CHAP. I.

THat which we have to doe in the Examination of this Preface is, to discover the errors of it, and to cleare up the truth against them. The errors wherewith it is fraught, are of two sorts, yet near a kin, and mutuall supporters each to o­ther; both very dangerous, and against the very heart of Christianity; Socinian, against the authority of the Scriptures; and Pelagian against the grace of God. According to our intention for the discovery and refutation of these, wee shall diligently insist upon those passages in this Preface, where those monsters appear, passing by, or lightly touching upon [Page 2] the rest, to avoid tediousnesse and impe­rtinency: And therefore, whereas we have four parts of this insuing Discourse, the first, his invitation to read his booke, the second, his motives therunto, the third a prevention of objections there-against, the fourth an Apolo­gy for his change of judgement, as he calls it. The first part, or his invitation we shall passe by (what ever observations might be made, shewing the spirit of the Authour) as but the sounding of his trumpet to bid battle to the truth. Upon the same account for his first motive to read his Booke, which is a long and plausible discourse against error in gene­rall; we shall not speake much to it; onely a word or two for caution about it. It is, though a discourse against error, yet itself very erroneous. 1. In the aime and tendency of it, which is insensibly and by covert insi­nuations, to instill those errours into the Rea­der, which afterwards are more openly con­tended for. 2. In the Contexture of it, which manifests together with his insuing discourse, what was the aime of it. To make this clear, we shall take notice of a passage or two in it, and then adde some thing afterwards exprest, which will satisfie, concerning the aime we speake of. 1. For the insinuation of his Soci­nian doctrine against the authority of the Scriptures, we have this expression from him; ‘That a man or woman, who have for ma­ny years profest the Gospell, may in processe of time come to discover vanity in some erroneous principle or tenet, where-with their judgements had been leavened, for some [Page 3] considerable space formerly, and so grow in­to a disapprobation or contempt of it; and yet may very possibly think and suppose, that the Gospell favours or countenanceth it, and that otherwise they should never have owned nor approved it.’ What Socinianisme is here vented, against the authority of the word of God, we shal shew hereafter; where we have occasion to insist against this error, and there­fore desire the Readers patience till he shall meet with it in due place.

2. For the insinuation of his Pelagianisme ex­alting the nature of man against the grace of God; generally his high declaiming against errour, as the onely cause of sinne, is se­cretly to undermine the doctrine of originall sinne, as to the corruption of the will. Parti­cularly, wee shall transcribe a passage or two wherein he so derives both our ignorance and sinfulnesse from errour, voluntarily by our selves, in our owne persons contracted, as thence hee evacuates the Scripture-doctrine concerning both our naturall blindnesse of mind, and corruption of will, to this purpose, he hath this passage, ‘That errour, and all mis-notions of God, &c. pollute, corrupt, and imbase the mind and understanding of a man, by their union, and communion with them; as a person of a noble house and blood, staines his honour, and reputation by couple­ing himselfe in marriage with a woman of base parentage and conditions.’This is a cleare insinuation, as if the understanding in the naturall man was in a state of great excel­lency and honour, contrary to the doctrine of [Page 4] originall sin concerning it, there is none that understands, &c. vaine man would faine bee wise, though he be borne like a wilde Asses Colt. But of this more hereafter; Another passage of like import, speaking of erroneous and lying ap­prehensions and conceites concerning God, he addes wherwith ‘men willingly suffer their mindes and consciences to bee imbased and corrupted even to a spirituall rottennesse and putrifaction. Againe, that errour disposeth the soule which drinkes it in, and converseth with it, to a spirituall death. ’In both which he supposeth nothing lesse, then that the soule is by originall sin, through the corruption of the will in a state of spirituall death, rottenesse and putrifaction.

And thus having shewed from his discourse it self his erroneous aim and insinuation accor­dingly. It is now time for me further to shew the same by what is afterwards exprest, as I promised, which I shal do by quoting his own words, which in the tenth page of this preface are these.

‘It is a thing as unquestionable, as that the Sun is up at noon-day, that Reason and Under­standing in men are competent to judge of the things of God, at least of some, yea, of ma­ny of them; or rather indeed of all that are contained in the Scriptures, according to the degree of their discovery and manifestation there:’And after some instances whereby he would confirm this doctrine, he comes to this conclusion pag. 11.

‘Therefore certainly those noble faculties and endowments of Reason & Understanding in [Page 5] men, as they are sustained, supported, and as­sisted (here are, as ever, words enough) by the spirit of God in the generality of men, are in a capacity of apprehending, discerning, un­derstanding (plenty of words still) the things of God in the Gospell; yea, and evi­dent it is from the Scriptures, that men act beneath themselves, are remisse and slothfull in awakening those principles of light and un­derstanding, that are vested in their natures, or else willingly choke, suppresse, and smo­ther them’(who may complaine for want of words, but this is his perpetual manner, which I shall not need after these hints to take much notice of) ‘if they remaine in the snare of unbeleefe. ’Then after a little more discourse he hath (with reference to a text of Scripture which wil not own his inference) these words; ‘Which clearly implyeth that men who act and quit themselves, according to the true principles of that reason, which God hath planted in them, cannot but beleeve and be partakers in the precious faith of the Gospell.’ To the same purpose in the fourth chapter of his book, pag. 41. He professeth his opinion, ‘That that life and salvation, which Christ in reality of designe, and with semblable accep­tance in the sight of God, had from the begin­ning purchased by his death for men; did, or doth (as it were) in the first breake, or dawn­ing of it, appear and discover it selfe in those principles of naturall light, reason, judge­ment, conscience, understanding, &c. which are found in the generality of men upon their coming into the world: Then he tells us, [Page 6] That men generally, as they grow up in the world, convert those principles of light and understanding to make provision for the lusts of the flesh; and that partly by an un-man­like ossitancy, partly out of an inordinate propenfity to comport with the world, they suffer their judgements and understandings to be corrupted, adulterated, imbased, and a­bused by many false and foolish Principles, and notions, which turne them quite a side from a regular and due prosecution of that life and salvation, which is in Christ for them, and might have been obtained by them; and that ignorance, or incapacity rather, of the things of eternal life which is in men, they have voluntarily contracted and brought up­on themselves.’ By this time, Reader, thou wilt discern something of the mystery of ini­quity lurking in this discourse of his against error; the refutation of what is here averred, we must defer a while, til we shall meet with it in its proper place, where, the Lord assisting, we are resolved to grapple close with Master Goodwin, and to make it (we hope) cleare as the Sunne, that he is not only a Teacher of falshood, but of the Pelagian Heresie; in the meane time we must follow him, as he goes on, and in the first place we shall finde him a Socinian.

CHAP. II.

THe second thing (▪good Reader) wherewith I desire to possesse and fill thee, judgement and [Page 7] conscience, heart and soule, and all that is with­in thee, to strengthen ttine hand to a diligent per­usall of the Treatise ensuing is, the high necessity that lyeth upon thee (as it doth upon all the world besides respectively) to awake, raise, and engage all those wor­thy faculties, and endowments which God hath vested in thee, reason, judgement, memory, understanding, about the things of thine eternall peace; and because this Iron I feare hath of late been much blunted with the earthly conceits, and suggestions of many, I am desirous to put so much the more strength to it; but to me it is the first borne of wonder and astonishment, that amongst men, professing the glorious Gospell of Christ, who is the wisdome of God; yea, amongst the Teachers themselves of this wisdome; men should be found, who thinke they doe God and men very good ser­vice, in perswading men wholly to lay aside their rea­sons, judgements, understandings in matters of Reli­gion, and not to make use of, or engage any of these in their enquiries after matters of a Spirituall, or super­naturall concernment; doubtlesse Satan is a debtor to those persons, who have seasoned the world with the unsavoury salt of such a Principle as this, for all the religious respects, and high entertainment, that have of late been given by many amongst us, to all those wicked, sencelesse, saplesse, hideous, and blasphemous Doctrines and Opinions, which like the dead Froggs of Aegypt make the Land to stinke; for if men may not interpose with their reasons, and judgements, to distinguish between Spirit and Spirit, Opinion and Opinion, why should not one Spirit be beleeved as well as another? and one Opinion received as well as ano­ther? or if the difference be not to be made by the interposure and exercise of reason in a man, I de­mand, by what other principle or meanes ought it to be [Page 8] made? If it be said partly by the Word of God, and partly by the Spirit of God. I answer;

Now he begins to come closer to his work, and by bolder steps then hitherto, moves on to the open venting of such Doctrines, as he durst but nibble at till now. In his first motive he hath made such a long discourse against Er­rours, as he begins to grow confident, that in the second, to which he is now come, he may broach errour without suspicion.

Here we have an hideous out-cry against such, as teach the laying aside of naturall rea­son, in enquiries about matters of Religion, and of a Let it be here obser­ved, that he useth Spi­rituall, and supernatu­rall for one and the same, which will be of use afterwards. spirituall and supernaturall concern­ment; and to make it sound the better, he tels us of such worthy faculties, reason, understan­ding, &c. in reference to these enquiries, as if he had never heard any thing of Originall sin, the blindnesse, darknesse, perversnesse, folly, bruitishnesse of the Naturall man; and then, as is the manner of all Seducers, and Here­tiques, he drawes his charge confused and in generall termes, and therein vents the bitter­nesse of his spirit to the full against all the Orthodox, that is generally, the Ancient Fa­thers, the School-men of best note after them; and in the last place the eminent Lights of the last Ages reformation, and of this present Ge­neration, these must be Factours for Satan, seasoners of the World with unsavoury salt, the abettors at least of all those borrid opini­ons, and blasphemies which have darkned our Land. What Jesuite hath a blacker mouth, or a stronger breath? But let us enquire into his [Page 9] Doctrine, and the mystery of deceit working in the bowels of it, and that by distinct pro­ceeding in particulars, which he hath fraudu­lently wrapt up together in generall.

1 Then it is true, that in some sence Reason is to be made use of in these enquiries of Reli­gion, and Spirituall concernments, as

1 Suppose an Heathen, not yet owning the true God, and his Word, he is by argu­ments propounded to his reason to be dealt with; by the Booke of the Creation to prove the one true God, as likewise by extrinsecall arguments to be drawne to read the Word of God, that by the word it selfe, as the Spirit shall please to enlighten by it, he may come to owne the Divine Canon, for the true word of the true God.

2 Granting the Scripture the un-erring Word of God, in whatsoever it shall deliver, we are diligently to employ our reason, in searching into the minde of God by the Scrip­tures, as our light to enlighten, and rule to direct our reason, as that word, which is able to make wise unto Salvation, and to make the man of God perfect, throughly furnisht to every good worke. And in two things here are our reasons to be exercised; 1. The Grammar of the Scriptures, or the formes of expression, to finde out the truth of them. 2. The Logick of the Scripture, or the true discourse thereof, and this in three things; the Scope, the Context, and Selfe-consent; Scripture compared with Scripture, the more obscure places interpreted by the clearer, and so in all the analogy of faith held. Now, Sir, [Page 10] you know very well that in this sence, and upon these termes, none of those, against whom you bend your stile, deny the use of reason, for they doe not teach that men in seeking into the meaning of the Scripture must become either fooles, or mad-men, or Enthusiasts. And was it in this sence only that you require the use of reason, or in any such sence as preserves the due authority of the Word, as for it selfe to be beleeved, as the perfect rule, you had never raised such Tragedies about the use of reason, or the laying it aside, as here you have; but we shall now passe to the enquiry, in what sence it is to be laid aside, and there I am af­fraid we shall finde you requiring the use of it, so as to evacuate the authority of the Word, therefore we say,

2. It is true, that in some sence man must lay aside his reason, in matters of religion, and in enquiries after matters of Spirituall, and su­pernaturall concernment; as,

1 That our assent to such truthes, as the Scriptures hold forth, may be the assent of Faith, the immediate ground of it must not be the Selfe-evidence of the thing testified by the Scriptures unto reason, but the authority of God testifying. Hence that knowne Doctrine of the Schooles, that the formall object (I like as well to say the proper ground) of faith is the first truth, or God himselfe revealing his minde. Hence suppose a truth taught in the Scripture is likewise demonstrated to my rea­son by Philosophicall arguments; (as for in­stance, That God created the world, that is, made it of nothing;) so farre is my assent to [Page 11] this truth, the assent of Divine faith, as it is grounded upon the authority of Divine testi­mony that assent which is grounded upon Phi­losophicall demonstration, is not Divine faith, but only Humane knowledge. He that trusts a man no further then he sees him (as we say Proverbially) trusts him not at all. Hence the Apostle, Through faith we understand Heb. 11. 3 that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seene were not made of things that doe appeare. It is only the Christian, sure, not the meere Philosopher, that by faith under­stands this, though haply both of them may understand it by demonstration, but the Chri­stian alone by Divine testimony for its owne authority assented to.

2 We may not oppose our naturall concep­tions to the Word of God, or make our ap­prehensions before-hand the rule of what we will receive, for the Word and revealed Will of God, and what we will reject; but what the Grammar, and Logick of the Word holds forth, must be the rule of our apprehensions, whether we can discerne how in reason the things affirmed should be, or not (we must not Afferre sensum Scripturae, but referre) otherwise we subject the authority of Gods Truth to our owne apprehensions, and beleeve him not, be­cause he hath said it, but because we by reason see it; neither shall we ever otherwise embrace the Word of God, for as much as the Word it selfe teacheth many things; 1. Above reason, Great is the mystery of godlinesse, saith the Apostle; yet it is no great mystery, if reason may comprehend it. What reason of men or [Page 12] Angels could ever have thought of such a thing, as the three Persons of the God-head, as the Personall union of God and Man in the Mediatour, the imputation of the Mediatours righteousnesse to beleevers; of Adams sinne to his Posterity, with many others? or who comprehends clearly these things, at least some of them, when revealed in the Word?

2 Many things against reason, that is, crosse to the apprehensions of corrupt reason, as it is now in all naturall men; The mind­ing of the flesh is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the Law of God, neither indeed can be. The naturall man receives not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishnesse unto him, neither can hee know them, because they are Spiritually discerned. (Your fruitlesse at­tempt to avoyd the strength of this text of Scripture, we shall consider in due place.) It is one vertue of the VVord preached, to cast downe the reasonings of the naturall man, 2 Cor. 10. 5. Many others of like import we shall have occasion afterwards to mention. On the one hand such is the blindnesse and wickednesse of man by Originall sinne, which are withall daily encreased by themselves and Satan; on the other hand, such is the myste­rious height, and transcendent purity of the Word of God, that mans reason must receive light from it, is not a light, otherwise then as enlightned by it, whereby to judge of it.

And as the truth we are now upon is evident by the Word, so is it by all experience; name me any one people, or any one person, since man was Created upon earth, that without the [Page 13] word or voyce of God for direction, by the light and ducture of reason, either worship­ped the true God, or did not fall upon a most abominable way of Worship, or light upon the Gospel-way of Salvation, to omit all o­ther deviations. Nay, you your selfe, who leane so much to your owne wisdome, and are so much in advancing the Rush-Candle of reason, against the Sun of the Scripture, are amongst others an evidence, even in this the Master-piece of your reason, the Treatise in hand, of the incompetency of mans reason not enlightened by the Word, through the Spirit, to judge of the things of the Spirit of God, whilst you fall so wretchedly foule upon the maine Doctrines of Predestination, Redemp­tion, Perseverance, &c.

Now if in this sence Mr. Goodwin acknow­ledged that reason is to be laid aside, why doth he raise a Controversie with those, who in the other sence, formerly specified, not only grant, but urge the use of it? But that Master Goodwin in this sence denies the laying it aside, and exalts it as the Judge of the VVord be­side, and above the word, seemes in the first place not obscurely insinuated, in the second place openly exprest, by some passages of his Pen.

For the first not obscurely insinuating it, what shal we say to that Doctrine of his, which he sayes is much to be observed, Pag. 5. of this Preface? That a man or woman, who have for many yeares profest the Gospel, may in processe of time come to discover vanity in some erroneous Principle, or Tenet, where­with ‘ [Page 14] their judgements have been leavened for some considerable space formerly, and so grow into a dis-approbation or contempt of it, and yet may very possibly think the Gos­pell favoureth, or countenanceth it, and that otherwise they should never have owned, nor approved it.’

Hence it appeares, that in your account er­rour may be discerned by reason, which yet shall be thought by the Gospell to be owned, so that the Gospell shall not be the rule by which to judge of truth and errour, but reason shall be the rule by which to judge, whether the Gospell it selfe (to wit, that sacred Writ which is received in the Church of God for the Gospell) be true or false. Then you goe on to the same purpose; ‘Now when a person shall be brought into the snare of such a con­ceit, or imagination as this, that the Gospell in some of the veins or carriages of it, teach­eth, or asserteth things that are vaine.’But be­fore you goe any further (allowing the Di­vine authority of the Gospell) it is unpossible that such a conceit should have place, that the Gospell in any of the veines or carriages of it should assert any thing that is vaine. He goes on; ‘Or if no good consistency with reason or truth; ’here is your rule, to judge of any opi­nion in matters of Faith, and that whereby the Gospell it selfe must be called to an ac­count, the consistency or inconsistency of it with reason; so farre it must be truth, as vaine mans blind reason judgeth it consistent with it selfe. You conclude, He is in a ready posture to throw from his soule all credence of the [Page 15] Divine authority of the Gospell, and to e­steeme it no better then a Fable devised by men; so farre then as you comprehend by reason, the things taught in the Gospell, to be agreeable to reason, neither above it, nor crosse thereto, so farre you will embrace the Gospell; if any thing you finde in it other­wise, you are in a ready posture to esteeme it no better then a Fable: I doubt you are so in­deed by your discourse here, and other-where, for most certaine it is, that there are many things in the Gospell both above your reason, and crosse to it.

But Sir, allowing the divine authority of the Gospell, It is impossible that any man should discover an errour in matter of faith, and religion, but he therein discernes it to be dis-owned and condemned by the Gospell, and the Gospell it selfe was the rule and the light whereby he discovered it; and the fruit of his discovery will not be (as you reason here) the blame of the Gospell, but of his owne former ignorance of the Gospell. But if here you have not spoken openly enough, you have discove­red your selfe fully, pag. 335. of your booke, where disputing against a maine Gospel-truth, namely, the unchangeable love of God to the Saints, your words are these. ‘Besides whe­ther any such assurance of the unchangeable­nesse of the love of God, to him that is godly, as the objection speaks of, can be effectually and upon sufficient grounds given unto men is very questionable;’yea, I conceive there is more reason to judge otherwise then so. But let us hear what you say next; Yea, (that which is [Page 16] more, it is indeedmore then enough) I verily be­leeve that in case any such assurance of the un­changeablenesse of Gods love were to be found in, or could regularly bee deduced from the Scriptures, it were a just ground to any intel­ligent and considering man to question their authority, and whether they were from God or no. Now have you spoken out; evident it is, as the light of the sunne, that you make mans reason (blind and corrupt as it is) a rule above the Scriptures, whereby to try them, and the only touch-stone of them; for that which may be found in, or regularly deduced from the Scriptures, must needs be the voyce of the Scripture in concordance with it self, by what rule now shall we question it, but that of our reason, as above it?

Now Sir, you must give me leave to tell you that your owne pen hath proclaimed you a ve­ry Socinian. And now let us see, whether this conclusion leads, even to the utter overthrow of the Scriptures: By the same reason that you may question this doctrine, found in, or regu­larly deduced from the Scriptures, you may question any other, and the authority of the Scriptures thereupon; a ready way for all He­reticks and erroneous Teachers. The Papists may question the authority of the Scripture, if Gods hatred against Image-worship, may bee found in, or regularly deduced from the Scrip­tures; you may question the authority of Scriptures, if holinesse of life, or whatsoever o­ther truth (as wel one as another) may be found in, or regularly deduced from them. Let me ad­vise you a more compendious way to maintain [Page 17] your errours against personall election, and re­probation, against the dominion of God there­in exprest, against the confinement of redemp­tion to the elect, against the perseverance of the Saints, against the efficacious influence of grace upon the will of man; and even this er­rour concerning the light and ability of the naturall man, for discerning and applying the things of the spirit of God, held forth in the Gospell; trouble not your selfe to torture the Scriptures, that they may seeme to witnesse for you; but for as much as they speake so much against you, question their authority, and whether they be from God, or not. And why should you not doe as your elder brethren of the Socinian-family have done before you? Let us first see their doctrines, as like to yours, as one egge is like another, what saith Smalcius? It is certaine, that whatsoever is contrary to reason, is neither extant in the holy Scriptures, neither can it be gathered from them, De Chri­sto vero & naturali Dei filio, C. 6. What saith O­storodius, another head of that Tribe? If rea­son or understanding expresly prove the Trini­ty of persons in God to be false, how may it come into the minde of any man, right in his wits, that yet notwithstanding it is true, and may be proved by the Word of God? Now adde Mr. Goodwins doctrine, and see if it speak not the same language. I verily beleeve (by the Secinian not Apostolicall faith) that in case any such assurance of the unchangeablenes of Gods love, was to be found in, or could regularly be deduced from the Scriptures, it was a just ground to any intelligent and considering man, to que­stion [Page 18] their authority, and whether they were from God or no? These doctrines, plainly allow not the Scripture in the Grammar and Logique of it, the rule and light to guide and conclude mans reason; but exalt the reason of man, as judge above it; whence, whatsoever Article of faith they dispute about, nothing is more usuall with them then this objection, this or that is false, because contrary to rea­son.

We have now seen their doctrines, let us see their deductions, which likewise must be yours, your doctrine being the same. Hence they proceed to deny many Articles of the faith, be­cause contrary to reason, at least in their ap­prehensions. The Racovian Catechisme, the bo­dy of their Theology, or Heresie rather, re­jects the doctrine of the three persons in one essence, p. 49. the two natures in the one person of Christ, pag. 55. Danies that Christ by his death satisfied for us, and merited eternall life for us, pag. 261. And all, because these are con­trary, say they, to right reason. Smalcius a­gainst Franzius opposeth Originall sinne, be­cause (if he say true) it is utterly contrary to reason, that an innocent person by once sin­ning should infect all his posterity. These for a touch of your Doctrine, and whither it leads.

CHAP. III.

COncerning the Word of God, it is to be acknow­ledged, that this is to be in speciall manner inte­ressed [Page 19] in all our dijudications between Doctrine and Doctrine, Opinion and Opinion, in matter of Reli­gion.

Why doe you not acknowledge it the per­fect rule?

And that this is the fire which must try every mans worke of what sort it is, and must separate the vil [...] from the precious.

Doe not you sit then as a Refiner by fire, of this fire it selfe, by your reason, so as to reject any thing that may be found in the Scripture, or regularly deduced there-from?

But as the Plummet and Rule doe not measure the worke of the Architect, or discover whether it be true and square, or otherwise of, and by themselves, but as they are regularly applyed hereunto, either by the Work­man himselfe, or some other, capable of making such an application; however true it may be that a sufficient test or proofe of the worke cannot be made without the use of the Plummet and Rule about it. In like man­ner, though the Word of God be of soveraigne use and necessity for the measuring of Opinions and Doctrines, and for the discovery of what is straight, and what crooked in them, yet he that desires to reap the Spiri­tuall benefit, and advantage of the usefulnesse of it in this kind; must first understand the minde and sence of God in it aright; and secondly, Be dextrous, and expert in making a due application of it, being rightly understood, to the Doctrines, or Opinions, the sound­nesse or unsoundnesse whereof he desires to understand by it.

[Page 20]

To what end are these waste words? 1. The Scripture is the rule, and reason is the eye; but as the Scripture is the rule, so is it the light too, by which this eye must be enlightened, o­therwise it is too darke to apply this rule. It is by the Scriptures that a right understanding is had of them, and a dextrous faculty for ap­plying them, they being the meanes by the Holy Ghost appointed, and sanctified, for en­lightening and sanctifying the reason of man. The Scripture is not only a rule for tryall, a [...] is that of the Architect, but for instructing too; it is such a rule, as gives rules for instru­cting and directing in all matters of Religion, and even for the use of it selfe, as a rule; and indeed that you may the lesse wonder hereat, all Arts are such rules, as give rules for under­standing themselves.

Suppose this Geometricall question was to be debated', whither in a right angled Tri­angle the square of the Hypolemise be equall to the square of the sides? I thinke you will grant, that we must fetch the demonstration from Geometry it selfe, and the demonstrati­on must conclude us; we must not say, though this proposition be demonstratively concluded in Geometry, yet we will question it, only in­deed here is the difference; A Geometricall demonstration renders the conclusion not on­ly agreeable to Principles, and former propo­sitions in Geometry, by which it is demonstra­ted, but withall cleare to reason; but the con­clusion of a Divine truth by Scripture is many times obscure to reason, though clearly agree­able [Page 21] to Principles, and other Doctrines in Scripture, because even those Principles and Doctrines proving it, are to mans reason▪ not for want of light in them, but through the blindnesse of it obscure. Yet shall reason see the legitimacy of the proofe, from Principles and Doctrines, in Scripture laid downe, when it hath very obscure apprehensions, both of the thing contained in the conclusion, and the things contained in the Principles and Do­ctrines proving it; these things faith belee­ving upon the authority of the word affirm­ing. 2. You deale with the Scriptures, as he, that because the rule and plummet doth not verifie the judgement, which he made by his eye at a guesse, he will therefore by his eye question the rule and plummet themselves; whilst you take liberty to question the authori­ty of the Scriptures, and whether they be from God or not, upon supposall of some­thing found in them, or regularly deduced from them, which relisheth not with your reason.

For first, it is not the letter, or forme of words, as separated, or considered apart from the spirit, notion, or sence of them, that is the touch-stone, or rule of tri­all for Doctrines, yea, the letter and words are only servants to the sence and notion, which they containe and exhibit, and were principally, if not only, delivered by the Holy Ghost unto men for this end, that by them the sence, minde, and Counsell of God in all the parti­culari [...]ies of them, which are held forth in the Scrip­tures, might be communicated and conveyed to the rea­sons and understandings of men; so that in case a man had the sence and minde of God upon the same termes [Page 22] of certainty & of knowledge, without the letter on which he hath it, or may have it by meanes of the letter, he should be as richly, as compleatly qualified, hereby to discerne between Doctrines, as he now can be by the op­portunity and advantage of the letter.

Words to no purpose still; 1. If the Letter and words of the Scripture be servants to the Sence and Notion, and so forth, as you de­clare, then is not that sence, which the letter and words exhibit (that is, the Grammar of the Scripture) in conjunction with the scope, context, and concordance thereof, that is, with the Logick of the Scripture, by mans rea­son to be questioned, but reason is to be cap­tivate to the authority thereof. 2. I hope you doe not thinke of any way for obtaining the sence and minde of God, otherwise then by the letter; if an Angel from Heaven should preach any other Doctrine, let him be accurst.

Now if the Scriptures themselves be upon no other termes, nor in any other case serviceable, or usefull unto men, for the tryall of Doctrines and Opinions, but only as and when they are clearly understood by them, it clearly followes, that whatsoever is requi­site and necessary to bring men to a true understanding of the Scriptures, is of equall necessity for the distin­guishing of Doctrines, and to interpose, or be made use of in all affaires and concernments in Religion; if then the reasons, judgements, and understandings of men must of necessity interpose, act, argue, debate, and consider before the true sence and minde of God in any Scripture can be duly apprehended, understood, and beleeved by men, it is a plaine case that these are to be [Page 23] used, and to be interessed in whatsoever is of any reli­gious consequence, or concernment to us. That the minde of God in the Scriptures cannot be duly appre­hended, received, or beleeved by men, but by the acting and working of their reasons, mindes, and understan­dings, in order hereunto, is evident from hence, viz. because the minde of God cannot be thus apprehended, or beleeved by men, but by meanes of an intellectuall or rationall difference tasted, or resented by them, be­tween this minde of his, and all other mindes, mea­nings, or sences whatsoever, that may be supposed to re­side, or be in the words.

If you was not a man, whose eare is chain'd to the musicke of his owne Tongue, you might spare the greatest part of your words, and yet speake as much as you doe. In what sence Rea­son is to be used, in what sence to be laid aside, we have seene already, as likewise the use and necessity of the Word of God, for begetting in mans understanding that intellectuall, or ratio­nall difference tasted, or resented by him which you speake of, the Word being the rule and light to the understanding, as to mat­ters of religion.

For example, If there be another sence to be given of such, or such a passage of Scripture, either contrary unto, or differing from that, which I conceive to be the minde of God here, which hath the same rationall, or intellectuall savour and taste with this, that is, which as well suits with the words, agrees with the Context, falls in with the scope and subject matter in hand, is as accordable with Scripture-assertion else­where, co [...]ports as clearly with the unquestionable [Page 24] Principles of reason, and the like; how is it possible for me in this case to conceive or beleeve, especially with the certainty of faith, that my sence is the minde of God, and consequently the true sence of that place, rather then that other, which hath all the same Chara­cters, Symptomes, and Arguments of being the minde of God, which none hath, therefore it must needs be by the exercise and acting of my reason and understan­ding, and by the report which they make of their disco­veries in their enquiries, that I come regularly to con­clude, and to be satisfied, that this is the minde of God in such or such a Scripture, and none other.

1 In our enquiries into the true meaning of any text of Scripture, the word it selfe by the formes of expression, scope, context, and a­greement with Scripture-assertion elsewhere, is our Card, and compasse, by which reason is to steere her enquiry, not reason the Judge a­bove, or against the word.

2 Such an example doe you here give, and so doe you state it, as it labours of a most evi­dent contradiction. For how is it possible that two different, much lesse contrary sences, should have▪ the same intellectuall taste, or sa­vour, should as well suit with the words, a­gree with the context, and have those other Characters, which you name, one as another? Secondly, suppose such a thing possible, how is it yet possible that reason should determine which is the true sence? If both sences have both Scripture and reason equally for them, as is here supposed, whence shall reason frame a judgement for this rather then that, or for that rather then this? I beleeve you made great [Page 25] haste, when you made so little speed. One thing further let me minde you of, that wher­as you begin with intellectual savour and taste, and conclude with the unquestionable princi­ples of reason, you might in both have spared your paines, for where the other Characters are found, they will conclude the sence, and if reason shall discerne them, she must needs see there is reason to conclude with them.

