Additions to the Saints everlasting Rest, to be put before the Second Part.

The Preface, directed 1. To Unbelievers, and Anti-Scripturists, 2. To Papists, 3. And to the Orthodox.

BEcause it is a point of such high concernment, to be assured of the Divine Authority of the Scriptures; and all men be not of one mind in the way of proving it, and because I have not handled this so fully as the difficulty and weight of the subject doth require, as intending only a few Arguments by way of Digression, for the strengthening of weaker & less exercised Chri­stians. I have thought meet therefore a little more fully to express my mind in this Preface, being loath to stand to enlarge the book any fur­ther. And that which I have to say, is to three sorts of Persons distinctly.

The first is, all those that Believe not the Truth of the Scriptures. Open Pagans live not among us: But Pagans professing Christianity are of late▪ too common; under the name of Libertines, Familists, Seekers, and Anti-Scripturists. Had I not known it by experience, and had conference with such, I should not speak it. And there is a remnant of Paganism and Infidelity in the best of Christians. The chief causes which pervert the understandings of men in this point, in my observation, are these two. 1. When men have deeply wounded their Consciences by sinning against Knowledge, and given the Victory to their fleshly lusts, so that they must either deeply accuse and con­demn [Page] themselves, or deny the Scriptures, they choose that which seem­eth the more tolerable and desirable to them; and so rather condemn the Scripture then themselves. And what malefactor would not do the like, and except against the Law which doth condemn him, if that would serve his turn? And when men that are engaged in a sinfull course, do see that the word of God doth speak so terribly against it, they dare not live in that sin while they believe the Scripture, because it is still wakening and galling their guilty Consciences: But when they have cast away their belief of the Scriptures, then Conscience will let them sin with more quietness. These men Believe not the Scri­ptures; principally because they would not have them to be true, ra­ther then because they do indeed seem untrue: For their Fleshly concu­piscence having mastered their Wils, their Wils have also mastered their understandings: and so as in a well ordered gracious soul all goes strait forward; in these men all is perverted and m [...]ves backward. These men refuse their Physick, because it is unpleasant, and not because it is unwholsome; yet at last their appetite so master­eth their Reason, that they will not believe any thing can be wholsome which goes so much against their stomacks. At least this makes them the readyer to pick a quarrell with it, and they are glad to hear of any Argument against it. Ahab believed not the message of Micheah, not because he spoke falsly, but because he spoke not Good of him, but Evil. Men will easily be drawn to Believe that to be True which they would fain have to be True; and that to be False, which they desire should be False. But alas, how short and filly a cure is this for a guilty soul! And how soon will it leave them in uncurable misery!

2. Another Reason of these mens Ʋnbelief, is the seeming contra­dictions that they find in the Scriptures, and the seeming impossibilities in the Doctrine of them, which so far transcend the capacity of man. To the former let me say this much. 1. It is meerly through our igno­rance that Scriptures seem contradictory: I thought my self once that some places were hardly reconcileable, which now I see do very plainly agree: Plainly, I say, to them that understand the true meaning of the words. There are no humane writings but lie open to such exceptions of the Ignorant. It is rather a wonder that the Scriptures seem not to you more self▪ contradicting, if you consider, but 1. That they are writ­ten in another language, and must needs loose much in the Translation; there being few words to be found in any language, which have not di­vers significations. 2. That it being the language also of another [Page] Countrey to men that know not the customs, the scituation of places, the proverbial speeches and phrases of that Countrey, it is impossible but many words should seem dark or contradictory. 3. Also that the Scriptures are of so exceeding Antiquity, as no b [...]ks else in the world are like them. Now who knows not that in all Countries in the world customs alter, and proverbiall speeches and phrases alter? which must needs make words seem dark even to men of the same Countrey and Language that live so long after. We have many English Proverbs, which if in after Ages they should cease to be Proverbs, and men find­ing them in our writings shall construe them, as plain speeches, they will seem to be either false, or ridiculous non▪ sence. The like may be said of alterations of Phrases. He that reads but Chaucer, much more elder Writers, will see that English is scarce the same thing now as it was then. Though the sacred Languages have had no such great alterations, yet by this it may appear that it is no wonder, if to the ig­norant they seem contradictory or difficult. Do not the Mathematicks, and all Sciences seem full of contradictions and impossibilities to the Ignorant? which are all resolved and cleared to those that understand them? It is a very foolish audacious thing that every novice or young student in Divinity, should expect to have all difficulties resolved pre­sently, or else they will censure the Scriptures, and speak evil of the things they know not, instead of censuring themselves: When yet these men know that in the easiest Science, yea, or basest Manufacture, they must have time to learn the Reasons of them. It is usual with raw Scholars in all kind of studies, to say as Nicodemus at first did of Re­generation, How can these things be? Sed qu [...]m [...]d­modum apud eos qui semel providentiam probe percepe­runt, non mi­nuitur, aut perit fides pro­videntiae ob [...]a quae non com­prehenduntur; ita ne{que} scriptu­rae Divinitati per eam totam diffusae quidquam d [...]trahitur, ex eo quod ad singulas dictiones imb [...]cilli [...]as nos [...]ra non possit adesse arcano splendori doctrinae qui in tenui & contempta locutione del [...]tescit. Origen. Philocali (per Ta­rinum Graecolat. Edit.) pag. (mihi) 12. 13. Me thinks such frail and shallow Creatures, as all men are, should rather be so sensible of their own incapacity and ignorance, as to be readyer to take the blame to themselves, then to quarrel with the Truth. It is too large a work for me here to answer all the particular objections of these men against the several passages of Scripture: but if they would be at the pains to enquire of their Teachers, or study what is written to that end, they might find that the matter is not so difficult as they imagine. Besides what Althamer, Cumeranus, Sharpius and others have purposely written for reconciling the seeming contradictions in Scripture, they may find much in ordinary Expositors. Junius answereth two and [Page] twenty Cavils which Simplicius the Pagan raised, and after him the Antinomians used against Moses History of the Creation. And he was fit for the work, having for a years time continued in the desperate Error of Athe [...] himself. But the fullest Confutation of these Blasphemous conceits are in the primitive Fathers (as Origen against Celsus, Tertul. Athanas. &c) where they shall find that the worst of Pagans brought forth these Monsters, and by what weapons they were destroyed.

2. And what if you could not see how to reconcile the seeming con­tradictions of Scripture! When you see Arguments sufficient to prove them to be the Word of God (which I doubt not but you may see, if you will search impartially and humbly) me thinks common reason might then conclude, that all that God speaks must needs be true: though our blindness hinder us from a distinct discerning it! 2. The like I say of the seeming Impossibilities in Scripture. Is any thing too hard for Om­nipotency it self? This Atheist derides it when he hears of the opening of the Red Sea, of the standing still of the Sun, &c. But dost thou believe that there is a God? If thou do, thou must needs know that he is Al­mighty: If not, thou hast put out the eye of Reason; For most Pagans in the world have acknowledged a God. Canst thou think that all the things thou seest, are made and preserved without a first Cause? Do the Heavens keep their courses, and the Earth produce that variety of beautifull Creatures, and the death of one, cause the Life of the other, and all kept in that order of superiority and inferiority, and all this without a first Cause? If thou say that Nature is the cause: I would fain know what it is that thou callest Nature? Either a Reasonable Being and Cause, or an unreasonable. If unreasonable, it could not produce the Reasonable spirits, as are Angels and the Souls of men, for these would be more Noble then it self: If Reasonable, is it not then God himself which thou dost call by the name of Nature? To be the first Reason, Being and Cause of all, is to be God. And then let me ask thee: Dost thou not see as great Works as these Miracles eve­ry day and hour before thine eyes? Is it not as great a work for the Sun to move, as to stand still? to move 1038442. miles an hour, be­ing 1663/8 times bigger then all the Earth? Is it not as hard a matter for the Sea to move and keep his times in ebbing and flowing, as for it to open and stand still? It is only the rarity and strangeness that makes us think one Impossible, when we see the other daily come to pass. If it were but usual for the Sun to stand still, every man would think it a [Page] far more incredible thing that it should move, and so move? Why then cannot God do the lesser▪ who daily doth the greater? The like I might say of all the rest, but that it were too long to insist on them. And for the truth of the History, it is proved afterwards.

2. I would further ask these men, Must not a soul that is capable of Immortall Happiness, have some guide in the way thereto? If they say, No then they either think God unfaithfull or unskilfull, who having appointed man an End, hath not given him direction thereto in the Means. If they doubt whether mans soul be Immortall, and whe­ther there be a Life of Happiness to some, and Misery to others to be expected after this, I have said enough against that doubt in this book following. And further l [...]t me ask them, Socrates be­ing near death (apud P [...]ato­n [...]m, Cicerone inte [...]prete) said thus: Magaa me spes tenet, Judices, bene mihi eve­nire quod mit­tar ad mortem: Necesse est enim ut sit alterum de duobus, ut aut sensus om­nino mors om­nes auferat, aut in alium quen­dam locum ex his locis morte migretur. Quamobrem sive sensus extinguitur, mors{que} ei somno similis est, qui nonnunquam etiam sive visis som­ [...]orum, placatissimam quietem affert; Dii honi, quid lucri est emori? aut quam multi dies reperiri possunt qui tali nocti anteponatur? &c. Sin vera sunt quae dicuntur, migrationem esse mortem, in eas oras quas qui è vita excesseruat, incolunt; id mu [...]to iam beatius est, te, cum ab iis qui se iudicium numero haberi volunt, evaseris, ad [...]os venire qui vere iudices appellentur, &c. convenire{que} eos, qui iuste & cum side vixerint. Haec peregrinatio mediocris vobis videri potest? Ʋt vero colloqui cum Or­phaeo, Musaeo, Homero, Hesiodo liceat, quanti tandem aestimatis? Equidem saepe mori s [...] fieri posset, vellem, ut ea quae dico mihi liceret invenire. Quanta delectatione autem afficeret, &c. Ne vos qui­dem, Judices, ii qui me absoluistis mortem timueritis; Nec enim cuiquam bono ma [...]i quidquam evenire potest, nec vivo nec mortuo: Nec unquam eius res à Diis immortalibus negligentur, &c. Sic Socrates. Qu [...]dam & Natura nota sunt, ut Mortalitas animae penes plures ut Deus noster penes omnes. Ʋtar ergo & sententia Platonis alicuius pronunciantis. Omnis anima est Immortalis. Ʋtar & Conscientia Populi contestantis Deum Deorum. Ʋtar & reliquis communibus sensibus, qui Deum Judicem praedi­cant, [Deus videt] & [Deo commendo.] At cum aiunt [Mortuum quod Mortuum] & [Vive dum V [...]vis] & [post mortem omnia finiuntur, etiam ipsa] tunc meminero & cor vulgi cinerem, à Deo depu­tatum, & ipsam sapientiam seculi stultitiam pronunciatam. Tunc si & Haereticus ad vulgi vitia, vel seculi ingenia confugerit, discede, dicam, ab Ethnico, haeretice, etsi unum estis omnes. Tertul. lib. de Resurrec. carn. cap. 3. How comes it to be the Common judgement of all Nations, even the most ignorant Indians, that there is a Life after this, where the Good and the Bad shall be dif­ferently recompenced. This the ancient Barbarians believed as Hero­dotus testifieth of the Getae. lib. 4. and of the Egyptians Diodorus Siculus lib. 1. biblioth num. 93. The very Inhabitants of Guiny, Virginia, Guiana, Peru, China, Mexico, &c. do believe this: as you may see Descrip. Reg. Afric. Guineae, cap. 21. 44. Acosta lib. 5. c. 7. 8. Hug. Luiscot. Part. 1. cap. 25. Jo. Lerius cap. 16. Sir Walt. Raughly, &c. What Poet speaks not de Tartaro, Campis Elisiis, Ma­nibus? And so do Philosophers of best note, except Galen, Epicurus, Plinius, &c. As for Pythagoras, and his Master Pherecides, the Druides, the Indian Brachmanes, Socrates, Plato, Cicero, Seneca, [Page] they all acknowledge it. Lege Marsil. Ficinum de Immort. Anim. Yea, Aristotle himself saw this, as appeareth De anima lib. 1. context. 65. 66. lib. 2. context. 21. lib. 3. context. 4. 6. 7. 19. 20. Sure then the light of Nature discerneth it.

Yet if these men say that there must be a Guide and Law for souls in their way to Happyness, and yet deny that the Scripture is it, I would fain know of them which is it, and where it is to be found? Hath God any other word or Law in the world above this? Sure neither Plato, nor Aristotle did ever call their books the Word of God: and Maho­mets Alcoran is far more unlike to be it then theirs. If they say that Reason is the only Guide and Law, I reply, 1. Reason is but the Eye by which we see our Directory and Law, and not the Directory and Law it self. 2. Look on those Countries through the world that have no Scripture-Guide, but follow their Reason, and see how they are Guided, and what difference there is between them and Christians, (as bad as we are,) and if you think of this well, you will be ashamed of your er­ror. Indians have Reason as well as we; Nay look on the wise Ro­mans, and the great learned Philosophers, who had advanced their Reason so high, and see how lamentably they were befooled in Spiritu­als; How they worshipped multitudes of Idols, even taking those for their Gods whom they acknowledged to be Leacherous, Adulterous, Perfidious, Bloody and wicked. Read but Justins Apol. Athenago­ras, Tertull. Apol. &c. Origen cont. Cels. Arnobius, Lactantius, Clemens Alex. Protreptic. Minutius Faelix, Athanas. &c. fully of this. Most certainly either the Scriptures are Gods Word and Law, or else there is none in the known world; And if there be none, how doth the just, true and Righteous God govern the Rational Creature, so as to lead him to the Happyness prepared for him? But of this in the fourth Argument following.

3. I would entreat these men but soberly to consider this; What if there were no full Absolute certainty of the truth of Scripture or Christian Religion, but it were only probable, (which no considerate m [...]n can deny) were it not the wisest way to receive it? what if it should prove true that there is a Hell for the wicked, what a case are you in then? You know your worldly happyness is a very dream and a shaddow; and a bruitish delight which is mixt with misery, and qui­eteth not the soul, and perisheth in the using. If you do lose it, you lose but a toy, a thing of nothing which you must shortly lose whether you will or no. But if you lose Heaven, and fall into Endless misery, it [Page] is another kind of loss. Me thinks then that common Reason should perswade men to venture all, though it were at uncertainty, upon that Religion which tels us but of a Possibility of a Heaven and a Hell, then to venture on a possibility of everlasting Misery, for a little bestial pleasure, which is gone while we are enjoying it! Yea, and when even in this life these sensual men have not neer so much true content as the Christian! Verily if I doubted of the truth of the Christian Religion, I durst not be of any other; but should judge it the wisest course to venture all I had in this world upon the Hopes that it propoundeth; yea, meer madness to do otherwise. If men that are at a lottery will venture a small sum for a possibility of a great one, though they know there is but one of twenty that shall get it; how much more would any wise man leave a little vanity, in hope of Everlasting Glo­ry, and to avoid everlasting misery, though it were uncertain. But most of all, when we have that full Certainty of it as we have.

4. Lastly, I would have these men consider, that though we doubt not but to prove that Scripture is Gods perfect infallible Law, yet if it were so that this could not be proved, yet this would not over throw the Christian Religion. If the Scripture were but the writings of honest men, that were subject to mistakes, and to contradictions in the manner and circumstances, yet they might afford us a full Certainty of the substance of Christianity, and of the Miracles wrought to confirm the doctrine. Tacitus, Suetonius, Livy, Florus, Lucan, &c. were all heathens and very fallible; and yet their history affords us a certain­ty of the great substantial passages of the Romane affairs which they treat of, though not of all the smaller passages and circumstances. He that doubteth whether there were such a man as Julius Caesar, or that he fought with Pompey, and overcame him, &c. is scarce reasonable, if he know the Histories. So though Math. Paris, Malmesbury, Hove­den, Speed, Cambden, and our own Parliaments that enacted our Laws, were all fallible men, and mistaken in divers smaller things, yet they afford us a full Certainty that there was such a man as William the Conqueror, William Rufus, &c. that there were such Parlia­ments, such Lords, such fights and victories, &c. He that would not venture all that he hath on the truth of these, especially to gain a Kingdome by the venture, were no better in this then mad. Now if Scripture were but such common writings as these, especially joyned with that uncontrolled Tradition that hath since conveyed it to us, may it not yet give us a full certainty, that Christ was in the flesh, and [Page] that he preached this Doctrine for the substance, and wrought these Miracles to confirm it, and enabled his followers to work the like, which will afford us an invincible Argument for our Christianity. Therefore Grotius, &c. and so the old Fathers when they disputed with the Heathens, did first prove the truth of Christian Religion, be­fore they came to prove the Divine Authority of the Scriptures. Not that we are at any such uncertainty, or that any Christian should dare to take up here, as if the Scriptures were not Infallible and Divine. But being now speaking to another sort of men according to their capa­city, I say, if it were otherwise, yet might we have certainty of our Re­ligion. I shall say somewhat more to these men in speaking to the rest.

2. THE second sort that I shall speak to, is the Papists. I find the chief thing that turns them from the Reformed Churches, and confirms them against us, is because they think they cannot other­wise maintain their Christianity, but by deriving it from their Church. The first Question therefore that Papists will dispute on with us, is, How know you the Scriptures to be the Word of God? For they fondly suppose, that because it cannot be known without the help of Tradition or Humane Testimony, that therefore this must be only the Testimony of the true Church, and that must be some visible Church, and that Church must be presently in Being, and must be Judge in the case, and must be Infallible in Judging, and all this can agree to no other Church; and therefore that theirs is the only true Church. And thus the particular Church of Rome will prove her self the only or universal Church. To stand here to confute these vain un­grounded Conclusions, would be to digress too far, and make this Pre­face too long. Yet something I wrote against their pretended Papal Infallibility, and of the uncertainty of their Faith; but being per­swaded by others to insert no more Controversie here, I reserve it for a fitter place. Only I would desire briefly any Papist to shew, whether their Doctrine do not leave the whole Christian Faith at utter uncer­tainty, and consequently destroy it (as much as in them lies?) For seeing they build all on the supposed Infallibility of the Church; and Vid. Gr [...]g. de Valent. To. 3. Disp. 1. Quaest. 1. punct. 7. §. 12. Et Bellarm. lib. 2. de sacrament. in gen. cap. 25. & suarez. de Fide Disput. 5. §. 4. that Church is the Present Church: and that is the Roman Church [Page] only; and Suarez. de fide Disput. 5. §. 7. & Disp. 11. §. 3. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Comiliis cap. 12. & 19. & lib. 2. cap. 2. Yet some­times they seem so pious as to preferr the Scripture before the Church: Nunquam sane mihi venit in mentem Eccle­siae iudicium sacrorum volu­minū authori­tati anteser­re, quae spiritus caelestis afflatu exarata fuisse cum Petro con­fitemur, cum & pueri, qui ne primoribus quidem labris divina monu­menta attige­runt, satis in­telligant, verae ecclesiae ratio­nem sine Verbi Dei integrita­te, quae sidei sedes est at{que} fundamentum, constare ullo modo posse Payva D• Andard: Defens. Consilii Trident. cont. Kemnit. lib. 2. pag. (mihi) 202. Sed de aliorum impudentia vid. Rivet. Catholic. Orthodox. Tract. 1. Qu. 9. pag. 94. that is only the Pope, as the Jesuits and most Papists say, or a general Councel, as the French: see what a case they bring Chri­stianity to with their followers? Every man that will Believe the Scripture, yea, or the Christian Faith, must 1. Believe or know that Rome is the true Church 2. That it hath Authority to Judge of Gods Word, and of the Christian Faith, which is truly it, and which not. 3. That this Authority was given by Gods Word (this must be known before men can know that God hath a Word, or what it is.) 4. That they are Infallible in this Judgement. 5. That Peter was at Rome, and was there Bishop, and conferred this Soveraignty on them as his Successors. 6. That each particular Pope is a true Pope, and lawfully called (which all the world must know, that know neither him, nor when, nor how he was called.) 7. That the Pope determines it as a matter of Faith (otherwise, they confess he may err, and be an Here­tick▪) 8. And they must know where is the proper subject of Infallibi­lity, whether in the Pope, or Councel, or else they know not which to build on (which yet they are far from agreeing on themselves.) 9. When two or three Popes sit together (which is no new thing) the world must know which is the right (for all the rest may err.) 10. Or if they joyn a Councel in the Infallibility, they must be certain that Christ hath given Councels this Infallibility. 11. And that this is on­ly to a Councel of Romanists. 12▪ And so that the Roman Church is the Ʋniversal Church, and not only a Part, as other Churches are. 13. And that they are free from Error in Councel, and not out of it. 14. That the Councel be General and Lawful (else they confess it may err.) 15. Therefore all men must be certain that it be summoned by the Pope. 16. And that the Bishops that constitute it are lawfully called. 17. And that the Pope doth Ratifie the Acts of this Councel, as well as call the Councel (else they conclude that they are unlaw­full, or may be fallible.) He that knows not all these, cannot be Cer­tain that Scripture is Gods word, no nor of the Truth of the Christian Faith according to the Papist grounds. And can all the world be certain of them? Or are all their Laicks certain? Yea or their Clergy? Yea or any man? Adrian the sixth tells us, that the Pope is fallible: and shall we not believe the Pope himself, confessing his own Ignorance? Though councels have decreed against Councels, and Popes against Popes, over and over. Yet we must needs believe them In­fallible, [Page] or forfeit our Christianity, according to their doctrine; that is, We must either renounce both Experience, Sense, and Reason, or our Faith. Is not this the way to drive the world again to Heathenism? And whether all the world lose not the Certainty of their Christianity, when there is an Inter-regnum upon the death of a Pope, let them fur­ther study. Full certain I am that the Christian world in Peters dayes did never pretend to hold their Faith upon his meer Infallibili­ty: Nor did Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, or any of the an­cientst that ever I met with, hold their Belief of Christ or Scripture on the Infallibility of the Bishop of Rome. The contrary I shall manifest in more convenient place. I will only adde this Question: How doth the Pope and his Councell know the Scripture to be Gods Word? If they Believe it on their own Authority, that is, because themselves say so, then they are self▪ Idolizers; and what makes them affirm it to be so? or what Reason have they for their Belief? If they Believe by any con­vincing Reason proving Scripture to be a Divine Testimony, then why may not the Clergy out of Councell, and others also Believe on the same grounds? Else the Faith of the Pope and his Councel will not have the same grounds with the faith of the People or Church besides: and then it is another faith: and so either the People or Pope are He­reticks. And why are we blamed for not Believing on the Authority of the Pope and Councel, when the Pope and Councel themselves Be­lieve not on that (that is, their own) Authority? I hope they will not turn Enthusiasts and pretend to private extraordinary Revelati­ons of the Spirit. If they say that they Receive the Scripture by the Tradition of the Ancient Church, and so on their Credit, why may not we know as well as they what the Ancients say in the point? and is it not the honestest way if they know more herein then we, to produce it, and shew us what and where the Antients speak? If they have it meerly upon Verbal Tradition, have not other men as good ears as the Pope and his Councel? and therefore (being as honest) to be as well credited in such reports: So far have the Roma­nists been from being faithful keepers of their pretended additional Traditions, that by depraving the Monuments of Antiquity, and by adding a multitude of Legends and forged writings, to advance their own ends, they have done the Church of Christ more wrong then ever they are able to repair: (as the late [...]ing t [...]uly told the Ma [...]q [...] of Wo [...]c [...]er in his (printed) conference:) But the vanity and forgery of their pretended Monuments is fully manifested by our James: Cook's Censura Patrum Erasmus, Dan: Blond [...]llus (on the by in all his writings, but) most fully in his Examen Decretalium: so our Dr Jo: Re [...]g [...]olds on other parts, and many more have opened their folly. And if it be their office to keep Traditi­ons, [Page] why have they been so careless as to lose all the rest of the things which Jesus did which John saith, would fill so many Volumes: and also all the Traditions which themselves suppose Paul to have deliver­ed unwritten to the Thessalonians and others. Shall we believe them Infallible that have already so deceived us?

