A DEFENCE OF THE FORMER TREATISE OF IVSTIFYING FAITH, Against the answer of N. B.

IT had been good, M. Downe, you had been aduised and warned by Diphilus in Athenaeus who said, Lib. 15. in fa­bula cui titu­lus [...]. [...], acceptâ candelâ candela­brum quaerebamus, we tooke the can­dle before wee had the candlesticke; meaning that it sauoureth not of prouidence to light the one before wee bee sure of the other. Without doubt you would not then haue builded your doctrine here in this Cittie, till you had layd a good foundation for the same, euen Iesus Christ,1 Cor. 3.11. Apoc. 1.who standeth in the midst of the seuen golden Can­dlesticks, [Page 18] and is the sole foundation of the eternall verity. But such was the iudgement of God cast vpon vs for our sinnes,Mat. 18.that refusing the wholesome doctrine of his Word, and following fantasies and nouelties of our owne inuenti­ons, we should now giue heed to lying spirits, and be led a­way with the spirit of error. But we be to them by whom o­ffences come: you cannot escape the hand of God except you speedily repent, and make satisfaction to this offended flock.

Indeed, M. Baxter, if I haue presumed to determine a question meerly Theologicall by such principles as are heterogeneall and Improper vnto the science of Diuini­ty: I must needs confesse I haue foully faulted, and iu­stly deserued the blame of Improuidence you lay vpon me.Poster. l. 1. c. 7. §. 1. & 4. For it is impossible to demonstrate, saith the Phi­losopher, passing from one kind to another: as for Arith­metike to demonstrate a probleme or conclusion in Ge­ometrie.Eccles. 2.14. But had your eyes been where Solomon sayth a wise mans eyes should be when you read my writing, you could not but perceiue that I had builded my do­ctrine vpon that very same good foundation you speake of, euen Iesus Christ and his blessed word. For what­soeuer I haue affirmed throughout that whole discourse I haue sufficiently warranted either by expresse testi­mony of Scripture, or (which is equiualent) by nece­ssary collection from it. Vnto your aduice therfore out of Diphilus in Athenaus I answer with the like but more sanctified words of Athanasius, Orat. contra Arrian. Loe we speake boldly out of the sacred Scriptures of holy and religious Faith, and [Page 19] setting the candle as it were vpon the candlesticke doe wee thus pronounce of the nature and definition of Iustifying Faith.

But put case M. Baxter I had been mistaken either in the truth of the conclusion, or in the proofes thereof, yet considering at least wise the probability of the one and the comfortablenes of the other, Charity I am sure would haue iudged the publishing thereof to haue pro­ceeded (to vse the words of Augustin) rather from the errour of loue, then the loue of error. The more vn­charitable are you that being not able to conuince mee of the least vntruth, ranke me notwithstanding in the num­ber of lying spirits, and so peremptorily denounce wo and iudgement against me.1 King. 19.12. Wherein as you bewray how little you fauour of his mild spirit who chose rather to come in a still and soft voice, then in a tempest and whirlewind: so greatly are you deceiued if you thinke such causes and idle meanes either affright or affect me. No no I am not so simple to belieue that the earthquakes when moles beginne to heaue, or that thunderbolts pre­sently flie abroad the world when euery hot braine threatens fire from heauen.Prou. 26.2. For as the bird by wandring and the swallow by flying escapeth, so the vndeserued curse shall not come, saith Solomon. Act. 4.36. And therefore vnlesse you can proue mee in deliuering this doctrine to haue beene an vnaduised Barnabas, I haue no cause to feare when you proue yourselfe but a rash and hasty Boanerges. Mar. 3.17.

Your Sermon made here in Bristol Nouemb. 5. 1601. [Page 20] stuffed with quirks, full of elenchs, and subtle distincti­ons, wholly bent it selfe against the truth of God, and hath shaken the well affected minds of many, who by your So­phismes seduced scarce know by what means they shall bee saued. Demosth. in Philip. You gaue vs Mandragor as to drinke, and vnder a sugred potion of your owne sole contriuing cast vpon vs the spirit of slumber. Aristoph. in Pluto. Was it not a bold part thus in peace to play the Lion, and rent in sunder (vnder pretence of truth) the blessed vnion of holy piety? to deliuer such new coined, strange, vncouth, and singular definitions, diuisions or distinctions of Iustifying Faith (being indeed Callida mendacia craftie vntruths) Plaut. Mostel. Athen. Dip­nos. li. 3. Cic. pro Clu­ent. as Apollo himselfe could by no meanes vnderstand (to vse the phrase of Antiphanes) and then to boast that scarce Archimedes could better and more liuely haue depainted his Theoremes then you iustify­ing Faith:Theocrit. ho­daep.then you forsooth had then against all writers old and new in one sole and sillie Sermon walking without fire in the darke delineated yea demonstrated as you say true Iustifying Faith the comfort of a Christian man.

Three heinous faults you charge my Sermon withall, Vntruth in the Matter, Sophistrie in the Manner, and Breach of peace in the issue and euent: all which, if one dead flie bee sufficient to corrupt a whole Alabaster of sweet ointmēt,Eccles. 10.1. as the wiseman saith, must needs be more then enough to discredit one poore and simple Sermon.

As touching the Matter, you know that so much thereof as concernes the point in question is euery way parallell and agreeing vnto the writing I sent you: and [Page 21] therfore if as you say it haue bent it selfe against the truth of God, loe here is Rhodes, according to the Prouerbe,Aesop. let vs see your leap, shew it in this and it shall be granted you in that also. Otherwise being so foullie ouerseene in charging a written tract whereof you haue taken so long aduisement and deliberation, you will hardly bee belieued in accusing a transient speech which might hap­pily bee past your eares before your vnderstanding had leasure to apprehend it.

As for the Manner, it cannot lightly be more absurd then is your manner of quarrelling at it. For if it be so stuft with quirks, elenchs, sophismes, and subtleties, how is it that by & by you call in contempt a sillie Sermon? And if it containe such new coined, strange, vncouth, and singular definitions, diuisions, or distinctions as Apollo him­selfe could by no meanes vnderstand, how come you to know that they are Callida mendacia, craftie vntruths, vnderstanding so readily what Apollo himselfe by no means could? Surely M. Baxter it was somewhat vnseasonable while you were chalenging me for I know not what So­phismes and Subtleties, thus to entangle your selfe in these labyrinths and mazes of contradiction. But in truth you play right Senecas Harpaste with mee, and as she being blind herselfe,Sen. ep. 50. euer complained of the darke­nesse of the house: so you wanting either wit or will to vnderstand tell me that I walke without fire in the darke, and impute Obscurity vnto my preaching. A vice from which I haue euer beene abhorring as they know well who are mine ordinary Auditors, or haue had experi­ence of my courses. For as in iudgement I haue alwayes esteemed Perspicuity a principall vertue in Oratory, vt­terly [Page 22] disliking the vanity and affectation of those men who with Antony desire rather to bee admired then vn­derstood:Sueton. Aug. c. 86. so haue I continually endeuoured to frame my practice vnto this iudgement, thinking that then I haue vsed best eloquence whē I haue spoken with the greatest euidence. If therefore, as Austin saith, I point you out with my finger the old or new moone, or some starre not so cleare which you would gladly see, De doct. Christ. Pro­log. and your sight be so weake that it cannot reach so far as my finger, you haue no reason to be offended with me. You should rather pray God to vouch­safe vnto you the eye salue of his spirit that you may see: I can but lend you my finger,Reu. 3.18. sight I cannot giue you.

Now for the issue and euent, you say that like a potion of Mandrake it hath cast vpon you the spirit of slumber, and like a Lion hath rent in sunder the blessed vnion of ho­ly Piety, that is in other termes hath bred in you at once both a Lethargie and frenzie, which is very neere a-kin vnto that wittie speech of the Apothecaries wife, that Pepper is hot in working and cold in operation. But tell me M. Baxter in plaine sadnesse, hath that Sermon indeed so shaken the well affected minds of many that now they scarce know by what meanes they shall be saued? For it seemeth strange to me that one sole and fillie Sermon should shake the minds of so many, and those so well affected too, and that in so important a case as the meanes of saluation: If your meaning be, as I guesse it is, that opposing the vul­gar definition of Faith, and defining otherwise then for­merly they conceiued of it, doubts and disputes haue growne thereupon, and consequently the interruption of your peace, and the vnion of Piety: I answer, first, that necessary doctrines must not bee suppressed, nor studi­ous [Page 23] minds depriued of wholesome instructions because of some inconueniences which may happen to follow. For as Augustin sayth, if vpon the publishing of truth offence be taken,De lib. ar [...].it is better to giue way to such offence then that truth be abandoned. Secondly, all the doubt and dispute that can grow vpon that Sermon is no other then this, of two definitions whether is the better, which I suppose is not to call in question the meanes of saluati­on. And surely if euery difference in the Logicall hand­ling of a point in Diuinity were the renting in sunder of the vnion of piety, there is no Diuine but playes the Li­on, and deserues the same aspersion you cast vpon mee. Lastly, better is doubting of truth, then resolution in er­ror: for doubting stirs vp seeking, and seeking hath the promise of finding,Mat. 7.7. and diuers I know vnto whom this promise euen in this particular hath graciously beene performed to the full satisfaction of their minds, and the vnspeakable comfort of their conscience, which comfort of conscience if you vnderstand by the spirit of slumber you doe no lesse then blaspheme: vnlesse you can shew that it is grounded vpon error which I know you can neuer doe.

Well sith so it pleased you to trie your wit and follow your will that vpon a sole confident opinion of your sound argu­ments, you haue bidden battell to all the learned men of Christendome, bitten famous Melancthon, honorable P. Martyr, blessed Caluin, renouned Beza, thrice honorable Grynaeus and Polanus, snapt & snarled at glorious Whi­taker; and excellent Perkins (whom as you say you droue so [Page 24] hard to the wall with your sudden arguments that hee knew not what to answer) yea all Fathers and writers both old and new for these.Theocr. [...]. 1600. yeeres: Sith I say you would needs come barefoot to these mountaines, giue leaue I pray you to mee one of the least but the most offended in the absence of the rest, for the glory of God and the satisfying of our peo­ple, to sift your arguments as you haue layd them downe in writing, and shape you an answer for the desence of Iustify­ing Faith, till you grasple with other most learned mens writings which shortly you shall receiue. Wherein if your errors be spied, it was your fault so confidently to deliuer in writing vnder your hand such absurdities: praying you to remember [...],Dinoloch. a­pud Hesych. who spits in an Ants nest shall haue sore lips.

De Anim. l. 3. cap. 3.It is not in our power, saith the Philosopher, to en­tertaine what opinion we please, neither doth the mind chuse whether it will assent vnto the truth of a conclusi­on yea or no: but simply and of the necessity of its na­ture yeelds to that part of the contradiction whereunto by force of syllogisme it is determined. If therefore the arguments which I haue vsed in this question bee indeed as they seeme vnto me sound and necessary: you may as well chide the Sun for mouing towards the west, or the earth for resting stedfastly on her center, as me for being swayed and perswaded by them. And yet by your leaue I was not so transported with Confidence, but that I still kept my selfe within the bounds of Modesty. For al­though it pelase you in the former section to charge me [Page 25] with [...]oasting that scarce Archimedes could better and more liuely haue painted his Theoremes then I iustifying Faith: yet was I in truth as farre from it, as you are from truth in affirming of it, submitting my selfe in all humility vnto the censure of Gods Church, and promi­sing vpon conuiction of my error to reuerse what euer I had said.

Yea but very insolently I haue bidden battell to all the learned men of Christendome, bitten, snapt, and snarled at Melancthon, Martyr &c. yea all Fathers and Writers both old and new for these 1600. yeeres. 1 Sam. 17.26. Intolerable arro­gance I confesse if your accusation be iust: for who but a presumptuous and proud Goliah would in such oppro­brious manner defie and reuile the host of the liuing God? But tell me I beseech you what are those despi­tefull and contumelious tearmes wherewith I haue so reproched those famous and excellent men? Nay did I in my Sermon so much as name either Melancthon, or Martyr, or Caluin, or Beza, or Grynaus, or Pelanus, or Whitaker, or Perkins, whom yet you say I snapt and snarled at? For that you adde particularly of M. Per­kins, as if I had boasted by my sudden arguments to haue driuen him so hard to the wall as hee knew not what to an­swer, is but a blacke drop of your slanderous pen. The truth is this, that in a priuate conference I told you, that he being demāded, if Faith be an assurance of our present state in grace and future saluation, what comfort remai­ned for him who not feeling this assurance thinks him­selfe to bee without Faith and consequently in the state of damnation: his answer was (which also in his books he hath published) that desire of assurance is in the acce­ptation of God as assurance indeed: to the which I sayd [Page 26] I could no way yeeld, seeing by the couenant of Grace, actuall Faith it selfe is absolutely required vnto Iustifi­cation, and therefore actuall assurance, if Faith bee assu­rance. Besides this priuate speech all I haue publikely said or written is no more but this in generall, that though my opinion differ from the writings and do­ctrine of most learned and worthy Diuines, to whom as farre inferiour I owe all respect and reuerence; yet being Gods freeman I cannot endure to bee mans Bondman and sweare to all they say. And is not this the same in effect which all our Diuines answer when they are char­ged by the aduersary to dissent from the Fathers? Let one Whitaker speake for them all; We are, saith he, not the seruants but the Sons of the Fathers: Contrà Du­raeum. if out of the law and from diuine authority they prescribe any thing vnto vs wee obey them as Parents: if they command ought a­gainst the voice of the heauenly doctrine, wee say wee must harken not vnto them but God. You Iesuits like bondmen and base slaues admit without iudgement and reason all the sayings of the Fathers, fearing I thinke the gibbet or whip if yee refuse any. Now M. Baxter, say if you dare, that glorious Whitaker with the rest of our Diuines bite, and snap, and snarle at the Fathers as well as I: if you dare not, and yet I vse no other language then they doe, then are biting, and snapping, and snarling, but your owne doggish tearmes, arguing rather notorious Sycophancie in you then such barbarous inciuility in me.

Well yet sith you will needs, say you, come barefoot to these mountaines giue me lea [...]e to sift your arguments and to shape you an answer for the defence of Iustifying Faith. Exod. 3.5. Sir it was reason I should pull off my shooes and come barefoot to these mountaines, because the ground on [Page 27] which I was to stand is holy. Neuerthelesse in this en­counter with you I trust you shall find my feet so well sh [...] with the preparation of the Gospell of peace, Ephes. 6.15. that I need not care what briers or thornes soeuer you plant in my way. And therefore good leaue haue you, sift my arguments in Gods name at your pleasure, for to that very end sent I them you in writing. But I am afraid least insteed of sifting, I find from you nothing else but meere shifting, as indeed I doe not. For to some of my arguments you shape no answer at all, some you unshape and turne cleane out of the forme I set vpon them, to not one of them doe you shape so much as probable or tolerable answer. So that although you seeme very ambitious and greedie of the title, yet if you haue no better skill in sifting arguments, and shaping answers, you will hardly obtaine so high an honor as to bee stiled Defender of the Faith.

Further you tell me that shortly I shall receiue the wri­tings of other most learned men, and grasple with them. They shall bee welcome M. Baxter whensoeuer they come: for the more you are that impugne the truth, the more honorable will the victory be. But I beseech you, Sir, when will that shortly you speake of be expired? for it is now more then two yeeres since you first threatned me with them, as by the date of your writing appeareth: and yet hitherto could I neuer heare either from them or of them whether they be white or blacke. Only it seemes they are very angrie Pismires, that a man cannot spit a­mong them without sore lips. But when I shall speake with these enemies in the gate, as the Psalmist saith, I hope they shall finde my lips so seasoned with the salt of grace, and so well prouided of an answer;Psal. 127.5. Col. 4.6. that I need not [Page 28] feare if they proue a nest, I say not of Ants onely, but euen of Waspes and Hornets also. In the meane season if they bee so deeply learned as you pretend, how is it that you so hastily preuent them, and haue not the man­ners to stay till your betters haue spoken? It is not, you say; vpon presumption of your greater learning, be­ing one of the least but out of a greater measure of zeale, as being the most offended. But, M. Baxter, they that doe the works of Zimri, haue not lightly in them the a­ffection of Phinees. And seeing you will needs bee the most offended, shall I say being the most offending? Certainly hauing no iust cause of offence giuen you, it is not so much either the glory of God, or the satisfaction of your people, as your own factiousnesse and vaineglo­ry that sets you so forward in this busines, and makes you so impatient to thinke of the second place. Of a colder temper it seemes are those learned Rabbies you scarre me withall, who while you hazard your selfe in the forlorne hope, wisely prouide for their owne secu­rity in the reerward. And as the Turke vses to marshall the basest of his nations in the front of the battell, that the enemies armes being wearied, & swords blunted vp­on them, his [...]a [...]j [...]ars may find the lesse danger and [...]e­sistance: so these I thinke are not vnwilling that you with your wrangling a while comber and annoy mee, that hauing spent my strength vpon you, I should not be able to endure the force of their second charge. But vn­to [...] [...]ish policy I oppose the old Roman wisdom,Veget. l. 1. c. [...]1. and as th [...] exercising their young souldiers to skirmish and [...] Martiall actiuities against a post [...]repa­red [...] [...]hereby with more readines and skill to en­counter a true enemie: so will I by trying and experi­encing [Page 29] my selfe vpon you) fit and prouide my selfe to the better entertainment vnto those learned aduersaries whensoeuer they shall please to assaile me.

Your writings are well polished, and shew whence you came, and where you were bred: Plutarch. [...]. but as smooth as they bee they cannot helpe you nor saue you from blemish, except you speedily (which I wish) snetch the new hatched Mansters. For the faire shooe helpeth no man of the Gowt.

Here, M. Baxter, you bestow vpon me once for all a few drops of your holy water sprinkle, telling me that my writings are smooth and well polished, sauouring something of the place whence I came and where I was bred: but withall remembring me (I thinke lest I should grow too proud of your praises) that though the shooe be faire, the foot is gowtie, that is, though the stile and manner of handling be Schollerly, yet the argument and matter is erronious if not hereticall. And so, as Hierome spea [...] [...] you cast vpon me an honorable kind of contumely, Ep. 6 ad Pam. & Ocean. comm [...]ing mee a little for some good parts, but vtterly bereauing one of the truth of Faith. Which commendati­on also here vousafed mee in grosse, anon you rob mee of againe by retaile, allowing mee nothing but ridicu­lous, vnlearned, and inkehorne speeches, and scarce af­fording me skill enough to compose a Syllogisme. But the best is your iudgement is not the truest touch to trie desert by▪ and therfore whether you praise or dispraise [Page 30] it no way moues me, the one cannot better me, the other cannot disparage mee. Neuerthelesse if you can plainly and directly shew that like another Ixion embracing a cloud insteed of Iuno, I meane my owne fancie insteed of Gods truth, I haue begotten thereupon these monsters (as you tearme them) of opinions: I will as you wish mee speedily snetch them,Psal. 137.9. and dash their heads against the stones that they grow not vp to the strength and sta­ture of Giants, to the further danger and disturbance of the Church. But till then pardon mee, if I neither snetch them,1 Pet. 2.2. nor feare blemish by them: nay if as the blessed of­spring of celestiall verity I still feed and cherish them with the sincere milke of the word that they may grow thereby to the further comforting of distressed soules,Iude 20. and building vp of the Saints in their most holy Faith.

And thus much in briefe for answer to your Pro­logue: now take wee a view also of the Disputation it selfe. Wherein if you obserue due proportion and De­corum, as that is no other then a head without wit or braine, so this can bee no better then a body without heart and spirit.

But that I may orderly proceed, I will briefely [...] the state of the Question betwixt vs, and next shewing how it is holden by you and denyed by mee. The Quest. The Question is whe­ther iustify [...]g Faith by the Church for 1600. yeeres bee rightly d [...]fined: you deny it, I affirme it.

In word you promise orderly proceeding, but indeed [Page 31] you lay the foundation of Babel, and by peruerting the state of the Question disorder and confound the whole Disputation. For whereas I inquire What is the true Nature and definition of iustifying Faith, and determine that that act whereby a man stands iustified before God, is not Assurance in the Mind but Affiance in the Will: you to forestall the reader on your side, and to worke all the preiudice you can against mee, substitute insteed thereof this enuious demaund, Whether iustifying Faith by the Church for 1600. yeeres bee rightly defined, and boldly auerre that I maintaine it negatiuely & you affir­matiuely. How you can quit your selfe of manifest pre­uarication herein I see not, vnles perhaps you say that al­beit directly & in precise tearmes I affirme not so much: yet defining otherwise then the Church hitherto hath done, indirectly and by consequence I auouch no lesse; But this figleafe is not broad enough to couer your na­kednesse. For suppose it were so, yet was it your dutie to haue retained the Question in that very forme of words I propounded it vnto you, and not in lieu of my Conclusion to place a Consectary of your owne colle­ction. If whereas you hold that Faith is Assurance, I should state the Question thus, Whether God commaund a lie to bee beleeued as true, and then peremptorily pro­nounce that you affirme it and I deny it, would you not think your selfe much wronged and abused? And yet this absurditie necessarily following vpon that opinion, as in my fift Argument is firmely proued: I should so doing but serue you with your owne sauce and repay you in your owne coine. How forcible therefore soeuer your Consequence may be, in this place it is very vnsea­sonable, and with more credit should you haue perfor­med [Page 32] your promise of orderly proceeding, if you had re­serued it thither where you meane to argue against mee. But Camels, saith Pliny, loue not to drinke till they haue troubled the water,Hist. Nat. l. 8. ca. 18. nor Sophisters to dispute till they haue clouded the Question.

Neuerthelesse because you vaunt so much and so of­ten of all the learned men of Christendome, all the Church, all the world, all Fathers, all Writers, old and new, Greeke and Latin for these 1600. yeeres: giue mee leaue in this place once for all to apply mine answer thereunto. I say therefore that it is but a vaine and idle brag full of Arrogance, Temerity, and Vntruth; Arro­gance in that you would seeme to haue read all Authors that haue wrtten these 1600. yeeres: which if you were such a glutton of bookes, and withall had the strength of an oke and the time of Mathuselah; yet could you not by any meanes performe: Temerity in that you thinke with the countenance of one inartificiall argument, to outbraue so many sound Demonstrations grounded on Gods Word and according with right reason: Vntruth, in that you beare the world in hand as if all Writers both old and new were cleerely against me, not so much as one giuing his suffrage and voice with mee, whereas in my Treatise I haue expresly shewed the contrary.

For first touching the Negatiue, that Faith is not As­surance, I vouched therein the authority of that reue­rend and worthy man of God M. Foxe, whose words anon you shall heare at large: In the meane season it behooueth you, if you will bee beleeued in this point, to produce the cloud of witnesses you so much boast of, that wee may heare whether they will depose the con­tradictory hereunto, namely that Faith is Assurance. [Page 33] For howsoeuer, you say you haue no fewer then All, yet it may bee when all comes to all you will proue as ill stored of testimonies as the wise man of Athens was of shipping, who being not worth the poorest shal­lop in the harbor, bare himselfe notwithstanding for owner of all the gallies that arriued therein. And sure­ly hauing throughly searched your Answer to this pur­pose, I find the nūber (by you cited) so small, that I need not much skill in Arithmetike to summe them vp: for, the totall amounts to no more then an Vnity, and all your Authors are but one Caluin, once alledged in the front thereof. Vnto whom I denie not but you might haue ioyned some other of the later Writers: but what are they to all both old and new for 1600. yeeres? For as for the ancient Fathers, not one of them (so farre as I can learne) affirmeth the iustifying act of Faith to be As­surance: and among the Moderne it is more then mani­fest that a good part of them flatly denyeth it. So that being backed of so few, and yet craking so loudly of All,Ter. Eunuch. act. 4. Scen. 7. you play right the glorious Souldier in the Comedie, who hauing but foure men in all the world, bestirred himselfe so busily with three of them as if hee had been mustering a whole Legion, and at length missing the fourth, gallantly demaunded where all the rest were.

Againe touching the Affirmatiue, that Faith is Affi­ance, I quoted that passage of S. Augustin, To beleeue is to loue, ad by louing to moue vnto God. In my Trea­tise De morib. Eccl. ca. 15. Now Loue (by which that Father vsually defineth Vertue) properly is not an act of Faith, because of Charity; Charity & Faith being two different and distinct Habits.1 Cor. 13.13. And therefore by Loue you are to vnderstand generally an act of the will, it being an affection of that Facultie: as if in plainer [Page 34] tearmes he should haue said, To belieue is that act of the Will whereby we moue vnto God: Which elsewhere he expresseth more clearly, saying, He that commeth vnwil­lingly beleeueth not, In Ioh. 6. tract. 26. and he that beleeueth not commeth not: for we run not vnto Christ by walking but beleeuing; nei­ther come we by the motion of the body, but by the wil of the heart. So that Faith being in S. Augustins iudgement an act or motion of the Will, what other can it bee then Affiance?12. q. 40. a. 2. ad 2. For, as Thomas sayth, that motion in the ap­petite which immediately followeth Desire to obtaine that good which wee esteeme possible to be obtained, is Affiance: Adde vnto him Theophylact; Hee that with great affection beleeueth, In Marc. 11. stretcheth out his heart towards God. And what doth it? It is vnited vnto him; and the heart enflamed gathereth great certainty that it shall ob­taine his desires. Where by the way obserue that cer­tainty is concluded out of Faith, and therefore can no more bee Faith then the Conclusion can bee one of the Premises.Serm. de San­cto Andr. So Barnard, To beleeue in God is to set all our hope in him. And our Diuines in the Conference of Altemburg define it by Affiance in the Heart and Will. In a word all those who seat it only or principally in the will,Colloq. Al­temb. accord with mee. For although defining it popular­ly they put vsually into their Descriptions, Assent vnto supernaturall verities which is an act of the mind: yet making not that, but Affiance only the proper act that iustifies, they doe in effect fully accord and agree with me. So that you see I am not driuen to so neere an exi­gent, but vnto your one I can oppose more then you are aware of. And yet had I farre more, I would not vpon presumption, either of their number or authority, say vn­to you,Ep. 11. inter. ep. Aug. as Hierome sometime wrote vnto Augustin, Suffer [Page 35] me I pray thee to erre with such men: and sith you see I haue so many companions in error with mee, you ought to bring forth one at least that ioynes with you. For who is he that would willingly erre with whomsoeuer or how many soeuer?2 Pet. 1.19. But hauing as S. Peter speaketh a more sure word of the Prophets for my warrant, I rather conclude with that free and ingenuous answer of Augustin to Hierom, More testimonies I thinke might I easily haue found if I had read much: Epist. 19. but the Apostle Paul shall bee vnto mee in­steed of them all, yea, aboue them all.

Let vs therefore see what you affirme and wee agree to be our iustifying Faith, and how you impugne it. Fides iustifi­cans in adultis quae sit. Iustifying Faith agreed vpon vs both as holden by the Church. We agree both in this that iustifying Faith (as we hold it and you de­ny it) is A certaine knowledge infused into the hearts of the elect by the Holy Ghost by which they constantly agree to all things reuealed in the Word of God, and also a firme Assu­rance whereby euery one of the Elect relieth vpon the Pro­mises of Christ, fully resoluing that Christ with all his me­rits are giuen to him for iustification and eternall life. Now as you deny this to bee iustifying Faith, so againe let vs see what you count iustifying Faith to bee. M. Downes iustifying Faith. Iustifying Faith is a rest of mans will vpon Christ and his merits of Iustifi­cation and Saluation. The validity of your definition wee will view anon by Gods help: in the meane season let vs see with what engins of rare wit and solid Syllogismes you endeuour to ouerthrow the former definition of ours, consi­sting vpon the generall Word, the causes, the effects, the pro­per Subiect and Adiuncts or essentiall Properties.

Your second cogitations I see are wiser then the first, and now you shoot with far better aime then erewhile, missing not much of the right state of the Question. For the Definition here attributed vnto me is I confesse that which I defend, and the other assumed vnto your selfe is that also which I impugne; I meane so farre forth as it makes Knowledge the Generall Word, and Particular Assurance the Act, or as you tearme it the adiunct or es­sentiall Propertie. For otherwise that causally it is from the Holy Ghost, subiectiuely in the elect, and effectuall vnto Iustification is not questioned by mee, but equally acknowledged of vs both.

Now the validity of my definition you say you will view anon, and anon by Gods help will I farther maintaine it against you. In the meane season let vs see how skilfully you can vse your buckler hand, and ward of those arguments I obiect against you. And that the reader may more easily concerne the course of our dis­putation, and how pertinently things are applyed: as hitherto before my Reply I haue set downe the words of your Answer, so henceforward before your Answer will I set downe the words also of the Treatise I sent you:

I will not play the Philologer in shewing the diuerse vse and acceptation of the word [...] or Fides, or quote Ciceros Fiat quod dictum est, or Augustins Fac quod di­cis for the Notation of it: nor play the Philosopher in [Page 37] discoursing of Physicall or Morall or Ciuill Faith, nor lastly will I speake of Theologicall Miraculous Faith.

No doubt but then we are like to heare good stuffe seeing at the first entrance into the lists you refuse to bee tried by those that best knew the meaning of the things which they would expresse, Nomen quod rem notat quasi notamé nec aliter e­nunciari res possit nisi ali­quo nomine. Aug. de Gen. ad lit. c. 7. lib. imperfecto. Apoc. adu. Gent. c. 46. Ib. ca. 3. and therefore found out names fit to note their natures. But Tertullian could haue told you (whose words you cite in your preface though falsly) Sinominis, inquit, odium est, quis nominum reatus, quae nominum accusatio? Nisi si aut barbarum sonat vox aliqua nomi­nis, aut infaustum, aut maledicum, aut impudicum. If you find fault with the Word wherein doth the Word offend, what can you say against it? except the Word bee barbarous, or ominous, or slanderous, or vnchast.

Stumbling at the threshold they say bodes no good, and little hope doe you giue of honest and plaine dealing in the sequele, that make your beginning with so fond and shamelesse a cauill. For neither doe I refuse to be tri­ed by those who found out the names of things, neither doe my words import any disliking of the word [...] or Fi­des: only I omit to discourse of such things as are vul­garly knowne and not greatly materiall to my purpose.Apolog. c. 2. & 3. Tertullian indeed tels mee that the Gentiles sometimes hated the very name of Christian, persecuting it with as much rigour in them that bare it as they did notorious wickednesse in others, albeit the Name neither were [Page 38] barbarous, nor ominous, nor slanderous, nor vnchast. But what is this to the purpose? vnlesse you say I am growne into as deep a detestation of the word Faith, as Pagans were of the name of Christiā: which none but an infidell can doe, and no other then a Satanicall and diuellish spirit would obiect vnto mee. For as the thing signified by the Word is that most noble grace of the Spirit of God which giueth the forme and being to a Christian man: so the Word also I confesse hath from the beginning both beene sanctified by the Holy Ghost, and religiou­sly retained in the Church to signifie the same; neither can it now without sacrilege and impiety either bee vio­lated or disused. It is not I therefore that finde fault or am offended with the Word: it is you rather that offer open violence vnto the plainest sentence, giuing withall strong suspicion, that hauing once passed the bounds of modestie, wilfully peruerting the state of the question, you will hereafter steele your forehead and waxe rech­lesse of saying any thing.

But I haue cited, you say, the words of Tertullian fals­ly. Not so falsly as you haue cited him idly. For wher­as that Father saith,Apol. c. 46. Philosophers player-like affect truth, and affecting corrupt it as being ambitious of glory: but Christians necessarily desire it, and intirely practice it as being carefull of their saluation: I report it somewhat more breefly thus, Although Philosophers player-like affect the truth as being ambitious of glory: yet Christi­ans studiously follow it as being carefull of their Salua­tion. So that omission of a word or twaine without any alteration of the sence, in a matter neither hindering nor furthering the cause in hand, or some such toy, as Hierome speaketh,Epist. 101. ad Pammach. is the crime you charge mee withall. [Page 39] For the true meaning of the sentence I am sure I haue kept: as for the words, because I endited out of my me­mory being then in Bristol, and vse not to cary my Li­brary about with mee when I trauell abroad, it was easie to mistake or forget some part of them.

