all the Motives and 
M dtA. that are the formal ob jeds of the ad of Paith >, but ic 
is the Veracity of the Reveller ^ or Speaker, or Teftifier. He that 
bdieveth the fame material Truths becaufe of the Veracity of 
God the Revealer, hath a true Divine faith ? though in regard 
of the Motives or Media by which men difcern or are pcrfwad- 
ed, thit the Revelation is indeed Divine , there may be differ- 
ences between feveral true Believers , and fome of them may 
makcufeof infufficient or miftaken mediums or motives. If 
you deny this,yhu will leave but few Chriftians among Chri- 
ftian?, and perhaps not any of the ignorant fort ; nay perhaps 
not one at all in the world, as to their firft Adof Faith, if your 
following grounds be annexed For my part, if I fee a poor 
Chriftian that believeth all the Articles of the faith, becaufe 
God hath Revealed them, who he is fully perfwaded cannot 
lie, to be yet at a lofs as to the dfeMa or A^ctives that fiiould 
perfwade him to take the Scripture to b,* a Divine Revihtion • 
or if he Receive this bq: on infiifficient grounds or Receive the 
Articles of f^aith by Tradition without Scripture and yet j^ive 
uph'mfilf hereupon to the Obedience of the Dof^nne which 
he recciveth, i (liall take him to be a r^eliever or Chriftian in- 


deed. Mtiny thoufands believe the Doflrinc of Scripture up- 
on Gods credit , and therefore wi. ha D. vine Faith , that arc 
not able to give you fuch proofs of the Revelation being Di- 
vine, as the caufc requires or dtfeives. 

5. The Divine Veracity is fofar known by men , as they 
know indeed that there is a God; For a lying god is not God, 
but an Idol. A nd fo far as common grace may lead men from 
Atheifin, fo far it may lead them to believe upon.tbe credit of 
God, or to acknowledge Gods Veracity, and fo to Believe the 
Gofpel ^j'fZ)it/»>f.7, when they once take the Gofpcl to be the 
Word of God. So that the faith of Temporaries may have 
the fame ohje^um forma/e, as the faich of Saints : that is,the 
Veracity of God .- And the /1:/(?<iij to prove the Revelation 
Divine, aie not the formal objed of faith; though the Reve- 
lation be of necei^\:y,&s a Condition fi-ne i^«4 «o« , to the ad of 
Faith, as PromM/^atton of a Lnv is to the ^^ of Obedience. 
Of this I have fpoken more largely in the Treface to part,!, of 
the Saints Refi. 

6. Where you fay fug. 381. f Tha^ faving Faith u built oh 
better Princiflts^M froceeiing from the Spirit ofChrifi and be- 
ir.g built upon h'4 tmtrediate Revelation and Teflimonj^ &c.] I 
y'lnf'iftr^ I doubt I differ from you more in this, theninlhe 
Condufion. I have m the fiift and fecond part of my 7>w^ 
agatKfi Irfidelitjf, (peciiiWy ^p-^g.^ 2. part. 2. §2. and through 
that part purpofely (hewed how much I afcribe to the Spirits 
Teftimony in our Belief. As alfo in the Saints Rifi^pjtrt.z.pag. 
1 97. f ' mprefTion 7. j r.a. ^ i . and in the Preface to that part : 
and irs fully and Judicioufly handled by the ^Irryrald in Thif, 
Salm. Jol.i, pag. 121. Jhef. de Tefllmoti. Sprit. And by 
Rob. Btroniut in Apodtx. ad Turnbull. p<«^-73 3. I readily 
yield that the illumination of the Spirit is neceffiry, and that 
when once men have Received theimprcfsof the Word, and 
the < mape of God by the Spirit on their hearts, they iiave then 
inrhemfelve«a Ahdium whence they may conclude that Scri- 
p'ure i? the Word of <>-od. But your plain Dodrine is [that 

ommon Srlief hath only An uncertain fallible AIcdtHm ^ and aU 
fuvtng ^,}ith hath a certain infallible 'J^Tedium^ and that tithe 
Tejlimofy immedinte) of the Spirit ^i'.hiH tu, Now I. HetC 

Ha I 


I may well cake it for granted that by this Tcftlmony , yon 
mean not the Spirit as a mcer efficient caufe, giving us the Rc- 
dified power of Believing, or the Habit, or exciting and edu- 
cing the Aft, as a Predetermining, or other efficienc caufe ; 
For as we all confefs this Medicinal Grace and efficient illumi- 
nation as well as you •, So this is none of the Concroverfie,nor 
the thing that you exprefs. Its one thing to give us eyes and 
Sight and to cure their difeafes, and fet open the windows, 
and anoiher thing to propofe an Objcd, or to fee in our ftead. 
We confefs that the Holy Ghofl gives u? the moral power or 
Habit, and educeththc Ad, and fo efficiently caufeth as to 
fee, and that fufficienc Objeds and Reafons for Believing are 
Uid before all men that have but a fufficient internal Sight. 
But your Teliimony which is made the Aiedinm , muft needs 
be fuppofed to be an objeElive Medium or E-vidtKce, or an in- 
tertjal Affirmation or EnttKciatioM -, as by another within us as 
faying \TkisiithefVorclofGod, orthuntrue^ byway of full 
Tertimony, not only opening the eyes to fee the evidence al- 
ready extant in the Word, d-c but alfj being it felfiheevi- 
dence,as a full inartificial Argument, and as an inward witnefs 
that is to be believed himfelf, and not only caufeth us to believe 
a former word. Now that befides all thcefficient illumination 
that caufeth us to believe the Divine Teflimony or Enunciati- 
ons already extant in the Word, there is no fuch inward word 
of the Spirit objeftively nccefTary as the A^ediumo^ om Belief 
to the Being of Saving Faith, and to prove its SpecificJi differ- 
ence ; befides what is faid j 1 briefly add, thefe few Reafons, 
1 . This Dodrine is Papall or worfe^makinq the Word of God 
infufficient in fmgenere^ to the ufe it is ordained for. i know 
that in other kind of Caufality, it is no difparagement to the 
Scripture, to fay that it is not fufficient : but it is fufficient in its 
own kind ; which is to contein the matter of our Faith,and ob- 
jedive Teftimony ofGod thereto, And tbouj^h we yield that 
theTranfcript or effect of this word on the heart is objectively 
ufeful, as well as efficiently, to confirm us in the Faith as a fe- 
condary Teftimony, yet it is not the prime Teftimony, nor Ne- 
^effary to fupply any defed in it : nor is Scripture in that kind 
infufficient without it .to afford us a valid Mcdmm for Belief : 



many Papifts, ( of whom Baronhs againft TurnhuSuf treat«! 
at large ) do indeed fuppofe fuch an infpiration or immediate 
Tcftiraony neceffary in the Pope or Church to afcerrain u.« that 
the Scripture is the word of God ; but we are* not of tnac 

2. If the objenive medium be uttered by a voice as it were, 
or any thing anfwerable wi:hin us, either it is aliunde^ fctchc 
and receitcd from without, that is, from Scripture, or i: is 
primarily from the inward Teftifier, Ifthefirft, then the /^m'- 
ptue Medium is I'ufficient, for it is the fame receiced within ; 
and fo the common and faving faith have the fame Afedium, 
If the later, then it is mtti Iiffiration p>-cpheiiiai^ and fo , 
I. None fhouldbeChriftiansO! faved but Prophets, which 
is Euthuft fm^ and more, 2. And the ordinarv way of mens 
Converfion fhould be without the word, or ihe word be unne- 
cefTary to it. For whit need another tell me that by a fallible 
way , which the Spirit within doth primarily u:ter by an itifal- 

3. The holy Scripture is the meaiftm of the common Be- 
liever, ( as Gods veracity is his formal objed. ) But the ho- 
ly Scripture is no uncertain, humane, fallible Medium, as you 
fay the Temporaries is. 

4. Your DoArine,(ai your words import, doth excufe all 
Infidels before God as guiltlefs -.For if there be not propound* 
ed to them in Scriprure.nor any other Iway , a certain Divne, 
infallible objedive Medium of Belief ^thcn cannot they be ob- 
liged to believe. For to believe without a neceifary Ob- 
jedis naturally impoflible. And though moral Impotency, 
which is but their vicioufnefs, do not escufc, yet natural Im- 
potency ac left , not caufed by fin , doth excufe. That 
their underftandings are fo blind, astohavenetd of ihelllu- 
minarion of the Sprit, to enlighten them to fee a futficient 
Objefl or 'jA'^.edtum o\ Belief, this is there own fault, t.ut that 
they cannot fee or believe without a certain Aded am or objed, 
this is no more tiieir fault, tlien it is that they fee rot non ex- 
iftcnrs , ortbat which is a thoufand miles of, orthat they can- 
not fee it in the dark. 

5. According to your Dodrine, molt of the Chriftians in the 

H 5 world. 


world, and all that I know ( as far a; I can learn ) muft be un- 
chriftcned, and caft into a ftatc of Condemnation. For 
though I know many chat have fachaTeftimouy of the Spi- 
rit as I have dcfcribed in ray Treat, againft Infidelity, T^artz. 
Yet I never knew one that had any other, that is, that had 
an immediate word uttered by the Spiric within him, diftinft 
from Scripture, which his firft faith was refolved into, as the 
Medium that muft fpecifie it. At left, it is a terrible DoArine, 
to put poor Chriftians on the rack, fo by that, few will ever 
know that they have faith, if they muft prove it fpecified by 
a Prophetick Revelation. And if you make any difference 
between this, and the Revelation of the Pcophcts, let us know 
wherein the difference liech. 

6. The undoubted fruit of this Do6lrinc received, would 
be the inflation of audacious, fiery, fantaftick fpirited men,thac 
are ready to think that allftrongimpulfes within them are of 
the Spirit of God , as poor humble Chriftians that feel no 
fuch thing, muft fall into defpair, for as they feel it not, fo 
they know not how to come to the feeling of ir. 

7. If this inward Teftimony be the certain Medium of 
knowingtheScripturetobcthe wordof God, then either all 
the Scripture or but part: If but part, which part, and why 
one part rather then another ? If all, whence is it that never 
any of the millions of Chriftians have from this inward Teft:i- 
mony taught us which Books be canonical, and which not.* 
but all go for that to other Teftimonies or Media. 

8. If we have infallible certain Media ^ to prove the Scrip- 
ture to be the true word of God without any internal MtJUnm 
as nrceffary , ( fuppofing the efficient Illumination of our 
minds by the Spirit to fee the Ul'ledia already extant) then the 
fuppofed Medium of the Spirits ImmediateTefiimovy ^ \s not of 
necefilty to faving Faith. But that the Antecedent is true, 
is mnnifeft thus : we can without that inward ^ordot Meiittm^ 
(hew fufficient proof, i. That all that God faith is true. 2. And 
that the Scripture is his word. And 3. Confeqnently chat 
all in Scripture is true. Srgo. &c. i. That God i«; Tf>-<a;v, 
and cannot lie, is as eafie to prove as that he is God. 2. That 
the Scripture is his word, is proved by certain Argilmcnts , by 


Eufebini, Angtifti»e^ and many other Fathers, by FlciKusi 
yives, DupiejftJ^ Grotiw, Davenport^ C^arhut^ Camero , Po/m- 
»«^, and an hundred more. Yet flill we maintain, i. 1 hat a 
natural Light is neceffary to fuch a belief of thi?, as tJie mecr 
natural man may reach. 2. A common Illumination is nc- 
cefTary to ' he higher apprehenfions, and faith of the tempora- 
ry. 3. And a fpecial Illumination is neceffary to faving Be- 

9. If we are in doubt of an inward word o( Teflimnny, 
wheth;'r it be from the Spirit of God or not, how fhall we 
know but by trying the Spirits, and how fhall we tre hen, 
but by the Word ? The word therefore is a ruffi:ient A^feJi- 
««,(' though not fuffigient to enlighten us to difcern it. ) 

10. The meiiuTU that is an inward objei^ive Teftimony, 
muft befomeword, or fomc work of f he Spirit on the loul, 
A word diftinft from a work : the common experience of ik- 
lievers doth denv,or not know,fuch a work,that isthcobje.H.ve 
motive, rauli be m order before the Faith that is cau^eJ bv it: 
But before the firft Ad of laving Faith , there is no fuch exi e- 
ricnce or objedive motive or c^^fj'f«w in the foul : therefore 
the hrft ad of faving Faith is not thus fpccified ; and therefore 
it is not neceffary to the fpecificarion. Yea, and thus there 
ll^ould no man ever be bound to believe, becaufe he muft have 
that inward experiment, Word, Afedmnfy or Monve excant 
in him, before he firlt believe ( if this were neccfTiry as is 
faid ) anJ\ct its certain that no man hath that experiment. 
Medium, &c. til! he do believe : forlnfidels have it not.. 

I confefs that a fanftified man hath an inw.ird Principle and 
Habit, which others have not, and that for confirmation af- 
ter his firrt belief, the experience of that may be afubfervient 
Mediufi. But I k low not of any one Article of Faith, or 
anyy^/f-^j'/wobj dive for thcdifcerning of that Truth which 
isnccert'iry to a Tiving Faith, which Temporaries have not 
fome knowledge of. They know all the fame Ardcle^ of 
faith, and believed them by the fame Medii-, though no: by 
the fame il'un'rated/andined minds, and not with a faith of 
the ftme fpecies /u'V/^Pemble truly, ( vindidj^*'-jr.it.psg.2i5 ) 
'But it mu(i be diligent :j ob/erved^^'hxt kj>}d of Xjvdution and 



tejiimonj of the Spirit It is^ "thereby »/ may bcfaidto be ajfttred 
of the Scriptures d'vi:e Truth, It is not arty inward [uggtfiion 
and infplration different from thofe Rvelations that are in the' 
Scriptures themfelvest at if the Spirit did by a fecond -, private 
particular Revelation ajfure me of the Truth of thefe former re- 
velations Wide in the Scriptures : ^e have no Warrant for any 
fuch private Revelation now^ nor is there any need of them, HoW 
then doth-the hoi/ Qhofi reveal to us the Truth of Scriptures ? I 
anfwery by removing thofe impediments that hitidred^ and bj be- 
fio'^ing thofe Graces that maizes us capable of this Knowledge, 

There's a twofold Impediment, i .Ignorance. l.Corrupti" 

on, • This holy Spirit cureth the. i. By Illumination refioring 

our decayed under ft anding, The fecond by San^lt^cation^ 

infufing into our 'De fires and Affe^ions fame ^Degrees of their 

primitive Holyneft. — -pag-Zid. Other inward and fecret 

Revelations of the Spirit we acknowledge not inthii Bufinefs. ] 

Sect. V 1 1 1. 