And for those that think it of Absolute necessity that the Church have some Judge for final Decision of Controversies about the sence of Scripture; and that judge it so absurd a thing for every man to be Judge; and therefore they think we must needs come to Rome for a Judge: 1. I would know whether they speak of▪ Fundamentals, and such other points as are plain in Scripture; or of smaller points that are dark? For the former, what need is there of a Judge? No Christian denyeth Fundamentals: and Heathens will not stand to the Papall Infallibility. A teacher indeed is necessary for the Ignorant: but not a Judge. It is the vilest doctrine that most ever Rome did forge▪ that Fundamentals themselves are such to us because they determine them▪ and that we cannot know them but on their Authority: yea, the Church (that is, the Pope) may by his determination, make new Fundamentals. If they were not impudent, this abomination would never have found so many Patrons. They ask us, How we know Fundamentals, and which be they? I answer, Those things that God hath made the Conditions of salvation. And what if we take in both them and more, that so we may be sure not to miss of them, so we go but to plain and weighty truths, what danger is in that? 2. Seeing all Christians in the world do hold the fundamentals (else they are not truly Christians) why are they not fit deliverers or Judges of them, as well as the Pope? 3. And for lesser and darker points, by what means is the Pope and his Councel able to determine them, and to de­cide the Controversie? If by rational means, what are they? and why may not as rational men decide it as truly? 4. Will it not be as hard a Question, who shall judge of the meaning of the Popes Decretals or Canons, where they are doubtfull? and so in infinitum. I see not but the Councell of Trent speaks as darkly as the Scripture; and is as hard to be understood. 5. If God leave a point dark and doubtfull, will it not remain so, whatsoever confident men may determine? 6. If God have left a certain means, and infallible Judge, for determining all con­troversies, and expounding Scriptures, why then is it not done, but the Church left still in such uncertainties and contentions. As some Anabaptists among us do boast of a power to work Miracles, [Page] and yet we can get none of them to shew their power in one; Just so doth the Church of Rome boast of an Infallibility in deciding of Con­troversies, and yet they will not infallibly decide them. If they should grow modest and say, they do not determine what is certain in it self; but what we are to rest in. I answer, Why should we be compelled to profess things uncertain? If they say, they are not all fit to be decided, and therefore the Church leaves some to mens Liberty▪ I answer, So Christ thought them not all fit to be decided, and therefore hath left many in doubtfulness; and is it not as fit we should rest in Christs decision? and his judgement concerning points fit to be cleared and de­cided, as in mans? The palpable mistake of that one Text 2 Pet. 1. 20. (that no Scripture is of Private Interpretation) hath misled many men in [...]his point. For they think it speaks of the Quality of the Inter­preter, [...]s if Private men must not interpret it; when the Text plain­ly speaks of the Quality of the subject. The true Paraphrase is evi­dently this [q. d. Besides the Voice from Heaven, giving Testimony to Christ, we have also in the old Scriptures a sure word of Prophesie te­stifying of him (for to him give all the Prophets witness) whereto ye do well to take heed, as to a light shining in a dark place, &c. But then you must understand this; That no Prophesie of Christ in the old Testament is of Private interpretation, that is, it is not to be interpre­ted as speaking only of those private persons who were but Types of Christ, of whom indeed it literally and first speaks: For though it might seem as if the Prophets spoke of themselves, or of the Type only, who was a Private person; yet indeed it is Christ that the Spirit that spake by them intended: For the Prophesie came not in old time by the Will of man that spoke them, and therefore is not to be interpreted pri­vately of themselves, or what they might seem to intend: but holy men spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost; and therefore his meaning must be looked to, and he intended Christ the Antitype] For example: When David said Psal. 2. Yet will I set my King on my holy hill Zion; You must not interpret this of David only, a Pri­vate person, and but a Type: but of Christ the Publique person and Antitype.

But I must spend no more words here on this kind of men.

LEt me adventure on a few words to the Ministers of the Gospel; not of advice (for that was judged presumptuous in my last, though but to the younger) but of Apologie. Though the Acceptance of this Treatise be far beyond what I expected; yet some have signified to me their dislike of some things in this second Part, of which I think it my duty to tender them satisfaction.

1. Some say it is a Digression. Answ. And what hurt is that to any man? I confess it was fitted at first to my own use (as all the rest was) and why may it not be useful to some body else? My business was not to open a Text; but to help Christians to enjoy the solid com­forts which their Religion doth afford: the greatest hinderance where­of, in my observation, is a weak or unsound Belief of the Truth of it. And therefore I still think, that the very main work lyeth in streng­thening their Belief. So that I am sure I digressed not from the way that led to my intended end.

2. Others have told me, that I should not have mixed controver­sie, with such Practical matter. Answ. And some, as wise, tell me, They had rather all were omitted then this. For the Truth must be known before the Goodness will be Desired or Delighted in. It seems to me the ordinary cause of Back sliding, when men either begin at the Affections, or bestow most of their labour there, before they have laid a good foundation in the Ʋnderstanding. And they are scarce likely to be the longest-winded Christians, nor to die for their Religion, that scarce know why they are Christians. Me thinks its preposterous for men to bestow ten or twenty years in studying the meaning of Gods word, before they well know, or can prove that it is Gods Word. As the Italians mentioned by Melancthon, that disputed earnestly that Christ was Really in the bread, when they did not well believe that he was in Heaven. If Fundamentals be controverted, it concerns us to be well seen in such Controversies. However, if this be unuseful to any man, if he will but let it alone, it will do him no harm.

3. Some blame me for making so much use of the Argument from Miracles: And withall they think it invalid, except it be apparent Truth which they are brought to confirm. Answ. 1. If it be first known to be Truth, there needs no Miracles to prove it. 2. Do not all our Divines use this Argument from Miracles? 3. And I do not by using this, hinder any man from producing or using as many more as [Page] he can. I no where say, that this is the only Argument. 4. If these men were as wise as they should be, they would take heed of shaking the Christian Cause, and striking at the very root of it, for the maintain­ing of their Conceits. If they take down the chief Argument which confirms it, what do they less. 5. Search the Scripture, and see, whe­ther this were not the chief Argument, 1. which succeeded then for bringing men to Believe, 2. and which Christ himself laid the greatest weight on, and expected most from. Nathaniel believed upon Christs telling him of his conference at a distance. Joh. 1. 48, 49. Ʋpon his beginning of Miracles at Cana in Galil [...]e, he manifested forth his Glory, and his Disciples believed on him, Joh. 2. 11. The Jews there­fore enquired for Signs, as that which must confirm any new Revela­tion to be of God, Joh. 2. 18. & 6. 30. 1 Cor. 1 22. And though Christ blame them for their unreasonable unsatisfied expectations herein, and would not humour them in each particular, that they would sawcily prescribe him, yet still he continued to give them Miracles, as great as they required. Though he would not come down from the Cross to convince them (for then how should he have suffered for sin) yet he would Rise again from the dead, which was far greater. They that saw the Miracle of the Loaves, [...]aid. This is of a Truth the Pro­phet that should come into the world, Joh. 6. 14. John (say they) did no Miracle: but all that John spake of this man were true: and many Believed on him there, Joh. 10. 41. Many believed when they saw the Miracles which he did, Joh. 2. 23. See also Act. 4. 16. Joh. 6. 2. & 7. 31. & 11. 47. Act. 6. 8. & 8. 6. 13. and Gal. 3. 5. Act. 2. 43. & 4. 30. & 5. 12. & 7. 36 & 14. 3. Heb. 2. 4. And Christ himself saith, If I had not done the works that no man else could do, ye had no sin (in not believing) Joh. 15. 24. And therefore he pro­miseth the Holy Ghost to his Disciples to enable them to do the like, to convince the world, Mar. 16. 17, 18. Yea, to do greater works then he had done, Joh. 14. 12. And he upbraideth and most terribly threat­ned the unbelievers that had seen his mighty works, Mat. 11. 20, 21, 23. Luk. 10. 13. Yea, the Blaspheming of the power by which he wrought them, (and his Disciples afterward were to work them) and ascribing them to the Devil, he maketh the unpardonable sin, Mat. 12. 31, 32. see also, Mat. 11. 2, 3, 4. and 13. 54. and 14. 2. Mar. 6. 2. 14. Joh. 5. 19, 20. and 7. 3. He tels them, The works that I do, bear witness of me, Joh. 5. 36. and 10. 25. Believe not me; beleive the works that I do, Joh. 10. 37, 38. Believe me for the very works [Page] sake, Joh. 14. 11. And how did the Apostles preach to convince the world, but partly by telling them of Christs Resurrection (the greatest of all his Miracles,) and his other works: and partly by doing Mi­racles themselves. They tell them, He was approved of God by signs and wonders, Act. 2. 22. and 7. 36. They declared also what Mira­cles and wonders were wrought by the Apostles, Act. 15. 12. And Paul vindicateth the Credit of his own Apostleship, and so the truth of his Testimony, to the Corinthians, thus, [Truly the signs of an Apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs and wonders and mighty deeds. 2 Cor. 12. 12. The way of bringing men to Believe in those daies is expressed Observe this Text well, and it will help you to answer the Question, [How know you the Scrip­ture to be the Word of God?] Heb. 2. 3, 4. How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by them that heard him (there is sense to the first Receivers, and their Tradition to the next:) God also bearing them witness both with signs and won­ders and divers Miracles; and gifts of the Holy Ghost according to his will. And who dare question this Witness of God? And fear fell on them all, and the name of Jesus was magnified, and men con­verted by the speciall Miracles that Paul did, Act. 19. 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, 19. I will say no more to the opposers of the sufficiency of this Argument, but wish them to answer, or learn of that blind man, Joh. 9. 16. Can a man that is a sinner do such Miracles? We know that God heareth not sinners. Or hear Nicodemus, Joh. 3. 2. We know that thou art a Teacher come from God: for no man can do these Miracles, except God be with him. Naturall Reason shews us, that God being the true, and Mercifull Governor of the World, the course of Nature cannot be altered but by his special appointment; and that he will never set the seals of his omnipotency to a lye; nor suffer the last and greatest inducement of Belief to be used to draw men to falshood: For then how deplorate were the Condition of mankind.

Object. But (you'l say) False Prophets may arise and shew signs: and Antichrist shall come with lying wonders. Answ. These are all lying wonders indeed; seeming to be Miracles, when they are not. Object. But the great question is, How we shall know which are Mi­racles indeed, when poor Mortals may be so easily deceived by superior powers? Answ. For the Difference between true Miracles and false, Camero, Prideaux, and most Divines that write of this Argument have handled it, to whom I referr you. I will only say this more; That [Page] We need not be curious in this enquiry: for if any doubt whether Mi­racles may not be wrought to delude, I would add these Qualifications to that Medium, and thus form the Major Proposition [That do­ctrine, or those books which were attested by Apparent, Frequent, uncontrouled Miracles, must needs be of God.] But such is this, &c. A wonder wrought once or twice may easier deceive, then that which is done one hundred times. A wonder in a Corner may be blazed falsly to be a miracle: But Christ had so many thousand witnes­ses (as of the Miracle of the Loaves) and five hundred at once that saw him after his Resurrection, and the Apostles appealed to whole Churches (even where they had secret adversaries) who might easily have disproved them, if it had not been true; and they spake with tongues before people of many Nations, and it was not one, nor one hundred, but the multitudes of Christians that had one gift or other of this sort, either Miracles specially so called, or healing, or prophecying, or See 1 Cor. 12. from the 1. verse to the 12. And Mark 16. 17. tongues, &c.

But especially no Uncontrouled Miracles shall ever be used to de­ceive the world. Two ways doth God Controul even the seeming Miracles of deceivers. 1. By doing greater in opposition to them, and so disgracing and confounding them, and the Authors, and the Cause; so God did by the Magicians in Egypt; by the Exorcists in Act. 19. and by Simon Magus, as Church Hystory tels us. In this Case, it is no disparagement to Gods Mercy or Faithfulness to let men work false wonders; for he doth but make them the occasion of his Triumph; that the Victory of Truth may be more eminent, and mens faith more confirmed. 2. Also by some clear and undoubted Truth (either known to Common Reason, or by former Scriptures) doth God oft Con­troul deceiving wonders. For if they are used to Attest an undoubted Falshood, then the former established Truth contradicting them, is sufficient controulment. So that as God will never set his own pro­per seal of a true Miracle to an untruth, so neither will he suffer a seeming Miracle to go uncontroul [...]d when it may endanger the faith and safety of mankind. Nor can it be shewn that ever he did other­wise, whereas the Miracles of Christ and his Disciples were uncon­trouled, Frequent, Numerous, Apparent, Prevalent and Triumphant.

Object. Then if Miracles be wrought now, they will inferr a New Scripture. Answ. No such matter. They will prove the Testimony to be Divine, where it is certain that they are wrought to confirm any Testimony; but no more. God may work them without man, to stir up [Page] mens hearts, and rowse them to Repentance, Vide Suar [...]z de fide Disput. 4▪ Sect. 3. §. 10. any new Testimony. Or he may enable man to work them for attesta­tion of f [...]rmerly revealed Truth.

Object. But wick [...]d men may do Miracles. Answ. But not when they pl [...]se▪ nor for what they please, but as God pleases. Wicked men may be Witnesses of the Truth of God.

I conclu [...]e with this Argument. That which was the great Ar­gument used by Christ and his Apostles to win the world to Believe, should be the Great Argument now for every man to use to that end with himself and others. But that was this from Miracles; there­fore, &c.

4. The same men that make this exception, are offended that I overpass some other Arguments, which are taken to be the chiefest: as Scrip [...]ure Efficacy, and the witness of the Holy Ghost to the Con­sciences of Beli [...]vers.

Answ. 1. Why should I be tyed to do that which so many have done already? 2. I never intended the full h [...]ndling of the point, but two or three Arguments to strengthen t [...]e weak. And may I not choose which thought fittest, as long as I hinder no man to use what other he please? 3. The Efficacy is either on the Ʋnderstanding, or on the Will and Affections. If on the Ʋnderstanding▪ then it is the Belief of Scripture truth which is thus effected: and so the Argument should run thus: whatsoever is so effectuall as to perswade men of its Truth or Divinity, that is True or Divine; but the Scripture is such, &c. I need not speak of the absurdity of the Major. Lege Rob. Baronium A­polog. Tract. 9. punct. 6. Assert. 3. pag▪ 729. 730. plenissi­mè. Or if the Efficacy be on the Will and Affections, then it presupposeth that it is first Be­lieved to be True. For nothing works on the Will, but by means of the Ʋnderstanding. But I neither dare, nor need to shew the weakness of such Arguments, the Papists have done too much in it, as their wri­tings generally will shew you. See Vane, Cressye, Richworths Dia­logues, Martin, Stapleton; and most run that way.

4. Vide Doctiss. Rob. Baronium Apodix. ad Jes. Turnebullum [...] pag. 626. ad 729. & Tract. 9. pag. 2. pag. 696. & pag. 733. Maximopere damnamus illos qui, &c. Vide etiam V [...]gam, lib. 9. de Justif. c. 47. Greg. Valent. To. 3. Disp. 1. Quaest. 1. punct. 1. §. 5. Et Suarez Disp. 3. de fide, §. 3. Et Contr. Vid. Stapleton. Controv. Relect. 4. qu. 3. Art. 2. R [...]sp. ad Arg. 1. Et in defen [...]. authorit. Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 12. §. 11. Malder in 2. 2. qu. 1. Art. 1. §. 8▪ Mel. Canu. lib. 2. de loc. cap. 8. And for the Testimony of the Spirit, it consisteth, first, in its Testimony by the Miracles which it enabled the Apostles to effect for the sealing of their doctrine; 2. And in the Sanctifying Illumi­nation [Page] of our understandings to see that which is Objectively Revea­led. So that this Testimony is the efficient and not objective Cause of our Belief, in this later sence. If men should judge of the Canon of Scripture, by the immediate Testimony of the Spirit, as if this were some Exterior Revealer of what is Divinely inspired, we should then have as great variety of Canons almost as of persons. Men talk of this in meer Disputes; but I never knew the man that would un­dertake to determine of the Canon by retiring into his heart, and con­sulting meerly with the Spirit within him.

5. Another great exception of the same men, is, That I seek to sa­tisfie Reason so much, of the Scriptures Authority: And the Reasons which they they urge against my Reasoning are these two. 1. It is too neer the Socinian way. Answ. Socinians will believe nothing, without Reason or Evidence from the Nature of the Thing Revealed: that is, They Believe nothing at all, as Certain: For if the Thing be Evident, it is (as such) the Object of Knowledge, and not of Belief. I will Believe any thing in the world which I know certainly that God speaks or Revealeth: Though the Thing in it self seem never so unreasonable. For I have Reason to Believe (or rather to Know) that All is True which God Revealeth, how improbable soever to flesh and blood. Is it not a shame that Learned men should charge this very Opinion in Chillingworth, Dr. Hammon, and others, as Read Videlius his Rationale Theolog. against Veronius, and throughout, how far Rea­son and Na­tural Princi­ples may be used in Dis­putes of Di­vinity. guilty of Socinianism? and thereby, 1. Make the Papists brag, that we cannot confute them, but on Socinian Principles. 2. And make young Schollars through prejudice turn off from the true ways of defending Scripture Authority; to the great wrong: 1 of their own souls, 2. and of their people, 3. and of the Protestant, 4. and Christian Cause. 3. And how could all the Wits in the World do more to advance Socinianism then these men do? by making men believe, that only the Socinians have Reason for their Religion: Which if it were true, (as nothing less) who would not turn to them? 4. And what more can be done to the disgrace, and ruin of Christiani­ty, then to make the world believe that we have no reason for it? Nor are able to prove it true against an Adversary? What would these men do, if they lived among Christs Enemies, and were chal­lenged to defend their Religion, or prove it true? Would they say (as they do to me,) I will Believe and not Dispute? Christs Cause then would be little beholden to them. And how would they Preach for the Conversion of Infidels? if they had not Reason to give them for what [Page] they perswade them to? How will they Try the spirits, and Try all things, and hold fast that which is good, but by Discourse? But it seems these men themselves have more Reason for their believing in Christ, then in Mahomet or Antichrist. They are good Christians and Teachers that while!

But the great Argument is this, They say (and great ones write so) that the Divine Authority of Scripture is Principium indemon­strabile: a principle not to be Proved, but Believed: for no Science proves its Principles.

To which I Answ. 1. When our R. Baronius, and others do affirm it to be Principium indemonstrabile, it is not as if it were not at all demonstrable; but that it is not demonstrabile per aliam Revelatio­nem; But they acknowledge that it contains in it those Caracters of the Divine Authority which by Reason or Discourse may be discerned. 2. It is therefore improper to say it is Credendum▪ a thing to be believed first, and directly that these Books are Gods Word; seeing it is (by consequence) confessed, that it is a Point to be Known by the foresaid Evidence; therefore not first to be believed. 3. And otherwise they contradict themselves, when they bestow whole Vo­lumes to [...]rove, that, It is part of the formal object of Faith (which answers the Cur Credis?) and yet to affirm it to be principium pri­mo Credendum, which makes it the material Object of Faith; For in this sence it cannot be both, as I shall shew. 4. How the Divine Authority of Scripture is the Principium Religionis Christianae, and how not, would hold a long debate of it self. Our R. Baronius himself saith, that [when we say all Christians should resolve their Faith into the Divine and Canonical Authority of Scripture, they do not mean that this is the only way of resolving Faith; as if no other way were possible, or available to salvation; but only that this way is the most convenient, profitable and certain; yea, and is necessary too in those Churches, where the Scriptures are known. Apologia adv. Turnebul. Tract. 1. c. 2. obs▪ 1. p. 46.] Which words shew, how far Scripture is a Principium. 5. As Theologie, Christianity, and all Re­ligion do presuppose Reason, (as all Morality presupposeth Naturality so it is evident that some of the Principles of Religion, or of Christia­nity must be first proved by Reason. And so we may compare it to those inferior Sciences, whose Principles must be proved by superior Sciences▪ though not by the same Science. Though Scripture in point of excellency should not be said to be inferior to Reason, yet in point of [Page] Order it may; as still pre-requiring or pre supposing Reason. As the form is after the matter, and the habit after the faculty. 6. Those Characters of Divine Authority which Divines mention, may (at least) some of them, be demonstrated to others (as Prophesies fulfilled, (which is Miraculous oft) and all to our selves: Therefore the Scrip­ture-Authority is not an Indemonstrable Principle. 7. The very being of all Belief lyeth in this, that it be an Assent to the Truth of an Enunciation, on the credit of the Testifier or Revealer. Now if we must first Believe Scripture to be Gods Word (and not Know it) then we must Believe it on the credit of the Revealer. And then it is by some other Revelation, or by it self. If by some other, then how know I that other Revelation to be of God? and so in infinitum. But if I believe it to be of God, because it revealeth it self to be so (as our Divines Vid. Baron. Tract. 9. per totum. say;) then this self-Revelation is, 1. either by way of proper Testimo­ny, or 2. by Objective Evidence, to be discerned by Reason. If the former (which must be said, or it cannot be the material object of Faith) then either I must beleive every Book that affirms it self to be Divine, or else I must have some Reason to Believe this so affirming of it self more then others. And these Reasons will be things Known and not Believed. 2. But if the later (by Objective Evidence) (Authorita­tem Scripturae duplici modo Deus apud nos contestatur. 1 In eo quod eandem orna­vit notandis qualitatibus & praerogativis su­pra omnia hu­mana Scripta. 2. In eo quod omnium suo­rum corda Spi­ritu suo afficit ut agnoscant veritatem suam in Scrip­tis illis mi­cantem. Rivet. Catholic. Orthodox. in Tractat pri­mo. Q [...]aest. 12 pag. 131. Col. 2. which is it that Divines generally say) then why do they not ob­serve, that this is to unsay what was said, and to say plainly, that it is a thing to be Known, and not strictly Believed, that this is Gods Re­velation? Things evident are the Objects of Knowledge: Things Testified are the Objects of Faith (as Testified.)

8. Yet I confess, That when we first Know this or that be a Divine Testimony, we may in a second place Believe it. For it is Revealed in Scripture; [Thus saith the Lord, &c.] And so the same thing may be, and is the object of Knowledge and of Belief. But it must (in the rational order) be Known first, and not Believed first. For else (as is said) I should Believe every writing so affirming it self Di­vine; or else Believe the affirmation of this without Evidence and Reason. 9. And indeed what else can be the meaning of our Di­vines, when they tell us, that all faith is resolved into the credit or Authority of the Testifier and Revealer? And as our Baronius, Apol. cont. Turnebul. Tract 3. §. 3. cap. 4. p. 108. saith, [Faith dependeth on two Principles, which must necessarily be foreknown, that a thing may be believed on ones Authority] Suarez rightly observeth, disp. 2. de. Fide, Sect. 4. §. 5 & disp. 3. Sect. 12. §. 1. One is, that [the par­ty [Page] doth speak this,] The other is, that [he is one worthy to be Be­lieved.] Mark it, he saith These two must be foreknown, and not forebelieved. (Though I know what he and others say, to make it both the objectum formale & materiale in several respects: but that can be but secondarily as I said.) As for their similitude from the Sun, which Reveals it self and other things: besides that objects of sense, and of Reason much differ in this, and similitudes prove nothing: In a sound sence I grant the thing inferred by it: To wit, that Scripture revealeth particular Truths to Belief, by way of Divine Testimony or Affirmation: But it revealeth it self to be Gods Testimony first to Knowledge by its own Characters or Excellencies (seconded by the external Testimony of Miracles;) And then 2. by Testification to Be­lief. Learned Hooker, Eccles. Polit. li. 2 & 3. hath shewed, that it is not first to be Believed that [Scripture is Gods Word,] but to be proved by Reason; which he affirmeth, is not very difficult demon­stratively to do. I dare stay no longer on this (referring the more ex­act discussion to some fitter place;) only, If Scripture cannot be proved to be Gods Word by reason; 1. Why do all our Divines in their Common-Places bring Reasons to prove it? 2. How will they deal with Pagans and Enemies? Object. But they still tell you [the Spirit is only sufficient, when all Reasons are brought.] Answ. 1. Thats to remove the Question. Or when the Question is of the Objective suf­ficiency, they answer of the Efficient, rectifying and elevating the Faculty. 2. Who knows not that a man may Believe or Know the Scripture to be Gods Word, without any more then a common help of the Spirit. The Devils and Damned believe or know it; and so doth many an ungodly man here. But a saving Knowledge or Belief doth indeed require a special grace of the Spirit.