But you knowing the very meaning of the Greeke word [...] comming [...] persuasus sum vel fui,I haue beene or am perswa­ded. whereof commeth [...] persuadere, to perswade, would haue stay­ed you from condemning vs that say Faith is a full perswa­sion: Besides the Hebrew word [...] comming of that which a man simply is perswaded of, Truth. and the Greeke com­ming of the Passiue [...] to bee perswaded, if you would might haue stayed you from incurring this infamy, and me from this labour. It had therefore as I thinke beene much better for you to haue been Philologos then Antipistos. But let vs see how you proceed.

Kemnitius a graue and learned Diuine saith that so great a matter as is the Definition of iustifying Faith is not to bee committed only vnto Grammaticall disputa­tions:Loco de Iu­stif. and yet so great store doe you make of one poore and naked Etymologie, as if there need no more but the knowledge thereof to decide the controuersie. For this, you say, if I would might haue stayed mee from condem­ning you, and eased you from this labour. Let vs therefore (seeing you are so confident vpon it) trie the strength of this Achilles.

[Page 40] Faith, you say, in the Greeke and Hebrew comes from a word signifying to bee perswaded, Ergo Faith is a Per­swasion. Sir I deny your Consequence. For first, euery word beares not alwayes the signification of the primi­tiue from which it is deriued,Arist. [...] ca. 1. partly because the num­ber of words being certaine and definite, but infi­nite of things, one word of necessity must haue more then one meaning: partly by vse (which is the rule and warrant of speech) they oftentimes degenerate from their natiue and first signification into a strange and farre different meaning. So that if your kind of reasoning may passe for currant, great danger and error must needs ensue vpon it. For example, Hypostasis if wee regard the first originall thereof signifieth Substance, and so saith Hierome, all schooles of humane learning vnderstand it: Epist. 57. ad Damas. yet were it horrible blasphemie thereupon to con­clude, Ergo in the matter of the Trinity it must signifie so too; for what mouth, saith the same Father, is so sacrile­gious as to say there are three Substances in the Trinity? It is not therefore so much to bee marked whence a word is deriued, as what it is vsed to signifie; and if it signifie many things (as Faith doth) then must wee in­quire in what sense it is to be taken in the present questi­on, that so wee may build our doctrines not in the aëry sound of words, but in the vertue of the things signified, as Basil speaketh.Contra Eu­nom. lib. 2.

Againe, words (as Logicians teach vs) haue their o­riginations sundry wayes, and among the rest from the Effects. Not to seeke far for an instance; The third ar­gument in a Syllogisme whereby the Conclusion is proued, is by the Grecians called [...], that is Faith, a word as you say deriued from a verbe signifying to bee [Page 41] perswaded: and yet I thinke your selfe will acknowledge that here it hath the name from the Effect, not because it is Perswasion, but for that it doth beget Perswasion. Whereupon it followeth likewise that Faith in our Que­stion flowing from the same fountaine is not necessarily to signifie Assurance, but may well be called so because by it euery true beleeuer may gather and conclude vnto himselfe Assurance.

Lastly, although the Greeke and Hebrew words whence Faith commeth signifie to bee perswaded, yet they doe not only signifie so. For [...] as Rabbi Kim­hi saith implies Affiance, and [...] in the middle voice imports as much, whence commeth [...] Confi­dence: and [...] (a word growing vpon the same root that [...] doth) construed with the Preposition [...] signi­fieth to trust, rest, rely on. Wherefore the originall words in either language being indifferently affected vn­to both, what reason can be rendred why faith in those languages should not as well beare the signification of Affiance as Assurance?

These reasons considered, you see at length the weak­nesse of your Achillean argument, and how insufficient it is to perswade that Faith is a Perswasion. Withall you may perceiue that if I would I might haue beene Philologos without any hazard vnto the definition of Faith which I maintaine: and that there is no cause why either you should vpbraid mee with the odious name of Antipistos, or I feare incurring infamie for any thing hi­therto I haue said or written. Howsoeuer, sure I am my Theologie agreeth better with true Philologie, then these virulent speeches with the rule of Charity, or (to shew by the way what a skilfull Pedant you are) your [Page 42] preposterous deduction of [...] from [...], the Primi­tiue from the Deriuatiue, with the precepts of Gram­mer.

Bee not offended if I handle [...], and giue new tearmes to old matters.

Aristoph. in Ran. & Luci­an. in Pseu­dosophistâ. You are no Constable, neither haue you put on the Lions skinne to subdue vs to your commaund. I tell you Master Downe wee are offended that you giue new tearmes to old Positions, and handle them not onely [...] (which in this point you cannot bee permitted to doe) but also [...] which is vtterly intolerable. I will therefore say vnto you. With S. Hierom, Ep. ad Pam­mach. & O­cean. Cur post quadringintos annos docere nos niteris quod ante nesciuimus? How cōmeth it to passe that thou after 400. yeeres space goest about to teach vs that be­fore we knew not? And so to you how dare you deale after a new manner in so waightie a thing as is Faith, opposing your iudgement to the iudgement of all the Church for these 1600. yeeres? In Praescript. Alas saith Tertullian, qui estis vos, vnde, quando? who are you, whence are you, and of what continuance?In Gen. hom. 3. lib. 3. ad Licent. But suo ipsius iudicio perijt sorex, By shewing your selfe you perish, as saith Origen and Augustin of others. Now perceiue wee that the iudgement of the whole Church cannot content you, but still you must haue one ink­horne tearme or other of your owne to shew your itching eares. Would not or could not all the learned men of the world define iustifying Faith, and contenting themselues with the Genus and Difference satisfie you, but that you [Page 43] would not onely dispute pro formâ against them (which might bee in a Scholler for triall of wit tolerable) but also publikely preach against their iudgements, and proclaime them erronious, only allowing your owne for true.

Indeed, M. Baxter, it is true, I am no Constable: if I were I thinke I should finde it a very troublesome of­fice to haue such a turbulent spirit within my iurisdicti­on as you are. And as for the Lions skin, as you say I haue not put it on: it is you that haue ietted vp and downe along time in it, to the great scarring and affright­ing of simple people.Aesop. But because your vntimely bray­ing and the vnlucky appearance of your eares now be­wray that it growes not to your backe, you must be con­tent to bee stript of it, and to walke hereafter as you are in your owne hide.

You are offended, you say, that I giue new tearmes to old positions, and handle them [...] after a new manner. An offence not giuen, but taken, and therefore little to bee regarded. For the Philosopher,Categ. c. 7. §. 16. though he would haue the common vse of speech to bee retained in fami­liar conuersation: yet Artists, sayth he, haue liberty to inuent new tearmes, so as they bee proper, determined, and adequated to the thing signified.Simplic. super Praedicam. qual. Academ. Quaest. lib. 1. In regard where­of himselfe doubted not first to vse [...] for that which formerly in the Concrete was called [...]: neither was Cicero afraid with out former example to call that Qualitas which the Grecians tearmed [...]. In a word, how many tearmes are there now frequently vsed in schooles, which vnto the ancients were vncouth and ne­uer [Page 44] heard of? It cannot therefore bee a sufficient excep­tion to say the tearme is new, vnlesse with all you shew it is not proper enough to expresse the thing signified, which here you cannot doe, as by and by will appeare.

This I thinke you saw, and thereupon very restrictiue­ly you say that in this point I cannot bee permitted so to doe. And why I pray you not in this point as well as in others? For it hath alwayes beene the custome of the Church of God euen in the highest points of Religi­on, partly for the clearing of those parts that are obscure and darke in them, partly for the preseruation of them a­gainst the innouations of heretiks, to deuise new tearmes, and as Athanasius speaketh,In disp. cum Ario coram Probo Genti­li iudice. things vnchangeably remay­ning to change the names of things. Hence the ancient Fathers inuented the word Trinity to signify the plura­lity of persons in one substance, Homousios to expresse the consubstantiality of the Sonne with the Father, Theo­tokos to maintaine the personall vnion of both natures in Christ, and six hundred such like words vtterly vn­known vnto former ages:Ibid. old matters, as the same Atha­nasius saith,Cap. 18. receiuing new names & those new names cou­ching vnder them no new meaning. According whereunto Vincentius Lirinensis, though he would not haue his Ti­mothie to broach new things, yet giueth him leaue to teach the same things he hath learned after a new manner. Being therfore warrāted both by the precept & practice of the Primitiue Church I see no cause but that euen in this point also I may be permitted to vse new tearmes.

Perhaps you will say that not only the tearme where­with it is inuested, but the matter hereof is also new: for so much your questions out of Hierome and Tertullian, and the floud of words following with not a drop of [Page 45] reason in them seeme to import. Whereunto though I haue already sufficiently answered, yet now I adde by way of surplus, that many Truths lye a long time hidden in their principles, and vnheeded of the wisest, which being at length disclosed and brought to light, are not therefore new in themselues, but onely vnto vs, com­ming newly vnto our knowledge: euen as the countrey of America is called the new world, not because it is of a latter creation then Europe, Asia, or Africa, but only because it is of a later discouery. These Conclusions vn­till their dependency and coherence with the principles doe manifestly appeare vnto vs, it sufficeth to beleeue them implicitly and in the preparation of the Minde: but when they shall bee vnfolded out of their principles, and clearly demonstrated vnto vs by necessary deduction from them, we are bound to yeeld distinct and expresse assent vnto them. And then, as it would haue been great folly in the Spaniard to haue refused the gold and trea­sures of the new world, because it was found out not by the old Argonauts, but by Christopher Columbus a late sailer: so would it bee great sinne in vs to disclaime and renounce the benefit of a truth, because it is made known vnto vs, not by an ancient Father, but by a man of ye­sterday or to day.Iam. 2.1. For this were to haue the faith of God in respect of persons, as S. Iames saith, and to restraine the gift of the Spirit of Wisdome and reuelation vnto the times of our predecessors, as if they only had eyes giuen them to spie out truths, and it were impossible for vs to see what they saw, not, although wee caried the Sunne in our hands, as Lactantius speaketh. Now then (to ap­ply this vnto the matter in hand) if the point you qua­rell at bee not onely new vnto the present custome;De Ciuit. Dei lib. 22. c. 7. as S. [Page 46] Augustin speaketh, but also contrary vnto reason and the grounds of Faith, I confesse it is erronious; and iustly may you come vpon mee with your demaunds out of Hierome and Tertullian, Ep. 23. ad Paulin. De veland. virg. cap. 1. who are you, whence, when, that after 400. yeeres you should goe about to teach vs what wee knew not before? But if it bee new only vnto vs, and not in it selfe: then doe I answer your Hierome with Hierome, Weigh not truth by time, and Tertullian with Tertullian, Nor space of times, nor patronage of persons, nor priuiledge of places may prescribe against truth. For that which is no otherwise new is true, and as the truth of God is with all reuerence and submission to bee em­braced. Howbeit this I say not as if I would be thought to bee the first discouerer hereof, or that it had laine hid as it were in the pit of Democritus vntill this time. For that there is a Faith (whose obiect is the Person of the Mediator) was neuer yet vnknowne in the Church, but hath euer beene manifest euen from the beginning. Search the Scriptures and you shall find therein nothing more cleere then this. For (as in the treatise sent you I haue shewed) the whole tenor of them runs thus, Hee that beleeueth in mee shall not perish, Ioh. 3.16. Ioh. 14.1. Ioh. 1.12. yee beleeue in God beleeue also in mee: As many as receiued him to them hee gaue power to bee the Sonnes of God, that is to them that beleeue in him &c. Rom. 3.22.26. Gal. 2.16.3.22. Phil. 3.9. Iam. 2.1. Reu. 2.13.14.12. Whereunto I adde that in sundry places it is expresly called the Faith of Iesus Christ, not because it inhereth in Christ as in a Subiect, but for that it hath relation and respect vnto Christ as vnto the right Obiect.

And that at length it appeareth, both that the matter is euery way old though the tearme bee new, and that new tearmes may bee giuen to old matters euen of this [Page 47] kind, so as they bee proper determined and adequated thereunto. It remaineth onely to shew that such is the tearme which here I vse. For proofe whereof I say no more but this, that if our best Diuines haue conuenient­ly distinguished other Faiths according to their obiects, calling one Faith of story because Scripture story, ano­ther Faith of Promise because the Euangelicall pro­mise, a third Faith of Miracles because miracles are the proper obiect of them: I see no reason why I may not as freely and as fitly call that Faith of Person which hath for its Obiect the Person of Iesus Christ. Neither can I conceiue if this bee an inkhorne tearme as it pleaseth your elegancy to tearme it, why Faith of Story, Faith of Promise, Faith of Miracles should not bee inkhorne-tearmes also. But you are a very nice and dainty man, you can tast no wine how old or generous soeuer, vn­lesse the cup out of which you drinke it bee grauen by Myron or Polycletus.

But this hath beene the course of all fanaticall spirits in all ages, moued with [...],Phil: 1.14. selfe-loue, contention, hypocrisie, and couetousnesse, De Haeresibus ad Quodvult Deum. to con­demne all others to set vp and stablish their owne fantasies. Read Augustine, yea see the Ecclesiasticall histories, Eu­sebius, Sozomen, Euagrius, Dorotheus, Vincentius &c. there shall you see whereupon these Schismes in the Church began. Let mee therefore intreate you if you will needs deale in these graue causes [...], yet that you will deale al­so [...], well, as becommeth a wise man. For otherwise you shall bewray your mind desirous of nouelties, hazard your [Page 48] credit, offend the Church, yea as hee saith take vpon you to glew an egge, Diogenianus. loosing your labour, and making your selfe ridiculous to the best.

What hath beene the course of fanaticall spirits in all ages, and whereupon they haue been moued to beginne their Schismes in the Church; I am not now to learne of you: neither needed you in this point so to flourish with your Greeke, or to make such a rumble with the names of Eusebius, Sozomen, Euagrius, Dorotheus, Vin­centius and the rest. But what my inward motiues haue beene, and with what affection I haue proceeded in this businesse, God and my owne conscience are a sufficient theater: for your tongue is not the fanne of this floore. And seeing my earnest protestation in my preface can­not perswade your vncharitable heart to entertaine a better opinion of my sincere and vpright meaning in this cause, but that you will notwithstanding reckon me in the number of fanaticall spirits, possessed with selfe-loue, contention, hypocrisie, and couetousnesse, condemning all other to set vp and stablish their owne fantasies; I appeale vnto him who alone knoweth the heart and trieth the raines,Ep. 69. ad Florent. Pu­pian. and say vnto you in the words of S. Cyprian, These things haue I written out of a pure mind and con­science, and with stedfast trust vpon my Lord and God. You haue my letters, I haue yours; in the day of iudgement both shall bee rehearsed before the tribunall of Christ.

Whereas you intreat mee to deale in this graue cause well, and as becommeth a wise man, surely hitherto I haue indeuoured so to doe: how well I haue performed [Page 49] it I leaue vnto the censure of the Church, and specially of those vnto whom the Spirits of the Prophets are subiect. In the meane season pardon mee if I feare none of those dangers you threaten vnto mee. How your selfe will auoid them I cannot tell, for neuer was there man wrote with lesse reason and more follie.

Three Faiths there seeme to be which lay claime and title to the priuiledge of iustification; Faith of Histo­ry, Faith of promise, and Faith of Person. The first is an assent of the mind vnto the truth of Gods Word, and specially the Gospell. And this whether it bee Acqui­site or Infused hath no interest in the matter of iustifica­tion. For besides that is absurd generall knowledge should iustifie—

That you dare bee so bold to make such a distribution of Faith I impute it to your desire of nouelties, Eph. 4. as you say in the words last betweene vs debated. I tell you there is but one Faith, and that a true and liuely working Faith, Knowledge the begin­ning, Appli­cation or Ap­prehension the Progresse, Rest the end of Faith. and this onely is iustifying Faith, and comprehendeth your three nice distinctions, and is compounded of them all con­ioyned together, the first the beginning, the second the pro­gresse, the third being the end.

It is not desire of noueltie in mee, but loue of confu­sion in you, that dare not haue those things distinguished [Page 50] which in their natures are diuided. For distinction of that which is ambiguous,Top. 1. c. vlt. saith Aristotle, is the prime and most necessary principle both of defining and dispu­ting well: the neglect whereof insteed of profitable rea­soning about matters of substance, induceth fruitlesse contention and iangling about words. Now that Faith is equiuocall and needeth distinction appeares first by reason, for that it comprehendeth vnder it sometime more and sometime fewer things, is both affirmed and denied of the same persons, is a word of accident attribu­ted to diuers Subiects not contained vnder one next Ge­nus, as to the Elect, to Reprobates, to Diuels. Second­ly by authority,Ser. de temp. 181. It is one thing to belieue a God, another to yeeld beliefe vnto God, another to belieue on God, saith Augustine. There is a kind of gift equiuocally called Faith, saith Oecumenius.In 1. Cor. 13. In 1. Cor. 12. Not Faith of doctrines, but Faith of miracles, saith Theophilact. There is one Faith of Pre­cepts, another of Signes, another of Promises, saith Ber­nard. The same among the latter writers confesseth Melancthon, Martyr, Kemnitius, Hiperius, Caluin, Vrsin, Foxe, Perkins, and who not? Nay behold Saul himselfe also among the Prophets: for besides that anon you acknowledge Faith sometime to bee spoken abu­siuely and by an equiuocation, you doe expresly both in your margent and text affirme that there are three kinds of Faith, and approue the same distribution which here you condemne in me.

For all this I tell you, say you, there is but one Faith, and that is iustifying Faith. Shall I now say vnto you as elsewhere you doe vnto mee, that you speake pure Bel­larmine? De Iustif. l. 2. cap. 4. For indeed you vse the very language of that Iesuit. Sectaries (saith hee, vnderstanding Protestants) [Page 51] are wont to distinguish three faiths, of history, of miracles, of promises: but Catholicks teach that they are one and the same Faith, and that iustifying Faith. But doth not the Apostle (in the place here quoted by you) auouch that there is but one Faith? yes verily: but thereby in the iudgement of the best Diuines hee meaneth, not that Faith whereby wee doe belieue, but that which we doe belieue: that is not the Habit but the Obiect of Faith, as if hee should more plainely say, there is but one Chri­stian Religion. And although in regard of the variety and multitude of materiall obiects, there may seeme to bee not one but many Faiths: yet because the formall reason wherefore we doe belieue them is but one, name­ly diuine testimony, and they are in such sort linked and woouen together that one Article cannot bee denied without the dissolution of the whole Creed, all being according to the old rule one copulatiue, it is therefore rightly and iustly called one Faith.

Finally where you say Faith comprehendeth my three nice distinctions, and is compounded of them all, I answer that such composition is altogether impossible: for Faith of Story, and Faith of Promise are in the Vnderstanding, but Faith of Person is in the Will, and it cannot be that one and the same Habit should bee subiectiuely in two seuerall faculties of so different natures. For the Habit that is for example in Peter is one in number and that which is one in number is indiuisible, and that which is indiuisible cannot bee at once in two Subiects, because as Philosophie teacheth Numeration is from the plura­lity of Subiects. This M. Perkins saw,On the Creed. and therefore saith, Some doe place Faith partly in the Mind, partly in the Will, because it hath two parts, Knowledge & Affiance: [Page 52] but it seemes not greatly to stand with reason that one par­ticular and single Grace should bee seated in diuers parts or Faculties of the Soule. And this also you cannot bee ig­norant was answered in my treatise vnto the same obie­ction: which obiection I maruell how you can with modestie and credit mention, vnlesse withall you were prouided to satisfie my answer. But seeing (as Cicero saith of Hortensius) when you haue ought to say you haue not the power to hold your peace,Verrin. 3. it is an euident and strong presumption now that you say nothing, that you haue nothing to say.

Bleare not the eyes of Gods Saints with your niceties and falsities any longer, for thus you reason. No historicall Faith hath any interest in the matter of Iustification: But firmely to belieue the truth of Gods Word, and specially the Gospell is historicall Faith, Therefore firmely to belieue the truth of Gods Word and specially the Gospell hath no interest in the matter of Iustification. Good Sir I deny your Maior, which you thus endeuour to proue ab absurdo & enumeratione partium, No generall knowledge shall haue any stroke in the matter of Iustification, All historicall Faith is a generall knowledge, Therefore no historicall Faith hath any interest in the matter of iustification. Proue your Minor, which I denie, telling you moreouer that firme­ly to consent to the truth of Gods Word in genere, and the Gospell in Specie is not a Generall knowledge, but a Speci­all knowledge, and therefore I argue. Such a speciall knowledge of the Gospell is the beginning of Faith Iustify­ing. Mat. 13.11. Ioh. 17.3. Mat. 16.17. But firmely to consent to the truth of Gods Word and [Page 53] the Gospell is such a speciall knowledge: ex confesso. Ther­fore firmely to consent to the truth of Gods Word and espe­cially the Gospell is the beginning of Iustifying Faith.

If you were as farre from hood-winking your owne eyes, as I am from blearing the eies of others, you might easily perceiue that now I deale against our common aduersaries the Papists, and ouerthrow the iustification of their Historicall Faith, by the chiefest arguments which Protestants vse. But you after the manner of those Gladiators called Andabatae, nor see nor care whom or what you strike: and so mildly affected are you towards mee that so you may make some probable shew of endammaging or disaduantaging mee, you reck not though through my sides you reach and wound the best Diuines of our Church, yea and the common truth which wee all maintaine.

Neither doe I vse such circumguagues, nor wiredraw my arguments into such a length as you beare vs in hand: but hauing nakedly and plainely defined what Historicall Faith is, I proue by two reasons that Faith so defined doth not iustifie, the first whereof is this, be­cause it is absurd that so generall a Knowledge should iu­stifie. So that your Ferio Syllogisme deserues a Ferula, and vtterly to bee cashed, as being no creature of mine, but an idle figment of your owne: and the next in Ce­larent (for so you forme it, although indeed it bee also in Ferio, the Minor proposition and Conclusion not­withstanding your generall notes being but particular enuntiations) is the onely Syllogisme intended by mee, [Page 54] and including my first argument. The Maior whereof it seemes you grant saying nothing vnto it: and the Mi­nor only you deny, which I cannot but wonder at, see­ing both the Minor and Conclusion are vniuersally vouched by all the Diuines of our side. The Conclusi­on is that Historicall Faith iustifies not: So saith Hype­rius,De fide Hom. iustificandi. There is a certaine Historicall Faith whereby those things which are propounded in holy writ are simply belee­ued: but yet is not applyed vnto Christ and the matter of our Saluation. Loco de Fide. The Minor is that Historicall Faith is a generall Knowledge: So sayth Kemnitius, There is a cer­taine generall Faith which vsually is tearmed Historicall: and againe, Historicall Faith is a generall assent holding in generall that the promise of the Gospell is true. And M. Perkins,Ser. caus. c. 36. A generall Faith whereby they giue assent vnto the Gospell. Neither doe I know any one of our Diuines that either in the Conclusion or the Minor doth gainsay them. So that by the iudgement of these men, both con­senting to Gods Word in generall, and to the Gospell in speciall, is not a Speciall but Generall Knowledge: and if the Speciality of the Gospell being but a part of the whole Scripture did specify Faith, it would follow thereupon that there are as many Speciall Faiths as there are seuerall Articles of the Creed, which were vn­reasonable to imagine. For that Faith which assenteth vnto the Gospell is no other then that which assenteth vnto the rest of holy Scripture: and although it may principally respect that part of diuine truth, yet doth it not only respect it, nor is limited thereunto as vnto the proper adequate obiect thereof, but vniuersally exten­deth it selfe vnto all supernaturall reuealed verities whatsoeuer. As for that Faith which our Diuines call [Page 55] Speciall, is to be vnderstood of Faith of Promises wher­by the Saints apply and appropriate them vnto them­selues, particularly and indiuidually assuring themselues of their present iustification and future saluation. And the ignorance hereof as I ween is the cause why you turne generall into speciall and write of this matter so wildly and confusedly.

This notwithstanding very peremptorily you pro­nounce that Historiall Faith is a speciall Knowledge, and thereupon Syllogistically inferre that it is the Begin­ning of Iustifying Faith: to what end I wot not well, vn­lesse it bee to proue that it doth iustify because as you conclude it is the beginning of that Faith. But whatso­euer your intent bee, your argument I answer by distin­guishing of the word Beginning. For if you vnderstand thereby a Pre-requisite or Preparatiue vnto iustifying Faith, you doe but fight with a shadow, for in that sence I grant the Conclusion, neither doth such a beginning of Iustifying Faith iustify. If you meane thereby that it is Iustifying Faith inchoat and in a remisser degree, then I deny your Maior, and say that such a knowledge (call it as you please generall or speciall) is not the beginning of iustifying Faith; If it were, then Diuels and Repro­bates hauing it should haue iustifying Faith which Gods Word attributes vnto the Elect onely.Tit. 1.1. And if it bee true that Faith of person is the consummation of Iu­stifying Faith as in the former section you say, it cannot bee that such a knowledge should bee the Beginning thereof: vnlesse you will say that Accidents may passe from one Subiect to another, which is against all Philo­sophy. For Historicall Faith is in the Vnderstanding, and Faith of Person is in the Will: and therefore Faith [Page 56] of Story beginning in the Mind can haue no subsistence elsewhere, and iustifying Faith being perfected in the Will cannot bee begunne in any other Subiect. The passages quoted in the margent though you should rack them till they rent asunder, yet will they not confesse what you alledge them for. For how I pray you hang these things together? To you it is giuen to know the my­steries of the Kingdome of heauen; This is life euerlasting to know thee; Flesh and Bloud hath not reuealed this vnto thee but my Father, Ergo Such a knowledge is iustifying Faith begun. This is too violent astraining of Scripture, and as Volusian speaketh, is not a sucking of milke, but drawing of bloud from the dugs of the Church. Ep. 1. ad Nic. 1. As for the Minor I haue already sufficiently demonstrated the fal­shood thereof: only it seemeth strange why you should take it as confessed. For sure I am in expresse tearmes I haue affirmed the contrary: neither can I guesse of what words you gather it, vnlesse perhaps of that I say and specially the Gospell, which were too ridiculous. For that indeed confesseth the Gospell to bee a speciall part of Gods truth, but (not determining Faith onely there­unto) it doth in no sort specifie it, as is aboue fully pro­ued.

Historicall Faith not di­uided from the other two kinds, but ioy­ned with thē, is cause of Iu­stification. Againe I would pray you to speake more learnedly, and argue soundly: For if you had said formerly, No Historicall Faith only iustifieth &c. We had been agreed. For Historica Fides est causa iustificationis non solitaria sed socia; non diuisa sed coniuncta. But speaking thus absolutely you speake vnlearnedly. Well, thus you proceed leauing your Minor naked and exposed to the mercie of the World.

Agreed, quoth you? Nay hee can hardly agree with mee that is at warre with himselfe: and had I spoken ne­uer so learnedly, and argued neuer so soundly, yet I ve­rily belieue you would haue quarrelled at it, because I see you make contradiction of mee the onely rule of your speeches. That there is but one Faith you say it is nouelty not to grant, and that, Faith only iustifies I think you dare not deny: how is it then that in the margent forgetting your selfe you talke of three kinds of Faith, which except my Arithmetike faile mee are more then one? and ioyne fellowes with that in iustification in the body of your text, which yet you confesse doth onely iustify? But what is it that comes not within the sphere of your omnipotent Philosophie? The power of your Logicke hath already contracted Vniuersall into Speci­all: and why then may not the subtlety of your Meta­physicke find a plurality also in an Vnity?

But to be plaine with you, I say that Historicall Faith is so far from being a ioint cause that at all properly vnder­stood of Iustification, but onely as I haue said a Pre-re­quisite or Preparatiue thereunto. True it is that Faith of Person is neuer Solitary, but is euer conioyned with sundry other graces, and among the rest with Histori­call Faith: yet are not their operations to bee confoun­ded, because in the same person they are conioyned. Many seeds lye in my hand together, yet euery one hath his seuerall and distinct vertue: Faith of Person is neuer without Faith of Story, yet it is Faith of Person which onely iustifies. And as in the generation of man, the [Page 58] Sensitiue soule goes before, and prepares a fit organ for the infusion of the Reasonable, and yet not the Sensitiue but the Reasonable only doth informe: so in the repara­tion of man, Faith of Story proceeds, and makes way for the inducement of Faith of Person, and yet not Faith of Story but Faith of Person only doth iustifie.

Now whether in speaking thus absolutely I haue spo­ken vnlearnedly as you say or no, it skilleth not much, seeing I am sure I haue spoken truly.1 Cor. 15.9. What euer I am, by the grace of God I am, and desire so to bee vnto his glory. My want and inability I thanke God I know: yet know I no cause why in this mediocrity of knowledge and speech I should in comparison with you any whit disable my selfe. But sith as the Apostle saith, knowledge puffeth vp, 1 Cor. 8.1. God grant vs both the spirit of humility, that denying our selues and all our learning, wee may be con­tent to bee wholly captiuated vnto the obedience of the Faith of Christ.

The Minor which you say I left naked and exposed to the mercy of the world was this, that Historicall Faith is a generall knowledge, which indeed in my Treatise I did forbeare to confirme, not for want of sufficient proofes, but presuming that so euident a truth would neuer haue beene denied. But now I hope it appeares by what I haue aboue said to bee so well guarded with strength of reason and approbation of the learned, that henceforward it need not feare the rigor of your oppo­sition.

Acquisite Faith the Diuels haue according to that of Saint Iames, The Diuels belieue and tremble: Infused [Page 59] Faith the Reprobates may haue, as Balaam, Iudas, Ma­gus. Now iustifying Faith is proper to the Elect, and therefore historicall Faith cannot iustifie.

O yee noble Schollers marke this Syllogisme: I haue made your arguments hitherto for you Master Downe, and in this creeping and incroching argument tell you that you beg the matter in question. For I deny that your definition of Historicall Faith is a generall knowledge, but speciall and peculiar vnto the Elect in the beginning of their iustifying Faith, conioyned with the Application, and Resting vp­on Christ and his merits. And to bee plaine with you I tell you it is ridiculous yea blasphemous to say that Diuels haue Faith, or that euer Balaam, Iudas, or Magus had Faith. And so telleth you M. Caluin, In Iac. 2.19. Ridiculum erit si quis Diabolos habere fidem dicat, it is ridiculous for any man to say that Diuels haue Faith: For there is but one Faith, Eph. 4. and the other is spoken [...], abusiuely and by an equiuocation, and is but a vulgar knowledge, or rather peculiar shew by miracles &c. as the same M. Caluin sheweth right learnedly, 1 Cor. 13.2. Calu. ibid. and also telleth you, Abundé constat totam hanc disputationem de fide non haberi, it is plaine that this whole disputation Iam. 2. is not about Faith. Let this therefore serue for an answer I pray you to your first distinction of Historicall Faith, which you confound with a vulgar knowledge as appeareth before: knowing this, No man that finally contemneth this Speciall knowledge of Gods Word and specially the Gospell can be saued. For hee can neuer haue the other two kinds of Faith spoken of before, except he begin with this kind of Faith.

Surely I am very deeply beholding vnto your Ma­stership, hauing so small skill in Logicke, that you will bee pleased to forme my arguments, and to shape them in so excellent fashion for mee. But I beseech you spare your paines where you are like to reape little thanks for your labour. Such officiousnesse in an aduersary is not without suspicion: and if you may haue the hammering of my arguments, your weakest answers I doubt not will be proofe inough against them. Leaue me therfore I pray you to the meaning of my own weapons, and looke you well vnto your owne defence; for I feare mee you will hardly bee able to auoid the danger of them. For thus I reason, That Faith which Diuels and Reprobates haue, iustifies not: Historicall Faith Diuels and Reprobates haue, Ergo Historicall Faith iustifies not. Here you see nor creeping, nor incroching, but faire and plaine dealing and such as I am well content all noble Schollers marke it. But let vs see what you reioyne hereunto.