ASto your paffagcs, ^^t^.^^a, 383. about opinion and 
fciencc. i . Faith is commonly faid to be neither opinino 
nor Sciences ; (Though for my own part,[ have given my rea- 
fons for its evidence againft Barcnius and Rada^ Apol. Part i. 
pag.ii^. c^c. and againft Hurtado'm Treat, againft Infidel. 
Dcterra. pag.6Z- Franfc. Mayco, and many others maintain 
it to be evident and demonftrable. Ariminenfis^ and many 
more with him deny it, faying, ( ut ty^rmine>if. contra Man- 
con ) that it hath evidenUam credibilitatU , non autem certitu- 
dinid : which fatisfieth not me : but if it hold , it may (hew 
the impertinency or invalidity of your arguing. 2 If Faith 
muft h2ive2Lfcientific.ll medium, or if a credible medis^m be 
enough and diftind, yet ftill this ^^f<KV»»w is extant to theun- 
fandified in the word of God, without an inward propheti- 
cal lofpiration. And though they fee it not favmgly, yet 
they fee it fuperticialiy , and with a common faith. Jt was 
the fame Reafons that prevailed with many of the fandificd 
and the Temporaries to believe, but not apprehended by the 



fame faith. Amtffu {uh<fupra) tells us ihn we ire paft cuedi- 
on : that in the Lumen df fir ens cifjefftfm as he calls it there is 
no difference. It was the fame Seed that fell Tnd grew among 
the thorns, and in rhc ftony ground, as in the good ground, 
though it had not the fame ground and enreitammenc , being 
received but fuperhcientiy mto the one , and being over- tope 
andchoaken with predominant enemies in the other. If an 
unfani^iSed Divine may ftudy, preach and defend every Afe- 
diftm neceffjry to Saving Faith, then may they have fome ap- 
prehenfiou andufeof every fuch Medium ^ but the former is 
true : Ergo . 

Where therefore you fay, f^^g. : 83. \.\\^x[hljpocrite\ ancHm- 
pfous perfoKS hiveni P rem fen infer ' the Articles of Faith) 
but fuch .IS are Humane 4tid dubioHi andpi'cbjble.] I exceed- 
ingly D.ffentinthis pirt cular. They may have all the fame 
Prrwi/^' asyou may have at your firft Believing. You had 
Help and Light to caufe you to fee the premifes which they had 
not, but you had.no Premf^'es more then they rray have. They 
have the fame Word as you. He that Believes becaufe of 
Gods Veracity, and his Scrip:ure Revelation, believes upon 
Premifes , that are better then humane dubious, and probable : 
but thus may Temporaries btlieve ; Ergo . 

But you ask, \'f hat Afediumt and Motives have thej to bt- 
Heve that to be Gods iVord. For their A[[ent to the Divine 
Truth of God- iVord can be no firmer and certain then the Pre- 
mifes which infer th.-it Affeni ; Novf Hypocrites neither have nor 
can hive a>,j Premifes or Motives to ReVeve the Divinity of that 
Word^ but fuch oi I named : ] <ty4nfrp. Far ami from the Be- 
lief of this Dodrine. i. Ail the Arguments to prove the 
Scripture to be Gods Word, wh'ch all the forenamcd Writers 
uf", and Tempr>raries Read, and ftudy and preach , (' befides 
the inward Teftimony which you plead for J are more then 
Humine, Probable and dubiou?. But all thefe may a Tempo- 
rary u^em his way : Erj^is . 

2 All the Premfes that yru had for your firft Bel'ef that 
Scrin'-u''e was<^joJs Vord.a Temporary may have : For you 
hid a work or word of the Sp rit to be made ufe of as a Pre- 
mife to infer Iklicffromj before you believed. But your firft 

I Premifes 

Premifes (to your Saving Belief^ were not fuch as yon De- 

fcribe Ergo . 

3. Ta\c heed of daftiing out the Chriftian faith at a blow, 
and giving up the caufe to the Infidels. For, if the inward 
Teflimony of the Spirt which you mention and precend to, 
be no furer a Meiiium or Premife , to infer Scripture to be 
Gods Word from, then feme of the other that you affirm to be 
but dubious, humane or probable then according ro you, there 
is no Argument for Scripture, that is better then lb : But the 
Antecedent is certain. For all thofe Arguments mentioned 
by the forcciced Writers, from that Imrirfick, Light ^ by which 
the Scripture, as the Sun is feen, and from Frophe/ies fhlfilled^ 
uncontrohleei Miracles Sealing it,^c. are as fure, as any a man 
before his firft believing or in the Ad, (yea or after) can fetch 
from Within him : (Though ftiU he mult have a L'ght within 
him from the Spirit to fee them : which is none of h s Premi- 
fes J Yei, if in.vardHolmefs orthe Spirits Ttftimony be the 
only Evidence, yet that Holincfs and Spirit *n all the fandifi- 
ed, ( which is mor. then in one man) is one o' the Trr wi,^/ or 
a J'/*^/«/» which an unfandified man may ufe : And though 
he have not the experimental knowledge of ic, and fo not the 
fame manner of apprehenfion, yet the Viedium is the fame. 

And what a Task do you fet the Preachers of the Gofpel 
here and what a cafe do you leave their Hearers in ? If there 
hti\o Prent'fes but this of an inward Teftimony, better then 
humane, dubious, (^t:. then no man breathing can produce any 
better to unbelievers to perfwade themto bel eve. But they 
muft fay, ['/> h^ve yiolnf.rilihle^ cirtain Medium to prove Scri- 
pture to be true, or C^' ijitanity to he true : but only ttuwane^ du" 
biom Premi'^es.} For his own inward Teftimony his Hearers 
have nor, nor can know it but by 'Believing him, which is a 
far more uncertain way then that you call uncertain. And 
how then fhall we exped that men believe us ? This is it that 
Knot and other Papifls falfely charge on our Religion that we 
have no infalliblecertaintyof it. 

5. The A-poftles and Evangelifts did produce infallible Pr^- 
w*/^/ for faith, befides the inward Teflimony of the Spirit in 
the Hearers: therefore there is other infallible Pnviifes to be 
produced. 6.Few 


6. Few good Chriftians do believe upon the Premi/c or A/e- 
Ji»m of the feiiimony you mention ( thougli "by the Spirit* 
work eSiciendy they do ? ) Therefore it is not of necellr y to 
the fpecifying of Saving Faith. 

Laftly, I again enter my DifTcnt alfo from your great Sup. 
pofitionof the Neceflity of infall ble Prtmtfts to a Saving 
Belief of Scrip'ure being Gods Word. The word of Reve- 
lation, is it felf but the Means of our Faith ; the Eflentials of 
our faith are the matter and Form fas we may call them : ) the 
eflential material ' ^bj'c^fl is the particular Articles of Faith Ef- 
fential to C hriftianitv r the formal Objeft is Divine Veracity ; 
that Scriprureis thcWord of God, is neither the formal Ob- 
ject, nor any eHential part of the material Objed ; but fas I 
la,d^ it i' necefTiry as a Cot^Gttion fine (j»a non^ or a {JMedium^ 
that the Matter be Revealed as from God by Scripture, or 
fas before the writing) by feme other way, as Promulgation of 
a Law is neccflary to obedience. Now as a manmuft hear 
the Law proir.ulgate,and believe that it is really the Sovcraigns 
Ad and will before he can obey it ; So we muft bear or Read 
the Word, and be perfwaded that it is the Word of God before 
we can fide Divwa believe it. But yet as a man may by meer 
Report, or by the Badge on his Coat, on fome meer probable 
Reafon, think this to be the Herauld authorized to Proclaim 
this Law, and yet a; long ?.s he takes it to be the Kings Law, 
and re erenceth and obeyetb it as his, he peitormeth the loy- 
al Obedience of a true Subjeft, and perhaps better then fome 
Lawyers that were at the making of it : So he that hearcth the 
Gofpel,' and is perfwaded that it is Gods Word , though but 
on wc'k or probable f^rounds, and yet doth therefore believe 
it becaufe of his confidence in Gods Veracity whom he takes 
to be the Revealer,hath a true Divine Faith. For there is both 
the material and formal Objed : the true Article? of faith are 
believed, and therefore believed becaufe God that cannot lie 
is the Aurhorof them: And that he <s the Author, is fiift anob. 
jedof Knowledge, and but Ucondanly of Belief. For the 
two Principles of faith [ThjtGod uTrne^ and that th^-< is hit 
iVnrdj. are inordcr firft to heknown,and thenthe Adof faith 
is built on them : Though fecondarily they are both the objed 

I 2 of 


of Belief it fclfj And if you muft of Nccefiicy to theeflcnce 
of your Faith, liavc demonflrations.or fciencifical, or infallible 
y''rr^«'/^/ apprehended to prove that the ^JMedmrn the Scrip- 
ture is of ood J the 1 muft you have ftill as good and certain 
'Tremifts, for the proof of every one of thofe Primjes • which 
is not necefTiiry. I confefs the beiter Evidence we have of the 
truth of Scripture, the ftronger our faith is Ike to be. But 
the millions of Chriftians that take it to be the Word of God 
upon the common vote of che Church and their Tcacher$,wi:h 
probable intrinfick Arguments ; and yet therefore firmly be- 
lieve it becaufe of Gods Veracity may have a faving faith, if 
1 deny thj«, I muft unchurch and unchriftian almoft all , or 
the far greateft part of the Churches and Chriftians in the 

I muft here expeft that it be objcfted to me , that F^hlo is 
Argumentative (wh^t need yon elje talk^ of Premifes ) and the 
canclftjion cannot excel in certainty^ the We^kjr of the Premifes , 
mr be mo'e Divine, ^nf^. This calls for a whole Digreflion 
that it may befatisfaflorily anfwered : But btcaufeall this is 
befidesour main Qieftion, I will content my felf with this ftiort 

It is a very great Controverfie among Divines , whether 
Faith be by Argumentation, and the Receprion of a Conclufi- 
on as rcfuking from the Pr/mifet, or ^ fimple Ad ; and whe- 
ther it have a certainty and Evidence or not. In a word , as 
Faith hath its material and formal Objcd, lb hath it its mate- 
rial and formal parts to conl\itute it. And as the material ob - 
jeds are the EfT^^ntial Articles of the Chriftian faith ( confi- 
deringnojv but the Affenting part of Faith) So the Belief of 
thefe Articles is the effential matter of Faith : And as the for- 
mal Objed is Gods Veracity , fo the form of this Faith , is 
a crediting or Believing God as God ; And as the Reveluion 
is the Copula or bond of both thefe Ob)cA«, fo the Recepti- 
on of the Revelation is the conjundion of the Matcer and 
form of Faith. In the ends and ufes of Faith there is confi- 
derable i. The Acceptabknefsof it to God. 2. The fatif- 
fadorinefs, and operative force with our felves , According- 
ly is its nature mix: and fuitable, having fome what of the will^ . 



jfnd fomewhatofthc/«/*i?f/7,Thewi7/hath i. ^n^ffiaKceo^the 
Vtracltj ofGoJtht Author, 7. Andi an acceptance of the Good that 
is offered in the material Objed : the former belongs to faith 
tKgenert: the latter alfo to the Chriftian Faith , or the Belief 
of any Promile, inffecie. The Veracity of God, which is the 
formal Objed, is the Rcfult of his three grand Attributes, his 
infinite Power, Wifdom and Goodnefs. fhefe are Effential to 
God as God. Becaufehe b O-wwipj/^wf, he will not break bis 
word through any »w/)(7/rK£7 to fulfill it : Becaufchc is r^ioji 
X^ifcy he will not break it through ignorance. i3ecaufe he is i^^fi- 
w/>f/j^(7(?o^, he will not breakit by unfaithftt/neft , fraf*d iyju- 
y?/cf,&\ The laft of thefe Attributes is moft eminent in f'era- 
c.tj. Accordingly, the/orwi/ad of Faith, which is the 6V- 
ving creixt to (Jok conteineth in it, or fuppoftth both a perfwa- 
fion or affent to the Truth of this in God, (even that he is 
God j and a ;/o»f Ajfe^ionofthe tt'/7/,by which we have a Com- 
p/4fe«nf and clofurc with,and an /^ffi^nce inthU Veracity of 
God : A'l miy be comprehended in Affiance. I am nocT'eak- 
in:;of Ajfi4*;ce in the Redeemer to do the works of his Orfice 
for us : thit belongs to Faith »« y^rcjf : but of y^j^ ^«cf in the 
Po^er^ tVifiom^Goodnefs^ and fo in the VerA itj or F:delitj of 
God-Revea!ing or Prom fing : which belongs to Divine taith 
in Genwrdl(whcn good it in the matter, and when it is a g'-acej 
This voluntary Affiince in Gods Veracity , being the formal 
Ad of Faith- (together with the Acceptance of the good in 
the fpeciil Objed,; is it wherein the Acceptablenefs of Faith, 
toGod confifteth) f) that hence you fee, that faith formally 
at fai.b, is not rhe A (Tent to the conclufion of this Argumenc 
[fVnat ever God fd t!j is true : hxt tjoii Q od faith, therefore thu U 
true: ^ but it is this AffiAtce in Godr Veracity. But Faich as 
comprehending matter and form, is both. Alfo that faith is Ac- 
ceftuble to God , as it is fuch an Affiance in his Veracity. 
And thus it needeth no formal Argumentation : or no more 
then to conclude thit God cannot lie, becaufe he is moll pow- 
erfull,w.f; and good. But now as to the fatisfadory and ope- 
rative u'e of filth about the material objed, there it prcceed- 
eth Argumentitively, and is called an ^ffent to the on- lufion, 
and it hath alway before us ( objedivcly offered ) fuch evi- 