In a word, If Reason were of no more use here then some make it, as it were in vain to preach or writ [...]▪ [...]n this point (for Christianity;) So it would follow that he that is mad or drunk▪ or an Infant, (if not a brute) were the fitttest to make a Christian; which is so vile an imagination, that I dare say, He that hath the best and rightest Reason, and by Consideration makes the most use of it, is the best Christian, and doth God best service: And that all sin is on the contra­ry, for want of Right Reason, and the using of it by consideration. But me thinks, I should not need to plead for Reason, till beasts can speak and plead against me! But yet I must tell you, if you heard the Accusation▪ you would excuse my Apology.

If none but the Ignorant be an Enemy to Knowledge, sure none but the unreasonable is an enemy to Reason.

6. BƲt the greatest offence of all is, that I lay so much upon hu­mane Testimony and Tradition: which some think uncertain; some think it would make our Faith too Humane; and some think it is too like the Papists arguing.

To all which I Answ 1. See whether the best of our Divines do not the like. I will name some of the choicest that ever the Reformed Church enjoyed. Rob. Baronius saith, Apolog cont. Turn [...]bul. Tract. 9 punct. 2▪ p 686. [The Testification of the present Church is a con­dition necessarily requisite for our believing the Scripture Authority: because Faith comes by hearing. 2. From the consent of all the present Church, or all Christians now living, the chiefest Argument may be drawn to prove the Authority of any Canonical Book. 3. From the perpetual and universal Tradition and practice of the whole Church from the Apostles times to ours, we may have a humane per­swasion, and that Certain and▪ Infallible, of the Divine and Canonical Authority of those Books which were still undoubted, or which some call the Protocanonical.] Dr. Whittakers saith, [It belongs to the Church, 1. To be a witness and keeper of the Scriptures. 2. To judge and discern between Scriptures which are true and genuine, and which are false, supposititious and Apocryphal. 3. To divulge them. 4. To expound them, De Sacr. Scrip. Q. 3. contr. 1. cap. 2. pag. 203, 204.] And in his Duplicat. adv. Stapleton▪ more fully, pag. 57. [Which of us knows not the necessity of the Ministry of the Church? and that it is safely and wisely appointed of God? so that to contemn the Minist [...]y and Testimony of the Church, is no thing else but to err from the Faith, and rush into most certain destru­ction] See more pag. 15. 58. 59 &c. 364. 60. 62. 69. 77. 71. 438. 119. 328. Davenant alloweth of Hystorical Traditions, de Judice con­trov. p. 11. §. 3. p. 24. 27. 30. 31 32. The like might be shewed out of Camero, Chamier, Amesius, and divers Chemnitius Exam. Concil. Trident. Part. 1. pag. (mihi) 109, 110, 111 &c. is so full, that in his eight sorts of Tradition he not only saith much more then I here do, but in some of them satisfieth And [...]adius himself, vide Andrad. Desens. Concilii Trident. lib. 2. pag. (mihi) 217. us{que} ad 230. others, but that I must not enlarge.

2. I would have the contrary minded tell me, How they know with­out Humane Testimony or Tradition, that these are the same Books which the Prophets and Apostles wrote? and wholly the same? that they are not depraved and wilfully corrupted? that these are all? How know you that one of the Books of Esther is Canonical, and the other Apocriphal? Where is the man that ever knew the Canon from the Apocripha before it was told him? and without Tradition? I confess Nemo ex scrip­toribus ecclesi­asticis qui continuata temporum successione ab Apostolis huc us{que} vix­erunt usquam in Scriptis suis in memoriam redigere eos dignatus est. [...]useb Hist. Eccles. l. 3 c. 19. loquens de libris Apocry­phis. for my own part I could never boast of any such Testimony or Light of the Spirit (nor Reason neither) which without Humane Testimony or Tradition would have made me Believe that the Book of Canticles is Canonical and written by Solomon, and the book of Wisdom Apo­criphal and written by Philo (as some think?) Or that Pauls Epistle to the Laodiceans (which you may see in Brun [...] in Epist. Sixtus Se­nensis and others) is Apocriphal, and the second and third Epistle of John, Canonical. Nor could I have known all or any Historical books, such as Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, &c. to be written by Divine inspiration, but by Tradition. Nor could I know all or any of those books to be Gods word, which contain meer Positive constitutions, as Genesis, Ex­odus, Leviticus, &c. Were it not for the same Tradition. Nor could I know that any of those books were written by Divine In­spiration which contain (besides such History and Positives) nothing but the Truths which are known by the Light of Nature, without further supernatural Revelation; if it had not been for Tradition Nor could I have known those Books to be written by Divine Inspiration, which speak of meer supernatural things, either Historical, as Christs Incarnation▪ Resurrection, &c. or Doctrinal, had not Tradition or Humane Testimony assured me, that these are the Books which those Holy men wrote, and that such undoubted, uncontroled Miracles were wrought for the Confirmation of their doctrine. Further I would know, How doth an illiterate man know, but by Humane Testimony, 1. Whe­ther it be indeed a Bible that the Minister reads? 2. Or when he reads true, and when false? and whether any of those words be in the Bible which men say are in it? 3. Or that it is truly translated out of the Hebrew and Greek? 4. Or that it was Originally written in those lan­guages? 5. Or that the Copies were Authentick out of which they were translated? 6. Or how will they know many Jewish Customs, or points in Chronologie, Geography, &c. without which some Scripture can never be understood? 7. Or how do the most Learned Criticks know [Page] the true signification of any one word of the Hebrew, or Greek (in Scripture or any other book,) yea Latine or English, or any language, but only by Tradition and Humane Faith?

Yea, there is no doubt but in some Cases Tradition may save with­out Scripture. For 1. Men were sav [...]d from Adam to Moses with­out any Scripture, that we know of. And (as Dr. Usher well obser­veth) One reason why they might then be without it, was the facility Vid. Euseb. Ni­eremberg. de O­rigine S. Scrip­turae, praecipue l. 1. & 2. & 3. and certainty of knowing by Tradition. For Methuselah lived many hundred years with Adam, and Sem lived long with Methuselah; and Isaack lived fifty years with Sem: So that three men saw from the beginning of the world till Isaacks fiftyeth year. 2. And thousands were converted and saved by the doctrine of the Apostles and primitive Preachers before it was committed to writing. So many Jews in the Captivity had not the Scripture. 3. And if any among the A­bassines, Armenians, or ignorant Papists do believe in Christ upon meer Tradition (no doubt, they may) who can doubt of their salvation? For Christ saith, that whosoever Believeth in him shall not perish: (Which way soever he was brought to Believe.) Will you hear Irenaeus in this, who lived before Popery was born? adv. haer. lib. 3. cap. 4. Quid enim & si quibus de aliqua modica quaestione disceptatio esset? Nonne oporteret in antiquissimas recurrere ec­clesias? (Mark, he saith not ad Ecclesiam Romanam, vel ad unam principem) in quibus Apostoli conversati sunt, & ab eis de prae­senti quaestione sumere quod certum & re liquidum est? Quid autem si neque Apostoli quidem scripturas reliquissent nobis? nonne oportebat ordinem sequi Traditionis, quam tradiderunt iis quibus committebant Ecclesias? Cui Ordinationi assentiunt mul [...]ae gentes barbarorum eorum qui in Christum credunt, sine Charactere vel atramento scriptam habentes per spiritum in cordibus suis salutem▪ & veterem Traditionem diligenter custodientes, &c. Hanc fidem qui sine literis crediderunt, quantum ad sermonem nostrum barbari sunt; quantum autem ad sententiam & consuetudinem & conver­sationem, propter fidem per quam sapientissim sunt, & placent Deo, &c. Sic per illam veterem Apostolorum Traditionem, ne in conceptionem quidem mentis admittunt quodcunque (Haretico­rum) portentiloqu [...]um est.

As for those that think it favors the Papists to argue thus from Tradition, they are quite mistaken, as I have shewed afterwards. The Papists build on the Authority of the Churches decisive judgment: [Page] But I use only the Churches Testimony. The Papists by the Church mean, 1. the present Church, 2 only their own Romish Church, 3. And in that only the Pope, or Councel (as infallible Judge.) But I mean, 1. the universal Church through the world, 2. Especially the Ancient Church next to the Apostles. 3. And therein the godly writers and Christians generally. The Papists ground all on the Church only, and think that we must first know the true Church, who is the Judge, before we can know the Scripture But I value (in some cases more) the Testimony Origen a­gainst Celsus gives you ma­ny. vid. l. 8. & Augustin. de Civitat. Dei, l. 22. Et testi­monium Por­phyrii in Cyrilli l. 10. Contra Julianum: Et Hieronym. advers. l. Vigi­lantii. Plura vide in Anno­tat. Grotii in l. de Verit. Reli­gion is, pracipue in l. 3. of Heathens, Jews, & all Hereticks (an enemies testimony being most va­lid against himself) And I use not their Testimony only, as they are the Church, or as Christians, but also as men, endued with sence & Reason, and the common remnants of Moral honesty. In one word, The Papists receive the Scriptures on the Authoritative Infallible Judgement of their own Church, that is the Pope: & I receive it as Gods perfect Law delivered down from hand to hand to this present age; and know it to be th [...] same books which the Prophets and Apostles writ, by an Infallible Testimony of rational men▪ friends and foes, in all ages. And for them that think that this lays all our faith on uncertainties, I Ans. 1. Letthem give us more Certain Grounds. 2. We have an undoubted infallible Cer­tainty of the Truth of this Tradition, as I have after shewed. He is mad that doubts of the Certainty of VVil. the Conquerer raigning in Eng. because he hath but humane Testimony. We are Certain that the Sta­tutes of this land were made by the same Parliaments & Kings as are mentioned to be the Authors: & that these statutes which we have now in our Books are the same which they maed. For there were many copies disperst: mens lands & estates were still held by them: there were multi­tudes of Lawyers and Judges whose calling lay in the continual use of them: & no one lawyer could corrupt them but his antagonist would soon tell him of it, and 1000. would find it out. So that I do not think any man doubteth of the certainty of these Acts, being the same they pretend to be. And in our case about the Scripture we have much more certain­ty, as I have shewed. These Copies were dispersed all over the world, so that a Cōbination to corrupt thē was impossible in secret: Men judged their hopes of salvation to lye in thē, & therefore would sure be careful to keep them from corruption, & to see that no other should do it: There were 1000s. of Ministers whose office and daily work it was to preach these Scriptures to the world, and therefore they must needs look to the preferring of them: and God was pleased to suffer such abundance of Hereticks to arise, (perhaps of purpose for this end, among others,) [Page] that no one could corrupt the Scriptures but all his adversaries would soon have catcht him in it: For all parties, of each opinion, still pleaded the same Scriptures against all the rest; even as Lawyers plead the Laws of the Land at the bar against their adversaries. So that it is impossible that in any main matter it should be depraved. What it may be in a letter or a word by the negligence of transcribers, is of no great moment. (Of which I desire the learned Reader to peruse that accurate Treatise of the truly Learned and Judicious Ludovicus Ca­pellus, his Critica Sacra.)

Indeed the Popish Doctrine of Tradition (such as you may find in Richworths Dialogues) leads directly to Heathenisme; and buildes all our Christianity on such certain uncertainties, yea palpable un­truths, that it is a wonder that they who believe them renounce not their Christianity.

But the great Objection is, that by a [...]guing thus, our Faith is fi­nally resolved into humane Testimony, and so is but a humane faith. Answ. If I said that those that make this Objection, shew that they know not well what faith is, nor what the Resolving of it is, which they mention, I should not wrong them. But because I would give a satis­factory account of my Belief in this gret point, I will more particu­larly answer the several Questions which use to be here reaised.

Quest. Why do you Believe the Incarnation, Death and Re­surrection of Christ, with all the rest of the articles or doctrines of your Faith?

Answ. Because they are the Word of God; or, God hath Testified or reported them; or, hath Revealed them to the world as true, so that I have no higher or further reason to believe them to be true, but only this, God hath spoken them.

Quest How know you that God hath Revealed or Testified these things?

Answ. There are many Questions comprehended in this one; or else it is very ambiguous. In regard of the Object, It is one thing to ask, How I know it to be Revealed? and another, How I know that it is God that Revealed it? In regard of the Act, the word [How know you] is doubtfull. You may either mean in your enquiry, By what prin­cipal Efficient Cause? or By what neerest efficient? or By what Motives or convincing Arguments? Or By what naturally requi­site Means? Or what Instrument? All these must not be con­founded.

Quest. How know you (that is, by what moving Reasons) that these things are Revealed?

Answ. I need not Arguments; my senses of seeing and Hearing tell it me.

Quest. But how did the Prophets and Apostles know that they were Revealed to them?

Answ. Some by Internal sence (who had it by inspiration;) and some by external sence, (who heard it from God or Christ or Angels, or read the tables which he wrote.)

Quest. How did the other Believers in those time know, that these things were Revealed to the Prophets or Apostles?

Answ. By their own Testimony.

Quest. How know they that their Testimony was true.

Answ. I have answered this at large in the 4 Chap. and 3. §. If it had not been Revealed to them, they could not have Revealed it to others.

Quest But how do we in these times know that these things were Revealed to the Apostles?

Answ. Some few parte of the world know it only by unwritten Tradition: But most of all the Churches know it by the Scripture which those holy men wrot, containing those Doctrines.

Quest. But how know you that these Scriptures were written by them?

Answ. By infallible See Chemnit. Exam. Concil. T. ident. Part. 1. pag. (mihi) 113. out of O­rigen Eusebius and Austin. shewing the use of this sort of Tradition. Tradition.

Quest. But how know you that they be not in the substance corrupted since?

Answ. By the same infallible Tradition assuring my Reason of it: Even as I know that the Statutes of the Land were made by those Kings and Parliaments whose names they bear: and as I know that the Works of Aristotle, Cicero, Virgil, Ovid, &c. were made by them, and are not in the substance corrupted. Yea, far greater certainly doth Tradition afford me.

Quest. But though you are thus assured of the Revelation, yet, How know you it is Divine? Or that it was God indeed that did Reveal it?

Answ. 1. You must know (as presupposed) that themselves affirm that God revealed this to them, both by their speech to those that heard them preach; and by this Scripture, which affirms it self to be of Di­vine Inspiration.

Quest. But how did they know themselves that they were not mistaken?

Answ. 1. Those whom God inspired, or to whom he spake, knew certainly by an unexpressible sense, that it was God himself and no delusion. God never speaks so▪ extraordinarily, but by the same act he both makes known the thing Revealed, and himself to be the Speaker. 2. Besides, they were fully certain it was no delusion, by the frequent, uncontroled Miracles which Christ did, and which he enabled them to do themselves. See more Chap. 4. §. 3. where this is fullier an­swered.

Quest. But how shall we know that they delude us not; and that the Scripture saith true in affirming it self to be of Divine In­spiration? For we must not believe every person or book that so af­firmeth?

Answ. I have answered this in the forecited Chapter and Se­ction.

To which I add: 1. Vide Greg. de Valentia Ana [...]ys. fidei, lib. 1. cap. 25. Et Junil. de parte Divin. Legis, lib. 2. cap. 27. There are such Characters of Verity and Majesty in the Scriptures themselves that may very strongly per­swade us of the Verity of them, at least, as being exceeding probable. Especially, the exceeding spirituality and Purity of them, and the High strange design of God manifested about the way of advance­ing his glory, and saving mankind; which Design in all the parts of it, excellently concatenated, was not laid open by one person only, nor in one only age; but was in doing many 100 years, and opened by ma­ny several persons at that distance, so that it is impossible that they should lay their heads together to contrive it. Also the fulfilled Pro­phecies, shew its Verity. And if any one part have not these Chara­cters so Evidently on it, yet it is certain, because it is attested by the rest (or some of them) that have them. 2. But that which fully per­swades me, (being thus prepared by the Quality of the Writings,) is, The many, Apparent uncontroled Miracles Phlegon in lib. 13. of his Annals, con­fesseth the Miracles done by Pe­ter, as Origen saith, lib. 2. con­tra Celsum. which the Apostles themselves did work, who wrote these Books: God would not have enabled them to confirm a false deluding Testimony (and that of such moment) by Miracles, and such Miracles. 3. And, when I have once thus Believed, I am much confirmed, both by the experience I have of the power and sweet rellish of the doctrine of the Scriptures on my own soul; and the efficacy of it on the souls of others; and also in that I find all the rational causes of doubting of the truth of Scripture, to be removed.

Quest. But when you make Miracles your great Argument, How know you that those Miracles were indeed wrought?

Answ. By infallible Tradition, partly by the Instrumentality of Scripture, and partly by other writings, and universal confession: as I know that Julius Caesar conquered Pompey, and William the Norman woon England.

Quest. But did you at first believe the Scripture on these Grounds? Or can it be expected that unlearned people should understand the certainty of this Tradition?

Answ. 1. I first Believed that the Scripture was Gods Word, meerly upon the Common uncontradicted Affirmation of my Teachers: And so do most others that I meet with: And so proceed to see the more certain Arguments afterwards. 2. Yet if they were wisely and diligently taught them, the unlearned are capable of know­ing the infallible certainty of that Tradition: Yea, and the certain­ty of the truth of the Translation in the substance; and that you do read truly the Scriptures to them, &c. For there is a Humane Testi­mony which is Certain; and so a Humane Faith: Yea, more Certain then my own Sense. Sense hath alway greater Evidence then Be­lief, but not so great certainty sometimes. I will rather Believe ten thousand sober, impartiall witnesses that say, they see or hear such a thing, (having no considerable contradiction,) then I would believe mine own eyes or ears for the contrary.

Quest. But is that Faith Divine and saving, when men take the Scripture for Gods Word meeerly on Report, or other weak Arguments?

Answ. It is a Faith that lies open to great danger by temptation, when the weakness of the Grounds shall appear: and will have much weakness in the mean time: but yet it may be Divine and saving. For still this mans Faith is resolved into Gods Veracity or Au­thority. Though on weak Grounds he take the Scripture to be Re­vealed by God, yet he Believes it to be True, only because God spoke or Revealed it. So that the error not lying in the Formal or Material Object of Faith, but only in the Arguments perswading that it is from God, this destroyes not the soundness and Truth of the Belief.

Object. But how know we that the Miracles were wrought to confirm the truth of these books?

Answ. They were wrought to confirm the Testimonie of men, whether delivered by Word or Writing. And this by [Page] Writing is that part of their Testimony which the Church now enjoyeth.

Object. But all that wrote the Scripture, did not work Mi­racles.

Answ. Their Testimony is confirmed by those that did.

Quest. Into what then do you ultimately Resolve your Faith?

Answ. If you understand the pharse of [Resolving Faith] strictly and properly, so it is Resolved only into the credit or Veracity of the Speaker, as being the Cause of the Verity of the Proposition which I believe, even the principal Efficient Cause; the Knowle [...]ge of whose Infallible Verity, doth, above all (and only in that kinde) cause me to Believe the things Revealed to be True.

But if you take the phrase of [Resolving Faith] in the largest sence, as it containeth not only its Resolution into its Formal Ob­ject, but into all its Causes in their several kinds▪ so it is Resolved thus. 1. As I have said, I Resolve my Faith into the Prime Truth, that is, into Gods infallible Veracity as the only Formal Object, or full proper efficient of the Verity of the Propositions believed, and the Principal Reason of my Belief. 2. I Resolve my Belief into Gods [Revelation, or Testimony] as the Principium Patefactionis, or the Naturally-necessary meanes of Application of the Former, which is the Principium Certitudinis (It is Rob. Baronius own distinction, Apo­dix. Tract. 3. Cap. 6. p. 123.) Yet I am forced to dissent from Baronius in that he makes this [Revelation] to be part of the Formal Object: Though [Gods Veracity or Gods Revealing,] and not the Truth of God without Revelation, be the Formal Object of Belief: yet I con­ceive the said Revelation to be no part of the Formal Object▪ but a Natural Meanes of the production of the Material Object by the For­mal Object which is its Efficient: And that not directly of the Imme­diate Material Object, but of the Remote only. For the Immediate Ma­terial Object is [the Truth] of Propositions: and the Remote, is [the Proposition] which is True. Now [the Revelation is directly a Produ­ction of [the Proposition] as such; but not of the Verity of it directly: We therefore Believe it to be True, because the True God spoke it. Though in a second place the Patefaction may be said to produce the Verity of the thing. 3. I Resolve my Belief into the Characters of Divinity which are found in Scripture, and into the uncontrolled Miracles by which it was attested, as the Principal motives (con­junct) by which I am perswaded that it was God, and no other, that [Page] was the Author or Revealer. 4. I Resolve my Belief into Humane Testimony or Infallible Tradition (Rationally, not Authoritatively Infallible) as the means of discovering to me matters of Fact, viz. that the Apostles did write: that, This delivered to me is The Writing: that it is All: that such Miracles were wrought: that the Scrip­tures are not Depraved in any material point, or out of Design: which Books, are Canonical, and which not. Had I been the person to whom God from heaven, or Christ on Earth did Reveal these Truths Imme­diately, then this Resolution of my Faith should have been into my senses (made use of Rationally): I should have known by External sense, what Christ spoke, and what not; what Miracles he did: and by Internal sense, that it was God and no other that Inspired me: and by both, that it was Christ, and no other that spake and workt Miracles. But seeing I live at so great a distance, and God Revealed not these things to me Immediately, but to the Apostles, and they to others, and they to others, and so down to this day; therefore Tradition must do that for me which sense did to the first Receivers: as I say, what sense did for them, that Humane Testimony doth for us; or must carry it between their senses and our senses, and so to our Reason. 5. I Resolve my Belief into all Truths Revealed in Scripture, into the Material Object (If it were not too improper to call that a Resolving of it into that which answers the Quid Credis? and not the Cur Credis? or the Cui?) 6. I Resolve it into the Books or writings, as the Authentick Instrument Revealing Gods mind: Not into the words as in this or that language, or as considered in themselves; but as considered in Relation to the Truths which they express, viz. as they are signifiers of all those Enunciations which they contain. 7. I Resolve my Belief into Reason or my Ʋnderstanding, as the neerest vital efficient Cause. 8. I Resolve it into the Holy Ghosts Illumination or Grace as into the Remote and former Efficient, enabling and causing me to Believe sin­cerely and savingly (but not into any Internal Testimony of the spi­rit as the Object of my faith.)

(I know our Baronius opposeth Spalatensis for one of the points which I here assert (Apolog. Tract. 9. punct. 4. and 5. pag. 711. 712. 713. 714. &c.) Were it not that I have been too tedious already, I would answer those Arguments of Baronius, which is very easie to do: but to the unprejudiced and conside­rate I think it will seem needless or at least is fitter for another discourse.

And thus having Catechised my self, to give men an account of my Belief, and help those that are weaker herein. I shall conclude all with two or three words of Advice to the Reader.

1. BEware that you exclude not, in your arguing, any Cause or ne­cessary Medium of your Faith. By quarrelling too eagerly with other mens grounds many men run upon this dangerous Rock. Lest they should give too much to Reason, or to Tradition, or the Church, or Mi­racles, some further exclude them then will stand with the Rationality and safety and Honor of Christianity; set not those things in Opposi­tion, which may and must consist in coordination, or subordination to others.

The removal of one necessary Cause may destroy the Effect, or of one Pillar, may pull down the house; or of one of the necessary parts, may kill the man; though all the rest be let alone, or more regarded then before It is no whit derogatory to the Law of the Land, to say, I must read it with my eyes, and by the help of Spectacles, and must re­ceive it with my hands, or ears, from a Herald or other Proclaimer, &c.

2. Take heed of denying the Perfection of Scripture in Deed, while you maintain it in words. Two sorts I would warn of this.

1. Those that plead for Traditional Doctrines not contained in * Ʋnde ista Traditio? utrumne de dominica & Evangelica Authoritate descendens? an de Apostolorum Mandatis at{que} Epistolis veniens? Ea enim facienda esse quae scripta sunt Deus testatur ad Joshuam; Non recedet Liber legis ex ore tuo, &c. si ergo aut Evangelio praecipitur, aut in Apostolorum Epistolis, aut Actibus continetur, observetur Divina haec & sancta Traditio. Quae ista obstinatio, quaeve praesumptio, humanam Traditionem Divinae dispo­sitioni anteponere? nec animadvertere indignari & trasci Deum, quoties Divina praecepta solvit & praeterit Humana Traditio? Mar. 7. 8. 1 Tim. 6. 3. Consuetudo sine veritate, Ve­tustas erroris est; propter quod relicto errore sequamur veritatem. Cyprian. Epist. 74. ad Pomp. pag. 229. 231. The same place of Cyprian is vindicated by Dr. Whitaker de sac. Script. Cont. 1. Q. 6. de perfect. Script. mentioned also by Goulartius on Cypr. ibid. Scripture. To these I have spoken elsewhere (Appendix to Treat. of Baptism.)

