The Triall of Faith.

The Rule it selfe The Rule it selfe. is layd downe in the eight Chapter of the second booke of my Treatise the 219 page, in these words, whether wast thou rightly prepared to be­leeue in Christ by other gifts of the spirit; which hee workes in men, before they haue a sauing faith.

The Exception, against the Triall.

This Rule (say some in effect) is idle, be­cause it pretends that men may try their faith by it: but indeede no man can, for (say they) all men are either regenerate, or [Page 4] vnregenerate, (there is no third conditio [...] betwixt them, and different from them) and neither the one, nor the other, can try their faith by this rule.

Not the regenerate because there is no gift, power, quality, disposition, habit, or affection (other then sauing faith) that is or can be sayd, to be a preparatiue to rege­neration. Neither can vnregenerate me [...] try their faith, because there is no gift in men vnregenerate, whereby themselues, or other can difference them, from those that remaine in their naturall estate, and that shall perish for euer.

The Apology for the Triall.

I answere, first generally to both re­generate and vnregenerate, that though by their exception they seeme to giue two different Reasons, one for the regenerate, and another for the vnregenerate: yet the reason belongs to all equally, because it denies either to the one, or the other, all or any preparations before faith or rege­neration, either to difference the rege­nerate from the vnregenerate: or one vn­regenerate man from another for euer.

Secondly, I answere to their reason concerning the Regenerate, that it is of no [Page 5] force, why they may not try their faith by this Rule, because it affirmes, that there can be no preparations at all to Regeneration but faith it selfe which cannot be true, be­cause a beliefe of the Gospell which is a stedfast assent to the trueth of that doctrine, is a gift of the Spirit, It is not a sauing faith, but a Heb. 11.6. meanes to it: yet is this beliefe a preparatiue to regeneration, and therefore may a regenerate man try himselfe by some other gift then by a sa­uing faith, as by a preparation to Regene­ration, and consequently try his faith by this rule.

Thirdly, I answere touching the vnre­generate, that their reason is vnsufficient, why they may not try their faith by this rule, because though they haue not a sa­uing faith (as indeed they haue not) yet may it not be in vaine for them to examine themselues concerning a s [...]uing faith by these preparations, for they may thinke they haue it, when indeed they haue not, and so may deceiue themselues with a vaine presumptuous hope of saluation. Now by this triall with these preparations they shall clearely discerne they haue it not: (for he that is farre from the prepa­ration to faith must needes bee further of from faith it selfe: he that hath not the les­ser [Page 6] which is more common, hath not the greater which is more rare,) whereupon they may bee occasioned, considering the danger of being without faith, and the be­nefite of hauing it, to seeke in the vse of the meanes for it, and by seeking to finde and obtaine it.

May not a man try whether hee haue a good lease or no, if he haue any lease at all though his lease be not good: yea, if hee haue any writing which hee takes to be a lease, though it be not, may hee not try whether he haue a good lease or no?

Besides though vnregenerate men haue no such gift whereby they may bee diffe­renced, from such as remaine in their na­turall estate, and shall perish for euer: ye [...] may they try whether they haue a sauing faith or no: and by triall know they haue it not, because they haue no such gift; fo [...] all that haue faith haue such a gift: euer as the want of election into a Colledge shewes that a man is not fellow there though he haue no gift whereby to diffe­rence him from all that are fellowes o [...] schollers in that Colledge; for all that are fellowes or schollers of a Colledge are e­lected into it.

If they had giuen some good reaso [...] why there can be no preparations at all to [Page 7] faith in Christ, then had they spoken to purpose against my Rule; but seeing they haue not done it, therfore is the Rule good for the purpose to which I intended it, for all their exception.

Fourthly, touching the proofe of their exception, viz: that there is no third state or condition betwixt men regenerate and vnregenerate, I answere that they bring no proofe of it, therefore can I not allow of it; and besides the contrary seemes to me very probable, vnderstanding this to be their meaning (as it must be if it be to pur­pose) that there is no third condition be­twixt a meere naturall man and one fully regenerate: for I thinke a third condition somewhat different from both, may bee assigned: and giuen namely, the condition of preparation, which may be compared to the twy-light, that is betwixt cleare day, and darke night, wherein whosoeuer is (being elected) may be said to be in his passage from the one, which is meere na­ture, the other which is perfect regenerati­on, and betweene both: that is, some way forwarded vnto regeneration, and about to enter into Gods Kingdome, and yet not actually admitted thereunto, as one con­ceiued, not borne, or in the birth, not quite [Page 8] brought forth, for as we read of some that were entred into Gods Kingdome and were Mat. 13.38. children thereof, and of some that were Eph 2.13.14. farre from it, so doe wee reade of some that were Mark 12 34. not farre from the King­dome of God, and that Mat. 23.13. were entring in, or about to enter, but not quite in.

I know there are but two places to bee enioyed by men after this life, Heauen and Hell, and but two sorts of persons to inhe­rit them, Elect and Reprobate: yet may the Elect, before they come into Heauen, be said to passe through a threefold condi­tion, the first of meere nature, in which there are no workes of the Spirit toward Regeneration. The second of Preparation, wherein there bee some gifts of the Spirit bestowed on them to dispose them to Re­generation. And the third is the full worke of Regeneration it selfe.

And I can see no reason in the world why this should be counted a Paradox or strange position, seeing (ordinarily) all they that are of age, passe through this preparation, Mat. 11.28. All that come to Christ and beleeue in him, must be weary and hea­uy laden. And as long as it is confest: first, that these d spositions, preparing vnto Re­generation are not the worke of nature but Gods Spirit: (else they would bee in all [Page 9] meere naturall men, and euen in the very Elect, when they continue in their state of [...]eere nature, which experience disproues) [...]econdly, that they are not wrought [...]y the Spirit alwayes, but then of purpose, when the time of their effectuall calling is [...]ome: thirdly, that they are not sufficient [...]o saluation, (if a man could be truely ima­gined being elected to die in that estate;) but onely that they are appointed as pre­parations to Regeneration in the Elect, who because they are ordained to that end which is eternall life, and to the meanes of that end which is Faith; therefore are they also predestinate to the meanes of this faith which are these preparations, in which when they are, they may be said to be in a condition, some way different from men either meerely naturall, or fully regene­rate, and consequently in a third condition some way different from meere grace or nature. And so much for answere to the exceptions against the Rule it selfe. Now followes the handling of the Rule.

The Tryall.

The Rule begins to be handled, Page 219. viz. That a sauing Eaith, &c.

The Exception.

The handling of the Rule.The first point in handling the Ru [...] that is excepted against, is a generall pr [...] position, that there be some preparatio [...] wrought in men by the Spirit, before th [...] beleeue in Christ.

Against this there lie two exception [...] first, that I doe not distinguish the gifts [...] the Spirit, which I say goe before Faith [...] Christ as preparations to it, nor shew wh [...] ther they bee common graces to Reprobates, or peculiar to the Elect, doe tend n [...] cessarily vnto saluation, and haue the promise: secondly, that the places alleadge by me to proue the generall proposition doe not proue it: but onely this, that Go [...] workes Faith, in those in whom it i [...] wrought, and that there is neither will, no [...] deede in mans power to beleeue in Chris [...] for saluation.

The Defence.

[...]o the first [...]xception.To the first Exception I answere, tha [...] though I doe not make all those same di­stinctions, of the preparing graces which they desire: yet doe I distinguish them a [...] much as is needfull: for in the Treatise [Page 11] they are diuided into Legall and Euange­licall, which is enough to my purpose: se­condly, I say that to the prouing of the point in question, there is no neede of such di­stinctions, as they propound, because in all that disputation, I speake of working of those preparations in the Elect onely (in whom onely a sauing Faith is wrought because they onely are to be saued, page 224. line 17.) So that as long as it is eui­dent, that the preparations to Faith that I speake of be ordinarily wrought in all the Elect (that is in them that are of yeeres and discretion) it is no matter though some of them be common to Reprobates with the Elect: Act. 13.48. for as long as they are wrought in Master Rogers 7. Treatises ch. 4. pag. 9. Modell of Di­uinitie pa. 278. them by Gods Spirit to prepare them to beleeue in Christ, and that they may be saued, therefore doe they necessarily tend vnto their saluation, and consequently must be such, as haue the promise, being by Gods appointment, ordeined as meanes to that end: not in respect of themselues, sing­ly considered in themselues, and in their owne nature, but in a threefold considera­tion.

1. In relation to the persons in whom they are wrought, which are the Elect, to whom saluation, and the promise belongs.

2. In respect of the ground from [Page 12] whence they proceed, which is the lo [...] of God in their election, of which they a [...] the fruits and effects, as well as iustify in faith it selfe.

3. In reference to the end for whic they are wrought in men ordained vnt [...] eternall life, viz. to make them fit per­sons, in whom Faith may be wrought fo [...] the obtaining of that saluation, to whic [...] they are elected.

So that as long as all Reprobates hau [...] not these preparations wrought in them but all the Elect haue: As long as many reprobates haue but some of them; but the Elect haue all ordinarily: and as long as by Gods appointment they doe not tend to the saluation of the Reprobat (be­cause God neuer intended their saluation) but of the Elect they doe, therefore is there no neede of making the distinctions which they pretend and propound.

To the 2. Ex­ception.As touching the second exception my defence is this. Both the Texts alleadged by me, a [...]e expounded by the learned, not of working Faith it selfe: but of the pre­parations vnto Faith, as shall appeare in the particulars.

Luk. 3.4. Tertull [...]an de de baptismo chap. 10.The first Text taken out of Saint Lukes Gospell, speakes of Preparing the way to Christ: which not onely Turtulli­an, [Page 13] but Maister Caluin, and Maister Pisca­tor expound of preparing the way by re­pētance; preparing the way to Christ by re­pētance is not the working of faith in men, but working in them repentance to the end they may bee prepared to beleeue in Christ. The words I shall haue occasion to cyte hereafter, among the testimonies of the learned, in proofe of the maine point, therefore will I respite the cyting of them till then. Ioa. 6.44, 35.

The second place of Scripture in Saint Iohns Gospell speakes of drawing men to come to Christ, that is, to beleeue in him; which by the iudgement of the learned is not to bee interpreted of working faith in men: but of preparing them to the worke of faith; namely, by illumination. Caluins com­ment on Ioh. 6.44. Hee teacheth (saith Caluin) that those are drawn whose mindes he doth enlighten, and whose hearts he doth bend, and frame to the obedi­ence of Christ.

That by the metaphor of drawing (saith Piscator) Piscators com­ment on Iohn 6.44. is vnderstood the illumination of the minde, the Lord himselfe declareth, where he saith, euery man that hath heard and learned of the Father commeth to mee. So that comming to Christ being belee­uing in him; drawing to come, being not comming it selfe; nor illumination being [Page 14] faith it selfe, therefore in the iudgement of those two learned men, the Text of Iohn is not to be expounded, as they haue saide: but as I haue deliuered it. This (I hope) is enough to confute that which they obiect against my interpretation of the Texts which I alleadged to prooue my generall proposition: namely, that there are some preparations wrought by the Spirit in men before they beleeue in Christ, The generall proposition concerning preparations. which was the first generall thing propounded in handling of the Rule.

The Tryall.

The cords by which God drawes man to beleeue, &c.

The Exception.

The second generall herein, was a speci­all recitall of the particular preparations which, and what they be, which I say goe before faith in Christ.

This they first deny, saying that there are none such.

Secondly they disproue it, by giuing two reasons why there can bee none such, or why some of them that I name can be none.

The Defence.

Against their bare Deniall I will onely oppose the testimonies of two learned Diuines of our owne time and countrey Maister Rogers, Maister Baynes.

Maister Rogers speaking how the know­ledge of mans misery by sinne, Maister Rogers Treatise 7, 8. c. 4. p. 9. ad 21. and of re­demption by Christ, doth worke in him on whom God will shew mercy; and how God by the light and helpe of it, draweth him for­ward, vntill hee beleeue, for his owne part, and in his owne person (for these be his ve­ry wordes in the beginning of that dis­course) hee doeth lay downe sixe seuerall workes of the Spirit, in six seuerall secti­ons of that fourth chapter, the heads of them are these, and they are more at large there discoursed of.

1 God makes them to beleeue their mi­sery, and to be troubled in minde for it,

2 They consult in this case what to doe.

3 They are broken hearted and hum­bled.

4 They haue a secrete desire of forgiue­nesse.

5 They conferre and aske pardon.

6 They forsake all for it, and highly [...]rize it, and then they come to apply Christ, [Page 16] and the promise to themselues, which his iudgement is a sauing faith.

In like manner and to the same e [...] Maister Baynes speaking, Maister Baynes briefe directi­ons to a godly life. how the kno [...] ledge of misery by sin, and redemption Christ, workes on a man towards faith Christ he saith thus.

1 Hee is drawne by the secret worke the spirit to beleeue that the doctrine taug [...] doth concerne him.

2 The Lord directeth him to enter i [...] further consideration with himselfe, of and [...] bout his present state, and consulteth what doe in this extremity.

3 From the former consultation, b [...] commeth to this holy resolution that he [...] not returne to his old wayes, but in all hu [...] lity, meekenesse, and holinesse, say with [...] Paule, Lord what shall I doe?

4 By this meanes he comes to an vnf [...] ned desire of forgiuenesse.

5 With earnest, humble and particul [...] confession of his sinnes, hee powreth o [...] prayers to God for the pardon of them Christ.

6 He hauing found this pearle, prize it as it is worth, and therefore selleth all th [...] he hath, and biddeth farewell to his sweet [...] delights, for the obtayning of it, and then [...] commeth to apply the Gospell to himself [...] [Page 17] and sealeth vp his saluation in his heart.

Neither is this the opinion of these learned and holy preachers, but of many other in our owne Church, Mr. Elton in his Catechisme the foure principle. Mo­dell of Diuinity, page 274, to 279. Mr. Wheatly of Regeneration ch. [...]4. Mr. Per­kins Catechisme, the fourth principle, and the state of a Christian. Sect. 6. to 16.

The next thing to be considered is their reasons whereby they would proue, that some of those preparations which I men­tion, do not goe before faith in Christ, and they are two.

The Exception.

Those preparations doe not go before faith in Christ. 1. Because they doe not draw all men to beleeue in Christ, in whom they are wrought for (say they) Gods cords do draw, and haue alwayes irresista­bly comming ioyned with them. 2. Be­cause (I my selfe) in my Treatise say, that some of them are effects and fruites of faith following it: Therefore cannot they goe before it as preparations, to which I will answere seuerally.

The Defence.

Their first reason To the first reason. is of no force: First because though those preparations, do not in the euent draw all men to beleeue in Christ, in whom they are wrought: yet do they at one time or other, draw all the elect so to do, that are ordained vnto eter­nall life, and to beleeue in him for that end. For of these onely is the question. Secondly, if their reason were good, then would it proue that a beleefe of the Gos­pell, is none of Gods cords, to draw men to beleeue in Christ, nor the Preaching of the Gospell none of Gods meanes, to worke faith in Christ, for neither the one does draw al men so to come to Christ, nor the other so worke faith in Christ, in all that haue the one wrought in them, or the other taught vnto them: witnesse the Parable of the seede in the Gospell. Mat. 11.19. to 28. Is not the act of generation Gods ordinance to the begetting of a child, because a child is not begotten by euery hand acts.

I confesse Gods spirit doth not onely draw men to beleeue in Christ: but also workes it in them actually, at one time or other, after those preparations: but draw­ing men to beleeue, or preparing them thereunto, is a different action, from his [Page 19] working of faith, or enabling them to be­leeue, and in the elect comming followes drawing necessarily, in respect of the euent.

Their second reason To the second reason. whereby they would prooue, that some of the prepara­tions I name, cannot goe before faith in Christ, is of no power: because, though I say some of them may go before it in one respect; yet may they follow in ano­ther.

Indeede I say, that a feare of God, goes before faith in Christ, as a preparation to it, page 222. and that a feare of God fol­lowes faith in Christ, as an effect thereof: page 304. but neither doe I say, that a fili­all feare is the preparation, nor a seruile feare the effect: though the faithfull after beleeuing in Christ, doe feare to sinne for feare of condemnation, else the Holy Ghost would neuer diswade from it on that ground.

The like may be sayde of sorrow for sinne, by comparing page 222. where it is a preparation to faith, and page 301. where it is an effect of a sauing faith, (or rather of one that hath it) for I do not say, that sorrow for sinne on the same grounds al­together, and in the same measure doth goe before and after faith in Christ, and [Page 20] therefore their reason is but a Cauill, and so I descend to the third generall thing against which they except in handling the sixt rule, viz. the particular naming of a beginning of repentance, to be one of those gifts of the spirit, that prepare to faith in Christ.

Against this there are three exceptions, 1 against the position it selfe. 2 against the exposition of it; and 3 against the hand­ling of the position.

The Triall.

The position it selfe that repent [...]nce is one of those prepara­tions. The position it selfe, is this, Repentance is begunne before faith in Christ.

The Exception.

This position they dislike for two cau­ses. First because it implies a beginning of repentance before faith in Christ, some space of time. Secondly because it suppo­seth that repentance is begun at one time, in some part of it, and finished at anothe [...] in the residue.

The Apology.

To the 1. Ex­cepti [...]n.I do indeede often vse the word Before [Page 21] to expresse the Precedency I meane, but neither did I meane, a precedency some space of time, nor can they shew it by the words of the booke, except I had added thereunto some other word as time, space, season, or the like, to giue light to such an interpretation, which is not done in that whole disputation. Or except the word Before in the English tongue, did alwayes carry that sence onely, which experience disprooues; seeing one thing may be be­fore another in nature, as fire before heat; in order, as the second before the third; In dignity as an Earle before a Baron; and in worth, as gold before siluer: As well as in time, as the begetting of a childe is be­fore his birth.

Secondly, they had reason to interpret my meaning of a precedency in nature, ra­ther then in time, because I made the be­ginning of repentance to be a meanes vnto Faith in Christ (as is to bee seene by my two first Arguments and other places of the booke) and therefore before it onely in the order of causes, and consequently in the order of nature. 2. Because in my dis­putation, I oppose the common opinion, and the receiued opinion concerning the precedency betwixt Repentance and Faith, is, that faith goes before repentance [Page 22] not in time, but in nature, therefore my o­pinion that contradicts theirs, should be vnderstood of the same manner of pre­cedency viz. that repentance goes before faith in order of Nature.

Thirdly, though I meant a precedency in nature, yet did I not meane that so much, as the proofe of this, namely a ne­cessity of the being of repentance with faith in Christ. For my chiefe intent was to shew that sinners cannot, warrantably with any expectation of benefit by thei [...] faith beleeue in Christ for saluation, ex­cept they repent; when they doe the on [...] they must doe the other, as appeares by this in that by way of exposition, I say men cannot beleeue in Christ as long [...] they liue in their sinnes, page 244, line 27 and that I expound the word Before b [...] till or vntill. page 279. line 26, 27. & 278 line 25; & 281. line 17.24. & 282. l. 25 27. and in other places.

In the fourth place. If I say to my Tenant, that owes me the rent of the two la [...] quarters: you shall not bring mee the on [...] quarters rent, before the other. I will n [...] receiue the first before the last; can it be hence concluded necessarily, that I mean he shall bring his first quarters rent in tim [...] precisely before the last: may not my Tenant, [Page 23] with as good reason, conceiue my meaning to be, that I will haue him bring both together, and if he doe so, may not he thinke I will be well content? In like man­ner, when I say sinners may not beleeue in Christ before they haue repented: It can­not be necessarily concluded, I meant, they must repent some space of time before they beleeue in Christ. They may with as good reason vnderstand, they must doe both at one time, when they beleeue in Christ they must repent, and if they so doe, it will be well pleasing to God: Charity might haue taught them to interprete mee the best way rather then the worst.

Fifthly, they that hold repentance and faith goe together in time, (but giue the precedency to faith in nature) yet speake of the precedency of faith vnto repentance, and when they speake of this precedency they say faith goes before repentance: and why then may not I which hold, repen­tance and faith goe together in time, but giue the precedency to repentance in na­ture; speake of this precedency, and say re­pentance goes before faith, why should I be vnderstood of predecency some space of time, more then they, and be blamed therefore rather then they.

Lastly, (if I may freely speake my [Page 24] minde) I thinke it may be maintained, that in some cases, and in some persons, in these dayes, repentance in some degree may be wrought before faith in Christ some space of time, according as those doctrines may be preached first or last in time, and be made effectuall to the good of the hearers by Preaching; for I could neuer yet con­ceiue how it crost any commandement or promise of God, or hindered any duty or comfort of the faithfull, or discountenan­ced the sincerity of profession, or dispara­ged the perseuerance of the Elect, in the estate of grace, or derogated from the free grace of God in Christ, or lifted vp man in any proud conceit of his owne free will, as long as it is affirmed, that repentance is but begunne onely: that it is wrought by the Spirit onely, and by the word onely, and in the Elect onely, and onely as an ef­fect of their Election, and only as a meanes to worke Gods will on them, by disposing them to faith in Christ, whereby they may be brought to that supernaturall end, to which they are ordained in him, and there­fore there needed no such clamour, as hath beene noysed about it, supposing the posi­tion hath beene so vnderstood.

But (it may be) others see what I can­not, they discerne more vntruth in the [Page 25] Doctrine then I, and descry more mis­chiefe likely to ensue thereupon, then I can apprehend; else there is no reason they should be so violent in opposing it: be it so, then I hope it will appeare by their ar­guments against it.

Surely if the opinion were so absurde and dangerous, I suppose the holy Scrip­ [...]ure would affoord arguments many and strong enough to confute it, and if they did, I make no doubt but they would bee diligent enough to collect them, and if they had, I guesse shrowdly, they would be forward enough to produce them, let vs then take a view of them, to the end wee may beleeue if it be possible.

The Exception.

Their Arguments are foure in number, and I will propound them in due forme that their strength may bee better discer­ned. The first Ar­gument.

If all sauing graces bee wrought all at once and together, so that when one is wrought, the other is wrought also, then is not repentance begun in time before a sauing faith: But the first is true, therefore the second.

The Assumption they prooue, as shall be seene by and by.

The Defence.