I 5 dence: 


dence of certainty, that where it is rightly apprehended , it is 
of the natarc of ^>cience ^ ( but advanced by the formal Aft 
of Affiance, by which ic is informed to be more AcctpubU 
then any bare Science. ) But multitude!, and moft by far dif- 
cern not this evidence fo clearly , as may make it fcientifical 
to them. Nay many may difcern but part of it ( to prove that 
Scripture or thefe Articles are the word of God ) or fome few 
of the weaker evidences of thefe Revelations, or if they have 
the moft demonftrative or certain evidences, yet they appre- 
hend them not as fuch, but fo weakly, that perhaps their af- 
furance or belief of the Truth of the word, may not exceed 
a ftrong probability. The ftronger any mans AfTenttothe 
matter is, the more fatisfadion he hath in his mind, ( and ct- 
ttris parihw ) the more operative and effcdual his faith is like 
to be, and fo to procure further Acceptance. But yet be ic 
never fo weak, if it be fincere, it receives an acceptablenefs 
from the formal Aft of holy Affiance in Gods veracity that 
informs it, that we may difcern the material part to be fincere. 
It is not necefTary that we find out, that it was by a certain in- 
fallible Divine A^edium^ that we took the Scripture to be the 
word of God ( and indeed many a one that fees it by fuch evi- 
dence , may yet fee fo little of the nature and force of that 
evidence, that his mif-apprehenfion or dark and weak appre- 
henfion may make it as unfatisfaftory and uneffeftual to him, 
as great probabilities clearly apprehended may be to another ) 
but as a humane Belief of our Teachers is an ordinary prepa- 
rative or concommitant( if not fomepart. ) So where the 
formal Aft is firm and true ( which makes it acceptable ) and 
the material objeft entirely apprehended inallitsefTcntials, 
the degree of apprehenfion is next moft regardable to difcern 
the fincerity j and becaufe the ufe of this macerial Aft is fo far 
to fatisfie us, as to lead up the Will to the acceptance of Chrift 
offered, and to rlofe with the felicity promifed, and to be ope- 
rative in us ; therefore the beft way to Judge of the fincerity 
of the Affent, is, If ic prevail habitually, and in the ccurfe of 
our lives aftually, with our Wills to sccept Chrift as Chrift^ 
and Love God and Heaven as fuch, and fo to prefer them be- 
fore all things in the world. As Dr. Jackfon (of faving faith ) 



fiith; what ever doubtings there may be , or weaknefs of be~ 
lief, even concerning the Truth of Scripture , and the pro- 
mifed Glory: yet he that isfofar pcrfwaded of it, as that he 
is refolved to venture all upon it, and rather to let go fin and 
pleafurc, profit and honor, life and all, then venture the lofs 
of what is promifed, and the fufFering of what is threarncd : 
This isa faving Acceptable faith, for all the weaknefs in the 
evidence or apprchenfion. This Anatomy of faith I give to 
make my fenfe as intelligible to the Reader as is poUible. To 
which add the Preface to the fecond part of the Saints Reft, 
the Preface to my Treat, againft Infidelity , and you will 
fee moft that I have to fay concerning this particular Sub- 

As to what you add to this till p-«^. 3 94. to prove that Be- 
lievers have the Spirit, its eafily granted : but the Queftionis 
not fo {general, nor of the word ^ Tefimt'iny J in general, but 
of fuch a Tcftmony as fliali be the Medium or '7'temife^(rom 
which objcdvely the firft Avt of faving faith muft neccffr ly 
be fpecified, which I deny. Ina whole Trcatife ( ag^mft In- 
fidelity ,' 1 have pleaded for the witnefs of the Spuit to the 
Truth of Chrift:anicy. 

P'^^f 3 9 % Your fixth Reafon is, that [ elfe the unre£e»erMte 
Varetts tntlf fracijui a^.d 'Bilievcrs as the Saints. ^ 

W«/iV.Your Reafon is good in my opinion:thougt) tbofe that 
d fpute againft me muft difclaim it, who fiy that i\w unreg^ ne- 
ratearc called in Scripcure Siints,Believer«,juftir;ed Sons ,0 c. 
and that not equivocally Taking faith for that which i* truly 
Chriftian and faving, you might eafily have known if ^ ou hid 
defircd it, that 1 confent to your conclufion, that the unrege- 
nerate do not believe. But yet with another fort of faich, 
they do believe ; and in this I fuppofc we ar e agreed, bccaufe 
we believe Chrift. And this other fort is diflfererced but as 
aforefaid. And that its true in its kind, I hope will benocon- 
trovcrfie between you and me , though I know not whe her 
Mr. .9/^/^/>^f/i''d' and I are fo fir agreed but I dare venru'ero 
fay thatyouand I arc,that f«/ (^ T'fr/yrw co-ve^-tumur. A^d 
therefore doubtlefs you that call it fo ohtr\[_cvmmon Qr^ce ^> d 
faith ] do take it to be [ true commov CJrace and Faith. ^ To 


gratifie you with additions to your double Teftimony,;> 398. 
from Calvin and Baror,ius^ I have heretofore produced 3 3 for 
the fame Conclufion, ( Difput, 5. of Sacram, ) and fixry more 
for another of the fame Importance. Yet do I not intend by this 
to blame you, for bringing your two witneffes forth as againft 
me, who had openly produced fo many fcorc againft the fame 
Doi^^rine that you charge me with ; for you might have Rca- 
fons for it that I know not of, or at left be excufabJe by your 

S E c T . I X. 

Page 398. V? OU let fall a point of great moment where- 
1 in I have long differed from you, f/?:, [ That 
Regenerdttmenbj favingfaith helieve that Chriji hath already 
fatisfiedfor thdrfws^fo as the debt is pfiid, and t he j freed, that he 
hath reconciled hii Father to them^ that their Jlnsare pardonei-^ 
or they jfiftified-, that they are Sons of Qod here^ or Jhall be Heirs 
of Heaven hereafter. ] And all thefe you fay. [ The common 
Believer Sy neither do y nor tspon any juji ground can believe. ]] 
And fo at laft we have Many Articles of faith, in which the re- 
generate believe and others cannot : andiffo, the difference 
is more material then I thought it : but I am pretty well fa. 
tisfied long ago ; that this Dodrine is much contrary to the 
Gofpel,and the nature of faving faih. 

Had you fpoken only of that Conditional pardon and Jufti- 
fication, &c. That is given in the Gofpel to all that hear ir, 
that maybe believed by theunregenerate, as your foregoing 
CXpreffions teftifie [ Thej may really believe the ^hole hi/fcry of 
the Scrpitureto be true^ J But you mean not this, butplunly 
fpeak of adual freedom. Reconciliation, Pardon, Juflificari- 
on, Adoption, and futurity of Glorification, And of thefe 
I am fully fatisfied that they are no Articles of divine faith at 
ill. But yet it is rone of ray purpofe to enter the lifts witli 
you about it, though it be a point of exceeding weight. I 
have in my Apol. to Mr. 'BUkfi m) DlreSl:ons for ^Peace of 
Con/ciencet and in the Saints Re/i, and many o:her wrirtings 



given fome of my Reafons already againfl this opinion : and 
chefore may be here the more excufed. And as long as the ccfti- 
mony of our great Divines at T)ort ftands on Record againft 
you, and the ftream of our prcfent Divines is againft you , 
in point of Authority I have the advantage of you, though 
Chamier^ Calvin, znd fome more tranfmarine Divines be on 
your fide,or feem to be fo.Mr.1)o\'t'« long fince effcdtuallycon 
fiited one of my name that held your opinion : And 1 muft con- 
fefs ] the mote incline to think that faving faith is no fuch thing 
asyoudefcribe, becaufe fuch a multitude of holy men (that 
doubclelshave faving faith ) do deny that it is any fucb thing : 
But ^ct cocaftin a breviateof n^y Reafons, ( that faving faith 
is not the divine Belief, that we aread^ually freed, pardoned , 
juftirted, Adopted and Heirs ot Heaven) may breed no quarel. 

RtAfon I. The Gofpel containeth all the neceflary mate- 
rial Objeds of faving faith .- The Gofpel containeth none of 
thcfe propofitionsforementioned^that you or I, or ^J.B. &c. 
issdually juftified, Adopred, ^c. ) therefore none of thefc 
propofitions are the objeds of fiving faith. 

The ^'O^el fufficiency in this is believed by n\\ Proteftants 
that I know, and by many Papifts as to neceflary At tides of 
faith. If any deny thcMinorJet himfhewmeihe Ttxr tf at 
faith he is juflified or adopted exprcfly, or by nc ceff-ry con- 
fcqucnce- If any fay that it is a Confequcnce from 'he I'rc- 
mifes, whereof one is in Scripture , and the other in us; I 
have anfwercd this to Mr. B/.ike t that this makes it not pure- 
ly </fyj<)^, nor at all to b« denominated ^(r^v^jUnlcfs the word 
cf the Gofpel were iht dtffilipu prxwtjforuw. 

Rea. 2. If this which you mention were the difference 
between a faving and a temporary faith, then the difference 
(houlfi bc,thac one believeth only the written word, or the 
Gofpel. & the other the(faving faith )believcs al.fo an unwritten 
word, and zhn which is not in the Gofpel. But this is not the 
difference, Srfo.^c. 

Rta. 3. The material objeft of faving faith is propound- 
ed by God to all men that hear the Gofpel^ and all com- 

K iranded 

inanded to believe it. But this •, ( that they are adually 
jaihfied, &c. ) IS not To, ner all commanded to believe it, 

If it were all mens duty, feme muft believe a faifhood. If 
you fay that it wouldbe a Truthconfequently, if they could 
believe if.l anfwer.lt muft be a truth antecedently, or elfe the 
firft ad of faith is falfe.If you fay,that men are firft commandr 
ed to repent and then believe, I anfwer; No repenting without 
faith will prove them juftified : therefore upon no fuch re- 
penting may they believe they arc juftified. If you fay fomc 
other Aft offaith goes firft, and juftifiethus , I anfwer ^ Then 
ic is that other A d that is juftifying faith. 

Rea. 4. The unbelief that condemneth men is not the not 
believing that they are already juftified, Adopted, ^c. There- 
fore the faith that faveth men is not the believing that they 
are juftified, Adopted, &c. for they are contraries. 

Uea. 5. The material Objcdof divine faith ( of afTent ) 
h feme word of God , at left written or unwritten. But 
the Articles mentioned by you, are ( as to the Church ordi- 
narily ) no word of God, written nor unwritten : therefore 
they are not the Objed of divine faith. If they be in the 
written word, let it be produced ; which cannot be done. If 
it be an unwritten word ( in the heart ) they that affirm ic 
muft produce or prove it, which they cannot do. And the 
common experience of Believers is, ^as fsras I can learn from 
themfelves ) that thtre is no fuch things for though they know 
of a Spirit effecting faith in them, that is, caufing them to be- 
lieve an Objed already revealed, yet they know of none, pro- 
pounding a new word or Object of faith to be believed as the 
Gofpel is. The cffcds of the Spirit indeied ( Faith, Love, 
&c ) are the Objeds of a reflex knowledge (as its called j but 
not of Faith: though they confequentiaily confirm us in the 
Faith, having therefore no ordinary divine word in us, wc can 
have no divine faith. 

Rea. 6. If our own inward Gracf she the objed of faving 
Faith, then are we faved by believing in our felve?, or fome- 
what of our felves, ( vUt That we are juftified, adopted. 


■uc. ) But the Ccnfequcnt is untrue , therefore (o is the 
Antecedent. Saving faith is a believing in Chrift. 

Fej. 7. That whxh no man hath before his firft believing 
cannot be thcmarcnal Objedof his firft faving faith ( and 
tbeicfore fpecihech It not, nor is e/Tential toit. y But no man 
hath before his firft believing either adual Juftification, Adop- 
tion, c^c. Thereforeneitherof rhefecan betheobjedt ofouc 
firft favmg faith. The Major is pliin, beeaufe the objed is 
before ihe <* d. The Minor is proved, in that Unbelievers are 
not juftified, Adopted, o>'- 

Rea. 8 The Doftrine that mnkes Juftification, Adopti- 
on, ^c. to go before fsith, and be the portion of Infidels, 
isunfound : hut (uch i<i|your5:. For menmuft havethcfe be- 
fore they can truly believe that they have thesi, and fo before 
your faving faith. 

Re*. 9 If that 1 be bound to believe ( to Salvation ) that 
I am adually juftihed, then either that I am juftified by faith 
or without faith : not without , for that's againft the Gof- 
peI;not by faith for I yet have it not at firft , and after either I 
am bound to believe that I do believe or not , ifnocftill the 
condufion will not be defiJe, becaufe my believing (which 
isnot byawordof God affirmed is :he pars defp.iiar o{ ihQ 
Premifes.If 1 am bound to believe that I do believe, then alfo 
muft I be be bound to believe, that f believe , that I do 
believe, and fo on : for why fhould I be bound to believe one 
Belief, and not to believe another, even th it Belief alfo. Ic 
was never known thai faith was its owne fpecifying Ob- 

Rea. 10. If my own inwnrd qu^lificdtions orreceivings 
from the Spirit are the Objcd of faving Faith , and the Gof- 
pelthe Ot?je(f^of common fath; Tl^en common Faith hath 
a perfed Objcd, and faving frith ( where ic differs from i: ) 
hath an imperfed Objedl : ( for fuch is both our fandificati- 
on, andou: J'jftirtcation at left, as reveiledtou , orthcRe- 
velitionof our J'jft.fication. ; But the Cor,kqi:nr is un- 

K 2 forini ; 


found, therefore fo is the Antecedent. I dare not compare my 
fnward evidences with the Gofpel. 

Rea. II. If the Spirits inwards Teftimony that lam Jufti- 
fied. Adopted, &c^ betheobjed offaving faith, then one 
true Chriftian hath more to believe,and another lefs.and there 
are as great variety of ObjcAs as of Chriftians^ and fomc are 
bound to believe much feldomer, as well as iefsjthen others : 
( For be that hath not the Objed is not bound to believe 
it : but fome Chriftians ( at moft ) have it but feldom, and but 
little •, ) But the Confequent is untrue , therefore fo is the 
Antecedent. Though Chriftians have feveral degrees and fea- 
fons of exerciHng faith , yet they are bound to exercife ic 
more and oftner then they do. And it is not made impolTible 
foe wane of a word to be the Objed. 