First, you say I beg the matter in Question. What matter? that Historicall Faith is a generall knowledge; but neither is that the matter now in Question, neither doe I any way beg it. For in this Syllogisme the Questi­on is, whether Historicall Faith doe iustify, of your Que­stion there appeares nor palme nor footstep: which yet in the former section against your negatiue I haue pro­ued to bee most true. That which you adde if it bee not senselesse is contrary both to your selfe and vnto reason. For saying that Historicall Faith is proper and speciall vnto the Elect in the beginning of their iustifying Faith, [Page 61] you plainely distinguish it from iustifying Faith, which is contrary to what you haue elsewhere said. If you still confound them and make Historicall Faith the begin­ning of Iustifying Faith, it is as if you should say the be­ginning of iustifying Faith, is speciall and peculiar vnto the Elect in the beginning of their iustifying Faith, which is altogether witlesse and senselesse. Lastly, to say that Historicall Faith which before was Generall and common as soone as it is conioyned with applicati­on and Resting on Christ becomes speciall and peculi­ar, is vtterly void of reason. For as Grace superadded vnto Nature in the Elect makes not Nature speciall and peculiar vnto them, but that still it remaines common vnto all men: so also Historicall Faith by accession of Iustifying Faith or Affiance changeth not its nature and becomes Speciall, but as it was euermore continues Ge­nerall. Generall I say, both Obiectiuely as stretching it selfe vnto all supernaturall reuealed verities: and Subie­ctiuely not being appropriated vnto the Elect onely, but commonly incident vnto others also.

Secondly you deny the Minor, telling mee plainely that it is ridiculous yea blasphemous to say that Diuels haue Faith, or that euer Balaam, Iudas, or Magus had Faith. If I should now temper my inke with some shar­per ingredient, and in the zeale of my affection say vnto you as the Angell sometime said vnto Satan,Iude 9. The Lord rebuke thee, it were no more then here you iustly de­serue. For it is not holy and learned men alone (which yet were too impudent) but euen the spirit of Wisdome and truth himselfe whom (I tremble to speake it) you charge with ridiculousnes and blasphemie. For doth not the Holy Ghost by Saint Iames in expresse tearmes say, [Page 62] The Diuels belieue and tremble? and by Saint Luke, Then Simon himselfe also belieued? Iam. 2.19. Act. 8.13. and did not Balaam prophecying of Christ, and Iudas preaching Christ as­sent vnto those truths wherewith they were illumina­ted? And what Orthodoxe Diuine is there ancient or moderne who falling vpon this question doth not ac­knowledge that Diuels and Reprobates doe Historical­ly belieue?De vnico Bapt. cont. Petil. c. 10. Saint Augustine is bold and compareth the Faith of Diuels confessing Christ, Wee know thee who thou art, euen the Sonne of God, with that memorable confession of Peter, Thou art the Christ the Sonne of the liuing God. This confession, saith hee, was fruitfull vnto Peter, but pernicious vnto the Diuels, yet in both not false but true, not to bee denied but acknowledged, not to bee de­tested but approued. And a little after hauing vouched that of Saint Iames, the Diuels belieue and tremble, and compared therewith the Faith of those who belieue the truth of God but liue wickedly, Behold, saith hee, Wee haue found out of the Church not onely certaine men, but Diuels also confessing the same Faith of one God, yet both confirmed by the Apostles rather then denied. Of the same iudgement are our latter writers, That Faith is attributed to Simon Magus, Inst. lib. 3. ca. 2. §. 10. saith Caluin, We vnderstand not with some that hee fained in words a Faith which was not in his heart, but thinke rather that being ouercome by the Ma­iesty of the Gospell, hee did in a sort belieue and acknow­ledge Christ to be the Author of Life and Saluation. Simon, saith Beza,In Act. 8.13. On the Creed. Ans. to Rhem. T. in Iam. 2.6. belieued with Historicall Faith. Historicall Faith, saith Perkins, is in the Diuell and his Angels. Such a Faith, saith Fulke, as is in Diuels, namely an acknow­ledging that there is one God, and so likewise of all the rest of the Articles of Faith to bee true, without trust or confi­dence [Page 63] in God. Finally, the whole Church of Auspurg, Whereas Saint Iames saith, Harm. Con­fess. the Diuels belieue and trem­ble, hee speaketh of an Historicall Faith: Now this Faith doth not iustifie; for the Diuels and the wicked are cunning in the History. Which last words I would wish you to note and obserue. For if Historicall Faith bee no other then an assent of the Mind vnto the truth of Gods Word, then Diuels and Reprobates so assenting, yea being cunning in the Story, must needs haue Historicall Faith. Adde hereunto, that if they doe not so much as Historically belieue, then the sinnes which they commit against the Gospell are onely sinnes of ignorance and not against knowledge, neither can they offend of malice, or fall into that vnpardonable sinne which is against the Holy Ghost.Mat. 12.32. Neither lastly can any bee said to haue made shipwracke of Faith, which yet the Scripture saith some haue done,1 Tim. 1.19. vnlesse perhaps you will say a man may make shipwracke of that which hee neuer had. So that now if I haue spoken ridiculously and blasphemously as you say, you see what Schoolemasters haue deceiued me, and vpon what reasons I haue been drawne into this fol­ly and impiety: or rather the world sees what folly it is in you thus against all reason to impute blasphemy and ri­diculousnesse vnto the truth of God, and the most glori­ous preachers and defenders thereof.

Yet Caluin, you say, telleth mee it is ridiculous to say that Diuels haue Faith, and, it is plaine that this whole disputation Iam. 2. is not about Faith. But is it possible that Caluin should striue against the torrent of so maine authority? or like the Philosopher of whom Aristotle speaketh forget, his owne voice, and vnsay that which he had formerly said? Certainly if you wil giue him leaue to [Page 64] bee the interpreter of his owne meaning you shall find hee doth not. For when hee denieth that Diuels haue Faith, and that Saint Iames there disputeth of Faith, hee vnderstandeth not Faith indefinitely, but particularly iustifying Faith. This is euident by his annotation on the twentieth verse,In Iam. 2.20. Here, saith hee, is no disputation of the cause of Iustification, whereby what other can hee meane then Iustifying Faith: And when hee saith the dispute is not about Faith, hee addeth forthwith, but of a vulgar knowledge which conioyneth a man to God no more then the sight of the Sunne lifts him to Heauen. Now what is that Faith which vnites vs vnto God, but onely Iustifying Faith? and what is this vulgar knowledge o­ther then Historicall Faith, by which the eye of the mind sees diuine truth as that of the body sees the Sunne? Of that therefore by Caluins iudgement Saint Iames spea­keth not,Beza in eun­dem locum. of this hee doth. And Beza who vpon this place treadeth in Caluins steps and well knew his mea­ning affirmeth that Saint Iames vnderstandeth not the same Faith whereby Saint Paul saith wee are iustified, but onely that whereby wee doe belieue there is a God, and that Christ is the Sonne of God, and that all things prescribed in both the testaments are true, which is in ef­fect the very definition of Historicall Faith. But for all your praysing of Caluin, you cannot bee contented with his exposition, but you must needs haue a tricke beyond him. For whereas hee by Saint Iames his Faith vnder­stand a vulgar knowledge, you will rather haue it to be a peculiar shew by miracles, which is the most sense­lesse deuice that euer was imagined. For who euer drea­med that the Question which there the Apostle dispu­teth should bee this, Whether a peculiar shew by miracles [Page 65] without works doe iustifie? And when hee saith Thou be­leeuest there is one God, thou doest well; the Diuels be­lieue also and tremble, what brute of Cuma or Arcadia would expound it thus, Thou hast a peculiar shew by mi­racle, it is well, the Diuels haue a peculiar shew by miracles also and tremble? Learne therefore and know that the Faith which Diuels haue, cannot bee Faith of miracles: for miracles the Diuels can worke none, being limited within the compasse of their nature which cannot pro­duce supernaturall effects, and neuer being ordained to bee the confirmers of Faith, to which end mi­racles were appointed. Now then to end this point, whereas you pray this may serue for an answer vnto my first distinction of Historicall Faith, I must tell you plainly that what you cannot win by force, you are not like to get by begging; neither can I at any hand bee in­treated to accept of friuolous and desperate speeches, for sound and substantiall answers. Whereas againe you make the ground of my error as you pretend to bee con­founding of Historicall Faith with a vulgar knowledge, You shall by your patience giue mee leaue still to erre that error, vntill by some new-found nicetie you can di­stinguish them, whereof I pray you let vs heare by the next. Lastly, where you wish mee to know that whoso­euer finally contemneth Historicall Faith cannot haue the o­ther two kinds of Faith, nor bee saued, I doe you to weet that I know it right well, but what you intend or would inferre thereon nor I nor I thinke your selfe know. Some thing was to be said to make a shew and to fill vp paper: but what and how pertinent it is, Hippoclides cares not.

The second is Faith of Promise and is a Perswasion or Assurance that the Promises of God made in Christ, to wit iustification, remission of sinnes, adoption, regenera­tion, finally Election it selfe and eternall saluation doe particularly pertaine vnto mee and are mine; Yet this iu­stifies not.

And I confidently hold that a firme and finall perswasion, application and assurance that the promises of God made in Christ to wit Iustification, Remission of Sinnes, Adoption, Regeneration, and Election it selfe, and eternall Saluation doe particularly belong vnto mee and are mine, is that which iustifies a man before God. You deny it, and thus you oppose.

Vnto my assertion you oppose only your simple con­tradiction, preparing your selfe immediately to answer my arguments. But because in my Treatise certaine words are promised before my reasons, whereat you ca­uill after your confused manner in a very importune and vnfit place: I will by your leaue rectifie what you haue disturbed, and maintaine them there where my owne method first ordered them.

This Faith of Promise although I deny not but in [Page 67] Scripture it is called Faith, and that euery Saint of God both may and ought to haue particular perswasion and Assurance: Yet I confidently deny that this Perswasion and Assurance is that which iustifies a Man before God.

A man may bee saued by this Faith, yet this Faith is not a iustifying Faith, therefore a man may bee saued without a iustifying Faith. Whosoeuer may bee saued by this Faith, and by your third kind of Faith may bee saued by two kind of Faiths, the one iustifying, the other not iustifying, which is absurd. Yet by your confession M. Downe, a Christian ought to haue this Faith as of necessitie. Then if hee ought to haue it hee cannot bee without it, and yet may ordinarily be saued without it as you say, and so saued with­out that which hee ought of necessity to haue to saluation: and also ought to haue that to saluation which will doe him no good to saluation because hee may bee saued without it. What absurdities and contrarieties be these?

Now alas were I as cunning as Theseus himselfe, how could I winde my selfe out of these perplexities and la­byrinths wherein you haue intangled mee? or were I as strong as Samson how could I breake in sunder these cords of absurdities and contrarieties wherewith you haue so fast bound mee? And yet when I looke more neerely vnto the matter, mee thinks the knots are not so intricate that there needs some God from the engine, (as it is in the Prouerb), to vntie them. For as Augustin [Page 68] saith, Doe but restore my words, and your calum­niation will presently vanish. All I say is no more but this that euery Saint of God both may and ought to haue particular assurance and perswasion: you report mee to say: A man may bee saued by this assurance, and that he ought to haue it as of necessity to saluation. Be­twixt which sayings there are as the Poet speaketh ma­ny high hils and deep seas: and therefore what iars or discords soeuer you haue here found, is in the song of your owne setting and not of my deuising. For what mad Syllogismes are these if insteed of your imaginary proposition you restore my true assertion, and then adde vnto it your Assumption and Conclusions, thus; A man may and ought to bee assured, But Assurance is not iustifying Faith, Ergo, a man may bee saued without a Iu­stifying Faith, Ergo, a man may bee saued by two kinds of Faith, Ergo, hee may bee saued, without that which hee ought of necessity to haue to saluation, Ergo, hee ought to haue that to saluation which will doe him no good to salua­tion: Doe you not see that against the canons of Logick, first, you haue one tearme in the conclusion, namely may bee saued, which is not found in either of the premisses? Againe, that neither tearme of the Conclusion is in the Maior proposition? And lastly, that the Conclusion is affirmatiue notwithstanding that the Assumption is ne­gatiue? Fie, fie that a Logicke-wright should so much ouershoot himselfe, and so shamefully transgresse his owne precepts. This infamy (to retort vpon you your owne words) had you not incurred, if you could haue abstained from peruerting my speeches, and adding vn­to them such impudent glossems of your owne.

But yet when I say a man ought to haue Assurance, [Page 69] doe I not therein confesse it to bee so necessary vnto Sal­uation that a man cannot be saued without it? Nothing lesse, and God forbid that euery ignorance or doubting of what wee ought to know, should presently exclude and barre vs from Saluation; for then no flesh possibly could bee saued. Although therefore when I say a man may bee assured I confesse a possibility, and when I say hee ought to bee assured I acknowledge a dutie: yet doth it not follow thereupon that such assurance is of absolute necessity. Necessary it may bee vnto the well-being of the Sonne of God, but not vnto his Being, as if hee could not bee a new creature without it: necessa­ry to cheere and solace him in the way to the end, but not vnto the end it selfe, as if without it hee could not as­pire vnto saluation. Such absolute necessity of assurance vpon paine of damnation I know none, saue onely of those truths which wee call fundamentall, among which I suppose your and my iustification and saluation are not to bee reckoned. And yet had I said (which I deny) that Assurance is necessary vnto Saluation, what inconuenience is it to say that neuerthelesse it is not necessary vnto iu­stification? For Saluation is the End, Iustification a meane or way vnto the End, and more things are subor­dinate vnto the end, then vnto the way: as vnto Saluati­on both Faith and workes are necessary, but vnto Iusti­fication Faith alone is required. And therefore also it is no absurdity to say that two Faiths are requisite vnto Saluation, as indeed Faith of Story and Faith of Person are, although but one Faith iustify which is Faith of Person. And thus much for your plaine-song: now let vs heare your descant and diuision vpon it.

Martiall. Emerepes a­pud. Apophth. Chrysippus.Dij mentem tibi dent tuam Philaeni, God send you your right wits to see these errors and to amend them. [...], Ne vities Musicam said one, Corrupt not musicke, speake not contraries nor nouelties. You can­not alwayes saile in the night but at last will bee taken, if you were as craftie as a Cuckow, Athanas. in Symb. as spake Pliny and Ari­stotle. Wee hold in Diuinity but one Faith and not diuers in specie, and that euery Christian man is bound to haue it hauing meanes giuen him from God vpon paine of damna­tion, and that no man can ordinarily bee saued without it. And therefore doe cast out your cobwebs, as following his counsell that said Vasis eijcias quas nectit aranea telas, knowing that your speeches endeauour to mingle water and fire together, which is impossible to doe. Neither are your forces any thing able to deceiue Gods Elect, so long time trained vp in his blessed schoole. Well may you consume your selfe as one said Comedo meipsum more Polypi,Alcaeus apud Athen. l. 7. Catull. Mat. 11. 1 Tim. 3.15. Act. 9. I eat vp my selfe like Polypus, but the Church can you not deceiue, for your sacke is full of Spiders as Catullus telleth one, Nam tui Catulli Plenus sacculus est aranearum. The Church is no reed but the pillar of truth, and there­fore it is hard for you to spurne against it.

Vnto this Rapsodie of sentences and prouerbs drawn in like Hercules oxen, and tyed together like Samsons foxes so preposterously by the tailes, were I a Grammar-schoole-boy againe, I would quickly patch you vp an [Page 71] answer in the same kinde. But now I affect not an opini­on of learning that way, desiring as becomes a Diuine rather to bee reall then verball. If children either in age or vnderstanding bee pleased with such Pedanterie, and delight to see so many babies in your writing, I enuie it not, so long as the grauer and learneder sort rest conten­ted and satisfied with the substance of my reasons. Only vnto that charitable prayer which you make for me out of that deuout Poet Martiall, that God would send me my wits againe, Lib. 2. Sat. 3. I know not what kinder wish to oppose then that of Horace the deuouter Poet of the two, that you which are franticke and bedlem-mad would something beare with those who are but a little discrazed and dis­tempered. For indeed you are right twin vnto the Lu­naticke gentleman in Horace, and as hee euery day visi­ted the theater and there [...]ate clapping his hands and keeping a stirreas if he saw some notable Tragedieacted before him, whereas the stage all the while was empty: so you here make much adoe, and tell mee of I know not what absurdities, contrarieties, and nouelties, and yet the ground you lay for them is in my words no where to bee found. Wherefore as Soph [...]cles being ac­cused of dotage read before the iudges his Ordipus Co­loneus which he had very lately composed,Cic. de Se­nect. and then de­maunded of them whether it seemed the poem of a do­tard or no: so because you charge mee as ber [...] of my right wits and fraught with nothing else but errors and contradictions, I appeale vnto the Christian reader, praying him to peruse and ponder my treatise, and if hee please this Disputation also, and then to iudge indiffe­rently betwixt vs whether I bee as this Festus accuseth me mad and beside my selfe, or else with Saint Paul, Act. 26.24.25. [Page 72] haue spoken the words of truth and sobernes.

1. Arg. If this were iustifying Faith, then whosoe­uer liues and dies without this particular Assurance can­not bee saued: sine Fide &c. without Faith it is impos­sible to please God. But a man may bee saued without it. Ergo.

I hope you meane de adultis, of men that haue meanes gi­uen them from God to get this Assurance: for otherwise I easily agree that God may extraordinarily saue whom it pleaseth him. But doubting not of your meaning, and denying your Minor, you take vpon you to proue it, first by an instance, and next by six reasons: All which let vs see.

Epist. 57.Taking me to meane de adultis, you doe no whit mistake mee: for as Augustin saith, that Infants know the things of God who know not so much as the things of men; if wee should goe about by words to demonstrate, I feare mee wee should bee iniurious euen to our very senses, endeuouring to perswade that by speech, the euidence of whose truth sur­passeth all faculty and office of speech. Neuerthelesse be­cause it is written without Faith no man can please God, and, the iust shall liue by his owne faith, many learned men haue hereupon conclude that Infants haue a Faith euen of their owne:Adacta Col­loq. Mom­pelg. Resp. de Bapt. in so much that Beza though of a different iudgement confesseth this to bee a very solid [Page 73] and firme foundation, and soone after addeth, that of this matter very learned Diuines, yea and the ancient Fathers also differ in opinion; for this Question, saith he, is among the number of those wherein because wee all know many things but in part wee may vary in iudgement, and yet the foundation of orthodoxall Faith stand safe. But you take it I meane de adultis, and as I haue said you doe not mistake mee, and therefore you deny my Minor: which when you say I proue by an instance and six reasons, it seemes you passed ouer my reasons perfunctorily and without attention, or cared not to let drop of your pen at aduenture whatsoeuer came next to head. For I proue the Minor by one instance onely, and the arguments fol­lowing are no more but fiue, and conclude not the Mi­nor but the maine Question, to wit, that Assurance doth not iustify: The instance is this.

I instance in those our Brethren of Germany who hold that Faith may totally and finally fall away, and conse­quently that there can bee no certainty of Saluation, whom yet the Church of God calleth and counteth Brethren, and it were vncharitable to censure of them o­therwise. Therefore (or at leastwise probable) Faith is not an Assurance.

Whatsoeuer our Brethren of Germany hold is true, but they hold that a man may be saued without this Faith, There­fore this position is true. O hominis acumen & argumen­tum lepidum! What mood and figure I pray you was this [Page 74] Syllogisme borne in? But proue your Maior; for we haue lear­ned Christ otherwise then to tie our Faith vnto the opinions of any one particular Church. Yea this argument sauoureth mightily of Popery, which I thought you had beene as far from as I know you are in this point from Christs verity and Christian vnity. For why I pray you might I reason thus as you doe to proue that works doe iustify a man before God, and merit eternall life. The Church of Rome holdeth so, Ergo, the Position is true? Ob. But you will say they are no Brethren: A. I answer they bee the Church of God if wee belieue M. Caluin and M. Bunny citing this place Antichrist sitteth in the temple of God: Ep. Tract. of Pa­cif. But hee sit­teth at Rome, Therefore Rome is the temple of God. But I pray you let vs not bee bound to defend the errors of our Brethren, neither too hasty to discouer them. And that this opinion is an error let the whole course of the Scripture de­clare. Da­ri­j Dari­j Whosoeuer liueth byaboue4 Faithaboue5 liuethaboue3 foraboue1 eueraboue2, But the Saints of God liue for euer, Therefore they liue by Faith for euer. All the gifts of God be without repentance, Faith is the gift of God, Therefore without repentance. That which continueth vnto the end and is made perfect cannot finally fall alway, Perficiet vs (que) ad finem bo­num Phil. 2. Fides est opus Dei. Ioh. 6. Ambr. 2. Cor. 6. Aug. in Ioh. Tract. 106. col. 513. But Faith continueth vnto the end and is made perfect, Therefore it cannot finally fall away. See what the Fathers say, Neque fides vera est si non sit perpetua, sed possit deficere, Neither is Faith true Faith except it bee perpetuall and cannot fall away. Credere ve­rè est credere inconcussè, firmè, stabiliter, & fortiter: To belieue truly is to belieue without wauering, firmely, stedfastly, and strongly.

There is a little triobolar pamphlet commonly [Page 75] called Baxters Logicke, the Authour whereof I thinke you esteeme as skilfull in that Art as euer was Zeno or A­ristotle himselfe. Though I could neuer find in my heart to loose an houre or twaine in perusing it, yet I perswade my selfe no man can better resolue you in what mood and figure this Syllogisme was borne. But if not satis­fied herewith you will needs know my opinion also, thus I thinke without all figure it was borne in a peeuish mood. For it is farre from my thought and purpose to maintaine that Whatsoeuer our Brethren of Germany hold is true, or that Faith once infused can either finally or to­tally fall away: and if you were not either desperately impudent, or brutishly ignorant, you would not so haue forced my words, and obtruded such vnreasonable rea­sons vpon mee. For thus I argue, Our Brethren of Ger­many may bee saued, yet they haue not this Assurance, Er­go, some that haue not this Assurance may bee saued. The Maior is grounded vpon the iudgement of Charity, and the censure of Gods Church calling and counting them Brethren. Such is the iudgement of Beza, Sadeel, Iewel, Epist. 2. ad Dudith. Posnan. As­sert. conf. in notà vnitatis. In Apol. and Defence of Apol. De Eccles. q. 5. c. 8. In thesi 5. On the Creed. Whitaker, Reinolds, Perkins, and whosoeuer is borne within the temperate zone of Christian loue, and not vnder the burning region of intemperate zeale, or frozen climate of vncharitablenesse. The Minor is thus pro­ued, because they hold that Faith may finally and totally fall away. For whether this Position bee true or false is not materiall in this place: onely if they hold so, as que­stionlesse they doe, then can they not bee assured, which is my Assumption. For to bee certaine of Saluation, and in possibility of damnation are incompatible and cannot stand together.

These things being so, to what end take you so much [Page 76] paines to shew that it is not alwayes true which some one Church holdeth, troubling the Reader with your need­lesse Obs and Sols? and why doe you alledge so many Scriptures to proue that Faith cannot faile, a truth I ne­uer doubted of? For herein you doe but plow the Sea-shore, and let flie at Sempronius when it was Titius that strake you. Neither is it a matter of any hardnesse or dif­ficulty to refell the most of your arguments if I would spend time and oyle about it: for like a bungling work-man you haue marred a good cause with ill handling. For example (to giue you a little tast of your weaknes this way) that wee are not to tie our Faith vnto the opini­ons of any particular Church you proue, because the con­trary sauoureth mightily of Popery. And yet Popery teacheth not that a particular Church cannot erre, nay doth not define that the particular Church of Rome can­not erre, but only alloweth that priuiledge vnto the Ca­tholicke or Vniuersall Church. Againe, to proue that Faith cannot finally or totally fall away thus you rea­son, Whosoeuer liueth for euer liueth by Faith, But the Saints of God liue for euer, Therefore they liue by Faith for euer. May I not now in requitall of your scoffing excla­mation crie out O hominem obtusum & argumentum stu­pidum? For first you conclude that the Saints liue by Faith, which is not the point in question. Secondly you haue one tearme in the Conclusion not found in the pre­misses, namely liue by Faith for euer, and so your Syl­logisme is a meere Paralogisme. Lastly, if to perfect vp the Syllogisme you vnderstand the Maior Propositi­on thus, Whosoeuer liueth for euer liueth by Faith for euer, then doe I flatly deny it: for they that liue for euer liue onely in this life by Faith, in the life to come Faith cea­seth, [Page 77] and then they liue by vision, not by Faith. But I forbeare farther to examine either these or the rest of your arguments, partly because wee agree both in the generall Conclusions,Demonax a­pud Plut. A­pop [...]h. and partly lest I proue as wise as he, who while his fellow was milking a ram-goat, held a siue vnder to receiue the milke.

But you say the German Church holdeth it: I deny it, neither can you be able to shew it, and therefore it is a great sinne thus to traduce the fame of so honorable Personages. Three and those no small lights in the Church of God I will shew which hold the contrary, and so leaue you to the Spirit of God who worke in you conuersion. In Postill. maior in Sex-ages. in E­uang. Luc. 8. de Semine. Luther in the place before, saith, Veri auditores sunt qui Verbum Dei perpetuò retinent & fructum adferunt: They bee true be­lieuers which hold fast alwayes the Word of God (which none can doe without Faith) and bring forth fruite. Bren­tius speaking of time-seruers saith that they did neuer truly belieue,In idem. E­uang. In ad Eph. c. 1. Bucer calleth that Faith which may be lost imaginem fidei & simulatam credulitotem, an image of faith and counterfait credulity. Now you haue heard these great Fathers of Germany against you, with what face can you accuse so indefinitely the Brethren of Germany of so no­table an error? But I will stay your leisure to produce those German-Brethren.

My leisure shall you not long stay for. That many doe not perseuere but fall from grace, both Scripture and expe­rience teacheth, saith Kemnitius.Exam. parte 1. de Iustil They that are most ele­cted [Page 78] may become Reprobates and therfore vtterly fall away, saith D. Andreas.Colloq. Mompelg. quaest. de Bapt. De gratiâ vni­uersali p. 26. Ib. p. 30. Dauid was elected, faith Heming [...]s, yet indeed lost the spirit, and was made guilty of eternall wrath vntill hee againe repented. And againe, As often as a sinner, saith hee, although neuer so enormious repenteth, of a vessell of dishonor and wrath, he is made a vessell of ho­nour and mercy: as on the contrary side whosoeuer is a ves­sell of honour and mercy, when willingly and wittingly hee fals into sinne, hee wasts his conscience, and loosing Faith becomes a vessell of wrath and dishonor. The Century-wri­ters,Cent. 1. l. 2. ca. 4. p. 275. & l. 1. c. 4. p. 120. That Faith once conceiued may be lost and shaken out, it is plaine by sundry examples and by the sayings of Christ: and, that Faith may bee lost the Apostles both by their say­ings, and examples doe demonstrate. Finally, the whole Church of Saxonie,Harm. conf. incon. Sax. art. 10. It is manifest that some that are re­generate doe grieue and shake off the Holy Ghost, and are againe reiected of God, and made subiect to the wrath of God, and eternall punishment. Read Zanchie in his Miscellanies, and there shall you find how much trouble that that worthy man sustained in Germa­ny among other things for gainsaying this point. For indeed this is one speciall Article wherein wee and the Lutherans (for them I vnderstand by Bre­thren of Germany) doe disagree, and the ignorance thereof argues that you are little or nothing at all ac­quainted with the controuersies that are betwixt vs and them.

But you haue great Fathers of Germany against mee, and can shew three no small lights in Gods Church which hold the contrary, euen Luther, Brentius, and Bucer. First Luther was no Lutheran, and not holding all those er­rors which those who are called of his name defend, is [Page 79] not to bee reckoned among them: yet thus saith hee,In artic. smal. cald. It is necessary to teach and know that when the Saints fall into manifest sinnes, as Dauid did, then Faith and the Holy Ghost are lost. Brentius indeed was a rigid Lutheran, and therefore it is likly hee held as the rest of his fellowes doe, for certainty I haue none hauing not his writings by mee. Neither doth the passage you alledge out of him euince the contrary; for as Excutifidians (giue me leaue so to call them) distinguish, they that haue true Faith in the trunesse of essence or existence, may yet as they say want true Faith in the trunesse of permanence or perseuerance. As for Bucer hee fals not within the com­passe of those whom I meane by the Brethren of Ger­many, for hee was none of those whom they call Luthe­rans.In Miscell. And yet as hee is alledged by Zanchie and others for the Perpetuity of Faith, so is hee vouched also by the contrary side for falling away from grace, as where hee saith: They who sinne against conscience by no meanes haue a true and liuely Faith. In Colloq. Ratisb. pag. 247. But suppose these three were such Brethren as wee speake of, yet what are they to Kemnitius, D. Andreas, Hemingius, Illyricus, Wigan­dus, Mathaeus Iudex, Basilius Faber, the whole Church of Saxony, and generally all Lutherans, who all hold as I haue affirmed? And therfore I do not as you say traduce their fame, nor accuse them wrongfully of error: they themselues haue diuulged and published it to the whole world in their books. And so my Assumption, that they haue not Assurance remaineth hitherto in his full strength and vertue.

You conclude vpon the premisses thus, Therefore or at [Page 80] leastwise probably this is not iustifying Faith. Dispute you positiuely, and conclude probably? Alas Master Downe, doe you preach after this manner at Cambridge to deliuer definitions by Sophistrie, when you should speake verè tru­ly? It seemeth when you said so you were not perswaded that your doctrine was true, but determined contingently and probably with fine words to ensnare poore silly hearers. For when you say, Therefore or at leastwise probably, you doub­ted of the Truth thereof. Surely this is not to goe recto pe­ctore with an vpright conscience in Gods cause. Ammian. Marc. l. 17. Plutar. in col­lect. But I hope wee shall take heed of you when you preach next, seeing you meane to tell vs the truth but only a probable tale. [...], A wise man will eschew your snares. Ep. ad Bos­phor. Bis enim ad eundem lapidem impingere stulto conuenit, saith Gregorius Theologus, It is the property of fooles to stumble twice at one stone.

Why Sir is it vnlawfull to conclude otherwise then Apodictically? or is it Sophistrie to vse Dialecticall Syllogismes in matters of Diuinity? Certainly then much to blame are all those Logicians who handle To­picall Syllogismes whose matter is contingent other where then among the Elenchs: and foully ouerseene are all writers both sacred and profane, ancient and mo­derne, who oftentimes dispute probably, knowing that although Demonstration only doe force and constraine, yet Probability doth very much bend and incline the minde. Saint Augustin did not so lightly esteeme of Pro­bable reasons: for Other writers, saith hee,I so read, that how much soeuer they excell in holinesse and learning, Ep. 19. ad Hieron. I doe not therfore thinke any thing to be true because they iudge [Page 81] so, but because they perswade me either by those Canonicall Authors, or by probable reason not abhorring from truth. Bellarmine vpbraiding Illyricus for his Coniectures is thus answered by learned Iunius, Contrà Bell. de transl. impl. 1. c. 11. Bee not so hot I pray you against humane coniectures: In a word whether wee would modestly shew our owne opinion, or refell anothers, wee deale humanely saying it is a coniecture, but to vpbraid humane coniectures is meere inhumanity. Dan. Cham. de oecum. Pont. Nay Daniel Chamier a very learned late writer in his booke de oecu­menico Pontifice doth professedly distinguish his argu­ments into Scripture, Coniecture, and Testimony: and will you therefore say of him as you doe vnto mee, that hee doubted of the truth of his cause, determined to ensnare poore silly Readers, and walked not recto pectore with an vpright conscience? Reioinder to Brist. reply. But so it is (I vse the very words of D. Fulk being almost in the same tearmes cauilled with­all by blundering Bristow) When you can say nothing a­gainst my assertion your selfe, you would make mee vncer­taine of it, and say that it is but a light suspicion of mine, because in one place before I come to the sound proofe of it I say it is a probable coniecture. And doth it follow therefore that I doubt of it because I offer a probable coniecture vnto other mens vnderstanding before by order of discourse I am brought to the manifest probation of it?

Well yet if Probable like you not, those that follow are Necessary, and I feare mee you will bee able to say little to them that leaue this without answer, and the weaker the argument the more disgrace to bee graueld by it. But my purpose in vsing both, was for the more strength and perswasion: for as Pindar saith, It is the sur­est and safest way in a tempestuous night to cast out of the ship two ankers. Olymp. [...]. 6.