1 I answere, If by sauing graces the meane such as are appointed by God [...] saue sinners instrumentally, then I deny t [...] consequence; and grant the Assumptio [...] for though all such sauing graces (supp [...] sing there were many of them) we [...] wrought all at an instant; so that when o [...] is wrought, the other is wrought also: y [...] might repentance be wrought in time b [...] fore all these: for in this sense onely fait [...] in Christ is a sauing grace, because it onel [...] apprehends and layes hold on the Sauio [...] Christ and his merits for saluation. Repe [...] tance is no such sauing grace: but if by sa­uing grace be meant either those that ten [...] to saluation, or are wrought in all the [...] that shall be saued, to make them person capable of saluation, then I grant the co [...] sequence and deny the Assumption, because some of these viz. illumination an [...] beliefe of the Gospell, and the beginning o [...] repentance, may in time be wrought before faith, for ought this argument proue to the contrary.

But let vs see how they prooue the a [...] sumption in which lyeth the strength o [...] the Argument.

The Exception.

If regeneration be wrought all at once and together, so that when one grace of regeneration is wrought, all other of the same kind are wrought also, then all sauing graces are wrought all at once and toge­ther.

But the one is true, therefore the other. The consequence (they imagine) is good, because by the work of sauing graces men are regenerated, and borne of the Spirit.

The Assumption they will prooue a­none.

The Defence.

I answere by granting the consequence of the proposition: but by denying the Assumption, and that for this [...]eason. Illu­mination of the minde and vnderstanding, with the knowledge of the mystery of the Gospell in Christ, is a grace of Rege­neration, as well as the sanctifying of the will and affections: yet may illumination be wrought in time before sanctification, in the Elect, because it is wrought in the reprobates without sanctification at all, and therefore regeneration is not wrought [Page 28] all at once and together, as they hau [...] alleaged. That Illumination is a grac [...] of Regeneration I prooue: first, because it is a part of the new man: Colos. 3.10. Eph. 1.17. Eph. 4.23.24. Act. 26.19. Eph. 1 18. & 21. secondly it is a part of the renuing Gods image i [...] vs: thirdly, it is a part of our turning an [...] conuersion: fourthly, because it is a part [...] our spirituall quickening.

But let vs heare how they prooue th [...] Assumption.

The Exception.

If all Gods workes be perfect, in thei [...] seuerall kindes; so that when part of the [...] is wrought, the other is wrought also then is regeneration wrought all at onc [...] and together; so that when one grac [...] thereof is wrought, all other of the same kind are wrought also at the same time.

But the first is true, therefore the se­cond.

The consequence they take for good, because regeneration, is one of the worke [...] of God that argue his perfection in wor­king: yea, one of the chiefest of them.

The Assumption they thinke needes no proofe.

The Apology.

I answere, by granting the conse­quence; but by denying the Assumption. 1. Because the Creation of the world, was not perfected in all the parts thereof all at once but successiiuely, and in sixe dayes. 2. The creation [...]f Adam was not, for his soule was created and put into his body (in likelihood) in time after his body was framed. 3. Sexin lacte dies ter sunt in san­guine trini­bis seni carnem, ter seni membra figurant. The generation of man man (which is Gods worke) is not per­fected all at one instant; for neither is the body perfect all at one instant, but in some dayes and weekes, after the child is con­ceiued and begotten, nor is the soule put into the body as soone as it is begot­ten and conceiued; but some dayes and weekes after the child is conceiued and begotten, for the man is not perfect till both soule and body be vnited together: fourthly, Iesus Christ doth frame the Church and make it perfect, not all at once and together, but successiuely by calling one member after another, and adding them thereunto. Act. 2.47. Heb. 11.40. Eph. 4.12.

I grant all Gods workes are perfect in their seuerall kindes, with that perfection [Page 30] which God intends them at seuerall time but one time they may be imperfect in regard of the whole; for vnto some part that are already wrought, others may b [...] added at other times when God pleaseth

I grant also that if by regeneration, th [...] meane Gods making a man actually h [...] childe, then is regeneration wrought all one instant and together, for that gra [...] that giues him prerogatiue to bee God sonne, viz: faith in Christ is wrought all [...] once and together: but if by regeneratio [...] be meant euery or any grace of the Spi [...] tending or disposing thereunto, or a [...] part of regeneration; then I say regeneration may be begun in one part at one tim [...] and perfected in another grace at anothe [...] time, as hath beene shewed in the instand of Illumination and Sanctification but [...] uen now, and as may be further declare [...] by peace of conscience, and ioy in the hol [...] Ghost, which are graces of regeneratio [...] yet are not wrought all at one instant wi [...] faith in Christ, (at least not in all men) b [...] some time after.

Neither can this bee any way a disp [...] ragement to God, which workes it thu [...] if hee please so to worke; seeing his wi [...] cānot disparage his power, nor his pleasu [...] his wisedome: therefore their first A [...] gument [Page 31] is not strange enough to proue the question, the second followes.

The Exception.

If a true change of the heart, The second Argument. cannot bee begun in time before a sauing faith, then re­pentance cannot be begun in time before a sauing faith.

But the one is true, therefore the o­ [...]her.

The consequence they say is good, be­cause repentance is a true change of the heart, the Assumption they proue.

The Defence.

I answere, if by a true change of the heart, be meant the change of the whole soule in all the parts and powers thereof, [...]hen I deny the consequence, and grant the Assumption. For the repentance I speake of is not such a change. But if thereby he meant an hearty sorrow for sinne and a true change of the purpose of the heart, without hypocrisie to leaue sinne; then I grant the consequence, and deny the As­ [...]umption, for this change of the heart may [...]e begunne in time before a sauing faith.

But they proue their Assumption thus.

The Exception.

If the beginning of a true change [...] the heart do presuppose that faith in Chri [...] death and resurrection, goes in time befo [...] this change, then a true change of th [...] heart cannot bee begunne in time before sauing faith.

But the first is true, therefore the s [...] cond.

The consequence they thinke none wi [...] deny.

The assumption they offer to proo [...] out of my booke, where page 301 refr [...] ning sinne is made a fruite of faith, an [...] page 310. we are sayd to draw downe ve [...] tue from Christs death to die vnto sinn [...] and from his resurrection to walke in ne [...] nesse of life.

The Apology.

I answere, 1. generally that this argume [...] directly crosseth the first Argument, for sauing graces be wrought all at once a [...] together, then cannot a true change of t [...] heart presuppose faith in Christ death to goe before this change in time. Secony, and more particularly I answere, th [...] [Page 33] The consequence I grant, the assumpti­on I deny, for I doe not say (which is the question) that at the first conuersion, when the heart beginnes first to be changed, this change doth presuppose faith in Christ to be in it at the same instant, and that there can be no refraining of sinne in any mea­sure so much as begunne till there bee in men faith in Christ, whereby they drawe downe vertue from his death and resur­rection, &c. But I onely affirme there, that refraining of sinne for conscience sake in sincerity and in a setled and constant course is a fruite of faith, and requires vertue from Christs death and resurrecti­on, to bee drawne downe by faith in Christ, and so doth power to mortifie our corrupt nature in the lusts of it, and to quicken vs in our new man, to cheerefull, constant, and conscionable new obedience, require and presuppose this faith in Christs death and resurrection: faith that Christs obedience Actiue and Passive, hath meri­ted pardon, and that if we repent, and be­leeue therein, wee shall be pardoned, is with Gods Spirit sufficient to soften and change the heart as farre as in repen­tance sticktly taken is required.

It is true, Repentance is a change o [...] the heart, for in repentance the heart [...] changed first in the affection of ioy [...] sorrow; for whereas a sinner before his repentance reioyced in doing euill, now he sorrowes for the euill hee hath done. S [...] condly, in the purpose of doing; for wher [...] as formerly he purposed to liue in his si [...] Now he purposeth to leaue them, but thi [...] change of the heart may be wrought before faith in Christ, as well as the chang [...] of the minde from darknesse to light [...] wrought before it, Acts 26 18. and the change may b [...] true in the one, that is, the heart, as well a [...] in the other, that is, the minde.

Indeede the beginning of the chang [...] of the heart, doth presuppose that fait [...] which is a beleefe of threatnings to th [...] impenitent, and promises to the repe [...] tant, which comprehends a beleefe of th [...] truth of the death and resurrection [...] Christ; and in the elect the beginning [...] this change of the heart doth suppose th [...] faith in Christs death and resurrection w [...] follow, for the perfecting of it, in mortif [...] cation and viuification. But it is not tru [...] that the beginning of this change doth p [...] suppose this faith as present, at the very i [...] stānt, whē this change is a beginning, whic [...] is the question, and which is not proue [Page 35] by this Argument, and therefore it proues nothing, the third followes.

The Exception.

If a man can neuer beginne to returne, till he beleeue that God will bee mercifull to him in speciall, The third ar­gument. then repentance is not begunne in time before a sauing faith.

But the first is true, therefore the se­cond.

The Apology.

The consequence is naught, 1. because it takes for granted (which I deny) that a beleefe that God will be mercifull to a man in speciall, that is in particular to Iohn and William, is a sauing faith. This is false. 1. because this is but an assent to the truth of a proposition, such a beleefe is but an Historicall faith, and such a faith is not a sauing faith. 2. because such an assent cannot be faith, because it doth not rest vp­on the authority of God, reuealing it in Scripture, for hee hath reuealeth no such thing, touching the saluation of any par­ticular man but generally to all, but vpon this beleeuing in Christ.

Indeede it is reuealed that God will be [Page 36] mercifull, in generall to mankinde, and in speciall to those of mankind, which be­leeue in Christ, so that till they beleeue in Christ, they may not beleeue, or per­swade themselues that God will be merci­full to them in speciall.

Before sinners doe beleeue in Christ they may beleeue and perswade them­selues it is possible for God to haue mercy on them, and that God will certainely be mercifull to them when they repent and beleeue in Christ, but before this they may not. For though exhortations to re­pentance are founded commonly vpo [...] the mercy of God in the Gospell: yet no [...] vpon the Mercy of God already receiue [...] by iustifying faith: but offered by God and to be receiued vpon Repentance, an [...] faith in Christ; for the conditions must be performed before we may expect the ac­complishing of the promise, and we mus [...] feele in our selues by the reflexe of our ow [...] conscience, that we do indeede hartily sor­row for our past sins, and purpose vnfeined­ly to leaue them, before we may rest o [...] Christ or trust to him for saluation: fo [...] till then wee are not persons well qua­lified to receiue mercy, nor fit to trus [...] in him for it, so as to bee sure to ob­taine it certainely in the end: for though [Page 37] the Scripture say, Repent for the King­dome of Heauen is at hand, yet doth it not say repent for yee are all ready in the Kingdom of Heauen by a iustifying faith.

Secondly, the consequence is naught, because it prooues no more but that re­pentance is not begunne till faith in Christ, and not that it is nor begun in time before it: for betwixt these two propositions there is great difference as hath bin wel obserued by them in their answer to my 3 argument.

The Assumption likewise is not true, 1. because a man may beginne to returne by illumination, for that is a turning of men from darkenesse to light, except they neede not repent of their ignorance and in­fidelity. 2. Acts. 26 18. because a man may begin to returne by a beleefe of that word that threatens the impenitent and for feare of punishment, he may also proceede further herein, by a beleefe of that word which promiseth mercy to the repentant, and in hope of pardon, but a man must beginne to returne before he beleeue that God will be mercifull to him in speciall, or else hee will neuer begin to returne, because there is no such speciall promise in the word, to be beleeued, as may appeare by this reason.

The beleefe that God will be mercifull to a man in speciall, must be either absolute [Page 38] or conditionall. Absolute it cannot be, be­cause no man can beleeue in this manner absolutely, but he to whom such mercy is absolutely promised. Now in the word there is mercy promised to none but vnder the condition of repentance and faith in Christ, nor is this mercy promised in spe­ciall and particular, but in generall to all mankind, viz. which beleeue in Christ.

If it be not absolute, then is it cond [...]ti­onall; if conditionall, then may not a sin­ner beleeue, that God will be mercifull to him in speciall, till he haue performed the condition. And therefore for all this, their third reason is weake, and sinners may be­ginne to repent in time before they be­leeue in Christ.

The Exception.

The fourth ar­gument.There is a fourth reason alledged to disproone my (supposed) position of re­penting some space of time before belee­uing in Christ, viz. because I say, page 231 301. 303. that the practise of repentance followes faith, meaning in time.

The Apology.

This reason is not worth the framing, or answering, for it answeres it selfe. Hee that speakes of the practise of Repentance, following faith, and thereby meanes the actuall performing of that, concerning his [Page 39] former sins which he hath purposed, viz: the leauing of thē, necessarily implies that a purpose to leaue them, doth goe before faith in Christ. Oh but say they, the follow­ing of the practise is in time, therefore the going before of the purpose is in time also.

I deny the consequence; because to the one, there is no need of time (that is) betwixt a beginning to repent and beleeuing in Christ, there needes no space of time; but betwixt beleeuing in Christ, and practising repentance, there is required space of time, viz: all our life after. Indeed in one place; I meane, by the practising of Repentance, Pag. 261. l. 25. the action of Repentance with the heart, or purposing so to doe, and this I say goes be­fore faith in Christ (that is, in nature, not in time) but by practise of Rep [...]ntance, viz: I meane, Pag. 301. 303. the putting in practise in our liues and conuersations, that which the heart hath purposed concerning the leauing of our sinnes, to the end the sinceritie of our Repentance may appeare; And so much for answere to their Arguments, whereby they indeauoured to prooue against mee (vpon a misconstruction of my meaning) that repentance is not begun in time be­fore faith in Christ: and consequently for answer to their first Exception against my position touching the precedency of Re­pentance [Page 40] vnto Faith in Christ, the second exception followes.

The Exception.

Against my position they except in the second place, that saying, Repentance is be­gun. I imply it is begun, in one port at one time, and finished at another time in ano­ther.

The Apology.

I answere: first, Maister Perkins speakes of Repentance, begunne in his Treatise of Repentance, chap. 1. will they make the like exception against him? secondly, they haue giuen no reason why repentance can­not be so begun and perfected, therefore is their exception of no worth; but I will giue one reason why it m [...]y bee so wrought: namely, because I haue already proued, that regeneration may be so wrought, that is, in one part of it, which is illumination at one time, and in another part which is sanctification at another. And so much for clearing my position the exposition followes. The exposition of my position consists in this, that I meane by the Repentance I speake of a true pur­pose of heart to leaue our former euill liues, &c.

The Exception.

These words (say they) define repen­ [...]ance, The ezposition of the position. but they thinke the definition [...]aught: 1. because it makes repentance, [...]onsist in the heart onely, which should be [...]n the whole man soule and body. 2. be­ [...]ause it supposeth that truth and sincerity [...]f heart can goe before faith in Christ. [...] because it implyes that true repen­ [...]ance may be before sauing grace or faith [...] Christ. 4. and lastly, because in hand­ [...]ing this point, I say a man may die with his true repentance, and not be saued, to [...]ll which I will answere in order.

The Apology.

I answere first, To the first ex­ception. that I had reason to call [...]rue repentance, a true purpose of heart to [...]eaue our former sinnes, &c. 1. because [...]mpenitency or vnrepentance, is a purpose of heart to goe on in our former euill [...]ourses, and to liue in them still. 2. be­cause Mr, Perkins so describes the nature of it. Mr. Perkins golden chaine, chap. 39. Repentance (sayth hee) is when a sinner turneth to the Lord, this is perfor­med when as any one by the instruction of [...]he Holy Ghost doth purpose, will and de­sire and endeauor, to relinquish his former sinnes and become a new man.

Secondly, I had no reason to make repentance to consist in the body and out­ward actions. 1. because repentance is [...] vertue, habit, or quality, (and so I describ [...] it,) which onely hath his seate in the soule heart, will, and affections, and not in an [...] part of the body. 2. because the repe [...] tance of the body (as they speake) is no [...] the vertue it selfe, but the practise of it, o [...] the actuall leauing of our former sinne [...] according to the purpose of our hear [...] Now this is not a part of repentance, Math. 3.2. Acts 26.20. Modell of Di­uinity. pa. 290. Perkins gold, chaine, ch. 37. Buc. iustit. loc. 30. pag. 289. b [...] an effect or fruites of that vertue, and wit [...] this agree not only the Scriptures, but th [...] iudgement of many learned Diuines, [...] our owne, and other Countries.

If they say that only is true repentance which bringeth forth a godly life.

I answere, if by true repentance the [...] meane that which in the euent shall stan [...] for true before God, which in this worl [...] shall helpe forward the assurance of ou [...] saluation, and in the end be crowned wit [...] Heauen; then I say that is true repentanc [...] which bringeth forth a good life. But [...] thereby be meant (as I vnderstand it) th [...] which in the nature of the thing is tru [...] repentance, that is, Repentance withou [...] dissimulation, then I say true repentance i [...] an hearty sorrow for past sinnes, and [...] [Page 43] true purpose to leaue the same.

If I describe faith in Christ by it office, [...]s it iustifies, then I will say it is a grace of God, whereby a sinner trusts vnto Christ for saluation: But if I describe it as it may [...]e distinguished from the faith of hypo­ [...]rites that shall faile them, then will I say, [...]t is a grace of God that workes by loue, [...]nd stirres vp vnto good workes: yet is [...]ot working by loue, and stirring vp to good workes of the nature of Faith, as it [...]ustifies (though it bee of the nature of that faith which iustifies) but an effect of that which doth iustifie, or rather a fruite of him, that is iustified by faith, by which he is declared and manifested to be iustified in Gods sight.

Euen so if I describe repentance pro­perly, and by the nature which it hath as a vertue, or holy quality, distinct from o­ther graces and vertuous habits, I will say it is a grace of God whereby sinners sorrow heartily for their past sinnes, and purpose vnfeinedly to leaue them. But if I discribe it so, as it may be differenced from the repentance of hypocrites which will faile them, then I will say it is a grace of God, whereby a sinner sorrowing for his sinnes, and purposing to leaue them, [Page 44] doth accordingly leaue them and amen [...] his life, yet is not this amendment of li [...] a part of repentance the vertue it se [...] but a effect of it, and an fruite of him that hath it in his heart, which the repentance of his heart is [...] clared, by the efficacy of it vnto sal [...] tion.

And indeede (to speake as the tru [...] is,) though in respect of the inward natu [...] of the vertue it selfe, and as it is seated the heart, that is true repentance which i [...] sorrow for sinnes past, and a purpose leaue them: yet in respect of efficacy v [...] saluation in the euent, and in respect manifestation, that onely is true rep [...] tance and is declared so to bee, whi [...] bringeth forth a good life. And if a m [...] may not perswade himselfe hee is [...] ued though hee beleeue in Chri [...] except this faith bee accompanied [...] him, with inward fruites of other gr [...] ces, and outward fruites of a holy lif [...] then may not a man perswade himsel [...] that hee hath repented, vnto saluation [...] the heart, except his inward repentan [...] in sorrowing for sinnes, and purposi [...] to leaue them be accompanied with outward amendment of life.

But they bring two reasons, to pro [...] [Page 45] that true repentance is not this true pur­pose of heart, &c.

The Exception.

Reason 1 True repentance is not a true purpose of heart to leaue our former sinnes &c. be­cause this purpose may fayle: but true repentance cannot faile.

The Apology.

I answere, 1. that if wee consider this purpose and repentance, onely in the na­ture of them, they may faile: for there is nothing in their nature, as they are in them­selues considered, that can keepe them from failing, but considering them in re­lation to the ground from whence they proceede which is election; to the end for which they are wrought in the elect, which is to make them persons capable of the saluation, vnto which they are elected; or to the efficient cause which is the spi­rit, who perfects his graces begunne, so they cannot fayle totally and finally: for in the elect this purpose of repentance is seconded with practise accordingly, in the euent.

2. Repentance not dissembled, (of which I speake) may fayle both of the end which is eternall life, and of the effect [Page 46] which is amendment of life. For a m [...] not hauing receiued the grace of perse [...] rance, may giue ouer this purpose and [...] turne to his former sinnes, and conseque [...] ly faile of eternall life, as may be suppo [...] in Ahab, and the Niniuites.

The Exception.

Reason 2 True repentance is not a true purp [...] of heart to leaue our former sinnes, & because this purpose may bee in Repr [...] bates, but true repentance cannot bee them.

The Apology.

I answere, as to the former argume [...] that true repentance, or a [...] purpose [...] heart to leaue our former sinnes (not d [...] sembled) may be in Reprobates, as Ahabs case, though true repentance whi [...] brings forth new obedience in the li [...] constantly, conscionably, and sincerely, ca [...] not: So that for all this I might warra [...] ably describe the true repentance I spea [...] of, by a true purpose of the heart to le [...] our former euill wayes.

I did not write a Treatise of Rep [...] tance, but of Faith (of repentance in [...] Treatise I spake, but by the way and occ [...] sionally) therefore was it not needful [...] [Page 47] should define repentance precisely, a des­cription if it would serue the turne.

If (of set purpose) I had treated of that common place I would haue defined it otherwise then I haue done, and I would haue shewed that the obiect of it is sinne onely and sinnes past, for of that onely must a man repent, for the doing whereof in time past, he must be sorry; and the do­ing whereof hee must leaue in time to come; and what can that bee but sinne onely, that is, 2. Cor. 12.21: Act. 18.22. Reuela. 2.22. sinne past (for there is no reason wee should repent of them before wee haue committed them,) though wee must endeauour to preuent them before we haue committed them.

And if I had directly meant to define repentance, I would haue left out of that which they call my definition, some words which are in, and haue put in some other which are left out.

That which I would haue left out, which is in, should haue beene these wordes, viz. and purpose to serue God better, for indeede they be but a conse­quence, following vpon our purpose of leauing our former sinnes, or rather an am­plification of it by the contrary, then any part of the nature of repentance, the ob­ [...]ect whereof is onely sinne, and therefore [Page 48] not new seruing of God. That which would haue inserted into the Definitio [...] which is left out, should haue beene thes words, is a godly sorrow for sinne, for th [...] is the first part of repentance, as shall [...] seene by and by.

If any aske me why I meant to de [...] cribe repentance as I did.