Rei*, 12. Alfo it would follow that the fame man is one 
day bound to believe ( if there be fuch a Teftimony ) and 
another day not : and perhaps another moneib or year : yea 
perhaps fome (hould never be bound to believe : for none have 
chat Teftimony conClant, and many Chriftians never have that 
at all, which is unfitly called an inward word or Revelation ; 
that we are adopted by immediate Teftimony. But^r. 

Rta. I J. C Though the Spirit work faith, yet ) the tefti- 
fying fealing Spirit is given to Believers and after faith, there- 
fore faving faith goeth before it, and is without it. 

Bea. 14. If out own Adoption , Juftification, &c. be 
the Objcds of our faving Faith, and it be an Article of Faith 
that you are juftified, &c. then to doubt of your Juftifica- 
tion, Adoption^c^r. is to doubt of the word of God : and to 
deny your own Juftification,is to deny the word ofGod,and fo 
all that you thus fpeak againftyourfelvesin your doubtings 
you fpeak againft the Truth of the word of God : But the 
Confequent is unfound, Ergo.&cc, 

Kea. 15. 0«r inward real Graces are the Objf As of our 
ftnowledge by the reflexion for as fome fay, by irtuition.^ 



Therefore they are not the Objects of faving faith. For 
though the fame thing as extrinfecally revealed may be the 
Object of bolbjbecaufe of different Revelations, yet I fuppofc 
fuch different intrinfick Revelations, will not here be pretend- 
ed ; nor is it necefTary that when the Spirit hath firft given us 
Grace, and then by an inward light and cfRciency , caufcd us 
to perceive it, and know that we have it, he (hould after give 
us an immediate word to tell us of that which he had before 
caufedustoknow ("ashecaufeth usto difceinextrinlick Ob- 
U&s. ) 

Rea. 1 6. The Articles of faving faith may be exprefled in 
the Churches Creed , but fo cannot thefe new Articles that 
you mention : For there muft be the names of fo many, and 
fuch individual pcrfons, as cannot be known j nor will it be 
certain. For you will not be content with the general, that 
he that htlieveth pjdl be faved ; but there muft be in your 
Creed, Yl am juftified, Adopted Jicc.^ which who can kno^v but 
they that have it? And fo their Creed is utterly uncertain to 
the Church, yea and every man hath a diftind Creed of his 
own ; There being one Article in it ( that he idjftftified ) that 
no man eife is bound to believe : and fo there muft be as many 
Creeds as Believers. 

Re^. 17. The Articles and Objedof faving faith may be 
preached to foroe ( at left ) that are uncalled, and they requi- 
red to believe: But your Objed and Articles can be preached 
torn man, therefor? they are not the Articles and Objedsof 
faving faith. No one unconverted man in the world can be 
calleJonto believe that he is juftified, unlefs he be called to 
bdieve an untruth, or according to the Antinomian Dodrine 
of Juftification before Faith,he can have no knowledge or dif- 
covcry firft that it is the true. 

Rea. 18. Were your Articles neceffjry Objefls of a faving 
Fairh, then all prefumptuous ungodly perfons are juftified for 
not believing f yea and all others. ) For, i. Its as natural 
ImpofTibiiity ( as is aforefaid ) to believe without an Objeft, as 

K 3 CO 


to fee without '^un or Light. The holieft man could not do it, 
2., And prefumptuous perfons have the Ad ; and its not long 
of them that there is no obje^^ for it : They are confident that 
ihey are juftificd, Adopted, ^c. But yon fay [ Thej do not or 
cannot l/elieve it.] But why is that ? Becaufe they Relieve not, 
even when they do hlieve it. I mean, f having no word of Re- 
velation, jthe name of Belicfis not due to the Adt : but thats 
not long of them. They are confident that God hath Juftifi- 
ed them and will fave them, as well as you. Though you fay 
you have a word for i: within you, which they have not. 

Reafon ip. The Scripture te'ileth us an hundred times over of 
another Faith as certainly faving without your Articles: there- 
fore thcfe Articles are not neceffary to faving Faith , to cite 
but a few Texts, Kom. 1 0.8,9, lo, 1 1. C^^**^ ^ ^^^ ''^"^^ of faith 
\iQhichree preachf that if thou fhilt confefs with fhj momh the 
Lordfefm, and (halt believe in thy heart that Godraifed him 
from the dead^ thou fhtlthe faved: for tviththe heart man be- 
lieveth unto Right eyufnefs^Siic.^ Here note i. that this is the 
Word that is faid to be in the heart, z/fr/ 8. And 2. yet it i$ 
the fame that the Apoftles preached. Now the ApoiHcs did 
not preach to men fuch Articles as yours, viz.. [Tou are a'rea- 
dj aSlnnlly jufliped, Adcpttd^&cc.'] by name : but only this con- 
ditional Juftification here mentioned. It is a Btlteiini to Righ^ 
teoHJnefs^ and not a 'Believing that ^eare Righteou* which they 
preach and require ; It is a Relieving Chri/is RefurreBion^Scc, 
and not q\xx o'^'n hontfly or felicity or pardon^ Sec. So thit this 
fame word which is prcacht by the Apoftles, is it that is in the 
heart, and not another Gofptl or Word of God •, viz [^ Thott 
ty^. B, artjr{f}ifed.~\ So Joh'i 1. 12. ^^sm^nj a* rcctived him, 
to them gave he power to become the Sons of God, even to them 
th^theltevein hu name.^ They muft believe that they may be- 
come Sons ; which is not a believing that they a^e fo^i^ Rom. 
4.24. Faith \ (hall beimputedto wfor Right€Oufn-ff^ if^e be- 
lieve on ht^n that raffed up (efMOHr Lord from thi dead. \ This 
h :!ie faving Fairh, which is imputed to us for Riglueoufnefs ; 
and-.therevfore is not a B'^lieving that we are righ eous.e^^if 
i'S'38>39, Forgivenefs of fir, 14 preached thr ottgh Chri(l, and by 
■'■^ '% \ ' ■ - him 


him a'l that helteve art Jftjlifigdfrom all t kings. ^Si.c.[Thi^ believe 
before they are juftified, and therefore not that they are juftifi- 
cd.But I havefaid enough of this heretofore in roy Confeflion. 

Reafon lo. All the Articles of the true faving Chriftian faith, 
have been ftill owned by the Catholick Church; Thefe Ar- 
ticles that you mention have not been ftill owned by the Ca- 
tholick Church , eherefore they are not Articles of rrue faving 
Fdith. They are not to be found in the Creeds of the Church, 
nor Writings of the Fathers of the Church , therefore they 
are not owned by the Church. All in the Creed that is pre- 
tended is.the [I Believe^ with [the Kemijfion offtis,^ which is not 
[] ^ believt that my fins are Alrendy remitted : For the Citechti- 
mens were to profefs this faith , anfl all were bound to believe 
it, O.her Reafons I have given elfwhere. 

1 caft inallchele Reafonshaftily, not improved as I ftiould 
d v), if I were ro make a Defence of the Truth j but to give you 
an account of the c.ujfe of my Diflcnt, becaufe I find this tic 
principal point of all our DifF<;rence. 

Yet that we feem not to differ more then we do,! muft again 
refer you 10 my Treatife of the Splits ^Unefs within tu to the 
Truth of Chri/hanity, ^ 2. &c. to know ray Cjncefiions. To 
which I alio add. that all that believe in Chrift, do believe in 
him far R^em'-Jfrm oj their own ftn\ and do by confent ^^ccept 
him ana pardon offered hy and ^ith him : and when they profefs 
to be Believers, they profefs thofePrf»»*y^j from whence they 
may conclude that they arc pardoned : And fo far as they 
know that they fincercly believe, they ma, and ought to con- 
clude thac they are pardoned. Yet its not a Word of God,much 
Icfs an Arcide of faving Faith. 

S E G T 


Sect. X. 

7>rf^r 3 9p.Vr On next inftance in iAcceptanct ani Love t§ 
\ Chriji. And I grant you ftill the condufian, 
that thcfe are not in the unregenerace in the (Ame fpecies as 
in the Saints. But that there is a Love and Acceptance true 
in its kind , andbow it materially differs from chat in true Be- 
lievers, I have oft (hewed, and (hall do here further in my Ad- 
ditional Explication. 

I faid in my Aphorifras , that [_ the Acceptance of an ofered 
Chrif is the ejfenml Form ofjuflifjing Faith.] ( not of Faith 
ingenerci) and you fay that I faid fo of [Love.] I know there 
is Love in Acceptance^ or Coa/eut, or Choyce : but if I might 
havechofen, I had rather you had charged me wich what \ in- 
deed wrote, then with what you imagine may be implied in 

Page^o^. Your eighth Reafon for the Caufe that I main- 
tain, is found and undeniable. 

Hence you pafs/Jj^t 404, to another Controvcrfie, anfwer- 
ing thisObjedion [^Love may he Ej[^*itialt9 faith^ hecaufe its 
agreed that Fiducia is an All of Fair h^ andthat in the JVill^ and 
not only Mr. Baxter, but Bellarmine/««<i miiny reformed Divines 
fayfo.'^ Anf^. I. liookt in ^<r//<irw/«f, and find him with 
the common vote of Schoolmen, and Divines placing Fiducia 
in the will, but fo far is he from making it an Ad of Faith, that 
the Pofitionthat he is the-e proving is, that [fides non eft fi in- 
cia,] againft the Proteftants, and concludes as you , that that 
fiducia ex fide oritur , non pot ejl e^e idem cum fide. Sure you 
did not indeed mean to prove hence that BeUurmine is of the 
Proteftant opinion which he writes againft. 1 fuppofe your 
intent was to limit his confent to the laft claufe of the Subjedt 
of Affiance. 

2. You might well fay many Reformed Divines are for the 
point which you artault ; foric is fo common, thatwi;h Papifls 
and our felves, it goes commonly as the Proteftant caufe. 

As to your firft Reafon f and your whole caufe) you utterly 
miflake and mif- report the caufe. It is not a ^^n^ct^o^U that 



Proteftanrs commonly mean by Affiance , no nor a Tn-ni^riirK 
neither as that word moftufuallyfignifiech the confidence or 
perfwafion of the inrclled in a high Degree. But ic is the ve- 
ry t/stj or Faith icfelf, which we commonly exprefs in Englifll 
by ^CreditfM^., or giving credit to a man ; Trujting him, or ha- 
vin(T affiance in him.\ And therefore our Divines do common- 
ly maintain agiinft the Papifts that Tn-vjc-ty f^f infcnptttm fig- 
niixQth fi he tjmpJMere ; and fiJem habere i which is our W^'- 
ance. And our Tranflitors thought fure that to Trnjl in GoJ, 
andtohopetKhim^RsaW one, ( and fo to Truft or Hope in 
Chrift) when they fo ordinarily tranflate gx^r^ by Trufting, 
as in Lhl{€ 24,21. Hu-a -j ri?^-n^o-riv on aurli &c. The fenfe alfo 
(hewsicisnotH'^p? as commonly defined that is here meant. 

So Alatth.l -,21. & Ront.l<^.\l.\\(!d 'l^ rcioVcfjuLTi a.n'^i^m i^rntist 
Andin h^s ISjme flMllth' Gentiles triifl. And the firft Belie- 
vers oi the S^hcfiA-^s Paul calleth 7 »<«:?* oHA^>io'T^< cvT<yXj/$?y, 
thtfe th. -It fir (I trtified in Cb^i/}, which is ail ons in Tauis fenfe 
with believing in him ; for in the next ver(e [c* wOTS^i/^acTsfJ 
isufedasSynonimal, to fignifie the fame thing. And fo in 
I 7'/w.4.io.&6.i7. Pi./.i.i 9 and other places , our Tran- 
flators call this [ Truftini^ in God, '2 which is our Affiance ; and 
undoubtedly an ad of the Will. And when ether words (as 
frequently) are ufed, it is the fame thing that is intended in 
many places of Scripture, which our Tranflators call [^ Trnfl' 
ing in ^oi.] Now bcfides your Pierophory or PcrfwaQon, there 
is in the nature of faving faith not only another Affiance , buc 
a double Affiance elfential to it in fome degree : as 1 fliall take 
the liberty according to my apprehenfion to open it. 

Belief is either volitntary and 4 Dutyy or involuntary^ and no 
mord good. The latter is the faith of the Devils, and all that 
believe the Truths of God as things that are again'l them, and 
would not have them to be :rue, and perhaps had ra:her noc 
believe them (for the underilanding is not free in it felf. ) This 
kmd of belief is meerly of the Intelled .- The voluntary vcr- 
tuous Behef of God, is either of fome things that we appre- 
hend SiSTneer/ji True, and having no Other good in them as to 
us but the Truth (nor perhaps toothers) There <ir* no fuch 
Revelations ; but yet our apprehcnfioni may be fuch of them. 