If it be here objected, and demanded; But is it meet, or tolerable, that the reason of man should judge in the things of God? or that the understandings of men should umpire, and determine in his affaires? I answer;

1 If God pleaseth to impart his minde, and Coun­sels in his Word and writing unto men, with an in­junction, and charge, that they receive and owne them, as from him, and that they take heed they doe not mistake him, or embrace either their owne conceits, or the mindes of others, in stead of his, in this case for men to put a difference by way of judging and discer­ning between the minde of God, and that which is not his minde, is so farre from being an act of Autho­rity, Presumption, or unseemly Vsurpation in men, that it is a fruit of their deep loyalty, submission, and obedience unto God. When Christ enjoyned the Disci­ples of the Pharisees, and the Herodians, to render unto Caesar the things which are Caesars, and unto God the things which are Gods; he did not only give them a warrant, and Commission to judge and determine what, and which were the things of God, as well as which were the things of Caesar, but laid a charge upon them also, to put this warrant in execution; and this not only by judging actually which [Page 26] were the things of God, but by practising and acting also, upon and according to this judgement.

2 To judge of God, and of the things of God, in the sence we now speake, is but to acknowledge, owne, and receive God, and the things of God, in their tran­scendent excellency, goodnesse, and truth, and as dif­ferenced in their perfections respectively, from all o­ther beings and things; the poorest and meanest sub­ject that is may lawfully, and without any just offence, judge his Prince, yea, or him that is made a lawfull Iudge over him, to be wise, just, bountifull, &c. at lest when there is sufficient ground for it.

Here according to your manner, you spin out your discourse by triviall Objections, and Answers; for your answer it is true, allow­ing the Scripture the honour to guide and re­ctifie reason by her assertions, and by her au­thority to conclude it: but both the Ob­jection and Answer tedious, because imper­tinent.

If it be yet further demanded; But is the reason or understanding of man competent to judge the things of God, as (for example) to determine, and conclude what is the minde of God in such or such a passage of Scripture, or in such and such a case? Doth not the Scripture speake of men in their naturall condition, calling them darknesse? affirming likewise, That the light shineth in darknesse, and the darknesse comprehendeth it not? and elsewhere doth it not informe us, that the naturall man perceiveth (or receiveth) not the things of the Spirit of God, because they are foolishnesse unto him? nei­ther can he know them, because they are spi­ritually [Page 27] discerned? And how many Heathen Phi­losophers, Hereticks, and others undertaking to judge of the things of God in the Gospell, by the light and strength of their owne reasons, and understandings, have miscarried, to the everlasting perdition of their owne soules, and as is much to be feared, of many o­thers also? to all this I answer by degrees.

More spinning still; He that hath an opi­nion to broach that may not abide the light, must not presently lay it downe in termes, but by winding discourses and fetches about usher it in. Master Goodwin is no Novice at this Arti­fice. Hence we had before such a long and plausible discourse against Errour in generall, wherein were couched many insinuations a­gainst the darknesse and impotency of the na­turall mans understanding; then a confused and cl [...]morous Discourse about the necessity, interest, and use of reason in matters of Reli­gion, and of a Spirituall or supernaturall con­cernment, till at last he came boldly up to vent his Socinian Errour. After which againe, no little impertinent objecting and answering, and having by this time, as he hopes, discom­posed the judgement, and scattered the inten­tion of his Reader, he is now hastening to speak out, what he durst but mutter all this while, and make for at a distance, by way of glancing, rather then asserting his Pelagian Doctrine, for which even his Socinian Doctrine hath been making way, and must still be employed in this service. And now good Reader, we are approaching that corrupt Tenet of his, which we gave notice of at the end of his Discourse [Page 28] against Errour, and which we then promised to call to account in its proper place.

CHAP. IV.

IT is a thing as unquestionable, as that the Sunne is up at noon day, that reason and understanding in men are competent to judge of the things of God, at lest of some, yea, of many of them, or rather indeed of all that are contained in the Scriptures, according to their degree of discovery and manifestation there; for doth not God himselfe owne them in this capacity, when he appeales, and referres himselfe unto them in seve­rall of his great and important affaires, authorizing them to judge in the case between him and his adver­saries? And now O inhabitants of Ierusalem, and men of Iudah, judge I pray you betwixt me and my Vine-yard, what could have been done more to my Vine-yard, that I have not done in it. So againe, Heare now O house of Israel, are not my wayes equall? are not your wayes unequall? In these and such like appeales, [...]e supposeth the persons appealed unto to be as capable, or (however as well capable, of the equity and righte­ousnesse of his wayes (and consequently to be in a re­gular capacity of justifying him) as of the unworthi­nesse, and unrighteousnesse of their wayes against whom he standeth in the contest. So our Saviour, to the chiefe Priests and Elders in his Parable, When the Lord therefore of the Vine-yard cometh, what will he (or rather, what shall he) doe un­to those Husband-men? they say unto him, he will miserably destroy those Husband-men, and let out his Vine-yard unto others, who [Page 29] shall render him the fruits in their season; We see these Priests and Elders, though men of great un­worthinesse otherwise, and farre from beleeving in Christ, were yet able to award a righteous judgement, and such as our Saviour himselfe approved, yea, and put in execution not long after, between him and his Hus­band-men; so in another place to the Hypocriticall Iewes, Yee Hypocrites, yee can discerne the face of the skie, and of the earth, but how is it that yee doe not discerne this time? yea, and why even of (or from) your selves judge yee not what is right? in which passage (amongst other things) be clearly implyeth these two.

1 That had they set their mindes upon things that most concerned them, they were in a sufficient capacity, by the direction and help of those Characters and Signes, which their owne Prophets had long before de­livered, clearly to have discerned, that the dayes and times in which they now lived, were indeed the dayes of their Messiah.

2 That [...] from themselves, that is, out of naturall and inbred Principles, whereby they were enabled to judge of things commodious, and expedient for them in like cases, they were in a capacity to have come to this issue and conclusion; That it was now high time to comprimise that great and weighty controversie, which had of a long time been depending between God and them, by Repentance. The Apostle Paul willeth the Corinthians in one place to judge what he saith; in another, he directeth, That in their Church­meetings the Prophets should speake, two or three, and that the rest should judge; in both which places [...]e clearly supposeth in them a competency of Iudicature, or discerning about spirituall things. And when in his defence before Agrippa, be de­mands [Page 30] of him, and the rest that were present, Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead? he clear­ly supposeth, that the Resurrection it selfe of the dead, which yet is one of the great and deep Mysteries of the Gospell, was nothing, but what they consulting with the light of reason, and understanding in themselves, (for they were not supernaturally enlightned) might judge probable enough, and no way unlike to be effe­cted. When God commands, and cals upon all men eve­ry where to repent (and so to beleeve) he must either suppose them in a capacity to distinguish, and discerne between the things, whereof he would have them re­pent, and so between what he would have them to be­leeve, and what not; or else speake unto them as no otherwise capable of such his Commands, then the stones in the earth, or Beasts of the field; and how then is the Commandement holy, just, and good? therefore certainly those noble faculties, and endow­ments of reason, and understanding in men, as they are sustained, supported, and assisted by the Spirit of God in the generality of men, are in a capacity of apprehen­ding, discerning, and understanding the things of God in the Gospel.

We have here an Answer to the Objection, first begun with an hardy and venturous asser­tion, with great confidence set off, that the naturall man may discerne of all the Truthes of God contained in the Scriptures, accor­ding to their degree of discovery, and mani­festation there, that is, according as they are more or lesse clearly laid downe there; That it is affirmed here of naturall men, is evident both from the Objection it selfe, and the An­swer [Page 31] in divers passages of it. Secondly, This assertion endeavoured to be proved by severall instances, but neither any of them, nor all toge­ther reach the proofe, there being nothing at all in them thus applyed, but meere fallacies.

1 From the part to the whole; Suppose these instances were obvious enough to the Na­turall man, it doth not therefore follow that he can discerne all Scripture-truthes, this is too slender an induction of particulars to prove the generall; And as all of them toge­ther labour of this fallacy,, so the last instance particularly. Suppose the naturall man may discerne some things to be beleeved, and re­pented of, it doth not thence follow, that he may discerne all things of that kinde.

2 From unequals, as if equals; 1. The Naturall man hath light to discerne some par­ticulars of the Law of God unto Conviction, yet in divers cases this light is very glimme­ting, and vanishing; it doth not hence follow that he hath light to discerne all the Mysteri­ous truthes of the Gospel. Instances belonging to the Law are, the first, second, and third. 2 By Naturall light may in divers cases a Pro­phecy fulfilled be discerned, comparing the e­vent with the Prediction of it. Thus in the fourth instance might the dayes of the Messiah have been discerned by the Iewes, who owned, and conversed with those Prophesies, which fore-told them, and that being discerned, a granted duty likewise, depending on it, must needs be discerned, as that the Messiah was to be embraced, and sins to be repented of; but neither doth it hence follow, that all Gospel [Page 32] Mysteries might be discerned: as for your ob­servation [...] the meaning may very well be, why not without a Monitor? 3. Sup­pose by Naturall light the Omnipotency of God may be discerned, and thence the possibi­lity of the Resurrection of the dead (for that is it the Apostle urgeth;) why should it be incre­dible to men, as though impossible with God? Still will it not hence follow, that more Myste­rious Gospel truthes may be discerned, though many Attributes of the Divine Nature may in some measure be discerned by Naturall light, and workes thereon depending; yet doth it no wise hence follow, that therefore all Gos­pell truthes are discernable; of this kinde is the fifth Instance, there being a great disparity betwixt these and those.

3 From the Argument to the Question, this in the fourth Instance, the Question to be pro­ved is of Naturall men, the instance here for proofe of it is of the Saints; an Argument al­together impertinent. Ignoratio Elenchi.

4 From the Object: The Command of God, to the Adjunct related to it, mans abi­lity for discerning it, the Command, or Ex­postulation aequivalent: Why doe yee not discerne? and why of your selves doe yee not judge? and when God cals men to beleeve, and repent, he must suppose them in a capacity to distinguish and discerne betwixt the things, &c. For an­swer hereto from the command of discerning, to the power of discerning, there is no conse­quence, except God who commands, give that power, man commanded cannot understand many maine things; otherwise why doth David [Page 33] pray so earnestly, that God would open his eyes, that he may behold the wonderfull things of his Law▪ Psal. 119. ver. 18. That he would give him understanding, that he might keep his Law, ver. 34? Why doth the Apostle pray for the Ephesians, That God would give unto them the spirit of Wisdome, and revelation in the knowledge of Christ, that the eyes of their understanding being enlightened, [...]ey might know what is the hope of his calling, 1 Ephes. 17, 18? Why doth the same Apostle teach, That the Naturall man cannot know the things of the Spirit of God? adding the reason, because they are spiri­tually discerned; If the Naturall man can dis­cerne all the truthes of God, all Gospel My­steries. In a word, to argue from the com­mand in generall, to ability for performance in things of Spirituall nature is an old Pelagian errour; the Lord commands the Iewes to make to themselves new hearts, but otherwhere he declares himselfe the Maker thereof; to cir­cumcise their hearts, but otherwhere it is his promise to doe it. Christ commands the Iewes to beleeve on the light, Iohn 12. 36, yet could they not, as being hardned, and of whom it was long since Prophesied that they should not 39, 40. A thousand instances might be given to confirme this truth: but we shall have more occasion afterwards; in the meanetime, when the Pelagians were thus wont to argue, from the command to the power, as Austine every where refutes them, by the promise of God to worke in the Elect by peculiar grace, what he requires, and by the prayers of the Saints, and by their thanksgivings, and the like; so he layes downe this generall conclusion. Nothing [Page 34] doe I see in the Holy Scriptures commanded by the Lord to man, for the proving of his free will, which may not be found either to be given of his goodnesse, or to be desired, for manifesting the ayde of Grace, Lib. 2. contra d [...] ­as, Episto. Pelag. c. 10. And in his Book, De cor­rep. & gratia, c. 2. Against that Pelagian cla­mour, why are we commanded to turne from evill and doe good, if we doe it not? but God workes in us both to will, and to doe: he answers; Let the Sonnes of God know, that they are acted by the Spirit of God, to act what is to be acted, and when they have acted it, to him let them give thankes, by whom they were act­ed, for they are acted that they may act, not that they may act nothing, and this is shewed to them, what they ought to act, that when they have acted, as they ought to act, that is, with love, and with the delight of righteous­nesse, they may rejoyce to have received that sweetnesse, which the Lord hath given, that the earth might bring forth her fruit; but when they act not, whether by not doing at all, or by not doing out of love, let them pray that they may receive what yet they have not, For what shall they have that they shall not receive, or what have they that they have not received? A little af­ter, Cap. 3. he concludes, that in the command man is to take notice what he ought to have in the reproofe, that it is his owne fault that he hath it not, in prayer, whence he is to re­ceive what he would have.

5 From Disparates, as one and the same, he affirmes such a knowledge in the power of the Naturall man, as whence he may repent [Page 35] and beleeve, nay must, for thus he inferres; that men, who act and quit themselves accor­ding to the true Principles of that reason, which God hath planted in them, cannot but beleeve, and be partakers of the precious faith of the Gospel; and repentance he requires be­fore faith, as is evident in that passage of his, God cals upon all men every where to repent, and so to beleeve; if they cannot but beleeve, and that they may beleeve they must repent; then from this knowledge in the Naturall mans power, both faith and repentance necessarily ensue. That this knowledge is in the power of the Naturall man, according to his Doctrine, is evident, because the Objection and Answer is about the Naturall man, whence he inferres this conclusion.

Now for answer, here is the fallacy, he con­founds that knowledge which may be in the Naturall man, with that which cannot be but in the Spirituall.

There is a two-fold knowledge about Spi­rituall things: The

• 1 Naturall.
• 2 Spirituall.

The former Historical, or of Logical apprehen­sion of Propositions rather then of things; or of Propositions only distinctly, of things con­tained in the Propositions confusedly, and afar off; as when a man reads an History of persons, places, &c. but sees them not with his eye.

The latter Iniuitivè, or of Spirituall Vision, the things themselves in the light of the Spirit, beheld, as it were by Vision, distinctly, and at hand; the former like that knowledge which [Page 36] the Queene of Sheba had of Salomon in her own Country, only by heare-say; the latter, like that which she had of him at Ierusalem, by the sight of her eyes, 1. King. 10. 4, 5, 6, 7. then she beleeved, then she admired, not till then. This is the knowledge, whence springs faith, and repentance, and this is peculiar to the Saints, 1 Ephes. 17, 18. 1 Cor. 2. 9, 10, 11, 12. Mat. 16. 17.

CHAP. V.

YEa, and evident it is from the Scriptures, that men act beneath themselves, are remisse, and slothfull in awaking those Principles of light and under­standing, that are vested in their natures, or else willingly choake, suppresse, and smother them, if they remaine in the snare of unbeleefe; Pray for us, (saith Paul so the Thessalonians) that we may be delivered from unreasonable and evill men, for all men have not faith. By unreasonable (or as the word signifyeth absurd) and evill men, he plainly meaneth, not men who naturally, or in actu primo were unrea­sonable, such as those, were not like to endanger him, or to obstruct the course of the Gospel; but such as were unreasonable, Actu secundo (that is) persons who acted contrary to the light and principles of reason, and hereby became [...], industriously evill, or wicked; that there were such persons as these abroad in the world, he gives this account, For all men have not faith; which clearly implyeth, that men who act, and quit themselves according to the true Principles of that reason, which God hath planted in them, cannot but be­leeve, and be partakers of the precious faith of the [Page 37] Gospel. To this purpose that passage in Chrysostome is memorably worthy; As to beleeve (the Gospel) is the part of a raised, and nobly ingenuous soule; so (on the contrary) not to beleeve is the property of a soule most unreasonable, and unworthy, and depressed, (or bowed downe) so the so [...]ishnesse of bruit beasts.

Reader, here we must grapple close with him; observe in his owne words what here he saith about the understanding of the Naturall man, and his power to make use of it for re­penting, and beleeving: now one of these two he must needs affirme, either that he may so use his naturall understanding, as thence, with­out any peculiar and higher worke of the Spi­rit of God, he may repent, and beleeve, or ra­ther he must; or else upon such use of it, as he may make, he shall certainly receive such a worke of the Spirit upon his soule, as thence not only may, but must faith and repentance be produced: whether of these he affirmes, I charge it with 1. Evident falshood, 2. With Pelagianisme.

First, for the falshood of both these I shall use only foure Arguments to evince it.

I.

From the doctrine of Naturall corruption.

If we be not sufficient of our selves, as of our selves, to thinke a good thought; If there be none in the state of naturall corruption that understands, that seekes after God; If that that is borne of the flesh be flesh; If in this flesh there dwels no good thing; If the naturall man receives not the things of the Spirit of God, but they are foolishnesse unto him, neither can [Page 38] know them, because they are Spiritually discer­ned; If the flesh, and the lustings thereof be con­trary to the Spirit, and the lustings thereof; If in the regenerate with the flesh, the Law of sinne is served in opposition to the minde, ser­ving the Law of God; If vaine man though he would faine be wise, yet is borne like a wilde Asses Colt; If the naturall man be dead in trespasses and sins; If he be darknesse; If the minding of the flesh be enmity against God; If it be not subject to the Law of God, neither can be, so that they that are in the flesh cannot please God; then in neither of those sences is faith and repentance in the Naturall mans power.

But the Antecedent, or the former is true.

Therefore the Consequent, or the latter.

As for those frivolous exceptions, which you have against some of these particulars con­cerning naturall corruption, we shall blow them away when we come to them, for they are light chaffe.

II.

From the Doctrine of the Naturall mans subjection to Satan.

If Satan be the Prince of the world, the god of the world; If the course of the world in the lusts of the flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh, be according to the Prince of the power of the Aire, the spirit that workes effectually in the children of disobedience; If Satan, the strong man, have such possession of the Natu­rall man, as without the peculiar worke of the Holy Ghost, as the stronger, he cannot be dis­possest.

[Page 39] Then is not repentance, and faith, in either of the two named sences in the power of the naturall man.

But the former is true.

Therefore the latter.

III.

From the subjection of the Naturall man to the Law, as the Covenant of Workes.

If in this estate of naturall corruption and subjection to the Devill therein, all Naturall men be under the Law, as the Covenant of Workes, and the Law only reveales sinne, and wrath, stirres up and increaseth finne, but gives no strength against it; When we were in the flesh, the motions of sinne, which were by the Law, did worke in our members, Rom. 7. 5. Sin tooke occasion by the Commandement, and wrought in me all manner of concupiscence, ver. 11.

Then as formerly.

But the former is here true likewise.

Therefore the latter.

IV.

From the Doctrine of Regeneration.

If Regeneration be (as the word sounds) a New Birth, a birth of the Spirit, in oppositi­on to the naturall Birth, as the birth of the Flesh; a birth not of bloud, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God; a quickning of such as were dead in trespasses and sins; a resurrection from the dead, a new creation; If none can come unto Christ ex­cept drawne of the Father; If not of workes that we have done, but of his owne grace; If not of him that wils, nor of him that runs, but of God who sheweth mercy; If a calling out of darknesse; If [Page 40] translating from the power of darknesse, a taking away the heart of stone, and giving a [...] heart of flesh. Then as formerly.

But the former is true.

Therefore the latter.

Further consideration of the falshood of this Doctrine we shall have in that which followes, shewing the Pelagianisme of it.

CHAP. VI. Now for the Pelagianisme of this Doctrine.

1 SUppose it acknowledge no supernaturall grace, (and therefore no grace) but only toying with the word Grace, ascribes saving vertues and operations to Nature, and an assist­ance from God, proportion'd and attem­per'd to the heedfull exercise and improve­ment of naturall abilities, then is it evidently Pelagian, and that of the first stamp.

But if this be not the spirit of this Doctrine those conclusions here laid downe are very closely exprest.

1 ‘That men act beneath themselves, ’(and here he speakes of the generality of men) ‘are remisse, and slothfull, in awakening those Principles of light and understanding that are vested in their Natures, or else willingly choake, suppresse, and smother them, if they remaine in the snare of unbeleefe.’

2 ‘That men who act, and quit themselves according to the true Principles of that reason which God hath planted in them, cannot but beleeve, and be partakers of the precious faith of the Gospel. ’Let us now adde a further ex­plication [Page 41] in his owne words presently after, and this will yet more clearly appeare to have been his meaning which we here suppose; his words are as followeth. ‘That about the effi­cacy of the Grace of God vouchsafed unto men, there is a great abuse of the word Na­turall, and so of the word Supernaturall, a word not found in the Scriptures, either for­mally, or vertually;’ (the grosse falshood whereof we shall see in due place) and that ‘the Scripture knoweth not the word Natu­rall in any such sence, wherein it should di­stinguish the unregenerate state of a man from the regenerate,’ (as false as the former, as in due time shall be demonstrated.) Now this Commentary of his owne is so manifest for the sence we here suppose, as needs no insisting upon; for if the efficacy of Grace be not su­pernaturall, then neither is Grace it selfe as the Principle, nor any effects of Grace, as to be­leeve, repent, &c. supernaturall; for the prin­ciple, operation, and effects are all of one kinde, naturall or supernaturall; and so Grace is nothing else but a naturall endow­ment, and improvement.

But then, what shall be his meaning after­wards in his explication of the Parable of the Talents, where he speakes thus: ‘That in case men will stirre up, and lay out them­selves accordingly, in the improvement of such abilities and gifts, as shall from time to time be vouchsafed to them, they may by vertue of the bounty, and gracious decree of God in that behalfe, attaine, and receive from God what proportion, and measure of [Page 42] the Spirit and Grace of God they can desire.’

I answer; The worke of this Spirit of Grace upon their hearts, if it be supernaturall, he contradicts himselfe, who will not allow that word either formally, or vertually about the efficacy of Grace; if he doe not contradict himselfe, this worke of the Spirit must be no­thing slse but such an influx, as is attemper'd, and proportion'd to mans Naturall acting, and therefore naturall. But this was the fre­quent manner of his great Apostle Pelagius, to play fast and loose at every turne with the words Grace, and Nature. I much suspect that very Doctrine of Pelagius, which Austine layes downe in his owne words, Lib. de grat. Christi, &c. c. 4. to be here touched: We, saith Pelagius, distinguish thus these three; In the first place we ap­point, to be able; in the second, to will; in the third, to be; To be able, we place in Nature, to will, in free Choyce, to be, in effect. That first, to be able belongs properly to God, who hath conferred it upon his Crea­ture; the two others, that is, to will, and to be, are to be referred unto man, because they descended from the fountaine of Free will; therefore in the will, and in the good worke, the praise is of man, yea, both of man and God, who hath given to him the possibility of the will it selfe, and of the work, and who alwayes helps that possibility it selfe with the ayde of his Grace, but that men may be able to will good, and to finish it, this is only of God. See now what Austine here ad­vertiseth, concerning Pelagius his Concession of Grace, (which, how rightly it suits Master Goodwin, let the Reader judge. ‘Whensoever (saith he) we heare that he confesseth the aide of Divine Grace, we ought to know, that he [Page 43] neither beleeves our wil, nor our action to be helped hereby, but only the possibility of the will, and work;’which alone of these three he affirmes that we have of God, and this in nature, as is manifest.

CHAP. VII.

2. SUppose it acknowledge no habitual grace upon the will renewing it, nor effectuall acting, and determining it, but all the assist­ance of grace acknowledged (be it naturall or supernaturall) is onely for inlightening the understanding, and exciting the will to deter­mine it selfe; whence it may come to passe, that the will may, as to the event, obey, or not obey the call of God. This is partly no more then what Pelagius acknowledged, partly op­posite to that grace, which the Orthodox Fa­thers maintained against him.

1 Observe here, that he puts all upon the Understanding, as if all the assistance of grace necessary, was onely for enlightening it.

2 That Pelagius himselfe was driven to ac­knowledge thus much, and withall, exciting grace, whatsoever he meant thereby.

3 That the Fathers opposing his Heresie, re­quired and maintained that grace, which by supernaturall efficacy, did not onely inlighten the understanding, and excite the will; but likewise did, by an efficacious impression, give both a new and spirituall power to the will, as likewise the acting of that power; and the same grace that gave the power, gave likewise the acting of that power, and was both preventing [Page 44] and effectuall, and peculiar, and of infallible issue for conversion, and therefore not common to those who were converted, with those who were not, but peculiar to the converted. But let us see the truth of what is here asserted.

And first, What Pelagius acknowledged (as much for ought I can discern as Mr. Goodwin,) August. lib: de gratiâ Christi contra Pelag. & Cae­lest. chap, 10. Thus reports him, ‘When he had a long time affirmed, that not by the aide of God, but of our selves in our selves, the will is made good; he objected against himselfe, out of the Epistle to the Philippians chap. 2. and how (saith he) shall that of the Apostle stand, It is God that workes in us, both to will and to doe;’ Then, that he might, as it were, answer this ob­jection, which he saw so vehemently against his opinion; going on he addes, ‘He works in us to will what is good, to wil what is holy, whilst he inflames us, who are addicted to earth­ly things, after the manner of the dumb beasts, loving only the things present, with the great­nesse of the glory to come, and with promise of rewards; whilst by the revelation of wisdom hee stirs up the listlesse Will to desire after God, whilst he exhorts us to all that is good.’ To the same purpose, c. 7. and c. 41.

2 What Austine requires in his answer here­to, when he had first discovered his subtlety, that all that he intends here, by revelation of wisdome, and exhortation may be nothing else but (according to his former doctrine) Effectuall and deter­mining grace upon the Will. the law of God and doctrine of his word; (as all that Mr. Goodwin means by his concession of grace is nothing but what is natural) He addes, [Page 45] But no such grace will we owne: Let him at length acknowledge that grace, whereby the greatnesse of the glory to come, is not onely promised, but is withall beleeved, and hoped for; nor only is wisdom revealed, but withall it is belo­ved; nor onely is all that is good exhorted to, but perswaded; for all have not faith, who by the Scriptures hear the Lord promising the Kingdome of heaven; neither are all perswa­ded, who are exhorted that they would come to him, who saith, Come unto me all yee that labour. No poten­tial grace but what is effectu­all, that grace which gives to be able to o­bey the cal of God, gives effe­ctually to obey. The grace of Christ not com­mon, but peculiar to all those and onely those, who are con­verted by it. The pow­er of con­version from God. But who they are that have faith, and who are perswaded to come to him, hee hath showne clearly enough, where he saith, No man can come unto me, except the father draw him; and a little after, where he speakes of unbeleevers, I have said unto you (saith he) that no man can come to me except it be given him of the father, Iohn 6. 44. and 65. This grace Pelagius must confesse, if hee will not only be called, but likewise be a Chri­stian. Hearken to this Mr. Goodwin, least your Christianity be called into question. And chap. 12. speaking of the same grace; ‘by this grace, saith he, we not only know what to do, but we do what we know; nor only doe we beleeve what we should love, but we love what we beleeve. ’Then he goes on chap. 13. ‘If this grace must be called doctrine, let it be so cal­led, but so, as that we beleeve, that God poures it into the soul more deeply and inwardly by an unspeakable sweetnesse, not only by those who plant and water outwardly, but also by himselfe, who gives the increase in secret, so as not only to shew the truth but to bestow love.’ For so doth God teach those who are called accord­ing [Page 46] to his purpose, giving at once both to know The teaching of divine grace, ef­fectuall upon the wil. what they should doe, and to doe what they know; whence the Apostle to the Thessalonians 1 Epistle 4. 9. But concerning brotherly love, yee neede not that I write unto you, for yee are taught of God to love one another: And that hee might prove that they were taught of God, he addes pre­sently, And indeed yee doe it towards all the bre­thren, which are in Macedonia; Shewing this to be a most certaine evidence, that they are taught of God, if they d [...]e what they are taught. After this manner, Are all taught, who are called according [...] purpose, as it is written in the Prophets, They shall all be taught of God.

But hee that knowes what he ought to doe, and doth it not, hath not yet learned of God according to Grace, but according to the Law; not according to the Spirit, but according to the Letter. Then chap. 14. speaking of the same effectuall teaching of grace, Of this manner of teaching, saith he, the Lord sayes, Every one who hath heard and learned of the father, comes to me; whosoever therefore hath not come, it is not rightly said of him, he hath heard indeed, and learned that he should come; but he will not doe what hee hath learned: In no wise is it The effi­cacy of grace determin­ing the wi [...] in its motion, & operation takes not away the liberty of the wil rightly said of that manner of teaching, where­by God teaches through grace; For (if as the truth speakes) every one, who hath learned, comes; whosoever comes not, hee hath not learned; but who sees not, that each one comes and comes not, by the liberty of the will? but this liberty may be alone, if it comes not; but if it come; assisted it must be; and so assisted, as not onely that it may know what is to bee [Page 47] done, but that likewise it may doe what it knowes. And hence, when God teacheth not by the letter of the Law, but by the grace of the spirit; he so teacheth, that what any one hath learned, he doth not onely see by know­ing, but also desire by willing, and performe by doing; and by that divine manner of teach­ing, even the Will it selfe, and the operation it selfe, not onely the naturall possibility of willing, and working is assisted. For if onely our power was helped by grace, the Lord would have said thus, Every one who hath heard, and learned of the father, may or can come to me: but hee saith not so, but d [...]th come to me: A power of coming Pelagius places in Nature, or even as he hath now begun to speake, in Grace, of what kind soever he accounts it, by which, as he saith, the possibility it self is helped, That aide of grace which gives the power of coming to Christ, gives the act like­wise. but to come is now in the will, and the worke; But it followes not, that hee that can come doth come, except he will it, and doe it.

But every one who hath learned of the fa­ther not onely can come, but doth come, where there is now both the advance of possibility, and the affection of the will, and the effect of the action.