2. Arg. That which is in time after iustifying Faith cannot bee that Faith; This is vndeniable. But this Par­ticular knowledge is in time after that Faith. This I proue out of 1 Ioh. 5.13. These things haue I written vnto you that belieue in the name of the Sonne of God, that yee may know that yee haue Eternall life. Behold Belieuing goes before and Knowledge comes after. As for that which followeth in the same verse, and that yee may belieue, I interprete it of Perseuerance and growth in Faith. Howsoeuer Belieuing and Knowing are here distinguished, and therefore are not all one.

I deny your Minor: neither doth that place of S. Iohn helpe you ought as wee shall see anon. I tell you that iustify­ing Faith is a Particular Knowledge, though in other tearmes by vs vsed, and by the Scripture set downe. So that where you say, a man first belieueth and then knoweth, wee say hee beleeueth, that is, hee particularly knoweth, appre­hendeth, and applieth Christ to himselfe perpetually and liuely to his saluation. So that Belieuing and particular knowing himselfe to bee elected are one: and that it is this knowledge thus I argue.

Before you come to bestow a word or two vpon the Minor which you deny, you thinke it good like a cun­ning [Page 83] and subtle disputer flatly to deny the Conclusion, and peremptorily to auouch the Contradictory vnto it, & then very prodigally to wast a multitude of words in the proofe thereof. A maruelous policy I promise you vtterly disabling me from farther replying: for as much as Logicke it selfe giues no precept how a man may re­ply vpon him who denies the Conclusion, and taking the Contradictory thereof as granted goes about there­by to disproue the Premises. For so doe you when you say Faith is a knowledge, and therefore goes not afore knowledge: my reason being contrarily framed thus, Faith goes before knowledge, therefore is not know­ledge. Doubtles had you not had the heart of Zenodotus, Martial. and the liuer of Crates, as the Poet saith, you could ne­uer haue stumbled vpon so politicke a deuise. But let vs heare your reasons.

What soeuer iustifieth a man is Faith: Dari­j Esa. 53.11. But particular knowledge iustifieth a man, Therfore particular knowledge is Faith. I proue the Minor out of the Scripture, By the knowledge of himselfe, saith the Lord, shall my righte­ous seruant justify many. Lo M. Downe here the know­ledge of Christ iustifieth a man, and is the same in effect and working that Faith is, and therefore are they both one, which you make to bee twaine by distinction and originall. Your speech helpeth Bellarmine that saith Faith may bee rather in ignorantiá implicitâ in an ignorance couched, then in explicitâ cognitione a discouered knowledge. Tom. 3. de iustif. l. 5. c. 7.

Iud. 14.18.Seeing here you plow with my heifer (as Samson sometime said vnto the Philistines) how is it that you read not my riddle also? I meane hauing borrowed this Obiection from my Treatise, why take you not from thence the answer also? Surely that you vrge the one so eagerly, and so diligently suppresse the other, I know no cause but this you knew not how to reply vnto it: and therefore I will by your fauor repeate the same againe, vntil you find out some forcible reason to driue me from it. The verbs of vnder standing and sence in the Hebrew tongue signifie not onely the acts of them, but of the will and affections also. So Psal. 1.6. the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous: And, Depart, I know you not: And I will not heare, see, &c. that is, God will not so know, heare, see, as to loue, and approue. And so may I interpret that of the Prophet, Christ being so knowne as to bee embraced and rested on by the will shall iustifie many. Adde now, that it is neither necessary nor likely your Particular know­ledge should bee here ment: for the Obiect of the Pro­phets knowledge is no other then Christ, but the Obiect of your knowledge is your owne selfe, or, your present state in grace and future Saluation. And what a sense­lesse speech doe you put into the mouth of the Prophet? for by your glosse it is as if hee should say My righteous seruant by making many to know that they are already iu­stified shall bring many vnto that which already they haue namely iustification. But Esay had in him both the Spirit of Wisdome and the Tongue of Eloquence, and there­fore pardon me if I cannot thinke he vsed to speake non­sense like you.

[Page 85]Where you say my speech helpeth Bellarmine who saith Faith may bee rather in ignorantiâ implicitâ, in an ignorance couched, then in explicitâ cognitione, a dis­couered knowledge; First, Bellarmine hath no such words, neither I thinke did hee euer dreame of an impli­cit or couched ignorance. Of an implicit Faith we haue often heard, and of a rude and confused apprehension the Iesuit in the place by you quoted speaketh: but an implicit ignorance was neuer yet heard of, and what meaning it may haue for my part I cannot see.De iustif. lib. 1. ca. 7. Bellar­mines right words are these, Faith is better defined by ignorance then knowledge: which saying of his how my speech helpeth I would you had taken a little more paines to make it manifest. For, whence and how you should collect it I cannot tell, except perhaps it bee thus, I say that Faith is not a knowledge; Ergo, I say also it is an ignorance. I answer therefore secondly, that Bellarmine and I, speake not of the same Faith, for hee speaketh of Faith of Story, and I of Faith of Person: so that when I say Faith of Person is not a knowledge I cannot help him who saith Faith of Story is not a knowledge. For, as for Faith of Story you cannot bee ignorant that con­trary vnto Bellarmine in my Treatise, I haue called it a Generall knowledge, so farre am I from defining it by ignorance with him. And yet I would haue you to know also, that when I say Faith of Story is a know­ledge, I meane not thereby Science of Conclusions ac­quired and gotten by demonstratiue proofe out of such principles as are of themselues knowne and euident. For how can a man by the light of naturall reason aspire to the knowledge of that which is supernaturall and aboue reason? But I vnderstand an explicit and distinct appre­hension [Page 86] of the necessary Articles of Faith, opposite vnto that brutish ignorance which Papists call implicite Faith and Blind obedience: which distinct apprehension Bel­larmine in the place before alledged denieth necessarily to bee required vnto Faith. Farthermore I would faine know how this followes, Faith is not knowledge, Ergo, it is Ignorance: for by the same reason you may con­clude, Faith is not Hope, Ergo, it is Despaire; or thus, Earth is not fire, Ergo, it is water, and so by your crea­tion all things in the world shall bee one of two, fire or water.Metaph. 12. But you should remember that simple negation is positiue of nothing, and that Priuations are reduced vnto that subiect whereunto their Habits doe belong: whence it followeth that denying Faith to be in the Vn­derstanding and so to be knowledge, I deny it also to bee Ignorance.

Againe, whatsoeuer bringeth life eternall bringeth iu­stification and is Faith: But true knowledge of Iesus Christ bringeth life eternall, Therefore true knowledge of Iesus Christ bringeth iustification and is Faith. The Minor I proue out of the Words of Christ in S. Iohn,Ioh. 17.3. Mel. & Pez. Arg. Theol. p. 3. notitia Es. 53. significat. non solum agnitionem personae & beneficiorum Christised e­tiam fiduciam quiescentem in Christo si­cuti & Ioh. 17. This is life e­ternall to know thee to bee the onely true Lord, and him to bee Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent into the world. The Maior is plaine, whatsoeuer apprehendeth that last which is life Eternall, apprehendeth the former, as election and iustification &c. But the knowledge of Christ appre­hendeth eternall life, Therefore it apprehendeth iustifica­tion. But hence it followeth, whatsoeuer apprehendeth iu­stification is Faith, True knowledge of Jesus Christ appre­hendeth iustification, Therefore true knowledge of Christ [Page 87] is Faith, and so consequently and conuersiuely Faith is knowledge, and this knowledge is Faith. Ioh. 19.25. Eph. 3.14.15.16.17.18. 1 Cor. 13. And by this meanes Particular knowledge commeth not in time after faith, but is Faith, and is knowledge in the beginning, & in proceeding is knowledge, and in the end is knowledge.

The Maior of your first Syllogisme that whatsoeuer bringeth life eternall bringeth iustification I deny. You say it is plaine because whatsoeuer apprehendeth the last such as is eternall life, apprehendeth the former also which is iustification. But first, what rule of Logicke allowes you thus to shift tearmes, and to turne bringing of life and iustification into apprehending life and iustification? For, howsoeuer you seeme to vse them indifferently, yet are they words of different significations: and therefore confounding them thus you make not so much the truth of the Maior plaine, as obscure the meaning thereof. Againe, chuse whether of these tearmes you please, yet is it palpably false that Whatsoeuer bringeth or apprehen­deth the last, bringeth and apprehendeth also the former. Rhetoricke brings a man to speake eloquently which is the latter: yet it is Grammar not Rhetoricke that brings a man to speake congruè which is the former. Physicke brings a man to the faculty of curing diseases which is the latter: yet brings not to the knowledge of the nature of things; for that belongs vnto the naturall Philoso­pher, and according to the old saying, where the Physi­ologer ends, there the Physician begins. So also in di­uine matters, Hope apprehends eternall life which is the latter, for it is the proper obiect about which it is occu­pied: [Page 88] it apprehendeth not iustification which is the for­mer, for then by your rule it should bee Faith it selfe, that being faith as you say which apprehends iustificati­on. As therfore when diuerse needles are by the Load­stone trained one after another, the vertue of the stone moueth the first, the first the second, and so of the rest, but the third or second is no way the cause of the depen­dency of the first: so in the concatenation of the causes of our saluation reckoned vp by the Apostle, to wit E­lection,Rom. 8.30. Vocation, Iustification, Glorification, the for­mer are mouers as it were vnto the latter, but not the lat­ter vnto the former. The reason of all in a word is this, because as I haue already shewed, more is required vn­to the maine end, then vnto the subordinate meanes: and therefore seeing saluation is the end, Iustification the meanes, not whatsoeuer is requisite vnto that is present­ly necessary vnto this.

The Minor that true knowledge of Iesus Christ bringeth eternall life, I also deny. For Particular assurance (which is the knowledge you must here vnderstand, or else you conclude not to the purpose) bringeth not eternall life, in as much as a man may be saued without it, as we haue already sufficiently proued. Neither doe the words of Christ in S. Iohn verify your Minor:Ioh. 17.3. for by knowledge there he meaneth not your particular assurance and per­swasion by which a man knowes he is iustified & shall be saued: but such a knowledge of Christ and his Gospell as is mingled with faith, and worketh our wils to accept of Iesus Christ for our onely mediator. And this know­ledge is said to bee eternall life, not because euery one that barely and nakedly knowes liues eternally (for as wee haue shewed Reprobates and Diuels haue Histori­call [Page 89] Faith) but partly, because no man can liue without it, partly because by it the Spirit of God worketh in the Elect that Faith by which they are iustified and so come to eternall life.

But what say I vnto the Minor deliuered in other tearmes, thus, Knowledge of Christ apprehendeth eternall life? I say first, it is not the same Proposition, because the tearmes are changed, neither are they equipollent. Secondly, I grant it to bee true, whether you meane by knowledge Dogmaticall Faith or Particular assurance: for by the one doe we apprehend that there is an eternall life, by the other that wee haue speciall interest in it. Well then, if it apprehendeth eternall life doth it not fol­low that therefore also it apprehendeth iustification? No, by no meanes: for as wee haue aboue demonstra­ted, it is not necessary that that which apprehendeth the latter should apprehend the former also. And yet though I disallow the consequence, the consequent I readily yeeld you, that Particular knowledge apprehendeth iu­stification: for so haue wee defined Faith of promise to be a perswasion or assurance that the promise of God made in Christ, to wit iustification, remission of sinnes, adoption, regeneration, finally, election it selfe and eternall saluati­on doe particularly pertaine vnto mee and are mine. What gather you now of this? Ergo, say you, it is iustifying Faith. How so? Because whatsoeuer apprehendeth iustifi­cation is iustifying Faith. Nay contrarily whatsoeuer apprehendeth iustification it not iustifying Faith: for apprehension followeth iustification, no man apprehen­ding himselfe to bee iustified vntill hee be iustified, but Iustifying Faith is in nature before iustification, that be­ing the cause and this the effect. And therefore vnlesse [Page 90] you will say that that which followeth is that which go­eth before, you cannot say that that which apprehen­deth iustification is that which iustifieth.

To conclude therefore neither is Faith knowledge nor knowledge Faith, but particular knowledge for ought you haue yet said or can say commeth in time af­ter Faith. But whereas finally you inferre that Faith is knowledge in the beginning, knowledge in proceeding, knowledge in the end, besides that the foundation vpon which it is grounded is vntrue it is cleane contrary also to that which erewhile you affirmed, that Faith is but one, compounded of my three nice distinctions, the first be­ing the beginning, the second the progresse, the third the end. For the third is Faith of Person, and in the Will, and is by your confession there the end of Faith, yet here you say faith is knowledge in the end: which things how they can stand together I see not, vnlesse you will say that knowledge is in the Will and so confound the facul­ties and operations of the soule.

In Ioh. 1. Ep. c. 5. to. 13. The place of Saint Iohn by you cited to proue your Mi­nor in your argument maketh nothing for you: because the Apostle speaketh of their increase of knowledge, and not of the originall begetting of knowledge, and so saith M. Caluin.

The text in the clearest tearmes that may bee distin­guisheth betweene Belieuing and knowing, and vnto that giueth the priority before this: but your glosse con­foundeth [Page 91] their natures, and saith that the Apostle here speaketh onely of increase of knowledge. Wo to the glosse that corrupteth the text: for if this bee S. Iohns meaning, it is as if hee should say, I write vnto you that know that yee are iustified & haue eternall life, that yee may increase in knowing that yee haue eternall life, and that yee may know yee are iustified and haue eternall life, which how vnworthy it is the pen of an Apostle euery one ea­sily seeth. But Caluin you say interpreteth the place as you doe. Bee it so: yet is it not the name of Caluin how venerable soeuer that may sway this matter. For seeing I professe to differ from him in the definition of Iustify­ing Faith, hee defining it by knowledge, I by Affiance: you may not thinke it vnreasonable, if in this point, and the explication of such scriptures as may seeme to con­cerne it, I desire rather to bee pressed with his reasons, then borne downe with his authority. But what saith Caluin? Because there ought to bee dayly proceedings in Faith, therefore he writes to them that belieue already, that they may more firmely, and certainly belieue. Where­unto I willingly assent, if you apply it as Beza in his an­notations doth vnto the last clause of the verse, and that yee may belieue: for then the meaning without forcing or constraining the words will bee as if hee should say, I write vnto you that belieue that belieuing yee may know yee haue eternall life, & knowing the same may constantly per­seuere and proceed on in Belieuing. For as the clouds poure downe raine to moisten the earth, and the earth moist­ned sendeth vp vapours againe to make clouds: so like­wise Faith begets Assurance, and Assurance being gotten doth againe confirme and strengthen faith. And thus doe the Century-writers expound this place,Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 4. p. 276. gathering [Page 92] from it that Cetainty of Saluation is an Effect of Faith and so euidently distinguishing knowledge from Faith.

3. Arg. That which in nature comes after iustificati­on cannot bee iustifying Faith. This appeares because Faith is the Efficient Instrumentall cause of Iustificati­on: and euery Efficient by the rule of Logicke is in na­ture before the Effect. But this knowledge or assurance is in nature after Iustification, Ergo, it is not Faith.

Your Minor is very false, and so proued by my former arguments. For particular knowledge and assurance of our saluation is not in nature after Faith, but is Faith and wholy infused by the Spirit of God, and begotten by hearing of the Word preached, and commeth to act by degrees accor­ding to the measure of grace giuen of God. For it is in Habitu sometime & not in actu,Faith habitu­all in power, actuall in the deed of belie­uing. as when one sleepeth his beliefe is not in actu, and yet hee liueth vnto God by his faith which liueth powerfully in him though not actually.

The Maior of my Syllogisme is vndeniable, because as I haue said Faith is the cause of iustification. For as D. Fulke saith vnto Bristow excluding it from Efficient cau­ses,Reioinder to Bristow. p. 172. Seeing Scripture often affirmeth that God worketh in vs by Faith, faith must needs be an instrumentall effici­ent when you haue said all that you can, except you will [Page 93] teach vs new Grammar and Logicke. The Minor there­fore you say is very false, and so proued by your former arguments. But those arguments are already answe­red, and thus I proue the Minor. For as for the rest of your idle and wilde talke touching the infusion, beget­ting, degrees, habit, act of Faith, I willingly passe ouer, lest pursuing you in this course I seeme to run riot and play the wanton with you.

The truth of a Proposition is alwayes in nature be­fore the knowledge of the truth: for Propositions are not therefore true, because they are knowne so, but they are first true and knowne so. Therefore this Propositi­on, I know I am iustified, spoken by one that is iustified, must needs presuppose the partie before to be iustified.

O. O. O. O. O.

What mum Master Baxtar? Hath Sigalion now in­stantly sealed vp your lips that you cannot, or are you suddenly become a professed Pythagorean that you may not speake? For me thinkes you that haue beene so vo­call and wastfull of your breath in so many impertinent and friuolous excursions, should not now bee so sparing and niggardly of a word or twaine vpon so necessary a point. But the truth is the argument is vnanswerable [Page 94] and inuincible, and therefore you held it better to say nothing, and slily to passe it ouer, then to marre all by saying nothing to the purpose. Which course if you had also vsed in the rest of this disputation, you should haue saued this scribling labor, and I had receiued virgin pa­per from you. And so, as Galba in the iudgement of all might haue beene thought worthy of the empire if hee had not beene Emperor:Tacit. 1. Hist. you also in the opinion of some might haue beene counted able to write if you had not written. But now that after so much loudnesse and cla­mourousnesse you are become so dumbe and silent, it ar­gues that though ability faile, yet will should not haue beene wanting, vnlesse the euidence of truth had per­force made vp your mouth. And so construeing your silence to bee in this point no lesse then plaine yeelding, I passe on to the next argument.

4. Arg. In conditionall Promises there can bee no Assurance of the thing promised before the perfor­mance of the condition. v. g. This is a conditionall Promise in the couenant of works, Doe this and thou shalt liue, Life is promised but on condition of Doing: and therefore vntill wee haue performed the condition, wee may not looke that God should bee reciprocall and giue vs Life. Now in the Couenant of Grace, Iustifica­tion is promised, but vpon condition of Faith: so saith the Scripture, Belieue and thy sins shall be forgiuen thee. Therefore the condition of Belieuing must first bee per­formed before wee can assure our selues our sins are for­giuen. If so, then Faith going before, and Assurance [Page 95] following after, Assurance connot bee Iustifying Faith.

I deny your Minor and say, there may bee an Assurance of Saluation in some measure, before there can bee the per­formance of Faith actuall in the highest measure: There­fore your Minor is vtterly false. For Faith in his true de­fined state is a firme Assurance and Perswasion, and a firme Assurance and Perswasion is, Faith, and both the Greeke and Hebrew words signifieth Faith (before cited) doe de­clare. Yea this Assurance is giuen vnto vs together with the hearing of the Word of God Habitualiter, and will shew it selfe Actualiter in due time, and therefore sometime is [...], and sometime is [...], the first in the begin­ning, the next in the Lords due time, and this can neuer be [...], but secundùm magis or minùs shall externas vel internas exerere vires, shew forth his forces either within man or without.

To make all plaine, my argument reduced into the right forme standeth thus, That which goeth before iusti­fication is not that which followes after iustification: But Faith goeth before iustification and Assurance followes af­ter, Ergo, Faith is not Assurance. The Minor of this Syllogisme is that which you deny affirming it to be vt­terly false, and you confirme it to bee so by this reason, There may bee Assurance of Saluation in some measure be­fore there can be Performance of Faith Actuall in the high­est measure, Ergo, Faith goeth not before Assurance, nor doth Assurance follow after Faith. The Antecedent of [Page 96] which Enthymeme I grant, for as much as there may bee Assurance in this life, but not the performance of Faith actuall in the highest measure, wee here Belieuing only in part, as the Apostle saith. But if hereupon it fol­low, Therefore Faith goeth not before Assurance, it will also follow, Faith goeth not before Charity or good works, because Charity and good works may be in some mea­sure, before Faith actuall bee in the highest measure: or thus, The elder Sonne is not borne before the yonger, because the yonger may waxe as tall as a Pygmee be­fore the elder bee growne to the stature of a Giant. Which Consequences if they be absurd and ridiculous, as absurd and ridiculous is it to inferre that Faith cannot bee before Assurance, because Assurance may bee in some measure before Faith bee in the highest measure. Nay farre better doth it follow from hence against your selfe that Faith is not Assurance, nor Assurance Faith. For if as you expresly say Assurance may bee in a lower measure when Faith is in a higher, how can they possi­bly differing so in degrees but bee differing things? For although it be true that more and lesse doe not diuersify the kind, yet is it as true that the same indiuiduall quality cannot at the same time bee both intended and remitted, no more then the same string in a Lute can at once bee strained vp, and let downe, and yeeld at the same time both a base and treble sound.

In the residue of this Section, you shew your selfe to bee one of those idle Oratours of whom Quintilian speaketh,Inst. Orat. l. 11. who neuer regard where the point or issue of the Question lieth, so they may besides the cause, either from the persons or out of some common place find oc­casion of declaiming.Lib. 6. Epig. 19. Such as was Postumus the Aduo­cate [Page 97] in Martiall, who being entertained to plead the cause of one who had three Goats stolen from him by his neighbour left the proofe of this, and fell a discour­sing of the battell of Cannae, of the Mithridatike and Car­thaginian wars, and other such impertinent matters. But neuer was there any offended more notoriously in this kind then you, all those speeches are nothing els but ex­trauagances and by-matters. For I pray you, how doth it concerne my argument to talke of the origination of Faith in Greeke and Hebrew, how Assurance is giuen, how it shewes it selfe, of Oligopistie, Plerophorie, and Apostasie, of the intention and remission of it, and final­ly of the inward and outward forces thereof? Surely,De arte Poët. as much as a Cypres-tree concernes a table of shipwrack as Horace speaketh. And therefore giue mee leaue to plucke you by the eare, and to say vnto you as did the poore Client vnto his Lawyer aboue named, Now I pray thee, Postume, say some thing at length touching my three Goats.

Where it pleaseth you to make remission of sinnes a Pro­mise vpon a Condition, I tell you with all the Church of God in all ages it is rather an encouragement to belieue assured­ly in Christ, as if hee should say, Thy sinnes bee forgiuen thee, therefore bee of good comfort, that both the former and latter, to wit forgiuenesse of sinnes and Beliefe might bee ascribed to the mercie of God.

The Minor which in the former section you denied, [Page 98] namely that Faith goes before iustification and Assurance followes after, in my Treatise I thus proued, because Iu­stification is promised vpon condition of Belieuing: and seeing in Conditionall promises there can bee no Assu­rāce of the thing promised before the performāce of the Condition, therfore in this promise we must Belieue be­fore we can be iustified, and be iustified before we can be assured we are iustified. Now to this you say it is rather an encouragement, then a Promise vpon condition: as if it were impossible that Promise vpon condition might bee an encouragement. Whereas me thinkes a Generall doth greatly encourage his Souldiers when he promi­seth vnto them preferment and reward vpon condition of some peece of seruice well performed.1 Cron. 11.6. And Ioab per­aduenture would not haue beene so forward and ventu­rous in the battell vnlesse Dauid had promised the office of chiefe Captaine vpon condition of smiting the Iebu­sites.

But you haue reasons for your saying more then a good many: for here like another Tertullian euery word almost you speake is a Demonstration. First all the Church of God in all ages affirmeth with you: and yet as shall plentifully appeare in the next Section, the Church of God neuer vnderstood but that Remission of sinnes was promised vpon condition of Faith. But as A­naxagoras when hee was driuen to his shifts and could not finde out the reason of some things, was wont to say it was the doing of Nous: euen so when you haue boldly affirmed that which you can by no meanes proue, it is your manner desperately to auouch that it is the saying of the Church. Secondly, you say this speech, Belieue and thy sinnes shall bee forgiuen thee is all one with this, [Page 99] Thy sinnes bee forgiuen thee, therefore bee of good comfort. Which happily wee may thinke not to be altogether so witlesse, if also you can perswade vs that a Physician saying vnto his Patient, Vse carefully the course of Phisicke I shall prescribe vnto you, and you shall surely recouer of your sicknesse, meaneth thereby no other then as if hee should say, Bee of good cheere, for thou art already reco­uered of thy sicknesse. Lastly, by this meanes, you say both the former and the latter, to wit Forgiuenesse of sinnes and Beliefe may bee ascribed to the mercy of God. As if Promise of Remission of sinnes vpon condi­tion of Faith were any way derogatory vnto the Mercy of God, but that both the one and the other may this notwithstanding bee ascribed thereunto. For if when God out of his soueraigne authority commaundeth to Belieue, it bee neuerthelesse of his grace that wee can and doe Belieue, according to that of S. Augustin, Giue what thou commandest, and command what thou wilt: why when out of his mercy hee promiseth Forgiuenesse if we doe Belieue, should it not bee ascribed vnto the same his mercy that we doe performe the condition and Belieue? But who knowes the salt that is in you?Eupolis. You are the onely Pericles of this age, Suada sits vpon your lips, and you alone leaue a sting behind you. For had it not been for this threefold cord of yours, I could neuer so easily haue been drawne from this truth.

Farthermore where you bring for the confirmation of your Minor (to proue Iustification to bee conditionall with the Papists) this place of Math. cap. 9. v. 2.M. Downes falshood, in ci­ting, constru­ing and ad­ding, to the Scripture. [...] [Page 100] [...], Confide fili, remissa sunt tibi peccata tua, Bee of good comfort Sonne thy sinnes bee forgiuen thee: you wrest it first to tell vs that Christ said to him, Thy sinnes be forgiuen thee if thou wilt bee of good comfort, which is false, and no part of Christs meaning, but rather the contrary, bidding the man sicke of the Palsie be of good comfort, because his sinnes (being the cause of his disease) were forgiuen him. Tom. 9. in Mat. In Mat. c. 9. This could Saint Hierome haue told you, yea Chrysostome and Master Caluin, E­rasmus, and the Greeke Scholiast. But what may wee ex­pect will bee the sequell of this, if you bee not hindred in your course? Well you haue a mind to doe mischiefe, but you want power as spake Plutarch to one, Harm. in Mat. 9. Archidamus Zeuxidis fili­us in Plut. M. Downe falsly transla­ting the Greeke text. and so I Hope shall. The second point which I challenge you in is false transla­ting of the Greeke text, contrary to the words them­selues, and all the world for 1600. yeares. You translate Mat. 9. v. 2. Crede fili & remittentur tibi peccata tua, Sonne belieue, and then thy sinnes shall bee forgiuen thee, when you should haue said with Saint Hierome, Ambrose, Beda, Caluin, Beza, Erasm. and the Church of England, Sonne bee of good comfort, thy sinnes bee already forgiuen thee. The Greeke word can by no meanes signifie to Belieue, but rather to bee confident or Bold, to trust to, and not to Belieue in, as Opibus confidere, Cicero, to trust to his riches, not to belieue in his riches, to assure my selfe that they shall benefit mee, not to belieue in them as my God to saue mee. Beside the Greeke word to Belieue, is farre off another name and nature. Againe by what authority doe you translate, Thy sinnes shall bee forgiuen thee, when you should say, thy sinnes are forgiuen thee? Haue you any commission in contemptum omnium Grammaticorum, to change tenses also, as you take vpon you vnder pretence [Page 101] of [...] to coine Distinctions? But I may easily spie your drift: you would needs parget your rotten cause and miserable Minor with this vntempered morter. Well, all the Schollers in our countrey will thinke the worse of [...] as long as they liue for this tricke. M. Downe addeth to the Scripture. But what intole­rable impudency is this and beyond all the rest to adde the word or coniunction [...], &, and, to the Scripture, saying (by your commission [...]) Belieue Sonne and then thy sinnes shall be forgiuen thee. Quite contrary is this to your knowledge, and conscience. Apoc. 22. Bethinke you therefore what a fearefull iudgement you incurre, and craue mercy at the hand of God while you haue time, confesse your errour and cancell your commission, so shall you haue the Church your Mother, and her Children your Brethren and friends.

That which in the former section you spake but lis­pingly, here you deliuer more plainely and articularly: for there you say it is rather an encouragement, but now you affirme peremptorily they are none but Papists that hold Iustification to bee conditionall, to such extremi­ties & straits am I driuen that I am faine to borrow aide and assistance of the common aduersary. But if I bee mistaken herein I hope I shall the more easily find par­don, because they of whom I learned it seemed vnto me to bee no Papists, and were commonly taken for very good Protestants. Christ, saith Beza,Conf. c. 4. 9. 4. is offered vnto vs to be possessed of vs with this condition if we doe belieue in him. On that condition, saith Vrsinus,In Catechis­moq de E­uang. is Christs righte­ousnesse made ours, if wee receiue it: Now that receiuing is the worke and act of Faith alone. The condition of Faith, [Page 102] saith Hemingius,Syntag. de E­uang. Art. 30. Cent. 1. l. 1. c. 4. p. 93. is required that the benefit may be appli­ed, that is remission of sinnes. The law, say the Century-writers, hath the Promise with condition of Doing and ful­filling it: the Gospell hath the free Promise with condition of Belieuing and receiuing it by Faith. That saith Master Foxe,De Christo gratis iustif. p. 237. 244. which properly wee inquire is for what cause or rea­son Saluation and Pardon of sinnes is promised, whether vpon some condition or none at all: And that the Promise is made vpon no condition no man I thinke will say, where­fore it remaines of necessity wee acknowledge some conditi­on, and that is Faith. In Camp. 8. Rat. In the Law, saith Whitaker, the condition was hard which no man could satisfy, but Christ propounds vnto vs a more easy condition, Belieue and thou shalt bee saued. Against San­ders cauils on the Lords supper. p. 424. De iustif. l. 1. c. 12. Ter. Eun. Act. 2. Sc. 11. Gods promises, saith Fulke, require the condition of Faith in them that shall obtaine them. Finally Cardinall Bellarmine who hitherto hath euer been estee­med no meane Papist reports this to bee the confession of all his aduersaries, and that they cannot deny it, That remission of sinnes is promised vpon condition of Faith. But Lord what ods and difference there is betweene simple folke and intelligent persons! For vnlesse you had told it mee I had neuer knowne that Bellarmins aduer­saries were Papists, nor that these men whom I haue na­med had beene wolues in sheepskins. Neither did I vn­till now vnderstand what you meant when you charged mee with Popery, and speaking pure Papist: your mea­ning I see was, that I spake right as Beza, Vrsinus, He­mingius, the Century-Writers, Foxe, Whitaker, Fulke, and all the rest of that ranke vse to do.

For confirmation of my Minor, and to proue Iustifi­cation to bee conditionall, I bring, as you say, that place of Math. Be of good comfort Sonne thy sinnes bee forgiuen [Page 103] thee. In handling whereof you tell mee farther, first that I wrest the text and falsifie the meaning thereof, then that I translate the Greeke falsly and contrary to the words themselues and all the world for 1600 yeeres, lastly that most impudently and quite contrary to knowledge and con­science, I adde vnto the Scripture. Telling mee moreo­uer that I haue a mind to doe mischiefe, but want power, that I contemne all Grammar, and parget a rotten cause with vntempered morter, and therefore must needs incurre fearefull iudgement, if in time I craue not mercy at the hand of God. Thus, Master Baxter, like Saint George a horse backe you fight with a painted dragon, and fai­ning monsters to your selfe set vpon them with such Herculean impetuousnesse and fury, as if you would a­maze simple people with your great puissance & powres: and then as if you had flaild to powder your true aduer­sary as well as your imaginary and strawen enemy, you giue foorth most terrible menaces and threats, that folke henceforward may not dare to meddle with your mo­thers sonne more. For where I pray you doe you finde this passage of S. Mathew quoted by me? and vnlesse you had resolued by falshood and forgerie to maintaine this quarrell against mee, with what face could you fa­ther the allegation of it vpon mee? No Sir, I did not so much as dreame of that place: only I say in generall that the Scriptures make this to bee the tenor of the Euange­licall promise Belieue and thy sinnes shall be forgiuen thee, Ioh. 3.10. little thinking that you who would bee counted a Master in Israel had beene ignorant of a doctrine so euident and fundamentall. For that so it is let these few texts bee carefully considered, Belieue in the Lord Iesus and thou shalt bee saued and thine houshold; Act. 16.31. Act. 10.23. That through his Name [Page 104] all that belieue in him shall receiue remission of sinnes: That whosoeuer belieueth in him should not perish but haue eter­nall life: Ioh. 3.15.16. Rom. 10.9. Gal. 3.22. If thou belieue thou shalt bee saued: That the promise of Iesus Christ should bee giuen to them that be­lieue. To these few I might easily adde six hundred mo, all which although not in precise forme of words, yet in vertue and meaning are all one with this Belieue and thy sinnes shall be forgiuen thee: and from them doe all Diuines gather that the Promise of the Gospell is not absolute but conditionall, if we Belieue as is aboue plen­tifully declared. Which being so, you shew your selfe in this Thrasonicall and swaggering section to bee too­too base and recreant, vtterly void both of forhead and conscience: otherwise you would not first so palpably and desperately haue belied mee, and then so impudent­ly and vnciuilly reuell vpon mee. Though you deserue it, yet will I not cast backe the dirt you here throw at mee againe into your owne face, I shall but defile my hands in so doing: rather will I as Saint Bernard coun­selleth; Breake the arrowes of contumely vpon the sheeld of Patience, Ser. 40. de modo benè viuendi. and hold forth the buckler of a good conscience a­gainst the sword of your malicious tongue.