L Here 


Here Truih it felf is a certain fort of Good. And thus the Tn- 
telled rcceivethchefe Truths, but not alone : For the Will 
hath a double concurrence, i. Looking with Complacency on 
the good of vericy Revealed, 2. Looking^ith a Complacen- 
cial Affiance or Truft to the Veracity of God the Author or 
Revealer. Thusit is that we believe fome Hiftories. 1 1. Or 
this voluntary Belief is of things hurtfftl torn , in our appre- 
henfion, as in cafe of our belief of Threatnings. Here the Will 
hath an Averfnefs to the material Ohjt^l , but Hill hath a com- 
placency joined with it both in the Cjt*ieral Qood of Verity^ 
even as in a Threatning, and a Complacency in, and voluntary 
approbation of the Veracity of God in his Threatnings. Thus 
it ought to be: And this compliance of the Will with Gods 
Veracity in a Threatning, is not commonly called Affiance; 
but a confenting or Complaccncial Approbation. III. This 
Belief hath foractirae a Revelation apparently good to us, (ot 
to the Church, or our Brethren and Gods honour) for its Ob- 
jed. Thus all merciful Narratives, Offers and Promifes, are 
believed? And here are thefe Ads. i. The Intelkd appre- 
hendeththe Veracity of God- Revealing. 2. The Will hath a 
Gomplacencial Approbation of this Veracity of God as good 
in it felf and a Divine perfection. 3. The Intelled Appre- 
hendeth the Letter and fcnfe of the Revelation. 4. And the 
Truth of it as proceeding from Divine Verity it felf. 5. And 
the Goodnef^- of it as its Truth in General. 6. And the fpecial 
Goodnefs of it from the Matter in fpecial. 7. And the Will 
concurreth in thefe Apprehcnfions by Commanding the Intel- 
led according to that Degree as the ads are Impirate. ^ And 
the Will hath a fpecial e^ffi^nce or TruJ} ( together with the 
Intellcdacquiefcing herein) in the Feracitjf of the Revealer as 
it refpedeth this fpecial Ob jed. For as 9 The fame Will 
hSith a. C omplacexicyy or Cofjfent or ^iceptance^ as to the Good 
Revealed, Trentifed, Offered t, fo it hath an anfwerable rcfped 
to the Power, Wifdom and fpecialgoodneff of God that pro- 
raifeth; and fo looking at his Veracity(the refult of thefe three) 
as the Foundation and formal Objed of his faith , he muft 
netdslook at it with a fpecial Volition, which we commonly 
call Affiance or Truft y and this laft is the very Act that is cal- 



led by the name of fiJes^ or fi .'uda. or /tffiuKCi , comprehcnd- 
mg the reft, but fo as that they are all denominated ufualjy 
from this as the perfcdive Ad. And this is the Affiance , thac 
we fay iscflenrial to Kaith in general as it hath a Promife, for 
its material Objed, and which is directly fignified by -n^^.-Jtiv di 
I'm t)v &iov , To truft a mins word, or to credit him^ or take 
his word, <5r truft his credit, and to believe him, andhave Affi- 
ance in him, are all one. IV. The fpecial faith of the Gofpel 
called faith in Chrift, contcineth allthcfe nine Acts aforefaid, 
and a tenth fuperadded which is a fpecial Affiancein Jefus 
Chnft as theSaviour to do the works of his undertaken Office, 
in our Salvation. ^o that all thefe ten Acts are n faving faith, as 
they are diftinguii"hed by the feveral objeds •, which yet are all 
but one fairh in a moral fenfe.and all thele but the fevefal parts 
of the Object. He that denieth this, rruft in equity except 
againft thofc particular Acts that he thinks may be left out. 

By this much I have told you what acts of the Intellect, and 
what of the Will are in faith, and what Affiance is in it : Tvo 
a^sof^ffiiKceiTeinhvm^ faich. Thefirllisan Affiance^ or 
Trufi in^ or criditing ofQcd a* the Promifer, becaufe ofhti Verd- 
city : This is in the genw. The fccond is, J» Affiarct in the 
Redttntfr as fack^ by which we Truft in him for the effects and 
E;ids of his Office. And this is efTential to the Chndtan faith 
tn fp*cie. All thcfe are comprized in thefe three General acts. 
I, Afjent. 2. Conftnt or Accevtsnce. 3. Ajfia»ct. This /rf/? 
Ajfiance in the 'JKeaiatou*-^ is not the fame with the General 
e^jfia»ce in God xs Promifer, hdor^ mentioned. This is the act 
that was commanded the Jaylor^ (comprizing the reft) AEi, 1 6. 

51. -n^v^cv om Tov Ky'fjd' Ir?7K:' X^idv ;c^ (Tw n tji ^c.] To thefc 
is Adoption given, J-ohn I.I2. ~o'ii'^<;{vi7tv mho "^viym. avr^, ~]So 
^(7w.4.5 and i?.i4. ^ p^ffim. 

Now the Plerophorie that you call Affiwce, is either an Af- 
furance or Cor.fi hnt pet f\\'afion of our own particular ftate of 
Grace- or of our particular Acceprance with God in our ad- 
drefT:?, or clfe feme high Degree only of the forcmentioned 
Affiinceor AfTient. Now it is none of thefe that \V^ call Af- 
fiwce, when we make it elTential to faving faith. .fmeftHj (hews 
fomewhat of the difference in C^tedHl.Tbeolog. / i. ca.&I.z. 

. L 2 ,.;^.J. 

€(ip.$. Where alfo be largely proveth faith to be in the Will 5 
and yet your forementioned fpecial Articles are none of its ob- 
jed ; Ajftnfus veto fpecialmjuo (iattanius Deum ejfe nojirum 
DeuminChriflo ^ noae[i a^Hs f> inks pdei ^ fed aUus ex fic^e 
tminans. Nu/ia eninf eji m^j '^ in te qu >m aha ctn'unio Axjff* 
veritatis^ nee verior fj'-^s w^prehtr f)^ untecfuim te ad Diurti 'ide 
fingtiUriter appUcaveris, faith Ptmh/^J'^it^iic, Grjf.pug. 26O. 
^that kind of fiducU which ^e cull Ajfurarce, and full perf\\)a. 
jionofthe pardon of our ftn<^ u a fruit of the other Fiducia ^ or 
Trufiinguntothe Promife It ftif^ whertin flands the proper A6i 
cf Jtifiifjii^g Faith. Ani it follows it not al^Mjes prefentlf-^ but 
after fame long time, after much pains tak.^n in the exercife of 
Faith a'^d other Graces. 1^ But that the other i^taWw is effen- 
tial to fiaith he proves by feveral Arguments^ pig. 2$'^' (In 
whicli our more voluminous Difputants againft Popery are 
much more copious.) knipag.ijo.iji. Where in the Mar- 
gin he faith, '^It is an erroneotts curio ft- j to make Ftducia a (^on- 
feqnent of Fides, and to fuy therefore 1 trttji a m-An btcaufe I be- 
iieve the truth of hit promife, that he ^ill do what he fajes ; thtr^e 
can beno goodconfiruBionof fuch a frying: for it is as much as 
this ^ / tru^ him bicaufe I trujl him.&cc] 

And thus your firft Cenfure is anfwercd : Affiance isefTentiai 
to true faith. 

Sect. XI. 

P4£^4c6.T70ur fecond anfvver of the Objedion you chofc 
X is, byalleadging from Rob. B'Tonitis two Rea- 
fonsto prove that /'fWwc/^is not in the VVili, The firft is \'Be- 
caufe D ffdence is not in the tVill. ] Anfrv. Fiduci.i is an ad both 
of the Uriderftanding and Wjll,and Dijjiilence'\sk3.ted in both^ 
Dj^^'««inthe Will israolily a Privation of the Truftand Af- 
fiance aforementioned. Your Argument from Baronim to prove 
it only in the Undcrftanding is ^ f becmfe m?n may diilrufi 
themfelvesi whi-chfignifieth not ah^tred.&CC ] Anf-^v. i. Though 
it fignifiesno hdtrcd oraverfation , it may fignifie a Privation 
ofthe Truftandboldnef«, andexpedation of the willand un- 
dcrftanding both, li Hti and/r//rbeads of the will, then fo 



may Affiance. Do you think Hope is in the will or not ? I do 
not think you will be fo lingular ?s ro deny ir. And then I 
would asfv whether Dtfpiir be in the Will ? if Defp^.tr be , fo 
may Dijjlder.ce. And here I may pur you to anfwcr your own 
Argument. hu\2inDefpav^thQi himfelf and hi* own affairs, 
without Hatred or Avcrianon • therefore Dcfpair is not in the 
Will. If you fay there is a certain Averfation of the will from 
the evil ot his affairs, in Defpair I (hall fay, it may b»: as tiuly 
faid of that Ditiidence which is a full contrary to Tiuil.lf you 
fay thatDclpjir isinthe will, asa Privation of Hope, I lliali 
fay then fo is this Diffi Jenre as a Privation of Fruft. 

Page 407, You confirm the inopinion o^ B^roniui from the 
[ the ufe of mediums to breed Cor-fidence ~] But, i . That proves 
9,^^ince^ as Its taken for ftrengrh of Aff-nt to be in .he In- 
tclled, but not as taken for the^ ucm' a-^uie.cenct or fx^i^ia- 
r;(7«of the Will. 2. It proveth Jjfii»ce in the Scn;^ture- 
fenfe (" a? taken for faith) to be in the underft iniiinf hut r.oc 
to be in the underttanding alone :For arfiance as hope 15 a.com- 
plicace Aft of the Intelle^i and Will > not phv fically en? , hue 
morally one, and Phyfically fo admirably complicate, ttuc its 
ve; y hard to diftinguifh them. 

Page 40S. You give us 54r<7«t«i his fecond Argument [/* 
fr,rrrahter ejfet oHhs volnyitattSy r.il <.iiH<^ cfjen^tia'n at ft. ertum, 
feu amor ob]eEli : cr muUi afn(,nt <^ dtfiierant ohjr^lum^ijui non 
lo^bcyitfAucAyn: ofr. ^ 

Ar.f, The Confequence is without all appearance of Truth in 
my eyes jfor it is the material objeft ; whofe love he and you 
doblainly fpeakof : but the love of the marenal objed as the 
end IS prefuppofed to the Ad of the Affiance in ve-acirv snd 
word of the Promifer as the means : and it is fiom this lormai 
objed,that Affmnce is denominated I donor tru(i the paydon of 
fin J ufi i5 catiiK , Adoptla T ^ though I love and dcfne tl em : huQ 
J tru :'i Gods Promife, becaufe ot his veracity for ihe pardon of 
fin: But if the Promifei: ielf betheobjed vvh:ch youmearijvtc 
I anfwer. i .My love to the Promife is becaufe of ihe good pro- 
m.fcd,& therefore prlmirily to the bcrtfi^ami bur fcccundat ily 
to the Promife-. bu: my TrufV is primarily i;i Godsvero' ity and 
next in the Promfcasthe produd of that -veracity, and not at 
ail in the benefit, but for the benefit promifed ; Hove the 

L 3 be- 


Benefit or good promifed formally, and I love thePromifc 
for the benefits fake finally, and as mediatly participating 
of the goodnefs loved. But I truft in the Divine veracity for- 
mally, and inthcPromife fecondanly, as partaking of ic as 
the matter in which it is cKprelt : Kut the good of the benefit is 
only finally pertinent to Affiance, and the good of the Pro- 
mife as the means to that end. 

2. I further anf^er to this ( and at once to the confirmati- 
on of the Minot^j that there is alicjuid deftderii ^ amoris in 
affiance^ and efTential to it, as there \^ ali^ttidbonii{^tnuz\\w 
the objed. But being a compound ad, it follows, not that 
it muft be denominated Love or Defire, or that it is r.il nlmd, 
Eventhedivineveracicy is the formal ohjed of affiance, not 
limply, butasthe Author and Informer of a Proraife of good 
things : For it is not called the objed of affiance ; if it produce 
only an alTertion that maketh to our hurt. And the Promife is 
the objedof affiance as a relative thing that hath refped at 
once both to the veracity of the Promifer and the gAod that 
is promifed. Hope hath fomewhat of Love and fomewhatof 
Defire in it effenrially, And yet it is riot to be called Love or 
Defire no more then a man is co be called [ Reafon or IntelieSl^ 
or: fVillj or z^adj, or a Souh. fo faith hath fomewhat of 
Hope and of Love in it , and yet is not to be called Love or 
Hope: of which more anon. .•» 

To the confirming Reafon I anfwer ; Its true that many 
love and defire that which they have no affiance or truft to ob- 
tain : and that proves that Love and Defire are not terms 
convertible with Affiance or Faith : but it proves not that affi- 
ance or faith hath no participation of Love or Defire. There is 
Love effential to all Defire : & yet a man may love that which 
he defirerh not ('if he have it air ady, ) though he cannot de- 
Tire that which he loveth not There is Love & defire efTential- 
ly in hope, and yet effential to hope, a man may love &c defire 
that which he hopeth not for. There is expedation eflential to 
Hope and yet I may exped that (as a hurt or injury, jwhich I 
hope not for. And ye: you will tell me thjat which I know not. if 
you tell me of any thing efientiil to Hope befides this defire 
C(6 irehending love & expedadon: I take it to be a compound 
of Defire and expedationfor atmoft with fome acquiefcencc 



and plea 'ore of die mind conjunct. ) Yet neither <^ thena alone 
is Hope. 

pjgt 409. You add a third Reafon to prove that Affiance 
is not in the Will, from \_ the ufe of the words in all goud Au- 
thon : ] But what words ? TA)i?:?3.i« and -T^-n/i-^s-K j but 

1 . Amtff'U ( C^'fedulM i . nblfup. ) tells you that even thefe. 
words in feverai Texts of Scripture fign fie lavirg faith 

2. But what's this to our Queftion, youlhould have limited 
it to one fort of Affiance, and not have fpoke ibus of ali Affi- 
ance in general, nor of that which Protcftants plead for m ipeci- 
al. Prove it if you can that mTiv'nv eii rDv 0£si', or the englifh 
Trufting, or Affiance, or the Latinc fiduciuor fides, arc not 
ads of the Will. And of this, we call not for proof from 
prophane Authors, bat facred, as knowing that '^^'^^ and ■^' 
9Ev.^t' is not the fame thing with them and with the Scriptures : 
See Mr. Qarai^rj Cnnnsy pag. 383,584 385. And a^ainft 
Pfochemm di novi itijhymenti (Ijlo^ /?4^.88,89 . where he ci- 
teth abundance of Scripture Texts, where -^p^ and ^'^.■-'e-iv e^i 
are u fed for Fiith and Affiance, or Truft to his Wod that 
promifeth us fome good, which is no: the ufe of the words with 
prophane Writers. And of your own fenfe of fi-Juci.t, fee 
Chamier defiie^ li. 11. chap. 11. in Ta^jjl. And iL/€mefii 
BeHarmint. Entrv.it. Tortt.di. ^.z^and 3. proving that faith is 
yifflance^^nd cap. i, eking Ciird-C'}»tareni*r^ Alex.tnd.'^les^ 
Bonivent^ Dnrandut, C diet an ^ affirming it to be in the Will 
as well as the Intclle(?^. To conclude therefore your PUroi ho- 
rie is not ^aiwaies at left)in the Will,but ^ies vel fiaNcu,TruJ}^ 
Affiince.Faith arc in the Inrellcd and Will. 