I answere. 1. I added the form [...] words, not because I meant thereby [...] describe any part of repentance, but b [...] cause they containe a necessary conseque [...] and effect following, vpon our purpose [...] leauing our former sinnes. For to what [...] should we purpose to leaue our sinnes [...] time past, excepr we resolued in time [...] come to serue God better: how shall th [...] former be manifested without the latte [...] 2. I omitted the other words not becau [...] I thought not sorrow for sinne, to be a [...] part of repentance, which shall be shew [...] by and by, but because purpose to lea [...] past sinnes necessarily presupposeth sorro [...] for the committing of them, else wh [...] should make a man to resolue to lea [...] them but the sorrow of his heart for [...] doing thereof. 3. I onely described rep [...] tance by a purpose of the heart to leaue [...] former sinnes, not because I thought t [...] to be all requisite in repentance, but b [...] cause [Page 49] this purpose and resolution is the last act of the heart as it repents, or the last act of repentance, as it is seated in the heart.

Now that the nature of Repentaance consists in two things, vix: vnfained sor­row of heart for sinnes already commit­ted, and purpose of heart not to commit the same againe, (to prooue this) I shall not need to produce testimonies of Scrip­ture, for common sence teacheth vs, that Repentance in men concerning things in the world, hath for the obiect of it things hurtfull [...]nely: that is, that either are such, or seeme to vs to be such. I (meane) wee feare or feele for something, that we haue done; and that our Repentance for the things that we haue done, and for the do­ing whereof wee are sensible of such hurt, consists in sorrow for the doing thereof; and in purpose to doe so no more, if it were to be done againe: I will make it plaine by a familiar example.

I want a conuenient house, hereupon I purpose to build one, I conferre with workemen about it, and the charge of the building, I am told it will cost mee but three hundred pound, vpon this charge I reckon, and goe about it, but before it be finished I finde it will cost mee foure hun­dred [Page 50] pound: when I see this I repent o [...] the building of my house: that is, it irke [...] me, it vexes me, and makes me sorry fo [...] the cost I haue bestowed on it, and not on­ly so, but I wish it were vndone, and re­solue if it were to doe againe, I would neuer build it: yea, I purpose neuer to vnde [...] take the building of a house againe, but will be sure it shall cost me no more then expect.

In like manner, for a long time a sinn [...] goes on in an euill course of life, witho [...] feare of Hell, and with a presumptuou [...] hope of Heauen, at length when the tim [...] of his conuersion is come, the Lord is pleased to let him see the folly and fowlenes [...] of his sinnes, the danger of his course, if [...] goe on, and the benefit of his repentance [...] he returne, these considerations belieued and laid to heart, makes him repent: that i [...] to be heartily sorry: yea, prickt in heart, f [...] his euill life past, and to resolue to liue [...] longer in them: yea, that now hee woul [...] not doe the same things againe, if the were to be committed, and were not a [...] ready done, and thus much be enough [...] haue written in defence of those word [...] wherein I describe the nature of the tru [...] repentance which I say goeth before fait [...] in Christ, and for answere to the first Exception [Page 51] against the Exposition, the second followes.

The second exception likewise is idle, To the second Exception. for whereas for the ground of it, it is ima­gined and alleadged, that there can be no manner of sincerity in a mans actions be­fore he beleeue in Christ. This I shall ea­sily disprooue by one that was no Prose­lyte, nor euer had faith in Christ (for ought the Scripture saith) yet doeth the Lord say of him concerning one action, viz: Gen 20.6. the taking away of Sarah Abrahams wife, that he knew he did it in the integrity of his heart, now if the heart of one man may be sincere in respect of Chastity, be­fore he haue Faith in Christ, why may not the heart of another bee vpright in respect of Repentance before faith in Christ, I doe not say, or meane, with that integrity, that is acceptable to God vnto saluation, but with that which is some way acceptable viz: for the obtayning of temporall bles­sings, and remouing the like euils and pu­nishments.

For as a regenerate man, though other­wise sincere and vpright generally, yet in some particular actions may dissemble and play the hypocrite, as Dauid in the matter of Vriah and Bathsheba: euen so an vnregenerate man, may in many of his [Page 52] action generally, be naught, and vnsound, deceitfull and hypocriticall; and yet in some one, sincere and vpright.

To the third Exception.In like manner their third exception i [...] friuolous; for it supposeth an vntruth for the foundation of it, viz: that no true re­repentance can goe before sauing grace, or faith in Christ: the contrary is plaine in the Niniuites who are said to repent, Ionah. 3.4 5. [...]at. 12.41. and ye [...] is it not reuealed that euer they had a sa­uing faith.

If any say that theirs was not true re­pentance.

It is disprooued: first, because it was wrought through a beliefe of the word preached: secondly, because the holy Ghos [...] calles it Repentance: [...] Math. 12.41. thirdly, because it was manifested so to be, by the signes of their sorrow for their sinnes, in fasting and humiliation, and by the practise of their purpose in leauing their sinnes.

Ionah 3.10.Or if any chance to say, the Niniuites had sauing grace or faith in Christ.

It cannot bee proued, seeing the sauing grace of Iesus Christ was neuer preached to them by the Gospell for ought can be shewed.

Indeed their repentance in some sence might be cald a sauing grace; because it saued them from a temporall destruction [Page 53] threatned to come vpon them within for­ty dayes, if they had not repented: but it saued them not from the eternall punish­ment of their finnes. And now to the last Exception.

In handling the exposition of my posi­tion; It is alleadged that I say, To the fourth Exception. a man may die with this beginning of Repentance and not be saued. I answere that they mistake and doe me wrong in this collection, for it is not a flat position, but a supposition: not that an Elect child of God may die with this repentance; but that (if it were possi­ble for him to dye in this state) hauing one­ly sorrow for his sinnes, and purpose to leaue them, and not faith in Christ; yet could he not be saued, and my reason is, because he hath not that grace, that enti­tles him to Christs benefits, and vnites him vnto Christ for the partaking of them; without which no man or woman of yeeres of discretion, and vnderstanding can be saued.

If any obiect it was to no end to make a supposition of an impossibility.

I answere, it is indeed impossible any such euent should fall out, as the dying of an Elect vessell with a beginning of Re­pentance, and without faith in Christ, and consequently without saluation, therfore in [Page 54] respect of the euent such a supposition is needlesse: but for all this there is some end of such a supposition in regard of that vse that may be made thereof, viz: to prooue the absolute necessitie of faith in Christ, in all men and women of age and discretion, which is so necessary, that with no othe [...] grace, either of Repentance, Loue, Pati­ence, or Obedience, wee can please Go [...] vnto saluation: the reason is, because b [...] no grace else (besides faith) haue we Christ to please God for vs, vnto our saluation.

Our Sauiour Christ makes a supposit [...] on about the deceiuing of the Elect; whe [...] he faith that the false Apostles should d [...] ceiue (if it were possible) the very Elec [...] shall any man say this supposition w [...] idle? Math. 24 24. because it was of an impossibility (God forbid) for though it were idle i [...] respect of the euent, because it is impossible for any of the Elect so to be deceiue [...] and corrupted by the heresies of false teachers; yet is it not idle in respect of the [...] and end which Christ aymed at therei [...] which was to shewe that the subtilty [...] false Apostles, Priests, and Preachers in th [...] Antichristian Church, by the depth of Sathan should be so great, and they shoul [...] so faire preuaile with their pleasi [...] [Page 55] doctrines, and lying words, that (if it were possible) the very Elect should be decei­ued thereby, to the end that they might take heed how they heard them, or gaue credit to their doctrine, but abandon it, and them, as appeares by the 25. and 26. verses.

Secondly, I answere to their exception: suppose I meant positiuely that a man might die with this repentance and bee damned, yet is not this vntrue, vnderstan­ding by this true repentance, that which I doe, viz: onely sorrow for sinne, and pur­pose to leaue it without dissimulation, as in the case of Abab and the Niniuites, and not the tree with the fruite, the purpose with the practise, the change of the heart, with the change of the li [...]e.

Obiect. 1 Oh but (say they) though in one place I say repentance is not sufficient to saluati­on, pag: 232. yet in another I say the re­pentance of the Publicans & Harlots, was sufficient to their saluation.

I answere that there is no contradiction betweene these two places, Solut. for in the for­mer I doe not say, it was not repentance sufficient vnto saluation; but that it was not grace sufficient to saluation (good cause by reason of the supposition, that sa­uing faith is not yet wrought, pag. 275.) [Page 56] Neither doe I say in the latter place, that the repentance of the Publicans was grace sufficient to saluation, but that it was re­pentance sufficient thereunto; for who knowes not by all that discourse that I speake of repentance properly and strictly therein, and take repenting for an action of the soule, and as it is a vertuous quality seated in the heart, and what can be more required of the heart for repenting, then harty sorrowing for sinnes, and vnfained purpose to leaue them?

Indeed God requires more of the re­penting sinner, then this sorrow and pur­pose, for he requires practise of this pur­pose, and new obedience; but practise is not repentance it selfe, but a fruit of it, and new obedience in life is not a part of re­pentance to constitute it: but an effect, to testifie it, not to be the nature of it, but the efficacy thereof vnto iustification.

Obiect. 2 Oh but (say they) to this Repentance begun before faith, is promised forgiuenes of sinnes.

True, but not directly or immediately, as if it were the hand to lay hold thereup­on, or the instrument to receiue it; for that is faith onely, which laies hold vpon Christ the Sauiour himselfe and receiues him: but because it is a way and meanes toge­ther [Page 57] with other preparing graces to fit vs for faith, whereby wee are entitled to Christ and all his benefits; euen as Hea­uen is promised to patience, to loue a [...]d new obedience, Ioa 3.16. Rom. 1.17. because in the Elect they are fruits of faith, to which it is promised directly and immediately as the hand and instrument to apply and apprehend it.

The repentance I speake of, viz: sor­row for sinne, and purpose to leaue it, is a­uaileable to saluation: that is, to qualifie vs for it, but not that whosoeuer hath this and no more grace, shall be saued and for­giuen: for what then should become of faith in Christ? but because in the Elect they which haue this wrought in them, as a preparation to faith, shall in time haue faith wrought in them also, to the end they may be saued, Philip. 1. for God will perfect his worke in them when he begins it.

Now I come to the third and last thing propounded about the position it selfe of the preced [...]cy of repentance, The handling of the position. vnto faith in Christ which is the handling of the positi­on: which is done three wayes 1. by pro­uing it, 2. by clearing of it, and 3. by ap­plying it.

The Triall.

The point is prooued two wayes: first [Page 58] by the testimony of a learned Diuine: s [...] condly, by reasons taken from Scriptur [...] and none of all these like them.

The Exception.

The proouing of the point, or portion by testimony.The testimony is Mr. Perkins, and [...] gainst it they except two wayes: first, (th [...] say) I mistake the meaning of the autho [...] for hee is not vnderstood to speake of r [...] pentance, before or without faith in Chr [...] but with it: secondly, though I had n [...] mistaken his meaning, yet is it but one si [...] gle testimony, because I had no more: an [...] thirdly, that his minde concerning th [...] point is not there declared directly and [...] set purpose, (as it is else where) but occ [...] sionally and by the way onely in anothe [...] discourse, and that it is deliuered in [...] booke that he neuer perused before he died, but was put out after his death.

The Apology.

I answere, to the end wee may rightly conceiue, To the first Exception. and distinctly v [...]derstand th [...] meaning of Mr. Perkins in the words al­leadged wee must take three things fo [...] granted which cannot be denied: first, tha [...] he speakes of a certaine order betwixt that repenting and beleeuing, and the laying hold of the promise there spoken of: 2. That hee sayth the order he speakes of i [...] [Page 59] Gods order. 3. That the order of God about repenting, beleeuing, laying hold of the promise, is to be obserued in Baptisme.

This being premised, In the next place wee come to speake what the order is in Mr. Perkins Iudgement, namely whether repenting go before beleeuing, or belee­uing before repenting.

Some say, his meaning is, first beleeue and lay hold of the promise then repent of your sinnes, I say, first beleeue the Gos­pell, then repent of your sinnes, then by hold of the promise of forgiuenesse and eternall life by faith in Christ. For their coniecture at his meaning, they giue no reason, but against it, my reason is this.

If their coniecture were right, then the beleeuing hee speakes of, and the laying hold of the promises, were all one faith, but that cannot be Mr. Perkins minde, be­cause he euidently distinguisheth betwixt them, for the beleeuing he speakes of, he ioyes with repenting, and the beleeuing that he ioynes with repenting, he distingui­sheth from laying hold of the promises, that shall be made cleare thus.

The beleeuing that hee ioynes with re­penting, makes men Christs Disciples, that appeares page 257. Col. 1. B. in these words marke, first it is sayd, make them [Page 60] my Disciples by calling them to beleeue a [...] repent, and the making men Christs Dis­ciples, by calling them to beleeue and repent, doth in the order there spoken of b [...] Mr. Perkins go before laying hold of th [...] promises; because speaking of propha [...] men that do not consider the order whic [...] God vseth, in couenanting with men i [...] Baptisme, he sayth, they deale prepost [...] rously ouerslipping the commandement o [...] repenting and beleeuing, and in the firs [...] place lay hold of promises made to them i [...] Baptisme, ibid Col. 2. B.

So that if the order of God peruerted by prophane man be (in Mr. Perkins opi­nion) first to lay hold of the promises, and then to beleeue and repent, then the order of God rightly kept by the godly must needes be first to obserue the command­ment of God by beleeuing and repenting, that is, first to beleeue the Gospell and re­pent, and then to lay hold of the promises, that is, by faith in Christ to rest and rely on his merits, for saluation; the rather is this true because in the same place. Col. 2. C. and vpon the former words, he inferres that which I haue cited in my Treatise. viz. wee must as good Disciples obey the com­mandement, which bids vs turne and be­leeue before we can haue any benefit or profit [Page 61] by the promise of God, &c.

Obiect. 1 Oh but (say they) he meanes not repen­ting without beleeuing in Christ. Solut.

True, vnderstanding it in respect of time, not of order, for repentance may be with faith in time, and without it in na­ture, but the question is of the preceden­cy of repentance to faith, not in time but in nature, M. Perkins meaning in that place (say I) is, that by the order of God (which is the order of nature) repenting goeth before laying hold of the promise, and therefore repentance (by his iudgment in that place) must goe before faith in Christ, For in his opinion faith in Christ is a laying hold, or an apprehending for a mans selfe, Perk. on the Reue. ch. 2. v. 14. and an Iud. v. 1. or applying the promises of God in Christ.

Obiect. 2 Oh but (say they) Mr. Perkins ioynes repentance with beleeuing, therefore the repentance he meanes is not without faith, but with it.

True, Solut. but the beleeuing he ioynes with repentance, is not sauing faith (for that is laying hold of the promises by faith in Christ, which he disioynes from belee­uing, ioyned with repenting) but a beleefe of the Gospell, which is the meanes of repentance, pag. 257. Col. 1. A. & Col. 2. B.

Because in the second place, they ex­cept [Page 62] against this testimony, that it is there­fore in sufficient, because it is but one an [...] it is therefore but one, because I had [...] more, therefore now will I shew, why cited but one, and that I haue more.

I brought but one testimony, because thought it enough, in regard it was the t [...] stimony of so learned & godly a Diuine [...] our age and Country, whose workes prai [...] him in the gates of our Ierusalem.

And now will I adde vnto that o [...] some other, to the end it may appeare haue more, and I will beginne with th [...] Doctrine of our owne Church of England, which ought to preuaile with vs b [...] yond other testimonies of particular D [...] uines.

Homily of sal­uation the 3. part. How can a man haue this true fait [...] this sure trust and confidence in God, th [...] by the merits of Christ, his sinnes are fo [...] giuen him, and he receiued to the fauour [...] God, and to be partaker of the Kingdo [...] of Heauen, when he liueth vngodly, and d [...] nieth Christ in his deedes; and in anoth [...] Homily.

As he that readeth Caesars comment [...] ries, Homily of faith the 1. part. beleeueth the History of Caesar [...] be true: yet it is not properly sayd, that [...] beleeueth in Caesar, of whom he seeketh [...] helpe or benefit: so he that beleeueth all th [...] [Page 63] is spoken of God, in the Bible to be true, and yet liueth so vngodly that hee cannot looke to enioy the promises and benefits of God. Although it may be sayd, that such a man hath a faith and beleefe to the word of God, yet is it not properly sayd that he be­leeueth in God, or hath such a faith or trust in God, whereby hee may surely looke for grace, mercy, and euerlasting life at Gods hands, but rather for iudgement and pu­nishment, according to the demerits of his wicked life.

With this agrees the Common Prayer Booke, The Common Prayer booke. where in the forme of administring the Lords supper, it exhorts the repentant onely, to come to Christ, that is, to beleeue in him for saluation, (in these words.)

Heare what comfortable words, our Sa­uiour Christ sayth, to all those that truely turne to him, come vnto mee all yee that trauaile and be heauy laden and I will ease you: So God leued the World, that hee sent his onely begotten sonne, that whosoeuer be­leeues in him should not perish, but haue e­uerlasting life, According to which the Catechisme in the common Prayer booke requires, those that are to be baptized, and are to come to the Communion, repentance or a stedfast purpose to leade a new life, be­fore a liuely faith in Gods mercy.

After the Doctrine of our Church shall follow the testimony of some learned Di­uines and Preachers of our Church.

If you haue not found the Sonne (sait [...] Mr. Foxe) seeke for him by repentance seeke and yee shall find, Mr. Foxe of Christ crucifi­ed. fol. 16. B. in quarto. repentance seeket [...] Christ, faith findeth him and obedien [...] holds him.

This faith is a great state, a Lady, [...] Dutches, (saith Mr. Latimer) first sh [...] hath a Gentleman Vsher, that goeth befor [...] her, Mr. Latimers fourth Sermon before K. Ed­ward, page 57. this Gentleman Vsher is called th [...] knowledge of sinne. When we enter into o [...] hearts and acknowledge our faults, an [...] stand not about to defend them, hee is none of these winkers, hee kickes not when he [...] heares his fault. Now as the Gentleman vsher goes before her so she hath a train [...] that commeth behinde her, &c. and these are the workes of our vocation, viz. to bee good to his neighbour, D. Halls workes page 147. of baptisme. and to obey God, &c.

Neuer will Christ come vnto that soule, where the Herauld of Repentance, hath not beene before.

The Key of Da­uid, pa. 27. prin­ted at London, 1610. in octa. The Scriptures calls this worke of the Holy Ghost, which is the beginning of our regeneration, by the name of Repentanc [...] euen the thing whereby wee are prepared to receiue the sanctification of faith. And afterward.

It is most impossible for any one, Ibid pa. 30. 31 to ob­taine this confidence of grace, except he first repent himselfe of his former life, sincerely, and from the bottome of his heart: for e­uen as the faith of knowledge, namely to be­leeue without all doubt, that God is, and that he is a rewarder of all that seeke him in Iesus Christ, and contrarily, one that taketh vengeance, on all those which turne away from him, for all their sinnes and wicked­nesse which euer they committed, as (I say) this faith must of necessity goe before true repentance towards God: so our repen­tance: namely, that wee conuerting from our owne wayes unto God, doe returne in­to the right way, must needes goe before that faith of Iesus Christ, and immediately after.

The beginning of the Gospell of God is repentance as it is written, The beginning of the Gospell of Iesus Christ, prepare you the way of the Lord, viz. performe repen­tance, and againe.

True Repentance towards Gods, must of necessity goe before the faith of Iesus Christ, and lastly.

Repentance is the first beginning and (as it were) the entry of our regeneration, but faith is the very perfection, and (as it were) the highest toppe of our Regenerati­on, [Page] viz. the insculpture and engraving of the Holy Ghost, whereby the repentant doth assuredly beleeue, that all, his iniquities are forgiuen, and that he is vnited with God in euerlasting loue in Iesus Christ.

Next to the testimony of our Church, and her Diuines, I will produce the wit­nes of the Diuines of other Churches, and first the ancient Doctors and Fathers, and then the latter writers.

Of the auncient Doctors, these shall suffice.

Iust. Mart. qua. 37. ad ortho­doxos. [...]. The baptisme of Iohn, ( which was the baptisme of repentance, Acts 19.4.) was (saith Iustin Martir) the beginning or en­trance of the Gospell of Grace, wherefore it was aboue the Law, otherwise hee had not admitted them which had sinned according to the Law, that hereby they might by re­pentance and faith in Christ receiue for­giuenesse of their sinnes comitted.

Tertul. lib de. [...]aptismo c. 10 [...]uasi candida­ [...]u [...] &c.Tertullian speaking of the baptisme of Iohn, saith that in those dayes, therefore the baptisme of Repentance was acted, as if the party baptized were thereby declared to bee a suter for remission, and sanctification by Christ, to follow after. And in another place.

Tertul. lib de [...]enitentia. ss. 6. The lauer (of baptisme) is the seale of faith, which faith is begunne and com­mended [Page] by the faith of repentance.

VVith what teares (sayth Basill) o [...]ght that soule burdened with many sinnes de­part from sinnes, Basil: mag: quest compendio ex­plicat. quest: 10. and with what hope and affection approach vnto God? Respons. first it ought to hate the former condemned life, so that it ought euen to abhorre the remem­brance of it, and to detest it.

St. Chrysostome speaking of Iohns ministery and baptisme in the Wildernesse of Iudea, saith thus: Chrysostome in Matth 3. Homil. 10. Because hee came to Preach the baptisme of Repentance &c, he inferred for remission of sinnes, as if hee should say; I perswaded them to confesse their sinnes and to repent: not altogether that they might be punished, but that the more easily they might receiue the gift of remission; for unles they had condemned themselues they had neuer sought for grace, and not seeking for grace, neither could they obtaine remission: for this Baptisme prepares the way to another Baptisme that is of Christ, and therefore he saide that they should be­leeue in one that was to come after himselfe.

Next to the ancient Doctors, follow the latter, (but learned) Diuines.

Let vs (saith Caluin) prepare the way: Caluins com­ment on Luke 3.4. that is, leauing our sinnes which stoppe the way to the Kingdome of God, let vs giue ac­cesse vnto his grace.