But albeit I intended not, nor aimed at this place of Mathew, as being euery way vnsufficient to proue that iustification is promised vpon condition of Faith: yet is it not so abhorring from my purpose, but that it may af­foard at least a probable proofe for my maine conclu­sion. For. Beza in his annotations on Mark. 2.5. doth vs to wit that the word [...] may be translated impe­ratiuely, thus, Be thy sinnes pardoned; as if it were in the third person plurall of the Coniunctiue mood (which Diomedes called the Mandatiue mood) for [...], as [...], [Page 105] saith Eustathius, and [...] is vsed by Homer for [...], and [...]. The reason why it may thus be turned is, because the Scribes vnderstood Christ, as if hee himselfe had actually forgiuen the Palsie-man his sins, as appeareth in the sixt and seuenth verses, which they could not so haue conceiued if hee had onely told him that his sinnes were forgiuen him. Now if this bee the right translati­on, what say you to this argument. The Palsie-man first belieued (for so it is said) When Iesus saw their Faith, meaning as well the Faith of the sicke man as of them that brought him) and then after Christ forgaue his sins, Ergo, Faith goes before Remission: But Assurance, as wee haue shewed, followes after Remission, Ergo, it is not Faith. But you will follow the ordinary translation. I giue you good leaue, for I take it to bee the truest: yet from thence also thus I argue, The Palsie man belieued, yet was not assured his sinnes were forgiuen him till Christ told him so much, for otherwise what needed Christ to tell him what hee knew already, Ergo, Assurance is not Faith.

That from whence followes a blasphemous absurditie cannot bee a truth, for from truth nought but truth can bee concluded: But from this, that Faith is Assurance such an absurditie doth follow. What is that? That God commands to Belieue an vntruth, and to bee assu­red of that which neuer shall bee. For God being truth cannot command falshood to bee taken for truth. Nei­ther tell mee here of who art thou that disputest with God? For this is a ruled case in Diuinity, God cannot doe things which imply contradiction, and therefore not [Page 106] make vntruth to bee truth, or knowledge errour. Now that this absurdity followes from thence thus I demon­strate. God commands the Reprobate to belieue: for, for vnbeliefe the world shall bee condemned. But no condemnation but for breach of a commandement, for [...], and therefore they are commanded to Be­lieue. I aske you then what it is to belieue? You will say, to know to bee assured. Therefore God commands the Reprobates to know and to bee assured. But this is a blasphemous absurdity, therefore is your opinion ab­surd which infers it.

Two things in this argument are betweene vs to be dis­cussed: First, whether it bee a blasphemous absurdity, to hold that God commandeth a reprobate, to belieue that hee shall bee saued. You affirme it, I deny it. Secondly, whether in this point God commandeth a Reprobate to belieue an vn­truth, when hee commandeth a reprobate to belieue and hee shall be saued. You affirme it, I deny it.

That it is a blasphemous absurdity to say that God com­mands Reprobates to know and to bee assured, that they are already iustified and shall bee saued, I haue indeed affir­med, and I thinke haue also sufficiently confirmed. But that God should commaund a Reprobate to belieue an vn­truth if hee command him to belieue and hee shall bee saued, I neuer yet affirmed. What then? This that, He should command him to belieue an vntruth, if hee command him, to belieue that hee is iustified and shall bee saued. A small [Page 107] difference will you say betweene And, and That. So was there betwixt Shibboleth and Sibboleth, Iude. 12.6. yet enough to discerne an enemy from a friend. For this propositi­on, Belieue and thou shalt bee saued is Hypotheticall and Conditionall, as if it were said in other tearmes, If thou belieue thou shalt bee saued: But this, Belieue and assure thy selfe that thou shalt bee saued is Categoricall and Ab­solute excluding all Condition. Now that God, com­mands all both Elect and Reprobate to Belieue in the Lord Iesus, and promises vnto them Iustification and Saluation conditionally if they Belieue, I grant: but that hee commands the Reprobate absolutely to know and assure himselfe, that hee is already iustified, and shall hereafter bee saued and glorified, I constantly deny. Which yet your opinion that Faith is an Assurance ne­cessarily infers, and therefore cannot bee true. This matter being thus cleared, let vs now bring your answers to the ballance and weigh them.

First, therefore I answer, Mat. 16.15.16. God cammandeth all men to Belieue the Gospell to bee saued, and therefore the Repro­bates. If you demaund why hee commandeth them to be­lieue that which neuer shall be, I answer, So it pleased him: So answereth Iesus Christ the Sonne of God, Math. 11. v. 26. Now goe, Master Downe and dispute with Iesus Christ, and tell him, that his Father deliuereth a blsphe­mous absurdity. Search not too farre into the counsels of God, lest you bee ouerwhelmed of his Maiesty: reuerence his doctrine, if you cannot vnderstand it, for who is able to [Page 108] search out the reason of his wayes and counsels, Rom. 11. seeing they bee like a great deep?

No, Master Baxter, it is not for dust and ashes to con­tend with the Creator of all things: nor for base clay to enter disputation with so glorious a Maiestie. Whatso­euer that eternall truth speaketh, I reuerence and adore, and dare not presume to search a higher reason of his a­ctions then his will, knowing full well that his will is the prime rule and cause of Iustice, and therefore that it is both folly to seeke a former then the first, and impie­ty to subiect Gods will vnto some extrinsecall director. But yet with you who (as I take it) are made of no bet­ter moulds then my selfe, and are not exempted from those humane infirmities, whereunto the rest of your brethren are subiect, I hope I may bee bold to enter ar­gument and to hold disputation, as in other matters, so touching this present question also. To you therefore this I say that, God doth indeed command the reprobate to belieue vnto saluation, and yet neuer shall he belieue nor bee saued. The cause hereof I know to bee Gods will, and am content with all lowlinesse and humility to say with Christ,Mat. 11.26. Euen so O Father because thy good pleasure was such. But what is this to our purpose? For it is one thing to command a Reprobate to belieue the Gospell, ano­ther thing to command him to know and assure himselfe that hee is already iustified and shall bee saued: for to Be­lieue the Gospell is to assent vnto an infallible truth, but to bee perswaded of the other is to yeeld to that which neither is nor euer shall bee true. You should therefore [Page 109] euidently demonstrate out of the Scriptures that God commands a Reprobate so to bee assured and perswa­ded: and then if I rested not satisfied with Gods reuealed will, you might iustly bid mee goe and dispute with Christ, and forbid to search into the counsels of God lest I be ouerwhelmed with his Maiesty. But if in Gods booke you cannot shew it, I hold it a humane fancy rather then a diuine truth: and therefore though I may not curious­ly prie into the secrets of God, yet may I freely trie and examine the ground of mens opinions.

Againe it is an vntruth that God commandeth, when he biddeth a Reprobate to belieue and hee shall bee saued. For, if hee could belieue, he should then be saued without doubt, Ioh. 11. That hee cannot belieue, the reason is, Christ hath not washed him Io. 13.8. neither hath opened his heart to belieue. So that if hee could haue belieued, hee should haue this doctrine effectuall vnto him to saluation. That he therefore could not belieue is not to bee imputed to the falsity of the doctrine, but to the hardnesse of his owne heart.

The commandement of God is absolute, Belieue: the promise of Saluation is conditionall, if we Belieue, That the Promise is conditionall you denyed in your answer to the former argument: now also you deny that Belieuing is commanded. Whereby you bewray, how inexpert you are in the Word of righteousnesse, as the A­postle speaketh: and that whereas by office you are,Heb. 5.12 13. and [Page 110] concerning the time ought to be a teacher, yet haue you need your selfe to be taught the very elements of the Christian Religion. That therefore the Promise is conditionall I haue in the due place demonstrated: now that Belieuing is commanded remaineth to bee poued, or rather it is al­ready proued, thus, No condemnation but for breach of a Commandement, Condemnation for vnbeliefe: for, for vn­beliefe the world shall bee condemned, Ergo, Beliefe com­manded. But this reason according to your wont you cunningly suppresse, and hauing found out a new Art of disputation, thinke it enough to scorne the premisses, and with a bold face to deny the Conclusion. Yet for your further confusion vnto necessary consequence, I adde the expresse words of Scripture, This, saith Iohn, is his commandement that wee belieue in the Name of his Sonne Iesus Christ. 1 Ioh. 3.23. And vnto diuine authority I adde the humble consent of holy men of God. Beza expoun­deth that place of Saint Iohns Gospell,Ioh. 6.29. This is the worke of God that yee belieue in me, De gra. vni­uer. De Praedest. & gratia. on this wise, This is that which God requireth of you that yee belieue in me. The Lord commandeth, saith Hemingius, that we belieue. To­gether with the Promise, saith Master Perkins, is conioi­ned the Exhortation or Commandement to Belieue, which is more generall then the Promise, because the promise be­longs only to Belieuers, but the Cōmandement both to Belie­uers & vnbelieuers. Harm. Conf. Sax. of remis­sion of sins & iustif. Finally, the whole Church of Saxony thus confesseth, It is the eternall & immutable command­ment of God, that we should belieue in the Son of God, ac­cording to this saying (which is my very ground) the Spi­rit shall conuince the world of sinne, because they Belieue not in mee. Nay, see the lucke of it, that which here you affirme to be an vntruth, not many lines before you haue [Page 111] auowed to bee a truth saying, God commandeth all to Be­lieue, and therefore the Reprobates. Yea doe you not in this place vnsay that which you say, saying, it is vntrue that God commandeth when hee biddeth a Reprobate to Be­lieue? For hee that Biddeth in my vnderstanding com­mandeth: vnlesse you that complaine of nice and subtle Distinctions in others, haue learned of late by some new-found nicetie to distinguish there where the letters and syllables onely differing, there is otherwise an i­dentie of nature and definition. A man would wonder how you could so soone forget your selfe, but that it is commonly seene a liar hath seldome or neuer a good memory.

But to proue that God commands not a Reprobate to belieue you come vpon mee with a most mighty and insoluble Enthymem. What is that I beseech you? Ma­rie this. A Reprobate if he could belieue, he should then without doubt bee saued: Ergo, God doth not command him to Belieue. A desperate Demonstration I promise you: for by the same reason you may conclude, that God commands him not to obey the Precepts of the Morall law neither, Because if hee could keepe them he should bee saued. What you conceiue may bee the knot and sowlder as it were of this Consequence I cannot well i­magine, vnlesse it be one of two, either this, God pro­miseth the Reprobate hee shall bee saued if hee Belieue, Ergo, hee commandeth him not to Belieue: or this, The Reprobate cannot belieue, Ergo, God comman­deth him not to Belieue, for your words seeme to bee indifferent either way. If you intend the former, first, you contradict your owne selfe, for in your answer to the former argument you deny Iustification and Salua­tion [Page 112] to bee promised vpon condition of Faith. Second­ly, euery Catechumenus and Nouice in Diuinity knowes that God vnto Commandement vsually annexeth Pro­mise to draw on Obedience: as in the Couenant of works, first hee Commandeth, Doe this and then Pro­miseth, if thou doe it thou shalt liue; and in the Coue­nant of Grace also, first hee Commandeth, Be­lieue, and then addeth the Promise, if thou belieue thou shalt bee saued. So that Promise and Com­mandement exclude not one the other, neither doth it follow, Faith is the condition of a Promise, Ergo, it is not commanded. If you vnderstand the latter, then know that as Augustin, and Barnard, and all Diuines not infected with Pelagianisme say, God commandeth some things which man cannot doe, to the end that knowing his owne insufficiency, hee may craue of him the helpe of grace that hee may doe them. And if God doe command any supernaturall action vnto the Repro­bate as without doubt hee doth, then doth hee also com­mand some thing aboue his power: for being meerely naturall he cannot produce any supernaturall operation. Whereupon it followeth euidently that although a Re­probate cannot belieue, yet neuerthelesse hee may bee commanded to Belieue.

Well, yet you will proue that a Reprobate cannot Be­lieue. To what end? for it is not denied, and you should rather strengthen your Consequence, and proue that therefore Faith is not commanded. Notwithstanding let vs heare your reason, for it seemeth to bee very re­markable. That hee cannot Belieue, say you, the reason is, Christ hath not washed him. If you had said as followeth, Christ hath not opened his heart to Belieue, or, it is to [Page 113] bee imputed to the hardnes of his owne heart, and had stopt there, I should easily haue yeelded vnto you: but now that you say the reason is because Christ hath not washed him, I must needs tell you it is vnreasonable rea­son, for it implies that wee are first washed and then Be­lieue, whereas both Scripture and the analogie of Faith teach vs that we first belieue and then afterward are wa­shed. Search the booke of God,Rom. 3.28. Act. 15.9. Rom. 3.25. and there shall you read, that wee are iustified by Faith, that the heart is purified by Faith, that God hath set forth Iesus Christ to bee a reconciliation through Faith in his Blood. Which Blood although it haue in it sufficient vertue and force to cleanse vs from the leprosie of all our sinnes, yet doth it not actually wash or purge any vnlesse it bee par­ticularly applied and accepted by Faith. Otherwise, as Ambrose excellently speaketh, if thou belieue not, Christ descended not for thee, Christ suffered not for thee. De fide ad Gratian. Wher­by it manifestly appeareth that Remission of sinnes is an effect or consequence of Faith, and that therefore the reason of the Reprobates vnbeliefe, is not because Christ hath not washt him, but rather the reason why Christ hath not washed him is, because hee doth not belieue, nor hath by Faith applyed the blood of Christ to him­selfe for the remission of his sinnes. Where you adde negatiuely, that the Reprobates vnbeliefe, is not to bee imputed to the falsity of the Doctrine, whether you meane thereby either this Doctrine that God commands him to belieue, or this that it is absurd hee should command him to bee assured, I confesse indeed, that neither is the cause why the Reprobate cannot belieue: but that either of them is false, you shall neuer bee able to shew, and I haue sufficiently proued the contrary.

Ex. 14.4. Rom. 9. If you aske, who hath hardned him? I answer, God; who hath power ouer the vessels of his owne making, to shew his Iustice or mercy vpon them as pleaseth his diuine Maiesty. If you will demand the cause, why God would not giue him a fleshly heart to belieue? Ioh. 12.39.40. I answer I know not: Est enim aliqua docta ignorantia, there is a certaine learned igno­rance, as well teacheth Master Caluin; neither can our shal­low wits search out the cause of his doings. But this I know that it is so, and the cause thereof principally to be his good pleasure. To conclude therefore this point, this Doctrine bringeth no blasphemous absurdity, as you impurely and impiously affirme, neither is the Doctrine false or implieth contradictories, though our blind natures cannot vnder­stand the things that bee of God. Of this matter and argu­ment, let these places bee well weighed, and by you either answered or reuerenced. Rom. 11.23. Gal. 3.22. Act. 13.48. 2 Thess. 3.2. Mat. 13.11. Prou. 16.4. Rom. 9.1 [...], 19, 20. and from henceforth leaue off to greeue the Spirit of God, wherewith the elect are sealed vnto the day of Redemption.

This is right that Sophysticall place which Aristotle in his Topicks calleth Apagogen, Lib. 2. c. 5. See Muret. var. lect, l. 7. c. 10. that is Abduction. For whereas I goe about to proue, that God commandeth not a Reprobate to bee assured, because so doing hee should command him to belieue a manifest falshood, which implieth contradiction, and affirmeth errour to bee truth: you not knowing what answer to make vnto [Page 115] the argument, deriue the attention of the Reader ano­ther way, and runne out into the common place of Gods secret counsels, and the cause of Induration, and the Reprobates inability to belieue, discoursing too and fro of these things at pleasure, hauing no other reason for so doing but onely, because in my argument you read the word Reprobate, and that I told you, in this point you had no iust cause to say vnto mee (as in our priuate con­ference you did) who art thou that disputeth with God? And yet as if all the while you had been in the very bow­els of the cause, and had not wandred so much as a haires breadth from it, you conclude very soberly and sadly, Therefore this Doctrine bringeth no absurdity, neither is false, nor implyeth contradiction. But faine would I know what the Premisses are whereupon you inferre this Therefore: or whether by the rules of your Logicke you may conclude without them: Vnlesse this bee the sequele I know not what to make of it, Our shallow wits cannot search out the cause of Gods works, Ergo, wee may not thinke it absurd that God shoul [...] command a Reprobate to belieue and assure himselfe of that which neither is nor neuer shall be true. Vaine man, proue once that God com­mandeth so, and I will presently grant, it is not absurd to thinke so. Why dispute you so earnestly of the [...] why it is, when I flatly deny the [...] that it is? And why doe you thus alwayes grate vpon the Conclusions, and make so little reckoning to answer the proofes I bring for it?

Well, not to wrestle with words any longer, nor so fruitlesly to beate the aire, because you thinke like the Cuttle-Fish to escape the net, by casting about you a fil­thy inke of foule speeches, telling me I speak impurely & [Page 116] impiously, and charging me with Presumption and Cu­riosity, for inquiring into the Counsels of God: giue mee leaue by distinguishing matters to cleare the water which you wittingly and purposely haue pudled, and withall to let the Reader see how basely and cowardly you seeke out starting holes to shift your selfe aside from my arguments, rather then Schollerly to answer them by some conuenient solutions. Consider therefore I pray you these few Positions.

1. The secret Counsels of God are those matters which hee hath treasured vp in the closet of his owne knowledge, and doth not disclose vnto mankind: but what truth soeuer it hath pleased him in wisdome to re­ueale vnto vs, and hath registred in his Word, is not to bee esteemed nor taken for a secret.

2. As to search into the hidden and secret Counsels of God is damnable Presumption, so not to search and inquire into his reuealed will is damnable Negligence. For as Moyses saith, The secret things belong vnto the Lord our God, Deut. 29.29. but the things reuealed vnto vs and our chil­dren for euer. De vocat. Gent. l. 1. c. 7. Whereupon Prosper, The things which God would haue hidden must not be searched, and the things which hee hath made manifest must not bee neglected, lest in them we be found vnlawfully curious, and in these dam­nably vngratefull.

3. They therefore that painfully and diligently tra­uell to find out such truths as are either expressed or in­folded in the written word, are not to bee tearmed Cu­rious but Studious. So distinguisheth Saint Augustin, Although both, De v [...]il. cre­dendi ca. 9. saith hee, bee carried with a great desire of knowing, yet the curious man inquireth those things which nothing concerne him, and the Studious man contrarily [Page 117] inquireth those things which doe pertaine vnto him.

4. This is a reuealed truth that, There is no contra­diction in God, and that Hee cannot doe those things which imply contradiction,2 Cor. 1.17.18.19.20. Heb. 6.18. or are repugnant vnto the nature and definition of a thing. For in God, as saith S. Paul, there is not yea and nay, but yea and Amen; nei­ther is it possible that hee should lie, or deny himselfe, and it is rather impotency then Power so to bee able to doe, whereas contrarily,De Trin. l. 15. c. 14. as elegantly Saint Augustin saith Powerfully hath hee not power to doe this, neither is it infirmity but firmity, because that truth cannot bee false.

5. These two Propositions are contradictory, The Reprobate is iustified, The Reprobate is not iustified: and, The Reprobate shall bee saued, The Reprobate shall not bee saued. God therefore cannot make that they should be true at once. For as Saint Augustin saith,Contrà Fau­stum Man. l. 26. c. 5. Whosoeuer saith, if God bee omnipotent, let him make that those things which haue been haue not been, sees not that he faith, if God be omnipotent, let him make that those things which are true in that they are true be false.

6. One part of the Contradiction is necessarily false namely this, The Reprobate is iustified,Rom. 8.30. The Reprobate shall bee saued: for they onely who are Predestinated vnto life, are as Saint Paul saith, effectually called, and they onely who are effectually called are iustified and shall bee glorified. And if it were possible that they should bee saued, then were there change in the vnchan­geable decree of God which hath finally reiected them, which is impossible.

7. Hee that commands a Reprobate that is not iusti­fied and shall neuer bee saued, to belieue that hee is iusti­fied and shall be saued, implieth a Contradiction there­in, [Page 118] and makes Falshood to bee Truth, and Faith errour. For according to that infallible maxime, Falshood is not vnder Faith: and therefore if the Obiect bee Falshood it is not Faith which apprehendeth it for true, if it bee Faith Falshood is not the Obiect thereof. So that hee which commands that false Proposition to bee belieued, makes that to bee Faith which cannot beare the definiti­on of Faith, and that to bee the Obiect which is not the Obiect thereof, that is as I said makes Faith to bee error, and Falshood Truth, which are contradictories.

8. God therefore neither doth nor can so com­mand: neither is it impure or impious to affirme so much, being in the Word of God so manifestly reuealed. Impi­ous rather and blasphemous is it to say the contrary: for it imputes impotency and weaknes vnto God, making him to say, Yea and Nay, and to auouch that for truth which is euidently false.

9. But this opinion, that Faith is an Assurance, infers this blasphemous absurdity. For as I haue shewed, God cōmands all men, euen Reprobates to belieue now to be­lieue as you say is to bee assured of iustification and Sal­uation, Ergo, God commands the Reprobate to be assu­red of his Iustification and Saluation, which is absurd.

10. Absurd therefore is that opinion that Faith is Assurance which infers it. For from truth no absurdity or blasphemie but onely truth can follow. These few Positions I pray thee, Gentle Reader, consider diligent­ly, and compare Master Baxters reply with them, and then bee iudge whether hee paint not gourds as it is in the Prouerbe, and talke cleane beside the purpose.

Those places of Scripture which you desire may bee well waighed, and then by mee either answered or reue­renced, [Page 119] I haue according to your desire duly examined, and doe from my heart adore them as being the words of the Eternall Verity: and this answer doe I giue vnto them, that not one of them touches the question in de­bate betwixt vs.Rom. 11.23 The first telleth vs that the Iewes if they persist not in infidelity, shall againe by the power of God bee ingrafted; Gal. 3.22. the second that the Scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne, that the promise by the Faith of Iesus Christ might bee giuen to them that Belieue; both which argue against your selfe that Faith is the condition of the Pro­mise; the third saith that as many as were ordained vnto e­ternall life belieued; Act. 13.48. 2. Thess. 3.2. Mat. 13.11. the fourth that euery man hath not Faith; the fift that to know the mysteries of the kingdome of Heauen is giuen to some and denied to other some, by which three it is cleere, that Reprobates doe not belieue,Prou. 16.4 Rom. 9.18.19.20. but the Elect onely: the sixt affirmeth that God made the wicked for the euill day; the last that God sheweth mercy vpon whome hee will, and hardneth also whome he will, and that in this point there is no disputing with God, inti­mating therein that there is both an Election and Repro­bation, and that both depend vpon the good pleasure of God. But not one of them proueth that God comman­deth a Reprobate to assure himselfe of his present iustificati­on and future Saluation which is the matter in question: and therefore I hope I may notwithstanding them all freely conclude that as God cannot command to doe that which is vniust, because hee is iustice it selfe, so he cannot command to belieue that which is vntrue because hee is truth it selfe. Neither doe I (I trust) so conclu­ding, grieue the Spirit of God, although perhaps there­in I greeue your stubborne spirit, which hath (I feare me) throughout this reply too much rebelled against the [Page 120] light: and therefore take heed lest you your selfe greeue the Spirit of God, Eph. 4.30. wherewith the elect are sealed vnto the day of Redemption.

Arg. 6. That which the wicked may haue, can­not bee iustifying Faith, for it is The Faith of the E­lect: But the wicked may haue this Perswasion, yea and many haue beene most confidently perswaded that they are in the fauour of God. You will say it is true Perswa­sion: But I say if forme make truth, they are as formal­ly, and therefore as truly perswaded of it as the godly. If the Godly then are therefore and for this cause iusti­fied, because they are strongly perswaded they are Iusti­fied, then why should not the wicked likewise bee iusti­fied by his strong Perswasion. But in truth these kind of speeches are vnreasonable, and senselesse, and so that opinion cannot be reasonable.

Many die and are saued that haue not a full Perswasion and assurance of their Saluation, yet are saued by Faith. I will answer you when you shew mee the man that so did die and was saued, and How you know that hee had at his death no full Assurance of his Saluation in Christ Iesu, and yet had Faith, and when you proue that there is at the houre of death (when the elect are made without spot or wrinkle) in the Saints of God a doubtfull Faith.

That many Reprobates and wicked men are strongly [Page 121] perswaded they are in the grace and fauor of God, no­thing is more cleere and manifest.Prou. 30.12. There is a generati­on, saith Salomon, that are cleane in their owne eyes, and yet are not washed from their filthinesse. Reu. 3.17. And the Angell of the Church of Laodicea saith of himselfe that hee is rich, and growne to great wealth, and had need of nothing: Vers. 14. Vers. 17. and yet in the iudgement of him that is Amen, the faith­full and true witnesse, was wretched, and miserable, Inst. l. 3. c. 2. §. 11. and poore, and blind, and naked. Yea, Experience it selfe, saith Caluin, sheweth, that Reprobates sometime are affe­cted with the like feeling almost that the elect are, that in their owne iudgement they differ nothing at all from the Elect. Such is the deceitfulnesse of mans heart, and the blindnesse of his selfe-loue, that it makes him easily o­uerweene himselfe, and to promise peace vnto his soule when hee is in the ready way vnto destruction. You will say that the Perswasion of the Reprobate and wic­ked, is built vpon a false and erronious ground, and ther­fore is Presumption rather then true Assurance. For answer hereunto consider, that the Elect of God before his Iustification is but a wicked man, whence Diuines vse to call it, The Iustification of the wicked, warrant­ed therein by that of Saint Paul,Rom. 4.5. To him that worketh not, but belieueth in him that iustifieth the wicked, his faith is imputed vnto righteousnesse. Rom. 3.28. Consider moreouer that Faith as a cause goeth before Iustification, for wee are iustified by Faith: and therefore if the Elect bee wicked before his iustification, hee must needs much more bee wicked before the first act of his Belieuing. In regard whereof Saint Augustin saith,Enar. in Ps. 311 Know thou that Faith when it was giuen thee found thee a sinner. These things being so, as without controuersie they are, I then de­mand [Page 122] of you, if Faith bee Assurance, what ground hath the Elect for his Assurance in the first Act of his Faith, more then the Reprobates and wicked haue? Certainly vnlesse you will flye with the Anabaptists vnto I know not what Enthusiasms and sudden reuelations, grounded vpon no arguments, formerly by the Holy Ghost im­printed in the soule, you cannot possibly shew any: see­ing before Faith they lie together in the same masse of corruption, and are alike liable vnto eternall damnation. Now vnto this argument thus enlarged and explaned, let vs see what answer you returne.

When I can shew the man that died without Assurance and was saued, and how I know at his death hee had no full Perswasion, and can proue that there is at the houre of death in the Saints a Doubtfull Faith, then (you say) you will answer mee. What M. Baxter, and not till then? Sup­pose I cannot satisfy your demands (as indeed who knoweth what is in the heart of man at the houre of his death?) shall my argument therefore for euer stand vn­answered?Declar. of Spir. Desert. And yet M. Perkins telleth you that, When a Professor of the Gospell shall despaire at his end, men are to leaue secret iudgements vnto God, and charitably iudge the best of him▪ and hee instanceth in one M. Chambers, who in his sicknesse grieuously despaired, and cried out that hee was damned, yet, saith hee, it is not for any to note him with the blacke marke of a Reprobate. The like censure elsewhere giueth he of Francis Spiera: Yea fur­ther, saith hee, When a Professor of the Gospell shall make away himselfe, though it bee a fearefull case, yet still the same opinion must bee carried. So that it seemes by this learned mans iudgement (who for ought I know is not singular herein but followeth the common opinion of [Page 123] other Diuines) that it is possible for a man to die in Faith and so to bee saued, and yet to die in Despaire and so without Assurance: whence it followeth necessarily that Faith is not Assurance.

But this answer of yours,Antholog. l. 2, [...]. brings mee in minde of a pretie Epigram of Nicarchus, which you may read in the Greeke anthologie. A deafe man commences sute against another deafe man, before a deafe iudge: the plaintife pleads, that the defendant owes him fiue months rent for his house, the defendant answers for himselfe that hee had been grinding at mill all night, the Iudge looking vpon them, why contend yee thus good fellowes, quoth hee? is shee not mother to you both? then keepe her both hardly. Semblable hereunto is your answer, for as if you were as blind as they were deafe, and had not eyes in your head to read my wri­ting, when I speake of onions, as it is in the Prouerbe, you answer of garlicke, and roue the whole heauen wide from the marke you should shoot at. I say that the wic­ked may bee strongly perswaded, and therefore Faith is not a Perswasion, you like the deafe defendant reply that you haue beene grinding at mill all night, telling mee I shall then receiue answer when I shew the man that died without Perswasion and yet was saued by Faith, and o­ther such stuffe of the same stampe. Verily, I am perswa­ded if old Sibyl or Oedipus or any other that hath anci­ently been esteemed for reading riddles should reuiue a­gaine, yet would they not bee able with all their cun­ning, to deuise how to accommodate and fit this answer to any part of my argument. For mine owne part I can make of it, nor fish, nor flesh nor good red herring, and therefore not troubling my selfe with your follies here I [Page 124] leaue it as I found it, vnkith vnkist as they say.

And in the meane time I will hasten to your Definition of Faith, which you call the third kinde of Faith and onely Iustifying Faith.

Soft and faire, no hast but good: you post away so fast vnto the Definition, that you leaue something be­hind you vnanswered which desires and deserues your further consideration. For first I proue vnto you that Faith cannot be a full Perswasion & certaine Assurance, partly because it is not so much as Assurance, partly be­cause such Fulnes agrees not to little Faith, and so makes the definition narrower and of lesse latitude then the de­finite, and partly because it is a most discomfortable do­ctrine to weake Christians, who finding this strength of Assurance wanting in themselues, may doubt whether they haue any Faith at all, if Faith bee no other then a full Assurance and firme resolution. Againe, I answer certaine obiections the chiefest you can haue against mee, and that with such generall solutions as will cut off almost any reason you can oppose vnto mee. These things being of such importance and consequence should not thus haue beene balked and husht vp in silence: for while they stand vnstirred and vntoucht you cannot rea­sonably bee thought either fully to haue satisfied my ar­guments, or sufficiently to haue maintained your owne cause. Out of doubt therefore it would haue been much better for your credit to haue made lesse hast, and more [Page 125] good speed: for tripping away so fast, and leauing mat­ters of such weight vtterly vnanswered, all the Schol­lers in our Countrey (to blow backe your owne scoffe into your owne face) will thinke the worse of your haste so long as they liue for this tricke.

To conclude this point, whereas there are two many faults as Simplicius saith, too vsually committed in the disputation and determination of Questions▪ it appeareth by what I haue now said that you haue hitherto grossely faulted in the former. For you doe but reiect and deny my Conclusions, without refuting the confirmations I bring for them: and so if not altogether alienate from you, yet leaue in suspence and doubt the mind euen of those who otherwise might bee of the same opinion with you. Now if you offend likewise in the second, and doe not in the remainder of your Reply, vtterly raze and o­uerthrow the foundations of my Doctrine, but suffer them to stand vnshaken and vnmoued: you shall both leaue the thirst of your readers expectation vnquenched and vnsatisfied, and proue your selfe but a bragging and boasting Pyrgopolinices, threatning much and perfor­ming nothing. Let vs therefore take a view hereof, and see what you haue to say against the definition which I giue to Iustifying Faith.