You conclude that ['H^/(>j/4/>fr'^//r/5>i/, (Jj4ll (lUlfjjth^t 
fiducia is i» the tyill^ I rvdl not fij be is impHde^t^ bat fu^e a. lit 
tleth:>i^)^fillnotmik^el:i/n blufj. ^ 

Anftv. For my part I was naturally fufficiently baflifull, 
bu'my Brethren have notably afiifted me in the cure of it: 
But I muftconfcrs that I fee nothing yet in your Argumen:?, 
nor in the hadnels of my caufe or company to make ms bluQi. 
N'uch more hath been faid by 'Bcl/.irmine zni mnny more,, 
fince this controverfie begun amongus ; then you have here 
faid •, andyci almoft all Proteftant Divines that ever I read 



or heard' of (excepting very few noted for fingularity) do 
without blulning hold to the old caufe in this point, aflercing 
Faith to be efTentiall/ pJacta, and in the Will : And the k\» 
that confirm it to the Intelleft, do moftof them make that 
Intelleduai AlTent to contain anintclleduall Affiance. 

And for Baronitis, whofereafons, you urge, he was young 
and raw when he wrote thofeexercitations, and fince that did 
change his mind in many particulars ; as you may forinftance 
fee in your point of the Spirits Teftimony, which in bis D*/- 
fut. agiinfi TurnbfillHs , he o:herwifc handleth then here. I 
ever lookt ( fince I had any acquaintance with them and thofe 
matters J on hisexcrcitations, as the unripe fruits of an ex- 
cellent wit ; and valued then more for what they promifcd 
and attempted, ( then in many points ) for what they perfor- 
med : but his after-labors, even the poll- humours have fo 
much more Maturity and folidity of conceptions , that I rauft 
fay it is pitty they had not been more perfeded, and God 
had not longer fpared us that man , whofe Judgement I value 
as highly as almoft any mans fince the primitive times of the 
Church. But whatreafon gives he why fiiucia\n\\\s kcon^ 
fenfe is not an Ad but effed of faith ? viz. [_ m accfpitur pro 
interna accjuiefcentia in divina benevolentia ^gratia. , per qttarn 
totiabilUpena.emHi^ &c. ] ^^^^233. Or rather as it is 
an Acquiefcence in the veracity of the Promifer. You know 
alfo that he is put to defend his fingularity by anfwering thefe 
Objedions. [] Sifi^ncia eji in intelUnu nondiffert ah ajfenfu^ 
ut hoc rcpHgnatl^o3rin<£ omnium Orthodoxorum, ^ p-^^^- 2 4I» 
Et nnllu^ ftnijHamOrthodoxiiiTheologHi dixit fidnciatft ejje af- 
fenfum am judicium mentis ' ^ P^^^' 2,42. Iconfefs I have 
long taken thofe pafTages of ^<«='^>'/f«/ which you alledge, for 
fome of his chifeft overfights : and I yet fee no caufe to thio^k 

Among others f commonly given by our Divines) thefe 
following reafons move meto think that Affiance as fir.nified 
h'^ ■THT^.vu'j Hi tIv Qioi; c^c. in Scripture, and by ourenglifli 
word Trtif}^ is in the Will as well as in the Intellect. 

, Reafon 


Ren. I, If Affiance or Truft be only in the Intellect, then 
may we bcfaid to put our Truft or Affiance in threacning, 
whofe Object is feme mifchiefcous : but this is «« ?«<!;>««», 
and fo the Confequent is falfe, thtrefore fo is the Antece- 

R:a. 2. The Gofpel or Promifcjas the Object of our faith 
or Truft, are eflentially good as well as true : therefore 
faith muft be eflentially in the Will as well as the Intel- 

ReA. 5. Chrift himfelf as he is the Object of our faith or 
Truft, is good as well as true : therefore that faith muft be 
the act of the Will as well Intellect. 

Ret*. 4. Jurtification, Adoption, Glorification, and the 
other benefits, which by faith are to be received, are offered as 
good, therefore the receiving of them belongs to the Will- 

Rea. 5. Hope and Defpare are not only in the Intellect, 
therefore Affiance is not only in the Intellect, for they differ 
very mrrowly. Our Divines, rharhiery ^■imefui4 , and other 
ordinarily make all hope to be fidftcuy though not all ficlucia 
to be hope, making this the difference, t\\^l[.ht jilncia fide in 
about the object as prelent, and the fiduci^ ffei about the 
chjefl 4S future. 

Rea- 6. fr»» and c/'/* are Ads of the Will : But one or both 
ihefe are in Affiance, therefore Ajfiavce is an Act of the Will. 
For the Minor, at God is the perfect Fountain of all Verity, 
and his V'^eracity is his Divine pcrfeccion ; fo the foul in Affi- 
ance doth /r«f, in fome initial fort which Viators arecapabk 
of, enjoy God in this his perfection. For A (fiance is a certain 
Ar^uitfceKce ar.d CcmplaceMcie o( the (oul in Gods veracity. 
2. And as his Promife is the means of the benefitto be re- 
ceivecl,fo the Will doth by affiance ufe this Promife to its end. 
Rea. 7. Veracity which is the formal object of Faith, is 
as much the Refult of Gods infinite goodnefp, as of his Wif- 
dom and Power : Thefore it is by faith or truft as neceflari- 
ly reftcd on by the Will as the underftanding. 

Ohjetl. Then the Belief of athreatning is Ajfance. 
An[^. No : There goes more then meer veracity and re- 
velation,to the Object of Affiance.Ic is faith in general,if iher* 

M be 


bebuctbefe, and when we believe a threatning : But all faith 
is not Affiance; It is not Truft or Affiance unlefs it be fome de- 
(irable thing that is revealed, and then in relation to that ouc 
Credence or Belief in the Divine veracity is thus named; even 
when both thefe obje6ls do concur. 2. Yet I add that a 
chriftian Belief> even of the threatniugsof God, muft be vo- 
luntary and contain a Complacency of the Will in the Will 
and veracity of Cod, though not in the eviJ threatned, and 
chough fo it be not called Truft. And they that believe any 
Jruth in voluntarily upon the credit of Gods veracity, taking 
no degree of complacency in his veracity or Witl,have not true 
faith ingenercj fave analogically or fecundum qdU. 

Rea» 8. Scripture being a Dodrine of morality, and not 
«f mcer Phyficks , is morally to be underftood : and there- 
fore according to the common ufe of thefe words in morality, 
Truft) Faith, Affiance are not to be limited to any one phyli- 
cal Ad, nor any one faculty of the foul, ror to be fliut out 
of the Will, If this Town were all infefled with the Plague, 
and only one Pbydcian able to cure them ; if he offer them to 
do it freely, and fome flander him as a Deceiver, and he tell 
them again. If you will truft me I will cure you ; All the world 
will underftand here that by trufting him, he means both the 
truft of the underftanding and the Will, arifing from fome 
fatisfadion both of his ability and honefty,and fo taking him 
for our Phyfitian, and putting our lives into his hand:and fo in 
other cafes. 

Sect. XII. 

YOU conclude, p^g* 410. with thefe cenfures. [^ i. That 
this AiTertion [^common and fpecial Grace are ejftntialljf 
the fame. ] Is not only erroneous, but far mora dange« 
rous then many, nay moft men think. J Anfwer.The more 
dangerous you take it to be, the loather you fhould have been, 
after fo many explications and Difputations for your own opi- 
on Written by me) to have openly fuggcftedthat I maintain 
the very fame thing thac I deny and write againft. 

2' You 


1. You CiYtpag. 41 1 . [ That the other propofthn^ that Cha- 
rity is efentta^- to JHJlijying faith ^ is a \\>orje nfifi^k^e then the for- 
nter^in refpeEl of the many ill Confe^uencts ^ &c. ] Anfwcr •, 
As you purpofc [ To manifefi this^ Wihen there u Kiccjfitj or 
any jufi opjiortHfiity to doit. ] as you after fay, and thereby 
put us in hopes of more of your labors ; fo I think you are the 
Judge of neceffity and opportunity,and feeing either will ferve, 
1 hope you will not want the later, if you do the former. Bos 
I would defire you that if God (hall call you to this work, and 
fatisficyou that it is the beft improvement of your precious 
time to fpcnd in the confutation of any errors of mine, that 
you would do me that great fnvour astounderftand me f if I 
fpeak intelligibly ) before you confute me, and to charge me 
with no opinions but my own, and that as delivered in my own 
word?,and that taken together as they mike up the full fenfe, 
era: left that you will not confute any opinion asraine,whichl 
have written purpofely againftiand alfo that you fix not on my 
Aphorifms, tilla correded edition come forth ; the fubftance 
of the fame Doftrine being more plainly cxprcfftd by me in 
many other books. And if this be the opinion that ycu are 
arguing againft, I intreat you to fay no more as my words, 
[[ that love is the ejfential fcrm of faith -, ] But that you 
may neither work want , if you are deftinated hereunto , noc 
yet lofe your labor ; I will before hand tell you my opinion, 
how far love belongs to faith J when I firft told you. i. That 
I refolve by God» affiltance to fay no more in fubftance , then 
is the common Dodrincof Proteflants, asfar aslcanunder- 
ftand it i and therefore will have company in my caufe. j.That 
I will nat fay fo much in terms as many of the raoft famous 
Pro'eftants do ^ I will inftance but in two. 

Chamier Panftrat. Tom j.li. \i.De fideyCi^.^. proving faith 
to be in thcVVill, hath this Argument. [$. i5. Efi & hoc 
ArgHmfjttH^i ctrtHiH : Omnu amor efi aBm voluntatii. At fdes 
efi amor .Er no e(i a^'H volant at is: Major per fe vera df cogntta; 
Mi'ior prchatur, ijHia vera fide^ e/} ea y ojuc credit in Dtum, at 
credere in Z)f«»w,'j/? amare Deum. Augoftinus, in Pfal. 1 50, Hoc 
ffi credere »« ChrtjJum^dUi^tre ^hnfittm.Et j« Johan,trad.29- 
,^id ef} credere in Diii?(^redendo am^rec^ vero viBus hoc ar- 

M i gnmenxo 


gnmtnto Gropperus in Enchiridio , &c. ] and fo he cites 
him as confenting. 

\\\t 0lhtT\s, Adacchoviuf^ who, i. Colle^.Difput.Jefu- 
fiific. Difp. i4.§.io,i 1.12,1 3. anfwcring C<«f»fro'j objedion, 
that by placing faith in the Will we confound it with Love, 
anfwercth, [ That the love of Complacency is required in faith, 
to Its ohjeSi. H^wcr Chenjnitus on Melanfthons Com. pUces^ 
fag.660^ faith, \_ Faith is fftch a knorvledge in the mind^ to 
which followeth ajfent in the JVill^ and a motion of the heart ap- 
prehending and apply ing to it felf with de fire and ^^ fiance, that 
ohjeEi which is manifefted to he good, fo that it refttth in it : 
Obje^. ^ut thus faith is confounded ^ith Charity : ^hich 
t^o the Holy (j hofl difiing/ti/heth fpecially, i Cor. 1 3 , y^«/*. 
Charity there is confidered^ as it is carried to Qod and our neigh- 
bour ^and not as it is earned to Chnfi as the meritorious caufe^and 
the benefits by him obtained and promifed to us in him, ^hich is 
the Charity or Love of faith, and is dijiingui/ied from the for' 
mer. ] Here he proceeds to (hew the difference. Now 
my Judgement which you have to oppofe ( if that be your 
work ) is this. 

1 .1 take it as a certain and weighty Truth that faving faith is 
in the Will as well as the Underftanding: and fo do the ftream 
of Proteftants ; though yet I highly honour Chamero^ and 
the French Divines of his mind, that think otherwife. 

2. I think the very Adof the Will is not properly called 
Love, according to the received ufeof that word. 

3. 1 think that all gracious Love is not the thing dircdiy 
meant by the Apoftle , when he extolleth Charity as the 
everlafting Grace. 

4. I think that Faith, Hope,and Charity,arc three diftirft 

5.1 fuppofe that this nobleGraceof Charity is ihefimple 
Love of the Deity, as our beginning and end, and all, and 
of all things elfe for his fake, as he appcareth in them : or the 
Complacency of the foul in God as our God. Creator, Re- 
deemer, SanSificr and Felicity, or as the chief good. And 
that the lawful! Love of our felves, and of food, rayment, 
wealth, book«,Sermons, humiliation Duties, ^c, may parti- 


cipate of fome beams from this higheft Charity ,but is not dircft- 
ly the thing it fclf. And that faith is thefi^iuci.il Affent before 
defcribcd; and that Hope \%iht fiducial ^tfirous exf elation oi 
the promifed Glory, and the future blcflings that are its necefTa- 
ry Foregoers. 

6. I fuppofe that thefe moral afts and habits SiTctotitu homi- 
nu^ and not to be confined to |any one faculty, as meer fimple 
phyfical Ads, at left not ordinarily. 

7. I fuppofe that as there is ( as aforefaid ) alicjHid dileEli* 
9yiis\Q Dcfire» and yet it is to be called Dcfire and not Love ; 
and aliifuid dUeFiioMt'i in Hope eflentially, and yet Hope is not 
Love, nor fo to be denominated •, every Grace being denomi- 
nated not from all that is in it, but from that which is eminent 
and fpecialinit, as to the Object ; cvQn(o there \s aiitfHtd fdei 
infpt^ & aliqmd fffi in fide ^ & aliejmd amoris in fide (^ (pe, 
and yet Faith is not Hope, nor Hope Faith, nor Love Faith. 

8. The Schoolmen having fome of them taken up a cuftom 
of diftinguifliing between Love in the affection and in the Will, 
and of calling all volition by the name of rational Love : if any 
be refolved to ufe their language, and to call the very act of 
Affiance, or of choice, or of confent, or Acceptance of an 
offered Saviour by the name of Love, though 1 will ufe the an- 
cient terms and not his, yet for the thing fignificd I firmly 
hold,thatitisase(rential to faving Faith in Chrift, asthelntei- 
Jccts Affent is ; and that i$ Davenant fpeaks, Faith begins in 
the Intellect by AfTent, and is compleated intheWill by the 
Acceptance of the offered Saviour. But this acceptance ( or if 
you will needs call it Love ) to Chrift as the Mediator or Way 
to the Father, doth much diff"er from the formentioned Love of 
God as our chief good and ultimate end. 

9. We are not faid in ' cripture to be juftified by Hope or by 
Charity, but by fai'h : butitisfocha faith as hath alttftiid fpei 
er Amorii in it : and will operate by thefe Graces. 