[...]elancth pro­ [...]gom: on [...]e Epistle to [...]e Romans. Iustification (saith Melanct [...]on) ought to be vnderstood of the good will of God, ac­cepting vs, not infusing into v [...] habits (that is, vertues) and yet there ought to be ver­tues in vs because the Gospell preacheth Repentance, and Faith cannot be but in Re­pentāce, therfore to the end our faith may be increased, [...]scators com­mentary on Luk. 3.4. our repentance must be increased.

That Christ may come into vs (saith Piscator) as our Sauiour, wee must prepare the way vnto him by true Repentance, & by bringing forth fruits worthy of Repentance.

Faith (saith Rolloc) doth alwayes fol­low a heart deiected and contrite in the sight of sinne and and misery. Rollocks com­mentary on Ioa. 5.44. Dietericus In­stit: Catecheticae pag: 241. de aenitentia.

Good workes follow Faith; but Faith is in none but th [...]se that are conuerted.

I know well, that they alleadge many testimonies against me, both out of ancient and latter writers, but being well conside­red, they make nothing against me; there­fore one answere will serue for all: for if they say Faith goes before Repentance, they speake either of a beliefe of the word, or of amendment of life.

When they speake of Faith which is a beliefe of the Word, then the sense is, a sinner must beleeue the threatning of the Word to the impenitent, and the promises of it to the repentant before hee will sor­row [Page] for his sinnes, or purpose to leaue them: and to this purpose spake Clemens Alexandrinus of the precedency of Faith vnto Repentance: saying, Cle [...]: Alexand [...] Stro: [...]. 2 l [...] et graece p: 7 Repentance is the office and worke of Faith; for vnlesse (a sinner) belieue that there was sinne, wherewith he was formerly held, he will not be remoued; and vnlesse he beleeue that pu­nishment hangeth ouer his head which offen­deth, and that saluation is promised for him that liueth according to the cōmandements, he will not be changed.

Answerable to which is that knowne place of St. Ambrose. Ambros: de pe­nitentia. l. 1. c. 1

No man can repent rightly, but hee that hopes for pardon.

In like manner when they speake of re­pentance, that is amendment of life, their meaning is; a sinner must belieue in Christ before he amend his life, Augus: Se: d tempore Se [...]: 7. Hom: 10. Gal: 5.6. and practise new obedience, and in this sense is St Augustine to be vnderstood, where hee speakes of Repentance, saying; Nothing makes true Pepentance but the hatred of sinne, and the loue of God; the fire of this sacrifice is loue; for that repentance that proceeds from the loue of God, must proceed from faith in Christ; for faith workes by loue, Gal: 5.6. but faith workes not by loue our first repentanc [...] (at our first conuersion,) which is sorrow for sinne, and purpose to leaue it, but amend­ment [Page 70] of life which followes faith.

Farre bee it from mee to presume to blame those worthy Authours, for spea­king promiscuously of Repentance the vertue, and amendment of life, the fruite thereof; there is warrant enough from Scripture phrase so to speake, in regard that where the one is, the other also is, or shall be in due time in the Elect; for the one is the way to the other: the repentance of the heart is the meanes to the repen­tance of the life, that is, amendment of the life: But I blame those that oppose my o­pinion for producing such testimonies a­gainst mee, when either they speake not of the same faith, or not of the same repen­tance that I doe: for touching faith, they speak of a beleefe of the word, and I of be­leeuing in Christ: and as for repentance, I speake of the vertue it selfe, they of the fruite of that vertue: I of the purpose, they of the practise; my repentance is inward in the heart, their outward in the life: mine in the affections, their in the actions; for I haue often and plainely affirmed, that a beliefe of the Word and Gospell goes be­fore any repentance, Ionah: 3 5. and that faith in Christ goes before the practise of repentance in a­mendment of life, and in the mortifying of our sinfull nature, that it breake not out to [Page 71] the committing of the same sinnes againe.

To the third and last exception, I an­swere that those allegations doe rather for­tifie the testimony for mee then any way weaken it: To the third [...] last exception against the te­stimony out o [...] Mr. Perkins. and make rather against them that alleadge it, for first in that it is vrged, the point was deliuered but in a passage only, where he had no such cause to discourse of that matter, this shewes that hee had the better minde to deliuer it (belike be­cause he thought it needfull and profita­ble to be opened, and that hee was more confident in the trueth thereof: secondly, In that it is said, the booke out of which the testimony was taken, was the last of his writings, which hee had not leasure to peruse, and that it was put out after his death; this implies, that hee wrote that booke when he was of most sound and set­led iudgement, and that therefore the Doctrine in question was most free from exception, and least needed correction: and therefore howsoeuer there may seeme some contradiction in his other workes, to that which is here deliuered: yet must the last writing be esteemed a retractation of the first, rather then the first of his wri­tings should be produced against this last for the confutation of it. And thus much of handling the point in question by proo­uing [Page] it, and of proouing it by the testimo­nies of men; now followes the proouing of it by arguments taken from Scripture, which of the six generals, was the fourth point propound [...]d to bee obserued in dis­cussing this question.

The Arguments are in number six: but in weight they are all found too light. We will examine their exceptions in order.

The Triall.

Repentance is begunne before Faith in Christ, The first Ar­gument. because the Repentance of the Publicans and Harlots. Mat. 21.31. was begunne before their Faith; and theirs was true Repentance and sauing Faith.

The Exception.

To this they answere, by granting that the Repentance and Faith of the Publicans and Harl [...]t, were true and sauing, but by denying that their repentance was to their Faith, as a meanes to an end, for (say they) the Text in Mathew shewes this onely; that the Pharisees perseuered in their infi­delity, and abode in their vnbeliefe, though the Publicans and Harlots belee­ued: or that the Pharisees, neither repen­ted not beleeued, though the Publicans and Harlots did both, before whom they [Page 73] should haue gone into the Kingdome of Heauen, and giuen them an example to follow.

The Apology.

This answere I will take away, by pro­uing that the Repentance of the uPbli­cans and Harlots, was to their Faith, as a meanes to an end; and this I will make good two wayes: first, by the context of the place, and a reason drawne out of it: se­condly, by the iudgement of the learned.

First the context, or the precedent and subsequent matter of that place, prooues my interpretation, because the condition of the Publicans, touching entring into Gods Kingdome is amplified, Ver. 28. and 29. by a parable of a sonne, who when he was bidden by his father to goe into the Vineyard and worke, the Text faith, He said he would not; but afterward he repen­ted and went. ver. 29. Now because by that sonne is meant the Publicans, and of that sonne, it is saide not onely and barely he went, (though hee said hee would not) but that hee repented and went; therefore this shewes not onely and barely he went: but that therefore he went, because he re­pented first of his not going formerly, and of his saying he would not goe; and there­fore [Page 74] consequently will it follow, that th [...] holy Ghost thereby meant, not onely a [...] barely that the Publicans repented a [...] beleeued; but that therefore they beleeue [...] because they repented first of their othe [...] sinnes: for as the repenting of the sonne f [...] his not going, and of his saying hee woul [...] not goe, was a cause why hee went, a [...] was a meanes vnto it (for sorrow for past fault, and purpose to leaue it, mus [...] needes be a meanes to the amending of it so the repenting of the Publicans an [...] Harlots for their sinnes in time past, was [...] cause and meanes of their beleeuing i [...] Christ afterward, and therefore was to i [...] as a meanes to an end, and consequently was in nature before it.

The rather is this true, because whe [...] the holy Ghost comes to speake of the Scribes and Pharisees described by the o­ther sonne, which said, he would and went not, ver. 30. he saith they repented not after­ward that they might beleeue: what lesse can hence be gathered, but that therefore they did not beleeue in Christ, viz: be­cause they did not first repent of their former wicked liues, nor were prickt in heart for them, nor purposed to leaue them?

Secondly, I prooue my interpretation, [Page 75] by the iudgement of the learned: namely, that the repentance of the Publicans was to their faith as a meanes to an end.

For in expresse words Mr. Beza sayth, Bezae annot. on Math. 21.32. that the repentance there spoken of, was a way to the faith there mentioned. I dispute not now what repentance Beza meanes, Iter igitur. ad fidem est [...] I haue prooued it to be true repentance in my Treatise, and the reasons are not answe­red, and besides now the point is granted by them.

Secondly, Morton of re­pentance, the argument of it toward the end Mr. Morton a learned Di­uine of our Country doth so expound the words, Matthew 21.32. you did not repent to beleeue, or that yee might haue be­leeued, and thereupon concludes that re­pentance is distinguished from sanctificati­on as being but a preparation thereunto. For if the Pharisies did not repent to beleeue or that they might beleeue, then on the contrary, the Publicans did repent to be­leeue, or that they might beleeue: and consequently, their repentance was to their faith as a meanes to an end.

And verily if the words had gone thus in the verse, they beleeued to repent or that they might repent. I beleeue they would haue concluded quickly, that their faith was to their repentance as a meanes to an end, and consequently as a cause of [Page 76] an effect, and therefore in nature before which is more then that they continued their beleefe, or that they both repen [...] and beleeued.

Wherefore my exposition hauing w [...] rant from the grammer of the text, agre [...] ment with the scope of the place, and co [...] sent with the opinion of the learned; a [...] theirs being but a bare affirmatiō. therefo [...] (I hope) it wil hence easily follow, that [...] Doctrine grounded thereon, concerni [...] the precedency of repentance to faith [...] nature, is warrantable, & consequently [...] first Argument to proue it, good for oug [...] hath yet beene shewed to the contrary.

The Triall.

Repentance is begunne before faith [...] Christ, The second argument. because God giues men repentan [...] to the end they may beleeue in Christ. 1. Tim. 2.25.

The Exception.

To this second Argument they answer that it prooues not the question, becaus [...] the text of Scripture, on which it is foun­ded is not rightly expounded. For (say they) by acknowledging the truth, in Ti­mothy 1. not meant beleeuing in Christ (as I haue expounded it:) but professing the [Page 77] truth, not onely in word, but in life and conuersation, accompanied with an in­ward change.

The Apology.

In defence of my interpretation, I haue giuen foure reasons, to three of which they answere: let vs examine the validity of their answeres in order.

The Triall.

First, by acknowledging the truth, in Timothy is meant beleeuing in Christ, be­cause by it wee come out of the snares of the Diuell, that is, of the Diuells children are made the children of God.

The Exception.

This (they say) is not a good reason, because wee come out of the snares of the Diuell by repentance, as well as by faith.

The Apology.

Vpon this I reply, that this instance o­uerthrowes not my reason, because reco­uering out of the snare of the Diuell, is a translation from being the Diuels child to be Gods childe. Now we are not made Gods children by repentance, but prepa­red to be Gods children, but it is directly sayd so of Ioa. 1.12. Gal. 3.26. faith.

It is plainely sayd of faith in Christ that 1 Ioan. 5.4, 5. it is the victory whereby wee ouer­come the world. 2. Pe, 2 20. To the acknowledging of our Lord and sauiour Iesus Christ, is attri­buted the escaping of the pollutions of the world, namely for time to come 2 Pe. 1.3.. Through the knowledge of Christ, is giuen all things, which appertaine to life and godlines, name­ly, to doe good workes and to performe new obedience in a setled & sincere course which are no where sayd of repentance.

The Triall.

Secondly, by acknowledging of the truth in Tymothy is meant faith in Christ, because in other places, Coloss. 2.2. 1 Tim. 2.4. Eph. 4.13. this faith is expres­sed by this Phrase.

The Exception.

To this reason they answere, that though in other Scriptures, a sauing faith be expressed by that phrase of acknow­ledging the truth, yet heere in Tymothy it cannot, Why? because this exposition can­not stand with the analogy of faith, and why? (forsooth) because repentance can­not stand without faith in Christ, or be without it.

The Apology.

By this answere, a blinde man may see, that they take it for granted, that if by ac­knowledging the truth be meant belee­uing in Christ, it cannot be auoyded, but repentance must go before faith in Christ. To the end therefore that they may pre­uent this, they will disprooue my inter­pretation, saying, that by acknowledg­ing the truth in Timothy is not meant faith in Christ, why? because it cannot. Why can it not be so meant? because it is against the analogy of faith, why is it a­gainst the analogy of faith: because re­pentance cannot be without faith, what is this but to runne in a ring, and to hunt Counter, without proouing any thing? who sees not that this is to beg the que­stion; and (vpon the matter) to prooue, [...]dem per idem, mouere & non promouere?

I prooue repentance goes before faith [...]n Christ, because repentance goes be­ [...]ore the acknowledging of the truth, [...]hich is a sauing faith. They answere, [...]e reason is not good, because by acknow [...]edging the truth there, cannot be meant [...]aith in Christ, why cannot faith in Christ [...]e meant there? because repentance is not [...]efore, or without faith in Christ.

The Triall.

Thirdly, by acknowledging of the truth in Timothy, is meant faith in Christ, because it is called the faith of the elect, Tim [...] 1.1. for onely the elect haue a sauing faith, be­cause onely the elect haue a Sauiour and are saued by him.

The Exception.

To this they answer by denying my in­terpretation of the Epistle to Titus; for (say they) the Apostle doth not there expli­cate, what he meant by acknowledging of the truth, namely the faith of the e­lect: For those words doe not shew what the faith of the elect is, but distinguish it from the faith of the elect.

The Apology.

Vpon this I reioyne in this manner. 1. Ancient Interpreters, both Gagneius. Guilliaudus. Papists and Calvin. Beza. Piscatur. Protestants, doe expound the words as I doe, that the latter are put exegetical­ly, for the interpretation of the former.

2 My Aduersaries barely say, the wordes distinguish, and not interpret without any reason of their affirmation, and therefore it is not good.

3 If those wordes, acknowledging of [Page 81] the truth, be a distinction, betweene the former words, viz. the faith of the elect, then do they distinguish two faiths, then do they distinguish the faith of the elect which is a sauing faith, from an acknow­ledging of the truth, or an assent vnto it, which is an Historicall faith, then by ac­knowledging the truth must be meant an Historicall faith: but by the acknowledg­ing the truth in Timothy, cannot be meant an Historicall faith, because an Historicall faith cannot follow repentance in nature, but goe before it, for the acknowledging the truth there spoken (whateuer it bee) doth follow the repentance there spoken of, because it is thereunto as an effect vnto a cause, or as an end to a meanes: for so much they confesse themselues, in their ex­position of the sence, of that place, which in their Iudgement and words runs thus, that God may giue them repentance, that those which now oppose the truth, may be wonne to the profession of it.

So that either those words the acknow­ledging of the truth, must not distinguish that which is meant by them from the faith of the elect, and by them must be meant an Historicall faith, and then repen­tance must goe before an Historicall faith, or a beleefe of the Gospell, or the acknow­ledging [Page 82] the truth doth interpret, the na­ture of the faith of the elect there spoken of, and then repentance must go before the faith of the elect, vtrum horum? and so much in defence of the reasons of my ex­position of the text to Timothy, wherein my second Argument is grounded, now a word onely in answere to their Interpre­tation of the place.

The Exception.

By acknowledging the truth. 2. Tim. 2.25. must be meant (say they) the pro­fession of the truth, and their reason is, because in Peter the phrase is so to bee taken. 2. Peter 2.21.

The Apology.

I answere, 1. Neither do they bring a­ny good reason, why the phrase must be so vnderstood in Peter: nor (if they did) could that proue it must be so vnderstood in Paul, nor haue they giuen any good rea­son from the text of Paul, of their expo­sition, and therefore their interpretation, without reasons for it, is not so good as mine with reasons.

2 In that place Paul speakes of the conuersion of Infidels, in this conuersion a beleefe of the Gospell hath the first [Page 82] place, then repentance, then faith in Christ, then profession, as a fruite of faith, but if their exposition of the words, acknowledg­ing the truth, by professing of the truth were good, profession must go in the first place, for there is no mention at all of any other; so that either by those words, can­not be meant profession of the truth: or men, must professe the truth at their first conuersion, before they haue either an Historicall or sauing faith.

3 In their owne words they expound what profession they meane, viz. not onely in word, but in life and conuersation accom­panied with an inward change. Now here­by they confound repentance and ac­knowledging the truth, which are diffe­rent: for the one is a meanes to the other, whatsoeuer is meant by them, for what is repentance in their iudgement, but an out­ward, and inward change of soule and body; of words, and workes.

The Triall.

Repentance is begunne before faith in Christ, The third Ar­ment. because men cannot beleeue in Christ, as long as they liue in their sinnes. Ioa. 5.44.

The Exception.

This Argument (they say) prooues not the question, for it onely prooues, that a man must repent of his sinnes, as soone as he beleeues in Christ, and not that he must repent before he beleeues.

The Apology.

To this I say, that had I intended, to prooue a precedency of repentance, vnto faith in Christ, some space of time, then (I confesse) this answere had beene suffi­cient to that Argument, because (as it is propounded) it prooues no more: but for­asmuch as my purpose was not so much but lesse, viz. a precedency in nature on­ly, therefore is not the answere to pur­pose, and consequently (for all that) it is sound and good: for two things may be in time as soone one as another, and yet in nature the one may goe before the other, as fire and heate, a father and a childe, else how can they with any colour hold faith and repentance to be together in time, and yet faith to go before it in nature and in order of causes.

Though my Argument be good as it is in the Treatise for all that which they haue answered vnto it, yet (as I shall now propound it) it shall be more strong.

If liuing in sinne go before not belee­uing in Christ as a cause and meanes there­of, then repenting of sin, goes before belee­uing in Christ, as a cause and meanes there­of. But the first is true therefore the second.

The consequence is good, because to liue in sinne, and to repent are contrary, so are not to beleeue in Christ and to beleeue in him, so that if vnrepentance, impeni­tency, or liuing in sinne, be a meanes and cause of not beleeuing, and to be a meanes and cause of a thing goes before it in nature, then penitency, repentance, or not liuing in sinne, is a meanes and cause of beleeuing in Christ, and consequently goes before it in nature.

The Assumption I prooue by Ioan. 5.44. Thomas Aqui. Caluin. Mus [...]nlus. Illiricus. Rollocrus. Piscatori com­mentary on the place. where by the iudgement of learned Interpreters) the Holy Ghost assignes this for a reason, and cause of the infidelity of the Scribes, and Pharisees, and why they beleeued not in Christ, viz. they li­ued in worldly pride, ambition, and coue­tuousnesse. And if this were truely veri­fied of them in those dayes, then may it be sayd of men in these dayes that liuing in their sinnes, is a cause why they beleeue not in Christ, and consequently leauing of mens sinnes, ( viz. in purpose) is some cause or meanes of beleeuing in Christ, [Page 86] and therefore goes before it in nature.

The Triall.

The fourth argument.Repentance is begunne before faith in Christ, at the first conuersion, because sin­ners must first repent of their sinnes, com­mitted after their first conuersion, before they can trust in Christ for the pardon of them.

The Exception.

To this they answere by denying the antecedent, for (say they) both the habit of faith, and some acts of it, viz. vniting and ingrafting into Christ, receiuing and apprehending Christ doe goe before re­pentance: secondly by denying the conse­quence, because through repenting after the first conuersion, in nature goes before faith in Christ, yet doth it not follow, it must so do, at the first conuersion.

The Apology.

First their answere to my Antecedent, had beene to purpose if they had prooued by some good reason, that in nature and order of working the habit of faith, had gone before the habit of repentance, or that the act of faith which is beleeuing in CHRIST, had gone before the act of repenting, that is, of sorrow­ing for past sinnes, and purposing to [Page 87] leaue them: but seeing they doe neither of these, the Antecedent is good.

They say indeede, that these acts of faith, viz. vniting and ingrafting into Christ, receiuing and apprehending Christ, go before repentance: but neither is this to purpose, except they prooued they were all one with the act of belee­uing in Christ, for of that act is the questi­on: nor doe they prooue what they say, for they doe barely affirme it: nor do I thinke it possible to be proued, because in nature I thinke it impossible for any vnrepentant sinner, to be vnited to Christ, ingrafted vn­to him, and made a member of his misti­call body.

Indeede vpon another occasion, they say repentance goes before these acts of faith, viz. perswasion and assurance of sal­uation and praying for pardon: and yet else where (in effect) they deny it, where they say to beleeue in Christ, is to be perswa­ded and assured of saluation by Christ, and that no man can pray for this pardon of his sinnes before he haue faith in Christ, Mr. Eltons Catechisme 4. principle. Mr. Perk. state of a Christian, Sect. 14. Mr. Rogers Mr. Baynes as is ci­ted before. the first of which points hath beene con­futed by me in my Treatise, and the second is contradicted by other Diuines, where they say praying for pardon of sinnes, goes before the application of faith, and the [Page 88] perswasion of Gods loue in Christ.

If they had giuen any reason, of their deni [...]ll of the consequence of this Argu­ment that had beene sound, it would haue answered my Argument, but seeing they haue not (good cause why? they cannot) therefore is the Argument as yet good, because as yet it is vnanswered. And in­deede I know not how they should an­swere it, as long as the habit of repentance and faith in Christ, are the same vertues, both at and after mens first conuersion, for nature and vse, and so are the acts of re­penting and beleeuing in Christ.

If any man can giue me a good reason why the spirit of God should not incite men, to repent and beleeue in Christ, i [...] the same manner and order at the first con­uersion, as he doth after it, when through weaknesse they fall and offend God, the [...] would I say, the consequence of my Ar­gument were weake, and consequently m [...] argument: but because (I thinke) they can­not: for if they could, they would, therefore as yet, is my fourth Argument good.

[...]ect.But (they say) this Argument implie [...] a successiue working of saith by God, an [...] of pardoning sinnes, as if a Christia [...] ceased to beleeue, when he falleth into an [...] grosse sinne after his first conuersion, an [...] [Page 89] that therefore faith must bee wrought a new in them, and be pardoned a new.

I answere to the first, that though I do not meane that the habit of faith is lost, Solut. by the committing of any enormous sin, and therefore there is no feare of neede to haue it planted in them againe: yet doe I thinke that a sinner falling into enormous sinne, doth not exercise his faith, nor vse the act of it, and he may in some sort be sayd for a time to loose the vse and exer­cise of this beleeuing in Christ: and that therefore after such a fall the Spirit of God must incite him vp againe, to the vse thereof, before he can trust in Christ: and that the spirit doth not thus incite a sinner to trust, vntill he haue stir'd him to repent of those great sins which he hath cōmitted.