[Page]2. Those that are so eager Doctissimi Nazianzen consi [...]ium ab omnibus Chri­stianis audien­dum [Divina contemplare, verum in ter­minis maneto: Loquere quae sunt Spiritus, & si Possibile est, nihil aliud. Nae Patris na­turam nimis curiorse rima­tor, Ʋnigeniti essentiam, spiri­tus gloriam; unam in tribus Deitatem: Ʋtere verbis consuetis. Ratio pertineat ad sapientiores. Sufficiat tibi ut habeas funda­mentum; su­peraedifficent artifices.] Ʋ [...]inam soli artifices superaedificarent! Ʋtin [...]m superstructiones suas multas & paene infinitas cum paucis & planis fundamentalibus pari aff [...]ctu & honore suscipien­das, non commiscerent! Si hoc conentur, decet tamen pios & prudentes Christianos discernere, inter prima illa pauca Credibilia à Christo & Apostolis immediate revelata, & innumeras illas De­ductiones Theologorum pro cujus{que} ingenio & opinione cum fundamentalibus in eundum locum con­trusas. Davenant. Adhort. pro pace Eccles. pag 87. 88. It was found Counsel that Pome­ranus gives the Ministers of Gods Word (ne tot articulis, &c) That they should not with so many Articles and Creeds and Confessions confound the minds of plain Christians, but that they should draw up the s [...]me of their Belief into some few heads. Nothing hinders but that professors and Licentiates in Divinity may busie their thoughts and spend their hours upon the knotty and abstruse Questions of that sacred Faculty; but why should the heads of ordinary Christians be troubled with those curious disquisitions? Dr. Hall Peacemaker, Sect. 16. pag. 118. 119. I pray read the rest of that small Treatise: and his Pax terris a smaller, but both worthy all our serious studying. Read Ʋshers excellent Sermon on Ephes 4. 13. before King James Jun. 20. 1624. through­out. to tye all men to their Expositions of Scrip­ture, and censure all for Heretical that differ from them therein; when we have disputed and contended our selves aweary, and wrang­led the Church into flames and ashes; yet that which God hath spoken obscurely, and so left difficult in it self, will remain obscure and difficult still. And that which is difficult through the weak­ness and incapacity of unlearned men, will be far better cleared by a rational explication, then by a bare Canon. O when will the Lord [...]nce perswade his Churches to take his Written Word for the only Canon of their Faith! and that in its own naked simplicity and Evidence, without the determinations and Canons of men! which are no parts of our Creed, but helps to our understandings, and bounds to our Practice in matters Circumstantial, which God hath left to mans determination; when will the Lord perswade us, not to be wise above what is written? but to acknowledge that which is unrevealed in the word, to be beyond us; and that which is more darkly revealed to be more doubtful to us. Then the hot contentions of the Church about the Mysteries of Gods Decrees, and nature and order of his immanent Acts; the nature and way of the workings of the Spirit on the Soul, &c. with a hundred quarrels about meer names and words, will be more lovingly and brotherly debated, without such alienation of affections, and reproachful expressions.

Two things have set the Church on fire and been the plagues of it [Page] above one thousand years. 1. Enlarging our Creed and making more fundamentals then ever God A [...]sim con­fi [...] ma [...] ­rem tam vite­ [...]um haeresium, quam praesenti­um dissidio [...]um part [...]m, in Ec­clesia hinc p [...]ae cipue natum fuiss [...] & esse, quod Concilia, Episcopi, Do­ctores Ecclesiae, nullo discri­mine, quaevis Scholarum dogmata, & Cathedrarum placita pro ar­ticulis fid [...]i Catholicae ven­ditarunt; pa­ri{que} ad salutem necessitate cre­denda consci­entiis imposu­erunt: ex qua­vis vero inter­pretationis Scripturarum discrepantia, minis faci [...]è haereses vel Schismata fece­runt. Paraeus in Irenic. pag. (mihi) 16. Vide & pag. 15. & 41. All Peace-making Divines still harp upon this string, and yet some call it Socinian. If any would see more of the Evil of making points necessary which God made not so, you may throughout Conrad. Bergius his Prax. Ca­thol. see enough, and the words of very many Divines, Lutherans and Calvinists, to that end. made.

2. Composing (and so imposing) our Creeds and Confessions in our own words and phrases.

When Men have learned more manners and humility then to ac­cuse Gods language as too general and obscure (as if they could mend it) and have more dread of God, and comp [...]ssion on them­selves then to make those to be Fundamentals or certainties which God never made so; And when they reduce their Confessions 1. to their due extent, and 2. to Scripture phrase (that Dissenters may not scruple subscribing) then, and (I think) never till then, shall the Church have Peace about Doctrinals. Chillingworth, Page last of the Preface, shall men be judged Socinians for advancing the Scriptures as the only Rule? I pray read well what that excellent Divine Doctor Stoughton hath written expresly and earnestly for what I now urge, in his Form of wholsom Words, about forming Church-Con­fessions. It seems to me no hainous Socinian motion, which Chillingworth is blamed for, viz. [Let all men believe the Scripture, and that only, and en­devor to believe it in the true sense (and promise this) and require no more of others, and they shall find this not only a better, but the only means to suppress Heresie, and restore Unity, &c.]

If you say, Men may subscribe to Scripture, and yet mis­interpret them, I answer, so they may do by humane Canons. If you say. They may preach against Fundamentals or Evident Truths, while yet they subscribe to the Scripture misunderstood, I answ. 1. All such weighty Truths are delivered expresly or very plainly. 2. I hope God will once not only bring into use the Ministerial Power, but also teach Magistrates to rule for Christ, to the restraining of such as shall so palpably offend as openly to contradict what they subscribe.

But that was the third and last word of advice I here intended, viz. that seeing Scripture is the sacred Perfect Law of the most high God, that men would use it Reverently, and that Magistrates would restrain men that would bring Gods Word into contempt under [Page] pretence of Preaching it, Ordinatio. nes corum te merariae, leves, inconstantes: nunc neophytos collocant, nunc seculo obstri­ctos, nunc A­postatas no­stros, ut Gloriâ eos obligent, quia Veritate non possunt: Nusquam fa­cilius profici­tur quam in castris rebelliū, ubi ipsum esse illic, promereri est, Ita{que} alius hodie Episco­pus, cras alius; hodie Diaco­nus, qui cras Lector: hodie Presbyter, qui cras Laicus: Nam & Laicis Sacerdotalia Munera injungunt. Tertullian. de Praescription. advers. haeret. That every ignorant fellow, whose tongue hath catcht a Lax, may not run up into the Pulpit to ease himself; Nor every one have leave to disgorge himself in the holy Assemblies, that hath got a surfit of Pride and self-conceit. O if you knew the weakness of poor people, and how apt they are to be deceived, you would not give deceivers liberty to do their worst. You that will not give men leave to perswade your Wives to Adultery, your Children to lewdness, your Souldiers or Subjects to Rebellion or Treachery, would sure be as regardful of mens souls, and the honour of Christ. And you that will not give every fool leave to go in your names on an Embassage, who would but disgrace you; would not let men speak publikely as in the name of Christ, that cannot speak sence, to the shame of our profession; Nor should men turn Preachers as the River Nilus breeds Frogs, (saith Herodotus,) when one half moveth before the other is made▪ and while it is yet but plain mud.

But I must make this Preface no longer. I pray observe that in the Margin, and see whether our times be not like Tertul­lians.

Reader, As thou lovest thy Comforts, thy Faith, thy Hope, thy Safety, thine Innocency, thy Soul, thy Christ, thine Everlasting Rest; Love, Reverence, Read, Study, Obey, and stick close to Scrip­ture. Farewel.

April. 2. 1651.

OF SINCERITY.

OF SINCERITY.

A more exact enquiry into the number and use of Marks, the nature of Since­rity, with other things of great moment in the work of Self-examination.

§ 1.SECT. I.

IT is a matter of such unexpressible consequence for every man to make sure work in the great business of his Salvation; it being so Easie, so Or­dinary, and so Dangerous to be Mistaken, that I think fit yet to add some further advice, to help men in the Triall of their own states. There is no Christian that hath any care of his Soul, or any Belief and true sense of the matters of Eternity, but must needs be very solici­tous in enquiring, How he may know what will become of him for ever and ever? and be glad of a cleer undeceiving Direction for [Page] the Discovery of this. As I lay under seven years doubting and perplexity of spirit my self, much through my ignorance in the managing of this work, so was I very inquisitive still after signes of Sincerity, and I got all the Books that every I could buy, which laid down Evidences and Marks of true Grace, and tended to discover the Difference betwixt the true Christian and the Hypocrite or Unsound: I liked no Sermon so well as that which contained most of these Marks: And afterward when I was cal­led to the Ministry my self, I preached in this way as much as most. I have heard as many complaints of Doubting, distressed Souls as most: and had as many that have opened their hearts to me in this point; of whom many have proved the most hum­ble, self denying mortified Christians; and many that were deep­est in doubtings and distress, upon triall of their lives, I found al­so deepest in Pride, Peevishness, unmortified Lusts, and unfaith­full Walking, which did feed their troubles. Upon this long experience of my self and others, and most serious study of this point, and prayer to God for his direction, I think it but my duty to open yet more fully for the benefit of others, what I have herein discovered which is necessary for them to understand in this weighty work: For one Error here may put the hearts and lives of godly people quite out of frame, and may do much to the confirming of the wicked in their Presumption and self deceit. I shall therefore lay down what I conceive to be the Truth in cer­tain Propositions.

§ 2 SECT. II.
Prop 1 Propos. 1. A Sincere Christian may attain to an Infallible Know­ledge of his own Sincerity in Grace, or in his perfor­mance of the Conditions of the Covenant of Life, and consequently of his Justification, Adoption, and title to Glory: and this without any extraordinary Revelation.

This Proposition I have proved before, and therefore need to say no more to it now. I lay it down here by way of Caution to prevent mistakes, lest any should think that I am against an at­tainment of Assurance here, because of some passages follow­ing.

§ 3 SECT. III.
Prop 2 Propos. 2. THis Infallible Knowledge is not properly a Certainty of Faith, (as too many Divines affirm.)

This also I have proved before in opening the Nature of Assu­rance,Lege Amesii Coron. de Art. 5. cap. 1. Coroll. 6, 7. pag. (mihi) 288. eadem quae Theologi in Sy­nodo tradentem. and in the Appendix of my Aphorismes of Justification. And Mr Wotton de Reconcil. and very many learned Divines of late have confirmed it fully. Proper Certainty of Faith, is when a man by meer Believing is sure of the Truth of the thing Belie­ved: This therefore leaneth fully on a Divine Testimony. But there is no Divine Testimony revealing that such or such a mans sins are pardoned, or he Justified. The Testimony of the Spirit is but partly by Giving us the Conditions of the Promise, which is our Evidence, and partly helping us to see them, and conclude from them, and take comfort therein. And so it witnesseth with our Consciences, by causing our Consciences spiritually and effe­ctually to witness. But this Testimony is not the Object of Faith: It is only Gods Testimony in Supposing that other ways of Revelation are ceased. Assensum quip­pe nostrum affi­ciunt fidei ca­tholicae Articuli, ut principia im­mediata, ac pri­ma. Fides autem subjungitur per modum assum­ptionis. Illius cr­go quae hanc per­suasionem facit, conclusionis non potest esse firmi­tudo major, quā quae praemissa­r [...]m debiliori in­est. Subsumptio autem illa ex­perimentalibus nititur judiciis, per privatam ho­minis conscien­tiam pensitatis. Quae cum n [...]n­nunquam in du­bium vocentur, an sint signa g [...] ­nuina & sa [...]e tent [...]ionum nu [...] occultentur, n [...] ad praesens solatium effulgeant, quid mirum si non, &c. Thologi. B [...]it [...]a [...]n in [...]ynod. Dordr. Suffrag. ad Art 5. Thes 3, &c. Scripture which affords us a Cer­tainty of Faith properly Divine in this point. (Though in other cases Natural Discoveries may be truly called a Divine Testi­mony in a larger sense; yet this is above nature:) Now Gods Word doth only say, He that Repenteth and Believeth, shall be pardoned, and justified, and saved: but no where saith, that you or I shall be saved. Object. But (you will say) as long as we may know that we Believe, is it not all one? Answ. No: For Gods Word tels me not that I Believe, therefore this must be known by Reflection and Internal sense, and not by Believing. He that Believeth he doth Believe, Believeth himself and not God: for God no where telleth him so; so then it is beyond doubt, that Assurance (as I said before) ariseth from the Conclusion, one of whose Premises is in the Word of God, and must be Believed: the other is in our own Hearts and must be felt or known: and therefore the Conclusion is mixt, and to be deduced by Reason, and is not an Object properly of Divine Faith, or of any Faith at all. There is but one Objection that seems to me to have any appearance of strength to take with any reasonable man: and [Page] that some think cannot be answered. And thus they argue, Whatsoever we ask of God through Christ according to his Will, we must Believe we shall Receive: But we ask Justification and Glorie of God according to his Will through Christ: Therefore we must Believe we shall receive them. Ans. This makes not our Justification and Salvation to be upon Certaintie of Faith. For, 1. The major Proposition doth only express a conditional Pro­mise of Justification and Salvation, and no Absolute promise. Now a Conditional Promise puts nothing in Being, till the per­formance of the Condition, nor gives any Certainty but on such performance. The Condition here expressed, is, That we ask, and that we ask according to Gods Will: which implies many other Conditions: For it must be in Faith and Repentance, and to right Ends, not to consume it on our Lusts (saith James) and we must be Certain that we are sincere in all this, before we can upon this Conditional Promise have a Certainty. 2. So that the minor Proposition here (That we thus Ask according to Gods Will in true Faith, &c.) This no Scripture speaks; and therefore must be known otherwise then by Believing. 3. Yet we may be said to Believe we shall Receive, in reference to the major Pro­position or Promise in Scripture, which is an Object of our Belief.

§ 4 SECT. IV.
Prop 3 Propos. 3. THough Infallible Assurance, as aforesaid, may be . Read of this our British Di­vines in the Sy­nod of Dort. in suffrag. ad Art. 5 Thes. 2. & 3. ex­cellently and moderately (as they did in all) here attained, yet perfect Certainty in Degree can­not; nor may lawfully be by any man expected.

This also I have proved before. For if we may be Perfect in the Degree of Assurance, why not of all Grace as well? and so have no sin? Nay there are so many Graces exercised in produ­cing our Assurance (besides Reason it self) that if they be not first perfect, it is impossible, that Assurance should be Perfect. For Example: He that Believeth not in Perfection the Truth of Scripture, and of that Promise, That [Whosoever Believeth shall be saved.] 2. And he that knoweth not in Perfection, the since­rity of his own Faith (neither of which any man breathing doth do;) cannot possibly be Perfectly Certain, that he is Justified, [Page] and shall be saved. For who can be Perfectly Certain of the Con­clusion,The Conclusi­on follows the weaker part of the Premises, say Logicians. Vide Smigletii Logicam Dispu. 13. Quaest. 8. 12, 13. ubi stre­nuè probatur, praemessae alteri­us debilitatem, semper & in omni mat [...]ria, redundare in conclusionem. who is but Imperfectly Certain of the Premises? And yet I have met with some men that think themselves very learned and spiritual, that confidently Dispute for a Perfection in Assu­rance. If any man say [That Bellarmine meant as much as this Imperfect Certainty, when he grants a Conjectural Certainty;] and be sure that he speaks truly; I will like Bellarmine the better, and his opposers in this the worse; but I will like a plain necessa­ry Truth of God never the worse. Sure I am that our great Di­vines affirming, That we are sure of Salvation by a certainty of Faith, hath given the Papists fearfull ground to baffle them and play upon us, and triumph over them. And when their own Students and followers finde it so, it hardens them against us fear­fully. And as sure I am, that no man is Perfect gradually in this life in any Grace, much less in so high a point as his Assurance. Among all those Consciences that I have had opened to me, I ne­ver met with an humble, heavenly, upright Christian, that would say, He was perfectly Certain: (Nay, and but few that durst call their Perswasion A Certainty, but rather a strong Hope:) But some licentious, fantastical Disputers, I have heard plead for such a Perfect Certainty; whose Pride and loose Living and un­mortified Passions and corruptions, told the standers-by, that they were the furthest from true Cert [...]inty of any.

§ 5 SECT. V.
Prop 4 Propos. 4. THough in some Cases it may be usefull to name several Marks: Yet the true infallible Marks of Sincerity, which a man may gather Assurance from, are very few, and lie in a narrower room then most have thought.

As I would not pick quarrels with the most Godly Divines, who lay down many Marks of Sincerity in their Sermons and Books; so would I not in foolish tenderness of any mans Repu­tation be so cruel to the Souls of poor Christians as to hide the Truth from▪ them in so weighty a point, and I speak against no man more then my self (heretofore.) I know ordinary Christi­ans cannot discern how these multitudes of Marks do lie open to exceptions: but the Judicious may easily perceive it, I shall there­fore [Page] here tell you the Truth, how far these many Marks are com­mendable and convenient, and how farre they are condemnable and dangerous. And, 1. When we are only discovering the Na­ture of some sinne, rather then the Certainty of the sinner, it is both easie and usefull to give many signs, as from the Effects, &c. by which it may be known, what that sin is; and so men may know how far they are guilty of it. But to know certainly whe­ther that sin will prove the Damnable state of the sinner, is nei­ther easie (in most cases) nor to be done by many Marks.

2. When we are discovering the Nature of some Duty or Grace (and not the very point wherein the Souls sincerity in that Grace or Duty lieth) it is both easie and usefull to give many Marks of them. But by these no man can gather Assurance of his sincerity.

3. When we are describing a high Degree of wickedness, which is far from the best state of an unregenerate man, it is both easie and usefull to give plain Marks of such a state. But to discover just how much sin will stand with true Grace, is another matter.

4. When we are describing the estate of the strongest Christi­ans, it is easie and usefull to Mark them out, and to give many Marks of their strength: But to give many of their Truth; and to discover the least degree of true Grace, is not easie. So I have shewed you wherein Marks may commendably be multiplied: But to lay down many Marks of sincerity, and say, By these you may certainly know whether you shall be saved or not: This I dare not do.

§ 6 SECT. VI.
Prop 5 Propos. 5. THere is a three-fold Truth to be enquired after in Exa­mination: 1. The Truth of the Act or Habit. 2. The Moral Truth of it as a Grace or Duty. 3. The Moral Truth of it as a Saving or Justifying Grace or Duty: or as the Condition of Ju­stification and Salvation. It is the last of these three only that the great business in Self-examination lieth on, and which we are now Lege Aquin. sum. de Veritate. c. 1. & 2, &c. accuratissimè de Veri & Veritatis definitione. searching after: The two first being presupposed as more easily dis­cernable, and less controvertible.

I will not here trouble plain Readers, for whose sakes I write, with any Scholastick Enquires into the nature of Truth, but on­ly [Page] look into so much as is of flat necessity to a right managing of the work of Self-examination. For it is unconceivable how a man should rationally judge of his own Condition, when he knows not what to enquire after: or that he should clearly know his sincerity, who knows not what sincerity is. Yet I doubt not but by an internal feeling a strong sound Christian who hath his Faith and Love, and other Graces in Action, may comfortably perceive the sincerity of his Graces, though he be so ignorant, as not clearly and distinctly to know the Nature of sincerity, or to give any just Description of it: Even as an unlearned man that is of a sound and healthful body, may feel what Health is, when he cannot describe it, nor tell distinctly wherein it doth consist. But yet as he hath a general Knowledge of it, so hath this ignorant sincere Christian of the Nature of sincerity. And withal, this is a more dangerous ground to stand on, because our sense is so uncertain in this case more then in the welfare of the body; and the Assurance of such a soul will be more defective and imperfect, and very unconstant, who goes by meer Feeling without knowing the nature of what he feeleth. Even as the fore­mentioned unlearned man in case of bodily health, if he have no knowledge, but meer feeling of the nature of health; He will be cast down with a Tooth-ake, or some harmless disease if it be painful, as if he should presently die, when a knowing man could tell that there is no danger, and he would make light of a Hectick, or other Mortal disease till it be uncurable, because he feels no great pain in it. It is therefore a matter of Necessity to open most clearly and distinctly the Nature of sincerity or Truth, so far as concerns the case in hand. I told you before that there is a Me­taphysical Truth of Being, and a Moral. I now adde further, that here are three things to be enquired after: 1. The Truth of the Act. 2. The Truth of the Virtuousness or Good­ness of the Act. 3. The Truth of the Justifying or savingness of the Act. The first is of Natural consideration: The two last of Moral Consideration. As for example: If you be trying the sin­ceritie of your Love to God: You must first know that you do love him indeed without dissembling: 2. That this Love be such as is a Dutie or Good, which God requireth. 3. That this Love be such as will certainly prove you in a state of Salvation. The first of these (whether you Believe and Love Christ or not) [Page] must needs be first known. And this must be known by internalLege Rivet. Disput. de Cer­titud. salutis •§. 33. pag. 248, 249. Even Learned Testardus is thus mistaken. De Natura & Grat. pag. 142. Thes. 180. whose words I will give you that you may see what way others go, in him. If any man feel that he Believeth, (for fe [...]t it is, and that most certainly of him that belie­veth) and be perswaded of the Veracity of God & Christ, that man can­not choose but certainly con­clude with himself that his sins are pardo­ned, and life eternal shall be given him. He therefore that professeth him­self uncertain of the pardon of his sins, and of his Salvation, doth in vain boast that he is a Believer. Certainly he that is not certain of the pardon of his sins, and of his Salvation, which is the Conclusion of the Syllogism of Faith, is either ignorant of what is contained in the major; or else doth not take it for certain (which yet is the word of God and Christ:) or else it must needs be that he doth not feel that he Believes: And how then can he be called a Believer? Thus Testardus erreth with too ma­ny more. Feeling joined with a consideration of the Effects of Real Love. And to this end many Marks may be useful, though indeed in­ward feeling must do almost all: No man else can tell me whe­ther I Believe and Love, if I cannot tell my self. It is no hard matter to a solid knowing Christian to discern this ordinarily. But when they do know this, they are far enough from true▪ Assu­rance, except they go to the rest. A man may be a True Man, and not an Image, or a shadow, or a corps: and yet be a false Thief, or a Liar, and no True Man in a Moral sense. This I lay down to these uses:

First, That you take heed when you hear or read Marks of Grace, how you receive and apply them: and enquire whether it be not onely the Truth of the Being of the Act or Habit that those Marks discover, rather then the virtuous, or the saving Be­ing or Force.

Secondly, That you take heed in Examination of taking up at this first step, as if when you have found that you Believe, and Love, and Repent, you had found all: when yet you have not found that you do it Savingly.

Thirdly, To take heed of the Doctrine of many called Ortho­dox great Divines, in this: who tell you, That, Every man that hath Faith, knows he hath it: and it is impossible to Believe, and not to know we Believe. This may ordinarily (but not alway) be true about this first Truth, of the meer Being of the Act. But is it not a wonder that these great learned Divines should not consider, that this is but a presupposed matter, and not the great thing that we have to enquire after in point of sinceritie? and that they may know they Believe long enough, and yet not know their Faith to be Saving? It is our beyond-Sea Divines that so mistake in this Point: Our English Divines are sounder in it, then any in the world generally: I think, because they are more pra­ctical, and have had more wounded tender consciences under [Page] cure, and less empty speculation and dispute. The second Truth to be enquired after, is, That this Act is Truly Good or a Virtue or Grace. For every Act is not a Virtue. Nor every Act that may seem so. I will not stand here curiously to open to you, wherein the Goodness of an Action doth consist. Somewhat will be said in the following Propositions opened. Only this much at the present. To denominate an Action properly and fully Good, it must be fully agreeable to Gods Will of Precept, both in the Matter, End, Measure, and all Circumstances. But improperly and imper­fectly it may be called Good or Virtuous, though there be Evil mixt, if the Good be most eminent: as if the substance of the Action be Good, though the Circumstances be Evil: and thus we ordinarily call Actions Good: But if the Evil be so predomi­nant, as that the Good lie only in Ends or Circumstances, and the substance (as it were) of the Action be forbidden, then we may not call it a Good Action, or a Grace or Duty. So that it is not perfect proper Goodness, that I here speak of: but the second, that is, imperfect: when the Action is commanded and Good in it self, and the Good more eminent then the Evil: Yet it may not be saving for all that.