Reader, It is easie for thee to observe from these testimonies out of this most learned and pious Father, how powerfull upon the will, how effectuall in the worke, how infallible, how peculiar, the grace of God is, according to what I affirmed before, and all with cleare evidence, and much strength of Scripture made good: But indeed this great assertion of Grace doth so abound in this doctrine, which he [Page 48] doth most strenuously maintain, that it is very hard to make an end of quotations out of him, not so much for his authority, as for his demon­stration by Scripture, and his singular excel­lency in discussing it. Wee shall adde a little more, and but a little. In his booke de grati [...] & lib. arbitr. c. 16. ‘It is certain, that when we Effectuall grace upon the wil determin­ing it in its motion. will, we will, but it is he who makes us to will what is good; of whom it is said, that the will is prepared of the Lord: of whom it is said, It is God who worketh in us both to will and to do.’It is certaine, that when we doe, we doe, but he makes us to doe, affording most effectuall strength to the will; who hath said, I will make you to walke in my Statutes, and yee shall keep my Iudgements and doe them: When he saith I will make you to doe, what saith he else, but that Habitual and re­newing grace up­on the wil together with effe­ctual. I will take from you the heart of stone, whence yee did not; and will give you an heart of flesh, that you may doe. And what is this, but I will take away your hard heart, whence ye did not, and I will give you an obedient heart, whence you may doe? here we have both the renew­ing, and acting of the will; and this certainly and infallibly. To the same purpose, cap. 17. Speaking of Peter, that he had no strong love, when he denyed his Lord, and yet he had a small and imperfect love, when he said to the Prevent­ing and subse­quent grace, operating and co-operating grace, preventing and operating; whence the first act of grace subsequent, and co-operating; whence the following act, to which following acts, this grace is preventing, and operating, subsequent, and co-operating, onely in respect of the first preventing and habituall grace all along. Lord, I will lay downe my life for thee, for hee thought he could doe what hee felt himselfe to [Page 49] will. Hee addes, And who had begun to give that, though small love? but he, who prepares the will, and perfects by working with us, what he begins by working in us: Because he, as the authour, works in us to will, who, as the finisher, works with us, when we will. Whence saith the Apostle, I am confident that he, that hath be­gun a good worke in you, will perfect it to the day of Ie­sus Christ. Phil. 1. 6. Therefore that wee may wil, he works without us; but when we will, and so will, as that we doe, he works with us: But without him, either working that we may will, or working with us, when we will, wee have no strength to the good workes of pie­tie. Chap. 18. upon that text of Scripture, Let us love one another, for love is of God, 1 Joh. 4. 7. Why is it said, Let us love one another, for love is of God, but because by the Command free will is admonished to seeke the gift of God; When it is said, Let us love one another, there is the Law; when it is said, for love is of God, there is Grace: Grace makes us lovers of the Law, but the Law it selfe without Grace makes us only offenders. Yee have not chosen me, but I have chosen you; If yee have not chosen, doubt­lesse yee have not loved, for how should they chuse him whom they loved not?

And Chap. 19. In Iohn, the light saith, Be­hold what great love the Father hath given us? In the Pelagians, darknesse saith, We have love of our selves; which if they had true, that is, Christian love, they would know whence they had it, as the Apostle knew, who said, We have not received the spirit of this world, but the Spirit of God, that we might know the things that are freely gi­ven [Page 50] us of God; Iohn saith, God is love; and the Pelagians say, that they even have God himselfe, n [...] of God, but of themselves. And when they con­fesse, that we have the knowledge of the Law from God, they will have love to be of our selves; neither doe they heare the Apostle say­ing, Knowledge puffesh up, but charity (or love) edifies. But I must take off my hand, he is so abundant in all his Polemique Writings a­gainst Pelagius, and his followers, that the Quotations would be Voluminous which might be taken out of them; I shall therefore conclude with the determination of the Mile­vitane Councell, at which Austine himselfe was President, and subscribed, Can. 4. Whosoever shall say, that the Grace of God by Jesus Christ our Lord, helps against sinning in this regard only, because by it the meaning of the Commands is revealed, and opened to us, that we might know what we ought to desire, and what to eschew, but that by it is not perfor­med, that what we know ought to be done, we also love to doe, and are enabled thereunto, Let him be Anathema; for when the Apostle saith, Knowledge puffes up, but charity edifies, it is very wicked to beleeve, that we have the grace of Christ for that which puffeth up, but that we have it not for that which edifies, when both is the gift of God; both to know what we ought to doe, and to love that we may doe it, that charity edifying, knowledge may not be able to puffe us up; but as it is written of God, That be teacheth man knowledge, so is it written likewise, that Love is of God. Here we have the Doctrin of the Church in that age against the Hereticks in this point.

CHAP. VIII.

3 LEt what Grace soever, how true and ge­nuine soever, be acknowledged from God to man, yet that Doctrine that teacheth, that it is given according to mens merit, in the sence of the Fathers against Pelagius, is Pe­lagian; but such is Mr. Goodwins Doctrine. E­vident it is, that he makes faith, and whatso­ever he cals Grace, so to depend upon the good use of the naturall understanding, as upon that account it is given unto men, how farre, and in what sence soever it is given; and as e­vident it is, that no good use can be made of the understanding in order to Grace, without some good use of the will; for except a man will, he shall not, without the use of his will he cannot provoke, and stirre up himselfe, so much as to meditate of God, and the things of God; but whosoever teacheth Grace to be gi­ven upon, or for the improvement of the Na­turall will in any kinde or degree, falls under that so famously damned Doctrine of Pelagius, That Grace is given according to merits; for clearing this, let us briefly represent the Pela­gian Heresie in its four-fold state, and the Do­ctrine of Austin, and other Fathers, and in them the Doctrine of the Church there-a­gainst.

In the first place, Pelagius denyed all ayde of supernaturall Grace (which Mr. Goodwin de­nies at this day, if he meane as he speakes) affirming, that the naturall strength of Free will was sufficient to fulfill the Commands of [Page 52] God, and to obtaine eternall life, denying O­rigin all sinne to the last.

In the second state he admitted the ayde of Grace, but 1. He acknowledged this ayde only in the Law, and externall Doctrine, as also in the example of Christ. 2. He ascribed only this to it, that by it man might more ea­sily fulfill the Commands of God, which with­out it he could fulfill. He likewise by Grace understood remission of sins.

In the third state, he at least seemed to admit inward illumination of the understanding, Many Learned men hold, that at length he came to this, a spe­ciall work of inward illumina­tion by the Spirit a­bove what he acknow­ledged in the second state; but he that shall vveigh well what Austine saith, Lib. d [...] Gr. Christi, c. 7. 10. 22, 23. 41. may well doubt of it. and inward excitation of the will; but this likewise, that man might be able the more easily to fulfill the Commands of God, which without it he might doe, ever denying the in­fusion of grace into the will, withall holding, that this Grace was given according to merit, that is, upon the good use of Naturall power before hand; against this Grace thus limited, we have out of Austine, and the Milevitan Councell newly spoken.

The fourth and last state was in the hands of certaine Pelagian Bishops, who wrote two Epistles against Austins Doctrine, which he answers in foure Bookes; their Doctrine the Father layes downe in these words: ‘They will have the desire of good in man to begin from man, that the grace of finishing may fol­low the merit of this beginning, if yet this at the least they will have.’

They differ from the last recited, in this; [Page 53] That they require this Grace, as simply neces­sary to the consummation of those vertues, the beginnings whereof were in Nature; but for the first motion unto good they required no internall grace; of this, Austine, Lib. 2. Contra duas Epistolas, Pelag. l. 8, &c. where after the stating of the question, in the prosecution of his answer, he strongly concludes all along a­gainst them, and therein against Mr. Goodwin, (taken in the best sence) that he that teach­eth, that any the least motion to good in man prevents the Grace of God, he teacheth that [...]igmatized Doctrine of Pelagius, that Grace is given according to merits, which as other­where formerly, so here againe he with much clearnesse refutes.

The Question is stated in these words: Now Subduing Grace. that is the thing which we have to attend, whether or no God inspires into man unwil­ling, Man un­willing, and resist­ing, by Grace made wil­ling, and consent­ing, the least desire of good how small and impe [...] ­fect soever from grace and resisting the desire of good, so that now he be not resisting, he be not unwilling, but consenting unto good, and willing good. A little after, for this they thinke is to be ob­jected against us; That we say, God inspires into man unwilling, and resisting the de­sire not of how great good soever, but of im­perfect good. It may be then that they them­selves so farre keep a place for Grace, that they thinke without it a man may have a desire of good, but that good imperfect; but for per­fect good, he cannot more easily have the de­sire of it by Grace, but without Grace he can­not at all have the desire of it. Having thus sta­ted it, he refutes the Pelagian tenet.

But so likewise they say, the Grace of God [Page 54] is given according to our merits, which in the East Pelagius fearing to be condemned, by the Acts of the Church condemned; for if with­out the Grace of God, by us begins the desire of good, that beginning shall be merit, (see here in how large a sence the Fathers take Me­rit in this Controversie) to which as of due the ayde of Grace comes, and so the Grace of God shall not be freely given, but our merit shall be given.

But the Lord, that he might answer Pelagius yet to come, saith not without me somthing ye may doe, with much adoe, but he saith, Without me yee can doe nothing. And that he might answer these likewise yet to come, in the same Gospel­sentence, he saith not, without me yee can fi­nish nothing, but, yee can doe nothing, Joh. 15. for if he had said finish, they might have said, That the ayde of God was necessary not to be­gin that which is good, this being of our selves, but to finish it; but let them heare the Apostle too, for the Lord, when he saith, With­out me yee can doe nothing, in this one word com­prehends the beginning, and the end. But the Apostle, as the expounder of the Lords saying, distinguisheth each more plainly, saying, Be­cause he that hath begun a good worke in you will finish it, untill the day of Christ Iesus, Philip. 1. But in the Holy Scriptures, in the same Apostle, we have found yet more then this, whereof we speak, We now speak of the desire of good, w ^ch if thou wil [...]c have begun by the wil of man, but perfected by the Lord. See what may be answered to the Apostle, saying, for, we are not sufficient of our selves to think any thing as of our selves, but our suf­ficiency is of God.

[Page 55] ‘To thinke any thing, saith he, to wit, good; but to thinke is lesse then to desire, for we thinke all that we desire, but we doe not de­sire all we thinke, because sometimes we think what we desire not.’

Since therefore it is lesse to thinke then to desire, for a man may thinke of good which as yet he desires not, and afterwards may by profiting desire, what before without desiring he thought of, how unto that which is lesse, that is to thinke any thing that is good, we are not sufficient as of our selves, but our suffi­ciency is of God, and unto that which is grea­ter, that is, to desire any thing that is good are we sufficient by our free-will, without the Divine ayde? for neither here doth the Apo­stle say, not that we are sufficient to thinke what is perfect, as of our selves, but to thinke any thing, (saith he) contrary whereto is no­thing: Whence is that of the Lord, Without me yee can doe nothing. Then alledging the mis­interpretation of Prov. 16. 1. by the Pelagians, where they read, The preparation of the heart is of man, and interpret it, that it belongs to man, to prepare the heart; that is, to begin good without the ayde of Divine grace.

‘Farre be it from the sonnes of the Promise (saith he) so to understand it, as though when they heare the Lord saying, Without me yee can doe nothing, they should, as it were, con­vince him, and say, Loe, without thee we can prepare the heart; or when they heare from the Apostle Paul, Not that we are of our selves suffi­cient to think any thing as of our selves, but our suffi­ciency is of God. They should as it were con­vince [Page 56] him likewise, saying, Loe, we are suffi­cient of our selves to prepare the heart, and by this, to thinke some good; farre be it from any so to understand it; but the proud de­fenders of their owne free will, and the for­sakers of the Churches faith.’Man prepares the heart, but not without the ayde of God who toucheth the heart; he concludes this Chapter with this memorable sentence.

‘Many good things God doth in man which man doth not; but none doth man, which God doth not make man to doe. Then c. 9. Therefore the desire of good would not be in man from God, if it was not good; but if it be good it is not, but from him in us, who is unchangeably good. For what is the desire of good, but love?’of which Iohn the Apostle speakes without any doubtings, saying, Love is of God; neither the beginning thereof of our selves, and the perfection thereof of God, but if love be of God, the whole is unto us of God; for God keeps us from that madnesse, that in his gifts we should make our selves first, and him last, because his mercy hath prevented me; for if without him we can doe nothing, truly we can neither begin, nor finish. That we may begin, it is said, His mercy shall prevent me; that we may finish, it is said, His mercy shall follow me; then in the close of this Chapter, speaking of mans purpose; ‘The good purpose of man, (saith he) subsequent grace assists, but except grace had gone before, it had not been. The care of man likewise, which is said to be good, though when it hath begun to be, it is helped by grace, yet doth it not begin without grace, [Page 57] but is inspired by him of whom the Apostle saith, But thankes be unto God, who hath put the same care for you in the heart of Titus; if it be the gift of God, that one man hath care for ano­ther, whose gift else shall it be, that a man hath care of himselfe? Then c. 10: which since it is so, I see not any thing in the Holy Scriptures commanded man of God, whereby his free will is proved, which is not found ei­ther to be given of his goodnesse, or to be re­quired for the demonstration of the ayde of grace; neither doth man at all begin to be changed from evill to good, by the beginning of faith, but as free mercy, and that which is not owing to him doth it in him.’

CHAP. IX.

THis leades us to an after state of Pelagia­nisme The Mas­silian state of Pelagia­nisme. in the hands of the Massilians, which was much one and the same with that in the hands of these Pelagian Bishops.

Of them, and their tenets, we have in Pros­pers Epistle to Austin about the Reliques of the Pelagian Heresie, as likewise in the Epistle of Hilary of Arles. That opinion of theirs, which we shall here take notice of, as falling in with this lost state of Pelagianisme, and pertinent to our present businesse, we shall lay downe in Prospers words; (if I be not deceived they speake Mr. Goodwin) Thus he relates. ‘Some of these doe so farre not decline from the Pe­lagian pathes, that when they are constrained to confesse that Grace of Christ which pre­vents all humane merits, le [...]t if it be rendred [Page 58] to Merits, in vaine should it be called Grace, this Grace they will have to belong to the condition of every man, wherein the Grace of the Creator doth so order him, who before deserved nothing, as not existing of a free and rationall will, that by the discerning of good and evill, he may direct his will both to the knowledge of God, and to the obedi­ence of his Commandements, and come to this Grace, whereby in Christ we are borne a­gain, to wit, by the power of Nature, by asking, seeking, knocking, that therfore may he receive, therfore may he find, therfore may he enter in, because he used the good of Nature wel; so that he deserved to come to this saving Grace, by the help of initial grace?’Let Mr. Goodwins do­ctrine be considered, where he denyes the word Supernaturall as formerly, and his conclusi­ons, upon which we are all this while, toge­ther, with his explication of the Parable of the Talents, and see wherein he differs from these here described.

Hilary relates it thus, They agree that all men perished in Adam, neither can any man thence be free­ed by his owne free will; But this they affirme to be agreeable to truth, and meet to be preached, that when the occasion or opportunity of ob­taining salvation, is declared to them that are utterly downe, and never able by their owne strength to rise, that by that merit, whereby they may will, and beleeve, they may be healed of their disease, and may obtain the increase of faith, and the effect of their thorow holinesse: But to begin any work, much lesse to finish it, they grant that no man is sufficient to himself. [Page 59] Then he addes to this purpose, That to beleeve, and will their owne healing by Christ, to seeke to the Phisitian for cure. These things they number not amongst workes, but these they will have to prevent the healing grace of Christ.

Upon the relation made in these two Epi­stles, Austin wrote his booke, De praedestinati­one sanctorum, & de bono perseveranti [...], where he with great strength and clearnesse refutes these opinions, proving at large, what Prosper brief­ly hints in his Epistle, that in those reliques of the Pelagian pravity, is nourished a strein of no mean virulency, if the beginning of salvati­on shall be evilly placed in man; If the will of man shal wickedly be preferred before the wil of God; If therefore any man shall be aided, be­cause he would, and not therefore he would, because he was aided; If he that is originally evill, shall evilly be beleeved to begin the re­ceiving of good, not from the highest good, but from himselfe, If God be pleased from some other thing then what he hath given.

We have therefore thus shewed the severall states of the Pelagian Heresie, that our new Pelagians, the Arminians might be unmasked.

And because the Doctrine of Grace is so excel­lently cleared by Austin, and some other Fathers against these sacrilegious Tenets, I shal yet bring some things more out of their rich treasures. Austin therefore, lib. de praedestinatione sanctorum, c. 2 thus states the Question, That according to his adversaries, faith is not given of God to us, but it is encreased by God in us, by that merit wher­by it begun of us. Against this he argues.

1 Here they depart not from that Doctrine [Page 60] which Pelagius himselfe was forced to con­demne, in a Court of Bishops in Palestine, to wit, That the Grace of God is given according to our merits; As though it belonged not to the Grace of God, that we have begun to be­leeve, but rather belonged to his Grace, which for our beginning is added to us, that wee should beleeve more fully and perfectly; and hence we in the first place give the beginning of faith to God, that the fulfillings of it may be recompensed to us, as likewise whatsoever else we faithfully aske. But against this, why doe we not rather heare, Who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompenced againe unto him? for of him, and through him, and to him, are all things, Rom. 11. The beginning it selfe of our faith then, of whom is it but of him? for it is not, this excepted, of him, are all the rest, but of him, and through him, and to him, are all things.

2 Truly was it said of the Apostle, To you it is given not onely to beleeve, but to suffer for Christ; he sheweth both to be the gifts of God, be­cause he saith both are given; neither doth he say, that yee might more fully and perfectly be­leeve in him, but that yee might beleeve in him.

3 Neither did he say that himselfe had obtained mercy, that he might be more faithfull, but that he might be faithfull, for he knew, that he did not first give the beginning of his faith to God, and had the increase thereof recompen­ced to him, but by him was he made a beleever, by whom he was made an Apostle: For being averse from the faith, which he wasted; & most vehemently adverse thereunto, he is of a sud­daine converted unto it, by a more powerfull [Page 61] grace: Nor only made of unwilling, willing to beleeve; but of a persecutor, a sufferer, in the defence of that faith, which he did persecute, For unto him it was given of Christ, not only to beleeve on him, but likewise to suffer for him: And therefore commending that grace, which is not given ac­cording to any merit, but makes all good me­rits (we saw formerly in how large a sence the Fathers understand this word Merit) he saith.

4 Not that wee are sufficient of our selves to thinke any thing, as of our selves, but our sufficiency is of God. Let them attend here, and weigh these words well, who think the beginning of faith is from our selves, the accomplishment from God. For who doth not see, that thinking is before beleeving? for no man beleeves any thing, unlesse he have first thoughts that it is to be beleeved; For although certaine thoughts doe most hastily, most swiftly flye before the will of beleeving, and it presently so followes, that it doth even most closely, as it were, ac­company them, yet must it needs be, that what­soever is beleeved, is by a preventing thought beleeved, although to beleeve is nothing else but to thinke with assent; for not every one that thinkes, beleeves: when many therefore think, that they may not beleeve; but whosoe­ver beleeves, thinks; and by beleeving thinks, and by thinking beleeves. Wherefore as to things that belong to religion and godlines, of which the Apostle spake, if we be not sufficient to think any thing, as of our selves, but our sufficiency is of God, cer­tainly we are not sufficient to beleeve any thing, as of our selves, which without thinking we cannot, but our sufficiency, whereby we begin to beleeve, is of God.

CHAP. X.

WE must take heed, Brethren, lest man extoll himselfe against God, when he 1. From Gods pro­mise to Abraham. saith, that he doth that which God hath pro­mised.

Is not the faith of the Gentiles promised to Abraham? and he, giving glory to God, belee­ved most fully, because he that had promised was able to performe, he therefore performes the faith of the Gentiles, who is able to per­forme what he promised.

In the tenth Chap. speaking of this same thing, It is (saith he out of the Apostle) of faith, that according to grace the Promise may be firme to all the seed; not from the power of our will, but from his owne Predestination, for he promised not what men, but what himselfe would doe, because though men doe those good things which belong to the Worship of God, he makes them to doe the things he hath commanded; they make not him to doe what he hath promised, otherwise that the promises of God may be fulfilled, it is not in the power of God, but of man, and what is promised by the Lord, is by them returned to Abraham; but so did not Abraham beleeve, but he beleeved, giving glory to God, because he that hath promised is able to doe; he doth not say to fore-tell, he doth not say to fure-know, [Page 63] for the deeds of another he may fore­tell, and fore-know, but he saith he is able to doe, and therefore not the deeds of others, but his owne.

We returne now to the second Chapter, The whole of faith from God. where it followes; Furthermore, if God worke our faith, acting in our hearts after a wonderfull manner that we may beleeve, shall we feare left he should not be able to doe the whole? and therefore man shall challenge the first part to himselfe, that he may merit to re­ceive the last from him? See if any thing else be done by this meanes, but that the Grace of God, which way soever, may be given accor­ding to our merit, and so Grace shall be no Grace, for thus it is returned as due, it is not freely given; for this is owing to him that beleeves, that by the Lord faith it selfe may be encreased, and faith encreased may be the re­ward of faith begun.

Neither doe they observe when thus they speake, that that reward is imputed to belee­vers, not according to Grace, but according to debt. (We see here againe the large signifi­cation of the word Merit, for any thing that may be supposed in man of himselfe, as a mo­tive to God for giving his Grace) But why the whole should not be ascribed to man, that he that could begin what he had not, might himselfe likewise encrease what he had begun, I cannot at all see, but only, because they can­not resist most manifest Divine testimonies, by Godlinesse from faith. which faith, whence godlinesse takes its be­ginning, is shewed to be the gift of God; As, ac­cording as God hath distributed to every one a measure [Page 64] of faith; and, peace to the Brethren, and love, with faith from God the Father, &c. Unwilling there­fore to oppose these so cleare Testimonies, and yet willing that of himselfe it should be un­to himselfe that man beleeves, he doth, as it were, compound with God, that part of his faith he may take to himselfe, and part he may leave to him; and which is yet more los­ty, the first he takes to himselfe, that which followes he gives to him, and in that which he saith belongs to them both, he makes himselfe first, and God last.

Of that minde was not that godly and hum­ble 2. From differen­cing grace. Teacher, most blessed Cyprian I meane, who said, ‘In nothing may we glory, for as much as ours is nothing; ’which that he might shew, he brought in the Apostle saying, But what hast thou that thou hast not received? but if then hast received, why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received? By which testimony especially was I also convinced, when I had been in the like errour, thinking faith, by which we be­leeve in God, not to be the gift of God, but of our selves, to be in our selves, and that by it we obtained the gifts of God, for living so­berly, and righteously, and godly in this present world.

This testimony therefore of the Apostle, where he said, for the repressing of mans haugh­tinesse, What hast thou that thou hast not received? suffers not any of the faithfull to say, I have faith which I received not. But neither may this be said, Although I have not perfect faith, yet I have the beginning thereof, whereby I first beleeved in Christ, because here likewise [Page 65] the answer is; But what hast thou that thou hast not received, and if thou hast received, why dost tho [...] boast, as if thou hadst not received? In this most e­vident intention of the Apostle, whereby (as by the context it appeares) he speakes against the pride of man, that no man may glory in man, and therefore not in himselfe, but in the Lord, to imagine the naturall gifts of God, whether entire and perfect nature, as in its first condition it was gifted, or whatsoever re­liques of corrupt nature, I thinke it too absurd; for by these gifts, which are common to all men, is one man differenced from another? Here he first said, Who hath made thee to differ? then he addes, What hast thou that thou hast not re­ceived? because a man pu [...]t up against another might say; My faith hath made me to differ, my righteousnesse, or whatsoever other thing. This good Teacher meeting with such thoughts, What hast thou, saith he; that thou hast not received? Of whom? but of him who hath made thee to differ from another, to whom he hath not given, what he hath given unto thee; But if thou hast received, why doest thou glory, as if thou hadst not received? Is he doing any thing else, but that he that glories may glory in the Lord? But nothing is so contrary to this intention, as for any man so to boast of his merits, as though he had done them to himselfe, and not the Grace of God; but that Grace which diffe­renceth the good from the bad, not that which is common to good and bad.

From Election, many heare the word of 3. From Election▪ truth, some beleeve, others gaine-say; these therefore will beleeve, these will not, who [Page 66] knowes not this? who denies? But for as much as in some the will is prepared of the Lord, in others it is not prepared, verily we must distinguish what comes from his Mercy, and what from his Judgement. What Israel sought (saith the Apostle) he obtained not, but the election hath obtained, and the rest were blinded. Behold Mercy and Judgement, Mercy in the▪ election, which hath obtained the righteousnesse of God; but Judgement upon the rest which were blinded, and yet these, because they would, beleeved; these because they would not, did not beleeve; therefore Mercy and Judgement are done even in the wills themselves; for Ele­ction is of Grace, not verily of Merits. There­fore freely hath the Election obtained what it hath obtained, there was not something of theirs that went before, which they first gave, and recompence was made to them, for he sa­ved them for nought, but to the rest who were blinded (as it is not there concealed) retribu­tion was made.

All the wayes of the Lord are Mercy and Truth, but his wayes are unsearchable; unsearchable therefore are, his Mercy, whereby he freely ac­quits, and his Truth, whereby he justly con­demnes, cap. 7.

But haply they say, the Apostle distinguish­eth faith from workes, and Grace, he saith, is not of workes, he doth not say, it is not of faith, true; but Christ saith, Faith likewise is the worke of God, Joh. 6. So therefore the A­postle distinguisheth Faith from Workes, as in the two Kingdomes of the Hebrewes, Iudah is distinguished from Israel, when as yet Iudah is [Page 67] Israel; for yee are saved by Grace through faith, and that not of your selves, it (even faith) is the gift of 4. From the effica­cy and pe­culiarity of Grace, de­pending upon ele­ction. God, and faith is not of workes, lest any one should boast, and all that the Father hath given me shall come unto me. What is this shall come to me, but shall beleeve in me? but that it may be done, the Father gives; No man can come to me, except the Father, which hath sent me, draw him: And they shall all be taught of God, and every one that hath heard of the Father, and learned, comes to me. If every one that hath heard of the Father, and learned, comes, truly who comes not, hath not heard of the Father, nor learned: for had he heard, and learned, he would come.

Farre removed from the apprehensions of the flesh is this Schoole in which the Father is heard, and teacheth to come to the Sonne. There is likewise the Sonne himselfe, because he himselfe is the Word of the Father, where­by he so teacheth; neither deales he with the eare of the flesh, but of the heart; there is to­gether likewise the Spirit of the Father, and the Sonne, for neither doth he not teach, nor doth he teach apart, because we say, the workes of the Trinity are inseparable, and he is verily the Holy Ghost, of whom the Apostle saith, Ha­ving the same Spirit of faith. Farre removed (I say) from the apprehensions of the flesh, is this Schoole, in which God is heard, and teacheth; we see many come to the Sonne, be­cause we see many beleeve in Christ, but where, and how they have learned this of the Father we see not, verily this grace is secret, but that it is grace who doubts?

This Grace therefore, which by Divine [Page 68] bounty is after an hidden manner given unto Grace pre­venting. subduing, renewing, effectuall. the hearts of men, is by no hard heart refused, because it is therefore given, that the hard­nesse of the heart may first of all be removed; when therefore the Father is inwardly heard, and teacheth to come to the Sonne, he takes a­way the stony heart, and gives a heart of flesh, as he promised by the Prophet Ezek. 36. for so doth he make the sonnes of the Promise, and the Vessels of Mercy, which he hath prepared unto glory; why therefore doth he not teach all that they may come to Christ? but because all whom he teacheth, in mercy he teacheth; but whom he teacheth not, in Judgement he teacheth not, because, he will have mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardens; but he hath mercy, bestowing good, he har­dens, recompencing according to desert. But why he teacheth not all, the Apostle opens so farre, as he thought fit to be opened, Rom. 9. 22, 23. Hence it is that the word of the Crosse is foolishnesse unto them, that perish, but to those that are saved, the power of God. All these God teach­eth to come to Christ, all these he will have saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth; for if he would have taught those to come to Christ al­so, to whom the word of the Crosse is foolish­nesse, without doubt even they had come too, for he neither deceives, nor is deceived, who saith, Every one that hath heard, and learned of the Father, comes to me; farre be it therefore that any man should not come who hath heard, and learned of the Father.

When therefore the Gospel is preached, some beleeve, some doe not beleeve; but they [Page 69] that beleeve whilst the Preacher sounds with­out, they heare, and learne of the Father with­in; but they that beleeve not, they heare without, not within, neither doe they learne; that is, to the one it is given to beleeve, to the other it is not given, which afterwards is more openly spoken; No man can come to me, except it he given him of the Father. Therefore to be drawne by the Father to Christ, and to heare and learne of the Father, is nothing else but to receive the gift of the Father, whereby to beleeve in Christ. For he did not distinguish Hearers of the Gospell from no Hearers, who said, No man can come to me, except it be given him of the Father; but Beleevers from unbeleevers: Faith therfore both begun and finished, is the gift of God; and that this gift is given to some, and not given to all he cannot doubt, who will not oppose most manifest holy Scriptures.

Chap. 12. When we come to little ones, and to 5. From the salva­tion of Infants. the Mediator betwixt God and man, the Man Christ Jesus, all assertion of humane merits going before the Grace of God, falls to the ground, because they are not distinguisht from the rest by any good preceding merits, that they should belong to the deliverer of men, nor he by any preceding humane me­rits, (when he is a man also) was made the deliverer of men.

For Infants; Originall sinne being by the Grace of God forgiven, or by the Judgement of God not forgiven, when they dye, they ei­ther passe by Regeneration from an evill to a good state, or by Originall corruption, from an evill to an evill state. And Lib. de bono per­sever. [Page 70] Whereas the Apostle saith, It is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shewes mercy; who releeves little ones, whom he will, when they neither will, nor run; those whom he chose in Christ before the world was made, as to whom he freely would give Grace; that is, no merits of theirs, whether of faith, or workes preceding; whom he wills not to releeve, he releeves not, of whom in his own pre­destination he hath otherwise judged; secret­ly indeed, but justly, for there is no iniquity with God, but his judgements are unsearchable, and his wayes past finding out. As of those two twins (Iacob and Esau) of whom the one is ta­ken, the other is left, their end is different, their merits the same; in whom yet so the one is freed by the great goodnesse of God, that the other is condemned without any iniquity in God; for is there iniquity in God? in no wise; but his wayes are past finding out; therefore let us without wavering beleeve his mercy in those that are freed, his truth in those that are punished; neither let us search things un­searchable, nor thinke to trace what is un­traceable.

Now whereas it was objected by the Massi­lians, or Semi-Pelagians, that Infants were dealt with according to future merits fore­seene, if they had lived; First, he rejects this as a most absurd conceit; that any should be judged not only according to his merits whilst he was in the Body, but according to those merits which he should have had, if he had been longer in the Body, (by merits here as frequently, he meanes only deeds, good or e­vil) [Page 71] whence it should come into their thoughts (saith he) whose wills are not contemptible, wondring, and astonisht, I cannot finde. ‘A new kinde of absurdity, saith Prosper, relating it, to imagine things to come which are not to come, and that what things are not to be, should be fore-known, and that what things are fore-knowne should not be done.’ After his rejection of this Opinion, he refutes it, both in his Book De praedest, & de bono Persever. and other-where I shall gleane a little, Lib. de prae­dest. Sanct. Cap. 12. We shall all appeare before the Iudgement Seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad, 2 Cor. 5. 10. What he hath done (saith he) not what he might afterwards doe, but whence this should come into the minde of such men, that things to come, which are not things to come should be punished, that to merits of Infants should be honoured, I cannot tell. To this time of the Body belongs Originall sinne.