And as touching the second member of their exception, concerning successiue par­doning of sinnes, I can see no reason, why we should euery day aske pardon of our sinnes, if God did not pardon them euery day, I see not why this may not be called successiue pardoning, Math. 6.11, 12. for if the godly sin euery day, must repent, and beleeue in Christ euery day, and craue pardon of the sinnes of euery day, then will God forgiue euery day (speaking after the Scripture phrase) and then there is a daily and succes­siue pardoning.

The Triall.

Repentance may bee begunne before Faith in Christ, The fift Ar­gument. because as great a worke as the beginning of repentance is wrought before it.

The Exception.

To this Argument they answere, that i [...] is naught, because it is founded vpon a false supposition, viz: as if I perswade [...] my selfe they thought that therefore re­pentance was not wrought before faith i [...] Christ, because it could not be so wrough [...] by God; as if they thought any too hard to hard the Lord, and therfore first or las [...] wrought.

The Apology.

Vpon this I reply thus; first as they vse, so they muse, because they thinke meanely of mee, therefore doe they per­swade themselues I doe the like by them, as if my shooe were of their last, or as if they knew, they deserued I shuld so iudge of them; but (the Lord knoweth) I had neuer such an imagination of them, or so meane a conceit of their iudgement, that they should thinke that simply God could worke it so by his absolute power: but that by his actuall power, (which is limi­ted [Page 91] by his will) he cannot: that is, looking to the order and meanes, which God in his word hath prescribed for the working of those graces, hee doth not giue power and efficacy enough to worke repentance before faith in Christ, and that therefore it cannot be so wrought.

Secondly, against them that hold re­pentance cannot be wrought before faith in Christ, as well as that it is not begun be­fore it (for this is their opinion, as well as that, in the sense that I haue named.) It is direct, to prooue that repentance may bee begunne before this faith; and to prooue that repentance may bee begunne before this faith; it is to good purpose to shewe, that as great a worke as the beginning of repentance is wrought before it, viz: a be­liefe of the Gospell: for the full working of one euangelicall and supernaturall grace in all the parts of it, is a greater worke then the beginning of another, and the working of that by fewer meanes, is a greater worke then the beginning of this by more.

These points haue beene prooued in my Treatise, concerning the working of a beliefe of the Gospell, and the beginning of repentance, and (if they had answered them well) they should haue prooued; ei­ther, [Page 92] that a beliefe of the Gospell is not a harder worke (in it selfe considered, and looking vnto the meanes of working) then a beginning of repentance: or (if it were) that it will not follow thereupon, that therefore a beginning of repentance is not wrought before faith in Christ: but nei­ther of these are done, and therefore for all this the argument stands vpright, in that probability of truth which it hath; ex­cept they will take the state and authority vpon them, that their very deniall shall be a sufficient confutation.

Indeed they cauill at some particular passages in the prosecution of this argu­ment, but they are not worth the answe­ring here, because my argument is no whit weakened by them, and besides they haue beene and shall bee vpon other occasions answered else where, and so at last I come to my last Argument.

The Tryall.

Repentance is begunne before faith, be­cause it was preached before faith, for it was the first Doctrine that was preached by Iohn Baptist, The sixt Ar­gument. by Christ, by his Disciples and Apostles.

The Exception.

To this Argument they answere: first, by saying it is but a weake one, and that by the iudgement of Mr. Caluin: secondly, by denying both antecedent and the conse­quence.

The Antecedent, because (say they) God doeth not alwayes call for repentance first; but sometimes for faith in Christ. Acts 10.43. and though he did yet is faith included.

The consequence; for (say they) it doth not follow, that because repentance was the first Doctrine that was preached, therefore it was the first grace that was wrought in the hearers: first, because when God calleth for any grace, none of the rest are excluded; but included rather. Acts 16.31. Secondly, because that which is first placed, is not alwayes first wrought, the last in words may be the first in sense.

The Apology.

First I answere generally to the whole Argument. If this were all the Arguments that could be brought to prooue the point, and that the weight of the cause lay on this foundation, then would it be but weakely supported, it might truely be said of it (as [Page 94] Mr. Caluin doth) that it is too weake; Caluins Insti­tution, l. c. 5. for Mr. Caluin speakes of such as onely relye on this Argument, which I doe not: the contrary is seene by fiue other, on foure whereof I relye, and not on this sixt, nor the fift.

Secondly, Musculus a learned interpre­ter, from hence, that repentance was the first Doctrine which those preached, plain­ly collects that the Doctrine of repentance hath the beginning, and principles of the Doctrine of grace, his wordes are these In this place (saith Musculus) Iohn re­quires Repentance, Musculus com­ment: on Math. 3.2. which the Prophets call turning to God, and of which the Angell p [...] his father in minde, when he said, he shoul [...] turne many of the childaen of Israel to th [...] Lord: Luk. 1.17. viz: to call sinners to th [...] acknowledgement of their euill life, and t [...] a change of their minde and true piety t [...] God, and this preaching of repentance i [...] such, that not onely is it necessary to the e [...] those that haue sinned may bee capable of grace; but without which no man hath ac­cesse vnto the throne of grace, according t [...] Heb. 6.12. And this is the Reason why Iohn, and Christ also, and after him th [...] Apostles, did first preach repentance, t [...] them that were to be conuerted vnto God.

So that in Musculus opinion, Re­pentance [Page 95] in nature goes before accesse to the throne of grace, and before our being capable of grace, (and consequently be­fore faith, by which onely wee haue this liberty,) viz: because Repentance was the first Doctrine which they preached to their hearers.

Secondly and more specially in de­fence of the Antecedent, I say, that where­as, for the confutation of my Antecedent, they bring two Reasons I will answere to them seuerally.

First, God doeth not alwayes call for faith in Christ first, for in that place first he preached Iohns Baptisme of Repentance, ver. 37. and of the day of Iudgement, v. 42. which (comparing, Acts 13.24. with Acts 17.30.31.) require repentance.

Secondly, though faith were included in the Doctrine of repentance; yet the in­cluding of it in that Doctrine, Acts 10.43. No more prooues the precedency in nature of faith in Christ vnto Repentance, (which is their opinion,) then the precedency of Repentance vnto Faith, which is mine.

To the consequence I answere first, that (notwithstanding their Reasons) it is very probable, if we consider these particulars.

First, that the preaching of Iohn, Christ, and the Apostles, was effectuall to some of their hearers.

Secondly, that this efficacy of their preaching consisted in working (through Gods blessings) in their hearers, an ability to doe the duties they taught, and where­unto they did exhort.

Thirdly, that this ability of doing those duties, was wrought in them as the Doctrines were taught, or when they were preached (as appeares plainely in the Apo­stles for the rest.) Acts 14.1.2. Acts 18.8. So that if Repentance were the first duty which all these taught, teaching were the meanes whereby they were inabled to doe it, and this ability were giuen to them, an [...] wrought in them as they preacht it; th [...] must Repentance bee the first grace tha [...] was wrought, because it was the first tha [...] was preacht and taught in their ministery (I meane vsually and ordinarily, not limi­ting God alwayes thus to worke without alteration:) the rather, because they were wrought by preaching to make them ca­pable of saluation, 1. Cor. 1.21. And they might as conueniently be wrought in their hearers for that end, according to the order in which they are taught, as any othe [...] way, or in any other order and manner.

Secondly I answere to the consequence, for as much as it is euident; that neither Iohn, no [...] Christ, neither the Disciples no [...] [Page 97] Apostles, did hit vpon the preaching of re­pentance first, by chance or fortune; but by the appointment and direction of Gods Spirit, therefore must it bee vppon some good ground; and if vpon some, vpon what more likely then this, viz: that the duty of repentance, was one of the first duties that was required to bee practised of them that were to be saued, and before they could beleeue in Christ for saluation.

Their reasons likewise brought to o­uerthrow my consequence are insuffici­ent.

The first because, though it be granted, that when God calleth for any one grace, none of the rest are excluded; but inclu­ded rather: yet will not this prooue, that in nature repentance goes before faith, but onely that they both goe together in time, and that both at one time, they are wroght together. Now for all this circumstance, the worke of Repentance may in nature goe before faith in Christ.

The second, because though that which is first placed, bee not the first wroght, in as much as that which is first in words, may be last in sense: yet for all this, may repentance be first wrought, seeing it is first taught, because GOD vsually wrought graces as they were taught, as [Page 98] hath beene shewed out of the Acts, but euen now; and therefore repentance may bee first both in sense as well as in wordes, because it is first in nature as well as in words.

If they had giuen any reason why re­pentance could not bee first in sense or na­ture though it were so in words, then had they indeed weakened my Argument, but till then it is good enough.

The Exception.

But they will say Repentance was first preached, because it was first felt.

The Apology.

I answere first, if they could proue this to be the reason of their preaching it first, I would discard my Argument, and the probability it seemes to haue, 2. I would faine know a reason why the duty of faith which is beleeuing in Christ (of which the question is) should not be as soone felt as the duty of repenting, if the one be as tru­ly wrought as the other?

Indeed the duties of repentance, which are hearty sorrowe for past sinnes, and purpose vnfained to leaue them, are sooner felt then the comfort of faith, which is as­surance and perswasion of saluation by Christ: but I can see no reason why the one habit or vertue, should not be assoone [Page 99] perceiued, and felt in the duties of it, as the other.

The Exception.

But they vrge in their answere to this Argument, that in my proofe hereof, I contradict something deliuered else where: for first, in one place, I say, that repentance is the first grace that is wrought in men by preaching of the Gospell, pag: 261. and in another place I say that other graces goe before rep [...]ntance, pag: 259. 260. Second­ly, there I speake of the practise of repen­tance assoone as it is wrought; but in an­other, I say that practise of repentance fol­lowes faith in Christ.

The Apology.

To the first I answere that I doe not say simply, pa: 262. that repentance goes be­fore all grace, for I neuer meant it went before a beliefe of the Gospell, the contra­ry is euident by the state of the question, pag: 231. but onely that it goes before faith in Christ: of the two, that is, Repen­tance and Faith, Repentance is the first. Be­sides, all those graces that are saide else where to goe before Repentance; doe but prepare to it, & so after a sort, may be said to make vp but that grace of Repentance.

To the second supposed contradiction, I answere, that the imputation is vniust, for where p. 261. l. 21. I speake of the practise of repentance as soone as it is wrought; I onely meant the duty of repentance, in the heart or the act of repenting, as it is, in the soule, viz: actuall sorrowing for past sinnes, and resoluing to leaue them: and in the lat­ter place, pag. 231. 21. 22. I speake of the practise of repentance in the life and con­uersation: that is, of the effects and fruites of it, when the inward purpose of the heart to leaue sinne, is brought vnto an outward act and execution: and therefore betwixt these (no more then betwixt the other two) is there any contradiction, as is pretended either to the truth of Gods word, or of mine owne opinion: and this is sufficient to haue saide in defence of my six Argu­ments, against that which by some hath beene obiected against my opinion.

The Arguments I haue already brought to prooue my opinion, being defended a­gainst the exceptions of some. It remaines that as yet they stand for good: so that the maine question needes no more confirma­tion. Notwithstanding it will not bee a­misse by way of aduantage to adde one more to the former, to driue the nayle to the head.

If repentance goe in nature before re­mission of sinnes, then it goes in nature be­fore Faith in Christ.

But repentance goes in nature before re­mission of sinnes.

Therefore repentance goes in nature before faith in Christ.

The consequence of the proposition, ( viz: repentance goes before faith, because it goes before pardon) I proue thus.

If repentance goe before remission of sinnes, and not before faith in Christ, then either it must goe hand in hand with iusti­fying faith; or come betweene iustifying faith, and iustification it selfe; neither of which are true.

First repentance doth not goe hand in hand with iustifying faith: first, because then it should haue as great a hand in re­mission of sinne, as faith in Christ; or we must determine what part it hath in remis­sion: secondly, they cannot answere so, be­cause they say repentance is a fruit of san­ctification which followes iustification, and therefore repentance cannot come be­fore iustification with iustifying faith.

Secondly, repentance doeth not come betweene iustifying faith, and iustification it selfe; for the one followes so immed [...]ate­ly on the other, that nothing can come be­tweene: [Page 102] for no sooner can a sinner beleeue in Christ, but immediatly he hath remission of his sinnes and is iustified.

The assumption ( viz: Repentance goes before remission of sinnes) I prooue by testimony of Scripture.

The testimonies of Scripture are these, Deut: 30.2. Ier. 18.8. & 4.4. & 26.3. Ezek. 18 21. Zech, 1.3. Act. 2.38. & 3.19. & 26.18. 1. Ioa. 1.7.9. whēce I thus reason.

That which is required as a condition to be performed before wee obtaine par­don is before it in nature.

Repentance in all those is required of sinners as a condition to be performed be­fore they obtaine pardon.

Therfore repentance is before remissi­on of sins: for it cannot be denied but that howsoeuer the end (as apprehended possi­ble to be had) may stirre vp a man to vse the meanes which be in order to the obser­uing thereof: yet the meanes must needes in nature be before the actuall obtaining of the end; neither can it bee denied but that Gods Spirit in the place afore named, directs vs vnto repētance as a means of ob­taining forgiuenes, by the apprehension of it, appointing vs to vse the means to get it. With this agrees the Doct: of our Church. We haue a perpetuall rule (saith the Homily) [Page 103] appointed vnto vs which ought to be obser­ued and kept at all times; Ser. of repen­tance, 1. part in the begin­ning. and there is none other way whereby the wrath of God may be pacified, and his anger asswaged, that the fiercenesse of his fury may depart, and bee remooued and taken away, where he saith: But now therefore, saith the Lord, Ioel. 2.14. returne vnto me. It is not without great impor­tance that the Prophet speaketh so, for hee had afore set foorth at large vnto them, the horible vengeance of God, which no man was able to abide, and so he doth moue them to repentance to obtaine mercy.

Answerable to this is the Catechisme appointed to be taught in publick schooles where he saith, Nowels Catch. in quar. fol. 5. Repentance is most necessa­ry for sinners, to the obtaining of the mercy of God: and afterward, Fol. 47. 48. sinners for the ob­taining of pardon haue need of repentance.

And hereunto consents Doctor White, Doct. Franc s Whites defencē pag. 17. where he saith. Ordinarily before the Lord forgiueth fowle enormous & monstrous sins, a sinner beginneth to detest & forsake them.

I might and could heape vp many o­ther testimonies, both out of the Fathers and latter Writers for the further proofe thereof; but that I thinke it needlesse, for I suppose my aduersaries will not deny it, and if they grant that repentance in nature goes before pardon, then must they grant [Page 94] also that it goes in nature before faith in Christ, Act. 10.43. for we beleeue in Christ for pardon.

The Triall.

The first Ob­iection.Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ, for then it should be sinne; for whatsoeuer is before faith, is without it, and whatsoeuer is without faith is sinne. Rom. 14. &c.

This they call a solid and sound Argu­gument, but it hath nothing but a sound and shew of truth, or proofe, as hath, and shall appeare yet more clearely God wil­ling.

To this Argument I answered by deny­ing the Antecedent, viz: whatsoeuer is without Faith in Christ is sinne, and be­cause the supposed truth of this propositi­on stands vpon the interpretation of a place of Scripture, Rom: 14. therefore did I answere they did not rightly expound it: first, because the faith mentioned in the place alleadged, is not faith in Christ, the Faith vnderstood in the question, but ano­ther kinde of Faith, viz: a perswasion to the conscience of warrant to doe the things wee doe.

The Exception.

To make good their interpretation of [Page 105] Romans 14. vlt. (and consequently their Antecedent) they now bring testimonies of Diuines, and reasons from Scripture.

First (say they) the text hath beene a thousand times vrged by the learned a­gainst the Pelagians and Papists in this sense.

The Apology.

I answere first it cannot be denied but the text Rom. 14. vlt. hath beene expoun­ded by many Diuines of faith in Christ, but neither do the ancients so interpret it: Patres fidem, scientiam liber­tatis exponunt quae conscientiā precedit, & vel bonam vel ma­lam eam facit. Calvin Iustit. l 3. c. 13. ss. 17. Zanchiusde ope­ribus Dei lib. 4. chap. 1. pag. 420: Paraeas ad Rom. c. 14. ver. vlt. (A learned Diuine of Germany, vpon the same place confesseth as much in his com­mentary.) Nor do all the latter Interpre­ters. For Caluin in his commentary vpon that place, and in his institutions, expounds it as I doe, and Zanchius. Nor if they did all interpret it, one after another, may their exposition be admitted, against or besides the interpretation, which the Holy Ghost in the precedent and subsequent verses of the text giues of that place it selfe, which is the same with that I haue alleadged.

That this interpretation of Rom. 14. vlt is not to be vnderstood of Faith in Christ, but of another faith as I haue alleadged, is euident, by considering that v. 2. of the same [Page 106] chapter, Paul speakes of beleeuing, that I may eate this or that meate, vers. 5. of es­teeming one day aboue another or all dayes alike, and of full perswasion in our mindes about the obseruation of them, verse 14. of knowledge and perswasion concerning th [...] cleanenesse or vncleanesse of meates, that i [...] the lawfulnes or the vnlawfulnesse of the [...] to be eaten, verse 22. of hauing faith with our selues, which is opposed to doubting or feare, and lastly, verse 23 the (verse out of which the words are quoted) of al­lowing or condemning our selues in the things wee do, Neither of all which haue any affinity with the nature of a sauing faith, which is the casting of our selues o [...] Christ; and the relying on his merits for saluation, or the beleeuing in his name for it, of which there is not one word in the whole Chapter.

Besides, the Apostle, Rom. 14.23. doth not deliuer a rule for all our morall acti­ons, that are either commanded, or for­bidden, the rule whereof is his written law: but for those actions that be in na­ture such, as those of which he speakes in that place, viz. indifferent actions, in them­selues neither simply commanded, nor forbidden, neithe [...] good or euill, which may prooue in the euent either good or e­uill, [Page 107] according as his opinion, iudgement, [...]nd conscience is, of the lawfulnesse or vn­ [...]wfulnesse of them. Now in these acti­ [...]ns, for the giuing of vs a warrant to do [...]r not to doe them, there is no neede of [...]aith in Christ: the perswasion or beleefe [...]at wee haue in our conscience, by the [...]ght of nature, true reason, or the word, is [...]le enough to warrant vs in the doing of [...]hem, or leauing of them vndone, and this [...] that faith whereof Paul speakes, ver. 23 Rom. 14.

Adde vnto these two reasons, this for a third: the Apostle doth not in the place cited, set downe a Rule how any or all our actions may be accepted of God vnto sal­uation, in which case he must haue treated of faith in Christ, without which it is im­possible to please God, Heb. 11.6. Heb. 11.6. but. how we may know whether in our owne conscience, our actions are warrantable for vs to doe them, or to leaue them vn­done. Now in this case there is no neede of faith in Christ, the perswasion or be­leefe, that wee haue vppon the former grounds of nature, reason or the word do warrant vs in the doing, or not doing of them, because these tell vs, (and we beleeue it for truth) that they be not vnlawfull and forbidden actions.

In my Treatise I haue giuen one reaso [...] more, why in that place of the Romans by faith should not be meant faith in Christ, but a beleefe of warrant to our conscien­ces, for the things we do, namely, becaus [...] though a true beleeuer in Christ, ha [...] faith in him: yet he sinnes in the actions [...] doth, if hee haue not another faith the [...] this, viz. a warrant to his conscience for the thing hee doth vppon some good grounds, for he cannot chuse but sinne, tha [...] rushly rusheth vpon the doing of som [...] thing not being perswaded, he may lawfully do it, but doubting hereof. But this Arg [...] ment, was not touched as being too hot for them. So that it appearing by these reason, that the meaning of those words, whatso­euer is not of faith is sinne, is not this, that whatsoeuer a man doth before he beleeue in Christ he sinnes: but whatsoeuer a man doth doubting he doth ill, or fearing hee doth, not well, or not being well resolued in his minde, it may lawfull be done either in it selfe or by him, and yet will venture to do it, he sinnes (saith the Apostle) be­cause this acton is not of faith, (that is) not of that faith of which he speakes.

Secondly I answere, that they which vrge this place in this sense, to proue what­souer is without faith in Christ is sinne, [Page 109] doe not well (reseruing reuerence to their learning otherwayes,) for the Doctrine of [...] text must be according to the sense of the words rightly expounded. If then this place being rightly expounded, speake not of beleefe in Christ, then must no Doctrine concerning this beleefe be raised out of that text, Rom. 14.23 except we wil make the Scripture say any thing any where which is presumption.

Thirdly, I answere they which vrge this place against the Papists, they do it [...]o disprooue their will worship deuised by man without warrant of the word, and such poynts as theis, and in this case the text may be alledged against them, because all such worshippe is without faith, that is, a man can haue no be­leefe, or perswasion to his conscience, that he may lawfully vse it, but in our question there is no talke of matters of this kinde, and therefore their alleaging of it, is no disparagement to my interpreta­tion or defence to their Argument.

The Exception.

But they offer now to prooue their ex­position by reasons, to the end their Ante­cedent may be made good thereby, to which I will answere seuerally.

The Apostle Rom. 14.23. speakes of faith in Christ, To the first reason. because he speakes of that [Page 110] faith which is faith of meates, or of liber­ty from meates, and this is a sauing faith because they that beleeue in Christ, ha [...] this liberty by faith.

The Apology.

I answere, first it is supposed that t [...] faith spoken of in the place quoted, is [...] faith of liberty from meates, but it is [...] this onely, but faith of bondage conce [...] ning meates; for they are bound by th [...] text, to abstaine from eating of the [...] they haue not that faith there mea [...] (though they had a sauing faith) as w [...] as they haue liberty to eate them, t [...] haue the faith there spoken of, when th [...] haue a sauing faith also: else by their ru [...] man that eates of any meate, sinnes not [...] uing faith in Christ which is absurd: s [...] condly, though he had spoken onely faith of liberty from meates, &c. yet d [...] he not say there, that they haue this libe [...] by faith in Christ (which is the ma [...] question,) as shall appeare by these t [...] reasons.