For there is a common Grace which is not saving, yet Real and so True and Good, and so True Grace: as well as a special Grace, which is saving: and there are common Duties commanded by God, as Alms-deeds, Fasting, Prayer, &c. which though they are necessary, yet Salvation doth not certainly accompany them or follow them. A man that findes any Moral Virtue to be in himself Truly, and to be Truly a Virtue; cannot thence con­clude that he shall be saved: Nor a man that Truly doth a Duty Truly Good in it self. Many did that which was Good in the sight of the Lord, but not with an upright heart: And even an Ahabs Humiliation may have some Moral Goodness, and so some Acceptance with God, and bring some benefit to himself, and yet not be Saving nor Justifying.

And some Actions again may be so depraved by the End and Manner, that they deserve not the name of Good, or Duty. As to Repent of a sinfull Attempt, is in it self considered a Duty and Good: But if a man Repent of it only, because it did not suc­ceed, or because he mist of the Gain, or Pleasure, or Honour which he expected by it: Thus he makes it a greater sin: And [Page] if he Repent but because his pleasure is gone, or because he is brought to poverty or disgrace by his sin, this is but a Natural thing, and deserves not the name of a Virtue. So to love God is in it self Good, and the highest Duty: But if any man Love God as one that he thinks hath prospered him in his sinne, and helped and succeeded him in his Revenge, unjust Bloud-shed, Robbery, sinfull Rising and Thriving, thanking God and loving him for his Pleasure in Lust, Drunkenness, Gluttony, or the like, as most men that Idolize their Flesh-pleasure do: when they have Ease, and Honour, and all at Will, that they may offer a full Sacrifice to their Flesh, and say, Soul take thy ease: Then they Thank God for it, and may Really Love him under this notion. [...] san­cti dicuntur, & quodammodo sunt, sed fine Ra­dice & Solidita­te, ut Rivet. disp. de Persev. sanct. §. 3. p. 203. This is to make God a Pandor or Servant to our Flesh, and so to Love him for serving and humouring it. And this is so far from being a Virtue, that it is one of the greatest of all sins. And if ano­ther man Love God in a better notion a little, and Love his Lusts more, this is no saving Love (as I shall more fully shew you.) So that you see a man hath more to look after then the meer Hone­sty, Virtue, or Moral Goodness of his Action: Or else all Actions that are virtuous would be saving.

The third thing to be enquired after, is the Sincerity of Grace considered as Saving. This is much more then the two former: And indeed is the great matter in Self-examination to be looked after: Here is the Work: Here is the difficulty: Here it is that we are now enquiring, how far Marks may be multiplied? how far they may be usefull? and wherein this sincerity doth consist. The two former will not denominate a man a sincere Christian, nor prove him Justified, and in a state of Salvation without this. Wherein this consisteth, I shall shew you in the following Propo­sitions: Now I have first shewed you what it is that you must en­quire after. (And I hope no wise Christian will judge me too curi­ous and exact here, seeing it is a work that neerly concerns us, and is not fit to be done in the dark: Our cause must be throughly sift­ed at Judgment, and our game then must be plaied above-board, and therefore it is desperate to juggle and cheat our selves now.) Only before I proceed, let me tell you, that according to this three-fold Truth or Sincerity, so there is a three-fold Self-delu­sion or Hypocrisie. (Taking Hypocrisie for a seeming to be what we are not, either to our selves, or others: though perhaps we [Page] have no direct dissembling intent.) 1. To take on us to Repent, Believe, Love Christ, &c. when we do not at all, this is the grossest kinde of Hypocrisie, as wanting the very naturall Truth of the Act.

2. To seem to Believe, Repent, Love God, &c. virtuously (according to the former Description) and yet to do it but in sub­serviency to our Lusts and wicked Ends, this is another sort of gross Hypocrisie: Yea to do it in meer respect to fleshly prosperity (as, to Repent because sin hath brought us to sicknes and poverty; to Love God, meerly because he keeps us our fleshes prosperity, &c.) this still is gross Hypocrisie.

It may be a great Question which of these is the greater sinne; To Repent and Love God in subserviency to our sin; or not to do it at all?

Answ, It is not much worth the thinking on, they are both so desperately wicked: Therefore I will not trouble the Reader with a curious resolution of this Question: Only thus: Though to denie Gods Being, be a Blasphemous denial of his Natural Excellencie, and so of his Attributes which are the first platform of that which we call Morality in the Creature; yet to denie these his Attributes, and withall to ascribe sin and positive wic­kedness to the Blessed Holy God, seems to me the greater sinne: Sicut esse Diabolum est pejus (quoad ipsum) quam non esse.

3. The next kinde of Hypocrisie, and the most Common is, when men want the sincerity of Grace, as saving only, but have both the Truth of it as an Act or Habit, and as a Virtue. When men have some Ita sincere, tam Resipiscenti­am quam fidem, Conditionem ad salutem adipiscē­dam prorsus ne­cessariam statui­mus. F [...]igland. de Grat. p. 997. Repentance, Faith, Hope, Love, &c. which is undissembled, and hath good Ends; but yet is not saving. This is the unsoundness which most among us in the Church perish by, that do perish; and which every Christian should look most to his heart in. This I think is discerned by few that are guiltie of it: Though they might all discern it, if they were Willing and Diligent.

§ 7 SECT. VII.
Prop 6 Propos. 6. As it is only the Precepts of Christ, that can assure us that one Action is virtuous, or a Duty more then ano­ther: [Page] So it is only the tenour of the Covenant of Grace bestowing Ju­stification or Salvation upon any Act, which makes that Act (or Grace) Justifying or Saving; and can assure us that it is so.

By the Precepts I mean any Divine Determination concerning our Dutie, what we Ought to Do or Avoid. It is the same sa­cred Instrument, which is called Gods Testament, his Covenant and his New Law, the several names being taken from several re­spects, (as I have opened elswhere, and cannot now stand to prove.) This Law of God hath two parts: The Precept and the Sanction. The Precept may be considered, either as by it self [Do this or that] and so it maketh Duty: This constitutes the Virtue of Actions; (Regulating them) And so the second kind of sincerity, [Wh [...]ther an Action be good or bad] must be tried by the Precepts, as Precepts. What God requireth is a Virtue: what he forbiddeth is a Vice: What he neither Requireth nor Forbid­deth, is Indifferent, as being not of Moral Consideration. (For the Popish Doctrine of Divine Counsels is vain.)

2. And then, these Precepts must be considered, not onely as they stand by themselves, and constitute Duty simply, saying, [Do this:] but also as they stand in conjunction with the Sancti­on, and say, [Do this or that, and be saved, or else Perish] as [Be­lieve and be saved, else not.] And in this respect and sense they constitute the Conditions of the Covenant: and so they are the only Rule by which to know what is saving Grace, and what not. And only in this respect it is that they Justifie or Condemn men: They may Justifie or Condemn the Action, as bare Precepts and Prohibitions: But they Justifie not, nor Condemn the Person himself, but as Precepts conjoined with the Sanction: that is, with the Promise or Threatning.

So that it is hence evident that no humane conjecture can ga­ther what is a saving Grace or Duty, and what not, either from a bare Precept considered disjunct from the Promise; or from any thing in the meer nature and use of the gracious Act it self. The nature of the Act is but its Aptitude to its Office: But the Con­sequents (for I will not call them Effects) Justification and Sal­vation, proceed from or upon them only as Conditions on which the free Promise bestoweth those benefits, directly. Those there­fore which make the Formal reason of Faiths Justifying, to lie in its Apprehension, which they call its Instrumentality, being in­deed [Page] the very Nature and Being of the Act, do little know what they say, nor how derogatory to Christ, and arrogating to them­selves their doctrine is, as I have elsewhere manifested.

I conclude then, that It is only the Scripture that can tell you what is Justifying or Saving Grace, by promising and annexing Salvation thereto.

§ 8 SECT. VIII.
Prop 7 Propos. 7. WHatso [...]ver therefore is the Condition which the Cove­nant of Grace requireth of man, for the attaining of Justification and Salvation, and upon which it doth bestow them; that only is a Justifying and Saving Act. And inferiour Duties are no further Marks to try by, nor are Justifying and Saving, then as they are reducible to that Condition.

This is it which I have asserted in the last forgoing Chapter: and this is the reason why I laid down but only two Marks there. Though in the first Part, in the description of Gods people, I laid down the whole description, which must needs contain some things common, and not only special Properties; yet now I am to give you the true Points of Difference, I dare not number so ma­ny particulars. The Performance of the proper Condition of the New Covenant, promising Justification and Salvation, then, is the only Mark of Justification or Salvation, Direct and Infallible: or is the only Justifying and Saving Grace properly so called. Now you must understand that the Covenant of Life hath two parts, as the Conditon for man to perform, if he will receive the bene­fits. The first is the naturall part concerning the pure Godhead, who is the First and the Last, the Principal Efficient and Ultimate End of all: Who is our Creator, Preserver, Governour, Happi­ness or Rest. This is [The taking the Lord only for our God] in op­position to all Idols visible or invisible. As the End as such is be­fore and above all the means, and the Father or meer Godhead is above Christ the Mediator as such (as he saith, Joh. 14. 28. The Father is greater then I) so this is the first and greater part of the condition of the Covenant: (And so Idolatry and Atheisme are the greatest and first condemning sins.) The second part of the Condition is, [That we take Jesus Christ only for the Mediator [Page] and our Redeemer, and so as our only Saviour and Supream Lord, by the Right of Redemption.] This is the second part: consisting in the choice of the right and only Way and Means to God, as he is the End: For Christ as Mediator is not the Ultimate End, but the Way to the Father. These two parts of the Condition are most evident in the Word, both in their Distinction and Necessi­ty. The former was part of that Covenant made with Adam, which is not Repealed, nor ever will be, though the rest of that Covenant may be laid by. It was afterward still fully expressed to the Church before Christs coming in the flesh: In all the peo­ples covenanting this was still the summe, that [They took the Lord only to be their God.] But the later part was not in the Co­venant with Adam: Nor was it openly and in full plainnesse put into the Covenant of Grace in the beginning: but still implied, and more darkly intimated, the light and clearness of Revelation still increasing till Christs coming. Yet so, as that at the utmost they had but the discovery of a Saviour, to be born of a Virgin, of the Tribe of Juda at such a time: But never that this Jesus was the Christ. And so it was only in a Saviour so to be revealed that they were to believe before: But after Christs coming and his Miracles (and Resurrection at utmost) he tels them [If ye be­lieve not that I am he, you shall die in your sins] So that to them to whom he was Revealed (at least) it was of necessity to be­lieve that [This Jesus is he, and not to look for another] Now to us Christians under the New Testament this later part of the Co­venant (concerning the Mediator) is most fully expressed, and most frequently inculcated: Not as if the former part (concern­ing God the Creator and End) were become less necessary then before, or ever the less to be studied by Christians, or preached by the Ministers of the Gospel: But on the contrary, it is still implied, as being fully revealed before, and a thing generally re­ceived by the Church; yea and confirmed and stablished by the adding of the Gospel, and preaching Christ. For the End is still supposed and implied, when we determine of the Means: and the Means confirm and not deny the excellency and necessity of the End. Therefore when Paul (Act. 17. &c.) was to Preach to the Athenians or other Heathens, he first preacheth to them the Godhead, and seeks to bring them from their Idols; and then preacheth Christ. And therefore it is said, Heb. 11. He that comes [Page] to God (as the End and his Happiness, or Creator and Preserver) must (first) believe that God is, and that he is (in the Redeemer) a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. And therefore the A­postles Act. 20. 21. preached [Repentance toward God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ] The first is [The turning from Idols to the true God] (and so Repentance is in order of nature before Faith in the Mediator, and more excellent in its nature, as the End is then the way: but not before Faith in the Godhead.) The second is the only high way to God. Therefore Paul was by preaching to Turn men from darkness to light (both from the darkness of Atheisme and Idolatry, and the darkness of Infidelity: but first) from the power of Satan (and worshipping devils) to God: (that so next) by faith in Christ they might receive Remission of sin, and Inheritance among them that are Sanctified, Act. 26. 18. And Christ himself took the same course, and preached these two parts of the condition of the Covenant distinctly; Joh. 17. 3. This is life eternal to know thee the only true God, and (then) Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. (Words of knowledge in Scripture-commands im­port Affection.) And Joh. 14. 28. The Father is greater then I. And Joh. 14. 6. I am the Way, the Truth and the Life: No man com [...]th to the Father but by me. And Joh. 14. 1. Ye believe in God, (there is the first part) Believe also in Me (there is the second part.) But intended brevity forbids me to heap up more proof in so plain a Case.

To this last part of the Condition is opposed Infidelity, or not­believing in Christ; being the chiefest condemning sin, next to Atheism and Idolatry, which are opposite to the first part. On these two parts of the condition of the Covenant, hath God laid all our salvation, as much as concerns our part; still supposing that God and the Mediator have done and will do all their part.

The first part of the Condition I call, The natural part; being from the beginning, and written in the nature of every reasonable creature: and by an Eminencie and Excellencie it is of Natural Morality above all other Laws whatsoever. The second I call, The supernatural part of the Condition; as being not known to any man by the meer light of Nature; but is supernaturally re­vealed to the world by the Gospel. The first part also, is the ba­sis or great command of the Decalogue; [Thou shalt have none other God but me] or in other terms [Thou shalt love God above [Page] all.] The second is the great command of the Gospel [Believe in the Lord Jesus] or in other terms [Love Christ above All] (For, as I said, words of knowledge in Scripture imply Affection, especially Will: where all Acts of the soul are compleat, which in the intellect are but incompleat, imperfect and preparatory: the Understanding being but the entrance to the Will; and the Will being an extended understanding: Therefore sometime Christ saith, He that believeth not is condemned: Sometime, He that loveth, any thing, more then me, is not worthy of me, and cannot be my Disciple.) And he joyneth them together in Joh. 16. 27. Therefore hath the Father loved you, because you have loved me, and have believed, &c.] Intellectual belief or assent therefore, where ever you reade it commanded, implieth the Wills consent and love.

And thus I have shewed you what the conditions of the Cove­nant are: which I have done the fullier, that you might know what is a Saving Grace or Act, and what not. For you may ea­sily conceive, that it must needs be safer trying by these then by any lower Act or Duty: and as all other are no further saving, then as they belong to these, or are reducible to them; so you can no further try your selves by them, but as they are reduced to these. And now you see the reason why I mentioned but on­ly two Marks in the foregoing Chapter: and why I say that true Marks are so few, by which a man may safely try his title to hea­ven. And yet you shall see that we must yet reduce them to a narrower room, when we come to open the nature of sincerity. In preparation to which I must tell you; that In the terms of these two Marks, or two parts of the condition of the Covenant, there is contained somewhat common (which an unregenerate man may perform;) and somewhat speciall, and proper to the Saints. Though all must go together and be found in those that will be saved, yet the specifical Form, or Constitutive difference, by which as Saving, the Act of a true Believer is discerned from the Act of an unsound person, doth lie but in part of it, and I think but in one point. As a man is defined to be [a Reasonable living-crea­ture:] but to be a creature will not prove him a man, nor to be a living creature neither: because that there are other creatures, and living creatures, or animate besides himself. But to be a Rea­sonable Animal or living creature, will prove him a man; because [Page] Reason contains his specifique form and constitutive difference. Other inferiour creatures may have bodies and fleshly bodies, as well as man, and others may have life (which we call a Soul) (and yet man must have these too) But others with these have not Reason; or a Soul indued with a power of Reasoning. So in these Marks of Grace or conditions of the Covenant: To love is common to every man: To love God and Christ is common to a Christian, with an hypocrite or wicked man: But to love Christ Savingly, (that is, as I shall shew you presently, Sovereignly or Chiefly) this is the Form or Constitutive difference of Love which is Saving. To Take or Accept, is common to every man: To Take or Accept of God and Christ, is common to a true Christian and a false: But To Take or Accept of God and his Christ Sin­cerely and Savingly, is proper to a sound Believer. So that even in these two Marks, the sincerity of both lieth in one Point. For supposing the Truth of the Act, and the Truth of the Vertue in generall (which are both common, as I have told you:) the Truth or Sincerity of them, as Saving, is the only thing to be en­quired after. And in this sense, I know but One infallible Mark of sincerity: seeing sincerity lieth in this one point. But before I come to open it more fully, I will premise (and but briefly name) two more Propositions.

§ 9 SECT. IX.
Prop 8 Propos. 8. GOd hath not in the Covenant promised Justification or Salvation upon any meer Act or Acts considered with­out that Degree and Sutableness to their objects wherein the sincerity of them as Saving doth consist.

It is said indeed, that He that believeth shall be saved, but then it is supposed, that it be sincere Believing: for any Believing is not here meant: For many that Believed, and that without gross dis­simulation, shall perish, as not Believing sincerely. And therefore Christ would not trust himself with those that yet Believed in him, because he knew their hearts, that they did it not in faith­fulness and sincerity, Joh. 2. 23, 24. But I shall confirm this more fully afterwards.

§ 10 SECT. X.
Prop 9 Propos. 9. THere is no one Act considered in its meer nature and Prop. 9. kinde without its measure and sutableness to its object, which a true Christian may perform, but an unsound Christian may perform it also.

I have great reason to add this, that you may take heed of try­ing and judging of your selves by any meer Act, considered in it self. If any doubt of this we might soon prove it, by producing the most excellent Acts, and shewing it of them in particular. Believing is as proper to the saved as any thing, for the Act. And yet as for the assenting Act, James tels us the devils Believe: And as for Resting on Christ by Affiance, and expecting Pardon and Salvation from him, we see beyond question, that many thousand wicked men, have no other way to quiet them in sinning; but that they are confident Christ will pardon and save them, and they undissemblingly Quiet or Rest their souls in this perswasion, and undissemblingly expect salvation from him when they have sin­ned as long as they can. And indeed, herein lieth the nature of Presumption: And so real are they in this Faith, that all our Preaching cannot beat them from it. If the Question be, Whe­ther a wicked man can Pray, or Meditate, or forbear the Act of this or that sin, I think none will deny it. But yet all this will be opened fullier anon.

§ 11 SECT. XI.
Prop 10 Propos. 10. THe Supremacy of God and the Mediator in the Soul, Prop. 10. or the pr [...]cedency and prevalency of his Interest in us, above the Interest of the flesh, or of inferiour good, is the very point wherein materially the sincerity of our Graces, as Saving, doth consist; and so is the one Mark by which those must judge of their states, that would not be deceived.
Prop 11 Propos. 11. FOr here the Sincerity of the Act as Saving consisteth Prop. 11. in being suted to its adequate object, (considered in its respects which are essential to it as such an object.) And so to B [...] ­lieve [Page] in, Accept and Love God as God, and Christ as Christ, is the sincerity of these Acts. But this lieth in Believing, Accepting and Loving God as the only Supream Authority or Ruler and Good, and Christ as the only Redeemer, and so our Sovereign Lord, our Saviour, our Husband and our Head.

I joyn both these Propositions together, because the explicati­on of both will be best joyned together. And first I will tell you what I mean by some of the terms in these Propositions.

1. When I speak of the Interest of God and the Mediator in the Soul, I do not mean a meer Right to us, (which we call Jus ad rem:) for so God and the Mediatour God▪ Man, have Interest in all men: as being undoubtedly Rightful Lord of all; whether they obey him or not: But I mean Christs Actual Interest in us and Possession of us (which we call Jus in re) and that as it con­sisteth in a Voluntary Entertainment of him into all the Powers of the Soul, according to their severall Capacities and Offices. As we use to say of men in respect of ther friends, [Such a man hath so much Interest in his friend, that he can prevail with him before any other.] So when Gods Interest in us is greater then the In­terest of the flesh, that he hath the Precedency and Supremacy in our Understandings, Wils and Affections, this is the sincerity of all our Graces as Saving; and so the discovery of our Souls sin­cerity. I shall yet fullier open this anon.

2. I here include the Interest of Father, Son and holy Ghost, both as they are conjunct, and as they are distinct. As considered in the Essence and Unity of the Godhead, so their Interest is con­junct: both Father, Son and holy Ghost being our Creator, Ru­ler and Ultimate End and chief Good. But in the distinction of Persons, as it was the Son in a proper sense that Redeemed us, and thereby purchased a peculiar Interest in us, and Dominion over us, as he is Redeemer, so doth he carry on this Interest in a pecu­liar way: And so the Interest of the holy Ghost as our Sanctifier is specially advanced by our yeilding to his Motions, &c.

3. By the Supremacy of God, and the Prevalencie of Christs Interest, I do not mean Renati quan­tumvis alacriter militent adver­sus peccata, ta­men & multa & magna carnis imbccillitate la­borant; cui, spiri­tu divinitus ex­citato, obluctan­tur; crebrò ta­men à cupidita­tibus carnis sc vinci patiuntur, &c. Suffra [...]. Theolog. Bre­mensium in Sy­nodo Dord. in Art. 5. Thes. 9. Vid. Thes. 10, 11, 12. 13. That it alway prevaileth for Actuall obedi­ence ☞ against the suggestions and allurements of the flesh. A man may possibly pleasure a lesser friend or a stranger, before a greater friend, for once or more, and then it proves not that the stranger hath the greater Interest in him. But I mean, that God hath [Page] Really more of his Esteem, and Will, and Rational (though not Passionate) Love and Desire; and Authority and Rule in his Heart and Life.

4. When I speak of the Interest of the flesh, I chiefly intend and include that inferiour good which is the fleshes delight. For here are considerable distinctly, 1. The part which would be pleased in opposition to Christ; and that, with the Scripture, I call The Flesh. 2. The thing which this flesh desires as its happiness; and that is, Its own pleasure, delight and full content. 3. The objects from whence it expecteth this delight and content; and that is, All inferiour good which it apprehendeth to conduce most to that End, as being most sutable to its self. By the flesh then, I mean, The soul, as sensitive, as it is now since the fall become unruly, by the strengthening of its raging desires, and the weakning of Rea­son that should rule it; and consequently the Rationall part, thereby seduced: or if the Rationall (mis-informed and ill-dis­posed) be the leader in any sin, before or without the sensitive: so that I mean, that which inordinately inclineth us to any infe­riour good. This inferiour good consisteth in the Lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and pride of Life, as John distinguisheth them: Or as commonly they are distributed, in Pleasure, Profits and Honour; all which are concentred and terminated in the sin we call Flesh-pleasing in the general: for that pleasure is it which is sought in all; or it is the pursuit of an inferiour fleshly happi­ness, preferred before the Superiour Spiritual Everlasting Happi­ness. Though most commonly this pleasure be sought in Honour, Riches, Eating, Drinking, Pleasant dwellings, Company, Sports and Recreations, Clothes, Wantonness or Lustfull Uncleanness, the satisfying of Passions and Malicious desires, or the like: yet some time it riseth higher, and the sinner seeketh his happiness and content in largeness of Knowledge, much Learning and curi­ous Speculations about the nature of the creatures, yea and about God himself. But perhaps it will be found that these are neer of the same nature with the former sensitive Delights. For it is not the Excellency or Goodness of God himself that delighteth them, but the novelty of the thing, and the agitation of their own Imagination, Phantasie and Intellect thereupon, which is natural­ly desirous to be actuated, and employed, as receiving thereby some seeming addition to its own perfection: and that not as [Page] from God, who is the object of their Knowledge; but as from the meer enlargement of Knowledge in it self; or, which is far worse, they make the study of God and Divine things which they delight in, but subservient to some base inferiour object: And so though they delight in studying and knowing God and Heaven, and Scripture, yet not in God as God, or the chief Good, nor in Heaven as Heaven; nor out of any true saving love to God: but either because, as some Preachers, they make a gainfull trade of it, by teaching others: or because it is an honour to know these things, and be able to discourse of them, and a dishonour to be ignorant: Or at best, as I said before, they desire to know God and Divine Truths, out of a delight in the Novelty, and Actua­ting, and natural Elevation of the Understanding hereby: It is one thing to delight in Knowing, and another to delight in the thing Known. An ungodly man may delight in studying and knowing severall Axioms or Truths concerning God; but he never chiefly delighteth in God himself. As a studious man de­sires to know what Hell is, and where, and many truths concerning it: but he desireth not Hell it self, nor delighteth in it. A godly man desireth to know the nature and danger of sin, and Satans way and wiles in temptations: but he doth not therefore desire sin and temptation it self. So a wicked man may desire to know the nature of Grace, and Christ, and Glory, and yet not desire Grace, and Christ, and Glory. It is one thing to terminate a mans desire and delight in bare knowledge, or the esteem, or self-ad­vancement that accrues thereby; and another thing to termi­nate it in the Thing which we desire to know; making know­ledge but a means to its fruition. So that though the virtuous­ness or vitiousness of our Willing, and severall Affections, do re­ceive its denomination and specification very much from the ob­ject (as in loving God, and loving sinfull pleasure, &c.) because there is the proper and ultimate terminus of the souls motion: yet the Acts of the Understanding may be exercised about the best of objects, without any virtuousness at all: It being but the Truth and not the Goodness that is its object; and that Truth may be in the best object and in the worst. And so it is the same kinde of delight that such a man hath in knowing God and knowing other things: for it is the same kinde of Truth that he seeks in both. And indeed Truth is not the ultimate object ter­minating [Page] the souls motion (not as it is Truth,) but an interme­diate prerequisite to Good, which is the ultimatly terminating ob­ject: And accordingly the Acts of the meer understanding, are but preparatory to the Acts of the Will, and so are but imperfect initial Acts of the Soul, as having a further End then their own proper Object: And therefore it is that all Philosophers place no Moral Habits in the Understanding, but all in the Will; for till they come to the Will, (though they may be in a large sense Mo­rally good or evil, vertuous or vicious, yet) they are but so in an imperfect kinde and sense; and therefore they call such Habits only Intellectual.