2 Why then may we not say, that the Gos­pel is preached in vaine, with so much labour and sufferings of the Saints; if men may be judged, even those that have not heard the Gos­pel, according to that contumacy, or obedi­ence which God fore-knew they would have had, if they had heard? and so Tyre and Sidon should not have bin condemned, because, if those wonderfull things and signes had been done amongst them, (which were done in those Cities to which the Lord speaks of this matter) they had repented in sackcloth and ashes, Lib. De Bono persever. c. 9.

3 Then neither may we rejoyce in those [Page 72] whom we know to have departed in a right saith, and a good life, lest they should be judged according to some wickednesses, which they were to com­mit, if a longer life had been granted to them; neither are they to be grieved for, and detested, who have finished this life in infidelity and wretched manners, because haply, if they had lived, they would have repented, and have li­ved in godlinesse, and according to those things they were to be judged, Epist. 107.

These two Arguments are in force against our Adversaries, because they hold, that a righ­teous man, a true beleever may fall utterly, and finally from Grace, and that it is in the power of the unrighteous to repent.

Our Saviour himselfe is likewise a most 6. From the person of the Me­diator. cleare light of Predestination and Grace, he the Mediator of God and man, the man Christ Iesus, which that he might be, by what fore-going merits, whether of Faith, or Workes, did his humane Nature obtaine? Give answer I pray, that man, that he should by the word Coeter­nall with the Father, be taken into the unity of Person, and become the only begotten Son of God, whence might he merit this? What did he before, what beleeved he, what asked he, that he should come to this unspeakeable excellency? Let man reply against God here, if he dare, and say, and why not I? and if he shall be answered, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? and yet shall not refraine, but shall encrease his impudence, and say, What doe I heare? Who art thou, O man? when I am, what I heare, that is, a man, which he is likewise, of whom I am speaking, and why am not I the [Page 73] same that he? But he is such an one, and so great by Grace; Why is Grace different where Nature is common? certainly there is no accep­tion of persons with God; what, I say not Christi­an, but mad-man would speake thus?

In our Head then may the fountain of Grace appeare, whence according to the measure of every one, it diffuseth it selfe through all his Members; by that Grace, from the beginning of his faith, is any man made a Christian, by which Grace from his beginning was that man made Christ, and of the same Spirit was this man borne againe, of which he was borne. As therefore he the only one is predestinated to be our Head, so we many are predestinated to be his Members. Let Humane merits here be silent, which have perished by Adam, and let that Grace of God reigne, which reignes by Jesus Christ our Lord, the only Sonne of God our Lord; whosoever he is, that in our Head can finde the fore-going Merits of that singular Generation, let him inquire in us his Mem­bers, the fore-going merits of multiplied rege­neration; for that Generation was not recom­penced to Christ, but given, that free from all Obligation of sinne, he should be borne of the Spirit, and the Virgin; so that we should be borne againe of Water, and the Spirit, it is not recompenced to us for any merit, but freely given, for he hath made us to beleeve on Christ, who hath made Christ for us, on whom we be­leeve; he makes in men the beginning of faith, and the finishing in Iesus, who hath made the Author of faith, and the finisher Jesus, Lib. de Predest. Sanct.

[Page 74] Lib. de Grat. & Lib. Arbit. c. 14. Thus he states the Question. But when these, not Defen­ders, 7. The corruption of Nature exprest in hardnesse of heart. but blowers up, and tumblers head­long of free will, have been convinced, that neither the knowledge of the Law of God, nor Nature, nor only the remission of sins, is that Grace which is given by Iesus Christ our Lord, but it makes that the Law be fulfilled, (scil. Evangelically) that Nature be healed, that sin reign not, when in these things they are con­vinced, they betake themselves to this, that w ^ch way soever they may endeavor, to shew that the Grace of God is given according to our merits, for they say, that though it be not given accor­ding to the merits of our good works, because by it we performe good works, yet is it given us according to the merits of a good will; be­cause, say they, the good will of man praying goes before, before which was the will of man beleeving, that according to these merits might follow the Grace of God, hearing and answe­ring prayer. In answer whereto.

If Faith be onely of Free Will, and not gi­ven of God, why doe we pray for those that will not beleeve, that they may beleeve? which we should doe altogether in vaine, did we not most rightly beleeve, that the Almighty God could convert to beleeving, even wills perverse and contrary to faith. The Lord knocks in­deed at the doore of free Will, when it is said, To day if yee will heare his voice, harden not your hearts, but unlesse he could take away the hard­nesse of the heart, he would not say by the Pro­phet, I will take from them the heart of stone, and give unto them a heart of flesh; which that it was [Page 75] prophesied of the New Testament, the Apo­stle shewes clearly, where he sayes, Yee are our Epistle, written not with Inke, but with the spirit of the living God; not in Tables of stone but in the flesh­ly tables of the heart, 2 Cor. 3. Can we say then without manifest absurdity, that the good Merit of a good Wil in man hath gone before, that the heart of stone might be pulled from him; when this very thing, the heart of stone, signifies nothing else, but a most obstinate Will, and is altogether inflexible towards God? For where a good will goes before, now verily the heart is not stony.

Lib. de grat. Christic. 7. Where we have first 8 From the in­crease of sin by the Law in the natu­ral man. Pelagius his doctrine of Grace: ‘God (saith he) assists us by his doctrine and revelation, whilst he opens the eyes of our hearts, whilst that we might not be taken up with things present, he shewes unto us things to come, whilst he discovers the snares of the devil, whilst he en­lightens us with his various and unspeakable gift of heavenly grace.’And then concluding this profession of his with a kind of absolution; ‘He that saith this (saith he) doth he seem to thee to deny grace? ’Now followes Austins Answer, where he shewes, the increase of sinne in the natural man by the Law, ‘This is (saith he) to place the grace of God in the Law and Doctrine. ’Hence it appeares hee acknow­ledgeth, that grace by which God shewes, and reveales what we ought to doe, not whereby he gives unto us, and aides us that we may do; Whereas the knowledge of the Law, if the helpe of grace be wanting, is of force onely hereunto, that the command may be transgres­sed; [Page 76] F [...]r where there is no law, saith the Apostle, there is [...]o transgression, and I had not knowne lust, had not the Law said, thou shalt not lust, and hence, so different is the Law from Grace; that not only is it of no advantage, but withal, of great­est damage; when Grace helps not, the Law commands, rather then affords helpe; it tea­cheth that the disease is, it healeth not: Nay, therefore rather because it is not healed, it is increased, that with greater care and diligence the medicine of grace may be sought after.

More fully to this purpose, lib. de grat. & lib. de arbit. c. 11. How is it that these vainest of men, and most perverse Pelagians say, that the law is the grace of God, whereby we are assisted not to sin? What is it that these wret­ches say, who without all doubt say contrary to so great an Apostle? He saith, that sin receives strength against man by the Law, and that it kills him by the command, though the com­mandement be holy, & just, and good, and that by good it workes death to him, from which he should not be freed, if the Spirit did not quicken, whom the Letter kills: Yet these un­teachable ones, blind against the law of God, and deaf against the voyce of God, they say the killing lett [...]r quickens, and contradict the quickening spirit.

Epistle 107. ad Vitalem, upon that Text, Col. 1. 13. Who hath delivered us from the power of dark­nesse, 9 From the sub­jection of the natu­ral man to the devil. &c. ‘How had we (saith he) free will to decline from evill, and doe good, when it was under the power of darknesse, ’ whence, as the Apostle saith, God delivered us? He it was then that made us free; This power of dark­nesse, [Page 77] what is it, but the power of the devill and his angels? who, when they had been An­gels of light, not abiding in the truth by their free Will, but falling from it, became dark­nesse; to this power of darknesse therefore is mankind subjected, by the ruine of the first man, in whom we all fell, who by this power was perswaded to transgression. This power of darknesse, the devil, who is likewise the Prince of the power of the aire, workes in the hearts of the chil­dren of unbeleefe (or disobedience:) This ruler of darknesse ruling them at his own will, which neither hath he free to doe good, but harde­ned to the utmost of evill-willing, in way of punishment for his wickednesse; What is it then that this power workes in the children of distrust (or dis-obedience) but his owne e­vill workes first of all? and above all, distrust and unbeleef; whereby they are enemies to the faith, by which he knowes they may be clean­sed, they may be healed, they may be born a­gaine in eternity, or unto eternity, most per­fectly free, which he most vehemently envyes unto them.

And therefore some of them, by whom he desires more fully to deceive, he suffers to have some, as it were, good workes, for which they are praised; but because the Scripture saith most truly, Whatsoever is not of faith is sin, and without faith it is impossible to please God, not men: This Prince indeavours nothing so much, as that they may not beleeve in God, and that they may not come to the Mediator by beleeving, by whom his works are destroyed. But the Me­diator entreth into the house of this strong man, [Page 76] [...] [Page 77] [...] [Page 78] that is, having mankind under his dominion; and first, he binds him, that is, he bridles and restraines his power with the stronger chaines of his own power, and so hee rescues all his vessels, which soever he fore-ordained to re­scue, freeing their Will from his power, that he not hindering, they may beleeve upon him with free Will: Wherefore this is the work of Grace not of Nature; the work I say of grace which the second Adam brought to us, not of nature, which the first Adam in himself quite de­stroyed; the work of Grace taking away sin, and quickning the dead sinner, not the work of the law, shewing sin, but not making alive from sin; this is the work of grace, which whoso receive, are made friends to the wholsome doctrine of the holy Scriptures, though they were enemies, not the work of the same doctrine, which who­so hear and read, without the grace of God are made worse enemies thereof. Whence the Lord Iesus distinguishing beleevers from unbelee­vers, that is, the vessels of mercy, from the ves­sels of wrath; No man, saith he, can come to me, ex­cept it be given him of my father, and presently as he said this, his disciples were offended at his do­ctrine, who afterwards followed him no more: let us not say therefore, that Doctrine is Grace, but let us acknowledge Grace, which makes Do­ctrine profitable, which Grace if it be wanting, we see that doctrine is even hurtfull. 10 From the thanks­giving & praiers of the Saints, and of the church.

Lib. de praedest. Sanct. c. 19. The Apostle gives thanks to God for those that believed, not verily because the Gospell was preached to them, but because they beleeved, I (saith he) having heard of your faith in Christ Iesus, and love to all the [Page 79] Saints, cease not to give thanks for you, &c. Ephes. 1. their faith was new and lately begun by the preaching of the Gospell, which faith being heard of, the Apostle gives thanks to God for them: if he should have given thanks to man, for that which he either knew or thought was not performed by him, it would have been rather flattery or mockery, then giving of thankes, Let us not be deceived, God is not mocked, faith, e­ven beginning, is his gift, that the Apostles thanksgiving be not deservedly judged false or of false glorying.

The like instance for thanksgiving, he brings from 1 Thes. 2. Then for Prayer, c. 20. That the beginning of faith is the gift of God, the Apostle admonisheth us saying, withall pray­ing for us, That God would open unto us the doore of his word, to speake the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds, that I may make it manifest, as Iought to speake, Col. 4. How is the doore of the word opened, saith he, but when the sence or understanding of the hearer is opened, that he may beleeve? and faith being begun, he may admit those things which are preached, and disputed for building up of wholesome doctrine, least the heart being shut up by un­beleefe, he may disallow and reject the things that are spoken: whence to the Corinthians, I will stay at Ephesus (saith he) till Pentecost, for there a great doore and effectuall is opened unto me, and there are many adversaries, 1 Cor. 16. What may we here understand, but that the Gospell be­ing there first of all preached by him, many be­leeved? and there were many adversaries of the same faith, according to that of the Lord, No [Page 80] man comes unto me, except it be given him of the fa­ther, and to you it is given to know the mysteries of the Kingdome of heaven, to them it is not given: The doore then is open in them, to whom it is gi­ven; but there are many adversaries of them, to whom it is not given.

More fully yet, Epist. 107. to Vitalis, wilt thou forbid the Church to pray for unbelee­vers, that they may be beleevers, for those that will not beleeve, that they may will to beleeve? for those that dissent from his Law, and doctrine, that they may consent thereto? that God may give unto them what he promi­sed by his Prophet, an heart to know him, and hearing eares? which they had certainly recei­ved, of whom our Saviour saith, he that hath eares to heare let him hear? What, wilt thou not, when thou hearest the Minister exhorting the people to pray to God, or himselfe with a loud voice praying, that God would compell the unbeleeving Nations to his faith, say Amen? What wilt thou blame the Apostle Paul for ha­ving such desires for the unbeleeving Iewes, Brethren saith hee, my hearts desire and Prayer to God for Israel, is, that they might be saved? The same Apostle to the Thessalonians 2 Epist. 3. Fi­nally brethren pray for us, that the word of God may run and be glorified, even as it is with you, and that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men, for all men have not faith; How should the word of God run and be glorified, but by the conver­sion of them to the faith, to whom it is prea­ched? since he saith to beleevers, as with you, surely he knowes, that this is done by him, whom he will have prayed unto, that he may [Page 81] doe it; as likewise that hee may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men, who should not beleeve, notwithstanding their pray­ers; wherefore he addes, for all [...] [...] [...] saith. Because they were to beleeve who were ordained to eternall life, but God makes such as doe not yet beleeve to beleeve, by the prayers of beleevers, that he may shew i [...] i [...] he that doth it. In the same Epistle, more towards the [...] ­ginning, In vaine and for fashion sake, rather then truely, doe we poure out prayers to God for such (speaking of Infidels) if it belong not to his Grace, to convert to his Fai [...] the Wills of men contrary to the Faith; [...] vaine and for fashion sake, rather then truely doe we give thanks to God, with gr [...] repre­sentation of joy, when any of them beleeve, if he doe not worke this in them. Wee pray not at all, but make a feigned show of prayer if we beleeve, that not he, but we our selves doe the things we pray for; we give no [...] thanks at all, but make a feigned shew of thanks, if we doe not think, that he doth that, for which we give thanks; And whilst with men we [...] ­fend free-will, with God we loose the bene­fit of prayer; and wee doe not render tr [...] praise, whilst we do not ackowledge true gr [...].

If we will truly defend Free-will, let us no [...] oppose that whereby it is made free; for he that opposeth Grace; by which our Will is freed to decline from evill, and to doe good, he will have his Will to be still captive. A lit­tle after upon that Text, who hath delivered from the power of darknesse: So it com [...] [...]o passe th [...] neither are they made beleevers but by fre [...] [Page] Will, and yet by hi [...] Grace are they made be­lee [...]ers, who from the power of darknesse free­ed their Will? So the grace of God is not denied, but is shewed to be true, without any humane merits fore-going, and free Will is so defended, as that it may be well settled with humility, not by haughtinesse cast head­long, and he that glories not in man, whether any other or himselfe, but in the Lord he may glo­ [...].

CHAP. XI.

To this l [...]st state of Pelagianisme in the hands of the M [...]ssili [...]ns we may subjoyn the Doctrine of a certain Abbot in his thirteenth Collation published by Cass [...]an, against whom Prosper hath vindicated the truth according to the Doctrine of Austin, in his book [...] contra Collatorem; we shall glean a little [...]ere▪ yet so much as shall state the error, and re­fu [...]e it.

TH [...] beginning not onely of acts, but even of good thoughts is from God, who both inspires in us the beginning [...] of an holy Will, and withall gives us the strength and opportunity of finishing those things which [...], rightly desire. A little after, not a little [...]ssing this assertion of his own, It is not easie [...]humane reason to discern, how the Lord gives to [...] that aske, is found of those that seeke, and c­ [...], unto those that knocke; and againe, is found of those that seeke not, appeares openly amongst those, who asked not for him.

[Page 83]

Here as by an inscrutable diversity is a defi­ [...]ition brought in, by which it is taught, that [...]any come to grace without grace, and that some have this affection of asking, seeking, [...]nd knocking by the watchfulnesse of free Wil, which yet in others, is with so great froward­ [...]esse affirmed to be blinded, as that it cannot [...]e called back by any exhortations, except it [...]e brought over unwilling, by the force of him [...]hat drawes it; as though this was not done [...]y the whole worke of manifoldly-various grace in the minds of all, that of unwilling, [...]hey are made willing. This Disputer hath quickly forgotten his former definition, &c.

Thou hast no fuller agreement, neither with the Hereticks, nor with the Catholicks (that is the Orthodox) they defend the beginnings of [...]ree Will, in all the righteous workes of men; We beleeve the beginnings of good thoughts [...]o come forth alwaies from God: but how is [...]t that thou doest not observe thy selfe to fall [...]nto that damned opinion? That, whether thou wilt or not, thou shalt be convinced to say, [...]hat the grace of God is given according to [...]ur merits, when some thing of a good worke from men themselves shall goe before (as [...]hou affirmest) for which it shall obtaine grace.

Neither yet doth any man injoy health when he would, [...]r is [...]e freed from the disease of his sicknesse at the desire of his will.

Thou teachest therefore that a man cannot [Page 84] indeed of himselfe lay hold on health bu [...] that he hath of himself the desire of health, an [...] of his own accord only, comes to the Phisitia [...] and th [...] this very thing, that he doth com [...] is not of the Physitian; As though the soul [...] it selfe did not languish; and she being sound [...] provided a remedy for her body: But th [...] whole man by her, and with her is fallen int [...] the depth of his misery, where till she receiv [...] the knowledge of her calamity by the Phys [...] ­ [...]ian, she delights to lye alwayes loving her er­rours, and imbracing falsehood for truth whose first step to health is, that she begin t [...] displease her selfe, and to hate her old weak­nesse, the next, that she desire to be healed, and know by whom she is to be healed; whic [...] things doe so go before her health, that by hi [...] are they planted in her, who is about to heal [...] her.

These two, the Grace of God, and Free Will, se [...] indeed contrary the one to the other, but they both a­gree together; and that we ought to have an eye t [...] both alike, we gather by the law of piety, least with­drawing one of these from man; we may seem to hav [...] transgressed the rule of the Churches faith.

The Churches Rule is, the Apostle publishing it, No man can say that Iesus is the Lord but by the 1 Cor. 12. holy ghost.

The Churches Rule is, But what hast thou [...] thou hast not received? but if thou hast receive [...] 1 Cor. 4. it, why doest thou boast, as if thou hadst not received it?

The Churches Rule is, By the grace of God, I [Page 85] [...], that I am, and his grace [...]as not in vaine in me, 1 Cor. 15▪ [...] I laboured more th [...]n they all, yet not I, [...]ut the [...]e of God, which was with me. And I have ob­ [...]ed 1 Cor. 7. 25 mercy of the Lord to be faithfull.

The Churches Rule is, That we have this trea­ [...]t 2 Cor. 4. 7. in earthen vessells, that the excellency of the power [...]y be of God and not of us.

The Churches Rule is, By grace yes are saved Ephes. 2. brough faith, and that not of your selves, it is the [...]ift of God, not of workes, least any man should [...]st.

The Churches Rule is, In nothing be yee terri­ [...]ed Phil. 1 by your adversaries, which is to them a cause of [...]erdition, b [...]t to you of salvation, and that from God; [...]se to you it is giuen through Christ not onely to [...]eleeve in him, but also to suffer for him.

The Churches Rule is, Work out your owne sal­ [...]tion Phil. 2. with feare and trembling, for it is God that [...]orketh in you to will and to doe according to his good [...]easure.

The Churches Rule is, Not that we are of our 2 Cor. 3. [...]elves sufficient, to thinke any thing, as of our selves, [...]t our sufficiency is of God.

This Rule God establisheth, saying, No man John 6. [...] come to me except it be given him of the father: And All that the father hath given me shall come unto [...]e; And Without me, yee can do nothing. And Yee Iohn 15. Luk. 10. [...]ave not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and no man [...]th known the father but the sonne, and be to whom [...]e sonne will reveale him. And As the father quick­ [...]s the dead, so the sonne quickens whom hee will. And blessed art thou Simon Barjonah, for flesh and [...]lood hath not revealed this to thee, but my father which Iohn 5. Mat. 16. [...] in heaven. By this rule the Will is taken from [...]o man, because the efficacy of grace workes [Page 86] not this in the wils of men, that they be not; b [...] that of evill, they be good; and that of unbe [...] leeving, they be beleeving; and they who we [...] of themselves darknesse, are made light in th [...] Lord; that which was dead, is quickened that which was downe, is raised; that whic [...] was lost, is found: This we beleeve, the gra [...] of our Saviour doth in all men whomsoev [...] who are delivered from the power of darknesse, [...] translated into the Kingdome of the Son of Gods lov [...] without the exception of any person.

When God sees us will to turne towards good, [...] meets us, he directs us, he strengthens us.

Who sees not this Doctrine assignes meri [...] to free Will, by which grace is prevented, upo [...] which grace waites, as an hand-maid, rendrin [...] desert, not bestowing a gift, which doctr [...] was in a Synod of Bishops in Palestine by Pel [...] gius himselfe condemned with a curse; fo [...] in him who begins to will good, and desir [...] to▪ depart from iniquity, and errours, w [...] professe the grace of God workes this very [...] thing.

We are not to beleeve that God created man such [...] one, as that he never could will, nor doe good, for t [...] would he not have permitted him a free will, if he [...] granted to him only to will, and to be able to doe evi [...] but neither to will, nor to be able to doe good.

That the first Man was created upright, without all sinne, in whom the nature of al [...] men was created together, there is no doub [...] [Page 87] and that hee received such a free will, that if he would not forsake the Lord assisting him, he might persevere in that good, which natu­rally he had received, because he would: and by the merit (heare the large sence againe of this word merit, for a good worke) of volun­tary perseverance arrive at that blessednesse, that neither would he, neither could he fall into a worse condition, but by free will it selfe, by which, as long as he would, he con­tinued good, he departed from the Law propounded to him, neither did he feare the punishment of death denounced against him, forsaking God, and following the Devil, rebel­lious against the Lord his Preserver, obsequious to the enemy his destroyer.

Hitherto we have had an excellent and clear passage, about mans uprightnesse by Creation, now followes the like for his corruption by the fall; Adam therefore was, and we all were in him; Adam perished, and al perished in him, The Son of man came to seek and save, that which was lost, Luke 19. for in that ruine of the Universall Transgression, neither the substance of mans nature, nor the will is taken away, but the light and ornament of vertues, of which by the deceit of the envious one, it is stript naked, but those things being lost by which he might have come to an eternall, and inamissible in­corruption of soul and body, what remained to him, but only what belongs unto temporal life, which is wholly of Damnation and Punish­ment? wherefore it behooves that they, that are borne of Adam, be borne againe of Christ, lest any man be found in that Generation [Page 88] which is lost; the first Man lost faith, lost continence, lost love, is des [...]oyled of wis­dome, and understanding, is voyd of counsell and strength, and by wickedly following after higher things, is cast downe from the know­ledge of truth, and the piety of obedience, not so much as feare to himselfe remaining, that he might abstaine from things forbidden, at least through the feare of punishment.

That he might shew the possibility of good to be in Man, reproving the Pharisees, he saith, Why doe yee not of your selves judge what is good? which verily [...]e would not have said, had he not knowne, that they were able by Naturall judgement to discerne what was right. This is one of Mr. Good­wins grand objections, as we have seen before, let us now see the answer.

Now he ascribes not only the willing of good, but the possibility too, to free will, as though therefore understanding was required of them, therefore Righteousnesse was de­manded, because they can bring forth these things, from the endowments of Nature, not from the gifts of God; but these things are commanded man, that by the very command of God, whereby what he hath received is charged upon him, he may acknowledge that he hath lost it by his owne fault, and therefore that the requiry of it is not une­quall, though he be unable to pay what he owes; but let him flye from the Letter-kil­ling, to the Spirit-quickning, and that ability which before he found not in Nature, let him [Page 89] seeke from Grace, which if he doe, i [...] is the great mercy of the Lord, if he doe it not, it is a just punishment of sinne.

It cannot be doubted, but there are in every soule naturally some seeds of vertues, planted there by the be­nefit of the Creator.

Then did Adam only transgresse, and in his sinne no man (beside) sinned, then are we conceived in no iniquities, neither did our Mothers bring us forth in any sins; we were not by nature the Children of wrath, neither were we under the power of darknesse, but vertues naturally remaining in us, we were ra­ther the Children of peace and light. God is principally vertue, to whom it is no other thing to have vertue, then to be vertue; of him when we are partakers, Christ dwels in us, who is the vertue of God, and the wisdome of God, Faith, Hope, Love, Continence, Un­derstanding, Counsell, Courage, and all other vertues dwell in us; but when we go [...] backe from this good, all things arise contrary to us, from us; for Beauty departing, what suc­ceeds but deformity? Wisdome going away, what stayes behind but folly? where Righte­ousnesse reignes not, what beares rule but iniquity? The seeds therefore of vertue, which by the benefit of the Creator were planted in us, were by the transgression of our first Fa­ther over-turn'd, neither can they be had, but by his restoring who gave them; for the na­ture of man is reformable by the former there­of, and capable of those good endowments [Page 90] which it had, that by the Mediator betwixt God and men, the Man Christ Iesus, in that very thing which remaines to it, it may recover what it hath lost; but there remaines to it a rationall Minde, which is not vertue, but the dwel­ling-place of vertue; for by the participation of Wisdome, Justice, and Mercy, we are not Wisdome, not Justice, nor Mercy, but wise, and just, and mercifull, which good things, though our rationall (Soule) be possest of Vi­ces, and we transgressing, the uncleane Spirit hath seiz'd the Temple of God, yet may they againe flow together into our rationall (Soul) by him who casts forth the Prince of this World, and binding the strong Man, takes away by force his ves­sels, and the spirit of this world being chased away, gives unto us that Spirit which is of God, that we may know the things that are freely given us of God; but he that hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. Thus farre against any seeds of good in man by nature since the fall; then he shewes the ground of mistake in his Adversary, as followes; But I conceive he is deceived with the semblance of truth, and mistakes, through a shew of false vertues, whilst he thinkes that those good endowments, which cannot be had, but by the gift of God, are found even in the mindes of the wicked; therefore, to wit, be­cause many of them are followers of righte­ousnesse, temperance, continence, and kind­nesse, all which they have not in vaine, nor unprofitably, and much honour and glory doe they in this life obtaine by them; but be­cause in those pursuances they serve not God, but the Devill, though they have a temporall [Page 91] reward of vaine glory, yet doe they not be­long to the truth of those blessed vertues. And it is most manifest that in the mindes of the wicked no vertue dwels, but all their workes are uncleane, and polluted, they having not Spirituall, but Naturall, not Heavenly, but Earthly, not Christian, but Devillish wisdome; not from the Father of Lights, but from the Prince of Darknesse, whilst by those very things, which they could not have, but by the gift of God, they are brought into subje­ction to him who first departed from God; he therefore that saith, that the seeds of vertue are naturally in every soule without the worke of Grace, what doth he endeavour to shew, but from those seeds some twiggs of merit sprouting, going before the Grace of God?

These few gleanings I have made out of Prospers Dispute against the Collator, as perti­nent to the Argument I have in hand, concer­ning the utter impotency of the Naturall man, to any thing that hath order to, and con­nexion with eternall life; as likewise concer­ning the preveniency, efficacy, and peculiarity of Grace; I shall shut up this Discourse with certaine determinations of the second Arausi­can Councell, which Councell was held about the middle of the fifth Century.

If any man saith, That the Grace of God may be conferr'd by Humane invocation, but not that Grace it selfe makes that it be invo­ked by us; he contradicts the Prophet Isaiah, or the Apostle saying the same, I was found of those that sought me not; I appear'd openly to those, who asked not for me.

[Page 92]

If any man contends, That God expects our will that we may be cleans'd from sinne, but doth not confesse, that by the infusion and operation of the Holy Ghost it is brought to passe in us, that even we will be cleans'd, he resists the Holy Ghost, affirming by Salomon, that the Will is prepared by the Lord; and he resists the Apostle wholsomely preaching that, It is God that workes in us to will, and to doe, according to his good pleasure.

If any man saith, that as the increase, so the beginning of faith, and the very affection of beleeving, by which we beleeve upon him, who justifies the ungodly, and come to the Regeneration of Baptisme, is not in us, by the gift of Grace; that is, by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, correcting our will, from [...]nfidelity to faith, from ungodlinesse to god­linesse; but naturally he is an Adversary to the Apostles determinations, blessed Paul say­ing, We are confident that he that hath begun this good worke in you, will finish it, untill the day of our Lord Iesus Christ, and that, to you it is given for Christ, not only to beleeve, but to suffer for him; And, yee are saved through faith, and that not of your selves, it is the gift of God. For they that say, that faith whereby we beleeve on God is naturall, doe after a sort define all that are strangers to the Church of Christ, to be Be­leevers.

If any man saith, That Mercy from God is bestowed upon us, beleeving, willing, desiring, [Page 93] endeavouring, labouring, watching, caring, asking, seeking, knocking, without the Grace of God, but doth not confesse that it is wrought in us, by the infusion and inspirati­on of the Holy Ghost, that we may beleeve, will, or be able to doe all these things as we ought to doe, and doth subjoyne the ayde of Grace, either to humility, or mans obedi­ence, and doth not agree that it is the gift of Grace it selfe, that we are obedient and hum­ble; he resists the Apostle saying, What hast thou that thou hast not received? and by the grace of God I am that I am.

If any man avouch, That by the strength of Nature we can thinke any good that belongs to the Salvation of eternall life, as we ought, or that we can chuse, or consent to the saving, that is, Evangelicall preaching without the illumination, and inspiration of the Holy Ghost, who gives unto all sweetnesse in con­senting to, and beleeving the truth; he is de­ceived by an Hereticall spirit, not understan­ding that voyce of God in the Gospel, saying, Without me yee can doe nothing; and that of the Apostle, Not that we are sufficient of our selves, to thinke any thing, as of our selves, but our sufficiency is of God.