First they haue this liberty, to eate [...] the meates there spoken of, that haue a b [...] leefe and perswasion to their conscien [...] from some good grounds, that they [...] lawfully eate of them: for this is the fa [...] there spoken of, as hath beene shewed [...] [Page 111] three reasons euen now, and this is not faith in Christ.

2 by faith in Christ all the elect haue li­berty a like from sinne, hell and the diuell &c, that are bound by them: but the Apo­stle speakes of a liberty from a bondage with which all men are not bound, for all men were not bound with the bondage of obseruing of dayes and meates, but the Iewes onely and Proselites, and therefore not all Christians, but the Iewish Christi­ans, haue liberty by the faith spoken, from the things to which they are bound, and consequently the faith there spoken of, must be not a sauing faith (which per­taines to all Christians, Iewes, and Gen­tiles) but a faith which pertaines to Christians which were bound, to the law of ab­stinence, viz. a beleefe or perswasion of liberty to eate the meate there spoken of, though otherwise forbidden.

Besides if it would follow that be­cause only beleeuers in Christ haue liber­ty from meates, therefore the faith there spoken of Rom. 14.23. is faith of liberty from meates, then by a like consequence might it follow, (but absurdly) that be­cause onely beleeuers in Christ are saued and sanctified, therefore faith in Christ is sanctification and saluation.

The Exception.

Secondly, the Apostle Rom. 14.23. speakes of faith in Christ, To the second reason. because hee speakes of that faith whereby we are per­swaded, we haue warrant and precept for liberty out of the word of God, for th [...] is a sauing faith.

The Apology.

I answere the reason is not good, be­cause this faith whereby we are perswa­ded we haue warrant and precept from the word for liberty out of the word of God (suppose it be for Christian liberty else, I can make no sense of the word,) a but a perswasion; of a truth, or an assured assent in my opinion and iudgement of the truth of this Doctrine, and this can be but an Historicall faith, it is not a sauing faith.

The Exception.

But they will obiect though the Apo­stle Rom. 14.23. do not directly intend to speake of faith in Christ, yet by a con­sequence the Doctrine may be true from that place: for if whatsoeuer be without a perswasion to our conscience and this be­leefe be a sinne, then much more whatso­euer [Page 113] is without faith in Christ, which is a more excellent Faith, and more necessarie then this,

The Apology.

I deny the consequence, except the want and absence of the one faith, made an action to be sinne, as well as the want and absence of the other. This cannot be: First, because then I know not how it can be auoyded, but that the presence of faith in Christ, should make an Action not to be sinne, which is absurd, in as much as faith in Christ doth not cause an action to bee no sinne: but not to be imputed for sinne vnto vs for our condemnation. Secondly▪ because that which makes an action to be no sinne, is the likenesse and neernesse it hath with the Rule of Gods will, pre­scribed for the doing thereof: which in mo­rall actions commanded or forbidden is the Law of God, and in indifferent actions which are neither commaunded nor for­bidden is this Faith, whereof the Apostle speakes Rom. 14. viz. a perswasion or be­liefe wee may doe or may not doe them: neither of which is faith in Christ.

Indeed faith in Christ is more necessa­ry and excellent vnto saluation then this perswasion, but this perswasion, is more proper and necessary then faith in Christ, [Page 112] [...] [Page 113] [...] [Page 114] to warrant vnto our consciences, the acti­ons that wee haue to doe, that bee in­different.

But it may bee, though the Doctrine, be neither directly, nor by necessarie con­sequence, to bee prooued from the text to the Romanes, yet by other Reasons taken from other places it may be. Let vs heare and try them.

The Exception.

Whatsoeuer is not of Faith is sinne, be­cause whatsoeuer is not of Christ is sinne, for to be without faith, and to be without Christ are all one.

The Apology.

I answere as touching acceptation vn­to saluation, it is all one in the euent, to be without Christ, the meritorious cause of saluation; [...]arke 16.16. as to bee without faith the in­strumentall. For a man cannot bee saued without either. Mar. 16.16. But to all intents and purposes, it is not all one to be without Christ and faith, for it is not all one to the making of our actions to bee sinne in the nature of sin.

It is neither being without Christ, nor faith, that doth this (for these only do cau­se, that our actions bee not imputed for [Page 115] sinne vnto vs, and not that they bee no sinns) The sweruing from the law and Rule of God, is that onely which makes an action sinfull.

The Exception.

Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne, 1. Ioan. be­cause whatsoeuer is done without spiritu­all life is sinne.

The Apology.

I answere. How farre and in what sense, faith in Christ is the spirituall life of Chri­stians, shall bee shewed (God willing) in the fourth obiection. For the present it is enough for the answere of this obiection to say, that it prooues idem per idem, which is as much as to say, it prooues nothing in the question: for with them faith in Christ, is the spirituall life of Christians as shall appeare in the fourth obiection, and the spirituall life of Christians is faith, as appeares by this obiection.

If with them, faith be the spirituall life of Christians, and if the spirituall life of Christians be faith, then that Argument that prooues euery action sinfull, that is done without spirituall life, namely be­cause it is done without faith: and againe, that Argument that prooues euery action [Page 116] sinfull that is done without faith, namely because it is done without spiritual life: I both their say, arguments prooue nothing, for (vpon the matter) in this question, they begge the question.

The Tryall.

To conclude in answere to this Argu­ment, and for a reason of denying the con­sequence, I sayd, that though Repentance bee begun before faith, yet it is not sinne for all that, because a beliefe of the Gospel goes before faith in Christ, yet is it not sinne.

The Exception.

This instance they offer to take away, and giue three Reasons, why an Histori­call faith, going before a sauing faith is sinne, to which I will answere.

An Historicall faith without faith in Christ is sinne, because it is no where alone required.

The Apology.

I answere. First, to the Antecedant, that if [...] by these wordes required alone, be meant that a beliefe of the Gospel is so required alone in one place, that there is no more else where required of men to their saluation, then I confesse, that a belief of the Gospel is no where required alone: but if thereby be meant (as it must be, if it bee [Page 117] to purpose) that there is no place of Scrip­ture in which the duty of beleeuing the Gospell is onely taught: and that in euery place, where beleeuing the Gospell is onely taught, beleeuing in Christ is taught also, then I deny it: for the Scripture doth not teach euery duty in euery place, ex­cept wee shall obserue no rules of Art in expounding Scripture.

Secondly, to the consequence I answer, that though beleeuing the Gospell were no where alone required: yet will it not be sinne for all that; because it is a duty in the word commanded to be performed of all the Elect, to make them capable of sal­uation, and no such thing can be sinne.

God doth require of men that which is taught them, and as it is taught; and some­times it may fall out a Preacher, by occa­sion of his text, or in a Catechisme lecture may onely teach men to beleeue the Gos­pell vpon Gods owne authority: shall we say the Minister sinnes in teaching it alone, or the people in learning it alone at that time, not hauing then a sauing Faith? Sure­ly God is not a hard man that takes vp where he layes not downe, Luk. 17.21. nor requires that which hee doeth not teach, or offer to worke.

The Exception.

An Historicall Faith without Faith in Christ, is sinne, because God requires more Faith then this.

The Apology.

To the consequence I answere, that though God require more Faith then the beliefe of the Gospell, of them that shall be saued, yet is not this sinne when it is a­lone without a sauing Faith, for God re­quires more then godly sorrow of a Re­pentant sinner, viz: an vnfained purpose to leaue his sinnes, and in time to practise new obedience: Is therefore godly sor­row for sinne, sinne indeed in a man, be­cause as yet hee hath not a godly purpose to leaue his sinnes wrought in him? surely such Diuinitie can neuer doe good in the Church of Christ.

The Exception.

An historicall faith without faith in Christ is sinne, because it may bee in Re­probates.

The Apology.

It cannot bee denied, but a beliefe of the Gospell may bee in Reprobates; yet [Page 119] will it therefore follow to bee sinne? Math. was [...]he gift of miracles sinne, in the Repro­bates because it was in them? surely no.

It is not the hauing of the gifts of the Spirit, that makes them to bee sinne to re­probates or in them, but the not vsing of them well to the honour of God, and the good of the Church: and it is their conten­ting of themselues onely with those, when they should labour for other and more, that causeth them to be sins in reprobates: for as they be had, so they come from God; and as they come from God, so they are good, and as they are good, they cannot be sinne; though as they are in them not vsed at all, or not well vsed, or not enough vsed, or abused, they may prooue sinne in them, yet simply because they are in them, or as they are in them, they are not: and so much in answere to their Defence of their first obiection, against my Doctrine of the precedency of Repentance vnto Faith in Christ.

The Triall.

Repentance is not begun before Faith in Christ, The second Obiection. because then it should proceede out of an heart vnpurified, for the heart is purified by Faith, Act. 15.9.

To this I answered, that it proues not [Page 120] the question, because the proofe of it, out of the Acts is not to purpose: first, because it doeth not at all speake of purifying by sanctification (of which the question is) but by iustification of which it is not: se­condly, though it had spoken of purifying by sanctification, yet doth it not prooue that Faith so purifieth the heart, that till Faith in Christ come, there is not so much as the least measure of this purifying be­gunne, for so is the Antecedent to bee vn­derstood.

The Exception.

To make their Argument good, they bring reasons: first, they prooue that the Text in the Acts is to be vnderstood of purifying by sanctification, from the filth of sinne, as well as by iustification from the guilt of sinne: secondly, they shew that though it could not bee prooued by that place of the Acts, that Faith purifies in that manner, yet by reason from other Scrip­tures doe they indeauour to prooue it, to which I will answere in order.

The Text ( Acts 15, 9. is to be vnder­stood of purifying by sanctification, as well as by iustification, because it is Faith in Christs blood, and Christs blood purifies both wayes.

The Apology.

The reason is not good, because it takes for graunted, that wheresoeuer the holy Ghost speakes of cleansing by Christs blood, both must be vnderstood. The con­trary is cleare by these places, Ro. 3.18. & 5.9. Eph. 1.7. 1. Pet. 1, 9. Ioa. 1.7.9. which must bee vnderstood onely of one, viz: purifying by iustification: for though Legall purifyings taught both, and Christs blood bee effectuall to the Elect in both kindes, yet will it not follow to be so vn­derstood euery where of both, and that the holy Ghost meanes both: and therefore not Act. 15.9. Besides, the Text, Acts 15.9. by the precedent & subsequent matter shewes clearely it meanes but one, viz: iustifica­tion in that the words are an answer in part to a question, & that questiō was not whe­ther sinners were sanctified, but whether or no they were iustified by faith in Christ.

Men are not to make the Scripture a nose of waxe, to say euery thing in euery place, specially when it expounds it selfe directly of what purifying it speakes: and the point of purifying by sanctification is not denied to faith simply (for I con­fesse it may be prooued by another Text) but onely to bee meant there, viz: Acts 15.9.

The Exception.

Secondly, the Text, Acts 15.9. Is to be vnderstood of purifying, by sanctification as wel as by iustification, because it speaks of purifying by sauing, and sauing com­prehends sanctification, as well as iusti­fication.

The Apology.

The reason is not good, because it is not true (which is supposed) that where­soeuer the holy Ghost speakes of sauing, viz: spiritually, he comprehends both: for these Texts, Rom. 5.9. 1. Cor. 5.5. Io. 5.20. are vnderstood of sauing by iustification onely. Indeed they that are saued are san­ctified, yet where sauing faith is attributed to any, it doth not follow, that there, by sauing should be meant sactifying.

The Exception.

Thirdly, Act. 15.9. must bee vnder­stood of purifying both wayes, because sanctification is directly attributed vnto faith, Acts 26.18.

The Apology.

I answere: first, that if it be a good rule, to expound one Scripture by another, and the darker by the plainer, then may the [Page 123] Text, Act. 26.18. be expounded by Acts 15.9. for the circumstances of the Text in the 26. chap. doe not shew of what puri­fying it meanes, but the scope of the place in the 15. Acts doth. And therefore the clearer, Acts 15. should expound the darker in the 26. chapter, the rather be­cause in the 26. chapter, sanctification is expressed by other wordes of turning them from darkenesse to light, and from the power of Sathan to God, and therefore for all this, Acts 15.9. must not be vnder­stood of purifying by sanctification.

Secondly, I deny not, but faith in some sense sanctifies vs, viz: as it teacheth it, Tit. 2.11. as it stirres vp to it by the comforts thereof, Rom: 121. Ioa. 2. but neither will it be prooued from thence, that there­fore purifying, Acts 15.9. must be meant of purifying by sanctification, because it is so vnderstood, Acts. 26, 18. (vnlesse the Apostle had in both places spoken of the same matter, vpon the same occasion, and to the same end in both, which cannot bee verified of these two places in the Acts.) Nor yet will it follow, that before faith doe sanctifie the heart, it is totally impure, with the filth of sinne, notwithstanding any gra­ces of the Spirit wrought therein, which is the point to be proued in the Antecedent.

Indeed vpon saying we are iustified by faith, it will thereupon follow that wee are totally vniustified: that is, actually before we beleeue in Christ; but in saying wee are sanctified by faith, it will not thereupon follow that we are totally vnsanctified be­fore faith come: and the Reason is because faith, by it office doeth more properly iustifie then sanctifie, and iustificati­on doeth not suscipere magis & minus, a [...] sanctification doth; neither is wrought by parts and degrees as sanctification is.

The Exception.

In the last place, they alleadge that ma­ny learned and sound Diuines doe ex­pound, Act. 15.9. of sanctification.

The Apology.

I grant it, but not to prooue an abso­lute and totall impurity in mans heart be­fore Faith, as they doe: but that there is not purity enough to saluation, without Faith in Christ, and that it stirres vp the heart of a man more to labour for an in­crease of sanctification begun. But though they had, yet doe not I thinke it reasona­ble or possible for euery Writer among the Protestants in these dayes to main­taine euery position in Diuinity, of [...]xposi­tion [Page 125] of Scripture, that hath beene giuen and deliuered by others in former times.

To conclude, If a man bee elected in Christ, and for his sake, before he be actu­ally in him, or haue any faith in him, why may they not for his sake also, bee in part sanctified before Christ bee actually in them by Faith, or Faith bee wrought in them actually?

The Exception.

The second thing vndertaken for the proofe of this their Argument is, that by Reasons from other places of Scripture, it may be prooued that Faith doeth sanctifie as well as iustifie though it cannot from Acts 15.9.

The reasons they bring are three, and I will answere them all briefely and in one answere.

Faith (say thy) doth purifie by sancti­fication as w [...]ll as by iustification: first, be­cause it is Faith in Christs blood which purifies both wayes: secondly, because the larger Catechisme saith so: thirdly, be­cause I my selfe say so in my Treatise.

The Apology.

To all these three Reasons, I answere that neither any one singly, nor all of them ioyntly, prooue the point in question, [Page 126] which is, that Faith so sanctifies the heart, that there is not so much as the least measure of sanctification begunne in the heart, till faith bee wrought: for (at the most) they prooue that which I deny not, but confesse as well as they, that faith in in Christ teacheth sanctification, increaseth it, and makes it acceptable to our salua­tion.

The Exception.

Obiect. 1 Oh but say they, before Christ bee in men, there can bee no sanctification in them, and before faith be in them, Christ cannot be in them.

The Apology.

Solut.Before Faith be in men, Christ is not in them actually, by his sufficient sauing grace: but Christ may be in men, some way; namely, by his wisedome, and en­lightning grace before faith in Christ bee in them.

Before Christ bee in men there is not sanctification enough in measure, nor suf­ficient vnto acceptation for our saluation wrought in vs; but before Christ be in vs actually by faith, sanctification may be be­gunne, by the preparations and dispositi­ons to regeneration.

If God be mooued for his infinite mer­cy and free grace in Christ, to bestow faith [Page 127] vpon sinners, when as yet Christ is not in them actually, why may hee not vpon the same grounds, and for the same reasons, for Christs sake begin sanctification in them when as yet Christ is not actually in them.

The Exception.

Obiect. 2 Oh, but say they, how can sanctificati­on be wrought, before they haue faith in Christ? whereby they drawe downe ver­tue from his sanctification to that end?

The Apology.

I answere, First, 1. Cor. 1.30. Christ is made vnto vs wisedome, as well as sanctification, and illumination of one Elect descends from Christs wisedome vpon them, and this discends before faith in Christ. Why then may not a beginning of sanctification? All our good is from Christ; but all is not drawne from Christ by faith, for preuen­ting grace is not so drawne: Are wee not called before we are iustified. Rom. 8.30. In like manner, all that is drawne is not from Christ, as ours by iustifying faith; for faith it selfe is not so drawne, for that faith should bee before and after it selfe: and if faith be not so drawne, why should Repentance?

Secondly, For the Spirit blowes where, [Page 128] when, and as it lists; so in what measure, and order it pleaseth him to beginne, and finish the work; so that as long as the begining of Repentance, and sanctification in the preparations (though before faith in Christ) be not attributed to the worke of Natute, or good vse of our owne Free-wil, but onely to the worke of the Spirit in the Elect, (which yet is not sufficient to sal­uation; nor acceptable thereunto without faith in Christ) I can see no inconuenience in holding a beginning of Repentance or sanctification in the dispositions thereunto before faith, and that therefore it will not follow that the Elect are wholly impure before faith in Christ, in whom those pre­parations to Regeneration and faith in Christ, are so wrought, as I haue sayd.

Indeed, some challenge mee for bor­dering vpon Pelaganisme and Poperie; as if I diuided some part of Repentance, be­twixt the worke of the Spirit, and of Na­ture; because I said, Nature onely doth n [...] worke the preparations to Repentance and Faith recited Pag. 222. l. 24. But how they can conclude it thence against me, [...] cannot see, and therefore doe I referre it them to conclude, and to the iudicious Reader indifferently to determine. This I am sure, I abhor Palaganisme and Popery, [Page 129] and I haue often and plainely affirmed them, al to be the work of the Spirit in the Elect; and haue denied them to bee the worke of Nature; yea, I haue giuen rea­sons for it, both in my Treatise, and in my Apologie,. Indeed I say, Pag. 258. that by the light of Nature, a man may know many actions bee doth to bee sinne, and that hee ought to repent of them, and leaue them: yea, that hereby many are mooued for a time to refraine some euill actions: But this prooues not that to repent, or to bee pre­pared to repent is the gift of Nature. I haue often affirmed that the worke of all those preparations, is the worke of Gods Spirit in the elect. If they can bring any place out of my Book where I say any one of them is the worke of Nature, in them that doe repent, then may they pooue my supposed Diuision: In the meane time such wresting of a mans writing sauours neither of loue nor iudgement.

The Triall.

Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ, because then it should be accep­table without faith, The third Obiection. but no grace can be acceptable to God without faith, Heb: 11.6.

The Exception.

This Argument (they say) I can neuer answere; but whether I haue or no, or now sh [...]ll, let the Reader iudge.

The Apology.

To this Argument I answered, that i [...] prooues not the question, because th [...] Text out of the Epistle to the Hebrewe [...] prooues not the Argument; for both qu [...] stion and Argument are to be vnd [...]rstoo [...] of pleasing of God, any or euery way, b [...] the proofe out of the Epistle to the H [...] brewes, is of pleasing God one way onely viz: vnto saluation.

To remooue my answere, and maintaine their owne argument, they shoul [...] haue done two things.

First they should haue taken away m [...] distinction, in one of the members there [...] concerning acceptablenesse, and shewe [...] that no repentance can be any way acce [...] table without faith in Christ: But beli [...] it was too hard a tas [...]e; for some repetance is not at all acceptable vnto sa [...]ua [...] on, as Ahabs and the Ninivites; and y [...] the same Repentance without Faith [...] Christ, is some way acceptable vnto Go [...] namely, to the auerting of a tempor [...] Iudgement, as in the same ex [...]mples.

Secondly, they should haue prooued, that the Text alleadged out of the Epistle to the Hebrewes to prooue their argu­ment, is to be vnderstood of a sauing faith only, for of that only is the question, which is not done.

I grant the Apostle in that chapter speakes of a sauing faith, vers. 5. but it seemes that in the verse alleaged, he speaks but of an assent to the truth of the two propositions following in the next verse, viz: that God is, or there is a God: second­ly, that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him, for he that doubts of either of these cannot please God at all: for how should he please God that beleeues not there is a God: But neither of these haue they done, and therefore for all this the argument is vnsound.

The Exception.

Oh but will they say, though the Text, Heb: 11.6. doe not prooue that all our actions done wiehout faith, are euery way vnacceptable; yet may it bee prooued by reasons taken from Scripture: let vs heare them, and answere them in order.

Without faith all our actions are euery way vnacceptable, because without Christ they are euery way vnacceptable.

I answere: first, there is some pleasing [Page 132] God without Christ to the obtaining of some blessings, as the examples of Ahab, and the Ninivites, and Iehu shew, and as the example of Cyrus will easily prooue. Isay 44.28. & 45.1.2.3.

Secondly, I answere, that this reason begges the question, because to bee with­out faith, and to be without Christ, makes an vnacceptablenes to one and the same end, viz: vnto saluation and not any or e­uery way, as the proofe should be; Faith in Christ makes vs acceptable to God, with that acceptablenesse to which we are elected in Christ, which hee hath purcha­sed, and which faith apprehendeth, but this is acceptablenes to saluation: for spi­ritual and heauenly things are the treasures of the couenant of grace, to which we are elected by the father, which are purchased by the Sonne, and which wee receiue in­strumentally by Faith.

The Exception.

But without Faith in Christ, all our actions are euery way vnacceptable, be­cause they are euery way sinne, & no sinne can any way please God.

The Apology.

I answere, though all our actions done [Page 133] before faith in Christ, are vnauaileable to euerlasting life, yet are they not sinne: Is the action of a youth blessing his meate by saying grace before hee haue faith in Christ, sinne? I say not that any action of a man out of Christ is altogether voide of sinne, but that some action of his, is not sinne, and my reason is this.

No sinne is any occasion, why God spares or blesses him that commits it. But some action, of a man out of Christ, is an occasion that God spares or blesses a man that doth it, as may easily be seene in A­hab, Ninivey, Iehu, and Cyrus; and there­fore some actions of a man out of Christ is not euery way sinne.