The summe of all this is, That it is but the Fleshes Pleasure and Interest which an ungodly man chiefly pursueth, even in his de­lightfull studying of Holy things: For he studieth Holy things and Prophane alike. Or if any think it too narrow a Phrase, to call this Flesh-pleasing, or preferring the interest of the flesh, it being the Soul as Rational, and not only as Sensitive, which turn­eth from God to inferiour things; I do not gain-say this: I know Gibienf determines it, that man apostatized from God to himself, and that in Regeneration he is turned again from himself to God. Yet this must be very cautelously understood; for God forbiddeth not man to seek himself duly, but commandeth it: Man may and must seek his own Happiness. The chief Good is desired as Good to us. But to state this case rightly, and deter­mine the mountainous difficulties that here rise in the way, is no fit work for this place: I will not therefore so much as name them. The easiest and safest way therefore to clear the present difficulty to us, is, to look chiefly at the different Objects and Ends: God who is the Supream Good, presenteth and offereth himself to us, to be enjoyed. Inferiour Good stands up in com­petition with him; and would insinuate it self into our hearts, as if it were more amiable and desirable then God. Now if Gods interest prevail, it is a certain sign of Grace; If inferiour good prevail and have more actual interest or possession then God, it is a certain sign of an unhappy condition; or that the person is not yet in a state of Salvation.

And as you thus see what I mean by the interest of the flesh or inferiour good in us; so in all this I include the interest of the world and the devil: For the world is, at least, the greatest part [Page] of this inferiour good, which stands in competition with God. And Satan is but the envious agent to present this bait before us: to put a false gloss on it in his presentation; to weaken all Gods arguments that should restrain us; to disgrace God himself to our souls; and so to press and urge us to a sinfull choice and pro­secution. He shews us the forbidden fruit as pleasant, and as a means to our greater advancement and happiness; and draweth us to unbelief for the hiding of the danger. He takes us up in our imagination, and shews us the Kingdoms of the world and their Glory, to steal our hearts from the Glorious Kingdom of God. So that the interest of the Flesh, the interest of the World, and the interest of Satan in us, is all one in effect. For they are but se­veral causes to carry the soul from God, to a false, deluding, mise­rable End.

Again, In the Proposition I say [It is the Prevalency of the In­terest of God or Christ, above inferiour Good] putting inferiour Good, as the competitor with God who is the greatest Good: because the Will cannot incline to any thing under the notion of evil, or of indifferent, but only as Good. No man can Will evil as evil: He must first cease to be Rational, and to be man. If evil ap­peared only as evil there were no danger in it. The force of the temptation lies in making evil seem Good, either to the senses, or imagination, or reason, or all. Here lies the danger of a pleasing☞ condition, in regard of Credit, Delights, Riches, Friends, Habitati­on,Mat. 9. How hard for a Rich man to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven? Health or any inferiour thing: The more Good appeareth or seemeth to be in them (as disjunct from God) the more dange­rous: for they are the liker to stand up in competition with him; and to carry it with our partial blinded souls in the competition. Remember this, if you love your selves, when you would have all things about you more pleasing and lovely. Here lies the unknown danger of a prosperous state: and on the contrary lies the pre­tious benefit of adversity; which if men were not brutish and un­believing, they would heartily welcome as the safest condition.

Again observe here, that I mention inferiour [Good] and not [Truth] as that which stands in competition with God. For of two Truths both are equally true (though not equally evident:) And therefore though Sata [...] would perswade the soul that infe­riour Good is better for us then God; yet he sets not Truth a­gainst Truth in competition. He would indeed make us believe [Page] that Gods Word is not True at all, or the Truth not certain. But with the Understanding there is no competition between Truth and Truth, if known so to be. For the Understanding can know and believe several Truths at once, though about never so diffe­rent matters; as that there is a Heaven and a Hell, that there is a God, a Christ, a World, a Devil, &c. But the Will cannot embrace and choose all different Good at once: for God hath made the enjoyment of them incompatible: Much less can it Will two things as the chief [...]st Good, when there is but one such: or God and the creature as equally Good, and both in the highest degree.

Here then you further see the meaning of the Proposition, when I speak of the Prevalency of Christs Interest, I mean it di­rectly and principally in the [Will] of man, and not in the Un­derstanding. For though I doubt not but there is true Grace in the Understanding as well as in the Will, yet (as I shall further shew anon) as it is in the Intellect, it is not certainly and fully discernable, but only the force of the Intellective Acts appear in the Motions and Resolutions of the Will. And therefore men must not try their states directly by any Graces or Marks in the Understanding. And also if it were possible to discern their sin­cerity immediately in the Understanding, yet it must not be there by this way of competition of different Objects in regard of the Degree of Verity, as if one were more True and the other less: as it is with the Will about the degrees of Goodness in the Objects which stand in competition. Though yet a kinde of com­petition there is with the Intellect too: As 1 between God and the Creature, who is to be Believed rather: and 2o between two contradictory or opposite Propositions, which is True, and which false. As between these [God is the chief Good] and [God is not the chief Good;] or these [God is the chief Good] and [Pleasure is the chief Good.] But though the Truth be here Be­lieved, yet that is no certain Evidence of Sincerity; except it be so Believed, as may be prevalent with the Will: which is not dis­cernable in the bare Act of Believing, but in the Act of Willing So that it is the Prevalency of Christs Interest in the Will, that we here speak of: and consequently in the Affections, and Con­versation. And indeed (as is before hinted) all humane Acts as they are in the meer Understanding, are but rude and imperfect: for it is but the first digestion, as it were, that is there performed, [Page] (as of meat in the stomack:) But in the Will they are more per­fectly concocted (as the chyle is sanguified in the Liver, Spleen and Veins.) And in the Affections they are yet further raised and concocted (as the vitall spirits are begotten in the heart: though many here take meer flatulency for spirits: and so they do com­mon passion for spirituall Affections;) and then in the Conver­sation, (as the food, in the habit of the body,) the concoction is finished: so that the sincerity of Grace cannot (I think) be dis­cerned by any meer Intellectuall Act: As you may finde Judi­cious Dr Staughton asserting in his Righteous mans Plea to Happi­ness. But yet do not misunderstand it, as if saving Grace did not reside in the Understanding.

Now as the Apostle saith, Gal 5. 17. The flesh warreth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh, and these two are contrary one to the other; A Christians life is a continual combate between these two contrary Interests. God will be taken for our Portion and Happiness, and so be our Ultimate End, or else we shall never en­joy him to make us Happy: The Flesh suggesteth to us the sweet­ness and delight of Carnal Contentments, and would have us glut our selves with these. God will Rule, and that in supremacy, or he will never save us. The Flesh would fain be pleased, and have its desire, whether God be obeyed and pleased or not. There is no hope of Reconciling these contrary Interests. God hath already made his Laws, containing the Conditions of our Salvation or Damnation: These Laws do limit the Desires of the Flesh, and con­tradict its Delights: The Flesh cannot Love that which is against it: It hates them, because they speak not good of it, but evil; because it so mightily crosseth its contents. It was meet it should be so: for if God had suffered no Competitor to set up their Interest a­gainst his, how would the faithfullness of his subjects be tried? how would his Providences and Graces be manifested? Even to Adam that yet had no sin, this way of Triall was judged necessary: and when he would please his Eye and his Tast, and desire to be higher, it was just with God to Displease him and to bring him lower. God will not change these his holy and righ­teous Laws to please the Flesh, nor conform himself to its will. The Flesh will not conform it self to God; and so here is the Christian Combate. Christ who hath Purchased us, expecteth the first or chief room in our Affections, or else he will effective­ly [Page] be no Saviour for us. The Flesh doth importunately solicit the Affections, to give the chief room and entertainment to its Contents. Christ who hath so dearly bought the Dominion over us all, will either Rule us as our Soveraign, or Condemn us for our Rebellion (Luk. 19. 17.) The Flesh would be free, and is still soliciting us to Treason. For as easie as Christs yoak is, and as light as his burden, yet is it no more suited with the Fleshes Interest, then the heavier and more grievous Law was: The Law of Li­berty, is not a Law of Carnall Liberty. Now in this Combat, the Word and Ministry are solicitors for Christ; so is Reason it self so far as it is Rectified, and well guided: but because Reason is naturally weakned and blinde; yea and the Word alone is not sufficient to Illuminate and Rectifie it; therefore Christ sends his Spirit into the souls of his people, to make that Word effe­ctuall to open their eyes: here is the great help that the soul hath for the maintaining or carrying on the Interest of Christ. But yet once Illuminating is not enough. For the Will doth not ne­cessarily choose that which the Understanding concludeth to be best (even hic & nunc, & consideratis considerandis:) A drunkards understanding may tell him, that it is far better (all things laid together) to forbear a cup of wine, then to drink it: and that the Good of Virtue and Duty is to be preferred before the Good of Pleasure, (This experience assures us of, though all the Phi­losophers in the world should contradict it: and I am not dispu­ting now; and therefore I will not stand to meddle with mens contrary opinions,) and yet the violence of his sensuall Appetite, may cause him to lay hands on the cup and pour it in. And indeed so far it is a brutish Act: and it is no such wonder to have sin­full Acts termed and proved brutish, if we knew that all true Reason is against them. Reason is on Gods side, and that which is against him is not Reason. (We may by Discourse proceed to sin, but the Arguments are all Fallacious that draw us.) There is no Necessity to the committing of a Sin, that Reason or the Un­derstanding should first conclude it Best: so great is the power of Sense upon the Phantasie and Imagination, and of these on the Passions, and the Choosing Power, (especially as to the exci­ting of the Locomotive) that if Reason be but silent and sus­pended, sin will be committed (as a man hath lustfull, and re­vengefull, and covetous desires in his Dream, and that very vio­lent.) [Page] Reason is oft asleep when the senses are awake; and then they may easily play their game: Even as the godliest man can­not restrain a sinfull thought or desire in his Dream, as he can wa­king; so neither when he is waking, if Reason be asleep: Although Reason never take part with sin, yet if it stand neuter, the sin will be committed. Yea that is not all: but if Reason do conclude for Duty and against sin, and stand to that conclusion, yet I think, the sensitive sinfull appetite and imagination may prevail with the Will (unless you will say that this Appetite is the Will it [...]elf, man having but one Will, and so may it self command the Loco­motive) against, as well as without the conclusion of Reason (as in the example before mentioned.)

To understand this you must know, that to the Motion of the Will effectually, (especially where there are violent contrary motions and inducements) it is not only necessary that the un­derstanding say, This is a Duty, or This is a Sin, or, It is better to let it alone: But this must be concluded of as a matter of great importance and concernment; and the understanding must ex­press the Weight, as well as the Truth of what it utters concern­ing Good or Evil: And this must especially be by a strong and forcible Act; or else though it conclude rightly, yet it will not prevail. Many men may have their Understandings informed of the same Duty, and all at the very exercise conclude it Good and necessary: and so concerning the evil of sin: And yet though they all pass the same conclusion, they shall not all alike prevail with the Will; but one more, and another less: because one pas­seth this conclusion seriously, vigorously, importunately; and the other slightly, and sleepily, and remisly. If you be busie, writing or reading; and one friend comes to you to call you away to some great business, and useth very weighty Arguments, yet if he speak them coldly and sleepily, you may perhaps not be moved by him: but if another come and call you but upon a lesser business, and speak loud and earnestly and will take no deniall, though his Rea­sons be weaker, he may sooner prevail. Do we not feel that the words of a Preacher do take more with our Wills and Affections, from the moving patheticall manner of expression, then from the strength of Argument (except with very wise men:) at least, how much that furthers it; when the best Arguments in the mouth of a sleepy Preacher, or unseasonably and illfavouredly delivered, [Page] will not take. And why should we think that there is so great a difference between other mens Reasonings prevailing with our Wils, and our own Reasons way of prevailing? (But I must check my digressing Pen, which creeps away to Controversies before I am well aware.)

Now all this being so, that there must be a strong, lively, loud, pressing, importunate Reasoning, and not only a True Reasoning and concluding; hence it is that there is necessary to the soul, not only so much Illumination as may discover the Truth; but so much as may discover it cleerly and fully; and may shew us the weight of the matter, us well as the Truth: and especially as may be still an exciter of the Understanding to do its duty, and may quicken it up to do it vigorously: And therefore to this end Christ giveth his Spirit to his people, to strive against the flesh. The soul is seated in all the body, but we certainly and sensibly perceive that it doth not exercise or Act alike in all: but it understandeth in and by the Brain or Animal spirits: and it Willeth, and Desi­reth, and Loveth, and Feareth, and Rejoiceth in and by the Heart: And doubtless the vital spirits, or those in the Heart, are the Souls Instrument in this work. Now to procure a Motion of the spi­rits in the Heart, by the foremotion of the spirits in the brain, re­quires some strength in the first motion; and the more forcible it is, likely the more forcible will the motion in the heart be. This order and Instrumentality in Acting, is no disparagement to the soul; but is a sweet discovery of Gods admirable and orderly works. (But yet I must recall my self.) Now therefore besides a bare Act of understanding, there is necessary to this effectuall prevailing with the Will, that there be added that which we call Consideration, which is a dwelling upon the subject, and is a se­rious, fixed, constant Acting of the understanding, which there­fore is likely to attain the effect: The use of this, and its Power on the Will and Affections, and the Reasons, I have shewed you afterward in the 4th Part of this Book. Hence it is, that let their wit be never so great, yet Inconsiderate men are ever Wicked men: and men of sober frequent Consideration, are usually the most Godly, and prevail most against any Temptation: there be­ing no more effectuall means against any temptation indeed, whether it be to Omission or Commission, then this setting Rea­son forcibly awork by Consideration. The most Considerate men [Page] are the most Resolved and Confirmed. So that besides a bare cold conclusion of the understanding (though you call it Practicall) this Consideration must give that Force, and Fixedness, and Im­portunity to your Conclusions, which may make them stronger then all the sensitive solicitations to the contrary, or else the Soul will still follow the Flesh. Now Christ will have his Spirit to ex­cite this Consideration, and to enable us to perform it more pow­erfully and successfully, then else we should ever do. And thus the spirit is Christs solicitor in and to our souls; and by them it advanceth Christs Interest, and maintaineth it in the Saints, and causeth it to prevail against the Interest of the Flesh. Where he prevaileth not in the main, as well as striveth, there is yet no sa­ving Grace in that soul. Whatever pleadings, or strivings, or rea­sonings, or concludings there may be in and by the soul on▪ Christs side, yet if the Fleshes Interest be still greater and stronger in the soul then Christs, that soul is in a state of wrath: He may be in a hopefull way to come to a safer condition, and not far from the Kingdom of God, and almost perswaded to be a Christian: but if he die in that state, no doubt, he shall be damned. He may be a Christian by common profession; but in a saving sense, no man is a Christian, in whose soul any thing hath a greater and higher Interest then God the Father and the Mediator.

§ 11 SECT. XII.
Prop 12 Propos. 12. THerefore the sincerity of saving Grace, as saving, li­eth materially, not in the bare Nature of it; but in the Degree: Not in the Degree considered Absolutely in it self; but comparatively as it is prevalent against its Contrary.

I cannot expect that the Reader should suddenly Receive this Truth (though of so great consequence that many mens salvati­ons are concerned in it, as I shall shew anon) till I have first made it plain. Long have I been poaring on this Doubt, Whether the sincerity of Grace, and so the Difference between an Hypocrite, and a true Christian do consist in the Nature, or only in the De­gree: Whether it be a Gradual or Specifical difference? And I never durst conclude that it lay but in the Degree; 1. Because of the seeming force of the Objections, which I shall anon an­swer. [Page] And, 2. Because of the constant contrary Judgement of all those Divines, whom I highliest valued. (For though I am asha­med of my own Ignorance, yet I do not repent that I received some things upon trust from the Learned, while I was learning and studying them; or that I took them by a Humane Faith, when I could not reach to take them by a Divine Faith. Only I then must hold them but as Opinions, but not Absolutely as Ar­ticles of my Creed.) But I am now convinced of my former mi­stake; and shall therefore endeavour to rectifie others, being in a matter of such moment.

You must remember therefore that I have shewed you already. that God hath not made any Act considered in its meer Nature, without considering it as in this prevailing degree, to be the con­dition of Salvation; and that a wicked man may perform an Act for the Nature of it, which a true Christian may do. But let us yet consider the Proposition more distinctly.

Divines use to give the title of saving Grace to four things;

The first is, Gods Purpose of saving us, and the special Love and Favour which he beareth to us, and so his Will to do us special Good. This is indeed most principally, properly, and by an excellency, called, saving Grace. It is the fountain from which all other Grace doth proceed: and, by this Grace we are Elected, Re­deemed, Justified and Saved. Now the Question in hand is not concerning this Grace which is Immanent in God; where no doubt there is no specifical difference; when Divines accord that there is no diversity or multiplicity at all, but perfect Unity (al­lowing still the unsearchable Mystery of the Trinity:) Therefore I rest confident that no solid Divine will say, that Gods common Love or Grace to the unsanctified, doth by a natural Specifica­tion differ from his special Love and Grace to his chosen; (as they are in God.)

The second thing which is commonly called Saving Grace, is the Act of God by which the Spirit infuseth or worketh the spe­cial habitual saving Gifts in the soul: Not the Effect (for that I shall next mention;) but the Act of the holy Ghost which worketh this Effect. This is called Gratia Operans, working Grace, as the Effect in us, is called, Grati [...] Operata, Grace wrought in us. Now

1. This is none of it that we enquire after in the Question in [Page] hand, when we ask, Whether the Truth of Grace lie onely in the Comparative or Prevailing Degree?

2. If it were, yet there is here no place for such a doubt. 1. Be­cause no man can prove such natural specifique difference in the Acts of God; nor will I think affirm them. 2. Especially be­cause in the Judgement of great Divines, there is no such Act of God at all distinct from his Essence and Immanent Eternal Acts: So that this is the same with the former. God doth not need, as man, to put forth any Act but his meer Willing it, for the pro­ducing of any Effect. If man will have a stone moved, his Will cannot stir it, but it must be the strength of his arm. But God doth but Will it, and it is done: (As Dr Twiss once or twice saith: But Bradwardine and others fully confirm) Now Gods will is his Essence: and he never did begin or cease to Will any thing, though he Will the Beginning or Ceasing of things. He Willed the Creation of the World, and the Dissolution of it at once from Eternity: though he willed from Eternity that it should be Created and Dissolved in time: And so the Effect on­ly doth begin and end, but not the Cause. This is our ordinary Metaphysical Divinity: If any vulgar Reader think it beyond his capacity, I am content that he move in a lower Orb. But doubt­less we must not feign a natural specifique difference of Acts in God.

The third thing which we commonly call Saving Grace, is, The special Effects of this Work of the Spirit on the Soul, com­monly called Habitual Grace, or the Spirit in us, or the Seed of God abiding in us; or our Real Holinesse, or our New Nature.

Now, 1. Our Question is not directly and immediately of this, Whether Common and Special Grace do differ more then by the fore­mentioned Degree? For this is not it which a Christian searcheth after immediately or directly in his Self-examination. For Ha­bits (as Suarez and others conclude) are not to be felt in them­selves, but only by their Acts. We cannot know that we are di­sposed to Love God, but by feeling the stirrings of Love to him. So that it is the Act that we must directly look for, and thence di­scern the Habit.

2. But if any m [...]n will needs put the Question, of this Habitu­al Grace only, though it be not it that I speak of principally, yet I answer him, That no man doubteth but that common Grace [Page] containeth good Dispositions; as special Grace containeth Ha­bits. Now who knoweth not that a Disposition and a Habit do differ but in Degree? A carnal man hath a weak Inclination to Good, and a strong Inclination to Evil: Or, if you will speak properly (for the Will cannot choose Evil as Evil, but as a seem­ing Good) he hath a weak Inclination to Spiritual and Heaven­ly Superiour Good; and a strong Inclination to Fleshly, Earth­ly, Inferiour Good: Whereupon the Stronger bears down the Weaker. But the Regenerate have stronger Inclinations to Supe­riour Spiritual Good, then to Inferiour Fleshly Good, and so the stronger in most Temptations prevaileth. Now what natural difference is here, but only in Degree?

The fourth thing which we call Saving Grace, is, The exercise or Acts which from these Habits or Effectual Inclinations do proceed. And this is the Grace which the Soul must enquire after directly in his Self-examination. And therefore this is it of which we raise the Question, Wherein the Truth or Sincerity of it doth con­sist? (There is indeed other things without us which may yet be called Saving Grace, as Redemption and Donation (commonly called the Imputation) of Christs Righteousness, and so Remis­sion, Justification, &c. but because every one may see that our Question is not of these, I will not stand to make more mention of them.) Now for these Acts of Grace, who can produce any Natural Specifique difference between them when they are speci­al and saving, and when they are common and not saving? Is not common Knowledge and special Knowledge, common Be­lief and special Belief, all Knowledge and Belief? And is not Belief the same thing in one and in another? supposing both to be Real, though but one saving? Our Understandings and Wils are all Physically of the like substance, and an Act and an Act, are Acci­dents of the same kind; and we suppose the Object to be the same? Common Love to God, and Special saving Love to God be both Acts of the Will.

But here before I proceed further I must tell you, That you must still distinguish between a Physical or Natural Specification, and a Moral: And remember, That our Question is onely of a Physical difference, which I deny; and not of a Moral, which I make no doubt of. And you must know that a meer difference in Degrees in the Natural respect, doth ordinarily constitute a [Page] specifical Difference in Morality: And the Moral Good or Evil of all our Actions lieth much in the Degree, to wit, that they be kept in the mean between the two extream Degrees. And so a little anger, and a great deal, and little Love to creatures, and a great deal, though they differ but Gradually in their Natures, yet they differ Specifically in Morality; so that one may be an excellent virtue, and the other an odious vice; So between speak­ing too much, and too little: Eating or drinking too much or too little: The middle between these is a Virtue: and both ex­treams are Vices: and yet Naturally they differ but in Degree. Virtue as Virtue, consisteth not in the bare Nature of an Act: but Formally it consisteth in the agreement or conformity of our Actions or Dispositions to the Rule or Law (which determineth of their Duenesse) which Law or Rule prescribeth the Mean (or middle degree) and forbiddeth and condemneth both the ex­treams (in degree) where such extreams are Possible, and we capable of them. So that there is a very great Moral difference (such as may be termed specifique) between those Acts which Naturally do differ only in Degree. I say, a Moral specifical dif­ference is usually founded in a Natural Gradual difference. If you confound these two specifications, you will lose your selves in this Point.

Furthermore observe, that I say that sincerity of Grace, as sa­ving, lieth in the Degree, not Formally, but, as it were [Mate­rially] only. - For I told you before, the Form of it consisteth in their being, the Condition on which Salvation is promised. The form which we enquire after, is a Relation. As the Relati­on of our Actions to the Precept, is the form of their Virtuous­ness, viz. when they are such as are commanded: so the Rela­tion of them to the Promise is the Form of them as [Saving] and so as [Justifying.] But because this Promise giveth not Sal­vation to the Act considered in its meer Being, and Natural sin­cerity, but to the Act as suted to its Object in its Essential re­spects; and that sutableness of the Act to the form of its Object consisteth onely in a certain Degree of the Act, seeing the lowest Degree cannot be so suted; Therefore I say that sincerity l [...]eth, as it were materially, only in the Degree of those Acts, and not in the bare nature and being of it.