If any man contend, That some may come to the grace of Baptisme by Mercy, others by Free-will, which, as it is evident, is depraved in all that are borne of the transgression of the first Man; he is proved an Alien from the right faith; for he doth not affirme that the free [Page 94] will of all men is weakned by the sinne of the first Man, or certainly he thinkes it so hurt, as that yet some may be able to search out the Mystery of eternall life by themselves, without the revelation of God; which, how contrary it is, the Lord himselfe proves, who testifies, not that some men, but that no man can come un­to him, but whom the Father drawes. As he saith likewise to Peter, Blessed art thou Simon, the son of Ionah, for flesh and bloud hath not revealed this un­to thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And the Apostle, No man can say, that Iesus Christ is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

It is of the gift of God, both when we thinke rightly, and keep our feet from fals­hood and unrighteousnesse, for as often as we doe good, God workes in us, and with us to work.

The Divine ayde is alwayes to be implored, even by the regenerate, and the Saints, that they may come to a good end, or that they may abide in a good worke.

The nature of man, though it should re­maine in that integrity wherein it was Crea­ted, yet could it in no wise keep it selfe with­out the ayde of the Creator, whence since with­out the Grace of God it could not keep safe that health which it received, how without the Grace of God shall it restore what it hath lost?

Many good things are done in man, which man doth not, but no good things doth man, [Page 95] which God doth not make man to doe.

No man hath of his own, but a lye and sin, but if any man have truth and righteousnesse, of that fountaine it is, which we ought to thirst after in this wildernes, that being, as it were, be­dewed with some drops from it, we may not [...]aint by the way.

To the same purpose with these, is the five and twentieth Canon, which because it is some­thing long, and we have in these sufficient, I forbear to transeribe.

CHAP. XII.

ANd now, Reader, thou mayest tax me for my prolixity in this Argument, let me plead my excuse in a word or two. 1. We shal be shorter in many other things hereafter, which, we may the better be, because we have been so long here. 2. Thou hast by this discourse some­thing to recompence the length of it; as 1. The severall states of the Pelagian heresie declared: 2. The doctrine of naturall corruption, how utterly impotent unto all saving good man is thereby, dead in sin, under the power of the de­vill, altogether in the dark about, averse from, adverse to the things that according to the my­stery of godlinesse accompany salvation. 3. The doctrine of saving grace, if thou beest any thing attentive thou mayst observe that,

1 For the nature of it, It is by the superna­turall operation of the spirit, plainly of di­vine originall, and extraction, in opposition to what is naturall to fallen man.

[Page] 2 For the Subject of it, that the Understan­ding is the subject of internall illumination by the holy ghost; that the Will is the subject of renewing, of regenerating, of quickening, of so [...]ing, of subduing, of healing, of rescu­ing, of effectuall, of determining, of trans­forming, of clean [...]ing, of infranchising Grace.

3 For the Distinctions of Grace.

First, Prevenient, and Subsequent; that prevenient grace, findes many unwilling, and resisting; makes him of unwilling, willing; of resisting, obeying: that subsequent Grace carries on, what by prevenient Grace was be­gun in man; that subsequent grace, though in reference to that first grace, whereby conver­sion was wrought, it be subsequent, yet in re­ference to all after gracious operations by man, it is prevenient all along.

Secondly, Operating, and Co-operating, operating the same with prevenient, and co­operating the same with subsequent; so that co-operation is on Gods part all along, in reference to all gracious operations by man, pre-operation, and on mans part it is sub-ope­ration; Man all along depending upon the grace of God, upon the inspiration of the ho­ly Ghost; so as the whole of every gracious operation, and worke in, and by man, is of God; and by man moving under the power and efficacy of the divine motion, upon his understanding and will, as the lower wheele, under and by the motion of the higher, the whole motion by both performed.

Thirdly, Sufficient and effectuall, not only [Page 97] sufficient or habituall grace is from God [...] but Effectuall or acting grace, upon the Will of man; the Lord giving not onely a power to will, but to will it selfe, and to doe; certain­ly and infallibly determining the will of man, without all impeachment of its freedome, nay, raising it thereby to its greatest freedome, be­ing delivered from the bondage of sin and Sa­tan, by the son made free: nay, where ever there is sufficient grace, to wit, a power for saving operation, there is likewise effectuall grace, thence the operation it selfe certainly and in­fallibly.

Fourthly, Common and peculiar grace. Sa­ving grace, or grace of saving kind is common to all the regenerate, and peculiar to them on­ly, this is evident from the last.

Adde hereto, those celebrated doctrines a­gainst the Pelagians, belonging to the doctrine of prevenient, and subsequent, operating and co­operating, sufficient and effectuall grace. 1. That the grace of God is not given according to mans merits; That is, takes no rise from any thing in man, but is altogether free, prevent­ing all good, and is the author of all good in man. 2. That grace is given to every act, a new inspiration of the holy Ghost upon the will of man, for producing every holy operati­on in Man.

Adde further, for perseveting grace, that it depends upon election, is a fruit of it, and that the election of God and Grace thereon depending, is meerly arbitrary, no other ac­count to be given thereof then meerly his will. And herein thou mayst behold those re­markable [Page 98] doctrines of the Schools, in the hands of the best Schoolmen.

1 Concerning originall sinne, that man by the fall, was in the first man, wholly dispoiled of supernaturals, stript of the garments of grace (which they have from Ambrose) and sorely wounded in his naturals, and then di­stinguishing the soule into a double region; the higher, that of the Understanding and Wil, the lower that of the Sence and Appetite, and distributing the sensuall Appetite, into two Faculties, the concupiscible, we may call it, the desiring faculty; and the Irascible, we may call it the attempting faculty. They have found foure sore wounds in the soule of man by originall sin: In the Understanding, ignorance; in the Will, wickednesse; in the Desiring Faculty (whose proper vertue it is to be rightly affected towards things pleasing to sense) Concupiscence, viz. Inordinate desires after such things; in the Attempting Faculty, (whose proper vertue it is to contend against e­vill, and for good, with wrastling against diffi­culties) weaknesse.

2 Concerning the Grace of God. 1. That grace is the fruit of election. 2. That the accep­tation of grace is the fruit of election. 3. That grace is the leader of the Will. 4. That not onely exciting, but aiding grace, that is renew­ing, and acting grace must be acknowledged. 5. That the beginning of every good work. 6. That the progresse of every good work. 7. That the consummation of every good worke. 8. That the whole of every good work is from God. 9. That faith, and every Theologicall or [Page 99] Christian vertue is by divine infusion and in­spiration. 10. That man cannot without the ayde of grace, resist temptation one mo­ment, with many others of the like kind, whole­ly agreeing with the doctrines of the Fathers formerly all edged.

Hence likewise, we may observe the doctrine of the merit of congruity, and that so highly extold by the Iesuites, and Arminians, that he that doth what lyes in him by the strength of na­ture, towards eternal life (Mr. Goodwins owne doctrine in that paragraph we have been upon all this while) shall thereby obtaine grace at the hands of God; are one and the same, and both of them one with that of Pelagius, and for which he hath past for an Heretick this one thousand two hundred yeares; that grace is given according to merits, and thus by the best of the School-men is this Doctrine cen­sured.

Reader, these things and much more, if thou beest any thing attentive, thou mayest in this Discourse observe excellently cleared, and strongly proved by Austin, Prosper, and the Fathers in the fore-mentioned councells. I have now done with this Paragraph; as for that saying of Chrysostome, with which hee concludes here, it is true, but impertinent. It is the property of a soule unreasonable and un­worthy not to beleeve, but such are the soules of all natural men.

CHAP. XIII.

SEcondly, Whereas it was objected, that men in their naturall estates, are by the Scriptures termed darknesse, and in this respect presented as un­able to comprehend the light of the Gospell: I answer, there is in the controversies about the extent and effica­cy of the grace of God vouchsafed unto men, as great abuse of the word Naturall (and so of the word Su­pernaturall, a terme not found in the Scriptures, either formally or vertually) as there is of the word Orthodox, in this and many others. The Scrip­ture knoweth not the word Naturall, in any such sense or signification, where in it should expresse or di­stinguish the unregenerate estate of a man, from the regenerate: Our Translators indeed render [...] ­ [...] (in the Scripture adjoyning, of which a [...] presently) the naturall man, but quo jure nondum liquet. And however the whole carriage of the context round about, maketh it as clear as the light (as I have elsewhere argued and proved at large) that it is not the unregenerate man, but the weake Christian, that is there spoken of, and termed [...], as a little after (in the same contexture of discourse) he is termed [...], carnall, and [...], a babe or young­ling in Christ. If therefore, by the naturall estate of men, the objection meaneth the unregenerate state of men, according to the whole compasse and extent of it, and under all the differences which it admitteth, I ab­solutely deny that the Scripture any where termeth na­turall men, darknesse.

1 The word Naturall (and so Supernaturall) [Page 101] is as much abused, as the word Orthodox, that is, they are both rightly used in the sense which he opposeth.

2 How vainly he quarrells at the translati­on of the word [...], Naturall, and falsely in­terprets it of the weak [...] Christian, we shall see in its proper place:

3 Whereas he denyes the word naturall to be found in Scripture in any such sense as should distinguish the unregenerate state of man from the regenerate, and the word super­naturall in the argument of the efficacy of grace to be found either formally or vertually: I must charge this bold assertion of his, 1. With selfe-contradiction. 2. With notorious false­hood. 3. With ranke Pelagianisme.

First, With selfe-contradiction: pag. 9. of his Preface hee chargeth them with great er­rors, who will have reason laid aside in enqui­ries after matters of a spirituall and supernatu­rall concernment, which he there makes the same with matters of Religion; what is then spirituall, and what is of religious nature, by your own confession there, is supernaturall. But all Christian graces (Faith, Hope, Love, &c.) are spirituall and of religious na­ture; therefore, grace and the efficacy of it, are supernatural. Vertually then at the least, this word supernatural is found in Scripture, in this argument of the efficacy of grace, for those graces are by the efficacy of a gracious in­flux, and in them is there an efficacious ver­tue of spiritual nature, otherwise, how are they spirituall?

2 With notorious falsehood, so obvious, that [Page 102] was not the sword upon his right eye utterly darkening it, I cannot imagine how such a doctrine should have escaped his pen. Let us bring it to the touch-stone of the Scriptures, singling out of many texts a few, Iohn 3. 5, 6, 7, 8 Is not there a first, and second birth; the first natural, the second supernatural? and is not this the effect of grace? is it not by divine im­pression upon the soule by the spirit of God, that any one is borne of the spirit? Iohn 5. 25. The hour is coming, and now is, that the dead shall hear the voyce of the Sonne of God, and they that [...]èare shall live. Is not the conversion of a sin­ner here set forth to be a spiritual resurrecti­on? and is not a spiritual resurrection both as spirituall (by your owne grant) and as a re­surrection supernatural? Eph. 2. 5, 6. Is it not a supernatural work, To quicken such as were dead in trespasses and sinnes, to raise them up together with Christ, and make them sit together in heavenly pla­ces in Christ Iesus? This union with Christ, and these spirituall advancements of the soule in Christ, are they not supernatural, and by the efficacy of grace? Ephes. 4. 22, 23, 24. Is not that change, In putting off the old man, in being renew­ed, and putting on the new man, which is created, &c. by the operation, and efficacy of Grace, and is it not supernaturall? 1 Cor. 2. 9. to the 15.

Is not that revelation of the spirit discovering what eye hath not seen, &c. Searching the deepe things of God, things as farre above the spi­rit of the naturall man, as the things of man, are above the spirit of a beast? Things which the spirit of the World, that is, that spirit [Page 103] which is common to men, cannot discover, things, that can no otherwise be discovered but by Spirituall light, things, which the Naturall man therefore cannot receive, because they are Spi­ritually discerned; Is not the revelation of these things supernaturall? A revelation which flesh and bloud makes not, Titus 3. 5. The wash­ing of Regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost. Doth it report nothing supernaturall to your eare? We might adde, 2 Cor. 5. 17. that new Creation there; and Iam. 1. 18. that new generation there; and Iob. 6. 44, 45. that drawing, and teaching of the Father, with many others of like kinde; are all these natu­rall, nothing in these above the power and operation of Nature, and that in this corrupt state? By this time I hope it appeares, that the word Naturall belongs to the unregenerate, and that Regeneration is by supernaturall o­peration, and that the unregenerate, or Natu­rall man, as such, is in Scripture Language darknesse.

Thirdly, with ranke Pelagianisme, I call it ranke, because thus farre it agrees with the first and second state formerly declared, as to admit no supernaturall operation upon the Soule, for conversion, or recovery from sinne, if this be not your meaning, I pray disclose your Riddle, for no man I thinke can judge o­therwise by your words.

Those Ephesians of whom the Apostle saith, They were sometime darknesse, had been not only, or simply unregenerate, but had walked in sins and trespasses, according to the course of this [Page 104] world, and after the Prince that ruleth in the Aire, that worketh effectually in the Children of disobedience, by whom their understan­ding had been darkned, and they possessed with many false, wicked, and blasphemous conceits concer­ning God, and the Gospel, &c. All which imply on unregenerate estate most dangerously encumbred, and from whence it argued the high and signall grace and favour of God, that even they should be delivered. The Jewes also, (Joh, 1. 5.) are termed darknesse upon a like account, viz. because they were strangely and desperately prejudiced, and pre-possessed with er­roneous Notions, and conceits against Christ, and a­bout the estate of their Messiah's first coming unto them, they expecting the forme of a great Monarch, rejected, and Crucified him in the forme of a Ser­vant; it was this darknesse, which they had through an oscitant, loose, and sensuall converse with their owne Scriptures, voluntarily suffered to grew, and spread it selfe upon the face of their mindes and under­standings, that was a snare upon them, and occasioned the sad event here mentioned, viz. That when the light shone upon them (i. e. when sufficient and pregnant meanes were vouchsafed unto them, to have brought them to the knowledgement of their Messiah) they comprehended it not, i. e. did not by the meanes of it come to see, and understand that, for the sight and knowledge whereof it was given them; for that (by the way) is to be observed, that the Evan­gelist doth not say, that the darknesse, in which the light shined, could not, or was not able to comprehend it, but only that it did not comprehend it.

Now it is a knowne Principle in reason, that a Ne­gatione actus, ad negationem potentiae non [...]alet argumentum, there may be a defect in acti­on, [Page 105] or performance, where there is no defect of power for action. And the very observation and report which the Evangelist makes of the Non-comprehension of the light by the darknesse, in which it shone, plainely e­nough imports, that the defectivenesse of this dark­nesse, in not comprehending the light, did not consist in, or proceed from any Naturall or invincible want of power to comprehend it, but from a blindnesse vo­luntarily contracted, and willingly, if not wilfully per­sisted in; for how can it be reasonably supposed, that this Evangelist, who flyeth an higher pitch then his Fellowes, in drawing up his Evangelicall Tidings for the use and benefit of the World, should in the very entrance of his Gospell, and whilst he was thundring out on high, (as one of the Fathers speakes) the Di­vinity of Christ, insert the relation of a thing that had nothing strange, nothing more then of ordinary and common observation in it? or is any thing more then ordinary, or what is most obvious, that men doe not fly in the Aire like Birds, or that Fishes doe not speake on the earth like men? Or is it a thing of any whit the more savoury consideration then these, that men voyd of all capacity, and destitute of all power to comprehend the light, should n [...]t comprehend it? but that there should be a Generation of men, whom it so infinitely concerned to comprehend the light, to ac­knowledge and owne their Messiah being now come unto them, and who withall had a rich sufficiency of meanes to have done the one, and the other, should notwithstanding be so stupid, and unlike men, as not to comprehend this light, nor to acknowledge or owne this their M [...]ssiah, is a matter of high admiration, and astonishment, and the mention of it very commodious, and proper for the subject of the discourse which the Holy G [...]st had now in hand (as might be shewed more [Page 106] at large) but I feare the Reader hath more then his burthen of an Epistle.

1 Here you answer certaine Objections a­gainst your new Doctrine, and in the first place (if I mistake not) you contradict your selfe, by the genius of your discourse, granting that in the Call of the Ephesians there was a super­naturall worke, for as much as you affirme that their state, which was of darknesse, was not such as naturall to fallen man, whom you will have, it seemes, meerly in his Naturall state, a Childe of Light rather then of Dark­nesse (as Prosper upbraides the Collator) so that howsoever nothing supernaturall be required, for bringing men to faith and repentance ge­nerally, yet here it must be admitted; if so, then is the word supernaturall vertually found in the Scriptures.

2 Your supposall of their unregenerate state so dangerously encumbred above the un­regenerate state of the generality of men, that thence this difference should arise, That though they were darknesse, yet these are not, is false and frivolous; for,

1 These very sins and trespasses, whence you argue the speciall aggravation of their condi­tion, were the very same wherein the whole world walked— according to the course of the world, and in the same subjection to the Devill was the world—according to the Prince of the power of the Aire, the Spirit that wrought in the children of disobedience; Such were all unregenerate, needs must the course of the world be according to that Prince, who is the Prince of the world, [Page 107] the god of the world. Nay, the Apostles, and first converted Iewes, borne and bred in the visible Church, before conversion, had their conversation among them, and were children of wrath together with them; here was then nothing peculiar to them in their unregenera­cy of force to quit the Naturall man of this charge of darknesse.

2 These sins and trespasses, wherein they walked were the fruits of Naturall corruption, whereby all men are dead in sinne, they here, though dead in actuall sins, yet dead by ori­ginall sinne; Thus the Apostle describes this sinfull conversation to be in the lusts of the flesh, and a fulfilling the wills of the flesh, and of the minde, all these sins of theirs were the workes of the flesh; and what is the flesh but corrupt Nature found in all men, to them derived from the first man? Ioh. 3. 6. That which is borne of the flesh, is flesh, diametrically opposed to the Spirit, which is the fountaine of Spirituall light and life; and that which is borne of the Spi­rit, is spirit; without which Spirituall birth, Nicodemus his grosse apprehensions there, shew the darknesse of the Naturall man; this flesh, or corruption of Nature, called likewise the Old man, made up of many deceitfull Lusts, the fountaine of this evill conversation, Ephes. 4. 22. called by the same Apostle, The Law of the Members, contrary to the Law of the minde, but of the minde renewed (for otherwise, walking in those abominable wayes whilst un­regenerate, they fulfilled the desires or will [...] of the minde, in fulfilling the will of the flesh, called, The Body of death. Likewise, Rom. 7. [Page 108] through which the Naturall man is dead; nay, so much as remaines of it in the Spirituall man, so much death there is still, as the Apostles complaint testifies; this the fountaine of what­soever sins the Apostle, now regenerate, was pester'd with; the fountaine then of all sins, and only of sinne in unregeneracy. The deadly strength of this corruption we see further by singular instance in David, a Person so holy, yet how upon advantage and surprisall did it prevaile against him, to put forth those dead­ly fruites of Adultery, and Murther, which sins he derives from Naturall corruption, that had seized him in the wombe, Psal. 51. Fur­ther, the Apostle charging corruption of Na­ture upon all Mankinde, Iewes and Gentiles, not one excepted, Rom. 3. he makes up his charge of most hideous sins— Their throat an open Sepulchre, the poyson of Aspes under their lips, their mouth full of cursing and bitternesse, their feet swift to shed bloud, &c. because of those strong incli­nations which are in all men through Origi­nall sinne, to these great transgressions; and where ever sins of this, or any other kind are actually committed, they are the fruits of this corruption; where they are not committed, it is from the restraining hand of God, at least, upon men. It was then by the corruption of Nature common to all, that these Ephesians were dead in trespasses and sinnes, covered over there-with, as with the deadly streames of that spring of death running over them; but the state of death is a state of darknesse to the ut­most. Adde, that all unregenerate men, in the state of death and darknesse, through corrup­tion, [Page 109] are likewise in the possession, and under the dominion of the Prince, and of the pow­er of darknesse, by whom the remainders of Naturall light (which is farre from Spirituall, holy, saving light are more and more dark­ned, and the capacity of Historicall light more weakned; the Doctrine then of the Na­turall mans darknesse, even in a state of death maintained, as we saw before by the Fathers, against the Pelagian [...], stands firme upon Scrip­ture-foundations, against which your attempts are as vaine, asimpious; so much for your first instance.

Now for the second Instance of the Iewes, you say, 1 Ioh. 5. it is manifest that darknesse is there charged upon all men made by him, ver. 3, 4, 5. and is not the like charge of dark­nesse upon all? otherwhere, 1 Cor. 2. 12. 14. and Iob 11. 12. vaine man would faine be wise, though he be borne (he is so by nature then) like a wilde Asses colt. The men of your Do­ctrine are deep in this condemnation of vaine men: to no purpose then is your Discourse, applying this darknesse to the Iewes only, tel­ling us of these and these things more then or­dinary in them, making for this darknesse in them; As for your observation, that the E­vangelist doth not say, (the darknesse could not, but did not comprehend the light) you dis­cover high Pelagianisme againe, for though you interpret this of the Iewes, whose unre­generate estate you will have by strong and des­perate prejudices against Christ to be much more encumbred, then is the unregenerate state of men generally, yet you will not allow that [Page 110] these could not comprehend that light.

2 This observation of yours is very vaine▪ as appeares by your trifling argument, viz. That the consequence holds not from the denyall of the Act, to the denyall of the Power. For,

1. From the universal denyal of the act, without exception, the consequence holds strongly to the denyal of the power, because God gives no power in vaine, but here is an u­niversall denial of the Act, as we have seen by the context; this non-comprehension being charged upon all men, and it is evident in ex­perience, except Mr. Goodwin, shall produce that naturall man, which comprehends this light.

2 The Power it self is otherwhere, and that very clearly denied, as we have but now seen, in our discourse of naturall corruption, and the naturall mans subjection, to the powers of darknesse in consent with which Scriptures this must be interpreted.

As for your following Discourse it is not worth a deafe nut, though you flourish it as much as you can: an ill face needs a good dresse; triviall matter must have words to set it off; the sum of your Rhetorication is, that if there be that naturall darknesse and impoten­cy upon all men, it was impertinent for the Evangelist to charge it upon the Iewes, especi­ally when he was entring upon Gospell-do­ctrine, beginning with that high and maine doctrine, the Divinity of Christ. But 1. His charge is here upon all men as we have seen, not upon the Iewes alone, 2. Is it such a wonder, that he that is about to set forth Christ, as mans [Page 111] redeemer, should teach the doctrine of natu­ral impotency and corruption, without which all other doctrines of Christ were in vaine? you may doe well upon the account of your pro­per reasoning, here to strike out the two first, and halfe the third chapter of the Epistle to the Ro [...]ant, your selfe, and brethren in error with you, are proofe sufficient how necessary that doctrine is, when notwithstanding it is so plainly and frequently taught, yet it is so strange to you; and now what was your drift in your former plausible discourse against er­rour is manifest, namely, that which we there mentioned to undermine the true doctrine of naturall darknesse, and impotency. You con­clude this Section, That you feare the Reader, hath more then his burthen of an Epistle: you need not doubt it, except there had been more truth and worth in it.

CHAP. XIV.

Thirdly, Concerning that Scripture (1 Cor. 2. 14.) but the natural man perceiveth not, &c. if, Rea­der, thou conceivest there is any thing in it spoken with any intent to disable Reason or Understanding in a man so farre as to devest them of all capacity and power for the apprehending, conceiving, or beleeving any the things of God; yea, or particularly, of such of the things of God, the discerning and beleeving whereof is of absolute necessity for salvation; thou maist if thou pleasest, deliver thy judgement from the mistake by the perusall of a few pages in a discourse formerly publi­shed, where thou wilt finde this passage of Scripture [Page 110] [...] [Page 111] [...] [Page 112] opened at large, and driven home to its issue, here I clearly demonstrate these three things.

1. That the place speaketh not of the naturall, i. e. of the unregenerate man, but of the weak Christian, the babe in Christ.

2. That the things of God here spoken of are not such things, the knowledge or discerning whereof is of absolute necessity to salvation, but the high or deepe things of God, of the true and worthy discerning of which, only the Spirituall man, i. e. the strong and well grown Christian is De praesenti, and immediately capable.

3. (And lastly) that the incapacity of these things of God which is here asserted to be in the Naturall man or weake Christian, is not an utter or absolute inca­pacity, or such, which by a diligent use of means he may not very possibly and according to the ordinary course of providence out-grow, but only a present or actuall in­capacity or indisposition, which is regularly, and (at it were) of course curable: these things I there evince from the expresse tenor, and carriage of the con­text.

For his explication of 1 Corinth. 2. 14.

1. Hee saith, the place speakes not of the Naturall i. e. the unregenerate man, but of the weake Christian, the babe in Christ. That the place speaks of the Naturall or unregene­rate man, is evident against his demonstrations he tels us of, which indeed are of no affinity with Euclia's, we have only night for a vision in them.

1. Of him that hath not the spirit of God, v. 11. But the spirit of the world opposite to the spirit of God, v. 12. 2. The things of the Spirit of God are foo­lishnesse [Page 113] unto him, and what things are these? why the things that are held forth in the preaching of Christ crucified, v. 2. Now to whom is the preaching of Christ crucified foolishnesse? to them that perish, V. 18. But to them that are saved, the power of God, to the uncalled, i. e. the unregene­rate, foolishnesse, but to the called of God, the power of God, and the wisdome of God, v. 23, 24.

2 The things of God here (he saith) are such, as are not absolutely necessary to salvati­on, but the high and deep things of God. But 1. The things absolutely necessary to be knowne, are as high and deep as any; the Trinity of the persons, the union of the two Natures in the Mediator, the oblation and intercession of Christ, the imputation of his righteousnes, &c.

2 These are the things absolutely necessary to salvation, for they are the things in the preaching whereof, Christ crucified is preached, v. 2. the things of the hidden wisdome of God ordain­ed to the glory of the Saints, v. 7. the things freely given of God to the Saints, v. 12. Whereas you say in the close here, that the spiritual man onely, that is, the strong and wel grown Christian is, de praesen­ti, and immediately capable, &c.

1 If onely the strong and wel growne Chri­stian be the spiritual man, then is the meer natu­rall man a weak Christian, and so all the world by nature Christians, i. e. beleevers: welcome all, Turkes, and Insidels, to Mr. Goodwins Church.

2 Whether do you allow the spiritual man, to be above the natural man or not? if not, (as indeed you cannot, if you will be constant to your selfe as here, so formerly, neither can [Page 114] you deny it, if you wil be constant to your self, as formerly we observed; but you are a fa­mous self-subverter, then is the Naturall man capable, de praesenti, &c. Contrary to your owne interpretation of the Apostles expresse doctrine here; if you doe allow him above the natural man, then you grant the word Supernaturall vertually in that sense, wherein you formerly denyed it; so that you are full of interwoven contradictions, at every turne refuting your selfe.

3 You deny here an utter incapacity of these things in the Natural man, &c. but such as he may out-grow, according to the ordinary course of providence.

1. Your Doctrine is evidently false. 1. These things of the spirit of God are discerned by another light, and another principle then the Natural man hath, He neither knowes, nor can know them, saith the Apostle, because they are spiritually discerned: and this light of the spirit, specifically distinct from the light of Reason in the Natu­ral man, as the light of reason is from the light of Sense in the bruit beast, v. 11. And this spirit the world hath not (therfore not the Natural man) v. 12. Formerly he made such an observation, as this, his refuge, that the Evangelist said, not Darknesse could not, but did not comprehend the light, which, how slender a refuge it was for him we there saw: here the Apostle is expresse, Cannot, yet he attempts an evasion. There is no end of this mans sophistry, nor can be upon his principles, that the Grammar and Logick of the Scripture must vaile to his Reason.

2 Your Doctrine here (as all along) is pure­ly [Page 115] Pelagian: for you acknowledge no such in­capacity in the Natural man, of discovering all Gospel-truths leading to salvation, but what by the diligent use of meanes hee may over­grow, &c. therefore of himselfe, not onely may he make use of the means, but so make use of them, as that thence, he shall certainly be sa­vingly inlightened: Which must bee one of these wayes.

1 Either the seeds of naturall light shall hereby grow up into a saving light, so Nature improves it selfe into Grace, and this is ac­cording to your Doctrine, that there is nothing supernatural in the efficacy of Grace; and this is highly Pelagian, for it makes Nature Grace, (Sub laude Naturae, latent inimici Gratiae) and Na­ture before this improvement must be Grace, in the seed, as by it, it becomes grace in the fruit, Or,

2 By this use of means, he shall procure the giving of saving light and grace from the hand of God, which is still the Pelagian doctrine, that the grace of God is given according to mans merits; but still it is a Riddle to mee, how you can allow thus much, and make good your doctrine, against the supernaturall effica­cy of grace.

As for your glosse upon 1 Cor. 3. 1. It is evi­dent the Apostle calls them carnall, opposed to spiritual; not absolutely, as formerly he had opposed the natural man, but in part, there­fore he addes by way of limitation, babes in Christ; but when he expostulates with them v. 3. are yee not carnall, and walke according to max? he there implies, that the meer man is wholly car­nall, [Page 116] for as much as the weake Christian, so farre as he is carnall, he is according to man, and wherein he walkes carnally he walkes ac­cording to man.

4 (And lastly to the Objection) concerning Hea­then Philosophers, and others of great parts, and naturall endowments of reason, wit, understanding, &c. who either rejected the Gospell, as a Fable, as the Philosophers, or else perverted and wrested the truth thereof in many things to their owne destruction, and possibly to the destruction of others, as Hereticks; I answer, when I affirme and teach, that Reason, or the intellectuall part of a man is competent to appre­hend, discerne, subscribe unto the things of God, and of the Gospell, my meaning is not to affirme withall, that therefore men of these endowments, though never so excellently enriched with them, must of necessity ap­prehend, discerne, or subscribe unto these things; Rea­son, and understanding even of the greatest advance in man, will serve men for other ends and purposes, be­sides the apprehension and discerning the things of God in the Gospell, and may accordingly be improved and imployed by them; yea, they may be imployed against the Gospell, and made to warre and fight against the truth of it: it is a saying of knowne truth concerning all things that have not an essentiall connexion with a mans soveraigne good:

Nil prodest quod non laedere possit idem. i. e.

Because some men suffer themselves to be bewitched with a corrupt desire of drawing away Disciples after them, and for the fulfilling of such a Lust speake per­verse things (as the Apostle speaketh) it doth not [Page 117] fellow from hence, that therefore they were in no capa­city, or in no possibility of speaking the truth, and re­fraining from the teaching of perverse things.