The third Faith is Faith of Person or Personall Merit; and of this Faith, I make the Obiect to bee Christ the Mediator meriting, the Fiducia a Rest or Deuolution, the Subiect of it, the facultie of the Will not the Vn­derstanding, the next end of it Iustification, the remore [Page 126] end eternall saluation, and I thus define it, A rest of the will vpon Christ and his merits for iustification and consequently saluation.

Because you complaine anon that the word Rest which I haue made to bee the iustifying act of Faith is ambiguous, and thereupon it pleaseth you in your Ans­wers following to take aduantage and make you mery with the Equiuocation thereof: you shall giue me leaue before I step a foot further in a few words, and a little more plainely to open my meaning touching that Act. And to this end, seeing to proue that Faith is an Affiance or Rest, I reported mee▪ in my Treatise vnto the words vsed in the originall of the old Testament, as [...], and the forme of words vsed in the new, as to be­lieue in, to hope in, or as in some translations it is read to belieue on, to hope on: I will first shew that these tearmes applied vnto Christ the right Obiect of Faith, import that very Act whereby wee stand iustified before God, and secondly I will diligently inquire and search out what may bee the true, proper, and naturall meaning of these tearmes, both which being cleerely demonstra­ted, it will manifestly appeare both what that Rest is which I make to be the iustifying Act of Faith, and how fondly and vainely you cauill and dally with the ambi­guity thereof.

That Belieuing in or vpon importeth that Act is in it selfe so apparant, that I thinke no sober man will deny it: but because to you a man must proue that the Sunne shines thus I demonstrate it. That which is imputed for [Page 127] righteousnesse, and by which wee are iustified, is the true Act of Iustifying Faith. This you cannot deny, vnlesse you will turne Papist: for our Religion will not permit you to ioyne any other companion with Faith in the matter of Iustification. But such belieuing is imputed for righteousnesse, and is that by which we are iustified: so saith the Apostle,Rom. 4.5. To him that belieueth in him that iustifieth the wicked his Faith is counted for righteous­nesse, and againe, Wee haue belieued in Iesus Christ, that wee might bee iustified by the Faith of Christ. Adde here­unto that whereas the same Apostle saith With the heart man belieueth vnto righteousnesse, Rom. 10.10. forthwith in the next verse hee interpreteth that Belieuing by Belieuing in, For, saith hee, the Scripture saith, V. 11. whosoeuer belie­ueth in him shall not bee ashamed. Wherefore I conclude that so to Belieue is the Iustifying Act of Faith. So also is Hoping in or vpon, being in effect the same with Be­lieuing in. For although Hope and Faith bee in nature two distinct Gra [...]es, and so reckoned by Saint Paul: yet seeing by reason of the neere affinity betweene them, Hope is sometime put for Faith, it may not seeme strange that to hope in, is also vsed for to belieue in. Now that Hope is sometime put for Faith appeareth by that of Saint Peter,1 Pet. 3.15. Bee ready alwayes to giue an answer to euery man that asketh you a reason of the Hope that is in you; where Hope, as Caluin saith,In eum. loc. is by a Synechdoche taken for Faith. And as manifest is it by Saint Paul that to Hope in, is no other then to Belieue in: for hauing said, That wee should bee vnto the praise of his glory who first hoped in Christ, Eph. 1.12.13. In whom also yee hoped hauing heard the Word of Truth, the Gospell of your Saluation, by and by hee ads by way of interpretation, In whom also Belie­uing [Page 128] yeee were sealed with the holy Spirit of Promise. In a word, the Act of Hope properly taken is expectation or looking out for the performance or comming of a thing: but Hoping in imports Affiance or trusting on something for the performance thereof. As touching the words of the old Testament [...], first I find [...] confounded with [...] as words of the same signification, they being after the manner of Scripture ioyned together in the same verse as equipol­lent the one to explane and expound the other: for ex­ample,Psal. 118.8. Psal. 37.5. It is better, saith Dauid, [...] to trust in the Lord [...] then to put confidence in man, and [...] Roll thy way vpon the Lord, [...] and trust vpon him. But [...] it selfe is in the same manner confounded with [...] which construed with the Proposition [...] signifi­eth to Belieue in, and is by your owne confession the very Act of iustifying Faith: for example, [...] they belieued not in God, Psal. 78.22. Mic. 7.5. [...] and trusted not in his saluation, and [...] Be­lieue not in a friend, [...] trust not in a Prince. Againe that which in the old Testament is vt­tered by one of these words, the same in the new is ex­pressed by Belieuing in: for example, [...] We trust in the Name of his Holinesse saith the old Testament,Psal. 33.21. Ioh. 1.12. 1 Ioh. 3.23.5.13. Prou. 3.5. Act. 8.37. Psal. 25.2. Psal. 31.1. Rom. 10.11. Hee that belieueth in his Name saith the new; [...] trust in the Lord with thy whole heart saith the old, If thou Be­lieue with thy whole heart saith the new: finally, In thee O Lord [...] haue I trusted let mee not be con­founded saith the old, Hee that Belieueth in him shall not bee ashamed saith the new. If you except against this last parallell, that the Apostle hath reference vnto that of Esay [...]. Hee that Belieueth maketh not [Page 129] haste, rather vnto those passages of the Psalmes aboue quoted: I answer with Beza that it is not likely,In ad Ro. 10.11. partly because the vniuersall particle, and the word in him is not to bee found in the Prophet, partly because the A­postle saith not as the Phophet Esay doth, maketh not haste, but precisely accordeth with the words of the Pro­phet Dauid, saying, shall not bee confounded nor ashamed. Howsoeuer, seeing in all these places the same thing is intended and meant, it is cleere that [...], and Belieuing in, are Synonyma, differing in name, but not in definition: and so I conclude what aboue I vn­dertooke to demonstrate, that all these tearmes proper­ly import the Iustifying act of Faith.

In the next place are wee to inquire the right accepti­on and signification of these words, that wee may more perfectly conceiue, what that Fiducia or Rest is, which wee haue made to bee that Act. And first [...] as R. Kimchi obserueth, properly and primitiuely signifieth to retire into some safe place for shelter or harbor: Iudg. 9.15. so is it vsed in sundry places, [...] Come, saith the bramble in the booke of Iudges, shelter or couer you vn­der my shadow; and the Prophet Dauid in the Psalmes [...] I will retire mee vnder the shadow of thy wings. And hence is it, that [...] a Noune,Psal. 57.1. deriued from this root, signifieth a place of refuge or protection, as where Dauid saith [...] the rocks are refuge for the conies, and Esay,Psal. 104.18. Thou hast been a for­tresse to the poore, a fortresse to the needy in his trouble, [...] a refuge from the storme or inundation. Esa. 4.6. So that this word referred vnto Christ betokeneth that Act whereby wee betake our selues vnto him as vnto the on­ly Sanctuary, where wee may bee preserued safe from [Page 130] the tempest of Gods displeasure, which cannot be but by iustification from our sinnes, according to that of the Psalmist,Psal. 2.12. If his wrath burne yea but a little, [...] blessed are all they that retire themselues to him. Vpon which place learned Iunius notes, that that retiring vnto God (which is there affirmed to be the cause of our blessednes) is no other then sincere Faith. The next word is [...] which signifieth to Roll: whence commeth [...] a Circle or Ring, and [...] a Spheare or Wheele; because as the cube easily setleth and stayeth vpon one side, so the Sphericall and round figure is euer subiect to rolling & turning. Being ioined with the Preposition, [...] it signifies to Deuolue or Roll vpon a thing, either to oppresse i [...] and beare it downe, as where Iosephs bre­thren say, We are brought hither [...] to roll and cast himselfe vpon vs, Gen. 43.18. Iob. 30.14. and Iob [...] they roll themselues vpon mee: or to bee supported and borne vp by it, as in the place of Psalmes aboue ci­ted,Prou. 16.3. and that of the Prouerbs, [...] Roll thy works vpon the Lord and thy thoughts shall bee esta­blished. Agreeable whereunto is that of the Psalmist though vsing another word [...] Cast thy bur­den vpon the Lord and hee shall sustaine thee, Psal. 55.23. hee will not suffer the righteous to bee moued for euer. This then ap­plied vnto Christ intimates vnto vs our fleeting & vnset­led estate, and the restlesnesse of our soules vntill wee come vnto him, according to that of Saint Augustin, Thou hast made vs for thy selfe, and our hearts are vnquiet till they rest in thee: and so imports that Act whereby being heauy loden with our sinnes, and seeking to bee eased of them, at length wee discharge our lode and rest our selues vpon him. The third word is [...], which [Page 131] signifieth to put confidence, trust, Affiance in or vpon a thing, and as Mercer saith firmiter inniti, In the sa [...]o Pagn. firmely to leane or rest vpon a thing. Hereupon you shall often­times find it ioyned with [...] properly signifying to leane on, whence also commeth [...] a staffe because men vse to leane on it and to support themselues by it: as for example, [...] yee trust in fraud and stub­bornesse, saith Esay, [...] and leane vpon it, and againe,Esa. 30.12. Esa. 50.10. [...], Let him trust on the Name of the Lord, and leane vpon his God. And to this word had I speciall regard, when I defined Faith by Fiducia or Rest, as appeareth by that in my Treatise I make the Act of Fiducia, to be Inniti, to leane vpon, which yet I therefore rendred rest, because in our English translations it is vsually so turned; as for example, that of the Prophet Hanani vnto King Asa, [...],2 Chron. 16.7. Vers. 8. is thus englished, Because thou hast rested vpon the King of Aram, and not rested in the Lord thy God, and againe in the next verse [...], Because thou didst rest vpon the Lord. So then this word in the matter of Iustificati­on designeth that Act whereby finding that wee are weake and feeble, vnable to support our selues, we make Iesus Christ our staffe, staying and resting our selues vpon him,Psal. 18.19. according to that of Dauid [...] the Lord was as a staffe vnto mee. The last word is [...] to Belieue in, or vpon: for as for that other of Hoping in, because it may seeme to bee rather the Act of Hope then of Faith, or but Catachrestically vsed when it is put for Belieuing in, I vtterly omit it. What is it then to belieue in, or on? Let the Holy Ghost (whose phrase it is) declare his owne meaning. Behold, [Page 132] saith the Apostle Peter out of the Prophet Esay, I lay in Sion a cheefe corner-stone, 1 Pet. 2.6. Esa. 28.16. chosen, and precious; and he that belieueth thereon, shall not bee ashamed. To Belieue on a stone seemeth an insolent and vnusuall speech: but it is no other then (as the Apostle expresseth himselfe) to come as liuing stones vnto the corner-stone,1 Pet. 2.4.5. and to lay and build our selues vpon it, that wee may bee made a spirituall house, which in effect is the same with that Re­tiring and Resting wee haue aboue spoken of; as will yet farther appeare if wee compare this place with the like of the Prophet Dauid; for whereas here it is said, He that belieueth thereon shall not bee ashamed, there the Psalmist deliuereth it thus,Psal. 33.5. They that looke vnto him, and run vnto him their faces shall not bee ashamed. But if you would yet more fully and plainely vnderstand what it is to Be­lieue in, or vpon a thing, then read and consider that most sweet and comfortable speech of Saint Iohn in his Gospell; As many, saith hee, as receiued him, to them hee gaue power to be the Sonnes of God, Ioh. 1.12. that is to them that Belieue in his Name. Lo, to Belieue in Christ, saith the holy Apostle, is to receiue Christ: and therefore if wee may know what it is to receiue Christ, wee shall also know what it is to belieue in him. Receiuing is a word of Relation and answereth vnto Offering: for what is not offered is rather taken then receiued. To offer Christ vnto any is the Act of God onely: to receiue Christ, is the Act onely of the Elect of God. God offereth Christ vnto vs, when either outwardly by the publike preach­ing of the Word, or inwardly by the secret knocking of his spirit, he counselleth and aduiseth vs to acknowledge that Iesus is the Mediator, and to admit of him for our Mediator. And wee againe receiue Christ so offered [Page 133] vnto vs when as being conuinced and perswaded by the Word and Spirit, wee acknowledge him in generall to bee the Mediator, and admit him in particular to bee our Mediator: So that there is a double Receiuing of Christ, the one is by the Vnderstanding, the other is by the Will: Christ is receiued by the Vnderstanding when wee Belieue historically, yeelding and assenting vnto the truth of the Gospell, the summe wherof is that Iesus is the Christ; For when the Apostle saith,1 Tim. 1.15. This is a true saying and by all meanes worthy to bee receiued, that Christ Iesus came into the world to saue sinners, what can hee meane by receiuing other then assenting that it is true? and when our Sauiour saith vnto the Apostle,Act. 22.18. They will not receiue thy witnesse concerning me, what else can he vnderstand then this, that they would not giue credit vnto his testimony, concerning Redemption and Salua­tion by Christ? This Receiuing though it bee of such absolute necessity vnto life, that no man can possibly be saued without it: yet is it not of such power and efficacy, that whosoeuer so receiueth shall infallibly bee saued. For as we haue shewed, The Diuels so belieue and trem­ble: and many who are inlightned, Iam. 2.19. Heb. 6.4. & 10.26. and haue receiued the knowledge of the truth, perish, notwithstanding eternal­ly in their sinnes. Besides therefore this Receiuing of Christ by the Vnderstanding, there is a Receiuing of him also by the Will, which is done by particular appli­cation, when in the sincerity of our hearts we accept and make choice of him alone to bee our Mediator, that is to say, to bee vnto vs a Prophet, a Priest, and a King. Wee accept him to bee our Prophet, when wee admit him to be our teacher, and absolutely submit our selues vnto his teaching. Wee accept him to bee our Priest, [Page 134] when wee rest and repose our selues vpon his Sacrifice and intercession for the washing away of our sinnes. Fi­nally, wee accept him to bee our King, when wee put our selues wholly and onely vnder his gouernment, and subiect our wils vnto his will, desiring that in all things it alone may bee done by vs. And this accepting of Christ by the Will, is that very Receiuing of him which Saint Iohn here meaneth.Ioh. 1.12. For first, whosoeuer thus accepteth of him hath without question withall be­stowed on him the same power and prerogatiue, which hee affirmeth to bee giuen to as many as receiue him, namely to bee made the Sonnes of God. Againe, that Receiuing is vnderstood which is opposed vnto the Iewes nor Receiuing:Ioh. 1.11. for hauing said, He came vnto his owne, that is vnto the Iewes, and his owne receiued him not, immediatly it is added, But as many as receiued him, &c. How then did the Iewes not receiue him? onely in not assenting vnto this that hee was the Messias? Indeed this was the ground why sundry of them receiued him not: but their not-receiuing of him was no other then that Act of their Will, whereby they refused to submit themselues vnto him as vnto the Messias. This doth our Sauiour intimate,Ioh. 5.43. when hee saith vnto them, I am come in my Fathers Name and you receiue mee not: if another come in his owne Name, him Will you receiue, that is, him will you admit and accept for your Messias. But plainly doth hee expresse it when in the Parable hee bringeth them in, resolutely and directly saying, Wee will not haue this man raigne ouer vs: as also when hee saith vn­to them,Luc. 19.14. Mat. 23.37. How often would I haue gathered thy children to­gether as the hen gathereth her chickens vnder her wings, and yee would not. Besides, diuerse there were of them, [Page 135] euen of the Scribes, and Pharisees, and Priests who knew right well, that hee was the Christ;Mat. 21.38. Mat. 22.30.31. for so much doe the Husbandmen themselues cōfesse in the Parable, when they say, This is the Heire: and how could our Sauiour iustly charge them with that irremissible sinne against the Holy Ghost, vnlesse they had knowne him to bee so? These then knowing him to bee the Messias, and yet not receiuing him, what can this not-receiuing be other then their will full reiecting and refusing of him a­gainst their knowledge and against their conscience. Vp­on all which it followeth that this being not-receiuing, receiuing opposed thereunto must needs bee that Act of the Will whereby wee accept of Christ to bee our Me­diator, that is to say, our Prophet to instruct vs, our Priest to make atonement for vs, our King to rule and gouerne vs. And because Belieuing and Receiuing are (as we haue shewed) all one, it followeth also necessari­ly that to Belieue in Christ is nothing else then so to ac­cept him.

To grow therefore at length vnto an issue, you see that according to promise I haue demonstrated vnto you, first, that those tearmes both of the old and new Testament mentioned in my Treatise import that Act of Faith whereby wee stand iustified before God: second­ly, what is the true, proper, and naturall meaning and signification of these tearmes: and that therefore thirdly by the word Rest, in my Definition I vnderstand no o­ther thing then that which these words import and sig­nify. Wherefore I must intreate you in the residue of your Reply to speake vnto this meaning: otherwise you shall but spend your breath in vaine, and wrestle not with mee, but with your owne shadow. Neuerthelesse if [Page 136] any shall thinke it fitter insteed of the word Rest, to sub­stitute any other of these tearmes, I forbid him not: for so doing he shall differ from mee in word onely, and not in sense. And to speake ingenuously and freely, seeing to expresse the Act of Faith speciall choice is made in the New Testament of Belieuing in, or vpon, and this a­gaine is expounded by such Receiujng as is before des­cribed: happily it were not amisse aboue all the rest to preferre this, and to define Faith by that Act of the Will whereby wee accept Christ to bee our Mediator for iustifi­cation and consequently Saluation. The rather because it seemes more fully and plainely to set forth the nature of that Act by which wee are iustified, and more apt and fit to resolue many doubts which may be moued touching iustification. For as Vrsinus, a right worthy Diuine, ob­serueth,Admonit. de lib. Concord. Faith iustifieth no otherwise then as it is an accep­tation and application of the merit of Christ, which is the proper Act of Faith alone, and so very Faith itselfe. These things thus premised: let vs now in the Name of God proceed to the examination of what you haue replied and opposed against my definition.

I answer, a man may rest his will vpon Christ and his merits, and yet bee damned for want of Sanctification, and so consequently may bee damned hauing Iustifying Faith, which is absurd, therefore is your Definition absurd.

Here, Master Baxter, and in the rest of your ans­wers [Page 137] insuing, you waue & flote vp and downe like a boat in a storme without a Pilote, answering tumultuarily what euer comes next to head, and scorning like another Cassius Seuerus to keep either in method your matter,Tacit. vel po­tiùs Quintil. de causs. cor­rupt. eloq. or modestie in your words. But as you lead the dance, so must I needs follow. Thus therefore you argue. No man can be damned hauing iustifying Faith, A man may be dam­ned resting his will vpon Christ & his merits, Ergo, Resting of the will vpon Christ and his merits is not iustifying Faith: The Maior I grant, the Minor thus you con­firme, Hee that wanteth sanctification may bee damned, A man resting his will vpon Christ and his merits may want sanctification, Ergo, a man resting his will vpon Christ and his merits may be damned. The Maior againe I grant, if you vnderstand it either thus, Hee that finally wanteth sanctification shall bee damned, or thus, Hee that wanteth present sanctification is for the present in the state of dam­nation: for otherwise the Elect vntill their effectuall vo­cation want sanctification, and yet shall neuer actually be damned. The Minor you barely affirme but confirme not: thinking it as it seemes proofe inough if you say it and subscribe thereunto Witnesse our selfe: vnto this ar­gument therefore I answer two things.

First, that you are a very vnkind and vngratefull man that hauing now the third or fourth time borowed argu­ments of me to serue your need, haue not the good man­ners to say mee God a mercy for it, or to acknowledge to whom you haue beene beholding. For in my Trea­tise thus I obiected against my selfe, If Faith be Affiance then the wicked may haue it: for Balaam desired to die the death of the Righteous, and some receiue the Word with ioy belieuing for a time. And vnto this obiection in the same [Page 138] Treatise I gaue a sufficient and full solution, distinguish­ing betweene that Affiance which is sleight and superfi­ciall, and that which is setled and grounded, as there you may read more at large, for thither I referre you. But because,Hecub. act. 2. as Euripides saith, the same speech spoken by diuerse persons is not alike entertained: peraduenture this answer would be better accepted if you might haue it from the mouth of greater authority. Read then M. Perkins exposition of the Creed, whereupon the first word I Belieue hee intreats of the nature of Faith, and you shall find in effect the same obiection in like manner answered, and distinction made betweene the fleeting mo­tions & desires of them who liue still in their sins & after the course of the world & the Desire of reconciliation that comes from a bruzed heart, & brings with it alwayes re­formation & amendment of life. This solution howsoe­uer now you haue cunningly dissembled, yet I must pray you the next time not to ouerslip it: for otherwise you shall bee counted but a miching disputer, and no whit at all disaduantage your aduersary, fighting against him with no better weapon then a rusty sword both edge and point rebated.

Secondly, I answer vnto your Minor negatiuely, de­nying that such Resting of the will vpon Christ and his merits, as wee haue described, and in the definition vn­derstand, can at any time bee separated from Sanctifica­tion. For besides that it is contrary vnto your owne Po­sitions, as anon in the due place shall bee obserued: it is also flatly repugnant vnto the rules of holy Scripture. For doth not the Scripture pronounce them all, Blessed, that retire themselues vnto the Lord? Psal. 2.12. Psal. 25.2. Psal. 125.1. that they shall not bee ashamed that put their trust in him? that they shall be [Page 139] like vnto mount Sion which can neuer bee remoued, but standeth fast for euermore? 2 Chron. 16▪ 8.9. that to rest vpon the Lord is to bee of a perfect heart? Finally, doth it not affirme that whosoeuer receiueth Christ and belieueth in him, Ioh. 1.12. Rom. 4.5. Ioh. 3.36. 1 Ioh. 5.1. Rom. 8.1.14. is the Son of God, is iustified before God, hath euerlasting life, is borne of God, is led by the Spirit of God, and walketh not after the flesh, but after the Spirit? vnlesse therefore vt­terly stripping your selfe of all modesty you will put on the forehead of an harlot, and say that all these things may bee affirmed of the Vnsanctified man: how can you possibly auouch that a man resting his will vpon Christ, retiring vnto him, trusting on him, belieuing in him, and accepting of him to bee his Mediator, can be without san­ctification, and for want thereof bee damned eternally? Nay, whosoeuer accepteth Iesus Christ for his Mediator, submitteth himselfe as wee haue shewed not onely vnto his Prophecy and Priesthood, but also vnto his King­dome: and if hee submit himselfe vnto his Kingdome, that is vnto his rule and gouernment, how can hee bee Vnsanctified? for the Vnsanctified man subiecteth him­selfe vnto the Flesh, and not vnto the Spirit of Christ:Act. 15.9. where by the way you may obserue, defining Faith in this sort, how and after what manner it purifieth the heart, and begetteth in vs sanctity and newnesse of life: whereas defining it by Assurance as you doe, it doth not readily appeare how such Assurance can bee the princi­ple and reason of our Sanctification. True it is that As­surance may bee vnto vs a strong motiue to proceed on in Sanctification and holynesse of life: but it is so farre from causing it, that it is rather caused by it. For by our holy life and conuersation as by the fruites, doe wee ne­cessarily gather that Faith which is the cause thereof is [Page 140] in vs, and so grow to an Assurance of our Iustification and present state in grace. In regard whereof Saint Peter, as it is in the vulgar translation and some Greeke copies, commandeth by good works to make our calling and electi­on sure. 2 Pet. 1.10. And although in sundry copies and translations By good works is omitted: yet the addition thereof misliketh not Beza, In loc. praed. Ibid. and Fulke confesseth that the circum­stance of the place doth of necessity require, that good works bee vnderstood though they bee not expressed in the text. On the other side if you define Faith with mee to bee that Act whereby wee accept and make choice of Christ to bee our Mediator, that is to say, our Prophet, Priest, and King: who seeth not that this Faith working in vs a free and voluntary subiection vnto the Kingdom of Christ, is the very purifier of our hearts, and the cause of all our holy studies and indeuours? whence al­so it appeareth what the reason is why our Sauiour vnto belieuing in the Sonne opposeth Disobedience vnto him when hee saith,Ioh. 3.36. Hee that belieueth in the Sonne hath euer­lasting life: and hee that obeyeth not the Sonne shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him: namely be­cause as Acceptation of him to bee our King is the root of all Obedience, so the reiection and refusall of him to bee our King is the very source of all Rebellion and Dis­obedience.

Your Genus is, that Faith iustifying is a Rest, which is false; when you speake more learnedly I will deigne you far­ther answer.

That Rest is not the Genus of Iustifying Faith I easi­ly grant you: for as appeares manifestly in my Treatise, I make Affiance, or which is all one Rest, to bee the Act or Forme of Faith, and not the Genus thereof. If I had thought it fitting to haue troubled the Definition there­with, I was not so ignorant but I could haue called it either an infused grace, or a gratious habit, or a Theo­logicall vertue: but because the Philosopher taught me that Habits are sufficiently defined by their Acts in refe­rence vnto their proper Obiects, I held it needlesse to ex­presse it.

But suppose I had made it to be the right Genus, how doe you disproue it? Forsooth it is sufficient for such a Pythagoras as you are to say it is false: & an inexpiable wrong would it be to demand a reason of your sayings. Onely you adde,Plut. in vitâ Alex. that when I shall speake more learnedly you will deigne me farther answer. Brauely againe spo­ken, and Alexander-like: for neither would hee being a King contend with any but Kings, neither may you be­ing so transcendent for your learning, and surmounting the most of men as farre as the Sun doth the lesser lights, without impeachment of honour vouchsafe disputati­on with any but your Peers, much lesse with such a one as is scarce to bee found in any Predicament. Yet seeing the Sunne so surpassing in glory is no way enuious of his light, but imparteth bountifully of his beames to the en­lightning of the rest of the starres: it may please you al­so (with whom wisdome must liue and dye)Ioh. 12.2. out of your benignity to send forth some influence of your learning [Page 142] vpon mee, that I may more cleerely discerne at least in this question betweene truth and that which is onely seeming so.

Shew mee for your warrant one place of Scripture that so tearmeth it, any one Father of the Church, old or new, for these 1600. yeeres, Greeks or Latins, that will auouch it, and I will yeeld to your Genus. The Hebrew word for Faith, and the Greek word (whereof you haue heard before) doe vtterly condemne you, they both signifying a perswasion and an Assurance, and neuer a Rest. I maruell you will teach the Holy Ghost to speake, and the Church now to vnderstand what Faith is, and that by such a woodden Definition which may rather moue to choller then consent.

If by denying vnto mee the warrant of Scriptures, of Fathers old and new, Greeke and Latin, for 1600. yeeres and of the Greeke and Hebrew words for Faith, you intend to proue that Affiance or Rest is not the Genus of Faith, it shall without more a-doo bee yeelded vnto you: for as appeares in the former section I make it to bee not the Genus but the Act or Forme thereof. But if you would thereby perswade that Rest or Affiance is not the Act of Faith, I must tell you that these reasons are cleane out of date, and that you doe too much abuse your Readers patience setting againe before him these Coleworts now more then twice sodden. For both in the beginning of this disputation, and in the last section saue two before this I haue throughly scanned & cleered [Page 143] this businesse; shewing that I am so farre from teaching the Holy Ghost to speake, and the Church to vnderstand what Faith is, as you vnchristianly lay vnto my charge, that I vse no other tearme, but that which the Spirit of God hath in Scripture sanctified to this purpose, and the Holy Church hath euer spoken and vsed. But because I am loth to pester my paper with so many Tautologies and needles repetitions as you vse to doe, thither must I entreate the courteous Reader to repaire for satisfa­ction.

In the meane season, seeing both by expresse testi­mony of Scripture, and cleere euidence of reason I haue warranted euery part of my definition, and yet you without disprouing the weakest of my proofes taunting­ly call it a woodden Definition: you must pardon mee if I tell you plainely that this wood-kinde of answering deserues to bee reformed with a little woodden corre­ction. But where you say my Definition may rather moue to choler then consent, a man would thinke reading this your answer, that either your principles were so in­curably hurt, or your braine dam'd and ram'd vp with such a deale of dull and tough flegme, that it were as ea­sy almost to remoue a mountaine as to moue you either to the one or the other. And yet indeed I find you of a cleene contrary complexion, euen the most pettish and waspish gentleman that euer I met withall, euery small & petty occasion stirs your choler, and works you pre­sently out of temper. But because I see it is your impo­tency & disease I beare with you the more, praying you notwithstanding to haue as much patience as you may, if at times for the purging of this humor I play the Phy­sician and minister some small quantity of rheubarb vn­to you.

For alas, Master Downe, what Rest can a man haue vpon Christ without Assurance to bee saued by his death and Passion and knowledge of his Lord and Sauiour. A full assurance therefore as a cause, worketh Rest vpon Christ as an effect, and is therefore the Generall word in the Defini­tion of Iustifying Faith.

Your argument if I mistake not standeth thus, That which is an Effect of Assurance cannot be the Act of Faith, But Resting vpon Christ is an Effect of Assurance, Ergo, it cannot bee the Act of Faith. I distinguish of Assurance, for it is either of the generall proposition, or of the Spe­ciall and indiuiduall; of the Generall when wee are as­sured that, Whosoeuer Belieueth on Christ shall bee iusti­fied and saued, of the Speciall when wee are certainly perswaded that We are iustified and shall bee saued. If you meane the former, then I deny the Maior: for such Hi­storicall Assurance is a necessary pre-requisite vnto Iusti­fying Faith, and is the cause without which wee cannot belieue on Christ, and therefore that which is such an ef­fect of Assurance may bee the Act of Faith. If you vnder­stand the latter, then doe I grant the Maior: for if such Assurance be (as I haue demonstratiuely proued) it selfe the Effect of Faith, it is more then manifest that, That which is an effect of such Assurance cannot bee the Act of Faith. But then I deny the Minor, that Resting vpon Christ, is an effect of such assurance: affirming that con­trarily [Page 145] Resting vpon Christ is the cause of such Assu­rance, and Assurance is the Effect of that Resting.

But, what rest, say you, can a man haue vpon Christ, without Assurance to be saued by his Death & Passion? Surely vnlesse wee know his Death and Passion to bee the onely meanes of saluation, wee cannot rest vpon him for it: but to say, that a man cannot rest vpon him for saluation, vnlesse hee know that hee is already transla­ted from death to life, is a most vnreasonable and sense­lesse speech, as if a man might not trust vnto his friend to doe something for him, vntill he were sure, it is alrea­dy done. If you be so sandblind in this present case that you cannot see how Rest may goe before Assurance, yet I hope your sight is not so much decayed but you may perceiue it through a paire of spectacles. Put case then that a skilfull and welknowne Physician should of­fer freely to cure the diseases of such as are sicke vpon condition they receiue Physicke of no other, but put themselues wholly & absolutely into his hands: doe you thinke it absurd to become his patient, or that you can­not repose your selfe vpon his skill to bee cured by him, vnlesse you be first assured that the cure is already done? Nay rather if you know well, that your health is perfe­ctly recouered, you cannot rely vpon him, for that whereof you are fully possessed. Iesus Christ the Arch-physician of our soules, as hee is knowne to bee all-suffi­cient, and euery way able to heale our maladies, so doth hee louingly inuite all those that are heauy loden to come vnto him, promising to refresh them all vpon con­dition, that renouncing themselues and all others they set their whole Affiance on him for the remission of their sinnes. And dare you now make question how a man [Page 146] may betake himselfe into the hands of Christ, vntill he know that his sinnes bee already pardoned? Nay rather when wee know the debt is paid, and that according to the old rule sinnes once remitted neuer returne againe, we remaine thankefull for that which is past, and continue our Affiance on him for discharge of that which is to come. For (to obserue this by the way) wee may not thinke that in the first act of our conuersion and iustifica­tion we receiue actuall pardon of all our sinnes past, pre­sent, and to come, as some, and those of no meane marke haue rashly and vnaduisedly taught: for sinnes past on­ly are then actually forgiuen, and sinnes to come onely in the destination and purpose of God. But neither doth God actually pardon the iustified man, nor the iusti­fied man actually receiue pardon for his sinnes, vn­till hee haue actually committed them, and renewed his Faith and Repentance for them. Neither let any man thinke that I speake this out of mine owne head, and without ground: for I am strongly backed herein by the warrant of Scripture, the euidence of reason, and the testimony of worthy men. By the warrant of Scripture: for that teacheth onely remission of sinnes past; so saith Saint Paul in expresse tearmes,Rom. 3.25. God hath set forth Iesus Christ to bee a reconciliation through faith in his bloud, to declare his righteousnesse by the forgiuenesse of the sinnes that are passed: By the euidence of reason, for if future sinnes as well as sinnes past bee actually remitted in our conuersion and first acceptation into grace, what need of Repentance, what need of Prayer that God would for­giue vs our trespasses? To repent and craue p [...]on of that whereof wee are not guilty, and which wee neuer committed, is palpable folly: and as great folly is it by [Page 147] Repentance and prayer to demand that of God which wee say wee are sure hee hath long agoe bestowed vpon vs: Finally, by the testimony of worthy men; for Par­don, saith Origen, is of sinnes past not future: Repentance, In ad Rom. 3. De acerbè Iudicantib. Miscell. lib. 3. pa. 97. saith Gregory Nyssen, is the dissolution and destruction of sinnes past. It is confessed by all truly godly and learned, saith Hierome, Zanchie, that the Saints to obtaine new re­mission for a new sinne haue need of a new act of Faith and Repentance, according to that saying so rise in Scripture, that by Faith men are iustified and haue their sinnes remit­ted: which when it is spoken of them that are come to yeeres of discretion, is alwayes to be vnderstood of A­ctuall Faith, that is of the Act of Faith.De praedest. & grat. Lastly Master Perkins, when a Faithfull man grieuously sinneth, the sinne is indeed remitted in the destination of God: yet no remission is actually either giuen by God, or recei­ued by man vntill hee repent. Nay if hee should neuer repent (which yet is impossible) hee should (as guilty of eternall death euen for this one sin) be damned: for there is no new remission of any new sinne without a new act of Faith and Repentance. But inough of this point in this place though it bee of great importance, because it is but by the way: only hence I gather that seeing Faith goeth before and Assurance necessarily commeth after remission, that Faith is not Assurance.