This likewise may be seen in the action of the Midwiues of the Hebrew woemen in Egypt, in sauing the male children a­liue. This was without faith in Christ, (for ought the Scripture saith,) Exo: 1.17.19. It was sinnefull some way, viz: as it was accompanied with a lie, which they told Pharaoh, concerning the speedy deli­uery of the Hebrew woemen, before the Midwiues came to helpe them in their of­fice: yet was it not euery way a sinne, be­cause it proceeded in part out of the feare of God: that is, feare to murther young Infants, and it was some way acceptable, [Page] because it is said, God dealt well with them, and made them houses: that is, blessed them with posterity.

The Exception.

Without Faith in Christ, all our acti­ons are euery way vnacceptable to God, for the publike great Catechisme allowed to be taught in Grammer schooles in Eng­lands faith asmuch.

The Apology.

I answere: first, the actions, whereof the Catechisme speakes, are good workes, commanded in the law, which I acknow­ledge to bee fruits of faith as well as they, and to be made acceptable by it; but eue­ry action is not such a worke: there bee some, that bee neither commaunded nor forbidden, but indifferent: secondly, the ac­ceptablenes which the Catechisme speaks of there, is but one way, viz: vnto salua­tion, as appeares by the place where hee interprets it, by the reward which God giues to the workes hee speakes of, and that reward is heauen, as will easily ap­peare to him that will peruse the pre­cedent and subsequent Question and An­swere.

The Exception.

Oh but say they, the distinction of pleasing God vnto saluation, and to some other way, and to some other ende is not good: first, because it is the distinction of the Papists: secondly because to what other end should on actions be accepta­ble but to saluation?

The Apology.

I answere: first, If all the Papists said were vntrue, and all their distinctions in Diuinity vnsound, and erroneus, then were this reason to purpose, if they can prooue they haue made this distinction as Papists and Hereticks I will yeeld. For my p [...]rt, I doe not thinke it fit to oppose Papists in euery thing they deliuer; least by contra­dicting them in some thing which may be true, wee keepe them backe from being gained, and reclaimed from their knowne errours, and expose our sel [...]es to iust refu­tation, giue them occasion to glory o­uer vs, and mooue people to suspect our soundest truths.

Secondly, I say t [...]at our actions may be some way acceptable, and to some o­ther end then s [...]luation, for the repentance of the Ninivites, was acceptable to corpo­ral [Page] and temporall preseruation, and salua­tion, not to Spirituall and Eternall, to saue from fire, sword, famine, pestilence or the like, which they might haue indured, and not from Hell fire; so that for all this, be­gunne Repentance may be acceptable to God before faith in Christ some way, viz: as it is a pteparation and disposition there­unto, as it is commanded and commended of God, and as it is his own work to make his Elect capable of saluation thereby.

They likewise cauill at other things, in answere to that obiection, and giue rea­sons why Cornelius had a sauing Faith, and why Ahabs and Iehus actions were sinne.

The Exception.

The reason to prooue Cornelius had a sauing Faith is, because he prayed and was heard, which cannot be without a sauing Faith.

The Apology.

I answere, a sinner may pray and bee heard, before a sauing Faith; else why doe our Diuines make this as a preparation to it, viz: with an humbled and sorrowing heart to approach to the throne of grace, to confesse his sinnes, and to craue pardon, as [Page 137] hath beene shewed before. Surely obedi­ence to Gods Commandement, that bids vs pray, and beliefe of the promise, to heare vs, may some way make our prayer ac­ceptable, and to be graunted, though wee haue not Faith in Christ, though not auail­able vnto saluation: 2, Cornelius Faith was not faith in Christ dead and risen, but an expectation of a Messiah to come; for how can that be a sauing faith, which ministers iust occasion to doubt, whether Christ bee come in the flesh or no: 1. Ioa. 4.3. 2. Ioa. 7. Thirdly, Cornelius was not a proselite; as yet he was vncleane, as ap­peares by the vision: for Peter durst not Preach the Gospell to him being a Gentile and vncircumcised: therfore is it not likely that as yet he had Faith in Christ.

Likewise the reason, why Iehus action and Ahabs, were euery way sinfull and vnacceptable, is not good; for the Rule propounded of the acceptation of our per­sons in Christ; of ayming in our actions at Gods glory, and of sincerity in the man­ner of doing them, doth make a man that doth such actions acceptable vnto saluati­on, the want of those doth not make them euery way vnacceptable as they imagine.

The Triall.

Repentance is not begunne before a sa­uing faith, The fourth Obiection. because then it should be begun in men before they ha [...]e any spirituall life in them, for faith is the spirituall life of Christian. Gal. 2.20.

To this Argument I answered in effect, that it prooued not the question, because the proote of ir, out of the Epistle to the Galathians was not to purpose: first, be­cause the place alleadged is to bee vnder­stood of the spirituall life of iustification with which wee haue nothing to doe in our question: secondly, because the question is of spirituall life but begunne but the proofe is of spirituall life, perfect in resp [...]ct of being in all the parts (not de­grees) of it: thirdly, the question is that faith is so the spirituall life of Christians, that there is not so much as the least mea­sure of spirituall life begunne in men be­fore they haue a sauing faith, but the proofe is of no such matter.

The Apology.

To this former answere of mine; I now adde this: first, to the argument it sel e, that if by spirtuall life, bee meant the life of iustification, or sanctification, then I say [Page 139] repentance is begunne before a man hath this spirituall life in him: but if sptrituall signifie, whatsoeuer a man hath in him which is not naturall, then I say repentance is not begunne in a man before hee haue something in him which is not naturall: something is begunne in a man before a sauing faith, which is not begunne in him before he haue any spirituall life for there is something in a man (which he hath not by any strength of nature) before sauing faith, as a beliefe of the Gospell, sight of his sinnes, feare of damnation, &c.

Secondly, to the proofe of this argu­ment out of the Epistle to of the Gala­thians, I answere: first, that where they say it is the spirituall life of the soule euery way. I answere, that neither doth the A­postle say so; nor doe they prooue it suf­ficiently. I haue saide enough to the con­trary, pag: 178. which is not answered: secondly, I answere that sauing faith is the life of a Christian, in respect of iustificati­on, and sanctification: not in respect of whatsoeuer is in him which is not natural.

The Exception.

To maintaine their argument, now they iudeauour to proue two things: first, that the text, Gal: 2.20. is to be vnderstood [Page 140] of spirituall life euery way. Secondly, that though it could not be prooued from that place: yet might it bee prooued by sufficient reasons, grounded on other Scripture, that faith in Christ is the spiritu­all life of Christians euery way.

To prooue the first concerning that Text to the Galathians they bring this reason. The life spoken of, Gallat. 2.20. is life by saluation, therefore by iustifi­cation, and fanctification, therefore euery way.

The Apology.

I answer, Paules liuing by faith must be vnderstood of such a life, as is attribu­ted vnto others by faith in the same chap­ter and epistle, but to others viz. all the elect, in the same chapter is attributed the life of iustification, and life is expounded thereof onely. Chap. 2.16. & 3.11. and therefore the life which Paule liued by faith spoken of in the 2. chapter and 20. must be the life of iustification onely, and not of sanctification at all.

The Exception.

Oh but will they say, I my selfe in my Treatise say that the text, Gallat. 2.20. is vnderstood of spirituall life, vnto [Page 141] iustification and saluation. pag. 278.

The Apology.

True, but by mine owne words it is e­uident what saluation I meane, viz. Iusti­fication, or forgiuenesse of sinnes, or sa­uing from hell: not saluation which com­prehends sanctification, as they would interpret me.

Besides neither the word saue, nor Sa­uiour is vsed in all the Epistle to the Ga­lathians, therefore cannot be vnderstood of such a saluation.

Adde to this, that when we say Christ is our Sauiour, we do not meane he is our sanctifier, but one that keepes vs from hell, and brings vs to heauen. For the power of sinne is a distinct thing from the pu­nishment, and as the power of sinne is ta­ken away by sanctification onely; so is the punishment by iustification onely: saluation is vnderstood of Iustification and of that which as a consequence fol­lows on it, our glorification.

Oh but may they say Pauls liuing by faith, ver. 10. was the same with his li­uing to God, ver. 19. and that is the life of sanctification.

I answere, liuing to God ver. 19. must either be the same with liuing in his fauor, [Page 142] and free grace by Christ, and then it is al [...] one, wtih beeing iustified by God through faith ver. 16. or else it must bee opposed vnto death to the Law; and death to the Law, is (in his meaning) renouncing it to iustification, as being vnable to keepe it, and by keeping it to bee iustified by i [...]; and therefore liuing vnto God, is seeking vnto the meanes, appointed by him fo [...] iustification, and liuing in his sight by fait [...] in his free grace. 2. If by those word [...] were vnderstood, I am sanctified by faith, then must the meaning of them bee to this effect; in that I haue had any motions to holinesse, preparations to sanctification, or any the least inclinatiō therunto, I haue had it by the faith of Iesus Christ; before I beleeued in Christ, I had not the least beginning thereof in any kinde: but this is contradic­ted by other Texts of Scripture, where it is sayd of S. Paul, He was taught according to the perfect maner of the Fathers, Act. 2.23. and was zealous towards God, and that hee had liued in all good conscience before God, vnti [...] that day, Namely, according to the light hee had by the Law and the Prophets. 3. Suppose it could be prooued, that Paul lyued vnto God, any way before hee be­lieued in Christ, yet will not this prooue he had no beginning at all of spiritual life [Page 143] before hee beleiued in Christ, for to liue to God is a plaine fruit of sauing faith, and a man may haue fome spirituall life begun in some sense, and not liue to God.

Lastly, though it could be proued, that Paul had no spirituall li [...]e begun in him, before he beleeued in Christ, yet wil not his example proue, that no man hath any spi­rituall life begunne in him, before hee be­leeue in Christ, inasmuch as P [...]ules con­uersion was extraordinary, for the gifts and graces of the spirit needfull to salua­tion, where in (all likly hood) wrought in him at once, and together, in an enthusi­asme, so are they not vsuall in all men and women in these dayes, but one after another successiuely, Sermon after Ser­mon, and weeke after weeke: and so much for answere touching their proofe out of the epistle to the Gallathians, the first thing propounded to make good their Argument.

The Exception.

The second followes which is to proue, that faith in Christ is the spirituall life of Christians, euery way, and that there is no spirituall life begunne in men, before they beleiue in Christ, and their reasons are foure, to which I will answere seuerally.

There is no spirituall life begunne in men before faith in Christ, because till then then they are dead in sinnes and tres­passes.

The Apology.

I answere, in him that is dead in tres­passes and sinnes, there is no spirituall life, of iustification or sanctification: but in him in whom repentance is begunne and other preparations, there is somewhat more then that which is naturall, whereby in some sort he is in a middle estate, al­though indeede he be still a naturall man, because nature hath the predominancy in him: and in this state he continues till he be regenerate in all parts which is assoone as he beleeues in Christ, and in this state was Nicodemus Ioa. 3. who came to Christ & was taught of him, & that which was not naturall was wrought in him, and yet he had not a sauing faith.

The Exception.

There is no spirituall life begunne in men before faith in Christ, because till then they haue not Christ.

The Apology.

The reason is not good, because though [Page 145] before faith in Christ, they haue not Christ in his righteousnesse, to their iustification, and in his sanctification, to their sanctifica­tion, and full conuersion both of heart and life: yet may they in whom repentance is begunne, and these preparations, haue him in them some way, viz. in his wisedome to their Illumination, and the beginning of their conuersion.

The Exception.

There is no spirituall life begunne in men, before faith in Christ, because till then they haue not the spirit. Gal. 3.2.

I answere, 1 the extraordinary gifts of the spirit, were not giuen but by hearing faith preached, which is the meaning of that place, Gal. 3.2. For at the preaching of the Gospell (the Doctrine of faith) and vpon the beleeuing thereof, were they giuen, Act. 10.41.44. 2. The spirit of adoption is not giuen before faith in Christ for that is the grace which instrumental­ly (and so onely) giues vs prerogatiue and title to our adoption, euen as it onely (but instrumentally onely) receiues Christ and his benefits. Eph. 1.13. Gal. 3.26. Rom. 8.13. 3. The gifts and graces of the spirit sufficient to saluation are not giuen before faith in Christ, Heb. 11.6. Rom. 5.1, 2. 4. The gift of sanctification is not [Page 156] giuen before Faith in Christ. But for all this will it not follow that before Faith in Christ, the spirit is no way giuen, the contrary may be seene in illuminati­on and a beleefe of the Gospell, for these are gifts of the spirit, and therefore parts of spirituall life in some sense. 1. be­cause they are supernaturall, (all natu­rall men haue them not, nor are they wrought by the worke of nature in any, no not in the Elect) 2. because blinde­nesse of minde, and infidelity which is contrary thereto, is a branch of spiritu­all death. 3. The Spirit inhabitant can­not be in men before they haue faith in Christ: but the Spirit assistant may, and the exciting by assistance may.

Indeede Illumination and a beleefe of the Gospell, are not spirituall life enough to saluation: yet is it life e­nough (by Gods blessing) and further grace to produce Faith in Christ in the elect, for within man and by the wor­king of the Spirit, there is no other worke but these, and that which is wrought by these, which perswades men to beleeue in Christ. If illumination and a beleeue of the Gospell, &c. had no super­naturall life at all: but were altogether dead workes, then could they produce no [Page 157] such effect as faith, and if they be not dead workes, then haue they some life, and if they haue some life, then from the spirit, and if from the spirit, then may they be called branches of spirituall life, and hee that hath them, may be sayd, to haue some spirituall life begunne in him, because (as hath beene sayd) he hath some life in him more then naturall, that is more then all naturall men haue.

The Exception.

There is no spirituall life begunne in men, before Faith in Christ, or faith in Christ is euery way the spirituall life of Christians, because sanctification goes be­fore iustification.

The Apology.

I answere, in nature saanctification is begunne before iustification. 1. be­cause regeneration is begunne before iustification, namely in illumination and other preparations as hath beene she­wed before. Secondly, because faith it selfe is a sanctifying grace, by their owne confession from Acts 15.9. and faith goes in nature before iustification.

Indeede iustification goes in nature before the perfection of our sanctification [Page 148] in all the parts of it, and before the accep­tation of it to saluation, but iustification doth not go before any or euery measure of sanctification can any way be begunne. The will of God in working is the Rule of perfection to the worke, and then is it sayd to be perfect, when it is wrought in part, or in whole according to that per­fection of parts, or degrees which the Lord intends vnto it, at seuerall times, and by seuerall meanes. The Lord is no way tied, for shewing the perfection of his workemanshippe, to finish a worke in all the parts of it, at sundry times, more then he is to finish it in all the degrees thereof, at sundry times.

The Triall.

Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ, The fift Ob­iection. because repentance is a proper effect and fruite of the Gospell.

The Exception.

This Argument is disclaimed, therefore is it vaine to spend time about it, for if they will not acknowledge and confesse it: I haue no reason to confute it any fur­ther. Onely I would haue the world beleeue, I doe not faine an enemy, and then flourish against him. For two lear­ned [Page 149] and godly Ministers, whose worthy workes are in print, haue vsed the same.

They which bring this proposition, Re­pentance is the proper effect and fruite of the Gospell beleeued, to prooue that repen­tance is not begun before iustifying faith, must be vnderstood to meane by a beleefe of the Gospell, either that beleefe which is faith in Christ, or that onely which is an assent vnto the truth of the Gospell. If they meane by a beleefe of the Gospell faith in Christ, then must it be their argu­ment which I haue propounded, to prooue that repentance goes not before faith in Christ: If they meane but an assent to the truth of the Doctrine of the Gospell, then doe they meane that no other faith goes before repentance but that, and then haue they two Diuines of our owne, lesse on their side, then they thought they had, and I haue two more on mine, for I hold that a beleefe of the Gospell goes before repentance, and repentance before faith in Christ, and let this be enough for that fift Obiection, the sixt followes.

The Triall.

Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ, The sixt Obiection. because it is not begunne before regeneration, for regeneration is not be­gunne [Page] before faith in Christ.

This Argument was answered, by de­nying the Antecedent, viz. that Rege­neration is not begunne before Faith in Christ, and the reason of the consequence, viz. that repentance is not begunne before regeneration.

The Exception.

For making good the Antecedent, viz. this proposition, regeneration is not be­gunne before faith in Christ, they bring two reasons, to which I will answere in order.

Regeneration is not begunne before Faith in Christ, because it issues from Christ, and from our vnion with him by faith, 2. Corinth. 5.17. Ephesians 2.10. Colo. 2.11.

The Apology.

I answere, first if by regeneration be meant our being made Gods children actually, then I grant, that our regene­ration must needes flow from our vnion with him by faith, but then it prooues not the Antecedent, for the regenera­tion wee speake of is not our beeing actually made the sonnes of GOD, but a worke of the Spirit beginning [Page] to fit vs for that: but if by it they meane any or euery worke of the Spirit, begin­ning to fit vs for regeneration, and ten­ding thereunto by GODS appoint­ment, as any worke of the Spirit in the vnderstanding or will, of one that is elected to saluation, to fit him for rege­neration by faith, then I say that such regeneration may be wrought before our actuall vnion with Christ by Faith, and doth not issue from it.

It is true that Regeneration issues from Christ, in the elect whether wee consider him as the efficient cause, either by way of meriting it for vs, or by working it in vs. Hebrewes 12.3. Ioan. 1.19. Ephesians 1.3. & 2.10. or as the finall cause, Galath. 4.19. But it is not true that regeneration so issues from Christ, that there is not so much as any the least beginning of it wrought in vs till wee bee actually vnited to him by Faith, which is the question. The contrary may bee seene in illumination, a beleefe of the Gospell, and vocati­on which are, and may bee wrought in the elect, before this vnion, Romans 8.20. though they tend to regeneration, (or rather) are a branch and member thereof, and there can noe inconuenience fol­low, [Page] hereupon, as long as the regeneration begunne before this actuall vnion, is the worke of the spirit, in the elect, and for Christs sake, that shall be perfected in due time, appointed by God for that end.

The Exception.

Secondly, they prooue that regenerati­on is not begunne before faith in Christ, because I my selfe say as much in my trea­tise, pag. 310.

The Apology.

I answere, by acknowledging that faith in Christ, becomes effectuall to bring forth good workes, and new obe­dience in a holy life, and to beget in vs o­ther Christian graces as hope, ioy, peace, newnesse of heart and vprightnesse, &c. which are the fruites of faith in Christ, and it becomes thus effectuall by our vnion with Christ through faith: but I doe not there affirme (which is alleaged, and is the point to bee prooued,) that no grace tending to regeneration, as a disposi­tion to it, is wtought before this our vnion, and therefore for all these two reasons, their last Argument is weake and insuffi­cient.

As I haue added to my six arguments one more, in defence of my opinion so will I adde one more obiection (which is an argument of theirs) against it, and it is this.

The Exception.

If faith in Christ goe before loue, and loue before repentance, then faith goes be­fore repentance.

But faith in Christ goes before loue, and loue before repentance.

Therefore faith goes before repen­tance.

The consequence (they thinke) is good because that which goes before the cause, goes before the effect, ergo if faith go be­fore the cause of repentance which is loue: then must it goe before repentance which is the fruite of loue.

The Assumption they prooue in the parts of it.

1 Faith goes before loue, because faith workes by loue, Gal. 5.6.

2 Loue goes before repentance, for the doctrine of the Church of England sayth so.

The Apology.

I answere: 1. If by loue be meant [Page 164] any kinde of loue to God, then I grant the consequence and deny the assumption. But if thereby bee meant that loue of God which proceedeth from our actuall being beloued of God in Christ, and our apprehending of the same in our owne perticular iustification, then I deny the consequence and grant the assumption. Some loue of God may be before iustifi­ing faith, for God is the obiect of loue, and God may bee conceiued and appre­hended as louing, not onely in many tem­porall blessings, but euen in some spiritual, before men beleeue in Christ. For God may be apprehended louing in sending his sonne to purchase redemption for man and manifesting in the meanes a possibility of obtaining our share therein, vpon repen­tance and faith in Christ, and as preparing v [...] by some workes of Gods Spirit to faith in Christ, and if we may be some way af­fected towards God vpon these conside­rations and grounds before faith in Christ, then may there be some loue before faith, and if our loue to God bee suteable to such preparing workes of Gods Spirit, as haue yer bin past vpon vs, and such good as hath bin manifested to v [...] from God, I say such loue is true in it kind, as being answe­rable to that, which God aimes at, in such [Page 165] meanes, though not with that perfection which is requisite to saluation immediate­ly, yet with that which is requisite by way of disposition and preparatorily. But that loue of God which proceedeth from the receiuing and apprehension of our iustifi­cation is a fruit of faith in Christ, and fol­lowes it. 2. I answer, that if by repentance be meant the practise of amendment of life, and new obedience, then the loue of God goes before repentance: but if by re­pentance be meant hearty sorrow for sinne past, and true purpose to leaue it, then I say the loue of God doth not go before repen­tance. Touching the first part of their as­umption, out of the Galathians that faith goes before loue, I say, it is not to purpose because it proues not that faith goes before all loue, but only that loue which proceeds from our first beeing beloued of God, which we apprehend by faith in Christ.

Neither is the doctrine of the Church of England out of the Homilies rightly al­leaged to proue the 2 part of their assump­tion, viz. that repentance hath an ingredient charity, & that repentance is a fruite of the loue of God: for the repentance the Homily speakes of is not repentance strictly taken viz. sorrow for sinne and purpose of lea­uing it of which I speake, but the whole [Page 156] worke of Gods Spirit on man to make him capable of iustification and salvation, or the whole conuersion of man in minde and will, in affections and actions, inward and outward; and this appeares in that it makes foure parts of repentance there spoken of, viz. 1. Sorrow for sinne, 2. ac­knowledgment and confession of it, 3. faith in Christ, and 4. amendment of life: in which sense it is no maruell if hee include loue and charity in repentance: soe that there is no reason to conclude thence that loue is included in repentance strictly ta­ken (as I do,) except they meane by loue some affection to God for making it possi­ble for vs to bee saued and prouiding a meanes to that end, and not a loue of God for our being actually saued, or meane by repentance amendment of life: for this is a fruite of loue, and in this sence it is that St. Augustine speakes to this effect.