Aristotle speaking of riches, saith, That it is un­possible that he should have them, who takes no care to have them; So are we to conceive of the knowledge and true discerning of the things of God in the Gospell, in what capacity soever men are, either for ability, or meanes otherwise for attaining them, it is unpossible that ever they should actually attaine to them, unlesse they be carefull, and shall bend the strength of their mindes and understandings in or­der to the attainment of them. Now the Heathen Phi­losophers (more generally) became vaine in their imaginations, as the Apostle speaketh, i. e. they spent themselves,, the strength of their parts, time, and opportunities upon matters of a low, or secondary con­cernment, and which they apprehended to have a more ready and certaine connexion with their owne honour, and esteeme amongst men, and did not charge them­selves, their gifts, or parts, with that worthy and bles­sed designe, which the Apostle calls the having of God in acknowledgement; upon this their unnaturall unthankfulnesse towards God, uttering it selfe in their addition of themselves, to studies, speculations, and enquiries of a selfe concernment with the neglect of him, [...] their foolish heart was darkned. Concerning Hereticks, it is a common Notion amongst us, that these from time to t [...]me were turned aside from the way of truth, by some uncleane Spirit or other; as Pride, Ambition, En­vie, Voluptuousnesse, or the like; if these Spirits once enter into a man, they will soone call in, and take unto themselves other spirits worse then them­selves; I meane spirits of errour and delusion, to ad­vocate [Page 118] for them, and plead their cause: as for the mistakes and miscarriages in judgement of good men, upright (in the maine) with God, and the Gospell, a­bout some particular points they are to be resolved into several causes, of which we shal not now speake particu­larly, only this I shall say, whatsoever any mans er­rour, or mistake in judgement, is about the things of the Gospell, it is not to be imputed to any deficiency on Gods part, in the vouchsafement of meanes unto him, competent, and sufficient, as well for the guiding into, as for the keeping of his judgement in the way of truth, but into some deficiency, neglect, or incogitancy of his owne, which he might very possibly have prevented, or over-come. But—

For the summe of this Paragraph concer­ning the Philosophers, and Heretiques, you say in the first place, That though they were able to apprehend the things of the Gospell, yet doth it not follow that they must; but 1. We have seene that no Naturall man is a­ble. 2. Finde one that ever did advance his reason to apprehend the Gospell-Mystery without the Spirit of illumination, revealing it by the Word, if not one, then none could, for from the Universall deniall of the Act, to the deniall of the Power, the consequence is undeniable. 3. Whether might those Philo­sophers (according to your apprehension) without the word of the Gospell, have found out in the Booke of the Creature the Gospell-Mystery, or might they so improve their rea­son about inquiry after God? That thereupon he must send his Word unto them, thereby en­lightening them? whether soever of these you [Page 119] take, you fall into the Relagian Heresie, as we often formerly evinced against your Discourse of the same batch with this.

As for your instance of men bewitched with a corrupt desire of drawing Disciples after them, and speaking perverse things; pardon me, if I be apt to beleeve that you speake feelingly, and from selfe-experience.

2 You teach that men must bend their minds and intentions to Gospel-enquiries, that they may have the knowledge thereof; Tis true, so doth the Spirituall man: But the Naturall man wants Principles for bending his minde thereto, as discerning nothing worthy in them, and his heart's set against them.

3 You say, That God punishing the Philo­sophers for their unthankfulnesse, addicting themselves to other things, &c. their foolish heart was darkned: this is true too, but the conclusion you ayme at here, scil, that there­fore they were able to have addicted them­selves to Gospel-enquiries is both false, and Pelagian, as hath been proved before; as sup­posing that man is able to performe all his duty.

As for Hereticks, it is true, you say, They are led aside by some uncleane Spirit, there­fore must I alwayes suspect an Heretick, though his conversation be never so specious, to be but a whited Sepulchre; whereas in the close of this Section you say, That whatsoever any mans errour, &c. be, it is not to be imputed to deficiency on Gods part, in the vouchsafement of meanes; I answer, deficiency sounds cul­pably, and therefore not to be imputed to [Page 120] God; but evident it is, that God doth not) yet without deficiency vouchsafe the necessary meanes of Gospel-knowledge, to many de­nying his Word, to more his Spirit, who have no more, nor otherwise deserved this deniall, then those to whom he affords both, who is sought of those that asked not for him, and found of those that sought him not, of whom it is, as of him that shewes mercy, not of him that wills, nor of him that runs.

Secondly, concerning the Spirit of God, by which alone, and in opposition to reason many affirme and teach, That the things of God, and matters of Reli­gion are to be apprehended, discerned, and knowne; I answer, that such an Opinion as this, is a conceit as uncouth, as [...]ulpably weake, and ill-coherent with it selfe, as lightly can be; for if only the Spirit of God within me apprehends the things of God, and I my selfe apprehend them not (and apprehend them I can­not, but by my reason or understanding, having no other faculty, where with to apprehend or conceive them) such an apprehension of them relateth not at all unto me, nor can I any whit be said the more to appre­hend them, because the Spirit of God apprehends them in me; then I may, or might, in case the same Spirit should apprehend them in another man; That which another man meditates, or indicts in my house without imparting it unto me, no whit more concernes me, then in case be should have meditated or indicted the same in the house of another man. Besides, the Spirit of God being but one and the same infinite, and invisible Spi­rit in all men, he cannot with any tolerable propriety of speech, nor with truth, be said to apprehend, discern, and concerve that in one man, which he doth not after [Page 121] the same manner apprehend, discerne, and conceive in another, yea, in every man; therefore if there be any thing more apprehended, or discerned of the things of God, in one man then in another, the difference ari­seth not from the different apprehensions of the Spirit in these men, but from the different apprehensions of these men themselves, and this by their owne reasons and understandings, they having (as hath been said) no other faculties, principles, or abilities where-with to apprehend, but these.

You affirme here, That many teach that by the Spirit of God alone, in opposition to rea­son in man the things of God are apprehen­ded: who those many are, or one of those many, I know not; the Doctrine of your knowne Adversaries is, That by mans reason are the things of God apprehended, but that they may be savingly so, reason must be Spiri­tually enlightned, and the whole soule sancti­fied, and that by preventing and differencing Grace, so that all you say further in this Se­ction are wast words; you may make great webs, if you spin thus plentifully, yet when all is done they will be but Cobwebs.

CHAP. XV.

IF it be demanded, But is any man able without the presence and assistance of the spirit of God, to dis­cern the things of God, or to judge aright the matters of Religion? I answer,

1 Plainely, and directly to the heart (I suppose) of these, who make this demand, No: The spirit of God [Page 122] hath such a great interest in, and glorious super-in­tendency over the Mindes, and Spirits, Reasons and Understandings of men, that they cannot act or move regularly, or performe any of these operations or fun­ctions that are most naturall and proper to them, upon any worthy or comely termes, especially in matters of a spirituall concernment, but by the gracious and loving interposure and helpe of the spirit; for (questionlesse) the intellectuall frame of the heart and soul of man, was by the sin and fall of Adam wholly dissolved, shattered, brought to an absolute Chaos, & confusion of ignorance, and darknesse, to a condition of as great impotency to doe him the least service, in order to his comfort or peace in any kind, as can be imagined. So that if the Reasons and Understandings of men quit them­selves in their actings or workings with honour, or with any due proportion to their benefit, comfort, or peace; it must needs be by meanes of that gracious conjunction of the spirit of God with them, which is a veuchsafe­ment unto the children of men, procured by him, who raised up the Tabernacle of Adam, when it was fal­len, Iesus Christ blessed for ever, in respect of which vouchsafement purchased by him, and given unto men for his sake, he is said to in lighten every man, coming into the world: so that what light soe­ver of truth, what clear and sound principle, or impres­sions of Reason or Understanding soever is since the fall, to be found in any man, is an expresse f [...]utt of the Grace, that is given unto the world, upon the account of Iesus Christ, and is re­invested in the soule, by the appropriated interposure of the spirit of God, the gift whereof upon this account, is so frequently and highly magnified in the Scriptures. Yea, not only the habituall residency of all principles of light and truth in the soule, is to be attributed unto [Page 123] the Spirit of God, as supporting and preserving them from defacement, but also all the actings and movings of the rationall powers of the soule, according to the ex­igency, ducture, and import of them, as in all right ap­prehensions of things, in all legitimate and sound rea­sonings, and debates, whether for confirmation of any truth, or the confutation of any error or the like, But—

Here we have a Question and an Answer, for the Answer we have much to observe, and con­tend against it.

1 You say that you Answer to the heart of those, &c. then, as is your perpetual manner, up­on this Argument, you Cant in high words, and generall expressions: Briefly, that you may answer to the heart of those, that hold the truth against you; You must Answer two things, first that the soule must be renewed by habituall grace. Secondly, That so renewed, it must be acted by effectuall grace.

2 You grant the utter dissolution of the in­tellectual frame by Adams fall, hereby no doubt you thinke to finde out an evasion from the charge of Pelagianisme: We shall see how well you will acquit your selfe of this charge in the examination of your doctrine: in the meane time, here is deep silence about the will of man, and about the sensual appetite: do you grant the Will, as to supernaturals, wholly dispoiled, as to naturals deeply wounded? doe you deny the lustings of the sensuall appetite in the state of innocency against right reason? Or do you with the Iesuiticall Schoole hold such lustings natural to that state?

[Page 124] 3 You lay down your maine doctrine that there is such a light vouch safed to all men, by the procurement of Iesus Christ, as that accor­ding to your former doctrine, every man in the world may improve it to faith and repen­tance. Here,

1 We must take notice of an unsound drop­ping of your pen by the way, and upon the by: Christ you say, raised up the Tabernacle of A­dam; this, no doubt to insinuate, that all men without exception, are redeemed by him; But by your leave Sir, it is the Tabernacle of David, that he raiseth up, as he took upon him the seed of Abraham: but men of unsound do­ctrines, have no minde to hold fast the form of sound words.

2 For the doctrine it self, which you ground upon Ioh. 1. 9. It is such, as that Scripture will not at all countenance. 1. They give a very fair interpretation of the place, and as to me it seems genuine, who understand by this light, natural Understanding, and Reason bestowed upon man by Christ, as God, and mans Crea­tor, which natural light still remains, though much obscured by the fall in man, without which he was not man; and of this light Christ, as the Son of God and Author of nature, is the Author unto every one borne into the World; Thus Calvin (and with him others) resolving the place thus, The Evangelist setting forth the divinity of Christ, shewes him to have been the Creator of all things, v. 3. And be­cause man is the choicest peece of the creatures here below, and wee are most affected with truths concerning our selves, he set forth [Page 125] Christ not onely as the Author of being to all creatures in general, v. 3. but particularly in­stanceth in man, whose being i [...] of the best beings; a life, and this life, of the best of lives; a rationall. and intellectuall. In him was life, he is life of himselfe; and he is the spring or author of life, to all living creatures: more particularly, of that life of light, which the rational creature, Man, lives, v. 4. the same light with that, v. 9. The Author of which light, the Creator of man, Iohn testifies him to be giving witnesse to his God-head, He that commeth after me is preferred before me, for he was before me, v. 15.

Of this light Austine speakes, Tract. 2. in cap. 1. Ioan. This life was the light of men, did hee say the light of beasts?—There is a certaine light of men, whereby they differ from beasts. Let us now see, and understand what is this light of men. Thou differest not from a beast, but by thy Understanding; whence art thou better then the beast? from the image of God; where is the image of God? in the minde, in the understanding. If therefore thou beest better then a beast, because thou hast a mind, by which thou understandest what the beast cannot understand, and thence thou art a man, that thou art better then the beast; The light of men, is the light of minds; the light of mindes, is above minds, and excels all minds. This was that life by which all things were made, here then the Creator of man is set forth his restorer.

2 If we must suppose it supernaturall Light, then must we limit the Subject enlightned [Page 126] thus; He enlightens every man that comes into this world, who is enlightned; that is, there is no other fountaine of Light but he, to all that are enlightned; here we may fitly bring in that illustration of that eminent light, Austin upon that text, They shall all be taught of God; who when he had according to truth interpre­ted it onely of the Sons of the Promise, and the Vessels of Mercy, according to Election—he addes for further clearing. ‘But as we speake rightly, when we say of any Schoole-master who is alone in the City, this man teacheth all, not because all learne, but because none learn but of him, whosoever doe there learne; so we rightly say, God teacheth all men to come to Christ, not because all come, but be­cause no man comes otherwise, Lib. de praedest. Sanct. chap. 8.’ so here, Christ enlightens every man that comes into this world, not that every man coming into the world is enlightned, but of all commers into the world, whosoever is enlightned, he alone is the enlightner; though as I said the former interpretation seemes most genuine; but whether the for­mer, or this, or whatsoever other interpretation may be the truth, it is evident, that Mr. Good­wins, who will have such a gift of illuminati­on vouchsafed by Christ unto all, as that every man may improve to faith and repentance, can­not be the truth.

1 From the context here, for notwithstan­ding this light, and enlightning, such is the darknesse both of the world, and of his owne, the Iewes, as, comprehended not this light, or ra­ther laid no hold upon it, as knew him not, [Page 127] [...] received him not, these only excepted, who [...] distinction from, and opposition to the rest, were not borne of bloud, nor of the will of the flesh, [...]or of the will of man, but of God; therefore well saith Austin, speaking of that light shining upon this darknesse; As when a blinde man is placed in the Sun-shine, the Sunne is present to him, but he is absent from the Sunne; so every foole, every unrighteous, every wicked person is blinde in his heart, wisdome is pre­sent to him, but being present to a blinde man, it is absent from his eyes, not because it is absent from him, but because he is absent from it, Tract. 1. in c. 1. Ioan. here was a beam­ing forth of this light upon such, and about them, in his workes and word, but they nei­ther discerne it, nor have any power so to doe, because they are blinde though in the middest of Sun-shine.

2 From the whole Doctrine of Naturall corruption, and the grace of Conversion throughout the Scriptures; even all those Scriptures, whence you gather, That the in­tellectuall frame of man was so shatter'd by Adams fall, are bent against all unregenerate persons, shewing not what they had been by Adams fall, if Christ had not been, but what they are, this notwithstanding, before regene­ration; therefore.

1 For the Doctrine of Naturall corruption, all men are thereby before regeneration flesh, in which dwels no good thing, wherein it is impossible to please God; which, enmity against the Law of God, contrary in its lustings to the Spirit, all dead in sin, all darknesse, all children of wrath, all in subjection [Page 128] to Satan, all under the Law, all borne as wilde Ass [...] Colts, all such as cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God, as savour onely the things of the flesh, &c. whereas if your Doctrine was true, the Scrip­ture must have affirm'd the contrary to all these, either that by Nature we are not flesh, or not so wholly in opposition to the Spirit; but that in the flesh some good thing dwels, that we may by Nature please God, that we are in amity with the Law of God, compliant to the motions of the Spirit, alive from sinne, light, children of peace, free from Satans bon­dage, borne under Grace, borne the Children of wisdome, such as can receive the things of the Spirit of God, as savour, or have those Principles, whereby we may savour the things of the Spirit, &c.

2. For the Doctrine of the Grace of conver­sion, the Scripture saith;

1 That it is supernaturall, quickning Grace, Grace by which we are borne anew, Grace raising from the dead, Grace anew creating; but according to your Doctrine, there should be no such thing, as the Grace of conversion, or Regeneration, but only a progresse of Naturall vertues, faith and re­pentance, but the fruits of the seeds of light in Nature; for this light you make a common vouchsafement to all, and the word Naturall you will not allow to difference the unrege­nerate man from the regenerate: so that in the building of your Babel, here is nothing but confusion of speech, from confusion of things, Grace is Nature, and Nature is Grace; Na­turall is Spirituall, and Spirituall is Naturall; [Page 129] and which is yet admirable, Spirituall is with you too supernaturall.

2 It is altogether free, and preventing; as there is a supernatural Grace of Conversion, so this grace, as altogether independent upon any thing in man, therefore is of God. 1. As of him that shewes mercy, meerly because he will shew mercy, and will have compassion, on whom he will have compassion; in opposition to man willing, or to man run­ing. 2 As of him that is sound of those that sought him not. 3. As of him that by this grace of his makes the difference betwixt the converted and un­converted, so as the glorified Saints shall owe unto God, not only what they received in com­mon with the damned, but that wherein they excell the damned; who hath made thee to differ? 4. As of him that cals, not only of the foolishest, and weakest, and basest, and most despised in the world; but even of the worst of men, 1 Cor. 6. 9. And Mr. Goodwin himselfe tels us how de­sperately incumbred the unregenerate state of the Ephesians was. Now according to your doctrine, all must be contrary; man must be­gin, and God must follow; man must first give, and God must recompence again; what­soever it is, that you shal please to cal the grace, or the work of conversion on Gods part, it must be vouchsafed unto those, who by the improve­ment of that common, original, natural grace you tel us of; that light vouchsafed to all in their natural birth, have sought the Lord, have willed, have runned, and so they having re­ceived that common Posse (Pelagius his owne grace) shall make themselves by the good use of it, to differ from those, who for not using it, are not converted. 3. It is effectual and pecu­liar [Page 130] the saving grace of God in Jesus Christ, is not potential but effectual, where-ever it gives the power, giving the deed likewise, not com­mon but peculiar, given onely to those, who are indeed saved by it, No man can come to me, ex­cept the father draw him, and I will raise him up at the last day; without this drawing, here is no pow­er of coming; whosoever is drawne, surely comes, and is surely saved; All are not saved, All come not, neither then could all come, or any, but those that doe come; this grace then is at once, preventing, effectuall, and peculi­ar. And indeed the peculiarity of it, is evident from the former heads, He hath mercy, on whom he will have mercy, there is a distinction of the heires of mercy from the rest, Who hath made thee to differ? differencing therefore peculiar grace, you hath he quickened, you, not all, &c. Thus we have seen the vanity of your Interpretation, and if we adde the Heresie too, we shall doe you no wrong; For, whether you confound Grace and Nature; or which way soever you make Grace to arise from Nature, or to de­pend upon any thing in the naturall man, you cannot possibly quit your selfe of palpable Pelagianism. The least charge that can be against you is, that grace is given according to me­rits, in that sense wherein Pelagius was refuted and condemned: The very Doctrine of Pela­gius you teach, for a common power of repen­tance in all men, against the supernaturall ef­ficacy of converting grace, against the preve­niency, and peculiarity of it, against the natural mans darknesse and impotency; and you offer fair against original sin, whilst you tell us, that [Page 131] [...]e are all borne so vested with light and pow­ [...]. And you thinke to carry all, as if you were no consort of his: onely because you have a new fetch for it, which, how slender [...]n o [...]e it is, I hope by this time appears.

What you adde towards the end of this Se­ction, about the actings and movings of the [...]ationall Powers, by the spirit of God; you doe so hover in generals, and onely put off with a parcell of fine words, as all that I shall yet say, is to pray you to speak plainly, and particularly; you use the same Artifice, and Cant most extreamly; Afterwards in the first Chapter of your booke, when you should lay downe your expresse doctrine about the divine influx and concourse; we must try if wee can hunt you out of your holes there.

CHAP. XVI.

1. THough the spirit of God contributes by his as­sistance after that high manner, which bath been declared, toward the right apprehending, un­derstanding, discerning the things of God by men; yet this no wayes proveth, but that they are the Rea­sons and Understandings of men themselves, that must apprehend, discerne, and understand these things; and consequently, must be provoked, raised, ingaged, im­ployed, and improved by men, that they may thus ap­prehend, and discerne, notwithstanding all that assist­ance which is administred by the spirit: otherwise, nothing will be apprehended or discerned by them. Nor will the assistance of the spirit, we speake of, turn to any account of benefit, or comfort, but of losse, and condem­condemnation [Page 132] unto men, in case their Reasons [...] Understandings shall not advance, and quit themselve [...] according to their interest thereupon.

This may passe as impertinent. It is the Rea­son of man that must apprehend, &c. But it is Reason sanctified, that apprehends savingly, man must stirre up his owne soule, but it is by the worke of the sanctifying spirit, that so he doth effectually. These things have been proved abundantly already.

3 In case the Spirit of God shall at any time reveale (I mean, offer, and propose) any of the things of God, or any spirituall Truth unto men; these must be ap­prehended, discerned, judged of; yea, and con­cluded to be the things of God, by the Reasons and Understandings of men; before they can, or ought to receive or beleeve them to be the things of God; Yea, before such a revelation can any wayes accommodate, benefit, and blesse their soule. When our Savi [...] speaking of that spirit to his Disciples, saith, And he will shew you things to come: And againe, he shal receive of mine, and shal shew them unto you (Joh. 16. 13, 14.) he supposeth that they (viz.) with their own Reasons and Understandings, were to ap­prehend and judge of the things that should be thus shew­ed unto them, to have been shewed unto them by the spirit of God, and not to have proceeded from any other Au­thor. Yea, in case men shall receive the things of God themselves, for the things of God, or of the spirit of God, before their Reason and Understanding have upon rationall grounds, and principles judged them to be the things of God: yet can they not receive them upon these termes, as the things of God, I mean, as the [Page 133] tnings of God ought in duty, and by command from himselfe to be received by men; or so as to benefit, or i [...]ich the soule by their being received. For as God requires of men to be praised with understanding, (i. e.) out of a rationall apprehension, and due consi­deration of his infinite worth and excellency; so doth be require to be beleeved also, and they that beleeve him otherwise, beleeve they know not what, nor whom, and so are brethren in vanity, with those that wor­ship they know not what, and build Altars to an unknowne God; to trust or beleeve in God upon such termes, as these, is, being interpreted, but as the devotion of a man to an Idol; yea, the Apostle himselfe arraignes the Athenians of that high Crime, and misdemeanour of Idolatry upon the account of their sacrificing to an unknown God.

This is of the same Spirit, Error, and im­pertinency with the last;

1 The Spirits revelation, he interprets his Proposall; This is just Pelagius his revelation, proposall by his word and doctrine.

2 The things by the Spirit proposed must be discerned the things of God, by our owne rea­sons, &c. Who doubts this? but (which he meanes not) by our owne reasons enlighte­ned, by renewing and peculiar Grace; hee saith, They must be received upon rationall grounds, true reason being by Scripture en­lightned.

4 And lastly, The interposure and actings of rea­son and understanding in men, are of that soveraigne, and most transcendent use, yea, necessity, in and a­bout matters of Religion, that all the agency of the [Page 134] Spirit, notwithstanding a man can performe [...] thing, no manner of service unto God with accep [...] nothing in a way of true edification to himselfe, with [...] their engagement and service. First, I stand charg [...] by God, not to beleeve every Spirit, but to try th [...] Spirits, whether they be of God; I demand, b [...] what rule or touch-stone shall I try any Spirit? wh [...] or upon what account shall I reject one, as a Spirit [...] errour, falshood, and delusion; and doe homage [...] my judgement and conscience to another, as the Spirit of God? If it be said, I ought to try the Spi­rits by the Scriptures, or Word of God; I demand againe, But how shall I try my touch-stone, or be sure that that Principle, notion, or ground, which I call th [...] Word of God, and by which I goe about to try the Spi­rits, is indeed the Word of God? There is scarce any errour that is abroad in the Christian world, but freely offers it selfe to be tryed by the Word of God, as well as the true Spirit of God himselfe; i. e. by such mean­ings, sences, or conclusions, as it selfe confidently as­serts to be the Word of God; i. e. the minde of God in the Scriptures; so that I am in no capacity to try such a Spirit, which upon such an account, as this, pretends his coming forth from God, unlesse I be able to prove, that those sences, [...]eanings, and conclusions, by which be offers to be tryed, are not indeed the Word of God.

Now it is unpossible that I should prove this meerly, and only by the Scriptures themselves; because unto what place or places soever I shall have recourse for my proofe, or tryall in this case, this Spirit will reject my sence and interpretation, in case it maketh against him, and will substitute another, that shall not oppose him. Nor can I reasonably or regularly reject his sence in this case, at least as an untruth, unlesse I apprehend some relish or taste therein, which is irrationall, or [Page 135] some [...]on which j [...]rreth with, or grateth upon some [...] principle [...] other of reason within me; for as [...] [...]e one hand, what Doctrine or Notion soever clear­ly [...]cordeth, and is commensurable with any solid and [...] [...]ted Principle, or ground of reason within me, [...] [...]by demonstrably evinced to be a truth, and from God; so on the other hand, what Doctrine, or saying s [...]r beares hard, or falls foule upon any such Prin­ciple, must of necessity be an errour, and somewhat that proceeds from Satan, or from [...]n, and not from God.

1 The same things most impertinently stil o­ver and over, an endlesse waster of words.

2 By what rule or touch-stone shall he [...]ry any Spirit, or Doctrine? he answers, If it be said by the Scripture, but how shall I try this touch-stone? I answer, By it selfe, as the rule, by reason, as the eye, enlightned and guided by this rule, according to the Grammar, and the Logick of it; He objects, That it is impossible to prove the truth, or disprove an errour meerly by the Scriptures, because still the question will be about the sence of the Scrip­ture; I answer, By the Scripture alone, as the rule, by reason, as making use of this rule, but so, as in making use thereof it be guided by this rule, and resolves all conclusions into the authority of this rule, is the truth to be proved, or errours disproved, and the sence of whatsoever controverted text discussed, and cleared.

As for that which you adde about irratio­nall last, and grating upon reason, &c. for as much as you doe not object reason to the [Page 136] Word, but oppose it thereunto, and advance it there-above, and will have reason the touch-stone of the Word, beside and above the Word; you shew your selfe, as formerly, a most impure and prophane Socinian, by all good men to be abhor'd; and whilst you plead so much for reason, you are a man mad with reason, no way solving those difficulties, which you pretend upon supposition, that the Scripture shall be the touch-stone; for let us suppose reason the touch-stone, must you not be at the same losse, your adversary denying that to be according to the principles and grounds of reason, which you affirme to be according to them? But here is no such diffi­culty, as you pretend; for allowing the Scrip­ture the Touch-stone, you shall by some Scrip­ture-truthes, wherein both your selfe and ad­versary agree, cleare the controverted text, and resute his errours about it, that he must either yeeld to the truth therein, or deny what he affirmed, and overthrow his owne foundati­ons.

The reason hereof is clearly asserted by the Apo­stle in these words, For God is not the Author of confusion, but of peace; from whence it ap­peares, that God is not divided in himselfe, or con­tradictious to himselfe, so as to write or assert that in one Booke, as in that of the Scriptures, which he de­nieth or opposeth in another; as viz. That of Nature, or of the fleshly tables of the heart of man; but whatsoever he writeth, or speaketh in the one, he wri­teth or speaketh nothing in the other, but what is fairly, and fully consistent with it.

[Page 137]

A doughty reason, God is not the Author of confusion; true, but man is, who hath so cor­rupted his reason, as he hath night for a vision, and gropes in the darke like a blinde man. It is one thing, what God wrote upon the nature of Man in his Creation, who made man up­right; another thing, what man hath written upon his owne nature by the Fall, who hath found out to himselfe many inventions; what the Devill likewise hath written upon his minde, by deluding suggestions. You may remem­ber formerly a peice of discourse much like this of yours, by your elder Brother the Collator, with whom Prosper hath to doe, confounding the state of Man by Creation, with his condi­tion since the Fall; and Prospers answer to him. It is admirable to see, how the same spi­rit, that possest Pelagius, and his Disciples of old, speakes the same things, and useth the same Arguments in Mr. Goodwin, One borne out of due time, so many Ages after.

In the praise of five things did they craftily couch their sacrilegious Doctrine, at so great enmity with the Grace of God, as Aug. ob­serves, Lib. 3. contra duas Epist. Pelagian. viz. In the praise of the Creature, of Marriage, of the Law, of Free-will, and of the Saints. How oft doe we heare Mr. Goodwin extolling man, and the noble faculties of reason, understanding, &c. in man? and here, from the Law of Na­ture, and from the Wisdome of God, hee thinkes to extoll the reason of blinde, corrupt, wretched, selfe-confounded man, against the Grace of God; I hinted to you before what a [Page 138] faire offer you made against Originall sinne, I beleeve your Doctrine about it is; That it is wholly taken off from man, by that glorious vouchsafement of light, you told us of, by Iesus Christ, to every one that comes into this world, but your darknesse about that light, and the darknesse of Man-kinde about things of the Spirit of God, that light notwithstan­ding we have lately seen.

As for the fleshly tables of the heart, we know no such, but in the regenerate, when the Lord shall have taken away the heart of stone, and gi­ven an heart of flesh, Ezek. 36. You may remem­ber how Austin concludes hence, as formerly we alledged him, that the will of man is whol­ly adverse, and inflexible unto good, before the effectuall and peculiar worke of regenera­tion; and where then shall be that provoking, and stirring up of reason, understanding, &c. you tell us of so often, in the Naturall man? We told you before, how ill-pleasing it was to you, to hold fast the for me of found words; I doe not wonder at it, it is not for your advan­tage; I perceive if we might have a new Scrip­ture see forth by your superlative reason, we should have the text much altered, for the Ta­berna [...]le of David, the Tabernacle of Adam, for the heart of stone, the fleshly tables of the heart:

Vpon this account it is a grave and worthy ad­vertisement of Master Perkins, in his Epistle be­fore his Treatise of Predestination; It is (saith he) also requisite, that this Doctrine (he speakes of Pre­destination, Election, and Reprobation) agree with [Page 139] the [...]of co [...]on reason, and of that knowledge of God, which may be obtained by the light of Nature; In [...] [...]ing of his [...]e [...]arly supposeth, That what­ [...] should be taught by any in the mysterious and high p [...]ts of Predistination, otherwise then accor­ding to the Scriptures, and the truth, may be clearly disproved by this, viz. The disagreement of it with the c [...]on grounds of reason, and of that knowledge of God, which the light of Nature shineth into the hearts of men: if himselfe had kept close to this Prin­ciple of his owne, in drawing up his judgement in the point of Predostination, the world had received a f [...]rre diff [...]ring, and better account from his [...]en of this sub­ject, then now it hath; But if his sence were, That the heights, and depths of Religion, (for so we may call the Doctrines of Election, and Reprobation, &c.) [...] nothing in them but what agrees with the grounds and principles of common reason, and with the Di­ [...]ates of Nature in men, and consequently may be mea­sured, discerned, and judged of by these, he did not conceive, that matters of a more facile and ordinary con­sideration were above the capacity and apprehension of reason.

For Master Perkins his. Testimony, and your Descant upon it, you doe but wander, 1. He builds the doctrine of Predestination upon the Word of God, in opposition to the judge­ments of men, his words are these; ‘The Do­ctrine of Predestination, and of the Grace of God, is to be built up out of the Word of God, and not out of the judgements of men.’ Then he addes out of Hilary, ‘God cannot be knowne but by God, of God must we learne whatsoever we are to understand concerning [Page 140] him, because no otherwise is it knowne then by him as the Author.’ After this he adds fur­ther; ‘It is requisite likewise, that this Do­ctrine agree with the naturall knowledge of God, and the Principles of common under­standing, such as these, and then layes downe divers.’