10. Whatfenfefoevcr the Schoolmen make of their diftin- 
dion of fides i':fo"mif,& format a Charitate^sti in this following 
fence it may truly be faid, that the Love of God doth as it were 
animate all Graces and Duties whatfoever: that is, not as they 
are particularatcidcnrs which have every one , no doubt, their 

M ? own 

Own form ; but as they are Right Means to the End : For as the 
Refped to the end is eflential to the means as means , ("though 
not to the Aft that materially is that means, ) and the end in- 
tended or Loved is the caufe of the means, (it being the very na- 
ture of a 6nal caufe to be anntum & eiefiieratum effcaciter ab 
ejficieftte, propter quo^ amatumfit efeQas-, as Ocl^iim ^uodlih. 4. 
qti.i. &in fsntypjiffim:) So the Lovc of God asour end,muft 
have the fame effentiall refpeft and influence into all the means 
that are inu[u truly and acceptably fuch , as the Fntentio finis 
bath into all ordinary means whatfoevcr. If this be the fenfe of 
fi<lei informii ^ formats charitate^ I think the diftinftion of very 
great ufe and moment : For I think that no Prayer,Study, Aim?, 
fuffering,is any further truly and fully moralized or Theological, 
or Rchgious, that is, are acceptable means to our fruition of 
God (which is our Salvation) then it iscaufed and animated by 
the Intention of God as our End^ which is the Love of God* and fo 
chat faith in Chrift,and Repentance, and Obedience, are all wr- 
diate Graccs,and muft be thus caufed and animated by the Love 
ofGod(yecfo, as that in fome refpect faich goeth before this 
Lovc, and in forac refpecc Love before this faith , which having 
lately occafion to difcufs,T (hall not here digrefs again to do it.) 
Of this I have faid fomewhat in my annexed Explicatory Pro- 
pofitions. I confefs I never underftood whether any Papifts took 
their diftinccion in this fenfe .- But I remember Aquinas and fome 
other of them fay fomething that bendeth that way, chough tliey 
feem not clear in it. And fo much tor my fenfe,that you may not 
aflault me next in the dark. 

If you join with the Lutheran Hethufiut whom you cite in 
detefttng them th^t mix Faith and Love in the a^ of Jttlii'} canon 
you will dereft the Generality of Proteftants , who mix that is 
conjoin them in rhe act, though not to the act of juftification 
as of equal ufe .- efpccialiy if you call ail acts of the W 1! towards 
Good, by the name of Love ^ for then they commonly make 
them one. 

Asforthe Hereticksyoumeniion,;>.4ii.4T2, Ihaveno bufi. 
nefs with them, Tie liudy Gods word, and there is no Herelie. 
And for the right underhand ng of it , I have exccedtng great 
caufe to diHruft my felf, and depend on the gracipus teaching of 



his Spirit. But I am refolved co be as impartial at I can,wich re- 
fpccc CO the Judgement of the Catholick Church of Chrift. 

Af to your conclufion,/><if .41 ? . &c. I freely confefs that when 
fuch unlearned fcriblers as we, impune , & inftlici pnerptrio as 
you fpeak, do tire the ('yet unfatiable) prefs, unhappily bringing 
forth our impertinencies (I leave the impious and monftrous Hc- 
refies to the facherj or the finders to dtfpofe of J it were unwor- 
thy dealing if fuch as you (houid be denied liberty, to cleanfe & 
favethe Church from our Errors. And for my one part , as I 
think not my felf meet to fpeak when I may be your hearer,fo lec 
my travail be never fo hard, if there were but one prefs in £«- 
gland ^ which offered me its help to deliver me of my impertinen- 
cies, I were much to blame if I would not readily difcharge it 
for your fervice, there being not many whofe judgement fconje- 
fluring by vour Exercirations ) I have preferred before yours. 
And therefore I take it for an honour ( though not to have been 
miftakenby you, nor to have been the eccafion of your fo much 
trouble, yet) that I have the encouragement of fo much of your 
Confent, and thar you condcfcend to be at fo much paini with 
me,whcre you did but think I had differed from you. 

Though you chofe to conceal your name , yet Tradition ha- 
ving publifhed it, your labour is to be a great deal the more ac- 
ceptable for the Authors fake. And if you defpair of my Conver- 
fion by it, its more likely to bc,becaufe of theunteachablenefs of 
roy dull underftanding, them from the impcrfedion of your Ar- 
guments, had you but aimed at the right mark. And where I dif- 
fent with confidence becaufc of my Reafons that feem fomewhat 
cogent, yet is it with a mixture of felf- diffidence, when, I think 
what a perfon I diflentfrom. 

And for your Refolution [to ott'» ank vindicate your Writing if 
9CC'i/ion ^f .^ It were ftrange if any thing of yours (hould be un- 
worthy to be owned by you •, but inftead of a vindication, were 
I your advifcr.you (hould fcarch after fome of my greater errors, 
and AfTault me rather in another point ( if this be your Harveft 
work^) at leafl in fomething where really we differ, left the world 
think that we are not in good fadncfs, and difpute not ex animo. 
But yet 1 leave this to your graver judgement, being fo far from 
deprecating any of your labours to favc men from the danger of 


my opinions, as that I am tempted to be a little proud that I am 
chaftifcd by fo learned and eminent a man ; and can promife you 
that your tight (hall be welcome co me,and your rebukes not al- 
together loft. '^\ll^Ql[the explication and confirmation of my ntTV 
untrue Hrpothe/it]&s you call it. you fpeak fo much too late,thac 
I confefslhavc nottheskilto fpeak much plainer then I have 
alreadydone: I have here done fomething, but its little but 
what was done before. And for the conprmation^^ou have faved 
me that labour. 

Had I known which are the [bj-mifiakes'] in yours> which you 

would not have fcverely toucht , I (hould have paft them over 

withoutany touch at all : Butiflhadnotexprcflcdmy DifTcnt 

from you on thofe pointjthat you bring in on the by , I ihould 

have had nothing to fay , but to have joined with you againft 

that i?<?;vffr whoever he be, whom you aflault. And, taking rae 

forfo angry a fellow as your fuppofitions of a paffionate Reply 

do intimate, Iknewnot whether you let not fall thefe pafTages 

on the by, left I (houldjlikc the angry man in Seneca ^ have falU n 

upon you for faying ftill as I fay, and bid you differ from me in 

fome'^hat that rve maj be t'^o.Sj.m^ertineYiciet^ dare not promife 

you to avoid : But 1 were very unworthy if I would be paffio- 

nate with fo learned and fober a man as you. But had I to do 

with a paffionate man, I (hould exped to be charged with paffi- 

on when ever I make him angry ; as if nothing but anger could 

provoke anger. Even Agitation with preflure foraetime fees the 

Turners wood on fire. When I have bin readier to nod then to 

be Angry, yet if I have fitted z/fr^drf^«/, I have oft been called 

angry , when the Truth is, I am daily lamented that my pituitous 

bram and languid fpirits, have deprived me of the paflion thac 

once I had ; and which I daily find the want of in my ftupidity. 

But at leaft I fhall promife you, that if I be \}mT^ertintnt\\[t very 

Pofition and Defign.of my whole Book (hall not be Imfertiner.t^ 

nor left to the Vindication of a TS^on-Putartm. \<mi ^rayirt 

and pny I (hall need I doubt not, and gratefully accept, '"ut you 

(hall not ha-e the excufc of a 'V affionAte Re^lj to deprive us of 

your Labours. Asfor your Ability not to Riply ; your p tnl b9nM 

horas non fit perdere, and your other buf»efs, I have the Imttden' 

€j as to v:c with you, and purpofe (o far to overgo you > as that 



you flial! fee Iwm able to he fdtnt^ though your writings be ne- 
ver fo frte from Pujfnn^ if cbey concern not me or the cauleof 
God,any more then this that you have written And if by your 
fore- intimations o^l^Railmg Rbttorick fg'^^fy**^g nothing but ^ant 
ofRejfon^^ your Readers (hall be brought into a conceit chat 
they even hear me Rail before I fpeak, I intend to be fo long (i- 
Icnt till I have awaked thera by faying nothing, and made thera 
know that they did but dream. And whether I be reputed Rea- 
fonablc or unreafonabIe,Paffionate or Calme,Erroneous or Or- 
thodox though I undervalue not the Judgement of worthy men. 
yet am I fo necr another kind of Judgement, that I have the left 
regard to (pare for this. Even good and learned men do judge 
of Perfons exceeding varioufly, as the variety of their prejudice, 
and interefts leads them. So the Great and dmons Scaiiger, 
Frattf. Junitu was fo great a man that [_ Ah ^p^flolorum tempo- 
rihut huEienPu parem Theologum nuHnm vUijfe fectt/um] was 
hisElogic {referente conjlantino L.EwptroMr,) But to the great 
and famous Dr. 7W>/r, bow unacquainted is be with School-Di- 
vinity ? How unmeet for fuch Difputations ? How ovcr-witted 
by Arminiaus ? How obfcure and what not ? So our excellent 
Biftiop HaU, be was ^J'he Glory o/Leyden, the Oracle of Textual 
«ni fchool'divimtjt richin LanguageSi fiibtile in Sfiinguljkhg, 
andin A'-gument wvircihle.] Epift. 7. And to the great TkuA- 
»Hs,bcwiiiyirdefultorioiMgenio, (juimulta ConAtut ^ an ad/e- 
cutuj fit ijttod molitbatur^ doElorum trit judicium. ] Hift. To. 3. 
1 7P-1 What can be more contrary then the cenfures of thefc 
men ? Who more Learned, more modcft,and faithful in reports, 
then the two that are on the one fide , and the two that are on 
the other ? How vain a thing is the efteem and applaufe of men I 
weftandor fall to the Judgement of the moft Great infallible 
God. They that take him fincerely for their God , do take him 
as Enough for them. And they that findjnot enough in him, will 
never be fatisfied. 

CMdrch J I . N 




Yj Eader, Becaufe many that have bought the former Edi- 
XVtions of my Book cal led the Saints Rijl, do grudge that I 
have annexed a Sheet to the feventhlmpreflion, on this Sub- 
jeft, which was not in the former, that they may have it here 
without buying that Book again, I (hall here alfo annex it. 

To the R EADER. 


A/nfi) loath to leave thee under any mifluke of mV 

I meaninginthisfoint^ that I Piall yet make fomt 

^ further attempt f^ the explaining of it. t^nd 

whereas I unelerfl and that fame Readers fay th^t 

thM nice dijiinguifhingdoth but p:iz,z,le men : and 

others ^illfurnotfalfely tp give out ^th-it I make commonGrace 

and f fecial to difer only gradually ^ind not fpeciflcally, in deffight 

of my exprefi ajferting of the contrary ; / intrea'.ethe firfl fort to 

tear that leaf out of the Book, which fptakj ofthid Sul^jiB, that it 

may not trouble them^ or to be patient while we fpeak.afew \\>ords 

to other S'^ that underjiand that which they are but puzzled ^ith. 

And I defire the ftcond fort once rm\e to remember, i . Tha^ I 

fiill affirm that common Grace andfpecial <io differ by a moral Jpe' 

cifick difference, and not a graciual only. 2. But that this moral 

fpecifick. dijferer.ce dothmattrially confift in a Phyjical Gradual 

Jiff'erfnce.^ . And it being a Moral fubje^ that we have in hand; 

cur terms mufi be accordingly nfed and underflood-> and therefore 

it is mofi proper ^hen ^e fpeak^ of uny unfa^iBified man, to fay 

that [ he is not a Believer, he hath no faith , he hath no Love to 

Cod.Sic.'] becauje ^e are fnppofedto fpeAkjo»ly of a true Chriflian 

fiving JAtth, Love^diC. ]] 4. 'But jet when it is l^m'^'n that we 

fpeak^ of another faith and love ^ Wv may Well fay that an unfan^ii- 

fie^wavlsfAthtljtfe: ani^henvfe er quire of tke difference^ W* 
mnflbe as exaB as fejfible^ in Jhetvingrvktrein it Ijeth , lejl rve 
delude the h)fpocrite, atid trouble the Regenerate. That the Faith, 
and Love^anci SanEtitj of the Vngodlj are bat Equivocally or A- 
nologically focalled^-in reffe^ to the Faith and Love cf the Saixtt 
I have proved in mj f ft h Difpittatijn of K'lght to Sacrament^. 

That ^h'tch I fha'l now add to wake my jenfe as plain as lean^ 
pjall be thefefolloxfirg DifiinUion ' and Propofitions. 

tl'e mttfi clijlingttiJJ} betrreen, i . Tho/e Graciottt a^j that are 
about our End^ and thofe that are about the means. 2. 'Between 
Qod confiderci generally as Godi indcoKfiJered in his [ever al pro ~ 
perties a^d attributes /iijlir.Blj. -^nd Chrijl confiJered perfonally, 
and confidercd fully in the p-nts ofhu Office^ 'Whether the ejfentiat 
or integral p.irtf. 3. Eetvteen the Qoodnefs ofQod is himfelf con- 
sidered, and as fuitable unto us, 4. BetXX'een the fim^le aU eft hi 
Jntellei},andtheccmp'iringa6i. 5. 'BetWe^'n the fiynple Velleity^ 
of the rvi{', aid the choice th.it fo/lorveth the Comperate aEl of the 
Jntelltfi. 6. Betvoeen the Speculative and PraHicalaSt of the 
InteUe^. 7. yind between the AEliof the trill thatvnfW'er theje 
trvo, 8. 'Bttwecfi an S^dth^t is ultimate t but not principal and 
prevalent ^ and an End that is ZJltimate and chief alfo. 

Prop. I. ^n tinfanSltfied man may Love him that is the true 
God^ and believe in that Per [on whotsjefui Ch ifi^the Redeemer. 
This is pafi controverfe among us. 

Prop. 2. An ur.gody man may love Qod as the Caufe of his 
^Profpfrity in the World. 

Prop.;. He may k»ovp that his evtrlaflinghappinefs is at the 
dijpofeof (jod^ andmiy believe him to be merciful and ready to do 
g'iod^ a^ii that to him. Anacorifequently may h^ive fome love to 
him as thus Gracious and Merciful. 

Prop- 4. He may by a fmple apprehenfor. knor^ that (jod Is 
Cfoodinhimfeif^ and CJoodttrfs it felfy and prea:h this to others. 
e^nd coyftq-sently may have in his ivill a con fen t or ^iUingaefs 
hereof, that Gcd be whit he m, even infinite Goodnefs. 