Lastly, Consider especially, that I say not that Sincerity lieth [Page] in the Degree of any Act in it self considered: as if God had pro­mised Salvation to us, if we Love him so much, or up to such a height, considered Absolutely: But it is in the Degree consider­ed Comparatively, as to God compared with other things, and as other Objects or Commanders stand in competition with him: and so it is in the Prevalency of the Act or Habit against all con­traries.

§ 13 SECT. XIII.

HAving thus explained my meaning herein, the clearing of all this to you, and fuller confirmation, will be best dis­patched these three waies. 1. By exemplifying in each particu­lar Grace, and trying this Rule upon them severally. 2. By ex­amining some of the most Ordinary Marks, which have been hi­therto delivered, and Christians use to take comfort in. 3. By enquiring what Scripture saith in the Point. And after these I shall answer the Objections that are against it, and then shew you the Usefulness and Necessity of it, and Danger of the con­trary.

1. The Graces of the Spirit in mans Soul, are either in the Un­derstanding, or in the Will and Affections. Those in the Under­standing (as Knowledge, Prudence, Assent to Gods Word, cal­led Faith, &c.) I make no Question, are as truly Graces, and as proper to the Saints as those in the Will and Affections. Divers erre here on both extreams. Some say, That there is no special Grace in the Understanding, but in the Will only. Others say that all special Grace is in the Understanding, and that the Will is capable of nothing but Freedom to Choose or Refuse; and that it ever follows the last dictate of the practical Understand­ing, and therefore no more is needfull but to inform the Under­standing, Others say, both Understanding and Will are the sub­ject of special sanctifying Grace, and that in both it must be sought after, and may be discerned. Between these extreams, I conceive this is the Truth: Both Understanding and Will (that is, the whole soul which both Understandeth and Willeth) is truly sanctified where either is truly sanctified: and the several Acts of this sanctified soul, are called several actual Graces: But [Page] though Grace be in both Faculties (as they are called) yet is it certainly discernable onely in the Will, and not in the Under­standing. For all Acts as they are meerly in the Understanding are but imperfectly Virtuous, being but Preparatory and Intro­ductory to the Will, where they are digested and perfected, as I said before. Dr Stoughton's words are these [As for my own part, I could never comprehend that which Divines have gone about, to be able to put a Characteristical difference in the Nature of Knowledge, that a man may be able to say Such a Knowledge is, and such a Knowledge is not a saving Knowledge. But only, as I use to expresse it (the Sun is the greater Light, but the Moon hath greater Influence on waterish Bodies:) So Knowledge, let it be what it will, if it be good and saving, it hath an influence on the Soul. There may be a great deal of Knowledge which is not Vital and Practical; which carrieth not the Heart and Affections along with it: and they that have it, have not saving Knowledge. But they that have the least degree of Knowledge, so it be such as hath an Influence to draw the Heart and Affections along with it, to Love God, and Obey God, it is solid and saving Knowledge.] So Dr Stoughton in his Righteous mans plea to Happiness, p. 38, 39.

And for my part I know no Mark drawn from the meer nature of Knowledge, or Belief, or any meer Intellectual Act, by which we can discern it from what may be in an unholy person: Those that think otherwise, use to say, that the Knowledge and Belief which is saving is Deep, Lively, Operative, &c. I doubt not but this is true: But how by the Depth we shall discern the saving sincerity directly, I know not: Or how to discern it in the Liveliness or Operativeness, but only in its Operations and Ef­fects on the Will and Affections, I know not. Whether it be so Deep and Lively as to be saving, must not be discerned immedi­ately in it self, but in its v [...]tal prevalent Operations on the Will. So that I shall dismiss all the meer Acts of the Understanding out of this Enquiry, as being not such as a Christian can try himself immediately by. And for them that say otherwise, they place the sincerity of them in the Depth and Liveliness, that is, in the Degree of Knowledge and Belief. For no doubt a wicked man may Know and Believe every particular Truth, which a Christi­an doth Believe. Some Learned men I have heard affirm indeed, That no wicked man can Believe Scripture to be the Word of [Page] God; but that's a fancy that I think needs no confutation; The Devils beleeve it no doubt. If any say, that saving Knowledge is Experimental, and other is not,

I answer, 1. Of matters of meer faith we have no experience: as that Christ is the second Person, was Incarnate, Crucified, Bu­ried, Rose again, &c.

2. Of common practicals wicked men have experience: as that the world is deceitful, that man is prone to sinne, that Satan must be resisted, &c.

3. For those other special Internal Experiences which deno­minate a Christians Knowledge Experimental, the Mark of since­rity lieth in the experienced thing it self, rather then the Know­ledge of it. For example, a Christian knows experimentally what the New-birth is, what it is to Love God, to Delight in him, &c. Now the Mark lieth not properly in his Knowledge of these, but in that Love, Delight and Renovation which he posses­seth and so knoweth.

It follows therefore that we enquire into the Acts of the Will, and see wherein their saving sincerity doth consist. For except the Acts of the Understanding, all that may be called saving is redu­cible to those two words of St Paul, To Will, and To Do. For all the other Acts of the Soul, are nothing but Velle & Nolle: ei­ther exercised on the Object as variously presented and appre­hended (as Absent or Present, Facil or Difficult, &c.) or ex­ercised with that vigour as moveth the spirits in the heart, and de­nominates them Affections or Passions.

First therefore to begin with the proper Act of Willing. Though of our selves without Grace no man ever Willeth God in Christ, yet on this Willing hath God laid our Salvation, more then on any other Qualification or Act in our selves whatsoever. And yet simply to Will God, to Will Christ, to Will Heaven, is not a saving Act. But when God and the Creature stand in com­petition, to Will God above all, and to Will Christ above all, and Heaven before Earth, this is to Will savingly. That is: to Will God as God, the chief Good and Cause of Good: to Will Christ as Christ, the only Saviour and chief Ruler of us: and to Will Heaven as the state of our chief Happiness in the Glorify­ing enjoyment of God. Not that all the sincerity of these Acts lieth in the Ʋnderstandings apprehending God to be the chief [Page] Good and Cause of it: and Christ to be the only Redeemer, &c. For a man may Will that God and that Christ who is thus appre­hended by the Uunderstanding, and yet not Will him as he is thus apprehended. The Uunderstanding may overgo the Will; and the Will not follow the Understanding; and this is no sa­ving Willing. If a man do know and Believe never so much, that God is the chief Good, and do not chiefly Will him (as the Devils may so Believe) it is not saving. Yea it is a great Question, Whe­ther many do not Will God (not only who is apprehended to be the Supream Good, but also) as he is apprehended to be the Supream Good, and yet Love something else more then him, which they know, not to be the chief Good, but against their Knowledge are drawn to it by the force of sensuality, and so these men perish for all their Willing. For certainly, if God have not ordinarily the prevailing part of the Will, that mans state is not good. When I say such men Will God [as] appre­hended to be the chief Good, I mean, they Will him under such a Notion, but not with an Act of Will answering that Notion. I refer the term [as] to the understandings apprehension, but not so to the Wils action as if it loved him as the chief Good should be loved or willed: for that's it, that is wanting, for which they perish. I propound this to the Consideration of the Judicious; for it is certainly worth our Consideration. It depends on the common Question, Whether the Will ever follow the last dictate of the Practical Intellect, which I shall handle elswhere. What I have said of Willing, you may easily perceive, may be said of Desire and Love, which are nothing but Willing. Love is an in­tense absolute Willing of Good as Good: Desire also is a Wil­ling it as a Good not yet enjoyed. Therefore the saving sincerity of both lieth in the same point: Many that perish Desire God, and Christ, and Heaven; and Love God, and Christ, and Hea­ven: but they desire and love some Inferiour Good more: He that desireth and loveth God sincerely and savingly, desireth him and loveth him above all things else: and there lieth his sin­cerity.

I need not instance in Hope, Fear, Hatred, or any of the Acts or Passions of the Irascible: For they are therefore good because they set against the Difficulty which is in the way of their attain­ment to that Good which they Will and Love: and so their chief [Page] Virtuousness lieth in that Will or Love which is contained in them, or supposed to them. A wicked man may Fear God, but the Fear of men or temporal evils is more prevalent in the trial. He may have an Aversation of his minde from sinne, or some low Degree of Hatred, as it is known to him to be evil, and to hurt him: but his Love to it is greater, and prevaileth against his Ha­tred. If any doubt whether a wicked man may have the least Hatred of sin, (yea as sin, or as displeasing to God) we are sure of it two wayes.

1. By daily experience of some Drunkards, that when they are considering how much they sinne against God, and wrong themselves, their hearts rise against their own sin (especially if the temptation be out of sight) and they will weep, and be rea­dy to tear their own flesh: And yet yield to the next temptation, and live weekly in the committing of the sin.

2. By the experience of our own hearts before our Sanctifica­tion (those that were not sanctified in Infancy:) many have felt that their hearts had some weak degree of dislike and hatred to the sin that captivated them. And I know divers Swearers and Drunkards that do so hate the same sins in their children, that they are ready to fall on them violently if they commit them.

3. And we may know it by reason too. For whatsoever a man may know to be evil, that his Will may have some hatred (or aversation) towards: (though not enough) But a wicked man may know sin to be Evil: Therefore he may have some hatred to it. The Will may sure follow the Understanding a little way, though it do not farre enough. But me thinks those should not contradict this, that are for the Wils constant determination by the Understanding.

The like I may say also of Repentance: so much of it as lieth in the Will; that is, the Wills turning from Inferiour Good (which it formerly chose) to God the supream Good, whom it now chooseth. The sincerity of this lieth in the prevailing De­gree. For if it be not such a Change as carryeth the Will more now to God then the Creature, but to God a little, and to the Creature still more, it is not saving. And if it be not a choosing of God before the Creature, though it be a choosing of God in the second place, it will not serve turn. And for that Repen­tance which consisteth in a sorrow for sin, 1. If it be not to such a [Page] Degree, that it prevail over our Delight in sin and Love to it, it is not saving. Many wicked men do daily repent and sin: I have known men that would be drunk almost daily, and some seven or eight daies continue in one fit of drunkenness before ever they were sober, and yet lament it with tears and pray daily against it; and being men of much knowledge and able parts, would con­fess it and condemn themselves in very moving language, and yet no means could keep them from it, but they have lived in it some ten some twenty years. Who dare think that this was true Re­pentance, when the Apostle concludes, If ye live after the flesh ye shall die, Rom. 8. 6, 13. 2. Yet I must tell you, that all these Graces which are expressed by Passions, as Sorrow, Fear, Joy, Hope, Love, are not so certainly to be tried by the Passion that is in them, as by the Will that is either contained in them, or supposed to them: not as Acts of the sensitive, but of the Rational appetite. I will not here stand on the Question, Whether Grace be in the sensitive or Rational appetite, as its subject, or both: Burgersdicius and o­thers, say, that Moral Virtue is in the sensitive only: but some­thing like it in the Will: but Theologicall Virtues are in the Will. But doubtless if he do prove Moral Virtue to be in the sen­sitive, he will prove a proportionable measure of Theological Virtue, to be there too. For there is no Virtue, truly so called, which is not Theological as well as Moral.

But if there be any doubt whether an unregenerate man may perform the same Acts as a true Christian, it will be especially a­bout the two great and principal graces of Faith and Love. And for that of Faith, I have said enough before. It consisteth (according to the Judgement of most Reformed Divines) partly in the Un­derstanding, partly in the Will. As it is in the Understanding it is called Assent or Belief: And for this I have shewed before, that a wicked man may have it in some degree▪ and that Grace as it is in the Understanding cannot be discerned directly; but only as it thence produceth those Acts in the Will wherein it may be discerned. There is no one Truth which a true Christian may know, but a wicked man may also know it (though not with that lively degree of Knowledge which will over-rule the Heart and Life.) Nor is there any one Truth which a true Christian may Believe, but a wicked man may also Believe it. If any deny this, let them name me one. And do not our Divines confess [Page] as much against the Papists, who place Faith in bare Assent? And And do they not expound James (the devils Believe) of such an Assent? If this were not so, it were an easier matter to try and know ones own sincerity, and so to have Assurance of Salvation. For we might presently name such or such an Axiom (as, that The Scripture is the Word of God, or the like,) and ask whether we do Know or Believe this to be True? and so might quickly be re­solved. For it is the Heart (or Will) that is deceitfull above all things: but the bare Acts of the Understanding, may more easily be discerned; as whether we Know or Assent to such an Axiom, or not: (Though I know also that even the Understanding par­ticipateth of the guilefulnes, and may be somewhat strange to it self.)

But some will say, that no wicked man can Believe the pardonQuamvis quis non habet veram & salvificam in Christo fidem, pote [...]t tamen in professione & doctrina verita­tis, bonam habere conscientiam, ita ut sciat veram esse illam doctri­nam quam profi­tetur & doc [...]t, &c. Triglandi­us de Trina Gratia pag. 943 of his own sins; or assent to the truth of this Axiome [My sins are pardoned.] Answ. I confess so many have harped on this string heretofore, that I am ashamed that the Papists should reade it in our writings, and thereby have that occasion of hardening them in their Errors, and of insulting over the Reformed Doctrine. I confess no wicked man (in sensu composito) can Believe for the pardon of sin; or hath such a Faith as pardon is promised to: But that they may Believe their sins are pardoned, and seriously be­lieve it, did not Error make it necessary, I should be ashamed to bestow any words to prove it. 1. A wicked man may (in my judgement, without any great difficulty) Believe an untruth, especially which he would fain have to be true (though every untruth he cannot believe:) But this is an untruth to every wicked man [that his sins are pardoned] (or even by the Anti­nomians confession it is untrue of all wicked men not elected;) and an untruth which he would fain have to be true: (for what man is so perverse in his fancies, as to doubt whether a wicked man would have his sins pardoned?) therefore he may Believe it. 2. That which is one of the chief pillars in the kingdom of the devil, and the master, deceiving, damning sin, is not sure incon­sistent with a wicked mans condition: But even such is the un­grounded Belief that his sins are pardoned (commonly called pre­sumption, and false faith:) Therefore, &c. 3. If it be the main work of a skilfull, faithfull Ministry, to beat wicked men from such an ungrounded Belief, and experience tels us that all means [Page] will hardly to it; (and yet that God doth it on all before he bring them by the Ministry to true Conversion,) then sure it is more then possible for a wicked man to have such a Belief. But Scripture, and a world of lamentable experience proves the An­tecedent (what do such Writings as Hookers, Boltons, Whateleys, &c. else drive at?) Therefore, &c. 4. Yea that the pardon of sin is not properly Credendum or a Material Object of Faith, I have proved elsewhere, and therefore need not stand on it now.

2. And for those Acts of Faith which are directly in and by the Will, I know not one of them (considered in the nature of the Act, without the prevalent Degree) which a wicked man may not perform. For the most proper and immediate Act [Wil­ling] which containeth a Choice of Christ and a Consent that he shall be ours, together with his Benefits, this I have before made manifest to be consistent with an unregenerate state. If any will affirm that a wicked man cannot be Willing to have pardon of all his sins, Justification and Salvation from hell, I think it not worth my writing six lines to confute them; sense will do it suf­ficiently. That this man cannot Desire, or Choose, or Will Holi­ness, and Glory with Christ more heartily, strongly and prevail­ingly then his pleasures or inferiour good, I easily acknowledge:Notitiam & Assensum quen­dam non Calvi­nus tantum, sed & Remonstr. ipsi tribuunt etiam Daemonibus. Fi­ducia male fun­dat [...], electionis opinio, & fructus evanidi, qui sine bono & hon [...]sto corde existunt, non magis argu­unt temporarios esse vere fideles, quam similitudo probat simiā esse ex genere huma­no. Amesius Antisynod. in Art. 5. c. 3. pag. (mihi) 354. For in that gradual defect consisteth his unsoundness. But that he may Will, Choose, Accept or Desire Holiness and Glory in a second place, next to his carnal delights or inferiour good, is to me beyond doubt. And accordingly for the obtaining of these, he may Will or Accept of Christ himself that gives them. This I shall prove anon, when we speak of Love.

And for that Act of Faith which most affirm to be peculiarly the Justifying Act, that is, Affiance, Resting on Christ, Recumben­cy, Adherence, Apprehension of him, &c. these (almost all Meta­phoricall) terms, contain not one, but many Acts, all which are most frequently found in the ungodly. For we undoubtedly know it, 1. by experience of our selves whilest we were in their state, 2. and by constant experience of the vilest sinners, that they not only undissemblingly Rest on Christ (that is, Trust ve­rily to be pardoned and saved by him, and expect it from him,) but also that this is the strongest encouragement to them in sin­ning, and we have need to lay all our batteries against this Bul­work of Presumption. Alas, to the grief of my soul, my frequent [Page] and almost daily experience forceth me to know this, whatsoeverLearned Rivet saith the very same as I of the difference between a tem­porary & true Believer. Dis­crimen ergo in­ter cos & vere fideles hoc est, quod quamvis utri{que} ex animo verbum ample­ctantur, non ta­men utri{que} ex tali animo, quo aliis omnibus verbum praefe­ratur, Nam [...] le­viter & per­functorie cre­dunt, &c. unde est quod vitam suam amant plus quam Christum: fi­at{que} ut s [...]i sint, nec sibi ca­veant ab infidils Diaboli: deinde ut in pr [...]ibus▪ gratiarum acti­one, & omnibus erga proximum officiis languidi fiant, & re­missi: Cum Ju­stificans Fides etiam Imbecil­la, sollicita sit, nec credentem animo elato esse sinat; studi­um{que} precum excitet, illud{que} anxium & intentum. Rivet. Disput. de Persever. Sanct. §. 16. pag. 210, 211. men write from their speculations to the contrary. I labour with my utmost skill to convince common Drunkards, Swearers, Worldlings, &c. of their misery, and I cannot do it for my life: and this false faith is the main reason. They tell me [I know I am a sinner, and so are you, and all, as well as I, but if any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righ­teous: I put my whole trust in him, and cast my salvation on him, for he that Believeth in him shall not perish, but have everlast­ing Life.] If I tell them of the nature of true Faith, and the ne­cessity of Obedience, They answer me that they know their own hearts better then I, and are sure they do really Rest on Christ and trust him with their Souls; and for Obedience they will mend as well as they can, and as God will give them Grace; and in the mean time they will not boast as the Pharisee, but cry, Lord be mercifull to me a sinner: and that I shall never drive them from Believing and Trusting in Christ for Mercy, because they be not so good as others, when Christ tels them, that men are not Justified by Works, but by Faith, and he that believeth shall be saved.] This is the case of the most notorious sinners (many of them) and I am most confident, they speak as they think: and from this ungrounded confidence in Christ, I cannot remove them. Where now is any difference in the nature of this Affiance, and that of true Believers? If you say, that it brings not forth fruit, and therefore is unsound, that's true: but that's only an extrin­secall difference in the effects, and speaks not the difference in the nature of the Act it self. But I have spoken of this more fully else­where.

But the greatest doubt is, whether in Loving God and Christ as Mediator, there be not more then a gradual difference between the regenerate and unregenerate? And I shall shew you that there is not. For it is undeniable that an unholy person may Love God and the Mediator: and as undeniable that they cannot Love God above all, till they are Regenerate. The later I take for granted: The former if any deny is thus proved. 1. That which the Understanding apprehendeth to be Good, both in it self and to the person, that the Will may in some measure Love. But an unregenerate mans Understanding may apprehend God to be [Page] Good both in himself and to the person: Therefore he may in some measure Love him. That wicked men may Believe that God is Good, is no more to be doubted of, then that they may Believe there is a God. For he that Believeth there is a God, must needs believe that he is Good. And that he may Believe that God is Good to him, also is evident thus. 1. Men know that they have all their temporal corporal Mercies from God (which are to them the sweetest of all;) and therefore for these, and the continuance of them they may apprehend God to be Good to them, and so love him. 2. And Scripture and constant experience tels us, that it is usuall with wicked men, not only to apprehend the goodness of prosperity, but thence mistakingly to gather, that God doth specially favour and love them as his people to Salvation. 3. Also nothing is more common with them almost, then from the thoughts of Gods Mercifulness and Goodness, and from mistaking seeming evidences in themselves, to conclude most confidently that their sins are pardoned, and that God will not condemn them, but will save them as certainly as any other. Also that Christ having died in their stead, and made satisfaction for all their sins, they shall through him be pardoned, Justified and Saved. Many a wicked man doth as confidently Believe that God loveth him through Christ, and doth as confidently thank God daily in his prayers for Vocation, Adoption, Justification, and assured hope of Glory, as if they were all his own indeed. Nay out of the apprehensions of some extraordinary Love and Mercy of God to him above others, he oft giveth thanks as the Pharisee, Lord, I thank thee, that I am not as this Publican. And doubtless all these apprehensions of Love may produce some Love to God again. As the grounded Faith and Hope of the Godly produceth a solid saving Love, so the ungrounded Faith and Hope of the wicked, produceth a sleight and common Love, a­greeable to the cause of it. As Christ hath a common Love to the better sort of wicked men more then to the worst (he look­ed on the young man, (Mark 10. 21, 22.) and Loved him, and said, Thou art not far from the Kingdom of God) so may such men have a common love to Christ, and that above the ordinary sort of the ungodly. For I am perswaded there is no man so wicked among us (who Believeth indeed that Christ is the Son of God and the Saviour) but he hath some love to Christ more or less. [Page] For 4. God hath been pleased to give those advantages to the Christian Religion above all other Religions among us, which may easily procure some Love to Christ from ungodly men. It is the Religion of our Country: It is a credit to be a Christian: It is the Religion of our Ancestors, of our Parents and dearest Friends: It is that which Princes favour, and all men speak well of: Christ is in credit among us: Every man acknowledgeth him to be God, and the Redeemer of the world: And therefore on the same grounds (or better) as a Turk doth love and ho­nour Mahomet, and a Jew Moses, may a wicked Christian in some kinde Love and Honour Christ: yea and venture his life against that man that will speak against him: as Dr Jackson and Mr Pink have largely manifested.

If any object, that it is not God or Jesus Christ that these men Love, but his Benefits: I answer, It is God and the Redeemer for his Benefits. Only here is the unsoundness which undoes them, They Love his inferiour earthly blessings better then him; and for this they perish.

§ 14 SECT. XIV.

HAving thus viewed these severall Graces, and found, that It is the prevalent Degree wherein their Sincerity, as they are Saving, doth consist; I will next briefly try this point upon some of the ordinary Marks of Sincerity besides that are given by Di­vines. In which I shall not speak a word in quarrelling at other mens judgements (for I shall speak but of those that I was wont to make use of my self:) but only what I conceive necessary to prevent the delusion and destruction of souls.

1. One Mark of Sincerity commonly delivered is this: To love the children of God because they are such. I the rather name this because many a soul hath been deluded about it. Multitudes of these that since are turned haters and persecutors of the God­ly, did once, without dissembling, love them. Yea multitudes that are killing them by thousands (when they differ from them in opinion, or stand in the way of their carnal interest) did once love them, and do love others of them still. I have proved be­fore that a wicked man may have some love to Christ, and then [Page] no doubt but he may have some love to a Christian, and that for his sake. Quest. But may he love a Godly man for his godliness? Answ. Yes, no doubt: Those before-mentioned did so. If a wic­ked man may have some degree of love to godliness, then he may have some degree of love to the Godly for it: But that he may have some degree of love to godliness is evident, 1. by experience of others, and of the Godly before conversion, who know this was their own case. 2. The understanding of an ungodly man may know that Grace and Godliness is good, and therefore his Wi [...]l may in some degree choose and affect it. 3. That which drew moral Heathens so strongly to love men for their Virtue and Devotion, the same principle may as well draw a man that is bred among Christians, to love a Christian for his Virtues and Devotion to Christ.

Object. But doth not the Scripture say, that we know we are translated from death to life, because we love the Brethren?