Now whereas you make a double inference hence; I Concerning the Doctrine of Pre­destination it selfe; 2 Concerning all other Doctrines not so high and mysterious, I will returne for answer to you, your owne Armi­nius's words to this Proposition of Mr. Perkins, viz. ‘Against this I contend not, only let this be added, where we cannot agree about these (common notions) by reason of darknesse over-spreading our mindes, and the weake­nesse and diversity of humane judgements, (which thou rejectest, saith he to Perkins) there let us have recourse to the first (the Word of God) for the definitive and peremp­tory suffrage, as that which is above all o­ther.’

You see here, 1. Arminius himself utter­ly turning his back of that Doctrine, which your inference pleads for; you will have the Doctrine of Predestination tried ultimately at the barre of Reason, he at the Scripture barre. 2 His reason for it; whereas we heare from you of nothing but light, shining from God upon the hearts of men, and the great capa­city of that noble faculty of reason in man, so frequently boasted of; He acknowledgeth such darknesse over-spreading the mindes of men, as common notions, and mens judgement ac­according [Page 141] thereto, are not to be rested in, but from them to the Word of God must the ap­peale be made for finall determination.

It was the saying of Augustine, That God hath bowed downe the Scriptures to the capacity of Babes, and Sucklings; Tertullian hath much upon this ac­count to excellent purpose; in one place (speaking of the Soule being yet simple, rude, and unfurnished with any acquired knowledge, either from the Scripture, or other Institution) he demands why it should be strange, that being given by God it should speake out (or sing) the same things, the knowledge whereof God giveth to his Children; not long after he admo­nisheth the Gentiles, that neither God, nor Nature lye; and thereupon that they may beleeve both God, and Nature; wisheth them to beleeve their owne Soules; A little after he saith, that the Soule he speakes of, hath the words (and therefore the inward sences and impressions) of Christians, whom notwith­standing it wisheth that it might never beare, or see; Elsewhere having mentioned some expressions of affi­nity with the Scriptures, as oft coming out of the mouths of Heathen, he triumphs over them, as it were, with this acclamation; O the testimony of a soule na­turally Christian! nor doth Calvin himselfe say any thing lesse then all this, when he saith; That God hath implanted (or inwardly put) the seed of Religion in the mindes of men, doubtlesse the seed sympathizeth richly with that body, which springs and growes from it: But these things by the way. All impressions, all principles of Light and Truth, which are found writ­ten in the hearts and consciences of men, are here written by the finger of God himselfe; therefore what Spirit, or Doctrine soever symbolizeth in notion, and [Page 142] import, with these or any of them, must of necessity be of the same parentage and descent with them, there be­ing no originall parent or father of light, and truth, but God onely. And on the contrary, what doctrine or spirit soever, putteth any of these principles to sorrow or shame, and doth not lovingly comport with them, hereby declare themselves to be of a spurious and ignoble race: As Christ reasoned with the Jewes, If God were your Father, yee would love me, For I proceed forth, and come from God, but because they bated him, he concluded them to be the children of the devill.

As for your testimonies out of Austin, Ter­tullian, and Calvin, you do but make use of your old fallacy, from the part to the whole; the Scripture is in some things bowed down to the capacity of babes; is it in all things so? all milke, no strong meat? Did Austin thinke the Reason of man, competent to search out, and give a reason of all Scripture truths? this by name, about Predestination, and the execu­tion thereof? let us heare himselfe upon this Argument, De verbis Apostol. Serm. 11. The Potter hath power over the clay to make of the same lump one vessell to honour, another to dishonour: wilt thou dispute with me? nay, wonder with me; cry out with me, O the depth of the riches, let us both agree in feare, that we perish not in er­ror; Oh the depth of the riches of the wisdome and knowledge of God, how incomprehensible are his judge­ments, and his wayes past finding out! Search things unsearchable, doe things impossible, corrupt things incorruptible, see things invi­sible, his judgements are unsearchable, let it [Page 143] suffice thee, and his waies past finding out. So [...] Teri [...]ians testimonies, the soule hath the [...]owledge of some things, impressions of some [...]hings belonging to Christians; but you may [...] soon get oyle out of a flint, as out of these testimonies wring your Conclusion: That all Divine Truths may be knowne by the naturall man, by reason of their agreement with the dictates of the naturall understanding, as it is now in the state of mankind, since the fall. For Calvi [...] his seed of religion, you would faine discourse into fruit, but your Discourse is neither the shining of the Sun, nor rain from heaven upon it.

1 The seeds of some truths are writ upon the heart of man, as knowledge, but these of the Law, not of the Gospell;— the Wisdome of God hid in a mystery, &c. flesh and blood hath not re­vealed, &c. No man can say Iesus is the Lord, but by the spirit: the natural man receives not the things of the spirit of God, neither can doe, &c. What man knowes the things of man? &c.— the spirit of God, not of the World, &c. The Naturall man darknesse, through corruption, by Satan further dark­ened.

2 The knowledge he hath by nature of those things of the law is very obscure, evanid, and clouded with many errors, and those invinci­ble otherwise, then as by the discovery of the word diligently consulted.

3 The highest knowledge the Naturall man can attaine to, with whatsoever helpe of the Word of God (without the renewing and pe­culiar worke of the spirit, vouchsafed onely to the Saints, whereby they become such) is but [Page 144] historicall, not intuitive, of logicall appre­hension, not of spirituall vision, and therefore such a knowledge, as is a great stranger to faith and repentance.

4 All saving fruit of this knowledge is ut­terly prevented, and the tendency of it to eter­nal life stifled, choaked, and perverted in every natural or unregenerate soule; and therefore how richly soever the seed sympathizeth with the body which springs from it, yet no such body shal spring from those seeds in the soyl of an unregenerate soul, partly through darknes, & error, and partly through pravity and pervers­nes; therefore your conclusion here is most im­pertinent, wherein you so insist upon the good­nesse of these seeds in their owne Nature, and in reference to their Author, God, as you o­ver-look the badnesse of man, the subject of them through the corruption of his Nature, so full of darknesse, falsehood, and enmity against the truth of God, as thence these seeds must needs rot under the clods, except the soyle be supernaturally changed.

CHAP. XVII.

COncerning the mystery of the Trinity, the incar­nation of God, or the Son of God, the concepti­on of a Virgin, with some other points of like conside­ration, commonly pretended to be against, or at least above, and out of the reach and apprehension of Reason; I clearly Answer.

1 That they are every whit as much; yea, upon the same termes, out of the reach of faith, as of Rea­son, [Page 145] For how can I beleeve (at least upon good grounds, [...]d as it becommeth a Christian to beleeve) that which I have no reason, nor am capable of apprehending any reason; nay, for which there is no reason, why I should beleeve it? If it be said, I am bound to beleeve the doct [...]ines specified, because they are revealed by God: I answer, That this is a rationall ground, whereof my Reason and Understanding are throughly capable, why I should beleeve them; the light of Nature clearly informeth me, that what God revealeth or speaketh must needs be true; and consequently worthy and meet to be beleeved. If it be further said, But Reason is not able to apprehend or conceive how three should bee really and essentially one, and the same; how a vir­gin should conceive and bring forth a Son, &c. I An­swer, That no faith or beleefe in such things as these, is required of me, nor would be accepted with God, i [...] case it were in me, above what I am able by Reason to apprehend and understand. As I am not able by my Reason to apprehend the particular and distinct manner how the three persons subsist in one and the same divine Nature and Essence: So neither am I bound to beleeve it; that which I am bound to beleeve in this point is only this, That there are three who doe thus subsist, (I mean in the same divine essence) and for this, my Rea­son is apprehensive enough why I should beleeve, viz. Because God himselfe hath revealed it (as hath been said) If I should confidently beleeve any thing more or further concerning the Trinity of persons (commonly so called, and there is the same reason of the other points mentioned) then what I know upon the cleare account of my Reason and Understanding, it would be presumption in me, and not faith; and I should con­tract the guilt of those whom the Apostle chargeth with in truding (or advancing themselves) into the [Page 146] things which they have not seen [i. e. rationally apprehended and understood.] But

1 Whereas you say, these mysteries here mentioned of the Trinity, Incarnation, and the virgins conception, are pretended to be a­gainst, at least above Reason, it seemes you de­ny even these to be above the reach of Rea­son in fallen man, which yet in your discourse immediately insuing, you grant in deed though not in termes: but contradictions are no rare things in your discourse.

2 Whereas you say they are every whit as much; yea, upon the same termes out of the reach of Faith, as of Reason:

1 It is false, for Faith hath the proper, and immediate ground of beleeving them, the authority of the Word revealing them; But Reason hath not an immediate ground of dis­cerning them, viz. such a light, as whereby they of themselves are visible to the naturall under­standing, therefore when they are within the reach of Faith, yet are they not within the reach of Reason upon the same termes.

2 You equivocate, for seeming to carry on your former doctrine, you relinquish it. For­merly you made Reason the touchstone of the Scriptures; and whatsoever text of Scripture should not be found to agree with Reason, and to be relished by it, must be rejected: here you make the Scripture to be above the tryall of Reason, as appeares by that which followes: For how can I beleeve? &c: If it be said I am bound, &c. This is a rationall ground, &c. the light of Nature, &c. Here you grant that Rea­son [Page 147] is to beleeve what the word affirmes, meer­ly for the authority of the word. But 1. This is contrary to your former doctrine, requiring that Reason finde a rationall tast and savour in the thing it selfe to bee beleeved. 2. Here Reason beleeves, rather then discernes the thing beleeved; it discernes the ground of beleeving, but not the nature or manner of the thing be­leeved: therefore as before, the thing beleeved is not upon the same terms, out of the reach of Faith, as of Reason.

3 Whereas you object, That Reason is not able to apprehend or conceive how three should be really and essentially one and the same, &c. and then answer, no faith or beleefe in such things as these, is required, &c. Let me aske you this one thing; Is it not a fruit of natu­rall corruption, by the fall, that we apprehend no more towards the distinct knowledge of these things? If so, then are you bound to know, and knowing to beleeve more of them; and your discourse about beleeving more then you apprehend, how unacceptable it would be, fals to the ground. But here againe you disco­ver that Popish & Pelagian leaven; that God hath no right to require of man any more, then man hath power to performe; as formerly you ar­gued from the command of God to the faculty of man. As for your Interpretation of Colos. 2. 18. I cannot receive it, intruding into the things which they have not seen, is in true interpretation, which they have not seen in the doctrine of the Scriptures.

2 If it be yet demanded, but is it not contrary to [Page 148] the grounds of Nature, and so to Principles of Reason, that a virgin should conceive a childe; and if so, how can such a doctrine, according to what you have asser­ted, be received as from God, or as a truth? I An­swer; It is no wayes contrary to Reason, nor to any principle thereof, that God should be able to make a virgin to conceive, but very consonant thereunto; [...] the Apostle Paul supposed it credible enough (as we lately heard) even in the eye of Reason, that God should make the earth bring forth her dead alive: indeed that a virgin should conceive in a naturall way, or according to the course of ordinary providence, is contrary unto Reason, but this Religion requireth not of any man to beleeve; nor doth it bear hard at all up­on any Principle of Reason; that God should be willing to doe every whit as great and strange a thing as tha [...], (I mean as to cause a virgin to conceive) for the ac­complishment of so great and glorious a designe, as the saving of a lost world. Nor is it contrary to Reason or any Principle thereof, that God or the first Being, being infinite, should have a manner of sul­sisting or being, far different from the manner of sub­sistence, which is appropriate to all created and finite beings, or that this manner of subsisting which is pro­per unto him, should be unto men incomprehensible. But most consonant it is to Principles of Reason, when God himselfe hath pleased so farre to reveale that appro­priate and incomprehensible manner of his subsisting, as to declare and say that he subsisteth in three, that men should accordingly beleeve it so to be.

So that most certaine it is, there is nothing in Chri­stian Religion, which so far as it concerneth men to know and beleeve, but what fairly and friendly com­ports with that Reason and Understanding which God hath given unto man, and what by a diligent and consci­entious [Page 149] use of these noble faculties be may come to know and beleeve, at least so far as to salve his great interest of salvation.

This Section is of the same stamp with the former; the sum of it is this, That it is agree­able to Reason, to conceive of God, that he is, and that he can doe above the course of Nature, and comprehension of Reason, and that when God shall declare that such is his being, and his doings such, it is likewise agreeable to Rea­son to beleeve him upon his word. But

1 Who denies this, but Mr. Goodwin and his associates in error? This is the very Doctrine of your adversaries, against which you dispute.

2 This no way agrees with your former Doctrines. 1. That which affirmes, that all men have that light of Reason and Understan­ding, which according to Gods dispensation towards all men, they may improve to saving Faith and Repentance; For saving Faith re­quires the knowledge of these mysteries, which you grant here come onely so far within the reach of Reason, as that when God hath re­vealed them, it is rational to beleeve his Word; without which, Reason could never find them out: But the greatest part of the men of the world have not the Scriptures. 2. That which affirmes Reason to bee the touchstone of the Scriptures; you said but lately of Predestinati­on, that whatsoever should be taught about it, otherwise then according to the Scriptures, and the truth, might be clearly disproved by the grounds of common Reason. You affirme page 16. That whatsoever doctrine or saying [Page 150] beares hard, or fals foule upon any undoubted Principle or ground of Reason within you, must of necessity be an errour: Now this prin­ciple and ground of Reason must be such, as in the account of men generally passeth for such a principle or ground. Now doubtlesse, that three should be essentially one, bears hard upon whatsoever grounds of Reason in you, or any man since the fall: That a Virgin should con­ceive, beares hard likewise upon Reason; I am sure it did so in the blessed virgin her selfe, Luk. 1. 34. therefore according to your do­ctrine formerly laid downe, these mysteries should be rejected, and indeed the whole do­ctrine of godlinesse, which the Apostle tels us is a great mystery, and therefore beares hard upon Reason.

Neither do you salve your former discourse when you say, it doth not bear hard upon any principle of Reason, that God should be wil­ling to doe as strange a thing, as to cause a vir­gin to conceive: For because the thing it selfe beares so hard upon Reason, and is so strange; therefore according to your former doctrine, the word affirming it, should be rejected. So for the manner of his subsistence, three in one, because it bears so hard upon Reason, as you here grant, that it is incomprehensible, accor­ding to your former doctrine, it ought not to be beleeved, as you know upon that very ac­count, your good friends, the Socinians, beleeve it not; But when you meet with such instan­ces as you dare not deny; as these now in hand, and yet they cannot be made to close with your doctrine, then you wind out of your [Page 151] owne doctrine it selfe, yet so, as you would seem still to hold it. In other instances, as about Election, and Reprobation, Redemption, Re­novation, the perseverance of the Saints, you will hold stifly to your grand doctrine of the preheminence of Reason, because the doctrine of personall election, and reprobation, and the dominion of God therein, relisheth not with your Reason; because the dependance of redemption upon election, and the doctrine of the Saints perseverance, and of the efficacy, and peculiarity of grace relish not with your Reason, therefore they must be rejected, though the Scriptures be as evident for them, as for the Trinity and Incarnation. And hee that should argue with you, as you doe here; that it is not contrary to Reason, neither doth it bear hard upon any principle of Reason, that God should have a dominion, to man incom­prehensible, would be rejected by you upon this account, that such a Doctrine it selfe was not according to Reason. Look over your con­clusion, concerning the unchangeable love of God to the Saints; and your questioning of the Scriptures, in case they either in terms, or by just consequence, avouch the same, pag. 335. of your book formerly alleadged, and tell me if it be not as I say.

As for the close of your Section. 1. That there is nothing in Christian Religion, &c. but what fairly comports, &c. To this, I oppose this assertion, formerly made good, That in Christian Religion, there are many things a­bove, many things crosse to mans corrupt Reason. 2. That by a diligent and consci­entious [Page 152] use, &c. I have formerly shewed at large, what putid Pelagianisme is here obtru­ded.

2 Looke how many precepts, exhortations, adm [...] ­nitions, I stand charged by God to submit unto, and practise, I am under so many charges and engage­ments from him likewise, to exercise my Reason, and understanding. 1. To apprehend aright the mind of God in every of these respectively, left when he injoyneth me one thing, I through mistake should doe another. 2. To consider how, when, and in what cases I am commanded by him to doe this or that. 3. (And lastly to passe by other particulars.) To gather together, and call up upon my soul all such motives and considera­tions, which I am able, whereby to provoke, stir up, and strengthen my self to the execution, and performance of all things accordingly. When God commandeth me to strive to enter in at the streight gate, to seek his kingdome, and the righteousnesse thereof, in the first place; To labor for the meat which endureth to everlasting life; To bee a man in understanding: (To omit other precepts of like nature without number) he commandeth me conse­quentially, and with a direct, clear, and necessary impli­cation, to rise up in the might of my reason & understan­ding, in order to the performance of these things, nor am I capable of performing the least of these great, and most important commands, in any due manner, but by interressing my Reason, Iudgement, and Understand­ing, and this throughly, and effectually, in and about the performance: The truth is, I stand bound in duty and conscience towards God, and in faith­fulnesse to mine owne soule, neither to beleeve any thing at all, as coming from God, which I have not, [Page 153] or may have, a very substantiall ground in Reason to beleeve, commeth indeed from him; nor yet to doe any thing at all, as commanded by him, unlesse there be a like ground in Reason to perswade me that it is indeed his command.

Many waste words still, according to your manner. One passage or two we must call to account.

1. God commands you, you say, in such and such precepts, to rise up in the might of your Reason, &c. Wee heare in Scrip­ture of the weaknesse of Reason, as to the things of God, not sufficient of our selves to thinke a good thought, &c. We hear of the might of the Word Preached, to cast down the strong holds and reasonings in man against the things of God: But where this mighty Reason dwels, I would willingly aske Mr. Goodwin, but that I feare he will send mee Racovia.

2. Nothign may you beleeve as comming from God, which you have not very substan­tiall ground in Reason to beleeve commeth from him; the like for obedience to his Commands: If you meant Reason enligh­tened, and sanctified by the Word and Spirit, thence beleeving upon the authority of the Word, your meaning was the same with theirs whom you oppose; but your meaning is, Rea­son, by its own light, receiving or rejecting the Word it selfe according as such and such Do­ctrines, are above or not above, contrary, or a­greeable to the apprehensions of the Natu­rall man, as wee have clearly found you [Page 154] out formerly, and to this you have been an­swered over and over, according as your tau­tology hath given occasion.

I confesse (good Reader) I have presumed at some­what an unreasonable rate upon thy patience, in detai­ning thee so long with the Argument yet in hand; But the sense of that unconceiveable mischiefe and misery, which I most certainly know have been brought upon the World Christian, (at least in our Quarters of it) and which lyes sore upon it at this day, by meanes of the reigning of this Notion, and Doctrine amongst us, That men ought not to use, but lay aside their Reason in matters of Religion; lyeth so intolerable sad and heavy upon my spirit, that I could not relieve my selfe to any competent degree, with saying lesse then what hath been said, to relieve the world, by hewing in sunder such a snare of death cast upon it, most assuredly all the ataxies, disorders, confusions, seditions, insurrections, all the errors, blasphemous opinions, aposta [...]ies from the truth and wayes of holinesse, all trouble of mind, and sad work­ings of conscience in me; all unrighteousnesse, and in­justice, all bribery and oppression, all un-man-like selfe-seeking and prevaricating with publique interests and trusts; all covetousnesse and deceit, and whatsoe­ver can be named in this world, obstructive, destru­ctive, to the present comfort and peace, to the future blessednesse and glory of the sons and daughters of men, proceed and spring from this one root of bitter­nesse and of death: they neglect to advance and in­gage home their Reasons, Iudgements, Understand­ings in matters of Religion, to imploy and improve them according to their proper interests and capacities in these most important affaires.

[Page 155]

Your tongue is your owne, in way of apo­logy for your wandring discourse: hitherto you tell us of the deep apprehensions you had of that unconceiveable mischiefe, &c. brought up­on the world by that doctrine, That men must lay aside their Reason in matters of Religion; a meer Hob-goblin of your own making, that you may have somthing to pelt at. How Reason is to be laid aside, and how not, we have shewed distinctly formerly; not as you represent; as if men should look at it as their duties to be Ide­ots and mad men in seeking into the things of God.

As for those Ataxies, &c. hence they are, That men have been so bold to oppose their owne corrupt reasonings against the word of God, instead of following the light and guidance of it, and captivating their fleshly reason to the Doctrines of Faith.

O Reader, my mouth is open unto thee, my heart is enlarged (now for a recompence in the same, I speake unto thee, as a deare Brother in Christ) be thou also enlarged, say unto the world round about thee, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light; doubtlesse the world should soone finde it self in another manner of posture then now it is, and see the whole Hemisphere of it filled with the glorious light of the knowledge of God in Jesus Christ, if the inhabitants thereof, every man from his quarters, would be perswa­ded to rise up in the might of his abilities, those heavenly endowments of reason, judgement, [Page 156] understanding, wherewith God, by Jesus Christ hath re-invested them to seeke after him, by en­quiring diligently into, by weighing narrowly all those things, as workes of Creation, workes of Providence, inscriptions upon the Soule, and e­specially the sacred word of extraordinary reve­lation, wherein, and whereby God hath drawne neare unto men, and (as it were prepared) po­stured, and fitted himselfe on purpose to be found and knowne, and this as well in the excellency of his Grace, as of his Glory, by all those who up­on these termes seeke after him. The time was when the Spirit was not given, because Christ was not glorified in Heaven; the time now is where­in the Spirit is not given unto the world, accor­ding to the preparations, and royall bounties, and magnificence of Heaven, because he is not glori­fied on earth by the worthy imployment of the meanes, abilities, opportunities vouchsafed unto men; the Word of God makes it one argument of the wickednesse, and sensuall wayes of men, that they have not the Spirit; yea, the Apostle Paul by charging the Ephesians to be filled with the Spirit, clearly supposeth it to be a sensuall straine of a voluntary unworthinesse in men, if they have not a very rich and plentifull anoynting of the Spirit.

A word or two to this wordy Paragraph.

1 Say unto the world awake, &c. Say you to your Reader. But for as much as this sleep is the sleep of death, as is here evident, in that the waking from it, is standing up from the dead; where is now that mighty Reason, Un­derstanding, Judgement, you have so often [Page 157] told us of, (as here again you doe) in the na­turall man?

2 The time now is (you say) wherein the spirit is not given unto the world, according to the preparations of the royall bounty, and magnificence of heaven, because, &c. this is (as formerly we have seen at large) the Pelagian do­ctrine so famously branded; that grace is given according to our merits, the Popish doctrine of the merit of congruity: the Iesuiticall doctrine, That he that doth what in him lyes by the strength of Nature, shall thereby obtaine Grace.

3 The Word of God (you say) makes it one argument of the wicked and sensuall waies of men, that they have not the spirit, Iudg. 5. 18, 19. what then? you adde; yea, the Apostle Paul by charging the Ephesians to be filled with the spi­rit, clearly supposeth it to be a voluntary strain of sinfull unworthinesse in men, if they have not a very rich and plentifull anoynting of the spirit.

Answ. 1. These Ephesians were regenerate, and spoken to as regenerate; therefore this concludes nothing for the natural man.

2. Tis true, what you say concerning the Naturall man, but false that you would con­clude, that therefore the Naturall man hath power to obtaine this anoynting of the spirit; from mans duty, to his ability, is a meer non sequitur. It is the duty of the naturall man, to fulfill the law of God (otherwise the transgres­sion of the Law is not sin) yet it is impossible for him. The flesh is not subject to the Law of God, neither can be. It is the duty of the natural man [Page 158] when the Gospell is preached to him, to come to Christ, and a sinful straine of voluntary un­worthinesse, that hee comes not; Yee will not come to me that yee might have life, saith Christ to the Jewes, rebuking them: Yet none can come to him except the Father draw him; and this drawing of the Father is not according to any prepara­tion of man drawn; He will have mercy on whom he will have mercy, and compassion on whom he will have compassion; It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mer­cy. It is the duty of the naturall man, to receive the things of the spirit of God revealed in the Gos­pell, which yet he cannot do, without the re­newing work of the spirit, whereby he becomes a spirituall man, because they are spiritually discerned But to obtaine this renewing worke of the spirit, is not in his power, hath no de­pendance upon any thing by him done in or­der thereunto. The wind bloweth where it listeth, thou bearest the sound thereof, but knowest not whence it comes nor whither it goes; so is every one that is born of the spirit.

CHAP. XVIII.

HE that lives up to those principles of light, which God hath vested in him, is underthe beatificall influence of that most rich promise of Christ; To him that hath, shall be given, and he shall have abundantly; By him that hath (in this promise) is meant (as clearely appeares from the tenor of the Parable immediatly preceding) such a person, who useth, imployeth, improveth [Page 159] that which he hath, hereby declaring that he hath what he hath; nor is that which he is here said to have, any thing of a Spirituall or superna­turall import, this likewise is evident from the said Parable, for here one of the three, who all had received talents, one, or more, all which ta­lents must needs by the course of the Parable be supposed to be of one and the same kind; nor is the least intimation of any difference, especially of any specificall difference between them, is said to be an evill and sloathfull Servant, notwithstanding his talent, and because of his sloathfulnesse, to be cast into utter darknesse; these are no Cha­racters (especially in the judgement of those, with whom we are to conflict in the ensuing Dis­course) of persons that had received any thing sa­ving, or supernaturall. But by that which is here promised to be given, and that in abundance, to him that hath, must of necessity be meant some­what, that is of a spirituall and saving nature; this also is evident from the carriage of the same Pa­rable, where the Servants who had received the talents, and imployed them faithfully (by whom are typified our Sa [...]iours, [...] those that have, as was lately said) are graciously invited by their Master into this joy, Enter thou into thy Masters joy: So to the other, enter thou into thy Masters joy.

Now if either God or Christ, be signified or meant by the Master of these Servants (as I suppose no man questions, but that either the one or the other are typi­fied hereby) by entring into their joy, cannot be meant a receiving of greater measure of naturall gifts or endowments, nor of receiving any reward, which belongs to persons qualified only with such endowments; [Page 160] as these, but salvation or eternall blessednesse and glo­ry; if so, it roundly followes, that by what Christ pro­miseth shall be given to him that hath (in the sense de­clared) is meant somewhat of a saving consequence, as regenerating Grace, the sanctifying Spirit of God, Faith, and the like. And promising not onely, or simply, that to him that hath shall be given, but further, that he shall have abundantly, he clear­ly signifieth, that in case men will stir up, provoke, and lay out themselves accordingly in the improvement of such abilities, and gifts, which shall from time to time be vouchsafed unto them; they may be vertue of the boun­ty and gracious decree of God in that behalf, attaine and receive from God what proportion or measure of the Spirit of Grace, and of God they can desire, there­fore they that teach men to be meerly passive in matters of Religion, and forbid them the use of their Reasons and Understandings, as unlawfull, and dangerous, in these affaires; how prudently soever they may consult their own carnall ease, honour, and worldly accommo­dations by such a doctrine, yet herein they say to men (in effect) be not excellent, let it never be said that the God of heaven hath made you rich or great.

Mr. Goodwin hath here led us to that famous Scripture, the Parable of the Talents, a Scripture so much abused by the whole nation of the Iesuites, in whose steps the Arminians tread, and amongst them this Author.

1 Let us see his Interpretation hereof. 2. The true Interpretation.

1 For his; It labours with two very great diseases. 1. Self-contradiction. 2. Pelagianisme. 1. For selfe-contradiction, spiritual and super­naturall, are here one and the same with him; [Page 161] as appeares in these words. ‘Nor is that which he is said to have, any thing of a spirituall or supernaturall import. A little after saving and supernaturall are one and the same with him, [...]n these words. These are no characters of per­sons that had received any thing saving or su­pernaturall. Presently after spirituall and of saving nature are one and the same in these words. By that which is here promised to be given, must of necessity be meant some thing of a spirituall, and saving nature,: and this in op­position: to naturall, in these words; by en­tring into the Masters joy cannot be meant a re­ceiving of a greater measure of naturall gifts or endowments, nor of receiving any reward which belongs to persons quallified onely with such endowments as these. But salvation, or eternall blessednesse and glory: If so, it roundly follows, that by what Christ promiseth shall be given, &c. is meant somewhat of a saving con­sequence, as regenerateing grace; the sanctifying Spirit, faith and the like, thus he;’Whence it is evident, that grace is not here naturall, that what is naturall is not saving, that regenerating grace is spirituall and supernaturall given upon the improvement of naturall endowments: but how doth this accord with his former Doctrine, about which he laboured so much that in the argument of the efficacy of grace, the word super­naturall was no where in Scripture so much as vertually found, that the word naturall distin­guisheth not the unregenerate from the regene­rate, &c.

We observed formerly that what he speakes here presently after concerning mens attaining [Page 162] what proportion and measure of the Spirit o [...] grace they can desire upon the improvement o [...] such gifts and abilities as they shall from time to time receive, doth involue him in a contradicti­on to what he there had taught; if he here meane the worke of the Spirit, to be any other then such an influx as is attemperd and proportioned to mans naturall acting, and therefore naturall, but if that be his meaning, then doth he contra­dict himselfe here, making all that is saving to be supernaturall as we have now observed, but he hath drunke deepe of an intoxicating cup, wonder not if he Stagger like a drunken man.

2. For Pelagianisme, as plaine and palpable as may be; that regenerating grace, the sanctifying spirit, faith and the like is given to men upon the use, employment and improvement of natu­rall endowments, which is that Stigmatized do­ctrine of Pelagius so notoriously refuted and con­demned, as formerly hath been cleard; where we had this very doctrine in the hands of the Massilians related by Prosper charging them there­in with high Pelagianisme, onely Master Goodwin hath another fetch for it, that new vouchsafe­ments by Iesus Christ unto all in their naturall birth, he tels us of, which how miserable a shift it is, hath formerly been discovered.

But that we may have the whole mistery of Master Goodwins doctrine about this point, and see his vaine, and selfe-subverting Sophistry. I shall add and examine a notorious passage, Page 329. and 330. of his Book, the summe whereof is as followeth.