Prop. 5. He m^yhavca fimple Apprehenfion that God fhwld 
beGlori'ied^andh)ncKredby tht creatures : and fo may have a 
fimpte Velletty thit be m^y be Glorified. 

P;op. 6. He m^y have aCer.fnl dim apprthtnfion that ever- 

N 2 ' lafiirg 


la^ittg Hafptntfi conftfleth in thi fight of the Glorj of god, aniiik 
hislovt and favour and heavenly Kingdom ; andfo may hdve 
fame love to him ad thus apprehended. 

Prop. 7. He waj compare God and the creature together^ and 
htuve 't / eculative or fiferficitnlknorvledge that (Jodis better then 
the crcaiare^ ana better to him ; a^dmay write and preach thU to 
others : And fo may have an anf^erable fuperficial unefe6lual 
Velleitj or lo ve to him^ even ai thus conpJered. 

Prop. 8. One and the fame m»n may have t^o contrary Zflti' 
mate endi of h^ pur.icuUr. Anions ; Even the fleafmg of Qoi^ 
ard the f leafing ofhu flfjh : proved. 

Argument, i. If the fame heart may he partly fanUified and 
partly uofanSli^ed (th^t n , in fame degree) then it may have tW9> 
contrary ends : Or if the fame man may have fiefh and^^inl^ tben^ 
he may have two contrary Vltiitiate ends^ 'But the Antecedent- 

iscertain^lc.rgo -fofara^ aman is carnal and U»fan5tified,. 

fleP3'pltafingandciTm\k\i is his End. 

Argam. 2. If the fame man might not have two cmtrary Vl' 
timate ends y then the godly fboulJtnever fin but in the mif-choofingy. 
ofthe means ^ or abating the 'Degrees of love to God : But tht 

conffqnentis falft and againfi experiencet Ergo. Peter did- 

not only mifchoofe a Wfans to Gods Glory when he denied his md', 
fier . A godly man Vehen heu drawn to eat or dri»kjoo much-, doth < 
it not onljM amiflaken means to Glorifie God, but Vliimately to. 
pleafe bisfiefij. Either David in Adultery did de fire fie fit-pita fing ' 
for itfelf^ or for fame other end. If for it felft then it Vca4 his Vh 
timxte end in that ati : Ifforfome^hat elfit as hii end^ For what ^ 
Tfo one ^lllfay his end vfOi Gpds Glory. A^d there is. nothing elfe^- 
to be it. 

Prop. 9. There « a continual firiving between theft treo con^s 
trary ends where they are^ One drawing one Way, and the other tht 
other way -^ andfometimeone, fometimes tht other prevailing fn> 
particular aSf. 

Prop 10. But yet, every man hath ine only Prevalent Vlti*. 
mate end, which uto he called Finis hominis, or is the chief Vlti' 
mHe End of the Habitual Predominant Inclination or Difpofitio»^ 
of his foul^and of the tenour or bent of his courfe of life. And that ^ 
•wh'wbjots againfi this Habitual bent:, iifaid to h the Ad: [mt of 

1 ^/Wb 


him, but of fomtthing in him] that li, not of that predominant Mf^ 
f^fftion which JhouU dtnominttte the man to be Godly or u^. godly ^ 
bnt of fame fttbdntd difpoficion th^t by accident hath got fomf 

Prop. II. As Godly men have God for their end. m to the pre 
dominant habit of their fouls, and bent of their livfs,foall kicked 
men m the ^orld have the creature and c Am il- ft If for their end, at 
to the 'Predominant Habit of their hearts, and bent of their lives : 
fa that this is /imply to be caRtd their feveral end, Vfhich is ths^ 
Ruling end^and hith the jreaxtjl Intereft in thtm i But jet us car- 
nal felfts a fubdued,rt filing end in the Godly ^prevailing in fomt^ 
particular A[iioyiS',{as istoofure,)fo God a>td Salvation may be a 
a fiifieciyabufedfubjeSled e*jdofthe ungodly that have but common 
Grace, and may prevail again(i thefirfh in fome particular out'' 
ward AEiions. 

This H evident in the foregoing Propojltions.lf a m<n by common- 
' (jrMt may have fuch a fimple and fu^erfciA apprehenfion of God ^ 
M is before mentioned^krsoxving htm to be good in himfelf, yea bejl, ' 
and good andbefl to him,rvhen ytt 4t thtfame time he hith a more 
deep predominant habitual apprebettf en that the Creature it bejh 
for him,then certainly he may have afubd^ed Love to God as befi 
inbimfelfandtohim, that's anf^trahle to this fup erf: ial k^ov^ 
ledge^ and ccnjifieth rvrth a preaomirant habitual Love to the 
Creature and car ral Self . I^oulddtji'^e every IHvine to be 
wart that he tell not^the hnfoiUili fed, -that whoever hath the leafi 
degree of Love to Qodfof himff If' cr not as a means to carnal 
ends ^ Jh all ctrtairJy bfi^fuved i F&r he '^ould certairly deceiv^- 
manj thoufand mi/erable. 'fouls that fi>ould per iWade them ofthfe. 
He thatbtJiiif£thth^th4keAja^t>d,believeth that hejs the chief 
Good, and befi for hi?ipif ht could Jee his G lory ^andfufym joy his 
Love f^r ever : And .many a "dcii krd mandoth preach all thu , and 
think^oi htfpeakji but ittswll but "ivith a fuper^iial opi/'.ianativt 
Beliefs '^''hich u ma(}-er<d bym«re (Irong apvreherfons of a con- 
traryGood; .\nd fe they lovi but \^iih a fstpe'ficiai Lovejhu's an* 
f^erable t-o*i meir opinior.ativt Beliefs and u c ncfuersd by a more 
potent Love to the contrary, .'io that jirittlyif jcu denominate 
not that fmgle ali ^ nor jhe pirfon as xhtu dtfpo/ed, but thebeni of 
his afethons, or the ?ct[onaccordirfg io )^hat tadetdhs n in tht 



Trihm'mant hahit of hU Soul -^fo it isfittefttofay that the gocl- 
ly loveth not the v>orI^, nor the th'mgi of the worlds and the wicl^- 
edloveth not God,r}er the thingi of Godoifuch. 

Prop. 12. The ft r.c ere intending of the end, d'nh concur 
to conftitutc a ftncere choice of the means. And therefore the 
Schoolmen f^j^ that Charitj ( or Love toGod ) in for met h all 
other Graces : not being the form of them as fuch or fuch A6t%or 
Habits, but as grAciovis means : As the means art effentially as 
mtans (ov the end, and fo an rm ate d by it -^ fe the mediate cjAEls 
of Grace as mediate^ are effentialiy animated by the love of the 
endy and participate of it. In thtsfenfe their i^oHrine of the in-- 
forming of other (Jraas by hve^is not only true^ but of very great 
Tveight, and giveth light to r*ia»y other points. And Thm as men 
of common Grace have onlj an abufed^fubdued l^ill or Love to 
God as their end, th^t*s conquered by thecontrary,fo they have bat 
an unApjftver able faith in Chriji^as the ^^ay to Gqd the Father ^ 
and an anfvcsrable ufe of all other means , which will never ' 
bring thjem to attain the end that isfofttperfic'tally and Mneffe^Hal- 
ly apprehended and intended. I deftre the learned Reader toper— 
ufe weil thefirfi Dijputation of Rada for Scotus,'3« this cjnejiion^ 
Prop. 11. The ACi of Love or Faith areconfiderable.i.Ph)' 
Jically '. I. In general as Faith and Love. 2.1n fpecial, as this 
Faith and Love about' this objeB^ the Father and the Son. And 
thus by common Grace men may have True Faith and Love; th^t 
is, fuchasis phyficaHy a true or real A61. 2,They are cg^ftder- 
able morally : and that, I . Either as Duty anp^ering a Precept 
j~ believe and love God. ) And thus they have an analogical 
defe^ive Morality inthem^ andfoarethatfar-^fiKCere or true -^ 
but »9t that fame true Love or faith in fpecie raorali tt'^ic/j the 
{^ommandrequireth. For it commandethusto lovtGsd above all, 
8CC. 3 .They are confUerable as conditions of the l^romfm ani E - 
videncet of fplritual life in thefonl^and thus vpickjdmcr} by com' 
man Grace are never made Partakers of them. Thij h'^ve y,ot the 
things themfelves. Thtir Faith and Live is not tht f^me thing 
which hath the Promifesmadstothemin the Ct'o/pei ; and fc aye 
not fue or JtKcerc. 

Prop. 14. Bf con/mcn Craccymen may love God unitr the 
Notion of the chiefe(} good^^nd moji de fir able otl , andjct n:t ni'h 


thjt L'ive which the chief ejl good muji be loved Vfitb •, iifjj there 
fore it 14 notmoralljf ftncereorftiviyig. 
" PJ^^*^5* There una not ion whiitfocver that a true Chrifii' 

%- an hxth of God,- and no ^ord thAt he can fpeal^of him but an un • 
reget^ey-ate man may have fome apprehen/ion of that fame notion^ 
ndfpeal^fJiojen'ords ; and know everj propofition concerning God 
nd Chrifi iii Redeemer^ rvhich a godly man may kr}ow:attd fo m <y 
tve fome love to God, or faith inChrift in th^t fame notinn : 
hottgh not W'ith fuch a clear (fftBual apprekenfton and lively 
foTverfHll Icve^oi thefanRiped have. 
Ob]ef,l. He cannot love God as hisend.Anfw/cr./^^tff'^roW 
efore thi.it hemsfj with a fuperficial lOitffeRual fubduedLove* 

Obj'.Fl. Hecannot love him as the chief good. ^nfiv.Ihave 
roved that he^pMy love him ur.der that notim. though not with 
'that love which the chief Good mUjl be loved with. 

ObjeSl. He cannot believe in Ghrift, or defire him, as a Savi- 
our to free him frgm every fin. ^"infiv. 7^t with a prevaltnt 
faith or dtfire-^felr flillhe hath more love then averfenefs to that 
fin '^ and thir efore more Averfenefs then love to Chrifi" as fuch : 
But amn gen^fil he ^a) wijb to be free from a!lfin,fo in p.irtica- 
iarhemayh^veuneffe^lual^Hfheitobefromhis mofi beloved fn 
in feveral rejpe^-t. 

Obje^i l)#c not to be free from fin as fin, or as againft God. 
Anf.Tfs:Amiiyt by common ^race may k^orv that Jin asfin u evilf 
and therefore may have uneffe&ttal ^i/hes to be freed from h as 
fuch : but at the {ame time he hath granger appyehenfonj of the 
ple^fure^ppofit^r credit that it brings him^ a>}i this prevaileth. 
Indeed mens carnal inie^-efl which tn ftn they love, is not its Oppofi- 
tion to God^noy the form il nature offin.T^oubtlcfs afl men that are 
ftngodly do not therefore love fin-,becaufe it it fin ^C^ againflGod^at 
leji this is not f^ total in them , but that there may be a fubdued 
MiK^ to the contriiry^a^d di[l'ke of fin as aguinj} God. Many a com- 
mon d'-unk.ard I h4ve k»o^n that when he hath heard cr talkp of fin 
C^a4 fin, as again fl Cod, hath crjed out agaiufi himfelf^and w.'pt as 
if he abhorred it : and yet gore on in it for thepleafure of thefiefh. 
Objcff, But where then .s mans natural enmity to God and 
Hii^inefs ? Anf-.p. i. Its doubtfull whether man nr:tHralh hath 
an enmity to (jo{ a;d H<.li»( f ^covfidered fimpl) -yor only confidered 
AS being agatnfi ma^j carnal intereft.Zr But Were tbeformir pro- 
ved^ ' 



pedjyrt common Grace ahatith that enmity, an^givesmenmif^ 
tlttncorrnptsd nature dcth. .:>,.' I 

ObiiEl. But the expcrif nee of the godly tellcth tfagpthatq 
is another kind of Light and Love which they have afc||^[|(i«l 
Vcrfion then before. An.i.h it not all Con-verts that can ]tidge^ 
by experience in this-ybecAufe all have not hadcommm^^ce in thrl 
higheji ^ or any gre^tobferved meafure before coHverfion^i. ItD 
hard for any to make that experiment y becaufe we kno^ not in ouA 
change jttfi ^hen common Grace left andfpecial Grace began. 3 .A 
Phyftcal gradual difference maybe as great as th At which joun 
experience teltjou of Have you experience of common light] 
and love before converfion, and of another fincp ^hich diferethl 
from it^more then the greatefi flame from a fpark rand more then] 
theff*n'Jhine at noon from the fmilight ^hen ycH cannot know a' 
man f Or more then the fight of the cured blind.n»an , thatfaw 
clearly from that by "^hch hejaiv men Lkf trees ^ ; or more then: 
the pain of thefirappaiofrrm the fmaUefi prick of a pin. \ 

Obje6i. But it is not common gifts that are^ workt up to bel 
fpeciai Grace ; one j(^*c<>/ is not turned into another, Anfw: 
True ; ImperfeBien is not turned materially into pfrfe5iio^. The' 
damning of the day is not materially turned into ^he greater light 
at noon. But a greater light fuperveneth^ and is aolded to the lefj. 
The blind mans feeing men Uke trees ^ was not it th^t ^as thepcr- 
fe^foffowittg fight, but an additional light ^as it* 

ObjeEl, But fpeciai Grace is the divine Nature, the image 
of God, the new Creature,e^c.and therefore doth differ more 
from common. Anf^^. leafil/yield the Antecedent , but deny the 
Confequence. The difference is as admirably gr fat as thefe -terms 
exprefs^thoughitbe but amoral fpecifickdtfference.* 

Reader, I will trouble thee no more, but to entreat thce^, if 
chou be of another mind, to differ from me wittj,out breach of 
Charity, as I do from thee, and to remember th^r I' obtrude not 
my explications on anyjand if I have done thee wrong.it is but 
by telling thee my thoughts, which thou haft liberty to accept 
or rejed as thou feeft caufe. But again,I intreat thee rather lay 
this b7; or tear it out of the book, then it (hould he any flum- 
bJing block in thy way, or hinder thee from profiting by what 
thou readeft. The Lord increafe our Light and Life,and Ldi^ 





-f " s. 






r; . A ■ -» 


'■■■\ -v 


-'.-^w • <