I had rather say Faith were a labour then a Rest: for it seeketh continually by sanctification and holy loue to bring both body and soule vnto eternall rest, and then Faith cea­seth when eternall pacification and rest is wrought in man.

Thus you reason, Faith is a labour, Rest is not a la­bour, Ergo, Faith is not a Rest. The Maior you proue thus, That which worketh rest is a labour, But Faith worketh rest and ceaseth when rest is wrought, Ergo, Faith is a labour. The Minor you leaue naked and with­out proofe, supposing I thinke that no man vnlesse bereft of his fiue wits would deny it, and hold that Rest is a la­bour. Let vs therefore briefly examine them both. The Maior of your second Syllogisme precisely and literal­ly vnderstood is not true: for that which worketh is the Agent or Labourer, and the Labourer cannot bee the Action or Labour. Whereupon it followeth, If that which worketh bee not a labour, And Faith as you as­sume worke, that therefore Faith is not a labor which is contradictory vnto the Maior of your first Syllogysme. And yet as I grant not vnto you that Faith is a labour, so neither dare I peremptorily deny it: only I blame you for speaking so confusedly where it was necessary to vse distinction. Know therefore that Faith as all other qua­lities whether acquired or infused may bee considered two wayes, either in the first act, (as Schooles vse to speake) or in the second. The first act is the very habit of Faith inhering and sticking in the soule: the second is the immediate and proper operation and action thereof. If then you vnderstand Faith in the first Act, and as it is an Habit, it is not a labour, but is imprinted in vs by the Holy Ghost, to the end that when oportunity is offered, and duty requireth, wee may by vertue thereof more sweetly, readily, and easily worke, and labour. And so [Page 149] far is it from being a labor it selfe, that oftentimes it lieth as it were idle & asleep doing nothing at all vntill it please the Spirit of God to stirre vp our wils, and to quicken the sparke hee hath put in vs, inabling vs thereby to coope­rate with him. But if you vnderstand Faith in the second Act, and as it is in operation and action, then may you iustly call it a labour: for as our Sauiour saith,Ioh. 6.29. to belieue in him whom the Father hath sent is a Worke which God requireth vs to doe, in regard whereof the Apostle Paul calleth it the Worke of Faith.1 Thess. 1.3. And because Faith iustifieth, not as it is in the first, but in the second act, that is not as it is an Habit, but as it is in action, accepting and applying vnto vs Christ and his merits, hence is it, saith Bucer, that Protestants vsually define it by a motion.De iustific. Let the Maior therefore in this sense bee granted vnto you.

The Minor which you thinke to bee so cocksure I flatly deny, confidently affirming that Rest is a labour: prouided, you vnderstand no other Rest then that which in my Treatise I haue expressed and declared. For if by Rest you meane Quiet, such Rest without all question is not Labour: for it is the end of labour, and a cessation from it, and therefore well did you say that, when eter­nall rest is wrought, then the labour of Faith ceaseth. But you cannot bee ignorant, that by Rest I vnderstand not Quiet, but Affiance, in as much as I render the Latin word Fiducia by it, and make the Act thereof to bee Inniti, which (as I haue shewed in some of our English translations) is oftentimes turned by Resting and Staying vpon. And this Rest, that is, this Relying, this Repo­sing, this Trusting or Belieuing on Christ, is not a Quiet, but a motion or operation, and therefore a labour. True it is that whosoeuer commeth vnto Christ, and setteth [Page 150] his whole Affiance vpon him, shall thereby finde refresh­ment and Quiet vnto his soule: yet neuerthelesse it is ap­parant that Affiance it selfe, is an act or motion of the Will, and not a Quiet, euen as the inclination of a mans selfe vpon his staffe, or the laying of him downe vpon his bed is an action of the body. In a word remember what a little before I haue deliuered to cleare this tearme from all ambiguity, and take it in the same sense which there I giue vnto it, and vnlesse you will say▪ that light is darknesse you cannot but confesse that such rest is a la­bour, and so that notwithstanding this argument, Faith may be a Rest.

But now giue mee leaue to take vp the weapon which you are forced to lay downe, and to trie whether a blow therewith from my arme will pearce any deeper: for thus I retort your owne reason against you. Faith is rather a labour then a rest, Assurance is not so, but rather a rest then a labour, Ergo, Faith is not Assurance. The Maior is your owne, and you may not deny it. The Minor I proue thus, Intellection or knowledge, saith Aristotle, is more like vnto rest and quiet then vnto motion: for although the mind while it is inquiring & seeking for knowledge is euer in motion and so laboureth, yet when the Habit of knowledge is once acquired and gotten, then is there no farther motion of the vnderstanding thereunto, but a sweet rest and Quiet therein. Whereupon saith the same Philosopher, By the quieting & setling of the soule, doth a man become intelligent and wise, meaning by Quiet, as Iulius Scaliger expoundeth him,Exerc. in Card. 307. 13. nothing else but the assent of the minde. I assume, But Assurance is such in­tellection or knowledge, for it is an habituall assent vnto this truth, that wee are in the present state of grace and [Page 151] shall infallibly bee saued. Wherefore I conclude that Assurance is rather a rest or quiet then a labour: whence also it farther followeth that Faith, being as you con­fesse rather a labour, then a rest, cannot be Assurance.

Againe, Faith, you say, ceaseth when eternall pacifi­cation and rest is wrought. I grant: for the Obiect of Faith, as the Apostle saith, are things which are not seene, whereupon Saint Augustin elegantly,Heb. 11.1. Si vides non est Fides, Beholding is not Belieuing. As therefore while we liue here in these earthly tabernacles, and are absent from the Lord, wee walke not by Sight, but by Faith: so when wee shall be clothed vpon,2. Cor. 5.4.7. Vers. 4. and morta­lity shall bee swallowed vp of life, then shall wee walke not by Faith, but by Sight. Neither is the ceasing of Faith any losse or disaduantage, but an exchange for the better, namely vision: for Seeing vnto Belieuing is, as the full brightnesse of the Sunne is to the glimmering light of a candle. I assume then, But Assurance ceaseth not when eternall pacification and rest is wrought: for then the certainty of our Election, of our adoption, of our ac­ceptation into grace, and finally of our Saluation is so farre from ceasing, that it is by so much the more con­firmed vnto vs, as intuitiue apprehension and the sight of the eye is more infallible then heare-say or seeing by reflexion. I conclude therefore out of your owne prin­ciples, that Faith ceasing, and Assurance not ceasing, Faith is not Assurance. But as touching Affiance or Re­sting vpon the mediation of Christ for iustification and Saluation, it is euident that that ceaseth when wee shall haue obtained eternall rest and pacification. For being perfectly quitted of our sinnes, and in full possession of Saluation, how can wee farther set out Affiance vpon [Page 152] him for it? Especially seeing hee shall then cease to bee vnto vs a Mediator of Redemption and Reconciliation, in regard whereof only hee is the Obiect of Affiance or Iustifying Faith, and shall bee vnto vs no otherwise then he is vnto the Elect Angels, a Mediatour of Conseruati­on to confirme & preserue vs eternally in the most bles­sed state of glory. For neither shall hee Prophecy any more vnto vs by the ministry of the Gospell, nor pro­pitiate for vs by the sacrifice of his death and Passion, nor gouerne vs by the scepter of his word as here hee doth:1 Cor. 15.24. but in this respect shall hee deliuer vp the King­dome vnto his Father, and the Godhead in the holy Tri­nity shall without all meanes bee immediately vnto vs all in all.

Rest therefore in Christ is the Effect of Faith, and Faith is the cause of Rest: and so consequently Faith is not Rest, nor Rest is not Faith.

If, say you, Faith bee the cause of Rest, and Rest bee the Effect of Faith, then is not Faith Rest nor Rest Faith. This I yeeld you. But Faith is the cause of Rest and Rest is the effect of Faith. How proue you this? It seemeth by the illatiue particle: Therefore that you referre vs for this vnto some former premisses. What then haue you formerly said? That a full assurance as a cause worketh rest vpon Christ as an effect. But neither is Assurance Faith, and I haue sufficiently proued that Assurance is not the cause of Rest, nor Rest an effect of Assurance. Againe, [Page 153] you say that Faith worketh eternall rest and peace. But how doth this follow, Faith is the cause of eternall quiet and resting from our labours in the Kingdome of Hea­uen, Ergo, it is the cause of Affiance and Resting vpon Christ here in this life? for it is not necessary that that which causeth the one, should also cause the other. But if in your Conclusion when you say Faith is not a Rest, you meane it is not that eternall rest, what is that to mee who define not Faith by such a Rest? So then your therefore either concluding beside the Question, or be­ing inferred vpon no Premisses, deserueth of mee no answer at all. Yet to take away all scruple, let vs see what may be said for it.

Bellarmine to proue that Affiance is an Effect of Faith,De iustif. lib. 1. cap. 6. and consequently not Faith, alledgeth and vrgeth three passages of Scripture: but withall I must tell you, that if hee dispute to the purpose, hee must meane by Affiance, no other then confident Perswasion or Assurance. For his aduersaries, as himselfe there saith, defining Faith by Affiance, vnderstand thereby that Speciall Faith, whereby euery one applying to himselfe the diuine Pro­mise, belieueth or rather confidently trusteth that all his sins are forgiuen him by Christ. So that if (as he ought) hee argue vnto the meaning of his aduersaries, hee con­cludeth not against my Affiance, but onely against your Perswasion or Assurance. Neuerthelesse let vs examine those places seuerally and particularly. The first is that of the Apostle to the Ephesians,Eph. 3.12. In whom wee haue bold­nesse and entrance with confidence by the Faith of him: whence it followeth, saith hee, if confidence or Affi­ance be by Faith, that Faith is not Affiance but the cause thereof: for otherwise the sense would bee, we haue en­trance [Page 154] with confidence by confidence, which is absurd. To this I answer, first that [...] or Confidence of­tentimes signifieth Perswasion or Assurance, being de­riued of a verbe that signifieth firmely to be Perswaded, as where the Apostle saith,Rom. 2.19. [...], thou strongly perswadest thy selfe that thou art a guide of the blind; Phil. 1.25. and againe, [...], this am I well assu­red of: and therefore it is not necessary here to vnder­stand it of my Affiance. Secondly, grant that by [...] this Affiance is meant, yet doth it not follow that it is an effect of Iustifying Faith, seeing by faith not Iustifying but Historicall Faith may bee vnderstood, which is the meanes by which wee grow vnto Affiance. Lastly, let it be farther yeelded, that both, by [...] Affiance, and by [...] iustifying Faith are meant; yet may Affiance this notwithstanding bee that Faith, neither will any such absurdity ensue thereon. For as when you say, wee are assured by Faith you would thinke your selfe wronged if I should inferre thereupon that Faith is not Assurance but the cause thereof, or that otherwise the sense would bee wee are assured by assurance: so when the Apostle saith in Affiance by Faith, why should he not also count himselfe as much abused if you gather from hence that Faith is not Affiance but the cause thereof, or that else the speech would be absurd, as if hee should say in Affi­ance by Affiance. The reason of all in a word is, because this forme of words may import that Affiance is the next and immediate Act of Iustifying Faith. The second place is that saying of our Sauiour vnto the woman dis­eased with an issue of blood,Mat. 9.22. Bee confident daughter, thy Faith hath saued thee: where saith hee, Faith is againe in like sort distinguished from Affiance; for the woman [Page 155] is moued to conceiue and entertaine Affiance who was already healed by Faith. To this I answer, that the word which our Sauiour vseth to the woman is [...] which signifieth to be bold or couragious, whence com­meth [...] Boldnes, courage,Exerc. 317.4. which as Iulius Scaliger saith, is the motion of Fortitude vnto some worke, and is opposed vnto Timerousnesse or Fearefulnesse. Nei­ther was it without speciall reason that our Sauiour chose that word rather then any other: for finding that vertue proceeded from him, and demanding who had touched him,Luc. 8.47. the woman seeing that shee could con­ceale it came vnto him trembling, and fell at his feet, and declared what shee had done, whereupon hee said vnto her, [...] Tremble not Daughter, nor be dis­may'd, but cheere vp and bee of good courage, for I assure thee thy Faith hath saued thee, goe thy way in Peace. Now this Boldnesse or courage I confesse is an effect of Faith, nay oftentimes an effect of the effect of Faith, namely Hope: for as Despaire of victory causeth Fearefulnesse and deiection of Spirit, so contrariwise Hope of victory maketh a man to bee bold and confident. But vnlesse you can proue that this Boldnesse is the same with my Affiance (which with all your skill you can neuer doe, they being of so different natures) you can neuer con­clude from hence that Affiance is an effect of Faith. The third and last place is that of the same Apostle vnto Ti­mothy, They which minister well shall get vnto themselues a good degree and much affiance in the Faith which is in Christ: where, saith hee,1 Tim. 3.13. Affiance is said to be acquired and gotten by Faith, because Faith may bee without such Affiance. Whereunto I answer that the word vsed in the originall is [...], which no way signifieth Affi­ance, [Page 156] but libertie and freedome of speech, whether wee vtter our mind vnto God by prayer, as where the Apo­stle saith,Heb. 4.16. Let vs come [...] with boldnesse and freedome of Speech vnto the Throne of grace, or make profession of our Faith before men, as where the same Apostle saith, Cast not away [...] your free profession, Heb. 10.35. as Beza translateth it: And because this li­bertie and freedome proceedeth from the testimony of a good conscience, and assurance of the loue and fa­uour of God:Heb. 3.6. therefore is it sometimes vsed for Assu­rance, as where the Apostle saith, Whose house wee are if wee hold fast [...] that confidence and reioycing of Hope vnto the end, meaning by Confidence saith Beza that most worthy effect of Faith whereby wee crye Ab­ba Father:Prou. 28.1. and sometimes for that Lion-like boldnesse which Salomon saith, alwayes attendeth a good con­science, and so doth the same Beza in this present place of Timothy vnderstand it.Heb. 3.6. vi­de annot. Tremel. ad Heb. 4.16. And hence it is that the Sy­riacke oftentimes rendreth this word by Retection or Reuelation of the face, because a good conscience lifteth vp the head, and boldly sheweth the face: where­as a guiltie minde hangeth downe the head, and (as one confounded and ashamed) dares not looke either God or man in the face. So then seeing this is the right sense and meaning of this word in this place, and it is in no place found to signifie my Affiance you cannot with any probability hence conclude that such Affiance is the Effect of Faith, and not Faith. Vnto these three passages thus vouched by Bellarmine, Heb. 11.1. Col. 2.2. & Ro. 4.21. Rom. 5.1. Ro. 14.17.5.2. you may if you please adde sundry others of the like nature, as namely those which attribute vnto Faith, Subsistence of things hoped for, eui­dence of things not seene, Plerophorie or fulnesse of Assu­rance, [Page 157] Peace with God, Ioy in the Holy Ghost, Spirituall glorying and boasting, obsignation by the Spirit, Eph. 1.13. Mat. 11.29. and final­ly, Tranquillity and quietnesse of the soule: all which I cannot but acknowledge to bee the fruits and effects of [...]ustifying Faith. But yet I deny that either they all, or any of them haue the same definition with that Affiance which I haue made to bee the proper Act of that Faith. And therefore to end this discourse, whereunto not the force of your Conclusion (which being barely affirmed might as easily haue beene reiected) but onely the sin­cere desire I haue to leaue nothing vnsatisfied, drew me: I still pronounce that for any thing hitherto hath beene said, Iustifying Faith is an Affiance.

Yet before I proceed any farther, I must bee so bold as to plucke you by the eare, and to call to your remem­brance what erewhile you said, namely that a man may rest his will vpon Christ and his merits and yet bee damned. Which how it may agree with that which here you say that Rest on Christ is an effect of iustifying Faith, I can­not (such is my blindnesse) see. For it seemeth that where the effects of Iustifying Faith are, there iustifying Faith also is: whereupon it followeth that either this Resting on Christ cannot be in those that are to be dam­ned, because they want Iustifying Faith to worke this effect in them, or that a man may bee damned hauing Iustifying Faith together with the effects thereof in him which by your owne confession is absurd, or lastly that this Resting vpon Christ is not a fruit or effect of Iustifying Faith which is diametrally opposite vnto your Conclusion. I beseech you Sir, let vs at your leasure heare from you how either these strange Paradoxes may be verified, or these seeming contradictions reconciled.

Besides this word Rest is ambiguous, and may bee taken in ill part, and may bee in many negligent and carelesse Christians which euery day and for euery sinne bring Christ to the Crosse, and say wee will rest vpon Christ, and in the meane time worke nothing worthy of the Name of a Chri­stian, but rather wallow in all kind of filthinesse. And in this sense onely doe I say a man may bee damned with such a Rest vpon Christ. I speake this to preuent your captious cauils. It is fit for you therefore that take vpon you to see more then euer any learned man saw before your time to be­ware of all equiuocations and words doubtfull.

That the word Rest is ambiguous I saw well inough, and therefore in my Treatise carefully distinguished the equiuocation thereof, where if you marked it not, you must blame your owne ouersight and not my Vnwari­nesse. For two kinds of Resting vpon Christ, I said there were, the one Sleight and Superficiall, the other Setled and well grounded, and this Setled and grounded Affiance I made to bee the Act of Iustifying Faith, as there you may read more at large. Now you, to preuent captious cauils, tell me, that when you say, a man may bee dam­ned notwithstanding his Resting vpon Christ, you vnder­stand it of that which may bee in many negligent and care­lesse Christians, that is to say of Sleight and superficiall Affiance onely. Wherein you shew your selfe too too both ridiculous and idle: ridiculous in saying, you speake [Page 159] this to preuent my captious cauils, whereas indeed this very captious cauill of yours was in my Treatise as ap­peareth so manifestly preuented by mee: Idle, in arguing from sleight and superficiall Affiance vnto that which is Setled and Grounded on this manner (for so in effect you confesse,) Sleight Affiance may bee in the Damned, Ergo, setled Affiance is not Iustifying Faith, as if you should say, An asse may haue a shadow, Ergo, the Body of a man is not a solid substance. And thus, to requite you with your owne Prouerbe, you perish like the rat by bewray­ing your selfe: for hauing vrged this argument now twice against mee and that with such confidence as if it alone were sufficient to batter downe the bulwarke of my Definition, at length you tell ys very grauely and sadly that it is but paper shot which hitherto you haue discharged, and that all the breaches you haue made may easily bee repaired by distinguishing an equiuoca­tion.

Where you say I take vpon mee to see more then euer any learned man saw before my time, it hath beene already sufficiently answered both in my Treatise & in this De­fence thereof. Neuerthelesse because you harpe so often vpon this string, this I adde, that (vnlesse you can demon­strate that it is impossible for a man of meane parts, and gifts to see and obserue that which men of greater lear­ning and deeper vnderstanding haue not obserued) I know no reason why a man may not without taxation of modesty take vpon him in some things to see that which others haue not seene before him. It is true that a Giant by reason of his tallnesse must needs see farther then a dwarfe or one that is but of a meane stature: yet if you place a dwarfe aloft vpon the shoulders of a giant, [Page 160] hee shall then bee able to see farther then the Giant him­selfe can. I am I confesse, not vnto your seeming onely, but in very deed a dwarfe as it were in Diuinity, euen the least and meanest often thousand; and those our Prede­cessors hauing beene so eminently and incomparably qualified with all kind of graces and endowments, are as it were Giants in comparison of vs. And therefore it would bee intolerable both pride to thinke and impu­dence to say that of my selfe I could see as farre into the mysteries of Religion as they could. But now being ad­uanced as it were vpon their shoulders, and hauing the benefit of all those volumes which they wrote, and in them of all whatsoeuer they knew: why should it seeme strange that something comes within the compasse of my ken which they though eagle-sighted perceiued not? And yet by your fauour, Sir, I take no such matter vpon mee, or if I seeme to doe so, I hope I doe it with all modestie, and it can bee no more then this that out of such Premises as they haue taught mee, I gather a Con­clusion which they attended not.

For I tell you this, if Master Perkins whom you say you blanked with your rare cunning dispute were desirous to sift this Genus or word Rest, you shall hardly perswade mee that hee will take it for any other then the effect of true Iustify­ing Faith.

Neither is it your vaine surmising what Master Per­kins would say; Neither his expresse and direct saying, [Page 161] that may be the decider of this controuersie. How well that worthy man deserued of the Church of God, wherein hee was like another Baptist both a shining and a burning torch, Ioh. 5.35. I cannot bee ignorant who knew him so well: and very vngratefull were I if I should not ac­knowledge to haue receiued a good part of that little skill I haue in my profession from his mouth hauing beene for sundry yeeres his ordinary auditor. Yet be­cause hee was not a Peter, or a Paul, nor so preserued from error by the Spirit of truth, that hee could mistake in nothing: I hope I may, without arrogance, and with reseruation of due reuerence & honor vnto his worth in some points dissent from him. And if you may seat Faith both in the vnderstanding and the will, notwithstanding that M. Perkins place it only in the vnderstanding,On the Creed. affir­ming that it scarce standeth with reason that one single grace should inhere in two distinct faculties: why may not I take the same liberty vnto my selfe, and define Iu­stifying Faith by Affiance, although M. Perkins would take it for no other then the Effect of Iustifying Faith? for so indeed hee doth, and I deny not, but freely con­fesse, that vpon the reasons aboue rendred, I doe in this point altogether differ from him. Neither yet did I say, that I blanked him with my rare and cunning disputes, for this is but the renewing of your old slander, the vanity of which I haue already detected. Onely it seemes that your best wine is wel-nie spent, seeing now you serue your guests with these dregs: and that you are driuen to a very narrow strait, when you are faine to arme against me such base calumniations and fictions of your owne braine.

When you send me to Master Foxe in his Booke de Chri­sto gratis justificante, without citing the place where, or the words what, of mee your speech deserueth none answer: but this I dare vndertake, you abuse the writings of so re­uerend a man.

The authority of Master Foxe was not vouched by me, to iustify my Definition, that Faith is Affiance, but to ouerthrow yours, who affirme that Faith is Assu­rance: and therefore was placed as was fitting, after those arguments which I vrged against you. Neuerthe­lesse here it pleaseth you after your desultory and disor­derly manner of disputing in a very vndue place to giue answer vnto it. And the reason why with such violence you hale it hither as I guesse, is this, that not appearing where it should it may seeme to giue no euidence at all a­gainst your Assurance, and being ordered where it should not it may seeme to bee but idly alledged as be­ing of no force to maintaine my Affiance. But yet let vs see what exceptions you take to eleuate this autho­rity.

Because I cite not the place where, nor the words what, my speech, you say, deserues no answer. I wisse, M. Bax­ter, that booke is not of such bulke but that perusing the titles of each Chapter you might soone haue found out the places by me intended: and you know that the sche­dule I sent you, being endited at Bristoll, where I was farre from my bookes, I could not possibly referre [Page 163] you vnto the very page and line, as otherwise I would haue done. But now because I haue the booke at hand, I will set you downe his direct words, and quote you the page where you may read them, and then leaue you to bee iudge your selfe, whether as you charge mee I a­buse the writings of that reuerend man, or hee agree with mee in this, that Faith is not Assurance.Foxe. Master Foxe therefore in his booke de Christo gratis iustificante, pag. 246.saith thus, My iudgement and opinion is that this confidence of mercy, and certainty of Saluation promi­sed is a thing which ought to bee very neerely conioined with Faith, and which euery one ought necessarily to apply vnto himselfe: yet being most applied is not that which onely by it selfe properly and absolutely dischargeth vs of our sinnes, and iustifies before God, but that there is some o­ther thing propounded in the Gospell, which in nature go­eth before this certainty, and iustifieth before God. For Faith vpon the Person of the Sonne of God, whereby wee are first reconciled vnto God necessarily goes before. A­gaine pag. 253. Although, saith hee, certainty and assu­rance of diuine grace (which it selfe is sometime commen­ded vnder the name of Faith) bee very neerely ioined with Faith, yet this assurance doth not properly import the cause of iustifying, but receiueth it being brought, neither work­eth iustification, but is rather wrought by it, and maketh them certaine, who by the Faith of Christ are iustified, but it selfe iustifieth not. And yet againe pag. 255. If the que­stion bee of the cause which properly iustifieth from sinne, I answer it is that Faith not whereby wee belieue, that wee are iustified, but whereby wee belieue in Christ the Sonne of God. Thus M. Foxe, and thus by M. Foxe, it appea­reth as I affirmed, that in this point I am not singular and alone.

[Page 164]Yet to preuent captious cauils, you may bee pleased to vnderstand that the Latin word vsed by Master Foxe, to wit Fiducia, I haue in my translation englished Con­fidence and Assurance; not that I was afraid lest rendring it Affiance, hee might seeme to exclude my affiance al­so from the Definition of Faith, for had hee done so, it were nothing to mee, hauing shewed that hee denies Faith to be Assurance, which was all I there affirmed of him: but because, if you marke his words attentiuely, you shall find that by Fiducia, hee vnderstands not Affi­ance, but confident Perswasion or Assurance, for hee doth euer confound it with Certainty, and expresly de­fines it to bee that whereby wee are assured of our iusti­fication by Christ. So doth Melancthon also, and Kem­nitius, and many others, vnderstanding by Fiducia, a firme Perswasion that our sinnes are certainly remitted by the propitiation of Christ, and all the benefits of the promise of grace giuen, communicated, and applyed vn­to vs. So that vnlesse I would haue depraued my au­thors meaning, I could not translate otherwise then I haue done.

Now thinke not that I hold, that a man ordinarily saued may be saued without relying vpon Christ Iesus: for I hold the cleane contrary, viz. that true Iustifying Faith assuring a man in spirituall knowledge of his owne saluation in Iesus Christ, worketh and causeth a sweet rest and reposing of the whole soule vpon Christ and his Merits. But I deny that this Rest is Faith, or this Faith Rest, no more then the tree can be the fruite, or the fruite the tree.

That no man can ordinarily bee saued without Rely­ing vpon Christ I grant, for according to my definiti­on, this Relying vpon Christ, is Iustifying Faith: but that this Resting vpon Christ, is vnto Faith, as the fruite is to the tree, proue it sufficiently, and in Gods Name take the victory. But you must not thinke, that affir­ming is prouing, or facing arguing: and very meanely doe you conceiue of your Readers iudgement, if you thinke, that your weake asseuerations can more preuaile with them then the strength of my reasons. For if by Rest you vnderstand, as you should, not Quiet and peace of Conscience which I confesse is not complete with­out Assurance, but that Affiance by which wee stay our selues vpon Christ, accepting him to bee our Mediator in such sort as is aboue described: I haue both plainely and soundly demonstrated, that Faith is such a Rest, and such a Rest Faith, and not the fruite of Faith.

And to be plaine with you, when you say Iustifying Faith is not a Knowledge or an Assurance, Tom. 3. de Iustif. ca. 7. you speake pure Bellar­mine, as appeareth in his Booke de iustificatione. I pray you therefore though you mislike M. Perkins, turne not pure Papist.

And to bee plaine with you also, if your kind of rea­soning may passe for currant, when you say, Iustifying [Page 166] Faith is not a Rest or Affiance, you speake pure Bellar­mine: Cap. 5.6.9. for in the same Booke by you quoted, as hee de­nieth Faith to bee Assurance, so hee denieth it also to be Affiance. I pray you therefore though you mislike my Definition yet turne not pure Papist. But, Master Bax­ter, you mistake the matter very much if you thinke all is Popish or erronious whatsoeuer either a member of the Church of Rome, or the whole Church of Rome holdeth: for by this rule wee should with the Arrians of Poleland, renounce the very Faith of the Trinity as a branch of Antichrists Religion, of whom it is reported, that therefore and for this reason, specially they hold the Pope to bee the misticall beast spoken of in the Reue­lation, and his triple Crowne a visible marke thereof, because hee maintaineth the doctrine of the Trinity. As therefore erewhile you said vnto mee, Let vs not be bound to defend the errors of our Brethren, so say I now vnto you, Let vs not bee bound to reiect the truths of our aduer­saries. For truth is Gods wheresoeuer it bee found, though it were in the mouth of him who is the father of lies: and if Ticonius the Donatist speake with better reason then Cyprian an orthodox father,Retract. lib. 2. ca. 18. S. Augustin will not sticke therein, to preferre the Hereticke before him that is Catholike. But notwithstanding all this, I would haue you to know, that all the agreement betweene mee and Bellarmine is onely in this what Faith is not: for in question what it is we differ the whole heauen one from another, he defining it by Assent vnto diuine truths, I by Affiance on the person of Christ.

Now, Master Downe, to make an end, and returne to my other affaires from whence you haue vnkindly drawne mee, I pray you read a few Positions to the which oppose what you can.

What your affaires are I am not well acquainted withall: but what they should bee I wot full well. A­mong the rest maintenance of Gods truth, and conuin­cing of contrary errors are both by the rule of Christia­nity in generall, and the office of the Ministry which you haue taken vpon you in particular required of you. Wherein if you bee sure, that all this while you haue beene employed, you discredit your action exceedingly when you say you are vnkindly drawne from your other affaires vnto it. Plut. Apophth. Remember you not what the woman replied vnto Philip of Macedon denying to heare her sute, because he was not at leisure? Hast thou not, quoth shee, leisure to bee a King? So say I vnto you, either doe the worke if you will bee a Minister of Christs Gospell, or else bee no Minister if you bee vnwilling to doe the worke.

To what end you should offer vnto me these Positions following, requiring mee to oppose what I can against them, I cannot well coniecture: for what stuffe haue you here brought vs besides that which either is already sufficiently answered, or whereof there is no question at all betwixt vs? And therefore I see no cause why I should vouchsafe to bestow any time or labour about them. [Page 168] Neuertheles to satisfy your request a word or two touching them.

True Iustify­ing Faith de­fined.1. Iustifying Faith, is an assured knowledge, or know­ing assurance, by the which euery one of the elected relieth vpon the Promises of the mercy of God in Christ Iesus, firmely holding that Christ and eternall life together with all the merits of Christ, are giuen to him to righteousnesse and eternall saluation.

Fides vnica & indiuidua spe­cie. Haec Fides differt nume­ro & gradu.2. There is but one onely speciall iustifying Faith.

3. This Faith differeth in number and degree.

4. It is manifest there bee so many seuerall Faiths in number, as there bee seuerall persons elected.

5. One man is not saued by another mans Faith.

Mat. 26.74.75. & 17.17. Mat. 9.24.6. This Faith differeth in degrees, small in one man, and mighty in another, Mat. 13.23. & 14.31. Act. 2.8. ca. 4. Mat. 15.28.