1. ‘Regeneration (saith he) imports a reitera­tion [Page 163] of some generation or other.’ I answer, re­generation is a generation over andabove a for­mer generation. 2. It cannot import a repeti­tion of naturall generation: true, therefore it must import a repetition of spirituall generati­ [...]n. False it is, (as will appeare by and by) a spi­ [...]tuall generation over and above the naturall generation, a repetition, if he will needs have [...]hat word of generation, but not of naturall nor [...]pirituall generation, but only of the genus com­ [...]on to both, one opposite species succeeding a­ [...]other. He goes on, 'Naturall and spirituall ge­ [...]eration are contra-distinguished the one to [...]he other, 1 Pet. 2. 23. and Iohn 3. 6. True, and [...]hence your discourse wil come to nought as wil [...]ppeare by these Scriptures mentioned when we [...]ave heard your conclusion, for which you are [...]aking way in these words, viz. ‘Now I sup­pose there can hardly be any instance given where the introduction of one contrary forme or quallity into the subjectis termed a repetition of the other; as for example, calefaction is never termed a repetition of Frigefaction.’Pittifull Sophistry: No such thing is here pretended; the spirituall birth is a repetition, not of the op­posite species or contrary forme, as you phrase [...]t, to wit, the naturall birth, but onely of the genus birth. As Calefaction succeeding Frige­faction, is a repetition, not of Frigefaction, the opposite species, but of alteration, the genus.

Now comes your conclusion, but it is an evill [...]gge of an evill bird, a false conclusion; from a false discourse; you conceive that regeneration relates not to the naturall generation, as natu­rall; but unto the spirituall state and condition [Page 164] of men in respect of their naturall condition an [...] birth. But the Scriptures newly mentione [...] prove two things utterly destructive of this con­clusion of yours. 1. That men by naturall gene­ration have nothing spiritually good in them▪ but the contrary, and that to the utmost▪ 2. That regeneration relates to the naturall ge­neration, as miserably corrupt and sinfull, th [...] our Saviour shews the necessity of regeneratio [...] or the second birth, because by naturall genera­tion or the first birth we are so sinfull; it bein [...] the birth of the flesh in opposition to the birth of [...] Spirit, 3 John 6. with the Context; thus Pe [...] opposeth regeneration as that generation which [...] of incorruptable Seed, to naturall generation [...] that generation which is of corruptable Seed; evident [...] that both he & our Saviour opposeth the latter i [...] its excellency to the former in its wretchednesse and therefore in no wise relates to the forme [...] according to any excellency in it to be repeated [...] In laying downe this conclusion, you tell u [...] that men generally in the dayes of their youth [...] degenerate from the innocency of their childe [...] hood and yonger years, and corrupt themselve [...] with the principles and wayes of the world whence you give us to understand, that regene­ration appropriable onely to persons living t [...] years of discre [...]on, is a repetition of that spiri tuall purity, which in their naturall birth they had; but,

1. Naturall birth, and that as it relates, to regeneration hath no more innocency or spiri­tuall purity in it, then what the flesh imports in utmost opposition to the Spirit.

2. This degeneration you speake of from [Page 165] the spirituall excellency of their naturall birth, [...] it such as whereby spirituall life received in [...]e naturall generation is extinct or not? if not; [...]en a man yet living may be borne againe to [...]e same life, which you grant most absurd, al­ [...]wing Nicodemus discourse for good in this [...]oint, and it is most manifestly absurd to every [...]e. If it be extinct; then 1. What is the advan­ [...]ge of it, and so to what end was it vouchsafed [...] men? 2. Regenerating grace prevents all [...]bilities in man, finding him wholly dead, as [...] spirituall life; where then is that mighty [...]eason, understanding, &c. you are wont to tell [...] of, and those endowments, and ability for [...]he improvement of them which here in your ex­plication of.

This Parable you mention, in order to regene­rating grace, you further tell us that in and up­on their spirituall state, in respect of their natu­rall generation, they are if not simply, you doe not say (though) but (if) not simply, and abso­lutely, yet comparatively innocent, &c. where­by it appeares that you have a good minde, simply, and absolutely to deny originall sinne in them. And in respect of these qualifications, in grace and favour with God, upon the account of the death and sufferings of Christ; formerly we heard from you of a saving light vested in the natures of all upon this same account; the vani­ty of which doctrine we have discovered.

Now you tell us of a state of Favour wherein upon the same account all children are, and the proofe we must expect in your second part, in the meane time the same arguments which re­futed your former opinion, refute this too with [Page 166] the same breath, and we must heare the Apost [...] telling us that we are by nature the children of wrat [...] But you will here say something to confirme i [...] Mat. 18. 1, 2, 3. Whence you infer a wreste [...] conclusion, that unlesse we shall say that chil­dren are in such a state of favour with God; w [...] shall make our Saviour (in effect) to say, tha [...] unlesse his disciples be like unto those who ar [...] in a state of condemnation, they cannot be sa­ved: But this according to your usuall wringing rather then concluding. For answer, 1. O [...] Saviour compares them in their qualification▪ not in their state or condition. 2. This compa­rison will not conclude infants in a saving state [...] for first, though in humility negative, rather then positive, they must be like children, yet that is not all: they must not onely be free from pride, ambition, &c. as children through the in­capacity of their tender age are, but further, they must have a humble and remorsefull sence of sinne, with contrition and selfe-loathing, an high esteeme and true impression of free grace pardoning, withall, faith, repentance, &c. which children have not, secondly, they growne to years of discretion, cannot in this humility wherein they are compared be like children, but from a principle of regeneration, whereas in children it is onely through incapacity of their age; therefore such qualifications in persons of years, conclude higher for them, then in Infants. As children are radically rationall, though in their infancy reason cannot expresse it selfe in many fruits: so are they radically sinfull, and that unto death in sin, though sin in that age cannot expresse it selfe as to many fruits of it.

[Page 167] In the next place you anticipate an objection which you could not but so that your doctrine is lyable to; not any thing you say that hath [...]e [...] said upon this last account, supposeth chil­dren to be begotten or borne without originall sinne, then you adde, onely that indeed hath been said, which supposeth that, that sinne which is in children, is taken away by the death of Christ: So that they are generally whilst chil­dren, in the favour of God through Christ, not­withstanding that sinne which is in them, which is as much as to say, they are borne without the guilt of originall sinne. Death (according to your doctrine here) raignes not over those that have not sinned after the Similitude of Adams trans­gression; againe, that state of corruption by na­turall birth which you allow is far different from that which the Scripture teacheth; yours is but such a state as is found in the regenerate, as is notwithstanding that corruption, a saving state; the Scripture teacheth it such a state of flesh, as without regeneration changing that state there can be no salvation. One passage I had al­most forgot, whereas you say regeneration is ap­propriable onely to persons growne to years of discretion, allowing what hath over & over been proved, that without regeneration there is no person in a saving state, it will hence follow, that so many children as are saved are regene­rate.

Hitherto Master Goodwins interpretation (with the examination of it,) which we had good rea­son to set downe in contradistinction to the true interpretation which now followes. And it is such as will evidence it selfe clearly to suit [Page 168] with the Parable, and is withall the sence of the Fathers generally who have spoken to it; as like­wise, (at least the prime sence) of diverse Mo­derne Divines of the best note: See the text, Mat. 25. 14. to the 31. to which is Paralel, Luke 19. to the 28.

The maine parts of this Parable are three: the

First, Of a man, (a noble man Luke 19. 12.) travelling into a far Country (to receive a Kingdome Luke, ibid) and committing to his servants his goods, and these goods (talents, Mat. 25. 15. pounds, Luke 19. 13.) by them to be imployed for encrease to their Lord. vers. 14. 15.

This noble man is Christ, this far Country heaven, his journey thither, his ascention; the Kingdome he is gone to receive, the Kingdome of glory at the resurrection; these servants, the Ministers of the Gospell, these talents or pounds the doctrine of the Gospell, committed to their Ministry; their employment for encrease, the faithfull discharge of their Ministry, with deli­gent labour against manifold hazzards, whereby the Gospell-Kingdome of Christ takes place in the world and is enlarged, as in the Parrable Luke 12. 41. to the 49. the servant there is not the Christian in generall, but the Minister of the Gospell, viz. the Steward of his Lords house, whom upon his faithfull discharge of his trust in the houshold, his Lord will make him Ruler over all that he hath, verse 42. with 44. So here the servants are the same; si Ministers of the Gospell, to whose trust the Lord hath commit­ted the mannaging & improvement of his estate, si his Kingdome here upon Earth, till his next [Page 169] [...]g, whom upon their faithfull discharge of this their trust, he will in like manner advance to further Rule, as in the third part of the Parrable is exprest, vers. 21. and 23.

Quere. But what may the inaeqality of the talents here signifie?

Answ. In Parables there are some essentiall parts, some amplifications for ornament; the essentiall parts are of speciall signification, in close connexion with the scope, the amplificati­ons of more generall signification, which if they should be too presiesly restrained, would many times pervert the true interpretation; as to give one instance. In the parable of the rich man in Hell, he is represented as taking care for his friends upon earth, that they may not come into those torments; we may not hence conclude that the damned in hell, have a loving affection towards, and a tender care of their friends yet living in the world, such an amplification no es­sentiall part I conceive the inaequality of the ta­lents here to be of this general signification, that the Lord doth in much wisdom, and with due circumspection commit the Gospell ministry to the Ministers thereof, good & bad; of the like con­sideration is that w ^ch immediately follows viz. to every one according to his several ability; that is ingeneral, the Lord requires a faithfull discharge of their Ministry, from every one of them; e­ven the meanest, but he that should give such a speciall interpretation as this; that even those Ministers who prove unfaithfull, and inbane condemnation in the end, had the least charge committed to them, and the least opportunities of Gospell-ministration, should swerve from [Page 170] the truth; therefore to shew that this is no spe­ciall part of the Parable, in Luke there is no in­aequality of the pounds, nor different ability of the Servants mentioned.

The second part of the parable vers. 16. 17, 18. the carriage of those servants in the absence of their Lord; two of them trade with their talents and make encrease; these are the fruitfull Mini­sters, who give diligent heed to the worke of the Ministery which they have received of the Lord, their increase is the fruits of their labours in the conversion and edification of soules, in planting and propogating the Churches of Christ; By the faithfull discharge of the Gospell ministery, the Kingdome of Christ in the world increaseth, as when leaven is put into dough, the Masse encrea­seth, or as when a graine of Mustardseed growes into a spreading tree. The third diggs into the earth and hides his Lords money; this is the un­faithfull Minister, who neglects the charge com­mitted to him, the doctrine of the Gospell, by Christ committed to his hand, as a lighted can­dle, which he puts under a bushell, or under a bed, so that it gives no light to the house; the unfruit­full Steward that gives not the family their meat in due season; too sloathfull to endure the la­bours of the Ministery, too fearefull to abide the hazards, and undergoe the sufferings, too worldly and sensuall, to minde the spirituall concernments thereof, with the necessary neg­lect of the things of this life. Now ensues the third part of the Parable, the returne of this Noble man, his calling these servants to account, and rendring to them according to their carriage in his absence, v. 19, to the 31.

[Page 171] The returne of this Noble man, is the coming of Christ to judgement; his reckoning with his servants: his calling the Ministers of the gospell to account; A word of weighty caution here to them: with them shall Christ begin, in the day of judgement: The accounts of the first and second here, are the accounts of the faithfull mi­nisters, the ministery in their hands hath been fruitfull, the recompence rendred them by their Lord, making them rulers over many things, and receiving them into his joy, is the State of glory conferd upon them; a state of highest ho­nor and fullest joy, agreeable hereunto is that of the Apostle. 1 Thessal. 2. 19, 20.

The account of the third servant, is the ac­count of the evil and unfruitfull Minister who to colour his own sloath and wickednesse, char­geth the Lord with austerity and unrighteous­nesse; the manner of hypocrites, and wicked ones, to cast their faults upon the Lord, guil­ty at once of disobedience and insolence. The labours and hazards which are indeed required of the faithfull Minister, he looks at as intol­lerable, and therefore takes and easier course, but to the destruction of himself and his hearers, repining in his spirit against the Lord, who hath made the ministeriall charge so laborious and hazardous, vers. 24, 25.

The answer of his Lord unto him. vers. 26, 27. is such, as makes way for his condemnation out of his own mouth Lu. 19. 22. Because he had such hard thoughts of Christ, to whom he must give account, he should therefore have used his utmost diligence to have fulfilled his ministry; Christ shall need no other testymonies against [Page 172] the wicked then their own at the day of judge­ment, nay their own mistakes & evil apprehensi­ons of him, shal yet be testimony sufficient a­gainst them to condemn them, and justifie him in their condemnation. But who are these exchan­gers here? the hearers of the gospell preached, by the faithfull preaching of the gospell, many hearers are gained unto the Lord, others are left more inexcusable, both making for the glo­ry of Christ at the great day, and therefore the faithfull Ministers, a sweet savour of Christ un­to God, in them that are saved, and in them that perish, 2 Cor. 2. 15.

The sentence of judgement is begun, ver. 28. That trust and honour which was conferd upon him, shall be taken from him, and conferd up­on the faithful minister, what is that? the glory of the faithfull minister in the fight of men and angels, shall receive increase from the condem­nation of the unfaithfull; Stript of all that ho­nour which sometime was vested in him, the confirmation of this sentence, vers. 29. He that hath; not onely what the Lord committed to him, but what he required of him, the encrease of his talents, to him shall be given glory, as a a recompence of his faithfulnesse, and he that hath this recompence of glory, shall receive en­crease, and it shall be abundant to him, from the condemnation of the wicked, and unfaithfull servant, as by the destruction of the vessels of wrath is made knowne so much the more, the riches of glory on the vessels of mercy. Rom. 9. 22, 23. On the contrary from him that hath not, viz. that which the Lord required; the encrease of his talent; shall be taken away even that [Page 173] which he hath, viz. that honour which he re­ceived from Christ, committing to his trust the Gospell Ministry, and which in the eyes of men by vertue thereof he bore in this world, which now shall end for ever in utmost shame and tor­ments, v. 30. and so as from the Glory of the faithfull Minister his misery shall encrease; as hence weeping and gnashing of teeth to the wic­ked Iewes that they see Abraham, Isack and Iacob and all the Prophets in the Kingdome of God, and them­selves thrust out. Luke. 13. 28. so that every way, to him that hath, shall be given, and from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath. And now I appeale to the Judicious reader, if this be not a naturall interpretation of this Pa­rable, and what is there now in it, for the im­provement of naturall indowements to the ob­taining of regenerating Grace.

This Section he closeth with a false charge, as if his adversaries taught men so to lay aside rea­son and understanding as to be meerly passive in matters of Religion, with avile slander, as though they consulted their owne worldly concern­ments in holding the truth against him and his fellowes, with Laodicean pride assigning unto man his excellency upon these termes, that upon the improvement of his natural abiilites, preventing regenerating grace he is made great by God. If I should now shew what by regenerating grace the men of his Confideracy understand, his errour would yet further appeare, but the digression would be [...] too long: Onely this passeth as an Article of Faith amongst them. That all the o­perations of God being performed, which he useth for working Conversion in us, yet so doth [Page 174] Conversion remain in our power as that we may not be converted. So that all the efficiency they acknowledge in converting grace, is to give us a power of Conversion, not Conversion it selfe: which how contrary it is to the truth, and with how much clearnesse the efficacy of grace certain­ly and infallibly working Conversion it selfe is by the Fathers in the Pelagian controversie de­monstrated, I shall not need here to say, if the Reader beare in minde what hath been said a­bove.

CHAP. XIX.

We have done with his Motives to read his Book: Now follows the third part of his Preface, viz. A prevention of Objections against the reading thereof; In this and the next which is likewise the last part, we shall not need to spend much time, there being little but impertenen­cies, beside what hath been answered before, we shall therefore touch upon such things as are observable, and as the Case shall require, insist sometimes more largely.

Object. 1. That he teacheth the possibility of the Saints finall Apostacy, he teacheth more then the possibility thereof, so that it many times comes to passe; for answer hereto he refers to the ninth Chapter of his Book; but the judicious Reader will finde there as every where else nothing but Errours.

Object. 2. That he exalts nature to the preju­dice of free grace, he answers hereto as followeth, which we shall set downe in his owne words, as formerly we have done (because this is a passage [Page 175] that requires distinct Examination,) and then accordingly examine it.

Concerning the Grace of God and the freenesse thereof, I hold and teach nothing but what fayrely and fully ac­cords with these positions.

1. That the originall or first spring of the salvation of the world, and so of every particular person, that comes to be saved, was in and from the Grace, the free Grace and good pleasure of God.

2. That the whole method or systeme of the Councels by which and according to which God effecteth and bringeth to passe the salvation of all that are saved, did proceed wholly and entirely from the same grace and good pleasure.

3. And more particularly, That the gift of Jesus Christ for a Mediatour and Saviour unto the world, and so the Grant or Promise of Iustification and salvation unto men, by or upon beleeving, issued solely and wholly from the same grace.

4. That men by nature and of themselves, i. e. Consi­dered in and under such a condition, as they were brought into by Adam, and wherein they should have subsisted (in Case they had ever been borne, and lived in the world.) Had not the free grace of God in Christ inter­posed to relieve them and better their Condition, have no strength or power, not the least inclination or propen­sion of wil, to doe any thing, little or much acceptable un­to God or of a saving import.

5. That notwithstanding this restauration or healing of the naturall condition of man by the free grace of God, yet there is not one of a thousand, possibly not one through­out the whole world but so farre corrupts himselfe with the lusts of the flesh and wayes of the world, that with­out [Page 176] a second reliefe from the free grace of God, as, viz. in his patience and long suffering towards him, ever comes to repent or beleeve, or to persevere beleeving and so to be saved.

6. That it is from the free and undeserved grace of God, that any person of man-kind, is so much as put into a Capacity of beleeving or hath power and meanes vouchsafed unto him sufficient to enable him to beleeve.

7. That a man is put into this capacity of beleeving by an irresistable acting or working of the free grace of God.

8. That when any man by vertue of the power and meanes vouchsafed unto him by the free grace of God comes actually to beleeve, the exercise and acting of this power proceeds also from the free grace and good plea­sure of God, so that no man ever beleeveth without a pre­sent and actuall assistance from the free grace of God, in order to this his beleeving, over and above his ability or power to beleeve.

9. (And lastly) That the Act of beleeving whenso­ever it is performed by any man, is so inconsiderably and at so low a rate of efficiency from a mans selfe, that (to helpe apprehension a little in the case) suppose the Act of beleeving, could be divided into a thousand parts or degrees, nine hundred ninety and nine of them are to be ascribed unto the free grace of God, and onely the one remaining unto man; yea this one degree of the Action is no otherwise neither to be ascribed unto man then as gratiously supported, strengthened and assisted by the free grace of God.

The Reader will finde none of these Positions contra­dicted by any thing affirmed or denyed in the di course: I attribute as much as possible can be attributed to the free grace of God, in and about the Act of beleeving, salving the attributablenesse of the action unto man himselfe, in [Page 177] the lowest and most diminutive sence that can well be conceived. It is man that beleeves, not God; therefore so much efficiency about it must be left to man, as may give it denomination of being his.

Reader, one word in generall; doth not he seeme to speake fairely for grace here? but never did any man play more fast and loose with sound and sense of his doctrin, then this Author doth; how Orthodox soever any of these posi­tions may be in their sound, not any one of them is so in the sense by him intended.

Read over his-first Position and his second, which are very generall, & the third where thou hast some explication of the former; then add the sixt, and thou hast a further explication; they all together come to this. ‘That God of his meer good pleasure appointed that all beleevers should be saved by Jesus Christ; that of the same good pleasure or grace, he gave Jesus Christ for the world; that by him all men are in their naturall generation put into a Capacity of beleeving, and have means sufficient afforded them for salvation: that in all this God hath an equall respect of grace to all men. ’By this time then thou mayst discerne, how different this grace which he teacheth, is from that Grace which the Scriptures teach, viz.

1. That God chose from all eternity by a speciall Decree of peculiar grace, the persons of those unto salvation, who in the end are saved▪ this Decree (wherein the grace of it appeares) not founded upon Faith or Workes, or any thing in [Page 178] Man foreseen, but meerly upon his owne good will and pleasure, that according to this Decree, he gave them to Christ, and Christ for them, by his Redemption to bring them certainly to sal­vation; that of the same meere grace he doth in his owne time effectually call them, thereby dis­criminating them in their actuall state and con­dition, as formerly he had in his Councel, from the rest of men; in their Call uniting them to Christ, blessing them with all spirituall bles­sings in him to the effectuall obtainment of sal­vation.

2. It is such grace as which notwithstanding the greatest number of persons by farre to whom it belongs, perish everlastingly; for he makes it equally belong to all the world, the greatest part whereof by far (I thinke he will not deny) pe­risheth.

For the fourth Position; The sinne and mi­sery of Mans condition in Adam, is meerly noti­onall: He doth not allow, that one man living is in that condition by his naturall conception and birth; whereas the Scriptures teach and with them the Fathers against the Pelagian heresie, that all men are borne in that condition, and remaine therein till they be regenerate by the peculiar grace of God, as we have formerly seen at large.

For the fifth: 1. He teacheth the Pelagian pow­er of the naturall and unregenerate man, casting a false glosse over it of restauration and healing, as we discours'd above.

2. He teacheth the Pelagian method of Rege­neration, that Grace is given according to Mans merit. This second reliefe from the free grace of God, being nothing but his patience and long­suffering, [Page 179] through which man being spared, mak [...] such use of his naturall endowments and com­mon principles, as thereupon the Grace of Re­ge [...]ration (whatsoever it is to which he vouch­safes that name) is given, as we saw lately in his explication of the Parable of the Talents.

For the sixth and seventh: What is here affir­med, we must understand of all Men at their birth or conception rather, according to his explicati­on of 1 Iohn 9. formerly. And so Originall sin, at least that which he himselfe granted by Adam in his fourth Position here is prevented to all men, never takes hold of any; the very thing by Pelagius maintained, and in him condemned; one­ly a new fetch for it.

For the eighth: As in his Preface hitherto and in his following Booke, whensoever he hath occasion to speak to the influx of God for the operation of grace in man; he hovers in the Clouds and keeps in Generals (well acquainted with that rule Dolus in Universalibus.) So here he tels us of a present and actuall assistance; but if the Reader here conceive that he grants an effii­cacious impression upon the will of man, by the spirit of God, determining it to the Act of be­leeving and working in man to beleeve, he de­ceives himselfe; for against such a doctrine he rai­seth bitter Tragedies.

For the ninth: He denyes the whole act of beleeving to be from God, and he renders his reason, because then it could be Mans act. The falshood of this position, and the vanity of the reason annex'd may thus appear.

1. For the position: God is the Author of all being, he being the onely Creator; but every [Page 180] part or degree of the act of beleeving (supposing it divided into whatsoever parts) is something, a being Contra-distinguisht to nothing: If Man be the Author of any part, whereof God is [...] Man creates.

2. God is the Author of all good, he being the one unchangeable and necessary Good. He good of himselfe, all other things by participa­tion; but every part of the act of beleeving is good; therefore from God the onely foundation of all good.

3. The Act of believing is specially good; all parts of that act are uniforme in nature; there­fore if Man be the Author of any part, whereof God is not, Man apart from God is the Author of something specially good.

4. If Man may be the Author of one part of being, of good, of speciall good; why not of more? Why not of the whole? and so Man shall be the Creator of the noblest operations; why should we then have inferiour operations for God to be the Author of, and not deny him the Author of all or any?

2. For the Reason: That God is the Author of the whole, doth no way deny Mans efficiency, or take the denomination of the act from him: Where causes are subordinate, the whole effect is produced by both; thus when in writing the teacher guides the learners hand, they both write the whole, every letter, and every part of every letter. In the motion of higher and lower wheeles, the lesse within the greater, the whole motion is performed by both; In causes thus sub­ordinate, but of different kindes, the denomi­nation is from the dependent cause. Thus when [Page 181] the Plummet moves the wheele of the clock round, we say the wheele, not the Plummet turnes round; but the Plummet is the first mo­ver. Thus when the Earth springs forth her fruits, God is the Author of them, of all and e­very part of them; yet the Earth springs them, though he produce them; he springs them not, but makes her to spring them. The denominati­on of the action ever belonging to the inferior cause, because in it is the principle whence the action Emergeth: In the production of Faith then, God works, and man works, and Man not one part onely, but the whole, but this in subordination to God who works the whole likewise; yet Man beleeves, not God, because in Man is the principle whence the act of beleeving issues: His will, but his will by grace renewed; His wil the principle which beleeves: Grace renewing the will the principle by which he beleeves: He beleeves in whom is the act of beleeving produ­ced; It is not produced by God in himselfe, but by influx from himselfe in Man.

It is no immanent action in God, but in Man, in him produced by a transient action of God upon him. Therefore I say with Austin; ‘It is certaine that when we will, we will, but it is he that makes us to will that which is good, who works in us both to will and to doe. So that it is cer­tain that when we beleeve, we beleeve;’ but it is he that makes us to beleeve, and that not in part, but in whole. Appositely Bernard, ascribing all that is good in man to the grace of God; ‘Not partly grace (saith he) and partly free will, but each of them by an undivided work, performes the whole.’This, the whole; and that, the [Page 182] whole; but as the whole is in this, so the whole is from that: Excellently Austine, proving not only the whole of Faith to be from God, but the denyall of it to be Pelagianisme. Having first pro­ved Faith to be of God, he adds (as formerly we have quoted him) ‘Furthermore if God work our Faith, acting in our hearts in a wonderfull manner, that we may beleeve, shall we feare least he be not able to do the whole? ’Now fol­lows the Pelagian [...]sme of the denyall. And there­fore Man challengeth to himselfe the first part of it, that he may deserve from him to receive the last. S e if any thing be done by this meanes, but that the grace of God, one way or other may be given according to our merits; and so grace shall not be grace.

Then in the prosecution of this discourse, he blames the pride of Man, that he will (as it were) Compound with God, so as to challenge part of his Faith to himselfe, and leave part thereof to God; and which is yet more arrogant, he will take the first part to himselfe, (and pray say Mr. Goodwin if this be not your part) leave the fol­lowing part to God: and in that which he saith belongs to them both, he makes himselfe to goe before, and God to behinde.

Thus have we seen the vanity, fraud, and Er­ror of your positions; as for the close of this Section, it may well passe for Smoak, and so may indeed all that follows, in the rem [...]ining objecti­ons and answers I shall therfore briefly touch up­on them, for there is nothing materiall in them.

3. Obj. That your doctrines are ro [...]ten Errors.

You answer for the two doctrines more larg­ly handled in the following book. 1. That you [Page 183] prove they were never cast out of the Church by any Councell reputed Orthodox, till the Synod of Dort.

An. 1. It seems you have so much modesty & con­science as to grant, some other of your doctrins, such as these here in your Preface that have been cast out by Councels, reput [...]d Orthodox, which indeed is true; to set aside that at Carthage, and that at Ierusalem, where Pelagius was condemned, we have seen the Milevi [...]ane, and second Arausican formerly rej [...]cting them.

2. For those two doctrins you are forced t [...] con­fesse that by the Synod of Dort they were rej [...]ct­ed, which was the greatest Protestant Synod that hath been held since the time [...] of Reformation.

3. What if they were not by any other, nor had been by that? Can you name no great Er­rors by your selfe confest so to be, but what have been by some or other Councill reputed Orthodox by Orthodox men, cast out?

2. For those two doctrines, you say they were taught by all O [...]thodox antiquity, and Calvin himselfe and who not? this is the true spirit of your fore Fathers; thus Iulian the Pelagian would have Iohn of Constantinople a teacher of the same doctrine with himselfe; but doe you not read the detection of his falshood, by Austin, with all brin­ging upon him the whole streame of the Ortho­dox to refute him? and do you not sadly resent your own danger, least in time you may heare; Haec verba tua quò proficiunt, nisi ut appareat, vel quo­modo de hac causa scire neglexeris Catholicorum senten­tias, Sermonesque doctorum, vel si eos nosse curasti, qu [...] fraude coneris circumvenire nescientes? Si nesciens, hoc fecisti, cur non miseram re [...]uis imperitiam? si sciens [Page 182] [...] [Page 183] [...] [Page 184] cur non sacrilegam deponis audaciam? Contr [...] Julian. Pelagi. lib. 1. Thus the Massylians or Semipelagians, alleadged that what Austin taught about the call of the Elect according to the purpose of God, in his writings against Pelagius, was contrary to the doctrine of those most famous teachers in the Church which had been before him. Prosp. in Epist. ad Augustinum; but Augustines answer thereto quo­ting Cyprian, Ambrose & Nazianzine teaching the same doctrine with him, and concluding the like of the rest generally, you are not ignorant of. lib de bono persev. C. 19.

4. Object. These discourses are ful of niceties, &c.

One of your Answers, is, that for your selfe, you go no further then you feel the ground firme under you: but your firme ground we have sound bogs and quagmires more then once; when you come to a soft place (you say,) you tread lightly; indeed you have your Reserves somtimes when you come to a knot; I beeleeve this doct­rine of divine influx, or concourse, is one of your [...]oft places, you are wont to Skin it over so fairely.

Another of your Answers, is, that your adver­saries have occasioned these subtilties, forsaking the grounds of reason, &c. whereas the truth is, Men of corrupt judgements, your friends, have by opposing their reasonings to clear Scripture occasiond them.

5. Object. Some plead a Non-necessity of en­quiring farther about this argument.

You answer to this purpose; 1. That the trea­sure of divine wisedome is not exhausted, but that we may make further discourses. But I an­swer, the truths by you opposed are so fully [Page 185] cleard long since, that should an Angel from bea­ven teach your doctrines, those that are taught of God, would see ground enough to reject him. 2. You boast of something done by you above all that went before you; I know it not: pray point us to your [...]. Then you proclaim the tro­phies of your party; whereas indeed, the church hath in divers ages triumphed in the ruine of your Errors, and so she will doe to the end.

6. Object. That these opinions have been held by a lesse religious generation of Men.

You answer that in such and such Chapters you have disproved the Objections. Take the last word here for mee, till those chapters be disproved.

7. Object. Armianisme, Pelagianisme, Socinia­nisme.

In answer whereto, you are upon your old false string, and would make us beleeve, that Calvin himself, the Synod of Dort, and I know not who, had sore fitts of Arminianisme. I returne you here to my answer to your third Objection.

Now follows the fourth and last part of your Preface, which is your Apology, I had almost said for your Apostacy; but let it passe in your owne words concerning your change of judge­ment; but forasmuch as your Arguments are one­ly generall, and upon a false supposition, that you have changed from Error to truth, and no other then what any Desertor of the faith might use, I spare the fruitlesse paines of answering any thing at all to them.