Many do daily say, they are sinners, and yet still they delight to sinne, this is but profession, not amendment, the soule is ac­cused, not healed, the offence is pronounced, not taken away, August. 10. tom. Ser. 7. de tem­pore. nothing makes true repen­tance but the hatred of sinne, and loue of God the fire of this sacrifice is loue.

Now at length I draw homeward, to­ward a conclusion of the whole, namely, [Page 157] to the last thing propounded in handling this point, of the precedency of repen­tance vnto faith in Christ, which is the vse and application, I made thereof in my Treatise, with which, as with the rest there is fault found.

It will not be worth my labour to confute (muchlesse recite) the particular faults and aberations, they espie therein: The applying of the point. because the answere vnto them, will little serue to the cleering of the Doctrine it selfe: partly because that which I should write in confutation thereof, must be ga­thered out of that I haue already sayd in this Defence, and partly also because the whole frame of those exceptions, will of it selfe (vpon my Defence) fall to the ground.

For I thinke they would neuer haue written against the application; but vpon a supposition, that the point whereupon it was raysed, is vnsound: for the vse of a Doctrine is good or bad, according as the nature of the Doctrine is true or false, as wel as if it be proper & natural, or streined and impertinent.

Now then if it may appeare as I (hope it shall to all that are willing and able to iudge) that I haue answered all their ex­ceptions, then doth my Doctrine touching [Page 168] the precedency of repentance vnto Faith in Christ as yet stand vpright, and con­sequently the application thereof by way of confutation, instruction, repre­hension, exhortation, and consolation, must goe for currant being naturall to the point and not wrested.

As it will not bee needefull for mee to defend all those vses, so neither to inlarge them, onely I would adde out more to the other fiue, and cleere one of them which I haue already made.

That which I would adde to the other should bee by way of caution, which is to aduertise the Christian Rea­der, that in perusing this my Defence, and meditating on the point it selfe, he would not doe either the one or the other, with a minde onely intent to vnder­stand the truth of the point, but with a heart to bee affected with the truth, when it is vnderstood: not labouring so much, to enquire whether of repen­tance or Faith, the one or the other goes before in nature or in time, as whether they haue them both or no, and how they may get them both, both being necessary in their kinde vnto salua­tion.

That vse which I would cleare, should be the fourth. (whence as also from other places in the Treatise, viz. page 226. 233, 234.) some collect, that I make that faith, not to be sauing faith, which is not wrought after Repentance.

To this I answere, far be it from me to imagine, must lesse to determine, that a true faith in Christ, (supposing it to be true) cannot be a sauing Faith. For Faith in CHRIST is a true sauing Faith, let it bee wrought by the Spi­rit of GOD when it will, before or af­ter repentance: for I thinke the hand of the Lord, is not to bee tyed, in as much as hee may worke how, and when hee will, with, and by the vsu­all meanes, and ordinarily, or with­out them, or against them, and extra­ordinarily.

But this I say, that for as much as it hath appeared, that vsually, and in the common order of Gods working, generally and in his ordinary course, God prepares men to beleeue in Christ, by the fore-worke of some graces tending to it, and that many will presumptu­ously say and perswade they beleeue in Christ, when indeede they doe not: and therefore to restraine men from [Page 170] presumption, I say that such persons, may not perswade themselues, as yet they hau [...] a sauing faith, 233. such may be conceiued not to haue a sauing faith, 234. not when they had it indeed, but when they thought they had it, and had it not: for how can a man look for benefit by beleeuing in Christ that continues in a purpose of sinning.

And that this is so, may appeare because in that vse I speake onely of carnall Gos­pellers, who cannot haue a sauing faith indeede, yet may they presume they haue it.

May not a Minister of the Gospell, knowing that Preaching is the way and meanes to worke faith in Christ ( viz. or­dinarily) reprooue carnall Gospellers, that neglect and contemne hearing of Sermons and yet thinke they haue faith in Christ: may they not say that their faith us not a sauing faith, viz. because they submit no [...] themselues to the ordinary meanes which should beget it, may not they say safely and truely that their faith is not a sauing faith, though God can, and will, and som­time doth worke a sauing faith without these meanes, viz. extraordinarily? why then may not I say, that the faith of car­nall Gospellers is not true sauing faith, seeing they were neuer prepared to be­leeue [Page] in Christ by the dispositions, which Gods holy Spirit workes ordinarily in those in whom he begets a sauing saith, though sometime God can and will, in an enthusiasme, and sodaine rapture, worke a sauing faith, without these preparati­ons? Surely yea, for not Gods extraordi­nary wayes and workes but his ordinary, are the pathes wherein wee must walke, the rule by which we must proceede, and the Touch by which wee must try our selues in cases of this nature. To con­clude.

By that which is written in this Apo­logy, the Christian Reader may discerne the materiall Exceptions against my Do­ctrine, and the Defence of my Doctrine against those Exceptions.

I know full well that a Maister of De­fence would haue put by these thrusts, with more skill, or haue beaten them backe with more strength, but I am onely a lear­ner in this Schoole, and therefore onely as a Scholler in this faculty (pro meo marte & arte) I haue playd my prize.

That which by Gods prouidence I haue seene materially obiected against my Doctrine, I haue (with Gods grace) an­swered, the pertinency and sufficiency of which answere I referre to the more [Page] learned and iudicious Readers to be deter­mined.

Some obiect my Doctrine is new, but I answere it is not a new: but a renewed Doctrine. Witnesse my testimonies, and reasons. It is not new though it seeme new, it skills not how new a doctrine be so it be true.

As it is not good to receiue euery Do­ctrine for this is to be carried about with euery blast. Eph. 4 14. So neither is it safe to reiect euery Doctrine which seemes new: for this was the errour of the Iewes who re­fused the Gospell because to their iudge­ment it seemed a new Doctrine. Acts 17.19.

The way to preuent errour by mista­king is to follow the rule of the Apostle, Prooue all things, 1. Thes. 5.21, 22 hold fast that which is good, abstaine from all apperance of euill. that is, Examine the Doctrines you heare by the word of God, and if after Triall they e­uidently appeare, to your iudgement to be good & sound imbrace and hold them fast, if naught and erronious, reiect and let them go. If any man after Triall shall dissent from me in this opinion, I will not be offended so he dissent as a brother in iudgement and opinion, and not in loue and affection; and so from answer­ing Exceptions to my booke in one [Page] point, I proceede and conclude with a remouall of some imputations against it in another, the Authors in both not being the same.

There came to my hands very lately certaine papers, containing an accusation against me concerning my first Booke cal­led A Triall of Faith, and my second A Defence thereof.

The things layd to my charge, are no lesse then periury, lying, and contradicti­on, heresie, blasphemy, and aequivocation, as if my booke were a mirrour of errours, and absurdities, and my selfe a monster of Ministers.

The matters being so foule, and the op­portunity so faire to purge my selfe, I thought good to adde a sew leaues for the clearing of my innocency herein: For in that these papers were brought me not knowing of them, nor looking after them when this booke was almost printed, I deemed that GOD (by his prouidence) would haue me defend my selfe for the credit of my Ministery, which is as tender as the apple of mine eye, that cannot en­dure little motes of disgrace vniustly to dimme it, much lesse such great beames of slander to put it out if it were possi­ble.

If the accusations were true, it were better my booke were burnt in Paules Church-yard, then sold there, & it were fit­ter for me to stand at a stake in Smithfield, then in a Pulpet in the Church, and if they be not true, then is it not meete to suffer simple people to be seduced to beleeue them, nor my selfe to be traduced by the report and beleefe of them, neither of which can be auoyded without some an­swere.

Whether they be true or no I referre to the Christian Reader to determine, when he hath read ouer the Defence of my Triall of Faith, and this Apology for it.

In this action and accusation, I will be but a Defendant, I will not giue rebuke for rebuke, 1. Pet. 3.9. onely I say, the Lord rebuke him. This is not my rebuke but the Lords, nor is it against him, but for him, (the Lord knoweth) euen for his vnfeined humili­ation and consolation in Christ Iesus. And so letting passe in modesty the very words of the accusation as offensiue to moderate eares, I proceede to answere the matter, and first the heresie and blasphemy.

The heresie and blasphemy is instanced in three particulars, 1. The first hereticall [Page 165] and blasphemous position is this, Triall of faith, p. 41. li. 30. I say Faith in Christ is the onely condition of the couenant of grace, that is required of all those that are capable of saluation.

I answere, this, is not heresie nor blas­phemy, because the Doctrine of our Church sayth as much, where it sayth, Articles of re­ligion in Q E­lizabeths time. Art. 11. Ser. of saluati­on, 1 part to­ward the end. that we are iustified by faith onely, is a most wholesome Doctrine, and that Paule deela­reth nothing. Rom. 3.25. vpon the behalfe of man, Concerning his iustification, but onely a true and a liuely faith, and after­ward, faith doth not shut out repentance, hope, loue, dread and the feare of God to be ioyned with faith, in euery man that is iustified, but it shutteth them out from the office of instifying.

2. A second Hereticall blasphemous Doctrine is, I say, God as soueraigne Lord of all, can appoint what meanes hee will to make vs capable of life.

Neither is this an hereticall and blas­phemous position, because the power of God is to be considered two wayes, Perk. gold chai. ch. 3. ei­ther actually or absolutely: Gods absolute power is that, by which hee can doe more, then either he doth, or will doe, Math. 3.9. Phillip 3.29. Gods actuall power is that by which he causeth all things to be, which hee freely willeth. Psal. 135.6.

Now then where I say, God as soue­raigne Lord of all, can appoint what meanes hee will to make vs capable of life, I do not speake of his actuall power, but of his absolute, for I doe not meane. Though the Lord hath actually willed and appointed that faith in Christ shall be the meanes to make vs capable of eternall life (that is, instrumentally onely and in no sense meritoriously) yet God as soue­raigne Lord of all, can now appoint ano­ther meanes to make vs capable thereof, as he would straine his wit to interpreat me. But my meaning is (which is eui­dent by the context) that before the Lord appointed and willed that faith in Christ should be that meanes, by his absolute power, as soueraigne Lord of all, hee might haue appointed any other grace, to haue beene the meanes (instrumental­ly and conditionally) to haue made vs capable of Heauen. If God by his ab­solute power can do more then either he doth or will, (as is confest out of Mr. Per­kins) then in case God had not willed that Faith in Christ should be this meanes, he might by his absolute power, haue ap­pointed any other meanes, and consequent­ly what meanes he would to make vs cap­able of life. For that action which de­pends [Page] vpon Gods free will or ordination, that, by his absolute power, he could haue done otherwise, (for that is the nature of free-will to do so as that they might haue done otherwise:) but the appointing of the meanes to make vs capable of saluation depends vpon Gods free-will and ordina­tion, therefore he might haue done other­wise, and consequently by his absolute power, he could haue appointed what meanes he would, to make vs capable of saluation.

And that the appointing of the meanes to make vs capable of saluation, depends on the free-will and ordination of God appeares because the merits of Chr [...]st depend therevpon, according to that of Mr. Caluin. Christ could not deserue any thing, but by the good pleasure of God, Caluin Iustit. l. 2 1. 17. the 1. but because hee was appointed to this purpose with his sacrifice to appease the wrath of God, and with his obedience to put away our offences, &c. Now if this be true in the meritorious cause of our saluation, which doth purchase it, much more is it in the instrumental, which makes vs but persons capable of it now it is procured by him; and so much for clearing the second sup­posed heresie and blasphemy.

The third hereticall blasphemous posi­tion [Page] is this that I say, the act of faith, which is beleeuing in Christ doth iustifie vs, and is our righteousnesse.

Of this sentence I wil not say much here, because I haue maintained it to be sound Doctrine (in my sense) in a priuate writing to himselfe, which he promised to answere, but yet hath not performed it, as also in a publike defence in print, and in the view of the world, which was perused and also allowed by two very learned and godly Doctors of Diuini­ty, for that end (which I humbly pray the Reader to peruse for his satisfaction, if hee be doubtfull,) euen as this Apology also hath beene prooued and approued by the same worthy Diuines. And so I passe from the heresie and blasphemy with which he charges me, to the periury, ly­ing, and contradiction, which is instanced by two particulars.

The first instance to prooue the periury lying, and contradiction is this, viz. be­cause in my second Booke, I protest I ne­uer wrote, that Christ hath merited that faith should be our righteousnesse, and iusti­fie vs, Defence, pag. 35. and yet in my first booke I say, the act of faith iustifies vs for the merit of Christ. Triall, page 196.

I answere, in these two sentences I doe [Page] neither forsweare, nor lye, nor contradict my selfe, because I do not affirme and deny one and the same proposition.

That I doe not in the two sentences forenamed, Arist. deinter: lib 1. chap. 4. [...]. Ram. logi. l. 2. cha. 2. contra­dictio est quando idem axioma af­firmatur & ne­gatùr; deny and affirme one and the same sentence, or proposition is plaine because I doe not in one place deny, Christ hath not merited that faith should be our righteousnesse, and iustifie vs, and in ano­ther place say, Christ hath merited that faith shall be our righteousnesse, and iustifie vs, for I onely say, faith iustifies vs for the merit of Christ. So that the same Martin in Ram. logis. l. 2 c. 2. Diasceps. quando idem consequens de eodem antece­dente affirmatur & negatur. con­sequent not being affirmed and denied of the same Antecedent in both propositions, therefore can there be no contradiction betweene them, and consequently no lie, and therefore no periury.

But it may be the propositions in the seuerall bookes are the same in sense and effect, therefore if in one place I deny, that Christ hath merited that faith should iustifie vs, and in another place affirme as much in effect, then haue I contradicted, and consequently periured and lied,

I answere, I haue not in effect contra­dicted my selfe, first because iustification in the first sentence is taken for our being iustified formally, or for the nature and being thereof, and for that very thing, [Page] whereby man of a sinner is made iust, and in this sense it is true I neuer wrote that Christ hath merited that faith should be our righteousnesse and iustifie vs. In the latter sentence iustification is taken effici­ently, for our being iustified, as by an effi­cient cause, and in this sence I might true­ly say without contradiction to the for­mer, the act of faith doth iustifie vs, as the instrumentall efficient for the merit of Christ, viz. apprehended thereby, that is, faith as an instrument apprehends and ap­plies Chri [...]ts merits for our iustification by them, and in this sense I say, in my first Booke, Trial pag. 178. [...]in. 1. Faith iustifies vs, not as it is in vs: but as it rests on Christ, and in this sence speakes the Synod of Dort, faith iustifies in as much as it apprehends the merits of Christ. Synod of Dort in [...]ng. pa. 23. er. 4 For euen as if I say a spoone feedes a childe, my meaning is not, that the spone is the foode and nourishment of the child, but onely that it is the instrument, where­by the foode and nourishment is reached and conueied to the childe, and by which he receiues that food whereby he is nou­rished. Euen so when I say, Faith is our righteousnesse, and iustifies vs, I doe not meane that faith is that righteousnesse it selfe, by which we shall be presented and stand righteous before God in his sight, [Page] for that onely is the righteousnesse [...] Christ actiue and passiue, but that faith [...] the instrument whereby the righteous­nesse of Christ is reached and communi­cated vnto vs, and whereby I receiue it to my iustification. Of the manner of this participation and communion or imputa­tion I haue declared my minde fully and plainely in the Defence, Defence pa. 2 [...] to 30. to which I referre the Reader.

Secondly, I answere: In the first pro­position my meaning is, I neuer wrote; that the merit of Christ is communica­ted to faith, and that by communion there­in faith iustifies vs, (as the Papists speake of the merits of our workes, when they are dipt or died in Christs blood:) For then should faith either deserue, or be the iustice whereby of sinners wee are made righteous, both which are farre, and [...]uer were from my thoght (the Lord knowes.) And in the second sentence my meaning is, the merits of Christ come betweene our faith and iustification, not to giue ver­tue vnto faith to iustifie vs: but to leade vs vnto Christ by whose merit we may receiue that righteousnesse, whereby of sinners we are made iust; Triall pag. 199. and in this sense I say, in my first Booke, that faith iustifies vs rather then any other grace of God, [Page] namely because it makes vs goe out of our selues, to seeke to the all sufficiency, of the death and obedience of Christ, to rest and trust in him for iustification and saluation, Ser. of saluation [...] part the end. according to the Homily, as great and as godly a vertue as the liuely faith is, yet it putteth vs from it selfe, and remitteth or appointeth vs vnto Christ, for to haue onely by him remission of our sinnes, and iustification. So that our faith in Christ (as it were) saith vnto vs thus. It is not I that take away your sinnes, but it is Christ onely, and to him onely I send you for that purpose, forsaking therein all your good vertues, thoughts and workes, and onely put­ting your trust in Christ.

The second instance by which he as­sayes to argue me of periury, lying, and contradiction, is, in my second Book, I pro­test I neuer wrote in my first Booke, that faith is our righteousnesse, and yet in my first Booke I say, faith is our righteous­nesse.

I answere, that this doth not argue me of periury, lying, and contradiction, be­cause I doe not speake of faith being our righteousnesse in the same sense and respect in both, for in the first sentence righteous­nesse must be taken properly and for­mally for that very iustice, whereby [Page] men are made iust and righteous, as by a forme, and of sinners made righteous formally. And in the second sentence, righteousnesse is taken improperly for an attribute giuen to faith, and it is the same with obedience, which the Apostle Paule attributes to faith. Romans 16.26. (For beleeuing in Christ is obedience to that commandement of God, which bids vs beleeue in Christ, 1 Iohn 3.23. and not beleeuing in Christ, is disobedience Iohn 3.36.) and in this sense it is true, faith is our righteousnesse, Rom. 1.11. when it is wrought in vs, as well, as faith is ours, when it is wrought in vs. And when I say, faith is our righteousnesse, I doe not meane it is the righteousnesse, by which wee stand truely and formally righteous before GOD, and in which wee shall bee presented pure, and with­out spotte of sinne before Him, but in this sense, that it is all the righte­ousnesse and all the obedience, which GOD workes in vs and requires of vs, as an instrument apprehending, to make vs capable of Christs righteous­nesse. According to the Doctrine of our Church, Paul declareth here, (Rom. 3.25. Ser. of saluation part 1 toward the end.) nothing on the behalfe of man but onely a true and liuely faith.

Not that the act of faith is our formall righteousnesse, and iustifies vs meritori­ously for, or by any worthinesse inherent in it selfe, or infused thereunto by Christs merits, but that it is called righteousnesse in a borrowed sense, because it is only the instrument appointed by God, whereby we are to apprehend, and lay hold vpon Christs merits which are our righteous­nesse, and the onely meritorious cause of our iustification.

In the second accusation he doth argue me onely of lying and contradiction, which he indeauours to do by this, be­cause in my second booke, I say, my first Booke was not a Treatise of iustification, and yet in the Title of my second Booke I name my first Booke a Triall of Faith concerning iustification by faith, but this doth not argue me of lying and contra­diction which I thus declare. 1. because I do not entitle my first Booke a Triall of the Doctrine of iustification: but a Triall of Faith. 2. Forasmuch as faith is taken in Scripture in one sense, wherein we con­ceit [...] it not to iustifie, and in another wherein we conceiue it doth iustifie. To the end I might fully declare, that my in­tent was in my Booke to speake of the latter, not of the former, I added in the ti­tle [Page] of the second Booke these words, viz. concerning the Doctrine of iustification in Faith: So that the sentence, wherein hee supposeth the contradiction to bee hath this sense, the Triall of faith, viz. of that faith which concernes iustification by faith.

And that the latter words, viz. concer­ning the Doctrine of iustification by faith, do argue, that by Faith I meant iustifying faith, this Argument will shew.

That Faith which concernes the Do­ctrine of iustification by faith, is iustifying Faith, for no faith doth concerne that Doctrine but iustifying faith.

But the Faith whereof I wrote, doth concerne the Doctrine of iustification by faith, so saith the title of the second booke. Therefore the faith whereof I speake is a iustifying Faith.

If hee would argue me of lying and contradiction herein, it must be by such an Argument as this.

That booke which concernes the Do­ctrine of iustification by faith is a Treatise of iustification.

But my first booke concernes the Doctrine of iustification by faith, so faith my second Booke in the Title.

Therefore my first Booke is a Trea­tise [Page] of iustification.

To this I answere, iustification may be considered, either as it is explicated and treated of, by all the causes thereof, and all the arguments incident thereunto, or as it is considered onely in one cause concurring thereunto.

In the first sense, I grant the propositi­on to be true, viz. he that writes a booke of iustification and explicates it in that large manner, doth write a booke of iustifica­tion, but in this sense his assumption is false, for in the sentence he alleaged against me. I limit the Doctrine of my booke to speake concerning iustification by faith, that is, of iustification, so farre as it is by faith, and of faith so farre as it concernes iustification, which is to speake of iusti­fication as it depends vppon one cause, and of faith as it is one cause of iustifica­tion.

And so (I hope) I haue cleared it, to the iudgement of all indifferent and iudicious men, that I haue not deserued to be accused of periury, lying, and con­tradiction.

I should now proceede to say some­thing touching the last imputation obiec­ted against me in those papers; which is acquiuocation, but this will neede no an­swere, [Page] for who knowes not, that I am not a Iesuite, nor the sonne of a Iesuite, whose practise and Art it is. I haue so­lemly protested against it in my Defence, pag. 35. and I hope my carriage in my Ministery, and conuersation these twenty yeares in the City and Parish where I dwell, will suffiently purge me from the suspicion of it. In a word.

In morall Philosophy hee is sayd to speake truth, who speakes as he thinkes, though he thinkes not as the thing is, and in Logicke hee is accompted to speake truth, that speakes as the thing is, though he thinkes not as he speakes. But in Di­uinity there is required a d [...]uble conformi­ty and agreement, with truth of the thing and the truth of the thoght, and this I haue obserued in the Defence of my Doctrine touching iustifying faith. For writing the truth of the matter, I referred my selfe to the iudgement of the learned, by whom my Defence and Apology were approued, and for the writing the truth of my mea­ning, I appeale to the righteous Iudge of the whole world. It may be that the Lord will looke on my affliction, 2 Sam 6. [...] and that the Lord will requite good for his cursing this day.