Answ. Yes, But then you may easily know it speaks of sincere Love. So it saith, Whosoever believeth shall be saved: And yet Matth. 13. Christ sheweth that many Believe who yet fall away and perish for want of deep rooting. So that the Sincerity of this love also lieth in the Degree, and therefore when the pro­mise is made to it, or it made a mark of true Christians, you must still understand it of that Degree which may be called Sincere and Saving. The difference lieth plainly here. An unsound Christian, as he hath some Love to Christ, and Grace and Godli­ness, but more to his Profits or Pleasures or Credit in the world▪ so he hath some Love to the Godly (as such, being convinced that the Righteous is more excellent then his neighbour;) but not so much as he hath to these carnal things. Whereas the sound Christian, as he Loves Christ and Grace above all worldly things; so it is Christ in a Christian that he so Loves, and the Christian for Christs sake, above all such things. So that when a carnal professor will think it enough to If a brother or sister be naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you say to them, Depart in peace; be [...]ou warmed and fil­led: but give them not those things which are needfull to the body, &c. Jam. 2. 15, 16. Hereby perceive we the Love of God, because he laid down his life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the Brethren. But who so hath this worlds good, and seeth his brother have need, and shut­teth up his bow­els of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? Let us not Love in word and tongue, but in deed and in Truth. 1 Joh. 3. 16, 17, 18. wish them well, but will not hazzard his worldly happiness for them (if he were called to it) the Sincere Believer will not only Love them, but Relieve them, and value them so highly, that if he were called to it, he would part with his Profits or Pleasures for their sakes. For example, In Queen Marier daies, when the Martyrs were condemned to the fire, there were many Great men that really loved them, and [Page] wished them well, and their hearts grieved in pity for them, as knowing them to be in the right: But yet they loved their Ho­nour and Wealth and Safety so much better, that they would sit on the Bench, yea and give sentence for their burning, for fear of hazzarding their Worldly happiness. Was this Sincere Saving Love to the Brethren? Who dare think so? especially in them that went on to do thus. Yet what did it want but a more in­tense degree, which might have prevailed over their love to car­nal things? Therefore Christ will not at the last Judgement, en­quire after the bare act of Love: but whether it so far prevailed over our Love to carnal interest, as to bring us to Relieve, Clothe, Visit them, &c. (and Christ in them) that is, to part with these things for them when we are called to it. Not that every man that loves the Godly is bound to give them all he hath in their necessity: For God hath directed us in what order to bestow and lay out our estates; and we must begin at our selves, and so to our families, &c. so that God may call for our estates some other waies. But (mark it, you false hearted worldlings) he that doth not so much love the ordinary sort of the Godly (and Christ in them) as that he can finde in his heart to bestow all his worldly substance for their relief, if God did not require him otherwise to expend it, this man hath no saving Love to the God­ly. If therefore you would not cheat your selves (as multitudes in this age have done) about your Love to the Brethren, try not by the bare act, but by the radicated prevalent degree of your Love.

2. Another ordinary Mark of Sincerity is this, [When a man is the same in secret before God alone, as he is in publike before men: making conscience of secret as well as open duties.] But, no doubt, as many a godly man may be the more restrained from sin, and incited to Good, from publike (and perhaps carnal) mo­tives, and so may be better in appearance publikely then he is in secret (for all men have some hypocrisie in them;) so many an unregenerate man may make conscience of secret duties as well as open; yea even of the thoughts of his heart. But still both se­cret duties and open are at the dispose of his carnal interest; for he will follow them no further then is consistent with that: so that this Mark doth but shew a mans sincerity in opposition to gross hypocrisie or dissembling, but not the sincerity of grace as it is saving.

3. Another ordinary Mark of sincerity is thus delivered: [When a man loves the closest and most searching preaching of the Word, and that which putteth on to the highest Degree of Holiness.] If he therefore Love it, because it putteth himself on to the Highest Degree of Holiness, and so far Love it, as that he is Willing to be searched, and put on by it, and if he there­fore come to this Light, that he may know his▪ Evil thereby, that he may mortifie it, and may get Christ and his Interest advan­ced in his Soul; then it is a sign that he hath that Degree which I have mentioned wherein sincerity of saving Grace doth consist: But many a wicked man doth Love a searching Preacher in other respects, and one that draweth men to the highest strain; part­ly, because he may Love to have other men searched, and their Hypocrisie discovered, and be put on to the highest: And part­ly because himself may be of, and delight in the highest strain of Opinion, though his heart will not be true to his Principles. Nay many a man thinks that he may the more safely be a little more indulgent to his Carnal Interest in Heart and Life, because he is of the strictest Opinion: and therefore may Love to hear the strictest Preachers. His Conscience is so blinde and dull in the Application, that he can easily over-look the inconsistency of his Judgement, and his Heart, and Practice. O how glad is he when he hears a rowsing Sermon, because, thinks he, this meets with such a man, or such a man; this fits the profane, and the lower sort of Professors. ▪So that in these respects he may Love a searching Preacher.

4. Another common Mark of Sincerity is [When a man hath no known sin which he is not Willing to part with.] This is a true and sound Mark indeed. For it signifieth not only a dislike, nor only a hatred of sin, but such a Degree as is prevalent in the Will, as I have before described: That Christs Interest in the Will is prevalent over all the Interest of the Flesh. So that this is but in effect the same Mark that I have before delivered. Except this Willingness to part with all sin should be but a cold uncon­stant Wish, which is accompanied with a greater and more preva­lent Love to it, and Desire to enjoy it: and then who dare think that it is any Mark of saving Sincerity? The like I might say of Ha­tred to sin, Love to Good, and many the like Marks: That the Sin­cerity lieth in the prevalent Degree: So also of the Spirit of Pray­er [Page] (which is another Mark) the Spirit of Prayer so far as it is proper to the Saints, lieth in Desire after the things prayed for (with the other Graces which in Prayer are exercised) For an Hypocrite may have as excellent words as the best, and as many of them. Now these Desires must be such prevalent Desires, as is aforesaid.

I think if I could stand to mention all the other Marks of Grace (so far as I remember:) it would appear that the Life and Truth of them all lieth in this one, as being the very point wherein sa­ving sincerity doth consist, viz. in the prevalency of Christs In­terest in the soul above the Interest of Inferiour Good: and so in the Degree, and not in the bare Nature of any Act.

§ 15 SECT. XV.

3. TO this end let us, (but briefly) enquire further into the Scripture-way of discovering Sincerity, and see whether it do not fully confirm what I say. Matth. 10. 37. Christ saith, He that loveth Father or Mother more then me, is not worthy of me, and he that loveth Son or Daughter more then me, &c. So Luk 14. 26. If any man come to me, and hate not (that is, Love them not less) his Father, and Mother, and Wife, and Children, and Bre­thren, and Sisters, and his own Life, he cannot be my Disciple: And whosoever doth not bear his Cross, and come after me, cannot be my Disciple. So vers. 33. Whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not All that he hath, he cannot be my Disciple. Here you see Sincerity is plainly laid, not in meer Love to Christ, but in the preva­lent Degree of Love, as Christ is compared to other things. And for Obedience Christ shews it, Matth. 25. Luk. 19. 20, &c. Therefore Christ saith, Luk. 13. 24. Strive to enter in at the strait gate; for many shall seek to enter, and not be able. Seeking comes short of striving in the Degree. And Paul saith, They which run in a race, run all, but one receiveth the Prize: So run that ye may obtain, 1 Cor. 9. 24. So vers. 26, 27. & Heb. 12. 1. And Christ commandeth, Matth. 6. 33. Seek first the Kingdom of God and his Righteousnesse: Shewing plainly, That the saving Sincerity of our seeking lieth in this comparative Degree; in pre­ferring Gods Kingdom before the things below So he saith, Joh. 6. 27. Labour not for the meat that perisheth (not, in comparison) but for the meat that endureth to Everlasting life, which the Son will [Page] give you. So Heb. 11. 6, 14, 16, 25, 26, 35. & 13. 14. Col. 3. 1. Rom. 2. 7. Luk. 17. 33. & 12. 30, 31. Amos 5. 4, 8, 14. Isa. 58. 2, 3. & 1. 17. Prov. 8. 17. Psal. 119. 2. Also a hundred places might be produ­ced, wherein Christ sets himself still against the world as his com­petitor, and promiseth Life on the Condition that we prefer him [...]efore it. To this end are all those precepts for suffering, and bear­ing the Cross, and denying our selves, and forsaking all. The Merchant that buieth this Pearl must sell All that he hath to buy it (though he give nothing for it.) All the beginning of Rom. 8. as Vers. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14. do fully shew, that our work and warfare lieth in a perpetual combat between the Flesh and Spirit, between their several Interests, Motives, Ends and Desires: and that which prevaileth shews what we are: When the flesh prevaileth finally it is certain Death; and where the Spirit prevaileth, it is certain Life. What can be more plain, then that Sincerity of Grace, as saving, is here placed in the Compa­rative or Prevailing Degree? So also Gal. 5. 17, 24. The Flesh lu­steth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the Flesh, and these are contrary one to the other. But they that are Christs have crucifi­ed the flesh with the affections and lusts thereof. Therefore are we charged, Rom. 13. 14. To make no provision for the Flesh to satisfie its lusts. So 1 Joh. 2. 16. Ephes. 2. 3. Gal. 5. 16, 17, 18, 19. Joh. 1. 13. & 3. 6. And Christ shews fully, Matth. 13. 5, 20, &c. that the difference between those that fall away, and those that persevere proceedeth hence, that one giveth deep Rooting to the Gospel, and the other doth not. The seed is rooted in both, or else it would not bring forth a blade and imperfect fruit: But the stony ground gives it not deep rooting, which the good ground doth. Doth not this make it as plain as can be spoken, that sincerity li­eth in Degree, and not in any Physical difference either of Ha­bits or Acts? The like may be gathered from all those Texts of Scripture, where Salvation is promised to those that Overcome; or on Condition of Overcoming: Not to all that fight; but to all that Overcome: as Revel. 2. 7, 11, 17, 26. & 3. 5, 12, 21. & 21. 7. He that overcometh shall inherit all things, and I will be his God, and he shall be my Son. So 1 Joh. 5. 4, 5. He that is born of God, Over­cometh the world. And they Overcome the wicked One, 1 Joh. 2. 13. & 4. 4. So Luk. 11. 22. And the state of wicked men is described by their being Overcome by sin and the world, 2 Pet. 2. 19, 20. [Page] Fighting is the same Action naturally in both: but the valiant, strong and constant, conquer; when the feeble, faint, and coward­ly, and impatient do turn their backs, and are overcome. So Christ saith, The Kingdom of Heaven suffereth Violence, and the Violent take it by force. Now Violence is not any distinct Action, but a different Degree of Action. Nor can you say, that all these places speak only of outward Action: For no doubt but it is Inward Violence more then outward, and the Inward Actions of the soul intended, more then the Motions of the body, which lay hold on the Kingdom, and make us Conquerours. So the Saints are described in Scripture by such Gradual and Prevalent differing Acts. As David: Whom have I in Heaven but thee? and there is none in Earth that I desire in comparison of thee, Psal. 73. 26, 27. Thy loving kindness is better then life, Psal. 63. 3. The Lord is my Portion, &c. A wicked man may esteem God and his Loving kindness; but not as his Portion, nor better then Life. So the wicked are called Lovers of Pleasure more then God, 2 Tim 3. 4. The Godly may Love Pleasure, but not more then God. The Pharisees Loved the Praise of men more then the Honour which is from God, Joh. 12. 43. A Godly man may Love the Praise of Men; but not More, &c. See also Job 3. 21. & 23. 12. Psal. 47. & 19. 10. & 52. 3. & 119. 72. Very many more Texts might be produced which prove this Point, but these may suffice.

§ 16 SECT. XVI.

5. THe next thing which I have to do, is to answer those§. 16. Objections which may be brought against it, and which, I confess, have sometime seemed of some weight to my self.

Object 1. Do not all Divines say, That it is not the measure of Grace, but the Truth; not the Quantity, but the Quality that we must judge our selves by: and doth not Christ say, That he despiseth not the day of small things, and that he will not quench the smoaking flax; and if we had Faith, which is as a grain of mu­stard-seed, we may do wonders, &c?

Answ. All this is true of sincere Grace, but not of unsincere: Now I have shewed you, that except it be of a prevalent De­gree, it is not savingly sincere. If you Love God a Little, and [Page] the World a great deal more, will any man dare to think that this is a sincere saving Love? When the Scripture saith, He th [...]t loveth the World, the Love of the Father is not in him: that is, there is no sincere saving Love in him: For no doubt the young man had some Love to Christ, that yet forsook him, because he Loved the world more: Or else, 1. Christ would not have lo­ved him; 2. Nor would the man have gone away from him in sorrow. But if you Love Christ ever so little more then the world or inferiour Good, though it be but as a grain of Mustard-seed, it will be saving and Christ will accept it. Cicero can tell you, That Friendship, or the sincerity of Love to a friend, consisteth not in every Act and Degree of undissembled Love. If a man Love you a little, and a thousand men much more, or if he love his wealth so much better then you, that he cannot finde in his heart to be at any loss for your sake, this man is not your friend: He doth truly Love you, but he hath no true sincere Friendship, or Friendly Love to you: For that consisteth in such a Degreee as will enable a man to Do and Suffer for his Friend. If a woman love her Husband without dissembling, but yet Loves twenty men bet­ter, and prostitutes her self to them, she hath true Love, but not true Conjugal Love to her husband: For that consisteth in a high­er Degree. In a word, Lay Christ (as it were) in one end of the☞ Balance in your estimation, and all your carnal Interest, and all Inferiour Good, in the other, and see which you Love most; and every grain of Love which Christ hath from you more then the world and Inferiour things, he will Accept it as sincere: And in this sense, you must not judge of your selves by the Measure of your Grace, but by the Truth: that is, not by any higher Degree, if you have once that Degree which makes it True and saving. And I do not think that you will meet with any sober Divine that will tell you, that if you will Love God never so little with­out dissembling, yet he will Accept it, though you Love your lusts before him. Nor will any sober man tell you, that if you Love the Godly without dissembling, God will accept it, though you love your carnal Interest so much better, that if they hunger or thirst, or are naked, or in want, you cannot finde in your heart to relieve them, or if they be in prison for a good cause, you dare not be seen to visit them.

Obj. 2. But (perhaps you'l say) if this be so, then there is no spe­cifique [Page] difference between Saving Grace and Common.

Answ. I told you before, that you must d [...]stinguish betwixt a Physical specification, and a Moral: The confounding of our Phy­sicks and Ethicks in Divinity, hath made and continued abundance of controversies, and much confusion. In a word, there is a Moral specifique difference grounded but in a Physical Gradual differ­ence, both of Habits and Acts, as is already more fully opened.

Object. 3. But (you may say) if there be but such a difference in Degrees, then how can a man know the truth of his Grace or ever get Assurance. For who can discern just the parting point: who can say, just such a degree of Love or Faith is sincere and saving, and the next Degree short of it, is not?

Answ. This Objection being of most weight, I shall answer it in these Propositions.

1. Where the prevailing Degree is not discernable, there no true Assurance can be had, in an ordinary way. And where it is very hard to discern the Degree, there it will be as hard to get Assurance.

2. Therefore those that have the smallest Degree of saving Grace, do not use to have any Assurance of salvation. Assurance is the Priviledge of stronger Christians, and not of weak ones, or of all that shall be saved. A Little is hardly discernable from none in nature.

3. And it seemeth that the reason of Gods disposal herein is very evident. For if God should let men clearly see the Least mea­sure of Love, Faith, Fear, or Obedience that is saving, and the greatest measure of sin that will stand with sincerity; and say, Just so far thou maist sin, or maist deny me thy Love, and yet be saved and sincere; then it might have been a strong temptation to men to sin as far as ever they may, and to neglect their Graces. I know some will say, That Assurance breeds not security: But that great measure of corruption which liveth with our small measure of Grace, will make Assurance an occasion of security and boldness in sinning. A strong Christian may bear and improve Assurance: but so cannot the weakest. And therefore God useth not to give Assurance to weakest Christians.

But then mistake me not, but remember that by weak Christians I do not mean those that are weak in gifts and common parts and expressions, nor by strong Christians, those that excel in these. [Page] Those are weak Christians that have no more Love to God, nor Desire after Christ, then will just stand with sincerity: and that have as much Love to the world and flesh, and take as much Li­berty to sin, as ever will stand with Salvation. And those are strong Christians, that strongly Love God, and have mortified and mastered their corruptions.

4. Where Grace is thus strong and in a great degree, there it is easily discernable; and therefore to such, Assurance is ordi­nary (except in a fit of Temptation, Revolting, or Desertion.)

5. But the chief part of my Answer is this. It is not the De­gree of Grace Absolutely in it self considered, wherein sincerity☞ doth consist, nor which we must enquire after in trial: But it is the Degree in a Comparative sense; as when we compare God and the Creature, and consider which we Desire, Love, Fear, &c. more; And therefore here it is far easier to try by the De­gree. You know that Gold is not currant, except it be weight, as well as pure mettal. Now if you put your Gold in one end of the scales, and nothing in the other; you cannot judge whether it be weight or no: But if you put the weights against it, then you may discern it. If it be down-right weight, you may dis­cern it without either difficulty or doubt: If it be but a grain over-weight, you may yet discern it: Though it is possible it may be so little, that the scales will scarce turn, and then you will not discern it so easily, which is the heavier end. But if it want much, then you will as easily on the other side, discern the defectiveness. So it is here. If God had said absolutely, So much Love you must have to me, or you cannot be saved, then it were hard to know when we reach the Degree. But you must (as I said) put Christ and Heaven in one end, and all things below in the other, and then you may well finde out the sincerity in the Degree. Every grain that Christ hath more then the creature, is sincere and saving.

§ 17 SECT. XVII.

6. LAstly, having thus given you my judgement in this great Point, I will give you some hint of the necessity of it, and the danger of mistaking in this case.

And, 1. I am certain that the Ignorance of this Point hath occasioned the delusion of Multitudes of men: Even common prophane men (much more those that are not farre from the Kingdom of God) when they hear, that it is not the Quantity or Measure of Grace, that we must try by, but the Quality; and that the least seed or spark is saving as well as the greatest Degree, they are presently confident of the soundness of their estates. Alas, how many have I known thus deceived? when they have heard that the least true Desire is accepted with God for the Deed: They knew that they had Desires that were not counterfeit, and therefore doubted not but God did accept them; when in the mean time their Desires to Pleasure, and Profits, and Honour was so much stronger, that it overcame their weak De­sires after God and Goodness, and made them live in the daily practice of gross sin: And they knew not that the sincerity of their Desire did lie in the prevailing Degree. God doth indeed Accept the Will for the Deed, and the best are fain to cry out with Paul, To Will is present with me, but to Do I finde not (in regard of those higher parts of spiritual Duty, and in the a­voiding of divers Infirmities and Passions:) But then it is only the Prevailing bent, and Act of the Will which is thus accepted.

So have, I know, multitudes been deceived by their small Degree of Love to the Godly, hearing that the least was a cer­tain sign of Grace, and knowing themselves to Love them with­out counterfeiting, who yet have since been carried to be their constant Persecutours, and shed their bloud. The like I may say of other Marks. And doth it not concern people then to be bet­ter grounded in this?

2. And doubtless the mistake of this hath caused many a sin­cere Christian to take up their Comforts on deceitful grounds, which accordingly prove deceitful Comforts, and leave them oft in a sorrowful case (though not in a damnable) when they come to make use of them. Satan knows how to shake such ill-ground­ed Comforts; and he usually doth it in a mans greatest agonies, letting them stand till then, that he may have advantage by their fall for our greater terrour. When he can put a poor Christian to a loss many times that hath the soundest Evidences, what may he doby those that either have none but unsound ones, or know them not at least?

[Page]3. Moreover the Ignorance of this Truth hath caused some Ministers to wrong the Holy God, and abuse poor souls, and misapply the Promises; Absolving those whom God condemn­eth: by mistaking the meaning of that saying, That the least De­gree is saving as well as the greatest: which is true only of the least prevailing Degree; but not of the greatest that is overma­stered by the Prevalency of its contrary.

4. And to my knowledge this hath been no small hinderance to many to keep them from fruitfulness and growth in Grace. They have been more securely contented with their low degree: whereas if they had known that their very sincerity lieth in the Prevalency of the Degree, they would have looked more after it. For them that say, that Assurance will make men strive for Increase: I answered before: I unfeigned­ly acknowledge with the Sy­nod of Dort (Act. de Art. 5. Thes. 12. p. 260) that to those Christians that God judg­eth fit t [...] enjoy Assurance, it is no in-let to se­curity or licen­tiousness, but a great exciter of their Graces. But I think it would be farre otherwise to those that are unfit to enjoy and use it: that is, to the lower and worser sort of sincere Christians. If there were no contrary cor­ruption in strength in us, then I confess it would be as they say.

5. And lastly, The Ignorance of this hath been no small cause of keeping the Godly in low Degrees of Assurance and comfort, by keeping them from the right way of attaining them. If they had considered, that, both the saving sincerity of their Graces li­eth in the Prevailing Degree, and also that the higher Degree they attain, the clearer and more unquestionable will be their Evidence, and consequently, the easier and more infallible will be their Assurance; this would have taught them, to have spent those thoughts and hours in labouring after growth in Grace, which they spent in enquiring after the lowest Degree which may stand with sincerity, and in seeking for that in themselves which was almost undiscernable.

To Conclude: This Doctrine is exceeding comfortable to the poor soul that groans, and mourns, and longs for Christ; and knows, that though he be not what he should and would be, yet he would be what he should be; and had rather have Christ then all the world. God hath the Prevailing Degree of this mans Will, Desire and Love.

And as necessary is this Doctrine for Caution to all, that as they love their souls, they take heed, how they Try and Judge of their condition, by the bare nature of any Disposi­tions or Actions, without regard to the Prevalency of De­gree.

I advise all Christians therefore in the Fear of God, as ever they would have Assurance and Comforts that will not deceive them, that they make it the main work of their lives to Grow in Grace, to strengthen and advance Christs Interest in their souls, and to weaken and get down the Interest of the flesh. And take heed of those pestilent Principles of Presumption, which would deceive you by the bare name and specious title of Free Grace; which make Christ as Justifier only to be the object of Justifying Faith, and not Christ as your Head, or Husband, or King: which tell you, That you have Fulfilled the Law, and satisfied it fully in Christ; and so need no more then to get the sence of Pardon, or shew your thankfulness: which tell you, That if you do but Believe, that you are Pardoned, and shall be saved, it shall be so indeed; as if this were the Faith that must Justifie and Save you. Deceivers may perswade you, That Christ hath done all, and left you nothing to do for your Justification or Salvation. But you may easily see from what I have said, That to Mortifie the Flesh, to Overcome Satan and the World, and to this End, to stand alwaies armed upon our Watch, and Valiantly, and Patiently to fight it out, is a matter of more concernment both to our Assurance and Salvation then many do confider. Indeed it is so great a part of our very Baptismal Vow, and Covenant of Christianity, that he that performeth it not, is yet no more then a nominal Christian, whatsoever his Parts and Profession may be: and therefore that Christ whom they trusted in, and whose Free Grace they boasted of, will Profess to these Profes­sours, I n [...]ver knew you: Depart from me ye that Work iniquity Mat. 7. 23. The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal: The Lord knoweth who are his: But let him that nameth the Name of Christ depart from iniquity; or else he shall never finde himself among the sealed, 2 Tim. 2. 19. Know you not, that to whom you yield your selves servants to Obey, his servants you are to whom ye obey; whether of SINƲNTO DEATH, or of OBEDI­ENCE ƲNTO RIGHTEOƲSNES? Rom. 6. 16. Not every one that Seeketh, or Runneth, or Fighteth (much less that Presumptuously Believeth and Trusteth) but he that OVERCOMETH shall have the hidden Manna, the whi [...]e Stone, the New Name, the White Raiment, and Power ove [...] the Nations; He shall eat of the Tree of Life in the midst of [Page] Gods Paradise, and shall not be hurt of the second death: He shall be confessed by Christ before his Father, and the Angels; Yea he will make him a Pillar in the Temple of God, and he shall goe out no more: He will write on him the Name of his God, and the Name of the City of his God, [New Hierusa­lem] which cometh down out of Heaven from his God; and his New Name. Yea he will grant him to sit with him in his Throne, as himself OVERCAME, and is set down with his Father in his Throne. He that hath an Ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches, Revel. 2. 7, 11, 17, 26. & 3. 5. 12. 21, 22.

FINIS.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal licence. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.