Fides imper­fecta; Ad resisten­dum tamen diabolo suffi­ciens & quare.7. The greatest Faith in this life is imperfect. 1 Cor. 13.9. & 12.

8. Though it bee small and infirme, yet it is sufficient to resist the Diuell, by reason of the prayers and promises of Christ.

2 Cor. 5.1. Esa. 53.11. Causa effici­ens material.9. This Knowledge or Faith (for they bee conuertible Ioh. 17.3.) passeth all vnderstanding Eph. 3.14. &c.

10. The Efficient cause of this Faith, is the Spirit of God.

11. The instrumentall ordinary cause, is the preaching sincerely of the Word of God.

12. God may worke extraordinarily Faith in the Elect without preaching by his Spirit. Obiectum Fi­dei in genere & specie.

13. The obiect of Faith in generality is the whole [Page 169] Word of God, in speciality the promises of God in Christ and his Merits.

14. The formall cause is a confident relation to all the Word of God, and certainty of saluation. Formalis.

15. The finall cause subordinate, Finis subordi­natus, sum­mus. is the saluation of the Elect, the chiefest end is the celebration of the mercy and iustice of God.

16. The effects are concerning God, our selues, Effecta. our neighbour: God, in truly seruing him; our selues, in wholy resting vpon him; our neighbour, in truly louing him.

17. The subiect where Faith resteth is the heart, Subiectum in quo residet Fides. Adiuncta duo. the vnderstanding, and the will of man.

18. The properties are two, first, that Faith bee aliue and not dead; secondly, that it bee perpetuall.

The first, the thirteenth, and the foureteenth, I whol­ly and absolutely deny, hauing fully proued, against the first, that Faith is not a Knowledge or Assurance; against the thirteenth, that the onely proper Obiect of Faith is the Person of the Mediator, and against the foureteenth, that the Forme thereof is Affiance and not any such Re­lation or Certainty. The ninth, sixteenth, and seuen­teenth in part I deny: the ninth, where you make Faith and Knowledge to bee conuertible which I haue proued to haue different natures and Definitions; the sixteenth where you affirme Resting vpon Christ to bee an effect of Faith, which I haue demonstrated to bee the Forme and proper Act of Faith; the seuenteenth, where you say that the subiect of Faith is both the Vnderstanding and the Will, against which I haue shewed, that it is impos­sible [Page 170] for one and the same Habit to be subiectiuely in two seuerall faculties of the Soule. The rest of your Positi­ons (sauing the inconuenience of some tearmes, and set­ting a fauourable construction vpon them) I acknow­ledge to bee true; and because, as the Apostle speaketh, I can doe nothing against the truth, but for the truth, therefore I oppose them not, but readily and willingly yeeld and subscribe vnto them.

But, Master Baxter, in all this long discourse of Faith, hauing spoken so carefully of the Definition of Faith, of the vnity of it in kind, and difference of it in number and degree, of the imperfection, sufficiencie, efficient, principall and instrumentall, of the obiect both in gene­rall and speciall, of the forme, and end both Subordi­nate and Highest, finally of the Effects, Subiects, and adiuncts thereof: in all this long discourse, I say, how is it that wee heare not so much as a word of Iustificati­on, which notwithstanding is the immediate and proper Effect of Faith? Immediate, because it is the first fruite and benefit that springeth of it, and commeth before Adoption and Sanctification: proper, because it is the Act of Faith onely, and not of any other Grace which iustifies a man before God. Whether it were of negli­gence, or of policy, that you haue omitted so materiall and necessary a point, I cannot say. If of negligence, it deserues a seuere chastisement: if of policy, it was I think you foresaw what a dangerous consequence would fol­low thereupon. For if you had placed Iustification (as needs you must haue done if you had mentioned it) a­mong the Effects of Faith, the Reader possibly might haue reasoned thus, If iustification be an Effect of Faith and so follow after Faith, then cannot Assurance of Iu­stification [Page 171] bee Faith, because it is an effect of Iustificati­on and followes after: for it is necessary that a man bee iustified, before hee can bee assured that hee is iustified. And thus you had cast away your whole pot of broth,2 King. 4.39. if you had not warily kept this Coloquintida out of it. But vpon what ground soeuer you haue forborne to speake of this point, I will by your leaue supply this defect, and in a word or two shew you in what sense I affirme that Affiance iustifies, and deny it of Assurance: for in some sort Assurance also may bee said to iustifie.

Iustification is a law-tearme, and is opposed vnto Condemnation. As therefore Condemnation is the sen­tence of a iudge pronouncing a man to be guilty, and de­liuering him ouer to bee punished: so is Iustification al­so the sentence of a iudge, but absoluing and acquitting a man both from crime and punishment. Now there are three barres at which all men are arraigned, and three Iudges, who at their seuerall barres either iustify vs, or condemne vs, that is to say, the barre of God, the barre of Conscience, and the barre of Men. If wee bee con­demned at all these barres, and by all these Iudges, wee are of all creatures the most miserable: if wee bee absol­ued at them all, and by them all, of all men wee be the most blessed. Againe, if Men acquit vs, what booteth it, if our owne Conscience condemne vs? and if our Conscience acquit vs, what auaileth it, if God con­demne vs? for who can deliuer the prey out of the pawes of that Lion? On the contrary side, if men condemne vs, it mattereth not, so as our Conscience doe absolue vs: and if our Conscience also doe condemne vs, yet happy are we, if God absolue vs, for God is greater then our Conscience. What that is,1 Ioh. 3.20. for which sentence of [Page 172] Condemnation passeth vpon vs at any of these bars there is no question, for it is well knowne to bee sinne: sinne I say which is so indeed, or at least is so in appearance. For although nothing appeare vnto God otherwise then it is, so that there can bee no error in his iudgement: yet our owne consciences and other men may easily bee de­ceiued and mistaken, and so without cause oftentimes pronounce sentence of Condemnation. What then is that by which wee are iustifyed and absolued from our sins, and the punishment of death due vnto them? Surely, that which is contrary vnto sinne, euen Righteousnesse. What Righteousnesse?Phil. 3.9. for, as the Apostle distinguish­eth, there is a Righteousnesse which is of the law, and there is a righteousnesse which is of Faith: by the for­mer, shall no flesh liuing bee iustified, by the latter eue­ry one that Belieueth is iustified. God iustifieth vs at his barre when hee seeth our Faith, that by firme Affiance wee rest and rely our selues vpon Christ to bee our Me­diator, accepting him to bee our Prophet, Priest, and King: for then according vnto promise doth hee accept the Passiue obedience of Christ to satisfy for our sinnes past, and imputeth vnto vs his Actiue obedience to sup­ply the want of that perfect legall righteousnesse which should be in vs. Our Conscience iustifies vs at his barre, when it is perswaded that God hath already iustified vs: for as long as it is perswaded that God condemneth, it cannot acquit vs. If the perswasion of the Conscience be built vpon a sandy and deceitfull foundation, it is rather vaine presumption then true assurance, and the iudge­ment that it giueth is erronious: but if it bee grounded vpon infallible euidence, euen the testimony of the Spi­rit of God,Rom. 8.16. witnessing with our spirits that wee are the [Page 173] sons of God, then is the Assurance sound and certaine, and the sentence pronounced thereupon iust and right­full,Phil. 4.7. whence presently ariseth in our soules such vncon­ceiuable peace as passeth all vnderstanding, and such du­rable ioy as nothing can take from vs. Finally, Men iu­stify vs at their barre also,Ioh. 16.22. Mat. 5.16. when our light so shineth be­fore them, that they see our good works, which are the fruits of Faith and a good Conscience, and thereby are moued to glorify our Heauenly Father: as being per­swaded in the iudgement of Charity that they are in­deed as they seeme to bee, euen iustified before God, and borne againe of water and the Holy Ghost. This iudgement because it is built vpon probability onely, and not vpon certainty (for who knowes whether the out­ward appearance come from the inward holynesse or hollownesse of the heart, but onely the heart it selfe, and God which made it?) May therefore bee erronious, and though proceeding from Charity, yet in the meane season swaruing from verity. If then when Men iustify vs, our owne Consciences tell vs, that they pronounce a wrong sentence, and absolue the guilty: the comfort that growes vnto vs thereby is no better then a cup of cold water is vnto a man sicke of a burning feuer, or then the Sardonian laughter which makes the face seeme to grin, while the deadly poison is searching through eue­ry veine, and seazing vpon the very heart. But if wee bee well assured that the sentence is iust and true, and that they are not deceiued therein, although it bee not the end wee aymed at, nor the Crowne wee looked for, yet is it a sweet and amiable companion of holy life, pu­blickely testifying vnto our great comfort that God hath been glorified by vs, our profession honoured, and [Page 174] others inuited if not gained vnto Christ. And thus much haue I thought good in regard of your silence to speake I hope not impertinently, at least wise not vnprofitably of Iustification: the summe whereof is that Affiance iu­stifies before God, Assurance before Consience, works before Men. So that I doe not simply deny either that Assurance is Faith (for in my Treatise I acknowledge that the Scripture sometime calleth it Faith) or that it iustifieth (for I confesse it iustifieth at the barre of Con­science) onely I deny it to bee that Faith which iustifies before God, affirming that Faith to bee no other then Affiance.

Thus, Master Downe, you haue, what you haue so much, so earnestly, so bitterly, and contumeliously wrested from mee in writing, sith that you haue refused to defend your Doctrine preached here by Disputation.

Indeed, Master Baxter, when I vnderstood by the aduertisements of sundry my good friends in Bristoll, that you had not onely drawne vp an Answer against me full of reprochfull and disgracefull speeches, but had al­so dispersed it abroad into the hands of diuers Burgesses of that City, thereby to discredit both mee, and the Do­ctrine which I preached among them, without vouch­safing after a whole twelue months space to send mee a copie thereof according vnto promise: true it is that as soone as the next oportunity was affoarded mee, I could not forbeare to chalenge you for this vnchristian and [Page 175] vnschollerly dealing, and to let you know the iust indig­nation and disdaine I conceiued thereat. Besides that once, did I neuer either by word or writing sollicit you in this matter: and then earnest perhaps and vehement I might bee in expostulating with you, but Bitter and Contumelious I am sure I was not, and for proofe there­of I referre mee vnto the testimonie of those who were then present with vs. But whether earnest and vehement, or Bitter and Contumelious, Answer from you by no meanes could I wrest any. And that now I haue obtai­ned a Copie thereof, thanks vnto those my good friends who neuer left following vpon the sent of the Foxe vn­till they surprized him for me, and not vnto you who desired and laboured nothing more then to keep it from mee. Of all men you liked not it should light into my hands, and yet of all men me it most concerned, and vn­to mee was onely promised. And so after the Parthian manner you fight flying, and as Caesar said of the Scythi­ans make it more difficult to finde you then to foile you.

Well yet I refused, you say, to defend the Doctrine I preached by disputation. First, the course which former­ly we had agreed and resolued vpon was Writing: and therefore I saw no reason why I should yeeld to haue the cause remoued from a higher vnto an inferiour Court, from Writing vnto Disputation. For as a late learned writer saith, Writings are more solid, peaceable, Dan. Cha­mier Ep. ad Egnat. Ar­mand. and cer­taine, then is present speech: for more solid must those things needs bee which are meditated then which are sud­denly; spoken, more peaceable then those things which are done in the tumult, and while the minds of the Disputants are with present vehemence inflamed; more certaine, [Page 176] for writings remaine, and words are winged and fly away, and writings easily conuince the impudence of them that would corrupt them, which speaking cannot so well doe. And although in quicke writing there bee without que­stion more aduisednesse then in present speaking, yet doth Saint Hierome excuse his hasty commentary vpon Saint Mathews Gospell,Proaem. com­ment. in Math. promising a more absolute worke, that you may know, saith hee, What ods there is betweene the boldnesse of sudden enditing, and the dili­gence of well-studied writing. Secondly, as the Apostle Saint Paul answered the Serieants that were sent vnto him from the gouernours of Philippi,Act. 16.37. After that they haue beaten vs openly vncondemned which are Romans, they haue cast vs into Prison, and now would they put vs out priuily? Nay verily, but let them come and bring vs out: so say I vnto you, after you haue in a more publicke manner traduced and wronged mee, scattering through the whole City a most slanderous inuectiue and libell a­gainst mee, doe you thinke now by a priuate and cham­ber-disputation to content mee? Nay verily, this plai­ster is too narrow for the wound, and open wrong re­quires open satisfaction. Lastly, howsoeuer you pre­tend that you set not pen to paper vntill I had refused your chalenge of disputation, the Reader may bee plea­sed to vnderstand that it is cleane contrary. And there­fore as I cannot but impute your deniall to impart vnto mee what in writing you had opposed against mee, to the distrust you had either in your cause, or in your owne sufficiency: so now, hauing scribled away so much precious time, and sacrificed so much paper to Cloacina, that suddenly you apprehend a disputation, I assure my selfe it was but a sleight deuised vpon the present to shift [Page 177] mee off, and to rid your selfe from me, whose residence you knew to bee elsewhere, and who at that time was to take vp a nights lodging with you. Or if you meant sincerely and vnfainedly, doublesse it was confidence you had either in the boldnesse of your forehead vnca­pable of the purple tincture of modesty, or in the vnskil­fulnes of those who were like to be our Auditors & Mo­derators, who as I take it haue more skill in Marchan­dize and trafficking, then in Demonstration or Dialecti­call Syllogismes. For otherwise wee had beene vpon e­quall ground in either of the Vniuersities, I suppose you would haue beene better aduised ere you had made that challenge vnto mee.

I pray God it may worke in you a willing mind to embrace Peace and Brotherly loue, without the which wee can neuer see God. Bristol. Iuly 27. 1602.

It is impossible that vnto a man of vnderstanding any benefit or profit should accrew by reprehension, vnlesse it may appeare vnto him by some euident remonstrance that that which is reproued in him bee faulty and erro­nious, and that also hee bee guilty thereof. For they that thinke themselues to bee in health, will hardly be drawne to take Physicke:In Pastore. and then shall we better correct them that are wayward, saith Gregory, when those things which they belieue to bee well done, wee demonstrate to bee euill. Whereas therefore it pleaseth you here in the con­clusion [Page 178] and closing vp of your Answer, to charge mee with a most Vnpeaceable and Vncharitable disposition, praying God it may worke in me a willing mind to embrace peace and brotherly loue: you may not thinke that this can any way affect or moue mee, vnlesse first you shew that I am guilty of this crime, and beare a mind so auerse and abhorring from Peace and Charity, as you pre­tend, which I am sure hitherto you neither haue done nor can doe. For though you haue carefully searched euery corner of my Treatise, and ransackt euery letter and syllable thereof with as much greedinesse as euer Laban did Iacobs stuffe to find his Idols therein;Gen. 31.33. yet haue you not found any thing sauouring other then of Peace and Loue, or if you haue, why doe you not, as Iacob said vnto his Vncle, put it here before your brethren & my brethren, Vers. 37. that they may iudge betweene vs both? You will say perhaps that in broaching this erronious do­ctrine touching the Definition of Faith, I plainely be­wrayed a seditious spirit, and that I intended the inter­ruption of Peace and dissolution of loue. But neither is it necessary that whosoeuer deliuereth an error should presently haue such a seditious intention, for then what writer almost either ancient or late but is guilty of that impiety? Neither is the doctrine errronious, but sound and good, and now plentifully proued so to bee by this Defence thereof against your Answer. So that this ac­cusation of yours, is altogether vniust, and grounded vpon no truth at all. Suppose neuerthelesse it were iust, and that you had found your Idols, I meane both Fal­shood and Faction in my writing: is it possible thinke you that such an Answer as this is, either of it selfe, or sanctified by your Prayer, may be effectuall to reclaime [Page 179] mee from mine errour, or to worke mee vnto a more peaceable mind? Certainly it is impossible. For what is it of it selfe other then a fardle of vanities? And what promise haue you in Gods word that vpon your prayer you shall bee able to open the eyes of the blind by daw­bing them ouer with clay, or to still the raging of the sea by sending forth more stormes and tempests vpon it? And that such is your Answer, and such the course you haue taken therein, although this Defence haue already made it as cleere as the noone-day: yet must I intreat your patience before I dismisse you in a word or two, to trauerse it ouer againe, and in a briefe Synopsis as it were to set before you the very spirit and quintessence there­of, that if it be possible you may see your nakednesse,Gen. 3.10. and be ashamed.

First, it is your manner like the Schollers of Theodorus to receiue with the left hand that which I offer with the right, that is to wrest and peruert my plainest words,Plutarch. [...]. and to make them speake not that which I intend, but what you conceiue is fittest for you to descant vpon. For ex­ample where I say, I will not speake of the notation, or di­uerse acceptions of the word Faith: you turne it another way saying I refuse, and accuse, and find fault with them. Againe where I argue thus, It is very probable, that many are saued without Assurance, because our bre­thren of Germany hold a man cannot bee assured of Salua­tion: you make me reason thus, Whatsoeuer our brethren of Germany hold is true. And againe where I affirme that the Saint of God both may bee assured and ought to bee assured: you report mee to say that hee ought to have it as of necessity to saluation. And yet againe where I say God should command a reprobate to believe an vntruth if hee [Page 180] command him to belieue that hee shall bee saued: you re­late it as if I had sayd, God should command a reprobate to belieue an vntruth if hee command him to belieue, and hee shall bee saued. These and sundry other sentences in like sort doe you misconster and wilfully depraue: vn­lesse perhaps your ignorance bee so grosse and palpable that you could not picke the right sense out of the plain­est tearmes that possibly could bee vsed. But nothing is well spoken, Terent. Pigh. Hierar. lib. 3. cap. 3. saith the Poet, which by ill relating a Syco­phant may not peruert: and if some bee growne to that height of impiety as to make holy writ it selfe a nose of waxe, and to vary the sence thereof, according to the al­teration and change of time, I may not thinke it much, if the speeches of so meane a one as I am be as hardly vsed, and feele the racke of sinister interpretation also. One­ly as Diogenes being informed that some derided him,Plutarch. [...]. they deride not mee, quoth hee: so say I, while you oppose your selfe; not vnto the meaning naturally bred in my words, but vnto a forraine sense by you brought vnto them, you strike not mee but your owne fancies, and like a distracted Aiax fall a murthering of poore cattell insteed of Vlysses and his companions.

Secondly, it is your guise vpon euery small occasion, and sometime none at all to shake hands and bid fare­well vnto the matter in question, and to runne out into many idle and impertinent discourses before you returne to it againe.In arte Poet. Not much vnlike the foolish Poet in Ho­race, who professing to sing the fortune of Priamus and the famous warre of Troy, by and by spends all his art and skill in describing the groue and altar of Dia­na, or of some Crystall riuer hastning about the pleasant and [Page 181] delightfull medowes. Of this sort is that purple patch in answer to my first argument, where you spend a whole side of paper to proue that which I neuer denied, That Faith can neither finally nor totally fall away: and tedious collation you make vpon that of Matthew, Sonne bee of good comfort thy sinnes bee forgiuen thee, a place which I neuer alledged so much as in my dreame: and finally, that vnnecessary excursion into the common place of Election, and Reprobation, and Gods absolute will, which makes no more to the answering of my fift argument, then an axe to the opening of a locke, or a key to the cleauing of wood, as it is in the Prouerbe. These extra­uagances and outtopes seeme to mee very strong pre­sumptions that though you could say but little to the purpose,Epist. yet your itching tongue had rather talke idly then say nothing. But a wise man, as Hierome saith, before hee speaketh considereth many things, not onely what but also when, and where, and will bee sure that it bee both true in regard of substance, and pertinent in regard of circumstance. For as a word oportunely spoken is, Prou. 25.11. as Salomon saith, Like an aple of gold with pictures of siluer; so a word vttered vnseasonably and out of due place are like Iewels and goldrings sticking in the noses and lips of the barbarous Indians, and rather deforming then becomming them.

Thirdly, it is another tricke of yours, in matters vn­necessary and of no moment to bee as loud as Stentor, but in things that very much presse you and call for satis­faction, to bee as mute as one possessed with a dumbe spirit. For example, in answer to my threefold distin­ction of Faith, I tell you, say you, iustifying Faith com­prehends your three nice distinctions: but whereas I [Page 182] proue the contrary, because it is impossible for one and the same habit to be subiectiuely in seuerall faculties, to this you say not so much as gry. Againe, whereas in my third argument I assume, that assurance in nature comes after iustification, you deny it: but the proofe I bring for it, because the truth of a Proposition is in nature before the knowledge of it, and that therefore Iustification goes before assurance, you passe ouer very slily, and say not one word vnto it. Furthermore, whereas I frame this obie­ction against my selfe, By the knowledge of himselfe shall my righteous seruant iustify many, Ergo, Faith is a know­ledge, and this Affiance may bee in the wicked, Ergo, Faith is not Affiance: you can bee well content to bor­row them from mee, and to dart backe as it were my owne arguments against mee, but close vp your eyes not daring to behold the answers wherewith I assoiled them,Gen. 29.17. as if you had beene a tender-eyed Leah, and had met with an Obiect ouer-bright for you. It may be you learned this policy of Antony, Cicl. l. 2. de orat. who held it the safest and surest course for an Oratour, when hee meeteth with a knotty peece and is vnprouided of a fit wedge for it, to passe it ouer with silence, and say nothing. But if, as Ca­to defineth, and Quintilian largely maintaineth, an O­ratour bee a good man skilfull to speake in causes: Instit. Orator. l. 12. c. 1. I assure you hee will much disdaine such base and dishonest shif­ting, as no way fitting with his owne goodnesse, or be­comming the defence of a good cause. And howsoe­uer in a continued Oration, because the mind can hardly so diuide it selfe, as at once to reflect vpon what is alrea­dy spoken, and to attend what is presently said, and bee imminent and instant vpon what followeth to bee sayd, many things may soone bee forgotten and scape vnob­serued [Page 183] by the Anditors: yet may not the like bee hoped for in a written tract, specially when it shall fall into the hand of an aduersary, for hauing leasure and time in­ough to peruse it ouer againe and againe, hee will bee sure to sift and examine euery sentence and syllable with such curiosity, that such palpable omissions as these can­not possibly passe vnheeded by him. But your trust was that this writing of yours, being entrusted vnto a few of your friends onely, should neuer come to bee so seuere­ly scanned by me. Otherwise had you had but the least dramme of wit or shame, either you would neuer haue set pen to paper, knowing how vnable you were to an­swer, or you would not thus haue playd the Abce-boy, and when you met with a hard word which you could not read, thinke it enough to skip it ouer.

Fourthly, as if the old Comedy, or Cartrailing were againe reuiued and allowed, you lode mee euery foot with most bitter reproches and contumelious tearmes.Xenoph. Sympos. And as cunning Cockmasters (distrusting the weaknesse of their Cocks) feed them with garlicke that yet they may annoy their aduersaries with the rancknesse of their breath: so you seeing by pure strength of reason you were very vnlikely to preuaile against mee, you thought yet with the stincking breath of slanderous and oppro­brious speeches to molest and trouble mee. For I pray you, are not these the principall flowers of your Rheto­ricke? Quirks, Elenchs, Sophismes, Crafty lies, silly Ser­mon, Monsters, Antipistos, you are no Constable, Incke-horne-tearmes, Itching-eares, Fanaticall spirits, Selfe-loue, Contention, Hypocrisie, Desire of nouelties, Niceties, Fal­sities, Vnlearned, Ridiculous, Blasphemous, Hominis acu­men, your arguments sauour mightily of Popery, your sacke [Page 184] is full of spiders, you haue a minde to doe mischiefe, Intole­rable impudence, you incurre fearefull iudgement, you grieue Gods Spirit, captious cauils, Pure Bellarmine, Pure Papist, and six hundred other like phrases wherewith e­uery page yea line almost is farced and stuffed, so that a man may sooner rid Augias stable then your An­swer of them. Certainly, the fountaine cannot be sweet whose streames are so vnsauoury, and the stomacke must needs bee full of many rotten and corrupt humours that sendeth forth such a pestilent and noisome breath. But it seemes by the date of your writing it was towards dog-dayes when you endited it, and you hoped to pre­uent a burning feuer or some such dangerous sicknesse by discharging your stomacke of so much filthy choler. It had been no hard matter to haue come euen with you in the same kind, and to vexe you with requiting like for like: saue onely that I considered, not so much what you deserue, as what best becomes him who pleads the cause of truth. For truth should bee maintained with the spirit of truth and sobernesse.Herodot. Po­lyhimn. It is the nature indeed of reprochfull speeches, as Syagrius the Spartan said, to stirre, prouoke a man vnto wrath: yet ought it not so to pre­uaile vpon a wise man as to moue him inordinately or vn­decently to reply. Enuy may haue taught you to speake euill, and a good conscience hath taught mee to con­temne euill speeches: you will needs bee lord of your tongue, and I will bee as much lord of my eares. And yet if sometimes I sprinckle a little salt vpon you, or to fret away some of your ranke flesh apply smarting cor­rosiues vnto you,Publ. Mim. you must remember, it is the intem­perance of the Patient that makes the Physician cruell, and according to the old saying, they that rashly speake what [Page 185] they should not, must sometime for punishment heare what they would not.

Fiftly and lastly, it is your fashion not so much to care what you say, as how loudly you cry: hoping I thinke that as C. Marius sometime said,Valer. Max. l. 5. c. 2. that Lawes could not bee heard in time of warre because of the clattering of armour, so neither should the voice of truth bee heard in this dispute by reason of your vociferation and cla­morousnesse. For thus you come vpon mee, How dare you deale thus, That you dare bee so bold, with what face can you accuse, I tell you there is but one faith, I tell you it is ridiculous and blasphemous, I tell you Faith is a know­ledge, I tell you the promise is not conditionall, O hominis acumen & argumentum lepidum, O yee noble Schollers, Wo vnto you, You cannot escape Gods hand, Quite contra­ry is this to your knowledge and conscience, Goe dispute with Iesus Christ and tell him his Father deliuereth a blas­phemous absurdity, All Fathers, all Writers, old and new, Greeke and Latin for 1600. yeeres, besides many other such peremptory and confident speeches.Instit. Orator. l 6. c. 5. Quintilian thought it scarce worthy to bee remembred in his Insti­tutions, that his Orator bee not turbulent and tumultu­ous as are they who are vnlettered and therefore I mar­uell how you who would bee counted as wise as Thales, could forget your selfe so much as to imitate base barri­sters and pettifoggers. Saue only,Declam. 18. as the same Quintilian saith, it was necessary to auouch with as much conten­tion of voice as might bee, that which otherwise you could not proue: that what affirmation it could not haue from truth, it might receiue from your manner of speaking. But Vanity, saith Saint Augustin, De ciuit. Dei l. 5. c. 27. is wonder­full talkatiue, yet is not therefore so powerfull as verity, [Page 186] for if shee list shee can also bee lowder then verity. For the shallower the brooke the more the murmure, and the emptier the caske the greater the sound. And therefore I would wish the Reader not to bee terrified with Tor­rents, Enar. in Ps. 57. as Saint Augustin speaketh, whose waters make a noise for a time, but presently will cease and cannot long continue. For doubtlesse if they of the hot and dry coun­treyes of Tema and Sabaea repaire hither in hope to sa­tisfy and quench their thirst,Iob. 6.19.20. they shall, as Iob saith, re­turne confounded and ashamed, because their brother hath deceiued them as a brooke, and as the rising of ri­uers which suddenly are dryed vp and faile out of their places.

Iudg. 16.17.These, Master Baxter, are the Topicall places whence all your arguments are deduced, and if I may so say, the fiue locks wherein your chiefest strength lyeth. What impressions they may haue made in the minds of simple people I cannot tell.Plaut. Paen. & Hor. l. 1. Ep. 7. Perhaps they that cannot discerne betweene Conicall and true gold, will bee content to re­ceiue Lupins insteed of currant money, and sounding words for sound proofes. And indeed it is the manner of the vnskilfull vulgar, though reiected and refused as most incompetent, yet to beare themselues as iudges in euery cause how weighty soeuer, and without taking a­ny knowledge at all of the right issue, to pronounce him ouercome that holds his peace, and him to haue answe­red that hath not held his peace, the controuersie to bee doubtfull or undecidable if both parties haue sayd alike much; whither side speakes with more reason neither doe they attend, and if they doe yet can they not vnder­stand. And because Vanity, De ciuit. Dei l. 5. c. 27. as wee haue obserued out of Saint Augustin, is euermore talkatiue then verity, and [Page 187] hee seemeth vnto them to haue spoken best who hath said most; therefore doe they for the most part giue sen­tence against the truth for vaine talking. But howsoeuer simple and ignorant people may iudge, sure I am they that are wise and learned, will esteeme the course you haue taken rather preiudiciall then any way auaileable vnto your cause. For should a man, as Iob saith,Iob. 13.7. talke deceitfully for Gods cause? or is the strength of truth so empaired that shee can no longer stand but by such wrie and sinister meanes? Nay verily but shee is still of so noble and hautie a nature that shee scorneth to haue her conquests empeached by so base and dishonorable suc­cors. Deprauing of the aduersaries words and meaning, impertinent digressions, dissembling of his reasons, and answers, vnchristian reuelling and reproaching, and tu­multuous hoobubs and outcries, are the vsuall weapons of those who resolue to fight in vnrighteous quarels. But truth being pure and simple will not, and standing firme vpon her owne base needs not, and because fal­shood hath no subsistence but only by her, cannot bee assisted and supported by such vniust and fraudulent po­licies. Although therefore as I haue said these meanes may bee forcible inough to seduce and beguile simple people, yet they that are wise and iudicious know that naked truth neuer comes disguised, either in a Wolues or Foxes case: but prudently discerning and separating be­twixt passionate speeches and found reasons, Rhetori­call flourishes and Logicall demonstrations, vnnecessa­ry circumstances and substantiall matter, iudge alwayes of controuersies not by what is confidently said and af­firmed, but by what is reasonable alledged and proued. And whosoeuer thou bee Christian Reader, that art in [Page 188] this sort affected and qualified,Deut. 33.8. Exod. 28.30. Mal. 2.7. especially if thou bee the man of Gods mercies, vpon whose heart the Lords Vrim and Thummim are set, whose lips preserue knowledge, and at whose mouth the Law is to bee sought, because thou art the Angell of the Lord of Hosts: to thee, and to thy vp­right and vnpartiall censure doe I most humbly submit my selfe, and my whole proceedings in this cause. If thou approue,Ps. 141.5. it shall the more confirme and settle mee in the truth: if thou reproue, it shall not breake my head, but bee vnto mee a most soueraigne and pretious oint­ment. Iudge therefore betweene vs both indifferently and freely, and the Lord giue thee a right iudgement in all things.

2 Tim. 2.7.And thus, Master Baxter, haue you at length my whole and entire Apologie, not importunately and vio­lently wrested from mee, as you say your Answer was from you, but voluntarily of mine owne accord endi­ted for the information and satisfaction of those who earnestly expect the issue of this combat. Whereby the prudent and discreet Reader, and I hope your selfe also may perceiue how small cause you had so vnseasonably to sing your Paean in your Prologue, and to trumpet out victory before you were entred in the lists. If for all this as yet you rest vnsatisfied, the fault is your owne and not mine:Eurip. for I cannot, as Euripides saith, fill him that is not staunch, powring wise sayings into a man that is not wise. And yet it may bee your Conscience and inward man are fully satisfied although ambition and vaine glory cause you to dissemble it. If without all paraphrase and circumlocution I call a spade a spade, and giue the right name vnto euery thing, I beseech you, beare a little with the ingenuity of my nature,Plut. Apophth. wee Macedonians are some­what [Page 189] rude. And yet I would haue you know that it is not so much your ignorance as your insolency which I inueigh against. For,Yuo Vilio­mar. in Rob. Tit. as a late learned Humanist writ­eth, There is no mortall man but is in some degree, tainted with ignorance, and this contagion haue wee drawne from mortality it selfe: for man when hee erreth, erreth because hee is a man, and to vpbraid error in man is to reproch euen mortality in selfe. Which if you had seriously and duly considered, either you would not with such petulancy haue beene caried against the errors you imagine to be in mee, or at least you would haue remembred your selfe also to be a man. But seeing you count your selfe the only wise-man, and others, as the Poet speaketh,Homer. to fly about like shadowes: you may not thinke it hard, if being both ignorant and insolent, you be admo­nished of the one, and chastised for the other.